D&D

[Draco Knight]

Oh god I love playing as the only character in a group with out of combat skills and a stat spread focused on Charisma. All the others are jarhead warriors, I'm so much richer than any of them...and they have no idea!

 

Any important quest items/monetary compensation(that is given out my an NPC) is given to my character because she seems like the most trust worthy...but she always keeps the lion's share of the loot and doles out just enough to keep everyone else happy.

 

My group picked up an OLD game we were sloughing through...I'd forgotten how much I LOVED this character.

[Wends]

Hmmm. D&D, eh?

 

AD&D only here. Been playing 2nd ed since... lemme see... started playing in 1989. DMing since 1991, and haven't played since. More characters than anyone can rightly shake a stick at (had to create an entire demiplane in a dimensional rift so a pair of whiny toads could keep playing their characters once the standard campaign settings became too 'status quo') if one counts NPCs.

 

Other than my precious, precious NPCs, 1 character. From back in the days where True Neutral meant you lent your services to whatever side was most in need and Chaotic Neutral meant you were STARK RAVING MAD and really had next to no control over what your character did. When druids couldn't multiclass and were removed from play at level 16 to be the grand druid (auto-NPC), when your DM had to make special allowances for non-human characters to be >9th level, and when a dragon could kill your ENTIRE PARTY with one swipe of its tail.

 

She was a chaotic good moon elf, in the days before TSR swapped the moon elves and high elves (making moon elves the aristocratic elves of Evermeet and the high elves the standard elves). She was a mage/thief. And she was sexy as hell with a naturally rolled 18 charisma, so you can come to your own conclusions as to how she robbed from her prey.

[Ilera]

It sounds really fun to me, and I've been curious about it for a while--but alas, the materials are expensive, and most of my friends aren't geeky enough to play.

[-platinum-draco-]

I think my groups D&D characters end up... weird. Gnome ranger with a hundred goats. Elf druid who is very protective of her mule. Paladin that likes whacking with slippers and paper fans. Pie obsessed halfling bard. Layed back ghost who rarely helps. ect.

[PsychoCrayon]

I have played D&D a few times with some friends, but later we stopped because it kept interfering with our schedule and some people became less and less interested in it as time went on.

 

Everytime I tell people that I used to play it though, they always feel bad for me as if they think I don't have a life. I have a very splendid life

Edited April 25, 2011 by PsychoCrayon

[-platinum-draco-]

I have a very splendid life

And probably a few more, if you're counting characters .

 

Our party of level twos, a one, and a five wiped out a kraken today, albeit a baby one. Party ghost-druid wiped out twenty goblins in one shot too, starting a forest fire in the process. My character currently has two non-evil goblins in the talons of her giant owl. We are weird, and left at a cliff hanger.

 

Chances are, my dungeon will be even weirder. We have a primary DM for rules and such, but we take turns with dungeons.

 

My character is technically chaotic good, but I believe she is leaning on chaotic neutral. She is a little money obsessed. However, she somehow knows how to keep on the paladin's good side. Honestly, my sister made a pun out of that just now, so if you can too, it was certainly not intended.

[SeanFreeman]

Ok, the PRIMARY reason I joined this community is about a fight I had with a player, and I'm looking for INFORMED people to discuss it with.

 

I had been hearing a lot from my players arguing about how they want to switch to hex-based movement during encounters and in dungeons. I flat out refused, and one of the players left my group 'forever' in a huff. I tried to explain to him in a calm way why hex is not a good idea using obvious mathematical formulas, but he was very adamant. Suffice to say, he's always been a problem player and we're all a little glad he left (we already have a replacement! biggrin.gif) BUT, drama aside, I think it's a very interesting debate. I wanted to see what some other DMs think about this.

 

My stance is that Wizards has carefully run many tests on the numbers. One of the biggest flaws with hex is that a hex is surrounded by only six squares, decreasing the effectiveness of close burst 1 powers by 1/4. Another problem is that facing, flanking and blast powers are altered. Finally, in terms of taking cover, more points to calculate from a point on your own hex means it's LESS likely a PC taking cover can hit any given hex unless you say you only need 5/6 points visible from a point on the hex, but this is a bad option because you're rewriting rules that are already balanced to work perfectly.

 

Finally, close blast 5 hex threatens more squares than close blast 5 squares, multiplying the damage potential by a lot!

 

 

Losing so much damage potential and being less vulnerable to attacks is a detriment to the balance of D&D 4th ed. I know this as a long time JRPG player who has juggled percentages and numbers his entire life, but not from actual playtesting.

 

Does anyone have a rebuttal? Have you gotten hex to work reasonably well without having to fudge numbers for your players or worry about accidentally making things too easy/tough?

Edited June 11, 2011 by SeanFreeman

[SeanFreeman]

Sockpuppet Strangler: I was unable to send you a PM apologizing for breaking (?) a rule because your PM inbox is full. Since you did say "If you have any questions," I do. How ya doin?

 

Alpha1: I'm not too concerned about appearing to be a nerd to someone who frequents this forum. Suffice to say I got some last night, and then I got drunk and played 4th ed with my friends. My life is great. How about yours?

Edited June 11, 2011 by SeanFreeman

[-platinum-draco-]

This dungeon was fun. And very hard. We were put against a ninth level necromancer. Who the dungeon master just took any spell of the spell list for, regardless of, y'know, he could actually cast them at that level, and he had three huge zombies guarding him. We got him down to zero hit points and had a large (in character) argument about whether or not we should blackmail him 10,000 gp each for his life. Most of us have really greedy characters, mine is a little money obsessed. And seriously, if you have a crossbow to someones head, why not ask them for money . Me, greedy . Then the DM, possibly out of the blue, made the necromancer have a ten-headed hydra, so I killed the necromancer. But then the hydra was actually neutral, so I made a diplomacy check and bribed it with cake (gluten free, with butterscotch frosting. Nice accuracy, huh?) I rolled 19, +6, two for helping kill the orcs (I think they were orcs. Maybe trolls? I dunno.) that were keeping it tied down, +4 for my diplomacy skill. Then we helped the hydra escape and were all happy.

 

Did I mention all of us are only level two? (three now. I may even get to four with this .) We are lucky, and think out of the box. There are no rails to go off of, and all our sessions end up bizarre and quirky. Like, to reference an anime, I made my shape-shifting companion thing change into a canary and land on my head once fighting was over.

 

I'm dungeon mastering next time. ^.^. All of us don't make them too easy, so I feel like if our characters were to fight normal foes, it would be WAY too easy.

 

 

[sweet_smurfette]

I miss playing D&D. All my dragon's names are in Drow because I had a Drowphobic elf character who learned Drow solely to insult her foes when she killed them.

 

Drow is a fun language.

[Swanfeather-te-kitty]

I love Dungeons and Dragons! I once had this elf Wth a crossbow. her catchphrase was "THe name's Anastriana Analantana Anastacia, and don't you ferget it!" She always said that before she killed some unfortunate halfling that mispronounced her unusualy complicated name...Just to make sure they wouldn't forget it.

There was also a perfume selling kobold named Harold. He was paired up with Fred, my six-year-old bro's wizard with a magical flying mop, and my father's suicidal elf-thing. Together, they almost moved the storyline two centemiters! Quite an acomplishment, I'd say.

Edited July 1, 2011 by Swanfeather-te-kitty

[libby2999]

My friend wants me to play DD with him, lol. It acualy sounds fun, but I doubt I'd get how to.

[sweet_smurfette]

My friend wants me to play DD with him, lol. It acualy sounds fun, but I doubt I'd get how to.

It takes a session or two to figure it out, but once you do, it's actually pretty easy.

[TheComingUp]

I've only really played it online but quit because my friend tried to get me to play it irl. My short attention span couldn't handle it. All those stats got me severely confused. But i'm sure it would be fun if I could actually play

[CrazyCorvid]

I'm a second-gen geek, so I've played D&D and other tabletop games since I was able to talk. Seriously, a few weeks ago I found a Star Wars character sheet that I wrote when I was six. I'm currently unofficial vice-president of my college's RPG club (which is spectacular) and I'm in two games at a time. I'm good enough at working 2nd and 3.5's rules to make a badass character out of any possible race/class combination. Recently I've been switching over to Pathfinder, just because I like a few of their rules better and the books are a lot cheaper.

 

I don't tend to repeat characters, but two of my favorites have been a catfolk swashbuckler, and a doppelganger ninja/druid. Both are fantastic combinations that abuse skill synergies and ability modifiers to no end. My favorite in-game event last year was turning a wagon into a TARDIS, using Mordenkainen's Magnificent Mansion, Greater Teleport, Time Stop, and a handful of other spells. It was larger on the inside and could travel through time and space.

Edited July 3, 2011 by CrazyCorvid

[-platinum-draco-]

Fantastic fandom-filled session today. I used my newly-acquired hat of infinite frogs to drown Moriarity and The Master. Then we went on the TARDIS, acquiring random sonic stuff. We got Umbrellas from Mycroft and then my character used a bag of not-really-infinite money to steal things from Torchwood before jumping through a portal to our own dimension. We really have no set timeline, if you haven't figured out yet. This started out with fairly normal dungeon crawling, and somehow we end up in modern day London.

 

It was quite fun.

[Nerendier]

So yea. I've been playing D&D. I've created a Paladin for when my DM finally allows me to play him. And I'm unsure what his alignment on paper should be!

 

Anyways, here's what he is and his goals:

He's a human Paladin who has devoted the first half of his life to helping the poor, alleviating suffering, and otherwise simply being a good guy. However, after helping so many people, and not really making a dent in the amount of suffering in one city alone, he comes to the conclusion that so long as there is freedom there will be suffering. So he sets out to remove freedom in order to prevent suffering. At every turn he's going to help those that need help, but his ultimate goal is to remove freedom, as he believes that so long as there is freedom there will be suffering, and no freedom means no suffering.

 

So, what alignment is this character?

For those who aren't familiar with 3.5 D&D Alignment, here's the list, you can look them up on tvtropes if you so choose:

Lawful Good

Neutral Good

Chaotic Good

Lawful Neutral

True Neutral

Chaotic Neutral

Lawful Evil

Neutral Evil

Chaotic Evil

 

 

I really can't decide which alignment he falls under. Tell me what you all think, and provide a justification for it if you so choose.

 

(Sorry if this is in the wrong section)

(We actually play 4th edition but use 3.5 edition alignment)

[Featherpaw]

Interesting! I'm not sure. Well Intentioned Extremist + Lawful Good, maybe.

[Lythiaren]

If I recall correctly from the PHB, all Paladins must be Lawful Good. Deviation from that alignment causes the Paladin to lose all of their powers until they repent and return to that alignment.

[Syaoransbear]

I think Lawful Good, since everything your character does is to benefit others. And freedom being a good thing is subjective. Trying to restrict freedom to benefit others isn't a sign of evilness. Seems kind of like when parents not allow you to do something and say it's "for your own good".

[TikindiDragon]

If I recall correctly from the PHB, all Paladins must be Lawful Good. Deviation from that alignment causes the Paladin to lose all of their powers until they repent and return to that alignment.

This, yes. Monks can only be Lawful alignment, Paladins can only be Lawful Good. 'Fallen' Paladins can become Blackguards.

[Nerendier]

This, yes. Monks can only be Lawful alignment, Paladins can only be Lawful Good. 'Fallen' Paladins can become Blackguards.

In 4e a paladin can be any alignment, so long as the god they worship is also that alignment.

[Kestra15]

Dame Judi Dench and Vin Diesel play D&D. Imagine how cool that game would be!

[StarDebut]

Dame Judi Dench and Vin Diesel play D&D. Imagine how cool that game would be!

So does Will Wheaton.

[TheDarkCynder]

I've heard of it, but I can't say I'm completely sure what it is. I know the basics, I mean, it's a pen & paper RPG right? It sounds pretty fun; two people in my English class always discuss tactics for it. I guess I could ask them about it. I don't know them very well though.