« first day (2671 days earlier)      last day (2299 days later) » 
01:00 - 22:0022:00 - 00:00

1:32 AM
I see much confusion about what a trope is. Have a thread: In context of storytelling "trope" does not mean cliched. A trope is a theme that occurs often in a genre. Two ill-matched people falling in love = romance trope. It can be done in a fresh way. All tropes can.
 
2:14 AM
Ah, I did think it just meant a repeated thing
I didn't realize it was this
Not a vast difference but a significant one
 
2:31 AM
@trogdor New avatar?
 
Yes
I discovered yesterday that there was an Archie/Sonic comic with the BoF 3 protagonists in it as a crossover
So I had to use it
 
That's a very specific audience :P
 
Yeah but that is what made it so amusing
I had never heard about it beforehand
So I had to express my amusement and also share it, hence this
 
 
7 hours later…
9:09 AM
In decades of tabletop role-playing, I've never laughed as hard and as often as I did this morning with the #KnightsOfTheBreakfastTable. In 3 sessions, Darkthorn has morphed from "Redwall" into "A Dark-humored, Medieval, Anthropomorphic Police Academy." #FateCore @EvilHatOfficial
 
 
1 hour later…
10:25 AM
@BESW that sounds superb
we need more fantasy police academies
... i need to watch police academy properly
 
did you watch it but improperly?
 
i have seen scenes and references and understand its cultural importance in comedy
 
10:50 AM
Then you know more than I do.
 
ah
same
I saw like, two clips of it
 
 
1 hour later…
11:59 AM
EeeeeeEEEee! My article went live on Pelgrane Press' website. Possibly 10 days ago, I don't know how I missed it.
 
Linky?
 
Factions in 13th Age, by yours truly. Exciting!
4
 
@Magician congrats!
 
@doppelgreener !!
 
Pinny!
 
12:20 PM
Curse of Strahd continues today
I get my awesome kensei powers now, so enemies of Omar the Monk best beware!
 
[takes out earplugs] Omar the Monk is a bear?
 
@Magician ooooh
 
@trogdor Indeed!
 
@doppelgreener He fights with the grace of one!
 
@trogdor aaaaaah!
 
12:27 PM
@doppelgreener Initially I wanted a character somewhat like the 4e Avenger class, who is something between the better-known archetypes of Rogues and Paladins. Religiously empowered assassin-type, hunter of the unholy, etc.
Kensei monk seems to be close enough
 
Oh, I misunderstood.
The enemies of Omar the Monk are bears?
What's he got against them?
@kviiri sounds cool. :)
 
@doppelgreener Two rock-hard fists and the way of the blade!
 
@kviiri Those are good things to have against bears.
 
Went for a bit of a walk yesterday
There was more snow than I expected. And fallen trees :s
 
1:10 PM
Gentlemen.
 
1:26 PM
@kviiri [quietly photoshops a slenderman into this photo]
 
@doppelgreener Slenderman doesn't have the adipose tissue that would allow him to retain heat in the winter, he ded
The real thing you should be afraid of? Bear.
 
@SPavel i don't think slenderman would listen as you explain this to him
@SPavel [quietly photoshops a bear into this photo instead]
 
@doppelgreener Of course he would not listen, he ded
 
@SPavel ok you got me there
 
Monster idea: warmth "vampire" that lives in cold areas, attaches to living things to keep itself warm, drains their body heat and then leaves to find the next source of heat
 
1:43 PM
@SPavel Sounds a lot like The Groke from Moomin (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Groke).
 
2:12 PM
@kviiri >japanese/european fantasy animation
of course there's a Japanese Moomin show
how did I not expect this
"She seeks friendship and warmth, but she is declined by everyone and everything, leaving her in her cold cavern on top of the Lonely Mountains." man that's sad
Also basically the Ice King from Adventure Time
 
 
1 hour later…
3:15 PM
@doppelgreener That may actually be the proper way to watch Police Academy, actually.
 
@Magician I don't understand if those are or ?
=D
 
Hey folks, in particular those who have run or played , and among those in particular @BESW: Tell me about things to do and things not to do!
 
@Anaphory Roll for shoes doesn't really have a strategy
Just do stuff
 
I mean as GM. I remember @BESW used it partially to show different play styles – who narrates success? Who narrates failure? That sort of thing.
 
@Anaphory Say yes. Let your players have and do the things. The game will go out of any one person's control, just guide it to do crazy things as it does that. Remember that when a player makes an action then takes a new skill, the new skill is a subset of what happened in the action, not a subset of the skill they used to do it. This means they can have lateral movement in new story-relevant things, instead of increasing specialisation in increasingly narrow actions.
Consider that if they try to jump using Jump 2, then fail and fall down a ledge screaming, they can spend XP to get a new skill of Screaming In Horror 3, which can come in really handy later. If you require a new skill to be a subset for the old skill, they don't get to do that, and skills acquired via failing often won't make sense or be possible.
 
In one of the answers on this side, I read something like “the new skill reflects something that was revealed in the action – all sixes doesn't mean you were lucky, it means you were good at this all along and this is how”. That sounded like a good guideline to me.
 
Don't sweat balance. The game isn't meant to experience balance. It is not that kind of game.
 
3:36 PM
Yep
 
@Anaphory Sure, that can work -- you discover you are actually an exceptional screamer. (You might not be aware of it, but hey, you now have a thing representing how good at it you are.)
 
'xactly
 
Here's a sample game:

The Tale of Inbar Rose, Sir Bearington and the Sword

Aug 28 '14 at 11:54, 20 minutes total – 162 messages, 9 users, 0 stars

Bookmarked Sep 17 '14 at 23:03 by doppelgreener

Here are my preferred methods for providing opposition:
16
A: How many dice does the GM roll when challenging the players?

doppelgreenerThere's no specific rule or best way. Roll for Shoes is malleable, and you'll work out what works for you. I have a couple of preferred approaches I've used, which work very well for setting up the number of dice to use for the difficulty of the task. The first approach is complex, the second is...

 
I like that second option
It's like 5e Advantage but makes way more sense
 
You can use any/both. You can have an Antagonist NPC (like Sir Bearington) then when a skill roll happens that's totally out of scope for that antagonist to deal with, use that method.
@SPavel bear in mind roll for shoes has you add up the result, not just compare highest dice.
The complete rules if you ever need them & aren't aware, are in the tag info: rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/roll-for-shoes/info
 
3:41 PM
I've had great fun in games where the DM added some kind of chip system, and PCs could put down chips to affect the outcome of rolls
@doppelgreener Yes, I know, which is why I said "makes more sense"
 
Nice
Cool. :)
I do suggest running with the base version initially before making modifications, but a chip system definitely seems viable.
 
A game where the DM has a "difficulty" dice pool and PCs can add/subtract to that by physically placing dice has a straightforwardness that I like
How many dice to roll? However many are right in front of you.
However, PCs want the DM to have fewer dice and themselves to have more... would be interesting to create a dynamic where they want everyone to have more dice, and must choose
Fate does this well with the compel/whatever stuff, where you can take a hit to be better later
 
@doppelgreener I have the first printed page of the forum thread where it was presented in my folder of short (in time or rules) RPGs. Today it seems I finally get round to playing it.
 
@doppelgreener The chip system was for D&D, for RFS you could just have dice (if the group has enough)
 
How do you start?
 
3:48 PM
@Anaphory Come up with a distressing situation and stick the PCs in the middle of it, then hit "play"
For example - the party is trapped on a rope bridge across Crocodile Gorge, and at the far end of the bridge, their nemesis the Duke of Holstein holds a pair of enormous metal shears
 
Any experience with asking players for prompts?
 
Rule 1 of GMing, never ask players for anything
 
I'd say it's never expect your players to do anything specific
 
That's not usually my rule 1, I have GMed too many PbtA games where “Ask provocative questions and build upon the answers” is a Rule.
 
You should ask a few things of your players, eg Civility and Respect at the table
 
3:51 PM
@Anaphory Let me be more specific - never ask your players to be proactive.
Players are great at reacting, like heroes in comic books when the villain builds this week's death ray or whatever
But if you want to get anywhere, the prompt should always come from the GM
 
That I can agree with, unless you have a really focused "leader" in your player group
 
@Randomorph Typically that's just a GM anyway, just one who's taking time off :P
 
@SPavel very true, or one who finally is getting a break from GMing
#foreverDM
 
@Anaphory Chitchat ahead of time and go with some random idea that comes up. The sample game I linked you came from some joking around about Sir Bearington i think. Another game that I ran for @BESW and a real life friend (liveblogged here in chat by BESW) started out as a sales competition, but I did my best to instigate as much nonsense derailing conflict as possible.
 
A mad libs could be fun
 
3:58 PM
It remained surprisingly intact, until the department store ceded to become its own city-state.
 
Get everyone to contribute one blank to the starting scene
 
@doppelgreener … thus ending the game. Eggscellent.
 
@Anaphory Yes very! But BESW's character was employee of the month by default until then.
 
@doppelgreener I read that as "employee of the month by defeat" and thought that it was odd to have employee of the month determined by force of arms
 
@SPavel For that particular game it would not have been so odd.
 
4:18 PM
@doppelgreener For that particular game, that is actually kind of what happened, including or not the ending, depending on how you see it?
 
@Anaphory well, neither of the player characters ever directly engaged in violence, but one of them became a sort of leader of a city-state, so ??
 
@Anaphory Pretty much all the advice above is great. Also, roll for everything. In particular any time a player asks you a question.
The answer to almost every question in Roll For Shoes is "I don't know, roll to find out."
Making new skills is the engine of Roll For Shoes. The more you roll, the more skills you make, which leads directly to learning more about the characters and the world.
@Anaphory One of my games started with each player making a character on their own, and then I figured out what the setting and opening prompt would be based on something that would get all those characters together.
"I'm going to play a bear."
"Okay."
"Can bears talk in this world?"
"I don't know, roll to find out."
[turns out bears can't talk]
 
4:35 PM
It seems this question is getting a lot of opion-y answers rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/113874/…
 
@BESW "Looks like bears can't talk, but they CAN sing""
 
@Rubiksmoose Almost any question that asks if something is balanced will get opinion-based answers, especially when the asker neglects to specify what "balanced" means.
 
@MikeQ Indeed. Especially confusing because in this case they don't even have a particular homebrew item for us to adjudicate. I voted to close.
 
Sorry about that @doppelgreener Didn't mean to add a system tag. I thought the initial edit was by the original author of the question
 
@Anaphory I like to ask players to narrate failures, while I narrate successes.
Apr 9 '15 at 12:07, by BESW
And, failing a roll doesn't have to mean you failed the action. It just means the situation didn't improve the way you hoped.
 
4:49 PM
@Wibbs I was just looking at that and was confused by the same thing.
 
@BESW I've never heard of RFS before but I love it!
 
@BESW "The situation has developed not necessarily to our advantage" --Emperor Hirohito playing Roll for Shoes, 1945
 
5:09 PM
@Wibbs No problem, I suspect it was them based on the limited information we have but I can't accept the edit regardless
@Rubiksmoose feel free to open a meta calling attention to it () then The Meta Effect™ will happen, meaning whatever fate it is headed for, it will arrive at much sooner — if it is to be closed it will be, same for revised or left open or reopened or all of the above.
@Wibbs btw, I saw your flag and revision of that question where you added the designer-reasons tag but you weren't sure if it belonged. Turns out it's an unusual case. I removed the tag because it's not asking for designer reasons, just reasons.
Usually all reasons questions ask for designer reasons because it's the only way for them to be viable, but that one's actually viable without doing so. Probably.
I'm wary we're falling into a little bit of a trap with designer-reasons, where as a community we focus on the tag rather than the question content, and let it set rules that aren't in the question.
In reality it just describes the the question is asking for the reasons the designers have given, answers must do that because the question asks for it, and the question asks for it because it can't meet our quality bars otherwise (we'll get 5 answers all speculating completely different things and none will be verifiably correct)
 
0
Q: Close or edit "Polearm with Reach, but without Heavy or Special property?"

RubiksmoosePolearm with Reach, but without Heavy or Special property? This question does not seem answerable objectively in its current form. It seems to have attracted mainly opinion-based answers and may accumulate more if something is not done to clarify and refine the question. Specifically, the OP s...

 
@doppelgreener I know rules vary from SE site to SE site, but questions about designer intent are off-topic on Gaming.
 
Never done a specific question meta question so hopefully I phrased it correctly
 
1
Q: Close or edit "Polearm with Reach, but without Heavy or Special property?"

RubiksmoosePolearm with Reach, but without Heavy or Special property? This question does not seem answerable objectively in its current form. It seems to have attracted mainly opinion-based answers and may accumulate more if something is not done to clarify and refine the question. Specifically, the OP s...

 
5:26 PM
@Yuuki Yeah... they would risk being off topic here too if not for asking "what did they say?" and sticking to that requirement of answering with what they say.
@Rubiksmoose looks fine, good stuff
 
@doppelgreener I guess it's a side-effect of TRPGs being more free-form than video games because even 'what did they say' would be grounds for off-topic on Gaming.
Because what if they didn't say anything?
The reasoning for making designer intent off-topic on Gaming is that Gaming's users are gamers not the game makers.
 
@doppelgreener Good to hear :) Thanks.
 
Even keeping abreast of dev diaries (which not all video games have or publish) isn't in our expected field of expertise.
 
@Yuuki we run into that a lot, but thankfully authors talk a lot more in the ttrpg sphere, and we have books full of nothing but things they said (so sometimes the books themselves explain something)
E.g. if someone asked a "why are things this way?" question about fate core, we're armed with entire books that dedicate 50-100% of their content to simply explaining the game development philosophy and design issues and why thing are the way they are.
 
@Yuuki Not all questions can be answered. That's okay! Proof of un-answer-ability is itself a good answer, and if you can't prove it... then maybe someday someone will come along who can answer it.
 
5:35 PM
@BESW It's less the unanswerability and more the "what is the goal of Gaming and what is the expected skillset of the average user".
 
Makes sense. Certainly I'm of the opinion that a lot of TTRPG dev intent questions aren't actually useful.
But there's also a lot more overlap between "player" and "developer" in this medium, and that makes it a different kind of beast.
 
When you vote to close and you put a vote in a category that others have not yet put their vote into, does it still count towards the total to close?
 
Yeah, TPRGs are a lot more freeform in that regard. There's a much stricter boundary between "player" and "developer" in Gaming although that doesn't preclude developers from being gamers.
@Rubiksmoose Yes.
Once the close votes total 4(?), the close reason will be the one with the most votes.
 
@Rubiksmoose Needs five votes with any reason. The majority reason is listed.
 
@Yuuki Thanks! Just curious really. I'm glad it is that way.
 
5:43 PM
@BESW I agree to the extent they're asked within the context of D&D and we don't usually get much useful out of that — it's a property that is simply the way it is because it's got 10+ different authors operating without a cohesive vision and things are the way they are because of history more often than not.
@BESW in the case of a tie, the most recent vote is the tiebreaker. If it's 1 Unclear 2 Too broad 1 Opinion Based, and you vote unclear, there will be a tie between that and Too Broad (2 votes each) and the reason displayed will be Unclear.
In the case of a diamond moderator closing the question, their reason is always the one that is displayed, no matter what the votes were beforehand.
 
5:55 PM
@doppelgreener I believe the same is true for gold-tag holders as well
 
6:14 PM
@GreySage oh, yeah, their gold badge dupe close would always win as a close reason.
 
@Rubiksmoose It seems to me like that question's author needs to look at Battle Masters.
 
6:36 PM
@nitsua60 For sure. but they are very focused on making this weapon.
 
I understand the appeal. As mentioned in my answer, long staves/spears were frequently used by various monk orders, particularly in Asia.
 
@Randomorph me too, but as of now the question definitely needs a lot of work before we can be confident in being able to get a good answer for it.
 
they were probably looking for something similar to this
@Rubiksmoose I find the question is pretty specific about what it's asking, albeit it does meander quite a bit
"Is a hypothetical polearm with Reach but not Heavy balanced?"
 
@Randomorph Hmm I don't think it is very clear that that is the case. And if so, I don't think the question itself is a good SE question.
 
In which case we can look at existing weapons for comparison, and make a note of the fact that damage dice do not greatly impact expected damage
 
6:40 PM
@Randomorph Although it has to be non-bladed.
@Randomorph I think the easiest solution would be for them to develop a weapon they want us to consider and ask us with that. The problem is that there are too many variables right now (especially with regards to damage) that it would be difficult for any one answer to be objectively right
 
It lays out the criteria in two separate locations. I don't feel it is unclear. The large amount of "Why I want this" text is largely unimportant, and probably detracts from the question a bit, but we have the necessary knowledge (minus damage dice) to answer it
@Rubiksmoose literally the only variable is damage dice
If they simply edited the question to say "What is a balanced damage dice on such a weapon" there would be nothing variable.
 
@Randomorph That is actually a very good point and I think a very good suggestion
 
I can make it in a comment, give me a moment
 
If that is indeed OP's intent then that would be a very good edit to make. I would want the exact properties needed to be laid out clearer as well, but yeah
 
howdy howdy
 
6:46 PM
I mean, in terms of laid out clearly, it doesn't get much clearer than how OP did it.. Except maybe in terms of formatting
 
@Randomorph Though one issue is that it doesn't answer the OP's original question technically since they wanted to know if the concept of the weapon with the properties listed was at all balanced from the get-go. I'm not sure right now if damage is truly the only thing to consider there.
 
It's not - damage is by far the least impactful thing aout the build design.
 
You're right, which is why I considered all the properties in isolation
But that's not a burden of the asker
If it turns out "Hey these properties together becomes OP" that can be done as a frame challenge answer
 
@Randomorph For you clearly. However, many other people are very confused. So inarguably, there is something unclear about the post. We also do not even have official clarification from OP that your interpretation is correct.
 
I think the real problem is the question appears near the top.. with a lot of fluff, and a meandering "conclusion" at the bottom.
 
6:48 PM
they want PAM to stop movement
that's HUGE for intraparty teamwork
 
a restructuring would do it some good. I stand by that there is already enough detail to answer in a non-opinionated way
PAM stops movement.. when combined with Sentinel.. Which they also will take
 
@Randomorph and I somewhat agree - except i'm not entirely positive what they're asking. If it's what we're assuming, it's answerable. If it isn't, then it's not.
 
In fact OP even says damage doesn't matter, so your comment may not be as impactful as I first thought. They want to explicitly know if it is balanced regardless of damage it seems
 
Which the answer I think is an obvious yes. Just give it zero damage and it can't be really OP can it? But we can also figure out "Hey, d6 or d8 could also work here without breaking the system"
@NautArch what part makes you unsure what they are asking?
 
@Randomorph Thre three questions i listed that it could be. They change tacks several times during the question. I agree that the question is most likely "is this balanced", but we also don't really ahve a clear descriptin of the homebrew item.
@Randomorph but again, the damage is the least impactful thing about this combo. And given that the build did depend on something that Wizards later 'balanced', makes me think that unwinding that isn't balanced.
 
7:00 PM
They "balanced" an already Heavy weapon.
Drop a couple damage die (as is the case with heavy in general) and you're fine
Whip's damage is as low as it is, because it has Reach AND Finesse
The fact that a monk gets auto-finesse to simple weapons, is moot
Also, I'm not sure how your other two questions could be inferred from the text. Again, literally the only variable on the weapon the poster left open was damage die, stating a high damage die is strictly not a requirement.
@NautArch also, regarding the impactfulness, keep in mind it costs 2 feats to make it as impactful as that. Polearms aren't considered OP otherwise, and in fact usually won't be chosen without at least one of those two feats.
Reach on it's own doesn't really add much to combat, and can be detrimental, as enemies have more room to maneuver in your threatened space.
 
Right, they just want polearm that doesn't have those requirements (heavy and two-handed.) I don't know what the reason is why there isn't one, but it seems clear that they really don't want to make one like that (given that the UA kensei allowed it, but they rolled it back on final release.)
@Randomorph Yes, two feats to get it as advertised. Theyw ant to be able to get it without the requirements that they've already stated.
@Randomorph except in this case, where a successful reaction hit will stop an enemy in their tracks.
 
They said Two handed is fine. They said they don't want Heavy or Special.
@NautArch with a feat. A highly expensive character choice.
 
@Randomorph ah, yes. Just not heavy. But then that opens it up to smaller characters who aren't allowed to the use Heavy. And the intent may be that polearms are Heavy because of the other things they do give you. Again, if it was generally okay, why'd Wizards roll it back on the Kensai in Xanathar? By making it Dex based, the extra reach combined with the other goodies Dex gives you changes the structure. It may be fine, but that's what the question may be asking.
DIscussing IF it's balanced is putting the cart ahead of the horse.
let's wait andsee if they clean up the question - or one of us can go ahead and do it and ask if it's right.
 
I think they rolled back the Kensai because Monk Weapons are Non-Heavy
Not because it's inherently that much more powerful
We're talking a damage difference of 1 pt on average.
 
Here is the way I would probably ask the question:
I want to make a dexterity based support character that uses weapons mainly for self-defense and not for offence. She will be a Way of Kensei monk.

For that, I want her to use a polearm with Reach so that she can keep enemies at a distance with the Polearm Master and Sentinel feats. But being a dexterous character with very little strength it would be useless if she has to do strength based attack rolls.

For this to work, I need a polearm with reach but without the Heavy or Special property (of which there are currently none).
Is this weapon balanced?
 
7:14 PM
Yep, that's probably how I'd ask it too @Rubiksmoose ... That being said the OP is more or less the same question, just much more roundabout.
 
Would it be completely derailing to make the edit then see if OP agrees with it?
 
Considering OP hasn't responded to suggestions, and said damage isn't an issue, I'd say phrase it mostly as you said, but with the question of "What damage die, if any, would be balanced with these properties?" @Rubiksmoose
Basically "A long quarterstaff, with Reach and Two-Handed instead of Versatile, but I wasn't sure on what damage die to use" or similar
 
@Randomorph That's funny--I look it at and see exactly the opposite. I see someone who wants to stop incoming enemies at range and wonder "why are you trying to shoehorn that into a monk? They can't do that, but a Battle Master can." So to me it's all the hand-wringing about not having the weapon that allows what you want that seems superfluous.
 
@nitsua60 I think because of the pop-culture precedent of the wise monk fending off attackers, and not letting them get close with a long staff. Or simply they want to play Jackie Chan.
 
@Randomorph Which makes perfect sense. You can do that, mechanically, by playing a dex-based fighter and naming it Jackie Chan =)
 
7:21 PM
Also anyone can, with those feats. Barbarian, Paladin, etc. Saying "Oh just be a Battle Master" is a bit offputting if you have a character concept already in mind
Technically the monk can too, just not with current weapons if they want to use Dex.
 
(I was specifically thinking of lunging attack with quarterstaff for the "stop incoming traffic" bit, and a number of the other maneuvers for the "want to be a support-combatant more than striker" that they mention.)
 
Yeah that's fair, I'm just saying it might not seem that way to someone with their heart set on the defensive monk archetype
 
@Randomorph I don't think this take is the way to go. OP is asking if a weapon with all these properties is balanced at all regardless of damage. It is possible that no matter how much damage it does that it would still be unbalanced and phrasing the question like that would preclude that possibility
 
You're right that anyone with Sentinel+PAM+a polearm could do the stopping traffic bit. To do it with a staff requires lunging, which also gets you the non-damage support bits. Taunting, commander strike, trip, pushing, &c. They're not all great choices from an optimization POV, but OP said they'd be happy with zero damage....
 
@Rubiksmoose that can be addressed with a Frame challenge. Sometimes the answer is just no. Many homebrew questions have the same types of answers regarding that.
@nitsua60 sounds like you could give an answer suggesting a Battlemaster Dip instead :)
 
7:25 PM
@Randomorph It seems very wrong to change a question such that answering it in the way OP seems to have intended it would require a frame challenge though.
 
Except, it doesn't. "Yes it's fine with x damage dice" answers the intended question. "No it's not fine even with 0 damage" also answers the intended question.
Maybe a better phrasing: "Is this combination of properties balanced? If so, what should the damage die be?"
 
@Randomorph That's why I dropped that first comment--it's not clear to me whether they're asking how to play traffic cop (to my mind: Battle Master) with a lot of partial answer thrown in there, or for help evaluating a homebrew (to my mind: requires some good explanation of how we evaluate equipment against existing comparands) with more background than is needed. And I'm off for the day!
 
Blarhg. I hate being blocked in my work waiting on someone else to fix something.
 
Well I made the edit. Not sure if this is proper etiquette or not. I'm hoping it is what OP intended and that they can confirm that sometime soon.
 
@Randomorph maybe, but allowing heavy weapons for a monk they did roll back. So they want a heavy weapon without the heavy property. I'd like all of the fun without the limlitations.
 
7:46 PM
"heavy weapons" is such a disappointing moniker for something that isn't even crew-operated
 
@SPavel But they could be Terry Crews operated.
 
@NautArch Terry Crews is a one-man crew
 
@SPavel exactly
 
Terry Crews dual-wielding ballistae would be a great character
Especially if he takes inspiration from Japanese infantry doctrine, and puts bayonets on them
 
@SevenSidedDie Just to provide another data point on what you asked me about a few days back. I trip over things like this now and again on various SE sites. What got my attention is also that participant also joins us on this SE.
 
7:57 PM
@KorvinStarmast I think I know the one you mean. I hope you're being mindful of confirmation bias and vocal minorities. There are people who have a lot of friction figuring things out, and ones that don't, and of the two, the former have a lot more asking & going "what's with this??".
 
@doppelgreener Everyone receives communications through their own filters, yes, I am very aware of that ... heck our own communications (between you and I) in the past few months unfortunately demonstrate that ably. And I am not trying to stir up something here.
SSD had asked me to add some clarity, and I saw Sard's post (he posts here on RPG.SE as well) and it struck me as related to that brief discussion.
 
@KorvinStarmast Rest assured I don't think you're trying to stir anything.
 
On the other hand, History.SE has a very different feel from RPG.SE, overall.
I am hoping they'll eventually get out of beta, but there are some site norms that I feel are acting like a brake on a wheel. :(
 
@NautArch no, they want a Reach weapon, that also qualifies for Polearm Mastery. There is in fact a non-heavy Reach weapon already.
 
ANyway, back to the old grind, see you all later.
 
8:07 PM
@KorvinStarmast ttfn!
 
@KorvinStarmast History would get out of beta in a week if they didn't clamp down on "do my homework" questions :)
 
@Randomorph Right, they want a Reach weapon that is a polearm and isn't heavy. I guess I"m saying is that there could be a problem with this - otherwise, they'd have created one on their own.
 
@NautArch there are Polearms that aren't Heavy. There are Reach Weapons that aren't Polearms or Heavy. It's also possible they chose not to add it because they were attempting to streamline a system they'd already complicated too much in beta.
 
@KorvinStarmast Speaking of which, you might be interested in this feedback that's trying to get the process of coming out of beta changed:
58
Q: Let's break up with "Graduation" and remove a bunch of "Beta" labels

CatijaOver two years ago now, we made a big shift in how we handle "graduation" - nearly severing the connection between "graduation" and site design. We also talked about removing the "beta" label at some point before sites “graduated” - when sites are clearly past that phase but don't yet qualify for...

 
@Randomorph quite possible
 
8:14 PM
@Randomorph I'd wager certain Eastern Europeans under 200 lbs have Polearms that aren't Heavy.
 
@NautArch one thing to consider, is Heavy, only adds one Damage Dice compared to Non-heavy two handed weapons (Longsword, Warhammer, Battleaxe). Reach reduces damage die size by one. Therefore a hypothetical Non-Heavy Reach weapon should be Two Handed and 1d8. (Probably will add this logic to my answer)
@Yuuki Is that a Polish joke? If it is, well played lol
 
Whoa there's a homebrewing stack?
Time to crank out some mead
 
Wait what?
 
@Randomorph As i've repeatedly said, the damage die really isn't my concern (nor is it that of the asker.) My concern is making a dex based reach, two-handed polearm. There may have been a balance reason as to why those are currently verbotten (and the one time there may have been one, they pulled it back.)
FOr more, it's more the finesse, than the damage value.
 
8:29 PM
@NautArch except it's not a dex based reach. It'd still be Strength base. The fact that the Monk can bypass that restriction is irrelvant.
The weapon is balanced with a d8 if it's martial, 2H, reach, and non-heavy
Also, a normal Monk wouldn't even be able to bypass that restriction.. They'd require the Kensei archetype to do so.
@SPavel I totally misinterpreted what you meant by Homebrewing there hahaha
 
@NautArch Hmm... as far as I can tell the balance reason might be related to reach weapons being used as zoning tools (reach + Sentinel) and Dex-based classes in general being able to cover more ground than Str-based classes.
 
@Randomorph hahaha
 
@Randomorph THat's a very good point - but they are specifically homebrewing the restrictions away so that a Kensai CAN use it. So it's basically a finesse weapon (or allowing it to be finesse for the Kensai monk.) But that's semantics (kind of)
 
@NautArch yeah I see where you're coming from. Personally I don't find Reach, Polearm Master, or Sentinel to be gamebreaking, and out of those three, Sentinel is by far the worst offender.
 
@doppelgreener Thanks for that link, doppel, it got me to finally join SE meta. Interesting proposal.
 
8:41 PM
@KorvinStarmast SE meta can be a rough place. For some, there be dragons. Tread with care.
 
I do not intend to post there any time soon.
 
It's a huge mixing pot of all kinds of people from all kinds of stacks in all kinds of different moods and some of them are having a very bad day.
Gotcha. :)
 
@KorvinStarmast I was skewered :)
 
@NautArch At se meta you was skewered?
Did they give you a nice marinade first before they put you over the coals? :)
 
@doppelgreener On Meta, there are dragons and there are people who believe they are Right. One is far more dangerous and the other thinks you are tasty with ketchup.
 
8:44 PM
@Yuuki Heh, nice one, but I think it's "there are people who "know" that they are right."
 
@Miniman Whole new SEDE challenge for you for a different stack (Game Dev SE): If you head to http://data.stackexchange.com/gamedev/query/edit/789430 you'll see GameDev.SE's custom close reasons. There are actually only 3 close reasons, but they've changed over time, and close reasons are immutable so each change is recorded as a new entry:
- IDs 6, 8, and 9 are the same reason as each other: "guide me" closes.
- IDs 4, 10, and 11 are also the same reason as each other: "debugging help" closes.
 
@KorvinStarmast Alternatively, people who do not believe they could be wrong.
 
@KorvinStarmast Oh, no. RPG meta.
 
@Randomorph Yeah, that too.
 
nevermindthen
 
8:45 PM
What does SEDE stand for?
 
@Rubiksmoose Stack Exchange Data Explorer.
 
AKA "nerd space for nerds"
 
Thanks!
 
@NautArch Well, that happens to us all. The trick is to be sure to be wearing powered armor or +2 Adamantine breastplate and mithril chaps.
 
Stack Exchange performs a weekly backup dump of all of its public data for the purposes of giving people backups if the site ever vanishes / turns evil / gets paywalled / etc. The backup is hosted on The Internet Archive and is freely available. It also hosts a copy itself, in SEDE, which also offers a utility to explore that data using SQL queries.
 
8:48 PM
@KorvinStarmast having the Barbarian's Unarmoured Defense (aka Thick Skin) also helps lol
 
@KorvinStarmast Ah, mine had an opening in the rear. that must have been the problem.
 
@NautArch assless chaps?
 
@KorvinStarmast NautArch made a feature request, and there be dragons on any meta. :(
mostly just because "i don't think this should be implemented" = downvotes on the question, which feels bad
 
Yeah I can understand down votes on suggested solutions that are unpopular, but for feature requests seems harsh
 
Adding features costs dev time, and as I recall, SE devs are paid people.
 
8:53 PM
@Randomorph would you mind deleting your comments under that homebrew weapon question? I just want to make it super easy and clear for OP to respond to us when he gets back. And since I already implemented some of your suggestions they may be confusing.
 
@KorvinStarmast sometimes it is also "the thing you are asking for does not jive with stack philosophy", and sometimes that is not visible to the person making the feature request until they have already made it -- it took a lengthy comment discussion before a comment arrived that sorted out nautarch's confusion.
 
@Rubiksmoose yeah that's fine
 
@doppelgreener Yeah, what one sees from the outside and what one sees form the inside can differ greatly.
 
I got some downvotes and lengthy comments myself on a RPG meta answer but I learned quite a bit from it.
 
@Rubiksmoose you may want to delete some of your outdated comments on that question as well btw
 
9:01 PM
@doppelgreener Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and say that most if not all Chat.SE-related proposals will be rejected.
Chat.SE is simply not a priority for SE and SE isn't a forum (in the web sense) in the first place.
 
Starting a new 5e campaign wednesday. Gnome mystic
 
@Hypersapien good luck. I'd be interested to hear how it playtests.. Mystic as is seems pretty abusable from an Armchair DM point of view, but it might be better in play.
 
@Randomorph that's what i was implying :P
 
@NautArch You might want avoid any Fey Bars in that state, they tend to be a bit.. cheeky (⌐■_■)
 
@Hypersapien nice! was thinking of going that way, but going wizard was more my thing.
 
9:14 PM
We're starting at 3rd level and the DM is giving everyone bonus feats. He picked Empathic for me.
 
@NautArch yeah I'm more of a wizard player as well, which archetypes have you played?
 
@Randomorph this'll be my first. Leaning divination when it's time to pick, but Lore is starting to interest me.
 
I have a problem playing core classes/paths. This is the second 5e campaign I've played. My first was as an Arcane Archer (before Xanthar's came out).
 
@Hypersapien that's cool, I've been considering giving bonuns feats in my next campaign
@NautArch Oh! Right I remember we had a conversation about this last week. I forgot that was you, sorry my bad lol
 
Yeah. He was trying to customize the feats to the character. He wanted backstories and everything. Sent out a big survey asking questions about our character's history and motivations.
Did a little "prologue" game with randomly selected pregenerated characters to show what happened to release the Big Bad.
 
9:19 PM
@NautArch You intending for a more blastery style, or going to aim for controller / utility?
 
I thought that was cool
 
@Hypersapien Yeah that's pretty neat. A nice touch of customization.
 
@Randomorph probably the latter (that's more my style). But need to see how the party rounds out. DOn't know what others are picking yet (or how long any of us will remain alive.)
the campaign is going to be fairly gritty, i think. and our Straight 3d6 stats don't make it easy to have an optimized character.
 
@NautArch Divination or Lore are both good fits for that role too. Divination lets you simply say "The target fails" sometimes. Lore (at least the modified one I use) let's you pick only a few damage spells and use different elements, so you can focus more on utility and control spells.
ooh Straight 3d6.. Brutal lol
What statline did you get, @NautArch ?
 
I ran a short campaign where I had a character be a mystic. It wasn't as bad as I thought, but there was still plenty that was difficult due to my lack of deep understanding about the class. If I hadn't studied up on it at least as much as I did it would have been a much worse issue.
 
9:24 PM
@Rubiksmoose in what way was it an issue? Sorry your sentence was unclear.
 
@Randomorph 9 str, 10 dex, 17 con, 20 int, 8 wis, 12 cha (after racial bonuses)
not too shabby :)
 
@Randomorph Well my worry was that power was going to be an issue. The main issue just ended up being him doing things that I wasn't aware he could do lol
 
Ooh that 8 wis is going to hurt though. Starting Int of 20 is quite nice though. What level start is it?
 
@Rubiksmoose Like the ability to stack active abilities (disciplines?) which was interesting
 
@Rubiksmoose yeah my issue with Mystic is the ridiculous flexibility that puts even the fairly OP Bard to shame. There's a ton of room for munchkinism in the Mystic rules, and they're complicated enough to make it hard to weed them all out.
 
9:27 PM
@Randomorph Luckily I heavily vet PC sheets before we get to the table to work out any kinks. And we had to work out some BIG ones for mystic. But in the end, it seemed very fun.
@Randomorph And yeah I'm still not sure that it is balanced power-wise honestly. The amount of flexibility and number of strategies they can be good at is incredible.
 
@Rubiksmoose Yeah I tend to vet PCs too. It helps set up expectations, and potentially (in my experience) catch player errors. It's good having a second set of eyes scan a sheet either way.
@Rubiksmoose Regarding Mystic balance and fun, I'm sure it's fun, because I can think of crazy ridiculous things you can do with it. The problem is if it's unfun for the other players as it seems to have a lot of potential to overshadow other classes, or be just as good as 2-3 classes at their core thing at once.
 
@Randomorph Yup I caught lots of errors. Also a good way for me to scope out what I have to deal with. And it gives me another reason to make them give me sheets as soon as possible which is nice.
 
@Rubiksmoose I usually play on Roll20 (no local friends interested in Tabletop), so I can vet their sheets even as they work on it if I want :D
My players are for the most part pretty eager to build their sheets, so I don't usually have issues with deadlines
 
@Randomorph Yeah that didn't end up being an issue at our table, but it was too short and I specifically talked with the player to avoid having that be an issue. It'll be interesting to see where the class goes when it becomes official.
@Randomorph oooo nice! Shame about no local though :(
 
@Rubiksmoose might need a few iterations yet.
 
9:36 PM
@Randomorph with the limited time I've had with it, I'd agree.
 
@Rubiksmoose Yeah, I can't really use my Dice or minis, and you lose a bit of that experience not being able to see people face to face. That being said, I save a lot of money on minis and dice :D
 
@Randomorph Not sure it would be enough to stop me from buying dice. I just can't say no to a really nice looking die or set of dice.
 
@Rubiksmoose I'm ashamed to admit I've bought some dice and a dice bag regardless. Not minis though.
I was also eyeing up a really nice DM screen on Amazon, but controlled myself
 
@Randomorph Yeah minis don't appeal to me that much honestly.
 
@Rubiksmoose If I was going to go heavy on the mini side of things, I'd probably buy Rich Burlew's art pack of the cardstock minis.
 
9:39 PM
OP responded and blessed the edit. I've voted to reopen.
 
Neat, I had cast my re-open vote earlier
So we need a benevolent outsider to come by
 
@Randomorph consider it done.
 
@NautArch blessed be ye, and your assless chaps!
 
@Randomorph I guess it helps that I do have friends with minis come to think of it.
 
@Rubiksmoose Heh, yep that makes a difference
 
9:49 PM
Xanthar's came out in the middle of a campaign where I was playing an Arcane Archer, and AA got nerfed (albiet mildly, and yes the DM made me change it). My fear is that the same will happen while I'm playing a Mystic. WOTC will release another book with the "Official" version of Mystic and It'll get nerfed again.
 
@Hypersapien It's a real concern.
 
@Hypersapien given the feedback around Mystic, I don't expect it to be landing in an official book any time soon
 
The way AA got nerfed was that they took the bonuses off Magic Arrow and moved it up to level seven, which meant that I needed to wait another two levels before I could get it back, even just for overcoming damage resistance.
I was level 5 and still didn't have a magic weapon.
The DM was real miserly with the magic items, even when we were in a big city.
 
@Hypersapien Ultra-rare magic items is a legitimate way to play
I believe it's not intended to Martials to need them that early either
That being said, maybe reminding your DM there are Magic weapons that don't add a +1 or more bonus also exist might make them flow a bit more freely @Hypersapien
 
I have one now, it just took a while.
 
9:55 PM
@Randomorph Showing them the table of minor magic items might also help.
 
@Yuuki yep, that's partially what I was referring to. XGE has some great minor ones now.
 
@Hypersapien did your dm allow you to bulid a different character?
 
@Hypersapien I currently don't have a magic weapon on my 5th level Paladin. 5e's not really balanced around equipment.
 
@Yuuki that table is great, have it bookmarked myself :D
 
9:59 PM
Almost all of your power is behind your class features. Magic equipment is the cherry on the figurative sundae.
 
So this just popped up in my duplicate review queue: rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/103041/…
 
@Randomorph Yeah, I found it awhile back and am planning to show to my DM and get an Alien Sword of Taverns.
 
01:00 - 22:0022:00 - 00:00

« first day (2671 days earlier)      last day (2299 days later) »