View Profile: Mistwell - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • MoonSong's Avatar
    Today, 02:03 AM
    A bit of an observation, the edition war was between 3e and 4e players, yet somehow the grognards won? I think lowkey is up to something. Not exactly correct, but partially right for the wrong reasons at least. I mean I think that WotC is in the best position to give us a good quality list and stuff to make gold worth it, in the same way I think they can give us a good warlord. However...
    745 replies | 83346 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Sunday, 11th November, 2018, 01:07 AM
    For a ruler, I am usually going to stat it out like this: 12 inches on one side, and 30 cm on the other. I then break each side down further, with 1/16th marks on the inch side, and mm marks on the cm side. I usually place larger tick marks at regions like 1/2 inch, and 1/4 inch.
    54 replies | 1675 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Wednesday, 7th November, 2018, 11:42 PM
    Unlimited uses...you know how that would be used most of the time. I mean, you're thinking UNLIMITED POWER! MUHAHAHAHA! But really it would be this...
    10 replies | 430 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Wednesday, 7th November, 2018, 07:30 PM
    I find ranged attacking is overrated. First, let's assume you're using published adventures. Not everyone does of course, but it's one objective baseline to draw from, and we don't have sufficient data on homebrew campaigns to draw any objective data. That said: 1) Published adventures on average tend to emphasize dungeons, and in particular dungeons which do not offer the ability for...
    108 replies | 3376 view(s)
    1 XP
  • MoonSong's Avatar
    Wednesday, 7th November, 2018, 04:31 AM
    But isn't that still something external not internal?
    46 replies | 1411 view(s)
    0 XP
  • MoonSong's Avatar
    Wednesday, 7th November, 2018, 01:08 AM
    I'm reluctant to watch the show, I've liked Sabrina for a long time. And I don't mean just the Sitcom, I used to watch the cartoons as a kid-and I don't mean the Disney and postDisney ones-. To me Sabrina is meant to be this cutesy and lighthearted thing; I'm not ready to see it as scary and chilling black humor. Also I'm not a fan of the devil pact in the new adaptation, I liked that witch just...
    46 replies | 1411 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Tuesday, 6th November, 2018, 08:44 PM
    What level is your Druid, and what subclass?
    13 replies | 355 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Monday, 5th November, 2018, 08:22 PM
    It is not. Wizards are quite powerful in 5e, and coherent. I'd say they rival the top of the list in terms of power, and definitely do not need a power boost for that. In terms of coherency of the class, their "thing" is utility. They have extremely high level of flexibility to deal with almost any kind of challenge the party might encounter. That's not a bug, it's a feature.
    60 replies | 1708 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Saturday, 3rd November, 2018, 10:16 PM
    The way you think is fascinating sometimes.
    75 replies | 3459 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Friday, 2nd November, 2018, 11:50 PM

    75 replies | 3459 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Thursday, 1st November, 2018, 06:43 PM
    I would think they would list plate armor simply as a magic item and let it be purchased that way. As for consumables, yeah that sounds like an issue. They probably should add some special allowance for class-based consumable expenses.
    20 replies | 861 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Thursday, 1st November, 2018, 04:24 PM
    So basically a change to XP based on roughly hours played, and a change to treasure based on a spendable point system rather than actual items?
    20 replies | 861 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Thursday, 1st November, 2018, 03:39 PM
    Can you summarize the changes and why you think each change was made?
    20 replies | 861 view(s)
    0 XP
  • MoonSong's Avatar
    Wednesday, 31st October, 2018, 05:05 PM
    No, it is a punishment, because otherwise those souls would go to the plane they are aligned with. The whole wall is an extortion racket from the FR deities to suck every last ounce of power from the inhabitants of the Realms.
    756 replies | 48825 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Monday, 29th October, 2018, 10:35 PM
    Wow. Not sure why it's not an attack, but that is a distinction Crawford makes.
    1022 replies | 1137133 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Sunday, 28th October, 2018, 04:59 AM
    These discussions should really take place assuming no feats. It's usually the feats that mess things up, and they do remain an optional rule.
    80 replies | 2899 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Friday, 26th October, 2018, 11:05 PM
    I am not seeing the math you are seeing. Could you please spell that whole thing out? Doesn't look at all overpowered to me, when you compare to the d8 weapon and shield, or two handed weapon user.
    80 replies | 2899 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Friday, 26th October, 2018, 03:31 AM
    It's martial melee weapon users we're discussing. Not simple weapon users. We have a good amount of data on weapons used with shields, and they're longsword, warhammer, and battleaxe. Spear and Dagger didn't even rank I seem to recall. Shortsword only ranks for actual two weapon fighting PCs, not those who use a shield. I seem to recall this is data from DnD Beyond? We also know modern WOTC...
    80 replies | 2899 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th October, 2018, 11:44 PM
    Let's stop there. Spear is one of the worst weapons in the game. I like the spear because of the classicness of it from literature and mythology, but in terms of D&D it's a terrible representative of how weapons work. You might consider a longsword or warhammer instead.
    80 replies | 2899 view(s)
    0 XP
  • MoonSong's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th October, 2018, 10:40 PM
    I work backwards. I don't particularly care for potential player's politics. And any politics will be window dressing to the campaign/plot. I mean I'm a luddite with a particular disdain of A.I., but you'd be hard pressed to ever find a campaign that is about seizing the means of production and topple down the evil robot overlords...
    91 replies | 2672 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th October, 2018, 09:50 PM
    Right and in that case it's exactly as if you had a shield...but at the requirement of a light weapon in your other hand. Seems fair. You can wield a 1d8 weapon which does 1d10 (versitile) and a shield, or you can wield a 1d6 weapon and a second light weapon which functions as a shield if you don't attack with it.
    80 replies | 2899 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th October, 2018, 08:06 PM
    Is it? It's roughly +5 AC if you give up your action (dodge) and +2 if you use only one weapon (shield). Here it's +2 AC if you take a -4 to your attack, AND you do less damage with those attacks (because all non-light weapons do more damage than light weapons). Seems right in the pocket for where the AC bonus should be for what you're sacrificing.
    80 replies | 2899 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th October, 2018, 06:00 AM
    Snarky error message
    247 replies | 19950 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Wednesday, 24th October, 2018, 08:44 PM
    Ganymede81 tell me again how FrogReaver could not have possibly been saying that a styrofoam weapon which looks similar to a real weapon would not do the real weapon's damage by the Rules As Written. I dare yah! I told you he was reading the rules that literally, to that level of absurdity. I was not wrong. He really is, as can be seen in his appleseed argument.
    167 replies | 3606 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Wednesday, 24th October, 2018, 08:40 PM
    I think the point here is that FrogReaver has some fundamental issue with gray areas in RPG rules. That it must be black and white or else it's flawed rules.
    167 replies | 3606 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Wednesday, 24th October, 2018, 08:35 PM
    Yes I do. Because it's expected you're not a martinet slavishly devoted to some "Rules As Written" concept. "Rules As Written" is an issue which was some prior editions of the game, but really isn't an issue for 5e. As stated in the DMG, "The D&D rules help you and the other players have a good time, but the rules aren't in charge. You're the DM, and you are in charge of the game." And from...
    167 replies | 3606 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Wednesday, 24th October, 2018, 02:11 AM
    The second paragraph spells out the first two levels. You treat it as the weapon damage if it's "similar". And then "At the DM's option, a character proficient with a weapon can use a similar object ". To me, the DMs option is saying "DM decides - is it so similar that it's 'as if it were that weapon' (the language of the rule)?" If yes, may use proficiency. If on the other hand it's not that...
    167 replies | 3606 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd October, 2018, 11:26 PM
    Me either. Worked that time. Huh. Weird glitch.
    167 replies | 3606 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd October, 2018, 06:39 PM
    I think for me, I'd allow mace damage but no proficiency bonus, unless the player made a compelling enough argument about a particular kind of shield which is so similar to an actual weapon that it should allow proficiency. I see three types of improvised weapons in the rules. 1. An improvised weapon so similar to an actual weapon that it can be treated as the actual weapon: use proficiency...
    167 replies | 3606 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd October, 2018, 03:48 PM
    Not sure why you added my name to this list (and poorly as it didn't work but fortunately I just happened to see it) but my argument is the area of the shield you're hitting with is "similar" enough to a mace to be treated as a mace for purposes of using the maces damage die. You disagree and wouldn't play it that way in your game, which is fine. You however want me to say this is somehow a house...
    167 replies | 3606 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd October, 2018, 03:37 PM
    Right, hence the debate we have here. Where one side, represented almost entirely by you, says there is only one way to intepret this rule. And the other side, represented by I think 7 people at this point, say there is another interpretation of this rule and both views are valid. And only one of those sides is calling the other sides views "outlandish" and it's the side represented by one guy....
    167 replies | 3606 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd October, 2018, 02:32 AM
    Hey I am not the one that started this RAW vs House Rules debate man. If you're willing to say it's simply an interpretation of the rules which, while it does not match your personal interpretation of the rules, nevertheless remains one rational way to adjudicated it under the rules, then no further debate occurs. You're the guy who said everyone who disagrees with him on this issue is making...
    167 replies | 3606 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd October, 2018, 12:10 AM
    Then you're not presenting your position clear enough for people to understand. So far everyone who has replied to you either read it the way I read it, or defended you by saying surely you're just being imprecise...without attempting to clarify what it would mean if you had been precise. So...what is your position, if we're all wrong about what your position is? You repeatedly said...
    167 replies | 3606 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd October, 2018, 12:07 AM
    No I truly honestly believe he had not considered the implications of his position, and that he was wrong, and I hope that example will lead him to modifying his position. That's kinda one of the main reasons we discuss things, isn't it? Everyone experiences it sometimes where they don't really think through all the ramifications of their position and realize they were wrong when it's pointed...
    167 replies | 3606 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Monday, 22nd October, 2018, 10:00 PM
    Yes, I definitely think that's what Frog means. Pretty sure he's clarified it several times to mean look similar, and not be about weight or material or striking portion. For example, there is this clarification Frog made to his position, "The force a shield can apply resembles the force a mace can apply. But the rules don’t talk about forces. They talk about object 1 resembling object 2." ...
    167 replies | 3606 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Monday, 22nd October, 2018, 09:39 PM
    No, it is not in my opinion limited to physically similar. I think physically similar is one aspect of similar you can use, but it's not the only one. For exmple if you used an object which looks exactly like a mace but it's made of styrofoam, it's not similar enough to a mace for the purposes of this rule. Because whether or not the object can actually hit with the force of a mace, or with the...
    167 replies | 3606 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Monday, 22nd October, 2018, 09:18 PM
    No. The moment you attack with your shield, you're no longer "wielding...no other weapons".
    167 replies | 3606 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Monday, 22nd October, 2018, 08:58 PM
    I believe sage advice said it does. Sage advice relatively recently answered that armor spikes cannot benefit from it because they are not held. As the shield is held, then the corallary of the sage advice implies that yes it should.
    167 replies | 3606 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Monday, 22nd October, 2018, 08:22 PM
    I agree with him that the portion of the shield you're hitting the foe with most closely resembles a hit from a club. I think I am the fourth or fifth person in this thread who agrees with him that's one reasonable judgement call. So you calling his decision outlandish? Consider the possibility it's your view that's outside the mainstream on this one.
    167 replies | 3606 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st October, 2018, 03:35 AM
    I disagree. I think it's one reasonable existing interpretation of the rules, right now pre-errata, to say once you've issued a command to your animal companion, it will keep on doing that same thing until you issue another command to it. So if you order it to attack in round 1, and don't order it to do anything else in round 2, it will continue to attack in round 2 without the use of the...
    61 replies | 3755 view(s)
    1 XP
  • MoonSong's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st October, 2018, 03:16 AM
    Perhaps However this is the internet. We are in an American site owned by an English gentleman with posters from all over the globe and that is this site alone. If you were to find my stuff in the wild you'd never know a thing about myself including my frame of reference. Maybe I just don't want to antagonize either side and just share things that come from the heart and reflect...
    91 replies | 2672 view(s)
    0 XP
  • MoonSong's Avatar
    Friday, 19th October, 2018, 11:59 PM
    I'm more of the idea that it's the other way around, one's own perspectives, thoughts, and morals shape our political views. Or at least it goes both ways. I have a problem with this -funny how we agree on lots of stuff but this isn't the case-, art is a fuzzy thing, but the one thing that makes art, art is intentionality. No intentionality, no art. No art, no statement. And the onus of...
    91 replies | 2672 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Friday, 19th October, 2018, 10:52 PM
    Our lack of adequate built in funny gifs? Oh you mean the Internet. You're describing a general problem with the Internet and ascribing it in particular to this message board. Not really fair. As this message board is part of the Internet, the default assumption should be that people will discuss the extremes. Not really something you can blame on this board. That's like complaining about...
    61 replies | 3755 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Friday, 19th October, 2018, 10:43 PM
    Wow. You appear to either of mispoken earlier, or forgotten what you said, or are shifting your argument. Here is what you said, "The most common and popular bonus actions almost all have an attack action tied to them." We were never discussing if some bonus actions are tied to attack actions. Of course some are...we've all been discussing one in this thread. I was replying to you claiming the...
    247 replies | 6593 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Friday, 19th October, 2018, 09:29 PM
    I think we call those platinum diggers.
    253 replies | 10283 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Friday, 19th October, 2018, 09:27 PM
    I listed the instances I am seeing most often are unconnected to the attack action. I explained how I entered the optimization guides and they also use them unconnected to attack actions more often. Your reply of "there's no debate about it, it's just simple fact" is provably false. I will repeat it again: The most common uses I've seen have no attack action tied to them (and are usually...
    247 replies | 6593 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Friday, 19th October, 2018, 08:52 PM
    I disagree. The most common uses I've seen have no attack action tied to them (and are usually affiliated with a spell, though not always). Things like Cunning Action, Flaming Sphere, Create Undead, Tiny Servant, Dancing Lights, Unseen Servant, Grasping Vines, Expeditious retreat, Healing Spirit, Shield of Faith, Spirtual Weapon, Hex, Hunter's Mark, Far Step, Healing Word, etc..I guess our...
    247 replies | 6593 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Friday, 19th October, 2018, 06:59 PM
    I disagree. They feel pretty well developed to me - it's just that they are not primarily about "abilities" but are instead role playing hooks. Used that way, they function pretty well. Particularly since it's often those role playing traits which get you inspiration... I keep hearing this, and I just don't get it. We've used them for 5 years now. We don't forget them, ever. We don't...
    253 replies | 10283 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Friday, 19th October, 2018, 06:50 PM
    In general, they don't. The general rule, right from the basic rules, is "You choose when to take a bonus action during your turn, unless the bonus action's timing is specified." Bonus actions were designed, as a concept, to not require triggers. Only the exceptions in a specific rule changes that.
    247 replies | 6593 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Friday, 19th October, 2018, 05:02 AM
    The rules are public. Anyone can see them and read them. There is no such charge. Mike Mearls was even asked on Twitter about why some stores charge. His answer was it was up to each store or DM, and some do it to pay for their costs (stores don't receive all the material for free). WOTC has nothing to do with the fee though.
    60 replies | 2323 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th October, 2018, 11:57 PM
    Say what now? Nope. Read again:
    247 replies | 6593 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th October, 2018, 08:52 PM
    This isn't a thing. Or I should say, this isn't a thing about AL. There is no charge for AL from WOTC. There is no requirement in any way that AL games charge to play, any more than there ever was a charge to play in Pathfider Society. If you are encountering a fee, it's purely that game store doing it, or some DM doing it. It has literally nothing to do with AL. There is no "AL Fee". And I...
    60 replies | 2323 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th October, 2018, 07:39 PM
    Nope. He never says he ruled against RAW. He never once mentions that phrase Rules As Written. The fact he, and Mike Mearls for that matter, both had conflicting and contradictory interpretations tells us, without any debate needed further, that the Rules As Written were not clear. That they needed intepretation, and that it wasn't that easy to intepret it because the guys who wrote it were not...
    247 replies | 6593 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th October, 2018, 11:04 PM
    I am using wording specific to the feat :)
    247 replies | 6593 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th October, 2018, 10:42 PM
    The original interpretation allowed the melee attacker to attack at advantage with often multiple attacks. This version, while not using a bonus action, also doesn't cause advantage for the attacker as often. So I am not sure it's "more powerful" than the original interpretation. I am also unsure why it took a bonus action to begin with - you're not doing anything extra by knocking someone down...
    247 replies | 6593 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th October, 2018, 10:39 PM
    DOWNVOTES ARE 3 Ghoul 8 Revenant 5 Shadow 10 Skeleton 17 Wight 15 Wraith 22
    549 replies | 8414 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th October, 2018, 09:32 PM
    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...
    247 replies | 6593 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th October, 2018, 08:59 PM
    Except the prior logic follows the established RAW/RAI for triggers that was established with Bonus Actions (as opposed to Reactions). As Jeremy Crawford points out in his response, "As with most bonus actions, you choose the timing..."
    247 replies | 6593 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th October, 2018, 08:45 PM
    For those saying this is purely a Rules As Written or Rules As Intended issue: Are you guys arguing the Rules As Written changed since these tweets despite no errata to this rule? Are you guys arguing the Rules As intended changed such that the tweets made closer in time to the point where these guys wrote these rules are less reliable concerning their then-recent intent than...
    247 replies | 6593 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th October, 2018, 07:34 PM
    Normally I'd agree. But when that game designer issues a ruling on how a rule works, and the ruling is 100% clear, and then three years later he issues a different and completely opposite ruling, and that different and completely opposite ruling is also 100% clear, we're now in a territory where the designer of that rule isn't sure how he meant it to work in the first place. He really, honestly...
    247 replies | 6593 view(s)
    6 XP
  • Mistwell's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th October, 2018, 08:08 PM
    Are you a time traveller? Are you lost in time? Is your internet connection so slow that you posted this at the beginning of the year and it only now finally was submitted?
    247 replies | 6593 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Warpiglet's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th October, 2018, 02:48 PM
    Warpiglet replied to Green hag CR
    I actually have a green hag as a main villain right now...she is posing as a good religious figure in exile. I don't plan to make it easy. First, she will have minions. Secondly, she is hard to track! If she goes invisible and runs, the party better have a good plan to catch her! A big greatsword does little to someone who is no longer there. I don't think they are all that tough frankly. ...
    6 replies | 424 view(s)
    0 XP
No More Results
About Mistwell

Basic Information

Date of Birth
May 8, 1969 (49)
About Mistwell
Location:
Van Nuys, CA
Sex:
Male
Age Group:
Over 40
Social Networking

If you can be contacted on social networks, feel free to mention it here.

Google+:
Mistwell
Twitter:
YetiMoose
My Game Details

Details of games currently playing and games being sought.

Town:
Van Nuys
State:
California
Country:
USA
Game Details:
D&D Next

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
13,772
Posts Per Day
2.25
Last Post
How do you stat out rulers such as kings and queens in your games? Sunday, 11th November, 2018 01:07 AM
Albums
Total Albums
1
Total Photos
1

Currency

Gold Pieces
93
General Information
Last Activity
Today 04:07 AM
Join Date
Monday, 4th February, 2002
Home Page
http://www.buyclassrings.com
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
4

10 Friends

  1. chibi graz'zt chibi graz'zt is offline

    Member

    chibi graz'zt
  2. Corwin Corwin is offline

    Member

    • Send a message via AIM to Corwin
    Corwin
  3. DeeRealLife DeeRealLife is offline

    Member

    DeeRealLife
  4. Dinkeldog Dinkeldog is offline

    Sniper o' the Shrouds

    • Send a message via AIM to Dinkeldog
    Dinkeldog
  5. merchantsteve merchantsteve is offline

    Member

    merchantsteve
  6. MoonSong MoonSong is offline

    Member

    MoonSong
  7. Patrick McGill Patrick McGill is offline

    Member

    Patrick McGill
  8. spyscribe spyscribe is offline

    Member

    spyscribe
  9. surfarcher surfarcher is offline

    Member

    surfarcher
  10. Warpiglet Warpiglet is offline

    Member

    Warpiglet
Showing Friends 1 to 10 of 10
My Game Details
Town:
Van Nuys
State:
California
Country:
USA
Game Details:
D&D Next
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Wednesday, 14th November, 2018


Tuesday, 13th November, 2018


Sunday, 11th November, 2018


Thursday, 8th November, 2018


Wednesday, 7th November, 2018


Monday, 5th November, 2018


Sunday, 4th November, 2018


Saturday, 3rd November, 2018



Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Page 1 of 12 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Tuesday, 23rd October, 2018

  • 11:23 PM - FrogReaver mentioned Mistwell in post Shield Attacks and AC Bonus
    Not sure why you added my name to this list (and poorly as it didn't work but fortunately I just happened to see it) but my argument is the area of the shield you're hitting with is "similar" enough to a mace to be treated as a mace for purposes of using the maces damage die. You disagree and wouldn't play it that way in your game, which is fine. You however want me to say this is somehow a house rule and not an intepretation of the rules, and that's not fine. I've never said there is no rule...I've said the existing rules allow for my intepretation of them. I still have no idea why saying Mistwell didn't work.

Tuesday, 9th October, 2018

  • 09:28 PM - Ristamar mentioned Mistwell in post What if Expertise were a simple +2?
    I agree, but those feats were more-or-less examples. The UA feats and the Prodigy feat grant expertise plus a small package of other abilities, providing additional context for the question posed by Mistwell. We already know the Skilled feat in the PHB provides three skill proficiencies and no ability score increase. The designers have also stated that a tool proficiency is typically less valuable than skill proficiency, and languages are typically less valuable than tools. As such, expertise in one skill or tool seems to be worth about half a feat, at best.

Tuesday, 18th September, 2018

  • 09:39 PM - Parmandur mentioned Mistwell in post 4 years of 5E on Amazon: same old same old
    ...bers of D&D in reports. It may have had a mention, but it's not been like MtG which is named and in instances we see how much it actually is making for Hasbro. Anyways, I tracked down the source of the information people were thinking about, and found out what it's all about. I'm happy to let you guys go on with your party now that I know what all of it is really about. On your link thing though...I really have no idea what you are talking about or referring to. Most of the links that I see and things posted are on how the books are selling on Amazon, not the Hasbro stock reports. Right now they are up 2 from when I last mentioned them (they were at 105 around at that time, currently at this point they are 107.62 high right now). I don't think I'm going against your numbers anymore now that I know the REASON why they probably are advertising it like they are with those numbers and an actual plausible explanation of where they got those numbers in the first place. Mistwell (who, IIRC, is both a Hasbro stockholder and a lawyer) is referring to your post, #133, which quotes Jester David in post #130, wherein can be found three links providing details of the Hasbro CEO discussing D&D in a stockholder facing context: that is, not a marketing context, but an actionable stockholder communication. The local paper article is interesting because it provides a solid number, but it is in line with what Hasbro has communicated to stockholders.

Wednesday, 29th August, 2018

  • 10:12 PM - Chaosmancer mentioned Mistwell in post Revised Ranger update
    ... win? [citation needed] Actually, just because the Basic rules are free doesn't mean people even know they exist. I certainly didn't tell my new players about it, because it is a poor version of the PHB and I always allow people to peruse my Player's Handbook so there is no need to tell them about the Basic Rules online. And, I think Yunru has a fair point I had not considered. There is a taboo on the players looking through the Monster Manual, but alternatively, all of the best companion choices are not in the Player's Handbook and are intstead in the Monster Manual. Yes, a proper DM should make those stats available to the player, but it would not be something a new player would see on their own. An animal companion is meant to be used strategically and support your own abilities and powers, not provide another party tank. That is completely unreasonable. Before level 5 or level 7, how does the Companion do this. Yes, Mistwell has talked a lot about the help action, but you are four levels deep into the subclass by that point. Is getting the equivalent of the True Strike Cantrip a valuable use of your time at levels 3 and 4? Sure, you could also have it stand somewhere and threaten opportunity attacks. But, either the enemy will be engaged with another PC (in which case the animal will be ignored as it is not contributing to the fight) or the animal will be 1v1 (in which case the enemy might kill the beast, use their action to disengage and move towards the backline, or simply take the relatively weak attack of the beast). This also puts the full tactical value of your beast on the DMs whims, because the DM gets to decide what the enemy does and you just have to hope it is what you were expecting. These spells and feats aren’t taxes, they are trade offs. And if having your animal companion be a DPR boosting meat shield is what you want out of it, you should have to pay for that with other ...
  • 06:09 PM - Satyrn mentioned Mistwell in post Revised Ranger update
    I am pretty sure at least Chaosmancer addressed them...I'm not trying to criticize, they're all fine as ideas, but the fighting style comes on at a different level than when they would get the companion, and the feats and spells are "taxes" that the Beastmaster has to use to make his subclass abilities be on par with the other subclasses who can use their feats and spells for additional things. Like I asked someone else: why couldn't those ideas just be subclass features? They can be. I even talked to Mistwell about simply giving the benefits of his suggested fighting style to the beastmaster directly, and added that to my notes as my preferred fix.

Tuesday, 28th August, 2018

  • 10:53 PM - Gradine mentioned Mistwell in post Revised Ranger update
    ...p that got caught in the battle. Honestly, my first thoughts when I hear "animal companion" are Aladdin and the PS2 cult action game Mark of Kri. Also, you know, The Beastmaster, who, yes, fights alongside a tiger, but for my money gets a lot more mileage out of his eagle and ferret companions. Helpful in a pinch but not something I'd expect to fight right at my side against anything more threatening that, say, a bugbear. Also, if I'm fighting a bugbear alongside my trusty wolf, and the bugbear starts attacking my wolf because he sees it as the bigger threat, there's something that's gone horribly wrong and has little to do with the construction of the class or its features. And that's it. 1 manoeuvrability option, and a couple of support options that mostly require charging straight to the animal companion's death. I exaggerated a bit on the straight maneuverability options (though you are discounting how useful the prone condition for getting in and out of harm's way). Mistwell once again clearly demonstrates some of the other ways different animal companions can be handy in a fight, but you've helpfully ignored those (and basically everything else I said). Again, what you seem to be asking for is something at least approaches the same level of combat functionality and survivability as another PC. I posit that that is an unreasonable request.
  • 09:57 PM - Gradine mentioned Mistwell in post Revised Ranger update
    Because "Being able to fight and take a hit" is in no way "ewuivalent to a PC"? The fact that I have to even explain that boggles the mind. 1) @Mistwell has already covered the numerous ways in which various animal companions are "able to fight", just not in the meat-shield manner you seem to hold as the only way to accomplish this 2) At what point is "being able to take a hit" necessary to be engaged in a fight? My wizard buddy can't really take many hits either, after all. Again, it is clear that you have a very precise expectation for what a Ranger's companion is supposed to be able to do. What is also clear (and the issue that is actually being discussed at the moment) is that there is nothing in the overall text of this current edition of D&D that would have reasonably given you that expectation with regards to the Beastmaster Ranger. You are instead relying on overly literal interpretations of this text (and the arguments of those responding to you) to try to make some obtuse semantic point. It is not working. Again, @Mistwell has pointed out that there are plenty of places across the internet that have taken the impetus to bui...

Friday, 24th August, 2018

  • 10:43 PM - Oofta mentioned Mistwell in post Missing Rules
    ...en DMs weren't allowed to alter or ignore rules. Oh wait... There are two questions here that I'm finding interesting. 1) Are rulings in some sense superior to rules? 2) Does whatever we decide about 1) entail that rules mean anything we want them to mean? In looking at those questions, I ask other questions like - why buy rule books? what allows us to recognise a D&D game as a D&D game? what did we want from rules anyway? My working premise is something like - Rules are a stable and meaningful foundation. They continue to have meaning even if we can alter or ignore them as we choose. We can have meaningful, resolvable debates about rules. A claim that rules mean whatever a given DM wants them to mean is not only unhelpful, in terms of the analysis of rules, but also false. A DM can alter or ignore the meaning, but cannot erase the meaning. As an aside, I think their meaning can be erased through removing them from context, i.e. rules only have meaning, given context. What Mistwell said, with a little extra. I would say there's a line between a ruling and a house rule that most people would recognize (not all, this is the internet of course). How you handle jumping an "unusually long distance" for example is a ruling. The rules are silent on the subject other than to say that sometimes it can be done. It gives no DCs, no instructions on whether you just state your character is going to jump further than usual or need a pogo-stick or roll a percentile die. So how it happens IMHO is a ruling. I make a ton of rulings all the time. It's just part of running a smooth game and can change the flavor of the game without changing core assumptions. On the other hand, I have a handful of house rules for when I explicitly override the clear intent of a rule in the book. For example, I've always thought the way certain items replace ability scores instead of enhancing them is dumb. A two year old should not be able to but on a belt and be able to lift a hor...

Thursday, 23rd August, 2018

  • 01:55 AM - Maxperson mentioned Mistwell in post Missing Rules
    There is a different between clear rules and ambiguous rules and between reading and hostile reading. There was no "hostile" reading. "Hostile" just a buzzword you are using. My reading is as it is written. It has two opposing rules. One says each magic missile targets a creature. The other says several creatures. You and I(assume you anyway) have the advantage of having played the game before, so we are aware of what Magic Missile is intended to do. New players are extremely unlikely to be on forums or twitter, or look online for errata. If Mistwell's completely unsubstantiated claim that 50% of the people who play 5e are new players to the game, there are a lot of people who are going to be confused by the contradiction in the Magic Missile rules.

Wednesday, 22nd August, 2018

  • 10:19 PM - CleverNickName mentioned Mistwell in post Favorite Flanking Fixes in Five-E?
    in 4e you got a +2 bonus to hit Personally that seems to small to me. Ever tried to fight two people at once. It ain't like the movies I will tell you that. I thank advantage is actually more realisticThis is what Mistwell was saying also. Getting a +2 to hit is not a bad solution, and it would feel very familiar to my group.

Monday, 23rd July, 2018

  • 12:23 AM - Blue mentioned Mistwell in post [GUIDE] Guide for optimized Sorcerer
    It's a bit disconcerting that you don't mention paladin under multiclassing, as it's widely considered to be one of the best combinations in 5e, and is significantly more powerful than any single class. I'm not sure if you noticed, the byline is: "By Sorxores, as originally published on the Wizards of the Coast message boards" When Wizards of the Coast shut down their forums in 2015, @Mistwell brought this and other guides over. Unfortunately the original author never came here and claimed it so it hasn't been updated since then. It's kept around in the links, but if you're looking for an actual discussion I'd suggest one of the guides with current posting in it.

Thursday, 12th July, 2018

  • 10:56 PM - Elfcrusher mentioned Mistwell in post Barbarian with Mobile and GWM Feats: as cool as it seems?
    Just for reference: "That is why you fail" is a Star Wars quote I paraphrased - Yoda to Luke in Empire. Not knowing that is why you fail to take the comment in the light hearted spirit in which it was intended when delivered by a being of pure evil. Ah, I didn't hear the Yoda voice. I took it as typical internet-forum disparagement. If you feel like explaining, I AM interested in your point. @Mistwell: Yeah combined with Ancestral Guardian it could be awesome. Either chase me and trigger AoO from my friends, or attack them with Disadvantage. EDIT: And if one of the friends has Sentinel it gets even better.

Sunday, 10th June, 2018

  • 07:16 AM - Ancalagon mentioned Mistwell in post What is the bard's "fireball"?
    Hello. So the Wizard/sorcerer has fireball, an iconic spell that is probably too good for its level. The cleric now has spiritual guardian, that's really freaking good. And Mistwell pointed out that druids have conjure animals - I haven't tried it but he swears it's great, and looking at it I see it has potential. These are all spells that are unique to those classes, and are all in that sort of "low-mid" sweet spot where D&D works so well (3rd level spell in this case). Gaining 3rd level spells is a big step up in the power of these classes, equivalent for the warriors getting their second attack. But I started wondering... what is the bard's version of this? For Warlocks it's arguably hunger of hadar (it's great area denial) but for the bard nothing leaps out at me...

Monday, 4th June, 2018


Wednesday, 30th May, 2018

  • 01:29 AM - pemerton mentioned Mistwell in post Cubicle 7 forums to close due to EU data law
    Mistwell, aramis erak The poster was Raven Crowking. He demanded that his posts be removed, but the demand was (sensibly) ignore. He therefore started to do it himself, editing out each post using the "edit" function. The issue was not about the capacity of the forum software.

Sunday, 20th May, 2018

  • 04:16 AM - FrogReaver mentioned Mistwell in post Shield master on twitter
    Mistwell Oofta I just realized 5ekyu has me blocked so I take it all back. Give him heck for whatever the heck you desire!!! Thanks for doing the needful. :)
  • 03:55 AM - FrogReaver mentioned Mistwell in post Shield master on twitter
    @Mistwell You said: "Don't accuse people of trying to change the subject because of some tactic or something - it's a legit issue that you're dismissing. It's just a rudeness issue that you can easily address...so why not address it?" I say: As long as your words are attributed correctly then what does it actually matter how that is actually accomplished? This is much ado about nothing IMO. In fact it's more rude and even more of an issue that we are even having to take time to address how you are being quoted (because you somehow declare it to be rude). Goodness Gracious...

Wednesday, 16th May, 2018

  • 01:07 AM - Oofta mentioned Mistwell in post Shield master on twitter
    Maybe you didn’t see the post where I stated that I’ve given up trying to engage with this? No examples will change your mind. Why bother? You have made some pretty grandiose claims. I'd be curious on why, for example, the shove tactic works for you and why you think it can "destroy" the enemy because I just don't see it. Mistwell may be a bit harsh, but at the same time you've made claims that don't seem to add up. For example with the shove and walk away (assuming shover has same movement rate as shovee) it simply wouldn't work very well. So I've got to wonder if you play theater of the mind, have the same group and DM, always play in wide open spaces, etc. I can see a few scenarios, assuming that PC Sam (who has shield master) shoves an Orc and then moves away. Other PCs in the group include Monty the Monk and Randy the Ranger. Scenario 1: Orc has a buddy Bob, also adjacent to Sam before the shove. Bob gets an opp attack if Sam runs away. No good. Scenario 2: Orc, no longer able to get to Sam goes after Monty who is within 30 feet after the shove and attacks him instead. Monty has a lower AC than Sam. No good. Scenario 3:Orc, no longer able to get to Sam, Monty or Randy moves and dashes to get next to Randy so he has disadvantage on his ranged attacks. No good. Scenario 4: Sam can't g...

Tuesday, 15th May, 2018

  • 08:30 PM - warfteiner mentioned Mistwell in post Lost Tales of Myth Drannor: DDAL's "Secret" D&D Book For Gen Con 50
    CapnZapp - No, you didn't come across that way at all. On the same token, my apologies if I came across snappish; not my intention. We're looking for awesome ways to incentive public play when we attend events, and Lost Tales happened to be our thing for 2017. As much as I'd love to say that I did it for the money (I do need at least two more shiny nickels in my collection!) it was really to provide something cool and unexpected for our public play people across the world. Future things will almost certainly be along these same lines. Mistwell - We started handing them out at Gen Con last year and continued doing so throughout the summer, fall, winter, and now spring of 2018. A couple admins still have copies - I only have my personal 2 copies left out of my original ~160 or so - and we've sent a ton of them to various locations all around the world. I sent them to Australia, a couple events in Russia, some in Italy, and even some to Israel last fall. The adventures don't have to be played at conventions, but that's just the most common way to get a copy of the book. As above, our intention is to reward the dedicated folks that attend public play events. The market on those things will crash, and hard, upon the digital release. We assumed that it would take roughly a year to get it that way, though, due to the huge number of other tasks that we're working on.

Thursday, 10th May, 2018

  • 11:58 AM - Jacob Lewis mentioned Mistwell in post Mordenkainens starting to show up in the wild?
    Mistwell Thank you! For that reasonable, rational, mature, and unemotional response. And for that Skeletor gif! I think I watched it for a minute before reading the rest of your response. And you're right. I could post my thoughts and ideas on system neutral topics, as I have in the past. I still do sometimes. But mostly I just read and don't always have time for posting. Not unless I think I have something funny to say. And it's not always as funny as I think it is, and it's never funny for everyone. Some people take their hobbies way too seriously. I like to think that I am lightening the mood. Most of the time... Anyway. I am not concerned with appeasing everyone else, though I do my best not to cross certain lines. Morrus (and a few others) keep me in check. I poke fun at everything, and if it gets some laughs, great! Mostly they go unnoticed or ignored, and that's fine too. I've played the game for almost four decades, been through edition changes, forum battles, much like many other...


Page 1 of 12 1234567891011 ... LastLast
No results to display...

Wednesday, 7th November, 2018

  • 09:00 PM - BookBarbarian quoted Mistwell in post Is Ranged really better than Melee?
    I find ranged attacking is overrated. First, let's assume you're using published adventures. Not everyone does of course, but it's one objective baseline to draw from, and we don't have sufficient data on homebrew campaigns to draw any objective data. That said: 1) Published adventures on average tend to emphasize dungeons, and in particular dungeons which do not offer the ability for everyone to stay outside of 30' from foes for very long without running into another room which is also occupied by foes. 2) Published adventures on average tend to emphasize magic weapons which are melee weapons, and in particular longswords. They also tend to have magic shields to be found in treasure. As the baseline of the game is that magic stores do not exist, the ability to use magic items you find is extremely helpful. 3) Given the commonality of dungeon settings, and the commonality that someone in the party will be melee and often several someones, cover comes into play. A target with half cover has...
  • 06:36 PM - smbakeresq quoted Mistwell in post Bolstering Wizards
    It is not. Wizards are quite powerful in 5e, and coherent. I'd say they rival the top of the list in terms of power, and definitely do not need a power boost for that. In terms of coherency of the class, their "thing" is utility. They have extremely high level of flexibility to deal with almost any kind of challenge the party might encounter. That's not a bug, it's a feature. I agree. However I did like the feature in earlier editions that you choice of school cut off access to another school. I thought that was a good option .

Sunday, 4th November, 2018

  • 05:06 AM - Panda-s1 quoted Mistwell in post Burning Questions: Why Do DMs Limit Official WOTC Material?
    Exactly. So, it was in fact a strawman. Nobody was presenting that position. You're in a thread asking why some DMs limit some rules, many people explained why they limit rules, and you replied its about cowardice and being unable to cope. Not with some explanation that you meant a small subset of people which wasn't representative of the majority of people who limit rules - no you made a broad claim about why people limit rules. To people, in this thread, who were saying why they limit rules. And then you acted shocked people didn't take too kindly to it. And you're still feigning confusion about it. As if you couldn't possibly fathom in a million years why people might react negatively to your strawman. Just because nobody was presenting that position doesn't mean I can't bring it up. The OP posited a question, I gave an answer. In my experience there are DMs who are like that. It wasn't directed at anyone here per-sé, but because I said a mean word people decided I was talking ab...

Saturday, 3rd November, 2018

  • 05:13 PM - Treantmonklvl20 quoted Mistwell in post Treantmonk's Guide to Wizards 5e
    Wow. Not sure why it's not an attack, but that is a distinction Crawford makes. It's because it does not require an attack roll. Toll the Dead is not an attack either. That said, although supported by the rules, DM's are not always going to let it fly, nor will all players (including me) be ready to exploit what is basically a loophole to let a familiar take offensive actions in combat. As for the value: 1) The big draw here is that the familiar can use it's action to use the spell, but keep in mind we are talking about a small cone of fairly low damage 2) The Wizard will need to maintain concentration on this spell. That's a fair cost for a fairly small attack 1/round. 3) The familiar is squishy as hell. This is not a hard spell to remove - one magic missile for example. 4) Also, there is the initial action to set this up So overall, I think it's OK. Saving that action every round is good, but the effect is OK at best. Spending concentration on this is a significant f...
  • 09:11 AM - Panda-s1 quoted Mistwell in post Burning Questions: Why Do DMs Limit Official WOTC Material?
    Who in this thread has given you the impression that their disagreement with you on this topic is because they are "incapable of dealing with not everything going the way [they] want it?" Name one person. No one, except everyone seems to think I was talking about them for some reason. Edit: I'll also say being asked loaded questions about the nature of DM'ing, despite saying numerous times that a DM gets the final say in their game, isn't conducive to this discussion either. Hell in one case I was given a scenario where a clear minority of the player group objected to the DM's want to play a gritty realistic game and asked if the DM should bend over backward to this minority's whims. I'm not exactly amused at being handed a question as if I don't understand how consensus and majority work.

Friday, 2nd November, 2018

  • 11:02 PM - Panda-s1 quoted Mistwell in post Burning Questions: Why Do DMs Limit Official WOTC Material?
    Use rope much? Okay the eladrin uses a rope to get other players across. While he's setting up the rope he's ambushed by goblins and has to fight them off on his own. Or in the case of hobgoblins the party is ambushed while two of the PCs are going across on the rope, and one of the hobgoblins manages to cut the rope before they can get across. You could argue Mystara does not have misty-stepping Eladrin. Irrelevant. But at what point can you not accept no for an answer? Never, did you miss where I said I go from game to game and ruin DMs settings by inserting my weird homebrew races? Do you just love eladrin that goddamn much? It's an example. To be clear I don't give a crap about Eladrin, I just think you should be honest about how you represent DM's as inflexible but are unwilling to answer the same question when turned on the player. Players don't get to be very flexible, meanwhile DMs can do whatever they want in their game, why would I advocate for DM flexibility? "Please ma...
  • 05:15 AM - Panda-s1 quoted Mistwell in post Burning Questions: Why Do DMs Limit Official WOTC Material?
    Why does every setting need to be Forgotten Realms or Golarion from Pathfinder? Sure, there are many people who enjoy the so-called "kitchen sink" settings, and I know at least Golarion was specifically designed in such a way (despite them nearly tunnel-visioning on Varisia, though not the degree that WotC tunnel-visions on the Sword Coast), and those types of settings can be fun (I personally enjoyed Golarion in the 2-ish years I played Pathfinder), but not everyone likes playing in them and not everyone likes running them. Say you have a group of 6 people, and this group is lucky enough to have 3 people who enjoy DMing. One DM loves running the kitchen-sink setting, one prefers gritty realism low-magic settings (so no spellcasters and so on), and one prefers human-only. Now the kitchen-sink DM just finished up a campaign, and is a little burned out on being DM for a while. So, it falls on one of the other 2. Gritty DM says he will run one, but one player doesn't like to play anything but wiz...

Thursday, 1st November, 2018

  • 05:54 PM - Blue quoted Mistwell in post [AL] Are Season 8's New Rules an Improvement?
    So basically a change to XP based on roughly hours played, and a change to treasure based on a spendable point system rather than actual items? I think that page is just the change to rewards. There's also changes to faction unless you take the faction background or give up the feature from your background for the faction feature. The change to treasure is a big deal. It hurts classes like wizard who have expenditures. It makes consumables, even mundanes ones, a serious expense. Plate armor - might as just got for a magic item. And this is regardless of what is found.
  • 04:05 PM - pogre quoted Mistwell in post [AL] Are Season 8's New Rules an Improvement?
    Can you summarize the changes and why you think each change was made? Hopefully, this summary from Wizards will suffice. http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/news/changes-dd-adventurers-league-rewards I think the reason(s) for the change are to create a more uniform and smoother play experience across various tables for AL.

Wednesday, 31st October, 2018

  • 04:45 AM - Al'Kelhar quoted Mistwell in post Burning Questions: Why Do DMs Limit Official WOTC Material?
    It's acceptable that you have such poor taste. We still like you despite your incredible deficiency in taste concerning this singular topic. I consider it simply a disability you unfortunately have obtained, either through birth or environment. You may even park in the disabled parking spot, provided you display a "I Hate Bards" sign in your window so that all may see your special needs and shake their heads in understanding. I get a surprisingly positive response to the "I run over monks" sticker on the bull bar of my ute. Can I park in the disable car park, too?

Monday, 29th October, 2018

  • 11:17 PM - Panda-s1 quoted Mistwell in post Burning Questions: Why Do DMs Limit Official WOTC Material?
    Oh I know. We all know. You came into a thread and told everyone who disagreed with your view that they were entitled. And so people called you entitled back, and you acted all shocked that people would dare do back to you what you had just done to them. "You just stabbed that man with a knife and now he's dead, you're a murderer!" "Um wow you sound like you're a murderer, I'm just killing people here." Yeah I don't think you understand lol.
  • 10:01 PM - epithet quoted Mistwell in post Burning Questions: Why Do DMs Limit Official WOTC Material?
    Oh...I think I have a guess: Kinda meant the exact opposite of what you seem to be implying, but hey... have fun with it.
  • 09:16 PM - epithet quoted Mistwell in post Burning Questions: Why Do DMs Limit Official WOTC Material?
    I disagree. And...so do the rules. 5e is pretty clear in declaring the rules as the domain of the DM, and not as a factor of consensus of the group. Prior editions were more focused on consensus, but not this edition. Some examples: "One rule overrides all others: the DM is the final authority on how the rules work in play." "And as a referee, the DM interprets the rules and decides when to abide by them and when to change them." "The D&D rules help you snd the other players have a good time, but the rules aren't in charge. You're the DM, and you arein charge of the game." Furthermore to your specific point about players demanding to play on a grid, that's a variant rule to begin with and specifically in the DMs realm for decisions. Shocked? Yup, grid play is a variant rule and not the standard rule for 5e. It's even listed that way in the Player's Handbook to make it clear to players it's not the standard: "Variant: Playing on a Grid" If you play out a combat using a square grid and minia...

Sunday, 28th October, 2018

  • 05:59 AM - flametitan quoted Mistwell in post Mike Mearls: so here’s the first part of my two-weapon fighting house rule
    These discussions should really take place assuming no feats. It's usually the feats that mess things up, and they do remain an optional rule. Without feats, it's slightly in favour of GWF still, though it's not as wide a gap. With some off the cuff math (i.e. not accounting for crits or whiffs, just multiplying the average of all dice by a 65% chance of hitting) it's about 25.9935 versus a 22.1 average at level 11. That said, TWF gets better use of crit fishing features, features that trigger on multiple hits (like hunter's mark and rage) or gives more chances to land large hits (like smite and sneak attack) which can change which one a character might use. Oh, and just having more attacks means it's not as likely to whiff entirely, thus more turns feeling like you're doing something. With GWM and SS, damage is massively skewed in favour of ranged and two weapon fighting, while PAM and XBE take away twf's bonus attack advantage.

Friday, 26th October, 2018

  • 12:16 AM - Quartz quoted Mistwell in post Mike Mearls: so here’s the first part of my two-weapon fighting house rule
    Spear is one of the worst weapons in the game. I like the spear because of the classicness of it from literature and mythology, but in terms of D&D it's a terrible representative of how weapons work. I disagree: I chose it because it's standard. I could have used the shortsword instead - the Roman spatha or gladius - or the Arab scimitar. All are 1d6 weapons. Actually, I should have used the dagger as it's a weapon a PC is likely to be able to carry around town, when unarmoured. That tilts things even more in the favour of the dual wielder.

Thursday, 25th October, 2018

  • 10:06 PM - Pauln6 quoted Mistwell in post Mike Mearls: so here’s the first part of my two-weapon fighting house rule
    Right and in that case it's exactly as if you had a shield...but at the requirement of a light weapon in your other hand. Seems fair. You can wield a 1d8 weapon which does 1d10 (versitile) and a shield, or you can wield a 1d6 weapon and a second light weapon which functions as a shield if you don't attack with it. Not so sure. It takes an action to equip a shield so not so easy to switch and the house rule gives +1 AC Even with the off hand attack. Seems to me the dual wielder is winning big time, albeit not at low levels. Do rogues still need bonus action second attack if this house rule favours those with multi attacks?
  • 08:11 PM - Pauln6 quoted Mistwell in post Mike Mearls: so here’s the first part of my two-weapon fighting house rule
    Is it? It's roughly +5 AC if you give up your action (dodge) and +2 if you use only one weapon (shield). Here it's +2 AC if you take a -4 to your attack, AND you do less damage with those attacks (because all non-light weapons do more damage than light weapons). Seems right in the pocket for where the AC bonus should be for what you're sacrificing. The quote said you forego the penalty if you parry.

Wednesday, 24th October, 2018

  • 08:56 PM - Satyrn quoted Mistwell in post Shield Attacks and AC Bonus
    Ganymede81 tell me again how FrogReaver could not have possibly been saying that a styrofoam weapon which looks similar to a real weapon would not do the real weapon's damage by the Rules As Written. I dare yah! I told you he was reading the rules that literally, to that level of absurdity. I was not wrong. He really is, as can be seen in his appleseed argument. Well, now I'm a little scared for my life, what with my upcoming LARP game this weekend.

Tuesday, 23rd October, 2018

  • 11:50 PM - FrogReaver quoted Mistwell in post Shield Attacks and AC Bonus
    I think for me, I'd allow mace damage but no proficiency bonus, unless the player made a compelling enough argument about a particular kind of shield which is so similar to an actual weapon that it should allow proficiency. I see three types of improvised weapons in the rules. 1. An improvised weapon so similar to an actual weapon that it can be treated as the actual weapon: use proficiency bonus and damage as if it were that weapon. 2. An improvised weapon which bears some resemblance to an actual weapon, but which is not so similar that it should be treated as the actual weapon. No proficiency bonus, and damage as if it were that weapon. 3. An object that bears no resemblance to an actual weapon. No proficiency bonus, and 1d4 damage. A shield falls into category 2 for me, unless a specific shield is successfully lobbied as being category 1 or 3. As an example of a shield which I think should be treated with proficiency (though not for mace - maybe short sword) I am thinkin...
  • 11:23 PM - FrogReaver quoted Mistwell in post Shield Attacks and AC Bonus
    Not sure why you added my name to this list (and poorly as it didn't work but fortunately I just happened to see it) but my argument is the area of the shield you're hitting with is "similar" enough to a mace to be treated as a mace for purposes of using the maces damage die. You disagree and wouldn't play it that way in your game, which is fine. You however want me to say this is somehow a house rule and not an intepretation of the rules, and that's not fine. I've never said there is no rule...I've said the existing rules allow for my intepretation of them. I still have no idea why saying Mistwell didn't work.


Mistwell's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites
 *

Mundane Treasure Generator

Treasure/Items
Mundane (non-magical) treasure: trade goods, objects d'art, etc. Whether your treasure hoard contai...