« first day (2981 days earlier)      last day (737 days later) » 

4:01 PM
Which happens here for example.
@NautArch I mean I will disagree with you there. If you can prove it with analysis it is not POB. And these are definitely things you can do with analysis by comparing class power levels
 
@Rubiksmoose But whether or not the 'objective analysis' converts to real life gameplay is another issue. and how do you determine the baseline?
 
@NautArch Baseline should be specified. The default assumption would be that you are comparing it to other classes. The Druid question does specifically say to compare to other classes.
 
@Rubiksmoose Out of curiosity, how do you really compare classes? They all do very different things.
 
@NautArch Honestly this is something I am not great at and I think generally people really over simplify in analysis. But there are certain aspects that are obviously easier (damage output eg)
 
@NautArch In a hard comparison, choose metrics and plot the success and failure probabilities... which is boring. For soft comparison, take some common stuff like melee combat and saving throws and look at the relative effectiveness of the classes.
 
4:11 PM
I'd probably frame challenge anyone who says Rangers are underpowered. Rangers are fine—except for Beastmasters, which suck.
 
On the more extreme side the UA Mystic class is really unbalanced, but the things that strike people as unbalanced with it is in the eye of the beholder.
@Xirema Rangers are underpowered. Change my mind.
 
Which is why I really wish they'd release the Revised Ranger in an official Sourcebook, since while most of the changes are minor, they did use that opportunity to completely fix the "Beast Conclave" in that document.
 
@Rubiksmoose Right, but if you're only looking at damage, you're ignoring everything else that a class may be good at. It becomes an uneven comparison immediately.
 
@NautArch So you add on some more metrics... like saves. Spellcasting variety. Still you're missing the out of combat stuff.
 
@Xirema I need to do some active tests on beastmasters. I'm not sure they suck
 
4:18 PM
Can I get some help flagging this comment answer?
I believe the core question already gives all we need to answer it as is. Mage Hand is not a creature nor is it an object, so it wouldn't be a valid target of the Teleport spell in the first place, which means it wouldn't be teleported, regardless of the trap mechanism. Whether it would trigger it at all is another question. — Mwr247 8 mins ago
 
@ColinGross Right, and how do you compare damage dealing vs something else? That's going to be very dependent on a table, no?
 
I think it may have already short-circuited my efforts to fix up the question for reopening.
 
@goodguy5 Even for the BM you sacrifice your attack to allow your animal companion to attack... which hoses you in the action economy.
@NautArch Likely. Even damage is. I have a campaign that has very little if any combat.
@NautArch But you could state some assumptions about the "testing table" and assert they approximate a significant number of real tables.
It gets rather long winded though.
 
@ColinGross I mean, that's pretty much the entirety of my argument. People think Rangers suck because they're using Beast Masters as the baseline for the Ranger power level (because they're 2/3rds of the reason people play Rangers in the first place), and if they'd open their minds to the other archetypes, they'd see that their general capabilities are on par with normal builds.
 
@ColinGross Sure, but your assumptions will directly impact the answer and a changed set of assumptions will change the results.
So we could analyze two classes based on a specific set of assumtions, but how useful is that?
 
4:21 PM
(Although maybe there's an argument that if a specific archetype is 2/3rds of the appeal of a class, then maybe it being underpowered is enough to call an entire class underpowered)
 
@Xirema Neither martial damage output nor spell power scale very well for the ranger class past L5. You're almost always better off multiclassing to rogue.
Plus, a bunch of their skills are very situational.
Favored enemy: orcs... great for when you're fighting orcs.
 
@Rubiksmoose As asked, the question does look ready for reopening if they don't care about the actual triggering mechanism.
they're not gonna like the answer, though.
 
@ColinGross you're not giving up your attack. You're just transferring it to another location/entity/hit point pool.
And you get a babysitter when you're unconscious
 
@goodguy5 The ranger's damage output and damage add ons are better than the companion. Same with AC. The companion is a bit of a utility, but not one where it's usually better to give up your action for the companions
 
The usual complaints I've heard about 5e rangers have to do more with the class being less enjoyable than just weak
With the usual suspect being the Favored Enemy thing
 
4:25 PM
@ColinGross Most of the power comes from Archetype features. All four of the other archetypes have some kind of feature that permits 3-4 attacks (or more!) per round, making up for what you might lose in raw per-hit damage.
 
Like I said. I'd need to sit down and look at it all.

You get similar attack scaling to a fighter.
 
@Xirema You mean the mutli-attack at L11?
Or the horde breaker + extra attack at L5?
 
@NautArch agreed.
 
Most of the medium or hard encounters you can build for a party of L5 characters are a few higher CR opponents if not a single opponent. The hordebreaker and whirlwind aren't all that useful in those situations.
 
@NautArch To the asker of those assumptions? Potentially really helpful to them assuming those assumptions relfect their issue.
 
4:32 PM
@NautArch It would be difficult to analyze two of anything without assumptions. I'm just happier when they're explicitly stated instead of assumed.
 
Actually, I'm realizing that The stirge attacks every round starting at level 13. 5 damage + 5 more from proficiency.

Attack. Deal 10 damage. attach/detach. Attack again. Deal 10 damage. attach.
Next start of round, drain 10 hp and immediately detach. rinse and repeat.
 
Am I mistaken that Swallow is not an "Attack Action", and thus ineligible to be used by an Animal Companion?
 
@Xirema raw only
 
@Xirema Frankly, I don't think creatures have a clearly defined Attack action, strictly speaking.
 
@goodguy5 Well.
@kviiri Stuff like Bite is listed as a "Melee Weapon Attack". That's pretty consistent for most creatures.
:47805983 It's listed as an "Action" for a Giant Frog.
 
4:40 PM
I misread
 
@goodguy5 Gotcha.
 
@Xirema Yeah, but what about things like Multiattack?
 
I thought it was a simple if-then.
If grappled, then swallow
 
They're similar in outcome to a character's Attack action but do they count as Attack action? I don't know if it's ever made clear.
 
@goodguy5 Yeah, if it worked that way, it would be listed in the first section, right after its stats.
@kviiri Characters can take actions that make attacks, but without using the "Attack Action".
 
4:42 PM
@kviiri The multiattack is usually listed as an action in the creature's stat block.
 
@Xirema Yes, but that doesn't answer the question
@ColinGross Yes, but is it an Attack action, RAW?
 
@kviiri I believe that's how it's written in the stat blocks. Lemme go find one.
 
I think most DMs of non-organized would allow companions to use non-attack actions
 
"Multiattack. The bear makes two attacks: one with its bite and one with its claws."
 
@ColinGross But is using that the Attack action from PHB? Or "Make an Attack" or whatever
Because that specific action is permitted for companions, and it's unclear whether multiattack counts
 
4:46 PM
Beast Master specifically calls out multiattack later. Multiattack is a special quality/type of action that allows multiple attacks.
 
Isn't anything with an attack roll considered an attack?
 
not disimilar to "extra attack"
 
@ColinGross Attack vs attack, particular action vs mechanic.
 
@kviiri I swear this game needs a formal ontology.
So, both the claws and bite actions of a bear specifically call out them being Attacks. "Bite. Melee Weapon Attack: +6 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 8 (1d8 + 4) piercing damage"
 
"Attack" is an action that allows a character to make one attack, sometimes more. Monsters often have Multiattack as a separate action, but no rule that makes their Attack action roll more attacks than one.
@ColinGross They're what we often refer to as lowercase-a attacks
Despite their capitalization
 
4:49 PM
Although, multiattack is an attack action? no?
 
@ColinGross Not explicitly, no.
 
^
 
Okay. So unless the stat block specifically calls out the action as "Melee|Ranged Attack" it's not an Attack Action.
Seems easy enough to follow.
 
@ColinGross Multiattack is an action that allows a monster to make 1 or more attacks, which is not the same thing as the Attack action.
 
@ColinGross Strictly speaking, not necessarily even then.
 
4:51 PM
@kviiri No? The action listing for bite might not be an Attack action? "Bite. Melee Weapon Attack: +6 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 8 (1d8 + 4) piercing damage"
 
@ColinGross Lots of things let you make Melee|Ranged attacks, like spells, but they aren't the Attack action
 
@ColinGross Attack action is something all characters know, it doesn't need to be listed in statblocks
 
or can you find one that lists the "Name, [Adjectives] Attack: <details> " where it isn't an Attack action?
 
Like dodge, dash etc
@ColinGross They're actions, yes, they do attacks, yes, but they aren't the Attack action.
 
@kviiri I thought we were talking about animal companions
 
4:53 PM
@ColinGross They're characters too
 
@kviiri I thought they were beasts.
 
@ColinGross Doesn't change the rules.
 
@kviiri are all creatures characters?
I always assumed the actions listed for the characters were available to all creatures, but now I'm questioning that.
 
@ColinGross Well the animal companions certainly are in this sense
 
@ColinGross they're definitely not.
 
4:59 PM
I mean, they explicitly can take the actions listed
 
@NautArch Are there creatures that cannot hide nor dash?
 
Including Attack, despite it being rather flakily defined for non-PCs
 
> "This weapon belonged to my great-great-grandfather."
> "But that's roughly seventy years old!"
🤔
 
@ColinGross mounts have a subset of actions
 
@NautArch While being ridden in combat. Yes. But the horse beast can hide and dash when it's being a horse on it's own.
 
5:01 PM
@ColinGross Birds have feathers and, with the exception of certain flightless birds, are somewhat ungainly on land.
 
Just not when being used as a mount.
@Yuuki Are birds creatures that you can think of that can't hide or dash?
 
@NautArch oh goodness please not mounts. That is a rabbit hole in and of itself lol
 
Well, I've never seen a leather jacket made from bird skin.
 
@Yuuki Is that a 5th edition creature?
 
So the usual rule for Attack is that you get to make one attack. Even though not explicit, the only even reasonably sensible ruling is that the creature can use one of its "plain" attacks. Whether Multiattack or exotic attacks count is the shadier area
 
5:03 PM
They also don't have the opposable thumbs to measure out small amounts of paprika.
 
@kviiri Actually I think the attack description states that you only get to make one unless you have a class feature that modifies it.
@Yuuki Which doesn't seem to impact their ability to hide or dash. I'm asking is there an example of a creature that doesn't have those actions available, and if so, what about the stat block informs us of that lack of ability.
 
@ColinGross Yea, true. NPCs don't, though
 
Does it have to be called out? and if that's the case, do we just assume all creatures can hide and dash?
 
Here's my no BS DM answer: yes you can use the special stuff in a creature's statblock.
 
@kviiri They have creature stat blocks with multiattck listed as an action just like bears.
@Rubiksmoose I'd probably house rule that too, but it doesn't appear to be the RAW case.
 
5:05 PM
Multiattack is not an "Attack Action". If it were, Beast Master wouldn't need to explicitly call attention to it at level 11.
 
@Xirema ah yeah. Forgot about that. Good point
 
@Xirema Does it call out multiattack?
Or just say it gets an extra attack?
 
It would instead be inferred to be something the Companion can do when the description says "You may use your action to tell your Companion to make an Attack Action"
> Starting at 11th level, when you command your beast companion to take the Attack action, the beast can make two attacks, or it can take the Multiattack action if it has that action.
 
@ColinGross as an action, but it's not The Attack action :)
 
@Xirema errata'd! Here I am flipping through paper pages like a sucker
 
5:07 PM
@ColinGross Yes, that's said explicitly in the MM
 
@ColinGross hahaha
 
IIRC, it's so you can't double-dip with Multiattack and Extra Attack.
 
When a monster takes its action, it can choose from the options in the Actions section of its stat block or use one of the actions available to all creatures, such as the Dash or Hide action, as described in the Player’s Handbook.
 
@Yuuki Yup that is because of MA not being Attack action.
 
@NautArch Question answered. The MM states they do get the actions as available in the phb
 
5:08 PM
Being able to Multiattack and then Multiattack again makes think of late-game 3.5e and Pathfinder with their iterative attacks.
God, that was an annoyance to deal with it.
 
@Yuuki Truth
 
overall, I think the Attack vs attack distinction is probably the worst naming issue in 5e. Even without this monster multiattack angle it's confusing as heck
 
@kviiri I concur. Plenty of synonyms could have been used to make a better distinction.
"ættack "
 
I have a feeling the Attack vs attack thing is something that the future 5e grognards will fondly remember in 2040's, when the new generation of players is debating which is better, DnD 9.5e or Pathfinder 4
 
@kviiri I wonder which intervening version will go back to ThAC0. Somebody has to teach algebra to kids these days!
 
5:20 PM
@ColinGross noice
 
@ColinGross DnD 6e will have THACsqrt(2)
 
By then we might not even have D&D. Could just have "Dragons: the Gathering"
 
@ColinGross I seriously think they should continue the 4e line under a franchise name like that. Or DnD: Tactics or somesuch
That might ward off haters
 
@kviiri DnD: Tactics. I like it.
 
Meh, Univ Cluster is down again and this time it isn't even my fault
I'm gonna go play the piano
Catch y'all later :)
 
5:27 PM
Ciao
 
@ColinGross Final Fantasy: Tactics was one of my favorites growing up, so I also approve
 
I liked Ogre Battle which had a related game Tactics Ogre. Tough to find, so I just play battle for wesnoth nowdays.
Fallout: Tactics was pretty bad.
 
@Xirema of course JC throws a wrench into this:
@ApocalypticTwit "Can a Ranger's Giant Badger Animal Companion use its multi-attack ability when ordered to attack?" @mikemearls Yep!
This really shouldn't be this hard.
 
@Rubiksmoose uhh
Why JC
 
Seriously.
 
5:41 PM
I mean, after level 11, he's definitely correct.
When were 280 character tweets introduced?
Because it seems like he had trouble fitting that answer in 140 characters. Just couldn't find a way to contain all the relevant information in those 140 characters.
 
Just couldn't find a way.
 
Tons of tweets had images of text anyway
 
@Rubiksmoose Well, that kinda poops the bed on this conversation.
 
@Xirema You think he couldn't think of "After level 11, yup!"?
@ColinGross I'd ignore it. Rules from 2015 were probably wrong anyway.
 
5:44 PM
@GreySage Too many characters, bro.
 
@GreySage So is JC an authoritative source or not?
 
@ColinGross Technically he is, but that doesn't stop him from being flat out wrong a lot of the time.
 
@ColinGross Death of the Author. His interpretation is exactly as valid as any other person's interpretation.
 
@Xirema except that WoTC says he is the final rules arbiter (kind of)
 
@Xirema That's not true.
 
5:45 PM
@GreySage Or like, correct, except he fails to mention an important conditional caveat, which was itself the actual issue trying to be addressed.
 
We frequently hold his interpretation above all others.
 
@ColinGross that's a long debate
 
@GreySage I tend to agree. But someone was bound to bring it up eventually.
 
@DavidCoffron We could count citations and make it a short one.
 
@ColinGross (the implication of my statement is that we probably shouldn't)
 
5:46 PM
@ColinGross no I mean the debate on whether Death of the author should be factored into literary analysis. In this case, Crawford does hold more weight in general
 
@Xirema I took your statement to be "this is what is" instead of "this is how it should be"
 
@ColinGross Fair enough.
 
@Rubiksmoose oh nooooooooooooooooooooooo
JC. why are you allowed to do things?
 
We should petition WotC to make RPG.SE the official rules source for 5e
5
 
5:48 PM
@DavidCoffron Yeah. I dunno. Either it's a canonical source or not. Kinda hard to come up with rules about when he's right or wrong without some other authoritative source to make those determinations.
 
@DavidCoffron "Can X do Y or Z?" JC: "Yes"
 
@GreySage I think we should include dndwiki if we're going that route. It would make a lot of edge lords pretty happy.
 
@GreySage that's tough when some questions are very contentious. And it would draw a lot of less-expert answers
 
@GreySage I do enjoy "yes" answer to questions involving "or". Then again, I'm a proponent of adding xor to the English vernacular.
 
@ColinGross Yeah, I wish XOR had a presence in normal speech.
 
5:51 PM
@GreySage if only
 
@DavidCoffron This isn't experts exchange. We're a stack... like dishes... or like so many discarded character sheets and notes
 
@GreySage Wait, you don't go around saying "zor" to people? (how I assume "xor" is pronounced in casual speech"
 
@GreySage We're the minority.
@goodguy5 Wait, you don't say "ex or" ?
New holy war!
 
I say "ex or" when I'm using it in a mathematical/science sense.

I assume it would be "zor" in another sense, because reasons.
 
I actually pronounce it "flirp"
 
5:53 PM
@Rubiksmoose ah, the ol' zurp and flirp
 
@goodguy5 I do actually say "ex or" in normal conversation, but only to very select people, like my extended family (who all are either computer scientists or were raised by computer scientists). To other people it just confuses them.
 
I suppose "ex or" makes more sense, as it's short for "exclusive or"
 
@GreySage Raised by computer scientists sounds worse than raised by wolves.
 
@ColinGross Well, I had 10 parents
 
I'm team ex-or.
 
5:55 PM
@goodguy5 Was it difficult to point to them sometimes?
 
@ColinGross nope, but referencing them was a pain
 
@goodguy5 I can see how that would be a problem to sort.
 
@ColinGross I was kind of raised in a bubble.
 
@goodguy5 That would make it easier to sort at least
 
@goodguy5 Definitely sounds like they made a hash of it.
 
5:57 PM
@ColinGross Aw, it's not that bad really. Sometimes you just have to push a little more onto the stack
 
Well I tried
 
@goodguy5 It's like they say, first in, first out.
 
@ColinGross "They" say a whole array of things! I think it's a real heap, iykwim.
 
I actually tweeted him about the what counts as an Attack thing
 
6:04 PM
@goodguy5 I think you’re barking up the wrong tree.
 
@Rubiksmoose thx for the follow lol
 
@Yuuki See? That's a sharp observation.
 
@DavidCoffron hahaha I'm honored to be among the 3 other people who do.
:)
 
@goodguy5 Better to sweep that right into a bin
 
@ColinGross I've got a whole group of things, while we're at it.
Side note: Do we think that other stacks do this game that we do here in rpg chat? Take one mild joke and have it dominate 90% of the chat conversation for 20 minutes?
 
6:11 PM
@goodguy5 The punning & play on words game? I'll play that all day if there are willing participants. I assume other chats have willing participants. I imagine the language stacks probably do it better.
@goodguy5 well, collect them with the rest of the garbage.
 
@goodguy5 My (brief) exposure to some of the other stack chats is that they spend a lot of their time complaining about Feminists in Tech. =/
 
I mean, yea. but what was it yesterday?

sentences that could be acronyms for "SLAG", I think.
@ColinGross Well, You can't make them collect garbage. You can only request it.
@Xirema Well, that's .... poopy.
 
@goodguy5 Stack Loves Acronym Games
 
@goodguy5 So you're asking them to make like a node and leaf?
 
(back to back solid jokes)
@ColinGross no, I'm just trying to list out some problems with relying on garbage collection. If you put too many resources into it, you'll be stuck with only one chopstick (dining philosopher's joke)
 
6:17 PM
@goodguy5 I'm sure the other nerdy ones do. That's a very nerd thing in my experience
 
@goodguy5 I had that happen to me once while dining at the Tower of Hanoi.
 
@DavidCoffron I think going into the chat room for any stack already indicates a higher-than-average level of nerdiness
 
@GreySage very true
 
@ColinGross honestly, I had not heard of that before. had to look it up. mathsisfun.com/games/towerofhanoi.html
 
Classic first year computer science programming puzzle... at least it was in the big ten schools back in the day.
 
6:23 PM
@goodguy5 Actually my wife and I use Towers of Hanoi as a very normal term in conversation as a shorthand for "we've got to do all these seemingly nonsense steps to accomplish this thing"
 
@Rubiksmoose I like "tar baby", but I've been told that has possible racial undertones.
 
@goodguy5 huh the only meaning I know for that is racial overtones.
 
@Rubiksmoose Same, outside of ErfWorld
 
o.O

It's one of Aesop's Fables.
I had never heard anyone even suggest that it was a racial comment until I was.... twenty......three?
 
@goodguy5 I mean I know of it from Br'er Rabbit.
 
6:30 PM
@Rubiksmoose That's yak shaving
Or sounds close to yak shaving
 
@Rubiksmoose I've taken to saying "glue baby" when in public to avoid the whole idiotic mess.
 
@ColinGross I am actually finding it very hard to define how we use it or thinking of a good example even.
@goodguy5 probably a good idea lol.
 
It drives me nuts when perfectly serviceable phrases get turned into things that are bad and I have to find another way to express the idea.
 
Yeah it sucks when a bad apple ruins something for everyone else.
 
oh man. A friend of mine was talking to his sister's suitor. The potential mate was African American.

My friend was talking about some conspiracy (real or contrived, I can't recall) and told the suitor "man, you're drinking the kool-aid". To which the fellow took offense and assumed that it was "a racist thing to say to a black person".
 
6:34 PM
@Rubiksmoose I'm downstairs in the basement rerunning a cat 6 line and my partner comes down and asks, "I thought you were going to clean the bathroom?"
@goodguy5 No, that's in reference to a mass cult suicide in the 70's
 
Oh, man. I'm great at that.... well.... not either of the specific things you mentioned but.

"Sweetie? Can you do X?"
"of course!" - goes on to do Y
"What happened to X?!"
"uhh......."
 
@ColinGross Jonestown, yeah.
 
@GreySage Yeah. That's the one.
 
@ColinGross Yes. I'm aware. My friend was aware. The suitor was not. I think that it was explained and reconciled. But it reminded me of it. "No, I'm not being racist. I'm just making a reference."
 
I had never heard of Watermelon or Kool-aid having any racial connection until I was in my 20s.
 
6:36 PM
@goodguy5 yeah, when you respond with "what does it look like I'm doing?!" it's time to explain yak shaving.
 
@ColinGross that is pretty much it then.
 
@ColinGross "Well, you see. I wasn't getting a good wifi signal in the bathroom for my spotify, so I had to rerun the cable so that the router would distribute to the whole house."
 
@ColinGross It' tricky because his tweets are official, but I think they aren't considered RAW. Queue discussion on the difference between an official ruling and RAW.
 
@NautArch RAW Rules are written in the books. /debate
lol
 
@Rubiksmoose that's actually probably the intent on that :)
 
6:41 PM
@Rubiksmoose I see it as a discussion prompt, opinion based, and basically regurgitating four years of memes on GiTP.
 
@Rubiksmoose RAWiB Rules as written in books?
RAWoT Rules as written on Twitter?
 
rawITBON
rules as written IN THE BLOOD OF NONBELIEVERS
 
7:14 PM
Wow. I did not mean to create such a hard stop. my b, guys
 
Well you made us realize that we were low on the blood of unbelievers and we all had to go to the cultist store to pick up some more so we can write all of our rawITBON answers.
 
Fair.

Also, if you haven't yet, I suggest saying "rawITBON" out loud as a single word. fun times
 
@Rubiksmoose I want to make a joke about hitch-hikers being a convenient source of blood, but there are still way too many hitch-hiking related murders around here.
 
Hey everyone, building a backstory for a character I need a monster idea, has to be irrational and chaotic, the ability to think not needed, I have a bard of whispers with a nasty flaw of curiosity who found tracks leading into the woods that she made the mistake of following. Prefer non humanoids
 
@KaleDodge spider thing. bigger, and with more of a hitch in its step. Think of blightfathers (getting image)
 
7:27 PM
@KaleDodge Hmm... irrational and chaotic kinda defeats my suggestion, but you could definitely make them irrational and chaotic. Or irrational from a certain point of view. I'm thinking about the Vord from Codex Alera.
Shapeshifting hivemind that converts biomass into more of itself.
Often described as insectoid in appearance.
 
both of these look good, can you tell me more about them?
 
@Yuuki are you talking about druid bees?
 
The issue is that the queens are sapient and highly logical.
 
Well, in the game, they erupt from zombies and just try to kill nearby humanoids. They have very viscous acidic saliva.

You could have it as either a sort of demonic/undead infection/possession.
If you can ask me specific questions, I can give you specific answers.
 
Since they're pretty far from irrational, you could combine them with the Typhon from Prey (2017). They're psionic entities that feast on "life energy" and part of the plot revolves around the fact that they have no concept of empathy. So there's a lot of decisions they make that might seem psychopathic or murderous but it's simply because they have an entirely different worldview that seems chaotic and irrational from ours.
@goodguy5 Hey, that's a spoiler.
 
7:40 PM
Im going to go with @goodguy5 but thank you yuuki so I have an idea how to make the creature physically work so can you tell me more about its behavior? how aggressive is it? how does it try and kill? does it have any weaknesses?
 
Who, the Kool aid guy?
Very aggressive, kills by smashing through walls, no known weaknesses
 
@KaleDodge beholder? but no tracks.
 
@Nautarch I wanted it to be defeatable by a Bard college of Whispers and a Celestial Sorcerer
 
@KaleDodge what level?
 
3-5
 
7:45 PM
@MikeQ He's weak against being turned upside down, all his life force drains out of him if that happens.
 
range of levels I see them being at the time
 
@KaleDodge you're looking at CR 4 then (for a challenge that would take all they have and be harrowing/worth telling stories about). Probably something with not too much damage output as your classes are squishy
 
@MikeQ Apocalypse World has a move inspired by the Kool-Aid man
 
Neogi master? They are spiderlike
 
Can you provide info or a link to info?
 
7:48 PM
Oh wait... i didn't ask, what game?
 
It's fairly aggressive. Moves very slowly. Follows whatever the nearest single prey is. So, if 3 people are 10 meters away and one person is 5 meters away, it will follow Mr. 5-meter until the distance to someone else is shorter. I THINK it hunts by smell? Not sure if it can "see".

Has a tongue attack situation that can be used to pull in enemies. Which is then usually followed by a big ol' dose of acidic mucous.
Aside from that, uses its creepy legs as stabbing implements.

Weakness (aside from just doing a mft of damage) are these pustules on it's back. Blightfathers have 2-3 large bulb
 
@David D&D
 
@KaleDodge here's the neogi
 
@goodguy5 I really like the idea, I can work with that as well
 
yea. I'm actually considering putting some of them into my game as well, now ^_^
 
7:52 PM
@davidcoffron good idea physically but these seem a little too mentally reasonable for what im looking for. That creature seems much more of a tyrantical diplomat that would be fun in a different setting
 
The more I think about it, the more I like the idea.

Party finds some zombies. nbd, right?

one of the zombies turns into that oozing nightmare fuel and the fight suddenly gets a lot harder.
 

« first day (2981 days earlier)      last day (737 days later) »