View Profile: Sadras - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Today, 11:52 AM
    I'm a big fan of Rescue at Rivenroar (4e) - it is the first adventure in the Scales of War AP. Very easy to run and highly enjoyable.
    13 replies | 274 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Today, 05:04 AM
    Well, I won't scrap the initiative in D&D as that I believe would mess around with spell duration. I don't need or want that headache. And I would keep the monster in the initiative order. What I might experiment with is the monster's additional laundry list of actions on misses or as @Hawk Diesel describes upthread as minor and major moves. One must be careful though as these minor/major moves...
    20 replies | 383 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Today, 03:42 AM
    What I liked about the concept in the OP was not so much the lack of initiative, but the creative thinking in having the monster respond to misses and what those misses could be given the laundry list provided in the same post.
    20 replies | 383 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:03 PM
    It is important to note that a character having low scores of INT, WIS or CHA doesn't necessarily mean the character is any less stubborn or that he might even listen to reason and may instead push his agenda due to ego or for any other reason (bribery or coercion). In Rise of Tiamat, there is a tiefling sorcerer, Maccath the Crimson, that is available for rescue from a large white dragon. The...
    316 replies | 5547 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:22 PM
    I'd also go so far as to leave that is in the player's domain. If and how the character can be persuaded on an issue should be left in the player's domain, just as the DM controls his/her NPCs. So I don't think a persuasion check can just easily be called for any time a player wishes to push his character's agenda/ideas over other characters. It needs to make sense in the fiction for the...
    316 replies | 5547 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:53 PM
    This is by far the most sensitive ruling you have on your list and I'd be weary about changing this without real experience in the base game already like many upthread have said. That said, I do think Rests and Magic are the two major considerations for DMs. Many (and personally I) consider this a terrible idea. You'd have to explain why a higher level fighter with a greater number of...
    37 replies | 916 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:38 PM
    Why does the DM need to get involved? The players amongst themselves can determine which arguments would sway their characters. There is no need for a save ends - that would be foolish.
    316 replies | 5547 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:21 PM
    This is a tall order. You want the cantrip to be effectively weaker than 1st level damaging spells, so no quadratic power up, but also useful enough to use as a viable action presumably at those higher levels? But maybe not? Maybe balance is of no concern and it is purely thematic and your idea of magic in the setting? Other than making cantrips a limited resource the only other option I can...
    97 replies | 2435 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:24 PM
    Off the top of my head... 1. Legendary Actions is one way using the mechanics of the game. 2. Changing up the terrain is another way - so for instance the white dragon's cold breath weapon attack might make the area affected difficult terrain for a round. 3. Using the in-game fiction - The missed club attack by the giant might force movement to have avoided the attack, at the character's...
    20 replies | 383 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:12 PM
    Okay but from this I'm understanding that if all the PCs are successful the Giant does not act, he just gets hammered away...until a miss or near miss does in fact present itself.
    20 replies | 383 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:52 PM
    Sounds great - but just so I can get my head around it I have some questions. If the Giant does or does not miss Jim, is it Jim the spellcaster's turn next? If Jim the Spellcaster misses, is it the Giant's turn again? What about Craig the Rogue and Marge the Cleric, when do they go...?
    20 replies | 383 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:21 PM
    I pretty much agree with this but also have no issue with it. If a player thinks up a well thought out tactic or makes a strong case in a social encounter (i.e. persuasion) then I as DM will likely assess the DC to be lower should I deem a roll to be necessary in order to determine success or failure for the tactic or the argument made respectively. EDIT: People learn and hopefully get...
    316 replies | 5547 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Saturday, 8th December, 2018, 02:55 PM
    And you haven't even mentioned the variant Inspiration/Fate like rule mixing, the converted 2e Complete Guides for 5e, the converted 3e Prestige Classes and the homebrewed 4e Epic styled 5e. @Celebrim the playerbase might have tinkered more with the very imperfect systems of 1e, 2e and BECMI which is understandable, but in terms of system mixing I'm in agreement with @dave2008 - 5e seems to...
    61 replies | 1934 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Saturday, 8th December, 2018, 02:44 PM
    Lightning Bolts 2-2=0 Wonder 15+1=16 The Wonder of You
    266 replies | 3497 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Friday, 7th December, 2018, 03:16 PM
    Similar to your experience, except I began to dislike 4e the more I played it and I love 5e. However unlike your obstacle where I agree with you it appears harder to port 5e'isms into 4e, 4e'isms are easier to integrate into 5e and much of that is already done via the designers. For my 5e blend I would take from earlier editions... From 4e skill challenges, expand on the multiclass feats....
    100 replies | 1531 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Friday, 7th December, 2018, 11:29 AM
    But why do their characters hate them? And unless the gnomes are evil, the question arises Are the characters generally evil?
    198 replies | 6656 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Friday, 7th December, 2018, 11:19 AM
    Level of Exhaustion, Equipment/Clothing damage or loss, Lingering Injury, Time (Daylight loss), Time (Environmental Factors - powerful wind strikes the cliff side every hour, making checks harder), Time (Sunburn), Inspiration Loss, Hit Dice.
    51 replies | 887 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Thursday, 6th December, 2018, 01:34 PM
    Lightning Bolts 21-2=19 Paralysis 11 Polymorph 9 Wonder 11+1-12
    266 replies | 3497 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Monday, 3rd December, 2018, 01:09 PM
    Similarly to your Soul Abattoir and collapsing Shadowfell example where you had not worked out what would happen on a failure? It allows you to avoid the "death" option and to use an alternative. This informs me that setting the stakes is not something enforced at your table, and so it is something the DM (you) might offer if you want the players invested.
    19 replies | 580 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Monday, 3rd December, 2018, 09:23 AM
    Binding 2-2=0 Lightning Bolts 25 Magic Missiles 17 Paralysis 18 Polymorph 22 Web 7+1=8 Wonder 23
    266 replies | 3497 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Monday, 3rd December, 2018, 09:02 AM
    For our own table, since I prefer a slower progression, the house rule is to zero out the XPs once a level is obtained.
    48 replies | 1202 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Thursday, 29th November, 2018, 12:16 AM
    0. Adventure/Session Name 1. Setting the Scene - a brief description, key notes/NPCs 2. The Event - introduces the conflict/quest - could be a singular or combination of the pillars. 3. Interesting Features - terrain/weather conditions, monsters, DCs...etc 4. Small Map (only if necessary) 5. Conclusion Adventure Name: We're the Rats Setting the Scene
    50 replies | 1292 view(s)
    4 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Wednesday, 28th November, 2018, 02:43 PM
    Sporelord Master of Fungi Mycorcerer Mycoconjurer Podcaster Mushrummoner
    18 replies | 449 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Wednesday, 28th November, 2018, 09:01 AM
    I'm thinking something along the lines of a mystery, such as MiBG, where the party arrives in town and becomes unwitting heroes before being entangled into the political machinations of the various groups vying for power... The other option would be to be a travel/exploratory adventure, fantastical sites, terrifying monsters...that is hard to pull off. Stardust and PotC kept it...
    157 replies | 5004 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Tuesday, 27th November, 2018, 03:50 PM
    I will likely purchase DoMM, CoS, ToA (+/- 200$ with postage) and pick up two kickstarters I was late on (+/- R150$ with postage), but other than that I have no more plans for purchasing than the odd DM's Guild AP guide. I've long ago abandoned mini's and tile-sets and I have more than enough material to keep me going for the next 3 years given my tables' frequency. Fortunately for my wallet...
    29 replies | 794 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Tuesday, 27th November, 2018, 10:07 AM
    I think you're definitely jumping the gun. I'm playing a massive campaign which includes a mashup of MiBG (Done), LofCS (1 session left), SKT (Chapter 3) with the backdrop of ToD (currently RoT) - so I'm years behind. :.-( I still intend to run CoS, ToA, Dragon Heist and Mad Mage someday. I'm always scouring pukunui's enhancing threads years later. ;)
    92 replies | 4403 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Friday, 23rd November, 2018, 02:04 PM
    I have not investigated the link in detail but do the Battle Deeds account for tier? Because inputting that makes it somewhat more complicated.
    33 replies | 1022 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Friday, 23rd November, 2018, 10:22 AM
    I can clearly see lots of work went into this so well done. Just a question, and I might have missed it as I mainly glossed/scanned over the two pdfs, but (1) How does Raise Dead work in your campaign AND I have to ask (2) Why do all clerics get that spell and resurrection? It just seems to me that if one is true to separating by domain/sphere not every deity has that kind of authority. Of...
    6 replies | 372 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Friday, 23rd November, 2018, 10:03 AM
    Good find. In a few months I will be running a mass combat scenario (end of Tyranny of Dragons) and this link will certainly be useful. I suspect I will have to make necessary adjustments for 5e's mechanics but that should not be too much of a problem. The battle deeds certainly can inspire, perhaps event influence, the direction of the fiction.
    33 replies | 1022 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Thursday, 22nd November, 2018, 06:16 PM
    Fair enough. Our table is used to using the exhaustion track for many a thing - dropping below 0hp, lack of sleep, recharging abilities...etc IMO rolling them all in one go makes the game more tense and PCs now immediately scramble to heal fallen PCs not willing to risk a death.
    84 replies | 2080 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Thursday, 22nd November, 2018, 04:19 PM
    The mini-game should be trying to not fall to 0hp - dodging, using cover, disengaging, healing...etc After 0hp you auto rack up an exhaustion - that is your penalty. You should not roll your death saves on your turn as that defeats the drama. You roll them all when someone comes to check you out - so there is no meta knowledge.
    84 replies | 2080 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Thursday, 22nd November, 2018, 02:55 PM
    That blasted turkey is ruining everything. :)
    491 replies | 7012 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Thursday, 22nd November, 2018, 02:51 PM
    This makes sense. It would definitely be a must have for every table.
    129 replies | 5230 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Thursday, 22nd November, 2018, 02:29 PM
    At this stage, probably a planar adventure seems obvious. Otherwise I would support an Advanced DMG, just for completeness purposes. I do most of this myself, but it would be nice to have this in published form. MAGIC: Reflecting on lower level magic settings, equitable cantrip replacement, introducing spell-casting costs, additional and/or hardcore sorcerer wild magic table/s, protection...
    129 replies | 5230 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Thursday, 22nd November, 2018, 10:37 AM
    Ah yes, they travelled to Lunitari with Kitiara and Sturm.
    13 replies | 422 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Thursday, 22nd November, 2018, 10:32 AM
    You may also house rule that the first round after being healed he is only allowed a move action as he first has to come to and get a grip of his surroundings. He would not be as alert as when he first entered into combat. So he is climatising to the situation around him, therefore he only gets a move action which is usually, grabbing his fallen items and standing up since he would more than...
    84 replies | 2080 view(s)
    4 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Thursday, 22nd November, 2018, 10:29 AM
    An additional level of exhaustion or perhaps a Lingering Injury (per DMG) or if hardcore both.
    84 replies | 2080 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Thursday, 22nd November, 2018, 09:41 AM
    Feather Falling 6 Invisibility 2-2=0 Headshot Spell Turning 6+1=7
    491 replies | 7012 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Wednesday, 21st November, 2018, 02:29 PM
    (1) The Invisible King is nothing but a wizard djinni, who is either an outlaw in his native plane and therefore in hiding or is indeed a liberated Djinni enjoying the comforts of the Prime Material Plane, and in both instances the invisible stalkers are his underlings, being his slaves or willing servants. The djinni fiercely protects his anonymity using agents to derail or hijack the PCs...
    8 replies | 344 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Wednesday, 21st November, 2018, 10:50 AM
    Whether @OverlordOcelot collected real data or not appears to remain very much in dispute, but one thing we can all agree on is that his post was the final purple worm that broke the camel's back. Aaaand with that I'm done.
    74 replies | 2621 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Wednesday, 21st November, 2018, 10:06 AM
    Feather Falling 8 Invisibility 10-2=8 Shooting Stars 4+1=5 Spell Storing 4 Spell Turning 9
    491 replies | 7012 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Wednesday, 21st November, 2018, 02:24 AM
    I feel as a DM you really have to work at it, especially the higher the level of the party, in order to exhaust their resources to affect play. Also the mechanic the table uses for rests is critically important - I cannot stress this enough. I have fully depleted the party's resources once during an 8th-level game in the module MiBG where I planned 9 encounters throughout the city in one...
    39 replies | 980 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Tuesday, 20th November, 2018, 09:42 PM
    Just for clarification purposes, if I acquire DDB, I can input Xanathar's spells manually but I cannot share it with my players? How do they control the latter? Keywords?
    124 replies | 3961 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Tuesday, 20th November, 2018, 11:06 AM
    Feather Falling 9+1=10 Free Action 6 Invisibility 10 Shooting Stars 10 Spell Storing 10-2 =8 Spell Turning 10
    491 replies | 7012 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Monday, 19th November, 2018, 11:05 AM
    Feather Falling 12 Free Action 13 Invisibility 15-2 =13 You cannot hide from me. Shooting Stars 13 Spell Storing 9 Spell Turning 12 Telekinesis 2+1=3
    491 replies | 7012 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Friday, 16th November, 2018, 01:03 PM
    Feather Falling 20 Free Action 20 Invisibility 15 Shooting Stars 20-2=18 Spell Storing 18 Spell Turning 18 Telekinesis 16+1=17
    491 replies | 7012 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Wednesday, 14th November, 2018, 01:51 PM
    Elemental Command 12+ 1 = 13 Feather Falling 19 Free Action 21 Invisibility 20 Shooting Stars 20 Spell Storing 24 - 2 =22 Spell Turning 23 Telekinesis 21
    491 replies | 7012 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Tuesday, 13th November, 2018, 02:34 PM
    Fair enough.
    491 replies | 7012 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Tuesday, 13th November, 2018, 01:08 PM
    Elemental Command 17 Feather Falling 23-2=21 Free Action 26 Invisibility 21 Shooting Stars 21+1=22 Spell Storing 23 Spell Turning 26 Telekinesis 23 Blame @akr71 for making my life difficult with the Verdana font.
    491 replies | 7012 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Monday, 12th November, 2018, 05:18 PM
    Elemental Command 18 Feather Falling 22 Free Action 23 Invisibility 24 Mind Shielding 2 Ram 8+1=9 Shooting Stars 27-2=25 Too high Spell Storing 22 Spell Turning 25 Telekinesis 24
    491 replies | 7012 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Sadras's Avatar
    Sunday, 11th November, 2018, 06:49 AM
    Elemental Command 18 Feather Falling 22 Free Action 24 Invisibility 25 Mind Shielding 10 Ram 10+1=11 Regeneration 10-2=8 Shooting Stars 28 Spell Storing 26 Spell Turning 25
    491 replies | 7012 view(s)
    0 XP
No More Results
About Sadras

Basic Information

About Sadras
About Me:
Still learning
Location:
Cape Town
Disable sharing sidebar?:
No
Sex:
Male
Age Group:
Over 40
My Game Details

Details of games currently playing and games being sought.

Town:
Cape Town
Country:
South Africa
Game Details:
A player in ASoIF and a DM for some 5e D&D campaigns

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
2,343
Posts Per Day
0.93
Last Post
Advice needed on starter adventure Today 11:52 AM

Currency

Gold Pieces
16
General Information
Last Activity
Today 12:53 PM
Join Date
Friday, 20th January, 2012
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0
My Game Details
Town:
Cape Town
Country:
South Africa
Game Details:
A player in ASoIF and a DM for some 5e D&D campaigns
Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast

Tuesday, 11th December, 2018


Monday, 10th December, 2018



Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Friday, 7th December, 2018

  • 04:28 PM - Quickleaf mentioned Sadras in post How to make an encounter with falling great distances interesting and dangerous, but not deadly?
    ...extra save. Thanks for your insights! So, I definitely am not looking to make this a dice-rolling smorgasbord; 18 check would be an absurd exercise in "when do I fail?", and it's evident the adventure writers realized that too, which is why they wrote the ascent as just 3 checks. However, their design kind of neuters the tension of the ascent. Yep, my players have established a moving anchor-and-rope system as standard operating procedure in these kinds of situations. Party is equipped with a bunch of pitons (stays) & five lengths of 50' rope. Grung Druid PC has climb speed and can transform into an ape with climb speed that can carry another character up on her back (so long as climb doesn't exceed 3 hours Ė max time limit on her wild shape Ė no problem). The rest use rope system. I'm thinking of this anchor system as the last line of defense Ė it's the backup if they can't react to the fall in another way before the stay catches. Actually, combining what you're saying with Sadras' idea, the loss of pitons/rope could be a consequence of certain failed checks. I deliberately want to avoid combat or the risk of it as a time pressure (because pacing reasons & several players leap into combat if a situation smells like a fight & aarakocra would sound alarm and launch counter-offensive), however as Dioltach mentioned I could do something with inclement weather. Generally speaking, the situation as presented is a roughly 1-2 long difficult/technical climb, no external pressures. I'll be tracking their progress on a map of Kir Sabal which I'm printing at 18" x 32" and mounting to foam core, creating backing so it stands up at the table, and cutting little slits along the walkways and sticking/adhering cardboard through to simulate the walkways. Players will move their minis along these walkways. And I have some invisible flight stands we can use for stuff that doesn't fit the mold.

Thursday, 29th November, 2018

  • 04:37 AM - robus mentioned Sadras in post How would you design one page adventures?
    @Sadras Iíd call that an encounter rather than adventure. For these kind of things youíve really got to empower the DM to fill in the blanks rather than provide the full details. So for your Wererat adventure you should provide the motivation and situation for the were-rat girl. And let the DM fill in the blanks. So Iíd say: The girl has fallen in love with the son of the inn-keeper and taken a position there despite really being betrothed to the son of the chief of the were-rat tribe nearby. A search party has been hunting for her and tracks her down to the inn. If the PCs choose to intervene then adventure is helping her to resolve her conflict. I donít think it needs much more than that. Names and relationships of the primary NPCs, some ancillary monster references (some guardians to the lair, perhaps some mutant ďboss ratĒ, the location (and numbers) of the were-rat lair etc, etc). As noted above, go for more theater of mind. Itís more A-Team adventure of the week stuff... @Morrus I i...

Tuesday, 27th November, 2018


Tuesday, 20th November, 2018

  • 05:44 PM - Parmandur mentioned Sadras in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    ...hing that contradicts your already decided premise. On top of that those who do not agree and actually make the effort to present evidence that doesn't align with your foregone conclusions are labelled haters and are accused of partaking in edition warring (as opposed to just disagreeing with the group think present with a handful of the 4e community) ... then you claim those who disagree are in fact the ones in an echo chamber, really? Honestly it seems you don't really want a multi-faceted discussion you want acquiescence with what you've already decided is the correct conclusion... or perhaps a passive audience to read over your theories on roleplaying while nodding in total agreement... Don;t get me wrong I find your ideas and thoughts interesting but I'm not going to passively agree with everything you post without questioning and looking at alternate evidence and angles, if you want that well... that's what blogs are for, I'm not even sure what ManBearCat is reacting to...? Sadras providing an example of how he took SC from 4E and enriched his 5E game is...edition warring...?

Friday, 16th November, 2018

  • 10:27 AM - pemerton mentioned Sadras in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    ...t kinda falls apart.Nonsense. This goes back to fiction first as a feature of 4e compared to other D&D editions. I don't need game mechanics to tell me that an ogre is a huge bruiser that can kill most ordinary people with a single swing of its club. That's the fiction. I only need game mechanics if something happens at the table - eg a player declares that his/her PC tries to beat the ogre in a fight. And then I can adapt whatever mechanics will give voice to this fiction. If the PC is low heroid, I will probably stat the ogre as a solo or an elite - which, mechanically, gives voice to the fiction that a low heroic tier PC probably can't best an ogre on his/her own. If the PC is upper heroic, then I can use a standard ogre straight out of the MM. If the PC is on the way through paragon tier, then I will probabl use one of the ogre minions from the MM - Lancelot cuts down anything less than a full-fledged giant with a single blow from his sword! As I was discussing upthread with Sadras, this is all about fiction first, mechanics second and in direct response to that prior fiction. My question is whether doing so was worth the sacrifices made in terms of class differentiation.I've never played or GMed a campaign where the most interesting thing that distinguished PCs was how quickly they got their juice back. I'm surprised that it's such a recurring refrain in this thread.

Wednesday, 14th November, 2018

  • 04:42 AM - pemerton mentioned Sadras in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    in all editions casters have - or can have, depending on spells known - the advantage; and I've never claimed otherwise. Other posters (eg Imaro, Parmandur, Sadras) seemed to be disagreeing with me when I said that in this respect 4e differs from 5e (because what you say is not generally the case in 4e, at least as I have experienced it). If in fact they do agree with you that in 5e casters have the advantage in these non-combat, no-time-pressure situations, then most of the discussion is over. Because that's the whole difference I've been talking about with the discussion of DC-by-level, skill challenges and the like. I can't see how this would be any different in 4e than in 5e or 1e or 3e.Then reread some of my posts in this thread, some actual play reports, etc. Manbearcat has already rehearsed the bulk of it in a post not far upthread. It's not rocket science - this is RPG design tech that was pioneered over 20 years ago.

Tuesday, 13th November, 2018

  • 01:49 PM - akr71 mentioned Sadras in post Survivor Magic Rings- Feather Falling FLOATS TO VICTORY!
    Sadras fonts? I logon, I post - I've never mucked with fonts on this forum. If its at my end, it because of my work PC.
  • 12:12 AM - pemerton mentioned Sadras in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    Are they optional? Do they provide a power boost that is necessary for the higher levels? From what I remember the books presented them as a non-optional part of character advancement.Hang on - so you don't want superheroics but you do want a power boost? You said this: Epic Destinies are part of the game... you are required to select one... correct? That's not strongly supporting that's requiring it. Sure anything can be changed with enough houserules and reskins but the point is that that isn't easy But in fact it's trivial to just not use an epic destiny. Or, as MwaO pointed out, you might mandate use of the same epic destiny for everyone (eg Destined Scion was mentioned). I think anyone who found that hard wouldn't be up to the task of modifying 5e in the sorts of ways that you and Sadras are saying can be done for those who want play experience X or Y.

Friday, 9th November, 2018

  • 04:27 PM - Manbearcat mentioned Sadras in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    Sadras That is certainly an option. I personally think a well-designed module would be interesting that: A) Pushed Fail Forward for all action resolution. B) Increased Martial Charactersí non-combatant fiat abilities (extrapolating from Background Traits and some other features). C) Had all spells cast require action resolution (I covered how this could be done well upthread). That would make for an interesting experiment.

Thursday, 25th October, 2018

  • 10:38 AM - Hussar mentioned Sadras in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    ...rovide to my players" and "the authority i am given by them" in that without the former I likely not to keep the latter. But, the choice to characterize a group agreeing to give the GM more control as being despotic GMed is telling. Huh. 5ekyu, you booted a player out of your gaming group because he didn't want to play a game that you wanted to play. You've never disputed that. Now, since no other player at the table could possibly do that, how exactly do you not have authority over someone? Funny how the idea that you would pick a different day, create a new group and run what you wanted to run was never even mentioned as an option. No, instead you booted the player and more than a few people in this thread saw nothing wrong with that. But, apparently, that doesn't mean authority over someone somehow... :erm: Frankly, call it throat warbler mangrove for all I care. The point is that "traditional" DM'ing places virtually all the power in the hands of the DM. Sadras - the problem I have with calling it "Dungeon Master" is that I consider myself a DM. I regularly run D&D games. But, I certainly don't feel that I have the authority to eject a player for not wanting to play in my new campaign. I have a lot more loyalty to my players than that. If someone at my idea objected to my next campaign idea, I'd simply pitch another one. The notion that players are essentially disposable runs very, very against how I view the table.

Friday, 19th October, 2018


Wednesday, 17th October, 2018

  • 03:34 PM - pemerton mentioned Sadras in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    I am responding to the thread as I read it. To me it seemed very clear in a range of posts that the technical device of "backgrounding" that Hussar mentioned was just an instance of, or useful expostiroy proxy for, a broader range of considerations about how fiction is established, handled etc. I feel that my discussion with Sadras is operating under that understanding and while obviously we have different views about what makes for good GMing I don't think there are any conceptual or terminological confusions affecting our discussion. (Maybe Sadras will correct me on that!) The argument about whether "backgrounding" prevents consequences was premised not on the fact that it is "not a focus of play" (as per Imaro's post just upthread) but on the fact that "the DM is hands off about it" (from the same post). I have posted an example in which the GM was hands off about the demands of allegiance - ie the players decided this - but in which consequences most definitely ensued. That is sufficient to refeute the claims made. If soemone now wants to say that all the action really is not in regard to the GM being hands off but rather their being no focus, well go to town but that's a different discussion. As far as "one man theatre" is concerned: about 70 posts upthread Imaro said " in a cooperative game where we s...
  • 07:22 AM - pemerton mentioned Sadras in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    ...g of a MacGuffin quest which had no narrative logic to it except that we were fetching a MacGuffin for a patron because that was the situation the GM had presented us with. It reveals the PCs as suckers and patsies. And in the context of a RPG, it also reveals the players as the GM's patsies - the GM has lured us into the game with the promise of a mildly interesting fetch quest for a NPC, and it turns out we were sucked in and were really telling quite a different story. Lanefan upthread asks - but was the fetch quest fun to play out? Answer: not terribly, it was pretty mid-grade RPging, but tolerable because the group (including the GM) was a group of friends who had RPGed together for quite some time. But mid-grade RPGing with friends can be fine when you have (as we all then did) the time on your hands. What made it less than fine was the GM move of unilaterally changing the meaning of something that was outside player control and that no player action had ever put at stake. Sadras describes this as "story now" sensibility. My memory for when this happened is a bit hazy, but I want to say some time around 1993 to 1995. So something like 10 years, certainly more than 5 years, before Ron Edwards wrote his "Story Now" essay. In a group who at that time played Rolemaster almost exclusively (the game in question was a RM one). I point that out so as to make the point that objecting to this sort of GMing is not some super-radical new-fangled thing.

Thursday, 20th September, 2018

  • 07:59 PM - OB1 mentioned Sadras in post Tell Me About Your Experiences With High Level 5E
    ...P and increase it 10% for the next encounter. Repeat until satisfied with the results. Same with max CR. Start at character level and increase by 10% until happy. Iíve found that my group, given their skill, character build choices and magic items can handle monster CR about 150% of their level. The way you claim to speak for everybody utterly trivializing death is not only not appreciated, it also speaks volumes itself. What does it speak volumes about? The rules of the game make resurrection easy and common at Tier IV; surely you donít dispute that. Thatís why character survival isnít what I focus on to provide challenge, but rather accomplishing goals. Players can be resurrected, but they can still fail. If you donít like death in your game, follow the DMG encounter guidelines and your players should have no problem avoiding it. If you want challenge, that means death will sometimes occur. Without actual failure you donít have real challenge, just the appearance of it. Sadras I am not a game designer, I work in movie marketing with a background in film and television production. I run a game every other week for 5 hours for a group that I would consider casual gamers and, when Iím lucky, play another 1-2 sessions a month. On average I prep 2-4 hours for a session, which has decreased over the 4 years Iíve run the campaign as Iíve gotten better as a DM even as the campaign level has increased. Iíve had 2 permanent PC deaths in 4 years, both during an epic BBEG battle at the end of Tier III, and two death/resurrections in Tier IV after 15 sessions. In every case those deaths meant the PCs accomplishing their goal at the time.

Friday, 7th September, 2018


Friday, 3rd August, 2018

  • 12:14 AM - pemerton mentioned Sadras in post My Attempt to Define RPG's - RPG's aren't actually Games
    Sadras - i think you're trying to pile significance onto "chess variant" vs "adhered to all the chess rules exactly" that those terms won't bear, especially in this context. Playing in ignorance or (for an adult playing with the child) deliberate disregard of certain rules is not the same thing as not seeing that your opponent is setting you up. There's a difference between (i) not noticing you're under threat or not noticing the significance of a piece being under threat (ie being set up by an opponent), and (ii) not treating a certain position as consituting a threat even though the full rules of the game make it one (ie not playing with en passant) and (ii) not knowing all the legal moves for the pieces (ie not playing with castling). In the case of (ii) (ie a game in which the players don't use the enpassant rule) moving your pawn two squares adjacent to an opponent's pawn isn't moving your pawn into danger. That's not the same as moving it into danger but not noticing. It's a signi...

Wednesday, 20th June, 2018

  • 05:28 PM - Aldarc mentioned Sadras in post Everybody Cheats?
    Aldarc I have no issue with you or how you play the game at your table. You have had more than enough opportunities to correct my perspective of your opinion on cheating, instead you chose to thought police me using an intimidation tactic. Strange route to go when you're concerned about people's perspectives of you. Keep in mind the only reason I responded was because of a new discussion with Umbran otherwise I considered our debate about cheaters closed. But that is the nature of forums. If you clearly remember I asked where does one draw the line for cheating....and no line was given. I apologise if you feel slighted (which you should not) but I stand by my assessment. Do what you feel is right.You may not have issue with me or how I play at my table, but I have an issue with you Sadras making continued assumptions. Yes, you asked me to draw the line. If you remember correctly I said that the line was contextual. That does not give you license to insert false words or positions into my mouth. Nor does that equate to "anything goes within the realm of cheating." When I call you out on making this assumption, you kept pressing and repeating it. You think that I had opportunities to correct your perspective? I did call out these assumptions. I thought that was clear. But, no. That's not how this works from any place of etiquette. You had opportunities to back off from your assumptions when they were repeatedly called out as assumptions. But you didn't and instead continued with "To me that gives off the impression that anything goes at your tablejust because there are worse things a player can do and because the game still continues swimmingly by your account." To which I responded: As the saying goes, "When you assume..." I didn't finish this statement, as I thought ...

Monday, 18th June, 2018

  • 03:01 AM - pemerton mentioned Sadras in post Flipping the Table: Did Removing Miniatures Save D&D?
    Lanefan, billd91 - Tony Vargas's reply makes the point that needs to be made aboout "realism" in a hit point paradigm. As far as narration of hp loss and zero hp is concerned - if you're narrating hp loss, and dropping to zero hp, in surgical detail, and then having your suspension of disbelief disrupted by the recovery that the game rules provide for, well, I would suggest changing your narration! As I posted upthread, as a former RM player/GM, and someone who was pretty familiar with the drfit from AD&D to RM, RQ etc in the 80s/early 90s, it remains very strange to see posters arguing for AC-&-hp combat on "realism" grounds, and to be distinguishing AD&D or 3E from 4e on that basis. Also, someone upthread (maybe Sadras) mentioned tinkering - the most trivial tinkering possible to a RPG is to change the short and extended rest durations in 4e or 5e. (I don't know how common it is with 5e; based on dicsussions on teese boards it was extremely common with 4e.)

Thursday, 19th April, 2018

  • 08:48 PM - Lanefan mentioned Sadras in post Game Mechanics And Player Agency
    If I may, I'd say this could have been a great opportunity for a check, but not to make the party do anything. ... 1. The party gets their way, but at a possible cost. ... 2. The party will have to re-evaluate their plans. ... Either way, the import of the check should be clear -- the result is what will happen and it will not be open to continued rehashing. The first and last line I've quoted above are at odds; because if the outcome is (2) then the party ARE being made to do something they clearly don't want to do. Further - and worse - is the "not open to continued rehashing" bit; which flat-out says you're using the check as a means of cutting off further roleplay. As the primary agency players own in the game is that of being able to roleplay their characters, this seems an obvious instance of using game mechanics to limit player agency. Sadras handled this exactly right, IMO, by letting the argument take as long as required to play out and leaving mechanics right out of it. And that last bit is an important thing I've embraced about checks. If the dice are rolled, the situation changes. I work to do this for every check, to make every check meaningful. Being open about this and setting stakes can be a method, but I find I don't always have to set explicit stakes especially since my players have adjusted to this method. Picking a lock, even, can be more fun if a failure leads to a change in circumstance. An example, for my last game: the rogue attempted to pick a rusty lock on an old treasure chest and failed. I narrated that a pick had become wedged into the lock and was stuck in the mechanism. The player now had the choice to try to pick the lock but break the tool at the same DC, or attempt to save the tool but break the lock at the same DC. The failure put a resource (the lockpick) in jeopardy and made that f...

Wednesday, 21st February, 2018

  • 06:31 AM - pemerton mentioned Sadras in post What is *worldbuilding* for?
    On causation - prompted by Sadras, and (I think) consistent with what AbdulAlhazred has been posting. In AD&D, a dragon gets combat bonuses when defending its young. Does that mean that, in the world of D&D, only dragons are driving to great effort to protect their children? No, it means that the designers, who lavished a lot of attention on dragons, thought this was an interesting idea to call out in respect of them, and so wrote in the bonus. Again in AD&D, a fireball can't be cast underwater, while a lightning bolt turns into a sphere rather than a bolt. But can a fireball still be cast with full effect in a raging cyclone? Why does an electric eel's "lightning" attack work normally underwater? Again, this isn't about causation in any meaningful sense - it's about using mechanics to try and convey some idea that seems interesting and fun. The designers cared about underwater, but not so much about tropical storms. And were not all that interested in trying to model the actual physical behaviour of bolts of ...


Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
No results to display...
Page 1 of 71 123456789101151 ... LastLast

Tuesday, 11th December, 2018

  • 02:36 PM - vincegetorix quoted Sadras in post Removing Initiative
    Well, I won't scrap the initiative in D&D as that I believe would mess around with spell duration. I don't need or want that headache. And I would keep the monster in the initiative order. What I might experiment with is the monster's additional laundry list of actions on misses or as @Hawk Diesel describes upthread as minor and major moves. One must be careful though as these minor/major moves + legendary actions could make an encounter super deadly. This is what I'll do I think. Keep the popcorn initiative, then if the players equal the target number or miss it by only 1 or 2, I'll let them do their desired effect, but use an hard or soft move against them to create a complication (those moves would be in addition to the normal Reaction of the monsters). This would also help me remove a part of the feeling that PC at level 5 are a little too tough for my taste.
  • 04:46 AM - 5ekyu quoted Sadras in post Removing Initiative
    What I liked about the concept in the OP was not so much the lack of initiative, but the creative thinking in having the monster respond to misses and what those misses could be given the laundry list provided in the same post. IIRC STA 2d20 did something similar with melee combat - if a PC failed their melee combat attack the other side either got attacks or did damage - maybe going either way... In 5e, this same thing could be done with the success at cost "setback" type mechanic - in that "you can still land your blow *but* only by opening yourself up to an AO" - taking a hit to deliver a hit. of course, it could also be an idea to allow the option of ""off-balance" and give advantage for attacks against you until the end of your next turn" as another flavor of this - but I prefer the other choice.
  • 04:19 AM - dave2008 quoted Sadras in post Removing Initiative
    What I liked about the concept in the OP was not so much the lack of initiative, but the creative thinking in having the monster respond to misses and what those misses could be given the laundry list provided in the same post. I much prefer the no-initiative concept. I actually don't mind the list of options either, but the idea that the "monsters" only act on a miss is a non started for me.
  • 03:34 AM - dave2008 quoted Sadras in post Removing Initiative
    Sounds great - but just so I can get my head around it I have some questions. If the Giant does or does not miss Jim, is it Jim the spellcaster's turn next? If Jim the Spellcaster misses, is it the Giant's turn again? What about Craig the Rogue and Marge the Cleric, when do they go...? Do what you want, but that sounds just awful to me.

Monday, 10th December, 2018

  • 03:28 PM - vincegetorix quoted Sadras in post Removing Initiative
    Off the top of my head... 1. Legendary Actions is one way using the mechanics of the game. 2. Changing up the terrain is another way - so for instance the white dragon's cold breath weapon attack might make the area affected difficult terrain for a round. 3. Using the in-game fiction - The missed club attack by the giant might force movement to have avoided the attack, at the character's choice of direction of course, but still. Good ideas. I always try to make combat less static, but with a group of seven new players, my monster turns come so rarely that when it does, I just want to speed up the combat and be done with it :P .
  • 03:17 PM - vincegetorix quoted Sadras in post Removing Initiative
    Okay but from this I'm understanding that if all the PCs are successful the Giant does not act, he just gets hammered away...until a miss or near miss does in fact present itself. Exactly. Maybe the chances to misses are higher with DW, I dont do math. Still, its rare at my table that a whole turn goes without any missed action. But you are right, I think it would require too much tweaking to work.
  • 03:04 PM - vincegetorix quoted Sadras in post Removing Initiative
    Sounds great - but just so I can get my head around it I have some questions. If the Giant does or does not miss Jim, is it Jim the spellcaster's turn next? If Jim the Spellcaster misses, is it the Giant's turn again? What about Craig the Rogue and Marge the Cleric, when do they go...? Yeah, that's the part that's hard to understand with DW when you come from initiative-using game: monsters dont have turn, they only act when the players miss an action. The other players go when they want to. Lets say we resolve the assault on the Hillg giant, the fighter succeed and all is good; we pause this scene for a moment and ''put the spot light'' on another character who want to go and its situation. If Jim may say that he runs to avoid the rock shower (Dex save) then throw a firebolt at the half-giant (attack roll). If he misses the Save, he would maybe take a little damage and the firebolt would have disadvantage. Or if the attack barely hit, the half-giant could take the damage, but ru...

Friday, 7th December, 2018

  • 04:13 PM - TaranTheWanderer quoted Sadras in post Do We Really Need Half-Elves and Half-Orcs?
    But why do their characters hate them? And unless the gnomes are evil, the question arises Are the characters generally evil? I think it's a throw-back from the annoying Dragonlance gnomes with the silly names and annoying personalities. The players just can't get over it. To be honest, even outside my usual group, I haven't ever played with anyone who played a gnome in a way that I enjoyed so I'm happy to not include them in any games I run. Unless I reskin them as something completely different.
  • 04:07 PM - Quickleaf quoted Sadras in post How to make an encounter with falling great distances interesting and dangerous, but not deadly?
    Level of Exhaustion, Equipment/Clothing damage or loss, Lingering Injury, Time (Daylight loss), Time (Environmental Factors - powerful wind strikes the cliff side every hour, making checks harder), Time (Sunburn), Inspiration Loss, Hit Dice. Good ideas, Sadras :) Especially like wind buffeting the cliffs about every hour.
  • 03:39 PM - Advilaar quoted Sadras in post Blending the D&Ds
    From earlier editions I would take racial and biological sex ability caps, I might be wrong, but I don't think biological sex ability caps were a thing in any edition. As far as racial, yes, there have always been some pluses and minuses. The only caps I know of were 18 for most PCs in 1/2e and the soft caps of 20 and 30 in 5e. But those applied everywhere at least for PCs with some notable exceptions. I do recall a lot of debates in printed magazines in the letters section about it back in the day and the occasional message board debate or house rule, but never anything official. I also remember those debates erupting in a lot of hard feelings. Also, I am not sure it really adds anything to the game. Personally, someone wants a Xena, warrior princess in my campaign and either rolls or point buys those stats (depending on method) and the power level of that campaign is compatible, I am down. Someone wants a Don Juan who hops in and out of bed with wealthy heiresses to fund his expens...

Monday, 3rd December, 2018

  • 03:57 PM - pemerton quoted Sadras in post What are your favorite Skill Challenges.
    This informs me that setting the stakes is not something enforced at your table, and so it is something the DM (you) might offer if you want the players invested.I see it as closer to something Luke Crane talks about in his Adventure Burner - the stakes are implicit in the situation, and thus - as the situation changes - can themselves change. This depends on a group who are reasonably familiar with one another's approach to play, so that the players can tell (from experience) when I am increasing or stepping back the pressure; and so that I can tell (again, from experience) what a player is committing to in an action declaration. Of course on the GM side if I'm not sure I can always ask - but my players don't tend to ask back, relying on the fiction as narrated by me, and in light of their familiarity with my approaches, to ascertain what is going on. Eg in the Soul Abattoir the players know that what is at stake, in general terms, is destroying the place and redirecting the flow of so...

Wednesday, 28th November, 2018

  • 08:38 PM - Stormbow quoted Sadras in post Please help me name a fungus-wielding caster...
    Circle of Spores Druid? :) That's the one! Mycomancers? I think we got a winner. Sporelord Podcaster Oh. My. God. My player's will love those puns! "DMMikes?" Isn't it a little weird that mushroom-people are the ones teaching others to summon and eat mushrooms? Or are the summoned shrooms just a tool for channeling magic? Well...not so much "eat" as "use the power of".

Friday, 23rd November, 2018

  • 03:55 PM - Garthanos quoted Sadras in post Mass Battle Rules for 4e
    I have not investigated the link in details but do the Battle Deeds account for tier? Because inputting that makes it somewhat more complicated. Hmmm maybe (but not so explicilly ) ie one of the speakers in the quotes is Athena ;) and with the DCs I am seeing maybe not However I think we are on our own with regards to much tier flavor they are generic enough that it seems likely translatable across tiers in effect for me its the difference than something written to enable mass combat in a rpg (The writer of this was basically targeting Xena and that is a narrower genre) vs something with the full D&D boom.
  • 01:51 PM - Garthanos quoted Sadras in post Mass Battle Rules for 4e
    Good find. In a few months I will be running a mass combat scenario (end of Tyranny of Dragons) and this link will certainly be useful. I suspect I will have to make necessary adjustments for 5e's mechanics but that should not be too much of a problem. The battle deeds certainly can inspire, perhaps event influence, the direction of the fiction. I did also see an unearthed arcana from 5e that you might glean mechanical bits from.

Thursday, 22nd November, 2018

  • 06:31 PM - 5ekyu quoted Sadras in post House rule for Going below 0 hp and get up again with a good berry or a healing
    Fair enough. Our table is used to using the exhaustion track for many a thing - dropping below 0hp, lack of sleep, recharging abilities...etc IMO rolling them all in one go makes the game more tense and PCs now immediately scramble to heal fallen PCs not willing to risk a death."Fair enough. Our table is used to using the exhaustion track for many a thing - dropping below 0hp, lack of sleep, recharging abilities...etc " One of those things is not like the other... :-). I also like using exhaustion for a larger variety than the rulebooks establish as core. End of days travel with carrying heavy (non-light) load... Sleep in armor... Success at cost consequence... Etc Etc Etc... But we prefer those types of CHOICES as the triggers, not bad dice flukes that happen tp pass a threshold. Its same reason we dont add more crit fumble crit effects to die natural this or that dice. We want to empower the characters and/or their choices - not dice swings.
  • 05:13 PM - TaranTheWanderer quoted Sadras in post House rule for Going below 0 hp and get up again with a good berry or a healing
    You should not roll your death saves on your turn as that defeats the drama. You roll them all when someone comes to check you out - so there is no meta knowledge. The easiest thing to do is to make the rolls secretly. In 3.5, you had to roll every round to stabilize or lose another hp. You died at -10 (or negative you CON as our houserule). We were never allowed to tell other people our hps or how close we were to death unless another player made a healing/medicine check. Worked well enough and we lost several characters like that. That said, there's probably more drama if everyone knows you are one roll away from death, forcing people to scramble and make sacrifices to get to you before you die.
  • 05:04 PM - 5ekyu quoted Sadras in post House rule for Going below 0 hp and get up again with a good berry or a healing
    The mini-game should be trying to not fall to 0hp - dodging, using cover, disengaging, healing...etc After 0hp you auto rack up an exhaustion - that is your penalty. You should not roll your death saves on your turn as that defeats the drama. You roll them all when someone comes to check you out - so there is no meta knowledge.I get that but unless you have constantly small combats with minimal risk (nobody gets pushed beyong half hp) then in my experience one can play the "never get so close two npcs crits can drop me" game but that basically is constant from start of fight - not a moment of drama... SOP. Most of the time i have seen PCs drop to zero in even moderately well played teams after say 2nd level, its bern from combos - one hit from a failed save spell and a different attacker crits before you can dodge or the healer gets in. More fluke than tactic or drama. One fight, the two front liners went in and the three enemy brutes rolled six attacks for four crits and two hits... bot...
  • 02:43 PM - Azzy quoted Sadras in post What Does the Game Need Now?
    At this stage, probably a planar adventure seems obvious. Otherwise I would support an Advanced DMG, just for completeness purposes. I do most of this myself, but it would be nice to have this in published form. MAGIC: Reflecting on lower level magic settings, equitable cantrip replacement, introducing spell-casting costs, additional and/or hardcore sorcerer wild magic table/s, protection scrolls, magic recovery ENCOUNTER DESIGN: Interesting terrain features, continuously changing combat landscape (remorhaz bursting up through tundra causing ice fractures, dragon tails causing collapsing columns/corridors, giant tearing out trees and earth...etc), updated encounter mechanics. MONSTER MODIFICATIONS: Additional traits, minions, mooks & swarms, hardcore alterations (increasing movement, incorporating shove/pull/grapple, spell and melee attack...etc), mechanics pulled from description, additional legendary lair actions SKILL EXPANSION: Skill challenge/complexities and various exa...
  • 12:49 PM - Azzy quoted Sadras in post House rule for Going below 0 hp and get up again with a good berry or a healing
    You may also house rule that the first round after being healed he is only allowed a move action as he first has to come to and get a grip of his surroundings. He would not be as alert as when he first entered into combat. So he is climatising to the situation around him, therefore he only gets a move action which is usually, grabbing his fallen items and standing up since he would more than likely have been prone. Riffing on this, you could say that the character suffers from the Incapacitated condition during the character's first turn that they've been healed above 0 hit points. This has the same effect, but simply uses an existing mechanic to explain it.
  • 09:57 AM - pemerton quoted Sadras in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    In my recent game, I introduced a remorhaz tearing out from under the tundra automatically creating an Ice Fracture (LotCS Statistics Next page 7). So while the PCs were having to deal with this beast they were also knocked prone and found themselves falling (10-50 feet) into freezing water or hanging onto some icy ledge or outcropping, having to scramble to get to the surface otherwise they were just sitting ducks as the beast had complete terrain advantage. In my mind all that and more should have been added to the MM for the remorhaz entry.This is how I did that sort of thing for the tarrasque in 4e: Minor Actions Ė at will Tail slap (melee 3 vs 1 target not attacked with any bite this turn): +32 vs Fort for 6d12+21, push 4 sq & knock prone Miss: creates a collapsing fissure extending 10 sq from a sq adj to the target, in a direction of the tarrasqueís choosing, that lasts until E of a T in which the fissure makes an attack; if this inc a sq occupied by a Medi...


Page 1 of 71 123456789101151 ... LastLast

Sadras's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites