View Profile: KarinsDad - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
No Recent Activity
About KarinsDad

Basic Information

About KarinsDad
Introduction:
Been playing for over thirty years. Looking for long term 4E game from level 1 to 30 as a player
Location:
New Jersey
Sex:
Male
Age Group:
Over 40
My Game Details

Details of games currently playing and games being sought.

State:
New Jersey

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
13,696
Posts Per Day
2.16
Last Post
Humans, Fighters, and Life Domain Most Popular On D&D Beyond Wednesday, 13th February, 2019 10:13 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
37
General Information
Last Activity
Saturday, 23rd March, 2019 05:11 AM
Join Date
Saturday, 26th January, 2002
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0
My Game Details
State:
New Jersey
No results to show...
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Monday, 31st July, 2017

  • 06:08 PM - Satyrn mentioned KarinsDad in post Do You Hint at Damage Resistance?
    Most people have advocated providing hints. A hint is not supposed to be explicitly obvious. There are, of course, degrees of clarity when it comes to hints. Meanwhile, on the completely opposite end of this spectrum from KarinsDad, I would rather make the game mechanics in play completely obvious. I've grown tired of regularly reinventing narrative descriptions for commonly-used mechanics like Resistance , and so I've "downloaded" the work to the players by telling them "This monster's resistant to that attack" and leaving them to imagine the narrative details as they wish. I do that as a DM because as a player I've grown to prefer just being told the mechanics, too. I like playing this game as a game. And we're not all great communicators. I don't know about the rest of y'all, but it's a common experience at my table that, after the DM has described a room (or contraption, or NPC) half of us are left scratching our heads in confusion while another player understood most of it, except for this other bit that the other player grokked - and still there's that list bit of info we all just forget immediately. I find that stripping the mundane things down into game terms improves the narrative and description ...

Thursday, 6th July, 2017

  • 07:36 PM - FormerlyHemlock mentioned KarinsDad in post How valuable is the shield?
    Look, KarinsDad, I'm not just pointing out your rules errors to be a jerk. Your argument is apparently that defensive investments cost too much to be worthwhile because it sucks the wind out of your offense and leaves you unable to contribute to a party. That's a rules claim. In a system where your assumption were true, your conclusion (offense trumps defense) would be true also. I think it's probably true in AD&D, for example. In 5E, it isn't.

Friday, 19th May, 2017


Wednesday, 10th May, 2017

  • 07:38 AM - Rya.Reisender mentioned KarinsDad in post A change of perspective: From DM to Player
    ...m for improvisation, but at the very least, the adventure should lead through the places intended for the adventure and not go completely off-rail. For example deciding some DC for an action not listed in the adventure is perfectly fine. But the group being all like "We don't like dungeon crawling, let's open a shop in town instead" would be a bit too much deviation. Note that this is absolutely theoretical as I never experienced a group derailing a campaign to this extend ever. My groups always stick to the adventure path even though they might to things in unexpected order. Of course it's also a little bit my job as the DM to give them the right pointers so they know how to follow the adventure path without feeling railroaded. I guess that's another reason I find it hard to be a player. I put in a lot of effort into DMing and when I noticed a DM does not put enough effort in or just isn't skilled enough for doing a good job as DM, then it's super hard for me to accept him as DM. @KarinsDad For me, when I play a game, I want to play the game as intended by the designers. When I play a board game, I want to play that game by the official rules. If one player was like "Hey, let's play this game, but let's change this and that rule, it's more fun.", I wouldn't want to play it anymore. Same for me with DMs that go against official rules in D&D.

Friday, 30th October, 2015

  • 09:13 PM - El Mahdi mentioned KarinsDad in post Warlord Name Poll
    ...DersitePhantom ; @Diffan ; @discosoc; @D'karr ; @Doc Klueless ; @doctorbadwolf ; @DonAdam ; @Dragoslav ; @Duganson; @EdL ; @EditorBFG ; @Edwin Suijkerbuijk ; @Eejit ; @ehren37 ; @Elfcrusher ; @El Mahdi ; @epithet; @erf_beto ; @Eric V ; @eryndel ; @Evenglare ; @ExploderWizard ; @EzekielRaiden; @Fedge123 ; @fendak ; @FireLance ; @Fishing_Minigame ; @Flamestrike ; @FLexor the Mighty! ; @Forged Fury ; @Fragsie ; @Fralex ; @FreeTheSlaves ; @froth ; @Gadget; @Galendril ; @GameOgre ; @Garthanos ; @Ghost Matter ; @Giltonio_Santos ; @Gimul; @GMforPowergamers ; @Gnashtooth ; @Green1 ; @GreenKarl ; @Greg K ; @GreyLord; @Grimmjow ; @Grydan ; @GX.Sigma ; @Halivar ; @HEEGZ ; @Hemlock ; @Henry ; @Herobizkit; @Hussar; @IchneumonWasp ; @I'm A Banana ; @Imaro ; @Iosue ; @Irennan ; @JackOfAllTirades; @jacktannery ; @jadrax ; @Jaelommiss ; @JamesTheLion ; @JamesonCourage ; @JasonZZ; @jayoungr ; @JediGamemaster ; @JeffB ; @Jester Canuck ; @jgsugden ; @jodyjohnson; @Joe Liker ; @JohnLynch ; @Johnny3D3D ; @KarinsDad ; @kerbarian ; @kerleth ; @Kinak; @KingsRule77 ; @Kirfalas ; @Kobold Stew ; @koga305 ; @Lanefan ; @Lanliss ; @Leatherhead; @Libramarian ; @Li Shenron ; @LuisCarlos17f ; @lowkey13 ; @Manbearcat ; @MarkB; @MechaPilot ; @Mecheon ; @mellored ; @Mephista ; @Mercule ; @MG.0 ; @MichaelSomething; @Miladoon ; @Minigiant ; @Mishihari Lord ; @Mistwell ; @MoogleEmpMog ; @Mon @MonkeezOnFire ; @MoonSong(Kaiilurker) ; @MostlyDm ; @Mouseferatu ; @MoutonRustique; @Nemesis Destiny ; @neobolts ; @Neonchameleon ; @Nifft ; @nightspaladin ; @nomotog; @n00bdragon ; @Obryn ; @Ohillion ; @oknazevad ; @Olgar Shiverstone ; @Orlax ; @Otterscrubber ; @Pandamonium87 ; @Paraxis ; @PaulO. ; @Pauln6 ; @Pauper ; @payn; @pemerton ; @peterka99 ;@ Pickles III ; @Pickles JG ; @pkt77242 ; @pming ; @pogre; @PopeYodaI ; @Prickly ; @procproc ; @Psikerlord ; @Psikerlord# ; @(Psi)SeveredHead; @Quickleaf ; @Raith5 ; @raleel ; @Ralif Redhammer ; @Raloc ; @Ranes ; @RangerWickett; @Ratskinner ; @redrick ; @Rejuvenator ; @Remathilis...

Sunday, 30th August, 2015

  • 02:37 AM - Quickleaf mentioned KarinsDad in post Rules Question: Sniping & Readied Action
    Zinnger You must be mistaking me with a DM who plans to have a perfect anything ;) And yep, I do get that a reaction is sacrificing your action AND reaction in 5e, so it's meant to be a conditionally powerful option. jrowland Interesting about the 4e using lines of sight to dictate degree of cover. That works in a mostly 2-D environment I suppose. And yep, I get the difference between "ready to shoot a goblin that attacks" and "ready to shoot a goblin I see." KarinsDad Yeah, you hit the nail on the head about the (fun and friendly) debate we've been having about how cover works. One friend describes it as binary in the grid-oriented sense. While the other takes a more naturalist approach like you. Basically your method is how I handled it BUT without the Perception check to determine if the PC spots goblin before it shoots. I like that, might have to run that by my cohorts and see if it will work for all of us. Thanks!

Friday, 7th August, 2015

  • 07:41 AM - Hussar mentioned KarinsDad in post Attunement
    KarinsDad, from your numbers, you should have given your group about 23 non-consumable Magic items by 6th level. That's a lot of magic items.

Friday, 19th June, 2015

  • 01:13 PM - Hussar mentioned KarinsDad in post Current take on GWM/SS
    ...t is, DPR does not take this into account. There is also the opportunity cost of taking the GWF/SS feats. A few posts up, we were comparing a human (variant) Lvl6 fighter to a hill dwarf Lvl 6 fighter. Thing is, our hill dwarf, with the Tough feat and an ASI has considerably more HP than the human. How much DPR is that worth when the hill dwarf can eat a dragon breath without saving while the GWF/SS fighter drops like a stone? My point is this: DPR is a metric that can be used for comparison and it's an important one. Certainly the DPR analysis that has been done points in the direction that there might be an issue. It's not conclusive, but, it does highlight the issue and I feel that it indicates that we should be taking a closer look. 2. Anecdotal evidence. When you think about it, play testing is pretty much purely anecdotal. But, there is a significant difference here. As it stands, with the anecdotes we have, I know that if I play the say Celtavian, DaveDash or KarinsDad play and my players did the same, I'd likely have similar issues. But, are these issues the result of the mechanics or a result of how they play the game? We don't know. There just isn't enough evidence here. To properly explore this, you need about 10 groups playing the same half a dozen scenarios multiple times and recording the results each time. All I really know at this point in time is that some people are apparently having issues with these feats, typically at quite high level. What I don't know is why they are having these issues. And without doing a LOT more testing, the anecdotes don't really prove anything. So, after this thread am I convinced there is a problem? No, not in the least. I am convinced that for some people there appears to be a problem. But is it systemic or an issue with the idiosyncrasies of their specific tables? Again, I don't know. I do know that my group is not having these issues, so, until we do have these issues or I see a LOT more har...

Saturday, 13th June, 2015

  • 04:08 PM - FormerlyHemlock mentioned KarinsDad in post DM Help: Tips and Tricks for Monsters In Combat
    @KarinsDad, per PHB 195 Shoving requires the attack action, so you can't do it on an opportunity attack. Good catch on Suggestion. I had intended to use the time to poison my claws (this particular player will know exactly what I'm doing when he sees me a bottle filled with light blue liquid--it's purple worm venom, just like he himself has bought with another PC) but I had forgotten that Suggestion ends on damage. At least he won't be holding a weapon any more though, hopefully. Maybe I'll Plane Shift him instead of clawing him. Remember that it's not "a weaker attack." Bare hands against a Rakshasa are a totally ineffectual attack. You need magic weapons to harm them.

Tuesday, 7th April, 2015

  • 01:00 AM - EzekielRaiden mentioned KarinsDad in post Short rests -- how often in a day?
    I think you might enjoy this quote: Aye, I've read it and appreciate its point. To put it another way, KarinsDad--if plans are worthless because plans always fail, why do we bother doing things like evacuation drills and emergency exit planning? The answer, of course, is that doing so demonstrably saves lives. The emergency plan will never be executed precisely as written, because every emergency is wholly unique. But the act of preparing for it, of planning for it, produces tangible improvement in results. Of course, there's a much lower impetus for planning in an RPG because RPGs don't put real lives on the line (unless you're Jack Chick :P), but planning still produces useful effects even if the plans themselves always, 100%, without fail, go pear-shaped.

Friday, 27th March, 2015

  • 09:47 PM - aramis erak mentioned KarinsDad in post Followup on "Everyone Starts at First Level"
    KarinsDad: English lesson for you: the word "may" is an axiomatic indicator of something being non-requisite, or in other words, optional. "Shall", "will" or "must" are the indicators of obligatory action. "May not" is an exclusion prohibition. The quoth bit in the PHB is an explicit option, because it uses the word "may". "Can" also indicates non-requisite action, with "should" being non-requisite but recommended. Rules lesson for you: Adventurer's League play still doesn't use 98% of the DMG (by page count), allowing explicitly the encounter balance (81-84, but which, aside from 1 paragraph, are replicated in the DMBR) and the grid rules. (249-251), plus those sections duplicated in the DM's Basic Rules (which are much of chapter 8 anyway). The adventures obviously use the section on social interaction (244-245), which provides a good guideline for social checks, and which En2:PotA explicitly calls out as allowed. So, since the DMG isn't actually used, it's CLEARLY optional. And the DM...

Monday, 23rd February, 2015

  • 10:47 PM - Jeremy E Grenemyer mentioned KarinsDad in post Happy 50th, Forgotten Realms!
    A thank you to KarinsDad for pointing out the time discrepancy (back on page 2 of this here thread) as to when Zirta was written. Whenever contradictions like these are found and called out, there's an opportunity to ask questions and possibly learn a little bit more about how the Realms came to be.

Wednesday, 4th February, 2015

  • 10:29 PM - DaveDash mentioned KarinsDad in post Is Concentration Bugging You?
    KarinsDad here is something. At our table, we interpret the "source of damage" wording to be per creature, as in a creature is one single source of damage. If a Dragon was to breath on you AND claw you, that's one single source of damage (the Dragon) so you only make one concentration roll. If your DM interprets a source of damage to be a type of damage, or even worse, each attack, you are statistically speaking going to fail a lot more concentration rolls (until your bonus is +9 at least). I personally don't think that's the intention of the rule, but the wording is ambiguous.

Monday, 2nd February, 2015

  • 05:40 PM - SkidAce mentioned KarinsDad in post Low Level Wizards Really Do Suck in 5E
    I like versatility KarinsDad, but not being able to fly and invis is a selling point for the new system. Granted I know its been around a long while, we had an unearthed arcana invisible flying barbarian (stealth attack copter) for a while, but it got old. P.S. We personally never liked improved invis, seemed to OP.

Wednesday, 28th January, 2015

  • 06:46 PM - SkidAce mentioned KarinsDad in post magic items prices
    Its also a matter of how far a given group/DM want to take the ripple effect of "sensible real world polices". Some groups more, some groups less. Some pick and choose what real stuff they like and handwave the remainder. We, for example, don't worry about weapon breakage or armor degradation. (this is not a thread derail, its an example I won't be discussing here). Other groups HAVE to have the cause and effect of breakage. It varies per group. So KarinsDad can be 100% percent correct in the cause and affect, but some groups may not go that far down the continuum. And thats cool.

Friday, 9th January, 2015

  • 08:33 PM - Guyanthalas mentioned KarinsDad in post Barter / Sell Treasure Items
    Thank you all for the responses, and they were about as varied as I was expecting. :) The easiest solution is clearly "liquidate the items at X% value outside of table time". (This is anywhere from 50-100%). This is how we have always done it in the past, and it annoys me. Why do I bother giving out a pearl, when I can just give them 100gp? Yes, a pearl is more flavorful... but if all anyone cares about is the 100gp then I think its flavor wasted. I like the idea of the pearl being worth ~100gp, give or take what you can get for it... but as KarinsDad put it, this isn't Merchants and Money and I run the risk of putting my players off. The other thing that makes a lot of sense is to "group items". Selling items one at a time using a system that takes 5 minutes each is a chore. But grouping things as "Gems", "uncommon trinkets", "rare objects", etc. makes a lot of sense, and sold en masse. Now, if the players LOVE this part of the game (doubtful) individual could be allowed... but I think that's an opt-in rather than opt-out. I was going to continue with my complex barter system anyway to see what kind of live feedback I'll get, but it will be shaped by what some people are saying. I like the idea of the exchange giving the party experience, as that rewards them for the time it takes doing this. This will probably get complex though, so I'll have to not go overboard on it. I'll post an update if anyone cares to how the group found it. Again, thank you all for the ideas and suggestions of how you do things!
  • 10:54 AM - pemerton mentioned KarinsDad in post Why is Hoard of the Dragon Queen such a bad adventure?
    I think the point was merely that 5E's power curve is stable enough that virtually any by-the-book character will be exceptional in play, regardless of concept.That wasn't how I read it - for instance, Sailor Moon's comment that s/he "couldn't give a fig tree about how much damage", and eschewing of intra-party comparisons, seemed to imply that effectiveness was an irrelevant consideration for him/her. there is no necessary feat tax (3e), there is no necessary ability improvement that needs to scale with the monsters AC (4e).These are all points about effectiveness. But I thought the poster I was responding to was eschewing effectiveness as a relevant measure for the viability of a character: "As long as I am playing my concept then it's all good." If playing my concept includes an effectiveness component - ie if playing isnt just about action declarations and getting into character, but is also about the outcomes of action resolution - than KarinsDad's metric for evaluating his wizard PC seems fairly reasonable.

Tuesday, 30th December, 2014

  • 04:48 PM - Tormyr mentioned KarinsDad in post How do you adjudicate firing through combatants?
    I like the cleanliness of this, but would like to know where you got this from. And this. I guess I am not seeing this as firing through cover as much as a player trying to do something unique and outside the general scope of the rules and requiring adjudication. The cover rules specifically mentiom firing through/past creatures as being half cover. EDIT: Oh geez. Failed my reading comprehension check today with the original post. I would give the +5 for 3/4 cover (it still could get through) when firing past lots of creatures. I also use the optional cover rule in the DMG that KarinsDad mentions.

Saturday, 22nd November, 2014

  • 09:34 PM - Plane Sailing mentioned KarinsDad in post Low Level Wizards Really Do Suck in 5E
    Two quick moderatorial things 1. Kaychsea, people have kept it civil, please don't start mud-slinging ("you have been sniffy") 2. KarinsDad, I think that the idea of 'RAW' is dead and buried as far as 5e is concerned. Don't go bringing it up again thanks! Now, back to discussing stuff fun stuff!
  • 05:21 AM - SkidAce mentioned KarinsDad in post If you aren't buying magic items, where will you spend your gold?
    I do agree with steeldragons on the fact that I didn't see neither magic shops, nor buying magic items until 3rd edition. There may have been individuals campaigns, I certainly believe you KarinsDad when you say you encountered them. Its the inference that it was a common thing was what I am objecting to.


Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
No results to display...
Page 1 of 101 123456789101151 ... LastLast

Tuesday, 12th February, 2019

  • 01:44 AM - cbwjm quoted KarinsDad in post Riddles and Puzzles in Gaming and Dungeons and Dragons in particular.
    I do like puzzles and traps, if they have a purpose. I hate traps and puzzles that are put into a game just for the sake of having them. Typically, if I have a riddle or puzzle or something then I prefer there to be alternate ways to figure it out. Perhaps they find an old journal that provides a hint to solving it. I also might include ability or skill checks that players can make for hints. Typically, I don't care if it is the intelligent wizard that solves the riddle or the stupid barbarian that solves it I figure that even the less intelligent can have a burst of genius once in a while. I had a DM add in a sudoku-like puzzle in a mansion. The PCs had to put gems in of a specific type. The PCs had to find the gems in the mansion before they could add them. It wasn't an especially difficult puzzle, but when a given gem had to be used next and the PCs didn't have that particular type of gem, they had to go searching. So, it wasn't just an individual puzzle, it was also an exploration (and...

Thursday, 7th February, 2019

  • 10:17 PM - OB1 quoted KarinsDad in post 90% of D&D Games Stop By Level 10; Wizards More Popular At Higher Levels
    Just out of curiosity, how long did that take real time and how often a month do you play? My primary campaign is at about the same point (18th level) started in the play test and expect to wrap up by May. We play about 10-12 hours a month, but had three different 6 month periods (one after each Tier)where we played another campaign over the last 4 years. Tier IV has been the longest continuous Section, having started in Feb of last year, but I’m having so much fun running and the players playing that we’ve been stretching it. Alas, the side quests are running out and the Prime Villain is on the move towards its ultimate goal so the end is now coming one way or another!
  • 10:04 PM - lkj quoted KarinsDad in post 90% of D&D Games Stop By Level 10; Wizards More Popular At Higher Levels
    Just out of curiosity, how long did that take real time and how often a month do you play? It's been really sporadic. We started the game at the tail end of the playtest. So 2014ish. We try to play once a week for about an hour or an hour and a half (via google hangouts, roll20 and DDB). But doing that math backwards would be really misleading. Each year, we've had months without getting a game in (because of real life, playing another campaign, or just chatting instead of gaming). But then we've had weekend get-togethers where we've played all day for two days straight. It would probably break my brain to try to figure out how much we've actually played over the last 5 years. It is SUBSTANTIALLY less than the equivalent of a weekly game for 5 years (even a game that we only play for an 1.5 hours). My wild guess is that had we managed a consistent schedule, we'd probably have gotten here in a couple years. Faster if we were playing 3 hour sessions instead of half that. But that's all ...
  • 12:56 AM - Ovinomancer quoted KarinsDad in post Is the Help action broken?
    So, is a single word sufficient for a brief utterance? I've already answered this. Attack, Dash, Disengage, Dodge, Help, Hide, Ready, Search Do you allow your players to tell the summoned creature to attack? If so, then why not other one word commands? I've already answered this. Do you allow your players to tell the summoned creature to "move and attack"? If so, then why not other three word command like "disengage and move"? I've already answered this. Do you allow the party leader to shout out to the team "Surround them and don't let any escape"? Or are your players mostly mute during combat except for "out of character" conversations? I've already answered this. Really, the tedious part of all of this is that I've clearly answered all of your above hypotheticals, but you haven't bothered to read my posts and are instead providing your own imaginations of my arguments so you can dunk on them. You might think that you don't have to define "brief utterance", but withou...

Wednesday, 6th February, 2019

  • 05:38 PM - Ovinomancer quoted KarinsDad in post Is the Help action broken?
    And although it is RAW, you are still unwilling to define how many words make up a brief utterance. Also, MM page 10. When a monster takes its action, it can choose from the options in the Actions section of its stat block or use one of the actions available to all creatures, such as the Dash or Hide action, as described in the PHB. PHB pages 192 and 193, Actions in Combat: Attack, Cast a Spell, Dash, Disengage, Dodge, Help, Hide, Ready, Search, Use an Object. Granted, creatures might have difficulty in using an object or it might be impossible to cast a spell. But, a Pixie could be summoned with a Conjure Woodland Beings and it should be able to cast its spells. Btw, talking about rules, "They obey any verbal commands that you issue to them (no action required by you).". No action required by you could easily be interpreted to mean that the verbal commands issued require no action by you. In which case the brief utterance rule is the general rule, and this is the specific rule...
  • 02:45 PM - Ovinomancer quoted KarinsDad in post Is the Help action broken?
    You call it a strawman, but it has the exact same 5 words as my example of "Dodge attacks, but don't move". It's telling that you continued with your strawman while snipping out the rest of my post where I address many of the points you continue to raise. Including that the quoted statement above is just fine. You don't have an official definition of how many words are in a brief utterance. In real life, someone can both do actions and talk. So, most people would assume that PCs and NPCs can say in combat what can be said in real life in 6 seconds. In real life, normal conversation is about 11 to 14 words in 6 seconds. So, 5 words is more than reasonable. It could even be called a brief utterance. Sigh, already said, man. Maybe if you read my posts, you could save time arguing against points I haven't made. Strawman or no strawman, your interpretation of the brief utterance phrase is not actually RAW with regard to what commands can be given with the Conjure Animals spell, rather it is...
  • 01:38 PM - Ovinomancer quoted KarinsDad in post Is the Help action broken?
    Specific trumps general. The general rule is that you can communicate brief utterances. The specific rule is that when commanding the conjured creatures, they will obey any verbal command. Any. Yes, specifuc trumps general, but there's no such conflict here. You have 1)The conjured creatures obey any spoken command, and; 2) you make freely speak in brief utterances during your turn. These don't conflict at all, so no trumping necessary. It's magic. It allows for verbal commands. I don't really see how Fireballing a bunch of enemies and taking some of them out because they fail their save is not overpowered, but putting a line of dodging wolves that aren't attacking is (note: in our game, the player doesn't decide on the exact creature, just the CR and any movement type like flying creatures). Nothing here contradicts any of my points. I agree with just about all of it. Still, verbal commands are limited to brief utterences during a turn. Sure, that means you can drop a line of conjured wo...

Tuesday, 5th February, 2019

  • 06:29 PM - Ovinomancer quoted KarinsDad in post Is the Help action broken?
    If you say so. Personally, the Conjure Animal spell states that the creatures appear in unoccupied spaces that you see. To me, this sounds like the caster can control exactly which spaces when he casts the spell, just like most other spells. The spell also states that they obey ANY verbal commands that you issue to them (no action required by you). I can see where a DM might say that all of the summoned creatures has to obey the same command, but on the other hand, no action is required. The caster is concentrating on the spell and should be able to command each creature individually, but even without that, the command "Dodge attacks, but don't move" doesn't seem that unreasonable because regardless of creature intelligence, the spell is magic and allows them to understand any verbal command given. How can they obey it if they don't understand it? Taking your restraints to their logical conclusion, creatures with Int 2 wouldn't understand any command. Meh. A restraint? I didn't read ...
  • 01:40 PM - Ovinomancer quoted KarinsDad in post Is the Help action broken?
    I wouldn't say that summons are OP, but if used well, they can become very potent. Just using them to attack is not always the best strategy. I have seen a line of them being used to split up a large group of monsters using the Dodge action. It takes a while for the foes to bust through that line and in the meantime, the PCs can focus fire. I suspect that many players use them only to attack whereas the Help and Dodge actions can be used in special circumstances.That's making those verbal commands do a lot of work. Nothing about conjures improves the intelligence of the conjured creatures, so until you get the higher level ones, complicated verbal orders are a waste. At the higher end, I suppose you can issue precise battle plans, but in a few moments? Recall that the conjerer doesn't gain control of the conjured creatures like an avatar extension of their character, but must instead issue verbal commans to otherwise independant creatures. I find the above still make conjures very usef...
  • 12:25 PM - CapnZapp quoted KarinsDad in post Is the Help action broken?
    Which is why one should do it with summoned creatures instead of familiars. A group of PCs can have advantage for many of the melee and ranged attacks in an encounter by having most or all of the summoned creatures do the help action. If the foes concentrate their attacks on the summoned creatures, they are not concentrating their attacks on the PCs, and summoned creatures tend to be a lot more durable than familiars.Though what this essentially says is: summons are OP. (I mean, once they're summoned, having them help out as opposed to making their own attacks isn't particularly OP. At low levels, abstaining from their own attack is a significant cost. At high level, it isn't, but at that stage having the Summoner hide to avoid losing Concentration becomes a cost in itself. Plus, foes with area attacks that can clear out all summons on one swoop are no longer rare) But yes, you're basically right: using your Familiar to gain advantage in combat is discussed much more often than the utility ...

Saturday, 2nd February, 2019

  • 01:23 AM - Azzy quoted KarinsDad in post Line Spells / Lightning Bolt
    Yeah. Artificial constraints like measuring devices or templates? Got it. Some people just don't like it when their melee PC can only move 30 feet, but the grid shows the enemy at 35 feet. They'd prefer to not use grids so that their melee PC gets an attack in every round. Meh. ;) I can't help it if people play the game wrong. Maybe they need to take a Snickers break. Meh. :D
  • 12:14 AM - Azzy quoted KarinsDad in post Line Spells / Lightning Bolt
    As if totm without grids doesn't have a plethora of problems. Who says use TotM? Get out a measuring device, use templates, and go freeform like many wargames. The grid is a cage, keeping your soul tied to artificial contraints. :D Go to the bathroom and you're suddenly clueless. Either you're playing TotM incorrectly, or there are bigger problems afoot. :D

Friday, 1st February, 2019

  • 11:45 PM - Mistwell quoted KarinsDad in post God Wiz...er...I mean, Druid?
    And where does the coat come in? I read that as, "I'll see myself out the door, as I've grabbed my coat in anticipation of your justified groan at my awful pun."
  • 11:33 PM - Mistwell quoted KarinsDad in post God Wiz...er...I mean, Druid?
    I have no idea what you are saying. Emphasis on the word "wave". It's a pun.
  • 08:36 PM - Blue quoted KarinsDad in post Line Spells / Lightning Bolt
    But the question is, do you allow those cubes to target any creature where a cube touches his space, or only if the cube takes up 50% or more of his space (as per the DMG circular area rules)? Sure. Or maybe I make a ruling and open it up a bit more - granting advantage on the save for the "looks like half, not sure if a little over or a little under" area.
  • 03:51 PM - rgoodbb quoted KarinsDad in post God Wiz...er...I mean, Druid?
    How exactly is a Druid casting a spell underwater??? ;) With a wave of their hands..? I've already got my coat.
  • 01:01 PM - BacchusNL quoted KarinsDad in post God Wiz...er...I mean, Druid?
    DMs at my table say nope all of the time by making it random. Besides, if you get monkeys, they can be commanded to Help the melee PCs. They can be commanded to form a line and all do the Dodge action. Let alone the places that they can get into. Monkeys rule in 5E. Yeah...monkeys are awesome. Less so when you are underwater and was hoping to summon a pack of Reef Sharks though. Great way to miss the point ;) !
  • 08:02 AM - Maxperson quoted KarinsDad in post Low Level Wizards Really Do Suck in 5E
    Negating the tactic??? It often does the opposite. It helps the tactic. Readying an action to shoot at the wizard popping up and down in an up field when he pops up will never help the tactic. The wizard PC can still often move until he has 75% cover (from the edge of a large tree, wall, or pillar) and then cast a spell. Or the wizard might be able move from one side of cover to another (for example, if behind a wall). And if NPCs are readying spells and the wizard PC never shows, then bye bye spell. This is what is known as Moving the Goal Posts. You specified a wizard popping up and down in the middle of a field and I supplied a tactic which completely negated that tactic. Moving the goal posts to walking behind a large tree, wall or pillar doesn't get you very far. Especially when a different tactic like walking right, left or around so that your cover is gone negates those tactics. Will your tactics work sometimes? Sure. Will they work most of the time? Probably not, or ...

Thursday, 31st January, 2019

  • 04:22 PM - jgsugden quoted KarinsDad in post Low Level Wizards Really Do Suck in 5E
    If you are that convinced, start a poll and ask the community.That would only be a poll of people replying to that poll in this community, which is a heavily biased populaton. Still, the percentage that use this feat at or below level 4 for their wizards would be very low, I'm sure. I wish D&D Beyond released some stats on what feats, etc... are taken. It would still be a biased population, but it would be interesting to see some of their information on characters that have been upgraded over time.
  • 03:21 PM - 5ekyu quoted KarinsDad in post Low Level Wizards Really Do Suck in 5E
    So, NPC spell casters who have magic missile are a dime a dozen at your table? At our table, it's mostly monsters. Sure, there are times when NPCs cast spells, but Magic Missile is very easy for a wizard to avoid. Minor Illusion of a box around himself (can't target MM on a foe you cannot see). Shield spell. Be behind total cover. MM is actually quite lousy as a DM attack against a 5E wizard once it is done once unless the DM rules that the simultaneous damage of magic missile is separate sources of damage and requires 3 concentration rolls (which is a crappy ruling for death saving throws, but YMMV). If the DM throws MM, then always have Shield spell available to thwart it in the future. Meh. No way I would take WC just to prevent NPC arcane casters from MMing my PC. As for least favorable attacks, more than 21 points of damage from a single source is REALLY REALLY rare at low levels. Almost all concentration rolls at nearly all tables are DC 10 below level 10. Typically, shy of a critical, a...


Page 1 of 101 123456789101151 ... LastLast

KarinsDad's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites