I feel the same way to a point. Yes , the characters are suppose to be heroic people tied closly to the story , but you shouldn't reward bad playing with a hand waved pass. If your PCs rush into a situation that they cant win and refuse to retreat they should be killed. The enemys that they are fighting arent suppose to be sitting around waiting to be killed by PCs. They are suppose to be living things with goals and when something goes wrong for the PC they dont say " Man you guys are getting killed....hey guys lets switch to nerf swords and go half strength."
One of the biggest diservises I see DMs giving to thier groups is not allowing a PC to fail. If you take out all the risk and dont let the die why are you even playing, the out come has already been desided for you. If you tell the guy in full plate " I know you just failed your athletics check to walk on the bridge over the gorge but thats to keep going" then whats the point of even having the skill in the game.
Edit - As a PC if I walk up to a bear at level 2 and kick it in the nose I expect it to eat me not for the clouds to part and be saved by deus ex machina. I've been in games like this and its exremely annoying. As soon as I realized I couldnt die I really pushed it until the DM finally killed me. Highlights included , Biting a bear on the ear only to have it "roll" a few fumbles and be scared off by passing gaurds and slapping the local crime boss and being tosses out instead of killed. Its just bad DMing to hand wave everything just so PCs dont die.
This kinda links into my theory of PC building as well. Killing a character teaches players to build a better PC. Your never going to improve as a player if the DM doesnt allow you to learn from your mistakes.
Edit 2 - Also I should probably say the group I play with on a regular basic are kinda insane action junckies. In book 2 they lite the castle on fire because now its more "extreme".
Having a summon monster spell be perm is a 20th level conjuration school ability so I dont think it would be appropriate for a low level character.
Meta-magic extend rod with the conjuration school would make you summons last 2 and a half rounds per level. For instance at level 4 you could have a small earth elemental for 10 rounds.
Other then that there is really only the summoner class that makes them last mins per level.
Bleeding Attack* (Ex): A rogue with this ability can cause living opponents to bleed by hitting them with a sneak attack. This attack causes the target to take 1 additional point of damage each round for each die of the rogue's sneak attack (e.g., 4d6 equals 4 points of bleed). Bleeding creatures take that amount of damage every round at the start of each of their turns. The bleeding can be stopped by a DC 15 Heal check or the application of any effect that heals hit point damage. Bleeding damage from this ability does not stack with itself. Bleeding damage bypasses any damage reduction the creature might possess
Wounding: A wounding weapon deals 1 point of bleed damage when it hits a creature. Multiple hits from a wounding weapon increase the bleed damage. Bleeding creatures take the bleed damage at the start of their turns. Bleeding can be stopped by a DC 15 Heal check or through the application of any spell that cures hit point damage. A critical hit does not multiply the bleed damage. Creatures immune to critical hits are immune to the bleed damage dealt by this weapon.
Bleed: A creature that is taking bleed damage takes the listed amount of damage at the beginning of its turn. Bleeding can be stopped by a DC 15 Heal check or through the application of any spell that cures hit point damage (even if the bleed is ability damage). Some bleed effects cause ability damage or even ability drain. Bleed effects do not stack with each other unless they deal different kinds of damage. When two or more bleed effects deal the same kind of damage, take the worse effect. In this case, ability drain is worse than ability damage.
Just to get the relevent rules in here. My 2 cents is they dont.
Number 8?! Where is the autosave on this merry-go-round. At that point, it would feel like a video game to me.
Ya , its a harsh world my friend. When you play in our game there is no pulled punches. The bad guys are treated as people that have just as much will to live as the PCs. Some times that ends up as a TPK. None of that "Now that you are down I will stand over you going MUAHAHAHAHA and run off". A creature downs you , you can preaty much expect it to finish the job .
You might be taking it to easy on them....We are on book 6 of the carrion crown ap. So far all 5 players are on atleast PC number 8. Two player are on PC number 14.
To be fair though , I didnt like the listed tactics on lot of the enemys so I changed them , same stats just doing different things. Five , atleast to me , seem like to few.
Edit - The new PCs that come in are from the order. They are very invested in this thing and cant afford for the PCs to fail so they keep sending in more ppl to keep the specialist team at fighting strength.
I wonce played a character similar to this. Storied him as a venerable bed ridden aasimar who made a deal with an outsider. The outsider would give him the power to get out of that bed and even return his physical strength to him for an un-named favor in the future.
Mechanically he was a sythesist summoner that I dumped all physcial stats to 7 and then added venerable to make them a 4. Mental stats got boosted to stupid high levels. I min/maxed my heart out but had a good back story writed up as to why and good role playing to back it up.
I think , atleast for my group , that we have done the player rolls perception always for so long because our players feel like if some one else is rolling a check for them then they are playing thier character for them. The DM might as well roll all checks for the character ( attack rolls , saves and what not. )
Adamantine Dragon wrote:
Welcome to my saturday LOL
Adamantine Dragon wrote:
I'll keep that in mind. Its honestly one of the only things that irks me other then everyone argueing with me about everything.
We have always had the players roll for anything related to thier character including perception checks. Over the years it has bit me in the @$$ though.
I've had players sit in one room rolling checks because " You wouldnt have asked for one if there is nothing here."
We did the no retry rule but that leads to complaining and " Im not going to re-try my perception. Im going to Take everything out of the room and check the walls , floors and ceilings."
I'm going to switch to the GM makes all passive rolls ( like perception checks for entering an area with hidden monsters or doors ). Players make active checks ( saves or using a skill by saying some like do I see any traps on the chest?)
I figure this way , even with the rogue missed passivly noticing the trapped checks on the way in meening that im not going to tell him about it , he can still get "his check" if he thinks to use it.
So I can just describe the room , make the secret checks and not prompt them to. Hopefully it will work out.
thats a crap load of charges man! I'm saying if you have the ability to do something for the party , like healing as one example , you should. If I can ill "pay you back" later by letting you use a wand or potion that I have purchased then I will. We could also come to some other arragnements out side of game.
Edit - This is assuming I dont currently have a wand to use of my own. You can take a running total and I will get you back with an equal total value.
I have not talked to the other players yet, but we are playing again this weekend and it looks like I will be playing with at least one of the two other guys from the last game. And I will probably be playing my Druid again, so I will be bringing it up to everyone at the table before we start.
Ya , even though they cant "give you money back" , you can still say some thing like. "Hey guys , last time I had to use up a lot of my wand because you forgot to bring one. This time can I use one of your wands to cover healing." Seems like the easiest way to even everything up if they arent total D-bags about it.
Unless, of course, the person "tanking" is preventing them from doing so by way of threatening with AoOs, feats that provide consequences for not attacking him, tripping, grappling, dealing massive damage in his own right etc.
Or using the Stand still Feat to prevent them from moving away at all.
Jonathan Cary wrote:
Ya you dont "owe" me healing. My wand being emepty would be assuming i've used it all up becuase my character is designed to keep things in melee and hitting only him.
ah , sorry only 2 games in. A friend dragged me with him and I havent read most of the rules for it. He hit the highlight , you can only use this stuff for a character , no pvp , stuff like that. Even so I would still want them to pay me back some how. Free charges from there wands after they get one?
Edit - did you talk to any of them out of game about helping you out?
Anyway , for the record , I do have a wand on my character.
Lets say the group is fighting a single strong bad guy. I use antaganize to get him in to melee and step up and stand still to keep him on me. As a result I get tore up preaty bad , lets say i've only got 2 hp left by the end but no one else is put into danger or even swung at. Are you saying that isnt worth a charge or 2 from a wand assuming that mine is empty because of my character design?
glad you had the highest ac. If I am taking most of the hit for the party ( lets say 75% of the attacks through my placement on the battlefield or feats like antaganize), I dont think its unreasonable to expect some healingfor the service im providing.
Edit - I think im mostly a little ticked because the cleric in my last party refused to channel or use prepared curing. All he would use on me was my wand.... I let him die 3 encounters in. If hes not helping me , im not helping him.
I'll take a shot at it.
Contributing to the group ,to me , meens are using your classes abilities to advance the story and can include the following.
1. Your character has , and uses , its available skills. For example , if you are a fighter I expect you to have knowledge Dungeoneering as one on the only classes that has it. If you cant tell me what a ooze we run into does your not helping.
2. I expect you to be able to help in combat in some way. Fighters and barbarian help in obvious ways. Everyone else can still do something. Even a wizard with out spells can still aid other or throw a rock or something. If your a bard and you "roleplay" that you played dead and the fighter dies with the enemy at one hit point , that death is your fault and you are not contributing.....you might even lose a hand if you reach for treasure.
Basically if you are doing something that farthers the goals of the party and have a properly built character your contributing. I understand that you cant build some one to be good at everything but you have an option to be doing something to help at all times.
I dont understand why OOC healing via cure light wounds wand is more acceptable then glorious heat and spark.
I think its because the perception is that one costs you gold for the healing and the other is "free" healing. Try to keep this in mind though , gold is a lot easier to come by the feats are.
Edit - One more thing. To heal for as much as a cure light wounds wand can with the glorious heat feat you have to be level 18.....
Goblins are @$$(*$&#
Treasure chest is trapped with a AoE arcane mark trap. When the PCs open it there is no role to hit , no save , no SR. They each get a visable , glowing phallic symbol on thier foreheads. Kinda like a " ya , you killed me but fu " from beyond the grave......dont worry its fades in a month.
No one said this mean things had to kill people right?
Imp...Now with 100% more vomit
Standard Imp can use a wand of vomit swarm on a UMD check of 13+ can stay invisabile forever. Summoning is not a hostle act.
My group is part way in to book 5. Just to start things off your party is going to have a hard time doing anything. Ustalav people are so insular its insane....these guys dont ever tolerate gnomes much less a bunch of monsters. Dhampir MIGHT be able to function but a man sized rat and cat with a winged snake are going to get killed on sight.
1. Advice isnt always bad. Reminding them about knowledge skill would be better. They will let the PCs identify a monster and thier abilities. Give the knowledge skill a good read over.
2. Healing is going to be important but i think that thier are plenty of way to get it. Potions scattered about and what not. Damphir is preaty screwed though. He will have no way to heal in the book other then sleeping. He will not be making it through HoH alive unless you DM fiat him through.
3. I wouldnt worry to much about the bomber. the prison is close quarters and some stuff isnt going to be effected by it.
4. Refer to first paragraph. The cat and rat would be attacked on sight as monsters. The human will do fine as long as he leave the bear out side town. The damphir might be ok if we can stay out of the way.
5. First , If they killed those 6 guys thier trust should be at 0 and the AP is over. At 0 trust they are run out of town and the villagers try to kill them. Since it sounds like that didnt happen ill tell you my party was level 2 when they got inside and level 3 before they went into the basement.
6.I allowed holy water to effect them. It made it a little easier but not to bad. I would say no to the potions. They also have those haunt syphons.
7. dont recall it either. Check the section with his cell.
8. I dont follow listed tactics so I tend to mak every fight harder... I've got a pile of bodys 5 books long with most people on thier 8th characters. The splatter man and lopper are going to be hard. The burning skeletans can be a tpk if they get surounded. Old ember maw is going to kill a guy atleast. There are plenty of encounter that will tpk if they arent careful.
9. New DM advice....hmm. Try to get familar with the rules in general. My first PHB has highlighter and little tabs sticking out all over the place. Read each monster entry and try your best to know what they do. Get good at improvising. My players have that " ya ya ya , but whats over there? " syndrome.
It looks to me like the size rules where included to state that a larger creature needs two hands to fire a smaller siege weapon.
Yes but it lists that as an execption to the statement before it. which is you dont use more hands to wield and fire a oversized fire arm.
I can agree though thats its a bit silly to have a giant struggling to use a siege cannon as a huge weapon while the dwarf has a " one-handed" gun that is 2 sizes bigger.
Eh , consider me bated lol. The text in the core rule book and UMC are the same execpt in a few regaurds.
You cannot make
What really gets me is the difference in the second part of the text. The first one gives on how to handle weapons and was made before firearms came out. It says you cant have a weapon that large. Thats preaty straight forward and no up for arguement.
However , UMCs text deals specifically with firearms only and goes out of its way to state that the size of the firearm and the hands to use it do not change when it is changing sizes ( baring siege weapons ).
This newer printing , which I believe is an addition to the orginal rules and here to clarify specifically how upsizing fire arms only works ,should be taken at its wording and legally allow oversized firearms at the table. I would go as far to say that the very specific language they put in that this might also be RAI.
PS - I can not endorce doing this in any game or accually showing up with a character that is using this concept. Its horrible and flawed. I am simple making a counter arguement for consideration. I do not believe it should work like this.