Why are stunlocking attacks still a thing in D&D? Pathfinder,

>>50291596
I want to say because anything else could eventually be overcome through levels/min-max bullshit

>>50291621
Makes no sense.

>>50291596
don't get stunned.

>>50291596
By that reasoning, reducing a PC to 0 hp is just dumb.

>>50291745
HP is a bigger safety net than saves.

>>50291596
Rider effects on attacks are useful as they offer a greater threat than binary alive/not alive HP. The greater the rider effect, the greater players should try to avoid being in a position where such rider effects should occur.

Where abilities change the way players handle combat, variety is introduced and therefore spices things up a bit.

If you don't have such rider effects such as save or dies, trips, pushing, difficult ground, and yes, stunlocking attacks, combat can end up very boring.

Stunlocking allows for a creature to have a significantly higher threat level wile not outright risking instant death, and does not provide a permanent effect on the player character. It's relatively tame compared to things like stat damage or curses.

If you don't want to get stunlocked, design your strategy around avoiding getting in a position where you'll get stunlocked.

>>50291812
>If you don't have such rider effects such as save or dies, trips, pushing, difficult ground, and yes, stunlocking attacks, combat can end up very boring.
You can have interesting riders apart from stunlocking. One thing that 5e doesn't use THAT often is ongoing damage.

>If you don't want to get stunlocked, design your strategy around avoiding getting in a position where you'll get stunlocked.
We'd all like to not get hit, but we don't have much of a choice if we're entering combat.

>>50291812
>If you don't want to get stunlocked, design your strategy around avoiding getting in a position where you'll get stunlocked.

>the position to getting stunlocked can be as simple as "getting hit in melee" by certain creatures or "being in AoE of a spell".

I mean, at its core you are essentially saying "never get hit by anything ever because it could be a stun".

Stunning isn't like opportunity attacks or getting flanked. You (as in, the team) can't just rely on nobody ever getting hit with stun.

And even the benefits of having stun as an effect you attribute to it could be fulfilled by just about any other debilating effect, that however still lets you do something. Effects like immobilize or blind or stuff like that can be devastating, but it can still be played around with, while stun is a boring, binary effect.

Stun is best used as reward (or punishment, I guess) for pulling off some sort of plan that requires creativity, coordination and some manner of luck, as it can be considered a method to circumvent dealing with the enemy. It should be an effect that is rare and needs a lot of investment or drawbacks to use so it stays exciting, instead of something that can be done commonly.

>>50291849
Stunlocking is great for making even grazing hits dangerous, though, while not being MASSIVE DAMAGE or HUGE PENALTY that makes your character effectively useless anyway.

>We'd all like to not get hit, but we don't have much of a choice if we're entering combat.
Have you tried not getting in melee range, using difficult ground to keep away, using a mount, using ranged weapons or reach weapons?

It's suboptimal for some builds, but so's getting stunlocked and having your guts torn out and eaten by hungry ghouls while you're paralysed and still alive.

>Why? What does stunlocking add to the game?

You might ask the same about any number of effects. Shit, you might even make the argument that severe debuffs(like feeblemind on a caster) are worse than being "stunlocked" since you're useless all the same, but still need to take your turn. Or mind control (specifically in combat), since you might actually disadvantage the rest of the party. And what about fear effects? Being forced to actually flee the combat while your comrades fight can definitely be worse than being merely unable to act.

The fact is, variety adds to the game and if all(or certain) players in your group absolutely hate certain effect or class of effects, the GM can just choose to not use monsters that utilize the said effects(or use/make up variants that don't have those effects).

>>50291914
>at its core you are essentially saying "never get hit by anything ever because it could be a stun".
Not quite. Most rider effects or special attacks only really work when telegraphed. Of course if you go attack a bandit and he hits you without warning with a 100 foot aoe 10 turn stun effect that's bullshit, but if you see zombies grabbing goblins and watching them freeze up while they're eaten and see previously fearless goblins running away screaming from these things and peppering them with arrows it's a good incentive NOT to have your fighter charge in to melee and then whine about how he expected them to just keel over and die.

Again, a caster with powerful spells shouldn't just be a run of the mill encounter, or the PCs should be packing some anti-stun stuff or effective saves or trust their allies to counterspell by that level where people can throw stuns out like candy.

I thought stun only occurred a few times a day and only once per round or do monks can get more stuns?

>>50291946
>HUGE PENALTY that makes your character effectively useless anyway.

I concede, if you give a penalty as huge that you may as well be stunned, you may as well stun.

However, you can make the same argument against those kinds of debuffs as against stun so that's really not saying much.

>>50291984
>
Again, a caster with powerful spells shouldn't just be a run of the mill encounter, or the PCs should be packing some anti-stun stuff or effective saves or trust their allies to counterspell by that level where people can throw stuns out like candy.

And this just shows another negative effect of stuns (and other such effective disables); they warp combat in a way that once they are available or expected, it becomes a game about dealing with the effect.

File: Robin-Williams.jpg (53KB, 675x450px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 675x450px

>>50291596
Oh lawd! Heven help, something terrible might happen to my character while fighting terrifying monsters of all shapes and sizes!

You're one of those PCs vs. GM mentality people aren't you. Monsters like ghouls who paralize when they hit, or naga with paralysis venom on their blades have that as a thematic flavor to the monster, and increase the challenge of fighting said monster.

It's a team game as well, so you becoming paralized in the fight adds a sense of agency to the rest of the party members to save your paralized ass. It can change the whole stratagy of a fight, allowing for variation in challenges.

Suck it up buttercup and make the will/con save.

When that happens I just grab my phone, GMs get ubersalty about that somehow.

>>50292014
>they warp combat in a way that once they are available or expected, it becomes a game about dealing with the effect.
This is where the discrepancy in my mind and yours occurs.

To me, if a mechanic in the game does not change the way how the players play, then there is no reason for that mechanic to be in the game.

If an added penalty for getting hit was simply "oh, you get a -1 to hit" then players will shrug and ignore the effect and carry on trying to flail away, and be slightly less effective doing what they were previously doing. Or possibly take a five foot step back and shrug before blasting the opponent with spells that don't need attack rolls.

All that does is turn fights into a game of dice rolling odds with no strategy.

Rider effects NEED to be drastic enough to change the flow of a battle so players either change their tactics, or use some of their resources in advance to minimise the impact of such issues. If they can be ignored outright, what's the point of having them? You might as well just make the enemies have +1 AC instead, or more hitpoints.

>tfw snapping turtle or panther monk monk
>tfw its retaliatory attack isn't an action nor an AoO
>be stunned, I still punch them back
You counter stunlocking with ruleslawyering

>>50292028
I think i recognize the OP.

He's the guy who wanders among different groups (because he can't hold a group worth shit due to his crippling social retardation), creates overly minmaxed characters geared for one thing only, then tries to game the system as hard as possible to grab the spotlight. When this doesn't work or when something that is (god forbid) outside of his area of experience happens, he, his pride wounded, his autism triggered, crawls back to /tg/ where he tries to get the sympathy/echo chamber/hugbox.

Not to mention ALL of his characters are little girls(male) with mommy issues.

>>50291946
>Have you tried not getting in melee range, using difficult ground to keep away, using a mount, using ranged weapons or reach weapons?

You mean "not getting hit in combat."

Tall order there, chief.

I know jack shit about DnD, but I fucking hate hate hate stunlocking in video games. So if it's anything similar to that I agree with you OP.

>>50292370
If EVERY enemy has stunlocks, then you probably should be backing the fuck out instead of charging, omae.

If your GM shoves you in a pit without warning with no way to tactically maneuver away from said stunlocking people he's probably a shit GM again.

>>50292461
Ghouls can charge.

What's that, GM? I'm stunned for 3 rounds? Alright, well I'll just sit here and play games on my phone while I wait an hour and a half for my turn.

>>50292567
I do this

>>50292486
Try setting up something like an obstacle between you and the ghouls, then. Maneuver where there's no easy charging method, like area with trees in them. Or have a wizard conjure up a portcullis, or throw down some caltrops.

Still more optimal than getting your guts eaten.

>Not having saves so high you can't fail
My Paladin had like 13 on Fort and Will at 6th level without magic items, the fuck are you doing?

>>50291596
Uh, just be thankful that 5E almost always allows for saves each round to remove now instead of, "Oh, you failed the 30% chance to not die" check that was just about every paralyzing / stunning effect in past editions.

>>50295175
If I remember correctly ghouls in 5e are still underCR as fuck with their 3 attacks with DC 12 or be paralyzsed

>>50292873
This is not an option in the majority of encounters.

File: 1471609259519.png (566KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

566KB, 1280x720px

>>50292995

>Fort +13, Will +13 without magic items

>base save +5
>Cha bonus +4

Did you have Con and Wis bonus at +4 too? Something is fishy here.

>>50292141
>To me, if a mechanic in the game does not change the way how the players play, then there is no reason for that mechanic to be in the game.

A mechanic should warp the game.

A mechanic shouldn't warp the game to the point that your combat options become "who isn't protected against my 'remove from combat' ability?".

In my opinion anyway. Like, even if you enjoy the rocket tag nature of such games, you may as well achieve it in a way that takes HP into account at least.

>>50295296
Then git gud and kill them before they hit you, you faggot.

>>50296822
Not an option.

>>50297084
Fuck off, shitter. They're fucking undead. If you can't find a way to deal with something with that many weaknesses, then you and your party are both retarded.

>>50297094
Undead have more immunities than weaknesses.

>>50297101
You might actually be retarded. Their immunities are entirely irrelevant if you never attack them. Hit their weaknesses.

>>50297139
>undead
>weaknesses
>in D&D

Haha, good one.

>>50297441
>What is Hide from Undead
>What is Control Undead
>What is Command Undead

>>50297899
Curiously enough those all seem to be spells.

>>50291596
because pathfinder significantly improved the game of the healer to remove these conditions and keep hp totals respectable during combat. If you want to avoid these effects you need a caster who is willing to play the role of support and if you don't like doing that, well tough shit thats how it works when you choose not to fight with a support who can remove conditions that stun lock.

>>50298339
Non-casting classes should really have a flag that says NPC-Only in 3.pf. Banning noncasters and fullcasters makes the game flow so much nicer, it's not even funny.

>>50291596
>What is Freedom of Movement
Stops everything but Stun & Daze, and you can turn Daze on your opponents via Dazing Assault. Did I mention nothing is immune to Daze?

>>50297899
Spells that you can't just spontaneously cast?

>>50298417
A scroll of Hide from Undead costs 25gp. Why wouldn't you have one just in case? The rest is just gravy, that a Cleric with open spell slots can prepare in 15 minutes, because they have a scroll of Hide from Undead

>>50298447
>A scroll of Hide from Undead costs 25gp.

Targets one creature, Will save DC 11, ghouls have Will +5, warded creature cannot attack the undead.

>that a Cleric with open spell slots can prepare in 15 minutes

Sure, let's all spend 15 minutes in combat.

>>50298510
>cleric
Use your fucking turn ability, whatever the fuck it is.

>>50298521
Ghouls have channel resistance and decent Wisdom, and some damage will just KINDA help.

>>50291596
status effects are necessary to make games fun. just hit points is boring.

ideally there ate multiple ways to win/lose.

hp loss = death.
ability damage = weakening.
debuffs = flat penalties.
buffs = flat bonuses.

stun
paralysis
silence
haste
slow
push

all contribute to making the game more than a boring numbers game.

>>50298408
i prefer to keep the full casters and ban noncasters, but including both doesnt work out well ubless all martials are at least also initiators.

>>50298510
>Ghoul
Genuinely forgot they're intelligent undead. Whoops.

It's not like they can fly or anything though, so they lose to the usual low level crowd control tactics. Nets, Grease, Entangle, Rime'd Ray of Frost, etc. Once they're entangled, they eat a -4 penalty to all attack rolls because Weapon Finesse, and then it's trivial.

Mundane nets are a remarkably potent ranged touch attack even without proficiency, right up until Freedom of Movement becomes available. +1 Ghost Touch nets are great at fucking over incorporeals though, since if you get them, they can't damage the net, or phase into the ground because of the net. Fantastic use of 8000gp, would recommend

>>50298572
There is nothing wrong with having status effects. However, stun specifically keeps the player from participating in the game. If the turns go by quickly and the stun does not last long this may be fine. Usually the opposite is the case: turns take long because someone takes a moment to think and the stun effect lasts multiple turns.

>>50295240
dc 12 is only 45% for proficiency alone, not counting attribute mod.

>>50297441
where is your cuck cleric?

>>50298713
see >>50298377

>>50291596
Ghouls aren't a problem, chasmes are way worse, it doesn't even need to attack, giving a creature a passive paralyze aura that will then proceed to hit whoever failed his save for an average of 80 necrotic dmg a CR 6 is just retarded.

>>50298408
Initiators from ToB/PoW and homebrew martial buffs go a long way to bridging the gap between martials and full casters.

>>50298896
Yeah, definitely. I do have a hard on for 4th level casters though, been meaning to make a dedicated fighter/samurai spell list for ages. I also use the "Move half and full attack" house rule, so that Haste retains its original intent in 3.0, of allowing martials to make a full move and full attack.
http://rpg20.com/spells.php?reptype=fullentry&valueid=220

Never had a chance to play ToB sadly.

>>50298934
i kind of hate 4th level casters. i think its because their spell progression doesnt start until 4th. if they gave it at thw beginning with just a slow progrwssion (like 5e) they'd be much better.

>>50299144
It's true that their stunted progression isn't the most fun, but it's worth it to produce stuff like 50gp potions of Lesser Restoration. I think it's also because they're kinda training wheel classes; you start off as a full BAB martial, then you get skills or immunities, and after 4 levels of play, you get to learn the basics of vanican casting, after you get the basics of combat and 3.pf in general

I also just think the spells in their lists are really well chosen, usually exactly what they need to fulfill their roles. Rangers get divinations like Commune with Birds/Nature, Speak with Animals/Plants/Stones, access to problem-solving flight with Glide and Raven's Flight, and access to Smite Anything in Instant Enemy, which they can supplement with Pearls of Power, which they can craft themselves. Pallys get great support stuff like Lesser Restoration, Resist Energy, Shield Other, Bestow Grace (Double CHA to all saves!), and the king of combat buffs, Holy Sword (0gp club -> +5 Holy Club of fuck you). Unsanctioned knowledge also gives you access to Divine Power, Haste, Blessing of Fervor, and Animate Dead as a joke.

Overall, I just think they're a really good chassis to build from, and I like how they're put together. A way to start casting at 1st, beyond spell trigger items would be nice though.

>>50299280
i dont have an issue with the list, just the fact that it starts so delayed, and the spell dcs are terrible

File: 1451983944010.jpg (133KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 900x900px

If ghouls can stunlock, then why is their level/CR so low?

>>50300245
because they stun one character and then the rest of the party kills them within the round.

>>50300600
But there are often multiple ghouls.

>>50300667
and collectively they will be a higher cr encounter.

iirc the save dc isnt all that tough, either.

>>50300691
DC 11 Constitution save.

In a game where the majority of classes lack Constitution save proficiency...

>>50300766
but basically everybody brings it up to at least a 14. so thats a bit better than 50/50 for the classes that lack con save proficiency.

>>50291596
God, you are a crybaby; try not getting hit.

Why do GMs get salty when you start playing games on the phone when stunned?

>>50300245

Ghouls are one of the more under-CR'd critters I've encountered in Pathfinder. A pack of CR 1 ghouls and a couple ghasts can still be bad fucking news even for a decently leveled party if you didn't have a blaster caster or cleric to just dust 'em all in one go, as I discovered when I set my players against a ghoul nest in a haunted mansion dungeon. Yeah, they couldn't take too many hits, on the other hand there were saving throws rolled left and right against paralysis and disease and the party couldn't make all of them. No casualties, but they did need to burn hero points they were saving for the dungeon's end to stop the party's monk from getting Coup De Graced.

>>50301496
>What is Freedom of Movement

>>50298377
>Pathfinder
>improved
AHAHAHAHA no.

>>50302650
Something you're unlikely to have access to if a group of ghouls can actually be a challenge to the party.

>>50302711
Ghouls are CR1, so you can see a pack of 32 would be CR9, which should be a challenging encounter for a level 8 party. Barring that, a scroll is 700gp a pop, and something I usually buy ASAP because Ghouls and Mummies exist. You can grab the scroll at about level 3 for a rainy day.

>>50302752
>Ghouls are CR1, so you can see a pack of 32 would be CR9, which should be a challenging encounter for a level 8 party.

In theory. In practice, the wizard can probably make them a non-issue with a single wall of fire or something.

>>50301496
Just so you're aware, a single ghoul is meant to be a challenge for a Lv1 party, and you're meant to use throwing attacks and reach weapons against them.

>>50302775
>CR 1 = challenging for a level 1 party

Total horseshit.

>>50302772
To be fair, that is pretty lazy encounter design. In practice, I'd probably mix it up with some CR3 air elementals, and round it off with some Basalisks, or an Ice Golem or something cool.

>>50302786
yes. what do you think cr 1 means?

its challenging for a level 1 party. challenging mwans ~1/4 party resources in 3.x, and ~6-8 in 5e.

>>50302987
Four level 1 PCs will murder the fuck out of a single CR 1.

It's not exactly challenging.

>>50303010
good chance hell take out that 1/8th of tbe partys hp

>>50291596
In my games, stunned (or immobilized or w/e) players don't skip turns. The monsters just get to make extra attacks against them.

The effects that DO force skipping turns (sleep, etc.) are punishments for players who take big risks and fail or otherwise fuck up real bad. Not getting to play is the worst thing that can happen to a player (that's part of what makes dropping to 0HP so bad, beyond the possible loss of your character), so they should genuinely feel like whatever happens is their fault and something they could have avoided - this is what they're supposed to thing about until they can get back into play.

>>50291596
forces you to do something other than face tank the mob.

yes, fighters are capable of not blindly charging into an enemy.

>>50303724
Greatsword fighters are just fucked, I guess?

>>50303734
>What are slings

File: 1465927080556.jpg (110KB, 430x430px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 430x430px

>>50303734
no, get behind a fucking palisade and use your damn bow you halfwit.

you can hail mary crit the next mob that doesn't stunlock, or level drain, or rust your armor. quit crying.

>>50303737
>>50303748
Because fuck melee fighters, am I right?

>>50303847
Just as not all 3rd level wizards can be effective against all magic elementals, not all melee fighters can be effective against all creatures causing stun.

>>50305453
You mean most characters.

File: 1466175301230.jpg (77KB, 405x405px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 405x405px

>>50305453
>magic elementals

Are these even a thing?

>>50303847
Nothing stops you from having more than one weapon, anon

>>50291596
because a game where the PCs and the Monsters don't play by the same rules is a game that gets boring fast.

Rarely do PCs get stun-locked, and if they do it absolutely shifts the focus of the battle from "kill the bad guys" to "protect our friend" and that's an incredibly fun shift to see.

Sure, it sucks when you get stun-locked, but everybody else is having even more fun and if you're not playing a tabletop rpg for the fun of the group, and only for your fun, just go play skyrim or something.

What is stunlocking?

>>50300245
Because they die quick and suck at hitting

>>50305555
>everybody else is having even more fun

Fucking horse shit, the others aren't having more fun because one guy doesn't get to play.

>>50305586
No more than other CR 1s.

>>50305601
>No more than other CR 1s.
Then they fit right in don't they?

>>50303748
A strength fighter will likely not be very good with a bow

>>50305623
No, because other CR 1s don't have stunlocks.

>>50305662
If it's not related to hp it has no effect on CR

>>50305697
And that's why 5e's CR system is retarded.

>>50305635
At level 1, 14 dex and +1 BAB gives +3 to hit versus an average AC of 12 at CR 1. That's a hit 60% of the time for 1d8, which is nearly half the average HP of a CR1 encounter. It's not ideal, but it's sufficient.

>>50305662
No, but they can fly, molest you through the earth where you can't hit them, blow away your gear, and that's just the CR1 elementals alone.

>>50305709
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/undead/ghoul

Ghouls have AC 14 and can charge.

File: 1468438338871.jpg (30KB, 420x280px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 420x280px

What system is this thread even talking about any more?

File: FagottOfTheYear.jpg (139KB, 1200x795px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 1200x795px

>>50291596
>Pathfinder, 4e, 5e, they all have stupid "you don't get to play this round, sorry" attacks.
Guess what? In a fight, people sometimes get stunned. If you don't like simulationist elements, play boardgames, you fucking pleb.

File: HarmonicaNo.gif (478KB, 500x224px) Image search: [Google]

478KB, 500x224px

>>50305709
Why would you put points into dex instead of con as a plate wearing str fighter? Also,
>playing 3.pf

>>50305750
In a fight, people also get instantly killed instead of absorbing attacks because "lol HP plot armor."

>>50291798
by that token, don't roll to do stuff anymore, let the GM just narrate how great your PC.

>>50305763
HP, you cockmongler.

>>50291849
>You can have interesting riders apart from stunlocking. One thing that 5e doesn't use THAT often is ongoing damage.
again you're arguing form a pure gamist POV, which is why I am telling you to play fucking boardgames. RPG systems generally try to mimick real world action to one degree or another.

>>50305745
It was always dnd

>>50305732
The statement was STR fighters are not very good with bows; I demonstrated that they were sufficient to contribute in a meaningful fashion at level 1. At later levels, you can add STR to damage through Mighty +X bows, but throwing weapons such as slings are usually better suited becasuse they get STr to damage for free.

>>50305758
No fighter can afford full plate at level 1, and Fighters have an incentive to invest in Dex because Armor Training. At High levels, that's going to be something along the lines of 14+6(Item)+5(inherent) = 25, or +7.

>>50305780
dnd has been strongly gamist since the first edition

>>50292567
First of all, my turns last no longer than 5-7 minutes. Secondly, I'm fine with you chilling out for a few minutes but when you tune in, I expect your concentration to be back on the game. Ideally you tune back in during your last turn of being stunned.

>>50292567
What edition guarantees stunning for 3 rounds?

>>50305762
Alright, then let me correct myself:
In FICTIONAL melee combat, heroic protagonists get stunned regularly but they do not get instakilled regularly. Source: Hollywood movies.

Now shut the fuck up and join the pleb corner.

>>50305797
OD&D wasn't an amateurish (thus the result is quite gamist) attempt at simulating fantasy medieval combat? im currently reading "playing at the world" and it seems your claim is quite wrong, considering its Chainmail heritage.

>>50305855
>heroic protagonists get stunned regularly but they do not get instakilled regularly.
not in this new age of GRIM N GRITTY fantasy fiction

>>50305831
Rolemaster. Stunned and Unable to Parry is best.

>>50305855
Hollywood movie combat hardly makes for fun RPG combat.

>>50305892
Well, if you wanna play dark fantasy, then yes include stun and instakills. Problem solved.

Protip: make chargen sweet and easy in that case.

>>50305916
>Hollywood movie combat hardly makes for fun RPG combat.
That's why game designers never try to combat systems that transport cinematic action well? Or are you one of those people who only play D&D and are not aware of what's going on in the hobby?

>>50305944
4e was a mistake

>>50306015
>mmo simulator = hollywood simulator
nope

>>50306015
Yeah, D&D combat is supposed to be shitty to incentivize players to avoid it.

>>50305534
The game sure as fuck stops you from being effective with more than one.

>>50292567
>Relatively new to Pathfinder
>Party has to find some kind of demon which can cast darkness at will
>Told I can't target the demon because I can't see him whatsoever
>Just sit there for two hours as the party struggles with this demon

I was stunned for five rounds during another campaign. I can't think of anything more boring than just sitting there waiting.

>>50303847
>every fight should be super accomodating to all players
fuck that noise.

i try to have about 25% of all fights stop one of the character's common combat tactics. as for which one? mix it up. sometimes rideby charges arent viable. sometimes archery isn't viable. sometimes you get ambushed and theres no time for defensive spells and buffs. sometimes melee is ill advised.

>>50309191
not that guy, but i feel like just canceling a combat tactic doesn't make for very interesting fights. one or two pcs will need to think harder and/or settle for subpar options, sure, but that's about it. a fight is much more interesting when the enemy has no resistances of the sort, but instead a combat tactic or special fighting style that requires coordination and/or out of the box thinking from the whole party.

>>50303847
not all melee fighters have big oozing vaginas and can't handle not being the center of attention for a combat.

so don't try to pull them into this shit.

>>50309417
sometimes you accomplish it through terrain and circumstances, other times its the creatures themselves

File: 1472611582883.jpg (21KB, 474x503px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 474x503px

>>50309417
it does make more interesting fights, for the dm. Especially if one of the players does nothing but charge and smite every combat for 3 years.

the guy behind the screen is playing too. and he's not getting any exp for this shit.

>>50309044
well, two hours is excessive, thus bad. however...
you're sitting around with supposedly good people, having fun. if you're sidelined for 30 minutes, don't be a little bitch.

>>50292012
That depends on the game. In 5e monks can make multiple stun attempts per turn, but 3.5 did not allow that without a heavy feat investment from splatbooks not everyone had.

>>50292447
Most editions of D&D allow clerics, bards, etc. to remove those effects or prevent them from occurring. That stuff is easily countered, and none of it is guaranteed to work because of saving throws.

>>50305697
>>50305702
Read the DMG, it's factored in if you read past the number chart.

>>50291596
That's what ya get for min-maxin' buddy.

>>50311135
>not having stun immunity is min-maxing

File: 1470972122665.gif (474KB, 450x253px) Image search: [Google]

474KB, 450x253px

Why is this thread so hostile and unexcellent?

>>50291596
>Whaaaa! My character is stunned
>Catgirl image

Jesus, you're terrible. To ACTUALLY answer the question though, many modern D&D creatures with these abilities have them in lieu of multiattacks. It's crowd control, as they will always be fighting multiple foes, and not always fighting with allies. It's a dynamic that achieves the same effect in a different way, in order to be interesting.

>>50297441
Positive energy, destroyed on 0hp, low level spells that target them specifically, unique weaknesses hard to heal. In most games, there are several classes that are built-in undead busters as well. They also don't make good mixed-unit combatants for similar reasons, and most of their advantages (immunity to sleep/charm/etc) mostly just prevents them from being cheesed by the casters regular "cheese everything" kit of spells.

>>50300766
>DC11 con save
>nearly a 50% sucsess for anyone that didn't dump con
Stop dumping the best stat you retarded dexfag

>>50311942
>Positive energy

Basically limited to clerics.

>destroyed on 0hp

Not an actual monster weakness.

>low level spells that target them specifically

That you have to know about beforehand.

>unique weaknesses hard to heal

And lots of immunities.

>>50311964
Those aren't encouraging odds.

>>50311895
>interesting

>you don't get to play

File: 1420008343246.jpg (4KB, 125x125px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 125x125px

>>50311983
>Positive energy limited to clerics
No. Many classes in many editions have basic cure spells, which almost always can be used to deal damage to undead in the same way inflict spells can heal them. The exception is 5e, where that's a houserule pretty much every game I've seen uses and undead typically have radiant damage weaknesses that multiple classes can exploit as well.

>destroyed on 0hp isn't a weakness
Yes it is. They can't be resurrected and can't recover from being downed. If you're fighting more than one, that can be a big deal.

>You need to know about anti-undead spells ahead of time
Well... yeah, if you want to get an upper-hand in a situation, having proper preperation and information is very important. Maybe you guys just got jumped? Likewise, there are plenty of great spells in lots of editions that are general use and have bonus riders against undead. Chill touch in 5e, Rattlebones in PF, resurrect in like everything, etc.

>Lots of immunities
Mostly to cheese. Sleep, charm, poison, level drain, etc. Whoops! You can't spam sleep on them, like everything else! So do constructs, incorporeal creatures, elementals, and so on. What's your point? You could also argue that

>>50312225
>Many classes in many editions have basic cure spells, which almost always can be used to deal damage to undead in the same way inflict spells can heal them.
Using Cure X just to harm undead is total shit.

>house rules

>They can't be resurrected and can't recover from being downed. If you're fighting more than one, that can be a big deal.
Monsters basically never recover from being downed in a fight.

>Maybe you guys just got jumped?
Or maybe we can't read the GM's mind.

>Chill touch in 5e, Rattlebones in PF
For all targets, not just undead... and still doesn't help against being stunned.

>resurrect
Huge casting time, mid level spell.

>Mostly to cheese.
So a lot of the usual tactics.

>>50312272
Stop relying on bad tactics and "winning" and learn to enjoy roleplay, skeleton

>>50305916
I'm unsure, given how most systems are MISS MISS MISS MISS MISS scratch MISS scratch scratch MISS OH NO HES BEEN MAIMED HOW WILL HE MAKE IT MISS MISS DRAMATIC CRITICAL HIT and other guy dies they're all very Hollywood based. Seriously if you wrote out how most combat went and did some story boarding with it they'd fit right on screen for generic sword fight scenes. the only problem is that the "hero" can get fucked over and it can take hours to get what would be a 2 to 3 minute scene in a movie.

>>50312272
>Using Cure X just to harm undead is total shit
...Why?

>Monsters basically never recover from being downed in a fight.
Guess that's a game to game thing, my game gets in battles against intelligent foes rather often

>For all targets, not just undead...
I think you didn't read that part properly. Those are spells that have good effects on target for ALL targets, AND have additional riders against undead, meaning that having them prepared nets you no loss and can give more effect against undead as well. If your grip is bad spell choice then.. well, that's sort of on you. Sometimes you're going to get suprised.

>resurrect
Same thing, even if it's not the most efficient, it's something.

>cheese is the usual tactics
Yuck. You know most of us want to enjoy these games, right?

>>50312342
>MISS MISS MISS

You mean chunking away at HP.

>>50312528
d20 systems love the idea of missing 45% of the time. Systems with probability curves love having you come up against a similar curve meaning you fail 50% of the time. Percential systems hate giving players above a 40% success rate at start or allow a roll off against similar skill level which once again gets to 50/50. I do mean miss miss miss.

>>50313475
>d20 systems love the idea of missing 45%

What kind of d20 systems are you playing?

>>50313559
You have a d20 + modifiers to to meet or beat 10+defensive modifiers. Modifiers being equal IE the origial concept of untrained peasants going at it makes it a d20 that must roll 10 or greater which is a 45% miss chance. I'm being kind as AC often outpaces to hit chances in a lot of d20 systems before you get to magical concealment or chance to neagate effects.

>>50313579
Okay, in all modern editions this is false for everything but edge cases, mostly because first level characters that make attack rolls don't have +0 modifier for it.

In 3.5, as levels advance the hit chances outscale AC, which do not get +1/level a scaling boost unlike BAB, getting to the point where AC stops being a defense you can rely on because a martial character has about 5% to miss (well, a bit more with second/third iteratives, but depending on build, not much).

In 4e, your hit chance is always around 70-75% unless you intentionally make it worse.

In 5e, AC's are bound and don't really scale at all, while attacks do, albeit a lot slower than 3.5, but in the end, you end up with a similar effect.

>>50313684
For player charters maybe. For appropriate for that level enemies natural armor, dexterity, and deflection bonuses. A CR 15 bronze dragon has 27, a CR 15 Mummy Lord has an ac of 30. That's + 17 for 45% hit for dragon and if 15 of that comes from class levels you have a piddly 2 more to make but that is not a 5% chance to miss, you would need a +25 or more. So what +5 legendary weapon, we already included feats for +2 so where does that other +5 come from?

For 4th and 5th sure maybe, they're not the thing that spawned the d20 shitstorm and where 90% of the d20 shit comes from.

>>50313982
Stat bonus, by 15 a character should have about I think 24 (+7) in his main stat with magic items (belts). On top of that, you got class features like barbarian rage for another +2 (at this level +3, right?) and possible buffs from the rest of the characters (at 15 you really should get at least a haste or something) in the party that stack with that. Charge, flanking, debuffs etc. also improve hit chance.

>>50310257
>if you're sidelined for 30 minutes
You have wasted 30 minutes.

>>50314033
Maybe I've just come from games that are stingy with attack bonuses or +X weapons cause I rarely see physical types keeping up in the arms race to hit.

>>50314194
If playing it by the book, attack bonuses tend to outscale defenses so much that investing in AC is considered a fool's errand by mid levels. But it also gets better with splats. I mean, yeah, core only martial? You are kinda fucked.

Also do note that a CR 15 encounter is supposed to be a moderate challenge for an entire party of level 15 PCs IIRC, not something the fighter can take 1 on 1, hence the low-ish hit chance is somewhat justified.

>>50314051
your party needs to take their turns faster.

if a turn takes more than 2 minutes to resolve, you are playing way too slow.

>>50314194
yeah, if you're sticking to wealth by level it's pretty hard to fall below 75% on the first hit with no buffs versus CR average AC as a full BAB class. Even with the strictest item availability of nothing above 16000gp from the gamemastering settlement guide, at 20th you're looking at 18+4(item)+5(inherent) = 27 STR -> +8 to hit, +20 BAB +2 weapon = +30 to hit versus CR 20 average AC of 36 yields 75% to hit

>>50314498
think you forgot attribute increases

>>50314436
so, you know, on a combat with ~15 combatants, 30 minutes between turns is reasonable

>>50314523
those are +5 inherent, i had a brain thing. Tomes don't cost below 16000gp, so you can't buy them in metropolises.

>>50314785
ah. i thought you were including tomes and skipping levelup.

okay, carry on, that maths reasonably well.

>>50291596
>4e
>take Superior Will and Dispater's Iron Discipline
>literally never ever stunned again on your turn

>>50315810
Two feats, one of which is a paragon feat.

>>50315926
I would think you'd only really start getting raped with stuns by paragon

>>50318428
>Monster Vault ghouls

>>50291812

This is it.

The only important hit point is your last one otherwise.

>>50321721
So why don't we make HP matter more by taking away the stuns?

>>50291596
Deal with it.

God players are such whiny entitled bitches these days.

Back in the day save or die effects were as common as sneezing and nobody complained, people were instead happy to reach level 2 and find a +1 sword. Now you dare have someone skip a turn of combat from some paralysis effect and they call the game balance police to come and take your DM licence away.

You're the reason why we had 4th edition. I hope you're happy with yourself.

>>50323525
because straight hp are boring and repetitive?

>>50324440
ntgb 4e was a perfectly acceptable game.

it just did a shitty job pretending to be d&d.

>>50324440
>Back in the day save or die effects were as common as sneezing and nobody complained
horse shit. People complained all the goddamn time and most people didn't even use them, that's why the rules fucking changed you goddamned retard.

>>50324476

Why? Because it attempted balance? It's non-combat rules were honestly more functional than 3.5s ever were.

>>50303847
> be melee fighter
> feeble thinkmeat can't grasp concept of how a bow work, only sword
>die to kobold at top of 15 foot tower

You make us martials look bad. You don't get a spellbook, you get a year list and attributes that support using it in flexible ways. I bet you're one of those people that complains that all fighters get to do is full attack every round.

>>50324564
It wasn't a broken mess so clearly it wasn't D&D.

A lot of people ITT seem to be arguing against an imaginary version of the OP where he complained that every single debuff in the game hurt his feelings. He didn't - he argued specifically that stuns are bullshit because they take the player out of the game. There are plenty of effects which don't but still dramatically limit what they can do (Silence, Blinding, Slowing etc) - these add the variety and tactical depth that people are arguing for without leaving anyone sitting around dick in hand for their entire turn.
Others have argued that it should be a simulation of stunning in the fight scenes of films or books (and/or real life fights for some reason?). Fine, but you can still do that without denying the player any action. Being stunned makes you sluggish (cripple the movement speed), slow to act (only 1 action per turn + certain free ones) and unable to attack (no action can be an attack - or spell) or defend (lower defences in some fashion, automatically fail things like attempts to tumble) effectively. In 90% of fights that will probably take them out just as much but it does allow them to contribute in some way for the remaining 10% (e.g activating switches, moving into position for when the stun wears off etc).

Of course some people just like stun effects for whatever reason or think that save-or-wander-off-to-do-something-more-interesting effects are great fun. There's no arguing against that position, as there is no real need to unless they start calling people That Guy for dicking around on their phones instead of being fully engaged in a combat they cannot act in and therefore have absolutely no reason to give a shit about.

File: 1473207032278.png (20KB, 409x494px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 409x494px

>>50325149
Why is everyone in this thread so mad at OP?

>>50325149
>being blinded is okay
>being stunned isn't

??????????????

>>50291596
>>50325149
>>50325153

OP samefagging.

Did I do it right this time?

>>50326036
Because you can still try to act when blinded. Stun means you are effecitvely skipped in the turn order. That's just not fun. And yes, debuffs and status effects should facilitate fun in one way or the other, not screw over the players in an arbitrary manner.

>>50326102
>everyone disagreeing with me and trying to be reasonable is the same person
sure

>>50326123
>being reasonable
>complaining about stunning

>>50324564
primarily because it sucked for d&d magic, and because the default fluff attached to everything was a shitty watered down parody of d&d fluff

>>50326855
>it sucked for d&d magic
>Wanting d&d magic to ruin another edition

>>50326855

It still had rituals for big, impressive magic.

>>50327318
>not wanting a game balanced around d&d magic.
>>50327370
i mean, i guess?
nothing approaching what a good mage could do in combat at levels 12-20 in 3.x.
and thats iconic d&d afaic.

>>50328081

Then why have non-spellcasters at all if that's 'D&D' to you?

I can't honestly think of any D&D character save maybe Elminster who threw about magic to 3.5 level. Raist and Magus, the two major iconic mages tended to save magic for magor things and play very conservative with it.

>>50328321
pharaun mizzrym was pretty magic heavy. liriel baenre. gromph and khelben.

but as for why have non spellcasters? id rather not, frankly. id have everyone be a minimum of 1/2 caster or give them equivalent utility not based on spell slots

>>50328390

I think at this point you are not really having stuff be D&D if you can't have Huma, Kelemvor or Cyric as PCs. You might as well call it another game if Fighting Men and Rogues are not PCs any more.

>>50328321
and when i run pathfinder, we often restrict it to tier 1/2/3 classes, tier 1/2, or tier 2/3.

>>50328439
fighting men and rogues are fine for a low level campaign, but they should absolutely be acquiring their own supernatural abilities by level 5 or 6.

otherwise, their 1-trick pony status (all i can do is hit things with a stick, but i do it real good) and (im good at lots of low level stuff but can't do anything you couldnt see in real life) are no longer valid character concepts when the game moves far beyond the realm of real life capabilities.

when you get to the levels that your teammates are dr. strange, iron man, and professor xavier, being a regular knight or catburgler is no longer a reasonable character choice.

>>50328515

That's nice and I'm sure it's a fine game but it's not remotely D&D at that point. That's more a combative Ars Magica. D&D is the game where a non-magical knight when up against the goddess of dragons herself, a foe that the greatest mage of his generation couldn't beat and struck her down.

>>50328562
in regular d&d, even a nonmagical knight can eventually survive a fall from orbit, wade through lava, and survive a direct hit to the face from a meteor. they're hardly realistic, and d&d world is very clearly not anywhere near the weak power level of real life.

but when it comes to their abilities to do anything *other* than shrug off what would kill anyone within human limits, or their ability to punch walking mountains to death, suddenly you expect them to conform to real-life limitations and pretend they somehow are even vaguely realistic.

compared to a level 20 fighter, conan and hercules are 2-bit chumps.

but for some reason, when its not about murder, fighter players throw a fit if you dare try to make them able to contribute like other party members.

so, since basically everyone who makes a fighter then bitches about how they dont have nice things whilst rejecting the nice things offered them, as soon as we pass level 6, and builds them even when we state in advance that were starting at 6 or higher, its easier to ban them by default and make the players ask for special permission to build them.

i have one friend who i always let play a fighter when he wants to. he understands hes building a 1-trick pony and doesnt bitch when someone else can almost keep up with him in damage and still do other stuff. he knows what hes getting into, and hes choosing it, so he is fine building a 1-trick pony.

>>50328515
>should start getting their own supernatural powers at level 5 or so.

thats not a bad idea.

in the future i will have to incorporate that into my campaigns.

they suddenly gain a bunch of unexplained but useful powers, that work well with how they already played their characters.

or some creature they encounter makes them into their champion.

or they're cursed with power, but at an in-story price.

or they find themselves gradually awakening powers from a heritage they didnt know they have. maybe x-men style.

or after encountering an occult ritual find themselves gradually becoming some form of monster.

lots of ways i can eoll with this, all of which let me make the mundane fighter not suck in the game.

or maybe they get a utility belt of sorts, or the ability to make consumables/charms/talismans/magic tattoos that help them at a moments notice.

and if theyre determined to be a 1-trick pony thwy can look to have their newfound abilities stripped from them as part of the campaign.