grognards.txt - sandbox gamers are the John Galts of the RPG world

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > grognards.txt - sandbox gamers are the John Galts of the RPG world

«‹›67 »

Rasamune: Jan 19, 2011; MORT
MORT
MORT

There is one argument for why 4E isn't really D&D.

When someone says, "we're going to play D&D" there are a coupe of things I assume.

1) There is going to be a Wizard who memorizes spells from a spellbook on some kind of Vancian schedule.
2) There is going to be a Cleric who is like the Wizard, except he can fight in melee, and turn/control undead, and he memorizes his spells from Prayer.
3) There is going to be a lame rear end fighter of suck, who tricks you into thinking he might be cool, but isn't.
4) There is going to be a Paladin class with some flavor of Lay on Hands and limited clerical spells.
5) I am going to have str, dex, con, int,wis,cha and maybe one or two more stats rated 3-18+ based on 3d6 rolling.
6) There are going to be HP.
7) There is going to be AC. (even if the whole thac0 thing changed between 2nd and 3rd, we still had AC)
8) I'm going to have to roll saving throws.

These are things I can count on in D&D. This is true of every single edition from 1st to 3rd. It doesn't really count for OD&D but lets be honest, how many gamers under 40 have even played OD&D once. When I say D&D, people think 1st-3rd and 4th.

Very few of those actually apply to 4th Edition. It's a vastly different game than 1st-3rd.

# ? Jul 10, 2013 00:12

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 28, 2024 12:15

Rasamune: Jan 19, 2011; MORT
MORT
MORT

nobody is telling TSR or WotC to change poo poo, cause they can't. what people are telling them is to acknowledge the lie they has been saying for over a decade now.

now i have outlined the games editions before showing where 1996 released 5th edition D&D, so i wont go through that again, someone wwanting it can search these forums.

the important thing is the list i made recently:

BD&D
AD&D
3.x
4/E

people could sit at the same table with 1st and 2nd edition books and play. they were that drat close. yes there are some that are buttsore about Devils and Demon being changed to appease bible thumpers, but there are also people that argue over Mind Flayer or Illithid, too. a random monster name means nothing. if you had 1st edition books, you still had the other name.

BD&D was changed each time, but through out, was MOSTLY the same. it is this compatibility that that made D&D what it was for nearly 30 years before WotC came along and threw it away because THEY decide that NOBODY wanted it anymore. the same thing for AD&D that lasted 20 years. WotC sees itself as God's gift to gaming and they can do no wrong. look at 4th edition and what people TRIED to warn them about BEFORE it was ever released. they just sat in their ivory tower not listening, and the same is true for DDN. they won't listen to what people are telling the the "feel" is.

the truth of the matter is WotC is no gaming god and Magic the Gathering is their ONLY success, and they have nearly destroyed it. the keep adding new and stupid gimmicks like split cards, planewalker cards, etc. how many games did WotC fail with?

Chainmail
Dreamblade
Primal Order

these are just RPG or D&D related games, but there is plenty more. WotC is incapable of making an RPG without the D&D name because without it that RPG would fail. It is why Peter Ad-whatever bought TSR in the first place.

you saw the cries when 4th came out about people not wanting to switch to a new game, and thus WotC gave birth to Pathfinder. right, wrong, or indifferent, it is the successor to 3.x. or at least in the beginning it supported 3.x more closely.

Hackmaster is in no way a method to support AD&D, nor are these clones based on d20 system. AD&D doesn't use the d20 system.

WotC has seen the damage PF has done to it, and that is again why they are willing to support their, and ONLY their previous "D&D" editions in Encounters for DDN.

they try to deny people enjoy AD&D and BD&D, and that is the problem. it was the same thing they tried doing when 3.x sales dropped was deny people enjoyed it as the reason for the loss in sales, so they made 4th.

when you have so much confusion, then the name that was so hard fought to protect or buy, means nothing.

you, also like many others, mistakenly assume that people only play D&D with "friends". I hated people like you on WotC forums and ENWorld, and i hate you here as well. you think your luck in having that many players around that you can select a few to enjoy playing with is how WONDERFUL the world works for everyone... just gently caress off with that.

1. playing with friends is a luxury, so take your 1% rich rear end philosophy elsewhere

2. new players don't have the option of playing with only friends

3. cons/store events don't let you just play with friends

anyone that closes their mind to the point they think D&D is ONLY played with friends is arguing a corner case, not necessarily the majority view.

it is about going FORWARD. WotC needs to stop acting like D&D never existed before them. they need to realize that when in trying to CLAIM to appeal to older edition fans, that not everyone wants to play "no child left behind so everyone graduates always in elementary school" DM fiat leveling.

posit this as it is one of my gripes about 3.x+ editions:

the DM assigns XP and rewards a bonus XP to the thief for doing something interesting and the game was more fun for all. the thief gains a level from the bonus XP.

is this a problem in AD&D? does it make any of the other players feel left behind?

is this a problem in d20? does it make any players feel left behind?

AD&D the answer would be no, everyone has different XP rates. d20, EVERYONE should be the same level all the time, that is the ONLY reason to have unified XP amounts for every class for every level, so everyone not that thief feels like they were left behind.

i have seen in 3.5 that exact thing happen and the exact defense used for the level system, IN A GAME!

the fat that the mentality of the games is so different is the problem, and the reason for this thread. the mentality towards the game itself is either TSR systems and way of playing or WotC systems and way of playing. they cannot play together because not unlike the systems, the players are not compatible with what they seek from the game.

another problem WotC created was to the same effect of "firing old players for new" or whatever you want to call it along those terms, that they are grasping for straws from the new audience.

Note that most people feel that a "true gamer" plays more than one RPG, so it really makes no sense from a company standpoint that you would get them to stop playing these 5 other games for yours only. so why change it for that purpose? WotC d20 editions are ALL just sales gimmicks. they are not even games. this is why 3.0 had to be changed after what, 3 years to an incompatible edition? i am not sure how compatible 3.0 and 3.5 is, someone else is free to make a thread to explain that if they haven't already. then they just throw it out 5 years later? 4th edition was changed in... 2 years? then thrown out mostly 2 years later, and for nearly a year have not had a single product to sell. this is because it isn't a game, but a marketing gimmick. that or they really think D&D is like an iPhone and they have made some vast technological improvement that the older books no longer function in the world. :confused:

# ? Jul 10, 2013 00:14

Chaltab: Feb 16, 2011; So shocked someone got me an avatar!

they just need to acknowledge they hosed up and FURTHER retract what they have said and done, and SUPPORT older editions then maybe the animosity towards them and players of their editions will be relaxed or might even go away. They have this thing now that is "fixing" the Realms to remove the damage done by the Spellplague of 4th edition

and this is WHY the are undoing the Spellplague of 4th edition to FIX the Forgotten Realms. maybe you should read current events? This is ALSO why they are bringing back Spelljammer, Ravenloft, etc settings. they ARE admitting they hosed up since 3rd on SOME levels. bringing back settings and support for them does NOT support the editions. Claiming Greyhawk has always existed so OD&D has always had support is just making a stupid claim and fooling yourself. Lying to yourself, actually.

Mearls still ahs a job at WotC, but as far as I know, Jon Tweet, Monte Cook, and the other from 3rd; many involved with 4th (Dave Noonan, Bill S., Scott Rouse, Randy Beuhler (see GLEEMAX! incident))...no longer have their job. But WotC as a company, be it Greg Leeds the CEO put into place by HASBRO, or someone other than the equivalent of a PR butt-kisser like Scott Rouse was and like Randy Beuhler was needs to come forward and admit flat out, that they hosed up. Personally, I would have Mike Mearls, and would have prefered the douche Bill S to have apologized.

Token offerings such as bastardized settings "we are making Spelljammer its own world!", "We are making Raveloft only a part of another plane instead of its own demi-plane", etc just to have the name for sale on products again of those "settings" is just trying to blow smoke up peoples rear end.

you see MANY others business apologize in the world with recalls on items for things that are NOT even hazardous, just offensive to some. Backpedaling some call it, well either way DDN token gestures are NOT enough of an apology for many. WotC can get on the ground and lick the poo poo form the boots of ALL those people (including 3rd because well 4th) they made wade through the poo poo that they have done to D&D.

a company sympathetic to the buyer is often the one that makes more money unless they are granted a monopoly against anti-trust laws such as telecomm which became worse than Standard Oil ever was.

now i know you are Lorraine Willaims posting ont hese forums about D&D, and have no idea why you would even come close to D&D after the 90s and what you did to it and your hate for gamers. Cause:

1. D&D has long since been diluted in the 80s, the thing AD&D strove to fix when released in 1977.
2. D&D doesnt need to be put on loving chorssstitch patterns jsut to have product awareness or revenue because:
A: WotC makes more than D&D
B: HASBRO has revenue from more than just WotC

So either you are Lorraine Williams, or just as loving stupid as she is/was.

again, they need to stop trying to sell new editions, and just sell the core editions books, and make adventures old and new for ALL editions compatible. I have said this before, that THAT is the support needed, but they FEAR printing anything with terms like THAC0.

How can you say you want to support older edition players and STILL slap them in the face by calling the game THEY choose to be worthless, which in turn is calling them worthless?

WotC only believes D&D works as the d20 system, and that is what they need to apologize for and rectify.

quote:

If you find you're unable to recruit players, it indicates two possibilities - either the game is defective or you are defective as a DM.

Again you prove yourself a fool. I am not one of those "collectors" that has 400 copies of the PHBs to let players use all the time, nor am i rich enough to do so. also not everyone just goes on and trusts places like Amazon for used books. SOME people like stores they can see and feel the book, and in the case of D&D and books in general SMELL the book to make sure it isnt covered in food stains and rot, or just general mildew and mold from improper care.

The access to the main game isn't out there (legally) like the SRD that many people use as a PHB for 3.x. There are sites that have been linked to on here that illegally share the HTML files present on CD-ROM version of 2nd known as Core Rules 2.0, but that isn't something everyone condones.

again like above, they are NOT supporting the edition for fear that people will want it, NOT their "new shiny".

D&D editions should not be collector items like some special print edition of Trivial Pursuit or Nintendo/Star Wars Monopoly. the collector value of the originals was in PART kept by new cores for the reprints of 1st and 2nd, but also the materials used and copyright dates. THIS helps, but why do only a limited run? Why for so long did they fear PDF sales, when they had nothing to lose, and thus BROUGHT BACK older edition PDF sales?

Why can't they have print form or print-on-demand for older editions?

it is about ACCESS, which IS DENIED by WotC to older editions for fear their 2013 model car will sell less than the 2012 model, because it is competing with yourself. remember that 4th edition was claimed, by Scott Rouse on ENWorld, to have cost at LEAST 7 digits in development....MILLIONS of dollars. They need the expense to be recovered like Disney praying overseas sales covers the flop that is THE Lone Ranger which is still $200 million away from making ANY profits at all or even breaking even!

It would cost less to fix 2nd than develop a new edition and release a fixed version with errata in place.

Hell it would cost less to make a 2.4 edition that goes between 2nd and PO, or a 2.7 edition that keeps 2nd ideas but updates to some 3.0 ideas, without those things like feats and such...ergo turning THAC0 into BAB for those 2nd graders that cant do math with today's technology to be able to subtract negative numbers.

but you are too blind to see any of that and think it is product failure or player failure. guess those are the reason i can no longer buy Twinkies huh? Company failure had NOTHING to do with Hostess, not does it have anything to do with TSR going bankrupt or WotC mismanaging D&D. it is ALL the fault of the players, and corporate management is never at fault. Glad you were born with a gold brick to suckle on when you popped out of your mothers snatch and didn't have to rely on her dirty fleshy teet and can live off that gold forever. Must be nice in your fantasy world...hope you don't have any goblins lurking in the shadows of the forest and you have your dice on hand to roll for an attack should they jump you.

Most people live in the real world, not your fantasy one.

you surely don't live in the bible-belt, and again live in the fantasy world where all pastimes ar allowed by everyone and obviously your fantasy world allows gay marriage to all should they so choose as well?

you are oblivious of the real world. you have to be some rich pampered snob living in the shadow of reality in new york wandering around wall street or some poo poo, cause you don't know poo poo about reality.

i bet you have probably never even heard of a "dry county" before either have you?

i guess your posh mansion has rooms just for D&D and everyone you know has the same at your home or you actually have places that allow such things outside of a single comic store that has ONE table for it for people to use IF the CCG players arent already filling it.

loving rich cock-suckers thinking they know everything. you are just yuppy trash. hope your diamond studded toilet paper from tiffanys doesnt mar your precious doesn't stink rear end!

gently caress OFF!

----

I have to give shadzar a hand: it must take work to be that incoherent and loony.

# ? Jul 10, 2013 01:11

dwarf74: Sep 2, 2012; Buglord

Rasamune posted:

There is one argument for why 4E isn't really D&D.

When someone says, "we're going to play D&D" there are a coupe of things I assume.

1) There is going to be a Wizard who memorizes spells from a spellbook on some kind of Vancian schedule.
2) There is going to be a Cleric who is like the Wizard, except he can fight in melee, and turn/control undead, and he memorizes his spells from Prayer.
3) There is going to be a lame rear end fighter of suck, who tricks you into thinking he might be cool, but isn't.
4) There is going to be a Paladin class with some flavor of Lay on Hands and limited clerical spells.
5) I am going to have str, dex, con, int,wis,cha and maybe one or two more stats rated 3-18+ based on 3d6 rolling.
6) There are going to be HP.
7) There is going to be AC. (even if the whole thac0 thing changed between 2nd and 3rd, we still had AC)
8) I'm going to have to roll saving throws.

These are things I can count on in D&D. This is true of every single edition from 1st to 3rd. It doesn't really count for OD&D but lets be honest, how many gamers under 40 have even played OD&D once. When I say D&D, people think 1st-3rd and 4th.

Very few of those actually apply to 4th Edition. It's a vastly different game than 1st-3rd.

So, in other words ... if you collect an arbitrary list of stuff you look for in D&D, it means that something else isn't D&D? Holy crazypants.

GROG TAX!
-------------

quote:

Simultaneous action can and has been represented quite well. Burning Wheel did it. Fudge did it. FATE did it. These are well respected games, widely considered to have good mechanics - and they somewhat suggest that "impossible" is questionable analysis at best.

Actually no. To 90% of people who sit down to play TTRPG's those games dont even exist, they have never heard of them and dont know jack about them. At least half of the current D&D players still dont know anything but the vaguest rumors of 5e and its been out in playtest for a year (seriously, go to some local D&D meetups and ask about about it, you'll be shocked how disconnected your average gamer is from the hobby). And to the 10% who do know what they are their reception is quite mixed.

The only people who consider those games to have good mechanics are half or less of the handful of people who play them, the larger number of people who bought the system and never played it with a group but want to seem more uber nerd then the next guy online and so talk about it like they have played it even though they havent, and 50% or less of internet reviewers, who are just the 2nd group on crack.

I've tried them all the best of the bunch is Fudge and its such a disjointed mess that I would rather sit down and play go fish.

# ? Jul 10, 2013 02:01

dwarf74: Sep 2, 2012; Buglord

Thats because pathfinder players like the game we have. We didnt go looking for a new system, D&D came crawling to us after 4e failed. So searching for "solutions" to things we dont see as problems are not gonna do it.

It 5e wants to get 3e PF players it needs to take the things that that system does well and jack them up to the next level, and spend a little effort minimizing what its not great at it. But dont worry much about that. We've had more then 10 years to figure those things out, they arent problems for us, dont try to solve them. Take the good stuff and make it better.

5e is running as fast as it can to 1e style play, which isnt a 180 from what we like, but its probably a 140, or more.

The failure here is in understanding your target audience

---------------

"You don't need to fix your game if you just sell the same poo poo you've been selling to customers who fired you, because they know how to fix it."

# ? Jul 10, 2013 02:03

FIRE CURES BIGOTS: Aug 26, 2002; by Y Kant Ozma Post

Wow this guy has a mean DM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDJ1UOpxjt4

also fundies are completely insane

# ? Jul 10, 2013 05:11

RYang: Dec 5, 2012

Rasamune posted:

3) There is going to be a lame rear end fighter of suck, who tricks you into thinking he might be cool, but isn't.

Literally "if fighters are allowed to have fun then it's not real D&D and isn't worth playing". No circumlocutions or twisted logic about how realistically magic would obviously be better or anything, just outright "fighters must always be worse".

-------

quote:

Then a mundane melee character of that level should be able to create a tsunami by punching the water, motivate people to do their bidding through inspiration or intimidation, and lop off the heads of those minions like it's nothing.

Then all you have now is "Swordcasting".

I agree with the "Kill minions like flies" part, but at that point in time your character is more akin too a god and magic and the mundane mix together.

At epic levels you probably want that, but I think level 20 is VERY high fantasy, yet not epic.

# ? Jul 10, 2013 18:23

Nancy_Noxious: Apr 10, 2013; by Smythe

quote:

ehh feats can die in a fire, but at worst thank god they are optional and i can play without them in next.

quote:

I am not sure that is an answer to the question: "What's your favorite feat in 3e or 4e? ". You're free to post, but maybe you clicked the wrong thread ?

quote:

no i didnt have a favorite feat in 3rd or 4th because after buying the books for those editions i sold them soon after. feats create an enviroment of powergaming that is unbalancing to campaigns. Also it promotes too much min/maxing. they could have implemented some feat type abilities as powers gained thru leveling and left it at that. how many of the 10k feats are playable and good, how many are reworded repeats?

# ? Jul 12, 2013 01:36

Slimnoid: Sep 6, 2012; Does that mean I don't get the job?

^ It's like he almost gets the point of how having a glut of feats is a really bad thing, but he wraps it up in some bullshit.

The Idiot King of Grognard Land posted:

Sacrosanct posted:
And this is why so many people are hating on Next. Not necessarily based on Mearls or the rules themselves (in fact it can't be because they keep making up reasons to hate it that aren't true). But because there is so much bad blood between them and you, and the fact you are a consultant makes them just HATE that fact.

While that's true for a relatively tiny group of people, most of those people don't like D&D at all, so the whole notion that I'M somehow the reason they're rejecting D&D is bullshit.

As much as I enjoy the sour grapes of those who despise me, I think that the real reasons for most people who are hating on NEXT come out of two factors that have little to do with me:
1) For many, its due to still feeling a lot of bad blood for WoTC due to the latter's decisions and attitude over the last few years.
2) For the small but vocal group of 4e fans, its fear at realizing that its generally accepted now that 4e was a mistake, and that the next edition is going to look relatively little like it.

RPGPundit

# ? Jul 12, 2013 02:00

KirbyJ: Oct 30, 2012

WoD grog, on whether or not you could make "Steal Life" not a sin (a thread full of grog in it's own right):

quote:

Arcanewatcher, calm down. I understand my way of thinking it's quite different from yours but there's no reason to turn this topic in flame.
My views on the "child/female" subject are not a thing to discuss here. For me, a child has not developed sense of honour and rational intellect, at least not as an adult, so even if he' s deeply ingratefoul I have no right to blame him - evryone was more or less self-centerend when he was a boy. Females, on the other hand, has been given by the Lord other duties, and were create to serve and obey their man without questining, so they had not the blessing of rational, analitic intellect nor the sense of honor and viriliy of a man.
So, I would never expect to a female or a child to repay a debt.

I'm not above charity and forgiveness - me, Saul - but I'm also sure about a thing: being a good, moral man (and I underline, man, doesn't imply to be a stupid. I would not ask the life of a man I saved - despite I would feel obligate to risk my life to save a man wich saved my back. But I'm in right to expect at least the intent of gratitude. I can say , with no doubt, an healed man how refuse to share a year of life, or even less, has not even the feeling of gratitude inside him -let alone the material demostration.

And forgiveness is for a man which wronged me without knowing, or a man which ask my forgiveness due to honest repentance. If a man wrong me consciously and freely, and feel no guilt about, I would ignore lesser insults. But if I drew my blood, I have the right, and the duty, to reapy him. Lex talionis, yes.
And it's still a limitation of the rightful rage of the wronged by the Wisdom of the Lord, because if a man cut one of my fingers, my impulse would be to slowly dismember him. No joke.

Exalted grog fresh off the press. Title: "How to make slavery more humane." :negative:

quote:

BEfore you slam me read thie passage from Manacle and coin

""Slave breakers use hard repetious Labor to force complicity, using other techniques where necessary.

The lash is a useful tool, because it can inflict terrible pain with little lasting harm.

Beatings(the soles of the palms, and the feet are common targets, since they leave no disfiguring scars) and repeated suffocation to the point of unconciousness are used at the slightest hint of disobedience or fatigue.

This is complemented with various forms of Verbal and psychological abuse, the form of periods of enforced silence, insults, sensorary deprivation, and thats that capitalize on the slaves worst fears.
Repeated promises to starve or mutilate the slave, along with threats to harm the rest of his family or tribe are used to force passivity.

The Guild considers Sexual assault a unprofessional way to conduct business, and the Immaculate order considers it immoral, but many independent slave traders employ rape as well.

(Am copying this by hand, as my copy of the book is paper)

I have 2 ideas in my head for ways to make the breaking process considerably more humane, do either of these seem legit?

Some kind of Alchemical Concoction that if fed to someone over say 5-8 weeks, will start to dull their sense of Identity, and promote suggestibility, so long as it doesnt imperil ones own survival in an obvious way.

Reason it takes repeated doses is to avoid the drug being an obvious aid for interrogators, spys, etc.

Realms allready tried this With Deshan using addictive drugs, but something that promoted suggestibility, rather then just was addictive, might be helpful to the initial breaking process.

Other idea, is some kind of bio engineered offshoot of Chakra orchids, designed to manage slaves, I dont think it would be too hard to ensure it did no truly permanent damage to the body, leaving the soul in place, acting as a Symbiont controller.

(Invasive as the forgoing idea, is I ADAMANTLY believe its far more humane then the methods described in Manacle and coin)

Also if a society does pass laws giving slaves a handful of rights any ideas how to enforce it in the countryside, where random visitors to your estate are rare, and vistors with the influence to report any violations of such laws will be rarer yet.

Worse, Thats where their will be the most incentive to mistreat slaves in the interest of profit, as opposed to simply out of a sense of cruelty.

Edit: A reply to the above post:

quote:

More humane? No, I don't think you can do that. If somebody sees slavery as inhumane, that's that. Experience tells me that nothing's gonna persuade them that enslaving people can be a humane thing. People are stubborn creatures.

More nuanced though? Maybe. Depends on implementation. I once ran a game which partially took place in the Underworld. The PCs visited the lands of the Eye and Seven Despairs at one point. He had nearly a whole society of Creation-born slaves he was using for experiments, but all of those slaves were living in much more comfortable conditions then ever. They even were allowed to leave him, if they so choosed.

And none of them ever did. Those were all slaves bought from the guild- they had life of torture, exhaustion, rape and all sorts of nasty business. And they were offered home and shelter for the rest of their life. A painless death on the operating table seemed much more pleseant then what was awaiting them out there.

Of course, brainwashing people into believing something like this, is utterly abhorent. But it does make you think, if sometimes inhumane isn't better for people then humane.

Making the breaking process more humane won't do much though. The key is in showing the feelings of the slaves. Their own true feelings, not changed by alchemical concotions or parasitic worms. You can mess around with those easy enough with no magic whatsoever.

KirbyJ fucked around with this message at 13:43 on Jul 14, 2013

# ? Jul 14, 2013 13:32

dwarf74: Sep 2, 2012; Buglord

That doesnt bother me. He likes 4e and that was the oddball outlier that failed. Frankly he's the backwards mutant, he's just not self aware enough to realize it. So I get more of a chuckle out of that tone then offended.

# ? Jul 14, 2013 22:50

Fuego Fish: Dec 5, 2004; By tooth and claw!

"I need some help making a tabletop game". Well, this thread seems innocent enough...

quote:

I have a group of friends who play tabletop games every week together and one of my friends jokingly said I should DM a game. I was running with the joke and started pitching fake ideas to him about what game I'd do. One thing I said was "Escape from Mt. Racism". After a few days of thinking about it, I kind of want to make something for that stupid idea.

Oh, well, maybe-

quote:

I was thinking that the setting could be WWII and the Nazis succesfully invaded Russia so the game would take place in a Gulag type of concentration camp (hence fulfilling the Mt. Racism part). I want the game to be more about story telling than combat because we usually play pathfinder and I think it would be a nice break. I'm planning on it being just a one-off game or a two-parter if it runs too long.

I was thinking that the gulag would have a mad scientist antagonist who was using the prisoners as test subjects for weird experiments. Whenever a character was caught trying to escape they would be taken away for experimentation and brought back but with a strange and awkward hindrance. One of my friends suggested making it a survival horror type of game like amnesia, like, there are enemies but you can't fight them.

TL;DR: Want to make a survival horror game about jews trying to escape a Nazi concentration camp. Want the game to be focused on story telling.

Well, ok, yikes. The guy wants to make a game that somewhat trivializes the Holocaust called "Escape from Mt. Racism", surely the replies will point out what a bad idea this is-

quote:

Call Of Cthulhu would fit just fine. Combat is wicked deadly, it has rules for that era and is easy to run.

quote:

New World of Darkness would do it well, as a mortals game (just need core book). GMs for it are called "Story Tellers" for a reason. Call of Cthulhu would not be bad either.

quote:

You want to play "The Farm"

http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/10/10995.phtml

http://memento-mori.com/online-store/the-farm-revised/

You're one of 6 players in a concentration type place where they'll eat you after 6 days if you haven't escaped.

# ? Jul 15, 2013 00:11

Boing: Jul 12, 2005; trapped in custom title factory, send help

quote:

I admit it: I'm a RPG fanatic from way back. I played all kinds of genres, although I was too cheap to invest in various rule books, because I was always the Game Master (or Dungeon Master if you prefer). AD&D, GURPS, V&V, Paranoia, Top Secret, Call of Cthulhu, Boot Hill, you name it. Like everybody else who has played the game, any game, I have lots of stories to tell about amazing adventures, incredible improvisations, great scenarios, and clever players outwitting impossible odds.

But forget that now. Tell me your stories of the stupidest players you ever had, the most boneheaded moves you ever saw in a game, the klutziest characters ever to grace the bone heap in the Tomb of Horrors.

I'm not talking about bad dice rolls. I'm not talking about unfortunate saving throws or evil traps. I'm speaking of times when the player commits an incredibly thick-headed lack of judgement that subjects the character to a cruel injustice or an untimely death.

My favorite mishaps came from one, count him, one player. We called him GODAG, for Good Ol' Dead-And-Gone.

(D&D game)
Me: "You come to a river."
Doug: "I'll look around for a bridge."
GODAG: "I jump in and swim across."
Me: "Really? Okay. Your armor is too heavy. You sink to the bottom and die."

(spy game)
Me: "The snipers continue to fire at your truck. The engine stops running and is now on fire."
Everyone else: "Get out of the truck and take cover."
GODAG: "I try to fix the engine."

(sci-fi game, in planes vs. tanks battle)
Me: "Joe and GODAG, your planes are both hit. You've each lost control and you're going down."
GODAG: "I jump out of the plane."
Joe: "I bail out of the plane."
GODAG: "I go back and get my parachute."

(Old West game, at the poker table with desperadoes)
Me, rolling dice: "You have lost all your money."
GODAG: "I'll put my guns on the table."
Me: "Really? You reach for your guns?"
GODAG: "Yeah, I'll bet my guns."
Me: "The other poker players see you reaching for your guns and shoot you."

Don't get the wrong idea: I'm not a capricious GM who kills off players for fun. I really tried to give him every opportunity to do something useful. In the end, what we got was entertainment value.

quote:

One of my favourites : My DM was describing a cobat setting that we had stumbled into. We were out numbered and as the dice were rolled apparently out gunned. As things went from bad to worse We found ourselves cut off with one door as a means of escape. It was of course locked. Our only thief pipes up and says " I try to pick the lock". The DM at this point reminds him of the melee going on around him. Our little thief insists. The DM basically got up and dropped a 25 piece jigsaw puzzle in front of him and told him " Here, you put this puzzle together while I beat you with a baseball bat. If you can finish it before I beat you senseless, we'll say that you get a shot at picking the lock"

Our thief got the hint.

# ? Jul 15, 2013 13:41

Chaltab: Feb 16, 2011; So shocked someone got me an avatar!

Boing posted:

Our thief got the hint.

Pff. Idiot. It's almost like he thought D&D was a cooperative fantasy roleplaying game where the players worked together. Oh, wait...

----
content

King of Dunces posted:

NPCs are a random collection of unique mechanics anyway, so whether they are "using" feats or not is entirely a point of view thing. Mearls thinks it's really cool to put all of an NPC's rules on their "card", and once you're doing that it doesn't really make a difference if you created them using optional subsystems or not.

Yes, that is terrible. But that is their answer.

-Frank

Dunce Calvary posted:

What the loving hell? Dude, Forgotten Realms is dead. Bruce Cordell flayed it alive and giggled as it slowly died of bleeding and whole-body infection. What you should be doing is coming up with a massive reboot and consolidation of the setting, Marvel Ultimates style. Or just leave it dead and come up with your own campaign setting. Or just farm it out to the FR fans. Not taking another hookworm-infested bloody diarrhea dump over the corpse.

I also see that the aforementioned chickenfucker is still on staff and is your Number Two after Monte Cook bailed out. What makes you think that any project involving Bruce Cordell and a major campaign setting is going to go well? He already hosed up Forgotten Realms and you're going to give him another bite at the apple? Really? Really truly?

Dunce Court Jester posted:

this new format follows 4th edition and Bill Slavisek with his "imagine they are two basketball teams of players" concept along the lines of two DDM armies fighting a skirmish. you could use the ettercap with 2d4 spider or not. odds are in its "lair" the ettercap is working with spider, when not for some reason you might find a loan ettercap. DDN says ettercaps are always grouped up with spiders. don't want one, then don't use the other. that is NOT the same tenor in "flavor". likewise the association to hags is too specific and like others have pointed out, why do they work with these hags? why is it pixies and poo poo?

now the flavor tries to incorporate some stupid "team ettercap" grouping so you find ettercaps, spiders, and hags in the same encounters. this is vastly different from Mind Flayers enslaving goblins and such as thralls. seriously, why is a hag working with ANY other creature for ANY reason? it makes no drat sense other than once again changing the mythology to try to make a D&D-mythology for everything that was ever based on Greek, Roman, Viking, etc mythologies. just no! stop it! if the original mythology isnt good enough, you know since it can actually teach the stupid players something while they play, then just make something up and stop using things from "REAL" mythology. throw out:

Medusa
Gorgons
Minotaur
Centaurs
Nymphs
Dryads
Elves
Dragons
etc

everything doesnt need a D&D branding on it to be used in D&D just to protect the copyright of the flavor text. so in tern they can Disney the mythological creatures and try to claim nobody else can use them in a game because the name is trademarked to WotC, like Disney tries to do with every loving public domain story it adapts and folds into its copyrights and trademarks. WotC is just furthering the 4th edition mantra of make it for D&D and to rally onward the Primal Order mistake made with Elric mythos and such that TSR also made, but this time trying to flat out STEAL mythos.

EVERYTHING doesnt need to be made in D&D's image. D&D isn't god. the people that like medusa and centaurs like it the way they heard them BEFORE D&D and will do it their way anyway, so LET them, and stop trying to give a D&D version of every drat thing!

# ? Jul 15, 2013 19:14

Chill la Chill: Jul 2, 2007; Don't lose your gay

quote:

If it was just rules I cared about I would have purchased the current flavor of the week, so called OP army and ran them instead.

quote:

Or, you could have still bought Tau anyway for all the same reasons, and had the joy of knowing that the rules weren't garbage.

Why do so many players feel like they have to choose between one or the other?

Seems like a reasonable response. Let's see what the reply is

quote:

Because games with brilliant rules are a dime a dozen. Or, actually, free of charge a dozen.

It's perhaps not a choice between one or the other, but to satisfy my itch for good rules, I don't ever need to spend more than a dollar... in my entire life.

The thing that makes it worthwhile spending 10 or 20 or 30 dollars on a book, much less thousands of dollars on a hobby (not even counting the in-numerous hours building, painting, etc..) thus cannot be the rules, and they may as well be opposites.

Good rules in 40K are like good peanuts on a private jet flight from New York to Tokio. Sure, it's nice to have good peanuts, but you don't have to pay for a flight like that to get good peanuts. And if the peanuts aren't all that great after all, it'd be a petty, but hardly relevant as long as you still get to Tokio fast and comfortable.

I think the grog is about how this guy doesn't know about the tons of shoddy TG rules out there and talks about the exclusivity of good rules and background/fluff but then he gets into a peanuts analogy.

# ? Jul 16, 2013 19:31

Plutonis: Mar 25, 2011

Pagan Racist Black Metal Murderer was arrested today. In celebration, here is the deity alignment chart he's making for his Pagan Racist (probably Black Metal and Murder-related) game.

Why are the deities classified in categories, you ask? Because why, all European Gods are the same!

Varg Vikernes posted:

When I say that all the European gods are the same, that the different names of the gods and goddesses are but different faces of the European divine concept, I am often met with ridicule and aggressive contempt. For some reason many refuse to accept that the same divine being is called by different names in different parts of Europe � including in those areas that used to be European or ruled by Europeans, such as Ancient Egypt, Sumer, Persia and the Indus Valley.

The origin of our European religion lies of course in the European race, and tribes belonging to this race have moved about for ages, in Europe, in Asia and even in Africa. They all had their preferences in relation to deity names, they were all influenced by different natural forces, social events, alien races and ideas, so it is no wonder that they all, by the time the settled down somewhere, called the deities by different names. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure that out. We all speak different languages for the same reason � and I would be surprised if I was met with ridicule and contempt for claiming that. We all know that as a fact.

Well that looks kind of stupid but Deity archetypes being a thing could be applied to all mythologies, but at least it's not that offen-

quote:

To me it is obvious that all the Europeans had a common culture and religion in the past, and I hope that more and more of you begin to share this view with me. This will be important after the soon-to-come (i.e. in the coming years) collapse of the Judeo-Christian civilization, when we (or rather those of us who survive) are to rebuild Europe and reconstruct our common Pagan heritage, for use as our new European culture, world view and religion. We must make sure that we unite as a race, in a European tribal confederacy, and for all future stop all slaughter of racial brethren. Our race is our nation, and Europe is our homeland!

# ? Jul 17, 2013 18:02

Apple Mummy: Oct 11, 2012

M posted:

quote:
Thus, especially in the context of centuries of institutionalized abuse of Afrcian peoples by European ones, it seems particularly problematic that the people of central Africa (and therefore Black People in general) are depicted as either Pirates, Talking Apes, or Gnolls.

This is incredibly racist.
Why do you insist on interpreting it that way? THAT is racist. Talking gorilla civilization in African jungle area is a great setting idea. Jumping to the conclusion that talking gorilla = black person is trying way too hard to find racism in everything. Its a symptom of PC society.

Z posted:

People are apes. We are all apes, regardless of ethnicity. Historical slurs notwithstanding, it is pointless to take offense at being labeled accurately.

Z posted:

Anyone can choose to be offended by anything.

There have to be well-reasoned limits on what is acceptable language (or thought), and what is not. Otherwise, we end up with language being cut down into Orwellian Newspeak, and we are no longer able to describe complex thoughts for fear of offending someone's sensibilities.

James Sutter posted:

For the record, as a representative of Paizo, I think it's perfectly reasonable and even *considerate* to tell us, "This piece of marketing material gives a poor impression of Paizo's take on race and ethnicity." The point of marketing is to show us in our BEST light, so if this is making people think poorly of us, that's a problem.

If folks want to discuss Garund and portrayals of the various ethnicities, that's also an important conversation, but a different one. I hope that folks who dig into the setting will see that we're trying hard to avoid the racism (and sexism, and homophobia, etc.) inherent in many games.

# ? Jul 17, 2013 19:32

Alien Rope Burn: Dec 5, 2004; _{I wanna be a saikyo HERO!}

Dr. Epic posted:

Is it objectifying when I treat it like an RPG?

I need to complete quest Date Night to obtain the +3 Girlfriend so I can enter the PrC Boyfriend and gain a +10 bonus to my dignity.

But then again, I treat all aspects of life like an RPG. Cleaning the dishes gets me 25 xp points. I also took favored enemy college exam. That combat bonus really comes in handy.

Keld Denar posted:

+3 Girlfriend is totally unoptimized. You are better off with a +1 Keen Witty girlfriend and then appling Greater Magic Make-up to increase her enhancement bonus.

Also, the Boyfriend PrC was written too early in developement. Most of it's abilities are only available per day. I suggest you add maneuver progress to it similar to Eternal Blade, selecting maneuvers from the True Heart and Compassionate Ear disciplines. This gives you more per/encounter options in case your DM makes you go on all-day date sessions with multiple encounters.

+diginity is pretty easy to optimize outside of a girlfriend though. Clothing of Sharp-Dressedness will give you a +5 circumstance bonus alone. If you spend a month or two working out with a Barbell of Strength or a Sparring Dummy of Ninja-Skillz, you can also gain an +1 to +5 insight bonus Physique, which applies when making strength based checks and allows you to apply your Str stat to most Cha based interactions in addition to your Cha.

Dr. Epic posted:

My class won't let me have a girlfriend with Greater Magic Make-up. I prefer the Natural Look feat for my girlfriend build. Though one or two ranks in Cosmetics isn't bad for optimization.

Coidzor posted:

But you still need a +3 Girlfriend to use the best augment crystals as a Rouge.

Also...sigged!

Telonius posted:

Ah, judging by that class restriction, I'm guessing you're looking for early entry into the Perfect Lifemate PrC? The crunch is powerful, but the fluff requirements are pretty steep.

# ? Jul 17, 2013 21:03

orphean: Apr 27, 2007; beep boop bitches
my monads are fully functional

Just some consimworld grog I came across today that is basically csw.txt:

quote:

I think one of the great things about wargaming is precisely the opportunity to get away from women. It's a sanctuary away from female domestic hegemony and it's 'honey-do lists' and perpetual nagging. Why do we want them around?? We need time away.

# ? Jul 17, 2013 21:16

90s Cringe Rock: Nov 29, 2006

OP posted:

How many women wargamers do you know?

Most of the thread posted:

Far fewer than I did 20 years ago.
I've met more than a score of them in person. At one point the history club I ran had more female members than male.
Two miniatures gamers that I game with on a regular basis. More if you include occasional games, and still more if you include role playing games.
10�.maybe.
Just a few.
Probably 10 to 20.
I see two or three at the venue where I game. They play science fiction and fantasy games at present. But they wander by and check out our historical games.
A number over the years � we currently have two of the four regular women gamers at my club being minis gamers (the other two being boardgamers) � and we probably have 15-20 regulars at the games club total.
I know 12. This is WAR GAMES too, not Just D&D real miniatures. They're out there
Couple dozen.

Don't be silly, girls don't wargame! posted:

Hmm- I think this is like the: 'do female (fantasy) dwarves exist?' conundrum. Some people claim to have seen one, but others doubt they exist or think that they can't be told apart from the male of the species to the untrained eye. My former (non- wargaming but long suffering) girlfriends always seemed to get into smaller shows for free when they came with me, I always thought because none of the wargaming clubs running them had a percentage die big enough to roll for the infinitesimally small probability of a young female wanting to come in!

You'd think seeing the rest of the thread would make him reconsider his urge to post, but no. Also: "a young female."

# ? Jul 18, 2013 10:22

90s Cringe Rock: Nov 29, 2006

How to assign the numbers are guidelines. That's why there are so many of them rather than a simple "Very hard is DC 25".

I wasn't trying to be ghoulish. You're the one who kept bringing up the Circus. If you want to use real life references as part of the conversation, OK. Do you realize how many circus accidents there are? Not just that one act, but in general? Lots of them. And do you know how much those people practice? Every day, full time? Your thief acrobat isn't putting in anywhere near that practice. Sage Genesis just said the other day that it takes a year to get to level 20. I'm pretty sure it's no stretch to say that in the adventures going from level 1 to 20, your characters isn't spending 10 hours a day practicing the same routine over and over.

There's a reason why circus acts have nets.

Now, I realize that D&D is a game so no one really cares that your character leveling to 20 doesn't mirror real life dedication in a particular skill. But you're the one who brought up the comparison to a real life example more than once, not me.

[Context: D&D Next has terrible maths, and a Cirque du Soleil acrobat died, therefore 20th level thief-acrobats should be incompetent]

# ? Jul 18, 2013 10:24

Chaltab: Feb 16, 2011; So shocked someone got me an avatar!

Thread Title: What's the biggest debacle in RPG history?

Oh boy...

quote:

I'm not so knowledgable about "20th (21st?) century RPG history", but I'll start the bidding at either all of D&D4 or the whole sordid affair surrounding CGL and Coleman's finances.

quote:

Probably D&D4e to be honest. In terms of sheer scale it's the largest number of hemorrhaged fans in RPG history. Other game systems don't have that many fans to lose in the first place.

FASA sold their digital properties separately from their table top licenses and to this day Battletech and Shadowrun haven't been able to integrate the books and digital services. Oops.

TSR bought the rights to Buck Rogers for way more than it was worth on the grounds that the head of the company was like the grand daughter or something of the Buck Rogers creator and she thought it was a much bigger deal than it had been for a decade or more. Between that and setting budgets for books based on criteria other than how much money they were expected to take in (such that they were literally producing some kinds of book for a loss and skimping on the budget for books that could be big sellers), the biggest name in the business straight up went bankrupt in 1997.

Embezzlement is a constant problem in medium sized game companies. Palladium Books had about a million dollars embezzled in 2006, Catalyst Game Labs had about a million dollars embezzled in 2009.

White Wolf destroyed their entire popular world line and replaced it with a reboot world no one gives a gently caress about. They sell about half a million less books per year than before they did that.

RaHoWa. Just RaHoWa. It exists. That is terrible.

Guardians of Order leased the license to more properties than they could actually write material for, causing them to be unable to pay their employees after paying for all their licenses, which made them even less able to put out material. They had the license to loving Game of Thrones and couldn't make a game because they couldn't afford writers and artists.

-Frank

One of these things is not like the others

quote:

Yeah, 4E without a doubt, but White Wolf is right behind them in the way they hosed up their franchise. loving Justin Achilli.

quote:

Franks basically got it. As far as I can see it's
1: 4E. A disaster so titanic it has caused the entire TTRPG industry to collapse around it. There is really no comparison. It would be like if someone made a car so ugly, terrible, unsafe and environmentally damaging that people largely abandoned the car industry as a whole and started riding boats everywhere.
2: nWod. A complete failing to update ones product. It managed to make its product have worse fluff and crunch AND to drastically misunderstand what people seemed to be playing Vampire for in the first place. So new WoD gets a strong F- sure but 4E is like a paper so offensively bad it got you kicked out of school and sent to juvey.
3: That Buck Rogers story is pretty famous, that's a good number three. If I can't pick 4E's treatment of the greyhawk setting which really deserves an entry all its own I would go with Buck Rogers.
Honorable Mention: "Dawizard"

quote:

Anyway, just going by the size of the damage done, it would have to be some part of the D&D4E thing. Whether it's "releasing 4E itself" or "ending the days of the OGL/SRD" or "Oops I just turned our loyal material-creators into our rival!"

That's right, everyone: Racial violence, the game? Guardians of the Order's collapse and refusal to pay their freelancers? The incompetence of White Wolf? FATAL? No, none of that. The biggest disaster in the history of the hobby is that edition of D&D I don't like.

# ? Jul 18, 2013 11:01

ProfessorCirno: Feb 17, 2011; The strongest! The smartest!
The rightest!

chrisoya posted:

How to assign the numbers are guidelines. That's why there are so many of them rather than a simple "Very hard is DC 25".

I wasn't trying to be ghoulish. You're the one who kept bringing up the Circus. If you want to use real life references as part of the conversation, OK. Do you realize how many circus accidents there are? Not just that one act, but in general? Lots of them. And do you know how much those people practice? Every day, full time? Your thief acrobat isn't putting in anywhere near that practice. Sage Genesis just said the other day that it takes a year to get to level 20. I'm pretty sure it's no stretch to say that in the adventures going from level 1 to 20, your characters isn't spending 10 hours a day practicing the same routine over and over.

There's a reason why circus acts have nets.

Now, I realize that D&D is a game so no one really cares that your character leveling to 20 doesn't mirror real life dedication in a particular skill. But you're the one who brought up the comparison to a real life example more than once, not me.

[Context: D&D Next has terrible maths, and a Cirque du Soleil acrobat died, therefore 20th level thief-acrobats should be incompetent]

Someone in the Next thread was wondering when "pretty much impossible to do even mundane physical acts" would become justified and seen as the new norm alongside invincible Einsteins. Guess we have our answer!

~*~

This is a slippery slope fallacy. "The wizard can call down a meteor, so everyone should be able to do crazy stuff."

# ? Jul 18, 2013 11:08

thefakenews: Oct 20, 2012

quote:

Where is D&D going? To hell in a handbasket since 2000. I figure this is likely it's swan song at this point. Wotc hasn't produced one version of this game that could hold my intrest in 13 years. The only thing this company has ever done for me is relent on their anti TSR version montra and produce reprints and pdf's. ( This is the only current D&D making money for them). This company divided it's fans, throws them away every 5-8 years, and believes legacy players like myself are going to buy their wana be retro 3.5 game just because it's labeled "Next". It's laughable.

# ? Jul 19, 2013 02:37

That Old Tree: Jun 24, 2012; nah

Chaltab posted:

Thread Title: What's the biggest debacle in RPG history?

Oh boy...

quote:

quote:
The posts in this thread make it sound like White Wolf doesn't, or barely, exist any more, but that's definitely not the case. Their website has current news pieces. They may be primarily focusing on their 20th edition reprints which are silently admitting that NWoD sucked snake dicks, but they're there. If they had ceased to exist, it would be almost excusable that they failed to cash in on the Twilight craze, but no, they were still publishing in 2008, the Twilight Heyday (trust me, I had a Twilight-obsessed girlfriend in that year, it was its heyday). The fact that they published Scion rather than Vampire: the Seduction is inexcusable from any kind of standpoint which matters here.

OK, instead of going to their website, try going to a brick and mortar store and count how many White Wolf books they have that were printed since 2009. Better yet, you could check Amazon and note that the latest book they even have records of existing is a paperback from Q4 in 2011.

White Wolf doesn't print things anymore. There are still pdfs made up of things in White Wolf properties from time to time, and you can still buy them or get those pdfs printed on demand, but the company doesn't make physical products anymore. Hasn't since people took Rick Perry seriously as a candidate for president.

In the sense of actually being a company that makes role playing game material you could actually buy in a game store, or even order and have sent to you on Amazon, White Wolf does not exist and hasn't for about 18 months. In the sense of actually being a company that produced products you were likely to see displayed prominently in a brick and mortar store, they haven't qualified for four years or more. Have you ever seen a physical copy of Geist: the Sineating? If you have, how about anything written since Obama took office?

-Frank

Not having books in brick-and-mortar stores is a sign of absolute failure�

quote:

quote:
It's easy enough to find White Wolf books in brick and mortar stores around here still

Of course it is. Those books didn't sell. Check the publication date on them. How many of the White Wolf books on the shelf now were written when George Bush was president?

I mean yes, you can still probably see a book of Promethean: the Created on the shelf, because game stores ordered a lot more of those than they sold. A simple reality that before the book came out, a lot more people showed interest in playing Frankenstein's monster than continued to be interested in the game once it had come out and people knew it was a dog with fleas. But remember: that book came out in 2006, so the fact that you can still see one on a shelf is actually why White Wolf doesn't publish books anymore.

-Frank

�and having books in brick-and-mortar stores is just a different kind of failure!

# ? Jul 19, 2013 07:05

Chaltab: Feb 16, 2011; So shocked someone got me an avatar!

quote:

The clouds across the sky rant was just a small part of 4e's marketing imploding on itself. Even WotC realized they had hosed up with the Gnome & Tiefling cartoon, naming it "The Gnome Problem" (a race used by 5% or less of characters is still used by 50% or more of gaming groups, because of compositional effects).

I would argue that their marketing really went off the rails when they started explaining what their actual designs were, and that was because the ideas they had were terrible. When they were talking in generalities about fixing math and reducing item christmas trees, people were cautiously optimistic. When they started going off about how monsters didn't exist when outside of combat and didn't need rules to interact with stories or their environments, people got trepidation.

-Frank

Oh my god he's still bitter about that Gnome and Tiefling video. I think that goes so far beyond funny that it's really just pathetic.

# ? Jul 19, 2013 10:31

Guilty Spork: Feb 26, 2011; Thunder rolled. It rolled a six.

Someone posted the question of whether Golarion is ethically problematic. There's some not-terrible discussion, but also some "Political Correctness gone mad!" some "You're the REAL racists!" and even some literal :biotruths:

quote:

Why do you insist on interpreting it that way? THAT is racist. Talking gorilla civilization in African jungle area is a great setting idea. Jumping to the conclusion that talking gorilla = black person is trying way too hard to find racism in everything. Its a symptom of PC society.

quote:

Who yelled about anything?

Of course I know of that characterization, and I completely reject it, and refuse to make the association myself. When I think of Africa I think of a big jungle area. What's cooler than a talking ape society? I haven't seen the materials you are talking about I only saw your description, it is possible you are right, maybe it is more blatant than I imagine from reading your post. I just hate the association and feel like actively looking for it too hard (being overly PC) is actually "recognizing" it. To me that feels "racist" as well. Feels like it "gives it legs" if you know what I mean. I want stupid racist associations such as that to die on the vine. ( hopefully that made better sense) And like I said, you saw the stuff, I didn't, I could be wrong, sorry if I was.

And to the mod who told me not to post again... If what I said is really that offensive to this community then I'm fine with being kicked out. On that sentiment, I went ahead and tried to explain myself better.

quote:

People are apes. We are all apes, regardless of ethnicity. Historical slurs notwithstanding, it is pointless to take offense at being labeled accurately.

quote:

Based on the OP's description, the setting does seem to perpetuate some stereotypes. But I think it would be a stretch to call it racist, or especially to call the authors racist (that's getting into defamation territory, actually).

Those who trash Golarion will probably have to trash a lot of TSR stuff, too, some of which was probably penned or at least approved by the inventor of the D&D himself (Oriental Adventures, anyone?).

In general, unless something is really offensive, I think it's preferable to just ignore it and instead rave about a setting you really like.

quote:

Is the Pathfinder setting ethically problematic?

Um, no.

It's a fantasy kitchen sink with a lot of recognisable tropes. How that could be somehow interpreted as unethical (which is another way of saying ethically problematic) is beyond me.

Also, the question seems to imply that there is some sort of conspiracy to build some real world racism into Golarion. That's perverse.

quote:

A person can choose to be offended, or not, over any particular issue. However, it is a great waste of energy to be offended by biological truths. Humans are apes, and we are apes whether we like the notion, or not. Just because an ignorant racist likens a given group of people to a bunch of apes with pejorative intention, doesn't mean they aren't apes. Malicious intent doesn't invalidate the statement, it only invalidates the objective (in this case - racist cruelty). Calling someone an ape isn't an inherently racist statement, and allowing racism to co-opt, or taint, biological facts is ridiculous.

quote:

quote:
Isn't this kind of like saying "[Infamous racial pejorative beginning with 'N'] is merely derived from the Latin word for 'black,' and is as such merely descriptive of dark skin, so therefore there's no point in getting offended by it"?
No. Humans are apes. There are no humans with genuinely black skin (melanin is a brown/red pigment).
In which modern language is the word friend of the family anything except a pejorative term? I know of no language where that word (and not just the Latinate variation thereof) is an accepted descriptor for a persons skin color. Ape is not an inherently pejorative term, and likening it to a word synonymous with systematic abuse is illogical.

quote:

Anyone can choose to be offended by anything.

There have to be well-reasoned limits on what is acceptable language (or thought), and what is not. Otherwise, we end up with language being cut down into Orwellian Newspeak, and we are no longer able to describe complex thoughts for fear of offending someone's sensibilities.

I have not suggested that inherently pejorative words can't be found in the English language. I have posited that primate and ape are not among them. As humans, we are inherently primates and apes, and share all of the traits of those two classifications. Allowing ape to be considered an inherently pejorative term would be nonsensical, despite anyone's hurt feelings. Emotion has to be tempered by reason.

quote:

quote:
Reason has to be tempered by context. When you ignore that generations of people have been using the word "ape" as a racist slur, and doing so precisely for the reason of saying "you are not human," it does not actually make a case that it is silly to be offended by that. If the people using the slur are technically wrong in doing so, that does not change the fact that the term is loaded with "not human" connotation in that context. It doesn't change the fact that anyone who was called an ape on the basis of their skin color has very good reason to be less sanguine about the term than anyone who was never called an ape on the basis of their skin color. One of these two groups gets to decide whether it's logical to be offended or not. It is not the group who has never been personally affected by it. They are the ones speaking from a position of inexperience.
You seem to be arguing that a term that accurately depicts all of humankind must be relegated to the position of pejorative. All it takes is vitriol and imagination to give any term a bigoted stain. It makes no sense to allow bigots to excise swathes of shared language. It is not insensitive to want to be able to have a conversation without worrying that any given sentence might offend part of one's audience. I am sorry if you are blind to the massive gulf between the words friend of the family and ape. One is clearly an inherently racist term, and the other is a description of every man, woman, and child who has ever lived.

quote:
To ignore context is illogical. It posits a lack of empathy for other human beings that is harmful to one's understanding of human logic. It argues that ignorance and inexperience is a purer foundation of logic, which is a farcical argument.
Personal attack nicely danced around. Bravo!

# ? Jul 19, 2013 15:48

moths: Aug 25, 2004; I would also still appreciate some danger.

I'm not sure how grog this is, but it's culturally tone-deaf as anything:

Silver Gryphone Games posted:

Burning Crosses - Savage Worlds

Hot on the heels of Two-Bit Thugs, the most powerful crime syndicate in Wellstone City, the Cross Clan is having some major internal issues. It seems that information relating to the family and its activities is making it to the police. They know there's a lot of money changing hands, but the upper echelons of the Brothers Cross can't find out from their own interrogations who is behind any part of this.

The party can either approach the situation as freelancers or as entry level thugs in the Cross Clan, depending on the preference of the Narrator or on the results of any previous adventures in Wellstone City. With the Cross family being ratted out and served to the police on silver platters, they are anxious to get the situation resolved, offering gear, assistance, cash, favors, and rank within their organization. Failure, however, is not an option, and once the mission is accepted, the party must complete it or they will suffer a fate most terrible at the hands of their employer.

This plot-point adventure is designed to follow up the two previous adventures, Public Transit Assassins found in the Core Rules, and Two-Bit Thugs. However, the adventure was also designed with the ability to use this it as the introduction to Wellstone City. Not a straight assassination run as it was with Public Transit Assassins and Two-Bit Thugs, Burning Crosses allows the characters to develop and use their other skills during this investigative modern noir adventure.

# ? Jul 19, 2013 23:57

Jimbozig: Sep 30, 2003; I like sharing and ice cream and animals.

What the gently caress, dudes. It's nothing to do with people being over-sensitive and those grogs need to learn how to argue. It's really loving simple to defend the gorilla-folk in not-Africa. Here is the argument. A) Gorilla-folk is an awesome idea and should have a place in the world. B) Real Gorillas live in the jungles of Real Africa. C) Thus the logical place to put not-gorillas in not-earth is not-Africa.

Having gorilla-folk in Africa is not a problem. If those gorilla-folk are described or depicted as having a culture akin to African cultures ... yeah, that's a bit racist.

Grog tax:
So some guy brought an intentionally broken character to an organized play event with the intention of trouncing every combat with a bison. Now from my outside perspective, this is hilarious trolling. The GM was unwilling to be a victim to this trolling and refused to let him play. Some responses from the fellows over at Paizo's forums.

quote:

Just because a character can solo a scenario, doesn't mean that the other characters don't get play, or that they won't have highly effective actions.

Sure I killed the wizard by myself, and revived you all from the dead, but your fighter did a really good job beating up that one skeleton!

quote:

Slippery slope there - how are GM's hurt by players being successful? Not allowing excellent legal builds because they might work too well is akin to not allowing excellent legal ideas beause they might work too well. It is not and never should be GM vs. Players.

How does it hurt you to have your hard work at providing a fun and challenging experience completely invalidated?

quote:

This is two things that can easily be unrelated.

1) a PC one-hitting a BBEG (and other enemies in the same scenario)

2) most of the players at the table not having a fun game due to simply not being able to do much other than watch.

Oh yeah, those things are totally unrelated.

quote:

I know people who build scenario-killer characters, they also happen to be great players to have at a table. The main reason being that they use their great power responsibly. Everyone is given a chance before the Uber-PC 'kills' the roadblock, and spends most the time just being helpful not OP.

Lets play a game where you overcome challenges and kill monsters! Don't worry about failure, Billy's wizard will stop sandbagging and show you that your efforts were meaningless all along.

quote:

If you've built a unique character who has powerful abilities, don't use them every encounter (unless party survival depends on it, of course).

What the gently caress is with these guys saying that the guy who brings an intentionally broken character should sandbag it? How about just bringing something not broken that you don't have to sandbag?

# ? Jul 20, 2013 02:11

Guilty Spork: Feb 26, 2011; Thunder rolled. It rolled a six.

Indie+ (whatever that is) did a live internet interview with our old friend James Desborough. He lived down to expectations in every way.

# ? Jul 22, 2013 01:46

ZeeToo: Feb 20, 2008; I'm a kitty!

quote:

This is what a d20 splatbook should be - focused on one aspect of roleplaying and weaving the rules around it.

You get your standard prestige classes, feats, et all. But rather than just a list of these, which are a dime a dozen in d20 books, the twist is that it is all built around a well-thought out organization.

The art is a unique in its style and fantastic. The pdf itself is laid out that it looks like it went through a few professional editors.

I really appreciate the author including the "stripped version," the bookmarks, and the errata notes. You can really tell the author cares about his creation.

My only peeve is a good one, I want more! I'm sure the author researched a lot, especially on the three real world goddesses. More on their clergies, churches, clerics, and differenfes would be awesome!

quote:

Ive read through this product and it was well done. The layout is awesome and makes it easy to read. Everything is layed out in a perfect system. The pictures are awesome and coloring is beautiful. I like this product and I hope that T.Catt and gang put more products in the near future.

So, what's all this ab--

...No.

quote:

It's added an interesting and certainly enjoyable twist to my groups game. Thank you very much.

quote:

I will admit, I had been hoping for something a little less ... fanservicey ... and more a straight-up treatment of an alternative cleric class dedicated to a more generalized idea of pleasure and love as opposed to just orgasm.

That said ... I'm a pretty rabid feminist. It's not all that hard to offend me. But the only things in this book that made me raise an annoyed eyebrow were a single class ability's "you must be naked or scantily clad to use this power" and the Pleasure Ooze monster. The rest was ... tasteful. I was shocked.

While this material wasn't what I was looking for, it's a well-illustrated, high production value, high quality book for those looking to add a very explicit choice to their class selection.

From what I've seen in offsite reviews (like gently caress I'm gonna read this)... nope. Not tasteful.

# ? Jul 22, 2013 06:45

Thuryl: Mar 14, 2007; My postillion has been struck by lightning.

quote:

A minor point- I wish to discuss it, but I'm trying to word this tactfully to avoid coming across as trolling (though I don't mind healthy discussion on the points). Basically, were I playing a U.S soldier in the so-called Civil War and was being portrayed as a "good guy", I would feel "dirty". I would not feel so "dity" as a Confederate being so portrayed.

Now to explain myself:

A- The use of the term "Civil War" was effectively Linconian propaganda, and I'd hate it every time it was used seriously. Compare concepts of "civil war" before and after said war, for example.

B- Whether the war was constitutional or not Lincoln's constitutional stance assumes the philosophically dubious posistion than intentions, rather than literal words, are to be used to be interpret documents.

C- The North had racism too, of course. The fact is that Lincoln almost certainly (some historians quibble, but not convincingly) put the "Union's" restoration (in and of itself not that worthy a goal) above abolishing slavery. The culture throughout all but perhaps a few radicals was one which openly considers blacks the most inferior race.

D- With the benefit of hindsight, I know that Lincoln's actions played a major role in establishing the modern United States, where the sheer lack of restraint on the Federal Government is, given the Constitution, utterly ludicrous.

Since I don't have that strong an empathy in the real world, my indignation with the contradictions in the United States stance strongly outweighs my disapproval of slavery. I wouldn't like but could tolerate playing a United States soldier who didn't believe the modern line of the war, or maybe even (though it would be far from my first choice of concept) an abolitionist so long as the United State's actual posistions were potrayed in a historically accurate manner. However, the modern oversimplification of the Union's posistion would make me crack it and leave the table.

By contrast, if I were a Confederate portayed as a "good guy" I would feel far less uncomfortable, false though it arguably is, because the Confederate government has adopted a self-consistent philosophical stance without internal contradictions. Even if the Union was portrayed in a historically accurate manner, portraying us as the "good guys" would make me feel uncomfortable unless the Union's actual stance were used and a very strong philosophical case was made in-game for the Union's posistion being Pure Good (racism and all).

grognards.txt: my indignation with the contradictions in the United States stance strongly outweighs my disapproval of slavery

# ? Jul 22, 2013 13:27

90s Cringe Rock: Nov 29, 2006

Surely "grogs.txt: Since I don't have that strong an empathy in the real world,"?

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

# ? Jul 22, 2013 15:12

MadScientistWorking: Jun 23, 2010; "I was going through a time period where I was looking up weird stories involving necrophilia..."

Jimbozig posted:

What the gently caress, dudes. It's nothing to do with people being over-sensitive and those grogs need to learn how to argue. It's really loving simple to defend the gorilla-folk in not-Africa. Here is the argument. A) Gorilla-folk is an awesome idea and should have a place in the world. B) Real Gorillas live in the jungles of Real Africa. C) Thus the logical place to put not-gorillas in not-earth is not-Africa.

Having gorilla-folk in Africa is not a problem. If those gorilla-folk are described or depicted as having a culture akin to African cultures ... yeah, that's a bit racist.

Actually the solution is to not have cultural analogs in the first place which would completely remove the complaints about the racist aspects of not-Africa. Golarion at times almost reads like it has G Gundam levels of insensitivity to every single nationality.
Here is some grog involving D&D Next which also involves a Disney property:

quote:

In regards to my concern that it is 'inspired' by card or video games is something I call the 'Pirates of the Caribbean' problem. The ride inspired a movie, which inspired changes to the ride, newer movies spawned further changes in the ride, and now more movies based on the ride itself are scheduled to be made, when neither is going to resemble what people liked in the first place.

# ? Jul 22, 2013 15:18

Jonas Albrecht: Jun 7, 2012

Good to see that after years and years of refining his talents, T Catt's art still looks like poo poo.

Anyway, a podcast comes out bashing Malifaux 2nd Edition, prompting a Wyrd forum-goer to declare victory.

quote:

Well it's easy for me to say I told people so, I've been an outspoken enemy of M2E sense the first ideas were released. Lets see why below...seeing this through guild eyes.

1. Stripped down masters and henchmen with upgrades can often be more or less the same except your now getting kicked in the soul and paying S.S.s for abilities worse then you had for free. You also get the added bonus of managing more cards, ya didn't it suck to have all the info on 1 card?

2. New stupid rules like charging giving 2 attacks...(so lame) I wanna move about 1 1/2 times my walk and get a +damage flip personally.

3. All the cool stuff that made the game unique from all the other miniature games out there is pretty much gone. Almost all the traits that made the game interesting are gone. Paired Weapons, Specific Aps (Melle, Ranged, Casting Experts) got blocked into 1 Ap, Magic Weapons are gone so Spirits are lame now, Slow to die, (Judges) Never Me, (Peacekeepers) Relentless, the family trait...and on and on. Sometimes its the little things like the Peacekeepers Faulty Circuits that add fun to the game, but all that kind of stuffs gone now.

4. The new V.P. system was the biggest letdown of all time. I hated the old system but now I have to keep track of V.P. each round and at the end of the game (Lame.) Also now people drop schemes tokens which is a poor system, are there not enough tokens in the game already Rezers?

Well I could go on and on but its pointless, I hate M2E and people already know this. About everyone wanted a balancing, but I just wanted a better balanced 1.5. All in all the time they wasted creating a new poorly running system could have been far better spent fixing and balancing an already great system.

1 Mans opinion....

Nighthater

# ? Jul 22, 2013 19:28

Bedlamdan: Apr 25, 2008

D&D has become a storygame CODE RED CODE RED

quote:

I don't care if it's officially optional or not. If I'm playing Next, I won't be using this God-awful rule.

Seriously Mearls? We have to give a mechanical reward to people so they'll roleplay their characters in an RPG?

If you have to do that, you're definitely going after the wrong group of people for your playerbase.

quote:

For certain games, this can be a benefit to the desired play experience.

This is NOT D&D.

The idea behind Next and one that regurgitated in every article was that the purpose behind the design of the core rules was to distill the essence of what was central to D&D.

Transferable ad-hoc bennies tossed out like beggin strips to players just for doing the kind of stuff central to the game medium is not part of the classic core D&D experience.

poo poo, no wonder design team members are leaving. They can smell the poo poo from this stinkbomb already.

quote:

Emulating other things because all the cool kids are doing it is sheep mentality. Its how you lose your individuality. D&D has a distinct feel. Working against that and blending in with all the other games is the fast track to loss of brand identity.

At least WOTC is reprinting AD&D and OD&D so the actual spirit of the original vision is available.

quote:

I am horrified. Really.

Not to speak for others, but it's the fact its even in the rules that bothers me, not that I can't ignore any rule regardless.

I'm picturing a powdered Victorian gentleman typing that, pausing sometimes to flutter his hands disturbedly.

quote:

I'm really at a loss to think of what convinced Mearles this was a good idea.

From a fanbase standpoint, Next has been not been popular with the 4E crowd. There has been some tepid curious interest from some old schoolers.

With this stinkbomb,what little old school interest there was has (IMHO) dried up and the rest of the game still isn't appealing to the 4E fans.

So.... who the hell is this game for now? Did anyone else on the team see this article before it went live?

quote:

Judging by the comments, this is a big hit among the narrative gaming crowd. D&D is now becoming an official story game.

Wait I thought Fate Points/Hero Points weren't storygamey it is almost as though the goalposts keeps shifting at the whims of a single mad-man.

quote:

This is still a design whose designers fundamentally believe that the game system is the be all end all of the experience. They see everything under the lense of "how could we represent/support this or that through the rules?" There's a fundamental disconnect going on here.

Also, it's way too early to call this a "story game", and it IS a different approach than 4e, but only in the application, switching "gamism" for "narrativism", basically, whereas the fundamental issue is the tacit support of the GNS/Forge type of thinking in the first place, where "System Matters", "role playing" equates "story", "simulation" is somehow bad and "not roleplaying", etc.

Le Sigh.

quote:

A few things:

One, how are the 4VENGERS! reacting? If they hate this and are rending their garments and throwing ash on their heads then this is the greatest thing since sliced bread.

Two, I have never and will never award XP for "good roleplaying".

With that said, the final thing: there is a grading system in 1e for adjudication of how long it takes a character to level (how much they'll have to spend) based on how well they performed their class (e.g., a magic-user who just for some reason did melee combat and cast no spells and the player barely paid any mind would rate a 3 or 4, whereas another who cast spells and found creative ways to use them might rate a 1 or at worst 2). Maybe Mearls is saying they're taking that concept and front-loading it? But that's not about XP, that's about how much time and money it takes to level so...I dunno.

I too base my enjoyment of things on my contempt for others. Also that last paragraph. :wtc:

There's a lot more of this in this thread.

# ? Jul 22, 2013 21:29

Rasamune: Jan 19, 2011; MORT
MORT
MORT

Please run, do not walk, away from D&D Next.

Giving mechanical benefits for roleplaying in a roleplaying game is like giving someone who actually bet, extra cards in poker. I guess there just weren't quite enough ways to powergame with character build fiddly bits alone, so this is what we get.

If no one roleplays without this its seriously time to ask yourself: am I gaming with the right people?

# ? Jul 22, 2013 21:51

MiltonSlavemasta: Feb 12, 2009; And the cats in the cradle and the silver spoon
Little boy blue and the man on the moon
"When you coming home, dad?"
"I don't know when
We'll get together then son you know we'll have a good time then."

ew who cares posted:

If the two Exalts are Essence 4, and they're having sex in the Lunar's spirit shape, then the Lunar decides whether the child is a beastman, and the Solar decides whether it will be a Solar half-caste or not.

If the two Exalts are Essence 5+ (the level at which Solars can give birth to beastmen) then it's pretty much entirely the Solar's decision.

Now, what isn't clear is, if a Solar "passes" on the kid being a Solar half-caste, can the Lunar then decide that the kid should be a Lunar half-caste, rather than the only choice being "Will this kid be a Solar half-caste or a normal mortal."

Personally, I don't think that there's anything wrong with that, and it seems to abide by the spirit of the rules.

I like your reasoning here thanks

# ? Jul 22, 2013 22:07

ZenMasterBullshit: Nov 2, 2011; Restaurant de Nouvelles "À Table" Proudly Presents:
A Climactic Encounter Ending on 1 Negate and a Dream

Bedlamdan posted:

There's a lot more of this in this thread.

Personally I prefer the comment section of the article

quote:

When I want to play FATE or Savage Worlds, I play FATE or Savage Worlds and not D&D. You guys are losing the narrative again on D&D being a simple game of exploration.

You guys are losing the narrative of what I want D&D to be! You can't have exploration in a game using these....story game rules!

quote:

Inspiration = Achievements. And they said 4E was a videogame knock-off.

The best ones are people who just don't even try to read the article

quote:

The article says this:

"The key lies in describing your action in an interesting way, acting out your character's dialogue, or otherwise helping to bring the game to life"

To me, that says "doing something you normally do, but with a lame accent." That doesn't sound like something worthy of a weird, socially tricky reward. I, as a DM, don't understand how I'm supposed to use this system. Why would I give players rewards for doing what they normally do?

No real joke about this one. Just some sad groggy dude who can't understand when or why to reward his players.

Dude posted:

A tool that eats up pages, word count, and time spent learning the game. It's no doubt a small amount of all of these, but there are practical reasons to not include something that's only going to be potentially useful. In an ideal situation where limitations of physical space in the book (and focus on the part of the DM/players) they'd be able to include every single rule that struck their fancy and just mark the questionable ones as optional. But since we don't have that ideal situation, they all need evaluated on the basis of how necessary they really are.

Same Dude posted:

Although, I must say I love the option of randomized background charts, even if I'm a little dubious about the amount of real-estate they might eat up in the book.

One Dude's really worried about this rule being added because it's being added in would remove or keep out......something. Not sure what but something else desperately needs this space.

# ? Jul 22, 2013 22:23

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 28, 2024 12:15

FriarZero: Mar 20, 2013; Patron saint of neckbeards.

quote:

quote:
Quote:
Like a lot of things relating to D&D rules design, the answer lies somewhere between providing no encouragement and demanding players to play act personalities that are distinct from their own.

no dumbfuck! you dont get to demand anything in rules deisng. all you get to do is decide possible outcomes of use of the rules and incorporate the best you can. you aren't the god of DMs sitting in Renton and everyone else must loving follow you, people can use the books for ANYTHING they want, including wiping their rear end with pages from 4th edition because that is about as much value as it has, and it probably has glossy paper so isnt even good for that!

you as a rules design person for a game like D&D, STAY THE gently caress OUT OF PEOPLES HOME GAMES. your job ends when the book is on the shelf to be purchased. designers and players alike need to learn this! there are some out their like tussock that worship Gygax, and some that worship Mentzer, and even some fool enough to worship you Mearls. unlike D&D having worship[ers does not grant you special powers or godhood in the real world. step out of your fantasy and join the real world. you are NOBODY, and mean NOTHING. you are a name on a book. you are not a celebrity or idol, you are a HASBRO toadie. you only have power in the insane crap you put into publications, and none more. LEARN YOUR loving PLACE.

Same guy on the topic of having default deities in the Player's Handbook.

quote:

they might as well go back to welcoming Jack Chick and Pat Roberts when they add detailed religions to the core of the game and such cause they might as well be doing what those people claim they were always doing in D&D, and trying to create a religion of their own.

again people wanting extra fluff beyond basic concepts of what type of creature this monster is, should buy the fluff book for the specific setting they wish to view it in. i dont see Greek and Roman god names in mythological creatures descriptions. no mention in medusa monster entry, no mention of King Minos in Minotaur entry....this is how it should be. something to the core that lets one use the creature, tells how the race lives and that is it. the DM is there to tell how it came to be, IF that plays any part of the game itself, or IF the DM wishes to go into it. Otherwise it is there because its a loving Minotaur.

i can count ZERO games in which the deity field on a character sheet was filled in by anyone, let alone clerics. only ay a Red Wizard of They or some other NPC did it matter, but for PCs it boiled down to "your god this", or "your deity that". they didn't need a name cause they werent that drat important, the PCs are the important ones to the game.

maybe now someone here will understand why D&D doesnt need any created religions in its base game, and that all the splat books do not get counted when claiming "x editions says this" because PF would then be called 3rd edition since it uses a license granted by WotC to officially make D&D compatible products. and PF is NOT 3rd edition. nor is any other 3PP STL or OGL product, they, like splats and settings in AD&D are ACCESSORIES. your floormats for your truck that came from Kmart are NOT an F-350, just an accessory. Monster Mythology DMGR blue splatbook is NOT 2nd edition, just an accessory. The Dragon is NOT AD&D, just an accessory.

# ? Jul 22, 2013 23:11

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > grognards.txt - sandbox gamers are the John Galts of the RPG world

«‹›67 »