Wow the errata totally escaped the two of us. That makes perfect sense now though.
.
But is it fair to downgrade an item this guy chose to specialize in if the erratad version is something he might not have chose to specialize in? that seems pretty janky to me..
.
And no not everything is immune to critical hits at high levels, and if EVERYTHING they fight is that is slapping the character that spent time to plan to be good at something in the face for no other reason than he planned. To me, that is not being a good DM/GM.
.
The truth is I just wanted to find a way to make criticals less of a problem without making it seem like im picking on him.
.
Concealment is good, fortification could serve a purpose, and strength reducers are not a bad idea. Just as long as everything he faces doesnt have fortification im ok with that
Is it fair? Well yes, it was never intended to be what you have been playing it as. It's like going shopping, seeing something marked WAY too low with a sticker, taking it up to the counter and finding out it was not on sale. "Oops." You knew it was too good to be true but you tried to buy it anyways. Honestly, the player took advantage of it long enough that you are complaining of a problem for all intents and purposes. Enforce the errata and if the character is upset, give them the option to change weapons and switch out weapon focus/specialization feats for that new weapon like another poster said. It is more than fair and the criticals shouldn't be much of an issue as the item stats will end up being more balanced now.
Doesn't matter if you want it or not. It's what you get, because you're playing D&D as a non caster. There are also people that have fun when being beaten with whips and chains. That's still assault, even if they think it's fun. Which is a giant non sequitor anyways.
Well, I wasn't going to "go there", but since you kind of broached the subject, I think it might help us all understand each other a little better if I make a little analogy.
Tabletop RPG playing is like making love. While there are "rules", everyone has a different idea of what is enjoyable and satisfying. Telling someone that they are doing it wrong if it takes more then 6-12 seconds, or they can't succeed with some classes, or that they need to meet some arbitrary numbers, may work for you, but it will leave many folks unsatisfied, and they won't have a good time.
I'm sure you think your way is, "the RIGHT way", but that is a matter of personal taste, and not really open to debate. Everyone is wired a little differently, and finds pleasure in unique ways. Being the strongest, or quickest, or having the biggest numbers doesn't mean anything if that isn't what the other participant(s) find desirable. If everyone is enjoying themselves, needs are being met by the experience, and at the end of the night they want to continue to participate, then you are doing it right!
Please consider this before you tell other people how to have a good time.
If that is what works for you, I'm not going to judge.
My point was that not everyone partakes in an activity for the same reasons. If you enjoy the way you do things, by all means continue. However, don't tell people that your way is the only way, or the right way.
EDIT: I have tried to point out to you on several occasions that your dismissive tone is very off-putting. As this is all non-verbal, impersonal communication, I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt, and assuming that you don't realize that you are very often rude and insulting.
This was yet another attempt to broaden your awareness of the feelings of those around you. Sorry that little sentence you made up was all that you took away from it. Perhaps you will read my above ppost again, and since you seem to be fairly smart, get the point of what I'm trying to say.
Again, good luck with your playstyle.
Hey, someone has to keep the monsters well fed so they can provide XP to the good characters. *evil grin*
You mean the paladins and good clerics, or those characters who, although good, lack an aura of good?
I find that very noble of you :P
Mistah and Fergie:
Really. I mean really. This has nothing, I repeat, NOTHING to do with the original post.
With that said, thank you all for the advice. We hung the hat on the campaign a long time ago and I allowed the thread to continue only to better my understandings of how to handle a situation similiar in the future, which I could foresee with the falcata anyways.
Good news is we liked the world, characters, and campaign so much we are now bulding our own world centered on it.
I am closing this thread because I dont want it to turn into a b!!&$/squabble page, which has been known to happen to old boards.
thanks for the help!
Critical hits are in no way relevant at any level, critical immunity or no critical immunity.That's a pretty bold statement. Do you have any facts, or even arguments, to support it?Sure do. Encounter paradigms. Beating the enemy as a non caster is a DPS race in which you have little time to win before they kill you as if it takes you two rounds, you'll win or lose based on init, if it takes you one you'll probably be ok, if it takes more than two you're too slow.
Devoting any sort of resources to critical hits is resources not being spent on something better. For example the weapons with decent crit ranges lack Reach, which is what you really want. Feats spent on applying random minor effects on a crit are feats not spent on something else.
Now, there are one of two possible outcomes here:
1: You do not need the critical hits to DPS down the enemy fast enough. You completely wasted your resources getting something that is not at all helpful to you.
2: You do need the critical hits to DPS down the enemy fast enough. Which means whenever you don't get them, you die. As the chance of not getting them is 70% at the lowest, clearly this is a losing proposition even in the short term and especially in the long term.
As such they are quite irrelevant, being only sucker bait for those who will take something cool but useless over something with any real practical value.
Hint: There's a reason why things like "D4 HD and half BAB" do not a weak class make, no matter how plain it might sound. There's also a reason why classes who have things like abilities that encourage you to stand still and abilities that encourage you to not stand still along with abilities like a nerfed Feather Fall are terrible classes. But one is sucker bait, and one is genuinely good.
And all PCs will get crit immunity to avoid turning dead in two round scenarios into dead in one round scenarios.
You by far based on all your statements and recollections of the rules have no made everyone realize one thing.
You would be absolutely, inarguably, in my own opinion, no fun to play a roleplaying game with. You completely miss the point of the game so far to call someone who chooses a flavor oriented combat system (you refer to as criticals, which I have yet to see you prove) makes them stupid and a sucker.
You by far are the prime example of a DM's nightmare, a rules lawyer, and (despite how many years of experience you may have)a munchkin for missing the big picture of playing the game.
Congratulations on being completely close minded to any others arguement and representing why people make fun of roleplaying gamers in the first place, you take this WAY TO SERIOUS.
The game is fun, criticals are fun, criticals kill things. Bottom line. pun intended.
I don't know if anyone has mentioned this (didn't seem like it) but the Heavy Fortification property no longer grants 100% protection. It only grants 75% protection. This means that only natural (from creature type) and cap-stone-based immunities exist (AFAIK).
As far as I'd be concerned, even as a crit-build character, go for it and have most enemies have Light Fort, many have Medium and the big-bads have Heavy*. It's not 100% immunities, so I still have the chance to get lucky and look awesome, but it still slows me down a little. It is high level play now and many creatures have learned to put up the necessary defenses for survival.
The complete immunity is something I'd reserve for a final BBEG (as in, the final one pre campaign retirement).*I'd actually recommend using the "resistance" % as a number to reduce the extra damage by, as opposed to a % to negate it. As in, if he normally does 48, and his critical would thus be an extra 144, he would do X% of 144 less on a crit than normal. An enemy with medium fortification would only take 120 (instead of 192) for example. This means that every crit matters without reducing the power of the resistance.
Thank you I will use that suggestion often. VERY INSIGHTFUL AND CONTRIBUTIVE.
I removed a post. Please learn to disagree politely.
I also removed a reply to that post.
stuff
Yes,it is fair to implement Errata.
If your...Thank you, all of you. This forum has been very insightful. I especially like the little tricks, like levitate haha.
I removed a post. Please learn to disagree politely.
I also removed a reply to that post.
Hurray for more biased moderation!
The more I post here, the more I realize the reputation of this place in most communities other than this one is well deserved.
Hi Welcome
Behavior has consequences. You don't like the consequences? Change your behavior.
Hurray for more biased moderation!
The more I post here, the more I realize the reputation of this place in most communities other than this one is well deserved.
Hi Welcome
Respectfully, have you considered that the common denominator in all of the forum slap-fights you get into is you?
Or that Occam's Razor suggest that it's more likely that one person is being a jerk than that many people are being a jerk?
Except that this problem does not occur anywhere else, including in the real world. Which means the common denominator isn't me, it's idiots.
If this is true, it indicates that you treat people elsewhere differently.
Here, you're: "My way is right, and everyone else is wrong. Also, everyone else is using houserules and the unique way my game is run is the only viable official way."
Not surprisingly, when you cop that kind of attitude, even people who might agree with you are going to argue with you.
Charisma's not a dump stat in real life.
Hurray for more biased moderation!
The moderation is appropriate. You have been rude and contemptuous of any opinion that departs from yours on any point. You have consistently insulted the viability and intelligence of any player who doesn't play things exactly your way.
People call you out for being obnoxious because you are being obnoxious.It's quite possible to argue and discuss differences without being nasty. You haven't been doing this.
Correct, most people on other forums and in the real world are not idiots, at least not to this degree.
Your insistence that anyone who disagrees with you is an idiot, and your belief that anyone you label an idiot should be insulted, are two errors you're making.
Treating anyone the way you have been treating people is wrong. The fact that you do it makes you a bad person.
Which is also why if you check my posting history you will see I became progressively meaner over time.
Do you suppose that makes people more, or less, likely to take you seriously?
I think this thread is done.