« first day (2399 days earlier)      last day (2551 days later) » 

12:00 AM
slow, though
 
@Shalvenay doing good. Just way too hot around here.
 
@ShadowKras ah. things are rather slow here...
 
Would it be better if things were fast?
 
:P
haha
 
12:57 AM
hey there @Papayaman1000
 
1:45 AM
Sup, peeps?
 
No, sorry. I was inviting my peeps-friends to dinner.
 
 
2:04 AM
I just answered a question that seems so straightforward I'm worried I'm missing something huge. Anyone have a minute to take a closer look? rpg.stackexchange.com/q/98738/23970
 
It's AnyDice, so it's not straightforward to me.
 
I'm just wondering if I'm reading the question right: OP just wants the larger minus the smaller, right?
(Which is the absolute value.)
I'm just wary, because that seems so much simpler than what they must have done for bullet #2, but this is the one they're having trouble with.
 
I... think so?
 
@nitsua60 It is entirely possible they forgot about the absolute value function and though they needed to do something like if (d20 > d4) {d20-d4} else {d4-d20} which is a bit more complicated
 
hey there @nitsua60
 
2:13 AM
@diego True... it's a bit abstract. Not that it's overly-complicated, but if you don't think about absolutes very often you might not immediately think "oh, there's got to already be a function for it."
@Shalvenay Hiya.
 
how're things going?
 
Tired. Looking at my list and debating trying to get one more thing done vs. going to bed.
You?
 
OK I suppose
 
Good morning!
@Shalvenay sorry for abrupt leave yesterday.
 
how're things going?
 
2:19 AM
Good morning and happy primary week!
 
@daze413 thanks! votes already casted
@Shalvenay good, but I have too much accumulated exhaustion.
Have to deal with two important tasks and then I can have some rest for a couple of weeks.
 
hey there @daze413
ah
I'm actually kinda headachey atm :/ so I think I'll be hitting the sack early, but I should be more available other evenings this week
 
Ok. But I think I'll be available from next, or after the next week.
 
2:36 AM
ah
I see :)
 
@nitsua60 The bit about the line distance is good. I like that kind of visualisation.
 
@Shalvenay hiya! Entertaining visiting guests is exhausting :p uncle came home from the US and we're basically all doing reunions for him. Problem is, my clan is kinda divided because of some land dispute so we have to host 2 separate reunions.
 
@daze413 at least your clan's land dispute isn't being transmitted around the world in real time to a bunch of non-participants who want no part of it, to the tune of 3 pages' worth
(TL;DR -- the Greeks and the Turks somehow believe it apropos to clog the international Notices to Airmen system up with their squabbles)
 
I see... like arguing in main comments
or arguing in a company-wide group skype.
 
2:52 AM
yep, only worse, haha
 
so those NOTAMs, they are broadcasted to all pilots, or something?
reminds me of the lighthouse joke
 
3:35 AM
@daze413 Depends on if you subscribe or not. NOTAMS are findable, but you need to know where to look. Depending on your equipment onboard, you can receive updates when they happen, but before you file/takeoff you have to check NOTAMS.
 
 
3 hours later…
7:09 AM
Only tangentially related to real-life.
 
7:57 AM
> Paranoid architects. Once per building you can declare a hidden architectural feature like a panic room, spy hole, or secret passage.
 
8:37 AM
> Questionable construction. Once per building you can declare a severely compromising construction failure, like a brittle wall, a security door with a loose fixture, or terrible soundproofing.
(actually that might be too close to what one could just do with Notice plus character justification, unlike the panic rooms which are exceptional)
@BESW Pumpkin seed & linseed are really nice in porridge.
 
I need some feedback on custom approaches
 
@eimyr In Fate?
 
@doppelgreener ...no, but the spirit of approaches remain.
 
gotcha.
request away!
 
So I want to categorise most of what players could do in a number of approaches, which are also horrible deeds to a varying level.
I would like to hear what isn't encapsulated by what I have atm
**Violence** - self explanatory, includes torture and other means of direct aggression
**Deceit** - Lying, stealing, forgery, conning etc. Anything that requires dishonesty.
**Resources** - solving problems by calling in external resources available to the party, e.g. requesting help of retainers, contacts, money...
**Judgment** - impartial and withdrawn examination - investigating, interrogating, gathering knowledge and evidence
**Rapport** - using sympathy and fostering positive relationships with the opposition
... I forgot about the markdown
 
8:56 AM
These all seem social. Is that the extent of intended coverage? e.g., things such as physical physique, athletics, sneaking, are not in there.
 
Sneaking would come under Deceit, but indeed physique etc. isn't covered. This is for a DitV-like game, I kinda want to steer away from "adventuring".
 
I wouldn't mentally categorise sneaking under deceit. Being quiet is not dishonesty, deceiving, conning, etc.
Deceit requires another party to actively interact with, and sneaking is all about avoiding interaction in the first place.
 
In a way I think about it more like Core skills rather than FAE approaches
 
But that's more about mental intuition of the word. If the mechanics say that's deceit anyway, OK.
 
so sneaking in and stealing a document would go under Deceit, I'd say
otherwise, if you just want to sneak to backstab someone it's Violence
 
9:00 AM
@eimyr Players, or characters?
 
@BESW What?
 
@eimyr They are somewhat like that. Approaches say "this is the kind of person I am" and are best compared to TV show logic -- the Smart Guy on the cast does all the Smart Guy things, even if it's ridiculously impractical for him to know all that stuff. Skills say "this is specific things I can do".
 
@eimyr "So I want to categorise most of what players could do in a number of approaches, which are also horrible deeds to a varying level."
 
@BESW Oh. Players.
But of course, through their characters.
Well, this is kinda the point. I want to steer player action-space towards a certain theme (doing bad things to avoid worse things in a community where there are horrible things and your arrival opens possibility of the WORST things)
I believe I can do that by highlighting certain character-actions and ignoring (autowin, autofail) others
 
Ok, so, things that are not covered:
- Ability to create things. Crafts.
- Skill with objects relevant to the game. Might be crafts, might be vehicles, or hardware, etc.
- Physical aptitude unrelated to violence or deceit. People might cover this as variously: athletics, physique, toughness, strength, agility, dexterity, speed, quickness.
- Intimidation, or social manipulation, such as trying to trick someone into anger. (This is not necessarily violence.)
- Strength of will, such as in response to attempts to get you ruffled.
 
9:05 AM
@doppelgreener I love you.
 
(so far I got those by skimming the fate core skill list)
@eimyr g-gosh eimyr-sempai
 
@doppelgreener W-watashi wa dai ski desu!...~baka
I think the last point is the most glaring there - ability to resist hostile action
 
Something to consider is that skill systems also include, omit, merge, or divide skills based on their relative importance to the game and the importance of forcing meaningful choices between skill investment. In a game that is all about sneaking, you'll expect to see several skills related to sneaking, because one single "Stealth" skill would be a "Solve Every Important Situation" skill. Some call that a "god skill".
 
Sure! I am aware of the fact.
 
Meanwhile in an action game, the stealth skills would probably be compressed into just 1-3 things, or omitted entirely, because of not being important.
 
9:09 AM
So going through your list, I'm trying to see how this can be addressed
 
In Atomic Robo, Shoot and Fight are merged into Combat because it's important to have combat ability being relatively universal, or it's vague enough that various types of combat can't be meaningfully split without causing problems.
@eimyr "It isn't important, so people who try this stuff can just do it / can never do it" are valid options. Lasers and Feelings doesn't have a "resources" skill because material wealth and external resources isn't important to the game.
 
So what I'm thinking is that if players want to help the townsfolk against by building a heavy crossbow to put above the gate - this is not important and should be skipped over to Violence when the crossbow is actually used.
 
I consciously said "not covered" rather than "missing" since it's not inherently an issue if something isn't covered by the game — conscious choices to not mechanise something are as important as conscious choices about what you will mechanise.
 
@doppelgreener That's why I'm asking. I want to check whether people see something I failed to notice I'm not mechanising.
 
@eimyr Yep that's reasonable. I mean, you're Witchers (more or less) — is being unable to mount fortifications actually going to set up fun situations, or is it more interesting to just say "yep, you do that"?
 
9:17 AM
@doppelgreener I mean, you're not Witchers for copyright reasons
But you're everything adjacent
 
I think it's more interesting to take that for granted as a thing the characters can do, and then they can skip up to the scenes the game is actually about.
Right, you are, uh, Wizarders.
 
I agree. That's why I've not included monster slaying
@doppelgreener (Actually I want to keep the spirit of the game while letting go of the world. You can have misery and crapsack worlds without referring to the universum)
@doppelgreener So the thing that I think might be problematic is the "strength of will" action, or reaction
 
Is it important to the game, and how important is it or how often is it going to be important?
are the players regularly going to be on the receiving end of actions, or are they the ones instigating them?
 
I think it's important that you have means of resisting opposition when targeted
that remains to be seen, but I imagine, for example, someone will lie to them on a regular basis
this kinda falls under "judgment", when you go to talk to an NPC to try and discover the truth
 
right
 
9:32 AM
but at the same time I want the players to be the ones deciding how trustworthy X is
 
it's ok to be important
but it's more important to be ok.
 
results of Judgment must say "he's totally lying" but not "he's a bad guy"
 
Trustworthiness may not be so important as whether certain things you are told (by anyone) are true, whether simply misinformation ("we think the beast is vulnerable to fire" -- actually they just startled it with bright light this one time, but it's fireproof) or an active attempt to deceive or manipulate the [cough] Wizarders so that the character can achieve their own ends.
In Fate we handle that via compels. "This is totally a lie, but you'll go with it and fall into an ensuing disaster because I'm offering you a shiny fate point and we both know you're going to take it."
 
"I think I should light the weird fog on fire, so can I get a Fate point out of this?"
 
Yes. ;)
 
9:39 AM
@eimyr First read "fog" as "frog". Makes sense either way.
 
mind you, it's not the kind of a game where players would be incentivised to make bad decisions consciously
so I don't know, I feel like a sixth approach could be useful but I'm not certain what it should be
 
> Mind Frog. You can use Athletics to defend against or overcome mental opposition.
 
9:55 AM
since we were doing that
 
I don't think there has to be a specific reason to post weird frogs.
3
 
well I mean, I wouldn't have thought to do it till we were doing it
but we did it
also, I don't know if your frog is evil, but he looks it,... and mine is definitely evil
so weird trend there if I am right
 
The one I posted is a slann from Warhammer Fantasy. They're... not so much evil as incredibly badass? But still Warhammer, so maybe evil after all.
 
oh Warhammer
 
Not 40k, so not everyone's horrendously evil.
 
10:05 AM
like,.... anything I hear about in any Warhammer thing usually turns out to be doomed, evil, or both
@Magician to be fair, 40k is the majority of what I know about so there is that
still like, the only thing I know about the fantasy setting is the Skaven
and who would have thought, yep, evil
 
Skaven are hilariously evil, yeah
 
who would have thought Warhammer would decide rat men were evil?
(everyone)
 
Curiously, 40k currently has a glimmer of hope in its lore.
 
what is that? because I have read summaries of several species lore,... and all of them are either mildly unsettling or downright horrible
 
Everything's still horrible, but Eldar may have awoken their god without all dying out first, and one of the Primarchs (of Ultramarines) is up and about all of a sudden.
 
10:09 AM
like, even the humans who are in it are sacrificing people to the god emperor or something, either that or they are playing hide and seek with some chaos god or other
@Magician I thought their god was,... a chaos monster thing?
 
Eldar did inadvertently bring about Slaanesh. This new god is meant to kill her.
 
oooh
all I ever knew about the Eldar was that they did some psychic type stuff they shouldn't have done, and not all of them themselves were evil, but some were, and the good ones that there are are supposed to be like, struggling even to survive bascially
then there are the guys I can't remember the name of that are completely biological (I mean like, even their "ships") and just eat everything they run into
 
@trogdor It wasn't so much evil as hedonism. They overindulged, and out of that Slaanesh was born. And now Slaanesh eats eldar souls when they die.
@trogdor Tyranids!
 
@Magician ah, fair enough I suppose
yep Tyranids
if those existed I would,..... not be happy
they are ridiculous and ridiculously evil
like, I don't know how the 40k universe isn't doomed just because those things exist in it
 
Tyranids have inspired the Zerg who have inspired the Tyranids. It's a fascinating bit of history. Alien is somewhere there in the background, too, obviously.
I don't know if I'd call Tyranids evil. Horrendous, sure. But they just follow their instinct.
 
10:16 AM
@Magician the only reason I wouldn't say the same thing about the Zerg as the Tyranids is because it depends on the Zerg leadership, plus the Protoss exist in Starcraft, so the Zerg aren't just gonna kill everything that easy :P
@Magician I suppose, but if their instinct is to kill the heck out of everything they meet,.... that still kinda dooms all life they meet
 
@trogdor I don't know in-depth Tyranid lore, maybe they do have their own actually cognizant and evil Overminds.
 
@Magician they apparently have Queens, but I don't know if those Queens have any agendas other than to keep the species thriving
but those Queens are definitely very smart/sentient, so I mean,.... I would at least posit they know what they are doing when they destroy whole planets full worth of life
that all being said, I am only going off of stuff I read a while ago
not any actual heavy interest or research into the breadth of the lore
 
@eimyr Take a look at what your approaches currently cover. There may be a way to slice things differently. For example, currently Violence describes a combination of physical combat, psychological/physical torture techniques, threats, and aggression in general. That's a very broad sweep of things.
 
I think I was reading stuff because I wanted to know some stuff about the orks and some race or other I think of mechanical beings
 
@trogdor Necrons! And reading WH40K lore is almost as dangerous as reading Tv Tropes
 
10:22 AM
and I ended up reading a bit about the Eldar and the Tyranids
@Magician it wasn't the necrons I think
those guys seem more unambiguously evil than the guys I was reading about
(just from the name alone)
ah the guys I mean are called "Tau"
 
Ah. Not really robots :)
 
@doppelgreener It is. It's partly intentional, as violence is something that would always be an option
 
I have no idea how I ran into them in the chain I was reading
@Magician I think the mixup was the armor the example one was wearing XD ( he looks way too much like some robot)
 
as in, if everything else fails, you can resort to violence to do your thing
 
@eimyr Sure. That's not to say you need to split that one up, it's just an example of the broad swathe. Should you want to rearrange or divide approaches, there's a lot of room for doing so.
@eimyr Another way to handle that is that you have no one approach for violence, and instead every approach has a certain flavour of violence you can apply it to.
 
10:26 AM
@trogdor Heh, Tau are the anime mecha-pilot race in 40k. They're hopeful. But also mind controlled by pheromones of the possibly nefarious ruler class. Because of course they are.
 
lol, of course
 
@doppelgreener So I want the approaches to have a structure, with some becoming unavailable (i.e. ineffective) as the situation escalates. So, at the outset, Rapport would be the expected one to pick, but as you antagonise a group, you could no longer establish good ties with them - you'd need to resort to Judgment and Deceit. If the situation goes south again, you might be limited to Violence and Resources.
 
and apparently their empire is comprised of at least like, 3 or 4 or maybe 5 different races?
 
@trogdor Yeah. They're the antithesis of the xenophobic close-minded Imperium, at least on the surface.
 
seems like it to some extent yeah
 
10:54 AM
Howdy
Can a spell like moonbeam (creates a cylinder where things get damaged) be cast in the air? Like, make a cylinder that is not touching the ground?
I always had the idea that these point-spells needed to choose a solid point
but I'm not sure if that was just my imagination or something I actually read
 
@BlueMoon93 Which game/edition?
 
oh, sorry, dnd 5e
 
Ta
@eimyr There's some revision I'd suggest to that idea. First, in the real world, it's perfectly reasonable for people to re-establish good ties between antagonised groups -- it takes negotiation, reconciliation, and other factors, and that's generally an exercise of Rapport.
 
@doppelgreener I'm not saying this is impossible, but that resorting to violence early on generally makes Rapport ineffective.
 
Second, I suggest decoupling the structure you're describing there from the approaches themselves, and make it more about the things you're doing with those approaches. Are you suggesting I wouldn't use Deceit and Resources at the outset, to assist in my exercises of Rapport? Are you suggesting I cannot use Deceit to sneak around or lie or manipulate during a situation that's gone very south?
 
11:00 AM
@doppelgreener Ok, so I think I need to express some additional context - I envision these approaches as a way to solve some conflict, or gain a particular outcome from a situation.
 
@eimyr I would consider the amount of stories where that is not the case, and so enforcing "no rapport is possible after violence" is incongruent with how the world generally works.
 
@doppelgreener No, not at all, I'm saying that you can do all those things but if you start punching villagers around, no one would like to discuss things peacefully.
 
@eimyr There are many situations where punching villagers around is a way to get them to discuss things peacefully. In particular, if I stride into a town of people who're already hostile, beating up a couple of them can be a really good way to get them all to calm down and listen.
 
I think I need to write the whole thing down and then have it reviewed in a more holistic way
 
Ok.
I suggest these kinds of restrictions you're talking about (from the limited description I have so far) seem to be incongruent with some fairly natural narrative flows, so either I am misunderstanding or they may benefit from revision.
> Here in spirit. If you have a belonging of a person not present in the scene, that person is now a valid target for psychic effects as if they were present.
 
11:15 AM
@BlueMoon93 I don't think we've got a lot of 5e people online right now. @Miniman, @nitsua60?
 
@BESW maybe I should just ask the question on RPG.SE
but I'll have to do it later, going to work now
cya around, fam
 
It'd be quite reasonable for a mainsite question, I think.
 
11:35 AM
@BlueMoon93 Technically, by the rules for cylinder-shaped AoE spells, it has to be touching the ground.
 
@Miniman 5e wasn't designed for battles entirely in the sky :p
 
@Shalvenay Yeah, D&D hates flying but nevertheless insists on it.
 
@Miniman "If you fly, you are terrible. Also here have some flying spells."
I imagine if they cut out flying effects they'd get a similar uproar to D&D 4e cutting out other historical mechanics.
 
12:00 PM
 
I appreciated 4e's approach to flying. "It's like walking, but without that annoying two dimensionality!"
 
I have an idea for a new alchemist character
 
I think you mean ache-emist.
> Harmacist. If you have unsupervised access to a target's food, drink, or open wounds, you may attack them with Lore instead of Fight. You can spend a fate point to wait until as long as the end of the next scene to make this attack instead of making it as soon as they come in contact with your (p)harmaceuticals.
 
> Hypocritic Oath. Whenever you protest your innocence, gain +2 to Deceive, no matter how suspicious the circumstances.
 
> Doctor-victim confidentiality. You may use your Harmacist stunt even under supervision if you Overcome with Deceive versus a difficulty of 4.
(Naturally you can fail or succeed at cost.)
 
12:12 PM
> Hypodermic Oath. You get +2 when creating advantages by plying the unwilling with chemicals.
 
> Alchenemy. Once per significant milestone, designate a target. You must have a piece of them - a hair will do. You gain +2 to Harmacist checks relating to them.
 
> Homeopathic Oath You can treat wounds by Overcoming with Attack, provided you have a weapon that could inflict them.
 
> Nenemasis. You have armor:4 vs attacks made by your alchemeny, but you are vulnerable to blind obsession over him or her.
@eimyr [snort]
 
@eimyr Sounds like the homeopathic oath should involve getting maximum results out of doing as little as possible
 
@doppelgreener No, it totally works: ineffective samples of the thing causing harm can cure or prevent the harm.
 
12:19 PM
@BESW At the risk of ruining the joke, I don't get it.
 
@Magician Nemesis, enema.
 
@BESW ice.
 
> Homeopathic Oath 2. You can treat wounds by failing to Overcome with an Attack.
better?
 
> Scrip pad. You can use Lore instead of Resources to create advantages and overcome obstacles through bribery.
 
The numbers for the Science March seem high but we won't know until we compare it to the numbers at the placebo march that's also happening
@vornietom There's hardly anyone at the homoeopathy march but they say that's how it works.
 
12:21 PM
Both those tweets had me laughing out loud :D
 
> A matter of dose. You can substitute medical equipment for weapons and vice versa.
 
I honestly feel bad for the people on the Placebo March who thought they were at the Science March but double blind testing is important
> Doctor's Writing. Your handwriting is impervious to espionage, as long as you were trying to keep its contents secret.
 
> Off-label prescription. Once per session you can use a tool or resource for a task that it's obviously unsuited for as if it were the right thing for the job.
 
Shouldn't Doctor's writing be impervious to espionage as long as you were trying to keep its contents clearly legible?
 
@Erik That might also be valid.
 
12:25 PM
> Placebo effect. You can use Rapport instead of Lore to overcome physical consequences, but the target adds their Empathy to the difficulty.
 
> It's psychosomatic. You can spend a Fate Point to allocate a physical consequence to a mental slot.
 
The doze makes the poison. Whenever you wake up from a nap, you gain the Poisoned aspect.
 
> I'm a doctor. You get +2 on Rapport to create advantages using your professional status.
 
In actuality, the last alchemist character I made in Fate never needed stunts for their alchemy in the beginning. (And still hasn't, since I only played her for a handful of sessions.) Given justification she was an alchemist, I could use things like Fate points to mechanise alchemy.
 
> Her Doctor. +2 to Lore when treating female patients but weak against German.
 
12:30 PM
> Rx scrawl. Attempts to understand your handwriting cannot succeed without a minor cost.
> Big pharma. A large free meal is delivered to you every lunchtime, along with a pitch for a new pharmaceutical and a handful of brochures.
 
@BESW Define always. All the time? Can you summon one at will?
 
@eimyr Somebody shows up at lunch time.
 
@BESW I'm imagining a Harmacist running away from a horde of salesmen with lunch invitations. More are joining the pursuit, emerging from nearby buildings, pouring from the windows, running each other over with cars as they try to catch up.
 
@eimyr PHARMA PURSUIT: THE GAME.
 
shame 200 words is over
 
12:38 PM
@eimyr or is it..?
 
@doppelgreener ...it is for this year?
 
> ...or is it? Once per session you can succeed at cost without the cost.
 
@eimyr or is it?
 
> Scrawled Diagnosis. Whenever you fail to treat a consequence, you can rewrite it in an illegible scrawl instead. It's still there, but cannot be invoked, except by another doctor or pharmacy worker.
...or even when you've treated a consequence and rewrote it to show it's healing.
 
Anyone been at a table where their magic weapon/item was destroyed? rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/98753/…
 
12:49 PM
> Consult a pharmacist... Once per session per player, that player can give you a Fate Point to use your Skills on an Overcome roll.
 
@NautArch Nope, and I'd hope not to see one - but it is a possibility.
 
@NautArch I've seen it happen several times.
...once a level 30 Fighter in a D&D 3.5 campaign had his sword disintegrated, and then the player was teased mercilessly for not having a backup.
I think he used a broken chair leg for the rest of the dungeon until he could get to a shop.
 
@BESW that's pretty awesome
 
@BESW Ouch.
 
Wait, no, that was the guy who just had his sword sundered, and then wasted four wishes trying to get it fixed because the GM was a stickler for grammar.
 
12:53 PM
If you give your players a good backup, I think it's okay. And let it be fixed.
Disintegrate though.... That's kinda an "I just want to take this away" thing.
 
@NautArch In 3.5, it's sort of tricky - for a level 30 Fighter, his sword would have had to have millions of gold worth of enchantments.
 
The guy who had his sword disintegrated was lucky enough to be running with a magician who could turn any weapon into any other weapon.
Yeah, the disintegrate was special. They were facing an epic foe who was especially vulnerable to the fighter's particular sword qualities. So she used command to have him give her his sword, and then she turned it to dust.
 
That's... Beautiful. But also still kinda a mean move.
 
(The sword couldn't have actually defeated her anyway, just annoyed her; they already had the three artefacts needed to really put her away for good.)
 
1:06 PM
Hmm... wizards can at least still cast the spells they have prepared. Disintegrating a Fighter's sword would be liking wiping the memory of a spellcaster, no?
 
@Yuuki and also burning their spellbook
 
@Yuuki I would think it isn't nearly as bad as that. If you wipe a Magic User's memory, they are completely useless. Unless the fighter has some super special ultra magic bond to old his sword that gives him a ton of bonuses, they could just pick up any other sword
 
In D&D 3.5, it can certainly make 'em unhappy--but only because most of a fighter's effectiveness is tied up in the gold he spent on the weapon's effects, and in feats that support that weapon. Give 'em a weapon of the same type and they get their feats back.
(Once you can afford the extradimensional space to carry 'em, a fighter tends to have at least two backups.)
In this case, the fighter's backup was a sorcerer who could turn his own high-level weapon into the kind of weapon the fighter specialised in.
 
Well, now I'm worried about the Hexblade weapon I get being disintegrated.
Do sentient/sapient weapons get saving throws on that even when not attended?
 
So it wasted a few of the party's actions and removed a particular set of weapon enchantments from the field while making the enemy look particularly awesome, but wasn't a major setback and didn't sideline the fighter.
Yes, as do magic weapons.
 
1:11 PM
@Yuuki What Hexblade weapon?
 
And, well. I was a GM who tried to do that kind of thing sparingly and with intent to ultimately make everybody more awesome, not casually or cruelly.
They were facing the ultimate villain of the campaign and had everything they needed to defeat her, if they could survive long enough.
 
@Miniman Hexblade Warlocks get a sentient/sapient weapon that essentially serves as their Patron.
 
@Yuuki They don't get it, they just work for it.
Also, weapons sufficiently powerful to be patrons are artifacts, and basically indestructible without a party of adventurers going on an epic quest to destory them.
Hmmm...that's a misspelling that works, I think.
 
(Including an international army of gnome, catfolk, humans, and elves, in an armada of sandships, to clash with the army of zombie half-orc werecrocodiles.)
 
Plot note: Archvillain gets fed up enough with a cleric/paladin who's been foiling their plans that instead of trying to find that cleric/paladin, they engineer events to get that cleric/paladin's god killed, hoping to put that cleric/paladin out of commission.
 
1:17 PM
@Miniman Hmm. I guess rereading the short blurb, it doesn't explicitly say that they wield the weapon.
 
@Yuuki "This pact gives you one of the most powerful weapons in the game at level 1." Yeah, no.
 
@doppelgreener I feel like that's similar to being annoyed at a particular ant and deciding to wipe out the continent it's living on.
 
@Yuuki Well, at least you can find the god, and maybe adjust things enough to make them vulnerable to ursurpation from other forces.
 
@Yuuki Ah, but it can be hard to find a specific ant, whereas continents are pretty easy targets.
 
@Miniman Indeed
 
1:24 PM
@Miniman It also means that there won't be any more of those ants annoying you in the future
 
@Miniman I mean, it could always be a fragment of the weapon. This is not the Pick of Destiny, this is just a tribute.
 
@BESW And she was right too!
 
@Yuuki Well, except that it doesn't give you any weapon unless you take Pact of the Blade, and even then, only at level 3.
 
good morning
 
1:29 PM
@Miniman And even then, that weapon probably isn't the legendary weapon that is your patron.
 
@Adam It could be the fragment Yuuki mentioned, though.
 
Maybe I had a weird perception of it, but I always thought of Hexblades like Frostmourne from Warcraft. Ultimately, while you get power from the blade, it itself is part of a greater entity.
 
@Miniman maybe, but that's thematic. As a DM, I'm not sure I would use that to justify giving you a magic weapon at the start of the game
 
@Adam Yep, I meant purely as fluff.
 
And the lore supports that, saying that the Raven Queen created these weapons and uses them to gain influence over the Material Plane. Does that mean your Patron is ultimately the Raven Queen and not the weapon?
 
1:34 PM
@Yuuki Nope, your patron is a weapon.
Just, you're ultimately being manipulated by the Raven Queen for her own ends, I guess.
 
The US Postal Service is ultimately under the authority of the Executive Branch of government I believe. But the President can't just walk into a post office and fire everybody.
 
@Adam I mean, it's 2017. Doesn't mean he won't try.
 
(How'd that come up?)
 
:P Not the point, of course. It's just an example that just because something else holds authority over your boss, that doesn't mean that you are directly responsible to that entity.
 
I think if "that entity" is the Raven Queen, responsible or not, you'd better listen real close to what she says.
 
1:38 PM
@Erik I agree with that.
 
And if your patron is Cuthbert or Hextor, the chain of command is probably uncomfortably literal.
 

« first day (2399 days earlier)      last day (2551 days later) »