View Profile: Pour - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • Myrhdraak's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:52 PM
    We are not playing that often these days, so I do not get the chance to see the rule changes in action that often. However, I had a nice two days session using the rules a week or two ago. So far the rule changes and the combat simulations have played out quite well. The number of rounds needed to face the enemies are so far very predictable, allowing me to really plan the adventure ahead and...
    236 replies | 22598 view(s)
    1 XP
  • AbdulAlhazred's Avatar
    Sunday, 28th October, 2018, 01:21 AM
    Its a pretty good encounter power. Probably about right, I'd value the effect at half a W, and the attack part by itself would be a bit weak without that, so it seems like it probably slides in about right. A little situational, but chances are good you'd find a reasonably opportunity to use it in each fight where it would work better than an at-will. Anyway, the daze pretty well makes it better...
    22 replies | 2436 view(s)
    0 XP
No More Results
About Pour

Basic Information

Date of Birth
December 15, 1984 (33)
About Pour
Introduction:
Location:
NJ, USA
Age Group:
25-30

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
931
Posts Per Day
0.24
Last Post
mIRC / Maptool Game Group Seeking 1 More for 13th Age (and more) Saturday, 29th March, 2014 04:02 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
17
General Information
Last Activity
Monday, 9th March, 2015 02:40 PM
Join Date
Tuesday, 22nd January, 2008
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0

4 Friends

  1. AbdulAlhazred AbdulAlhazred is offline

    Member

    AbdulAlhazred
  2. Myrhdraak Myrhdraak is offline

    Member

    Myrhdraak
  3. Rechan Rechan is offline

    Member

    Rechan
  4. ShadowDenizen ShadowDenizen is offline

    Member

    ShadowDenizen
Showing Friends 1 to 4 of 4
No results to show...

Saturday, 1st October, 2016

  • 04:34 PM - Rune mentioned Pour in post IRON DM 2016! (Sign-up and Scheduling)
    I know it's a long-shot, but I'm going to shout out to some heavy-hitters from days of yore: el-remmen, Wulf Ratbane, seasong, incognito, Enkhidu, Quickbeam, ajanders, Pour, Plane Sailing, Piratecat One more slot to compete in IRON DM 2016! Step right up!

Monday, 19th January, 2015

  • 09:28 PM - Rune mentioned Pour in post Scheduling Thread for IRON DM 2014
    What? Nobody wants to step up and challenge PnP? Perhaps a contestant from days of yore might be willing to give you a run for your money? Wulf Ratbane? seasong? Quickbeam? Nifft? el-remmen? Enkhidu? howandwhy99? InVinoVeritas? Iron Sky? ajanders? Pour? BriarMonkey? steeldragons? Lwaxy? Dragonwriter?

Sunday, 26th January, 2014

  • 08:16 AM - Quickleaf mentioned Pour in post D&D 4.5E (Not Essentials)
    Pour A really good example of what I think you're describing is in Dragon#394, in an article entitled "Unearthed Arcana: The Awakened Psion" by Peter Schaefer & Robert J. Schwalb. It outlines a system for improvising a range of cool effects for a psion's powers, along with potential consequences for when it goes wrong. Maybe it's a bit extreme to be expanded for all psionic power source PCs, but I think it's a good example of a "guidelines for improv" type system. Another good example I found was the bard power "Versatile Glamour" from one of the PHB2 bard paragon paths. Though it was a bit too defined and combat oriented, I like how it is essentially several powers in one. Of course, with a spell like "Cloud of Daggers" or psionic powers it's easy to come up with creative noncombat uses. Martial powers, however, are a bit trickier; for example take a fighter power like "Come and Get It"...besides using it to lure enemies into a trap with the forced pull, I don't know how that would ...

Sunday, 19th January, 2014

  • 10:04 PM - Quickleaf mentioned Pour in post The 4e Solo Thread
    ...6 solo lurker) by the Jester Enraged Cave Troll (level 7 solo brute) by Nemesis Destiny Kobold Horde (9 solo skirmisher) by Quickleaf Shammu, Psion of the Order (11 solo controller) by (Psi)SeveredHead Beast of Bechaeux (13 solo brute) by Quickleaf Terakalir, steam-augmented dragon (14 solo soldier) by RangerWickett Ghost Council Swarm (15 solo brute) by RangerWickett Lurpask, Vexing Bugbear (16 solo skirmisher) by the Jester Mutated Umber Hulk (16 solo controller) by the Jester Trapper (18 solo lurker) by the Jester Lurborask, Grimlock Priest of Jubilex (20 solo controller) by the Jester Yuan-ti Anathema (21 solo brute) by (Psi)SeveredHead Desverendi, Spirit of the Land (23 solo controller/brute/lurker) by (Psi)SeveredHead Genius Loci (30 solo controller) by the Jester Shaktari, Queen of Mariliths (34 solo skirmisher) by Pour
  • 09:59 PM - Quickleaf mentioned Pour in post The 4e Solo Thread
    Pour Yikes! That is one scary monster. The only thing I noticed missing from her stat block is improved critical hit damage for the falchion. It should at least be +3d6 for the high crit property, and you probably could have set it at +6d6 or even +8d6 and still been fair. With 12 attacks per round, she absolutely should be crit-fishing. If the players can do it... ;)

Thursday, 29th August, 2013

  • 10:36 AM - pemerton mentioned Pour in post Difference From 10 Years Ago?
    ...mechanical models of elves, dwarves, knights, etc? Or if I read a module - say, Bastion of Broken Souls for 3E - and see some interesting ideas in it - say, a Night Hag dream traveller oracle, or an angel who is a living gate for a pocket plane where a god has been exiled - am I forfeiting ownership by incorporating those ideas into my game? When I used those ideas I had to mechanically translate them from 3E to RM; and I also had to ignore some silly advice from the module writer around framing and NPC motivations and possible actions - but I don't generally buy modules for those sorts of details - I am looking for cool ideas, and for nice maps and locations. Instead of giving examples of what you do in your own game, people seem to have moved towards discussing a "standard" game experience, <snip> Maybe it's a 4e thing or even a 3e thing or a WotC thing in general.I see plenty of 4e people talking about what they do in their own games - me, Manbearcat, Storminator, S'mon, Pour, Jester and others (though some have left the boards due to being fed up with edition-warrior dogpiling). But different games foster different sorts of techniques, and so different sorts of discussions about them. In a system in which mechanics are conceived of as gameworld physics engines (RM, RQ, most of 3E, good chunks of AD&D's action resolution mechanics) then discussions of techniques naturally drift towards new physics models (falling damage used to be a popular one; hit points and wounding is another perennial; two weapon fighting seems to come up quite a bit too). In a system in which mechanics are in the first instance conceived of as metagame - ie for resolving a scene or a conflict of narrational authority - then once someone has chosen a system (be it 4e, or HeroWars/Quest, or whatever) then there's probably going to be less discussin of varying the basic mechanic - you'd just change games for that - and more discussion of framing and resolution of conflicts within ...

Thursday, 25th July, 2013

  • 04:05 PM - keterys mentioned Pour in post EPIC5-2 Dragons Dark (Free L28 Adventure)
    Pour Thanks for the praise! It's sometimes hard to believe that LFR's Epic adventures are free. :) I'll admit, I occasionally wonder if I could have taken the time spent on Epic and kickstarted my own game, or gotten a gig writing for 13th age, or any number of things that might have resulted in actual money. I've largely found that the pay isn't that much, and it's a lot more about the pleasure in creating something and having others enjoy it, so Free gets a lot more folks enjoying it. It's been time well spent on an area of the game where there was so much glorious unexplored room to play around :) Maybe someday it'll even create some opportunities for me. Who knows: focusing on the last two adventures first. Look for 5-3 in an October time frame and 6-1 (the conclusion) at Winter Fantasy in January, presumably released to the website in early February.

Tuesday, 11th June, 2013

  • 08:32 AM - Quickleaf mentioned Pour in post What level is your 4e game? (Poll)
    Tony Vargas Yes, I agree, and it seems there's a chorus of others who agree with you. I'd find it challenging to write a module at epic because there's so much campaign story that's gone on before that determines the focus of the players. I think there are two ways to handle it more easily: Do an adventure path with epic support like WotBS or (I believe) Zeitgeist will be. Follow Pour 's idea to make a Dungeon Delve product strictly for epic tier.

Sunday, 5th May, 2013

  • 06:14 PM - Blackbrrd mentioned Pour in post Campaign brainstorming 4e point of light setting
    Thanks @Pour I thought I might list some typical medieval trade goods: Spices, Linen, Paper, Perfume, Oil, Wax, Wine, Wool, Fur, Cotton, Salt, Cloth, Tapestries, Glass, Metals, Grain, Tallow, Leather, Hemp, Honey I could see the region as a whole export: Wool, Fur, Metals, Glass, Metals (Copper, tin, lead, silver), Tallow, Leather, Honey I could see the region being self-sufficient with: Linen, Wine, Grain. I could see the region importing: Spices, Paper, Perfume, Oil, Wax, Wine, Cotton, Salt, Cloth, Tapestries, Hemp. I think most of the imports and exports would happen through Fallcrest as roads in medieval times where notoriously bad - if not built by Romans (or the Nerath empire in this case). Maybe the road between Hammerfast and Fallcrest is one of those roads?

Thursday, 2nd May, 2013

  • 05:28 PM - pemerton mentioned Pour in post Pros and Cons of going mainstream
    When I read commentary such as this from someone who should (must?) be intimately familiar with the source material, I am left stunned...stunned. <snip> Player empowerment =/= GM relegated solely to "rules guy." Facepalm or SMH is the appropriate internet response?My first thought is that, as part of a marketing campaign, this is Mearls as an echo-chamber for a certain sort of potential customer who is not especially happy with the current direction of WotC's games. You may be right, though, that he doesn't have a good feel for what people are doing with the game - but then why hasn't he asked Chris Perkins, who presumably is in an office/cubicle down the hall somewhere! I guess it's possible that most home games are crap and you, I, S'mon, Quickleaf, Pour and others are some breakout exceptions. But suppose that were true - which I personally doubt - is there any particular reason to think that things were once upon a time different in some past golden decade? I played quite a bit of, and saw plenty of others playing a lot of, crap D&D back in the 80s and 90s.

Wednesday, 1st May, 2013


Friday, 26th April, 2013

  • 08:14 AM - pemerton mentioned Pour in post I ran my first Epic session last Sunday
    Pour, I'm enjoying your writeups. And am getting a sci-fantasy-horror vibe from them. When the party split, how did you handle it at the table? Several sessions ago now I had a split party, and tried round-robinning across each of the the three groups to keep everyone engaged, but it didn't work especially well - in part because I didn't feel I was achieving meaningful mechanical connections across each group.

Monday, 22nd April, 2013

  • 09:10 AM - pemerton mentioned Pour in post I ran my first Epic session last Sunday
    Pour, cool writeup, thanks. I've duly taken notes of your abominations of ignorance, given that one of the lead PCs in my game is an Invoker/Wizard/Divine Philosopher/Sage of Ages who serves (among others) Erathis, Ioun and Vecna.

Sunday, 14th April, 2013


Friday, 5th April, 2013

  • 04:58 PM - Nemesis Destiny mentioned Pour in post D&DN going down the wrong path for everyone.
    My response? "OK. Makes sense." While I think we can all agree that this makes sense, I'd be curious to see the reactions from fans of the game if it were PF-isms that we were discussing, dissecting, bashing, and asking proponents to justify for inclusion in the game going forward. I think that was Pour 's point more than anything, because I really wasn't offended by that post.

Sunday, 31st March, 2013

  • 04:43 PM - Ratskinner mentioned Pour in post D&DN going down the wrong path for everyone.
    ...a baseline, some standard a Bard meets to attack and defend herself on an 'adequate' level, regardless of build options, something inherent in the class. Likewise, a Fighter should have some sort of baseline social and exploration potential. I think this is the heart of it, but I think there are issues that make it more complicated. Issue 1: All D&D tables do not share the same levels of balance between the pillars. Frex: I've seen games where taking extra languages was an important part of things...simply by eliminating "common". So trading utility between pillars is a tricky business, and not always viable. I think some of the "unbalanced" charges leveled at 3e are due to cultural shifts in playstyle over the life of the edition. (Not all of them, to be sure, but some.) Issue 2: Different players and groups have different conceptions of how wide the gaps between Useless, Weak, Able, Strong, and Primary Contributions should be. For instance, given the above, some characters that Pour might term useless in combat might be termed only weak by ForeverSlayer. I think a lot of its detractors felt that 4e's range between Useless and Primary was too narrow. Issue 3: (Conflict) Resolution is different in all three pillars. Which makes it very hard to quantify exactly how to translate one to the other. I think one of the purposes of the open playtest is to avoid solving these problems at the design(er) level, and let vox populi do it for them. So, in the end, "Its balanced" will mean "most people liked it this way." I could be wrong on that, though.

No results to display...
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Monday, 10th February, 2014

  • 04:17 AM - Dungeoneer quoted Pour in post What should 4e steal from 13th Age?
    Steal the Icons...and Setting. Steal the Magic Items limits. Personally...I would just get a cheap copy of the 4e Players Handbook...then rip the binding off and glue it on the 13th Age book...and see if your players are happier. :) (Btw I enjoyed 4th Ed...I just like 13th Age more) LOL. I think they'd notice when they suddenly couldn't flank or charge. But it IS tempting! Death Attacks w/ Last Gasp Saves on Select Elites/Solos (to allow a little more death attack into 4e, but not quite save or suck given the requirement of hit, then save... but that'll probably be controversial) I haven't tried this yet, but this reminds me of one other thing I want to steal from 13th Age... the death save systems. I think the harder saves combined with a free recovery on a natural 20 is way more dramatic. And it's mechanically very similar to 4e anyway so there should be no problem dropping it in.

Sunday, 9th February, 2014

  • 06:32 AM - Dire Bare quoted Pour in post Tyranny of Dragons D&D minis
    You don't really believe that's going to be their only price point when their site and operations are established, do you? I do. They actually address it on the Kickstarter page. While nothing is laid in stone yet, they expect to sell customized miniatures in the $15-20 range, which is right where they are at with the Kickstarter and the "stronger-but-less-detail" material. It's also clear they feel that as 3D printing technology rapidly improves, so will the cost-per-miniature situation, but that's speculation. I think the idea is cool and I hope their Kickstarter is successful, but it's hardly a game-changer . . . . yet . . .
  • 04:13 AM - jodyjohnson quoted Pour in post Tyranny of Dragons D&D minis
    You don't really believe that's going to be their only price point when their site and operations are established, do you? No, I don't. I think it could be lower or it could be higher. If you referring to the player character market only, I agree that this is the future for special snowflake PCs. As far as DM/group minis, I don't see it happening. The appeal of Hero Forge is customization of character minis. DDM and PFB minis are DM minis and aren't about customization. It's about iconics, villains, npcs and monsters. And having them arrive painted.
  • 12:20 AM - jodyjohnson quoted Pour in post Tyranny of Dragons D&D minis
    Same. I happily backed this and will be making use of it, especially as time goes on and they expand their customized options. This is the future of miniatures, in my opinion. Pledge $30 - Receive one customized 28mm-30mm character (domestic shipping included). Pledge $20 - Receive one customized 28mm-30mm character in lower detail material (domestic shipping included). If that's the future, I'm buying my mass produced pre-paints now while they are in the $2-10 range.

Sunday, 26th January, 2014

  • 02:35 AM - Mistwell quoted Pour in post [L&L] Campaigns in D&D Next
    @Mistwell Sure, I'll defend them, largely on the point of contention what has been going on in this thread is nothing close to "bad behavior". I'm sure some other threads have thrown muck back and forth, but rereading this thread I just don't see it. It's not just this thread, but it happened in this thread as well. Here is an example: Oh we're playing it like that, are we? Alright: Whenever he slaps me in the face, there's always going to be someone trying to convince me I should be thankful for the human contact. Every time he opens his mouth (or hits "publish" on his WotC blog) the words are plain as day but apologists pop out of the woodwork to defend him. It's quite valid to feel something, then to qualify why they feel it, which was done. Then a friendly, conversational approach was taken by someone else who felt differently. I found the discussion between pemerton and Kamikaze, with a dash of Balesir and Sadras, to be rather enlightening, actually. In fact it was goin...

Saturday, 25th January, 2014

  • 10:19 PM - Quickleaf quoted Pour in post D&D 4.5E (Not Essentials)
    I'd also like to see more attention given to the possibilities beyond what's written, be it suggestions on what a monster can do that isn't exactly listed but rather implied, or how powers can work in skill challenges or general play- not just combat. The basic nature of the power blocks and stat blocks is extremely convenient for a lot of us as a skeleton to build on, but far too many people saw them as the limits of what could actually be done with a given power or monster. Cut the head off one of the major hate-ons of the edition and draw attention to the freedom of play it actually gives and the convenience/quickness/improvisation aspect of the simplified or organized blocks in conjunction with good math. I totally second this! It's also tricky to offer guidelines for monsters/powers that don't themselves become codified into some sort of power stunt list. I mean, beyond some sort of combination of page 42 and the Tutorial: Terrain Powers article, what would that even look like?
  • 06:49 PM - Mistwell quoted Pour in post [L&L] Campaigns in D&D Next
    Mistwell Well, that's one way to embrace those feeling indifferent or suspect with the next edition, indirectly ridicule their perceptions, you know, instead of talking it out like @Kamikaze Midget. We understand you are a strong proponent of 5e. More power to you. And it must be taxing to see all the reactions to it when they don't align with your own, but you're better than this Mist... I am not indirectly ridiculing the attitude I'm highlighting here, I feel I am being pretty direct about it. I am fine with legitimate criticism of 5e or any game. I engage in plenty of criticism of 5e myself (perhaps you missed my long rant about how I don't like the healing system much). However sometimes people take very minor comments, or simply comments that are trying to explain what direction 5e is going or what things the creators think it does well, and then they go out of their way to take it as an insult against their preferred edition. And I am calling out that bad behavior. And i...
  • 05:50 PM - sabrinathecat quoted Pour in post D&D 4.5E (Not Essentials)
    I agree with a ton of the stuff listed, particularly with Nemesis. My only two cents add-on would be... can we have a real Necromancer? Oh, you mean someone that can animate dead, control undead, drain life energy, and not be a total wuss in battle? Yeah, that would be nice. I think the illusionist is the only specialist wizard that didn't get short-shrift.

Friday, 17th January, 2014

  • 01:23 AM - fjw70 quoted Pour in post Pushing the 4th edition envelope
    I've thought a lot about the problems with condition tracking and while the easiest way to handle this comes the way of Quickleaf's suggestions on the DM side, I wonder if we couldn't have most conditions overwrite each other along certain established chains, ala slowed, immobilized, restrained, dazed, dominated, stunned, helpless, unconscious, dying or petrified; if something higher up the chain affects a target, it suffers that condition and loses the others. Might even work with ongoing damage of the same type, or is that actually the official ruling? Mark, prone, and flank are really key to the tactical combat, in my mind, and achieving and losing them should be something that evolves and is tracked. I suppose you could have a game of precedence with all class features, and mark is overridden by things like warlock's curse and oath of enmity, or vice versa. I like that chain of conditions idea.

Friday, 10th January, 2014

  • 06:08 AM - Zelkon quoted Pour in post Reply if you love 4e
    I really put a crazy lot of faith in the management, before I realized most the design leads disliked the edition or simply never understood it. Chris Perkins and the freelancers produced the memorable stuff. You know, I actually championed Mearls at first, too. After the bumbling of the first two years of the edition, it had to get better. I really thought his leadership push was going into proliferating 4e across a wider breadth of tastes, interests, and play styles while keeping in line with the stable core. Part of me hoped for Paizo-level attention to the edition and materials to buy and run. But they tanked it, instead. They freaking tanked it. *Snip for length* Are you me? The last 4e magazine came out today, so 4e is officially dead. No longer will we see any support for this beautiful, horribly managed game.
  • 03:55 AM - Warunsun quoted Pour in post Reply if you love 4e
    All this talk got me thinking, anyone else wish they'd released this... 60213 It would be nice even if they released it as pure/only PDF on dndclassics.com. I would buy it just to read it. The manuscript must have been finished. Heck, it may have even been fully formatted.

Thursday, 9th January, 2014

  • 11:50 AM - fjw70 quoted Pour in post Reply if you love 4e
    Entirely agree with @sabrinathecat . 4e just wasn't given its proper due. If they'd only loosen up the GSL... All this talk got me thinking, anyone else wish they'd released this... 60213 NV was the 'default' 4e setting and, despite the intentional vagueness with room to grow, man, I really wanted that book before they closed shop. Recently picking up Monsters of the Nentir Vale only made me want it even more. It would have been the prime material component of a pretty elaborate setting, given Underdark, Plane Above and Below, Feywild, Elemental Chaos, Demonomicon, Book of Vile... err, actually, maybe we skip that one..., and really all the books. Someone needs to assemble that fluff! 4.5e is what we deserved. And no, that wasn't Essentials. The Nentir Vale book was the one thing I really wanted from 4e that I didn't get. But the Nentir Vale Monster Vault was pretty good though.
  • 11:11 AM - keterys quoted Pour in post Reply if you love 4e
    Entirely agree with @sabrinathecat . 4e just wasn't given its proper due. If they'd only loosen up the GSL...I'd have loved to see what 4e could have looked like with a better development cycle and a lot more cooks throwing out recipes. It's a damn shame, really.

Wednesday, 8th January, 2014

  • 11:32 AM - delericho quoted Pour in post Why I Think D&DN is In Trouble
    Man, I would have bought that up. Incorporating everything they learned along the way, math fixes and errata, but also the lessons of late-edition adventure and monster design from the get go, catered to all adventuring tiers, and eliminated the redundancy... It would have been awesome. Unfortunately, the backlash from 3.5e was such that they didn't feel they could go down that route. Instead, Essentials fills much the same niche for 4e - a new set of core rulebooks, a new entry point, with a cleaned up ruleset. It's just that instead of introducing the "cleaned up ruleset" all at once (as in 3.5e), Essentials merely incorporated the incremental changes to date. The problem was that by making it clear that this was not 4.5e, but rather just a new set of supplements, they pulled the market out from under those books - enough existing 4e players simply elected to stick with what they had, and likely get the updates via DDI, that Essentials never really took off. I suspect it did well en...

Monday, 30th December, 2013

  • 05:29 PM - Mistwell quoted Pour in post What Would You Put In a 5E Red Box?
    Four miniatures representing characters/races and pre-made sheets. I hope not. That, IMO, sets the wrong tone for new players. Miniatures should not be implied as the default means of playing the game.

Tuesday, 3rd September, 2013

  • 07:20 AM - pemerton quoted Pour in post Difference From 10 Years Ago?
    I was mentioned! <snip> I do wish I had the discipline to continue with my campaign summary thread, though. So many stories worth sharing. That and the conversions/homebrews are the real reason I still stop by the site. And, of course, mentions!Well, you were mentioned because you were in my mind (most recently, at least) for your Epic thread. If you don't have the discipline to make more posts on that thread, at least leave a comment on my "PCs kill Ometh" thread!

Monday, 2nd September, 2013


Wednesday, 10th July, 2013

  • 07:08 PM - the Jester quoted Pour in post (Underdark/Torog) The King's Highway
    This article is really good. http://nuntonlibrary.wikia.com/wiki/Torog True- but it doesn't talk about the characteristics of the Highway, which is what I'm after. I seem to recall that Underdark mentions some terrain effects or hazards or... or something like that, I dunno... I can't recall!

Thursday, 6th June, 2013


Monday, 3rd June, 2013

  • 11:18 AM - Will Doyle quoted Pour in post Dungeon/Dragon Submissions This Window
    As an aside, wouldn't it be awesome if every month's Dungeon had a Heroic, Paragon, and Epic offering to cover the breadth of the edition at this juncture? The problem with that, I guess, is that it may lead to them pushing through lower-quality adventures just to hit the quota. Plus I'm guessing they get more way more Heroic tier submissions than Epic.


Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Pour's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites