View Profile: doctorbadwolf - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:36 PM
    Always givem more when it fixes a problem not bad to address the "must have" nature of things.
    35 replies | 564 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:33 PM
    I wouldnt go that far myself Yes to opposed rolls yes to aid other and a bonus to spell levels added. Presumably the best casting ability my Int is 18 and the Bards Charisma is 17 the Priests wizdom is 16 ... My casting ability controlls there spell slots contribute... enemy side does something similar. Compare total and apply special effects ;P I am sure they could be devils in the details...
    35 replies | 564 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:05 PM
    I suspect I would like a lot of your houserules
    78 replies | 1768 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:00 PM
    Chainmail Ranges in Inches I think each was 10 yards Sorcerer 60"Warlock 48"Magician 36"Seer 24" Better than Archery IRL ;)
    35 replies | 564 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:57 PM
    I was suggesting basic if the one player wants to counter an enemy spell he asks his allies if they want in? yes they all add no? they do not get to
    35 replies | 564 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:08 PM
    Idea of Multi-cast counterspell .... hmmm when I ask for strength check and multiple people are lifting I have in the past asked for the highest persons strength then gave a bonus for each person whose strength was within 5 points of that. AND make one check what if there was a rule where multiple casters could participate as a group or they interfered with one another?
    35 replies | 564 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:03 PM
    It is definitely a guess but you know in combat the guess is fairly solid the enemy spell is not something you want to happen
    35 replies | 564 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:00 PM
    There is a roll if they are countering a spell that his higher than 3rd... but I can see how opposed checks might feel more dynamic - my idea was to have d4+spell level+int? damage of a type perhaps related to the spell countered if you succeed and snap back damage if you fail, while allowing even countering lower level spells be somewhat more questionable. I definitely understand not...
    35 replies | 564 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:26 PM
    Trading a spell slot to delay them? and them not losing a spell slot, that is edging passed not even something i would want. Does it progress the fight might be a measure of worth.
    35 replies | 564 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:19 PM
    Combat and Tactics looks to have been extensive material.
    78 replies | 1768 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:13 PM
    Yeh the wasted reaction is one of the reasons why I didnt like protection its competing against the sentinel feat and opportunity attacks too. (both seem to be a defender fighters meat)
    78 replies | 1768 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:10 PM
    Agreed lots of cool answers.
    78 replies | 1768 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:18 PM
    Aside from introducing possible but even potentially rarish failure on lower level ones I wasnt thinking of inhibiting just flavoring it up a bit adding pop when it succeeds and opposite small ouch when it doesnt (ie having it potentially fail against a lower slot spell was just more of that pop) It occured to me that modern wizard duel inspiration does draw heavily on Harry Potter. ...
    35 replies | 564 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:00 PM
    I was thinking it sort of gave flavor of magic being dangerous not just a level of commitment to the counterspell too...
    35 replies | 564 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:54 PM
    How about my idea... make it a bit more iffy against lower level spells and give whiplash effects even a small amount of damage d4+spell level? of a type related to the spell countered. (if any) or a type opposite. And conversely when I fail to counter it i might take a small amount of damage of the opposite type maybe? I brought up the original Chainmail to show both heritage and that the...
    35 replies | 564 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:38 PM
    Nods I can see that... and even at 5th level for the wizard its one of potentially many. Put it alongside fireball or lightning bolt.
    35 replies | 564 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:52 PM
    How many adversaries are typically spell casters? I can actually see it way more valuable in say my game than someone else's as I think people are the most complex and interesting monsters of all. But I have definitely seen many a game where it never came up.
    35 replies | 564 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:40 PM
    So you have seen it as becoming "must have" hmmm.
    35 replies | 564 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:30 PM
    I am now picturing a counterspell which harms the enemy if it succeeds by whiplash like effect and may harm the one casting counterspell if it fails.
    35 replies | 564 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:26 PM
    Counter Spell goes way way back in Chainmail it was one of several magic abilities the casters simply had. Alongside either a Fireball, or Lightning bolt, seeing in the Dark and becoming invisible till they attacked. The above were basically at-wills, yeh. Though in a mass battle each turn might be closer to an encounter but since the adversary also only did one thing its closer feeling to...
    35 replies | 564 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 12:14 PM
    I do not think I remember seeing more than 1 or 2 henchmen ever it demonstrates how different experiences can be.
    78 replies | 1768 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:51 AM
    I had considered a Leading Attack... which allowed one to probe for openings or induce openings in the enemy so that subsequent attacks could make use of the revealed opening. Whether the attack was yours or someone elses. Once the opening was exploited it went away. So you could make it a pretty big benefit I wasnt thinking advantage though. The other fighting styles give advantage on the attack...
    49 replies | 1008 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:38 AM
    This reminds me of the assertion that 1e had people playing with extra rows of polearm users in the groups There is a feat where ALL adjacent allies get +1 AC bonus due to your shield work. Phalanx Warrior It is subtle. But that is not a FEAT bonus so if a bunch of you had it. The entire group could be compounding with adjacent allies - each member of the phalanx created shield wall...
    78 replies | 1768 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:13 AM
    The 2e Fighter *(Warrior Lord) definitely included the 4e Warlord in its banner (at least flavor wise).
    78 replies | 1768 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:01 AM
    Fireballs must be really easy to cast... (this is actually a reference to an old issue of D&D spells always working but being described as really hard and meticulous = but a stray cat could mess up the casters day - ok that is later in the story)
    78 replies | 1768 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:42 AM
    To be clear ... does not exist in 4e either that is more 4e is an MMO speak congratulations join the dog pile of ignorance.
    78 replies | 1768 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:15 AM
    Taunting / Intimidating and so on was a very common technique IRL. People/creatures are not dead wood. NOTE the very very limited but still available stopping up a doorway just quit being the only way which it was previously. When it's all you got it gets glorified. "sophisticated" -stop up a doorway is sophisticated? It was a desperate only way for decades LOL The Cavalier cannot...
    78 replies | 1768 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:46 AM
    It uses your one and only reaction... no opportunity attacks no Sentinel feat benefits and you are protecting against an attack that may have been something which already failed. It seems like you are trading out offense not defense.
    78 replies | 1768 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 11:45 PM
    I heard this was a patch for someone leaping off of cliffs/tall towers with impunity
    160 replies | 4045 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 11:28 PM
    My first personal character for the last edition was a swordmage with white lotus riposte trivially created at level 1. Do a swordburst damaging a bunch then if they attack they get porcupined with force blades back
    78 replies | 1768 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 10:45 PM
    That just needed quoted
    160 replies | 4045 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 09:39 PM
    Conceptually Talents for Monsters opposite Talents for Player Characters may be rather like what I was talking about depending on the details Or at least a method to present the new abilities
    100 replies | 2216 view(s)
    0 XP
  • doctorbadwolf's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 09:30 PM
    I love the Romulans and the aftermath of their world dying is explored very interestingly in STO, so I’m looking forward to that.
    16 replies | 383 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 09:13 PM
    Or go variant human I think. Interesting and a different take. Interestingly intricate level progression Makes me think of Conan almost ;) What would be your best level 5?
    78 replies | 1768 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 09:08 PM
    It almost has to be seen that way when it takes so much time and energy for me I have to decide if it's even worth it.
    100 replies | 2216 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 08:56 PM
    Thanks to those who actually contributed on this thread without playing accusatory MMO games
    78 replies | 1768 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 08:49 PM
    Pretty murky behind paying for it, not that I would begrudge doing so if it managed to clear up the problems I currently see with 5e.
    100 replies | 2216 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 08:38 PM
    Not sure that is entirely true myself I was targeting a big tactical module as much as something WOTC could produce as anything. The earlier edition had a Tactical expansion of 192 pages; The set of role oriented subclasses some may already exist minor tweaks on Cavalier. Monsters which create more varied problems than a big bag of hit points and something like a more explicit stunt system...
    100 replies | 2216 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 08:28 PM
    I shoot for not overwhelmingly specific partly because it could differ a lot It's a method for inspiring people without over-riding their own inclinations. someone just shared a homebrew everyman/simple action that allows someone to "Take a hit" when their adjacent squishier allie is about to be hit they can interpose, hoping maybe their greater defense helps them out. It could be seen as a...
    100 replies | 2216 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 08:18 PM
    Ah that works and is a compromise removing my criticism.
    78 replies | 1768 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 08:15 PM
    Yeh I couldn't understand how there was a failure to communicate... which is evidence of a failure to communicate too LOL
    100 replies | 2216 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 08:12 PM
    Parrying an attack against ones ally for that shield user might be... a somewhat different thought. You trade out your shield bonus to improve an allies armor class not your own... you no longer get the bonus till the end of your turn.
    78 replies | 1768 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 08:09 PM
    Hmmm.. I was just thinking that a reaction is such a commodity using it when the enemy might not even hit would feel lame.
    78 replies | 1768 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 07:57 PM
    I do like that quite a bit... I have been thinking for quite a while that a lot of fiction has heros who do little tidbits that might be seen as overlapping on the specialists. Many times it includes characters inspiring their allies but yes this is definitely another, a dive in front of an attack seems viable (you could even add some small movement if you accept being prone afterwards)... ...
    78 replies | 1768 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 06:59 PM
    OK I will channel my much younger self. Note I now disagree with that guy on almost every point for various reasons. hmmm maybe some are still influencing my thinking Hit points massively increasing? I mean really? Single attribute based actions = there is nothing that simple? Classes = carbon copy encouragement for the win Amnesia magic = nothing at all like legend or myth....
    163 replies | 7129 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 06:45 PM
    That might be ok if something is rare enough it isn't something to count on or worry too much over ... however it REALLY REALLY seems strange a mage is immune to the interference of the Cavalier adjacent to them. Hard to imagine they cannot ... something about mechanics being unnecessarily different, yada yada yada memory escapes me. Mage slayer looks like it has some bite against adjacent...
    78 replies | 1768 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 06:13 PM
    There is a fun issue... your intimidation or even active interference against nearby enemies cannot will not interfere with casters they are immune.
    78 replies | 1768 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 06:04 PM
    My gameworld has a hmmmmm archetype? That sometimes were called justiciars originally like police back in the ancient times but many of them became more like personal guards in modern times. Green Knights were one such group who I sort of hedged as being like druid/fighters when it was 1e days. But the Warden in 4e was associated with the Nature magic / sort of Druidic branch it fit rather well....
    78 replies | 1768 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 05:59 PM
    I kind of like that too it rather has the intimidation angle going on... You are distracting them because they think you might be coming back for more.
    78 replies | 1768 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 05:52 PM
    Yes it certain seems to have some how many of what you mention above are in the Players Handbook vs Xanathars (which I had not investigated) I think ones that require a reaction are pretty darn limited though. And goading attack seems to have no impact on casters.
    78 replies | 1768 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 05:49 PM
    We had tons of outdoor adventures back in the day I still do including many open arenas and battlefields whose only walls were trees ...heck I think dungeons were actually pretty nonsensical to many DMs. 5 foot door ways for the win I suppose or dead squishies because someone objects to enemies falling for false openings, tricks and taunting and intimidation effects. Honestly I do not...
    78 replies | 1768 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 05:33 PM
    The exception proves the rule... they might also ignore your attacks and run past so they can get at the more brains behind you not because you are too tough but because more meat is back there. Yeh but if you can barely react to one enemy see 5e... watch the others run by to get at the squishy threat with glea. The doorway/choke 5' point solution can under a narrow circumstances enable...
    78 replies | 1768 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 05:26 PM
    The above is pointing out how recognizing roles as specializations of PCs is not a new thing I think if you make a diverse set of tactical choices they will undoubtedly interact with roles. 5e classes are pretty locked down design elements hurray for supporting classes but it means that the fighter is a meh defender without something like the subclass Cavalier. And arguably he needs a way to...
    100 replies | 2216 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 05:07 PM
    Show me how show me. An ability might support one role when used one way and another role when used another way... does that mean it somehow doesn't support roles?
    100 replies | 2216 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 04:59 PM
    Ah I was kind of hoping you had some inspiration on that which I lacked to be honest.
    100 replies | 2216 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 04:55 PM
    You are being obtuse I told you that you could swap out the adjective for its opposite and the sentence and idea still sounds interesting why would you have ever assumed I meant the adjective was ? "important"? Explain how it even makes sense to look at the words I want to meet a fancy dancer and assume your can remove the word dancer and have it even be meaningful let alone important?...
    100 replies | 2216 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 04:30 PM
    Your being very hard to hit is not some invisible property If they do not behave differently very quickly then the DM is roleplaying them very badly... The guy who looks like he might be leaving openings but can take a lot of shots will be the target of choice the entire battle. Even though the DM knows you can soak the crap out of it. That will take much longer for the monsters to notice ...
    78 replies | 1768 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 04:23 PM
    @dave2008 creating non-combat tactical role support might be something brand new to D&D even. Though I have heard of the face and similar ideas I do not remember them ever being rich with tactical choices.
    100 replies | 2216 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 03:59 PM
    Thumbs up for being very on topic ;)
    100 replies | 2216 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 03:50 PM
    Adjectives cannot stand alone they describe the other and I pointed out you could in theory also create a non-combat tactical module which might be very intriguing to be honest.
    100 replies | 2216 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 03:45 PM
    And the early edition had fighters become minion sweepers too as they levelled (if the DM used them zero levels it could in theory make fighters feel pretty badass)
    100 replies | 2216 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 03:41 PM
    The party was according to Arneson originally inspired by the US fireteam of 4 soldiers. With classes approximately reflecting its composition/roles.
    100 replies | 2216 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 03:38 PM
    Adjective is battlefield indicating type and noun is role ... could call it combat role too. ( though in theory you could actually have a non-combat tactical expansion)
    100 replies | 2216 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 03:30 PM
    Not everything is a comparison and 4e will not always be better ;) - it cannot be ubiquitous like it was in chainmail (nor as absolute) so giving it other subtle control like the control I added which fit flavorwise seems a compensation for the indirect control it used to get.
    100 replies | 2216 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 03:27 PM
    Sure and ones best designs are likely something you buy into yourself. I also think battlefield role support is a component of tactical game play. 5e is not very flush with that. So a module that built a series of subclasses to bring that on might be good. Had not even seen the Cavalier till I asked about defenders.
    100 replies | 2216 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 03:08 PM
    It took an expansion to get what looks like a functional defender... unless I am missing something
    100 replies | 2216 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 03:02 PM
    Fireball and lightning were iconic wizard magic from Chainmail they had indirect control because they were ubiquitous and as large area of not-ally friendly effects influences enemy behavior to not-clump together and 2 get close to allies of the wizard so the wizard cannot easily smash you - A wizard always had 1 or the other (which they could do every turn of the battle). Other consistent...
    100 replies | 2216 view(s)
    0 XP
  • doctorbadwolf's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 02:30 PM
    It was sold as a product in itself, not as an “early access” for another product. If all of the mechanical content is duplicated, they’re going back on that, and turning a 25$ product that was worth its price into a glorified Dragonmark article about Sharn.
    31 replies | 895 view(s)
    0 XP
  • doctorbadwolf's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 07:09 AM
    Unless the Wayfinders Guide is updated with those tweaks, this would be absolutely unacceptable.
    31 replies | 895 view(s)
    0 XP
  • doctorbadwolf's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 07:08 AM
    If the WGTE “was a playtest”, wotc did something extremely dishonest with its release. You know people payed for it, right?
    31 replies | 895 view(s)
    0 XP
  • doctorbadwolf's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 06:47 AM
    Thats literally the primary content of an Eberron setting book.
    31 replies | 895 view(s)
    0 XP
  • doctorbadwolf's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 05:26 AM
    Nothing yet. I hope that it doesn’t have everything from Wayfinder’s Guide, because I’ll be very ticked off if they essentially make it so that I have to pay twice for the same stuff in order to get what’s new in this new product. I also wonder if we if we will be getting an Eberron Starter Kit.
    31 replies | 895 view(s)
    0 XP
  • doctorbadwolf's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 05:23 AM
    Hexadin should be fun, but a straight rogue would also be fun. You want a build where weapon damage die just doesn’t matter, and that doesn’t require your target be within 5ft. Rogue/Battlemaster with two whips could be really fun. Most maneuvers don’t even specify melee, much less 5ft, so you could do a lot with the secondary effects and a build they can’t easily get to. Combine that with...
    15 replies | 347 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 05:21 AM
    It was already mentioned something other than boring bags of hit points monsters consider that your starting point ... then one needs abilities which interact with those on the player side and that depends on what abilities you give those monsters doesn't it devil is in the details and one thing you provide cascades into other things remember how I mentioned "what good is an ability that allows...
    100 replies | 2216 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 04:43 AM
    I prefer a foundation and some assumptions in the foundation make changing it pretty difficult. For instance 4e assumed heros were most likely gradually approaching something akin to demigod status able to perform stunts which parallel works of magic through skill alone now if you wanted to pretend to being just a farm boy who could accidentally kill beasts the size of buildings through brute...
    100 replies | 2216 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 04:11 AM
    you could definitely get a goal through the hoops right into left field over that issue...
    100 replies | 2216 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 03:54 AM
    Here is a lesson in playing a defender if you are too hard to hit and ultimate on saving throws ie defenses it is a very good way NOT to be an effective defender in 4e because the DM will have next to no reason for monsters to attack you because the DM is almost always the difference between you being attacked and not. Although occasionally a defender will have a nice trick that suckers the...
    78 replies | 1768 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 03:28 AM
    Because swordmages are so intrinsically superior, snicker They simply must be built as level 17
    49 replies | 1008 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 03:23 AM
    I did make a more controllerish lightning bolt up thread
    27 replies | 942 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 03:09 AM
    Not what I was saying I was saying so there is that. You wanted to know why I thought it would be difficult and that was an element I would like to see but also an example of how such an element could touch on wide varieties of other design elements and that is a reason tactical elements tend to not be easy squeezy lemon peasy
    100 replies | 2216 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 02:33 AM
    Did that way back in 1e days but I am lazier now... reflavor seemed sufficient
    100 replies | 2216 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 12:52 AM
    LOL you took facing more literally than I meant it... but I suppose I could have said impacting its utterly appropriate for monsters to have one set of rules and the monsters another. your hyperbole about how having zero to -3 be unconscious with the rest dying is still hyperbolic and misplaced unless you think you are playing 3e where they lock step npcs and pcs like the game was RuneQuest 3...
    160 replies | 4045 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 12:37 AM
    Looks for place in the books saying monster and player facing rules are identical... then turns to 3rd edition ahah.
    160 replies | 4045 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 12:34 AM
    honestly I only remember their premise ... they may have grabbed random encounter difficulties for all I know so a few bad rolls in a row on the dms side and your group is eaten by a series of nasties which if you planned would be really nasty. Though i think a chase scene with lower difficultes ie a skill challenge would be how the second level + 4 would go down if they survived the first is...
    160 replies | 4045 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 12:11 AM
    Bloodied is a pacing mechanism which changes and swaps out tactical choices. (Does that make bloodied tactical even though it itself isn't usually a choice I think so - see below for ways it becomes a choice too) On the monster side of the screen monsters get powers that renew on bloodied conditions for instance it changes there choices I have player characters with powers and even skill...
    100 replies | 2216 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Saturday, 20th July, 2019, 11:44 PM
    One can use all the option rich elements not to optimize for potency or balance but for flavor which is why I liked even Hybrids in 4e. 5e multi-classing doesn't live up to my expectations for enabling broad richness, it appears to make somethings prohibitively costly for little reason and other things trivially easy because of coincidence or something. Like having to go 17 levels before I...
    100 replies | 2216 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Saturday, 20th July, 2019, 11:06 PM
    There was a player designed expansion for 4e I think it was designed to show how the rules were flexible enough that without change you can make 4e as deadly as you wanted I think it was called 4th core?
    160 replies | 4045 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Saturday, 20th July, 2019, 11:00 PM
    That is how we interpreted it. From zero to optionally negative 3 nobody had to worry about you if you managed to drop negative farther than that it was a dying process although easily stopped. We still died horribad easy but that rule did make it less absolute than what I saw in the old Blue Book D&D
    160 replies | 4045 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Saturday, 20th July, 2019, 10:57 PM
    Yes 3 to 5 is reasonable... though I have known many editions where the designers thought X was the target and players did 1 significant battle with only a few scrapes otherwise besides that so I it may just be people being people. Sure that is the other end of the improvement how much tougher do you make it when you have X likely fights in a given span. 5e did seems to learn some from...
    160 replies | 4045 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Saturday, 20th July, 2019, 10:22 PM
    I would express it as there was less random fluctuation and you are more aware of how how a given challenge will resolve... its not "trying hard" its predictably hard... less oops more planned on the verge of tpk because i designed the encounter that way. DM choices ARE decisive and blaming the dice less a thing. There were ways of Jinxing the EL guidelines even in 4e so its not completely...
    160 replies | 4045 view(s)
    0 XP
More Activity
About doctorbadwolf

Basic Information

Age
34
About doctorbadwolf
Introduction:
Cooperative storytelling, solid mechanics, fun. Everything else is just details.
About Me:
Gamer, designer, author, musician. All the things. Polinerd.
Sex:
Rather not say
Age Group:
31-40
My Game Details

Details of games currently playing and games being sought.

State:
California
Country:
USA
Game Details:
Currently running a 4e Eberron game set mostly in Sharn, featuring crime investigations both local and small and larger conspiracies (one character is an exiled Knight of one of the Orders disavowed in Karnath, and seeks to purge the corruption of the Blood of Vol and return her order to it's former honor and glory. )

"Crossroads"- 1630's Earth (mostly Europe) where magic is present and the british royal family is Welsh, descended directly from Mordred (and The Morrigan), and Shadar-kai (sort of shadow fey, for those not familiar). Basically, and age of Empires/Emperialism focus, with Norther Europe united under the banner of Reykjavik, the Catholic Church in ruins, the Eastern Roman Empire calling itself The Byzantine Empire (with Eastern Orthodoxy prominent), and the Muslim Empire controlling the Middle East, Northern Africa and parts of southern Europe. And then all those fun colonies.

Alternity, Firefly-esque campaign

Forgotten Realms 4e game currently finding themselves
My Character:
Tend to play skirmishers with light weapons, who mix martial prowess and magic, usually with some acrobatic/parkour abillity. in DnD terms, ShadowDancers, Monks, Assassins, Gishes of all kinds. The occasional Avenger type. Also, fond of Sherlock Holmes types.

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
3,875
Posts Per Day
1.62
Last Post
Star Trek Picard extended Comic-Con trailer Sunday, 21st July, 2019 09:30 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
20
General Information
Join Date
Sunday, 30th December, 2012
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0

3 Friends

  1. Alpha WOLF Alpha WOLF is offline

    Member

    Alpha WOLF
  2. Garthanos Garthanos is online now

    Member

    Garthanos
  3. Reinhart Reinhart is offline

    Member

    Reinhart
Showing Friends 1 to 3 of 3
My Game Details
State:
California
Country:
USA
Game Details:
Currently running a 4e Eberron game set mostly in Sharn, featuring crime investigations both local and small and larger conspiracies (one character is an exiled Knight of one of the Orders disavowed in Karnath, and seeks to purge the corruption of the Blood of Vol and return her order to it's former honor and glory. )

"Crossroads"- 1630's Earth (mostly Europe) where magic is present and the british royal family is Welsh, descended directly from Mordred (and The Morrigan), and Shadar-kai (sort of shadow fey, for those not familiar). Basically, and age of Empires/Emperialism focus, with Norther Europe united under the banner of Reykjavik, the Catholic Church in ruins, the Eastern Roman Empire calling itself The Byzantine Empire (with Eastern Orthodoxy prominent), and the Muslim Empire controlling the Middle East, Northern Africa and parts of southern Europe. And then all those fun colonies.

Alternity, Firefly-esque campaign

Forgotten Realms 4e game currently finding themselves
My Character:
Tend to play skirmishers with light weapons, who mix martial prowess and magic, usually with some acrobatic/parkour abillity. in DnD terms, ShadowDancers, Monks, Assassins, Gishes of all kinds. The occasional Avenger type. Also, fond of Sherlock Holmes types.
Page 1 of 18 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Sunday, 21st July, 2019


Saturday, 20th July, 2019


Friday, 19th July, 2019


Thursday, 18th July, 2019



Page 1 of 18 1234567891011 ... LastLast
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Saturday, 13th July, 2019


Friday, 12th July, 2019


Thursday, 11th July, 2019


Wednesday, 10th July, 2019

  • 10:57 PM - ParanoydStyle mentioned doctorbadwolf in post Which kind of D&D content, created and published on Patreon, are you most likely to support?
    So, discounting temporarily the various and diverse "Other" responses, "Monsters" (which to my mind includes NPCs even though I made them separate categories in the poll because I guess my mind was not my mind then? weird) seem to be the most sought after content thus far. This is good because monsters are the kind of content I've already in the groove of making. Again I want to thank everyone for your responses which have been very educational. doctorbadwolf, I'm not fortunate enough to be running as many games as you, I've just got the one and even that just started, but I think I feel exactly the same way you do about player options and homebrew content.

Thursday, 4th July, 2019


Wednesday, 3rd July, 2019

  • 08:16 PM - Yaarel mentioned doctorbadwolf in post What spells should have had the ritual tag, but don't?
    @doctorbadwolf Assuming light armor is baseline. It is probably still worth a skill to gain proficiency with it. The Wizard class did not get it and, if it wants it, could reasonably swap something like a skill for it. Note proficiency with one or more simple weapons is also a baseline. Together, light armor and one or more simple weapons, plus shield, total 4 points for basic self-defense − what typical people look like when they get drafted for a battle. • 2 shield • 1 light armor • 2 Medium Armor (prereq light) • 3 Heavy Armor (prereq medium) • 2 flat +1 bonus to AC (full Dexterity) • 3 Mage Armor (light +1) • 4 ability score +1
  • 05:32 AM - Yaarel mentioned doctorbadwolf in post What spells should have had the ritual tag, but don't?
    @doctorbadwolf To clarify regarding balance. I agree always-on Mage Armor is nonbroken. At the same time, Mage Armor is very powerful, ultimately as powerful as Plate Armor. Plate Armor too is nonbroken. Warlock has always-on Mage Armor as an invocation, and no one seems overly fascinated with it. At least in the context of a Warlock, it seems balanced. I feel the Wizard can get it for free. At level 1, to anticipate Eldritch Knight, a Fighting Style should be able to swap the medium armor and heavy armor proficiency for always-on Mage Armor and a Wizard cantrip. I feel Mage Armor can be a more normal part of the D&D experience. My concern is, this mainstreaming of Mage Armor and its defacto improvement of Dexterity versus Strength, needs to come with a rethinking of the heavier armors generally and ensure Strength Fighters remain competitive. In the dynamic of 5e, attacks seem more valuable than defense. Moreso than earlier editions. Not exactly sure why. I agree with you that the armor ...

Tuesday, 2nd July, 2019

  • 04:00 AM - Yaarel mentioned doctorbadwolf in post What spells should have had the ritual tag, but don't?
    doctorbadwolf It is balanced for the Wizard to have Mage Armor always on. Casting and dispelling as an action at-will. As a class feature. Without spending slots on it. (As is, the Wizard class is underpowered at level 1, compared to Fighter and Cleric at level 1. The boost of Mage Armor can help fill this gap. It balances.) If other classes want to multiclass to dip into the Wizard to pick up Mage Armor, that is balanced too. Regarding rituals, I prefer to keep the ritual design space separate for noncombat.
  • 01:53 AM - Yaarel mentioned doctorbadwolf in post What spells should have had the ritual tag, but don't?
    doctorbadwolf To be clear, Mage Armor is balanced. AC 18 cannot break the game. The problem is. D&D 5e depends on the math of bounded accuracy. It is necessary to stay sober and curb the intoxication temptation and habit of piling on endless bonus numbers. AC 18 is the highest armor AC possible in D&D 5e. Getting access to the highest AC possible is worth a half feat. Officially it is worth two half feats, and by allowing an unlimited Dex bonus on top of it, it is equivalent to three half feats. Requiring only one half feat to gain Mage Armor seems generous.

Saturday, 20th April, 2019

  • 09:31 PM - Mercurius mentioned doctorbadwolf in post Star Wars VIII: The Last Jedi argument
    doctorbadwolf, I watch absolutely zero anime or cartoons, so can't comment on that. And yeah, it would be nice to see a male hero that doesn't solve everything through brute force. I don't disagree with what you said re: Carol Danvers and WW, but also think there's room for exploring gender-flavored themes and ideas (e.g. "How might a woman use the Force differently than a man?").

Thursday, 18th April, 2019


Friday, 12th April, 2019

  • 07:57 AM - Hawk Diesel mentioned doctorbadwolf in post How do YOU handle a Fastball Special, and other team manuevers?
    ...suffer in distance, that does not mean that inventive individuals could not develop new throwing techniques that better balance accuracy with distance. 2) These competitions use ideal throwing implements. But the implements do not have any input into the execution of the throw. If we are talking about launching a person, and that person is as practiced at being launched as the thrower is at launching a person, then there may be opportunities and techniques made by both the thrower and throwee that improve distance and accuracy. So long as the throwee is not just being passive, dead weight then there is opportunity for the throwing implement to aid in the execution of the throw. Something a caber or weight cannot do. For example, check out the heights and distances achieved by this taekwondo team: https://youtu.be/eSnEaoQeAqc They are working together to achieve more height and distance than they could alone, and demonstrating ability to accurately strike targets as well. doctorbadwolf - The above video may provide additional inspiration for team maneuvers.

Wednesday, 10th April, 2019

  • 06:16 PM - Hawk Diesel mentioned doctorbadwolf in post How do YOU handle a Fastball Special, and other team manuevers?
    Elfcrusher - That was my main point though. If a player is not just wanting to try something, but is using resources and class/racial abilities to attempt these feats, then why not allow them to try and do so with some reward for creative use of their resources. In a world full of magic and elements that break traditional concepts of "normal" and "physics," I just have difficulty understanding the line people use to determine that one element is completely fine (magic users bending the laws of reality to their whim), but fantasy warriors of fictional strength couldn't achieve feats outside what one might expect in the real world. And yes, I'm aware of the meter long chain. I was a thrower in college. If you haven't tried it, there is NOTHING more therapeutic than spinning to whip a metal ball hurtling through the air fast enough to destroy anything in it's path. ^_^ Elfcrusher and doctorbadwolf - Let's try and cool off a bit. We are all talking about a dice game that we imagine in our heads. We all have different concepts about what D&D is or isn't. While I disagree where some people place the line for what does or doesn't break immersion, genre, or levels of gonzo, I fully respect people's ability to place the line where they are most comfortable. I think its interesting to discuss with people the reasons for their considerations, both as a means to challenge and expand my own stances, as well as to reinforce them through my arguments. Let's not let differences of opinion or hostility break down a really interesting conversation about how something like this could be incorporated into D&D, how it might be executed, under what circumstances, and how people might rule on it in the moment. Players are always testing us as DMs with creative ideas or solutions that we could never have expected, forcing us to make off-the-cuff rulings based on gut instinct. So let's use this as an...

Tuesday, 9th April, 2019

  • 02:23 AM - Hawk Diesel mentioned doctorbadwolf in post How do YOU handle a Fastball Special, and other team manuevers?
    Immortal Sun - My issue with your way of ruling it is not necessarily in the difficulty. As you mentioned, the DCs you set are reasonable. But you don't really go into the throw distance. Additionally, you don't really make mention if the thrower needs to use their action too. So there's some ambiguity regarding some aspects that would help determine if it's even worth trying the maneuver. And you indicate yourself that success is pretty much the same as running up and attempting an attack. If this would require action economy investment on the part of both the thrower and throwee, then all that for something the throwee could do themselves is not really worth it. So outside of some ambiguity with your propsed solution, my main issue is that you yourself talk about a "punishing" side of a check and that you don't even want it to happen. Now, sure, as a DM there are plenty of things I don't want in my games or don't want my players to do. But in the words of doctorbadwolf, I still try to allow these instances in good faith if it makes sense. I try to reward creativity and provide rewards commensurate to the difficulty of the attempt. Additionally, I try to allow my players to try new things that might not be allowed by the rules if ot makes sense and seems fun. Yes, people are heavy and throwing them might be hard. But what if the thrower is Enlarged or under the effect of Bear's Strength or using a potion of Giant Strength? And maybe the throwee is reduced, wildshaped, or a monk. There are instances where these attempts might make more sense than just normal, everyday fights where the players haven't used relevant resources. But if these things become a problem, session 0 has already established that I may discuss with my players using the Wand of Retcon and change or disallow previous rulings for future sessions if my initial ruling becomes problemstic or the players attempt to abuse my leniency.

Monday, 8th April, 2019

  • 12:50 PM - Oofta mentioned doctorbadwolf in post How do YOU handle a Fastball Special, and other team manuevers?
    doctorbadwolf, when I referenced jump distance base being limited to the jump distance of the thrower, I meant that if the thrower had a supernaturally long jump speed it would not be counted in. So if the thrower has boots of striding and springing, it doesn't get added in for example. There are class features as well that can increase jump distance. As far as the skill check, I sometimes call for it if you need extreme accuracy on where you're targeting, if you want to pull off a stunt or if you want to make a slightly longer leap.

Friday, 29th March, 2019

  • 01:57 AM - Hussar mentioned doctorbadwolf in post How Should Taunting Work?
    doctorbadwolf - I think the point he was trying to make is that you shouldn't get too hung up on the specifics of the example. Iron Golem may have been a bad choice, but the point still remains, is allowing this sort of things to be put in the hands of the player good for the table? At my table? Yup, no worries. Other DM's are far more controlling than I am though, so, they wouldn't like the idea that you could "force" them to do anything. The inconsistency here is, as you point out, we can already do most of a "taunt" with something a heck of a lot smaller than a wolf. Granting advantage every round with a tiny familiar is perfectly fine. Because, apparently, if it's in the rules, then it makes it ok. However, a 150 pound angry wolf drawing aggro is apparently totally unbelievable. :uhoh: Some folks are really, REALLY against anything like a house rule, particularly anything like a house rule proposed by a player. And you will never convince these folks otherwise.

Thursday, 28th February, 2019

  • 05:08 AM - FrogReaver mentioned doctorbadwolf in post Variants/Subclass for a DPR Rogue
    doctorbadwolf A rogue that can self cast haste is a very scary character. It's a good thing that only comes up at level 13+. If I were to do a combat focused rogue I would find a way to add in some NOVA damage capabilities. I think rogue at will damage is about right. It's just paladin's divine smite and fighter's action surge really tend to overshadow them. I feel like a combat focused rogue needs an X times per rest ability that allows him to deal damage as if he had crit on his next hit or something similar.

Sunday, 3rd February, 2019

  • 08:39 AM - pukunui mentioned doctorbadwolf in post A 5e Swordmage?
    doctorbadwolf: Have you looked at the stone sorcerer from Unearthed Arcana? I seem to recall that it was something of a swordmage in disguise. It had the swordmage's aegis class feature, and it also enabled you to take the paladin's weapon-based smite spells, among other things.

Friday, 11th January, 2019

  • 09:26 PM - Blue mentioned doctorbadwolf in post yes, this again: Fighters need more non-combat options
    I have that evidence I believe doctorbadwolf is speaking of saved... https://www.sageadvice.eu/2018/03/09/a-majority-of-dd-characters-dont-use-feats/ It was from Jeremy Crawford citing their internal data. Another piece of D&D data: a majority of D&D characters don't use feats. Many players love the customization possible with feats, but a larger group of players is happy to make characters without feats. Feats are, therefore, not a driving force behind many players' choices. #DnD Yes. And doctorbadwolf has been attempting to say that "a majority of D&D characters don't use feats" is the same as "most D&D games do not allow feats". I don't think those statements are the same, what Jeremy Crawford said does not support the second. The majority of my characters don't have feats - but a good chunk of my characters haven't gotten their second ASI yet (I rarely go for it with my 1st ASI), and of the ones that have many have gone for a second ASI. But that doesn't mean I'm playing in a featless game - feats are allo...
  • 09:19 PM - Quickleaf mentioned doctorbadwolf in post yes, this again: Fighters need more non-combat options
    And I'm calling that out as a unsupported statement. You're the one presenting it, please provide some proof. I have that evidence I believe doctorbadwolf is speaking of saved... https://www.sageadvice.eu/2018/03/09/a-majority-of-dd-characters-dont-use-feats/ It was from Jeremy Crawford citing their internal data. Another piece of D&D data: a majority of D&D characters don't use feats. Many players love the customization possible with feats, but a larger group of players is happy to make characters without feats. Feats are, therefore, not a driving force behind many players' choices. #DnD EDIT: If you're in the camp that believes Jeremy is misinterpreting data, you can scroll down to see Adam Bradford's comment about DND Beyond characters who have feats as supporting evidence.


Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
No results to display...

Monday, 22nd July, 2019

  • 09:23 PM - jayoungr quoted doctorbadwolf in post Any news on the Eberron Hardcover books' release date?
    If the WGTE “was a playtest”, wotc did something extremely dishonest with its release. You know people payed for it, right? Charging for playtest material is a trend. I remember a couple of GenCons ago when everyone was fighting to pay $30-35 for the newest FFG Star Wars supplement in playtest form.

Sunday, 21st July, 2019

  • 04:23 PM - Parmandur quoted doctorbadwolf in post Any news on the Eberron Hardcover books' release date?
    It was sold as a product in itself, not as an “early access” for another product. If all of the mechanical content is duplicated, they’re going back on that, and turning a 25$ product that was worth its price into a glorified Dragonmark article about Sharn. They were very clear that WGtE was always intended to be a playtest for another product down the line: the material in question was made available for free as fast as possible. The remaining 150 pages may or may not be worth the money, but it is what they were selling (and they had to compensate Baker and the others involved). I admit, I didn't buy the book because they said it was a playtest for a future book: because they were transparent about their plans. If it makes you feel better about the new book, it will have somewhere in the neighborhood of 200-230 new pages, probably including a ton of monsters, using Ravnica as the basis for comparison.
  • 08:58 AM - CapnZapp quoted doctorbadwolf in post Any news on the Eberron Hardcover books' release date?
    I hope that it doesn’t have everything from Wayfinder’s Guide, because I’ll be very ticked off if they essentially make it so that I have to pay twice for the same stuff in order to get what’s new in this new product. I thought this was *exactly* what will be happening..? And you don't *have* to pay for anything. If you put up money for the Wayfarer's Guide, you did so because you wanted Early Access in unrefined form. But you could have just waited for the finalized product if you didn't like "paying twice"... Cheers
  • 07:21 AM - Parmandur quoted doctorbadwolf in post Any news on the Eberron Hardcover books' release date?
    If the WGTE “was a playtest”, wotc did something extremely dishonest with its release. You know people payed for it, right? Certainly, but WotC was always upfront on what they were doing. Mearls even laid out their exact plans for this hardcover on Twitter as a conditional possibility. They released a portion of the book on UA the day of release, and proceeded to release the relevant playtest material for the rest of the year. They've also stated they will finalize the WGtE and enable PoD, and I see no reason to doubt they will, since the parts they are likely to repeat are all free online for everyone. The value for the WGtE was never the material that they were making free, it's the other ~150 pages of setting and RP info from Keith Baker.
  • 07:17 AM - Charlaquin quoted doctorbadwolf in post Any news on the Eberron Hardcover books' release date?
    If the WGTE “was a playtest”, wotc did something extremely dishonest with its release. You know people payed for it, right? It says it's playtest content, both in the book itself and in its dndbeyond description, so I don't see how it's in any way dishonest. Unless the Wayfinders Guide is updated with those tweaks, this would be absolutely unacceptable. I don't agree, but like Parmandur said, WotC has promised to do exactly that.
  • 06:54 AM - Parmandur quoted doctorbadwolf in post Any news on the Eberron Hardcover books' release date?
    Thats literally the primary content of an Eberron setting book. Not really: the WGtE had a large page count that had nothing to do with the hand full of rules that will be repeated (else why playtest them?), such as RP flavor different races and campaign info for Sharn. The 3.X setting had loads of books that didn't repeat the handful of Race and Class options, and seemed to do fine. The core Races, the Dragonmark stuff, and the Artificer will be repeated: the extensive Sharn campagn material almost certainly not: monsters, and info for other parts of Eberron would be my expectation. But the WGtE was a playtest: what they playtested is bound to be repeated. One big difference: new art, rather than precious edition leftovers.
  • 05:42 AM - Parmandur quoted doctorbadwolf in post Any news on the Eberron Hardcover books' release date?
    Nothing yet. I hope that it doesn’t have everything from Wayfinder’s Guide, because I’ll be very ticked off if they essentially make it so that I have to pay twice for the same stuff in order to get what’s new in this new product. I also wonder if we if we will be getting an Eberron Starter Kit. The material that went through the UA process will almost certainly be repeated, but that came to like 20 pages over all.

Saturday, 20th July, 2019

  • 01:58 PM - Ovinomancer quoted doctorbadwolf in post Double Dash
    You referenced out of combat speed as a problem. There are rules that cover most instances of out of combat running. It's...quite relevant. Sigh. Already had this conversation. I didn't bring up out of combat movement, that was others. So, no. I'm not ever going to care, even a tiny little bit, about this sort of nit picking. You know what walking speed is. Pedantry is entirely useless. I don't, actually. Calling it a walking speed comes with a host of assumptions, like "what's your running speed?" that are entirely unwarranted and not intended by the rules of the game. I also note that you didn't provide the reference to Athletics increasing your speed.
  • 05:10 AM - Ovinomancer quoted doctorbadwolf in post Double Dash
    But...that is the rule set for chases. Okay... yes? I feel you're trying to say something but it's just not quite complete... It’s also strongly implied in the rules that exceeding your walking speed would be a function of a strength athletics check, which a strength fighter will be better at it unless the rogue is an expert, in the high case they should be better than the non expert. This only leaves normal combat movement speed dominated by rogues. Which doesn’t seem weird at all, to me. Huh, I've completely missed that rule, and have also completely missed all the threads talking about how that works. Where is this strongly implied? Is there a thread talking about reasonable DCs to set for, say, doubling your speed? Also, where is your move speed called your walking speed, as I seem to have missed that as well?

Friday, 19th July, 2019

  • 11:11 AM - Cap'n Kobold quoted doctorbadwolf in post Monk, Way of Tooth and Claw
    A character that turns into other creatures (primarily animals) without losing their mental faculties and training, mechanically (and narratively, but the mechanical part is what makes Wild Shape the best fit, because it already just does the thing. A Monk/Druid can turn into a squirrel and make an unarmed attack with stunning strike, dealing monk die damage, and then move squirrel speed+monk speed bonus. That dynamic, of being able to turn into not just a squirrel or panther, but a kung fu squirrel or panther, is what I want. Filling out the concept is the idea of being able to bring that transformation back with you, into your born state, gaining gills, or even more enhanced speed, or heightened senses, or a climb speed, or whatever, and perhaps even do those things while in an animal form (fish bear land shark). Pie in the sky, I'd like to be able to turn into a dryad or treant or similar, and/or an awakened tree. I do want it to be weirder than a Druid, but be thematically Druidic in nature. Th...
  • 10:53 AM - Cap'n Kobold quoted doctorbadwolf in post Finesse rebalance
    As a general design thing, I really wish both Dex and Str were somehow used in all attacks. Not only is it logical that a character with 16 Str and 16 Dex should always be more dangerous than somebody with 16 in one and 10 in the other, but it would encourage more variety in point distributions. I'm fine with not requiring Dex for attacks, but I'd like to see it used for AC calculations rather than being able to dump it if you're wearing heavy armour. I'm unsure of the best way to do that, keep all armour meaningful, and not break bounded accuracy however. I think a few simple weapons should be finesse, like staff, spear, and handaxe. For one thing, those are never the best options, so it’s not gonna break anything. For another, they aren’t heavy slow weapons, so why not? Conceptually for me at least, there is a distinction between "not a heavy, slow weapon" and "the wielder's athleticism and power are irrelevant to this weapon's use". The classic two handed sword(longsword) for example does ...
  • 06:49 AM - Flamestrike quoted doctorbadwolf in post Monk, Way of Tooth and Claw
    A level 2 Moon Druid can turn into a Brown Bear or a Lion, and retains all class and race features, so long as their new form can physically do them. How on earth are you doing martial arts katas learnt as a Human... as a Wolf? How is the physcial form of a Wolf, capable of doing what a Human can? A Monk with Wildshape can use all of their unarmed stuff, Unarmored Defense, Unarmored Movement, Deflect Missiles (minus the redirect missile part in most forms), Evasion, Stunning Strike, etc, all work just fine in animal form. How? How is a Wolf deflecting arrows, or delivering a snap kick, grappling something (other than with a bite), or even simply punching someone? Like... if Jackie Chan was somehow turned into a Wolf, how on earth is the Wolf blocking attacks, executing katas and so forth? None of the martial arts he's learnt (as a human) in any way translates into a Wolfs physiolgy.

Thursday, 18th July, 2019

  • 03:11 PM - Fenris-77 quoted doctorbadwolf in post Different Paths: Shadow Dancer Rogue
    I think if we look at other rogue abilities, they leverage opposed checks, which still eventually means that only BBEGs are ever going to win the contest. If we don’t want that level of reliability, I’d rather not require expertise in performance to even have a real chance of success. I think the simpler thing may be to make an attack roll to accomplish the task? or impose a save?The 15th level ranger ability Stand Against the Tide uses the reaction to force a miss to hit an opponent with no roll needed or save possible. That's probably a good baseline> If we want to play with every miss in a round we'll need some kind of check that has a reasonable chance of failure, regardless of which build is rolling. After some thought, I think agree that a skill check maybe isn't the way to go. How about a straight DEX check at DC 15 or something in that range? That would give a 20 DEX PC a 50-50 chance to redirect. We can just play with the DC to make the % whatever we decide is fair.
  • 12:45 PM - Ovinomancer quoted doctorbadwolf in post Double Dash
    Have you considered allowing Athletics checks to go faster as part of taking the Dash action, once per turn? Doing so as an action is implied in the description of Strength ability checks, IIRC, but codifying it a bit might help in this case. Much like jump distance, the hard numbers represent what is possible without a roll. But also Expertise needs to be less exclusive. Rogues and Bards get 4 each. Other characters could get 1 in tier 1 and another in tier 3 and it wouldn’t break anything at all.My design problem: rogues get to run fast while fighters don't. Design constraints: minimum intrusion Your solution: add concrete sub-system for using athletics to run faster. Because rogues will now run even faster because expertise (lacking in fighters), add and balance change to class progression to add limited expertise choice to all classes so they can choose to offset rogue run fast options. Result: rogues still run faster because the original issue is untouched and all fixes also apply t...
  • 12:43 PM - dnd4vr quoted doctorbadwolf in post Finesse rebalance
    I think a few simple weapons should be finesse, like staff, spear, and handaxe. For one thing, those are never the best options, so it’s not gonna break anything. For another, they aren’t heavy slow weapons, so why not? Or, all weapons are finesse, damage is strength except for monks, rangers, and rogues, who each have a feature that changes things. Our house-rule for versatile weapons is they have the finesse property or the heavy property (player's choice) if you use both hands. Finesse does DEX mod to attack, but still STR mod to damage (like others); and heavy does STR mod x1.5 (round down) to damage.
  • 04:52 AM - Horwath quoted doctorbadwolf in post Double Dash
    Why the straight line and non-difficult terrain? Hurdling and normal race race tracks don’t exist in your world, or ya got people running 2-3 times faster on the straight-away? Because I do not want to remove Rogues and Monks ability to have more flexible Bonus action for double Dash, but still give option for all classes to get 3×speed in some situations.
  • 04:50 AM - Ovinomancer quoted doctorbadwolf in post Double Dash
    Fr anyone wondering, that rogue (assuming 30ft movement) is running at about 10 miles per hour with a triple movement. The American collegiate women’s record for a 100m sprint calculates to about 20.5 miles per hour. So, still plenty of room for using ability checks to run faster. My problem isn't that rogue can go "fast," it's that no one else can. That said, I haven't done anything about it. It's just gone in the bucket of 'Many of my biggest complaints about 5e are summed up in the Rogue, but they haven't been worth the time to houserule.' It's not a heavy bucket.
  • 02:29 AM - Slit518 quoted doctorbadwolf in post Double Dash
    What is video gamey about all our sprinting, and some people being able to completely run circles around others? It is a joke, because there was a Mario Kart game called Double Dash. If you take your movement, use your Action to Dash, and then use your Bonus Action to Dash again, that would be a Double Dash :cool:

Wednesday, 17th July, 2019


Monday, 15th July, 2019

  • 09:01 PM - CleverNickName quoted doctorbadwolf in post Does Your Fantasy Race Really Matter In Game? (The Gnome Problem)
    I’m always flummoxed by folks having a hard time seeing a place for Gnomes. I’m curious. What is your general conception of the identity of the Gnome race?Back in the red-box days of BECM, gnomes were just pointy-nosed dwarves that love gold. And that's how I treated them in the game, and I never really paid much attention to them otherwise. There was the odd adventure where the party would have to go retrieve something that was stolen by gnomes, but that was about it. Fast forward a few dozen years (ugh, am I really that old?) and I realize that how I see gnomes hasn't really changed. To me they are, and probably always will be, pointy-nosed dwarves that love gold. So if I were ever inclined to include gnomes in my game, I would just shrug and make them a subrace of dwarf. Something like: GNOME Gnomes have the dwarf traits in the Player's Handbook, plus the traits below. Ability Score Increase. Your Intelligence score increases by 1. Artificer's Lore: Whenever you make an Inte...


doctorbadwolf's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites