TRPG General Chat

Shalvenay

00:06

hey there @godskook

Papayaman1000

godskookum

godskook

I admit NOTHING

Papayaman1000

@godskook wait what

godskook

lol

trogdor

lolz

Shalvenay

00:11

@Papayaman1000 -- have you come up with something you want to try for Friday, or do you want me to send you my notes?

Papayaman1000

@Shalvenay I've got ideas. Kehehehehe... heh heh heh heh heh... AHAHAHAhuegh ...I need a glass of water.

5e seems nice. Definitely running that.

Shalvenay

cool

anything about tone/theme/genre/expectations on characters I should know ahead of time?

BESW

00:30

@godskook [wave] What's new?

Shalvenay

01:06

hey there @JoshuaAslanSmith

godskook

Depends? How long has it been?

@BESW

After @KRyan, I wouldn't be surprised to bump into someone else I knew in here.

BESW

01:21

Not that I know.

Shalvenay

hey there @Trish

godskook

Gotcha.

Then the answer is "being here" :P

Ryan

wee starting a new skyrim character. Its counts as RPG

Shalvenay

01:37

hey there @daze413

daze413

@Ryan only if you derail the plot by killing Alduin as you witness that first time he resurrects a dragon

@Shalvenay heyo! whats up?

Shalvenay

not a whole lot, somewhat bored actually, as for you?

daze413

obsessing over the answer of this:

theangrygm.com/the-infamous-angry-riddle-contest

Ryan

@daze413 hmm? not quite sure I understand what that sentence means

daze413

@Ryan I meant that in a table top scenario, and you pull a "witness this cool thing my BBEG does while you sit there, hiding or something", you will, more likely than not, get your BBEG killed by the PCs

ACuriousMind

01:42

@daze413 The much more entertaining version is when the PCs start questioning how the BBEG actually did that, generating the plot of the next few sessions by having the GM desperately trying to fix plotholes :P

Shalvenay

@ACuriousMind hahahaha

@daze413 at least you've never had to ponder a PC who can wield an <Insert Geographical Entity Here> Removal System

Miniman

@daze413 Well, it has to be either the iron or the copper chest, but I don't think there's any way to tell which.

Shalvenay

"Sorry, but that kingdom got deleted a while ago. Idiot warlord thought he could enslave my people."

ACuriousMind

@Shalvenay I've had entire conspiracies grow out of having to explain how the PCs' opponents got their hand on a specific piece of information. Since then I'm very careful to think about the flow of information :D

The "it's a mystery" angle works only in certain situations, sadly :P

Ryan

going to make a tank character. Something I never do. And play on Master difficulty. Should be interesting; ranged guys and dragons might really give me trouble

daze413

01:47

@ACuriousMind there are a lot of ways to counter this, I personally like to go with "ok, how could it be true? Discuss..." then let the players help in collaborating. It may seem like a cop out... It is...

@Shalvenay I'm afraid I don't quite follow?

@Miniman How did you rule out the bronze?

Adeptus

@Miniman Does the "only one true sentence" include the "one true sentence" sentence?

Shalvenay

@daze413 ah, sorry -- it's a reference to my EVE Online main and the fact he's pretty much fully qualified as a Naglfar pilot

Miniman

@Adeptus It must, or the player who got it wrong would have been right.

Also, he specifically said "four statements".

daze413

@Adeptus That breaks the whole logic of the thing... I hope not?

Miniman

@daze413 Not, it does. There are 2 true sentences.

The first one isn't one of them.

Shalvenay

01:49

having something like that raining truck-sized thermonuclear-warhead-tipped artillery shells on your head from orbit...yeah, that'd be a bad day

Miniman

So they can either be "copper is deadly" and "bronze is deadly", which would make it the iron, or "copper is safe" and "bronze is deadly", which would make it the copper.

AFAICT there's no way to determine which is the case.

Adeptus

@Miniman Where does it say "four statements"?

ACuriousMind

@daze413 Oh, sure, players generating the plot by speculating is a nice move. That doesn't mean you don't have to play through it, in a way that doesn't generate more plotholes. I'm not complaining, if you think that - it's fun, I enjoy that sort of improvisation (both as a player and as a GM)

Miniman

> Here’s a copy of the four statements it made.

daze413

@Shalvenay I'm afraid of tapping even a portion of EVE online, lest my fragile mind break

Adeptus

01:52

@Miniman Ah! That's only in "the whole story" not "the puzzle" - I wonder if that was deliberate?

daze413

@ACuriousMind Yeah, it's a lot more fun, from the other side of the screen, to just discover it as it unfolds. But then, to each his own :)

godskook

The statue says four sentences. #2 and #4 are causally linked as opposites, and thus one of them *MUST* be true and the other false.

#1 can not be true if #3 is true, which blows the logic out for Bronze being teh right chest. Bronze could still be the right chest, but that player's logic is wrong.

#1 requires that either A)All the statements are true except #1(Impossible), B)all 3 are wrong(also impossible), C)#1 and exactly 1 other statement are true(possible only if Copper is correct), or D)only 1 statement is correct(making the iron or copper correct, but indeterminate from this poi…

Miniman

@Adeptus Presumably - we already have a clue his players didn't.

godskook

Thus, by C and D, I've narrowed the options down to exactly 2 possibilities.

Miniman

@godskook If #1 is a true statement, no other statement can be true. Which is impossible due to the contradictory nature of #2 and #4.

So your option C is invalid, not that it matters.

godskook

01:56

True

Miniman

And your D requires that #1 be true and false.

Two statements must be true, and they can't be the first statement.

But it's still indeterminate between iron and copper, unless I've missed something.

daze413

@Miniman perhaps the wisdom is in the knowing that there is only 50:50 chance of success, and that risk is inevitable.

but that kinda sucks...

Miniman

@daze413 Yeah, I was wondering about that too - the initial introduction goes on a fair bit about how you have to be willing to take risks.

CTWind

Isn't there the possibility that the chest is safe but doesn't contain the crown?

Miniman

But he says it's a "fair" logic puzzle, which conventionally requires that it be solvable solely through logic, without having to guess.

@CTWind Not if you accept the puzzle's introduction.

daze413

02:00

@Miniman But knowing angry (I feel I am qualified to know him, being an angry celebrity and all), I think he'd make it actually solvable

@CTWind possible to be safe to just touch, but when you open it, it explodes.

CTWind

@daze413 That works too.

Adeptus

@CTWind but assuming the intro is true, Two of them will destroy anyone who so much as touches them. The third is safe to touch and contains the Crown of Kings.

godskook

Ok, I conceptualized "D" wrong. #3 being false leads to a contradiction, but #3 being -true- leads to what I described as the end result.

Which gives us 2 true statements

#3, and #2 or #4

Miniman

Yeah, exactly.

godskook

Still leads to the same end result.

2-true, 2-false, and 2 options left to try.

Miniman

02:10

> Note: In this case fair means only that Angry has not misrepresented the conditions of the puzzle in his speech at the beginning and that the statue’s logic is sound.

So the conditions given are accurate, apparently.

Adeptus

the statue's logic is sound but misleading

Miniman

> It didn’t help that it was specifically designed to trap people who were good at these sorts of logic puzzles.

That's kinda the idea.

BESW

"...there is logic in what he says."

►

CTWind

Is it a grammatical technicality puzzle? Is only one of those 4 statements truly a sentence? :-P

godskook

There's no reason to believe that the 10' pole trick won't work here.

Miniman

02:13

@godskook Sure, but it's pointless.

godskook

Why?

The chests are EASILY opened.

BESW

Most poles have blunted ends.

Miniman

@godskook Because the goal is to solve the puzzle. Finding a creative way to circumvent it won't get us the Crown of Kings (or anything else).

godskook

Ok? By technicality, a dagger would work.

"If you manage to think of something I haven’t thought of, you’ve outsmarted the designers. I think they’d consider you worthy in that case."

Angry explicitly tells that to the players OoC

I'm reasonably confident Angry doesn't lie.

Miniman

You're really telling me that he didn't think of the 10' pole, the most commonly attempted approach to every puzzle and trap in D&D history?

godskook

02:16

That's a meta development of -gamers-. No reason to believe that D&D trap designers had to deal with that particular kind of issue.

Shalvenay

@Miniman LOL. the funny thing about the 10' pole is that it really exists

Adeptus

Also, is it safe for anyone to open, or do you have to be an heir to the crown?

Shalvenay

(and in longer versions, too)

Adeptus

@CTWind I'm pretty sure they all qualify as sentences

godskook

The references to sacrifice suggest that Iron is the right choice, as I ~think~ that's the most practical of the metals represented here.

Miniman

02:18

@godskook If you really want to circumvent the puzzle, just summon 3 things and have them each open a chest. It still doesn't achieve anything.

godskook

Well, it sure as hell doesn't solve the riddle, I agree.

Miniman

Is anyone else bothered by "they're all easy to open" in conjunction with "2 of them blow you up if you even touch them"?

godskook

Nope.

Those two things can be true simultaneously.

Miniman

Oh, I'm not suggesting it's part of the puzzle. It just bothers me conceptually.

daze413

if the only thing barring the room is a portcullis (assuming its made of iron bars which you can see through), you can still mage hand it

or unseen servant

but given how deliberate angry is with spells circumventing things (remember his megadungeon article about gates?), I doubt it'll work.

Ryan

02:29

Playing on Master from the beginning while really trying to roleplay is surprisingly hard. Had to use potions just to survive Helgen

Shalvenay

@daze413 I take it Angry is not a fan of the wizard solving all the problems with his spellcasting? xD

hey there @JuneShores

ACuriousMind

@Ryan Personally I think playing Skyrim on higher difficulties is the "tedious" instead of "fun" kind of being difficult :P

Ryan

I like the challenge. I wouldnt play on Legendary or with 1 Life rules though

JuneShores

Hi hi.

Shalvenay

how're things going?

JuneShores

02:36

Going alright. Making pizza.

Shalvenay

alright here

daze413

@Shalvenay no, he is not. Though it makes sense... in a world of magic, then a decent dungeon maker would make it hard for a wizard to bypass everything

Shalvenay

@daze413 yeah -- you'd think the designers would think of those sorts of things :P

Ryan

02:52

@JuneShores mmm pizza

JuneShores

This crust came out really good.

trogdor

pizzzzzza

XD

CTWind

One other thing I can think of for the riddle is there's a bit of extra information they could ask for to determine if there's a trick: The intro is very specific about treasure chests, but the statue only says 'chest' in its hints, and no one asked what the statue is made of. One of the statue's hints could be referring to the statue.

I'm not sure how much that knowledge would actually help, though.

If the statue's made of bronze, then "The copper chest is deadly to touch" could be false, "The bronze chest is deadly to touch" could be false (referring to statue's chest), and the copper chest being safe to touch and containing the crown could be true which'd make exactly one statement true (if the statement about one sentence being true doesn't include itself).

That said, feels dirty if that's the true answer.

I also wonder if the true answer may be that you're intended to throw people at the chests until one opens with the crown; the intro does say "If you are not willing to risk death, you may leave. A ruler must take great risks and make great sacrifices. If you are afraid of risk and sacrifice, you are not fit to rule.". If there was a definite answer to the riddle, theoretically you wouldn't have to take a risk or sacrifice, you could just solve it.

Miniman

03:17

@CTWind Yeah, but...ew.

CTWind

"The third is safe to touch and contains the Crown of Kings" might just always mean the third one you try to open. >_>

That'd probably invalidate the statue, though.

nitsua60

@daze413 obsessing in which way?

@Miniman I think you've missed something: 2 and 4 aren't actually contradictory.

Miniman

@nitsua60 They're not, but if you take the puzzle conditions as true, they are.

> Note: In this case fair means only that Angry has not misrepresented the conditions of the puzzle in his speech at the beginning and that the statue’s logic is sound.

nitsua60

@Miniman I'm not sure I'm following you.

I'm taking contradictory as meaning 2=F <--> 4=T.

Miniman

@nitsua60 If "one statue is safe to touch and contains the crown, while the other 2 are deadly to touch" is true, which he says it is, than 2 and 4 become contradictory.

CTWind

03:26

We are given 3 facts in the introduction:
There are three treasure chests: Copper, bronze, iron.
Two treasure chests will destroy anyone who so much as touches them.
The third treasure chest is safe to touch and contains the crown of kings.

Then we have the statue giving the following 4 statements:
1- I speak only one true sentence.
2- The copper chest is deadly to touch.
3- The bronze chest is deadly to touch. (Evidently true?)
4- The copper chest is safe to touch *and* contains the crown.

I believe we can then surmise that the two deadly treasure chests do not contain the crown, and therefore there is no deadly treasure chest that contains the crown and there is no safe treasure chest that does not contain the crown.

nitsua60

@Miniman Hmm... not by my symbolic breakdown. -(A and B) = -A or -B. So 4=F reads as [(copper is not safe) or (copper does not contain crown)]... oh, whoops. Should have written it out before chiming in.

=D

Miniman

@nitsua60 Man, I haven't seen De Morgan's used in so long...ah, the nostalgia.

But yeah, they aren't inherently contradictory, but apparently the puzzle introduction is accurate, so yeah.

CTWind

Given that bronze clearly didn't have the crown, then (assuming no trickery with the statue being made of a type of metal it's talking about):

If copper contains the crown:
2: False
3: True
4: True
(Therefore, 1: False)

If Iron contains the crown:
2: True
3: True
4: False
(Therefore, 1: False)

And, so far as I can tell, we're out of further hints.

nitsua60

@CTWind I reject your given. Not that it's false, but that it's info the players didn't have, and it was designed to be solved by the players.

Miniman

@nitsua60 Yep, but bronze can be eliminated anyway.

CTWind

03:34

True, if bronze contains the crown:
2: True
3: False
4: False
(Therefore, 1: Paradox/true and not meant to refer to itself)

Clearly the chest exploded not due to a magical trap, but due to a logical paradox.

The problem with that being that it turned out that bronze was deadly to the touch.

(Alternatively, there's annoying trickery in there involving bronze being an alloy consisting partially of copper. I highly doubt that's it, though.)

Miniman

The other thing they could do is touch the statue again, but I think it's unlikely that that's the solution.

From the Whole Story:

> It will speak only once until a chest has been touched.

Doesn't appear in The Puzzle, either.

CTWind

Oh dammit

they could touch the statue's chest.

and then get another hint.

Miniman

I actually meant "now that someone has touched the bronze chest and asploded" they could potentially get another hint.

CTWind

Right, but I overlooked that when I was talking about the statue's hints only referring to 'chests' relative to the intro always referring to 'treasure chests'

the intro didn't specify 'treasure chest' once- right there.

Miniman

@CTWind Yeah, I didn't mean to shift the spotlight from that idea, either, it's pretty clever.

Sadly we don't know what the statue's made of :(

CTWind

03:49

Yeah, and like you said the "The Puzzle" section doesn't have that line, which makes me doubt it being part of the solution.

Miniman

Side note: The Crown of Kings? As opposed to...the Crown of People Who Wear Crowns For No Reason?

CTWind

If the intro wasn't specific about the crown being in a treasure chest, I'd guess the answer was smashing open the statue's.

But that doesn't look like the case.

Adeptus

04:09

@Miniman Queens? Princes/Princesses/Dukes/Duchesses/other royal titles?

Miniman

@Adeptus What, so it's only a crown for monarchs who are also mature males?

Adeptus

@Miniman ...yes?

daze413

04:31

@nitsua60 I am stalking it and watching it sleep

More seriously, though, how does anyone come up with those puzzles?

Papayaman1000

@daze413 I usually try a top-down thing (Start with a theme and go from there), then focus on making statements until it's interesting and evaluates properly (such as using wordplay, as this one might have).

The Oracle

04:47

1

Q: How should this question about maps be workshopped?

A new user has asked a question about map making, specifically on how to figure out distances for a map they made. While the question, in its current form, is off-topic for the site's format, it seems like there is useful information there if only it were phrased in a more specific, RPG-related ...

godskook

Hey, did we ever figure out Angry's riddle?

Adeptus

@godskook No. We only know it isn't the one that blew up...

godskook

lol

Well, we had the -why- of it blowing up last I was in here.

Adeptus

Paradox? Hmm

Miniman

@SevenSidedDie Incidentally, I kinda put vastly oversimplified words in your mouth with that meta answer - feel free to object, and I'll revise it.

SevenSidedDie

05:04

@Miniman I tend to vasty undersimplify the words in my mouth, so that's possibly improvement. Looks good from here. :)

Miniman

@SevenSidedDie Thanks!

:36824187 What language?

Papayaman1000

@Miniman JS

Miniman

@Papayaman1000 I haven't used JS in ages, but Google suggests that the function is evaluated on assignment, rather than each time the variable is used.

Assuming you're assigning a function call to a variable, that is. If you assign a function definition to a variable the variable just becomes a shorthand for calling that function.

Papayaman1000

@Miniman Okay then. So I could set a variable as a function to return another function's call to make the variable's value re-evaluate each time it's called?

Miniman

@Papayaman1000 I suppose so, but why not just call the function?

Papayaman1000

05:16

[I'm trying to make it so I can roll for a weapon's damage by calling its formula.]

The function is a die roll, so it can have different outputs given the same argument. So I'm trying to run that function by calling weaponObj.damage

Miniman

I guess what I'm asking is, why not just call damage(weaponObj)?

Papayaman1000

Because... well... I could dump the relevant architecture, if you wish.

Miniman

Nah, it's not like it really matters.

Purely a case of stylistic differences.

Papayaman1000

And do modifiers on multi-die rolls apply to each die, or to the total of all rolls?

Miniman

@Papayaman1000 Depends on the system.

Papayaman1000

05:24

@Miniman D&D 5e

Miniman

@Papayaman1000 Then modifiers are pretty much always to the total of the roll.

Papayaman1000

@Miniman Okay then.

Miniman

(I hesitate to say "always", because there's usually some exception kicking around, but to my knowledge there isn't any.)

Papayaman1000

@Miniman Well, one way or the other, it would generally be easier to just add the mod after the roll is called due to the architecture of the roll function, so I'll do that.

godskook

05:44

Slash of Daylight[Meta-Smite feat]
Pre-req: Smite, +6 bonus damage to smite from class levels.
Description:
As a standard action, you may make a Slash of Daylight. If you do, attack all targets in a 15' half-circle. Deal an additional +1d6 damage. Calculate your effective smite damage for these attacks as if you were 4 levels lower.
Special: You may not use a meta-smite feat if doing so would reduce your effective Paladin level to less than 1.

Homebrew for 3.5

Thoughts?

Miniman

@godskook I think if you're homebrewing smite-related abilities, you probably need to start by making smite suck less.

godskook

I already houserule it to be per-encounter.

This plus that seems like a lot of power, tbh.

Admittedly, I should've included that from the start.

Miniman

Ah, cool. So this is like Whirlwind Attack for smite, basically, except without the crappy pre-requisites.

godskook

And not reach-based

Miniman

I'll defer to this answer for assessment of the usefulness of this sort of thing - it's a bit harsh, but it covers everything I'd want to mention.

Yours is vastly better than Whirlwind Attack, no question, but it's still pretty niche.

godskook

05:51

"If Whirlwind Attack had no prerequisites, it would have some niche uses."

:P

Miniman

I did say yours was vastly better, and I stand by that. It's just...still not something I'd take, personally.

godskook

What about in E6?

Miniman

Ah. Hmmm.

Adeptus

What level do you get +6 bonus damage to smite?

godskook

Level 6

Miniman

05:54

So it's an attack on all opponents in a 15' half-circle, +Cha to attack roll and +1d6+2 to damage.

godskook

Note that a normal smite is dealing only +6 damage, so the net difference is basically zero.

Miniman

@godskook Yep, I've got that in mind.

godskook

I'm changing it to a dice to "count" the meta-smite feats stacking on top of eachother in case I add more of them.

The "effective paladin level" part will be a cost lever to keep them from stacking too absurdly.

Miniman

It's tricky. In general, even in E6, I'd consider this still not great. But if I was a level 6 Paladin anyway, it'd start to look pretty good, I think.

godskook

And plus, everyone's used to that from metamagic/metapower feats.

Ok, let's assume that Paladin 6 happens :P

Cause I'm working on that assumption at the very least.

Miniman

05:58

Especially if I'd already gotten the feats I really wanted and could afford to spend further feats on niche abilities - E6 lends itself well to broadening your capabilities rather than deepening them.

godskook

I mean, as an E6 Pally, what're you wanting that's -better- than doing AoE melee damage?

Miniman

@godskook I was just thinking about that.

daze413

@godskook kinda sorta, yeah, it's that there is a 50:50 chance of not getting blowneded to pieces, and that the hopeful heir must live with taking the risk and losing lives of those he cares about.

Miniman

@godskook As a Paladin in E6, I'd probably be working towards a mounted charger, I guess, since most of those feats are available at that point.

And if I've picked Paladin, I'm going to want to be doing a mounted build, so as to make use of their main (somewhat) unique feature.

godskook

Y'know, I never actually figured out if Shocktrooper applies on a charge.

Miniman

06:04

@godskook It does. On a mounted charge...it's tricky.

godskook

Er derp

I meant to add "mounted"

Miniman

5

Q: Can you use charge-specific feats while mounted?

I am going to have my party face level 7 orc fighters mounted on worgs. I gave them leap attack, shock trooper and ride-by-attack. Can the orcs use their leap attack feat and the heedless charge option of shock trooper while mounted - i.e. does it work if the mount leaps to trigger leap attack a...

dnd-3.5e feats

@godskook So yeah, I guess my thoughts would be: This is definitely something I'd think about taking and using when the situation arose, but after I'd gotten everything I could find to improve my normal shtick (whatever that might be).

godskook

Out of curiosity, how high up the list do you think it goes if you don't grab mounted combat feats at all?

Miniman

Well, it'd still be below all the feats that boost my normal combat round - there'd just be a lot less on that list.

Significantly boost, I should say, since I'd definitely get this before Weapon Focus even though Weapon Focus would, technically, boost my normal attacks.

Miniman

06:23

Wait, does your houserule make smite 1/encounter, or 2/encounter for a level 6 Paladin?

Also, am I reading correctly that this ability works on non-evil targets?

godskook

06:35

And.....college is a dick

You still there?

Miniman

@godskook Still around, but not for much longer.

godskook

Gotcha

Uses for smite are just swapping "day" for "encounter"

So if you have +uses, that's +uses/encounter.

By my houserule.

Miniman

Ah, right. And does this ability work on non-evil targets? Also, can you exclude allied targets?

godskook

ok....you didn't ping for some reason.

Miniman

@godskook Sorry, I don't habitually ping in an ongoing conversation.

godskook

06:41

And yes, Smite works on non-evil targets

It normally pings anyway

Mostly because in my setting there's not an "evil", so adjudicating alignment is much much harder.

So I just handwave it to "reasonable targets"

Miniman

Ok, at that point, with 2 uses per encounter, (and remembering that at level 6 a full-attack is only 2 attacks), this starts looking pretty good.

godskook

And -this feat- should probably have good friendly fire rules too.

Do note that there's ways of increasing smites per foo

That are "per encounter" in my rules.

Miniman

Then yeah, definitely looking good.

I gotta go, talk to you later!

godskook

Thanks, that does clarify what I'm forgetting about my own houserules.

RollingFeles

@SevenSidedDie hi!

SevenSidedDie

06:52

@RollingFeles *waves* Hi!

(I'm up way past my bedtime though.)

RollingFeles

Oh, I wish you good night then! :)

Just wanted to talk about DW a little. Nothing special or specific. Just had awesome experience running it last time, although I know that I violated some GM rules, done few things wrong in general sense, but my players were happy.

I really loved to create feeling of the danger. Real danger. They met orcs battle squad(yeah, my orcs know battle drill) and they never risked to fought in all-in face to face, so, the most of the session was about retreat and covering some civilians.

I compare it with my DnD experience. Although, I had tense moments as a player in DnD, but I never felt such tension and feel of danger as my players did last session.

BESW

10:18

Happy Festival of Ridván, by the way!

trogdor

oooh

eimyr

thanks

Happy festival to you too!

Momonga-sama

11:25

Hello

BESW

[wave]

Momonga-sama

BESW, are you familiar with 3.5 or not much? :p

eimyr

@Momonga-sama Well, it's the expected value of a single roll of the most popular die.

The Oracle

0

Q: Can somebody explain the inconsistent voting on this?

I posted an answer to this question. It was deemed off-topic by the mods and users decided to down-vote it, according to the comments because the question was unclear (which in their opinion makes for an unclear answer, regardless of actual content of the answer). I don't agree with the opinion...

discussion voting

BESW

11:54

@Momonga-sama Sorry, got caught up elsewhere. I played 3.5 for four or five years, four or five years ago.

NautArch

12:29

hello to all

BESW

Hey, guys, it's late and my math is tired. How many d6s do I need to get a 50% chance of rolling at least one 1?

Also, can I ask for some practical research? Please tell me how many d6s you can pick up in one hand--not for rolling, just holding them without being too nervous about dropping them.

Miniman

4, I think.

Sorry, for the first question.

At least 6, for the second question - that's as many as I have access to right now.

Erik

When you say "pick up", do you mean "how many dice can you hold in one hand" or "using one hand, how many dice can you get off a table without dropping any"? I think I can hold 10-15 dice in one hand, but I won't be able to pick them up with one hand

(It also depends on die-size, but I'm assuming standard ones ;) )

BESW

Let's say "grab a handful of dice." How many is that for you?

(I've got another 200-word RPG brewing.)

I want to say something like "Each player puts a handful of d6s in the middle of the table" and know what that means.

Erik

12:46

If I grab a handful of dice, probably around 10 (but I don't have any to check right now; that just sounds like what I normally grab when I need to collect some random ones)

If the goal is to grab as many as possible it goes up a lot, though. D6 stack very well

Miniman

I have 11, but it was a mix of types.

Papayaman1000

With the d6s out of my tower, and my massive hands, probably around 15. They're tiny, but if you own a tower, that's the size they're going to be. d6s out of a Monopoly box or something, though? Maybe 8.

Just stumbled upon an old meta post on how to tag dnd-5e. One memorable suggestion was dampersandd.

...Ah. BESW, that was your fault.

BESW

I'm not proud. Or tired.

Draft of 200-word RPG: Too Much Bubblegum.

Papayaman1000

That seems really fun, I will say.

Erik

13:03

It looks funny, but I'm not sure how this is an RPG?

eimyr

@Erik You did not say that.

Erik

Hm. It must have been my evil twin.

eimyr

Is he a really cool guy?

BESW

Ace Erik. What a guy.

Momonga-sama

13:21

You folks know some advanced rules for d&d's airships? :p

NautArch

@Momonga-sama what kind of rules?

BESW

What kind of D&D?

Erik

I feel like asking "What kind of airships" just to fit in...

NautArch

and just to round out the "what kind"...what kind of airships

@Erik beat me to it!

i am shocked at how well that dying pc answer has been received.

godskook

13:46

What kind of advanced?

BESW

@emma [wave]

Momonga-sama

@BESW 3.5 That would be.

Darn it, stahp.

Erik

Have you check the Eberron books? The setting features a lot of airships

BESW

I believe the Arms & Equipment Guide has airship rules too.

Papayaman1000

I wonder what kind of rules 5e has in place that could support a weightless environment.

BESW

13:57

But the A&E's mechanical quality is... spotty.

Transcript for