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

Basic Information

About paladinn
Introduction:
OSR/ 5e Grognard
About Me:
Delusions of adequacy
Location:
Virginia
Disable sharing sidebar?:
No
Sex:
Male
Age Group:
Over 40
My Game Details

Details of games currently playing and games being sought.

Country:
USA

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
36
Posts Per Day
0.04
Last Post
Mythological Figures: Vlad the Impaler (5E) Yesterday 02:09 AM

Currency

Gold Pieces
2
General Information
Last Activity
Today 02:14 AM
Join Date
Tuesday, 15th November, 2016
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0
My Game Details
Country:
USA

Tuesday, 16th July, 2019


Sunday, 7th July, 2019

  • 02:57 PM - Koren n'Rhys mentioned paladinn in post Gavin Norman, Necrotic Gnome, Talks Old-School Essentials and D&D 5E Dolmenwood
    paladinn Necrotic Gnome is producing thier own version of the 1E content. As part of the Kickstarter, Gavin did a book of the races and classes, and a second volume with Druid & Illusionist spells. Also included are some 1e rules (poison, 2-weapon fighting, weapon specialization, among others) as well as rules for separating race and class if desired. He intends to add more as well - monsters, treasures, etc. Not sure about spells - I do hope more M-U and Cleric spells get brought in for variety. The problem, as Gavin has mentioned, is rejiggering things to fit into B/Xs range of 14 class levels and only 5&7 spell levels rather than the 7&9 of 1E. For me, OSE wins hands down over LL due to its concise, clear writing and presentation. Honestly, the biggest thing about LL that bugged me to an irrational degree was the crazy XP charts. Those numbers drive me nuts!

No results to display...
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Sunday, 21st July, 2019

  • 04:03 AM - dave2008 quoted paladinn in post Mythological Figures: Vlad the Impaler (5E)
    If the purpose of the column has changed, fine. I was just wondering if it was going to Stay about AToC and ATMC. I'm guessing that honest inquiries and non-group-think are frowned-upon now. No honest inquires are strongly encouraged. However, all you said was "So this column is just an ongoing ad for the Touch of Class stuff?" Maybe it wasn't intended, but it comes off a bit snarky with no indication that you knew about the rest of the series. Sorry I missinterupted, but I think if you look at your statement with fresh eyes you can see it is an easy mistake (that others seem to have picked up as well). That being said, I shouldn't have been so snarky in my response. I almost deleted that part - wish I had. p.s. You should probably read the other replies, including those by Mike and Morrus, before you make comments like this. I did read the other replies before I posted it, but not before I wrote it. Like I said, I wish I had deleted that bit. I chose to reply with snark on a post...
  • 01:50 AM - dave2008 quoted paladinn in post Mythological Figures: Vlad the Impaler (5E)
    So this column is just an ongoing ad for the Touch of Class stuff? No, I'm guessing you don't check here often but it has only been recently that they have used the Touch of Class classes. The vast majority are standard WotC class builds. PS, you should probably do a little research before you make a comment like that.

Saturday, 20th July, 2019

  • 03:31 PM - Nathaniel Lee quoted paladinn in post Mythological Figures: Vlad the Impaler (5E)
    So this column is just an ongoing ad for the Touch of Class stuff? Are you really surprised that they would want to provide examples of how one could use the product they’re trying to sell? Plus, it’s not like you couldn’t just adjust the stat block to suit your own purposes. I wouldn’t use any of these as-is without _any_ modification.

Friday, 19th July, 2019


Tuesday, 16th July, 2019

  • 02:16 PM - Morrus quoted paladinn in post Mythological Figures: Vlad the Impaler (5E)
    So this column is just an ongoing ad for the Touch of Class stuff? The column has approaching 70 mythological figures, one every week since March 2018. The last 4 used ATMC. If you want to skip those 4, we're cool with that. I hope you enjoy the other 65 or so.
  • 12:04 PM - Mike Myler quoted paladinn in post Mythological Figures: Vlad the Impaler (5E)
    So this column is just an ongoing ad for the Touch of Class stuff? This is the last ATMC/AToC-built character. :) Next week we'll get back into the Epic Monsters/regular-Mythological Figures shuffle with either Arachne or Skin-Walkers, and the week after that I've got Saladin lined up.

Wednesday, 10th July, 2019


Saturday, 6th July, 2019

  • 02:51 AM - Hugh Acton quoted paladinn in post Gavin Norman, Necrotic Gnome, Talks Old-School Essentials and D&D 5E Dolmenwood
    What's the advantage of OSE over established products like Swords & Wizardry or Labyrinth Lord? OSE is an exact clone, as opposed LL or S&W. Also, it's presentation is designed for easier table reference and modularity. I have the BXE (same stuff, old name) in the POD paperbacks and they are quite handy. I've introduced the game to lots of players at my FLGS and many do love the difference in style of play from 5e.

Thursday, 18th April, 2019

  • 04:47 PM - Whizbang Dustyboots quoted paladinn in post Stranger Things and D&D at Last: A Review
    I like Stranger Things.. Just wish they hadn't used "demogorgon" as a monster name. Demogorgon has a very specific meaning for D&D'ers. That's the joke. These are kids who've taught themselves to play and, as a kid whose friends taught themselves to play in the late 1970s and early 1980s, they get some stuff wrong. But everyone at the table is having fun, so who cares? (For years, I was sure it said in the 1E DMG that a serious curse was placed on everyone nearby if a crystal ball got broken. I'm pretty sure that was someone misremembering Lord of the Rings and, not having fully read the DMG, applying that to D&D as a "rule." It did turn us all into crystal ball-lobbing anarchists, though.)
  • 03:04 PM - PabloM quoted paladinn in post Stranger Things and D&D at Last: A Review
    I like Stranger Things.. Just wish they hadn't used "demogorgon" as a monster name. Demogorgon has a very specific meaning for D&D'ers. He, that's exactly why I like they had used it.

Thursday, 3rd January, 2019

  • 09:48 PM - Pauln6 quoted paladinn in post Unearthed Arcana: Sidekicks
    I'd think the differentiation would be a matter of RP more than mechanics, Especially when it comes to spellcasting. Why shouldn't fireball be available to a cleric of a god of fire? Or a druid, for that matter? You see some of this in 5e now: light clerics can cast fireball. The cleric specialty powers/spells seem to be a means of "opening up" clerics to other spell options that they would not normally get. Why not open it up completely and let a cleric take what suits his/her deity?D&D spells are based on myths, legends, fairy stories, parables, and modern pop culture. To stay faithful to this tradition, spells shouldn't just be a collection of dice and effects. They tried that in 4e to a greater extent and leeched a lot of character out of the characters. I think 5e is very close to the sweet spot to please most of the people most of the time. The variation in clerics works really well in play without them eating up the wizard like 3e CoDzilla. If you want to tweak your Cleric furth...
  • 06:02 AM - mrpopstar quoted paladinn in post Unearthed Arcana: Sidekicks
    I'd think the differentiation would be a matter of RP more than mechanics, Especially when it comes to spellcasting. Why shouldn't fireball be available to a cleric of a god of fire? Or a druid, for that matter? You see some of this in 5e now: light clerics can cast fireball.A cleric of Light casts fireball because there is no radiant equivalent. The cleric specialty powers/spells seem to be a means of "opening up" clerics to other spell options that they would not normally get. Why not open it up completely and let a cleric take what suits his/her deity?Because I hate freedom of choice and want to ruin the game for others. ;) In my view, thaumaturgy wouldn't produce balls of energy. It would instead produce effects that call for energy to descend as it does with sacred flame. This might call for a generic sacred energy that is modified by the appropriate energy type. A cleric of Light would therefore cast sacred energy (radiance), a cleric of Fire would cast sacred energy (fire),...

Friday, 28th December, 2018

  • 11:37 PM - Chaosmancer quoted paladinn in post Unearthed Arcana: Sidekicks
    "Better" is very subjective. Someone might argue that Superman is better than Batman because of powers; but Batman has lots of fans. Min/maxing is a hazard even in 5e. And yes, sub-optimal choices are also a risk. But that's what player's choice is about. I think this flexibility could solve a lot of current issues with 5e. One could build a great "ranger" type character who could wildshape. Nearly infinite possibilities. Is there possibility for abuse? Of course. But a lot of that depends on the DM. 5e relies a lot on DM fiat (or veto); and this model would do the same. If I understand you correctly though, that is an awful lot of weight to put on the DM if they have to weigh and consider every spell choice for potential abuse. I don't think I'd recognize every "over" powerful combo, and some things just become auto choices. Who here would really turn down spiritual weapon, a bonus action, non-concentration magic attack that does force damage? There is no spellcaste...
  • 10:56 PM - Saelorn quoted paladinn in post Unearthed Arcana: Sidekicks
    But you are also limited by your spellcaster level. You're not eligible for fireball until level 5. Before that I should think you want burning hands, etc.Fair enough. I might want to take burning hands before I have access to fireball, although I would still be hard-pressed to take flaming strike after I already have fireball. Most of my experience with flexible class (and class-free) systems are also level-less, so that wasn't something I'd taken into consideration. In a game like Shadowrun, for example, all of your spells are available during character creation. And if you want to do more than throw fireballs, you Have to take something else. But what you take is Your choice. If All you want to do is blast, you should be able to do that; but don't call yourself a healing cleric.When it comes to game design, one thing that a lot of free-form games fail to consider is that a choice between un-equal options is not a real choice. I'm not going to choose a spell that I'm unlikely to ever us...
  • 09:57 PM - Saelorn quoted paladinn in post Unearthed Arcana: Sidekicks
    I think a lot of this needs to be left up to the player. And it's not a matter of being "locked into" anything. If a players wants to take fireball without taking burning hands or flaming sphere, why not? Of course, a fire cleric would Want to take all that (as well as flame strike and scotching ray and ???), but that should be up to the player.As a player, I would have a hard time choosing burning hands and fireball and flame strike over healing word and fireball and wall of force. Even if my concept is a fire mage who primarily casts fire at people, fireball is sufficient in the vast majority of situations where I'd want to do that, and picking redundant fire spells over actual increased utility feels a lot like shooting myself in the foot. Presenting both possibilities as though they were equal, and expecting a player to self-limit on the basis of theme, seems unreasonable to me.
  • 09:23 PM - Saelorn quoted paladinn in post Unearthed Arcana: Sidekicks
    I think spells should be spells.. The type of spellcaster you are depends on what you pick. If you want a cleric, pick healing, turn undead, some protective spells. for a cleric of a god of fire, add fireball and such. If you want a druid, pick wildshape and nature-based spells. If you want a specialist wizard, pick accordingly. I think this allows ultimate flexibility in character concept without the added complexity and constraints of "class features."The danger in this approach is that not all spells are created equally, and many spells are largely redundant. If given the option of playing a spellcaster who knows all of the most useful spells from a variety of different themes, or all spells from one theme, then it's hard to keep the two spell lists balanced. Looking at the Light domain, for example, it grants six different fire spells; but a spellcaster who only took fireball would still be able to play that role in the party, while also covering a wide variety of other roles with...

Thursday, 27th December, 2018

  • 09:59 PM - R_Chance quoted paladinn in post Unearthed Arcana: Sidekicks
    This. Plus, while being a foundation for a good "Lite" game, it could be easily extensible. That really appeals to me: added options without added complexity. Sounds like True 20. Green Ronin reduced all the core classes in 3.x to the basic three. There were, iirc, feats that allowed customization of the three.

Monday, 24th December, 2018

  • 06:06 PM - Pauln6 quoted paladinn in post Unearthed Arcana: Sidekicks
    "Subclasses" would become something like kits - bolt-ons for the 3 main classes.I think ranger, paladin and (maybe) barbarian would be kits for the warrior; bard and assassin and whatever for the expert. Wizard and cleric (and druid) would be different types of spellcaster. If these are done with feats, two characters could have the same basic abilities but customize that way. A warrior could take paladin feats, or just the standard combat-ish feats from the current game. In 3.x, spellcasters could cast Any spells; the "type" of magic (divine or arcane) really only impacted the attribute associated (Wisdom or Intelligence). I think this would allow a lot of flexibility and diversity.Cross-pollination of spells is a game balance nightmare. 5e is the most balanced version I've ever played while maintaining the feel of earlier editions. I would not want to open the Pandora's Box of 2e or CoDzilla of 3e.

Tuesday, 18th December, 2018

  • 09:07 PM - Azzy quoted paladinn in post Unearthed Arcana: Sidekicks
    I wonder how many people really like the Battlemaster.. lol More than those that like the champion, if I'd hazard a guess.
  • 07:44 PM - jmucchiello quoted paladinn in post Unearthed Arcana: Sidekicks
    The class/subclass concept in 5e Requires one to take a subclass. Even if you just want to be "just a fighter", you have to go Champion. "Just a rogue" Requires one to go Thief. As designed, you can't be a generalist Wizard (I don't consider War Mage as a real generalist) The classes here would more easily facilitate "generic" classes. And multiclassing, IMHO, would be easier without factoring in all the extraneous class features of the subclasses. You could, if you had people who would be confused by the Champion not being "in" the Fighter, combine the Fighter class chart with the Champion abilities and label the resulting class "The Champion". All the subclasses could be made into "proper" classes in this way. Would it really be better if the Fighter had the Champion in it and pathfinder style, the Battlemaster said "this ability replaces the (champion) ability". I don't think that easier.


Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

paladinn's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites