View Profile: dave2008 - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Today, 01:05 AM
    Thanks! I don't think specify enemies turns is the 5e standard. The Marilith's reactive trait states: "The Marilith can take one reaction on every turn in Combat." Though not the same as what I am doing, I don't think I need to limit it to enemies turns either. I will think about it though. Yes, I actually like legendary actions quite a bit. However, as I have been working on...
    299 replies | 26671 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Today, 12:42 AM
    No, I don't think there is such a situation. But we have neither a bard nor a battlemaster, so it wouldn't come up for us anyway. If we did I think this would be a less attractive proposal. We are more concerned with magical effects stacking. We don't even have a character that can cast Bless! I only mentioned Bless because it was the first buff spell I could think of, I should have looked...
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:51 PM
    First I am speaking about experience of playing D&D with my group 1st, D&D second, and 5e D&D last. If I only have 5 years of experience with 66% of the 5e classes I still deem that as experienced. If you do not, fine my group is not experienced. I believe a stated this is a proposal. Something we are considering (we as a group, not just me). So what we are looking at is adding +...
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:32 PM
    If a class feature is magic it would be affected. If the feature is described as magical specifically or it is (and here is the issue) easily , and universally (by our group) inferred to be magical. I have come to realize that a lot of issues people have with this concept are because you (general - not you specifically) are worried about how anyone would view the rule change with respect to all...
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:46 PM
    No I cannot because we currently handle the issue by removing all + items from the game. I have mentioned this several times throuhout this thread, I apologize I assumed i had mentioned that to you already. This also solves the issue, but I am looking for a different method. Also, BA is not a problem. Things bending it to far are.
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:42 PM
    Generally speaking I stat NPCs as monsters not PCs. In fact, I don't think I have stated an NPC like a PC since we made the switch to 4e and I continue to do the same in 5e.
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:38 PM
    I have never claimed to know all 12 classes. I in fact stated that my group has never played a bard, monk, or barbarian (perhaps not in response to one of your posts though - I don't recall). And I conversely know little about those classes. I don't know why you thought otherwise. I understand your point. However, relative to what my group is currently doing (no + magic items), this...
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:15 PM
    Encounter building / combat challenges are not something I have any problem with. However, I really like the spreadsheet idea. I have a pretty good intuitive feel for balancing encounters (and I am good at adjusting on the fly), but I would think a spreadsheet like that would be very helpful. i will have to look into making one. Thank you for the input!
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 07:28 PM
    I have added the Aboleth Overseer to the Aberrations section. Along with the typical tenants of the hardcore series, I tried to redesign this aboleth without using legendary actions. I thinking about doing that as standard procedure for the hardcore series. I would be interested to know what people think.
    299 replies | 26671 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:57 PM
    Thank you for the comments, that is helpful.
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:54 PM
    That is the kind of perspective I am looking for - thank you. We typically are only concerned with how a change affects how we play the game. However, I am personally interested in the impact on a broader scale. The only issue for me is, I don't get any pay off for considering all classes and spells, etc. It is a lot of time spent with no benefit - that is why I opened the concept to...
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:48 PM
    The result is the same as if there were no + magic items. Since magic items are not required in 5e, this falls within the design intent of the class. I am all good here. This particular complaint of yours is without merit IMO. That being said, if he proposal steps on some other part of the Bard ability, I would be interested in hearing it. I am not sure how much experience with D&D you...
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:39 PM
    To be clear - I have no issue with challenging my groups. That is not what this proposal is about. It is about the concept of BA (which I like) and how to prevent it from being bent to far out of shape.
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:37 PM
    Quite possible. As I noted I already have a solution that works for me. I am just looking for another option. Thank you, that is the type of feedback I am looking for. As originally intended it has no effect on belts of ... and it I already stated that it doesn't change magic that grants advantage. I would have to review barbarians in more detail, we don't have in our group (and...
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:18 PM
    To clarify further: my group tries variant rules all the time (some proposed by me some by my players). We give it a go, if it doesn't work for us we change it back or modifying it. Anyone reasonably mature can handle rules changes and tweaks (whether they are major or small) without much fuss if your open and honest about it.
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:14 PM
    You misunderstand, the bardic inspiration doesn't change. You don't subtract anything, you take the higher value. You just don't get to add the bardic inspiration + magic item bonus. I disagree with this statement. For a "house" rule, one only needs to worry about the affect on players at the table (or house if you will). If this was some variant rule I wanted to publish, then I...
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:04 PM
    I hadn't thought about it. Gut reaction is no, but i need to think about it more.
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:03 PM
    That is a good point, thank you for bringing it up. This rule would affect stacking AC too - magic doesn't stack. So you can have only one magic buff to AC. You would still have the issue of adding one magic item bonus to AC, but not multiple.
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:06 PM
    Yep, that seems a bit out of wack. Don't they have the biggest HD as well?
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:29 AM
    I looked over my notes and it was supposed to be the "Planetar Battlemaster," so I have updated the elite planetar with some battlemaster traits and replaced the planetar champion with the planetar battlemaster
    299 replies | 26671 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:26 AM
    Yes, going old school would be fine for Bless, but Bless is not the only issue. More damage doesn't bother me. My original fix was to give +weapons more damage instead of + to hit. I am just looking for a simple, elegant solution that works for a myriad of magical buffs.
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:21 AM
    Possibly, but Bless is not the only issue. My proposed solution also works for magic items that stack, as noted by S'mon
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:18 AM
    I will have to look into barbarians, no one in my groups plays one so I am not familiar with the ins and outs of the class. From a glance I am not found of the resistance to damage mechanic.
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:16 AM
    Thank you for the input. So with my suggestion the AC would only be 22 (unless the forge bonus is non-magical, not sure what that is). Still as tough as an ancient red dragon ;) I don't know what I am doing wrong, but it seems like a rarely ever roll crits.
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:11 AM
    Thank you, that is the type of information I am looking for. No one has ever played a bard in my groups, so I am not familiar with what they do / can do. I will have to review the class and take a look.
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:02 AM
    Yes, that is an option and I have tried something like that. I think I need to update the OP and clarify that I am not really looking for other options, but wondering if the option I am looking has ramifications that I am missing. The last sentence of the OP doesn't seem to resonate with anyone.
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:07 AM
    That solution does work for me, it is what I am doing now. But I am looking for another option. Also, I haven't come to a conclusion. As I stated in the OP: "I can bet this breaks something else, but I am not sure what. Any thoughts?" So, I am curious if my proposed solution messes with something else in the game's mechanics that I am not thinking of.
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:03 AM
    To be clear I never said anything about CR or balance or tactics or challenging my players. That is not the issue. To be honest, I am not looking for other options to solve the issue. I already know how to solve the issue by removing or banning or increasing tactics or increasing encounter and/or monster strength. I am really just looking to see if there is some problems with my proposed...
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:55 AM
    I am aware, as I mentioned in the OP that is my current solution.
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:55 AM
    Yes, that could be a solution. But I was also trying to find a solution without using the ban hammer. I am also looking for a solution that would work for spells I don't know about or future spells (or magic items) that do similar things.
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:52 AM
    Did you read the OP? I said that is my current solution, but that I am looking for a different option. I also clarified in the OP that it is not broken, but "bent" and I want an adjustment. I've been playing 5e since it came out, so I know how to make the encounters that challenge my group. I am looking for a different solution.
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:34 AM
    Like I clarified, it isn't broken, but a bit bent IMO. I want to straighten it out a little ;) It is an issue for some, so I am looking for suggestions for a fix, not a dismissal of the issue. If it is not an issue for you and your group - great! But it is an issue for me, and I have seen it be an issue for others on these forums. Also, you misunderstood (or assumed I did) what my point...
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Yesterday, 12:22 AM
    From time to time I have pondered about what to do about the compounding effects of magic equipment and buffing spells. Basically I feel that these two together break bounded accuracy (typically in favor of the PCs). My current solution is to not give out + magic items. However, I was thinking about another option. Here is my proposed solution: magic doesn't stack. Whatever magic gives...
    70 replies | 1218 view(s)
    2 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Monday, 12th November, 2018, 02:45 AM
    I have added the Astral Deva and Planetar Champion to the celestial sections. These are both elite versions. After a long absence from this thread I hope to be more active over the next few months.
    299 replies | 26671 view(s)
    3 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Monday, 12th November, 2018, 02:10 AM
    That is a good plan!
    118 replies | 3831 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Monday, 12th November, 2018, 02:07 AM
    Flexibility. Some people like squishy earlier levels, and you are not required to level at that rate. We use milestones not XP for leveling. For those that don't like squishy they can start at 3rd level. You will notice that some significant class features are spread through the first 3 levels. It is pretty elegant as it gives you a good deal of flexibility in the type of play.
    118 replies | 3831 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Monday, 12th November, 2018, 02:02 AM
    I have some suggestions we use in one of my groups, since you mentioned AC as DR and you seem to like "grittier" combat. FYI, this is based in part on actual play experience that monsters actually have to few hit points - despite your gut reaction. Everything is the same with the following additions: 1) Bloodied hit points (semi taken from 4e). Each creature and PC gets bloodied hit...
    118 replies | 3831 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Monday, 12th November, 2018, 01:44 AM
    LOL - seems like every edition someone complains that D&D is like a video game!
    118 replies | 3831 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Sunday, 11th November, 2018, 10:06 PM
    What you are missing is that in D&D rolling a "hit" doesn't necessarily mean your sword struck the opponent (read the description of hit points by Gygax in the 1e DMG). It simply means you reduced the opponents poll of luck, skill, stamina, and a bit of physical resistance know as "hit points." So in 5e the fact the fighters do so much more damage, is in fact them "hitting" much more...
    118 replies | 3831 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Sunday, 11th November, 2018, 06:36 PM
    FYI, you don't have to track hit points if it is not your thing.
    118 replies | 3831 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Sunday, 11th November, 2018, 02:21 PM
    I would suggest you play the game first. It also depends on how much your players are into optimizing, but your suggested revisions will make it nearly impossible to take a fighter down. To clarify, I do like the idea (I think it adds some flavor), but it will unbalance the game, not balance it. If you just like the idea - go for it, but don't expect it to balance the game. It will...
    118 replies | 3831 view(s)
    2 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Friday, 9th November, 2018, 12:37 AM
    I think the nobles work fine for 90-95% of rulers (kings and queens included) in my games. In fact, I tend use higher level NPCs for lords and such, while Kings, Queens, and Emperors would be typically be lower level / CR
    54 replies | 1673 view(s)
    2 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Wednesday, 7th November, 2018, 10:34 AM
    Though I agree this is a mechanical option, you can't just "take" a boon. They are granted by (the DM) some divine source or lost relic or mythical location, etc.
    14 replies | 548 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Wednesday, 7th November, 2018, 10:27 AM
    Maybe, but the show makes it pretty clear that witches have the ability to use magic and humans do not. So the source may be primarily external, but the ability to use it is internal. The one bit of contradictory evidence to this is that they mention exorcism by catholic priest (which I assume are human). Of course that may be completely external.
    46 replies | 1410 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Wednesday, 7th November, 2018, 03:15 AM
    OK, I got all of that, but they are not actually stated to be fiends or fey the show. They are something different / more than human (similar to HP really). That being said I understand why, in D&D terms, a tiefling makes sense.
    46 replies | 1410 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Wednesday, 7th November, 2018, 01:19 AM
    I've watched most of the new show (missed the first episode or 2), but I know nothing about previous shows or versions. Why is she not simply a human? Are "witches" some type fiend in the shows lore? They certainly look human.
    46 replies | 1410 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Monday, 5th November, 2018, 04:12 PM
    The assumption at the time was that I would be adding +4 and higher weapons to epic levels of play. However, I have since changed my mind on that. The 2nd drafts will remove the +weapon requirements. I am using Epic Ranks instead in the future.
    1192 replies | 193811 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Saturday, 3rd November, 2018, 05:24 PM
    How do you or gyor know what is WotC's stance on canon fluff? Can you point me to a post, statement, tweet, video, etc. where one of the designers comments on the their approach to canon in 5e? I the two of you just guessing or inferring?
    46 replies | 1412 view(s)
    2 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Saturday, 3rd November, 2018, 05:10 PM
    Does WotC have a stated position on "canon"? I have never seen one, but it is not something I seek out. EDIT: To be clear, have they issued a statement of some kind about their stance on canon? I am not asking for anyone's belief. I am wondering if they have written out an official position somewhere?
    46 replies | 1412 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Saturday, 3rd November, 2018, 03:07 AM
    Let see. Attack CR: DPR = 38 (CR 5) + attack bonus +8 (+1 CR) = CR 6 on attack Defensive CR: HP = 75 x 2, immunities multiplier, 150 effective HP (CR 6) + AC 20 (+2 CR) = CR 8 Total CR: (6+8)/2 = CR 7. Looks spot on to me. Nice work
    3 replies | 189 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Saturday, 3rd November, 2018, 02:55 AM
    That is why you need to beef (or buf) him up!
    4 replies | 253 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Friday, 2nd November, 2018, 11:36 PM
    I have not, but your going to need a tougher Strahd! I made a CR 17 version to you could use, but I think you might want to look @Mike Myler 's Dracula posted a few days ago. http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?654469-Epic-Monsters-Dracula-(5E)
    4 replies | 253 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Friday, 2nd November, 2018, 11:30 PM
    I am working on Epic Magic at the moment, then I am going to work on Divine Authority. I can give you a little more info, but I am still formulating the actual "rules." Not all epic creatures have "Authority." Right now I am thinking it is limited to Gods and Primordials, with perhaps a few specific exceptions. Authority is what a god uses when it wants to perform miracles. Within...
    60 replies | 21127 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Thursday, 1st November, 2018, 07:23 PM
    The CR and encounter guidelines generally assume a 4 person party. I simple method to amp up a monster to compensate for more PCs is to increase its HP and actions. Increase the HP by 25% and add 1 attack action for each character above 4. So, in your case, increase the boss's HP by 50% and give it 2 more attack actions (not including multiattack). To make the fight more interesting, the...
    11 replies | 384 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Wednesday, 31st October, 2018, 05:23 PM
    Yes, that is one reason I am revising my epic monsters to have extra turns instead of legendary actions. Lair actions are still good though.
    49 replies | 1637 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Wednesday, 31st October, 2018, 05:20 PM
    The issue with D&D is that it appeals to such a wide audience that I don't think it can be fully functional out of the box as you say. I haven't read all your posts, but I am guessing you think 5e monsters are poorly designed. Personally, I think some have major flaws as well and I routinely modify or make my own (of course there are great RAW tools to do this - even out of the box). However,...
    49 replies | 1637 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Wednesday, 31st October, 2018, 12:08 PM
    Wow that turned quickly. I was just jumping back on to cheer for the dragon, but there was no need!
    343 replies | 4940 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Wednesday, 31st October, 2018, 10:12 AM
    You could just raise the DC as well. Though I think a mix would be good. Also, maybe some should be spell attacks instead of PC saving throws.
    25 replies | 707 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Wednesday, 31st October, 2018, 10:07 AM
    Dragon 8 Giant 5
    343 replies | 4940 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Wednesday, 31st October, 2018, 01:03 AM
    I think addressing it is a good idea, but I wouldn't think DM's need help to excise it from the setting. I don't see racism, sexism, and anti-Semitism as part of the setting, just HPL's personal biases. You don't need any of those elements to play the game's setting and I wouldn't expect to see them included in the setting in any way.
    6 replies | 392 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Wednesday, 31st October, 2018, 12:58 AM
    That is my thought as well. Though "poetic" might be a bit strong IMO ;)
    343 replies | 4940 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Tuesday, 30th October, 2018, 09:44 AM
    Yes, they get more and more difficult the further you are from 4 PCs. I have seen suggestions of +25% HP + one legendary action for each PC above 4. That seems logical. Thus, for 8 PCs you would have 2x teh HP and 7 total legendary actions. That seems a bit much to me. I would probably go with the 2x HP, but up damage rather than add more actions.
    49 replies | 1637 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Tuesday, 30th October, 2018, 09:38 AM
    Dragon 12 Elemental 3 Giant 8 Monstrosity 10 Undead 10
    343 replies | 4940 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Monday, 29th October, 2018, 05:37 PM
    Unfortunately I have never run a beholder encounter, but I think Cornpuff has the right idea with the magnet and tactics. After reviewing the beholder here are some thoughts: 1) I think the eye rays could be very effective against a party, but you may want to up the DC if you think the are trivial. 2) You might want to give it the ability to counterspell & shield, trading an eye ray for a...
    25 replies | 707 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Monday, 29th October, 2018, 07:41 AM
    downvotes are 2 Aberration 7 Dragon 21 Elemental 10 Fey 4 Giant 10 Monstrosity 11 Undead 10
    343 replies | 4940 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Sunday, 28th October, 2018, 02:59 PM
    I disagree with that. I can't say for your group, but they work fine for mine. In my experience you just have to have a good understanding of your parties capabilities and the monster's capabilities. I can run a RAW legendary monster and make it exciting and deadly for my group. But I would probably have trouble with other groups (based on what I see on this forum at least) if I didn't make...
    49 replies | 1637 view(s)
    2 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Sunday, 28th October, 2018, 02:53 PM
    That is a bit of a loaded question. To me "Boss" monster has video game implications of the final "solo" monster at the end of the level or something similar that your party faces. Legendary monsters can fill that roll, but they are not limited to that roll. For instance, both unicorn, kirin, and solar are legendary monsters, but they don't fit the stereo type of "boss" monster. The...
    49 replies | 1637 view(s)
    4 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Sunday, 28th October, 2018, 02:39 PM
    Aberration 13 Dragon 20 Elemental 12 Fey 6 Giant 12 Monstrosity 16 Undead 10
    343 replies | 4940 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Saturday, 27th October, 2018, 11:04 AM
    I re-posted the epic boons here: Old Stuff
    60 replies | 21127 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Saturday, 27th October, 2018, 10:38 AM
    Thank you for the kind words. I am still working on it. I am working on the magic and spells section at the moment, which is not my strong suit so it is taking some time. I am also sidelined at the moment by work and family life. I should have more time in November. I have a first draft of all the epic spells (or all I am going to issue in this first draft of the Immortal Rules) completed...
    60 replies | 21127 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Saturday, 27th October, 2018, 10:18 AM
    Aberration 11 Construct 3 Dragon 26 Elemental 14 Fey 9 Fiend 5 Giant 17 Monstrosity 17 Undead 16
    343 replies | 4940 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Friday, 26th October, 2018, 02:28 PM
    Got it
    31 replies | 1226 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Friday, 26th October, 2018, 10:51 AM
    He said $30 dollars, that would be £23.44
    31 replies | 1226 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Friday, 26th October, 2018, 10:44 AM
    Aberration 12 Construct 5 Dragon 31 Elemental 18 Fey 18 Fiend 7 Giant 19 Monstrosity 21 Undead 13
    343 replies | 4940 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Friday, 26th October, 2018, 10:42 AM
    Hmmm, the link provided does not take me to the preview. Any help pointing me to where I can see the preview?
    17 replies | 798 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th October, 2018, 05:39 PM
    Thank you posting. The discuss on the twitter chat is interesting. At first read I didn't like it, but it is starting to grow on me.
    85 replies | 3356 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th October, 2018, 12:01 PM
    Aberration 10 Celestial 7 Construct 6 Dragon 37 Elemental 18 Fey 19 Fiend 10 Giant 20 Monstrosity 25 Undead 14
    343 replies | 4940 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Wednesday, 24th October, 2018, 02:56 PM
    Downvotes are, 2 Aberration 14 Celestial 13 Construct 8 Dragon 38 Elemental 18 Fey 19 Fiend 13 Giant 21
    343 replies | 4940 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Wednesday, 24th October, 2018, 03:06 AM
    Aberration 14 Beast 10 Celestial 15 Construct 12 Dragon 33 Elemental 20 Fey 20 Fiend 13 Giant 20 Monstrosity 28
    343 replies | 4940 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Wednesday, 24th October, 2018, 03:03 AM
    Awesome! I have been going back and forth on this one. For nostalgia reasons I think I have to get it. I will have to take trip to my local FLGS?
    31 replies | 1226 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st October, 2018, 05:38 AM
    That is what is so interesting about D&D, i TPK'd my party with a red dragon! Every group is different and will have different experiences. The only mistake is in thinking our experience is universal. My group hits way below their weight compared to what a few people on these boards experience. I can easily challenge them with the MM monsters, but I do like to make my own tougher versions...
    253 replies | 10281 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Saturday, 20th October, 2018, 01:14 PM
    DOWNVOTES ARE 2 Aberration 21 Beast 18 Celestial 20 Construct 20 Dragon 27 Elemental 20 Fey 21 Fiend 18
    343 replies | 4940 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Saturday, 20th October, 2018, 04:15 AM
    I actually like the middle of the road approach they took. Small benefit + story elements. If it was just story, my group would be interested. These are the types of mechanics I can never remember so I don't use them. Though it is also a concept I am just not comfortable with. To me that is not a 5e thing, just a game concept I don't like and really wouldn't use in any form. Fine that...
    253 replies | 10281 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th October, 2018, 08:03 PM
    Magic Using monsters can be tricky for PCs - if the DM's can use them effectively. Sounds like they will have a quite a ride ahead of them.
    57 replies | 1795 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th October, 2018, 03:17 AM
    I could be wrong, I was 75% sure I had seen it somewhere in a 5e product. But a tried finding it after a wrote that and I didn't have any success.
    16 replies | 396 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th October, 2018, 02:45 AM
    Why not just use un-typed damage then. It still exists in 5e (though it is extremely rare).
    16 replies | 396 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th October, 2018, 01:46 AM
    No it is not. But if you think they are too similar it would be better, IMO, to revise other aspects of Combat Clarity or Doom Sense. Adding force damage it clunky and doesn't follow the design intent, as you describe it, IMO. After your description of the design intent, the best option, IMO, is to leave the damage type up to the DM. Your disregard for the importance of damage type is...
    16 replies | 396 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th October, 2018, 11:56 PM
    I don't have an issue with your explanation. It makes sense. But I don't agree with the conclusion. What not just leave the damage type to the DM? If the damage is a rusty nail - make it piercing. If it is from the hot pot - fire damage, and then bludgeoning damage from the fall. Force damage doesn't make it feel like fate and it just seems, well - forced ;)
    16 replies | 396 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th October, 2018, 11:52 PM
    But it is more clearly "enhancing" the damage if it maximizes the damage and/or makes it critical damage, or even maximum critical damage! And to clarify, I don't necessarily have any issue with divination spells doing damage, I think that thematically, for this spell, my proposal makes more sense. Adding force damage doesn't same like an enhancement, but an addition. Make some better,...
    16 replies | 396 view(s)
    0 XP
  • dave2008's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th October, 2018, 10:17 PM
    I've been looking for more divination spells - so thank you! My first thoughts: Doom sense: I think it would make more thematic sense for the spell if it maximized the damage done or turn it to a critical rather than adding force damage. Sword of Damocles: I would suggest radiant damage instead of force damage. Radiant is the 4e/5e stand-in for divine/celestial damage and that make...
    16 replies | 396 view(s)
    1 XP
More Activity
About dave2008

Basic Information

Age
45
About dave2008
Introduction:
architect of the gods
About Me:
I am an Architect who likes to design in the real and fantasy worlds. I am also a bit of a fanboy for epic level monsters and adventures. I also have a deviant art account: http://hypergojira.deviantart.com/

This (enworld) and deviant art are pretty much it for me on social networking type sites.

Well come to think of it, I do have old blog that I might resurrect some time:
Location:
Ohio, USA
Disable sharing sidebar?:
No
Sex:
Male
Age Group:
Over 40
My Game Details

Details of games currently playing and games being sought.

Game Details:
none at this time
My Character:
none at this time

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
3,297
Posts Per Day
0.94
Last Post
5e Hardcore: Monster Manual Today 01:05 AM

Currency

Gold Pieces
26
General Information
Last Activity
Today 01:21 AM
Join Date
Thursday, 9th April, 2009
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
1

5 Friends

Showing Friends 1 to 5 of 5
My Game Details
Game Details:
none at this time
My Character:
none at this time
Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast

Tuesday, 13th November, 2018


Monday, 12th November, 2018



Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Wednesday, 17th October, 2018

  • 10:52 PM - Hawk Diesel mentioned dave2008 in post Some New Divination Spells
    Thanks dave2008! So with doomsense I can see where you and others have reservations about divination spells dealing damage. But the way I like to see it is since the caster is really using magic to enhance the outcome of a damaging attack (like nudging a person to step on the one slick spot on the ground and slip into the fighter's sword). As such, it seems appropriate to me. Also, I don't want it to be too similar to combat clarity (which is also a 3rd level spell). As for the damage type, I can certainly see the association between a diviner and... well... the divine (celestial, gods, all that). But personally, I see it somewhat differently. Damage done by a divination spell is not direct damage, but rather an escalation of damage from some other source. The way I envision the Sword of Damocles is not a literal sword appears and falls, dealing damage. But rather the target doesn't notice the rusted nail protruding from the shoddily made door, causing him to walk into it, painfully flinching fr...

Monday, 8th October, 2018


Tuesday, 11th September, 2018

  • 11:51 PM - Mike Myler mentioned dave2008 in post Epic Monsters: Yog-Sothoth (5E)
    ...er Plane. That is a 5th level spell and Know the Unknown comes at a time when the Warlock can only cast 3rd level spells. So it is too powerful. I'm afraid that level of nuance isn't in my wheelhouse for Lovecraft although there are folks in the crowd that could *definitely* crush some more general writeups like that! A new spell list (or some alternates) isn't a bad idea and I'll think on that, but contact other plane is much more powerful than Know the Unknown (which I modeled on legend lore) because this class feature gives cryptic information, not one word answers, and it might not even be of any real use to the warlock. It also fits in the mold started with Cerebral Omniscience--very limited early access to a divination spell ahead of caster level. THAT SAID I *do* like contact other plane's potential insanity bit and that fits in perfectly here so I'm adding it (or rather something like it) in! I can understand why you went this way, but I was hoping to see a stat block. @dave2008 - I think what he's saying is that as all the stats would be pretty close to infinity, why bother? :) Lan-"some things are just too big for stat blocks"-efan I noted that I, "....understand why you went that way,..." However, one could say "why bother" for any god. Many people don't believe gods should have stats and should be unassailable by mortals. But that is not the D&D way, IMO. I gave Yog stats in my 5e epic updates on these forums and here there is precedent for Yog in D&D. Here are its 1e stats: 101310 101311 Dave's Yog-Sothoth is located here --> http://www.enworld.org/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=100217&d=1533835452 I don't take shirking my task lightly and really got the impression that Yog-Sothoth is metaphysically *not* an entity like the others. It's everything and yet not-everything all the time forever right? There's a point where you have to sit down and say, "hey--even if PCs interact with this thing, they could never actually interact with it directl...
  • 03:12 AM - Lanefan mentioned dave2008 in post Epic Monsters: Yog-Sothoth (5E)
    dave2008 - I think what he's saying is that as all the stats would be pretty close to infinity, why bother? :) Lan-"some things are just too big for stat blocks"-efan

Thursday, 30th August, 2018

  • 02:30 AM - Oofta mentioned dave2008 in post How come BBEG coming out never have magic weapons or items?
    In fourth edition, the monster level was an accurate reflection of its overall power, as well as its expected performance against individual PCs. All I can say is you didn't play with the group I DMed. As @dave2008 mentions it needed some work particularly at higher levels.

Sunday, 19th August, 2018

  • 04:10 PM - SkidAce mentioned dave2008 in post 5e EPIC MONSTER UPDATES
    dave2008 , I forsee, IMO, an inconsistency you may want to take into account during this design phase. (UNLESS, epic games and standard games are totally divorced from each other) 16th level group of adventurers combat the infamous Ursine'Twain, Demon Double Drop Bear, Lord of the Infinite Wasteland Prison of Stralia, in the Abyss. The demon has legendary actions, as they should for this grand semi-solo combat extravaganza. Players survive, but did not kill Ursine'Twain on its home plane. Adventurers become "epic", they go back to the prison wasteland to finish the job. Demon no longer has legendary actions?

Wednesday, 8th August, 2018

  • 12:59 AM - RedTorment mentioned dave2008 in post 5e EPIC MONSTER UPDATES
    RedTorment I updated Strahd. I think I picked up and clarified all your questions. Let me know if I missed anything. dave2008 It is perfect ! Thank you for your time !!!

Friday, 3rd August, 2018

  • 06:22 PM - RedTorment mentioned dave2008 in post 5e EPIC MONSTER UPDATES
    .... 2) The DMG provides a monster making guideline. These are not hard and fast rules. They are suggestions on how to make a balanced monster of a given CR. The DM is not bound by them. Heck, when I DM, sometimes don't even use a stat block! 3) This is an old stat block. On newer creatures I clarify that an "epic" weapon is used to get the virtual size benefit. You can check out my 5e Epic Characters thread for more information on epic weapons. These are first drafts. When I get to the 2nd and 3rd drafts I hope to clarify items like this better. 4) I generally believe +1 to hit & +1 to damage paradigm of 5e is inadequate. The problem this creates is that you have immensely powerful creatures that hit (damage) like cream puffs. It breaks my sense of immersion and quasi-realism. 5) The damage by size guidelines are not followed strictly in the MM (at least not for natural weapons). 6) Monsters and NPCs do not follow the same rules as PCs. Thank you again for clarifying dave2008. It is all clear In the meantime, I did find this: CURSE OF STRHAD Vladimir Horngaard (Pag 242) Medium undead (Revenant) STR 18 (+4) Vladimir wields a +2 greatsword with a hilt sculpted to resemble silver dragon wings and a pommel shaped like a silver dragon's head clutching a black opal between its teeth. As an action, he can make two attacks with the sword (+9 to hit). It deals 20 (4d6 + 6) slashing damage on a hit. Against Strahd, Vladimir deals an extra 14 (4d6) slashing damage with the weapon. A medium monster with STR 18 but it deals 4d6 !

Thursday, 2nd August, 2018

  • 10:08 PM - RedTorment mentioned dave2008 in post 5e EPIC MONSTER UPDATES
    Yes, I agree. Thank you for your time dave2008
  • 04:23 PM - RedTorment mentioned dave2008 in post 5e EPIC MONSTER UPDATES
    Thank you for your quick and helpful response dave2008. About Multiattack, the original version says "Multiattack (Vampire Form Only). Strahd makes two attacks, only one of which can be a bite attack." In your CR17 stats can strahd make also 2 bites attacks or only one? How much the CR will increase if I buff Strahd to turn it in a 12th level spellcaster ? Thanks !
  • 10:41 AM - RedTorment mentioned dave2008 in post 5e EPIC MONSTER UPDATES
    Hey dave2008 this Strahd version is perfect for my 6 players party + allies. I have a question about the longsword attack. Is it a +3 magic longsword correct? Why it does 6d6 and not 1d8 ? what happens to the necrotic damage replaced in this version with lightning damage. ?

Tuesday, 3rd July, 2018

  • 01:40 AM - robus mentioned dave2008 in post 5e EPIC MONSTER UPDATES
    dave2008, Iím running your Yeenoghu but reading through MToF I see WotC consider him to be Huge (14 feet tall), whereas you have him as Large. Any reason for the size discrepancy? I imagined him as huge until i rechecked your stat block.

Thursday, 28th June, 2018

  • 04:42 PM - SkidAce mentioned dave2008 in post Deity Ranks Revised
    ...e to encounter it. Back then ranking also determined which god could cancel out another gods Actions. But you also do not mention this one, so what is your Motivation for your rank System? Good question, and one that I am currently developing an answer to. I started using Greyhawk and Iuz back in 1986/87?, so I hear yah loud and clear. I guess my current direction is based on two things. You saw above where I described "deities" Deities are embodied somewhere in the planes. They range from lesser deities that may live in the Material Plane, to major deities that control several planes. Such deities can be encountered by mortals. So most godlike figures are currently divided into three groups, lesser, standard, and major god. I currently for my use have them kinda sorted out and ranked by challenge rating (a blunt instrument I know...). But, I also recall and am fond of giving different ranks different abilities. Currently I am theorizing between the abilities dave2008 has broken down for each rank of god, and the godly ranks from the system called THE PRIMAL ORDER. (Its from a little known company called Wizards of the Coast. ;) ) I used to like restricting spell levels granted by deity, but am leaning away from it. My reasoning is a lesser god might have very few followers, but if they focused on one, could they not grant any spells they wished? In the OP I kinda use they level and type of god to determine whether they have clerics at all, or just grant boons or sponsor warlocks. Which in effect, limits spell levels doesn't it? *Brainstorming Only* Maybe a demigod could sponsor a ranger or paladin champion.

Monday, 25th June, 2018

  • 01:56 AM - SkidAce mentioned dave2008 in post Deity Ranks Revised
    ...h worshipers. Quasi-deities fall into three subcategories: demigods, empyreans, titans, and†vestiges. Demigods†are born from the union of a deity and a mortal being. They have some divine attributes, but their mortal parentage makes them the weakest quasi-deities. Empyreans were created at the beginning of the cosmos, and embody the various fundamental forces of the cosmos, such as gravity, energy, entropy, etc. Should an empyrean be slain, a lesser empyrean of a similar nature inherits their power. Titans†are the divine creations of deities. They might be birthed from the union of two deities, manufactured on a divine forge, born from the blood spilled by a god, or otherwise brought about through divine will or†substance. Vestiges†are deities who have lost nearly all their worshipers and are considered dead, from a mortal perspective. Esoteric rituals can sometimes contact these beings and draw on their latent power. Feel free to comment as you see fit... (waves at dave2008 )

Tuesday, 19th June, 2018

  • 12:10 AM - SkidAce mentioned dave2008 in post Deity Ranks: Quasideities, Lesser Deities, Greater Deities
    I mostly agree with dave2008 on things like this, however I abhor the word "intermediate god". "I am a greater god fools!" certainly rolls off the tongue well enough. And even "Sadly, it is beyond my power as I am but a lessor god." can be made to work. But "We intermediate gods are not allowed to manifest on the prime" sound like blech. :D

Sunday, 13th May, 2018

  • 01:35 AM - SkidAce mentioned dave2008 in post 5e Immortal Rules
    Glad you found it dave2008, the ideas, concepts and flavor definitely separates mortals from gods. Make sure to read the intro story about Set, as an example of the difference. The "excel" calculations of power levels? Yeah, maybe not.....but it was how we did things back in the day...

Saturday, 12th May, 2018


Wednesday, 9th May, 2018

  • 08:15 PM - robus mentioned dave2008 in post Disintegrate vs Forcecage
    Why does Yeenoghu need to blast his way out. Can't he just teleport out. It will require a Cha save, but Yeenoghu has a really high one. While Yeenoghu has access to the actual teleport spell. I gave all Demon Lords access to a short range teleport as an action to prevent tactics like this. (Though only Graz'zt can use it as a legendary action.) Even if you don't give Yeenoghu this he still has a 1/day teleport he can use to escape and if by chance he does fail the save he has legendary resistance. I should have specified that I'm using dave2008's beefed 5e monsters. His version of Yeenoghu has Disintegrate instead of Teleport. But you're right that some limited teleport would be a good addition for Demon Lords.

Wednesday, 11th April, 2018


Friday, 30th March, 2018



Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
No results to display...
Page 1 of 68 123456789101151 ... LastLast

Wednesday, 14th November, 2018

  • 12:11 AM - Matrix Sorcica quoted dave2008 in post 5e Hardcore: Monster Manual
    I have added the Aboleth Overseer to the Aberrations section. Along with the typical tenants of the hardcore series, I tried to redesign this aboleth without using legendary actions. I thinking about doing that as standard procedure for the hardcore series. I would be interested to know what people think. I really like it, and really like the new design. Maybe specify it has max one reaction per enemyturn. I do think certain 'legendary' monsters could benefit from legendary actions, perhaps in conjunction with reactions? Otherwise, they may never opportunity attack, or cast spells etc as some of your monsters are wont to as legendary actions.

Tuesday, 13th November, 2018

  • 08:54 PM - 5ekyu quoted dave2008 in post Breaking Bounded Accuracy: Proposed Fix
    I have never claimed to know all 12 classes. I in fact stated that my group has never played a bard, monk, or barbarian (perhaps not in response to one of your posts though - I don't recall). And I conversely know little about those classes. I don't know why you thought otherwise. I understand your point. However, relative to what my group is currently doing (no + magic items), this proposal is still a buff for my group (if we had a bard). Currently Bardic inspiration (d6) has a chance of buffing +1 to +6. With proposed revision, Bardic inspiration (d6) has chance of buffing +2 to +6 , so a mild net gain for the Bard (again if we had one). However, after all of that, I did just quickly skim the Bard and Bardic Inspiration isn't even a magic ability, so my proposed change would affect it at all! So why did you bring it up in the first place ?! Now it seems to be oddly just trolling... you really dont get that a lack of knowledge of now 3 of the 12 classes kind brings into question...
  • 08:18 PM - clearstream quoted dave2008 in post Breaking Bounded Accuracy: Proposed Fix
    From time to time I have pondered about what to do about the compounding effects of magic equipment and buffing spells. Basically I feel that these two together break bounded accuracy (typically in favor of the PCs). My current solution is to not give out + magic items. However, I was thinking about another option. Here is my proposed solution: magic doesn't stack. Whatever magic gives you a bonus to a roll (not disadvantage or advantage) cannot stake with another type of magic that gives you a bonus to the same roll. Example: Fighter Bob has a +3 longsword and Cleric Jane cast bless on him (rolling 2). Bob only gets his +3 bonus from the sword on his attack roll, but he still gets the +2 bonus to his saving throws from bless. I can bet this breaks something else, but I am not sure what. Any thoughts? EDIT: Break is to strong of a word, I think stacking magic bends BA further than I like. EDIT 2: To clarify the bold part above, I am not looking for alternate solutions. ...
  • 08:12 PM - Saelorn quoted dave2008 in post Breaking Bounded Accuracy: Proposed Fix
    This rule would affect stacking AC too - magic doesn't stack. So you can have only one magic buff to AC. You would still have the issue of adding one magic item bonus to AC, but not multiple.What counts as magic, though? Spells and magic items, sure, but what about class features? Does it depend on how the class feature is described, or is it just a "class" bonus either way? From a practical, administrative standpoint, I'm not sure how to make sure that everyone is on the same page with what stacks and what doesn't, unless you go back to naming bonuses.
  • 08:05 PM - 5ekyu quoted dave2008 in post Breaking Bounded Accuracy: Proposed Fix
    Providing advantage or disadvantage doesn't mess with BA because it doesn't extend the range, just the probability. I don't really have an issue with hit rate. Ok so, hit rate and stuff are not a problem you have encountered in your game but BA is... "Basically I feel that these two together break bounded accuracy (typically in favor of the PCs)." So, for us less experienced folks - can you tell us maybe three specific examples where broken BA occured in your game's actual play and caused a problem - preferably ones with magic items and bless and other such spells?
  • 08:00 PM - 5ekyu quoted dave2008 in post Breaking Bounded Accuracy: Proposed Fix
    That is the kind of perspective I am looking for - thank you. We typically are only concerned with how a change affects how we play the game. However, I am personally interested in the impact on a broader scale. The only issue for me is, I don't get any pay off for considering all classes and spells, etc. It is a lot of time spent with no benefit - that is why I opened the concept to the community. To get feedback. Providing advantage or disadvantage doesn't mess with BA because it doesn't extend the range, just the probability. I don't really have an issue with hit rate. In my games, classes that are not the PCs can still come into play as adversaries and temporary allies sometimes sought out by the PCs - so should we take your claim they aren't involved in how you play i supposed thats not true of your games? Interesting. best of luck.
  • 07:57 PM - 5ekyu quoted dave2008 in post Breaking Bounded Accuracy: Proposed Fix
    The result is the same as if there were no + magic items. Since magic items are not required in 5e, this falls within the design intent of the class. I am all good here. This particular complaint of yours is without merit IMO. That being said, if he proposal steps on some other part of the Bard ability, I would be interested in hearing it. I am not sure how much experience with D&D you have, but my group has been playing D&D for 30 years and 5e since the beginning. My players don't branch outside of their comfort zone much so I don't have a much experience with some classes, but then again I don't need to either. However, I have vastly more experience with my group than you do. We are mature adults that can handle quite a bit. Heck we played a 4e adventure without any powers - just improv., so I don't think we need any luck - we got it covered ;) Last part first - IDK what you consider experience or relevant experience but not knowing enough about 2 of the 12 classes to know...
  • 07:03 PM - Satyrn quoted dave2008 in post Breaking Bounded Accuracy: Proposed Fix
    I don't know what I am doing wrong, but it seems like a rarely ever roll crits. You must have weighted the wrong part of your d20.
  • 06:02 PM - 5ekyu quoted dave2008 in post Breaking Bounded Accuracy: Proposed Fix
    You misunderstand, the bardic inspiration doesn't change. You don't subtract anything, you take the higher value. You just don't get to add the bardic inspiration + magic item bonus. I disagree with this statement. For a "house" rule, one only needs to worry about the affect on players at the table (or house if you will). If this was some variant rule I wanted to publish, then I would absolutely need to consider all 12 classes. I am definitely curious how it affects all 12 classes, I like a rule to be well rounded and universal. However, I will never likely see the following at my table: monk, bard, or barbarian. In 30 years of playing my group has never selected one of those classes. RE the bold - again a sign of where experience matters. Assume a fighter has +2 to hit due to a sword - net bonus say +7 I give him bardic inspiration under the current rules at d8 then the possible results are +8 to +15 I give him the same dice in your system and the net bonus is +7 to +...
  • 04:00 PM - Jay Verkuilen quoted dave2008 in post Mythological Figures: Conan the Barbarian (5E)
    Personally I would use whatever method best reflects the character and I can't get rage and action surge without multiclassing, so for me: Conan has to at least multiclass fighter/barbarian Absolutely and some Rogue gives him great mobility, amazing Athletics, and an ability to be uncannily Perceptive without having to have a jacked Wisdom. Conan's Wisdom is OK, but it's not crazy like his Strength, which is clearly a 20 as he's stronger than anyone he meets, in general. Just for kicks, I tried a point buy AL-legal build of Conan at 14th level and he'd actually be pretty decent, maybe missing a bit in the social department but the general spirit of the character worked out.
  • 03:42 PM - FarBeyondC quoted dave2008 in post Breaking Bounded Accuracy: Proposed Fix
    Here is my proposed solution: magic doesn't stack. Whatever magic gives you a bonus to a roll (not disadvantage or advantage) cannot stake with another type of magic that gives you a bonus to the same roll. Does this non-stacking also apply to penalties?
  • 02:30 PM - clearstream quoted dave2008 in post Breaking Bounded Accuracy: Proposed Fix
    From time to time I have pondered about what to do about the compounding effects of magic equipment and buffing spells. Basically I feel that these two together break bounded accuracy (typically in favor of the PCs). My current solution is to not give out + magic items. However, I was thinking about another option. Here is my proposed solution: magic doesn't stack. Whatever magic gives you a bonus to a roll (not disadvantage or advantage) cannot stake with another type of magic that gives you a bonus to the same roll. Example: Fighter Bob has a +3 longsword and Cleric Jane cast bless on him (rolling 2). Bob only gets his +3 bonus from the sword on his attack roll, but he still gets the +2 bonus to his saving throws from bless. I can bet this breaks something else, but I am not sure what. Any thoughts? EDIT: Break is to strong of a word, I think stacking magic bends BA further than I like. EDIT 2: To clarify the bold part above, I am not looking for alternate solutions. ...
  • 01:27 PM - S'mon quoted dave2008 in post Breaking Bounded Accuracy: Proposed Fix
    I will have to look into barbarians, no one in my groups plays one so I am not familiar with the ins and outs of the class. From a glance I am not found of the resistance to damage mechanic. So unarmoured barbarians add their CON bonus to their AC, as well as their DEX bonus. At low level this gives a moderate AC comparable to medium armour, but at very high level you may see some odd effects. Bracers of Defense (uncommon item) plus CON 20 plus DEX 16 plus shield gives AC 22 a lot cheaper than full plate & +2 shield (rare item). I don't think this is game breaking, but with the half damage while raging the barbarian will be even better than the Fighter.
  • 09:10 AM - S'mon quoted dave2008 in post Breaking Bounded Accuracy: Proposed Fix
    Here is my proposed solution: magic doesn't stack. Whatever magic gives you a bonus to a roll (not disadvantage or advantage) cannot stake with another type of magic that gives you a bonus to the same roll. I think it'll work ok. It will tend to hurt PCs and help monsters, especially at higher level. In particular it will make larger PC groups relatively less powerful and lessen the quadratic buff effect. Personally I agree with others that stacking bonuses usually isn't really an issue in 5e because of the Concentration mechanic and because powerful monsters get very high to-hit bonuses, and often do enormous damage on a critical hit. In my Saturday game the dwarven forgepriest Cleric-8 has AC 25 (+1 plate, +2 shield, +1 forge bonus, +1 ring or cloak bonus) so most foes are only hitting on a 20, maybe an 18. He still got taken to single digit hp by a single crit from a wraith.
  • 05:48 AM - GreyLord quoted dave2008 in post Breaking Bounded Accuracy: Proposed Fix
    That solution does work for me, it is what I am doing now. But I am looking for another option. Also, I haven't come to a conclusion. As I stated in the OP: "I can bet this breaks something else, but I am not sure what. Any thoughts?" So, I am curious if my proposed solution messes with something else in the game's mechanics that I am not thinking of. The thing is, I didn't see it was broken in the first place. HOWEVER, with that in mind, I don't see that your option breaks anything. If it works for the group, go with it. If anything, saves are already a little broken (if we are going for things that I might consider a tad broken) at higher levels in relation to other things (for example, spell saves) so leaving that for bless is probably a good idea. Combat being focused on, if you leave the bonus to hit with the weapon but bless doesn't add anything (or, perhaps it's simply the one that gives the highest bonus and that's it...which is how many play it already in some circles),...
  • 04:13 AM - Saelorn quoted dave2008 in post Breaking Bounded Accuracy: Proposed Fix
    Yes, that could be a solution. But I was also trying to find a solution without using the ban hammer. I am also looking for a solution that would work for spells I don't know about or future spells (or magic items) that do similar things.The other obvious solution would be to change what +X items do. For example, under my own set of house rules, +X weapons only deal extra damage, and +X armor increases your DR; but I also converted armor into DR as baseline, so it might be kind of weird outside of that context.
  • 03:59 AM - Oofta quoted dave2008 in post Breaking Bounded Accuracy: Proposed Fix
    Did you read the OP? I said that is my current solution, but that I am looking for a different option. I also clarified in the OP that it is not broken, but "bent" and I want an adjustment. I've been playing 5e since it came out, so I know how to make the encounters that challenge my group. I am looking for a different solution. My alternative is that if you give out magic items don't hand out items that skew the numbers too much. Sorry if that alternative doesn't work for you, but if you've already come to a conclusion, why ask?

Monday, 12th November, 2018

  • 10:21 PM - Mike Myler quoted dave2008 in post Epic Monsters: Drop Bears (5E)
    Ecohawk did a Monster ENCyclopedia: Tomb of Annihilation edition and it has the zorbo at the end: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?584582-Monster-ENCyclopedia-Tomb-of-Annihilation Looks like a dire drop bear to me​ ;)
  • 07:27 PM - Satyrn quoted dave2008 in post Brand new DM to 5E and many concerns...
    LOL - seems like every edition someone complains that D&D is like a video game! It's especially funny considering the numerous video games using TSR-era D&D rules. Even more so since the videogamiest of all editions (4e in my opinion) is the basis of so very few video games.
  • 04:25 AM - Umbran quoted dave2008 in post Hidden


Page 1 of 68 123456789101151 ... LastLast

dave2008's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated
5e Hardcore (AD&D) Monsters & Templates
This is the download companion to my 5e AD&D: Monster Manual. This set of downloads provides a PDF of all the monsters and the tools I use to make the monsters. Included are the following:
The Hardcore (AD&D) Monster Manual. PDF of all the monst...
3321 0 4 Saturday, 1st April, 2017, 02:49 PM Saturday, 1st April, 2017, 03:49 PM
4e Epic Monster Updates
These are the updates for several 4e epic threats that I had posted on the old WotC forum. I also included the epic minions that some of these gods could summon / create, and I included the damage by level charts (at the end of the PDF) I used to cr...
160 0 2 Tuesday, 29th November, 2016, 04:49 PM Tuesday, 29th November, 2016, 10:12 PM
5e Epic Monster Updates
This is a compiled PDF of my Epic Monster Updates from this thread: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?468639-5e-Epic-Monster-Updates

This PDF will updated when I finish a monster type.

If you would like to help and make some epic monste...
7884 0 1 Sunday, 20th March, 2016, 02:19 AM Thursday, 10th May, 2018, 03:38 AM

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites