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

Basic Information

Age
35
About SatanasOz
Location:
Wellington, New Zealand
Sex:
Male
Age Group:
25-30
My Game Details

Details of games currently playing and games being sought.

Country:
New Zealand

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
36
Posts Per Day
0.01
Last Post
Conversion help - critique my stat blocks for Cormyr: Tearing of the Weave Sunday, 18th November, 2018 05:31 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
3
General Information
Last Activity
Thursday, 23rd May, 2019 07:33 PM
Join Date
Tuesday, 10th March, 2009
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0
My Game Details
Country:
New Zealand
No results to show...

Tuesday, 13th November, 2018

  • 09:24 PM - Quickleaf mentioned SatanasOz in post Conversion help - critique my stat blocks for Cormyr: Tearing of the Weave
    SatanasOz Shadowslain Lizardfolk Defensive CR = 1/2 effective HP = 27 + 15 from Weave Drain (which is like Regeneration 5) = 42 AC 15 Offensive CR = 2 DPR 10 Attack +5 Total CR = (0.5 + 2) / 2 = 1.25 You're within rights to round up to CR 2 if you feel Weave Drain merits it. Checks out. Shadar-kai Defensive CR = 1 HP = 17 effective AC = 15 + 4 saving throws + 1 shadow jaunt/hide in plain sight (like one round of goblin's Nimble Escape) = 20 Offensive CR = 2 DPR = (8 + 8 + 13) / 3 = 9.7 Attack = (4 + 4 + 9) / 3 = 5.7 (I'll say +5) Total CR = (1 + 2) / 2 = 1.5 Making it CR 1 seems like a good choice. Checks out. Kithguard Marran Defensive CR = 7 effective HP = 55 + 18 (Uncanny Dodge used three times against an attack dealing 12 damage) = 73 effective AC = 16 + 4 saving throws + 4 Cunning Action (like goblin's Nimble Escape) + 1 (combined effect of Hide in Plain Sight, Evasion, and Shadow Jaunt) = 25 Offensive CR = 5 DPR = (20 + 10 + 10) / 3 = 13.3 ...

No results to display...

Wednesday, 14th November, 2018

  • 07:01 AM - Tormyr quoted SatanasOz in post Conversion help - critique my stat blocks for Cormyr: Tearing of the Weave
    Charisma would also fit, due to the whole "force of personality" concept behind the attribute. They resist by sheer gall. Would make it tons easier for the PC in my particular game, though. The affected casters are a bard and a warlock. That is why I went for con - the attribute also linked to concentration saves. Hmm, tough one. I might go for DC 10 cha saves then. The effect is a clue to the ultimate BBEG of the adventure and should feel scary (and drive the PC to put some effort into avoiding it). Gosh, the 3.5 Version was really brutal (no save). I will sleep about it for a night. For now, I am drifting towards making it a DC 11 con (8+2+1) on the prime material and a DC13 (with 2x proficiency) on the Plane of Shadows - since that is where a dead magic zone is being created. There isn't anything stopping you from changing its charisma score. 3.5 and 5e undead often have drastic differences in the last 3 ability scores.

Tuesday, 13th November, 2018

  • 11:47 PM - Quickleaf quoted SatanasOz in post Conversion help - critique my stat blocks for Cormyr: Tearing of the Weave
    Thanks heaps for that already. Sounds good then. I think i might tune down Kithguard Marran a little bit then - maybe 8HD and bring the main weapon attack in line with the ranged to a +7 (ignoring the magic weapon). I see the proficiency in all saves adds a lot to the defensive CR calculation, but I am not quite sure how else to simulate or convert the Gal-Ralan item from 3.5 (bracers giving +1 to +5 to saving throws. This character had the +2 version originally). I like the fluff - that they are wearing enchanted bracelets to "keep the soul from slipping back into the plane of shadows" and would like to have some element carried over into the stat block. Final question for Quickleaf: Is there a calculator you are using for these breakdowns, or just quick math by hand based on the guidelines? I've heard there are calculators out there, but I don't use them. I have lots of experience converting & DMing, and I trust myself more than any calculators. I use the DMG page 274 guidelines as...
  • 09:53 PM - Tormyr quoted SatanasOz in post Conversion help - critique my stat blocks for Cormyr: Tearing of the Weave
    Thanks heaps for that already. Sounds good then. I think i might tune down Kithguard Marran a little bit then - maybe 8HD and bring the main weapon attack in line with the ranged to a +7 (ignoring the magic weapon). I see the proficiency in all saves adds a lot to the defensive CR calculation, but I am not quite sure how else to simulate or convert the Gal-Ralan item from 3.5 (bracers giving +1 to +5 to saving throws. This character had the +2 version originally). I like the fluff - that they are wearing enchanted bracelets to "keep the soul from slipping back into the plane of shadows" and would like to have some element carried over into the stat block. Final question for Quickleaf: Is there a calculator you are using for these breakdowns, or just quick math by hand based on the guidelines? I have an Excel spreadsheet in the downloads section that I use for all my creature creation. http://www.enworld.org/forum/rpgdownloads.php?do=download&downloadid=1189

Sunday, 31st August, 2014

  • 12:40 PM - Plaguescarred quoted SatanasOz in post How many spell slots ... (multiclass & Arcane Trickster)
    It is not 100% clear if only the levels in a class for which you have chosen the magic archetype count towards that of if both count once you have one of these.If you don't have the Spellcasting feature from more than one class, you don't follow MC rules for Spell Slots determination; PHB164 Spellcasting: Your capacity for spellcasting depends partly on your combined levels in all your spellcasting classes and partly on your individual levels in those classes. Once you have the Spellcasting feature from more than one class, use the rules below.

Tuesday, 29th October, 2013

  • 02:27 PM - Kobold Stew quoted SatanasOz in post Small races overly disadvantaged?
    old official answer to the question. if that was their intent, did they succeed for the Gnome (yet)? I've not played a Gnome in Next yet, but it reads better than previous editions, in my eyes. There are fun distinctive abilities and a number of potentially viable builds.
  • 06:11 AM - Meatboy quoted SatanasOz in post Small races overly disadvantaged?
    :) - well spotted sir. I see the point of measuring from the corners, but ATM I am more looking for guidance on a more mundane issue: How to have a small ranged fighter that is not strictly worse? Reading up on another thread though, I have to revise my earlier comment a bit about older editions. 3e had it the other way around in some situations. A small caster would be mechanically better (getting the ac bonus, but not being hampered by weapon choice / str). Its a tough question, in 3e, I'd say use a light crossbow as I'm fairly certain even small races can use that. Or if you consider dwarves as small use them as they have no sized based weapon restrictions and are just generally awesome. Halfling with throwing weapons and rapid shot/two weapon fighting/quick draw can be pretty fun. Still not sure if it's legal but they can put out quite a few attacks per round maybe not super optimal but probably viable in standard groups. for 4e "fighter" is a much looser term. I stopped playing before I ...
  • 05:55 AM - n00bdragon quoted SatanasOz in post Small races overly disadvantaged?
    A small caster would be mechanically better (getting the ac bonus, but not being hampered by weapon choice / str). Clearly the smaller characters should have lower mental stats to reflect their smaller brains then.
  • 05:52 AM - Kobold Stew quoted SatanasOz in post Small races overly disadvantaged?
    How to have a small ranged fighter that is not strictly worse? For a halfling (ranged) fighter, you swap on avg. 1 point damage per round in exchange for Lucky, Halfling Nimbleness, and Naturally Stealthy.

Monday, 28th October, 2013

  • 08:30 PM - MJS quoted SatanasOz in post Small races overly disadvantaged?
    Thank you all - glad for all your thoughs on this. I hope this comes up in the internal math / balancing discussions and gets somewhat rectified before the releas. For my current game though, I'd have to see. I like the simulationist touch of having negative consequences from being small, but I also want it some counterbalance from the gamist perspective. Else, this feels to much like the "wrong" choice to make and locks Gnomes and Halflings out of another archtype. Maybe a weapon specialisation like the halflings, or I drop the "heavy" category for large weapons. *muse* I think the heavy crossbow is the answer here. The longbow is out - their arms are too short - but the heavy crossbow, if they can crank it, and lift it, they should be able to use. You might also allow some gnomish innovation, if thats how they're portrayed in your campaign - a Gnomish bow, larger than a short bow, smaller than a longbow, engineered especially for their size - just kick the rules in the ass wherev...
  • 06:06 PM - MJS quoted SatanasOz in post Small races overly disadvantaged?
    Hi all, Something that made me think about small races: Today we had a character creation session, and one of my players wanted to play a Gnome ranged fighter. Doing the math and getting ready I was surprised to realize that she got punished for her size twice. a) being slow, shared with the dwarf b) ban to use high damage (Heavy) weapons in a meaningful way So my question I guess: Is there any advantage to offset the two disadvantages form being small? Are their racial abilities supposed to make up for it? Or is this a relic form older editions? In 3e, you got the AC bonus to offset this a little. 4e just made everyone the same. Just to make this clear, this is not a question about realism or whether halflings and gnomes should be able to wield longbows. This is just a question about the gamist side of things: Are small races punished for flavor reasons without a mechanical offset? Gnomes in 1E get: - infravision - defense bonus vs. giant class creatures - special abilities in ...
  • 11:54 AM - n00bdragon quoted SatanasOz in post Small races overly disadvantaged?
    4e just made everyone the same. Ugh. If you must know 4e had these very same abominable rules. Short races moved 5 squares while most other races moved 6 and elves moved 7. Also short races couldn't use two handed weapons designed for medium-sized creatures (they could use smaller crappier versions of the same though).
  • 11:25 AM - Paraxis quoted SatanasOz in post Small races overly disadvantaged?
    Just to make this clear, this is not a question about realism or whether halflings and gnomes should be able to wield longbows. This is just a question about the gamist side of things: Are small races punished for flavor reasons without a mechanical offset? Simply put YES. There is no mechanical bonus to being small, like having a +1 to AC or anything. The DM can use narrativist and simulationist implied bonuses to make up for this but nothing is spelled out in the game. For example it should be easier for that gnome ranger to find cover and concealment then a medium sized character, a small shrubbery is a good hiding spot for someone 3' tall but not 6' tall. NEXT has taken a giant leap backwards in gamist design. I don't like that aspect of it, I wish they would worry more about the math and checks and balances like this to make all race/class choices valid but they don't.

Monday, 22nd April, 2013

  • 03:46 PM - Sadrik quoted SatanasOz in post Spellcasting Bonus: can't we just lose it?
    The force of your argument thins out at the end quite dramaticaly. Silly? As silly as pretending to be an elven-wizard shooting rays? In the end, I think we should leave it to the wizard players reporting playtest feedback. In this particular case, it seems like quite the either / or thing. Some player like to roll more themself, some like the mental image of auto hit spells. The math should be the same anyway. Majority makes the rule here - I hardly think the fun of play hinges entirely on this one fact. I can buy the idea of consistency. All spells as to hit a save score vs effect OR to save against effect. In fact, I think 5e should have a module for putting attacking saving throws but it should also use saves. Where my conflict is, I like spells that auto-hit. Need to touch someone for shocking grasp, auto-hit. Need to shoot finger of death ray, auto-hit. Need to launch a fireball at square X 200 feet that away, auto-hit. Really the key for spells in my mind is save vs. effect. Now if you...

Friday, 19th April, 2013

  • 01:57 AM - I'm A Banana quoted SatanasOz in post 4/18/2013 D&D Next Q&A
    You constructed quite the corner case here. Golems are discribed as quite rare. But whatever the case, if the DM feels like that kind of adventure is fun to play than it is his responsibility to adjudicate. Knowing his players, he can either acept it, an thus create a tough challenge for the wizard player (maybe that is the whole point for the BBEG to have such defenders). Or he can Throw them a bone and, for example, hand out the ring of "golem immunity disruption" and be done with it. A great DM might combine those two, creating an atmosphere of dispair for the Wiz in the beginning, and than carefully allowing them to gain such an advantage and thus increasing the sense of empowerment and accomplishment for the whole gang. However, none of these options are valid if there just is no immunity or such things and every mob in the book is crafted as a level appropriate challenge for x players of y. So, "golems are supposed to be rare!" isn't going to be a very good defense. In a particular DM's ...

SatanasOz's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites