View Profile: Paul Farquhar - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Today, 05:20 PM
    Hardly a recent development...
    31 replies | 592 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Today, 02:06 PM
    I suspect the "minority" is actually an overwhelming majority. As with most things on the internet, it's a small number of people making a lot of noise that create an illusion that a lot of people think the same way.
    232 replies | 9837 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Today, 10:06 AM
    On the whole, if I didn't want to use encumberance I would allow this if the character being picked up and carried was small, or the character doing the carrying had the "Powerful Build" racial ability. Otherwise I would require an action.
    13 replies | 396 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:43 PM
    "You fight like a cow!" Really, bards should have the ability to counter Vicious Mockery as a reaction.
    13 replies | 493 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:53 PM
    Just to pick you up on that last point, but a certain J. K. Rowling never played D&D or read fantasy fiction...
    69 replies | 2099 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:33 PM
    Also a professional physicist, and I support this statement. If you think you understand how science works in this world you really, really don't. So it would be silly to try and apply it to a fantasy world.
    69 replies | 2099 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:29 AM
    There are no halfling companions in BG2 or NWN2, but their are a couple in BG1. One is a psychopath and the other is saccharine. The one in Pathfinder: Kingmaker also leans to saccharine. We have a gnome an a halfing PC in one of my games. The gnome is played as a bit of a kook, but the halfing is indistinguishable from a small human. But that's how Tolkien wrote them, so I don't see it as a...
    102 replies | 3370 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th July, 2019, 03:08 PM
    If you look at gnome portrayal in media, especially CRPGs, they are usually interpreted as the whacky/insane race. See Jan Jansen (Baldur's Gate 2), Grobnar Gnomehands (NWN2). This is even lampshaded in Pathfinder: Kingmaker. (Paraphrase) "How could I have known he was a spy? Sure he was a sorcerer, sure he was a gnome..."
    102 replies | 3370 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Wednesday, 10th July, 2019, 02:58 PM
    I do. In order for someone to become really good at something, they have to dedicate most of their time and effort to that thing. Which means they have no time left to learn other things, which far from improving might even deteriorate. Or they can choose to develop general competency at the expense of not being the best at any one thing. I don't see any reason why that should be the...
    224 replies | 5808 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Wednesday, 10th July, 2019, 11:53 AM
    Yeah, but that's not really my issue. The players are doing absolutely everything they can to make sure they are as prepared as possible to face the villain. Rushing in recklessly is the opposite of how they play. But the problem still remains that the villain is very intelligent, very powerful, never leaves a very well defended lair, and time is of the essence. And the longer players spend...
    50 replies | 1893 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Wednesday, 10th July, 2019, 10:35 AM
    I think the "farm boy drawn into an adventure" is an important archetype. So I think it's important for a "generic" class to exist that doesn't aquire special features until they have gained some experience.
    106 replies | 2311 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Wednesday, 10th July, 2019, 10:07 AM
    There is, and I personally wouldn't allow the full proficiency bonus - half at best. But feats are an optional rule, it might be a good idea to alow something of this sort in a no-feats game. But personally, I think that if a party if falling foul of saving throw spells too often, they need to prepare better, not change the rules.
    224 replies | 5808 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Wednesday, 10th July, 2019, 08:19 AM
    In what way? I frequently convert early modules, and I don't find them much different to what I would do anyway. And Rahasia is by Hickman, so is emerging from the first phase of module design.
    39 replies | 1508 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Wednesday, 10th July, 2019, 08:12 AM
    Perhaps downtime training could be applied to saving throws? In HP: The Order of the Phoenix the protagonist is supposed to be being trained to resist the mind-influencing spells of the villain. The effectiveness of said training was doubtful though.
    224 replies | 5808 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Wednesday, 10th July, 2019, 08:05 AM
    If a wizard really wants to learn to use a sword, the downtime rules in Xanathar's guide can be used. For 300 hours practice they can become proficient.
    224 replies | 5808 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Wednesday, 10th July, 2019, 07:57 AM
    Why would they be? To be a level 20 wizard one would expect them to have spent a lot of time practicing and studying magic, not training with swords. If you don't use something you don't get any better. And don't call me... never mind.
    224 replies | 5808 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Tuesday, 9th July, 2019, 05:23 PM
    Which your helpful minion will helpfully throw in the garbage.
    38 replies | 2176 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Tuesday, 9th July, 2019, 05:19 PM
    The answer to pretty much all of those is "the people who live in the world don't understand how it works". Which is pretty much like the real world (a scientist simply being someone who has a better idea of how little they know than the general population does).
    69 replies | 2099 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Tuesday, 9th July, 2019, 09:14 AM
    I'm surprised no one has meantioned the usual book pact combo for Magic-Whacking-Stick (MWS) + GFB. Plus the bonus fire(+radiant) damage at level 6. Mean damage at Level 6 (Cha 18): Agonising Blast 19hp: MWS+GFB+RS vs two adjacent targets 25.5hp Mean Damage at level 17 (20 Cha): Agonising Blast 42hp: MWS+GFB+RS vs two adjacent targets 46.5hp I haven't included Hex in the calculations,...
    24 replies | 1091 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Saturday, 6th July, 2019, 08:24 PM
    Here is a link describing all three adventures: https://www.dndbeyond.com/essentials/continue-the-adventure. There doesn't appear to be an "arc story", as they say in episodic TV.
    6 replies | 505 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Saturday, 6th July, 2019, 10:28 AM
    I think it would be an illustration of all that is wrong with internet feedback if the homunculus and turrets where removed or nerfed because there are some people who don't like them.
    129 replies | 6363 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Thursday, 4th July, 2019, 10:30 AM
    Three high stats would make a good barbarian, paladin, monk or a melee focused cleric, bard or warlock. Noble tends to go with paladin. Noble half elf paladin Str 18 Dex 10 Con 16 Int 9
    3 replies | 232 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Wednesday, 3rd July, 2019, 06:03 PM
    They have a choice, they can confront the villain or the world ends. They have been putting it off, trying to become more powerful, gather allies and weapons, but in the end they can confront evil head on or they can die. Or both.
    50 replies | 1893 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Wednesday, 3rd July, 2019, 03:15 PM
    DMs shouldn't put the players into situations where they have no chance of success either - there is always a tension between freedom, story and realism. The trick is to find the right balance (which may be different for different groups).
    50 replies | 1893 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Wednesday, 3rd July, 2019, 01:50 PM
    Yeah, not going for Deus Ex Machina like healing shrines. They can take short rests, but the party is long-rest caster heavy, so that probably won't help much. There are some spots that they should be able to sneak or negotiate past, but I don't want it to feel too easy - it's supposed to be the big finish. I think dropping scrolls and wands along the way is probably the best way to go...
    50 replies | 1893 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Wednesday, 3rd July, 2019, 07:24 AM
    4 is fine, 7+ is too many, less assertive players will find it difficult to get a look in. 3 or less can sometimes be too few. Sweet spot is 4-6.
    21 replies | 830 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Tuesday, 2nd July, 2019, 05:23 PM
    Old guy who is six days out from retirement...
    9 replies | 667 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Tuesday, 2nd July, 2019, 04:50 PM
    My players are experienced enough to understand the risks. The difficulty is in coming up with a choice other than "let your friends die" and "you die, then your friends die" that makes sense for the story. The only other things I can come up with so far with are "all the villain's minions are a pushover" and "you find a McGuffin of single use instant long rest".
    50 replies | 1893 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Tuesday, 2nd July, 2019, 04:16 PM
    I'm planning a climactic raid for the climax of a current campaign. The party is likely to be pretty drained by the time they reach the lair of the Big Bad. The Big Bad is very badass. However, there will be a battle raging outside, so it wouldn't really make sense for the party to pause or their allies will be killed. Any suggestions?
    50 replies | 1893 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Tuesday, 2nd July, 2019, 10:28 AM
    Gnomes! Why did it have to be gnomes?
    8 replies | 321 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Tuesday, 2nd July, 2019, 08:28 AM
    Deep Roy
    56 replies | 2220 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Tuesday, 2nd July, 2019, 06:55 AM
    Err, I could be wrong, but I don't think Rudyard Kipling ever played Baldur's Gate.
    641 replies | 17995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 10:32 PM
    They could use a magnifying glass to observe beasts that are too small for everyday detection. Would exist with "pseudo-medieval" technology.
    13 replies | 505 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 10:22 PM
    Sure, if you insist that all the targets must be visible at the same time (which the spell doesn't say), then it becomes a cone (as some gaze attacks are, like the beholders anti-magic ray, and the Catoblepas death gaze). Word of Radiance is not a cone spell, because: a) The description does not say it is a cone; and b) the spell is in most respects similar to Thunderclap and Sword...
    101 replies | 3077 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 07:44 PM
    As I said, the relevence is obvious (none whatsoever).
    641 replies | 17995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 07:21 PM
    I can see behind perfectly well. It's called turning, which is both common sense and not forbidden by the rules. And bears clearly don't crap in the woods, since there are no bears in the woods in this country. Which is plain old common sense, as Judge Oliphant would say.
    101 replies | 3077 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 07:18 PM
    The human thing is core 2nd edition rules. The computer game goes with something that makes more sense (The dual classed fighter druid can wear any armour). It jumps the other way with cleric weapons though. Your dual classed cleric fighter is merrily choping things up with a sword, then suddenly wham, you level up and you can't hold your sword any more. The relevance should be obvious.
    641 replies | 17995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 06:17 PM
    Actually it was an error in the rules implementation (although possibly a deliberate one), according to 2nd edition rules, multiclassed druids should abide by the armour restrictions. And Jalhera is wearing studded leather when you first meet her, so you are free to abide by "will" not wear metal armour if you wish. Her race permits her select that multiclass option, but has no other...
    641 replies | 17995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 04:12 PM
    Hmm, they have railroads in Eberron...
    37 replies | 1152 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 03:56 PM
    Have you come across Jalhera in Baldur's Gate? She is a multiclassed Fighter/Druid and I have seen her stomping about in full plate despite being a faithful druid in good standing.
    641 replies | 17995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 03:52 PM
    You ever tried tried teaching maths to a small child? You start with counting, 1, 2, 3. Just because it's elementary doesn't make it not maths. As for zero, let's just say that goes well beyond elementary...
    52 replies | 3277 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 03:21 PM
    No, Barkskin is for use when in animal form. Given that Hide + Dex 14 + shield > Barkskin, it's basically useless in human form.
    641 replies | 17995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 03:13 PM
    Yes. he repeated his observations many many times. I've visited his house and seen some of his research. Statistics. "One" is a number. Increase the number and you increase the confidence interval. Maths.
    52 replies | 3277 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 03:04 PM
    I would say there is nothing wrong with the way the rule in the druid section is written. However, the equipment section of the PHB does not make it sufficently clear that non-metallic alternatives are possible (apart from for shields). This can significantly disadvantage non-moon druids.
    641 replies | 17995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 02:54 PM
    My background is in physical science, but I work in education, and I often find myself banging my head on the desk over reports from so called "educational scientists". It not science, it's just a pile of guesswork with little or no supporting evidence.
    52 replies | 3277 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 02:49 PM
    No it wouldn't. It would support the theory, but it would confirm nothing. You would need some maths to show that there was a causal relationship, rather than co-incidence. If they presented their findings as proven, without some kind of mathematical evidence to back it up, then no, they are not a scientist. How do they know it's a new species, rather than an outlier of an already...
    52 replies | 3277 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 02:36 PM
    I mentioned that earlier. If a player came to me with that concept I would allow the druid to replace the restriction with will only wear metal or stone armor (or similar vow). As addressed earlier, and supported by sage advice, it isn't a balance issue, just theme/flavour.
    641 replies | 17995 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 02:27 PM
    Tensor calculus is just a specialised tool, like a sprig hammer.
    52 replies | 3277 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 02:18 PM
    No, Maths is essential for making an objective comparison between the idea and experiment. Doing science without maths is like doing carpentry without wood. Now, there are certainly some scientists who aren't that brilliant at maths, but they still have to use it, even if it's indirectly via the computer.
    52 replies | 3277 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 02:09 PM
    But now that I'm perfectly sure I have none, Why, I do it again and again.
    13 replies | 505 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 01:39 PM
    I think even the good ones benefit from preperation and tweeking to suit your table. I haven't read HotDQ, but I'm aware that it isn't well regarded.
    37 replies | 1152 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 12:55 PM
    Joking aside, there is a general assumption in quantum physics that if the maths looks complicated, then it's probably wrong. The obective is to find the simpler maths that underlies the complexity.
    52 replies | 3277 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 12:09 PM
    Quantum Physics is easy. It's statistical analysis that is hard.
    52 replies | 3277 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 11:43 AM
    Statistically, when a video game includes a "good" and an "evil" path the vast majority of players choose the "good" path. But the still want the "evil" path to exist. Why? because they want to be able to CHOOSE to do the right thing. Without an evil option they cannot choose good. Options should exist within the game, even when those options will never ever be taken up.
    641 replies | 17995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 08:54 AM
    One thing that has troubled me is the lack of a lower limit on wildshape. So the druid could turn into something small enough to be effectively invisible and intangible, e.g. an amoeba.
    13 replies | 505 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 08:39 AM
    Who? Which people? I haven't seen any people in this thread saying that, and I have never seen anyone playing want that.
    641 replies | 17995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Monday, 1st July, 2019, 07:41 AM
    "Younger" being anyone under the age of 90.
    9 replies | 667 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Sunday, 30th June, 2019, 02:10 PM
    I think it's better to use milestones than sessions - I've known some sessions that involve little more than the PCs chilling in a tavern. It doesn't seem to be in the spirit of D&D to level up after an episode in which nothing much happens.
    45 replies | 1811 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Sunday, 30th June, 2019, 09:58 AM
    Nope, it is so blatantly obvious that no consensus can exist that the joke is not funny. The original post is the joke.
    232 replies | 9837 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Sunday, 30th June, 2019, 09:53 AM
    Indead, it only works with the right players.
    7 replies | 437 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Sunday, 30th June, 2019, 08:39 AM
    Optional rules is optional. And even the optional rules have nothing on field of vision. The rules assume you can turn your head! It says "can" see - i.e. it is possible for you to see the target. It doesn't say "must be looking at" at the instant the spell is released. Otherwise most spells and all ranged weapons would be limited to a 120 degree arc - assuming human, other races could...
    101 replies | 3077 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Sunday, 30th June, 2019, 08:03 AM
    So does Thunderclap (and that can hit friendly targets). But not everything has good con saves. You gain most benefit from Potent Spellcasting with cantrips that affect multiple targets or apply damage multiple times. Bonfire could be an interesting choice for an Arcana cleric. Shame they can't dip into the warlock spell list! Shame their higher level bonus spell list is so sucky too.
    101 replies | 3077 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Sunday, 30th June, 2019, 07:09 AM
    I interpret "can see" purely mechanically - if you have line of sight and the target isn't invisible or hidden, you can "see" it. 5e doesn't have facing and field of vision rules. But I agree that it a situation where you can hit at many as 8 targets with Word of Radiance would be unusual. It's just an extreme example, using a cantrip that goes from rubbish to good with Potent Spellcasting.
    101 replies | 3077 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Saturday, 29th June, 2019, 04:56 PM
    Just throwing something else out there: Aberrant Dragonmark could be used to pick up BB/GFB. So you could use Magic Adept to pick up Magic-Whacking-Stick. (I guess some DMs might let you take Magic Adept twice anyway). GFB from an Aberrant Dragonmark would use Con as it's casting stat, which would probably be a little better than Int or Cha.
    101 replies | 3077 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Saturday, 29th June, 2019, 04:46 PM
    Setting ships on fire was used against the Spanish Armada. Mostly to disrupt rather than destroy. Ship vs ship you would want to keep your prize intact if at all possible, but against a flotilla that becomes less of a priority.
    448 replies | 15409 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Saturday, 29th June, 2019, 02:21 PM
    Perhaps people who write games don't spend a great deal of time outdoors?
    352 replies | 12297 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Saturday, 29th June, 2019, 01:26 PM
    As it should. An offhand dagger is just about viable if you don't want to lug a shield around with you, but fighting with two big heavy weapons is so stupid even Conan doesn't do it.
    232 replies | 9837 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Saturday, 29th June, 2019, 01:16 PM
    Ergo, if you are powergaming, you would not choose to make a melee Arcana cleric. Original thesis disproven. End of thread.
    101 replies | 3077 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Saturday, 29th June, 2019, 01:00 PM
    Any 8th level cleric with Potent Spellcasting and a wisdom of 20: Get surrounded by 8 enemies then spam Word of Radiance. Average damage = 96 hp per round. Just an example, but any domain with Potent Spellcasting, including Arcana, is probably better off not wasting time hitting things with a stick. And Arcana has lots of other good options for its two wizard cantrips competing with GFB and...
    101 replies | 3077 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Saturday, 29th June, 2019, 11:24 AM
    Your AC is probably pretty high anyway, so you shouldn't need to use Shield all that often. Once per long rest might be enough. Although a DM might rule you need to drop your weapon to use it, since a Holy Symbol can only be used as a focus for divine spells. You can achieve a similar result without limited use with the Defensive Duellist feat. Tempest clerics are proficient in Rapiers. ...
    101 replies | 3077 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Saturday, 29th June, 2019, 10:29 AM
    I'm not convinced two weapon fighting should be much practical use. It seems to be more used for flash gits to show off than be an effective form of warfare (see Raiders of the Lost Ark).
    232 replies | 9837 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Saturday, 29th June, 2019, 10:16 AM
    If you take Magic Initiate you can grab Shield as your first level spell. This can whack your AC up to 24/25 (27 stacked with Shield of Faith). You don't need to make concentration saves if you don't get hit.
    101 replies | 3077 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Saturday, 29th June, 2019, 08:09 AM
    I'm not sure if it's been mentioned, but only the Arcana cleric can get Green Flame Blade as a cleric spell. This means they can add their wisdom bonus to the fire damage. Any other cleric would have to use their Int or Cha bonus. It doesn't matter for Booming Blade as it gains no benefit from it's casting stat. Tempest Clerics can use their "Destructive Wrath" to do maximum damage with...
    101 replies | 3077 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Friday, 28th June, 2019, 05:11 PM
    gamers ∩ athletes = {}
    32 replies | 1051 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Thursday, 27th June, 2019, 08:57 PM
    I think the identity crisis is more to due with "ranger" being a familiar occupation in the real world. Most of us have come across rangers who protect National Parks, or Texas Rangers - frontier lawmen. But the D&D ranger wasn't based on either of those real life rangers, it was based on a particular ranger in a particular novel.
    352 replies | 12297 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Thursday, 27th June, 2019, 05:13 PM
    Correct me if I'm wrong, Booming Blade stacks with Divine Smite?
    101 replies | 3077 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Thursday, 27th June, 2019, 03:33 PM
    “Side? I am on nobody's side, because nobody is on my side, little orc.”
    641 replies | 17995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Thursday, 27th June, 2019, 03:28 PM
    There was a 1st edition adventure based on The Mines of Moria published in White Dwarf round about 1982. They made Aragorn a multiclassed Ranger/Paladin (allowed because of his unique heritage) and Gandalf a cleric.
    352 replies | 12297 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Thursday, 27th June, 2019, 03:20 PM
    Which may be something that they are not allowed to do, according to the rules. A character is allowed to try and keep casting spells after they run out of spell slots. The DM narrates the outcome "your spell fails".
    641 replies | 17995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Thursday, 27th June, 2019, 03:10 PM
    Actually it is you who have missed what is going on, presumably due to having skipped several pages. Yes there is:
    641 replies | 17995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Thursday, 27th June, 2019, 03:05 PM
    Agreed. When a player says "my character does X" it actually means "my character tries to do X". I agree that the player is trying to violate the rule. Players are ALLOWED to try and break rules. They will probably fail (although not in this case). There is nothing to stop you trying to break the law. You may or may not succeed.
    641 replies | 17995 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Thursday, 27th June, 2019, 02:57 PM
    No, certain people are insisting that if you are doing that doing that you are "playing it wrong". Mine too.
    641 replies | 17995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Thursday, 27th June, 2019, 02:54 PM
    Rule Lawyer: "My druid swims across the ocean in his plate armor." DM (me): "you sink after six feet. You are drowning." RL: "Yeah, I can do it. I read the rules, and we are only playing with PHB + DMG. I read page 182! Ima swim across the ocean! In my plate. While carrying my bag o' rats! RESPECT MAH PLAYA AGENCY! HOW U LIKE DEM APPLES!" DM (me): "Rule 1: the DM narrates the outcomes,...
    641 replies | 17995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Thursday, 27th June, 2019, 02:46 PM
    Actually I don't. I'm quite content in my knowledge that in my game there would be no negative consequence if a druid put on metal armour (unless the player decided to role-play it themselves).
    641 replies | 17995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Thursday, 27th June, 2019, 02:43 PM
    You are correct to point out that the term "strawman" has been missaplied. hover this statement "your posting history is clearly nothing but the most extreme trollish behaviour" is itself trolling.
    641 replies | 17995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Thursday, 27th June, 2019, 02:35 PM
    Wrong. A player can say "my character flies across the chasm", even though it is against the rules because their character cannot fly. The DM doesn't say "you can't do that", the DM says "you fall into the chasm". The player can try and break the rules any time they like, and the DM narrates the outcome (which is usually failure).
    641 replies | 17995 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Thursday, 27th June, 2019, 02:30 PM
    Apart from the DM. If the DM decides a particular suit of plate mail gives an AC of 17 and is made from ankylosaurus hide then that becomes true.
    641 replies | 17995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Thursday, 27th June, 2019, 02:20 PM
    D&D is an exercise in collective storytelling, not a competitive boardgame. The rules exist to facilitate storytelling, not limit it. I have never asked, or been asked "do you agree to abide by the rules?" in D&D. There was an interesting article on Monopoly yesterday. Some fans have been objecting to changes made that make it impossible to cheat. They consider cheating to be an important...
    641 replies | 17995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Thursday, 27th June, 2019, 02:01 PM
    Right. They can choose to do that (although I would see it as a rule the character agreed to, not the player). People change their minds all the time, particularly concerning things like religion. I wouldn't penalise it in my setting. I have never ever seen it happen though.
    641 replies | 17995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Farquhar's Avatar
    Thursday, 27th June, 2019, 01:53 PM
    That too. Clerics are great casters with a good AC. They don't really need to be rocking out fighter-like melee damage, once they get a few levels in they will be too busy casting proper spells to go round hitting things with a wooden stick, no mater how supercharged. Word of Radiance is a bit of an underrated gem for any cantrip damage clerics (not to mention divine soul sorcerers), and you...
    101 replies | 3077 view(s)
    0 XP
More Activity
About Paul Farquhar

Basic Information

Age
51
About Paul Farquhar
Location:
Surrey, UK
Disable sharing sidebar?:
No

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
2,076
Posts Per Day
3.05
Last Post
"The Future of D&D is International" (Inverse article) Today 05:20 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
1
General Information
Last Activity
Today 05:45 PM
Join Date
Tuesday, 5th September, 2017
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0
Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 123456

No results to show...
Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 123456

Monday, 24th June, 2019

  • 05:37 PM - lowkey13 mentioned Paul Farquhar in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    There are no rules, and there have never been any rules, that say a druid cannot don a suit of metal platemail in order to sneak into a castle. If a DM prevents me from taking that action, he is in fact railroading me by invalidating my decision. So, there's this. And also, this- Actually, the reason for the limit in 1st edition was that druids had access to far more powerful offensive spells than clerics did. Paul Farquhar Let's examine the history a little, first. Druids are probably the most poorly-understood class in terms of history. Let's start with the actual text (Eldritch Wizardry, Supp. 3, OD&D) where the Druid first crossed over from monster to PC. Mistletoe takes a place of importance with them as a holy symbol or item as crosses and other like items do with other types of clerics. Druids have spells which are in general peculiar to them, although some of their spells are similar to those of magic-users or clerics in general. ... Upon reaching the 5th Circle druids then gain the power to shape change (as previously mentioned in GREYHAWK with regard to the Druid-type monster), and when changing from one form to another they lose from 10% to 60% of any damage previously sustained ... Druids are able to employ the following sorts of weapons: Daggers, sickle or crescent-shaped swords, spears, slings, and oil. They may wear armor of leather, and use wooden shields. They may not use metallic ar...

Monday, 13th May, 2019

  • 04:40 PM - Draegn mentioned Paul Farquhar in post Three wizards against two adult dragons
    Paul Farquhar ...creatures in my game do not follow the traditional characteristics that are printed in the various rule books. The dragons in my game are more akin to what has been presented in the Game of Thrones show. As an illustration for how npcs work in my game, if playing a traditional game upon entering a church one might expect all of the priests to be able to pray (cast spells). In my game the priests might only be there because they have some litany and liturgy skills to conduct sermons and artist skills to produce illuminated manuscripts. This picture illustrates how large the two drakes are. http://images5.fanpop.com/image/photos/31600000/Marcia-Gillmore-dragons-31667003-1024-768.jpg They are not fully grown, yet are considered to be "adults" because they are capable of laying eggs. They both breathe fire (hot or cold flame), spit acid and exhale toxic fumes. They both have skill levels that reflect their interests and combative abilities. I still expect both of the boys ...

Wednesday, 8th May, 2019

  • 04:51 PM - OlegRu mentioned Paul Farquhar in post Help me with good RP/Optimization balance for Half-Elf (probably)Valor Bard (archer?)
    Yes! Heck that's a story all by itself! So you *call* yourself a skald, and you even have the entertainer background (BTW, SUPER IMPORTANT: If you are new to 5e, be sure to read the background chapter! It's not just roleplaying fluff, half your skills can come from your background. It's like a mini-class!). You know how to heal, you know how to fight (pact of the blade maybe?), you know how to sing... but you have a secret. You really didn't have that *spark* that distinguishes great bards (ie the one with bardic magic) from others. Until one day, you met that mysterious teacher... Thanks for the replies @Paul Farquhar @Zardnaar and @Ancalagon, and all due respect, but I really want to stick to playing a bard and just interested in having him be an archer so that he can deal some attack damage/and survive combat because he's further from the worst monsters. Things like Paladin, Warlock wouldn't match his backstory or the way I want to RP him.

Thursday, 2nd May, 2019

  • 06:06 PM - Laurefindel mentioned Paul Farquhar in post Cleric shenanigans (metaphysical, no right answers)
    Are there any counter-examples you can find from official published settings or adventures? I think @Paul Farquhar meant that examples given in adventures are not representative of the game world because if they were, the adventure would not happen there. You and @Celebrim are advocating that despite the guidelines restricting character classes to a minority, nothing in the published material seem to support that claim according to the examples we are given. From where I stand, it appears to me that both sides are pointing at some inconsistencies, but are comparing apples to oranges. Both claims are true and coexist simultaneously. To a certain point, I like that the players aren't the only casters around. There needs to be enough of them to make believable adversaries (casters can't be THAT rare if that's the 5th one we battle in the last 5 days...) and to support the described economy of spell material components, spellbook supplies etc that is hinted at in certain settings (mainly Forgotten Realm and Eberron). Due to the wide breath of power level from lvl1 to lvl20 (or even lvl10), D&D stru...

Saturday, 23rd March, 2019

  • 02:04 AM - Hussar mentioned Paul Farquhar in post Casting Begins Soon For D&D Movie?
    ...erent? You are flatly stating that expensive and good are orthogonal without any actual evidence and in the face of numerous counter examples. And, apparently, your definition of "good" is "movies I like". Well, I'm not you. I reject movies you like as being good because I don't like them. So, your movies are bad because I don't like them. Not exactly the most productive of conversations is it? Not so fast. According Hussar, good is objective, not subjective. No, no, no. Good is objective. And since Rotten Tomatoes gave it a critics score of 79% (aka Fresh) and 86% of people liked it (giving it 3.5 stars or better), Pirates of the Caribbean is a GOOD film. Your opinion is unimportant. The critics and the people have spoken. PotC is objectively a GOOD film. There can be no dissension. Have I learned my lesson? What's wrong with PotC? Why isn't it a good movie? It's well regarded by critics and people who watched it. Who's saying that it's a bad movie? Paul Farquhar is equally wrong by trying to claim that "good" is some sort of nebulous, undefinable concept. If the critics say something is pretty good, and the people who watch it say it's pretty good, who am I to say, "Oh, well, I'm different, I think most movies are bad, so that means that they're bad". Sorry, I lack the arrogance to think that my personal tastes denote anything remotely related to quality.

Thursday, 7th February, 2019

  • 03:49 AM - Hriston mentioned Paul Farquhar in post Archetypes
    Maybe we mean different things by 'adventure'. I think it is fine for an adventure to not have any traps in them. If a campaign didn't have any traps that would be out of the ordinary and something that should be brought up in session 0. Good point. I was using the word adventure the way I’d assumed Paul Farquhar was using it, i.e. to mean the content of the game in which the character is being played. That would include many adventures of the sort you’re describing over the course of many sessions. I don’t see any particular problem with an adventure location devoid of locks or traps. In fact, it could give the character a chance to focus on its skill with locks and traps in a different light, wondering why the inhabitants don’t lock up their goods, and is this what they call security?

Thursday, 30th August, 2018

  • 12:42 PM - lowkey13 mentioned Paul Farquhar in post What makes D&D, D&D?
    h/t Paul Farquhar So a recent comment in a different thread started my thought process, and here it is- "Racial stat boosts are one of the things that makes D&D D&D and not some generic fantasy roleplaying game." So, what does make D&D, D&D? I mean, really? I was thinking in terms of 5e (which is why it is posted here), and how one of the reasons 5e is supposedly appealing is that it manages to rope in some of the nostalgia/OSR/1e crowd (who, hopefully in turn, is teaching it to the young 'uns). This makes 5e very, um, D&D? Like, ur-D&D or something. So, before going any further, it is my general understanding that there have been conversations about past editions of D&D and whether or not they are "D&D enough." DO NOT DO THAT, PLEASE. I am asking people to NOT rehash old grievances, however well-nursed. As we all know, the only proper grievance to express on these forums is the well-known and universally approved dislike of Paladins. So, really, what makes D&D, D&D, such that "messing with it" re...

Thursday, 23rd August, 2018

  • 03:08 PM - lowkey13 mentioned Paul Farquhar in post Survivor Appendix N Authors- LEIBER WINS!
    Anderson, Poul 10 Bellairs, John 19 Brackett, Leigh 18 Brown, Frederic 20 Burroughs, Edgar Rice 23 Carter, Lin 18 de Camp, L. Sprague 17 de Camp & Pratt 20 Dunsany, Lord 19 Farmer, P. J. 20 Gardner, Fox 21 Howard, R.E. 19 Lanier, Sterling 20 Leiber, Fritz 23 Merritt, A. 21 Moorcock, Michael 22 Norton, Andre 21 Offutt, Andrew J. 20 Pratt, Fletcher 20 Saberhagen, Fred 18 St. Clair, Margaret 19 Tolkien, J. R. R. 27 Vance, Jack 6 Weinbaum, Stanley 18 Wellman, Manley Wade 20 Williamson, Jack 18 Zelazny, Roger 22 CORRECTED. Seriously, guys? Charles Dexter Ward is NOT an author. Ha, Ha Paul Farquhar

Thursday, 19th July, 2018

  • 11:53 AM - Coroc mentioned Paul Farquhar in post Curse of Strahd: What is Straud von Zarovich's Title? [SPOILERS ALERT]
    Paul Farquhar well i cannot find the exact source and maybe i am wrong, maybe i only read somewhere where to put Barovia in FR, but there is one weak and one very strong indicator that Barovia is connected to FR and maybe had ist prime material roots there (which come into Play in roots of evil it is not exactly drawn into the mists but there exists a prime material Barovia parallel), see the cite from FR Wiki below for the indicators i found in a rush: Cite Form FR Wiki: The Svalich Woods of Barovia also briefly merged with the Quivering Forest and Twilight Marsh near Phlan in the late 15th century DR.[10] The Vistani nomads of Barovia were known to frequent parts of Faerûn and shared similarities with some Gur, suggesting that the two peoples may be related. Before it became part of the Demiplane of Dread, one of the two gods worshiped in Barovia was Lathander, though he no longer had any power there after the rise of Strahd, and didn't answer the prayers of his few remaining follo...

Sunday, 24th June, 2018

  • 05:50 PM - Satyrn mentioned Paul Farquhar in post "Run away! Run away!" ... what if they don't?
    It should also be an "escapable" monster - if the monster has great speed and great perception... not great. I find this is the one place place I'm happy as a DM to invoke that Plot Armor Paul Farquhar mentioned. When the players choose to flee, I'll most often find some reason, any reason, the monster chooses not to give chase. It works great when I can applh some cost to the reason. Like, maybe it snags tbe players' lackey and settles down for a meal.

Wednesday, 13th June, 2018


Wednesday, 6th June, 2018

  • 12:27 PM - Coroc mentioned Paul Farquhar in post Two New Settings For D&D This Year
    Paul Farquhar "...Arthas (I know, it's a retcon to canon),... " I hope not. Although if i imagine some Drizzt entering Athas by crashing his spelljammer within the cannibal halfling jungle .....

Tuesday, 22nd May, 2018


Wednesday, 16th May, 2018


Thursday, 12th April, 2018

  • 02:17 PM - Coroc mentioned Paul Farquhar in post Mechanics of Revived Settings; your thoughts?
    Paul Farquhar #130 your take on Athas is Genius, the halfgiants maybe resolved. I would have gone with reskinning ho for mul, but theres a different way as you Point out: halforc -> halfgiants mountain dwarf -> mul hill dwarf -> athasian dwarf But now i think of it, it would even be better to reskin halforc for mul still and take mountain dwarf with ist +2 str and +2 con for halfgiant! That is neat, you can even leave heavy armor prof as is and the stat increase fits better. for the rest go stout -> athasian halfling Wood elf but with int raised instead of wisdom -> athasian elf human (nonvariant) -> athasian human halfelf tbd thrikreen -> reskin dragonborn breath attack for poisonous bite, put 4 claw attack Routine into one attack 1d4 natural wepons give +2 dex +1 wis

Tuesday, 10th April, 2018

  • 06:36 PM - lowkey13 mentioned Paul Farquhar in post Mechanics of Revived Settings; your thoughts?
    But... please? Was already familiar with it, but there's a huge difference between something available "from our back catalog" and something enjoying the barest level of official support. And I will say that... aside from D&D Spelljammer, nothing in WotC's back catalog gets my motor running better than Star*Drive, which is one half of one of my White Whales that I've almost given up all hope of ever executing successfully. I hear ya. I would love to see Space5e! I think that Paul Farquhar would as well. Sometimes, it is good to run the old stuff (I still do with 1e, Paranoia, and WFRPG). But ... some of the old stuff makes for tough reading. Star Frontiers (to use that example) is pretty badly outdated, both in terms of fluff and rules.
  • 12:22 PM - Coroc mentioned Paul Farquhar in post Mechanics of Revived Settings; your thoughts?
    Paul Farquhar I think Remathilis does not differ between fluff aka examples of commonly used or rarely used ingredients for D&D: (tiefling race, sci fi laserweapon) and real mechanics: attributes rolls etc. Also in the Core books there is several material stated explicitely as being optional, even Gnome race for PCs. Also there is a heavy recommendation to change every rule that you and/or your Players do not like in your homebrew. Apart from organized play there is no need at all for any fluff rule (liek playable race) to apply in a given setting, only if you make mechanical differences in your homebrew then it becomes important to communicate These and be aware of how they might afflict game Balance. There are numerous other examples where These Basics apply even if you stay true to the core rules. e.g. -druid summoning (any animal? No, the DM has the last word), -Magic items (not needed for Balance, would Paul Farquhar insist at least 1 of each Magic item exists in any given game worl...

Tuesday, 3rd April, 2018

  • 02:56 PM - Coroc mentioned Paul Farquhar in post Mechanics of Revived Settings; your thoughts?
    Paul Farquhar #34: On your questions 1. It is different, the PCs are really kings and can draw on the resources of their Domains (countries). There were many official splats, each detailing a Domain which would be Player Background. It is not limiting at all, the PC can go on a dungeon crawl with a Party or a war campaign with his whole army. There were Domain spells i cannot remember if These were connected t othe bloodlines i would have to read it up, they basically were useful in mass combat, e.g. maipulate the Terrain difficulty. 2. There were half a dozen human subraces each with their own Attribute boons and malus and some other characteristic. If i remember correctly rulers were all humans, you could be dwarf or elf as a minor pc eventually, i might be incorrect here. 3. It is unique in a way that here is e.g. 1 Dragon, 1 Medusa, 1 Werewolf or whatever in the setting (Imade the types up atm) but thats it. These Unique Mobs are like rulers with their own armies, or Major bosses. They ...
  • 11:29 AM - Coroc mentioned Paul Farquhar in post Mechanics of Revived Settings; your thoughts?
    Paul Farquhar #31 In Birthright the Players are either Kings, some from Magic bloodlines (independant of race) which gives them Special minor powers, or a Party consists of a ruler and his staff. Anyway, each ruler has his own land with resources and resource Management, it is compatible to 2nd ed battlesystem with rules for mass combat if you are into such stuff. Another Thing notable is th planar configuration if i can remember right, there is only a normal material plane and the shadow plane, on the later halflings have got some powers. There are different human races, and a Party will most likely consist of These if i remember correctly. With Monsters it is the usual ones but some are uniqe like e.g. there is not a medusa Population but "The Medusa " with stronger powers than a Standard Version. I think These "named" Mobs had bloodline powers also, and if i remember correctly you could inherit their bloodline (or those of other rulers) in a bit of a "Highlander" Fashion.
  • 11:10 AM - Coroc mentioned Paul Farquhar in post Greataxe, greatsword, and a little math
    Paul Farquhar #98 It is entirely logic that a blunt weapon of a certain weight and length does as much damage as a slightly heavier weapon with a bit shorter length so like greatclub and mace doing 1d8. It is not logic at all that adding a spear tip to a quarterstaff will not add anything to it's damage and make it less usefull (no Polearm master anymore) It is also not logic a 1 handed Club does 1d4 but an unwieldy (if used 1 handed) quarterstaff should do 1d6 and allow the use of a effective use shield still. That is utter BS sorry i have to use strong words, because almost every one discusses the marginal differences between great axe and greatsword and does not see the elephant (quarterstaff) in the room.

No results to display...

Tuesday, 25th June, 2019

  • 01:51 PM - 5ekyu quoted Paul Farquhar in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    What about if a druid decides they don't want to be a druid any more and becomes a fighter? According to 5e rules multiclass characters retain all the abilities from both classes.5e rules do not by default allow a character to "no longer be" a class. You can add a class thru multiclassing. Do, "dont want to be a druid" (or an assassin or a barbarian ) would have to be worked out by the player and GM.
  • 12:36 PM - FarBeyondC quoted Paul Farquhar in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    It's against the spirit of the game for a druid to wear full plate long enough to sneak into a castle? I don't think so. The game has always been about ingenuity. That action is entirely within the spirit of the game. I know there's a principle thing going on here (one I don't agree with), but I'm thoroughly confused as to why people keep trying to get the druid to get into the metal armor to sneak into the castle. Like, why not turn into a rat or some other innocuous little creature and ride in another player's pack or something? What about if a druid decides they don't want to be a druid any more and becomes a fighter? According to 5e rules multiclass characters retain all the abilities from both classes. If a character decides they don't want to be of a given class anymore, you wouldn't use the multi-class rules for that. You know, because those rules don't actually remove the class in question? However the player and DM decides to mechanically and narratively enable the change...
  • 11:25 AM - Shadowdweller quoted Paul Farquhar in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    No it isn't, but all other things being equal, a better AC makes you flat better than a worse AC.In the absence of any other factors. But there ARE other factors. You mean Conjure Animals? The spell that in 5e has been nerfed to require concentration, so when you are hit (which you will be if the DM denies you anything better than hide armour) everything vanishes?No, summoning full stop. Conjure Animals is merely the lowest-level and easiest to use such spell in 5e. Conjure Woodland Beings can be used to summon a swarm of pixies, for example - who can all cast confusion, polymorph, etc albeit with a low save DC. Conjure Elemental specifically allows the caster to control type and is an excellent choice for cramped environments. The risk of being hit is frequently easy to mitigate by hiding behind other targets (aka allies), if not the summons themselves; ducking behind full cover; or if all else fails dropping prone. Light and Tempest clerics are well ahead of druids in terms of blastin...
  • 11:02 AM - Ohmyn quoted Paul Farquhar in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    I think you are talking about the difference between a law like "thou shalt not kill", which is broken all the time, despite having been written by god on a stone tablet; and a law like the laws of Physics, which cannot be broken unless you are an engineer called Scotty. Yup. Both fall under the qualifications of being a rule, but one can be ignored, and the other can't. When a rule exists only as a choice, then actions can defy it. If a taboo holds no penalty for defiance then it has no weight as a taboo, and thus can safely be ignored.
  • 06:45 AM - Shadowdweller quoted Paul Farquhar in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    5e duids don't get anything better than what clerics get, and 5e clerics can wear half plate at least. AC isn't the be-all end-all of the combat pillar. 5e Druids beat the pants of the cleric in terms of battlefield control, summoning. They are generally better at blasting (aside for cantrip-level damage; druid attack cantrips are notably behind the curve even discounting domain bonuses) and of all things, healing efficiency. Aside from the combat pillar, they have significantly better utility as well.

Monday, 24th June, 2019

  • 09:51 PM - JonnyP71 quoted Paul Farquhar in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    And on page 36 of the 1st edition PHB it lists the non-proficiency penalty that applies when you use a weapon prohibited by your class. Also, on page 15: "thieves can not use thief abilities when using prohibited weapons or armor." Your 1st statement is incorrect - the non proficiency penalty is for weapons the character has not chosen to be proficient with, nowhere does it state it corresponds to weapons not allowed by their class - as the assumption is that the character simply *cannot* use them. For example - a cleric chooses to be proficient with mace and staff, he gets the non-prof penalty when using other cleric weapons such as hammer, club or flail. The 2nd statement is also inaccurate due to context, as it is *specifically* referring the case of multi-classed dwarven fighter/thieves. Possessing the fighter class allows the Dwarf to wear heavier armour and use all weapons, but that statement refers to the impact of the multiclassed F/T doing this with regards to Thief abilities. It has *...
  • 08:18 PM - lowkey13 quoted Paul Farquhar in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    And on page 36 of the 1st edition PHB it lists the non-proficiency penalty that applies when you use a weapon prohibited by your class. No. What you mean is the Weapon Proficiency Table on p. 36. So go through this, assuming some knowledge of 1e: Let's use the Druid as an example: You start with a number of proficiencies, for a Druid, 2. That means you get to choose 2 of your allowed weapons - for a Druid, you can choose between club, dagger, dart, hammer, scimitar, sling, spear, and staff. A total of eight (8) weapons. Every five additional levels, you get an additional proficiency. So at eleventh level, the Druid is PROFICIENT IN FOUR OF HIS EIGHT WEAPONS. If the Druid attempts to use a "Druid Weapon" that the Druid is NOT PROFICIENT IN, then there is a -4 penalty. This is not a catch-all table to allow, inter alia, Clerics to use swords with a penalty. What happens when the Druid attempts to use a non-Druid weapon? The Druid Explodes. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • 07:56 PM - orangefruitbat quoted Paul Farquhar in post Does the Beholder's anti-magic field move with it?
    Normally, this wouldn't be a problem, but in this case the beholder is participating in a battle-royale and will be controlled by a player (PvP style) and not me as an objective DM. So I'm trying to be as RAW as possible. So basically: 1) rotate the beholder into the direction you want the AM cone to point (assuming you want it on) 2) optionally move, keeping the same facing. The cone will move with the beholder 3) fire your eye rays into the 270 arc not covered by the AM cone. Is that correct? One last question - anti-magic field is a concentration spell - so does that mean you could force the beholder from dropping the AM cone by damaging it (at least until the start of its next turn)? The beholder is kind of prohibited from rotating itself if it is using this ability. Doesn't matter - it can see and float in any direction.
  • 06:45 PM - JonnyP71 quoted Paul Farquhar in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    I hadn't actually noticed this categorically false remark before. A 1st edition thief could use a two handed sword - they had a non-proficiency penalty and couldn't backstab with it, but they could use it. Page 19 of the 1E PHB specifically states this is not the case. I quote: **** A thief may use a short sword, broad sword or long sword but not a bastard sword or a two handed sword That is quite clear, nothing about non-proficiency penalty.
  • 05:18 PM - Morrus quoted Paul Farquhar in post D&D Essentials Kit Offers a New Place to Start
    I think you underestimate people. Or at least potential D&D players - it's not a game for dumb people. When I started playing in the 1980s there was no internet, no one had ever played an RPG, and the rulebooks whern't as well written as they are these days, but we still figured out how to DM. Well yes, but notably far fewer people did so, and millions more do so these days, and part of that is the evolution of the presentation of an RPG to new people.
  • 02:35 PM - Hollow Man quoted Paul Farquhar in post D&D Essentials Kit Offers a New Place to Start
    I think you underestimate people. Or at least potential D&D players - it's not a game for dumb people. When I started playing in the 1980s there was no internet, no one had ever played an RPG, and the rulebooks whern't as well written as they are these days, but we still figured out how to DM. First, I think the game should be for all people, even ones you perceive as "dumb". And I guess I would be one of them, because back in the 80s, I had difficulty with it. Because the game didn't do a good job of explaining to a 10 year old, who likes rules, exactly what to do if a player wants to do something that isn't explicitly explained. So my previous comment still stands. Spending as much time as possible explaining how to run a game goes a long way toward expanding the hobby beyond who is playing it today. -HM
  • 01:09 PM - CapnZapp quoted Paul Farquhar in post If you could put D&D into any other non middle ages genre, what would it be?
    You are not the only one. What point is he trying to make? That only some but not all arguments against hit points in a game with firearms can be easily dismissed as holding melee and ranged to different standards. You can't ever have guns and HP in the same game? Yes of course. I have never said you can't or shouldn't. My aim here is to explain to people used only to D&D that people with the opposing preference aren't weird or stupid. There are real issues with the hit point based damage model that might not be apparent to people that has only ever played D&D. In short, I'm explaining how the other side is thinking to ease everyone's appreciation of differing viewpoints. Just hearing somebody railing against hit points as making a "mockery" of firearms and then using that to dismiss the entire idea that there is value in ditching hit points is reductive, simplistic and uninformed.
  • 12:32 PM - MarkB quoted Paul Farquhar in post If you could put D&D into any other non middle ages genre, what would it be?
    As I've mentioned, I've played Traveller and FASA Star Trek quite extensively, and I don't think they particulalrly encorage tactical ranged combat. I think once you get away from D&D tabletop RPGs tend to become less focused on combat full stop. Although the Starship Combat in Trek was awesome. Traveller did spawn the Snapshot skirmish rules that had action points and the like, but I think they where really too cumbersome for a fun tabletop game. However, the Rebel Star Raiders -> X-Com -> Shadowrun computer games are pretty much direct decedents. You basically need a computer to keep track of the cover, otherwise it's just not fun. I did read the Boot Hill rules a long time ago. If I remember correctly that had a "three hits and you are dead" rule instead of hit points. Which made it far too random to make a fun game. Thanks. XCOM is actually what specifically comes to mind for me. It's been a back-burner project for me for some time to make an XCOM based campaign, but I've never found a ...
  • 08:59 AM - Shadowdweller quoted Paul Farquhar in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    But in 5e non-Circle of the Moon druids are seriously underpowered in the combat pillar if the DM limits them to hide armour.Not at all, unless you're talking melee combat. In which case, yes, but not really what the 5e (non-moon) druid seems designed to do.

Sunday, 23rd June, 2019

  • 03:51 PM - JonnyP71 quoted Paul Farquhar in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    They could play as Ada Lovelace*. But the thing is, there is a reason a player can't be a computer hacker in the 1890s - computers haven't become sophisticated enough yet. If you want a player not to be able to put their hand into a gauntlet, something almost anyone could reasonably expect to be able to do, you need to give a reason. No one is saying "you are wrong to enforce metal armour restrictions on druids in your game". But the way you suggest doing it is pretty much a perfect example of poor DMing. *She was dead by then, but if she faked her death she could still be alive in the 1890s. Maybe a computer hacker was a poor example (though I clearly meant it in the modern sense - there was no internet in the 1890s!) - the point was about a character not fitting with the setting. Saying 'no' is not poor DMing, trying to force a DM to say 'no' however is poor play. I'm running a sandbox 2E game at the moment in a world which currently only has Humans and Halflings as playable races, there's a...
  • 03:26 PM - JonnyP71 quoted Paul Farquhar in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    Yes. Yes it is. That is EXACTLY what railroading is. True. However, saying "you can't do that" is not how you deal with it. If the player is causing a real problem, then "you try to do that, angering Silvanus. You take 20d6 lightning damage. Your character is dead, bye bye don't slam the door on your way out." Is a better way to deal with it. So if I run a game of 1890s Call of Cthulhu and someone asks to play a Computer Hacker and I refuse because it doesn't fit the world - I'm now 'railroading'? Nope. 'Railroading' is not limiting player choices in terms of character options to ensure they fit a game world, it is running a game in which the choices that they DO have (and the actions that they take) do not matter as events are pre-ordained.
  • 10:39 AM - Ohmyn quoted Paul Farquhar in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    And you have to deal with edge cases. What happens when they wear a non-armour robe that is sewn with gold thread? This reminded me of a point that's always bugged me about the explanation of Druids not liking metal because they prefer more "natural" options. Gold forms in nature without any human intervention. So does silver, copper, and platinum. You'll never find leather in nature. It has to be created artificially. Shouldn't they be fine with armor made from silver? Sounds like Druids are super dumb about what "natural" means.

Saturday, 22nd June, 2019

  • 12:18 AM - Aebir-Toril quoted Paul Farquhar in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    So, you don't allow clerics in your game? Even those that don't get heavy armour proficiency by default are probably packing an AC of 19, and that is before they start casting Shield of Faith on themselves. And it's not that hard to get an AC over 16 on a wizard, sorcerer or bard without magic items. And in my experience it makes little difference. AC only matters if attacks come your way. This is not what I am saying. да, this is true​, but it should not be so. I allow clerics, but I certainly don't think they are correctly balanced.

Friday, 21st June, 2019

  • 06:17 PM - Parmandur quoted Paul Farquhar in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    The best place to see something is not necessarily the inside... I don't want to go too far down this track, but to lend credence to your point, even laicization is about bureaucratic permissions for engaging in ritual activities, not what in D&D might be termed as "Class." It would be more liek the Acolyte Background losing the feature, not a Druid losing their mojo.
  • 06:08 PM - Sacrosanct quoted Paul Farquhar in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    The best place to see something is not necessarily the inside... Well, it lends me a little bit more credibility than someone whose never been exposed to the subject they are talking about. Especially since you’re wrong on your assumptions, as I explained and gave you what that process is. So rather than dismiss what I wrote by going after me personally, I’d prefer if you’d be able to provide supporting evidence to you’re argument. I have to say though, I’m guessing you won’t be able to because it’s objectively provable that priests can choose to lose their priesthood, and those infractions are, rules as written, justification to remove them from priesthood. Google Laicization.


Paul Farquhar's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites