« first day (2801 days earlier)      last day (2163 days later) » 
00:00 - 15:0015:00 - 19:0019:00 - 00:00

Colin Gross
Colin Gross
3:00 PM
Gotta run to a meeting. I'll check with you later @Helwar. Postman has a GUI for setting headers and the body of requests.
 
Helwar
Helwar
I feel like I lack some BASIC knowledge, as they give me info but I don't know how to tackle it
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
I'd start with that as it's pretty easy.
 
Helwar
Helwar
@ColinGross ok thanks!
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
What OS are you running?
 
Helwar
Helwar
sadly Ubuntu
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
3:01 PM
I like that.
It has curl. I'll hack up some curl examples after my meeting.
 
Helwar
Helwar
Thank you very much !
 
SPavel
SPavel
@Helwar I'm designing a REST API right now!
Well, I am chatting instead of working, but I ought to be designing the REST API right now
 
Helwar
Helwar
@SPavel me too
I mean, chat instead of work... I'm struggling USING a rest api
so designing one is miles away
 
Delioth
Delioth
Eh; as with a lot of software development it's perfectly reasonable for someone to know how to build something but not use it
 
SPavel
SPavel
@Delioth This is how you come up with bad software
 
Delioth
Delioth
3:07 PM
Well, it's perfectly reasonable to build a rest api in Java complete with unit tests and a library that makes manual testing easy, but be completely unable to build Java or javascript that would call that api to do meaningful work
Alternatively: a ton of people who built Photoshop probably aren't good digital artists
 
Helwar
Helwar
@Delioth but they sure know where the blur plugin is and how to work it
I'm so un-knowledgeable that I struggle to interact with the damn thing hahahaha
 
SPavel
SPavel
@Delioth Just because they aren't good at it doesn't mean they don't understand how the tool is used by those who are.
Without knowing how your users use the software, you cannot make good decisions about how to make that software.
You can guess and be lucky, or you can get close enough that people do not complain, but that is not the same thing.
You can also try to compartmentalize this knowledge within a product management group, but the result is never as good as when the entire team shares that knowledge
 
Delioth
Delioth
Knowing how your users use it doesn't necessitate actually being able to use it (i.e. I know the users of my API take it in with a Python script and parse it as JSON and that they prefer things structured like so; but I don't have the requisite knowledge to build a similar Python program that consumes the API in the same way)
 
Helwar
Helwar
@ColinGross I got it working on the Postman GUI (thankfully!), I don't know how to get the actual code to use on my javascript file though.... gonna poke around it a little see if it falls from somewhere
 
GreySage
GreySage
@SPavel Is it Neon?
 
Helwar
Helwar
3:22 PM
@ColinGross Actually, nevermind, I found it
 
Delioth
Delioth
@SPavel And I'd argue exactly the opposite of the product management - they're a fantastic resource since they can work out all the kinks without wasting my expensive dev time, and then provide exactly the requirements (rather than wasting dev time on figuring out requirements, and then building code to meet those, and then another 6 meetings with the client learning those aren't the requirements they actually want, and then another $1000 of dev time is wasted just because they changed)
 
SPavel
SPavel
@Delioth Product should be figuring out requirements but devs need to understand why those are the requirements and not blindly build
In an ideal world, the ACs would be perfect and cover all cases and convey in minute detail what needs to be done without encroaching on how it must be done, but I've not seen a team that can do that
 
Delioth
Delioth
@SPavel Devs absolutely don't need to fully understand the requirements. Partial understanding, definitely; but fully understanding every reason is too much
 
SPavel
SPavel
@Delioth I never said they need to internalize all knowledge that led to the requirements, that would be insane
 
Delioth
Delioth
Though I think we're just talking about slightly different points - I'm saying a dev can build a product without being able to use it fully, you're saying devs need to be able to understand how a product is used to build it (it's a subtle difference, but I think we pretty much agree)
It's perfectly valid for a backend dev to be able to build an API but not be able to actually use that API; though they need to have an understanding of how users/clients (will) use that API (and a Product team may or may not be helping to disseminate that understanding)
 
GreySage
GreySage
3:40 PM
@Delioth If you can't use the API, how do you test it?
 
SPavel
SPavel
@GreySage don't test, just build
tests cost story points
 
Delioth
Delioth
@GreySage We've got libraries for that. Notably for my Java environment, Swagger (you just throw some annotations on some controllers and it gives a neat little UI that builds the requests for you)
 
OneCritWonder
OneCritWonder
Oh hey, the chat works at work. I'm sure this wont destroy my productivity at all.
 
Delioth
Delioth
Lets you build requests that you think'll come in and get back responses, but I neither have to know how to build scripts that make requests nor scripts that can take the response and do something meaningful with it
 
OneCritWonder
OneCritWonder
Good morning Rubiksmoose.
 
Rubiksmoose
Rubiksmoose
3:47 PM
Morning :)
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
@Helwar Glad that worked out for you. That API looks like a mess.
 
SPavel
SPavel
@ColinGross Most APIs are bad
Our API is good though :)
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
@SPavel I find most are pretty okay. Having an endpoint that accepts multiple serializations with slightly different structures is a bad smell. An endpoint that does both soap and rest is also a bad smell.
 
Delioth
Delioth
@ColinGross Of course, because no-one wants to sleep in their bathtub
 
SPavel
SPavel
@ColinGross anything where you POST in order to get data is insane by definition
And there is a lot of that!
 
goodguy5
goodguy5
3:52 PM
why am I getting so much rep from that stupid answer about raising undead on your own cloned corpse
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
@goodguy5 Someone was asking for a friend?
 
SPavel
SPavel
@goodguy5 Is it a D&D question, because if yes, that's why
D&D questions = free rep
 
goodguy5
goodguy5
I've gotten 325 I think, so far
 
GreySage
GreySage
@goodguy5 This is how I think of most of my high-rep generating answers
For example, my first answer with triple digit upvotes I only posted because everyone was talking about the question and possible answers, but no one was actually answering it, so I figured I'd throw a quick answer out to encourage better answers.
 
goodguy5
goodguy5
I definitely feel like it's meme-able.

"spends an hour crafting the perfect answer - barely noticed"
"off the cuff point about rules as written - praised widely"
<jackie chan confusion picture>
 
OneCritWonder
OneCritWonder
4:01 PM
That's how my reddit response karma works.
 
Helwar
Helwar
@ColinGross I have to go home now, I'll explain later :) thanks
 
OneCritWonder
OneCritWonder
A paragraph with links, page references, and examples? 2 points.
A single sarcastic sentence with a lame pun? 689 points
 
A Very Large Bear
A Very Large Bear
Have any of you guys played a Gumshoe variant before?
 
Delioth
Delioth
@OneCritWonder Hell, I have a massive write-up that I've commented a few times for Pathfinder (on the subject of "how to make good/evil/law/chaos not a gut thing but something that you can actually use"); just a few updoots in a relevant sub. Uncited comment about how black widows can live underwater for a few days and a comment about them biting you on the toilet? 5k updoots
 
NautArch
NautArch
@nitsua60 punchspace?
 
A Very Large Bear
A Very Large Bear
4:06 PM
I assumed he meant meatspace
 
NautArch
NautArch
@goodguy5 much like my snake prone answer
 
SPavel
SPavel
@goodguy5 This is already in the meme section of SO meta
Related to the Fastest Gun in the West
 
goodguy5
goodguy5
oh perfect
 
OneCritWonder
OneCritWonder
I've not played Gumshoe nor a variant.
 
KorvinStarmast
KorvinStarmast
@Delioth Link to that answer? I am not sure I have seen it . Well written things on using alignment effectively are to me worth the time
 
Delioth
Delioth
4:18 PM
@KorvinStarmast Well, we were momentarily detoured to Reddit at the time and I'm not sure I've ever put it up on stack. I'll search for the write-up though (whether it's on stack or Reddit)
 
SPavel
SPavel
@Delioth That's because alignment is boring but spiders and butts are both interesting
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
@KorvinStarmast have you read Keith Baker's take on alignment re: Eberron?
 
Delioth
Delioth
@KorvinStarmast This answer kinda starts on how I think alignment ought to affect characters, but it doesn't go into the deep reasoning defining each alignment (that write up is quite long, and I should probably have a link to it handy but I don't; I should be able to find it though maybe) rpg.stackexchange.com/a/102351/26912
 
Delioth
Delioth
4:43 PM
Aha; here we go. There's a little context to it but I mostly ignore the context. I think it's laid out pretty well too- starts with a couple lines to define Good/Evil/Neutral, then Lawful/Chaotic, then a breakdown of how Law/Chaos interacts with each Good-Evil, then a description of how Neutral on the Law-Chaos spectrum. And then a little blurb at the end that says how I think this ought to affect gameplay. reddit.com/r/Pathfinder_RPG/comments/7vm0tv/_/dtub0nh
 
SPavel
SPavel
@Delioth Most of the time, the alignment system fails because nobody bothered to define chaotic/lawful so just doing that is already a good start
 
Delioth
Delioth
Yeah; I've also found from most descriptions of alignment they don't actually define good & evil. They sort-of-assume that it's "nice" and "bad" but don't go beyond that, and consider it mostly a "gut" thing (with possible real-world parallels)
 
SPavel
SPavel
I'm not entirely sure that a Robin Hood who is never in danger is CN solely because giving up his social status and time is already a sacrifice
But otherwise, sensible
 
Delioth
Delioth
Yeah - the Robin Hood case I really should have placed as more of on the line between good/neutral in that sense.
 
SPavel
SPavel
If Superman fights a bunch of muggers, he is never in danger, but it's still Good
 
Delioth
Delioth
4:55 PM
I put it neutral because I think the primary sacrifice he makes is of the wealth of the rich and his primary goal is the uplifting/survival of the poor
@SPavel See, and I believe that based on those criteria his action is Neutral. He's sacrificing the wellbeing of the muggers for the good of the neighborhood, He's not sacrificing anything of himself (well, time I guess - so it'd probably lean towards good a little)
 
Yuuki
Yuuki
Well, those muggers might have a Kryptonian dagger so maybe it's a sacrifice of his possible wellbeing, who knows?
 
SPavel
SPavel
Well, given that the normal framework doesn't actually have much logic about where it puts people, that is a fair judgment
@Yuuki That is a surprisingly good point
 
Yuuki
Yuuki
Incidentally, I feel like if we put together all the pieces of Kryptonite in DC, we might end up with a planet bigger than Krypton was.
 
SPavel
SPavel
Since alignment is based on intent
@Yuuki It could just be the same piece of Kryptonite
 
Delioth
Delioth
It's not a perfect system I must admit, but I think it's at least a good start (and I can see where Supes fighting muggers would be Good, because it's an attempt to reduce the overall Evil in a system - but that'd be neutral in the same way a Judge is neutral)
 
SPavel
SPavel
4:59 PM
@Delioth Is a judge neutral?
Or to be more accurate
Is the judge-law system neutral?
A judge only judges insofar as the act matches the law
But if the law-system is designed to reduce Evil, the law is Good
 
Delioth
Delioth
Yeah - sacrifices the well-being/time of criminals for the well-being of the community
 
SPavel
SPavel
The judge may be Neutrally executing the law, but it is a Good law
 
Yuuki
Yuuki
@Delioth Well, if you subscribe to the "criminals should be punished" theory of justice.
 
SPavel
SPavel
One may argue that the rehabilitation of a criminal is for the benefit of the criminal
 
Yuuki
Yuuki
Reformation policy is more "improves the well-being of criminals for the well-being of the community".
 
Mike Q
Mike Q
5:01 PM
Every creature has a vertical-align and horizontal-align
 
Delioth
Delioth
@Yuuki It's mostly a real-world example that does a decent approximation
 
Mike Q
Mike Q
"vertical-align: good" is invalid
 
Yuuki
Yuuki
@MikeQ Ugh, I have enough trouble with centering divs, I don't want to bother with True Neutrals.
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
I like the relativistic approach to alignment. Two LG characters can see one another as LE.
@Yuuki bootstrap everything? /S
 
Delioth
Delioth
It's still sacrificing the time and freedom of the criminal for either/both their own well-being (which is neutral) or the community well-being (which is still neutral)
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
5:04 PM
Another conundrum is the characters that knows they are LE, but read The Prince, and all their actions are LG.
 
Yuuki
Yuuki
Look guys, alignment is easy.
> Good-Evil: An action is Good if you roll above a 10. An action is Evil if it makes someone post a designer intent question.
> Law-Chaos: if you tie your ties with a double Windsor, you are Lawful. If you wear Hawaiian shirts on Monday, you are Chaotic.
 
Delioth
Delioth
@SPavel The fact that the Law may be good or evil is irrelevant (and by a strict reading of my write-up, any Law is between Lawful Neutral and Lawful Evil - it sacrifices exclusively of others, in a strict and well-defined manner, for either its own benefit or for the benefit of others)
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
If you're evil, but live your life as though nobody would be able to tell, are you still LE to detect alignment magic?
 
Mike Q
Mike Q
@ColinGross By default (assuming no alignment-concealing abilities) yes
 
Yuuki
Yuuki
@ColinGross People keep interpreting The Prince poorly. Even if you don't think it's satire, it's not about how to rule a government efficiently, it's about how to stay in power.
 
Mike Q
Mike Q
5:05 PM
Magical alignment detection is really dumb, because why have a legal system when you could replace the judge and jury with some dude who casts Detect Evil
 
Yuuki
Yuuki
The goal of The Prince is not to create a prosperous state, it's to avoid decapitation.
 
Delioth
Delioth
@MikeQ Because selfish actions aren't necessarily bad actions
 
Mike Q
Mike Q
@Delioth My point being that an objective, independent morality system would result in some strange schools of philosophy
Which can be extended to my greater point, that the alignment mechanic is bad and should feel bad
 
Yuuki
Yuuki
@MikeQ Oh man, what if alignment is basically like D&D racism?
Even though actual racism also exists in D&D, I guess.
 
Mike Q
Mike Q
@Yuuki That's not a "what if". Some tables/players/campaigns/designers think of alignment that way.
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
5:09 PM
@MikeQ The blood war in MToF is basicallythat
 
Mike Q
Mike Q
Go into cave. See monsters. Do they have "Evil" written on them? Great, that's a death sentence. Go kill them without any hesitation. The end.
 
Delioth
Delioth
@MikeQ Yeah, that's why I did my best to interpret it... better than the rulebooks do. I'd still advocate for a third axis to the alignment system (Zeal or something, to determine how devoted to being an alignment you are - someone entirely apathetic to alignment would be TN with a 0 in Zeal, someone entirely devoted to balance would be TN with a 2 in Zeal)
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@Delioth I feel like most tables have a hidden value for zeal for each character (based on the backstory/personality traits, etc)
 
Mike Q
Mike Q
Alignment should be replaced with something like Values, Beliefs, Likes, Dislikes, which is less interpretative
 
Delioth
Delioth
@MikeQ And those are bad interpreters of rules/philosophy (I can't say bad GM's or bad players because that falls into telling people how to play the game)
@MikeQ I don't think it should really be replaced, but should probably exist alongside those things which should be essential portions of a character's backstory and personality anyways
@DavidCoffron True, but it might help some people if it were more codified (Why does my LG Paladin act X way but the LG Wizard act another? Is one of them failing to uphold lawful-goodness right?)
 
Mike Q
Mike Q
5:12 PM
@Delioth Eh, the alignment system as-is is oversimplified and often results in annoying paradoxes
Like, a pirate who adheres to the Pirate Code. Does that make them lawful or chaotic?
 
Delioth
Delioth
They're Lawful (note that I'm using the interpretation from that reddit comment I linked above)
Or they're Neutral, depending on how much the code focuses on them saying "screw the law"
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@MikeQ They're also lawful according to the Player's Handbook
(if we're talking about 5e)
 
Delioth
Delioth
But they're certainly not chaotic. Pirates whose modus operandi is purely to break the law would be Chaotic, but pirates with a code are not that.
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
"Lawful Neutral. individuals act in accordance with law, tradition, or personal codes. Many monks and some wizards are lawful neutral. [emphasis mine]"
Or perhaps:
"Lawful Evil. creatures methodically take what they want, within the limits of a code of tradition, loyalty, or order. Devils, blue dragons, and hobgoblins are Lawful evil."
 
Mike Q
Mike Q
Eh. I tell players not to worry about alignment too much. And also to ignore alignment as listed in the bestiary.
 
Sir Cinnamon
Sir Cinnamon
5:17 PM
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@MikeQ Agreed, but the way its written they are basically just ideals anyway, since you can act against your alignment if you want (although many monsters don't RAW)
 
GreySage
GreySage
@SirCinnamon Right, Barbossa would be Netural, while Captain Teags (Jack's father) is Lawful.
 
Sir Cinnamon
Sir Cinnamon
Chaotic is a matter of perspective (I say, picketing outside Mechanus)
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
Barbossa is either Chaotic Neutral, or Neutral Evil (depending on which film you watch)
[in 5e terms]
 
Delioth
Delioth
@DavidCoffron Aye - Alignment is descriptive, it describes your motivations and occasionally the actions you take; it doesn't prescribe what your actions must be
 
GreySage
GreySage
5:20 PM
@DavidCoffron I don't remember him specifically opposing the law, more not caring about it (and in later films enforcing his own law)
 
Sir Cinnamon
Sir Cinnamon
@DavidCoffron I was watching Die Hard, so which is it
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@GreySage "Neutral evil (NE) is the alignment of those who do whatever they can get away with"
 
Mike Q
Mike Q
@SirCinnamon "Yippie kay-yay, poppit"
 
SPavel
SPavel
@ColinGross Being LE without anyone else being able to tell is the most LE thing
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
"Chaotic neutral (CN) creatures follow their whims, holding their personal freedom above all else."
@SPavel not all LE characters focus on subterfuge
 
SPavel
SPavel
5:22 PM
@DavidCoffron Yeah, only the ones who are still alive
 
GreySage
GreySage
@DavidCoffron Right, so Neutral, not Chaotic
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@GreySage I said chaotic neutral or neutral evil, definitely not chaotic evil
 
Delioth
Delioth
@SPavel what David said : LE is about helping yourself at the expense of others, and holding to some sort of code or law. More powerful LE characters tend to take it a step further, and impose their will/law on others (which would be sacrificing their freedoms for your benefit)
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@GreySage There have been times he has definitely acted based on his whims throughout most of the movie
 
SPavel
SPavel
I'd say CN doesn't really care about getting away with it
Sometimes following your whim is worth getting the building collapsed on top of you
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
5:24 PM
@SPavel "personal freedom above all else" Breaking the laws would rduce your personal freedoms
 
Mike Q
Mike Q
@DavidCoffron No, breaking the laws and getting caught would reduce your personal freedoms
 
SPavel
SPavel
@MikeQ Breaking the laws, getting caught, and not being able to escape
 
GreySage
GreySage
@DavidCoffron I'm evaluating him based on Delioths metric, not the PHB
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@GreySage then no chaos with that spectrum
 
nitsua60
nitsua60
@NautArch Yes, what many call "meatspace" I call "punchspace." Depending on the day. In any case, I was saying: if you'd like to be on my RL game-invite/-notification list let me know. Given that these games are in my town (not 45 min south of here) they're easily twice as reachable if you'd want.
(or even if you'd never consider driving down, you could see the pitches if nothing else.)
 
SPavel
SPavel
5:27 PM
Based on how you refer to meatspace, coming down may not be advisable :P
 
Delioth
Delioth
@GreySage Yeah- to be Chaotic you'd have to actively oppose the Law (not caring puts you in Neutral); because if actively opposing is Chaotic, and not caring is Chaotic, and following is Lawful... there's nothing that really fits in Neutral besides "in-between"
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@SPavel Breaking the laws, getting caught by someone you can't bribe, and not being able to escape
 
Delioth
Delioth
Part of what I tried to do is to actually define Neutral as a real thing, and not just "anything that isn't the other ones"
 
SPavel
SPavel
@DavidCoffron Bribe/threaten/etc
If you are caught by a level 1 peasant with a truncheon, soon the universe corrects that situation to you not being caught, AND you having a shiny new truncheon
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@Delioth trouble is, I can think of a couple belief systems that don't fit into your model nicely
(wherease a "everything else" category includes them)
 
SPavel
SPavel
5:30 PM
Also under this definition, is "an eye for an eye" evil?
 
Delioth
Delioth
@DavidCoffron I'd love to discuss them - I don't think my model is perfect
 
nitsua60
nitsua60
@SPavel =D
 
SPavel
SPavel
It would seem so, after all, you are taking of others to give to yourself (the satisfaction of justice done)
(plus, an eye)
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@SPavel Depends on your motive for the rule. If it truly is "the satisfaction of justice done" then I suppose, but that's not always the motivation
 
SPavel
SPavel
@DavidCoffron isn't that the point of that creed?
it's "fair" that an offender suffer as his victim has suffered, for a particular definition of fair, so revenge restores the fairness
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
5:32 PM
historically perhaps, but it doesn't have to be, it could also be to keep society in good runnings (which makes it different)
 
SPavel
SPavel
@DavidCoffron If anything, it does the opposite, leading to huge blood feuds
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@SPavel No one said it has to work. Only that it has to be the goals of the creature's employing it
 
Delioth
Delioth
@SPavel Not necessarily - your interpretation on taking of others to give to yourself (i.e. vengeance) would be one, but if you're motivated for i.e. the good of society (this guy stole $100; to better society he's got to lose his hand)
 
Mike Q
Mike Q
@Delioth Right, but who dictates that chopping off the guy's hand is good for society
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@Delioth I have a problem with good = altruism. Some people do good deeds for their own benefit (such as a feeling it comes with), but I would hesitate to call them un-good.
 
Delioth
Delioth
5:35 PM
@MikeQ Since alignment is tied to one's motivations... the person doing it.
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@MikeQ The person's personal ideas. Someone else might call them evil, but to them they needn't be
 
Delioth
Delioth
(Yeah, I know this system ends up that people who are actually mad/insane pinging as "Good", but I like to think of that as a much more interesting consequence than traditional stuff)
 
Mike Q
Mike Q
@Delioth Alignment is tied to motivations? So consequences don't matter?
I dislike this model because the classic "I'm only trying to help!" becomes a blank check for objective goodness
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@MikeQ Consequences affect how your alignment is perceived by other people (or how you percieve your actions in the future). Not the actions/behaviors themselves
 
Delioth
Delioth
@MikeQ Pretty much, yes.
 
GreySage
GreySage
5:37 PM
@MikeQ Goodness is not mutually exclusive with incompetence
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@MikeQ There is no "objective goodness"
 
Mike Q
Mike Q
@DavidCoffron But isn't the alignment as perceived by others more important? It's not like you're casting Detect evil on yourself.
 
Delioth
Delioth
@MikeQ It's notable that it's actual internalized motivations, not what you say. If you're truly in the belief that your actions sacrifice of yourself and benefit others, you're good.
 
Mike Q
Mike Q
@GreySage I'm referring not to "person tries to help but fails" but rather the scenario of "person does something intrusive and unethical in the name of helping" (this often applies to villains who believe they're saving the world)
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@MikeQ That's why I personally think those spells are dumb. Almost every situation can be interpreted as good/evil or lawful/chaotic
 
Delioth
Delioth
5:39 PM
You're objectively good due to your actual motivations being good. This comes with the interesting consequence that the bad guy who wants to purge "crappy elves" for the betterment of the whole elven society can't be smited.
 
GreySage
GreySage
@Delioth Except by Smite Neutral. Those filthy Neutrals...
 
Mike Q
Mike Q
There's also the old conjecture that well-written villains shouldn't see their own actions as evil
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@MikeQ Or they are accepting the evil practice for a greater cause. There are some very well-written villains (and heroes for that matter) with that arc
 
Mike Q
Mike Q
@DavidCoffron I know. Like I said, it's a conjecture.
 
doppelgreener
doppelgreener
@DavidCoffron the thing is: that's only true in our universe. In our universe that's true because good and evil aren't cosmic forces and don't objectively exist; they're subjective issues people made up and discuss and figure out. D&D doesn't exist in our universe. D&D exists in a universe in which good and evil are cosmic forces, which factually exist regardless of our opinions, and creatures and acts are objectively and measurably good or evil and our perspective doesn't matter.
 
Delioth
Delioth
5:43 PM
@MikeQ Yeah, because from a certain point of view, the bad guys aren't bad. Just like from a certain point of view the good guys aren't good.
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@doppelgreener Yes. But even in the D&D multiverse there are interpretive aspects to alignment
And the lines aren't clearly drawn
 
Mike Q
Mike Q
Sigh. I still think think that, at best, alignment exists to discourage player characters from randomly murdering each other.
 
doppelgreener
doppelgreener
@DavidCoffron which is part of a grand tradition of contradictory mixed messages around alignment.
 
nitsua60
nitsua60
Which tradition somehow grew out of a perfectly sensible 0e alignment system that had nothing wrong with it, IMO.
 
doppelgreener
doppelgreener
nevertheless: there are spells to measure goodness and evilness. things objectively embody goodness and evilness and affect goodness and evilness. goodness and evilness exist as an intrinsic objective part of a person as much as electrons and protons and neutrons exist as an intrinsic objective part of me. the goodness and evilness of an act is an objectively measurable fact of the universe, as much as gravity or magnetism are objectively measurable facts of the universe.
 
nitsua60
nitsua60
5:45 PM
[creakily dismounts soapbox]
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@MikeQ I find it a useful tool for explaining some motivations of minor NPC's that I don't have time to flesh out all the way: "I killed them because they are evil"
 
Delioth
Delioth
@DavidCoffron Yeah, this is really the issue I tried to remedy - define everything more solidly (including the middle ground), and determine what the source of objective truth is (the character's motivations: not consequences or someone else's interpretation, but only the person doing the action)
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@doppelgreener Neutrons are a hoax :P (but yeah, I understand that they are measurable constructs in D&D, just the metric always changes so it's hard to pin down)
 
Mike Q
Mike Q
@doppelgreener A friend of mine once suggested an interesting concept in their homebrew setting, where alignment-based magic is notoriously unfair and was based on now-outdated principles once held by ancient bigoted mages
 
nitsua60
nitsua60
 
Delioth
Delioth
5:48 PM
And really, anyone trying to do anything with alignment has to do both (though that might just be the software guy in me who doesn't like dealing with squishy constructs)- determine what the bounds are, and determine what the source of truth is. I think my interpretation does a decent job at both, and comes with interesting consequences (though there are other interpretations which are just as valid)
 
doppelgreener
doppelgreener
@MikeQ that kinda works but i'd just rip out alignment altogether at that point :P
 
Mike Q
Mike Q
@doppelgreener Well yeah, that's what I do in my homebrew settings :)
 
doppelgreener
doppelgreener
imo that is a major improvement :P
i've played in a lot of systems that just have freeform character descriptions that matter mechanically because of what they describe, and that's done wonderfully for me. good/evil and law/chaos don't serve those needs for me.
 
Mike Q
Mike Q
@doppelgreener Lawful dwarf?
 
SPavel
SPavel
@MikeQ ugh don't remind me
 
Mike Q
Mike Q
5:52 PM
@doppelgreener But then again, their setting has a lot of in-world bigotry in it, as an intentional theme. So the idea of "ancient mages hated kobolds so they defined them as evil for the purposes of magic" is actually internally consistent.
 
doppelgreener
doppelgreener
@MikeQ no like fate aspects. "Dryad warrior coming of age", "agile and gregarious", "iron-willed and open-minded", etc
there was someone recently who asked about adding a third alignment axis because two don't sufficiently help with characterising PCs and NPCs, and that was just tragic for me to read because no amount of alignment axes can be used to properly characterise anybody -- by the time you have enough to actually describe any decent amount of detail, you have over a thousand of them and that's so many you can't figure out anything about them at all. ten words of freeform description would say more.
 
nitsua60
nitsua60
One axis always worked fine for me: "there's an actual war going on between two self-identifying groups as a matter of setting. Are you with one side, the other, or neither?"
 
Mike Q
Mike Q
@nitsua60 I side with Lawful Dwarf
 
nitsua60
nitsua60
(Oh, man, I thought I'd climbed down from here already.)
 
doppelgreener
doppelgreener
@nitsua60 yeah that works fine.
 
goodguy5
goodguy5
5:59 PM
ugh, I've been so productive today at work and I'm super over it.
 
nitsua60
nitsua60
It's quittin'-time somewhere =)
 
Rubiksmoose
Rubiksmoose
@DavidCoffron I had a whole other answer typed out to your question and I had to scrap it and write it anew.
 
SPavel
SPavel
@nitsua60 Knowing PCs, they will make it their mission to make peace, and then make everything worse
 
GreySage
GreySage
In other news, @Hobo_warrior 's bounty put me over 10k. Now I have moderator tools I have no idea what to do with!
 
Rubiksmoose
Rubiksmoose
@GreySage wooohoo!
 
nitsua60
nitsua60
6:07 PM
@GreySage Welcome to the club!
 
SPavel
SPavel
@GreySage Go mad with power?
 
nitsua60
nitsua60
(Just about the only thing I know how to do with my mod tools is see that I do about 1/4 as much as @doppelgreener does with them.)
 
A Very Large Bear
A Very Large Bear
@Rubiksmoose I've just read your answer on the polymorph question and you've convinced me that my answer is incorrect. Should I delete my answer or should I modify it to say I believe your answer is correct? What's the protocol in this situation?
 
nitsua60
nitsua60
@AVeryLargeBear (btw: love your profile)
 
A Very Large Bear
A Very Large Bear
@nitsua60 Thanks!
 
doppelgreener
doppelgreener
6:09 PM
@nitsua60 i'm near a computer nearly every waking hour and have attention issues; neither of those are true for you. :P
 
GreySage
GreySage
@AVeryLargeBear If you think your answer has value (and you don't mind potential downvotes) just leave it. You can throw in an edit that you think the other answer is better. You can also delete it if that's what you want to do.
Does that question also settle the "Polymorph into werewolf" debate we had a while back?
 
Yuuki
Yuuki
Wrong answers can still provide information.
 
Rubiksmoose
Rubiksmoose
@AVeryLargeBear I suspect that your answer will not get downvotes honestly. I am usually conflicted. Sometimes I'll remove my answer if I believe I got something very wrong and might mislead people but sometimes I'll leave up a wrong answer anyways since it can still be informative. It is really up to personal preference.
@GreySage Hmmm interestingly it might inform it a bit.
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@Rubiksmoose i realized in asking there are literally no CR4 large or smaller creatures. (The limit of animal shapes)
 
A Very Large Bear
A Very Large Bear
I'm not worried about downvotes, just about confusing the matter.
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
6:24 PM
@AVeryLargeBear An admirable outlook
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@GreySage umm. This one?
 
Rubiksmoose
Rubiksmoose
@AVeryLargeBear very admirable! Fwiw, I had written up a very similar answer to your (though expanded to show that the rules really give no RAW answer to this situation when I saw that it wasn't really a targeting question...
 
GreySage
GreySage
@DavidCoffron There was a question a few weeks back about polymorphing a target into a werewolf, since werwolves are shapeshifters and polymorph doesn't affect shapeshifters.
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
@Yuuki In response to the previous The Prince reference, I do not find it satire, but a decent treatise on how to get things done while respecting the power of the masses and powerful.
 
Rubiksmoose
Rubiksmoose
@DavidCoffron oh interesting...
 
GreySage
GreySage
6:26 PM
@DavidCoffron Yup, that one
 
Rubiksmoose
Rubiksmoose
So there is a limit to this kind of hijinks at the least lol
 
Yuuki
Yuuki
@ColinGross Also, people tend to forget the context of "it is better to be feared than loved". If you can't be both, then it's better to be feared. And above all else, avoid being hated.
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@Rubiksmoose for now. We'll get more beasts eventually I imagine
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
@Yuuki Also, if you're going to do good, do it where people can see. If you're going to do bad things, do it in such a way nobody knows. Also, don't F-ing boast about the bad things you've done to others except in certain circumstances.
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@GreySage yeah I think the fact that shapechangers aren't affected is relevant here while it's not in the CR-case. (Rubiksmoose's answer)
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
6:29 PM
I really enjoyed the historical references and examples given in the text.
 
Yuuki
Yuuki
And even if The Prince isn't a satire, there's a fairly good argument that it's sabotaging advice.
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
@Yuuki If you're LE and following that advice, it's possible (even likely) to live an entirely good life because the circumstances to be outwardly evil just don't manifest in a cost over benefit way. Is that character then good?
 
Rubiksmoose
Rubiksmoose
@DavidCoffron Though I may have a contradiction in my internal logic here...
 
Yuuki
Yuuki
For one, Machiavelli suggests that a prince should live within the city he rules (which tends to leave one susceptible to mobs and rebels).
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
@Yuuki it seems to work out okay.
 
Rubiksmoose
Rubiksmoose
6:32 PM
@Yuuki Huh I don't think I've ever heard the theory that it is satire. Is this some legitimate school of thought regarding the work?
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
@Yuuki But less likely of their arising in the first place if the rest of the advice is followed.
 
doppelgreener
doppelgreener
Random Fate writing tip: Once you *get* aspects, and start thinking about them in terms of how they manifest in play, the next lesson is that NPC aspects do not need to follow the same rules as PCs, because NPCs operate differently.
Tweeted by rdonoghue on June 1, 2018 at 1:28 PM
For PCs, Aspects tell us who the character *is*. For an NPC, Aspects tell us how that character should be *used*.
Tweeted by rdonoghue on June 1, 2018 at 1:28 PM in reply to rdonoghue
@BESW @trogdor
 
GreySage
GreySage
Remember that Machiavelli wrote The Prince to the ruling class, while suffering exile by that same ruling class
 
Yuuki
Yuuki
> He discourages liberality and favors deceit to guarantee support from the people. Yet Machiavelli is keenly aware of the fact that an earlier pro-republican coup had been thwarted by the people's inaction that itself stemmed from the prince's liberality.

> He supports arming the people despite the fact that he knows the Florentines are decidedly pro-democratic and would oppose the prince.

> He encourages the prince to live in the city he conquers. This opposes the Medici's habitual policy of living outside the city. It also makes it easier for rebels or a civilian militia to attack and …
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
@GreySage he was very much trying to gain favor and get paid.
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
6:33 PM
@ColinGross does that make him evil?
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
@Yuuki He also proposes to a number of tactics to be seen as one of the people.
@DavidCoffron Is pragmatism evil?
 
Yuuki
Yuuki
> Machiavelli was a proper man and a good citizen; but, being attached to the court of the Medici, he could not help veiling his love of liberty in the midst of his country's oppression.
> The choice of his detestable hero, Caesar Borgia, clearly enough shows his hidden aim; and the contradiction between the teaching of the Prince and that of the Discourses on Livy and the History of Florence shows that this profound political thinker has so far been studied only by superficial or corrupt readers. The Court of Rome sternly prohibited his book. I can well believe it; for it is that Court it most clearly portrays.
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@ColinGross shrug depends on the game and edition /you adds tag
 
Yuuki
Yuuki
> Jean Jacques Rosseau
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
@Yuuki My impression was that he was very much in favor of demagoguery when true conviction was not present.
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
6:36 PM
@Rubiksmoose question is does a spell persist even if the creature "isn't affected"
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
Either way, ruling by being seen as a proponent of the people.
@DavidCoffron It won't even work if the target isn't valid... however, the initial target (a human) is valid, but the polymorphed form (a shapeshifter) is not valid for the spell effect.
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@ColinGross I prefer ruling by being seen as the propane of the people (how I read at first)
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
That's the issue. Initial target is valid. Ongoing creature under the effect is not.
 
Yuuki
Yuuki
There is also a school of thought that in writing The Prince, Machiavelli became so disgusted with this theoretical leader that he became a proponent of free republics afterward.
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@ColinGross a shapechanger is a valid target, just unaffected. Slightly different
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
6:38 PM
@Yuuki I'm less concerned with the author's motives than the actual advice and it's applicability.
@DavidCoffron True. Good point.
@DavidCoffron So change the wording: The initial form is affected. The polymorphed form is not affected by the spell.
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@ColinGross which for the werewolf case (if the spell doesn't end) you constantly shift between werewolf and initial form
 
Rubiksmoose
Rubiksmoose
@DavidCoffron Yeah I think I'm ok logic wise. That "isn't affected" phrase is pretty clearly a continuous thing.
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
Maybe. Or since the spell doesn't affect the polymorphed form it works fine
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
@DavidCoffron Why the flipping? The initial effect only occurs once.
@Rubiksmoose If you cast polymorph twice, you don't flip between forms.
At casting time, it changes the form. It then continues to affect the subject of the spell?
 
Rubiksmoose
Rubiksmoose
@ColinGross That is because the second casting ostensibly overrides the first though right?
 
goodguy5
goodguy5
6:42 PM
I'm not sure, but I think my friend and I just broke up
 
Rubiksmoose
Rubiksmoose
@goodguy5 :'(
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
@goodguy5 That sounds unpleasant
Sorry to hear that.
@Rubiksmoose But is the subject not affected by both spells?
Neither indicate that they stop the effects of a previous casting.
 
Rubiksmoose
Rubiksmoose
@ColinGross If it didn't continuously affect the target it would not be able to hold the new form.
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@ColinGross "The transformation lasts for the duration, or until the target drops to 0 hit points or dies." This is the continuous effect, the transformation is one time. Your right
 
Rubiksmoose
Rubiksmoose
@ColinGross You can only be under the effects of one spell of the same name right?
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
6:44 PM
@Rubiksmoose I don't know about that. Can you be charmed twice?
 
goodguy5
goodguy5
They're hyper-upset about a stupid joke. I mean, they've been dealing with a shitload of life stuff lately, so I'm not 100% sure they're in their right head-space. (hence my uncertainty)

So, I'll know next week, I guess.
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@Rubiksmoose polymorph / true polymorph
@ColinGross only be separate spells
@goodguy5 hope things work out man. Sorry to hear
 
goodguy5
goodguy5
@DavidCoffron actually separate spells, with different names etc. right?
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@goodguy5 yeah
 
Rubiksmoose
Rubiksmoose
@goodguy5 :-/ That is really unfortunate. As crappy as situations like that are uncertainty about them, IMO, can be even worse.
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
6:46 PM
@DavidCoffron is that PHB or DMG?
 
Rubiksmoose
Rubiksmoose
@DavidCoffron oh that is an interesting take on it...
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@ColinGross PHB in the Spellcasting section
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
"The effects of different spells add together while the durations of those spells overlap. The effects of the same spell cast multiple times don’t combine, however. Instead, the most potent effect—such as the highest bonus—from those castings applies while their durations overlap.

For example, if two clerics cast bless on the same target, that character gains the spell’s benefit only once; he or she doesn’t get to roll two bonus dice."
is that the section?
 
Rubiksmoose
Rubiksmoose
@ColinGross Thats the one.
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
But two polymorphs don't have different potency?
 
Rubiksmoose
Rubiksmoose
6:47 PM
Of course the question of "most potent effect" is infuriatingly undefined, but that is not the point here at least.
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
Also, that would mean the first is still in effect as the duration is ongoing.
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@ColinGross they still don't combine. Which one takes effect is up to the DM
 
Rubiksmoose
Rubiksmoose
@ColinGross That is only relevant when determining which spell is taking effect.
@ColinGross Correct. It doesn't end the spell it just supresses its effect.
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
Perhaps it's the more powerful creature, the most recent casting, or the more powerful spellcaster but only one of the transformations actually affects the target
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
So a spell effect than changes the subject into a thing that is not affected by the spell.
Does not affected mean you're no longer under the effect?
eg.... a construct that gets sleep cast upon it?
is it under the effect of a sleep spell or not?
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
6:50 PM
But if I polymorph AND true polymoroh (or other transformation effects) they can combine. Which is what led to this confusion in the first place (as I can inflate CR temporarily)
 
NautArch
NautArch
@nitsua60 I'm never one to say no to idea generations (or expressing my opinion!) Not sure I'll be able to make it in person, though. Between the Chatizen game(?), my local group, and a VTT I'm starting as DM with some friends, my roleplaying availability to travel is nearly nil.
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
Maybe better wording, "when you are not affected by a spell, can you be under the effect of that spell?"
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
@ColinGross no but I think the spell is still active
 
Rubiksmoose
Rubiksmoose
@ColinGross My interpretation of that is that the construct would still have the sleep magic on them, but the magic is having no effect on them. It dopesn't end the spell but it just ceases to have any effects.
 
David Coffron
David Coffron
So sleep is on you for the duration like normal, just no effect
Now if I polymorphed the construct into a monkey it would immediately fall asleep
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
6:52 PM
@DavidCoffron I think we then differ on the meaning of unaffected.
but I can definitely see your logic
it's raining, but you're not wet.
unaffected by heat does not indicate that it is not hot.
 
Rubiksmoose
Rubiksmoose
@ColinGross oh that is a very good way to put it.
I'll have to remember that analogy...
 
Colin Gross
Colin Gross
"
Unless a spell has a perceptible effect, a creature might not know it was targeted by a spell at all. An effect like crackling lightning is obvious, but a more subtle effect, such as an attempt to read a creature’s thoughts, typically goes unnoticed, unless a spell says otherwise."
I think @DavidCoffron is probably correct here.
However, I'm still going to see about digging up contradictory references.
@DavidCoffron Yeah. This appears to be the case. Immunity to the effect does not negate the duration of the spell unless the spell ends when the effect is resisted (e.g. saving throw or immunity)
 
00:00 - 15:0015:00 - 19:0019:00 - 00:00

« first day (2801 days earlier)      last day (2163 days later) »