D&D 5E How We Beat the HD, HotDQ, Spoilers

[Prism]

Actually no, except for the small chance of a PC dieing there are no reprecussions wether th pcs win, lose or not fight at all. Even if they kill the HD, it simply gets replaced by a no name HD in a later adventure.

That may be how its written (possibly as it needs to stand up in encounters mixed group play?) but I know that when my character was in disguise in the second episode it made my job a lot harder when the Half Dragon was striding about giving orders. In fact I bottled it and retreated without much info having been obtained. Up until that point I had been quite happy bluffing the minor cultists

On the other hand when our recently humiliated Halfling fighter who was watching from afar rolled a super perception check and spotted the half dragon wandering around, he had to be talked down from starting round 2 of the fight. If he had had a bow in his hands then an arrow would have probably been foolishly loosed!

So that fight did have a little relevance to our continuing campaign at least

 

[KarinsDad]

Not every group will consider a dragon flying overhead to be equivalent of Mount St. Helens about to erupt. Your group seems to have appraised the situation as much more directly life-threatening than mine.

No doubt.

I view a dragon like I would in the real world of an Apache attack helicopter or a Harrier jump jet.

There's no way one is going to take them down with hand guns, they'll just swoop in and the person dies.

If you were being objective, you would understand that. Dragons really are that big of a threat (based on their abilities). The fact that the module did not emphasis that means that the designers were playing "Combat as Sport". As a player, I do not know that.

I just know that I was given a situation which seems like a death trap and my first reaction is to talk it over with my fellow players.

I've seen footage of the 2011 Japanese tsunami. People running towards the oncoming wave of water and debris in order to aid stragglers, the old, and infirm. They did not discuss the pros and cons of doing so before running to help. They just went, at great personal risk, but obviously not believing they were especially likely to die. Just regular folks, not even adventurers (or fire/rescue/police).

I am not roleplaying a regular person. Regular people end up on the Darwin Awards list. I am roleplaying an adventurer with an Int of 16. Someone who weighs the risk with the gain and someone who is trained to know that just rushing in is the fastest way to die. Btw, if the NYC authorities would have had a good idea that the WTC buildings were about to collapse, they would have ordered their men to not enter them / get out of them. It happens all of the time with fire and police. If the risk is too great, they stand down. Same with our troops. They do not just recklessly rush into battle. Knowledge is the key to good decision making and there are rules in place for fire, police, and soldiers to not make the same dumb mistakes that were made in the past. If a plane ever crashes into another building in one of our cities, you can bet good money that the police and firemen will not go in unless they are disobeying orders.

Some people play lawful good as lawful stupid. I don't. There are times when a heroic PC should sacrifice himself, and other times when he should walk away and plan to fight on more equal footing.

The fact that you appear to be arguing that PCs (regardless of whether they are heroic or not) should just rush in without any thought is a bit strange.

I totally get that your group jumped on the "I'm a hero" bandwagon and rushed in (or snuck in) to save the day. That's cool. Not all tables are like that. A dragon is a big enough threat that it should give all PCs pause, and the game designers should have emphasized that. They didn't. That's so weird. The fact that a lot of people ignored how really serious a threat a dragon is is even weirder. People have played the game for decades and do not understand how deadly a DRAGON!!! is? WT?

I can only surmise that some people who cavalierly went to the town and did not really discuss the dragon metagamed that it was an adventure, so they were supposed to head in. Like in the Mearls video where the players barely discussed the dragon.

 

[Prism]

ike in the Mearls video where the players barely discussed the dragon.

Could you post me a link to the video? Interested to see how it played out

 

[KarinsDad]

Could you post me a link to the video? Interested to see how it played out

I can only find the short version. The long version was on the Nerdist, but when I went to look at it recently, it did not come up. Google Mearls Hoard of the Dragon Queen.

 

[sithramir]

No doubt.

I view a dragon like I would in the real world of an Apache attack helicopter or a Harrier jump jet.

There's no way one is going to take them down with hand guns, they'll just swoop in and the person dies.

If you were being objective, you would understand that. Dragons really are that big of a threat (based on their abilities). The fact that the module did not emphasis that means that the designers were playing "Combat as Sport". As a player, I do not know that.

I just know that I was given a situation which seems like a death trap and my first reaction is to talk it over with my fellow players.



I am not roleplaying a regular person. Regular people end up on the Darwin Awards list. I am roleplaying an adventurer with an Int of 16. Someone who weighs the risk with the gain and someone who is trained to know that just rushing in is the fastest way to die. Btw, if the NYC authorities would have had a good idea that the WTC buildings were about to collapse, they would have ordered their men to not enter them / get out of them. It happens all of the time with fire and police. If the risk is too great, they stand down. Same with our troops. They do not just recklessly rush into battle. Knowledge is the key to good decision making and there are rules in place for fire, police, and soldiers to not make the same dumb mistakes that were made in the past. If a plane ever crashes into another building in one of our cities, you can bet good money that the police and firemen will not go in unless they are disobeying orders.

Some people play lawful good as lawful stupid. I don't. There are times when a heroic PC should sacrifice himself, and other times when he should walk away and plan to fight on more equal footing.

The fact that you appear to be arguing that PCs (regardless of whether they are heroic or not) should just rush in without any thought is a bit strange.

I totally get that your group jumped on the "I'm a hero" bandwagon and rushed in (or snuck in) to save the day. That's cool. Not all tables are like that. A dragon is a big enough threat that it should give all PCs pause, and the game designers should have emphasized that. They didn't. That's so weird. The fact that a lot of people ignored how really serious a threat a dragon is is even weirder. People have played the game for decades and do not understand how deadly a DRAGON!!! is? WT?

I can only surmise that some people who cavalierly went to the town and did not really discuss the dragon metagamed that it was an adventure, so they were supposed to head in. Like in the Mearls video where the players barely discussed the dragon.

Personally I think your 16 int character might have a lot of other thoughts than "this is insane" about this adventure based on pure intelligence. There's a flying dragon nearby. Why would it ever come and attack you specifically? Most of the time you are if you're staying hidden or under trees or inside why would your character be threatened by it at all? Why wouldn't you be able to help some poor villagers escape or do a lot of things still? 16 int means you're essentially a genius. You can likely think of plenty of exit strategies and ways to deal with this situation with minimal danger from the dragon. You just need to be smart.

He can't see you and their vision isn't great enough to notice every little thing going on as they fly past focused on certain areas. Even if he did why would he do anything to you? The only thing I could see being a problem is the part where if you damage it he'd leave. Well it makes sense to avoid that situation even if a few people die because standing on a parapet and shooting at a dragon IS dumb.

I've never seen you mention how you think your LG should treat helpless people? If the threat is too great then let them die? What if your friends want to go would you? If you think it's totally a death sentence wouldn't let them just go without them?

Did you have knowledge Arcana? You could likely gauge the size of the dragon and know it's not an ancient wyrm. It's powerful (definitely more powerful than you and you're group) but it's not an unstoppable volcano either. Yes you debated if it's worth going to the town but I just don't think it was poor design of the adventure to have the dragon in it.

If you saw 10 orcs (which your group might not likely be able to beat in a direct confrontation alone) what would you do? That's a very realistic thing to see as an adventurer. I think having the dragon instead of a different set of overwhelming odds put against you is for flair. You can't take on the whole town's worth of enemies in one fight but a smart character won't ever have that happen anyways. Just dont' directly confront said dragon?

The adventure calls to people who are heroic in that they will face deadly odds to help save people but also allows smart people who can weight their decisions to help without it becoming Mt. Saint Helens. The dragon is busy and it seems it adds that epic flair of being involved with it. There's danger but you still choose how much danger you are involved in. You don't have to stand on the parapets and fire at it but you can help people safely (in terms of the dragon threat).

 

[KarinsDad]

Personally I think your 16 int character might have a lot of other thoughts than "this is insane" about this adventure based on pure intelligence. There's a flying dragon nearby. Why would it ever come and attack you specifically? Most of the time you are if you're staying hidden or under trees or inside why would your character be threatened by it at all? Why wouldn't you be able to help some poor villagers escape or do a lot of things still? 16 int means you're essentially a genius. You can likely think of plenty of exit strategies and ways to deal with this situation with minimal danger from the dragon. You just need to be smart.

He can't see you and their vision isn't great enough to notice every little thing going on as they fly past focused on certain areas.

How exactly do PCs know that dragons have lousy vision? Metagame much?

Now that I have the Monster Manual, I'll go check to see if Dragons have lousy vision. I suspect that even if they do, they still have a decent Perception.

I've never seen you mention how you think your LG should treat helpless people? If the threat is too great then let them die? What if your friends want to go would you? If you think it's totally a death sentence wouldn't let them just go without them?

Yup. Valid questions. Some of them even get thought of in game. That doesn't mean that a discussion is not beneficial. Your point here is moot.

Did you have knowledge Arcana? You could likely gauge the size of the dragon and know it's not an ancient wyrm. It's powerful (definitely more powerful than you and you're group) but it's not an unstoppable volcano either. Yes you debated if it's worth going to the town but I just don't think it was poor design of the adventure to have the dragon in it.

How exactly does my PC know that this is not an ancient wyrm? Again, metagaming? Have you ever tried to gauge the size of something in the dark from a long distance away? How many people confused flairs with a large UFO in Arizona (which btw was proven based on spectrum analysis of the color). All I knew was that it was large enough to attack the keep and presumably set the town on fire.

If you saw 10 orcs (which your group might not likely be able to beat in a direct confrontation alone) what would you do? That's a very realistic thing to see as an adventurer. I think having the dragon instead of a different set of overwhelming odds put against you is for flair. You can't take on the whole town's worth of enemies in one fight but a smart character won't ever have that happen anyways. Just dont' directly confront said dragon?

IIRC, enemies were not even mentioned when we were far away. We did not discuss enemies, we discussed the dragon. It wasn't until we got to the town that we saw enemies. From far away, we saw small shapes moving around the town. At least that's how our DM described it to us and knowing how meticulous our DM is, I suspect that's what the writeup in the book mentions. I vaguely recall that our DM read something straight out of the book, but my memory is not good enough these days to state this as fact.

The adventure calls to people who are heroic in that they will face deadly odds to help save people but also allows smart people who can weight their decisions to help without it becoming Mt. Saint Helens. The dragon is busy and it seems it adds that epic flair of being involved with it. There's danger but you still choose how much danger you are involved in. You don't have to stand on the parapets and fire at it but you can help people safely (in terms of the dragon threat).

PCs do not know the dragon is so busy that it will ignore them. Players do not know what the "adventure calls for". This is all armchair quarterbacking by you after knowing the facts.


Discussing the dragon is a perfectly reasonable and even expected response. If you do not think so, fine. Metagame away.

 

[Sacrosanct]

No doubt.

I view a dragon like I would in the real world of an Apache attack helicopter or a Harrier jump jet.

There's no way one is going to take them down with hand guns, they'll just swoop in and the person dies.

Yep, death is certain. Oh wait....

I am not roleplaying a regular person. Regular people end up on the Darwin Awards list. I am roleplaying an adventurer with an Int of 16. Someone who weighs the risk with the gain and someone who is trained to know that just rushing in is the fastest way to die. Btw, if the NYC authorities would have had a good idea that the WTC buildings were about to collapse, they would have ordered their men to not enter them / get out of them. It happens all of the time with fire and police. If the risk is too great, they stand down. Same with our troops. They do not just recklessly rush into battle.

Alright, now you're really starting to irritate me because your complete lack of knowledge and assumptions are now encroaching on things I actually have experience in. I was willing to laugh off your claim that kids today are more likely to cheat than before while at the same time linking to a source that directly proved you wrong (that was pretty funny), but now you're going overboard.

Do not, for one minute, presume to think about what those firefighters would have been ordered to do, or that they aren't that intelligent by doing so (a high INT person would never just rush in). For one, that's just ignorance of what actually happened, and two, it's incredibly insulting. I am a military veteran, and I've seen first hand intelligent people rush into combat to help or save someone else because they are brave. And because we were ordered to. It has nothing to do with how smart they are. Stop using intelligence as an excuse for you to act cowardly. I strongly suspect even if you have an INT 8 PC you wouldn't have changed your behavior.

Some people play lawful good as lawful stupid. I don't..

You don't play lawful good as lawful good either, by the common definition. You seemed more than willing to make false promises and break your word at the first hint that things might not go your way, while the lawful evil person kept his. Lawful good people don't do that. Again, you're using "intelligence" just as an excuse to do whatever you want. Intelligence and moral character are not related like you seem to assume they are.

 

[KarinsDad]

Alright, now you're really starting to irritate me because your complete lack of knowledge and assumptions are now encroaching on things I actually have experience in.

Cool.

I was willing to laugh off your claim that kids today are more likely to cheat than before while at the same time linking to a source that directly proved you wrong (that was pretty funny), but now you're going overboard.

I did not make that claim. I made the claim that it is becoming more acceptable to cheat, not that people are doing it more often.

Acceptable

You spun that claim into what you wanted it to be because you do that.

Also, if you actually do research, you'll find that cheating in college (done at least once) was about 30% prevalent in the '40s and 70% to 90% prevalent now. But you read one sentence in one article and think you are an expert instead of reading multiple articles. Do your research, read what people actually write, and stop misrepresenting what they do write.

Do not, for one minute, presume to think about what those firefighters would have been ordered to do, or that they aren't that intelligent by doing so (a high INT person would never just rush in). For one, that's just ignorance of what actually happened, and two, it's incredibly insulting. I am a military veteran, and I've seen first hand intelligent people rush into combat to help or save someone else because they are brave. And because we were ordered to. It has nothing to do with how smart they are. Stop using intelligence as an excuse for you to act cowardly. I strongly suspect even if you have an INT 8 PC you wouldn't have changed your behavior.

Oh, you mean like the behavior that rescued about two dozen villagers and face planted the Half Dragon into the dirt? I just did it smart instead of following his agenda. You thought my PC wizard was not brave to walk out in no armor and just a dagger to rescue that woman?

You have a weird sense of intelligence and bravery.


You are a vet. Thank you for your service.

I never once said that our military was not brave. That's your spin once again on what I wrote. I wrote that they have rules and procedures in place for when a situation is too risky, and I even wrote that police and firemen would be disobeying orders in order to rush in in that same circumstance. Of course our military, police, and firemen are brave.

If you and I sat down at a gaming table and shared real world stories instead of gaming stories, we'd probably be closer friends than you could imagine. Or not.

You don't play lawful good as lawful good either, by the common definition. You seemed more than willing to make false promises and break your word at the first hint that things might not go your way, while the lawful evil person kept his. Lawful good people don't do that. Again, you're using "intelligence" just as an excuse to do whatever you want. Intelligence and moral character are not related like you seem to assume they are.

I'm playing 5E lawful good. I could care less about earlier editions:

"LG creature can be counted on to do the right thing as expected by society."

The townspeople expected us to rescue that woman. We did. We rescued a lot of other NPCs. We are on a mission to rescue the Monk.

This concept of "keeping your word to outlaws" is one of the stupidest things I've heard in a while. The half dragon is a raider and society expects me to kick his butt. They do not expect me to keep my word to him.

There's no way I'm going to handcuff my PC to keep his word with a guy who is threatening to kill an innocent person. That's beyond Lawful Stupid. Police do it all of the time. They lie through their teeth to tell a suspect things that will diffuse a situation, and yes, I have seen it first hand. That doesn't make the police Chaotic Neutral, it makes them well trained.

 

[Wrathamon]

This is a game. Don't know why people are getting so personal.

 

[KarinsDad]

This is a game. Don't know why people are getting so personal.

Good point. I removed my personal info from that post.