View Profile: Reynard - D&D, Pathfinder, and RPGs at Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • LostSoul's Avatar
    Monday, 25th June, 2018, 02:16 PM
    Doubtful; most of my notes are spread out all over the place!
    197 replies | 26404 view(s)
    0 XP
  • LostSoul's Avatar
    Monday, 25th June, 2018, 01:46 PM
    SQL would be better than Excel, but you could probably do it like this: Data Sheet Column A: A list of all people, places, or things. e.g. A1: Rufus A2: Fletch A3: Belsornig Column B: An id value. Unique numbers, starting at 1 with an increment of 1. You can write a formula for this; enter B1 manually as 1, then B2 is the formula =B1 + 1 and you can just copy paste all the way down.
    16 replies | 566 view(s)
    0 XP
  • LostSoul's Avatar
    Monday, 18th June, 2018, 12:30 PM
    The result of the reaction roll sets the number of successes needed in the skill challenge before three failures. "Uncertain, cautious, and wary", the most common result, is 6 and it goes up and down from there. That doesn't necessarily mean there will be any conflict, so there may not be any rolls needed. The PC only rolls when there is conflict and the way I determine that is if I don't know...
    197 replies | 26404 view(s)
    1 XP
No More Results
About Reynard

Basic Information

About Reynard
Introduction:
Writer and gamer.
Location:
Southwestern Connecticut
Disable sharing sidebar?:
No
Sex:
Male
Age Group:
Over 40
Social Networking

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

Twitter:
IanAsItWere
Facebook:
IanAsItWere

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
3,814
Posts Per Day
0.63
Last Post
Take An Adventure In Dystopia With Palladium's Original After The Bomb Thursday, 19th April, 2018 03:18 AM

Currency

Gold Pieces
61
General Information
Last Activity
Friday, 13th July, 2018 05:07 PM
Join Date
Friday, 18th January, 2002
Home Page
http://www.ianeller.com
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0

4 Friends

  1. LostSoul LostSoul is offline

    Member

    LostSoul
  2. Mark Mark is offline

    CreativeMountainGames.com

    Mark
  3. Mark CMG Mark CMG is offline

    Member

    Mark CMG
  4. The Shaman The Shaman is offline

    Member

    The Shaman
Showing Friends 1 to 4 of 4
No results to show...

Monday, 8th January, 2018

  • 06:02 PM - Oofta mentioned Reynard in post Setting Party level vs an Ancient Red Dragon
    I've been busy and didn't respond before, but I do have to say that the party was given every possible advantage and then some. So Reynard, I wanted to give some feedback ... I don't think the system is necessarily broken, but you bent too far backwards to "help" the party. It happens to all DMs, I know it's happened to me more than once (and probably will again) and it has very little to do with 5E. Solos are never easy to run, have never worked very well and the CR guidelines aren't going to be much help when you gave them this much of an advantage and an additional 20th level character. Having said all that, I'm trying to give some helpful advice. But the big question is: did the players have fun? If they did, then the encounter was a success. Sometimes the players stomp on your encounters, it's part of the game. wish to create a simulacrum of a 20th level bard Did they have access to a 20th level bard for the 12 hours it takes to cast the spell? Also, note the part of the rules of Simulacrum where it gives the rules for repairing it. Specific beats general in this game and if there's a specific rule...

Thursday, 14th December, 2017

  • 05:37 PM - hawkeyefan mentioned Reynard in post Setting Party level vs an Ancient Red Dragon
    Reynard As a rule of thumb, I'd add +2 to Hit and Damage rolls, and add a 1d6 to the fire damage from its attacks. I think the CR rules in the DMG would only indicate a +1 to attacks, but I'd go a little more. Raise its AC to 21, which won't make a huge difference, but will turn a few hits into misses Raise the DC for Frightful Presence, Breath Weapon, and Wing Attack by 1 (Wis DC 20, Dex DC 22, Dex DC 23, respectively). I'd also add a good amount of HP...probably about 100. Or give it some other means to help mitigate damage. A simple Potion of Invulnerability would allow it to take half damage from all of the PC attacks for 10 rounds. These increases put it somewhere between the CR 17 Adult and the CR 21 Ancient. However, I think the key to this will be to increase the number of Legendary Actions and uses of Legendary Resistance. I think you could double each, at least. And as Warmaster Horus suggested, maybe create a couple of unique Legendary Actions that you think woul...

Tuesday, 15th March, 2016

  • 05:55 PM - innerdude mentioned Reynard in post D&D comes to Middle Earth (from Cubicle 7)
    ...antra constantly on these forums, "Play what you like! It's okay to have your own preferences! No one has to tell you you're having badwrongfun!" But as soon as I talk about my dissatisfaction with the current One Ring product line, because I have personal preferences of what I enjoy in the Lord of the Rings fiction, somehow I'm now a bitter nerd-rager? To give some context: Faramir is BY FAR my favorite character in the Lord of the Rings fiction. (Peter Jackson's deplorable treatment of Faramir in the movies is worthy of much more nerd rage than Cubicle 7, but that's another debate entirely. :p;)) The entire backstory of Gondor, Numenor, Isildur and Anarion, the North and South Kingdoms of the Men of the West, etc., are by far my favorite parts of the Lord of the Rings lore, closely followed by the history of the Silmarils. I don't currently have any tattoos, but if I ever got one, it would be of exactly one thing --- the White Tree of Gondor. So yeah, I'm partial to Gondor. And @Reynard might be right; The One Ring isn't "made" just for me. They made a design decision to stick to one particular time period and locales for the system. And because of those choices, I have been unwilling to promote the system more, because that's not the Lord of the Rings RPG play experience I want. To me, The One Ring is missing what I consider to be some crucial, nay, vital pieces. Why the need to jump to Cubicle 7's defense? Do you work for them, or have some business interest? They made a choice to focus on what I see as particularly uninteresting aspects of Middle-Earth's Third Age. I'm not denigrating anyone who prefers what they've already produced; I'm simply saying I will be dissatisfied as a customer until I see support for Gondor characters. And this is somehow . . . offensive? As far as what Cubicle 7 posted on their web site, it's a lovely sentiment. Truly, I'm sure they mean it from the bottom of their hearts, and I'm sure they feel it when they say it. But the harsh real...

Wednesday, 27th January, 2016


Tuesday, 26th January, 2016

  • 11:56 PM - Quickleaf mentioned Reynard in post What map of Faerun can I use for DM Guild?
    Reynard I totally agree with you in principle about going for quality. But financially I'm not sure if doing commissioned art/maps as a little guy makes sense. If you look at a lot of the products on DM's Guild they're "pay what you want" with an average paid price of roughly $1.50. A commissioned full page piece of color art or map could easily run you $100. And remember that DM's Guild (technically OneBookShelf & WotC) takes a 50% royalty on every sale. So to recoup the price of a $100 commission, under the "pay what you want" model (where you're averaging profits of $0.75 per sale), you'd need to bring in about 133 sales to break even. I'm just not sure what kind of volume DM's Guild sales numbers look like, but my hunch is that reaching 133 sales would be a significant milestone for a little guy. That explains why few of the products I've seen use original commissioned art, and instead favor no art, Public Domain art, stock art, etc. bristolscale7 While I do think that WotC will ...

Tuesday, 7th April, 2015

  • 09:34 PM - feldrol mentioned Reynard in post FANTASY GROUNDS Virtual Tabletop's D&D License!
    Gecko85 : With one click you apply fog of war everywhere on the map. Then to remove it, you draw a rectangle or a freeform. Reynard : To see if this product is for you, sign on for an adventure at FGCon later this month. It is free and you will be able to play as a player. You will see how the programm runs for players.

Thursday, 12th March, 2015

  • 04:24 PM - Manchu mentioned Reynard in post So what exactly is Wizards working on?
    @Reynard Oh okay, sure I totally agree with that. I meant more that, GenCon was a wash in terms of 5E. The fun I had there was "edition neutral" which is counter-intuitive for an edition's launch event. DEFCON 1 I understand there are constraints on OP adventures that home play products can ignore but I don't think those constraints excuse bland writing. Maybe whoever wrote those adventures was trying to be "iconic"? I think anyone who has played D&D (even a D&D CRPG) would recognize those AL adventures as a pack of tropes.

Wednesday, 25th February, 2015

  • 05:41 PM - SkidAce mentioned Reynard in post so... any word on PDFs yet?
    Good discussion. Reynard, I didn't miss your point, I feel the loss of folks due to no PDF is likely offset by the recruiting that those who like the game are willing to do. We have taught three new people in the last four months. No PDF or OGL. Of course we have no way of knowing whether the impact you speak of (which seems valid) or my thoughts, are greater or lesser on the hobby as a whole. I personally feel the lack of PDFs/OGL has a smaller impact than the appeal of the game itself. YMMV (as evidenced above). Thanks for the thoughts! SkidAce

Wednesday, 13th August, 2014

  • 12:34 AM - Quickleaf mentioned Reynard in post PCs that are too big for their britches...do they live or die?
    Oryan77 Generally I always consider Reynard's advice of "talk to your players" the Rule Zero of DMing. You should always do it, even if it gets overlooked a lot or is hard with certain personalities. For me, it is a given that whenmy group composition changes as significantly as yours has (75% new players!) I am going to take at least 20 minutes at the start of a session to ask about their expectations and experience gaming. Sometimes talking with new players - particularly those new to the hobby - can leave confused looks about genre expectations, social contract, and all that jazz. Because they have nothing to base their opinion on. Generally, however, I think it's a good idea and you might be surprised by what you learn. For example, their behavior could be passive aggressive because they're used to NPCs being fodder or betraying them (due toyourDMing or a previous DM). Or they might have vastly differ genre expectations than PLANESCAPE and in the face of struggling to grasp it default toslapstick. Or maybe it's a ...

No results to display...
Page 1 of 29 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Friday, 2nd March, 2018

  • 07:15 PM - pogre quoted Reynard in post The Monetization of D&D Play
    Nor do I have a problem with a "GM Yelp" because if you are providing a service for which you ask money, people should be able to find out whether you are any good at it before hand. This is an awesome idea. I actually really miss the feedback forms players used to do on DMs in organized play. If I could get meaningful critical feedback from players I would be a lot more tempted to run AL.

Thursday, 1st March, 2018

  • 07:55 PM - prosfilaes quoted Reynard in post [UPDATED] Most D&D Players Prefer Humans - Without Feats!
    Just because something does not conform to your notions or anecdotal experience does not mean it is a lie or conspiracy. Presumably Crawford has decades of data, from organized play to various electronic systems to just plain old letters and forum posts, on which he has based his claims. Okay, but that type of decades of data is incredibly hard to integrate. As people have pointed out, he can't have decades of data on the feat question, since all non-5E editions have either required feats or not included them, and it gets complicated about how to integrate information about low-level characters into that feat data. I trust the race data more, but it's still pretty rough, especially if it's from decades of data. And an important question is what does it mean for us, and it's hard to say without some more details. That's information that could come from more detail about the data; it's possible D&D has a lot of new, short-term players that play humans, and this applies mainly to them.
  • 07:22 PM - Gammadoodler quoted Reynard in post [UPDATED] Most D&D Players Prefer Humans - Without Feats!
    Just because something does not conform to your notions or anecdotal experience does not mean it is a lie or conspiracy. Presumably Crawford has decades of data, from organized play to various electronic systems to just plain old letters and forum posts, on which he has based his claims. I find it very strange that so many people are coming into this thread to not just say they don't like to play that way, but to intimate Crawford is actually lying about this. What could the possible motivation be? Is there a human focused splat on the horizon they are trying to drum up support for? Whether suspicion is warranted or not, the burden of proof is on the party making the positive claim. With no reference to the specific data WOTC is using or how they analyzed it, it would seem JCís claims are equally anecdotal, more persuasive perhaps, given his position, but still anecdotal. I donít have any reason to doubt JCs claims and I have insufficient experience to make a supporting or contrary anecdot...
  • 06:58 PM - Gradine quoted Reynard in post [UPDATED] Most D&D Players Prefer Humans - Without Feats!
    Just because something does not conform to your notions or anecdotal experience does not mean it is a lie or conspiracy. Presumably Crawford has decades of data, from organized play to various electronic systems to just plain old letters and forum posts, on which he has based his claims. I find it very strange that so many people are coming into this thread to not just say they don't like to play that way, but to intimate Crawford is actually lying about this. What could the possible motivation be? Is there a human focused splat on the horizon they are trying to drum up support for? Oh, I have no reason to doubt Crawford is true; I just found it amusing that my own experiences are so different from the apparent baseline!
  • 05:53 PM - mikal768 quoted Reynard in post [UPDATED] Most D&D Players Prefer Humans - Without Feats!
    Citation? Crawford is a primary source. No he isn't. The data he's using is the primary source. Data which could easily be skewed. Some examples- Using only DNDBeyond, which can have mainly SRD/free resources (i.e. no feats). Also, the majority of the characters in the data pool may be from 1-3, in which case only Variant Humans can even possess a feat unless house ruled.
  • 05:47 PM - Yunru quoted Reynard in post [UPDATED] Most D&D Players Prefer Humans - Without Feats!
    Citation? Crawford is a primary source.No, Crawford is a secondary source. This data he only alludes to is a primary source.

Thursday, 1st February, 2018

  • 05:51 PM - Kobold Boots quoted Reynard in post Is D&D Too Focused on Combat?
    Using Bonds, Flaws and so on as something analogous to FATEs Aspects works pretty well in my experience. Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app In my case, I usually have a session zero where players can mad lib their backgrounds with other players and the DM chiming in while using poker chips as a currency to buy their story. If anyone wants to add or change something they need to outbid or equal whatever was spent to get to that point. I started doing this because any character's backstory has an effect on the campaign but also affects every other player at the table. The natural preventer that stops players from being jerks to each other is that anything they spend on someone else's story is less they have to spend on themselves and jerks get rooted out fast. Ex. "I am friends with all nobles and courtiers of the noonah empire, they love me and I'm always chatting with them to influence the world" - dick move. GM vibes in with similar coin "Your friends are imaginary...
  • 05:31 PM - Kobold Boots quoted Reynard in post Is D&D Too Focused on Combat?
    What I don't understand is why people are so resistant to treating other aspects of the game the same way. I posted half of this answer in another post you've acknowledged with XP, so I'll only add the other half. :) Objective tasks like combat require a lot of rules to handle properly and are bloated by character guidelines that increase word count. Subjective tasks like social situations can't be modeled well given the same word count, it's actually less effective because you have far more nuance with the interaction Here's something that works for my table: Player trying to convince a merchant to lower pricing. 1. How strapped is the merchant - If he's doing well he'll be inclined to haggle -2 to difficulty. If not less so +2 2. How good of a mood is he in today - start at 10, roll 2d10. First die is 1-5 good mood, 6-10 bad.. second die is the modifier (range of 0-20) sets the initial difficulty. So final diff is no check necessary to 22 - really bad day. Roleplay be...
  • 05:12 PM - Flexor the Mighty! quoted Reynard in post Is D&D Too Focused on Combat?
    I think this suggests a hard dividing line between combat and role-playing that isn't necessary or desirable (IMO obviously). When characters engage the enemy in combat, the players are still role-playing. it is just that the process of combat is a lot more granular than other aspects of the game, meaning that their role-play involves their character sheets and rules a lot more. This doesn't need to be the case. D&D combat could just as easily (and satisfactorily) be treated the same way as the negotiation you described: the player tells you what they plan to do, their tactics and approach, and if you think that leaves some ambiguity they make a single "attack roll" to determine whether they win the fight or not, and what the consequences are of either. That's a perfectly viable way to conduct combat in D&D -- and in a lot of cases, especially when talking about combats that ultimately don't matter and exist primarily to drain party resources or eat game time, it is preferable. Sometimes, thou...
  • 11:07 AM - pemerton quoted Reynard in post Is D&D Too Focused on Combat?
    What I hope for is a system that removes the whole idea of the singular face. that is, a social interaction system that is as inclusive for the whole party as combat is.I would really start with framing and consequences first, because that's how combat works: GMs (typically) frame combat so that all the PCs get drawn in; and there are consequences for all players in combat (ie their PCs take hp loss). If you are playing the weakling mage, and choose not to roll any attacks, that doesn't stop the GM declaring attacks against you that sap your hit points. So what is going on that players who never have their PCs say anything, and leave it all to the "face", never suffer consequences? Never have anyone try and speak to them? Ask them their opinion on the matter? Never develop reputatios as buffoons? Etc. Once the framing and consequence issue has been indentified, then it makes sense to look at a system for integrating the multiple checks of multiple players into a single resolution of the ...
  • 04:16 AM - mach1.9pants quoted Reynard in post Is D&D Too Focused on Combat?
    Absolutely but that doesn't mean the other pillars should not get the same amount of care in the rules. They could, but they never have over the decades. DnD is a combat game, from inception. The 75% of rules on combat has worked well so far! :D
  • 01:05 AM - Kobold Boots quoted Reynard in post Is D&D Too Focused on Combat?
    Hi Reynard - You're posting rather eloquently and succinctly regarding your point of view so I feel like it's reasonably safe to reply to a couple of your points. It isn't so much the idea of "more rules" as it is "similarly complex rules." So if players have lots of options and tactical choices in combat I think a game should have similarly complex social mechanics. In games with more breezy combat mechanics, breezy social mechanics are fine. Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app The above makes perfect sense from a completeness point of view but every game on the market is going to have what it is known for and D&D has its roots in combat, so many of the structures of resolution are going to be around combat. I'd also like to point out that many games well known for the social aspects, don't really have much in the way of rules around social interactions, but have a lot of time spent on building out settings and plot devices (Masquerade comes to mind) Gygax also...

Wednesday, 31st January, 2018

  • 08:23 PM - jmucchiello quoted Reynard in post Is D&D Too Focused on Combat?
    Almost all of those editions have some versions of those rules, from the War Machine to the Wilderness Survival Guide to Birthright. The issue here (for me) is why 5E is so weak on them. WSG came out 10-11 years after the PHB and DMG. Birthright came out 6+ years after AD&D2. Neither of them are in the DMG for their respective editions. (I have no idea what War Machine is.) And I don't own either of them so I don't know what rules you are talking about. But still, they weren't including, apparently in 3e, 4e, or 5e.
  • 08:03 PM - jmucchiello quoted Reynard in post Is D&D Too Focused on Combat?
    "The GM can just make it up" isn't a reasonable response to people that actually want games to have rules for the things you are supposed to be able to do in said games. I want to zoom in on this. Among the more popular (or even less popular) rules systems, how many of them support these other styles of play? Not many, I presume, but I could be wrong. Enlighten me. I know such rules aren't really in generic games like GURPS and HERO. Does WoD have rules for palace intrigue? I mean that's the wheelhouse of V:TM, right, with it's princes of cities and houses? Aspect games like FATE don't really have rules for intrigue since it all hinges on the aspects you create. I'm also curious what these rules would look like. Are you envisioning something like 4E skill challenges (but fixed)? Or are you hoping for some kind of social points analogy to hit points?
  • 07:54 PM - jmucchiello quoted Reynard in post Is D&D Too Focused on Combat?
    Sure but you can't simply dismiss what the rules do and do not support and whether the support or lack thereof determines the group's engagement with those playstyles. "The GM can just make it up" isn't a reasonable response to people that actually want games to have rules for the things you are supposed to be able to do in said games. So in a game like D&D that relies on fairly intricate rules for combat, telling people to just handwave courtly intrigue or perilous exploration is dismissive and unhelpful. And yet, millions of people for 44 or so years have managed to do just what you say they shouldn't have to do. The original game rules were rules for fighting at 1:1 scale combats. And with those rules, people played out palace intrigues, heist style capers, dungeon crawls, all other mixes of combat or non-combat. The rules for all RPGs are just toolkits. And where those toolkits are found wanting, the GM fills in the blanks. And the game continues, and people show up session after se...
  • 07:30 PM - jmucchiello quoted Reynard in post Is D&D Too Focused on Combat?
    These statements are true, but it is undeniable that the game rules offer support for some of those over others. The questions seem to be whether that is as it should be, and if not how to go about changing it. I suppose I was not clear. You can replace D&D in my list of play styles with GURPS, V:TM, even Toon. The group has more influence over play style than the game system.
  • 06:12 PM - Kobold Boots quoted Reynard in post Is D&D Too Focused on Combat?
    These statements are true, but it is undeniable that the game rules offer support for some of those over others. The questions seem to be whether that is as it should be, and if not how to go about changing it. Personally, I'm fine with it the way it is. I really don't want the designers telling me how to play the game beyond frameworks that already exist. Then again, I've spent tons of time filling in the holes over the years and feel that if I hadn't, I wouldn't have learned how to DM well. Of course "well" is open to anyone's opinion once they play with me. I'm not gassing myself up, just stating how I feel about it.
  • 05:07 PM - Kobold Boots quoted Reynard in post Is D&D Too Focused on Combat?
    Do you feel the same way in regards to combat? Do you think the game is trying to give PCs "participation trophies" in combat, too? Do you think combat is a situation in which players should not expect to necessarily be able to participate or meaningfully contribute? Yup. Characters are not going to be able to meaningfully contribute in all cases and all scenarios. That's why character generation and how you choose to build your character matter. However, that's not to say that players don't think outside the box and make a difference or that if I run into a fully optimized team I'm not going to have done the math on their builds and know how to kill them.
  • 04:31 PM - Kobold Boots quoted Reynard in post Is D&D Too Focused on Combat?
    ...uilding encounters -- to support this. But a big part of that is the game system making sure everyone is viable in the scenario. One subsystem that i think manages this pretty well overall is Starfinder's ship combat. Ship combat roles are disassociated from character classes -- the technomancer is as good a potential pilot as the soldier for example -- and each role has mechanical actions they can take that have specific results. Commanders can give orders and offer support, gunners attack, science and engineering can mitigate damage or improve attacks and defenses and so on. So maybe a "social combat" system could be developed that keeps the "face" (the "pilot" of the social encounter) but adds an advisor role and a bodyguard role and a so on. Then you add a back and forth system where the sides are trying to wear down each others resolves and resistances and when enough "social damage" is done, the encounter is over and the consequences take place. I hear where you're coming from Reynard, but it's not the responsibility of the rules system to ensure that all players have fun. That's largely on the DM and players. What you're suggesting, to me at least, looks like the rules being responsible such that every player gets a "participation trophy" even if they aren't specifically geared for whatever is going on at the time. I don't subscribe to that being a great way to structure a game and think it takes too much away from the actual people at the table. Balance doesn't have to mean, every character useful all the time. "Social combat" to me, means "Write better plot and take ideas from the players so they are engaged" Thanks KB

Tuesday, 30th January, 2018

  • 04:13 PM - Ovinomancer quoted Reynard in post Is D&D Too Focused on Combat?
    "We try to convince the baron to write us a letter so we can get to the capital without being molested by guards" does not need to be handled terribly differently in the game rules than "We try to move down the hallways without setting off any of the pressure plates so we can get to the treasure without being pinioned with poison darts" or "we try to cut our way through the orc line so we can get to the necromancer without having our life force sucked out." Each one represents a bunch of steps and challenges that are based on the capabilities of the PC as written on the character sheet, guided by the strategies and tactics of the players. The problem with treating the first as special, requiring convincing statements, is that it becomes a game of "GM May I?" very quickly. Imagine the opposite where the outcome of combat was determined by how well you described your attacks and feints and was based primarily on whether the GM liked what you said, what their mood was and whether their kids had r...


Page 1 of 29 1234567891011 ... LastLast

0 Badges

Reynard's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites