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?
    734 replies | 9546 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...
    1794 replies | 57193 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Campbell's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th October, 2018, 03:39 PM
    Here's the thing: In any social situation we are always constrained by the expectations and customs of the social group, even if we do not give voice to them. When I am playing a role playing game, despite the insistence of total theoretical freedom of action, I am constrained by what is socially acceptable to do at the table. When I run the game the same is true. This is the natural state of...
    1794 replies | 57193 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Campbell's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th October, 2018, 06:22 AM
    Anyone else have it? I am still working my way through my copy. Really like most of what I am seeing so far. More thoughts to follow.
    1 replies | 203 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Campbell's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th October, 2018, 05:45 AM
    I am not really a fan of back-grounding as a formal mechanic - mostly because I think it reinforces playing a character concept rather than a character. I also think it encourages individual creativity over vigorous collaboration. I am not a fan of these walled off gardens we have the tendency to create in this hobby where we decide how exactly everyone else at the table is allowed to engage with...
    1794 replies | 57193 view(s)
    3 XP
No More Results
About Jay Verkuilen

Basic Information

Date of Birth
November 30

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
710
Posts Per Day
1.12
Last Post
Mythological Figures: Conan the Barbarian (5E) Yesterday 04:00 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
0
General Information
Last Activity
Yesterday 04:31 PM
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 7 1234567 LastLast

Tuesday, 13th November, 2018


Monday, 12th November, 2018


Sunday, 11th November, 2018


Friday, 9th November, 2018


Thursday, 8th November, 2018



Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast

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 20 1234567891011 ... LastLast

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 ;)
  • 05:49 AM - Garthanos quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    I also agree that in a smaller group this was good. I generally prefer a smaller group and D&D often runs into the problem that its strident niche protection means that you often have a party that can't do things it needs to. But that's a different issue. Yes true, now niches rewarding teamwork is nice and can be very very fun but smaller parties need both broader capabilities like more skills trained or much narrower stories (which are not always the desire).
  • 05:43 AM - Garthanos quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    Absolutely. it's a balance between writing so much down you tie the hands of the DM and the players ("I want to do XYX... well, there's a feat/power/class feature/practice for that... sorry") I think for some things of that sort can be avoided if written carefully. In effect the ability is not can I do it or not it becomes a reduced price to do it and higher reliability to do it. This works well for rituals and practices at least.
  • 05:26 AM - Garthanos quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    Yeah, I guess I should say I don't think it's as big an issue as people think, but resource management is always an issue given the game design and it's an issue with really varying classes' need for resources. The whole "milestone" mechanic was obviously there to encourage longer workdays so I'd say WotC was worried about it then, too. Sure it wasn't ignored in the design I am saying it was not problematic in play AND milestones were actually to allow people to have longer days if they wanted so basically those and encounter powers allowed how many encounters in a day could be more driven by the narrative and not as much by the daily resource anyway that is how I see it. It allowed you to have spikes in ability. Bards were problematic due to their propensity to act off-turn, at least in the original version (not the Skald rebuild). Off-turn actions really mess up other people's turns and lead to a lot of confusion. . Ah to a degree off turn actions seem a reminder that the game...

Sunday, 11th November, 2018

  • 11:53 PM - Hussar quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Worlds of Design: What Makes an RPG a Tabletop Hobby RPG?
    Some of the classic modules are clearly directly inspired by novels or stories. The most notable example of this is G1: Steading of the Hill Giant King, which is very clearly based on the first de Camp and Pratt Incompleat Enchanter novel. The claim though (responding to my post about Raistlin) was that Dragonlance was originally played in a different game, not D&D. At least from the Wikipedia entry, Dragonlance was conceived by Tracy and Laura Hickman on their way to Lake Geneva for a job interview in 1982. I would not be surprised if the "Raistlin being tired when he got low on spells" trope was RP fluff that whoever played Raistlin in the original games put on combined with the fact that Raistlin's Con was fairly low. Certainly it's the kind of thing that Tolkien had had Gandalf say in LotR so it makes sense that it was a way to RP. But it's nowhere in the game itself. AFAIK, you have this backward. They played the adventures then wrote the story. The tropes, like wizards getting tired, ...
  • 11:42 PM - Selvarin quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Mythological Figures: Conan the Barbarian (5E)
    IMO, rage can be a lot of things. You could have a cold anger or just a really intense focus. But it's pretty clear from the quotes that rage fits Conan very well. Fair enough. I just needed to look at the class a bit more. So...Barbarian (Berserker) 13 or Bar 8 (Berserker)/Rog 5 (Thief)? (Whenever crunching brain cells on other questions, character-building keeps me occupied just enough.)
  • 07:25 PM - Garthanos quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    Yeah, WotC seems really obsessed with the "work day" idea, but I think it's a chimera in many ways. Ultimately who really cares how long the "work day" is? I suppose it matters if there's a lot of kicking in the door dungeon grind expected. What you're really trying to avoid is the party totally going nova in the one fight they have. The real balancing is done by the action economy. Characters who can do too much in a round or, vice versa, too little, are the real problem IMO. For the most part, 5E got the action economy right (unlike some really notable bad examples in 4E... I'm looking at you bard, barbarian, and avenger). There are encounter designs that really stress a character in one encounter and some characters are markedly more short rest dependent than others. Compare a party with a fighter, warlock, and monk to one with a paladin, sorcerer, and cleric. The latter benefits very little from short rests while the former is highly dependent on them and a big nasty fight is going to exhaust...

Saturday, 10th November, 2018

  • 08:37 PM - aramis erak quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Worlds of Design: What Makes an RPG a Tabletop Hobby RPG?
    The reason it bears on the fiction and the mechanics is that many prior D&D characters totally didn't work as pseudo-Vancian casters before. Only casters did and pseudo-Vancian casting always worked poorly with fiction (except in Vance). Read how in, say, Dragonlance, Raistlin is described as being fatigued by casting, but spell casting does no such thing in actual D&D rules. I recall reading that the game which the novels were grounded in wasn't D&D/AD&D... the D&D modules were ported from the other game.

Friday, 9th November, 2018

  • 10:45 PM - Parmandur quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    True, you're right but it really ends up undermining other characters due to the fact that DC creep means there's no point for them even trying things after a while, which I think is really problematic. I would have been much happier if they'd done something like having Expertise grant automatic advantage on checks, some number of rerolls, or rolling D10+10 instead of a D20. That way the overall bonus wouldn't get so high but the character would be able to perform more reliably. This would reinforce just how insanely difficult achieving DC 25 or 30 is even for highly proficient characters. IMO fearing multiple advantage (roll three take the better of them) isn't really worthwhile. The effect on the expected value isn't that huge and diminishes but it represents just how much more reliable a character with advantage is compared to one without. I think that skill proficiency could well have worked with advantage instead of there being a flat bonus. WotC's big mistake when they implemented ...
  • 05:09 PM - Stalker0 quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    Good point. I was going to say that. The whole point of bounded accuracy is to avoid having to have a DC by level table and DC creep in general. Now I don't think they actually managed to avoid DC creep in some parts of the game but they tried. Yeah I think part of the issue is when you see level 6 characters "routinely" (not all the time but common enough) pull off DC 30 skill checks....I think it can cause the DM to want to inflate skill DCs. But at that the same time the key is....that character isn't really supposed to fail on those skill checks. Its just what they do.

Thursday, 8th November, 2018

  • 05:27 AM - Garthanos quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    Cool. Yeah I wasn't really thinking of the intelligence issue as we kind of finessed that as I recall. It was more the "I can't really pick anything notable up" issue, as well as the game mechanical one of having markedly different stats. I played some psychological ones, too. Occasionally I'd get attracted by the dead in raven form. "Delicious eyeball!" Fortunately there are no cars to streak in the Forgotten Realms! LOL yes the psych thing is fun ... Tuathan theme gave me animal form at level 2 and fly speed 6 extension of it at level 10 so didnt much matter what class I picked. 102935
  • 05:05 AM - Garthanos quoted Jay Verkuilen in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    I found, the primary issue with 5e was that if one wanted to put stress on the resource management side of things one needed to ensure the recovery system (rest) used, worked for short/long rest PCS AND for dungeon, city and travel type adventures. For my table the rest mechanics that were offered in the PHB and DMG were just not practical in all the above mentioned categories all the time. The synchronized resources allows 4e rest mechanics to be altered very easily for context for instance maybe you have a nasty mountainous journey only give an effective daily recovery every other day or desert journey every week - it wont screw over any given class more than any other. It made DM adjustments on the system predictable.


Page 1 of 20 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Jay Verkuilen's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites