View Profile: Saelorn - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Today, 02:29 AM
    I get that. There were a lot of changes, both qualitative and quantitative. It was a bigger change than the difference between 3.0 and 3.5, I think. What I don't get is, how did those changes influence your play? What sort of situation would you find yourself in, which would play out differently in a 1E game as compared to a 2E game? Or is it that you would find yourself in different sorts of...
    18 replies | 556 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Today, 12:57 AM
    I don't use any of the extra flanking rules, but it's already incorporated into the narrative, for situations where it's necessary. When the rogue gets Sneak Attack, from having an ally threaten the target, that's flanking. When a wolf or thug gains Advantage from Pack Tactics, that's flanking.
    32 replies | 8201 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:49 PM
    By my perspective, the issue is less about auto-scaling cantrips, and more about auto-scaling utility spells. At low levels, you can cast Burning Hands or Shield from your level one spell slot, and they both give a level-appropriate effect. At high levels, you still get a level-appropriate effect from casting Shield in a level one spell slot, but casting Burning Hands in that spell slot is...
    112 replies | 3007 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:03 PM
    I don't quite follow. In what way did the changes to the game (class, race, rules) influence how you played the game? I get that the specific rules for ranger favored enemy and elven level limits changed, but how did those changes influence what you did with the character?
    18 replies | 556 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Yesterday, 12:09 AM
    At least when I played 2E, you didn't automatically learn any new spells when you gained a level. If you were a level 5 wizard, but you never found any scrolls or captured any spellbooks, then you were still casting level 1 spells. The ability to learn a spell automatically was restricted to specialist wizards, and was the primary benefit of specializing.
    37 replies | 1030 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Monday, 10th December, 2018, 10:04 PM
    I remember reading through an older edition - something older than 2E, at the very least - which gave a distinct impression that recovering spells was something which happened in between dungeons. It was definitely not the case where you could just hold up in one room, and sleep until morning, as overnight resting so-often devolves into.
    37 replies | 1030 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Monday, 10th December, 2018, 05:26 PM
    This should be basically fine, and it's one of the suggested optional rules, but keep in mind that the classes are balanced around the concept of six encounters between long rests, with two short rests at equal intervals (two fights, then a short rest, two fights, then a short rest, two fights, then a long rest). If you change the length of the rests, then warlocks are probably going to end up...
    37 replies | 1030 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Saturday, 8th December, 2018, 10:33 PM
    A simpler rule to the same end would be that healing someone at zero does not automatically revive them. If someone becomes a noncombatant as soon as they're unconscious, then players will heal them before they get to that point. It's like giving them a buffer to remain conscious when they're about to die, except the buffer is measured in your last few HP instead of as additional death saves.
    30 replies | 490 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Saturday, 8th December, 2018, 09:14 PM
    I figure, there's a reason why most independent hacks end up looking a lot like Basic, while serious attempts to copy 4E require larger companies. It also explains why the D&D hack I'm currently writing looks so little like the ideal version I just described.
    100 replies | 1561 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Saturday, 8th December, 2018, 12:53 AM
    YMMV, but based purely on personal experience, 3E/Pathfinder/4E gives me a vastly different experience with magic items than either 2E or 5E does. In 2E or 5E, since enchanting is difficult/impossible, my first thought upon finding a magic item is to wonder what we can do with it. If we find a Circlet of Blasting, then we'll question whether the paladin or the rogue can make better use of it,...
    100 replies | 1561 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Friday, 7th December, 2018, 01:30 AM
    Assuming I was building my own D&D remix, and I didn't actually have to do the work involved: I would start with the race and class framework from 4E, but I'd frontload the classes so that you get most of your powers at first level, like in older editions. I would also nix any powers that were substantially redundant or narratively unclear, to make them more distinct. I'd remove the...
    100 replies | 1561 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Thursday, 6th December, 2018, 08:38 PM
    I think the issue is that the "natural" way goes counter to the "correct" way. Which way can be considered "normal" will depend entirely on the individual, and whether they spent a lot of time quoting the original text, or whether they automatically flipped everything in order to make sense in conversation at the table. I'm having trouble in following this thread, because every time someone...
    61 replies | 1943 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Thursday, 6th December, 2018, 12:41 AM
    I nominate System Mastery. They review an RPG every other week, and have maintained that schedule for years now, which is pretty impressive given the sheer number of pages involved.
    78 replies | 2065 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Monday, 3rd December, 2018, 08:09 PM
    I was thinking more about strong healing potions, or other things that are too good to use. With things like potions and scrolls that don't do anything useful, I default to selling for cheap. The Potion of Climbing, for example, is not useful enough to warrant using. In a party of four people, giving one of them a climb speed for an hour is unlikely to help at any point before reaching level...
    24 replies | 971 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Friday, 30th November, 2018, 03:51 AM
    I've seen a couple of different approaches to this sort of thing, but I struggle to adapt them to the tabletop. The first is to put a hard limit on how many you can carry. If enemies commonly drop healing potions, but you can only carry 15 of them, then you're going to start using them in order to make space. If you can only carry 5 elixirs, and you're already up to 4, then you might use one...
    24 replies | 971 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Thursday, 29th November, 2018, 03:31 AM
    A game doesn't need to be sustainable, for it to be successful. If you put out one book, and people are still using that book twenty years later, then that sounds pretty successful to me.
    22 replies | 871 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Wednesday, 28th November, 2018, 10:17 PM
    Put me in the camp of players who hate finite-use items. Unless that item has the ability to permanently alter the status quo, it's effectively worthless. Given that challenges will only increase in difficulty over time, using an item in order to get through these lesser trials now, will mean that I have no chance of surviving the greater threats later on; especially since I will no longer have...
    24 replies | 971 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Tuesday, 27th November, 2018, 02:01 AM
    That's not scary at all. I will follow the footprints until I find the Tarrasque, where I will beat it to death with my sword, because I know with 100% certainty that it is physically incapable of inflicting lasting harm on me.
    38 replies | 1280 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Monday, 26th November, 2018, 01:57 AM
    I think that's pretty much it. Early editions were such a kludge of mish-mashed mechanics that it was hard to consider the whole as a cohesive system. When it was clearly already a patchwork design, it didn't seem weird to patch more bits into it or out of it. Third edition was a cohesive system, with clear and consistent mechanics. Patching in something from AD&D would seem out of place. ...
    61 replies | 1943 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Saturday, 24th November, 2018, 03:19 AM
    Not that I've ever played it, or would ever play it, but MAID is a good example a rules-light game. You have six stats, a health track, a method of advancement, and everything else is up to interpretation. I don't know that it's possible to come up with an objective definition for rules-light or rules-heavy, because it's all relative. Shadowrun is rules-light, compared to Living Steel....
    22 replies | 871 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Saturday, 24th November, 2018, 02:12 AM
    Fair enough, although I think they have something weird with half-elves, and divine magic is supposed to be different in Eberron. I'm not sure how the whole "silver flame" thing maps onto the domain structure, for example. That's the kind of thing that I would want a document to support. The most important part of a setting is in the (setting-agnostic) definition, though, which tells us which...
    34 replies | 917 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Saturday, 24th November, 2018, 01:20 AM
    I consider a setting to be supported if it is playable with the rules provided. Forgotten Realms is supported, because the rules in the PHB are all consistent with how things work in that world. Eberron is not supported in the PHB, because things work differently there. Supporting a setting is a different thing than defining a setting, by my perspective. You need things like a map, and notes...
    34 replies | 917 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Friday, 23rd November, 2018, 11:35 PM
    I suspect that, against a party of four level 13 characters, a group of four banshees would hit substantially harder than their CR would suggest. If you had four such encounters in a day, as the XP guidelines suggest, there's a fairly high chance of TPK. I mean, I already know that a level 5 monk can punch way above its level, when it comes to disabling bosses; and the most common reason why...
    139 replies | 6291 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Friday, 23rd November, 2018, 08:31 PM
    I don't consider it a problem, if a high-level party is almost immune to a banshee's wail. It's kind of a balance issue already, that non-HP abilities are equally effective across levels. A banshee shouldn't have an identical chance to kill someone who is level 5 or level 20, any more than a level 5 monk should have an equal chance of stunning someone who is level 5 or level 20 (which they do)....
    139 replies | 6291 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Wednesday, 21st November, 2018, 11:00 PM
    And what, you're going to ready an action to dive behind cover when you expect the dragon is going to breathe on you? If you're going to spend the whole time cowering in the background, instead of up in the dragon's face, then you might as well not show up. Remember that your Dex modifier is -1, so you're not doing anything with a bow. It's not feasible to add new party members, as preparation....
    139 replies | 6291 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Wednesday, 21st November, 2018, 09:53 PM
    If you're a level 17 fighter, and your Dex save is at -1, then you would need to find +12 worth of bonuses to turn an impossible DC 21 save into a probable one. Advantage is meaningless if you still fail on a 20, but might tip the scales if you can also find +8 worth of bonuses elsewhere. I'm not too familiar with everything on your list, but from what I do recognize, there's not much that you...
    139 replies | 6291 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Wednesday, 21st November, 2018, 09:22 PM
    Right, but how does it help for the saving throws to be literally unmake-able, rather than being 90% or 95% unmake-able? Would you have acted any differently, in preparation or during the fight, if you'd known that it was theoretically possible for you to resist some of his abilities? Or would you still focus on ways to alleviate the effects, under the assumption that you'll probably still fail...
    139 replies | 6291 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Wednesday, 21st November, 2018, 08:54 PM
    That would be a reasonable argument, if it was true, but it's not. Preparation gives very little ability to change the odds (since you'll never turn an impossible save into a probable one, the tools simply don't exist); and impossible saves are more-or-less irrelevant to the necessity of running away. If a cosmic dragon walks up to you and hits you with a DC 45 breath weapon, then you just...
    139 replies | 6291 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Wednesday, 21st November, 2018, 07:29 PM
    I would argue that it's less about short encounter days, and more about having too many resources available. The design expectation of six encounters in a day is an unreasonable one, so players end up with more resources than they need, even if their encounter day is of a reasonable length. In my experience with running high-level campaigns, characters have a lot more resources than they can...
    39 replies | 983 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Wednesday, 21st November, 2018, 07:05 PM
    As I understand it, if someone survives a blow and can still fight back, then the wound won't seriously impede them in the short term. If the wound they take is so bad that it would impede them, then they're probably out of the fight. All-or-nothing is actually a pretty good way of looking at someone, in terms of combat efficacy. A high-level character who has been hit but isn't out of the fight,...
    38 replies | 1280 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Wednesday, 21st November, 2018, 02:28 AM
    From my experience, players are unlikely to go nova in situations where they can't reliably rest afterwards. The effect of limited resources is that they don't nova in the first place, because they don't want to run out of resources later. At least in the games I've played and run, it's pretty obvious when it's safe to go all-out. The boss fights usually come after the fodder, rather than the...
    39 replies | 983 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Wednesday, 21st November, 2018, 12:40 AM
    That only makes sense if you assume anything with HP can be felled by a single blow. While it might be a reasonable assumption for puny humans (although I would argue that point, as well), it doesn't even begin to cover something like a dire bear or kraken. Nevertheless, the most common situation which fails to be scary is combat, because an orc with a giant axe can only do so much to your...
    38 replies | 1280 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Wednesday, 21st November, 2018, 12:13 AM
    Deadliness is not synonymous with difficulty. You can have a difficult fight with low stakes, or an easy fight with a (small) chance of TPK.
    42 replies | 1116 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Tuesday, 20th November, 2018, 08:13 PM
    I guess that depends on what the player expects to get out of the action. Personally, when I take the Dodge action, my expectation is that enemies may choose to not attack me. If the player is expecting to still be attacked, and looking forward to imposing Disadvantage on the attack roll, then I could see why they might feel disappointed. A similar situation happened in my first 5E campaign....
    60 replies | 1734 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Monday, 19th November, 2018, 11:33 PM
    The most important factor, to me, is the certainty with which an unwinnable fight can be escaped. If a monster just comes out of nowhere, and ambush webs the party before they can do anything, then that's a bad lethal encounter. If the party is walking along, and an ancient dragon appears a couple of miles off but they could probably engage it if they tried, then that's the opposite extreme. ...
    29 replies | 837 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Monday, 19th November, 2018, 09:07 PM
    The point of play is to figure out what happens. The heroes should overcome the villains, if they are stronger and/or more clever. If you want every encounter to be difficult, then you are essentially putting everything into the second category ("if they are more clever"), and you're ignoring the first category ("if they are stronger"). The thing is, cleverness in combat is not the only...
    42 replies | 1116 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Monday, 19th November, 2018, 08:14 PM
    The difference is that guessing a god's personal password is a crazy plan that nobody should expect to work, while trying to dodge a breath weapon is the primary way that characters are expected to interact with breath weapons. It's fine if the party has zero chance at the former, because the designers can't anticipate it as a probable course of action, but they anticipate the latter with such...
    139 replies | 6291 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Monday, 19th November, 2018, 12:00 AM
    It's not a matter of whether or not you can deal with the monster, because failing a saving throw is always a possibility, regardless. You can still deal with an ancient red dragon, even if you can't save against its breath weapon. Whether your evasion chance is 0% or 10% is more-or-less irrelevant to your chances of winning. That doesn't excuse them asking for saving throws which are...
    139 replies | 6291 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Friday, 16th November, 2018, 08:24 PM
    These fighting styles don't exist in a game that uses feats as written, so they're intended to also cover some of the ground that their iconic feats provide. I mean, feats are an optional rule anyway, so I'd rather that fighting styles be balanced on their own instead of relying on feats to keep them balanced. I took the core archery style as the baseline, since +2 to hit with almost every...
    56 replies | 1495 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Friday, 16th November, 2018, 12:46 AM
    For the record, I use the following fighting styles in my game: Defense: AC +1, and +2 to all saves Duelist: +2 to all attack rolls Two- Weapon: +1 to AC and attack rolls, and add damage dice together for every attack. Striker: Add proficiency bonus to weapon damage when using a weapon in two hands.
    56 replies | 1495 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Thursday, 15th November, 2018, 10:32 PM
    How much damage would it do? As I see it, the damage is either so little that the spellcasters won't care (in which case it doesn't change their choices, relative to the field not being there, and there was no point in your designing the thing); or it's so much that the spellcasters will do anything to avoid triggering it (in which case they're effectively in an antimagic field, and there was no...
    15 replies | 554 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Thursday, 15th November, 2018, 09:02 PM
    Dueling is far from terrible. A +2 bonus to damage is pretty significant, in comparison to the 1d8+3 that you're otherwise dealing. The only real problem is that it has to compete with +1 AC, which is probably going to win out for anyone who cares enough about AC to choose a shield in the first place. A champion with Dueling and Defense styles is a solid choice that does its job well and is easy...
    56 replies | 1495 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Thursday, 15th November, 2018, 08:24 PM
    That goes back to your interpretation of how you correlate actions in the game to actions within the narrative. It can be hard to reach consensus on what, exactly, is observable to characters in the world; and which information, if acted upon, would be meta-gaming. I've heard too many horror stories about GMs who wouldn't let a player know how many HP their own character had left, under the...
    60 replies | 1734 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Thursday, 15th November, 2018, 01:32 AM
    I would disagree on this point. An important factor that you seem to have overlooked is that taking the Dodge action can cause enemies to re-evaluate who they attack. If nobody attacks you, your Dodge action was only wasted if their decision to not attack you was made without regard to your Dodge action. If your choice to Dodge causes them to not attack you, then your action had the effect of...
    60 replies | 1734 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Thursday, 15th November, 2018, 12:23 AM
    I would have to see your changes to the other styles first, but my immediate impulse would be to take this style and keep the full bonus to AC at all times (until such point as I hit the cap, and then the extra bonus is wasted as damage). The ability to use a greatsword, while still gaining +2 to AC (later improving to +3), blows the shield and defense style out of the water. Of course, I...
    56 replies | 1495 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Wednesday, 14th November, 2018, 11:59 PM
    Fighters with the Great Weapon Fighting style are supposed to use greatswords rather than greataxes. It gives a greater bonus with the former than with the latter. It's still relatively terrible, compared to what archers and tanks get. My best guess is that they realized how powerful the relevant feat was, and intentionally under-powered the fighting style in order to compensate. Personally,...
    56 replies | 1495 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Wednesday, 14th November, 2018, 11:21 PM
    Fighters are supposed to use greatswords, just like barbarians are supposed to use greataxes. You get a penalty for playing against type.
    56 replies | 1495 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Wednesday, 14th November, 2018, 10:14 PM
    It's not that the +1 to AC while dual-wielding is a negligible benefit for a dual-wielder. It's that dual-wielding is not relevant to tanks, who use shields. There are dozens of formulas and features for calculating AC, but if you care about AC as your main thing, then you've already disregarded dual-wielding and archery as possibilities. A +1 bonus to AC for a dual-wielder is worth less than...
    56 replies | 1495 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Wednesday, 14th November, 2018, 09:53 PM
    No, because it only applies when you're dual-wielding, which means you're still at a net penalty compared to using a shield. The feat helps you overcome part of the AC penalty from dual-wielding, but it's not good for characters who care about optimizing AC, which is where the fighting style really matters. Now you're into the realm of trade-offs, rather than benefits. Increasing your max HP...
    56 replies | 1495 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Wednesday, 14th November, 2018, 09:12 PM
    Which you must be dual-wielding in order to use. The Defense fighting style gives you a +1 bonus, while also letting you benefit from a shield and heavy armor. It pushes the envelope forward one step, instead of helping you to offset the AC penalty associated with not using a shield. Which is only useful in situations where you have those penalties. Again, you're offsetting penalties rather than...
    56 replies | 1495 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Wednesday, 14th November, 2018, 08:46 PM
    Fighting styles are significantly more powerful than feats, in my opinion. There's no feat which is as powerful as +1 to AC, or +2 to every attack roll you ever make. They aren't flashy, but they apply so frequently that they're on par with raising your primary stat, which is more than can be said for the vast majority of feats.
    56 replies | 1495 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Wednesday, 14th November, 2018, 03:41 AM
    Based on what I've heard around these boards, I can't imagine that spreading the damage around would be something that you want to incentivize, if you have a lot of Healing Words available and only rarely have short rests in which to spend your hit dice. If you can't take advantage of free healing from hit dice, then you might still want the enemies to attack a tank that's low on HP, because...
    74 replies | 2078 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Wednesday, 14th November, 2018, 12:57 AM
    Whether or not Dodging is useful is something that's likely to vary, depending on things like party composition and the abundance of short rests. I can say that I made significant use of the Dodge action while I was playing a low-level Eldritch Knight, because I was the tank, and we spent a lot of time in narrow corridors. Various design decisions in 5E mean that AC is unreliable, unless you...
    74 replies | 2078 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Tuesday, 13th November, 2018, 11:43 PM
    It usually stands for "Random Number Generator". If that's the case, then in this context, it might refer to the degree by which the randomness of the dice can make the game fall apart. D&D 5E was designed so that the randomness of the dice are unlikely to ruin anything, because characters have stats in a very small and predictable range, and no single die roll is going to kill anyone. Over...
    6 replies | 421 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Tuesday, 13th November, 2018, 09:09 PM
    Abstraction is a matter of degrees, and D&D has always been somewhere in the middle of the pack, being more simulationist than (for example) Everway but more abstract than (for example) GURPS. Prior to 4E, the rules supported a wide range of interpretations, and you were perfectly justified whether or not you wanted to say that a successful attack roll necessarily correlated to a physical impact...
    139 replies | 5963 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Tuesday, 13th November, 2018, 08:30 PM
    If it's nonsensical to imagine that a dagger can harm an iron golem, but then someone with a dagger stabs an iron golem to death, then something has gone horribly wrong with the system. This point is related to the original topic, because the original topic is that the basic combat rules don't make a lot of sense, and I'm more-or-less agreeing with that. You need to make some concessions to...
    139 replies | 5963 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Tuesday, 13th November, 2018, 08:12 PM
    What counts as magic, though? Spells and magic items, sure, but what about class features? Does it depend on how the class feature is described, or is it just a "class" bonus either way? From a practical, administrative standpoint, I'm not sure how to make sure that everyone is on the same page with what stacks and what doesn't, unless you go back to naming bonuses.
    70 replies | 1499 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Tuesday, 13th November, 2018, 04:13 AM
    The other obvious solution would be to change what +X items do. For example, under my own set of house rules, +X weapons only deal extra damage, and +X armor increases your DR; but I also converted armor into DR as baseline, so it might be kind of weird outside of that context.
    70 replies | 1499 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Tuesday, 13th November, 2018, 02:41 AM
    It could just be that bless is too good, given the normalization effect of rolling an extra die. Are there other spells or effects that you're having a problem with? It could be as simple as getting rid of that one spell.
    70 replies | 1499 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Tuesday, 13th November, 2018, 02:26 AM
    If you're trapped behind a wooden wall that has 30hp, then a finesse dagger hits as hard as a brute force dagger, because the metric for force is the HP. The only time when finesse damage makes any sense whatsoever is if you're attacking something that has weak points. It's a reasonable(ish) assumption when you're talking about humans or dragons, but less so when you're talking about golems or...
    139 replies | 5963 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Saelorn's Avatar
    Monday, 12th November, 2018, 10:44 PM
    It's not so bad, if you assume that a level 1 fighter with zero experience hasn't actually been training for years. Granted, it goes against the description from earlier editions, but it's fairly consistent for what it is. Both characters are barely trained in the use of a dagger, and have the same amount of natural talent, so they're both equally skilled with that dagger. They both have training...
    139 replies | 5963 view(s)
    1 XP
No More Results
About Saelorn

Basic Information

Date of Birth
August 23
About Saelorn
Location:
San Diego
Social Networking

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

Twitter:
Saelorn
My Game Details

Details of games currently playing and games being sought.

Town:
San Diego
State:
California
Country:
USA

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
6,142
Posts Per Day
3.51
Last Post
On the Differences Between 1e and 2e (Not all AD&D Is the Same) Today 02:29 AM

Currency

Gold Pieces
15
General Information
Last Activity
Today 08:33 AM
Join Date
Tuesday, 25th February, 2014
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
5

1 Friend

  1. Noctem Noctem is offline

    Member

    Noctem
Showing Friends 1 to 1 of 1
My Game Details
Town:
San Diego
State:
California
Country:
USA
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Wednesday, 12th December, 2018


Tuesday, 11th December, 2018


Monday, 10th December, 2018


Saturday, 8th December, 2018


Friday, 7th December, 2018


Thursday, 6th December, 2018


Tuesday, 4th December, 2018



Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Page 1 of 14 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Monday, 19th November, 2018

  • 06:32 PM - Laurefindel mentioned Saelorn in post Ranger Beast Master: errata will add new features to your animal companion!
    I must say that I agree with @Saelorn too, I believe in the gaming principle that dice are to be rolled only if the outcome of a challenge is uncertain, and that if a player is allowed/enforced to roll, there should always be a chance, however small that is, to succeed on the task at hand. I was very happy that D&D 5e (at last!) embraced that principle but somewhat disappointed that there wasn't a blanket "1 is always a failure and 20 is always a success" underlying rule. Let one peasant out of twenty resist the full scale of the magical effect, and let the hero have its 5% chance of escaping the bad guy's "gotcha!" button. It's not going to break the game and IMO, it's one instance when simplicity and consistency win over complexity and diversity. I don't see how the game is much better with the possibility to auto-fail on a save, or auto-succeed on a skill check.

Thursday, 8th November, 2018

  • 05:35 AM - OB1 mentioned Saelorn in post Ranger Beast Master: errata will add new features to your animal companion!
    Not on saving throws, which is one of the main reasons why I believe they didn't anticipate the situation. I don't know that there's ever been an edition where saving throws were literally unmake-able, let alone on as-consistent a basis as they are in 5E. Saelorn, let me start by saying that I understand that this is a pet peeve of yours, but it really got me thinking about the reality of the situation and I just wanted to bring some hard data to it. I get the fact that you don't like that a PC can encounter threats that they may not be able to overcome on their own, but for me, it's an incredible feature of 5e, not a bug. But beyond that, the actual issue of impossible saves isn't as large as you seem to imply. First of all, every character, by level 20, can achieve a minimum of +2 in all of their saves via their ASI choices, which means that that any PC can ensure they have a chance to make a saving throw up to DC22. Additionally, any PC may choose to be a fighter, and thereby achieve a minimum of +3 to all of their saves, but for the purposes of this argument, let's use the DC22 baseline, since it doesn't restrict you to a specific class (and since any PC choosing a Paladin can achieve a min of +8 in every save). The rules state tha...

Monday, 5th November, 2018

  • 09:47 PM - TaranTheWanderer mentioned Saelorn in post What variant rules should I add to my new campaign?
    Yup. It's a big sack of unintended consequences... what's the cheapest lightest weapon a wizard or anyone can carry to blow off crits? Might help TWF as you burn your dagger off-hand to stop the dragon crit then just draw another on your turn. I can imagine how many of their crits being eaten by enemy dagger breaks before my players balked... no wait... they would never approve it in the first place. You know it's a good rule when basic question prompt the "nobody forcing you" evasion. I mean, as a DM I wouldn't make PC crits meaningless by having wizards carry non-focus staves just for the purposes of not taking damage. I like to make my games cinematic and fun for the players. I'd hope that a DM using this rule would do the same. In all likelyhood, I could see an NPC use sacrifice something to avoid certain death but would give the PCs some kind of advantage. Saelorn I think in a more gritty setting, it would be more meaningful.

Thursday, 1st November, 2018

  • 10:49 PM - pukunui mentioned Saelorn in post Dragon+: Q&A with Jeremy Crawford, 10/30/18
    Saelorn: That one's OK. It's the one about adding a class feature that makes beast's attacks magical for the purposes of bypassing resistance. I don't care how JC tries to justify it to himself or spin it to us, that's a rules change. Not errata.

Tuesday, 18th September, 2018

  • 01:39 PM - Elfcrusher mentioned Saelorn in post Arguments and assumptions against multi classing
    Saelorn and Maxperson: I'm distinguishing between asking the question "What would this character do?", which I think is totally fine, and stating, "Action X is what the character would do," as if it's the one action among all the possibilities which is the most likely. It's the latter that I think is nonsense. People do unexpected, improbable, irrational things all the time.

Monday, 3rd September, 2018

  • 03:53 PM - Sadras mentioned Saelorn in post Arguments and assumptions against multi classing
    What i found odd tho (unclear apparently) was the immediate juxtaposition of disallowing an expressly optional element and disallowing a core element to try and use that juxtaposition to paint the former with the latter. Odd was the ommission of consideration of optional per the rules vs core per the rules. True, but if the DM allows MC but disallows a pallock, then the juxtaposition made by @Arial Black stands. I could be mistaken, but that is what it seemed like in Saelorn's post - he/she was referring to a particular MC being disallowed.

Tuesday, 24th July, 2018

  • 04:23 PM - Elfcrusher mentioned Saelorn in post A discussion of metagame concepts in game design
    And as it took 15-odd years to get things to this sad point, it'll probably take another 15 to get 'em back. 5e is merely a worthy start in that direction. It's funny how "will appeal to fans of all editions" got interpreted to mean "will meet the strict requirements of the most extreme zealots." Actually, because I'm curious, can you (or @Saelorn or anybody else) provide me with a specific quote from WotC that you think is evidence of a broken promise? (With full acknowledgement that the above quote is not evidence that you are in the camp; all it actually implies is that you are disappointed with 5e, not that you think they broke promises to get there. So apologies if I made incorrect assumptions.)

Monday, 23rd July, 2018

  • 09:38 PM - Kobold Boots mentioned Saelorn in post A discussion of metagame concepts in game design
    ...n general I don't give much credence to the whole "WotC promised me the moon and all I got was this t-shirt" complaint. I know some fans of previous editions (or parts of previous editions) feel like WotC "betrayed" them for various reasons, but it seems to me that people interpret their "promises" with unreasonable expectations, and then feel like promises were broken when those hopeful interpretations turn out to be incorrect. And in cases where they really did say, "We're going to do X" and then failed to do X, I would assume it was more that they realized X was untenable and regretfully changed their minds, as opposed to having intentionally misled people with marketing hyperbole. Product development goes that way sometimes. I mean, just look at the reactions to the Ravnica announcement. You'd think the sky was falling. Personally I'm glad they try to give updates and previews, rather than keep it all secret until launch in order avoid accusations of betrayal. Saelorn - Regarding your betrayal comment due to WoTC focusing on the middle. I'd argue that your lack of acceptance (not the same as understanding - I think you understand very well) of how markets work is probably the cause of your strife and not WoTC. Once you're running a business, you're doing statistics on the market. Once you're doing statistics you're looking at the middle 50 and folks that are one standard deviation away from the middle 50 for whatever you're marketing because that's where you're going to make most of your money. If you're not in that grouping then it's not the company that's the problem. You need to find the product where you're in that middle 50 plus 1 stdev in order to be happy. Of course, from any marketers viewpoint by aiming at what they're aiming at, they're marketing "to everyone". Elfcrusher regarding the Ravnica thing. I just don't get the folks that hate the idea of using M:tG settings as fodder for D&D. While it's not my first choice of ...

Thursday, 19th July, 2018

  • 05:18 PM - DMMike mentioned Saelorn in post D&D Action Economy - Alternative
    ...something already that costs an action in exchange for boosted defense: Dodge. Adding to OP. I'd be leaving in passive AC (because who doesn't love finding out that their attack was worthless?), but the Defense action would be a choice between Dodging or Saving. Saelorn: so tanking hits would still be possible - just not tanking spells/saves. You might also want to check if you're sure you want the possibility of casting 2 spells of any kind in a round, or if this needs the same restriction as for bonus action spells. I hope that the stigma over this would be lessened, since the free action would give other characters the chance to act twice as well. Maybe characters with a higher initiative score can react, attempting to disrupt the spell? How about lifting a rule from the glorious Dragon Warriors? Shields: don’t add to your AC but if you’re hit, roll a d6. On a 6, no damage. Maybe give different quality of shields different amounts of hits (number of) or HP (worth of damage). Just a thought. Would it bust the game? Pretty harsh that a shield would work, however poorly, regardless of the attacker's skill. But I have to agree with you (DW?) that shields and armor should use separate rules. It would make sense for the shield bonus to ap...

Wednesday, 18th July, 2018

  • 12:39 AM - Satyrn mentioned Saelorn in post Sanctuary plus Spirit Guardians?
    Would you end sanctuary then if the caster insults and nonmagically goads an opponent? If you would, would you require a save if a character tried to verbally goad a creature protected by sanctuary? Yes, because an insult is an attack on emotions. And yes, obviously. Man, Saelorn's right. Sanctuary is so weak.

Sunday, 15th July, 2018

  • 12:23 PM - Manbearcat mentioned Saelorn in post A discussion of metagame concepts in game design
    I'm not sure but at low levels probably not a lot but at higher levels it would keep you more cautious. I'm guessing. Assuming various powers that attack Harm 3 or Harm 4 come into play more at high levels, and the boxes don't change, then of course the threat of death would be high at any level. Perhaps unmanageably high but again I'd have to see an entire system to know for sure. I am happy enough with a moderately unrealistic system like hit points for a high fantasy super heroic game. I might also enjoy a less super heroic game. In such cases maybe WOIN or GURPS or even RQ would work. This is a totally different axis from metagame. I wouldn't want a metagame mechanic in any of those games if I had a choice. I think I could enjoy any of those games otherwise but I'd still favor the high fantasy game of D&D style the most. Emerikol (and Lanefan and perhaps Saelorn ), you (and Lanefan) answered my question with a response about the implications on the gameplay paradigm; eg “it would make it more lethal.” This thread is about “metagame mechanics” and players making decisions based exclusively on (what you perceive as) observable phenomenon (biological, physical) from the character’s perspective. I’m looking for your response in relation to that. So let me go a bit further and perhaps you can comment on this. A 10th level Fighter is challenging a trio of Stone Giants on the edge of their plateau which sits 70 feet above the ground. Situation 1: a) He has 100 HPs and the only chance the fall has to kill him is if he’s been significantly worn down in combat by interaction with the Stone Giants and their clubs (that are as big and weighty as him) and thrown boulders. b) As he waded in he sees a show of strength by the Stone Giant Cheieftan; the impact of one of these clubs and/or thrown boulders utterly ruins a rock formation of ap...

Friday, 6th July, 2018

  • 10:40 PM - TwoSix mentioned Saelorn in post Multi-classing: as good as it seems?
    ...That and +1 DC is a common ASI at 4th - both affecting more and doing more damage when you do. The other choice being a feat. If you'd like to say that a feat and no feat are about the same in power, I will have to disagree. Initial benefit of a subclass varies, but some are quite overwhelming. Do you feel like these are of no import? Bear Totem barbarian's expansion of Resistance to all damage but psychic? Moon druid's Combat Form? Battlemaster's Superiority dice? Paladin's oath with oath spells and channel divinity Warlock pact? Wizard's arcane traditions, like Arcane Ward from Abjuration or Portent for Divination? And that leaves off all the other features I listed that were not addressed: # of rages, spell points, action surge, ki, divine smite, sneak attack damage, and invocations. I can respect that you stand by your original statement. I'll leave my numeration of the benefits of levels 2-4 here so that others can make up their own minds. I feel Saelorn is somewhat understanding the importance of the 2-4 features, and you're somewhat overstating it. Level 2-4 features are quite useful, but so are plenty of level 1 features! Better armor, Con save proficiency for a caster, fighting style, more cantrips and low level spells known are all good things to have. And really, even in the worst case the delta between an optimized character and an unoptimized character at level 4 just isn't that large. The real pain point for a multiclass character is usually 5th-8th, when you're down a feat/ASI and missing the Extra Attack/3rd level spell boost. And even that can be mitigated if you're doing a part rogue build or cantrip build.

Tuesday, 3rd July, 2018

  • 01:37 PM - Maxperson mentioned Saelorn in post Would you allow this?
    Heh, if you google the definition of role-playing, both meanings are right there: Saelorn was using definition 1 and saying that's what he prefers. But that doesn't mean definition 2 is invalid, and I don't think anyone ever meant to imply differently. Saelorn already acknowledged that someone adding details is using the first definition as I argued, but that he didn't care for the additions and it wasn't this thing. I've never argued that the second definition is what I am using, as I wasn't using it.
  • 12:28 PM - TwoSix mentioned Saelorn in post What is the essence of 4E?
    And frankly give me Smash over Street Fighter any day - and I can't wait for Smash Ultimate to come out. I'm also a strong 4e fan. I wonder if the two are linked :) Or Young Linked, or Toon Linked. :) I bought a Switch the day after I saw the Smash Ultimate trailer. And I'm also a 4e fan, so I think Saelorn's original comparison is dead on.

Monday, 2nd July, 2018

  • 02:18 PM - Maxperson mentioned Saelorn in post Would you allow this?
    I can see both sides of this. On the one hand, it is pretty reasonable to define role playing specifically as "playing a role" in the normal sense. Saelorn's definition is probably what a non-gamer would expect the term to mean. On the other hand, the term has broadened in meaning to encompass all sorts of things you do when you play a role-playing game. There are many different but perfectly legitimate styles of play that fit into that category. But given the community we're all in, it's probably safer to assume people here will interpret the term broadly, so be careful how you use it. The meaning has broadened for sure, but even with his limited definition, the person narrating additional details is still roleplaying. Saelorn finally acknowledged that himself and stated that he prefers his way over the other, which is fine. We all have our preferences and I also prefer games without player narration of details as in the scarf example up thread.

Saturday, 23rd June, 2018

  • 02:40 AM - mrpopstar mentioned Saelorn in post Super Simple Armor
    jaelis this gives back to the rogue (because I don't truly harbor Dex any ill will), captures everything a boil down needs to capture for me, takes most everything offered for consideration in the thread into account, and gets buy-in from Saelorn, so, I'm feeling pretty good about it. :) I'll update the first post to reflect my thinking. Most burning question: Should things be listed as "light masterwork armor" or "masterwork light armor" ? Armor Armor Class (AC) Strength Stealth Light Armor 11 + Dex modifier -- Disadvantage Light Masterwork Armor 12 + Dex modifier -- -- Medium Armor 14 + Dex modifier (max 2) -- Disadvantage Medium Masterwork Armor 15 + Dex modifier (max 2) -- -- Heavy Armor 16 Str 13 Disadvantage Heavy Masterwork Armor 18 Str 15 Disadvantage Shield +2 -- --

Thursday, 21st June, 2018

  • 09:11 PM - Manbearcat mentioned Saelorn in post What is the essence of 4E?
    Saelorn The very first game I ran TPKed the very first fight. This was a game with 1 player who has played since the 70s, one that has played since the 80s and another noob to TTRPGs (but a Chemist and extremely good at puzzle solving and proficient at tactical and strategy games). They built a group that had absolutely 0 force multiplication and 0 synergy, virtually no control, no ability to Minion Sweep, and limited ability to dig into Healing Surges and rally. The didn’t interact with the environment/stunt for control (which is the primary impetus for Terrain Stunts) either. It was only a level + 2 combat, but it was a massacre. They learned pretty quickly after that!

Wednesday, 20th June, 2018


Monday, 18th June, 2018

  • 07:08 AM - Shasarak mentioned Saelorn in post Flipping the Table: Did Removing Miniatures Save D&D?
    ...you're fine and dandy at 1 hp in AD&D, so that every injury in AD&D is one that causes death unless tended to in which case it lays you out for a week, causes no issues? I'm not the one who raised the AD&D zero hp rules as a marker of realism, precisely because the above is not very realistic! That is true, being almost dead and then being brought back to life and only having to rest for a week is not very realistic. But in any case it is simply not true that having 1 hp left in ADnD means that you are "just fine and dandy". It would mean that any injury is going to be the one that potentially kills you. As you yourself say, descrbing your 1hp character as "just fine and Dandy" is simply nonsense narration. Frankly Gary Gygax himself does a much better job of describing such a character in his explanation of hps. (Whereas death saves, for instance, are easily treated as a metagame mechanic rather than a marker of ingame status.) Which is exactly the Schrodinger approach that @Saelorn described, it does not make sense narratively in the moment. Only after you have resolved the scenario can you actually describe what happened.

Wednesday, 13th June, 2018

  • 04:05 PM - OB1 mentioned Saelorn in post Dropping to 0 HP - Alternate Rule
    ...ous. At the same time, I hate the mechanic of unconsciousness, as the only lever I have to make that dangerous is to hit PCs when they are down. Which means not a death spiral, but pretty much instant death. I want this rule to allow players to take risks to be heroic when they want to or retreat when they need to. I want to give them increased agency over the zero HP condition. Laurefindel same rate of exhaustion recovery, though I was considering allowing a player to spend half their level in hit dice after a long rest to recover an additional level of exhaustion. Also, strongly thinking about making level 6 exhaustion unconsciousness, and if at 0HP requiring a death save every round and if above 0 a death save every hour to mimic the action trope of clinging to life with grievous injury. I probably won’t turn this into a Con save, to keep those proficient at a max of 75% success rate. I do like the idea that a barbarian or fighter can risk continuing to fight while at 0 HP. Saelorn - what do you see as the complicated part of this? Seems straightforward to me but perhaps I’m missing something or not articulating the rule correctly. Again, appreciate the feedback everyone! I know this isn’t to everyone’s taste, but I think/hope it encourages a style of play and change in tactics that can be interesting for certain types of campaigns.


Page 1 of 14 1234567891011 ... LastLast
No results to display...

Wednesday, 12th December, 2018

  • 02:36 AM - Zardnaar quoted Saelorn in post On the Differences Between 1e and 2e (Not all AD&D Is the Same)
    I get that. There were a lot of changes, both qualitative and quantitative. It was a bigger change than the difference between 3.0 and 3.5, I think. What I don't get is, how did those changes influence your play? What sort of situation would you find yourself in, which would play out differently in a 1E game as compared to a 2E game? Or is it that you would find yourself in different sorts of situations to begin with, because the different editions made different assumptions? As an example, the 2E that I played placed a strong emphasis on avoiding combat, by trapping enemies or otherwise using the environment to end a fight before it started. But in 4E we would just charge blindly forward, and engage every enemy in direct combat, because that's what the edition seemed to assume. 2E you could still get your butt handed to you sideways very fast if you went derp. 4E protected you from that a lot (triple HP level 1, healing surges, low damage from enemies in MM1, no old school energy drains/i...

Tuesday, 11th December, 2018

  • 09:17 PM - lowkey13 quoted Saelorn in post On the Differences Between 1e and 2e (Not all AD&D Is the Same)
    I don't quite follow. In what way did the changes to the game (class, race, rules) influence how you played the game? I get that the specific rules for ranger favored enemy and elven level limits changed, but how did those changes influence what you did with the character? If the only change was to favored enemy for Rangers, it would be similar to an errata. As I think I was trying to show, the rules changes both in number, in focus, and in aggregate, influenced the play. It certainly did from what I observed. YMMV.
  • 02:08 AM - OverlordOcelot quoted Saelorn in post Trying to make 5e more oldish and want some people's opinions
    I remember reading through an older edition - something older than 2E, at the very least - which gave a distinct impression that recovering spells was something which happened in between dungeons. It was definitely not the case where you could just hold up in one room, and sleep until morning, as overnight resting so-often devolves into. Must have been OD&D, as AD&D and BECMI did overnight rest. The red cover Basic set Player's manual p25: "In more advanced games, adventures may last more than a day. In such cases, a Cleric can gain spells each morning, if completely rested. Any and all spells may be changed at this time, if desired." p38: "In more advanced games, adventures may last more than a day. In such cases, a magic user can study spells each morning, if completely rested. A mule should be brough along on long adventures, to carry the spell book along with normal equipment." For 1st edition, the DMG p40 says that you need 4-12 hours of rest depending on spell level (8 hours for...

Monday, 10th December, 2018

  • 10:41 PM - Henry quoted Saelorn in post Trying to make 5e more oldish and want some people's opinions
    I remember reading through an older edition - something older than 2E, at the very least - which gave a distinct impression that recovering spells was something which happened in between dungeons. It was definitely not the case where you could just hold up in one room, and sleep until morning, as overnight resting so-often devolves into. Not sure where you might have seen it (Basic D&D, perhaps?) -- in 1st edition AD&D, there was a period of rest (4 to 12 hours, depending on max level of spells) where you could sleep OR have light activity (no fighting or exploring), followed by 15 minutes of prep per level of spell regained. So, if you were a 2nd level caster regaining two 1st level spells, it was 4 hours of rest + 30 minutes of study. (I think they generously dropped that to 10 minutes per spell level in 2nd edition?) I always got a kick out of the idea that, a high level wizard would literally take DAYS to regain all his spells! (I seem to recall that a 29th level caster would take somet...

Saturday, 8th December, 2018

  • 10:35 PM - Zardnaar quoted Saelorn in post Blending the D&Ds
    I figure, there's a reason why most independent hacks end up looking a lot like Basic, while serious attempts to copy 4E require larger companies. It also explains why the D&D hack I'm currently writing looks so little like the ideal version I just described. Most hacks of B/X can be done in a reasonably small page count while something like 3.X or 4E require 1000 odd pages (cf 160 odd pages for Basic Fantasy). My B/X hack would add feats and fort/ref/def from 3.x and rewrite the feats to smooth out the difference between the crap ones and the good ones and probably add expert (non combat) ones to the ix that certain classes get more of so bonus expert feats are not competing with the combat ones a generic bonus feat would. Ability scores are capped and some OSR things would come back like old school SR/MR but it would be a flat number on a d20 not % based- like the old D&D minis game. For example MR 90% becomes 18 and you have to roll a 19 or 20 to beat it and its not modified by caster l...
  • 10:10 AM - dave2008 quoted Saelorn in post Blending the D&Ds
    Assuming I was building my own D&D remix, and I didn't actually have to do the work involved: Emphasis mine: Isn't that the truth! ;)

Thursday, 6th December, 2018

  • 07:44 AM - Kobold Stew quoted Saelorn in post Mythological Figures: Odysseus/Ulysses (5E)
    A trick bow wouldn't prove that Odysseus was a better person than any of the suitors present. Otherwise, they could watch him string it, and then repeat the trick. Remember that all others try before Odysseus successfully strings the bow. The story always made perfect sense, in any edition of D&D that included Strength bows. Odysseus had Strength 18/00, and a bow built to support that. Only one in 21600 individuals could possibly match him.That is one interpretation. If Homer described a magic bow that has a trick to stringing it, I'd accept that. But he doesn't.Odysseus is the only one described as sitting when stringing the bow. All others are standing. He repeatedly describes the bow-stringing challenge as a contest of strength, and Odysseus himself boasts of his strength immediately after stringing the bow. Odysseus has been disguised as a beggar, remember, and has been made to look other than what he is by Athena. The boast you mention (I presume you refer to Od. 21.426) -- eti ...
  • 06:23 AM - Beowülf quoted Saelorn in post Mythological Figures: Odysseus/Ulysses (5E)
    A trick bow wouldn't prove that Odysseus was a better person than any of the suitors present. Otherwise, they could watch him string it, and then repeat the trick. Superior strength would prove that he's innately superior. The story always made perfect sense, in any edition of D&D that included Strength bows. Odysseus had Strength 18/00, and a bow built to support that. Only one in 21600 individuals could possibly match him. Sorry I missed this response earlier. Yes, that's always been the party line in D&D, but I see some good arguments for the "trick" version: 1) If it were really all about physical strength it would literally be the only example in the entire story of Odysseus, across both the Iliad and the Odyssey, where his physical strength is what sets him apart. And it would happen when he's an old man. Hmm. 2) I was not assuming that the "trick" is something you notice when you're watching, such as using a bow stringer. (A good analogy might be the "trick" of holdi...

Wednesday, 5th December, 2018

  • 01:02 AM - LostWormOnItsWayHome quoted Saelorn in post Worlds of Design: “I Hate Dice Games”
    If you can find it, you might want to look at the Street Fighter game, from White Wolf. I know that they went as far as to remove attack rolls, since whether you hit was based on specific grid positioning, and much of the play centered around moving on the grid so as to not be where the attack lands. I think there might still be dice for damage/soak, or attempting to block, but they're really secondary to the primary action of choosing your moves. You could probably turn them into flat values, without losing too much. Thanks for the information. I'll definitely take a look for inspiration.

Tuesday, 4th December, 2018

  • 07:25 AM - dave2008 quoted Saelorn in post Mythological Figures: Odysseus/Ulysses (5E)
    RAW, the primary method of stat generation is to roll for it, so it's entirely legal to say that Odysseus naturally started with multiple 18s. Yes, but that is not a common point of reference from which we can analyze and discuss his choices. You could, in theory, roll all 18s. It is just not a realistic constraint. I believe he stated he was using point buy (or standard array) for this series. So arguing you can do it differently is kinda pointless as it is not the concept of this thread / series. The idea is: you have certain constraints and then how to you make the best version of X based on those constraints. It is an interesting idea and I enjoy the results, even if I don't always agree with his choices. How do you make Odysseus while giving him whatever stats and abilities you want is not as interesting, IMHO, as how to make him within the constraints of the expected stat array (point but or standard array) and D&D race and class system.
  • 02:57 AM - Maxperson quoted Saelorn in post On Wishes and Magic Item Shoppes and Gold: The Paradox of Choice
    I was thinking more about strong healing potions, or other things that are too good to use. With things like potions and scrolls that don't do anything useful, I default to selling for cheap. The Potion of Climbing, for example, is not useful enough to warrant using. In a party of four people, giving one of them a climb speed for an hour is unlikely to help at any point before reaching level 5. I mean, I'll hold onto it if I can't sell it, but remembering to write it on my character sheet at every level is rarely worth the effort involved. A pound of gold would have significantly more utility. That isn't my experience. At low levels with 4 people is exactly when the potion of climbing is useful. You drink it, climb up the problem area and lower a rope. It's very useful in solving problems. As for healing potions, those are rarely useful in combat in my experience. You find them at level appropriate strengths, so light wounds at low level, moderate-serious at mid level, and so on. The p...

Monday, 3rd December, 2018

  • 04:31 PM - Maxperson quoted Saelorn in post On Wishes and Magic Item Shoppes and Gold: The Paradox of Choice
    Put me in the camp of players who hate finite-use items. Unless that item has the ability to permanently alter the status quo, it's effectively worthless. Given that challenges will only increase in difficulty over time, using an item in order to get through these lesser trials now, will mean that I have no chance of surviving the greater threats later on; especially since I will no longer have that item, to help me. I've found it to be the exact opposite. The Potion of Climbing is only really useful now, because later on when the challenges increase, so do our abilities and someone will be able to fly, dimension door, or use some other ability that makes the potion useless.
  • 02:45 PM - delericho quoted Saelorn in post On Wishes and Magic Item Shoppes and Gold: The Paradox of Choice
    The first is to put a hard limit on how many you can carry. If enemies commonly drop healing potions, but you can only carry 15 of them, then you're going to start using them in order to make space. If you can only carry 5 elixirs, and you're already up to 4, then you might use one during a drizzle because you're confident that you'll find more before you need them again. A good idea. Of course, encumbrance rules suck, so there's that problem to deal with first. :) The second is to attach a tangible, permanent benefit toward using the item. If every elixir you drink raises your maximum HP by +3, then that incentivizes finding an excuse to use it early. I like that. You could give a small but non-trivial XP award for using up these items. I've also thought about adding expiration dates to potions, but that seems like a lot of bookkeeping. Yep, this is something I like, too - use it or lose it. All that said, I'm left with a big question: do I really care? If I give the PCs a...

Tuesday, 27th November, 2018

  • 03:54 AM - ModernApathy quoted Saelorn in post Scary situations that aren't
    That's not scary at all. I will follow the footprints until I find the Tarrasque, where I will beat it to death with my sword, because I know with 100% certainty that it is physically incapable of inflicting lasting harm on me. The scary part is finding it's droppings along the way.

Saturday, 24th November, 2018

  • 01:55 AM - Remathilis quoted Saelorn in post What does a setting need to be "supported"
    I consider a setting to be supported if it is playable with the rules provided. Forgotten Realms is supported, because the rules in the PHB are all consistent with how things work in that world. Eberron is not supported in the PHB, because things work differently there. Interesting perspective. Things don't work ALL that differently on Eberron (mechanically speaking); though Eberron adds new options (races, dragonmarks, etc) and redefines some fluff (mostly new spins on each race). There is nothing stopping you from making a dwarf fighter, human cleric, halfling rogue, and elf wizard in Eberron, though you might be missing some of the unique flavor of the setting. I certainly think Eberron is far closer to the FR "default" than something like Dark Sun, which usually requires you to toss half the PHB in the trash when playing.

Friday, 23rd November, 2018

  • 10:01 PM - Pauln6 quoted Saelorn in post Ranger Beast Master: errata will add new features to your animal companion!
    I don't consider it a problem, if a high-level party is almost immune to a banshee's wail. It's kind of a balance issue already, that non-HP abilities are equally effective across levels. A banshee shouldn't have an identical chance to kill someone who is level 5 or level 20, any more than a level 5 monk should have an equal chance of stunning someone who is level 5 or level 20 (which they do). Character level is supposed to mean something. If you want to deal level-appropriate damage with a Fireball, you have to up-cast it into a higher level slot. If you want to deal a level-appropriate paralysis effect with Hold Person, then it's still just level 2. I dunno, I think the point in bounded accuracy is that maybe she should. The reduction in opportunity to kill PCs comes from taking her down that bit faster.

Thursday, 22nd November, 2018

  • 07:22 AM - CapnZapp quoted Saelorn in post Ranger Beast Master: errata will add new features to your animal companion!
    text I wouldn't bother, Saelorn. It's obvious there are people that treat the rules as holy writ.
  • 02:35 AM - Pauln6 quoted Saelorn in post Ranger Beast Master: errata will add new features to your animal companion!
    And what, you're going to ready an action to dive behind cover when you expect the dragon is going to breathe on you? If you're going to spend the whole time cowering in the background, instead of up in the dragon's face, then you might as well not show up. Remember that your Dex modifier is -1, so you're not doing anything with a bow. It's not feasible to add new party members, as preparation. You can certainly choose for your existing divine spellcaster to cast this spell, rather than something else, but it takes their action and concentration. As above, but in terms of action economy, the divine spellcaster in your party is probably going to cast Bless instead of Resistance. Which is actually the point of this whole tangent. Without a paladin's aura, high-end saves become entirely unmake-able without preparation. With a paladin's aura, sufficient preparation can make saving throws make-able, though not reliably. Just because an item is Uncommon, does not mean it's for sale, or easily fi...

Wednesday, 21st November, 2018

  • 10:28 PM - Mistwell quoted Saelorn in post Ranger Beast Master: errata will add new features to your animal companion!
    If you're a level 17 fighter, and your Dex save is at -1, then you would need to find +12 worth of bonuses to turn an impossible DC 21 save into a probable one. Advantage is meaningless if you still fail on a 20, but might tip the scales if you can also find +8 worth of bonuses elsewhere. I'm not too familiar with everything on your list, but from what I do recognize, there's not much that you could acquire in preparation. You probably don't have time, between recon for the fight and when the fight actually needs to take place, to go gain three levels so you can pick up a feat. Nor are you likely to recruit a high-level bard or sorcerer, if you didn't have one already in the party. Seriously, imagine the situation. Your party needs to take out an ancient red dragon next week, so you have time to prepare. What can you feasibly do, to get ready for its breath weapon? You might have time to go on a quick quest for a magic item, but nothing gives enough of a bonus to your saving throw for it t...
  • 09:25 PM - Mistwell quoted Saelorn in post Ranger Beast Master: errata will add new features to your animal companion!
    That would be a reasonable argument, if it was true, but it's not. Preparation gives very little ability to change the odds (since you'll never turn an impossible save into a probable one, the tools simply don't exist); and impossible saves are more-or-less irrelevant to the necessity of running away. If a cosmic dragon walks up to you and hits you with a DC 45 breath weapon, then you just take it on the chin, mark down a couple of HP, and proceed to wipe the floor with it. I disagree. The tools are there to change the odds from an impossible save into a probable one, dependant of course on how impossible the save is. Impossible saves are relevant to running away as running away lets you then prepare using the tools I am referring to. Here are some tools (this is not an exhaustive list): Bardic Inspiration Bend Luck Dark One's Own Luck Bless Resistance Lucky feat Portent Aura of Protection Tides of Chaos Inspiration Foresight Holy Aura Shapechange Magic items which ...


Saelorn's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites