View Profile: CapnZapp - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:10 PM
    *shrug* Low level spells don't need more damage. Just stop using damage-dealing spells in low-level slots.
    61 replies | 1274 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:53 PM
    That's actually not the whole truth. Not since you are talking about slots, rather than spells. A level 1 spell slot is much more versatile and flexible than a "cantrip slot", at least for the main casters we're talking about (read "wizard and cleric"). Long story short - you're focusing too much on raw damage IMO. I'd accept the fact that there comes a time when level 1 slots aren't...
    61 replies | 1274 view(s)
    1 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:52 PM
    No, you mean lower level spells. He's talking about spell slots. You can't cast a level 1 spell slot in a higher level. Level 1 spell slots are always level 1.
    61 replies | 1274 view(s)
    1 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 12:27 PM
    True, but at high level, your save DC becomes relatively much better (monster saves stay relatively low). So while the DPR (damage per round) of a 1d10 low-level cantrip might not be much more than half of the average of 5, the DPR of a 4d10 high-level cantrip is easily 80% of the average of 22. And so while the damage dice is "only" quadrupled, the actual DPR might have increased by a factor...
    61 replies | 1274 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:32 AM
    Addendum: to answer how to actually fix it, my best suggestion is to limit the number of cantrips you can use. Perhaps something as simple as "you can cast a number of cantrips equal to your spellcasting ability modifier +3. You regain all spent uses after taking a short or long rest". This might not change much from your perspective, but it does change the balance slightly (in the favor...
    61 replies | 1274 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:25 AM
    I think you should reconsider, and start using your low-level slots for utility, not damage.
    61 replies | 1274 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:23 AM
    Welcome to the discussion. By browsing past posts you will realize I am well aware how the rules work, what exact changes were made, and how I detest these changes, and have come up with easy suggestions how to fix the problems that 5E have created! :)
    165 replies | 4118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Saturday, 8th December, 2018, 10:56 AM
    I find it hilarious that you are squabbling over the minutae while stubbornly refusing to see the real cause, and the easy fix. (Hint: millions of d20 players happily used working vision rules for decades, including the Pathfinder players that still use them today :D ) Way to make your life harder, guys ...but it's your game...
    165 replies | 4118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Saturday, 8th December, 2018, 10:51 AM
    That came out of nowhere. Why the hostile response? :confused: I volunteered a reply to the OP - and yourself - in the belief I was helpful. If you don't want regular forum users to reply to meta questions, maybe then not solicit the input? Plus, no posts are blocked when using the app, so your testy reply not only feels unprovoked but also hard to understand. :(
    24 replies | 342 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Friday, 7th December, 2018, 10:33 PM
    Thank you for acknowledging 5E vision doesn't work and needs to go away. What names you then use for low-light vision and the exact specifics is none of my business :)
    165 replies | 4118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Friday, 7th December, 2018, 07:34 PM
    Yes
    3 replies | 255 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Friday, 7th December, 2018, 07:33 PM
    On the app the link leads to a thread discussing fleet sizes.
    24 replies | 342 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Friday, 7th December, 2018, 03:14 PM
    Except, of course - and by nitpicking you already knew this was coming - infravision and darkvision are far from the same thing, so, no, it really is "never before 5E" :) Thankfully, nobody is (hopefully) seriously arguing we should go back to 1E vision :) Anyway, what 5E did was to "simplify" vision. Both compared to 3E and 1E. Unfortunately, they threw out the baby with the bathwater...
    165 replies | 4118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Friday, 7th December, 2018, 01:13 PM
    Plus: Don't tell me Owls (and Elves) can't see beyond 60 ft at night. Ergo: Switching forest animals over to Darkvision is absurd and doesn't work, and the best solution is to revert them to the rule that has been working for decades without a hitch: low-light vision (or even "nightvision" for the grognards).
    165 replies | 4118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 6th December, 2018, 08:00 PM
    "groups should still be using torches in 5e" - this is just some kind of inertia, or wishful thinking. When you really consider the case, having torches is more bad than good. This also completely ignores the advantages of not having torches. These advantages are overwhelming! So there should be a considerable incentive to use torches. The best way to incentivize torches is to make the...
    165 replies | 4118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 6th December, 2018, 10:48 AM
    This. Specifically, the issue isn't "Darkvision good" or "Darkvision bad". The change that 5E needlessly made, is adding Darkvision to so many races, that it becomes "too easy" to have an all-Darkvision party. With Elves etc back to not-Darkvision, you can still have an all-Dwarf party, but most parties will contain at least one not-Darkvision member. This has significant implications...
    165 replies | 4118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 6th December, 2018, 10:29 AM
    What makes it easy is if adventurers bring torches and other light sources. You'll see them from far away. That Darkvision = dim light = Perception penalty I consider almost a benefit, not a detriment. Why? Because ambushes are fun, and because without that -5 monsters have an almost impossible task of successfully surprising the heroes!
    165 replies | 4118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 6th December, 2018, 10:24 AM
    I don't think so at all. We're getting Realms products because that setting, by far, is the most popular. Plotless megadungeons and mislabeled not-heists on the other hand, might generate low buzz in any setting.
    96 replies | 2673 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Tuesday, 4th December, 2018, 07:25 PM
    Why would anyone choose to be a fighter in this scenario...?
    20 replies | 688 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Monday, 3rd December, 2018, 11:05 AM
    Agreed. Of course, nobody contested this. This discussion is about whether Elves and Dwarves should have the *same* kind of superior sight.
    165 replies | 4118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Saturday, 1st December, 2018, 05:29 PM
    That is my question, yes.
    20 replies | 4862 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Saturday, 1st December, 2018, 09:44 AM
    Still no dev that have had to answer for this?
    20 replies | 4862 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Friday, 30th November, 2018, 01:45 PM
    Exactly :)
    165 replies | 4118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Friday, 30th November, 2018, 01:42 PM
    Nope :) Not in the EN World app I'm using anyways. It's a completely different GUI than the regular site (mobile skinned or no). Do note I had to go through some acrobatics to install it on my phone, though. Basically, no amount of searching found me the app. I could find it on my Windows desktop, but not in my phone's Google Play Store. Can't remember specifics about how I got it sorted in...
    7 replies | 163 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Friday, 30th November, 2018, 11:27 AM
    I gave up on trying to use forum sites (like this one) on my mobile. Reading is passable, but actually posting is a nightmare. OTOH, ENWorld has an app, which (I believe?) is a skinned version of the regular Tapatalk app. While ads are unavoidable, it does make using the site (reading AND posting) a relative breeze!
    7 replies | 163 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Friday, 30th November, 2018, 11:22 AM
    Thing is, you can remove the right hand panels through greasemonkey (or other clever script work) to reclaim the screen estate. Maybe you had this set up and then switched browsers? Upgraded to Firefox Quantum (which I believe breaks old plugins)? The site changing its web code so your script stopped working? Or you could simply be losing your mind :)
    2 replies | 171 view(s)
    1 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Friday, 30th November, 2018, 11:16 AM
    Lots of self-appointed armchair police around, I see. How about you leaving the IP policing to the actual trademark holders, and focus on having fun, mkay? :)
    17 replies | 664 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Friday, 30th November, 2018, 11:10 AM
    Great stuff! Do you have any other suggestions of this level of quality? :)
    17 replies | 664 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Friday, 30th November, 2018, 11:06 AM
    Do all of what? You seem to be contesting something, but I'm not sure of what. (I'm not even sure you're in the right thread, seeing the title here is "Ridding Elves and Half-elves of Darkvision...) You don't need light if you have Darkvision, that's just a fact. Light is a luxury you definitely can and will opt out of while travelling in unsafe territory. Why? Because the benefit (not...
    165 replies | 4118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 29th November, 2018, 10:47 PM
    I just stumbled over something that (for me) is very rare: a fan-made supplement that blew my socks off. I was looking for WFRP warpstone but found this instead - the crones are perfect for my upgraded Tome of Annihilation Sewn Sisters. Intriguing mechanics... and the illos! The beautiful illos! :D (PS. Google Book of Beautiful Horrors by Regerem)
    17 replies | 664 view(s)
    1 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 29th November, 2018, 10:46 AM
    I think the lesson is to ignore CR. As an experienced DM, just wing it and save yourself some time and effort. But thanks for sharing!
    15 replies | 720 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 29th November, 2018, 10:40 AM
    Now you're not even making any sense. Unless, of course, you're intentionally obtuse. Or, you attempted a joke, in which case I failed to see it. Anyway. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, let me take this step by step, and end with a question. This is a thread about ridding Elves and Half-Elves of Darkvision. My observation is that with the revert back to low-light vision, it becomes...
    165 replies | 4118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Wednesday, 28th November, 2018, 10:49 PM
    ? Maybe you need to read the thread title?
    165 replies | 4118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Wednesday, 28th November, 2018, 09:59 PM
    Since I'm not sure why you felt you had to qualify or comment my statement, let's take this one step at a time. Yes, they need light. They no longer have darkvision. In total darkness I wouldn't say they see "poorly" - they see jack squat. In more unspecified levels of darkness they do have excellent vision, just like a cat or an owl. For instance, they see perfectly in moonlight. Not...
    165 replies | 4118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Wednesday, 28th November, 2018, 12:29 PM
    If you mean to say that DMs Guild is not without it's disadvantages, effectively putting a dampener on creativity everywhere else, then I absolutely agree. As for Greyhawk, that ship sailed a long time ago. I wouldn't hold my breath for official support even for fan content.
    60 replies | 1743 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Wednesday, 28th November, 2018, 11:22 AM
    My biggest beef is that every medium- or high-level effort is still geared towards weak/new players with unoptimized characters, maybe not even using the crunch in the book: feats, mc, magic items.
    92 replies | 4309 view(s)
    1 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Wednesday, 28th November, 2018, 09:55 AM
    Agreed! :) I couldn't say it better myself :) Not to mention how it helps humans. If everybody and their dog can see in the dark, and the Dungeon Master runs Darkvision correctly by having such creatures turn off their light, not having Darkvision makes for a significant handicap that adds nothing to the fun of the game.
    165 replies | 4118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Tuesday, 27th November, 2018, 12:49 PM
    Apparently the gboard keyboard doesn't work with the ENWorld App, creating humongous smilies? Oh well.
    165 replies | 4118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Tuesday, 27th November, 2018, 12:11 PM
    Remember, treating Darkvision as only providing dim light is a 5E invention to justify the removal of low-light vision. It makes Darkvision far fiddler than it needs to be. The solution is to restore low-light vision to the game, and drop the gotchas surrounding Darkvision. Yes, Underdark races do use light. But only within the safety of their settlements! No sane sentry or watchtower...
    165 replies | 4118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Tuesday, 27th November, 2018, 11:44 AM
    Nah, monsters have abysmal skill scores. You can easily detect monsters even with disadvantage. On the other hand, being able to travel in total darkness (as a group) is a game changer advantage. You easily choose dim light over being insta-spotted from miles away (overland) and a hundred yards (in the Underdark). Tldr: Darkvision isn't particularly powerful on its own. But the absence...
    165 replies | 4118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Monday, 26th November, 2018, 08:04 PM
    Tell that to Black Friday....
    92 replies | 4309 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Monday, 26th November, 2018, 08:02 PM
    Dragon Heist: Not a heist. Mad Mage: not even an adventure, just loads of random dungeon levels. So I consider the lack of interest quite natural, but I can only speak for myself.
    92 replies | 4309 view(s)
    2 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Monday, 26th November, 2018, 07:57 PM
    Again the elegant solution is to roll back WotC's ill-advised changes. This solves everything because nothing about low-light and dark vision was broken in 3E.
    165 replies | 4118 view(s)
    1 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Monday, 26th November, 2018, 01:31 PM
    A party gains so much from being all-dark enabled that it isn't funny. Any group of minmaxers worth their salt rolls up half-elf instead of human and gnome instead of halfling, and can then enjoy a minor variation of the classic Human, Elf, Dwarf, Halfling party with no lanterns and no problems sneaking around. Getting rid of "low-light vision" was made to simplify the game, but it is a stupid...
    165 replies | 4118 view(s)
    2 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Sunday, 25th November, 2018, 10:34 PM
    The question is why the threat title haven't been edited yet...
    241 replies | 8848 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Sunday, 25th November, 2018, 10:30 PM
    Thank you for the overlay link. The majority of customers will not have or even know about those old maps, and by looking at the overlay it seems the complaints are overblown. To me it appears that most customers will not even consider it an issue. Yes there are a very small number of corridors that lead into the "expanded" map, but I can't imagine anyone being compelled to make these...
    46 replies | 2105 view(s)
    1 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Saturday, 24th November, 2018, 07:40 PM
    Not sure why you feel you need to reiterate this with me. Someone said "They've mentioned on various YouTube videos that they decided to leave out certain areas of each level so that individual DMs can extrapolate and create their own stuff." I responded with "And of course we all know that's not the real reason." It seems like we agree?
    46 replies | 2105 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Saturday, 24th November, 2018, 05:51 PM
    No, I meant that the reason isn't "that individual DMs can create their own stuff". That's bollocks. That would assume DMs are unable to expand on existing maps if these don't indicate large unexplored areas, as if we somehow need explicit permission to expand maps, which is obvious nonsense. Instead the real reason is that WotC nowadays never does more than they think they can get away with....
    46 replies | 2105 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Saturday, 24th November, 2018, 03:09 PM
    And of course we all know that's not the real reason.
    46 replies | 2105 view(s)
    2 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Saturday, 24th November, 2018, 03:09 PM
    Exactly my sentiment. I can't imagine using this book in any other way than having a completely different campaign (city-based or not) that occasionally offers quests that sends the heroes down on specific quests, where you experience a limited slice of the dungeon and then get out again. Semi-random dungeon bashing for twenty levels straight sounds like it would bore my players to tears,...
    46 replies | 2105 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Saturday, 24th November, 2018, 03:04 PM
    The reason it's written that way is because the game only officially supports 20 levels. Using epic boons to offer epic progress (beyond the rules in the PHB) seems like a perfectly normal thing to do.
    342 replies | 29241 view(s)
    1 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Saturday, 24th November, 2018, 02:59 PM
    People have made their own adventures and put them up on web sites for decades. I don't see how things have changed. Nobody's forcing you to use DMsG after all. I long back to the time when people didn't expect to make money off of their loved hobby.
    60 replies | 1743 view(s)
    1 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Friday, 23rd November, 2018, 11:38 PM
    Ayep. The problem is, a large portion of players turn to the class for jobs it doesn't do particularly well. Instead of choosing the class for the few things it does do well.
    21 replies | 1670 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Friday, 23rd November, 2018, 11:35 PM
    This. The class is a clear example of anxious design that gets caught in the details.
    21 replies | 1670 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Friday, 23rd November, 2018, 11:29 PM
    Nah. Batman idk but level 9 heroes? Nope.
    13 replies | 463 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Friday, 23rd November, 2018, 11:26 PM
    My honest advice: find something else for a 16th level party to do. A different module entirely. I'm currently running the module with characters that just reached level 13, half way through the Tomb of Nine Gods*. I have to upgrade or replace everything. Nothing is threatening as written. The module is written with a weak party that ends up at level 10. Maybe. And that's a weak party,...
    429 replies | 125743 view(s)
    1 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 22nd November, 2018, 07:24 AM
    Call me when this reaches the printed page of an official accessory.
    114 replies | 3992 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 22nd November, 2018, 07:22 AM
    I wouldn't bother, Saelorn. It's obvious there are people that treat the rules as holy writ.
    139 replies | 6242 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 22nd November, 2018, 07:17 AM
    You can't be serious. Who in their right mind thinks it a good idea to spend precious resources just to turn an impossible save into a save you can make, let alone a probable one? Nobody. Saying you can spend resources to turn your +0 bonus into a +4 bonus, so you can make that DC 23 roll (if you roll 19 or better)... Talk about missing the point. :( If it has eluded you then let...
    139 replies | 6242 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Wednesday, 21st November, 2018, 07:55 PM
    I just found it funny, no slight intended.
    14 replies | 1014 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Wednesday, 21st November, 2018, 07:52 PM
    When you say "Itís good that every character has saves that they actively suck at making" that sounds as if I am arguing the opposite. I am not. You do suck at a save you only make if you roll 17 or better, so it's not like I'm saying characters should never have sucky saves. What argument do you have for the "difference" to be negative? How can fixing the rules so you never have to make...
    139 replies | 6242 view(s)
    2 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Wednesday, 21st November, 2018, 03:23 PM
    I believe you are already aware of this, but for the benefit of any new viewers: For each hoard, take the CR of the main monster (or the "effective CR" of a group of monsters, if there aren't a given BBEG). Generate your hoard per DMG. (Obviously, using an online generator is the quick and easy way.. Especially if you can find one with new items from splatbooks factored in as opposed to the...
    14 replies | 1014 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Wednesday, 21st November, 2018, 03:10 PM
    Who's Taylor? :)
    14 replies | 1014 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Wednesday, 21st November, 2018, 02:18 PM
    You get what you pay for. It's basic in more sense than one.
    117 replies | 5739 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Wednesday, 21st November, 2018, 02:13 PM
    Somehow I find that sentence amusing (It's not wrong, and so this is not a dig at you)
    25 replies | 662 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Wednesday, 21st November, 2018, 02:05 PM
    An odd thing to say, given this thread is about determining "most anticipated" specifically through voting and no other means
    59 replies | 4476 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Wednesday, 21st November, 2018, 11:28 AM
    No, asking a player to roll 23 on a twenty-sided die is never as it should be, even if I'm the only one out of a hundred. It is bad inelegant design, and it could easily have been averted by simply saying your saves are never worse than your proficiency bonus. The fact this gives you a 3-in-20 shot at making Graz'zt's saves changes very little from a game balance perspective. But it does a...
    139 replies | 6242 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Tuesday, 20th November, 2018, 03:18 PM
    I was wondering, how do you do this? I can only find filters (and not even a filter for ratings) - nothing that allows me to say, for example, show me adventures sorted on best rating first. (Do note: I'm asking in 2018. This thread is from 2017.)
    8 replies | 3839 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Monday, 19th November, 2018, 09:20 PM
    You are clearly not talking about the same thing as I. No analysis so far that I have seen has come to providing the numbers for the case I outlined earlier. If a four-year old could do it, do you really think anyone would still defend these feats?
    23 replies | 990 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Monday, 19th November, 2018, 10:44 AM
    Sure, no prob :)
    23 replies | 990 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Monday, 19th November, 2018, 10:43 AM
    Exactly - and bleedingly obviously so. Thank you Saelorn.
    139 replies | 6242 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Sunday, 18th November, 2018, 07:20 PM
    His post spends significant space crunching numbers on GWM, but with no indication he's crunching the case where GWM is actually good. This makes me worry someone will take his number as proof GWM is alright. And no, you don't get to say his post uses the case (one of them at least) where GWM really shows its true colors. There's a huge difference between theoretically being able to have...
    23 replies | 990 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Sunday, 18th November, 2018, 01:41 PM
    I don't understand what you are saying. (assuming you by "Zappos" are referring to me) I specifically stated I haven't read the specific analysis and then proceeded to explain why it's easy to fail. You don't seem to be talking about the feats and if they're broken (they are). You seem to be talking about whether this particular analysis is broken and that's fine - let me just reiterate I...
    23 replies | 990 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Sunday, 18th November, 2018, 09:12 AM
    Aaaand again not the point. Being asked to roll a 21 on a twenty-sided die is. This isn't about tactics. Of course you will have weak saves. I am not complaining you will have weak saves.
    139 replies | 6242 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Sunday, 18th November, 2018, 09:10 AM
    Yes but that doesn't make it better. The design choice here was "let's not spend time polishing off high level play in the hopes noone notices" Why do you feel it's important to point out that this was a choice? Why not instead join me in condemning that as the bad design it is?
    139 replies | 6242 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Sunday, 18th November, 2018, 09:07 AM
    No that's a false representation. It's not that you can know in advance which save to prop up. And you can't prop up all your saves. And the caster's in your group should not help you in the first place; spending resources to turn a 100% miss rate into maybe a 90% miss rate is just bad tactics. So no.
    139 replies | 6242 view(s)
    1 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Saturday, 17th November, 2018, 09:46 AM
    Didn't read the entire thread - have someone mentioned combining will o the wisps with banshees? :) Here's the one-two combo: Wail (1/Day). The banshee releases a mournful wail, provided that she isn't in sunlight. This wail has no effect on constructs and undead. All other creatures within 30 feet of her that can hear her must make a DC 13 Constitution saving throw. On a failure, a...
    54 replies | 2775 view(s)
    3 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Saturday, 17th November, 2018, 09:36 AM
    Without looking at your numbers specifically, I find that this type of analyses are usually misleading, grossly underestimating what a minmaxer can do with the -5/+10 mechanism, thus severely underestimating the power of these feats. In short: these feats are completely broken but white-room analysis generally doesn't see it. Again, I haven't looked at this particular set of numbers. But I...
    23 replies | 990 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Wednesday, 14th November, 2018, 01:19 PM
    But why are you downplaying the genuine fun to be had by stepping into the magic shoppe with ten thousand shiny coins in hand? Look at my Bazaars of Port Nyanzaru thread. Despite zero official support I spent weeks preparing those price lists, and it took the group an entire session to sort out who bought what. They're still talking about that, and how satisfying it felt for them. Now...
    780 replies | 85742 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Monday, 12th November, 2018, 05:04 PM
    At least you aren't denying how crap their rule is. Other than that I really have nothing else to tell you.
    139 replies | 6242 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Monday, 12th November, 2018, 04:57 PM
    Or you can accept my argumentation "this feels very wrong, almost as if they forgot to plug a hole in the system". I don't know if DC 23 is harsh. For a low- or mid-level character sure. But what's so harsh about high level heroes fighting appropriate opponents. A CD 23 monster should sport a DC 23 save! Bottom line: there's nothing wrong with epic threats forcing DC 23 saves (even...
    139 replies | 6242 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Monday, 12th November, 2018, 04:53 PM
    Sorry but this reads as a response to something I never said. Keep in mind: I'm not asking that my character should have no weaknesses. Of course he should. But there should not be any common examples of characters that can't even beat the DC on rolling a 20. All your example differences will still be valid. Just because you can make a save by rolling a 19, say, doesn't mean that...
    139 replies | 6242 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Monday, 12th November, 2018, 12:18 PM
    I strongly disagree. Not making sure that your level 17 hero always stands a chance of success (even if she needs to roll 20 to pull it off) feels like lazy, sloppy design. Why ask a player to make a roll that is literally impossible? Making sure the "bad" saves of characters always stay just ahead of the big bads save DCs, even by a little, is the elegant and obvious thing to do - and...
    139 replies | 6242 view(s)
    2 XP
No More Results

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
11,925
Posts Per Day
2.11
Last Post
Cantrip Auto-Scaling - A 5e Critique Yesterday 11:10 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
90
General Information
Last Activity
Yesterday 11:13 PM
Join Date
Wednesday, 25th June, 2003
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Sunday, 9th December, 2018


Saturday, 8th December, 2018


Friday, 7th December, 2018


Thursday, 6th December, 2018


Saturday, 1st December, 2018



Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Page 1 of 16 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Thursday, 6th December, 2018

  • 10:42 AM - Hussar mentioned CapnZapp in post Review Dragon Heist, Mad Mage, and Ravnica!
    Speak for yourself CapnZapp. It IS a heist, just that the players aren't the ones heisting. Big deal. Get over it. And a plotless megadungeon is something people have been asking for for YEARS. But, as far as my review goes, it'll be a little while. I want to get at least a couple of chapters in before I come back and review. For one, I only own it on Fantasy Grounds which makes reading it ... difficult. But, well, two sessions in, and it's playing very well. I'm not sure about other Reddit's, but, the Dragonheist Reddit group is bloody FANTASTIC. Gobs of extra material and advice. Really great stuff. I've already filled out a LOT of the adventure with extra stuff that I've ... errr... been inspired to emulate (as in blatantly steal) ... from other users. There's some great stuff there.

Wednesday, 31st October, 2018

  • 06:41 PM - Elfcrusher mentioned CapnZapp in post 5E's "Missed Opportunities?"
    You might find it, maybe, but how are the economics work? If the cost is based on the item's utility and not the local market, how is a village of a couple of hundred souls going to be affected by the massive influx of cash that would occur if the PCs bought it? How did the town get it and appropriately appraise it? They certainly couldn't have bought it since its value may exceed the value of everything else in the village... What standard do you follow on the pricing and what are the downstream effects of it? Although I really hope, for several reasons (none of which have to do with particular animosity toward @CapnZapp), that WotC never publishes an official price list, what would be kind of cool is an expansion of the system in Xanathar's for buying/selling magic items to incorporate both location and another, somewhat arbitrary factor, to represent high/low magic. That is, a small village that happens to be very magical (e.g. a moon elf enclave founded around a magical well) will have different factors than a large, low-magic city. The DM still determines, however he/she likes, what the average price or price range would be, but then generates not just whether an item is available (or a buyer is interested) and the actual price, but also the reasons for that availability/price. Which is sort of what the Xanathar's rules do, but without accommodating locational variation.

Tuesday, 30th October, 2018

  • 01:49 PM - Maxperson mentioned CapnZapp in post Official 5e Classes?
    That's the beautiful part about 5E. Between the DM's Guild and third-party releases, there's plenty of quality classes to be had. I much prefer 5E's slow release schedule over the "a book or two, twelve thousand spells, and maybe a new class or two" every month. You can do a lot with subclasses. Look at Eldritch Knight or Arcane Trickster. You don't need whole new classes to add variety. As CapnZapp said, there's a ton of space in-between nothing and the glut of 3e that could be utilized. We aren't asking for an avalanche of new classes. We're just asking for something.
  • 02:27 AM - Quickleaf mentioned CapnZapp in post Memorable Beholder solo encounters?
    CapnZapp I've honestly never run a beholder fight, only some roleplaying with one back in AD&D. Just looked over the encounter in ToA, and several things popped out. The fight is heavily influenced by the party's access to magical flight & how much metal armor they wear. No metal armor and plentiful magical flight makes the fight a lot easier than presented. A beholder favors a long-range fight with ~120-feet to work with, and ideally some kind of obstacles for PCs to overcome / slow them down in approaching the beholder. Yet Belchorzh only has 50-feet from the top of the domed room to PCs on the floor. The iron sphere magnet trap serves as a potent obstacle, though with an easy way to overcome it. Also, in the event it becomes an "aerial" fight, the risk of falling for 5d6 isn't too bad for 9th+ level PCs, so I'd be tempted to make the room larger (more on that below). A beholder wants to include as many creatures within its Antimagic Cone. Yet Belchorzh has to make sure not to look ...

Monday, 29th October, 2018

  • 10:42 PM - Lanefan mentioned CapnZapp in post 5E's "Missed Opportunities?"
    ...s to find out uses for it, because there's little to buy past 2nd or 3rd level. Sure, for a simulationist campaign where you're building your own keep, refurbishing an ancient cathedral, you can come up with solutions, but that doesn't work well with adventuring based campaigns where you have little down time. Monthly living expenses is a decent idea, but once again it works better in campaigns where PCs have a more set timeline than one where they're constantly haring off after some trouble or another. Been a problem since the beginning, because the game was based off stories like Conan/Fafhrd & Grey Mouser where the protagonists were chasing after all kinds of wealth and conveniently spent it all on drinking/whoring between adventures as a narrative conceit. Harder to do when the players choose not to do that and an ale is 3 cp, and they've got 3,000 gp.Training expenses. They need to train for each level-up, and it costs. That, and though I'm not as adamant on the topic as CapnZapp is, I agree that the concept of tradeable-buyable-sellable magic items (randomly generated!!!) simply makes realistic sense in any game world where the PCs are not the only adventurers that exist, simply because other adventurers, just like the PCs, are sometimes going to come back from the field packing items they have no use for. Where I disagree with the good Capn, however, is in item creation. Ideally this should take long enough that adventurers never do it themselves and rarely get someone else to do it for them. The 3e model, where you could in effect make whatever you wanted in a very short time, was one of its poorer design choices.
  • 03:01 PM - Panda-s1 mentioned CapnZapp in post Burning Questions: Why Do DMs Limit Official WOTC Material?
    ...s. They evolved over time to match the appearance of the great cats in their favored region. The northern Tabaxi resembled lynxes and maine coons. Desert tabaxi have little fur (and they only sound like Khajiit if the player wants them to :) ) ect... Easy fix, and it greatly added to the lore of the campaign world that our group is creating. TL/DR: I'm totally okay with disallowing classes/races/archtypes from my game if they don't fit the theme of the game I'm running. But I love it when my players come up with a way to fit their favorite class/race/archtype into my game. My group embraces the "group storytelling" aspect of D&D very much. Edit: I'm bad at proofreading my posts, and I haven't had my coffee yet. :) Man that's the kind of thing I like to hear. Not just working together with your players to figure out a thing in your game world, but actually giving thought in how to allow a player to have a certain option in your campaign. I wish more DMs thought this way. CapnZapp hey there you go, that's how you can have a cat race "in the snowy mountains of a barbaric world," someone figured it out for you lol.
  • 02:44 PM - robus mentioned CapnZapp in post 5E's "Missed Opportunities?"
    In my opinion the biggest missed opportunity is the presentation of published adventures. Echoing CapnZapp's thoughts above, almost every one is oriented toward some cataclysmic event which forces the adventure on a treadmill until the threat is ended. That combined with really quite sloppy implementations (I've been suffering through the "hot mess", as pukunui calls it, of Dragon Heist) means that almost every time it's a disappointment of missed opportunities (I still hold out hope for Curse of Strahd, if/when I run it :) ) Instead I wish that they would change their approach to adventure structure and break them into discrete parts for each heroic tier. (SKT sort of did this but the epic threat loomed throughout.) This would allow for some downtime between adventures and provide more tier appropriate challenges. As far as the mechanics are concerned - those are running quite fine for me. The players are still having fun (even at level 17), now that I'm adjusting the encounters to their style (and bringing in reinforcements if they cake walk something I thought would be tougher :) )
  • 01:37 PM - jasper mentioned CapnZapp in post Burning Questions: Why Do DMs Limit Official WOTC Material?
    ... world. You donít have to play in itĒ. If I would homebrew a campaign (I do Adventure League), for Appropriate Thematics I would ban: Feats, just because I want to see how the game would run without them. No Underdark races as PCs. I would like to keep the Underdark as evil place to visit; not one you go home to for your family reunion. Partial ban on Voloís Monster. You come up with a great backstory. But you will be occasionally at disadvantage on something. Why because Grandma just got ran over by goblin in a goat cart. So I a coward Panda-s1. No I would start right out banning stuff because as jmucchiello said, I been burned by OFFICIAL MATERIAL before. Had Bob loan be the ďComplete Copy of PaladinsĒ for a week. I missed the big thing. I asked Bob, ďAnything crazy or over powered in this paladin? ď And Bob replied, ďNoĒ First COMBAT ON THE FIRST LEVEL WITH HIS LEVEL ONE PALADIN OUT COMES a HOLEY AVENGER. Then Bob whined and half the table whined when I banned it. Sorry CapnZapp for decades in various games I been meeting players who say it is Official you must allow it. I have not discovered where this line of thought comes from.

Sunday, 21st October, 2018

  • 03:37 AM - Mistwell mentioned CapnZapp in post Updated errata will be released within the next month!
    ...g asked for is an actual change. Not just a clarification, but a revision. A change to rebalance certain elements. Some pet peeve. But thatís a slippery slope. Because once you decide to start changing, itís hard to stop. Thereís always another problem or fix required. Because the game is never perfect. Thatís how you get 3eís 3 pages plus all the polymorph discuss, or 4eís 27 pages, or Pathfinderís 9 pages. To say nothing of 3.5e or Essntials. I disagree. I think it's one reasonable existing interpretation of the rules, right now pre-errata, to say once you've issued a command to your animal companion, it will keep on doing that same thing until you issue another command to it. So if you order it to attack in round 1, and don't order it to do anything else in round 2, it will continue to attack in round 2 without the use of the Ranger's action. Clarifying that's how it should work is not any different than the other errata we've had before this. Plus it will REALLY piss off CapnZapp if they call it a clarification rather than a revision like that. Which is a huge bonus! :) * *I kid I kid! I like CapNZapp. I just like to poke at him from time to time.

Wednesday, 17th October, 2018

  • 10:20 PM - aco175 mentioned CapnZapp in post expanded core treasure magic items?
    I like to make things up and give abilities to common items. In the older editions we had swords that could shoot lightning bolts and such. In 5e I give a normal +1 longsword a power to cast LB 1/day, or more likely I make it a +0 sword that can give a bonus attack with advantage 1/rest and LB 1/day. It makes it magical and the +0 keeps with the scaling problems. Normal items like quivers that have unlimited arrows or waterskins with unlimited water make things easier to play and not track. I do not have what you actually asked for but CapnZapp sumed it up nice.

Wednesday, 26th September, 2018

  • 11:45 PM - Eric V mentioned CapnZapp in post The Only Thing I Don't Like About 5e! (Hint- ASIs)
    I don't think it's up for debate that in terms of bang for your buck, ASIs in your primary stat are better than feats. Having said that, if your DM runs encounters using the CR system as presented (especially with the modifiers for additional creatures), you won't miss the extra plusses that come from the ASI. In this, CapnZapp s assertion that D&D is too easy can be made to work for the game; go ahead and take Keen Mind or Actor, it won't affect the math in combat and skills overmuch. There are corner cases, of course, but a game where no ASIs existed wouldn't need to be tweaked at all as far as things like encounter-building are concerned, I suspect.

Sunday, 26th August, 2018

  • 11:52 PM - Hussar mentioned CapnZapp in post Revised Ranger update
    Do I have this straight? WotC made a horrible mistake with the Beastmaster class. To fix that mistake, they need to make the pet as durable as a PC and deal equal damage to what a PC can. Additionally, in order to fix this mistake, they should put a disclaimer on the class that this class is totally unbalanced and you can only play it if your DM okays it. Is that about right? CapnZapp, you actually expect WotC to publish something like this? Seriously?

Friday, 24th August, 2018

  • 05:06 PM - OB1 mentioned CapnZapp in post Revised Ranger update
    I really donít know whatís so complicated about this. At the start of 5e, most of the players were veterans to D&D and brought in expectations and habits from previous versions of the game. Those perceptions led to an initial misunderstanding of how the class would work in play and resulted in low satisfaction reporting in polls. At this point, most people playing 5e never played another version, and without that bias find the Ranger class to be satisfying. Additionally, those who have played previously have been able to adjust their play style to the new system. Thus the change in polling results. It wasnít the class, it was the players. Given the evidence that tens of thousands of people are able to play a Beastmaster Ranger successfully, I can only conclude that CapnZapp lacks the skill necessary to do so, and wishes WotC to produce an easier version of the class more in line with his abilities.
  • 03:36 PM - MechaTarrasque mentioned CapnZapp in post Revised Ranger update
    You appear as if you haven't listened. At all. Here, let me summarize the thread for you: 1. WotC says the revised Beastmaster isn't needed, since everybody loves the PHB Hunter. 2. Some of us call BS. 3. You point out the UA revision still exists. 4. We point out it is still not official. In short, you are entirely and completely wrong. There is no solution and WotC pretends there is no problem. There. Any questions? 1. Every time there is a "monsters are too weak" thread, you argue that is true. 2. You also regularly claim that any who disagrees with you is on the WotC payroll. 3. If the monsters are too weak, then the PHB BM's pet is in no danger. 4. Since you are now claiming that monsters are not too weak, since they can obviously threatened the pet, you, CapnZapp, are clearly on WotC's payroll. So which WotC employee are you? 'Fess up. We have the right to know.

Monday, 13th August, 2018

  • 03:31 AM - Chaosmancer mentioned CapnZapp in post Revised Ranger update
    ...ility this has is the exact same as the level 2 Beast Sense spell, only permanent. Which, that is nice sure, but by this point you've got plenty of other ways to scout, or have been using Beast Sense for the past 10 levels, and it isn't going to actually help you out all that much. I know you are offering these as alternatives to the Revised Ranger, and I get that UA stuff tends to be better... but what I mostly see in your spells is an attempt to do the exact same things the Revised Beastmaster does, only do it worse because it costs spells known and spell slots along with concentration slots to maintain. Maybe I'm the wrong guy to review these, but I just don't see why I would ask someone to go this route instead of using the UA. Why? Why does it need to see print to matter? Are you insisting on AL rules at your home table? If not, then why would it matter in the slightest? The only reason I would have liked it to see print (and I doubt this is the same reason CapnZapp has) is that I would have liked a more official place to turn to. I have the Revised Ranger in my binder full of optional material and when a player is making their ranger character I'm going to have to stop them from looking at the PHB and dismissing it by letting them know that somewhere in my ratty binder is a better solution. A printed book might have gotten tossed into the pile of books people can look at, and then I wouldn't have to direct them, they would see it themselves. It is a minor annoyance, but it is an annoyance all the same.
  • 12:58 AM - Hussar mentioned CapnZapp in post Revised Ranger update
    But, again, the UA companion does what you want CapnZapp. It's strong enough not to get killed in combat (and, simply adding 3 death saves to the companion fixes that completely) and deals enough damage that it makes for a decent second attack. Remember, the UA companion is attacking twice per round, typically - once on its turn and once on the ranger's turn. That makes a pretty big difference. See, I've actually played in groups with the the UA beast master. If it wasn't the top damage dealer in a given fight, it was probably second best. It consistently pumped out very comparable damage to any other martial character. AFAIC, the class is fixed. Job done. I would suggest that instead of theory crafting, actually TRACK the damage done by your characters for a couple of sessions. I think you'll find that the UA beast master ranger is fine.

Wednesday, 8th August, 2018

  • 12:43 PM - Aldarc mentioned CapnZapp in post Itís LAUNCH DAY For The Pathfinder 2 Playtest!
    CapnZapp, it seems that you are projecting both hubris on Paizo and a competition between Paizo and WotC that exists only in your head, and it's severely clouding any rational judgment on your part of Pathfinder 2 here.

Sunday, 24th June, 2018

  • 02:38 PM - OB1 mentioned CapnZapp in post Fiddling around with Fifth Ed
    How do feats and MC make that much of a difference? I play a RAW campaign playing a published adventure and I see some of the "problems" noted in OP, but I have never played without feats or with MC, so I have no reference point. Feats dont seem to a high impact on our game. They don't necessarily make a huge difference but they can. With Feats and MC turned on, if your group then goes for full optimization, there are synergies that allow you to get quite a bit above the baseline in terms of power. As with magic items, they can simply make you better than what the game was designed for. Combine that with white grid encounters and a misunderstanding of how CR and daily encounter math works, and combat can become trivial using the base single encounter guidelines. Of course, your party chose abilities specifically to become more powerful than the baseline, so I can never understand why people then complain when that shows up in play ( CapnZapp for example, has issues with his game because of this, and then blames WoTC for not designing to his baseline rather than designing for the majority of players). It's like buying a Ferrari, driving it at 120 on the freeway and then being surprised when you are passing everyone else on the road. There has to be a baseline somewhere, setting it for new and casual players makes sense, as it allows the game to be much more accessible to the masses. Hardcore players can either adjust that baseline to their tastes with the tools provided or turn off options to keep things in line.
  • 06:08 AM - UngeheuerLich mentioned CapnZapp in post Fiddling around with Fifth Ed
    Easiest way to fix your problems: Also use one or two the rest options in the dmg. Or make one ip yourself. If your players are resting all time just make a long rest take more time. That way you easily achieve more balance because you get to your 6-8 encounters per day often enough to at least make your PCs not spend all daily resources in one fight. That was the turning point in our mid level campaign. Before that the wizard dominated and trivialized some fights. After that we had a well enough balanced game. CapnZapp you should really try to speak only for yourself and stop claiming that other people's experience is wrong. Even though the game may not work for you, it works well enough for at least a few of us. And we are all a vocal minority.

Friday, 15th June, 2018

  • 08:41 PM - pming mentioned CapnZapp in post Balancing D&D
    Hiya! Seems to me like CapnZapp would be happier with 4th edition. I don't mean that as anything other than exactly what it sounds like. My interpretation of 4e (Full Disclosure: I have NEVER played 4e...only read) is that it pretty much erred on the side of "DPS Balance" over "Interesting Thing". I get that some people like their D&D "crunchy", no problem there. What I don't get is trying to force 5e to be "crunchy" and at the same time remove one of the biggest cornerstones of the game's design: The DM's requirement to be actively involved in adjudicating case-by-case situations with "rulings, not rules". At any rate, good luck with your changes, Capn...hopefully you can find some sort of nigh-perfect modification house rules that give you what you want. I still think it would be easier for you to put 5e stuff into 4e though. ^_^ Paul L. Ming


Page 1 of 16 1234567891011 ... LastLast
No results to display...

Sunday, 9th December, 2018

  • 11:52 PM - Radaceus quoted CapnZapp in post Cantrip Auto-Scaling - A 5e Critique
    True, but at high level, your save DC becomes relatively much better (monster saves stay relatively low). So while the DPR (damage per round) of a 1d10 low-level cantrip might not be much more than half of the average of 5, the DPR of a 4d10 high-level cantrip is easily 80% of the average of 22. And so while the damage dice is "only" quadrupled, the actual DPR might have increased by a factor of seven. (Example simplified for clarity) Regardless, a cantrip failed save means no effect or damage. And 22(4d10) damage at 17th level is no different than someone firing a bow, or swinging a sword at the same level, and stacked next to a melee class that spell attack cantrip takes one action of the spellcasters action economy, whereas, a weapon attack benefits from extra attack. This is pretty much incorrect. Many cantrips require an attack roll, not a save. Since casters are about as likely to hit as warriors, this makes casters at higher level pretty good damage dealers with cantrips alone. T...
  • 11:19 PM - epithet quoted CapnZapp in post Ridding Elves and Half-Elves of Darkvision
    Welcome to the discussion. By browsing past posts you will realize I am well aware how the rules work, what exact changes were made, and how I detest these changes, and have come up with easy suggestions how to fix the problems that 5E have created! :) I've been here for a few pages, enough to see you bounce around between a couple of different "issues." Your biggest issue seems to be that the current rules don't go far enough in making a party use torches. You really seem to like torches, a lot. What you haven't done is to explain why everyone should be using torches, or rather why the game should encourage everyone to use torches beyond what it already does. I mean, if you want to see clearly and in color you'll need a light source, but it really seems to bother you that 5e doesn't go farther to promote torch sales. Your other issue, as far as I can tell, is that creatures that ought to have superior night vision, like owls, don't. They've been lumped together with everyone else under t...
  • 07:25 PM - Blue quoted CapnZapp in post Cantrip Auto-Scaling - A 5e Critique
    Addendum: to answer how to actually fix it, my best suggestion is to limit the number of cantrips you can use. Perhaps something as simple as "you can cast a number of cantrips equal to your spellcasting ability modifier +3. You regain all spent uses after taking a short or long rest". This might not change much from your perspective, but it does change the balance slightly (in the favor of spells over cantrips). But mostly it fixes a personal bugbear of mine - how casters can cast Firebolt or Acid Splash all day long, every round for hours on end, and how this breaks world verisimiltude. Need to dispose of a corpse? Just dissolve it with an endless number of acid cantrips! Need to break out of sheriff's jail? Just burn a hole in the wall! After all, a "cantrip" than can kill a grown man in one or two blasts (a commoner), can't be said to have "no effect" on the environment! *blech* We have very different feels - which is all to the good! For me, the fact that casters never need...
  • 07:05 PM - FrogReaver quoted CapnZapp in post Cantrip Auto-Scaling - A 5e Critique
    That's actually not the whole truth. Not since you are talking about slots, rather than spells. A level 1 spell slot is much more versatile and flexible than a "cantrip slot", at least for the main casters we're talking about (read "wizard and cleric"). Long story short - you're focusing too much on raw damage IMO. I'd accept the fact that there comes a time when level 1 slots aren't useful to deliver damage. In fact, as many posters have pointed out, this might actually be a valuable property of this edition. Once you factor more than hp loss into value, however, your "natural answer" becomes way more complex than you're letting on. And it might just be that the simplest solution is to do nothing at all: just don't use low-level slots for damage-dealing and you're fine. The non-damage low level spells are fine. As everyone has pointed out they are useful. Having low level spells do a little better damage than cantrips makes them useful but shouldnít drastically affect game balance...
  • 04:30 PM - Hawk Diesel quoted CapnZapp in post Cantrip Auto-Scaling - A 5e Critique
    Addendum: to answer how to actually fix it, my best suggestion is to limit the number of cantrips you can use. Perhaps something as simple as "you can cast a number of cantrips equal to your spellcasting ability modifier +3. You regain all spent uses after taking a short or long rest". This might not change much from your perspective, but it does change the balance slightly (in the favor of spells over cantrips). But mostly it fixes a personal bugbear of mine - how casters can cast Firebolt or Acid Splash all day long, every round for hours on end, and how this breaks world verisimiltude. Need to dispose of a corpse? Just dissolve it with an endless number of acid cantrips! Need to break out of sheriff's jail? Just burn a hole in the wall! After all, a "cantrip" than can kill a grown man in one or two blasts (a commoner), can't be said to have "no effect" on the environment! *blech* I don't know that I agree with your assumption regarding cantrips leading to the breakage of versi...

Saturday, 8th December, 2018

  • 06:17 PM - epithet quoted CapnZapp in post Ridding Elves and Half-Elves of Darkvision
    I find it hilarious that you are squabbling over the minutae while stubbornly refusing to see the real cause, and the easy fix. (Hint: millions of d20 players happily used working vision rules for decades, including the Pathfinder players that still use them today :D ) Way to make your life harder, guys ...but it's your game... I think you'll find that the D&D 5e vision rules are a simplified version of the d20 vision rules. Darkvision and low-light vision have been combined, and 5e darkvision now only provides dim-light vision in total darkness, but it gives a more logical "twice as good" vision in dim light compared to the "twice as far" d20 low-light vision. The light categories are almost the same, but renamed. The "bright light" of d20 is "daylight" in 5e, while d20 "normal light" is called "bright light" in 5e. Perhaps if you were to point out the "real cause" I might be better able to see how using the d20 vision rules offer an "easy fix." I suppose I might be limited by the fact th...
  • 03:44 AM - Morrus quoted CapnZapp in post Echohawk's Collector's Guides Broken?
    On the app the link leads to a thread discussing fleet sizes. Sorry to break it to you, but itís fine on the app. The problems you are experiencing are due to the very large number of people who have blocked you, and the resultant thread ID changes. As a fix, I suggest you stop getting blocked.

Friday, 7th December, 2018

  • 11:38 PM - doctorbadwolf quoted CapnZapp in post Ridding Elves and Half-Elves of Darkvision
    Each torch lasts an hour, right? Weighs a pound. Lets say six to surround camp, say with watch twelve hour camp, 72 pounds of torches a day... 48 pounds if you go 8 hours only lit... Times a week on the road. Huh. Torches in my games last several hours. I don't think I'll be changing that to match RAW anytime soon. How odd. Then again, we also have more common magic items, like glowrods, but that's just in my games. maybe that wasn't toward me but... i do not have a problem with 5e vision, i have a problem with how 5e defines normal outdoors at night darkness as so severe that it makes common tropes like nocturnal hunters, travel/sentry by moonlight and camping outdoors practically no longer viable. The error to me was not dropping low light, infravision, ultravision, cantelope vision, rose colored glasses vision and whatever other visions existed in the decades we have had - but in not having what would be effectively "dim light" cover normal nighttime lighting and leave the current "bl...
  • 11:05 PM - 5ekyu quoted CapnZapp in post Ridding Elves and Half-Elves of Darkvision
    Thank you for acknowledging 5E vision doesn't work and needs to go away. What names you then use for low-light vision and the exact specifics is none of my business :) maybe that wasn't toward me but... i do not have a problem with 5e vision, i have a problem with how 5e defines normal outdoors at night darkness as so severe that it makes common tropes like nocturnal hunters, travel/sentry by moonlight and camping outdoors practically no longer viable. The error to me was not dropping low light, infravision, ultravision, cantelope vision, rose colored glasses vision and whatever other visions existed in the decades we have had - but in not having what would be effectively "dim light" cover normal nighttime lighting and leave the current "blinded" equivalent cover more extreme "worse than that" cases.
  • 09:15 PM - doctorbadwolf quoted CapnZapp in post Ridding Elves and Half-Elves of Darkvision
    Each torch lasts an hour, right? Weighs a pound. Lets say six to surround camp, say with watch twelve hour camp, 72 pounds of torches a day... 48 pounds if you go 8 hours only lit... Times a week on the road. Plus: Don't tell me Owls (and Elves) can't see beyond 60 ft at night. Ergo: Switching forest animals over to Darkvision is absurd and doesn't work, and the best solution is to revert them to the rule that has been working for decades without a hitch: low-light vision (or even "nightvision" for the grognards). Or close enough as to be effectively the same thing. IMO, the only thing wrong with 5e Darkvision is that the Dim Light part doesn't extend as far as you can see.The limit on seeing in darkness to a certain range is fine with me, but it should be (the more natural reading of the text) that you see in dim light clearly, and within 60ft you see in Darkness like it's Dim Light. And then Superior Dark vision simply lets you treat all darkness as dim light. Torches are s...
  • 03:49 PM - Nebulous quoted CapnZapp in post Review Dragon Heist, Mad Mage, and Ravnica!
    Well, not really. I've read a big reason for the dominance of the Realms is that lots of homebrewers accept that setting as an acceptable source for their homebrewed worlds. That is, something like: of all 5E customers, half is using their own world, 25% are using Forgotten Realms and then every other setting is in the low single-digit numbers. So if half of homebrewers consider Realms content acceptable for their worlds, a whopping 75% of all customers are potential buyers of Realms material, many many many times the next best selling setting. This certainly explains why WotC keeps publishing Realms books in my mind. And it means homebrewers aren't necessarily out of the market. Instead, they probably contribute to the continued dominance of Forgotten Realms. We have used the FR setting for many, many years, ever since the little gray box. But neither myself or my players are what you would call hardcore realmsfans. Other than a few early D&D novels back in the 80s and e...
  • 03:21 PM - Charlaquin quoted CapnZapp in post Ridding Elves and Half-Elves of Darkvision
    Except, of course - and by nitpicking you already knew this was coming - infravision and darkvision are far from the same thing, so, no, it really is "never before 5E" :) Thankfully, nobody is (hopefully) seriously arguing we should go back to 1E vision :) Anyway, what 5E did was to "simplify" vision. Both compared to 3E and 1E. Unfortunately, they threw out the baby with the bathwater and I recommend everyone to revert to, not the 1E but the 3E vision :) I wouldnít do exactly the 3e version. 3e low-light vision is sorta clunky and hard to use, at least for 5e. Iíd revert back to the darkvision/low-light vision split, but simplify low-light vision. Iíd go with the 4e version, where creatures with low-light vision can just see without penalty in dim light.
  • 03:17 PM - delericho quoted CapnZapp in post Ridding Elves and Half-Elves of Darkvision
    Except, of course - and by nitpicking you already knew this was coming - infravision and darkvision are far from the same thing, so, no, it really is "never before 5E" :) Yeah, okay. Fair enough.
  • 03:09 PM - delericho quoted CapnZapp in post Ridding Elves and Half-Elves of Darkvision
    This is what I am fixing by reverting the ill-advised change that never before 5E was D&D, and returning elves to low-light vision :) Nitpick: it's not "never before 5e". Back in 1st and 2nd ed, elves had exactly the same infravision as dwarves. What 5e is doing is not new; it's a reversion back to the way Gygax wrote it. (On the larger topic, I've already stated my preference. So I'll not get further involved in that one. :) )
  • 12:23 AM - Hussar quoted CapnZapp in post Review Dragon Heist, Mad Mage, and Ravnica!
    That does not change either of two facts: 1) the modules still aren't generating buzz and my main point, 2) this is likely not because they're set in the Realms. Not generating buzz on En World, maybe. I dunno. The FB Dragonheist site has 2000 members and is pretty active, with posts by Mr. Greenwood on occasion. The https://www.reddit.com/r/WaterdeepDragonHeist/ subreddit has 1800 users and new posts daily. It's sitting in the mid 400's on Amazon.com, what, six months after release? DotMM and Dragonheist are the top two modules WotC has out in terms of sales on Amazon right now. There's a couple of dozen supplementary adventures and background products for Dragon Heist on DM's Guild, many of them done by Guild Adepts. How much better do you expect a module to do? What would you consider "generating buzz"?

Thursday, 6th December, 2018

  • 07:43 PM - doctorbadwolf quoted CapnZapp in post Ridding Elves and Half-Elves of Darkvision
    The vast majority of monsters cannot close a full 60ft and attack in the same round, which limits your options using darkness to ambushes using ranged attacks in the vast majority of cases, or with great stealth rolls where close-up fighting is preferred. This is a limitation - whether you choose to acknowledge it or not. Having Darkvision so widely available has taken something away from every DM's narrative and gameplay toolset - and hasn't added anything in return - once again, whether you care about it or not. I do care about it - because if a game mechanic takes something away, I want to see something else as compensation. What does Darkvision do to compensate me for my restricted options for the use of darkness as an atmospheric narrative tool (you can feel the breath of the creature upon you but cannot see it...) or as a gameplay tool (daggers fly out of the dark alleyway 20ft away and you are caught entirely by surprise *rolls with advantage + sneak attack bonus*). Previous edi...
  • 04:49 PM - Parmandur quoted CapnZapp in post Review Dragon Heist, Mad Mage, and Ravnica!
    That does not change either of two facts: 1) the modules still aren't generating buzz and my main point, 2) this is likely not because they're set in the Realms. The Realms, if anything, probably help. Dragon Heist has been getting very good reviews, as a rule. While a heist is not laid out per se, there are 18 keyed dungeons in the book (a dungeon is nothing if not a heist waiting to happen), and the possibility of a group of players pulling a heist at some point is fairly high if given free reign.

Wednesday, 5th December, 2018

  • 09:24 PM - epithet quoted CapnZapp in post Ridding Elves and Half-Elves of Darkvision
    ... This discussion is about whether Elves and Dwarves should have the *same* kind of superior sight. Back in the old days, you had infravision and ultravision representing the ability to see in the infrared and ultraviolet spectrums, respectively. That's no longer how things see in the dark in D&D, and we now have darkvision instead. That means, necessarily, that we have to have a new wavelength added to the electro-arcano-magnetic spectrum, right? This actually makes a fair bit of sense, and solves a few other problems along the way. D&D magic and spellcasting taps into a sort of background radiation that suffuses the worlds, like The Force in some ways. 5th Edition products call this "the weave," though I think it must be more chaotic except in certain extraordinary areas, like ley lines. Darkvision, then, must be an ability to perceive Octarine (the color of magic) along with the normal visible spectrum. Much like the presence of magic suppresses the need for technological innovation...

Tuesday, 4th December, 2018

  • 07:29 PM - Yunru quoted CapnZapp in post A Better Spell Damage Guide
    Why would anyone choose to be a fighter in this scenario...? Because they still deal more damage? And with less overkill to boot. Your assumptions just make the problem worse. Now, instead of slightly outperforming the fighter, the caster is outperforming the fighter by more than 50%. Not at all actually, the sum total of the eighteen highest slots doesn't outperform 4 greatsword attacks until around level 19. And both of those are before considering features like fighting style, magic items, and action surge. Edit: Something appears to have gone wrong with my maths when I recreated it, standby. Edit 2: Aha! I was comparing it to my fighter, which gets double weapon damage at level 11 (instead of a third attack), and action surge 1/round at level 17. That's enough to twist the numbers slightly enough at low levels, and majorly at high levels.

Saturday, 1st December, 2018



CapnZapp's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated
[ToA] The many and fabulous bazaars of Port Nyanzaru
The second iteration in convenient PDF form.

General discussion: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?595068-ToA-The-many-and-fabulous-bazaars-of-Port-Nyanzaru

Design discussion: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?627782-many-an...
496 0 1 Friday, 4th May, 2018, 06:50 PM Friday, 4th May, 2018, 06:50 PM

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites