Annoying Game Questions You Want Answered

[The Adventurer's Almanac]

Let's say that D&D were to add an attacking option similar to Power Attack, but instead of sacrificing accuracy for damage, you sacrificed accuracy in exchange for hitting more targets. How mandatory would it be to spam this on enemies every round? At what point would the penalty make it not the superior choice in most circumstances? Would boss monsters completely paste parties?

[OgreBattle]

It depends on if it KO's opposition, or if it can apply a useful penalty to multiple targets. If not then focus firing is more important because being at 1 or 100 hit points, you're at 100% offensive power.

Another problem with D&D's attacks are... the system was created to abstract all that parrying and feinting and counterattacks and meaty chops, but then people tacked on "parrying, power attack, etc. are now distinct abilities"

[Foxwarrior]

You should really learn algebra at some point.

Actually, everyone should probably learn algebra in elementary school, it's really useful.

[The Adventurer's Almanac]

I don't think they teach algebra until middle school, actually.

[Zaranthan]

Yeah, you need a pretty solid base in arithmetic before the basics of algebra even mean anything, let alone make sense.

[The Adventurer's Almanac]

It depends on if it KO's opposition, or if it can apply a useful penalty to multiple targets. If not then focus firing is more important because being at 1 or 100 hit points, you're at 100% offensive power.

Another problem with D&D's attacks are... the system was created to abstract all that parrying and feinting and counterattacks and meaty chops, but then people tacked on "parrying, power attack, etc. are now distinct abilities"

And what if those attacking options were simply built into the system and everyone could do them instead of having to waste a feat on it?

[deaddmwalking]

In a case where you're not going to hit without a natural 20, you should spam the multi-attack (especially if you roll for each one). Hitting multiple targets is better than hitting fewer targets, and if the penalty doesn't matter, you should do that.

I think it's important to determine whether you roll per enemy, or one roll total - that does impact the equation. If something is unlikely to happen, rolling twice makes it more likely to happen than rolling once... Rolling once with a penalty is probably worse than rolling without the penalty, but rolling twice with a penalty may make you more likely to hit at least once. Ie, if you need to roll an 11+ for 1 hit (50%), or get to roll 2 attacks that need a 15+, you have a 50% of getting at least one (but only a 25% if you only roll once).

If you have abilities that affect rolls/re-rolls, that also may determine what is the optimal strategy.

[OgreBattle]

And what if those attacking options were simply built into the system and everyone could do them instead of having to waste a feat on it?

With the way HP and AC tends to be in D&D it would be tough to make a variable maneuver combat system that is more satisfying and faster than dropping things with big damage.

My opinion is that the D&D melee warrior can become more interesting to play not so much the power attack, expertise type stuff but making positioning, blitzing, blocking a smoother and bigger part of the combat.

I will also always bring up that a giant swinging a tree should be knocking human characters over by virtue of the core mechanics supporting huge size differences, and not the giant using a bullrush.

[The Adventurer's Almanac]

I think it's important to determine whether you roll per enemy, or one roll total - that does impact the equation.

This is an excellent point that I had not considered, thanks. I'm definitely thinking "one roll total", because the alternative would mean that blast attacks like Fireball would make you need to roll against everyone you hit, which, while detailed, can slow things down a lot. If that also happens to nerf multi-attacking, then that sounds like a double win in my book. I need to go actually crunch some numbers, but this is helpful.

My opinion is that the D&D melee warrior can become more interesting to play not so much the power attack, expertise type stuff but making positioning, blitzing, blocking a smoother and bigger part of the combat.

I can sign onto that. Having attacking options that alter your numbers is nice, but not as necessary as a fun movement and positioning system that doesn't result in flying archers killing everyone in the world.

I will also always bring up that a giant swinging a tree should be knocking human characters over by virtue of the core mechanics supporting huge size differences, and not the giant using a bullrush.

Oh, tits, you're right. How could I forget that? That should be baked in, too.

[The Adventurer's Almanac]

Could someone yell at me about economics? I've written up some loose rules for buying and selling items at different values, since there's always someone who wants to try and haggle with the merchant or wonders if the campaign's actions have an effect on a town's prices. I've come up with the quickest and dirtiest solution I could think of.

An item's price in the book is its Base Value. This is the item when it's being sold normally and there's nothing weird affecting the price.

An item's Base Value can be modified based on its Demand. The more people that want to buy an item, the more it costs. Pretty straightforward. It comes in 5 levels:

[*]Very Demand sets an item’s Base Value to 200%, meaning it may be sold for 100% of its Base Value.
[*]High Demand sets an item’s Base Value to 150%, meaning it may be sold for 75% of its Base Value.
[*]Regular Demand does not change an item’s Base Value, meaning it may be sold for 50% of its Base Value.
[*]Low Demand sets an item’s Base Value to 50%, meaning it may be sold for 25% of its Base Value.
[*]Very Low Demand sets an item’s Base Value to 25%. People will not buy items from you if they are this unwanted.

As this relates to crafting, an item is typically created at 25% of its Base Value, meaning you'll get a profit from it as long as it's not in Low Demand. If a merchant likes/dislikes you, or if something is affecting production, or what the fuck ever, then you slide its Demand along this scale accordingly.

Am I missing anything? Price wars aren't really something I care to model, but I know how frustrating it can be to invest into crafting shit only to find out that you'll break even at best. Should I not even bother with this?

[deaddmwalking]

I think you should consider the list purchase price and the list sell price as 'quick and dirty' - someone will buy your shovel for half the listed price because they're pretty sure they can get at least that much for it without too much work, and if they're willing to hold it a couple of weeks they can get more.

If you're selling an item, and you find the person who needs it, there's no reason you can't get the full purchase price (instead of half the normal purchase price). But if you're going to sell it to a merchant who will then resell it, you get much less.

Basically, D&D economics is based on pawn-shops. The people running pawn shops pay you less than an item is worth (because you need the money and they're going to have it in inventory for potentially a long time) and they'll sell it for as high a price as they can (but probably less than brand new).

Appraise sucks as a skill, so if you're using D&D, a good roll on appraise would be a good way for figuring out how much you can get for it.

If the base price is 50% of the list price, a DC 10 should get you that, with each +5 getting you another 15% (DC 15 is 65%, DC 25 is 95%) and with good roll you can get more than 100% (sometimes people will pay extra because you're an awesome adventurer and this shovel helped slay a dragon).

Getting more money than an item is 'worth' shouldn't be a problem - you do want to have something like the wish economy where piles of gold are used to pay for armies and not for artifact swords. Getting more money helps PCs live a better lifestyle and have better MUNDANE equipment, and hire grooms and buy horses etc. It's more important to have things that players WANT to spend money on than trying to keep them from getting money.

[The Adventurer's Almanac]

Getting more money than an item is 'worth' shouldn't be a problem - you do want to have something like the wish economy where piles of gold are used to pay for armies and not for artifact swords. Getting more money helps PCs live a better lifestyle and have better MUNDANE equipment, and hire grooms and buy horses etc. It's more important to have things that players WANT to spend money on than trying to keep them from getting money.

Yeah, I'm certainly not worried about PCs being able to make money. I don't really disagree with what you, but I'm not certain how you can't just say that when you're selling to someone who really wants to buy from you, then you sell it to them at Very High Demand, since that would be equivalent to the full purchasing price. I think I'm missing what you're saying.

[Mechalich]

Am I missing anything? Price wars aren't really something I care to model, but I know how frustrating it can be to invest into crafting shit only to find out that you'll break even at best. Should I not even bother with this?

Unless your game is primarily about crafting and/or business management making lots of money via crafting is actually probably something you don't want, because it creates an incentive to spend all your time crafting instead of adventuring or shadowrunning or whatever it is the PCs are doing.

Additionally the physical creation of utilitarian items on an artisanal basis has historically not been the path to great profit. Very few people in history have gotten rich making horseshoes or shovels (selling yes, producing, no) prior to the industrial revolution. The exception is artists, but the production of art is generally very different from crafting in RPG terminology, and even then in pre-industrial times artists rarely got rich on their own terms, they simply found rich patrons who allowed them to live large.

The more probable use for PC crafting is to allow the PCs to produce items that they need that either are otherwise entirely unavailable or are only available at via ruinous price-gouging.

[The Adventurer's Almanac]

Well, under normal conditions you can make items for a quarter of the price you can buy them for. That sounds like ruinous price-gouging to me?
I should also mention that I have a downtime system with actual fucking jobs you can do, so if there's any incentive to make money outside of adventuring, then that's the way. Plus, after doing some math... you can make as much selling by selling a single rare Pokemon as you can by building a character around working the best jobs, being high level, and spending a week working instead of doing anything cool.
As long as you can get more money by adventuring or playing the main game or whatever, what's the issue with letting PCs get some extra pocket change?

[The Adventurer's Almanac]

Fuck it, yell at me about people doing jobs, too. I figure I should hammer out the average income for a regular person before I go assigning prices to things, right?

They're pretty straightforward, there's a list of Professions, their Associated Skills, and their Base Income. A Bartender, for example, needs the Charm, General Education, or Intuition skills, and their Base Income is $10.
Professions go up to Grade 8, and you can trade in skill points for grade points - more the higher your level, but a Bartender's Maximum Grade is 6, because there's only so good you can be at reenacting Coyote Ugly.

Working your job takes a Downtime Action and you can't do it more than twice a day unless the place you live really doesn't give a shit about labor laws. You make a Profession Check by rolling the Profession’s Skill + your Grade + other bonuses. There's also a feature that serves as a multiplier to your Grade, which is mostly intended for NPCs, but could be taken by players if they really want it.

A bartender who's good at their job and doing it for years but is only level 1 because they've never risked their life for stupid reasons, would have Adept Charm, AKA they roll 4d6 dice. Because he's an NPC with nothing better to do with his life, he's at the Maximum Grade of 6, and has the Professional feature I mentioned earlier, which doubles his Grade.
This means he rolls 4d6+12 when making a Profession Check and gets $10 per point in the check. If he just feels like putting in an average day's work, he can forgo rolling and "take 3" on his check, meaning he acts as if he rolled all 3's on his d6 rolls. On average, he makes a (12+12)= 24 on his check, and goes home after a single shift with $240, with plenty of time left in the day to contemplate abandoning his career and doing this shit as a side gig instead. Instead of doing that, he returns for his second shift, scoring $480 for a single day's work.

Meanwhile, his coworker, who is a hardened adventurer who has this job because he enjoys rolling the Bartender random events, is an ultra badass PC who's max level, has Grandmaster Charm, and hasn't bothered with any of this "grade" shit. He just rolls 8d6 per shift, meaning he can take 3 and make exactly as much money as the aforementioned chump, only he's 19 levels higher than him. He takes his proceeds from a single shift, buys a Hyper Potion, then leaves town for the day to punch a dragon in the dick and come home with its incredibly valuable body parts to sell for money he can use to bribe the mayor with.
If were he to apply himself at his bartending job, then he could theoretically make twice as much money as before, resulting in $480 per shift, $960 per day, or about 4-5 thousand dollars a week. Not bad for the best bartender in the world, but not significantly moreso than his coworker - he's better off taking that Charm skill and getting a better job with it... like being a noble or socialite, which comes with its own set of issues.

Wait a minute! I forgot that Pokemon of sufficient Intelligence are also capable of holding down a job, too. You can't really give them Grades, but you can still get your Chansey a job at the local Pokemon Center as a Nurse... Hm. Is it legal to exploit your Pokemon's labor like this? I probably don't want people catching Pokemon so they can basically send them to labor camps and shit. Wait... do they even pay Pokemon? Oh god, I keep opening more cans of worms with this game.

[RelentlessImp]

Wait a minute! I forgot that Pokemon of sufficient Intelligence are also capable of holding down a job, too. You can't really give them Grades, but you can still get your Chansey a job at the local Pokemon Center as a Nurse... Hm. Is it legal to exploit your Pokemon's labor like this? I probably don't want people catching Pokemon so they can basically send them to labor camps and shit. Wait... do they even pay Pokemon? Oh god, I keep opening more cans of worms with this game.

Sword & Shield let you send Pokemon out to do labor and get paid for it. https://www.ign.com/wikis/pokemon-sword ... ement_List here's an overview of it.

[The Adventurer's Almanac]

Oh, shit. I don't have a Switch, so I haven't played that one yet. What's the mechanic called?
I'm glad there's precedent for that, but I can immediately think of one problem with it: What about the person who goes around catching as many Pokemon as they can so they can basically exploit their labor? That sounds like something Team Rocket would do... which makes me think it should be an option, just not a very legal or ethical one. Or perhaps when a Pokemon works for a while it makes enough money to buy its own food? So that way you send Mr. Mime to work at the general store, but instead of you getting cash money, you just don't have to feed your Mime for a week or something.

[RelentlessImp]

Oh, shit. I don't have a Switch, so I haven't played that one yet. What's the mechanic called?

Poké Jobs. They're accessed at the computer terminal, and have varying timeslots (see the link above). They give you cash, items, and your Pokemon get experience points at the same time. As the postings are on the terminals in the Pokécenters, all evidence points to it being legal in the Galar Region at the very least.

[Dean]

Every element of the pokemon world breaks down if you don't institute limits on how many creatures one person can control at a time. It's not unique to this. If I can send 100 caterpies to do anything you game is busted and fucked.

[The Adventurer's Almanac]

Well, an obvious limitation could be that you have to be there to work with your Pokemon. Sure, it's its own creature and can take care of itself, but it's still your responsibility, so you can't just tell your Machoke to stay in town and move pallets of bricks while you go out and adventure - YOU need to move bricks too, motherfucker!
This has the added bonus of tying into the loyalty system, so when you and Mr Mime are both flipping burgers for 8 hours, you not only get Mimey's paycheck, but your relationship also grows stronger.

Now, if you have a bunch of spare Pokemon you never use and you want to get them out of your box, then maybe you can just sell a Machoke to a construction company where they'll take care of it and give it a purpose in life. You probably don't want to do this with the Machoke you've raised since it was an egg, but one you just caught? It's not that different from trading with a person.
Hmm... though that assumes there are any positions open at the construction company. Trainers can't just go out and catch everything they see to sell into corporate bondage because there's just not that many people who will buy Pokemon. Ugh, this is basically another can of worms... but I do think being a Poke-hunter is thematically appropriate. Sounds like a good source of side-quests, too.

[Pedantic]

Am I missing anything? Price wars aren't really something I care to model, but I know how frustrating it can be to invest into crafting shit only to find out that you'll break even at best. Should I not even bother with this?

An interesting solution I've seen to this problem is offering up loot and/or having abilities that provide "raw crafting materials" above and beyond normal treasure currency. So crafting is a time cost to reduce the price of items, and you can also spend blue crystals instead of coins to pay for them.

The only issue is that if you're putting that kind of resource into your random treasure tables, you're making crafting a much less optional ability to have in your party, and you're kind of committing to crafting being an expected part of the game.

[The Adventurer's Almanac]

Joke's on you, not only do I already have that, but I also have it to where almost any character gains access to some sort of crafting category early on in the game. At character generation, if they really want.

[Dean]

There's been a lot of talk about Pokemon lately because...I dunno, one assumes something terrible happened to AA during childhood , but any conversation about mixing D&D and pokemon or even styling one like the other has me wondering something. Has anyone ever thought of or made an explanation for "Evolutions" that could fly in a world where everyone wasn't told to just ignore it? The pokemon world has much higher suspension of disbelief than the D&D world does. A snake just glowing and become a Naga, or a fish just glowing and then becoming a water dragon would only be accepted because players know if they ask even a single question about it the setting will crumble to ash.

I get the appeal though. Evolutions are inherently cool. Monster Hunter has wyverns that upgrade to giant wyverns then giant fire wyverns and all sorts of stuff like that. I don't think the exact magikarp to gyrados thing is worth saving but with just a little effort you could get close enough.

Cocoons could be a big thing maybe. Panthers get suffused with magic, make themselves a hidden nest, become cocooned, and come out Displacer Beasts? That sorta thing? A fish that builds a jellylike cocoon then grows for 6 weeks and comes out as a 12 foot long sea serpent works ok for my suspension of disbelief.

These are my initial brainfarts. Anyone got anything else?

[The Adventurer's Almanac]

Magic crystals are cooler than cocoons, plus you get the added benefit of getting to explain what kind of weird looking biomass the players see inside of its crystalline cocoon. Magic is probably the only way you're going to be able to slide anything like Pokemon evolution past your players, because it's just fucking magic. It's total nonsense. Having it happen over a period of days or weeks makes it way less nonsensical, though.

And I don't even like Pokemon that much! The franchise just makes me sad. As do its various tabletop interpretations.

[erik]

The first time you capture a Pokémon you actually killed it and reanimated it as a creature that can be summoned from a pocket dimension stasis realm. Improving them is as much a feat of the caster as it is accumulating battle experience for the spirit.

In the wild different stages may set in more gradually like normal development with exceptions for really extreme cases like gyarados. They could have an intermediate phase or something that takes a few weeks.