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

Basic Information

Date of Birth
January 18
About Yunru
Location:
Peasedown St John
Sex:
Male
Age Group:
19-24
My Game Details

Details of games currently playing and games being sought.

Town:
Radstock
State:
BANES
Country:
United Kingdom

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
3,481
Posts Per Day
2.02
Last Post
[Merged] D&D forum renaming thread Monday, 29th April, 2019 05:19 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
95
General Information
Last Activity
Monday, 29th April, 2019 05:45 PM
Join Date
Wednesday, 24th September, 2014
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0

1 Friend

  1. Reinhart Reinhart is offline

    Member

    Reinhart
Showing Friends 1 to 1 of 1
My Game Details
Town:
Radstock
State:
BANES
Country:
United Kingdom
No results to show...
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Monday, 29th April, 2019

  • 06:14 PM - DectectiveCharizard mentioned Yunru in post [Merged] D&D forum renaming thread
    What will happen to Yunru's post? I oft use their Monk guide, for instance? On discord, they talk of delete? OT: How to get rid of the accidental extra c in my name? To be topical, now I have account might not be so hard, but recent change made manually keeping up with posts hard.

Wednesday, 24th April, 2019

  • 04:02 AM - Esker mentioned Yunru in post [GUIDE] I Fought the Law and Won: The Rogue Guide
    The way I read the phrasing had me worried that it was rolling all your attacks, seeing if any were a crit, and then assigning SA to that one. You've since shown that I was in error in that reading, thanks for taking time to respond. You weren't in error; that's exactly what the original table was based on. The qualitative point still stands even with the corrected numbers, but there's still room for disagreement about whether it's reasonable to ignore the rider damage. @Yunru wants to include all of it, @vostygg wants to exclude it. Seems to me the best measure is somewhere in between. In my experience, movement following a booming blade is rare, and the control effect is often useless, because I've got an ally next to the creature I'm attacking, so the enemy just stays put and attacks them. It's also been my experience that if staying put would really hamper the enemy, they'll move and take the damage rather than accept a tactical disadvantage. But YMMV and all that; it's certainly party, creature, and DM-dependent. In any case, if we want to compare average DPR really accurately, we should try to put a probability on the rider damage taking effect. It's probably pretty low -- maybe 10% or so -- but at some tables it may be substantially higher. If we do that, we can interpolate between Yunru's numbers and vostygg's. TWF is very likely to come out ahead at lower levels, and BB is likely to come out ahead at higher ones. But the picture is incomplete ev...

Friday, 12th April, 2019

  • 08:46 PM - 77IM mentioned Yunru in post [Merged] D&D forum renaming thread
    Yunru is right. I care about two kinds of posts: - relevant to 5E - relevant to all editions of D&D However, there's currently no filter that shows me what I want. I need to either open the forum twice, or "filter with my eyeballs." I'd love it if tags were mandatory, and there were a viewing mode that showed both threads tagged with 5E and threads tagged with "All Editions." The best UI would be to make the filter selection check-boxes and I can include the editions I want. But now I'm just dreaming.

Monday, 18th February, 2019

  • 10:14 PM - TaranTheWanderer mentioned Yunru in post Strength requirements for ranged weapons
    It would push all martials into being more MAD while keeping casters SAD by comparison. Why can’t they just be happy?! Yunru Allow d6 ranged weapons a benefit to strength bonus damage up to plus 1(12-13 str) Allow d8 ranged weapons benefit to strength bonus damage up to plus 2 (14-15 str) The justification being stronger characters can make use of the stronger pull of the different weapons. It gives a bit of incentive to be a bit stronger but doesn’t take much away from full dex characters. It doesn’t benefit 16-20 str characters as much but having 20 str has other benefits. I wouldn’t give that to crossbows. They have the benefit of being simple weapons that any commoner can use...which means you might want to put heavy crossbows in the simple weapon category. I don’t think that will break the game.

Saturday, 16th February, 2019


Thursday, 7th February, 2019

  • 05:13 PM - DM Dave1 mentioned Yunru in post Why deciding to round down multiclassing spellcaster levels was stupid
    Because if you have a class, like Paladin 3, your existing benefits should not get worse because you took a level of some other class. I'm quite happen that ASI are class levels, spells known as class levels, etc. I'm not pushing for more powerful multiclass. But what Yunru pointed out is that you are taking something away that you had previously given, and that I am not for. Can you clarify the bolded part above? The existing benefits of a 5e Paladin 3 do not get worse in any way that I can see if the player chooses to multiclass into, say Paladin 3/Ranger 1. The Paladin 3 abilities stay the same, but the character gains the Ranger 1 abilities. Are you (and/or Yunru) maybe saying in past editions, the MC spell progression was different and you are calling those "existing benefits" that are now being "taken away"?

Wednesday, 6th February, 2019

  • 08:57 PM - Oofta mentioned Yunru in post Sage Advice Compendium Update 1/30/2019
    I think the whole two weapon fighting is just another example of the tortured/finicky reading you have to use if we try to parse out exact meanings. I read "when you attack with a light weapon" as meaning that the attacks in the attack action need to be done with a light weapon. I think that's also how Yunru interprets it: the wording has nothing to do with timing. For 5ekyu, it seems to qualify the weapon used and the timing (that only one attack needs to be made). In any case, I just say the heck with that and pay no attention to the letter of the rules.
  • 07:10 AM - Harzel mentioned Yunru in post Why deciding to round down multiclassing spellcaster levels was stupid
    Ironically the Sorlock doesn't suffer this setback at all. (emphasis mine) So you think a Sorcerer X/Warlock 2 is not behind in spellcasting compared to a Sorcerer X+2? Not meaning to put words in their mouth, but it looks like Yunru was referring specifically to the issue raised in the OP (multiclassed caster having fewer spell slots than a single-classed caster with the same total levels due to the rounding rule). That's much more narrow than 'not behind in spellcasting'. And it's correct, as the Sorcerer/Warlock is not subject to the rule referenced in the OP.

Tuesday, 5th February, 2019

  • 09:17 PM - Xeviat mentioned Yunru in post Why deciding to round down multiclassing spellcaster levels was stupid
    Yunru, I'm entirely onboard with you here. If I have a multiclasser, I'll be rounding up after dividing levels and adding them together. The Eldritch Knight and Paladin progressions are rounding up. There's nothing a Paladin/Ranger gains that should require them to loose "caster levels". The Spell Point system does this to characters too.

Friday, 1st February, 2019

  • 06:33 PM - FrogReaver mentioned Yunru in post Human variant archery fighter- did I lock myself into a subpar race?
    It's pretty obvious what I'm comparing. I even labeled them. If it's not obvious to you, it's because you choose not to acknowledge it. I think Yunru explained it better. The comparison you made wasn’t well enough defined or at the proper levels it needs to be at in order to be relevant. Why did you take that specific comparison when you could have easily made one at the appropriate levels?
  • 05:09 PM - DM Dave1 mentioned Yunru in post Sage Advice Compendium Update 1/30/2019
    I feel the rules are clear on this and the sage advice only clarified. I think you are the outside on this one - great name though ;) The rule on limiting bonus actions doesn't apply because you indeed are taking an action. Likewise! :) Yeah, I'm now convinced that free standing bonus actions are possible to invoke even when taking a "forced" action. But whether the bonus action works or not is case specific. I was conflating rulings and rules upthread. Example: Player: My PC would like to Misty Step out of the Stinking Cloud DM: Ok, you use your bonus action to attempt to cast Misty Step... give me a CON check (DC 8 + however much you failed the initial CON check) to see if you can get the words out properly between the retches... Something like that instead of saying "No, you can't use a bonus action b/c rules (that I've misinterpreted... sorry Sage advice)!" This rule is gaining focus for me. Thanks dave2008 and Yunru and BluejayJunior! Cheers

Sunday, 27th January, 2019


Saturday, 12th January, 2019

  • 03:06 PM - Aebir-Toril mentioned Yunru in post The Mechanical Impact of -5/+10
    Here's a breakdown of how using -5/+10 affects average damage, when you deal an average damage of X, and need to roll a minimum of Y on the die to hit (N.B. I'll be going lower than 2 because while the chance for success without -5/+10 ceases to change, the chance for success with it continues to change). The value you get is the increase, so a negative means -5/+10 does less damage. Y -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Dmg Diff 9.5 9-0.05X 8.5-0.1X 8-0.15X 7.5-0.2X 7-0.25X 6.5-0.25X 6-0.25X 5.5-0.25X 5-0.25X 4.5-0.25X 4-0.25X 3.5-0.25X 3-0.25X 2.5-0.25X 2-0.25X 1.5-0.25X 1-0.25X 0.5-0.25X 0.5-0.2X 0.5-0.15X 0.5-0.1X 0.5-0.05X 0.5 Thanks for this Yunru, I was planning on doing an analysis of all of the static bonuses in 5e.

Saturday, 5th January, 2019

  • 11:43 PM - Satyrn mentioned Yunru in post Shield cantrip
    I'd also careful about that. Compare to the 1st-level shield of faith spell (bonus action, +2 AC, concentration). It also potentially boosts the AC up to 21 just with Proficiency and Dex, which is better than any armor, and is well ahead of the AC calculation that dragon sorcerers get. I wouldn't be doing this, either. @Yunru, why are you looking to make a shield cantrip, anyway?

Saturday, 8th December, 2018

  • 03:45 PM - FrogReaver mentioned Yunru in post 5e Character Guides - why rate all features?
    @Yunru do you plan on actually contributing to the thread? Or you going to keep on taking little ad hominem pot shots? Do you have anything more to say on the actual topic or is this change in discourse an indication that you are through with the topic?

Tuesday, 6th November, 2018

  • 12:32 AM - thebestjessins mentioned Yunru in post My Booming Blade Focused Eldritch Knight
    CSS: Yea, I'm aware of the material and for the most part I don't think it will be a big deal. I can also just buy scrolls of the spell and not worry about the material components as well. I know that an owl will be quit squishy but if it dies it at least absorbs an attack that would have been on me anyways. I'll probably attempt the scroll route more than using one of the very few daily spell slots to recast anyways. I assume as the level rises it will die a lot. If it starts getting crazy I can reassess. Depends on DM really. Yunru: The issue is that the prereq for spell sniper says I must be able to cast at least one spell already. At first level you can't so the first opportunity to take it will be 4th level. It's not a free spell for a non spell casting class. The glaive and the halberd are both heavy 2 handed weapons which means I cannot use a shield (down 2 AC), have to respec for a strength build, which drops initiative, and drops my crossbow attack and damage, and cannot use Defensive Duelist because it's not a finesse weapon. The whip is cool but it's only 1d4 and unless you have the spell sniper then it's reach won't sync well. Gavin O: Yea, the action economy of the DD is a bit weak because it's the Reaction slot so only once per round so my plan was to primary use it only when I move away and trigger AoO. Since DD only works again melee attacks and you can only perform a melee attack (unless they have certain spell abilities or otherwise) on attack of opportunities. I figure I'm I'm going to intenti...

Saturday, 3rd November, 2018

  • 11:53 AM - clearstream mentioned Yunru in post Banishing Eldritch Blast
    Unless a GM chooses his foes based on random die roll at CR4 (which iirc is neither required nor even recommended) then the nose count from MM have almost no relevance. Its not how games are actually run in what i have seen. One can consider or ignore whatever factors one likes. For me, when a quarter of foes have a feature, then it's reasonable to suppose that feature will appear in sessions at a higher rate then others that only one percent of foes have. That supposition tallies with our experience over 64 sessions, two years of play. Thus, for me, it is a factor I cannot easily ignore. What weighs more heavily for me is Yunru drawing attention to the DMG Errata, where ammunition from a magic ranged weapon is deemed magical. Which on the one hand makes one wonder what magical ammunition is for (!?) and on the other hand seems eminently sensible.

Friday, 19th October, 2018

  • 09:12 PM - Maxperson mentioned Yunru in post I was right about Shield Master
    Ah, my bad. (My fault for not reading the whole thread...how on earth did "simultaneous" even become a point of argument?) Yunru's claim that you have taken the attack action before you actually take the attack action. He said that getting the bonus action with the attack action meant that you could use the bonus action prior to attacking. I pointed out that "with" meant simultaneous or after and not before. Or if the attack comes after the push, really. I agree, but that doesn't seem to be the intent of the feat. It also makes sense for the feat to allow the bonus action after the attack, as the opponent will be off balance or at least more vulnerable to a push due to avoiding the blow or being hit. The feat would allow you to take advantage of that with the bonus action.

Thursday, 18th October, 2018

  • 12:18 AM - pemerton mentioned Yunru in post I was right about Shield Master
    When you go to college you can have a car.That's an odd example for you to put forward, because normally you'd expect that car when you start going to college, not when you graduate! EDIT: And once again beaten to the post by Yunru.

Wednesday, 17th October, 2018

  • 05:49 PM - pemerton mentioned Yunru in post I was right about Shield Master
    I really don't understand why some people insist they understand the rules better than the people who professionally wrote and interpret said rules. <snip> But if you think you have greater claim on understanding and interpreting the RAW than Jeremy Crawford you're sadly mistaken.This isn't true for poetry, and it isn't true for legislation - both of which have received far more attention as objects of interpretation than RPG rules - so I don't see any reason to think that it would be true of the 5e rules. The "rules as written" say that the bonus action is enlivened when you take the attack action. What counts as taking the attack action? Contra Yunru, I think that you must make an attack to take that action. Contra Ristamar, I see no good reason to think that taking that action requires having taken all your attacks (eg if I am playing an 8th level fighter and delcare an attack-move-attack, when do I take the attack action? To me the answer seems to be at the start of that sequence). Jeremy Crawford no doubt has his own opinion, but I don't see where he wrote it down in the rules!


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

Monday, 29th April, 2019

  • 05:40 PM - Morrus quoted Yunru in post [Merged] D&D forum renaming thread
    Well, I mean... My comments regarding the sneak previews of the next Touch of Class needing 5e tags were just straight up removed, so... The new layout works fine because people can search by tags, despite the majority not using tags, including the ruler of the board, and comments regarding the usage of tags are being deleted. Seige Heil? I'm sorry, should I have picked a different totalitarian regime to draw comparison to? I mean, I would, but none have a recognisable short statement to my knowledge. Completely unacceptable. I want to make it clear that there is a zero tolerance policy towards abusive language, especially language as offensive as this, directed at me or any staff here. Yunru, you are no longer welcome at this site. Everybody, you need to remember that you are guests, and if you treat your hosts badly you will be asked to leave. Coming into my house and making it unpleasant for me means only one of us is staying.

Sunday, 28th April, 2019


Saturday, 27th April, 2019

  • 09:32 PM - Esker quoted Yunru in post Beast Master Ranger: Redeemed?
    Not to the extent of the Beastmaster's companion. PCs can at least use hit dice to get up to full health with a short rest Hmm... Is there a sage advice confirming that the beast doesn't gain hit dice alongside the ranger? I guess RAW it doesn't say that it does, so it probably doesn't. Seems like an easy tweak to say that they should get a d6 for each ranger level and (no CON mod added) once you start calculating their HP maximum as 4x ranger level. But fair enough as written. Yes, an optimised build is out-damaging an unoptimised build, things are as they should be. But it doesn't outdamage an optimised build. Nor does an unoptimised beastmaster out-damage an unoptimised... anything else? We don't actually have numbers for an unoptimized beastmaster build, so it's an open question whether it actually falls short of the baseline. I suspect it doesn't. Hence my question: if true and the unoptimized beastmaster is doing damage merely at the warlock baseline, should the single ...
  • 08:38 PM - Esker quoted Yunru in post Beast Master Ranger: Redeemed?
    I mean, if you're dependent on an external source of healing to keep your pet alive, and only do well with an optimised build, I would say no, it's not redeemed :P I don't think that's quite fair. Don't most classes depend on external sources of healing? It's a party game. As to "only do well with an optimized build", the optimized build is out-damaging the generic eldritch blast + agonizing blast + hex warlock by 50% or so throughout most of its career. Do you want to say that the eldritch blast warlock is a bad class because it requires further optimization to reach those same levels of DPR?
  • 08:03 PM - vostygg quoted Yunru in post [GUIDE] I Fought the Law and Won: The Rogue Guide
    Why does that matter? You're wanting to do that anyway so they have to move back and take extra damage. (N.B. You're shoving away, not prone) I see. I thought you were trying to use it as a consistent source of advantage, but you are instead using it to up the probability that your rider damage will trigger against opponents with no ranged capabilities. Sure, I'll buy it. I still very much doubt you'll reach the frequencies you need to overtake TWF with Dual Wielder, especially from levels 1-10. I'd be happy to post those break-even points if you'd like.
  • 07:44 PM - vostygg quoted Yunru in post [GUIDE] I Fought the Law and Won: The Rogue Guide
    If only someone had worked it out across every level so we could just check out the points where BB changes (<5,5,11,17), since that'd give a best-case for BB. As it happens, I have those numbers right here. The percentage for each level represents the minimum frequency with which the BB rider damage has to trigger in order for the DPR of a BB Swashbuckler to exceed that of a TWF Swashbuckler, without factoring in the Dual Wielder feat. If the percentage is greater than 100%, it means that the DPR of the BB Swashbuckler cannot be made to equal that of the TWF Swashbuckler at that level, even if the BB rider damage triggers 100% of the time. Level 1: 93.8850% Level 2: 93.8850% Level 3: >100.0000% Level 4: >100.0000% Level 5: 26.4850% Level 6: 26.4850% Level 7: 43.3350% Level 8: 43.3350% Level 9: 60.1850% Level 10: 60.1850% Level 11: 15.2449% Level 12: 15.2449% Level 13: 26.4850% Level 14: 26.4850% Level 15: 37.7150% Level 16: 37.7150% Level 17: 9.6250% Level 18: 9.6250% L...
  • 06:54 PM - Esker quoted Yunru in post [GUIDE] I Fought the Law and Won: The Rogue Guide
    I mean, the most reliable is the Mastermind, at least in pairs. Yeah, that'd be a powerful combo, if a RP recipe for some spoiled broth, as it were. Pretty rare (in my experience, anyway) to see a group with two characters sharing a class, let alone a subclass, though.
  • 05:01 AM - vostygg quoted Yunru in post [GUIDE] I Fought the Law and Won: The Rogue Guide
    Ummm... what? The value I gave was for level 5, which is the start of the most played area. Levels 1-4 are over in almost as many sessions. Not even going to touch the hot mess that is averaging across all levels. Did you add the "insert other use of ASI" for Booming Blade? I was wondering how long it would take for the infamous EnWorld snark to rear its head! It's why a lot of people I know don't bother with these boards any more. This whole thing is purely an academic exercise, since there is very little chance you are ever going to get your BB rider damage with high enough frequency to make the DPR for a Booming Blade Swashbuckler equal to that of a TWF Swashbuckler at almost any level, something which you seem unwilling to concede for some reason. I won't even touch the hot mess that is taking the break-even point at level 5 and applying it across all levels. Also, please show me which three or four ASIs you would choose in order to raise the Booming Blade DPR above the two or t...

Friday, 26th April, 2019

  • 07:49 PM - vostygg quoted Yunru in post [GUIDE] I Fought the Law and Won: The Rogue Guide
    Does it though? Booming Blade does +3.315 more damage if the extra damage triggers every time that you hit. The break even point is if you trigger the damage 38.61% of the time (not even factoring in the action denial possibilities). So unless Booming Blade triggers less than 38.61% of the time, Booming Blade provides higher DPR for Swashbucklers on average. (I kinda want to work out a build that uses Shield Master to guarantee they'd have to move to make an effective attack.) My experience is that Booming Blade triggers far less than 38.61% (closer to 10%), but YMMV. That's why I consider it highly situational, and why I stand by the statement you quoted that "TWF provides higher non-situational DPR for Swashbucklers on average". By the way, your TWF Barb 2 / Fighter [Champion] 5 / Rogue [Swashbuckler] 13 crit-fishing build is the gold standard, as far as I'm concerned, in terms of cases where TWF actually makes sense. EDIT: I'm also curious about the math behind your 38.61% threshold....

Thursday, 25th April, 2019

  • 03:51 PM - Esker quoted Yunru in post [GUIDE] I Fought the Law and Won: The Rogue Guide
    Another nice one is if you also pick up Warcaster, and... some way to be less squishy (AT maybe?). Yeah, if you're building around booming blade you're not making *that* much use of your swashbuckler features, so you may as well get find familiar and mirror image with your subclass and free up a feat later on for warcaster.
  • 01:41 AM - Esker quoted Yunru in post [GUIDE] I Fought the Law and Won: The Rogue Guide
    But that's still more damage for you than TWF then. Yeah, that's what I'm saying; some fraction of the time, the BB rider actually does go off, so that ought to be taken into account in a DPR calculation. It's small, in my experience -- less than 38% certainly -- but it's there.
  • 01:38 AM - Esker quoted Yunru in post [GUIDE] I Fought the Law and Won: The Rogue Guide
    Then don't attack that enemy, attack a different one? I mean, I guess that makes sense if I'm trying to maximize my own DPR, but unless it's a horde of one-hit-killable chumps, it usually makes more sense for the party to focus fire, since injured enemies hit just as hard as uninjured ones (swarm abstractions aside, I suppose). Even if I end up with overkill damage, I'd rather take someone out than not.

Wednesday, 24th April, 2019

  • 06:43 PM - Esker quoted Yunru in post [GUIDE] I Fought the Law and Won: The Rogue Guide
    (I kinda want to work out a build that uses Shield Master to guarantee they'd have to move to make an effective attack.) Does standing from prone count as movement in terms of triggering the booming blade rider? I would have thought not. Or do you mean shoving away? That could be quite nice if the enemy's turn is between yours and the other melee-ers in the party. Actually it's nice either way; if your melee allies go between you and the enemy, shove prone; if the enemy goes between you and them, shove away. How about the following: Half Elf Swashbuckler (taking the High Elf variant for Booming Blade) / Battlemaster 10 STR, 16 DEX, 14 CON, 8 INT, 10 WIS, 16 CHA Take rogue to 7 first (taking expertise in athletics, obviously), then take the first fighter level, taking defense style, followed by rogue 8-10 for shield master and 20 DEX. Booming Blade now does 3d8 on movement. Then grab a couple more fighter levels, taking riposte, precision attack, and maybe feinting attack for times when ...
  • 04:00 AM - vostygg quoted Yunru in post [GUIDE] I Fought the Law and Won: The Rogue Guide
    Why are we assuming that Booming Blade doesn't get the extra damage? You're a swashbuckler, you run up to the enemy, Booming Blade it, bonus action disengage, retreat. Either the enemy makes a (probably improvised) ranged attack, or it takes the damage. One is extra damage, the other is action denial. You are trading more reliable hits and sneak attacks with TWF for situational control/damage with Booming Blade. Ultimately, it's a matter of preference. I've never played in a game where Booming Blade extra damage triggers every round or even most rounds. If I'm lucky, it triggers once per combat. Most rounds, if you happen to hit and your opponent doesn't have a decent ranged attack or isn't next to one of your allies, it provides some action denial. That's fine, if that's your bag. Me, I hate missing, so I prefer the more consistent DPR of TWF. I don't think it's right or accurate to represent Booming Blade as strictly better than TWF, however. People should know that TWF provides highe...

Tuesday, 16th April, 2019

  • 10:13 AM - mpathy quoted Yunru in post A Collection of D&D Class Build Guides - Wiki Thread the Second
    I'm working on it! Kinda. Not really. Real life, y'know? That said, 5e's outdate isn't nearly the problem that older edition's had. Everything's still usable, you just have to use your own judgement for new races/subclasses. ... Probably why everyone keeps putting it on the backburner. Well, in my opinion, the new books, especially Xanathars Guide, did a really great job in make the subclasses even more diverse. Some examples: Ancestral Guardians are super different from the Berserker Barbarians and also the other, Hexblade Warlocks are also very different from normal ones. That was the reason. The points for the old ones are still valid, altough some new spells are a game changer for some classes - where a fighting character very hardly thinks about using green blade flame, sword burst and so on. So also for them, best practises might have changed.

Friday, 29th March, 2019

  • 08:10 PM - MechaTarrasque quoted Yunru in post The Moon(s) Patron
    I did consider that at first, but the difference between Combat Wild Shape and regular Wildshape is different enough that I feel they're really different features that just happen to share a resource and work a similar way. If no one in the party was going to play a moon druid, I wouldn't have any objections, but I could see someone being out of sorts if their moon druid was being outdone in his/her specialty by a warlock. If I was in charge of 6e (assuming 6e will exist), I would be inclined to make warlocks the "other shape changing class", but more focused on changing into one thing and powering up the form whereas druids change into a lot of beasts. So a warlock and a druid could both turn into a wolf, but that is all the warlock could change into. At level 20, the druid's wolf is only slightly better than a MM wolf, but the warlock's wolf could be a huge, flying, three-headed frost-breathing wolf.....

Thursday, 28th March, 2019

  • 06:27 PM - Satyrn quoted Yunru in post The Wandmaker Patron
    I mostly just based them on what a Harry Potter character can do. That makes sense. It acts as a foci regardless of class, but that doesn't help outside of multiclassing. You're right that it's weak. I'm considering having it able to be summoned as a free action, so you can never be disarmed, but would that be enough? I don't want to put too much power into it, because it gains quite a bit of power later? That still wouldn't be enough for me to ever consider taking this. I'd be tempted by an additional predetermined cantrip known (available only while holding the wand). Specifically thaumaturgy. It's one of that fun cantrips, but not normally available to warlocks so I'd be getting something unique to this patron without adding anything if great power.

Wednesday, 27th March, 2019

  • 08:25 PM - jayoungr quoted Yunru in post The Wandmaker Patron
    It's about a specific wand, that it gives you. It can be used as a foci for any spell, only you can use it, and as you gain more Warlock levels it gives you more Pact Magic spell slots. That's all it does. Ah, okay. Maybe just add a sentence saying that the wand does not have charges, then?
  • 07:39 PM - jayoungr quoted Yunru in post The Wandmaker Patron
    It's complete? You have a feature at levels 1, 6, 10 and 14, and an expanded spell list. The features are about the wands, though, and unless I'm missing something, there isn't anything about how the wands work. I admit I've never played a warlock, so maybe things that seem obvious to someone who has played one just aren't jumping out at me. I don't understand? Wands in the DMG typically have a set number of charges and regain a certain number each day. There is also very often a chance that the wand will break and become unusable when the last charge is expended, encouraging players not to use it all up in one day if possible. See these wands from the SRD, for example: http://www.5esrd.com/gamemastering/magic-items/rods-staves-wands#TOC-Wand-of-Binding

Monday, 25th March, 2019

  • 11:09 PM - doctorbadwolf quoted Yunru in post How Should Taunting Work?
    It's definitely Persuasion vs Insight. As for how it should react, there's no one way even for a single species, let alone every create. Part of it also depends on what you're taunting it into doing. Great point on the reaction. Setting a specific behavior is more in line with 5e simplicity, but leaving it open ended works fine, as well. A feint would be deceiving your opponent into thinking there's an opening that isn't actually there, and thus Deception. A taunt is persuading your opponent to take a course of action, and thus Persuasion. Both would have different outcomes. For instance, I can't see a feint granting disadvantage against other targets, because if the feint succeeds then the creature isn't going to be attacking other targets. Great points. A feint, IMO, is a move you do to get advantage against a creature, primarily, but I can also see using it to get them to overextend using their movement to come into a space they won't enjoy being in. This is probably a l...


Yunru's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites