View Profile: jaelis - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Today, 05:23 PM
    IMO the rapier is a little too good, but I'm OK with the finesse rules in general. So I just say you can't use the rapier with a shield, and that works for me.
    5 replies | 148 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Today, 05:10 PM
    I think that's a sound argument, but debatable because it is a bit of a tangle of specific and general rules. (For instance, cure wounds can't heal you above your hp max, but that is due to the general rule.) But for the purpose of this argument, I'm willing to assume that the hp max reduction takes precedence over the spell.
    55 replies | 1098 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Today, 04:45 PM
    What effect? The hit point reduction. So until you take a long rest, your hit point maximum is zero. The fact that you die when your hp max is reduced to zero is not a status effect, it is just something that happens when you get bit. You seem to be reading it as, "The target dies if its hit point maximum is zero due to this effect." But that is not what it says.
    55 replies | 1098 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Today, 02:58 PM
    Yes, granted, the raised creature is still at 0 hp. (Though this is in fact debatable since the vampire condition and the raise dead spell conflict, and its not obvious which should have priority.) No, that is wrong. The effect of the bite is to kill you when the bite occurs, not to keep you dead if you are later revived. It says "The target dies if this effect reduces its hit point maximum...
    55 replies | 1098 view(s)
    1 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Today, 02:18 PM
    Just from a rules lawyering perspective, "The target dies if this effect reduces its hit point maximum to 0" is a trigger, not a status effect. At the moment the vampire reduces the hp maximum to zero, the target dies. If the target is later raised, then even it it remains at 0 hp, the "die when you are reduced to zero" no longer applies because the triggering condition was not met. There is no...
    55 replies | 1098 view(s)
    1 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:00 PM
    This is the spot where I would go with rulings (and IMO RAI) over rules. Although this twitter thread suggests Crawford would play it as you suggest, cast GR right after raise dead.
    55 replies | 1098 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:44 PM
    Why not assume that gentle repose keeps the soul nearby? Explains why they cant become undead.
    14 replies | 427 view(s)
    1 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:48 PM
    Crawford says it works: I would interpret "working" the same way dnd4vr does.
    14 replies | 427 view(s)
    1 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:10 PM
    Do note that you can cast gentle repose again before the first casting expires. That helps with time pressure.
    55 replies | 1098 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 10:12 PM
    jaelis replied to Monk Tortle
    I don't think that anyone was suggesting tortle monks should be disallowed?
    38 replies | 1056 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 07:23 PM
    jaelis replied to Sailor Spells
    Clearly, a Sailor should have Moon Prism Power ;)
    14 replies | 420 view(s)
    1 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 04:13 PM
    jaelis replied to Monk Tortle
    Now I'm curious, what kind of benefit might I get at your tables if I wanted to play a gnome barbarian?
    38 replies | 1056 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 12:23 AM
    jaelis replied to Monk Tortle
    Welp, perhaps you are right, interesting to think about :)
    38 replies | 1056 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 10:47 PM
    jaelis replied to Monk Tortle
    Which abilities depend on dexterity?
    38 replies | 1056 view(s)
    1 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 10:00 PM
    jaelis replied to Monk Tortle
    IMO, tortle is totally a powergaming choice for monks. It solves the hard problems of the class, that it is very MAD and lacks armor. Yes they have offseting abilities, but tortles still have those abilities, plus a better AC. Arguably, monk is the "best" class for a tortle to play. If they play a fighter, then they really are wasting their shell ability, since they could just wear armor...
    38 replies | 1056 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 07:11 PM
    jaelis replied to Monk Tortle
    Just my two bits, but if I were the DM, I would say no and counter with the fact that you are bypassing one of the main limitations of the monk class, that it can't wear armor :)
    38 replies | 1056 view(s)
    1 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 02:22 AM
    Cool that would be great.
    31 replies | 1181 view(s)
    1 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Wednesday, 10th July, 2019, 08:54 PM
    I like turn based. But I think real time is more popular, and it probably makes sense to cater to the majority if you want the game to be successful.
    31 replies | 1181 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Tuesday, 9th July, 2019, 04:06 PM
    So to be clear, this is a 4e idea? Oh duh, I see the tag now. :p
    9 replies | 283 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Tuesday, 9th July, 2019, 12:44 PM
    Would you do the same for monsters, or is it more of a the pcs are special kind of thing?
    71 replies | 1930 view(s)
    1 XP
  • dwayne's Avatar
    Tuesday, 9th July, 2019, 10:29 AM
    I have just uploaded Phylums (Zionillagurrluga) to the downloads area. Phylum Phylums (Zionillagurrluga) The Phylums as the terrains call them because the races real name is a combination of sounds, vibrations and pheromones. They are a colony of worms much like the common caterpillar on earth that share a hive mind of a sort. They take a humanoid form it is assumed to mimic of the race...
    0 replies | 92 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Monday, 8th July, 2019, 10:08 PM
    75% success against a garden-variety monster, under adverse conditions, seems pretty reasonable to me. If you want to have a particularly alert guard, you can give it proficiency, or even expertise, in perception.
    104 replies | 2785 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Monday, 8th July, 2019, 08:23 PM
    You can arrange difficult circumstances and say they give a bonus to observer's perception checks. For instance, when trying to move quietly through dry leaves, you can give observers a +10 bonus to hear. With that mechanic, you can tune the difficulty as you like. It's not hard to come up with situational modifiers like that. Basically it gives the rogue a chance to hide in situations when an...
    104 replies | 2785 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Monday, 8th July, 2019, 03:22 PM
    It seems like the most obvious way to interpret "darkness spreading to fill a sphere." Darkness doesn't normally "fill" things, it is actually just an "emptiness" of light. So if darkness fills a sphere, then I take it to mean that light is excluded from that sphere, which means that light cannot pass through it. This is supported by the fact that a creature with darkvision cannot see through the...
    34 replies | 1081 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Monday, 8th July, 2019, 08:32 AM
    Yes, I think the darkness spell specifically blocks line of sight through its area.
    34 replies | 1081 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Monday, 8th July, 2019, 01:50 AM
    It is funny but probably not as useful as the standard version :)
    2 replies | 238 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Monday, 8th July, 2019, 01:49 AM
    Like this? .. / .- - - .- -.-. -.- / - .... . / -.. .- .-. -.- -. . ... ... -.-.--
    25 replies | 734 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Sunday, 7th July, 2019, 07:39 PM
    My take: No and yes. (Assuming they are trying to perceive using sight. Nothing for the PC, but the NPC cannot see that PC. PC has disadvantage, NPC still can't see anything.
    34 replies | 1081 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Thursday, 4th July, 2019, 03:55 PM
    I like the giant kobold idea.
    2 replies | 225 view(s)
    1 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Wednesday, 3rd July, 2019, 04:58 PM
    I should make a character whose spells are dad jokes. "Magic won't-miss-ile!" "Polymore-fun for you!" "I rename you William, and now you're invisi-Bill!"
    9 replies | 461 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 11:03 PM
    jaelis replied to True Polymorph
    Yes, as long as you can see yourself anyway. If you turn yourself into an object, though, you would not be able to concentrate and the spell would immediately end.
    11 replies | 413 view(s)
    1 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 10:28 PM
    It is up to the DM if something like an amoeba counts as a "creature" in the rules sense. Or, for that matter, whether amoebas even exist in your world.
    13 replies | 487 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 07:07 PM
    jaelis replied to Expertise Feat
    Yes I have the same feeling.
    13 replies | 522 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 05:20 PM
    jaelis replied to Expertise Feat
    I'll buy these arguments if you play without multiclassing. But I don't see that big a difference between picking up expertise via a feat compared to via a 1 level dip into rogue.
    13 replies | 522 view(s)
    1 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 03:46 PM
    I see, so in its most elementary form, your argument would be that if you observe something once, then you are using math because one is not equal to zero. So if you observe a single event that confirms or denies your hypothesis, then you are using math. I can't really argue with that, if you are saying we need math to distinguish one from zero or yes from no, then math is an essential part of...
    52 replies | 3236 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 03:07 PM
    What maths are applicable here? Was Darwin doing science when he came up with the theory? What kind of math was he using? Of course, I do agree that one piece of data doesn't confirm the entire theory. But it does confirm that particular prediction of the broader theory. I don't know, I'm not a biologist. But do you really want to claim that taxonomy was not a science until we had DNA...
    52 replies | 3236 view(s)
    1 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 02:37 PM
    Hmm. Currently, there is no fossil evidence between a flightless, mouselike mammal and the flying proto-bat that it evolved into. The theory of evolution predicts that intermediate forms existed. If a paleontologist finds a fossil of a flying-squirrel-like animal in a geological layer in between that of the mouse and that of the bat, it would confirm the predictions of theory. Are they using...
    52 replies | 3236 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 02:16 PM
    "Simple" to a mathematician or physicist doesn't mean quite the same thing as simple to a layperson though. Maxwell's equations are paragons of simplicity and elegance, but they still involve pretty gnarly vector calculus. (You can simplify them even further using tensor notation, but now you're doing tensor calculus!)
    52 replies | 3236 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 02:10 PM
    Well, the claim seems to have drifted from "scientists use complicated mathematical formulas to try to explain their theories" to "scientists use math." The second statement is certainly more defensible, but still I think misses the point. Science is fundamentally about having an idea, testing it objectively against some form of experiment, and then revising or rejecting the idea as required....
    52 replies | 3236 view(s)
    1 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 01:21 AM
    Yep, a couple hours for the big ones.
    395 replies | 30714 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 12:52 AM
    No, seals cannot breathe water, no mammal can.
    395 replies | 30714 view(s)
    1 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Sunday, 30th June, 2019, 10:26 PM
    Some scientists do, but not all. You might be thinking of physicists, but botanists are scientists too.
    52 replies | 3236 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Sunday, 30th June, 2019, 04:51 PM
    jaelis replied to Expertise Feat
    This is probably not what you want, but I like feats that express some flavor about the character who has them, as opposed to a plain mechanical benefit. Also, I think there are only a few skills where expertise is really useful. So I made up these: Canny Grappler (replaces Grappler) Prerequisite: Proficiency in Athletics or Acrobatics You are a fearsome wrestler. Gain the following...
    13 replies | 522 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Saturday, 29th June, 2019, 05:14 AM
    We rolled 3d6, in order, and then lied about what we got. :)
    67 replies | 1917 view(s)
    7 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Wednesday, 26th June, 2019, 02:54 PM
    Just to say, I use the XGtE rule, but added a benefit to the armor fighting style to let you ignore it.
    140 replies | 12177 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Sunday, 23rd June, 2019, 04:27 AM
    jaelis replied to Flurry of Blows
    Links or it didnt happen ;)
    16 replies | 789 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Sunday, 23rd June, 2019, 03:59 AM
    As for subclasses: open hand and kensei are solid. Avoid five elements, and shadow isnt so much a combat build. I think long desth is decent, but Im less familiar.
    9 replies | 568 view(s)
    1 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Saturday, 22nd June, 2019, 03:35 PM
    jaelis replied to Flurry of Blows
    In fact JC says you can: https://www.sageadvice.eu/2018/01/20/can-a-monk-move-between-the-hits-of-flurry-of-blows/
    16 replies | 789 view(s)
    4 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 04:26 PM
    FWIW, my take on versatility is this: Fighting Style: Brawling: If you have a free hand while you take the Attack action on your turn and attack using a melee weapon or your unarmed strike, then you can attempt to grapple or shove an opponent as a bonus action. Feat: Versatile Fighter - Increase your Strength score by 1, to a maximum of 20. - When attacking with a versatile weapon held...
    49 replies | 1995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Wednesday, 19th June, 2019, 06:24 PM
    jaelis replied to Human Viability
    All the same, I think you can try to objectively assess how different mechanics compare. IMO gnomes are just fine balancewise, but standard humans are a bit weak. I'd say standard tieflings are weaker, and I have no problem with all the variant tiefling versions that have been published. The variant human is of course strong, but only works if you are using feats. You don't need to worry about...
    21 replies | 1042 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Wednesday, 19th June, 2019, 01:35 PM
    Oops thought this would be a thread about defeating Zuggtmoy :) But on the topic, Ive always wanted to try a bard based grappler as a luchador.
    4 replies | 272 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Tuesday, 18th June, 2019, 08:09 PM
    jaelis replied to Human Viability
    I also think this is a fine adjustment. Another alternative is to use the variant human stats but say the feat has to be the Prodigy feat from XGTE. That is pretty reasonable too.
    21 replies | 1042 view(s)
    3 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Tuesday, 18th June, 2019, 02:46 PM
    Sounds like a good premise for a play-by-post experiment :)
    81 replies | 4501 view(s)
    0 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Tuesday, 18th June, 2019, 02:13 PM
    Cool maneuver's I'd like to see: - Leaping attack (jump over a monster and hit it from above) - Whirlwind attack (attack all monsters w/in 5 feet, dealing some amount of damage) - Ranged reaction attack (not sure how to trigger though) - Ijatsu strike (draw your weapon and attack) - Crippling blow (reduce opponent's speed temporarily)
    76 replies | 3263 view(s)
    3 XP
  • jaelis's Avatar
    Tuesday, 18th June, 2019, 02:02 PM
    I think people are reading more into the Sage Advice tweets than warranted. All I see is an answer from Mike Mearls: So first that is Mearls not Crawford, and second it is not directly about attacks. The plain text of tremorsense says "A monster with tremorsense can detect and pinpoint the origin of vibrations within a specific radius, provided that the monster and the source of the...
    19 replies | 953 view(s)
    0 XP
No More Results
About jaelis

Basic Information

Date of Birth
July 26, 1969 (49)
About jaelis
About Me:
Physicsy
Location:
C'ville

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
2,607
Posts Per Day
0.63
Last Post
Finesse rebalance Today 05:23 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
14
General Information
Last Activity
Today 08:14 PM
Join Date
Wednesday, 13th February, 2008
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0

1 Friend

  1. dwayne dwayne is offline

    Member

    dwayne
Showing Friends 1 to 1 of 1
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Monday, 15th July, 2019


Sunday, 14th July, 2019


Friday, 12th July, 2019


Thursday, 11th July, 2019


Wednesday, 10th July, 2019


Tuesday, 9th July, 2019


Sunday, 7th July, 2019


Saturday, 6th July, 2019


Thursday, 4th July, 2019



Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Thursday, 23rd May, 2019

  • 09:20 PM - Oofta mentioned jaelis in post Incorporeal Movement
    That too is a confusing part, because the ghost is only resistant to weapon attacks. So it is semi-solid so that a sword *can* damage it. I'm with jaelis on this one. The fact that an incorporeal creature is slowed to half speed walking through a sword means that it is interacting with it, just not as much as a normal (corporeal) creature.

Friday, 21st December, 2018

  • 08:30 PM - TaranTheWanderer mentioned jaelis in post Dispute about Rings of Elemental Command
    I don't know if this is helpful but, in previous editions, it differentiated "Elementals of the plane to which the ring is attuned can't attack or even approach within 5 feet of the wearer. If the wearer desires, he may forego this protection and instead attempt to charm the elemental (saving throw applicable with a -2 penalty to the die). If the charm fails, however, total protection is lost and no further attempt at charming can be made, but the secondary properties given below will then function with respect to the elemental." and "Creatures, other than normal elementals, from the plane to which the ring is attuned attack with -1 penalties to their attack rolls" (emphasis mine) Which leaves me to believe that, if they are trying to make it similar to how it's been traditionally, jaelis has the correct interpretation.

Wednesday, 4th July, 2018

  • 04:17 AM - Maxperson mentioned jaelis in post Would you allow this?
    ...ying that, to refer to both the role-playing and the other thing as role-playing is to confuse the term. Okay, great, but who here said that they were both roleplaying? Not me. I've been telling you that they were different for quite some time now. He's doing two distinct things: role-playing, and something else. He's making decisions as his character would make them (which is role-playing), and he's inventing details about the setting beyond the purview of what his character can actually control (which is a different activity, that is not role-playing). The distinction is important to maintain, since the whole reason I would disallow the scenario in question is because of the something else. I run games where players only role-play, and never do that other thing. Without having sufficient language to distinguish between the two, there is no way to get my point across. Agreed, but in this thread this is a problem of your own devising. I don't recall anyone but you and perhaps @jaelis confusing the two, and I think you confused him with your responses to me. :p

Saturday, 23rd June, 2018

  • 02:40 AM - mrpopstar mentioned jaelis in post Super Simple Armor
    jaelis this gives back to the rogue (because I don't truly harbor Dex any ill will), captures everything a boil down needs to capture for me, takes most everything offered for consideration in the thread into account, and gets buy-in from Saelorn, so, I'm feeling pretty good about it. :) I'll update the first post to reflect my thinking. Most burning question: Should things be listed as "light masterwork armor" or "masterwork light armor" ? Armor Armor Class (AC) Strength Stealth Light Armor 11 + Dex modifier -- Disadvantage Light Masterwork Armor 12 + Dex modifier -- -- Medium Armor 14 + Dex modifier (max 2) -- Disadvantage Medium Masterwork Armor 15 + Dex modifier (max 2) -- -- Heavy Armor 16 Str 13 Disadvantage Heavy Masterwork Armor 18 Str 15 Disadvantage Shield +2 -- --

Thursday, 7th June, 2018

  • 11:06 PM - Gardens & Goblins mentioned jaelis in post College of Glamour - Mantle of Inspiration movement fluff
    It says it "enthralls your allies with vigor and speed." So, they momentarily become faster. It's the same dodging ducking and weaving, essentially. Good call - so yes, a burst of speed ninja-like speed. And as jaelis suggests, perhaps the enemy are distracted, at least enough to miss their attacks of opportunity. I'll mix them - playing it/portraying it as surge of otherworldly energy the energises friends and offset foes. Thank you good people!

Monday, 7th May, 2018

  • 04:30 PM - Gadget mentioned jaelis in post Question on Illusory Dragon, Sickening Radiance, and Maddening Darkness spells
    ...th True Sight as having successfully made the investigation check and having advantage on the save vs Breath. Sickening Radiance - The wording of the spell indicates that the creature only needs to make a saving throw when it enters the spells area the first time or starts in the area to avoid damage, exhaustion, and negation of invisibility benefits. Does that indicate that the creature can travel through the spells area without needing to make more saving throws to avoid taking any further damage or levels of exhaustion. Is that correct? Yes, if they made the first ST when entering the area or starting their turn there, and they have enough movement to make it outside the area of the spell by the end of the their turn. Maddening Darkness - It states that "light created by spells of 8th level or lower can't illuminate the area." But the Sunburst spell states that "This spell dispels any darkness in the area that was created by a spell." Which takes precedence. I think jaelis has the right of it here. Since Sunburst is instantaneous, it can dispel the Madding Darkness without illuminating the area. This is a nice compromise between two equal level spells as targets within the Madding Darkness area will not be subject to the Sunburst effects, but the Madding Darkness will be dispelled.

Saturday, 31st March, 2018

  • 12:19 AM - Kobold Boots mentioned jaelis in post Greataxe, greatsword, and a little math
    I hate this suggestion for 5e. Maybe for a new rpg but not for D&D IMO Considering it's an amalgam of 1e, and 3e with the exception of the single damage die and use of feats for real effects, I chuckled at this. I do respect your tastes and opinion though. Just know that any solution that keeps different weapons at different damage die isn't going to solve the issue. Averages won't change. Single base damage die with character skill will. Especially since the larger base damage die doesn't prevent any weapon from doing 1 point of damage. Far more interested in @jaelis 's opinion.

Thursday, 29th March, 2018


Wednesday, 28th March, 2018

  • 02:20 PM - Coroc mentioned jaelis in post The best solution for longswords
    jaelis #220 I disagree partially, Yaarel has at least found a solution for the Dilemma by houseruling it. Let us formulate the key Points of the Topic one more time: 1. Long sword wielded 2 handed (versatile) is inferior to other 2 handed weapons especially for GWM, unless of course you are using a shield from time to time. 2. Elves and Rogues are per Default proficient in Longsword but both are often Dex heavy, which makes Finesse Qualities of 5E redundant/ in oposition to this proficiency. So we want to resolve that as Close to RAW as possible: For 1. i see no easy way out, other than those fluff houserules i did post in several postings above. (Remember fluff does not alter game mechanics) For 2. and staying Close to RAW the only solution i see is give rogues and elves rapier proficiency instead of Long sword (ok rogues already got that). For those arguing that i take away something by this, keep in mind that no elf warrior is barred from putting Points in strength an...

Monday, 26th March, 2018

  • 08:54 AM - Coroc mentioned jaelis in post The best solution for longswords
    jaelis #158 6 Pounds is the weight of a 16th century bidenhaender = greatsword of the Landsknechts (Length up to 6 ft) A normal Longsword (for 2 handed use) would not exceed 3-4 Pounds, especially if designed to be used 1 handed occasionally. Still both are not Finesse weapons, and a very unfitting weapon for slim elves except you want to imagine your character looking like those grotesque comical figures in some MMORPGs aka "where is the sword running with the gnome?"

Friday, 23rd March, 2018

  • 03:02 PM - Coroc mentioned jaelis in post The best solution for longswords
    jaelis except Gygax did not define the Longsword other than with its stats though and the case is resolved really easy: introduce a arming sword / side sword / broadsword aka sword which is 1 handed only and does 1d8 slashing. And no it does not Need to have Finesse, but it will not hurt the game Balance if you allow it. Of course your elves or rogues get proficiency with it. Keep the longsword as it is and rename it bastard sword. Rename Great sword as Long sword. That way you are historically accurate and did not hurt anything in terms of game balance or availability. I really agree on armor though: There ain't no such thing like leather armor, especially studded leather armor, and ring mail is not a thing to exist. There was an armor called Cuirboulis or so which was hardened by oil cooking, very thick breastplate made of leather, but your nowadays Heavy metal / Gothic / BDSM Outfit is just fashion Accessoire, which got nothing to do with armor and will never work as such. In f...

Thursday, 8th March, 2018

  • 06:37 PM - lowkey13 mentioned jaelis in post Disintegrate Vs. Druid
    Oh. No. Not this thread again. :) jaelis has already, and correctly, noted that this was addressed in Sage Advice, so there's that. The more interesting question is WHAT POWERS OF NECROMANCY DOES IT TAKE TO BRING BACK THE DUSTED DRUID AFTER TWO YEARS??!!??!!

Sunday, 4th March, 2018

  • 07:48 PM - Harzel mentioned jaelis in post Teleport and Detect Thoughts
    I would not let Detect Thoughts result in anything better than "Seen Casually"; if Salida is indeed concentrating to 'help' the wizard see the location, then I'd say at least "Viewed Once", and probably "Seen Casually". As jaelis noted, Salida having an object from Omu could avoid the question entirely, although it would be nice to allow the wizard to feel clever for thinking of using Detect Thoughts.

Thursday, 1st March, 2018

  • 07:19 PM - Ovinomancer mentioned jaelis in post Distract drop invisibility?
    ..., usually with a weapon, and a monster makes such an attack with a body part unless otherwise called out. In other words, it's a different logical basis for argument and not a reductio of the one used for attack and invisibility. The purpose of this is to say 'see, I can twist things, too!' The problem is that those making the attack argument are not twisting anything -- they are saying that the exemplary definition of attack in the rules is not exclusive, and they refer to past iterations of the rule to show agreement with their thinking. Which set of supporting evidence are you using for melee attacks? But, even that said, I really don't see a huge problem with allowing a dragon (or dragonborn) to use their breath weapon as an OA. I don't see anything that breaks, it's flavorful, and it punches up those abilities in ways I actually like (dragonborn breath attacks are weak, and dragons can always stand to be more terrifying). My comment, while you're correct I didn't believe jaelis would play that way, wasn't facetitous in that I really don't have any problem whatsoever with that ruling, and I might even use it myself with some more thought. The Mirror Image discussion started with me saying I have not issues with Magic Missile interacting like that. Both of these example show that even attempting to reductio ad absurdum the problem doesn't actually lead to absurd outcomes. They may not be outcomes you like, but they're not absurd.
  • 06:32 PM - Ovinomancer mentioned jaelis in post Distract drop invisibility?
    Well I would encourage you to talk to others about how they read it, and maybe tweet JC, and see how many people have a "twisted" reading. Point being, you're trying to disparage the your opposing side and then walking away. What kind of impression do you think that leaves people? Disparage? I'm sorry, but jaelis said he was intentionally twisting words to make his argument, and you were agreeing with him, so how can I disparage you for saying that you were doing what you said you were doing?! Seriously, I'm at a loss, here.

Thursday, 15th February, 2018

  • 10:48 PM - SkidAce mentioned jaelis in post Draft Rune Magic Feat
    jaelis , here is the final(tm) version. :D Rune Magic Feat Prerequisite: The ability to cast at least one spell You gain the ability to inscribe a spell with the range of touch or self into a rune as a ritual (10 minutes). You may only have your spellcasting modifier number of runes active at a time. Any unused inscribed runes expire after a long rest. Spend a spell you have prepared to bind it to a rune. You must supply any required material components, and the spell must have a casting time of one action. You can later activate the rune as a bonus action. You may choose a creature other than yourself when you create the rune. That creature can use an action to activate the rune by touching it or speaking its name aloud. In either case, the creature must be within 10 feet of the rune, whether it is inscribed on an object or a surface. The activating character makes all decisions about how the spell behaves, but it uses your spell DC, attack modifier, and level for...

Wednesday, 14th February, 2018

  • 07:42 PM - SkidAce mentioned jaelis in post Draft Rune Magic Feat
    Revision jaelis Rune Magic Feat Prerequisite: The ability to cast at least one spell You gain the ability to inscribe a rune as a ritual (10 minutes). You can have your spellcasting modifier of runes at a time. Spend a spell you have prepared to bind it to a rune. You must supply any required material components, and the spell must have a casting time of one action. You or a person you designate can later activate the rune as an action (bonus?), just as if you had cast the spell. The activating character makes all decisions about how the spell behaves, but it uses your spell DC, attack modifier, and level for resolution. If you are level 5+, you can scribe a rune as a trap, in which case it functions exactly like a glyph of warding (at level 3) I don't want a rune scribed onto an item to be any harder for a character to use than a potion or scribed scroll, so I do not prefer attunement to be involved. Its also okay to be a "little" powerful, as its not for publication.
  • 03:58 AM - SkidAce mentioned jaelis in post Draft Rune Magic Feat
    jaelis My goal is to create a mechanism by which one time use runes can be put on places, weapons, armor, other people etc. So like a "Cure Wounds" rune cast on the fighter that can be activated later as needed. Or a "Fog Cloud" cast in a hallway as a minor "trap". I thought using Glyph of Warding as a template would reduce rules bloat. Back to the drawing board.
  • 01:41 AM - mrpopstar mentioned jaelis in post Homebrew cantrips
    jaelis these are fun spells!


Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
No results to display...
Page 1 of 60 123456789101151 ... LastLast

Monday, 15th July, 2019

  • 05:43 PM - Blue quoted jaelis in post Death and 0 Max HP
    I think that's a sound argument, but debatable because it is a bit of a tangle of specific and general rules. (For instance, cure wounds can't heal you above your hp max, but that is due to the general rule.) But for the purpose of this argument, I'm willing to assume that the hp max reduction takes precedence over the spell. I am as well in 5e. I was more saying that I enjoyed that there was that guidance in which way to make ruling which could have been helpful.
  • 04:51 PM - Blue quoted jaelis in post Death and 0 Max HP
    What effect? The hit point reduction. So until you take a long rest, your hit point maximum is zero. The fact that you die when your hp max is reduced to zero is not a status effect, it is just something that happens when you get bit. You seem to be reading it as, "The target dies if its hit point maximum is zero due to this effect." But that is not what it says. One concept from an earlier edition of D&D was specific overrides general. If that's the case, the specific of the spell returning at 1 HP should overcome the general rule that HPs can not exceed max HPs.
  • 03:26 PM - dnd4vr quoted jaelis in post Death and 0 Max HP
    Yes, granted, the raised creature is still at 0 hp. (Though this is in fact debatable since the vampire condition and the raise dead spell conflict, and its not obvious which should have priority.) Good, you agree the raised creature still has a maximum 0 hp (well, you don't say maximum, but I have to assume you mean that because otherwise the Raise Dead would restore the raised creature to 1 hp, and you said 0). Now you do think this is debatable, so until you decide to argue for Raise Dead over the vampire condition, I have to disagree with your next assessment: No, that is wrong. The effect of the bite is to kill you when the bite occurs, not to keep you dead if you are later revived. It says "The target dies if this effect reduces its hit point maximum to 0." Well, the effect reduced the target's hit point maximum, and it died. The rule took effect, did what it said, and now it is done. There's nothing here that says the target will die again in the future if its hp maximum is still ze...
  • 02:37 PM - dnd4vr quoted jaelis in post Death and 0 Max HP
    Just from a rules lawyering perspective, "The target dies if this effect reduces its hit point maximum to 0" is a trigger, not a status effect. At the moment the vampire reduces the hp maximum to zero, the target dies. If the target is later raised, then even it it remains at 0 hp, the "die when you are reduced to zero" no longer applies because the triggering condition was not met. There is no general rule that you instantly die whenever your hp maximum is zero. "The reduction lasts until the target finishes a Long Rest." The triggering condition is still present until a long rest is completed, which the corpse cannot do because, well, it is a corpse. If you raised the target, which is still at maximum 0 hit points due to the vampire bite, it would simply die again immediately since that is the effect of the vampire bite. The effect of the triggering condition is why our DM is ruling Greater Restoration is required (to restore the loss of hit points from the vampire bite) and it will have...
  • 12:13 AM - Sword of Spirit quoted jaelis in post Death and 0 Max HP
    This is the spot where I would go with rulings (and IMO RAI) over rules. Absolutely. I figured Id have to come up with a ruling (though for me it wouldnt be to allow greater restoration to work on a dead body, because that breaks a greater rule than alternative options in my mind), but after a closer examination realized that it actually can work as a fairly strong interpretation of RAW if greater restoration follows rather than precedes the raise dead. Although this twitter thread suggests Crawford would play it as you suggest, cast GR right after raise dead. Yeah. Not completely the same, but really close.

Sunday, 14th July, 2019

  • 09:44 PM - Sword of Spirit quoted jaelis in post Can Gentle Repose extend the timelimit for Revivify?
    Why not assume that gentle repose keeps the soul nearby? Explains why they cant become undead. That could work metaphysically, but Id probably still not go with it because it makes it easier than Id like to come back from the dead.
  • 05:49 PM - dnd4vr quoted jaelis in post Death and 0 Max HP
    Do note that you can cast gentle repose again before the first casting expires. That helps with time pressure. Yeah, we finished the session with Gentle Repose cast and having returned to the manor at the village. One of the characters has a Giant Eagle steed, so we are thinking of placing the corpse (which is under 5 feet tall luckily) into our bag of holding and sending him ahead to the closest major city, where he has the best chance of finding a cleric high enough in level to save her. The rest of the party will follow as quickly as possible. We don't like splitting up, but it seems our best bet. While I think RAW there is nothing wrong with repetitive castings of Gentle Repose, I doubt our DM would allow it. We already house-ruled revivify because it is OP as is. He likes death to be an actual issue in the game. :) For those who are interested, I will give a quick recap. The character's max hp was already greatly reduced by the wraiths we faced before the vampire. Two punches knocked ...

Saturday, 13th July, 2019

  • 01:57 AM - nobody69.420 quoted jaelis in post Monk Tortle
    I don't think that anyone was suggesting tortle monks should be disallowed? I whole-heartedly agree. Tortle Monks wouldn't be a teenage mutant ninja turtle, that would have to be a Tortle Rogue. And a Tortle Monk is just a good combination of class and race, and I don't think any classes or races should be disallowed for any reason, regardless of the circumstance.

Thursday, 11th July, 2019

  • 11:23 PM - jgsugden quoted jaelis in post Monk Tortle
    Which abilities depend on dexterity?You do not have a PHB? Putting aside AC and attack elements... Deflect Missiles (damage you an reduce, ranged attack roles if you spend the Ki) Evasion is highly impacted. Certain Tradition Abilities. Also, the traditional things that are important to a melee combatant - high initiative to get into position, for example.
  • 11:07 PM - ad_hoc quoted jaelis in post Monk Tortle
    IMO, tortle is totally a powergaming choice for monks. It solves the hard problems of the class, that it is very MAD and lacks armor. Yes they have offseting abilities, but tortles still have those abilities, plus a better AC. Arguably, monk is the "best" class for a tortle to play. If they play a fighter, then they really are wasting their shell ability, since they could just wear armor instead. If they play a wizard, they are wasting their stat bonus. So I don't think tortle monks need any compensation for anything... they are already ahead of the game. Land Druid is very good for a Tortle (and themed!)
  • 10:48 PM - jgsugden quoted jaelis in post Monk Tortle
    IMO, tortle is totally a powergaming choice for monks. It solves the hard problems of the class, that it is very MAD and lacks armor. Yes they have offseting abilities, but tortles still have those abilities, plus a better AC. Arguably, monk is the "best" class for a tortle to play...I expect your opinion would be in the minority.[EDIT: Apparently I am wrong. I tried finding some stats and monk is common for Tortles on D&D Beyond, although that may be inflated by people making their TMNT dream characters for giggles.] If focused on utility for a character expected to be played for a prolonged time, I would rather play a cleric, barbarian, fighter, druid, or paladin as a Tortle. Further, if you built a Tortle cleric and a Wild elf cleric and compared them over time, Ithink you'd find that there is a gross advantage for the elf over time. I dont disagree with much of what youve laid out jgsugden. But I would say that having a higher than normal AC at levels 1-3 increases survivability ...
  • 08:22 PM - Blue quoted jaelis in post Monk Tortle
    Just my two bits, but if I were the DM, I would say no and counter with the fact that you are bypassing one of the main limitations of the monk class, that it can't wear armor :) Agreed. Especially if you are using the Tortle +2 STR and going STR Monk - something you can do just fine if you don't need DEX for armor.
  • 04:10 AM - TarionzCousin quoted jaelis in post Saving Throws and non-proficiency
    Would you do the same for monsters, or is it more of a the pcs are special kind of thing?"Special: Heroic" or "Special: Short Bus"? Nearby Paladins They're always lurking around corners. Don't they have something else to do, someplace else to be?
  • 02:07 AM - gyor quoted jaelis in post Should Baldur's Gate 3 be turnbased or Real Time With Pause?
    I like turn based. But I think real time is more popular, and it probably makes sense to cater to the majority if you want the game to be successful. Well so far Turn Based is beating RTwP 2 to 1, with 3 people saying hybrid. Small number of votes so far admitted. But the last two games of Larian's, were turn based and they made way more money then Pathfinder: Kingmaker and Pillars of Eternity 2 (not that these did bad at all, great games). Divinity: Original Sin 2 made so much money it's shocking, 85 million dollars in 2017 alone (if the game made even half as much in 2018 then it made well over a hundred million dollars) to become one of the most profitable games of that year. And the 2 original sin games and the upcoming divinity: fallen heroes are all turn based. It was so successful, that seeing Larian's success lead to Pillar's of Eternity 2 was made to be playable in turnbased mode as well. So yeah Larian has already lead to expectations that RTwP vs turn-based wil...
  • 01:25 AM - MarkB quoted jaelis in post Should Baldur's Gate 3 be turnbased or Real Time With Pause?
    I like turn based. But I think real time is more popular, and it probably makes sense to cater to the majority if you want the game to be successful. There have been some pretty popular turn-based games in recent years. Aside from traditional RPGs like Larian's existing Divinity Original Sin games, there are tactical combat games like XCOM, and a whole host of successful JRPGs. WotC chose to work with Larian due to their RPG pedigree, and it seems very likely that their successful implementation of turn-based combat was part of that.

Wednesday, 10th July, 2019

  • 05:12 PM - DMZ2112 quoted jaelis in post A Reliable Talent for Expert Stealth
    Oh my gods, six pages. Thank you all for taking the time to respond. 75% success against a garden-variety monster, under adverse conditions, seems pretty reasonable to me. If you want to have a particularly alert guard, you can give it proficiency, or even expertise, in perception. You are not wrong, but this is not in line with your original proposal. You said that high-level rogues should have the chance to sneak when no one else could. I agree with that idea, but that is not what this is. This is a high-level rogue having a chance to be detected when anyone else would be detected as a matter of course. To actually get to the point where such a rogue feels challenged, the monster would require a truly ridiculous bonus to their roll, well in excess of +10. Seems you have a good handle on it and don't need my advice. Enjoy it! I hope I didn't shut you down, Ovinomancer; I have a tendency to speak in absolutes that is easily interpreted as a lack of interest in discussion. I'm not...

Tuesday, 9th July, 2019

  • 11:03 PM - cbwjm quoted jaelis in post Saving Throws and non-proficiency
    Would you do the same for monsters, or is it more of a the pcs are special kind of thing?More of a PCs are special kind of thing as the heroes of the story. Monsters will retain their current saving throws.
  • 09:02 PM - abe ray quoted jaelis in post Dancing lights variant
    It is funny but probably not as useful as the standard version :) How would you improve upon it then?
  • 05:28 PM - Garthanos quoted jaelis in post Diplomatic Inspiration / Leadership
    So to be clear, this is a 4e idea? Oh duh, I see the tag now. :p Some of my ideas do work in both contexts for instance one is a class feature for fighters called Battleready which allows fighters to have decent initiative most of the time (using mental attributes to represent planning and prediction and awareness so you are not actually - reacting - to the onset of battle, ie instead of using Dex). This is something that can be used without change in both games.

Monday, 8th July, 2019

  • 09:30 PM - DMZ2112 quoted jaelis in post A Reliable Talent for Expert Stealth
    1) don't confuse DCs with contested rolls -- rolling a 33 is not a Nearly Impossible challenge, even if it's pretty much a de facto one. Maybe I'm not understanding you, but the situation seems /worse/ with contested rolls. Most monsters can't beat a 20, and the rogue will roll a 23 more than half the time and higher the other half. 2) You don't challenge a rogue with stealth challenges at this point, except on rare occasion and then well telegraphed. They are really, really good at sneaking. If you apply the stealth rules reasonably, this is just very awesome and not an "I win button." As you note, you have to have the right conditions to hide, so it's not an all-the-time thing or should even be assumed -- and I'm generous with hiding opportunities. While I do on occasion design encounters in which hiding is unhelpful or impossible, generally speaking I come down the other way, on this: it /should/ be assumed. Denying the opportunity to hide has to be pretty carefully gauged, at lea...


Page 1 of 60 123456789101151 ... LastLast

jaelis's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites