View Profile: Yardiff - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
No More Results
About Yardiff

Basic Information

Date of Birth
February 11, 1963 (55)
About Yardiff
Greater San Diego Area
Disable sharing sidebar?:
Age Group:
Over 40


Total Posts
Total Posts
Posts Per Day
Last Post
Survivor Rods & Staves- THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE! Today 09:05 PM


Gold Pieces
General Information
Last Activity
Today 09:05 PM
Join Date
Thursday, 15th January, 2015
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Sunday, 9th December, 2018

Friday, 7th December, 2018

Thursday, 6th December, 2018

Wednesday, 5th December, 2018

Tuesday, 4th December, 2018

Sunday, 2nd December, 2018

Friday, 30th November, 2018

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Friday, 19th October, 2018

  • 05:45 PM - DM Dave1 mentioned Yardiff in post Survivor Monster Types- DRAGON WINS!
    DOWNVOTES ARE TWO. Aberration 21 Beast 20 Celestial 20 Construct 20 Dragon 22 Elemental 20 Fey 20 Fiend 20 Giant 20 Humanoid 20 Monstrosity 21 Ooze 20 Plant 20 Swarm 18 Undead 14

Tuesday, 21st August, 2018

  • 02:30 PM - lowkey13 mentioned Yardiff in post Survivor D&D Computer Games- Baldur's Gate WINS!
    Congratulations to Baldur's Gate- main page updated! BTW, it has been mentioned before, but you can find new (mobile device) versions of some of these games here- (I haven't played these, so I can't tell ya if they are good are not, just thought I'd pass this along.) Re: new survivor thread- Yardiff We will be re-running some classic survivor threads in a little while to see if the results change. Tallifer We are doing Appendix N next.

Friday, 3rd August, 2018

Tuesday, 6th February, 2018

Wednesday, 15th November, 2017

  • 02:40 AM - Hussar mentioned Yardiff in post A Proper Ability Score Generation Preference Poll
    Sorry ... I don't remember everything ever written. :) But then I kind of agree with Arilyn, if you just keep rolling I don't see the point. To be 100% fair to Yardiff here, he's absolutely up front about what he wants. Point buy doesn't get him what he wants. Die rolling can (particularly if the group is lenient about rerolls and variant die rolling methods). IOW, Yardiff want's a 32 point buy value character or more. Which means that standard point buy or array just is not going to give him what he wants.
  • 12:16 AM - Hussar mentioned Yardiff in post A Proper Ability Score Generation Preference Poll
    Why not? If he started as rogue, he'd be no problem. There's no minimums for your base class. And no, Yardiff, that's not pulling out my "against type" character. I POSTED my entire group for perusal and apparently that's not a good enough test. When I talked about my ranger, the guesses netted one out of three of the posited stats. ((Oh, no one cares about the other three, so, there goes the whole "I can guess your stats thing".)) I mean, is a hunter ranger with sharpshooter actually playing against type? Seriously? I dump statted Con, both for the in game reason that the character was quite young and the out of game meta-thinking that my archer character isn't going to get hit much anyway, why bother with Con? Then I got told that Alertness was a totally out of place feat. Umm, what? Largely guaranteed advantage on 2-3 attacks in the first round of combat with Sharpshooter? That's out of place? Plus cannot be surprised? Dunno about your games, but, that's come up more than once in mine. But, hey, the goalposts are on roller skates anyway, so, this conversation is largely p...

Thursday, 5th October, 2017

  • 02:04 PM - Barolo mentioned Yardiff in post Point Buy vs Rolling for Stats
    I'm not saying rolling is better or worse, just that standard 4d6 drop lowest does not give you a better chance of getting ability scores for your MAD class. If you're using a modified rolling method that gives better numbers on average, that should not be compared to a 27 point buy. I am not sure I understood what you meant here, but point buy in itself does not give me any chance (it is exempt of chance), whereas rolling does give me a chance (as chance is involved after all) to have better ability scores than point buy does. Just by giving me a chance, any chance, to roll higher, it already gives better chances, does it not? Of course, it also gives me a chance to have worse ability scores than point buy. I am not stating I have better chances to play a concept I would be playing no matter what my stats are, what I am saying (and what I guess Yardiff meant) is that I have a chance to try a concept I wouldn't otherwise, or that would be too gimped, as it would not really work if I either rolled poorly, or average, or did point buy/standard array. I can understand that, if I am wholeheartedly invested in a concept, then rolling might help, or totally get in the way of my fun, and the netting an average so close to point buy just means point buy will actually more often fulfill a minimum required for any generic build to be feasible. But from a perspective of someone who will play dozens of PCs over the years, and does not feel invested in any one single concept for one specific campaign, but has many concepts in mind and can use any of then, rolling just feels like extending the horizons. I am trying to say is that what I see in play is that rolling allows for concepts out of the obvious. Sometimes because one needs to work around bad stats, they end up building some PC that does not really depends so heavily in stats to begin with...
  • 09:52 AM - Yaarel mentioned Yardiff in post [Homebrew] − Rethinking the Ability Scores
    Actually, strength was incredibly important to the medieval archer. English longbows took a great amount of strength to draw and hold steady once they were drawn. I would agree that perception is more important than manual dexterity when it comes to accuracy in archery. I like the way D&D tradition handles the ‘strength bow’. Perhaps for 5e, it is a special masterwork weapon that allows the archer to use Strength for archery damage instead of Precision. So, here, the archer uses the Perception ability for the attack bonus, and can use either Precision or Strength for damage. Normally Precision for a precisely steady hand, but Strength can replace it if the bow is designed for strength to hit harder. Yardiff. Yeah, I wish D&D made it possible to use many bonuses at the same time, from whichever abilities seem to be relevant factors. But D&D pressures designers and players to pick the one ability that seems to be the most prominent, despite other factors being present too.

Sunday, 24th April, 2016

  • 04:21 PM - pemerton mentioned Yardiff in post Geniuses with 5 Int
    Women will be impressed by his physical strengthWhat if the PC's CHA is 8? Since when does STR score determine anyone's reactions in a way that would be problematic in this particular case? it results in nonsenseI want to be clear on this: are you and Yardiff saying that Gygax, in his DMG, is wrong in describing one possible narration for low DEX as being that the character is agile and slippery in the grasp, but weak in all other respects (hence slow, poor balance, poor hand-eye coordination, etc).

Wednesday, 13th April, 2016

  • 01:12 PM - Ovinomancer mentioned Yardiff in post Geniuses with 5 Int
    ...fect sense? You're back to requiring the enemy general to be a moron so your moron can beat him, which, as far as I understand it, isn't the point of the exercise. At some point you should be willing to critically look at your construction and rework it so that it does make sense instead of piling on the retcons. Especially when your retcons break the narrative as well. It was meant not as "you're the type of person..." but "this is the type of argument you are making..." (Which it is.) If you want to continue to believe I'm putting words in your mouth, or to extend "imagine" to other less savory realms, that's your choice. If you say that I'm making an argument that I didn't make, and didn't voice, then, yes, that's the exact definition of putting words in my mouth. I don't have to keep believing it, you keep actually saying it. Citation on that? Keeping in mind that determining the mechanical result and narrating the fluff are* two different things. Covered by Yardiff. *Perhaps I should say "can be" two different things, which seems to be the core of the disagreement on this topic. There's some room in there, but not as much as you're making out. 5e liberally mixes fluff and mechanics, and the lines are blurry in a number of places. This isn't 4e, where the mechanics were 100% carved out from the fluff. This is more like 2e and earlier editions, where they're intertwined. You can divorce them, if you'd like, and I've repeated said that I've no real problem with that and that's I've played that game before and had fun. My points here have been that you're methods require altering the formula and rules of 5e a bit to accommodate. Not much, but enough you should be willing to acknowledge that. This entire thread's worth of argument could have been eliminated by that simple acknowledgement. EDIT: for the record, I play with houserules. I don't enforce class fluff -- they're bags of mechanics that have some theme, but a player can creat...

Tuesday, 5th April, 2016

  • 04:13 PM - robus mentioned Yardiff in post Player knowledge and Character knowledge
    This thread seems destined to incite another flame war. @Yardiff - what was your intention with the original question? You're surely aware that opinions differ wildly on this topic?

Saturday, 2nd April, 2016

Friday, 18th March, 2016

  • 09:38 PM - AaronOfBarbaria mentioned Yardiff in post So 5 Intelligence Huh
    Yardiff, would you mind pointing out what you found funny about the last post of mine you laughed at? I've been trying to use more effective humor, and that involves playing to my audience, so it would be great to see what tickles your funny bone.

No results to display...
Page 1 of 23 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Saturday, 24th November, 2018

  • 08:32 PM - Ganymede81 quoted Yardiff in post Inquisitive 17 / (What) 3?
    Inquisitive 18, 19, 20. Just being annoying ;-p. I'm going to echo this suggestion, but not the sentiment. I think this is seriously a great option.

Wednesday, 14th November, 2018

  • 09:42 PM - Elfcrusher quoted Yardiff in post Mythological Figures: Conan the Barbarian (5E)
    People can read the same words and have different interpretations. The first example sounds more like a successful intimidation check. The second example does fit well with a rage like effect. The third example sounds more like a fear/horror effect causing fight or flight from the creature and Conan of course did fight. Maybe you're assuming a very narrow, specific interpretation of the barbarian's "Rage"? I think those are all great examples of the rage mechanic. The player (author?) can fluff the mechanics however they want.
  • 09:21 PM - BookBarbarian quoted Yardiff in post Mythological Figures: Conan the Barbarian (5E)
    With his back to the wall he faced the closing ring for a flashing instant, then leaped into the thick of them. He was no defensive fighter; even in the teeth of overwhelming odds he always carried the war to the enemy. Any other man would have already died there, and Conan himself did not hope to survive, but he did ferociously wish to inflict as much damage as he could before he fell. His barbaric soul was ablaze, and the chants of old heroes were singing in his ears. [...] Conan put his back against the wall and lifted his ax. He stood like an image of the unconquerable primordial—legs braced far apart, head thrust forward, one hand clutching the wall for support, the other gripping the ax on high, with the great corded muscles standing out in iron ridges, and his features frozen in a death snarl of fury—his eyes blazing terribly through the mist of blood which veiled them. The men faltered—wild, criminal and dissolute though they were, yet they came of a breed men called civilized, w...
  • 09:10 PM - Elfcrusher quoted Yardiff in post Mythological Figures: Conan the Barbarian (5E)
    This is the way I look at barbarian rage and Conan. If its not mentioned that Conan rages in every fight then barbarian rage doesn't fit. I find that to be a strange comment. Regardless of what happens at particular tables and other metagame analyses, why would a barbarian go into a rage in every fight? Wouldn't it be better roleplaying to only go into a rage when appropriate? (And maybe not always on the very first round...?)
  • 09:07 PM - BookBarbarian quoted Yardiff in post Mythological Figures: Conan the Barbarian (5E)
    This is the way I look at barbarian rage and Conan. If its not mentioned that Conan rages in every fight then barbarian rage doesn't fit. Hmm. I've played my fair share of Barbarians over the last 4 years, and I've had plenty of fights where I didn't Rage. Particularly at low levels where just a 3rd fight in a day was more than I had Rages for. I think the evidence TheCosmicKid provided from Phoenix in the Sword alone more than justifies 5e rage for a Conan like character.

Monday, 12th November, 2018

Friday, 9th November, 2018

  • 07:14 PM - Gladius Legis quoted Yardiff in post Is Ranged really better than Melee?
    There wouldn't be a debate if it wasn't for the 5e feature that I dislike the most. Dex bonus to damage. Just my opinion. 100% this. Seriously: 1) Make STR the ONLY ability modifier ever that adds to weapon damage, ranged weapon damage included. And if your STR modifier is negative, that affects your ranged weapon damage, too. 2) Make it so crossbows can never add ability modifier to damage, such as via a new "mechanical" weapon property. Up crossbows' damage die one size bigger to compensate somewhat. Those two changes would solve *so many* problems. And get rid of all those annoying 8 STR/20 DEX builds in the process. And for good measure, 3) change Hexblade so CHA applies only to attack rolls, still need to use STR for damage.

Thursday, 8th November, 2018

  • 10:29 PM - squibbles quoted Yardiff in post Is Ranged really better than Melee?
    Oh lord is this thread really devolving into a Battle of Pedants about military history? Is it? Joy! :D [A ranged group] can work more effectively then melee in a group containing only one or the other... I mean this is all displayed in the real world were when guns became able to punch through armor, melee became a back up fighting style, and when we gained the ability to fire more than once without reloading it all but vanished with the exception of stealth... then we made silencers, making range preferred all around unless your trying to save precious ammo. If your still not convinced then consider one question... where are our melee plains and tanks? I know its a game but the tactical advantages are still their and to balance that the would have to make melee supper powered compared to ranged and they didn't. Yes, at the inflection point where combatants with missile weapons can reliably kill or disable combatants with shock weapons before the latter close in, the utility...

Monday, 5th November, 2018

Sunday, 4th November, 2018

Saturday, 27th October, 2018

  • 11:35 PM - Jay Verkuilen quoted Yardiff in post Mythological Figures: Conan the Barbarian (5E)
    Conan was ONE OF the characters that the barbarian class was based off of, but the earlier barbarian classes didn't have rage as one of the core class features. True, "barbarian fiction" was a thing back in the day. I was thinking of the 1E Unearthed Arcana barbarian, which had a lot of pretty clear Conan-isms.

Thursday, 18th October, 2018

Thursday, 27th September, 2018

  • 06:37 PM - 5ekyu quoted Yardiff in post Revisiting material components - enforcing in a game focused on resource-management
    Personally I find resource management adds to my emersion in a game. Agreed - with caveat - if the resource management itself is managed in a way that adds to immersion. one could have resource management that added a "non-tainted water is scarce" element to the game and thats fantastic *to the degree* that the outcomes of that and processes of that make it immersive. if the water management rules are "roll a die each day to see if you fet tainted water" (no skill or circumstance adjustment) and that leads to off-kilter in-game breaks in immersion - it can hurt.

Wednesday, 5th September, 2018

  • 03:06 AM - Maxperson quoted Yardiff in post Survivor Appendix N Authors- LEIBER WINS!
    Other than this Fellowship you speak of, you have proof that a bunch of people 'got together' to down vote a particular author? Circumstantial, sure. Tolkien was rip roaring until the private message about the Fellowship was made public. Then all of a sudden Tolkien was the #1 target.

Sunday, 2nd September, 2018

  • 11:14 PM - Grognerd quoted Yardiff in post 1e Followers in a 5e Game - Just for Fun!
    Matt Colville did a Kickstarter for something like this. Thanks for pointing this out. I followed the link that was provided. Looks pretty cool! I like your exemple of the paladin. But building are not always available or need to attract followers. Maybe use a rule based on level. TCR = character level, with a limit for individual like 1/2 TCR or 1/3 TCR. PC under level 5 rarely attract followers. I wouldn’t necessarily tie to land, but to fame and having an “operating base”. It could just be building the PCs acquired, or a guild hall like a mercenary company or something. The "operating base" is the exact point. That's why I said a structure or a setting. So, for example, a Druid may not build a building, but they must at least have a sacred grove or something. There needs to be a place to rally to in order to attract the followers. Plus, this requires some sort of expenditure on the part of the PCs, which seems fair. I am waiting for mine. The idea is sound. It also makes you abl...
  • 11:07 PM - Grognerd quoted Yardiff in post Thoughts on the Resilient Feat
    Resilient is already a very good feat. I thought this would have been a thread on how Resilient erases class identity by partially removing saving throw weaknesses. Having 2 proficiencies does that wholly. I couldn't disagree more. I don't think that having Saving Throws removes class identity in any way. Class identity is better established with the Class Features than with the class's base saving throws. By this logic, the Monk completely removes class identity at 14th level! But when you have, for example, a Fighter and a Barbarian that both have the same Saves (STR/CON), and can see clear class distinctions between them, it rather goes against the claim that allowing Feats to give more saves removes class distinctions. Splitting them into physical and mental is not the way to go. You need to split them into primary and secondary. This is a consideration for how to modify it. Thanks. I'd think just letting people take Resilient more then once would be less unbalancing. Chances...
  • 07:03 PM - smbakeresq quoted Yardiff in post 1e Followers in a 5e Game - Just for Fun!
    Matt Colville did a Kickstarter for something like this. I am waiting for mine. The idea is sound. It also makes you able to play MORE D&D, if someone can’t make it or you just don’t have enough you can fill in with Henchman.
  • 06:34 PM - UngeheuerLich quoted Yardiff in post Thoughts on the Resilient Feat
    I'd think just letting people take Resilient more then once would be less unbalancing. I don't think so. I think the resilient feat itself is unbalanced due to good and bad saving throws and a way to get a saving throw if your stat is already even would be appreciated.
  • 10:37 AM - MNblockhead quoted Yardiff in post 1e Followers in a 5e Game - Just for Fun!
    Matt Colville did a Kickstarter for something like this. Yeah, I'm letting Matt do the work for me. :-)

Friday, 31st August, 2018

  • 02:37 PM - Maxperson quoted Yardiff in post Survivor Appendix N Authors- LEIBER WINS!
    This is what I have to say to those banding together to force an out come. Let the votes fall as they will. This is probably just me but it seem wrong to private message each other to coordinate voting to keep a particular author high in the votes. Meh. It's an author that I have been upvoting already with a very few others. I have been upvoting the ones I know and who have had great impact on the game. Tolkien, Leiber, Vance, Zelazny and Moorcock. The rest of the authors I really don't know, so I've just been jumping on the downvote bandwagon to get rid of them. Vance is gone.

Page 1 of 23 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Yardiff's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites