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

Basic Information

Date of Birth
August 31, 1981 (37)
About Kinak
Location:
Columbus, OH
Sex:
Male
Age Group:
31-40
My Game Details

Details of games currently playing and games being sought.

More information:
www.metroplexitygames.com

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
1,109
Posts Per Day
0.43
Last Post
Undead Origins: From Mummy to Zombie Monday, 25th April, 2016 02:41 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
2
General Information
Last Activity
Thursday, 28th April, 2016 03:30 PM
Join Date
Tuesday, 15th May, 2012
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
5
My Game Details
More information:
www.metroplexitygames.com
No results to show...
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Friday, 30th October, 2015

  • 09:13 PM - El Mahdi mentioned Kinak in post Warlord Name Poll
    ... @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.0 ; @MichaelSomething; @Miladoon ; @Minigiant ; @Mishihari Lord ; @Mistwell ; @MoogleEmpMog ; @Mon @MonkeezOnFire ; @MoonSong(Kaiilurker) ; @MostlyDm ; @Mouseferatu ; @MoutonRustique; @Nemesis Destiny ; @neobolts ; @Neonchameleon ; @Nifft ; @nightspaladin ; @nomotog; @n00bdragon ; @Obryn ; @Ohillion ; @oknazevad ; @Olgar Shiverstone ; @Orlax ; @Otterscrubber ; @Pandamonium87 ; @Paraxis ; @PaulO. ; @Pauln6 ; @Pauper ; @payn; @pemerton ; @peterka99 ;@ Pickles III ; @Pickles JG ; @pkt77242 ; @pming ; @pogre; @PopeYodaI ; @Prickly ; @procproc ; @Psikerlord ; @Psikerlord# ; @(Psi)SeveredHead; @Quickleaf ; @Raith5 ; @raleel ; @Ralif Redhammer ; @Raloc ; @Ranes ; @RangerWickett; @Ratskinner ; @redrick ; @Rejuvenator ; @Remathilis ; @Ristamar ; @RolenArcher; @Rol...

Wednesday, 13th August, 2014

  • 10:08 AM - pemerton mentioned Kinak in post Sphinx
    This is the best thing I've seen for 5e. The actual stats are neither here-nor-there - as Kinak noted, immunity to non-magical weapons can get pretty old pretty fast, and having most of its abilities buried in a spell list does nothing for me. But I think the flavour text and lair abilities are on a par with the best of 4e. Those lair actions are a weird mix, from the minimally effective to the argument inducing to the completely brutal. It could make for some cool plot points, but mixing campaign-altering plot point powers with rerolling initiative is pretty odd.I think these are meant to give a range of options to the GM. There was a widespread complaint about 4e that it didn't give GM's the flexibility they wanted for out-of-combat monster actions. Now some of us just made stuff up - eg in my game, when the Sphinx wanted to get rid of the PCs, it struck a bargain with them to teleport them somewhere else, and I didn't worry about the absence of "teleport others if they agree via negotiation" from the statblock. But for those who want the book to give them permission...

Tuesday, 5th August, 2014

  • 07:17 PM - Quickleaf mentioned Kinak in post 17 Planar Species: A Reimagining
    Kinak You've got some investing ideas there! Definitely good stuff. Acheron: Your Avali undead constructs are kind of the direction I was heading in too, only taken to a much fuller extent and with more diversity. Reminds me a little of the draugir wraiths of Norse/Scandinavian myth as depicted in the Witcher 2 video game; here's some concept art: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-b55cN6PfIxw/TfpSaNgCROI/AAAAAAAAAmw/NG8beu1OfnU/s1600/draug_new.jpg Pandemonium: Yeah, sinister madness was the theme I was working off of. Your physical description is certainly viable, the blindness or lack of eyes making sense for a tunnel dwelling race. The mouth thing I associate with Gibbering Mouthers/Beasts/Orbs, which I had thought about using but then decided should stay as Far Realms creatures. The Desmanians (?) are definitely fiends NOT incomprehensible abominations from beyond our reality, their madness probably closer to sociopathic paranoia or delusions of grandeur overall rather than incomprehensi...

Friday, 30th May, 2014

  • 05:19 PM - Ahnehnois mentioned Kinak in post Dungeon Mastering as a Fine Art
    Kinak No doubt. Moderation in all things. I tend to have plenty of opposition forces be people acting in their own legitimate self-interests. Some are of alien mentalities (or are just mindless) and simply don't conform to human notions of morality. Others are pawns of greater evil forces that do their masters' bidding out of fear. Sometimes, they're just opportunists. The example I was thinking of is a case where I had an undead nemesis play something like The Dark Knight's joker; an anarchist bent on destroying the world's order by force and persuading or coercing people to his cause. I was certainly uncomfortable with the idea of portraying a character whose villainy was manifest in hooking children on drugs or convincing people to sexually assault or murder each other. But the long and short of it is that if I'd dumbed the character down, it would have been insulting the players' intelligence, and it would have taken away both the threat level of the creature's presence and the sa...

Sunday, 8th December, 2013


Friday, 22nd November, 2013

  • 04:51 AM - Cadence mentioned Kinak in post Advanced Class Guide Playtest Rules
    ... thinking of it for a totally different setting might help a lot. Is there a better name that might help me than alchemist? Glancing through the PDF and focused more on the Shaman (as that seems to be the biggest draw from earlier posts), to me it seems more like a divine witch class more than an Oracle/Witch combo. <snip> Also to at least give it some Oracle flavor they should have retained the Oracle's Curse ability which I think could have easily been worked into the Shaman class as more of a primitive and superstitious flavor. Like @Jester Canuck says too, its almost like forcing it to be a hybrid is getting in the way of some of the Shaman's potential. If you want changes to it, I'd like to avoid having it necessarily go for a primitive and superstitious flavor - I'd like it to work there, but also work for maybe something like an Eastern flavored campaign too. War Priest - With paladins being limited to LG this class does serve a purpose. It works I guess. I think @Kinak is right on this one and that it isn't quite there yet. I'd mimic your criticisms from a lot of the other classes that it seems like an archetype for the Cleric with its d8 and 3/4 BAB and not a good alternate to the d10 and full BAB Paladin. Arcanist - Lame. It's an alternate spellcasting system not a class. Like Words of Power. Just give us the system and let us swap it for other spellcasting classes. I vote with @Kaodi , @Kinak, and @Ace in terms of the Arcanist being one of the nicest things in the book... but I can see your point on why a system idea might be better than presenting it as a class. I wonder if they'll have that in the class construction rules that are supposed to be in the final book. Maybe something easy that would let us give the Wizard vs. Arcanist vs. Sorcerer type distinction to the Cleric, Druid, and (in reverse) the Bard. The class creation rules they want to put at the end might also explain why: All in all the classes really look like they're being ...

Wednesday, 23rd October, 2013

  • 06:00 PM - MoutonRustique mentioned Kinak in post Designing Boss Fight - Succubus (Help Appreciated)
    Kinak beat me to it... what I wrote (should anyone care) A possible solution to the over beating on the PCs is to offer a major buff/recharge for the PCs during the battle. A possible avenue could be : when the Duc is released from compulsion he uses a family heirloom/artifact/etc to grant a massive heal and/or recharge to the PCs. Another could be : closing a portal leaves behind a power surge that can be manipulated with Arcana or "suffered through2 with Endurance and grant a buff/heal/recharge. Having one of the bystanders or allies be an angel that is tried to hid, but got found out and is slayn by the succubus and he grants a boon to the PCs as a death-wish. Something else.

Tuesday, 22nd October, 2013

  • 04:12 PM - Trit One-Ear mentioned Kinak in post Designing Boss Fight - Succubus (Help Appreciated)
    Thanks Kinak, I was pretty tired when I wrote that post last night. I'm glad it made enough sense for someone to give some sound advice out of it. I like your ideas concerning the outs. Yes, the other members of the council are perfect wild cards to help me change the flow of battle. They can easily interrupt or change any stage if things start to be getting away from me. Agreed in upping the zones, and will look at my map lay out with your ideas in mind. I do want some place the heroes stand to be not too devastating... but I'll let them worry about that. Seeing as they could probably close a portal in a turn or two as a group, the zones won't be around too long. Angry DM's article has some mini-milestone suggestions, but I think I'm going to adapt his to include your advice somewhat. Every stage transition (so twice throughout the battle) heroes get a chance to regain an encounter power and to spend a healing surge. I'll add action points as an alternative to encounter powers just to give them s...
  • 04:07 AM - DMMike mentioned Kinak in post One Hit Die per Character. Ever.
    ... TerraDave: it sounds like ASoIaF RPG isn't modeling its namesake very well. D&D could do it, but would also need some major tweaks. I think you need to keep hit points low to keep players respecting the fragility of their characters. And like in the books, players should keep negotiation, fleeing, deception, greater numbers, and magic trick options on the table. (Literally, if need be). We'd need to use both AC improvement and Damage Reduction, especially if anything bigger than a brigand is going to be attacked. Which begs the question: exactly what to AC and DR represent? Further (and mentioned above), what exactly are the (very few) hit points representing? Can you lose hit points on a miss? Is blood always drawn on a hit? And as we learned from dear little Bran, a fall from 30+ feet doesn't always mean death. Sometimes it means a coma, and dreams of a three-eyed crow. With only one hit die, everyone's going to hit zero HP sooner or later. What happens at that point? Kinak: cool idea. Why not turn Hit Dice into tools, instead of a number? Maybe all characters have only three hit points, and each hit die is a daily (encounter?) chance to roll damage reduction against a hit of your choice. So, fighters have better damage reduction than wizards?

Sunday, 20th October, 2013

  • 07:02 PM - MoutonRustique mentioned Kinak in post [PoL] Some Thoughts on Action Denial
    Action denial is probably the hardest thing to design well... It's usually, very, very boring for the player (very bad) or overpowering for a monster (less bad, but potentially very bad - mostly story side). The problem is it's just SO expected and possibly ingrained into our vision of combat... and it's almost always the best tactical choice... I see a few paths possible, but nothing as useful as a concrete answer: A) using the "off-turn" approach suggested by Kinak. In essence, you're removing "true" action-denial from the game. This is the easiest answer to design for, but probably the hardest sell... B) taking a cue from the 5e packets and making it "until you use X action to stop it" - you have the benefit of player "participation" so it's less boring and you can customize to hurt more of less depending on X. It has merit mainly in the psychological fast-one it's pulling on the player by engaging him to stop the condition (very much like the prone condition of 4e). Easier to sell, but system analysing players may see through it (CharOp will.) C) reduce to the cost of the action-denial by reducing the value of the actions. (this is my favorite one) This can be accomplished by longer (in rounds, not real-life time) combats, higher prevalence of "opportunity defeats" where victory is gained by more by action X as opposed to X actions. D) probably in conjonction with C) increase the value of the "not-standard" actions. This is harder to build i...

Saturday, 19th October, 2013

  • 03:14 PM - Storminator mentioned Kinak in post I need ideas for an "artifact"
    That is pretty awesome Kinak. Just the sort of thing I was looking for. I'll have to be careful about the design, because I'm sure my players will instantly be looking for the skill challenge angle. PS

Thursday, 17th October, 2013

  • 07:18 PM - Trit One-Ear mentioned Kinak in post Designing Boss Fight - Succubus (Help Appreciated)
    I may also change up the succubus "dominate" power to make the actual battle with her more dynamic. Rather than making it an on-turn attack, maybe let it be an immediate interrupt when she's attacked so either the attack is re-directed or if noone is within range of the attacker then it charges the nearest ally. You could also do both, with the limit of only one creature dominated at a time. She's revealed her true nature so I like the idea that dominates are momentary perception scrambles rather than the type of dominating she'd do in cognito. I was thinking something similar, especially in Stage 3. Giving her a free action on 10+her initiative to make a... Close Burt 5 or 10 attack? Everyone she hits makes an at will atack against a nearby ally. Using Kinak's idea of having a whip and using it to snare people, she can then be able to redirect attack to that target. Ultimately, I find dominate to be more frustrating than fun for players, and would rather find ways to mess with them while letting them keep their actions. Storminator - Lurkers have always given me the same trouble, both as a DM and a player. A few weeks ago my Gnome Illusionist and friends fought the solo dragon in Chris Perkin's rewrite of Hill Giants (who can turn invisible very frequently) and we did essentially that - prepared actions, then nova'd. However, making her a Lurker in Stage 2 might be useful, using the portals as a means to disappear and reappear. With all the other Cambions and Devils running around, I think it could be crazy enough to keep the heroes busy while she's popping in and out. I'm not entirely clear on how to build a Boss encounter like this while using other monsters in different stages. Combined HP (so killing the Cambion is just as effective ...
  • 03:15 AM - Mercurius mentioned Kinak in post [2013] Did I miss any good setting/flavor books?
    Kinak, I did pick up both Numenera and the Greenwood book. Actually, until I ordered Mythic Realms last night, they were the last two RPG books I had purchased, although separated by almost a year - I got the Greenwood book last October, and Numenera in August of this year. Its been many, many years since I've gone 10 months without an RPG purchase. Maybe I'm growing up finally :-S I'll check out Magnimar. It looks like a nice city to plop into my new setting.

Friday, 11th October, 2013

  • 05:06 PM - Mercurius mentioned Kinak in post Do we have an ETA yet? (And a couple questions about Next)
    Thanks all, especially Kinak for the question-by-question answers! I'll take your advice and read over the rules as I dabble with ideas for a campaign. It sounds like the parts that are missing are parts I don't mind missing; I'm very comfortable with "ad hocking" and prefer a sense of space in the rules. Also, the group I would be playing with tend to be "old fogies" (~40-45ish) who grew up on AD&D and are used to that style. I'm the only one, I think, that played 3.x - the rest started 4E after not playing since 2E or even 1E. 2014 makes sense from the standpoint of the 40th anniversary. I'm wondering if they are considering coming out with some kind of deluxe starter set for GenCon, then the Holy Trinity (PHB, DMG, MM) in the Spring of 2015. Of course that's a long gap between the two, but maybe they'll fill it with a campaign box set adventure or something...

Sunday, 29th September, 2013

  • 04:09 PM - N'raac mentioned Kinak in post Does pathfinder strike anyone as too gamey?
    First off, I agree with @Kinak - as long as we get about the same amount of complaints from both sides, we probably have it right. Maybe we need two contemporaneous editions, one back to OD&D where you pick a class (which might be a race, otherwise you're human), get specific class abilities (and not many of them) and that's it, and another with a dizzying array of choices. Or we need a game that provides that first one as the core rules, and the rest of the options as just that, options you can add in. I think that's oversimplifying it. For one thing, the complaint is more that "my character doesn't get as much cool abilities as the next guy's", which could just as easily be solved by nerfing the next guy's. For another, the case being made here is that PF gave characters more abilities, but that those abilities were 'uncool'. Abilities that don't require so much tracking might serve the same purpose better. To the first issue, it's generally better received to give something than to take something away. To the...
  • 03:30 PM - Ahnehnois mentioned Kinak in post Does pathfinder strike anyone as too gamey?
    So, what are the options here? "My character doesn't get enough cool abilities" is answered by Pathfinder giving all characters more cool abilities. Now the complaint is "I can't keep track of all my cool abilities". So what's the solution that answers both complaints?I think that's oversimplifying it. For one thing, the complaint is more that "my character doesn't get as much cool abilities as the next guy's", which could just as easily be solved by nerfing the next guy's. For another, the case being made here is that PF gave characters more abilities, but that those abilities were 'uncool'. Abilities that don't require so much tracking might serve the same purpose better. Edit: Uh, yeah, what Kinak said.

Tuesday, 24th September, 2013

  • 03:03 AM - pemerton mentioned Kinak in post New D&D Next Playtest package is up (19/9/2013) [merged threads]
    Buffed fighters and nerfed casters. The game also feels quite complex for giving so few options.I can see what Kinak is getting at here, and am curious about the fighter options for the gladiator/weapon-master - is it less fiddly in play than it reads on the page? I think they could solve the proficiencies issue by stripping them completely from class. Leave them entirely in the Backgrounds. If you choose Scholar and then Fighter, you deal with the lack of armor and good weapon proficiencies. Hopefully, if the Background is balanced against others and you'll have other benefits you wanted out of that background. If you want a more traditional Fighter, pick a more traditional Background.That's interesting. And radical. In a non-granular background/class system it's potentially punitive - but you probably wouldn't have to add much granularity (eg get one bonus tool, weapon, armour, etc proficiency when you choose your class) to make it less punitive and potentially quite attractive.

Sunday, 8th September, 2013

  • 08:28 PM - Cadence mentioned Kinak in post Feats vs. Attribute Increases
    If you go this route, does the +1 inject too much gamesmanship because it means everyone will go for all odd abilities when they know the campaign will probably end in the low levels and go for even when they know you'll be aiming higher? The standard E6 requires a pair of feats to get a +2 and so avoids that problem (the first feat only serves as a prereq for the 2nd). In my P6 I've made the first feat in the chain give a +1 bonus to choice of skill or save based on that ability (pick it anew each day) so that the first feat isn't otherwise useless. An easy restriction could be to limit it to no more than a total of +4 on any ability. @Kinak 's idea of having a chain of them with level restrictions seems reasonable to me too.

Friday, 6th September, 2013

  • 04:52 AM - Chronikoce mentioned Kinak in post Far Realms inspired campaign. Thoughts and Suggestions appreciated!
    Kinak you hit the nail on the head. I am shooting to convey to the PC's that the situation is so incredibly dire that the gods are not only too busy to provide the power, they are allowing/encouraging the evil beings to fill in for them. I could see Vecna, or maybe one of the Chaotic good gods being on board. Fortunately for me I have yet to see a single player choose to play a chaotic character that is religious. Apparently all my players go for chaotic atheists lol. I considered just letting other good outsiders fill in for the spell giving but felt that it doesn't convey enough of a feeling of the universe being on the brink of madness. Even the gods own servants are too busy fighting some crazy battle for the sake of everyone that none of the good outsiders are free. @RUMBLETiGER I am shooting for something along those lines. The fiends and devil aren't doing this just because they can/for power (although that is definitely a secondary goal). They are doing this because even they see ...

Sunday, 1st September, 2013

  • 04:22 PM - Chronikoce mentioned Kinak in post Far Realms inspired campaign. Thoughts and Suggestions appreciated!
    @RUMBLETiGER Thanks for the tip on a race that holds back Far Realms. I think that will fit in nicely. I already had an idea for an NPC that they think is an ally but turns out to be evil so having these guys seem evil and turn out to be good would create some nice symmetry there. @Cadence I currently have no plans to allow them into the Far Realms for this reason. Madness beyone imagination does make it hard to describe to my players hehe. As for leveling, I was thinking I might boost the starting point to 3rd Level. I don't usually use XP in my games but instead use checkpoint leveling. I am thinking of getting the party up around 15th level with access to artifact items that are assisting them or 20th level (If just to let them hit 20 since we have never had a game get that high). I don't want them to start out too high at first otherwise there won't be any threat of them being captured (without beefing up royal guard to superhuman levels at least). @Kinak I was thinking of having the recurring villian be an alienst from 3.5. At the game's outset this NPC was actually instrumental in the assassination attempt. Was thinking it would be cool to have him assist the party in their escape, he could even start giving them quests in repayment for saving them. They would later find out they are working for a madman and in fact they madman framed them. Should get them suitably riled up against him. Also thanks for the tip on Horror vs Horror themed. I am probably shooting for a middle ground. I have never done a horror campaign before so this is really an experiment for myself as well. I may shamessly use the encounter you described because it sounds like an excellent scene. In general I am still trying to decide how to handle the middle portion where there is leveling and forshadowing. I think the trouble is I won't be able to do too much planning in that department until I know which (if either) nation the party sides with. I think I could ...


Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
No results to display...
Page 1 of 15 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Tuesday, 26th April, 2016


Sunday, 27th September, 2015

  • 12:36 AM - Nightfall quoted Kinak in post Occult Ritual - Turn one Dragon into another!
    ...rph spell wouldn't be able to accomplish. As far as dickishness, it depends a lot on how you frame the ritual. If you're up front with the fact that they don't control its final form, you're great. Within the ritual format, you could make a full success result in a hatchling dragon form of their choice and with complications, you get to twist it or narrow the list of choices. I'm pretty sure they'll understand this isn't something they can get done in a day. It might take the entire campaign OR at least a good chunk of it. I've already decided that they'll get a working version but it will not quite play out to expectations. (IE they think they're getting a Silver dragon but instead get a Lunar Dragon) I'm not going to say you're insane, but it's probably not something you should hand out to player's lightly. If they really want to do it, make it a quest to get the ritual, the ingredients, and the time/place to perform it. It'll feel cheap if they don't earn it. Cheers! Kinak It's not something I'm just doling out along with XP. I'm running Kingmaker AP. I want something a kind of long standing side quest for maybe a couple players. Or at least something they might want to work towards. We'll see how it goes.

Friday, 11th September, 2015

  • 01:08 AM - gamerprinter quoted Kinak in post Channel energy houseruling
    If you don't want to half them, you could alternately have the channel cost two uses if it's hitting both living and dead targets. Really good for fights against the undead, but would also burn through resources that might have come in handy later. This is exactly how I'd allow the request if I were GMing your game. Paizo chose to deliberately separate the benefits of positive energy channeling as healing or damage to undead, and there are no legal RAW work-arounds to get what that player wants, and I completely agree with that separation. You want to do it, pay for 2 daily uses of channeling, and I'd allow heal and damage at the same time.

Tuesday, 8th September, 2015

  • 06:34 PM - Ezequielramone quoted Kinak in post Channel energy houseruling
    For the houserule, I'd suggest halving the amount it heals/harms when both living and undead are in the area. Say the struggle between life and death mutes the effects. Cheers! Kinak Interesing, I was thinking in something like a full round action. Or maybe choose how much die heal and how much harm. So you don't waste a point of you divide and round. What do you think?

Friday, 7th August, 2015

  • 03:52 PM - billd91 quoted Kinak in post Gen Con Has Doubled In Size Since 2010
    The main considerations for hotels are how close they are to the con and cost. A price that'd get you a single room within walking distance ($195 for us this year) could get you a suite that's a short drive away ($175). If you do need to drive, keep in mind parking can get expensive. We got a cheaper hotel farther out last year (maybe too cheap, but we went as a group and the person booking it is notoriously cheap) and drove in. The drive was reasonably short, access easy, and parking was cheaper than parking at downtown hotels. I have to emphasize that. Really. We paid about half for parking by driving in than we usually did getting downtown hotel and walking.

Monday, 23rd March, 2015

  • 08:35 AM - Dire Bare quoted Kinak in post D&D DICEMASTERS (Collectible Dice Building Game)
    It's cool that they're getting their licensed products rolling out :) That said, this one isn't for me, based on the X-Men version. I like card games and I like dice game. I even like deck-building games where other game pieces are used so you don't have to shuffle all the time. I'm just spoiled by card games where the rules are on the card. I don't want to be consulting a reference card constantly (especially if they keep having multiple cards for the same die type). The double-randomness of what you draw and what you roll is also a major turn-off. I got confused by your "reference card" complaint, and I'm still not sure I get you. There is no "reference card" for the game, although playing without a copy of the "game mat" can get confusing. Or are you referring to the game cards themselves? I tend to think of the game as a "card and dice game" rather than as a "dice game", as you do need the game cards to play. But I see them just like Magic cards but with the "extension" of the d...

Tuesday, 27th January, 2015

  • 07:47 PM - doctorhook quoted Kinak in post D&D DICEMASTERS (Collectible Dice Building Game)
    It's cool that they're getting their licensed products rolling out :) Dicemasters is not Dragon Dice. That's like seeing the the 5e books on the shelf and saying, "Great, another F.A.T.A.L." The Marvel game is very highly thought of, it's a far superior game to even Quarriors!, the game it's based off of. This is just like Attack Wing, a D&D spin-off of another popular game. Neither are really my cup of tea (I don't like collectable anything, even if the Dicemasters packs are pretty inexpensive), but they are popular among the board gaming crowd. I'm all for another product that WotC can license the D&D brand to in order to keep the game I do play evergreen without spitting out splat-o-da-month.These guys have it right: licensed products are good for D&D at the current time. Absolute worst case scenario is that D&D Dicemasters is a total flop, the D&D brand becomes diluted slightly by another forgettable game, and WizKids loses its shorts. Best case scenario is that this becomes...

Sunday, 25th January, 2015

  • 08:27 PM - Dog Moon quoted Kinak in post Do high-level monsters need Spell Resistance?
    It is weird in certain situations, but it's also fairly reflective of how it works in play. The vast majority of enemies are near the party's CR and that makes the SR a coinflip. You could make it any roll of over SR - caster level. Which would at least cut out a roll, but still slows things down some. I agree there isn't a great option to just drop in and replace it. Well, I agree my examples are sort of the extremes, but I know that while most creatures are designed for about 50/50 for a character of equal CR, most of the times you are fighting creatures either less than your CR [when fighting against groups of enemies] or slightly above [such as the single boss monster], which means that the 50/50 rarely is there anyway. But regardless of the specifics, at least we both agree that there doesn't some to be a good option to easily replace SR. :)
  • 10:08 AM - Starfox quoted Kinak in post Do high-level monsters need Spell Resistance?
    ...it helps take care of save-or-suck effects that still suck if you make your save, like suffocation. Kinak I try to come up with a term for the suffocation save-and-suck phenomenon, but all my terms end up vaguely disgusting... Suckotacion? Suffosuction? (This post is not 100% serious.)
  • 09:17 AM - Dog Moon quoted Kinak in post Do high-level monsters need Spell Resistance?
    It's an interesting thought, but I agree I wouldn't quite work. If I were going for a simple fix, I'd tend towards something like completely negating the effect if they roll an 11 or higher on the save die. It works out similarly probability-wise, removes a roll, and makes life harder for really optimized casters with stratospheric saves rather than the casters falling behind every level. Well, whatever is done I think it would have to take into consideration both level and SR, unless you would just say ANYTHING with SR negates the effect on a roll of 11 or higher, but then everything with SR would then have a 50% chance of not affecting it. Which is kinda goofy. An epic 30th level Wizard still only has a 50% chance of any spell successfully targeting a CR 1 creature with SR whereas in this system it would be impossible for them to fail. And a level 1 Wizard which normally would never have a chance of besting the SR of a Balor [31], would then have a 50% chance of being successful. ...
  • 12:18 AM - Dog Moon quoted Kinak in post Do high-level monsters need Spell Resistance?
    I shy away from SR unless I'm using pre-statted monsters. I think is pretty much how I've always done it. I could go through all my homebrewed monsters, but I honestly think that I've given only like maybe one or two creatures SR. Anything built from a creature that already had it of course retains it, but otherwise I usually don't just add SR to a creature unless I feel like there's a really good reason to. But that won't stop me from using a room full of Demons in my adventures. I'm not going to not use regular monsters just because they have SR. I know one time a DM took an idea I had seen online where you take the SR, consider it a stat and then added that modifier to all saves. So 16 SR would be +3, so would add +3 to all saves. But that sorta just make things wonky because at 1st level SR 11 is a good chance of failing but then wouldn't add anything to the saves while SR 20 at 15th level isn't going to fail very often but the +5 to all saves is just going to make their sa...

Saturday, 24th January, 2015


Tuesday, 19th August, 2014

  • 11:26 PM - MarkB quoted Kinak in post Amulet of Health, Another Strong Item
    I disliked the old girdles of giant strength because they wiped away your choices. Suddenly, your choice to play a weak character by assigning a low score to strength became completely irrelevant. In a way, I think 5e's equivalents are actually worse, because the people with good scores (read: 20s) won't get any benefit from them. So they'll naturally trickle down to the party members with the worst scores. Cheers! Kinak Actually, I think they open up choices in a 5e game, by making multiclass combinations more viable. They're never going to be particularly useful to a character for whom they boost a primary stat, but by giving them to a character for whom they're boosting a useful secondary stat, you're opening up new an interesting avenues of advancement for that character.
  • 08:31 PM - Remathilis quoted Kinak in post Amulet of Health, Another Strong Item
    Especially with the amulet of health; it really should go to the person with the lowest Con. I know for my players, it wouldn't take long for them to realize that the person with the lowest Con just got bumped up to near the top because they had the lowest Con. It's not going to warp how they build their characters, but I have it admit it feels totally backwards. In our group, we'd give it to someone who was going to be in combat alot, but already didn't have a great Con due to MAD: a ranger, paladin, cleric or rogue perhaps. The fighter or barbarian might already be close to that number, and it seems like a waste on the mage (whose going to stay out of melee anyway). Need before greed, but need =/= having the lowest score.
  • 08:14 PM - billd91 quoted Kinak in post Amulet of Health, Another Strong Item
    Even back then, we were "roll and assign." So, yes, if someone put a decent score into strength, then got a pair of gauntlets, they felt kind of dumb. It's not a huge deal in and of itself, although getting a magical item as a reward and feeling dumb because of it certainly isn't optimal. But, in the process of feeling dumb, they realize that the magical item has more mechanical impact than the choices that defined their character. Maybe that excites some people, but it's certainly not what we were looking for in a game, even back then. I don't think the process of deciding who should get the item makes it cause any less of a problem. Especially with the amulet of health; it really should go to the person with the lowest Con. I know for my players, it wouldn't take long for them to realize that the person with the lowest Con just got bumped up to near the top because they had the lowest Con. It's not going to warp how they build their characters, but I have it admit it feels t...
  • 07:43 PM - ExploderWizard quoted Kinak in post Amulet of Health, Another Strong Item
    Even back then, we were "roll and assign." So, yes, if someone put a decent score into strength, then got a pair of gauntlets, they felt kind of dumb. It's not a huge deal in and of itself, although getting a magical item as a reward and feeling dumb because of it certainly isn't optimal. But, in the process of feeling dumb, they realize that the magical item has more mechanical impact than the choices that defined their character. Maybe that excites some people, but it's certainly not what we were looking for in a game, even back then. Players make choices that they want for their characters much like we make choices in life. I grew up, went to college, graduated and make a decent living. If I win the lottery tomorrow does that mean I should feel dumb for bothering to get an education and a job? Build choices are much the same way. Your character doesn't know where the adventuring life may take him/her and so makes the best choices possible in the present. A magic item falling into t...
  • 06:57 PM - Sacrosanct quoted Kinak in post Amulet of Health, Another Strong Item
    It's probably because I'm not explaining myself well. Everyone makes their characters normally. Nobody's dumping anything assuming they're getting items later. But, if I do give out an item like this, they eventually realize that the magical item is all that actually matters now that they have it. They wish they could dump the stat in question after getting the item, because it does literally nothing for their character anymore. For a 5e example, see the post keterys up thread. Hopefully that's a bit clearer. If I still don't make sense, don't worry about it too much. I'm probably talking in circles. Cheers! Kinak So it's not really a problem in 20+ years of DMing? (since they existed back in AD&D) I've been gaming for just over 30 years, and I guess in my own anecdotal experience (FWIW I know ;) ), these items were pretty rare (certainly nothing to be planned for), and when they did show up, they were given to the PC who would gain the most benefit. I imagine that's a pretty common way of doing it. Therefore, I really don't think they are a problem or take away choices as has been claimed earlier. YMMV of course
  • 06:16 PM - Sacrosanct quoted Kinak in post Amulet of Health, Another Strong Item
    The attunement limit, frankly, implies a game with a lot of permanent items. Over twenty years of DMing, including several high-level campaigns, I've only run one campaign where that limit would have come into play. I admit I'm having a hard time parsing some of your posts. Here you're saying that in over 20+ years you've only had one campaign where PCs would have had more than 3 powerful magic items, but earlier your post seemed to imply that your players would use their primary stat as a dump stat because it was nearly assured they would get an item (like gauntlets). That doesn't seem to jive in my mind because there are TONS of magic items, and the odds of the items being rare enough that PCs hardly ever had 3 combined with the odds that they always got an ability boost item (fairly early on) seem pretty low; almost contradictory.
  • 05:31 PM - Ruin Explorer quoted Kinak in post Amulet of Health, Another Strong Item
    The fact that low con is so much more dangerous than low anything else aside, I just don't want my players to feel dumb because they put a decent score into something and got a sweet magical item later. Maybe nobody else has ever had that problem, I honestly don't know. But it was pretty consistent back in my 2nd Edition days and I'm really not excited to see that mechanic back. Cheers! Kinak There are two big problems with this, as I see it: 1) In 2E days, most groups rolled stats, they didn't elaborately buy them, so this whole "WASTED RESOURCES!" thing is a bit of a red herring if you want to discuss "the lessons of 2E". Indeed even post-2E it seems sketchy to focus on this so tightly. 2) The PARTY finds a magic item, not "a specific PC". The second one is a big deal and I've seen this precise thing happen in 2E - the party find Gauntlets of Ogre power - now they have a choice - give it to the 18/76 Fighter (significant gain going to what was it, 19 STR, or 18/00?), or give to the other main "hitter", in this party, a Speciality Priest of Someoneorother, for a much bigger gain. Either way it's a win. If the Fighter already had 19+ STR, it's simple - the SP gets it. That's STILL a win for the party! No-one's resources are being "wasted". Same with any of these items. Already got 15 CON, going up to 19 with this Amulet? WIN. If you don't think it's a win,...
  • 05:29 PM - ExploderWizard quoted Kinak in post Amulet of Health, Another Strong Item
    I agree 100% on this. Focus on the player's ongoing choices is key. That said, with mechanical build choices being presented, I think players have a reasonable expectation that those choices will also be respected by the system. Otherwise, why are they being asked to make them? Cheers! Kinak I see mechanical build choices existing for the sake of variety rather than a mini game to be "won" on its own. So build choices made to realize a character concept remain valid no matter what the party finds in it's adventures. I also hope the DMG addresses the issue of magic item destruction. In my games it can often be easy come easy go. Magic items can be lost or destroyed, new items found, etc. Think of magical items as goodies rather than the core of your character and when they are lost or broken it won't be the end of the world. In the classic 81 movie Clash of the Titans, Perseus begins his adventure with a magical helm, shield, & sword. The hazards of adventuring cause his helm to be lost in the swamp, and his shield melted by Medusa's blood. Two out three permanent magic items consumed in a single adventure!!! Does he cry foul and demand that the gods give him back his stuff? Nope. He keeps trucking on doing his thing. The gods send him a magical owl anyway. :D Ev...


Page 1 of 15 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Kinak's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites