View Profile: Garthanos - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Today, 05:57 AM
    That's something that might not be easy to see from just looking in from the outside. The classic game (and even 5e) is deadly, at first, but eventually (quickly) becomes a lot more survivable, and, even if things go south, probably recoverable. But, 3e, went from merely dangerous to rocket tag, and, there was the whole win-at-chargen thing, so what was mildly challenging to one character could...
    174 replies | 4267 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Smart's Avatar
    Today, 05:21 AM
    Thanks for the help everyone. I decided to go for Celestial Warlock (nice healing) Pact of the Tome (all the rituals). When necessary I will be a magic archer but my main thing will be healing and ritual support. May pick up a whip as a weapon (1 level of fighter for Con saves and weapons). Will probably go Tortle for race just to be different.
    17 replies | 755 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Today, 04:21 AM
    AFAICT, 2e ditched demons & devil's &c to be less offensive, maybe they decided to cut down on the orientalism/cultural-theft for similar reasons?
    3 replies | 96 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Today, 04:12 AM
    I mean, seriously, that makes sense and is intuitive to apply, right? Freakishly, it's not what the DMG actually says .. ...but, then, so many 1e Gygaxisns are freakish, that way... part of the charm, I guess, just downright baroque.
    174 replies | 4267 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 04:04 AM
    Since a reaction can be used to analyse a spell (just read this) and a reaction can be used to counter what if two mages were working in tandem... ie they could know what nature/level it was what resources to spend on countering it and similar benefits. Team dueling for the win?
    50 replies | 798 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 03:57 AM
    Oh and I do kind of like your idea of allowing it as level 1 ... basically in homage to Chainmail ;)
    50 replies | 798 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 03:56 AM
    Yes I think the original potency as Talian is suggesting does feel appropriate at least for slot equal cost when you go over It needs to make up for possible fails where it used to be automatic before.
    50 replies | 798 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Today, 03:09 AM
    The 3.x/PF rules do lavishly reward that sort of meticulously-applied system mastery, yes. It's /also/ that, yes. I love doing a good build-to-concept in 3e or 4e or in other systems that are better for that approach than any edition of D&D, like, oh, Hero. ;) But 3e was probably the height of D&D for that style - it gave you so many options, so much flexibility, and gulf between an...
    161 replies | 8897 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 03:02 AM
    I agree it intuits as being slot cost heavy and I am wanting it to feel fun instead of poof, technically if you are fairly certain the counter spell will work with my suggestions it is slightly more powerful doing low but potentially flavorful whiplash damage on the controller of the countered spell. Even changes some are suggesting like making it opposed checks I think is flavorful...
    50 replies | 798 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Today, 02:57 AM
    Not /that/ 0 hps rule. The DMG 0 hp rule says you fall unconscious if you are reduced to /exactly/ 0, then start bleeding - if you're reduced to -1 or less, either at one go, or by being hit again while unconscious, you're dead. I know you read it differently, and I guess a lotta DMs in my area did, too, because it alsways seemed to be played that 0 down to -10, regardless of how you got there,...
    174 replies | 4267 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Today, 02:52 AM
    4e minions did a decent job of cashing the check the DMG wrote, there. I mean, there may have been a hold on it while it cleared, but, ultimately, it wasn't rubber. 13A, IMHO, did even a bit better with it's mooks, which combined some of the ease of DMing and threat of swarms, with the progressive figure-removal of minions - and of old-school wargames, where you'd remove figures from the rear...
    784 replies | 22649 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Today, 02:42 AM
    It doesn't do that. Rather, it offers an alternative mechanic for defeating those same ogres. Instead of hitting AC 16 repeatedly for a total of 40hp, the DM can require you hit AC 25, once, and not have to worry about damage. Kinda like the old called shot variants, but in the DM's bailiwick, chosen by him when building an encounter.
    784 replies | 22649 view(s)
    2 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Today, 01:33 AM
    But it is true to the fiction. The ogre that is tough for mid-heroic PCs is not tough for mid-paragon PCs. That's it. I mean, speaking purely about the fiction, what is inconsistent? This is not a statement about the setting or the gameworld inhabitants. It is a statement about mechanics. Changing the numbers used to resolve declared actions, and find out what happens in the ficiton,...
    784 replies | 22649 view(s)
    1 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Today, 01:24 AM
    There's actually little evidence for this in the history of D&D. Most kobolds, goblins and 0-level humans will be either up or down if hit by a AD&D fighter with weapon specialisationm 18 STR and a magic weapon (damage die +1 for magic +2 for spec +3 for 18/01 STR = minimum 7 damage on a hit and typically quite a bit more). But I've never seen it suggested that this does not make for good play. ...
    784 replies | 22649 view(s)
    2 XP
  • doctorbadwolf's Avatar
    Today, 01:18 AM
    That at least was a physical product!
    34 replies | 998 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Today, 12:53 AM
    Not a huge difference, it was pretty hard to be a non-fighter specialist, like a Paladin or Ranger, because they were just hard to get into, anyway. Specialization, at all, OTOH, was a huge deal, it seriously powered the fighter up. I want to highlight this because it's still, by far, the strongest part of your case. All this hair-splitting and RaW invoking to paint a picture of 1e PCs maybe...
    174 replies | 4267 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 12:27 AM
    Sounds interesting. Nods I think I agree... it is at least ballpark.
    81 replies | 1887 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 12:08 AM
    A solution I seen still kept the reaction cost but allowed it to be done after the subject was hit... and forced a re-roll (it could combine with other sources of disadvantage) But the damage reduction idea how exactly did that work?
    81 replies | 1887 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:50 PM
    It seems like we sometimes grapple with a concern that the requirements of fitting magic into a game system, at least, one where all the participants won't have equal access to magic, requires compromising the vast sweep of what magic seems able to do across the various sources of inspiration. It might be more helpful to look at what magic in the source material actually allows any one given...
    23 replies | 686 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:36 PM
    Always givem more when it fixes a problem not bad to address the "must have" nature of things.
    50 replies | 798 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:33 PM
    I wouldnt go that far myself Yes to opposed rolls yes to aid other and a bonus to spell levels added. Presumably the best casting ability my Int is 18 and the Bards Charisma is 17 the Priests wizdom is 16 ... My casting ability controlls there spell slots contribute... enemy side does something similar. Compare total and apply special effects ;P I am sure they could be devils in the details...
    50 replies | 798 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:09 PM
    It sounds like the main problem isn't the spell, but the kind of complicated simplification of rolling every-off-turn-everything and some on-turn stuff, all into the harried Reaction.
    50 replies | 798 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:05 PM
    I suspect I would like a lot of your houserules
    81 replies | 1887 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:00 PM
    Chainmail Ranges in Inches I think each was 10 yards Sorcerer 60"Warlock 48"Magician 36"Seer 24" Better than Archery IRL ;)
    50 replies | 798 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:57 PM
    I was suggesting basic if the one player wants to counter an enemy spell he asks his allies if they want in? yes they all add no? they do not get to
    50 replies | 798 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ryujin's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:30 PM
    "Legend" (the 1985 film with Tom Cruise, Mia Sara, and Tim Curry) "The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension" I wanted to say "Hansel and Gretal; Witch Hunters", but apparently it did pretty well financially.
    36 replies | 566 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:08 PM
    Idea of Multi-cast counterspell .... hmmm when I ask for strength check and multiple people are lifting I have in the past asked for the highest persons strength then gave a bonus for each person whose strength was within 5 points of that. AND make one check what if there was a rule where multiple casters could participate as a group or they interfered with one another?
    50 replies | 798 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:03 PM
    It is definitely a guess but you know in combat the guess is fairly solid the enemy spell is not something you want to happen
    50 replies | 798 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:00 PM
    There is a roll if they are countering a spell that his higher than 3rd... but I can see how opposed checks might feel more dynamic - my idea was to have d4+spell level+int? damage of a type perhaps related to the spell countered if you succeed and snap back damage if you fail, while allowing even countering lower level spells be somewhat more questionable. I definitely understand not...
    50 replies | 798 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:14 PM
    Nod. It's not rocket science. But, it does have limits. Changing a creature from standard to solo - while, for the sake of "simulationism" (in the Forge Sense), holding its XP value constant to maintain that it is, in fact(actually, fiction), 'the same creature' - only brings it down 9 levels. So, 4th level party vs Type V Demons, for instance, not going to cut it. ...I think the...
    784 replies | 22649 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Yesterday, 07:38 PM
    That's an amusing way of thinking of it. ;) I like it.
    174 replies | 4267 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Yesterday, 07:18 PM
    Answering before I read the thread... I'll probably make a fool of myself... You could go with the old Item Saving Throw paradigm. The PC failed his save, so each of his items must also save! Depends on how you interpret "/body/ of a dead creature" ("remains" would have been more favorable to the possibility, IMHHO) and "restores any missing body parts." But, really, the Disintegrate...
    22 replies | 498 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Yesterday, 07:11 PM
    I think we can all acknowledge that D&D was played very differently by different groups back in the day - but still, if we're interested in the question - look at how the published rules, themselves, stacked up in terms of theoretical lethality. The results, if any, is going to be just that, theoretical. The reality already happened, and happened differently, for different groups in different...
    174 replies | 4267 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:26 PM
    Sure. I would suggest that the issue is that these choices are made early, typically 1-3 level range. So players are not really getting the psychological thrill of making those significant character build choices like you were in the early levels or even smaller ones later. Several comments on the 5e to PF2 subreddit thread noted this. One person said that they felt like the thrill of their...
    161 replies | 8897 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Charlaquin's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:15 PM
    My philosophy is, never point your DM gun at something unless you’re willing to pull the trigger. If PC death is on the table, then when a PC dies, they’re dead. No fudging rolls, no extra chances, no rescuing them, they’re dead. To do otherwise weakens the tension posed by the threat of PC death. If you don’t want to kill off PCs, that’s fine. Just make it clear ahead of time that PC death won’t...
    24 replies | 450 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:02 PM
    Time? Yes, like 2 years, and the encounter guidelines weren't even ready until /after/ we'd starting running HotDQ. Resources? Maybe not s'much: the future of D&D was uncertain during those two years, and it didn't seem like Hasbro/WotC was giving Mearls a lot of $$$ to make 5e happen. PF's future seems uncertain, but it sounds like Paizo /is/ putting some resources into it - didn't you...
    11 replies | 566 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:26 PM
    Trading a spell slot to delay them? and them not losing a spell slot, that is edging passed not even something i would want. Does it progress the fight might be a measure of worth.
    50 replies | 798 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:19 PM
    Combat and Tactics looks to have been extensive material.
    81 replies | 1887 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:13 PM
    Yeh the wasted reaction is one of the reasons why I didnt like protection its competing against the sentinel feat and opportunity attacks too. (both seem to be a defender fighters meat)
    81 replies | 1887 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:10 PM
    Agreed lots of cool answers.
    81 replies | 1887 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:18 PM
    Aside from introducing possible but even potentially rarish failure on lower level ones I wasnt thinking of inhibiting just flavoring it up a bit adding pop when it succeeds and opposite small ouch when it doesnt (ie having it potentially fail against a lower slot spell was just more of that pop) It occured to me that modern wizard duel inspiration does draw heavily on Harry Potter. ...
    50 replies | 798 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:15 PM
    That's just D&D from time immemorial (if you can't remember 1974, anyway). 5e is nice enough to share an approximate value of X (ok, and Y, short rests) at which it's nominally intended to balance. Since Paizo is sensibly done with trying to be more D&D than D&D, PF2 needn't stay with that attrition paradigm. But, you still took them in 3.x: slept to prepare spells, took a few minutes...
    11 replies | 566 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:10 PM
    Okay. That's fair. Having played 3-5e and PF1, I'm not sure if this is an assessment that I would ever associate with 5e at all. D&D 5e is usually associated with being light on significant choices that a player will make,* because it is a concerted move towards pre-3e simplicity and recapturing the OSR crowd. In various comments about switching to PF2 from 5e on the PF2 subreddit, for...
    161 replies | 8897 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Ryujin's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:09 PM
    You have an excellent point there. A couple of my friends who are indie actors/filmmakers have a passion project they've been working on for some time now. At first they were going to fund it directly but then they hit on an idea for a horror film, that they could fund at a lower level, then possibly shop to streaming services. Their premise sounds good and they've got a good vision for it, so...
    39 replies | 314 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:00 PM
    I was thinking it sort of gave flavor of magic being dangerous not just a level of commitment to the counterspell too...
    50 replies | 798 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:54 PM
    How about my idea... make it a bit more iffy against lower level spells and give whiplash effects even a small amount of damage d4+spell level? of a type related to the spell countered. (if any) or a type opposite. And conversely when I fail to counter it i might take a small amount of damage of the opposite type maybe? I brought up the original Chainmail to show both heritage and that the...
    50 replies | 798 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:38 PM
    Nods I can see that... and even at 5th level for the wizard its one of potentially many. Put it alongside fireball or lightning bolt.
    50 replies | 798 view(s)
    1 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:21 PM
    Given that there's been some discussion about roleplaying, what it means to play a character, and what it means to find one's character challenged in a certain way, I thought I would post some quotes from Burning Wheel Gold. This spells out how I think about it pretty well. I'm quoting from the Revised edition that came out a few months ago. First, Jake Norwood's Foreword at p 6 (Norwood...
    784 replies | 22649 view(s)
    4 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:52 PM
    How many adversaries are typically spell casters? I can actually see it way more valuable in say my game than someone else's as I think people are the most complex and interesting monsters of all. But I have definitely seen many a game where it never came up.
    50 replies | 798 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:40 PM
    So you have seen it as becoming "must have" hmmm.
    50 replies | 798 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:30 PM
    I am now picturing a counterspell which harms the enemy if it succeeds by whiplash like effect and may harm the one casting counterspell if it fails.
    50 replies | 798 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:26 PM
    Counter Spell goes way way back in Chainmail it was one of several magic abilities the casters simply had. Alongside either a Fireball, or Lightning bolt, seeing in the Dark and becoming invisible till they attacked. The above were basically at-wills, yeh. Though in a mass battle each turn might be closer to an encounter but since the adversary also only did one thing its closer feeling to...
    50 replies | 798 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 12:14 PM
    I do not think I remember seeing more than 1 or 2 henchmen ever it demonstrates how different experiences can be.
    81 replies | 1887 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Paul Smart's Avatar
    Yesterday, 12:07 PM
    Lots of great ideas. Thanks everyone. I am thinking Halfling (because it is my favorite race) Fighter 3 (Battlemaster) for all the trick shots as a base. After that I am not sure. I may combine this with Halfling Paladin riding a war dog (love the idea of a tiny dude on a dog with a lance).
    15 replies | 367 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:51 AM
    I had considered a Leading Attack... which allowed one to probe for openings or induce openings in the enemy so that subsequent attacks could make use of the revealed opening. Whether the attack was yours or someone elses. Once the opening was exploited it went away. So you could make it a pretty big benefit I wasnt thinking advantage though. The other fighting styles give advantage on the attack...
    49 replies | 1022 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:38 AM
    This reminds me of the assertion that 1e had people playing with extra rows of polearm users in the groups There is a feat where ALL adjacent allies get +1 AC bonus due to your shield work. Phalanx Warrior It is subtle. But that is not a FEAT bonus so if a bunch of you had it. The entire group could be compounding with adjacent allies - each member of the phalanx created shield wall...
    81 replies | 1887 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:30 AM
    What system are you talking about? 4e? 4e has no mechanic for turning the PCs into "minions" to fight much higher level antagonists. Rather, it has a mechanic for turning those higher level antagonists into solos and the like. This is because a game in which PCs are toggled either up or down would not make for very good play. I've bolded a few bits which demonstrate that you don't...
    784 replies | 22649 view(s)
    2 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:17 AM
    Go onto the next thing. Perhaps don't work with such a tight notion of "the adventure" or "that mission". Nothing. That's my whole point. There's not an end to possible RPGing because the PCs made their way easily through a castle. But this is purely external adversity: people used to like you but now they don't. It doesn't involve any sort of reevaluation or reconceptualisation.
    784 replies | 22649 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:15 AM
    I GM much more than I play a PC. When I play a PC this is what I am looking for - but more below on my personality weakness in this respect! As a GM I like to see what drives the PCs. I also enjoy the big moments of conflict, some of which are internal - or intra-group - and some of which are external. The first time I really played a character in this way was actually in a freeform Cthulhu...
    784 replies | 22649 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:13 AM
    The 2e Fighter *(Warrior Lord) definitely included the 4e Warlord in its banner (at least flavor wise).
    81 replies | 1887 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:01 AM
    Fireballs must be really easy to cast... (this is actually a reference to an old issue of D&D spells always working but being described as really hard and meticulous = but a stray cat could mess up the casters day - ok that is later in the story)
    81 replies | 1887 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:42 AM
    To be clear ... does not exist in 4e either that is more 4e is an MMO speak congratulations join the dog pile of ignorance.
    81 replies | 1887 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:07 AM
    It boggles my mind that this is the conclusion you reach when the person you are quoting is comparing this to 5e without once mentioning 4e. :erm:
    161 replies | 8897 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:15 AM
    Taunting / Intimidating and so on was a very common technique IRL. People/creatures are not dead wood. NOTE the very very limited but still available stopping up a doorway just quit being the only way which it was previously. When it's all you got it gets glorified. "sophisticated" -stop up a doorway is sophisticated? It was a desperate only way for decades LOL The Cavalier cannot...
    81 replies | 1887 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:46 AM
    It uses your one and only reaction... no opportunity attacks no Sentinel feat benefits and you are protecting against an attack that may have been something which already failed. It seems like you are trading out offense not defense.
    81 replies | 1887 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Yesterday, 12:03 AM
    It's a bit hard to express a view on this without more context, but I don't think it is such a thing. I'm not seeing that there is a situation suggesting to the PC (and his/her player) that, in fact, those who fight beside me are not worth dying for. But maybe I've missed something or otherwise misunderstood what you are describing.
    784 replies | 22649 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 11:45 PM
    I heard this was a patch for someone leaping off of cliffs/tall towers with impunity
    174 replies | 4267 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 11:38 PM
    In other words, the 7th Sea setting falls into the Uncanny Valley of Earth-based settings.
    119 replies | 9004 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 11:28 PM
    My first personal character for the last edition was a swordmage with white lotus riposte trivially created at level 1. Do a swordburst damaging a bunch then if they attack they get porcupined with force blades back
    81 replies | 1887 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 10:45 PM
    That just needed quoted
    174 replies | 4267 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 09:39 PM
    Conceptually Talents for Monsters opposite Talents for Player Characters may be rather like what I was talking about depending on the details Or at least a method to present the new abilities
    100 replies | 2253 view(s)
    0 XP
  • doctorbadwolf's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 09:30 PM
    I love the Romulans and the aftermath of their world dying is explored very interestingly in STO, so I’m looking forward to that.
    16 replies | 406 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 09:13 PM
    Or go variant human I think. Interesting and a different take. Interestingly intricate level progression Makes me think of Conan almost ;) What would be your best level 5?
    81 replies | 1887 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 09:08 PM
    It almost has to be seen that way when it takes so much time and energy for me I have to decide if it's even worth it.
    100 replies | 2253 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ryujin's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 09:02 PM
    That's a damned shame. I won't be adding *another* streaming service for one show :(
    447 replies | 19995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 08:56 PM
    Thanks to those who actually contributed on this thread without playing accusatory MMO games
    81 replies | 1887 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 08:49 PM
    Pretty murky behind paying for it, not that I would begrudge doing so if it managed to clear up the problems I currently see with 5e.
    100 replies | 2253 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 08:38 PM
    Not sure that is entirely true myself I was targeting a big tactical module as much as something WOTC could produce as anything. The earlier edition had a Tactical expansion of 192 pages; The set of role oriented subclasses some may already exist minor tweaks on Cavalier. Monsters which create more varied problems than a big bag of hit points and something like a more explicit stunt system...
    100 replies | 2253 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 08:28 PM
    I shoot for not overwhelmingly specific partly because it could differ a lot It's a method for inspiring people without over-riding their own inclinations. someone just shared a homebrew everyman/simple action that allows someone to "Take a hit" when their adjacent squishier allie is about to be hit they can interpose, hoping maybe their greater defense helps them out. It could be seen as a...
    100 replies | 2253 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 08:18 PM
    Ah that works and is a compromise removing my criticism.
    81 replies | 1887 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 08:15 PM
    Yeh I couldn't understand how there was a failure to communicate... which is evidence of a failure to communicate too LOL
    100 replies | 2253 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 08:12 PM
    Parrying an attack against ones ally for that shield user might be... a somewhat different thought. You trade out your shield bonus to improve an allies armor class not your own... you no longer get the bonus till the end of your turn.
    81 replies | 1887 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 08:09 PM
    Hmmm.. I was just thinking that a reaction is such a commodity using it when the enemy might not even hit would feel lame.
    81 replies | 1887 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 07:57 PM
    I do like that quite a bit... I have been thinking for quite a while that a lot of fiction has heros who do little tidbits that might be seen as overlapping on the specialists. Many times it includes characters inspiring their allies but yes this is definitely another, a dive in front of an attack seems viable (you could even add some small movement if you accept being prone afterwards)... ...
    81 replies | 1887 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Charlaquin's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 07:16 PM
    Yeah, same. If you don’t think the product is worth the money due to its crunch content being playtest material destined for a future book, I don’t blame you. But it’s unfair to claim they were being dishonest. They were very clear about what the product was.
    34 replies | 998 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 06:59 PM
    OK I will channel my much younger self. Note I now disagree with that guy on almost every point for various reasons. hmmm maybe some are still influencing my thinking Hit points massively increasing? I mean really? Single attribute based actions = there is nothing that simple? Classes = carbon copy encouragement for the win Amnesia magic = nothing at all like legend or myth....
    163 replies | 7145 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 06:57 PM
    I recommend sblock and trigger warning. Aside from that, great post... ...y'all'll hafta just imagine a cynical quip, here. Maybe later.
    784 replies | 22649 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 06:45 PM
    That might be ok if something is rare enough it isn't something to count on or worry too much over ... however it REALLY REALLY seems strange a mage is immune to the interference of the Cavalier adjacent to them. Hard to imagine they cannot ... something about mechanics being unnecessarily different, yada yada yada memory escapes me. Mage slayer looks like it has some bite against adjacent...
    81 replies | 1887 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 06:28 PM
    Not that many monsters cast spells. There is a Mage Slayer Feat, though, that well, just read it... I mean, a 5e caster in a world where everything had Mage Slayer would still have it easier than an old-school magic-user.
    81 replies | 1887 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st July, 2019, 06:22 PM
    After L5R? What did L5R do?
    217 replies | 14656 view(s)
    0 XP
More Activity
About Garthanos

Basic Information

About Garthanos
About Me:
Artist, Poet, Scientist and Game Fiddler
Location:
Lincoln, Nebraska
Disable sharing sidebar?:
No
Sex:
Male
Age Group:
Over 40
Social Networking

If you can be contacted on social networks, feel free to mention it here.

Facebook:
lancealandyas
My Game Details

Details of games currently playing and games being sought.

State:
Nebraska

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
7,685
Posts Per Day
2.02
Last Post
Counterspell what do people think? Today 04:04 AM

Currency

Gold Pieces
78
General Information
Last Activity
Today 04:36 AM
Join Date
Sunday, 15th February, 2009
Home Page
http://www.dyasdesigns.com/kingsmagick.php
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0

34 Friends

  1. AbdulAlhazred AbdulAlhazred is offline

    Member

    AbdulAlhazred
  2. Aldarc Aldarc is offline

    Member

    Aldarc
  3. C4 C4 is offline

    Member

    C4
  4. Charlaquin Charlaquin is offline

    Member

    Charlaquin
  5. darkbard darkbard is offline

    Member

    darkbard
  6. doctorbadwolf doctorbadwolf is offline

    Member

    doctorbadwolf
  7. FireLance FireLance is offline

    Member

    FireLance
  8. firesnakearies firesnakearies is offline

    Member

    firesnakearies
  9. Flipguarder Flipguarder is offline

    Member

    Flipguarder
  10. heretic888 heretic888 is online now

    Member

    heretic888
  11. Igwilly Igwilly is offline

    Member

    Igwilly
  12. keterys keterys is offline

    Moderator

    keterys
  13. Klaus Klaus is offline

    Member

    Klaus
  14. malcolm_n malcolm_n is offline

    Member

    malcolm_n
  15. Nemesis Destiny Nemesis Destiny is offline

    Member

    Nemesis Destiny
  16. Neonchameleon Neonchameleon is offline

    Member

    Neonchameleon
  17. On Puget Sound On Puget Sound is offline

    Member

    On Puget Sound
  18. OpsKT OpsKT is offline

    Member

    OpsKT
  19. Paul Smart Paul Smart is offline

    Member

    Paul Smart
  20. pemerton pemerton is offline

    Member

    pemerton
  21. Raven Crowking Raven Crowking is offline

    Member

    Raven Crowking
  22. RedSiegfried RedSiegfried is offline

    Member

    RedSiegfried
  23. Reinhart Reinhart is offline

    Member

    Reinhart
  24. Rolenet Rolenet is offline

    Member

    Rolenet
  25. Ryujin Ryujin is offline

    Member

    Ryujin
  26. Scrivener of Doom
  27. surfarcher surfarcher is offline

    Member

    surfarcher
  28. thanson02 thanson02 is offline

    Member

    thanson02
  29. The Fighter-Cricket
  30. Tony Vargas Tony Vargas is online now

    Member

    Tony Vargas
  31. Turtlejay Turtlejay is offline

    Member

    Turtlejay
  32. UHF UHF is offline

    Member

    UHF
  33. UngeheuerLich UngeheuerLich is offline

    Member

    UngeheuerLich
  34. Yaarel Yaarel is offline

    Member

    Yaarel
Showing Friends 1 to 34 of 34
My Game Details
State:
Nebraska
Page 1 of 15 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Tuesday, 23rd July, 2019


Monday, 22nd July, 2019


Sunday, 21st July, 2019



Page 1 of 15 1234567891011 ... LastLast
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Friday, 19th July, 2019

  • 02:41 AM - AbdulAlhazred mentioned Garthanos in post Ranger: Beastmaster New Powers
    ...l). The only other lack being access to a truly world-shaking PP like Battlefield Archer. So, you don't REALLY need to fiddle with their powers, they just need maybe 3 really nice sky blue feats and a sky blue PP. There is a misconception that, because the beast is not a combat monster, that the build is 'bad in combat', it isn't. It is basically just as effective as the other 3 ranger builds, except without some fairly small extra benny. In return you get a basically unkillable companion that can take hits for you, do OAs, set of traps while you are nice and safe at the other side of the room, carry stuff, etc. (heck, if you're a halfling there are beasts you can RIDE, beat that!). Heck, I guess a pixie ranger could ride ANY companion, hahaha. Anyway, I have nothing against some powers that push the beast more into being an ersatz weapon, that isn't a bad idea at all, but it should be thought of more as 'color' and not so much as something needed to 'beef up' the build in any way. Garthanos, the +1 hit and damage bonus you are giving is OK, it certainly won't break anything and isn't going to make the character stronger than an optimized twin striking build. I wouldn't go any further than that, except maybe to extend it to some non-at-will versions.

Friday, 12th July, 2019

  • 08:21 PM - Yaarel mentioned Garthanos in post 4e Clone − help create it!
    Which is one reason the Warlord doesn't work as an archetype, to 5e Fighter is too deeply committed to all-DPR, all the time. Off on a basic level, IMHO. If you can't think of high-level abilities a class should have, you don't have a handle on the class, yet, and you won't create a viable class, but another LF to be overshadowed by all the Qw's in 5e. It seems to me, the Fighter is a great chassis for the Knight/Warlord. The Fighter has so much ‘uncluttered’ design space. Because the Fighter base design space guarantees excellent damage dealing, the design space for the archetype can focus exclusively group enhancement capabilities. @Zardnaar, @Garthanos, I found it easy to translate Come and Get It, into a 5e format and sensibility. It is also an example of how there is little difference between 4e Encounters and 4e Dailies. Taunting Strike // Barrier Attack 3 Worldly Mind, Intimidation // Action Target: foes in close Versus: your Charisma versus each foes Charisma Hit: Barrier: each foe moves into melee Target: foes in melee Attack: your per-turn attack You taunt your foes, goading them to come attack you. When they reach you, you bust out to punish each of them. Each hostile in close range (30 feet) who can see or hear you must make a Charisma defense, or as a reaction move toward you, adjacent within melee range (5 feet) if able. Then you make one per-turn attack (such as using a weapon or a cantrip) against each hostile in melee. [Compare 4e Come and Get It PH1]
  • 06:38 AM - doctorbadwolf mentioned Garthanos in post Fighting With Style, Fighting Styles as Level 1 subclass choices
    @Garthanos With respect, I do not care about nitpicking examples of zero to hero narratives. I’m not here to follow every possible rabbit hole of a debate that ever presents itself. Rand is a farmboy, his dad barely trains him, and I’ve read these books 7 times. You aren’t going to badger me into agreeing with you, so just drop it.

Thursday, 11th July, 2019

  • 01:31 AM - AbdulAlhazred mentioned Garthanos in post Diplomatic Inspiration / Leadership
    Tony Vargas Garthanos This is where I bill the 'non-wonky math' feature of HoML. Since a skill check and an attack roll are going to work exactly the same, you can simply make powers which attack with skill checks! That makes this sort of design a lot cleaner. Instead of imputing all sorts of craziness to a Diplomacy or Intimidate check, you simply create a power, which has an attack line of something like 'Intimidate vs WILL' and it can do whatever (psychic damage being an obvious possibility).

Wednesday, 10th July, 2019

  • 04:02 PM - Fenris-77 mentioned Garthanos in post Why don't everything scale by proficiency bonus?
    I'd be happier about picking saves if the saves were all created equal, but the really aren't. Maybe give each class one of the strong three and let them pick from the weaker three. Or even chose one from each list. Garthanos - if you gave each of those tiers +1 (for a range from +1 to +3) I don't think you'd be breaking anything. I don't think it's as interesting as adding specific skills, but that's a matter of personal taste.

Saturday, 6th July, 2019

  • 03:59 PM - Blue mentioned Garthanos in post Ranger: Beastmaster New Powers
    Garthanos, can you make sure to use the edition prefixes when creating a new post so the target audience for the thread is clear from the forum screen? Thanks. EDIT: Me be idiot and missed it. Sorry!

Tuesday, 2nd July, 2019

  • 04:57 AM - Umbran mentioned Garthanos in post The perfect D&D edition (according to ENWORLD)
    Oh I guess I will unblock the jerk .... It is time for you, Garthanos, to review The Rules. Specifically, take a look at the section, "Keep it civil". Because you are, at this point, far over the line. You have been lucky, riding on the grace of the fact that the moderators have been busy. But from now on, we expect you to be polite and respectful in this thread, and elsewhere on this site. If your mood is such that you cannot do that, we expect you to recognize that, and hold off posting until you can treat your fellow gamers well. If you have any questions on this, please take it to e-mail or PM.
  • 04:47 AM - doctorbadwolf mentioned Garthanos in post The Intelligent Fighter , Thibault's Circle.
    Garthanos I don’t think my comment was out of sync, but it’s fine. Anyway, I do think that an Int oriented fighting style and some new maneuvers for the battle master would be better than a new battlemaster style subclass. Instead, I’d want to explore what a subclass could provide as constant benefits or at will abilities. Or perhaps something more like the warlord subclass Mearls toyed around with in the happy fun hour stream.
  • 04:32 AM - Yaarel mentioned Garthanos in post 4e Clone − help create it!
    Garthanos I am mulling three rest types. • sleep (8-hour long rest) • meal (1-hour short rest) • breather (15-minute brief rest) The breather matters because it is the standard unit of time to perform a magical ritual. (I like a 15-minute unit over 10, because there are about one hundred of them per day: 14 minutes and 24 seconds.) Also, 15-minute breather feels like a more useful time space to get something done. It is enough time to bandage wounds, explore a room, eat something on the run, regather ones wits, and so on. I am unsure what restorative benefit to assign to the pause. Short rest can spend hit dice, long rest refreshes all hit points and hit dice. Re 4e: an ‘action per breather’ can approximate an encounter power. And it comes with its own narrative explanation. The capability is exerting and requires one to catch ones breath before doing it (effectively) again.

Sunday, 30th June, 2019

  • 02:11 AM - doctorbadwolf mentioned Garthanos in post What is the Ranger to you?
    Garthanos you know I’m an old 4venger, you don’t have to tell me how cool 4e is. This is a thread about the ranger conceptually, though, not about the relative merits of different system’s design philosophy. And yes, in the 4e era I was regularly bugging the designers for magical options for the Ranger. They finally did it in essentials, adding a bunch of primal utility powers to the ranger list, and making it easy for a phb ranger to pick up Wilderness Knacks, but I would have still preferred to also see some primal weapon based attack and defense powers, and some Ranger specific rituals.

Wednesday, 5th June, 2019

  • 07:02 PM - Yaarel mentioned Garthanos in post How To Clone 4E Using 5E Rules
    Garthanos and Tony Vargas I really want to consolidate AC and Reflex. So, a sword attacks the Reflex defense. A ray attacks the Reflex defense. An armor improves the Reflex defense, if the Strength/Constitution prerequisite is met.
  • 05:02 PM - Yaarel mentioned Garthanos in post How To Clone 4E Using 5E Rules
    @Tony Vargas, @Zardnaar 5e long rest grants complete healing PLUS hitdice. What if a long rest only gives hitdice? Thus someone who is fresh (unbloodied) can spend hitdice in the form of second-winds. But someone who is injured or exhausted must spend the hitdice immediately to recover, thus is more vulnerable to further damage from future battles. @Tony Vargas, @Garthanos, and others Personally, I love the 5e proficiency bonus, and feel it more than adequately addresses the 4e half-level bonus. Student Tier Levels 1-4 (Proficiency +2) Heroic Tier Levels 5-12 (Proficiency +3, +4) Paragon Tier Levels 13-20 (Proficiency +5, +6) Epic Tier Levels 21-24 (Proficiency +7, also allows ability scores to improve beyond 20) Moreover the Epic Tier can come with an Epic Destiny, becoming ‘Immortal’ by various methods. 5e feats include certain ones that are a ‘half feat’ plus a +1 ability score improvement. It is easy to equate smaller 5e feats as one or two half feats. I consider 4 skill proficiencies to be worth one half feat. Minor traits like Elf Trance are worth one skill proficiency. In some settings, languages matter, and if so, they might be worth a skill proficiency. Together light and medium armors proficiency equals 1 skill, and heavy armor prerequiring light and medium armor, is worth an other skill. A cantrip seems worth two skills, or something ...

Friday, 14th December, 2018

  • 03:15 PM - lowkey13 mentioned Garthanos in post On the Differences Between 1e and 2e (Not all AD&D Is the Same)
    Manbearcat Garthanos Zardnaar Lanefan Saelorn So I was trying to get at a slightly different point that had been bugging me for a while (much more subtle than the continued banes of my existence; e.g, Paladins, Gnomes, and Rapiers). We (and I include myself in this) often treat 1e and 2e interchangeably (I often use the 1e/2e descriptor). In many ways, that is fair- there is a great amount of overlap between them! Certainly more, IMO, than between any two other "numbered" editions. But here's the thing- while most of us normally easily differentiate between the other old compatible editions (OD&D, B/X, BECMI), we don't often think about or see the differences between 1e and 2e. And I think that's a topic worth thinking and talking about. 1e was around from 1977 (PHB) until 1989 (2e).* 2e was around from 1989 until 2000. I mean .... it's kind of insane when you think about it. And both editions had controversial publications that (arguably) created their own separate demi-mondes (1985, UA, lead...

Monday, 3rd December, 2018

  • 03:01 AM - AbdulAlhazred mentioned Garthanos in post What are your favorite Skill Challenges.
    To answer Garthanos original question: I don't know that I have a favorite exactly. The DMG2 has some good advice and RC has a good clear write up. There are a couple other books that touch on the subject tangentially, but nowadays I live with mostly my own advice. I stick to the RC implementation, technically, but I really like being looser most of the time than any of the books suggest. However I'll agree with pemerton that Complexity 1 and 2 challenges are usually PRETTY tightly focused and work well in the original 4e style.

Wednesday, 28th November, 2018

  • 04:21 AM - Manbearcat mentioned Garthanos in post 4e Compared to Trad D&D; What You Lose, What You Gain
    ...and daily powers leveraged in SCs do bring an attendant opportunity cost (if I understand correctly what you mean by this). You're understanding me correctly. To be clear: Opportunity cost in terms of... If I forgo this Move Action to get in position (instead spending it to push toward success in a relevant SC) to use x Standard Action for Combat I'll have to use lesser effective y Standard Action. Or, more difficult still, consider the course of action that Garthanos carved out above: Fighter spending multiple actions (and multiple rounds to potentially, but not assuredly) take control of the Elite Controller (Leader) Tank instead of deploying his normal combat shtick to lock down enemies, create catch-22s to dictate the melee, and deal a lot of damage/improve his team's survivability. Getting the action economy and the rider effects (see Dazed on the Elite while he is in the cockpit) is something an average GM could easily miscalculate and a poor GM could cluster-eff entirely. Those sort of opportunity-cost based decisions must be weighed and balanced by a GM (in real time, on the go).

Saturday, 24th November, 2018

  • 05:59 PM - Manbearcat mentioned Garthanos in post 4e Compared to Trad D&D; What You Lose, What You Gain
    ...tion”, I don’t see how Fighters typically being physically imposing/dynamic, Rogues being scoundrel-ey/resourceful/daring-do, and Mages being erudite/mystical is a problem? In Marvel Heroic, Hulk is going to be SMASH-ey and Doctor Strange is going to be erudite/mystical. If the mechanics/PC build schemes don’t engender that emergent quality, there is something wrong with the game. Same goes for Leverage and any game with strong, distinct archetypes. 3) If the concern is challenge-based, then (a) see (1), (2) maybe there is a system maths problem, and (3) if “Challenge” requires heavy deviation from archetype (therefore diluting archetype or rendering it incoherent), then the game has a problem (see (2) above. 4) Fail-Forward and (1) above (hard framing and dynamic situation changes) should alleviate “fiction-irrelevant best skill spamming.” 4e has all 3 of those built into its Noncombat Conflict Resolution so if that isn’t happening then it’s straight user error by the GM. Garthanos , thanks for posting. I’ll get a response up later and move this thread along.

Friday, 23rd November, 2018

  • 05:09 AM - AbdulAlhazred mentioned Garthanos in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    OK on this "I would’ve much preferred the ability to adopt any role within the core 4 by giving players a big choice at level 1, an option that placed an overlay on every power you used or that gave you a new way to use them." Basically have Source Specific Powers and less class powers. But I think combining that with having BIG differing stances to dynamically switch role might be a better idea so that your hero can adjust role to circumstance. I have to defend this NPC right now vs I have to take down the big bad right now vs I have to do minion cleaning right now, I am inspiring allies in my interesting way, who need it right now. and the obligatory Argghhhh on this. " I wanted classes to have different power acquisition schedules" And thematic differences seemed to have been carried fine. I know this is a rather long-delayed comment on this, but.... I tried this design approach in HoML (both the one Mearls is talking about AND the options that Garthanos mentions). This is REALLY REALLY HARD to make work, and there's a huge cost in terms of diluting the thematic coherence of the class' power list. You can't just 'add an overlay' and/or a class feature choice, or something similar and successfully transform one role to another. Roles are more deeply ingrained into the classes than that, and making 'role light' so you can simply swap them out is a poor substitute. This is basically why Strike! is uninteresting to me, the 'role matrix' approach it uses just doesn't really do justice to roles. Now, I think its fine to do something akin to what the Berserker does in HotFW, make a 'switching' class that can toggle into a different role when it makes thematic/narrative sense. It is still hard to pull off well, and you won't suddenly stop being an X just because you are now in Y mode, but you can certainly go from 'high damage melee striker' to 'front line leader' or something like that and its workable. One thing that was excellent about 4e...

Thursday, 22nd November, 2018

  • 02:50 AM - pemerton mentioned Garthanos in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    ...sting experiment, with some solid ideas. Thinking about why it didn't ultimately work is fruitful 4e works very well as an RPG, with one major exception and one other point of complexity. Major exception: the scaling for combat numbers is different from the scaling for out-of-combat number (roughly +1 per level vs +0.7 per level). At heroic tier this can mostly be ignored, but as levels grow its effect on the maths becomes more evident. It means that you can't have truly universal resolution (eg Intimidate vs Will, Acrobatics vs Reflect, to-hit vs a skill challenge DDC, etc) without the maths breaking down. Fixing this would require reworking the maths of one or both systems, which would be hard, so it's something that I fudge over in play. Point of complexity: 4e combat resolution is very concrete (mapped terrain, detalied position tracking, etc). But 4e non-combat is very abstract (skill challenges). This can cause ajdudicative challenges at the point of interface. As I think Garthanos has noted in this thread, it also puts some hard limits on the gonzo eg epic fighters can't easily leap to the moon, because their exploits also have to fit on a battle map tracked in 5' squares. So anyway, to say that "4e didn't work" is simply to say that it was not as commercially successful as WotC hoped. That's not primarily an inquiry into RPG design but into (i) RPG marketing and (ii) what is popular in RPGing. I have my own views on why 4e was not popular, informed mostly by what I read on the interwebs. (1) Many RPGers don't like closed scene resolution and other forms of abstraction, other than hit points as a weird exception. (2) Many RPGers treat resource management and related puzzle solving as the main focus of play, whereas 4e tends to subordinate this in certain respects. (3) Many RPGers prefer much tighter GM control of outcomes than 4e defaults to.

Monday, 19th November, 2018

  • 12:09 AM - pemerton mentioned Garthanos in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    ...l but impossible at 1st level thing is to set a DC of 25+. Which is not fiction-first. Or to put it another way: if the DC follows "the narrative" (which I am taking to be synonymous with what I and others are calling the fiction - ie an understanding, prior to mechanics, of what is and is not feasible for the protagonists) then what is the role of bounded accuracy? They are different methodologies - opposed, almost. Thus, as I said, my confusion on this point. Right. Which is the case in 4e as well, it jut approaches it from the question of "How hard of a door would be a reasonable challenge at this level?" Sometimes the answer is the DC 15 wooden door, sometimes it's the DC 25 mithril door, and sometimes it's the DC 35 primal spirit of doors. Tare you claiming in 4e the DC of a wooden door would change depending on the level of whoever interacted with it and that is an example of fiction first?4e builds in level scaling, and minionisation, and the rest. (And I see that Garthanos also makes this point.) The mathematical result of keeping the door at DC 15 and scaling the bonus by 0.5 per level; and of keeping the bonus to the attempt confined to the raw STR bonus and stepping down the DC by 0.5 per level; is the same. Either way, we have a change in the fiction - ever-growing prowess of the PC - that is then expressed mechanically - the same door get easier to burst down or the same ogre gets easier to defeat. 5e doesn't have the level scaling. And it doesn't adjust the DC of the attempt vs the door (I think - see my uncertainty reported above). If it's nevertheless fiction first that means the fiction is the 15th level fighter has rather little more prowess than the 1st level fighter, as relative feasibilities change hardly at all. But to be honest there's little that I see in the design to suggest fiction first, and the most common refrain I here from 5e proponents is "bounded accuracy", which as I have said is a quite different methodology. The DC ...

Friday, 16th November, 2018

  • 10:10 AM - pemerton mentioned Garthanos in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    Are these Martial Practices? If so which ones are being used and at what level are they gained?They're just action declarations. I don't use Martial Practices in my 4e game. (A difference between me and Garthanos.) My point is that if simpe action declarations resolved as skill checks can do things "comprable to raising the dead" or "opening portals to other planes" then Martial Practices can hardly make martial PCs less capable. As to your other post: I don't know on what basis you say that I said, in another post, that "ritual caster alone makes casters more effective than martial PC's in 4e." I didn't say that, and don't agree with it. I've posted multiple actual play examples in this thread that show why I don't agree with it. What post are you referring to? And is your view based on your own play experience? As to thinking that the invoker/wizard caster in my game doesn't leverage the rules well, please read these two actual play reports and then tell me what the weakness of play consists in. The explanation for why ritual casting doesn't dominate play in 4e as I experience it is fairly straightforward. Domination in play can take two main forms: providing mechanical solutions ...


Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
No results to display...
Page 1 of 92 123456789101151 ... LastLast

Tuesday, 23rd July, 2019

  • 03:24 AM - Maxperson quoted Garthanos in post Counterspell what do people think?
    I agree it intuits as being slot cost heavy and I am wanting it to feel fun instead of poof, technically if you are fairly certain the counter spell will work with my suggestions it is slightly more powerful doing low but potentially flavorful whiplash damage on the controller of the countered spell. Even changes some are suggesting like making it opposed checks I think is flavorful mechanics not really attempts to weaken it. The method I'm suggesting is weaker, though. It can be tweaked if you think it's too weak. Perhaps double proficiency for the caster of the counterspell.
  • 01:59 AM - Maxperson quoted Garthanos in post Counterspell what do people think?
    How about my idea... make it a bit more iffy against lower level spells and give whiplash effects even a small amount of damage d4+spell level? of a type related to the spell countered. (if any) or a type opposite. And conversely when I fail to counter it i might take a small amount of damage of the opposite type maybe? I brought up the original Chainmail to show both heritage and that the flavor of caster vs caster is ummm solid in foundation. I was thinking that it should become a 1st level spell. If it's used to attempt to stop a spell of the same level, then you roll an opposed check 1d20+int bonus+proficiency and the higher wins. If you use a higher spell slot, you get +5 to your roll per spell level higher, so using a 5th level slot to stop a 3rd level spell would be 1d20+int bonus+proficiency+10 vs. the defender's 1d20+int bonus+proficiency. If you use a lower level slot, you get -5 per spell level lower, so attempting to use a first level spell to stop a fireball would be 1d20+in...
  • 12:20 AM - Xaelvaen quoted Garthanos in post Show me how to build a defender....
    I suspect I would like a lot of your houserules First of all, thank you! I've been considering for a while making a post of all the houserules we use, just to share with everyone. A solution I seen still kept the reaction cost but allowed it to be done after the subject was hit... and forced a re-roll (it could combine with other sources of disadvantage) But the damage reduction idea how exactly did that work? As a Reaction when the defender, or an adjacent ally would be hit (so after a hit is declared), the defender can use his shield to reduce the incoming damage by (1d4 for small shields, 1d6 for medium) plus the target's strength bonus. Considerably weaker than monk's deflect arrows, but as a fighting style we thought this lesser version was appropriate for defenders. With one reaction per round limitation, giving up a potential 1d8+7 (with duelist style instead) on an opportunity attack, 1d6+5 DR felt fair.

Monday, 22nd July, 2019

  • 10:21 PM - Oofta quoted Garthanos in post Counterspell what do people think?
    I was suggesting basic if the one player wants to counter an enemy spell he asks his allies if they want in? yes they all add no? they do not get to I could see that - maybe - if you changed it to some kind of contest and giving the people an option to assist for advantage. So in my example (sadly not an exaggeration) the wiz or cleric channeling spell energy to the bard to assist in the battle could actually be kind of cool. But ... I have issues with that too. Basically what kind of check do you make it? The wiz would want to use arcana, but he's probably the only one. What if the enemy is a sorcerer? Their arcana check probably isn't going to be great. How do you handle spells of different levels? I'm not saying it couldn't be done, I'm just not sure how to implement it in a way that D&D would handle it. Right now the counter works for everything lower than level 3 and you can cast to the counter at a higher level to guarantee it's dispelled. I guess it feels like it would almost re...
  • 10:09 PM - Tony Vargas quoted Garthanos in post Counterspell what do people think?
    https://dmdavid.com/tag/how-new-changes-created-the-4-most-annoying-spells-in-dungeons-dragons/ I kind of feel like its unlikely to come up so often as to really be a problem? But since it doesnt advance the battle towards its conclusion very much is it one people will even use? It sounds like the main problem isn't the spell, but the kind of complicated simplification of rolling every-off-turn-everything and some on-turn stuff, all into the harried Reaction.
  • 09:49 PM - Zardnaar quoted Garthanos in post Show me how to build a defender....
    Combat and Tactics looks to have been extensive material. Yeah it was the best of the players option books. Tested a few rules in it such as weapon abilities, fighter Grand Master rules, siege weapons, critical hit tables, new armor and weapons, fire arm rules.
  • 09:42 PM - Oofta quoted Garthanos in post Counterspell what do people think?
    Idea of Multi-cast counterspell .... hmmm when I ask for strength check and multiple people are lifting I have in the past asked for the highest persons strength then gave a bonus for each person whose strength was within 5 points of that. AND make one check what if there was a rule where multiple casters could participate as a group or they interfered with one another? what would happen in our games was that: BG1 casts a spell Bard counters BG1's spell BG1 counters Bard's counter Wiz counters BG1's counter of Bard's counter BG2 counters Wiz's counter of BG1's counter of Bard's counter of BG1's counter Cleric counters BG2's counter of Wiz's counter of BG1's counter of Bard's counter of BG1's counter ... and it just kind of circle's down the drain in chain counters of counters of counters. I guess an easier answer would have been that you can't counter a counter, but then the enemy casters would never get a spell off. Or maybe you can counter a counter but not counter a counter of a counter...
  • 05:08 PM - dave2008 quoted Garthanos in post Show me how to build a defender....
    I am currently not happy with the options I have found so far. I might be missing something Lot's of good answers in this thread - did you find what you were looking for?
  • 03:56 PM - UnknownDyson quoted Garthanos in post Counterspell what do people think?
    I was thinking it sort of gave flavor of magic being dangerous not just a level of commitment to the counterspell too... I don't think you should mechanically inhibit an arcane spellcasters ability to deal with magic. Wizards - they learn and prepare spells at great monetary and time costs. Sorcerers - they have a very limited number of spells known. Warlocks - They don't have many spell slots. One thing that these classes have going for them is that they can deal with magic in ways that the divine casters can't. Besides, counterspell already has weaknesses built in. It only works if the caster can see a target within 60 feet of them (unless you are a sorcerer with the distant metamagic), and requires a reaction. The DC for the upcast is 10 + the spell's level going off your spellcasting stat, which means you don't get to apply your proficiency bonus unless you are an abjurer. I don't think making counterspell unreliable against lower level spells is the way to go. I personally like the d4 w...
  • 02:58 PM - UnknownDyson quoted Garthanos in post Counterspell what do people think?
    How about my idea... make it a bit more iffy against lower level spells and give whiplash effects even a small amount of damage d4+spell level? of a type related to the spell countered. (if any) or a type opposite. And conversely when I fail to counter it i might take a small amount of damage of the opposite type maybe? I actually like that much better as a subclass feature for a sorcerer or wizard than I do for the whole game.
  • 01:58 PM - Maxperson quoted Garthanos in post Counterspell what do people think?
    How many adversaries are typically spell casters? I can actually see it way more valuable in say my game than someone else's as I think people are the most complex and interesting monsters of all. But I have definitely seen many a game where it never came up. It doesn't matter how many are spellcasters, since it just takes up one spell sitting in your potentially usable spells. If no spellcasters are encountered, you use those 3rd level slots on another spell. It's not like you have to commit to it taking up an actual spell like it would have in a prior edition when you chose all spells in advance.
  • 01:44 PM - Maxperson quoted Garthanos in post Counterspell what do people think?
    So you have seen it as becoming "must have" hmmm. It automatically shuts down spells of 3rd level or lower being used against you, and gives you a roll against the rest. Why would you not pick it and save your side damage, control, death, etc? You can even put it in a higher slot to auto shut down even higher spell levels.
  • 12:02 PM - Zardnaar quoted Garthanos in post Show me how to build a defender....
    This reminds me of the assertion that 1e had people playing with extra rows of polearm users in the groups There is a feat where ALL adjacent allies get +1 AC bonus due to your shield work. Phalanx Warrior It is subtle. But that is not a FEAT bonus so if a bunch of you had it. The entire group could be compounding with adjacent allies. That was me and yes we used AD&D pokearms in formation more than once. Henchmen.
  • 07:50 AM - Paul Farquhar quoted Garthanos in post Show me how to build a defender....
    Thanks to those who actually contributed on this thread without playing accusatory MMO games There is nothing wrong with MMOs using Taunt. It is a perfecly resonable solution to practical limitations of the game engine. The problem comes when you import it back into PnP, and hence simplify the far more sophisticated tactics the medium allows. This thread demonstrates it. In 4e you have ONE option for making a defender. In 5e you have many options. In 4e you have ONE option for making a leader, in 5e you have many options. In 4e you have ONE tactic that works in any situation. In 5e you need to employ different tactics depending on if you are in an enclosed dungeon or out in the open, if you are fighting brawlers, archers, wizards or flyers.
  • 07:36 AM - Flamestrike quoted Garthanos in post Show me how to build a defender....
    Parrying an attack against ones ally for that shield user might be... a somewhat different thought. You trade out your shield bonus to improve an allies armor class not your own... you no longer get the bonus till the end of your turn. There is a Fighting Style for that - Protection. Its an amazing Fighting style, that is often overlooked for Defence. At-will (uses your reaction) disadvantage to an attack against an ally is huge. A shield wall of 10 spear+shield guys with that Fighting style, in 2 ranks of 5 x 5, imposing disadvantage on all incoming attacks against each other. The guys in the front rank have between 3 and 5 adjacent allies with that fighting style (on either side, and behind them) each. Disadvantage is worth around -5 to an attack roll, and it reduces the chance of a crit from 1/20 to 1/400. It also negates sneak attacks; which while it doesnt happen often, is huge when it does happen. Im seeing Greek Hoplites in ranks wearing half plate (greaves, helm, breastplate) and...

Sunday, 21st July, 2019

  • 09:26 PM - FrogReaver quoted Garthanos in post Show me how to build a defender....
    Or go variant human I think. Interesting and a different take. Interestingly intricate level progression Makes me think of Conan almost ;) What would be your best level 5? To fully flesh out the defender idea. Variant Human with sentinel Barbarian 2 / Rogue Swashbuckler 3 Str 14 Dex 14 Con 16 Mental stats however you prefer You do 3d6+4 damage on your first hit and on an OA. You can either use a shield for a total of 19 ac (assuming best medium armor) You can dual wield for more sneak attacks (since you rage on first turn you don't need the dual wield feat to draw both weapons at the same time. You just draw your 2nd sword on your 2nd turn when you can use it) You can have a free hand and occasionally grapple an enemy If needed you are solid with a bow. Bonus action hide + sneak attack. The more important factor is this character will feel like a defender from level 1+
  • 08:24 PM - dave2008 quoted Garthanos in post So whatever happened to the Tactics Variant/Module or Whatever
    Which is why I mentioned that having a set of subclasses which supported roles yes like the 4e ones or split out an enhancer role separate from the leader role or a couple others which are definitely possible. I definitely that is an interesting way to do it. Makes it a lot easier in some sense. It was not expressed as a "requirement" in the sense that you were thinking. You act like it was a trap... But I am not even sure what you mean by tactical choices if they somehow entirely do not interact with roles. No I didn't see it as a trap. However, I am more personally interested in a simple 5e approach. A set of optional rules that would provide tactical options. These would sit on top of or along side existing rules. Possibly some alternate rules, but make them have as little impact on existing rules as possible. However, it is pretty clear to me that such a set of rules would not be what your looking for. I don't think it is possible for a simple set of rules to provide the depth ...
  • 08:16 PM - dave2008 quoted Garthanos in post So whatever happened to the Tactics Variant/Module or Whatever
    Ah I was kind of hoping you had some inspiration on that which I lacked to be honest. Sorry, no. I have no special insight. I personally don't have a need for a tactical module as my players are not tactically minding (even when we played 4e). However, i do find it interesting. I was hoping you had some ideas or at least an idea of what you considered a "tactical module" to be or perhaps a list of trait / abilities / actions that would make such a module.
  • 08:15 PM - Xaelvaen quoted Garthanos in post Show me how to build a defender....
    Hmmm.. I was just thinking that a reaction is such a commodity using it when the enemy might not even hit would feel lame. Ahh, now I understand. When we use this function, I just let the players know "Goblin is hitting squishy." They don't know the numbers, but know it will be a hit. Then the intervening person can decide whether or not to spend their reaction. They don't get to know if it is a Critical Hit, obviously - but it'll never be a wasted reaction. When it comes to those sort of things, I always believe in player agency. Never been fond of the 'disadvantage to the triggering attack' that the Shield style gives, so I'm a bit more lenient when I play rules-lite games I suppose.
  • 08:12 PM - dave2008 quoted Garthanos in post So whatever happened to the Tactics Variant/Module or Whatever
    You are being obtuse I told you that you could swap out the adjective for its opposite and the sentence and idea still sounds interesting why would you have ever assumed I meant the adjective was ? "important"? Explain how it even makes sense to look at the words I want to meet a fancy dancer and assume your can remove the word dancer and have it even be meaningful let alone important? Especially if they say it could even be NOT fancy. You acknowledged already that the combat part was probably assumed so somebody says battlefield roles and you ask is battlefield the important part (when I said even non-combat roles would be interesting)... for crying out loud yes damn it paying attention to roles and how they are supported by tactical choices is important because tactical choices almost automatically fall into roles based on what they accomplish recognizing there are roles allows your offering to have diversity and breadth. Didn't mean to upset you. Look, I don't know you and I prefer not ...


Page 1 of 92 123456789101151 ... LastLast

Garthanos's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites