|
The Barbarian uses butter, oil and a cast-iron skillet? Fancy that. I am a filthy college student, so I enjoy Wild Turkey 101, ginger ale, and the way being bourbon drunk sneaks up on you. Also just made Canton Style Barbeque Pork tonight and it owned; next time I'll let it marinate overnight like it's supposed to so it can own harder.
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2013 05:16
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 18:13 |
|
|
fatherdog posted:The issue with expertise dice is the same issue there's been with maneuvers in every edition other than 4th - when your choice is between "Do X" and "Do more damage", "Do X" is never the right tactical choice. Unless you're a wizard: "Do more damage" is never the right tactical choice when your X is "end the encounter". Both sides of this axiom are still true in 4e to certain extents: if you are a Striker, "Do more damage" is always the right decision. Unless you're a Warlock, then "Do X" is better than your damage until Paragon. Or you have something like the Rogue's Knockout. Wizards have really crazy good Dailies if you come from a Caster Edition mindset (old Sleep, Charm of the Dark Court, Phantom Chasm/Visions of Avarice/Twist of Space, Summon Succubus, etc) and your "Do X" At-Wills (Hypnotism, Winged Horde, Beguiling Strands) are generally better than your "Do more damage" At-Wills (Witch Bolt, Arc Lightning, et.al.) e: Goons With Spoons has a loving amazing pulled pork recipe that everyone with a slow cooker and some time to kill should make at least once. Go Advanced and use molasses instead of cornstarch.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2013 06:26
|
|
|
Gr3y posted:My favorite Rum cocktail is called a "Tropical Storm". Pour three finger of your selected rum into a rocks glass. Add a paper umbrella. Enjoy. This is a good cocktail. Goes down smooth.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2013 01:42
|
|
|
Alright, let's break this down point by point from the perspective of an (amateur) game designer.Kai Tave posted:Mearls has something of a point in that if you want a game that's all about cleaving to archetypes then you don't want/need a huge list of all sorts of jargon-y options all over the place because you're trying to stick to those archetypes. Fine, okay, except this sort of overlooks that A). a bunch of people play D&D to mash together a half dozen classes and prestige classes and templates into some horrible transporter accident of a character and B). that a lot of things that have gone on to "resonate" with players are things that weren't "traditional D&D archetypal" from the get-go. Yes, like Warlords. Or 3E Sorcerers for that matter, that's a thing that wasn't "archetypal" by D&D standards and now it's so drat popular that it's been in two successive editions of D&D and Pathfinder has all sorts of crazy-rear end options for Sorcerers. Even as someone who got into playing D&D from 3.X, this really isn't the case. People like customization, yeah, but mashing together eleventy billion classes and PrCs and poo poo got you the stink-eye from DMs, either made you suck or stupid good as a player, and was a goddamned headache all around. The defenders of, say, 3.X fighter-types multiclassing all the live long day were the CharOp boards and guys like Frank Trollman; people hate those fuckers. From a player and a designer standpoint, discrete and modular ability chunks are good enough. Class, race, theme, background, maybe a subclass, and some feat-type things; that offers a large potential amount of creatable characters without creating something impossible to properly playtest. I don't know how popular Sorcerers actually are (Skip Williams had a hate boner for them, they didn't get introduced in 4E until the PHB2, and never really got the options Wizards did), but the innately magical magic guy is archetypical beyond D&D. Using the Warlock might've been a better example, or the Monk. quote:Also it sort of ignores that there's another, perfectly valid approach to creating characters and that's to go mechanics first and then think about what sort of character that collection of pieces brings to mind. Maybe he has a point in that the people who very first started playing D&D back in 197X weren't doing it "because they wanted to take Rapid Shot" but these days, y'know, that's not exactly some weird foreign way people like to approach making the greatest archer ever. A player shouldn't have to dick around with the building blocks to make a functional archetype, though. What you're talking about is more or less mandatory in 3.X and only marginally less so in 4e and that sucks. If you want to play an archer, you should just be able to show up and say "Hey, I took the Archer package. I'm an archer." Now, if you want to mess around with the guts of the system, you should be able to customize this package or put some stuff together that still makes you an archer without being an Archer. For example, you want to be an archer based on Archer from Fate/Stay Night: you take the Blacksmith background and the Hero of Justice theme alongside the good at shooting poo poo class package. quote:And as long as D&D has been a game that ostensibly claims to emulate all these amazing fantasy stories and archetypes while mechanically doing a pretty uneven job of doing so at best, fiddling around with the game mechanics like a bucket of Lego bricks has been a time-honored way for players to actually make the character they want rather than the character they thought they wanted but turned out in practice to be something else. Selling people a smaller bucket of Legos and hand-waving it away with "we really want to stop adding so much stuff to the mechanics of the game and shift our emphasis to story"...wait, does this mean Next is a storygame now? I'm confused. Think you confused yourself with that metaphor  I don't think Mearls is selling this tortured metaphor less Legos as opposed to those Lego theme sets. Legos are Legos. Now, Mearls will probably gently caress this up, since he can't finish projects or write mechanics or anything, but the general concept and article are sound.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2013 02:04
|
|
|
It would have been disappointing to at least one D&D audience and stupid assholes would've gotten mad about it. D&D. D&D never changes.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2013 04:01
|
|