| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
 Posted - 29 Sep 2007 : 03:52:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Nevertheless, as to the question, "What if the person you are roleplaying leads a boring life?" Well, who really wants to play as a character who leads a ho-hum life? That takes away the whole point in playing...
That was a way for me to say that "playing somebody else life regarding of what kind of life he has" can be fun for a minority, but the majority prefer to be a protagonist of a story. |
Edited by - Skeptic on 29 Sep 2007 03:54:26 |
 |
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 29 Sep 2007 : 03:57:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Which they might well tweak anyway.
Tweaking is fine, fun and part of the "gamer" experience.
Using D&D like Ed's group* or many others scribes here (I guess) is IHMO, a missed opportunity to discover some really interesting games.
*From what we know through THO. |
Edited by - Skeptic on 29 Sep 2007 07:29:56 |
|
|
|
Aewrik
Seeker
80 Posts |
Posted - 01 Oct 2007 : 19:01:14
|
Hah... I dug up my old dragon accessory for DoD, and... I think D&D should get some inspiration for dragons, there.
One type of dragon there, can dish out 24594 damage with their breath weapon. A normal human has 10hp in DoD, and the most über hero to ever have set his foot upon that world had at most (tata!) 50.
Comparing knights vs. dragons as David vs. Goliath, or -more popular- as peasant vs. a fully armed AH-64 Apache, just lost its meaning.
I would've liked if the dragons of Faerūn would've been as almighty (stats-wise) as they rightly should be : )
I have a file I composed about dragons stowed away on a floppy somewhere... I'll see if I can find it and translate it. It's based on the very good information given in the Drakar supplement, and I've just added some of my own twists to make the dragons more... dragon-like.
Edit: Oh, and it's fluff, not crunch. I just used stats to give you a hint on the relative power level between dragons and the rest of the world.
I use dragons this way in FR, too. They're basically immortal, always. |
Edited by - Aewrik on 01 Oct 2007 19:04:09 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36803 Posts |
Posted - 01 Oct 2007 : 20:03:05
|
quote:
Originally posted by Aewrik
Hah... I dug up my old dragon accessory for DoD, and... I think D&D should get some inspiration for dragons, there.
One type of dragon there, can dish out 24594 damage with their breath weapon. A normal human has 10hp in DoD, and the most über hero to ever have set his foot upon that world had at most (tata!) 50.
Comparing knights vs. dragons as David vs. Goliath, or -more popular- as peasant vs. a fully armed AH-64 Apache, just lost its meaning.
I would've liked if the dragons of Faerūn would've been as almighty (stats-wise) as they rightly should be : )
I have a file I composed about dragons stowed away on a floppy somewhere... I'll see if I can find it and translate it. It's based on the very good information given in the Drakar supplement, and I've just added some of my own twists to make the dragons more... dragon-like.
Edit: Oh, and it's fluff, not crunch. I just used stats to give you a hint on the relative power level between dragons and the rest of the world.
I use dragons this way in FR, too. They're basically immortal, always.
Part of the problem with dragons and D&D is something that has remained constant, throughout all the editions: a lot of DMs have a tendency to have the dragon sit around in its lair and wait for someone to come fight it. And then, when combat does happen, the DM keeps the dragon on the ground, not only allowing full PC access to it, but negating one of the dragon's biggest advantages.
A dragon doesn't need a 25k hp breath weapon. A dragon simply needs to be played as intelligently as its score would imply. Once a dragon hits adult age or so, they should be very difficult for any group of players, unless those players are powerful, highly mobile, and have had plenty of time to prepare and stack the deck in their favor.
I've had a couple of people explain to me how their 10th level fighters were able to kill dragons by themselves. And these people were always bewildered when I replied "Not if I was running the dragon!"  |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
Aewrik
Seeker
80 Posts |
Posted - 01 Oct 2007 : 21:08:29
|
I've found the document, but it's alot to translate...
Perhaps someday you'll see how most dragons are played in Sweden : )
But you're right -- The dragon's greatest weapon is its superior intelligence. However, the image you get from many generic adventures (FR utilizes dragons to their full potential -- most of the dragons in Dragons of Faerūn are a testament to that), is exactly what you describes: they're just another kind of monsters waiting for heroes to defeat them.
I'd love to play with a DM that could portray a dragon "correctly" : ) |
|
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 01 Oct 2007 : 21:32:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Part of the problem with dragons and D&D is something that has remained constant, throughout all the editions: a lot of DMs have a tendency to have the dragon sit around in its lair and wait for someone to come fight it. And then, when combat does happen, the DM keeps the dragon on the ground, not only allowing full PC access to it, but negating one of the dragon's biggest advantages.
In D&D, a dragon shouldn't be more dangerous than any other monster of the same CR.
Also, don't forget that the designers already lowered those CR to make them feared.
However, the fly speed is included in the CR. |
|
|
|
Aewrik
Seeker
80 Posts |
Posted - 01 Oct 2007 : 22:07:11
|
And that's what so wrong. Trying to keep the balance in a game, where there are creatures based on mythology that portrayed the dragons as almost immortal beings gifted with the power to level cities and make kings bow in awe.
That was true in D&D until 3rd ed, in my opinion, when they started the massive project of trying to balance the game (which evidently failed, as they're creating a fourth edition, now).
I mean, hit points are a very abstract value in D&D. How come that two persons with con 15 can take a different amount of damage? So what if one of them is more experienced in battle (or at book keeping), they still have the same stamina (as it is rolled on con, and not fortitude). One of them can take the pain better, and suddenly, he doesn't die when a dagger strikes him in a critical spot, while the less experienced one would collapse from the wound.
"Hm, we didn't think of that." So they cover it up by the "Coup de grace" rule.
If I remember correctly, you stop gaining hit points after a certain level in AD&D, right?
I mean, a wizard with high con (+3), could theoretically have 140hp at level 20. I mean, that's as much as a juvenile blue dragon. Could the wizard actually survive a worse beating than a dragon?
There are better ways of making a setting heroic, without having fighters being able to withstand an ancient red dragon's breath of fire while taking a shower in oil, or having a wizard who has never used his hands to fight with giving the town constable a good beating (it would be quite cool, but that's beside the point).
There are alot of things the D20-system can't motivate. And seing that 4th ed. will bear the D20 logo, It can't be better. As it seems, they mostly draw sharper lines and nerf, not adding much new content.
Of course, to all of this, you can apply common sense and let the poor fighter be turned into charcoal in the inferno, but that's not supported by the rules, which is what D20 is all about.
That didn't turn out as much rp-talk as a scornful comment :
Feels good to vent the frustration, though... |
Edited by - Aewrik on 01 Oct 2007 22:14:24 |
|
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 01 Oct 2007 : 22:44:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by Aewrik
And that's what so wrong. Trying to keep the balance in a game, where there are creatures based on mythology that portrayed the dragons as almost immortal beings gifted with the power to level cities and make kings bow in awe.
That was true in D&D until 3rd ed, in my opinion, when they started the massive project of trying to balance the game (which evidently failed, as they're creating a fourth edition, now).
What you are talking about can't really be done using any edition of D&D. Don't bash D&D for being what it is, a game mae for killing dragons in dungeons and taking their treasure. If you want to do something else with the game it's fine, but you're not under any waranty.
You can also try another RPG that may fit your style of play better. (Hmm I'm looking at the Dragon in the monster book of Burning Wheel, I think you would like it)
BTW, 4E banned the (IMHO, stupid) idea to build monsters with PC things, you might like that very much.
|
Edited by - Skeptic on 01 Oct 2007 22:46:16 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36803 Posts |
Posted - 01 Oct 2007 : 22:46:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by Aewrik
If I remember correctly, you stop gaining hit points after a certain level in AD&D, right?
I mean, a wizard with high con (+3), could theoretically have 140hp at level 20. I mean, that's as much as a juvenile blue dragon. Could the wizard actually survive a worse beating than a dragon?
Uh, your math is wrong. Only warriors could get more than +2 hit points, in AD&D. And the CON bonus cut off at level 10, for wizards. So a 20th level wizard could have, at most, 70 hit points - 4+2 for every level from 1 to 10, and then a single hp per level after that.
Your points are otherwise valid, though. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Aewrik
Seeker
80 Posts |
Posted - 02 Oct 2007 : 00:20:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Aewrik
If I remember correctly, you stop gaining hit points after a certain level in AD&D, right?
I mean, a wizard with high con (+3), could theoretically have 140hp at level 20. I mean, that's as much as a juvenile blue dragon. Could the wizard actually survive a worse beating than a dragon?
Uh, your math is wrong. Only warriors could get more than +2 hit points, in AD&D. And the CON bonus cut off at level 10, for wizards. So a 20th level wizard could have, at most, 70 hit points - 4+2 for every level from 1 to 10, and then a single hp per level after that.
Your points are otherwise valid, though.
Yeah, I was referring to 3rd ed, where wizards gain 1d4+Con modifier every level.
AD&D is (in my opinion, as always) much better in many ways. Of course, THAC0 was a little complicated until I understood that the result was (1d20 - targets AC) against THAC0. And the saves feel more relevant than reflex, fortitude and will saves, since they aren't already represented with other numbers. Also, I think they're easier to motivate since they are typically (and feel very) heroic.
Skeptic: Yeah, I know :/
It's just depressing that the best campaign setting I've ever played in must be revised so often. Especially when the systems aren't very well motivated.
AD&D books are very hard to come by, and I can't bring my computer with me to the table, since I think it removes a little of the... realness (adj. for genuine, whatever that is... genuity? bah). AD&D is a little off limits, for that reason. $12 is really cheap for core rules, though (on paizo.com)...
I think I have found a DMG and PG for AD&D, however. I'm just going to see if I have to pry them from the owner's cold dead hands, or if he's willing to sell them to me ;)
Another good thing about AD&D, is that there isn't much interpretation of the stats needed. A basilisk yields 1,400 or 7,000 xp, and that's that. There is no advancement, and no random numbers (except hp, of course). In other words, the DM doesn't have to spend hours preparing things irrelevant to the plot. In other words, I can focus on the core of the adventure: the plot and roleplaying elements.
Perhaps the basilisk isn't the best example, but it supports my main point: the D20-system is the real advanced dungeons and dragons. For me as a DM -because of the rules- it's a labor, and not a game.
Good night :)
Early morning tomorrow... |
|
|
|
Aravine
Senior Scribe
USA
608 Posts |
Posted - 17 Oct 2007 : 18:02:56
|
| I'm sorry guys, but I think we're going a little off topic. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I beleive the subject was "what is roleplaying", not "what is the max HP fora wizard with con(-) and could he technically beat a blue dragon?" |
The brave don't live forever,the cautious don't live at all |
Edited by - Aravine on 17 Oct 2007 20:49:23 |
|
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 17 Oct 2007 : 18:12:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by aravine
I'm sorry guys, but I think we're going a little off topic. correct me if I'm wrong, but I beleive the subject was "what is roleplaying", not "what is the max HP fora wizard with con(-) and could he technically beat a blue dragon?"
Okay, let's try to revive that topic carefully...
The difference between a board game and a role-playing game ? The shared imagined universe.
That would be a simple and not confusing definition of an RPG : A role-playing game is a game in which there is a shared imagined universe. |
Edited by - Skeptic on 17 Oct 2007 18:16:43 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
What is roleplaying?
