View Profile: Paul Farquhar - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Friday, 15th February, 2019, 08:03 PM
    Wizards are not required to pick up any ranged cantrips. It's quite possible and legal for a wizard to have no ranged capability whatsoever. Sure, it's inadvisable, in the same way that a warrior not bringing a bow is inadvisable.
    245 replies | 7012 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Friday, 15th February, 2019, 03:49 PM
    Do what soap operas do: write their dramatic death scene, and don't worry about how to bring them back until the episode in which it actually occurs.
    21 replies | 543 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Thursday, 14th February, 2019, 05:44 PM
    Or the wizard prepare a fly spell. If the party knows what to expect, they should prepare appropriately, even if that means the barbarian saying "I go to beseech my people for aid. In the meantime, my brother Cletus the Archer will help you out". But the game is called Dungeons and Dragons, not Wide Open Spaces and Dragons. There is a clue in there somewhere about what sort of gameplay the...
    245 replies | 7012 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Wednesday, 13th February, 2019, 10:20 AM
    I think goggles of night are more useful on characters who already have darkvision, since they increase the range and might give the party a chance to see the monsters before they see you. I can't think of any official D&D races with tremorsense. Starfinder has one. If I was going to add it, it could possibly be an alternative animal feature for a simic hybrid from Ravnica. I did experience...
    7 replies | 292 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Wednesday, 13th February, 2019, 09:56 AM
    If the players are too dumb to think of a solution, they fail. That is what makes it a GAME.
    245 replies | 7012 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Wednesday, 13th February, 2019, 09:37 AM
    If you wanted to allow it, you could rule that the ranger loads two bolts at the same time, or the bolt ricochets to the second target. Normally, I would expect a crossbow ranger to pick up the crossbow master feat anyway, but in a "no feats" game I would definitely allow it.
    22 replies | 641 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Tuesday, 12th February, 2019, 02:57 PM
    Duel wield rapiers requires a feat, and they don't get anywhere near the DPS of someone with the Great Weapon feat. But on the whole, a finesse fighter will only be slightly worse DPS than a 2H weapon user, slightly worse AC than full plate + shield and slightly worse at range than a specialist archer. So what? If you want to be quite good (but not the best) at everything (apart from carrying...
    245 replies | 7012 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Tuesday, 12th February, 2019, 09:50 AM
    No. I wouldn't build a barbarian with less than 14 dex. MAD is a known issue for 5e barbarians - one reason I'm not fond of the class, but increasing dex from 8 to 14 comes at a relatively low opportunity cost (depending on race), and shouldn't prevent maxing out STR and CON. And it has the side effect that most barbarians are respectable bow users. And there is little point in having dex higher...
    245 replies | 7012 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 11th February, 2019, 05:21 PM
    I wouldn't count on that.
    45 replies | 1452 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 11th February, 2019, 04:19 PM
    Sure, you could build a barbarian with dex as a dump stat, if you wanted to emulate that famous hero Conan the Klutz, and be lousy at melee as well as ranged, due to poor AC and initiative. Hell, you can make your strength 8 too. The point is, player decisions are supposed to have consequences. You seem to want to eliminate any meaning to player decisions to the point where you might as well roll...
    245 replies | 7012 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 11th February, 2019, 09:09 AM
    This is garbage. No competently built barbarian has less than 14 dex, and they get martial weapon prof at level 1 and Extra Attack at level 5, class abilities which improve ranged attacks. So they should be doing around 13 points of ranged damage per round, not 4.5.
    245 replies | 7012 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Sunday, 10th February, 2019, 10:31 AM
    A couple of general notes on barbarians: * The Path of the Ancestral Warrior (Xanthar) is useful for preventing enemies ignoring a high AC build; * Path of the Zealot Divine Fury (Xanthar) extra damage works with a finesse weapon; * Scourge Aasimar (Volo) have a racial that enables them to damage themselves - potentially useful for sustaining rage.
    55 replies | 2668 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Friday, 8th February, 2019, 08:14 PM
    If the situation at hand is the entire campaign has been a series of one sort of battle, then the climactic battle is a completely different type of battle, then it is just an appallingly badly designed campaign. Shoot the DM, not the rules.
    245 replies | 7012 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Friday, 8th February, 2019, 08:09 PM
    No one is forcing anyone to do anything. The party has to find what works for them. Spellcasters can use support spells OR they can step up with the ranged damage whilst the barbarians support with bows. If the spellcasters aren't sorcerers or warlocks they can prepare enough spells to do either on the fly. The thing is, the character who does the best melee damage should not expect to be the...
    245 replies | 7012 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Friday, 8th February, 2019, 08:01 PM
    1) It's not the physical attacks that kill you, it's the mental. 2) If you roll hp, and you get very lucky. In practice, in a point buy game, most barbarians have dex and con between 14 and 16, and are better off wearing medium armour. 3) As some have already pointed out, rage doesn't stack with finesse. So you can have AC or you can have damage, but not both on the same character. In my...
    55 replies | 2668 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Friday, 8th February, 2019, 06:27 PM
    It's hardly unconventional, it's even in the basic rules: "The following features can add more fun and suspense to a combat encounter: Terrain features that pose inherent risks to both the characters and their enemies, such as a frayed rope bridge and pools of green slime Terrain features that provide a change of elevation, such as pits, stacks of empty crates, ledges, and balconies...
    245 replies | 7012 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Friday, 8th February, 2019, 02:51 PM
    Suggestion: If a game is likely to involve puzzles, discourage players from creating characters who are much smarter or dumber than the player is in real life. Another suggestion: if players get stuck, let them cast Guidance to get a hint.
    45 replies | 1452 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Friday, 8th February, 2019, 02:32 PM
    The guarantee is they learn to memorise those spells once they have been in a few tactical situations which would have gone a lot better had they had them available.
    245 replies | 7012 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Friday, 8th February, 2019, 09:18 AM
    That's absolutely false. They are not as effective as they are in melee, but they are still able to make a contribution. It's considerably better than a baseline character with no relevant class abilities, which would be one attack per round with a light crossbow for 1d8, and infinitely better than the barbarian who was too dumb to bring a longbow in the first place. A good DM will set up a...
    245 replies | 7012 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Thursday, 7th February, 2019, 08:09 PM
    Isn't the whole point of ancestral guardian tanking?
    22 replies | 701 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Thursday, 7th February, 2019, 12:21 PM
    I take it you haven't seen the tooth fairies in Hellboy 2? There is little creepier than hordes of tiny creatures. They can come though windows, crawl under locked doors, emerge from fireplaces and ventilation ducts, you kill one and there are a dozen more right behind it... Here is one I made earlier: SWARM OF IRIDESCENT BUTTERFEY Medium swarm of Tiny Fey, Chaotic Neutral...
    52 replies | 1915 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Thursday, 7th February, 2019, 09:32 AM
    I've made quite extensive use of background material from Baldur's Gate and Icewind Dale CRPGs, but I guess that's not quite what you mean?
    19 replies | 747 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Thursday, 7th February, 2019, 09:28 AM
    The original D&D druid (and bard) is based on a Victorian reinvention of what they imagined the pre-Roman Celtic religion to be. Given that the original druids kept no written records, all they had to go on was what the Romans said, and the Victorians decided that what the Romans said was propaganda, it was pretty much based on Arthurian myth (I.e. early fantasy fiction) and pre-Raphaelite...
    32 replies | 1068 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Thursday, 7th February, 2019, 09:14 AM
    In the normal course of play, most new players will discover they need some kind of ranged capability before they reach 2nd level, about the same time they discover they need a healer and someone to disarm traps. Default starting equipment for most classes tends to include a ranged weapon.
    245 replies | 7012 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Wednesday, 6th February, 2019, 12:01 PM
    As a DM, I don't think "flight at will" would be overpowered as an Aasimar racial feat.
    7 replies | 349 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Wednesday, 6th February, 2019, 11:57 AM
    The point is, a party only needs one character to be good with traps (true, you can split the skills amongst multiple characters, but you don't need to) so, even if you are confident the adventure will feature traps, you run the risk of redundancy unless you can do something else, such as hold your own in a scrap or act as the party face. Which is why all rogues get sneak attack, whether they...
    58 replies | 2468 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Tuesday, 5th February, 2019, 06:15 PM
    Dancing Sword 17 Defender 18 Dragon Slayer 21 Flame Tongue 20 Frost Brand 21 Holy Avenger 17-2=15 - anything paladin must be bad Luck Blade 21 Nine Lives Stealer 20 Sun Blade 21 Sword of Answering 18
    280 replies | 4743 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Tuesday, 5th February, 2019, 06:05 PM
    Lets throw something else out there - what if one player creates a character who focuses on locks and traps and another player creates a character who is just good at locks and traps, but - because 5e supports this - is good at other stuff as well?
    58 replies | 2468 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 4th February, 2019, 04:47 PM
    I believe, with multiclassing being firmly labelled "optional", caveat emptor is considered to apply.
    115 replies | 3447 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 4th February, 2019, 04:42 PM
    I'm pretty sure the reason for rounding down is the design intention that single class >= multiclass. As opposed to the situation in 3rd edition where most optimised characters were a hodgepodge of 4 or 5 different classes.
    115 replies | 3447 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 4th February, 2019, 09:34 AM
    In addition, monks have super-high dex, a second attack at level 6 and are proficient in shortbows. They really have no excuse for sucking at ranged combat.
    245 replies | 7012 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 4th February, 2019, 09:25 AM
    No. There was a thread where someone thought that +x weapons did confer a bonus to spell casting, and the rest of us explained why they were wrong. If you read the DMG you will see their are some magic items that do apply a bonus to both attacks and spellcasting (staffs mostly), but if that is the case it is noted explicitly in the item description.
    9 replies | 310 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Sunday, 3rd February, 2019, 06:41 PM
    The thing is, if someone makes a character who is only good at picking locks and disarming traps, what do they do if the adventure has no locks or traps?
    58 replies | 2468 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Sunday, 3rd February, 2019, 02:55 PM
    No THAC0 in 1st edition. 1st edition was "consult the weird table". THAC0 was 2nd edition.
    44 replies | 1643 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Sunday, 3rd February, 2019, 02:53 PM
    That was the 1st edition assassin. In 1st edition, all assassins had to be evil because killing someone for money was evil. The 5e assassin removes the "for money" requirement, so an assassin could be, for example, an agent licenced to kill. Only one way in which 5e > 1e.
    44 replies | 1643 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Saturday, 2nd February, 2019, 04:52 PM
    I would hardly consider Barbarian a 1st edition class, since it was added in Unearthed Arcana only a couple of years before 2nd edition launched. And the lawful good paladin thing highlights exactly what was wrong with 1st edition: every paladin was pretty much identical to every other paladin, both in terms of abilities and personality. Once you had played one game of 1st edition there was no...
    44 replies | 1643 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Saturday, 2nd February, 2019, 04:05 PM
    As a 1st edition veteran, I have to agree with this sentiment. 5e is by far superior to 1st edition.
    44 replies | 1643 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Saturday, 2nd February, 2019, 02:44 PM
    But that's exactly what the Thief, Oath of Devotion Paladin, Open Hand monk etc are: The 1st edition version of the class*. There is no need to add or remove abilities because the work is already done for you, along with the balancing. Just tell your players that only have one archetype available. *strictly speaking, you should allow thief and assassin, since both where in 1st edition, along...
    44 replies | 1643 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Saturday, 2nd February, 2019, 10:22 AM
    Many of the abilities that where core in 1st edition are archetype abilities in 5e - for example, thief: climb walls, cleric: heavy armour proficiency, paladin: turn undead, monk: quivering palm. 2nd edition introduced kits, so suggesting that removing archetypes would make the game more like 2nd edition is being disingenuous. Even 1st edition had subclasses: Illusionist, Assassin.
    44 replies | 1643 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Friday, 1st February, 2019, 06:13 PM
    Has anyone mentioned kensai yet?
    48 replies | 1785 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Friday, 1st February, 2019, 02:49 PM
    Losing an action does not lose your bonus action. It may leave you unable to trigger a bonus action if an action was required to trigger it (eg. duel wielding). Rogues in particular have things they can do as bonus actions even if they have no action. Or a sorcerer could cast a quickened spell, etc.
    512 replies | 14395 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Friday, 1st February, 2019, 12:57 PM
    One of the issues with 3rd edition is you needed an huge knowledge of the rules in order to get the most from your character.
    75 replies | 2700 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Friday, 1st February, 2019, 09:33 AM
    Thief is a vanilla rogue (2nd edition) / thief (1st edition). Your statement is factually incorrect. 5e is better than those editions if you want to create a less standard character. You might perhaps look at the Scout and Investigative archetypes in Xanthar's Guide if you want a rogue who isn't into climbing.
    58 replies | 2468 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Friday, 1st February, 2019, 09:26 AM
    No. And I think it's worth noting that Baldur's Gate 2, a 2nd edition CRPG, added a version of archetypes into the game (using optional 2nd edition rules) and was much improved by it. 1st edition classes are far too narrow and restrictive.
    44 replies | 1643 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Thursday, 31st January, 2019, 10:05 AM
    In 3.0 their was the Duellist prestige class. Or you could follow duel wielding for lots of attacks (only possible with high dex) or critical hits - Rapier had the highest critical threat range. 3.5 added more options for increasing dex fighter damage, and Pathfinder even more. It's something the various developers thought belonged in the game, and if you look at a sampling of classic movies you...
    75 replies | 2700 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Wednesday, 30th January, 2019, 06:59 PM
    If you actually use encumbrance, no one would have a strength of 8.
    75 replies | 2700 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Wednesday, 30th January, 2019, 12:25 PM
    They've been viable since 3rd edition - and they should be. The Princess Bride is one of the most popular D&Dish fantasy movies with my group.
    75 replies | 2700 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Tuesday, 29th January, 2019, 12:20 PM
    No. It doesn't take damage if it moves through the wall, but it does take damage if it moves out of the wall and then back in again.
    29 replies | 1072 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Tuesday, 29th January, 2019, 10:25 AM
    Can you enter a room if you are already inside it?
    29 replies | 1072 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Tuesday, 29th January, 2019, 09:40 AM
    Targets take damage twice: 5d8 when the spell is first cast and 5d8 on their own turn. However, if the wall is straight the target can normally avoid the second 5d8 by stepping out of the wall. However, if the wall can be bent it can be made very difficult for the target to step out of the wall, even if you interpret "enters the wall for the first time on a turn" as not applying if the target...
    29 replies | 1072 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 28th January, 2019, 06:28 PM
    RAW, you don't have to use the rule. But IMO, pretty much any religious character is made more fun if there are things they won't do because it is prohibited by their religion. A druid in one of my games won't wear any armour.
    99 replies | 3867 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 28th January, 2019, 06:16 PM
    But you didn't, did you? The only thing stopping you was the fear that you might want to cast another concentration spell. You where playing the wrong class. Either play like a wizard, do the subtle thing and cast non-concentration spells for the duration, or play like a sorcerer and blow stuff up.
    1285 replies | 266644 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 28th January, 2019, 04:46 PM
    You don't have to run Suggestion for eight hours. Once you have convinced the guards that these aren't the druids they are looking for and they move along it's done it's job and you can do something else. It sounds to me that you wanted a character who blows stuff up with magic. That's not the wizard (or at least they are not the best at it). If you choose the wrong class it doesn't mean...
    1285 replies | 266644 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 28th January, 2019, 01:10 PM
    It's a list of core features that should be part of any D&D game. If you leave out core features of the game you shouldn't be surprised if you find balance disrupted. 3rd edition allowed for competitive dex fighters. You would have to revert to 2nd edition to get rid of the Errol Flynn types.
    75 replies | 2700 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 28th January, 2019, 10:08 AM
    Yes, they have it slightly backwards, but you still attack once unarmed and twice armed on your turn. I suppose if you pick up your fighter level after you have 17 levels of kensai then the dueling is of some benefit, but I don't think it's worth giving up Perfect Self and a ki point for. I've never seen the game played in that level range anyway!
    12 replies | 506 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 28th January, 2019, 09:29 AM
    Which makes no difference. Finding exotic non-metallic armours for the party druid is a fun sidequest. And since druids aren't meant to be front liners (unless a shape shifted moon druid) it is an insignificant drawback that makes the game more fun. No reason not to use it.
    99 replies | 3867 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 28th January, 2019, 09:19 AM
    Actually, it would deal considerably more damage than a fireball. As a straight wall, any target that isn't immobilised can move out of the wall, only taking the initial 5d8 damage. However, if you could bend the wall as I have illustrated, it would be impossible to step out of the wall without stepping back into it and taking an additional 5d8. So damage would be 10d8 (55) minimum, compared to...
    29 replies | 1072 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Sunday, 27th January, 2019, 06:02 PM
    Nothing prevents you doing it. It just does less DPS than a single class fighter and less DPS than a single class kensai.
    12 replies | 506 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Sunday, 27th January, 2019, 09:58 AM
    Here is why the wall has to be straight: S-bends could be used to catch a great horde of enemies in the AoE. >v>v> ^v^v^ ^>^>^
    29 replies | 1072 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Sunday, 27th January, 2019, 08:01 AM
    Monsters that need magical weapons to damage. What's that, you haven't got a magic rapier? But you could simply give your players more direction. You don"t have to acept any character your player bring to the table, especially if they show a lack of imagination or are fixated on a rules fallacy. "This adventure starts out when the members of a dwarven merchent company are hired to ship a magic...
    75 replies | 2700 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Sunday, 27th January, 2019, 07:57 AM
    I suspect some players are interpreting the dueling rules a little more loosely. The other thing with kensai is they usually use their versatile weapons two handed at low level. Technically 1d8+2 is better than 1d10, but the difference isn't enough to make it work multiclassing for. But why do you want to make this character? What's wrong with a single class kensai?
    12 replies | 506 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Saturday, 26th January, 2019, 02:13 PM
    I give out xp for accomplishing significant quest objectives, but not for treasure (unless the treasure is something needed to fulfil the quest). I give out about 1/3 of the total xp in this way. I also award full xp for monsters the party gets past but avoids killing (unless it's a case of running away in blind panic). I don't award any xp for randomly killing anything that there was no...
    27 replies | 938 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Saturday, 26th January, 2019, 12:35 PM
    Macavity: Rogue(Mastermind)?
    14 replies | 788 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Thursday, 24th January, 2019, 08:56 AM
    A feat is also required in order to duel wield rapiers. In a no feats game it's d6 shortswords and AC capped at 17. As for archers, they are good and all, as they should be in a fantasy game, but theorycrafting fails to account for the tight confines of dungeons or the availability of magic bows.
    92 replies | 3746 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Thursday, 24th January, 2019, 08:50 AM
    Then don't have rapiers in the game at all - it requires a higher technological level of metallurgical knowledge to manufacture a blade that thin that won't snap the instant it is used, so they don't really belong in a true pseudo-medieval setting. It doesn't matter if you think they are overpowered, underpowered, or whatever. It's no different to gunpowder weapons - if you don't think it fits...
    92 replies | 3746 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Wednesday, 23rd January, 2019, 07:50 PM
    I take it you have never read any of the many posts by CapnZapp, pointing out the superiority of great weapon fighters! And he isn't wrong, a fighter with a two handed sword and GWF will easily outdamage some guy with a couple of rapiers. Meanwhile, the pole-arm master is making better use of bonus actions, and the old fashioned sword-and-board guy is finding far more magical weapons that he can...
    92 replies | 3746 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Wednesday, 23rd January, 2019, 04:28 PM
    Following the design philosophy of 5e, Trident shouldn't exist as a separate weapon category at all. It's a spear.
    52 replies | 2908 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Wednesday, 23rd January, 2019, 09:06 AM
    What's wrong with it? The game is designed to support different kinds of fighters. The party will still need a strong character for dungeoneering, but there is no reason it shouldn't be the cleric, for example.
    92 replies | 3746 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Tuesday, 22nd January, 2019, 02:34 PM
    Then such a party would very likely be stuffed, without having to make any rule changes. For example, TftYP p99 6. Turnstile: "a strong character could rip it out with a successful DC 24 Strength (Athletics) check" TftYP P75 21. Stone Block: "can be pushed by the combined effort of up to four characters with a combined Strength of 45". Such obstacles are common in the average dungeon.
    92 replies | 3746 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Tuesday, 22nd January, 2019, 02:26 PM
    Not by name. However, in 5e "you can draw a single weapon as part of your move". Thus a throwing weapon user could throw the weapon in hand, then draw and throw a second with the "extra attack" feature. However, a fighter would not be able to take advantage of a third attack unless they where duel wielding or had the duel wielder feet.
    92 replies | 3746 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Tuesday, 22nd January, 2019, 09:20 AM
    I don't see any need to remove Archery, but the Weapon Thrower idea is good. However, I believe that RAW drawing a throwing weapon is a move action, which means weapon throwing caps at two attacks per round. Ergo, the ability should stipulate that the weapon thrower can draw and throw a weapon as part of the same action. And, really, if parties actually exist where everyone makes strength a...
    92 replies | 3746 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Tuesday, 22nd January, 2019, 08:12 AM
    In the 1st edition DMG there was a table for randomly determining the weapon type of magic weapons. It made 70% of them longswords.
    92 replies | 3746 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 21st January, 2019, 05:27 PM
    I have yet to see anyone come up with any evidence that this is an actual problem in actual gameplay, rather than a bee in theorycrafters' bonnets.
    92 replies | 3746 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 21st January, 2019, 10:33 AM
    As giant shark, with the following alterations: Increase AC to 18, remove Blood Frenzy ability, change damage to 3d8+6 bludgeoning. At challenge level 5 it would suit a level 1-3 party.
    20 replies | 770 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 21st January, 2019, 08:48 AM
    Sidequest: Giant knucklehead is attcking fishingboats. Twist: it's actually a thayan submarine undergoing field tests.
    20 replies | 770 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Sunday, 20th January, 2019, 08:59 PM
    As an observation, knucklehead trout must grow rather large and heavy in order for their ivory to be useful.
    20 replies | 770 view(s)
    0 XP
No More Results
About Paul Farquhar

Basic Information

Age
50
About Paul Farquhar
Location:
Surrey, UK
Disable sharing sidebar?:
No

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
1,298
Posts Per Day
2.44
Last Post
Ranged Options for All Classes Friday, 15th February, 2019 08:03 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
1
General Information
Last Activity
Friday, 15th February, 2019 08:03 PM
Join Date
Tuesday, 5th September, 2017
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Saturday, 16th February, 2019


Friday, 15th February, 2019


Thursday, 14th February, 2019


Wednesday, 13th February, 2019


Tuesday, 12th February, 2019


Monday, 11th February, 2019


Sunday, 10th February, 2019


Saturday, 9th February, 2019


Friday, 8th February, 2019



Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Thursday, 7th February, 2019

  • 03:49 AM - Hriston mentioned Paul Farquhar in post Archetypes
    Maybe we mean different things by 'adventure'. I think it is fine for an adventure to not have any traps in them. If a campaign didn't have any traps that would be out of the ordinary and something that should be brought up in session 0. Good point. I was using the word adventure the way Iíd assumed Paul Farquhar was using it, i.e. to mean the content of the game in which the character is being played. That would include many adventures of the sort youíre describing over the course of many sessions. I donít see any particular problem with an adventure location devoid of locks or traps. In fact, it could give the character a chance to focus on its skill with locks and traps in a different light, wondering why the inhabitants donít lock up their goods, and is this what they call security?

Thursday, 30th August, 2018

  • 12:42 PM - lowkey13 mentioned Paul Farquhar in post What makes D&D, D&D?
    h/t Paul Farquhar So a recent comment in a different thread started my thought process, and here it is- "Racial stat boosts are one of the things that makes D&D D&D and not some generic fantasy roleplaying game." So, what does make D&D, D&D? I mean, really? I was thinking in terms of 5e (which is why it is posted here), and how one of the reasons 5e is supposedly appealing is that it manages to rope in some of the nostalgia/OSR/1e crowd (who, hopefully in turn, is teaching it to the young 'uns). This makes 5e very, um, D&D? Like, ur-D&D or something. So, before going any further, it is my general understanding that there have been conversations about past editions of D&D and whether or not they are "D&D enough." DO NOT DO THAT, PLEASE. I am asking people to NOT rehash old grievances, however well-nursed. As we all know, the only proper grievance to express on these forums is the well-known and universally approved dislike of Paladins. So, really, what makes D&D, D&D, such that "messing with it" re...

Thursday, 23rd August, 2018

  • 03:08 PM - lowkey13 mentioned Paul Farquhar in post Survivor Appendix N Authors- LEIBER WINS!
    Anderson, Poul 10 Bellairs, John 19 Brackett, Leigh 18 Brown, Frederic 20 Burroughs, Edgar Rice 23 Carter, Lin 18 de Camp, L. Sprague 17 de Camp & Pratt 20 Dunsany, Lord 19 Farmer, P. J. 20 Gardner, Fox 21 Howard, R.E. 19 Lanier, Sterling 20 Leiber, Fritz 23 Merritt, A. 21 Moorcock, Michael 22 Norton, Andre 21 Offutt, Andrew J. 20 Pratt, Fletcher 20 Saberhagen, Fred 18 St. Clair, Margaret 19 Tolkien, J. R. R. 27 Vance, Jack 6 Weinbaum, Stanley 18 Wellman, Manley Wade 20 Williamson, Jack 18 Zelazny, Roger 22 CORRECTED. Seriously, guys? Charles Dexter Ward is NOT an author. Ha, Ha Paul Farquhar

Thursday, 19th July, 2018

  • 11:53 AM - Coroc mentioned Paul Farquhar in post Curse of Strahd: What is Straud von Zarovich's Title? [SPOILERS ALERT]
    Paul Farquhar well i cannot find the exact source and maybe i am wrong, maybe i only read somewhere where to put Barovia in FR, but there is one weak and one very strong indicator that Barovia is connected to FR and maybe had ist prime material roots there (which come into Play in roots of evil it is not exactly drawn into the mists but there exists a prime material Barovia parallel), see the cite from FR Wiki below for the indicators i found in a rush: Cite Form FR Wiki: The Svalich Woods of Barovia also briefly merged with the Quivering Forest and Twilight Marsh near Phlan in the late 15th century DR.[10] The Vistani nomads of Barovia were known to frequent parts of FaerŻn and shared similarities with some Gur, suggesting that the two peoples may be related. Before it became part of the Demiplane of Dread, one of the two gods worshiped in Barovia was Lathander, though he no longer had any power there after the rise of Strahd, and didn't answer the prayers of his few remaining follo...

Sunday, 24th June, 2018

  • 05:50 PM - Satyrn mentioned Paul Farquhar in post "Run away! Run away!" ... what if they don't?
    It should also be an "escapable" monster - if the monster has great speed and great perception... not great. I find this is the one place place I'm happy as a DM to invoke that Plot Armor Paul Farquhar mentioned. When the players choose to flee, I'll most often find some reason, any reason, the monster chooses not to give chase. It works great when I can applh some cost to the reason. Like, maybe it snags tbe players' lackey and settles down for a meal.

Wednesday, 13th June, 2018


Wednesday, 6th June, 2018

  • 12:27 PM - Coroc mentioned Paul Farquhar in post Two New Settings For D&D This Year
    Paul Farquhar "...Arthas (I know, it's a retcon to canon),... " I hope not. Although if i imagine some Drizzt entering Athas by crashing his spelljammer within the cannibal halfling jungle .....

Tuesday, 22nd May, 2018


Wednesday, 16th May, 2018


Thursday, 12th April, 2018

  • 02:17 PM - Coroc mentioned Paul Farquhar in post Mechanics of Revived Settings; your thoughts?
    Paul Farquhar #130 your take on Athas is Genius, the halfgiants maybe resolved. I would have gone with reskinning ho for mul, but theres a different way as you Point out: halforc -> halfgiants mountain dwarf -> mul hill dwarf -> athasian dwarf But now i think of it, it would even be better to reskin halforc for mul still and take mountain dwarf with ist +2 str and +2 con for halfgiant! That is neat, you can even leave heavy armor prof as is and the stat increase fits better. for the rest go stout -> athasian halfling Wood elf but with int raised instead of wisdom -> athasian elf human (nonvariant) -> athasian human halfelf tbd thrikreen -> reskin dragonborn breath attack for poisonous bite, put 4 claw attack Routine into one attack 1d4 natural wepons give +2 dex +1 wis

Tuesday, 10th April, 2018

  • 06:36 PM - lowkey13 mentioned Paul Farquhar in post Mechanics of Revived Settings; your thoughts?
    But... please? Was already familiar with it, but there's a huge difference between something available "from our back catalog" and something enjoying the barest level of official support. And I will say that... aside from D&D Spelljammer, nothing in WotC's back catalog gets my motor running better than Star*Drive, which is one half of one of my White Whales that I've almost given up all hope of ever executing successfully. I hear ya. I would love to see Space5e! I think that Paul Farquhar would as well. Sometimes, it is good to run the old stuff (I still do with 1e, Paranoia, and WFRPG). But ... some of the old stuff makes for tough reading. Star Frontiers (to use that example) is pretty badly outdated, both in terms of fluff and rules.
  • 12:22 PM - Coroc mentioned Paul Farquhar in post Mechanics of Revived Settings; your thoughts?
    Paul Farquhar I think Remathilis does not differ between fluff aka examples of commonly used or rarely used ingredients for D&D: (tiefling race, sci fi laserweapon) and real mechanics: attributes rolls etc. Also in the Core books there is several material stated explicitely as being optional, even Gnome race for PCs. Also there is a heavy recommendation to change every rule that you and/or your Players do not like in your homebrew. Apart from organized play there is no need at all for any fluff rule (liek playable race) to apply in a given setting, only if you make mechanical differences in your homebrew then it becomes important to communicate These and be aware of how they might afflict game Balance. There are numerous other examples where These Basics apply even if you stay true to the core rules. e.g. -druid summoning (any animal? No, the DM has the last word), -Magic items (not needed for Balance, would Paul Farquhar insist at least 1 of each Magic item exists in any given game worl...

Tuesday, 3rd April, 2018

  • 02:56 PM - Coroc mentioned Paul Farquhar in post Mechanics of Revived Settings; your thoughts?
    Paul Farquhar #34: On your questions 1. It is different, the PCs are really kings and can draw on the resources of their Domains (countries). There were many official splats, each detailing a Domain which would be Player Background. It is not limiting at all, the PC can go on a dungeon crawl with a Party or a war campaign with his whole army. There were Domain spells i cannot remember if These were connected t othe bloodlines i would have to read it up, they basically were useful in mass combat, e.g. maipulate the Terrain difficulty. 2. There were half a dozen human subraces each with their own Attribute boons and malus and some other characteristic. If i remember correctly rulers were all humans, you could be dwarf or elf as a minor pc eventually, i might be incorrect here. 3. It is unique in a way that here is e.g. 1 Dragon, 1 Medusa, 1 Werewolf or whatever in the setting (Imade the types up atm) but thats it. These Unique Mobs are like rulers with their own armies, or Major bosses. They ...
  • 11:29 AM - Coroc mentioned Paul Farquhar in post Mechanics of Revived Settings; your thoughts?
    Paul Farquhar #31 In Birthright the Players are either Kings, some from Magic bloodlines (independant of race) which gives them Special minor powers, or a Party consists of a ruler and his staff. Anyway, each ruler has his own land with resources and resource Management, it is compatible to 2nd ed battlesystem with rules for mass combat if you are into such stuff. Another Thing notable is th planar configuration if i can remember right, there is only a normal material plane and the shadow plane, on the later halflings have got some powers. There are different human races, and a Party will most likely consist of These if i remember correctly. With Monsters it is the usual ones but some are uniqe like e.g. there is not a medusa Population but "The Medusa " with stronger powers than a Standard Version. I think These "named" Mobs had bloodline powers also, and if i remember correctly you could inherit their bloodline (or those of other rulers) in a bit of a "Highlander" Fashion.
  • 11:10 AM - Coroc mentioned Paul Farquhar in post Greataxe, greatsword, and a little math
    Paul Farquhar #98 It is entirely logic that a blunt weapon of a certain weight and length does as much damage as a slightly heavier weapon with a bit shorter length so like greatclub and mace doing 1d8. It is not logic at all that adding a spear tip to a quarterstaff will not add anything to it's damage and make it less usefull (no Polearm master anymore) It is also not logic a 1 handed Club does 1d4 but an unwieldy (if used 1 handed) quarterstaff should do 1d6 and allow the use of a effective use shield still. That is utter BS sorry i have to use strong words, because almost every one discusses the marginal differences between great axe and greatsword and does not see the elephant (quarterstaff) in the room.

No results to display...
Page 1 of 42 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Saturday, 16th February, 2019


Friday, 15th February, 2019

  • 10:53 PM - Staffan quoted Paul Farquhar in post Pages From The Upcoming Nautical D&D Book!
    We renamed sahuagin "unpronounceable shark people". Official pronunciation per D&D Beyond is "sa-HU-a-gin" (with a hard g). It was a bit odd hearing Matt Mercer say it though.
  • 08:15 PM - Saelorn quoted Paul Farquhar in post Ranged Options for All Classes
    Wizards are not required to pick up any ranged cantrips. It's quite possible and legal for a wizard to have no ranged capability whatsoever. Sure, it's inadvisable, in the same way that a warrior not bringing a bow is inadvisable.One difference is that wizard cantrips fire with INT, rather than DEX. Wizards are ensured a reasonable degree of accuracy with their cantrips, where warriors are not guaranteed a reasonable degree of accuracy with a bow, unless they build for it. Personally, I'm of a mind that nobody should get a free pass on things that they aren't good at. Both wizards and warriors should need to invest into DEX, if they want good at-will ranged attacks. Both warriors and rogues should need to invest into STR, if they want to be good with melee attacks.

Thursday, 14th February, 2019

  • 06:39 PM - Oofta quoted Paul Farquhar in post Ranged Options for All Classes
    Or the wizard prepare a fly spell. If the party knows what to expect, they should prepare appropriately, even if that means the barbarian saying "I go to beseech my people for aid. In the meantime, my brother Cletus the Archer will help you out". But the game is called Dungeons and Dragons, not Wide Open Spaces and Dragons. There is a clue in there somewhere about what sort of gameplay the rules are designed around... So your solution is: ask someone else to handle it for you because you're incompetent or hope you have a wizard in the party that can cast fly. As a bonus, only fight in dungeons and apparently not against dragons out in the open. Gotcha. :hmm:

Wednesday, 13th February, 2019

  • 07:30 PM - Saelorn quoted Paul Farquhar in post Ranged Options for All Classes
    If the players are too dumb to think of a solution, they fail. That is what makes it a GAME.This is 5E. Failure isn't on the table. The only difference is whether the barbarian gets to participate, or whether they go play Mario Kart for an hour.
  • 04:20 PM - Whizbang Dustyboots quoted Paul Farquhar in post Pages From The Upcoming Nautical D&D Book!
    U1-3 were designed and marketed for for 1st edition AD&D. Illusionists have been present since the start of 1st edition AD&D. I don't see how the existence of a "zeroth edition" is relevant, since U1-3 was never designed or marketed for that edition? You're going to have to go back and re-read my original post to see what I was trying to say, or just stop worrying about it.
  • 02:24 PM - Oofta quoted Paul Farquhar in post Ranged Options for All Classes
    If the players are too dumb to think of a solution, they fail. That is what makes it a GAME. Which would be fine. If there were options. Sometimes there is not. Everyone keeps yelling "teamwork for the win!" but what if the wizard (if there even is one) doesn't have jump or spiderclimb or fly? Because of those 3, I've only ever seen anyone take fly, and fly is the only one that would work against flying creatures. In addition, fly is concentration so it's only 1 person. Too bad if you have more than one melee type in the group. Maybe I just want people to be honest. If you have strength based melee types they're going to suck in certain encounters unless the DM changes the scenario. Never throw any intelligent opponent that strength based characters can approach. I think that's a problem, and limits logical scenarios based on the campaign. Or just tell the OP that, no there are no ranged options for all classes (which really should be no ranged options unless you have a decent de...
  • 11:37 AM - NaturalZero quoted Paul Farquhar in post Artificer UA to be released in February
    The Artificer is interesting, because it fills a story niche, but not one that existed at the time D&D was originally created. It arose later, along with the Steampunk genre. I kinda feel like the broad strokes of the artificer do actually pre-date DnD. I think about Hephaestus creating robots and mechanical golden women in greek myth and medieval alchemists creating homonculi and "magic" formulas, for example.

Tuesday, 12th February, 2019

  • 07:24 PM - Gradine quoted Paul Farquhar in post Artificer UA to be released in February
    So I spend a hour throwing 600 acid flasks, creating an impenetrable barrier of broken glass.... It's also generally assumed we care as much if not more about the spirit of the rules than the exact letter.
  • 07:00 PM - Kobold Avenger quoted Paul Farquhar in post Artificer UA to be released in February
    So long as this version doesn't have an infinite bottle factory... I think it's generally assumed everyone has infinite ammo now, as I feel many groups don't want to count how many arrows, bolts, bullets, etc they're carrying.
  • 04:54 PM - Seramus quoted Paul Farquhar in post Artificer UA to be released in February
    So long as this version doesn't have an infinite bottle factory...Infinite bottle factory was one of the really unique and delightful things about the class. Certainly no worse than all the other infinites in the game, and a fun reason to engage more with NPCs.
  • 02:50 PM - Oofta quoted Paul Farquhar in post Ranged Options for All Classes
    No. I wouldn't build a barbarian with less than 14 dex. MAD is a known issue for 5e barbarians - one reason I'm not fond of the class, but increasing dex from 8 to 14 comes at a relatively low opportunity cost (depending on race), and shouldn't prevent maxing out STR and CON. And it has the side effect that most barbarians are respectable bow users. And there is little point in having dex higher than 14 either, medium armour > Unarmoured Defence. As for fighters, they have lots and lots of options for dealing with ranged enemies that don't involve dexterity. And I already pointed out Eldritch Knights' ranged attacks key of intelligence (and later get access to Misty Step and Fly, that don't depend on any ability score). Thanks to extra attack a Battle Master is likely to land the occasional hit with a bow even with -1, and they don't need to do significant damage to Disarm, Trip or whatever Manoeuvre they chose. Or they can have a friendly wizard cast fly on them, or they can choose to play race ...

Monday, 11th February, 2019

  • 08:04 PM - Saelorn quoted Paul Farquhar in post Ranged Options for All Classes
    Sure, you could build a barbarian with dex as a dump stat, if you wanted to emulate that famous hero Conan the Klutz, and be lousy at melee as well as ranged, due to poor AC and initiative. Hell, you can make your strength 8 too. The point is, player decisions are supposed to have consequences.Are we still pretending that the game is balanced? If nobody can safely dump Dexterity - not even a high-Strength fighter with heavy armor - then that points to a serious issue with stat balance. After all, plenty of people can get away with dumping Strength, Int, Wisdom, or Charisma. Why should everyone in the world need above-average Dexterity in order to be minimally competent? (And yes, this argument is borrowed from Constitution, which everyone already agrees is a broken stat.)
  • 07:55 PM - Oofta quoted Paul Farquhar in post Ranged Options for All Classes
    Sure, you could build a barbarian with dex as a dump stat, if you wanted to emulate that famous hero Conan the Klutz, and be lousy at melee as well as ranged, due to poor AC and initiative. Hell, you can make your strength 8 too. The point is, player decisions are supposed to have consequences. You seem to want to eliminate any meaning to player decisions to the point where you might as well roll a d20 and if the score is greater than 1 the monster dies! It seems to me that you are unaware of the martial ability: Extra Attack. This works with bows!!!! Thus ALL martial classes (even monks) have at least twice as many ranged attacks as non-martial characters*! *(warlocks excepted) As for fighters, sure, a heavy armour fighter might dump stat dex, but they could just as easily be an outstanding archer. Player choice has consequences. The system does not force a fighter to be poor at range, the player has to choose it. And even a dex 8 fighter can gain abilities to help in ranged combat: an Eldrit...
  • 07:48 PM - Lord Twig quoted Paul Farquhar in post Ranged Options for All Classes
    Sure, you could build a barbarian with dex as a dump stat, if you wanted to emulate that famous hero Conan the Klutz, and be lousy at melee as well as ranged, due to poor AC and initiative. Hell, you can make your strength 8 too. The point is, player decisions are supposed to have consequences. You seem to want to eliminate any meaning to player decisions to the point where you might as well roll a d20 and if the score is greater than 1 the monster dies! It seems to me that you are unaware of the martial ability: Extra Attack. This works with bows!!!! Thus ALL martial classes (even monks) have at least twice as many ranged attacks as non-martial characters*! *(warlocks excepted) As for fighters, sure, a heavy armour fighter might dump stat dex, but they could just as easily be an outstanding archer. Player choice has consequences. The system does not force a fighter to be poor at range, the player has to choose it. And even a dex 8 fighter can gain abilities to help in ranged combat: an Eldritch K...
  • 02:38 PM - Oofta quoted Paul Farquhar in post Ranged Options for All Classes
    This is garbage. No competently built barbarian has less than 14 dex, and they get martial weapon prof at level 1 and Extra Attack at level 5, class abilities which improve ranged attacks. So they should be doing around 13 points of ranged damage per round, not 4.5. Tone it down, dude. First, you don't get to decide what and how I build characters. Second, not all strength based characters are barbarians. Third, not all barbarians are built according to your specifications. Last but not least, if you use a longbow and don't add dex you get average 4.5 damage per hit modified by your dexterity adjustment. Therefore if I'm a paladin or a fighter in heavy armor with an 8 dex (or lower if you roll for stats) my average damage per hit is 3.5 with a long bow. At ... I don't know ... 5th level I'm a +2 to hit after adjustments. So an average AC of 16, I'm going miss 70% of the time. While I was talking about damage per hit, the average damage for this guy per round is a sad and pathetic 2 point...

Sunday, 10th February, 2019

  • 07:15 PM - vpuigdoller quoted Paul Farquhar in post Pages From The Upcoming Nautical D&D Book!
    A few thoughts: * U1-3 is level 1-5 if they keep the original level range. This corresponds to statistically the most popular range for adventures and the range of the waterdeap book. * U1-3 is a bit short to fill a book on it's own. The remaining space could be taken up by ship and underwater rules and creatures, or the adventure could be expanded up to level 10. * It has ships and underwater, but I don't remember any navel battles (as featured in UA) in U1-3. * Saltmarsh was originally located in Greyhawk but it could easily be relocated to any generic fantasy setting (or even real world 17th century Cornwall). I agree Saltmarsh was written in a way that can easily be placed elsewhere if you wanted to. They will probably give you some tips in how to set it in other Campaign Settings as they did in TftYP. I do hope that if Saltmarsh is indeed included that they also include the Saltmarsh maps.
  • 06:06 PM - Parmandur quoted Paul Farquhar in post Pages From The Upcoming Nautical D&D Book!
    A few thoughts: * U1-3 is level 1-5 if they keep the original level range. This corresponds to statistically the most popular range for adventures and the range of the waterdeap book. * U1-3 is a bit short to fill a book on it's own. The remaining space could be taken up by ship and underwater rules and creatures, or the adventure could be expanded up to level 10. * It has ships and underwater, but I don't remember any navel battles (as featured in UA) in U1-3. * Saltmarsh was originally located in Greyhawk but it could easily be relocated to any generic fantasy setting (or even real world 17th century Cornwall). Considering that per Mearls, they just started revising the vehicle rules based on feedback, and this book is in layout, I doubt the seafaring UA was meant for this release. It was probably meant to be useful for playtesting with this book.

Friday, 8th February, 2019

  • 09:00 PM - Oofta quoted Paul Farquhar in post Ranged Options for All Classes
    If the situation at hand is the entire campaign has been a series of one sort of battle, then the climactic battle is a completely different type of battle, then it is just an appallingly badly designed campaign. Shoot the DM, not the rules. But if the DM gets more than 40 feet away and you're a strength based person, that's not going to be an option. :confused:


Page 1 of 42 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Paul Farquhar's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites