View Profile: Salamandyr - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
  • Salamandyr's Avatar
    Monday, 15th July, 2019, 05:10 PM
    OSR games tend to fit the expected playstyle better than more modern games: fighters fight, clerics back them up, and keep the team going, thieves are sneaky, and magic-users drop fireballs. A plethora of tiny changes, seemingly unconnected, eventually built up a system where fighters no longer value strength, the highest damage dealers were the former thieves, clerics could do everything better...
    74 replies | 2826 view(s)
    4 XP
  • Salamandyr's Avatar
    Wednesday, 10th July, 2019, 10:24 PM
    If it's not real time with pause (like its predecessors), I'll probably skip it.
    47 replies | 2021 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Salamandyr's Avatar
    Wednesday, 26th June, 2019, 03:51 PM
    (quote abbeviated for space) You are too right. I will say, 5e gives a VERY enjoyable gaming experience. That consistency however is it's weak point. It gets rid of the lows, but also the highs, leaving you with a consistently fun experience lacking the transcendence occasionally achieved by earlier editions (but also the occasionally game wrecking disasters those editions could be prone to...
    196 replies | 11639 view(s)
    2 XP
No More Results
About Salamandyr

Basic Information

Date of Birth
February 8, 1971 (48)
About Salamandyr
Introduction:
Looking for some classic fantasy gaming.
Location:
St. Charles, MO
Age Group:
31-40

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
919
Posts Per Day
0.19
Last Post
Check Out The One Ring 2E’s Cover Art! Yesterday 02:19 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
2
General Information
Last Activity
Yesterday 04:08 PM
Join Date
Friday, 12th May, 2006
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0

Friday, 19th July, 2019


Wednesday, 17th July, 2019


Tuesday, 16th July, 2019


Monday, 15th July, 2019


Thursday, 11th July, 2019


Sunday, 30th June, 2019


Wednesday, 26th June, 2019


Tuesday, 25th June, 2019


Friday, 21st June, 2019


Wednesday, 15th November, 2017

  • 11:04 PM - Wulffolk mentioned Salamandyr in post I feel like there is a problem with ability score bonuses.
    ...nges that make me feel good about myself. Can someone write that for me? Please? There are better game systems out there, but they lack the name recognition of D&D, and are thus harder to find players for. Gygax & company did an excellent job capturing the imaginations of thousands of people like us, and creating a new genre of games for people to enjoy. For that I am eternally grateful to him. I just wish they had been better at game design, so that D&D was built on a more solid foundation and was not burdened by so many legacies that make so little sense. I know that is easier to say in hindsight than it was to see in the moment, and games are much more sophisticated now, but the core problems with D&D are too baked in to change, and without D&D evolving the whole hobby stagnates. It is like the NFL. There have been other leagues (USFL, CFL, XFL, WFL and college football) that have done some things better, but none of that matters because the NFL is still KING. Salamandyr I much preferred dice pool systems like World of Darkness over d20, and would love to play a d6 rule-set for a fantasy game, but it is hard enough to find players for D&D, let alone obscure games. I had actually designed the foundation of a d6 dice pool RPG before I heard of d6 Fantasy, and there are a lot of similarities.

Tuesday, 8th August, 2017

  • 04:01 AM - Ancalagon mentioned Salamandyr in post What non-combat abilities should fighters have?
    Salamandyr Reading your post about all the skills a warrior should know... and well, yeah. Maybe fighter *should* be a class with more skills... and giving the fighter one extra skill to pick would do a lot for this, or maybe even 2? Tweak the class skill list as well? This would be a *very* straightforward way to "buff" the fighter's out of combat abilities...

Monday, 7th August, 2017

  • 05:24 AM - Quickleaf mentioned Salamandyr in post What non-combat abilities should fighters have?
    ...mpanions heeding your guidance a number of temporary hit points equal to your proficiency modifier. This represents them keeping up their guard better after your guidance. Whet the Blade (camp) During a short or long rest, you can use a whetstone and water to hone the edge on a number of bladed weapons equal to your proficiency modifier. A blade whetted by you grants the following: If the blade was in good repair, it gains a +1 damage bonus on its next successful hit. If the blade was damaged or rusty, remove the “broken” condition from the blade. Wound Binding (camp) During a short rest, you can expend one use of a healer’s kit to expertly bind your wounds or the wounds of a willing creature. You or that creature gains advantage on any hit dice spent to heal at the end of the short rest. When used during a long rest, it allows you or the creature whose wounds you bind to regain 1 extra hit die (normally a long rest restores half your hit dice). And I fully stand behind Salamandyr's examples of non-combat unique things fighters could do. Speaking from personal experience being taught Apache stick fighting blindfolded, awareness is absolutely the first fighting skill. Actually, in OD&D I think something like this was represented there where "Superheroes" could detect invisible creatures (or something like that, I forget the specifics). For me, the first problem I have with the fighter class is that, unlike nearly every other edition (don't know 4e well enough to include that), the fighter was always better at hitting things than other classes. With the proficiency bonus system, every single class has the same chance to-hit, assuming they have the same ability modifier. I've made a lot of changes, in part because of that, and also because I don't like they way they designed the battle master. But all of my changes are almost entirely in the realm of combat abilities. There really aren't any non-combat abilities that I can think of that all fighters sh...

Sunday, 15th January, 2017

  • 08:30 PM - Satyrn mentioned Salamandyr in post What happened to the punk aesthetic in D&D?
    Aye. Salamandyr and akr71, I'd say exactly the same thing, except that my big homebrew work would be setting up lots of mechanics to reward worshipping and praying to the gods rather than a magical pole. Instead, I turned my effort to (occasionally) making up magic items, because the players will use them.
  • 03:24 PM - akr71 mentioned Salamandyr in post What happened to the punk aesthetic in D&D?
    Salamandyr Yep, I have experienced this too. I had an idea to create my own world where magic works differently - weaker the farther you get from the magical pole. I could spend probably 100's of hours getting it to where I wanted, but thankfully I realized the ROI wasn't worth it. We play in the Realms and I have always been a big proponent of 'My Realms' - I'll take what I want from canon, but ultimately if I want to change the geography, the politics or the key players to suite what is happening in my game, I will.

Wednesday, 9th March, 2016

  • 07:53 PM - AaronOfBarbaria mentioned Salamandyr in post 6-8 encounters/day - how common is this?
    Saying that the DM can enforce a 6-8 encounter day seems irrelevant to the argument that the game should have been balanced around a lower number of assumed encounters per day.The irrelevant thing is that some other number could have been chosen, since the number chosen was done so by way of surveying as many players as could be bothered to actually give input on the matter and then going with what the majority said they wanted or were used to. 3e assumed 4/day, and that fits with my experience of dungeoncrawling expeditionsAnd as a perfect counter-point to your experience, there is my experience that 12 encounters in a day of dungeon-crawling is a more common occurrence than 4 (in any version of the D&D game that isn't 4th, to be as specific as possible about my experiences). Salamandyr, I agree that there may be some benefit found in looking at Adventuring Day XP table, and the Multipart Encounters guideline, rather than the individual encounter XP budget or number of rests. Those two details actually present themselves as "more than this without a rest (of appropriate length for the guideline in question) is probably a bad idea" and are probably easier to follow in practice as well (I wouldn't know, considering I don't use the XP guidelines at all in running my games - and my party hits the 6 encounter mark more often than not even when some of those encounters are extremely dangerous).

Friday, 30th October, 2015

  • 12:24 AM - The Grassy Gnoll mentioned Salamandyr in post Human v. Dwarf FINALS!
    Gah! I missed the chance to vote Gnome in the semi. Don't suppose it would've made much difference. But, Salamandyr, what you said = gnome... Although, a lot of "making race X have trait Y" comes down to RP. Humanity has so much variation, and within essentially homogenous societies there is enormous variation...why should the same not be true for any race? I know a couple of very grumpy Irishmen who'd score a 7 or 8 tops in CHA. I know a very funny German. I know lots of cheerful Scots who eat healthily and don't drink or start fights. I know some impolite Americans. I know a French lady who is extremely diligent about underarm depilation. To be fair, every Canadian I've met has been very healthy and positively vibrating with energy. But the point is, in every grouping there is almost infinite variety. You want a silly dwarf or a crude elf or a pacifist half Orc? Do it. Play it that way. Also, vote dwarf. Because underdog. And because combining it with everything else makes a dwarf bard, right?

Wednesday, 28th October, 2015

  • 12:58 PM - EzekielRaiden mentioned Salamandyr in post Dexterity Vs Strength An In Depth Look
    ...+1 to three solid skills including one that is both mobility and defense, +1 hit and damage with the best ranged weapons and solid melee weapons) are a too-tempting package, but it's hard to question the clear utility of "you can buy AC with gold, and spend your ASIs on powerful/interesting feats instead." My main Problem is that non-martial classes have nearly no reason to put any points in it, Dex is far more usefull to them and you simply need a bit of Dex for non-heavy Armor. Yeah. It's not even like Con, since everybody likes having HP. Strength is almost worthless for anyone else. Acrobatics can be used to defend against Grapple, even. That's part of why I said what I said. Unless a DM goes out of their way to make specifically Strength-based checks commonplace, anybody that doesn't actually carry a melee weapon can, essentially, ignore it. Add in that most DMs handwave carrying capacity as well, just for good measure. Hence why what I really wanted was to get a reply from @Salamandyr -- I'm curious how his game operates. (Also, did you change your screenname, Salamandyr? I swear I saw someone else with that icon...) Edit: Gah! I missed it, you DID reply, just not to me. Anywho... Exactly what discosoc said; climbing is vertical movement, jumping can be vertical, horizontal, anything you need. Jumping can negate difficult terrain. And he's also right that, largely thanks to stereotypes of "agile" characters being able to climb walls, or somersault over the heads of people, and kung fu movies, we've grown used to the idea that agility has anything to do with jumping high...when all that stuff is brute strength and practice. Which, I think, really just gets into how artificial--indeed, gamist--the "Strength"/"Dexterity" divide really is. Because I also know that all sorts of people who do "dextrous" things in fact need to be powerfully athletic in order to do them. A "real" archer has to have strong arms--you can't draw a high-tension bow (say, an English yew lo...

Thursday, 3rd October, 2013

  • 11:14 AM - Cyberen mentioned Salamandyr in post The Monk - What is the monk to you and why?
    I am with Celebrim an Salamandyr here : the Monk doesn't really belong to a rationnally designed fantasy game, and neither the Barbarian nor the Ranger, blabla... But, wait ! We can't afford to design a new game from top down here. We're talking D&D Next, which main duty is the ability to emulate previous editions out of the box. Previous material (either official, 3pp, or homebrewed) include "Barbarians", "Rangers" and "Monks", so Next has to support those *keywords* natively, even if the concepts are lousy. I really dig the idea of psionic warriors, and I would theoretically put D&D monks, Jedi, and battleragers under this umbrella (and have the totem warrior be a flavour of ranger).
  • 04:23 AM - pemerton mentioned Salamandyr in post The Monk - What is the monk to you and why?
    I think monk is related to paladin, for what that is worth.I agree. In 4e, for instance, there are at least two ways of building a monk-like character: the monk class, and the avenger class. You can also see this if you look at Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed/Evolved, in which his monk variant is The Oathsworn. Minigiant, Salamandyr - I think your arguments, if followed through on, will tend to produce "monks" that no one will play. For instance, no one in a typical D&D game is going to build a 10th level fighter but then drop their armour and weapons and fight bare-handed against 5th level monsters. That's unreaslistic except in some pretty niche situations. So for those who want to play someone who fits the Jet Li or Crouching Tiger archetype, we need a class that makes fighting without arms or armour mechanically viable. And it needs to do so from 1st level, much like a paladin or fighter or thief needs to be a viable representation of their basic archetype from 1st level.

Saturday, 24th August, 2013

  • 02:55 PM - Hussar mentioned Salamandyr in post How Much of D&D is the Rules?
    True. But play those adventures with Rolemaster, or Runequest, or C&S, or HARP, or even Burning Wheel, and the experience will be much closer to D&D. Well, Rolemaster is close enough to 3e that sure, I'm fairly certain the experience would be similar. C&S and HARP are both close enough to AD&D that, again, it's not a really huge jump. Not surprising given the history of the games. But, again, going a bit further afield, and you start getting very different experiences. As Salamandyr said, in D&D, the kobold attacks you because that's what kobolds do. In other games, the kobold attacks you because you gained a complication from an action you took.

No results to display...

Tuesday, 20th June, 2017

  • 03:49 AM - Yaztromo quoted Salamandyr in post Guns in your world, and in mine!
    Saw this first on my phone and thought I was giving XP...but apparently I "laughed". No disrespect intended; I meant to XP. This is awesome, and I will check your Barsoom rules out. Glad to hear people are still bringing the old school to D&D. Don't worry, I like to make people laugh! ;)

Monday, 19th June, 2017

  • 01:03 AM - Yaztromo quoted Salamandyr in post Guns in your world, and in mine!
    No flintlocks-too modern Were I to add firearms to my next campaign--I'd either go science fantasy; with radium powered rifles with 200 mile ranges like on Barsoom You can find my take on Barsoom and its radium bullets here: http://www.arion-games.com/affBarsoom.pdf

Wednesday, 7th June, 2017

  • 11:04 AM - CapnZapp quoted Salamandyr in post Why I Am Starting to Prefer 4d6 Drop the Lowest Over the Default Array.
    More and more I'm leaning to just letting the PC's have whatever stats they want what fits their characters. Even all 18's doesn't really skew the challenge all that much. The important aspect is the balance between the characters in the party. As long as everyone gets to choose their stats, you are to some extent correct. But that's not the issue in this discussion. The problem arises when one character starts with a 20, while another starts with a 14. That's three more feats, which makes a huge difference. That is a problem. Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

Friday, 2nd June, 2017

  • 02:37 AM - FormerlyHemlock quoted Salamandyr in post What would you miss about 5E if you were playing AD&D?
    Modern characters don't actually do more damage than than earlier edition characters. They put up larger numbers, but they are attacking larger pools of hit points. And many of those cool resources they can expend to up their damage sky high wouldn't even be necessary except to deal with the huge bag of hit points that monsters now have. Average hit points for an ogre in 1e? Less than 20. Average hit points in 5e? around 60. Heck monsters in 1e don't even average more than 10 hp until they've got 3 hit dice; Fireballs used to be lethal rather than an efficient way to reduce monster hit points by a third. Not to mention the fact that the average 20th level wizard had only 35 HP. People like to talk about high-level wizards completely eclipsing fighters, but it was never really true without multiclassing or dual-classing involved. When you have only 35 HP between you and death, 70 HP on a friendly suit of armor is much appreciated as a way to buy time. In other words, glass cannon...

Thursday, 1st June, 2017


Thursday, 18th May, 2017

  • 02:25 AM - Dungeonosophy quoted Salamandyr in post Simply D&D--based on the My Little Pony system.
    Sounds like Microlite20. Yeah, but even more streamlined. And with no math. That's a thing I like about this system. As far as I can tell from the review, there is literally no adding together of die rolls, or adding bonuses. You always just roll one die at a time, and that's it. I'm burnt out on math.

Saturday, 6th May, 2017

  • 09:38 PM - Satyrn quoted Salamandyr in post Two-Weapon Fighting alteration
    The only alteration I've made to two-weapon fighting is that any object in the off-hand, like a cloak, a torch or a dagger, can be used as an improvised shield for +1 AC, whenever the off-hand object is not used for attack. I've considered changing the off-hand attack to only happen when the main hand weapon misses (and not requiring a bonus action), but haven't done so. I don't think this is the direction you're going though. Hmm, I'm thinking it might be most interesting if that +1 AC always applies (that way the player never needs to fiddle with his AC) and then add in that the off-hand attack to only happen when the main hand weapon misses. As a reaction instead of a bonus action.

Friday, 5th May, 2017

  • 05:02 AM - cbwjm quoted Salamandyr in post Two-Weapon Fighting alteration
    Anyone, and yes, it can stack with the feat. The aim is to add some flexibility and some simulation to what an off-hand weapon is for--ie deflection and opportunistically stabbing those you missed with your main attack. Cool, thanks for sharing. Whether or not I go with the second attack option, I think that I will add this to two-weapon fighting.
  • 04:43 AM - cbwjm quoted Salamandyr in post Two-Weapon Fighting alteration
    The only alteration I've made to two-weapon fighting is that any object in the off-hand, like a cloak, a torch or a dagger, can be used as an improvised shield for +1 AC, whenever the off-hand object is not used for attack. I've considered changing the off-hand attack to only happen when the main hand weapon misses (and not requiring a bonus action), but haven't done so. I don't think this is the direction you're going though. This is an interesting idea though. Do you allow it for anyone or only those with the fighting style or feat? Do you allow this to stack with the +1 AC bonus from the dual wielder feat?

Monday, 27th March, 2017

  • 06:30 PM - Tony Vargas quoted Salamandyr in post 5e Warlord Demand Poll
    No more dissection of the warrior archetype into smaller and smaller chunks. Brief as it is, this is one of the better arguments against adding martial classes. (Really, it's been an issue ever since the Thief appeared in Greyhawk in 1975!) Unfortunately, for it to work, the existing martial class, the Fighter would have to have been a great deal broader in it's capabilities. If the 5e fighter had been able to do everything the 3e & 4e fighter, and the 4e Warlord & Ranger, and the 3e Warblade and Knight, and the myriad official and un-official stabs at swashbucklers and the like that have been attempted over the years, sure, sub-dividing it (beyond sub-classes) would have been superfluous. But, that's not the 5e fighter. The 5e fighter is a multi-attacking high-DPR machine, it doesn't have the design space or flexibility to do a lot more than that, sub-classes have minor side-lines, 1/3rd caster or the like, because that's all there's room for. So, yes, additional martial classes ...

Thursday, 9th March, 2017

  • 07:25 PM - Warpiglet quoted Salamandyr in post I hate rapiers. Do you?
    If it helps, bronze age thrusting swords are referred to as rapiers by historians/archaalogists, and they have about as much to do with Renaissance rapier as the arquebus has with an M-16. And the rapier does show up in the hands of the occasional foppish nobleman in Conan stories. Likewise, the swordplay of the Fafhrd & Gray Mouser stories is told in very latter day fencing terms (Fritz Leiber was himself a fencer), so despite its early iron/bronze age tech, it has a very picaresque, swashbuckling feel. So it's not really out of line for a rapier to show up in muscular, savage, bare chest, bare breast fantasy (otherwise known as "the best kind"). But like you, when the entire party becomes default dex fighters, it's tedious and stretches what I want from my fantasy tea party all out of shape. Yes, that does in fact help. I will read up about. It might help me not be distracted and keep the suspension of disbelief (related to my magical tea party land)
  • 07:07 PM - Maxperson quoted Salamandyr in post I hate rapiers. Do you?
    If it helps, bronze age thrusting swords are referred to as rapiers by historians/archaalogists, and they have about as much to do with Renaissance rapier as the arquebus has with an M-16. And the rapier does show up in the hands of the occasional foppish nobleman in Conan stories. Likewise, the swordplay of the Fafhrd & Gray Mouser stories is told in very latter day fencing terms (Fritz Leiber was himself a fencer), so despite its early iron/bronze age tech, it has a very picaresque, swashbuckling feel. So it's not really out of line for a rapier to show up in muscular, savage, bare chest, bare breast fantasy (otherwise known as "the best kind"). But like you, when the entire party becomes default dex fighters, it's tedious and stretches what I want from my fantasy tea party all out of shape. Yes, but unless my character is a foppish nobleman, pirate or some other class that makes sense, I'm not going to pick up a rapier. My fighter in his full plate armor is going to pick up a weapon to m...

Saturday, 4th March, 2017

  • 04:36 PM - Jeff Albertson quoted Salamandyr in post Hidden
  • 02:46 PM - Alexemplar quoted Salamandyr in post 5e Warlord Demand Poll
    I am missing the "I am a player/DM of 5e and actively do not want WOTC to create a warlord class". No more dissection of the warrior archetype into smaller and smaller chunks. Warlord is something characters can do at high level. As such it should be handled outside the class structure--get a castle? get an army. Run around conquering things and warlord-ing it up. EDIT: voted "don't care" but that is a lie. I do care. I actively don't want a warlord class. Meh. We already have over half a dozen variants on "I wear little to no armor and cast spells". I think DnD warriors could use some variations and more defining.
  • 12:24 AM - Eubani quoted Salamandyr in post 5e Warlord Demand Poll
    I am missing the "I am a player/DM of 5e and actively do not want WOTC to create a warlord class". No more dissection of the warrior archetype into smaller and smaller chunks. Warlord is something characters can do at high level. As such it should be handled outside the class structure--get a castle? get an army. Run around conquering things and warlord-ing it up. EDIT: voted "don't care" but that is a lie. I do care. I actively don't want a warlord class.So it is alright for spellcasters to have more and more classes but martial characters can live with the small amount of nerd revenge design that gets thrown their way. I also find it disgusting that people actively campaign for the exclusion of something others want and that they can choose to ignore. Great so your enjoyment must come at the expense of others.
  • 12:21 AM - Yunru quoted Salamandyr in post 5e Warlord Demand Poll
    Who is to say that something introduced in UA is going to stay in the UA? -SalWho is to say people would want it to stay UA?

Friday, 3rd March, 2017

  • 09:46 PM - Mercule quoted Salamandyr in post 5e Warlord Demand Poll
    EDIT: voted "don't care" but that is a lie. I do care. I actively don't want a warlord class. I voted "satisfied" for similar reasons. I used to say "I don't care, would allow if it was any good." The truth is, though, that I would rather a Warlord class not take up the limited number of options players can process meaningfully. It's a waste of space. The 4E Warlord was interesting for that game, which was tightly balanced around various roles and power sources. From a narrative approach, having martial classes do things that were more or less magical was a bit odd.
  • 06:24 PM - LapBandit quoted Salamandyr in post How much Warlord do you want?
    I'm really not...I'm describing what is an end point of a career as a fighting man. As to the latter part, I mostly agree, except I dislike sequestering interesting development opportunities inside class roles, instead of opening them up in the game rules themselves. I see. Well, perhaps your perspective is better served by feats (and maybe the "Warlord" is just that, a feat) that emulate those abilities. I've often wondered what D&D would look like if more of the class features were feats and everyone got an ASI every two levels. You could increase the ASIs for the Fighter and Rogue accordingly.
  • 06:11 PM - LapBandit quoted Salamandyr in post How much Warlord do you want?
    Honest to betsy, I don't want any warlord, class, subclass, or other. I'm tired of dissecting the warrior archetype into any more smaller chunks. Being a warlord is something I just wanna see fighters do, at upper levels. "You're 15th level? Time to build a castle and lead some armies!" I don't even want to limit it to fighters--Mordenkainen has led armies. Rary is supposedly the top military strategist in the Flaeness (if I remember my Greyhawk lore correctly). Thieves and assassins can lead guilds. Clerics can have legions of Templars, Rangers and archer companies, Barbarians and hordes. Paladins are basically fighters with some extra stuff, so they can lead armies. Being a warlord isn't a class thing...it's a high level thing. You're describing a role and not a set of like features grouped together that makes a class or archetype. That said, I'd prefer the fighter get anything that people feel they need in the warlord. The class is already lacking versatility, any class derivative...
  • 05:58 PM - Corwin quoted Salamandyr in post How much Warlord do you want?
    Being a warlord isn't a class thing...it's a high level thing. Or even just a roleplaying thing.


Salamandyr's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites