« first day (2990 days earlier)      last day (1957 days later) » 
00:00 - 20:0020:00 - 00:00

8:00 PM
@nitsua60 I'm not a fan of going back to ThAC0 system, but it did have some advantages. It was also the gateway drug into algebra, so that was nice.
@ColinGross (sounds to me like the answerer is kinda back-porting modern attack logic onto the lookup philosophy of older editions)
@ColinGross what's wrong with the tagging on the old (current) one?
(just out of curiosity since I don't see anything amiss there)
@Rubiksmoose it says RAW, but then asks for tweets and rulings which are the parts that set up the apparent contradiction with SA and GWF
@nitsua60 Yeah. It doesn't mesh with ThAC0. Especially not the 3.5 rules.
@ColinGross Ah, well it does not actually say RAW because I removed that tag right after you posted the question.
It is also worth noting that the RAW tag is used when you are asking about RAW in the question. It doesn't restrict the answers in any way.
But yeah I removed it since you were clearly not focusing on RAW.
Either way. It's the last time I take V2Blast's advice on what would be a good question or not.
8:23 PM
@ColinGross lol to defend V2's honor I think it is a good question. Or at least can be with a little tweaking.
8:40 PM
@Rubiksmoose Yeah. I've got a draft for a more specific question that directly addresses the root of it. Haven't had time to read it over again. Probably monday.
9:09 PM
Alright, I made a Homebrew for some revised Sorcerer Metamagic Options, rough draft here, looking for feedback: homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/print/Sk7UiePukE
I've got like another page of options that got struck from this version because they were too weird or gimmicky.
@Xirema negative spell could be huuuge. maybe 2 points?
Right off the bat... you're making the Sorcerer MAD by requiring Intelligence. Sorcerers ability is supposed to be innate, not learned.
not sure i understand suppressed
@NautArch Debated that for awhile. My reasoning for setting it to 1 is the fact that it doesn't just let you choose any other damage type you want.
@T.J.L. Fair.
@Xirema oh geez. I totally missed that. Being able to change those out is BIG.
If you're allowing changing of metamagic, it may be better to have them cost more, or that there's a cost to change.
9:12 PM
@Xirema I'm with @NautArch on the cost. It can get around immunities. It should be damned expensive.
@T.J.L. yeah, the more i think about it ,the more it's a 3 point value.
By contrast, I think Precise is way to expensive. Advantage is not that powerful.
@NautArch Maybe half the spell level?
Artillery and Instantaneous are also incredibly powerful
My counterpoint is that Sorcerers can't change their spells whenever they want. That would be incredibly powerful on a Cleric or Druid, but on a Sorcerer, if their spells can't deal the right kind of damage, they could lose half their lineup from one bad dungeon.
i mean, if i was at your table, I'd be a sorcerer.
9:14 PM
Especially Storm Sorcerers, whose gimmick depends heavily on dealing Thunder/Lightning damage.
(features which, by the way, would no longer function if they used that Metamagic)
@Xirema right, but that's the gimmick they chose. When not in a subpar environment, they're extremely powerful.
Unless they turned a poison spell to thunder. Rolling Thunder, anybody (aka Negative Cloudkill)?
@T.J.L. I chose 3 points because that's the cost for Heightened Spell, which incurs disadvantage on the Saving Throw.
i'm also not sure i get the poison/thunder and acid/lightning negativeness. I would think if anything it would be thunder/lighting and poison/acid.
My assumption was that Disadvantage on Saving Throw == Advantage on Attack Roll, or at least nearly equal.
9:16 PM
@Xirema i don't think i'd make that equivalence
@Xirema Not really - a miss on attack roll does nothing. Many spells still do something on a save. Honestly, I'd never take Heighten either. I think it's too expensive for what it does.
@T.J.L. Fair.
@NautArch That I also debated for awhile. My gut instinct was that Thunder and Lightning pair a bit too nicely in terms of their sources, so they shouldn't be treated as opposites. It's a tricky call though, since some of the damage types don't have perfectly natural opposites.
Suppressed I like, though again... I'm not sure on the cost. Perhaps a different cost for Instantaneous spells vs. ones with durations. For example, a Suppressed Fireball is a lot less scary than say... Suppressed Cloud Kill, or Suppressed Spirit Guardians from a Divine Soul Sorcerer.
@NautArch Artillery is highly gimmicky. Most spells have relatively tiny AOEs for their Range, so using that only really makes sense if you're playing in a battlefield-type encounter.
@NautArch I'd probably consider lowering the odds on successfully targeting the exact chosen location, though I'd have to make the rolls more complicated to do that.
@Xirema how are you defining visibility range? AFAIK, there is no definition on that outside of darkvision.
9:22 PM
I'm not sure I'd use any of the Advanced Metamagics, except maybe Discounted Spell... and even that, only as a Divine Soul for things like Raise Dead.
@NautArch "If you can see it, you can target it".
@T.J.L. I'd probably prepare Reclaimed Spell if I knew I were going into a spellcaster-heavy encounter. Provides some resistance against Counterspell spam.
@Xirema would self(area of effect) count with these?
@NautArch I mean, yeah, but since the location offset is based on the spell's range, it would have no effect.
Yeah, Reclaimed Spell is okay, but probably returns too many points - it's just as good as using Flexible Casting. I'd make that half the level.
@NautArch Me too; I don't see where a couple of extra dice rerolled is that big of a deal. You are already re rolling he weapon's 1 or 2
9:24 PM
@T.J.L. I'll consider it.
@Xirema so basically you remove the range requirements for all AOE spells. DOesn't make spell sniper kinda less interesting?
It kind of steps on the toes of Subtle, too.
@KorvinStarmast my tables allow rerolls of those. But we really like rolling dice.
@KorvinStarmast I'm okay with the ruling on those rerolls, mostly because I do a lot of convention games and getting people to roll efficiently in the first place is a chore. Anything that involves a reroll takes even more time.
@nitsua60 No, you are not crazy. The 1e method was to hit the target number, or over, not the AC or over. Even with THACO you needed to roll that target number or better. TN determined by table, thaco, with modifiers etc ....
9:26 PM
Not really.

1. Spell Sniper only affects Attack Roll spells, very few of which (possibly none?) "target an area"
2. Artillery Spell removes your ability to precisely choose where the spell will land, making it less powerful than Spell Sniper for most encounters. It's only powerful in situations where you know that landing the spell ~1000' away will still hit something valuable.
@T.J.L. Yes, I agree, and Jeremy had a subsequent tweet or SA commentary addressing the "rerolling slows down play" point exactely. But I'd rather have seen that precise point on why put into the SA.
@T.J.L. I could see that. I've gotten very good at prepping my dice and counting quickly. So rerolling is not a big deal in terms of time. Adds maybe 5 seconds.
@T.J.L. Bear in mind with Flexible Casting, you do spend more points than the level of a spell to create it. So in a sense, you're only getting half the value of the spell back from that Metamagic to begin with.
@Xirema Sure, but you're also getting something for next-to-nothing. Any other caster would lose the spell slot in its entirety. You're getting about 75% of it back (creating spell slots is never 2:1).
@T.J.L. I can definitely see that, though I'm not sure how you'd PHB-ese your way into describing that.
9:30 PM
Into describing what?
@Xirema About your metamagic homebrew, do you automatically know all the lower metamagics and can apply any you've prepared freely throughout the day, but you can only prepare a single greater meta magic?
@GreySage For the lower Metamagics, it's based on your INT modifier. You can prepare a number each day equal to it (minimum 1). You're correct about the Greater metamagics.
@Xirema But the pool from which you draw to prepare includes all the meta magic options?
@GreySage Yeah.
I'm also not sure I understand the mechanics of a sorcerer being able to choose. Their whole schtick is that the power is just kinda theirs. Flexibility in that doesn't seem to jive.
9:36 PM
@T.J.L. Well, it's 50% for a 1st level spell, 66% for a 2nd level spell, 60% for a 3rd level spell, 57% for 4th, 55% for 5th.
@NautArch I mean, yes, I agree that PHB Sorcerers are very inflexible. ;)
@Xirema and I think that's their thing. They are powerful and have powerful control, but they don't get flexibility.
@NautArch Well, they're as powerful as other spellcasters.
Give them flexibility without a cost, and you've given something without taking something away
They get the same number of spell slots per day, but far fewer spells they can learn and far fewer spells they can have learned.
Quote of the day from GiTP forum discussion: DMs need to lighten up about rules and just let things flow. Players need to do the same, but also stop looking for "loopholes". Both sides need to stop weaponizing the rulebooks (PhoenixPhyre is one of my favorite posters there; has some neat ideas on world building)
9:40 PM
@KorvinStarmast THAT is awesome.
But the problem is i don't think both sides will. Many players want to optimize.
and if they're going to optimize within the rules, the DM needs balance.
@NautArch tis a consummation devloutly to be wish'd says the bard ....
I am still not sure why a pike weighs 18 pounds.
@NautArch Well, the goal is to give them something. I don't much approve of the way that Sorcerers lost all the advantages of being a Sorcerer in the 5e conversion but retained all their disadvantages. I mean, one of their Metamagics (Careful Spell) is just a weaker/less interesting version of a feature that Evocation Wizards get to do for free (Sculpt Spell).
@Xirema except can't they use careful on any spell school while evocation are limited to evocation spells?
So is your initial design goal that sorcerers are underpowered and need to be boosted?
@NautArch Yeah. And I think giving them more Sorcery Points or more Spell Slots (a'la 3.5) is a bad approach, so I'm focusing on their Metamagics.
Especially since the Metamagics approach focuses on giving them more choices to make in combat rather than just boosting raw DPR.
9:47 PM
@Xirema Ah, okay. That's the first time i've heard they're underpowered - and having seen them in play, I disagree that they are underpowered. So maybe I'm looking at this from a view that's inherently going to cause problems for a review.
@NautArch I mean, frame challenging it is good, if the expectations are wrong, it's going to make for a bad homebrew.
@Xirema It's just the first time i've heard an opinion that sorcerers are underpowered
@NautArch How have you seen them compare to wizards?
@GreySage We had a wizard in our party in the early phases of the campaign, and we've had two sorcerers since. So i'm comparing early wizard vs late sorcerer - but in terms of combat, I haven't seen a big difference in the power of the wizard vs sorcerer - and I"ve seen the power of metamagic and been very impressed.
but gain, that's early wizard, vs later sorcerers.
sorcs get quicken, wizards don't
9:51 PM
I'm not sure where that math is coming from. If a character casts a 5th level spell, and that metamagic goes off, they get 5 points back. They need seven to turn it into a slot, which means they're getting 5/7ths, or 71% of the slot back.

I'm not suggesting a sliding scale for how many points you get back from a spell. Make it half the level of the spell. End of math.
@T.J.L. Ah, you know what? I was looking at the wrong table. Thought the point conversion for a 5th level spell was 9 points, 7 for 4th.
In that case, I think I will cut it in half.
@MikeQ Quicken isn't very powerful though. It basically just means "cast a spell, plus a cantrip, for 2 Sorcery Points".
@Xirema Or "Cast a spell and do something else important", like administer a potion or use another magic item.
@GreySage That's true.
@Xirema But that's still pretty big (depending on level) Cantrips can still be a big deal damage-wise on top of actual spell damage.
Aside, I feel like the spontaneous aspect of Sorcerers is overvalued. Like, sure they don't need to prepare their spells in advance, but at level 11 a Wizard will have more spell prepared than a Sorcerer will ever know, and it only goes up.
9:59 PM
Is the sorcerer spell list a proper subset of the wizard spell list? Or do they get any non-wizard spells?
@Xirema I like the intent behind artillery spell but I think it needs a tweak. Right now it reads as pretty complex compared to other mechanics and the "miss" distance is a) potentially massive, b) extremely likely, c) worse on a higher roll (against the usual intent of the game)
@MikeQ Almost, they get 1 or 2 unique spells (Chaos Bolt is one)
What a bizarre spell
While I think the sorc's class mechanics are sound, it would be nice if they had access to a wider spell list
@MikeQ There's a small number of spells they get that Wizards do not.
Chaos Bolt being the lone spell they get that literally no one else gets.
(Until Guildmasters Guide to Ravnica, where it becomes one of the Background spells that anyone can get)
@SirCinnamon Definitely soliciting tweaks to adjust its behavior.
@Xirema I hate when they do that. Like how they gave Destructive Wave to to Storm Clerics. Paladins have to wait until end game for it, but the cleric gets it early? No way, man.
10:05 PM
I really wanted it to have a more normal distribution in its targeting, but I don't know a good way to handle that without just adding lots of dice and modifiers.
@Xirema Thea idea that you could actually end up firing in the wrong direction is funny but not realistic I think
@SirCinnamon Well, the realistic use-case is that you target the spell a few miles away, and it lands ~1000' off target.
@SirCinnamon I guess that could happen if you were to just target the guy 60' from you with a Fireball and then use the Artillery metamagic.
@NautArch Half casters complaining about full casters? Really? :)
@Xirema To be clear, the spell has the same area as normal, but it can be cast anywhere you can see, right?
I mean, nothing is stopping you from doing that.
@GreySage Yeah.
10:07 PM
@Xirema I mean it could happen if you target half a mile away if you have some bad luck
I'd like to see one more meta magic added to sorcerer before level 11. Not sure which level to fit it in, maybe 7,
I just think that's a pretty low accuracy - 10% chance to hit, but if you miss you miss too big, imo
@KorvinStarmast Hey, that spell is only on the Paladin list. It's a domain spell given to the clerics.
because yeah, fireball for example - 10% chance to be dead on but if you miss, no matter what you roll for the offset, you'll have missed by at least 130 feet
@SirCinnamon The big issue is that I didn't want a metamagic that basically reads "for 5 sorcery points, you can nuke the moon".
10:10 PM
@Xirema Of course - and it's hard to balance that for all spells...
I mean, it does let you do that, but you need to accept that you may not hit what you're looking at.
But if there's a simple way to normally distribute the target in a circular area, I'm all ears.
having it scale off the distance of the actual cast is the most realistic, though complicated
@SirCinnamon I mean, I guess you could go like, 10d8 - 45, multiplied by the distance between you and the target, divided by 70.
Generate an angle between 0 and 179, somehow.
In that scenario, the maximum distance it could be off by is equal to half the distance between you and the target—and very unlikely to hit at that extreme.
Roughly 2 in one billion.
here's simpler although stronger by a good deal:
81-100 = hit
1-20 = offset north
21-40 = offset east
41-60 = offset south
61-80 = offset west
Offset = size of aoe (radius, edge size, line-length) * range die
range die = d4 if target < 1mile away
d6 if target 1-5 miles away
d8 if target 5-15 miles away
d10 if 15-30 miles
d12 if 30 - 100 miles
d20 if > 100 miles
those ranges are off the top of my head but... something like that
@SirCinnamon I would probably scale all those distances down by like a factor of 4-5. Normal visibility when you're not orbital-dropping from a moon is about 5 miles.
10:22 PM
@Xirema Haha yeah I got to 5 fast and the scale went all wacky
But basically like that
@SirCinnamon It's definitely simpler, but it also has the issue of resulting in a blast pattern that is a giant plus sign.
Admittedly, my original version results in a bunch of concentric circles, which isn't much better.
@Xirema It does over simplify in that respect. It could be changed to be N-NE-E-SE-S-SW-S-SE to vary a little more but if it avoids doing trig at the table it's worth it!
@SirCinnamon I mean, that's definitely fair.
Sidebar: as you might be able to guess, I added some Standard Deviations to my probability calculator.
Stats for Roll [10d8-45]
Total Possible Rolls: 1.073741824E9 (1073741824)
Mean: 0.000000
Median: 0
Mode: 0 (5.8199208E7)
80% Range: [-9,+9]
95% Range: [-14,+14]
99.5% Range: [-20,+20]
Sidebar to this sidebar: I don't remember what 1 standard deviation is supposed to represent, and I'm hoping it represents the 80% centered on the mean.
@SirCinnamon Well poopy.
10:30 PM
Not a very memorable number
@SirCinnamon It's 69's shut-in, introverted ex-cousin.
Spends his days doing statistical analysis instead of going to parties
I'm off for the weekend now! You can message me but I likely wont see it until monday :P Have a good weekend all!
@SirCinnamon o/
11:27 PM
@Xirema Other d20 games have handled offsets by rolling a d8, each side corresponding to N, NE, E, etc.
Roll a d360 because adding complexity is fun! /s
00:00 - 20:0020:00 - 00:00

« first day (2990 days earlier)      last day (1957 days later) »