Xyll's page

quote=HOGARTH]The problem with creative solutions like chopping at an Entangle spell with your sword or climbing on the back of a huge enemy is that you're effectively making house rules on the fly (assuming that the creative solution in repeatable in the future), and you're effectively making Entangle spells and huge enemies permanently weaker (by giving them additional weaknesses). That's not something I really like to do.quote

Actually chopping at the vines would be the equivalent of makeing a strength check to break free like the spell states you can.

The real problem I believe Ion Raven is having is the dismisal of creative ideas out of hand. This is more of a GM style issue then a rules issue. I perfer ad hoc actions and creative solutions. They show me the players are not just going through the motions.

Just because you arbitrate an action one one does not make it a house rule. Circumstances vary from encounter to encounter and there are a number of variables to weigh.

I once had a 2nd level rogue jump on the back of a troll and backstab the hell out of it. He got slammed repeatedly into walls taking automatic damage but he made his roles and held on. Using CMB versus CMD there would be little chance of him succeding without adding condional variables ( Making things up ). But it was a great moment and is still talked about by the players. In other words they lived the moment rather then rolled dice and compared it to a chart.

I have had similar problems over the years. I have had Micro /Macro issues with extensive information on kingdoms and background but i forgot to make the adventure fun for the players.

I have since changed back to the "organic" approach of offering a base adventure and see what springs from it. Players are great at jumping to conclusions and voicing ideas. From these come some of the best games I have run.

I had two players declare genocide on all halflings after being beaten repeatedly by a band of halfling rogue/highwaymen. Some of the halflings managed to keep surviving and ruining there day. They met them at 1st level and by 10th level they finally killed the last one. This was a simple encounter that turned into a campaign.

I was thinking more along the lines of Planscape and Dark Sun (Not whatever that was in 4th edition). : ) Also I was thinking if they go back and revise some of the old school adventures for the newer edition.

As it is I will stick to my Pathfinder campaign for now.

Its simple I have the Core Rule Book and the Bestiary.

I love what Pathfinder did to 3 edition. Pathfinder made the system better and more playable in my eyes. That being said I still am not a fan of tactical/wargame combat. I hope 5 edition can add the light and flexible combat with solid player options.

To the answer the question.

It can be different. It can bring back propietary settings and creatures pathfinder can not. But mostly it will be new. I am intrigued by the possibilities.

I personaly run games that encourage and reward heroic creative actions. That being said I started with Basic D&D which required creative thinking. I have played with more modern GM's that had a deer in headlights look when non-linear actions were attempted. Unfortunatly some focus on the rules so much they forget that the game should be heroic and fun for those involved.

Defiling magic would be on the rise now.

Defiling golems that are fueled by ambiant life energy.

Cabals of wizards empowering spells through defiling.

If I remember correctly Sorcerer kings were able to grant magic by some strange being. Bah can't remember right now.

Large scale acid/corrosive clouds. Living defiling spells run amok.

Every session I have a legal pad were I take the character sheets write down the HP/AC/cmb/cmd/ saves/init/primary weapons and BA. I do this to make my job easier. I have the final determination of HP damage not players. i tell them the damage they took but what i have written is the final say.

Seriously I would have bounced that player as soon as he refused.

I as a GM spend many, many hours preparing a game then a player does with one character as such it is my ball play by my rules or go home.

I had a GM that liked to play with characters when no one was around ususally benificial but really annoying. He changed one players character from male to female. ( Pretty Random ) However it was fun getting an adventure from an old character of mine one day. :)

Actually XP rules are part of the game. People just like to ignore them.

The only issue you have is if you start to ignore XP and level whenever appropriate you may discourage some players.
The xp rules are there to give a sense of growth to players.

One work around may be to use the slow advancement but give large plot/rp/noncombat XP bonus. To encourage acheiving goals.

Side Note:

I have seen some of the most outspoken RAW Lawyers on these boards make similar comments about the XP system as written in the book. Seems kind of Hypocritical.

Just my opinion

I can envision an entire game session that invokes the feeling of great victory by overcoming the dangers of environmental challanges without a single combat round.

That would be something to strive for.

Most games handwave travel as an inconvience to get to the fights.

Finarin: Your above statements are downright und&d/pathfinder like. :)

I agree 100% skills should be used as a means to combat environmental dangers.

Old campaign in 2nd edition. We came across a room with two wells in it. One was a well of life/curing the other was filled with a strange glow. One player stuck a +1 staff into it and it sucked it from his grasp. It was a well of wishes that would grant a wish if you put a magic item in it. We did not know that.

One player got a smart idea to start taking water from the well of life and pouring it into the other well in order to overfill it for some reason. (Never figured out why)

So the water fused with the magic item wishing well and suddenly there was a magic item monster killing the party. I was playing Raul the ranger i had a rod of cancellation. I went to fight the magic item creature and canceled the magic causing explosions from items failing saves that it was made of.

The result was a 60' radius crater that just happened to hit the crystal artifact we were searching for which failed its save. It exploded completely vaporizing the dungeon and leaving a 400' null magic crater.

I managed to completely wipout the dungeon and campaign with a total everything kill.

The only thing that survived was The Tarrasque (becasue he was always around in all high level dungeons) and the DM NPC because he had her start running as soon as the magic item monster fight started. plus she rolled a NAT 20 on save.

Finest moment in game I ever had. :)

I always wanted to play a dragon. Even just a baby one but, no I always have to run the games. :)

I always wanted to run a trade/colony type game. players never liked the idea. :(

If you change the rules you risk ruining the trust your group has.

I am not against house ruling something but you must be careful. It can't just make sense to you.

I agree 100%

How ever the 3.5 wotc complete books are examples of bad decisions that started to break the game. Those are supposed to be tested and professional.

However, there are 2 things to keep in mind:

1) Every rule you change may effect other rules in ways you didn't intend.
2) The more houserules you add removes you further from the common frame of reference everyone uses to discuss the game.

-Skeld

This is very true which is why it is tested in play and if it is found wanting it is modified or discarded. Much like Pathfinder did when it modified 3.5.

The common frame is removed when discussing certain rules not the game in general but since the RAW itself is debatable to people adhering to it...

Sarcasm is highly underated. :)

Because that is the way they like it and that is the way it has been.

Play the game as written or don't play at all because that is what is right.

Since they get paid for it they are experts and professionals.

Your experience will never exceed a professionals. ( Even if you have been playing longer then some of them have been alive.)

Individual thought is not aceptable the machine is finely balanced and optimized. No official rules ever broke a game. Why make different editions at all what is written is perfect no one can deny it.

Come join us. Be one with us. The computer is your friend.

Seriously do what you think is right and have fun. If the people you are playing with it like it so be it.

Peoples adherance to cannon is disturbing at times.

Just my opinion.

I have never liked feats being localized rule adjustments.

They should give specialized abilities and bonuses not plug holes in exploitable rules.

Cranewings I like the wild swing option.

No offense to anyone be we are in the house rules section of the messageboards. He was looking for opinions and options on how to make the game better for his players and his game.

It is a game with well thoughout arbitrary rules that sometimes have fixes built into the game (Step-up)for issues that may arise.

That being said on to Power Attack and why can't everyone do it. It is nothing more then a wild swing. The feat gives you control. Without the feat whatever penalty you took on the attack would also be a penalty on your AC as you are off balance. Discuss and derail. :)

Every good tactical game I have played had rules for movement, then action with everything being resolved simultaneously. I could play pathfinder as a tactical game but that would require to many modified rules. :)

I have no problem with 5' step as long as they do not enter a threatened area or withdraw from combat. If they do then the opponent deserves an attack of opportunity. Or they could stand there accept the attack of opportunity and cast there spell or whatever.

My problem with the 5' step is the withdrawl from contact without repercussion. I can see a 5' step laterally or diagonally to adjust position but still maintain melee contact. To simple allow someone to withdraw from contact with no penalty seems absurd.

The reason a boxer allows a step back is to catch their own breathe. How many flurries have you seen pushed around the ring with a determined attacker preventing the defender from getting a break.

You are welcome Cranewings

Novels are the issue I never see a divine caster ever not have the proper spell even in d&d books. They may not have the strength but never the right spell. But to each their own.

I was just asking a question not asking for approval:)

But not every place is like "Burger King" sometimes you can't have it your way. So instead make the best of a sub-optimal situation and fix the problem yourself.

If you want all casters to be equal that is a fine choice to keep it as memorized spells.

Personally I think it is not logical even for a fantasy setting.

Clerics are the instruments of powerful beings and as servents must follow certain rules. They should be powerful.

That being said there are no rules for actually keeping faith in games so it really does not matter if the casting rules make sense or not.

Funny things about gods in games they should be able to regulate their at all times since they gave it to them in the first place.

Also since they are gods they should have no problem if nothing else figure they are on auto pilot and unless something is funny it is automatically granted.

Then again it is just a personel issue I have with the game.

Cranewings I agree with you, but I do not use grids. I have always felt that if you are engaged in melee combat you can not just back off without the enemy letting you. When you are engaged in melee combat you do not have the luxury of backing off whenever you want.

One simple fix is to remove the rule that a 5' step does not provoke an attack of opportunity. If they disengage the enemy gets a free swipe at them.

Fencing is not the baseline for tactical rpgs.

I also like the CMB roll also as an option.

I love the answer "if you don't like a rule get rid of all the rules", If I love cheeseburgers, but do not like pickles; I will take them off, not get a chicken sandwich.

I have actually had no problem with it working for the past 5 years. :)

Clerical spells are rarely earthshattering. They offer buffs and defense for the most part if you stick to core rules.

I tend to limit spells based on diety and alignment. I have stoped a player from healing a half-orc because he was a dwarf that worshiped a dwarven god.

I have made players make knowledge religon checks and diplomacy checks to cast spells that there god may not approve of.

Divine magic just never worked for me as a prepared approach. Clerics have no power themselves. They act as a conduit for divine power. Wizards tap power and control power. Clerics do not they are but a vessel. Higher level means the Gods can pump more power through you and not kill / drive insane/ blow you up.

I have actually used it for years in 2nd ed but stoped for awhile in 3.XX and have just put it back in.

I give all divine casters the ability to cast at will from the spell list.

So does anyone else think it is strange that the servent of a powerful being would have to prepare in advance spells?

Does the god just load him up with godly power in the morning?

Why would the god whose servent is furthering its goals not be granted a spell it needs because they did not prepare it in advance?

Why would a god not prevent a character from using its magic for a purpose contradictory to the god's ethos?

Long story short I let clerics cast whatever spell they want to or need. They must rest and pray but they can cast whatever they need.

If they need a more powerful spell they can call for aid but the penalties for this often means it is a last ditch effort.

I do not mean to be offensive I just never look at D&D as a tactical game. I know they have pushed for a more tactical experience. It is strictly my bias I am working with.

My major issue with tactical maps is that I play a great deal of wilderness type campaigns. I seldom use dungeons any more and if the map is not detailed how I feel it should be then it bothers me.

I know the game was based off of a wargame. When I use mass combat rules I use miniatures but for stanadard adventures with a 6+ player group there is barely enough room for books and players much less maps that would represent an encounter starting at 200'+.

However I have been swayed by some posts and may try a dungeon crawl using miniatures to see how the players react to it.

Again no offense intended I am just sharing my bias.

Btw how do people represent wilderness adventures with flying creatures? Like dragons straffing etc.. trying to get idea and see a different point of view.

Well most feats are still in good use. I still use attack of opportunities, tumble, acrobatics etc.. Just never played with minis and maps.

Most of my players have been playing for years yet feel like new players. They are slow to decide on actions. If I was to drop a battlemap i could only imagine the questions about movement much less actions they could take.

I can see greater tactical play with maps but then again i am not playing a tactical game. I have the wrong players for that. I want the game to flow it bogs down enough as it is.

I am a stern GM I have learned to be quick and decisive. No arguements about where people are. I am running the game period. My players accept this.

I have been playing for over 25 years I have run over 15 different type of games and i have been the regular Gm for over 15 years. I see the game very differently then "newer" players. I have never looked at a system and thought it was perfect. Some are better then others and that is why i use pathfinder. But the RAW of Pathfinder are house rules of 3.5 that are published. I modify them as I see fit.

I have never had a character that was broken because of the way I run my game.

I find that those that love the RAW often drag the game down in my opinion and at my table. I do not want an discussion about the rules i want to enjoy myself.

I may have to look into some tokens for some combat usually i have maps I am using for an encounter so I generally know where everyone is at.

I love Battletech but I know how long that takes and with small kids time is precious so during games i fear i am one of those fiat GM's. Must be old school upbringing. I tend to move combat along very fast with really slow players so I can only imagine if they try to move figures around.

My brother was joking with me about the horror if we played battletech with our current group. It would take days for a minor skirmish.

I guess it all depends on the players you have. If i had a group of wargamers i could see using mini's but with what I have fiat has to do.

I think my one problem with using mini's is feeling the need to reflect terrain exactly. I am not that good of a mapmaker yet. Getting better but that is my major issue with Virtual Table games. It takes me hours of harvesting images and I lose sight of the game. ( I have been trying for 6 months to get a pathfinder game with my old group )

vip00,

I run my game with gummy bears and oreos for monsters. Nom nom nom!

As far as I'm aware DnD has always had a tactical element, so it's not exactly a new concept. Then again, my gaming group tends to have 1 combat encounter max per 8-hour gaming session, so it's not exactly a major time sink.

If you kill something do you get to eat it?

That would be great I could work with that. :)

I think my major issue is that i play with large parties and often have to have several people rolling at one time in order to keep the flow of the game going.

I average 4-6 players, last session I had 9. It can go very bad real quick with that many people.

I just realised that people play D&D as a tactical game. I feel well... silly I have been running games for years and never once thought of using tokens in a roleplaying game.

I never even considered it a valid option.

If i wanted to play a tactical game I would play Battletech or other tactical games. My brother laughed when I announced this mid game and everyelse just stared at me.

No wonder people have such problems with combat taking forever. If i had to stop and set up a combat board everytime it would drive me crazy.

What ever happened to imagination and dice?

Just started campaign my brother talked me into 2nd level characters to make them more survivable. I raised levels of encounters then ran into having a 9 player party instead of 6 it is not good for the enemies.

Sir Galeson Barsteel. Human LN Paladin of the Order of St. Cuthbert. Lawbringer pain in the butt, leader.

Athalia Arroway. Human CG Ranger. Warden bandit hunter, scout

Gerkholb Masterstone. Dwarf LG Cleric Targos (sp). Healer good dwarf

Morgrim VIII Steelforge.Dwarf NG Fighter. Young dwarf lord, young player nephew.

Nasdrouya. Elf LN Fighter(Archer). Bow Scion ranged terror

Jayden. Elf NG Wizard/Rogue. Quiet stalker, new to spellcasters.

Krakus. 1/2 Elf LN Fighter(Mobility) Useful second in command

Elsbeth. 1/2 Elf CG Sorcerer(Stormborn) Acts like archer

Fidgit. Gnome C Druid. Niece young likewise very bloodthirsty and really really funny.

Vash Fidgits Snow Leopard mount

So Far they saved olegs, killed a bear, killed spiders and more bandits in less then 2 rds per combat. I am going to have to make serious adjustments.

Campaign material I agree more is better. Any reason why you are asking this question?

When not running,

Leader, defacto they think I am bossy I just want the game to go.

Why can't people( female gamers )socialize before or after not during.. :(

Facilitator, GM in me gotta help even when it hurts.

Think i need to read a history book for fun. Have not read one since college. It sucks when you take what you love and turn it into work.

I agree scrap the spell casters as every one has some power.

Maybe have the crafters as traits or feats to be chosen early on.

Make the lords non-playable or npc class. Maybe make a feat for later development.

Possible bloodline type from Unearthed Arcana?

Everyone with power would be in effect summoners with elemental magic instead of summoning spells.

I will look for Vurt seems interesting.

In someways I envy those that focus on one or two series and learn everything there is about it. I never had that focus/obsession for any one thing. I have played over 20 different rpgs over the years so I tend to merge things after a while.

BTW

What is with the grammer police around here?
I have seen comments numerous times on posts.

Looked up to and too I use also. English is a horrible language.

I am a working american with a degree in history and political science selling Steel for a living.

Besides to , too, their, there can go to hell hell

I blame public school edumacation. Fer real, yo.

Never cared for grammer it just gets in the way. :)

I read.

Not for speed.

i simple read and good books create images in my head so i stop reading and start seeing and feeling what is going on. Best i can say.

This is just an age and experience arguement.

If you started with a game ( ie 3.xx, shadowrun etc. ) that offered choices then you tend to plan to reach a goal.

If you started with 1st ed or 2ed or games with limited choices you tend to play more organic with seeing what comes to the character.

Of course this is just my opinion.

my major issue seems to be thinking of a creative idea for a concept with out the nagging feeling I have seen this before.

Sometimes ignorance is bliss, if only i was a beer drinking sports nut ( i do like watching sports ) who ony cared about hooking up and haveing the best pimpest ride around....

O well guess i can blame my mother for teaching me to love reading.

True, with the shear volume of written word out their i guess every sentence written is in fact plagarism. :)

You are right that way i can rip entire campaign plots and characters from books without even knowing i did it right :)

I have read a lot of books over the years. I mean a lot I have read trilogies in 2 days. I hurt myself moving my paperback collection.

Looking at predesigned adventures I see stories similar to things I have read and I judge them often wanting.

I look at my own adventures and see where I stole ideas from books and it bothers me.

I look at the superstar entries and see items and characters from books with many common traits.

I cannot name characters from most books because they all have run together.

I have friends who read one or two series a year and they know everything about them. I read them and think it is ok but nothing special is this just a jaded perspective. Should I stop reading books in order to enjoy RPG's more ;)?

Just some random thoughts.

Discuss

That is true a Gnome would invent it and dwarf would perfect it and keep it conealed as a clan secret never to be released on the pain of death.

As a side note i believe dwarves would be the first to develope any type of powder to aid in mining.

He also is working on a pump alchemist fire thrower.

And he blames me for the stuff we come up with if it was not for him i never would have spent the past 20 odd years playing this game. :)

I guess I did not know what I was starting :)

My brother who loves to invent in game objects came up with his idea for Dwarven powder for a campaign we are building. His idea is:

2 part Charcoal
1 part alchemist fire
1 part Dragon Guano

You take the charcoal and the dragon guano and soak it in alchemist fire until all of the liquid is absorbed. You let it dry and very carefully powder the material.

I told him he was a sick man. This then degenerated into a conversation about various types of dragon guano and their effects using Blue for blasting caps and black for thermite.

This is what years of Military Intelligence gets you I guess.