View Profile: SolidPlatonic - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
No Recent Activity
About SolidPlatonic

Basic Information

About SolidPlatonic
Disable sharing sidebar?:
No
My Game Details

Details of games currently playing and games being sought.

State:
Pennsylvania
Country:
USA

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
17
Posts Per Day
0.02
Last Post
Mythological Figures: Odysseus/Ulysses (5E) Monday, 3rd December, 2018 09:26 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
0
General Information
Last Activity
Yesterday 06:58 PM
Join Date
Wednesday, 7th December, 2016
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0
My Game Details
State:
Pennsylvania
Country:
USA
No results to show...
No results to display...
No results to display...

Sunday, 9th September, 2018

  • 02:55 AM - MoonSong quoted SolidPlatonic in post Arguments and assumptions against multi classing
    c) No coffeelocks I've played a paladin warlock and a paladin bard, and I've played with several paladin warlocks and one paladin sorcerer. What I meant by "abuses I've seen on the boards," was an imprecise way of saying all of the "abuses" that are possible with CHA-based multiclassing, seen from firsthand knowledge, reading other peoples' experience, and doing the research myself. I haven't had anyone play or ask to play a coffeelock, yet. That's probably because that is just the most egregious, eye-rolling abuse of a poorly-designed rule. It basically comes down to (one of the few) very sloppy design elements in 5e that can pretty easily be avoided. A talk with players to say, "hey, don't abuse MC rules" also works in most cases, but the internet shorthand is to just to state that MCing CHA-based classes is uncool and should be avoided. Please, forgive me if I quote you over something old. I can't claim I was the one to invent the coffeelock, but I described the basic idea very ...

Tuesday, 4th September, 2018

  • 04:05 AM - TheCosmicKid quoted SolidPlatonic in post Arguments and assumptions against multi classing
    It would be the absolutely lighest touch to get rid of 99% of the abuses I've seen on various boards, but allow the most flexibility for players. What you've seen on boards is not necessarily an accurate representation of what it looks like in actual play. I would suggest resisting the urge to ban anything based on hearsay.

Tuesday, 15th May, 2018

  • 07:40 PM - tomBitonti quoted SolidPlatonic in post Adventure modules that take place in a theater?
    And Madness Followed is a Mythos-inspired adventure that takes place in a theater, Dungeon 134 The Sixfold Trial from the Pathfinder Council of Thieves adventure path has the characters actually *IN* a play. This is the one that came to mind for me. See: http://pathfinder.wikia.com/wiki/Council_of_Thieves_(adventure_path) The Sixfold Trial by Richard Pett To banish the monstrous shadows that stalk Westcrown by night, the PCs go undercover, joining the city’s chaotic theatrical community in an elaborate plot to infiltrate the estate of the decadent lord-mayor. Yet theater life turns deadly when they become players in a spectacle no actor has ever survived. Can the PCs endure their debut performance in a city where an actor’s first big hit is often his last? Thx! TomB

Wednesday, 12th July, 2017

  • 04:39 PM - LordEntrails quoted SolidPlatonic in post [Updated] Who's Playing What On Fantasy Grounds? Final Stats For 2016!
    I wonder why no Dungeon World? Maybe if you are playing DW you end up just using a Google+ chat or Roll20? DW is played on FG, It just doesn't have it's own ruleset. It is played either using CoreRPG or MoreCore. There has actually been some recent community development of resources for it. You can learn more here; http://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?39043-Dungeon-World-Module

Wednesday, 28th June, 2017

  • 05:34 PM - imagineGod quoted SolidPlatonic in post Fantasy Flight Games Announces Genesys RPG
    OH, I get that the symbols are equivalent. But if you haven't played SWRPG but are using the SWRPG dice with Genesys, you'll have to do a translation in your head every time. I ran the SWRPG starter boxes for several groups, and the problem they had was which dice to use and the symbols, anyhow. Now imagine you are a new/casual player, and the the Genesys book says you get a <Genesys Sybmol> advantage but you rolled a <SWRPG advantage>. It could get confusing. Further, the various symbols could easily be mistaken: failure SWRPG looks like Advantage Genesys. Threat SWRPG kinda looks like Triumph Genesys, etc. So the $100 I spent on getting all the dice I would need is basically down the shoots if I want to play a fantasy RPG with Genesys. To be honest, the Genesys symbols are better but could be made even better with a few simple fixes. Genesys Advantage should just be a normal checkbox tick for correct. Genesys Threat should just be a question mark for the unexpected bad things to happen. ...
  • 03:59 PM - imagineGod quoted SolidPlatonic in post Fantasy Flight Games Announces Genesys RPG
    Ugg, I get that they don't want to use Star Wars symbols, but could they at least have made them similar so that we didn't have to buy dice again? Like, Jester David already said, the percentage of symbols and their types are the same like those of Star Wars FFG. The difference is just the flavor: The Star Wars "Jedi wings" symbol of Advantages is now the arrowhead (arrow = advantage) The Star Wars "Imperial" symbol of Threat is now a circular ringtrap (trap = threat) The Star Wars "Starburst" remains the same Success symbol. The Star Wars "Caltrops" for Failure remains a caltrop but now with 4 spikes instead of 3. The most obvious are the Triumph and Despair symbols in the new system. They are both just: A big circle round the basic Success (starburst) for epic Success A big circle round the basic Failure (4-spiked caltrop) for epic Failure. 85600

Tuesday, 31st January, 2017


Tuesday, 17th January, 2017


Wednesday, 7th December, 2016

  • 09:10 PM - Tony Vargas quoted SolidPlatonic in post Unearthed Arcana Fighter: Samurai, Sharpshooter, Arcane Archer & Knight
    I'm getting rather annoyed with how JC has been sneaking in all the vilified 4e rules lately. Did that marking really need to return? WTF!Yes. Yes, it did, and there's a lot more that needs to, as well (obviously, including a Warlord class), if 5e is to live up to it's goal of inclusiveness towards fans of all past editions, rather than wallowing in self-congratulatory intolerance as the h4ter edition. For some people it makes no sense. It caters to a style of play that isn't shared by everyone.Yes, like Vancian casting, 6-8 encounter days, band-aid clerics and beatstick fighters, the mark mechanic works well for certain styles and clashes with others - that's the /point/, those styles it works for are a step closer to being enabled in 5e. There certainly are styles of play shared by people.But not "shared by everyone." Which is why we should see far more optional rules than what we currently have.Every rule out after the PH (and some in it) is an optional rule the DM must opt...
  • 04:42 PM - DEFCON 1 quoted SolidPlatonic in post Unearthed Arcana Fighter: Samurai, Sharpshooter, Arcane Archer & Knight
    The sniper is interesting because it is a way for a fighter to get a Feat without needing to use the Feat OPTIONAL rules. Interesting idea, this was maybe not executed well but fundamentally a good design. Don't agree. If you're a DM that is going to allow a player to take a subclass that has basically a feat embedded in it... just be a DM that allows a player to use their "bonus" ASI slot to take said feat. That's why fighters and rogues have those extra ASI slots... in order to take combat abilities as class features that the designers didn't want to just make "fighter exclusive" or "rogue exclusive". So by making subclasses that just give out these feats in the form of subclass abilities, all they are doing is changing the level from which these PC would get these abilities. Which is kind of funny to me... seeing as how we have people saying they don't want fighter archetypes to be just specific "Battlemaster-like" combat superiority builds, but instead we now have "feat builds" instead...
  • 03:46 PM - RotGrub quoted SolidPlatonic in post Unearthed Arcana Fighter: Samurai, Sharpshooter, Arcane Archer & Knight
    Personally, I don't like how they made a really strong rules base and then subvert it with classes/subclasses that don't need to exist. Knight and Samurai should be backgrounds. By making it a subclass, does that mean no knight or samurai can get Champion abilities? Or Battle Master Abilities? Or cast spells without multiclassing? None of the abilities in the UA couldn't have been just additional Battle Master manuevers. Would have made the Arcane Archer way better. That said, it would have been cool to get a variant Eldritch Knight that had some archery abilities.... The sniper is interesting because it is a way for a fighter to get a Feat without needing to use the Feat OPTIONAL rules. Interesting idea, this was maybe not executed well but fundamentally a good design. It means they have a bunch of cool "powerz' they want to add the game and pick the first class name that pops in their head. Knight and a samurai are defined by their game mechanics alone. Even if it conflicts with exi...

SolidPlatonic's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites