TOPIC: Hardcore too hardcore for rare builds?

lazlo_hollyfeld1985 wrote: So here are my questions
Is the Rare build suppose to cake walk or beat the dungeon on hardcore...or just make it to room 6 or 7.

I would say "reasonable expectation of reaching room 7 unless things really go south, and clear room 7 maybe 25% of the time". You want wins to be infrequent enough to feel special, but it's also important that the majority of the failures feel like "if only we'd arranged our spells better and our Barbarian hadn't slid/rolled for crap, we'd have a chance", not "well that was a freaking waste of time".

lazlo_hollyfeld1985 wrote: if you cant solve a puzzle...no amount of money spent can get you to pass a room 7 puzzle.

A million dollars to buy a Ring of Three Wishes and use one of the wishes to solve the puzzle?

Wade Schwendemann (Dr. Uid) wrote: Lose a turn effects are pretty bad.
Maybe it should be "may take no offensive action" type turns instead?

Intriguing idea! How would you justify it in game? The concept of being stunned is easy to comprehend because that's a real-world state. How would you explain being able to perform some Standard Actions but not others? Outside of a very narrowly-focused set of magic items (e.g., Cloak of Blending ), I'm having trouble envisioning an on-the-fly prohibition against offensive actions.

Druegar wrote:

Wade Schwendemann (Dr. Uid) wrote: Lose a turn effects are pretty bad.
Maybe it should be "may take no offensive action" type turns instead?

Intriguing idea! How would you justify it in game? The concept of being stunned is easy to comprehend because that's a real-world state. How would you explain being able to perform some Standard Actions but not others? Outside of a very narrowly-focused set of magic items (e.g., Cloak of Blending ), I'm having trouble envisioning an on-the-fly prohibition against offensive actions.

Maybe the creature/monster/enemy has an ability to generate force shields.or cages?

Perhaps a friendship type spell where you are allowed to help, but not attack?

Some sort of a Mystic charm/rune on the wall that forces a save, a la the fear rune from before?

I'm not thinking every room should be this way, but maybe a couple creative ways to justify people being able to still do something

Maybe the option is on normal you can take a non-offensive action, but at HC or higher, it's save or lose a turn. Higher level players should be prepared for more powerful effects, and more punishment for failure.

I think part of the problem with the high AC rooms in VTD is the current random number generation method. A well geared group is likely to not slide a low number very often, while they seem to come up a fair amount in VTD. I think a return to 1d10+10 might be a better long term solution if VTD is going to continue. The current method has too much variation around to hit.

(disclaimer - as some one that switched from a caster build to a sliding build during VTD I very well may side a 4 at GHC )

OrionW wrote: I think part of the problem with the high AC rooms in VTD is the current random number generation method.

Cranston (the programmer of the apps) just came up with a method of more closely approximating the in-person slide results. We'll see how well that plays in an upcoming virtual adventure.

Druegar wrote:

Wade Schwendemann (Dr. Uid) wrote: Lose a turn effects are pretty bad.
Maybe it should be "may take no offensive action" type turns instead?

Intriguing idea! How would you justify it in game? The concept of being stunned is easy to comprehend because that's a real-world state. How would you explain being able to perform some Standard Actions but not others? Outside of a very narrowly-focused set of magic items (e.g., Cloak of Blending ), I'm having trouble envisioning an on-the-fly prohibition against offensive actions.

Perhaps call it "Staggered" where you can only take non-offensive actions until you recover your wits and dust yourself off. "When Staggered, you are reeling from an opponent's onslaught and can't focus well enough to engage offensively against the creature again this round. You may take non-offensive actions during this turn."

Fred

Druegar wrote:

Wade Schwendemann (Dr. Uid) wrote: Lose a turn effects are pretty bad.
Maybe it should be "may take no offensive action" type turns instead?

Intriguing idea! How would you justify it in game? The concept of being stunned is easy to comprehend because that's a real-world state. How would you explain being able to perform some Standard Actions but not others? Outside of a very narrowly-focused set of magic items (e.g., Cloak of Blending ), I'm having trouble envisioning an on-the-fly prohibition against offensive actions.

I think maybe a "knockdown" or "disarm" effect could explain it.

You've been knocked prone, all you can do next turn is resume a fighting stance, and take one non-offensive action like drink a potion.

Or, perhaps "terrified" or "afraid" would be more thematic (also there are in game dispell fear effects so that might lead to some fun interactions).

"cowed" - you're too intimidated to attack, you can only take a non-offensive action while you build up your courage.

Mike Steele wrote: "cowed" - you're too intimidated to attack, you can only take a non-offensive action while you build up your courage.

That's the best one yet, and I would be excited to hear a DM say of the monster: "You have been cowed by its awesome presence. You may only take non-offensive actions next turn."

This effect could also be bestowed by being hit by the monster, instead of by failing a save, so as to incent AC or Saves in a given room. (Maybe the "being hit prevents offensive action" would be called something else for clarity like "rattled.")

Bunch of conditions exist that don't get used that are along the lines of limiting offense.

See:
Nauseated
Prone
Shaken
Sickened

I haven't found yet how you stand up in TD. Standard action?