Search results

For me it's beserker, which ties into their key ability: the Beserker Rage

I'd recommend switching to max damage for enemies. It really does wonders for the devil may care attitude and it Makes Monsters Scary Again(tm). I appreciate your wanting to install a cap however. If I were to do it, I'd likely cap HP at level 10, which I think would be about a sweet spot for me.

Yes to both except for one thing. I hate the D&D ism that a buckler was strapped on the arm. It's not an arm guard. It's held in the hand and was used to punch as often as not. So i would assigned it as an offhand weapon, maybe 1d3 bludgeoning. On the tower would be tempted to make it -10 with...

Disagree. What's more fun for me is the story. More time in mechanics and adding up numbers detract from the fun. So a number is neutral for me, while an extra die is a hindrance to fun.

I prefer quick resolution, so a fixed number works better for my goals. Too many dice rolls and adds can really slow down game play.

My never-gonna-happen preference for 5e would be Might - Strength + Constitution combined Agility - AC, dodging, acrobatics and the like Dexterity - to hit with ranged and finesse weapons, sleight of hand, all other handy stuff Wits - Intellect, convincing, perception, insight Will -...

I've been through a few list variants myself. I would most likely remove animal handling and medicine and just put them under nature. I'd actually remove deception and add convince as a skill. Then you can use convince (usually with INT) if you're trying to sway someone with logic, or...

I have a few in a one note folder. Main ones: Players roll defense. Monster damage is fixed at max damage. No inspiration. Instead each PITBF can be used to gain advantage on a roll that relates to that PITBF once per day per item

Definitions are funny things. I am into "Iron Sports" as a hobby, and among exercise scientists, there are arguments about how many types of strength there are. A typical definition is 4, although some go up to 7. Give that professional sports scientists have different definitions for strength...

Just googled the coldest inhabited place on earth. Omyakon in Russia averages below -40F for 5 months of the year and maxes out at 43.2F in summer. Record lows are -89.9F (-67.7F) Their outhousesdone have pipes because the water freezes and vodka even will freeze if left outside. Not the kind...

Nothing scares a party more than a bunch of brute running past the front line straight to the casters!

I make them at every opportunity.

I am always baffled by the viewpoint that removing ASIs make races a blank slate. Do people really not see the other racial features as defining? I've had a half-orc wizard, and I cam tell you that relentless endurance saved his butt more times than I can remember!

Unfortunately that's not what a shadowrun adept does. It's not really a monk. More of a warrior with melee battle spells.

They can use infernal and celestial hand signals. They're mostly a combination of inappropriate and comforting gestures.

Not really a no magic, but id love to see a melee sorceror without spells in the vein of a shadowrun adept.

I've seen a lot of conversation on the racial ASI topic on this forum and I wanted to say my piece. Many people see no problem with ASIs as it relates to entirely different species. It's seen as accepting why a gazelle is more dextrous than an ape, but the ape is stronger. I understand this...

I've made a hack attempt at 5e without ability scores, and if I ever wrote a newbie heartbreaker, that's the first thing I'd do.

Or a barbarian or monk!

Honestly I'm tired of trotting out the argument that a race is more than it's ASIs. Some people are convinced that it's true. Other's talk about racial features. I'm looking forward to the change.