Artemis Entreri

Earl Grey's page

42 posts (46 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 alias.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Overall, I would like to see different weapons used in different situations and the proficiency system should accommodate that so that it isn't too single weapon focused. E.g. you start using spear but if the opponent gets too close you drop the spear and draw a sword and further if the opponent starts to grapple with you, you draw a dagger. And I have always been puzzled that all the dungeons and living quarters are big enough to wield a greatsword effectively. There should be limitations and different weapons used in different situations. Now with weapon focus and specialization feats (or dex to damage with a single weapon type with unchained rogue) people tend to stick to one weapon in all the situations and there seems to be no limitation to this.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Matthew Downie wrote:

I'm opposed to changing this.

If I'm trying to convert old adventures to a new system, and I forget to convert 10,000gp into 10,000sp, suddenly all the PCs are stinking rich.

I've never seen any issues with the current system. Copper and silver are for the commoners. Sackfuls of gold are for rich adventurers.
1cp A pound of wheat or a candle
1sp A cheap lamp or half a pound of cheese
1gp A goat or a traveler's outfit

As an adventurer I wouldn't like to prance around the cities with sackfuls of gold when the commoners would kill you for even a portion of what you carry.

The biggest problem comes with the containers and carrying capacity. E.g. belt pouch can hold only 100-200 coins and you can't buy anything with that. This makes the bags of holding and handy haversacks a necessity which is stupid.

Btw where can you buy those magic pouches that always have the exactly right amount of coins and you can just toss around? Like in all the movies.

2 people marked this as a favorite.


The monetary system in D&D has bugged me for almost 30 years i.e. since I started BECMI. After the first few encounters we noticed that there is no use carrying around any silver and especially copper pieces. What I would like to see is to make the system more silver centered and make gold more valuable. Or if the gold is the only currency that matters, why do we need to have the exchange rates in the rules? I know there is something that costs a few copper but those are hardly ever used.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Maybe shortsword should be named goblinsword to really get this conversation going. ;)

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
... have you seen Amiri's bastard sword?

Unfortunately yes but at least I don’t have to watch it while playing like in video games and I mostly use prd anyway. But that is just what I meant by over-sized weapons which are a real turn-off for me.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Chemlak wrote:


Don't cry realism in a game with fire-breathing dragons, magic spells, non-genetic inheritance, and other fantasy elements.

This argument annoys me as there needs to be some realism in addition to suspension of belief. Realism where it is possible within an fantasy setting helps with immersion. E.g. over-sized weapons like in some video games have always been beyond my suspension of belief and therefore I have avoided those games.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Something I often hear the game developers referring to is 'word count'. Therefore I'd say the material components should be left out from depleting the precious limitation and maybe something new added instead.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sumutherguy wrote:

The question then, is this: why is it cool and fine that 9th level spell-casters can rewrite reality and make or break nations daily, or hourly if they choose? Conversely, why is a 20th level rogue, who has based his entire concept and build on being able to kill one dude at a time who he catches unawares and hits perfectly dead to the point of completely neglecting all other important aspects of combat (mobility, defense), utterly unacceptable?

I think that the people are ok with e.g. powerful wizards because they are used to it and rogues should stay in their own underpowered niche.

With sap master rogues might be able to do something that every sneaky bastard should be able to do, i.e. knock out people unawares. How is that game breaking? In my opinion normal rogue should have possibility to knock out someone while using sap without wasting all their feats. Maybe fort save against knockout or similar rather than inflicting incredible amounts of damage as with sap master.