D&D 5E Things that make you go Hmmm, Starter Set **spoilers**

[Uller]

You are misreading the trap on the Goblin Trail.

"If the characters are searching for traps, the character in the lead spots the trap automatically if his or her passive Wisdom (perception) score is twelve or higher. Otherwise, the character must succeed a DC 12 Wisdom (Perception) check to notice the trap."

In otherwords, if the lead character doesn't notice it automatically, THEN allow a roll. This is an interesting way to run it...I like it. EDIT: Although I allow my players to use Search (now Investigation) if they are actively looking for something. So I'd still play it this way, but the rolled check would be Investigation, not Perception, if that is what the PC is trained in.

Second EDIT: I see what you mean...yes, passive perception should not require the player's "actively" searching. I think in this case they are just using it as a means to avoid the check. The second trap doesn't even have the "if the characters are searching..." clause. I read your post and it seemed you were saying that if they didn't spot it with passive perception they wouldn't spot it at all. Maybe that is not what you are saying...but if so, they do get to make a roll if they are actively searching.

I like a lot of healing potions. Healing potions are a common magic item. I allow my players to purchase them between adventures and they find them often during adventures. I encourage them to use them frequently so the cleric doesn't feel like a heal bot and to help them understand that they don't NEED a cleric at all...our group is at 7th level now and many of them feel like spending an action for 2d4+2 hp is not worth it. But between fights, they'll often down a few if they are out of HD and constrained by time, which they frequently are.

 

[reiella]

Yeah, I find it funny that to drink or administer a potion takes an action (Basic, page 49), but to drink all the ale in a flagon is a free action (Basic, page 70). It really sets the potion as a sub-optimal choice as you put it. Drinking the potion as a free action during your move would give it much more purpose.

The obvious solution is to start making Ale of Healing.

[ edit fixed a weird thing that still doesn't look right ]

 

[Kobold Stew]

Yes, but they get their magic item (5 of them) in the last dozen rooms. For a group of PCs that you yourself said would rarely be continued.

Isn't it special? ... YMMV.

So I'm really not getting your objections. You say you want more, cheaper items per player, coming at earlier levels, but you don't want one good item for the whole party by the end of the campaign? That sounds pretty unappealing to me, making magic items plentiful and generic.

We are working with different assumptions for how to motivate players. As you say: YMM (and apparently does) V. For what it's worth, though, I don't see this as a problem.

 

[KarinsDad]

You are misreading the trap on the Goblin Trail.

"If the characters are searching for traps, the character in the lead spots the trap automatically if his or her passive Wisdom (perception) score is twelve or higher. Otherwise, the character must succeed a DC 12 Wisdom (Perception) check to notice the trap."

In otherwords, if the lead character doesn't notice it automatically, THEN allow a roll. This is an interesting way to run it...I like it. EDIT: Although I allow my players to use Search (now Investigation) if they are actively looking for something. So I'd still play it this way, but the rolled check would be Investigation, not Perception, if that is what the PC is trained in.

Am I misreading it?

"If the characters are searching for traps, the character in the lead spots the trap automatically if his or her passive Wisdom (perception) score is twelve or higher. Otherwise, the character must succeed a DC 12 Wisdom (Perception) check to notice the trap."

This says to me that if the party is not searching for traps (i.e. has not told the DM that they are doing this), the character in the lead does not get a chance at an auto-spot.

At that point, the character in the lead gets to roll.


The way you are interpreting this text, it should read:

"The character in the lead spots the trap automatically if his or her passive Wisdom (perception) score is twelve or higher. Otherwise, the character must succeed a DC 12 Wisdom (Perception) check to notice the trap."

Second EDIT: I see what you mean...yes, passive perception should not require the player's "actively" searching. I think in this case they are just using it as a means to avoid the check. The second trap doesn't even have the "if the characters are searching..." clause. I read your post and it seemed you were saying that if they didn't spot it with passive perception they wouldn't spot it at all. Maybe that is not what you are saying...but if so, they do get to make a roll if they are actively searching.

Now you got it (I was responding pre-second edit).

I like a lot of healing potions. Healing potions are a common magic item. I allow my players to purchase them between adventures and they find them often during adventures. I encourage them to use them frequently so the cleric doesn't feel like a heal bot and to help them understand that they don't NEED a cleric at all...our group is at 7th level now and many of them feel like spending an action for 2d4+2 hp is not worth it. But between fights, they'll often down a few if they are out of HD and constrained by time, which they frequently are.

I agree. I like them a lot in 4E. I hand them out quite frequently in 4E.

But in 4E, it's a minor to pull out and a minor to drink.

In 5E, it's an action to pull out and drink. Costly.


And the fact that the module hands out 12 of them seems a bit excessive. It points to a design flaw. IMO. YMMV. If PCs cannot continue on without certain magic items, how is this that much different than 4E where PCs fell behind if they did not get enough magic bonus items (pre-inherent bonuses)?

 

[KarinsDad]

So I'm really not getting your objections. You say you want more, cheaper items per player, coming at earlier levels, but you don't want one good item for the whole party by the end of the campaign? That sounds pretty unappealing to me, making magic items plentiful and generic.

I said nothing of the sort.

I said that they got 3 items in the last 2 rooms and 5 items in the last 12 rooms. By the time they get the 2 items in the second to last room, they get to use them for one encounter. By the time they get the last magic item, they never get to use it unless the players continue to use these PCs post-starter set (which I suspect will be a rare thing for many groups once the PHB comes out).

I find that odd.

I don't mind the module handing out 7 magic items (although that's a bit above the guidelines at 7 items in 4+ levels of play), but spread them out a bit more and earlier so that the players (whom WotC is presumably trying to woo to their 5E system) actually get to use them a bit.

We are working with different assumptions for how to motivate players. As you say: YMM (and apparently does) V. For what it's worth, though, I don't see this as a problem.

Ok. You do not see it as an issue.

I pointed it out so that DMs who think like me and might consider it an issue can move some of those items earlier into the adventure.

I want my players to enjoy this a lot and finding items and getting to use them will be beneficial to that goal.

 

[Kobold Stew]

I said nothing of the sort.

I don't know how to reconcile this claim with your earlier post.

3 of the items are found in the second to the last fight and the last fight. 3 out of 7.
<snip>
The fun of gaining magic items is in the ability to use them. Not for them to be acquired with a half hour left in the entire set of gaming sessions.
<snip>
1 item per level seems a bit light as a default.

Players LOVE finding magic items. Why be so stingy?
<snip>
Either way, for a game system stingy with magic items, a 2 AC boost for a stealthy PC is a really big dot deal and I was just surprised to see it. Not a deal breaker issue, just something odd. YMMV.

First passage: magic items should come earlier.

Second passage: magic items should be able to be used i the adventure (and so should come earlier).

Third passage: there should be more magic items, earlier.

Fourth passage: there should be more magic items, but not the one big item that comes at the end.

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with these objections, only that I do not share them. But yes, IMO, that is the natural way to read your earlier post, sand if you believe you are saying "nothing of the sort" then you are not communicating your concerns clearly.

 

[KarinsDad]

I don't know how to reconcile this claim with your earlier post.



First passage: magic items should come earlier.

Second passage: magic items should be able to be used i the adventure (and so should come earlier).

Third passage: there should be more magic items, earlier.

Fourth passage: there should be more magic items, but not the one big item that comes at the end.

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with these objections, only that I do not share them. But yes, IMO, that is the natural way to read your earlier post, sand if you believe you are saying "nothing of the sort" then you are not communicating your concerns clearly.

I was objecting to your statements:

"You say you want more, cheaper items per player"

"That sounds pretty unappealing to me, making magic items plentiful and generic."

I do not want cheaper items. Where did I say that?

I do not want to make magic items generic. Where did I say that?

These phrases are your interpretation of what I said, not what I said.



I do want more items than the 2 items handed out in 4 levels in the first 80% of the module. Not more overall, but more than 2 in 4 levels and then 5 in 0.5 levels.

I think it stupid to pull out most of the bells and whistles of magic items in the last 2 hours a 12 hour set of adventures and the last 3 items in the last 45 minutes.

Sure, having the best encounters at the end of a module to have a great ending makes sense. Throwing most of the magic items there (5 out of 7), not so much.

 

[Perun]

Yeah, I find it funny that to drink or administer a potion takes an action (Basic, page 49), but to drink all the ale in a flagon is a free action (Basic, page 70). It really sets the potion as a sub-optimal choice as you put it. Drinking the potion as a free action during your move would give it much more purpose.

Perhaps the potion-drinking action presumes you need to take the potion from wherever you're keeping it, uncork the phial and then drink it, as opposed to just grabbing the tankard and quaffing the ale. Of course, one could argue that the amount of liquid should come into play (a phial is, IIRC, about a single sip, whereas the flagon is... well, a bit more, in any case), but that's why I would assume quaffing (according to Pratchett), rather than drinking.

Regards.

 

[Uller]

Now you got it (I was responding pre-second edit).

Yeah, I originally took your meaning to be that none of the pre-gens had any chance of ever spotting the trap...

I do think that skill checks should always require a roll of some sort. It seems like they are adding the passive perception check to apply for things that can only be found with an active search...like if your passive perception is high enough you just spot it automatically (as long as you are actively looking). I wouldn't allow passive perception to be used to spot a trap if a player isn't looking though.

In 5E, it's an action to pull out and drink. Costly.

And the fact that the module hands out 12 of them seems a bit excessive. It points to a design flaw. IMO. YMMV. If PCs cannot continue on without certain magic items, how is this that much different than 4E where PCs fell behind if they did not get enough magic bonus items (pre-inherent bonuses)?

Yeah, in my game the players seem to save the potions mainly for the most dire circumstances during a fight or for after a fight if they can't take a short rest or are out of HD.

It is costly for an action. But I haven't had any complaints so far. I may eventually house rule that you can do it as a bonus action but it provokes an AoO. The idea of quaffing a potion and attacking without penalty seems about much to me.

 

[KarinsDad]

Yeah, in my game the players seem to save the potions mainly for the most dire circumstances during a fight or for after a fight if they can't take a short rest or are out of HD.

It is costly for an action. But I haven't had any complaints so far. I may eventually house rule that you can do it as a bonus action but it provokes an AoO. The idea of quaffing a potion and attacking without penalty seems about much to me.

That might not be a bad solution, but it does nothing for archers and spell casters. At low level, the PCs will have few potions because potions are costly and their distribution is totally within control of the DM. At higher level, a 2d4+2 potion is not going to make much of a difference.

Disadvantage seems too strong of a penalty to assign. However, a house rule like the following might work:

A creature can drink a potion as a bonus action once per turn, but the PC has a -2 penalty to attacks, ability checks, and saving throws until the end of his next turn. Costly, but not as costly as losing an entire action.

Plus, this opens the game up for Potions of Fly and disengaging all in the same round; Potions of Invisibility, attacking, and then moving away without provoking, etc.