Annoying Game Questions You Want Answered

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Sat Aug 11, 2012 9:05 am

I'll see if he can give me a more specific reason I can't use physical arrows, and explain why I want to use them, see what comes out of that.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Fri Aug 17, 2012 10:07 am

Basically his answer was "No string. Have you ever tried not conjuring an energy arrow while drawing the string?" and subtly implying that the god who gifted the bow to him may not take kindly to using mundane bows instead or modifying the bow to have a string. So I'm probably going to start experimenting with casting on energy arrows and drawing without intent to conjure an energy arrow.

I think my favourite thing about having played Runequest is that it imparted some magic tea party to magic in other games. Strange as that may sound.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As far as my own game goes, due to obscene number bloat, and my own difficulty setting appropriate challenges for them*, we're shelving the game I was running. It was still the longest continuous campaign I've run at about 3 months (mid-May to mid-August), of which I'm actually incredibly, pathetically proud. Hopefully the start of the semester doesn't completely bone my group and we can actually play a new campaign (one player may be going back to an out of state college after several years away from it, another can't play Thursdays due to her class schedule).

*Also, I was getting tired of people complaining about Tome.

So, because the three problems cited stem from 1) My over generosity as a DM, 2) Tome, and it's handling by the group, and 3) people having ignorant impressions of published classes that lead to them thinking the tome versions were too much (pretty much every time someone said that the CArc Warlock was overpowered, or that their limited number of invocations was the only thing keeping them from being so, my thoughts were filled with "fuckyouitstoodamnedweakhaveyoueverfuckingplayedoneshutthefuckupIhateyoudouchebag"), and with the advise of people outside the game, I've decided to run Core Only. Also, because I'm hoping people will see the things that *do* need to be fixed. Possibly I'll be giving people advise/ideas made to reveal those things....

Anyway, what I have so far is a world literally constructed by Archelementals, who were quite literally tied to Alchemy. Like, the processes of Alchemy will actually be children of the elements and shit, and alchemy and it's processes influence the world's astrology and, well, the world. It's sort of Low-High magic, in that I'm not putting in Ye Olde Magic Shop, and npcs don't make tons and tons and tons of magic items that wind up just lying around. If someone makes a magic item, it because they are making something for themselves, or possibly someone close to them. At the same time, anything that doesn't cost XP and can improve quality of life will be thrown around like fucking candy. Druids and Plant Clerics will cast Plant Growth on a yearly basis. Wizards fabricate and polymorph up food. Clerics gather around the town grain storage weekly and stack up castings of Purify Food/Water. Settlements with particularly high level wizards seriously just mine gi-fucking-gantic Walls of Iron. Roads are made through Transmute Mud to Rock/Transmute Rock to Lava/Transmute Lava to Rock tricks. Some particularly high level wizards probably bind beholders to rods and play Minecraft all day.

All this said, the world is, at least to start, Mechanically Core Only. Which is to say I'll probably be refluffing monsters all the damned time, and am even creating monastic orders with different Bonus Feat sets, but no classes, spells, creatures, etc. are being pulled from outside the Core Three, except possibly for flavour. I grabbed the Archomentals as not-gods-but-have-cults figures, for example. Which makes Cryonax worshippers sad because there's no Core Cold Domain.

At the same time, the world is mild-ly steampunk. Not Industrial Revolution scale with the tech, but it's not unheard of for random humans and gnomes to make stuff that seems like it came out of Girl Genius. Because I'm apparently ok with writing up items and reflavouring monsters to be steammechs and shit, but not with writing up or element swapping spells in a "Core Only Game."

...the question in all of this follows... One of the players asked if steamtech means firearms. He wants me to use the ones from Dragon Magazine, but when he asked I remembered the firearms in DMG. Are the DMG firearms terrible or ok or what?

[[Core Only is both to exercise self-discipline, because I don't think I've ever even tried to run core only, and to try and teach people "see! D&D needs more shit!" in an ill conceived attempt to get them to be at least a bit more welcoming of fixes]]

ishy · Post by **ishy** » Fri Aug 17, 2012 10:41 pm

I like how in a core only game the first thing a player asks for is dragon magazine content.

DMG firearms are not very good.
Then again, I've never seen firearms rules in a fantasy game that I actually liked.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Sat Aug 18, 2012 12:37 am

Actually, I think the actual first thing asked for wasn't even that, it was the Avenger paladin variant, if I recall.

I looked over the DMG firearms, and basically they amount to Large and Huge Longbows that can be used one handed, and have less range. And are obscenely expensive.

The Dragon firearms are an outgrowth of those. The pistol in Dragon #321 is literally the pistol from DMG. The rifle just has a better range, and then they added a bunch of other shit that I can write up perfectly fine.

So I'm thinking I'll basically treat the DMG guns exactly like that, outsized longbows with terrible range, that medium creatures can use one handed, and which only carry a single shot. Other guns exist, but they're experimental and unique, much like the steam tech. There will be a slight price break, but they'll still be more conspicuous consumption items than day to day weapons, as they'll cost roughly as much as heavy armour.

erik · Post by **erik** » Sat Aug 18, 2012 2:12 am

There's no reason why DnD firearms couldn't have been mechanically as repeating crossbows. Rate of fire as your iterative attacks and move action to reload clips/speed loaders (or rapid reload for free action reloads). Of course able to be enchanted as ranged weapons (enhancements for weapon and ammo).

If you gave special traits for different guns (heavy gun, shotgun, automatics) and enough damage to justify using a feat for rapid reload and not having a strength modifier on it then they would be viable without being the only weapon to use.

Koumei · Post by **Koumei** » Sat Aug 18, 2012 4:03 am

There really is a reason why everyone uses their own system (leading to me being delighted when I find someone using my own) for guns in D&D: the ones presented in the DMG are pretty lame.

But hey, you said Core Only, so they can enjoy their shitty guns.

CatharzGodfoot · Post by **CatharzGodfoot** » Sat Aug 18, 2012 5:27 pm

If you're going Core-only as an experiment, don't ruin it by immediately changing the rules. Just allow all of the weapons in the DMG as well. Even steampunk laser pistols and antimatter rifles (although they don't have a price, so players can't start with them without special abilities like 'start with a masterwork weapon of your choice').

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Sat Jan 12, 2013 4:42 am

I happened upon the fact that, in Mage, sleeper disbelief actually does hurt mythic creatures. The problem is, that the 2nd edition book does not specify how and I can't find anything at all about unbelief in the Revised book. Does anyone know where I can find some kind of system, or if there even was one? If I'm going to have an adventure about a marauder ripping holes in reality and sending bygones across to wreak havoc and kill sleepers, I kind of need to know how long a gryphon can last.

Ted the Flayer · Post by **Ted the Flayer** » Sat Feb 16, 2013 5:34 am

Resurrecting the thread.

I was wondering if there were any alien/freakish/nonhumanoid good aligned outsiders (or aberrations, or whatnot)?

In my campaign setting, I have done away with the outer planes as written, and instead am having pocket demiplanes and other dimensions with alien physics. However, I don't want to ape Lovecraft completely, and don't want all the outer planar stuff to be completely evil. I'm just wondering if there's freakish looking good creatures other than Flumphs and Silthilar.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Sat Feb 16, 2013 7:01 am

Balhannoth's (MM4) are CN aberrations, Lodestone Marauders (MM4) are N aberrations, but they're also of animal int. Concordant Killers (MM4) are pretty classically diablic looking, but N (they're outsiders), which reminds me of Diaboli, from an issue of Dragon (327), again, classically diabolic appearance, but Chaotic, usually good, outsiders. They fight Far Realms denizens and hail from the Realm of Nightmares, coterminous with the Region of Dreams and the Ethereal Plane.
Quaraphons (MM3) are CN aberrations. Seryulins (MM3) are giant, near-human intelligence, slugs that are N aberrations. Susurruses (MM3) are N aberrations. Prismatic Ropers are N aberrations, but they're also ropers, so they're not exactly the most intelligent or active aberrations... Trillochs (MM3) are pretty classically lovecraftian looking CN outsiders. Visilights (MM3) are sentient balls of light with porcelain masks and arms, that wear black dresses. They're LN outsiders.
Windghosts (MM2) are again pretty lovecraftian creatures, and are usually Lawful, they're aberrations.
Lurkers are giant manta ray-like ambush predator aberrations from Underdark that are N aberrations, but are of animal Int. If you gave them a higher Int, you could actually make a pretty cool society of fairly alien creatures. Possibly enemies of Illithids, or whatever.

Plus, it's D&D, so you could always just have a race that was mind fucked by gods of "good" in it's history, that are CG beholders, or whatever... Or just make something.

Ted the Flayer · Post by **Ted the Flayer** » Sat Feb 16, 2013 7:21 am

Those are definitely things I can work with. I've already added the winged template to mind flayers and reskinned them into mi-go, I have no issue with changing things around.

Basically, I think the "great wheel" is kind of stupid and it doesn't fit in my game. So I'm trying something different.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:31 am

What do people think of replacing Chaos and Law in D&D with Entropy and Stasis, and having them just represent the tendency for a character to change or stay the same. It's meaningless, but at least it's more definable than Law and Chaos.

shadzar · Post by **shadzar** » Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:42 am

Prak_Anima wrote:What do people think of replacing Chaos and Law in D&D with Entropy and Stasis, and having them just represent the tendency for a character to change or stay the same. It's meaningless, but at least it's more definable than Law and Chaos.

i would prefer to leave chaos alone, and the instability it is, and name law to Order, which it always stood for. some series opposite of chaos. law is just one form of code, but a BAD choice from a thesaurus for an antonym of chaos.

Koumei · Post by **Koumei** » Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:46 am

It'd be better to just do away with Law and OrderLaw and Chaos (okay, both, L&O is shit). Have Good and Evil, and don't worry about the other crap.

Avoraciopoctules · Post by **Avoraciopoctules** » Tue Feb 19, 2013 1:28 am

In Lamentations of the Flame Princess, there is just Law/Chaos, no Good/Evil axis. Law means "Has a Destiny" and Chaos means "Tainted by magic". Though to get the right emphasis, "magic" probably needs to get a few gratuitous Ks.

hyzmarca · Post by **hyzmarca** » Tue Feb 19, 2013 3:49 am

Prak_Anima wrote:What do people think of replacing Chaos and Law in D&D with Entropy and Stasis, and having them just represent the tendency for a character to change or stay the same. It's meaningless, but at least it's more definable than Law and Chaos.

I prefer to think of them as blowing stuff up and not getting blown up.
But you can still call them Law and Chaos.

Law is the metaphysical force responsible for things like inertia, which is why every molecule in your body doesn't spontaneously accelerate to the speed of light in opposite directions, and the Conservation of Energy/Matter, which is why you don't spontaneously stop existing. Both good things.

Chaos is responsible for time's arrow, which is why things happen in order instead of all at once or not at all, and all thermodynamic processes, which are why chemical reactions happen and things can do work.

On a cosmic scale, helping one beat the other is kind of stupid, because you'll die either way. The only choice is if you freeze due to all thermodynamic processes halting or if you explode at the speed of light.

On a social scale, Law is traditional. It's not about organization or hierarchy, it's about resistance to change. As a result their societies are ancient and stable when left alone, but prone to suffering from Outside Context Problems. Chaos is about change and dynamicism, as a result there is a lot of upward mobility in chaotic societies, laws change easily, and they're more adaptive, but they're also more prone to internal revolution.

Koumei wrote:It'd be better to just do away with Law and OrderLaw and Chaos (okay, both, L&O is shit). Have Good and Evil, and don't worry about the other crap.

Good and Evil are actually more problematic. It's actually possible to give coherent, consistent, not-shit definitions to Law and Chaos. Stasis and Entropy works in this regard. It's not possible to give coherent definitions for Good and Evil, because there are none in the real world. The best you can do is change them to Celestial/Holy and Fiendish/Unholy and remove all moral weight from them.

shadzar · Post by **shadzar** » Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:15 pm

Koumei wrote:It'd be better to just do away with Law and OrderLaw and Chaos (okay, both, L&O is shit). Have Good and Evil, and don't worry about the other crap.

never watched that show, but i meant Good and Evil, Order and Chaos.

Ted the Flayer · Post by **Ted the Flayer** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 5:02 am

Alright, quick question here.

The Alienist PrC grants the ability to convert the fiendish and celestial monsters in the Summon Monster line to Psuedonatural versions. Is that a power-up? Wait, let me restate that, is that enough of a power-up to matter? I'm considering changing the spells to do that due to there being no celestial or fiendish realms in my universe.

Koumei · Post by **Koumei** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 6:24 am

Unless you use the Joke Book version, then no, Pseudonatural is more or less equal in power to Fiendish or Celestial. Handy to have as a little freebie on a class that's giving you full caster progression, but if it were made the standard for everyone, you wouldn't suddenly see everyone prepping Summon Monster spells.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 6:34 am

The only real difference is that Psuedonats get True Strike 1/day instead of Smite (rival hat), 5 more SR, and make enemies take a -1 on attacks (alt form, but why would you not summon the monster in that form?). On the other hand, celestial creatures have an additional resistance over fiendish and psuedonats.

fectin · Post by **fectin** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 1:42 pm

Pseudonatural turns your low level summons into real (albeit minor) threats. You can summon a tiny viper and be much more confident that it will hit and force a save vs. poison. It's still pretty crap, but at least you're only fishing for one outlier, not two.

Pseudonatural also has a minor debuff. It's not great, but it's better than nothing.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 5:08 pm

...now imagine what a psuedonatural tiny viper looks like.

Darth Rabbitt · Post by **Darth Rabbitt** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 5:26 pm

Prak_Anima wrote:...now imagine what a psuedonatural tiny viper looks like.

Probably something like this.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 5:41 pm

I feel like giving a snake tentacles makes it less of a snake... I was thinking something more like this[pretty nsfw]

...You Lost Me · Post by **...You Lost Me** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 9:33 pm

That just looks like a penis...