I have a bit of an issue with social skills (Intimidate and Persuasion) - by and large, what happens is that the party has a 'face' character, who has a high Charisma and will take proficiency in one (or even both) of these skills. That character will then stand front and centre in all social interactions the group faces, and basically run the entire Interaction pillar of the game.
My idea to fix this, which I'll grant you is currently half-baked at best, is to remove those skills in favour of Social Proficiencies - these work much like Tool proficiencies, in that they apply every time the character is interacting with a particular group. For instance, the Noble might have proficiency in 'nobles' (surprisingly enough), meaning that he applies the bonus in all social interactions of that sort. The Warlock might have a higher Charisma, but without the proficiency he may still not be the optimum choice. (Indeed, if you combine that with rules that there are some things you can only do if you have the proficiency, it's an even stronger mechanic.)
Once that's in place, the next step is "Social Expertise", where a character will be considered an expert in certain social environments - parties, command, negotiations, gambling, and so on. When in an environment where the character has expertise, double the proficiency bonus applies... provided it applies at all, of course!
The net effect of all of this should be that the Interaction pillar becomes at least a bit more spread out - it becomes much harder to have a single nominated 'face' character. Additionally, since the Social proficiencies are less tightly tied to ability scores than the existing skills, that at least potentially gives rise to using Intelligence and Wisdom in place of Charisma as the key characteristic (or even other attributes... though Charisma is likely to be the default).
At the moment, it's little more than a half-baked part of an idea. But I'm definitely of the opinion that the game would be better for having as many characters as possible involved in all three pillars (Combat, Interaction, Exploration). At the moment, the Combat pillar is quite good, the Exploration pillar isn't quite so good, and the Interaction pillar is worse still. So if this helps redress that somewhat, so much the better.
Thursday, 20 December 2018
Friday, 14 December 2018
Perception and Investigation
Something I've been doing wrong with 5e since I started:
The purpose of the Perception skill (technically a Wisdom (Perception) check) is to determine what the character's senses can detect - does the character see the tripwire, smell the gas, hear the voices in the other room, taste the poison, feel the gust of cold air... or intuit the presence of magic, hearken the the presence of a god, or similar.
The purpose of the Investigate skill (technically an Intelligence (Investigate) check) is to assemble known facts into conclusions: this funny smell combined with the lantern flame turning that colour means we're about to encounter flammable gas; this taste could just be almonds... or cyanide; the tripwire, coupled with these holes in the wall, indicate a poison dart trap... and so on and so forth.
This means a few of things:
The purpose of the Perception skill (technically a Wisdom (Perception) check) is to determine what the character's senses can detect - does the character see the tripwire, smell the gas, hear the voices in the other room, taste the poison, feel the gust of cold air... or intuit the presence of magic, hearken the the presence of a god, or similar.
The purpose of the Investigate skill (technically an Intelligence (Investigate) check) is to assemble known facts into conclusions: this funny smell combined with the lantern flame turning that colour means we're about to encounter flammable gas; this taste could just be almonds... or cyanide; the tripwire, coupled with these holes in the wall, indicate a poison dart trap... and so on and so forth.
This means a few of things:
- When the PCs enter an area, the DM should describe all the things that they see, hear, smell, etc, depending on their passive Perception scores... but should not indicate what these mean.
- When a PC searches an area, the DM should first ask how they go about doing that (in broad terms), and then call for a Perception check, and then describe what they now see (but, again, should not indicate what these mean).
- PCs should probably also have a "passive Investigate" score, calculated in the same way as for passive Perception. And based on that, the DM should probably also explain how some of the things detected fit together.
- When PCs search an area, the DM should probably also call for an Investigate check (in addition to the Perception check) and use that to describe how some of the things detected fit together.
To give an example of something that's likely to come up in my next session...
Player: I'll examine the clock. Is there anything of interest there?
Me: It's a very large, very ornate clock. It's a very modern construction, but made to look considerably older. The mechanism appears to be extremely complex. It also looks like the back of the clock is recessed into the wall itself.
Player: I'll open it up to take a closer look at the mechanism.
Me: Make a Perception check, and also an Investigate check.
Player: I rolled a 17 for Perception, and 13 for Investigate.
Me: You note that several of the components are free moving - they don't appear to be part of the mechanism for the clock itself. You also note that the back of the clock is hinged. You don't know what this means.
Player: Ah, there must be a secret door. Can I check for traps?
Me: You've already checked. You didn't detect the trap.
Player: The trap?
Me: {grins}
Player: Okay, can I move the mechanism to open the door?
Me: Sure, roll a Dex check. Your proficiency with Thieves' Tools applies...
Player: 24.
Me: Manipulating the device is easy. You move the various levers around, and... well, you know I said you didn't detect the trap?
Player: Yes...
Me: Click...
I guess I should maybe provide some context to this: in the example given, the clock contains both a secret door (DC 15) and a trap (DC 20). The player rolled well enough on Perception to notice the moving parts associated with the first but not the second, but didn't roll well enough on Investigate to understand either. If the latter roll had been a 15 or higher, I would have told him that this was all part of a secret door.
You'll notice that in the example I didn't allow the player a second roll to search specifically for traps. To get a second roll, the player would have needed to significantly changed the scenario - by smashing apart the clock, by taking an age to break it all down, or similar.
Lastly, I've adopted the "click" rule described by the Angry GM: when a trap is triggered the PCs have an immediate chance to declare an action. They don't get told the context, and so effectively have to guess - dive to the side, jump straight up, stop breathing, etc. If they guess right, they gain Advantage on the resulting save (or the trap has Disadvantage on the attack); if they guess disastrously wrong they suffer Disadvantage; in most cases, or if they dither, they just get hit normally. (In extreme cases, Dis/Advantage may turn into auto-success/failure. But that's less common.)
Thursday, 13 December 2018
Conditions for Resting
As the "Storm King's Thunder" involves considerable overland travel, I'm gradually working on a set of house rules associated with such journeys. In particular, I've been looking at rules for resting.
Short Rests
In general, you can take a short rest at any time, unless the environment is actively hostile. It is assumed you can hole up reasonably securely, post a watch, and remain sufficiently alert to get some rest. The only real downside is that a short rest takes an hour.
Long Rest
The prerequisites for a long rest are considerably more arduous than for a short rest.
In the Dungeon
In general you cannot take a long rest in a dungeon - you will have to retreat from the dungeon and make camp outside. There may be some exceptions to this, especially if you have cleared large sections of the dungeon or if you can find an easily-isolated room.
In the Wilderness
In order to take a long rest you require food and water, warmth, shelter, and appropriate clothing. The requirements for food and water are simple enough - characters must carry or find rations and must carry or find water. Likewise, appropriate clothing will be determined by the terrain, but is generally something that can be assumed (unless the party find themselves teleported, or similar!).
The requirements for warmth and shelter generally means that the party must keep a fire for the night and must have sufficient tents for all members. The latter requirement can be omitted between late spring and early autumn in temperate climes, provided the weather is cooperative.
If the party cannot meet the requirements for a long rest, they can still be assumed to get sufficient sleep to stave off exhaustion, and can enjoy the benefits of a short rest.
Urban Environments
Under normal circumstances, a party should be able to benefit from a short rest in any urban environment (includes inns and way-stations in the wilderness).
On the Planes
Naturally, the requirements for a long rest vary wildly in planar environments. The requirements of "food and water, security and shelter" remain unchanged in broad terms, but what these mean in specific terms will obviously depend on the precise nature of the planar environment!
Short Rests
In general, you can take a short rest at any time, unless the environment is actively hostile. It is assumed you can hole up reasonably securely, post a watch, and remain sufficiently alert to get some rest. The only real downside is that a short rest takes an hour.
Long Rest
The prerequisites for a long rest are considerably more arduous than for a short rest.
In the Dungeon
In general you cannot take a long rest in a dungeon - you will have to retreat from the dungeon and make camp outside. There may be some exceptions to this, especially if you have cleared large sections of the dungeon or if you can find an easily-isolated room.
In the Wilderness
In order to take a long rest you require food and water, warmth, shelter, and appropriate clothing. The requirements for food and water are simple enough - characters must carry or find rations and must carry or find water. Likewise, appropriate clothing will be determined by the terrain, but is generally something that can be assumed (unless the party find themselves teleported, or similar!).
The requirements for warmth and shelter generally means that the party must keep a fire for the night and must have sufficient tents for all members. The latter requirement can be omitted between late spring and early autumn in temperate climes, provided the weather is cooperative.
If the party cannot meet the requirements for a long rest, they can still be assumed to get sufficient sleep to stave off exhaustion, and can enjoy the benefits of a short rest.
Urban Environments
Under normal circumstances, a party should be able to benefit from a short rest in any urban environment (includes inns and way-stations in the wilderness).
On the Planes
Naturally, the requirements for a long rest vary wildly in planar environments. The requirements of "food and water, security and shelter" remain unchanged in broad terms, but what these mean in specific terms will obviously depend on the precise nature of the planar environment!
Monday, 10 December 2018
Mysteries: A Golden Rule
One of the classic problems with mysteries in D&D was the Paladin's ability to detect evil at will - he could just scan everyone, identify the one person who pings as evil, and that's your bad guy. (I exaggerate, but only a little.) The other classic problem that I've seen when people construct mystery scenarios is that you tend to have the Big Bad and a bunch of other NPCs. And because those NPCs are not the Big Bad they're always open and helpful - and so identifying the one guy with something to hide becomes easy.
Well, there's a shock.
Of course, if you actually read some mysteries, especially by people who write them repeatedly and well, you find that it doesn't work like that. Instead, the protagonist meets resistance on several fronts, as people simply refuse to speak to him, or they're evasive on particular subjects, or they warn him off of investigating some topics (which, of course, encourages the protagonist to investigate exactly that).
And the reason for this is that there's a golden rule for writing mysteries: everybody has something to hide.
What that means is that every character should have some subjects they're just not willing to discuss, every character should have some things they're willing to lie about, and every character should have some secret that they don't want to be revealed. The PCs' job, then, is to tease out the truth from the set of inconsistencies - if A say this and B says that and the physical evidence says this other thing, then the truth must be...
(Once that's established, it becomes a matter of applying the Three Clue Rule - for every conclusion that you want the PCs to reach, you should provide three big clues. That way, they'll miss one, misinterpret a second, and get it on the third.)
It's also worth noting that all those lies and secrets should not (or at least should not necessarily) make the person doing the lying a villain - a person might well have made a stupid but innocent mistake that they're now hiding.
Of course, for extra credit you could set it up such that the person is willing to reveal the truth, but only in the right circumstances. For instance, a man might not be willing to discuss his whereabouts, and therefore his alibi, in front of his girlfriend if his whereabouts were "buying an engagement ring for her" - but might well be happy to discuss that when she's not around. (You'll note that that is also a secret that doesn't make him a villain - see above.)
As regards the problems created by detect magic, these are usually caused by people forgetting that the PHB specifies that humans don't have a tendency for any particular alignment, including Neutral. Therefore in any settlement fully a third of everyone the PCs meet should ping the Paladin's spell.
(And, yes, it's also the case that in addition to the 'main' evil that the PCs are confronting you'd also expect them to happen upon a whole load of other nastinesses that they might or might not want to clear up as well. So maybe that creepy old man isn't the murderer, but if he's instead using his business contacts as a front for drug smuggling, maybe the PCs want to stop that as well?)
Anyway, that's that. To recap:
Well, there's a shock.
Of course, if you actually read some mysteries, especially by people who write them repeatedly and well, you find that it doesn't work like that. Instead, the protagonist meets resistance on several fronts, as people simply refuse to speak to him, or they're evasive on particular subjects, or they warn him off of investigating some topics (which, of course, encourages the protagonist to investigate exactly that).
And the reason for this is that there's a golden rule for writing mysteries: everybody has something to hide.
What that means is that every character should have some subjects they're just not willing to discuss, every character should have some things they're willing to lie about, and every character should have some secret that they don't want to be revealed. The PCs' job, then, is to tease out the truth from the set of inconsistencies - if A say this and B says that and the physical evidence says this other thing, then the truth must be...
(Once that's established, it becomes a matter of applying the Three Clue Rule - for every conclusion that you want the PCs to reach, you should provide three big clues. That way, they'll miss one, misinterpret a second, and get it on the third.)
It's also worth noting that all those lies and secrets should not (or at least should not necessarily) make the person doing the lying a villain - a person might well have made a stupid but innocent mistake that they're now hiding.
Of course, for extra credit you could set it up such that the person is willing to reveal the truth, but only in the right circumstances. For instance, a man might not be willing to discuss his whereabouts, and therefore his alibi, in front of his girlfriend if his whereabouts were "buying an engagement ring for her" - but might well be happy to discuss that when she's not around. (You'll note that that is also a secret that doesn't make him a villain - see above.)
As regards the problems created by detect magic, these are usually caused by people forgetting that the PHB specifies that humans don't have a tendency for any particular alignment, including Neutral. Therefore in any settlement fully a third of everyone the PCs meet should ping the Paladin's spell.
(And, yes, it's also the case that in addition to the 'main' evil that the PCs are confronting you'd also expect them to happen upon a whole load of other nastinesses that they might or might not want to clear up as well. So maybe that creepy old man isn't the murderer, but if he's instead using his business contacts as a front for drug smuggling, maybe the PCs want to stop that as well?)
Anyway, that's that. To recap:
- When writing a mystery, be sure to include plenty of people who might be the villain.
- Every major character should have topics they don't want to talk about and secrets they don't want shared. (They might be willing to talk about some or all of these under particular conditions.)
- Those secrets don't necessarily make the person a villain, and even if the person is a villain it doesn't necessarily mean they're the villain.
- In the course of the investigation the PCs will likely uncover a bunch of other issues. They may or may not want to fix those at the same time.
Wednesday, 5 December 2018
A Strange Observation, and Some Thoughts
For reasons that now escape me, I found myself looking back at the pregenerated characters for the D&D Starter Set, specifically to look at how much food and water they carry. What I found was odd - different characters may carry 10, 5, or 2 days' worth of rations. One character carries no rations at all! Likewise, four of the five characters have a waterskin.
(Actually, there is a good reason for this - depending on the chosen background, each character will have a different 'pack', and those packs contain varying amounts of food and water.)
Incidentally, it's worth noting that D&D (at least in 5e) says that characters need a gallon of water per day, while the waterskin contains half a gallon of liquid. So by RAW four of the five characters have enough water for only half a day. However, I'm inclined to adjust this - apparently the recommended intake for an adult is about half a gallon a day, so a waterskin should be enough for one day.
Anyway, the reason (I suspect) that the characters have food and water, but have it assigned with no particular rhyme or reason, is that that's one of those things that D&D has as a "nod to realism" - characters have food and water because of course they need to eat and drink, but who really cares? Just write them down and forget about them!
But this is one of the areas where I think the game could (and probably should) be doing better - and especially in a Starter Set adventure like "Lost Mine of Phandelver", where there is a perfect opportunity to do better. Here, the game starts with a fairly simple dungeon (which is good), then has a largely 'urban' section (which is also good), and then has a section of exploring a wider wilderness area. So by the time the group are on to that exploration, they're already used to much of the core of the game, and ready for some of the resource tracking that could come with that process.
(Then again, D&D's rules for wilderness travel have traditionally sucked, and although 5e is slightly better than previous editions they're still not good.)
The reason that I'm pondering all this is that "Storm King's Thunder", the adventure I'm running at the moment, features a lot of overland travel. And while at the moment that travel is all on roads and is easily handwaved, before too long the party will want to be going off-road, at which point it would be really good to have something better to offer.
Plus, at some point I'm keen to move over to my "ten things" approach to encumbrance. At which point I'm inclined to consider rations for 5 days to be one "thing" and a waterskin likewise to be one "thing". (Then again, right now they have a wagon, so don't need to worry about 'things'. But once they go off-road...)
(Actually, there is a good reason for this - depending on the chosen background, each character will have a different 'pack', and those packs contain varying amounts of food and water.)
Incidentally, it's worth noting that D&D (at least in 5e) says that characters need a gallon of water per day, while the waterskin contains half a gallon of liquid. So by RAW four of the five characters have enough water for only half a day. However, I'm inclined to adjust this - apparently the recommended intake for an adult is about half a gallon a day, so a waterskin should be enough for one day.
Anyway, the reason (I suspect) that the characters have food and water, but have it assigned with no particular rhyme or reason, is that that's one of those things that D&D has as a "nod to realism" - characters have food and water because of course they need to eat and drink, but who really cares? Just write them down and forget about them!
But this is one of the areas where I think the game could (and probably should) be doing better - and especially in a Starter Set adventure like "Lost Mine of Phandelver", where there is a perfect opportunity to do better. Here, the game starts with a fairly simple dungeon (which is good), then has a largely 'urban' section (which is also good), and then has a section of exploring a wider wilderness area. So by the time the group are on to that exploration, they're already used to much of the core of the game, and ready for some of the resource tracking that could come with that process.
(Then again, D&D's rules for wilderness travel have traditionally sucked, and although 5e is slightly better than previous editions they're still not good.)
The reason that I'm pondering all this is that "Storm King's Thunder", the adventure I'm running at the moment, features a lot of overland travel. And while at the moment that travel is all on roads and is easily handwaved, before too long the party will want to be going off-road, at which point it would be really good to have something better to offer.
Plus, at some point I'm keen to move over to my "ten things" approach to encumbrance. At which point I'm inclined to consider rations for 5 days to be one "thing" and a waterskin likewise to be one "thing". (Then again, right now they have a wagon, so don't need to worry about 'things'. But once they go off-road...)
Tuesday, 4 December 2018
The Beginning of a Thought
I was musing about single-use magic items, and in particular the tendency of PCs to just horde these items - because they might be needed later, or because the Cleric has the ability to cast the spell at no cost, or for whatever reason they're never the best use of resource, so they just sit there. It's something that bugs me just a bit (though not too much - it's not something I give much thought to). Certainly, I would much rather that characters use these items!
My initial solution to this had three parts:
(My initially proposed award would be 50 XP per member of the party per item. Again, though, if and when I revise item crafting, I'm inclined to think that each item will be assigned a value - you can trade it in for gold, break it down for Lore or Reagents, or expend it to gain XP, and in each case it is worth the same numeric amount. But that's a long-term project I'll probably never get around to.)
My initial solution to this had three parts:
- Use of encumbrance rules such that the characters' ability to carry lots of potions is limited. Especially when using the "ten things" rule, carrying lots of individual potions or scrolls becomes prohibitive.
- Use of some sort of 'expiry date' mechanism to foster a use-it-or-lose-it mentality. The big problem with this is that it limits the ability to place potions within a dungeon, since they'd probably have expired by the time the PCs get there.
- Allowing PCs to trade in unwanted potions and scrolls. Initially, this would just allow them to sell them for cash. However, if I ever sort out my revisions to item crafting, it may be possible to break down potions into Reagents and scrolls into Lore, and thus reuse them on other items.
(My initially proposed award would be 50 XP per member of the party per item. Again, though, if and when I revise item crafting, I'm inclined to think that each item will be assigned a value - you can trade it in for gold, break it down for Lore or Reagents, or expend it to gain XP, and in each case it is worth the same numeric amount. But that's a long-term project I'll probably never get around to.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)