View Profile: cbwjm - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Sunday, 17th March, 2019, 08:18 PM
    The artificer is now available to use on DnDbeyond for those interested.
    278 replies | 15985 view(s)
    3 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Thursday, 14th March, 2019, 11:37 PM
    I've been told it's pretty good and that I should watch it but I don't have enough time in the day to watch this alongside everything else.
    85 replies | 2793 view(s)
    0 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Thursday, 14th March, 2019, 08:33 AM
    I love his artwork, one of my favourite artists and this cover looks pretty cool with the different coloured kobolds.
    30 replies | 878 view(s)
    0 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Thursday, 14th March, 2019, 01:53 AM
    If you prefer dry humour, they better not try too hard to squeeze off an occasional fart joke.
    266 replies | 10200 view(s)
    0 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Monday, 11th March, 2019, 10:08 PM
    I had, half-heartedly, started on rules for firearm ammunition which included alchemy shots and spell shots. Alchemy shots could be made by anyone proficient with alchemist supplies and included things such as dealing additional fire or acid damage or creating a cone of fire like a shotgun. Spell shots were enchanted ammo that would do things like bind your target with the web spell, or blast...
    278 replies | 15985 view(s)
    1 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Monday, 11th March, 2019, 09:29 PM
    If it actually came up, I'd let a caster wearing armour they aren't proficient in to cast spells that don't have somatic components. Pretty sure that used to be a rule in earlier editions that non-somatic spells could be cast without restriction if the arcane spellcaster somehow gained armour proficiency. This thread reminds me that it was ages before I realised that even clerics have the...
    32 replies | 1307 view(s)
    0 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Monday, 11th March, 2019, 04:21 AM
    All it requires is someway to make a weapon magical. It doesn't have to be a crossbow, they can use a short bow if they want to stay ranged. They have infusions and spells if they haven't found a magical weapon yet. More than likely anyone building an artificer who wants to make use of that 2nd attack will build for it. If they make a mistake the DM will either let them retcon their build or the...
    278 replies | 15985 view(s)
    2 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Sunday, 10th March, 2019, 01:58 AM
    For all we know they will. Still early days yet and if they out in options for firearms specialists in the artificer then they will likely include them.
    278 replies | 15985 view(s)
    0 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Sunday, 10th March, 2019, 01:37 AM
    Then make a firearm mastery feat for firearms?
    278 replies | 15985 view(s)
    0 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Saturday, 9th March, 2019, 03:11 AM
    Could do, there is certainly precedent for classes gaining additional saving throws although they normally come in at higher levels.
    18 replies | 842 view(s)
    1 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Saturday, 9th March, 2019, 02:07 AM
    I do like this, but I feel like a couple of changes I would make would be to remove the fighting style (this is more to do with feel than anything, I can understand not wanting to remove it) and make the 6th level war magic exactly the same as war magic for the eldritch knight, that is, no bonus action expend a spell slot to attack twice with the Attack action. It seems a little weird and with...
    18 replies | 842 view(s)
    1 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Tuesday, 5th March, 2019, 11:40 AM
    I don't mind milestone XP, particularly since the level gain of each class has been standardised, but something I have done in the past is to award quest XP, complete a quest, gain 5% XP needed to level. I combine this with encounter XP, that is the difficulty of the monsters the players face. The thing about encounter XP is that it doesn't matter how that encounter is beaten, it could be through...
    94 replies | 3135 view(s)
    0 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Tuesday, 5th March, 2019, 05:38 AM
    I'm up to the final episode and I :):):):)ing love it.
    38 replies | 962 view(s)
    0 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Monday, 4th March, 2019, 04:21 AM
    I heard .7 cycles. Figured he was out most of the day.
    266 replies | 10200 view(s)
    0 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Sunday, 3rd March, 2019, 11:03 PM
    The godsmen (I think they are the ones with the forge) probably have a high number of artificers in their ranks. People consider the forgotten realms a kitchen sink setting but it pales in the face of planescape.
    278 replies | 15985 view(s)
    0 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Sunday, 3rd March, 2019, 10:55 AM
    They are just cosmetics though. Compare it to games where you can actually spend money to gain a mechanical advantage. It's why there was such an outcry over battle front 2, those loot boxes were providing an actual in game benefit. Cosmetics though, really don't matter. You can play the game without having any of them and it won't affect gameplay at all.
    140 replies | 5720 view(s)
    0 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Friday, 1st March, 2019, 10:13 AM
    Same as ranger and paladin. The only difference is they gain spellcasting at 1st level.
    278 replies | 15985 view(s)
    0 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Friday, 1st March, 2019, 03:27 AM
    Hah, yeah. I can totally see both of those things happening.
    278 replies | 15985 view(s)
    0 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Friday, 1st March, 2019, 02:44 AM
    What's amusing about it?
    278 replies | 15985 view(s)
    0 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Thursday, 28th February, 2019, 11:56 AM
    I've literally only just heard about Anthem today. It sounds pretty cool, the only reason I'm not getting It is that I have too many other games or other media to get through.
    140 replies | 5720 view(s)
    0 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Thursday, 28th February, 2019, 11:36 AM
    Because they want to?
    40 replies | 1840 view(s)
    0 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Thursday, 28th February, 2019, 09:15 AM
    I probably lean towards no, I don't want it updated but really, I don't care either way. Greyhawk seems like a setting that would need very little work for DMs wanting to run it to update it to 5e.
    142 replies | 4641 view(s)
    0 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Thursday, 28th February, 2019, 01:28 AM
    I think the really weird, can't make sense of it thing was for some kind of demons, or maybe far realm stuff. I can't recall if the far realm was a big thing in 3e though. I also might be getting mixed up with some pathfinder demons. There has probably been plenty of things like it in the history of DnD. Niv Mizzet is already statted up. I think he is the highest CR in the Ravnica book at CR...
    17 replies | 686 view(s)
    0 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Wednesday, 27th February, 2019, 10:10 PM
    Haha, those crazy Simic are at it again. Looking at the picture, are you sure that size large is large enough? It might be better off as huge (is that the next one after large?) I like all of the various attack effects, I think this would be a dangerous creature to fight but would make for a fun encounter. For the confusing effect, how did you get the DC? I've always thought that monsters...
    17 replies | 686 view(s)
    0 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Tuesday, 26th February, 2019, 11:47 PM
    Whoops, I misread hours as days. I'm in agreement, I think a cycle is a day.
    266 replies | 10200 view(s)
    1 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Tuesday, 26th February, 2019, 10:16 PM
    Star trek has subspace communication arrays to help facilitate communications. Maybe the Orville universe has something similar and there simply aren't any that far out of union space.
    266 replies | 10200 view(s)
    0 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Monday, 25th February, 2019, 04:08 AM
    I pretty much only use them as bonus skills or tool/language proficiencies with a general idea of what my character is like. For instance, I would play a wizard who was a sage very different from a wizard who was a soldier. The ideals, bonds, and flaws I tend not to really use. I normally don't even use the flavour ability of the background.
    51 replies | 1937 view(s)
    0 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Monday, 25th February, 2019, 02:41 AM
    They used to have this restriction in 3rd edition. I'm not really too concerned with it in 5th but if you are then I'd say feel free to apply the restriction again for your 5e games but only apply it at the start of the campaign rather than altering it part way through and surprising your players. Depending on the campaign the restriction might not even be much of a restriction as some campaigns...
    165 replies | 5114 view(s)
    1 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Saturday, 23rd February, 2019, 07:00 AM
    I got an email about this the other day, looking forward to the full realise. Like pukunui, I think the satyr needed something else, just one more decent ability I think would balance it out.
    40 replies | 1840 view(s)
    1 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Saturday, 23rd February, 2019, 03:22 AM
    This is why I think Isaac is going to turn on his people. His lights are blue. Red = bad, blue = good.
    266 replies | 10200 view(s)
    0 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Friday, 22nd February, 2019, 06:14 AM
    I dont worry too much about it. People will still contribute, as long as they describe what they are trying to do then I think it works well. I'm not too worried about feeling super immersed, in fact, I think actors that get too into their character would detract from the fun.
    53 replies | 1766 view(s)
    0 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Thursday, 21st February, 2019, 09:44 AM
    For the thieves tools, basically, if your background gives you a tool or skill and you already gain this from your race or class, then you are allowed to choose something else. In your case, the rogue class gave you thieves tools so you get to select some other tool instead. I'd suggest the forgery kit, it seems like something a criminal might use. For dice, just by a basic set of dice. If you...
    24 replies | 823 view(s)
    3 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Thursday, 21st February, 2019, 09:34 AM
    Planes in MtG typically don't have gods. There is the plane of Theros (think fantasy Greece) which has 14 or 15 gods and Amonkhet (Think fantasy Egypt, this has a planeshift article which might have information on them) which had a handful as well (Although all of the gods in Amonkhet worked for the Nicol Bolas, the dragon planeswalker). Most other planes in MtG had no actual gods, or at least no...
    5 replies | 346 view(s)
    0 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th February, 2019, 04:43 AM
    We usually forget about inspiration. Tried adding in a yellow d20 as the inspiration die and we did make use of them for a while, we have since lost them though and so haven't really remembered that inspiration was a thing.
    63 replies | 1770 view(s)
    0 XP
  • cbwjm's Avatar
    Tuesday, 19th February, 2019, 09:01 PM
    I'd prefer that the artificer fits the setting only since it will be part of the eberron release. For other subclasses that don't fit well within eberron, I'd prefer that they were released elsewhere. This could be on the DMsGuild or in another Xanathar's style book where they include the artificer for those that didn't want to buy the eberron book.
    402 replies | 23850 view(s)
    0 XP
No More Results
About cbwjm

Basic Information

About cbwjm
Location:
Auckland
Disable sharing sidebar?:
No
My Game Details

Details of games currently playing and games being sought.

Country:
New Zealand

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
2,319
Posts Per Day
1.51
Last Post
Artificer UA has been released! Sunday, 17th March, 2019 08:18 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
21
General Information
Last Activity
Today 10:44 AM
Join Date
Wednesday, 7th January, 2015
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0

1 Friend

  1. Eleihun Eleihun is offline

    Member

    Eleihun
Showing Friends 1 to 1 of 1
My Game Details
Country:
New Zealand
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Monday, 18th March, 2019


Sunday, 17th March, 2019


Thursday, 14th March, 2019


Monday, 11th March, 2019


Friday, 8th March, 2019


Wednesday, 6th March, 2019


Tuesday, 5th March, 2019


Sunday, 3rd March, 2019


Saturday, 2nd March, 2019


Friday, 1st March, 2019



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

Friday, 21st December, 2018

  • 02:46 PM - lowkey13 mentioned cbwjm in post No Magic Shops!
    Not being able to see posts by people that have blocked you? Fair enough. Not being able to access entire threads just because they happened to be started by people that have blocked you? Broken as freak - I didn't know we could own threads and decide who gets to see them. (I duly note that this behavior is likely not consciously set up that way by Morrus and is probably considered a bug in the forum software. Still, it hasn't been fixed or mitigated for years, so that excuse isn't particularly persuasive anymore) Hey now! I love me a magic shop thread! ;) Anyway, cbwjm and Mistwell I think a lot of the debate over the block/ignore function tends to be one of those, "Sure, it is great in practice, but how does it work in theory," type of issues. The enworld community, in contrast to an unfortunately large part of the internet, is still a large, diverse, and active community of people engage in regular conversations without it going off the rails. Part of this is because of the excellent moderation of Morrus, Umbran, Danny, and others (including all of us regular users who flag issues). But part of this, IMO, is because of the block list. It's a great feature for several reasons. First, in use, it keeps people from further attacking each other. It's the ultimate in de-escalation. But, and this is an important point, it's also a calming/moderating influence on all posts, IMO. Because I don't know about you- but I don't want to get blocked. I like talking to people! So any time I think maybe I just need to ratchet it up a little .... I don't. I st...

Friday, 13th July, 2018

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

Tuesday, 12th June, 2018

  • 11:48 AM - Coroc mentioned cbwjm in post UA: Giant Soul Sorcerer
    cbwjm Thank you, might be fun, i'd wish though their creative energy would concentrate on other things, but that is just me.

Wednesday, 4th April, 2018

  • 12:18 PM - Coroc mentioned cbwjm in post Mike Mearls tweet: Is the Known World of Mystara coming to 5e? (What's Cool About Mystara?)
    cbwjm #84 Your ideas to "shoehorn" different races into a classic Setting are great, also for DMs who want to do something like that with their official or homebrewed setting, but let me ask you and the rest of the Forum (although it had been asked before): Is this the biggest Problem we got in converting new Settings to 5e? Maybe i do not see things like that because i get old and stubborn but for me the biggest Goal to achieve when converting classics like DS, ebberon, DL or Mystara to 5e is: Do i get the same feel from the Setting like when i played it Long ago with a different Version of the rules and would even someone not familar with the Setting back then but starting to Play it with a 5e conversion get the same vibe? That is the hardest Thing to achieve and imho this requires something which seems to be outlawed by at least some of the Forum These days: Cut it out, leave it, do not allow it, restrict reduce: classes, spells, equipment allowed/ available, Combos, alignment...

Thursday, 15th February, 2018

  • 07:00 AM - Hawk Diesel mentioned cbwjm in post Getting rid of the short rest: The answer to Linear Fighter vs Quadratic Wizard?
    ...have ONE utility spell running in most situations and then burn spell slots with damaging spells, 1 per turn, that do typically less damage than the damage being doled out by the martial characters. In practice I just don't see the spell casting uber-race outshining their mundane counterparts. Do they sometimes? Sure, some spells are just the thing to save the day, as they should be. But just as often the monk gets in a Quivering Palm or a paladin triggers a massive Smite or a frenzied barbarian is able to resist the mind-bending spell that has beguiled the rest of the party. All fair and valid points. I have played high level D&D, though admittedly not much. But thank you for bringing up these examples. It is helping me consider whether I am still thinking that magic users are as powerful as I proposed. At my table we long rest once every 2 or 3 sessions. Are you saying that your table long rests more than once per session? Yea, sometimes. Either similarly to what cbwjm, or being in games where long rests were just plain used more often than short rests (though that game had the house rule that short rests were 4 hours, so anytime you could short rest there was no reason not to just go for a full long rest). That's the sort of thing that we hand wave. There is no real tension there. So either we just declare that time passes and we're wherever we need to be or perhaps have a bit of description of what happened but not actually play it out. If exploration is the thing then we do that but it would be a series of encounters and obstacles. It's sort of the same with the skill system. If there is no consequence and/or it isn't interesting then there is no roll. Do you mean you hand wave that single encounter between long rests in the travel periods? I'm not understanding. But I have experienced a number of sessions in my games where there is max one or two encounters between long rests. Obviously when I DM I can have control over the pacing...

Tuesday, 23rd January, 2018

  • 05:42 PM - Hawk Diesel mentioned cbwjm in post Attempt at a Kalashtar race
    So if I were to give anything extra, I would want it to reflect how Kalashtar are refugees fleeing execution and assimilation into the Dreaming Dark, il-Lashtavar. Not all Kalashtar are warriors, but all have an instinct for survival. Combined with their psychic talents, I might suggest this: Inertial Armor. Your latent psychic talent provides you a measure of protection against physical harm. When not wearing any armor, your AC is calculated as 11 + Dexterity. You can use a shield and still benefit from this ability. Alternatively, I might grant advantage on saving throws against exhaustion from forced marches and lack of sleep, due to their history of far travel to escape enemy Inspired soldiers looking to exterminate them. As for the psych damage and the cantrip, normally I would agree with you cbwjm. Damage tyoes are fairly interchangeable. However, if you look, Totem Barbarians remain vulnerable to psychic damage, Psychic damage is the only kind that can normally affect a creature under the Feign Death spell... many resistance/immunity exceptions are around psychic damage. Additionally few spells or abilities inflict psychic damage, and arguably it is the only damage type not in some way grounded in a physical or material way. Unless you build a character with a focus on psychic damage and alter many spells to allow for such, few players will ever deal psychic damage in any significant amount. Thus their would be little reason to adjust encounters or otherwise account for someone that deals psychic damage. So while most damage types are interchangeable, I would say psychic and force are the lone exceptions. I'd even put necrotic and radiant in the same category as the others.

Friday, 12th January, 2018

  • 04:21 AM - Olive mentioned cbwjm in post Wizard Spells
    If they're allowed to do this then you're really encouraging them to start colluding. Personally I don't like telling players, "Yeah, I know the mechanics encourage you to do X, but I'd really rather have you roleplay so can you just cooperate?" I would much rather point to a mechanic and say, "Sure, you can copy...but there's an X% chance it will get erased from your own spellbook." I was going to post something but then cbwjm said what I thought. I just don't see this as a huge issue, especially as they're going to want to prepare different spells regardless so they can maximise the things they can do.

Thursday, 16th November, 2017

  • 12:27 PM - Coroc mentioned cbwjm in post Weapon Help
    Do it like cbwjm suggests, give it a fixed boon (1d4 is ok) and some charge ability modelled after a spell. The charged ability should be usable as a free action on a hit, or instead of one of your normal ranged attacks. Rather than introduce a mechanic depending on the attribute, give the weapon a reason and personality why it does not be wielded by weak characters. If your intend is as a GM that the sword should go to the party brute and no one else, then the sword will simply zap everyone else for 1d4 force damage who even touches it. Rule 0 applies, if someone questions why and does not accept your explanation that the sword wants to be wielded by the strongest char because of blah.---

Thursday, 9th November, 2017

  • 05:04 AM - Hawk Diesel mentioned cbwjm in post D&D's Monk Way of the Sun Soul in 'Xanathar's Guide To Everything'
    I don't get it. Why would they re-release the sun soul monk? If the version presented in the SCAG is problematic, I would prefer they address that reasoning and proposed changes in a UA. Doing this makes me wonder if they are just trying to pad their page count. Also, I second cbwjm. What flaws are there in the Sun Soul Monk? Seems like a mechanically sound archetype to me.

Wednesday, 1st November, 2017

  • 03:06 PM - Hawk Diesel mentioned cbwjm in post Monk Weapon
    That should satisfy a player whose character concept is based around "Longsword". It probably won't satisfy a player whose character concept is based around "d10 damage" But here you are making a value judgment. You are inherently saying that a player must value the role playing aspect over the game aspect of something is a role playing game. It is not up to us to decide how a person plays or what gives them enjoyment when playing. I suppose a table could decide this together in a session zero, but then such a person would be better prepared to understand how others would respond to playing an elf monk and wanting to actually use all the abilities their choice of character grants. I really like how cbwjm put it. The rules are really guidelines or suggestions. They shouldn't be taken as immutable dogma. But then I don't believe in sacred cows.

Tuesday, 24th October, 2017

  • 09:04 AM - Yaarel mentioned cbwjm in post Mystic playtest...ugg this class is all over the place
    @GMforPowergamers, @cbwjm The way I wish the Magic Weapon spell worked is like this: Class Level: Attack Bonus Student L1: +1 Master L9: +2 Legend L17: +3 Epic L25: +4 Each plus is 8 levels higher. The advancement covers the entire 20-level career. They way it actually works is like this: L1: +1 L7: +2 L11: +3

Tuesday, 3rd October, 2017

  • 04:56 AM - Chaosmancer mentioned cbwjm in post Sorcerer vs Warlock
    Xeviat and cbwjm Sure, there are a lot of things we "could" do. I mean, in one respect, the only difference between a wizard and a bard is divide between Art and Science. And Music aficionados are usually quite eager to point out the science behind the art, and vice versa. But, if anything, the Wizard and the Warlock are more similiar. It doesn't matter if you studied for the test or someone handed you the answer sheet, you're still taking a test. That is a fundamental difference between "I was born for this" Birds don't need to study to know how to migrate and fly, they just do it, and no amount of tinkering to grow wings or building things that fly makes us birds. The metaphors can get really mixed, and, like I said, we can make all of these crushed together, but there are fundamental differences at play in the lore of the sorcerer that really should not be ignored. Even if the mechanics of the class and the game don't reflect that story accurately

Saturday, 1st July, 2017

  • 08:38 AM - Hawk Diesel mentioned cbwjm in post Converted Pathfinder spells for Cryomancers
    I haven't read them all yet, but I agree with cbwjm regarding Snowball. Either increase the damage, or make it a cantrip. If you go the cantrip route, on a hit the target automatically has disadvantage on their next attack before the start of your next turn. As for Ice Armor, if you compare it to Mage Armor (also a first level spell), then it is clear that no one would take mage armor if this is an option. Thus I would bump Ice Armor up to 2nd level or make it a concentration spell to balance against mage armor.

Tuesday, 13th June, 2017

  • 06:07 AM - Sword of Spirit mentioned cbwjm in post I gave up--Here's a Warrior-Mage base class
    Hi all! I took some time to think through the class more. I'd like to provide a simplified comparison for ease of analysis. I'd be particularly interested in commentary from those who have looked at the original proposal, including FrogReaver, Hemlock, Zardnaar, cbwjm, Blue, as well as anyone else who likes to look at these sorts of things. I'm going to take as a baseline for balance the wizard's Bladesong Tradition, since the designers felt it was more or less balanced. My class needs to be comparable in overall balance to Bladesinger. My table will present a simple comparison of essential features level by level, for a skeletal baseline, that should be no more powerful than Bladesinger. Then I'll provide a list of features that can be added, and it would help me greatly if I could get people to basically "say when" when the class hits the point where it is overpowered compared to Bladesinger. Except for what is spelled out on this table and intro, assume that this class's features and stats are identical to a Bladesinger. Ie, you are taking away the stuff in the Bladesinger columns, and adding in the stuff in the Warrior Mage columns. I made an exception by noting where they both gained Extra Attack. You can more or less forget the first...

Monday, 29th May, 2017

  • 05:20 AM - TheCosmicKid mentioned cbwjm in post Oriental Adventures 5e - What race options are there?
    ...we have a very hard time seeing anything other than humans really 'being' any of those classes and caring about how the world sees them. I mean, if you are a spirit folk samurai (not sure if that was even a choice, but for sake of argument...), why would this spirit folk even be a samurai of some ruler in some land that has virtually nothing to do with his "race"? Sure, the spirit folk probably has his/her river/forest/mountain/whatever in the daimyo's province...but that would be it. Why would the daimyo accept such a creature into his confidence? Why should the daimyo even trust such a creature, who obviously would have significantly different ideas on what is "right", "just", or even "legal"...compared to humans?The spiritual beings in East Asian legend mirror the human social order much more closely than fairy folk do in European legend. Chinese mythology even has a celestial bureaucracy with ranks, offices, and duties just like the imperial bureaucracy. And -- Alex Williams and cbwjm mentioned Journey to the West. In that story, not only is the "adventuring party" composed of a variety of nonhuman characters, but the underlying reason for their journey is that they've all converted to Buddhism. You never hear about elves or trolls converting to Christianity; the implication is that they're fundamentally incapable of it. But Buddhist lore has spirits, demons, and monsters all happily joining the team and working together. So I'm thinking that, all things being equal, it takes far less effort to explain why a river/forest/mountain/whatever spirit might be a samurai than why an elf might be a paladin.

Wednesday, 17th May, 2017

  • 04:00 PM - Redthistle mentioned cbwjm in post Druid subclass: Circle of the Warden
    ... are definitely something which can be expanded with additional forms being added for the warden to learn. There could be a level requirement (prefer not to have one though) or they could start with 2 or 3 forms and then be able to choose more as they level up. For the tankiness, I did think of doing something similar to the dragon sorcerer which grants +1 hit point/level. This would bring them up to a d10 hit die equivalent. It would certainly help them survive in melee by giving them just a little more of a hit point buffer. This works, does what it needs to, but it kind of isn't too interesting. Although I guess the more interesting parts of the warden are the forms. I probably wouldn't increase the size of their hit dice, but the idea of them gaining temp. hit points could be interesting. Perhaps Wisdom modifier (min. 1) temp hit points at the start of their turn. Although I've been concentrating on getting Primal Forms into a reasonable draft form, the ideas from @rgoodbb and @cbwjm quoted above have been moving around in the background of my mind. I do think that cbwjm's original ideas for the 6th, 10th, and 14th level features are good as they are, but adding the Wisdom modifier as temporary hp while in primal form is appealing and makes a certain sense. What if the Circle of the Warden was designed like the Circle of the Land subclass, with multiple types of warden? The 4e Player's Handbook 2 described the Earth Warden and the Wild Warden, and the 4e Primal Power book gave us the Life Warden and Storm Warden. They wouldn't necessarily have to be named after those specifically, but the notion of those tree-related powers in 4e ... it would be like playing a were-treant or something. Sweet! I haven't looked at any of the Paragon Paths yet, so they haven't been included in my thinking here. I'm probably missing some good ideas because of that. Anyway, back to some ideas for primal forms. Here's the current adaptations I've considered: Form of the Avalanche Unl...

Sunday, 14th May, 2017

  • 03:51 PM - Redthistle mentioned cbwjm in post Druid subclass: Circle of the Warden
    I'm working on getting this Circle feature more in line with the descriptions in Wild Shape, and find myself in need of other some feedback on what I'm working up. Primal Form At 2nd level you do not gain wild shape. In place of wild shape, you gain the ability to use your bonus action to assume a form of primal power to enhance your combat abilities for 1 minute. The number of times you can assume a primal form is shown in the wild shape column of the Druid table in the Player’s Handbook. There is no Wild Shape column in the Druid Table. Instead, the feature states that you can transform 2 times, but once both transformations have been used, you need to take a short or long rest to regain the ability to transform. I'm thinking we should just use that language. In Wild Shape, the Beast Shapes table (re-labeled Primal Forms below) shows a real disconnect with changing into primal forms (I guess that's why cbwjm called it a "1st draft," eh?) of the Circle of the Warden. Primal Forms Level Max. CR Limitations Example 2nd 1/4 No fly or swim speed Wolf 4th 1/2 No fly speed Crocodile 8th 1 - Eagle Now, a hint of a direction to go shows up immediately in Form of Storm's Thunder (with a bit of added fluff inspired by the 4e class descriptions) below: Form of Storm’s Thunder Tendrils of mist drift around you, flickering with light, as faint rumbles of distant thunder emanate from your body. On your turn, when you hit with a melee attack, you deal an extra 1d6 thunder damage. This increases to a d8 at 5th level, d10 at 11th level, and a d12 at 17th level. Here, cbwjm added class-level specific increases to the damage in the spirit of cantrip-type increases, while keeping the increases lower than cantrip increases in keeping with other kinds of class/archety...

Sunday, 7th May, 2017

  • 06:07 PM - MoonSong mentioned cbwjm in post This is a directory of posters who think the sorcerer needs fixing
    ...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 spell progression (something which was then saddled onto all future spontaneous full-casters), spontaneous caste...

Sunday, 30th April, 2017

  • 12:06 AM - Oofta mentioned cbwjm in post Unearthed Arcana: Get Better At Skills With These Feats
    Do you allow anyone to make the check as a bonus action? Or does it take their full action to ignore difficult terrain? Or is it a check that's made as part of their movement? If the answer is the first or third choice, then yes, I can see how the feat wouldn't seem that great for your table. Otherwise, all the feat does is allow a character to do what they already could, but faster. I do it the same as cbwjm if I think it makes sense, it's just part of the movement. A lot of times I'll also allow athletics. So either dive dextrously through the thick brush or muscle your way through. There are times when it doesn't make sense. If the difficult terrain is a supernatural effect of a monster warping space for example. So just another feat I don't need.

Wednesday, 26th April, 2017

  • 05:00 AM - Lanliss mentioned cbwjm in post homebrew Cleric Changes discussion
    I started thinking on some Cleric changes to apply to my world, ways to make them more interesting as a class. I am leaning heavily towards more Warlock-like changes, since I think Warlock and Cleric are two sides of the same coin. To that end, here are some of my changes Going to happen: Changes that I am decided on, mostly pretty obvious things that come with the Warlock Chassis Short-rest spell slots, same progression as Warlock, including Mystic Arcanum Divine Gifts: Invocations for the Cleric. One of the topics to be discussed. cbwjm has been helping out on this, and even put it in a handy link. http://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/B1WZWvYTAx


Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
No results to display...
Page 1 of 79 123456789101151 ... LastLast

Monday, 18th March, 2019


Tuesday, 12th March, 2019

  • 07:57 AM - doctorbadwolf quoted cbwjm in post Artificer UA has been released!
    From memory what I had down in my notes was that spell-shots weren't just for casters, these were enchanted ammo that anyone with a firearm could use. For the spell-sniper subclass, they were able to cast spells using their weapon and their weapon range. It would deal normal weapon damage in addition to the spell damage and were able to use the weapons range. Thing is, I think in many cases, the spell could easily have a better range than the firearm. Seems hard to balance without spending spell slots, or a hard x/day limit, but conceptually I’m into it. Artificers already can! "After you gain the Infuse Item feature at 2nd level, you can also use any item bearing one of your infusions as a spellcasting focus." So all you need is the enhanced weapon infusion and you can use any weapon you want as your focus. What I mean is, they shouldn’t be stuck using wands in order to benefit from their subclass traits. Basically, a retrofitted Arcane Archer as an artificer, mixed with ...

Monday, 11th March, 2019

  • 10:48 PM - doctorbadwolf quoted cbwjm in post Artificer UA has been released!
    I had, half-heartedly, started on rules for firearm ammunition which included alchemy shots and spell shots. Alchemy shots could be made by anyone proficient with alchemist supplies and included things such as dealing additional fire or acid damage or creating a cone of fire like a shotgun. Spell shots were enchanted ammo that would do things like bind your target with the web spell, or blast the target and everyone in range with a fireball. I think I was creating a wizard subclass which used firearms and I wanted some special ammo to go with it. I'd love to see something like that, though a lot of it is just...a different way to describe casting a spell, with maybe a different "does it land" mechanic and/or a change of range. I think the way to go might be a feature that lets you use the ranges of your weapons when using your weapon as a spellcasting focus, and then focus new ammunition on things that are genuinely new?

Sunday, 10th March, 2019

  • 11:44 AM - 5ekyu quoted cbwjm in post Artificer UA has been released!
    For all we know they will. Still early days yet and if they out in options for firearms specialists in the artificer then they will likely include them.My bet would be we see another sub-class that is optional that gets the better use of guns as part of its features. I kinda figure some of the pieces we see now will be spread among 3-4 subs - some non-pets.
  • 01:41 AM - NaturalZero quoted cbwjm in post Artificer UA has been released!
    Then make a firearm mastery feat for firearms? Well, sure. You can homebrew anything but you can't always convince every DM to use your homebrew over an official product. It would be cool if they put a nice little mod with some firearm options, feats, and related magic items.

Saturday, 9th March, 2019

  • 02:17 AM - FrogReaver quoted cbwjm in post The Knight Eldritch (Eldritch Knight decoupling onto the Wizard) [very early version]
    I do like this, but I feel like a couple of changes I would make would be to remove the fighting style (this is more to do with feel than anything, I can understand not wanting to remove it) and make the 6th level war magic exactly the same as war magic for the eldritch knight, that is, no bonus action expend a spell slot to attack twice with the Attack action. It seems a little weird and with war magic, they are likely to be attacking with cantrip + bonus attack anyway. For weapon spell focus, I would probably steal the wording for the college of swords bard for the spell focus which allows any simple or martial weapon they are proficient with to act as a spell focus and move the wording as an additional line in bonus proficiencies. It would be nice if they could better concentrate on spells, maybe a level 2 ability "Mind over Body" that lets them use their intelligence modifier instead of their constitution modifier for concentration checks. This could get a little weird though since...

Sunday, 3rd March, 2019

  • 11:33 AM - Imaculata quoted cbwjm in post For the good of video games, Anthem needs to fail hard
    They are just cosmetics though. Compare it to games where you can actually spend money to gain a mechanical advantage. It's why there was such an outcry over battle front 2, those loot boxes were providing an actual in game benefit. Cosmetics though, really don't matter. You can play the game without having any of them and it won't affect gameplay at all. But they DO matter. They ARE the gameplay, especially in an RPG. RPG's are to many people all about making your character look nice. This is also the case for multiplayer games, where your character's appearance is a crucial part of how you present yourself as a player to other players. It is your avatar. It is the core gameplay, and gamedevelopers know how important they are to us, which is why they ask money for it. A mechanical advantage is clearly worse, but that doesn't make it much better. They are both part of the same problem. If cosmetics weren't important, then why do so many RPG's have elaborate character creators? Clearly we c...

Friday, 1st March, 2019

  • 03:14 AM - Kobold Avenger quoted cbwjm in post Artificer UA has been released!
    What's amusing about it? Queue the thread speculating about what campaign setting is next... Also setting purists who insist that if a class never existed in the last edition a campaign setting was published in, it's not part of that campaign setting.

Tuesday, 26th February, 2019

  • 11:37 PM - Maxperson quoted cbwjm in post The Orville Season Two - Thoughts?
    Star trek has subspace communication arrays to help facilitate communications. Maybe the Orville universe has something similar and there simply aren't any that far out of union space. That's an idea, but I still think the simplest explanation is correct and it's 30ish days.

Monday, 25th February, 2019

  • 09:25 PM - Staffan quoted cbwjm in post Sneak attacking undead and constructs seems wrong
    They used to have this restriction in 3rd edition. One of my more frustrating experiences as a DM was running the Eberron adventure Shadows of the Last War, precisely because of this issue. One of my players was playing a rogue wielding a rapier and not having much in the way of Strength bonus, instead planning to rely on sneak attack and crits for damage. Here's a list of the stuff the PCs fight in that adventure: Some kobolds A warforged with DR 2/adamantine and 25% chance to negate crits/sneak attack. Either some skeletons (DR 5/bludgeoning, immune to sneak attack/crits) or some goblins and a bugbear, depending on route. Some bugbears. Human goons. Skeletons and a vulture zombie (DR 5/slashing, immune to sneak attack/crits). Glass zombies (immune to sneak/crits, DR 5/bludgeoning until they have taken half their hp in damage, then DR 5/slashing) More goons. Wolf skeletons (immune to sneak/crits, DR 5/bludgeoning). Carcass crab. Living flaming sphere (immune to sneak/crits, DR 10/magic). H...
  • 02:49 AM - dnd4vr quoted cbwjm in post Sneak attacking undead and constructs seems wrong
    They used to have this restriction in 3rd edition. I'm not really too concerned with it in 5th but if you are then I'd say feel free to apply the restriction again for your 5e games but only apply it at the start of the campaign rather than altering it part way through and surprising your players. Depending on the campaign the restriction might not even be much of a restriction as some campaigns have little to no undead or constructs. That's a good point. I'll bring it up, but the last thing I want to do is nerf the other player's character build! I'll suggest it for our next campaign and just wait until then. Maybe at later levels it won't seem so OP.

Saturday, 23rd February, 2019

  • 11:51 PM - Satyrn quoted cbwjm in post Odyssey of the Dragonlords Player's Guide is Free!
    I got an email about this the other day, looking forward to the full realise. Like pukunui, I think the satyr needed something else, just one more decent ability I think would balance it out. Proficiency with pan pipes is a necessity.

Thursday, 21st February, 2019

  • 03:40 AM - Asgorath quoted cbwjm in post Sage Advice Compendium Update 1/30/2019
    Depends on what you think of as common-sense when reading the feat. I always read it as occurring after the attack action was completed, I just houserule it so that it can be whenever, no attack action required. If I was going to require an attack then I'd allow it to be after the first attack but really, I'm not too concerned if it comes before all of their other attacks. Right, my sample size is obviously very small in the grand scheme of things, but everyone agreed about the “if X then Y” timing that JEC clarified in 2017 to at least mean one attack had to be made before the bonus action was available.

Thursday, 14th February, 2019

  • 12:11 AM - ad_hoc quoted cbwjm in post Artificer UA to be released in February
    I like how they call everyone who is happy with how the DnD team is doing things a corporate shill. So thought provoking, I'm sure many have rethought their generally happy position on the release schedule after being called a shill. It's even worse if you validate their complaints by telling them that it's okay that they don't like something. I guess the part where they get upset is when you tell them that them not liking something doesn't mean that it is wrong. And perhaps people like it this way. Maybe it comes down to people being attached to D&D. I've seen people have the stance that it should be all things to all people because it is D&D. If there are people who don't like the game then it is flawed. It's funny that this idea is still prevalent after we had 4e. There was a time when people thought D&D might be dead forever. But now that it is not only doing well but is the most popular RPG of all time, people feel they are entitled to it being a certain way. I'm th...

Monday, 11th February, 2019

  • 01:44 AM - Zardnaar quoted cbwjm in post Deva Warlord - Aurelia Warleader
    This just gave me an idea for creating a map for a world (normally I just scribble some basic shapes and build something from that). Take 30 or so basic land cards shuffle them together and then deal them out into a grid like 4x4 or 3x5 and then convert the mix of islands, forests, mountains, etc into a map. Islands could represent any large body of water if falling in the centre of a land mass. On a side note, Aurelia is CR 23 in 5e. Her stats are in the ravnica guide. I pegged her at CR 18. In magic terms casting cost 6 is generally at the upper limit of what is playable and things like Dragonlords tend to start at CC 6. Casting cost 10-15 is generally the upper limit of MtG critters and would be CR 20+ IMHO as they are basically epic level foes (epic being 15+ in 5E, 20+ 3/4E).

Friday, 8th February, 2019

  • 07:45 PM - Garthanos quoted cbwjm in post 4E Redux
    Looks pretty cool, I'll be adding it to my list of ideas for maneuvers. Reading through the PDF, I felt it seemed familiar, turns out it's done by the same guy as the maneuvers list I linked to. The variant looks more versatile than the original AND simultaneously from what I read also as functionally as "balanced" as anything in 5e.

Wednesday, 6th February, 2019

  • 02:13 PM - Garthanos quoted cbwjm in post 4E Redux
    I found this the other day, someone took the fighting maneuvers of the battlemaster, added a few extras, and replaces the fighting styles with learning maneuvers instead. It's a pay what you want on drivethruRPG: https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/248600/VDP-5E-Fighting-Maneuvers?manufacturers_id=13388 I'm wondering if this might do 90% of what I want to make martial combat a bit more interesting. Ever seen the Variant Fighter? https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz74Lu7ft9sycGpYbi02UHk5RmM/view To be honest though there is a thread on here about what you give up and what you gain with 4e vs Trad D&D and it among various other things fairlly decisively confirm for me it would be way too much work to make 5e what I would want and I am better off developing 4e
  • 01:09 AM - TwoSix quoted cbwjm in post A 5e Swordmage?
    Actually, I'd forgotten about it until today but the Sterling Vermin class the Magus is a pretty decent looking arcane half-caster. You choose your college at 1st level and that can actually change things up so that a magus of the arcane order mixes swordplay and wizardly magic while a magus of the sylvan circle mixes swordplay and druidic style magic. It also has an ability to enspell their blade which changes the damage type (arcane order deals force, sylvan circle deals poison) and unleash the mark to inflict an additional effect. The enspell blade is kind of similar to what I was thinking of the other night. Makes me think I must have half remembered the class when coming up with ideas. Yea, I played one for about a year, it's a really solid class. The arcane order subclass even has the teleport to attacked allies ability, like one of the 4e swordmages. I believe it's up to 6 subclasses now in its most recent release. I hesitated to mention it since the OP said no homebrew, but t...

Monday, 4th February, 2019

  • 10:49 PM - Xeviat quoted cbwjm in post 4E Redux
    I do wonder if somwthing like twin strike would be too powerful at later levels for the relatively low cost of giving up +5 damage on an attack (2 attacks with a greatsword at level 11 would be deal I g 6d6 per hit) but then I also want players to feel powerful at later levels so that might be okay. It's actually a good way to allow for interesting notions with the different weapons. If certain effects require giving up a weapon die or weapon dice, and others require giving up ability damage, it would make those effects favor light weapons or heavy weapons respectively. You could favor choices without having to restrict them. But, this type of stuff might be easier under the 4E structure since ability scores grow faster. In my early attempts to start on this, assuming 1d8 as baseline and 18 Stat, you could build a system where weapon die damage scaled at a rate similar, though more spikey, than ability mod + enhancement mod scaling. This talk has got me thinking that maybe 5E's bou...
  • 08:52 PM - Xeviat quoted cbwjm in post 4E Redux
    Sure. I've only just started putting together the exploits. Before now i was looking ar smaller benefits that would let you spend attacks to improve another with an additional effect. Fighters would eventually be the kings of these moves once they hit 11th level and could choose from exploits others couldnt use. Currently, for the martial cantrips, I'm looking only at the 4e core rulebook. I'm still thinking of basing their power on the number of extra attack you earn so that fighters are better at them but then I hadn't thought about providing benefits to replace extra attack which could be a great idea. Here's been my thoughts on removing extra attack: Have "weapon attack" scale like cantrip damage. Allow giving up ability mod or weapon dice of damage to power effects. Higher level characters can thus put more effects into an attack. A simple maneuver would be -1 weapon die to attack 2 targets for X[w]+ability. Two-Weapon Fighting would then be the way to get multiple dice at low...


Page 1 of 79 123456789101151 ... LastLast

cbwjm's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites