|
ZearothK posted:Wait, which RPG models velocity? The HERO system can do this! Just spend the next 6.5 hours coming up with the correct model to use for your calculations and not only can you accurately model velocity but you'll also be able to determine exactly when your players completely lost interest and wandered off to do something else.
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 15:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 18:45 |
|
|
Wouldn't the moon have a massive penalty to its Hide checks due to its size? There is some loving nerd who has calculated this I bet.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 15:25
|
|
|
I wanted to write up a fake DEATH BATTLE write up for when two PCs in the campaign I'm in were facing off in a tournament battle and tried to do that style of math, "Well if with base 40 feet of movement, with Haste, Bonus Action Dash, +5 from this, +10 from that... They can move at the SPEED OF SOUND!" but I didn't have their sheet so gave up at trying to figure that out. It was fun writing up what I could, reviewing my session notes to track their achievements: "These two Heroes have been friends and adventurers, saving the world one Irate Dragon at a time, but who would win if they had to turn their weapons, skills and abilities on each other!? This is Thundertwig and I'm Sorc, and it's time for a FINAL FIGHT!!!"
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 15:31
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Doesn't Cyberpunk or Shadowrun do something like it for modeling grenades exploding in a small enclosed space? _where they land (you roll) _how they scatter (a table) _ and depending on the blast radius a frag has, there are optional rules on how to distribute damage on a group in its blast radius (probably what you are talking about). And yes it includes walls and enclosures. I can also think of at least one OSR game with bouncing/missing rules for grenade launchers. It's like you missed the target AC? Roll 1d12 for the direction and 1d6 for the bouncing range in meters. Now hurt everyone in blast radius.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 15:37
|
|
|
ikanreed posted:Gurps tried. Probably should've seen that one coming.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 15:38
|
|
|
MikeJF posted:Probably should've seen that one coming. it's the story of gurps, after all
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 15:41
|
|
|
NameHurtBrain posted:Wouldn't the moon have a massive penalty to its Hide checks due to its size? Back in the Murphey's Rules thread, yes. Offsite version available here. quote:Except, well... the problem with line of sight is that checks made to Spot something take a -1 penalty per 10 feet of distance. Given that our moon is somewhere around 1.2 to 1.3 billion feet away, you're looking at a 120 million penalty to your check.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 15:56
|
|
|
NameHurtBrain posted:Wouldn't the moon have a massive penalty to its Hide checks due to its size? What do you mean, look at it, it's like the size of a coin
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 15:58
|
|
|
Taciturn Tactician posted:Back in the Murphey's Rules thread, yes. Offsite version available here. And yet the sun always hits its touch attacks for radiant damage.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 15:58
|
|
|
Shadowrun has the "Chunky Salsa" rule, where if the blast of the grenade hits something that it doesn't blow up the shockwave goes back, which hits the character again. This can make a 5 foot hallway become you getting hit 6 times the damage of the grenade.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 16:16
|
|
|
This is the point where, as the DM, you turn to the offending player, mutter something along the lines of "Congratulations. The moon, as an inanimate object, is not trying to Hide. You successfully Spot it." and threaten to start throwing erasers at them if they bring it up again.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 16:29
|
|
|
Also it presumes that the sun and the moon in a given setting have the same size and distance from the planet as their counterparts do in our solar system.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 16:43
|
|
|
Ugly John posted:The moon, as an inanimate object, is not trying to Hide. The moon very much tries to hide. Like, I get where you're coming from, but the moon very much tries to hide (on a monthly basis, in fact!)
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 16:46
|
|
|
The sun has a lot of hit dice to add to its check to light the moon up. Without the sun, the moon is indeed hard to spot.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 16:56
|
|
|
Ugly John posted:This is the point where, as the DM, you turn to the offending player, mutter something along the lines of "Congratulations. The moon, as an inanimate object, is not trying to Hide. You successfully Spot it." and threaten to start throwing erasers at them if they bring it up again. 3.5 Rules on the Spot Skill posted:The Spot skill is used primarily to detect characters or creatures who are hiding. Typically, your Spot check is opposed by the Hide check of the creature trying not to be seen. Sometimes a creature isn’t intentionally hiding but is still difficult to see, so a successful Spot check is necessary to notice it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 16:58
|
|
|
Taciturn Tactician posted:The target not intentionally hiding is not sufficient to automatically succeed a Spot check. You can rule circumstance as the DM since there is a "sometimes" in there, but "it's not hiding so you see it" isn't an automatic property of how Spot works. This is exactly what the eraser is for. EDIT: Rogue AI Goddess posted:The sun has a lot of hit dice to add to its check to light the moon up. Without the sun, the moon is indeed hard to spot. This is also a really good answer!
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 17:05
|
|
|
Surely the sun should be giving you a spot penalty from the glare.  Also I read someone who did the maths and it has millions in size penalty but billions in distance penalty so you can't ever see it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 17:07
|
|
|
Poil posted:Also I read someone who did the maths and it has millions in size penalty but billions in distance penalty so you can't ever see it. see, you can fail Spot checks against inanimate objects not trying to hide (though posts, like celestial bodies, presumably aren't characters or creatures anyway so maybe those rules are irrelevant?) Dallan Invictus fucked around with this message at 17:30 on Mar 27, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 17:27
|
|
|
quote:Spot checks may be called for to determine the distance at which an encounter begins. Anyway, I went to check GitP forums, and apparently it's a solved issue: quote:This has been debunked. You are within its radius of illumination, therefore you see it, even if you fail a spot check. Same thing for the moon. Rules Compendium. It's the same for the stars, except that you need to go to a 3.0 source to find out that yes, starlight is dim light. Rogue AI Goddess fucked around with this message at 17:33 on Mar 27, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 17:28
|
|
|
Rogue AI Goddess posted:You can see the moon, but you can't fight it until one of you closes the distance. "Houston, we got a 17 on initiative"
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 17:30
|
|
|
NihilCredo posted:Much more relevant is how utterly inflexible 3.5/Pathfinder is at letting characters try any physical action that isn't specifically baked into their character class. Want to surprise swing a chandelier into the dastardly villain and knock him down with your momentum? Unless you specifically took the Dashing Rogue prestige class or the Attack from Swinging Ceiling-Mounted Object feat, it's gonna be strictly worse than just walking at a brisk pace towards the villain and calmly attacking him. Want to swim underwater at night, grab the dozing dock guard by their ankle and drag them into the water? The grapple rules forbid that in eighteen different ways. This is one of the things I most dislike about 3.0+ style of play, at least the groups I've been in. People treat their character sheet like a menu in a video game. If it's not on the menu, it can't be done.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 17:50
|
|
|
Taciturn Tactician posted:The target not intentionally hiding is not sufficient to automatically succeed a Spot check. You can rule circumstance as the DM since there is a "sometimes" in there, but "it's not hiding so you see it" isn't an automatic property of how Spot works. "... IS THE MOON A GOD drat CREATURE? You know what, gently caress it. Give me one second..." *rolls dice* "Were you actively hiding? No? Roll initiative, the ELDRITCH HORROR that was the moon has awoken and it sees you. Congratulations, you fail to go first, and the moon eats you."- Me if I was DMing and people started saying that during the game. I mean, it's funny, but your own highlighted quote does specify creature, not "creature or object". Which means characters will always find the TV remote, unlike me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 18:12
|
|
|
Randalor posted:"... IS THE MOON A GOD drat CREATURE? You know what, gently caress it. Give me one second..." New "one weird adventurer trick": Find any mimics in a room by attempting to Spot every object with a character with a massive penalty.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 18:14
|
|
|
Wait, so what do you have to roll to, say, spot a dime from across the room? Is it just assumed that everyone can see it somehow?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 18:24
|
|
|
AnoHito posted:Wait, so what do you have to roll to, say, spot a dime from across the room? Is it just assumed that everyone can see it somehow? 
Rogue AI Goddess fucked around with this message at 18:30 on Mar 27, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 18:27
|
|
|
Rogue AI Goddess posted:I assume you'd make a Search check for that. quote:You generally must be within 10 feet of the object or surface to be searched. I feel like that just makes things even worse, re: finding the moon...
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 18:30
|
|
|
I imagine that if you wanted to locate the moon with sufficient precision to interact with it, you wouldn't "eyeball it" with skill checks. Either go through all the observations and calculations that space agencies do or, more practically, scry on it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 18:42
|
|
|
Finding a mundane object is search not spot. You can't search for the moon as it is more than 10 feet away. Also 3.x has too many skills Rogue AI Goddess posted:I imagine that if you wanted to locate the moon with sufficient precision to interact with it, you wouldn't "eyeball it" with skill checks. You don't need a skill check to navigate to a place you can see if there is no obstruction that breaks line of sight. If the moon is not in the sky I would take either survival or knowledge: astronomy Barrel Cactaur fucked around with this message at 19:10 on Mar 27, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 19:05
|
|
|
Rogue AI Goddess posted:I imagine that if you wanted to locate the moon with sufficient precision to interact with it, you wouldn't "eyeball it" 
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 19:41
|
|
|
d20srd posted:The Spot skill is used primarily to detect characters or creatures who are hiding. Typically, your Spot check is opposed by the Hide check of the creature trying not to be seen. Sometimes a creature isn’t intentionally hiding but is still difficult to see, so a successful Spot check is necessary to notice it. Nowhere in this description does it imply that you would need a Spot check to locate the moon, so it doesn't matter. You don't have to roll for everything. The moon is not difficult to see. Rogue AI Goddess posted:You can see the moon but you can't fight it until one of you closes the distance. I guess this works if you wanna fight rules lawyering with rules lawyering.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 20:21
|
|
|
NihilCredo posted:I find these jokes puzzling. You can't fault a dungeon crawling tabletop game system for failing at modeling celestial objects, or any kind of physics phenomenon that isn't relevant to "four guys fight at most a dozen other creatures in close-range combat". D&D 3e presents itself as a rules system to model a simulated world and everything in it - in fact these jokes can only work because D&D makes that claim, and is not very good at it. "spot the moon" is a more absurd version of your "rock'em-sock'em-robot full attacks are better than improvised attacks", the result of sedentary game designers throwing together rules and numbers based on what "makes sense" without thinking about the result. it's the same as Burlew making fun of 4e for having a max weapon range of 150ft, save 4e was more honest about being a tactical squad combat game
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 20:24
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:D&D 3e presents itself as a rules system to model a simulated world and everything in it - in fact these jokes can only work because D&D makes that claim, and is not very good at it. "spot the moon" is a more absurd version of your "rock'em-sock'em-robot full attacks are better than improvised attacks", the result of sedentary game designers throwing together rules and numbers based on what "makes sense" without thinking about the result. it's the same as Burlew making fun of 4e for having a max weapon range of 150ft, save 4e was more honest about being a tactical squad combat game I don't think D&D 3e has ever made that claim. The joke works on some level because lots of rules get added in to adjudicate real world scenarios like that and supplements add systems and subsystems that lends to that feeling but I don't think its ever been officially been the case. Maybe some players/DMs act this way, but that isn't really how it works.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 20:27
|
|
|
Thankfully, we have FATAL from a hard-working game designer who developed rules based on real-world statistical distributions
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 20:44
|
|
|
3.x absolutely made the mistake of going too granular but not granular ENOUGH where you get issues like yeah, if you want to toss a chair or swing off a chandelier, well, we're granular enough we have skills that are related to that. We have spot/search for seeing things and rules for seeing and it's granular enough that the thought exercise of not being able to see the moon is relevant parody.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 20:49
|
|
|
Endless Mike posted:Thankfully, we have FATAL from a hard-working game designer who developed rules based on real-world statistical distributions ... nope. Nope nope nope nope nope.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 20:50
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I don't think D&D 3e has ever made that claim. The joke works on some level because lots of rules get added in to adjudicate real world scenarios like that and supplements add systems and subsystems that lends to that feeling but I don't think its ever been officially been the case. Maybe some players/DMs act this way, but that isn't really how it works. ok, maybe it doesn't want to model everything. but you can compare D&D 3e and similar games, where rules approximate real-world physical processes, to games like Apocalypse World etc., where rules approximate narrative processes consider also the attempt to make D20 a universal system for all settings
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 21:00
|
|
|
You can't spot the moon, but with a high enough Bluff skill you can BE the moon
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 21:39
|
|
|
I absolutely loved that grognards.txt bard story.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2024 23:04
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:You can't spot the moon, but with a high enough Bluff skill you can BE the moon When the moon hits your eye, and it rolls really high, that's a morte.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 06:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 18:45 |
|
|
nimby posted:When the moon hits your eye, and it rolls really high, that's TPK.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 06:38
|
|
