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 6 of 6 FirstFirst 123456

No results to show...
Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 123456
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345

Sunday, 16th March, 2014

  • 02:41 AM - Ahnehnois mentioned Dausuul in post Can mundane classes have a resource which powers abilities?
    It would totally depend on the implementation of such a systemNo doubt. Before the board shutdown Dausuul listed a pretty decent spread of possibilities. There are plenty of ways to go about this. Of course, a resource system would also depend on implementation, but since we've seen so many poorly implemented resource systems in D&D, I think it might be time to try something different.

Saturday, 15th March, 2014

  • 02:59 AM - Quickleaf mentioned Dausuul in post Can mundane classes have a resource which powers abilities?
    Dausuul Agreed! I think the use of triggers and conditions makes for a far more interesting play style for fighters, rogues, and their ilk. JamesonCourage Sounds like a fun system, buti have a question about logistics: you list over 20 uses for technique points on the fly...how do players keep track of all that?

Monday, 10th March, 2014

  • 08:47 AM - pemerton mentioned Dausuul in post how many 5e supporters are upset about the possible $50 price tag
    So the list of people who say they were going to buy but now have doubt because of the price include, in my opinion, a lot of people who made it clear they were unsure about the game before the price issue existed. I think all of Ashkelon, Dausuul, ForeverSlayer, GMforPowergamers, Jester Canuck, and mhensley had all expressed, to one degree or another, doubt and a level of unsureness before the price issue existed.Obviously posters can speak for themselves, but as someone who reads a lot of D&Dnext and other threads I would regard both Dausuul and GMforPowergamers as strong supporters, and probably also Jester Canuck - Dausuul in particular made it clear a year or more ago that he(?) wanted a game closer to B/X than 4e, though learning some lessons about tightness of design/structure from 4e. D&Dnext looks like a candidate to be that game.

Thursday, 6th March, 2014

  • 03:58 AM - SkidAce mentioned Dausuul in post Animate Dead and Alignment Restrictions
    A fighter? Like, "I'll hit you so hard, I'll kill you and your corpse will reanimate!"? :erm: Dausuul said it. But to clarify, I was alluding to the fact that anyone could study necromancy, just as anyone could study...shrubberies. Granted the framework of DnD causes your class to dictate the majority of your abilities. So a fighter who studied up on necromancy wouldn't amount to much without multiclassing, but I was talking character concepts, not class abilities per se.

Wednesday, 5th March, 2014

  • 07:17 PM - I'm A Banana mentioned Dausuul in post Animate Dead and Alignment Restrictions
    There's a conceptual thing going on here. Dausuul's comparison isn't a bad one, but I don't think it goes quite far enough. On the one side, life and death are just energies like fire to be manipulated. On the other side, life and death mean something. Life is to be encouraged, protected, enhanced, defended. Death is dark, scary, unpleasant, tragic. Life good, death evil. Those who support life are good, those who support death are bad. D&D actually has this second view as something of the default -- it has ever since OD&D where Clerics of Chaos were a thing and they got Finger of Death instead of Raise Dead and they could rebuke undead instead of turning them. Not that Wizards were really partial to this debate when they got the ability to make undead. Which might actually be something of a solution: The most powerful abilities regarding life and death are for the Good and Evil Clerics, respectively. They are only bestowed by Good and Evil gods, respectively. Wizards (and clerics adhering to more neutral gods) do...

Friday, 24th January, 2014

  • 06:25 AM - pemerton mentioned Dausuul in post Wandering "Monsters": Magic Items
    the Jester, Dausuul, thanks for those replies. Would it be fair to say that, in this sort of play, the idea of balancing encounters/effectiveness over "the adventure" doesn't really come into play, because in a certain sense there isn't such a thing as "the adventure" until the players actually play the game? Where I'm going with this is that I see a contrast between the sort of play you are describing, and the approach found in (say) 13th Age but also hinted at from time-to-time in relation to D&Dnext. In 13th Age, for instance, the players don't have full control over "the adventure" - in particular, if they take a rest before dealing with the equivalent of 4 balanced encounters then the GM is entitled, and on my reading of the rules obliged, to impose a "campaign loss" of some sort. As well as a pacing device, this also balances the asymmetric resource suites of the different classes. A corollary of this approach, discussed in the 13th Age rulebook, is the factoring of items into "the maths". ...
  • 01:57 AM - pemerton mentioned Dausuul in post Wandering "Monsters": Magic Items
    The game's a toolkit and can handle groups with those factors (granted, there are problems with mixing radically opposing factors in the game group) with GM involvement and care. <snip> If they are experienced and well-equipped, dial up the danger. Directly accounting for them just sticks the PC on the treadmill. I guess I don't really see the difference - beyond the rhetorical - between "involvement and care . . . [to] dial up the danger" and "stick[ing] the PC on the treadmill." the Jester, Dausuul, both your replies seemed to suggest that you envisage the players having a degree of control over the encounters their PCs face - am I reading you correctly? higher level characters in 4e, certainly, and from my experience 3e as well, can handle escalating encounter challenges as they level. 1st level 4e characters can handle Level+2 encounters, but by epic tier, they can usually handle Level+6 encounters. I wonder if 4e characters actually need magic items at all!My 4e game uses magic items but no expertise feats. The PCs are 24th, and in the last session ended up in combat with a 22nd solo, a 23rd solo, a 24th solo and a 23rd elite (overall 30th level encounter). Stripping out of the magic item bonuses would have made hitting very hard!

Monday, 13th January, 2014


Tuesday, 29th October, 2013

  • 04:36 PM - steeldragons mentioned Dausuul in post When Demons Intrude (Wandering Monsters 10/23/13)
    Just another reiteration that that is some really good stuff, Dausuul Definitely using these parameters as a future matter of course. Thanks!
  • 04:13 PM - pemerton mentioned Dausuul in post Fighters vs. Spellcasters (a case for fighters.)
    ... to? The correct inference would be that I prefer not to play a game in which the mechanically best approach for my honourable paladin to stop the dragon is to sacrifice people. That should be a choice that is driven by considerations of theme and value that then inform the mechanical framing. And I would not like a GM who framed me into that sort of situation without regard to those matters of theme and value. Conversely, if I am playing a foul-mouthed fighter, then why am I trying to persuade the king via Diplomacy? And why have I been framed into that scene? Until you give me some answers to those sorts of questions, how do you expect me to explain how I might GM such a scenario? The fact you have indicated you first had to be “satisfied that it won't hurt the game for the wish to be granted” implies that, if you feel it would, then you would simply deny the granting of the wish at the outset.I didn't say that I had to be satisfied in that way. I was working within Dausuul's idea of rolling the dice - my pont was that, if a GM decides to roll the dice to see if a wish is available, s/he has decided that a wish can be obtained within the game. Personally wishes are something I prefer to handle with a great deal of care. I'm not the biggest fan of the traditional D&D approach to wishes. This seems to be exactly the type of “mother may I” play Hussar has consistently expressed disgust for. Hussar would not have any trouble learning whether or not wishes were available this way in a game that I was running.

Wednesday, 11th September, 2013

  • 04:58 PM - Blackbrrd mentioned Dausuul in post Skill Challenges in 5E
    Dausuul you took the words out of my mouth here. I think Starfox has some very good points on why the current incarnation of the skill challenge doesn't work without some creative DM-ing. I do like the idea of skill challenges, but in it's current form, I don't quite like them. Some skill challenges could have been made better by having a timer on them. For instance making it harder after x rounds and fail completely after y rounds. This doesn't fit all skill challenges though.

Monday, 12th August, 2013


Monday, 15th July, 2013

  • 10:41 AM - pemerton mentioned Dausuul in post July 11 Q&A: Cosmology, Monster Descriptions and Monster Variants
    You don't need to be bad player or person to read "default" material in "core" rulebooks and assume it is true for the game your signing up for. Many folks just assume that anything presented as default is just a part of D&D. Certainly 4e weaves its cosmology very tightly with its classes and motivations. You might choose any number of classes (or features) presuming that you will get to involve yourself in one its cosmological struggles.I agree with all this. From my point of view, it is a huge strength of 4e! (Though perhaps limits its replay value.) I tend to think you're right that it's more problematic for a unity edition. I like Dausuul's idea of presenting little cosmology "packets" (the Abyss, the Hells, etc) which are pretty well-established parts of D&D lore - perhaps in the Monster Manual, given that like monsters they are classic D&D story elements - but leaving it to the GM to decide how they are all connected together.

Monday, 1st July, 2013

  • 06:12 AM - Hussar mentioned Dausuul in post L&L 1/7/2013 The Many Worlds of D&D
    I can live with this. Like Dausuul, I'm not really a fan of Planescape (the Hell you say :p) but, this seems to be a pretty good compromise. Most of the Planescape stuff gets shunted into the outer planes where it doesn't really impact play outside of Planescape and I still get planes that I like - similar to 4e style elemental planes - that are ((to me and me only)) better for plopping down adventures on. And, really, putting the Feywild between the Prime and the Positive, and Ravenloft (or whatever it will be called) between the Prime and the Negative, makes a fair bit of sense to me. And, it possibly opens up an interesting relationship between the borders of the Feywild and the Dread.

Tuesday, 4th June, 2013

  • 10:16 PM - Quickleaf mentioned Dausuul in post 5/30 Q&A: Charm, Chases, and Combat Free
    Dausuul I agree that pursuit and evasion need to interface smoothly with combat. However, how would you classify the "chase the messenger/pickpocket" scene? There is no combat involved there. The tension is in whether or not the PCs intercept the messenger or the pickpocket before they reach a target. I mean, I suppose a thuggish group might start opening fire on an unarmed noncombatant in a crowded space...

Friday, 19th April, 2013

  • 01:15 AM - Spatula mentioned Dausuul in post Feats: What Are They For?
    I'm kinda with you Dausuul. To me, feats should be an answer to the question, "What is cool and unique about your character, that sets him/her apart from all the other [race] [class] characters?" And not just some combat bonuses, or prerequisites for attempting certain actions, or class abilities in disguise. I guess my problem is that coming up with cool, interesting things for feats to be is difficult, which is probably why the designers have stuck with endless variations on "get a bonus to this d20 roll under these circumstances." I always loved (most of) the feats from the 3e Eberron campaign book, because they were really interesting and flavorful and useful, AND they also tied the character to the world. Dragonmarks, druid orders, animal totems... that's the kind of stuff that I would like to see as feats.

Thursday, 18th April, 2013

  • 04:25 AM - hbarsquared mentioned Dausuul in post We need more Int/Str/Cha saving throws
    First, I agree with looking at the Bestiary for determining the abilities that characters must use in saves, not just spells. Second, since checks and saves are equivalent in terms of bonuses, each spell/monster ability should call out the Ability for the Save (the immediate save for half damage) or the Check to Make (action on your turn to escape), or even both! (Illusions: Wis save, and an Int check in following rounds?) If you include both options, perhaps it would be easier to hit all Abilities. I do think it is important to hit all abilities, as either a Save or a Check to escape. Again, not exactly evenly, but Stormonu's list as well as Dausuul's suggestion of taking into account the horribleness of the effect.

Wednesday, 3rd April, 2013

  • 05:40 PM - pemerton mentioned Dausuul in post D&DN going down the wrong path for everyone.
    Dausuul, the proven technology for delivering both is multiple resolution systems - simple and complex. Burning Wheel uses this approach. So does HeroWars/Quest. So do various 4e hacks that use skill challenges or something similar for quick-and-dirty fights. This can be hard to implement in a traditional D&D system, though, because it requires allowing a single set of ingame events to be modelled by two different resolution systems - with the choice of system depending on metagame context, not ingame considerations. That could be pretty controversial. Though I was just reading 2nd ed Combat & Tactics for the first time, and it has a system a bit like this for duelling, so there is at least than one pre-4e-precedent for the two parallel resolution options.

Tuesday, 5th March, 2013

  • 06:04 PM - Li Shenron mentioned Dausuul in post Rules for improve-by-doing skills
    What stops this from occurring? First of all, the fact that skill bonus will still be limited by level. Second, (also for Dausuul) the purpose of this idea is to have fun with seeing your skill bonus improve depending on what happens in the story, rather than just increase it up to your maximum when you level-up. So once again, a player that is just trying to find all possible ways to max the skill quickly, is a player who's not interested in this idea.


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

Thursday, 7th March, 2019

  • 11:40 PM - 5ekyu quoted Dausuul in post Monsters struggling to hit players? Common?
    Because one monster attacking with advantage is less effective than two monsters attacking without. This tactic is only useful in a "minions and boss" scenario. What do you accomplish by grappling the tanky fighter-type? Making them stay next to you until you're dead? That's probably what they were planning to do anyway. I'm going to assume that by "trip," you mean "shove." This can work, but you need a very large group. Assuming that you have about a 50% chance to succeed on a shove, you're burning 2 attacks each round to grant advantage to the others. You need at least 5 monsters mobbing the target for that to have any payoff at all, and you need 7+ monsters for the payoff to be significant. Sometimes they do. Often they don't, because spellcasters are not all that common. You can't just walk down to the corner store and buy one. Besides, PCs focus fire on spellcasters like nobody's business. They can fight intelligently, too.Re including casters as enemies... "Sometimes they do. Oft...
  • 10:48 PM - Johnny3D3D quoted Dausuul in post Monsters struggling to hit players? Common?
    My PCs are currently level 4 with ACs ranging from 14 (the sorcerer) to 20 (the BM fighter with plate and shield). I haven't found to much problem in monsters hitting them. Early on I would use more monsters that had stuff like pack tactics (Kobalds +4 to hit with advantage - challenged even the fighter). As they go up in levels and monsters start getting +5 or more to hit - it's becoming even less of a concern. Admittedly, my group isn't a very min-max bunch so maybe I'm just lucky. But I suspect if they were - I wouldn't have to try too hard to challenge them. 1. Athletics check to grapple, can't move. 2. Athletics check to knock prone - grant advtg & disad to hit. 3. Profit. :D #3 Assumes the GM rules the prone target cannot stand while grappled (unless they first win a grapple roll), which is certainly how I'd run it. Okay. Yes, that tactic works. But notice that you are now expecting the DM to look at two different special attacks (grapple and shove), plus the de...
  • 08:55 PM - S'mon quoted Dausuul in post Monsters struggling to hit players? Common?
    Okay. Yes, that tactic works. But notice that you are now expecting the DM to look at two different special attacks (grapple and shove), plus the detailed "being prone" rules (which specify you can't stand from prone when your speed is 0), and put all these together to achieve a soft lock. That goes well beyond "look at the strategies in the book." I kind of agree, given that this tactic only occurred to me a couple days ago and I've been running 5e since late 2014! Also it won't work in my high level game since most of the 5 PCs are high level Barbarians - one of them can't roll an Athletics check under 28, and the weakest of them is rolling with +10 at advantage. Of the two non Barbarians, one is a 19th level Moon Druid, so that's out too. So that leaves the 17th level Rogue who can't get less than 24 on Stealth - he is vulnerable though if a monster can ever catch him...
  • 06:11 PM - S'mon quoted Dausuul in post Monsters struggling to hit players? Common?
    What do you accomplish by grappling the tanky fighter-type? Making them stay next to you until you're dead? That's probably what they were planning to do anyway. I'm going to assume that by "trip," you mean "shove." 1. Athletics check to grapple, can't move. 2. Athletics check to knock prone - grant advtg & disad to hit. 3. Profit. :D #3 Assumes the GM rules the prone target cannot stand while grappled (unless they first win a grapple roll), which is certainly how I'd run it.

Tuesday, 5th March, 2019

  • 04:42 PM - Merudo quoted Dausuul in post The New Class Tiers
    This thread is about class tiers, but a lot of people are taking the word to refer to level tiers. The class tier should be broken up into level tiers. So there should be a tier list for level 1-4, a tier list for level 5-10, a tier list for levels 11-16 and a tier list for level 17-20. Not breakup the class tier in this way makes the information next to useless as play is usually restricted to a level tier or two.
  • 03:32 PM - S'mon quoted Dausuul in post The New Class Tiers
    Public service announcement: Class tiers is a way of categorizing classes by how powerful and versatile they are. A "tier 1" class can do pretty much anything, a "tier 5" class is mediocre at its specialty and sucks at everything else. It has nothing to do with level. The concept originated in the 3E community, as a way to describe the extreme lack of class balance in that edition. Level tiers is a grouping of experience levels into categories, with the idea that new options will open up and the themes and scope of adventures will change from one tier to the next. The concept dates back to the Red Box era, although I think the use of "tier" to describe it comes from 4E. In 5E, "tier 1" encompasses levels 1-4, "tier 2" encompasses 5-10, "tier 3" is 11-16, and "tier 4" is 17-20. This thread is about class tiers, but a lot of people are taking the word to refer to level tiers. I wish they'd explicitly called the 4 Level Tiers Novice-Heroic-Paragon-Epic - but they didn't want to make t...

Saturday, 2nd March, 2019

  • 11:29 PM - Merudo quoted Dausuul in post The New Class Tiers
    The only class I feel is really in a separate tier is paladin. Paladins do it all; they take hits, dish out damage, heal, cast spells, passively buff the entire party, and look good doing it. Even so, the difference is not overwhelming, maybe half a tier by 3E standards. Moreover, a chunk of the paladin's strength lies in their ability to heal and buff the other PCs, which makes their power less objectionable. At tier 1 Paladins are nothing special. They have too few spellslots and not enough abilities to really stand out - the Battlemaster & Gloom Stalker are likely to perform better. Paladin level 5, 6 & 7 (for some oaths) are incredible boosts, though. I think its important for ratings to have two categories: tier 1, and tier 2.

Friday, 1st March, 2019

  • 06:23 PM - Ovinomancer quoted Dausuul in post Sneak attacking undead and constructs seems wrong
    Huh? That's not true at all. Double spell slots is a colossal buff. Unless you're doing the whole 5-minute workday thing, casters have to ration their high-end spells with great care. Double spell slots means you can lob twice as many fireballs before you have to fall back on cantrips. You might be assuming that spell slots stack the way they do in 5E multiclassing, but I don't think that assumption is warranted. Based on @dnd4vr's description, it sounds like they threw the 5E multiclass system out the window entirely and went with the AD&D approach. That would mean each class tracks its own spell slots separately. @dnd4vr can correct me if I'm wrong here. Looking over the list of characters, it seems like a reasonably balanced party, at least at a glance. The only character I'd be worried about not keeping up would be the fighter/barbarian; that one seems like it would have less synergy than the others. (The barbarian/monk is an interesting mix... is that character going Dex-focused or Str...
  • 04:27 PM - dnd4vr quoted Dausuul in post Sneak attacking undead and constructs seems wrong
    Huh? That's not true at all. Double spell slots is a colossal buff. Unless you're doing the whole 5-minute workday thing, casters have to ration their high-end spells with great care. Double spell slots means you can lob twice as many fireballs before you have to fall back on cantrips. You might be assuming that spell slots stack the way they do in 5E multiclassing, but I don't think that assumption is warranted. Based on @dnd4vr's description, it sounds like they threw the 5E multiclass system out the window entirely and went with the AD&D approach. That would mean each class tracks its own spell slots separately. @dnd4vr can correct me if I'm wrong here. Looking over the list of characters, it seems like a reasonably balanced party, at least at a glance. The only character I'd be worried about not keeping up would be the fighter/barbarian; that one seems like it would have less synergy than the others. (The barbarian/monk is an interesting mix... is that character going Dex-focused or Str...

Thursday, 28th February, 2019

  • 09:28 PM - Autumn Bask quoted Dausuul in post Sneak attacking undead and constructs seems wrong
    I think dnd4vr is talking about really old multiclassing, 1E-style. In modern versions of the game, it would be known as "gestalt" multiclassing. *dons grognard hat* The way it worked back in the day was, if you wanted to multiclass, you did it at character creation. From then on, all earned XP was split evenly between your classes. You shared the abilities of all the classes, and averaged their hit points. Thus, let's say each PC currently has 20,000 XP. For a regular PC, that would put them at 6th level, close to 7th. The rogue/fighter would split those XP between classes: 10,000 to the rogue half, and 10,000 to the fighter half, which means level 5 in both classes*. The character has all the abilities of a rogue 5 and a fighter 5; hit points halfway between fighter 5 and rogue 5; and the proficiency bonus of a 5th-level character. If that seems brokenly powerful to you... well, that's because it is. Multiclassing was insanely good in AD&D, which is probably why the system was completely...
  • 08:50 PM - lowkey13 quoted Dausuul in post Sneak attacking undead and constructs seems wrong
    I think dnd4vr is talking about really old multiclassing, 1E-style. In modern versions of the game, it would be known as "gestalt" multiclassing. *dons grognard hat* The way it worked back in the day was, if you wanted to multiclass, you did it at character creation. From then on, all earned XP was split evenly between your classes. You shared the abilities of all the classes, and averaged their hit points. Thus, let's say each PC currently has 20,000 XP. For a regular PC, that would put them at 6th level, close to 7th. The rogue/fighter would split those XP between classes: 10,000 to the rogue half, and 10,000 to the fighter half, which means level 5 in both classes*. The character has all the abilities of a rogue 5 and a fighter 5; hit points halfway between fighter 5 and rogue 5; and the proficiency bonus of a 5th-level character. If that seems brokenly powerful to you... well, that's because it is. Multiclassing was insanely good in AD&D, which is probably why the system was completely...

Tuesday, 26th February, 2019

  • 07:24 PM - lowkey13 quoted Dausuul in post The horror of petrification in D&D
    Souls in D&D can be annihilated in a variety of ways, or condemned to torment in the Lower Planes. It's a universe in which really awful stuff happens to a lot of people. I don't see why being a rock, unaware and unfeeling, is so bad. If you're evil, it's about the best fate you could hope for. Anyway, nothing is forever. Eventually your statue will be destroyed, by geological forces if nothing else. If it takes a million years, you won't care; all that time will pass in an eyeblink* for you. *Unless the DM rules that you still experience the passage of time despite being "unaware of your surroundings." In that case, petrification is indeed a horrific fate; but that's on the DM, not the rules. Mmmmm ... that's a truly terrible fate. I like it.

Monday, 25th February, 2019

  • 11:50 PM - dnd4vr quoted Dausuul in post Sneak attacking undead and constructs seems wrong
    How's he getting to do that? By definition, if a new foe enters the conflict, that foe has taken a turn; they used it to walk in the door. Unless they're somehow getting dumped onto the battlefield without warning, they should not be at risk of assassination. I guess they were Surprised demons! :D I've never heard of summoned creatures be Surprised. Most commonly they get to act immediately on the same turn they're summoned, on the summoner's init. Well, since they were dumped into the fight, I guess our DM decided they were surprised. Of course, it wouldn't matter with the way he was running it since he was allowing the assassinate as long as the rogue went first and the creature had yet to act. The DM had the summon demons act the round after they were summoned.
  • 11:33 PM - S'mon quoted Dausuul in post Sneak attacking undead and constructs seems wrong
    How's he getting to do that? By definition, if a new foe enters the conflict, that foe has taken a turn; they used it to walk in the door. Unless they're somehow getting dumped onto the battlefield without warning, they should not be at risk of assassination. Yeah, by RAW someone entering battle after round 1 won't be assassinatable, unless somehow they start with the Surprised condition.
  • 11:32 PM - dnd4vr quoted Dausuul in post Sneak attacking undead and constructs seems wrong
    How's he getting to do that? By definition, if a new foe enters the conflict, that foe has taken a turn; they used it to walk in the door. Unless they're somehow getting dumped onto the battlefield without warning, they should not be at risk of assassination. The couple times this has happened was when demons were summoned and such, so yeah, pretty much just dumped into the fight. Fortunately, it doesn't happen often. He may not have done it purposely, but he did seem to stumble into a very effective build. It can definitely be unfun to feel like someone else is always doing the cool things in combat. One thing to point out is that for Assassinate, it isn't always an auto-critical. If they attack someone that hasn't gone yet, they always get advantage (which lets them use sneak attack), but it only becomes a critical if the target was surprised. Unless you are just constantly getting the drop on your enemies, he should be doing significantly less (but still good) damage on the first ...
  • 07:13 PM - iserith quoted Dausuul in post Polymorph is a bad de-buff spell
    Still confused as to why experienced adventurers (high enough level to be facing enemies with polymorph) would be totally ignorant of a whole class of spells. It isn't just polymorph, after all. Every shapechanging effect in the game works much the same way: Destroying the shapechanged form is a ticket back to your original self. This is the sort of survival knowledge I expect to be general among adventurers. A barbarian may not understand the precise technical differences between polymorph and Wild Shape, but knowing that the answer to certain types of evil wizardry is to throw yourself fearlessly into the jaws of death*? Sure. For most barbarians, that's the answer to everything anyway. So my experience is that, in these types of games, this is the point where the player either (1) Declares his or her character doesn't know anything about polymorph, then signals to the rest of the group that he or she is not a filthy metagamer by doing something unproductive or counterproductive; or (2) As...
  • 07:01 PM - Elfcrusher quoted Dausuul in post Polymorph is a bad de-buff spell
    Still confused as to why experienced adventurers (high enough level to be facing enemies with polymorph) would be totally ignorant of a whole class of spells. It isn't just polymorph, after all. Every shapechanging effect in the game works much the same way: Destroying the shapechanged form is a ticket back to your original self. This is the sort of survival knowledge I expect to be general among adventurers. A barbarian may not understand the precise technical differences between polymorph and Wild Shape, but knowing that the answer to certain types of evil wizardry is to throw yourself fearlessly into the jaws of death*? Sure. For most barbarians, that's the answer to everything anyway. (And if you want to rule that polymorph's impact on mental stats makes you incapable of reason, the DM should just take over running the polymorphed character and be done with it. As a player, I would prefer that to having my every move policed for whether it is sufficiently stupid. Being micromanaged i...

Saturday, 23rd February, 2019

  • 04:43 PM - ClaytonCross quoted Dausuul in post Here Are The Most Popular D&D Feats (War Caster Leads The Pack!)
    You never encounter foes that lurk in ambush and let the scout go past so they can attack the entire party? Or ambush with ranged attacks? Or teleportation, invisibility, or shapechanging to look like an ally? ...All I can say is, your DM is very, very nice to you. I have, the Paladin cast his spell the first round then drew his weapon after and move into 5ft so if they moved he would get the opportunity attack ...every time.. .without fail. My GM actively tries to kill me as scout so no, he is not being very very nice. I would like to take this moment to thank Wizards of the coast for Shadow of Moil and misty step though, without ether of this character would have died many times over. Thunderstep is not bad ether but when I found it my GM suddenly started including a wizard with counter spell in every single ambush... but until last session just one so misty step still saved me as I was able to argue that the text on counter spell "You attempt to interrupt a creature in the process...

Friday, 22nd February, 2019

  • 10:31 PM - Retreater quoted Dausuul in post Polymorph is a bad de-buff spell
    Agreed. Anyone with even passing knowledge of shapechanging would know that fatal injury to the transformed person causes them to change back instead of dying. That's the kind of information (here is a danger, here is how you deal with that danger) that people eagerly spread and share. It isn't some hyper-technical rules point, it's a fundamental principle of how transformations work in the world. 3E had the right idea here: There's polymorph, which is a spell to be cast on a willing ally for buff or utility purposes, and there's baleful polymorph, which is a spell to trap an enemy in animal form. I don't know that I would split polymorph into two spells, but I would give it two modes: The regular mode requires a willing target and is otherwise the same as now. The baleful mode is limited to CR 0 forms. You keep your own hit point total and don't revert when reduced to zero. You get an initial saving throw to resist, and another save at the end of each of your turns. On a successful s...

Thursday, 21st February, 2019

  • 05:58 PM - dnd4vr quoted Dausuul in post Initiative options?
    Hello, I was researching the same question and I stumbled upon this excellent idea: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?513971-Concurrent-initiative-variant-Everybody-declares-Everybody-resolves-WAS-Simultaneous-Initiative I wonder why this is not in the top resources for 5e post. I tested it on my table and it was a huge success, this really feels how D&D was meant to be played. No more "you entered the combat minigame please stand by for your turn" but a seamless experience. Hope this helps. Well, I just spent a couple hours reading through this. It is an interesting idea, but not for me personally. I have an idea from the Greyhawk system but it would place a lot of the responsibility on us players, which could be a good thing. I'll post more about it later when I have time.


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