View Profile: Dausuul - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Monday, 22nd July, 2019, 08:24 PM
    Aside from the two free spells per level, the main way for wizards to expand their spellbooks is to copy from the spellbooks of other wizards. Often this is a willing trade: You get one of my spells that you don't know, I get one of your spells that I don't know, we both come out ahead (aside from the scribing costs). In other cases, it's... not so willing: I kill you, take your spellbook, and...
    25 replies | 630 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Monday, 15th July, 2019, 08:59 PM
    Agreed, that would be my interpretation as well. Gentle repose can stop the clock but not turn it back.
    14 replies | 611 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Monday, 15th July, 2019, 08:57 PM
    I am also not a fan of kitchen sink settings. It's why I allow and even encourage variant human as a race option, even though it's way overpowered: If all of my players pick variant human, it takes off a lot of the pressure to incorporate races that make no sense in the setting.
    114 replies | 4482 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 06:02 AM
    Flicker of Shadow is almost entirely noncombat. It lets you slide through keyholes*, and dart unseen from one place of concealment to the next. That's its purpose. Its combat use is severely constrained by the fact that it ends on the same turn you use it, and it costs your bonus action, so you can't do any Cunning Action tricks. The only way I can think of to use it in combat is if you start...
    39 replies | 1017 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 03:02 AM
    I love this idea, since I also prefer rogues to monks but like the shadow theme. Here's how I might go at it: Flicker of Shadow. At 3rd level, as a bonus action when in dim light or darkness, you can turn yourself and any objects you are carrying into shadow. While in this form, you can pass through gaps as small as 1 inch wide without squeezing, you can hide anywhere, and you do not suffer...
    39 replies | 1017 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 11:29 PM
    Rope. Always carry a coil of rope. Even on an urban adventure, rope is invaluable for climbing up buildings, tying up prisoners, rigging traps, and all kinds of other improvised uses. In the immortal words of Sam Gamgee, "You'll want it, if you haven't got it." A knife is also highly recommended. You may never use it in combat, but it's immensely useful in all manner of noncombat situations. ...
    5 replies | 234 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 10:23 PM
    Another option would be to play with the normal rules, but say that one advantage negates one disadvantage and vice versa; so if you have 3 sources of advantage, you can suffer 2 sources of disadvantage and still have advantage on the roll (instead of having it all cancel out and give you a normal roll, which is how it works by RAW). That would do what I think you're trying to accomplish here,...
    37 replies | 989 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 04:19 PM
    As a rule, even guaranteed success on a given roll is rarely going to make or break an adventure, so I don't think this will cause balance issues. The one thing I would be careful of is saving throws. It's very hard to impose disadvantage on saves in 5E, but it's not impossible, and stacking disadvantage on a key saving throw could be a game-changer. Other than that, it should be fine,...
    37 replies | 989 view(s)
    6 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Sunday, 7th July, 2019, 10:28 PM
    Dausuul replied to Warlock hex
    Anything can be house-ruled, but by the book, the spell is quite clear: You can transfer it any time (hence why it says "a subsequent turn of yours" instead of "your next turn"), and there is nothing in there saying it has to be the same encounter. It would be pretty silly to have a duration that scales all the way up to 24 hours if you could only use it in a single combat.
    4 replies | 311 view(s)
    5 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Sunday, 7th July, 2019, 12:11 AM
    Drat, I was hoping this would be a book full of inside stories of the history of D&D, like the ones Jim Ward has been putting up.
    38 replies | 2269 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Wednesday, 3rd July, 2019, 11:52 PM
    The barbarian has absolutely no reason to exist other than tradition. It would be trivial to make it a fighter subclass. If it had not been a stand-alone class in previous editions, no one would ever have suggested making it one in 5E. Ditto paladins, rangers, sorcerers, druids, and bards. I originally had cleric in place of warlord, but you have convinced me to change my vote. However, I...
    60 replies | 2068 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Wednesday, 3rd July, 2019, 09:37 PM
    That drastically reduces the odds of success unless you set N = 2, in which case it's not saving any time.
    22 replies | 987 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Tuesday, 2nd July, 2019, 11:45 PM
    My group only has 3 players most of the time. But taking Magic Initiate to get shield seems just as pointless to me as it does to you. This isn't about large groups versus small groups, it's about whoever made that suggestion not understanding what makes shield a good spell.
    21 replies | 884 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Tuesday, 2nd July, 2019, 06:12 PM
    I would provide them with a "DM fiat" means to recharge, like a healing shrine which can grant the entire party the benefits of a long rest. (This offer good for one use only per PC or party-affiliated NPC. Offer void if shrine is moved from its present location. Benefit is usable only by character to whom it was granted. Simulacra may not benefit from shrine. Magical reverse-engineering of...
    50 replies | 2015 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Tuesday, 2nd July, 2019, 02:09 PM
    If the BBEG is sealed in its lair and can't come out to engage us, sure, we'll take a rest. Why not? If the BBEG is not sealed in its lair, and we've killed a bunch of its minions so it knows we're coming, which is normally the case, then making ourselves prone and vulnerable to surprise right before combat seems like a bad idea.
    50 replies | 2015 view(s)
    4 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Tuesday, 2nd July, 2019, 03:15 AM
    Yeah, that is certainly something to be aware of. In my case I'm not too worried, because I DM on the regular and I'm used to managing large groups of monsters efficiently. And since I can only give one order per round, which all of the minions then follow, and the minions in question have Int 3, there's no question of putting together elaborate strategies where this zombie goes here and then...
    22 replies | 987 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Tuesday, 2nd July, 2019, 12:49 AM
    Personally, I would not dip cleric as long as there were new wizard spell levels to be had. I'm addicted to the stream of new toys, and cleric toys just aren't as much fun for me. However, the necromancer is a very good subclass to dip with; any time you have a high-level spell slot and nothing good to put in it, you can always convert it to MOAR ZOMBIES. :) So, if you're going to dip, I say put...
    22 replies | 987 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 11:18 PM
    On cantrips: Obviously toll the dead is any necromancer's go-to damage cantrip. Also, I highly recommend mold earth. It's not much for combat, but any time you need to dig up a grave, you just wave your hand. And if you need to stash your undead buddies while you go into town, you can bury them in short order. And one more interaction to point out: The conquest paladin is going to be your...
    22 replies | 987 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 11:14 PM
    Strongly dislike vampiric touch. It does less damage than a cantrip, it requires you to wade into melee, and if you are taking enough damage to need the healing, you'll lose concentration in short order, so what's the point? It's a truly terrible spell and Grim Harvest does not make it better. If you want to deal damage with a 3rd-level spell slot, throw a fireball. In fact, I would not even...
    22 replies | 987 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 08:07 PM
    If it's small enough that it can't be seen, then the druid can't have seen it.
    13 replies | 531 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Saturday, 29th June, 2019, 10:42 PM
    I think I started with 3d6, arrange as you like. When I joined my first long-term group in college, it was 4d6 drop lowest, and the DM would let you reroll if you rolled like crap.
    67 replies | 2111 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Saturday, 29th June, 2019, 06:36 PM
    I like this! It opens up a lot more design space for rituals. There are a bunch of spells that feel like they shouldn't cost combat/adventuring resources, but also shouldn't be usable every 10 minutes. This would make it possible to add other limiting factors. I particularly like the option of ritual-only material components.
    108 replies | 3859 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Saturday, 29th June, 2019, 06:09 AM
    My picks: Arcane lock Continual flame Knock Catnap Tongues Leomund's secret chest Mordenkainen's magnificent mansion
    108 replies | 3859 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Friday, 28th June, 2019, 02:57 AM
    Fair point. I keep forgetting that so many folks play most of the game at tier 1 and rarely get into 2, let alone 3. I don't think the bonus action is a good tier 1 balancing factor, though. At those levels, there are far fewer bonus actions competing for that spot; so the bonus action requirement does too little to pull back TWFing when TWFing needs to be pulled back, and it does far too much...
    232 replies | 10222 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Friday, 28th June, 2019, 02:25 AM
    The thing most folks seem to agree on is removing the bonus action. Not being able to use that bonus action really stings as you start gaining abilities and spells. I'd start there and see if it does the trick. Fighters might need some extra help past level 11, but otherwise I think that could be all you need.
    232 replies | 10222 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Friday, 28th June, 2019, 02:00 AM
    The damage numbers look decent (at least until 10th level), but consider that you are sacrificing the opportunity to take War Caster or Resilient (Con) and you are taking an Arcana cleric, who would normally stand in the back lobbing spells or ranged weapons, and putting them on the front line. That's a big hit to your ability to hold concentration spells, which is generally much more important...
    101 replies | 3206 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Friday, 28th June, 2019, 01:07 AM
    6th level? Last I checked, create dead was 3rd-level, although around here we call it fireball. :) Jokes about typos aside - I've had similar thoughts about create undead. The main reason I can see to put it at 6th is that you can create ghouls with it, and ghouls have an at-will paralyzing attack that works on almost all monsters. Paralysis for even 1 round is practically a death sentence, so...
    4 replies | 293 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Friday, 28th June, 2019, 12:20 AM
    Exactly. There's a ton of evidence for the claims about Zak S - no need to search all 77 pages of this thread, a simple Google search turns up multiple first-hand accounts. And Mearls should not have offered the support that he did, and I hope that HR at WotC sat down and had a long talk with him about why his handling of that situation was a problem. But claiming that Mearls doxxed Zak's...
    1012 replies | 72442 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Thursday, 27th June, 2019, 11:17 PM
    Then it should be pretty easy to provide a link to it.
    1012 replies | 72442 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Thursday, 27th June, 2019, 11:11 PM
    That is quite an accusation. Is there evidence for it?
    1012 replies | 72442 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Thursday, 27th June, 2019, 09:51 PM
    I assume he is referring to earlier editions, when a cleric was a healbot with a mace. Most of your time was spent pumping hit points into your companions. On the rare occasion that your companions didn't need hit points, you bopped things with the mace. If you wanted to be edgy and different, you could swap out the mace for a warhammer. (But not an axe. Axes were not cool. The gods frowned...
    101 replies | 3206 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Thursday, 27th June, 2019, 09:44 PM
    Who gets to say it isn't "grammatically correct?" Most of the Rules of Grammatical Correctness were arbitrary pronouncements by 19th-century grammarians who suffered from severe Latin envy and hated the fact that their native language was descended from the uncouth speech of Saxon peasants. If something has been used for 700 years, and great writers and orators were among those using it,...
    1012 replies | 72442 view(s)
    7 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Thursday, 27th June, 2019, 09:04 PM
    The DM in tglassy's example is looking at the combat rules, seeing that the inevitable result is PC victory with negligible expenditure of resources, and deciding that it isn't worth bothering to go through the motions of rolling dice. The end result is the same as if the combat had been played out - you're just getting there faster. That is quite different from deciding to deep-six the combat...
    178 replies | 5867 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Thursday, 27th June, 2019, 04:23 PM
    Starting later on the chart doesn't improve the multiclass build to any great extent. You're behind at level 13 (since Action Surge has yet to come online - FrogReaver is 100% right that nobody in their right mind would MC just one level of fighter), you rule at 14, you're at parity from 15-16, move ahead again at 17, and then fall behind from 18-19 before coming in about even at 20. And...
    35 replies | 1217 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Thursday, 27th June, 2019, 04:02 PM
    Who would have thought that a system specifically designed to encourage people to speak without thinking, that blocks you from expressing anything complex or nuanced enough to require more than 280 characters, and that gets essentially zero moderation would turn out badly?
    1012 replies | 72442 view(s)
    5 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Thursday, 27th June, 2019, 02:41 PM
    The Monster Manual has a bunch of suggestions for this. (It gives rather short shrift to white dragons, but I suppose that makes sense given that they don't even reach human-level Intelligence until ancient.) Black dragons get lizardfolk and plant monsters; blue dragons get elite human minions; green dragons get evil jungle creatures and corrupted/mind-controlled elves; red dragons get chaotic...
    16 replies | 606 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Thursday, 27th June, 2019, 12:01 AM
    Sure, it looks nice at 14th level. But let's look at the whole level range. The multiclasser brings +1 AC, Action Surge, and the ability to get TWF which isn't among the style options for paladins. The last is notable at 4th level because TWF is busted at low level, and at levels 13+ because it synergizes nicely with Improved Divine Smite. The multiclasser also gets Second Wind, but this will...
    35 replies | 1217 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Wednesday, 26th June, 2019, 11:00 PM
    Man, this edition sounds amazing. Where can I get a copy? :)
    286 replies | 11027 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Wednesday, 26th June, 2019, 09:52 PM
    I regard the ranger as the "light cavalry" of the party - not in the sense of riding horses, but in the sense of being a highly mobile force used for scouting, flanking, and harrying the foe. To me, the ranger is defined by: Hard-hitting offense Limited defense (they don't make great "tanks") Mobility in combat Exploration ability Mastery of terrain
    352 replies | 12781 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Wednesday, 26th June, 2019, 06:46 PM
    Ah - failed to find that one, thanks! So we're looking at an average of 70 falling damage, plus 99 fire damage, coming to 169 damage instantly and an additional 99 per round. For the overwhelming majority of PCs, this means insta-death. A high-level PC with a good Con might be able to survive for six seconds. Seems fine to me.
    178 replies | 5867 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Wednesday, 26th June, 2019, 06:21 PM
    So your example of a "checkmate scenario" is "falling 500 feet off a rope bridge into lava." This is a situation entirely covered by the existing rules*. Which of those rules do you feel is inadequate to the situation, necessitating a special "checkmate" rule? *Well, almost. Falling damage and damage to objects are covered, but the existing rules don't specify how much fire damage you take...
    178 replies | 5867 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Wednesday, 26th June, 2019, 04:59 PM
    The sniper scenario isn't particularly interesting. It's already easier in the game (doable with Sharpshooter feat, Extra Attack, or a lucky crit) than it would be in real life (next to impossible), so I see no reason to make it even easier. The knife to the throat scenario is one of the areas where the hit point rules do have issues - similar to falling damage - but here's my question: How...
    178 replies | 5867 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Wednesday, 26th June, 2019, 02:58 AM
    It's effectively a -1 penalty to AC for anyone multiclassing two martial classes. So, you're nerfing martial multiclass builds. Do you think that they need it?
    35 replies | 1217 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Wednesday, 26th June, 2019, 02:53 AM
    I play it by the book. An orc only has 15 hit points; a 5th-level ranger, attacking with advantage, has a good chance to lay down that much damage in 1 round. If the ranger isn't 5th level yet... well, an orc is a tough customer for low-level PCs; your only chance of an instant kill is a solid crit, putting the arrow right in its eye. I do rule that a surprised creature can't shout a warning...
    178 replies | 5867 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Wednesday, 26th June, 2019, 01:17 AM
    If you have an upper-crust background, you get more social perks, but you also get more quests dumped in your lap (noblesse oblige, after all), more enemies gunning for your family, and more rivals gunning for you personally. Also, the whole party tends to benefit from your privileges, which cuts down on intraparty tensions. You can, of course, skip out on your obligations (not so much the...
    39 replies | 17288 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Tuesday, 25th June, 2019, 06:24 PM
    The way I read it, what that means is you can't take the same combat style twice. You can take multiple styles if you get them from multiple sources, but basically what that means is you get a choice of "+1 to AC" or "use a reaction to impose disadvantage when someone attacks your ally." The powerhouse combat styles (Great Weapon, Archery, Dueling, and Two-Weapon) can't be stacked because they...
    35 replies | 1217 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Dausuul's Avatar
    Monday, 24th June, 2019, 02:10 PM
    From the "Movement in Combat" rules: "You can't stand up if you don't have enough movement left or if your speed is 0."
    3 replies | 220 view(s)
    4 XP
No More Results
About Dausuul

Basic Information

Date of Birth
October 2, 1976 (42)
About Dausuul
Location:
Indiana
Disable sharing sidebar?:
No
My Game Details

Details of games currently playing and games being sought.

State:
Indiana
Country:
USA

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
8,632
Posts Per Day
2.04
Last Post
Please help out some new GM's with a few questions Monday, 22nd July, 2019 08:24 PM
Albums
Total Albums
1
Total Photos
1

Currency

Gold Pieces
30
General Information
Last Activity
Today 05:02 AM
Join Date
Monday, 17th December, 2007
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0
My Game Details
State:
Indiana
Country:
USA
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Thursday, 27th June, 2019


Wednesday, 26th June, 2019



Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Monday, 26th October, 2015

  • 08:55 PM - sleypy mentioned Dausuul in post Refusing To Heal Party Members?
    Dausuul I bet! Lanefan I could see the paladin wanting to attach himself to a group of "likely" criminals thinking they would eventually lead him to the culprit if they aren't the criminals themselves. If there is a band of adventures running around made up of numerous half-fiends, that could be a considerably larger issue than the robbery. The fact that they are also the robbers could just be coincidental.
  • 07:13 PM - Lanefan mentioned Dausuul in post Refusing To Heal Party Members?
    I only found out about it (in character) the last session. My PC doesn't know who did it but suspects someone in the party at least.What a wonderful powderkeg of a party! I agree with Dausuul on this one - among other things you-as-Paladin are (very likely) part of the justice arm of the church; and if the church has been robbed investigating said robbery might take precedence over your other adventuring activities until the case is solved...which if nothing else gets you out of the party. Lan-"meanwhile, if I'm the PC robber I'm busy thinking about how I can frame the Pally for it"-efan

Monday, 20th July, 2015

  • 04:49 PM - Remathilis mentioned Dausuul in post Converting a 4e skill challenge to 5e: looking for suggestions...
    ...d the PCs have a few days to get things ready for the rebels. If they win, they earn 2 VP (which do work like in Red Hand of Doom; earn enough points they influence the outcome of the war. They earn VP other ways too, such as sabotaging supply lines or defeating allied forces). Level: 3 Difficulty 4 (10 before 3) Skills (each use takes an hour) Diplomacy (Persuasion): Rally the troops. Max 3 successes. History: Recall relevant info from past wars or tactics. Max 3 successes. Intimidate: Project confidence and push the troops. Max 3 successes. Nature: Scout terrain, predict weather, and set ambushes. Max 3 successes. Religion: Pray to god and comfort nervous troops. Max 2 successes. I want to do something like that; allow the PCs to use their skills (or checks) to influence the battle in ways that will be played "off camera" during the actual battle. I'm just looking for a way to determine if they did "good enough" to warrant 0, 1, or 2 VP towards the war effort. Dausuul posted a system that involved a certain number of successes in a certain number of "passes" (rounds, effectively). Each pass could be a day, so they'd need to get 8 successes with their skills over 3 days; if they get less, they get 1 VP or none if they really botch it. Read his system here. The advantage here is that its no longer 3 strikes you're out, which seems very anti-5e.

Monday, 18th May, 2015

  • 06:28 PM - ThirdWizard mentioned Dausuul in post Treantmonk's Guide to Wizards 5e
    You putting "plot" in parentheses does not change how Dausuul intended it which was solely as a plot (not a plan or scheme, but a plot point in a story) spell with no other uses. Wow. Just wow. Dausuul even clarified this in the original thread that he was referring to "plot spell" to mean "non-combat spell" very explicitly. I'll even quote myself. Not plot in reference to "the plot of a book" but plot in reference to "my character is plotting something." Hope that helps. Again. I hope this helps.

Saturday, 18th April, 2015

  • 03:18 PM - Quartz mentioned Dausuul in post Convince me we're doing the Warlock wrong
    If your Warlock is choosing to specialise in Eldritch Blast, then she shouldn't be surprised if that's all she can do. Consider invocations like Mask of Many Faces or Beguiling Influence or Book of Ancient Secrets. The first two work very well together. At higher levels Eldritch Sight comes into its own, as does Eyes of the Rune Keeper. Edit: Dausuul pipped me to the post with the same thoughts. A case of Greatminditis.

Wednesday, 15th April, 2015

  • 06:25 AM - pemerton mentioned Dausuul in post Power Creep pitfalls in 5E
    The others presumably are 'best' at some kind of fighting, if you slice 'best at fighting,' at just the right angle to show it off, it just may not be DPR. Maybe one or more of those doesn't seem to stack up well to single-target DPR (certainly they won't in an analysis that measures single-target DPR), but the DM can always structure challenges to highlight one 'best' or another, so each character gets his time in the spotlight.The feats cover two-handers and archers. For shield-users, their schtick is defence and shield bashes. For dual wielders, Dausuul has mentioned the "cutting through hordes of mooks" road to glory. I find this thematically a bit incongruous (in my mind, a great hulk with a battle-axe rather than a swashbuckler is who I think of as a mook-cleaver) but mechanically it makes sense. What makes it the duelist's time to shine?

Monday, 13th April, 2015

  • 04:44 AM - pemerton mentioned Dausuul in post So.... hide?
    As I read the rules, one source of confusion is this: a necessary condition of being able to Hide is not being seen; but most of the time, the reason a player wants his/her PC to hide is so as to avoid being seen (and thereby get defensive advantages, ambush advantages, etc). In the particular case of the halfling: the only way the rules make it crystal clear that s/he can't be seen if behind the larger fighter is if the Hide check succeeds; but the only way the Hide check is permitted is if s/he can't be seen behind the fighter. Further complexity comes from the use of the word "obscured" - something can be oscured yet visible (eg if in dim light, patchy fog or behind moderate foliage). How does being obscured interact with the requirement that you can't hide from a creature that can see you? And how does the disadvantage on Perception checks to see lightly obscured things interact with the Hiding rules? I agree with Dausuul - as written, it's a mess.

Sunday, 12th April, 2015

  • 04:19 PM - Fanaelialae mentioned Dausuul in post Trading AC for DR in 5e
    I did some back of the envelope calculations and it looks like 5% DR per point of AC (over 10) is correct. So Plate Armor should grant 40% DR (against all attacks, but not saving throw based effects). As Dausuul correctly points out above, using a flat DR number is going to make her basically invulnerable to weak threats and very vulnerable to powerful threats. That's why I think you should go with a percentage based DR instead. It will keep weak creatures relevant while preventing dangerous creatures from rolling over her. Also keep in mind that this means that she will be subject to many more "on-hit" effects than other PCs with the same armor. In a fight with wolves, for example, she's likely to be subjected to many more Strength saving throws (to avoid being knocked prone) than a similarly armored ally. If she fights Giant Crabs or a Roc, chances are she's going to be grappled, which might not be the same foregone conclusion for her companions. In essence, things are likely to feel significantly different for her. EDIT: On the plus side, it would mean she'd be a little less susceptible to crits than her companions, since natural 20s ignore AC but DR still applies.

Tuesday, 7th April, 2015

  • 11:09 PM - doctorhook mentioned Dausuul in post Unearthed Arcana: Modifying Classes & Spell-less Rangers
    ...oultices, you have two options: 1. Multiclass ranger for a couple levels. 2. Work with your DM to create a homebrew druid variant that gets poultices. "Rangers with Band-Aids" should be a Led Zeppelin cover band. ;) Thing is, though, even without Aragorn, it wouldn't bother me. As I said above, there are any number of purely "mundane" abilities that only certain classes are trained in. Anyone can take the dash action, but only rogues can do it as a bonus action. Anyone can be proficient in a skill, but only a few classes get innate bonuses to chosen skills. So I really don't have a problem with only rangers having this degree of proficiency with herbs and medicine. :)All of you sorta hit on the fact that this is a verisimilitude-breaker for me, which is definitely true. For me, "only ranger poultices work" is a bridge too far. @'Sir Brennen' I had forgotten all about healer's kits! In practice I think those fit the bill, but they still have problems. Healing systems are tricky. @Dausuul used the example of why some classes get sneak attack and others don't; that never concerned me because HP (and, by extension, damage) is an abstraction, and because backstab/sneak attack is a sacred cow. Sorcerers and wizards are magical and get magic from different places, so sure, why not have different powers? But with poultices, I imagine someone going into the woods and picking herbs and other junk for a poultice, and I just can't square that with other characters in the woods their whole lives, learning nature stuff, but never how to roll two herbs together. @Mouseferatu I lol'd out loud out loud at your cover band joke. Rangers with Band-Aids--I'll play the cowbell, can you do vocals? Part of what I really like about the FS as a sorcerer is just that - it helps clarify that sorcerers aren't about bloodlines in 5e, they are about magical origins. "I have a draconic ancestor" is a magical origin. "I am touched by wild magic" is a magical origin. "I am the chosen of a god" is...

Monday, 16th March, 2015

  • 09:51 PM - DaveDash mentioned Dausuul in post Aversion to Creativity?
    I'm pretty sure his post was sarcasm, playing off the idea of "People aren't creative because they want to buy things instead of make them." applying to the rules of the system as well as adventures & campaigns. Ah I may have missed the sarcasm, I so Dausuul I apologize.

Thursday, 12th March, 2015

  • 07:25 PM - evilbob mentioned Dausuul in post Necromancers in 5E
    Dausuul, thanks for the update! I was definitely one of those interested in hearing about high-level necromancers in play. It's nice to know if you can get all the stars to align, it's awesome, but otherwise it's not a game-breaker. Seems like it would be a blast to play! What is your "record" of most skeletons brought to a battle? Also I LOVE the synergy with seeming and stinking cloud / cloudkill; those are great ideas. One thought: have you tried wind walk instead of teleport? 2 extra skeletons that way and a lower spell slot, although it's a much slower method of travel (both to get there and to start it up). Sidebar: the conjuration school (subclass) does nothing to support your conjuration spells, except at level 10 it makes it easier to concentrate on them and at level 14 it grants some bonus HP to summons. It's probably one of the weaker schools, battle-wise (although pretty amazing RP-wise, with the ability to conjure any small object into your hand).

Tuesday, 10th March, 2015

  • 11:30 AM - pemerton mentioned Dausuul in post New Dungeon Master and board user!
    If anyone has any helpful advice for a first time DM, I'd be very grateful! My general advice - similar to Dausuul's - would be to follow your players' leads. And prep with that in mind. If you have a few NPCs prepared who are connected to your players' PCs' backgrounds, and a few ideas about stuff those NPCs might do that would bring them into conflict with the PCs, plus a map or two to set the action in, that can be enough. Also, PCs in 5e seem pretty robust, so don't be afraid to turn on the pressure a bit. At least in my experience, players find high stakes more exciting than low stakes. Finally, don't make the mistake of saving your best material for later. If you've got a good idea, use it now!

Friday, 20th February, 2015

  • 02:14 AM - DaveDash mentioned Dausuul in post Warcaster, polearm master and learning to love the optimizing?
    Its a dex fighter with a slightly more damaging bow, but also doesn't get sharpshooter, magic weapon damage, etc. Lower base range, gotta invest in your fairly limited resources (cantrip, invocation slot). The archer fighter probably has archery style, so has a 2 point attack advantage on you. Lots of games don't track ammo (I don't unless its a plot issue, like being shipwrecked, lost in the desert, etc). I feel its probably too much for just a 2 level dip, but fine for someone with the majority of their class levels in warlock. True. I see your point. Dausuul I agree with you, I don't think RAI that polearm master is intended to work that way with warcaster.

Friday, 16th January, 2015

  • 05:23 AM - Guyanthalas mentioned Dausuul in post My PC's and the Stirge Scourge
    Dausuul Yeah, we had some conversations about that in our group, but the DMG is clear. DMG Pg. 82 This adjusted value is not what the monsters are worth in terms of XP; the adjusted value's only purpose is to help you assess combat difficulty.

Monday, 5th January, 2015

  • 10:04 PM - Rune mentioned Dausuul in post How do you kill a 10th level character?
    Dausuul: I don't disagree with any of that. I just don't understand why you don't factor in the DM's tactical decisions as part of the mechanical underpinnings of the system, when they are actually a very critical variable in the equation. It is no less the case that a DM who chooses not to attack an unconscious character is also intervening in the system's resolution. Further, it is entirely possible for a DM to determine ahead of time that a certain NPC will attack downed opponents if given the chance. That isn't "choosing to kill a PC." It's choosing to follow through on a predetermined tactical course.

Thursday, 18th December, 2014

  • 09:46 PM - Imaro mentioned Dausuul in post What would you like to see in a "revised edition" of 5E?
    No it's not pertinent at all. My claim is that these feats are not working as intended because you can completely eclipse one characters damage output by taking them, do you refute this? If I take tough twice and you devote two slots to dealing damage... yeah you should probably do alot more damage than my character... of course I'll probably be able to take more damage than you... Context is everything and your dancing around specifics is starting to make me think you really don't know what you're talking about. For the rest of your post, you didn't even quote me correctly. I never said what you are claiming at all "The DM only used flying creatures". Start by quoting correctly. I never said "only" I said a majority... @Dausuul read my post correctly, I'm surprised you didn't... Now whose purposefully misquoting? :erm: As for a quote, here you go... Or, as another example, picture this scenario. You're Bob the melee fighter and you've put hundreds if not thousands of hours into your character. You are finally reaching the higher levels. Jim the archer however in your group has decided to pick up Sharpshooter and Crossbow Expert. As you start leveling up, you start to note a lot of encounters you're pretty ineffective compared to Jim. Jim can basically do everything you can do up close and personal in combat, but he can also do the same things at range, and unfortunately for you, most of the higher level encounters you're facing happen to use a lot of highly mobile flying, or legendary moving creatures.

Tuesday, 16th December, 2014

  • 05:52 PM - Quickleaf mentioned Dausuul in post How does Surprise work in 5e?
    ... It's checked by passive Wisdom (Perception) vs. Dexterity (Stealth) roll. If you're surprised, you don't move or take an action for that first turn. So, if the decoy bandits attack before the hidden archers, the characters aren't surprised by the archers. They get advantage on attacks on any character that didn't notice them. If the archers attack before the decoy bandits, anyone who didn't notice them with passive Wisdom (Perception) is Surprised. This includes the decoy bandits, who will need to make perception rolls to notice their brothers. The only remaining questions, IMO, are DM calls -- do the PCs get active Wisdom (Perception) checks because they are on their guard? We can assume that the decoy bandits are scanning the trees for signs of their brethren -- do they get active checks? And if so, do they get advantage? So now I'm going to go XP everyone who gave this answer! Yeah, that's right, because they are surprised. I agree those are the rules, and Dausuul you said it well: surprised is treated as an almost condition. However, applying that rule to all situations gives crazy results... 1 Goblin Rogue surprises the PCs, therefore his 30 Hobgoblin allies (who obviously failed to be disguised as human soldiers in heavy cloaks) get to take advantage of the PCs' surprised state and wail on them the first round of combat. Thus, in most fights the ideal strategy is to have one Super-Stealth monster/NPC/PC surprise the enemy, while the rest of their allies just show up. It's practically a "Win" button, or at least a "Gain Devastating Advantage" button. I wonder how you guys don't see this as crazy? Maybe you're looking at the OP example very differently?

Monday, 10th November, 2014

  • 11:30 PM - Sadras mentioned Dausuul in post Gamehole Con Live Tweeting Perkins Panel
    Alzrius & Dausuul I understand the challenge very clearly, but I do not think it is impossible to do. 1st Film: Do an origin story of how these Elves turned black, evil and to the worship of Lolth...expand on the story of the Crown Wars (if following FR's history) or Elfwars (2e The Complete Book of Elves)...etc 2nd Film: Do a story of survival, reflect on the break away Eilistraee worshipping Drow, the conflict that perhaps arose, and introduce "white" surface slave traders, showcasing the greater evil and threat in the underground, the Illithids. 3rd Film: The Rise of Drizzt? A love story, Drizzt & Cattie-brie? It really doesn't have to be a black/white thing, there is so much more that they can explore.

Wednesday, 15th October, 2014

  • 04:53 PM - SigmaOne mentioned Dausuul in post General Feats Discussion
    Why would that be the point? How is it good game design to present flavorful trap options? Why should someone who wants to play an Actor be forced to gimp their character a little bit? I love the design of the feat system: balancing against +2 ability forces feats to be significant and character-defining. It's the feats themselves that fall flat, most being too weak to consider. This reduces feats to minor mechanical upgrades you might give your PC at 12th or 16th level, after you've maxxed the ability scores you care about. I don't know, I think a lot of the feats are really cool, and I'd consider taking them over +2 in many cases. But given that, as Dausuul said, overpowered feats are much more of a problem than underpowered ones, I think they were right to be cautious. Some are probably weaker than they should be and might not get chosen often, and perhaps these can be tweaked down the road to make them more appealing. But I think in general, there will be a fair number of people who, given the option, will take feats.

Saturday, 6th September, 2014

  • 02:51 AM - Ratskinner mentioned Dausuul in post I for one hope we don't get "clarification" on many things.
    Woof! I agree with Imaro, this thread did explode, and I feel like it would be going in circles to pursue it much further. I will, however, sound some partial agreement with pemerton and Dausuul on the broader issue of stealthy activity in 5e. Even though I think the rules are fairly clear on hiding, I don't think they particularly clear on distinguishing or specifying how hiding and sneaking work with each other. (Which, I think is part of what Dausuul is getting at.) To me, it seems like the rules, are written with the understanding that "hiding" and "sneaking up on" are two different things vis-à-vis Dexterity(Stealth) checks. However, that understanding isn't very clearly stated. So, while I know I plan on handling a hidden character who then attempts to sneak up on someone, I'm not at all sure that there wouldn't be other equally valid interpretations. For the most part, I'm good with.


Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
No results to display...

Friday, 21st June, 2019

  • 12:45 AM - Parmandur quoted Dausuul in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    It's funny how half the people defending the "no armor" bit are saying "It's the rules, druids aren't allowed metal armor, stop trying to break the rules," and the other half are saying, "It's just a story restriction, it's not part of the rules, so why are you complaining?" Precisely, that's the point: it will vary table to table, DM to DM, and that is the strength of this approach. There is no balance concern, if a DM lets the Dwarf Druid wear studded leather nothing is changed except the story which is always at the DMs discretion.
  • 12:04 AM - Ohmyn quoted Dausuul in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    I don't put my players into no-win situations. Feel free to run your games differently, just don't expect me to stick around if you force the issue without an alternative. See, the thing is, if you don't remove player agency, it's never a "no-win situation". They fully have the option to go against their own values if they feel it appropriate. I wouldn't call infiltrating the enemy, learning their plan, and saving hundreds of lives at the expense of having to set your personal values aside to be a "no-win". If there are mechanical penalties for going against their view, such as a 3.5 Druid losing their magic for 24 hours if they don metal, they can opt to deal with that for the greater good. That's not true with a DM ruling a player won't do something, and is the only case in which a "no-win situation" can possibly happen (not including something silly like a DM offering two death doors), which is why it's a bad concept to bring to the table. It's funny how half the people defending the "n...

Thursday, 20th June, 2019

  • 10:31 PM - Ohmyn quoted Dausuul in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    Actually... my recollection is this was not the case in early editions. I don't have my books handy so I can't say for certain, but I'm pretty sure that there was at least one of those early editions which simply said "Wizards can't wear armor." No consequences for wearing armor were spelled out. If you tried to put on armor, it fell off because wizard. I suppose it's appropriate that druids would be the one class continuing to write their class rules in a silly, primitive way that every other class moved on from several editions ago. Well in AD&D it was just a dungeon crawl, but even then they always gave reasons, despite how poorly defined the edition was for anything outside of combat. For example, they didn't actually have "Wizard", but had "Magic-User". It specified, "they can wear no armor and have few weapons they can use, for martial training is so foreign to magic-use as to make the two almost mutually exclusive." It at least made mention that they can't wear it because they possess...
  • 09:13 PM - jasper quoted Dausuul in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    Actually... my recollection is this was not the case in early editions. I don't have my books handy so I can't say for certain, but I'm pretty sure that there was at least one of those early editions which simply said "Wizards can't wear armor." No consequences for wearing armor were spelled out. If you tried to put on armor, it fell off because wizard. I suppose it's appropriate that druids would be the one class continuing to use a silly, primitive rule that every other class moved on from several editions ago. there you see. that is the reason. Druids are old fashion and primitive. The rule was good enough back in AD&D it is good enough today. Now shut up! Put Lawerence Welk on. Feed my prunes and change my depends. :)
  • 05:43 PM - Parmandur quoted Dausuul in post Is it possible that the Revised Ranger is not dead?
    So, they are changing the ranger, but you can keep using the old busted version if you really want to. :) The PHB Ranger isn't busted, just narratively dissatisfying to a significant number of players. Most people are already happy with the Ranger as-is, which is one of the main source of their reluctance to pursue a solution, they don't want to to put out the majority report that is already fine.
  • 03:42 PM - TwoSix quoted Dausuul in post Is it possible that the Revised Ranger is not dead?
    One other class that I think needs an overhaul is the warlock. The use of invocations (Agonizing Blast, Thirsting Blade) to "complete" their at-will attacks was a very bad choice. On the one hand, it creates a trap for novice players who don't realize how heavily warlocks depend on their at-wills. On the other hand, it opens up a lot of space for multiclass cheese. If I were revising the warlock, I'd give them a choice of class features at 1st level: Eldritch Blast (use your action to make a ranged spell attack for 1d10+Cha) or Thirsting Blade (use your action to make a melee weapon attack using Cha; note this is not the Attack action and thus does not work with Extra Attack). Then they would get another feature at 5th or 6th level where they get to make a second attack with their "attack feature." Finally, an invocation would let you pick up the second option so you have both EB and TB; I feel that's more in the design space for invocations, which should focus on versatility and flavor rat...
  • 02:53 PM - Ristamar quoted Dausuul in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    Where I have a problem is a restriction which is presented as if it were a rule, but is not written clearly enough for an actual rule (which armors count as metal? what replacement options exist, if any? what happens if you do wear metal armor?), and when asked for clarification, the designers say "This is just a story thing, you can wear metal armor and it won't affect game balance if your DM is okay with it." Say what? Of course it affects game balance, metal armor is a lot better than non-metal armor! If druids were meant to be medium armor wearers, that ought to be spelled out in the rules and the non-metal restriction clearly presented as a non-binding story element. If not, that should also be spelled out, including details of precisely which armors are forbidden, and consequences imposed for wearing them. The designers deliberately chose not to lay out strict restrictions and guidelines for the adjudication of Stealth, and you're expecting a treatise on what constitutes metal armor a...
  • 01:11 PM - Paul Farquhar quoted Dausuul in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    There also weren't reports of them turning into dinosaurs. If you want D&D druid lore to line up with actual historical druids... that ship done sailed a long time ago. D&D druids where more closely based on the romantic Victorian reinvention than actual history in the first place.
  • 07:51 AM - Ohmyn quoted Dausuul in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    "Can I get nonmetal versions of the armors I'm proficient with, and if so, how?" It also raises a conundrum if the DM says no, because it brings up the question of how the Druid is proficient with all of the medium armors if there exists no version of them they could have worn to train in. How does a Druid become proficient in half plate if it essentially does not exist for them? The question of studded leather also remains true, although since Sage Advice is stated to be official rulings, and it specifies studded leather as one of the common armors for Druids, it's at least clear they can choose to wear it. However, that still then raises the question of if they're allowed to wear it because it doesn't contain enough metal to be a concern, or if it's because the PHB does not specify that the spikes or rivets of studded leather have to be metal. All in all I forgot to add these points, so I'll try and add to the original post.
  • 06:33 AM - FrogReaver quoted Dausuul in post In-Combat Healing: How and Why?
    They are not a guaranteed return because you can't be certain they will in fact make the difference between "teammate on the ground" and "teammate up and fighting" for at least 1 round. Whack-A-Mole isn't a guaranteed return in all circumstances either. It's only guaranteed in a few very particular cases. 1) Enemies ignore downed allies and don't hit them with AOE's AND 2) No enemies go after you would heal a downed ally before he gets his turn. If those 2 conditions aren't met then whack-a-mole isn't guaranteed. That is the virtue of the "whack-a-mole" strategy: If there are no enemies between you and your teammate in the initiative order, you know with 100% certainty that your healing spell will purchase at least 1 round of actions for your teammate. And if there are enemies between you, you know that, and you don't cast the spell in the first place. This also assumes enemies aren't particularly vicious toward downed PC's. If they are then the PC might be dead before you can p...
  • 05:39 AM - CapnZapp quoted Dausuul in post In-Combat Healing: How and Why?
    And if the DM is playing monsters "viciously," so that they go hard after downed PCs, Unfortunately I believe 5E forces me the DM to act that way. Yes, I think it is "vicious" and I don't like it. But it's the only way to not make whack-a-mole a winning tactic because of the huge savings in damage/hit points it entails. Of course, a better solution would be for the game to NOT force the DM to be "vicious". I don't *want* my monsters to go after fallen heroes! I think it only breeds resentment, and fouls the mood across the table. So I introduced a rule where you count hp down to -10 (instead of stopping at 0). This instantly removed the main attraction of whack-a-mole. Which in turn allows me to not have my monsters look very stupid for leaving fallen heroes be. Now they can focus on the ones still standing, which is how the game should have been from the start!

Wednesday, 19th June, 2019

  • 11:37 PM - FrogReaver quoted Dausuul in post In-Combat Healing: How and Why?
    (I would add that I don't think whack-a-mole is driven by any desire to optimize use of spell slots. It's actions that are being optimized here. Actions are the currency with which you buy victory, and a healing spell is an investment: Spend an action now, to earn back actions later when a teammate is up and fighting instead of down and bleeding out. If your expected return on that investment is less than the action you spent on the spell, it's a bad use of your action. Whack-a-mole is a way to guarantee a return.) Why aren't my proposed healing tactics not a way to get a guaranteed return?
  • 10:53 PM - LordEntrails quoted Dausuul 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 w...

Tuesday, 18th June, 2019

  • 12:39 AM - Tony Vargas quoted Dausuul in post On the Inscrutability of AD&D and Ye Olde Styles of Play
    (I'm not exaggerating. There was a three-ring binder just for the house rules. It was... something.) Hey! I resembled that remark... Well, except the group with the binder full of house rules. Presumably they had figured out that other people did things differently, and therefore set out to codify every single one of the differences. I can't decide if they were heroic, insane, or both. ... that's fair.

Thursday, 13th June, 2019

  • 07:01 PM - Charlaquin quoted Dausuul in post Warlock build advice...
    Just a note with shadow blade: It is a concentration spell, and concentration is very difficult to sustain in melee. The Mobile feat will help a little, but you'll still be a lot closer to the enemy than a concentrating caster wants to be. If you go this route, consider taking your first level in a class that gets proficiency in Constitution saving throws. Alternatively, you could take the Resilient feat for Constitution. War Caster is also worth considering in addition to which ever source of Con save proficiency you go for, but proficiency should be the higher priority.
  • 06:28 PM - FrogReaver quoted Dausuul in post Warlock build advice...
    Just a note with shadow blade: It is a concentration spell, and concentration is very difficult to sustain in melee. The Mobile feat will help a little, but you'll still be a lot closer to the enemy than a concentrating caster wants to be. If you go this route, consider taking your first level in a class that gets proficiency in Constitution saving throws. You will have proficiency in con saves and a decent ac from either a shield or dragon skin sorc ability. You will also hit enemies with booming blade and move away. Further disincintivising them from going after you. I highly recommend warcaster for this pc as well to further up con saves since you are very reliant on shadow blade. But all in all due to reduced enemy attack rate, good ac and a sturdy con it should leave your concentration up in 90% of fights.
  • 03:08 PM - 5ekyu quoted Dausuul in post Warlock build advice...
    5ekyu's approach is a good one and I recommend it. Here is another build you could consider: Race: Half-elf (put the stat bonuses in Dex and Con) Stat allocation: Str 13, Dex 15+1, Con 13+1, Int 8, Wis 9, Cha 14+2 Levels 1-2: Paladin. Take the Duelist fighting style, and fight with rapier and shield (describe the shield as a buckler). Levels 3-5: Warlock. Take Pact of the Chain. Be sure to pick up green-flame blade and/or booming blade right away. Levels 6-8: Paladin. Take Oath of the Ancients. Level 9: Warlock. Level 10: Paladin. Levels 11+: Any mix of paladin and warlock levels you like. This has the advantage of keeping your entire build on theme (using Oath of the Ancients), and offers some nifty synergies. You don't get Extra Attack until level 8, so you'll be behind the curve from levels 5-7; but green-flame blade and/or booming blade can tide you over in the meantime, the fighting style also helps, and you can take advantage of those fast-refreshing warlock spell slots with Divine Sm...

Wednesday, 12th June, 2019

  • 09:29 PM - Sword of Spirit quoted Dausuul in post Berserker Barbarians: Wait what?
    THANK YOU. Frenzy is little more than a ribbon. Mindless Rage is what makes berserkers good. It's like people are looking at a flying car and saying it sucks because of the lack of trunk space. I don’t consider it acceptable to give one subclass its meaty ability at level 3 and its ribbon at level 6, and then do the opposite for another subclass of the same class. I somewhat doubt that was design intent either. I don’t value the frightened and charmed immunity nearly as highly as some because of how situational it is. You could go entire levels without it ever coming up, while something that grants extra attacks should reasonably come up every second fight or so.

Sunday, 9th June, 2019

  • 04:34 AM - FrogReaver quoted Dausuul in post The Overkill Damage Fallacy
    Yeah, it blows the whole argument out of the water. If you compare two PCs with exactly the same amount of overkill, of course your analysis will find that overkill is not a factor. If we're going to use silly white-room examples, why not have the PCs deal 5 and 10 damage instead of 4 and 8? Suddenly PC #2 has an 84% chance of killing a monster on the first round, and a 36% chance of killing a second monster, while PC #1 has a 60% chance of killing one and a 0% chance of killing a second. Thus, we can "prove" that overkill is THE dominant factor in combat, with just a small change to our rectally generated values. Showing that the 2 attack PC kills enemies faster in a given scenario doesn't prove overkill had anything to do with it. In fact overkill had nothing to do with it. The damage distribution favored the two attack PC in this situation. In actual play, I have found that overkill is a minor factor, but not for the reason OP claims. Monsters usually have a lot more than 4-5 hit point...
  • 01:26 AM - jgsugden quoted Dausuul in post Damaging Spells and Objects
    I would lob a fireball and watch 'em burn.So you'd consider them flammable, then? Still, they will take several rounds to burn, even if they take d10 per round.


Dausuul's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated
Beast Lord
A solution to the question: "How can I have a griffon mount, always available, without wrecking game balance?"
280 +1 1 Saturday, 19th November, 2016, 10:21 AM Saturday, 19th November, 2016, 10:21 AM

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites