View Profile: Rya.Reisender - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
  • Rya.Reisender's Avatar
    Tuesday, 9th July, 2019, 06:46 PM
    Rya.Reisender started a thread Languages
    So I was just wondering how to determine if PCs can communicate with a creature. Each creature has a list of languages it can speak, but what if the PCs don't have any of these in common? The player's handbook says that many languages are just different accents of the same language, but it doesn't list which languages belong to the same accent except for the example of elemental languages. ...
    9 replies | 374 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Rya.Reisender's Avatar
    Wednesday, 26th June, 2019, 11:03 AM
    The moment the PC voices his intent to attack, I immediately start combat, roll stealth and initiative. Already before the attack if the stealth roll failed, the orc can alert the camp even before any attack rolls take place. If the stealth roll succeeds, then all PCs who rolled stealth (aka the ones who want to attack) can act in round 1 while the orcs can't. The orc will raise alarm at the...
    178 replies | 5682 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Rya.Reisender's Avatar
    Sunday, 23rd June, 2019, 08:40 AM
    All of them hundreds of times? Well... so far I finished DMing Lost Mine of Phandelver and have an ongoing Princes of the Apocalypse campaign and I think pretty much every 5th encounter has a sentence about some creature escaping when a condition is met (usually "losing the battle" or "left alone"). But I handle it like how most others here do, just stick to the rules and let the creature...
    59 replies | 2589 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Rya.Reisender's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 08:05 AM
    I was just wondering how you handle it when the module says that a villain escapes when he is about to lose the battle, but actually has no means to escape combat-mechanics-wise (grappled, etc.). Would you just force it and just override any combat rules and switch to narration mode or just let the villain die if he can't get away through combat means, making the players miss out on potentially...
    59 replies | 2589 view(s)
    0 XP
No More Results
About Rya.Reisender

Basic Information

About Rya.Reisender
Disable sharing sidebar?:
No
Sex:
Rather not say
Age Group:
31-40

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
843
Posts Per Day
0.60
Last Post
Languages Tuesday, 9th July, 2019 06:46 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
42
General Information
Last Activity
Thursday, 18th July, 2019 10:57 AM
Join Date
Monday, 21st September, 2015
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0
No results to show...

Friday, 29th March, 2019

  • 11:01 AM - Harzel mentioned Rya.Reisender in post Unsatisfied with the D&D 5e skill system
    If the core issue is "players have no idea what to do with their skills if they are not specific", then I wouldn't change the rules at all and instead simply give them a handout that lists each official D&D 5e skill with a list of things you can do with that skill. This. And perhaps to do that in a way that leverages / integrates with how the OP has been thinking about the problem: go ahead and create and/or steal a more detailed list of skills. Then just figure out which 5e skill subsumes each one and use that (along with abilities/skills info from the PHB) to construct the list that @Rya.Reisender suggests. Seems like that would produce a set of ideas for the players that is as specific and suggestive as an expanded skill list would be without the trouble of having to muck about with rules changes. I have another point to make, but I want to preface it by saying I intend no disrespect to @twofalls or your players - please don't take this comment in a way that is as extreme or dismissive as it may at first sound. Anyway, here's the thing: 5e skills are not meant as buttons to be pushed. The basic outlook for the player should be that the PC "can attempt anything". In the main, ideas for PC actions should arise from their circumstances, not from a preexisting list of things they can do.* Of course, it is reasonable that that should be tempered by knowing what each PC is good at, but in 5e that description by design comprises very general categories, not specific actions. The advantage of this is adaptability to varying circumstances. (The PHB section Chapter 7 Using Ability...

Tuesday, 18th September, 2018

  • 03:39 PM - iserith mentioned Rya.Reisender in post Burning Questions: What's the Worst Thing a DM Can Do?
    Wow. What, then, is even the point of having a DM? Or going further, what give you the impression that the game's intention isn't to be tinkered with? Where do you draw the line? The Player's Handbook has "ask your DM" type points all over it, and the DMG is a toolkit for making up your own stuff. How exactly do you believe the game is "intended" to be played? I don't take as hard a line as Rya.Reisender does, but I would say that the first step in what I understand to be the intended play experience is that the DM decides whether the rules need to come into play in the first place to resolve something and then, once he or she decides they must, I do greatly prefer the DM follow those rules (or agreed upon house rules, variant rules, table rules, etc.). Notably this doesn't mean the DM must use the rules to resolve something. He or she can simply narrate the result of the adventurers' actions without reference to the rules.

Wednesday, 22nd March, 2017

  • 02:53 AM - Hussar mentioned Rya.Reisender in post Where does optimizing end and min-maxing begin? And is min-maxing a bad thing?
    ..., with 30 seconds, you can justify pretty much any character building decision you care to choose. The issue here is that there are players, primarily DM's, who feel that it is incumbent upon themselves to police the players and make sure that those players are playing "right". While the persistent mantra is "trust your DM", I find that the opposite "trust your players", while equally true, is practiced a lot less frequently. I only reward inspiration when putting yourself into a disadvantage by playing out a flaw, which is what min-maxers usually don't do. They would just complain "What's the point of inspiration when you first have to get disadvantage to even get it?" sometimes, but usually they just accept my rule silently. While my players that are heavily into roleplaying just play out their flaws anyway and are more like "Heh, I didn't actually do this to get inspiration, I just wanted to play out my character, but nice." To me, this is a case in point. Note that Rya.Reisender has adjusted the mechanics for Inpiration. This isn't what is in the PHB. The question I ask is, "why?" Why alter the rules? You want to encourage players to play up their flaws, but, only their flaws? Doesn't that mean that players will become just a collection of flaws, rather than presenting well rounded individuals? Sure, characters have flaws and those should certainly inform play, fair enough. But, that's just one facet of a character. There are also goals and beliefs too, if we're sticking with just the stuff from Backgrounds. Why are those not also given equal weight and rewarded equally? Look, it's your game, and do what makes you happy. But, for me, I think that this approach may not produce the best results.

Thursday, 26th January, 2017


Monday, 30th November, 2015

  • 11:12 PM - pukunui mentioned Rya.Reisender in post in search of a holiday adventure
    Rya.Reisender: I run an episodic campaign, so theoretically it shouldn't be difficult to slot in a one-shot Christmas-themed adventure. It's just a matter of figuring out what. I'm warming up to the idea of the Christmas Carol-esque adventure, the link to which I posted above. Obviously I'd have to tone it down a bit, as a lich is a bit too powerful for a bunch of 5th level PCs, but I can use the general framework, I think. Also, I might have the PCs' patron give them quirky little magic items as gifts.

Thursday, 19th November, 2015

  • 01:57 PM - iserith mentioned Rya.Reisender in post Running away on intimidation
    Rya.Reisender: I don't think realism is really the best goal to pursue, whereas consistency is in my view. Consistently playing hobgoblins as creatures who would rather die than surrender allows the players to make decisions based on this fact. I also recommend telegraphing this trait via their interaction with the PCs so that telling the fighter's player that his demand for surrender was completely ignored isn't a total surprise. Context established up to that point would show why the hobgoblin refuses outright, no roll.

No results to display...
Page 1 of 27 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Wednesday, 10th July, 2019

  • 04:38 AM - Monayuris quoted Rya.Reisender in post Languages
    So I was just wondering how to determine if PCs can communicate with a creature. Each creature has a list of languages it can speak, but what if the PCs don't have any of these in common? The player's handbook says that many languages are just different accents of the same language, but it doesn't list which languages belong to the same accent except for the example of elemental languages. Any clue? For example I'm wondering if PCs can understand undercommon. Is that just a different accent of common? Or a completely different language? It seems strange to me that underdark creatures (which don't speak common) couldn't communicate which creature of the surface at all. Anyone can point me where it's defined which languages are just different accents from each other? No idea other than what is posted above. I assume characters that don't speak the same language can't understand each other (each language is different enough to be in-interpretable). So Common and Undercommon are two completely dif...

Sunday, 23rd June, 2019

  • 02:05 PM - billd91 quoted Rya.Reisender in post Villains that are supposed to escape
    All of them hundreds of times? Well... so far I finished DMing Lost Mine of Phandelver and have an ongoing Princes of the Apocalypse campaign and I think pretty much every 5th encounter has a sentence about some creature escaping when a condition is met (usually "losing the battle" or "left alone"). But I handle it like how most others here do, just stick to the rules and let the creature die. I was just wondering because often players miss out on even seeing half the creatures abilities, because they have this habit of keeping everything grappled and even if the creature has say the ability to move through walls, that doesn't help it when its speed is 0. Of course I could change the ability to "It can move through walls and is immune to the grappled condition" in preparation, but still feels like cheating to me. Then the module should have thought of it. If a module says something about a creature escaping (because it's losing or is left alone), that doesn't mean it needs to succeed - r...
  • 08:54 AM - Tony Vargas quoted Rya.Reisender in post Villains that are supposed to escape
    Of course I could change the ability to "It can move through walls and is immune to the grappled condition" in preparation, IDK. walls are typically made of stone, their not nearly as dense as some PCs can be... ;P but still feels like cheating to me. Then the module should have thought of it. But, seriously, go right ahead. If a creature can become non-corporeal or something, it could slip right through the grapplers' fingers. Not out of line at all to add something like that, or just rule it on the spot. The game, itself doesn't think of everything, and, while a module is meant to do a lot of prep work for you, you ate still going to need to make rulings in play. As a matter of fact, it's possible that you have already made some rulings that your players have taken as encouraging the frequent use of grappling... So go ahead and rule in favor of monsters getting a chance to show their stuff before the combat ends.

Saturday, 22nd June, 2019

  • 06:07 AM - Charlaquin quoted Rya.Reisender in post Villains that are supposed to escape
    I was just wondering how you handle it when the module says that a villain escapes when he is about to lose the battle, but actually has no means to escape combat-mechanics-wise (grappled, etc.). Are there actually any 5e modules that do this? Would you just force it and just override any combat rules and switch to narration mode or just let the villain die if he can't get away through combat means, making the players miss out on potentially fun pursue scenes? It depends. If I’ve got a good rapport with the players and I have a strong sense that they’d be accepting of me just narrating the villain’s escape, then sure. On the other hand, one of the things I enjoy most about D&D is the power the PCs have to say “screw what the plot says is supposed to happen, we make our own fate.” And that’s something I would never want to take away from the players.

Friday, 21st June, 2019

  • 06:14 PM - DMMike quoted Rya.Reisender in post Villains that are supposed to escape
    I was just wondering how you handle it when the module says that a villain escapes when he is about to lose the battle . . . just let the villain die if he can't get away through combat means Bloodthirsty PCs, much? You'd better help out your excellent adventure module writer by giving the villain a nice failsafe - like only she knows which well a PC's family member is stuck in, or the villain's thrall lights an orphanage on fire somewhere if she dies. I kind of like the idea that if the PCs kill off the BBEG an impostor/second in command takes over. Yup. The PCs sure captured the villain. The adventure is won! Now let's finish him off...wait, is he WEARING A MASK!?
  • 06:05 PM - Dausuul quoted Rya.Reisender in post Villains that are supposed to escape
    I was just wondering how you handle it when the module says that a villain escapes when he is about to lose the battle, but actually has no means to escape combat-mechanics-wise (grappled, etc.). Would you just force it and just override any combat rules and switch to narration mode or just let the villain die if he can't get away through combat means, making the players miss out on potentially fun pursue scenes? I would do one of two things: If I noticed the issue while prepping, I'd give the villain a reasonably reliable means of escape (note that "reliable" is not "foolproof" and the players can still kill the villain if they foil the escape plan). Then I would come to ENWorld and gripe about poor module design. If I noticed the issue mid-combat, I'd shrug and let the villain die, then do what I had to do to get the module back on track. After the session, I would come to ENWorld and gripe about poor module design. I won't say that I never fudge things as a DM, but these days I do it very co...
  • 05:38 PM - Tony Vargas quoted Rya.Reisender in post Villains that are supposed to escape
    I was just wondering how you handle it when the module says that a villain escapes when he is about to lose the battle, but actually has no means to escape combat-mechanics-wise (grappled, etc.). Would you just override any combat rules and switch to narration mode In 5e, that's not even a switch or an override, it's just making different rulings. The villain tries to escape, the DM narrates successful escape, the players try to stop him, the DM narrates failure, the party tries to track or pursue him, the DM narrates the pursuit taking them to a side-encounter or dead end. Perfectly orthodox 5e play dynamic.
  • 04:57 PM - the Jester quoted Rya.Reisender in post Villains that are supposed to escape
    I was just wondering how you handle it when the module says that a villain escapes when he is about to lose the battle, but actually has no means to escape combat-mechanics-wise (grappled, etc.). That's a great example of poor adventure design. Never unfairly rob the pcs of a well-earned victory. Contrived "he gets away no matter what" stuff is great for a novel, but D&D is a game.
  • 04:53 PM - Draegn quoted Rya.Reisender in post Villains that are supposed to escape
    I was just wondering how you handle it when the module says that a villain escapes when he is about to lose the battle, but actually has no means to escape combat-mechanics-wise (grappled, etc.). Would you just force it and just override any combat rules and switch to narration mode or just let the villain die if he can't get away through combat means, making the players miss out on potentially fun pursue scenes? I do not run modules. However, if the module is well written there should be some sort of explanation as to how the villain escapes. In my game if I want a villain to escape during a specific scene I plan it so the villain is there is taunt and harass the characters. A medusa turns one character to stone then calmly walks away leaving the players to decide to chase or save the stoned character from being smashed to bits by one of the medusa's minions. An enemy officer fires a missile weapon from an elevated position at the characters, then rides away as the players begin to defeat ...
  • 04:06 PM - Xaelvaen quoted Rya.Reisender in post Villains that are supposed to escape
    I was just wondering how you handle it when the module says that a villain escapes when he is about to lose the battle, but actually has no means to escape combat-mechanics-wise (grappled, etc.). Would you just force it and just override any combat rules and switch to narration mode or just let the villain die if he can't get away through combat means, making the players miss out on potentially fun pursue scenes? Well, I never 'break the rules' to ensure the escape, but I do have a wide list of contingencies available. The big rule here is, keep it new and keep it organic. If the same method is used every time you have a villain escape, it does break your verisimilitude (especially if it's multiple times in a single campaign), but players can build up this distaste for it even if it's over multiple campaigns. Also keep in mind, there are -many- ways for a villain to escape and the players not even know it. As others have mentioned, giving them a magic item to perform an escape (misty step, dime...

Tuesday, 18th June, 2019

  • 01:59 PM - Bobble quoted Rya.Reisender in post Tremorsense and ranged attacks
    There's a difference between those. Tremorsense can only detect things that are in contact with the same ground. A flying creature or someone standing on a floating platform or floating himself would be unseen for the person with tremorsense. Yes, yes. And given that ~99% of encounters are with things that touch the ground my recommendation stands.

Monday, 17th June, 2019

  • 02:15 PM - Bobble quoted Rya.Reisender in post Tremorsense and ranged attacks
    But as clarified by Sage Advice, with Tremorsense you can see everything that's connected to the ground, the hand is connected to the ground via the rest of the body, so you can detect that with tremorsense. Then, since its original inception it has been changed to just another magical vision not a vibration detection like hearing or touch. At this point there is no reason to have it in the game. Might as well give all who have it True sight like ability.
  • 01:20 PM - Oofta quoted Rya.Reisender in post Tremorsense and ranged attacks
    Person without tremorsense shoots an arrow at person with tremorsense in a heavily obscured area within tremorsense range? Disadvantage or neutral? Well, I only pay attention to the sage advice that's in the official document and I don't see a clarification there (and honestly I ignore/override some of those), so I'll give you my ruling. So let's start with the definition: " tremorsense can detect and pinpoint the origin of vibrations within a specific radius, provided that the monster and the source of the vibrations are in contact with the same ground or substance." Compare that to truesight: "out to a specific range, see in normal and magical darkness, see invisible creatures and objects" So I would say the former let's you know the exact location so you don't have to guess where they are, the latter allows you to see them. If you don't have tremorsense you have to guess where something is which may mean that you fire that arrow in the wrong direction and have no chance to hit. So I would...
  • 12:49 PM - Hriston quoted Rya.Reisender in post Tremorsense and ranged attacks
    So how would you rule here: Person without tremorsense shoots an arrow at person with tremorsense in a heavily obscured area within tremorsense range? Disadvantage or neutral? Disadvantage on attacks against an unseen target applies to this attack because the attacker is seen so doesn’t have advantage for being an unseen attacker. There is no advantage for unseen missiles.

Wednesday, 24th April, 2019

  • 01:15 PM - Oofta quoted Rya.Reisender in post Use Magic Missile to determine whether a statue is an Object or a Creature?(!)
    I only call for initiative if players are aware of an enemy and want to attack it. Or an enemy is aware of the players and wants to attack them. Seems rather silly to me to let players roll initiative out of combat just to see who to ask what he is doing first. I just let my players act freely and only if I notice one is not saying anything ask "What are you doing in the meantime?". The situations where I've called for initiative outside of combat are extremely rare but may happen if events are happening nearly simultaneously. Think complex trap, building collapsing around the PCs, etc. Even then I'm more flexible than combat initiative, but I do want to limit possible actions. For example if the PCs are caught in a burning building and after facing a few obstacles some of them start suffering from smoke inhalation (failed con save). At a certain point one of the PCs has the option to try to help their buddy or an NPC, but they're going to be moving more slowly. To mimic that they can't ...

Tuesday, 9th April, 2019

  • 02:11 PM - Mort quoted Rya.Reisender in post Ritual Spells - do they need to be a separate category?
    A Warlock ability allows them to learn all Ritual spells. If all spells were Ritual spells they could cast everything.Are you talking about pact of the tome, or something else? Pact of the tome gives you a few rituals and the ability to scribe any rituals you find (at a cost). You still need to find the rituals.

Friday, 29th March, 2019

  • 11:01 AM - Harzel quoted Rya.Reisender in post Unsatisfied with the D&D 5e skill system
    If the core issue is "players have no idea what to do with their skills if they are not specific", then I wouldn't change the rules at all and instead simply give them a handout that lists each official D&D 5e skill with a list of things you can do with that skill. This. And perhaps to do that in a way that leverages / integrates with how the OP has been thinking about the problem: go ahead and create and/or steal a more detailed list of skills. Then just figure out which 5e skill subsumes each one and use that (along with abilities/skills info from the PHB) to construct the list that @Rya.Reisender suggests. Seems like that would produce a set of ideas for the players that is as specific and suggestive as an expanded skill list would be without the trouble of having to muck about with rules changes. I have another point to make, but I want to preface it by saying I intend no disrespect to @twofalls or your players - please don't take this comment in a way that is as extreme or dismissive as it may at first sound. Anyway, here's the thing: 5e skills are not meant as buttons to be pushed. The basic outlook for the player should be that the PC "can attempt anything". In the main, ideas for PC actions should arise from their circumstances, not from a preexisting list of things they can do.* Of course, it is reasonable that that should be tempered by knowing what each PC is good at, but in 5e that description by design comprises very general categories, not specific actions. The advantage of this is adaptability to varying circumstances. (The PHB section Chapter 7 Using Ability...

Wednesday, 13th March, 2019

  • 03:00 PM - dpkress2 quoted Rya.Reisender in post Not your average HIDE questions
    No. Definitely not. If you cannot hear and cannot see, everybody is hidden from you. You can still guess a location based on smell, though. . An exception to this rule would be creatures with keen smell? If they make their perception roll (with advantage) they know exactly where the hidden creature is? I would rule yes, but would that be a house rule? Not just any animal though. Any animal that has acute smell in real life is accounted for in D&D mechanics by giving them the keen smell trait.

Tuesday, 5th March, 2019

  • 01:11 PM - Harzel quoted Rya.Reisender in post Non-spell area effects vs. total cover
    The text you quoted is part of the Area of Effect section, so I'd apply that as well of course. That is unless the ability description says otherwise. Banshee's Wail is very specific in how it works and doesn't even refer to an AoE type. Here are some spell descriptions that also do not explicitly refer to any AE shape. Would you say that these are or are not AE spells? My take is that they are. (Obviously, Ice Knife has a couple of parts. I am referring to the explosion part.) Destructive Wave - You strike the ground, creating a burst of divine energy that ripples outward from you. Each creature you choose within 30 feet of you must succeed on a Constitution saving throw or take 5d6 thunder damage, as well as 5d6 radiant or necrotic damage (your choice), and be knocked prone. A creature that succeeds on its saving throw takes half as much damage and isn’t knocked prone. Ice Knife - You create a shard of ice and fling it at one creature within range. Make a ranged spell attack against the ...
  • 04:48 AM - Harzel quoted Rya.Reisender in post Non-spell area effects vs. total cover
    If the monster ability refers to an Area of Effect (e.g. "Cone"), I'd apply the rules for that AoE. Sure, but that doesn't help. The rule for how a spell's effect expands (that I quoted) is separate from the rules for the individual shapes and applies to all of them.


Page 1 of 27 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Rya.Reisender's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites