View Profile: Wrathamon - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
No Recent Activity
About Wrathamon

Basic Information

About Wrathamon
Mission Viejo
Age Group:
My Game Details

Details of games currently playing and games being sought.



Total Posts
Total Posts
Posts Per Day
Last Post
Humans, Fighters, and Life Domain Most Popular On D&D Beyond Saturday, 9th February, 2019 08:39 PM


Gold Pieces
General Information
Join Date
Tuesday, 1st October, 2002
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written

1 Friend

  1. JeffB JeffB is offline


Showing Friends 1 to 1 of 1
My Game Details

Saturday, 16th February, 2019

Friday, 15th February, 2019

Monday, 11th February, 2019

Saturday, 9th February, 2019

Friday, 12th December, 2014

  • 03:45 AM - I'm A Banana mentioned Wrathamon in post Running Eberron in 5E
    ...ference between "I prepare and cast fireball" and "I make a bomb that explodes using the mechanics of fireball" largely boil down to whose action triggers the effect. Meanwhile, other classes that can use fireball (such as sorcerers and sun clerics) have additional mechanics that make them stand apart from each other. If the goal is to simply replicate what the 3e/4e artificer could do, the artificer can be a subclass and prepare spells in items that others can trigger. If the goal is to make the artificer an independent class, they must have more to distinguish it than letting allies trigger their spells. "I think otherwise" is fine, but it isn't much of a reason for anyone to agree with you. Earlier, people said that subclasses based on creating certain items could support the class. I argued that the proposed subclasses seemed a little arbitrary. Someone came in and had the brilliant idea of using artificer PrC's as a basis for subclasses. I'm on board with that. Recently, Wrathamon proposed an alternate item crafting system perhaps with different "rider effects" that artificers could choose. That sounds like it has some meat, too. I can totally see an artificer class condensing out of that cloud of vaporous hypothetical mechanics. But notably, both expand the mechanical place of an artificer beyond an armor-wearing, club-wielding, trap-disarming wizard who lets others trigger their spells. Warlocks and sorcerers both won their independence from wizards in a similar fashion: their mechanics are more than "I am a blood wizard who uses spontaneous casting and a spear" or "I am a sword-wielding wizard whose magic spells are gifts from beyond this world." Meanwhile, assassins couldn't jump away from rogues because they couldn't get a unique enough head of steam, and swordmages are a kind of fighter now because "I am a fighter who casts spells" is not big enough to leave a subclass. So there is a distinct mechanical scope that a class needs to achieve in 5e ...

Sunday, 7th December, 2014

  • 08:24 AM - Orich Starkhart mentioned Wrathamon in post Armor as DR
    ... successful hit always does a minimum amount of damage. Problem solved.I suppose this can address the problem that sufficient Armor DR makes a character invulnerable to low damage weapon attacks, what about increased vulnerability to higher level high-damage attacks making DR seem pointless? DR works better in 5e than in 3e, since high level hit points are defined in a way that emphasizes longevity over physical destruction. DMMike, please elaborate on this point about the definition of hit points. Bringing up Reactions is interesting, because it also brings up action economy. The move/action/reaction system is fantastic - except that -defending yourself- falls completely outside of that economy. For 5e, parrying should be an Action and/or Reaction, while damage reduction applies to all hits. Agreed, and parrying could be added as a possible action/reaction, akin to the existing "Dodge", but I think Sadrik's "Parry" is independent of action economy, thus could coexist with Wrathamon's counter proposal to use an action or reaction to "parry or block". Such a parry or block attempted as a reaction may be much like a Shield spell - implemented specifically in response to a known-damaging blow. Gamers should be able to subtract DR from damage in the time that it takes to carry their pencils to the correct spot on their character sheets. Indeed. I think a big weapon can hold things at bay and give less opportunity to attack the person, i.e., increase their parry score. I hold you away from me with my sword and shield. If you sneak one in you will have my armor to contend with. Yes, but the defender waiting for an attacker to approach already gets an Opportunity Attack, interrupting their attacker's movement, when the attacker tries to come within the defender's range. Maybe the attacker can complete move and their attack only if they avoid a successful hit from the defender's reaction attack (perhaps necessitating a change/clarification of the rule that the...

Friday, 5th December, 2014

  • 09:05 PM - Orich Starkhart mentioned Wrathamon in post Armor as DR
    ...mmodated by either: a) the parry modifier to a weapon should be normalized to 0 for the melee weapons, while small and light weapons (e.g.: dagger) get -1, pole weapons (e.g.: spear, halberd) get +1, or b) the base Parry for a human becomes 6, to account for adding both Proficiency and weapon parry bonus. You could go 2/4/6 for the DRs I suppose, but I worry about magic making the ACs to high and making HP last too long. perhaps 1/3/5 may work.. I think you mean magic making the DR, rather than AC, too high? Does my suggestion above about applying the magic bonus to Parry deal with this issue? As far as HP lasting too long - this is of course going to depend on the specific DR value(s) and on the nature of attacks the characters suffer in the campaign. The math has to work differently if we simply translate a fixed AC to a fixed DR. But because in D&D damage per attack tends to increase with level of encounter, going to an Armor as DR system risks the behavior mentioned by Wrathamon, that the armor-wearer becomes less vulnerable than in the unmodified rules to low-damage attacks, but less protected in the attacks of foes that deliver higher damage per attack. A certain degree of this makes sense - a dagger wielded against a plate armored champion in melee would have a hard time doing any real damage at all. One possible mitigation for the fact that armor-as-DR doesn't reduce hit probability, so in this system armor helps less than AC against high-damage attacks: perhaps DR can be proportional to proficiency bonus? At its most simple: light armor DR = prof medium = 2*prof heavy=3*prof This does mean the dagger-armed (d4 damage) PC cannot expect to hurt the mail armored NPC (DR=6 at levels 1-4) at all unless the PC makes critical hit the attack has significant damage bonuses of some sort (ability modifiers, magic enhancement, circumstantial or class feature bonuses, the attack qualifies for additional damage dice (e.g., Sneak Attack) there is explicit p...

Saturday, 8th November, 2014

  • 01:33 AM - Cernor mentioned Wrathamon in post DMing for Only 1 Player [Any Tips?]
    I started in 4e when my brother ran me through Keep on the Shadowfell... He gave me an NPC companion (and later a second PC to control), and kept it interesting by not sticking to the book. DMing for a single player has a lot of similarities with a group, and you will see that most of them work equally well for more than one person, but my biggest tips are: 1. Echoing Wrathamon, don't be afraid to throw an artifact at them (or powerful magic item), even at a low level. You could have them come across an artifact, have the story revolve around it for a time, then move on to bigger and better things-- The plus side of which is that you can make encounters more difficult and more interesting, because they'll be buffed up beyond what they should be. 2. Don't start them at first level. Keep in mind that they'll burn through resources a lot faster than a full party, and being alone they won't have anyone to take hits for them. Personally I like levels 3 or 4 to start, because they don't breeze through the levels anymore and have the foundation of their class build done (especially path specializations). 3. I know this is a common sentiment, but give them support! Add in a second PC for them, or an NPC to help them out. It may reduce their sense of vulnerability, but ideally it should make them more invested in the world because they develop a relationship wit...

Friday, 19th September, 2014

  • 07:12 PM - doctorhook mentioned Wrathamon in post D&D5E Duergar PC Race Suggestions
    @Wrathamon's post cleared this up nicely, and I XP'd him for it, but it's worth repeating, so here I go. So you're telling me 4E's duergar are basically tiefling dwarves, but earlier editions duergar(and variants) were dwarves related to demons.Nope, no fiends of any kind. Pre-4E duergars were only related to dwarves, with the exception of half-fiendish duergars called "durzagons", who were a specific type of monster spawned from duergars breeding with devils. Pre-4E duergar were the dwarf-analogue of drow: evil, dark-skinned underdark-dwellers with innate magical (psionic) abilities. In 4E, the mechanics and fluff for durzagons was absorbed by duergars, except that these new duergars were racially infernal and bred from each other (similar to tieflings), rather than each one being an actual half-fiend like the durzagon was. So far, all signs point to 5E duergars being like pre-4E non-fiendish duergars.

No results to display...
Page 1 of 14 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Wednesday, 5th December, 2018

Wednesday, 21st November, 2018

Monday, 15th October, 2018

  • 11:09 PM - Yunru quoted Wrathamon in post Do bracers of archery benefit ranged spell attacks? It says ranged attacks ... not ranged weapon attacks. RAI probably a no Okay, let's break it down: A - Mike never states how things are, he states how he would rule. B - The Archery fighting style is worded very differently to Bracers of Archery. C - Mike even rules if it says "Ranged Attacks" then it does apply. But yes; RAW: Yes RAI: No Rule of Cool: Yes
  • 10:10 PM - Kite474 quoted Wrathamon in post Fantasy Grounds Toolset Usage Report
    surprised by PF2 having a decrease but og pf having an increase Makes sense. The honeymoon period of the shiny new playtest is done so all that's left (or will be left) is folks who are in earnest trying to test everything out

Wednesday, 26th September, 2018

  • 08:27 PM - Morrus quoted Wrathamon in post Pathfinder: Kingmaker Is An Isometric RPG Experience
    is it just run around killing monsters and completing quests are is there actually some of the kingmaker kingdom building rules in the game? I haven’t got that far yet, but it’s heavily implied the latter features.
  • 09:00 AM - Jhaelen quoted Wrathamon in post Dragon Reflections #12 - Cthulhu Rises!
    didn't darksun have a scaly race?Not as a player race. At least not in the original core set. In the revised core set they added Pterrans, iirc.; i.e. a race of flying dinosaur-like humanoids. A supplement introduced the 'dray', a reptilian race created by an undead sorcerer king. In 4e they sort of became a player race using the rules for Dragonborn.
  • 04:46 AM - Wolfpack48 quoted Wrathamon in post Delving Beneath the Surface of Runequest: Glorantha
    Seems a lot of games use Glorantha ... is that a public domain sorta world? Glorantha is owned by Chaosium and was created by Greg Stafford. It's not public domain, but there are three Chaosium systems that use Glorantha for the world -- HeroQuest (Robin Laws narrative style play), 13th Age Glorantha (d20), and the original system, RuneQuest, which just launched the newest edition this week (and is reviewed here). Mythras is also a popular ruleset that can be used with Glorantha, and both Mythras and RuneQuest are based on the Basic Roleplaying System (BRP), same as what is used for Call of Cthulhu. RuneQuest and Glorantha have been around since the early days of 1st edition AD&D, but this RQ edition of the rules is the most tightly coupled BRP system with the world of Glorantha, hence RuneQuest: Roleplaying in Glorantha.

Tuesday, 24th July, 2018

  • 07:31 PM - Flexor the Mighty! quoted Wrathamon in post D&D's Best Year Ever - But Hasbro's Goal Is For D&D e-Sports
    Most of the classics were competitive tournaments run at conventions ... mix this with entertaining casts and I would watch it. Yeah. I have no desire to watch Critical Role or stuff like that but watching tables try to navigate a Tomb of Horrors style tourney module and outwit the puzzles, traps, and monsters would be interesting and may be something I'd view now and then. Not sure a 5e style system would be my choice for such things though.

Thursday, 12th July, 2018

  • 12:31 AM - Faoil quoted Wrathamon in post Ross Watson talks Wrath & Glory!
    the space marine makes sense but the weird high-heel ninja S&M cyborg? maybe because she has skulls on her and some priest like things hanging that makes her 40k? Like I said I use to follow 40k but that was like 15 years ago so I dont really know if this is how the new 40k is If it sets your mind at ease, she's a faithful illustration of a Death Cult assassin model released alongside 'Codex Witch Hunters' in 2003. Here's the model. Believe it or not there was a predecessor model for Death Cult Assassins in the earlier Inquisitor tabletop game which was even more provocatively attired.

Tuesday, 10th July, 2018

  • 09:25 PM - Dire Bare quoted Wrathamon in post Ross Watson talks Wrath & Glory!
    these images dont scream 40k to me but I am not a hardcore fan so maybe they do They might not be the most iconic images, but they fit into the 40k universe pretty well. But man, I hate high heels on female warriors . . . so stupid.
  • 07:18 PM - Mike Myler quoted Wrathamon in post Ross Watson talks Wrath & Glory!
    these images dont scream 40k to me but I am not a hardcore fan so maybe they do How about the pregens? Did you snag Blessings Unheralded while it's free? 99192

Saturday, 7th July, 2018

  • 02:48 AM - Henry quoted Wrathamon in post THIS Is The Pathfinder Playtest Rulebook!
    I feel if they are going about printing it.. the final version won't be that altered by the playtest. How much changed from the hardcover PF 1 playtest to the final? Was it just some balance or did major things change? That would be my fear as well Jason Buhlman, the lead designer replied to someone who asked a question very similar to this at Paizocon; he replied that he personally completely re-wrote the Fighter class from ground up in the PF1 playtest back in 2008. “no big deal, just throw out your 5,000-word manuscript, is all!” He joked (or words to that effect). Sounds to me like they are pretty serious about getting this right. It was this one, I believe?

Thursday, 21st June, 2018

Sunday, 17th June, 2018

  • 03:53 AM - gyor quoted Wrathamon in post Elves in forgotten realms and 5e - what is the official source?
    They were fey in 3rd edition ... shadow fey from the plane of shadow. Shadow Fey / Shadow Elves. They got rid of the 4e version They didn't get rid of the 4e versions, Raven Queen is from 4e originally, as is there ability to teleport with resistance to damage. Maybe even some of the other stuff. So the merged the 4e and 3e origins, they split the difference between fey and human origins, and made them elves, humaniods with Elven Ancestory. I just wish they'd offered more advise on integrating 5e Shadar Kai with the previous lore, in 4e Shadar Kai we're a big deal in the FR setting, and even appear in 5e novels. I would suggest that Prince Riven made a deal with the Raven Queen, in exchange for Shadar Kai souls being reincarnated into the bodies of new born babies born to human parents with a link to the Shadowfell, such as to Shadovar parents, Riven would open a door way into the FR shadowfell, so the Raven Queen could spread her influence in FR.

Friday, 15th June, 2018

  • 09:41 PM - Hussar quoted Wrathamon in post My Experiment with 5e - No Classes with Cantrips
    I wonder if you just limited cantrips to once per short rest if you would get that feel you're looking for, but I guess its the bigger spells. Did you allow Ritual Caster? Yes, I did. However, no one took it, so, it never came up. Note, that I did still have rangers and paladins, so, it's not like I went no magic. Just a lot lower.

Monday, 14th May, 2018

Friday, 27th April, 2018

Thursday, 26th April, 2018

Tuesday, 24th April, 2018

  • 11:08 PM - Tony Vargas quoted Wrathamon in post [PF2] Cleric class preview + spells per level
    Yeah, the thing is “people who don’t want to play 4e” is an unsustainable market to cater to in a world where 5e exists. Their options are pretty much either to appeal to 4e fans who don’t want to play 5e, 4e fans were the ones willing to give a new edition a fair try, so we're mostly playing 5e, at least when not playing 4e, as well. I'm like "where's my Warlord!?! It's been years!" but I'm still playing it. OK, running it, specifically, in my case. or to try to attract a new demographic based on PF2’s own merits instead of aping whatever Edition of D&D the latest edition snubbed. So far, it looks to me like they’ve been trying to do a bit of both.That's worked exactly never in the history of RPGs - OK, not fair, lots of RPGs have carved out niches for themselves, that way. I'd expect Paizo to aim higher than just another "like D&D, but better!" fantasy heartbreaker, though. I think they would like to appeal to their pf1 fans, bring back any pf1 fans that moved on to 5e and bring...

Page 1 of 14 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Wrathamon's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites