|
I am having great difficulty pan-frying a steak to a good, solid rare. Does anyone have any tips?
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2013 04:54
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 08:16 |
|
|
If someone were to run Danger Patrol, I would kill all the other applicants and climb over the pile of bodies to play in that game.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2013 18:43
|
|
|
Countblanc posted:The thing is, they sort of do, but not in the way you're probably thinking I mean. McDonald's and Coke don't have to worry about being "[brand] enough" because they're too big to fall. The two have monumental mainstream appeal (for reasons that aren't just "people think they're the best" obviously, but that's another thread entirely, probably in D&D ironically), and burger and soda grognards aren't controlling all discourse surrounding them. In fact, there isn't discourse in the way D&D and other tabletops have it - Very few people who drink Coke will ever discuss what "real coke" is, not because there aren't forums to do it at, but because the ratio of people who care to those who just drink whatever the waitperson brings them when they order a coke skews heavily toward the latter. Coke's userbase gives no fucks, so of course Coke doesn't have to listen to a very small percentage of people who are vocal about what the Coke brand represents. Ugh. No. Of course their is a vocal minority of toxic customers. If you think such minorities don't exist for larger companies, or that they're just "too big" to ignore, you're wrong. There is a Jack-in-the-Box Taco Club, where people line up around the corner for new restaurant openings to get their lovely tacos. There are websites cataloging McRib sightings. And yet both companies have moved away from these vocal core groups of loyal customers to provide what the market research indicates people want to buy: higher-quality, more complex meals. McDonalds used to define the bounds of the QSR industry; now, they exist in a much larger, more varied market. They have to work to distinguish themselves. Not that the golden arches are suffering, in any way, but that is mostly because they have realized they aren't the industry leader any more - and so they've continually evolved to offer something new and exciting above the Big Mac. Wizards knows this, too; they have consistently told the Magic grognards to piss off when they whinge endlessly about new cards or rules changes or whatever. Magic stays in the top 3 because it's consistently one of the best choices in TCGs, and that's a constant process (especially in the wake of also-rans like the WoW TCG).
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2013 22:52
|
|
|
Barudak posted:So much money on the table not being pursued makes me sad. Time and again, we've seen that VTTs are expensive, troublesome, buggy, and, well, just like any other sort of software development. The first person to market with a decent networked tablet-enabled tabletop assistant will make some serious money, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Wizards has already tried and failed.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2013 23:17
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:If you're going to make homemade pizza, you have to add fennel seed (whole or crushed) to the sauce, you have to. A lot of commercial tomato sauces/pastes don't have it, but it adds so much flavor to a pizza sauce you have no idea. The first idea is horrible. Don't do it. It will ruin your good sauce. The second idea is intriguing and I will try it next time instead of raisins or a carrot.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2013 09:33
|
|
|
Use a spindown to keep track of your current attack bonus. Don't tell me you don't own a spindown per player, you loving nerds. For bonus eraser saving, use five spindowns and a d100 (Attack, Defenses, HP).
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2013 19:13
|
|
|
I am going to supercede this stupid argument by asking our Great Benevolent Moderator to tell the story of just how in ze hell he broke his crock pot.
Gau fucked around with this message at 21:02 on Mar 15, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2013 20:59
|
|
|
If you replace "skill" with "move", that is basically Dungeon World.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2013 06:33
|
|
|
I'd like to point out that the secret to really good eggs is dill. A pinch for something like an omelet, but for scrambled just let fly. Oh, and garlic, but you knew that already.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2013 15:56
|
|
|
Mikan posted:I really do think more RPGs should have some kind of cards attached. I'd like a D&D where all the abilities and spells and feats and stuff are on cards, and if you're feeling lazy that night you could just grab like seven cards from the deck and have a fully functioning character ready to go. You could even do a draft and watch people fight over who gets the Wizard card or something. D&D 4E already is roughly three steps away from card-based character creation. I think the base issue that you're getting at is that RPGs need to make better use of props, cards, tokens, and the like to communicate and guide play. I mean, just the idea of a character sheet for something as fiddly as D&D is absurd. I want to play a game, not do homework. There's no reason for RPGs to not meet or exceed the technological sophistication of board games. This is an area where we've sort of backslid, as well. I've read anecdotes of early D&D games where character cards were literally cards with a name, stats/saves, and hit points. When you got an item, the DM wrote it on a card and handed the card to you. Mapping was done on graph paper; monsters were also (handmade) cards that the DM kept hidden in a file. I feel like the bog-standard D&D character sheet is a step down from this sort of tactile play.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2013 06:00
|
|
|
I tend to think of it as less "kid-friendly" (which is not what Magic is operating as) but more "new-player friendly." Magic has been doing this for years, and while some of their efforts have been more...misguided, they at least have the idea in placed along the entirety of their development line. I always thought it was a sad failure that 4E had such an awful starter box. They could have put most of that poo poo in one of the D&D Board Game boxes and converted players on the spot. Games for broad appeal (like D&D) should be designed around good play and easy, shallow learning curves. Shoving a sheet full of strange terminology and arcane numbers in front of newbie is pretty much the least accessible you can make a product.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2013 07:36
|
|
|
goldjas posted:The DM guide in 4e had something like an entire chapter on it, how could he not unless he didn't read the guide for the thing that he was doing. Yeah, I should be required to reverse-engineer monsters to make a balanced encounter. That's great RPG design!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2013 02:51
|
|
|
The other real difficulty in estimating the success or failure of Fourth Edition is that 4E was the first edition available and purchased largely online. The industry standard for "public sales figures" is games store surveys, which don't take into account online sales. It's a curious conundrum; Wizards first encountered it when the Third Edition books were being carried in proper book megastores. They built better metrics for this sort of thing when they started selling Magic in big box stores. We can't really say that 4E was a resounding success or "beat" Pathfinder or whatever, but the really basic analysis of DDI numbers combined with the fact that the original run sold out incredibly quickly can tell us it certainly wasn't a failure.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2014 12:58
|
|
|
ritorix posted:Wotc also now has the dndclassics site to sell those older editions again. So they finally found a way to cash in on the old school gamers. That's gotta be one of their few sources of income right now with no new books on the shelves besides a handful of bad adventures in over a year. Even ddi will have dried up since they discontinued their digital magazines. ahahahahhahahahahhahahahahhahahahahhahahahah
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2014 15:44
|
|
|
It's been said before, but the story that I read out of "D&D Next" is the Fourth Edition was D&D's chance to be a Big New Thing again. It's less that it failed (it clearly didn't) and more that it failed to make more than single percentage points of Magic's revenue. So, they've got a half-dozen guys working on the project now and it's going to be D&D as gently caress because these guys know D&D, and meanwhile they are going to pump millions of dollars into TCGs because those are loving money on wheels.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2014 16:34
|
|
|
The OGL screwed D&D as a brand forever, and not just old D&D. When the GSL was first revealed, there were people asserting that you could just as easily copy Fourth Edition with only minor changes. You can't copyright mechanics and all of the "flavor" (legally "presentation") of the game is already out there for the taking, so Wizards would have a hell of a time making a case. For a similar issue, note that nearly every TCG uses some sort of "tapping" mechanic: bowing, kneeling, exhausting, whatever. But as long as you don't call it tapping or use the tap symbol, you're pretty much good. Hell, Wizards has the goddamned patent for TCGs, but it's essentially unenforceable with current case law.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2014 19:50
|
|
|
Rulebook Heavily posted:And if a party brings more than one wizard? That's not a thing. Now you're just making poo poo up.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2014 20:12
|
|
|
Hashtag Yoloswag posted:It also becomes an absolute clusterfuck of bookkeeping at that stage. Some people really enjoy this. We had a blast with how dynamic the game becomes around Paragon, as a wargame. Past there, it starts to...drag.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2014 11:47
|
|
|
Well, $39.95 (the price of the PHB in 2006) would be $46.35 in 2012. Inflation can be a bitch. They're selling the "Premium" reprints of 3.5 for $49.95, as well.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2014 16:48
|
|
|
Winson_Paine posted:Yeah they sounded like they were 3.5 fans from some of the other convo I heard, or at least not 4e fans. Still, it was neat hearing people who were excitable about it. It turns out their money spends too. I'm actually intrigued to see what the on-the-ground "buzz" is for 5th Edition. I have a feeling that, outside of internet forums, there are a lot of people who will buy D&D on "feel" in a less critical and more "oh look, it's D&D again!" way. Regardless of merit, there are a lot of people interested in iterative changes to the legacy of D&D.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2014 04:44
|
|
|
Dungeon World has always left me a bit...blah because if I want to play odd-school D&D then I can just do that by picking up the Rules Compendium. It just cuts too close to the source material and doesn't add enough. It's like, if I'm going to eat something vegetarian, there are a lot of good choices that play to strengths: stir fry, lasagna, salads. The only reason I'd go with the veggie burger is because someone told me it's better for me despite the fact that it tastes slightly wrong and adds nothing to the experience. If I want a hamburger, I can eat a juicy fuckin' burger. I don't need RPGs to reflect my life choices.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2014 21:13
|
|
|
I've had some delicious black bean patties, but they are good because they don't even try to taste like a ground beef patty and instead pursue their own path to tasty satisfaction. You can't beat red meat at being red meat, stop trying. I'm more interested in something like the Torchbearer lambburger, but grinding up lamb/Burning Wheel to make a burger/retroclone is still sort if sacrilegious.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2014 23:06
|
|
|
I know this is a dumb question, but what the gently caress was ORIGINALLY happening in this GIF?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2014 03:47
|
|
|
The "swinginess" of d20 is an issue, but that side of the math has little bearing on gradated success as a mechanic. All you need to do is base the levels of success around the DC. Establish thresholds like this:
As long as you use the same scale for everything, people would pick up on this pretty damned quickly. Especially if you put a cheat sheet on the character sheet.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2014 10:17
|
|
|
Mirthless posted:Given how fast Wizards abandoned and distanced themselves from the product, I think market research would support the opposite truth. I've always been confused by this notion. 1st Edition was 1979-1988 [10 years] 2nd Edition was 1989-1995 [7 years]* 3rd Edition was 2000-2003 [~2-3 years] 3.5 Edition was 2003-2007 [4 years] 4th Edition was 2008-2013 [6 years] *Not counting a couple years of reprint products. Even if you count 3rd Edition as one game, it had a seven-year lifecycle. Gau fucked around with this message at 17:03 on Mar 6, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2014 17:01
|
|
|
Mirthless posted:Essentials was a more thorough revision of how the game was intended to be played than 3.5 by a pretty wide margin, but even if we ignore the rebranding attempts they made mid-way through the game's lifecycle, I don't think anyone can argue with any sincerity that Wizards was still on board with the product past 2010. Sure I can. They released new books, continued releasing digital content, and maintained the Encounters program. Also, Essentials (a backwards-compatible product designed to attracted new players with a simpler approach) was more of a revision than a complete rewrite of the game that required you to buy all new books? This is like, anti-logic. quote:The most glaring example of this is them halting development of their online toolkit, which the entire product was supposed to be built around. Yes, I am aware that the head developer on the project was involved in a murder/suicide. But the fact that they didn't continue development on the project afterwards should have been a pretty good sign that it simply wasn't worth it to put in the effort any longer. Yeah, I'm certain there were no personal or human resources reasons for abandoning a project that involved a murder-suicide. No, I'd bet that they were just giving up on D&D. As evidence, I point to the fact that they kept releasing books, adventures, and digital publications for the game. quote:But beyond that, compare the product release cycle of 3.5 as it was winding down to the product release cycle of 4e for the last two years. It's night and day. 4e was a great product, a great game, aimed at an audience of gamers that are pretty bad about not actually paying for their products. It's the whole reason they stopped releasing them digitally - they couldn't sell retail copies OR digital pdfs because people were just cracking the copy protection and passing them around on torrent sites. [citation needed]
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2014 17:25
|
|
|
Mirthless posted:Because that literally is what happened. Digital PDF sales were killed around the same time Wizards worked with law enforcement in like 4 different countries to bust major pirates. I guess it's coincidence that Wizards just decided to stop raking in free money at the same time that they caught a number of people who had been cracking and redistributing official PDFs? "Wizards tried to crack down on a problem endemic to the entire publishing industry, and pulled their PDF sales in response to a huge internal leak of a flagship game. Ergo, 4E players pirate more."
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2014 17:30
|
|
|
Mirthless posted:I don't know how my line of thinking is somehow less plausible than "Wizards of the coast killed their hugely successful game because some people whined on an internet forum". I don't know if you're selectively reading explanations, but here's one that is not a ridiculous strawman (it's also mine): quote:It's been said before, but the story that I read out of "D&D Next" is the Fourth Edition was D&D's chance to be a Big New Thing again. It's less that it failed (it clearly didn't) and more that it failed to make more than single percentage points of Magic's revenue. So, they've got a half-dozen guys working on the project now and it's going to be D&D as gently caress because these guys know D&D, and meanwhile they are going to pump millions of dollars into TCGs because those are loving money on wheels. Also, a cursory search of The Pirate Bay shows that there is about an order of magnitude more pirating of Pathfinder material than 4th Edition. So, like, good try dude, but I can't see any founding for your notions.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2014 17:41
|
|
|
Winson_Paine posted:This is just a request to be less dumb and maybe talk about games or something. This is crazytalk. Is Torchbearer more Mouse Guard: Bigger, Better, Faster, or is there a lot to differentiate the two? The idea of resource and time management and using actual mechanics to represent the better parts of adventuring is really appealing, but looking at the character sheet makes me worry I'd be buying a book that I already own 3/4 of.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2014 18:17
|
|
|
Guy A. Person posted:The problem is that we have been gazing into the abyss of grogdom so much and wrest'ling with monsters that we, too, have become monsters. Is it that by its indefiniteness it shadows forth the heartless voids and immensities of the universe, and thus stabs us from behind with the thought of annihilation, when beholding the white depths of the milky way? Or is it, that as in essence whiteness is not so much a color as the visible absence of color; and at the same time the concrete of all colors; is it for these reasons that there is such a dumb blankness, full of meaning, in a wide landscape of snows- a colorless, all-color of atheism from which we shrink? And when we consider that other theory of the natural philosophers, that all other earthly hues — every stately or lovely emblazoning — the sweet tinges of sunset skies and woods; yea, and the gilded velvets of butterflies, and the butterfly cheeks of young girls; all these are but subtile deceits, not actually inherent in substances, but only laid on from without; so that all deified Nature absolutely paints like the harlot, whose allurements cover nothing but the charnel-house within; and when we proceed further, and consider that the mystical cosmetic which produces every one of her hues, the great principle of light, for ever remains white or colorless in itself, and if operating without medium upon matter, would touch all objects, even tulips and roses, with its own blank tinge — pondering all this, the palsied universe lies before us a leper; and like wilful travellers in Lapland, who refuse to wear colored and coloring glasses upon their eyes, so the wretched infidel gazes himself blind at the monumental white shroud that wraps all the prospect around him. And of all these things the Albino whale was the symbol. Wonder ye then at the fiery hunt?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2014 19:36
|
|
|
Rulebook Heavily posted:all spells are available to wizards/clerics I think this is the crux of where argument really gets off the rails for me. Okay, let's say everything superhuman is magic. Awesome, that's a decent game-wise assumption. It's the idea "if it's arcane, then Wizards can do it, and if it's divine, then Clerics can do it" that really drives the balance issue. You could give everyone all kinds of awesome abilities and if Wizards get to do them too, then it's pointless from a gaming perspective; even if Wizards have
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2014 07:54
|
|
|
Winson IRL right now: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5b1a-hqvGNI
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2014 23:03
|
|
|
Let f(u) be the marginal cost of buying Gau increasingly irate avatars about his failed Kickstarter.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2014 00:02
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:Isn't that poo poo all getting handled or something? Yes, Mikan is awesome and picked up the Kickstarter. This isn't D&D Next talk, though, so questions should probably be redirected to the KS thread.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2014 01:21
|
|
|
This will improve the thread.
Gau fucked around with this message at 01:42 on Mar 12, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2014 01:38
|
|
|
Plutonis posted:https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/funtyrant/nightfall basically forums poster gau made this game kickstarter and did not deliver and still posts even though there are a lot of pissed off peopel whose money he took from lol And I wore a scarlet title about it for like, two months but when I changed it to something else the cabal of gauhaters was on it and changed my title inside of twelve hours. Twice. Gau fucked around with this message at 02:33 on Mar 12, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2014 02:30
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:man I can't imagine why they'd be annoyed with you I hope that buying titles makes them feel better, I really do. Also it's worth nothing that I saw under a grand of that money, and that includes the money I paid for art and stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2014 02:38
|
|
|
Rulebook Heavily posted:You left me with the horror that is writing OSRIC conversions, you do realize that I am actually and legitimately sorry for this. Ugh. Cease to Hope posted:So what happened to the other six grand It turns out that trusting goons with money is a pretty universally bad idea. Who could have known?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2014 02:47
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:Please forgive me. I only saw $1000 of the money I stole. I foolishly allowed the rest to be stolen from me! Good job.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2014 02:51
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 08:16 |
|
|
stoutfish posted:why do you guys have a 200 page thread about a game no one cares about? seems like a waste of energy at this point. tradgames.txt Meanwhile the Meikyuu thread just sits.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2014 04:12
|
|