close votes: rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/48579/…

In an alternate reality: Doctor Hwhat, starring Lil John as the Doctor.

[blink]

@doppelgreener Next week is getting messy. Would you prefer Saturday afternoon until 5ish, or some time Sunday?

@BESW Hm. I'm open to either, but you should check with Dan, because he may have work on Saturday.

Okay...

I have an unskippable dinner Saturday evening, Trogdor can't make Saturday afternoon long enough to really be worth it, Raycia can't do Sunday...

Friday evening! \o/

I, ah, I read that as "unspeakable dinner" at first

Char-Gar-Entréicon, the Dinner That Hath No Name!

@Lord_Gareth psst

(i'll cease reminding you now)

Urgh I've been so busy T_T

[Has 2 books on the cusp of release, a 3rd that just needs a spit-shine, and a 4th in the pipe]

You really shouldn't smoke books or spit on them.

@Lord_Gareth should i remind you later after all then?

@BESW I agree, the ink makes it awful

It's been a thing for ages

It's not common to get more than one star on something requiring clickthrough to understand, but it happens.

Hmmm.

Having prepped for both my next RPG sessions already, I find myself adrift.

Maybe I should do some work on November's return to the Doctor Who storyline.

....or I could go back to the holy werewolves thing.

Oh, that reminds me

Did you want a link to the (very brief, abortive) game in which Persephone was a thing?

[blink] Why would I want this?

I dunno

Some folks like to read

(games)

@Emrakul This would cause more flame wars and death than a new religion.

@Emrakul A new religion in 1600's Germany

Aside from the stigma attached to such a study, and the associated inevitable bias one way or the other, the big problem is likely data collection.

No Such Thing As D&D x1,000,000.

Not to mention that any such study would inevitably awaken Lord Potatothulu

Is that what you want, @Emrakul? Are you trying to summon eldritch spuds?

d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/a/angelic-aspect <-Of course Paizo did this. Why would they not do this? Why am I even surprised?

@Lord_Gareth Is it just that it's way too efficient a method of buffing?

@BESW Protection from Evil is an under-leveled 1st level spell that shuts down an entire subschool of magic by itself.

This spell adds effects to that, which are nearly useless

So for a higher level slot, you get...practically nothing

And as the spell advances into its higher forms it becomes progressively less worth the slot it's in

Ah.

Compared to existing spells of that level in the same role (self-only buffing)

So it's just a trap spell?

Why is that remarkable? There are a ton of trap spells already.

Because it's a trap spell that directly references one of the iconic models for spell efficiency

?

Protection from Evil

It's a buff, a defense, and a dispel all at once

Available dirt cheap in almost every caster class

So when you see it folded into this spell it seems like it should be crazy good

And then it's not

You're better off memorizing Protection and saving your second-and-higher slots for almost anything else

Even with the extra required actions

@Emrakul I wonder when Paizo will learn that all doing that does is make us min/max really angrily.

When it makes you min/max elsewhere.

Systems designed by optimizers are portraits of clarity and elegance that are striking for their ease of use.

Actually, this might be a good time to talk some RPG community theory. I had an interesting opportunity recently that may interest you.

I'm working with a new freelancer for DSP, and I wanted to get a feel for his experience with design and thoughts on design theory.

So as part of our ongoing conversation I asked him what he thought a system designed by optimizers would look like. He's been published under a few different 3pp before, he's played the game (PF) for awhile.

And his answer was that he felt a game designed by optimizers would be marked by a great power disparity between hidden, superior choices and the more obvious ones

I'm still trying to figure out why this is

Because that's what optimisers talk about in the 3.PF context.

Go on?

What's there to go on about? Optimisers in the 3.PF system talk incessantly about trap options, corner cases, and so forth. They appear to derive enjoyment from "solving" the chargen minigame puzzle.

Also usage puzzles but it can look a lot like chargen since we construct demonstrative scenarios.

Thus it's natural that someone on the outside, who sees the conversations casually in passing but doesn't participate in them or study them, would assume that's what they like.

Obviously a system focuses on what its developers like, so a system designed by optimisers would be filled with traps and edge cases, putting the focus on metagame puzzles of combining mechanics.

I'm gonna take this moment to make a brief aside

You remember the whole 'RPG mechanics reading is an arcane science?' thing?

<-Aspie kid

Social convention is an arcane science

Hence asking the 'go on'

Because none of what you said was obvious to me in the way it was to you

Fair enough.

If you talk about something all the time, people assume you like it, or at least like hating it, and so given the opportunity will surround yourself with more of it.

3.PF optimisers talk about power disparity, trap choices, corner cases, and mechanics use in opposition to the system's stated expectations.

So it's very natural to assume that's what they'd put in a game of their design.

...in fact, they have. Look at Paranoia.

Fair, but Paranoia is up front about the unique experience it's selling to you

I think there might be an even deeper level to it in the case of optimizers.

Right, Paranoia is a love letter to that kind of mechanical perversity and player-vs-player-vs-GM competition.

Optimization is in large part an exercise in stacking the deck in favor of yourself as much as possible.

But if your designer is mostly familiar with PF.... well, he's not used to designers who clearly state objectives supported by their rules system, is he?

No. In a lot of ways he's like me, a very long time ago.

It is understandable to assume that a person who likes doing that in play might design a system which is stacked in their own favor as well, which would be a system that features lots of secret optimizations that only a practiced optimizer would find.

On the very cusp of understanding

@Grubermensch This.... is a good example of an outsider's perspective of optimisation, I think, but maybe not an accurate generalisation of the craft itself.

@Grubermensch Huh. Odd, that. I never, as an optimizer, actually saw op in that fashion.

Oh no, I'm definitely talking about the outsiders' perspective. Obv people are more complicated than that.

A lot of optimisation is about honing a character to work with the rest of the group: optimisation doesn't automagically imply "seeking superiority." It's about conscious control to achieve any mechanical goal.

Indeed. A lot of what seems like tipping the scales is us trying to make a bad tool work for us and not against us

@BESW I didn't intend "yourself" to mean specifically that the optimizer was on his own in the group; D&D sets up a pretty clear Group vs DM dynamic.

Which is part of the reason we really like clear, well-defined systems

I have only rarely met optimizers that op for the sheer sake of opping

Most of us are in it to bring something to life, be it a single clear scene or an elaborate character concept

@Lord_Gareth That distinction in any field is often very hard for a non-expert to see.

@Lord_Gareth Optimisation is somewhat... cultish... to the outside perspective. You consult secret formulas hidden deep in the Archives of For-Um, referring to Rules and Laws which bear the Names of Wisdom, beseeching guidance from Adepts in the Craft and debating Points of Esoterica, ultimately seeking to unlock the Secret of Eternal Mastery.

@BESW And lo, the Prophet did speak, "Thou Shalt Not Lose Caster Levels."

Exactly.

You know I think using phrases like "Stormwind Fallacy" create a culture of elitism.

@BESW THIS

@BESW Caveat: this is only true because of a lack of accepted terms and definitions across the community

Stormwind in particular bothers me because it is close to meaningless as a Law.

[Curls protectively around his Oberoni Fallacy blog post]

The ideas behind these "fallacies" and "laws" are useful and valid.

But the naming conventions are elitist when they aren't just stupid.

Stormwind as articulated is binary, which misses the point and tends to piss off people who don't spend their free hours playing philosophy games.

Many of them use terms like Law and Theory to assign ontological weight which the notions don't have by borrowing the mantle of genuine philosophical or scientific authority.

@Grubermensch Stormwind is only attempting to assert that skillful roleplaying and skillful optimization are not on a sliding scale

@Lord_Gareth BUT IT DOESN'T ACTUALLY DO THIS

While assigning the names of individuals to them is at least as bad, because it takes a commonly-owned bit of knowledge and assigns ownership of it to the most popular kid at school who said it.

Stormwind also carelessly conflates the player in totality with the play of a particular character.

There is an inherent tradeoff between mechanical prep and roleplaying prep that exists for every character in every game. Because that's how time works.

@Grubermensch [raises eyebrow, looks at DitV, Fate, and every other game where RP and mechanics are conflated]

Only if the two have to exist in the same time slot.

So while it is possible for the player to be skilled at both approaches, the use of one necessarily diminishes the use of the other (not to mention any other approaches that are carelessly excluded from the spectrum).

Mechanics in 3.PF tend to happen before or after the session, in terms of optimization

@BESW Is it possible to optimize in Fate?

But I'll agree that as the system merges the two endeavors, you has less of a contest between them. Stormwind, however, is presented from the D&D context where they are very separate.

I'd argue otherwise, rather stridently.

I've never seen optimization intrude within a session except in cases where expected op levels vs. actual op levels were different, resulting in a disruption of the experience.

Which, I mean, Same Page Tool

Mechanical planning happens before or after a session; in the session, roleplaying happens

Mechanical use becoming an outgrowth of roleplaying

@Lord_Gareth There is most certainly a prep component to roleplaying.

I prep for roleplaying.

I find it vital to understand and inhabit the character, and that means I have to work out who the character is, off-screen, and what has defined his life. That takes time.

How does that not happen during the creation process?

Who they are informs what they do; what they do informs mechanical choices.

A to B to C

All of those things interact with each other throughout the entire span of the game.

Yes, but C only happens sometimes

At this point, we're just arguing "My RPG style is more universal than yours," and it's not really relephant to any of the original points.

It takes me several sessions of playing a character to figure out who they are.

@BESW I'm not arguing that it's more universal, I'm explaining my process.

Ex. In @waxeagle's 5E Starter game, my character didn't make sense in my head until six sessions in, when he finally confronted his objective. Only then did I understand what his deal was. And then I could flesh out the character.

It's a process.

@Grubermensch And in the context of arguing the Stormwind Fallacy, the only way that's useful is if one example refutes any counterexample he can give (you've given an example, so you're done), or if your example has to be more universal than his (can't be done, so what's the point?).

I think what you meant to be arguing was that the Stormwind Fallacy presents the misconception/refutation issue as a false dichotomy.

@BESW I'm not trying to negate Stormwind.

I don't believe it's possible to negate Stormwind, because it's poorly constructed and meaningless.

Which really can't be supported or denied by examples of play; it should be done by examining the Fallacy itself.

@Grubermensch Then what is the purpose of this conversation?

It started with my mentioning Stormwind as an example of optimiser culture, and you said it's binary and meaningless, and then-- [gestures upwards]

I believe (supported somewhat by @Lord_Gareth's statements) that part of the base misconception in Stormwind is that mechanical optimization and roleplay are not competing for the same slice of time.

I'm still trying to figure out the 'binary' part.

> Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa.

@Lord_Gareth To do that, you'd both have to analyse the text of the refutation rather than provide personal anecdotes.

That statement is binary. It can only be refuted by claiming that the two are mutually exlcusive which is absurd.

It's not what any person who has ever had Stormwind thrown at them is claiming.

@Grubermensch The Fallacy was written/formalized during a time period when that was the precise and common claim

Then I feel deep sorrows for forumers past.

Yeeeah, Stormwind was written in a particular historical context and if you ignore that, it becomes less meaningful.

@Grubermensch As someone who was around for it, all I can feel is undying hate.

I'll retrench my statement at "Stormwind is no longer relevant to the discourse."

Which is--yanno, one reason it's stupid to give it a name like it's a universally useful philosophical work.

Man I wish Oberoni was less relevant to modern discourse >.<

@Lord_Gareth Link?

@Grubermensch unendingraeg.tumblr.com/post/96430470189/…

It's a hideous problem in the online PF community

I enjoy that you have lightened the mood with an anime screencap.

@Grubermensch This is exactly what I mean by the optimisation community stealing terms from other disciplines to lend their assertions undeserved ontological weight.

@Grubermensch That is my favorite image in the universe.

@BESW TBF that's a forum issue more than a specific optimization issue.

Calling "optimisation and RP can work together" the "Stormwind Fallacy" gives it dignity and holding power as something which should be argued.

So it's not allowed to become a background assumption of the community.

[skims] I approve of this being given the weight of Fallacy.

It has almost certainly been articulated somewhere else long ago, because this comes up in a variety of dsciplines.

Yeah, that's slightly more reasonable to call a fallacy, but then I take issue with it having some random guy's forum handle attached to it like he's the first guy to say "Just because I can fix it doesn't mean it's not broken!"

@BESW Yeah that's what I'm saying.

Really, it's a misunderstanding of the point of Rule 0 entirely.

Rule 0 is supposed to fill in gaps, not rewrite big swaths of the core game.

That and be a preemptive strike against rules lawyering.

So again, creating a culture of elitism: canonising individuals by attributing to them notions which did not originate from them, thus creating a conversational space with an unnecessarily high bar for entry.

Anyone (@Jadasc): Care to explain the rational behind nwod-virtue-vice?

@Grubermensch unendingraeg.tumblr.com/post/96955171179/… <-Relephant

The name "Rule 0" also gets my Loogie of Disapproval, as it enforces the misguided notion that the GM's power comes from anything except his players.

@BESW I mean.... kind of?... 0th rules are rules that are unspoken community understandings.

@BESW I'm not a fan of it either but at this point the name "Rule 0" is like the positive/negative setup in electricity.

We all know we screwed up but it's too late to fix now

@Grubermensch And it shouldn't be. Leaving R0 unspoken is the underlying problem behind more than half the social problems this Stack answers questions about.

Fair point.

In fact, it isn't an unspoken understanding in the RPG community anymore: just toxic pockets of it.

[Cough]PATHFINDER[cough]

More and more RPGs are explicitly exposing Rule 0 to the light of day by clearly saying it IS a playstyle choice rather than a default RPG mode, even if they then embrace it for their particular game.

Calling it a Rule tries to inculcate it as a concept universal to the RPG experience rather than a choice made by some RPG systems and groups.

I suppose the good uses of Rule 0 are actually pretty well-defined. You could just put them in the preface and have a nice clean experience of it.

This conversation only makes my link more relevant. This pleases me in vainglorious ways.

And it's not like Rule 0 was EVER a universal RPG constant; it's just ingrained in enough of the louder parts of the community that they're able to miss the rest of the world around them.

People need to understand that R0 is a patch.

Oh, well put.

[shows up, says something interesting] This morning is made of win

Also you broke my streak.

Heh

Also, my new job is writing manuals, so I can claim at least a bit of competence now.

Grats on the job!

@BESW It was no long streak to begin with.

@Zachiel Tell me more

@BESW having a job means less time spent here.

@Lord_Gareth I write installation and user manuals for electrical circuitry devices I don't really understand, but I'm improving.

Alright, time for me to go to bed.

Catch y'all later

@Grubermensch goodnight

See ya

ttfn

@BESW isn't the stormwind fallacy that they can't?

@doppelgreener The fallacious statement is that RP and op are exclusive ends of a sliding scale

With the rest of the original post being the refutation.

Asserting that there's no exclusivity in the relationship between roleplaying and mechanical achievement

Whenever you talk about a fallacy, the fallacy is the sentence that is said not to be true.

(this is true for all fallacies, by definition)

right, it's just that BESW quoted the more healthy position as the fallacy :P

@doppelgreener, I need a link to the Same Page Tool please.

@Lord_Gareth BESW's profile

bankuei.wordpress.com/2010/03/27/the-same-page-tool

Danke

Bitte

@Lord_Gareth oh boy, it's like that wizard-who-can-change-their-spells class was made for this question: rpg.stackexchange.com/q/48595/1204

But it probably needs to be closed: best at what?

Mmm, actually, the way it's asked at the end opens that up a bit... But benefit the most is still an odd question

"well a fighter benefits tremendously in that they won't suck terribly; a wizard would be totally omnipotent either way!"

Utterly unasked for observation based on our Fate game: when the plot, for whatever reason, doesn't link up with characters' aspects that much, use more situational aspects for compels.

That's the thing that I screwed up, leading to PCs barely getting any fate points that night. Ah well, live and learn.

@Magician Good learning!

@doppelgreener Aye. I mean, ideally the scenario would be constructed in such a way as to actually use PCs' aspects, but that's a whole different matter.

@doppelgreener This is one of the lesser problems with opt's use of "Fallacy." They use it to mean the fallacy and the refuting argument interchangeably. It's also one of the reasons it's a stupid idea to name a fallacy for the person who refuted it.

Hey, chat. I want to brainstorm Fate aspects for the Tenth Doctor (toward the end of his run, circa "Stolen Earth"/"Journey's End").

@doppelgreener, @RedRiderX [wave]

@BESW Hi!

Hey!

What's new?

clickerheroes.com

I'm spending too much time with this

Way too much

I'm still working on my own version of DW. Or more like AW in fantasy setting.

In-universe, I'm somewhat struggling with the concept of faith when it comes to the cleric class. I think the real magic of real-world religions is how a person can be so dedicated to a deity without ever having any concrete proof of one's existence.

While in RPG settings, a deity manifests themselves all the time.

Having one's faith waver at times is a natural part of faith I would like to reinforce for clerics, but what is faith when you actually see the effects of your god work around you?

@Oxinabox Sure — it's for questions involving the virtue/vice mechanic used in nWoD games, as there are a couple of them, and it tends to attract discussion. Probably worth adding a "morality system" tag at some point, too.

@Oxinabox I suppose it's like the "alignment" tag for D&D, except that where everyone knows that D&D uses alignment, Virtue/Vice/Morality/Integrity aren't as well known outside their games.

@RedRiderX this must be how Lord Gareth sustainably harvests skulls

... though somehow I more imagine him letting them grow fruitfully for a few years, then tearing through among a raging warband of barbarians

who generally decimate the populace through their sheer warrior screaming long before they even get within weapons distance

the application of sonic damage would make a particular librarian lich blush

So my clerics have a move, "trust your life to fate", that allows them to perform a single highly dangerous feat, surviving through sheer faith that their god will protect them. Thoughts?

Example use case: The evil warlock is holding the cleric's party at gun... er, staffpoint on the top of the cliff and demanding them to hand back the Amulet of Doing Very Much Evil they took. The cleric takes a calm breath, holds the amulet in his hand and says: "Agron, guide my fall." He then leaps down the cliff, facing a fall that would certainly kill a normal person or seriously wound a seasoned hero like him.

The player rolls, gets a 10+ and, by Agron's divine providence, just happens to land in a stack of the softest hay there is without any serious injury.