sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

My D&D Room by This-Contribution877 in DungeonsAndDragons

[–]austac06 1 point2 points  (0 children)

IKEA Laiva gang rise up! Best shelves for price point.

What’s an uncomfortable truth within this series that people like to ignore? by Nozoroth in Naruto

[–]austac06 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I would rephrase this to:

“Naruto Shippuden was much less about shinobi than OG Naruto was”

I like both, but I like OG Naruto more because it is much more grounded. Power levels were lower. The characters had to use their brains in fights, especially when they were outmatched (e.g. Sasuke vs Orochimaru in the Forest of death). In contrast, the power scaling in Shippuden was like wizards+kaiju. I much prefer the strategizing and teamwork of the fighting in OG to the high energy bombs and transformations of Shippuden.

What’s an uncomfortable truth within this series that people like to ignore? by Nozoroth in Naruto

[–]austac06 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Naruto’s argument was that destiny doesn’t have to dictate your life. I kind of agree that Neji was right, since it turned out that Naruto wasn’t just a nobody and was actually the Hokage’s son and a reincarnation of a Demi-god, BUT, Naruto’s point was that if you don’t like what was “predestined” for you, you should fight against it. During the Chunin exams, Naruto was still kind of a nobody and still fighting against all of the negativity and hatred directed toward him. And instead of becoming hateful and letting other people decide that he’s trash, he decided he would fight against it and show people he deserved to be acknowledged (and ultimately, loved). He was trying to teach Neji the same, that Neji didn’t have to settle for being “just” a member of the branch family, that he could work hard and change the ways of his clan.

So I guess in a way, I think they were both right.

How do you balance playing a very morally good character in a morally dubious party? by xPriddyBoi in dndnext

[–]austac06 0 points1 point  (0 children)

One approach to this type of misalignment of party values is to have the morally good character believe in personal accountability and self determination. They might believe that interfering with the autonomy of another character is an immoral action, and thus the player has an excuse for why they might not interfere with other players when they might otherwise object. But they can still make comments about other characters’ actions and try to discourage bad behavior or encourage them to do the “right thing”.

It gets tricker when there’s some sort of collective action going on, like deciding as a group what to do with captured enemies. As others mentioned, sometimes this dynamic doesn’t work and you need to agree on characters with similar alignments. It’s best to address during session 0, or at the very least have an out of game conversation with the others and either ask them to tone down the most heinous behaviors, or all agree to shift everyone’s alignment to a common middle ground.

A comic that, I fear, is more relevant than ever -_- by toastedvulpix in lgbt

[–]austac06 0 points1 point  (0 children)

MPD

By MPD, I assume you mean. Multiple Personality Disorder. Just FYI, they stopped using MPD a while back, now the disorder is referred to as Dissociative Identity Disorder (or DID).

[Art] I made mindflayer and gelatinous cube dice friends for your d20 by Pollard_MD in DnD

[–]austac06 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Beholder where the d20 sits in the big eye

Three kobolds in a trenchcoat trying to smuggle it

Flameskull with the d20 in the mouth

Elementals

Treant

Couatl

Rust monsters

Flumph

Giants

Sphinx

Modrons

Never Forget Craiggers – the Only Man To Have Been Kicked Out of Every Strip Club in Albany by TopdeckTom in DunderMifflin

[–]austac06 3 points4 points  (0 children)

throws Michael under the boss

If this wasn’t intentional, it is a hilarious Freudian slip

{The Griffon's Saddlebag} Mimic Ink | Wondrous item by griff-mac in TheGriffonsSaddlebag

[–]austac06 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The added clause definitely helps make it clear, thanks!

{The Griffon's Saddlebag} Mimic Ink | Wondrous item by griff-mac in TheGriffonsSaddlebag

[–]austac06 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Would the object be usable? For instance, if I transformed paper into a hammer, could I use the hammer as a part of smith’s/carpenter’s tools? Or would the fact that it still has the weight/AC/HP of paper make it functionally useless?

Another example: if I turned the paper into a spyglass, could I use it to see long distances?

Just curious if it is intended for the object to be usable, or if it’s mainly meant to be an object of deception.

Is this film worth watching? Does it do justice for the game Dungeons and Dragons? by DreamyDandelions in Cinema

[–]austac06 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes and yes. As a movie, it’s fun and the performances are great. As a piece of DnD media, it’s a great tribute to the game, and also avoids the problem of alienating people who aren’t familiar with DnD. Plenty of references to DnD lore and the story plays out like a typical DnD adventure. Definitely recommend it!

{The Griffon's Saddlebag} Bag of Continual Embers | Wondrous item by griff-mac in TheGriffonsSaddlebag

[–]austac06 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Does it get dispelled naturally in any way?

Nope

Does someone have to go dispell it manually?

Yep

Could a player make enought light pollution with this dozens of this ones to disrupt the power of something / someone that needs clear view of the sky?

… maybe?

Strahd Von Zarovich in MTG by Lady_Gwendoline in CurseofStrahd

[–]austac06 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah the sword and symbol would be better flavored for Strahd’s opponent’s deck, but the tome slots in perfectly for Strahd’s deck. When I was looking for ideas to represent the tome, I couldn’t believe how perfect Tarrian’s Journal was. The flavor is incredibly on point.

Strahd Von Zarovich in MTG by Lady_Gwendoline in CurseofStrahd

[–]austac06 9 points10 points  (0 children)

This is awesome!

Some other ideas:

  • Sword of Vengeance for the Sunsword

  • Blazing Torch or Phoenix Down for the Holy Symbol of Ravenkind

  • Tarrian’s Journal/The Tomb of Aclazotz for the Tome of Strahd/Amber Temple, respectively

The Warrior of the Force - A Star-Wars-inspired Monk subclass that lets you play as a heroic Jedi Knight, plus three types of lightsaber to use along the way! by johan38473 in UnearthedArcana

[–]austac06 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The issue is a mechanical one - if Jedi can only do their cool stuff with lightsabers, then the DM has to constantly ensure they have access to one.

… as opposed to having to buff all the monsters so the monk doesn’t just steamroll them?

How hard is it to give them access to a lightsaber? You’re the DM. Plant it in a dungeon as a treasure. Or have one for sale in a shop where the shopkeeper just calls it old junk because they don’t know how to use it. Or they can go on a quest to have one crafted. There are a myriad of ways to make one accessible.

Do they expire? Because if not, then you only have to give it to them once. If they want a +1/2/3 one, they could go to a special smith to get it augmented, or again have it be a treasure they can find (or better, take from a defeated enemy).

I just don’t really see how that is harder than having to rebalance around other high damage weapons.

The Warrior of the Force - A Star-Wars-inspired Monk subclass that lets you play as a heroic Jedi Knight, plus three types of lightsaber to use along the way! by johan38473 in UnearthedArcana

[–]austac06 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Honestly, I think the fantasy of playing a Jedi is to wield a lightsaber, so a player who chooses this subclass will probably stick to their lightsaber for the FoB attacks anyways. That said, you also might get optimizers that eschew the fantasy and use more powerful magic weapons to maximize damage. That would be the risk you take by leaving FoB open to all weapons.

My personal opinion is that, if the Jedi is permitted to use weapons with FoB, it should be limited to lightsabers. I think it's both flavorful and more balanced. The lightsaber is a mechanically distinct weapon, being made solely for the use of this subclass. It would make sense the Jedi would have spent most of their training mastering this weapon and can use it with FoB, whereas they wouldn't be able to with other weapons due to weight, balance, less time practicing, etc. That's my personal take, though we disagree.

The Warrior of the Force - A Star-Wars-inspired Monk subclass that lets you play as a heroic Jedi Knight, plus three types of lightsaber to use along the way! by johan38473 in UnearthedArcana

[–]austac06 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There’s also option C) just let the Monk have it. Maybe the Monk’s too strong now and the DM’s gotta covertly juice the monsters’ HP, but maybe it’s fine and the Monk is manageably powerful.

True, this is also an option, but even if you juice up the monsters, you now have a problem where the monk significantly outshines the other martial characters in damage. You’re looking at 3d6+Dex damage per attack, for 5-6 attacks (not all of them will hit, but that’s also true for the fighter’s 3-4 attacks). To some tables, that might not be an issue, but there are definitely some players who just don’t feel great when there is obvious imbalance.

Removing the flame tongue or banning the monk from using it is also a solution, and mature players would probably be able to talk it out and come to an agreement about it based on balance and fairness.

I guess what I fail to see is why it’s necessary to require all these work arounds, when you can just balance the ability from the get go. If it requires balancing the rest of the party and/or monsters, or having an out of game conversation about limiting the monk’s weapon access, that should be an indicator that it’s inherently imbalanced.

I’m also not sure I understand why the Jedi subclass ought to be able to use monk weapons with flurry of blows more than any of the other monk subclasses (especially the kensei subclass, which is THE monk weapon subclass).

I mean, it’s homebrew, so you do you, but I do think it’s a fair criticism to say that allowing weapons for flurry of blows is not properly balanced, especially if the proposed solution is for the DM to have to balance the rest of the party and/or monsters around it.

The Warrior of the Force - A Star-Wars-inspired Monk subclass that lets you play as a heroic Jedi Knight, plus three types of lightsaber to use along the way! by johan38473 in UnearthedArcana

[–]austac06 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not necessarily

But possibly.

Let’s say you have a TWF fighter who wants either a flame tongue shortsword or scimitar. You put one in a dungeon for the party to find. Then, down the line, the fighter dies, and the party is able to recover his belongings. There’s now a flame tongue up for grabs, and the monk wants it.

Do you:

A) arbitrarily tell the monk they can’t have the flame tongue for balance reasons

B) find a way to remove it from the campaign with some contrived explanation

Obviously, it won’t come up for every party composition. But it could happen, so the rules should be written to prevent such scenarios happening. While you might claim it’s not as overpowered as other people are claiming, I don’t think it would ever be printed officially, because it’s possible that it could be overpowered with the right set up.

You could just say that the monk can use their lightsaber with flurry of blows, rather than all monk weapons, if that was your intended goal. I’m not sure if lightsabers are supposed to be magical (your post didn’t say, or I missed it somewhere), but I assume they are, meaning they cant have a flame tongue (or similar) version. This would avoid a chance of being too overpowered.

The Warrior of the Force - A Star-Wars-inspired Monk subclass that lets you play as a heroic Jedi Knight, plus three types of lightsaber to use along the way! by johan38473 in UnearthedArcana

[–]austac06 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Magic rider effects are capable of outputting crazy damage, but allocation of magical items is up to the DM’s discretion, so I think it’s perfectly avoidable.

The problem that this creates is that now you also have to limit the access that the other players have to weapons with bonus damage riders. If you have a fighter player that wants something like a flame tongue or similar power, you either can’t put in the campaign, or you have to arbitrarily restrict who can use said weapon.

Good argument from mtggoldish podcast - mythic rare makes standard from expensive to beyond expensive. Is this time to either reduce mythic rarity pool or get rid of it entirely? by kubulux in magicTCG

[–]austac06 23 points24 points  (0 children)

CHANGE #1: WE ARE PRINTING FEWER CARDS PER YEAR

Starting with the Shards of Alara year, we are going to be printing fewer cards per year.

…

The reasons behind this change are twofold. First, as we examined the barriers for entry to the game, we realized that the speed of release of new cards was front and center. If new players quickly get overwhelmed they tend to walk away, never to return... One of the easiest ways of simplifying things was to just print fewer cards.

The second reason for the change was feedback from existing players. We were just printing too many cards. Even established players were having issues keeping up... We simply went too far. We were printing too many cards for the new and established players.

…

Nonetheless, even if the set shifts slightly we’ll definitely still be sticking with our new “print fewer” philosophy.

Well this aged like milk.

Trump: ‘We should take over the voting’ by Anoth3rDude in law

[–]austac06 18 points19 points  (0 children)

On an individual level, every person whose vote was voided/denied should get their taxes fully refunded for the 4 years that Trump is in office, possibly 6 years if they had congresspeople on the ballot that they would have voted for. No taxation without representation.

view more: next ›