View Profile: dco - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
No Recent Activity
About dco

Basic Information

Date of Birth
May 10, 1976 (42)
About dco
Location:
Basque Country
Disable sharing sidebar?:
Yes
Sex:
Male
Age Group:
31-40
My Game Details

Details of games currently playing and games being sought.

State:
Basque Country
Country:
Spain

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
371
Posts Per Day
0.22
Last Post
Archer build Friday, 1st March, 2019 01:28 AM

Currency

Gold Pieces
0
General Information
Last Activity
Tuesday, 5th March, 2019 08:35 PM
Join Date
Monday, 15th September, 2014
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0
My Game Details
State:
Basque Country
Country:
Spain
No results to show...

Wednesday, 21st November, 2018

  • 06:28 PM - OB1 mentioned dco in post Ranger Beast Master: errata will add new features to your animal companion!
    5ekyu your argument is that balance is subjective. My argument is that it’s objective but not a single point. There is a range of acceptable power levels that can be considered balanced in the overall context of the game. dco argues that the errata was made for balance issues, and that the designers used to think the subclass was balanced and now say it wasn’t and needed fixing. My argument is that pre and post errata are both balanced, and that the reason for the change lies outside of actual mechanical balance and more in play experience.

Sunday, 7th May, 2017

  • 04:14 PM - MoonSong mentioned dco in post This is a directory of posters who think the sorcerer needs fixing
    ...of each other. I used to be alone like a mad Cassandra way back during the open playtest when I predicted that Neo-Vancian would mean balance problems for sorcerers, but over time I've noticed there is more and more posters who think the class could use a little help and recently that number has exploded. Just a beg, please, please pretty please with sugar on top, if you think the sorcerer class is not underpowered, or doesn't lack options, or overall doesn't need adjustment. (Or worse you don't want a sorcerer class at all), please refrain from posting here or being confrontational if you can't help it. This thread doesn't seek to prove a point or disprove yours. It just wants to be a hub for like-minded players and DMs to make acquaintance of each other. Double so for newcomers to the forum. The Directory so far. If you want to be included (or removed), edit this post to add or remove your name (and only your name, no vandalism plz). @Tony Vargas, @Hawk Diesel, @RangerWickett, @dco @Gwarok, @LapBandit @Sword of Spirit, @Gradine, @gyor, @Xeviat, @Yunru, @Jago, @flametitan, @Ketser, @cbwjm, @Immoralkickass @ScuroNotte , @Irda Ranger @dropbear8mybaby, Ilbranteloth Gradine's treatise on the sorcerer A brief(?) treatise on the plight of Sorcerer The fundamental problem with the Sorcerer in 5e is that the reason the class was created in the first place was to create a mechanical distinction that no longer exists in 5e. 4e solved the problem by creating a new mechanical distinction, but that no longer exists in 5e either. See, the 3rd edition Sorcerer was basically worse than the Wizard in all but a handful of ways (more spells per day being the big one, also they had slightly better weapon proficiencies and were more fun at parties). In exchange they had slower spell progression and no bonus feats, because WotC overestimated the power of spontaneous casting Monte Cooke hated sorcerers reasons. Pretty much everyone agreed that simply on the basis of the slower spel...

Thursday, 4th May, 2017

  • 01:16 AM - Quickleaf mentioned dco in post The Fighter Problem
    Also dco I'm curious about your thoughts about the cleric and wizard getting lots of subclasses in the PHB, and the fighter and rogue getting three subclasses in comparison. I see a double standard, but I'm suspecting you (and others) see it differently. How do you see it?

Thursday, 20th April, 2017

  • 09:08 PM - CapnZapp mentioned dco in post Nerfing Great Weapon Master
    Ilbranteloth, Tony Vargas and dco: Thanks for your replies. I guess I owe y'all an apology - I didn't mean to appear undecided on the question of disadvantage compared to −5: I know disadvantage is a penalty that varies from −1 to −5 so obviously disadvantage can only be better. The reason I asked (but apparently failed to carry across) is that in the actual playtested scenario, players heavily rely on having advantage to wring the most out of the feat. And so I was wondering what the removal of advantage does to the analysis. (Imposing disadvantage doesn't mean the feat will get used with actual disadvantage; it means the feat can now never be used with advantage). So I didn't mean to ask the basic question of whether disadvantage or −5 is preferable. We've already established that the analysis at this basic stage (applying advantage to the raw feat), the feat still looks fairly reasonable, because the miss chance seems decently high. And so the conclusion is that the feat isn't too badly ...
  • 06:28 PM - Ilbranteloth mentioned dco in post Nerfing Great Weapon Master
    I still don't immediately see how you arrive at "Disadvantage would make the feat more powerful". Perhaps you can walk me through it. Disadvantage is generally stated to be equal to -5, but mathematically that's incorrect. See here: http://andrewgelman.com/2014/07/12/dnd-5e-advantage-disadvantage-probability/ or here: http://onlinedungeonmaster.com/2012/05/24/advantage-and-disadvantage-in-dd-next-the-math/ among many other places. In general, the +5/-5 for advantage/disadvantage is in the middle of the curve. The closer you get to the ends the curve you get, the less of a bonus of penalty it imposes. The math that dco posted was to show you that when you're trying to hit an AC of less than 5, then you hit 64% of the time with disadvantage, but only 55% of the time with a -5 penalty. On the other end, when the target is an AC 15 or higher, disadvantage hits 9% of the time, but with a -1 penalty you only hit 5% of the time (when you roll a 20). This is assuming no other modifiers to the roll, of course. But basically it's an acknowledgement that disadvantage is only -5 when your target number is around 10 or 11. Otherwise it's less of a penalty than -5. In addition, by using a numerical penalty, there are potential situations where you can have disadvantage and the -5 penalty. RAW, that can't happen with reckless attack, but it does take away the advantage so it still an additional penalty. Another irony of the D&D combat system is that once you need to roll a natural 20 in order to hit at all, none of the other penalties aside from disadvantage matter. Disadvantage is the only way, RAW, ...
  • 11:48 AM - CapnZapp mentioned dco in post Nerfing Great Weapon Master
    ...are close to hitting. Finally, Lucky helps considerably when perhaps only a roll of 1-4 will be deemed bad enough that you will accept a miss (and not spend a superiority dice). It cuts down misses by a whopping 25%. If only 1 or 2 is such a bad result, misses are reduced by 50%! Anyway, the probability of rolling 2, 3, or 4 on advantage is certainly less than 20%, which is what I charitably use as the assumed miss chance when I arrive at my figure of +40 bonus damage per round on average. --- Back to the disadvantage proposal. Once you no longer can achieve actual advantage, as opposed to merely negating disadvantage, you will burn through your superiority dice much faster and Lucky is no longer nearly as attractive. And you need these to truly abuse the feat. I have not done the calculations to back up this hunch, though. My point is that once you see the whole minmaxing picture, perhaps you are hurt more by the lack of advantage than your initial numbers suggest, dco?

Tuesday, 7th February, 2017

  • 11:50 PM - Helldritch mentioned dco in post When Fiends Attack: Are Balors, Pit Fiends and Ultraloths too weak?
    dco Strahd will never ever fight the pc head on. He will ambush. He will retreat. He will come back with help. He will enforce the 6 to 8 encounters per day so that your players will have to spend ressources. Your players should never be able to fight Strahd fresh from rest. Once they try to take on him, he will not allow them to rest. He will harrass them through out their rest where ever it might be. Strahd through his spies will know the PCs' strength and weaknesses and he will use that against them. He will know if they have the sunsword or the symbol or Ravenkind. He will not allow the players to choose the battle ground, he will choose it himself. P239 of the CoS book says that whenever Strahd is encountered outside the Tarroka reading he will be accompanied minions. Only on a 19-20 will you see no minions. That leaves us with many many possible fights/reinforcement. Fighting Strahd is a war of attrition. There will be no glorious charge, no duel to death, no clear cut way ...

No results to display...
Page 1 of 11 12345678910 ... LastLast

Tuesday, 26th February, 2019

  • 06:38 PM - dnd4vr quoted dco in post Sneak attacking undead and constructs seems wrong
    Sure, I only pointed that D&D is not the best simulationist game and why things are done as they are done because reading your post it seems you are looking for some kind of explanation to mechanics, explanations that are not there in the game or were changed to suit your notion of what those mechanics should represent. Depends on what you read or what you play, I can play in other games classes or archetypes that are as good or better depending on where you spent your points without the rigidity of this class system, in D&D 5e the rogue is what it is. My point is that the mechanics are different but the class is supposed to deal the damage it deals the same way it is supposed to have the other 14-15 features. If you don't use one of the main features of a class personally I don't see what's the point of using it. You can also have the same problems representing other features from classes, how do you represent that the rogue only has one attack from lvl1 to lvl 20? Only disabled cha...
  • 05:34 PM - Vicent MartĂ­n Bonet quoted dco in post Age of Sigmar's Cover Art Unveiled
    And this reads more about your own projections to discuss my own opinion, so what? I see some kind of robot with a gun, WH40k has servitors, Except, that's not a robot? That's one dwarf from the kharadron, which are society of dwarfs that has gone and embraced progress and innovativeness instead of staying with the traditions that brought them into the edge of annhilation. WH never had those kind of things, And in truth it did have "robots". While confined within the art, there were quite a few instances of robotic constructs in the empire. Stuff of clogwork, to be specific. 40k and the old world have been here for 30 years or more and were released at a time when thing were more fun, I'm certainly sure they have more lore and more funny things at least for me. That's some serious goalpost shifting, we've gone from "it has no fun stuff" to "it has more fun stuff" at which point... well, duh? One's a 30 years old setting of 8 editions of main product, 4 editions of rpg. The o...
  • 04:16 PM - dnd4vr quoted dco in post Sneak attacking undead and constructs seems wrong
    Now I completely understand why the rogue was doing a crapton of damage XD Yeah, I will have to review it all with our DM, but I am 95% certain he was letting the rogue assassinate nearly every combat. Adding the surprise condition would make at least some of a difference, and I think the others will be happy with that. Like I said, we don't want to nerf the rogue, but it just seemed like he was to good to be true... which, apparently, he was. :) If they are damaged by weapons I don't see the problem, the rogue deals more damage with one attack, that's all, the same way a heavy weapon or a more agile/strong characters does more damage. If you have problems with the simulation avoid D&D, the classes have a lot of mechanical differences for defense, damage, spells, etc that could be the same for all, but it is done this way for differentiation. The rogue instead of making more attacks deals more damage in one attack, if you limit this extra damage then what's the point of using tha...
  • 03:54 PM - Vicent MartĂ­n Bonet quoted dco in post Age of Sigmar's Cover Art Unveiled
    Yes, looks like a bad mix of WH40k and WH and probably without the fun and the lore of those old settings, it doesn't help that it also entails the killing of the old world by GW. This frankly reads less, "I am seeing this" but rather, "I was told almost ad nauseam this and therefore I am projecting this into the image." There's very little in that image that can really be labelled "40k" with the exception of the woman in hulkbuster armor and raised sword at the forefront and maybe the guy on the baloon if by 40k you mean, "it has a gun capable of firing more than once an hour." How can you infer that something will "probably" will have no fun nor some lore hooks that are interesting, just from seeing an image? And I'm using the word probably here when I think it's almost "certainly". And, with all due respect, the whole spiel of "the killing of the old world" can be borderline asinine once you factor in that,at the moment, this company in question is about to release an additional su...

Sunday, 24th February, 2019


Thursday, 21st February, 2019

  • 06:42 AM - Jester David quoted dco in post Pathfinder 2E or Pathfinder 1E?
    They could also try porting the adventures to other systems if it flops. I continue to be stunned that they haven’t done conversions to 5e. That should be a simple thing, as the writing is done and the art is paid for, you just need to pay for the conversion and re-layout making it a fraction of the original cost while also potentially appealing to an audience many times larger than the original printing...

Wednesday, 20th February, 2019

  • 09:40 PM - Erekose quoted dco in post Pathfinder 2E or Pathfinder 1E?
    They could also try porting the adventures to other systems if it flops. That’s what Troll Lord Games appear to be doing and Goodman Games come to think of it ...

Sunday, 23rd December, 2018

  • 10:19 PM - TrippyHippy quoted dco in post WorldOfDarkness.com Closing Down?
    From what I know they changed the cover and that's all, they had some problems with the Black Madonna not sure if in USA or Germany.Believe me, it wasn't the cover. In fact, they had already anticipated the cover change right before the Kickstarter campaign began. The imagery I'm talking about was in the 'Book Three' section of the book. You'd know it if you see it - but honestly, it's not something that ought to be greatly missed. I also understand that there was some issue with Black Madonna too, although this may be a different issue to do with the surrounding historical symbolism around the content. Like I say, I was a backer and have the originals rather than the general release versions - so it's hard to know exactly what has changed without comparing the two directly. I would stress again though, as someone involved in playtesting and as such, seeing the game develop through the manuscripts - the actual text of the game hasn't been changed at all, I think. In my view, it is the b...

Saturday, 24th November, 2018

  • 10:41 PM - doctorbadwolf quoted dco in post Big Changes At White Wolf Following Controversy
    You were talking in general but it doesn't change anything I understand that writting about something happening now is more problematic and has more backslash, as this is a RPG it makes perfect sense that they don't use the polemic parts but if they wanted to use them it would still be fiction. This discourse about what people should write doesn't make any sense. Writters are free to write about what they want and if they are breaking any law then the law will punish them, following what you say a lot of books would not exist. Books can have different audiences, themes, purposes, they don't need to be politically correct or push some virtues or social interests that make you happy, they are written by people who are complex human beings who think different, are under different laws, etc. I also don't care about your labels, the author of that section of the vampire RPG could be a better human being than you and me...in any case what is important is the quality and if you like his work. ...
  • 07:26 PM - doctorbadwolf quoted dco in post Big Changes At White Wolf Following Controversy
    Who is we and why not? Because you don't like it? Decent human beings. I’m pretty sure even trippyhippy agrees with the statement you’re challenging. They just disagree that the case in question is actually a case of such trivialization. If you think that we should be trivializing real world atrocities as they’re happening, I’ve nothing else to say to you that won’t get me banned.

Wednesday, 21st November, 2018

  • 04:25 PM - 5ekyu quoted dco in post Ranger Beast Master: errata will add new features to your animal companion!
    Obviously it is subjective, I have my opinion but it doesn't change randomly depending on the direction of the wind like it happens with the designers.It may be just me but... Small erratta for the ranger after years and a playtest with feedback seems not to be on the same par as the wind changing direction. The latter happens a lot more frequently and less obvious as to cause behind it. But that might be subjective too.
  • 03:28 PM - OB1 quoted dco in post Ranger Beast Master: errata will add new features to your animal companion!
    I was told the ranger was unbalanced, later I was told they were alright and the lack of balance was a myth and now they are going to release an errata. Funny. Balance in 5e isn’t on a tightrope, it’s on a meter wide suspension bridge. There is plenty of room to adjust without falling off. This change wasn’t necessary for balance, but it does move the class closer to the middle of the bridge without changing the intended flavor of the class.
  • 03:21 PM - 5ekyu quoted dco in post Ranger Beast Master: errata will add new features to your animal companion!
    I was told the ranger was unbalanced, later I was told they were alright and the lack of balance was a myth and now they are going to release an errata. Funny.Almost like balance is a subjective judgement... Odd.

Friday, 26th October, 2018

  • 08:14 PM - Stalker0 quoted dco in post Barkskin *Might* Be the Worst Spell Description I've Ever Read
    They should also get past the clothes to hit/touch you if that is your point and clothes don't get AC bonus. That is simply the scale of how AC works. I like to think that clothes provide ".2 AC", but it gets rounded down. Aka it provides some protection, but in the scale of what we are dealing with, not enough to matter.

Wednesday, 24th October, 2018


Saturday, 20th October, 2018

  • 08:42 AM - Yunru quoted dco in post Barkskin *Might* Be the Worst Spell Description I've Ever Read
    Who cares, in this game you don an armor and suddenly enemies have more difficulty to hit you. The important thing is the effect. Well armour also does that in real life... (since if the armour absorbed it, they haven't really hit you, and if it deflects it, well... they still haven't hit you.) Not to mention camo armour.

Friday, 19th October, 2018

  • 05:53 PM - Doctor Futurity quoted dco in post The New Savage Worlds Is Storming Kickstarter
    Looks more of the same to me, from art to small rules tweaks that you could do yourself, but more expensive. It seems the things I dislike will continue there: - The wild die and its quirks, 63% for a d4 and 88% for d12 and sometimes a better die is worse. - Open rolls that make the game very swingy and slower. - Lack of uniformity or consistency, I have the sensation of playing minigames for some rules and others are disjointed. - It claims to be fast but it isn't. Will check it when it is released, perhaps it surprises me improving a lot of little things but the last edition had some negatives compared to the previous one. You should find an experienced group to try it with. None of the problems you identify manifest at my table, and the game is definitely fast (and furious).
  • 03:43 PM - Azgulor quoted dco in post The New Savage Worlds Is Storming Kickstarter
    Looks more of the same to me, from art to small rules tweaks that you could do yourself, but more expensive. It seems the things I dislike will continue there: - The wild die and its quirks, 63% for a d4 and 88% for d12 and sometimes a better die is worse. - Open rolls that make the game very swingy and slower. - Lack of uniformity or consistency, I have the sensation of playing minigames for some rules and others are disjointed. - It claims to be fast but it isn't. Will check it when it is released, perhaps it surprises me improving a lot of little things but the last edition had some negatives compared to the previous one. Different strokes, different tastes, etc. Savage Worlds isn't for everyone, so no worries if you don't like it. However, the game plays fast. If you're saying it doesn't, I'd say that's a user issue rather than a system issue.

Monday, 3rd September, 2018

  • 11:25 PM - Asgorath quoted dco in post Revised Ranger update
    All can attack at range, a melee ranger without spells compared to a monk or barbarian will only do 1d8 more to that flying dragon in the case he chose colossus slayer. I don't know what is a gloomstalker as I never buy extra books, it looks good but doesn't change the other subclasses, in any case food for thought for homebrews and works differently than an extra attack, thanks for pointing it out, will try it substituting volley and whirlwind attack. Hide is good but you need somewhere to hide and in combat a GM that lets you hide in front of an enemy unless you have surprise. Not our group. The things out of combat are not very good, I can be a rogue with more skills, double proficiency on them, take a 10, hide, dash and disengage as a bonus action, don't need to specialize in melee or ranged combat, better damage unless you use hunter's mark and damage focused on one enemy which is usually better. Uncanny dodge and evasion sooner, if I go arcane trickster I have access to illusions ...
  • 07:55 PM - Asgorath quoted dco in post Revised Ranger update
    We don't use feats and they are optional, practically on 1/3 hits hunter's mark will go down without a feat. If you use them and want damage the best feats are GWF, Polearm master and sharpshooter and other classes can have hex, the gap with other classes will be bigger. I also find a bit disgusting that you need that one spell to try to keep up with other classes, if it is so important they should have designed the class better. 1d8 is good, but beyond the second attack that's all the extra reliable damage you get till you reach level 20. At that level other classes have some good powers, monk can have two more unarmed attacks, the berserker another attack, the battlemaster has his maneuvers, the paladin can make his weapon magical with +CHA to hit, or have advantage against one enemy, etc. At level 11 a champion will have 3 attacks which can be also used at range, more initiative, general durability, better saves, action surge, etc, that makes him far better at combat. The melee ra...


Page 1 of 11 12345678910 ... LastLast

dco's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites