TRPG General Chat

4:00 PM

Looks like it's a bit of both. There were plans for a group of supercommandos from Mandalore but it was ultimately scrapped and the armor design was saved just for Boba.

NautArch

@MikeQ Or someone strongly rooted in reality :P

G. Moylan

@Yuuki then since Boba was popular, Lucas said "hey wait, let's finish telling that story" and then made the book deals

NautArch

ALthough I think there was a step where he realized that for someone reason this rando side character was well loved, so he cashed in on him.

goodguy5

isn't a mandelorian just someone that believes in recessive and dominant traits?

G. Moylan

@goodguy5 I can't tell if you're trying to make a joke or if you're asking a serious question

Yuuki

4:01 PM

@goodguy5 Nah, that's a Mendelorian. You're thinking about a male time-traveling sports car.

G. Moylan

oh I see

Xirema

TBH, I think Boba Fett's widespread appeal is far more substantially explained by the pre-internet viral marketing of the toys, the one non-poopy part of the Holiday Special, etc....

Anaphory

Hey everyone! Long time since I was last here.

goodguy5

@Yuuki I'm pretty sure that's a Man Delorian. You're thinking of a time travelling car in a south Asian jungle.

NautArch

@Anaphory welcome back!

G. Moylan

4:05 PM

I don't get why you all seem to be ignoring the EU books here. The stories of "didn't Boba do this or that thing" or "aren't the Mandalorians this way" are all EU stories. None of this "lore" would exist without that material

Anaphory

I have recently gone to Reddit for agame recommendation and it has reminded me of why we have stopped answering those questions here…

Gwideon

I honestly don't want the mando to be Boba. I think boba is kinda.... Overrated. yeah he has some cool stuff but I'd honestly like to explore a new character.

Yuuki

@G.Moylan For one, they're not canon. For two, it's chicken-and-egg. Boba Fett isn't popular because of the EU books. The EU books exist because Boba Fett was popular.

G. Moylan

@Yuuki they were canon for decades, though

@G.Moylan including when the prequels were made

NautArch

@Gwideon seems like he definitely isn't and that what I remember regarding the flashback isn't right (but i'm checking that).

I'm fine with not-boba. In fact, i'd prefer it. Boba died in the pit as far as i'm concerned.

G. Moylan

4:07 PM

@Gwideon it's definitely not. This guy is a rookie

@Yuuki but his popularity increased dramatically after the books told us exactly how badass he really was. Before that, he was just a cool guy that people wondered about

@G.Moylan with non-convential situations, anyway. I should add that caveat. He clearly knows what he's doing with humanoids

Yuuki

@G.Moylan And that latter half is why the books exist. There's a reason why there's entire sagas about Boba Fett and Mandalorians whereas there's only one comic about Skippy the Jedi droid.

G. Moylan

@Yuuki I don't see what your point is then if you agree with me.... before the books, he was "the guy with the cool armor that captured Han" and people liked him but didn't really have a way to evaluate his "coolness" in comparison to, say, any other bounty hunter except that he was the only one remotely characterized in Ep. V and was centrally involved in the plot. After that, his popularity surged when people had more content to consume about him.

because then it was "oh cool look how much more of a badass this guy is"

Gwideon

anyways Mandos are a really cool culture and I'm glad we're getting more exploration of that in canon. Once I get a bit more money I'd like to start work on a custom mandalorian armor

NautArch

Just watched the flashback scene again. Definitely not the scene from Attack of the Clones, but the kid does look similar. Putting to bed the theory that it's boba.Just someone new with a resurrected mandalorian religion.

@G.Moylan I think you're wrong. Before that he was just a cool guy with a huge cult following.

The cult got bigger once lucas cashed in on it.

G. Moylan

that is literally wha tI'm saying

NautArch

4:14 PM

Okay, I misunderstood!

But Lucas clearly just stumbled onto a character that was instantly loved with almost no information about him.

The power of visual design.

Yuuki

I mean, my point was just it's funny how much lore sprang up from "oh hey, this guy's armor looks cool".

G. Moylan

indeed. I do think it helped that he was the only bounty hunter really featured, though. We could have very easily ended up with Dengar or Bossk as our cult figure

STT LCU

Quick grid-movement Q: In D&D 5e, can I move diagonally through two enemies?
from
_X
XP

to

PX
X_

NautArch

@STTLCU Playing on a square grid or hex?

STT LCU

Square

Pierre Cathé

4:17 PM

I'd say yes, but I'm pretty lax in terms of movement with my players

G. Moylan

I think technically you can, yes, since you can move directly diagonal instead of proxying it with orthogonal movement. It's the same 5 feet as moving forward one square, and it's still considered "adjacent"

it just seems weird to think about spacially, but we have to remember that D&D grid combat is non-euclidian when using the Diagonals rules

Yuuki

If your murderhobo makes sure to kill the children before their parents, do they technically earn less Evil Points for not killing orphans?

G. Moylan

@Yuuki yes, but it's cancelled out by making the parents suffer the loss of a child

STT LCU

@G.Moylan Well thefact that human-sized critters aren't physically 5ft wide helps understanding a little :D

Pierre Cathé

Is it more cruel to kill the parents in front of their children or the children in front of their parents ?

NautArch

4:19 PM

@STTLCU I think it's okay - but do you play with the optional:diagonals rules?

G. Moylan

@NautArch this is ultimately the rub. if you don't use the rule it doesn't matter :P @STTLCU

STT LCU

@NautArch you mean the 5-10-5-10 cost of movement through diagonal squares?

Yuuki

In related Star Wars news, Fallen Order is pretty fun so far for a hack-and-slash RPG.

NautArch

@STTLCU yes

G. Moylan

@STTLCU no the "diagonals are the same as moving in 'straight' lines" rule

wait, what?

they're both optional, I suppose I made an assumption about which one we were addressing

my bad

STT LCU

4:22 PM

yeah I guess there's an optional and an optional-option :D

NautArch

dndbeyond.com/sources/dmg/running-the-game#UsingMiniatures

G. Moylan

@Yuuki I've heard that but also heard it's quite short and doesn't have much replay value

Xirema

So 5e doesn't write its movement rules in terms of grid space, so it's an optional rule on top of an optional set of rules.

In the strictest terms possible, 5e is written in terms of euclidian space.

Yuuki

@G.Moylan Replay value has dropped a lot as a point of value for me. I'm no longer a teenager with significantly more free time and significantly less money.

G. Moylan

@Yuuki yeah, I think I'll have to wait for a sale.

Yuuki

4:24 PM

Untitled Goose Game was $15 USD for about four hours of entertainment and I considered it fully worthwhile.

G. Moylan

@G.Moylan oh wait, you're saying the opposite

Xirema

But with weirdness, like creatures occupying 5 foot cubes (5'x5'x5'). How are those cubes oriented in space? .................. 15% off your next purchase.

Pierre Cathé

@Yuuki Depends on the quality of the entertainment

Good fun is worth every penny

Yuuki

UGG had me cackling like a devious witch every five minutes, so there's that.

Rubiksmoose

@Yuuki Yussss. Highly worth it.

G. Moylan

4:26 PM

I still have not played the Goose game but from what I've seen it looks fun

Yuuki

Its popularity is honestly a pretty good example of how the gaming demographic has changed. It's $15 for an afternoon of fun, very little replay value but it's a novel experience.

Speaking generally, the gaming population has aged up and there's less value on replayability because people are increasingly full-time workers and don't have enough time to replay games anyway, so they're looking for novel and fun experiences instead.

NautArch

howdy @Curl!

Thanks for hopping in about your question

G. Moylan

@Yuuki true. I do enjoy being able to fire up an old game and play something "new" though without having to shell out for something actually new

NautArch

How has your DM discussed use of alignment with y'all @Curl?

Yuuki

I honestly don't expect to finish Fallen Order because MH: Iceborne drops in January and I doubt I have enough time during the holidays to make much progress.

Pierre Cathé

4:30 PM

@G.Moylan Same, but that's just me being greedy

Curl

Well it's our first game so he just sort of told us to take a glance at the PHB and choose. I've watched a few DnD youtube videos before so had a decent idea, and went with Chaotic Neutral @NautArch

G. Moylan

@PierreCathé I mean, is it not greedy of game publishers to expect us to shell out $20-$60 for a "new" experience that is all used up after we've done it once?

Curl

since I just wanted to explore the world and didn't want to be bound by complete good nor complete evil

hence also the chaotic alignment

G. Moylan

@G.Moylan and then limit that experience to 20 hours of content?

Curl

that's why I was taken aback when our DM said if you didn't exhaust all options before killing someone, a.k.a without having your hand actively forced, it would be an objectively evil action

G. Moylan

4:33 PM

@Curl good and evil are constructs. Perspective is key

Curl

In my defense the ruffian (DnD 5e) has terrorized the town and was the active aggressor

NautArch

@Curl I mean, did they talk to you about how alignment would be used in their game? It's a really really tricky thing to account for because of it's wide interpretations.

Mechanically, what is the DM saying will happen as a result of your actions?

Curl

Well we have a paladdin in our party, and he has said there might be some conflict if we are evil aligned

paladdin's an NPC btw

NautArch

@Curl WHat's the alignment of the paladin? What oath? Paladins are no longer lawful stupid in 5e :)

Pierre Cathé

@G.Moylan It is, and great games ten years ago are often still great games

Curl

4:35 PM

Didn't really find out haha, from his actions (shielding others from trouble) he's definitely good, but no scenario has come up showing whether he's neutral or lawful etc

NautArch

@Curl Well, shielding others from trouble may be in their best interest. It's why alignment is really a personal thing.

Curl

and honestly our DM saying that killing is evil is kind of the first time he brought it up in game

Pierre Cathé

@G.Moylan My childhood was mostly Tropico II and Caesar III, and when I fired them up last month I found they were still really good

NautArch

I'd definitely ask for a chance to discuss alignment and how it's going to be used in your world @Curl. For the most part, I think it's better to play the character you want, but realize that your actions may have an external response. That response is up to the DM. But if it seems you're killing innocents, etc., then the world will respond accordingly.

But that's only if they hear about it :P

G. Moylan

I just don't see how the "demand" is now for shorter one-and-done games at the same price. It seems like a marketing trick. I would think replayability would be key in an age where financial concerns are growing and people moreso consider their value-per-dollar. Look at things like crappy restaurants shutting down. Not good value for the money.

Curl

4:37 PM

I see

Pierre Cathé

@Curl How do you think the GM would react if you told him that you're "Trying to rid the world of evil, in your own way" ?

NautArch

Otherwise, trying to force 'alignment' as a mechanic when there really isn't one can just make people upset.

Curl

@PierreCathé Good question, I didn't really think about it that way

NautArch

Vengeance Paladins are a thing now.

Pierre Cathé

I mean that guy was a bad guy, wasn't he ?

G. Moylan

4:38 PM

@Curl I always try to think of alignment as a descriptor for what your character believes, rather than a roadmap for how your character should behave

Curl

I lied about letting a defeated bound ruffian go to get some intel, and killed him because I was afraid that he might be freed by friends or himself to become a threat again

NautArch

@G.Moylan @Curl and as a compass to help guide how you'd respond to certain situations.

Curl

We weren't leaving the dungeon anytime soon, so I wanted the least amount of enemies possible

G. Moylan

@G.Moylan and again, good and evil are prespective-based. a villain is likely to view themselves as a hero, after all

NautArch

^^ @Curl

Curl

4:39 PM

The GM has said something about formulating an ideal to follow

What would be a good type of compass?

@NautArch @G.Moylan

G. Moylan

@Curl your bonds and ideals

NautArch

@Curl Hard decisions are hard. I mean, if the DM wanted there to be an in-world effect, he could give a backstory to that person (but should ahve come up during interrogation) to make the decision harder. Maybe they were the son of the local town leader. And now you've got a problem back in town.

@Curl what's your background?

G. Moylan

@G.Moylan look to your backstory. is there a person or faction that is close to this character? what do they believe?

MikeQ

@Curl Killing NPCs and lying about it is usually an indicator that a player doesn't mind having a non-good character

G. Moylan

@MikeQ non-good by what measure? the character may view themselves as good

Curl

4:41 PM

Elf Rogue that got tired of his neck of the woods that went out adventuring for fun (kinda generic I know, first dnd game so didn't really have many ideas)

NautArch

@MikeQ But also depends on the reasons for doing so.

@Curl I mean, what actual background did you pick for your character? Not your backstory, but the Background mechanic?

Xirema

@Curl So as DM, I don't think I'd force an alignment change from CN→CE just on the basis of that situation, but killing a subdued opponent definitely goes beyond what I'd parse as "Neutral" behavior.

Curl

Sorry I'm a little inexperienced, what would be a back ground mechanic? @NautArch

NautArch

@Curl dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/…

G. Moylan

Hermit, Soldier, Sailor, Spy, etc.

missed opportunity for Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

NautArch

4:42 PM

@Curl As part of character creation, you should have picked a background along with your race and class.

Yuuki

@G.Moylan Was about to point that out.

Curl

@NautArch hmmm... we seemed to have skipped over that in character creation. I don't remember him walking us through this portion

Xirema

Like, to give context, our LE Artificer regularly uses her party members (and NPCs...) as guinea pigs for her alchemical experiments. No one has died (or even suffered major negative consequences) as a consequence of that, but there's basically no question that she belongs in some flavor of Evil on the alignment chart.

G. Moylan

@Curl it seems to often be left "up to the player" to figure out, but it is important mechanically, as it can grant you bonus proficiencies

Xirema

Our Fighter still has a third eye on his forehead because of it.

NautArch

4:45 PM

@Curl It's a pretty important bit! Gives you proficiencies, languages and some help in coming up with the softer side of characters.

WIthout it, you're literally missing skill proficiencies and languages possibly.

G. Moylan

@Xirema when they open it, does the world end?

Pierre Cathé

@Xirema Sounds like Krieger from Archer

G. Moylan

@G.Moylan or do they transcend reality in some way?

@PierreCathé aww, Pigly....

Curl

I see, I guess he didn't want to bother with it because we have limited time each session and our Warlock and druid both took like 4 hours to pick out 1st levels spells haha

Will ask about it next session

G. Moylan

it's possible it was just forgotten.

In older editions they weren't always important

MikeQ

4:47 PM

@G.Moylan Not what I meant. If a PC actively lies to the other PCs, then that usually tells me (as a player or DM) that the player doesn't mind playing an untrustworthy character whose motives/morals don't align with the other PCs

Curl

So I use that background to craft a motivation, and roleplay through that?

NautArch

@Curl I'd definitely talk with the group. Picking spells shouldn't be an in-session thing.

MikeQ

@Curl Or the other way around. Choose whatever motivations you want, then pick a background that kinda fits.

G. Moylan

@MikeQ ah I see. That's the trick, though, isn't it? All the gray-area of my evil vs your evil

NautArch

@Curl Kinda/sorta. THere are tables under each background option that you can pick or roll from. Or use to guide you in writing your own. But it's those traits/ideals/bonds/flaws that guide your roleplay.

Curl

4:48 PM

@NautArch it was our first session together and he needed to walk us through all the nitty gritty stuff because none of us ever played nor had time to dedicate to this outside of session

NautArch

Or do as @MikeQ said and go the other way. But for those just starting, it's often easier to pick the background that works and then create your traits.

Curl

@NautArch understood

G. Moylan

@G.Moylan it's why I wish Alignment wasn't so mechanically integrated into the rules, since it's all wishy-washy gray stuff anyway

MikeQ

@G.Moylan My point here is more about trust, and not so much about philosophical questions of morally gray vs evil

Xirema

@G.Moylan Nah, he just gets Advantage on checks using Perception until it goes away. (And Disadvantage on Charisma checks, but he's been in a dungeon the whole time since he got it, so it hasn't come up yet...)

NautArch

4:50 PM

@Curl I would deifnitely suggest you and the DM read about having a true session zero and the DM should also read how to DM a session zero

Curl

I kind of just inserted my IRL morals into my character because I just wanted to explore the DnD world and do as I please

MikeQ

@Curl That can be a valid approach. Still, the DM and other players (probably) can't read your mind, so you may want to discuss these things openly with them out-of-game, and make sure their expectations and your expectations are compatible.

G. Moylan

@MikeQ right but my point is simply that the game mechanics are a bad simulation for that since whether I trust someone doesn't necessarily correlate with whether we're "good" or "evil"

NautArch

@Curl You can absolutely do that, but giving some clearer direction can help, too. But also realize that the DM can and should have the world react to your decision and choices. Want to kill off the peasant at the inn? yeah, go for it. But recognize that the world will react to that.

Curl

like my rogue doesn't steal, but in fact actively says he's willing to take the lesser share of the loot when the coins can't be divided equally (14 divided by 5, I took 2 coins instead of 3 that everyone else got)

NautArch

4:52 PM

@Curl Rogue as thief is definitely a confusing thing. Don't think of them in such black and white terms. It's more that you have a certain set of skills. How you apply them and who you are are separate from those skills.

Curl

but if I see someone harming me, I'm definitely going to try to remove them as a threat, no matter how small

@G.Moylan yea I also feel like alignment is way too wishy washy

MikeQ

Alignment is a terrible game mechanic

I was going to cite one of the many many chat quotes about how bad alignment is, but there are too many to choose from.

G. Moylan

as the Taking20 YouTube channel says, "Alignment is #fakenews"

Curl

The crux of our disagreement this specific instance was essentially I believe killing to prevent them coming back as a threat is neutral, whilst my DM said thats evil since he's already tied up

But there has proven to be more enemies around the area

G. Moylan

Matthew Colville also has several terrific videos of how Alignment is a crap mechanic and should be judged in the moment. Also on how we can subvert our traditional interpretations of "Order" vs "Chaos"

MikeQ

4:55 PM

Right, so if moral choices are going to be significant in this game, and the DM has a rigid view of alignment and morality, then you should talk with the DM (out of game) to make sure you understand their in-game moral system

2

Curl

so i felt that even though he's tied up now, there's a high chance he comes back if we leave him

Gwideon

hmm

Curl

Is it completely up to the DM though? Because I definitely don't want to be labeled as Chaotic evil just because of these kinds of situations

then the next time i do something good he's like no, thats not evil, you can't do that

MikeQ

@Curl Yes and no. The DM is the final arbiter in these sort of decisions. However, by discussing it with the DM, so that you understand each other, you can account for each others' views, and these decisions will be less arbitrary.

NautArch

@MikeQ @Curl This. So much this.

@Curl Unfortunately, it is 100% up to the DM how they're going to determine actions.

Curl

4:57 PM

@MikeQ it just feels like a complete one way street, I discuss it with him and he's just like no you're wrong

Medix2

If alignment is a meaningful part a campaign, the GM needs to define how it works and what it means because no two people agree on how alignments should be used, nor what they mean.

NautArch

@Curl That's why a session zero is important. It gives everyone a chance to talk about it and figure out how and IF it's going to be used in the game.

MikeQ

@Curl Then say that you don't understand their in-game moral system, and need an explanation on what the DM expects

NautArch

I'd also be very wary of 'traps'. The DM could force you into making a decision based on your 'alignment', and the punish you for having done so later.

Curl

@NautArch Sadly we're kinda past that point, already started the adventure for a good while

MikeQ

4:59 PM

If you're still part of the game, then it's not too late.

Curl

yea I just feel like I'm getting pushed towards an alignment for a few actions

NautArch

@Curl AH, that's where you're wrong! It's never too late for a session zero!

It's a good idea whenever there appears to be a disconnect between folks at the table. Making sure everyone is playing the same game and having fun is the goal. So asking for one to make sure that's happening is a good thing.

Curl

@MikeQ well his explanation was just I need to exhaust all options before killing, and I said well, there really aren't any options that don't involve a high chance of harming my self, that's why I killed him. And he just said well then you're killing out of convenience so that's evil

But I thought killing to maximize my chances of survival was the definition of neutral

NautArch

@Curl Okay, so it's evil. So what?

Himitsu_no_Yami

@NautArch I feel like the term "session zero" is misleading in that regard. Maybe they should be called session X.5 (X being previous session number)

Curl

5:01 PM

Now he springs a paladdin saying there might be conflict if we turn evil

NautArch

@Curl I don't want to make assumptions about the DM, but it seems like they have a vision for how the campaign is going to go and how the characters will act in it.

MikeQ

Ok... then maybe ask the DM and other players about seeking ways to un-evil yourselves. And in future situations, discuss these choices with the other PCs beforehand. Group decisions can be much safer.

Curl

@NautArch I mean no actual game mechanics have come in, but I'm just afraid down the road he's gonna force me to take actions I don't want to because of my alignment

NautArch

Understanding that is the priority. Especially when they just introduced a potential stick in the game to keep you doing what they want to do.

G. Moylan

@NautArch @Curl I'd also like to point out that "session zero" isn't always a one-time thing. Whenever there's a disconnect, it's wise to take some time to regroup

Curl

5:03 PM

or spring those traps you mentioned

And tbh, I'm not that into the roleplaying to begin with, I'm just self inserting to adventure and screw around

I won't go full asshole and steal and kill for fun, but if someone's giving me a reason to kill them I won't hesitate

MikeQ

Regardless, there's clearly some disconnect between your and your DM's understandings and expectations. And that can only be resolved by talking it over with them, and making sure you're on the same page. Otherwise you risk playing by rules you don't understand.

Curl

DM's also kinda secretive about the direction of the campaign

he gets almost a hostile tone if we start making meta guesses as to where the campgain might be headed

@NautArch

Hot RPG Questions

9

Q: For the Ring of Shooting Stars, what is the spell save DC of Faerie Fire?

The Ring of Shooting Stars has the following feature: Faerie Fire. You can expend 1 charge as an action to cast faerie fire from the ring. Since it does not specifically state that you use your spell save DC or list a spell save DC (unlike its Ball Lightning or Shooting Stars features), wha...

Curl

@MikeQ does that mean we all have to be on the DMs page exclusively? Because the DM doesn't seem like he's willing to budge at all even though a few of us players all disagree with him

I mean I understand that he's the DM

MikeQ

It means that the DM and players should be on the same page.

Curl

5:07 PM

but it feels like he's forcing rules on us that don't make sense to us

NautArch

@Curl please watch the language here! We try and keep a Be Nice policy that includes avoiding expletives.

Curl

that's why i wanted to ask if my thinking was justified, as I could be completely wrong here

NautArch

@Curl sheesh. that's no fun. I want my players to talk and make guesses. That means they're actually into it.

MikeQ

@Curl Then ask the DM to explain their rules and expectations

NautArch

@Curl Well, kinda yes. They can play the hard line, but players can also walk away.

Be the overbearing DM all they want to an empty table.

MikeQ

5:09 PM

Also, the wrong way to go about this is to scrounge around for non-players (such as internet strangers) who agree with your opinions, and then try to leverage that against the DM's decisions. That's not how discussions work.

Rubiksmoose

@NautArch Plus, I get to steal all the ideas they had that were better than what I had planned. :3

NautArch

@Rubiksmoose What?! I've never done that! Nossir, not me.

Gwideon

anyone seen the early 2000s xmen cartoons

NautArch

@Gwideon yup, but not since the early 2000s :P

Rubiksmoose

@NautArch hehehe. Of course not... me neither.

MikeQ

5:12 PM

@Curl To clarify, getting the DM and players on the same page usually means that both the players and the DM need to make some adjustments and concessions, in order to account for what the others want out of the game.

Gwideon

those are actually pretty decent. xmen evolution was kinda a part of my childhood. I know there's a lot of nostalgia for the 90s show but um yeah

Curl

@MikeQ I mean he's explained his line of thinking, but I disagreed and refuted his argument, and since there isn't a hard set rule for alignment we're just in deadlock

Anaphory

@NautArch You say that, but that is only the very extreme case. Even before that, it doesn't have to be like all or nothing. I may well turn out like that in practice in @Curl's case, but it doesn't have to be.

MikeQ

Don't we have some existing questions here on what to do when the participants disagree over alignment?

Anaphory

Probably millions. Alignment is fraught with wibbly wobbly ruley unruley disagreement.

But that line of thinking just goes back to what you just said two messages ago ;)

Curl

5:15 PM

@MikeQ this is what I found "Alignment is a tool to help you think about your character's personality and to help explain it to others. If it isn't helping your character, then ignore it.

If your DM is trying to be a jerk about it, and trying to punish you (like having paladins detect alignment and then attack you for not being evil,) then just change your alignment to chaotic / neutral and say, "I do what I want." :)"

NautArch

@Curl Well, it's not really a deadlock. You've got to go with their answer. Period.

@Curl But what really needs to happen is that discussion of their expectations of alignment and a clear understanding of how they'll adjudicate it.

MikeQ

@Curl That's not great advice, because it still puts the player in an adversarial position against the DM. And that's usually a bad approach.

NautArch

If there are things you don't agree with, then you'll need to talk about it. If both parties are unwilling to budge, then you'll have a hard decision to make.

Curl

@NautArch so the DM is the final arbitar, and if he refuses to budge there is no recourse other than leave the game?

@MikeQ yea that's what i thought too

MikeQ

@Curl There are always other options. You could try changing your own playstyle to meet the DM's expectations. Although that may be just as futile if you don't know what those expectations are.

Curl

5:18 PM

I feel like he isn't straight up being the jerk but he's forcing unreal alignments based on his personal views

NautArch

@Curl Yes, once the DM has made a call, that's generally the call (especially if a discussion is no longer available.) But you can choose to adjust to the table as they run it or walk away.

Or adjust to it and complain about it to strangers (often what i've done)

Curl

I guess that's the problem, I'm not a big roleplay guy myself and just don't want to be bound towards any set of character actions (must act good, must act evil) but the DM is definitely pushing me in that direction

MikeQ

Let's take a step back. Is the issue that you understand and disagree with the DM's expectations, or that the expectations don't make sense?

Curl

@MikeQ the first i want to say? From what I understand, DM expects that if I keep killing bound enemies I'll turn evil, when i disagree saying those aren't evil actions

@NautArch yea guess that's another reason why im here

haha

MikeQ

And there's the mismatch of expectations. You want to play a game where your character can kill without consequence. The DM wants the players to play by a rigid morality system. So you two aren't playing the same game.

NautArch

5:22 PM

@Curl You can always opt not to interrogate. Just kill the enemies and move on. Interrogation is questionnable anyway, especially if there's nothing you can do with the prisoner after that makes sense.

@MikeQ @Curl Although I generally deviate from alignment here. Yeah, killing innocents is going to make me as a DM think you're evil (although unclear what i'd actually do about that.) What I always do as have the world react to the decisions PCs make.

Curl

@MikeQ I feel like I can try to go along with the morality system because I believe my actions do make sense for my alignment

NautArch

@Rubiksmoose help pile occurring on this question. May want to jump in and move to chat or something.

@Curl You can always just continue to play you. Let the DM determine what happens and see if you enjoy the ride. You might!

Curl

@NautArch my thinking was, that ruffian was not innocent, so he's definitely fair game

@NautArch yea that's fair

just frustrated

sigh

NautArch

@Curl Sure, but there may be data you don't know. Maybe that ruffian was doing X because of Y. And you don't know Y. But having killed him, not knowing Y will then cause Z to happen.

Actions generally have repercussions. It may be unclear as to what they are or when they'll happen.

Curl

@NautArch oh no he just said killing the ruffian regardless of his story is evil

Someone_Evil

5:26 PM

Nov 3 at 14:10, by Someone_Evil

BTW, you can use the arrow on the right of a message (when hovering) to reply to a message. Makes mixed conversations easier to follow

MikeQ

Just disagreeing with the DM's opinion is not a discussion.

Curl

The ruffian said he was terrorizing the town for fun (during interrogation) so we knew that he didn't have a noble cause

NautArch

@Curl So in his world, that's an evil act. You can talk with him about what that means. You can decide to commit that act in the future (or not). And he can decide what happens when you do or don't do it.

Curl

I see

MikeQ

A discussion would be more like this: You tell the DM that you just want to have fun with the game, and not worry too much about moral philosophy. But you also don't want to be punished as an evil character. Then ask what you (and the DM) can do to resolve this, so that the game is fun for both of you.

Curl

5:29 PM

@MikeQ yea that sounds like solid advice, will bring it up next session

@NautArch I guess another big problem is that I don't like playing a game where someone can arbitrarily impose rules on their own whim, that's why the lack of definitions in the alignment is frustrating me

NautArch

@Curl Do you, as a player, expect consequences for actions? Or do you really want this to be more video-game like where you can do whatever you want with no repercussions?

Curl

I definitely believe I shouldn't get away with murdering townsfolk, but I feel like it makes more sense in game to not get punished for killing enemies

MikeQ

Then that's another point for discussion: You don't understand the DM's alignment framework. And only the DM can explain it to you.

NautArch

@MikeQ I think that's a better discussion then asking if they can do whatever they want :)

MikeQ

It can also help to involve other players in these discussions. Not to turn them against the DM, but rather to get their feedback and advice.

Curl

5:34 PM

I think you bring up another good point, the DM isn't looking for feedback and advice

a lot of things we say or do are often rebuffed by the DM, but all of us just roll with it since its been pretty minor stuff

like before we were fighting in a limited space he said I couldn't attack because there my allies were between me and the enemy, but today's session he suddenly well you know you can move through ally's space to attack right

MikeQ

Yep, this is basically the same problem: You and the DM are trying to play by different rules, and the DM assumes that you understand the game as they do.

Curl

and I brought the situation beforehand and just brushed it off saying well you guys were near a cliff so moving around like that might make you trip and fall

but this time you're in a closed room so you can safely move through allied space

just these inconsistent and sudden changes in rules

NautArch

@Curl DM may be making on the fly decisions and then correcting them later. But discussing it is a good idea there. We all make mistakes :)

You can attack if there's a creature between you and the enemy,the enemy just has cover and an AC bonus for it.

You can also go thorugh enemy spaces (depending on sizes) as difficult terrain.

@Curl Do you own the PHB?

KorvinStarmast

@Curl In my experience, when the DM is claiming that a single act changes a character's alignment they do not understand D&D 5e alignment basis, and for those from previous editions this can be a little confusing. There is some hard coded alignment stuff that people got used to ...

Curl

@NautArch yeah, but those first few sessions we mostly relied on him for guidance on rules

KorvinStarmast

5:41 PM

... but using a single act as "step function alignment change" robs role play and consequences based RP of that critical factor ... time and reflection.

MikeQ

@KorvinStarmast Alignment is pretty subjective, and those sort of alignment shifts aren't unheard of

Maybe it makes sense within this particular campaign, maybe it doesn't. We don't know.

KorvinStarmast

@MikeQ it depends. And for sure, alignment is descriptive and not perscriptive.

Curl

now that I've gotten to know the game better and know what to look for in PHB I've started getting a better idea, but a lot of times he also sort of bends rules in PHB on a whim which leaves me frustrated

NautArch

@KorvinStarmast I don't think the DM is changing alignment, i think the DM was confused as to why a character of one alignment would do something that they think is only something a different alignment would do.

KorvinStarmast

@Curl But, in the DM's world, they have the final say on stuff like that.

NautArch

5:42 PM

@Curl Which is another thing to talk about! THere's a lot about 5e that is loose and requires DM adjudication. But if they rule in one direction about something, that should become a true 'rule' that is always applied in every following situation.

KorvinStarmast

@NautArch Then that's even less satisfying as a perspective, in terms of not understanding what alignment is ..

@Curl Here is how we did it for a long time in a previous edition. YOu can start as any alignment, and if you mostly conformed to that as you played, your "marker" didn't move. But if your actions were time and again in coflict with that, the marker would move and, with enough movements ... the alignment would be changed to reflect how the PC was conducting themselves.

NautArch

@KorvinStarmast Absolutely.

Curl

@NautArch Fair enough. I guess I just don't like a human player being able to define rules on the fly instead of an official rule made by a unbiased third party that we all understand

KorvinStarmast

I think 5e is trying to get toward that, somewhat, in terms of alignment being descriptive rather than persecriptive for a PC

@Curl This edition will not give you that for alignment questions for PCs.

MikeQ

@Curl The written rules can fail in many instances, in which case the DM should adjudicate. Although ideally the DM should explain their decision when that happens, so that they don't confuse the players with seemingly inconsistent rulings.

NautArch

5:46 PM

@Curl 5e leaves a LOT up to the DM. There are lots of clear rules, but there is also a lot of grey area.

KorvinStarmast

@Curl Your problem in the question is the NPC paladin ....

MikeQ

@KorvinStarmast That seems to be a symptom rather than the underlying problem

KorvinStarmast

And their reaction to your character. IMO, your character did what a CN would do with that context. B ut I am not your DM.

@Curl ... and how your DM is interacting with your character via that NPC. (@MikeQ there I completed the thought)

MikeQ

@Curl I forgot to mention, while the DM has the final say, there's a flip side: The DM is responsible for communicating their expectations. How the setting works, how the rules work, what the characters see, and so on. If the expectations aren't clear, then that falls on the DM.

NautArch

@MikeQ something something great responsibility

MikeQ

5:51 PM

@NautArch something something invisible dragons

Curl

Yea the DM has the right to decide on his expectations. I guess I'm just frustrated that I disagree with those expectations and have no power to change the situation other than not play

KorvinStarmast

@Curl with a wry grin I suggest that you point out to your DM that killing is a commonplace in D&D; without it the game can't exist.

MikeQ

You can change the situation, through discussion, which is more than saying "I disagree"

NautArch

@Curl Your power is to discuss the situation and how you feel.

MikeQ

It's also possible the DM may not want to have drawn-out debates during the game proper, but they may be more flexible and receptive if you bring it up out-of-game

Curl

5:54 PM

I just don't know how else to discuss with him because he is unwilling to budge

MikeQ

Outside of the game, are you friends with the DM and other players?

Curl

Yea we're roomates

we talked about it after session too

NautArch

@Curl i'd bring up it as confusion on your part. You don't understand the mechanics of alignment and how they are having them work in their game.

Curl

out of game

MikeQ

Good. Then you can have a discussion. You're their friend and player, so they probably want the game to be fun for you.

Gwideon

5:56 PM

This is why I don't really assign mechanics to alignment. It confuses people.

KorvinStarmast

@Curl If the DM says "you can't do that" you counter with "yes, I do that. Now what are the consequences of me doing that (or of me trying to do that)."

NautArch

@Gwideon Yeah, for me it's more about how do the other players react? WHat decisions do they make? Does word of the action get around? If so, how would the world react?

KorvinStarmast

@Curl Then tell the paladin "you are in charge of the prisoners, if it bothers you so much."

MikeQ

@KorvinStarmast In this case it sounds like the DM wants the players to approach things in a specific way. So if the DM says they can't do something, it would be more productive to ask why, rather than try to fight the DM.

KorvinStarmast

@MikeQ That's another way to peel the onion, yes.

Curl

5:58 PM

@KorvinStarmast my gripe with the situation is similar to something like this "Tasting cannot kill me right? I taste what's in the vial to see if it's poison" "you lose all hitpoints and fall unconcious" "but you said tasting can't kill me" "it's a VERY strong poison so it does"

KorvinStarmast

@Curl Did that happen already?

Did you then have to roll death saving throws?

Curl

oh nono that's a hyperbole, as in I feel like he's adjucating unfairly

MikeQ

@Curl That's a situation where both the player and DM fail to communicate. The player doesn't know that it's a poison, or that tasting it could kill them. The DM doesn't know that the player doesn't know this.

Curl

when something makes sense but he suddenly springs new mechanics to counteract it

NautArch

@Curl Do you have an actual in-game example besides the alignment thing? I think going down theoretical pathways isn't helpful.

Curl

6:05 PM

nothing off the top of my head other than that cliff ally space example

oh wait

there was another time when another group of ruffians were able to suddenly move over 35 ft to reach me and gang up on me (I was 40ft away), but I'm not sure if that was one of their abilities or he just fudged game rules to takeout the group dmg dealer

NautArch

THe cliff-ally-space question was a good one. THey may have been unclear about using creatures as cover. Or the rules on passing through creature spaces. A ruling was made, but then after the session, you could review the actual rules and discuss how it'd work in the future.

@Curl Did they move and attack? Or just move and surround you?

Curl

move and attack

NautArch

That sounds like some fudging occurred. Now, it's important to note that monsters can be adjusted (and often are.) But there's also the concern of doing so to make things 'unfair' and more importantly, 'unfun'.

Curl

Well the cliff space situation was, I asked if I can attack and he said there wasn't room to fit me through, so I "learned" from then on that if I cannot reach opponents without going through allies, its impossible to do so. The thing is today he then suddenly brought it up and when I brought up the previous instance of the same situation it felt like he was inventing rules to circumvent his previous rulings

NautArch

@Curl Well, were you using a reach weapon?

Or do you have reach? If not, then you can't attack through an ally.

Curl

6:11 PM

rapier both times

he is new to GMing so he mightve made a mistake?

I feel like at this point im just ranting and should probably

stop

NautArch

@Curl And was the creature medium? And what race are you?

Curl

sorry guys, again, just frustrated

wood elf

ally was a dragonborn, enemy bugbear

NautArch

it's okay to rant! And i think i'm about to clear something up rules-wise for you :)

Curl

was behind dragonborn 5ft, dragon born is meleeing enemy bugbear

NautArch

Okay, so with the rapier, you can't reach the enemy (they're out of your reach). In addition, you can't move through the enemy's square because you're not two sizes larger or smaller than it (or have other racial traits.)

20

Q: Is there a penalty for attacking THROUGH an ally's position while in Melee?

You can move through an ally's position (as difficult terrain), but can you attack through it at no cost? If you have 10' reach, but there is an ally between you and the target, does the target get the +2 cover or is that ignored as friendly ally who could move away?

dnd-5e reach cover

Curl

6:14 PM

I can't move into my ally dragonborn's space, attack, bonus disengage and return to my starting position?

NautArch

5

Q: Move into nonhostile space attack and move

Moving Around Other creatures You can move through a nonhostile creature's space [but] you can't willingly end your move in its space. Is that "end your move" at the end of your turn or if you stop to attack? I had a player who wanted to move into another friendly character's space, att...

dnd-5e combat movement

Curl

as in share the 5ft space with the dragonborn instead of fully through the dragonborn

ah i see

MikeQ

Some creatures can share a space (after moving) with other creatures, but that's a specific exception rather than the general rule

Curl

understood, thanks for the help!

gtg now, thanks again for listening guys!

G. Moylan

My question was just marked as dupe again: rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/149201/… at what point can I just get it locked?

It was flagged as dupe of a question that I specify in the question body I am not duplicating

KorvinStarmast

6:22 PM

@G.Moylan are the answers so far useful?

G. Moylan

@KorvinStarmast the answers to both were useful but when I originally asked the question I hadn't realized that I would have to copy the spells into my own book to use them. I was operating on the assumption that I could use the found book as-is. the "duped" question doesn't make this assumption and instead addresses the actual rule

KorvinStarmast

@G.Moylan so is it a dupe now, or isn't it?

NautArch

@Curl No worries! And do note that in this case, you really felt that the DM was doing something wrong, when in fact they weren't. Just shows how careful we need to be about accusations and to frame questions around having fun and wanting to make sure everyone is on the same page rather than doing so with any sort of aggression.

KorvinStarmast

@NautArch If I may second this notion ... @Curl

G. Moylan

@KorvinStarmast the way it's phrased, it isn't. I'm asking what my options are for using the book, to which the answer is technically "you can't, you have to copy the spells." So it's a similar answer to a different question

I even specified in the body

BUT, it's been flagged as Dupe like 3 times in its existence, so I wonder if it's worth arguing about any more

KorvinStarmast

6:25 PM

@G.Moylan Ok, I unduped it and I hope I have not started "dupe hammer wars" now ...

G. Moylan

is there even a "downside" to a question being flagged as dupe?

NautArch

THis is a good question @G.Moylan. I'm honestly unsure. It seems like the general does apply here with some effort, but having that effort done is also helpful. I'm going to go start a war with @KorvinStarmast. BRB. :P

KorvinStarmast

@NautArch Iin that case, Nuke it from orbit, it's the only way to be sure!

NautArch

But seriously, this is actually making me reconsider the current discussion on this question. If someone has a specific enough case to override the general that should apply to it, does it deserve it's own?

In @G.Moylan's case, I think it does. There's enough specificity where it matters. In the linked above, I don't think so, because it's handled entirely by the Q&A.

MikeQ

@G.Moylan If you have more than 2147483647 (2^31-1) questions marked as duplicates, the site experiences an integer overflow and the servers explode

G. Moylan

6:33 PM

@MikeQ I'd better be careful, only 2147483646 give or take 1 to go!

G. Moylan

6:45 PM

@NautArch @KorvinStarmast if it's going to be flagged as dupe, I would think I'd be adupe of this: rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/50424/…

actually, wait, wrong link

This question: rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/111852/… but even this one was marked as dupe in a similar vein to mine. Both my question and this question are wondering if it's even possible to use the book without copying

yet, in both cases, the linked question we've "duplicated" is asking about actually copying the spells, rather than using them without copying in the first place

NautArch

@G.Moylan Oh! I think I may ahve misunderstood your question completely. Were you really just asking if a wizard's spellbook can be used like a series of spell scrolls?

G. Moylan

reusable, but yes. Can I cast the spells straight out of the book, but also, what are all my options for using the book in the first place. To which the answer is what you put: I have to copy it into my own hypothetical spellbook in order to use them

I guess the new meta question is whether the question I duplicated should be marked as a dupe of the question it is supposedly duplicating

again, the assumption here is different in the base question

NautArch

@G.Moylan honestly not sure. I think as it stands, it is a duplicate of the other one (but i like my answer better) so maybe go the other way?

I think a meta about this might be best.

Rubiksmoose

Not having a huge amount of time to look at this, I suspect some of this might overlap with things talked about in: rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8717/…

NautArch

@Rubiksmoose we should ask whomever asked that question! :P

Rubiksmoose

6:59 PM

There he goes! [points in opposite direction]

G. Moylan

no yeah my question and my dupe target are definitely the same. I'm asking now about my dupe target: should it be marked as a dupe of its supposed dupe target. My question ahd the same problem: we made the assumption/asked if we could use the book without copying, while the current "target" is asking an entirely different question that happens to have a similar answer

NautArch

get 'im boys!

KorvinStarmast

TJL convinced me to close it again, so I did. I used your new dupe target @G.Moylan

NautArch

@KorvinStarmast I'll go reopen it :P

Transcript for