|
Post by Rincewind on Dec 2, 2007 10:36:56 GMT -5
I thought tower shields worked pretty well the way they are- you've been demonstrating that well enough for Dmitri's game.
As for the hide checks, I'd say that it's best the way it is to keep things simple- but if someone is at a much better vantage point to see the hiding character than normal, give them a good bonus on their spot check. So the wizard flying 10' above the ground can see the rogue hiding in the well much better than anyone else, he gets +10 or negates the cover bonus or something.
|
|
Dmitri
Land Owner
D&D Geeks of the World Unite!
Posts: 1,466
|
Post by Dmitri on Dec 3, 2007 12:10:08 GMT -5
I think the biggest thing with hide checks is to make sure that a character makes periodic checks - without knowing the results.
I mean, if you are hiding and get spotted and the spotter doesn't immediately make that known, the spottee wouldn't necessarily know. Of course, this requires the ROLEPLAYER to act as though his character does not know he can be seen - a challenge to be sure.
Since no one in my campaign even bothers hiding, it hasn't come up there, but I usually require a hide check whenever moving from one "hiding spot" to another (crossing an open space while trying to hide, or crossing rough terrain, for example), or whenever there are new observers, or pretty much whenever I think it is about time to see if he or she fails again. Hiding is not the same as invisibility, after all.
|
|
|
Post by pigdish on Dec 3, 2007 12:46:17 GMT -5
That's why I never tell the players information about mechanics (DC, AC, HP). Just roll what I asked you to roll and maybe you'll find out what happens. I find it annoying when players ask the DM, "What's the AC, what's the DC, how many hit points does it have left, etc." It totally breaks the mood of the game because it becomes a roll playing game.
So the house rule would be "Your character needs to figure out how tough a creature is or how difficult a task is by actually performing the task (rolling the dice). They can learn things in a descriptive fashion ("that guy is hard to hit", "By Jaga that slope is going to be very hard to climb") but not hard numbers as in DC 20 or 15 hit points left."
|
|
|
Post by Kaber on Dec 3, 2007 13:38:47 GMT -5
A good point pigdish. I do find that it is hard to do sometimes as I have so many other things to concentrate on I don't think about that.
There's always room for imporvement.
As for the hide check, I will occasionaly roll a spot check against the hide check. The player still feels a certain amount of control and I can shrug and say "ok, you slip into the shadows along the wall apparently unseen," when in fact they were spotted.
|
|
Dmitri
Land Owner
D&D Geeks of the World Unite!
Posts: 1,466
|
Post by Dmitri on Dec 3, 2007 13:39:05 GMT -5
Yea, ideally I would do that I think, but I tend to slip up a bit with DCs on saves and the like and AC. But I never ever give out HP info, other than "The demon is looking tired and hurt, etc."
|
|
|
Post by Tomas on Dec 4, 2007 7:52:30 GMT -5
I always figured it was constant study that finally payed off - a level 2 fighter taking cleave has been giving this concept thought for all of level 1, and finally has figured out how to make use of his theory. It is this type of thinking at is behind my wanting to require a player to pick his/her next Feat one level before receiving it. (ie at the beginning of 2nd level). I am also considering having the player choose their next class level in the same way. Tom
|
|
Dmitri
Land Owner
D&D Geeks of the World Unite!
Posts: 1,466
|
Post by Dmitri on Dec 4, 2007 20:19:45 GMT -5
I don't think that is a bad thing, picking class and feats a level in advance. One of the issues people have is getting new splat books, and wanting to take a character in a new direction with no previous reasons for it in RP terms. Not a bad concept, Tom.
I just always get leary of "paying to level" - it totally screws the wealth by level tables.
|
|
|
Post by pigdish on Dec 5, 2007 7:52:22 GMT -5
So don't use the wealth by level tables. I never used them in the past and neither did the DMs of my previous gaming groups.
Now that I think of it I don't like the a set wealth by level concept. Not all characters, classes, game worlds are created equal. You could have a world where money is hard to come by, even magic items, and exotic equipment. While another world could have everything in abundance. But I suppose having a table is a starting point for a DM.
|
|
|
Post by Rincewind on Dec 5, 2007 10:53:38 GMT -5
Yea, I always thought so to, but Tai Shar weighed in about this in LGG6 the other week and said something about getting a different answer directly from the CS guys at Wizards. So I figured what I had always took to be a rule would best be classified as a house rule for now. I mentioned this to the guys in LGG2, but I might as well mention it for the boards here. The Magic Item Compendium specifically says, on a page at the top left near the beginning of the book, that the armors which count as one less do so for purposes of proficiency as well. E.g. a mithral breastplate is light armor and needs the light armor feat. I believe printed material trumps "Some guy at Wizards said...." I would encourage DM's to take a really close look at anytime a player claims he can use such an ability twice to make Heavy armor Light, though. This smacks of munchkinism and tends to be rather ridiculous.
|
|
Dmitri
Land Owner
D&D Geeks of the World Unite!
Posts: 1,466
|
Post by Dmitri on Dec 5, 2007 12:28:00 GMT -5
How can you use it twice, Rince? Where would the other "step down" come from? Am I missing some great exploit here? That would make no sense - sure, I can see mithral making a BP light, but not heavy plate. That would not only be broken beyond all recognition, but just plain silly.
|
|
Dmitri
Land Owner
D&D Geeks of the World Unite!
Posts: 1,466
|
Post by Dmitri on Dec 5, 2007 12:31:09 GMT -5
I agree, Pigdish, wealth by level isn't the end all and be all. But it is the generic fall-back for a world, so I always think of it. Most of the grouops I played in prior to Aesirin Hall groups took place in a sort of generic world, without a history that really mattered. It was kinda like one-off games strung together with the same PCs. Now there were a coupla really good games with DETAILED worlds were the standard DMG stuff got tossed, only keeping the mechanics. They were a blast.
|
|
|
Post by Rincewind on Dec 5, 2007 13:08:12 GMT -5
How can you use it twice, Rince? Where would the other "step down" come from? Am I missing some great exploit here? That would make no sense - sure, I can see mithral making a BP light, but not heavy plate. That would not only be broken beyond all recognition, but just plain silly. I don't remember exactly how it goes, but Tai had some magical armor in a box which was made of small pieces and flew together, making a suit of armor which counted as one less for proficiency and all. He then made the pieces out of mithral so that his full plate would count as light armor. *sigh*
|
|
Dmitri
Land Owner
D&D Geeks of the World Unite!
Posts: 1,466
|
Post by Dmitri on Dec 5, 2007 13:39:28 GMT -5
Dear God in Heaven... nah, sorry, full plate as light armor would NEVER fly in one of my campaigns.
I mess the old days when a +1 weapon was a big deal and standard full plate was not easy to come by...
|
|
|
Post by grond on Dec 5, 2007 19:50:17 GMT -5
Then price full plate at 16000 instead of 1600. Or just make the top armor in each weight bracket special order, one month to complete and put it in treasure either never, or only 5% of the time. Of course you would have to run about 5 campaigns with the same group and no full plate before they really adapted to the idea of it being rare.
|
|
|
Post by grond on Dec 5, 2007 20:01:14 GMT -5
I'd like to think, as far as multiclassing, that the character should have to do something particularly important to pick up an entirely new character class. First level in most classes is a major power level, it usually comes with 2 or 3 totally new abilities, and in most cases reflects a character dedicating their early life to training for it. Why should a fighter just be able to pick up a cleric level? I sort of think it should be like the test based prestige class qualifications (alternate, not sure where I read it), pass a particular trial in game with all of the potential to fail and all of the consequences for doing so. Or maybe just travel with a trainer and dedicate a generous amount of time to studying your character's new path.
|
|