User talk:Marasmusine

From D&D Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

just wondering if you would[edit]

Hey I was wondering if you get time to take a look through and let me know what you think. I have been editing it for a few days now just wanted some feed back if you can please. thanks for your time. --Vladmere.Labefactum (talk) 08:07, 10 October 2015 (MDT)


Hey, thanks for fixing up that location error with the Genasi. Cheers.--Vladmere.Labefactum (talk) 23:17, 7 October 2015 (MDT)

I don't know any other way to ask.[edit]

Could you check out and give any advice you have? I'm relatively new to making classes but I think I did pretty well fixing this one up. --Capt Hooks (talk) 23:17, 14 August 2015 (MDT)

Made some huge changes since your last stop, if you or anyone else could give me a run down on your thoughts it would be great. --Capt Hooks (talk) 22:30, 21 August 2015 (MDT)

Fallen lands stuff[edit]

Hello again Marasmusine, I just finished a first draft of the Rakshia for 5th edition and was hoping you could take a quick look at for balance and such when it's convenient for you. Thanks again --Aitharious (talk) 21:14, 11 August 2015 (MDT)
Hey Marasmusine, thanks again for helping me out with all of my stuff. I was just hoping you could just take a quick look at the suggested characteristics for the 5e Rakshia and give your opinion on it as well as any suggestions for the race. Thanks again for all the help, --Aitharious (talk) 12:45, 14 September 2015 (MDT)
I'll swing by when I get chance! Marasmusine (talk) 14:18, 14 September 2015 (MDT)
Sounds good and thanks for all the help--Aitharious (talk) 11:25, 15 September 2015 (MDT)
Hey Marasmusine, I was looking through the 4e weapons to prepare for a class I'm planning on making and noticed that there are a few things that didn't make sense based on my understanding of the 4e guidelines of weapons. The Flintlock Pistol (4e Equipment) is an example that I think has damage that's to high since it has the off-hand trait. I'm not sure if ranged One-Handed weapons treat off hand differently but if it does reduce the damage then it should only be a 1d6 damage rather than 1d8. I might be totally wrong or there may be some incorrect wording with the guideline. But if I am correct I was hoping to just go through the weapons there and fixing things us as well as bad flavor stuff (like a weapon being called by several different names when each name is actually a different weapon).
Additionally since I don't think there are any admins that actively work on the 4e pages, I was hoping to check with you if it's alright that I go around and fix abandoned pages (over 6 months with no edits and in need of significant changes) I'll only be making changes to the statistics for the most part and only adding flavor where it is significantly lacking and do my best to keep it as similar to the original authors intentions as possible. Sorry for the rant and thanks again for all the help. --Aitharious (talk) 12:57, 25 September 2015 (MDT)
I had spent some time balancing the 4e firearms earlier last year, I need a moment to figure this, brb. Marasmusine (talk) 13:13, 25 September 2015 (MDT)
If I use my guideline at Weapon Design (4e Guideline), I think you're right. Starting with simple +2 one-handed melee 1d8 -> martial 1d10 -> ranged 1d8 -> off-hand 1d6 (with load two minor and powder crit cancelling out).
However, it's possible I increased the damage because the range (5/10) is much less than one would expect from a military weapon. My memory is hazy on this. I'll let you decide.
I hereby delegate all 4e maintenance tasks to you! Marasmusine (talk) 13:26, 25 September 2015 (MDT)
Hello again Maramusine I've been thinking about the "Tool" property that is on several 4e weapons and I've reached a stalemate as to what to do with them but I've come up with a few options. --Aitharious (talk) 14:49, 2 October 2015 (MDT)
1. Treat it like most weapon benefits and reduce the damage by 1 size.
2. Treat it similar to a minor benefit and add minor penalties as appropriate.
3. Restrict the caliber of weapons they can be applied to (EI only simple, or anything except superior).
4. Ignore it as it has no effect on combat.
5. Increase the weapons cost to be that of both a weapon and a tool.
My opinion is #5 if the tool aspect has no bearing on combat ability. I would also ensure that the tool is not as effective as the equivalent standalone tool (there needs to be some tradeoff) Marasmusine (talk) 15:19, 2 October 2015 (MDT)
Ok I've made the changes to the weapons as appropriate, I think one thing for the Simple Tool weapons they just remain as an equally effective tool since it's more like a tool that can be used as a weapon rather than a weapon that can be used as tool, as is the weapon tools seem to be for a very specific scenario and as such give a +2 to that specific scenario for a tool that gives a bonus to a broad task i'm thinking it should be a +1. for example the Bagh Nakh gives a +2 to climbing when you have no ropes or other climbing assists, if there was a weapon that gave a bonus to all climbing it would only be a +1.
From here I'm going to be cleaning up the code of the weapons and grabbing or creating images for the weapons, once that's done I'll probably move on to the lists of feats and just doing what I can to fix them up. --Aitharious (talk) 12:49, 5 October 2015 (MDT)
Hi again Maramusine I've just finished up with the links and categories of all the weapons and I was wondering how you go about adding images both from ones computer and from the internet, I would like to just use images from wiki as most of the weapons have actually existed but there are a few that I will have to draw up myself (luckily I've gotten quite good at drawing weapons and armor). Anyways your help would be greatly appreciated. --Aitharious (talk) 20:09, 6 October 2015 (MDT)


Hey Marasmusine, I hope this is a good way to contact you. I wanted to ask you something concerning some races I wanted to make. I played Council of Wyrms, which is a 2e D&D campaign setting where the PCs play as dragons, and I wanted to create feral dragon races for 5e on this wiki. I planned on using Council of Wyrms as a guide and placing them under the homebrew section for "Races". However, I wanted to ask if there are any dragon races that already exist for 5e, which would make my creating them redundant. I haven't found any, but I wanted to ask anyway. If there aren't any, is the "Races" tab the correct place to put them? I'm still new to the wiki but I've been wanting to get more involved, so any help here would be greatly appreciated. --Vobria (talk) 01:12, 21 September 2015 (MDT)

Sorry to intrude, but there is no dragon race for 5e; however, I am also planing to make a dragon race, so if you want to work together then just call me. Again sorry to intrude on your conversation. Azernath (talk) 10:04, 21 September 2015 (MDT)
My advice is to make it a race-class combination. The classes in the PHB do not work well for non-humanoid races. Marasmusine (talk) 03:00, 11 October 2015 (MDT)

Fu'Ara Race[edit]

Hello, Marasmusine! I really must say thank you (and a huge sorry!) for helping me to fix up that huge blunder of a race I made. I'm not sure if it's any better as of now, having removed the "subraces" (thank you for confirming my doubts on these!) and fixed the rest where I could, but I really hope that it's worthy of your approval now. Please point out if there's any additional faults or inconsistencies that clash with the D&D, let alone 5e, rules and I'll try to rectify it as soon as I can. I'm not sure if the "base damage" effect makes sense now after adding additional notes to the Lore/Physical Description, and I'll just remove it if you find it more convenient, but I hope you didn't find my idea for a race too Mary Sue or bland. Thank you for all your hard work, and sorry for adding to that load! --Fablefang (talk) 06:38, 6 August 2015 (MDT)

Thanks Fablefang, I'll take a closer look ASAP. Marasmusine (talk) 10:56, 6 August 2015 (MDT)

Special Column Table Formatting[edit]

For your information, it has not been chosen to use the "most recent" 3.5e Special column formatting in the table. See also Help:Standards and Formatting (DnD Guideline)#When to Capitalize. If you have been making these changes please stop unless we discuss this formatting. --Green Dragon (talk) 01:11, 17 September 2015 (MDT)

I'm not sure what you mean. Marasmusine (talk) 11:45, 17 September 2015 (MDT)
On the Illusionary Weapons Master (3.5e Prestige Class) you made a change (diff) stating "lower case for feature names in tables". This is true in the most recent WotC 3.5e publications. However, D&D Wiki did not implement that since there was almost a new table formatting every 3.5e publication over time (as I am certain that you know). Thus, Help:Standards and Formatting (DnD Guideline)#When to Capitalize states that "Special abilities in the "Special" column of class tables1 (Wild Shape, Uncanny Dodge, Improved Evasion)". I am saying that if we want to use the most recent WotC 3.5e publication then we need to make the intervention in the guidelines rather than intervening ad-hoc. See also the superscript note. Does this help make the situation more understandable, or I am still confusing you? --Green Dragon (talk) 14:54, 17 September 2015 (MDT)
Well I know what it's about now, but I'm still a little confused. I was going by the formatting in my First Printing 3.5e PHB, so how recent is "most recent"? Even the 3.0 SRD uses lower case for class feature names in the class table, when was it ever capitalized? Marasmusine (talk) 15:10, 17 September 2015 (MDT)
This was the case when Druid (Evaluational Base Class Layout) was worked on, or shortly before I believe. --Green Dragon (talk) 08:56, 29 September 2015 (MDT)
So the discussion is at Talk:Druid (Evaluational Base Class Layout)/Capitalized Abilities in Tables?. This was before my time, and before 5e (which presumably the discussion does not cover; 5e also uses lower-case style [i.e. table entries are not titles, and class feature names are not proper names]). I would like a revote. Marasmusine (talk) 11:02, 29 September 2015 (MDT)
I don't know if a re-vote is necessary since 3.5e is not the most current D&D edition and asking users to give their input into a game which they may or may not use probably is not necessary. As long as we have a discussion- or even move this discussion to that page, wait some time for more input from other users who may have that page on their watchlist, and then change all the corresponding formatting bases (preload, When to Italicize and Capitalize (DnD Guideline), etc), it should be fine I presume. --Green Dragon (talk) 00:32, 20 October 2015 (MDT)
Does this mean that this formatting only applies to 3.5e classes; and 5e classes should be formatted per the 5e PHB? Marasmusine (talk) 01:16, 20 October 2015 (MDT)
Good observation. When to Italicize and Capitalize (DnD Guideline) worked for both edition, 3.5e and 4e to a degree that was acceptable (minor problems like the special column formatting style exist of course). 5e of course, is a new formatting style. As such "When to Italicize and Capitalize" should be split by editions, with the existing labeled under "3.5e and 4e" and then a new "5e" section. Do we agree that this would work and keep the page current, or is there a way that would approach the differrent styles across various editions better? --Green Dragon (talk) 09:25, 20 October 2015 (MDT)
I think I'll write a 5e style guide addressing some of the most common issues. Where a style element is universal across all editions (e.g. class names are not proper nouns), we can identify these and do an "all editions" section. Marasmusine (talk) 13:38, 20 October 2015 (MDT)
I'm looking at the class tables in the 5e PHB, and the feature names in class tables (and feature names in general) do have initial capital letters. It's just the 3.5e PHB that is all lower-case. One subtlety is that the name of a class feature is capitalized (e.g. Eldritch Invocations) but the component parts of the feature are not (e.g. each invocation is an "eldritch invocation") but these can be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. Marasmusine (talk) 08:32, 31 October 2015 (MDT)

Castles and Heraldry[edit]

Hi! I've responded to your post on my talk page. I've also tried to go through and add some of my content to the Issue 3 page, unfortunately I'm in the field right now and do not have access to any of my notes, notebooks, books, etc. I won't be back for a couple of weeks... I'll try to add some stuff off the top of my head, but I'm working 12+hour days.for the next couple weeks. --Calidore Chase (talk) 05:37, 27 September 2015 (MDT)


I posted on blue dragons page about this as well, but do you know if I'm required to post a disclaimer on all of my pages for a campaign setting or if the main page alone works? I'm writing an extensive list of feats, weapons and overall a lot of pages that I alone am working on so I'm just curious if I should worry about using the disclaimer on all of it or if main page alone works?Also could you please stop making edits to the page I'm working on :P Taz447 (talk) 02:14, 3 October 2015 (MDT)

Hello, you should put the disclaimer on pages that reference trademarked names (or other IP). Marasmusine (talk) 03:33, 3 October 2015 (MDT)
Don't forget to add categories to the pages too, per my edits. Marasmusine (talk) 05:15, 3 October 2015 (MDT)

I'm waiting too untill its closer to the entire thing being finished, before I do that, at this point there's new stuff being put in and removed too frequently to bother. --Taz447 (talk) 05:18, 3 October 2015 (MDT)

This is because I'm trying to avoid it being used by anyone untill the entire thing is finished, I hope you understand --Taz447 (talk) 05:43, 3 October 2015 (MDT)


Thanks for the tips, also im not sure if its a problem to add my signature to my work as a quicker, easier way to access. If it is let me know i now understand that it shows up in history however i would still like my signature to be directly on my ideas and thoughts thank you.

It's policy not to directly sign the page. If other editors come along and do work on the page, then you would no longer be the sole author. You can use the article's talk page to link to your user page. You can also maintain a list of the things you started on your user page. Marasmusine (talk) 02:42, 11 October 2015 (MDT)

By Jove, Thank You[edit]

Barnstar-rotating.gif The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For tens of thousands of edits, thousands of deletions, thousands more useful things. For years, you've been a reliable and an amazing contributor to this community in all respects. Thank you. --SgtLion (talk) 05:41, 12 October 2015 (MDT)

I know you have a lot of barnstars already, so I apologise~ My simpleton's method of counting your user logs tells me thus: At time of writing, you have 22444 edits on pages still up, 7169 deleted edits, 14961 page deletions, 1969 page moves, 304 user blocks, 60 page protects, 21 File uploads, 2 patrols and 1 user creation (yourself, surprisingly) since your first edit on 11:35, 8 November 2008 (GMT), creating the fancy Dretch. That's a whole lotta clicks. The only reason I didn't take it upon myself to count your letter contribution is because the dandwiki server struggles to send me a fraction the stuff you've done without a massive delay.

You've been reliable help for any issue I've come across here, and you've helped all kinds of users wherever I look. I realised recently that I just innately trust you to sort it when I stick a delete template on pages. You have been (and still are!) the backbone in transforming this wiki into something greater. I can only hope you can continue to improve my now favourite DnD resource for a long time to come. Just.. avert your gaze quickly while I find out why apparently this still isn't turning like it should! --SgtLion (talk) 05:41, 12 October 2015 (MDT)

Don't know what to say, thanks! Marasmusine (talk) 08:19, 12 October 2015 (MDT)

Glad to have helped out![edit]

Just glad to have given a hand! I'm still rather new at this whole wiki editing thing, so I may have slipped up once or twice. Not to mention that i'm still rather new at DnD in general. I heard of the game for years, but it was only recently that I actually experienced first hand how flippin' awesome it is. Because of that, maybe some of the boons I made might not be exactly balanced compared to the others. --SineDiego (talk) 19:46, 17 October 2015 (EST)

Sure, I may have to tweak some! Marasmusine (talk) 01:18, 18 October 2015 (MDT)


Hey, thanks for putting the 3.5 mermaid in the right place, I'm still getting the hang of formatting stuff :3 --TophatDoctor (talk) 15:11, 24 October 2015 (MDT)

Made some changes[edit]

Hi! Care to look at this again? Craft Magic Tattoo Variant (3.5e Feat) --Calidore Chase (talk) 22:57, 25 October 2015 (MDT)

From Kydo[edit]

I've been working on this variant rule for quite a while now, and it's gone through about a billion variations and changes. I think I'm getting closer to something that is actually workable, but I wanted to get other peoples' opinions on it before I put it to the table. Please give it a browse if you have the time. If you have any comments, criticism, or advice, please let me know. (I'm especially having difficulties figuring out how to phrase the idea with clarity) --Kydo (talk) 13:04, 31 October 2015 (MDT)

I've had a quick look at the first section, you'll have to forgive me, I do my usual over-criticism! Marasmusine (talk) 16:52, 31 October 2015 (MDT)

5e class header levels[edit]

The section headers in 5e classes look so similar, making it hard to distinguish structure at a glance. The highest-level header used right now is h3, but h2 would increase distinction across the board with no downside. I would like to convert the homebrew 5e classes to the following hierarchy:

  • ==ClassName==
    • ===Flavor===
    • ===Flavor===
    • ===Creating a ClassName===
  • ==Class Features==
    • (Hit dice, proficiencies, equipment (each at h4), and feature table here.)
    • ===Feature===
    • ===Feature===
      • ====Sub-feature==== (e.g. fighting style choices)
      • ====Sub-feature====
    • ===Feature===
    • ===etc.===
  • ==ClassName Archetypes==
    • ===Archetype===
      • ====Feature====
      • ====Feature====
      • ====Feature====
  • ==Multiclassing==

You made most of the edits to 5e Class Preload, so I want to know what you think about this. —Proton[talk] 16:24, 5 November 2015 (MST)

I prefer the smaller headers, but that's just me, I have no objection to shifting everything up one level. I would like to have the lowest-level headers as semi-colon titles rather than h4. Marasmusine (talk) 16:38, 5 November 2015 (MST)
Because of the unsightly gap between the header and the text? —Proton[talk] 17:52, 5 November 2015 (MST)
Also to stop the TOC from being too long. (I wonder if there's a way the TOC can be split into two columns...) Marasmusine (talk) 02:00, 6 November 2015 (MST)
I know there is some magic word you can use to limit the maximum depth of the TOC, it eludes me presently. —Proton[talk] 02:40, 6 November 2015 (MST)

Note on random feat[edit]

Hey Marasmusine, the guy from "Time is Money" here. Sorry for the extra work load lately and wasting space here.

Me and my DM have worked a feat for my artificer into an almost wholly homebrew game similar to the one I made as a template. The original intent was to show a gain of crafting knowledge, or a burst of inspiration, after you made an item and sold it to a wealthy benefactor, being a large achievement. I wasn't quite sure of how to implement it narrowly for that focus, so all I could think of was to put it into an experience crystal as the Artificer's Rend. If that seems like the ability is too powerful (to the extent it can't even be fixed) please place the page deletion template on it; if you could find a method to word or balance it, then please do that instead.

Edit: I forgot to mention, The 1/100 gp was a number we haven't really put into testing, but it seemed like it would be ok as a 1000 gp item would give 10 xp, a 100,000 gp item would yield 1,000 xp, the number to reach second level from a hugely priced item. If that isn't reasonable please change the number as well, it simply worked in theory.

Hello! My problem with the current write-up is that "to a person of relative importance or power" isn't defined, or what the parameters of the "personally requested item" might be, what the item's "prove" is (value?), or what an "experience crystal" is (In my opinion the amount of XP given should always be the purview of the DM). As written, it's also still susceptible to an arrangement where the crafted item and money is repeatedly passed back and forth generating crystals.
I can think of a few alternatives, but a question first:
This is a feat for an artificer, is it supposed to be limited to items created through their Item Creation class feature?
Marasmusine (talk) 02:20, 10 November 2015 (MST)
Thanks for taking a look at this post... I've looked about and found a few things to clarify. The first note is that the feat was mainly looking at the homebrew class of artificer. The benefactor will almost always be a wealthy merchant or renowned prince who wanted a custom-made item. The definition of "personally requested" item would be either something the DM told the artificer, or a sale of any item the DM deems an influential person might have wanted. The "prove" was actually a typo, I haven't had access to a computer for some time. My phone changed what I meant and I didn't notice until you pointed it out.
The other points you made are good. I limited the use to once a month so the artificer couldn't just get a constant experience flow from mundane items, but can get a little bit to jumpstart an enchanting career. Since the homebrew artificer doesn't use the specific class feature of item creation, I would simply limit it to an item of masterwork quality or better. Please let me know what you think about these revisions.
Okay, I've had a quick look at the homebrew class, added a link to it, and made the Rending feature a prerequisite. Marasmusine (talk) 14:09, 10 November 2015 (MST)
Personal tools
Home of user-generated,
homebrew, pages!
admin area
Terms and Conditions for Non-Human Visitors