View Profile: dnd4vr - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Sunday, 19th May, 2019, 06:42 PM
    Our DM is taking a break, so we are starting a new campaign and yours truly is in charge! MWAHAHAHA! :lol: I get to add my own flare and tastes as the reigning DM and am looking for options on combating "normal" fights to the death. I have been thinking about tactics such as grappling, knocking prone, etc. because I find the endless fight after fight where they typically end in every creature...
    20 replies | 628 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Saturday, 18th May, 2019, 11:51 PM
    Woo-hoo!!! I was the first (and only) bet for Greyhawk! :)
    70 replies | 4241 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Saturday, 18th May, 2019, 04:05 AM
    I guess as changes go everything is fine. Personally, I like the Deck as is, but if it works better for your group that's great! :)
    3 replies | 273 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Friday, 17th May, 2019, 04:26 AM
    No, this was not any sort of attempt about novaing. I don't care about novaing. No matter what system you use, someone can always nova--whether it is to a lesser or greater degree maybe--but they can always do it. When I wrote about options those aren't under the player's control, they are options for how the mechanic plays out. I am not sure which I prefer either, but since then have...
    35 replies | 1222 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Wednesday, 15th May, 2019, 01:15 PM
    Funny you should mention a "casting-stress" system... I was thinking about something like the "spell drain" system in Shadowrun. Spell Drain After you cast a spell, you make a Spell Drain check using your spellcasting modifier. The DC is equal to 10 plus the spell level of the spell you cast. If you fail your spell drain check... (options) 1. you suffer psychic damage equal to the spell...
    35 replies | 1222 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Tuesday, 14th May, 2019, 02:31 PM
    So, jgsugden, you replied and then blocked me so I can't see your reply? Very mature. I never took away your assumption, I emphasized it because it is a very faulty assumption considering what people are like in the real world--and thus likely the same in a fantasy world. I agree it would be much better if people were kinder and more generous with their time, money, education, etc., but sadly...
    127 replies | 4769 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Tuesday, 14th May, 2019, 02:09 PM
    One of the players at our table wants to make a necromancer, to make those that have committed atrocities pay for their offenses--and even death cannot free them from making their payments. BUT... our DM says that won't really work because he would only be animating a dead body, the "soul" has moved on and thus the offenders would not even be aware that they are being punished. Also, walking...
    6 replies | 250 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Tuesday, 14th May, 2019, 04:19 AM
    I agree it is very silly, but the point is it is possible and at some tables (not ours) you have a 9th-level cleric in every town to raise a fallen friend, and wizards to teleport a party, or whatever. Anyway, it is why our DM often narrates encounter that are very easy and doesn't award XP for them since there really was no threat to the PCs.
    127 replies | 4769 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Tuesday, 14th May, 2019, 04:15 AM
    I didn't change a word, I added the emphasis to show why your idea won't work, most likely ever. So, why should I remove it when I added it for MY argument, not yours? There is no such thing as a Utopia and if you want one, stick to your fantasy world. Of course, even there, people are people--and that means many are selfish and care little for people outside their own circle. But yes, those...
    127 replies | 4769 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Monday, 13th May, 2019, 05:54 PM
    If you do not have the required STR for an armor, your speed is reduced by 10 I believe, but you can still wear it. Bold emphasis added. There are too many people who are unwilling to do their share and wish instead to rely on government programs for their well-being. Very true, some have little choice and offering them opportunities would turn things around, but there are many who feel...
    127 replies | 4769 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Monday, 13th May, 2019, 02:42 PM
    When you get to a certain level, defeating/killing a single goblin is hardly dangerous or suicidal. It is a flaw in the system IMO that you continue to earn XP for very easy encounters, and as I understand it our DM doesn't award XP if the encounter's XP total doesn't reach at least Easy. For example, a couple Hell Hounds (CR 3, worth 1400 XP total) would not be enough to meet the 1800 XP to...
    127 replies | 4769 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Monday, 13th May, 2019, 03:38 AM
    TANGENT: I, for one, don't like the quick progress of XP and leveling in 5E compared to AD&D/2E. There is no reason why just about every elf and dwarf over 150 years old wouldn't likely be 20th-level if they wanted. I can just imagine an elven wizard who magic missiles one goblin a day, every day, for 20 years... and he will be 20th-level. If he wanted to increase the difficulty of the...
    127 replies | 4769 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Monday, 13th May, 2019, 03:31 AM
    We wouldn't scale cantrip damage most likely if we implement a spell point system. However, I would probably suggest allowing cantrips to include spellcasting ability modifier to damage, just as STR or DEX can add to weapon attacks.
    35 replies | 1222 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Monday, 13th May, 2019, 12:35 AM
    I've played in campaigns where major cities are lit by thousands of Continual Light spells dimmed like hooded lanterns to games where magic is so rare some cultures consider it a myth. Personally, I don't like magic-heavy campaigns and run my own games where 5th-8th level characters are rare and 9th-level+ are very rare, maybe one in a kingdom per class or so. When PCs reach these levels, they...
    127 replies | 4769 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Sunday, 12th May, 2019, 02:25 PM
    I imagine experience is the best teacher here. After a couple times of novaing and then being less than effective when you are really needed, it seems like discretion would quickly be acquired. Also, with cantrips always available, it is no worse than when a character runs out of spell slots normally.
    35 replies | 1222 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Sunday, 12th May, 2019, 04:30 AM
    I've been looking at it more today and trying to come up with a simpler variant just so we won't have to reference the tables: * Your spell points are equal to your total caster levels times 3 plus your spellcasting modifier. If you have more than one spellcaster class, you only gain the highest spellcasting modifier to add to your spell points. Paladins and Rangers divide their level by two,...
    35 replies | 1222 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Saturday, 11th May, 2019, 05:13 PM
    I was reading about the variant option of using Spell Points in the DMG (p. 288 I think...). I am thinking about suggesting it to our table and am curious if anyone here is using (or used and abandoned) the idea of spell points or their own version? If so, how did it work for your table? I like the idea and don't mind the added complexity, but I do have some balance concerns: At 20th-level...
    35 replies | 1222 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Saturday, 11th May, 2019, 03:58 PM
    True, this is not the place for a debate, but you are woefully ignorant if you honestly think in this modern day world there is not a culture of sexual harassment/assault against men. Disagree if you like, but I have said my piece and will leave it at that.
    33 replies | 1572 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Saturday, 11th May, 2019, 03:40 PM
    So, because it is a truly horrible thing to do to women, you want it done to men now? Wouldn't it be better to stop doing it to everyone? Regardless of gender, proving harassment should be done by law, not public opinion and justifiable outrage. It is wrong to blame and do to women, but it is just as wrong to blame and do to men. Everyone deserves a chance to defend themselves and we should...
    33 replies | 1572 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Saturday, 11th May, 2019, 04:26 AM
    Ditto. For Bless, no rolling an extra die and slowing things down. For Guidance, we have been using a straight +2, but keeping it a cantrip and removing the concentration requirement. Each character can only receive it once until they take either a Short or Long Rest. To the OP, your house-rules work fine, too IMO. :)
    16 replies | 682 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Friday, 10th May, 2019, 05:27 AM
    Thanks all for the feedback. I'm leaning towards pitching the following right now: We'll use the +9 maximum proficiency bonus progression (+2,2,3,3,3,4,4,5,5,5,6,6,7,7,7,8,8,9,9,9) Our house-rule makes the maximum ability score bonus +4 (9-12 = 0, 13-14 = +1, 15-16 = +2, 17-18 = +3, 19-20 = +4). Expertise: you gain a +2 bonus to your proficiency in the selected skill, kit, or tool. This...
    27 replies | 1074 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Friday, 10th May, 2019, 04:05 AM
    Well, for one, I did. ;)
    73 replies | 6261 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Wednesday, 8th May, 2019, 01:25 PM
    I don't recall why, but I do remember the character was getting advantage on his checks. I'd have to ask either the DM or the player why they got it, but it was there and what helped make the odds worse (or better, depending on how you look at it). As far as the sure-footed feature, the DM could have done that but seemed content not to. I certainly would have run things differently but I just...
    27 replies | 1074 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Wednesday, 8th May, 2019, 01:09 PM
    One thing I don't think has been mentioned is setting a DC can be subjective if you want to play that way. It solves most issues anyone might have with Bounded Accuracy IMO. Scenario 1: Take the blacksmith NPC. For him, crafting a sword might be a simple task. Sure, it takes time but he knows the process and has done it many times during his life so the DC could be 5 or even 10, and then add...
    118 replies | 3956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Tuesday, 7th May, 2019, 12:17 PM
    There is a vast difference between being "good" and succeeding "with impunity". It would have been nice if the DM had given the large creature advantage, especially since it was a quadruped, but he didn't because the character "has expertise." When you watch a man-sized PC knocking gorgons (probably 1500 lbs or more...) on their butts over and over, I think he failed once out of a dozen times...
    27 replies | 1074 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Tuesday, 7th May, 2019, 05:15 AM
    In our game it would be very rare because permanent magical weapons are rare to begin with. The extras it has, especially the Action Surge, pushes it to very rare. As you say, plot-wise it can be legendary if it is a unique item--nothing wrong with that. In a game where magic is more common, I would only rate it as rare, however.
    23 replies | 889 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Tuesday, 7th May, 2019, 04:34 AM
    Our first increased proficiency bonus progression went to +8 and we just recently bumped it to +9. I can't see going any higher, though. It is a good idea with Expertise increasing it by x1.5... It is like another idea I had that Expertise would add +1 bonus for each Tier of play. If we stayed with the +8 max proficiency bonus, Expertise would grant +12 total at the highest levels. The only...
    27 replies | 1074 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Tuesday, 7th May, 2019, 04:04 AM
    Very well put. I'll have to give this some thought. I don't want to return to the days of crazy bonuses to everything, but you have a good point. To me a lot of this stems from the idea that your ability score modifier can represent some training while proficiency is there for addition training and practice, etc. I agree that some skills simply don't work if you don't have training in them.
    118 replies | 3956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Monday, 6th May, 2019, 03:59 PM
    Something like that would be a return to earlier editions, but I don't see a problem with that. The problem before was you could spent 1 point per level and end up with +20s and such to skills. If you limit it to something akin to years or levels of study, maybe have it range from +1 to +6 (RAW) or even higher, it would work well IMO. With our progression going to +9, it is the same as 1.5 times...
    27 replies | 1074 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Monday, 6th May, 2019, 01:19 PM
    Some good ideas. Like I said I like the improved prof bonus progression and expertise, IMO the double-skill thing is too much. I like the idea about "reliable" features.
    27 replies | 1074 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Monday, 6th May, 2019, 05:20 AM
    Since you need more info here you go: Increasing the proficiency bonus range to +9 maximum creates a greater gap between lower and higher level characters. Our table finds a change from +2 to +6 in RAW too little to really represent the improvements 20 levels of experience could bring. At any rate, the difference between RAW +6 and the higher +9 is typically nothing in the first tier, a +1 for...
    27 replies | 1074 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Sunday, 5th May, 2019, 11:18 PM
    We played yesterday and discussed things about proficiency bonus, expertise, etc. We tried some new house-rules and for the most part worked okay, but I am presenting them here for further consideration and discussion: Our proficiency bonus progression ranges from +2 to +9. We are currently at 5th- or 6th-level and use +3 and +4, respectively. RAW it would be +3 anyway, so only two characters...
    27 replies | 1074 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Sunday, 5th May, 2019, 04:57 AM
    I think this is a good balance. I wouldn't bother with the check, after all you didn't have to make a check to cast the spell. Simply giving it a cost in the action economy (bonus action, or even a reaction) works well enough IMO.
    25 replies | 791 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Saturday, 4th May, 2019, 03:00 PM
    I guess I've just never seen any confusion about it, and it surprises me when others seem to say theres "lots of confusion" about it. Although the skill list is hardly exhaustive, most tasks do have a skill that is applicable IMO (forcing open a door or something similar being the most common offender). I think the most useful thing to learn from his article is to be flexible about ability scores...
    176 replies | 7764 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Saturday, 4th May, 2019, 12:13 PM
    Actually, after reading his article, I didn't feel like there was much there not already covered in the PHB. Ability scores are "key", skills are added if they apply to the task.
    176 replies | 7764 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Saturday, 4th May, 2019, 04:59 AM
    I've been encouraging the other players to narrate their characters actions instead of calling for rolls as well. The DM told me after one session when we discussed it that he'd decided to reward it by doing one of two things. Suppose the players says, "I'm going to search in the corner behind the chair for a trapdoor or secret passage." Our DM would either just say "When you moved the chair,...
    176 replies | 7764 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Saturday, 4th May, 2019, 04:47 AM
    Just a *bump* to see if anyone who hasn't voted yet wants to over the weekend. Sorry for the interruption. :) Playing tomorrow, so I hope you all have a great weekend and if you're gaming, roll lots of nat 20's!!
    106 replies | 3771 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Saturday, 4th May, 2019, 04:42 AM
    Ah, I see you struggle with the same thing our group does, but it sounds like it might be worse for your table. As one of the few experienced players at our table, I encouraged the others not to min/max at first level so they would have some appreciable room to grow and enjoy seeing the improvements. They listened a bit... but still most have at least an 18 or higher in a prime score and we're...
    118 replies | 3956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Saturday, 4th May, 2019, 04:04 AM
    That's fine. I recall in the source I mention it was a Wisdom check/save because of the willpower to resist the cursed items taking over the character. An option would be that the character has to make a check/save against EACH ability score. You could roll randomly to see which one is first, etc. Since every class/character has strengths and weaknesses, it is fair IMO. If the player makes...
    51 replies | 1251 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Friday, 3rd May, 2019, 12:58 PM
    I will see if I can remember the source, but I DO know there was once some cursed artifacts that if the characters took them, each day the possessor had to make a Wisdom check/save DC 15. With each failure, the DC increased by 1. If they had three failures before three successes (similar to Death saves, maybe where they got the idea even...), they become Chaotic Evil and an NPC. If a character...
    51 replies | 1251 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Friday, 3rd May, 2019, 04:52 AM
    I am curious what horrible flaws you find in the Bounded Accuracy system? I have issues with it myself, so I am genuinely curious.
    118 replies | 3956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Thursday, 2nd May, 2019, 12:36 PM
    Sorry, perhaps I wasn't clear. I want a difference, however slight, between the 4th and 6th-level spells both trying to dispel an 8th-level spell. By simply applying disadvantage in both cases imposes the same penalty--there is no difference. If that isn't an issue for the group, then of course applying disadvantage is one route to go.
    30 replies | 1128 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Thursday, 2nd May, 2019, 04:30 AM
    You're arguing semantics really. When I wrote "How challenging do you want that lock? Is it a DC 15, 18, 20, 25, or 30?" for example, you (or I) are deciding that on exactly the criteria for which you consider is making you unbiased and impartial. You HAVE to care because you as DM decide by making that judgment call, believing it is a fair value, etc., etc. By making that judgment call, you are...
    118 replies | 3956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Thursday, 2nd May, 2019, 04:03 AM
    While it would make it simpler, it would also take out the relative power of using a slot lower. For instance, if I am trying to dispel an 8th-level target spell with a 6th-level Dispel or a 4th-level Dispel, the disadvantage is the same. As rarely as it happens in our game, the more complex version doesn't hurt really. Sure, whatever works. Glad you liked it. If it helps yours or...
    30 replies | 1128 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Wednesday, 1st May, 2019, 11:56 AM
    Here are the changes I would make (adds a bit of complexity to the RAW though): 1. The DC 10 plus two times the spell level of the spell your are trying to dispel. 2. For each spell level of the slot used to cast Dispel Magic above 3rd, reduce the DC by 1. 3. A spellcasting check is required for 1-3rd levels spells as well (it isn't automatic). 4. If you fail on the check to dispel, you can...
    30 replies | 1128 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Wednesday, 1st May, 2019, 04:23 AM
    I agree. And I can't even begin to comprehend how non-brilliant this thread became... ;)
    419 replies | 10869 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Wednesday, 1st May, 2019, 04:20 AM
    Well, even when you decide what ability scores an NPC will have (using point-buy, rolling, or simply assigning them) you are injecting bias. When you decide to give the NPC expertise, you are injecting bias, etc. No matter how you determine the total bonus you want to grant the NPC, even if it is through a rule system provided by the game, at some point you are injecting bias. The DM has a...
    118 replies | 3956 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Tuesday, 30th April, 2019, 05:43 PM
    You could have but didn't, why would you expect the next guy to? ;) j/k
    419 replies | 10869 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Tuesday, 30th April, 2019, 04:22 AM
    Looks like the Gloves of Thievery are trying to steal this one at the finish line... why am I not surprised. ;)
    419 replies | 10869 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Tuesday, 30th April, 2019, 04:19 AM
    Yep, it looks pretty good! There is enough free, basic content out there that really you don't need much to get started. Kudos! :)
    15 replies | 613 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Tuesday, 30th April, 2019, 04:14 AM
    One thing I thought of and I haven't read every post in the thread, so if it's been mentioned, consider this support for it anyway: Only PCs make skill checks. As DM, once a player wants to do something that might have significant consequences for failure, you assign the skill/ability combination and DC for the check. For NPCs, there is no check. A DM simply decides if they succeed or fail....
    118 replies | 3956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Monday, 29th April, 2019, 05:23 PM
    Well, to quote a well-known individual: "From a certain point of view." See, unfortunately the problem is I thought I had made my interest clear that I was only concerned with the proficiency bonus itself, and I know some people voted with that in mind. However, because I used "ultimate skill", it was pointed out that it should, in fact, include the ability score modifier (which I wasn't). ...
    106 replies | 3771 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Monday, 29th April, 2019, 03:06 PM
    A lot of it is very subjective, which is shown in the poll I think. A blend of simplistic but realistic is hard to achieve, and overall I think 5E does a decent job.
    106 replies | 3771 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Monday, 29th April, 2019, 02:28 PM
    Gloves of Thievery 3 Helm of Brilliance 12 Helm of Comprehending Languages 7 Helm of Teleportation 4 No matter what language you speak, that was brilliant!
    419 replies | 10869 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Monday, 29th April, 2019, 02:24 PM
    Now that I have over 50 votes (53), let's see what is happening: Vote option 1 (23 votes): 0-1 times equates to a +15 modifier over +0 Vote option 2 (10 votes): 2-3 times equates to a +10 modifier over +0 Vote option 3 (12 votes): 4-5 times equates to a +6 modifier over +0 Vote option 4 (5 votes): 6-7 times equates to a +3 modifier over +0 Vote option 5 (3 votes): 8-9 times equates to a +1...
    106 replies | 3771 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Monday, 29th April, 2019, 03:24 AM
    While you might want to remain impartial, apparently in 5E the "rules" that are "supposed to say whether an expert smith has a +7, or some other number" don't exist. This was intentionally done to allow the DM to decide what that number should be. As a general guideline, I like to think of the modifiers as representing a standard deviation or the "next level of ability" for each +1. For...
    118 replies | 3956 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Sunday, 28th April, 2019, 10:27 PM
    For my understanding HP has always been represented by three categories: meat body, skill, and luck/blessing/magic/etc. Getting hit in 5E (or any edition IMO) could result in a loss of one or more from categories. Once damage is done, the DM narrates it as the story dictates. If you have 50 hp, and get hit for only 1 or 2, then maybe it is a scratch, but maybe it was also you moving to avoid...
    106 replies | 3771 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Saturday, 27th April, 2019, 04:18 AM
    Yeah, we already thought of that and decided is such spells/effects are enough to put you under your damage threshold, they take effect. Due to the fact that the damage threshold also includes your level, this does make sleep, etc. slightly more useful against PCs and NPCs/BBEGs who have a damage threshold, but no one had an issue with that.
    36 replies | 1044 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Friday, 26th April, 2019, 09:45 PM
    While I can see your point and agree on many levels, given the designers' perspective that ability score does represent natural talent and training in a skill, I don't mind a character without proficiency attempting higher DCs since RAW there is no autosuccess with a nat 20. At best, with a 20 ability score and +5 mod, the highest DC they would even have a chance with is 25. Even DC 15 would only...
    106 replies | 3771 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Friday, 26th April, 2019, 07:29 PM
    Well, without the quote from the book indicating the intent of the designers, I was going from prior editions where ability scores literally were only natural ability for something and didn't represent some level of skill, even without proficiency. To me then the term "proficiency" is poorly chosen because it implies the training I thought 5E wanted it to represent. Without the quote, it could...
    106 replies | 3771 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Friday, 26th April, 2019, 02:55 PM
    The question has meaning, it simply isn't as specific as you would like to feel able to vote. With all the different scenarios possible, there is no point in specifying, it is a general question meant to run the gambit of possibilities. That is another reason why as asked what people think/feel/intuit about it--if you decide to vote, go with your gut. :)
    106 replies | 3771 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Friday, 26th April, 2019, 02:51 PM
    It isn't flawed for what I am questioning, and frankly although I am still lacking as many votes as I would like to feel comfortable drawing conclusions yet, the present evidence brings about surprising support (from my point of view anyway), particularly in light with the design intent Baba pointed out (for which I will freely admit I was ignorant of and was skewing my own personal...
    106 replies | 3771 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Friday, 26th April, 2019, 02:39 PM
    I agree. The only times we require proficiency is 1) in aiding another to grant that person advantage and 2) if the knowledge/task is truly obscure and would unlikely be covered by general knowledge or experience gained in life. There are some skills I wouldn't think you could attempt without proficiency, such as knowledge skills. But this is where my understanding differed from the designers as...
    106 replies | 3771 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Friday, 26th April, 2019, 01:16 PM
    Thanks, that is an excellent point on the 5E design! It wasn't, obviously, my take on the system at large but it does explain more of what the designers were doing. Kuddos! :) Good point. I am not looking to rekindle the huge point spreads from prior editions, just FYI. I am curious if the present system is in sync with the overall expectations of the people playing. I'll think on...
    106 replies | 3771 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Friday, 26th April, 2019, 05:02 AM
    Sure, many mechanics of 5E are frustratingly simplistic to me and that is why I only "like" 5E and don't "love" it like other versions I've played. But, again, I don't want to get into a discussion (yet) about it until later. Then, I'll be more than happy to go over everything but beforehand it is counter-productive. If you're still around and interested at that point then cool, let's chat then,...
    106 replies | 3771 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Friday, 26th April, 2019, 04:58 AM
    The math is fine. Yours has some slight errors, but nothing major. Your 105/400 is already counting ties as losses, and then you seem to want to add them in again (unless I misread something... always a possibility). If I ever have more votes (10 is not nearly enough for me to even begin to use the information from the poll), then I'll go into detail on the math. This is not simply a...
    106 replies | 3771 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Friday, 26th April, 2019, 03:50 AM
    If I ever have enough votes to reach my conclusion, I will happily talk about it, but to do so beforehand would not have little value to me. And I haven't asked anyone to agree with anything other than my premise that I want their views on a non-proficient person versus a maximal proficient person. If the votes don't support my assumption, I will gladly admit it and move on. If they do, I'll...
    106 replies | 3771 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Friday, 26th April, 2019, 03:20 AM
    I've done the math. I am doing the poll to see what the evidence of peoples' opinions say about it. But otherwise, why did you reply to this thread other than to tell me to do work I've already done?
    106 replies | 3771 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Friday, 26th April, 2019, 02:57 AM
    So far (but I am waiting until more people vote if they do overnight and tomorrow) I am seeing results I expected. Why I don't just state my thoughts and have others discuss it is because instead of a discussion it becomes a defense of 5E and all that is holy about it. Except in your example it is not the dagger that the Wizard improves with, it is proficiency in attacks. The fact that he has...
    106 replies | 3771 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Friday, 26th April, 2019, 01:37 AM
    Proficiency is training and then experience which builds on that training. Ability score bonus is natural talent or inclination towards a skill or attack type, whi. Of course certain features can grant expertise or advantage to making skill checks or attack rolls. Neither of the two people have any of these characteristics. They have the exact same ability scores. One has no proficiency in a...
    106 replies | 3771 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Friday, 26th April, 2019, 01:29 AM
    Very true, but I am not talking about full combat versus each other. For skills, think of contested rolls, and for attacks, think of how often a nonskilled would likely hit a higher AC than an ultimately proficient person would.
    106 replies | 3771 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Friday, 26th April, 2019, 12:32 AM
    Excellent "I will never" list! But not quite what I am saying in the rest of it: a 19-year-old amateur boxer WOULD have proficiency, and I am say someone with absolutely no skill or training at all, which only makes your view stronger that someone with no skill or training would ever be able to "out-do" someone with the highest level of proficiency (sans expertise...).
    106 replies | 3771 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Friday, 26th April, 2019, 12:09 AM
    While I disagree about ability bonuses because I am talking about proficiency only, you make an EXCELLENT point concerning expertise, which is not something I was thinking of! THANKS! (And THAT is also why I pose such questions and ask them "at large" via polls. :) ) However, since there is no "expertise" you can apply to attacks, it still falters a bit in that respect... hmm...
    106 replies | 3771 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Friday, 26th April, 2019, 12:07 AM
    No trick LOL, but I find it funny how people think that! :D But I am not just talking about a skilled person, but the highest level of skill (proficiency only) attainable. I am not saying +6 RAW because that isn't the point. If you feel +6 is fine for the highest possible level of skill, then of course go that route. Also, untrained or no proficiency is +0, so if you considered it that way,...
    106 replies | 3771 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Friday, 26th April, 2019, 12:01 AM
    Darn! You caught me, Admiral. ;) Valid, but since I am talking about attacks/skills in general, I just wanted people to follow their gut overall. Should versus any other word-choice is mostly a matter of semantics. "Could" works just as well, but I choose "Should" because this is a matter what you believe is likely and makes sense to you in your own game setting. Every table will...
    106 replies | 3771 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th April, 2019, 11:10 PM
    In my discussion at our table yesterday, I thought I would do a poll to get some feedback from the 5E community here. Now, I am expecting certain results, but maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised. You have two people: one has no proficiency to a skill or attack, the other is 20th level and with the highest proficiency possible. Now, remember, we are talking ONLY proficiency or not, there is no...
    106 replies | 3771 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th April, 2019, 08:33 PM
    Well, the loan frost giant that DID attack us by hurling rocks in the middle of the night proved more of a challenge. We beat him eventually, but he put up a decent fight. :) If there had been two of them, it would have been MUCH worse!
    118 replies | 3956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th April, 2019, 08:03 PM
    Not really. The only situation it would have been remotely challenging really is if the jumped us at night when some of the battlers were unarmored. Even then, the number of HP the characters had would make up for it. And the DM didn't want to be nasty, he wanted to use lower CR creatures in number to try this "bounded accuracy lets mooks be effective, yada yada yada." Well, I don't expect...
    118 replies | 3956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th April, 2019, 01:38 PM
    We implemented our new system and it worked great: Add CON score to HP at level one. Damage Threshold = CON + Character Level If HP falls below Damage Threshold you make a Concentration check to remain conscious. You take one level of exhaustion. A critical hit automatically requires a Concentration check to remain conscious, regardless of HP. At 0 HP, you fall unconscious and start making...
    36 replies | 1044 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th April, 2019, 01:27 PM
    All true, the chance of Tim winning a contest of multiple shots diminishes drastically with more and more attempts, and as I said before things like SS can make a difference. But I am talking about the odds of both hitting on a single shot. Bob is only 10% more likely to hit than Tim, again despite all the XP and such. Last night we had an encounter with 13 orcs and 5 orogs. Our party has...
    118 replies | 3956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Wednesday, 24th April, 2019, 12:35 PM
    If they aren't acting alone, you miss the point. Of course weaker foes are great as support and fodder to a BBEG, that's been true long before bounded accuracy came along. The "special rule" in 4E I am not familiar with since I never played it, but it seems like bounded accuracy IS the special rule... they just made everything else worse IMO by making it universal. So you've never had...
    118 replies | 3956 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Wednesday, 24th April, 2019, 03:32 AM
    I am not talking about survivability or lethality, I am talking about pure odds of hitting. That's all. With the sole exception of the SS feat removing disadvantage at long range (a feat that Bob might have and Tim might not), Bob has very little advantage (only +2) over his neophyte son despite likely years of experience. I am also not saying I think it should still be a 1-1 level to bonus...
    118 replies | 3956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd April, 2019, 11:09 PM
    Yeah, we've adjusted proficiency bonus to range from +1 to +8 because it seems pretty wrong over 19 levels to gain only a +4. I never had an issue with things in 2E or even 3E for the little while we played it so I don't understand why bounded accuracy even was thought up... Any way, we also changed proficiency bonus because ability score modifiers going up to +5 and prof bonus to +6 as written...
    118 replies | 3956 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd April, 2019, 10:46 PM
    Don't know why tieflings seem to be popular... they aren't in our group really. Only one player has played them. Personally, I dislike them as much as Lowkey and his gnomish paladins. ;)
    90 replies | 5414 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd April, 2019, 03:08 PM
    It isn't just crafting either IMO. I was looking at proficiency bonus for attacks. At level 1 you are +2, at level 8 you are still only +3. Let's say the kingdom is having a festival and there is an archery contest. Young Tim was trained by his father Bob in the bow for a long time, so he is a Fighter 1 with Archery Fighting style, just like his dad, Bob, who is level 8. Now, Tim is blessed...
    118 replies | 3956 view(s)
    2 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd April, 2019, 04:08 AM
    Yep. I unvoted myself. Polls shouldn't be hidden after you vote IMO. But, since in our group most people are very *meh* when it comes to subclasses, often not finding anything that really appeals to them. I think the overflow of subclasses smacks too much of "we don't think you can just play with your imagination, so we'll hand-feed you something you might like". I know a lot of people like...
    53 replies | 2737 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st April, 2019, 10:43 PM
    Agreed. It totally depends on the style at your table. Our group is fairly heroic I suppose... We defeated an Archmage while at level 6 (didn't kill him, but he fled... later returned and killed off most of the party...) and a Young Black Dragon when level 4-5 (only one character actually died in that battle, but it was close!). I get what you mean about tracking degrading items and that is...
    36 replies | 1044 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st April, 2019, 10:03 PM
    That's cool, whatever works. If we added things like this, though, it would probably be with the suggestions I made since weapons and armor aren't generally so poorly made to fracture that percentages of the time. I'm glad to hear it is changing players' behavior though. I see your point about deadliness of larger creatures. One of the posts I wrote earlier about a variant system made crits by...
    36 replies | 1044 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st April, 2019, 09:17 PM
    Yeah, definitely some good ideas! I like the idea of armor making a crit do normal damage instead of double, but ruining the armor. The problem with this is frontliners would be burning through armors. Maybe instead have armor reduced by 1 point for each crit it stops? So, Plate would go from AC 18 to 17 after one crit, then 17 to 16, and so on. We already have critical fumble rules, but...
    36 replies | 1044 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dnd4vr's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st April, 2019, 09:03 PM
    Good advice and ideas, thanks!
    16 replies | 731 view(s)
    0 XP
More Activity
About dnd4vr

Basic Information

About dnd4vr
Disable sharing sidebar?:
No

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
466
Posts Per Day
5.18
Last Post
Combating fights to the death Sunday, 19th May, 2019 06:42 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
0
General Information
Last Activity
Today 02:26 PM
Join Date
Wednesday, 20th February, 2019
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Monday, 20th May, 2019


Sunday, 19th May, 2019


Saturday, 18th May, 2019


Wednesday, 15th May, 2019


Tuesday, 14th May, 2019


Monday, 13th May, 2019


Saturday, 11th May, 2019


Friday, 10th May, 2019


Wednesday, 8th May, 2019


Tuesday, 7th May, 2019


Monday, 6th May, 2019



Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Tuesday, 23rd April, 2019

  • 03:54 PM - DM Dave1 mentioned dnd4vr in post Crafting Items - Expert Craftsman vs Adventurers
    ...pend their plunder on when they visit the big city. That said, letting a Bard or Rogue use their Expertise to gain double proficiency with Smith's Tools or Leatherworker's Tools or whatever sounds fine to me if that's a thing that will help advance their character concept. We're talking an XP difference of up to 48000 points. None of the characters in our current game have that much XP and we've been playing for almost 6 months now. Sure, but playing for 6 months doesn't actually mean much. Do you meet weekly? Bi-weekly? Perhaps more importantly, how much time has passed in your campaign world? Characters in our campaign (which meets every other week or so) might gain 3 levels over the course of 6 or 7 sessions - and that might be months in the game world or it might only be 4 or 5 days. Point being, if you think about it too hard it all becomes nonsense. So? Did we have fun despite the math/physics? If yes, then it's all good. It seems that the OP issue (as dnd4vr empathizes above) is really with bounded accuracy. The range of bonuses in 5e is tight on purpose. Rather than abilities advancing exponentially, 5e ability advancement is mostly linear and, with some exceptions, capped. Seems that it goes without saying, but the game is not intended to simulate reality. It is, as they say, what it is, and the math hasn't impacted the enjoyment of the sessions at our table.

Friday, 29th March, 2019

  • 02:37 PM - DEFCON 1 mentioned dnd4vr in post 2d10 for Skill Checks
    ...ver)... I find it funny that you've been trying to claim my change doesn't work for what I've been trying to accomplish. ;) Now if you're talking about just the average table... sure your math might be right. But obviously my table isn't average. So why you made the claim in your original post... Mathematically, you have introduced a much greater variance. You are heading in the opposite direction of your stated goal. ...using math for tables which are not mine makes me cock an eyebrow at your claims. If all you're trying to do is just say that for the average table that has more DCs in the 10-14 range, rolling 2d10 does not give any appreciable affect... that cool. You probably are right (and if I cared, I'd actually go through your math to confirm it for myself.) But if that's the case, I'm wondering why you also made the statement about my specific situation, which by accounts does not appear to fall into the average table you are talking about (and which is what dnd4vr has also been writing about)?

Friday, 22nd March, 2019

  • 06:22 PM - DM Dave1 mentioned dnd4vr in post 2d10 for Skill Checks
    ... fact that the d20 die roll produced way too large a variance for me, resulting in a PC's personal modifier having much less meaning in the grand scheme of results. A PC with a +6 to a skill versus one with a +0 did not make a perceptional difference that often... when the +0 could roll 16s to 20s while the +6 would roll 3s, 5s, 6s etc. The lack of a bell-curve meant modifiers had less import. Simple solution: have the players switch dice. That way the PC with the +6 could roll 16s to 20s while the +0 would roll 3s, 5s, 6s. Amirite? On a more serious note, I have noodled over this before but concluded that the d20 just works. In the multiple dice method, any combo of dice is going to have results that strongly favor the middle of the range thereby lowering the chances of spectacular successes and failures. High and low rolls alike can create memorable moments at the table and reducing the chances of those would be a net loss, IMO (especially the failures :devil:). As dnd4vr demonstrates, rolling a 20 (or a 1) is 5x less likely to happen with 2d10 than it is with a d20. In game, when there is a meaningful consequence for failing a check and so a roll is called for by the DM, the +0 PC could simply offer to Help (or Work Together with) the +6 PC. If that is appropriate in the given situation, the "problem" of the lesser skilled PC rolling higher goes away - instead they have teamed up to gain advantage and gain a better chance to succeed. One might also argue that 2d10 for skill checks also somewhat diminishes the impact of the Rogue's Reliable Talent since it's less likely to roll less than a 10... or that it diminishes the value of Bardic Inspiration as the truly skilled PC won't need it as often... but maybe neither of those is really that significant... That said, if 2d10 works for your table in a fun way, that's cool - and I'm glad you shared it!

Friday, 8th March, 2019

  • 02:34 PM - Hriston mentioned dnd4vr in post Sage Advice Compendium Update 1/30/2019
    ...ame time as Y, not that Y can exist so long as X eventually does. But X is true at the same time as Y because it's true of your entire turn. You can't both take the Attack action on your turn and not take the Attack action on your turn. It's one or the other. Possibly, except we have another rule, the one that says you do not have a bonus action until given one. In that case, you cannot go to the bookstore (bonus action) because the bookstore doesn't exist until you take money out of the ATM. Okay, that example got weird, but still, that's how it works. Okay, I was ignoring the bonus action part of the example because of the weirdness, but what I've been saying about Shield Master still holds. The rule you're citing says you don't have a bonus action to take unless "a special ability, spell, or other feature of the game states that you can do something as a bonus action." Shield Master states (with conditions) that you can shove a creature as a bonus action. Alternatively, dnd4vr's example states (with conditions) that you can go to the bookstore and buy a book as a bonus action. You cannot take a bonus action to shove until you've taken the Attack action on your turn. If X, Y means X cannot be a future event if Y occurs, it must be a current event. Right, and my argument is that it's current because of the "on your turn" language. Perhaps an interpolation would help: If you [do] take the Attack action on your turn, you can use... The fact your interpretation jumps to the end of the turn to check if the Attack action has occurred and then goes back to earlier to allow the bonus action prior to the Attack action. Since you've been clear that declaration isn't how you do this, then you have to be allowing a end-of-turn check to justify the bonus action. It's different than that, though. Until satisfaction of the condition can be checked for (which, at the latest, is at the end of your turn), all that has happened is a shove-attempt. Once the moment...

Sunday, 3rd March, 2019

  • 06:10 PM - UngeheuerLich mentioned dnd4vr in post [5E] Interrupting a Spellcaster via Ready Action
    5ekyu You still miss the target. 1. RAW Ready goes 2nd, but not after an action but a perceivable trigger. So hostage scenarios are an edge case as well as having a killing shot. It is also possible to circumvent the trigger and still cast a spell. (Subtle casting metamagic etc.) 2. Hostages are often low level bystanders or badly wounded people. For the scene it is not necessary to do a killing blow, just the threat of it. 3. I even second you in rulings that make ready an action a rare scenario. So no concentration. But I like it as a gamble you might take in those situations. 4. I just strongly disagree with your reading of "finishes the trigger". We would not have the discussion if it was worded as in previous editions "finsihes the triggering action". In that case the spell would go off no question. But I really like the wording of 5e RAW because it rewardsclever thinking on both sides. dnd4vr As you can read in my post: I don't think the rule is in anyway jnfortunately written. Actually it works perfectly. No backloop. No time traves. Just a simple trigger reaction and then tine goes on normally. The only thing you as a DM have to take care off: you don't say: the wizards ignores your threat and just casts you have to say: ignoring your warning the wizard still moves his hand. And now the PC decides: shoot or not. The player might get a sense motive pr perception chech to notice what the intend of the movement is, but now you have to decide possibly before you know what the movement means. That alligns perfectly with movie scenes that depic such situations.

Saturday, 2nd March, 2019

  • 04:43 PM - MarkB mentioned dnd4vr in post [5E] Interrupting a Spellcaster via Ready Action
    The rule I stated was for determining the exact spell being cast. The DM could just as easily rule it as Insight check or similar against the Mind Flayer's Deception (if it was actually trying to fool the PC Fighter). Of course, with that thinking the Deception act by the Mind Flayer could constitute its action! LOL And as I wrote in my post, the player could simple react and throw the spear immediately, without deciding to make the check. Again, lots of ways to handle this. Which still doesn't address the second part of my post. Readied actions, unlike reactions in general, don't occur immediately. They happen after the trigger finishes. That leaves a lot less room for interpretations that allow an action to be interrupted. That’s interesting. Is that written somewhere? I’ve not heard that rule but I like it. It's the rule dnd4vr was referencing - Xanathar's, page 85.
  • 04:38 PM - DM Dave1 mentioned dnd4vr in post [5E] Interrupting a Spellcaster via Ready Action
    That just opens up more room for disagreements. If the Mind Flayer hasn't actually cast the spell yet, how do you know that's what it's doing, as opposed to speaking or gesturing to an ally? Must the Fighter take his readied action the moment the Mind Flayer utters any word or makes any gesture? And again, you take your readied action after the trigger finishes. What counts as someone finishing starting moving their hands or speaking words? Simple: There should be no disagreement because the DM makes a ruling, like dnd4vr stated above. I would say the trigger is finished as soon as the Flayer starts moving its hands or starts to speak in a spell-like fashion, just as the player intended. Then it's up to the player to decide for their PC if they think it is a spell or not. If the player then says their PC tries to recognize the Flayer's motion (or speech) as spellcasting before throwing the spear, the DM might call for an Arcana roll. If the player rolls well, the PC is pretty sure it's a spell (or not). If they roll poorly, they have no idea. In any case, the player gets to decide if the PC carries out the action, or ignores the trigger, per the rules of the Ready action. How about another example. Let's say the fighter readied this action: "I throw my spear at the Flayer if it starts moving towards us". As a DM, would you really insist the the Flayer finish its movement - perhaps it moves 20' to get next to the wizard, attacks, then moves its last 10' to get next to the fighter - before all...

Friday, 1st March, 2019

  • 03:51 PM - Dausuul mentioned dnd4vr in post Sneak attacking undead and constructs seems wrong
    In martial classes, being able to stack that free sneak attack hit onto a fighter attack routine is tremendous. There isn't an answer for it in the other martial abilities (at least with the choices you've made, a fighter/barb great weapon fighter with the right feats and your multiclassing rule would dish serious damage and almost never miss). Your multiclassing rule will supercharge your martials and not do much at all for your casters. Huh? That's not true at all. Double spell slots is a colossal buff. Unless you're doing the whole 5-minute workday thing, casters have to ration their high-end spells with great care. Double spell slots means you can lob twice as many fireballs before you have to fall back on cantrips. You might be assuming that spell slots stack the way they do in 5E multiclassing, but I don't think that assumption is warranted. Based on @dnd4vr's description, it sounds like they threw the 5E multiclass system out the window entirely and went with the AD&D approach. That would mean each class tracks its own spell slots separately. @dnd4vr can correct me if I'm wrong here. Looking over the list of characters, it seems like a reasonably balanced party, at least at a glance. The only character I'd be worried about not keeping up would be the fighter/barbarian; that one seems like it would have less synergy than the others. (The barbarian/monk is an interesting mix... is that character going Dex-focused or Str-focused? Str would seem like a better fit, since it lets you stack rage on top of Flurry of Blows, but I could see the other way too.) Regardless, if our system works for us to meet the challenges we face and the play style we like and our DM fosters, it isn't broken. :p Damn straight. It sounds like a fun game! There's nothing wrong with house rules, as long as everyone is on board and willing to address any issues tha...

Monday, 25th February, 2019

  • 05:41 PM - Hawk Diesel mentioned dnd4vr in post Sneak attacking undead and constructs seems wrong
    dnd4vr Not meaning to sound disrespectful (but certainly recognizing my question can be be seen as such), but have you asked your player how they imagine it works? Did you give them a chance to solve the "problem"? The way I see it, D&D is composed of mechanics and how we see imagine, or "skin" them. There is nothing inherent about the mechanics that make up what we call a human to be human. I can just as easily take those same stats and state that it is a bugbear. The mechanics are not impacted by this, but it allows us to explore the role playing opportunities of having a bugbear present in the party. Additionally, there is nothing that says I can't take the mechanics that make up a warhammer and describe it as a big battle gauntlet. Mechanically the description has no impact on the mechanics, but it can help explain and realize a player's concept for their character. Similarly, Sneak Attack can easily be skinned into other actions. The problem is that we have this kind of cultural un...

No results to display...
Page 1 of 18 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Sunday, 19th May, 2019

  • 11:12 PM - Satyrn quoted dnd4vr in post Combating fights to the death
    Our DM is taking a break, so we are starting a new campaign and yours truly is in charge! MWAHAHAHA! :lol: I get to add my own flare and tastes as the reigning DM and am looking for options on combating "normal" fights to the death. I have been thinking about tactics such as grappling, knocking prone, etc. because I find the endless fight after fight where they typically end in every creature on one side being killed as a bit... well... ridiculous. I understand DND is a fantasy game, and combat can be a vital part of it, but even an experienced party of characters suddenly confronted by a band of orcs and outnumbered 4-1 or worse should consider fleeing or surrender. So, I am looking for options on how to play out combat encounters. I want the players to think more about getting into a fight and not just rush in confident that the battle of attrition will end in their favor. Any advice? Do you mean trying to get the players to the flee more often, or trying to get the players to not ...
  • 06:05 AM - mach1.9pants quoted dnd4vr in post Bet on Sunday’s ‘surprise’ D&D announcement
    Woo-hoo!!! I was the first (and only) bet for Greyhawk! :) I voted greyhawk too, in hope rather than expectation! When does the surprise drop, Sunday's almost over in NZ?
  • 12:01 AM - MNblockhead quoted dnd4vr in post Bet on Sunday’s ‘surprise’ D&D announcement
    Woo-hoo!!! I was the first (and only) bet for Greyhawk! :) But you won't be the first or the last Greyhawk fan to be disappointed. :-(

Wednesday, 15th May, 2019

  • 04:42 PM - Tony Vargas quoted dnd4vr in post Using Spell Point Variant Rule?
    Funny you should mention a "casting-stress" system... I was thinking about something like the "spell drain" system in Shadowrun. That was one of the things in the back of my mind, yes. Magic is often presented as 'dangerous' or 'exhausting' or otherwise something you wouldn't want to do systematically just because you can - alternately, magic is often presented as something that /can't/ be used any time you want (only at certain times under certain conditions, with the aid/approval of some entity, etc). Vancian, in an abstract/meta-game/dissociated way, does boil down those sorts of things down to a net effect: you can only use magic n/day, but it's a pretty kludgy way of doing it. Spell Drain After you cast a spell, you make a Spell Drain check using your spellcasting modifier. The DC is equal to 10 plus the spell level of the spell you cast. If you fail your spell drain check... (options) 1. you suffer psychic damage equal to the spell level of the spell you cast. (Not bad, but s...
  • 03:12 PM - 5ekyu quoted dnd4vr in post Using Spell Point Variant Rule?
    Funny you should mention a "casting-stress" system... I was thinking about something like the "spell drain" system in Shadowrun. Spell Drain After you cast a spell, you make a Spell Drain check using your spellcasting modifier. The DC is equal to 10 plus the spell level of the spell you cast. If you fail your spell drain check... (options) 1. you suffer psychic damage equal to the spell level of the spell you cast. (Not bad, but since damage can be healed fairly easily, not much of a thing really.) 2. you suffer a level of exhaustion. (Good, but might be too much of a penalty.) 3. you cannot cast another spell for a number of rounds equal to the spell level of the spell you cast. (Makes casting higher level spells potentially risky.) Cantrips could be included in all this, or might be left out. So with option #3, maybe you can still cast cantrips or maybe not? If anyone has other options for failing the spell drain check, let me know. :) What do you think, Tony?Not Tony but if this is me...
  • 10:41 AM - Perun quoted dnd4vr in post Using Spell Point Variant Rule?
    I was reading about the variant option of using Spell Points in the DMG (p. 288 I think...). I am thinking about suggesting it to our table and am curious if anyone here is using (or used and abandoned) the idea of spell points or their own version? If so, how did it work for your table? I like the idea and don't mind the added complexity, but I do have some balance concerns: At 20th-level with 133 points a character could have 19 5th-level slots, which seems really powerful. As early as at 9th-level, a character could have 8 5th-level slots (with a point left over). Even with Eldritch Invocations, the two 5th-level slots a warlock gets at the same level seem very underpowered by comparison. So, is anyone using spell points? What issues (if any) have you come across? Use it for our Sorcerer as opposed to spell slots. Has been working very well. It is kept separate from the Sorcery Points. Has not out shined the other spell caster. I'm playing an 8th-level sorcerer in a campa...
  • 09:25 AM - CapnZapp quoted dnd4vr in post Using Spell Point Variant Rule?
    I imagine experience is the best teacher here. After a couple times of novaing and then being less than effective when you are really needed, it seems like discretion would quickly be acquired. Also, with cantrips always available, it is no worse than when a character runs out of spell slots normally.Yeah this presumes something that rarely is true. Novaing is something you do against hard foes, making those encounters much less interesting and challenging. That the other encounters, the easy ones, become slightly less easy, is not a concern. The real conclusion here is to ask yourself why the game allows you to nova at all, at least without paying a hefty price.

Tuesday, 14th May, 2019

  • 02:11 PM - jgsugden quoted dnd4vr in post How do you handle the "economy killing spells" in your game?
    I didn't change a word, I added the emphasis to show why your idea won't work, most likely ever. So you identified one of the conditions I said was necessary for the result and said it could not work as part of the proposition. When you counter an argument by taking away a stated assumption for the argument, you are not counteing the argument. That was my point.
  • 04:42 AM - Maxperson quoted dnd4vr in post How do you handle the "economy killing spells" in your game?
    I agree it is very silly, but the point is it is possible and at some tables (not ours) you have a 9th-level cleric in every town to raise a fallen friend, and wizards to teleport a party, or whatever. Sure. Many tables create their own issues, and for many other tables those aren't issues at all.
  • 02:37 AM - Maxperson quoted dnd4vr in post How do you handle the "economy killing spells" in your game?
    When you get to a certain level, defeating/killing a single goblin is hardly dangerous or suicidal. It is a flaw in the system IMO that you continue to earn XP for very easy encounters, and as I understand it our DM doesn't award XP if the encounter's XP total doesn't reach at least Easy. For example, a couple Hell Hounds (CR 3, worth 1400 XP total) would not be enough to meet the 1800 XP to warrant an Easy encounter for three 10th-level characters. I think this is really a mountain(20th level) out of a molehill(goblin). This is a rulings over rules game and if someone is importing a single goblin every day for his morning goblin murder, and it's not even remotely close to rising to the level of an easy challenge, I'm not giving experience for it. If this person is going out seeking goblins to kill, then he's engaging in dangerous behavior, because instead of 1, it might be 100 today. And that's if he can even find one that day. The whole scenario seems silly to me.

Monday, 13th May, 2019

  • 06:41 PM - jgsugden quoted dnd4vr in post How do you handle the "economy killing spells" in your game?
    Bold emphasis added. Then remove it. You can't change the assumptions to counter an argument. Yes, the wealthy and the poor would all need to change how they live in order for nobody in the world to starve, to lack healthcare, to have clean water, to have food, etc... but we're on the verge of a politics discussion and I'm not terribly interested in that... My point is that in the real world, there are a lot of people with the power to solve a lot of problems. If people changed their priorities, we'd live in a Utopia. If all the wealthy shared their resources, if all the unemployeed put their unusued time to volunteering, if everyone put the Needs of the Many above the Needs of the Few, or the One..... Well, we'd have a lot less misery. The same should be true in a fantasy world. The wizard or druid that volunteers their time to help the farmers, etc... would be the exception, not the rule. Magic is power, just like money in the real world is power. People do not share power, o...
  • 03:04 PM - Dausuul quoted dnd4vr in post How do you handle the "economy killing spells" in your game?
    When you get to a certain level, defeating/killing a single goblin is hardly dangerous or suicidal. It is a flaw in the system IMO that you continue to earn XP for very easy encounters, and as I understand it our DM doesn't award XP if the encounter's XP total doesn't reach at least Easy. For example, a couple Hell Hounds (CR 3, worth 1400 XP total) would not be enough to meet the 1800 XP to warrant an Easy encounter for three 10th-level characters. If you assume the XP system is the universal physics of the world, rather than a narrative device that applies to PC adventurers, you will end up with far bigger worldbuilding challenges than a few 4th-level spells.
  • 01:39 PM - Maxperson quoted dnd4vr in post How do you handle the "economy killing spells" in your game?
    TANGENT: I, for one, don't like the quick progress of XP and leveling in 5E compared to AD&D/2E. There is no reason why just about every elf and dwarf over 150 years old wouldn't likely be 20th-level if they wanted. I can just imagine an elven wizard who magic missiles one goblin a day, every day, for 20 years... and he will be 20th-level. If he wanted to increase the difficulty of the monsters when he got higher level spells, he could do it much quicker... I've never had a problem with that, because it seems to me that it takes a special kind of crazy to go on what amounts to multiple suicide missions. Fighting dangerous creatures is deadly, and the vast majority of people just don't want to do that. Exp from non-combat situations should be very slow going, so most elves and dwarves that even have class levels at all wouldn't be mega high level.

Sunday, 12th May, 2019

  • 06:55 PM - FarBeyondC quoted dnd4vr in post Using Spell Point Variant Rule?
    I was reading about the variant option of using Spell Points in the DMG (p. 288 I think...). I am thinking about suggesting it to our table and am curious if anyone here is using (or used and abandoned) the idea of spell points or their own version? If so, how did it work for your table? I like the idea and don't mind the added complexity, but I do have some balance concerns: At 20th-level with 133 points a character could have 19 5th-level slots, which seems really powerful. As early as at 9th-level, a character could have 8 5th-level slots (with a point left over). Even with Eldritch Invocations, the two 5th-level slots a warlock gets at the same level seem very underpowered by comparison. So, is anyone using spell points? What issues (if any) have you come across? Going from bottom to top: I've been allowed to use a variant on spell points for a couple characters in some games I've run. While it wasn't overpowered in the particular game I ended up using them in, they do make spellcast...
  • 06:24 PM - MechaPilot quoted dnd4vr in post Using Spell Point Variant Rule?
    I was reading about the variant option of using Spell Points in the DMG (p. 288 I think...). I am thinking about suggesting it to our table and am curious if anyone here is using (or used and abandoned) the idea of spell points or their own version? If so, how did it work for your table? I like the idea and don't mind the added complexity, but I do have some balance concerns: At 20th-level with 133 points a character could have 19 5th-level slots, which seems really powerful. As early as at 9th-level, a character could have 8 5th-level slots (with a point left over). Even with Eldritch Invocations, the two 5th-level slots a warlock gets at the same level seem very underpowered by comparison. So, is anyone using spell points? What issues (if any) have you come across? I use spell points for all the casters at my table (except the warlock because it's kind of baked in), because I kind of hate spell slots. I don't use the version as it's presented in the DMG, because I don't impose the one-...

Saturday, 11th May, 2019

  • 05:19 PM - 5ekyu quoted dnd4vr in post Using Spell Point Variant Rule?
    I was reading about the variant option of using Spell Points in the DMG (p. 288 I think...). I am thinking about suggesting it to our table and am curious if anyone here is using (or used and abandoned) the idea of spell points or their own version? If so, how did it work for your table? I like the idea and don't mind the added complexity, but I do have some balance concerns: At 20th-level with 133 points a character could have 19 5th-level slots, which seems really powerful. As early as at 9th-level, a character could have 8 5th-level slots (with a point left over). Even with Eldritch Invocations, the two 5th-level slots a warlock gets at the same level seem very underpowered by comparison. So, is anyone using spell points? What issues (if any) have you come across?We ran an Esper genesus campaign for 18 months. It uses that rule for its psychic types alongside slots for its engineers - think arcane vs divine. They worked fine alongside each other. If I were going to implement it, any "...
  • 04:17 PM - Staffan quoted dnd4vr in post Dice Camera Action intro video for next season, insight to the next hardback?
    Regardless of gender, proving harassment should be done by law, not public opinion and justifiable outrage. It is wrong to blame and do to women, but it is just as wrong to blame and do to men. Everyone deserves a chance to defend themselves and we should not make such things into modern day witch (or warlock) hunts. I know victims as well, on both sides, and "getting some pushback" is never a good thing. Just something to think about. Here's the thing. By the very nature of such things, sexual harassment is very hard to prove. It usually happens when the perpetrator and victim are alone, which means it turns into a he-said-she-said thing. And that means there's reasonable doubt, which in turn means it's almost impossible to convict someone of it. But I'm not a court of law. I can still believe in one of the parties over the other without overwhelming proof. I can definitely do that when there are multiple accusations. And I can then choose not to associate with the alleged perpetrat...
  • 03:44 PM - robus quoted dnd4vr in post Dice Camera Action intro video for next season, insight to the next hardback?
    So, because it is a truly horrible thing to do to women, you want it done to men now? Wouldn't it be better to stop doing it to everyone? Regardless of gender, proving harassment should be done by law, not public opinion and justifiable outrage. It is wrong to blame and do to women, but it is just as wrong to blame and do to men. Everyone deserves a chance to defend themselves and we should not make such things into modern day witch (or warlock) hunts. I know victims as well, on both sides, and "getting some pushback" is never a good thing. Just something to think about. Really not wanting to get dragged into a “debate”. Is there a culture of sexual harassment/assault against men? No. Is there against women? Yes. The pushback is part of an effort to change the culture. End of story.

Friday, 10th May, 2019



Page 1 of 18 1234567891011 ... LastLast

dnd4vr's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites