What if you started with considerably less than 100 gold pieces (or 100 gold pieces worth of equipment)? What if only simple weapons are available?
What if you couldn't understand the language of a party member? Of all your party members? Of a seemingly nonhostile race the party just encountered? (These assume the Linguist feat and magical assistance are unavailable.)
What if you are limited to martial classes? arcane classes? divine? primal? psionic?
What if you need to reach two milestones before you gain the benefit of an extended rest?
Could you survive? If not alone, how many party members would it take at minimum to survive?
~
I have heard my friends mention a setting they call the "Midnight Campaign" which increases the difficulty of the game.
Do you like the idea of a challenge as such? Can you not stomach it? What are your thoughts?
Please keep the replies positive and nonjudgmental, and feel free to share your more challenging scenarios.
If your Dungeon Master had you roll your ability scores with 5d6 and total the three lesser values, could you survive?What if you started with considerably less than 100 gold pieces (or 100 gold pieces worth of equipment)? What if only simple weapons are available?
These seem interesting. Sounds like a pretty good challenge.
What if you couldn't understand the language of a party member? Of all your party members? Of a seemingly nonhostile race the party just encountered? (These assume the Linguist feat and magical assistance are unavailable.)
I don't like this one. If the party can't communicate with one another, I don't understand why they would stay together.
What if you are limited to martial classes? arcane classes? divine? primal? psionic?
What if you need to reach two milestones before you gain the benefit of an extended rest?Could you survive? If not alone, how many party members would it take at minimum to survive?
Generally I like these. Although my personal preference is to have as much diversity amongst characters as possible (different power sources, different races, and preferably little overlap in class role), having a party of all martial, all arcane, or what have you, can be interesting. All divine would be a lot of fun, especially if they're all different dieties ;)
What if you couldn't understand the language of a party member? Of all your party members? Of a seemingly nonhostile race the party just encountered? (These assume the Linguist feat and magical assistance are unavailable.)I don't like this one. If the party can't communicate with one another, I don't understand why they would stay together.
Circumstances could bring like-minded people together. Let's say it is this:
You speak only . . . um . . . Giant, and you meet a group of people who all speak . . . oh . . . Deep Speech. A person you trust is there and can speek Giant and Deep Speech, and tells you it is important the two of you work with them to accomplish a common goal. Not soon after, your trusted friend dies. What now? I'll tell you what. Time for charades.
No?
What would you do?
If your Dungeon Master had you roll your ability scores with 5d6 and total the three lesser values, could you survive?
ROFL... So many people here act like they are afraid to step outside without all six scores above 15. I can practically hear their heart palpitations from here.
That sounds like an awesome experiment.
What if you couldn't understand the language of a party member? Of all your party members? Of a seemingly nonhostile race the party just encountered? (These assume the Linguist feat and magical assistance are unavailable.)I don't like this one. If the party can't communicate with one another, I don't understand why they would stay together.
That's how one game I'm in started. I spoke Elven and Eastern Common, one other PC spoke Elven and Western Common, one spoke Eastern and Western Common, and the other four spoke Western Common and various languages.
We stayed together because we'd somehow managed to work things out while working as caravan guards hired on at various points.
Eventually I picked up a smattering of Western Common and everyone in the party learned Eastern Common. (That made the most sense, considering that the game setting is in Imperial China.)
Yes, in the meantime we DID role-play the language difficulties. Including one guy actively role-playing trying to learn Eastern Common with a dictionary and no formal instruction. He frequently said strange things. (Eventually we got formal instruction.)
I have heard my friends mention a setting they call the "Midnight Campaign" which increases the difficulty of the game.
wiki.rpg.net/index.php/Midnight_RPG_Camp...
It's not really a campaign setting - it's actually a separate game system using the majority of the 3.5 Ed. D20 rules, but with some notable modifications...
I haven't played it, but I've seen the books. It's a third-party 3.5 game, though, and the company dropped it, so there's no chance of it being re-released for 4th. The basic concept is pretty bleak - it's 200 years after EVIL WINSTM, and the Dark God Izrador is in charge, with his Church of Shadow and their dark orc minions running everything. Most of the magic has been sucked out of the world, most of the regular PC races are either oppressed or outright enslaved, and the PCs are basically the only heroes left...
What if you are limited to martial classes? arcane classes? divine? primal? psionic?
I had this for one LFR adventure. We were all primal and we did cover al the roles and combat went great and stuff. Social skill challenges were near impossible for us since we all used CHA as our dump stat... It worked because we roleplayed with the skills we did have and the DM allowed things like that (like getting a discount by joining in a armwrestling contest).
So yes, I think everyone can survive that.
If your Dungeon Master had you roll your ability scores with 5d6 and total the three lesser values, could you survive?
What if you started with considerably less than 100 gold pieces (or 100 gold pieces worth of equipment)? What if only simple weapons are available?
If the DM does his job and accounts for the party's alteration in power level from standard and adjusts encounters accordingly, yes, but I wouldn't enjoy it. I *hate* rolling for ability scores.
What if you couldn't understand the language of a party member? Of all your party members? Of a seemingly nonhostile race the party just encountered? (These assume the Linguist feat and magical assistance are unavailable.)
Not being able to understand party members would either be a pain in the butt as we have to mime crap. Wouldn't play. Heck, when I run Star Wars, I let Wookiees speak Basic because otherwise, it's just a pain in the butt.
What if you are limited to martial classes? arcane classes? divine? primal? psionic?
Martial, Arcane and Psionic, fine. Divine and Primal, might play, probably wouldn't have fun since I don't like them.
What if you need to reach two milestones before you gain the benefit of an extended rest?
Files under 'ridiculous house rule' to me, but I only suggest taking an extended rest when it's necessary rather than convenient. Survive, yes, but would spend the entire game thinking it's ridiculous.
I had this for one LFR adventure. We were all primal and we did cover al the roles and combat went great and stuff. Social skill challenges were near impossible for us since we all used CHA as our dump stat... It worked because we roleplayed with the skills we did have and the DM allowed things like that (like getting a discount by joining in a armwrestling contest).
So yes, I think everyone can survive that.
Congratulations! You qualify for our arm wrestling discount! XD
If your Dungeon Master had you roll your ability scores with 5d6 and total the three lesser values, could you survive?
What if you started with considerably less than 100 gold pieces (or 100 gold pieces worth of equipment)? What if only simple weapons are available?
If the DM does his job and accounts for the party's alteration in power level from standard and adjusts encounters accordingly, yes, but I wouldn't enjoy it. I *hate* rolling for ability scores.
This was assuming no adjustment on behalf of the Dungeon Master. That's why there is the question of survival. Scaling the game to the players would defeat the purpose of this question.
What if you need to reach two milestones before you gain the benefit of an extended rest?
Files under 'ridiculous house rule' to me, but I only suggest taking an extended rest when it's necessary rather than convenient. Survive, yes, but would spend the entire game thinking it's ridiculous.
This is actually a house rule suggested by Dungeon Master's Guide 2 on page 55 under the "Drawing Characters Onward" section.
~~~~
What if all of the elements I mentioned in my original post were true simultaneously? Could you survive?
@ Mad_Jack Thanks for finding that for me. I probably shouldn't read it, though. I want to keep my mind virgin for the experience.
Otherwise, let's hear some more difficult scenarios. Please. Share.
If your Dungeon Master had you roll your ability scores with 5d6 and total the three lesser values, could you survive?
ROFL... So many people here act like they are afraid to step outside without all six scores above 15. I can practically hear their heart palpitations from here.
That sounds like an awesome experiment.
I agree. Sure, D&D is all about creating an awesome warrior, but who ever said "awesome" meant "unbeatable"?
If your Dungeon Master had you roll your ability scores with 5d6 and total the three lesser values, could you survive?
I'm afraid I don't know how to do the math to figure out what 5d6 drop the two highest is on average, but when I threw a test roll I got 3 4 4 8 9 13. That's a +2 mod to my attack stat, assuming a race which bumps it. Yeah, I could survive with that. I wouldn't hit as much or have as much HP, but it's close enough to base values that I could persevere with the right class/build.
What if you started with considerably less than 100 gold pieces (or 100 gold pieces worth of equipment)? What if only simple weapons are available?
Yeah, doable. I think a party could survive even if they started with nothing but staves for two-handers and clubs for one-handers. Again, it'd be more difficult.
What if you couldn't understand the language of a party member? Of all your party members? Of a seemingly nonhostile race the party just encountered? (These assume the Linguist feat and magical assistance are unavailable.)
Hell, that's hardy any obstruction at all in the survival sense. You just get a bit more roleplay as everyone says stuff abut Darmok and Jalad at each other (and then a lot less for the rest of the campaign because the group can't understand each other). Work out some rudimentary conceptual sign and it's easy enough to coordinate in the necessary ways.
What if you are limited to martial classes? arcane classes? divine? primal? psionic?
Sure. Every class of every power source is at least serviceable right out of the box.
What if you need to reach two milestones before you gain the benefit of an extended rest?
Sure, I suppose. That's considered standard anyway.
Could you survive? If not alone, how many party members would it take at minimum to survive?
I didn't know we were talking about soloing. I couldn't begin to tell you how many it would take. I assume we're talking about difficulty scaling with the number of people, in which case I would assume that whatever balance point where adding players is most beneficial before it's outweighed by the addition of additional foes is still applicable.
As for combining all of these limitations, it really becomes impossible to say whether it's survivable without knowing the particulars. A low attack stat can be compensated for by playing a high-accuracy class like an Avenger or a NAD-attacking dagger Rogue, but those might be ruled out by a power source limitation, for example.
The real net result is that people would min-max and powergame all the harder just to cope with the game's hobbling. Where one might have played a Half-Orc Wizard for the flavour of it, the player might not feel that sacrificing half of one's attack stat mod by picking a race that doesn't bump it just isn't worth the difficulty incurred. You won't see people playing low-accuracy builds like power-attacking hammer-wielders because their attack is already low enough. What's more, with stats being randomly determined, the people who roll well will be head and shoulders above the rest, and they'll be most optimally positioned to use the powerful cheese and feel justified/obligated in doing so because the party needs all the help it can get.
In other words, if you love cheese, stock builds, and character choices made for purely mechanical reasons, use the above limitations. Myself, I wouldn't have any fun with any of the above (save the linguistic difficulty and perhaps brief periods of sub-standard equipment) because it brings nothing new to the table. It's just the same as regular D&D only with more fail. Thanks, but I get my fill of that from streaks of bad rolls; I don't need a game that's stacked so I have to have a streak of good rolls just to break even.
I agree. Sure, D&D is all about creating an awesome warrior, but who ever said "awesome" meant "unbeatable"?
Nobody, unless you count your implication in this post here. Awesome may not mean unbeatable, but it sure as hell doesn't mean 'missing mundane foes on a 14' either.
If your Dungeon Master had you roll your ability scores with 5d6 and total the three lesser values, could you survive?
I'm afraid I don't know how to do the math to figure out what 5d6 drop the two highest is on average
It's about 7.57
If your Dungeon Master had you roll your ability scores with 5d6 and total the three lesser values, could you survive?
I'm afraid I don't know how to do the math to figure out what 5d6 drop the two highest is on average, but when I threw a test roll I got 3 4 4 8 9 13. That's a +2 mod to my attack stat, assuming a race which bumps it. Yeah, I could survive with that. I wouldn't hit as much or have as much HP, but it's close enough to base values that I could persevere with the right class/build
It's about 7.57
I once wrote out all the combinations by hand to calculate the odds for rolling results of 3 through 18 for 5d6 sans the two greatest values. I wish I hadn't thrown them... oh! haha! I found them! \o/
My calculations show there is a 14.85% chance you will roll a sum of 7. That means about 1 out of 7 times, you will get 7. Those are the greatest odds there are for any one sum using this method. As the sum gets farther and farther from 7, the less likely it is to occur.
@ MrCelsius You got really lucky with that 13 there. With this method you have a 2.19% chance of totalling to 13. That means you should only get that result about 1 out of 45 times.
@ Ajs How did you calculate that? Please teach me your formula. >.< Writing combinations out by hand takes forever!
@ everyone So, if you find an increase in difficulty unpalatable, where is your threshhold? How difficult is too difficult before it is no longer fun?
So, if you find an increase in difficulty unpalatable, where is your threshhold? How difficult is too difficult before it is no longer fun?
It's not so much that greater difficulty isn't fun, it's that it's not a fun kind of difficulty. If standard 4e D&D is the equivalent of watching Jackie Chan beating people senseless with a stepladder (and I'd say that it's approximately that awesome) then lowering stats or item quality is the equivalent of making that ladder ten times heavier; yes, Jackie has a harder time wielding it, but it's not more difficult in an interesting or entertaining way, it's just more difficult. Barring certain classes is like telling him he can only fight with that stepladder; no shopping carts or benches or horseshoes on the end of a rope for him! That may be more difficult for Jackie, the master of improvisation, but for the audience (read: the players) it's just less interesting.
I've run a campaign for powerful characters. In order to make combats challenging, I added dangerous terrain, threw in extra enemies (in the campaign's final battle they mopped up Orcus, Demogorgon, and Dispater without breaking a sweat), and denied short rests so they'd be worn down for the real fight. These options for increasing difficulty are dynamic and entertaining, and can be used to make for a truly exciting and cinematic 'hard mode' that doesn't amount to the adventurers doing all the same old things only with leaden weights shackled to their limbs.
Regarding all being one type of character (martial, divine, etc), that seems very workable. A group that I play with is starting a campaign where we wanted some sort of unifying element to the party. We decided that all of the characters would be changelings, which posed some interesting but not insurmountable problems in trying to create a balanced party. We don't have any tough guy (i.e. strength and con based) characters, but we have a rogue and an assassin to deal out damage and a charisma based paladin to serve as defender. I think it will work just fine.
This is extremely fun and stretches your roleplaying muscles to the max.
I didn't realize how fun this could be. Your original stats roll determines what race you can play, what class, etc. I never play wizards. Now I have to since it's the only thing I qualified for. I have 4 spells, they were randomly given to me.
Yes, I play in one of these games with the 3 most experienced members of my gaming group and the first DM the group ever had.
No we don't survive often. That's half the fun!
This was what Gygax had in mind when he made the game. 3d6 in order to stats. Try playing a 2nd Edition game with that method. Don't use any options.
This is extremely fun and stretches your roleplaying muscles to the max.
I didn't realize how fun this could be. Your original stats roll determines what race you can play, what class, etc. I never play wizards. Now I have to since it's the only thing I qualified for. I have 4 spells, they were randomly given to me.
Yes, I play in one of these games with the 3 most experienced members of my gaming group and the first DM the group ever had.
No we don't survive often. That's half the fun!
You're the kind of player I would enjoy gaming with, I think; someone not afraid of "fighting the system" or wielding a "ladder ten times heavier".
The idea of randomly generating everything about your character's stats really appeals to me somehow. It's exciting not to know how it will come out, then to deal with your outcome creatively and effectively. I just love a challenge.
You're the kind of player I would enjoy gaming with, I think; someone not afraid of "fighting the system" or wielding a "ladder ten times heavier".
The idea of randomly generating everything about your character's stats really appeals to me somehow. It's exciting not to know how it will come out, then to deal with your outcome creatively and effectively. I just love a challenge.
It's important to restate that this is the experienced group I game with. I play with another group that is mostly newbies and it frustrates me to no end.
For a really good time, run a one shot game with a randomly selected DM, plot, attributes, race, class, and level. We did that for a year between campaigns (2nd edition). The most memorable character I ever played in d&d was a one shot random character.
Sir Sits-A-Lot, the Kobold Paladin. I did a scratchy high pitched voice and acted like Didymus from Labyrinth (barky, like a little yappy dog). He had a mount...Slowie-slow-slow the giant snail. The best part of the game was the last battle.
Slowie moved at a snail's pace obviously, so when I decided to charge the big bad guy....it took 5 rounds. "What are you doing this round?"..."I'm getting off Slowie and shouting, 'You can do it boy, you're the best mount a hero could ever ask for! Then I'm getting back on next round.'"
Funny thing is, My character was the only one to survive the game. The BBEG nova'd and I wasn't close enough to him. After he did so, I was easily able to take him out. The charge worked and I did...normal weapon damage(dm and I agreed this was logical).
The people who played in that game still talk about Slowie being the best "character" ever made. I keep telling them he wasn't the character, Sits-A-Lot was. Weird how people remember things. This one scene is the one I think about when I think about d&d.
If your Dungeon Master had you roll your ability scores with 5d6 and total the three lesser values, could you survive?
Well, here are my rolls, I think I got lucky on one of them, but luck is the name of the game when rolling for stats. Somebody can end up with a power house, and some people can end up with a house mouse.
1-3-4-4-5 = 8
4-5-5-5-6 = 14
2-3-3-4-4 = 8
1-2-3-5-6 = 6
1-1-3-4-5 = 5
3-4-5-5-6 = 12
Lets see, you didn't mention arrange as desired, so I am going to assume you intended them in order. So I have Con and Cha as hihg stats, to increse my survivability I'm going to optimize a bit, as would anyone faced with this kind of restrictions.
Class: Battlemind, A tough defender is great for survivability, and will help out the party ! My stats line up perfectly for a Con / Cha Battlemind, Hihg Con gives me a good attack bonus and HP and Charisma helps me talk my way out of tight jams.
Race: Half Elf ! Perfect stat boosts, gives me another power and even pumps my talk myself out of trouble ability !
Final stats Str: 8 Con: 16 Dex:8 Int:6 Wis:5 Cha:14
Really not that crippling a character if played right
What if you started with considerably less than 100 gold pieces (or 100 gold pieces worth of equipment)? What if only simple weapons are available?
how little ? if it's enough to outfit myself with a suit of armour, a club and a wooden buckler I should be alright, if not pretty good.
What if you couldn't understand the language of a party member? Of all your party members? Of a seemingly nonhostile race the party just encountered? (These assume the Linguist feat and magical assistance are unavailable.)
Take the linguist feat. Or just roleplay it and try to figure out some common gestures ! (props to the fellow who was apparently at Tanagra.)
What if you are limited to martial classes? arcane classes? divine? primal? psionic?
I just went with what presented itself, limiting power sources doesnt make the game harder just more confining.
What if you need to reach two milestones before you gain the benefit of an extended rest?
a 4 - 6 encounter day is pretty standard for my groups....
Could you survive? If not alone, how many party members would it take at minimum to survive?
Survival really isnt that hard, success could be the tricky part.
~
I have heard my friends mention a setting they call the "Midnight Campaign" which increases the difficulty of the game.
Do you like the idea of a challenge as such? Can you not stomach it? What are your thoughts?
Please keep the replies positive and nonjudgmental, and feel free to share your more challenging scenarios.
Could be fun, could be nothing but frustration, theres nothing wrong with a challenge, but the game ceases to be fun for a lot of people when you cannot succede at anything without rolling a 16 or better, and shortly after the best course of action is always just run away.
Reducing the probability of victory is not the same as making an encounter more challenging. Having to find a way to get at a sniper in a very well fortified position is challenging. Having to roll 18+ to hit a sniper is not challenging; it's just improbable.
Some of the restrictions listed in the OP can lead to an intersting group makeup, or add challenges to gameplay. Some of them just make success less probable. For instance, having to play a character with the stat rolling method doesn't make for a more interesting character; it just makes for a less capable one. You're not being challenged to play smarter; you're just going to succeed less frequently at the things you try to do. How much less frequently depends on how well you can optimize and work the system within the constraints given. To me, that's not a challenge to achieve higher levels of roleplay; it's a challenge to compensate for the crap hand the DM dealt the players.
Some of the other restrictions can lead to interesting challenges or campaign themes. For instance, having everyone in the group play a martial or primal character could direct the theme of the campaign. They could all be soldiers in the same unit, students from the same academy, a convention of "savage" creatures gathering to deal with a specific threat, or a hundred other things more interesting than peasants with sticks or superpowered hobos who met in a bar. Limiting access to weapon groups has the potential to challenge players interested in those weapons to gain access to them, which might at least be fun for those players whose characters would want to use weapons. Starting everyone poor adds an adventure or two to the start of the campaign (and can provide a good reason for the party to be a party despite various alignments and agendas if you play it as a slave escape or shipwreck sort of thing).
Ultimately, I'm playing to have fun. Proving my ability to tolerate hardship isn't appealing to me, do I won't bother with it unless people I really enjoy playing with are excited about the prospect. When that's the case, I'll get my fun from hanging out with them, and tolerate the game's restrictions as long as everyone's having a good time, including myself.
@ Thundersteel1918 You're right. I didn't mention "arrange as desired" or not. I was thinking, yes, you can place the scores where you like, but it could be fun to assign them in the random order they appeared, sure.
As for the starting wealth, I wouldn't randomize it like, I think, 3rd edition does, but how about it depends on the class a player chooses. Maybe even their background affects it.
@ Kaganfindel I guess this is just my way of thinking, but
lower probability = harder to succeed = more challenging.
Lower odds could come by way of attack bonuses vs. defenses, or being (considerably) outnumbered, or a lack of magic items, or perhaps yadda yadda yadda. There are lots of examples.
I agree with your sniper example as a challenging situation, but what I mean is a challenging mode of play rather than a challenging event. Which I guess means I am saying everything would prove challenging rather than one specific scenario.
Lastly, I am not sure why you mention achieving higher levels of roleplay. My original post is asking whether you can survive with those premises in effect, not if they increase roleplaying.
@ J-Pop_Jedi When I roleplay, I suppose I aim for something a little more serious than what you have going, as far as proper nouns go at least. I'm not into anything comically debilitating, but at the same time some reasonable constraints could increase the challenge--which is what I find fun.