« first day (1201 days earlier)      last day (3763 days later) » 
00:00 - 10:0010:00 - 14:0014:00 - 16:0016:00 - 20:0020:00 - 00:00

Zachiel
Zachiel
2:00 PM
I think it's asking about what to do in those situations, not a specific solution for his game, that's only presented as an example
 
Joshua Aslan Smith
Joshua Aslan Smith
I totally agree jon hobbs
I also had to resist the urge to say, "your simulationism is wrong!" not that the goal is wrong, but its clearly someone who has a very low understanding of how real weapons actually work.
 
wax eagle
wax eagle
@JoshuaAslanSmith I always ask myself why are you simulating when you could be abstracting when topics come up like this, but know that actually asking things like that is usually futile
 
Joshua Aslan Smith
Joshua Aslan Smith
@waxeagle I 100 percent agree with that as well but you'll get in logic loops with people
I have my own logic loops, we all do, but usually if they lean towards heavy simulationism the paradigm shift toward abstraction is too much.
 
wax eagle
wax eagle
@JoshuaAslanSmith finding the right balance is hard too. I get that some people want a much higher level of simulation than I do, but it seems like when your simulation breaks down, and it's clearly the simulation's fault, abstraction should be the answer.
 
Joshua Aslan Smith
Joshua Aslan Smith
thats the problem though, for a lot of gamers RPGs are about the stories that come out of play, not the play itself which is sad. I got into RPGs via boardgames though so for me the mechanics just have to work or it has to be so abstracted that the story is the mechanics ala fate or dungeon world
@waxeagle thats a great point
separate conversation: my fave corporation of the day
Palantir Technologies
Palantir Technologies, Inc. is an American computer software and services company, specializing in US government customers, and since 2010, financial customers. History Palantir was founded in 2004 by Peter Thiel, Alex Karp, Joe Lonsdale, Stephen Cohen, and Nathan Gettings. Early investments were $2 million from the US Central Intelligence Agency venture arm In-Q-Tel, and $30 million from Thiel and his firm, Founders Fund. Alex Karp is Palantir’s CEO. Palantir’s name comes from the "seeing stones" in J. R. R. Tolkien's fantasy epic The Lord of the Rings. Headquartered in Palo Alto, Cali...
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
2:08 PM
Blarg, this snake hair thread...
 
Joshua Aslan Smith
Joshua Aslan Smith
snake hair?
 
Professor Captain Loki Caprion
Professor Captain Loki Caprion
@JoshuaAslanSmith CEO - S. Aruman
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/31447/… <-Part of my answer was, "You don't need disguise self for this, just describe your hair as being made of snakes."
And the response in comments was...
Fruuuuuuustrating
 
Phil
Phil
@JonathanHobbs I'm curious - why have you removed the indie-rpg tag from the questions relating to Dread? Is it a particular issue with that game and its classification?
 
Joshua Aslan Smith
Joshua Aslan Smith
@ProfessorCaptainLokiCaprion Lol yeah, its a real company with two very interesting products (also very geeky: Gotham and Metropolis)
 
gomad
gomad
2:11 PM
Well, thanks guys. Gotta run. Bye!
 
wax eagle
wax eagle
@Phil it has enough questions now that the tag is not in danger of falling off.
 
Joshua Aslan Smith
Joshua Aslan Smith
@Lord_Gareth LOL, part of why I dont play 3.pf the players can be very literalist about the rules
 
Phil
Phil
@waxeagle that doesn't really answer my question though...
 
Aaron
Aaron
@Lord_Gareth I explained my sudden race change as a descendant of an aasimar changing into a custom race as my mother was exposed to a magical explosion when I was a child.
 
Phil
Phil
Is the tag no longer relevant to those questions and/or that system?
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
2:12 PM
So, in 3.x thereìs no white haired witch, right? I want to make a spellcaster with Thematic Spell: hair but I reallly don't know how that could work...
 
wax eagle
wax eagle
@Phil the indie-rpg tag was on those questions so they had a tag in case dread aged off. it won't now
the tag is sort of a system placeholder tag.
for low volume systems
 
Phil
Phil
@waxeagle ahhhhhh, that makes sense - thx :o)
 
Joshua Aslan Smith
Joshua Aslan Smith
@waxeagle thanks I always wondered about that tag thought it didnt have a point but now I see it does
 
doppelgreener
doppelgreener
1
Q: Should we tag questions about established (indie) RPG systems with [indie-rpg]?

Jonathan HobbsCurrently the indie-rpg tag has two distinct purposes. As a tag alongside another system tag, where that system happens to be an independent RPG. For example: a portion of our dread and freemarket questions. It also happens to be used on its won in a couple of questions - on the Do and Engel sy...

discussion tags
 
wax eagle
wax eagle
@JoshuaAslanSmith it's kind of a crappy use for a tag tbh
 
Joshua Aslan Smith
Joshua Aslan Smith
2:14 PM
@JonathanHobbs thanks Ill go take a look and contribute
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
@Zachiel Well, I imagine you'd start by taking the feat.
 
Phil
Phil
facepalm I even checked the meta before asking, and completely missed that question's existence
 
wax eagle
wax eagle
lol, and with that meta post that usage is deprecated
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
@Zachiel That being said, I don't really see the problem. You take Thematic Spell (Hair) and describe your spells in a hair-themed fashion. When you make touch attacks your hair lashes out, surging with magic, and touches the other guy. Artful sprays of your luxurious locks, glimmering and gleaming with hostility, form your ranged touch attacks.
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
@Lord_Gareth lol. I'm past that point. I'm guessing under which conditions a literalist DM would allow me to have a flowing mass of hair doing things as a default. Persistent mage hand? (Is that even doable? I didn't check the variables of the spell)
 
Joshua Aslan Smith
Joshua Aslan Smith
2:18 PM
lol
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
@Zachiel Hrm. There's a hair-based weapon somewhere in 3.X, by the by. Frankly, though, define 'literalist'. Do you mean rules literalist? Setting literalist? Because the former won't have any issues - it's just a hand, and as long as you don't represent yourself as having more than two hand slots you're rules-golden
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
fluff-literalist, as you were discussing before
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
@Zachiel No, he was just Stormwinding. There is sadly no fluff precedent for prehensile hair. However, on the scale of Messed Up Bullcrap in D&D Settings that thing doesn't even rank above half the published demons.
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
like "no, you can't pickpocket people with your feet, even if you took profession: antipodist as a skill and you have both hands free, because you could fool people into letting you come close as long as they can keep sight on your hands. And no, playing the lute with your feet is not "more awesome", it's just harder so you get a -20 to your perform skill. If you want to avoid that be a Hadozee, not a human.
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
@Zachiel Yeah, see. It's harder for me to advise you on how to deal with those people because instead of sitting down at their tables I slap them, and then yell at them, and then I walk away from their cowardly, insecure asses.
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
2:25 PM
To be honest, I have some problems with beeing too free from fluff too. Let's suppose I cast unseen servant and I fluff it as being my hair taking life and doing things. One could think to stop me by cutting the hair link between me and the object I'm holding. The servant is no more invisible because it's made of really visible hair... how do I fix that?
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
@Zachiel Well clearly your hair is already magically growing, bending, and shaping itself since unseen servant has quite the longer range than you do. They cut your hair? Fine. It grows back.
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
No, I'm not talking about if the spells continues to work. I'm talking about how do I avoid getting the advantage of tricking my enemies to lose one round trying to cut them (suppose they didn't recognize the spell)
I'd be describing something that would give me an advantage that's not in the spell nor in the feat
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
@Zachiel The Spellcraft DC of the ability doesn't change, yes? You need Spellcraft to identify a spell in the first place. If the opponent has Spellcraft, they make their roll and act accordingly. If they don't, the information was always denied to them in the first place and you've gained no more advantage than you normally would.
Getting further, 3.5 has no called shots and never will, so how are they attacking your 'hair'?
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
the same way they flush water over a summoning circle traced with chalk to break it?
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
@Zachiel Without Spellcraft how do they know to do that?
And, getting further, the summoning circle is an object. There's rules handling how to attack objects.
There are no rules which permit attacking the hair on your head.
rpg.stackexchange.com/a/31490/6172 <-Expanded my answer slightly
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
2:33 PM
I figure that if I cast solid fog and the fog is made of hair, not trying to cut them with a sword becomes really strange in fiction. As would using a wind spell to get rid of them.
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
@Zachiel And? Ask how much I care. Go on. Ask. The hair isn't made out of one big strand of hair, yes? It's a shifting mass of silky locks, exuding faint traces of perfume on the wind, that floats and bobs in a self-contained ethereal breeze. Try to pass through and find out that it's strong as well as beautiful.
Anyone using a wind spell has Spellcraft available to them.
Anyone who doesn't was screwed the moment you said solid fog
And it's not like Thematic Spell hasn't been out for ages and ages. These "problems" show up if I go Thematic Spell (Skulls) or Thematic Spell (Ponies) or even Thematic Spell (Shards of Light)
They're not problems. They're cop-out concerns brought up by Dungeon Masters without the balls to handle new and exciting concepts in their campaigns, or ones that are afraid of player creativity.
Avoid such sniveling cowards.
 
Aaron
Aaron
@Lord_Gareth You tell them!
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
@Lord_Gareth or campaigns with PVP
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
@Zachiel Sounds like metagaming unless you're using spellcraft to identify the spell.
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
because of thee old concern "you're getting away with this only because you're better at tricking them into thinking things, instead of beeing good with the rules"
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
2:41 PM
What they do in the total absence of appropriate information is not your fault.
@Zachiel Sorta like the Spellcraft Rules. Which they would need to identify your spell to begin with.
Still not seeing the problem.
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
I don't know. Let's suppose I cast a regular unseen servant. So I float some item. They see the item and can't recognize why. What do they do? Maybe they think there's someone invisible and try to dice him the same...
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
@Zachiel And there's a million ways you could've done that. Greater Mage Hand, Servant Horde, Telekinesis, an invisible helper, etc, so forth.
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
But getting a visible mass of hair in the equation is sort of adding an illusion spell that can't be foiled by true sight into the mix, for free
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
There's a hundred million different ways to do almost anything in 3.5. If someone else leaps to conclusions about yours, that's not your fault.
@Zachiel No. And I find the sentiment to be both stupid and insulting. What does the hair mean anything for? Explain to me how the hair means a goddamn thing.
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
It's deceiving. If I was to ignore the hair then no illusion spell would do anything
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
2:48 PM
@Zachiel How? It's a shifting mass of fluid hair that's picking stuff up. If they want to attack the hair that's their problem; like Unseen Servant, it cannot be attacked. If they want to attack the object, it's no harder than normal. You ever notice that people hold hair tight to cut it?
If they wanna take a swing at it, that's their problem.
And not yours.
Especially not when you're using the feat as presented
And getting better you're actually burning a whole feat slot for it
Which is insane but screw it, you're a caster, you can afford to light the feat on fire.
Why should you care?
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
Getting specific. I'm not sure getting strands of hair from me to the position of the servant is using the spell as presented.
Having an unseen servant made of hair should be ok.
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
@Zachiel There's a brief swirling breeze, and locks of your hair float to the location of the Servant, where they multiply into the mass of hair.
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
the usual reason someone takes the feat is increasing numeric variables and IIRC making spellcraft checks harder
@Lord_Gareth and that's not what I want to describe
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
@Zachiel All it does is make Spellcraft checks slightly harder, to the tune of a +2 DC. That's not worth a feat. That's not even worth a skill trick.
@Zachiel So your hair stretches and bends, silky-smooth, from your head and manipulates objects for you.
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
I want to describe my hair extending and grabbing the item, stemming directly from my head.
yeah
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
2:51 PM
So just do that.
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
Maybe warshaper level 1 would be a better idea
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
Though frankly, I wouldn't waste that on Unseen Servant when I could use that description for Telekinesis.
....
@Zachiel, would you like to know why you are, at this moment, the chief subject of my undying hate?
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
I think you can have all your spells look different with that feat, but only one per level gets the +1 CL
 
Inbar Rose
Inbar Rose
I think you guys need to consult one of the most important rules of any RPG - If the rules don't make sense, don't listen to them - or in other words - do whatever you want and screw the rules!
4
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
@Lord_Gareth why not?
 
Professor Captain Loki Caprion
Professor Captain Loki Caprion
2:53 PM
@InbarRose [Applause]
 
Inbar Rose
Inbar Rose
@ProfessorCaptainLokiCaprion [Bows]
 
Aaron
Aaron
@InbarRose I second this.
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
@InbarRose Not applicable in my context, for reason I fully understand and approve.
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
@Zachiel It's not that I dealt with a 50-page thread of this bullcrap, though that helps. It's not that you're coming across as afraid of other players being idiots, though it is a little. It's that you're essentially saying that you're not allowed to be creative because morons might be in the game with you and react badly to your ability without using the skill whose entire job is preventing said stupidity.
 
Inbar Rose
Inbar Rose
3.5 is full of holes, and millions of solutions. instead of looking at a hole and saying "geez, what a big hole" just pull out any of the millions of solutions available. Lord Gareth is giving you solutions, and you just keep looking at the hole Zachiel.
2
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
2:54 PM
And that somehow, their incompetence would then be your fault
 
Inbar Rose
Inbar Rose
Well. That's better.
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
@Lord_Gareth I'm not saying they would react badly. I'm saying they would react more badly, and not because of how the feat works but specifically because of the fluff I'm adding out of nowhere. I'm describing something (the strand of hair connecting me to the location of the servant) that isn't there by the rules.
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
And it's not like if they're new you can't teach them about Spellcraft and give 'em a helping hand.
 
Inbar Rose
Inbar Rose
[Sigh]
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
......
Nope, I'm done.
Bother someone else with it.
 
Inbar Rose
Inbar Rose
2:58 PM
@Zachiel - What is the problem with the solutions?
You seem to be dismissing any solution provided.
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
I'm sorry I can't get you to the point, @Lord_Gareth
@InbarRose The solutions he's been giving are not solutions to my problem, in my opinion
 
Inbar Rose
Inbar Rose
That doesn't give me any new information. I asked "why"
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
@InbarRose The best bit about this statement, incidentally, is that in this case there is a rule that's right here trying to let him do it.
 
Inbar Rose
Inbar Rose
@Lord_Gareth I have been in enough stupid arguments to realize that this is a misunderstanding of the problem at hand - probably due to poor communication of intent.
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
My problem is: what would be the best thing to refluff this way? A is not working, because ...
Gareth's answer to the problem is "no, A is working fine". And I don't care, because my GM would never listen to him.
 
Inbar Rose
Inbar Rose
3:01 PM
@Zachiel - Again - you fail to answer my question.
I know whats happened.
I read the chat.
I want you to tell me why those are not good solutions, not "those aren't good solutions"
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
The problem with the solutions is they are not kosher for my GM
 
Inbar Rose
Inbar Rose
So your GM would not approve?
Why not?
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
exactly
@InbarRose because my DM is concerned with nobody in the game being tricked by things that are not due to the rules but are stemming from my description. If it's an invisible servant made of hair it probably even has to be invisible (but this I will ask) and it shouldn't trick people into finding solutions that are not applicable when the feat and the spell don't call for it.
If I choose hair as a theme I probably cast hair from my fingers, or my spells look like they're made of hair, but they're not made of my actual hair.
 
Inbar Rose
Inbar Rose
"nobody in the game" like.. the NPC's he controls?
"not due to the rules" And if they follow the rules?
"invisible servant made of hair it probably even has to be invisible (but this I will ask)" invisible servant is invisible....
"trick people into finding solutions that are not applicable" Isn't that what half teh game is about?
" feat and the spell don't call for it" Does fireball have written "use me on kobolds" ?
 
Aaron
Aaron
@InbarRose fireballs made of hair.... Smelly
 
Inbar Rose
Inbar Rose
3:08 PM
I think you are over complicating the situation. If you want your hair to actually grow from your head and do things that is one thing. But if you want it to look like the hair is doing something that is another. So you need to be clear.
To make it look like your hair is manipulation objects around you - you can use many, many different solutions, from telekensis, to unseen servant, to illusions spells, even mind-melting spells.
If you want your hair to actually grow and manipulate things - I have not seen a spell/feat/rule for this - so you would need to ask your GM.
If you do want it to look like it is growing - you already heard the solutions, and they should satisfy all conditions for your GM. Casting an illusion spell to make your hair appear to grab things around you, and using prestidigitation or telekinesis, or unseen servant to actually move the items... what is the problem?
brb
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
@InbarRose like the other PCs. Think of this game as a LARP.
 
Aaron
Aaron
@Zachiel So I missed a lot of this convo what is the exact issue?
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
@InbarRose No, I'm not looking for illusory effects. I want it to be the wizard's hair actually growing and making shapes, thanks to magic
 
Joshua Aslan Smith
Joshua Aslan Smith
lol
 
Aaron
Aaron
@Zachiel This is for ascetic only right?
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
3:25 PM
@Aaron I want to make a D&D 3.5 character that behaves like one of those japanese monsters with animate hair. I'm ok with having this as an effect of magic and not some supernatural ability. I'm not ok with refluffing spells or other thing in such a way that they'd start assuming lecit but not working ways to stop it
For example maybe I need a level of bard and melodic casting to disguise my spellcasting so it's no more recognizable as such.
 
Aaron
Aaron
@Zachiel What do you mean by "I'm not ok with refluffing spells or other thing in such a way that they'd start assuming lecit but not working ways to stop it"
 
Inbar Rose
Inbar Rose
You could always just say its a Wish spell.
 
Aaron
Aaron
@InbarRose I wish for the spell Deus ex machina
 
Inbar Rose
Inbar Rose
:)
 
Aaron
Aaron
Is there a map.SE?
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
3:30 PM
I remember some discussion on a forum about refluffing spells, @Lord_Gareth was in it. So this people was talking about how much refluffing was ok (the original topic of the conversation is not involved here) and someone came up with this example where a druid casts plant growth and fluffing it as animals coming out of the forest and defecating on the fields would have produced an extra effect - the animals - so that was not refluffing, it was creating a new, more versatile/useful spell
 
wax eagle
wax eagle
@Aaron GIS.SE exists
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
I don't want to create a more powerful spell by refluffing it in ways that were not intended
 
wax eagle
wax eagle
but that's not maps exactly
 
Aaron
Aaron
@Zachiel Ok I understand now.
@Zachiel So this is purely for aesthetic purposes. I would say all you need to do is tell your dm just that. It is just aesthetic.
 
Inbar Rose
Inbar Rose
@Zachiel How about you refluff Animate Rope To affect your hair? Maybe increase the level of the spell to level 2 so that you can extend/manipulate your hair even further?
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
3:33 PM
@Aaron I need to find something similar enough to the intended effect that "It's just aestethic" works. And I specifically need to find a way that involves an aestethic change to my liking by the rules (like thematic spell), because it won't otherwise be allowed.
 
Aaron
Aaron
@Zachiel Ah. I am afraid I can't help with that.
@waxeagle I will check it out.
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
@InbarRose Homebrewing is kept to a minimum. Again, think of it as if it was a large LARP. Everybody knows the rules and asking the authors for new rules or personalization is not ok. That's why I need an already exisiting aestethic change by the rules.
 
Inbar Rose
Inbar Rose
How the hell are you supposed to refluff/change/add a new spell if you can't homebrew?
It seems you are asking the impossible @Zachiel
"I want to do something not in the rules - but it has to be in the rules" ?
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
@InbarRose I don't have to properly refluff. I have to find something in game that allows me that. Thematic Spell is the closest thing I can think of, but it's not nearly enough.
 
Inbar Rose
Inbar Rose
Your character can tie rope into his hair - Animate Rope. Done.
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
3:36 PM
Maybe master transmogryfist or some other shapechanger class could help
@InbarRose Or she could tie her hair into ropes... but I don't know where the consequence of that could be going.
 
Inbar Rose
Inbar Rose
You are the one with the crazy impossible-to-satisfy need, why don't you tell me?
 
KRyan
KRyan
3:47 PM
Zachiel, your game sounds extremely unfun
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
@KRyan Pretty much this.
 
Aaron
Aaron
@KRyan Yea.
 
KRyan
KRyan
all these things you are saying, all the hoops your DM is making you jump through, they sound all extremely obnoxious, and your DM really does not sound very good at all
furthermore, 3.5 is a terrible choice for system to use as is
because it's literally not usable as-is
 
Aaron
Aaron
My DM lets us do whatever he approves and if our lvl 5 characters fight like lvl 10 characters then he just ups the monsters but gives us lvl 5 monster XP.
 
MadMAxJr
MadMAxJr
This debate again?
 
Aaron
Aaron
3:50 PM
@MadMAxJr What debate?
 
MadMAxJr
MadMAxJr
The environment of the game that Zachiel is playing in, is what it looks like.
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
And I'm not even planning to play that character
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
@MadMAxJr Of course this debate again. This debate will happen every single time Zachiel comes to us looking for advice on how to prosper in that wretched, Lovecraftian hellhole that he insists on gaming in.
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
I'm just wondering what it would look like in that environment.
It's 10 month I log in in that place just to have a say on mechanical rules discussion
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
And we'll keep getting mad about it because this crap keeps happening.
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
3:55 PM
Hower, I'd have the same problems if I was to DM my group. My idea of gaming revolves around not letting the camel stick his nose in the tent.
 
Aaron
Aaron
@Zachiel I have no idea what that phrase means
 
Inbar Rose
Inbar Rose
@Aaron Second.
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
Camel's nose
The camel's nose is a metaphor for a situation where the permitting of a small, seemingly innocuous act will open the door for larger, clearly undesirable actions. A typical usage is this, from U.S. Senator Barry Goldwater in 1958: This bill and the foregoing remarks of the majority remind me of an old Arabian proverb: "If the camel once gets his nose in the tent, his body will soon follow." If adopted, the legislation will mark the inception of aid, supervision, and ultimately control of education in this country by the federal authorities. According to Geoffrey Nunberg, the image ente...
 
MadMAxJr
MadMAxJr
Best I can tell, without pointing at 'bad play group' over and over, is that what you want and what the DM wants are two different things. It sounds like you want a more story oriented focus with little restriction on how you build your character up and I'm not sure you'll find that in a d20 based game.
 
Aaron
Aaron
ah
 
Inbar Rose
Inbar Rose
3:56 PM
Okay - so... your idea of a good role playing game is to always follow the rules as written and never adopt anything new?
 
Aaron
Aaron
That sounds boring
I follow most rules but we have our little homebrew stuff here and there.
 
Inbar Rose
Inbar Rose
Indeed.
 
MadMAxJr
MadMAxJr
I think it's not so much their opinion as their DM's opinion that strictly by the rules. And they're picking and choosing what fits in and what does not, to model a planescape type setting.
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
@Zachiel - I can confidently state that I've never, ever encountered the problems you're so worried about. If you can't trust your players, ditch them. If you can, you have no problem.
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
@MadMAxJr But I don't want to do that in a place where potentially everyone can do what they want, because I want to feel (and not necesssarily be) like the special snowflake
@Lord_Gareth I can't. I'm playerless now. Way to goooo.
 
Lord_Gareth
Lord_Gareth
3:58 PM
@Zachiel With the amount of effort, involvement, and emotional investment it takes to game? Screw gaming with people you can't trust.
4
 
Zachiel
Zachiel
Well, not literally, but we're basically playing Hero Quest
 
MadMAxJr
MadMAxJr
I'm going to have to agree with Lord_Garet here for once. If there's no trust at the table, there are worse problems than finding a way to make your character into what you want.
 
Rob
Rob
Ey up
 
Inbar Rose
Inbar Rose
@Zach - Everything here is trying to tell you this, and you for some reason aren't hearing it so pay close attention: If the rules are getting in the way of playing the game, those rules are bad.
 
00:00 - 10:0010:00 - 14:0014:00 - 16:0016:00 - 20:0020:00 - 00:00

« first day (1201 days earlier)      last day (3763 days later) »