View Profile: TwoSix - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Today, 03:35 AM
    Let me start with: "I don't have much interest, if any at all, in this conversation...so I'm not particularly interested in getting drawn back in." However, I think I have some virtual ink to spill on the internet on this one. For my money, the two have significant differences in TTRPGs. In TTRPGs, I associate "scene" with "a discrete unit of play, whereby situational framing >...
    167 replies | 3584 view(s)
    3 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:08 PM
    Averages about 20-25 sessions, which we occasionally mix up with shorter arcs to try out different games.
    11 replies | 219 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:13 PM
    3.X using the Spheres of Power classes wouldn't be a bad start for an urban fantasy game. You'd have to expand non-magical options and update equipment lists, but I think that would be possible by using a modified Spheres of Might system. (It's probably way too much work, but I'd love to see the SoP system adapted to the 5e chassis.)
    63 replies | 1801 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Monday, 24th June, 2019, 10:01 PM
    I'd have Survival give the most information at the lowest DC possible. If Survival isn't good at reading tracks, it really doesn't deserve a place on the skill list. I'd let Nature tell you what kind of animal it is, but not really follow the tracks. Investigation could give some clues as to how old they are and a general sense of what kind of creature it is, but would be a much higher DC to...
    56 replies | 1138 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Monday, 24th June, 2019, 09:10 PM
    I'm with Aldarc here. I don't think the answer is a single general use Urban Fantasy TTRPGing system with theme/premise-neutral mechanics to rule them all (this almost always leads to an overwhelming GM presence in play trajectory to manufacture an experience...typically putting players in a significantly more passive position than in a game like Blades in the Dark). This is precisely why I...
    63 replies | 1801 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Monday, 24th June, 2019, 03:16 PM
    Ah ok. (I’m asking this out of a position of ignorance) So when someone refers to “Urban Fantasy” in TTRPGing, are they referring to “a malleable game/system without a tight play premise baked in so it can be drifted to (say) the modern focus of ‘paranormal romance’ or something similar?”
    63 replies | 1801 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Monday, 24th June, 2019, 02:29 PM
    No problem. A lot of people just see the name "Mage" and the Sphere system and don't realize how different the two games really are. I agree with your point that is not a toolbox game, nor is it intended to be.
    63 replies | 1801 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Monday, 24th June, 2019, 12:33 PM
    In Mage: The Ascension they are, but not in Mage: The Awakening.
    63 replies | 1801 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Monday, 24th June, 2019, 02:48 AM
    Something similar to that play anecdote that you're mentioning above happened in my 2nd 4e game that went 1-30. While that was a Bladesinger rather than a Fighter, it was all martial, so its applicable. It was mid-Paragon Tier. While the Druid and Rogue dealt with an endless tide of mooks, the Bladesinger was locked in a duel with the Captain of the Guard (CotG). The player wanted it to...
    7 replies | 377 view(s)
    3 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Sunday, 23rd June, 2019, 11:05 PM
    Have you looked at all at Mage for Chronicles of Darkness 2nd edition? Beyond sharing the name and the broad contours of the magic system, they're extremely different games. No consensual reality, and definitely no bases on Saturn.
    63 replies | 1801 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Sunday, 23rd June, 2019, 09:34 PM
    Does Blades in the Dark not qualify as Urban Fantasy? Grimdark, cutthroat urban setting (Duskvol) - check Paranormal (overruneth and all kinds) - check Magic - check Factions/tribes embroiled in endless war to ascend hierarchy - check
    63 replies | 1801 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Sunday, 23rd June, 2019, 01:37 PM
    You're definitely underselling the joy of telling the DM you just did 28 points of damage; no, that wasn't a crit; no, my turn isn't over, that was just my first attack. :)
    49 replies | 1102 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Sunday, 23rd June, 2019, 01:33 PM
    Not to mention it would make sorlocks the best damage option in the game with no obvious competitor, and I don't think anyone wants that.
    49 replies | 1102 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Saturday, 22nd June, 2019, 02:07 AM
    Just for the record, I don't think anyone is advocating for the variable power attack of 3e. -Prof/+2*Prof is a fixed -2/+4 until level 5, when it becomes -3/+6. It changes with level, but it can't be varied by the player. True, but the fights that matter are also going to feature greater resource expenditure on buffs. Better scaling with accuracy is one of the primary perks of the...
    49 replies | 1102 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 11:54 PM
    Assuming a bog standard level 1 greatsword attack (+5 attack, 2d6+3 damage), normal attacking is superior when AC >= 20, AC 19 is equal, -2/+4 is better between ACs 18 and 14, and -5/+10 is better when AC <= 13.
    49 replies | 1102 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 11:09 PM
    If I was making it a base rule, I'd do it as -Prof/+2*Prof, rather than a flat -5/+10. Not nearly as problematic in Tier 1-2 that way.
    49 replies | 1102 view(s)
    2 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 09:45 PM
    Unfortunately, SS doesn't work with throwing weapons by RAW. (Although it would be great if it did!) The -5/+10 portion of the feat requires an attack with a ranged weapon; two-weapon fighting requires a light melee weapon. The thrown property lets you make ranged attacks, it doesn't make the weapon count as a ranged weapon. You can certainly rule otherwise (I personally disagree with...
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Thursday, 20th June, 2019, 09:25 PM
    The revised ranger is not dead; however, it is very badly burnt.
    106 replies | 3838 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Thursday, 20th June, 2019, 07:39 PM
    If the concern is lethality, why not simply up the AC and HP of the companion to PC levels, but have the offense diminished to compensate? Give the ranger a spell that heals 1d10+Wis as a bonus action, but only on their companion. That's pretty much how WoW pets work.
    106 replies | 3838 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Thursday, 20th June, 2019, 03:42 PM
    That's not bad. I think the only change I'd make is that I'd have the Tier 2 upgrade be either a second attack or the ability to do one of each, mixing and matching would be kind of fun. Especially if Thirsting Blade and Eldritch Blast each have their own suite of invocations.
    106 replies | 3838 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Thursday, 20th June, 2019, 03:25 PM
    I'm a little confused as to how the cleave and -5/+10 part play nicely together. You have to take the bonus action before the attack action to gain the -5/+10 bonus. The extra cleave only triggers on a kill or crit, but requires the bonus action as well. Is it intended to be an either/or thing, or is the intent that the kill/crit allows you to take an additional bonus action?
    45 replies | 1353 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Wednesday, 19th June, 2019, 09:28 PM
    Yep. The 0 hit point cushion means a kobold doing 1d3 and an ogre that does 2d10+8 are the same level of threat when you're at 1 HP. If the ogre had a decent chance of killing you outright (by pushing you close to negative max), then your attitude to healing shifts. Yea, it's probably not necessary to use bloodied. You could go with a "carrot before stick" approach, and have your common...
    60 replies | 1978 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Wednesday, 19th June, 2019, 09:09 PM
    Yea, it's the official druid now for my campaigns. So much more flexible and interesting.
    16 replies | 509 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Wednesday, 19th June, 2019, 09:06 PM
    That's a small part of it, but not the major portion. Even if cure wounds healed for double its current amount, you still wouldn't cast it until the target was near death. It's just more efficient that way. The best way to get people to want to heal is to penalize being injured. Maybe bring back the 4e bloodied condition at half HP,and have bloodied targets attack with disadvantage. (That...
    60 replies | 1978 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Wednesday, 19th June, 2019, 07:39 PM
    Kibblestasty's Beastmanger Ranger has some pretty solid rules for an animal companion. https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/bxudj7/kibbles_alternate_beastmaster_ranger_v11_fine/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x This druid remake also has some nice rules for an animal companion in the Circle of the Keeper:...
    16 replies | 509 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Wednesday, 19th June, 2019, 02:34 PM
    I just don't see a way that in-combat healing can be an effective strategy within the current rule set and general metagame assumptions. It isn't just a question of resource efficiency. It's that the penalty for hitting 0 is too small, the window from being unconscious to dead is pretty large, and that at most tables, the penalty for actually dying isn't that severe. (Have a new character...
    60 replies | 1978 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Tuesday, 18th June, 2019, 07:10 PM
    It is admittedly strong for a paladin or rogue due to the accuracy bonuses. There are certainly good reason to gate it behind a fighting style or a feat. Fighting style is just my personal last option, if I'm going to gate it, I'd rather gate it with a feat. They do have a lot of accuracy, true. But the eDPR gains are minimal without something to scale that accuracy, which requires...
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Tuesday, 18th June, 2019, 06:28 PM
    That makes sense, but it also locks the scaling aspect behind a level 1 dip into fighter or 2 level dip into ranger, which is something I personally would like to avoid. I like the idea that a barbarian or valor bard or cleric or monk could choose to use BA free dual-wielding without a dip. Ideally, I'd like to see Two-Weapon Fighting Style give a bonus of around 1.5*N damage (N=number of...
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Tuesday, 18th June, 2019, 04:50 PM
    Yea, I was going for a pretty limited remake, with minimum changes to other rules. But that portion of the rule, by itself, is pretty balanced. If I was going for a more broad fix, I'd make that the default rule for two-weapon fighting, and move the bonus action attack into the dual-wielder feat. Edit: Actually, if you make it a broader fix, I'd let the followup attack have stat mod to...
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Tuesday, 18th June, 2019, 04:49 AM
    B/X - The tight, holistic focus of design around its play paradigm. - The Exploration Turn/Rest > Wandering Monster Clock > Resource Attrition/Risk Reward Cycle Loop. - Monster Reactions/Morale. - Gold for xp. 4e - (Again) The tight, holistic focus of design around its play paradigm.
    51 replies | 2035 view(s)
    5 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Tuesday, 18th June, 2019, 03:56 AM
    Well, the OP mentioned Locke Lamora, which is pretty modern in its viewpoint.
    37 replies | 871 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Tuesday, 18th June, 2019, 01:54 AM
    Sure thing.
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Tuesday, 18th June, 2019, 01:53 AM
    Wealth, celebrity, and power. I'd use the lifestyle expenses tiers as basic ranks, although you might need finer levels of gradations between different levels of the aristocracy. Wealth- Spending money on lifestyle expenses establishes a baseline reputation. Takes time to establish, at least 6 months for modest to comfortable ranks and years for wealthy and aristocratic rank. Having some...
    37 replies | 871 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Tuesday, 18th June, 2019, 12:44 AM
    Ok, so make scale mail 15+Dex(max 1) and half plate 16+Dex (max 1)? I could get behind that.
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 08:20 PM
    Sure is! It's a scaling, concentration-less Hex++ that stacks with Hex, that also becomes an amazing defensive tool against big bads at 10. The other warlock 1 abilities are good, too (except for Fey), but they're certainly not straight up better than Hexblade Curse.
    31 replies | 1020 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 08:11 PM
    3e d20 + mods >= TN. Simple, powerful, the core of the game since then. Why change perfection? Multiclassing. The gold standard. There's a reason that 5e went back to it. Feats. Of all of 3e's evolutions, adding PC rules that weren't bound to class was probably the biggest one. Prestige classes. Highlighted the joys of 3e's "LEGO block" character building. Hobbled by too-strict and...
    51 replies | 2035 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 07:19 PM
    Knowledge Cleric 1/Wizard X. You trade slightly slower spell advancement for a bunch of useful spells, armor and shield proficiency, and you make your smart wizard even better at knowing things. Both mechanically strong AND narratively coherent. Warlock/Sorcerer. Obviously known for its powergaming potential as a Warlock 2-3/Sorcerer X, but i really like this combo even with a 50-50 split...
    2 replies | 170 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 07:07 PM
    You can strip out Hex Warrior straight up, and Hexblade is still probably the strongest overall warlock patron. You can move Hex Warrior to Blade Pact if you want to stop Warlock 1 dips from happening, or just fold it into base warlock if you don't see the MC as being a problem.
    31 replies | 1020 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 06:34 PM
    Oh man, "long term" and "cohesive" are really strong words for how we played back then. :) A "campaign" usually meant we remembered to bring our character sheets from last time and didn't have to start over.
    17 replies | 822 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 04:54 PM
    You've defeated me with your clever wordplay. I concede.
    31 replies | 1020 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 04:14 PM
    It's difficult to find anything approaching a true commonality for how we all approach the game. There's generational issues, age issues, and a bunch of local and personal idiosyncrasies at work. Did you learn to play in 1977, or 1987, or 1997? Did you learn to play when you were 10, or when you were 25? Were you first exposed to the game by a friend inviting you to play, or did you learn by...
    17 replies | 822 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 03:53 PM
    My simple argument is that Pact of the Blade suggests a more offense-oriented approach for a character than Pact of the Tome. If you disagree with that interpretation of the flavor, that's fine. Since the OP seems to agree with that interpretation (otherwise why would they have made the OP?), I'll continue to support them by suggesting rules changes that may help them realize their vision.
    31 replies | 1020 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 03:14 PM
    Yes, but this is a case where the description on the package doesn't match what's in the box. I mean, if you want to make a warlock that's good in melee, it's a little surprising to find out the "Blade" warlock doesn't do as well as the "Book" warlock.
    31 replies | 1020 view(s)
    2 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 03:11 PM
    Are you trying to patch Blade-lock based on the assumption that Hexblade would not be present in your game? Just because a fix that boosts Bladelock for other patrons might be way too strong combined with Hexblade. Simple Bladelock patch: Remove Lifedrinker. Move Thirsting Blade to 7, and change it to give the equivalent of the EK level 7 ability War Magic. Now a Str-based warlock can do...
    31 replies | 1020 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 04:20 AM
    It always felt to me like there wasn't usually much choice in the matter. If you're playing a frontliner with Heavy Armor Proficiency, you're probably going to go Str. Otherwise, you're probably going Dex unless you have a compelling reason not to. (Like a barbarian.) A tweak that could nudge people into Str builds would be to raise the AC bonus of medium armor by 1, but lower the allowable...
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 04:11 AM
    Dual Wielder (updated 16-Jun) You are a savant of weaponry. You are able to use any combination of weapons in unconventional yet effective ways; you gain the following benefits: -When you take the Attack option, if you are wielding a one-handed melee weapon in each hand, and if you miss with an attack, you may make a second followup attack with the weapon in your other hand. You do not...
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    2 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Sunday, 16th June, 2019, 01:47 PM
    That makes sense in a theoretical context. But what BA currently exists in 5e that is better than a weapon attack with a -X/+X rider attached? (Specifically, for any class not a full caster?) The only optimized high level build in 5e that doesn't use it is a sorlock using Quicken. My takeaway is a little different. The primary factor that keeps heavy weapons and archery above any other...
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Saturday, 15th June, 2019, 04:54 AM
    It's a lot harder to care about the Healer feat in a game that has the Healing Spirit spell in it.
    72 replies | 2792 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Saturday, 15th June, 2019, 04:48 AM
    Okay, trying an alternate approach. This rework of Dual Wielder enables a lot of builds that didn't previously work, by tying together Dual Wielder with GWM and SS. It also enables round by round switching between shield and weapons as needed, so it also synergizes with Shield Master if desired. Dual Wielder You are a savant of weaponry. You are able to use any combination of weapons in...
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 07:37 PM
    Well, yea. It's one of those cases where their multiple criteria that are valid considerations, but might be mutually exclusive. I'm mostly just trying to lay out all the relevant criteria and see how many of them can be addressed by any one set of fixes. I agree that GWM is the superior feat, both in terms of efficacy and in design (the proc-based BA is quite fun.) I think my issue is...
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 06:45 PM
    Let's fight anyway! Dork. :) If you allow non-light weapons baseline, that brings dual-wield and great weapon into a virtual tie. (6.85 to 6.89 at 65% hit rate.) Great weapon does better as AC drops, DW better as AC increases. At really low ACs, it actually becomes worthwhile to drop one longsword and switch the other to 2H, which is kind of awesome. (Just as a personal thing, I'd love...
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 05:57 PM
    I'm a little torn on these. I value the idea of making just a single change to one feat to validate the concept. The cascading effect is certainly real. I don't think the balance of the current game is sacred (if a rule change makes rogues and monks a little better, or paladins a little worse, I'm not going to cry about it), but I don't want to invalidate already present rules content in my...
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 02:07 PM
    Ok, so I understand your position. So I guess I just have a few questions/thoughts: 1) Why can’t Aptitude Bias run the other direction (as so many do); overestimating the importance of a honed Skill-set or natural affinity? 2) In the last several years on these boards, we’ve seen a LOT of instances of people who are articulate, well-read, tenured GMs struggle significantly in one or both...
    1473 replies | 42569 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 10:26 PM
    Citing the above, I want to make sure I've captured your position before I attempt to move the conversation forward. To do so, I'm going to also cite the below from me: Is your position that I (and others) have a blind spot for the gravity of the amplification effect I cite above (or further still, that it is indeed a causal effect) because of natural ability/decades of honing the crafts...
    1473 replies | 42569 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 10:19 PM
    Yea, this is more of a list of possible criteria to hit, not really a proposal yet. I'm still debating. I'm starting to go back to the beginning of this discussion, and I'm thinking that there should be some baked in scaling in the base rule, no style or feat required. Turn the fighting style into a small damage bonus (like Dueling), and use the DW feat to enable the BA attack (to parallel...
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 08:28 PM
    What about this? 1) The base rule stays as-is. Two light weapons, you gain a possible BA of a no stat-mod light weapon attack. 2) The fighting style lets Extra Attack classes use two weapons to do about equal damage to heavy weapon users, no BA required. if your class/subclass gives you a better BA, great. If not, you can use the dual-wield bonus action. This keeps things equivalent...
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 08:17 PM
    Double post.
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 07:28 PM
    The former. my color scheme is default text on black background of that helps (I’m computer incompetent so that is the best I got).
    26 replies | 651 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 07:21 PM
    YOU ARE CORRECT SIR Invisible text in other thread and linked thread.
    26 replies | 651 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 07:09 PM
    The text in the bottom quote is visible to me.
    26 replies | 651 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 05:59 PM
    I'd say agnostic, using those terms as defined. I tend to draw my own settings use a pretty broad brush, to leave room for the player's ideas. But I generally have a small-c catholic "Church" that does the classic fantasy genre temple things, that's a fixture in most areas under human control. It tends to exist in some tension with nature worshippers (elves and other fae adjacent...
    31 replies | 1097 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 04:33 PM
    One of my players is playing one now, and he does a great job playing up the different aspects and signs. It's kind of at the point where I hope he makes a poor pact because he does such a good job making the character super creepy when he's semi-possessed.
    77 replies | 2939 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 03:03 PM
    That's not bad. It puts the "+mod on BA attacks" back into feat territory, to go along with PAM and XBE. Moving the -X/+Y into a separate feat would make it so you need 2 feats for every combination of -X/+Y and a reliable BA attack, which is appealing. (PAM/GWM, SS/XBE, DW/New feat) Maybe for the scaling bonus, do something that gives a die bonus, rather than a flat increase? A die...
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 02:45 PM
    Can't do that for this case, because the damage expression is different. Without the fighting style, the off hand damage is 11.5 avg per attack. Assuming base accuracy 65%, not counting crits, it's 52.7 > 50.0 > 45.0 for PAM/GWM > DW > GWM only. I think I need to adjust the fighting style. I didn't really want to, but it scales too well and is too good compared to Dueling/GWF. Maybe...
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 03:05 AM
    I'm still running some numbers, and the numbers go up and down a little based on the target's AC, but generally the DW Champ 15 has about a 45% chance to crit per attack, and over a 90% chance to get at least one crit. A DW Champion/Rogue might do some really good damage! Edit: Ehh, Champion DW with Elven Accuracy still does less damage that a standard GWM Champion. It is close, though. It...
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 02:23 AM
    If you think of one, let me know. I would guess Hexblade something something, or maybe a crit-fisher. I tried a Vengeance Paladin with Hunter's Mark up, but it's not any better than PAM in that case. Most of my calculations showed that GWM and SS scale much better as accuracy bonuses stack up (once your hit w/ advantage gets into the 95% range). So doing something like permanent...
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Wednesday, 12th June, 2019, 10:48 PM
    I'm not sure what your "rend" suggestion is doing, or what your intention is as to how it coexists with my suggestion. Are you stating it as "Once per round, if you have hit with at least two different weapons, the second attack does an additional +5 damage."? Or is it intended to be any two attacks while dual-wielding? That's the closest I can get to figuring it out. Assuming low...
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    2 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Wednesday, 12th June, 2019, 08:08 PM
    I don't use them, but I imagine they're popular because they provide an upfront way to define the setting that the players can immediately recognize. You can write "dwarves dislike and distrust magic" 50 times in your campaign gazetteer, but a rule that says "dwarves can't be wizards or sorcerers because they dislike magic" really communicates the concept to the players in a way they'll...
    77 replies | 2939 view(s)
    2 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Wednesday, 12th June, 2019, 06:31 PM
    No worries! Just to draw on the well-covered cleric/warlock example, that sort of contradiction doesn’t happen in my game because clerics and warlocks don’t exist. Gods exist, and magical entities that grant powers exist, but how a character relates to them is entirely driven by their concept. They might use sorcerer as a base for their “priest of god of fire” concept, or Druid for their “I...
    77 replies | 2939 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Wednesday, 12th June, 2019, 06:04 PM
    I'm flattered! But yea, the only real point of distinction I would draw is that it's not matter of "not roleplaying", it's that the roleplaying I do isn't bound by the flavor and the restrictions in the book. I have no problem running a cleric as a follower of a god, or they might just be a trained healer. As an example, in Eberron, I use cleric mechanics for House Jorasco all the time, and...
    77 replies | 2939 view(s)
    2 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Wednesday, 12th June, 2019, 05:41 PM
    Nah. I've run the numbers pretty thoroughly. Factoring in Reactions is meaningless, as this doesn't impact them. A first level PC might get 3 attack "rolls", but since one of them can only occur on a miss, the amount of nova damage that could be applied via on-hit effects remains the same. A 5th level fighter with the Dual Wielder, Crossbow Expert, or Polearm Master all have the same...
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Wednesday, 12th June, 2019, 04:36 PM
    I think the fault line here is going to be if you answer “yes” to the below two questions, and pretty much all iterations possible of good/bad/mediocre on either side of the balance. I would have to answer “yes” to all of them because I neither conceive nor have I experienced anything approximating a tight (or even shabby) coupling between the two. I’m like most people; good at some...
    1473 replies | 42569 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Wednesday, 12th June, 2019, 04:23 PM
    This is my current approach. In the interest of parsimony, I'm going to restrict changes to the dual-wielder feat, and not try to drop the bonus action. Instead, I've put scaling into the dual-wielder feat. Dual Wielder changes -Remove the +1 AC bonus. -Add "Whenever you take the Attack action while wielding a separate melee weapon in each hand, whenever you miss an attack with a weapon in...
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Wednesday, 12th June, 2019, 03:28 AM
    Nah. There's plenty of other fantasy heartbreakers that do that. D&D should be a toolkit. Sturdy skeletons, with loose fitting skin that's easy to reskin. If there's arguments that clerics and warlocks can't multiclass, you've already bound the story to the class too tightly.
    77 replies | 2939 view(s)
    2 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Wednesday, 12th June, 2019, 02:32 AM
    To make sure I'm getting this right, are you saying that a Monk's extra Martial Arts Attack and Flurry of Blows should also be removed from the bonus action?
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Tuesday, 11th June, 2019, 08:41 PM
    I feel like there is a teeny tiny excluded middle between MAXIMUM TERSENESS (SUNDAY SUNDAY SUNDAY) and exposition economy (while still managing the key components of dramatic device) :)
    1473 replies | 42569 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Tuesday, 11th June, 2019, 08:31 PM
    This is so much more entangled than I ontrmdrf. EDIT - (Lol how about INTENDED. My phone autocorrected to ontrmdrf. Makes sense). Ok, let me pose a simple question. Is it possible to be very good at conflict framing (a) and resolution (b) yet be mediocre in words usage on the journey from a to b? Is the inverse possible (poor at framing and resolution but beautiful prose/oratory)?
    1473 replies | 42569 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Tuesday, 11th June, 2019, 08:07 PM
    lowkey13 I think you’re more or less saying what I said in my initial post in this thread: Framing and understanding of dramatic device (arc composition and pacing, tropes) are fundamentally tethered. Insofar as they are (and they are), if one wants to fold “understanding and deftness in deployment of dramatic device” into “literary”, then we’re going to have a (self-imposed imo)...
    1473 replies | 42569 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Tuesday, 11th June, 2019, 06:53 PM
    Couple things: 1) In the spirit of this thread, I was trying to demonstrate that the framing of the creature is hierarchically more important than the words used to depict it (though again, they matter...they’re just lower in the hierarchy). 2) If you aren’t thematically framing a “bogeyman” as a bogeyman, then it seems pretty apt to point out that the situation the PCs are confronted with...
    1473 replies | 42569 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Tuesday, 11th June, 2019, 04:20 AM
    Your threads suck! And you're terrible! And we hate you! More stuff!
    1473 replies | 42569 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Monday, 10th June, 2019, 07:35 PM
    You could, but you certainly don't have to, depending on how the new mechanic is implemented.
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Monday, 10th June, 2019, 07:16 PM
    No worries. If your saying that conversation with some pals while you're at dinner is different than TTRPG conversation, then sure. TTRPG conversation is structured such that it produces an evolving gamestate and the participant experience that goes with that. The former does have structure, but its more etiquette and cue-driven (so different in some ways, similar in others) and its purpose...
    1473 replies | 42569 view(s)
    3 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Monday, 10th June, 2019, 04:53 PM
    The problem with that approach is that once you make it advantage, it doesn't stack with everything else that grants advantage. (What's the benefit to a barbarian with Reckless Attack, for example?) And it doesn't really map to the narrative of using two different weapons. (What if your main hand weapon is a flametongue, and the off-hand weapon is a dagger of venom?) It would be a slight...
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Monday, 10th June, 2019, 03:55 PM
    I haven't been following this thread. I'm assuming the above contrast or dichotomy you're trying to draw is something essential to this thread? But if you're looking for an answer (insofar as I'm even remotely capable of inferring what you're looking for from this scant bit)...how about... Probably both? It seems to me that if a bogeyman creature of folklore with specific thematic...
    1473 replies | 42569 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Manbearcat's Avatar
    Monday, 10th June, 2019, 03:22 PM
    So the Qallupilluit is quintessential bogeyman mythology. For bogeyman mythology to be thematically potent, it has to have some way to hook into the PC's childhood or folklore, otherwise, its just another creepy monster. So this is actually the perfect example where a GM's deftness of framing is hierarchically the apex currency in the purchase of a great gaming moment. "Your little...
    1473 replies | 42569 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Monday, 10th June, 2019, 03:16 PM
    That's not bad. With that rule, you could leave the fighting style alone, since it would scale about as well as dueling. And the accuracy bonus would go well with a change to the Dual Wielder feat that adds a -X/+2X mechanic. Edit: Checking a bit more, I really like how that looks. No feats, just fighting styles, 2H is a little ahead, about 1.2-1.5 dps per attack at tier 1. DW scales...
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Monday, 10th June, 2019, 01:58 PM
    Oh, absolutely. Level 3 fighter features are almost all damage increases, or damage+utility. Any feature that lets you swap an attack should have a return that's, at-worst, equivalent damage to one fighter attack and situationally even stronger. Likewise, since they are fighters, you don't want a feature that's encouraging them to give up all their attacks every round, since that takes away...
    34 replies | 1304 view(s)
    1 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Monday, 10th June, 2019, 01:29 PM
    For the test case "When you take the Attack action using a light melee weapon in each hand, you gain one free attack with the off-hand weapon that does not gain ability modifier to damage", I think it would push rogues and monks into dual-wielding for a featless game, yes. I'm personally OK with that. Rangers and paladins would probably dual-wield for tier 1, but tier 2 would make heavy...
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Monday, 10th June, 2019, 02:07 AM
    Considering that only one out of four of those classes will sometimes dual-wield right now, that certainly seems like a strong argument to remove the bonus action. Especially considering that 3 of those 4 classes should really be commonly dual-wielding, at least by trope.
    217 replies | 7465 view(s)
    0 XP
  • TwoSix's Avatar
    Sunday, 9th June, 2019, 03:36 PM
    I'd see an Int fighter as making a lot of studied, precise strikes, and working with their allies to make coordinated attacks. Maybe features like "Sacrifice one of your attacks to identify a target's weakness. The target is vulnerable to the next attack that targets them." or "Sacrifice one of your attacks and choose one of your allies. The next time that ally takes the Attack action, they...
    34 replies | 1304 view(s)
    3 XP
More Activity
About TwoSix

Basic Information

Age
40
About TwoSix
Introduction:
DM or player
About Me:
Experienced gamer looking for any roleplaying game, up for playing or DMing in the Central NJ area.
Location:
Lawrenceville, NJ
Disable sharing sidebar?:
No
Sex:
Male
Age Group:
31-40
My Game Details

Details of games currently playing and games being sought.

Town:
Lawrenceville
State:
New Jersey
Country:
USA
Game Details:
Player or DM looking for anyone interested in any roleplaying game. Love to try new systems.

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
6,266
Posts Per Day
0.98
Last Post
How Many Actual Sessions Do Your Campaigns Last? Yesterday 11:08 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
14
General Information
Last Activity
Today 03:30 AM
Join Date
Friday, 18th January, 2002
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0

4 Friends

  1. Campbell Campbell is offline

    Member

    Campbell
  2. clearstream clearstream is offline

    Member

    clearstream
  3. Manbearcat Manbearcat is offline

    Member

    Manbearcat
  4. Nytmare Nytmare is offline

    Member

    Nytmare
Showing Friends 1 to 4 of 4
My Game Details
Town:
Lawrenceville
State:
New Jersey
Country:
USA
Game Details:
Player or DM looking for anyone interested in any roleplaying game. Love to try new systems.
Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast

Wednesday, 26th June, 2019


Tuesday, 25th June, 2019


Monday, 24th June, 2019


Saturday, 22nd June, 2019


Friday, 21st June, 2019


Thursday, 20th June, 2019


Wednesday, 19th June, 2019



Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast
Page 1 of 9 123456789 LastLast

Thursday, 13th June, 2019

  • 01:18 AM - FrogReaver mentioned TwoSix in post Improving Two-Weapon Fighting
    Yeah that. Also, if you look at later designs, The Warlock's Eldritch Smite from Xanathar's, are limited to once per round. Since Eldritch Smite grants the prone effect, I may want to buff my nerfed Holy Smite. You go for it. I like TwoSix implementation better. You don't have to change a blazillion other rules to get it to work.

Wednesday, 12th June, 2019

  • 05:23 PM - lowkey13 mentioned TwoSix in post What lore from previous editions do you wish stayed?
    Speaking of clerics and warlocks, I do miss the old days when role playing had an effect on your character. Meaning, if clerics didn’t follow the guidelines set by their god, they wouldn’t have spells granted. Similar to how if paladins and rangers strayed, they lost their abilities. Since then, the game feels like the role playing fluff is completely divested from the class, where each class is now just a box of stats and the role that class is inspired by doesn’t matter; where role playing doesn’t matter if you don’t want. Bingo. That's what I meant when I wrote the following- So I would make that a more general comment- I want a more tight integration of fluff and mechanics. To make it explicit. A lot of players have the TwoSix philosophy (that D&D is just a bunch of mechanics that you mix and match to make your own concepts). Which is a fine way to play- but I prefer to have a tight integration of fluff and crunch; the RPing and the mechanics should feed on each other, not be divorced from one another. But my view, looking at 5e, is clearly not the prevalent one.

Sunday, 9th June, 2019

  • 01:46 AM - 5ekyu mentioned TwoSix in post Improving Two-Weapon Fighting
    TwoSix ""To me, the ideal outcome is that great weapon fighting and two-weapon fighting are roughly equivalent (within 10% damage) for a neutral use case, like champion fighter." Another point for Mr, my ideal "fix" would be to not drive for identical or close enough to not matter outputs gor radically different choices. Instead my preference would be for radically different choices to produce radically different outcomes. Outside of white rooms now, there are significant differences in builds based around TWF and gwf for instance. The consolidation under dex is likely one of the bigger ones when rsnge gets into play too. But, for me, as z for instance of how my mind eorld, instead of trying to find ways for dagger-dagger to duplicate the hard hitting but lower odds of a hit outputs for maulers, I would rather see them get options yo evdn furb increase the better chances of getting hits. So maybe you get an option for that off- hand dagger bonus action to give you advantage on your stac...
  • 12:16 AM - 5ekyu mentioned TwoSix in post Improving Two-Weapon Fighting
    TwoSix "To me, the ideal outcome is that great weapon fighting and two-weapon fighting are roughly equivalent (within 10% damage) for a neutral use case, like champion fighter." I would from a design perspective take issue with the champion fighter bring described as a neutral use case for an all classes feature. Fighter is the one class that effectively scales its tier-3 and tier-4 damage by means of direct extra attacks. Fighter is the one class that represents several of its level gains in feats - and success to certain feats often features in these moarDPR discussions. Fighter is also one of a minority few that get fighting styles. Fighter is also at least arguably a class built around sustained "non-nova" output so, some of the "one more swing" potential is muffled by that as well. Those make using the fighter as the baseline for balancing changes to the two-weapon-fighting feature *not* at all by a long shot a neutral choice. Seems to me that unless these "fixes" only apply to ext...

Wednesday, 5th June, 2019

  • 01:41 PM - Elfcrusher mentioned TwoSix in post Should I play 4e?
    Yes, we did. Maybe it's because I never played casters but I honestly can't remember; however I think I agree with @TwoSix who said that back then it was all exciting.

Tuesday, 4th June, 2019

  • 08:03 PM - Cadmius Clairmonte mentioned TwoSix in post The highest sustained DPR build I could make
    @TwoSix I went to look for sage advice wording on twinning eldritch blast, and on twitter Crawford says that if a spell is able to target more than one creature with its casting, then it is not eligible for being twinned. By definition, eldritch blast can target more than one creature when you hit level 5, since you can use one missile on two different creatures. Because of this, you can't twin eldritch blast when you hit level 5. You can of course still quicken it though.
  • 03:12 PM - Mistwell mentioned TwoSix in post Revised Artificer Survey now available
    ...e restrictive than Extra Attack, but since you can Infuse a magic weapon for yourself if you need it and it counts as Extra Attack for multiclassing purposes, I’d call the current Artificer a martial by this definition. I don’t see any reason spellcasting via subclass needs to be 1/3 progression. Have the subclass kick in at 2nd level and give them half-casting via their subclasses. As long as there’s one that gets something else, like extra Infused Items, or a more powerful pet, or bonus ASIs like the Fighter and Rogue get. Anything, really, as long as there’s an avenue for playing a non-casting Artificer. Of course, I know it won’t happen. They didn’t give us an option for non-casting rangers, they’re not going to do it for Artificers. But as long as this thing is still in play testing, I’m going to keep giving the feedback that I and others want a non-spellcasting option for the class. Weird. The quote has my name. But I didn't write what you're responding to? Maybe it was TwoSix ?
  • 03:11 PM - UngeheuerLich mentioned TwoSix in post The highest sustained DPR build I could make
    ... make really sure they've checked their work. It would usually take Fighter 11 to pull that off. The other problems with your build is that your stats are invalid, assuming point buy, and that you can't take a warlock multiclass with a 10 Cha. Granted, you can certainly get a 20 Dex by level 12, but you're wasting one of the best features of Hexblade by doing so, and your AC and spell attacks suffer by the stat split. I don't want to dissuade you from building cool characters, and the concept is certainly an effective and fun one. But stuff like "best sustained DPR build" or "best nova DPR" are pretty much already solved problems, and the threshold to find something competitive with those builds is very high. I think it would have helped if you adressed the OP after my quote so it he notices it and it does not sound as if you are adressing me. If there is no space in the name, it is easy. I am not sure how to use the following mention with the name of the op correctly. TwoSix

Tuesday, 7th May, 2019

  • 02:58 AM - OlegRu mentioned TwoSix in post Help me with good RP/Optimization balance for Half-Elf (probably)Valor Bard (archer?)
    So from reading all of the replies, here are my follow-up ideas/questions for you guys - @Zardnaar, @TwoSix, @Mistwell, @Tony Vargas, @Treantmonklvl20 I'll format this to go by topic: Is there something you'd recommend outside an archer bard that would fit my char's style (maybe some simple-type multiclass I mentioned in the OP or something else)? Also, is a ranged bard preferable to keep him safer due to lower defense/HP and for spell concentration? Ability Scores: Cool so I'll probably take the STR10 DEX16 CON12 INT10 WIS12 CHA16 then. (I care about strength as I'd like to have decent athletics score and wisdom, again, for the skills) Although, I'm a bit worried regarding the CON - I've seen a lot of talk that it's important - for concentration I think? So in order to avoid issues casting, I should equip just a sword if I'm not using ranged at the moment, not the shield? (and keep shield around just in case, but I'm not sure when I'd use it) For armor, yeah I don't want penalties to stealth as I'd like my char to be able to sneak around in the wilderness camouflaged or hide place...

Sunday, 13th January, 2019

  • 10:42 PM - FrogReaver mentioned TwoSix in post The Mechanical Impact of -5/+10
    Nah, it's the auto-hit part that makes it complicated. It's why either end becomes a static increase. You start way to many posts out with no. TwoSix was correct in this instance. When you have an expanded crit range it gets very complicated as 19's can crit but don't auto hit. You are correct in that when crit damage boost and auto hit both occur on a 20 only that the damage increase cancels out and no one has disagreed with that.

Tuesday, 8th January, 2019

  • 09:52 PM - clearstream mentioned TwoSix in post An Unearthed Arcana I would like to see - mechanical fixes
    I cut out the rest to save space, but I think that's a great idea. Now, to the question above. Are we going to come to a consensus about a given fix like GWM, or would we have like 5 different fixes for it in the document? If we are going with the former, I would recommend the following. A thread where the potential fixes are noted and discussed, followed by a thread where people vote on poll containing those fixes. 1 vote per person, and the top vote getting goes into the document. The lengthy explanations for each fix would be stated in the OP of that voting thread. Good idea. Something like that could very well advance the conversation. I'll take a pause and then come back with a new thread for collating "proud nails", matched by one on reddit to cast a wider net. With then perhaps a survey for the community to rank them. So it seems like there could be some sense of convergence around @TwoSix and @Sword of Spirit suggestions. I'd prefer WotC got onto it, but I can see that a community project could be pragmatic, and maybe influence what comes along down the line. How might we create that cabal?

Saturday, 3rd November, 2018

  • 01:34 AM - pemerton mentioned TwoSix in post Worlds of Design: What Makes an RPG a Tabletop Hobby RPG?
    4E was a good example of this. There were just a ton of changes from prior editions, and many of the changes were in the direction of pushing players towards miniatures and maps and the power cards just pushed people towards the obvious conclusion of minis game/CCG influences. I noticed longtime players thinking this way and becoming more like they were playing that kind of game, being much more focused on their characters enumerated powers.I believe spell cards were published for AD&D. And for as long as I can remember, players of spell casters in RPGs would address situations by reviewing the spells they had available. This relates to my post in reply to TwoSix: the idea that the player of the AD&D caster is engaging the fiction when reviewing a spell list (because in the fiction the PC has memorised spells) while the 4e player is only engaging the mechanics (because in the fiction the PC doesn't have all these rationed powers) rests on a very thin/veneer idea of the fiction. It's not actually engaging and changing the shared fiction.

Tuesday, 30th October, 2018

  • 06:14 PM - epithet mentioned TwoSix in post Burning Questions: Why Do DMs Limit Official WOTC Material?
    ... If we wanted to play in Middle Earth, and more than half of the players wanted to play dragonborn but the DM said "sorry, it doesn't fit the game", are you seriously arguing that that DM is saying "my way or the highway"? ... I would submit to you that if more than half of the players want to play dragonborn that y'all don't actually want to play in Middle Earth. Although... if among the refugees from Laketown were a number of women who were pregnant when Smaug's blood rained upon Esgaroth and tainted the Long Lake, their children born thereafter might carry some legacy of the dragon, even if they don't look like D&D dragonborn. I can see using the dragonborn crunch even if the dragonborn fluff is inapplicable. Edit: Dammit, TwoSix!

Saturday, 20th October, 2018

  • 09:59 PM - Satyrn mentioned TwoSix in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    Except nobody is arguing that the DM can't change the fluff. :) Hey, I'm not arguing anything. It's just my life's mission to point out this fact repeatedly when discussing gods in 5e. Well, it's more like one of my life's continuing side quests. My life's mission is to top the Laughs columns. I'm almost there. I'm topping the Laughs Given by quite a wide margin over Tony Vargas and I'm closing in on him for Laughs Received. Once I catch him, its just TwoSix and . . . . . . lowkey13. Sigh That one's gonna take a while.

Friday, 19th October, 2018

  • 01:21 AM - Imaro mentioned TwoSix in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    Dunno who you are implying. Certainly not me. Got any specifics you'd like to put on the table? I believe pemerton's general approach to gaming is characterized by the setting not being the DM's but instead the groups... I believe Manbearcat is similar in his tastes and well TwoSix pretty much said it was his preference when he responded... but I wasn't sure since I haven't interacted directly with him as much as the other two posters I listed. I honestly don't know what your general approach is though I will admit you seem very pro-player entitlement and much less enthusiastic about anything that maintains or establishes DM empowerment. No. Why would it? The basic premise is that the DM has 100% of the power. Using backgrounding means that the DM now has 99.99% of the power at the table. That tiny sliver that the DM is prevented from bringing into the forefront of play is also off the table for the player as well. But, when the DM brings something up in game, it's not background is it? It's foreground. And, even by this mechanic, would now be fair game. Exactly the same way as if a player did the same thing. Well first let me reply in the same way you did... when you say DM control is 100% whose game are you speaking about here, certainly not...

Thursday, 18th October, 2018

  • 12:39 PM - Xetheral mentioned TwoSix in post I was right about Shield Master
    ...s a specific exception that overrides the general rule, and Shield Master does not do that. Some people read it differently because it's possible to disagree on what the general rules are. For example, the combat mechanics are abstract, and in an abstract system I don't see any reason to assume that the statements "you cannot do two different actions simultaneously" and "once you start one action you need to complete it before you can start another action" are true. Instead, I interpret the applicable general rule as the one in the book that says that the timing of bonus actions is up to the player unless otherwise specified. I don't consider implied timing (such as via the use of an if/then statement) to qualify as "specified". Therefore I read Shield Master as leaving the timing of the bonus action up to the player. (Note that I would consider implicit timing to qualify as "specified" if failure to do broke the system, because that would create a much stronger inference. As TwoSix explained above, however, leaving the bonus action timing of Shield Master up to the player can't break anything.) Your reading is certainly valid. I'm just trying to answer your question as to how it's possible to read it differently.
  • 12:36 AM - pemerton mentioned TwoSix in post I was right about Shield Master
    What would have worked best is if they eliminated the use of a bonus action for the shove entirely. Just have it say, "Once per turn on your turn if you hit a creature that is no more than one size larger than you with a melee attack, you do damage as normal, and as part of that same successful attack you can make a Strength (Athletics) check contested by the target's Strength (Athletics) or Dexterity (Acrobatics) check (the target chooses the ability to use). If you win the contest, you can either knock the target prone or push it 5 feet away from you." That way you still have your bonus action, and there are no timing questions.That's what I take it to mean (subject to the suggestion from epithet and TwoSix that's come out upthread): taking the attack action means taking an attack, but doesn't require finishing taking all those attacks.
  • 12:11 AM - pemerton mentioned TwoSix in post I was right about Shield Master
    The shield bash requires the attack action, regardless of other considerations. If you don't have the Shield Master feat, the shove takes the place of an attack, so any way you parse it a character who makes a shove has taken the attack action.Thanks, that's what TwoSix said also.

Wednesday, 17th October, 2018

  • 03:44 PM - pemerton mentioned TwoSix in post I was right about Shield Master
    ...geably in these sorts of contexts, so - without more to suggest that it matters - I wouldn't treat this as significant. (Eg 4e is full of these sorts of stylistic but - from the rules point of view - meaningless variations which are simply the produce of different writers at different times.) The obvious concern with "if you make an attack" is that it allows multiple uses - which get coralled by the general limit on bonus actions, but nevertheless is an unsettling implication especially in a "specific beats general" ruleset. So I think it's easy to see why they didn't go with that. My own view remains that taking the attack action can't occur independently of making an attack roll, any more than brushing your teeth can take place independently of moving your tooth brush - in both cases the latter is not the totality of the former, but is an essential constituent of the former occurring. To me, that therefore implies that the bonus action must come after that first attack. But TwoSix's clever (if in some sense unsatisfying) argument about the practical irrelevance of policing the bonus vs non-bonus action in the event that the non-bonus action doesn't come to pass offers a pratical gameplay reason to expand the reading the natural language would otherwise suggest. My final interpretation would be driven by balance concerns - ie is it too strong to get to do your shove for all your attacks rather than some - but I'm not going to try and work that out (certainly not in the context of this thread!, and I don't think I'm competent to attempt it at all).
  • 03:21 PM - pemerton mentioned TwoSix in post I was right about Shield Master
    ... it can't be nested. The "on your turn" bit isn't a trigger, it's just a reminder of the scope.I guess I don't find the contrast between "scope" and "trigger" very helpful for understanding or parsing these rules. I mean, I feel that I could deploy that distinction to say that the "scope" of the Shield Master bonus action is a turn in which the Attack action is taken - and that action is taken (although not necessarily fully resolved, if I have an Extra attack) as soon as I attack on my turn. And now there's no "nesting". Conversely, I feel like I can insist that Cunning Action does have a trigger - to wit, when you take a turn in combat. (Ie I can't take the bonus action, effectively doubling my speed, in ordinary movement situations.) And now there is nesting. You can't simply assume people will reach a conclusion that fits your definition of reasonable or rational.Of course not. But I can put forward what I think are good or bad reasons for various interpretations. Until TwoSix provided me with the reasoning not far upthread, it seemed pretty clear to me that the attack action has to be taken to trigger the bonus action; but the inherent oddity of extra attack within the game together with the movement example makes it pretty clear to me that one takes the attack action by making an attack on one's turn, and then the exra attacks play out in a rather flexible way, which if it can include 15' of movement can probably include a bonus action as well. So if this gets characterised as "nesting" well I just don't see what the problem is. Nesting doesn't seem to be a concept that occurs in the rules, or that one needs to explain or apply the rules. It seems to be an external concept introduced for the sake of tidiness. Can a rogue who is Dashing as part of a cunning action drop something as s/he moves (but not at the beginning or end of the move)? I assume so - the rules don't contain a notion of "nesting" that makes me doubt it. I should add - the oddness ...


Page 1 of 9 123456789 LastLast
No results to display...

Monday, 24th June, 2019

  • 07:52 PM - Tony Vargas quoted TwoSix in post The urban fantasy market seems awfully stagnant
    Saturn bases aren’t bad. Where I get confused is why there’s a need to go so far beyond urban fantasy. Scifi and cyberpunk are present from the start.Sci-fi for two of the 9 Traditions and 2-3 of the 5 Conventions (depending on how far the Progenitors are taking it in the story, and the Syndicate & NWO don't need to go there, at all) - cyberpunk for only one of each. In no one plays a Virtual Adept or tangles with It-X, no cyberpunk. No SoE or Void Engineers, no space opera. You might get some Tom Clancy level sci-fi from the Progenitors or James Bond gadgets from the NWO, but on the PC side, you have 7 traditions & the Hollow Ones using non-technological magick. If you /just/ want magic along the lines of Harry Potter to Harry Dresden, you're down to the Order of Hermes (and maybe the Verbena), but you /coould/ restrict your story like that, if you wanted. In Mage: The Ascension they are, but not in Mage: The Awakening. One of many things that was better about the oWoD. ;P ...
  • 04:05 PM - Paul Farquhar quoted TwoSix in post D&D Essentials Kit Offers a New Place to Start
    Isn't "You walk into a shady tavern, a hooded, mysterious stranger in the corner offers you gold and treasure to complete a task" the normal adventure starter since time immemorial? Yup, how dare they not have that!
  • 01:14 PM - BoxCrayonTales quoted TwoSix in post The urban fantasy market seems awfully stagnant
    In Mage: The Ascension they are, but not in Mage: The Awakening.Yes, but my overall argument was aimed at every iteration of World of Darkness. Mage: The Awakening has an entirely different set of baggage. I believe the Mage Chroniclers' Guide attempted to provide alternative options, but providing options isn't really the intent of the games as a whole. They're married to very specific settings with specific themes and don't invest much in alternative settings. A number of their creative choices I don't agree with. For example, I've never liked how either has dealt with ghosts and similar. The penumbra/twilight is a headache (I much prefer The Everlasting's simplified "reverie" concept) and the CoD/GMC 2e flowcharts are another headache. There are tons of things I could criticize, but one point I think of pertinence would be that spirits are treated as subject to our conceptions of space-time despite being defined by a lack of corporeality. There are rare situations where this isn't the cas...
  • 11:34 AM - BoxCrayonTales quoted TwoSix in post The urban fantasy market seems awfully stagnant
    Have you looked at all at Mage for Chronicles of Darkness 2nd edition? Beyond sharing the name and the broad contours of the magic system, they're extremely different games. No consensual reality, and definitely no bases on Saturn. Saturn bases aren’t bad. Where I get confused is why there’s a need to go so far beyond urban fantasy. Scifi and cyberpunk are present from the start.

Saturday, 22nd June, 2019

  • 01:45 AM - 5ekyu quoted TwoSix in post Another attempt at fixing the -5 / +10 issue
    Assuming a bog standard level 1 greatsword attack (+5 attack, 2d6+3 damage), normal attacking is superior when AC >= 20, AC 19 is equal, -2/+4 is better between ACs 18 and 14, and -5/+10 is better when AC <= 13.Power attack in forms that allowed chosen minuses to hit and comparable gains in damage have been around for a while in various types of d20 gsmes snd others for a long time. Experience with them backs up your claims in actual play non-ehite room excels where the right assumptions get you amy results you want. Those who typically evangelize the 5 -10 round here fall back when pressed on how you just eont use it when it's not superior and then ignore that part of the sample. But, in actual play, a variable -×+2× will mean a lot more opportunities for the feat to give you extra. It eont be the same yield, but then, the -1 to -4 gains will be all coming from cases which would have been-0+0 so anything gained is more to the average. Its all gain, no downside if applies eith the same p...

Thursday, 20th June, 2019

  • 09:47 PM - Raunalyn quoted TwoSix in post Is it possible that the Revised Ranger is not dead?
    The revised ranger is not dead; however, it is very badly burnt. It's getting better. It's so happy!!!!
  • 04:17 PM - Laurefindel quoted TwoSix in post On GWF and a versatile fighting style
    I'm a little confused as to how the cleave and -5/+10 part play nicely together (snip) or is the intent that the kill/crit allows you to take an additional bonus action? I understand the confusion, the strike-through didn't transfer like the bold and italic. I corrected the OP Here's the intent: On your turn, as you make an attack roll, you can use your bonus action to enable the "power attack" feature until your next round. You are not bound to use it on all (or any of) your attacks, but that would be the only way to use the -5/+10 on a reaction attack. The cleave feature is free however, with a limit of once per turn

Wednesday, 19th June, 2019

  • 11:48 PM - FrogReaver quoted TwoSix in post In-Combat Healing: How and Why?
    That's a small part of it, but not the major portion. Even if cure wounds healed for double its current amount, you still wouldn't cast it until the target was near death. It's just more efficient that way. It might help if you define near death. If defined as very low hp then I disagree. Not risking an ally fall to 0 in battle is a better tactic than slightly more resource efficient strategies. The only time this might not be true is if in your campaign you are constantly having to go on despite being out of resources.
  • 11:28 PM - FrogReaver quoted TwoSix in post In-Combat Healing: How and Why?
    I just don't see a way that in-combat healing can be an effective strategy within the current rule set and general metagame assumptions. It isn't just a question of resource efficiency. It's that the penalty for hitting 0 is too small, D&D is a team game. When you heal your team isn't hitting for 0. the window from being unconscious to dead is pretty large, Sure, but why take that chance in the first place when you don't have to? and that at most tables, the penalty for actually dying isn't that severe. (Have a new character ready for next session!) It's not mechanically severe. Assuming you enjoyed your character then losing him is a fairly severe consequence. If characters dies at -10 HP, and replacement characters always started at level 1 with no magic items, and the entire metagame would shift to favor healers, high AC characters, and temp HP granters. Sure. I'm not really looking for ways to alter the game. I'm taking the stance that in-combat healing in 5e ...
  • 10:53 PM - LordEntrails quoted TwoSix in post In-Combat Healing: How and Why?
    ... It's that the penalty for hitting 0 is too small, Agreed. ... I detest the way the game is currently set up to encourage you to do Healing Word on just-fallen allies... Yep, but... ...The best way to get people to want to heal is to penalize being injured. ... Yep, and their is an optional rule for this in the DMG... This is really more dependent on the DM than anything else. ... Exactly. Actually 2 optional rules that really fix most of this. 1) Re-roll initiative. The healer can now never be certain if they are going to be able to heal before the allies turn, so they start acting proactive/protectively. 2) Lingering wounds. Now their is a penalty every time a character goes to 0. One that lasts. So again they players start worrying about it and the healers start being protective healers. Protective healers require in-combat healing. And, if the DM starts being a little more ruthless, or just stops protecting unconscious characters, now AoEs starts including downed character ...
  • 09:16 PM - Tony Vargas quoted TwoSix in post In-Combat Healing: How and Why?
    That's a small part of it, but not the major portion. Even if cure wounds healed for double its current amount, you still wouldn't cast it until the target was near death. It's just more efficient that way. Yes, you may goad monsters into Overkill and 'waste' their damage or 'gain' let's-pretend-healing damage due to heal-from-0. The best way to get people to want to heal is to penalize being injured. Maybe bring back the 4e bloodied condition at half HP,and have bloodied targets attack with disadvantage. (That might be too harsh, so you could adjust the threshold to a third or a quarter if you wanted.) Sure, bloodied, even without disadvantage, did that for most characters - monsters could be more dangerous when you were bloodied, for instance, without having to actually gimp you into some kind of death spiral. But, I don't think penalties are necessary: just getting rid of heal-from-0, just counting the negative hps, alone would do it, because the 'bonus' is gone. Of course,...
  • 09:13 PM - Xeviat quoted TwoSix in post Druid Animal Companion Circle
    Yea, it's the official druid now for my campaigns. So much more flexible and interesting. I think I'll merge some of my thoughts in there and talk in that community some. I think the druid could use a bit of stuff at 1st level when you compare them to a Cleric.
  • 09:06 PM - Xeviat quoted TwoSix in post Druid Animal Companion Circle
    Kibblestasty's Beastmanger Ranger has some pretty solid rules for an animal companion. https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/bxudj7/kibbles_alternate_beastmaster_ranger_v11_fine/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x This druid remake also has some nice rules for an animal companion in the Circle of the Keeper: https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/aze71s/alpha_druid_v02_now_with_four_new_circles_a_new/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x Woah, neat! I've been working on a druid rewrite and I think I can just grab this. Interesting to take Wildshape out of the druid chasis.
  • 08:21 PM - Tony Vargas quoted TwoSix in post In-Combat Healing: How and Why?
    Success under conventional wisdom is almost universally based on the idea that the adventuring day is a marathon and that the only way to lose is to exhaust your resources to fast. Thus, tactics that minimize resource usage by using your resources to maximum numeric effect (such as the classic whack-a-mole healing) are very highly regarded. I'm not sure I agree that's what's going on: It may be more a matter of casters having better things to do with their high level spells than heal up a damage sponge significantly, rather than just stand him up with a low-level slot, tempting the monster to waste another round knocking him down again. Yes, the damage sponge may lose actions or get killed, but you can always wring him out on the next short rest or just get a new one. (oh and that trick about putting a sponge in the microwave to disinfect it - doesn't work on damage sponges, can even get a little messy) We do want to use our resources in ways that maximize their numerical effectiv...

Tuesday, 18th June, 2019

  • 06:45 PM - Hawk Diesel quoted TwoSix in post Improving Two-Weapon Fighting
    That makes sense, but it also locks the scaling aspect behind a level 1 dip into fighter or 2 level dip into ranger, which is something I personally would like to avoid. I like the idea that a barbarian or valor bard or cleric or monk could choose to use BA free dual-wielding without a dip. Ideally, I'd like to see Two-Weapon Fighting Style give a bonus of around 1.5*N damage (N=number of attacks), which is similar in scale to Great Weapon Fighting and Dueling. Edit: I'll be honest, I'm also pretty OK with giving classes that probably want to dual-wield but have superior bonus actions (i.e. monk and rogue) a bit of a boost. It's not like their damage is out of control at any level. I suppose that's fair, but there are two classes that would benefit so greatly from TWF that there is no reason they wouldn't do it. The Paladin and the Rouge. For me, the mechanics around sneak attack and smite really make me uncomfortable redesigning general two weapon fighting rules, since there would ...
  • 06:11 PM - Hawk Diesel quoted TwoSix in post Improving Two-Weapon Fighting
    Yea, I was going for a pretty limited remake, with minimum changes to other rules. But that portion of the rule, by itself, is pretty balanced. If I was going for a more broad fix, I'd make that the default rule for two-weapon fighting, and move the bonus action attack into the dual-wielder feat. Edit: Actually, if you make it a broader fix, I'd let the followup attack have stat mod to damage, but only with light weapons. It's equivalent to greatsword with no fighting styles in damage. If the fighting style changes to any one-handed weapon (bumping the d6 to a d8), it's about equivalent to the great weapon style. Actually, I think the normal two weapon fighting rules should remain the same. For example, it should be a meaningful choice for a rogue to pick between the extra attack, or disengaging. The benefit of making the fighting style specifically grant the benefits above is that it ALSO allows for a bonus action for normal two weapon fighting, but does not require it for a f...
  • 04:05 PM - Hawk Diesel quoted TwoSix in post Improving Two-Weapon Fighting
    Dual Wielder (updated 16-Jun) You are a savant of weaponry. You are able to use any combination of weapons in unconventional yet effective ways; you gain the following benefits: -When you take the Attack option, if you are wielding a one-handed melee weapon in each hand, and if you miss with an attack, you may make a second followup attack with the weapon in your other hand. You do not add your ability modifier to damage when you make this followup attack. Actually, I think you are on to something here. This portion right here should be the Two Weapon Fighting Style. It allows this style to scale as most of the others and it can see use when using action surge. I'm stealing this.
  • 03:48 AM - Yaarel quoted TwoSix in post [5E] Urban Intrigue Campaign - Gating the Sandbox
    Wealth, celebrity, and power. Status because of wealth, celebrity, and power ... is modern. In premodern cultures, it is more important to be *related* to a noble and have a title, than to actually have money. Money has value − specifically to pay for armies to conquer and steal wealth from other communities. These ‘spoils of war’ were often spent lavishly to emphasize the victory. The next generation of these conquerors use this ill-begotten money to build useful infrastructure (transportation, buildings, functional bureaucracies, etcetera). The generations after this are *born* into power, and take the status quo for granted as if things have always been this way. In peace time, fear became respect, and respect became loyalty, and loyalty became love. It is weird to me how the same people who are essentially psychopaths who murder and loot others, become objects of patriotism and love. But that is how it works. Just look at Rome. Archeologists sometimes refer this phase of huma...
  • 01:49 AM - Xeviat quoted TwoSix in post Improving Two-Weapon Fighting
    Ok, so make scale mail 15+Dex(max 1) and half plate 16+Dex (max 1)? I could get behind that. Maybe! I'd really prefer if medium armor granted +1 AC over leather armor and the dex you'd have at a given level. The trouble is that there is only 1 upgrade for each kind of medium armor (ignoring Hide). Dex-based characters typically start with Dex 16 and improve that to 18 at 4th and 20th at 8th levels, if they don't go for feats. Medium Armor Master exists, but the light armor wearer is getting +AC from their Dex the whole way, and you'd have to give up a whole ASI (granted, Halfplate with a Dex 16 and Medium Armor mastery is +2 AC over Breastplate). I just feel like Medium Armor proficiency should always give you something. Luckily, it comes paired with shield proficiency, so that's something. If scale was 15+1 and half plate was 16+1, medium armor mastery would get them to the same ends for a medium armor dex character like the Ranger or some Fighter/Rogue mix (would 5/15 Fighter/Rogue be ...

Monday, 17th June, 2019

  • 08:09 PM - Xeviat quoted TwoSix in post The Final Bladelock
    You can strip out Hex Warrior straight up, and Hexblade is still probably the strongest overall warlock patron. You can move Hex Warrior to Blade Pact if you want to stop Warlock 1 dips from happening, or just fold it into base warlock if you don't see the MC as being a problem. You think their Curse is a big enough ability? It kind of is an extra spell slot, though you could stack if with Hex.


TwoSix's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites