View Profile: flametitan - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
  • flametitan's Avatar
    Yesterday, 12:43 AM
    Pikes. Their weight is borderline absurd for what the weapon provides in game terms.
    98 replies | 2735 view(s)
    1 XP
  • flametitan's Avatar
    Sunday, 16th June, 2019, 09:31 PM
    Greyhawk does have a lot of similarities with the FR, though I seem to recall Mystara got a little more weird materials progressed (though I dunno if most games really interacted with the weird stuff in Mystara.) That said, I do think that if WotC were to ever release them, they'd need more time to flesh out the question of, "Why play this setting over the Realms?" Greyhawk seems to have an...
    92 replies | 5090 view(s)
    1 XP
No More Results
About flametitan

Basic Information

Age
22
About flametitan
Disable sharing sidebar?:
No
Age Group:
19-24
My Game Details

Details of games currently playing and games being sought.

Country:
Canada

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
671
Posts Per Day
0.55
Last Post
What are your Pedantic Complaints about D&D? Yesterday 12:43 AM

Currency

Gold Pieces
4
General Information
Last Activity
Today 04:00 AM
Join Date
Wednesday, 2nd March, 2016
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0
My Game Details
Country:
Canada

Tuesday, 16th July, 2019


Monday, 15th July, 2019


Thursday, 11th July, 2019


Wednesday, 10th July, 2019


Tuesday, 9th July, 2019


Thursday, 27th June, 2019


Tuesday, 25th June, 2019


Monday, 24th June, 2019


Friday, 21st June, 2019


Thursday, 20th June, 2019


Wednesday, 19th June, 2019


Monday, 17th June, 2019


Sunday, 16th June, 2019


Friday, 1st February, 2019

  • 11:31 PM - pukunui mentioned flametitan in post Sage Advice Compendium Update 1/30/2019
    flametitan: Fair enough, I suppose. It does feel like someone who has mastered the use of shields should be able to do it more efficiently (e.g. as a bonus action). The wording of the feat — and thus the accompanying ruling from JC — does not seem to be conducive with this interpretation. I think I shall just ignore it. No one in either of my groups has the Shield Master feat, but if anyone were to take it, I would allow them to use the bonus action shield bash before they make any attacks with their Attack action.

Thursday, 15th November, 2018


Sunday, 11th November, 2018

  • 09:49 PM - pming mentioned flametitan in post First Impressions – Guildmasters Guide to Ravnica
    ... setting (here's the direct link to that particular video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJd6g--Ok_A ). Dael is a breath of fresh air for me, really. Still new enough to not be jaded, smart enough to figure stuff out for herself, and honest enough to realize what she likes and doesn't like. Her expertise/focus on literature and stories REALLY shows in how she runs her games. Her Australian accent (and good looks) are just the icing on the cake. For the side of sweet, creamy ice-cream, add in her rather good production quality of her videos and you have a definite winner. :) But I digress a bit. Ravnica seems like a "half-finished" idea, really. I don't know. Maybe I'm just expecting too much from WotC on this. When I think "world guide" I think of Forgotten Realms (1e Grey Box), Aereth (d20 Goodman Games), or Greyhawk (1e boxed set). I guess I'll just have to sit and wait for others to start posting about their campaigns to see just how diverse/open/useful it may be for me. Thanks flametitan for the quick run-down. :) ^_^ Paul L. Ming
  • 07:15 AM - pming mentioned flametitan in post First Impressions – Guildmasters Guide to Ravnica
    Hiya! So, flametitan, it's not so much a "Guildmasters Guide to Ravnica" as it is to a "Guildmasters Guide to A Very VERY small area in Ravnica"? Or am I missing something...isn't the 'world' called Ravnica? Or is Ravnica just this small little district? If so, is there nothing about the rest of the world? I mean, you can't really call a book "Guide to Earth" and then only concentrate on the USA. Now I'm confused again. I guess one of my main questions is about the "Guildless" and how they play a part or otherwise fit into the scheme of the world. Those guys interest me...the rest of the guilds? Not so much (or at all, really). But then again, "Guildless" could just mean "Guildless in this little area of the world and this is how people think of them". For all I know there is an entire countr...er.."district"...full of nothing but Guildless. Anyone? ^_^ Paul L. Ming

Monday, 4th June, 2018

  • 01:01 AM - Yaarel mentioned flametitan in post ‘Advanced’ Dungeons & Dragons
    @flametitan. Adventures should be setting specific. Some are specifically for Forgotten Realms. Some are specifically for Dark Sun. And so on. DMs can use Advanced D&D core rules to modify the adventure. Many DMs develop a homebrew setting, and might modify the adventure to make it suitable for a region within their own setting. @TwoSix. I agree, the 5e design model is financially successful, so far. The strategy of ‘bigger but fewer choices’ with baked-in setting flavor, makes a vivid ‘feel’ that is conducive to corporate branding, for brand recognition, movie licenses, and so on. Also, the fewer but salient options are helpful for beginner players, and newbies are how to ‘grow’ a brand. The ‘D&D’ setting is Forgotten Realms, but modified to port in Greyhawk (races), Planescape (great wheel cosmology), and even some 4e Nentir Vale (fey and shadow cosmology, and tiefling and dragonborn races). This baked-in setting flavor is the ‘branding’. On the other hand, many veteran players are growing...

Wednesday, 29th November, 2017

  • 12:56 PM - Coroc mentioned flametitan in post Move over Fireball and Spirit Guardians, there is a new best 3rd level spell sheriff in town!
    flametitan kudos, that is very much considered old school style these days. It is like i do it when i prepare a new Setting,*** diversity, i take out those parts of the game that do not fit into an official campaign world or some homebrew (in the end it is always part homebrew). In restricting things i see challenges for the players and the dm instead of limitations like younger People always seem to complain about. Guess i get to old for this egomaniac orientated world already. You want an adventure? You are sitting naked in a dungeon with NO starting equipment and gold. Your execution is scheduled in three hours. Try to find an item to pick the lock of your chains and the cell door if you want to escape. So now that i want this to work, that is why you are not allowed to play any teleport at will class.

Sunday, 7th May, 2017

  • 04:45 AM - MoonSong mentioned flametitan in post This is a directory of posters who think the sorcerer needs fixing
    ...test when I predicted that Neo-Vancian would mean balance problems for sorcerers, but over time I've noticed there is more and more posters who think the class could use a little help and recently that number has exploded. Just a beg, please, please pretty please with sugar on top, if you think the sorcerer class is not underpowered, or doesn't lack options, or overall doesn't need adjustment. (Or worse you don't want a sorcerer class at all), please refrain from posting here or being confrontational if you can't help it. This thread doesn't seek to prove a point or disprove yours. It just wants to be a hub for like-minded players and DMs to make acquaintance of each other. Double so for newcomers to the forum. The Directory so far. If you want to be included (or removed), edit this post to add or remove your name (and only your name, no vandalism plz). @Tony Vargas, @Hawk Diesel, @RangerWickett, @dco @Gwarok, @LapBandit @Sword of Spirit, @Gradine, @gyor, @Xeviat, @Yunru, @Jago, @flametitan, @Ketser, @cbwjm, @Immoralkickass @ScuroNotte , @Irda Ranger @dropbear8mybaby, Ilbranteloth Gradine's treatise on the sorcerer A brief(?) treatise on the plight of Sorcerer The fundamental problem with the Sorcerer in 5e is that the reason the class was created in the first place was to create a mechanical distinction that no longer exists in 5e. 4e solved the problem by creating a new mechanical distinction, but that no longer exists in 5e either. See, the 3rd edition Sorcerer was basically worse than the Wizard in all but a handful of ways (more spells per day being the big one, also they had slightly better weapon proficiencies and were more fun at parties). In exchange they had slower spell progression and no bonus feats, because WotC overestimated the power of spontaneous casting Monte Cooke hated sorcerers reasons. Pretty much everyone agreed that simply on the basis of the slower spell progression (something which was then saddled onto all future spontaneous full-casters), ...

Monday, 13th February, 2017

  • 08:42 PM - lowkey13 mentioned flametitan in post Unearthed Arcana: Wizards & Warlocks -- Hexblades, Raven Queens, and Lore Mastery!
    Can't say as I agree with that. Having double-locked invocations with unique features encourages playing non-obvious combinations, so you can get those unique features. Here's the thing, though. They aren't really unique. Take a look. You have four abilities (Curse Bringer, Claw, Mace, Moon Bow) that are all +2d8 damage per spell slot + (SPECIAL ABILITY). And based on my review, you'd have to have a really special character design cooked up to make a Bladelock that doesn't have a Hexblade patron. Because it's almost as if they thought, "Hey, let's level up the bladelock by giving them an even better patron." And that's the killer, for me. The great thing about the Warlock design was supposed to be the independence of the Pact/Patron. While there are aspects of this that I like, I absolutely abhor the design philosophy behind it. And, as pointed out by flametitan above, when you lock in invocations by pact/patron, you close the design space. Are you running an undying warlock? An undying light warlock? Well, so sorry for you! This isn't just about the specific abilities, but about the class.

Saturday, 12th November, 2016

  • 07:49 PM - Satyrn mentioned flametitan in post D&D Inducted Into National Toy Hall of Fame (Along with the Swing and Little People)
    That is the definite downside of only having a couple inductees every year... there's always a "Hey, wait, how did X get inducted before Y?" I know personally I have that reaction to the Game Boy going in before things like Hot Wheels, and The Game of Life getting to be the 5th board game to go in rather than something like Pachisi or Clue (behind Monopoly, Checkers, Scrabble, and Candyland) but it is what it is. When you start listing these things, and with flametitan suggesting this was - not rigged, more manipulated - brought about by heavy internet campaigning, I kind of feel like D&D doesn't belong in there. Not yet anyway. But as you say, it is what it is. And it's not bad. Not bad at all.

No results to display...
Page 1 of 17 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Monday, 15th July, 2019


Thursday, 20th June, 2019

  • 05:30 AM - doctorbadwolf quoted flametitan in post Acquisitions, Inc.: First Impressions
    I'll just be frank: I don't like Acq Inc. and even without the spells the impression I'm getting from talk of this book isn't making it sound like I should give it a shot. I know what I like in my games, and this book isn't it. Hey, you do you. I’d rather read through something before making that choice, but it sounds like the spell section wasn’t actually at all a make or break situation for you. If you dislike AcqInc, you’re unlikely to enjoy reading a book with the same style and sense of humor.
  • 03:12 AM - doctorbadwolf quoted flametitan in post Acquisitions, Inc.: First Impressions
    Honestly, looking at the spell section just affirmed for me it's not the kinda book I want. I hope it works well for those who do like AI or its content, though. I’d read the other parts of the book first, tbh. I love the C Team, but none of those spells are gonna exist in my game. AqInc itself, the franchises and their magic items and positions, the deep crow, etc, are all fine with me, as is defining a corporation as a type of chartered company in the early modern sense, and franchises in the same context, and just ignoring that they share names with more modern concepts, but those spells are just gags. They’re the only thing I’ve been disappointed by so far. I’d have really liked to see some boons similar to the special powers of the C Team, with rules for player rewarding each other with “bits” to power those booms.

Monday, 20th May, 2019

  • 04:23 AM - RxDrAcula quoted flametitan in post Bet on Sunday’s ‘surprise’ D&D announcement
    It's a neat setting that mixes magitech with more pulp action, and sometimes noir elements. The setting creator, Keith Baker, describes it as, "Lord of the Rings meets Indiana Jones and The Maltese Falcon." I like it a fair amount, but it's a setting that knows what it wants to be and leans into its unique elements hard. By extension, it's not a setting that'll appeal to everyone.Huh, well I certainly love all three of those movies. (Humphrey Bogart was in Falcon, right?) Anyway, I'll most certainly give it a shot.

Monday, 28th January, 2019

  • 09:10 PM - Parmandur quoted flametitan in post These Are DDB's Most Viewed D&D Adventures
    To add on to what Parmandur said, Ravnica as a setting has no planar elements; what happens is that Ravnica seems to be a popular meeting place for planeswalkers, the primary cast of Magic's storyline. Planeswalkers cannot take anyone else with them, and there's currently no other way to hop planes without a planeswalker (with the exception of one device the antagonist stole in a whole other world). Planescape, by contrast, is all about the planes. Now, theoretically, most of what planescape has to offer can be covered in a Manual of the Planes type book; however, such a generic manual of the planes would lack the "character" of the setting. This character is primarily based on the foundational principle that belief can cause actual change, and the resulting conflicts that it brews. The Blood war continues because both sides believe that their outlook on reality is correct, and because the those who haven't taken a side believe it better for the war to continue than for either side to win. The...
  • 06:54 AM - quoted flametitan in post These Are DDB's Most Viewed D&D Adventures
    It already is available on the DM's Guild. There's even 36 community made products that relate to ravnica in the store. exactly. the problem is not the 'availability', it is the fact that, differently from other settings, no official wotc 'developers' kit' is available on the guild.

Tuesday, 15th January, 2019

  • 09:41 PM - Chaosmancer quoted flametitan in post Matt Colville’s Strongholds and Followers
    At least with the warlock, a large part of the problem is figuring out what the warlock's "thing," is, its unique mechanical ability that helps it stand out. Initially it was going to be an eldritch blast boost, but then it was pointed out that warlocks didn't have to take Eldritch Blast. Invocations are unique to the warlock, but how do you boost invocations? The extra spell slot was eventually deemed to be the simplest way to boost the warlock via a stronghold bonus. Yeah. I've got a hombrew we're talking about at my tables, breaking it up per pact boon. So a blade pact gets free crits, a tome pact gets double concentration, and the chain pact gets to summon servitors. It feels right since A) Warlocks make deals to copy the powers of others, B) The pacts are different enough that it doesn't feel too strange to have different benefits and C) It gives a buff to chainlocks, and gives a better feel for their theme.

Monday, 14th January, 2019

  • 12:42 PM - 5ekyu quoted flametitan in post Matt Colville’s Strongholds and Followers
    And also because the OGL doesn't have more than one subclass per. But yeah, wotc's not going to give you legal trouble modifying this for your home games.Ahhh... I did not realize that was a restriction - never bothered to read the latest OGL. That makes a lot of sense then, given the legal concerns. And yea, OGL has no impact on homebrew.
  • 06:22 AM - 5ekyu quoted flametitan in post Matt Colville’s Strongholds and Followers
    At least with the warlock, a large part of the problem is figuring out what the warlock's "thing," is, its unique mechanical ability that helps it stand out. Initially it was going to be an eldritch blast boost, but then it was pointed out that warlocks didn't have to take Eldritch Blast. Invocations are unique to the warlock, but how do you boost invocations? The extra spell slot was eventually deemed to be the simplest way to boost the warlock via a stronghold bonus.Honestly, if I were going to expand this feature for my campaign - and I would - there would be features for each sub-class as to me and my experience that is the level where class meets "who am I" and they become fast friends. One feature per class was imo a good choice for ironing out the core system in a reasonable amount of space and time as well as completeness as new classes are likely not as likely as new sub-classes. Also marrying feature to form (structure to gains) is to me another good choice for presenting a simpler f...
  • 01:13 AM - Quickleaf quoted flametitan in post Upcoming products will "touch on cultures that don't usually get exposure."
    The ship book's one of the 2019 releases, and the other cultures one is going to be a 2020 release, so there's no reason to think they're connected. Well, at least in the case of transitioning from the storyline of Storm King's Thunder to Tomb of Annihilation...the latter hinted at the former with the whole Ring of Winter and Artus Cimber subplot which ToA followed through on. And the two Waterdeep books Dragon Heist and Dungeon of the Mad Mage are explicitly connected. So tying releases together is definitely something they have done before.

Saturday, 8th December, 2018

  • 10:28 PM - Lanefan quoted flametitan in post Ridding D&D of All Races - Multiple Choice Poll
    I'd rather get rid of the idea that just because the race exists in a book, it should therefore exist in the world. Having the option to include them is fine, but there's times where I see people seem to assume that because it's in a book, it must be included in a world.Well, in organized play that's exactly the case: if a race is in an allowed book then it's allowed, and the DM has no choice. That same mentality bleeds over into home games*, leaving the DM stuck between either allowing something she doesn't want in her game or being the villain and saying no. * - perhaps a bit more controversially, I'll posit this mentality is far stronger now than it was, say, 30 years ago; in part due to all the 2e splatbooks from the '90s (and the resulting push from players to include their contents in the game) and in bigger part due to 4e's "everything is core" marketing approach. For my own part, I can live with Gnomes far more than with Dragonborn or Tieflings. D's and T's to me are just the so...

Friday, 23rd November, 2018

  • 06:40 AM - BlivetWidget quoted flametitan in post Official D&D Errata Updated (Nov 2018)
    I was saying that there was the possibility that the wording was done in relation to Magic Initiate, whether to clarify or remove it. It was something where I wasn't sure if it made it clearer or changed the ruling, and needed to read up on it more, so the answer I gave was purposefully ambiguous. In this case, it doesn't really change much in practice, but it pairs well with the, "You learn that spell," part of Magic Initiate. Okay, thanks for the clarification on your thoughts. I agree it doesn’t change anything wrt the sage advice on Magic Initiate. Minor wording change that seems in line with the rules and sage advice up to this point. Probably just there to head off some multiclassing arguments.

Wednesday, 21st November, 2018

  • 04:48 PM - BlivetWidget quoted flametitan in post Official D&D Errata Updated (Nov 2018)
    It might also have to do with Magic Initiate, as the previous Sage Advice rule for that was that it'd technically add that spell to your spells known if you were of the appropriate class. I'd have to read into it more carefully, but that might also play into it. Could you clarify what you mean by this? By my reading, nothing has changed in this regard. A wizard who takes Magic Initiate (Wizard) still gets another wizard spell known.

Saturday, 17th November, 2018

  • 07:24 AM - doctorbadwolf quoted flametitan in post Official D&D Errata Updated (Nov 2018)
    I notice that every Class now gets their spells specified as "[Class X] spells"rather than just spells. Is this is some sort of anti-cheese maneuver by the devs? I wish they hadn't. I'm not sure, but I think this makes multi-classing between casters more complex and annoying. I get that they want to avoid "cheese", but IMO they go a bit too far with this one. I've seen some people willfully misinterpret the way multiclassing works in order to prepare spells they shouldn't (usually via ignoring the big rule where you treat spells known and preparation as if you were only a single member of that class). This is just to help shut those people up. I don't think it only does that, though. I'll have to dig into it more after the weekend, bc it's gonna be a busy one, though. I'm sure I'm not the only one disappointed in the Beast Master changes, I think many of us were expecting something stronger than this: Continuing the previously-issued command on subsequent rounds would've been a much ...
  • 02:29 AM - Sword of Spirit quoted flametitan in post Official D&D Errata Updated (Nov 2018)
    It might also have to do with Magic Initiate, as the previous Sage Advice rule for that was that it'd technically add that spell to your spells known if you were of the appropriate class. I'd have to read into it more carefully, but that might also play into it. I prefer that version. It isn't really overpowered.

Friday, 16th November, 2018

  • 10:01 PM - LordEntrails quoted flametitan in post Official D&D Errata Updated (Nov 2018)
    A problem I see is the new change for Disintegrate contradicts the Sage Advice about a disintegrate and a wildshaped druid. Note sure it does, as pointed out by another, but it does go to show me that Sage Advice is not infallible and is not RAW, it's just advice. I'm looking at the D&D Beyond website. They didn't axe that line, unless they did in the physical book but forgot to inform Curse... I doubt they go out of their way to inform their partners, they don't with FG. So I'd be surprised if DDB was updated yet. Give them a little time.
  • 09:00 PM - Jester David quoted flametitan in post Official D&D Errata Updated (Nov 2018)
    One thing I noticed is a weird discrepency in the Demilich errata. It was changed from 80 (20d4) to 80 (32d4), which would make sense for the 2.5 average of a d4. The problem, however, is that the Demilich has this annoying sentence, that it seems they didn't axe: "Undead Nature. A demilich doesn’t require air, food, drink, or sleep. So great is a demilich’s will to survive that it always has the maximum number of hit points for its Hit Dice, instead of average hit points." So either someone "corrected" a non-issue, or the Demilich is now supposed to have 128 hit points. I think someone forgot the maximum hit point line, as it's a mechanic in the fluff text. Really, the point of having averages is to give DMs a range and flexibility with numbers. So if they need a tougher monster, they can choose to roll or go with 75% rather than 50% without "cheating" and adding extra Hit Dice. But the demilich works against that. I just hope the "undead nature" line also got removed...
  • 08:39 PM - Parmandur quoted flametitan in post Official D&D Errata Updated (Nov 2018)
    I've seen some people willfully misinterpret the way multiclassing works in order to prepare spells they shouldn't (usually via ignoring the big rule where you treat spells known and preparation as if you were only a single member of that class). This is just to help shut those people up. Figured it was something along those lines...
  • 12:31 AM - gyor quoted flametitan in post First Impressions – Guildmasters Guide to Ravnica
    And I appreciate it. A third one that's been on my mind, though I wouldn't know how correct it is, is the feeling of there not being a thematic thread to hang story ideas off of, or at least one that is worn on its sleeves. Planescape and Eberron, the settings I have most fondness for, are settings that are proud to boast their themes and how to play into them. Planescape being about how belief matters, and Eberron being about the shades of grey in morality and how to navigate them. For Ravnica, I can almost see a thread for the idea of the relationship between nature and civilization, and how that would look in an ecumopolis, but the problem there is that only about half the guilds have a possibility of interacting meaningfully with it, while only three (Selesnya, Gruul, and Simic) directly touch upon it. The Themes for Ravnica is straight up urban issues and political intrigue taken to the greatest extreme. No other setting has a planet wide government like Ravnica and the closest it com...

Thursday, 15th November, 2018

  • 05:09 AM - dave2008 quoted flametitan in post First Impressions – Guildmasters Guide to Ravnica
    For Ravnica, I can almost see a thread for the idea of the relationship between nature and civilization, and how that would look in an ecumopolis, but the problem there is that only about half the guilds have a possibility of interacting meaningfully with it, while only three (Selesnya, Gruul, and Simic) directly touch upon it. I guess that seems more approachable to me. A setting have a theme I think is good and interesting, but it would seem oddly forced to me if everything tied into it. Having some of the guilds oblivious to the theme just makes sense to me. It seems more, well real. I have never played Eberron or Planescape, but I would hope it is not as all encompassing as you made it seem.


Page 1 of 17 1234567891011 ... LastLast

flametitan's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites