View Profile: Laurefindel - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
  • Laurefindel's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:54 PM
    hum, lets see what D&D has to offer. - a class system emulating an easily quantifiable "zero-to-hero" trope, and clear character archetypes - an abstract damage/health system without specific injuries where "are you dead?" is a simple yes/no question - characters that can go through a lot of damage/punishment as they gain levels without being inconvenienced - easy access to healing. Even...
    88 replies | 1921 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Laurefindel's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 04:22 PM
    I know the OP mentioned Vancian Casting as an example of undesirable subject but, here I go: Vancian Casting Not as a game mechanics - that is not being discussed here - but as an in-game (fluff) property of magic. Spells are magical constructs, entities of their own, held in the magic-user's mind like individual bullets in a gun. Casting (releasing) spells isn't hard to do (just like pressing...
    51 replies | 1432 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Laurefindel's Avatar
    Tuesday, 11th June, 2019, 01:08 AM
    That would leave the ranger as the only divine caster, getting rid of wizard, druid, paladin, and cleric, making the bard the main healer and the warlock the most priestly-type character. A whole lot of spells would exist as magical secrets for bard only, although the divine soul sorcerer technically covers all of the cleric spells. that would be a very cool campaign premise, but a clear...
    26 replies | 1008 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Laurefindel's Avatar
    Monday, 10th June, 2019, 04:19 PM
    I too had considered a "everyone is a spontaneous casters" for a while (except for the wizard; spell preparation was their thing). For me,this was meant for young and new players; this way they wouldn't feel pressured to know each and every spell to make a judicious choice. It just didn't turned out to be necessary in the end. I would have given the bard's progression to cleric and druid, and...
    26 replies | 1008 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Laurefindel's Avatar
    Monday, 10th June, 2019, 12:03 AM
    Agreed, However, the point is that this can be what TWF becomes; if the principle holds true. Something like “whenever you make a melee attack as a bonus action, you can also make an attack with your offhand weapon”. Thing is, I’m not sure if the principle does hold true, and if it would solve enough of the problem to be considered as a solution.
    203 replies | 5306 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Laurefindel's Avatar
    Sunday, 9th June, 2019, 10:34 PM
    All type of BA use, or mainly the extra attack ones? In other words, what if you could stack multiple BA as long as they were extra attacks?
    203 replies | 5306 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Laurefindel's Avatar
    Saturday, 8th June, 2019, 04:33 AM
    No, but a friend of mine played the mount of his paladin once in 3.5. The “human” was just a dumb noble brat. The celestial horse was the brain and soul of the character.
    9 replies | 350 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Laurefindel's Avatar
    Friday, 7th June, 2019, 01:49 AM
    I understand this doesn’t factor in the maths whatsoever, but rolling one die for damage without bonuses feels... unsatisfying. Especially at high level. So yes, the high-level fighter would make 4 off-hand attacks, but they would all feel rather weak. It’s only a perception issue, but somehow i can’t get over it.
    203 replies | 5306 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Laurefindel's Avatar
    Thursday, 6th June, 2019, 11:23 PM
    I think it would be fair to say that in a feudal society where resurrection is a thing, there would be specific rules to address succession of deseased nobles. Some societies might downright outlaw its use for the nobility, or grant a “mourning period” before the crowning of the heir whereas the decreed is allowed to claim its throne back. But I’d imagine it would still be a source of...
    198 replies | 10145 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Laurefindel's Avatar
    Thursday, 6th June, 2019, 05:55 PM
    We always pronounced it “tako” as opposed to “tak zero”, and used masculine pronouns. That seemed pretty universal in my groups from the Laurentians to Montreal to Sherbrooke here in Quebec. Never played in the Quebec city area however.
    166 replies | 5310 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Laurefindel's Avatar
    Wednesday, 5th June, 2019, 06:10 PM
    It always were down to what people considered fun. D&D is a game, that’s it’s primary function. Turning a challenging fight into a trivial one can indeed be fun, but when the same trick can be pulled again and again unless the DM introduces specific countermeasures to prevent it; it’s a weakness on the game, not on the players’ (DM included). The trick gets old fast. I call this broken....
    157 replies | 157859 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Laurefindel's Avatar
    Wednesday, 5th June, 2019, 12:59 AM
    I gotta agree with CapnZapp on that one, Course correction mid campaign is one thing - adjusting as we go is expected- but when I’m compelled to add a very specific ability to counter a very specific PC spell just to give the fight a fair chance of being fun, something’s wrong. I never played by the adage that “if it ain’t broken, don’t fix it”, but if i can’t have fun with the game without...
    157 replies | 157859 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Laurefindel's Avatar
    Thursday, 30th May, 2019, 06:48 PM
    There is always a bigger fish
    24 replies | 888 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Laurefindel's Avatar
    Thursday, 23rd May, 2019, 06:17 PM
    I've done both, each time to bring a different feel to the game. More often than not however, one or two PCs are from the starting town (for lack of better name), and one or two PCs are from abroad. Preparing a game for visitor PCs and local PCs require significantly different approach however. Doing both is always a bit of a headache. 'findel
    18 replies | 574 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Laurefindel's Avatar
    Tuesday, 21st May, 2019, 03:57 PM
    Another one behind SkidAce. Neither feels satisfactory without the other.
    31 replies | 919 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Laurefindel's Avatar
    Sunday, 19th May, 2019, 09:58 PM
    This is a good suggestion. I’m a big fan of 0 hp = defeat, which may mean death, unconsciousness, morale break, loosing the face, or whatever concequence that makes sense to the stakes that were set at the beginning of the fight.
    20 replies | 747 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Laurefindel's Avatar
    Saturday, 18th May, 2019, 08:00 PM
    "What is missing in 5E that you had in other editions?" my college buddies... :(
    71 replies | 3912 view(s)
    3 XP
No More Results
About Laurefindel

Basic Information

Date of Birth
March 23, 1977 (42)
About Laurefindel
Introduction:
RPG, LEGO and Showbiz! Oh my!
Location:
somewhere in Canada...
Disable sharing sidebar?:
No
Sex:
Male
My Game Details

Details of games currently playing and games being sought.

State:
Quebec
Country:
Canada

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
291
Posts Per Day
0.07
Last Post
If you could put D&D into any other non middle ages genre, what would it be? Yesterday 02:54 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
6
General Information
Last Activity
Today 05:44 AM
Join Date
Monday, 26th May, 2008
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0
My Game Details
State:
Quebec
Country:
Canada
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Sunday, 16th June, 2019


Friday, 14th June, 2019


Thursday, 13th June, 2019


Monday, 10th June, 2019


Saturday, 8th June, 2019


Friday, 7th June, 2019


Thursday, 6th June, 2019


Wednesday, 5th June, 2019


Monday, 3rd June, 2019



Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Friday, 12th April, 2019

  • 01:13 AM - ardoughter mentioned Laurefindel in post How do you handle hit points?
    Man this thread brings back memories. I remember a blazing row with Raven Crowking and others on this topic that went on for 30 pages or so. I do like Laurefindel's approach to the topic. For the record, I almost never narrate hp loss, too tedious, other than indicating increasing fatigue on the part of NPCs as they HP drains away. I have come to view HP as plot protection. A resource that keeps you in the story and you stay there until you loose it. Then things become questionable. I did in my youth explore other options, simulationist systems have too much random death and yet not random enough. While very few people survive 10 stab wounds some have lived long enough to take out their attacker. Wound systems tend toward the death spiral, and while that might be realistic it is not much fun. So, I tend to not think too hard about hit points and go with, while you have them you are still in the game and when they are gone at the mercy of others.

Thursday, 11th April, 2019

  • 09:11 PM - robus mentioned Laurefindel in post How do you handle hit points?
    Now, we could make some big changes to the game's rules so that you'd actually spend hit points as a resource, and combat was won in part (or in whole!) by bidding hit points against a foe's bid, but if we adopted that new process for mechanical resolution, it would be very notably not a traditional D&D/D20 rules set. I think simply making the player roll damage (now called "defense" or something) to find out how difficult it is to fend off the successful attack is all that's need to adjust to this definition of HP? The player is determining (randomly it's true) how much it costs them from their resource pool. But perhaps I'm thinking of some middle path between what you and Laurefindel are conceiving? But more likely I'm not fully grokking the issue? :)
  • 04:49 AM - Hussar mentioned Laurefindel in post How do you handle hit points?
    If you choose not to spend them, what happens? Well, going by the description Laurefindel provided, I'd say that the attacker gets to succeed. Meaning if the attacker is trying to kill you, you die. What a really fantastic way of modeling HP. Consider that yoinked. I LOVE that interpretation. It makes HP actually make sense. It's a player resource that they spend to avoid negative consequences. Which means that you could easily model just about anything you want to model. Such as, say, a duel where the goal isn't to kill the other, but, rather, to the first hit. Nobody actually scores a hit until someone runs out of HP. Or, if the PC falls off a cliff and doesn't die, it's because there was a tree sticking out that broke your fall, placed there by the expenditure of HP. Wow. I can see this being a fantastic way of running the game. And, as far as something like a poisoned weapon goes, well, sure, you can avoid the HP ablation of the weapon, but, the poison effect is separate, so, because of the poisoned weapon, you are somewhat constrained in how you ...

Wednesday, 19th December, 2018

  • 09:17 PM - dave2008 mentioned Laurefindel in post Encumbrance Variant (load vs equipment slots)
    In general I like the concept. Thank you for sharing. I am not sure if all the ratings are correct (I have looked at that closely). Also, I do think Laurefindel's simplification makes a lot of 5e since, but I could see your more detailed list as a variant.

Friday, 19th October, 2018

  • 10:46 PM - DM Dave1 mentioned Laurefindel in post 5E's "Missed Opportunities?"
    ...g to your race or background, in addition to spending it to gain advantage on a roll. Advantage/disadvantage and bounded accuracy are my favourite addition to this edition. That being said, monsters do feel like bags of hp sometimes, and although i don't think it has anything to do with bounded accuracy, I think they could have gone further with small but distinctive monstrous abilities, like what the orcs and goblins have. I think there could have been more low-magic setting possibilities if some of the core features were set as variants. For what its worth, that's where i think the missed opportunity was. Indeed, but each of those situations has a calculatable probability of occurring within the set of all possible outcomes and the most likely results, even expected value, can also be calculated. It's actually kind of a fun exercise. That said, my calculations say the expected value of the bonus is more like +6/-6 than +5/-5 (in fact, it would round up to 7). This site supports Laurefindel's post: http://zerohitpoints.com/Articles/Advantage-in-DnD-5

Tuesday, 16th October, 2018

  • 02:46 AM - Grognerd mentioned Laurefindel in post High-Level Features for Mid-Level Campaigns?
    I think you're missing an obvious question: why do the campaigns stop there? There are plenty of adventures in Dungeon and elsewhere that can be used. Dude... he answered that in his OP, directly behind what you mentioned... Long story made short, my campaigns usually run until level 11th-13th. The sweet spot for me is between 5th and 9th level; after the PC have enough hp to withstand challenging encounters, but before their low-level abilities become irrelevant (and before the PC have enough hp to face all but the most outlandish opponents). And he also very politely requested... (please don't reply just to say how high levels aren't that difficult to play; that is a good discussion, but one we can have in another thread) I mean... c'mon. Just help the brother out! Laurefindel, I obviously haven't checked this out for balance and whatnot, but you could always parallel 1e. Normal progression up until level 10, then from levels 11+ instead of the normal HP progression, characters gain either +1 (1d6 Hit Die), +2 (1d8 HD), or +3 (1d10 or 1d12 HD) Hit Points with no Constitution modifier. That changes the paradigm for Fighters (for example) from gaining 60+CON Modifier/Level Hit Points - which could easily total 100 HP or more - to 30 HP flat rate. Then you get to keep the characters a bit more mortal, yet not have to rework the entire set-up. Similarly, you might (as you have already intimated) take a page from Basic D&D when they had Demihumans who could only rise to 12th Level or whatever, but every X additional XP gained an A, B, C, et al. feature. This would be done similarly to the Epic Boons but limited to the class features of the characters.

Sunday, 26th August, 2018

  • 08:15 PM - Satyrn mentioned Laurefindel in post Revised Ranger update
    I'm curious as to your reasoning. How could the Animal Handling rules have been made more clear and that helped the Beastmaster? Keeping in mind that Bard's and Rogues Expertise could mean they are far Superior with the Animal Handling skill if they desired to be. I made a comment similar to Laurefindel's I think it would improve the beastmaster because it would show the baseline power of the pet if it belonged to the party's rogue, and then we could all actually see how the beastmaster's pet-related features are improvements to the pet, and by just how much. Plus, it'd be clear that you don't have to be a beastmaster to have a pet.

Wednesday, 13th June, 2018

  • 04:05 PM - OB1 mentioned Laurefindel in post Dropping to 0 HP - Alternate Rule
    ...le. That said, for the next campaign I’m running, I’m looking for a slightly grittier style, with the heroes constantly pushed to their limits and having to constantly compromise their goals just to stay alive. To this end, I’m looking for rules that encourage finding other solutions to encounters than combat. Retreat from combat that isn’t going overwhelmingly well except when the stakes are worth the risk. And when they do engage? Go hard and fast to minimize the chance of anyone dropping to zero. And make getting into the next combat all the more risky. I want to make combat feel risky and dangerous. At the same time, I hate the mechanic of unconsciousness, as the only lever I have to make that dangerous is to hit PCs when they are down. Which means not a death spiral, but pretty much instant death. I want this rule to allow players to take risks to be heroic when they want to or retreat when they need to. I want to give them increased agency over the zero HP condition. Laurefindel same rate of exhaustion recovery, though I was considering allowing a player to spend half their level in hit dice after a long rest to recover an additional level of exhaustion. Also, strongly thinking about making level 6 exhaustion unconsciousness, and if at 0HP requiring a death save every round and if above 0 a death save every hour to mimic the action trope of clinging to life with grievous injury. I probably won’t turn this into a Con save, to keep those proficient at a max of 75% success rate. I do like the idea that a barbarian or fighter can risk continuing to fight while at 0 HP. Saelorn - what do you see as the complicated part of this? Seems straightforward to me but perhaps I’m missing something or not articulating the rule correctly. Again, appreciate the feedback everyone! I know this isn’t to everyone’s taste, but I think/hope it encourages a style of play and change in tactics that can be interesting for certain types of campaigns.

Friday, 18th May, 2018

  • 07:07 PM - Satyrn mentioned Laurefindel in post Inspiration & Hero Points Math
    Sorry, Lan, this isn't aimed at you at all, your post was just convenient rant fodder. I've mistaken Laurefindel for Lanefan before. Does this mean I'm not alone in doing so?

No results to display...
Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast

Friday, 14th June, 2019

  • 01:37 AM - Garthanos quoted Laurefindel in post What do you love about your favorite edition that ISN’T rules related?
    I know the OP mentioned Vancian Casting as an example of undesirable subject but, here I go: Vancian Casting Not as a game mechanics - that is not being discussed here - but as an in-game (fluff) property of magic. I found the game didnt do justice to Vances flavor but reading Vance helped D&D feel a little better it was still the part of the system most often hacked back then. Not ironically my favorite edition people often think removed Vancian is actually functionally closer in terms of use frequency to Vance and makes flavor completely adjustable. Also pretty sure I remember Vance also described in the stories exceptions to the living spell that struggled to escape your brain flavor (basically cantrip effects that were almost side effects or changes in the caster) - of course this was a bloody long time ago so I cannot claim precise memories. I love that my favorite editions flavor is entirely my own and that it doesnt take hacking to make it so.

Tuesday, 11th June, 2019

  • 01:59 AM - Ashrym quoted Laurefindel in post Wizards (et al.) Casting Known Spells?
    That would leave the ranger as the only divine caster, getting rid of wizard, druid, paladin, and cleric, making the bard the main healer and the warlock the most priestly-type character. A whole lot of spells would exist as magical secrets for bard only, although the divine soul sorcerer technically covers all of the cleric spells. that would be a very cool campaign premise, but a clear departure from the base assumptions of a typical D&D game. Divine vs not divine spells is fluff and the priest background over-rides "priestly" classes for anyone who wants the fluff. Religion is also easy to tie in regardless of background. I've played campaigns banning magical healing too. It's also unnecessary in 5e because of the healer feat, potions on the equipment list, and hit dice healing on short rests. Plus the various class self healing that may be available. If a group does believe they need a dedicated magic healer then bards work and divine sorcerers as an alternative. It plays jus...

Monday, 10th June, 2019

  • 01:31 PM - CapnZapp quoted Laurefindel in post Improving Two-Weapon Fighting
    Agreed, However, the point is that this can be what TWF becomes; if the principle holds true. Something like “whenever you make a melee attack as a bonus action, you can also make an attack with your offhand weapon”. Thing is, I’m not sure if the principle does hold true, and if it would solve enough of the problem to be considered as a solution. There are too many desirable things you might want to do with your bonus action. It would still mean TWFers would be barred from, say, a magic item that lets you take the Dash action as a bonus action. I would never take TWF except in the most magic-light of campaigns, and probably only in a feat-less game as well. (My own games are the polar opposite of that) Making a choice at level 1 that you only pay for ten levels later, a cost you're probably not even aware of, is the reason I dislike the design of TWF.

Saturday, 8th June, 2019


Friday, 7th June, 2019

  • 07:55 PM - Xeviat quoted Laurefindel in post Improving Two-Weapon Fighting
    I understand this doesn’t factor in the maths whatsoever, but rolling one die for damage without bonuses feels... unsatisfying. Especially at high level. So yes, the high-level fighter would make 4 off-hand attacks, but they would all feel rather weak. It’s only a perception issue, but somehow i can’t get over it. Magic weapons would still apply a bonus. I'm just leaving off the +3-+5 from Str/Dex.
  • 02:03 AM - TwoSix quoted Laurefindel in post Improving Two-Weapon Fighting
    I understand this doesn’t factor in the maths whatsoever, but rolling one die for damage without bonuses feels... unsatisfying. Especially at high level. So yes, the high-level fighter would make 4 off-hand attacks, but they would all feel rather weak. It’s only a perception issue, but somehow i can’t get over it. Cast hex or hunter's mark, you'll feel better. :)

Thursday, 6th June, 2019

  • 09:22 PM - kenmarable quoted Laurefindel in post Jonathan Tweet: Prologue to Third Edition
    I really like these articles! Thank you mr. Tweet! However - and I must be the only one thinking like that - I really liked AD&D 2e’s take on the demons and devils. I like their names, I like DiTerlizi’s uniform looks, i like 2E’s attempt at rationalizing them with (somewhat) consistent lore. I like that demons and devils were just the names that mortals gave them [edit] hum, apparently I’m not the only one... And while i now understand how unsustainable releasing mounds of different settings must have been, I always appreciated them in a “this is how you make your own campaign setting kids!” kind of way. Sometimes I feel like I'm the only one that liked the names Tanar'ri and Baatezu. Pretty clearly there are several of us. Personally, even if the motivation behind the change was dumb, I loved that change! As a teen playing AD&D, calling them demons, devils, and angels was boooooooring and they were so cliched in movies, books, etc. I still get bored every time I call them "demon...
  • 07:26 PM - vincegetorix quoted Laurefindel in post Let's Talk About THAC0
    We always pronounced it “tako” as opposed to “tak zero”, and used masculine pronouns. That seemed pretty universal in my groups from the Laurentians to Montreal to Sherbrooke here in Quebec. Never played in the Quebec city area however. I'm also in the ''le tako'' camp and I'm in Québec City, but I had players from the south side of the river (Levis, Kamouraska and Beauce refer to it as ''la Tak-zero''. Strange people on the south side...strange people... :p Anyway, thanks all for your answers, you may ignore my thread derail.

Wednesday, 5th June, 2019

  • 02:48 PM - mortwatcher quoted Laurefindel in post Let's list the "broken" spells
    I gotta agree with CapnZapp on that one, Course correction mid campaign is one thing - adjusting as we go is expected- but when I’m compelled to add a very specific ability to counter a very specific PC spell just to give the fight a fair chance of being fun, something’s wrong. I never played by the adage that “if it ain’t broken, don’t fix it”, but if i can’t have fun with the game without fixing it; it was broken. now this comes down to what you mean by fun because for me, using that big spell to completely shut the baddie down sure feels great and fun, so I do not see it as broken if your players are telling you that it feels not fun for them when combats are shut down by those big spells, then you should adjust on a macro level

Wednesday, 15th May, 2019

  • 05:06 PM - Beleriphon quoted Laurefindel in post Help me name the fantasy-historical pantheons
    Sorry, I didn't mean to give anyone the impression that I was defending a single native American pantheon/religion. My point is that Olympian and Asgardian shouldn't have to be dismissed as names for Greek/Roman and Norse-inspired pantheons because they are seats of power where only part of the gods/creatures of that mythology live. Calling them Hellenistian, Romanus or Norscan still implies that they are named after a culture, which isn't as neutral (if the intention is to remain generic) as the name of a place tied to that mythology, in this case Mount Olympus or Asgard. The line of reasoning makes sense. Sticking with a place works as it make it clear through our cultural associations what we're talking about. Olympians means the Hellenistic gods of classical Greece. So Zeus, Hades, Aphrodite, and the rest. They don't literally have to reside on Olympus in myth to know what I mean when I say that. Same for Norse myth, Asgard is an important place in the myths and most if not all of them s...
  • 02:55 PM - Umbran quoted Laurefindel in post Help me name the fantasy-historical pantheons
    You do realize that: A) America (and Canada) comprise of a lot more terrain types/regions than the plains. B) Assorted tribes lived in all of them. And still do. Yes. Simply put - the Native Americans are not a single culture with a unified pantheon. There are several different traditions and belief systems among them. Neither all Norse Gods were Asguardians; Loki, Frey and Freya, to name a few, were not. ... So you are right, they are not accurate, but I don't think this automatically disqualify them as names for real-world mythology-inspired pantheons. Not equivalent. Yes, among the Norse gods there were Aesir and Vanir and other groups. But all of those characters spent time in Asgard, interacted, and knew each others names, and appear in the same stories. The collection of gods at least wound up as the pantheon of what we can (at least roughly) call one religious tradition. Call him Odin, Wotan, Grimnir, or one of several other names, there's a period where most of th...

Thursday, 2nd May, 2019

  • 10:08 PM - Tony Vargas quoted Laurefindel in post Want to shake things up: Doorways, Scouting, Caution
    I stand corrected then! My DM never used them for sure... Yeah, they were hidden in the DMG and pretty terrible.
  • 09:59 PM - Tony Vargas quoted Laurefindel in post Want to shake things up: Doorways, Scouting, Caution
    "grapple, pull and gang-up" on the party fighter … unlike AD&D, there are actual rules for doing that. There were totally Grappling and Overbearing rules in 1e AD&D!
  • 07:51 PM - Celebrim quoted Laurefindel in post Cleric shenanigans (metaphysical, no right answers)
    I'll give one thing to 5e however, For the first time (AFAIK), D&D has NPC entries that represent human(oid) NPCs that are neither lvl0 commoners nor characters with PC class levels, yet can cast spells, use one or two abilities, and a variance of hp. It is now a lot easier to implement that few NPCs have class levels, yet fit in a game world that can be challenging for the players. You could play a whole campaign using only NPC stat blocks for adversaries. There is something to be said for that. The reason I resist it is mostly a grudge I hold against 1e AD&D, which treated NPC's and PC's differently, and invariably gave to NPC's benefits that PC's could not receive. The unfairness of this when I was a player frustrated me greatly, and so as a DM, I generally prefer to have a situation where the game system at least doesn't distinguish between PCs and NPCs, and any NPC could be a PC and any PC could be an NPC.
  • 06:37 PM - Celebrim quoted Laurefindel in post Cleric shenanigans (metaphysical, no right answers)
    I think Paul Farquhar meant that examples given in adventures are not representative of the game world because if they were, the adventure would not happen there. You and @Celebrim are advocating that despite the guidelines restricting character classes to a minority, nothing in the published material seem to support that claim according to the examples we are given. From where I stand, it appears to me that both sides are pointing at some inconsistencies, but are comparing apples to oranges. Both claims are true and coexist simultaneously. I agree both claims are true and coexist simultaneously. Neither in of themselves though proves a particular ratio between non-PC classed individuals and PC classed individuals. So I'm also making further claims. a) While the locations where adventures happen are not representative of the whole world, they are representative of more than 1/10000th of the inhabited world. b) In all settings where any locations have been detailed, the ratio...

Sunday, 28th April, 2019

  • 07:31 AM - Paul Farquhar quoted Laurefindel in post Cleric shenanigans (metaphysical, no right answers)
    Oh, I know I'm deep in houserule territory, but as the OP pointed out, the PHB seems to support the "faith as the key to a door inside the cleric's own powers". For what it's worth, I run my Forgotten Realms exactly as the OP stated. The gods will want you to think otherwise obviously... I'm an FR vet, so I'm citing 2nd and 3rd edition rules for FR. I don't think it's ever been make explicit in 5e. Other DMs are free to rule differently. But I think it makes campaign settings more interesting if there are fundamental differences in how magic works, and I think divine magic is one of the best ways for those differences to be represented in rules.

Saturday, 27th April, 2019

  • 07:49 PM - Paul Farquhar quoted Laurefindel in post Cleric shenanigans (metaphysical, no right answers)
    If they lose their faith, they lose their ability to focus the magical energies (or whatever) into spells, but the gods themselves, as powerful as they are, have little to do with their cleric's ability to cast spells. At best, they can guide the cleric spiritually, display actual powers (divine intervention feature), or "block" their magic if they think the cleric is out of line. Again, I say: it depends on the campaign setting. In the Forgotten Realms clerical magic comes directly from gods. Lose the favour of your god and you lose your spells. This isn't a core rule, it's a setting specific rule. In some universes clerical spells can be fuelled by faith in yourself or some ideology, but not In the Forgotten Realms. If a cleric from Eberron where to somehow travel to the Forgotten Realms, their spells would stop working until they adopted a deity. However, if a cleric from the Forgotten Realms was transported to Eberron their spells would still work since in that world the thing they believ...

Monday, 15th April, 2019

  • 04:36 PM - Yaarel quoted Laurefindel in post Injury / Exhaustion / Energy Drain
    However, my beef with the second level of exhaustion (speed halved) is that it encourages a "fight to death" approach since you can't properly run away. In itself that is not an issue since D&D in general tends to be rather binary in terms of victory/defeat, but in my experience, games that stress the use of the exhaustion table - or houserule the use of the exhaustion table as a health track to mimic injuries - are usually aiming at dialing the super-hero knob down a notch or two. And these are the games where players are most likely to run from a threat rather than stand and fight in all-or-nothing stakes. For me, I consider all of the ‘morale’ possibilities, during the ‘bloodied condition’ when characters and monsters reduce to half hit points or less. This is when Intimidation checks to force surrender are possible, and especially when monsters decide whether to flee the fight or not. By this time, everyone has an idea of what the strength of the opponent is, and decides accordingly. Especi...

Friday, 12th April, 2019

  • 02:37 PM - Celebrim quoted Laurefindel in post How do you handle hit points?
    Whoa,,,, So much for that… Oh, I get it now, you meant you didn't want me hijacking this thread with a lengthy dissertation. ;) Sorry, it's me. Actually, while I admit to the whole lengthy dissertation thing, I don't admit to the hijacking. The meaning of a 'hit point' and how they are handled narratively is something that has been talked to death for years now, and for a while there was a topic that invariably got a thread closed. No one else was really saying anything that hadn't been said before, and you made by far the most original comment in this thread. So I'm quite happy to glom on to that idea and run with it like a 1e AD&D thief with a fat wallet. I think you'll find that most of the time during these conversations about GMing theory, both sides are exaggerating the differences in play style to a certain extent and that for the most part, were we the players at the table we wouldn't mind too much the slight differences. But thinking about different approaches to...

Thursday, 11th April, 2019

  • 06:46 PM - TaranTheWanderer quoted Laurefindel in post How do you handle hit points?
    Like @Hussar said, then your character suffers the full consequences of the attack or hazard. If your opponent wanted to kill you - the most frequent situation - then it succeeded and your character is dying, unstable, and you have to roll death saving throws. If the opponent just wanted to slap you behind the head, then you allowed it to do so, probably without further complications. The most obvious muddy corner is whether you keep the hp you have when you can't spend enough to negate the attack (i.e. you have 4 hp left and receive 10 damage). We know by this interpretation that you couldn't avoid the consequence and become dying, but do you still have 4hp? That's where the DM needs to stay consequent with RAW and rule that if character with 0 hp is dying, a dying character has, by definition, 0 hp (otherwise it would be stable and conscious). A character that cannot spend enough hp to negate an attack becomes dying and drops to 0 hp. There might be some mental gymnastics to do with things...


Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast

Laurefindel's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites