View Profile: Garthanos - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 09:13 PM
    Question is does the design team actually understand the material well enough to change it or evoke what was liked about it and currently we keep getting all the signs of no not really *you dont make offerings of things that were barely background and just complained about by others if you are really after the previous edition audience you claim to be designing this for. You introduce easy...
    35 replies | 661 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Today, 08:56 PM
    To be fair, 4e was very much designed based on criticisms of 3e (and earlier) - 'static combat,' LFQW, 5WMD, CoDzilla, Sorcerers inferior to Wizards (heck, everyone but CoDzilla being inferior to Wizards), broken combos/exploits, broken spells, 'Rocket Tag,' /needing/ 20-level builds, whacked Epic-levels, lack of functionality outside the 'sweet spot,' burden of prep & difficulty of running for...
    35 replies | 661 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 08:41 PM
    Don't think your snark gets unappreciated...
    35 replies | 661 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Today, 08:38 PM
    It's in the DMG, it emphasizes the grid, including flanking, adds /facing/ of all things, and lets anyone mark (or maybe that's a separate variant?). Anyway, it credibly delivers the "grid dependence/tactical-boardgame" people who didn't like 4e complained about. They did seem to be working primarily from criticisms of 4e. 2 & 3 prettymuch go together. There also really was this...
    35 replies | 661 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Today, 08:21 PM
    5e does add back Marking in the tactical variant, but it's a case of turn it on and anyone can mark. So not too helpful. Standard Rules, Protection Style > Battlemaster, which has a maneuver or two that might help, you could also pick up the prime warlord-like maneuvers, too, while having the fighter's extra attacks and action surge. You'd be a primary-Striker, tertiary-Leader/Defender. ...
    17 replies | 217 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 08:12 PM
    I think well done homebrew is on the table
    17 replies | 217 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 08:01 PM
    Could you elaborate a Halfling who just wants to keep his friends safe sounds familiar
    17 replies | 217 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 08:00 PM
    The battlemaster had potentially but only gives an innadequate not quite. Mearles half done idea could actually have the seeds for a functional tactical warlord.
    17 replies | 217 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 07:51 PM
    Cavalier is evidently one of the things I have been overlooking... protection style is one of those sounds nice but eats too much by taking your reaction against an attack that you do not even know is going to hit? And once you start fighting enemies with multiple attacks, your Reaction from the style only works on the first attack. In 4e you could mark multiple opponents from level one...
    17 replies | 217 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 07:40 PM
    I flagged 5e for a reason and No a D&D character ;) I would like them to be able to protect progressively better No particular race but I like humans generally and martial classes.... though my Aegis Swordmage doesnt look like its going to happen
    17 replies | 217 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 07:32 PM
    And some are kind of innadequate like how second wind is very nearly un-used in 4e due to action economy and which is even more tied down in 5e. But it gets a variant? Thought i would double down on why the variant they presented isn't really even the interesting parts of Healin Surges Healing Surges in 4e A limit to healing albeit high limit to "commonly available" healing (no...
    35 replies | 661 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 07:28 PM
    That right there feels altogether too true though at the same time I wonder how that could happen
    35 replies | 661 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Today, 06:38 PM
    I meant it as non-specific and all-inclusive. I would absolutely include things like those things, in 'things.' The example was illustrative, not exhaustive. Now, if you want to get down to the level of experiencing system artifacts, sure, even freestyle, with no system to speak of could be said to have those, and they'd be different from an actual system. But, my point was not that...
    713 replies | 19985 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 05:35 PM
    I think people do not always get how over all structure contributes It kind of relates to 5e designers take on healing surges mentioned earlier.
    35 replies | 661 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Charlaquin's Avatar
    Today, 04:33 PM
    The strength of 4e’s monster design, IMO, was not in the design of its individual monsters, but in the way monster roles allows you to build dynamic tactical encounters more easily than in other editions. The individual monster designs were fine, good even, but in 4e one individual monster is only a fraction of what makes up a combat encounter.
    35 replies | 661 view(s)
    4 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 04:27 PM
    I am currently not happy with the options I have found so far. I might be missing something
    17 replies | 217 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Today, 04:06 PM
    These two accounts of 5e seem pretty congruent with one another. They remind me of a certain, fairly common, sort of approach to 2nd ed AD&D. I've also edited a post about half-a-dozen upthread having read these posts. EDIT: and I also just read this, which seems equally congruent with the other two posts:
    713 replies | 19985 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Today, 03:56 PM
    I don't understand. Are you saying that sometimes the GM has to ignore successful checks and treat them as failures because otherwise the players will win the game unfairly or too easily? That's a strange assertion, if it's the one you're making. I also don't understand what "combats that are unavoidable" has to do with anything. That's just more checks. If the player's dice are "hot" (as you...
    713 replies | 19985 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 03:55 PM
    Insert DM in the equation who doesn't have that 4e as a resource and you have a need for the obvious part of a tactical module. The thing is character abilities need to interact interestingly with monster abilities the ability to easily stand up from being prone is meaningless if nothing prones you. I do not see this stuff as operating in isolation.
    35 replies | 661 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Today, 03:41 PM
    An action declaration is a proposal that the fiction should include a certain content. For instance, I climb the wall is a proposal as to the content of the shared fiction, namely, that it includes the PC climbing the wall. I don't know what playing their character means here other than some improv acting. If the GM is deciding everything that happens, what else are the players contributing...
    713 replies | 19985 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 03:38 PM
    I find the accusation that people want it to be exactly the same is ummm insert something not nice. I mean really why not actually try to be better? 4e had some experiments later in the edition where a class could shift battlefield roles for instance swapping out your general fighting specialization dynamically. Not that they were totally locked down any way but explicit fluidity is good too.
    35 replies | 661 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Charlaquin's Avatar
    Today, 03:31 PM
    I didn’t expect them to succeed in making the edition able to be played like any other edition, but I did expect them to try, and I expected that some fans of each edition would be able to tweak the game in ways that they would enjoy, even if it didn’t perfectly replicate their edition of choice. I also expected that a lot of these modular rules packets would end up being DM-side, because the...
    35 replies | 661 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 03:27 PM
    That was a 192 page book... sounds pretty extensive.
    35 replies | 661 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Charlaquin's Avatar
    Today, 03:26 PM
    I don’t think anyone expected the game to be able to play exactly like each other edition. But I don’t think anyone took the promise of modular rules too literally. Early on they were quite explicit about the idea of modular rules packets that could be plugged in or removed to tailor the experience more to your group’s play style, and those never appeared, beyond the handful of optional rules...
    35 replies | 661 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 03:24 PM
    One of the appeals of the previous edition was it was very easy to DM...
    35 replies | 661 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 03:22 PM
    And some are kind of innadequate like how second wind is very nearly un-used in 4e due to action economy and which is even more tied down in 5e. But it gets a variant?
    35 replies | 661 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 03:17 PM
    You named one right there dude... do you really think you can go and change virtually every monster an easy fix to the game?
    35 replies | 661 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 03:15 PM
    Because increasing the tactical element of play interleaves with every class used and any combat spell and every monster in use. How many bits and pieces do you have to interact with just for one element is what makes it difficult? I already mentioned the bloodied condition I will point out more broadly why that example works. It can give us monsters who have tactically interactive abilities...
    35 replies | 661 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Today, 02:04 PM
    I see this as somewhat similar to what I posted upthread - that in AD&D there's no systematic way to put your connection to family on the line.
    713 replies | 19985 view(s)
    1 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Today, 12:38 PM
    I've highlighted you use of the word things. I think you're using it to refer to certain sorts of events in the fiction. The sorts of things that might be presented on a messageboard in the form of a transcript. In my post I was talking about experiences had by the players, at the table. The transcript - the in-fiction events - is one component of these. But does not exhaust them. To give...
    713 replies | 19985 view(s)
    1 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Today, 12:23 PM
    I guess I'm assuming that - or wondering whether - there is more that can be said than just It's my preference. That is, that it's possible to articulate why it's good. Upthread, Lanefan asserted that 4e's hp mechanic is flawed because it doesn't conform to his expectations for a hp mechanic. That's a pretty strong claim - that his way of thinking is better. Presumably there's something that...
    713 replies | 19985 view(s)
    1 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Today, 11:40 AM
    Action resolution in Burning Wheel (which can be ported to other systems eg Classic Traveller): * Intent and task action declaration; * Say 'yes' or roll the dice; * Success is success on both intent and task; failure is narrated by the GM by reference to intent and/or task as will keep things moving and maintain or increase the pressure; * Let it ride (ie results stand - no rerolls).
    43 replies | 1502 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Today, 11:35 AM
    Dredging up arguments do little good to this thread.
    123 replies | 7353 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Charlaquin's Avatar
    Today, 07:11 AM
    We’ve known the promise of modularity was an empty one since before the end of the playtest. Unfortunate, because 5e has a really, really solid mechanical underpinning that WotC just doesn’t seem to have any interest in experimenting with. There were some pretty cool variant rules in the DMG, and that was it. If you want any more tweaking than that, it’s 3rd party or nothing.
    35 replies | 661 view(s)
    1 XP
  • AbdulAlhazred's Avatar
    Today, 06:10 AM
    Right, there is really very little reason why you would NOT want that bonus. In any case most rangers are only going to have one HQ in play at a time, so they tend to focus fire. There is just not much to be gained by splitting up your attacks unless you're reduced to pinging minions with TS, which is a pretty silly thing to do in most cases (but stuff happens). As I said before Prime Shot is...
    27 replies | 1081 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 05:48 AM
    Quite honestly it seems like it would be prohibitively difficult to add on like a patch in the first place so I wasn't really expecting to see it. Just adding in the bloodied condition for its fantasy fighting pacing fun might be extensive let alone a broad tactical boost. 5e design paradigm seems to make it an extensive rewrite not a add on.
    35 replies | 661 view(s)
    3 XP
  • doctorbadwolf's Avatar
    Today, 05:43 AM
    You referenced out of combat speed as a problem. There are rules that cover most instances of out of combat running. It's...quite relevant. I'm not ever going to care, even a tiny little bit, about this sort of nit picking. You know what walking speed is. Pedantry is entirely useless.
    116 replies | 3032 view(s)
    0 XP
  • doctorbadwolf's Avatar
    Today, 04:52 AM
    But...that is the rule set for chases. It’s also strongly implied in the rules that exceeding your walking speed would be a function of a strength athletics check, which a strength fighter will be better at it unless the rogue is an expert, in the high case they should be better than the non expert. This only leaves normal combat movement speed dominated by rogues. Which doesn’t seem...
    116 replies | 3032 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 04:40 AM
    Except they needed doorways and extra rows of pikeman to do anything at all apparently AD&D was my first experience and I didnt see in home games or conventions much different sizes of party than I have seen in 3e and in 4e or 5e.
    108 replies | 2656 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 04:31 AM
    Row of pikeman... LOL you must have been gaming with entirely different people than me.. never saw once in my gaming career a row of pikeman in the party that sounds so heroic like the fighters are incompetent buffoons oh yeah they were. The infamous doorway let's play bugs bunny and pop one out so we always have one not everyone was only doing tunnel fighting nor thought it really needed to...
    108 replies | 2656 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Today, 03:41 AM
    Here is some rules text from Apocalypse World (which is one of the games Campbell was referring to), pp 12 and 194. The rule for moves is to do it, do it. In order for it to be a move and for the player to roll dice, the character has to do something that counts as that move; and whenever the character does something that counts as a move, it’s the move and the player rolls dice. Usually...
    713 replies | 19985 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 01:06 AM
    Not from the DM himself which is what we were discussing... a DM finding themselves now able to cut loose instead of faking it. This meant many 4e DMs were reporting more player kills than they ever had with any edition previously Yeh in a world of D&D caliber magic that isnt the guy standing in front its often the one with the pointy hat
    108 replies | 2656 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Today, 12:59 AM
    … see, that's not cynical, at all... (I shouldn't talk, I'm totally cynical.) TBH (not just cynical), denying that system makes a difference strikes me as pointless. Obviously, systems are different, and those differences can't be quite meaningless. Now, to turn around the prior cynicism: The "cost" can include no longer being able to abuse or leverage that lack of systematic...
    713 replies | 19985 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 12:59 AM
    Too expensive IMHO actually and Fighters have another resource there attacks... spend one of your attacks scanning your enemies for an opening you may use Int/Cha or Wisdom (or appropriate skill such as investigation, insight, deception) and your next attack vs that enemy can be as though you had a superiority die additionally add int/wiz/charisma.
    32 replies | 584 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:31 PM
    On the one hand, that's not really much of a perk. Most Combat Styles actually make you better at something than the next guy. If your INT is 16, this makes as good with a Rapier as the guy with DEX 16. ::shrug:: Maybe have the INT bonus add in some other way. Maybe just add it, rather than replace it? With some proviso about the type of weapon & enemy or something? IDK. OTOH...
    32 replies | 584 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:18 PM
    Now that I think of it, there were other references to Level /n/ Monsters here and there in 1e. Summoning for instance. And a whole little blurb about how they used the word 'level' for a /lot/ of different things that didn't necessarily correspond. Oh, yeah, but you could be subtle about it. DM's Screen hides a multitude of sins. One of the biggest things was the convention that...
    108 replies | 2656 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ryujin's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:09 PM
    I'd guess, based on one line in that trailer, we'll be seeing a "man's usefulness vs. machine" in this one.
    32 replies | 494 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:18 PM
    I added something to the fighter in both 4e and 5e that allows any mental attribute to be used as your initiative stat (call it battle ready). I would like tactical maneuvers for the Battlemaster as the next step similar to how the Battlemaster has Charisma mods
    32 replies | 584 view(s)
    0 XP
  • doctorbadwolf's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:07 PM
    If I had to choose between “flowing from form to form” and “actually being that animal with the monk’s mind and training”, I’ll choose being the animal. If there is a way to do both, even better.
    18 replies | 576 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:08 PM
    You mean the bonus if they are attacking the same monster as you?
    27 replies | 1081 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:03 PM
    Nods there is definitely that... but there is also how tactical you are willing to play the adversaries pulling your punches by having enemies play more than a bit dumb was pretty common back in the day 4e felt fair if that makes any sense.
    108 replies | 2656 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Yesterday, 07:08 PM
    I think it's important to keep in mind that 5e short rests resources are pretty pointedly /not/ encounter-based, the intended theoretical balance-point for encounters:short:long is 6-8:2-3:1, or about /two/ encounters between rests. And, that's in theory, in practice, it depends on how much time you have between encounters and whether you use a variant, like the 'gritty' variant that makes short...
    38 replies | 1419 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 07:03 PM
    Level appropriate is a bad word LOL
    108 replies | 2656 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:57 PM
    Sorry to riff off of just a couple sentences but... Seems like "informal practices" could be pretty varied and readily mutable (or set in stone, and violently defended, I suppose). If I'm following, that's an example of 'informal practice,' and - I'm really hoping - neither 'informal practice' nor 'GM stipulation' nor 'consensus roleplaying' have any extra-special...
    713 replies | 19985 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:27 PM
    You're not wrong about those being similarities, but they're not identical, and the play dynamic they generate can be /very/ different. The short/long rest distinction in 5e, for instance, is 1 vs 8 hrs, often time enough for one is time enough for the other, you just can't take more than one of the latter in a given 24 hr period - the design assumption is 2-3 short rest & 6-8 encounters per...
    188 replies | 12777 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:50 PM
    So you can get more XP than the next guy, pull ahead of him, and 'win' the game? That's not an entirely unfair characterization - I'd note that in 5e, XP does have an effect, in that the XP requirements to level relative to the XP value of a standard encounter budget, lead to faster leveling in Apprentice Tier, and after 11th level, and slower leveling through the putative 'sweet spot.' So...
    84 replies | 5302 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:40 PM
    OK, I had noticed you said something about auras, and now that definitely reminds me of an encounter in, IIRC, PoS, with Chillborn Zombies. In 4e, virtually all auras didn't stack when overlapping, but - wonders of exception-based design - a few explicitly did... ...and illustrated why they shouldn't've. ;) I can't recall exactly where, but I heard that 8 encounters was the original...
    108 replies | 2656 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:11 PM
    I suppose in 5e style false opening and taunt should be distinct one based on str/dex and the other based on cha
    164 replies | 5739 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Charlaquin's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:39 PM
    Oh, for sure. With any weapon, a stronger person with equal skill will be able to use it more effectively. This is why conceptually I like the idea of all weapons using Str for damage. Similarly though, proprioception and fine motor control are more important than raw muscle when it comes to winning the bind with pretty much any melee weapon. So conceptually, I think most if not all weapons...
    87 replies | 2829 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Yesterday, 12:43 PM
    But on your own account this isn't true. Because the GM can always narrate something else. As you're presenting it, all the players get to do is make suggestions that the GM may or may not follow up on. How is that possiby a success, given the declared action? It's obviously a failure - the PC has not got what s/he wanted (namely, incriminating financial documents). So when do the players...
    713 replies | 19985 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Yesterday, 12:42 PM
    There are certainly ways to adjust these things though, if "hitting" becomes too easy. I believe that the Fantasy AGE Companion provides some alternate rules (especially to address the oft-cited problem of HP bloat) and there is the upcoming Fantasy AGE Campaign Builder. That said, the Stunt points are fun. They add both additional chaos and tactical choice to combat. Plus, players in my...
    43 replies | 1502 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Yesterday, 12:14 PM
    That would not be the plan for it. I don't think that most campaigns last that long anyway. Nerf the monsters? I read elsewhere that the frighten/corruption/etc. rules were meant to balance higher level parties. If it's too much, in your experience, then maybe take it out? I don't plan on the grmidark insanity stuff anyway. I have a copy of DCC, and I can't say that I was impressed or...
    7 replies | 279 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:44 AM
    Yeah, this actually reminded me much more of the 5e Warlock, where you can pick Invocations related to one of your paths (e.g., Blade, Chain, Tome), but most are essentially class features of your choice. Part of the popularity of the warlock, IMHO, is in how it provides players with greater build and customization points.
    38 replies | 1419 view(s)
    0 XP
  • doctorbadwolf's Avatar
    Yesterday, 07:52 AM
    I say the following with no negative feeling or intention. This is completely irrelevant to the thread. I do not care about this sort of objection. Its a magical martial artist that can run up sheets of rain at level 9, and do other weird :):):):) before then, magically turning into a bear via Druidic magics that don’t care at all about mass and energy, and already allow a Druid to retain...
    18 replies | 576 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Charlaquin's Avatar
    Yesterday, 07:20 AM
    The funny thing is, strength is much less important for using polearms effectively than it is to using swords effectively, and much, MUCH less important than it is for rapiers. Turns out, most two-handed weapons don’t require that much strength to use, and polearms in particular are much more about precision, because the length means very small movements at the back end cause the tip to move very...
    87 replies | 2829 view(s)
    0 XP
  • doctorbadwolf's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:50 AM
    Thats really fun. I would say that it needs some amount of benefit that doesn’t require ki expenditure, or adds to a current use of Ki, to fit the other subclasses. This is one reason ppl don’t like 4 elements monks, for instance. (According to Mearls) edit: I don’t think that gaining better forms needs to cost more ki, tbh. Especially not fly speed. I’d probably also add Alter Self and...
    18 replies | 576 view(s)
    0 XP
  • AbdulAlhazred's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:41 AM
    Truthfully, the Beast Master build is NOT at all underpowered in a basic sense. The only issue it has is the lack of access to a certain set of highly potent feats. Beyond that, the lack of the TWF's larger off-hand weapon is trivial (.5 point of damage on a hit, not a big deal). The only other lack being access to a truly world-shaking PP like Battlefield Archer. So, you don't REALLY need to...
    27 replies | 1081 view(s)
    1 XP
  • AbdulAlhazred's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:23 AM
    Well, Xeviat, HoML does mostly group powers by source, though it doesn't really outlaw 'cross sourcing' by gaining boons which provide powers outside your source. In that sense source is a bit more 'thematic' than it is in 4e. Anyway, I think AoE damage IS control, very much so! However, I think wizards could profitably have gone much more in the direction of terrain effects, like walls and...
    26 replies | 834 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:21 AM
    Always remember never bother saving the bar maid just the princess because greed is good
    84 replies | 5302 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:47 AM
    When you say "always conceptually bugs..." you're possibly even righter than you know: that was a frequent criticism of D&D back in the day. Any number of games used 'more realistic' experience systems, including 2e, and all later eds, as a result. /Just/ gold for XP is an odd variant, usually you could get XP from combat, too, just maybe not the lion's share depending on how good you were...
    84 replies | 5302 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Yesterday, 12:43 AM
    It depends on how cunning the invading supernatural forces are, and how slow the modern society is to accept the reality of them. Come in quietly, reconnoiter invisibly, polymorph to infiltrate, and then charm/dominate/replace key people? Apart from some logistical concerns the world is yours, no one even notices. Encircle a major city with your undead horde, and cackle your demands for...
    39 replies | 1622 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Yesterday, 12:02 AM
    5e is definitely not bloated like 3e, for just one example. Also, it should be pretty obvious that 5e managed some faults of it's own that 3e didn't suffer from. Do I really need to argue something so obvious? Have tobacco companies gone out of business? Has global peace broken out?
    188 replies | 12777 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 11:55 PM
    Except magic in the source material /does/ follow patterns, they're just patterns in the unfolding drama of the narrative, not in the (non-existent) underlying reality of the implied 'magic system.' A gnome who can spin straw into gold - but not mind-control people, render himself invulnerable with shields of force, throw balls of fire, etc, etc, etc (so, y'know, not as powerful as a 5th level...
    20 replies | 493 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 11:17 PM
    Ha! Blatant Nerd Stereotype! …and true. Thank you, yes.
    713 replies | 19985 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 11:05 PM
    That's an issue, because we have no guide as to which of the various deadly monsters in TSR eds parties were supposed to face at a given level. We have decades of experience giving us a really good idea, but that's still all subjective, and it would tend to shift the game towards whatever desired level of lethality we were working towards...
    108 replies | 2656 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Charlaquin's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 10:48 PM
    Perfect, this is exactly the sort of thing I was looking for! Thanks. This, although not what I had in mind, is very cool. Very PbtA.
    5 replies | 215 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 10:14 PM
    Off topic - why not, after 6 years a topic can drift, right - say you were a ghoul in 4e. And say you were a /vegan/ ghoul. What do you do now, in 5e, that there are no more Wilden?
    73 replies | 13950 view(s)
    0 XP
  • doctorbadwolf's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 10:13 PM
    Just add strength score to movement for fighters if the problem is fighters being slower than rogues.
    116 replies | 3032 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 10:08 PM
    IDK, I read the article and the original thread and this one, and I feel like a very simple cogent point being made by said article is missed or ignored or bulldozed or something: Magic in traditional TTRPGs like D&D fails to model or evoke magic in the sources of inspiration they nominally draw from.
    20 replies | 493 view(s)
    1 XP
  • doctorbadwolf's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 09:34 PM
    Good points. I’ll think on it more and review he whole thing from the ground up again tomorrow.
    39 replies | 978 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 09:29 PM
    I should hope so, that's potentially some powerful drama there. (I'm picturing WWI, for some reason, not being too into the DitV setting.) Does the character conceive a death wish and get killed? Find a renewed reason to live and survive - or die tragically, or even heroically, in spite of that? Become a stronger person or descend into an emotional spiral - if the latter, how can he pull out...
    713 replies | 19985 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 09:11 PM
    Yeah, that's a given. 4e DMing was phone-it-in easy. I felt like I'd almost forgotten how to run after a few years. ;) But it's like falling off a bicycle. (something else it turns out I'm good at) And armed ones using iterative attacks, that got brutal, too. Published adventures varied quite a lot. With modern eds, you can compare how PCs stack up to the encounter guidelines. ...
    108 replies | 2656 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 09:09 PM
    I believe I said that. 5e didn't get rid of the things that were complained about, it put /back/ the things that those stalking-horses were really about. You have no idea. I'm a bitter, cynical, old man on my best day, discussing the most innocuous things. I turn it down to 11 when I'm here. Heh. Depends how you run it. 5e /brought back/ the faults of 3e - and, more importantly, those...
    188 replies | 12777 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Charlaquin's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 08:51 PM
    To be fair, it’s been like 20 years. During 3e I was a player and a minmaxer and I wanted Dex to damage so I could dump strength. Now I mostly DM and I want Str to damage so players have a reason to want it.
    87 replies | 2829 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 07:22 PM
    Seems right up FATE's alley, and something that could be touched upon in systems that model the character's psychology in some way (Hero, would be the one I'm most familiar with: psych lims), that can be tested (EGO roll) and change over time (changed around, or exp to 'buy down/off'). Certainly not with the same detail and play dynamics, of course... I didn't follow that, probably because I...
    713 replies | 19985 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 07:00 PM
    Sure but dont you figure it actually didn't require as much skill or art because EL delivered..
    108 replies | 2656 view(s)
    0 XP
  • doctorbadwolf's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 06:48 PM
    I’d love a remake of that classic game
    6 replies | 185 view(s)
    1 XP
  • doctorbadwolf's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 06:46 PM
    The DC calculation comment was not in reference to the PC making a check. I posited that the ability could instead force a Dex save from the new target. That DC would obviously be based on the PCs Dex. If if it’s possible every time, that is very powerful. It needs to be limited, and I don’t think that limiting it with the least fun method possible (setting the DC so that the success rate is...
    39 replies | 978 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 06:39 PM
    It's effing hilarious.
    38 replies | 1419 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Tony Vargas's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 06:34 PM
    Any chance your formative play experience with 4e included Keep on the Shadowfell, Thunderspire Labyrinth, and/or Pyramid of Shadows? (Because, while the middle one was actually mostly pretty good, each included at least one example of completely whacked encounter design.) ...or, y'know, alternately, maybe your DM just liked killing you... ;) Vs encounters run closely to guidelines,...
    108 replies | 2656 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
7,592
Posts Per Day
1.99
Last Post
So whatever happened to the Tactics Variant/Module or Whatever Today 09:13 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
78
General Information
Last Activity
Today 09:15 PM
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 offline

    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 14 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Saturday, 20th July, 2019



Page 1 of 14 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 89 123456789101151 ... LastLast

Saturday, 20th July, 2019

  • 08:56 PM - Tony Vargas quoted Garthanos in post So whatever happened to the Tactics Variant/Module or Whatever
    Don't think your snark gets unappreciated...To be fair, 4e was very much designed based on criticisms of 3e (and earlier) - 'static combat,' LFQW, 5WMD, CoDzilla, Sorcerers inferior to Wizards (heck, everyone but CoDzilla being inferior to Wizards), broken combos/exploits, broken spells, 'Rocket Tag,' /needing/ 20-level builds, whacked Epic-levels, lack of functionality outside the 'sweet spot,' burden of prep & difficulty of running for DMs, excessive impact of system mastery ('win' the game at chargen!), steep learning curve being a barrier to entry, Fighter SUX! (not just LF/QW/CoDzilla, lack of meaningful contribution out of combat, called out as natural 'party leader' & tasked with protecting weaker party members, but with 0 mechanical support for either), BAB & Rank disparities at high level making challenging specialists while including non-specialists virtually impossible... ...anyone wondering why 4e changed so much, mutilated so many sacred cows - it's because people just complained t...
  • 08:38 PM - Tony Vargas quoted Garthanos in post So whatever happened to the Tactics Variant/Module or Whatever
    So whatever happened to the Tactics Variant/Module or Whatever It's in the DMG, it emphasizes the grid, including flanking, adds /facing/ of all things, and lets anyone mark (or maybe that's a separate variant?). Anyway, it credibly delivers the "grid dependence/tactical-boardgame" people who didn't like 4e complained about. Honestly, I don't think the 5e designers were up to the task. Everytime I hear them talk about 4e I'm amazed by how little they get the appeal of 4e.They did seem to be working primarily from criticisms of 4e. What we were told and-or led to believe in the pre-playtest and early-playtest days were three things: 1. 5e would be 'modular', the intent being to limit or even eliminate knock-on effects to other modules when making changes to one 2. 5e would be designed with kitbashers in mind, such that a DM could - with more or less effort - massage the game into what she actually wanted to run 3. With enough kitbashing 5e could be largely made to play like any ...
  • 08:26 PM - Lanefan quoted Garthanos in post So whatever happened to the Tactics Variant/Module or Whatever
    You named one right there dude... do you really think you can go and change virtually every monster an easy fix to the game?Depends how fine-tuned you want to get with it. The 3e idea of templates might hold water here: tactical templates (say, a forced-move template or a marking template or a minion template or whatever) that you could then apply to whichever monsters you like and in whatever combination you like; without having to go in and change the write-up for every monster in the various MMs which, without question, would be tedious as hell.
  • 08:23 PM - MarkB quoted Garthanos in post So whatever happened to the Tactics Variant/Module or Whatever
    And some are kind of innadequate like how second wind is very nearly un-used in 4e due to action economy and which is even more tied down in 5e. But it gets a variant? Thought i would double down on why the variant they presented isn't really even the interesting parts of Healin Surges Healing Surges in 4e A limit to healing albeit high limit to "commonly available" healing (no healing if your subject is out except by dm controlled resources) Defenders and to a lesser degree melee combatants have more not just more hit points they need healed more often doing their fighting style and role. A resource spent in extreme exertion for skill use not just healing and sometimes by magic items and rituals adding this could be nice in a module Flavor wise putting the awesome in the character being healed as much as the healer proportionate healing - yes its kind of flavor too. (remember curing light wounds healed your low level character completely folks you were unconscious and dy...
  • 08:21 PM - Tony Vargas quoted Garthanos in post Show me how to build a defender....
    In 4e you could mark multiple opponents from level one using various abilities even when you weren't there to put the beat down and force the opening basically you could picture it as being scary intimidating enough to be a distraction5e does add back Marking in the tactical variant, but it's a case of turn it on and anyone can mark. So not too helpful. Standard Rules, Protection Style > Battlemaster, which has a maneuver or two that might help, you could also pick up the prime warlord-like maneuvers, too, while having the fighter's extra attacks and action surge. You'd be a primary-Striker, tertiary-Leader/Defender. If Feats are available, you can Sentinel, which is very like an eKnight's Defender Aura (better, really, not that that's hard), but, really, it doesn't synergize well with Protection, so pick another style - oddly, probably Greatweapon, because you might as well go for a reach weapon, as one of the functions of Sentinel is actually keyed off reach. That feat, alone, can m...
  • 08:19 PM - dnd4vr quoted Garthanos in post Show me how to build a defender....
    I think well done homebrew is on the table Well, I don't know how "well done" it is, but our Paladin has been using it and likes it well enough compared to other available oaths. I've edited the earlier post to include it. Let me know what you think.
  • 08:18 PM - Flamestrike quoted Garthanos in post Show me how to build a defender....
    The battlemaster had potentially but only gives an innadequate not quite. Mearles half done idea could actually have the seeds for a functional tactical warlord. For a Warlord: Battlemaster 3/ Crown Paladin 6/ Lore Bard 5 Other levels to suit. Feats: Inspiring Leader. Expertise: Persuasion, History Skills: Lots Ability Scores: Strength and Charisma You have: Protection fighting style (reaction impose disadvantage to hit an ally) Maneuvers: Rally, Commanders Strike, Maneuvering attack, Distracting strike Cutting Words (Rename to 'Warlords Aegis') Bardic Inspiration (Rename it to 'Warlords Inspiration') [+ Charisma to Saves] Aura Song of Rest - an inspiring speech - (use at the same time you're giving your inspiring speech with Inspiring leader] Inspiring leader Temp HP Champion challenge and Turn the Tide Spells (re-fluffed as Martial powers): Bless, Warding Bond, Compelled Duel, Command, Healing word, Heroism, Aid etc. Most of the above is either at will or keyed off a short r...
  • 08:04 PM - Flamestrike quoted Garthanos in post Show me how to build a defender....
    Cavalier is evidently one of the things I have been overlooking... protection style is one of those sounds nice but eats too much by taking your reaction against an attack that you do not even know is going to hit? And once you start fighting enemies with multiple attacks, your Reaction from the style only works on the first attack. In 4e you could mark multiple opponents from level one using various abilities even when you weren't there to put the beat down and force the opening basically you could picture it as being scary intimidating enough to be a distraction Cavaliers can Mark each opponent they attack from 3rd level onwards. Each marked creature gets disadvantage to attack anyone other than you, and if they deal damage to anyone other than you, you get a free attack against them (bonus action, bonus to damage, with advantage) on your next turn. Add on Sentinel for even more fun. They also then provoke an AoO from you if they attack someone else, AND they provoke one for moving away ...
  • 08:02 PM - dnd4vr quoted Garthanos in post Show me how to build a defender....
    I flagged 5e for a reason and No a D&D character ;) I would like them to be able to protect progressively better No particular race but I like humans generally and martial classes.... though my Aegis Swordmage doesnt look like its going to happen LOL don't know why I missed the 5E flag... Anyway, do you want only official options or can you possibly use homebrew? We use an Oath of Protection Paladin we made that might work well for you with some other feats/options you could take. Oath of the Protection Spells 3rd: Guiding Bolt, Sanctuary 5th: Prayer of Healing, Warding Bond 9th: Beacon of Hope, Life Transference 13th: Divination (Ritual), Guardian of Faith 17th: Flame Strike, Greater Restoration Channel Divinity: You gain the use of your channel divinity after a short or long rest. You gain the following two Channel Divinity options: Sacred Weapon: As an action, for 1 minute, you add your Charisma modifier to attack rolls made with a weapon of your choice (with a minimum bonus of +1)....
  • 03:41 PM - dave2008 quoted Garthanos in post So whatever happened to the Tactics Variant/Module or Whatever
    You named one right there dude... do you really think you can go and change virtually every monster an easy fix to the game? Yes, especially after playing 4e I have a wealth of easy options at my finger tips! To be honest, I lot of 4e monsters aren't as engaging as people claim. That being said, there was an excess of conditions and movement that could be fun. I find in 5e it is best to us straight 5e monsters for mooks and then dress up a boss with a few 4e-isms. Strikes the perfect balance for me and doesn't require much effort at all.
  • 01:23 PM - dave2008 quoted Garthanos in post So whatever happened to the Tactics Variant/Module or Whatever
    Quite honestly it seems like it would be prohibitively difficult to add on like a patch in the first place so I wasn't really expecting to see it. Just adding in the bloodied condition for its fantasy fighting pacing fun might be extensive let alone a broad tactical boost. 5e design paradigm seems to make it an extensive rewrite not a add on. Why do you think it would be difficult to add? Doesn't seem that hard to me. I guess it depends on what you are looking for. So, what would you want in a tactical module?
  • 06:10 AM - AbdulAlhazred quoted Garthanos in post Ranger: Beastmaster New Powers
    You mean the bonus if they are attacking the same monster as you? Right, there is really very little reason why you would NOT want that bonus. In any case most rangers are only going to have one HQ in play at a time, so they tend to focus fire. There is just not much to be gained by splitting up your attacks unless you're reduced to pinging minions with TS, which is a pretty silly thing to do in most cases (but stuff happens). As I said before Prime Shot is really THE significant give up to get Beast Master, and only because of the feat chain associated with it.
  • 05:04 AM - Zardnaar quoted Garthanos in post 2e, the most lethal edition?
    Except they needed doorways and extra rows of pikeman to do anything at all apparently AD&D was my first experience and I didnt see in home games or conventions much different sizes of party than I have seen in 3e and in 4e or 5e. No parties are similar size. I met a bit if power creep into the game to make up for it. Weapon rules in the RC, or DM allowed UA for 1st Ed, Fighters Handbook 2E. OSR adventures often have NPCs to rescue often with things like "if equipped NPC may serve as henchmen".
  • 04:41 AM - dnd4vr quoted Garthanos in post New(?) Fighting Style: Tactical
    First off, thanks to all for the responses! I love getting home from work and finding multiple posts. :) From some of the posts, I think there is some confusion maybe? The style default is to allow the Fighter to use his Intelligence modifier for attack rolls, not damage. Now, maybe those posts were addressing the optional house-ruled bonus action? We added bonus action or reaction abilities to all the fighting styles, so I included it for that reason. But my focus is on the main description of the Fighting Style. I added something to the fighter in both 4e and 5e that allows any mental attribute to be used as your initiative stat (call it battle ready). I would like tactical maneuvers for the Battlemaster as the next step similar to how the Battlemaster has Charisma mods We already house-rule Initiative can be a Dex, Int, or Wis check (player's choice). I think I would rather do something like: If you spend a round studying an opponent, you can add your int modifier (in addition to you...
  • 04:35 AM - Zardnaar quoted Garthanos in post 2e, the most lethal edition?
    Row of pikeman... LOL you must have been gaming with entirely different people than me.. never saw once in my gaming career a row of pikeman in the party that sounds so heroic like the fighters are incompetent buffoons oh yeah they were. Fighters are very good in OSR games. OD&D mentions party sizes of 20, 6 to 8 PCs plus Henchmen also allows for a lot more bodies. The expectation does seem to skew towards more bodies.
  • 01:59 AM - Zardnaar quoted Garthanos in post 2e, the most lethal edition?
    Not from the DM himself which is what we were discussing... a DM finding themselves now able to cut loose instead of faking it. This meant many 4e DMs were reporting more player kills than they ever had with any edition previously Yeh in a world of D&D caliber magic that isnt the guy standing in front its often the one with the pointy hat Party sizes were larger they often thought you would have a second rank of pikemen behind the Frontline. And you would bait people into 10' wide passages. I don't think many people okay 2E RAW phb only doing 1E adventures. If you do yeah it's harder than 1E.

Friday, 19th July, 2019

  • 11:18 PM - Tony Vargas quoted Garthanos in post 2e, the most lethal edition?
    Level appropriate is a bad word LOL Now that I think of it, there were other references to Level /n/ Monsters here and there in 1e. Summoning for instance. And a whole little blurb about how they used the word 'level' for a /lot/ of different things that didn't necessarily correspond. Nods there is definitely that... but there is also how tactical you are willing to play the adversaries pulling your punches by having enemies play more than a bit dumb was pretty common back in the day 4e felt fair if that makes any sense. Oh, yeah, but you could be subtle about it. DM's Screen hides a multitude of sins. One of the biggest things was the convention that many melee monsters would 'attack the greatest threat' or 'attack the strongest enemy' or something else that meant "Ignore that there's no mechanical way the Fighter can 'protect' his allies."
  • 07:46 AM - Raith5 quoted Garthanos in post 2e, the most lethal edition?
    I have heard DMs say in 4th they can go full out.... also a level +4 encounter is an acceptable encounter in 4e. Th DM has so much control over how dangerous things are by RAW the comparisons fail Agree. Different types of pacing within editions in addition to pacing across editions is an issue that makes comparisons really tricky. We had a lot of encounters in mid to high level 4e where were beyond level +4, if you had daily powers or even party synergised encounter powers on tap. We also used to also get really strung out in terms of long rests in 4e. We once went a whole level/ 8-9 encounters (when we were about 26th level) on one long rest, we had no daily abilities and about 3 healing surges left in whole party by the end. Good times.

Thursday, 18th July, 2019

  • 09:11 PM - Tony Vargas quoted Garthanos in post 2e, the most lethal edition?
    Sure but dont you figure it actually didn't require as much skill or art because EL delivered..Yeah, that's a given. 4e DMing was phone-it-in easy. I felt like I'd almost forgotten how to run after a few years. ;) But it's like falling off a bicycle. (something else it turns out I'm good at) Giants are a particularly odd case for the transition between 2e and 3e. Up close, thanks to the weapon bonus damage, crits, lots of hit points and Con bonuses, giants are generally more dangerous.And armed ones using iterative attacks, that got brutal, too. I think, if you ask "Which edition was most lethal?" that really asks - what percentage of characters did each edition actually kill? It has nothing to do with whether a 2e fighter could beat a 1e fighter, or otherwise comparing their stats to each other. It asks what power level characters were, *with respect to the challenges they were given*. Unfortunately, the real numbers are lost to us. Your best bet for a real fair analysi...

Tuesday, 16th July, 2019



Page 1 of 89 123456789101151 ... LastLast

Garthanos's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites