Yeah, it's most commonly known in the phrase "balikbayan box," which is a big package Filipinos who live somewhere else send back to their families at home, filled with things that are cheaper or easier to get wherever the person lives.
user15026
(Sorry, I am using too many small ones words and not getting the whole idea and I know that, I am pulling on threads of brain memory)
My party came across an encounter against a creature that is supposed to be immune to non-magical damage. This isn't much of a problem for us, as we have magic weapons. But our rogue seems to be at a big disadvantage with their sneak attack damage.
If a player hits a creature that is immune to ...
The spell Simulacrum begins as follows:
You shape an illusory duplicate of one beast or humanoid that is within range for the entire Casting Time of the spell. The duplicate is a creature, partially real and formed from ice or snow, and it can take Actions and otherwise be affected as a norm...
@trogdor The whole concept of "create an innately subservient clone of myself to do things I don't want to" is deeply disturbing if you think about it.
Mind you, so is "create a clone of myself" - the rest is just creepyicing on the weirdcake.
@trogdor Why not? I've recently seen some interesting discussions related to which Eclipse Phase morphs can reproduce by traditional means and the social implications surrounding that (both in terms of preconditions and consequences). Presumably similarly interesting observations can be made in fantasy with relation to simulacra.
Though in EP's case, a lot more of social disagreements, interesting opportunities, pitfalls etc. circle around forking (copying of minds). E.g. the bioconservative Jovians who see resleeving as death-or-similar vs. the radically progressive autonomists who are fine with forking and merging a lot.
And then there's the topic of what happens in what jurisdictions when an alpha (i.e. identical in terms of quality) fork decides to start an independent life of its own.
Eclipse Phase is about how a fluid individual sense of identity changes societal identities, and it does this by providing body fluidity and societal mechanics and makes it fun by letting players attain great power at interesting costs. D&D is... not about that and does not do that and does not make that fun.
An example of a fantasy setting (or location in a setting) which touches upon similar topics would be Abydos with its complicated relationship with death.
Well, judging by the question's text, there's already exploration going on: 'what if you can use magic to allow birth of half-nobles for some hefty sum?'. It is an implied possibility coming out of the way simulacra work in the setting, and the asker seems to have spotted an interesting emergent property that can lead to interesting social reevaluations of concepts such as nobility.
I think I may still have a link for an article about how the brilliant idea to add the "Immortal" titles to LOTRO totally encouraged fair play, friendship and trust.
Which obviously aren't important at all when you plan to build an online game (sarcasm intended)
Yeah, I'm quite sure I've linked it in this chat before but my search skills are failing me.
Within the last year, I'd guess. It was about how for every system, there are some things it lets you do, some things it pushes you to do, and some things it gets in the way of you doing.
.... that article just made me remember a short D&D premade adventure set I once saw in an old magazine. It was pretty horrible, and perhaps it is better if I spare you the details on how they tried to make the game more inclusive.
@kviiri Well, since you asked... Please forgive me in advance if I will use some not-so-good wording, as I said before English is not my primary language so I always feel uneasy when writing about similar topics because I know I may not be using the most appropriate wording.
Anyway... in what I assume was an attempt to be more inclusive one of the prebuilt character in the premade adventure module was described as "gay". Then, since the adventure considered that a disadvantage the character was made overpowered far above the rest to compensate the penalty
And to give you an idea of HOW overpowered he was... If my memory serves well he was vital to the plot (chosen one, Mary Sue syndrome), had an indestructible necklace the made him basically immortal (if he died, the amulet would act like a soul jar and automatically resurrect him at a later time even if the body was disintegrated), free spells and so on.
So - basically the message was "since this character is a gay male, here are free bonuses to compensate your pain to have to play him"
Wow, that's... it sounds like somebody told the writer that one problem with portrayal of QUILTBAG+ characters in media is that they tend to die before the end of the story.
@BESW it happened at least 10 years ago - maybe more. I don't remember all the details, only some bits.
I think it was a module for 3rd edition D&D.
And I think I remember some lines that did actually say "since probably no one will want to play this character, we tried to make him more interesting by giving him special ability and plot relevance"
(There's also been another review with a similar issue recently.)
@Derpy Now this does look closer to the ideal intent of disadvantage points and compensations for added inconveniences, difficulties and complications of a PC's life, but I have to agree with you that the implementation seems radically miscalibrated to say the least.
@vicky_molokh Yep. But the real problem was that the disadvantage wasn't "look, you lost an hand in a fight, now you are a warrior that will never be able to use a shield"
Nope, the disadvantage was that the character was a QUILTBAG+ characters
@Derpy I don't know about the system you're talking about, but normally there is a disadvantage in being a member of a group that a bunch of recurring people have a prejudice against.
In systems such as GURPS or WoD, this is what you get points for. For the fact that just by playing a game, you're likely to get negative reaction, much like having a below-average charisma is disadvantageous in communicating with people.
I'm not really sure how you'd mitigate that. One idea I had was to require an explanatory comment after every X downvotes but there'd be nothing stopping someone from making the comment to get more downvotes then deleting it afterwards, so that wouldn't really solve anything.
The point is that the disadvantage wasn't intended as "you are the different one in the group. Every time your party will visit an inn, the town folks will attack you with pitchforks". They weren't trying to address in game disadvantage that could relate to the character you were playing.
@JohnClifford I don't think it will serve us good to force that kind of activity, because said comments would not be coming from a place of wanting to help. At least not help the new user.
@Derpy Could you please rephrase or elaborate? I'm not sure what mitigation is meant here, and I don't think the point of disadvantages giving points is about mitigation the way I understand the word.
@BESW Or, there is already a similar enough hybrid called a faun or a satyr that is human sized. Depends on what mythological traditions and stories one grew up with , I suspect.
Again, speaking based on the experience with the way social stigmas are implemented in systems I know, things like 'Criminal Record', 'Uplifted Animal', 'AI' and so on are all examples of such disadvantages, and surely it's unlikely that a fellow roleplayer party will mock someone for playing a criminal or AI.
@vicky_molokh that was the point. Like I said, I have only vague memories of the module (like I said, I found it in an old magazine that I bought at a comic con over 10 years ago, and that was only because I was interested in a Magic card price list that was included with it) but I remember a line that was like what I said before
again, I don't even know if I have the magazine still stored somewhere (I think it would be one of the first one to get the recycle treatment during any spring clean up...) but I still clearly remember reading the module plot and having a "what were they thinking when they wrote this" reaction.
@Derpy That's an odd statement which seems to be contrary to the usual logic of character likeability (basically, making a character overpowered makes it more disliked which makes it less likely to be played out of avoidance of being branded a munchkin).
@vicky_molokh I think they had a mindset like "Oh, no, my character is pink girlish guy while everyone else is a macho bearded dwarf - every other player will make fun of me!! Maybe if I could heal them during fights, never die, shoot lazers from my eyes and summon inns and beer on will they will like me more!"
@Sirv Is it? I had the impression it's the way things work even with complete non-roleplayers, e.g. in some fighting games and MOBAs, where some characters are hated only more for being too poverful or easy to play.
If you would take, e.g. the Warhammer 40k universe as an example for a setting. Any faction, can with some degree of certainty, be labelled as "evil" in some way
@LucasF. It depends on the system really, but taking D&D 5e as an example alignment is nothing more than an indicator of the kinds of actions you're generally disposed towards. It doesn't mandate that you follow through with it, just that you're naturally inclined towards actions that run alongside your alignment.
Take an orphanage that's on fire. A good character would likely try to find a water source to put the fire out. An evil character would find some wood to throw on it.
Well that's just it; alignment is very much about personal belief. Someone might consider themselves the goodest of the good but their actions, viewed externally, are horrific.
The good character might still try to save them because all life is precious. Which someone might view as an evil action because the saved aliens will then go on and eat faces.
Someone who lives by the tenet "the ends justify the means" might do some seriously awful things in the service of an otherwise good cause. To them, they're still a good character. Sirv does have a valid point though.
@Sirv That is true. By this logic, the orks that murder and pillage are "lawful good" as well, because in their eyes, what they do upholds the traditions of their race
Although in the case of characters who lean neutral->evil, they might know by their conscience that a given act is "evil" but go ahead and do it anyway because they don't care enough about the morality to not do it.
If you take an established character like Strahd von Zarovich as an example, Lucas, he absolutely knows that the things he does are evil. He just doesn't care.
@LucasF. 4e and later 5e downplay alignment quite heavily, to the point it's hardly ever mechanically relevant in 5e. But in earlier editions, there is a fair amount of "doing X is always evil" no matter the means to those ends. Eg. the use of poisons was in one sourcebook, for 3.5e IIRC, considered always an evil act.
I don't think it's possible to assign absolute alignment value to actions because depending on how they play out they might have good or bad consequences regardless. It's that old morality question: if you murder someone who would have gone on to, say, commit genocide and take significantly more lives than you did, did you do a good thing?
@LucasF. It is a more common view nowadays, but it totes was a rigid mechanic in earlier editions. You'd have spells and such that worked against a certain alignment or so on.
you'll probably find there's a general pushback here against using alignment to lead the character as opposed to alignment as descriptive of how the character is
the character should act the way they do because of who they are, and then you figure out which alignment category that fits them in afterwards
Two of the characters in my group started out with "chaotic neutral" on their sheets and the way they've been playing I have no reason to change that. XD
@kviiri there's some mechanics where it's relevant, and you might be okay with a world where good/evil/law/chaos are kind of abstract spiritual forces in that sense
@JohnClifford so what does a neutral character do? I object to that perspective, since I think that most good, evil and neutral characters would try to put the fire out.
@KorvinStarmast Basically whatever they want but without actively hurting anyone else if they can avoid it. They're out for themselves but they'll help others if they benefit from it.
Suppose I have one of a pair of sending stones, and I wish to locate the other stone of the pair. Is there any spell or other magic that will allow me to find the stone's mate? Assume I have never held or seen the stone's mate.
A limited range solution is potentially acceptable, but a longer ra...
The thing is, tabletop roleplaying in general (and D&D especially) are supposed to be environments where players can do anything. Or at least they can try to do anything. It's not like it's hyper-realistic, but it also isn't intended to be a limited sandbox. Real people are a complex mess of emotions, motivations, subtext, mindgames and manipulation. Why would a PC be any less complex? I don't think singular alignment allows for enough flexibility.
most people do not go out of their way to help each other, but they will do things like hold open doors and try not to run you over and that kind of thing
you can be an example of a perfectly kind and considerate and even arguably generous nice person that we'd probably call a good person in reality but that doesn't qualify you as good by my interpretation of the alignment system
@HotRPGQuestions Every stone is a sending stone. It's just that for the vast majority of stones, their pair is somewhere out there, very likely in another galaxy. Pairs with both ends on the same planet are rare.
If you want to break it down to an admittedly-simplistic representation: good characters ask "What can I do to help you?". Neutral characters ask "What do I feel like doing right now?" and evil characters ask "What can I do to help me?"
Personally I think that alignment only makes sense on cosmic scales - devils and angels and demons (whats the CG equivalent?). If you have to apply it to humanoids, it should be related to this - a Faustian pact aligns a warlock as LN, a devotion to a god might make you CG (or anything else). Neutrality is avoiding this cosmic battlefield, or pitting things against each other.
The original alignment system had law, chaos, and neutrality and was a variation on something that Arneson had run into in the Blackmoor games he was running ... as some of his characters began to betray each other / backstabbing and such, he arrived at the chaotic character concept. (If you read Svenson's account, the first raids were very much "if we don't work together we will fail ... and as it is, quite a few will perish in the end).
My party came across an encounter against a creature that is supposed to be immune to non-magical damage. This isn't much of a problem for us, as we have magic weapons. But our rogue seems to be at a big disadvantage with their sneak attack damage.
If a player hits a creature that is immune to ...
The spell Simulacrum begins as follows:
You shape an illusory duplicate of one beast or humanoid that is within range for the entire Casting Time of the spell. The duplicate is a creature, partially real and formed from ice or snow, and it can take Actions and otherwise be affected as a norm...
Suppose I have one of a pair of sending stones, and I wish to locate the other stone of the pair. Is there any spell or other magic that will allow me to find the stone's mate? Assume I have never held or seen the stone's mate.
A limited range solution is potentially acceptable, but a longer ra...
