View Profile: FrogReaver - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
  • Warpiglet's Avatar
    Tuesday, 30th April, 2019, 01:07 AM
    You could have them grapple and do damage either way by raw. For extra creep factor have some damage be piercing or slashing via bite. It changes nothing about the challenge rating imho. Got for it.
    16 replies | 494 view(s)
    1 XP
No More Results
About FrogReaver

Basic Information

Age
32
About FrogReaver
Disable sharing sidebar?:
No

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
4,552
Posts Per Day
3.10
Last Post
A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life Thursday, 18th April, 2019 03:15 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
51
General Information
Last Activity
Friday, 17th May, 2019 09:20 PM
Join Date
Tuesday, 19th May, 2015
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0

1 Friend

  1. Warpiglet Warpiglet is offline

    Member

    Warpiglet
Showing Friends 1 to 1 of 1

Saturday, 11th May, 2019


Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Thursday, 11th April, 2019

  • 04:53 PM - Benny89 mentioned FrogReaver in post Elven Accuracy Samurai Archer vs Xbow master battlemaster analysis.
    ...ving more than 3 is a tiny percent chance. Analysis You will turn about 80% of misses in a day into hits with precision attack. Without elven accuracy the Samarui will turn 25% of his total attacks into additional hits. With elven accuracy it's about 35-40%. This still makes precision attack better and that's without factoring in the difference in going crossbow expertise vs going elven accuracy. So let's do an actual analysis at level 11. BattleMaster 11 vs Samauri 11. I'll assume 6 combats a day that last 4 rounds each. Samauri will be a half-elf with elven accuracy + sharpshooter + 20 dex (uses a longbow) Battlemaster will be variant human with sharpshooter + crossbow expertise + 20 dex (uses a handcrossbow) At level 11 I'm getting that the battlemaster does about 20-30% more damage per day than the Samauri. (That's without crits calculated which will give the samauri a small advantage but not overly much. So maybe 15-25% estimated) Btw. do you have AnyDice math for that FrogReaver? I would like to save that somewhere and also show a friend who asked for it. Thank you!

Sunday, 24th March, 2019

  • 08:55 PM - TaranTheWanderer mentioned FrogReaver in post Can Sharpshooter be used with a Net?
    "-" is also listed as the weight of a sling. Are you trying to say that the sling has an undefined mass? FrogReaver would say it has 0 mass. It actually has mass but its value is inconsequential to the encumbrance mechanic. Its mass is N/A.

Thursday, 21st March, 2019

  • 01:04 AM - TaranTheWanderer mentioned FrogReaver in post Can Sharpshooter be used with a Net?
    FrogReaver I hate to disagree with you because I often do agree with you but, in this situation, the table in the book doesn’t say 0, it instead, has a dash, which I interpret as N/A. So you can’t add damage if damage is not applicable to the attack. Now, you could maybe reskin that sucker as a bola...

Saturday, 16th March, 2019

  • 07:41 PM - Satyrn mentioned FrogReaver in post Playing with the Averages - A simplistic approach
    Our DM was thinking about using the average unless it would automatically reduce a character to zero, and then actually roll in those cases to give the character a chance to keep going after the hit. He would also use it for BBEGs, etc. I like the idea that @FrogReaver put forth. What your DM is considering would require that he knows how many hit points the player has left, or would result in the player saying "oh, that takes down" and the DM responding "no, wait; let me roll the dice," then gathering up the dice, etc. I think that it would be more straightforward when a player is dropped to 0, he flips a coin. Heads, he's still up at 1 hp. Tails, he's on his butt at 0. A character with only 1 hit point when he takes damage doesn't get to make the coin flip.

Friday, 8th March, 2019

  • 09:15 PM - TaranTheWanderer mentioned FrogReaver in post Bard Faerie Fire in Tier 1
    ... you, Bad, bad charisma save. Someone previously mentioned testing FF against Bane. I think that is a much more interesting comparison than Tashas' or DW, even though one is more buff and the other debuff. You give me 4 orcs, I will cast Bane on 3 of them or all of them if higher level within tier 1. I'm not a maths guy so cannot run the numbers, so this is just my experience, but if you are thinking of playing a Bard, Bane would be my absolute first pick, and then Healing word, and then Disguise self for shenanigans and just add one more for flavour. Ps. I cannot wait to reach a level where I can try Synaptic Static, Bane, Cutting Words and Mockery. That will be a good day indeed! Interesting. I’m a bard newb and I would like to recruit you to peruse this thread: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?657398-Bard-Advice-how-much-can-I-dump-combat-stats&daysprune=14 Please help me kit out my bard and help advise me on spells. I will pay you double whatever FrogReaver paid. Now back to your regularly scheduled debate.

Saturday, 23rd February, 2019

  • 05:09 PM - ClaytonCross mentioned FrogReaver in post Here Are The Most Popular D&D Feats (War Caster Leads The Pack!)
    FrogReaver I just want to say I appropriate you actually trying to argue the point even half side ways where others have devolved into personal attacks trying to devalue people instead of debate the information we know. On the point of the question asked. Why are people personally offended by the idea they don't need warcaster to cast a vary small niche of spells instead of considering something like multi-classing and low level paladins getting a better consecration save than resilient(con) for games that are not expected to go higher than 7 and that might inflate those numbers as you pointed out?

Sunday, 10th February, 2019

  • 10:57 PM - MNblockhead mentioned FrogReaver in post The Pitfalls of D&D Beyond Data
    You keep taking about things you “have” to do. What you mean is things you “want” to do. Can we cut FrogReaver some slack on his overly imperative writing style and just agree that a significant percentage of us geeks enjoy discussing statistics? I find his posts on this and other other thread to be, overall, measured and interesting.
  • 03:56 PM - Blue mentioned FrogReaver in post The Pitfalls of D&D Beyond Data
    FrogReaver, I agree with all of your points and I'd like to add another - self selection. Just like ENworld we discuss a lot of points but we're just a subset of all players and not necessarily a representative sample. I hadn't thought at all about the skewing, either from subclass choice level or multiclassing. That's a really good catch. I wish they would release their data on github or somewhere so we could all examine it.

Friday, 8th February, 2019

  • 11:11 PM - squibbles mentioned FrogReaver in post Cantrip House Rule
    I commented on FrogReaver's proposed changes in an earlier post (summary; the balance is probably fine but I suspect the changes would not be much fun), but have had some further thoughts while continuing to read the thread. To compensate for the lack of scaling cantrips I would reward casters with extra spell slots. I'm leaning toward 1 extra spell slot of each level up to level 6 spells. You would gaub the extra spell slot immediately upon reaching the level where you first gain that spell slot. For example a level 5 Wizard would have spell slots of 5 level 1, 4 level 2, 3 level 3 but his cantrips would not scale. Casters would scale with more spell slots, more powerful spell slots and more powerful spells. So my take is that removing cantrip scaling doesn't go against any of that. The design principle underlying cantrip scaling is that 5e aims for a balanced rate of power acquisition across classes. All the classes get a power spike at 5th, 11th, and 17th levels, usually from multiple features...

Saturday, 19th January, 2019


Friday, 11th January, 2019

  • 02:23 AM - CleverNickName mentioned FrogReaver in post Out Of Combat Action Surge Uses
    What FrogReaver and aco175 said. I'm sure that Action Surges can be used out of combat, they just aren't. A player won't normally want to "waste" the ability trying to force a door or climb over a wall or whatever, because they will want to hang on to that surge for whatever might be lurking behind it. I'm sure our DM could engineer a very specific situation that might force a player to use an action surge out of combat, but it hasn't happened yet. (Or if it has, we have found other ways around it. We're pretty stingy with our per-rest abilities.)

Friday, 14th December, 2018

  • 12:57 AM - Hussar mentioned FrogReaver in post Cantrip Auto-Scaling - A 5e Critique
    ...e a different cantrip for a different element as you can't switch cantrips. Sure, you could have chosen two ranged damage dealing cantrips - say, fire bolt and ray of frost. But, that comes at a cost as well. One of your very small suite of cantrips is now very often not used because, unless you happen to be fighting something resistant to fire, you're always using Fire Bolt because Fire Bolt deals better damage and reducing something's speed by 10 feet for a round often isn't all that useful. With one first level spell, I can ALWAYS choose different energy types. Outside of something that is immune/resistant to all energy types, it's unlikely that I won't be dealing full damage every time I cast it. With that added bonus that anything that has weakness to a particular damage type is always an option. So, we have a spell that, at most levels, deals as good if not better damage than a comparable cantrip, with considerable added versatility. Again, not seeing the problem. FrogReaver - despite repeated examples being shown, you still have not demonstrated that cantrips are better at dealing damage than even 1st level damage dealing spells, never minding second level ones. Thus, it's pretty clear that game balance is not your concern here. Please, please, demonstrate why you think that cantrips outstrip direct damage 1st and 2nd levels spells and please walk me through how you came to that conclusion because EVERY SINGLE example that's been brought up has shown that cantrips, outside of very corner cases, NEVER out damage 1st and 2nd level spells.

Wednesday, 12th December, 2018

  • 11:13 PM - cbwjm mentioned FrogReaver in post Cantrip Auto-Scaling - A 5e Critique
    I think folks were thinking that it meant that improved divine smite added another additional d8 when you use divine smite? That looks to be the case. I did a check on sage advice and I think I've found the tweet that FrogReaver was thinking of, or at least the tweet that clarifies that it is only a single +1d8 not +2d8 that Jeremy had originally stated. https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/880852301140811777 Removing the sentence should remove that ambiguity. With all of the errata we've had, part of me wonders if I should just rebuy the core books, or at least the PHB. I think I have the 1st or 2nd printing so now, they are quite out of date. They're still useable but I can see there being possible issues when people have different printings.
  • 04:38 PM - doctorbadwolf mentioned FrogReaver in post Cantrip Auto-Scaling - A 5e Critique
    FrogReaver At this point, I think any further discussion is a waste of time. You continue to act as though no one is addressing your complaint, even though most participants have done so. In response to someone else, you even try to claim that versatility is irrelevant to the complaint. It isn’t, and the idea that it is is patently absurd. Versatility is an advantage that level 1 spells have over cantrips. The idea that magic missile using a level 1 slot has to be strictly better, at all levels, than any cantrip, is false. Magic missile (and other level 1 damaging spells) is better than any cantrip is specific situations. You keep saying weird stuff like “That would be a valid point if anyone had brought it up but no one has”....but I and others have done so, repeatedly! But you refuse to address it! Instead of nitpicking, shifting goalposts, and trying to condescend to people who absolutely get what you’re saying and disagree with you, why not just...try to engage genuinely with ...
  • 04:26 AM - Thyrwyn mentioned FrogReaver in post Cantrip Auto-Scaling - A 5e Critique
    FrogReaver said: 1) “My reason was that a level 1 spell slot is a resource...” —-this is undeniable; 2) “...anything which requires a resource should be better than something that does not.” —-on its own, most people, myself included, would agree with this design philosophy. The problem is that your position has nothing to do with 1st level spell slots: it’s about 1st level spells, which are not the same thing, and are not included in either of the statements quoted above. Counter-arguments have included A) Cantrips have slots, too - that is a resource, too. See point #2, above B) 1st level spell slots are versatile, and can be used to cast a greater array of spells as needed. Cantrip slots cannot be changed. Versatility is better than unchangeable. C) The value of a 1st level spell slot decreases at a greater rate than the value of the cantrip slot. A Wizard will gain 2 cantrips over their entire career, but 20 additional spell slots. Take any spell caster that has exhaus...

Wednesday, 14th November, 2018

  • 06:55 PM - TaranTheWanderer mentioned FrogReaver in post How useful is the Dodge action?
    OverlordOcelot I think you're making this out to be a big deal when it isn't. When I dm, I play the opponents in a way that would be logical to their motives and their intelligence and their tactical and arcane knowledge guides the kind of decisions I make for them. I, personally, don’t change an action based on what a player does unless I feel it makes sense to change the action. Smarter opponents with knowledge of PCs abilities will change tactics more often to adapt while stupid enemies might keep slugging away. I don’t change tactics based on ooc info. If I can help it. You are free to do it any way you like. FrogReaver“You keep on ignoring that Spreading damage around is useful in itself. ” Actually, I’m not arguing for or against this. I didn’t touch on that point at all. But it’s probably true that it can be useful, especially if a DM uses dodge as a guide to attack someone other than the person dodging. (I assume that’s what you mean by spreading the damage, unless I’m misunderstanding. An enemy sees someone is hard to hit so they choose to attack someone else thus spreading the damage around.)

Friday, 9th November, 2018

  • 07:45 AM - ClaytonCross mentioned FrogReaver in post Is Ranged really better than Melee?
    ... is better to use from people with different intent not qualifying that intent to each other. On topic. Ranged and Melee both have similar weapons with 1d6, 1d8, and 1d10 dice with the same 1-5 bonus to hit and damage and both have feats with -5 to hit for +10 damage. So I am not sure that "to hit" or damage be it average or max are normally distinctly different enough to matter. You can argue Greatsword vs a Hand crowsbow and a Heavy crossbow vs dagger but really its the classes that make those weapons matter for damage and to hit more than the weapons themselves. A monk with dagger, a rogue with a hand crossbow, a fighter with heavy crossbow, a barbarian with great sword etc. So if we are talking about range vs melee the tactical advantage of reach for defense and offense it what makes ranged better. When you start talking about party composition, enemies, and classes... your not talking about ranged vs melee any more your just jumping into scenario testing. I think the heart of @FrogReaver 's original post is under appreciation and general consideration of melee character's contributions to a group. That said, I generally don't care about melee vs ranged as a rogue as either is generally more important to the group as scout, a wizard as combat manipulator, and I really feel like when melee characters are under appreciated its not for the melee fighting style its more for a lack of out of combat utility which can often be fixed by the player finding a party role. Example, Grog on critical role was not just the Berserker Barbarian he was also the groups quartermaster and many of best moments of Critical Role that involved Grog were not his combat triumphs but when he made party members trade party goods in comical ways. Don't get me wrong he put down the damage at times and he struggled to be in the fight bring a melee weapon to a ranged fight but I feel like it was the out of combat role that really made the best moments. I see this in my group too and it does not just e...

Monday, 22nd October, 2018

  • 10:35 PM - Hawk Diesel mentioned FrogReaver in post Shield Attacks and AC Bonus
    Ganymede81 The way I understand him, FrogReaver is placing priority on how an object looks visually to determine whether the damage an object might deal when used as an improvised weapon can be similar to a given weapon when used as a basis for comparison. In his arguments he has made it clear that (for some reason) the force a weapon / object-used-as-an-improvised-weapon might deal can be similar, but that this characteristic cannot be considered when determining if an object resembles a weapon. And so while he has admitted that a mace and a shield could produce a similar force, they would not deal similar damage in a D&D 5e game because they do not look enough alike to resemble each other, which I take to mean that they do not visually resemble each other (despite the fact that they clearly do resemble each other when other qualities outside of visual characteristics are considered, especially those characteristics that are most valuable when assessing the deadlines of weapins and objects being used as weapons). So while he adm...
  • 06:04 PM - Hawk Diesel mentioned FrogReaver in post Shield Attacks and AC Bonus
    ...as if it were that weapon and use his or her proficiency bonus. An object that bears no resemblance to a weapon deals 1d4 damage (the DM assigns a damage type appropriate to the object). If a character uses a ranged weapon to make a melee attack, or throws a melee weapon that does not have the thrown property, it also deals 1d4 damage. An improvised thrown weapon has a normal range of 20 feet and a long range of 60 feet. Emphasis mine. Nowhere in the entry does the official RAW say what damage an improvised weapon must do, but that the damage assigned is strictly the DM's discretion. It does provide an example to measure against as a benchmark, stating that an object that bears no resemblance to a weapon deals 1d4 damage. However, it does not specify whether that is meant to be visible resemblance (your example of a kitchen knife versus a greatsword) or functional resemblance (a shield being able to be used in similar fashion and to similar effect as a club). So I'm sorry FrogReaver, but this is not a matter of house rule versus RAW. This is a merited interpretation of the rules, since it clearly states that the DM determines the appropriate damage. It does not state that all objects that are not directly in 1-to-1 correspondence to existing weapons must deal 1d4 damage, nor does it strictly clarify how the rules define "resemblance" in regards to an object compared to a weapon.
  • 04:22 PM - Hawk Diesel mentioned FrogReaver in post Shield Attacks and AC Bonus
    FrogReaver, it seems you have gotten hung up on the mace thing. I think what all epithet was getting at was that since the edge of a shield can focus energy into a smaller space, much like the flanges of a mace, that it was not unreasonable to have a shield deal more damage than a 1d4 club. He made the comparison between a 1d6 damage club and a 1d8 damage mace, and stated that because the primary difference between the two is that the mace has those flanges that concentrate force, it was the reason that it deals more damage. Thus a shield, with a similar force concentrator, would deal more more damage (1d6) than a typical improvised weapon of similar size might deal (1d4).


Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
No results to display...

Friday, 19th April, 2019

  • 02:49 AM - pemerton quoted FrogReaver in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    However the dm just deciding gets much closer to real life than rolling dice. The dm can make informed decisions and include much more into the decision making process than dice ever dreamed of.This is where I disagree. My reasoning is similar to AbdulAlhazred's - that there is more in the heaven and earth of the gameworld than is dreamed of in any GM's philosophy. GM decision-making isn't "informed decision-making", it's just one person's preferences for the fiction trumping another's. Which is exactly what makes it not like real life!
  • 01:51 AM - AbdulAlhazred quoted FrogReaver in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    From the character perspective both of those methods emulate real life. From a God perspective neither of those methods emulate real life. However the dm just deciding gets much closer to real life than rolling dice. The dm can make informed decisions and include much more into the decision making process than dice ever dreamed of. See, this is what I, generally speaking, dispute. My assertion is that even the most enriched of game world settings are so 'thin' in terms of detailed understanding of the processes and implications of the established facts, that any decisions made about what "is or isn't likely" are indistinguishable from pure opinion. The DM can indeed "make up stuff" and call it realistic, that doesn't make it so in any meaningful sense except that it adheres to his preferences. If he makes up some 'explanation' for something, that too is made up ultimately. Real life OTOH is governed, objectively, by principles best understood using a framework like the Buddhist concept ...

Thursday, 18th April, 2019

  • 11:04 AM - pemerton quoted FrogReaver in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    pemerton The game world both is and is not like real life. There are similarities and differences. Pointing out the differences doesn't negate all the similarities. From a players perspective that is roleplaying a character the game world often feels and functions like the real world because he is viewing the game world through the characters perspective. From that perspective going to a tea-house is no different than going to a tea-house in real life. You see neither the real life person or the in game character have any awareness about the processes external to them that cause anyone to be at the tea-house when they visit. They only know if someone is or if someone isn't there when they visit the tea house That's what we mean when we say the game world is like real life. From these first person perspectives there's uncertainty about who you will find in the real world tea house and who the character will find in the game-world teahouse. Now, obviously the processes that determine ...

Thursday, 11th April, 2019

  • 04:38 PM - Benny89 quoted FrogReaver in post Elven Accuracy Samurai Archer vs Xbow master battlemaster analysis.
    ...ving more than 3 is a tiny percent chance. Analysis You will turn about 80% of misses in a day into hits with precision attack. Without elven accuracy the Samarui will turn 25% of his total attacks into additional hits. With elven accuracy it's about 35-40%. This still makes precision attack better and that's without factoring in the difference in going crossbow expertise vs going elven accuracy. So let's do an actual analysis at level 11. BattleMaster 11 vs Samauri 11. I'll assume 6 combats a day that last 4 rounds each. Samauri will be a half-elf with elven accuracy + sharpshooter + 20 dex (uses a longbow) Battlemaster will be variant human with sharpshooter + crossbow expertise + 20 dex (uses a handcrossbow) At level 11 I'm getting that the battlemaster does about 20-30% more damage per day than the Samauri. (That's without crits calculated which will give the samauri a small advantage but not overly much. So maybe 15-25% estimated) Btw. do you have AnyDice math for that FrogReaver? I would like to save that somewhere and also show a friend who asked for it. Thank you!

Tuesday, 9th April, 2019

  • 10:29 PM - Benny89 quoted FrogReaver in post Elven Accuracy Samurai Archer vs Xbow master battlemaster analysis.
    So now thnik about the Samauri…. if a Samauri gets advantage on 27 attacks then how many extra attacks does he land? Assuming a 50% chance to hit then he would land 13.5 attacks. Advantage would grant an additional 6.75 attacks to land. Even with elven accuracy it's only like +10 attacks landing. (Example was at 50% chance to hit) Would you recommend multiclassing BM crossbow fighter after level 12 or stick to pure?
  • 04:12 PM - cmad1977 quoted FrogReaver in post Race choice for pure Hexblade build
    Sounds like someone that doesn’t want to admit they were wrong Sounds like some petty little person wants to be ‘right’ on the internet! Congratulations little guy!
  • 01:36 PM - UngeheuerLich quoted FrogReaver in post Race choice for pure Hexblade build
    Sounds like someone that doesn’t want to admit they were wrong No. But I don´t want to explain myself again. Please accept that we had some communication problem and accept that I did not want to imply that it was rolled in order. And it is just not important enough to argue over semantics. Especially not in a foreign language. So please just drop it. Just for reference: that is what align means in German. Nothing implys "rolling in order" except for the last bullet point maybe. The second last bullet point "justiert" could also be translated with adjusted... the thrid last with "reconciled"... but I thought aligned would have been the better translation. aligned —ausgerichtet adj · angepasst adj · abgeglichen adj · justiert adj · in eine Linie gebracht
  • 05:52 AM - UngeheuerLich quoted FrogReaver in post Race choice for pure Hexblade build
    The rolls weren’t in order highest to lowest either. I’ll give ya a chance though. What do you mean when you say aligned? Because at this time I can make no sense out of that comment except that aligned = in order Forget it. Not important enough.
  • 05:11 AM - Esker quoted FrogReaver in post Best gish (PHB only)
    You can take magic intiate with a tempest cleric and gain shileleagh that way as well. Tempest is a lot more gishy than nature IMO. That's a thought. Hurts to have to give up war caster for shillelagh, though, especially since you don't get CON save proficiency as a cleric. Heh, or I suppose you could take first level in fighter for CON saves and dueling style, magic initiate druid at 1st level for shillelagh and whatever else appeals to you, and then go Trickery Cleric (since you already have heavy armor and martial weapons) to get mirror image and blink. You could even use your channel divinity to give yourself advantage on attack rolls, which is arguably even gishier than what tempests can do.
  • 03:57 AM - ClaytonCross quoted FrogReaver in post Fixing the terrible Weapon Master feat
    Now you are flip flopping on your goals a little. The previous goal of feats was to not be normal. Adding in weapon proficiencies into the main melee feats opens those feats up to spell casters that are interested in using a weapon. Why does it start mattering that you see such feats on fighters and such when you never see them on a wizard as is? I missed the weapons proficiency, I thought you meant a +2 to hit generic and separate add. I am okay with proficancy, you can't get double and it doesn't stack with itself and it would open up some interesting new options like mages staff fighting. Sorry, I didn't flip flop I just miss read you. I think it was the 2 handed weapon that lead my mind astray.
  • 03:37 AM - ClaytonCross quoted FrogReaver in post Fixing the terrible Weapon Master feat
    Sure, the point I was getting at was that a feat that grants weapon proficiencies needs to treat the weapon proficiencies as a ribbon and grant some other primary benefit. For example the weapon master style feats should probably give proficiencies in their respective weapons. GWM should grant proficiency in 2 handed heavy weapons etc. Weapon Master itself would likely make the most sense coupled with the martial adept feat that grants a few maneuvers and superiority dice. I think adding "to hit" makes them less flavor and more a way to break bounded accuracy above and redundant to the ASI, +X magic weapons, and the scaling proficiency bonus we already have. There is a large risk doing more harm than good with that. It's also not like they are not good enough that I don't see polearm master, great weapons master, sharpshooter, shield master, mobility, medium armor master, and heavy armor master almost every campaign I have been in since 5e. Weapons Master and Martial Adept are the only ...
  • 03:20 AM - Benny89 quoted FrogReaver in post Elven Accuracy Samurai Archer vs Xbow master battlemaster analysis.
    If you make 100 attacks then on average you will miss by 1 a total of 5 times and miss by 2 a total of 5 times and miss by 3 a total of 5 times. If you use your dice when you miss by 1-3 then you on average have a 100% chance to cause 5 misses by 1 to turn to hits and have a 90% chance to cause the 5 misses by 2 to become hits and an 80% chance to cause the 5 misses by 3 to become hits. That's actually more like a 90% chance instead of 80% chance that I estimated earlier... Either way it results in 12+ misses becoming hits. Nice, thank you. That makes more sense now :)
  • 01:48 AM - ClaytonCross quoted FrogReaver in post Fixing the terrible Weapon Master feat
    ...) dagger which my GM let me use Shillelagh on, but I did not go as you stated for 3 of your 5 assumption. I am just saying even if your are right the majority of the time feats are for characters to be unique, to the idea is that you don't need them because of normality seems backwards their very intent. They setup the abstract. They create variation. So having normal assumption and players that want to break that is a if not the primary reason for a feat to exist. Having a longsword wielding wizard with warcaster using it to strike with boomingblade for opportunity attacks is exactly the justification for feat like this. Not a write of that normally doesn't happen because *most* feats are about how you can be not normal not about what is normal. I am not saying you are wrong that what you say is mostly true. I am just saying its an off argument to use mostly true as a basisis for a system made to defy that. In my humble opinion. Anyway, been a while. Good to see you a round FrogReaver-san. long time no debate. lol.
  • 01:44 AM - Benny89 quoted FrogReaver in post Elven Accuracy Samurai Archer vs Xbow master battlemaster analysis.
    @Benny89 1. You are vastly overrating darkvision for an archer. Darkvision only has a range of 60ft. 2. You only use precision dice when you have a "near miss". It's fairly unlikely you will have more than 2 near misses ever and having more than 3 is a tiny percent chance. Analysis You will turn about 80% of misses in a day into hits with precision attack. Without elven accuracy the Samarui will turn 25% of his total attacks into additional hits. With elven accuracy it's about 35-40%. This still makes precision attack better and that's without factoring in the difference in going crossbow expertise vs going elven accuracy. So let's do an actual analysis at level 11. BattleMaster 11 vs Samauri 11. I'll assume 6 combats a day that last 4 rounds each. Samauri will be a half-elf with elven accuracy + sharpshooter + 20 dex (uses a longbow) Battlemaster will be variant human with sharpshooter + crossbow expertise + 20 dex (uses a handcrossbow) At level 11 I'm getting that the battlemaster ...

Monday, 8th April, 2019

  • 06:37 PM - UngeheuerLich quoted FrogReaver in post Race choice for pure Hexblade build
    Yes it does. Words have meanings. But not as you think sometimes. You read more into it as I said. You think "aligned" refers to rolling in order? Nope. The alignment could have happened after arranging a set of rolls like 12, 14, 16, 10, 8, 18 from highest to lowest. After the arrangement they do align perfectly. If one of them was odd, they would not. So no. Never implied rolling in order. But actually it does not matter. The probability of rolling them not in order is 720 times higher but still not high by any standard. (Blue´s calculation should be for "rolled not in order" already.)
  • 05:54 PM - UngeheuerLich quoted FrogReaver in post Race choice for pure Hexblade build
    No assumption. You claimed they were. “Of course every individual roll is unlikely, but those stats are not only unlikely, but perfectly alligned. There is a high probability that such a roll is faked... “ Nope. That quote does not imply that I assumed they were rolled in order.
  • 05:16 PM - Esker quoted FrogReaver in post Best gish (PHB only)
    Best PHB only Gish = Tempest Cleric (Paladin is honorable mention but tempest cleric will give you the most traditional gish feel for the level 1-8 progression). The tempest cleric is a nice alternative to nature cleric. The domain spells are definitely gishier, and wrath of the storm is fun; you don't otherwise have a lot of uses for a reaction outside the odd opportunity attack. It's a less weapon-focused option than nature cleric since you don't get to use WIS when attacking with a weapon (though you could forego a shield and wield the maul of Thor or something, which admittedly is a cool image), but you didn't specifically say you wanted your magic to directly support your weapon attacks, and you do get some combat magic perks (thunderwave or shatter+destructive wrath). There is a tempest cleric at my table and she has attacked with a weapon maybe once since level 5, since toll the dead or sacred flame has better average damage than a single one-handed weapon attack by then, but since you ...
  • 02:08 PM - UngeheuerLich quoted FrogReaver in post Race choice for pure Hexblade build
    Why assume it was an in-order roll? Why assume I did assume that? With those rolls its not necessary. For my test with students, it is.

Monday, 25th March, 2019

  • 05:21 PM - TaranTheWanderer quoted FrogReaver in post Can Sharpshooter be used with a Net?
    Yeah, I see what you're saying but it's not what I was getting at and could probably try to clarify but I think my last post just illustrates that I need to segue out of this conversation. I'll just maintain all my previous points and continue to disagree with Frogreaver's theories. edit Nope That's the first time you've responded to any of my posts for the last few pages. I was waiting with baited breath. At least you waited for the most ridiculous one, it was easy pickings.
  • 02:47 PM - Supergyro quoted FrogReaver in post Can Sharpshooter be used with a Net?
    There doesn't need to be a page number. It's called logical deduction and is the foundation of most math and computer science. Evidently you didn't read my original post.. It's sad I have to repeat it... "--" could mean "does no damage and can not be given damage by feats" or it could mean "does no damage and can be given damage by feats". You seem to argue the latter when it could very well be the former, the book does not say. It's probably not mean the latter since to say the latter they could have said '0', but again, hard to say, since it's not defined. I don't see how a math book would resolve this. To use mathematical language. If for all X, F(X)=0.. it could be F(X)+10 or it could be F(X+10). The first is '10', but the second is '0'. Now unless you can point to the rulebook as to where, you're just enforcing a house rule. There is nothing in a math book that resolves this conundrum since, the rules use a symbol "--" and do not define the order of operations for that symbol. ...


FrogReaver's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites