View Profile: ExploderWizard - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
  • ExploderWizard's Avatar
    Saturday, 8th June, 2019, 12:33 PM
    The use of the word "blob" may be an indication that your paint is too thick. Most miniature paint needs to be thinned with water a bit before application to go on smooth. It is better to do two thin coats than one thick one.
    7 replies | 558 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ExploderWizard's Avatar
    Saturday, 1st June, 2019, 05:48 PM
    This is not a universal play style. D&D can be and has been played without improv acting and its associated buzzwords. While improv can be fun and not a wrong way to play if the group finds that most fun, it far from being the only way to run a game. There are those who still enjoy the game aspect of play which has nothing to do with crafting a narrative or stringing together a series of improv...
    106 replies | 3525 view(s)
    3 XP
  • ExploderWizard's Avatar
    Saturday, 1st June, 2019, 01:35 PM
    I have run this adventure in its native system and it was a blast. To really make the adventure click, the players have to really want to invest in their domains and see them grow and thrive. If you have a group that just wants to be wandering murderhobos forever this adventure will NOT be enjoyable. Domain management and the War Machine system were the best parts of the Companion rule set and...
    2 replies | 352 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ExploderWizard's Avatar
    Saturday, 1st June, 2019, 01:23 PM
    Ummm..... Zephyros perhaps? :lol:
    5 replies | 594 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ExploderWizard's Avatar
    Saturday, 1st June, 2019, 01:20 PM
    When it comes to the game world, it exists for the benefit of the players, and not necessarily for the PC's. The world is a creation crafted to serve the people at the table and it doesn't consider or care about the fictional characters that inhabit it. While the DM lays the groundwork of creating the world, it does not become a living, breathing place until there are players to interact with it....
    106 replies | 3525 view(s)
    3 XP
  • ExploderWizard's Avatar
    Monday, 27th May, 2019, 05:40 PM
    I have run the original adventure several times and haunted manor makes perfect sense being largely empty. The gang of smugglers need such a place for their hideout. It wouldn't make sense to have the manor's upper levels crammed with monsters, which would draw attention to the place, while the smugglers operating below are trying to keep a low profile. One way to add a bit of interest without...
    14 replies | 1214 view(s)
    0 XP
  • ExploderWizard's Avatar
    Thursday, 23rd May, 2019, 12:22 PM
    Are you kidding? The Forest Oracle provided so may laughs not to mention an epic thread here which provided more entertainment than any other module of similar page count. For pure entertainment value I give The Forest Oracle 5 stars!
    41 replies | 2243 view(s)
    0 XP
No More Results
About ExploderWizard

Basic Information

Date of Birth
November 27, 1969 (49)
About ExploderWizard
Introduction:
Looking for people interested in some old school gaming.
Location:
Fredericksburg
Disable sharing sidebar?:
No
Sex:
Male
Age Group:
Over 40

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
7,667
Posts Per Day
1.89
Last Post
Could use some help on painting skin tones.... Saturday, 8th June, 2019 12:33 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
6
General Information
Last Activity
Sunday, 16th June, 2019 12:24 PM
Join Date
Thursday, 15th May, 2008
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0

4 Friends

  1. Athinar Athinar is offline

    Member

    Athinar
  2. Eviltwinskippie Eviltwinskippie is offline

    Member

    Eviltwinskippie
  3. Hairfoot Hairfoot is offline

    Member

    Hairfoot
  4. YourSwordIsMine YourSwordIsMine is offline

    Member

    YourSwordIsMine
Showing Friends 1 to 4 of 4

Saturday, 8th June, 2019


Wednesday, 5th June, 2019


Monday, 3rd June, 2019


Sunday, 2nd June, 2019


Saturday, 1st June, 2019


Monday, 27th May, 2019


Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Tuesday, 9th January, 2018

  • 02:58 AM - robus mentioned ExploderWizard in post Enhancing "Rise of Tiamat" (Practical stuff to try at your table!)
    Eldarc - you asked for some crunch and of course you shoukd check out the Unearthed Arcana Mass Combat PDF: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?425122-Unearthed-Arcana-Mass-Combat-Rules But i also think ExploderWizard’s approach is very effective: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?471525-Tools-for-Running-Larger-Battles-Efficiently&p=6744493&viewfull=1#post6744493

Friday, 23rd June, 2017


Monday, 26th September, 2016

  • 06:02 PM - robus mentioned ExploderWizard in post How much punishment can a party take?
    When it comes time to run your battle I really like ExploderWizard's system proposed here: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?471525-Tools-for-Running-Larger-Battles-Efficiently&p=6744493&viewfull=1#post6744493 But there are lots of other good ideas in that thread (and much simpler than the system proposed by WotC)

Monday, 21st March, 2016

  • 05:31 PM - AaronOfBarbaria mentioned ExploderWizard in post Is there too much gold/reward?
    You're still not addressing the issue. If someone wants to play AL, they must stay inside of the rules. I'm trying to raise issue and discussion to make AL better (i.e. fix the broken economy) within that context. You're basically saying, "Take it or leave it". That's not helpful, and from an argumentative standpoint, this is an "is-ought" fallacy. I'm trying to make things better, not throw the baby out with the bath water. To use your language, I'm actually trying to come up with a solution to my shoulder hurts when I rock climb, not just admit defeat and not rock climb at all. But again this doesn't help players who want to stay in AL. You might as well just say, "Hey, why don't we play scrabble instead?". Suggesting non-AL as a fix for the AL economy problem isn't a solution for the AL economy problem.I agree with what ExploderWizard has said in reply to your quoted post. Also, if you are wanting Adventurer's League specific talk, you should probably post in the Adventurer's League section of the forum - putting a thread in the general 5th edition section makes it look like you are talking about 5th edition in general, where my comments are entirely appropriate answers to the issues you've raised.

Friday, 4th March, 2016

  • 12:39 AM - pemerton mentioned ExploderWizard in post How do your roleplay?
    ...ovide anywhere from 5% success per point (AD&D roll under stat resolution), to 5% per 2 points (everything in 5e), to considerably less than either of those (attack bonuses in AD&D). The difference between, say, 11 and 15 Strength is not nearly enough to mark one character as a totally ineffective driver of action. In your Tomb of Horrors play through summary you gave a series of examples of player skill. Spiking walls, recognizing a curse that inverted alignment and gender, etc. None of these are especially tied to stats. Creative players, prepared players, genre savvy players... These are all ways player skill can help a character to survive, and are independent of stats.I agree on STR and combat. An odd artefact of the percentile STR rules for fighters is that non-18 STR has a much lower mechanical impact on combat, saves etc than the comparable ranges of DEX, CON and WIS. On the ToH example: I think this relates to some of the points about changes in playstyle that ExploderWizard makes. In 2nd ed AD&D, much more than at the time ToH was first played, I think the GM is likely to call for a STR check to successfully hammer in spikes; for an INT check to notice that the cleric is not an anti-cleric; etc. Expectations around resolution and automatic success changed (and I think were changing even between 1975 and 1978 when the PHB was published). In a system where the GM "says yes" if the players articulate a credible plan, and doesn't call for dice rolls to see if the plan succeeds, stats are not really relevant. But (again to echo ExploderWizard, I think) once we get the thief class introduced and other similar changes in approach, that earlier style tends to drop away. (To clarify the relationship between this comment and the ToH example: the ToH example is meant to illustrate the importance of "making good moves"; but over time "good moves" involve stat checks because of broader changes in approaches to action resolution, making stats more central. Th...

Wednesday, 24th February, 2016


Saturday, 19th December, 2015

  • 07:54 AM - pemerton mentioned ExploderWizard in post Failing Forward
    ...hnique best-suited to scene-framing play, that is, play in which narrative dynamism is front-and-centre, and momentum is only rarely lost. Of course, in scene-framing play, the GM needs to listen to player action declarations: when the GM tells the player that the rattlesnake rears up in front of the PC, the player is expected to declare some action in response - ie they declare what it is that the PC does now. But in scene-framing play, the GM shouldn't be asking the players "What do you do now" as part of the process for transition between scenes. The GM should be framing the PCs (and therefore players) into the next confrontation. And flipping it around: if you're playing exploration/discovery/GM-world-building style, rather than scene-framing, then you don't need "fail forward", because it is completely fine for the game to come to a halt, for momentum to be lost, and for the GM to look to the players to kickstart things again. This is the sort of play that Lanefan and ExploderWizard are familiar with and prefer. It has very little in common with the Apocalypse World sort of play that Neonchameleon is mentioning in. And as I've tried to explain, the question "What do you do now?" is playing very different roles in the two approaches. Finally, anyone who thinks that scene-framing play is about railroading is suffering a fundamental misunderstanding. "Railroading' is about pre-determined events where choices don't matter. Scene-framing is about leaving everything open - events, the presence or absence of rattlensakes (or curses or tripwires or . . .) - until a new fictional situation is narrated by the GM in response to the events, context etc generated by the previous scene. Here are two links, to reports of my first and my most recent Burning Wheel session. Both involved use of "fail forward", as I've mentioned in more detail upthread. Read them and you'll see that neither was anything like a railroad. How can it be a railroad, for instance, to have the mace...

Wednesday, 4th November, 2015

  • 08:54 PM - iserith mentioned ExploderWizard in post Turning a boring trap into an exciting encounter.
    The trouble here is two-fold: First, the purpose of the die rolls is to obviate a requirement for narrative detail. Second, the descriptive method works for some die rolls and not for others, making it inherently unfair. Third, rewarding some players for narrative unfairly penalizes other players. @ExploderWizard covered much of what I would say in his or her response to you, but I thought the time you put into your response to me deserved a reply out of respect for your contribution. First, I would say that the purpose of die rolls and mechanics that call for them is to resolve uncertainty as to the outcome of the fictional action undertaken (if the DM establishes uncertainty at all), not to obviate a requirement for narrative detail. Second, the "descriptive method" works for everything the character does in the context of the setting. At the very least, a player must describe a goal and approach to dealing with a particular challenge. This is how the DM determines whether or not there is uncertainty and thus a roll. Flowery language is nice, but not required to communicate a goal and approach. The DM is well-advised to adjudicate based on the goal and approach only, regardless of the kind of language used. (Though a DM might award such interaction with Inspiration when it exemplifies an es...

Friday, 30th October, 2015

  • 09:13 PM - El Mahdi mentioned ExploderWizard in post Warlord Name Poll
    ...M @Aaron Of Barbaria; @AbdulAlhazred ; @admcewen ; @Aenghus ; @Ahrimon ; @Ainulindalion ; @airwalkrr; @Aldarc ; @akr71 ; @AmerginLiath ; @Andor ; @AntiStateQuixote ; @aramis erak; @Aribar ; @Arnwolf ; @Ashkelon ; @Ashrym ; @Athinar ; @AtomicPope ; @Azurewraith; @Azzy ; @Bawylie ; @bedir than ; @Bedrockgames ; @bert1000 ; @billd91 ; @Blackbrrd; @Blackwarder ; @Blue ; @Bluenose ; @brehobit ; @BryonD ; @Bupp ; @Campbell ; @CapnZapp; @CaptainConundrum ; @CaptainGemini ; @Carlsen Chris ; @casterblaster ; @CasvalRemDeikun; @cbwjm ; @ccooke ; @Celebrim ; @Celondon @ChameleonX ; @Charles Wright ; ChrisCarlson; @CM ; @cmad1977 ; @costermonger ; @Creamsteak ; @Crothian ; @Cybit ; @Dausuul; @Dayte ; @dd.stevenson ; @DEFCON 1 ; @Delazar ; @DersitePhantom ; @Diffan ; @discosoc; @D'karr ; @Doc Klueless ; @doctorbadwolf ; @DonAdam ; @Dragoslav ; @Duganson; @EdL ; @EditorBFG ; @Edwin Suijkerbuijk ; @Eejit ; @ehren37 ; @Elfcrusher ; @El Mahdi ; @epithet; @erf_beto ; @Eric V ; @eryndel ; @Evenglare ; @ExploderWizard ; @EzekielRaiden; @Fedge123 ; @fendak ; @FireLance ; @Fishing_Minigame ; @Flamestrike ; @FLexor the Mighty! ; @Forged Fury ; @Fragsie ; @Fralex ; @FreeTheSlaves ; @froth ; @Gadget; @Galendril ; @GameOgre ; @Garthanos ; @Ghost Matter ; @Giltonio_Santos ; @Gimul; @GMforPowergamers ; @Gnashtooth ; @Green1 ; @GreenKarl ; @Greg K ; @GreyLord; @Grimmjow ; @Grydan ; @GX.Sigma ; @Halivar ; @HEEGZ ; @Hemlock ; @Henry ; @Herobizkit; @Hussar; @IchneumonWasp ; @I'm A Banana ; @Imaro ; @Iosue ; @Irennan ; @JackOfAllTirades; @jacktannery ; @jadrax ; @Jaelommiss ; @JamesTheLion ; @JamesonCourage ; @JasonZZ; @jayoungr ; @JediGamemaster ; @JeffB ; @Jester Canuck ; @jgsugden ; @jodyjohnson; @Joe Liker ; @JohnLynch ; @Johnny3D3D ; @KarinsDad ; @kerbarian ; @kerleth ; @Kinak; @KingsRule77 ; @Kirfalas ; @Kobold Stew ; @koga305 ; @Lanefan ; @Lanliss ; @Leatherhead; @Libramarian ; @Li Shenron ; @LuisCarlos17f ; @lowkey13 ; @Manbearcat ; @MarkB; @MechaPilot ; @Mecheon ; @mellored ; @Mephista ; @Mercule ; @MG....

Sunday, 2nd August, 2015

  • 07:54 AM - pemerton mentioned ExploderWizard in post A case where the 'can try everything' dogma could be a problem
    Whether the GM decides that there is a box (or is not a box), that decision cannot possibly depend on whether or not the players ask, if the GM is to maintain the illusion of an objective reality. ExploderWizard already replied to this, though. Most of the time the GM won't have thought about whether or not there is a box, or broken furniture, or mould on the ceiling, or whatever it is that the player is asking about, until the player asks. So making a decision does depend on whether or not the player asks. If the content of the decision is shaped by the player asking, how does that undermine the illusion of an objective reality? From the point of view of the PC, the world simply is what it is. You, Saelorn, may have a preference that the GM dice in such situations, rather than choose, but that is a fact about you. My own experience tells me that it doesn't generalise universally. I'm not even sure that it is typical. For a GM to maintain neutrality - for the GM to avoid intentionally empowering or disempowering the players - the decision would need to be based on the GM's prior knowledge of the world, or else it would need to be determined randomly.I don't really see why I, as a ...

Monday, 29th June, 2015


Wednesday, 13th May, 2015

  • 06:56 PM - Halivar mentioned ExploderWizard in post How often do you fake it as a DM?
    ExploderWizard Absolutely. I keep #2 and #4 on hand at all times. When I use a name, I scratch it off and note it on my scratch sheet for inclusion in my "campaign bible" (a Google Doc with a cast of NPC's and current events).

Thursday, 7th May, 2015

  • 08:52 PM - pemerton mentioned ExploderWizard in post Character play vs Player play
    ...e to get the game moving. I can't remember what happened to the horses, but the PCs certainly never had anything to do with them! The other one I can think of is a PC being tasked by his god to recover a lost artefact (which turned out to be the Rod of Seven Parts), but that was the player's idea so probably doesn't fit your definition of a quest. A third one might have been when they went looking for the missing niece of the Baron, although it may be that they initiated that themselves - I can't remember now. In any event, in a game in which the players are taking the lead, the GM's agency is in interposing opposition and driving towards conflict. Whereas the players provide the dramatic motivations for their PCs. This does not give the GM any lack of agency, and has nothing much in common with computing. I guess I just like foreshadowing in my stories. I like stories that are unresolved but them pick up again later. I think a lot of people like foreshadowing (maybe not ExploderWizard). But that is fairly orthogonal to the current discussion. It possible to generate foreshadowing without using the sort of heavy-handed style that the adventure you've described does. Here is an example from my 4e game: * The PCs travel temporarily into the past, and while there rescue a young apprentice from the mirror in which her crazed master had trapped her; * Back in the present, the PCs see a series of family portraits on the wall of the Baron's hall - two of the women greatly resemble the rescued apprentice, although the one in the older portrait is quite a bit older than the apprentice was when she was rescued; * The PCs learn that the older woman (the apprentice aged 50-ish?) was the Baron's grandmother, and that the more recent portrait is of his niece, who (i) happens to be engaged to marry the Baron's advisor, whom the PCs know to be a secret Vecna-worhsipper, and (ii) happens to be missing; * The PCs track down the niece, thinking she's been kidnapped by u...

Thursday, 30th April, 2015

  • 08:11 AM - Hriston mentioned ExploderWizard in post How does alignment work in encounter reactions?
    ExploderWizard, thanks for your response. I was hoping I would hear from someone who had actually used these rules. I, like others, skipped over them in the past, and now that I am delving into them I can see why I, or others, might have thought they were too complicated to use, or at least undesirable since just role playing seems like an easier option. Unless magic was being employed, in my 1E games alignment is something that comes into play over time rather than a factor in a chance meeting. Thus there I don't use any modifier to the reaction roll purely for alignment. Does this mean you only checked reaction for chance meetings? I think it was in the Holmes rules that the reaction roll was presented only in the context of wandering monsters. I guess the assumption was that if the DM had placed a monster intentionally then its motivations and agenda had been worked out ahead of time. Was that the way you played it? There are exceptions (aren't there always?) If someone were to bravely ...

Wednesday, 22nd April, 2015

  • 05:02 AM - pemerton mentioned ExploderWizard in post Would you change a monster's hit points mid-fight?
    They can't do a bit of both?Sure, if that's what they want to do and what the table enjoys. ( Umbran made much the same point upthread.) My point is that not all tables play with the GM as magician (to continue my metaphor). I only take issue when perfectly valid forms of play are referred to as cheating or wrongI think that's fair, and that's why I disagreed with the label "cheating" (post 553 upthread), for much the same reasons as ExploderWizard did.

Wednesday, 15th April, 2015

  • 08:14 PM - Manbearcat mentioned ExploderWizard in post Would you change a monster's hit points mid-fight?
    ...t, then there isn't much more we can discuss. If you do accept it, we now only quibble over what tools are acceptable for what groups. I'm not really sure how we go from my post (which is specifically about GM subordinating player agency through the application of force) to your post (which asserts the trivially obvious; that GMs are inevitably going to have an impact on the trajectory of play due to all that goes into being a Games Master - reading players', hopefully, telegraphed cues of their thematic interests, framing of conflicts, playing the PCs' adversity, sorting out the fallout, making rulings in corner cases, etc) as a rebuttal. I mean no one would disagree with that general position. But just because GMs will inevitably have an impact on the trajectory of what emerges at the table, it doesn't mean that one can't qualitatively assess the immediate, and potential, impact of force upon player agency. There are two main types of player agency as I see it. The type that @ExploderWizard is advocating for and is present in all games of D&D. This is strategic/tactical player agency. The right to make informed strategic and tactical decisions and have play outcomes authentically be driven by them. Then there is thematic player agency. The right of a player to advocate for their PC's thematic interests/protagonism, whatever flavor that might take, and to make decisions/answer the bell when those thematic interests/that protganism is challenged during play...and have relevant play outcomes emerge authentically as a result of the player advocating for their PC. In either case, if the system's play procedures mandate that some form of fortune resolution is required to derive the outcome, then it is handled without force/manipulation. This ensures that the player's strategic/tactical/thematic agency in that particular situation is intact. That whatever immediate fallout, and latent knock-on fallout down the line, accrues (good or bad) is driven/earned by the player's c...

Sunday, 22nd February, 2015

  • 06:46 PM - Jester David mentioned ExploderWizard in post I believe the D&D boardgames actually hinder the table top game.
    And this is what WoTc doesn't seem to want to accept. They are trying to grow a product that is a small niche, to the point of possibly having their expectations too large. As ExploderWizard says, that's the point. You don't make more money if you only remain in your small niche. WotC is trying to expand out of their tiny hobby and into other venues. That means a little bit of overlap in audience, but that's not too bad since they're also not putting out waves of books at the same time. What about new customers? If you don't know the feeling of a good table top RPG then you wouldn't know the difference between a fantasy boardgame and D&D. Especially a D&D boardgame. D&D is one of those things that has to be played and experienced to really "get". Because it's so different. Explaining it is kinda hard. It's difficult to make the jump from standard board games (or video games) to D&D. The board games can make this transitory process easier, being a bridge. That's a good thing for those new customers.

Friday, 12th December, 2014

  • 07:23 AM - Iosue mentioned ExploderWizard in post Behind the design of 5th edition Dungeons and Dragons: Well my impression as least.
    ...chance. Take the reaction table. PC's never get better at monster reactions. Players, however, do; as they through trial and error and practical experience develop strategies that encourage the DM to give a bonus to the roll, if not do away with it altogether. PCs do get better at the raw probabilities of combat, mainly because players can never practically get better at that. Better at avoiding it, better at settings up favorably tactically or strategically, sure. But not better at literally surviving and winning at an exchange of blows. Consider mapping, both dungeon and wilderness hex mapping. Anyone who's played with a mapper can tell you that making the map takes up some time. But the mapper isn't just a metagame job for one particular person -- his character is mapping (remember, blurred lines), and the map represents the players' greater understanding of their surroundings, which maps (no pun intended) to the characters' understanding. I can't speak for Sacrosanct and ExploderWizard, but I suspect their games may resemble mine, where a lot of game is spent getting the map made, debating choices that need to be made, scouting ahead, racking our brains and brainstorming ways to search a room, tracking encumbrance and who's carrying what, and so on. This is the meat of the game. Straight up combat, OTOH, tends to be dispassionate die rolls; "AC 5." "Okay that's a hit." "7 points damage." "Okay, that goblin falls, dead." That's just resolution, and on the whole, I'm not in my character's head-space, not feeling what they're feeling and thinking what they're thinking. (Unless, of course, things go south, and both my character and I are going, "Oh crap, oh crap, OHH CRAAP! Run away! Run away!") So, even when you have 50% of encounters going to combat, that doesn't account for all the stuff that happens between the encounters, stuff that's as much part of the game as anything else. Our group may get into combat five times in a session, but only choose and buy ...

Thursday, 11th December, 2014

  • 02:48 PM - Mullerov mentioned ExploderWizard in post Using 'Versatile' bonus 1 handed
    ExploderWizard ok that would render my interpretation void unless I would have 2 shields but then that's bordering on cheating. Fair enough Ravenheart87 no need for trolling cheers ;-) Giltonio_Santos i'm not sure how it would be interfering with my action. Thinking realistically if I was running toward an enemy and slung my shield over my shoulder (i would imagine since I did this on a regular that I would have some sort of strap attached to it for easy slinging), grasped my hammer with both hands to smash my opponent in the face followed by me slinging my shield back around to ready myself for a counterstrike. That this wouldn't be some sort of unnatural movement. I'm guessing you mean that the 'combine' part means that it would happen simultaneously in which it would indeed be impossible but like you said everyone has their own interpretation. pming this is the exact reason I wanted to ask people their opinions on this. But I guess you're right that if something seems too good to be true ...

Monday, 20th October, 2014

  • 01:11 AM - Hussar mentioned ExploderWizard in post The Case for a Magic Item Shop?
    I suppose Goldmoon should have told her companions to sod off she was staying home because she was gimped because the true gods had been forgotten. :erm: This is a very bad example ExploderWizard. The Goldmoon character in the modules was an NPC, typically, AND had spells provided to her through a magical staff from the very first session. At no point was Goldmoon bereft of clerical magic. By the end of the first adventure (and it's actually earlier than that) she has full clerical abilities. Slightly different than being stripped of your class schtick for extended periods of time through no fault of your own.


Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
No results to display...
Page 1 of 87 123456789101151 ... LastLast

Saturday, 1st June, 2019

  • 06:54 PM - jgsugden quoted ExploderWizard in post Does the world exist for the PCs?
    This is not a universal play style. D&D can be and has been played without improv acting and its associated buzzwords. While improv can be fun and not a wrong way to play if the group finds that most fun, it far from being the only way to run a game. There are those who still enjoy the game aspect of play which has nothing to do with crafting a narrative or stringing together a series of improv skits. Improv just means you're writing it on the spot - unless you script your games, you are improvising them. So, really, you're saying that acting is not a universal part of a role playing game. Let's see what the PHB has to say about it: Roleplaying Roleplaying is, literally, the act of playing out a role. In this case, it’s you as a player determining how your character thinks, acts, and talks. Roleplaying is a part of every aspect of the game, and it comes to the fore during social interactions. Your character’s quirks, mannerisms, and personality influence how interactions resolve.So, roleplayi...

Thursday, 23rd May, 2019

  • 12:29 PM - Zardnaar quoted ExploderWizard in post Amazon ratings of Ghosts of Saltmarsh
    Are you kidding? The Forest Oracle provided so may laughs not to mention an epic thread here which provided more entertainment than any other module of similar page count. For pure entertainment value I give The Forest Oracle 5 stars! Point.

Saturday, 4th May, 2019


Friday, 15th March, 2019


Wednesday, 20th February, 2019

  • 09:31 PM - Flexor the Mighty! quoted ExploderWizard in post What paints do you use?
    Selecting the best paint will depend on several factors including your painting style, what types of models you will be painting, and what you will use them for. If you are painting minis for tabletop game use then they will handled and sometimes roughed up a bit. Vallejo model color tends rub off easily from handling unless you really seal the heck out of it. For display or competition pieces it is fantastic paint.If you like the ease of painting straight from the pot or bottle then Vallejo and Scale 75 will not be your best picks. Citadel, P3 , and Reaper work well for this. If you do like Citadel (and I do like some of their colors very much) but hate their dry up in one month pots then take a look at the Coat d'Armes range. They still have the old Citadel classics in the hex shaped bottles with tight fitting lids. Never had that issue with Vallejo. I give them a a couple coats of a matt varnish, army painter mostly, and haven't had issues.
  • 08:09 PM - Satyrn quoted ExploderWizard in post What is the difference between hidden and unseen?
    If the invisible creature farts loudly then it is still unseen but not hidden. Unless there's a dog in the room to take the blame.

Friday, 4th January, 2019

  • 05:23 PM - Dausuul quoted ExploderWizard in post Elven trance and long rests
    A long rest is 8 hours period. An elf doesn't have to spend quite as much of it zonked out, that's about it. This is a great filter question for prospective players. A few of gems like these could filter the cheese away from your table. Trying to filter prospective players with weird corner-case rules questions is a great filter for prospective DMs.

Tuesday, 27th November, 2018

  • 10:56 PM - Aebir-Toril quoted ExploderWizard in post 4.33 Years in: What Now for 5E? (and have we reached "Peak Edition?")
    I don't put much stock in the "evergreen" label. D&D Essentials was advertised as evergreen too. When is the next print run of that. :lol: Nothing is forever except editions that are no longer actively supported. Ha, true.
  • 10:46 PM - Parmandur quoted ExploderWizard in post 4.33 Years in: What Now for 5E? (and have we reached "Peak Edition?")
    I don't put much stock in the "evergreen" label. D&D Essentials was advertised as evergreen too. When is the next print run of that. :lol: Nothing is forever except editions that are no longer actively supported. It is an indicator of intention. With any product, whether it will be evergreen is dictated by sales. A product can sell well without being intended to be evergreen, but being successful with the intention to be evergreen makes long-term viability more likely.

Monday, 26th November, 2018

  • 09:29 PM - lowkey13 quoted ExploderWizard in post On Variability, House Rules, Research, and the 1e/5e Difference
    Fallibility of memory indeed!! B3 was Palace of the Silver Princess, The Lost City was B4. :lol: HA! That's more the fallibility of me. ;) One of these days, we should have a (non-5e) Palace of the Silver Princess Discussion. Now THAT is a story. ps- I edited the original so I can feel marginally less stupid.
  • 09:18 PM - Mort quoted ExploderWizard in post Underpowered Group Found BBEG
    I would like to address the the concept of poor design for a moment. Too often poor design is thrown out as a catch-all excuse whenever an "un-winnable" combat scenario is a distinct possibility within the context of the adventure. I don't expect to be able to chop through any and all situations with brute force in a role playing game. There are choices that can be made that don't involve hitting something with a sword or fleeing for your life. Some situations might require parley and negotiation to resolve. It becomes difficult to resolve such encounters when the players always almost without exception, start fighting first. The problem with many published adventures is that parlay and negotiation have little to no chance of working. All too often players learn not to bother. One issue that contributes to the problem of every obstacle looking like a nail is that all PC classes in the last few editions of D&D have been forged into hammers. When every member of the party is more or less a top ti...
  • 06:33 PM - Mort quoted ExploderWizard in post Underpowered Group Found BBEG
    This happens to everyone eventually. I call it STRAIGHT TO THE NAGA syndrome. I was running N1 Against the Cult of the Reptile God and my party of over achieving players located a secret door and bypassed almost the entire XP generating dungeon to face a spirit naga as 1st & 2nd level characters. They died. Did the group have any clue that they were completely outmatched? Was there any way (other than go through the dungeon "correctly") for them to, if not win, then escape the encounter? One problem with just about every iteration of D&D is that running away is ridiculously difficult and often not the option it should be. If this was a case of the group, through good play, has essentially doomed themselves - and that's not satisfying at all. It's essentially a Tomb of Horrors "you've turned left instead of right and now you're all DEAD mwahahaha!!" scenario, and for a home game - that's usually the exact opposite of fun. Let events unfold naturally. If the players have thus far assumed...

Sunday, 25th November, 2018

  • 02:57 PM - Kobold Stew quoted ExploderWizard in post Ridding Elves and Half-Elves of Darkvision
    Actually infravision did not remove the problem of darkness. It allowed heat signatures and differences to be seen in the dark. Cold blooded creatures and undead could still sneak right up on you and of course you literally couldn't see the writing on the wall. Darkvision is much better even with the drawbacks it still has. All true - I could have been more precise. It remains true that darkvision in 5e presents significant obstacles that need light to overcome.

Monday, 19th November, 2018

  • 01:25 PM - Scary quoted ExploderWizard in post Anyone else find this really irritating?
    1E could use some improvement too! How many times have you flipped through looking for a magic user spell only to find " see [cleric] or [druid] spell of the same name" and were annoyed with the extra page flipping! Clerics had it great because their spells were listed first. Other classes had to reference another classes spell list.Google sheets!! An electronic spell list, easily filtered for whichever class you are playing. Basically your spell book once you print it out

Sunday, 23rd September, 2018

  • 07:11 PM - Charlaquin quoted ExploderWizard in post Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
    The issue with mechanical options being used to differentiate characters is that not all mechanical options are created equal with regard to power level. If they were then the complaint would be be that the options "don't really mean anything" because the the options are desired to produce power, not difference.Please don’t tell me what I desire and why. I would love it if there could be tons of options that were all perfectly mechanically balanced, because I do want those options for the purpose of differentiation, not power. There certainly are players who feel the way you describe (“the options don’t mean anything” was a common complaint directed at 4e), but not everyone who wants more options feel that way. I’m a special snowflake, not a power gamer. I want a character who can do different things than everyone else’s character for the sake of being different, not for the sake of being stronger. I’ll take options I know are mechanically worse if I think they’ll be more interesting, even in 5e with...
  • 06:41 PM - doctorbadwolf quoted ExploderWizard in post Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
    What does mechanical distinction WITHOUT power look like to you? How many choices to make at each level that are all lateral moves would be enough to satisfy the craving for difference? I don’t understand what’s confusing or unclear? There are many games where you can choose between options at most or all levels. "The game" needs nothing: gamers may.or may not want certain features. Where there is sufficient demand that doesn't alienate others, we may see it. Alternative Class features are something they are floating to test interest right now, so we'll see. Okay? I’m not interested in nit picking back and forth about what “need” means. First , this assumes the best/only way to differentiate a character is mechanical. There was no mechanical distinction between most classses in 1e/2e and people managed to create vastly different characters just fine... Reflavouring or working with a DM to make an additive and unique “ribbon” power is often the best way to define a character. No, it doesn’t ass...
  • 05:20 PM - doctorbadwolf quoted ExploderWizard in post Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
    The issue with mechanical options being used to differentiate characters is that not all mechanical options are created equal with regard to power level. If they were then the complaint would be be that the options "don't really mean anything" because the the options are desired to produce power, not difference. If anything we can look to past editions and the popularity of cookie cutter builds that provide "optimal" outcomes for whatever niche of expertise the player desires. These optimal builds become standardized and soon the entire proposed reason for so many options is rendered null and void because choosing a set of options that is not optimized for performance is a losing proposition. Character differentiation is something that needs to come from the player, not the mechanics. Maybe you played with very different people than I did, but I almost never saw any of the CharOp builds in actual games. Once or twice, in 20 years of gaming, and even then it wasn’t really the internet crafted build...

Thursday, 16th August, 2018

  • 02:21 AM - Maxperson quoted ExploderWizard in post What's so great about Elminster?
    [incoming grumpy old man ramble] Well sonny back before the internets we had a magazine printed on genuine paper called Dragon. In this magazine, FR creator Ed Greenwood would write articles and tidbits about the Realms sometimes using fanciful storytelling detailing meetings between himself and Elminster. I remember reading about such a story that involved Mountain Dew. I do have the Dragon Magazine archive set so I might be able to find the issue. :p Listen grandpa, I'm no spring chicken myself. I, too remember that paper magazine called Dragon, which is where I drew that quote from. We gonna settle this with a duel? Dragons at 20 paces? :lol:

Thursday, 9th August, 2018

  • 01:38 PM - Maxperson quoted ExploderWizard in post What's so great about Elminster?
    Um....he likes Mountain Dew? Wrong soda! From the Wizards Three Article at Elminster's place. "It was early in the evening; it’d be hours yet before my study was invaded by three mighty mages. Or so I’d thought. I was strolling unconcernedly down the hall, laden with a case of cola and some bottles of ice wine, when a sudden, well, hoofing sound from above made me look up, dump the drinkables onto the broadloom with a hasty crash, and dive into the nearest closet."

Sunday, 20th May, 2018



Page 1 of 87 123456789101151 ... LastLast

ExploderWizard's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites