View Profile: ad_hoc - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Friday, 22nd February, 2019, 05:20 AM
    Yeah, it was for 3e because things quickly get out of control for spellcasters after 6. I suppose in 5e it would be 10th level but it's not really the same as it isn't the same game.
    9 replies | 320 view(s)
    1 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Monday, 18th February, 2019, 10:17 PM
    I know the general rule for moving between attacks. Specific exceptions always supersede general rules. There is no taking an action without doing the action. There is no declare actions step. You're spending 1 Ki to make 2 attacks immediately after the attack action. Here is Jeremy Crawford discussing it at 6:30 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ew1dc6VBHhA
    30 replies | 1227 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Monday, 18th February, 2019, 10:46 AM
    You're discounting the cost of a feat here which is huge. I mean, sure, having another way to avoid OAs that doesn't cost Ki is an advantage. But is it worth a feat? It's a specific circumstance where you have to run past 1 enemy. When you need to run past 3 or 4 to get to your target then Mobile is no good. If you don't need to run past any, then again it doesn't benefit you. The...
    30 replies | 1227 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Monday, 18th February, 2019, 07:48 AM
    It's not as strong as Valour but could be more fun depending on taste. Bardic Inspiration is very strong but using it on flourishes means not using it for allies. Mobile flourish has the most potential. Slashing isn't worth the inspiration cost and the defensive one is nice to have in dire circumstances. Cloud of Daggers is a great spell for a Swords Bard. Keep in mind too that it works...
    19 replies | 829 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Monday, 18th February, 2019, 07:38 AM
    Well, not if you're using Flurry. Both of those need to come immediately after the last attack of the attack action. Personally I'd rather eat an OA from a mook (if it comes to it) and get my full attacks against the target I'm trying to Stunning Strike than take a feat so I can use an attack to avoid an OA. The amount of times that specific scenario will happen is pretty rare. If you need to...
    30 replies | 1227 view(s)
    1 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Monday, 18th February, 2019, 04:53 AM
    No, Mobile is mostly redundant on a Monk. Bonuses to movement speed decrease in benefit the more movement you have. In order to avoid OAs you need to attack the creature first which means you're probably not attacking the ones you really want. It also doesn't stop creatures from just walking up to you and attack you on their turn. There is benefit to it but it's not worth a feat. You...
    30 replies | 1227 view(s)
    1 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Monday, 18th February, 2019, 01:30 AM
    Whatever adventure we're currently playing.
    26 replies | 842 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Sunday, 17th February, 2019, 11:24 PM
    The Backgrounds already do that, for Ideals at least.
    11 replies | 386 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Saturday, 16th February, 2019, 10:13 PM
    ad_hoc replied to Reaching tier 4
    It's as easy or hard as your table makes it to be.
    34 replies | 1222 view(s)
    2 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Saturday, 16th February, 2019, 07:55 AM
    I think the Guardians of the Galaxy template is perfect for a D&D movie. The GotG were a completely unknown C-list comic book property before their movie. The plot is mediocre at best; they're out to get a MacGuffin and stop Mr. Evil Twirling Moustache. It's the dynamics between the characters and fun tone of it that made it good. That's all a D&D movie needs. A party of likeable...
    50 replies | 4521 view(s)
    2 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Friday, 15th February, 2019, 12:18 AM
    I think the best way to do it is to use the Sun Soul as a template for other elements if you want them.
    10 replies | 501 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Thursday, 14th February, 2019, 11:31 AM
    Just checked and mine worked. Perhaps logging out and logging back in or clearing your cookies/cache?
    9 replies | 352 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Thursday, 14th February, 2019, 08:59 AM
    Clarification for you here, and I promise it will make sense if you think about it. Unarmed strikes are not weapons. That makes sense right, you're not actually holding a weapon. Attacking with an unarmed strike is a melee weapon attack. This is where 5e could be a little more clear in the wording. There are 4 possible attacks Melee weapon attack Melee spell attack
    3 replies | 273 view(s)
    2 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Friday, 8th February, 2019, 10:29 PM
    Barbarians have very few rages. They won't be raging in most combats. The ones they do get to rage they're quite good. Seems balanced to me.
    55 replies | 2791 view(s)
    1 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Wednesday, 6th February, 2019, 09:53 PM
    ad_hoc replied to Archetypes
    Maybe that is where you lost me. Our table doesn't confer with each other to create a party (past trying not to have duplicate class/subclasses). We just make the character we want to roleplay.
    58 replies | 2546 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Wednesday, 6th February, 2019, 07:58 PM
    ad_hoc replied to Archetypes
    I'm with you somewhat but it is odd to me that you use the term 'metagame'. I would consider putting in obstacles that are specifically designed to be overcome by the PC's specific abilities to be metagaming. I like the adventure that comes from not knowing what will come. If an adventure is tailored to the characters then that takes away the excitement. And there is a bit of what you said....
    58 replies | 2546 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Wednesday, 6th February, 2019, 04:03 AM
    ad_hoc replied to Archetypes
    Maybe we mean different things by 'adventure'. I think it is fine for an adventure to not have any traps in them. If a campaign didn't have any traps that would be out of the ordinary and something that should be brought up in session 0.
    58 replies | 2546 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 5th February, 2019, 10:55 PM
    Guardians of the Galaxy worked very well with a mediocre story. It's the characters and their interactions that are important.
    20 replies | 1401 view(s)
    1 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 5th February, 2019, 10:50 PM
    People have had great success running Ravenloft adventures for a long time.
    52 replies | 1971 view(s)
    1 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 5th February, 2019, 10:57 AM
    The first rule of horror is that the unseen monster is always scarier. People will imagine the worst. The key to horror in RPGs is to slowly ratchet up the tension over the course of a session. The trick here is that it needs to be done fresh each session. If you go straight into it then the horror elements will come off as comical. The ever looming threat of what might be around the corner...
    52 replies | 1971 view(s)
    1 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 5th February, 2019, 10:52 AM
    While the entire adventure doesn't have to be there (but could), a trip to the Feywild would help a lot. Make the Feywild itself a character. The first reference that comes to mind is the 2018 movie Annihilation. They pass through a prism where the land has been changed and only gets stranger the deeper they go. Some of the abnormalities are beautiful and others are nightmare fuel.
    52 replies | 1971 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 5th February, 2019, 04:10 AM
    ad_hoc replied to Archetypes
    I guess this comes down to how we play. I like the challenges to be the challenges and then how the players approach them depends on what they have and how they go about using those resources. I think changing the challenges based on what the players have chosen takes away their agency in that regard. And in this case the trap defeater is being a liability on the party because now there are...
    58 replies | 2546 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Monday, 4th February, 2019, 07:30 PM
    ad_hoc replied to Archetypes
    Right, but if traps are added to the adventure because of the character then that's bad because now there are traps to deal with. I do agree that traps should be an assumed part of D&D. 1 adventure might just not happen to have traps and I think that's fine. If all the adventures don't then that's something that should be talked about in session 0.
    58 replies | 2546 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Monday, 4th February, 2019, 04:30 AM
    ad_hoc replied to Archetypes
    That doesn't actually accomplish anything. A character who is supposed to help the party with traps who adds traps to the adventure is doing more harm than good. In the specific case of traps I think it is a staple of D&D. Most adventures should have some.
    58 replies | 2546 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Sunday, 3rd February, 2019, 01:31 AM
    Thread necromancy noted. That just isn't true. There is a fairly recent thread that goes into why Strength is important if you care to read it. A rapier is just a finesse weapon with 1 more damage, it doesn't really make that big of a difference.
    218 replies | 49632 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Thursday, 31st January, 2019, 11:00 PM
    I can't find anywhere that it says that. I don't see why we would treat a 5' line as a 10' one, etc. Just treat a 5' line as a 5' line.
    69 replies | 2079 view(s)
    1 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Thursday, 31st January, 2019, 10:32 PM
    Looks like they are actually selling for around $300. I am surprised too. Usually things sold as collector's editions don't actually go up in value because people who want collector's editions just buy them straight away.
    15 replies | 1031 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Thursday, 31st January, 2019, 04:50 PM
    The game is written story first. WotC hasn't written a combat strategy game. They've written D&D. All throughout the game are story choices they have made. From the identity of the races, classes, backgrounds, etc. to the resolution systems are all in service of the story. Of the particular fantasy world of D&D. In every page they are telling the player what kind of fantasy world to play...
    99 replies | 3942 view(s)
    1 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Thursday, 31st January, 2019, 01:42 AM
    Why are you assuming that is for a line with a 5' width? What is the top diagram for then? A line with a 2.5' width?
    69 replies | 2079 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Thursday, 31st January, 2019, 12:07 AM
    Xanathar's actually shows the opposite. Look at the 5' diagram.
    69 replies | 2079 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Wednesday, 30th January, 2019, 06:37 AM
    Well now we're getting into power comparisons which are both very complicated and cannot be resolved as it is not a competitive game (so no one can prove they are right). The question of whether one class should have higher AC than another can be asked of every class in the game. To answer your question: I don't think the Druid is under powered. I don't think it needs an AC boost. ...
    99 replies | 3942 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Wednesday, 30th January, 2019, 05:49 AM
    Nature Cleric is a thing if that is what you want.
    99 replies | 3942 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Wednesday, 30th January, 2019, 02:10 AM
    They do make good druids.
    99 replies | 3942 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Wednesday, 30th January, 2019, 01:24 AM
    Oh then we are on the same page. I suppose it is a preference thing. If I made a choice like that for my character I wouldn't want it to just be cosmetic.
    99 replies | 3942 view(s)
    1 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 29th January, 2019, 11:25 PM
    If you replace all metal with things that behave exactly the same way then what is the point? Not touching metal at all is an interesting thing to me which can create interesting differences and situations. Replacing metal with things that behave exactly the same way as metal is like saying 'my character is different, she has grey eyes!' I mean yes, that is a difference, but doesn't make a...
    99 replies | 3942 view(s)
    1 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 29th January, 2019, 10:50 PM
    I think pets are a central theme here. 5e did a lot to smooth play and keep the pace going. They made an attempt to limit summons and such but I don't think they went far enough. Our table has a limit of 2 on summon spells. A thing I do is encourage people to roll damage at the same time as their attack. The moon druid in the party said that she likes rolling damage separately because of...
    55 replies | 2864 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Monday, 28th January, 2019, 09:27 PM
    That sounds like TPK. It is part of the game. Make new characters!
    8 replies | 331 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Monday, 28th January, 2019, 07:41 PM
    Good on you. I am not a fan of rolling stats but I have always believed that if you're going to roll you should do it in order. Otherwise, what is the point of 'random' scores.
    105 replies | 5042 view(s)
    1 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Monday, 28th January, 2019, 06:48 PM
    Hide armour is medium. That's why Druids have medium armour proficiency.
    99 replies | 3942 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Monday, 28th January, 2019, 05:42 AM
    If you take the "flavor" out of the game what is there left?
    99 replies | 3942 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Monday, 28th January, 2019, 04:18 AM
    What if she were not okay with her 14 Constitution and decided that her character is actually really tough so she puts down 20 Constitution. It's her character right?
    99 replies | 3942 view(s)
    2 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Monday, 28th January, 2019, 03:57 AM
    Why should other classes have lower AC? If this is the reasoning you should just make all characters have the same AC so it's fair.
    99 replies | 3942 view(s)
    1 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Monday, 28th January, 2019, 03:56 AM
    Why does she get to decide if she is okay with it? What if a player is a wizard and is not okay with not wearing armour so they want to find plate armour which is light? Do players just choose what weapons and armour they will use?
    99 replies | 3942 view(s)
    1 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Monday, 28th January, 2019, 03:24 AM
    I think we are playing different games. If you want another example then making a suit of plate armour which counts as light. Same thing.
    99 replies | 3942 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Monday, 28th January, 2019, 02:04 AM
    As far as getting 'specialized' armour, I see it the same as making a finesse greatsword and the like.
    99 replies | 3942 view(s)
    1 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Monday, 28th January, 2019, 12:29 AM
    Padded, Leather, and Hide
    99 replies | 3942 view(s)
    1 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Sunday, 27th January, 2019, 08:47 PM
    You're right I just don't think this is a bad thing. I could see a character saying "Of course adventurers have a hearty constitution." They don't all need to be able to recollect libraries of information (low Int) but they sure all need to be at least somewhat tough. I also think the 1hp/level is actually a big deal at a certain point. There difference between 1hp and 0hp is huge....
    105 replies | 5042 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Sunday, 27th January, 2019, 07:26 PM
    I think Constitution is just weird in that it operates in a different range of numbers than the other stats and yet uses the same ability score pool. Con is essentially a 12-16 stat rather than an 8-16 one like the rest of them. I think when viewed this way, it is okay thematically. 12 is low, 14 is average, 16 is high. It also makes sense that adventurers would be tough. They literally have...
    105 replies | 5042 view(s)
    1 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Sunday, 27th January, 2019, 06:03 PM
    Sounds like you want to play AD&D. Game is still there. Nothing stopping you. No need for magic items. Just let them ignore Concentration. Like you said, nothing stopping you from changing monster's abilities.
    102 replies | 7396 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Saturday, 26th January, 2019, 05:42 AM
    Then why are you quoting rules pages?
    254 replies | 175771 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Saturday, 26th January, 2019, 05:12 AM
    Yelling at a wall all day long won't change anything.
    254 replies | 175771 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Saturday, 26th January, 2019, 04:43 AM
    shove/grapple are special attack action attacks. https://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/08/28/grapple-or-shove-opportunity/
    254 replies | 175771 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Saturday, 26th January, 2019, 01:49 AM
    Yes, this. 5e is designed to be intuitive. The intuitive way is to just allow any order because it makes the game play smoother and everyone is happy. When we get into worrying about sequencing events we get into the minutiae of competitive games like MtG. I once had a binder printed out of all the errata and rules clarifications that I brought to tournaments to show judges when...
    254 replies | 175771 view(s)
    1 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Friday, 25th January, 2019, 09:34 PM
    Magic Initiate is much better than 3 cantrips. MI is also not great on a full caster such as the Warlock. There are diminishing returns. The 3rd cantrip (in the Warlock case, the 6th) is not as powerful as the previous 2. The level 1 spell can be very good. It can give a non-caster a familiar for example. At most you can have cha to atk/dmg with the pact weapon. Anything more than that...
    17 replies | 790 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Friday, 25th January, 2019, 07:08 PM
    It is to be used when the enemy gets to you. It's really not hard for enemy creatures to approach PCs in 5e. So this gives Warlocks a good melee option. You don't want to have disadvantage on your Eldritch Blast. You could take a different attack cantrip but a weapon attack will deal more damage. So it's about versatility. It can't be a full package like the Valour Bard. That's what the...
    17 replies | 790 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Friday, 25th January, 2019, 05:35 PM
    Take 20 is not a rule in 5e.
    110 replies | 2808 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Friday, 25th January, 2019, 05:32 PM
    Well when you houserule in 3e rules that is going to happen... I am glad 3e is behind us and most players will never need to worry about its mess. Most of the problems I see on the internet involve 3e players twisting 5e around to fit into its paradigm.
    110 replies | 2808 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Friday, 25th January, 2019, 05:21 PM
    While Blade Pact is the weakest of the pacts, the pacts are all fairly minor abilities. Blade Pact gives you a melee option. That's what it is for. That's it. Turning it into a full subclass' worth of stuff swings the balance too far. You just made Blade Pact the best choice for all Warlocks. And it's not even close. This is also why the Hexblade is grossly overpowered. It is by far the...
    17 replies | 790 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Friday, 25th January, 2019, 04:54 PM
    5e doesn't have a take 20 rule because the whole endeavour was uninteresting to start with. You just succeed and move on with the game. That is because 5e is written narrative first while 3e is written simulation first. Think of 5e like watching an action movie. Anything that would be uninteresting to watch in an action movie is skipped over because it is also uninteresting to play...
    110 replies | 2808 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ad_hoc's Avatar
    Friday, 25th January, 2019, 04:06 AM
    I don't think it strips away the tension because there is no tension to begin with. The only exception is for downtime activities. 1 roll to simulate a work week's worth of effort for something. Otherwise just narrate away until there is an important scene and there are stakes and consequences. Ability check rolls should be special with high stakes associated to succeeding or failing.
    110 replies | 2808 view(s)
    0 XP
No More Results
About ad_hoc

Basic Information

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
2,115
Posts Per Day
1.04
Last Post
Here Are The Most Popular D&D Feats (War Caster Leads The Pack!) Friday, 22nd February, 2019 08:41 AM

Currency

Gold Pieces
29
General Information
Last Activity
Today 04:42 AM
Join Date
Saturday, 27th July, 2013
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Saturday, 23rd February, 2019


Friday, 22nd February, 2019


Wednesday, 20th February, 2019


Tuesday, 19th February, 2019


Monday, 18th February, 2019


Sunday, 17th February, 2019


Saturday, 16th February, 2019


Friday, 15th February, 2019


Thursday, 14th February, 2019


Tuesday, 12th February, 2019



Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thursday, 31st January, 2019

  • 02:59 AM - Dax Doomslayer mentioned ad_hoc in post Line Spells / Lightning Bolt
    ad_hoc, I was not assuming anything - this is why I asked the question. However, the previous tokens for the cone above it is showing instances of the same area effect which threw me off. However, that's a good point that it's probably a 10' for the bottom and a 5' wide for the one above it in that diagram. I appreciate the insight. TaranTheWanderer - thanks for this. I was actually asking both and your diagram definitely helped clarify this to me! I appreciate everyone's response to this.

Friday, 7th December, 2018

  • 01:16 PM - Quartz mentioned ad_hoc in post Nightwalker: Really a CR 20?
    I'm in the same boat. At least one player loves to pump his knowledge skills, and can easily make DC25-30 checks. It's a rare day they don't know something about a monster. As ad_hoc said, if the PC can't have known then the check is going to fail. If you want to give some success produce only the most obvious information. You don't have to read out the MM entry just because the PC made a DC 30 check.

Sunday, 18th November, 2018

  • 11:40 PM - MNblockhead mentioned ad_hoc in post Player wants to play a Star Elf, any balance concerns?
    For those who are interested, the player read about the "star elf" or "twilight elf" in some Forgotten Realms book. He had no idea of the mechanics. I created a homebrew race in D&D Beyond based on the suggestions made by ad_hoc , above. After that and some e-mail back and forth, he went with Eladrin instead.

Tuesday, 23rd October, 2018

  • 09:44 PM - 77IM mentioned ad_hoc in post Ideas for Improving Inspiration
    So to bring this back around to the original topic (which was "how to improve Inspiration" and not "why your particular problem with Inspiration isn't valid")... Our table houserules inspiration to apply whenever it is relevant to a background trait. So just straight up advantage when a trait is relevant to what is happening. ad_hoc: How does this work out, in practice? How do you prevent it from being abused? Like, I could imagine someone with the Ideal of "Survival" wanting to get advantage on every single saving throw... I'm asking because I really want to try this system for my next game. My biggest problem with Inspiration is the Traits/Ideals/Bonds/Flaws are very hard to use -- there's too many of them (5 per PC???) and a lot of them are not very well thought-out. Traits in particular are mostly role-playing prompts, and I don't see them motivating consequential actions the way Ideals, Bonds and Flaws might. I'm worried that someone with a Trait of "I always use big words" will do that (which is good) and consistently get advantage on all Charisma (Persuasion) checks (which is over-powered).

Friday, 21st September, 2018

  • 10:17 AM - Sadras mentioned ad_hoc in post Mitigating players spamming Help, Guidance, Bardic Inspiration, and oh Iíll roll too?
    @ad_hoc Appreciate the detailed reply. I'm not sure I agree with everything but then again I don't feel I have thought through it all either and therefore count myself as ill equipped for a rebuttal. Something for me to look into this weekend and see how I feel about it. :) Just as an aside and why I was asking, no one at our table has dared to use their familiar in combat for the obvious reason that they risk losing it.

Tuesday, 18th September, 2018

  • 06:30 PM - Quickleaf mentioned ad_hoc in post Mitigating players spamming Help, Guidance, Bardic Inspiration, and oh Iíll roll too?
    iserith robus ad_hoc A lot of advice about ďPlayers donít decide when to roll, the DM does.Ē Yep! My issue is not that I donít practice that; it is that I am getting worn down constantly policing the players on this issue & constantly finding new ways to explain this specific to a scenario as one or more players eagerly reach for their dice. Itís tiring for me because I love to say ďyesĒ to my players & the policing part is my least favorite part of DMing. ďNo, you canít Help/Work Together because you havenít said anything that would be helpful in this negotiation. Is there something youíd like to speak up and add to support the Bardís arguement?Ē ďNo, Bard player, you canít roll to beat the druidís Nature check because you havenít proposed doing anything substantially different. Besides the Druid is the *best* in your party at Nature lore. You might try a new approach?Ē ďNo, Sorcerer player, you canít make a History check here. Because nothing in your background as a native of the forests near Wa...

Tuesday, 28th August, 2018

  • 04:29 AM - Ashrym mentioned ad_hoc in post Guessing - Most and least played classes
    ad_hoc IIRC the WOTC survey way had rangers at 7th spot. I cannot find that old link but http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/dd-survey-results-summary shows: Fighter Cleric Rogue Wizard Paladin Warlock with druid also in last. What I linked earlier is per 100000 and more recent, however. In any case, rangers don't top popularity or end in the bottom.
  • 03:54 AM - Ashrym mentioned ad_hoc in post Guessing - Most and least played classes
    ad_hoc It looks like a good sampling. What is the statistic data for Ranger at 9th?

Friday, 13th July, 2018

  • 02:12 AM - Unwise mentioned ad_hoc in post Multi classing Objections: Rules vs. Fluff?
    cbwjm The reason I came up with that example is that I actually played a Dwarf from a clan that prided itself on never having been in sunlight. They felt that sunlight would weaken both them and their culture, like it must have done to humans. He of course saw the sun for the first time and fell in love with it and the outside world. I chose deep-dwarf over Drow because it would not have the issues I mentioned above. To me that is the trick, something can be a great story yet shift the view of the world. In my Warhammer campaign example, my players all had great back stories (which they never do normally) but the end result was that it was a group that did not fit in the world at all. ad_hoc I can see where you are coming and agree, but don't have that experience myself. Frankly if they engage in RP or backstory at all I am thrilled, we don't have people competing for the spotlight.

Monday, 21st May, 2018

  • 01:40 AM - Ilbranteloth mentioned ad_hoc in post As a player: prefer Homebrew or Published settings?
    I not only prefer published settings, I prefer published adventures only. I would be very cautious about entering a game with homebrew adventures. Even 3rd party adventures can be very bad so I would want a DM who is picky about what they bring to the table. Can I call that out as an ironic answer for somebody with a handle of ad_hoc?

Monday, 12th February, 2018

  • 05:07 AM - Nevvur mentioned ad_hoc in post How long til you modified 5e?
    ...l" some GMs prefer or require before giving a thing serious consideration for inclusion in their own games. Not that anyone needs WotC's approval to modify the game and have fun doing it, and anyway, custom monsters are some of the lowest-impact form of house rules (again, as I define it). Even so, I'd like to avoid derailing the thread with a debate about semantics. However you and others approach the question and select an answer is fine by me. Clarifications in written responses are appreciated. @Jer: I hope my explanation to Satyrn explains the difference between the thread title and poll question - that is, there's no difference as far as I'm concerned. I did state that rulings on nebulous systems ("situations... that aren't explicit in the rules" in your words) should be excluded. If you feel otherwise, that's fine. I'm not going to try to police the thread, so again, people can answer the question/poll as they see fit. Also again, clarifications like yours are appreciated. @ad_hoc: You wrote that it's impossible not to house rule. Adventurer's League players, in theory, should all be operating under the exact same set of rules. A person who has only ever DMd AL would have a "Never" response if they're abiding by AL guidelines. That's not always the case, of course. However, as defined in the OP, rulings are not house rules (see response to Jer). @redrick: You identified an interesting grey area - codification of a ruling. I feel there's a difference between codification of a ruling and mere consistency with a ruling. DM wiggle room, I guess? Not sure where I would place codification if house ruling is a binary yes/no situation. I'll give it some thought, and perhaps other participants in this discussion can weigh in on the point in the meantime. --- As to my own experiences... Started playing D&D back in the 90's. Didn't get much gaming in '99-'14, then returned to D&D as a DM in Jan '14 with 4e. I gave it about two weeks before I started house ruling and ...

Wednesday, 7th February, 2018

  • 11:15 PM - TheCosmicKid mentioned ad_hoc in post modified ability score calculation
    There are two goals. The first goal is to generate PCs with novel ability scores. I would like to have fewer PCs with good scores in all their important abilities but 8s or 10s in all their non-essential abilities. The second goal is to have a party where the PCs are relatively balanced with one another. I want to prevent what I see as the biggest issue with random ability score generation, where some players roll up super PCs and others get very weak PCs. If the PCs mostly end up with high scores, that's okay, I can adjust the encounters accordingly; same thing if the scores are mostly low. I also like the idea of all the players generating their ability scores as a party during session zero. Though, as TheCosmicKid points out in post#6, creating special rules for it causes some unnecessary problems.Okay, if the collective generation isn't a primary goal, then playing cards would be my suggestion as well. To spell it out in a little more detail than @ad_hoc: build a deck of 18 cards and deal them out into six piles of three. Sum each pile to get your six ability scores. You can tune the deck to get the power level you want. [Three 1s, three 2s, three 3s, three 4s, three 5s, and three 6s] will produce results equivalent to an average 3d6-in-order roll. For arrays that look more like the 4d6-drop-lowest method, there's no perfect deck, but I recommend something like [one 0, one 1, two 2s, two 3s, three 4s, four 5s, and five 6s]. Or if you think using cards instead of dice is just plain wrong for D&D, you can also normalize dice-generated ability score arrays pretty easily. First, pick a target total or point-buy value or whatever other measure of power level you like. Second, create an array using any normal dice method. Third, roll 1d6 to randomly select a score in that array and add 1 (if the array is below the target) or subtract 1 (if it's above). Repeat step 3 until you've reached the target level.

Sunday, 17th December, 2017

  • 09:40 PM - Gardens & Goblins mentioned ad_hoc in post Desperately need help, trying to catch up to party.
    You have created a ....monster :eek: I'm guessing the fighter has.... Defense Style for the +1 AC? And for some reason, folks have missed how Heavy Armor doesn't let you add your Dex bonus to AC. With the +1 magical bonus, and if that assumption is correct then yeah, ok AC 25 Thing is, as ad_hoc alludes to, if something as straight-forward as an AC calculation is so... off from the actual core rules then you're playing in La La land. Lordy knows what crazy rule pretzel readings have been taken with regards to the other characters. Do you have a complete break down of the house rules involved & the other table member's character sheets?

Saturday, 16th December, 2017

  • 04:25 PM - Dax Doomslayer mentioned ad_hoc in post Dragonborn Breath Weapon vs. Dragonborn Fear
    ad_hoc: Hmmm - wouldn't it being treated as basically a 'half-feat' by itself indicate that as a feat in and of itself would be weaker. In addition to those things mentioned above, if the target can't see or hear the dragon born, they automatically save. Between that, getting saves when taking damage causing another save wouldn't you feel that this is watered down enough especially when taking the dragon born race 'as a whole' which seems to be a bit of an under performer? I'm just curious as to what you think.

Tuesday, 12th December, 2017

  • 11:23 PM - Dax Doomslayer mentioned ad_hoc in post Dragonborn Breath Weapon vs. Dragonborn Fear
    Hi, Thanks for the replies! Jalelis - Correct. No +1 stat that normally would go along with it if taking at first level. If they were to take the dragon breath feat, then the extra +1 comes into play. ad_hoc: I'm not clear by what you mean by 'would need to give up a stat bonus'. Are you indicating the standard Dragonborn bonus of +2 Str or +1 CHA or do you mean the additional stat bonus that would come normally come with the feat? If the latter, I totally agree. If the former, I'm curious as to why you feel this would be necessary. From all accounts as it is, the Dragonborn seems to be a bit underwhelming compared to a good deal of other races.

Thursday, 7th December, 2017

  • 04:12 PM - Tormyr mentioned ad_hoc in post Super Monk Jumps
    ...specific does trump the general. the general in this case are the two effects. the specific is when they are combined... the specific rule on what happens when effects are combined. it says ADD TOGETHER not multiply together. Also, the 10' of original movement is not a spell effect so it should not get added twice any more than two effects which increase your AC allow you to count your base AC10 twice. If your proposal is that the individual spell language should trump the specific rule about what happens when spell effects combine, then that rule is practically useless. but again, this is mt take based on the rules presented. Thanks for pointing this out (again). Based on the text under Combining Magical Effects, which I had not read in a while, I would agree that since Step of the Wind is essentially a spell-like effect, the monk in our example would have a jump distance of 40 ft (the original distance + the effect of Step of the Wind + the effect of jump). This goes back to ad_hoc 's ruling all the way at the beginning. I know that some people get combative and hold to their positions when discussing the finer points of rules and rulings, but I appreciate the opportunity to discuss these things especially when someone such as you keeps their head about it. Sometimes I think I have a pretty good picture of how the rules work. Other times, like now, I realize that I missed something. Regardless of the outcome of a discussion, I am better prepared for a ruling at the table, have my reason ready, and move on. Cheers.

Wednesday, 6th December, 2017

  • 05:22 AM - Tormyr mentioned ad_hoc in post Super Monk Jumps
    EDIT: Somehow pulled off a double post.
  • 05:21 AM - Tormyr mentioned ad_hoc in post Super Monk Jumps
    I would love some crouching tiger, hidden dragon, in the game. It would appear the 5E precedence with identical effects is take the strongest one and apply it. Actually, that is a really good point. This would easily fall under the section in the PHB at the beginning of the Spells chapter. In this case, 3x would be the total jump distance multiplier but for a different reason than ad_hoc was mentioning.

Sunday, 3rd December, 2017

  • 12:06 AM - 24Fanatic365 mentioned ad_hoc in post Why penalize returning from death?
    My wife and I play AL at the local game shop, and you may be surprised to know, there are still house rules. A DM is running the game, so how could there not be house rules? Like ad_hoc mentioned above, the way 5e was designed leaves little to no chance that ANY group playing it will not have some form of house rule, or a different way of looking at and interpreting the rules that actually ARE there for us to see in black and white in the core rulebooks. Iím ok with slightly modifying how I play the game dependent on the group Iím playing with at the moment. I just want to spend some time having fun, and D&D is a relatively new way my wife and I have recently discovered for us to do that together. As far as I can tell, thatís the main purpose of the game. Fun. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sunday, 9th October, 2016

  • 10:26 AM - pemerton mentioned ad_hoc in post After 2 years the 5E PHB remains one of the best selling books on Amazon
    ... more or less racist, more or less homophobic, etc. It's about the conception of the gameworld, and thereby of who is (potentially) part of the game, being projected by WotC. It's about WotC's communication to the potential market of D&D players. I seriously doubt anyone who was remotely interested in RPGs was ever stopped by the lack of such a statementIt depends on what you mean by "seriously interested". If the rulebooks give the impression that the gameworld does not contain a certain sort of person, than a real-world person of that type might not become seriously interested, precisely because s/he assumes that the gameworld, and hence the game, is not something for him/her. I certainly know people who are "seriously interested" in movies or TV shows and will choose not to watch ones that have no people of colour in them, because they're sick of engaging with fictional works that they are not invited to imagine themselves a part of. Which, to me, makes doctorbadwolf's and ad_hoc's reports of similar responses to D&D in relation to sex, gender and sexuality very plausible.


Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
No results to display...
Page 1 of 58 123456789101151 ... LastLast

Friday, 22nd February, 2019

  • 03:12 PM - Parmandur quoted ad_hoc in post Here Are The Most Popular D&D Feats (War Caster Leads The Pack!)
    I'm not saying 0 people do that. I'm just saying that of the 15+ million 5e players, those who do are in a distinct minority. This is not to say it's wrong, but it is relevant to talk about when we're talking about statistics and why people are doing what they're doing. I think so many Rangers and Rogues have Sharpshooter because the players want their characters to be sharpshooters. I think the same is true of War Caster. Their characters are 'war casters' so they take the War Caster feat. As for mechanics, I bet not wanting to play the weapon juggling game of dropping and picking it back up again is a big selling point because that isn't heroic. Yeah, it's pretty commonsensical.
  • 08:02 AM - Kurotowa quoted ad_hoc in post Here Are The Most Popular D&D Feats (War Caster Leads The Pack!)
    I bet few people think 'I want to play a ranged attacking character, what class and feats do I choose for that'. Rather they look at the theme of classes, backgrounds, races, and choose ones and create a character who they think would be fun to play as. Once they decide on their class, then they look at what sorts of weapons, spells, and such that character would use. You'd be surprised, every group has its own dynamic. In my current group we've got a guy who's not big on mechanics. He went to one of those historic recreation towns on his last vacation and got to shoot a crossbow. The experience impressed him so much he decided his next character would be a crossbow user, and the group put our heads together to help him pick the right class for it. Other times we've had someone decide they wanted to play the front line anchor and then shop around for which class offered the style they wanted. So yes, some people look through the book and pick an option they think looks fun. That's ho...
  • 04:05 AM - Parmandur quoted ad_hoc in post Here Are The Most Popular D&D Feats (War Caster Leads The Pack!)
    I would argue that EB is not necessary to optimize. It's just a d10 cantrip and invocations are precious. Probably not, but the CharOp consensus is bullish on EB. Which is the point, most people are not plugged into that.

Monday, 18th February, 2019

  • 05:06 PM - Tyrfingr quoted ad_hoc in post Does A Monk Actually Benefit From Taking Mobile?
    You're discounting the cost of a feat here which is huge. I mean, sure, having another way to avoid OAs that doesn't cost Ki is an advantage. But is it worth a feat? It's a specific circumstance where you have to run past 1 enemy. When you need to run past 3 or 4 to get to your target then Mobile is no good. If you don't need to run past any, then again it doesn't benefit you. The general rule is that if you can attack more than once during an action you can move between attacks. Flurry is an exception as it states you gain 2 attacks immediately after the attack action. Without the word 'immediately' you would be correct. Actually, it says "Flurry of Blows Immediately...you can spend 1 ki point to make two unarmed strikes as a bonus action." Also, per the PHB, "If you take an action that includes more than one weapon attack, you can break up your movement even further by moving between those attacks." So, you've immediately spent 1 ki to take a bonus action to attack twic...
  • 01:02 PM - Fanaelialae quoted ad_hoc in post Does A Monk Actually Benefit From Taking Mobile?
    The general rule is that if you can attack more than once during an action you can move between attacks. Flurry is an exception as it states you gain 2 attacks immediately after the attack action. Without the word 'immediately' you would be correct. Perhaps I'm being lenient in my interpretation, but I don't read it that way. Although I do see where you're coming from. To me it says that you need to make the attacks as part of the action that triggered it. For example, let's say you are playing a Fighter/Monk. You can't take your attack action, action surge to disarm a trap, and then take your flurry. But you could move, attack, move, attack, move, attack, move, attack, and move. It certainly doesn't hurt anything as far as I can tell, and it has a nice thematic flavor. Like the warrior who rushes through the line of opponents faster than the eye can see, only to have them dramatically collapse afterwards. A classic trope of martial arts movies.
  • 08:24 AM - Allistar1801 quoted ad_hoc in post Does A Monk Actually Benefit From Taking Mobile?
    Well, not if you're using Flurry. Both of those need to come immediately after the last attack of the attack action. Personally I'd rather eat an OA from a mook (if it comes to it) and get my full attacks against the target I'm trying to Stunning Strike than take a feat so I can use an attack to avoid an OA. The amount of times that specific scenario will happen is pretty rare. If you need to avoid many OAs then you have a Monk ability for that. If you need defense, you have another Monk ability for that too (Dodge). But, as I said, take the thing you think will be most fun. Maybe that is Mobile, maybe it is something else like Observant which will help you engage with a different pillar. In a vacuum if I had to take a (combat) feat as a Monk I like Alert. Yeah, you do get monk abilities to avoid stuff like this, but ki is a pretty valuable resource at low tier play and you dont want to use it for just anything. Just as well it consumes your bonus action meaning less attacks and less d...
  • 06:11 AM - Allistar1801 quoted ad_hoc in post Does A Monk Actually Benefit From Taking Mobile?
    No, Mobile is mostly redundant on a Monk. Bonuses to movement speed decrease in benefit the more movement you have. In order to avoid OAs you need to attack the creature first which means you're probably not attacking the ones you really want. It also doesn't stop creatures from just walking up to you and attack you on their turn. There is benefit to it but it's not worth a feat. You esp. want to use your ASIs for Dex and Wis as they are both important for the Monk. All that said, do what you want. You want to take it? Then take it. Don't mind what other people in the party want you to do. I agree that movement is less good if it's the only thing going for you, but like I mentioned before, we might need to catch a person. I've also used this before to carry our paladin and effectively boost his speed/reposition him. Not carrying a lot of items and him being light are pretty handy. Yes I do have to attack in order to avoid AoO's, but the amount of attacks that monks get as w...

Saturday, 16th February, 2019

  • 11:33 AM - Henry quoted ad_hoc in post D&D movie, take note...
    I think the Guardians of the Galaxy template is perfect for a D&D movie. The GotG were a completely unknown C-list comic book property before their movie. The plot is mediocre at best; they're out to get a MacGuffin and stop Mr. Evil Twirling Moustache. It's the dynamics between the characters and fun tone of it that made it good. That's all a D&D movie needs. A party of likeable characters. The first Guardians movie had several things going for it: -Strength of vision. Gunn and crew had a very strong idea for what came out, from the music, to the characterizations, to the humor. A movie with too many competing visions becomes a muddled mess or too formulaic, as in the case of half the movies that get made. -Likeable Characters (and decent actors who like them, too) - No argument there. -A hell of a good editor who knows what the strengths of a certain movie are, what to cut and what makes a story keep moving. I think Guardians either lucked out, or had the resources t...
  • 10:15 AM - Markh3rd quoted ad_hoc in post Sage Advice Compendium Update 1/30/2019
    I'm just making an observation. Water is wet. Ahhhhhh. But wet is not water.
  • 09:34 AM - Markh3rd quoted ad_hoc in post Sage Advice Compendium Update 1/30/2019
    Is your argument that 5e wasn't worded perfectly? That is a given. The game would still be in editing if they were striving for perfection. The rule is fine. The section on Bonus Actions could have been a bit clearer and there could be some clarification text on some abilities like Shield Master. Not my argument, just my observation. And I agree with you that it could have been clearer when written.

Thursday, 14th February, 2019

  • 04:22 PM - Asgorath quoted ad_hoc in post Sage Advice Compendium Update 1/30/2019
    He specifically talked about the Attack Action and Extra Attack and stated that you cannot do an action within an action. Being able to move is a special property that applies to the Attack Action. It doesn't allow for doing anything and everything. You can't splice actions in the middle of other actions. You're not taking an action in the middle of another action, you're taking a bonus action. Those are two very different things. The bonus action rule very clearly says that you get to decide when to take the bonus action on your turn, unless there are timing requirements in the bonus action itself.
  • 06:23 AM - Markh3rd quoted ad_hoc in post Sage Advice Compendium Update 1/30/2019
    He specifically talked about the Attack Action and Extra Attack and stated that you cannot do an action within an action. Being able to move is a special property that applies to the Attack Action. It doesn't allow for doing anything and everything. You can't splice actions in the middle of other actions. One could argue that, "You choose when to take a bonus action during your turn, unless the bonus action's timing is specified, and anything that deprives you of your ability to take actions also prevents you from taking a bonus action." is also an exception to this rule, just like movement is.
  • 05:57 AM - Asgorath quoted ad_hoc in post Sage Advice Compendium Update 1/30/2019
    Because there is one rule allowing something everything else must be allowed? You're just making things up now. Which is fine of course, you're free to houserule whatever. You're just making the game more complicated than designed. I don't follow. The rule for bonus actions is clear: you choose when to take the bonus action on your turn. JC explains in the video that you can take your bonus action at any point during your turn.
  • 04:17 AM - Asgorath quoted ad_hoc in post Sage Advice Compendium Update 1/30/2019
    So your position is that you can splice up actions? So if you, say, cast a spell you can perform another action while you are resolving the spell? So cast Magic Missile, fire off one missile, do a bonus action, move about, then fire off the rest of the missiles? You're making the game far too complicated. No, I never said anything like that. First of all, all bolts from Magic Missile strike their targets at the same time. You create three glowing darts of magical force. Each dart hits a creature of your choice that you can see within range. A dart deals 1d4 + 1 force damage to its target. The darts all strike simultaneously, and you can direct them to hit one creature or several. Based on that, it's entirely reasonable to move, cast Magic Missile, do a bonus action, and then move some more. Or, rearrange those 4 things into any order you like. The perceived complexity here are the multiple attacks from Extra Attack. Given the special rule that says you can break up you...
  • 02:06 AM - Hriston quoted ad_hoc in post Sage Advice Compendium Update 1/30/2019
    The Bonus Action becomes available when its requirements are met. Another way to look at it is that you meet the requirements when you use the bonus action made available by the game feature. It's like the game feature gives you the ability to do a cool action-combination, part of which takes your action.

Wednesday, 13th February, 2019

  • 09:45 PM - Hriston quoted ad_hoc in post Sage Advice Compendium Update 1/30/2019
    Why do you need to take the 'attack action' at all in the 'fiction'? For your character to shove a creature in the fiction (without the feat's bonus action), you need to take the Attack action. I don't think there's any other action that's suitable for that action declaration. Obviously, your character isn't "taking the Attack action" in the fiction unless s/he is playing D&D! Crawford has explained that it is this way to keep the game flowing. The rules are designed to make combat go smoothly and quickly. I get that, but I don't think a monolithic RAW interpretation is necessary for that. You also don't get a bonus action until a thing gives that action. So you don't have it to use until you've done the attack action. You seem to be referencing this passage from the section on bonus actions: You can take a bonus action only when a special ability, spell, or other feature of the game states that you can do something as a bonus action. You otherwise don't have a bonus action ...

Monday, 11th February, 2019

  • 04:03 AM - Dausuul quoted ad_hoc in post Humans, Fighters, and Life Domain Most Popular On D&D Beyond
    Mearls stated that less than half of gaming groups use feats. I trust the data he has. Where did Mike Mearls say this? The only place I have seen this assertion made is in a thread title here on ENWorld, and the data cited was showing that less than half of characters use feats - in other words, the person creating the thread misinterpreted the data.
  • 03:50 AM - Dausuul quoted ad_hoc in post Humans, Fighters, and Life Domain Most Popular On D&D Beyond
    Less than half of gaming groups use feats. No. Less than half of characters (on DDB) use feats. We have no idea how many gaming groups use them. In a group which allows feats, not all of the characters will actually have feats; many players will choose the stat bump instead. By definition, in a group which does not allow feats, none of the characters will have feats. So the number of characters who have feats is almost certainly understating the number of groups that allow them.

Saturday, 9th February, 2019


Thursday, 7th February, 2019

  • 05:28 PM - Dausuul quoted ad_hoc in post 90% of D&D Games Stop By Level 10; Wizards More Popular At Higher Levels
    I'm surprised by how many are playing in tier 4. 5.4% is a lot (even with DoMM out). I'm not really sure how Beyond works, is it possible that people are creating level 20 characters as character building exercises? Maybe that plays into why classes are differently popular at different tiers. Yes, it is possible, and in fact I think that is the most likely explanation for tier 4 being more popular than tier 3. These stats don't distinguish between characters being actively played and characters created as a thought exercise. I bet that if you took that chart and broke it out by level, you would find next to nothing from 17-19 and a huge spike at 20.


Page 1 of 58 123456789101151 ... LastLast

ad_hoc's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites