It’s a bug in our simulation. If you’re poor and you lose a little money, you go bankrupt. But if you’re rich and you burn a fuckton of money, you can buffer overflow into richness and go back on top.

That time I got reincarnated in my Medieval 2 Total War campaign and I used cheat codes to make Byzantium win against the islamic nations

Team work makes the dream work!

I bet the daily bunny no.66 is over there!

Welcome back and happy new year!

I’m also struggling to go back to pre-holidays productivity. New year is going to be rough lol

I’ve seen some crazy takes on Sneak Attack, it wouldn’t surprise me if this happened at least once in the entirety of our existence.

Something about rolling a bunch of damage dice without expending resources really makes some people uncomfortable. They see the Paladin and the Sorcerer expending spell slots, the Fighter only having one Action Surge, etc… and come to the conclusion that the Rogue is inherently broken.

Thank you, I was quite confused by this one!

This sounds like Commie propaganda. We all know the Roman empire fell because of an influx of immigrants from beyond the border!

Jokes aside, some of these comments would have a place in history classes. They’re certainly better than anything I’ve heard from some of my professors back in the days.

I don’t know you, but I have more games in my library than gaming hours in a month. I haven’t touched anything released in the past three years, and mostly replay older games and emulators. The entire PS1 and PS2 library, as well as Nintendo 64, GBA, DS, etc… can be played on your fridge, and you can pirate those games for free, or buy their remasters (if they’s any) for cheap.

I’ve been playing, as usual, a M2TW campaign with Byzantium during the holidays. You get Roman walls and horse archers. The best of both worlds.

How rich are they expected to be? I’ve noticed that wages seem to have gone up from 3.5, with unskilled labor going from 1sp/day to 2sp/day, and skilled labor going from 3sp/day to 1gp/day. If you wanted to retire (for 50 years) comfortably (2gp/day), you’d need 36,535 gp, which I think is a lot more than a low level adventurer would have.

A lv1 character starts with 100/150 GP (IIRC, depending on which class you choose), which is enough to sustain the character for 3+ months with average expenses. That being said, most expenses can be bypassed with magic (Goodberry, Tiny Hut, Create Food and Water), which means that the money can actually sustain the party a lot longer than that, and that’s on top of survival rules (tracking rations, travel hours, etc…) being almost completely nonexistent in 5e. As soon as the character hits lv3-5, they will probably have no compelling reason to go on an adventure anymore, except for the one made up by the player when writing their backstory.

I’ve heard that so long as the small army has a way to deal damage at all, they’ll dominate even high level enemies. Did they change that? I think the whole idea of adventurers makes a lot more sense if they can’t just send a small army to easily deal with a dragon or whatever else they’re worried about.

This was a bit exaggerated on my end: yes, action economy is king in 5e, and still is in 2024. What I meant is: a 2024 Barb can have up to 17 HP at 1st level (12 baseline + 3 from CON modifier + 2 from Tough), which are worth twice as much thanks to Rage granting them resistance to all damage. Wizards will take Spell Initiate and gain a free cast of Shield. Generally speaking, characters have a higher damage output and more resources compared to their 2014 counterpart, which was already high compared to previous editions of DnD. And that’s not taking into account how difficult it is to die in 5e because of the death saving throws rule.

These are not necessarily bad things: people will probably enjoy the higher floor for baseline power, and there’s nothing wrong with that. There’s also nothing wrong with forgoing the dungeon crawling origins of DnD in favour of more of a more theatrical/role-playing experience, which has already been pretty much the only way people has played the game for the past few years.
It’s just not something I particularly enjoy or crave for. After a while, playing an overpowered character with near-endless resources in a game that seems designed around the idea of you doing cool shit all the time, it gets old. I prefer grittier experiences, which 5e and especially 2024 are unable to provide.

There’s not enough change to prefer one over the other, IMO. It’s the same game with a few patch notes and some fanmade mods built into the default experience. Some things were streamlined (potions as bonus action and grapples requiring a saving throw, for example), some things were improved (all classes and subclasses being playable right off the bat without the need of extensive homemade reworks), and most of the game was left as is, for better or for worse.

Some changes are nice, some are arguably worse, balance is still wack, and they did nothing to really tackle any of the problems that afflicted the base game ten years ago - martial/caster disparity, mounted combat being completely broken, no clear indication on the power level or recommended price for magic items, etc…

I disliked 2024 because it tipped the scale even more towards “heroic fantasy”, with players being unfathomably rich and strong enough to fight a small army at lv2 already, but it’s not a problem new to 2024: it was already there in 5e, it was just exacerbated in the new edition.

Last night, I killed a city guard, raised it as a zombie, ordered it to cause a fire to the elven city’s great holy tree and then bite a few peasants. In the meantime, I cast Hunger of Hadar over a few dozen civilians.

I was bored.

“I have been accused of being a nasty old sexist-male-Chauvinist-pig, for the wording in D&D isn’t what it should be. There should be more emphasis on the female role, more non-gendered names, and so forth. I thought perhaps these folks were right and considered adding women in the ‘Raping and Pillaging[’] section, in the ‘Whores and Tavern Wenches’ chapter, the special magical part dealing with ‘Hags and Crones’, and thought perhaps of adding an appendix on ‘Medieval Harems, Slave Girls, and Going Viking’. Damn right I am sexist. It doesn’t matter to me if women get paid as much as men, get jobs traditionally male, and shower in the men’s locker room. They can jolly well stay away from wargaming in droves for all I care. I’ve seen many a good wargame and wargamer spoiled thanks to the fair sex. I’ll detail that if anyone wishes.”

From D&D Co-Creator Gary Gygax was Sexist. Talking About it is Key to Preserving his Legacy.

I played this game years after its release, luckily without spoilers, but I had heard a LOT about it and how great it was.

It’s one of the very few instances of a game living up to its hype. Loved every second of it! The humour is always on point, gameplay is unique, soundtrack is on fire, and the story’s not bad either. I only had minor grievances with it, but nothing that made it drop below a 9/10 for me.

Happy holidays, Alex! Thank you for sharing these :D

Io Saturnalia, Pug! Thank you for an entire year of rough roman memes :)

(A bit early, but I don’t know if I’ll log into Lemmy tomorrow)

Then they’d kill you to steal your riches.

If it helps, most people in a game store, and most dnd players, are socially awkward as well.

I used to be very socially awkward as a kid until I went to my local game store to play yugioh. I haven’t played in ages but I’m still happy i did! I’m still socially awkward, but a lot less than before, and I met some people I’m still friends with years later.

Happy holidays 'lolz! Thank you for your wonderful app :)