Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Reconciling 4e's rough edges with Story Now play
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8991850" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>That. And also it's a nice suggestion about how to set up a particular sort of difficult/challenging/hindering terrain - ie make it be a narrow beam (or whatever), require Acrobatics checks to move at half speed, have a rule for making a check if you get hit or otherwise you fall (I'm taking this from the RC - I don't think it's in the PHB), etc. That last bit could be conceived of as a form of terrain power - it creates the possibility of falling without having to push to an empty square, because the occupied square is mostly empty space.</p><p></p><p>There are wonky aspects: generally being pushed over a ledge gives a saving throw to avoid falling (instead falling prone at the edge), but in the narrow beam case it's being replaced by an Acrobatics check which is far more level-dependent (but there's no "edge" to fall prone at, so the generic rule doesn't easily apply). I think the most important thing is to be pretty upfront with players about how you plan to resolve these things. At least in my 4e experience, the excitement is not in discovering that an Acrobatics checks is needed, but rather in discovering that <em>my PC is here but really needs to be over there</em> and then working out how you're going to make that Acrobatics check despite your low DEX and heavy armour!</p><p></p><p>A couple of thoughts.</p><p></p><p>In another active ENW thread, a poster is talking about a 21st level party having crushed the god Lolth. When I ran an encounter between 29th level PCs (I think they were just short of 30th) and Lolth, it was pretty epic, but I had beefed up Lolth to give her enough action economy to be viable against 5 PCs. In general, especially above Heroic tier, my advice would be that you can't go wrong making key creatures/NPCs interesting in their stat blocks, and for solos in particular looking for ways to strengthen their action economy.</p><p></p><p>The second thought is that the maths is (nearly) everything. So when a designer (or a player) comes up with a combo that seems to break the maths (like the DEX-based barbarian build I mentioned in the other thread) I think it is best to just be upfront and talk about how to fix the maths of the build. Don't fall into the "right to dream" habit of treating the mechanics of the builds as an expression of the fiction (eg what it <em>really</em> means to be a barbarian), such that it would be disrespecting the fiction to fix the maths.</p><p></p><p>The one bit of maths I didn't fix, and perhaps should have, is the +6 to all knowledge skills for the Sage of Ages. I think this would be better done as Advantage (in the 5e sense) on all those skills. The +6 just goes a little bit too far in breaking the skill challenge maths. In practice, the way I've handled it is (i) to rely on the fact that other PCs also have to succeed at checks to win the challenge, and (ii) to use framing and "soft" moves in the context of the challenge to pressure the Sage of Ages player to declare non-knowledge-based actions. That's where "story now" techniques come into their own!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 8991850, member: 42582"] That. And also it's a nice suggestion about how to set up a particular sort of difficult/challenging/hindering terrain - ie make it be a narrow beam (or whatever), require Acrobatics checks to move at half speed, have a rule for making a check if you get hit or otherwise you fall (I'm taking this from the RC - I don't think it's in the PHB), etc. That last bit could be conceived of as a form of terrain power - it creates the possibility of falling without having to push to an empty square, because the occupied square is mostly empty space. There are wonky aspects: generally being pushed over a ledge gives a saving throw to avoid falling (instead falling prone at the edge), but in the narrow beam case it's being replaced by an Acrobatics check which is far more level-dependent (but there's no "edge" to fall prone at, so the generic rule doesn't easily apply). I think the most important thing is to be pretty upfront with players about how you plan to resolve these things. At least in my 4e experience, the excitement is not in discovering that an Acrobatics checks is needed, but rather in discovering that [I]my PC is here but really needs to be over there[/I] and then working out how you're going to make that Acrobatics check despite your low DEX and heavy armour! A couple of thoughts. In another active ENW thread, a poster is talking about a 21st level party having crushed the god Lolth. When I ran an encounter between 29th level PCs (I think they were just short of 30th) and Lolth, it was pretty epic, but I had beefed up Lolth to give her enough action economy to be viable against 5 PCs. In general, especially above Heroic tier, my advice would be that you can't go wrong making key creatures/NPCs interesting in their stat blocks, and for solos in particular looking for ways to strengthen their action economy. The second thought is that the maths is (nearly) everything. So when a designer (or a player) comes up with a combo that seems to break the maths (like the DEX-based barbarian build I mentioned in the other thread) I think it is best to just be upfront and talk about how to fix the maths of the build. Don't fall into the "right to dream" habit of treating the mechanics of the builds as an expression of the fiction (eg what it [I]really[/I] means to be a barbarian), such that it would be disrespecting the fiction to fix the maths. The one bit of maths I didn't fix, and perhaps should have, is the +6 to all knowledge skills for the Sage of Ages. I think this would be better done as Advantage (in the 5e sense) on all those skills. The +6 just goes a little bit too far in breaking the skill challenge maths. In practice, the way I've handled it is (i) to rely on the fact that other PCs also have to succeed at checks to win the challenge, and (ii) to use framing and "soft" moves in the context of the challenge to pressure the Sage of Ages player to declare non-knowledge-based actions. That's where "story now" techniques come into their own! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Reconciling 4e's rough edges with Story Now play
Top