View Profile: CapnZapp - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Today, 09:05 AM
    It died when WotC decided to not rock the boat afraid that any new ideas would jinx the edition and stop the profits rolling in.
    4 replies | 89 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Today, 09:03 AM
    Hello I'm looking for a map and material of the old school sandboxy feel. Any recommendations, particularly ones published for 5E, maybe on DM's Guild? Specifically: You have a map of wilderness, with the usual ruins, marshes, abandoned towers, caves and what not. In one corner of the map there's the town that'll become the adventurers home base. This is supported by descriptions of...
    0 replies | 0 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Today, 09:00 AM
    Hello I'm looking for a map and material of the old school sandboxy feel. Any recommendations, particularly ones published for Pathfinder? Specifically: You have a map of wilderness, with the usual ruins, marshes, abandoned towers, caves and what not. In one corner of the map there's the town that'll become the adventurers home base. This is supported by descriptions of what you'll...
    0 replies | 2 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Today, 08:44 AM
    CapnZapp replied to PF2 XP for Gold
    Well, already in the Playtest you start out with silver. The numbers in the picture aren't drastically different from the playtest. Just different. Like, IIRC, the first three levels giving 15, 20, 25 gold instead of 8, 16, 30 gold; the table ending in 20,000 gold instead of 55,000 gold or some such. That's a tweak, not a change I'd be interested to know if there was a discussion around...
    14 replies | 275 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Today, 08:35 AM
    I fear you're not seeing the woods for all the trees. The real risk is staying with the 3.x/PF system, since just about everyone that can't stand it's complexities have bailed for other games. It would simply attract very few new customers. My whole point is that Paizo will fail unless they're ready to accept that Pathfinder 1 doesn't cut it anymore. Why? Because 5th Edition has truly...
    182 replies | 12372 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:28 PM
    CapnZapp replied to PF2 XP for Gold
    Nice find. That means they've tweaked the expected character wealth somewhat. I'll update the tables when I find the time.
    14 replies | 275 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:57 PM
    Yes :) But no :) Of course, you don't need XP to do that. Just tell your players "level up quicker in tier I and slower in tier II" and done. Isn't that clear?
    84 replies | 5218 view(s)
    1 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:53 PM
    CapnZapp replied to PF2 XP for Gold
    Ah the entitlement of youth! ;) But to answer your question: "yes" and "if you're not gaining your gold from adventuring, you're not an adventurer, you have a job". I'm sure you can find plenty of xp for gold resources, especially from the OSR community if you want to know more about the variant :)
    14 replies | 275 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:35 PM
    CapnZapp replied to PF2 XP for Gold
    Of course this "Gold per monster" is not really meant to be used. You're supposed to be able to use the existing random treasure tables, after all! Also: if you routinely offer quests with gold rewards, feel free to hand out less random gold. If you want a faster leveling pace, hand out more. All we can discuss here is a baseline.
    14 replies | 275 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:27 PM
    CapnZapp replied to PF2 XP for Gold
    The above table is for the players to use. As the DM, you need something else - you need to know how much gold to place by each creature. Whereas a steady diet of encounters alternating between High and Severe difficulty lets each character level up after ten such encounters, now the amount of gold depends on level. Whether you choose party level or monster level is up to you. Personally I...
    14 replies | 275 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:32 PM
    It does, doesn't it?
    84 replies | 5218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:29 PM
    Just a heads-up: if you're interested in the Pathfinder 2 thread on this topic, I've linked to it in the first post.
    84 replies | 5218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:27 PM
    Absolutely!
    84 replies | 5218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:26 PM
    But now you're assuming a 1:1 XP to GP ratio. You can change that, you know. If you dislike the overall idea that's one thing (and nobody's forcing ya), but don't slam the whole concept over a detail (and a fairly extreme at that; tier IV dragon treasures isn't exactly an average data point...)
    84 replies | 5218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:22 PM
    Just to note, fantasy has always been "racist" in the literal sense that some species are plain better than others. Do I find it offensive that Elves and Dragons are plain better than Orcs or Manticores? Or that Orcs are better than Goblins? Numenorans and Cimmerians better than Dunelendings and Styxians? Not in the slightest, since it's fictional races we're talking about.
    24 replies | 557 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:18 PM
    Funny that. I consider it good DMing to *avoid* resource drains and time sinks... When there's zero challenge, there's no fun. When there's no fun, what's the point in even playing?
    28 replies | 533 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:16 PM
    Absolutely. Once you have done that one or three times, however, I suggest you simply stop doing it. Tell that to the module writers, though...
    28 replies | 533 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:13 PM
    Yes, and that's boring as frak.
    28 replies | 533 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:12 PM
    Or, you could just skip the encounter and have to do none of those things...? It's not as if you're about to run out of content while exploring Chult...
    28 replies | 533 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:10 PM
    Point is, the module offers none of these things. You just meet a dozen goblin in the jungle, and lose half an hour's worth of playing time.
    28 replies | 533 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:07 PM
    Yes, they should be used very sparingly; they're boring and pointless and suck up time you could spend on more exciting stuff.
    28 replies | 533 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:06 PM
    Those investors who think they saw a business opportunity?
    27 replies | 336 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 12:13 PM
    I'm not denying the theoretical similarities. I'm telling you they look and feel completely different. 4E had an intense focus on the battle board. Every little push and move felt important and useful. While this made playing a Fighter much more fun and interesting and rewarding than in 3E or 5E, it contributed to making combats take forever (at least if you made them challenging). 5E is...
    182 replies | 12372 view(s)
    1 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:53 AM
    CapnZapp replied to PF2 XP for Gold
    Here's my complete XP for level table. I find it natural to list the XP to reach a given level as opposed to XP you need to leave a level, so 10 XP is listed as the requirement to reach level 2 instead of the xp you need to complete level 1. The numbers are rounded off. Level Required 1 2 10 3 30 4 60 5 110 6 190 7 320
    14 replies | 275 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:03 AM
    As a reminder of the dangers of the art of nitpicking unless you're sure you're correct...: First off, it would be "sneaked", not "sneeked". Secondly, you're wrong https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/snuck-or-sneaked-which-is-correct
    4 replies | 213 view(s)
    1 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:59 AM
    And your point is?
    84 replies | 5218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:52 AM
    What an odd thing to say. You come across as not having played either. I have played both 4E and 5E and they're worlds apart. For D&D games, that is. I guess you could say 5E is virtually identical to 4E compared to, say, Monopoly or Uno...
    182 replies | 12372 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:46 AM
    Maybe I read you wrong, but choosing to run XP-for-gold isn't to make players act a certain way. Obviously you will want to tell your players about the nature of the campaign up-front, so they can create characters suitable for sandbox play. You run the xp variant because you like it, not to force the players into a play style... Or maybe I completely misread your point...?
    84 replies | 5218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:42 AM
    Fair question. XP has been a part of every edition of D&D (and Pathfinder). But now it serves no purpose (other than to trick players into believing character advancement happens at an objective and scientifically controlled rate, I guess). You can remove XP and level up the party whenever you want with zero impact. But what if I don't want to remove XP? What if I happen to dislike...
    84 replies | 5218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:31 AM
    CapnZapp replied to PF2 XP for Gold
    An alternative solution: encourage barter instead of selling loot. A simple example: The sell price is 25%, except if you accept "store credit". Then you get 50% (for permanent items) or even 75% (for consumables). If you sell your magic sword (market price 100 gp) you get either: - 25 gp (which you then can spend for xp) - permanent items as if you spent 50 gp - potions, scrolls etc...
    14 replies | 275 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:22 AM
    Absolutely. It is a specialized campaign style, not a suggestion to replace the default rewards chapter of the DMG :eek: :cool: As for your individual points, a comment or five: 1: Come on, even a single level is EASILY worth much much more than a measly +1 to your attacks. That doesn't mean there is a problem, or rather, a challenge, only that's it's pretty much the converse of what you're...
    84 replies | 5218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:48 AM
    Now you seem to argue in favor of 5E and simpler systems, Saelorn. All this time I've thought you were in these discussions to defend older systems (like 3.x). If you're content with simple PC options, then of course the issue of "1 hour build; 1 minute kill" goes away. The remaining question for you then is: What about the calls for crunchier player character generation and build...
    182 replies | 12372 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:34 AM
    CapnZapp replied to PF2 XP for Gold
    It strikes me the value of permanent items you find is considerable compared to the xp you need to level up (which are set by the amount of "loose gold" you gain). It seems any campaign interested in xp-for-gold should consider increasing the ratio of gold to items in any loot, to make it less appealing to sell off items in order to level up faster. Having more cash relative to the value of...
    14 replies | 275 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:26 AM
    CapnZapp replied to PF2 XP for Gold
    As I understand it, the only way to make it happen is to abandon the regular xp per level chart (which is real easy: 1000 xp each level) and instead create an accumulated expected wealth per character table, and use that for xp. Trouble is, neither table 11.1 nor table 11.2 (of the playtest) is that table. So here's the accumulated version of table 11.1, per character, rounded off: Level...
    14 replies | 275 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 09:23 PM
    Yeah, no. You keep saying 5E has all the faults of 3E. You also appear to argue people want bad things. Time to recalibrate your beliefs to reality there bud.
    182 replies | 12372 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 08:59 PM
    Now I don't know what game you're talking about, or how that relates to NPC build rules... The only game I know where "easy fights still take too long" is 4E, and I'm not defending that edition. If you truly believe that, or it's inverse a) that you "lie" just because your monsters don't follow PC build rules... b) that following PC build rules somehow prevents a DM from "cheating" if...
    38 replies | 1360 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 07:21 PM
    Sure. Don't forget about one thing, though: People run the xp-for-gold scheme for (at least*) two reasons: a) they like getting the choice between gear and levels b) they like the way gameplay changes when you no longer need to kill or defeat monsters If all you do is replace "30 xp" written on the back of an Orc with "30 gp" in its pockets, all you get is a). In order to not lose...
    84 replies | 5218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 07:09 PM
    CapnZapp started a thread PF2 XP for Gold
    My question is "how easy or hard is it to use xp-for-gp in Pathfinder 2?" (based on the playtest and any available info on the completed game) First I should probably explain what xp for gold even is: Instead of getting xp for killing monsters, or even for completing "milestones" (quests), you can spend gold for xp (likely back in your home town). You decide for yourself what's more...
    14 replies | 275 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 06:52 PM
    I'd say you keep focusing on the wrong thing, Tony. What makes you think 4E succeeded where 4E failed, even if all those things were true? That's right - because it wasn't those things that made 4E fail, and it wasn't really those things that people disliked. It was the way they were used in 4E that made people balk. Since the edition wars are long over, and this isn't about 4E anyway,...
    182 replies | 12372 view(s)
    1 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 06:37 PM
    Ha - that's funny. Everybody knows true grognards only love the edition from 20-30 years ago. So 5E isn't up until 2040! :p
    38 replies | 1360 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 12:23 PM
    The only phone app I'm using as regards my RPG hobby is the one I'm using right now, the EN World forum app
    10 replies | 170 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 10:43 AM
    If I had the money to buy WotC I would force every dev to edit all monster stat blocks to clearly indicate which spells are Concentration.
    21 replies | 757 view(s)
    1 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 10:37 AM
    Unfortunately I'd say you were hoodwinked. The full game will come out on Aug 1, which is only two weeks away. Your purchase will be completely obsolete by then. Nobody will discuss it. Nobody will want to use it, since a thousand little things will have been tweaked. (Heck, it was obsolete already six months ago, given the six or so patches that happened during the playtest) ...
    6 replies | 249 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    7 replies | 512 view(s)
    1 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 10:22 AM
    Sure, when you put it that way. But let me ask you: which is more fun a) a combat encounter that might take a long time to resolve but never feels dangerous and never could pose a threat b) a combat encounter which inadvertently turns out to be impossibly hard; monster AC you can't hit, special attacks you can't defend against or c) a combat encounter that's challenging but not too...
    38 replies | 1360 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 10:06 AM
    Yes obviously. I can't believe PF2 is about to redo the same mistake 4E did, by going for a "clear" presentation. The allure and excitement fundamental to D&D is its class-based approach, where each class is its own special snowflake present for you to unwrap. Only a programmer would want to "clarify" that by breaking class abilities down into it's basic parts and them present them in a...
    38 replies | 1360 view(s)
    4 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 09:58 AM
    Sure. However, the D&D community is rather insular and simply uninterested in "other games". So far all those other games could be printed on the Moon, for all their impact on dndish games (read "no impact whatsoever") Rephrased: until those mechanics appear in the official Player's Handbook (or maybe a Pathfinder equivalent) they could just as well not exist at all...
    38 replies | 1360 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 09:40 AM
    4E made a lot of unpalatable design choices, and yes, some of them involved characters and monsters, but no, 4E didn't fail because monsters used separate rules from characters. We now have 5E which is wildly successful despite having that. Your conclusion seems unlikely. Sure there was *something* about stat gen people didn't like, but probably not the mere separation between PCs and NPCs. A...
    182 replies | 12372 view(s)
    3 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th July, 2019, 12:24 PM
    The worst of all worlds is when the ruleset pretends it offers challenge and therefore excitement, when in reality it gives the players a thousand and one tools to completely control the frequency of recharging* and therefore the level of challenge, with just a single exception: time constraints. *) simplistic naive countermeasures such as wandering monsters are so pathetically easy to get...
    38 replies | 1360 view(s)
    1 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th July, 2019, 11:14 AM
    Thread locked until release.
    7 replies | 512 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th July, 2019, 11:07 AM
    True, but also a huge nitpick and wildly irrelevant to the discussion.
    182 replies | 12372 view(s)
    1 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th July, 2019, 11:09 PM
    Okay, so I'm not seeing any replies from people that actually share the sentiment asked about; just speculation on what they might say. Carry on...
    38 replies | 1360 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th July, 2019, 11:07 PM
    Can't you just build a different wizard, one that remains a squishie, if telling "squishie stories" is that important to you?
    122 replies | 7095 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th July, 2019, 11:05 PM
    A very wise choice :) after all, a player has one (1) character to worry about, while the DM has a dozen. Making PC chargen more crunchy than NPC chargen makes a lot of sense.
    182 replies | 12372 view(s)
    1 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th July, 2019, 11:02 PM
    Theoretically, yes indeed. However, we've already got 5E where 1 was sacrificed (but not for the benefit of 3). So it feels like more of a market to offer 1 & 2 :)
    182 replies | 12372 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th July, 2019, 08:52 PM
    People want incompatible things: 1) deep crunchy charbuild options on the player side 2) simple fast monster creation on the DM side 3) PCs and NPCs being governed by the same rules Sorry, no can do. The only possible way to have 1+3 is what 3.x tried, and it completely killed high-level DMing for me. Ultimately 2 is paramount, so the real choice is between 1 and 3. And my players...
    182 replies | 12372 view(s)
    1 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th July, 2019, 05:34 PM
    CapnZapp started a thread PF2 and energy damage
    Traditionally D&D games make choosing fire over other magical energies (electricity, cold, sonic, etc) a given. Fire spells are generally best, plain and simple. About the only real use for something like acid or thunder is when you're up against a Fire Elemental or something else with resistance/immunity to fire. So I'd thought I'd ask: what do you think of this? Does it bug you as it bugs...
    1 replies | 239 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th July, 2019, 10:46 AM
    That's actually more common than you'd think, that people misuse the adventure format even though all they want is to read you a story, having no interest or intention to let the players exhibit free will. Also, could we move this thread out of the Pathfinder forum? It's a D&D general topic.
    370 replies | 149572 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th July, 2019, 10:32 AM
    To my personal surprise, the thing one of my players said he disliked most about 5E was the need to have X encounters a day. That is, have less and the long-rest classes gain the upper hand; have more and the short-rest classes gain the advantage. Now, what, if any, discussion about encounter expectations is there regarding Pathfinder 2?
    0 replies | 284 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th July, 2019, 05:45 AM
    No, you were onto the right answer: people get emotional when it comes to D&D even though once in a while the game itself is blameless; they're only projecting their own insecurities and prejudice. In other words, there's absolutely nothing special about a rapier discussion that's different from discussing Monty Haul, reptile boobs or Satanism. It's just one more thing to get riled up about.
    87 replies | 2794 view(s)
    1 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Monday, 15th July, 2019, 10:01 PM
    "Only fighter" OAs might make sense from a gamist perspective, but how does it stop the monsters from getting to the wizard? The whole point of OAs is deterrence. As a fighter, you don't actually want to use your opportunity attack; you just want the threat of it to make the monster stay put. If OAs no longer are a built-in natural ability, won't that mean monsters break-off from fighters...
    122 replies | 7095 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Monday, 15th July, 2019, 02:43 PM
    Not sure what you mean by "fluid", but if you mean the opposite of "static", that is, that PF2 characters are able to move about the battlefield more, then I'm all for it. One big drawback of 3.x combat (including games with a similar ection economy, such as WFRP3 and Pathfinder 1) was the way the game made you choose between movement and attacking at full capacity. Why? Since this led to...
    122 replies | 7095 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 08:05 PM
    Thank you for replying. No game is perfect, but there's a darn big difference between 3E and 5E, say. I think this is chiefly because most players play 5E and wasn't around (or doesn't care to remember) the dark old days of 3E. And the (from Paizo's point of view) vocal PF1 community doesn't demand it either - how could they, they haven't seen anything remotely resembling caster-martial...
    122 replies | 7095 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 07:55 PM
    Never played PF1 (but played 3.x a lot), will give 2 a go. Reason: 5E doesn't offer enough charbuild crunch for my players.
    28 replies | 1323 view(s)
    2 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 02:39 PM
    In 5E, the main reason monsters attack frontliners and not backbenchers isn't attacks of opportunities. It is the simple fact the Wizards stay more than 30 ft back. If the monster must choose between only moving (wasting its Multiattack) and actually attacking someone within reach, they choose the latter 9 times out of 10. The only gameplay tactic that doesn't really work anymore because 5E...
    122 replies | 7095 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 01:35 PM
    Honestly, it appears you're the only one, based on how you, and you alone, respond to my every post on the subject, always trying to make it about me, rather than the topic discussed. (And, no, you won't get answers this time either... )
    122 replies | 7095 view(s)
    1 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 01:29 PM
    CapnZapp started a thread Similarities 4E PF2?
    Edit: This is not a troll thread. For the purposes of this thread, assume I am neutral towards 4th edition and that any similarities are neither bad not good. Thank you. I've heard the sentiment "PF2 will be good because it's like D&D 4E" enough times now that I gotta ask: What are the similarities between 4E and PF2? What could be the specific PF2 mechanics (and/or design assumptions) that...
    38 replies | 1360 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 09:44 AM
    If the goal is to retain the 4E-era prominence Pathfinder 1 enjoyed, the only way for Pathfinder 2 not to be a heartbreaker is to adhere just as close to 5E as PF1 adhered to 3E. In other words, it's not about setting. There have been literally hundreds of dndish fantasy settings, and none of them, not even Forgotten Realms, have achieved brand name recognition to survive outside its system....
    122 replies | 7095 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 09:36 AM
    If we go by in-game performance, the LotR Ranger is Boromir!
    352 replies | 12479 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 09:35 AM
    Funny, I don't remember Legolas melee combat pet...? *Gives Gimli a glance* Oh wait...
    352 replies | 12479 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 07:20 PM
    That's WotC's job :)
    352 replies | 12479 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 11:38 AM
    How so? I mean, having the simple "pre-built" sidekicks at level 1-6 is great and all, but how would the product be less desirable by also having build guidance for higher levels....? (Maybe I misunderstood your point)
    9 replies | 410 view(s)
    1 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 10:44 AM
    From a white-room numbers point of view, this makes the Beastmaster appear quite overpowered. But 1) it's two creatures, neither of which can survive if half a creature. Of course the pair appears strong! 2) most players will not want to mistreat and abuse their animal friends. The need to keep their pet alive means the feature will not be as overpowered as cold-hearted numbers indicate. But...
    352 replies | 12479 view(s)
    1 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 10:32 AM
    As for the Beast, offer (at least) three archetypal critters: Ursine (bears, boars, etc): can wear heavy armor barding, master's hit points + 2/level. Lupine (wolves, dogs, etc): can wear medium armor barding, master's hit points, trip or equivalent special ability (master's save DC). Feline (cats, monkeys, etc): can wear light armor barding, master's hit points - 1/level, master's...
    352 replies | 12479 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 07:45 AM
    As for a rangery counterpart to Paladin smiting; two ideas: Infuse Trap. Make a snare or place a bear trap. Spend a slot to make the trap magical. Since trap damage is way less direct or assured than smites, damage should be way higher. I suggest three times as high, meaning 1d20 (instead of 1d8) plus an extra d20 for each higher spell level. Plus 1d20 extra against your favored enemies...
    352 replies | 12479 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 08:21 PM
    Much to my surprise, I wholeheartedly agree to two Flamestrike posts in a row (see XP given) Yes, the core issue is probably that MMearls & Co vastly overvalue the explore pillar of the game; together with their inexplicable inability to understand what abilities contribute to fun gameplay and which shortcut and negate it.
    352 replies | 12479 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 04:15 PM
    Yep. Thanks. (Of course, if you multiply the 5E races by its classes by its Backgrounds, you'll get a number that blows 1E and 2E out the water )
    122 replies | 7095 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 04:14 PM
    The UA article isn't simply "more detailed/in depth". It's two different systems, two different approaches, with two different results. I definitely like the Essentials approach much better, since the characters are *actually simple*. What would be cool would be to extrapolate a complete levels 1-20 progression of each of the three Essentials sidekicks. Then you'd have something comparable...
    9 replies | 410 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 04:04 PM
    The animal companion needs to be able to enter melee combat and survive, maybe not as primary tank, but certainly the attention of a couple of adds. And the random fireball. And still not be dying, making the pet into an ability that only adds a weak link into the party; something the other players (not so) secretly wish wasn't present at all. In short, the pet needs to soak as much punishment...
    352 replies | 12479 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 02:32 PM
    I an slightly amused at this sentiment. Recent "core" rulebooks offer well over ten classes, like twelve or fourteen. Historically, D&D has had four, maybe seven, core classes. I still feel both 5E and PF2 are downright generous with their core offerings!
    122 replies | 7095 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 09:48 AM
    Now you're getting dangerously close to actively seeking out an argument with me. I've repeatedly said that while I might have preferences (much like everyone else) I have no real stake in what MMearls chooses to focus the class on. Just that whatever that focus is is a real improvement, so that the Ranger becomes actually best at *something*. Except that that something mustn't be "best at...
    352 replies | 12479 view(s)
    1 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 08:39 AM
    Well, for what it's worth, had I played a 5E Ranger, I wouldn't have bothered with casting many spells...
    352 replies | 12479 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 09:36 PM
    Sure. I won't deny Pathfinder is likely to overengineer things much like 5E underengineered them. I was merely pointing out "competence" does not need to be a monolithic number. Having distinct and separate facets of competence is not inherently redundant or surplus, is all.
    182 replies | 12372 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 08:25 PM
    Sorry but you don't get to decide my issues are unimportant while yours are. And I don't know what threads you're reading, but you have certainly missed a crap-ton of them, all saying the Beastmaster is essentially :):):):):). What the Ranger most definitely does not need, is MMearls faffing around with relatively unimportant details while missing the greater picture, which is that the...
    352 replies | 12479 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 08:14 PM
    It's spellcasting is incredibly weak sauce. Compare paladin smiting. The ranger needs way more than known spells - had they been able to convert spell slots to bonus damage on top of their regular damage, that could mean that feature would be worthwhile. As is, nah. Just remove it entirely and hope WotC deems that to be a significant loss, so they make either the attacks or the pet...
    352 replies | 12479 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 08:09 PM
    Nature vs nurture. Trained vs natural
    182 replies | 12372 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 04:45 PM
    If you're saying you have a clear ID for what YOU want the Ranger to be, sure. Otherwise, this and other threads clearly reveal nobody can agree to what the Ranger is and should do; and that the inability of the devs to pick an ID and then give us a strong execution of said ID is really the core reason why people consider it weak. That's funny - I'd say all it needs is one subclass where TWF...
    352 replies | 12479 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 09:53 AM
    Oh boy are you in the wrong thread if that's supposed to mean you think the ranger is fine, Tony
    352 replies | 12479 view(s)
    0 XP
  • CapnZapp's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 09:52 AM
    Generally we're in agreement. Just two nitpicks 1) I never argued they should invent something new and un-inconic. Literally every feature I want them to choose from will be something people consider as iconic. 2) That's literally the meaning of an overhaul! Look, they will never admit the PHB class is simply underpowered. That's why I'm arguing they should drop some abilities to...
    352 replies | 12479 view(s)
    0 XP
More Activity

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
13,025
Posts Per Day
2.22
Last Post
So whatever happened to the Tactics Variant/Module or Whatever Today 09:05 AM

Currency

Gold Pieces
90
General Information
Last Activity
Today 09:07 AM
Join Date
Wednesday, 25th June, 2003
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
1
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Saturday, 20th July, 2019


Friday, 19th July, 2019


Thursday, 18th July, 2019



Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Page 1 of 18 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Wednesday, 17th July, 2019

  • 12:50 PM - Aldarc mentioned CapnZapp in post Similarities 4E PF2?
    CapnZapp, that's certainly true, which is one reason why many other RPGs out there are more conscientious about time pressure mechanics. E.g., running out of light/torches in Torchbearer, countdown clocks in Blades in the Dark, and randomized countdown rolls in Index Card RPG. The countdown clocks in Blades, in particular, is pretty genius. Everytime the PCs go into downtime mode to recover, the countdown clocks for their surrounding factions will continue ticking. Not just one, but all of them. Eventually they will trigger, with or without the PCs addressing it, changing the game states. The world around the players advances regardless of their resting. Ignore these things at your own peril, and the situation will boil.
  • 02:04 AM - Parmandur mentioned CapnZapp in post Similarities 4E PF2?
    ...nothing like 4e, and very similar to 4e. So that complicates the issue. I'm with you. PF1 was born of an opportunity to pick up the torch of 3.5 D&D dropped by WotC in the form of the OGL/SRD, leverage their Dragon/Dungeon subscriber list, and sell to the winning side in the edition war. There are no such opportunities, today. 5e has it's own OGL, 4e does not; Paizo has no existing relationship with past fans of 4e; and there's no anti-5e edition war. There's no /reason/ for Paizo to in any way intentionally evoke 4e. The only possible source of similarity might be in that with nothing else to leverage, Paizo might resort to merely trying to make PF2 a better game than PF1 in it's own right. It's worth noting that a lot of people who have been working on PF2 were working at WotC eleven years ago, working on 4E. It's not just an unrelated group who might come to similar solutions, it's the same people approaching problems they worked on before. As to your question, CapnZapp in terms of what people are gesturing towards as re.inding them of 4E (good or bad, fairly or unfairly) compared to PF1, I would point to: 1. The action economy, which is a major shift from 3.X ways of doing things, and obviously pretty core to the play experience. 2. The per level addition to all checks, which takes 4E's approach but with even bigger numbers. This is in addition to a 5E style multitiered proficiency system, which has apparently gotten bigger numbers since the playtest. 3. The Feat-a-Palooza approach to PC building within a Class framework bears more than a superficial resemblance to the 4E power catalogs (though the stylistic resemblance is potent).

Tuesday, 2nd July, 2019

  • 07:30 PM - Umbran mentioned CapnZapp in post What is the Ranger to you?
    What the... CapnZapp "Keep it clean: Don't use obscenities or profanity, don't use clever tricks to run around the profanity filters"
  • 02:52 PM - lowkey13 mentioned CapnZapp in post Is Pathfinder 2 Paizo's 4E?
    Now, when I say it's close to 4e, I'm talking about the mechanics. 2 step resource recovery, a multitude of preroll mechanics, virtually all classes being built around a suite of special abilities (typically spells for most of the classes). Very little niche protection. Overnight HP recovery and virtually unkillable PC's. And that's just off the top of my head. When you say it's close to 1e, what are you looking at? Mechanically, it's a completely different game. So, what is the 1e DNA you're identifying with in 5e? Is it though? Completely different? I mean, I'd start by noting that just above us, CapnZapp states he's playing 5e because it resembles d20 (3e) without the annoying crud, so there's that. But for my terms, using the DMG (slow natural healing) combined with self-restraint at the table (archetypes from the 1e PHB) and no variant rules from the PHB (no feats, no MCing) leads to a very 1e-feeling game, so much so that we pretty much run 1e adventures exclusively. The slow healing takes care of the healing, and we have instituted an additional house rule (system shock of DC 15 if you get knocked down below 0hp, variant of DMG p. 273, anything below -10 is insta-death). TBH, with that, the only real difference left is the at-will cantrips; we are currently engaged in an ongoing, and lengthy, debate about what to do with those.

Tuesday, 25th June, 2019

  • 10:23 PM - Matthia05718273 mentioned CapnZapp in post If you could put D&D into any other non middle ages genre, what would it be?
    A CR3 Archer from Volo's Guide to Monsters fires twice per round, and deals an average of 8 damage per hit. If the person advancing on them has a low AC, which a character in a Western setting will, they can take down an average-HP character from a 3rd level party in two turns - so, unless their opponent wins initiative and is close enough to close the distance in one turn, yes they can kill them before being punched in the face. I guess someone would counter by saying that a character would wear armor to close the difference. Meaning the rules solution to this problem is simply, make armor more cumbersome than it is (you can't close the distance as fast), or make it not as useful (the AC increase is not as good, especially compared to making yourself more dexterous). I gotta say this thread is a little exhausting to read. Hasn't CapnZapp already admitted that he thinks D&D can handle firearms, he just prefers different systems?
  • 12:49 PM - MarkB mentioned CapnZapp in post If you could put D&D into any other non middle ages genre, what would it be?
    CapnZapp I still feel that your argument that D&D favours moving to close in to melee rather than using cover feels more like theory crafting than actual gameplay practice. But even conceding that it might occur in standard D&D, I still don't see that it will be a factor in a Western setting. In a Western setting, ranged combat is king. Your primary damage dealers are pistols and rifles and shotguns, with things like knives and tomahawks coming in second and also being throwable. So, in this setting, where's the motivation to charge into melee? What purpose is there in a character running around in the open? Sure, the HP model may somewhat mitigate the downside of such a tactic, but what's the upside? Why wouldn't people make tactical use of range and cover in those circumstances?

Sunday, 23rd June, 2019

  • 04:13 PM - Fenris-77 mentioned CapnZapp in post If you could put D&D into any other non middle ages genre, what would it be?
    CapnZapp I think you're mistaking my point for something it's not. The lack of understanding specifically indexes the inability (by design) of HP to simulate damage from any real world weapons - HP as simulation. One big subset of arguments about HP and firearms is how while they might work for melee they don't for firearms (as a simulation). They don't 'work' for either, the only difference is the extent to which people don't realize that they don't work for melee (again, as a simulation). In both cases they are a heavily fictionalized account of combat. It's not that I don't understand the complaints, I just don't have a lot of sympathy for them - HP is what it is and asking it do something very different from what it's designed to do is always going to messy and complicated. Maybe worth it as a hack (who doesn't love a good rules hack) but don't complain that it doesn't fit like a glove. So, to sum up, I am only addressing some specific points about the value of HP as simulation as regards m...

Wednesday, 12th June, 2019

  • 05:41 PM - TwoSix mentioned CapnZapp in post Improving Two-Weapon Fighting
    ...hit effects remains the same. A 5th level fighter with the Dual Wielder, Crossbow Expert, or Polearm Master all have the same number of possible hits. I'm not sure that this should be in the DW Feat - it doesn't fit. I do like the idea of extra damage and I think you might channel the Two Weapon Rend feat from 3E - something like "When you hit a target with two non-ranged weapons with which you are proficient in the same round and are using Strength as the modifier you do +5 damage." Only +5 damage and not +10 because there's no negative modifier (and you're getting double stat bonus damage anyway). And round, not turn as the Bonus Action from TWF can be separate from the Action, plus it allows the PC to get the bonus damage from using a Reaction. Again, nah. Assuming a world in which martials have access to GWM and SS, the -X/+X mechanic is necessary. It lets attacks scale better with both accuracy and on-hit effects. (You could of course do a complete redux of feats, like CapnZapp did a few years ago, but one of my criteria was to keep the design as parsimonious as possible. So no GWM/SS fixes here.) And +5 on a disadvantaged attack (since it requires two different attacks to hit) is absurdly weak. Assuming roughly standard hit rates, that's maybe a +2 damage bump per turn that doesn't scale with Extra Attack. Totally defeats the point of the design. One of my main criteria is that the feat redesign should sit on the safe shelf as GWM or PAM or SS. It needs to be competitive without blowing them away (<10% delta in either direction, ideally). Now, running some numbers, I have some concerns about Tier 1 deltas for strong Tier 1 builds like VHuman Fighter 1/Barb2. The delta is about 1.6 DPR between someone taking Dual Wielder and GWM at level 3 (23.3 to 21.7, assuming point buy, Reckless/Rage, and a 1 in 3 proc rate on GWM). GWM/PAM pull ahead at level 6, though, even with the Dual Wielder bumping Str to 18. (42.2 to 40.7). I might need to make a li...

Thursday, 30th May, 2019

  • 12:09 PM - robus mentioned CapnZapp in post Would campaign skeletons address the lack of adventures for minor settings?
    CapnZapp raised an interesting point in the Expanse thread on the lack of adventures for settings once the rulebook is published. Now we all know writing a comprehensive adventure path/campaign is hard (and frequently fails to please everyone all of the time). But is there an opportunity for something simpler (a campaign skeleton say?) which GMs could flesh out as they go? I frequently find that I like the general idea of a campaign and then get frustrated with the details provided. (Often the details seem confusing or at odds with the campaign, or just included to for funsies and not really contributing anything). A campaign skeleton would basically act as an adventure outline identifying the villain and major antagonists and the general structure (hooks to get into the adventure and the major plot points). I'm thinking something like a 5 or 10 page outline? Adventures are generally easy to conjure on short notice: you know the party and their level, so throwing obstacles at them isn't too...

Wednesday, 22nd May, 2019

  • 07:34 PM - Mercurius mentioned CapnZapp in post Game of Thrones Spin-offs: News & Speculation
    CapnZapp, good thoughts but I'd go further and say in an ideal world we'd get a Malazan series, or a proper attempt at Earthsea, or something else entirely. But you know how the biz works: you leverage a brand that works, and HBO is going to try to make as much money as possible off "Game of Thrones" as they can...and GRRM will laugh all the way to the bank, even if it veers further and further from his original vision.

Tuesday, 21st May, 2019

  • 05:00 AM - pemerton mentioned CapnZapp in post If there's one game where stat differences are justified, what game would that be?
    I'm far more interested in the value he feels this adds to the game.By this you're meaning not just gendered roles/classes/playbooks, but sex-based stat penalties? My guess - from the discussion of Conan in the OP - is that CapnZapp wants the play experience that would result from gendered classes/playbooks, but (1) isn't too familar with a wide range of RPGs beyond a certain sort of D&D, and (2) has a certain sort of "simulationist" sensibility that leads to a preference for process-driven mechanics (men are stronger, so give them a stat mod) rather than just cutting to the chase and having gendered classes/playbooks.
  • 04:28 AM - pemerton mentioned CapnZapp in post If there's one game where stat differences are justified, what game would that be?
    you've framed it in the context of wanting to make a game where "men are from mars" because you think that's how "things are IRL" CapnZapp didn't say that's how things are iRL. To the contrary, The point isn't to moralize or repress someone's real-life gender identity. The point is that in this world, and in particular my take on it, "men come from Mars, women come from Venus".The phrase this world referst to the imagined world of the RPG, not real life. I doubt I would play the game that CapnZapp posits. I do play RPGs which, as part of their presentation of mediaeval life, note the significance of certain gender distinctions (Burning Wheel has some lifepaths that are women only; Prince Valiant has a discussion of assumed gender roles, and how this might bear on the incorporation of women PCs into the game). I agree with the suggestion by you and steenan that what CapnZapp is looking for would probably be better achieved by having gendered lifepaths or gendered "playbooks" (to use the PbtA terminology). In a D&D-type game, this would be gendered classes. Mazes and Minotaurs is a semi-spoofy OSR-ish RPG that do...

Monday, 20th May, 2019

  • 12:00 PM - Aldarc mentioned CapnZapp in post State of the mystic
    Having a Psion class is a good call. I agree with CapnZapp that a lot of past psionic archetypes could easily be ported to subclasses of preexisting classes: * Psychic Warrior: Fighter Subclass * Soul Knife: Monk or Rogue Subclass * Wilder: Sorcerer Subclass * Ardent: Bard or Cleric Subclass

Sunday, 5th May, 2019

  • 08:30 PM - Aldarc mentioned CapnZapp in post Paizo To Make Kingmaker Bestiary... For D&D 5E!
    CapnZapp, you seem to be sending mixed messages. On the one hand, you seem to think that Paizo missed their opportunity to make products adapted directly for 5E as is. On the other, you bemoan that Paizo is not making "5E Advanced." But I suspect that if Paizo made either then their profits would fizzle out even faster. Why would the market bother with Paizo if they did either especially when many tables do not allow 3pp materials? By producing materials for 5e, Paizo would be making themselves niche among niche rather than carving out a more unique niche for themselves.
  • 03:50 PM - Hussar mentioned CapnZapp in post Paizo To Make Kingmaker Bestiary... For D&D 5E!
    I think the point that CapnZapp was trying to make is that Pathfinder is a pretty small slice of the RPG market. Considering that the RPG market without WotC producing any new books is about 15 million dollars (and that included 3e and 4e at the time), it's not really too much of a stretch to think that Pathfinder's market share isn't really large. I realize that the common wisdom is that WotC is the 600 pound gorilla, but, really, we don't know how the market slices up.

Friday, 3rd May, 2019

  • 05:09 PM - Oofta mentioned CapnZapp in post "straight" rolls in D&D
    If you have a sub-plot of removing the alignment change aspect, consider an alternative. Make it an incredibly difficult task. Make it a quadruple deadly encounter if you have to. If the party fails, it's not a TPK, the only long term result is that they missed their one shot to "fix" the item. They can't even destroy it if they wanted to. At that point they have a dilemma. Continue to use the item risking becoming evil NPCs or never use it again, but that risks the item calling out to a more amenable party. Let them know ahead of time what's going to happen. There's a McGuffin that can be used to destroy the item once they know what's happening but it might, maybe, just possibly be able to change it as well. As far as LE being allowed in the party, I agree with CapnZapp. Just because a person is lawful doesn't mean they won't (or shouldn't) sooner or later kill off other PCs. It's just that when they do it they'll let you know that "it's nothing personal".

Tuesday, 16th April, 2019

  • 01:54 PM - Sadras mentioned CapnZapp in post Deconstructing 5e: Typical Wealth by Level
    Look, @CapnZapp, I get what you are looking for, but, frankly, it's just not feasible in the 5e ruleset. It really isn't. The fact that no game system or designer has pulled it off or done any better than Gygax kind of indicates it can't be done. How good any magic item is depends on to many intangibles. Despite me not 100% agreeing with @CapnZapp regarding rarity, I don't believe the above statements are quite true. I mean what you need is a base for the cost of magic, it should not be so difficult to tabulate. Then what you need are (1) multipliers for high and low magic campaigns, (2) Consumable or Permanent enchantments, (3) Utility and (4) Rarity (Tiered - perhaps as per @S'mon's post). It just requires some work which I think WotC would rather not invest but I think it would be worthwhile in the long run, but that is just me. @CapnZapp, funny enough despite all the negative feedback you endure on this board for the issues regarding Rests, Feats and Magical Items I certainly appreciate...
  • 09:31 AM - Hussar mentioned CapnZapp in post Deconstructing 5e: Typical Wealth by Level
    Look, CapnZapp, I get what you are looking for, but, frankly, it's just not feasible in the 5e ruleset. It really isn't. 3e and 4e both took their mechanics from how earlier editions of the game were being played. If you played AD&D, you were absolutely dripping in magic items. Either from playing AD&D modules, or using the random treasure charts, AD&D presumed a huge number of magic items in the group. They might not have been powerful items, but, you did have a bunch of them. I mean, all you have to do is look at the 1e paladin who was limited to only ten magic items. 4 weapons, a suit of armor, a shield and 4 more magic items. That was the hard limit for paladins. Yikes! That's about what you'd expect on a 10th or 12th level 3e character in a very high magic campaign. So, 3e and 4e welded the magic items into the character building rules. You were presumed to use magic items to build your character. The problem is, players being the pragmatists that they were, spent their cash o...

Sunday, 14th April, 2019

  • 04:02 PM - Maxperson mentioned CapnZapp in post Deconstructing 5e: Typical Wealth by Level
    That's a good thing. Giving PCs easy access to magic items was a bad idea in 3E and 4E. Note WoTC barely follows their own rules for items, money and encounters. Whether it's good or bad is entirely opinion based. For you and I it's bad, and for CapnZapp it's good. He has rules in Xanthar's for buying magic items now, and if he doesn't like that brand of strawberry ice cream, he has the ingredients for the strawberry ice cream he wants, so he can make his own.

Friday, 29th March, 2019

  • 12:54 AM - Ovinomancer mentioned CapnZapp in post What is a "Reputation Comment"
    Before I say something negative, I try to put myself in someone else's shoes. In this case, I would try to remember that Morrus has to respond to a lot of stuff, moderate comments, deal with extraneous stuff on the board, and have a life too. Especially when other people (like Nagol, for example) can also fill in details. :) OTOH, I also remember that I don't always practice what I preach, so there's that. And that's more important than responding to CapnZapp?! Pull the other one, it's got bells on!


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

Friday, 19th July, 2019

  • 11:58 PM - Colder quoted CapnZapp in post XP for Gold
    Nice find. That means they've tweaked the expected character wealth somewhat. I'll update the tables when I find the time. Yeah, from what I hear they're moving to a silver standard to keep gold values from getting ridiculous when making expensive purchases.
  • 09:33 PM - Maxperson quoted CapnZapp in post XP for gold 5th Edition campaign
    But now you're assuming a 1:1 XP to GP ratio. You can change that, you know. 20 to 1 in order to fix dragons would make orc experience average about 17, rather than 100, and I'm not sure the players would appreciate my changing the exp ratio for each monster. If you dislike the overall idea that's one thing (and nobody's forcing ya), but don't slam the whole concept over a detail (and a fairly extreme at that; tier IV dragon treasures isn't exactly an average data point...) Relax dude. I just said I wasn't sure about it. That doesn't even come close to "slamming the whole concept." I liked gold for exp during 1e, since that was the only way to get to any reasonable level.
  • 09:23 PM - Fenris-77 quoted CapnZapp in post High level and trivial encounters
    Funny that. I consider it good DMing to *avoid* resource drains and time sinks... When there's zero challenge, there's no fun. When there's no fun, what's the point in even playing? What's even better is to avoid parties taking an immense amount of time to search every 10 foot section of room and corridor for secret doors and traps, or the host of other things that bog down a streamlined narrative when there are no consequences for wasting time. The whole point is that the party knows how the mechanic works and they actively try to avoid random encounters. It works well. Building pressure and tension using passing time is mostly a very effective tool in a DMs toolbox, although exactly how that tool gets used varies from DM to DM.
  • 07:42 PM - Saelorn quoted CapnZapp in post Is Pathfinder 2 Paizo's 4E?
    What about the calls for crunchier player character generation and build options? As you say, crunchier PCs are incompatible with easy NPCs, if they both use the same rules. You have to choose your priorities. Where Pathfinder 1 succeeded was that they chose the exact same priorities as 3.5 (complex characters, NPC symmetry, lots of work for the GM), which meant nobody had any reason to stick with 3.5 instead of moving to Pathfinder. With Pathfinder 2, they're going with different priorities than either Pathfinder 1 or D&D 5E, which means somebody is going to be left behind no matter what. That's a much riskier move than if they'd just tried to update an existing game.
  • 06:57 PM - amethal quoted CapnZapp in post XP for Gold
    "If you're not gaining your gold from adventuring, you're not an adventurer, you have a job".The two things are not mutually exclusive, unless you have an extremely broad definition of adventuring. However, I'll take that as a "yes".
  • 05:00 PM - amethal quoted CapnZapp in post XP for Gold
    First I should probably explain what xp for gold even is: I'm not quite sure I follow your explanation. Does the gold effectively have to be wasted in order to gain XP? Also, does it matter how you got the gold in the first place (i.e. does it have to be from adventuring)? However, it doesn't really matter how mathematically rigorous or elegant your system is, since if I keep having to choose between a cool magic item or gaining a level I'm going to choose to play a different game instead, one where I can get both.
  • 04:50 PM - Tony Vargas quoted CapnZapp in post XP for gold 5th Edition campaign
    Why does xp need to be important?So you can get more XP than the next guy, pull ahead of him, and 'win' the game? now it serves no purpose (other than to trick players into believing character advancement happens at an objective and scientifically controlled rate, I guess). You can remove XP and level up the party whenever you want with zero impact.That's not an entirely unfair characterization - I'd note that in 5e, XP does have an effect, in that the XP requirements to level relative to the XP value of a standard encounter budget, lead to faster leveling in Apprentice Tier, and after 11th level, and slower leveling through the putative 'sweet spot.' So arbitrarily leveling that lingered too long in Apprentice tier or skipped through the sweet spot too quickly could contribute to an overall less enjoyable campaign. But what if I don't want to remove XP? What if I happen to dislike keeping xp around as a vestigial remainder of past editions?Why, I re-add back real purpose to XP, of c...
  • 04:21 PM - 5ekyu quoted CapnZapp in post High level and trivial encounters
    Funny that. I consider it good DMing to *avoid* resource drains and time sinks... When there's zero challenge, there's no fun. When there's no fun, what's the point in even playing?Oddly, I consider it good GMing, well really moderately competent GMing, to make encounters and events entertaining or interesting enough to be "worth the time" and engaging and fun, even if not technically "challenging" in any combat sense. Even a low challenge encounter csn be very important and fun, if desired.
  • 04:18 PM - Oofta quoted CapnZapp in post High level and trivial encounters
    Or, you could just skip the encounter and have to do none of those things...? It's not as if you're about to run out of content while exploring Chult... Which is why I sometimes just narrate the trivial encounters. If I've described the area the PCs are travelling in as goblin infested, I'll narrate some minor skirmishes with goblins for example. "The goblins attack a few times, seeming to test how strong you are. You repel their attacks easily and they seem to give up." I don't really ever use random encounters during the game. If I want some "filler" or "tone" encounters I may roll for random encounters ahead of time but then think about whether it adds anything to the story. So yes, sometimes I'll just skip them other times I'll spend a minute or so on narration. Depends on the group, the story arc and tone of the campaign.
  • 04:17 PM - 5ekyu quoted CapnZapp in post High level and trivial encounters
    Point is, the module offers none of these things. You just meet a dozen goblin in the jungle, and lose half an hour's worth of playing time.The module usht running the game, the GM is. The module foesnt know who the PCs are, the GM foes. The module doesnt know what the players at that table enjoy, the GM does. Heck, the module rarely runs the NPCs, the GM does. So, if all the GM does is "lose a half hour" that's his choice, not the modules.
  • 03:42 PM - dnd4vr quoted CapnZapp in post Super Simple Racial Features
    Just to note, fantasy has always been "racist" in the literal sense that some species are plain better than others. Do I find it offensive that Elves and Dragons are plain better than Orcs or Manticores? Or that Orcs are better than Goblins? Numenorans and Cimmerians better than Dunelendings and Styxians? Not in the slightest, since it's fictional races we're talking about. Very true and good point. While I am seeking a level of balance between the races, of course certain options will seem "superior" for one race over another, but that also depends a lot on what you want the character to be good at. For instance, some races are naturally stronger or more dexterous than others, making them better fighter-types than those races that aren't as strong or dexterous. However, as others have pointed out in other threads, with the universal 20 cap, all have the potential to be equally "the best". Other racial features will also lean towards character strengths, but how you play the character and de...
  • 03:37 PM - Celebrim quoted CapnZapp in post High level and trivial encounters
    Tell that to the module writers, though... That you are running a module is no better of an excuse than "the dice made me do it". Don't let the module ruin your fun either. Once you have done that one or three times, however, I suggest you simply stop doing it. Might very much depend on what relationship develops between the goblins and the PCs. I've had players before that totally would be aboard going with the Evil Warlord route and think accumulating an army of goblin followers was awesome. Otherwise, encounters of this sort tend to become summaries or handwaves where the players get the option to play them out if they want to. As in: DM: "Late in the afternoon of the 10th day, you meet another group of goblin drovers, herding pigs through the forest. They eye you warily." PCs: "Eh... move on? Yeah, we just move on." UPDATE: I suppose there is a reasonable question as to why do even that much, because the answer isn't obvious. The reason you have non-encounte...
  • 12:54 PM - Hussar quoted CapnZapp in post Is Pathfinder 2 Paizo's 4E?
    The vast majority of official 4E adventures are just stringed-along combat encounters. 5E adventures read much like AD&D or 3E adventures, which you may or may not like, but at least make for a sizeable difference. Now that I can't really argue with. 4e modules, particularly early ones, were egregiously bad. To be fair, the Dungeon ones got better towards the end - the Chaos Scar adventures were actually a ton of fun. On the other hand, magic items in 4e were what you made them. My rogue with a life draining dagger and my warlock with the Crown of Winter were both fascinating to play. Again, it's what you make it. But, yeah, we're going to have to agree to disagree here. You see these massive differences in play and I simply don't. 4e and 5e, outside of combat, play virtually identically. 5e, to me, is just sped up 4e. It's an improvement, to be sure, but, the 4e DNA is most certainly there in every aspect of 5e.
  • 11:00 AM - Hussar quoted CapnZapp in post Is Pathfinder 2 Paizo's 4E?
    What an odd thing to say. You come across as not having played either. I have played both 4E and 5E and they're worlds apart. For D&D games, that is. I guess you could say 5E is virtually identical to 4E compared to, say, Monopoly or Uno... LOL. I always shake my head when folks say this. Hrm, 2 step recovery system, skill system that is virtually identical (strip out the level adjustments from 4e and you get the 5e skill system), every class is built on the same model, instead of powers, nearly every class gets spells, many of which do the same things that powers did in 4e. What else... oh, removing the need for magic items - 4e used inherent bonuses, 5e just does without, umm, what else? NPC's and PC's built on different rules, no magic item economy, spells attack stats, I'm sure I could come up with more. Having played and run both for about equal numbers of years, I can honestly say that if you think they're worlds apart and that 5e is closer to 3e, well, I'm not sure ...
  • 10:54 AM - Doug McCrae quoted CapnZapp in post XP for gold 5th Edition campaign
    Maybe I read you wrong, but choosing to run XP-for-gold isn't to make players act a certain way. ... You run the xp variant because you like it, not to force the players into a play style... --- One big reason is to encourage a mercenary playstyle. Like Conan in many stories, or Han Solo (initially). To get away from the saccarine chivalric stories where you good.
  • 10:03 AM - Doug McCrae quoted CapnZapp in post XP for gold 5th Edition campaign
    d) because it makes xp important again. Ever since D&D abandoned having different xp charts for different classes (a Thief levelling up faster than a Magic User given the same XP), or paying XP to enchant items (upgrading that +1 Sword into a +2 Sword costs 5000 gold and 1000 XP, say) there really is no need for xp anymore…Why does xp need to be important?
  • 09:20 AM - Hussar quoted CapnZapp in post Is Pathfinder 2 Paizo's 4E?
    /snip Why don't you abandon this unproductive viewpoint and instead listen to me when I tell you that 5E feels like a proper successor to 3E while truly fixing its most egregious faults in a way neither 4E nor PF did. :) /snip. Heh. It feels that way because of the presentation. It's certainly not the mechanics which are virtually identical to 4e. If 5e is the proper successor to 3e, then 4e was as well. But, the trick that WotC has performed has been to convince everyone that 4e and 5e are not related at all, while, at the same time, retaining virtually all of the mechanics of 4e. The primary difference between 4e and 5e is the speed of combat. Outside of that, the game is virtually identical. Or, to put it another way, 5e is a very good successor to 4e. It's only related to 3e through the leftover design DNA that passed through into 4e. Now, I think that Tony Vargas is going a bit too far in relating 5e to earlier editions and the whole "DM empowerment" thing. Because, ...
  • 12:02 AM - Tony Vargas quoted CapnZapp in post Is Pathfinder 2 Paizo's 4E?
    You keep saying 5E has all the faults of 3E.5e is definitely not bloated like 3e, for just one example. Also, it should be pretty obvious that 5e managed some faults of it's own that 3e didn't suffer from. You also appear to argue people want bad things.Do I really need to argue something so obvious? Have tobacco companies gone out of business? Has global peace broken out?

Thursday, 18th July, 2019

  • 09:44 PM - Saelorn quoted CapnZapp in post Similarities 4E PF2?
    Now I don't know what game you're talking about, or how that relates to NPC build rules... The only game I know where "easy fights still take too long" is 4E, and I'm not defending that edition.In that case, you have (a2) easy fights that resolve quickly and the players get to show off how awesome they are, and you have (b2) impossible fights that the players avoid in order to show off how wise they are. The choice between your given options, (a) (b) or (c), was disingenuous. In reality, the choice between (a2) and (b2), or (c), is a lot less one-sided. If you truly believe that, or it's inverse a) that you "lie" just because your monsters don't follow PC build rules... b) that following PC build rules somehow prevents a DM from "cheating" if they really want to... I really have nothing to say to you...I'm not talking about that. Those are honest choices, which a system can use or not, and players can accept (or reject) at face value. I'm talking about the illusion of objectivity, wher...
  • 09:09 PM - Tony Vargas quoted CapnZapp in post Is Pathfinder 2 Paizo's 4E?
    What makes you think <5E> succeeded where 4E failed, even if all those things were true?That's right - because it wasn't those things that made 4E fail, and it wasn't really those things that people disliked.I believe I said that. 5e didn't get rid of the things that were complained about, it put /back/ the things that those stalking-horses were really about. This just feels like you're bitter about the fate of 4E, tbh….You have no idea. I'm a bitter, cynical, old man on my best day, discussing the most innocuous things. I turn it down to 11 when I'm here. 4E and 5E looks, feels and plays very differently.Heh. Depends how you run it. listen to me when I tell you that 5E feels like a proper successor to 3E while truly fixing its most egregious faults 5e /brought back/ the faults of 3e - and, more importantly, those of the TSR era - some of them to a lesser degree, but bringing back an issue, is not fixing it. And, as someone who appreciated 3e for things it did /well/, 5e is, sad...


CapnZapp's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated
High Level Shopping
High Level Shopping
243 0 1 Monday, 14th January, 2019, 06:37 PM Monday, 14th January, 2019, 06:37 PM
[ToA] The many and fabulous bazaars of Port Nyanzaru
The second iteration in convenient PDF form.

General discussion: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?595068-ToA-The-many-and-fabulous-bazaars-of-Port-Nyanzaru

Design discussion: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?627782-many-an...
806 0 1 Friday, 4th May, 2018, 06:50 PM Friday, 4th May, 2018, 06:50 PM

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites