View Profile: 200orcs - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
No Recent Activity
About 200orcs

Basic Information

Date of Birth
November 30


Total Posts
Total Posts
Posts Per Day
Last Post
Moon Druid Epiphany Saturday, 30th March, 2019 10:39 PM


Gold Pieces
General Information
Last Activity
Today 07:16 PM
Join Date
Friday, 25th January, 2019
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
No results to show...

Tuesday, 5th February, 2019

  • 09:44 PM - 77IM mentioned 200orcs in post 5e - Just Missing the Mark
    If not, is it "legal" for me to create something that can be used by the community? Yes, it definitely can be. IANAL but there are 3 ways: 1. If you put it up on, you can use any 5E rules you want, plus certain settings. 2. If you conform to the licensing terms of the OGL, you can use any 5E rules in the SRD. 3. If it's just a fan-made work that you're putting up for free, it's not really clear just how much you can reference 5E before it becomes copyright (or possibly trademark) infringing. But, in practice, as long as it's a free fan-made thing that is respectful of the IP and doesn't pretend to be WotC-produced, you should be fine. I post such things here on ENWorld all the time, and I've never gotten sued over it. (Maybe Morrus is getting regularly sued on my behalf...?) As far as making something that is "rules legal," the DM has a ton of latitude in interpreting improvised actions; see the box on PHB page... 193! Holy crap, 200orcs was right! Anyway, as long as your new tactical options don't actively contradict anything in the RAW, they could be considered "rules legal" in the sense that they are valid DM rulings within the framework of the rules. They'd still be house rules (of your house) but not variant rules.

No results to display...

Sunday, 31st March, 2019

  • 12:09 AM - snickersnax quoted 200orcs in post Moon Druid Epiphany
    Primordial Druids sounds hardcore. If druids where called primordial Druids a lot more people would play them. That character concept... I know, Right? The Primordial Druid's journey could be about connecting to that first spark of life at the beginning of all life. Kind of a shape-shifting archeological journey, an exploration deep into the roots of the tree of life. The metaphysics is so delicious...

Saturday, 9th March, 2019

  • 09:38 PM - 5ekyu quoted 200orcs in post Tips? Haven't DMed D&D since 2E
    If the measuring stick is 6-8 and you measure 1-2 do you feel that it purposely devalues certain classes? Are you creating an inbalance? What's interesting to me is that it totally depends in the game your players want to play. I DM for two different groups and I have an open table game I have done this on purpose as a tool to improve by experiencing different players. Players that love RAW, play by the rules will feel it. They will instinctually know they can go Nova every time. It also leads to 5 minute days. Go into a room, fight, long rest. Players that focus on the story will instinctually hate 6-8 fights. The thing is though they do not care about class balance between themselves. They might enjoy combat but will make suboptimal choices for the sake of their character concept, even during combat. So if your table leans heavily on either side you are fine. If it's split in the middle then it becomes super challlenging to balance.Again, in our games, its a mix and often the characte...
  • 03:27 PM - 5ekyu quoted 200orcs in post Tips? Haven't DMed D&D since 2E
    I find the hardest thing to handle with 5e compared to other RP games is the short/long rest mechanic and the supposed 6-8 combat encounters a day. If you have classes that regain benefits on short rest, example fighter, warlock and classes that gain benefits during long tests, example wizard you have a weird power curve imbalance to deal with. It's not uncommon for a lot of groups to want to take a long rest every 2 fights, and to be fair fitting 6-8 combat encounters in a single day a lot of times feels unrealistic for the game. This leads to a weird conundrum for me. Realistic world versus needing classes that rely on short rests. Either way I feel like I am doing something wrong.I find the myth of 6-8 being "needed" to be mostly not needed. It's there not as a recommendation but as a measuring stick, after all. My games tend to run a mix, sometimes its 1-2 encounters between long rests, sometimes its 3-5, sometimes it's more. Tends to work fine but gives each time to shine. The tire...

Sunday, 24th February, 2019

Thursday, 21st February, 2019

  • 04:30 AM - dnd4vr quoted 200orcs in post Initiative options?
    Having said that I believe that Shadowrun is a better system. I have always wanted to run D&D with Shadowrun rules, but I have never got around to it. I always liked the idea, but even more so than D&D, it became a game of "speed kills". I don't really want that either. Our DM is working on a damage soaking system for D&D similar to Shadowrun, but it involves some pretty drastic homebrew! I've been playing around with a variant of the Greyhawk system and want to suggest it to our group, but a lot of it does come down to enhancing initiative vs speed of play. I agree the re-roll each round just takes too much time in TTRPG. I also read a thread were one post used a purely narrative system. The DM would simply ask who wants to do what, and describe it to the players, letting the action resolve when their turn came. My friend joked with me the other day and just asked me, "Dude, when are you just going to make your own game?" The more I think about different systems like D&D, Shadowrun, ...
  • 02:06 AM - Draegn quoted 200orcs in post Initiative options?
    Ok. I have played a lot of Shadowrun so I get what you are saying. If you allow multiple actions per round you would break the game. There is the thief archetype that allows the 22 and go again at 12style. But it's a high level ability and they get to go twice. For DnD you have to change the mindset of high initiative to take multiple actions, to maximizing action economy per round. Essentially by being able to take a bonus action, move, standard action, reaction you can maximize what you can do per round Having said that I believe that Shadowrun is a better system. I have always wanted to run D&D with Shadowrun rules, but I have never got around to it. You might find The Dark Eye 4e to be of interest.

Saturday, 16th February, 2019

  • 07:29 AM - S'mon quoted 200orcs in post Open Table Campaigns
    What would you do differently if you where starting over with a new group? Why did your current group stop playing? I often had 4 groups on the go doing Stonehell Dungeon. It worked fine. Basically I got a bit bored of Stonehell after a couple years and the 4 groups have been switched over to new stuff - Princes of the Apocalypse, Primeval Thule x2, and resumed my Rise of the Runelords/Shattered Star mashup. The Thule games are still open table but I am looking for more social roleplay, emphasis on NPC interaction etc. The only problem with Stonehell is that kids today won't map! So it only really worked when I had rare mapper players in groups. And open table = no mapping continuity. Edit: I use the same Open Table techniques in new Thule game, notably real time = game time. So if a month has passed in real time, a month has passed in the game.

Friday, 15th February, 2019

  • 03:17 AM - S'mon quoted 200orcs in post Open Table Campaigns
    I actually found your initial comment enlightening because of those two things you mentioned. It's definitely a simple solution but effective. How did you handle exploration. Did you RP it or fast forward to the location players were heading to? Exploration within the dungeon normally step by step but I summarise passing through explored territory. Wilderness travel was rare and mostly summarised.

Thursday, 14th February, 2019

  • 01:10 AM - S'mon quoted 200orcs in post Open Table Campaigns
    I tried to, ultimately I had issues with players not coming back to town at the end of the session. The other problem was that each game a new person was around so I had to RP their game introduction. You don't have to RP their introduction - you say "OK so you met this Cleric in the tavern, he's just arrived in town and looking for ADVENTURE!" :) I found with 1 week long rests & game time = real time between sessions, players don't try to stay in the dungeon. Basically I establish a clear social contract - no long rest during session, the session is what happens BEFORE you long rest. The long rest happens at end of session.

Thursday, 7th February, 2019

  • 10:34 PM - Shiroiken quoted 200orcs in post Build to Balance an All Damage Party
    Ancestral Guardian Barbarian Champion Fighter (bow) Hunter Ranger Forge Cleric With this party, a switch hitter, who can move between ranged and melee is optimal. Rogue is the best in this regard, and fits with the DPR scheme of the party (best defense is a good offense). If you want to do support, Bard is the obvious choice, and College of Lore can be amazing with Cutting Words. Bard AC might be a bit of an issue, so College of Valor might work as well, since it gives you both medium armor and shields. I got to watch them play and it's pretty much a DPS race. The Cleric mostly runs bane and goes into melee. The two ranged characters plink away and the barbarian rages and tanks.Tell your Cleric to switch to Bless, rather than Bane. Bane only works until that enemy is dead, while Bless keeps working for most of the combat (and helps his save for spell Concentration).
  • 01:19 PM - Paul Farquhar quoted 200orcs in post 90% of D&D Games Stop By Level 10; Wizards More Popular At Higher Levels
    It's interesting how my tables distribution is totally different. Fighters are not popular at all. Barbarians and Ranger and Warlocks are the most frequent proudly followed by Rogue and Sorcerer. Effect of small sample sizes I guess. Rogues are the most popular amongst my groups, clerics the least.
  • 11:19 AM - Baldurs_Underdark quoted 200orcs in post Riddles and Puzzles in Gaming and Dungeons and Dragons in particular.
    If the PC is dumb but the player is smart, can the PC solve the puzzle? This. I played a half-orc barbarian. Even if I knew the answer to a puzzle in real life, my character would only try to smash it up. Telling the solution to a puzzle to a fellow player with a higher intelligence so they can solve it in character feels stupid, so I never do that. But according to our DM, a surprising large number of puzzles can be solved with violence too.

Tuesday, 5th February, 2019

  • 08:50 PM - Quartz quoted 200orcs in post Theorycrafting Versatile
    Think of it this way, do you consider a Barbarian with a shield and a greatsword OP or not? Under this suggestion, you can't wield a 2H weapon one-handed, only a Versatile weapon. Also if you can one hand a 2H weapon, can I dual wield it? No, you can one-hand a Versatile weapon, not a 2H weapon.

Sunday, 3rd February, 2019

  • 08:10 AM - doctorbadwolf quoted 200orcs in post A 5e Swordmage?
    FWIW: lightning lure is one of the SCAG cantrips. Also, aren't all four of those cantrips (the others being green-flame blade, booming blade, and sword burst) based on 4e swordmage powers? Great catch! And yes, they are! How is the name: hexblade, duskblade or swordmage? I’d go Swordmage or Spellblade, I don’t like most other names for the concept. So why not use Wizard/Bladesinger as your class? because even with the SCAG cantrips, it’s still 90% wizard. The Bladesinger is fun, but it doesn’t have access to some of the things needed to make a solid gish that is singularly focused on magical melee combat with a weapon. Hexblade is pretty much the closest thing, right out of the box. It does damage and has access to utility, but doesn't really fully fill the swordmage's "I have 15 magical weapon powers that all do different things while teleporting every round" role as much as simply dealing some decent damage with eldritch smite while replicating some of the utility of wizard spells. ...

Saturday, 2nd February, 2019

  • 04:59 PM - FrogReaver quoted 200orcs in post A 5e Swordmage?
    So why not use Wizard/Bladesinger as your class? Wizards don't do things when they attack. They either cast spells or attack. That's not what the OP is looking for.

Thursday, 31st January, 2019

  • 07:26 PM - Satyrn quoted 200orcs in post Druid Armor Restrictions
    Here is the thing, Druids are not proficient in Heavy Armor, so in order to get it they need to multiclass or spend a feat. Which is why it's fine. That means they are sacrificing something else. But DM whining sucks I agree. Psst - he said "half plate" :uhoh:
  • 04:51 PM - ad_hoc quoted 200orcs in post Druid Armor Restrictions
    I think that the sage advice "might undermine the story and the world being created in your campaign" is seriously bad advice and a very nasty threat. It's basically saying that if you don’t follow their fluff you may have badwrongfun. This advice sounds very much off the usual tone of actually encouraging people to be free in their fluff and world-building... It would have been acceptable if they threatened about balance "if you don't follow our rule, you will have this mechanical problem", but here the tone is different, it's really like "your fantasy WORLD may suck". Because instead allowing chaotic evil Paladins or Wizards in heavy armor doesn't undermine anything? You know what this tone reminds me of? A politician typical tactic when they screwed up big time and issue doomsday threats to call for others to back them up :D The game is written story first. WotC hasn't written a combat strategy game. They've written D&D. All throughout the game are story choices they have made. From t...

200orcs's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites