Dave and Stacey collaborate using Google Drive and make liberal use of the commenting feature. This blog series pulls out some of those comment threads, either because they amused us or because we think they’re interesting from a game design back-and-forth perspective.
“Any attacks made against creatures hostile to the huecuva within the aura have advantage, while attacks made by creatures hostile to the huecuva within the aura have advantage.”
Stacey: I adjusted this language to be clearer. Is it okay?
David: Yes, but you could also be simpler: “The huecuva and all creatures within 30 feet of it, whether friendly or not, gain advantage on all attack rolls.”
Stacey: Okay, see but you’re reading it wrong. That’s not what it says.
Stacey: OH, NOPE I WROTE IT WRONG.
“stunned for 1d4 rounds”
Dave: This is so much better than the axe attack that the draugr should do nothing but slam attacks, then use the axe to carve up a stunned party into filets for dinner. Something like the knockback that the chieftain has would be better.
Stacey: What if I beef up the other attack and make the stun only one round?
Stacey: I meant for greataxe to be 10 anyway. Also, everything in parentheses I’m going to recheck.
Stacey: Oh, or what if they just have disadvantage for 1d4 rounds?
David: That would work.
“261 (18d20 + 72)”
Stacey: Isn’t 18 x the con bonus 108?
Dave: Yeah, good catch. I must have changed the Con later, probably to make the poison DC more appropriate.
Stacey: We should change the 72 to 108, though, right?
Dave: It already is.
Dave: …because I changed it after I saw that.
“1d10 x 100 ft.”
Dave: I multiplied all these by 100 rather than 10, because you don’t want a 10 ft. teleport—anticlimactic.
Dave: If that’s too much, consider 1d4 x 100.
Stacey: I was just gonna say that. Okay.
Stacey: I originally thought the point was just to fuck with them by moving them around the room, not to effectively remove a player from the fight.