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

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

See this post? This giant post? It's just one part out of many. I've bolded some of the more egregious pieces, but I'm sure I've missed a lot:

quote:

What's Wrong with 4th Edition, Part 1
Esper's Endorsement and My Response

This is a topic that I've avoided for quite some time. It's a topic that gets really, really under my skin. I'm not surprised how many "greybeards" who started with old-school gaming, nor how many young kids who grew up with Diablo and World of Warcraft love 4th edition Dungeons & Dragons. I've watched a dozen youtube videos and read two dozen blogs both praising 4th edition and telling the viewer/reader to "convert" (as if it were some religion) or vilifying the new system and calling it "tabletop WoW," "WoW-lite," or any other permutation of a "WoW" reference.

Now, I'm going to sit back and explain, calmly, rationally, why 4th Edition, despite how fun it may be for a player, game master, or whatever, is not a role-playing game. I'm not saying it's a bad one, what I'm saying is that Dungeons & Dragons 4th edition fails as a role-playing game on every level. Period.

Lots of people disagree. They claim it's fun. Fine. I'll address that near the end. Suffice it to say that I have heard all of the arguments, read the books, talked to friends who've played and both enjoyed and hated it. I've watched it played on YouTube and in real life. I have no interest in playing it whatsoever. I cannot emphasize more how much I find it to be un-fun. I cannot even make a character without becoming frustrated by the game. If I cannot get excited about my character, then I cannot play the game. This is literally a game that I find impossible for me to play. That is why I've never personally playtested it myself. I cannot explain it any better than that. Part of the game is rolling up a character--it is literally a stage of play, when you roll one up you are already playing--and if I cannot even complete that stage without wanting to douse the book in gasoline and light it on fire because it is not only un-fun, unexciting, and uninteresting, it is downright frustrating in a way I have not experienced since that goddamn vulture in Ninja Gaiden.

This is why I have to scratch my head and wonder if something is wrong with me or with all of the people that love 4th edition.

Now, I've heard all of the arguments as to why 4th edition is not only good, it's the best incarnation of D&D yet. Esper actually does a very decent review of it on YouTube and makes a solid case for adopting it. However, his discussion is full of very, very prominent flaws. Go ahead, watch his review before continuing reading.

First, Esper does NOT possess credentials. Having started with 3rd edition does not equate to having credentials by a longshot. He's been playing for 10 years, but I've played for nearly 20 and I know of people who have played since the 1970s and knew Gygax personally.

Second, he does not explain how 1st and 2nd edition AD&D are archaic from a design point-of-view. He just says it, no qualifications, no explanations, just an axiomatic statement that those systems are "out of date." This is extremely telling in that it inadvertently reveals a very prominent bias, making it apparent that he is not approaching it from a purely analytical standpoint. Simply put, he didn't think the game's mechanics before 3rd edition were up-to-date. I could assume he means "not like video-games enough" but that would be assuming (although his statement that he's "been a gamer" since he "picked up an NES controller" indicates that he equates tabletop role-playing with video games on some level). His lament that he felt things in 3.5 were "outdated" again begs the drat question, "What do you mean by 'outdated'?"

To truly understand why he converted to 4th edition we need reasons why he felt 3rd and 3.5 were so flawed and archaic. His complaint that "everybody uses the same stuff" in 3.5 is confusing when, basically, all of the classes in 4th edition are relatively all the same in their mechanics. His discussion of why demons and devils don't teleport out of combat makes sense, but there are spells to prevent that (I guess he forgot about dimensional anchor and similar spells). "NPCs, monsters, and character classes all use the same rules," is his lament. However, from a design standpoint, that is actually a strength because it simplifies things! Otherwise, you get things like White Wolf--where you basically need to throw open your Werewolf the Apocalypse book if you're running a coterie in Vampire the Masquerade and they get jumped by a garou (if you want to represent them accurately and not just use the stats in the back of the Vampire book). But this also ignores the point that we do have hordes of different rules, feats, spells, and more, despite the fact that he put all of the supplements that describe them on display as his favorite additions to the game!

By now, I'm confused. Did he house-rule D&D 3.5 so heavily that he forgot what the actual rules were? Okay, that's a bit harsh. Regardless, I see where he's coming from when it comes to a single spell-list, but I've played games like Rifts and Palladium Fantasy, so I see a definite advantage from a design point-of-view to streamline spells as a result of my experiences. "My cred" if you will. Which stretches back to "Classic D&D" and the Rules Cyclopedia in the late 1980s/early 1990s. If you lived in the Philly area, you were listening to Color Me Badd's "I Wanna Sex You Up" on Q-102.

Then, he talks about the PC's classes "filling the role in the game that they're supposed to fill." Again, I have an enormous problem with this. I've run VERY unconventional games in D&D. Entire campaigns were run in 2nd edition without clerics or fighters or thieves or mages. Seriously, my Dark Sun campaign sophomore year of college basically consisted of a bard, a gladiator, and a psionicist/defiler. That's it. No cleric. Although the gladiator was a bit of a tank, he wasn't as versatile. The bard was a poisoner, not a thief, so breaking and entering was limited. The defiler had to keep his arcane magic under wraps due to the fact that if anyone knew, they'd kill him, so he stuck mostly with psionics. Yeah. No fighter, thief, mage, cleric roles in that party at all. My current party has a warlock, a dread necromancer, a barbarian and a rogue. No cleric (yet). No standard arcane spellcaster with utility spells. And the party is doing fine. The idea that there are roles to fill is bunk. Hell, plenty of people have blogged about how you don't need a cleric. The idea that a character is supposed to fill a predetermined role is what frustrates me so much about 4th edition. I've played games without classes whatsoever, where you simply developed a concept and built it (like White Wolf or D20 Call of Cthulhu) and had a blast. It's myopic, narrow-minded, and unnecessary. Hell, lots of gamers absolutely hate the existence of classes and frankly quit D&D back in 1st or 2nd editions because they think classes are out-of-date! If that is the case, 4th edition is a step backwards, not forwards, because it shoehorns every character with no flexibility or customizability! 4th edition was outdated before it was even launched!

Esper's lament about how he was unhappy with losing a level is also extremely telling. I know a lot of old schoolers who ran during the Gygax days of White Box and Red Box D&D would sneer at Esper. "Tough luck, pal. It's a consequence. You died." 4th edition is about not having to pay the piper. There are no lasting consequences for a lot of effects. And that is a problem. But I'll get to that later. Anyway, yeah, saying that the level was gone and he couldn't get it back is so skewed. "Your level is gone. You can get it back, though... through adventuring until you get enough XP to get it back." Levels are fluid, in a way. But anyway, I digress.

The item creation costs are stupid. Yes. Spells that cost XP make a bit of sense (you're sacrificing a part of yourself). Small XP costs for item creation may make sense too. Not the exorbitant costs, though. I've had problems with item creation costing XP. I don't like it. It balances things out... a little. But I've allowed players to buy feats and powers with XP, powers and feats they wouldn't have gotten as quickly, or in as much abundance. But item creation? Yeah, you should GAIN XP for that--you did in 2nd edition! It simply shouldn't be so easy as blowing gp and XP, but should take time to gather components and rare objects that both enhance the flavor of the world and make the item itself more special.

Esper's complaint about non-spellcasting classes being boring is also bunk. Fighters can be amazingly powerful and versatile, and are drat good if you use wandering monster tables and random encountes. Rogues can forge documents like passports and royal writs and warrants that can get the party into places without combat. They're incredible skillmonkeys. My favorite rogue of all was a halfling archeologist that I created. Archeologist! Not a thief, but something more akin to a pint-sized Indiana Jones. He was basically what Indy said Marcus Brody was when he lied to the Nazis, "He's got a two-day head-start on you, which is more than he needs. Brody's got friends in every town and village from here to the Sudan. He speaks a dozen languages, knows every local custom. He'll blend in, disappear, you'll never see him again. With any luck, he's got the Grail already." Yeah. Only Brody was a joke. My halfling, however, was exactly that. High charisma, high dexterity, high intelligence. Yeah, he was poo poo in combat. But he wasn't built for combat. (This is one of the reasons I hated 4th edition--I couldn't build my halfling archeologist.) With enough finagling, you could built a barbarian from Mongolia or Northern Africa who raged and rode horses. A finesse fighter with a rapier like a Musketeer was entirely possible and at high levels a fighter specializing in longsword could go about saying, "I'm the greatest swordsman that ever lived" like Mad Martigan. Creativity made these classes interesting.

But wait a second, in Part Two of his review, Esper says, "Now, you build the class the way you want." Then he turns around and says each class has a role, and mocks those who think that's constraining. So, wait, you just contradicted yourself and attempted to dismiss that contradiction by logical fallacy--you make a funny voice and attempt to discredit anyone who disagrees by imitating them, and then say, "shut up." Sorry, man, that doesn't fly. And the roles he assigns to the classes? Who the hell did he ever play with? For me, the cleric was always the man BEHIND the leader (who was most often the fighter or paladin). He was the Archbishop Turpin to the paladin's Charlemagne, or to reference the amazing Flesh + Blood, the cleric is Ronald Lacey's "Cardinal" to Rutger Hauer's fighter, "Martin." (As an aside, Ronald Lacey's character is such a great example of how a cleric should be role-played in a party, I feel the movie should be required viewing by DMs and cleric players alike). By-the-way, the fact that the fighter fit on ONE PAGE is actually his strength and he's the most versatile and customizable class in the entire drat game (with the possible exception of the rogue). Seriously, Esper's laments that fighters were "boring and generic" in 3.5 just shows how little imagination he had. Yeah, if you wanted to optimize your fighter, they're all the same. If you didn't care about min/max-ing, you could make a truly unique fighter in a party of truly unique fighters and they'd all be pretty awesome, have different weapons, and fight in interesting ways. I hear more complaints about how the classes are generic in 4th edition (especially since min/max-ers can quite easily optimize their classes and it is just obviously stupid not to do so).

Yeah, that statement about half-dragon-half-minotaur-barbarian-fighter-ranger was just... so telling. So very telling. The more we watch, the more of Esper's tastes in gaming are revealed. In fact, the further I got into watching his video on 4th edition, the less I wanted to play it (if that is even possible) and the more I realized how much he misunderstood 3.5 and all previous editions of D&D.

Esper's statement that he has a solid understanding of the design of previous editions is questionable, because so far we've heard beefs he has with those designs, but not any reflection on what those editions were designed to accomplish. They weren't designed to do what Esper wants. But Esper's playing Dungeons & Dragons, a game that never had him as a target audience. Until 4th edition that is.

I won't say his criticisms are illegitimate. They are! However, Esper is not able to look beyond his own tastes and desires and understand what kind of play the game is designed to facilitate. Like I said, Esper was never the target audience of any edition prior to 4th. And I'll go on to explain why after a few more paragraphs.

Esper then goes on about how the old methods of marketing and open-source materials were gone in favor of loyalty programs and general, overall consolidation of media sources such as print. His tone makes this seem like a Good Thing, then he shows the evolution of Mario from NES to the Wii. That was a not-too-subtle metaphor for progress. And if there's anything I learned from postmodernism, its that positivism and the idea that "progress" (i.e. change brought about by technological developments) are definitely something that is up for questioning. I mean, technological progress enabled millions to die in two World Wars (that very fact spawned the postmodern movement and brought about the questioning of positivism by-the-by). Besides, these new marketing strategies sounded to me like Wizards of the Coast was trying to cash in on new trends in marketing and things like downloadable content. I don't blame them--they're a business and CEOs keep their jobs by pleasing stockholders (just like the CEO of United Fruit when he arranges to have economic hit-men crash the planes of South American presidents who won't sell-out their people). Okay, that's a bit of a logical fallacy for me to equate Wizards with economic hit-men, but you get what I'm trying to say (I hope). These changes are not necessarily Good and in fact, I'm highly suspect because I know that Wizards and Hasbro (by extension) are after MONEY. And as a capitalist, I believe it is my duty to invest my money in products that I believe have a specific standard of design and quality of production. As the first video comes to a close and Esper basically brings up natural selection, it has now become clear that he is being didactic--4th edition is new, therefore superior. The period in which D&D didn't change was it's stagnant era, when TSR was almost destroyed by bankruptcy. Esper has gotten on a soapbox and is basically calling anyone who doesn't "change with the times" a Luddite and is implying that its time for those people to die off. Maybe he doesn't realize he's saying that and doesn't mean it. But it is a not-too-subtle subtext to everything he is saying openly, whether he is conscious of it or not.

When Esper says Kobolds are bland in 3.5, he's obviously never DMed them right. They're like Viet Cong--they're trap-making machines who live underground! I've seen people run encounters with Kobolds that nearly killed 5th-level parties! Attacking by night, using missile weapons, employing false retreats to lure PCs into trapped areas (falling spiked logs, pit traps, etc) and kill-zones, Kobolds can be very ungeneric and... here's the killer... realistic. Let's be honest, if a bunch of 3-foot tall dog-people (2nd edition) or lizard-people (3rd and on) wanted you dead, they wouldn't fight you toe-to-toe, even if they were savage and primitive.

Everything Esper says about his first Kobold encounter sums up what he wants out of D&D--a miniature war game. He wants Necromunda with some roleplaying and grid square maps instead of measuring tape. "Movement was more tactical," he says. That sounds like a miniature wargame to me. This is regression alright, like a lot of 4th edition's critics claim. Gygax and Arneson created D&D because their players wanted to actually pretend they were the figures they were playing with in Chainmail, for crying out loud! And if Esper actually had any real cred and an understanding of the design based on purpose, he'd understand that! Indeed, I try to run 3.5 without miniatures because it slows the game down and I prefer to use my imagination and ability to describe a scene effectively. Everything Esper says about building encounters, calculating XP, statting monsters, etc., just drives the point home--the problems with the game that Esper had all focused on combat. And the visuals make it absolutely undeniable--everything during this opening sequence is a picture of people at miniature-grid tables and mats. I try not to use miniatures and mats as visual aids--I prefer my own descriptive abilities and the use of pictures and photographs to build a sense of atmosphere and environment, not tactical positioning and obstacle-placement.

Anyway, moving on...

Esper is entirely right about how 4th edition was designed as a whole new car as opposed to a remodeled old one (ignoring the fact that old cars are often worth a fortune in good condition). He is right when he says the system is more consistent. He is 100% right about everything he says is strong about 4th edition.

It is designed for a new generation of gamers. A generation of gamers that were weaned on Diablo, World of Warcraft, and other computer games. A generation of gamers that has been brought up being told that they're a precious snowflake, individual and unique. A generation of gamers to whom their schoolteachers have been told "you cannot say the student is wrong" and "you cannot mark their answers with red pens" because of their precious little feelings. A generation of gamers who goes online and makes gay and racist jokes while playing Call of Duty multiplayer. A generation of gamers who cannot associate their actions with the logical consequences that come about. A generation of gamers that got a trophy just for participating. A generation of gamers that are occupying Wall Street because they don't have a job and want a hand-out (not because they think banks and corporations need to be more socially responsible). A generation of gamers who are used to having the government, school, and computers take care of everything for them.

A generation of gamers that are and will be perpetually spoiled children.

I know that sounds harsh, but hear me out. Yes, I know it is hyperbolic, but generations have trends (anyone remember how solipsistic the "Me Generation" of the baby-boomers has been for the past 50-60 years?) and I'm talking in generalities. I'm allowed to. I'm a historian. So what if there are statistical outliers that don't match the norm? When everyone I read or watch who loves 4th edition gives reasons that all lie within one or two standard deviations of the mean, I'm allowed to start making blanket statements. Likewise, when I observe personal tendencies that all seem to conform to the average, I'm again allowed to speak in trends, groupings, and generalities.

Anyway, if you want encounters to be more interesting, don't use game mechanics. That simply reduces every opponent to combat tokens meant to be killed and little else. Yeah, I understand how the powers and stuff 4th edition gives to opponents makes them interesting to fight. What about other forms of interaction? The game is a system that encourages a certain style of play, and that style is to consider every encounter a fight.

Want to make those kobolds more interesting? How about all creatures (not just the PCs) go to negative hp? When the fighter deals that 4 hp kobold a hit for 6 damage, don't have it just die. It collapses, bleeding out. The kobold out of a threatened square with the next initiative then drags his dying friend out of danger by the arm. Next turn, he and another kobold hoist the body onto their shoulders and flee to a safer place where they can try to stabilize him or at least comfort him as he dies. He's their friend. They aren't just evil base-attack bonuses worth 1/2 CR, they're living creatures when you do that. Think realistically. Think the magic words "suspension of disbelief." (I'll probably go deeper into the whole "suspension of disbelief" in my next post on 4th edition.) And read what Justin Alexander has to say about how it is not difficult to design better encounters in 3.5 D&D so long as you approach the text without all your erroneous preconceptions about design purposes.

Anyway, to continue, a lot of this comes from the schizophrenic nature of D&D. It's always been a role-playing game built around a combat engine, an engine derived ultimately from Chainmail back in the 1970s. It isn't a role-playing game with a combat-resolution system as a part of its greater problem-resolution system, like, say, White Wolf. The D20 system addressed this, but the inclusion of miniatures and tactical rules, like attacks of opportunity, actually reinforced the combat elements, as did the removal of the ecology and society segments of every entry in the Monster Manual. More and more classes, toys, and feats all helped to create a combat-heavy bent to 3rd edition and 3.5. The idiosyncrasies this brought about play a huge role in Esper's dissatisfaction with 3.5. They also play a huge role in why the OSR was established.

Esper wants D&D to be primarily a combat engine, with all role-playing elements taking place outside of the actual pages of the rulebooks. Don't deny it, watch Part Two of his review. Every aspect of the game he raves about (except for the online and computer stuff) has to do with combat. Monsters have stat-blocks that describe all his abilities, attacks, and powers? Combat. Races have one good ability that you can use once per encounter? Combat. At surface level, this appears to be what the OSR is about. So why don't they convert to 4th edition? Why do they continually stick with an "outdated" system?

Consequences.

Esper seems to be a bit more mature than a lot of the people I'm going to take aim at, but I'm going to do it nonetheless. Most 4th edition players I've met are geeks, nerds, and dorks. Alright, fine, most gamers period are geeks, nerds, and dorks, but I'm talking about a specific kind--the kind that has a lot of deep-seated insecurities. They were bullied as kids. They sought solace in their hobbies and interests and developed a superiority complex and as a result they act like little Napoleons when they talk about comic books, argue over whether Kirk or Picard was a better captain, or play D&D. I saw this kind at Captain Blue Hen in Newark, DE one day while I was shopping for trade paperbacks of Sandman. They were recording a podcast and were trashing Joe Satriani for calling himself the "Silver Surfer."

"How dare he? Who is Joe Satriani to call himself that?"

I wanted to call them sad, pathetic little virgins, but they've probably got girlfriends (geek girls exist now) or wives (they're old enough to be married). Joe Satriani surfs, he has a silver guitar (upon which he surfs the frets), and he's one of the best guitar players alive. Frankly, more people will benefit from his musical talents than will ever read the drat comic. Grow the f--- up.

It's called a Napoleon complex. I saw it all over the gaming community in Newark, DE, when I was in graduate school. Their self-esteems are so fragile, they have to haze newcomer gamers. They play nigh-unkillable characters. When they die, they whine when they lose a level upon resurrection. They don't like to face the consequences of failure because it subconsciously reminds them of when they couldn't do a single sit-up in gym class or couldn't get a date to the prom.

I've had characters die. I rolled up new ones. If I was purposely f---ed over by the GM, I left the game. If it was just how the dice went, nobody was to blame. If it had been a product of incautious behavior or overlooking an important detail, the fault was mine. Hell, once I had a samurai who was defeated by a treacherous PC in such a way that he felt he had dishonored his ancestors and his lords. He committed seppuku. I basically killed my character because it was what my character would have done. And I rolled up a new one. It's how the game is played.

Actions have consequences. The players of my Forgotten Realms campaign are fully aware of that. Sometimes, they make bad decisions. Hey, if Star Wars was being roleplayed by the kind of gamers who complain about setbacks (like losing a level for having been killed and resurrected), what do you think they'd say when Luke's player got Luke's hand chopped off by Vader and lost the lightsaber duel against a more powerful opponent in The Empire Strikes Back?

Consequences make a game believable. Otherwise, it's just a mentally masturbatory game where you live out your fantasies of revenge and empowerment in a make-believe world. It ceases to tell any kind of entertaining or meaningful story. Some people can't get through John Updike's novels because all of his main characters are assholes. If that is the case, why do I want to watch a bunch of nerds and geeks who are angry about getting bullied turning around and bullying others?

MovieBob covered this pretty drat well in regards to video games, but the "Hard Truth" applies to D&D. Check around 8:35 and listen to what he has to say about Six Days in Fallujah.

Basically, 4th edition isn't challenging. "Balance" is so darn important because every single drat encounter is resolved through fighting (at least, that's what the system lends itself to and how the game is designed to be played). (As an aside, Justin Alexander's essays on "Fetishizing Balance" and balance types discuss how people approach balance wrongly in 3rd edition.) Yeah, you can run it differently, but the point is, because Ron Edwards is right and SYSTEM DOES MATTER, the system has an effect on the player's approach to the game and if it is designed for combat to resolve encounters then playing it any other way is going to bring about just as much house-ruling, inconsistency, and idiosyncrasy as every single previous edition.

The OSR method of playing is incredibly unbalanced and lethal because you're supposed to be smart, think outside the box, and find ways to avoid, kill, trap, or negotiate with the monster in order to get the treasure. Killing creatures earned next-to-negligible XP. Treasure earned lots of it. How to play OS D&D? Think outside the box, dammit! Solve problems! Exercise your drat imagination!

D&D 4th edition isn't designed for that. Since balance is so overly fetishized, it's designed to be the sort of "fun" that comes from "pwning n00bz" not overcoming actual challenges through brains. "Oh, but there's tactics!" Yeah, sure, fine. If I want to play a tactical game with miniatures I'll play Warhammer. I want to solve problems and how to separate the ancient red dragon from his hoard as a third level mage is a drat difficult challenge, but it's worth a whole hell of a lot of XP. If self-esteem, real, true, actual self-esteem is built through accomplishment, then it becomes apparent that OS D&D actually does more to build self-esteem than 4th edition does.

Esper's claim that from a design-standpoint 3rd edition and 3.5 is bad was basically refuted even before it was written by Justin Alexander in "Calibrating Your Expectations." Here's a quote:
I�ve been working and playing with the new edition of Dungeons & Dragons longer than most. Ryan Dancey sent me a playtest copy of the new Player�s Handbook back in 1999, almost a full year before it was released at GenCon 2000. I had been an outspoken critic of AD&D for several years at that point and, more recently, been involved in a number of heated debates with Ryan over the OGL and D20 Trademark License.

By the time I was done reviewing the playtest document and sending my comments back to Ryan, I had basically done a 180-degree turn-around on both. Wizards of the Coast had assembled three incredibly talented game designers � Jonathan Tweet, Monte Cook, and Skip Williams � to rework the system, and they had succeeded brilliantly. They stayed true to the roots of the game and captured the best parts of it, while shedding decades of detritus and poor design. There were still a few quibbles here and there, but they had taken advantage of the largest and most expensive design cycle for an RPG ever conceived and used it to deliver an incredibly robust, flexible, and powerful system.

One of the most impressive things about 3rd Edition is the casual realism of the system. You can plug real world values into it, process them through the system, and get back a result with remarkable fidelity to what would happen in the real world.

Some people will consider this to be a remarkable claim. It doesn�t take much experience with the roleplaying hobby before you're familiar with dozens of vehement diatribes on the lack of realism in D&D and the resulting shortcomings in the system. Whole laundry lists of complaints (aimed at hit points, the encumbrance system, falling damage, or attacks of opportunity, for example) have been generated. In fact, such claims are so prolific that making the opposite claim (as I have done) is practically a heresy of sorts.

But, in my experience, these complaints largely originate either from people carrying over their criticisms of previous editions (where many of the criticisms were true) or from people failing to actually look at the facts and run the numbers.

So what I want to do, rather than just making my claim, is to take a look at a few rules, actually run the numbers, and demonstrate how effective D&D really is at modeling the real world.

And run the numbers he does. Justin Alexander demonstrates conclusively (in my opinion) that D&D 3rd edition and 3.5 is a highly adept simulation of reality that works extremely well without excessively clunky mechanics that wreck suspension of disbelief (before you say anything about realism and clunkiness of system, go take a look at Riddle of Steel). Johnathan Tweet, Skip Williams, and my God, Monte Cook designed 3.5. Seriously. Monty F---ing Cook.

For nearly every complaint Esper had, I gave a discussion and occasionally posted a link to an essay (by Justin Alexander) on that exact topic which demonstrated that Esper wasn't approaching the game's design in a manner that maximized its actual potentials.

Justin Alexander's observations on the very design decisions of 4th edition are incredibly revealing into the very purpose of the engine's design. Another quote:
Unfortunately, since Mearls started working at WotC, there are plenty of indications that he's swallowed the Kool-Aid. Which leads to the other big strike 4th Edition has against it, in my opinion...

DESIGN ETHOS AT WIZARDS

The current design ethos which seems to be holding sway at WotC is radically out-of-step with my own tastes in game design and gameplay.

Take, for example, an article Mearls wrote on the rust monster as part of the "Design & Development" column at WotC's website. Here we have a rust monster given an ability which corrodes, warps, and cracks metallic equipment and weapons. 10 minutes later, though, the metallic equipment and weapons are A-OK. They just repair themselves without any explanation.

This design is an example of the "per encounter" and "no long-term consequences, because long-term consequences aren't fun" schools of thought which the WotC design department seem to be mired in at the moment. But the result is a cartoony game system: My characters no longer live in a world I can believe in. They live in a cartoony reality where actions don't have long-term consequences and the grid-lines of the holodeck are clearly visible.

Another example from Mearls would be his blog post about skills from late last year, to which I have already written a response. I'm not saying that this skill system is one we're likely to see in 4th Edition, but I am saying that it shows that Mearls' design sense has radically altered since he designed Iron Heroes and The Book of Iron Might.

Let's take a look at a recent quote from David Noonan: "Powers unique to the new monster are often better than spell-like abilities. At first glance, this principle seems counterintuitive. Isn�t it easier and more elegant to give a monster a tried-and-true power from the Player�s Handbook? On the surface, sure. But watch how it works at the table. The DM sees the spell-like entry, grabs a Player�s Handbook, flips through it to find the relevant spell, reads the relevant spell, decides whether to use it, then resumes the action. See where I�m going with this? That�s a far more cumbersome process than reading a specific monster ability that�s already in the stat block. Heck, the physical placement of one more open rulebook is a hassle for a lot of DMs."

This quote is interesting to me, because it shows the type of wrong-headed logic skew that I see prevalent in a lot of the WotC design decisions of late. Basically the thought process here goes something like this:

Step 1: A spell-like ability looks easy to use, since it's a tried-and-true power from the PHB. But, in practice, the DM actually has to open up the PHB to see how the spell works. So instead of having all the information at their fingertips, they have to open up another book. And if the creature has multiple spell-like abilities, you've actually got to look at multiple page references in the PHB to figure out what the creature's range of abilities is.
So far, so good. This is all absolutely true.

Step 2: It would be easier if we put all the relevant information in the monster's stat block, so that it's right at the DM's fingertips.
Right again. Some people might complain about "wasted space", but I would love the utility of it. I have a similar reaction whenever I see "undead traits" in the stat block. You mean I have to flip back-and-forth through my copy of the MM to keep on top of this creature? It took me many months of DMing 3rd Edition before my undead stopped losing random abilities from that "undead traits" entry.

Step 3: So they shouldn't have spell-like abilities. Every creature should have a completely unique mechanic designed just for it.
... what the hell? How did you go skewing suddenly off to the side like that?

The problem is that Noonan is fallaciously conflating two types of utility:

(1) Spell-like abilities make it easier to use the rules because, as your familiarity with the rules for various spells grow, you will gain greater and greater mastery over a larger and larger swath of the ruleset.

(2) Putting all the information you need to run a creature in the creature's stat block makes it easier to use the creature because all the information you need is immediately accessible (without needing to look in multiple places, which also ties up books you may need to be using to reference other information).

There's no need to jettison utility #1 in order to achieve utility #2. The correct solution is to use spell-like abilities and list the
information you need regarding the spell-like ability in the creature's stat block.

(Which is not to say that a creature should never have a unique ability. There is no spell to model a hydra's many-heads, for example. The point here isn't to stifle creativity. The point is to avoid reinventing the wheel every time you want to build a car.)

We actually saw a similar logic-skew in Mearls' treatment of the rust monster:

Step 1: Rust monsters feature a save-or-die attack (and often you don't even get a save). The only difference is that it targets equipment instead of characters. Save-or-die effects aren't fun, because they simplify the tactical complexity of the game down to a crap shoot.
This is absolutely correct.

Step 2: The rust monster should still be able to attack, corrode, and destroy equipment (because that's its schtick and it's a memorable one) but it shouldn't be a save-or-die effect.
Yup.

Step 3: So we should keep the save-or-die attack, but make the armor miraculously un-rust and de-corrode after 10 minutes.
... and there they go again, skewing off towards the cliff's edge.

(The correct answer here, by the way, is: "The rust monster will use the existing mechanics for attacking items. Because we want the rust monster's ability to be frightening and unusual, we will allow it to bypass hardness. The damage will also be inflicted on metallic items used to attack the rust monster. Magic items are affected, but may make a saving throw to avoid the damage.")

I know that's an enormous quote of text, but it essentially isolates two major problems of design and the illogic behind the design of 4th edition--problems that Esper and other gamers actually see as strengths. Make no mistake, they do! Esper's complaint about losing a level is indicative of the whole approach the 4th edition design team took regarding the rust monster.

The game is purposely designed to allow the players to fight through a dungeon as close to consequence-free as possible. And fight is the key word here. All utility and non-combat abilities (especially spells) are relegated to long, time-consuming (in game) tasks or actions (like rituals). Basically, this renders utility spells, like knock, entirely useless. Most of the time knock is used is because you come to a locked or stuck door and need to open it quickly before your pursuers catch up to you. But since there are healing surges and "running away" and "losing a fight" isn't "fun" then why would you need knock for that purpose? Hell, why have knock in the game at all when the rogue can just keep trying to pick the lock ad infinitum?

As Esper describes the fact that monsters use different rules (in his second segment), what he's talking about is how the monster behaves in combat and what powers the monster has. This is because 4th edition has basically reduced all monsters to combat-obstacles to be killed, period.

Again, a quote from Justin Alexander:
This is yet another logic skew at work. They correctly identified a problem ("when combat and non-combat abilities are mixed together in the stat block, it's difficult to quickly find the combat abilities on-the-fly") and simultaneously came up with two solutions:

1. We will have a new stat block that separates the combat information from the non-combat information. This will make it much easier to use the stat block during combat, and if it adds a little extra time outside of combat (when time pressure isn't so severe) that's OK. (You can see the logic behind this solution discussed, quite correctly, by James Wyatt in another column.)

2. We will get rid of all the non-combat abilities a monster has, since they'll never have a chance to use them given their expected
lifespan of 5 rounds.

Now, ignoring all the obvious problems in the second design philosophy, why do you even need to implement such a "solution" when you've already got solution #1 in place?

(In case the design problems in the second "solution" aren't obvious, here's another quote from David Noonan: "Unless the shaedling queen is sitting on a pile of eggs, it doesn�t matter how the shaedlings reproduce. The players will never ask, and the characters will never need to know." What Noonan is ignoring there is that the reason the PCs might be encountering the shaedling queen in the first place is the pile of eggs.

If D&D were simply a skirmish game, Noonan would be right: You'd set up your miniatures and fight. And the reasons behind the fight would never become important. But D&D isn't a skirmish game -- it's a roleplaying game. And it's often the abilities that a creature has outside of combat which create the scenario. And not just the scenario which leads to combat with that particular creature, but scenarios which can lead to many different and interesting combats. Noonan, for example, dismisses the importance of detect thoughts allowing a demon to magically penetrate the minds of its minions. But it's that very ability which may explain why the demon has all of these minions for the PCs to fight; which explains why the demon is able to blackmail the city councillor that the PCs are trying to help; and which allows the demon to turn the PCs' closest friend into a traitor.

And, even more broadly, the assumption that detect thoughts will never be used when the PCs are around assumes that the PCs will never do anything with an NPC except try to hack their heads off.

One is forced to wonder how much the design team is playing D&D and how much the design team is playing the D&D Miniatures game.

This was before 4th edition was even released, and his predictions were correct. 4th edition is basically a miniatures game. It's Chainmail morphed into D&D (minus lasting consequences) all over again. So much for "progress." Like I said above, 4th edition is outdated and Esper is apparently unaware of his inadvertent hypocrisy.

The entire thing is all about the players having a superficial and ultimately empty experience that is "fun" but not "challenging." Once you figure out how the mechanics work and get enough tactical experience down, you can literally use a few simple math formulae to calculate the results of any given encounter simply using the given stats of the PCs and the mean stats for the opponents (which isn't hard, especially for minions). Most of my friends who quit playing 4th edition quit because they would spend 5 minutes calculating the results of a 1-hour combat session and their predictions were so accurate that the game became utterly predictable and boring.

Add-to-that the lack of consequences and what you have is something I am not interested in playing. Ever. I won't even try it. The very system irks me. I've not played with enough good GMs in my life to feel any sort of certainty or trust that whomever runs a 4th edition game and invites me will be willing to let me try to negotiate with the kobolds instead of kill them. I have the feeling that I'm going to echo lindybeige's complaints about the system when the DM says "you can't do that" to me whenever I try to do something that the game doesn't give me an express power.

Why would anyone want to play a game like that? Well, like I said, nobody in generations X or Y can seem to take failure. It hurts their precious little egos. So when they fail in real life, they blame Wall Street instead of getting back on the drat horse. Compare Esper's attitude regarding his character's death to this old grognard's tale I saw on rpg.net a few years ago:
I played a Magic User in Greyhawk .. THE Greyhawk... for a while. Up to 6th or 7th level when I retired him because I was tired of him and went back to my 8th level fighter.

My favorite adventure was as a 1st level MU. I had heard about an entrance to the 3rd level of Greyhawk and went down. Alone. With 3 HP and a Charm Person spell. Just me. A 1st level MU. In Greyhawk Castle. With Gary Gygax reffing.

I hit 2nd level at the end of the night with enough XP to be one shy of 3rd. I ran, I snuck, I threw lanterns (fire, oil, and a handle in one convenient package!), I ran, and I ran some more. It was still one of the best single evenings of gaming I've ever had.

So, I have heaps and heaps of "no loving sympathy" for people who complain it's boring to play a low level MU.
Someone else posted that one of the designers of 4th edition had played with Gygax as a preteen and was always complaining that his magic-user died, but the kid never learned how to play smart like the others--he wanted to zap and zap and zap away.

Behold. The "Me Generation."

On that same forum, one of the posters wrote: "Though I might argue that the amount of information that a new player has to understand by looking at a 4E character sheet is certainly more to digest than a OD&D character sheet. ... 4E also presumes... or at least encourages through example... a certain style and approach to play. OD&D had so few rules to "anchor" it that it meant that new players could make the game their own. "

The response? "Mechanically yes, but OD&D demanded a lot more out of it's players. Modern D&D demands less. ... [Presuming/encouraging a specific style] is a huge bone in 4es favor.
Again placing more demands on the player. Game design is about crafting a players experience."

I'll reiterate and link again: SYSTEM MATTERS. The worst thing about the whole system of consequences being removed and character death being so remote a possibility is that there's no real challenge (unless the DM basically goes out of his way to try to kill the PCs with extremely unbalanced encounters). Therefore, there's no real psychological reward. Oh, it's fun. But there's no real sense of player agency. By removing challenge and consequences and reducing everything to a series of combat encounters in a linear dungeon, the ability for the players to actually participate in the creation of a story (like the players are doing in my Forgotten Realms game) is diminished. I have half a mind to think that 4th edition is so friendly to DMs because it allows them to railroad the players so effectively and convince them that they're having a grand old time while he's doing it. There's no way in 4th edition the PCs are going to chase the brown bear off using bells, whistles, banging metal, and other things that generally drive bears off in real life. They're going to have to kill it because that's how the game works, that's how it is designed, that is how it is supposed to be played. If the DM allows for anything else, he is literally and most assuredly doing it wrong because he is not using the game for the purpose for which it was designed.

Again, I'll link Ron Edward's article: System Does Matter. And the above paragraph is proof. If you think a good DM and veteran role-players (as opposed to "roll"-players) in your group redeems your game, I'm sorry, you are wrong because your style of play is actually misusing the system, making it do something it wasn't designed to do. Therefore, any arguments that the "fun" and "role-playing" aspects of 4th edition are all dependent on the group composition and DM are hereby demolished.

QUOD ERAT DEMONSTRANDUM.

As lindybeige says in his review of 4th edition (linked above), 4th edition "is not a role-playing game at all. It is sort of a weird miniatures skirmish game, and an incredibly slow one at that." Yeah. I'll take 3.5 or OS D&D over 4th edition for the fantasy role-playing and Warhammer Fantasy Battle if I want to spend a fortune playing miniature skirmish games.

Next part, I will discuss the mechanics of the game a little and how it totally destroys suspension of disbelief, which in turn discourages immersion and role-playing.

I think Esper ran over this grognard's dog and dumped it on his front porch. This is the only logical explanation.

# ¿ Nov 3, 2013 04:44

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 23, 2024 12:12

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

Oh poo poo, that's a 3rd Edition conversion of the Guide to Unlawful Carnal Knowledge!

And I've got just the perfect Grog tax, from a Pathfinder sex PDF called "Pathfinder Vices." It goes one step further and takes content from the Book of Erotic Fantasy, Nymphology, GUCK, and Quintessential Temptress:

quote:

Sex
Cup Size
The character�s class and possibly their race may have an effect on cup size. The steps are as
follows: AA,A,B,C,D,DD(E),DDD(F), G,GG, GGG, and finally, HELLO!*
. At the GM�s option,
Characters with DDD or larger breasts must pay double for clothing or suffer from nearly
constant button pops or other wardrobe malfunctions, due to lack of clothing size
standardization in the era.

Optional Rule: Weight Increases- Breasts are heavy. Who hasn�t heard complaints from some
woman about having 5 pounds worth of milk sack attached to her chest? This optional rule
reflects that, with a few caveats: 1) weight increase is given as a percentage due to races of
different sizes having different cup size parameters 2) being three dimensional objects, breast
weight increases are not linear, and finally 3) I�ve done extremely complicated math for other
supplements that doesn�t have a place here due to the implementation of an easier system.
The table below is an approximation of that math:

Cup Size Weight Increase
D 5%
DD 7%
DDD 9%
G 12%
GG 15%
GGG 20%
HELLO! 25%

Default cup sizes for classes are determined by their Hit Dice (more rugged characters are
generally thicker) and Saves
D12 Hit Dice: D cup
D10 Hit Dice: C cup
D8 Hit Dice: B cup
D6 Hit Dice: A cup

Strong Fortitude (First Level base value +2): +1 cup
Weak Fortitude (First Level base value +0): -1 cup

Arcane Spells: Magic is sexy, +2 cups!
Divine Spells or Alignment/Code of Conduct Restriction: gods don�t like competition, -1 cup*

Famous people tend to have bigger boobs. If you have a class feature that gives you any type of
fame bonus, start with a DD cup.�

If the campaign uses some sort of reputation bonus that applies to all characters, that bonus
does not count for this purpose; only class features that specifically work for members of that
archetype. If using d20 modern, Celebrity and Dilettante occupations do count for this bonus,
but only because those occupations go beyond the standard reputation system.

Worked Examples
PHB
Barbarian- Start with a D cup, though some GMs don�t consider �non-lawful� a significant
restriction on alignment and start their barbarians at DD cup.
Bard- Start with a C cup
Cleric- Start with a B cup
Evil gods know how to appreciate a good bust! Evil Clerics start with a C cup
Druid- Start with a B cup
Fighter- Start with a D cup
Monk- Start with a B cup
Paladin- Start with a C cup
Ranger- Start with a C cup
Rogue- Start with an A cup�

Sorceror- Start with a B cup
Abyssal/Infernal Sorceror- Demons and devils like them boobies! Start with a D cup.
Wizard- Start with a B cup

NPC Classes
Adept- Start with AA cup if divine or B cup if arcane.
Aristocrat- Start with A cup�

Commoner- Start with AA cup**

Expert- Start with A cup
Warrior- Start with D cup

*
These modifiers don�t stack. If the character has any or all of them, only subtract 1 cup.
�
I know that characters don�t get bigger breasts until after they become famous, but they always claim the breasts are natural�
�
But is usually higher due to charisma bonuses common for rogues.
�
An aristocrat that doesn�t start out with decent charisma is screwed in more ways than just her job, but only by flat fetishist nobles.
** Her profession often puts her at a respectable B or C cup depending on Cha, and Con.

APG
Alchemist- Start with a DD cup*

Antipaladins- Evil gods know how to appreciate a good bust, their paladins start with a D cup
Cavalier- Start with a C cup
Clerics with the Arcane Subdomain- Arcane Magic is Sexy! Start with a DD cup.�

Clerics with the Love/Lust Subdomains- Your god isn�t jealous, start with a DD cup.�

Clerics with the Daemon, Demon, and Devil Subdomains are blessed with a C cup
Druids of the Reincarnated Archetype can pick what class and race they were before
they were reincarnated. They use their old class and race to determine their base cup
size modified by their current attributes.
Fighters of the Gladiator Archetype- Start with DD cup because of their Fame.
Inquisitor- Start with a B cup
Oracle- Start with an AA cup�

(Exception) Oracles with the Lame curse waddle around under the weight of DD cups.**

Skirmisher Rangers- Don�t have Divine Spells, start with a D cup.
Summoner- Start with a C cup
Witch- Start with a B cup
Wizards of the Enhancement school of the Transmutation College start with a C cup

Ultimate Combat
Gunslingers- Start with a D cup
Monks of the Martial Artist Archetype- aren�t held in place by their faith, their free
breasts start at C cup.
Ninja- Start with an A cup��

Samurai- The same thing as a Cavalier, starts with a C cup unless your GM sticks with gender
roles, and doesn�t allow females to be Ronin.

Ultimate Magic
Bards with the Celebrity/Demagogue Archetype- start with a DD cup, because they�re
Famous
Bards of the Geisha Archetype- start with a C cup
Magus- Start with a DD cup.��

*
An alchemist isn�t considered an arcane spellcaster, at no point does it say �an alchemist creates arcane extracts�. Therefore they should
calculate as a C cup, however I considered their alchemy class feature and their mutagen feature both worth +1 cup, because what self
respecting alchemist worth her tits weight in salt wouldn�t use her alchemy to her advantage?
�
I�m aware the arcane subdomain doesn�t change the character�s magic type to arcane, I just thought it would be fun.
�
Lust and Love gods truly bring new meaning to the phrase �lecherous old bastard�
�
This might seem� wrong in light of Alahazra, but remember, unlike other divine spellcasters, Oracles cast using Charisma as their governing
stat. This puts any Oracle worth her tits weight in salt at +3 or +4 cup size. See Starting Attributes Modifying Cup Size.
** Funny how the oracles with the Lame curse are the least lame, they actually prefer to be called �differently mobile�. Upon further inspection,
inspection, I notice that the Lame curse makes characters better at sex in general as they level up due to their indefatigability. Upon initially
deciding on their ridiculously large breasts, I had not really known that about them.
�� On the off chance you actually see a ninja, discerning their gender is rare.
�� Decent HD, Strong Fort, and Arcane Magic is a fun combination.

Prestige Classes
Typically prestige classes (not being allowed at first level) won�t modify starting cup size,
however, some classes may by their very nature involve some degree of transformation which
has (at least for these rules) an accompanying cupsize shift. Examples are given below:

Dragon Disciple- Transformed by their faith, into half dragons, shrewd combination of d12 HD,
Strong Fort, and Arcane Spells transforms female dragon disciples� breasts into G cups unless
they were already larger. Add the difference in cup size for any features they gained by being a
Dragon Disciple, for example, a sorceress turned Dragon Disciple gains a strong fort (+1 cup)
and hit die 3 steps larger (+3 cups), while a Bard or summoner turned Dragon Disciple only
gains 2 steps for hit die and 1 step for strong fort. If this would increase cupsize past HELLO!,
additional increases are wasted.

Loremasters- The applicable knowledge feat can give them the effects of Pleasing Physique,
enhancing cup size by +2. They may apply d4s as they wish (such as to trim down a hip line
expanded by years of constant sex or add to an emaciated waistline that should not be able to
support her upper torso).

Rage Prophet- This class doesn�t change cup size, but cup size depends on the class chosen at
first level.

Starting Attributes Modifying Cup Size
Constitution represents more voluptuous, healthier figure and adds its modifier to cup size.
Characters whose highest cup size modifier is Constitution generally have saggier, floppy
breasts, with asymmetrically shaped larger nipples.
Charisma represents a measure of self esteem gained (presumably, for game purposes) from an
appearance that isn�t unattractive. Add its modifier to cup size. Characters whose highest cup
size modifier is Charisma generally have more symmetrical, well rounded soft breasts and
medium nipples with a moderate bounce.
Strength subtracts 1/2 of its modifier (remember, subtracting a negative is adding a positive;
round down) to cup size as higher strength represents firmer more compact breasts while
lower strength represents flabbiness. Characters whose highest cup size modifier is Strength
generally have firmer more conical or pectoral shaped breasts with only a little bounce and
small nipples.

Optionally, Characters with Disguise can reduce their cup size by 1 step per rank without any
discomfort. Characters attempting to go beyond this take -1 armor check penalty per step
beyond (not cumulative with actual armor check penalty, use the worse of the two) per extra
step they attempt to take. It is up to the GM whether cup size penalizes disguise rolls.

Traits:
The character may purchase either Larger or Smaller Breasts with traits if they are available or
with the Additional Traits feat if traits normally aren�t available but can be purchased. In either
case this requires first level or being subjected to �Cosmetic Magic�.

Calistrian Prostitute- Increases cup size by one step in addition to its normal benefits
Charming- Increases cup size by one step in addition to its normal benefits
Larger Breasts- Increase cup size by 1 step and gain a +1 or +2 enhancement bonus to
diplomacy checks made against breast fetishists (Social, Any Racial). This trait comes in 2 levels.
Smaller Breasts- Decrease cup size by 1 step and gain +1 or +2 enhancement bonus on
diplomacy rolls made to influence flat fetishists (Social, Any Racial). This trait comes in 2 levels.
Thick- You gain +1d4 to your waist and hip measures. Whether using default weight multipliers,
or the randomized ones discussed later, your waist roll is added to your weight multiplier. In
addition you gain a +1 trait bonus to your CMD to avoid Bull Rushes and Trips. This bonus stacks
with dwarves� racial Stability if you�re using that ability.

Optional Trait: Hermaphrodite
This trait is applied to females by adding any penis trait. Since vaginal traits aren�t
reflected here, it wouldn�t make much mechanical sense to base hermaphrodites on
males. If they did, the male would need both a vaginal trait and a breast trait.

Special Abilities:
Brassiere of Breast Alteration- Characters who have worn this brassiere should make note of
this somewhere on their Character Sheets.

I checked the word count. 1,781 words about game mechanics for breast size. Isn't it odd that attempts by gaming books to be sexy almost always end up being the opposite?

Libertad! fucked around with this message at 07:30 on Nov 4, 2013

# ¿ Nov 4, 2013 07:27

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

More Pathfinder Vices! This time, feats!

quote:

Bukkake Mode [General]
You paint the whole room white when you do it.
Prerequisite: Fertile, Sexual Techniques 10 ranks
Benefit: You seem to squirt gallons of semen all over the room (optionally females might gain a feat called Cytherea Mode, a female may squirt 1 foot per 2 points of her total Sexual Techniques score). If you are inside your partner�s vagina when you orgasm, no roll is necessary on your part to impregnate, though you are still at the mercy of your partner. If you ejaculate on your partner, you can be assumed to take 1d8 rounds to finish, with each round emitting 1d6 strands of ejaculate (each being about 3 ml). for simplicity, you can multiply the results of 1d8 and 1d6.

Dick/Motorboat Choke [General]
Depending on whether you are male, female, or hermaphrodite you may use one or more body parts to choke others.
Prerequisite: A cup size that exceeds DD, or penis length longer than 8�, Base Attack Bonus +1.
Benefit: Whenever you grapple an opponent you may use any body part that meets this feat�s prerequisites to attempt to cause someone to suffocate. Normally this requires a Combat Maneuver check, but if your Sexual Techniques skill is higher than your CMB you may use it instead. If you beat their CMD they must roll to avoid suffocation (CRB p. 445). This provokes an attack of opportunity unless you have Improved Grapple.
Normal: Grapples use CMB and provoke an attack of opportunity.

Two Fisted Technique
Prerequisite: Dex 15
Benefit: in a regular DnD game you�d have Two Weapon Figthing. If you tore �em off they�d count as �Light�. With that rationale, you get -2/-2 whenever you try to �manhandle� two customers simultaneously with this feat, but not in combat. This means that you can make two rolls and take the better roll plus half of the lesser roll. For the purposes of earnings, you get +50% to the dice roll appropriate to the DC you make. This is cumulative with High Tippers.
Normal: Without this feat you get -4/-8 to beat people to death with ripped off penises. You still suffer those penalties for combat, but not for Sexual Techniques.

You Don�t Hit Girls
Ingrained in almost every male humanoid since they are born is the indoctrinating creed that it is somehow wrong to hit girls even if they break your heart, even if you�re drunk and, disturbingly, even if they are beating the poo poo out of you themselves. Many men have sisters or mothers who they would not like to see hurt and somehow the character has learned to latch on to this protective instinct and indoctrination and to use it to her advantage.
Prerequisite: Female, allies with the Bodyguard feat, either a positive charisma modifier or Pleasing Physique.
Benefit: Allies with the Bodyguard feat that use Aid Another to increase your AC increase it by +3 rather than +2. Allies without that feat grant +2 as normal.

So is the writer implying with the last feat that domestic abuse should be OK while intoxicated? :gonk:

# ¿ Nov 6, 2013 04:05

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

ProfessorCirno posted:

It's very strange to me when in the game world, its okay to be racist towards elves and orcs (even killing them), but when someone is prejudiced toward black people, gay people, or female people, they're irredeemably evil as in the real world. Just because elves and orcs are fictional doesn't excuse prejudice against them or the racist way they're designed. D&D societies display this bizarre moral system where they treat their own kind with 21st century liberal attitudes, but otherwise act like conquistadors/cowboys/etc.

That was an incredibly sad post. Especially because in that thread a black gamer seriously considered not introducing his kids to the hobby after reading it(this wasn't the major reason, just a bunch of incidents added up and this was the straw that broke the camel's back). I posted a bit in that thread a way back, now I just don't have the fortitude to slog through it again.

In the meantime, grog tax. Pathfinder Vices actually gets worse:

quote:

Accelerated Pregnancy
Trasmutation
Level: Clr 7, Src/ Wiz 6
Components: V, S, DF
Casting Time: 1 round
Range: Touch
Target: 1 pregnant creature
Duration: permanent
Saving Throw: Fortitude negates
Spell Resistance: Yes
This spell will speed up pregnancy by a factor of 720, increasing months to hours (plus or minus
1). The pregnant woman must make a constitution check vs. DC 10 when it�s time to give birth.
Success indicates that the birth is successful, failure indicates that the child dies and the woman
suffers a permanent -1 reduction to constitution. This is instead of the normal affects of
miscarriage.

Annihilator's Penis of Power
Transmutation
Level: Brd 4, Src/ Wiz 4
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 round
Range: personal
Target: self
Duration: 1 minute per level (D)
Saving Throw: Special
Spell Resistance: No
With this spell the caster (a creature with a penis or some appendage that functions like a
penis, or a caster under the effects of a Phantasmal Penis spell) empowers his penis to become
as strong as steel, granting it DR (1 x caster level)/- . It causes a disintegrate effect on chastity
belts, which magical ones get a save to resist. It renders sterile characters fertile, and if you�re
impotent, this spell mitigates that temporarily. Inhibition losses to the caster are halved.

Blast of Semen
Conjuration
Level: Src/ Wiz 5
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Close (25 ft + 5 ft / 2 level)
Area: Cone
Duration: 2 minutes/level
Saving Throw: Reflex negates
Spell Resistance: No This spell unleashes a blast of disgusting off-white slime that coats everything in the area of
effect. The slime turns cloth crusty, but affects everything else like grease. Because of this, any
naked flesh that was within the area of effect is considered to be greased, as per the spell. Flesh
in contact with this slime is slightly sticky but does not actually hamper movement (other than
the grease effect). Casting this spell during sex allows the caster to automatically pass his
fortitude save to impregnate (thus relying only on his partner�s roll) if he does not pull out.
Material Components: a little snail that is consumed during the casting

Change Orientation
Enchantment (Compulsion)
Level: Brd 3, Sor/Wiz 4
Components: V, S.
Casting Time: 1 action.
Range: Close (25 ft. +5 ft./2 levels).
Targets: One living humanoid creature.
Duration: 1 hour/level.
Saving Throw: Will negates.
Spell Resistance: Yes.
Macho posturing barbarians and warriors all over the lands live in abject terror of this spell,
despite their rather camp leather and fur outfits and suggestive horned helmets.

With a few surreptitious gestures the mage plants a change in sexual orientation within the
target�s mind and they begin to feel the effects immediately, their mind wandering into erotic
daydreams along the lines of what has been suggested to them. Once the kink or orientation
change has been implanted the mage is free to go up and make their modest proposal to the
now far more receptive target, who will hopefully blame the drink come the morning.

Change Sex
Transmutation
Level: Sor/Wiz 3.
Components: V, S, M.
Casting Time: 1 action.
Range: Touch.
Targets: Creature touched.
Duration: 30 minutes/level.
Saving Throw: Fortitude negates.
Spell Resistance: Yes.
A few magic words, a waving of hands and the swallowing of a small dried frog and zap, you are
a beautiful woman or hunky man, at least in theory. This spell enables you to transmute to any
gender, be it male, female, fully functional hermaphrodite or a fair representation of any weird
third or fourth sexes a humanoid species might have.
This spell is often used for disguise or to curse others for a short time. Others use it to test
whether they really would have been better off as the opposite gender and to experience the
wonders of the penis or the female orgasm.

Many are totally unprepared for the hormonal changes involved in such a drastic bodily
alteration and women changing to men can turn into frenzied rampaging beasts seeking to pork
anything in sight, while men changing to women can turn into frenzied rampaging beasts
seeking chocolate with ferocious intensity.
Arcane Material Component: A small dried frog.

Grease a character with a greased penis may eliminate up to -10 in penalties to stuff it into a
partner�s orifices

Summon Monster this line of spells has no direct impact on the sexual aspect of
Pathfinder but a single variant spell could be researched (summon sexual partner) that
summons a humanoid or creature with 1 rank in Sexual Techniques per caster level. For the
purposes of this variant spell, replace all instances the word �attack� with �breed� in the
description.

I feel like this document was written by a 14-year-old boy.

Libertad! fucked around with this message at 05:25 on Nov 6, 2013

# ¿ Nov 6, 2013 05:18

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

So I found some grog on the right-wing website Free Republic:

quote:

Princess Hillary

12th level Demagogue/4th level Lawyer/1st Level "Fighter for our Children's Future"

STR 6

DEX 7

CON 11

INT 12 (20*)

WIS 4

CHA 8

* INT score modified by Headbands of Girl Power. These do not actually increase her INT score, but they convince millions of onlookers to behave as if she has an INT of 20. Saving throw DC 26 to avoid this enchantment. Anyone who is conservatively aligned (Lawful Conservative, Neutral Conservative, or Chaotic Conservative ("Libertarian")) gets a +6 circumstance bonus to make the save.

AC: 22 (Wears Pantsuit of Protection, +6)

HP: 88

Attacks: Glaring Stinkeye: Make saving throw (DC 22) or become nauseated, as per the spell

Summon Secret Servicemen: As a standard action, Hillary can summon 2d6 elite 8th level Secret Service Goons to rough you up

quote:

Good one! But you forgot that she is also permanently surrounded by the Magic user spell "Protection from Reality" and has a "Ring of the Compliant Socialist Press", both of which make immune to the Special Prosecutors of Waterdeep". She also gets a +10 reaction adjustment from Urban Orcs, and is always accompanied by her sidekicks, Sid Blumenthal (15th level Toadie) and Paul Begala (12th level malignant dwarf).

# ¿ Nov 7, 2013 00:49

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

So Pathfinder officially banned the re-fluffing of game mechanics.

quote:

Claws and Talons: If I gain claw attacks, can I put those claw attacks on my feet?
If you are a bipedal creature (roughly humanoid-shaped, with two arms and two legs), your claws must go on your hands; you can not assign them to any other limb or body part.

If you are a quadruped (or have more than four legs), you can have claws on your feet. If you have claws on all of your feet, normally you can't use all of those claw attacks on your turn unless you have a special ability such as pounce or rake.

Talons are much like claws, but go on a creature's feet, usually a bipedal creature (especially a flying bipedal creature such as a giant eagle or harpy). An ability that grants you claw attacks cannot be used as if they were talon attacks (in other words, you can't "re-skin" the ability's game mechanics so you can use it on a different limb).

�Pathfinder Design Team, Wednesday

Whatever happened to the power of imagination?

Libertad! fucked around with this message at 23:27 on Nov 16, 2013

# ¿ Nov 16, 2013 23:21

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

ProfessorCirno posted:

What's that, James Jacobs, Creative Lead of Paizo? You have something to say about wizards?

~*~

5) I think it's a myth propagated by people with agendas.

Well, he didn't say EXACTLY that..

Anyway, grog tax:

quote:

Article: Is D&D 4e Really Role-Playing?

This is where people say �You can roleplay just fine in 4e!� It�s true in the same sense that you can roleplay in Monopoly � you can make the little doggie act up. But you can�t really do simulationist Monopoly (and its rules are disjoint enough from real-world that versimilitude�s impossible). Similarly, it�s harder to do simulationist D&D with 4e. Not impossible of course, just made harder by the rules and the core conceits behind the rules. It specifically prescribes things like defined quests that are effectively metagame considerations and therefore counter to a simulationist�s expectations about their activity in the game world.

But don�t you �just need more imagination?� Perhaps. Imagination is what helps smooth over rough points in the imperfect nature of simulationism � it�s �suspension of disbelief� and finding a reasonable in-game-context explanation for things that seem to break simulation. But there�s a continuum of how much people can tolerate/how much work they want to put out to make the simulation happen.

# ¿ Nov 20, 2013 06:12

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

quote:

The medieval period, though romantically remembered for chivalry and knights, is not known for its gender equality. However, medieval society is not as discriminatory as most moderns believe. Women find places in medieval society as guild members, powerful landowners, and abbesses. Some societies assign gender to certain roles but allow women to assume those roles though assuming a different gender. Complex gender issues aside, third edition assumes ability is not based upon sex or gender. This means a female fighter swings and hits as hard as a male fighter.

The religious views of women that colored feminine perceptions in the medieval times are another gender consideration. There is no inherent Eve or Madonna in third edition. This does not remove all historically sex-defined roles, but it does allow a GM more equality in game play.

What kind of place in society would women have in third edition parameters? Making women statistically equal to men challenges every historical concept of women. Female rulers would be more common, or even the norm in some kingdoms. Women would bear arms and be a part of military endeavors. A female society and fighting force could exist and kill anyone that has problems with sword-carrying chicks. Religious institutions would incorporate women in their hierarchy, and female apprentices would be accepted as readily as male ones. Because of third edition�s gender assumptions, GMs determine societal roles rather than assuming historical gender roles. That being said, if GMs prefer busty serving wenches and damsels in distress (so that PCs can kill dragons and steal their treasures), keep in step with the historical view towards women in a magical medieval society.

# ¿ Nov 22, 2013 07:33

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

quote:

There's this Paladin of Torm. He manages to get captured by the Drow. Fortunately, the matron who captured him turns out to be a sex crazed nymphomaniac and has three daughters who are also sex crazed nymphomaniacs so rather than torturing and kill him they make the Paladin into a sex toy.

Now the Paladin is loathe to admit it but he's starting to like this arrangement. He doesn't have to work and he gets screwed into exhaustion every night by hot dark elf babes.

At what point does the Paladin fall?

Responses:

quote:

The point where he breaks his oath to his god.

quote:

He's not helping evil by having sex with them.

quote:

I don't think Celibacy is a part of the Paladin's oath, so this situation doesn't cause him to fall. However, I doubt the Drow are allowing him to continue to worship Torm so he falls the first day he spends loving the dark elves instead of praying to his god.

quote:

A more pertinent question is how long he can keep the drow ladies satisfied before they get bored and kill him.

I'm betting two weeks. Most Paladins have high STR and Con scores so they tend to be in good physical shape.

quote:

There are certain herbs and roots that make a woman's body just poisonous enough that they don't get pregnant. That also isn't taking into account magic, and what not. I'm sure there's a spell out there, or three, that makes you sterile temporarily.

quote:

You dont have to like you duty to do it. He falls when presented with the oprotunity to succesfuly escape and does not, because he would rather give hot dickings. He is alowed to give hot dickings, he is allowed to enjoy hot dickings, he is allowed to fail at his oath as long as it was not by consous choice. (aka he is alowed to try and fail, but he MUST try). My palidin is a chef also, he enjoys cooking. He wont fall because he enjoys cooking, he wont fall because he enjoys cooking more than defending the viliage from ogres, he would fall if ogres attacked and he ignored it so he could cook. Same thing.

quote:

It doesn't matter if he likes it. The gods don't give two shits about his sex life- he can plow those purple lips with gusto and scream Armageddon quotes while he's doing it.

What matters is that he not commit an evil act, not commit enough chaotic acts to change his alignment, and that his actions don't stray from the will of Torm.

Paladins also can't willingly associate with evil creatures. That means that if he is given the CHANCE to walk away and he chooses to be a drow fucktoy instead, he falls from grace (but is still LG, just an ex-paladin). However, if he is being FORCED to associate with evil creatures (not choosing to) then that line is moot.

He basically falls at the point where he has some chance at escape and lets it slide past because he's grown complacent.

# ¿ Nov 24, 2013 02:04

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

ErichZahn posted:

I seem to remember this person being banned from Dumpshock and the entire internet faintly pulsing with "Finally!". Is he trying to dare people to disagree with him, or does he just think that his poo poo doesn't stink?

Fucks is a good sport though, does he have an account here yet?

Catalyst Game Labs' head, Loren Coleman, not only embezzled $800,000+ from the company, he also refused to pay freelancers for their work.

Frank Trollman was one of them.

Given that Frank burned his bridges as a game designer long before the scandal, and apparently whistleblowing on a company can ruin your career in the tabletop industry, the other freelancers used Frank to bring to light the financial discrepancies.

Now, Frank's complaints were legitimate, and other freelancers can confirm his accusations. In fact, it was what caused Wildfire (CthulhuTech guys) and Posthuman Studios (Eclipse Phase guys) to break off and form their own companies (both RPGs were published under Catalyst in 2010 and before).

Unfortunately Frank got personal and started attacking Coleman's Mormon faith, complaining about how they're all swindlers and that the church encourages this. He posted about it on rpg.net as well as Dumpshock, and got banned for this. Then he had his followers on the Gaming Den post his responses in his stead when he was already banned.

Grog tax, Amazon reviews of 4th Edition D&D:

quote:

The newest edition of the Dungeons and Dragons saga is simple. Convenient and expensive to attracted new players with new cash. But mechanically, the system is a step back in gamer evolution. It does cater to amine' fans and the WOW crowd. But doesn't offer the depth or insight experienced gamers crave. If you're new to Role-playing, start here. If you're an experienced gamers, this product is a flaccid, stinky bomb.

Synopsis - if you don't know what's good in RPG, this is a learning experience. If you're already experienced, pass on this product.

quote:

The game may say D&D on the front and it may use D&D terms and logos but this is actually a D&D clone computer game put on paper. If you enjoy any sort of role-playing, stay very, very far away from this game. This is simply and attempt for WotC to attract fantasy computer gamers to table-top games. My group has dediced to abandon 4.0 and wait until Pathfinder comes out and use that with 3.5. Expect to see my copy of the 4.0 Players Handbook on sale here in the near future. Used-like new!

quote:

I've been playing D&D now for over 30 years now, grew-up in a time before the internet and video games, when you pretty much used a pen, some paper and your imagination to have fun. Well I was sad to see TSR go(the end of an era), I had hoped that Wizards Of The Coast would keep producing products along the same lines that TSR did, and for awhile it seemed like it, but then Hasbro swooped in and bought the company. Hasbro of course wanting to make $$ decided to totally change the game, that way forcing players to go out and buy all new books, their first attempt was 3.0 which didn't last that long. Then 3.5 and now 4.0. "video games on paper" their way of trying to get the kids to buy. Give it two or three years and there will be a 4.5 edition.
Good going Hasbro! You took a game that generations grew up playing and TOTALLY SCREWED IT UP!!!

January 12, 2012
Hello all, just wanted to add that Hasbro is now working on what would be 4.5.
Of course they'll come up with a new name and stay clear of calling it 4.5.

The weird thing is that more than a few 3.5/Pathfinder fans in the reviews are also complaining about computer games influence, a complaint more unique to "Old School" gamers. Don't they know that people said the same thing about 3rd Edition? Or that a lot of the most popular material and homebrew in said Edition (Warlock, Tome of Battle, gish classes) were in part derived from outside, more modern, media?

Libertad! fucked around with this message at 22:03 on Nov 24, 2013

# ¿ Nov 24, 2013 20:57

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

Why's Zak bothering with The Gaming Den? As of late Frank and co. haven't really been trolling other forums (that I know of), and they don't really have a fanbase outside that website, so what drew Zak there in the first place?

Anyway, grog tax:

quote:

Skank
Enchantment (Compulsion) [Mind-Affecting]
Level: Sex 1, Src/ Wiz 1
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: touch
Target: 1 creature
Duration: 5 minutes per level (D)
Saving Throw: Will Negates
Spell Resistance: Yes
This spell turns an innocent, sweet person into a wild and crazy nymphomaniac. The affected
person will be struck by the nymphomania insanity for the duration of the spell (see the end of
this section for rules). This spell is very popular with apprentices at school who like to cast it on
snotty, preppy girls.

Libertad! fucked around with this message at 19:18 on Nov 28, 2013

# ¿ Nov 28, 2013 02:49

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

Okay, so there's this D20 Blaxploitation game called Solid!, which strives to be a serious and respectful look at the genre.

quote:

On the flip side of the coin, don't make a mockery out of the film genre either. Blaxploitation came about because people of color didn't have a voice during a time when their message needed to be heard. Be respectful and most of all, enjoy your experience.

And then we have...

quote:

The Uncle Tom Effect [General]
You are especially good at bluffing Tools of the Man.
Benefit: This feat allows you to bluff Tools of the Man into believing that you are an upstanding and harmless Negro. This skill adds a +4 soul bonus to all Charisma-based skills against all Tools of the Man. Unfortunately, if this skill is employed in front of brothers and sisters, it will have the exact opposite effect on them.

# ¿ Dec 1, 2013 19:32

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

Grog-apalooza!

quote:

The Sisters of Rapture (SoR) are warrior-priestesses dedicated to the service of love goddesses and their churches. Any female volunteer from any humanoid PC race may become a Sister of Rapture, although most novitiates are adolescents introduced to the Sisterhood by older members. As such, the starting age for a first-level human SoR is (12 +1d4) years. For longer-lived nonhuman races, subtract five from the starting age listed in the Core Rulebook and add 1d4. Critics have often chastised the Rapturous for indoctrinating girls at so young an age, but the Sisters do so only in order to properly shape novitiates� sexuality at their most crucial stage of development. SoR novitiates are always volunteers and are never prepubescent.

The Sisters of Rapture are very sexual, sensuous creatures. They exist to spread pleasure and love throughout the world in the name of their patron goddesses and do so with abandon. Most of them are bisexual, seeing no difference between the love of a woman for a woman and the love of a woman for a man. For the Rapturous, love knows no gender or race and has no intrinsic boundaries. Love is divine and sex
is a celebration of love�s divinity. Sisters of Rapture are not, however, promiscuous sluts willing to jump into bed with just anyone. They�re always selective and always make sure their partners understand that the act is as much a religious experience as a pleasurable one.

Keep in mind that this is supposed to be a sex-positive, feminist sourcebook!

Libertad! fucked around with this message at 04:37 on Dec 14, 2013

# ¿ Dec 14, 2013 04:30

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

Plague of Hats posted:

Sex Positive TG: It's feminist if they like getting their tits out.

Well, it reads less like sex-positive so much as an author's complete lack of understanding of what it really encompasses.

Grog tax:

quote:

Encounters with Working Girls will be difficult for the party to distinguish between types. As these can range from a "Slovenly trull" to an "Expensive doxy", general appearance is not all that telling, even for the keen eyed party member out on the town for a bit of frolic. For in some cases the encounter may be with nothing more than a local dancer, prostituting herself to augment her income or to fulfill some libidinous drive. Or it could be an elderly madam, out soliciting for her stable back at the Pleasure Palace.

Rates are times the harlot's combined charisma-Comeliness score divided by 2. [R = # (C+C/2)]

Racial Preferences

It is difficult, at best, to regulate this factor into the role playing involved. Each player's character will have certain preferences based (most likely) on the player's own. Thus, the following table is calculated upon the harlot's racial preference(s) and not the clients'. For example, a female elf courtesan, is not likely to entertain a client or low social class regardless of his/her ability to pay. But if she is (say for need of instant cash!) so willing, then her rates would certainly inflate accordingly. Thus, the tables reflect an adjustment to the figures previously mentioned, based on the client's race and social class; note, the client's "looks" are not ignored, but enough money will overcome such as long as the other requisites are not compromised.

The actual working location will vary, of course, depending upon the status of the harlot. Those of the lowest ranks will gladly spend a few turns in an alleyway, or on the back porch of a business; few of these ever take clients to a room somewhere, unless it is the practice of their pimp to muscle the client out of even more money. Brazen tarts, Wanted wenches, the Haughty doxy and Expensive courtesan usually keep an apartment with at least 2 rooms--as many as 12, in which to entertain clients. These are furnished according to the status of the harlot; with the lower ranking ones residing in more pungent and less clean conditions.

I don't know about you, but these fractional mathematics and unnecessary sub-systems are kind of hot.

# ¿ Dec 14, 2013 06:30

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

Paizil is a neologism coined by Roy/Mr. GC/Sunic Flames, a jerk who trolled Min-Max Boards and The Gaming Den (and eventually The RPG Site). Paizil is supposedly a combination of the words "Paizo" and "fail." Before he got banned, he called other players "basket weavers" for not breaking the poo poo out of the game with excessive min-maxing. He eventually got banned for getting into fights with posters, claiming that people who could not afford stacks of splatbooks to be unintelligent, and generally giving out factually incorrect arguments. He was annoying as hell.

Anyway, grog tax:

quote:

Grabby: You�ve never been able to keep your hands to yourself, unable to keep from copping a quick feel when the opportunity presents itself. You gain a +1 bonus to melee touch attacks against characters you�re sexually attracted to.

Lewd Thoughts: You often have sexual fantasies about the attractive people around you, finding it easier to imagine them naked rather than focus on what they�re currently doing. You gain a +2 bonus to Will saves against compulsion effects from characters that you�re sexually attracted to.

Symbolic Weaponry: You can�t ignore the phallic nature of spears and similar weapons, and get a thrill of titillation when you drive such weapons home. You gain a +1 bonus to confirm critical hits when using any type of lance or spear.

Libertad! fucked around with this message at 08:22 on Dec 22, 2013

# ¿ Dec 22, 2013 08:18

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

I don't really see what's "grognardy" about Shamus Young's encumbrance rant; it's a little on the math-nut side, but I don't see any toxic opinions or creepy stuff in it.

Grog tax, from The Book of Vile Kink-Shaming:

quote:

Nipple Clamp of Exquisite Pain: The wearer of this ring is immune to debilitating pain effects such as the circle of nausea spell. He is also immune to the wrack spell. He is not immune to actual damage described as pain, such as that found in the eyes of the zombie, however. The clamp converts all pain into a pleasurable sensation. This item does not change how or whether the character takes damage, but it does change how he might react to it.
Caster level: 5th; Prerequisites: Craft Wondrous Item, masochism; Market Price: 8,000 gp.

quote:

Masochism
Enchantment (Evil)
Level: Asn 3, Blk 3, Clr 3, Sor/Wiz 2
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Personal
Target: Caster
Duration: 1 round/level

For every 10 points of damage the caster takes in a given round, he gains a +1 luck bonus on attack rolls, saving throws, and skill checks made in the following round. The more damage the caster takes, the greater the luck bonus in multiple rounds if the caster takes damage in more than one round during the spell's duration.
Material Component: A leather strap that has been soaked in the caster's blood.

I can't decide whether it's meant to be an "It involves weird sex I don't understand, therefore it's evil!" view, or an S&M "kinky dominatrices" personal fantasy kind of "evil."

Look:

quote:

Many slaves to darkness are consumed by addictions and perverted tastes. Unsavory sexual behavior, drug addiction, sadism, and masochism are just some of the horrible traits common to the evil and perverse.

I can see it in regards to genuine sadism (not the whips and leather variety), but masochism? What?

quote:

Masochism: Masochists are rarely at full hit points because they continually inflict pain upon themselves. A masochist gets pleasure from feeling pain and sometimes can't tell the two sensations apart. Masochists wear jewelry and devices that dig into their flesh with hooks and clamps, they flagellate themselves with whips and barbed wires, and they cut their own bodies with knives and razors. When encountered, a masochist has typically lost 1d3x10% of his total hit points to self-inflicted wounds.

A masochist gains a +4 circumstance bonus on saving throws against pain effects (such as a symbol of pain). Furthermore, if he takes damage equal to his character level in a round, he gains a +1 circumstance bonus on attacks and damage rolls, skill checks, and saving throws for the next round. Masochists often grin with a sickening glee when struck in combat, and they make noises of ecstasy even as they suffer terrible wounds.

And then it just gets weird:

quote:

Slash Tongue
Transmutation (Evil)
Level: Clr 0, Sor/Wiz 0
Components: V, S
Casting time: 1 action
Range: Close (25 feet +5 feet/2 levels)
Target: One living creature with a tongue
Duration: 1 round
Saving Throw: Fortitude negates
Spell Resistance: Yes

The subject's tongue gets a thin cut. The subject takes 1 point of damage and takes a -1 penalty on attack rolls, saving throws, skill checks, and ability checks on the following round due to the annoying pain.

quote:

Cheat
Transmutation (Evil)
Level: Brd 1, Sor/Wiz 1
Components: V, S, F
Casting time: 1 action
Range: Personal
Target: Caster
Duration: 1 minute/level or until used
Saving Throw: None
Spell Resistance: No

At one point during the duration of this spell, the caster can alter the probability of a game of chance. This spell can only affect nonmagical games, such as those using cards or dice. It cannot affect games involving magic, nor a magic item involved in a game of chances (such as a deck of many things). Whenever a roll is made to determine the outcome of the game, the caster may force a reroll of the outcome and take the better of the two rolls.

For example, Darkon is playing a game called dragonscales, which he has a 1 in 4 chance of winning. The DM secretly rolls 1d4 and tells the player that Darkon lost. Darkon, under the effect of a cheat spell, can have the DM reroll. The spell alters probability, so there is no subterfuge that another character could notice (except for the casting of the spell itself). To even an astute observer, it appears that the caster is just lucky.
Focus: A pair of dice made from human bones

Libertad! fucked around with this message at 01:43 on Jan 14, 2014

# ¿ Jan 14, 2014 01:05

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

The Dongion is like Your Dungeon Is Suck, except that it's on the opposite end of the Edition Wars and has the same lack of good humor.

Grog Tax:

These entries are from The Greenland Saga: the Lost Norse Colony. It's a 3.0 D&D adventure set in real-world medieval Europe (you can already see where this is going) in the early 2000s. It's pure, unrestrained creepy, and the publisher was infamous for front cover cheesecake art.

"Historical realism dictates that I make the players of female PCs and women gamers feel incredibly uncomfortable."

"Don't worry, I assure you that I am an expert on how women really act in real life, it helps my role-playing!"

"This is very important to her character! Wait, why are you all leaving?!"

Libertad! fucked around with this message at 20:31 on Jan 16, 2014

# ¿ Jan 16, 2014 20:22

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

To the 2 posts complaining about Iron Edda's inclusiveness, I can't seem to find the sources with Google search. Do they exist?

Anyways, grog tax:

quote:

Demon Mother's Mask

Aura faint transmutation; CL 3rd
Slot Head; Price 3,600 gp; Weight 1 lb.

Description:
This primitive hyena-like mask is usually made of leather, but some are made of soft metal like copper or even carved out of the skull of an animal. You gain a +2 competence bonus on Handle Animal and Heal checks. You can smell when nearby creatures are in heat or otherwise especially fertile (creatures such as humans that can breed any time of year always smell fertile unless they are barren).

If Lamashtu is your patron, the mask counts as a holy symbol and a hole for a third eye appears in the mask�s forehead. You may use summon monster II once per day to summon a fiendish hyena, which obeys you as if you shared a common language. You may interbreed with animals that are within one size category of your size, usually creating (if you are a humanoid) animal-humanoid creatures such as gnolls or lizardfolk, or sometimes natural lycanthropes prone to live in hybrid form.

Construction
Requirements: Craft Wondrous Item, detect animals or plants, polymorph, summon monster II, creator must have at least 5 ranks in Handle Animal and Heal; Cost 1,800 gp

# ¿ Jan 25, 2014 08:19

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

Are those comments from the Cracked Magazine article, by any chance?

Grog tax, also about Barbarossa:

quote:

To all those people that say this should be censored or banned:

Remember, many of those people who wanted (and succeeded sometimes) in banning alcohol, mini-skirts, blow jobs, masturbation, gay sex, Grand Theft Auto, Dungeons And Dragons, heavy metal music, and so on, were every bit as genuinely disgusted and concerned about their social implications as many of you are about this, and in a weird way, this is actually part of what the allies were fighting for in World War 2. The real Nazis were the ones that held "Degenerate Art" Exhibitions in which they collected together work which they felt was depraved and dishonoured their military, and then exiled those who made the art or made it illegal for those who made them to create anything else. Real freedom of speech means having to allow the expression of things you hate, because I guarantee you that there exists a group of people somewhere who hate you and your speech, as much as you hate this.

quote:

Oh no, people want to masturbate to things I don't like, somebody stop them!

quote:

This is not worse then the producers or inglorious basterds or indiana jones or any FPS where you hunt down nazi's or axis and allies or nazi zombie movies or iron sky or hogans heroes... I mean the list goes on to infinity. Using nazi's to sell merch is about as common as using sex. The difference between playing as them or playing against them is irrelevant. The medium is the message.

Considering this is a site that currently is running an article about nazi's while at the same time has a topics entry on 'boobs' you need to cut out the "humanity is doomed" aspect of this. Take down every article or reference to breasts you've ever made or stop producing content based around nazi's and you have a point. Otherwise, shut up and don't act like you don't know how exploitation works.

Grog: Nazis and boobs are interchangeable.

guy posted:

i don't take this as an example that humanity doomed, i take it as an example of the free market at work.

i may not be interested in this, but clearly some people are, and that CHOICE should never be taken away from them, just like i would never try and take away someone's bong.

same guy as above posted:

thumbs down crowd -why in the world would you be in favor of denying someone their choice in anything?

why do you think that YOUR opinion is better than theirs?

# ¿ Mar 27, 2014 02:43

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

In other news, the Eclipse Phase RPG writers got sick and tired of Men's Rights Activists making GBS threads up their site, and their lead designer issued a statement banning them from the forums and not wanting them as fans of Eclipse Phase.

Rob Boyle posted:

There have been some heated discussions on our forums over the past few months involving several self-defined "men's rights activists" (MRAs). We here at Posthuman have steered toward a low-key moderation policy in the past, but these discussions (among others) have prompted us to take on a more direct role. After some further deliberation, we've decided to just come out and make something clear.

Every single one of us at Posthuman Studios stands in support of feminism's basic principle: treating women as people. As can be gleaned from our books, we're a fairly left-wing group, and we don't hide our politics or claim to be unbiased. We believe we live in a world where patriarchy and male privilege are real, ongoing problems, and equality for all people, regardless of sex, is a worthy goal.

As a group, we at Posthuman find the politics of MRAs to be toxic, offensive, and completely removed from reality. We have also found the conduct of MRAs on our forums to be far from ideal. We do not appreciate that MRAs are driving other fans away from our forums.

We want the Eclipse Phase community to be one that is inclusive of all viewpoints, but we must draw a line when there is a viewpoint that insists on attacking and offending others as an essential aspect of its existence. We are looking forward with Eclipse Phase, not back -- towards the future, not the retrograde gender divisions of the past. No matter how MRAs may like to cloak their beliefs in the language of inclusiveness and equality, they support neither, and instead fulminate against the loss of privilege long afforded one half of society at the cost of another. Those who must attack the idea of another's equality to better preserve their own benefits are not the sort we wish to encourage. They're likely to do more harm than good in their toxic concern trolling and false equivalencies. So, we, the principles at Posthuman, are making clear our stance on the issue and the type of community to which we would like to belong.

Here's our stance: If you self-define as an MRA, please fire yourself as an Eclipse Phase fan. We don't want you. We want our forums to be open and inclusive, and we don't see the point of debating with you anymore. You have other places on the internet where you can wallow in the awfulness of your male privilege.

While we will not be actively rooting you out, be forewarned that spouting offensive MRA bullshit will get you banned from our forums.

Rob, Brian, Jack & Adam
Posthuman Studios

(Note: We actually wrote this several weeks back, and were just waiting until we had finished recruiting some new moderators to post it. The recent attacks by Elliott Rodger just reinforce our stance on this matter and MRA politics.)

Slith posted:

Hey, cool. Just heard about this, been supporting you guys for the past five years or so.
You can write me off as a customer for good now.

I don't even consider myself an "MRA" I'm about as politically moderate as you get, but you don't beat bigotry with more bigotry and intolerance - You might as well have just said you don't want blacks purchasing your game.

This isn't the company I supported five years ago.

The struggle of MRAs-just like those of black people.

# ¿ May 28, 2014 02:30

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

quote:

stupidity.

Hey i have an idea how about everybody stops being bigoted and realize that people are people and that gender, race, sexual preference, country of origin, language, ect. DOESN'T loving matter. MRM's are bigoted. Feminists are bigoted, racists are bigoted, homophobes are bigoted, xenophobes are bigoted. how about this instead aligning yourself with one group you actually give a gently caress about HUMANITY and fight for equality for all, take on all issues fight for HUMAN RIGHTS not your twisted hosed up bullshit biased crap. gently caress you Eclipse phase you bigoted fucks. gently caress you MRM you bigoted fucks. judge individuals not groups. support all humans not just a few.

quote:

no not a one post wonder

yeah it pissed me off to see this because the admins are lumping a group together. rather than saying look if you are being offensive we will ban you they singled out a group of people based on the actions of a few not all people in that group are guaranteed to behave as such. it would be like some guy hanging a sign on the door of his shop saying no muslims allowed because a few muslims were always bad mouthing christianity in his shop. it is a bigoted standpoint to take. and no you can't choose to be black or not but why should that stop you from standing up for all human rights rather than just black rights?

Libertad! fucked around with this message at 02:16 on May 30, 2014

# ¿ May 30, 2014 02:13

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

quote:

Grognards.txt: Feminists are bigoted, gently caress you Eclipse Phase you bigoted fucks.

I fully support this as a potential new title change.

Grog tax:

quote:

So, some of you might know of the kickass Creative Commons RPG called Eclipse Phase. Most of the stuff they do is pretty cool, but recently they appointed a SJW-esque user name bibliophile20 as a moderator who's been silencing MRAs (claiming that we're making "group attacks" by making accurate statments about feminist activities), and banning the ones who refuse to comply with the support of the other, generally left-leaning, moderators.
Feels bad man.

quote:

You tend to find this in any hobby that's male dominated. There's a lot of over protectionism for women in a hobby that's mostly men. Usually it's other guys that are so excited that a woman is interested in the same thing they are that they white knight up and over compensate.
I've often wondered if the reverse happens in female dominated hobbies. Maybe there's some horseback riding forums somewhere with a bunch of women rallying around the single guy that's into horses that posts there. I kind of doubt it though.

quote:

RPG.net is the same way. They have openly stated that admitting you are an MRA is grounds for a permanent ban from the forum, as is stating any MRA views or "denying woman's experiences" by disagreeing with them on gender issues.

OP posted:

Yeah. The real irony is that in the world of Eclipse Phase, feminism is almost certainly a dead ideology, given the ability to freely swap your mind into a body with a different gender (or no gender at all)!

the only rational poster here posted:

Since bibliophile20 was appointed moderator, about two people have been banned. One of those was banned by bibliophile20 under the reasoning you've quoted them as giving.

The other was you, being banned by Rob Boyle, the writer of the game, for the same thing. If member #1 is a member of your feminist conspiracy, then I don't think you can really claim that it has been "taken over", unless bibliophile has loving mind control powers.

This seems less like something topical for MensRights, and more like you trying to whip up an outrage army because you're mad you got banned.

Libertad! fucked around with this message at 06:19 on May 30, 2014

# ¿ May 30, 2014 06:16

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

quote:

DCC Campaign Update: Now With More Gender-Indeterminate Wizards!

In this weekend's camping expedition/adventure the PCs were:

-lost in the Tanglewood forest

-drawn to the conclusion that it was better just to wander around looking for things to kill rather than trying to spend hours crafting some elaborate plan to take out the Smug Elves.

-ambushed by a force of Evil Forest Centaurs

-informed that forest centaurs are dicks.

-reminded with lethal force that 0-level characters shouldn't act like heroes.

-made aware that like in most of the Last World, actual humans are a rarity; however, in this region of the world there is a particular superabundance of mutants.

-surprised by the fact that apparently Shaggy-Red Caveman Mutants are often also Psychics.

-sent the message that their attempt to stop the Eco-Ogre attack on Arkhome had failed.

-not surprised by how little they cared, now that they were safely a half-continent away from the Eco-ogres and their Eye-tyrant overlords.

-warmly greeted by Bolt-O, the conversation-starved production robot.

-able to recruit Bolt-O to their group, by engaging in such diverse topics like "do you think that there is a practical difference between alligators and crocodiles" and "what is your favorite letter of the alphabet, and why?"

-confronted by three of the gender-variant-and-indeterminate archwizards of the Grand Inclusive & Non-Hierarchical Azure Order.

-only slightly less surprised than the Azure Wizards when the PCs' own gender-indeterminate wizard politely declined joining them, since he doesn't actually feel oppressed or set apart at all for being "trigendered" (as the wizard's 10-year old Player called it...)!

-warned about Cannibal Vines.

-nevertheless taken totally by surprise by Cannibal Vines, at the cost of Marak the Wizard's life.

-witnesses to a cannibal-vine-planting operation undertaken by a trio of easily-spooked Furry Mutants.

-able to reach the Azure Tower, only to be sent off immediately to deal with the Furry Mutants and the Toad Wizard of Bobgobdobulz (who as usual want to bury the whole world in mud and swamp).

-forced to face the fact that Bill the Elf is in serious repressed grief for his brother Ted's death, and looking for substitute-Teds in all the wrong places.

-unexpectedly drawn into a drumming competition with the Furry Mutant Tribe.

-clever enough to discover that Bolt-o can double as an excellent steel drum.

-able to win over the Furry Mutants against the Toad Wizard through the power of aggressive drumming alone.

-quick to learn that having 50 Furry Mutant 'braves' at your command is not nearly as useful as it sounds.

-successful at blowing both the Toad Wizard and his Toad Fiend to little bits, with relatively little help from the cowardly and largely useless Furry Mutants.

-determined to settle down for a good long time in the village of the Azure Order tower, to spend a year's sabbatical for relaxation and self-improvement.

RPGPundit

Currently Smoking: Moretti Rhodesian + Gawith's Squadron Leader

# ¿ Jun 1, 2014 01:02

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

neonchameleon posted:

The Gaming Den objects vitriolically to many of the ideals that "classic" grogs have - in favour of their own idiosyncratic approach that says that 3.5 got everything right and is the One True Way. They may not be old school grogs, but Trollman is routinely quoted here for very good reasons.

There's also the fact that the quotes of average Gaming Denizens (my term for Frank and his followers) aren't as bad, comparatively speaking, as The RPG Site and creepy sex poo poo. For example, Frank and a lot of the posters there realize how wrong it is to insert rape fantasies into gaming sessions, and that basing orcs and goblins off of real-world "primitive" minority cultures is pretty racist. I remember a thread over there of one guy complaining about "militant feminism" making rape in media an "unnecessarily big deal," and the entire board pretty much turned on him.

Another part of it is due to Frank having some hard-left Marxist viewpoints. This, combined with a large section of the board going to his defense whenever people disagree with him, ends up creating an atmosphere where more conservative and reactionary grogposts can't as easily take root. This isn't always the case: a few posters enjoy saying the word "human being" and making fun of gamers by implying they have sex with other men (despite nominally being in favor of gay rights).

Anyway, some old Gaming Den grog. News breaks out that Gary Gygax dies, and some of the posters are less than respectful.

quote:

There used to be this thing about speaking ill of the dead, especially the recently dead. It would be nice if we could have a moratorium on the more venomous criticism of Gygax's many faults until he's at least in the ground.

Grog posted:

There used to be reasons for it, too. Used to be, you lived in a fairly small, tight nit community. If you talked poo poo about a dead person, you upset their family and generally started issues between your family and theirs. Now? Now you've got 6 billion anonymous strangers. Miss Manners doesn't have as much practical value anymore.

quote:

Unfortunately, this occasion is being used to cement Gary Gygax's reputation as sole grandfather and mastermind of D&D.

So yes, I am going to talk poo poo about him. I'm sure people talked poo poo about Nixon when his rear end was put in the ground even when people tried to DESPERATELY have us forget about all of the ill poo poo he did by hyping up what a great statesman he was. Same for Reagan. poo poo, people writing this sort of pandering, ignorant bullshit only makes me want to bash them more.

His legacy is bullshit and a warped Aesop and I wish someone had the balls and/or knowledge to confront him on this.

IT'S OVER, THE THIEVES WIN.

Gary Gygax. Just as bad as Nixon and Reagan.

I remember having an argument with this poster a few years back when I still posted on the board, when I asked him why he cared so much about people playing 4th Edition and having their needs catered to by WotC. He said that it was just as bad as people listening to right-wing talk radio and eating out at fast food restaurants. I can't find the post, but I'd post it if I had it on me.

quote:

This class would make a terrible defender, as its primary marking ability is an Immediate Reaction, which cannot be used on its own turn. Whoever designed this does not understand the fundamentals of Dungeons and Dragons Fourth Edition.

quote:

Please backup your claim and sign you post (by placing "--~~~~" at the end of your post). Unfortunately, no 4e expert are present right now to argue, you have to wait for them. If you want your comments to be taken seriously you are required to at least elaborate a little, not a two-line long whining. --Leziad 23:02, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

quote:

It seems clear to me that the intent is to allow that immediate reaction to be used on its own turn. All it needs to do is be changed to a minor action, or have a tiny footnote that says "Despite being an immediate action, this power can be used on your own turn". Indeed, saying that the author "does not understand the fundamentals of D&D 4e" just because of ONE MINOR MISTAKE, when its plainly clear what the author intended is overly harsh. And a defender doesn't need to be able to mark often or frequently - the sheer fact that this class can cause prone or immobilization at-will makes it an effective defender. Karrius 00:38, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

quote:

ONE mistake? How about the class feature that gives +CHA to all attacks against marked opponents? Not only is that broken (up to a +5 to hit at first level, untyped!), it gets more broken as you level up. Ditto for the alternate build, which has the same problem as the Wizard's Orb of Imposition class feature, only worse (stunlocking all the time!). There's the fact that it grants Threatening Reach and Heavy Blade Opportunity as class features, and can mark enemies with an OA. Tide of Battle, as mentioned, can't be used on the player's turn. That's either a typo and it's meant as a free action - not minor, as that would make it impossible to use at all - in which case it's insanely overpowered (+CHA damage to any enemy you hit, and it lowers attack rolls and damage as well!) or it's written correctly and is intended to be awkward and only barely usable thanks to Threatening Reach. Speaking of which, how many reach weapons other than the whip are usable by the sorts of small creatures that supposedly favor this class? There's the at-wills you mentioned which immobilize and knock prone (and it can immobilize AT RANGE) while dealing full normal damage; one of them even targets a non-AC defense. How about the fact that you gain at-will powers every time you gain a daily? The only existing class that even comes close to resembling that is the Psion preview, and that's due to the unique way Psion powers work. There's the L1 daily Shadow Assault which deals 4[W] damage plus turns you invisible - nice for a striker, but this is supposedly a defender. Speaking of which, how about the L10 utility Rallying Shout? That's a straight-up leader power. Those aren't the only examples of this sort of thing and they greatly exceed the tendency of other classes to dabble into another role. And that doesn't even take into account powers like the L2 utility Natural Leader or the L10 Dark Binding, which create greatly overpowered player-controlled minions. Some interesting ideas at work here, but you can't seriously argue that the author designed this with full knowledge of the 4e mechanics. It's amateurish at best. --75.21.170.64 05:15, October 8, 2009 (UTC)

quote:

You can take only one immediate action per round, either an immediate interrupt or an immediate reaction. If you take an immediate action, you can�t take another one until the start of your next turn, but you can�t take an immediate action on your own turn. If you don't understand that, you don't understand the fundamentals of Dungeons and Dragons Fourth Edition. --Reginald P. Linux 13:26, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

quote:

Nothing I said contradicted that. I understand the rules just find. If you don't see that, you don't understand the basic use of the English language. Also, anyone who thinks they should "Leave the design to the professionals at WOTC" (which I see you wisely edited out, but still thought) REALLY is not too clever. Karrius 22:17, September 1, 2009 (UTC)

Libertad! fucked around with this message at 00:18 on Jun 3, 2014

# ¿ Jun 2, 2014 23:42

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

some guy's response to Eclipse Phase's banning of MRAs posted:

So basically, �We believe all women are people, therefore we cannot agree with treating men as people. We cannot support a viewpoint that insists on attacking others and who may be driving people away from our forums, therefore we are disowning and banning all people with opposing viewpoints. Also we wrote this earlier, but we were waiting for a good public tragedy to pin on MRAs.�

You realize if they�d written this but about feminism, social media would be calling for boycotts right now and to have Rob fired.

# ¿ Jun 5, 2014 05:34

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

dwarf74 posted:

Chaltab, if you can read ENworld without wanting to pop Ahnehnois in the face... Well, you probably have him blocked. That pedantic sperglord is something special.

Alright, this isn't all that common, but it's not the first time I've seen it in this thread; can we please not imply that people who fit the grogs.txt moniker (be they Edition Warriors, misogynists, etc) might have Asperger's or are autistic? It's pretty demeaning to people with said disorders to be lumped in with jerks and bigots, and even if said jerks were autistic, it's primarily not because of that. I can bet that 99% of the people perpetuating toxic memes in the hobby are doing it for other reasons, such as prejudiced views, nerd elitism and tribalism, and their big egos making them unable to admit to being wrong on the Internet.

And although the last example is more a case of being over-analytical than bigotry, I remember an earlier post describing sexist posters on GiantITP "sperging out" or something to that effect.

Grog tax:

quote:

2nd edition was around for 21 years, it is the last true pure role playing game. The others are nothing more than glorified board games.

Libertad! fucked around with this message at 22:33 on Jun 30, 2014

# ¿ Jun 30, 2014 22:30

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

After reading 5th Edition's paragraph on sex and gender, the Gaming Den discusses the inclusion of gender identity in RPGs!

quote:

Yeah, I'd say an straightforward observation on complexity and culture, then a sentence or two magic and you're pretty much done. A paragraph on hyena sex/gender is derailing (and going to get you 'oh that furry game' tag pretty quick) and the aside to hermaphrodites (true, otherwise or whatever) kind of wanders off topic and confuses itself.

I wouldn't call 5e's bit progressive, exactly, but the 'these things exist and are normal' is probably the limit of what you want to do before you hit the train to preachy town.

That said, if the game's focus is on exploring culture and sexuality, then, yeah, it needs to be a bit bigger. If its about shooting fools in the face because a car chase/gunfight with ogres on the Golden Gate Bridge is awesome, it's a little extraneous.

quote:

This is going to sound really really insensitive, but honestly there are no winners and only losers when you try to get into the nitty gritty of gender identification terminology. There is no term that people use for self identification that other people don't find offensive. There is no pejorative term that is not used by some for self identification. The old adage that you can't please all of the people all of the time applies in force to gender identity terminology, and since you're talking about peoples' personal gender identification people are legitimately personally offended when they happen to be some of the people who aren't pleased at any particular time.

I'm pretty sure I actually drove Ceiling Cat away from this board by stubbornly insisting that gender reassignment surgery was a cosmetic surgery that didn't change your internal biology and also had an unfortunately high rate of complications and patient dissatisfaction. I'm sorry about that, but the unfortunate medical reality is that gender reassignment surgery that we can do right now is actually not that great in a lot of ways. And while that would seem to be generally uncontroversial, it was apparently important enough to her identity as a human being that this option was magic that merely discussing the medical realities of what current procedures were capable of was considered a friendship ending offense.

There is nothing you can say or do that will make it better. No matter how many letters you add to LGBT, there will always be someone who feels left out and someone who feels that one of the letters you used stands for something that offends them. The fact that something is technically true is no defense at all; because many peoples' personal gender identities importantly hinge on believing something counterfactual.

People have personally defined gender identities, and that's fine. But if you get any more specific than that you're walking into a god drat mine field where anything at all could be the equivalent of making GBS threads on their Koran.

-Frank

quote:

Uh, why is this necessary again? Unless you're introducing rules unique to transgender experiences, this really has no place in an RPG. poo poo, if you're going to include trans-sexuality why not include a little essay on how some people like to put on animal costumes when they have consensual sex and that's a perfectly valid life choice they can make. Or write a paragraph about how some people choke themselves while masturbating- you can bring up your suffocation rules when you do so!

In other words: don't put this poo poo in an actual game. Nobody loving cares about your sexuality at the game table, and unless you're playing a weird loving game nobody really cares about your character's sexuality either. There's a goddamn reason almost every game table has a 'fade to black' response whenever sex comes up.

quote:

I'm in. Leave the binary terms for the Westboro Baptist Church. Eveybody else on the planet is now part of "The Alphabets" and has to spend an unhealthy amount of time listening to Imagine.

Side note: nobody has made a ten hour loop of that for me to amusingly link to? YouTube, I am disappoint.

quote:

To add, most players prefer to keep sex and gender issues out of their tabletop games and discussion of them is a waste of page space.

Even in a game with cis gendered characters, the gender of a character is rarely going to be relevant past knowing what pronoun to use. Before getting into the issue, I would ask myself how this would be relevant to the player's games.

Although you could argue that, even if it doesn't matter to the game, including it will attract progressive types and you make enough money off that to justify inclusion.

quote:

Because adding a few paragraphs on gender identities will net you a decent bit of money and publicity off social justice warriors. No, it doesn't matter to the game at all, but it does influence your bottom line.

Its the same reason to include a gay character, black character, disabled character etc even if it doesn't matter to your game. Some of your customers love this stuff.

quote:

So you're telling me that, to be inclusive of every human being on
Earth, you are going to put shout-outs in your game that reminds everyone of the following minority groups who would like representation:

Little people
Trans-species
Ethnic minorities
Non-gendered/asexuals
Albinos
Chinese nationalists in Taiwan
ect.

Because if you don't plan on including everyone in your little crusade you're just being a loving hypocrite, picking the one thing you care about and telling every other group to gently caress off. Here's a goddamn line you can put in your game: "You can be whatever the gently caress you want to be in your game of make-believe, whether that includes gender identity, race, or unusual physical characteristics."

quote:

From my comfy seat in the Straight White Dude Club, all this stuff bores me immensely. I'm a staunch ally, though, in the Voltaire sense.

But those asshats making up new lingo on their blog with a readership of 30 people, and bitching at me for not magically being aware of it, they can go gently caress themselves right in their orifice of choice.

"Seven items, plus/minus two". Let's see..."straight, gay, bi, likes to crossdress, wrong bits for their gender, both genders or none, non-human". 7 categories. That's about the maximum number of categories I (and thus by extension any sane, intelligent, reasonable person) can be arsed to give a gently caress about.

And that's me meeting the rainbow halfways. My actual sorting algorithm goes "Fuckable? Y/N".

quote:

I think this highlights why gender really doesn't matter. I am not going to have sex with anyone in my RPGs, so gender really doesn't matter.

If someone announced their character is transgender, my only thought would be "I really hope this person doesn't try to turn this into a game about gender issues.".

quote:

And I have no issue with the player putting transgender on their character sheet, but it won't come up in play unless someone is already set on bringing up gender issues. Games don't operate like novels. You aren't going to get intelligent discussion between two characters about a heated topic. Just heavy handed messages or fighting.

The arguments I am hearing boil down to "Include it to make transgender people feel good", which comes at the detriment of the actual game(by using up page space).

To be fair, the OP of the original thread self-identifies as both male and female, and several posters were supportive of inclusion, but the above posts...yeeeesh. The bolded parts are particularly hideous.

What's more ironic is that the Gaming Den's, politically speaking, pretty hard left on a lot of issues. Frank's comment in particular was surprising to me, as he was pretty much saying "there's no point in even trying for inclusion" when he's criticized the more sexist and bigoted aspects of the table-top and video game fandom in the past (he's a supporter of Anita Sarkeesian).

Libertad! fucked around with this message at 22:40 on Jul 27, 2014

# ¿ Jul 27, 2014 04:57

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

Is there a sexy fox race on Pathfinder? I've played Sakura Spirit recently on steam whilst falling in love with one of the lovable kitsune maidens on it and want to play it on my players on the IRL group I GM...

# ¿ Sep 24, 2014 01:49

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 23, 2024 12:12

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

greatn posted:

There is literally a kitsune in PF so if that floats your boat knock yourself out.

That was a grog-quote. I should've used the quote tags.

Grog Tax:

Amazon Review of 4E Corebook Set posted:

I have been A Dungeon Master for over 20 years, running 1st, 2nd, Skills & Powers and some 3rd edition. This new system is not working, it just doesn't feel like Dungeon & Dragons. Go back to 3.5 or even better PathFinder which is a great SYSTem!!!!!!!!!

A very good, in-depth review devoid of unnecessary hyperbole.

# ¿ Sep 24, 2014 02:11

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

quote:

quote:

quote:

ProfessorCirno posted:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

ProfessorCirno posted:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

ErichZahn posted:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

Plague of Hats posted:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

guy posted:

same guy as above posted:

Rob Boyle posted:

Slith posted:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

OP posted:

the only rational poster here posted:

quote:

neonchameleon posted:

quote:

Grog posted:

quote:

more TGD grog posted:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

some guy's response to Eclipse Phase's banning of MRAs posted:

dwarf74 posted:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

greatn posted:

Amazon Review of 4E Corebook Set posted: