« first day (3681 days earlier)      last day (32 days later) » 
00:00 - 20:0020:00 - 23:00

12:33 AM
@Adeptus i'd say "glad it's not just me" but that feels weird to say since i was suspecting that was just a fundamental break in the game lol....
Yeah, definitely a pattern in my experience as well.
12:49 AM
Hello hello
@Ben hello!
How’re you doing?
1:04 AM
can't seem to remember how to socially-distance
@doppelgreener I suspect it's a fundamental design flaw that gets covered up nicely by the group dynamics of Steve Jackson and his friends.
@MarkWells i'm very curious what kind of gameplay patterns could lead to avoiding this one
Not playing to win.
okay but i mean, what actions?
like, does it take making attacks on other players during the game?
Maybe. I'm picturing something like arbitrarily picking someone at the table to be your enemy, and just messing with them throughout the game.
1:13 AM
If you use your blocking cards as soon as you get them, instead of hoarding them, that changes the game dramatically.
our group follows this pattern:
1. level up without interference until a couple of people are reaching level 8.
2. the people at level 8 start getting some interference when it's opportune.
3. when someone enters combat at level 9, people throw them opposition because otherwise they'll lose, and that player responds with buffs because otherwise that palyer will lose. everyone piles on until everyone runs out of stuff. the player probably fails the combat.
4. the next player who enters combat at level 9 wins.
well "our group follows" more like "my past group did and also so did most other groups i sat down with"
Right, exactly. We got into that pattern too. But I think BESW has basically the right idea: you all need to blow your resources instead of hoarding them.
@BESW oh nice
And yeah, if you choose your targets based on the player at the table rather than their current position in the game, that's another way to significantly change how the game works (though I don't think it's necessarily better.)
note that the above loop i'm describing isn't "playing to win", it's "doing what seems to make sense in the scope of the game"
1:14 AM
@nitsua60 to post something I put in NAB a bit ago; chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/55968488#55968488
Yeah, the "hoard until someone's about to win" strategy is maximizing the effectiveness of your cards in the face of randomness.
also known as the “negative feelings/wear a mask” bouquet
It's kinda like how D&D's d20 swinginess changes how we value dice-based vs automatic effects.
@BESW also like, i don't see the purpose of interfering with someone's level 3->4 combat. there's no stakes in that which i'm worried about. and everyone else evaluates it the same way. and since we're not messing with them, they probably don't need to use more than one item. why would i spend my limited resources this way? i'd rather save it for whoever becomes an actual threat, which tends to be when someone's at level 8 or 9.
@doppelgreener And that's playing to win.
1:18 AM
@MarkWells no?
You gotta Steve Jackson it. You're interfering with their level 3 -> 4 combat because you don't like the color of their shirt or something.
it's playing the game under the terms the game laid out
It's playing to be effective. Which is not the same as winning: it's making sure your choices have weight.
(In case it's unclear, I'm not disparaging that behavior. It's perfectly normal and expected in many tabletop games.)
The game's designed so that using obstructive cards early on feels less impactful than using them later. You don't have to have any interest in winning, to want the things you're doing to change the landscape of the game in noticeable ways.
1:20 AM
i mean, "playing to win" appears to describe something exceptional, and as though winning is my all-consuming goal or some unusual preoccupation. i am, in fact, just trying to play the game, using the resources and tools it gave me, to do the things it's asking me to do. obviously part of that is someone wins, and obviously i'm supposed to try to be that person because that's precisely what it told me.
at each step, i am doing the things that seem to make sense in the framework the game has given me.
"target people because you don't like the color of their shirt" isn't "not playing to win", it's "doing something entirely outside of the framework the game has given me"
Yes, and that's the design flaw. The game doesn't provide enough framework.
i just want to get away from this "the solution is to not play to win" and "that's playing to win" thing because that feels pretty reductive of what's going on
and not accurate
(because, as said, i don't think what i'm doing is "playing to win" so much as literally "playing the game")
That would be why we see this pattern in so many groups: it's not exceptional. You follow the incentives the game offers and it's what you get.
Sounds vaguely similar to everyone going for farms in Carcasonne
1:36 AM
Yet more reasons why I'll probably never finish Cardboard Monsters.
I also noticed something... most of the people I play with... "play nice". We mostly avoid maliciously giving someone a Curse or whatever, until it comes down to win-or-lose. We played with one guy at a party, who played mean. He'd curse people as soon as he picked one up, mess up people's lower-level combats, etc. And he ended up winning by a fairly large margin. That may be a more effective play style... but it was less fun for everyone else.
(Unless you're playing with friends, and everyone is on-board with cutthroat play)
@BardicWizard I'm in a bit of an odd place. I have lots of stuff to do, but it's all just waiting on other people. I've got a job to do tomorrow (which was confused with today), but I haven't received the information I need for the job, I need to book an appointment for sometime in the near future but I need to know what my availability is, since there's a lot of other jobs that will be happening... "soon", so I can't double book myself
I'm also moving in with my partner this weekend but I haven't really been able to do anything about that just yet since of everything else going on, but once that's done that'll be a big job checked off the list
So I'm currently at work, writing a program in the "Urgent, Not Important" pile rather than working on the "Important, Not Urgent" pile that's been sitting there for 2 years now, at 95% completion. Lol
@Adeptus What game is this?
2:23 AM
@Ben There's been a conversation about why so many peoples' experience with the card game Munchkin is consistently unhappy in particular ways.
Ah ok
2:46 AM
@Adeptus I've really only ever played that game as a cooperative event or with strange and unusual rules everyone had to follow; always found those more fun
3 hours later…
5:20 AM
Q: Can a player spend a fate point to declare it a full moon?

anonIs a player able to spend a fate point, to declare it a full moon? For instance, if they have a lycanthrope character who gains more power in the full moon. I know a fate point can be spent to declare an arrival/having an item and such like that, which is unrelated to an aspect and more setting r...

5:44 AM
Q: When using the evocation wizard's Sculpt Spells, can you protect fewer creatures than the maximum you are allowed?

Guillaume F.The Evocation Wizard's Sculpt Spell ability allows the wizard to protect some creatures from their own evocation spells: When you cast an Evocation spell that affects other creatures that you can see, you can choose a number of them equal to 1 + the spell’s level. The chosen creatures automatica...

6:00 AM
@HotRPGQuestions this is a question I didn’t know existed and now I realize I just skipped that section since I’ve only played 1-2 wizards and none were evocation focused
@HotRPGQuestions I mean, even if you want to be a strict originalist you can achieve the effect just by picking a couple nearby ants to protect with your extra slots.
@HotRPGQuestions IOU 1 witty remark
6:26 AM
I just got hit by a wave of lethargy. Ugh.
I could feel it in my shoulders
6:45 AM
that's where all my lethargy waves come from
5 hours later…
11:46 AM
@ThomasMarkov Gosh, I debate asking "Are the attacks of SWS simultaneous?" but I think it'd just open the eldritch blast can of worms again
@Medix2 IIRC 'attacks are not simultaneous unless explicitly stated otherwise' is the default answer.
@vicky_molokh-unsilenceMonica Oh yeah, it might be simpler than I thought. Though whether or not the multiple attack rolls constitute one attack is unclear, well... Hmmm maybe the spell says attack and not attack roll
Oh yay "Make a melee spell attack against each target", and it doesn't say they're simultaneous so they aren't. Awesome!
@Medix2 lol I have no idea.
Im gonna do my own mathematical analysis of SWS today.
> If there's ever any question whether something you're doing counts as an attack, the rule is simple: if you're making an attack roll, you're making an attack.
PHB194, though not sure if applicable in context.
@vicky_molokh-unsilenceMonica Go see Whirlwind Attack which is somehow only one attack (according to the SAC Doc, which is official rulings)
11:57 AM
@Medix2 Whirlwind attack: see Multiattack. Multiattack (ranger): see page 93. Page 93: Extra Attack . . ?
TSR, why are your indexes looking as if you were bitten by White Wolf?!
Q: Is the Hunter ranger's Volley feature considered a single attack or multiple attacks?

David CoffronThe Hunter ranger's 11th-level Multiattack feature has two options. One of them is Volley: You can use your action to make a ranged attack against any number of creatures within 10 feet of a point you can see within your weapon’s range. You must have ammunition for each target, as normal, and...

And also the eldritch blast question I linked a few messages up
Unrelated: I know that tags are supposed to be some sort of "emergent folksonomy", and I've more or less given up on them having rules/policies over just what is done / practices, but, this question has three tags unique to that question.
Do we just let new tags exist for a while (a year?) and see how much use they get? Do we add them to older questions that should have them? Do we just remove them (this seems an impossible option since it implies no tags would ever exist)? Something else entirely (such as: there is no clear answer)?
I'm also unsure whether those links are to sites that pirate / go around paywalls
Ive retagged.
Archives of Nethys is official PF host.
Maybe official is the wrong word
I think they are legal.
they're the officially endorsed host
Even though the feature links to a purchasing page?
12:07 PM
Guess they're part of some random free thing somewhere
@Medix2 ???
@ThomasMarkov If you click any of the "Player Advance Guide" links, you're brought to a page that asks you to purchase said book
@Medix2 it tells you what the specific source that content is from so you can buy it if you like
d20pfsrd does the same thing I think
"This website is not published, endorsed, or specifically approved by Paizo Publishing."
@Carcer So I assume it's also part of a free SRD or similar?
12:10 PM
Would meta or main be more appropriate to ask the question?
"Is this place legal"
@Medix2 ah, I see what you're getting at now. Hooray, licensing
Probably LAW Stack ngl...
I dunno about PF2 but PF1 had to be published with quite permissive licensing because it's 3e-era OGL-based
which is why something like d20pfsrd can exist
@ThomasMarkov Notably the Permissions section exists, though... Times like this I wish I took more courses in law
I think it works as a main site question in that it's something that an expert in RPGs would conceivably have particular knowledge of
the OGL was a big deal after all
we've also fielded questions about what content people can legally use in self-published works etc. on the mainsite, so I don't think it's inappropriate
12:17 PM
@Carcer Yup, sometimes to... Mixed results
Q: We are not lawyers. Why do we allow law topics?

Tritium21This is a site about Role-Playing Games. We are experts on Role-Playing Games. There is a sickening number of questions about law, that are only tangentially related to games, and they are being treated as on topic. This is highly problematic: The questions are almost always far too broad. ...

12:53 PM
@Medix2 I wish I'd have thought to look around the twitter verse for a JC tweet when I was forming my answer; glad you did. Thanks. Also, I like your question on the PF2 site, but I can't be sure it isn't better on meta than on main. My gut is on main since it would be more useful to more people seeing it there ...
@KorvinStarmast We have other legal Mainsite questions... though we probably also have legal Metasite questions somewhere XD
agree on both
Im starting to think SWS is too strong for a 5th level spell.
@ThomasMarkov I've seen people make it fourth level so Eldritch Knights and Arcane Tricksters can use it
1:01 PM
@ThomasMarkov Nope. I looked at the damage analysis Blue Moon did and he left out one important bit: you have to roll to hit. It's only OP if you give advantage on all of the attacks (which JC says isn't how it works).
@Medix2 Um, excuse me, what?
And also, for a ranger it comes on line at level 17. At that point, enemies are gigantic bags of HP.
@KorvinStarmast Against 5 AC 15 targets at +7 to hit, it has an expected damage output of 123.
Now a bard at level 10 with it; heh, nice use of magical secrets. And your stated edge case is five targets, which won't always be the case. You reduce the number of targets and the aggregate damage goes down ...
It's a niche spell, not an 'always use' spell.
@ThomasMarkov Using your structure there, a fireball against 10 orcs does how much damage? .😁
whats their dex save bonus?
1:04 PM
If they all save, it does 130. Their save bonus is +1
If none save it does 270
Expected damage of 231.
(Not sure where you got AC 15 from, at tier 4 (Ranger spell level 5) AC 15 seems low from the high tier monsters I've seen.
And for one orc it does either 27 or 13 on average.
Why are you stuck on a Tier 4 ranger here?
Because it's a Ranger spell.
A 9th level wizard can get this spell.
Its a wizard spell too.
1:07 PM
I know this. And if the wizard ends the attack Right Next To an enemy at the end of their turn, the can't use another spell to move away until next turn. It's a great big "kick me" sign for wizard. (Or you could call it "high risk, high reward")
But at least I now see your point on the AC 15/Tier 2 analysis.
My white room analysis case included a Fighter 2 Bard 10 and used action surge. 😎
@Medix2 I'm not sure about that "is this site legal" question. If it's not, do we need to delete the question so we're not linking to it here?
Can you use spell scrolls while under the effect of tenser's transformation?
That reminds me, I need to look at something for Darkness.
@ThomasMarkov hmm, can't get to that spell at the moment ... not sure ...
"Until the spell ends, you can’t cast spells"
You cast a spell from a scroll, so no.
1:11 PM
Darn, I wanted to cast SWS while tenser's transformed.
OH well, one more dream shattered ... 😢
spell glyph tho
@ThomasMarkov yes, a great little piece of home defense for the wizard's tower, amirite?
@NautArch As a computer scientist I should suggest a standardized form of the URL, hashed, so you can check a site by hashing its URL
@ThomasMarkov That wouldn't do much even if it worked would it? SWS is spell attacks (though I suppose you might get advantage)
1:14 PM
Worth the trouble? Prolly not x)
@NautArch I'd just.... remove the link???
@Medix2 then the question has no subject?
@Someone_Evil Ah, only get the force damage bonus on weapon attacks.
odd situation.
@Medix2 Probably also related for you:
Q: Should questions about Pathfinder now link to Archives of Nethys over d20pfsrd?

IfusasoAn extension of this other meta question; Paizo has taken down their own PRD and officially licensed the Archives of Nethys page as their reference document. Archives of Nethys provides a community driven resource for all Pathfinder (and Starfinder) content, including setting-specific rule conte...

1:22 PM
@Someone_Evil Migrate to meta and close as dupe?
I think that answers my question... somehow
Not dupe, but the statement causing the older question may answer this one
@ThomasMarkov I'm still pretty wary about linking to potentially pirate sites
While not nefarious here, could easily be misused by someone.
Does that not answer my question?
@NautArch Did you read the Paizo article?
1:24 PM
Is your question primarily concerned with whether it should be linked to by us (which is a meta concern)
Paizo describes the site as an "Officially Licensed Partner"
So this... isn't that site?
No, it definitely is...
@Medix2 Not so that I'd (forcibly) close as such, but I guess it clear it up for you (and that may warrent it being closed)
Archives of Nethys is the site we are concrned about, and it is the same site Paizo calls and officially licensed partner
And yet: "This website is not published, endorsed, or specifically approved by Paizo Publishing." weird
1:26 PM
nethys became an officially endorsed partner
@Medix2 That's legalese that Paizo requires of everyone that is not Paizo.
it was hosting the pathfinder reference document before that happened, so also conceivable that they just never updated the boilerplate legal
I don't know if there's a difference between the 1e, and 2e part of that site. We'd probably need a PF expert for that :)
@ThomasMarkov I'm not referencing this specific issue, but the more general one of "is this site legal?"
@NautArch Paizo calls it legal so...
1:28 PM
@ThomasMarkov again, not about this question specifically, but the category of questions of "is this site legal"?
It's a dangerous place for us to be, i think.
So hide it on Meta to be more safe?
@Someone_Evil I think that @Ifusaso is one such
@Medix2 I honestly don't know...i think a meta question about these might be good?
Well not particularly hidden, but that's the suggestion right? That putting it on Meta would be less worrying?
unless there is already some mod direction here?
1:30 PM
@NautArch Meta about Meta at last!
welcome to rpg.meta.meta.se
Q: What about meta-meta Stack Exchange?

Nick BerardiMeta Stack Exchange (which emerged from Meta Stack Overflow after the Stack Exchange network was spawned) is great; it gives you a chance to talk about the Stack Exchange network in a disconnected forum so that you don't have to break the fight club rules of talking about Stack Exchange sites on ...

Q: How should we handle questions about site legality?

NautArchThis is a bit of sticky question because it concerns the scenario where it's unclear if a site is a pirated site or not. We clearly need to only link to non-pirated content, but when someone has a question about if a site is legal or not, what should we do? The concern is that if it's illegal, we...

@NautArch I found a way to answer that Meta question... I'll probably start writing it up
@Medix2 SSD's answer to stance on piracy I think is relevant "It's a bad look to openly talk about using pirated materials here, and so easily avoided. As a poster, one should studiously avoid it. As stewards of the site we should actively discourage it."
So I think your decision to delete the question was correct.
@Someone_Evil Why don't you think it's a policy question?
Also, I really really think it'd be a good idea for when active high-rep users interact with other active high-level users by overriding tags/dupes/etc, to leave a comment.
Ah, that was TM's edit, missed that
I don't think it's useful to treat that question as "what's our policy?" which the tag implies since we don't have a previous policy on the matter (do we? now I'm unsure)
2:03 PM
No real skin off my tag back, but under Policy, there are questions about how to handle pirated content.
Hmm, I suppose it is treated as policy (and I've referred to it such in the past). It's just the canonical meta is poorly labeled for that purpose
The policy meta tag seems to be a mess. There's questions explicitly about an exisiting policy (changes, about parts of etc,), question which are a querent trying to get a policy for a problem (some of these have rather low scores), and then some about how policies work in general. Not sure if we need some spring cleaning on that
That sounds like a job for...NOT ME!
2:22 PM
Q: How can you detect a Doppelganger?

ImaginaryFirst, within D&D 5e, what magic, items, or special abilities would allow player characters to detect a doppelgänger? Second, and perhaps not easily answerable, what types of clues or cue might give away a doppelgänger without the use of magic? Or how as a DM might I give players a chance to noti...

Argh, when comments to moved to chat, why do folks still comment and not use the chat?
their comments are different
I had always thought that was a general request to keep comments in the chat
because they can't then move the next set to that chat (i don't think)
But that may be my own interpretation
well that was partly sarcasm
but the chat overflow is for moving comments that are getting very chatty so they don't clutter
gotta put that /s!
2:31 PM
if a user has a different comment on a post that is unrelated to the discussion that's been moved, I think it's entirely valid to post that as a comment
Right, but an active comment section is unlikely to stay inactive.
but it is a problem when people continue having comments about the conversation that got moved to chat yes
I just usually stay in chats when they've been made to keep the comment section clean.
no reason for me to push that on others though
although when a new chain is already 3 comments in and I could have made it 4, id ecided to put in chat rather than creating a new comment chain
1 hour later…
3:53 PM
@Someone_Evil If it's a policy, I suggest taking the relevant content from whatever meta post you consider canon, and putting the content up under rpg.stackexchange.com/help/referencing
We can't edit those help articles
@NautArch I think it's just natural that most people want to interact with SE in ways that SE specifically tries to avoid. It's meant to be a canonical Q&A site and not so much a social or interactive space, but many people sort of expect and want that kind of interaction and operate in that mode
@NautArch It's probably the aversion to the herd of cats in the chat. /S
It's sort of like a chromatic dragon in D&D trying to be Good: it can happen, but it will involve struggles and setbacks, and most probably won't put much effort into the project; it's so contrary to natural inclinations that many probably never quite get the point of the endeavor in the first place
4:10 PM
@Upper_Case There's a place for dragons to hang out now in chat.
Ok, anyone have insight why my taggit answer is being downvoted?
@JohnP Possibly people thinking you misread the edition of the question (i.e. purely at a glance at the tag and the mention in the answer)?
@JohnP You need more downvotes? Ughh... I think I've still got one left from this morning. What do you want downvoted?
@JohnP third party source isn't legit?
yeah, probably for reference to third party source that isn't the origin of the thing
4:18 PM
> Is there any lore in D&D, whether in 5th Edition or prior, about where the poison "oil of taggit" comes from?
@JohnP I found that on a reddit thread as well, but decided against using it because I don't know about third party sources from 3.0
It's referenced in 3.0 DMG and expanded on. Question does not state official.
But if I had asked for lore in 5e and got something from Kobold Press as an answer, I'm not sure I"d be okay with that.
@GcL No, I don't need more downvotes. Someday I'd actually like to get to 10k
10k downvotes?! That would take forever.
4:21 PM
@GcL you chicken?
@NautArch It's called "lore", not "certified court documents". We should be encouraging answers from a variety of sources. /soapbox
@MarkWells For me, that's a slippery slope. What's the difference between something like Kobold Press or something I just made up on my own?
@JohnP Just as "strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government" unlicensed or non-cannon third party sources are no basis for a system's lore.
@MarkWells BUt I also didn't downvote (or upvote) JohnP's answer. I'm just saying how I"d respond personally if I had been the querent.
Yeah, when you ask "what does D&D say about this" I think the implicit scope is first-party
4:24 PM
@JohnP mention whether there's any coverage in 5e and you'll probably be fine. No mention of taggit oil there? Cool, we fall back to earlier editions. It's a due diligence sort of thing.
@MarkWells I feel like that's a slippery slope because there are a lot of 3rd party sources that are intended for use with a significant amount of lube. I'd rather not have those fan fics included. Drizzt Do'Urden Does Dallas is not something I'd like showing up as lore.
@NautArch What's the difference between something from WOTC and something I just made up on my own? A few years ago I would have said "playtesting" but these days there's an implied "(lol)" on that.
@doppelgreener but earlier editions themselves don't answer it, either.
@doppelgreener He already mentioned the 5e DMG and then edited it to reflect existence in 3.0
I'm pretty sure it's not an edition problem
4:25 PM
@MarkWells HeyICanChan linked to an answer on another question which strongly implies that taggit is totally undefined, which (if true for D&D 5e) causes a significant problem: the official, 1st party lore specifically leaves it undefined in all capacities other than that it exists in fully-refined form and has specific effects
Unless we're counting 3rd party lore, which we may, i just am unsure (and that is what I think our current discussion is covering)
I'm also pretty sure that if the answer said "there is no explanation of what a taggit is in official D&D material, but this popular third party 3e book posited it's just a kind of plant" it'd be okay
I think you have to justify that there's no answer in the first-party material before you fall back to referencing third party is all
Oh, OK. Now that I reread—it's because the answer isn't actually saying what a taggit is or how we get taggit oil. At least, it's not cutting to the chase: it has a weak start by saying what taggit oil does. But when it does answer it's using 3pp where people are probably expecting an authoritative (i.e. wizards) source. 3pp is making it up as much as me saying "a taggit is a miniature woodland buffalo and the oil comes from its fur."
@doppelgreener neither 1e nor 2e DMG has it, might have first been in a Dragon Mag article
Granted, a first party source is also just as equally making it up, but has the benefit of being first party
4:29 PM
@doppelgreener I like that better. That's cannon in my worlds now.
@doppelgreener "miniature woodland buffalo" new head canon tbh.
Well I'm happy to have contributed that to y'all. 😂
@doppelgreener actually, the oil comes from its hump. 😎👍
that's just derivative of the miniature giant space hamster
(And for buffalo my brain usually defaults to the American Bison, which has a bit of a hump on its shoulders)
4:33 PM
@Carcer Even then I feel like we might have some issues, though maybe they're edge cases, and it may matter what the querent wants the lore for. If some self-published D&D adventure fully defines what the Dark Powers (of Barovia fame) are, I'm not sure that's worth anything.
@Upper_Case you still convey the information that the querent explicitly wants - "there is no official lore"
a reference to a third party source is then a suggestion for an alternative that the querent may or may not find helpful in its stead
@Carcer I agree
@Carcer I agree, but I think that that's the entire answer. Someone looking for lore and going to literally anything anyone ever posted in a public forum to get it is basically idea generation
You can say that and then present answers people have gone on record with in other products.
@KorvinStarmast that new answer on sculpt spell doesnt work, I dont think.
The first three examples have a continuous space of outcomes, sculpt spell is a discrete space. The intermediate value theorem applies in the first three cases, but not in the case of sculpt spell.
4:37 PM
@doppelgreener That approach seems sensible. "There's nothing in the DMG or other WOTC-published materials about it. Here's how other writers have developed the idea, though."
I feel that such a standard makes it impossible to assess answers against one another. If Blue Devil Games says it's X, and Red Angel Games says it's Y, I'm not sure how votes "should" be distributed among them, which seems to me to be contrary to the SE ethos
If questions have a specific application of the lore they want, that's a different story
Can we cite doppel here in chat as a lore source?
@KorvinStarmast thanks for the correction. I'm now wondering which one of these is the popular misconception one of us has fallen for.
We should find a taggit cultivator and check with them.
@NautArch I can't/won't stop you
@Upper_Case While I get your point about the need for a specific application (I'm the one always yelling at people about use cases), assessing answers against one another is a tool for producing useful answers, not an end in itself.
@Upper_Case Whichever one has landed on the correct answer of miniature woodland buffalo should get your vote /S
4:42 PM
@doppelgreener Technically it's only oil of taggit if it's produced in the Taggit region of Faerun.
@MarkWells ah, hmm, fascinating
Must be at least 51% taggit extract to bear the name "Oil of Tagget"
You never expect these things
If less than 50%, it must be called"Oil derived from taggit and other ingredients"
@KorvinStarmast I went through all the articles listed as "Poison" on the dragondex and checked those mags, no source there either.
4:45 PM
@MarkWells I don't think I'm in a position to push strongly for one approach over another. But I do feel confident in properly understanding that duplicate answers are to be avoided, and the actual, stackable answer to the instances we're talking about is "there is no official lore".
Adding that "more than 0 people have thought this approach worth writing down" doesn't add much, begins to resemble idea-generation and shopping-list questions, and creates the possibility of hard-to-curate answer avalanches. Though I suppose that outcome would probably only affect a handful of answers across the stack, and so may not really be a problem in practical terms
@JohnP that is great work to cite
I did find an interview where they were saying one of the drawbacks was they added a bunch of stuff with no back flavor in 3.
"if it was defined, it would be defined in these places. I looked there and didn't find it. I conclude it probably isn't defined." is a reasonable logical sequence for answers to use when proving a negative.
@JohnP That's not a drawback, it's space for exploration.
@doppelgreener I added that plus a big "NO OFFICIAL SOURCE" banner. :p
4:55 PM
@JohnP May want to update that headline, it's not a yes/no question
> Is there any lore in D&D, whether in 5th Edition or prior, about where the poison "oil of taggit" comes from?
@JohnP argh, title and body not matching.
I'm pretty sure that taggit is just a misspelling of taggant: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taggant
Those were discontinued in the U.S. due to a variety of concerns, including possible toxicity
@doppelgreener I'll put my best man on it! 🤦‍♂️ Wait, that's my brother (he was my best man at our wedding) and I think his lack of interest is measurable with large calipers ...) Sorry.
@Upper_Case I kinda doubt that
4:59 PM
@NautArch ayup.
@Upper_Case Hmm, so the oil of taggant is actually a radio wave. Fascinating! 👀
I did find a mention of it in Forgotten Realms, but just that some NPC's built up an immunity.
Taggit is clearly a corruption of git tag, a command used in source code control. A Git tag is a durable label attached to a specific revision; unlike a branch pointer, which moves as commits are added, a tag stays where it was placed. Similarly, oil of taggit causes you to stop moving and stay where the oil was placed.
@MarkWells Ok. Oil buy that.
@MarkWells are you sure it's not a reference to the Django application "taggit", reading the documentation for which bores you into unconsciousness?
5:09 PM
Targeted advertising is getting out of hand. I just saw an Arby's commercial where you roll a d20 to select something from the menu.
I don't know the linguistic term for it (paging @Medix2 ?) but there's a transformation where a (verb + qualifier) phrase gets flipped into (qualifier-verb) so that it can function as either a single verb or a related noun. The example that comes to mind is "set off" -> "offset" meaning the distance by which something is set off.
If I want to REALLY attract downvotes I'll throw in all the Pathfinder lore I've found :p
@ThomasMarkov what I do is first check and see if I have a coupon, and then ask if my wife wants something from Arby's. She always says no. Saves me a lot of d20 rolling. .😎
@MarkWells which is not quite the same as "he set off the charge" when doing explosive ordnance disposal. 😎
@KorvinStarmast ANd finally, you just end up at Whataburger.
@KorvinStarmast That's the distance from which something is set off :)
5:14 PM
@NautArch As often as not, yes. 👍
Prepositions are magic.
@MarkWells prepositions are friendship?
@MarkWells Actually, I think the term is 'danger close' but I may be confusing my old field artillery and naval gunfire spotting jargon with EOD jargon. Been too many years, and they may have updated the field manual
Another 3 mentions down with no source.
@KorvinStarmast As someone whose knowledge of explosives mostly comes from the film Tremors 2, I would expect there to be some precise term for "it's gonna be big, really big, keep running".
5:23 PM
@MarkWells They're making a 7th movie this year... or releasing it.
I didn't get details.
Michael Gross is a Termors machine.
Yesterday was first session of the RotFM campaign. I learned all too late that my character's name is "Mr. Biggs"
Absolutely did not expect the number of Hank Hill jokes in quick succession
Glad some people are calling him Lloyd.
@MarkWells my chem teacher would call that “student-created”
5:38 PM
@MarkWells Time to page the linguistics Discords...
@Medix2 "Compounding"?
@Someone_Evil Well, here the compounding isn't just a compound; it's coming from a previously common ordering that gets reversed
Well... assuming that actually happened; which might be hard to prove in some cases
So... I've found a Dragon mag article and 7 other mentions in core books for 3.x and no source.
But it might just be a specific type of compounding. Maybe skyscraper is the same boat along with corkscrew
@JohnP But have you gone through all the novels in the FR setting and see if a character talks about it there?
5:46 PM
@GcL You just shush.
@Someone_Evil Yeah probably just compounding since it's not incorporation or anything similar. I guess you could tack on a "nominalization" if you wanted
@JohnP Have you considered the Scot idiom as the source? Taggit or Tag Tailed?
@GcL Imma bout to get agitaggited
Taggit is actually a person's name, so it might just be named after the person who first processed it: ancestry.com/name-origin?surname=taggit
@Axoren Great. We will hold a seance and ask what it was processed from :p
5:55 PM
@JohnP Soilent Green?
a dash of grandma gives this one some extra kick!
They must have had a really toxic home life.
2 hours later…
7:47 PM
If anybody owns books on D&D Beyond, does it have pronunciations for firbolg, slaad, Yuan-Ti, Chult, or Svirfneblin?
@Medix2 you're not in one of my stackizen campaigns?
It's pronounced "Smurf Goblin"
@NautArch I mean, I wouldn't be participating in it, so it feels kinda weird to just borrow books
@Medix2 According to the Dragon Magazine #31 article "Ay pronunseeAYshun gyd", by Frank Mentzer, firbolg is correctly pronounced "FEER-bolg".
Says Google
@Axoren Oh yeah, I've read that thing it's... inconsistent sometimes XD But yeah, these are just terms we have questions (and answers) to regarding pronunciation; I'm just wondering if D&D Beyond actually matches what our answers have stated/claimed
7:49 PM
Fir Bolg is also a Irish Folklore thing, and I'm pretty sure it's pronounced that way, too
fear-bolg, Slod with a soft O
those are the only two i found so far
Is it pronounced Slod or Slod?
@Axoren Sl0d
Gif vs. Gif
7:50 PM
Cot, Caught
@Medix2 It was for sharing of content, I have 3 campaigns set up sharing.
@Medix2 Slaw'd works :P
Is it pronounced Elf or Dwarf?
00:00 - 20:0020:00 - 23:00

« first day (3681 days earlier)      last day (32 days later) »