View Profile: Jay Verkuilen - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
  • Campbell's Avatar
    Monday, 5th November, 2018, 03:22 PM
    I am disappointed in Mike. I do not see the virtue in continuing to re-spark the flames of the edition war every 3-6 months like this. What's the end game here?
    930 replies | 12855 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Campbell's Avatar
    Friday, 19th October, 2018, 04:15 AM
    For what it's worth I believe in shared ownership of setting, more in terms of taking an active interest in it and responsibility for it's content than the freedom to do whatever we want with it. The GM is mostly responsible for it in the same way that players are mostly responsibility for their characters. Obviously there's some interaction there. No one is an island. This is a game where we...
    1795 replies | 57730 view(s)
    3 XP
No More Results
About Jay Verkuilen

Basic Information

Date of Birth
November 30

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
723
Posts Per Day
1.13
Last Post
Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked Today 05:15 AM

Currency

Gold Pieces
0
General Information
Last Activity
Today 05:17 AM
Join Date
Saturday, 18th February, 2017
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0

1 Friend

  1. Campbell Campbell is offline

    Member

    Campbell
Showing Friends 1 to 1 of 1
Page 1 of 8 12345678 LastLast

Saturday, 17th November, 2018


Friday, 16th November, 2018


Thursday, 15th November, 2018


Wednesday, 14th November, 2018


Tuesday, 13th November, 2018


Monday, 12th November, 2018



Page 1 of 8 12345678 LastLast

Friday, 16th November, 2018

  • 09:12 PM - rmcoen mentioned Jay Verkuilen in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    Seems like I read a game or a class recently - this thread? a link? - where powerful spells were built across rounds like Jay Verkuilen mentioned. Your normal comabt actions were Words of Power, which had a low-level effect. But over time, the Words you used in the combat built more powerful spells with more powerful effects. Making up an example: Force (direct damage spell) + Levitation (perhaps used as a defense, lifting a temporary shield of debris to block an attack) + wYld (raw power, used to push enemies back a few steps) = FLY, enabling the wizard to escape from his foes and hover above the field of battle. 3 rounds to cast, with minor beneficial effects along the way. But then we're designing a whole new magic system, which isn't the same as "fixing" D&D. Guys (and gals), we're 89 pages into this disucssion. While a very interesting debate that has wandered about the field of battle.... what's the point? what's the goal? Are we trying to make 4e less artificially balanced? Give 5e martial characters more flash, more high level power? Make a better mousetrap?

Wednesday, 7th November, 2018

  • 10:32 PM - pemerton mentioned Jay Verkuilen in post Dragon Reflections #16 – Gygax Fights Back!
    Jay Verkuilen - I like your suggestions better than power attack - the latter is purely an optimisation problem, whereas trading attack for defence involves intervening variables that are outside the player's control and that can't be readily computed. So it becomes more like choosing an orientation for your PC, than solving equations.

Monday, 5th November, 2018

  • 09:08 AM - pemerton mentioned Jay Verkuilen in post Worlds of Design: Fantasy vs. Sci-Fi Part 1
    ...ive Fiction, and they appear in all sorts of Spec Fic. Is it a robot or a golem? Well, really, it doesn't matter all that much. What does matter though, is the different themes of the story which do (usually) differentiate fantasy from SF.I agree that tropes on their own don't do a perfect job. But for the reason I've given I don't think your version works either - it fails to pick the radical difference of both internal and external aesthetic of (say) LotR vs REH's Conan. That tropes don't do a perfect job doesn't mean that they do no job at all. What inclines us to call Star Wars sci fi? They talk about parsecs, and planets, and hyperdrives, and the like. That's tropes, and it pushes away from fantasy. Is Star Wars nevertheless really fantasy because it involves magic, and princesses, and dark lords, etc? Certainly the absence of those tropes from 2001 is what helps make it clearly sci-fi. But in Star Wars they are present in combination with sci-fi tropes. I think I'm with Jay Verkuilen in doubting that really is going to help us here. Genres aren't natural kinds; at best they're shortcuts to help us engage in analysis and criticism of a work.

Wednesday, 24th October, 2018

  • 12:40 AM - pemerton mentioned Jay Verkuilen in post Worlds of Design: “All About Me” RPGs (Part 2)
    Jay Verkuilen I haven't played or run Conan 2d20. But I've GMed Burning Wheel with a bit of a S&S flavour. I've also GMed a 2 PC, all thieves AD&D game years (decades) ago which had a bit of a S&S feel. D&D-style dungeon crawling is not very S&S at all (Xuthal of the Dusk and Red Nails not withstanding). S&S has quite a social dimension, and doesn't have to be urban but frequently is.

Tuesday, 23rd October, 2018

  • 04:30 AM - pemerton mentioned Jay Verkuilen in post Worlds of Design: “All About Me” RPGs (Part 2)
    Jay Verkuilen Absolutely! I've often posted on these boards that if you want to get REH Conan-style Swords and Sorcery adventure, you've got to change the D&D XP system (at least) and probably other aspects of the system also, so that players are rewarded for having value beyond the acquisition of loot, and don't get hosed when they leap before they look.

Wednesday, 10th October, 2018

  • 09:02 AM - pemerton mentioned Jay Verkuilen in post Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
    Keeping numbers low (so basicly the same % chance thru the levels), while increasing, instead, the tiers of power/influence/effect of the pc vs the world and viceversa. (Like: on an enemy inferior by two/three tiers, you just deal damage/crit; one tier below: roll to hit with automatic advantage, same level: no change; and viceversa)4e is a version of this: in combat, for instance, PC and opponent bases scale at basically the same rate, and so the % chance remains largely the same through the levels; but creatures that are inferior per the fiction relative to the PC tier are framed as minions, and hence die on a hit; or get bundled up as a swarm, and hence get taken down in swathes. 4e non-combat has less tight maths, which can produce some of the issues Jay Verkuilen has identified (the big offender in my game is the +6 to all knowledge skills that a Sage of Ages gets). But the orientation of the game is still towards what you describe - level-appropriate DCs that try to establish roughly consistent chances of success, with the differences of tier being expressed in the fiction rather than the mechanics. I think this kind of approach could lead to getting rid of levels and DCs altogether, in favor of a more spread out growth and resolution mechanic, with more emphasis on situational, narrative bonus/malus, extended contests, multiple successes and the like.Again, 4e can be considered a version of this (and literally is a version of this if you strip out the level adjustments for creatures and the stat gain and enhancement bonuses for PCs). The differences between tiers are really about complexity (higher level PCs have more, and more complex, options); the range of effects available, which straddles fiction and mechanics (eg flight is available...

Friday, 21st September, 2018

  • 09:00 AM - pemerton mentioned Jay Verkuilen in post Burning Questions: What's the Worst Thing a DM Can Do?
    ... Iserith, is that if you play it your way (do not assume players are examining until told), the players always fail to spot the gloves. <snip> Unless of course, in the fiction ofthe world, they spot it by accident when moving past. What mechanic exists like that? A Perception check. Or at the very least, a dm examination of passive pereception, maybe giving a different description to a play with a passive score of over 15. Or at least, that's the way I'd do it. Some of the description is sometimes driven by random chance: that randomness being whether you by accident happen to notice something or not. if the history check fails the PCs just have to carry on without whatever clues might have been hidden in the Dwarven runes - if any. This is why pre-emptive checks can be useful - sometimes things just get found (or missed) by random chance en route to doing something else unrelated.There is another reason being suggested for GM-called for/deterined Perception-type checks, by Jay Verkuilen, which is that they serve a metagame purpose of mixing things up and putting the players on edge: that's exactly what I use an informational check for, as well as tension building. A failed check often does move the tension up. The players know there were failed checks with potential information missed, which makes them start to wonder what's going on. (Well at least I would hope so, but clearly that would depend on the player.) I've definitely curbed my own propensity for calling for rolls where there isn't any consequence but in this case or when the player's description is just fluff, but something like the check I outlined has consequences. I think this often depends on the table. Folks I've played with for many years will often call for checks where there's something that the player seems to be missing and it is possible the character might know something. I'll also call for checks from out of seeming left field to stimulate the player or push them in a different directi...

Monday, 2nd July, 2018

  • 10:50 PM - Lanefan mentioned Jay Verkuilen in post Flipping the Table: Did Removing Miniatures Save D&D?
    Tony Vargas - Jay Verkuilen - first off, xp to both of you for a really interesting and civil discussion this last 20 posts or so. And then, a question: am I reading both of you correctly, when you're talking about how easy/hard it is/was to change or kitbash 4e, that it's relatively easy to drop things out you don't like but much harder to add things in you do like? For example, hit points and effects - if I'm reading you right you'll both say it would be way easier to drop or ignore the 'bloodied' mechanic than it would be to introduce a wound-vitality or body-fatigue system. Just curious... Lanefan

Thursday, 21st June, 2018

  • 03:37 AM - pemerton mentioned Jay Verkuilen in post Flipping the Table: Did Removing Miniatures Save D&D?
    Hit points that aren't strictly meat damage can still be understood from a character being increasingly tired out or weakenedBut not so tired that you can't still move at your maximum pace, carry your maximum load, climb walls just as well as you could before entering melee, etc! But suppose we downplay the "weakened, tired" aspect and emphasise Gygax's other elements - luck, divine favour, magical protections, etc. Even here there are multiple subsytems that don't interact - saving throws, as per the quote upthread about poison saves, are a separate subsystem for this stuff, and then magical protections and divine favour can also be the result of magic items, spells etc. 4e closes some of these gaps - there is generally no distinction, for instance, between the threats of physical harm that AD&D handled via saving throws and the threats of physical harm that AD&D handled via hit points; and as Jay Verkuilen (I think) mentioned upthread, it uses healing surges to handle exhaustion. But 4e opens up at least one new gap (or, perhaps, generalises it from the 3E barbarian's rage) - namely, limited use non-magical capabilities that manifest as martial encounter and daily powers, and action points. Putting everything into a common pool can reduce the odd (non-)synergies between abstractions, but of course also reduces moving parts which itself has implications for game play. 3E is my personal least favourite for this stuff: it replaces poison saves (which, as Gygax describes in the quoted passage) were a type of luck mechanic, with Fortitude saves - but Fortitude is a mechanic largely independent of the hit point system; and poison doesn't do hp damage but stat damage. So your magical protections and luck stop you getting squashed by a hill giant's club (a mid-to-upper level PC can soak the 20 hp easily enough) but don't help agasint the STR damage (and resultant penalties to attack and...

Thursday, 2nd November, 2017

  • 03:52 AM - pming mentioned Jay Verkuilen in post Loops in RPG Adventure and Game Design
    Hiya! Jay Verkuilen, yes, exactly. For a video game this is fine, the "loop method" works...minor variations of the general 'thing'. Different weapons, enemies, etc...but it's still very much the same thing: combat and tactics. Toss in a little bit of percieved overland travel to break it up, maybe a cutscene or two, but it's still a loop of "fight, fight, fight, fight, end, roll credits". This works for a lot of video games...even MMO's where people do the same "boss fights" over and over to get specific rewards. If you know what you are going into, this isn't a problem, it's a feature. :) In a First Person Shooter, I'm expecting to be doing a lot of shooting bad guys. For table top RPG's, however, using the loop method just isn't going to work. Well, I suppose it could if everyone at the table is going for this sort of game. The only time I can remember doing this was when we played the Street Fighter RPG when if was first released. Then again...it's a TTRPG based on a video game, so...uh...yeah. ;) ...

Sunday, 1st October, 2017

  • 01:57 PM - pemerton mentioned Jay Verkuilen in post Power Creep
    Can't you just use classes and monsters from AD&D?I wasn't replying to you. I know (from reading earlier posts/threads of yours) that you want a system for pricing/buying/building magic items that is balanced from the point of view of PC build mechanics. But that didn't seem to be what Jay Verkuilen was asking for. It's quite conceivable that there is no mechanic that will meet your requirements. But Jay Verkuilen pointed to AD&D as providng an example of what he might want - and the AD&D rules manifestly are not a balanced system of PC-build rules. Rather, they're guidelines for how the GM should handle the item-creation process, which includes injecting balance at whatever point s/he wants to in whatever way s/he wants to. It's nothing like what 3E or 4e provided. (And it seems to be widely recognised that 3E fails in what you're asking for, and 4e largely achieves it by making magic items "boring".) To some degree I could, but it would require a good bit of calibrating to get right. I won't say that the 1E system was perfect, just that it's there. I shouldn't have to. That's what I pay game designers to do. It's not some kind of weird monster that only appeared in 2E, it's fairly core functionality.The AD&D system has rules for costing potions - gp = to XP value, whic...

No results to display...
Page 1 of 21 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Saturday, 17th November, 2018

  • 07:23 AM - pemerton quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    The 4E perspective (call it anti-naturalist I guess) is very much that the only value elements in the game have is how they interact with the PCs.No. It takes it that the only time action resolution mechanics are needed is to resolve declared actions. The Gygaxian Naturalism blog doesn't distinguish the following sorts of mechanics: AC as a shorthand notation for armour type (which is true of some MM monsters, not others), AC as simply a resolution device (which is true of some MM monsters), demographic stats and treasure types (which aren't for any sort of action resolution but rather "world building"), etc. But they play different functions in gameplay. Someone can play 4e and also plot out ecologies, social structures, etc. Nothing in the system will stop that, or even push against it. (Trying to play B2 in 4e will probably suck, but that's not the be-all-and-end-all of naturalism in FRPGing.) This is an actual play report of some 4e epic tier play. Where's the lack of naturalism, or...
  • 07:04 AM - pemerton quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    there's a desire for a semblance of what has been called Gygaxian naturalism, for instance, which would suggest that there's a Great Chain of Monster Being but that a given monster's toughness (abstractly represented as it may be) exists separate from the PCs.The toughness of a 4e ogre exists "independently of the PCs". I even described it arleady - it's quite a bit tougher than a town guard (or a goblin or even a gnoll) but quite a bit less tough than Sir Lancelot (or a giant or a vrock demon). I'm pretty familiar with the Gygaxian Naturalism blog. Here's what seems to be the salient passage: to go beyond describing monsters purely as opponents/obstacles for the player characters by giving game mechanics that serve little purpose other than to ground those monsters in the campaign world. This naturalism can take many forms. For example, OD&D often tells us that for every X number of monster Y, there's a chance that monster Z might also be found in their lair. In the case of the djinn and ...
  • 06:09 AM - Garthanos quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    Purportedly the same creature has drastically different stats. A different fighting style like what happens when you can't find the openings for your awesome moves and take the simpler ones which are easier ... ie same stats (Strength etc) same size generally speaking same appearance same goals significantly different relative ability to whom they are facing.
  • 06:02 AM - Garthanos quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    that there's an external (albeit fictional), largely self-consistent world separate from the PCs. The 4E perspective (call it anti-naturalist I guess) is very much that the only value elements in the game have is how they interact with the PCs. . its the only area you really need mechanics for... My npcs if they have been around a while have huge amounts of traits and if they are played well tons of value to the PCs
  • 05:58 AM - Garthanos quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    I don't follow. I was simply noting that having tiers of play being a such a central game concept was not in other versions of the game. What would be unnatural as anything would be anything sentient NOT fighting with a different pace and method (or getting the same exact results if you prefer) when confronted by an enemy who very quickly demonstrates they are outclassed or whom they outclass. The use of minions is a better simulation both of the fantasy fiction and it could be seen as factoring in the above in effect being less of a simplification which all D&D combat is(than having enemies fight the same way no matter who they are challenged by) they simulate both adversaries adjusting their fighting style based on the opponent's ability. I repeat referring to a particular model as "natural" because you are used to it and that seems the only real excuse is silly.
  • 04:29 AM - Garthanos quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    Tiers of play is very, very much a 4E concept. It was hinted at in BECMI due to the way those books were published but not really part of the game otherwise. Short hand for broadly different levels having broadly different appropriate adversaries and defenses why the hell do you care about the word? I was saying take every ability you find on an ogre in 4e where they have interesting abilities not 1e, now write those abilities so they end up being harder based on the enemy applied to. The generalist advancement in 4e leads into this everyone is better at avoiding getting their head smashed in by that ogre (insert more interesting ability) A Head Smash does the Solos effect against someone with say the defenses of a level 1 to 4 characters can be expected to have.... but not basically missing unless ... he chooses an easier move when he is up against more awesome enemies. Or are you honestly thinking this word made a huge difference in the description? Yes you did ignore entirely the presenta...
  • 03:53 AM - Garthanos quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    Spell interruption with casting time, for instance, turns out to work nicely. Higher level spells with longer casting times are hard to get off. There was in my experience a serious difference in practice and theory... which is I feel a broad issue in older D&D (and probably pokes out now as well). Gygax asserted that magic items were a bit like the fighters spells in providing versatility however I do not recall any warriors with a number of magic items at all similar to spells.
  • 03:49 AM - Garthanos quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    I know people who pretty strongly prefer naturalism and are very bothered by game mechanical devices like minionizaion. "They have no chance of making a good headshot against the higher level character so they take easier weaker effect but more readily available openings... their special moves are never attempted because they are simply frustrated by the heroes abilities and defenses. yes my ogre still can use that move that threw your hero back half a dozen yards but really its not going to happen when you are in paragon " Practically the ability which never makes it into actual play is wasted space in the current context of the story (that is a game driven answer yes) However if you want write them all up with things from how they are at all tiers (with a tier of farmer/apprentice level being populated by level 1 minions. Then say they have a penalty to all the Solo abilities that is effective disabling and almost always not worth using after 5 or 10 levels but in practice they will either...
  • 01:20 AM - pemerton quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    So, three ogres: one an elite, one 'standard', and one minion. Sounds fine...until you ask how that 1-h.p. minion possibly managed to survive growing up in a colony of might-makes-right ogres, or how it's lasted this long without suffering the one little scratch or accident that would do the one point damage required to kill it, and so on. More broadly, if the fiction works in a particular way when PCs are involved then it also has to work the same when the PCs are not around: the 1-hit-point minion has one hit point. Period. Without this the fictional setting and background becomes nothing more than internally-inconsistent - and thus worthless - garbage. And in this I AM putting fiction first, because if the fiction doesn't work right then the whole game kinda falls apart.This is confused and incoherent. Having 1 hp is not part of the fiction. It's part of the mechanics. There are no "three ogres, one elite, one standard and one a minion". There's just three ogres, all equally tough. Mu...

Friday, 16th November, 2018


Thursday, 15th November, 2018

  • 05:17 AM - R_Chance quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Lost Laboratory of Kwalish: A D&D Adventure For Charity
    Depends on how you ran with it, but you could certainly treat the ship that way, or elaborate it. I played Barrier Peaks... oh, damn, twenty years ago. Part of it involved dipping into the XCom lore a bit, with the ship being a human ship but highly influenced by alien technology. The campaign's big adversary (later proven to be a frenemy) Keraptis (yes of White Plume Mountain fame) was looking for it and there were some stranded XCom personnel looking for a way out of Oerth. At the time I hadn't played XCom so I didn't actually know the backplot, which was fun. It's hard to describe how overall crazy the scenario was, but the weapons from Barrier Peaks stayed with us for a while essentially as highly limited use magic items even after the XCom group gathered up all the Elerium to power their own ship back. Sounds fun. I never DM'd it, I ran in it when it was new... early 1980s iirc. I was the main DM for my group, running a homebrew game, and a friend ran modules to give me a break sometimes. Goo...

Tuesday, 13th November, 2018

  • 07:37 PM - BookBarbarian quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Mythological Figures: Conan the Barbarian (5E)
    And I guess I think the "he absoultely must be single classed!" crowd are simply missing the character. I agree that not all "barbarian culture" characters need to be barbarian class and everyone who steals for a living needs to be a rogue, but so what? What's the win to limiting a Conan build to one class? He's had a lot of different training and experiences, and explicitly sought those out and studied the craft carefully. That feels like multiclass to me, which allows getting his core competencies without making any really notable variations from the the rules except for a few small switches here and there. And I think your missing Robert E. Howard's point with the character. He didn't have all sorts of training, yet he still had all sorts of competencies all stemming from being raised in a brutal land and culture where you had to be peak human to survive. He didn't have to learn how to be sneaky yo be a successful thief, he already knew that from stalking game, and being stalked by predators ...
  • 06:26 PM - Greg K quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Mythological Figures: Conan the Barbarian (5E)
    I largely agree, though Barbarian was clearly originally built to simulate Conan :( Why should we assume that the 5th edition Barbarian was built to simulate Conan? The 1e Barbarian was designed to help simulate Conan, but it had not rage ability. The 4e Fighter was, specifically, stated by Mearls to have been based upon Conan and was not built around a rage ability as was the 4e Barbarian.
  • 05:00 AM - Elfcrusher quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Mythological Figures: Conan the Barbarian (5E)
    And I guess I think the "he absoultely must be single classed!" crowd are simply missing the character. I agree that not all "barbarian culture" characters need to be barbarian class and everyone who steals for a living needs to be a rogue, but so what? What's the win to limiting a Conan build to one class? He's had a lot of different training and experiences, and explicitly sought those out and studied the craft carefully. That feels like multiclass to me, which allows getting his core competencies without making any really notable variations from the the rules except for a few small switches here and there. Oh, I'm not at all arguing he must be single classed! I think he should be whatever class(es) get him the combination of abilities that most effectively enable him to do what he does in the stories. I don't care if the answer is a re-fluffed Paladin/Druid/Sorcerer, or a single-classed Cleric. Whatever. It's just labels. I'm not even actually completely opposed to there being rogue levels ...
  • 04:15 AM - dave2008 quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Mythological Figures: Conan the Barbarian (5E)
    And I guess I think the "he absoultely must be single classed!" crowd are simply missing the character. I agree that not all "barbarian culture" characters need to be barbarian class and everyone who steals for a living needs to be a rogue, but so what? What's the win to limiting a Conan build to one class? He's had a lot of different training and experiences, and explicitly sought those out and studied the craft carefully. That feels like multiclass to me, which allows getting his core competencies without making any really notable variations from the the rules except for a few small switches here and there. Personally I would use whatever method best reflects the character and I can't get rage and action surge without multiclassing, so for me: Conan has to at least multiclass fighter/barbarian

Monday, 12th November, 2018

  • 11:05 PM - Elfcrusher quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Mythological Figures: Conan the Barbarian (5E)
    I think it captures the feel of Conan, though I still prefer the idea of him being a multiclass Barbarian/Rogue/Fighter because I think that matches the fiction due to how many times Conan switches careers. It's one time where the fiction and game mechanics actually match up. But for a single class take it does hit the points fairly well, though as another post noted it is probably a bit OP in spots at least for a PC. I still think you're making a category error conflating "class" with "career". Just because somebody steals for a living doesn't make them a rogue. Just because somebody fights for a living doesn't make them a fighter. Just because somebody comes from a barbaric culture doesn't make them a barbarian. And vice versa on all of those things. I agree that the equivalence of these concepts was historically a design intention, but in 5e I think it's pretty clear that the designers are trying to break that connection. Classes really define a collection of thematic abilities. A wi...
  • 10:38 PM - MwaO quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    I think you could at the lower levels but it became increasingly implausible at higher levels and fairly ludicrous at epic tier. I played a good bit of 4E and generally felt that the game ran best in levels 4-15. In many respects, D&D's "sweet spot" has always been those mid levels over all editions, where PCs are tough enough to given and take a beating but not so full of abilities they bog down. 4E tried to extend that downwards with 1st level being quite a bit tougher, with mixed results and my experience (as a player) with the really high levels was that it too bogged down. If you're doing a 'realistic D&D campaign where PCs with martial explanations can't take all powers', one of two things is happening: Everyone is abiding by a set of self-imposed limitations that are the rough equivalent to what the martials have to deal with. Then things work. No one is playing martials. This is reasonably common to see in other editions — if the casters can blow apart the system as they can in not-4...
  • 08:02 PM - BookBarbarian quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Mythological Figures: Conan the Barbarian (5E)
    There's a feat for that and Cunning Action is wicked powerful as it is. Dude who regularly GMs my group just banned the Dash part of it in or ToA game because he's tired of rogue super-mobility. :p I'd cut down the time of The Hunt because if I were playing a rogue, I'd throw my arms up in the air and be like "why the f#$% did I just sink levels into the rogue class" because 80% of the time The Hunt will allow a barbarian overcome (with hour long durations) tasks or obstacles that a rogue (equipped with their core features and such) was intended to do. It's a solid idea but overly generous with how much the resource costs the player (and therein is detrimental to other players, not to the barbarian). It does seem much stronger than say Eagle totem 3. Dash as a bonus action while Raging and Disadvantage on enemies opportunity attacks against you.
  • 07:45 PM - BookBarbarian quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Mythological Figures: Conan the Barbarian (5E)
    Just for fun, a first draft of a "properly Conan" barbarian subclass... Path of the Survivor In the wild, barbarians must be pragmatic and adaptable, or else be food for the carrion beasts. The most self-reliant of barbarians are sometimes said to follow the path of the survivor---although they themselves would likely scoff at labeling it a "path". In their eyes, theirs is the natural state of mortal races, and all other pursuits are civilized eccentricities. But those who would dismiss them as ignorant savages should beware, for every once in an age, these barbarians come to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth beneath their sandaled feet. Primal Hunt Starting when you choose this path at 3rd level, you can connect with your primal instincts not only to unleash your rage, but also to reach a state of beastlike awareness and reflexes. Some barbarians call this state "the hunt." As a bonus action, if you are not already hunting or raging, you can expend a use of your rage to begin the hunt. Whil...
  • 05:53 AM - Garthanos quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    I get what they were trying to do, but I really disliked how blatantly and unabashedly game mechanical the milestone was. That was my feeling with a lot of 4E, though. Think of it as a circadian rhythm thing ;)


Page 1 of 21 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Jay Verkuilen's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites