Tommy Brownell
Legendary Pubber
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2017
- Messages
- 3,982
- Reaction score
- 10,756
I AM a huge fan of lots of hair, so that's probably right.It's all about hair volume. They really knew how to volumize the hair in 2e.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I AM a huge fan of lots of hair, so that's probably right.It's all about hair volume. They really knew how to volumize the hair in 2e.
Does that mean you enjoyed those shirtless pics I sent you?I AM a huge fan of lots of hair, so that's probably right.
That's a great pic. I really like it.
Eh, Bryce is a great reviewer, but that’s he because he has very specific wants from a module, and why he dislikes something can be as much of a selling point as why he likes it. Back in the day, that’s why people who didn’t like Pundit still sent him stuff to review. By seeing the product through the specific lens of a detailed reviewer, you get a good idea of the product. I don’t care whether or not Bryce pans something, I care why he pans it.There is a ton of garbage out there, far too much for me to wade through. Have you taken a look at Ten Foot Pole? This guy reviews a lot of material and most of his recommendations are spot on.
The Death of Sturm is Elmore at his best.That's a great pic. I really like it.
I don't always agree with Bryce. For example, Bryce doesn't care for Jeffrey Talanian's adventures but every single one of them has been a big hit at my table. On the other hand Bryce (and everyone else in the OSR) gushed over Deep Carbon Observatory but my wary players didn't engage with any of the bait and skipped most of the content.Eh, Bryce is a great reviewer, but that’s he because he has very specific wants from a module, and why he dislikes something can be as much of a selling point as why he likes it. Back in the day, that’s why people who didn’t like Pundit still sent him stuff to review. By seeing the product through the specific lens of a detailed reviewer, you get a good idea of the product. I don’t care whether or not Bryce pans something, I care why he pans it.
Bryce likes weird and different, he equates that with “good”. But if you know that about him, then you can make great use of his reviews, even if you completely disagree.I don't always agree with Bryce. For example, Bryce doesn't care for Jeffrey Talanian's adventures but every single one of them has been a big hit at my table. On the other hand Bryce (and everyone else in the OSR) gushed over Deep Carbon Observatory but my wary players didn't engage with any of the bait and skipped most of the content.
Those two (Talanian vs DCO) were the exact examples that came into my head of where my tastes are very different from Bryce's.I don't always agree with Bryce. For example, Bryce doesn't care for Jeffrey Talanian's adventures but every single one of them has been a big hit at my table. On the other hand Bryce (and everyone else in the OSR) gushed over Deep Carbon Observatory but my wary players didn't engage with any of the bait and skipped most of the content.
Knowing a reviewer’s taste makes a world of difference most of the time. Heck, same goes with friends and their recommendations.Bryce likes weird and different, he equates that with “good”. But if you know that about him, then you can make great use of his reviews, even if you completely disagree.
Knowing a reviewer’s taste makes a world of difference most of the time. Heck, same goes with friends and their recommendations.
A pretty good video on the superior alternate proficency rules in the 5e DMG which I'm also a fan of but used the static bonus option instead of die.
He notes that they are in Shadow of the Demonlord but from what I recall the rule actually appeared first in 13th Age.
I made my own a while back by editing a pdf as I couldn't find one.Now I'm gonna have to scour the web for a skill-less D&D 5E character sheet, one that just has a space for me to write a Proficiency Dice.
If anyone knows a place I can find one, I would be appreciative, especially if it's a form-fillable character sheet
Wow, that was a quick response - this is along the lines of what I am looking for!
That's one's form fillable. You just need to download it first.Wow, that was a quick response - this is along the lines of what I am looking for!
I've just saved this in my files, thanks!
(I'ld love a form-fillable version of this if it is out there, but otherwise this is really cool )
ahh yeah, now I see!That's one's form fillable. You just need to download it first.
My main issue with the gritty realism rules are the way they interact with the recharge systems; classes benefit differently from short and long rests, and they disproportionately hit some of the long-rest recharge classes who already struggle with their class resources anyway (Barbarian, Sorcerer, Ranger) without really affecting the short or mixed classes at all. The game requires much deeper tweaks than just changing the amount of time a rest takes.Also lots of other great rules in the DM Guide as well, such as the Gritty Realism rule for Recovery, and the Lingering Injuries and System Shock rules.
I also don't mind the Plot Point rule, although I'ld probably only allow Option 1 for it, the one about adding a Plot Twist. The other two options are just a bit too swingy for my kinda game.
Generally if you're tweaking the rest rules it should be because you're already out of sync with the games expectations eg. you're doing something other than dungeon bashing and therefore you're struggling to ever get in more than one or two combats in a single day. So in that case, you're tweaking the rest rule in order to avoid overly benefiting the long rest classes.My main issue with the gritty realism rules are the way they interact with the recharge systems; classes benefit differently from short and long rests, and they disproportionately hit some of the long-rest recharge classes who already struggle with their class resources anyway (Barbarian, Sorcerer, Ranger) without really affecting the short or mixed classes at all. The game requires much deeper tweaks than just changing the amount of time a rest takes.
My main issue with the gritty realism rules are the way they interact with the recharge systems; classes benefit differently from short and long rests, and they disproportionately hit some of the long-rest recharge classes who already struggle with their class resources anyway (Barbarian, Sorcerer, Ranger) without really affecting the short or mixed classes at all. The game requires much deeper tweaks than just changing the amount of time a rest takes.
Yeah...but, most of these things are really not that hard to deal with.Yes. There are also many, many small and easily overlooked rules that can suddenly cause problems when you change the rest times. For instance, read the Animate Dead spell carefully. Assumptions like that one are buried everywhere and are a headache to adjust.
At this point, the short rest vs long rest design is one of my top irritants in 5e. I really hope they ditch it next time, it'll make changing rest length to de-emphasize daily combat a lot easier.
Doesn't that make Warlocks kind of insane? 50% more business is a lot of business.I made short rests free outside of combat but only two a day.
I even said "you don't need to tell me your taking it, just mark it down and keep going".
Anything to stop them talking about whether they should take them or not.
No not really. Two short rests is basically the expectation.Doesn't that make Warlocks kind of insane? 50% more business is a lot of business.
Hah, it's been a while since I ran 5E. It's early and I haven't had my coffee yet and I was thinking that two was one more than normal.No not really. Two short rests is basically the expectation.
The Warlock player mostly just complained about not having enough spell slots.
[...] The last few times I have run D&D 5E, I asked my players to envision their character's Background first, and their Class second; it is just so much more evocative, and gets away from the template feel of D&D characters.
Now this video has pointed out this Proficiency Dice rule with Backgrounds and Class; this works really well with how I like to run a game. Less bloat for something pulpy like D&D, I'm all for that. I'ld really like a D&D 5E character sheet without a Skill List on it, then I'ld use Proficiency Dice for actions based on Class and Backgrounds, then this is the way I'ld run the game. [...]
That's pretty much what I've done. It was partially inspired by AiME where long rests require safety so making friends and finding safe havens is more important. It makes it complicated enough that spiking a door and resting in a dungeon doesn't count as a long rest.The main issue with 'Gritty Realism' is that one week for a long rest is a ridiculous amount of game time and takes a lot of the strategic ability to make decisions about when to rest out of the hands of the players (disempowering them) while at the same time, by respresenting such a huge chunk of game time means the GM loses flexibility too. (Eg. if you're running a campaign where there's some kind of invasion going on and the players are running out of resources, it's both hard for the players to find time to take a rest and hard for the GM to adapt if they do. A week is a long time if there's an army flying through the countryside sacking towns and villages). And you can get all the benefits of restricting rests if you just say that it has be 36 hours (so a whole day and two nights) doing very little in a safe place.
For Warlocks, the key power is in your invocations and cantrips anyway. Your spell slots are a nice bonus which you should be careful about using anyway.Hah, it's been a while since I ran 5E. It's early and I haven't had my coffee yet and I was thinking that two was one more than normal.
If you count up spell slots at level, so spell levels cast per day, the Warlock is right on par with the other spellcasters, more or less, right up to 20th. It depends a little on what Invocations you take, but it works. I can see why people don't think so just looking at the class in the PHB. They just need to focus on maximizing the level output from each slot.
I don't think they are oversights. Warlocks are the "simple" magic-user (Like Fighters or arguably Barbarians are the "simple" martial class), Eldritch Blast is pretty much their main combat tool (If only the other cantrips had invocation trees, too...), so the spell was likely tuned with that in mind. WotC sometimes break balance curves where they feel it's appropriate (Fireball, for example, is stronger than it should be because it's an iconic spell), and I think this is another one of those examples.I always thought the lack of level restrictions in Eldritch Blast Invocation and EB's exception to the rule in multiclassing were terrible -- and easy to fix oversights.
Just off the top of my head you could easily re-write EB Invocation restrictions (or similar obviously complimentary Invocations) as each further one requires a tier step or two. That prevents obvious synergies from being too obvious, still allows diversity in what and when to take them, and prevents them from dominating the selection pool.
Always thought Warlock as a half-baked class. Fun ideas, "cake wreck" result, still enough sweet batter goodness to appeal to the less discerning.