View Profile: Madeiner - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
No Recent Activity
About Madeiner

Basic Information

Date of Birth
August 11, 1985 (33)

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
71
Posts Per Day
0.02
Last Post
How to change the "pinning down" mechanic? Wednesday, 28th February, 2018 01:22 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
5
General Information
Last Activity
Friday, 9th March, 2018 11:14 AM
Join Date
Sunday, 9th March, 2008
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0
No results to show...
No results to display...
No results to display...

Thursday, 21st May, 2015

  • 07:30 PM - Dausuul quoted Madeiner in post Anyone figured out math to remove extra attacks?
    Maybe a simple equation that allows for no-damage; half damage; or full damage (half/ full damage intended relative to the amount you would do with all possible attacks) Sure. Reduce all attack bonuses by 2. Then say that if you miss by 4 or less, you deal half damage. That will yield the same average damage, but with a middle ground between "all" and "none." Also consider eliminating the damage roll and using the average. (If you do this, I'd change the Great Weapon fighting style to give a flat +1 to damage.) All that said, I agree with the general sentiment that it's worth trying the game out as written before you start messing with it. The multiple attacks of 5E go a lot faster than the iterative attacks of 3E.
  • 09:04 AM - Li Shenron quoted Madeiner in post Anyone figured out math to remove extra attacks?
    Now, the easiest way would be ofc to roll just one d20 for however many attacks you have. You hit, you multiply your damage by the number of attacks you have. You miss, you miss everything. This however results in PCs dealing either 0 damage or a wholelot of damage with no middle ground. I would do exactly that, but instead of multiplying the damage you roll multiple dice. You still get approx the same sort of damage distribution "shape", except that 0 damage has a higher chance than before. If the minimum, the average, and the maximum are the same, I wouldn't worry about balance. But if you have some time to do the math, you can also check how much the variance changes.
  • 06:15 AM - FrogReaver quoted Madeiner in post Anyone figured out math to remove extra attacks?
    Hi there. One of the main reasons im switching over to 5e from PF is to speed up combat, and iterative attacks are what are slowing PF down so much (one of my players can do up to 8 attacks per round...) I see that even in 5e, higher level characters get two to four attacks per turn depending on conditions. I'd love a simple, yet balanced, way to remove those extra attacks to speed up combat even more, while also keeping the same expected damage output. Now, the easiest way would be ofc to roll just one d20 for however many attacks you have. You hit, you multiply your damage by the number of attacks you have. You miss, you miss everything. This however results in PCs dealing either 0 damage or a wholelot of damage with no middle ground. Is there a "nicer" solution (again, i want the simplest thing possible) that allows for a middle ground? Maybe a simple equation that allows for no-damage; half damage; or full damage (half/ full damage intended relative to the amount you would d...
  • 04:31 AM - quoted Madeiner in post Anyone figured out math to remove extra attacks?
    I worked some more math and finally found the formula that would allow me to do this. In doing that, i realized it's probably just as fast as having multiple attack, especially when i have to adjudicate all those things. (Sneak attack came to mind, where the rogue is more interested in having at least one attack hit, then in anything else) The formula, for whoever is interested from a purely academic standpoint, is easy: Add N to an attack roll. For example, 5. Note 2 different ACs for monster; The normal AC, and its AC + N (AC + 10 is easy to remember, if you use N=5) Rewrite attacks on the sheet so that based on the amount of attacks you do with a single action, you deal different damage. If you have two attacks, you do 1x damage on AC hit, and x2 amount on AC+10 hit. If you have three attacks, you do 1.5x damage on AC hit, and x3 damage on AC+10 hit. Etcetera. However, all things considered (having reaction use different damage or modifier than an attack action, for exampl...
  • 02:50 AM - Tony Vargas quoted Madeiner in post Anyone figured out math to remove extra attacks?
    Yeah i reckon its still going faster than pathfinder. Most likely - though, if you don't push past the 3.5 obsession with 'RAW,' it might not speed up that much. Once your group is accustomed to taking off the cuff D&D rulings in stride instead of wrangling over the rules, you can enjoy the speed benefits (among other things) and 5e can be a lot of fun. However, that's a change i would still like try, at least in theory, if only to see if it's feasible. It's not an easy variant. Multiple attacks are key to the DPR power of the Fighter and fighter-like half-casters, and the Fighter has nothing else of note going for it. It'd almost be easier to do away with multiple attacks by doing away with the classes that depend on them. You'd have plenty of classes left.
  • 01:45 AM - Celtavian quoted Madeiner in post Anyone figured out math to remove extra attacks?
    Yeah i reckon its still going faster than pathfinder. However, that's a change i would still like try, at least in theory, if only to see if it's feasible. For now, with my limited math skills, i have discovered that If i add an (arbitrarily decided) +N to hit to an attack roll, and have two attacks per round, i can hit normal AC to inflict 1 hit worth of damage, or hit AC+2N to inflict two hits worth of damage, and the average damage stays the same. For an higher N, you get a more "belly" curve. For N=0, you get that you either miss, or hit for double damage. I'll try to scale it for multiple attacks and see if i can do it. There's probably a better formula... Are you still going to let them move and attack multiple creatures? And will you still allow them Bonus Action and Reaction Attacks? Some classes rely on multiple attacks like the monk and fighter. Did you spend time thinking about the following: 1. The Fighter is the only class that ever gets more than two attacks ...

Wednesday, 20th May, 2015

  • 11:58 PM - GX.Sigma quoted Madeiner in post Is 5e still full of Save or Dies?
    How do you guys deal with that? I'm really curious. Also, anywhere i can find a list of these kind of abilities so that i can ban/fix them for my playstyle? Solution to this problem: Have the players tell you what spells they want. If one of them seems like it won't fit in the style of game you want to run, tell them that and have them pick a different one. Meta-solution to the meta-problem: Frame expectations and options before and during character creation. Create characters together, not in isolation.
  • 07:03 PM - Saelorn quoted Madeiner in post Is 5e still full of Save or Dies?
    How would you solve this, providing that we all like this playstyle?You are going to have difficulties, because 5E isn't really designed for that style. Balance is supposed to take place over the course of 4-12 encounters in a day, which is why it's not game-breaking for a Wizard to neutralize one or two of those at the expense of a high-level spell slot. The DMG includes guidelines for changing the effective length of the combat day. Instead of telling you how to balance characters against only having one encounter in a day, though, it suggests you re-define the conditions under which the party recovers resources. For example, you could use something like a milestone method, where the party gains the benefit of a short rest after every two encounters (even if they're a week apart), and the benefit of a long rest after four encounters. Or you could say that a long rest can only be completed once per week, and requires you to be in town, so the characters need to manage their resources by tak...
  • 05:32 PM - FormerlyHemlock quoted Madeiner in post Is 5e still full of Save or Dies?
    Simulacrum seems to have the same issue for me. I read the forums and people talk about a simulacrum army. I don't really understand what's that supposed to me. Reading the spell, i know i'd never allow more than one simulacrum anyway, under any circumstances. But still, even ONE simulacrum is a problem for me, because it doubles someone's power. If the encounter was carefully balanced for a party of four, having a fifth level 14 member will skew the balance, and guess what? I either design encounter for a party of five (for a net difference of 0 for this ability for which a PC has spent resources) OR i don't take it into account and guess what? An encounter designed for four people that actually has 5, is over as soon as it begins. How do you guys deal with that? I'm really curious. I deal with it by not even pretending to balance encounters for the party. (I never know which PCs are going to be in use on a given night anyway.) Whether it's a single CR 5 Roper in a cave, or a gigantic d...
  • 02:10 PM - EzekielRaiden quoted Madeiner in post Encumbrance
    There is immediately a "bug" that i can think of; a 8-str wizard carrying a staff around. Is a staff heavy? Surely you can't cram 8 staves on your person. An 8-str character gets 0 heavy items allowed. Should 1 be allowed at a minimum? Well, something that immediately sticks out to me is: why are you excluding the things you actually do carry around, literally in hand? That is, you're not counting the weight of worn armor, yet you are counting the weight of "wielded" weapons and shields. That seems strange to me! Why not count each piece of "equipped" gear as excluded? That gets around the "why can't a wizard lift his staff" problem without creating the "why can the wizard carry twelve staves without penalty" problem: the one staff actually "in hand" (or stowed, when needing both hands free) doesn't count, but any EXTRA weapons would. To simplify issues of "multiple simultaneous-use items," e.g. sword-and-board or TWF, a character proficient in such stuff would consider sword-and-board (or tw...
  • 01:30 PM - I'm A Banana quoted Madeiner in post Is 5e still full of Save or Dies?
    Thanks for your input :) This is one thing that differs from my playstyle. And probably the source of my problems. I've never in my life had 6 encounters in one day, except when running the very-rare dungeon adventure (happened like three times in 7 years) I will have ONE single, very difficult and carefully balanced encounter requiring multiple layers of strategy and designed to shut down character abilities one by one and designed to be overcome by exploiting one of two specific weaknesses of the encounter, usually only after having to use resources on actually finding the vulnerability or exposing it. That's....strategic. You can still do this in 5e, it'll just require some careful effort on your part to make it work (which it doesn't sound like you're really opposed to). One thing you might do - take a look at encounters with phases or waves: once you handle the guard animal, it calls in reinforcements, and once you've dealt with reinforcements the major guard arrives, etc. You ...

Madeiner's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites