• F/15/Cali@threads.net@sh.itjust.works
    46·
    27 days ago

    “So this is my character. Her name is Armpits Esquire and she’s three halfling paladin brothers from a dead order in a trenchcoat. Because of their stacking auras, they are nearly- no, you can continue loading, it gets worse.”

  • justdaveisfine@piefed.socialEnglish
    221·
    27 days ago

    The second one sort of depends on the player. I’ve had a few players that have made absolutely ridiculous characters but played them very well and it was a good experience.

    The first one is a strong no. I’ve never seen anyone who does a broken meta build do anything beyond ruin everyone’s time and complain (or quit) if the DM reins them in at all.

    • fonix232@fedia.io
      20·
      27 days ago

      I was once in a game where the GM allowed his buddy to be a build like that, but in a nifty “hidden origins” way, where the PC slowly realises their own immense power, but is super clumsy with it, so they’re an active danger to the party but you also can’t just leave them at an inn because they can potentially destroy the world if they have a nightmare…

      Then he got turned into the campaign’s secret big bad that was only revealed at the very end. THAT worked out well. Turned out he could control his powers and just used us to get rid of his also evil archnemesis of his before attacking the party.

    • Not a newt@piefed.caEnglish
      16·
      27 days ago

      In half the campaigns, the Doctor Farts PC ends up being the MVP because they weren’t minmaxed and as a result have much more utility.

    • bob_lemon@feddit.org
      3·
      26 days ago

      The first one works in a campaign that expects everyone to do the first one (and where the GM does the same for the enemies). Assuming the character is still a character when looking beyond the stats, that is.

      • Aeao@lemmy.world
        2·
        26 days ago

        I’m into more listening to game. I’ve never actually laid one.

        Wouldn’t what you’re describing be pretty pointless. Like super inflation. Okay you’re a millionaire but bread is 1000 so does it really matter?

        A game where every character is doing 1500… how is that different from every character doing 15 damage gameplay wise? You can add as many zeros as you want but if we all have those extra zeros isn’t it essentially the same?

    • psud@aussie.zoneEnglish
      1·
      16 days ago

      I give my players pretty wide latitude, after a few sessions they generally agree with me if their character isn’t working well. Too weak can be treated with better weapons; too powerful get bored and go home. One of the too powerful synergised two powers to become practically invulnerable

      • StinkyFingerItchyBum@lemmy.caEnglish
        1·
        25 days ago

        Have you considered 3 giant miniature space-terrasques in a trenchcoat? The were 3 wild terrasques minding their own business in the wild, when they stumbles on a druid orgy who were all tripping on shrooms. They magically shrunk the terrasque family not realizing that their int was inversely proportional to their body size. Now the clever tiny devils are on a quest to reverse their shinkification. Without their enourmous size they must rely on their wits to survive in a land of humanoids. The only tools at their disposal are 3 pairs of women’s undies and a trenchcoat.

        1st the clever crew must find the rare Psilocybe semilanceata, the mushroom that powers the druid magic. Then they must find the elucive druid and his circle. Finally they must recreate the original conditions by seducing an entire druid circle into an orgy without being discovered.

      • edgemaster72@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        26 days ago

        Unless your DM is a stickler for the updated 2024 rules, then in that case it can’t, because they changed Twinned Spell to require that the spell let you target additional creatures when cast at higher levels, which Suggestion does not.

          • edgemaster72@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            25 days ago

            The group I’m playing with now we’re using 5.5. Anyone still playing Adventurer’s League doesn’t have a choice, 5.5 is mandatory there.

              • Squirrelanna@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                1·
                24 days ago

                First, I found melee combat excruciatingly dull in 2014. While it’s not super different, the weapon masteries in 2024 add enough crunch and flavor for me to find it far more interesting and fun.

                Second, druid is my favorite class in terms of flavor, specifically specializing in wild shape, and ‘14 is probably my least favorite iteration of it. I think’ 24 improves upon circle of the moon immensely regarding mechanics and, even if the list of beasts is smaller, the streamlined design to their attacks makes them feel more potent as more than just a chunk of animal flavored temp HP.

                There’s also a lot of things that really should have been added earlier as quality of life. Off the top of my head, steady aim for rogues. Tasha adds it for '14 as an optional feature but it really needed to be the default.

                Also, cure wounds actually feels potent now. Healers rejoice, you have a reason to use it over the more action and spacing efficient healing word.

                • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
                  1·
                  24 days ago

                  I hadn’t read about the new weapon masteries. I am shocked they didn’t make these limited per day powers. That’s usually how anything fun in DND goes- you can do this cool thing but only once or twice.

  • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
    11·
    26 days ago

    Do you think the people who make Dr Farts want to play with other people who make Dr Farts type characters? And the people who make 1500 dmg/turn combat monsters, do they want to play with other combat monsters?

    I feel like sometimes no. Sometimes people want to be the odd one out. Which sucks, because a group that’s homogeneous on this aspect I think can work pretty well. If everyone’s a combat monster the GM can go crazy. But if there’s just one or two combat monsters, now they have to figure out how to keep it fun for them and also Bob The Fighter that hits for 1d8+2 each turn.

    • F/15/Cali@threads.net@sh.itjust.works
      5·
      26 days ago

      In my experience, dr farts is the result of an overabundance of options and lack of foresight. They don’t know what it’d be like, so they try it. Giving players a silly character swap voucher, good for just one session per campaign, solves that. Similar deal for the overjuiced character. (Not usable during story boss encounters)

      Once people recognize that the boundaries are there to improve their experience, not detract from it, they usually follow the flow of the game and build on others’ characters. If they don’t, chairs are easy to fill.

    • edgemaster72@lemmy.worldEnglish
      3·
      26 days ago

      Somewhat similarly, as a character with a good variety of options available in combat, I worry somewhat about the Ranger and Warlock I play with whose turns are pretty much always “I shoot the [x]”, but everyone seems to be having a good time so I guess combat gameplay isn’t really their bag, idk.

      • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
        6·
        26 days ago

        Rogue is worse. I played a rogue for a while and it didn’t really deliver a great experience. Every combat was “I shoot, move, cunning action hide”.

        Scouting was largely outclassed by the wizard’s familiar, and even more so the pact of the chain familiar. Splitting the party is tedious and risky.

        One GM tried to make a system to abstract scouting- you’d make some checks and get information and maybe trouble. But that guy liked PbtA way more than me, and it clearly influenced his design, because pretty much every time you used this system something bad would happen. I don’t play these games to be a fuck up. I want to be exceedingly competent in my niche.

        I guess some of that is up to individual GM style, but I think some of it is on the system itself.

        • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
          3·
          26 days ago

          I’ve had a lot of DND players, often people that exclusively play DND, tell me they like it that way. They like that there’s basically no rules for conflict outside of combat. “Just talk it out” and “we’re here to role play stop looking at your sheet”.

          Personally, not my taste. If we’re just going to “talk it out” I feel like we should write a book instead. That or actually rip out the stunted social rules in DND. That would help the annoying thing where the real life Sales Guy brings his whole personality into his 8 Cha Fighter.

          But I also think a lot of those people have never really played anything else, and like dnd’s “barely any rules” better than whatever fantasy they’re imagining.

          I like that games with working social rules can let someone who’s shy or quiet play someone socially powerful, just like a physically weak person can play a strong barbarian.

  • enbee@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    8·
    26 days ago

    If anyone wants to do a dr. Farts style campaign let me know. I would love to ref a zany to the max campaign. Be warned that dr. Farts may have to contend with the likes of Detective Vague.

  • Øπ3ŕ@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    4·
    26 days ago

    Wait, the DM wants them to choose between the “two extremes” of “I will murder you” and “I will murder you”?

    Must be AD&D/2.0, NGL.