@waxeagle I believe that permanent spell effects are still spell effects, so they can be dispelled. Hard with TP being so high-level, but still doable.
I've had to teach a lot of new people how to roleplay. I don't break out the full SPT, but I do hit key points, usually depending on what game we're playing. The key point of "do you play to win? what does that look like?" is usually the first big point. "Do the optimal thing vs. do the interesting thing" is the second.
After that it's helping people get their heads around "You have a near infinite list of possible moves, which mostly depends on what would make sense in the genre" and "Act your character" which are completely new and different.
That said, the SPT doesn't require a ton of discussion even with people who have experience, mostly it's a "We'll do this, this and this" and if there's discussion, it's because someone is encountering something new ("Wait, how does that work?") and you explain and give an example.
That said, a well designed AND written game renders the SPT moot except as a clarification to people new to how to play it. The SPT is a crutch for rules being unclear about how to key into different styles of play and what is, or isn't supported.
The unfortunate reason it IS so popular, is the amount of games that just are terrible at telling people how to play them, and how to coordinate when a game can be played a lot of different ways.
AH, you probably never spoke with me enough. I'm gonna tell you, but it's just for the sake of explaining. I'm in a weird game that's basically a MUSH with D&D characters, a persistent world with PCs of various levels, no fixed grups and economy problems. I'm trying to find a charater that I like playing and that other players want to interact with in a positive way and that gets me what the others are getting (or do seemingly get)
I also have this cage of compulsive optimization, linked with failure to actually cope that with roleplaying, low interest in things that are not RPing that does not help me imagine new humanity-filled characters and a lot of envy
no, my character is so not awesome and boring and emotionally disconnected
Also, this passion for optimization is putting a stigma on me.
I can tell you how I planned (and failed) all of my previous characters
@Zachiel eh, I can't really say much if you're playing an online game with people jumping in and out all the time. The social dynamics are really different and it's harder to catch and link in with other players that way
@Zachiel It's the same reason I can't give a lot of help to people playing LARPS with constantly rotating large groups of people.
@Zachiel Have you tried asking other players how to make characters who are more engaging? It may be a dynamic specific to that community as far as what they're looking for?
I met my boyfriend of 7 years through a Gaia Online RP. :P But he's probably the only lasting friend I've ever made through any game I've ever been in, and those number hundreds.
And it's the recurring characters that I envy more. Especially the ones who seem to have hit, spot on, the character they like to play, like 8 years ago, and are still playing them with gusto and are at epic levels now (we don't actually use most epic level rules, we just keep leveling past 20, except for stopping BAB and Saves
They tend to be suspicious of me asking, mostly reacting with one of the following: -I have no idea of how I achieved that. I just play. -You should stop trying so hard, just play and have fun. -You should stop being so envyous. and so on
@Zachiel Hmm, yeah, that's another factor in some MU*s. It takes a lot of time and investment to build up a character, and you're forced to start over if you just don't want to play the character anymore. You can't just hop to someone else on the same level.
plus, you start with money of a character your level, more or less. Which means people who don't change their character are both really rich - and - more ingrained into the imaginary of everybody else
Yes, considering this thing is calculated on getting one level every two months (the ampount of money we get per day, at least, is) and I gained like none in the last 6 months because work and stuff...
@Bankuei since it opened, but I left, discouraged, for extended periods of time. Before Brian Ballsun Stanton forcing me to roll the character we decided togheter, I was in the optimization limbo for 15 months or more
@Zachiel So, off and on for 8 years? I would honestly just go elsewhere and give up on it. You can keep banging your head against the wall trying to figure out exactly why it's not working for you, or you can just look elsewhere. That seems a better use of your time.
I know there's some conflict in what I want to play wersus what I want to get: I'd like to play some form of exibitionist, maybe a skimpily dressed bellydancer, then I envy stark matrons and witches surrounded by spooky caravans and complex characterizations.
@Bankuei That's not the thing I'm looking for (yet the one everybody tells me). I don't want to partly because I've spent so much time there I dread having to spend it elsewhere to get to that same point, just maybe to discover I'm in the same situation (and it happened), partly because I really like how some players play and I'm willing to use my character as a mean to play with them
@Pixie In fact, they can often be complementary. A player seeking mostly Expression and Kenosis, for instance, can let the player who favors Fiero or Schadenfreude have the killing blow against the opponent.
wow. I never realized until just how broken pathfinders Item creation rules are if you read them strictly RAW. A sword of continuous True strike is cheaper than a +3 sword...
Should totally build a true strike sniper for my big bad sniper dude in my game.
@Zachiel Consider a food that you really like. And a food you don't like. Do you imagine if you eat a LOT of the food you don't like, that you'll start liking it? Do you imagine the food that you DO like, requires you to eat as much to like it? It's the same thing with games.
@Aaron Oh man. I love True Strike as a last ditch thing for my alchemist. "I reeeally don't wanna hit the closely clustered party when I nova this guy so..."
@Zachiel It won't take you as long to get enjoyment from a game you like when you find it... because it will fit whatever the thing is that you enjoy from it.
@Zachiel That's the best advice I can give you. No one can teach you how to read minds. No one can teach you to change what you like/dislike. No one can teach you how to change other people's minds at will. And no one can teach you how to learn more from something you've honestly tried to learn from, for years.
@Bankuei well, I never gfound anything I liked more. I got suggested trying a mmorpg. You just want to be strong, and you're not this good at Roleplaying? Well, I met the same problems there. I wasn't able to do what was needed to keep up with my guildmates. Like I wanted to quit my PC at night without letting bots run, or I wasn't happy to spend hours doing professions, or able to know a good auction from a bad one. That one I stopped
@Zachiel If it's worth it to you, it's worth it to you, but it's best to weigh the stress it causes you against the amount of fun you're able to have (or have ever had). Spending some of the time (not even all, if you don't want to leave it behind entirely) experimenting that you spend on this one game that has never worked out for you could help you find something else you like better.
@Bankuei I haven't tried to learn it, really. Because I don't really know what one must do to learn it. And because I'm lazy and I don't like to exercise, or start studying psychology/sociology/literature rather than gaming,
@Zachiel Well, I can't help you. You want answers for something you've been doing off and on for 8 years. It sounds like what you are doing isn't working for you. I would try something different. You don't want to. Ok. Let us know how it works out for you.
@Zachiel That sounds a lot like you're listening to the wrong things. If your enjoyment of the game doesn't rely on "finishing" it in the normal sense, that's not a bad thing. Don't rely on other people defining the way you have to enjoy a game, of any kind.
@SevenSidedDie From what I understand, Sociability is more "hanging out with your friends doing a social activity" - could be roleplaying, could be something else. "Asabiyah" is more specifically the dynamics of the game, being able to effect change together in it.
@SevenSidedDie No, this is where you shrug off my response regarding your pedantry in response to my pedantry and chalk it up to a really horrible day in progress. :/
Now I'm wondering if actually sitting down with the metagame reward questionnaire for the party is actually, practically useful, or if it's more useful as a tool for personal reflection.
Because as fun as it might be to start making character sheets for the players as well as the characters, I worry that it's a bit too abstract and clinical to really base a game's dynamic around.
@lisardggY I think it might be most useful when people have trouble answering the question of what they enjoy in games. Some people can communicate these things easily; others aren't really sure how to identify it.
@lisardggY From experience... it wasn't really illuminating. What I got from using my PDF survey version with my group was "yeah, we do have different goals, as we suspected." It wasn't really obvious what to do with it after.
@SevenSidedDie Yeah, that's what I suspected. It's not as if you can now sit down to play and adjust the sliders accordingly. And lest we forget, the GM has his own metagame goals too.
@lisardggY Yeah. What I did get out of it was to recognise where I was getting frustrated by pushing futilely for my own goals (as GM), and where I was being frustrated by "distractions" that were actually critical goals for other players.
That was before I left the group. When I rejoined it later, after some space, I've found that I'm much more relaxed about it, and not driving for my own ideal "perfect game" anymore.
@lisardggY I think it helped that in between, I played games with lots of other people. Getting goals fulfilled elsewhere made me less angsty to get them with the home group.
Just got an email from Adam Koebel (creator of Dungeon World) announcing his new position as resident GM at Roll20! He's going to be running several games on Roll20.
@RobertF Sweet! I remember he'd said something about new opportunities and quitting his job, but I didn't know it was because he was going to work for Roll20.
If he runs Apocalypse World, jump on it. He's a fantastic MC.
@SevenSidedDie See? That's what I'd like to get at least. Coming back relaxed and not wanting my game to be perfect. But every time something reminds me what other people can achieve, I grow unrestful. It's not that I stop enjoying the game, it's just that I start trying to ask people to turn me into them, and most don't enjoy this.
@Zachiel The trouble with fixating on what other people have achieved is that, that's not how they got there. They started from the bottom and built up to that, probably not even knowing that's where they were headed. You can't just take the end goal and try to get there, because you're skipping the foundation.
@SevenSidedDie Well', I ve been teaching people to play M:tG, several times. Now they're all way better at the game than me. The same happened with DotA. I'm either a terrific teacher, or really bad at everyting I try.
@RobertF I went to the university that gets blown up in the opening credits to Caprica. :) Actually, you get pretty jaded about filming here, it's so everyday.
@Zachiel Ack. Apostrophe error and I can't edit it anymore!
@RobertF X-Files was before I moved here from the outlying area. But yeah, it's pretty common. I walked by a set a couple days ago, coming from my local brewpub. But you never know what they're filming, so it's just trucks and lights and lots of people standing around.
@Zachiel I suppose not, actually. Tell me then: how red is it? Is it any good at being red?
@Zachiel That's great then. Good at being aqua-ish. Now, purple: is it very purple at all? Purple is the colour of emperors, so it's important to be very purple. Is it?
@SevenSidedDie - We had time to visit the beautiful gardens at Queen Elizabeth Park. The geodesic dome was really cool. I recall an episode of Stargate was filmed in the dome.
And neither gold, the colour of wealth, nor scarlet, the dye of kings. And I bet it isn't really any good at being white like a flawless diamond, either.
But even if it was really great at being green, colors are not mutable. They're fixed. Unless we're talking about blue and black dresses, of course. Are you really trying to convince me that improving is that hard?
In fact on the way to the park we drove right by an enticing game store but didn't have time to explore. I gather there must be a hopping RPG community in Vancouver.
@Zachiel It's that, you've only got one colour, and a million to compare it against. And it's guaranteed to make any colour you pick "fail", if your measuring stick is millions of different measuring sticks. Same with the self: we only have one self, but millions of people to compare ourselves to. We can always find someone better than us, if we just pick the measuring stick defined by what they are good at.
The flaw is that, those people can do the same: no matter how awesome they are at the thing you fixate on, they can find someone who is equally more-awesome at some other measure.
You're giving moral values to others' personal preferences and situations and holding yourself to that standard, instead of considering the inherent value in what you like and what you can do. You can make anything seem like it's superior if you tailor your expectations to it being superior.
@RobertF It's an OK RPG community. It's who you know, of course. Avery McDaldno is from here and used to run a weekly meetup for one-shots (that I consistently failed to go to). Cr0m and Johnstone Metzger (he of the DW supplement Class Warfare) run (or ran?) an old-school D&D club. But it's really low-key, and mostly hard to find a group. Good stores, though.
@Zachiel You said earlier that you're not actually big on the rules awesomeness, right?
I man, I know the rules, pretty well, it's just that the good things to do don't click in my mind like they might. I see things and I think they'ìre strong when they're not. Or I've built this huge misconceptiosn that I should avoid spells with a save because people might pass it. Then ok, I see this guy cast a 2nd level spell with DC 38 (or something like that) and in the dsame way I tought I had to avoid spell resistance, then someone showed me a spell that ups your caster level by 10 for the roll to pass it.
So when you're looking at what these other people have achieved, and you want that, you've got a problem: only build-style characters can be made by looking at the end goal and working towards it. If you're not ludus though, you're killing yourself by focusing on the build stuff.
You want deep engagement with character (kenosis), arcs that come to a satisfying close (closure), sociability + asabiyah (hangin' out and belonging to the tribe), and blowing off steam (venting). About right? And probably deep engagement most, since you list that first?
Ah, I like it then. Like, I'm always trying to get the exact Wis I need to cast the spells I need and trying to get that feat that comboes with power attack (just to realize, months later, that it only works if I charge)
@Zachiel I think the main problem I can see here is that your game, due to it not being a tightly knit tabletop party but a loose online game, is that people seem (from where I'm sitting) not to be invested in other people's enjoyment.
@Zachiel were goblin dice involved? Theres a certain meta-ness to a crunch and random-heavy system such as any D&D-system where you need to censor/edit impulses of story vs the how the system stacks up
@SevenSidedDie - Oooo I see there's another great game store called Drexoll Games in Vancouver! Have you been there? I'm always impressed to see a game store that looks like it has its shit together & aren't mismanaged.
After I played that bard I wanted a character who I wanted to be happy. That was my only aim. She had to be happy with what she got. Now she's the best in the world at what she chose to do - the downside is that it's not surviving, or being able to fight for her freedom.
I have a friend who, for years, had some issues that she really hated to involve her character in. It wasn't personal failure like you say you have with your characters, but other issues. The solution (after some failed attempts at immersion therapy), was that the party agreed to avoid those issues. We wanted her to have fun her way.
@SevenSidedDie right I get that, Im trying to steer zachiel toward the realization that its a system issue possibly in addition to a table/whatever the format of play is
@JoshuaAslanSmith no, the player (the wizard that's a great optimizer I talked before) just chose him as my training target because he had good damage resistance. My bow and teeth weren't that great at dealing damage at level 6
Another player, lower level than me, morphed into an avariel and patiently pelted him one damage at a time
you might even have more enjoyment from story games like Fiasco, which share many aspects with RPGs, but are solely about whats right for the character and the situation
@JoshuaAslanSmith I heartily agree. Failure, in the D&D sense of the word, isn't really an option in games like Fate or Dungeon World. You may not have the outcome you wanted, but you don't get the sense of "back to square one with fewer hit points".
@SevenSidedDie I also don't like needing to make hard choices (it looks like a lose-lose situation) but I really like the kind of story it creates. It fills me with emotions. But then I goof up and, submerged by emotions, I make the poorest choices.
@RobertF I used to live nearer to Drexoll, but after I moved and Strategies opened, it's closer now. They're both great, and run by great people, and I wish I had more money to throw at them.
@SevenSidedDie Yet of all the games I've played it's the only one I consider playing. Dungeon World is actively fighting against closure, for example. Also, other games where you don't gain XP by playing feel like I'm wasting time. Why am I not in the game where I need them, farming, instead?
dont see how dungeon world fights closure, it also has xp and rewards you for trying to do things yet failing and being true to your character's traits
@Zachiel Fiasco is one evening, not a big commitment. The point of playing it would be to break the cycle of "my guy has to win for me to have fun." Fiasco is all about making awful but awesome choices, ruining your character's life in the most entertaining way possible.
@SevenSidedDie I played like 5. I felt like the less imaginative player at the table, every time I try to do something fun I'm trying to come up with complicate plans other players don't get and well, now that I think about it if that's what you mean with closure no, I don't mean playing short games.
@JoshuaAslanSmith I played it several times. Every time it felt like whatever thing we did caused other things to happen and we were never out of danger
@Zachiel There's a book called Play Unsafe by Graham Walmsley that you might find useful. It explains in deep detail why trying to be clever is the best way to guarantee you'll feel uncreative and mediocre compared to the other players. And why it's an illusion.
@SevenSidedDie The first game of Fiasco I had was awesome. Well, it was not that great because I got tricked into situations I was unable to fight out of, but in the end I rolled a 13 so it was great
@SevenSidedDie I've been reading it. All that whole "whatever bores you is fresh and new for other people"
@Zachiel Trying to avoid danger in Dungeon World is like trying to play D&D by locking yourself in the bathroom: it's self-defeating. When you stop avoiding danger in DW, suddenly your PC becomes awesome and powerful.
@Zachiel That's what I'm saying: trying to prevent danger from coming is self-defeating. It's like, trying to fix a crashing plane by painting it red mid-flight: it has zero positive effect and is a waste of effort.
@Zachiel OOH. I remember you talking about that one. Also, your GM sucked.
half the book is GM guidelines and advice which in any other system (say 5e's dmg) is ultimate snoozefest and worthless, but it THE MOST IMPORTANT THING in DW's pdf
@Zachiel DW doesn't really care if you're a good GM, but is does care whether the GM breaks the rules. DW can work pretty great with a mediocre GM so long as they actually obey the GM rules.
@Zachiel I'd have to see the chat again, and it was a long time ago, right?
@Zachiel Exactly the point I was making with colours, except stated way better.
Being SMBC the punchline is all about compounding the problem; in real life, the end of those observations instead has to be realising it's a dumb pattern and working to get out of it.
Ah, but I already know. And I know we have some really good players there - it's part of why I like playing with them. Even if I usually play at the opposite side of the map, because mistakes.
@Zachiel They didn't become awesome players by looking at someone else's character and trying to be like them, though. They became awesome by slowly developing their own character, bit by not-awesome bit.
Add to that the Walmsley observation: those characters seem awesome to you, because you didn't think of them. If you ever want to have a character that others think is awesome, you have to start with something that seems pretty ho-hum to you. Which may seem self-defeating. But if impressing others in the tribe is the desire, that's the way to do it.
Also, when a character meets failure, making them curl up into a ball of defeat has to stop. The only thing that's different between people in life who succeed and people who don't is that the ones who succeed don't beat themselves up when they fail. They fail just as much, but don't stop at the first failure.
So it's not even a realistic feeling for the kind of character you're trying to portray. Those awesome players with the awesome characters have absolutely met failure on their way up. If you want to be like them, gotta start embracing failure and the "get back on the horse" character mentality.
@SevenSidedDie A very good point, and a variant of the Impostor Syndrome. Your own characters are probably more interesting to others than they seem to you.
I have a character now. He's pretty much like me. He has problems socializing, he's shy with woman he'd like to be around but fears being regarded as a creepy guy, isn't really good at taking decisions. There's players who like him. Lately, he met a female wizard with high dex and charisma. She was like a dream, she managed to fool him and he couldn't decipher what she really was. he's fascinated by mistery, so he tries not to discover how she did that. Like me, he talks too much. So he told her. And she shafted him. I'm not the kind of woman for you. What do you want from life, do you even…
@SevenSidedDie No, it's perfactly realistic, it's what I do every day, maybe except for my nebulous will not to lose even at being good at a game
I want him to remake himself, but not being the guy who ever did it in real life, I have low ideas on how. This is D&D. You don't get better at doing things by stating you train a lot, you get better with time. So... I'd probably need to start moving steps in the direction of his objectives. But I'd also like to see if I can craft new, more compelling objectives I can actually fulfill.
@Zachiel D&D's advancement mechanics are irrelevant here because the character's problem has nothing to do with them. I really feel like mechanics are a red herring here.
@Zachiel When it comes to goals, drive, personality, etc. you do actually get better by just saying so. It's a character, after all. Write him differently now. D&D's mechanics don't have anything to say against that.
@Zachiel Objectives are always hard. Whenever I create a character I usually fall into the trap of describing what he is, and possibly what he was, but not what I want him to end up being.
I sometimes felt that leveling slower than other people prevented me from doing that thing you often see on anime, where a character gets beaten, then buffs up and goes taking his toll.
@Zachiel But in my experience, this has very little to do with mechanics. I've had characters reach level 20 and still be vaguely moving around in life, and another reach level 6 and complete a huge personal story arc.
@Zachiel D&D doesn't handle that dynamic at all, so feeling like it's missing is inventing a problem that isn't there. A GM can overlay it on D&D's mechanics, but you don't have one in this context.
@SevenSidedDie right. And people who like playing more than I do and lose less time complaining and actually level up faster get those moments on me, instead XD
Anyway, I'd work on objectives.
So, the original idea is he wants to build a castle and train locals to defend themselves
I have not enough money for building a castle yet.
I can get some [groan] by leveling up
or I can, in the meantime, work towards ensuring that the neighborhood loves and supports me.
@Zachiel Ok, try converting those objectives into ones that don't rely on being a specific level or having money. Maybe focus on "Give the locals the training and confidence to defend themselves" - something that can be resolved through purely character-driven play, regardless of level.
@Zachiel When you put the castle in the mix, you're implicitly adopting the assumption that "character advancement" has to involve GP or XP, something measurable.
Since we don't always play with a DM (DMs are supposed to play with many people and give them somewhat equal space based on how much each guy plays), getting things done with NPCs is often slow and asking for more space to the expense of others.
@lisardggY The castle actually.... Well, Brian Ballsun Stanton told me about this book and I pretty much built on that character
@SevenSidedDie which locals? They are there, but I don't have the gaming autorithy to tell they like me or to say what they do. I can only do that to other players. Who won't get better because I train them, not faster or better than they would, say, by cooing with their in-game wife.
@lisardggY Kildar, by John Ringo. (I only later discovered the protagonist is a sexual maniac... >_>)
My point is that choosing objectives that are explicitly orthogonal to and independent of the main progress tracks is good practice for reducing dependency on those tracks.
american guy that made lots of money by going Rambo on some terrorists in the previous book of the series is lost in a snowstorm in Georgia (the country, not the state [sic.]) He hates pests so he asks the locals if there's a different place to sleep than the tavern. They point him at the caravanserrai. The caravanserrai comes with the lands around it, and the farmers, who happen to be descendandts of the lost legion and to have problems with chechens. He calls people in and trains them. Their attitude towards women builds tension.
Ah, here comes another problem. Because of the whole elephants and tigers problem, all the people who actually give me sound advice know [snip] about the game's dynamics.
@SevenSidedDie well until I can get money to build a castle and enough fame to justify taking authority. Playing with a clan of secluded druids who'd like me to only fight if the forest is involved isn't really helping, but I'd feel bad for leaving
@Zachiel But it's self-defeating. You want to set your PC's goals, so that you can get out of the need to grind the mechanics before you can feel effective. But this goal needs you to grind before you can do it.
To return to the "making the hard choices" mode, you're consciously setting objectives that you know you can't achieve without going through an unpleasant grinding process. Why?
Well I didn't really set them myself. I know I want a cohort, because it's another character I can move essentially for free, and having two characters might help me get my character a little more dynamic by throwing at him the right questions and giving him the right support (I need to avoid marrying my cohort... I need to avoid it like hell.) And partly it was Brian who suggested it, based on his perceptions I guess?
I've been trying to find a character that was both easy to play and that I was willing to play for a long time and he said, like, let's hepl you, but whatever comes out, you'll stop looking for something better and play it.
After 1 year and 3 months awya from the game because I had no inspiration for a new character, that was the right thing to do, I guess.
By the way, I'll be slower now. A guildmate came and I'm roleplaying with her. I'm (my character is) currently telling here I'm irritable because this other character dumped him and he wants to react, but hfears being considered miserable for trying to get her when she already said no
@SevenSidedDie Well, I was just going to say, with the Dire Wolf question, obviously I'd prefer not to lose that answer, but I can certainly see how the guy who asked the question seems to have a different idea about what he was asking.
"How can I have a Dire Wolf familiar?" could possibly be a separate question, worded correctly, although it's perilously similar.
@Miniman Yeah. And seems to have unaccepted his strange non-answer. At this point I'm thinking it may be best to let it sink into obscurity and leave it alone. If it needs fixing, I suspect a "please ask a new question" will be the way to fix it, if at all.
@Miniman Even if he does poke it more, I suspect the community won't engage with it much and it will sink in good time. Far as anyone else seems to be concerned, it's asked and answered.
And avoiding yanking the question's meaning around is worthwhile all by itself.
@Miniman Not massively changing a question and invalidating its answers is a guideline that we like. That it fits with your self-interest is a bonus. :)
Jerome felt only Christ should have rays of light, so he used "horn" to describe Moses' exultation in Exodus. His editor's notes make it pretty clear he knew what he was doing and most people at the time also understood the horns shouldn't be taken literally.
@Zachiel Well, a pun. Which is often taken out of context.
> Listen. Are you busy? I'll tell you the whole story. > The Septuagint scholars mistranslated the Hebrew word for "young woman" into the Greek word for "virgin". > It was an easy mistake to make... because there was only a subtle difference in the spelling.
I thought you were going to talk about the specifically Catholic notion of the Pope's right to lead through spiritual succession from Peter, rather than the almost universal Christian belief in the virgin birth.
@lisardggY I believe there's also some grammatical fiddly bits, beyond the specific use of a single word, which indicate a Hebrew-version understanding of the virgin birth.
Any time a reading of the Bible focuses on a single word or a single line out of context to support its claim, my eyes go all "Not sure if."
Any Hebrew version of Matthew I can find is translated, probably from English, so it's gone through far too many translations, each with its own assumptions, for me to see anything there.
Skipping around a bit, I've seen some Jewish texts that support the virgin interpretation in the original Hebrew. The Isaiah text that Matthew refers to says that "God shall send a sign that the [young woman] shall become pregnant", which is easily interpreted as "virgin", otherwise it wouldn't be much of a divine sign.
And anyway, assigning a truth value to christianity based on whether a mistranslation occured is implicitly accepting its fundamental assumptions, so you might as well go with it anyway.
Well, they're not really religions. With the gods so prominently present, they're more like business conglomerates, bartering services for spell slots.
(Incidentally, I've started reading Max Gladstone's Craft Sequence novels, and his gods there are explicitly both the partners and product of power-brokerages)
@Theik Ok, so with 5e there isn't a canon cosmology, but (from my faulty memory) I don't think the Wall of the Faithless has rated a mention anywhere in the DMG, at least.
I'm working on a world book for Dungeon World and I was wondering if you'd instead, maybe take a look at my page and give me some DW-specific feedback.
http://bit.ly/BnBRPG
thanks for your time.
Javier
fingers crossed The PF game that I'm in right now might dissolve next week, and one or more of the other people seems to want to play something that isn't D&D.
I'm really hopeful that I'll get to play something else.
And by 'next week' I apparently mean 'tomorrow'. I'm bad at dates.
@StuperUser I think it's fine, actually. Edit it to emphasise that you really truly mean it when you say that you want actual play experience. Answers behaving badly don't automatically mean the question is badly scoped.
Though, you might want to pick one: PF or 4e. That's probably a source of some of the "too broad" votes, because that's really two different questions. (So I take it back: it does have a problem. It would be fine if it was one target system.)
