View Profile: Warbringer - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
  • Myrhdraak's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th July, 2019, 09:18 PM
    Thanks. Now all the 4th edition stuff is in the right forum. Great work! /Myrhdraak
    86 replies | 4404 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Myrhdraak's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th July, 2019, 09:13 PM
    Most likely yes. Currently I use Word for class compendium with all their powers and PowerPoint for character sheets. Having it in word make it quite easy to edit, copy and paste. /Myrhdraak
    243 replies | 26450 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Myrhdraak's Avatar
    Monday, 8th July, 2019, 10:05 PM
    Elvish as they were the first civilisation before they left the world. Many elvish artifacts and old scripts. Orc being main evil force they come second. All magic comes from dragons initially, so draconic is number three. Common consist of akkad, amorit, and sumerian as the campaign is based on a Babylonian setting.
    11 replies | 511 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Myrhdraak's Avatar
    Monday, 8th July, 2019, 09:54 PM
    I played 4e with some 5e adoption (bounded accuracy, backgrounds, inspiration, 9 encounter days, etc). I call it 4.5 edition. For me it is the best of two worlds. /Myrhdraak
    39 replies | 1540 view(s)
    0 XP
No More Results
About Warbringer

Basic Information

Date of Birth
April 9, 1966 (53)


This Page
Instant Messaging

Send an Instant Message to Warbringer Using...


Total Posts
Total Posts
Posts Per Day
Last Post
Unearthed Arcana August: Races of Ravnica Tuesday, 14th August, 2018 04:26 AM


Gold Pieces
General Information
Last Activity
Tuesday, 4th December, 2018 06:25 AM
Join Date
Sunday, 21st September, 2003
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written

2 Friends

  1. chibi graz'zt chibi graz'zt is offline


    chibi graz'zt
  2. Myrhdraak Myrhdraak is offline


Showing Friends 1 to 2 of 2
No results to show...

Friday, 30th October, 2015

  • 09:13 PM - El Mahdi mentioned Warbringer in post Warlord Name Poll
    ...eYodaI ; @Prickly ; @procproc ; @Psikerlord ; @Psikerlord# ; @(Psi)SeveredHead; @Quickleaf ; @Raith5 ; @raleel ; @Ralif Redhammer ; @Raloc ; @Ranes ; @RangerWickett; @Ratskinner ; @redrick ; @Rejuvenator ; @Remathilis ; @Ristamar ; @RolenArcher; @Roland55 ; @RPG_Tweaker ; @Rune ; @Rygar ; @Sacrosanct ; @Saelorn ; @Saeviomagy; @sailor-Moon ; @SailorNash ; @Saplatt ; @Satyrn ; @Shades of Eternity ; @shadowmane; @sheadunne ; @Shasarak ; @shidaku ; @shintashi ; @Shiroiken ; @SigmaOne ; @sleypy; @sleypy01 ; @SpiderMonkey ; @Staccat0 ; @Staffan ; @steeldragons ; @steenan @STeveC ; @strider13x ; @Strider1973 ; @Sword of Spirit ; @Talmek ; @TerraDave; @TheCosmicKid ; @The_Gneech ; @TheHobgoblin ; @The Human Target ; @the Jester; @The Mirrorball Man ; @The Myopic Sniper ; @ThirdWizard ; @Tia Nadiezja ; @Tinker-TDC; @Tonguez ; @Tony Vargas ; @Tormyr ; @TrippyHippy ; @tsadkiel ; @tuxgeo ; @twigglythe Gnome ; @TwoSix ; @Uchawi ; @Ulorian ; @UnadvisedGoose445 ; @UngeheuerLich; @Us ; @Valmarius ; @Warbringer ; @was ; @wedgeski ; @Wednesday Boy ; @Wik ; @WillDoyle ; @Winterthorn ; @Wuzzard ; @Xeviat ; @Yaarel ; @Yunru ; @Zalabim ; @Zansy; @Zardnaar ; @Zeuel ; @ZickZak ; @ZombieRoboNinja ; @ZzarkLinux

Wednesday, 2nd September, 2015

  • 12:07 PM - El Mahdi mentioned Warbringer in post Warlording the fighter
    ... rules… Rally the Troops Once per long rest, a Warlord can motivate and focus their group with a stirring speech (whatever group they are leading at the time, be it their adventuring group, a company, or a whole army). Doing so either allows all members of the group to recover hit points equivalent to the Warlord’s Wisdom or Charisma modifier times ½ the allies level (minimum of 1), or free all members of the group from non-magical fear (the Frightened condition), or reduce any effects due to exhaustion by one level. The group must be within hearing range of the Warlord, and only affects members not at 0 hit points. Command Actions (in-work) Individual tactics or maneuvers - based on Battlemaster maneuvers, 4E Warlord powers, etc. @fuindordm @Tony Vargas @GMforPowergamers @Hussar @cbwjm @epithet @MoonSong(Kaiilurker) @bert1000 EzekielRaiden @Manbearcat @Uchawi @Ashkelon @Eric V @pemerton @Jester Canuck @Bluenose @Minigiant @I'm A Banana @aramis erak @Warbringer @Leatherhead @ehren37 @Winterthorn @TheHobgoblin @Neonchameleon @Obryn @Imaro @nomotog @Ashrym @The_Gneech @Remathilis @Olgar Shiverstone @Sacrosanct @Gimul @Twiggly the Gnome @CapnZapp @MechaPilot @kerbarian @Psikerlord# @jgsugden @DEFCON 1

Wednesday, 23rd October, 2013

  • 08:46 PM - DMMike mentioned Warbringer in post One Hit Die per Character. Ever.
    Warbringer: that system is reminding me of another published one...maybe Fate. But I think I'm dreaming up a simpler one... Damage reduction might defeat the purpose of having low-hit-point characters, since it's effectively hit points in reverse. As far as character builds go, I like the idea of each character getting a max hit die, and his CON bonus in HP. Each Hit Die you gain is effectively an Anti Hit Die, which you get to use in each encounter (medium danger) or daily (high danger!). It would probably be a good idea to make 0 HP the Narrative-Health point, so characters don't automatically die, but they do need some sort of story-based explanation for how they survive. You'd probably also need to turn healing spells into temporary-HP spells, in case the PCs decide to attack something that's a little too big. What about high level monsters that deal high level damage? You'd need a combination of approaches: tactics, resistances, (vastly) improved AC, maybe regeneration, temporary hit...
  • 09:38 AM - pemerton mentioned Warbringer in post Fighters vs. Spellcasters (a case for fighters.)
    ... the player can pretty easily decide "here is what I will ad lib into the story", with confidence his rolls will succeed. That may be a misread and they were highly lucky, but that's not what I'm seeing. <snip> I would expect that, on occasion, a roll fails. Especially when the concept was a Chamberlain very reluctant to have anything to do with the PC's, with an adversarial mindset, I would think he would cause a few problems for the characters. <snip> Maybe it's a very lucky convergence, but it looks to me like failure is a rare, freak occurrence, especially when the occasional difficult roll has opportunities for re-rolls. Is it "bog standard" to be 90%+ likely to succeed on most rolls and have plenty of rerolls available for anything problematic? Seems like these charts don't generate a very challenging result, but I'm looking over only one example, so perhaps it is atypical (though hearing "bog standard" chorused by those more familiar suggests that is unlikely). Warbringer has done the maths, saving me the trouble (thanks Warbringer, sorry no XP). And yes, 4e skill challenge mechanics are based around a good average chance of success per check to ensure a robust overall chance of success. It's very similar to D&D combat. One way of analysing D&D combat is in these terms: that hit points, by letting you suffer hits without losing, grant you rerolls vs your enemies, so that you eventually have a good prospect of taking them down. But those hit points are a resource, and replenishing them costs more resources (spells, surges, time, whatever). And that is part of the dynamic of play. In Manbearcat's example the players spend resources (powers, APs) in order to achieve success (in some cases, literally via rerolls). Much like combat. But what you are calling "ad libbing into the story" is what I call roleplaying. The player says what his/her PC does. That is then resolved, and the fiction changes appropriately - in ways which themselves frame future po...

Tuesday, 22nd October, 2013

  • 12:54 PM - Kinak mentioned Warbringer in post One Hit Die per Character. Ever.
    @Kinak : cool idea. Why not turn Hit Dice into tools, instead of a number? Maybe all characters have only three hit points, and each hit die is a daily (encounter?) chance to roll damage reduction against a hit of your choice. So, fighters have better damage reduction than wizards?That's about the idea. Looks like Warbringer used something similar. I'd tend towards more than three base hit points, but not for power reasons. Con just needs something to modify. I'd tend towards just using Con Score, but even 5 + Con Mod would also work. The question of whether they refresh daily or after each encounter is interesting. Per-encounter feels more like what happens to me, but daily would give a grittier atmosphere. Per-encounter also allows longer adventures in a setting without magical healing. Otherwise you'll hit a five minute work day wall pretty quickly. Cheers! Kinak

Saturday, 31st August, 2013

Monday, 29th July, 2013

  • 08:56 AM - Balesir mentioned Warbringer in post 07/29/2013 - Legends & Lore It’s Mathemagical!
    1) Any reason this was started as a separate thread, rather than adding to Warbringer's earlier one? 2) I echo the 'black text' comment, and 3) The main thing I find surpassingly odd, here, is why skill bonuses can go up to +12 but attacks only go up to +6?? Looked at from one perspective, attacks are just skills in "weapon use" or "fighting" and "magic use" or "spellcasting". Why do non-combat skills, specifically, have to have double the expertise range? Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF300T using Tapatalk 4 Beta

Monday, 1st July, 2013

  • 04:27 AM - pemerton mentioned Warbringer in post Narrative Space Options for non-spellcasters
    ...he alarm!" Btw, I'm using my - I recognise this guard as the child of [insert description of parents who live in PC's home town, and explanation of the trouble that they're in]." Resolving this sort of director stance play has two dimensions - first there's establishing the truth of the player's desired specification of backstory, and then there's resolving the conflict (social conflict, in my example; but if the backstory is about the existence of a secret door into a palace, the conflict might not be social but exploratory) in which the player's PC wants to trade on that backstory. The first can be done via skill rolls (as in BW, via Wise checks or Circles checks) or via sheer stipulation based on a limited points resource (this is how MHRP does it, with the rules for Resource creation). The second then needs some sort of conflict resolution mechanic of the sort I've already mentionted upthread and in this post. In D&D it is almost certainly going to be dice-based, although Warbringer upthread has suggested the possibility of doing this in a points/slot-based way (eg at stage 1 I expend resources to make it true in the fiction that the bandit guard has the "aspect" [I]worried about his parent's troubles; at stage 2 I expend resources to "compel" that aspect, establishing that because of those worries, and my promise to help resolve them, the guard will let me into the bandit camp without raising the alarm). EDIT: A further complication with Stage 1 done via dice rolls is whether the resolution happens ingame, or purely at the metagame level. BW does a bit of both, but tends to favour the ingame approach: so when "my guy" approaches the bandit guard to bargain over the fate of the guard's parents, if the skill roll to establish the truth of the fiction is a failure, that means that the PC had a false belief. And tthe GM can therefore have the guard reply "Huh? With the money I'm making here I've already set my parents up for life - I guess you're working from out-...

Tuesday, 30th April, 2013

  • 09:12 AM - Grydan mentioned Warbringer in post So what's the problem with restrictions, especially when it comes to the Paladin?
    I think it would be possible to create a list of things you *must* do and of things that you *can't* do if you want to remain a Paladin of God-X. It wouldn't need more than ten of them. They could be called the Ten Commandments. Once you've got a good idea of what a god cares about, desires, and dislikes it shouldn't be hard. Of course that implies a more serious approach to religion than is common in D&D. I can't properly respond to that without violating community rules. Suffice it to say, significant real world . . . disagreements revolve around differing interpretations of such lists (further complicated by issues of transferring from oral tradition to text, and multiple layers of translation, as well as accrued centuries of interpretation). A simple "You cannot do X (and remain a Paladin)" will lead to great debate about exactly what constitutes a case of X, which, as Warbringer says, is the same quagmire with a different name. "You cannot kill innocent creatures" . . . well, innocent meaning what? In whose judgment? By whose standards? "You cannot tell a lie" . . . well, what constitutes a lie? Is a lie of omission enough, or does it have to be an explicit lie? (I could go on for some time on that one, as what constitutes a lie is quite the can of worms) "You must show mercy" . . . well, what counts as mercy? Is mercy offering my wounded enemies medical aid, or is it offering them a swift death? In a game without hard-coded 'do it differently than the DM's interpretation and you lose your stuff' rules, these are questions a character (and their player) might spend some time thinking about, before coming to their own conclusions. Just as in real life, others might dispute their interpretations, but also as in real life, in the end, we'd have no way of knowing who (if anyone) was truly correct. I personally find such things far more interesting than *BZZZT...

Wednesday, 17th April, 2013

Thursday, 4th April, 2013

  • 06:42 AM - pemerton mentioned Warbringer in post Legends & Lore 4/1/2013 valid choice.I was the one who introduced the idea of "fate points" into the discussion. Newbies need a system with (i) less complexity in player options, and hence in PC build, but (ii) more survivability than an experienced player typically needs in a starting PC. Those needs are not served by the system Mearls is proposing, because his system is based on the level paradigm, where low complexity is anchored to low level, which is in turn anchored to low hit points, which means the a newbie's first experience is likely to be having his/her PC die. Hence my suggestion - newbies need a non-level based, parallel approach to simplying their PCs while preserving survivability; and one way to do that is to grant rerolls, Fate Points or something similar in lieu of PC abilities, because these are easy to use and improve survivability. The newbie can then trade these in for real class abilities as s/he gets a feel for the gameplay, but this can be done independently of levelling. Warbringer made the additional observation that, in practice, many GMs of new and/or young players allow rerolls, fudge dice etc. And my suggestion would be a way of formalising that while shifting power over the PC from the GM to the player, and hence giving the newbie a truer taste of what RPGing is about.

No results to display...
Page 1 of 24 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Tuesday, 24th July, 2018

  • 04:14 AM - Mercurius quoted Warbringer in post Ravnica: Is This The New D&D Setting? [UPDATED & CONFIRMED!]
    Now partly in jest, but of course Star Wars - less the development but more the attitude - "we don't need these old gronards who've supported the franchise telling us how to run our franchise." ... maybe only partly in jest. Now, I don't think there's a political agenda here, and I doubt there is even this type of thinking, and I for one look forward to adding this book to the over 200 D&D books on the bookshelf. OK, I hear you about Star Wars. I haven't loved anything since Return of the Jedi. But Star Wars and D&D are different in a way that makes all the difference. Star Wars has a canonical story with a limited number of options in the form of films. D&D has many worlds, different ways of playing the game and making it your own. Having a piss-poor actor(s) play Anakin Skywalker "taints" the legacy of Darth Vader; you can't ignore meticlurians (sp); and you can't un-see Leia flying through space. It happened in the official version of the story. You can, at best, only re-watch the original ...
  • 03:56 AM - Mercurius quoted Warbringer in post Ravnica: Is This The New D&D Setting? [UPDATED & CONFIRMED!]
    I can think of another franchise that just imploded with the same thinking ... Care to share what you're talking about? Anyhow, I'm not sure why this isn't a best of both worlds kind of thing. We get a new setting for those that are interested in new ideas and worlds (like myself), but we also get coverage of a classic setting. I suppose it is a bummer if you're a Greyhawk or Mystara (etc) person hoping for your favorite setting to get 5e treatment, but it seems quite likely that Eberron isn't the end of classic treatments. Or maybe you wanted a hardcover of Eberron, but even then we'll get POD eventually. So again, I'm not sure what there is to complain about that isn't based upon some variation of "But you didn't cater exactly to my particular desires!"

Friday, 16th February, 2018

  • 08:23 PM - Zardnaar quoted Warbringer in post Amazon: D&D at the start of 2018
    Actually, from a revenue perspective they get to book the sale price to the distributor (which I was assuming was 50% because of Amazon) Either way its still only around $10 per book (20% of $50, 50% of deep discounts on Amazon so maybe $13. I don't think 5E has sold a million units yet due to Mearls not mentioning it since he has claimed it has outsold everything apart from BECMI and 1E. If it had sold 2 million for example they still have only made 20 million dollars over almost 4 years from the PHB which we all know is the biggest selling D&D book. If D&D is getting 20-30 million in revenue WotC is making (at best) 6-15 million dollars plus whatever they get off the games and VTT. Its still a nice amount of money but a decent movie or video game is 10 or 20 years profit in one hit. The problem being that a decent movie or game is going to eat huge a huge amount of money and its not worth paying WoTC licensing fees to make a decent game or movie. An average priced game is 80 million, a ...
  • 07:18 PM - Jester David quoted Warbringer in post Amazon: D&D at the start of 2018
    Remember, WoTc makes about 50% the retail price Actually, the base price breakdown tends to be 40% store, 20% distributor, 20% printer, 20% publisher. WotC gets 20%.

Wednesday, 20th September, 2017

  • 12:56 PM - jasper quoted Warbringer in post What Is an Experience Point Worth?
    Will answer this once right after "how many angels can fit on the tip of a pin.?" easy first the student needs to decide on the dance music. Then as practical exercise the student takes a take measure and notes the buttocks and leg length of each angel. That will get you the step distance. the rest is math.

Saturday, 16th September, 2017

  • 06:56 PM - Mephista quoted Warbringer in post Fighting Style Balance: Offense vs. Defense
    Strange as it seems, the best defensive optimization in D&D is hit point opitimization I disagree. With all the healing anything that mitigates dms is better. Like ac. Depends on the character, to be honest. A spellcaster is going to want to focus on AC and damage avoidance due to Concentration more than they'll want HP. Meanwhile, a fiend-blade'lock is going to want to work on damage resistance to get the most out of their Armor of Agyths; their defense is built on a hit-me-I-hit-you feeling. Barbarians and Fighters rock out the HP.
  • 03:27 PM - FrogReaver quoted Warbringer in post Fighting Style Balance: Offense vs. Defense
    Offense - better game play, more excitement. Strange as it seems, the best defensive optimization in D&D is hit point opitimization I disagree. With all the healing anything that mitigates dms is better. Like ac.

Saturday, 13th May, 2017

  • 08:29 PM - doctorbadwolf quoted Warbringer in post Rogue Daggers
    That does work, but calls to mind a large green Ogre. So it may, or may not, work, on multiple levels. I'm unfamiliar with the reference, but cool! Weep Whisper and Weep is awesome. I may steal that for an adventure, pair of villains, or something.

Saturday, 2nd April, 2016

  • 03:11 PM - thecasualoblivion quoted Warbringer in post Rolled character stats higher than point buy?
    Or 3e and 4e players are more honest ;) I don't see honesty as matter of edition so much as dishonesty being an inevitable side effect of rolling for stats. 3E and 4E players weren't so much more honest but instead were merely less likely to roll for stats.
  • 02:59 PM - thecasualoblivion quoted Warbringer in post Rolled character stats higher than point buy?
    This might just be the most pointless thread I've ever read on the boards in 15 years :) Actually, this is the best thread of this sort I've read on forums ever. This is the first such thread that has honestly addressed the cheating/fudging issue to this degree. I attribute that to this thread occurring during the 5E era as opposed to the 3E or 4E eras, since people playing 3E and 4E on the whole seemed a lot less likely to be rolling stats.
  • 02:57 PM - Maxperson quoted Warbringer in post Rolled character stats higher than point buy?
    This might just be the most pointless thread I've ever read on the boards in 15 years :) You don't look hard enough I think :)

Thursday, 24th March, 2016

  • 04:55 AM - Ilbranteloth quoted Warbringer in post Passive skills
    One of the worst part of d&d is skills is the pass/fail, there isn't really a degree of success, which is the exact opposite to combat (where degree of success is hit points damage) If you change that perception a little (and it's kind of embedded in optional rules) think about it from a level of success, if you like somewhere between no roll and passive. Basically a passive check gets you enough - need to climb a wall with a ladder beside it - that's a DC10... Average person suceeds, taking their time and climbing the ladder one step at a time ... You have a +5 dex and proficiency, sure up you go in half the time, only takes a bonus action ... Want yo take a risk and go for it being a free action v dc20 ... Roll away Same with clues or knowledge.... Passive you know trolls regenerate ... Int +5 with proficiency, but in this part of the world it's acid and not fire that stops it... But what was that thing they take double damage from... Want to roll? Etc.... Low passive - basic; high passiv...

Sunday, 28th February, 2016

  • 04:35 AM - Hriston quoted Warbringer in post So 5 Intelligence Huh
    No, but if limitations are being taken to create benefits in other stat choices, shouldn't there be in game resource management? There is, in the form of a penalty to Intelligence checks, saves, and spell attack rolls. That said, I prefer it when a player sees it as an opportunity to turn those constraints into characterizations There's nothing wrong with that, but those kinds of decisions are usually made during char-gen. What I'm hearing being advocated for on this thread, however, is for low-Intelligence characters to continually make bad in-game decisions that will be detrimental to the survival of themselves and their party. That's pretty much excluding their players from full participation in the game.
  • 02:48 AM - pemerton quoted Warbringer in post So 5 Intelligence Huh
    The rules for INT specify that the ability to reason is controlled by INT. A low INT = a low ability to reason. It's up to the player to roleplay that limitation.Don't the rules handle this? Eg upthread Hriston gave the example of making a knowledge check to recall facts about the London Underground (or some other salient element of the gameworld). A PC with a low INT will suffer a penalty to that check, reflecting his/her weaker recall and reasoning abilities. Presumably the character also suffers a penalty on attempts to decipher unfamiliar (but somewhat cognate, so in-principle decipherable) languages/dialects, and on INT-governed perception-style checks. In other systems, I'd take such a low score as a complication that the GM could create opportunities against. In D&D, especially point buy, what's the point in the stat if their are no in game complications, where in other stats i gain benefits from higher stats like Con, Dex, Str?The complication is that already set out by other ...
  • 01:09 AM - iserith quoted Warbringer in post So 5 Intelligence Huh
    The rules provide the modifiers, the scores are the bounds in which the player should be considering character options. The rules provide the modifiers, the scores are the bounds in which the player CAN be considering character options, if they want. If not, why bother with scores that define the range of a character's ability ti interact with the world around them? A lot of games just deal in modifiers rather than ability scores that determine modifiers. I would say the reason D&D doesn't do this is simply tradition, especially since the rules are silent on how a player must roleplay a character with a particular ability score.
  • 12:44 AM - Maxperson quoted Warbringer in post So 5 Intelligence Huh
    I'd prefer a player do that; if they don't I'll encourage the behavior in game. Otherwise, let's sut remove INT, WIS, CHA - they're supposed to be bounds Er, I said it was up to the player to roleplay the limitation ;) Totally agree with the rest of what you said. If you aren't going to roleplay the limits of your stats, there's no point in having numbers for them.
  • 12:07 AM - Hriston quoted Warbringer in post So 5 Intelligence Huh
    Ok two things 1) when you DM do your players now how much damage themy take? ( I played in a campaign where the DM just tell us know the "impact" and it was pretty fun) Yes they do. This doesn't change that it's OOC metagame knowledge. Also, we aren't terribly concerned about avoiding metagaming. I agree that playing in a game where you don't know your character's HP would be fun. Never tried it though. 2) isnt the point of role playing to play within in the confines defind by the chararctet sheet? (Couple o great anedotes are playing with "Stoopid" the 3 int fighter (played by a Phd maths at college) and "one-word" the dwarves cleric - the player literally coveyed intention in "one word"... Another character in that party was "Cliche" the thief ... Yes the player talked in chiches ) Those sound like great RP choices, but no that doesn't mean other choice aren't equally as valid. The character sheet doesn't always tell the whole story and should be seen as a springboard rather than...
  • 12:06 AM - pemerton quoted Warbringer in post So 5 Intelligence Huh
    isnt the point of role playing to play within in the confines defind by the chararctet sheet?I'm not Hriston, but I'll express a view on this. It seems to me that the point of roleplaying is to play a character within the rules of the game. If the rules of the game permit a certain action declaration, then if I - playing my character - want to make that action declaration, I can. If they don't, then I can't. This is why, for instance, an AD&D fighter can't cast spells no matter how much his/her player (both in real life, and in character) might want to. If the game rules permit the action declaration but penalise my character for making it (eg in AD&D if a newly dual-classed character declares an action using an ability of the old class, s/he forfeits XP), then - knowing that rule - I will take it into account (so, eg my MU-now-fighter will use spells only in extremis). The rules for INT don't specify any particular action declarations that are prohibited to a character with 5 INT, do th...

Monday, 22nd February, 2016

  • 09:44 PM - Tony Vargas quoted Warbringer in post What Makes the Fighter Best at Fighing?
    I see the Fighter the same way I see Batman. He's not the strongest, fastest, toughest, smartest, or possesses some strange special powers. He's just a highly trained and motivated human with a metric butt-ton of resourcesIt's certainly easy to see a high-level 1e fighter that way - with his Rod of Lordly Might, Platemail of Etherealness, Helm of Brilliance, and, er, well, Wings of Flying, maybe? Heck, in a sufficiently Monty Haul campaign he could probably qualify as Iron Man. I really wanted to pick action surge & second wind. However, I must face the facts, and I voted that the fighter is not best at fighting :-( No matter how you define "best at fighting", the Fighter is either competing for 1st place or behind 1st place.Competing for 1st place is still best, because the competitors can't claim to be strictly better. (They might also claim to be 'best' of course). Fighting = "winning" the encounter. ... the fighter falls behind the Paladin (smite), the barbarian (rage), the wizard ...
  • 08:46 AM - pemerton quoted Warbringer in post Why Has D&D, and 5e in Particular, Gone Down the Road of Ubiquitous Magic?
    I think it at least partly has to do with the fact that the later versions of D&D have moved towards giving PCs more abilities on the whole than earlier versions. <snip> The reality is that you have a lot more room to design varied and interesting abilities when magic is in the mix. Just look at what happened with the 4e fighter ability Come And Get It or the 4e Warlord powers. Heck, I'm pretty sure I've seen criticisms on this board about the 5e fighter's second wind ability, because it recovers hit points rather than just granting temps. A lot of people don't like these abilities because they feel that they are too close to being magical, rather than the extraordinarily mundane. It's unlikely anyone would have complained about those abilities had they been instead assigned to the Swordmage or the Bard, since those classes are inherently magical. if it's magic you don't have to explain it. Much easier for WotC to give out magic to fighters and rogues than give them supernatural abili...

Page 1 of 24 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Warbringer's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites