View Profile: TwoSix - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Today, 04:09 PM
    Can't agree with that; I'd argue the contingent that likes both 4e and 5e is larger than the contingent that only likes 4e. I like pretty much every edition except 1e, the 1e books always seemed kinda ugly to me, and I never understood why people would go back and play 1e when 2e was right there.
    84 replies | 2245 view(s)
    3 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:16 PM
    Yea, there aren't a lot of people who are "Meh" about 4e. You either really liked it or you really didn't.
    84 replies | 2245 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Friday, 17th May, 2019, 03:56 PM
    Yea, agreed. The WotC Artificer is fine, it's not like I would turn it away if someone wanted to play it, but I'd show them Kibbletasty's first and recommend it as the superior option.
    64 replies | 2306 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Tuesday, 14th May, 2019, 03:41 PM
    Fair enough. It can't be done using only player facing resources, it requires interaction with the Monster Manual to make work. I still think it's better for the game for the DM to simply define their game world in a way that the concept can fit, rather than to justify the concept with Tippyverse style contortions of monster and spell interactions. That way leads to Pun-pun. :)
    6 replies | 244 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Tuesday, 14th May, 2019, 03:17 PM
    The problem is that the concept (bring the dead back to unlife against their will) violates the 5e paradigm for how resurrection, undeath, and souls work. Even True Resurrection, a 9th level spell, can't bring a soul back against its will. Fundamentally, this isn't a "find a new trick in the PHB" issue, this is an issue for the DM to make a world-building decision on how they want souls to...
    6 replies | 244 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Monday, 13th May, 2019, 09:49 PM
    Again, interesting because we have agreement and disagreement here. I agree that the "simmer" (let's call it) of Game of Thrones has been essential to the cognitive workspace that viewers inhabit as they watch it unfold. But for my part, (more food!) oversteeping something can lead to a bitter, wrong-noted product. When I look at two of the primary character arcs that were just recently...
    172 replies | 3768 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Monday, 13th May, 2019, 09:03 PM
    See, this is interesting to me (and one of the reasons I brought up gaming as a corollary or coincidental reference-point if you'd like). I've enjoyed the ramped-up pacing. If there is one complaint I've had about Game of Thrones and other modern media (Avengers Endgame, The Last Jedi, and Black Panther come to mind), its a combination of pacing and (mostly related) poor cutting (including...
    172 replies | 3768 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Monday, 13th May, 2019, 07:00 PM
    It's a smart move to stay quiet. Outrage has a shelf life, especially in our current media climate. Stay quiet for 6-9 months, then make occasional small posts and appearances.
    75 replies | 5883 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Monday, 13th May, 2019, 06:08 PM
    DW and AW work off of the "shared intuitions/understandings of the fiction" model above, very much. However, a couple things work in concert to constrain GMs very much: 1) The explicit, focused, clear Principles, Agenda, and Move structure. 2) The fact that the game will push back against you if you deviate from (1). 3) The fact that if you just follow (1) devoutly, the game works...
    43 replies | 1934 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Monday, 13th May, 2019, 05:38 PM
    Its been far from perfect yes. But I enjoyed it because I enjoy media in a very focused way. Its probably similar to the way I enjoy my gaming. In fact, I would say that the issues that I've seen being put forth by hoards of people on Reddit and by personal nerd friends have great parallel to TTRPG incredulity and disdain. Unsurprisingly, on these boards at least, I'm often on the opposite...
    172 replies | 3768 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Monday, 13th May, 2019, 05:17 PM
    Iíll second that emotion. Loved it. Loved this season (save for perhaps 3-4 scenes and transitions...which is a minor quibble). Clearly Iím just a bad, shallow Game of Thronesíer.
    172 replies | 3768 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Friday, 10th May, 2019, 07:00 PM
    Pretty sure Red Dragons always evolve from applying a Fire Stone to a normal dragon.
    44 replies | 1325 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Friday, 10th May, 2019, 05:40 PM
    If a player went out of the way to tell me their PC is not buying a whetstone and refusing to care for their weapons, then I'm going to make a weapon degradation an issue for them. Because they just told me specifically that they want weapon degradation to be a plot point! (Alternatively, they just have a preference for more simulation and realism in their games, which I can then flag as a...
    2689 replies | 84844 view(s)
    3 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Friday, 10th May, 2019, 03:29 PM
    The problem with the combination of "no sex outside of wedlock" and "divorce is extremely difficult and frowned upon" is that most 16-22 year olds (the primary marriageable age in my grandparents' era) are going to take the "OK, let's bonk now!" option over consideration of the long term consequences. That's what teenagers from the dawn of time have done! Also, add on to the fact that the...
    73 replies | 6151 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Friday, 10th May, 2019, 02:16 PM
    Sure, but a lot of those people would have been married to each other in our previous, more restrictive, era. There's a lot of self-selection going on now, as people who are married now tend to be more stable and family oriented, as that's why they made the choice to be married. The act of marriage, in and of itself, doesn't make people more stable and family-oriented. (See the OP for an...
    73 replies | 6151 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Friday, 10th May, 2019, 02:13 PM
    Not recently, but I certainly remember groups in college having issues due to some extracurricular bonking. And also, thanks for reminding me of how awesome "bonk" is as an euphemism. That's slipped out of my vocabulary, and now I'm going to bring it back! :)
    73 replies | 6151 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Friday, 10th May, 2019, 02:09 PM
    1) A flourishing porn industry is much more a function of a technological change than a change in societal mores. And I doubt most people actually working in the industry would say it's "flourishing". 2) Ostracization and shame rarely channel people in positive directions. And the primary flaw in the pre-60s attitudes was that the ostracization and shame was rarely applied equally, but fell...
    73 replies | 6151 view(s)
    6 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Friday, 10th May, 2019, 01:43 PM
    Nah.
    73 replies | 6151 view(s)
    4 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Wednesday, 8th May, 2019, 09:20 PM
    I tend to associate this trope with classic JRPG heroes, and the best fit for that (good fighter, support and healing magics) is easily a paladin.
    63 replies | 2650 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Wednesday, 8th May, 2019, 01:55 PM
    It's an extra action per long rest, not short rest. If it was short rest, I would rate it ahead of the sword +2. If I were a gish, I would probably favor the flexibility of the extra action over the +1 to hit, but I personally tend to favor flexibility over purely numeric concerns. But there's no way the sword as written is anything other than a rare. (Again, judging rarity on mechanical...
    23 replies | 889 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Tuesday, 7th May, 2019, 04:09 PM
    Judging purely on power level, this is at best a rare. It's a bit worse than a sword +2, which is also a rare.
    23 replies | 889 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Tuesday, 7th May, 2019, 03:35 AM
    OlegRu 1) Bard is pretty much spot on for your concept. If you want to be more skill-focused and a better caster, lore bard is probably a better fit, and certainly fits your RP concept. Valor is generally worthwhile if you're willing to invest feats, ASIs, and spell choices to make your weapon combat. Basically, you'd have to decide how high of a priority good archery is to your character....
    36 replies | 1150 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Tuesday, 7th May, 2019, 01:10 AM
    I specified eladrin or drow, so 14 Cha. I'm not as down with half-elf, since you can't get an 18 Dex with Elven Accuracy at level 4. And yes, he's a worse archer than a dedicated archer, and a worse bard than a dedicated bard. BUT.... he's a better attacker than the dedicated bard, and a better caster than the dedicated archer. So really, it comes down to how much you value specialization...
    36 replies | 1150 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Tuesday, 7th May, 2019, 12:18 AM
    I wouldn't go that far. A bard isn't as good an archer as a fighter or ranger, for sure. But archer-bard is one of the few ways to do a full caster that doesn't sacrifice a tremendous amount to get a good at-will attack pattern, outside of a sorlock or bardlock. My personal recommendation for an archer bard with point buy would be to go elf if possible, ideally eladrin (or drow if...
    36 replies | 1150 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Monday, 6th May, 2019, 06:38 PM
    What boy doesn't remember when he found his dad's stash of +3 magic magazines hidden in the attic?
    20 replies | 677 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Monday, 6th May, 2019, 01:53 PM
    I can see the resemblance to C+ that you draw there. Here are the reasons I would say itís better (3 Cs oddly enough): Constraint Clarity Cognitive Workspace As you (and surely others) know, I regularly champion systemized GM constraint. Itís one of the reasons I adore the PBtA systems (and Bakerís work broadly). AW and DW constrain the GM elegantly and quite clearly. However, there...
    43 replies | 1934 view(s)
    5 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Saturday, 4th May, 2019, 07:29 PM
    Alright, so I wanted to get a quick example up of Dungeon World play and what it would look like if you imported some Blades in the Dark to it. DUNGEON WORLD PLAY EXCERPT The PCs (Druid and Fighter) are on a ridge-line overlooking a vast chasm that has opened up due to a natural or unnatural cataclysm (to be determined). They recently discovered that the sealed prison colony that was a...
    43 replies | 1934 view(s)
    5 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Friday, 3rd May, 2019, 09:00 PM
    I.....don't know?
    51 replies | 1251 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Friday, 3rd May, 2019, 08:37 PM
    I would agree with this in the general case, but in this specific case (the characters are already level 16, and probably only have a handful of sessions left before the game ends), I think an all-or-nothing approach might be better.
    51 replies | 1251 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Friday, 3rd May, 2019, 04:53 PM
    Depends on if diverting the narrative and/or expending party resources would be considered a negative in CapnZapp's game. From the overall tenor of his posts, I think it might be, but of course I can't know for sure.
    51 replies | 1251 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Friday, 3rd May, 2019, 03:50 PM
    As a power-gamer, I wouldn't just be measuring the possibility of character loss; I'd also be looking at the power level delta between my established character and a replacement character. (I could do a lot with a fresh 15th-16th level character!) If your character replacement rules are generous, feel free to make the risk large. If character replacement is problematic, you need to make...
    51 replies | 1251 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Thursday, 2nd May, 2019, 06:13 PM
    Yup. Agreed. I think what Iím going to do for this thread is take a pair of similar situations Iíve resolved in DW and Blades and contrast them (to suss out why Blades is a ďbetterĒ approach for what the two games are trying to accomplish). That should work in the service of the thread premise. I also need to get back to Lanefanís respobse.
    43 replies | 1934 view(s)
    2 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Thursday, 2nd May, 2019, 02:03 PM
    Heck, even the division between Wizard and Cleric is doing too much work codifying the magic system. Just use the UA Sidekick classes: Warrior, Expert, Spellcaster.
    76 replies | 5014 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Wednesday, 1st May, 2019, 11:04 PM
    I don't have time to get to Lanefan or produce a post that addresses all I would like to. However, after doing a quick scan of the thread, I think I have something to offer here. There is a reason why most people who play PBtA games would say that Blades in the Dark is a more finely crafted game than earlier iterations of PBtA games (like Dungeon World). It isn't because these games are...
    43 replies | 1934 view(s)
    5 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Wednesday, 1st May, 2019, 12:18 AM
    All the engine really requires to be playable are the 6 stats, the number of Hit Die/Hit Points, and a list of things the character is proficient with. Everything else is really just codifying progression, power levels, and setting flavor. They could have just as easily written every subclass as its own class, or combined classes into a core 4, or just had one "class" with a menu of feat...
    53 replies | 2732 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Tuesday, 30th April, 2019, 11:54 PM
    Good changes. I definitely need to think about the counterspell one, as my current game is a higher level game with multiple casters in the party. I'm already running into some "bogging down" issues caused by counterspell.
    30 replies | 1128 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Tuesday, 30th April, 2019, 11:50 PM
    Yea, I agree with Saelorn. (That was weird to say. :) ) The paladin aura is great, but a +3-4 bonus makes it just worthwhile to accept the tradeoffs of having to stay within 10' of the paladin. Even a +5 is very far from an automatic save, and the best way to save against an area effect is not to be in the target area, which clustering around the paladin tends to inhibit. I also rarely see...
    2 replies | 186 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Tuesday, 30th April, 2019, 10:46 PM
    Good post Lanefan. I'll try to get a reply up afterwhile.
    43 replies | 1934 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Tuesday, 30th April, 2019, 03:24 PM
    Attaching this here from the original 5e thread due to relevance. Iíll habe further thoughts after I read the OP and have a minute. "Meaningful Consequence" My take on this will always append "upon the gamestate" to that. Because they don't spell it out in the section on Using Ability Scores, here is the likely best reference point for what the designers meant by "meaningful consequences."...
    43 replies | 1934 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Monday, 29th April, 2019, 11:01 PM
    "Meaningful Consequence" My take on this will always append "upon the gamestate" to that. Because they don't spell it out in the section on Using Ability Scores, here is the likely best reference point for what the designers meant by "meaningful consequences." I think this is a good working definition that is cribbed from many-a-modern-game. If the gamestate isn't changed in some...
    1672 replies | 59167 view(s)
    5 XP
  • Nytmare's Avatar
    Sunday, 28th April, 2019, 04:38 PM
    I am in the following boat: Need to Play Games - Increasing Number of Other Commitments - Increasing Available Time - Decreasing Amount of Crap I Buy That Never Has a Chance to Hit the Table - Increasing
    33 replies | 1514 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th April, 2019, 11:28 PM
    It would kind of depend on the skill. Some skills should have less variance in possible results than the other.
    106 replies | 3768 view(s)
    2 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th April, 2019, 10:43 PM
    Yep, pretty much how I wanted it to work. It's not better than GWM, or SS, and doesn't really synergize with them. But it lets classes that aren't fighter, paladin, or ranger dip to get fighting styles and the important -5/+10 mechanic. I saw it as being more for monks, or valor bards, or classes that wanted to go dual-wielding or sword and board and still do decent damage.
    100 replies | 21989 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th April, 2019, 02:00 PM
    I know this is a big and nearly impossible ask, but any chance that the Player's Option books will be added at some point?
    11 replies | 578 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th April, 2019, 01:58 PM
    That's a pretty cool system, although I do prefer the playbook system from Beyond the Wall better, overall. Granted, that's OSR, not 5e.
    11 replies | 484 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Wednesday, 24th April, 2019, 04:24 PM
    Weapon Master Select two weapons, which are your mastered weapons. You gain the following benefits. - You are proficient with your mastered weapons. - You gain the benefits of a fighting style when wielding a mastered weapon. These fighting styles do not stack with the same fighting style gained from another source. --- If the weapon has the two-handed keyword, you gain the Great...
    100 replies | 21989 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd April, 2019, 03:41 PM
    Because "My momma raised me right, even though my daddy was an <fill in the blank>" is always going to be a popular fantasy origin.
    90 replies | 5392 view(s)
    4 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd April, 2019, 12:47 PM
    Both are very good classes, BTW.
    53 replies | 2732 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd April, 2019, 07:01 AM
    Good OP for discussion! If you broadly distilled TTRPGing down to its absolute minimum constituent parts, I think, as you've said, the answer has to be a firm "no." However, I think there is going to be some overlap in specific moments of play that may not be possible to divorce entirely from an investment in quality of form. For instance, a few things come to mind. 1) When I'm...
    404 replies | 8413 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd April, 2019, 01:44 AM
    TwoSix replied to Arcana Domain
    Potent Cantrip should definitely work on BB/GFB for an Arcana Cleric unless the DM specifically bans it. Shillelagh/BB for a 20 Wis 8th level Arcana cleric should be doing 2d8+10, plus the 2d8 on enemy movement. That's almost S&B fighter/paladin level, which isn't bad for a full caster.
    16 replies | 3200 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Nytmare's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd April, 2019, 01:25 AM
    Design wise, I wish they did, but at this point I think that the spectrum of classes is how things are going to go.
    53 replies | 2732 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd April, 2019, 01:25 AM
    Not at all. I could imagine a game using a strictly 5e chassis that had 60 2 page classes, with no subclasses at all. Maybe even no decision points at all, much like 1e and 2e classes.
    53 replies | 2732 view(s)
    3 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd April, 2019, 12:58 AM
    It isn't really a TTRPG thing, I think it's MMO concepts influencing the archetype. I remember reading a WoW preview back in 2003, where they described Rogues are the ultimate melee damage dealer, and thinking to myself "That's actually really brilliant, and would be great in D&D. Fighters are defensive, and Rogues are offensive." Doing a little digging, it looks Everquest rogues are also...
    158 replies | 9192 view(s)
    2 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd April, 2019, 12:41 AM
    As someone who's pretty crunch oriented and has played a good amount of 3.5/PF, 4e, and 5e, I'd only partly agree. 4e is certainly the most balanced, but 5e has much better balance for casters than 3.5/PF, even if you only do 1 or 2 combats per long rest. Concentration and the relative nerfing of a lot of utility spells sets to that.
    158 replies | 9192 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Nytmare's Avatar
    Monday, 22nd April, 2019, 01:06 PM
    What was the death mechanic in "Over the Edge"? I remember that it had had some kind of system in place that worked kinda like a death flag, but I don't remember what it was.
    112 replies | 4080 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Nytmare's Avatar
    Monday, 22nd April, 2019, 12:43 AM
    Jumped to the wrong window with my reply.
    23 replies | 1242 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st April, 2019, 08:59 PM
    Yea, I'm pretty sure it's intentional to not specify that divine power has to come from deities. Personally, I think D&D style henotheism kinda sucks. I much prefer settings with more ambiguous religion.
    72 replies | 2423 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Saturday, 20th April, 2019, 10:03 PM
    I think where I'd disagree with you is that I think "situational" and "effective" are pretty tangential to each other. Sharpshooter is actually a pretty situational feat; it's only really a good feat if your concept is a martially inclined archer. But when that's your character concept, Sharpshooter is both hugely effective and aesthetically pleasing to play (as it makes your character perform...
    11 replies | 494 view(s)
    2 XP
  • clearstream's Avatar
    Saturday, 20th April, 2019, 01:52 PM
    I feel the same way. I've been applying a rule of halving the tier 2 values, halving again (quartering) the tier 3, and again (one eighth) the tier 4. The following image is snipped from my "campaign pacing" Excel sheet; you can see my assumptions about costs for revivals and training. My two-year campaign saw characters reaching level 16, and using this system they had enough coin to retire...
    179 replies | 142108 view(s)
    0 XP
No More Results
About TwoSix

Basic Information

Age
40
About TwoSix
Introduction:
DM or player
About Me:
Experienced gamer looking for any roleplaying game, up for playing or DMing in the Central NJ area.
Location:
Lawrenceville, NJ
Disable sharing sidebar?:
No
Sex:
Male
Age Group:
31-40
My Game Details

Details of games currently playing and games being sought.

Town:
Lawrenceville
State:
New Jersey
Country:
USA
Game Details:
Player or DM looking for anyone interested in any roleplaying game. Love to try new systems.

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
6,133
Posts Per Day
0.97
Last Post
Favourite D&D edition thatís not 5E Today 04:09 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
14
General Information
Last Activity
Today 08:00 PM
Join Date
Friday, 18th January, 2002
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0

4 Friends

  1. Campbell Campbell is offline

    Member

    Campbell
  2. clearstream clearstream is offline

    Member

    clearstream
  3. Manbearcat Manbearcat is offline

    Member

    Manbearcat
  4. Nytmare Nytmare is offline

    Member

    Nytmare
Showing Friends 1 to 4 of 4
My Game Details
Town:
Lawrenceville
State:
New Jersey
Country:
USA
Game Details:
Player or DM looking for anyone interested in any roleplaying game. Love to try new systems.
Page 1 of 6 123456 LastLast

Monday, 20th May, 2019


Friday, 17th May, 2019


Wednesday, 15th May, 2019


Tuesday, 14th May, 2019


Sunday, 12th May, 2019


Saturday, 11th May, 2019



Page 1 of 6 123456 LastLast
Page 1 of 9 123456789 LastLast

Tuesday, 7th May, 2019

  • 02:58 AM - OlegRu mentioned TwoSix in post Help me with good RP/Optimization balance for Half-Elf (probably)Valor Bard (archer?)
    So from reading all of the replies, here are my follow-up ideas/questions for you guys - @Zardnaar, @TwoSix, @Mistwell, @Tony Vargas, @Treantmonklvl20 I'll format this to go by topic: Is there something you'd recommend outside an archer bard that would fit my char's style (maybe some simple-type multiclass I mentioned in the OP or something else)? Also, is a ranged bard preferable to keep him safer due to lower defense/HP and for spell concentration? Ability Scores: Cool so I'll probably take the STR10 DEX16 CON12 INT10 WIS12 CHA16 then. (I care about strength as I'd like to have decent athletics score and wisdom, again, for the skills) Although, I'm a bit worried regarding the CON - I've seen a lot of talk that it's important - for concentration I think? So in order to avoid issues casting, I should equip just a sword if I'm not using ranged at the moment, not the shield? (and keep shield around just in case, but I'm not sure when I'd use it) For armor, yeah I don't want penalties to stealth as I'd like my char to be able to sneak around in the wilderness camouflaged or hide place...

Sunday, 13th January, 2019

  • 10:42 PM - FrogReaver mentioned TwoSix in post The Mechanical Impact of -5/+10
    Nah, it's the auto-hit part that makes it complicated. It's why either end becomes a static increase. You start way to many posts out with no. TwoSix was correct in this instance. When you have an expanded crit range it gets very complicated as 19's can crit but don't auto hit. You are correct in that when crit damage boost and auto hit both occur on a 20 only that the damage increase cancels out and no one has disagreed with that.

Tuesday, 8th January, 2019

  • 09:52 PM - clearstream mentioned TwoSix in post An Unearthed Arcana I would like to see - mechanical fixes
    I cut out the rest to save space, but I think that's a great idea. Now, to the question above. Are we going to come to a consensus about a given fix like GWM, or would we have like 5 different fixes for it in the document? If we are going with the former, I would recommend the following. A thread where the potential fixes are noted and discussed, followed by a thread where people vote on poll containing those fixes. 1 vote per person, and the top vote getting goes into the document. The lengthy explanations for each fix would be stated in the OP of that voting thread. Good idea. Something like that could very well advance the conversation. I'll take a pause and then come back with a new thread for collating "proud nails", matched by one on reddit to cast a wider net. With then perhaps a survey for the community to rank them. So it seems like there could be some sense of convergence around @TwoSix and @Sword of Spirit suggestions. I'd prefer WotC got onto it, but I can see that a community project could be pragmatic, and maybe influence what comes along down the line. How might we create that cabal?

Saturday, 3rd November, 2018

  • 01:34 AM - pemerton mentioned TwoSix in post Worlds of Design: What Makes an RPG a Tabletop Hobby RPG?
    4E was a good example of this. There were just a ton of changes from prior editions, and many of the changes were in the direction of pushing players towards miniatures and maps and the power cards just pushed people towards the obvious conclusion of minis game/CCG influences. I noticed longtime players thinking this way and becoming more like they were playing that kind of game, being much more focused on their characters enumerated powers.I believe spell cards were published for AD&D. And for as long as I can remember, players of spell casters in RPGs would address situations by reviewing the spells they had available. This relates to my post in reply to TwoSix: the idea that the player of the AD&D caster is engaging the fiction when reviewing a spell list (because in the fiction the PC has memorised spells) while the 4e player is only engaging the mechanics (because in the fiction the PC doesn't have all these rationed powers) rests on a very thin/veneer idea of the fiction. It's not actually engaging and changing the shared fiction.

Tuesday, 30th October, 2018

  • 06:14 PM - epithet mentioned TwoSix in post Burning Questions: Why Do DMs Limit Official WOTC Material?
    ... If we wanted to play in Middle Earth, and more than half of the players wanted to play dragonborn but the DM said "sorry, it doesn't fit the game", are you seriously arguing that that DM is saying "my way or the highway"? ... I would submit to you that if more than half of the players want to play dragonborn that y'all don't actually want to play in Middle Earth. Although... if among the refugees from Laketown were a number of women who were pregnant when Smaug's blood rained upon Esgaroth and tainted the Long Lake, their children born thereafter might carry some legacy of the dragon, even if they don't look like D&D dragonborn. I can see using the dragonborn crunch even if the dragonborn fluff is inapplicable. Edit: Dammit, TwoSix!

Saturday, 20th October, 2018

  • 09:59 PM - Satyrn mentioned TwoSix in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    Except nobody is arguing that the DM can't change the fluff. :) Hey, I'm not arguing anything. It's just my life's mission to point out this fact repeatedly when discussing gods in 5e. Well, it's more like one of my life's continuing side quests. My life's mission is to top the Laughs columns. I'm almost there. I'm topping the Laughs Given by quite a wide margin over Tony Vargas and I'm closing in on him for Laughs Received. Once I catch him, its just TwoSix and . . . . . . lowkey13. Sigh That one's gonna take a while.

Friday, 19th October, 2018

  • 01:21 AM - Imaro mentioned TwoSix in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    Dunno who you are implying. Certainly not me. Got any specifics you'd like to put on the table? I believe pemerton's general approach to gaming is characterized by the setting not being the DM's but instead the groups... I believe Manbearcat is similar in his tastes and well TwoSix pretty much said it was his preference when he responded... but I wasn't sure since I haven't interacted directly with him as much as the other two posters I listed. I honestly don't know what your general approach is though I will admit you seem very pro-player entitlement and much less enthusiastic about anything that maintains or establishes DM empowerment. No. Why would it? The basic premise is that the DM has 100% of the power. Using backgrounding means that the DM now has 99.99% of the power at the table. That tiny sliver that the DM is prevented from bringing into the forefront of play is also off the table for the player as well. But, when the DM brings something up in game, it's not background is it? It's foreground. And, even by this mechanic, would now be fair game. Exactly the same way as if a player did the same thing. Well first let me reply in the same way you did... when you say DM control is 100% whose game are you speaking about here, certainly not...

Thursday, 18th October, 2018

  • 12:39 PM - Xetheral mentioned TwoSix in post I was right about Shield Master
    ...s a specific exception that overrides the general rule, and Shield Master does not do that. Some people read it differently because it's possible to disagree on what the general rules are. For example, the combat mechanics are abstract, and in an abstract system I don't see any reason to assume that the statements "you cannot do two different actions simultaneously" and "once you start one action you need to complete it before you can start another action" are true. Instead, I interpret the applicable general rule as the one in the book that says that the timing of bonus actions is up to the player unless otherwise specified. I don't consider implied timing (such as via the use of an if/then statement) to qualify as "specified". Therefore I read Shield Master as leaving the timing of the bonus action up to the player. (Note that I would consider implicit timing to qualify as "specified" if failure to do broke the system, because that would create a much stronger inference. As TwoSix explained above, however, leaving the bonus action timing of Shield Master up to the player can't break anything.) Your reading is certainly valid. I'm just trying to answer your question as to how it's possible to read it differently.
  • 12:36 AM - pemerton mentioned TwoSix in post I was right about Shield Master
    What would have worked best is if they eliminated the use of a bonus action for the shove entirely. Just have it say, "Once per turn on your turn if you hit a creature that is no more than one size larger than you with a melee attack, you do damage as normal, and as part of that same successful attack you can make a Strength (Athletics) check contested by the target's Strength (Athletics) or Dexterity (Acrobatics) check (the target chooses the ability to use). If you win the contest, you can either knock the target prone or push it 5 feet away from you." That way you still have your bonus action, and there are no timing questions.That's what I take it to mean (subject to the suggestion from epithet and TwoSix that's come out upthread): taking the attack action means taking an attack, but doesn't require finishing taking all those attacks.
  • 12:11 AM - pemerton mentioned TwoSix in post I was right about Shield Master
    The shield bash requires the attack action, regardless of other considerations. If you don't have the Shield Master feat, the shove takes the place of an attack, so any way you parse it a character who makes a shove has taken the attack action.Thanks, that's what TwoSix said also.

Wednesday, 17th October, 2018

  • 03:44 PM - pemerton mentioned TwoSix in post I was right about Shield Master
    ...geably in these sorts of contexts, so - without more to suggest that it matters - I wouldn't treat this as significant. (Eg 4e is full of these sorts of stylistic but - from the rules point of view - meaningless variations which are simply the produce of different writers at different times.) The obvious concern with "if you make an attack" is that it allows multiple uses - which get coralled by the general limit on bonus actions, but nevertheless is an unsettling implication especially in a "specific beats general" ruleset. So I think it's easy to see why they didn't go with that. My own view remains that taking the attack action can't occur independently of making an attack roll, any more than brushing your teeth can take place independently of moving your tooth brush - in both cases the latter is not the totality of the former, but is an essential constituent of the former occurring. To me, that therefore implies that the bonus action must come after that first attack. But TwoSix's clever (if in some sense unsatisfying) argument about the practical irrelevance of policing the bonus vs non-bonus action in the event that the non-bonus action doesn't come to pass offers a pratical gameplay reason to expand the reading the natural language would otherwise suggest. My final interpretation would be driven by balance concerns - ie is it too strong to get to do your shove for all your attacks rather than some - but I'm not going to try and work that out (certainly not in the context of this thread!, and I don't think I'm competent to attempt it at all).
  • 03:21 PM - pemerton mentioned TwoSix in post I was right about Shield Master
    ... it can't be nested. The "on your turn" bit isn't a trigger, it's just a reminder of the scope.I guess I don't find the contrast between "scope" and "trigger" very helpful for understanding or parsing these rules. I mean, I feel that I could deploy that distinction to say that the "scope" of the Shield Master bonus action is a turn in which the Attack action is taken - and that action is taken (although not necessarily fully resolved, if I have an Extra attack) as soon as I attack on my turn. And now there's no "nesting". Conversely, I feel like I can insist that Cunning Action does have a trigger - to wit, when you take a turn in combat. (Ie I can't take the bonus action, effectively doubling my speed, in ordinary movement situations.) And now there is nesting. You can't simply assume people will reach a conclusion that fits your definition of reasonable or rational.Of course not. But I can put forward what I think are good or bad reasons for various interpretations. Until TwoSix provided me with the reasoning not far upthread, it seemed pretty clear to me that the attack action has to be taken to trigger the bonus action; but the inherent oddity of extra attack within the game together with the movement example makes it pretty clear to me that one takes the attack action by making an attack on one's turn, and then the exra attacks play out in a rather flexible way, which if it can include 15' of movement can probably include a bonus action as well. So if this gets characterised as "nesting" well I just don't see what the problem is. Nesting doesn't seem to be a concept that occurs in the rules, or that one needs to explain or apply the rules. It seems to be an external concept introduced for the sake of tidiness. Can a rogue who is Dashing as part of a cunning action drop something as s/he moves (but not at the beginning or end of the move)? I assume so - the rules don't contain a notion of "nesting" that makes me doubt it. I should add - the oddness ...

Tuesday, 16th October, 2018

  • 11:28 PM - pemerton mentioned TwoSix in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    To be perfectly honest, it didnít really occur to me that this would be contentious.That surprises me! Although there are a wide variety of approaches expressed on ENworld (I'll point to eg Aldarc, TwoSix, Nagol in this thread), there is a default or dominant approach which is that RPGing = the GM establishes a fiction (which typically will take the form of some sort of "story") and the players' role is to work their way through that fiction. Hence any suggestion that players should exercise some control over establishing the fiction will be contentiouos.
  • 02:29 AM - pemerton mentioned TwoSix in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    To me its simple, both sides have to be able to say no without being painted as wrong or bad people or dicks or bad gms or there really is not an honest negotiation or collaboration going on.GM: I don't like running a game with warlocks - it offends my sense of the setting/my sense of decency/I think they're broken/etc. I think that GM is perhaps a bit precious - though, as per TwoSix's game, there's a difference here between a pickup game at a club and a serious game which is expecting a high degree of commitment from all participants. But the case that has been discussed in this thread isn't that sort of saying "no". It's you can play a warlock, but only if I get to muck around with your patron. Which is not actually saying "no" at all! It's about insisting on a certain power to author and muck around with the player's backstory that s/he would like to keep purely in the background, or perhpas would like to use as his/her own colour for the play of his/her PC. I think it's misdescription to characterise that as "saying 'no'", and I think it's bad GMing.

Thursday, 27th September, 2018

  • 02:29 AM - Manbearcat mentioned TwoSix in post Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
    http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/Styles/Blackend/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by TwoSix http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/Styles/Blackend/buttons/viewpost-right.png I think it's probably more around "concept" than it is about "narrative". Not to trivialize other people's play agendas, but I think their focus is on demonstration of backstory, concept, and capabilities, not generation of plot. Where capabilities are in the non-combat but also non-spellcasting sphere, I'm reminded a bit of @Manbearcat's "DCs > 30" thread (which I think was lost in a crash a year or three back). They seem to be heavily gated behind GM decision-making. Do you have thoughts on how this works out in practice? Ah the last thread on these boards that I really invested any headspace and vigor too. It was a good one as well, with a lot of diverse and interesting angles in conversation about game design generally and 5e resolution specifically. Unfortunately, the crash killed it (and a long DW PBP thread I had) and sucked the last vestiges of interest I had in this forum. However, I would be i...

Wednesday, 26th September, 2018

  • 03:09 PM - Oofta mentioned TwoSix in post Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
    TwoSix, Maxperson, Two observations. First, I agree that not all build combinations would make sense. But just taking sub classes times races, we get 2,960 (assuming I counted right) alternatives. Even if 90% of those don't make sense for some reason, that leaves close to 300 options. Heck, make it 99% and throw in a smidgeon of feat/build/multi-class choices (i.e. champion fighter with dex vs strength, sword and board vs great weapon) and I think there are more builds than I could ever personally play. Second is just a general observation that may or may not apply to any specific individual that posts here. I played/judged a lot of living campaigns in 3.x and 4E. In my experience with those campaigns and editions, most people that cared about optimization gravitated to a handful of builds. In other words, to many people the multitude of options in previous editions was an illusion. I get the desire for more options and especially more significant choices at higher levels. I gues...
  • 12:24 PM - pemerton mentioned TwoSix in post Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
    Itís all well and good to describe my attacks differently than Tommy describes his, but if weíre ultimately still rolling the same d20 to see if we can roll the same d8, with maybe slightly different modifiers, then Iím not really doing anything different.I think a lot of people think of roleplaying in terms of the overlaying of colour that doesn't actually change the core of the shared fiction. I think that's essential if eg an AP is also going to be a roleplaying-intensive experience. I'm going to call on TwoSix to see if he will share more thoughts on this, as I'm pretty sure he has some!

Monday, 17th September, 2018

  • 02:29 PM - pemerton mentioned TwoSix in post Curiosity: Demarcation between Personalizing and Homebrew
    I call my games "Greyhawk games" if I'm using GH maps, and most of the proper names - for peoples, nations, cities, etc - come from the GH books. (I tend not to fuss too much about which era maps I use, as I don't follow any particular era for details/minutiae.) I do so even when eg using the Wizards of High Sorcery with their three moons as an ancient Suel order of wizardry still current in the Great Kingdom (because I liked that bit of the DL world); or using a mash-up of GH gods, homemade gods and ancient Egyptian gods for my Suel pantheon; or ignoring the canon about GH vikings being descended from Suel migrants. I don't think that satisfies TwoSix's test - eg you can't just look up some websites and build a WoHS for use in a GH campaign - but I generally don't use that sort of approach to PC building in my games in any event.

Friday, 27th July, 2018

  • 06:24 PM - Tony Vargas mentioned TwoSix in post Mundane/Simple Fighter Pre-build
    ...hat the fraction of folk who actually wanted the boringly simple (which is probably no larger than would want boringly simple blaster casters) can just go somewhere else ;) they have their cake. Nod. Part of the argument for simple options, though, is as a default training-wheels path that can gently introduce new players to the game. It's /hardly/ necessary in the case of 4e, really, since, for all it's depth of options and cloud of chaff feats, it's the clearest & most consistent D&D has ever gotten. In fact, it's counter-productive to do it the way Essentials did, since it actually makes the game less consistent (more complex), and creates a barrier to ever taking those training wheels off. So the idea, here, and I didn't set up the wiki first post well to encourage it, is to build this hypothetical simple (and or mundane) fighter as a default build. A version sticking to the rules would be fine, especially for the 'mundane' side of the exercise, which was the point TwoSix made. What I envisioned was a 'spammer' that just got multiple uses of a single encounter & daily, but could go off the reservation and start retraining them at any time. ... BTW, I don't suppose there's an easy way to format a table in the board's markup that others could easily fill in, is there?

Tuesday, 24th July, 2018

  • 07:11 AM - pemerton mentioned TwoSix in post A discussion of metagame concepts in game design
    ...ill about 2000 years ahead of them. In other words, envisaging a world in which dragons need to flap their wings to fly is not the same thing as envisaging a world in which gravitation as I know it operates. And given that the only treatment of planetary motion in an official D&D sourcde that I'm aware of is Spelljammer, and it's account of planetary motion has nothing to do with gravity at all, there is good reason to think that there is no universal gravitation in the D&D world. What happens in the D&D world if a person tries to measure the density of their world by means of a torsion balance (a la Cavendish)? I think the rulebooks leave this a completely open question - or, rather, they assume that this won't happen. Just the same as, in Traveller, the game just assumes that no one will actually ask what a jump drive is or how one works, because (of course) there is no coherent answer to that. In any event, to return to the logic of the point that I am making (and that TwoSix has made): It does make sense to view D&D as having such scientific categories as gravity and fluid mechanics. It just ALSO has magic, which when applied to the former, supersedes them.It's of the nature of scientific categories that they describe natural phenomena or natural processes that are not arbitrarily "superseded". That's what makes it science. Consider this, from p 58 of Gygax's DMG, under the heading "Travel in the Known Planes of Existence": [S]uppose that you decide that there is a breathable atmosphere which extends from the earth to the moon, and that any winged steed capable of flying fast and far can carry its rider to that orb. Furthermore, once beyond the normal limits of earth's atmosphere, gravity and resistance are such that speed increases dramatically, and the whole journey will take but a few days. You must then decide what will be encountered during the course of the trip - perhaps a few new creatures in addition to the standard ones which you deem...


Page 1 of 9 123456789 LastLast
No results to display...

Monday, 20th May, 2019

  • 06:55 PM - dave2008 quoted TwoSix in post The Final Announcement from The Descent Live Stream: Eberron Hardcover
    Eberron is my favorite setting. Did I need a new hardcover? Nope. Am I happy to buy one? Absolutely. Honestly, I'm down for pretty much any book that isn't an adventure. I wouldn't be surprised if it was an adventure, or at least has an adventure in it. Setting info + NPC/Monster info + setting crunch + adventure seems like a likely format to me.
  • 06:48 PM - Tony Vargas quoted TwoSix in post Favourite D&D edition thatís not 5E
    Can't agree with that; I'd argue the contingent that likes both 4e and 5e is larger than the contingent that only likes 4e.Not to mention liking 4e and some prior editions (I was a straight-up 4venger, but I'm also one of those old guys for whom nothing will ever match what I had with 1e, for instance - and more on that below, since you bring it up...). I like pretty much every edition except 1e, the 1e books always seemed kinda ugly to me, and I never understood why people would go back and play 1e when 2e was right there. THE biggest reason for preferring one older edition is that it's the edition you started with. It's just a powerful emotional connection, I guess. The 1e books graphic design elements were, well, ingenuous, they evinced the enthusiasm-over-experience development of the early game (many early RPGs, in fact). I got the impression that everyone involved in rolling out a 1e book was prettymuch a fan of the game. So it was a sort of charming amateurism, for me, an...

Tuesday, 14th May, 2019

  • 05:10 PM - Dausuul quoted TwoSix in post Need help for character build
    Fair enough. It can't be done using only player facing resources, it requires interaction with the Monster Manual to make work. I still think it's better for the game for the DM to simply define their game world in a way that the concept can fit, rather than to justify the concept with Tippyverse style contortions of monster and spell interactions. That way leads to Pun-pun. :) The main point I wanted to make was that the "laws of magic" in D&D do allow for the binding of dead souls against their will. Mind-blasting and enslaving a wraith is a roundabout way to get there (though I don't think it ventures into Tippyverse territory; it's a reasonable application of the tools available to a 15th-level necromancer), but it shows that it doesn't require a change to anything fundamental about the D&D cosmos. I do agree with you that it would be better to work out a specific solution with the DM. You wouldn't need a custom subclass or anything, just a homebrewed spell would be enough.
  • 03:29 PM - Dausuul quoted TwoSix in post Need help for character build
    The problem is that the concept (bring the dead back to unlife against their will) violates the 5e paradigm for how resurrection, undeath, and souls work. Even True Resurrection, a 9th level spell, can't bring a soul back against its will. It violates how resurrection works; it does not violate how undeath works. Dead souls can be turned into undead against their will. Here's one way of doing it: Cast feeblemind on a wraith, then follow it up with Command Undead. The wraith can then turn the necromancer's victims into specters; a specter is specifically described in the Monster Manual as being a spirit that was prevented from passing to the afterlife. However, you can't pull this stunt until 15th level, so it's likely to be more aspirational than practical.

Friday, 10th May, 2019

  • 11:02 PM - Maxperson quoted TwoSix in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    If a player went out of the way to tell me their PC is not buying a whetstone and refusing to care for their weapons, then I'm going to make a weapon degradation an issue for them. Because they just told me specifically that they want weapon degradation to be a plot point! (Alternatively, they just have a preference for more simulation and realism in their games, which I can then flag as a player-DM mismatch.) Sure. If you add it in for your game, it will be there. Absent you making it an issue, though, it's just not. That brand spanking new sword the bard bought is going to be in the same condition the fighter's 5 year old, well used sword is in, despite the fighter not caring for it. 5e does not have weapon degradation for PCs, whetstone or not. The lack of weapon degradation rules doesn't mean the PCs can't come up with a plan to rust out the contents of an enemy's armory, for example. I agree. I would allow that as well, despite not using a weapon degradation system myse...
  • 02:51 PM - lowkey13 quoted TwoSix in post Hidden
  • 02:48 PM - lowkey13 quoted TwoSix in post Dice Action Camera players in sex scandal!
    Not recently, but I certainly remember groups in college having issues due to some extracurricular bonking. And also, thanks for reminding me of how awesome "bonk" is as an euphemism. That's slipped out of my vocabulary, and now I'm going to bring it back! :) Justin Timberlake, c. 2006- "I'm bringing sexy back." TwoSix, c. 2019- "I'm bringing BONK back!!!!!!"
  • 02:41 PM - tglassy quoted TwoSix in post Dice Action Camera players in sex scandal!
    Sure, but a lot of those people would have been married to each other in our previous, more restrictive, era. There's a lot of self-selection going on now, as people who are married now tend to be more stable and family oriented, as that's why they made the choice to be married. The act of marriage, in and of itself, doesn't make people more stable and family-oriented. (See the OP for an example!) I wouldn't necessarily agree with the first point, as while the divorce rate has been going down, it's still between 40% and 50%. Marriage should always be carefully considered. I think this is why, in times past, a girl's parents had more say in who she married. it wasn't because the parents, usually the father, wanted something out of it, it was because they didn't trust a teenager to know who would be able to take care of her, and they wanted to make sure she was with someone who would treat her right. Sure, you had the fathers who married their daughters off for their own gain, but t...

Wednesday, 8th May, 2019

  • 06:18 PM - OlegRu quoted TwoSix in post Help me with good RP/Optimization balance for Half-Elf (probably)Valor Bard (archer?)
    ... getting Sharpshooter until 8, because it really starts to pay off once your accuracy has improved and you have more ways to generate advantage. (Even without Elven Accuracy, advantage is huge for Sharpshooters.) 7) Yea, can't trade cantrips, but you can trade in one spell for another whenever you level. For Bards, up to level 10 I tend to think of it as you gain 2 spells every level, but lose 1. Spells to choose have to be based on the concept, but for an archer, anything that gives advantage is good. Look for spells that don't require concentration, and any spells that are bonus actions or reactions. 8) Well, with jack of all trades, you'll be decent at a lot of skills. I tend to prefer to put Expertise in skills I have a high stat in, but really, this is something that can definitely be a role-playing choice. I haven't seen too many DMs play a style where any one particular skill check will make or break you, but only you know that about your own game. This reply is to TwoSix and tagging UngeheuerLich as I mentioned. Thanks for continuing the discussion! Unfortunately, Warlock really wouldn't fit into my concept - my char would never make such pacts, and similar case paladin. Some did suggest the 1 lvl dip in fighter for archery fighting style, which I would consider. 1. Yeah that seems to be the main dilemma now - how much and when to focus on CHA vs DEX and certain Feats. I definitely want my guy doing some attacking in combat and prefer for him to usually be doing so in a safer way - that's why the ranged, but I see many saying how important it is to focus on casting power. 2. For CON - yeah 14 would be nice, but there's a few WIS based skills that I'm into, so for that reason I wanted to keep a 12 there, leaving me with only 12 for CON. 3+4. A few people have suggested heavier armor and shield - I guess they are imagining more of a battle-mage type dude. For me personally I want the char to be able to stealth without penalties and also attack...
  • 03:29 PM - UngeheuerLich quoted TwoSix in post How rare is this weapon in our campaign?
    It's an extra action per long rest, not short rest. If it was short rest, I would rate it ahead of the sword +2. If I were a gish, I would probably favor the flexibility of the extra action over the +1 to hit, but I personally tend to favor flexibility over purely numeric concerns. But there's no way the sword as written is anything other than a rare. (Again, judging rarity on mechanical power, not on campaign narrative considerations.) Oh sorry, you are right. With only 1/long rest it is about as powerful in the hands of a fighter. For a paladin who could do a nova round once per day Iīd still rate it higher, because that is really the paladinīs thing and for him it does not really make a difference if it is short or long rest. But I now share your opinion and rate is as rare.
  • 11:34 AM - UngeheuerLich quoted TwoSix in post How rare is this weapon in our campaign?
    Judging purely on power level, this is at best a rare. It's a bit worse than a sword +2, which is also a rare. No. 5% bonus to hit is not as good as an extra action surge. Even if you get it at level 1, you need to make 20 attacks per short rest so that an extra +1 to hit will make a difference. An extra attack of a fighter usually hits with more than 50% chance. So you need more than 10 attack that the extra +1 to hit is better than an extra chance to hit.That proportion actually does not change a lot with extra attacks. It is even better though, because you might use it for extra movement so you actually might make an attack when the +2 weapon wielder does nothing. I also ignored the possibility of hitting twice as much and I ignored advantage and crits. I don't know about your campaign, but getting an extra attack when you want seems better to me than having chance determine when you hit that one more time.

Tuesday, 7th May, 2019

  • 12:34 AM - Zardnaar quoted TwoSix in post Help me with good RP/Optimization balance for Half-Elf (probably)Valor Bard (archer?)
    I wouldn't go that far. A bard isn't as good an archer as a fighter or ranger, for sure. But archer-bard is one of the few ways to do a full caster that doesn't sacrifice a tremendous amount to get a good at-will attack pattern, outside of a sorlock or bardlock. My personal recommendation for an archer bard with point buy would be to go elf if possible, ideally eladrin (or drow if Mordenkainen's tome of foes isn't available). 15 Dex to start with a 17 after the +2, 13 Cha to bump to 14, 14 Con, and 12, 10, 8 (or 10, 10, 10) into the other stats to taste. Grab Elven Accuracy as your level 4 feat (which bumps Dex to 18), and Sharpshooter at 8. (You can flip these if you'd like, but Sharpshooter really takes off once you can leverage Elven Accuracy.) Your standard tactics are to get advantage by any means necessary, and pump out 2 bow shots a round, and use your bonus actions to hand out Inspiration Dice. Greater Invisibility at level 7 will be a godsend of a 4th level spell, and o...

Monday, 6th May, 2019


Friday, 3rd May, 2019

  • 08:56 PM - Umbran quoted TwoSix in post "straight" rolls in D&D
    I would agree with this in the general case, but in this specific case (the characters are already level 16, and probably only have a handful of sessions left before the game ends), I think an all-or-nothing approach might be better. And, of course, if that's the case, and there's a big battle climax, who should the PCs be fighting?
  • 06:00 PM - CapnZapp quoted TwoSix in post "straight" rolls in D&D
    Depends on if diverting the narrative and/or expending party resources would be considered a negative in CapnZapp's game. From the overall tenor of his posts, I think it might be, but of course I can't know for sure. A bit too many double negatives there for me to follow, but I think I should say: yes :p Diverting the narrative isn't a cost that makes my players avoid power-ups. My players are generally fine with the story taking whatever path, as long as it gives them opportunities to excel in combat. The sure-fire way to make my players avoid something, on the other hand, is if it represents personal failure on some level, with the ultimate cost being permanent penalties (fewer hit points, lower attack bonuses, etc). Even "your character is dead/retired" is preferable to having to keep playing a character below maximum efficiency. There is a reason players dreaded "level drain"... So a "cost" of "as penance you must slay three dragons" is considered a straight reward. A cos...
  • 04:28 PM - Umbran quoted TwoSix in post "straight" rolls in D&D
    If your character replacement rules are generous, feel free to make the risk large. If character replacement is problematic, you need to make the risk smaller and/or demonstrate that fixing the alignment change is a possible avenue to get the players to jump on the item and take on the risk. If you can fix the alignment change, it isn't really a risk, though. Or, it is only as risky as the fix is...

Tuesday, 30th April, 2019


Friday, 26th April, 2019

  • 12:01 AM - dnd4vr quoted TwoSix in post Proficiency vs Non-Proficiency
    To be honest, my gut instinct is ďthis question feels like a trap.Ē Darn! You caught me, Admiral. ;) It would kind of depend on the skill. Some skills should have less variance in possible results than the other. Valid, but since I am talking about attacks/skills in general, I just wanted people to follow their gut overall. My own take is I don't have any particular gut feeling or other expectation about how those numbers should shake out. "Should" is a risky mindset to have in a game that shares elements with childhood games of make-believe and is driven by imagination. In my view, such a game is better approached with the mindset of "could," "might," "may," or "can" rather than a mindset of "should", "would," or "must." So however that math works out (and I'd be interested to see the numbers), it's fine by me. After all, maybe that's just how it works in this world of swords and sorcery. Should versus any other word-choice is mostly a matter of semantics. "Could" works ...


TwoSix's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites