Dungeons and Dragons Megathread

I know of at least four d20 systems/products (Dragonmech, d20 Mecha, d20 Future, the Arcforge playtest for Pathfinder) that allow you to be a mech pilot, but good I'm less certain about (especially since I haven't actually read the Dragonmech ones).
There was a Mecha Pilot class in D20 BESM, but that game was an unplayable mess that never should have been published. It seemed to have been written by someone completely unfamiliar with non-D20 RPGs who'd just heard of concepts like "combat skills" and "defense rolls" without any idea of how they worked.

Plain old d&D 3.5 has dozens of ways to simulate piloting a warbot with a little creative reflavoring.

Segregation of fluff and crunch, yo.
One could look at the various spells that make you bigger, stronger and less resistant to damage (Righteous Might, Polymorph, Form of the Dragon, Wild Shape) to figure out how to price a mecha as a magic item based on the bonuses it gives.
 
Also, for a Fighter with 16 Strength and 15 Con, who wants to put 4 of their stat upgrades in Strength and the fifth in Con, where would you put the Con one? First, at Level 4? Or third, at Level 12? One delays getting to Strength 18 and getting +4 melee attack bonus and damage until level 12, the other delays getting that retroactive extra hit point. I've got a feeling I should shoot for the extra hit point ASAP, but on the other hand, that 18 strength at Level 8 is calling me...
I assume you're talking 5ed - get str to 18 or better yet 20 by level 8. The 8-12 gap is very, very long in terms of XP compare to 1-8, and you don't wanna be sitting there with 16 str. It's only +2 to hit, but if your bounded accuracy caps out at +11, that's a lot.
 
I assume you're talking 5ed - get str to 18 or better yet 20 by level 8. The 8-12 gap is very, very long in terms of XP compare to 1-8, and you don't wanna be sitting there with 16 str. It's only +2 to hit, but if your bounded accuracy caps out at +11, that's a lot.
Oh, sorry, forgot to specify didn't I. No, not 5ed, Pathfinder - sorry for the misunderstanding. Does your advice stand?
 
Crumplepunch Homebrew: Ranger Rework
Hey, I finished the 5e ranger revision I have been working on for a while. Posted it elsewhere a few days ago but forgot to put it up here.



Notable changes:
Hunter's Mark as a feature rather than a spell.
Memorise-list spellcasting like every other divine caster.
Foe-Slayer is now a much lower level feature.

Thoughts would be very welcome.
 
Last edited:
I strenuously and extensively disagree, save for the fact that Pathfinder's popularity has enabled excellent third party developers like Dreamscarred Press (all hail) to rise and grow.
I don't find the lack of options in 5e appealing, I like spreadsheets and graphs for all the stuff I want to do *shrugs* to each their own.





[Pathfinder question]

So, finishing up Strange Aeons. I have a mechanics question, but spoilers because it involves the final boss. It's a balance question, so you don't need knowledge of pathfinder, just how balance works in d20 style stuff.

The players are going to become part Great Old One at the end. The Great Old One they stop, Xhamen Dor, is a living idea. Thanks to shenanigans that happened in the story, the players getting amnesia in the opening book, Im going to have the parts of Xhamen Dor in them become a part of them after they "kill" his main body.

I was planning to give each person 7 hit dice and change their type to aberration, thus diving up Xhamen Dor's hit dice by 4, but that seems like a little too much boost in power.

Three are martials, and one is a druid, so they're never going to be a top tier party, and thus I'm not too worried about balance. However, +5cr seems like a lot to give all at once.

Maybe only 4 or 5 hit dice, and have the "missing" bits of Xhamen Dor be something they need to hunt down?
 
Last edited:
Just giving hit dice is pretty boring. Yes, it boost your power - but ultimately, it's just more hitpoints, BAB, saves and skills, and no class features, which is pretty boring.
A creature-type change doesn't actually do much for PCs - mostly, you'll be immune to some spells that target humanoids.

If you want it to be interesting, give your players something akin to the Half-Celestial or Half-Dragon template instead. Make something up if need be.
That way, you give your players interesting new abilities instead of just raw power. You also get the option to give different players slightly different templates.

Outside of that, you can also go with the Corruption-rules from Horror Adventures - though be aware that RAW, those are written to sooner or later take characters away from the player, though that's not too hard to fix.

Or you can go for a combination - use a Half-X template (change creature type, add vision modes etc, some stat boosts, possibly some resistances, damage reduction and spell resistance), give some spell-like abilities that fit, and then give each player some effects from the corruption-rules without otherwise using the corruption-rules.
 
I've given them templates already, I mentioned those a few pages back in this thread.

I was just trying to find a way to build a plot hook (looking for the rest of the thing) in a way that they can't miss it.

They be managed to somehow avoid every post campaign plot hook ivrstuck into the game so far it's exasperating.
 
For naming my type of axe - I asked elsewhere, and the three best suggestions were (Dwarven) 'Telescopic Axe', 'Spring Axe', and 'Switch Axe'. I checked a Neo-Kuzdhul dictionary, and none of those were words (well, Spring was, but not regarding a coil of metal, mostly regarding the season), but there was 'extend' - 'mahathnud', and 'collapse' - 'asgurik', along with the rules for compound words (Kuzdhul is like German, you have a new concept? Combine some relevant words! Too long? Combine more words!), so 'mahathnudasgurik' literally means 'extend-collapse', but would roughly translate to 'telescopic', and while that's cumbersome, that's why non-dwarves use the Common translation!

So I'm going to go with 'Telescopic Axe', at least until the neo-Kuzdhul expert that I reached out to gets back to me on whether the words 'spring' and 'switch' exist with the relevant meanings.

Heh. Imagine this dwarf tells you his weapon is a switchaxe. You go 'that's a little weird', expecting like a switchblade-sized axe. Instead it's this massive two-handed thing that can extend to polearm size!
 
Personally, I'd have it be a Gnomish invention. Gnomish racial weapons tend to have the silly stuff like being extensible or super fast to draw. They can appreciate the versatility, too! And are more likely to actually be crazed enough with versatility to master the use of such a weapon.

Although if you have it be an Exotic weapon, may I suggest having the collapsed form be a Light weapon? That way, you go from a two-handed weapon to being able to duel-wield the weapon. Having an innate thrown range increment makes it have a nice niche use with the Returning magic item enhancement.

If I really wanted to make a weapon like this that's worth a feat for proficiency that isn't doing stuff found nowhere else, I'd have it be a double weapon that has crit-fishing stats on the Light form and have the two-handed form add an effective statline for much more general use on the other side.

Exotic double-weapons in general should have two statlines with entirely different priorities, like 2d4 17-20 x3 crit on one side and 2d6 20 x2 Reach and Trip on the other. Having the two modes be from shifting the weapon itself makes the idea of double weapons much harder to justify, but most double weapons are a single piece of metal doing both things.
 
I must say, with 5e I am quite pleased about WotC remembering their other D&D settings (Maztica and Zakhara look to be rolled up in Forgotten Realms looking at several recent books and the online poll, but even that is more acknowledgment than the past several years). If they go through with some more of the settings they were eying (like Eberron and Arthas) I'll be quite happy. Will save me a bunch of time trying to House Rule content from AD&D 2E to 5E.

Now if only the people behind encounter design, UA class design, and balancing weren't moving back 1-1.5 editions in terms of mindset. I'd really rather not return to the time of Must Take spells / abilities, must take party composition, must-possess equipment sheets / magic items, etc. Already seeing it in a couple CR evaluations / "balanced" UA archetypes.
 
I must say, with 5e I am quite pleased about WotC remembering their other D&D settings (Maztica and Zakhara look to be rolled up in Forgotten Realms looking at several recent books and the online poll, but even that is more acknowledgment than the past several years). If they go through with some more of the settings they were eying (like Eberron and Arthas) I'll be quite happy. Will save me a bunch of time trying to House Rule content from AD&D 2E to 5E.

Now if only the people behind encounter design, UA class design, and balancing weren't moving back 1-1.5 editions in terms of mindset. I'd really rather not return to the time of Must Take spells / abilities, must take party composition, must-possess equipment sheets / magic items, etc. Already seeing it in a couple CR evaluations / "balanced" UA archetypes.
How would you say they're remembering non-faerun settings? Because that's my biggest bugbear with the edition at the moment. Outside of a few token UA's and a conversion fo the first Ravenloft adventure they basically haven't.

Also they've stated they don't try too hard to balance UA stuff before release - it isn't official and its apparently easier to nerf something than to buff it. They also never look at multiclassing for UA material, so keep that in mind.
 
*immature jokes about the succubus having loot in her ass*
"Enough balls to dress up a Christmas tree with
"Bigger on the inside than on the outside."
Me: "so it's like a TURDIS?"

Why did I get zapped by a lightning bolt out of nowhere? :(
 
Personally, I'd have it be a Gnomish invention. Gnomish racial weapons tend to have the silly stuff like being extensible or super fast to draw. They can appreciate the versatility, too! And are more likely to actually be crazed enough with versatility to master the use of such a weapon.

Although if you have it be an Exotic weapon, may I suggest having the collapsed form be a Light weapon? That way, you go from a two-handed weapon to being able to duel-wield the weapon. Having an innate thrown range increment makes it have a nice niche use with the Returning magic item enhancement.

If I really wanted to make a weapon like this that's worth a feat for proficiency that isn't doing stuff found nowhere else, I'd have it be a double weapon that has crit-fishing stats on the Light form and have the two-handed form add an effective statline for much more general use on the other side.

Exotic double-weapons in general should have two statlines with entirely different priorities, like 2d4 17-20 x3 crit on one side and 2d6 20 x2 Reach and Trip on the other. Having the two modes be from shifting the weapon itself makes the idea of double weapons much harder to justify, but most double weapons are a single piece of metal doing both things.
Well, I'm using the official weapon design rules, and all that allows for is gaining and losing the Reach property. It's an Exotic weapon mainly because the Longaxe is, since the extra Design Point you get by going Exotic is immediately taken up with making it Dwarven.

As for it being Dwarven rather than Gnomish, I'm roleplaying it as my character considering combat his craft, knowing that to be the best craftsman you can you must know your tools, and thinking the best way to know your tools is to build your tools. That's why he started thinking about building gear - it's become a thing where he wants to build or be involved in building all his weapons and armour, at least the stuff he's intending on using a lot. Then, thinking about the tactical disadvantages a lone fighter has wielding a polearm, as opposed to the more disciplined ways of fighting the Home Guard use - he's spent a lot of time guarding his family's caravans, so has had to fight a lot of skirmishes where a disciplined pikewall wasn't the best option - and realising that some of the Gnomish inventions he saw in his travels have some merit to them. So basically it's a Dwarven take on a Gnomish idea, stripped of all the frippery and made as practical and mass-producible as possible - given a certain level of skill in craftsdwarfship, which you can take almost as granted with most dwarves. Thus, no other special properties, no odd damage types or abilities, just as hard-hitting a weapon as possible, that can solve the 'doughnut' problem that most independent polearm fighters face.

And I've decided to call it a 'Switch Axe', which while the Neo-Kuzdhul dictionary I am using doesn't have 'switch', it does have a variation of 'change' that works, and could easily be translated as 'switch'. So, Abrat Axe it is! Or, if I use the NK word for 'Axe', 'Abrat Bark' (changer axe), or possibly siginbark instead of bark for 'two-handed axe', or even '(sigin?)barku-abrut' for '(Two-handed?) Axe of Change'

So, either:
  • Abrat Bark = Switch Axe (lit. Changer Axe)
  • Abrat Siginbark = Two-handed Switch Axe (lit. Changer Two-Handed Axe)
  • Barku-abrut = Switch Axe (lit. Axe of Change)
  • Siginbarku-abrut = Two-handed Switch Axe (lit. Two-handed Axe of Change)
And now I just need to pick one of those four. Any preference, guys?

EDIT: Picked one! Abrat Siginbark = Two-handed Switch Axe (lit. Changer Two-Handed Axe, or Two-Handed Changer Axe if we're more grammatically correct)
 
Last edited:
I must say, with 5e I am quite pleased about WotC remembering their other D&D settings (Maztica and Zakhara look to be rolled up in Forgotten Realms looking at several recent books and the online poll, but even that is more acknowledgment than the past several years). If they go through with some more of the settings they were eying (like Eberron and Arthas) I'll be quite happy. Will save me a bunch of time trying to House Rule content from AD&D 2E to 5E.

Now if only the people behind encounter design, UA class design, and balancing weren't moving back 1-1.5 editions in terms of mindset. I'd really rather not return to the time of Must Take spells / abilities, must take party composition, must-possess equipment sheets / magic items, etc. Already seeing it in a couple CR evaluations / "balanced" UA archetypes.
Considering Maztica as originally released was fairly clearly rolled up in the Forgotten Realms (leaving aside being on the same planet the starting point for Maztica's releases was Faerûnian colonialism, up to actual Faerûnian colonies being established in the default now of the Campaign Set) in a way Zakhara or Kara-Tur weren't, it doesn't seem strange for that particular subsetting to just be treated as part of the Realms in the same way Chult is just as much part of FR as Ruathym is.
 
Last edited:
Considering Maztica as originally released was fairly clearly rolled up in the Forgotten Realms (leaving aside being on the same planet the starting point for Maztica's releases was Faerùnian colonialism, up to actual Faerùnian colonies being established in the default now of the Campaign Set) in a way Zakhara or Kara-Tur weren't, it doesn't seem strange for that particular subsetting to just be treated as part of the Realms in the same way Chult is just as much part of FR as Ruathym is.
True: While geographically Maztica is arguably further than either of those, lore-wise it always has been more of a "Forgotten Realms visitors to the country" thing. That said in 5E I don't think they have any intention of setting a game in Maztica or Zakhara in and of itself so much as acknowledging their existence, but even that is acceptable (and, possibly, for the best considering some of their poorly aged aspects).
 
Now if only the people behind encounter design, UA class design, and balancing weren't moving back 1-1.5 editions in terms of mindset. I'd really rather not return to the time of Must Take spells / abilities, must take party composition, must-possess equipment sheets / magic items, etc. Already seeing it in a couple CR evaluations / "balanced" UA archetypes.
Adding to what shepsquared said about balancing, we'll honestly see how well they're doing come November when Xanathar's Guide to Everything is released; that'll be their first official release of much of the UA material, and it'll tell us how exactly they're moving forward with 5e's design.
 
Adding to what shepsquared said about balancing, we'll honestly see how well they're doing come November when Xanathar's Guide to Everything is released; that'll be their first official release of much of the UA material, and it'll tell us how exactly they're moving forward with 5e's design.
And if they fix some of the blatantly terrible stuff that's been pushed into the UA in the last year or so. *eyes the wizard UA*
 
How would one run a CE character who is that way because they were slaves, and the only thing that helped them was power from some CE demon lord? It'd be kind of like full on nihilism, right, freedom by realizing nothing matters? Or is that too neutral evil?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top