> Schrödinger's Mortality. At the beginning of each session, roll 1dF. If the result is + you get +2 to create social advantages with fellow mortals. If the result is - you get +2 when interacting with necromantic energies. If the result is blank, you get both benefits but can be compelled because you're a terrifying abomination.
I like the direction that takes. Particularly the Schrödinger reference haha
I was thinking maybe something along the lines of no sleeping/eating etc, recover at half your hit die at any given time x times per day (outside of combat/tasks requiring skill checks).
@Shalvenay I've used donjon.bin.sh/fantasy/name on occasion (and the other generators on that site for other things can be handy). Actually, I often just pick a name out of the 5E Player's Handbook for a race, since I'm boring like that.
The problem is that D&D doesn't truly know what D&D alignments are. Alignment has changed from edition to edition, and has been the subject of considerable debate every time. It barely works in a universe where good, evil, law, and chaos are objectively measurable things; when you try to bring it into the real world it collapses under a lack of any real agreed-upon definitions of what it means to be "good", or "evil", or "lawful", or "chaotic". — Oblivious Sage1 min ago
I think, all difficulties aside, we can clearly classify the question as Chaotic Shiny.
@MikeQ Orcs are typically given "tribal" names (urgh), but half-orcs tend to have English names because they're raised in human groups that want to minimize their orc heritage and because in D&D human = English.
@MikeQ I'm pretty sure I've played alongside Reverse Evil characters.
Yeah I mean... I think it's often ill-advised to apply the alignment system even in fiction, where most of this stuff is far more clearly cut than in the real world.
And we have a pretty good consensus that the alignment system is rather vague and up to interpretation even in DnD where it arguably makes a degree of sense.
The idea of applying it to real world seems rather ill-advised... and comes off to me as trying to promote a clear simplification from a game to serve some greater purpose
@BESW the answer seems to think that the rules make it clear that the player chooses their own alignment, not that the actual definition of what alignments are is clear
dnd-5e I need to check: when this question talks about "grappling" it actually means "grabbing" right? IIRC D&D 5e has on grappling rules or conditions, just "grabbing".
@BESW Sure, fair point; that verbiage probably varies considerably from edition to edition. But I still contend that they're not making the argument that alignment itself is well-defined.
@BESW I was hoping that if the question did get answered, it would be by someone pointing out how wildly inconsistent, overlapping, and nonexclusive alignment definitions are.
Also since there is no cosmic good vs evil war or law vs chaos war in real life, there are literally no alignments on those axes.
There's a lot of struggle between efforts considered good and efforts considered evil, there's no "unified evil side in the cosmic war" schtick.
(And people protesting in favor of changing laws to support social good are both chaotic and lawful, so good luck working that one out.)
@Carcer "Down with the current laws! Overthrow! Rebel!" can be pretty chaotic, whereas "Let's us the instruments our legislation gives us to change things from the inside" looks like lawful enough.
But, and I quote myself, a large part of defining one person's real-world alignment is coming to a table consensus about what the alignments represents.
(Even if, at my table, the chaotic would not want to make new laws and judjhing case by case would feel better to them, because writing down a rule means having to bey it even if it happens to be unjust)
oh sure, that's hardly a simple issue, and people who are fundamentally good - i.e. they want what is best for other people - may find themselves on different sides of the same issue
In one webcomic that touches on many DnD topics, including alignments, this issue is noted as the problem of good: Two good characters who disagree will readily believe each other to be evil. Evil characters would never mistake a disagreeing evil character to be good.
But anyway, I find myself rolling back to the thing that I keep saying... I don't really see the point of alignment, or any real benefit it offers over an intuitive "good guys"/"bad guys" distinction...
...and even less benefit in taking the rules of game and trying to refit it as some general-purpose moral compass or whatever.
because heroic fantasy is full of embodiments of good and evil and being with the capacity to tangibly perceive evil in some way?
it has some utility in encouraging a desired playstyle. A player makes a character who is meant to be good and you hope they at least put a modicum of effort into being a decent person
I agree it's not a useful system in the real world
@Carcer But the alignment as a system isn't really necessary to have those.
Good and evil as concepts are important, but that 3×3 grid, not so much, nor mechanics pertaining to it (as 5e has shown by having abolished the mechanics for alignment in almost all parts of the system)
I recall us discussing here some DnD edition that had a thing for replicating things by alignment
So eg. if you had poisons in an earlier edition and your heroic character can't use them because they're evil, they came up with neutral and good poisons and gave them their own names
@kviiri Oh, the BoED "poison" replacements were very distinct: they were all universally pointless and unusable, except for one that only justified its existence by providing the template for a ridiculously overpowered exalted feat.
(What, I can take two feats and get the ability to deal Dex damage with touch attacks? Yes please I will be rolling up a monk with multiple natural attacks now.)
[flurry of blows that only have to hit touch AC] [enemy freezes up and falls over, unable to move anything except its eyes] "Next!"
Just a shame it wasn't compatible with the PrC that caused touch attacks to inflict level drain.
BoED was nonsense, but occasionally amusing nonsense.
And I actually enjoyed the Vow of Poverty; it was a demonstrably underpowered choice in every way, but it was useful for reducing bookkeeping complexity and it provided some interesting build options.
I once had players fight a completely naked Vow of Poverty Tattooed Monk.
The decision to move on my website the list of games I played instead of the list of D&D games in my hall of fame was purely because of what I was editing at that moment.
Well, to be fair, I think the same would apply to any adaptation of Tolkien's legendarium if it wasn't fiercely popular to the point of practically defining character appearances
> Tolkien describes Gollum as either dark, bone-white or sallow (pale yellow): at one point, the Men of Ithilien mistake his silhouette (seen from a distance) for a tailless black squirrel. Gorbag and Shagrat describe him as a dark fellow. In a manuscript written to guide illustrators to the appearance of his characters, Tolkien explained this by saying that Gollum had pale skin, but wore dark clothes and was often seen in poor light
@MikeQ Pretty much --- in the original printings of The Hobbit, Gollum parted with the ring and Bilbo relatively amicably. Then later, in writing LotR, Tolkien decided that this wasn't just a ring but The Ring whose power over mortals is such that one can't simply part ways with it.
Except Faramir of course.
Faramir, who wouldn't touch it were it lying by the roadside.
"Tolkien would write that of all characters Faramir resembles the author most, and that he had deliberately bestowed upon the character several traits of his own"
@ColinGross Yeah, I'd like his site better if he applied one more round of liposuction to each article, but I guess that 'voice' is part of his schtick
@Derpy Aren't some of these inconsistencies caused by the fact that there were two editions of The Hobbit released, one of which retconned some of the lore to better fit with the Lord of the Rings trilogy?
Here are the images from the transcript: https://i.stack.imgur.com/mk59E.jpg https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZlqKk.jpg https://i.stack.imgur.com/g9Xp5.jpg https://i.stack.imgur.com/8fTda.jpg https://i.stack.imgur.com/8nSlM.jpg https://i.stack.imgur.com/Ddb6X.jpg https://i.stack.imgur.com/30EQ3.jpg https://i.stack.imgur.com/SYlqu.jpg https://i.stack.imgur.com/H3Mk9.jpg https://i.stack.imgur.com/9UvGb.jpg https://i.stack.imgur.com/mEYjF.jpg https://i.stack.imgur.com/Ggzu3.jpg
I like reading theangrygm because I've dealt with many of the same issues and frustrations, and it helps to read how a more experienced GM has handled them. Although with 3.x/PF, my solution is to simply stop running those systems. I've tried applying my own "fixes" but it's more trouble than it's worth.
This tension pool thingy seems system agnostic, and it can add time-consuming challenges, so it could be useful in games that have more time to work with
@MikeQ Some DM's like to use the "ticking clock" to pace play, which is where I think the tension pool works. In my brother's game, it won't as we are a beer and pretzels' group first, and more serious last in that campaign. In our ToA group, and the on line nature of our group, that pool thing would I think disrupt the tone we've set as a group.
"Jackson also argues that it was necessary for Faramir to be tempted by the Ring because in his films everyone else was tempted, and letting Faramir be immune would be inconsistent in the eyes of a film audience"
@SirCinnamon To be fair though, some parts of the books are only interesting to poets, linguists, or genealogists. It's a fine story, but like reading any mythology... sometimes it's just done for the achievement unlock.
@ColinGross Yes, thats basically what i've heard. While being massively groundbreaking, inspirational and world changing, it may not be the best reading experience
@SirCinnamon You'll only know if you read it. Colin's point about taste seems to match what I've heard from others over the years. some like it, some love it, some can't finish it. I first read it as a skill unlock so I could read Bored of the Rings and get the jokes.
@KorvinStarmast In our TOA game it could work for determining travel encounters, although then again the only player variable would be how many spaces we intend to travel, since we don't really investigate the environment too much. Maybe if/when we get back to a town.
@KorvinStarmast I do eventually want to read it, but the list of books i want to read is never ending. Just a matter of being in the right mindset at the right time at this point
@MikeQ I think our DM has a tool for daily encounters already. (In the adventure). It might fit if we get into a dungeon or into Omu ... but since I am happy with our DM's pacing instincts, i am hesitant to suggest a change.
@KorvinStarmast Isn't the temptation supposed to be impossible to overcome?
I can get resisting the temptation, because many characters do it. But it's consistently shown to require strength and force of character, even from hobbits who are naturally resistant to excess ambition and Galadriel who is extremely strong and wise about the danger of the One Ring
But Faramir doesn't show any need to resist, he just casually dismisses the idea of wanting the Ring and is not shown to struggle
@kviiri The elves sorted it out and resisted it. They knew what was up.
@kviiri He also doesn't like power for the sake of power. His entire life was focused on the people and environment. The martial and power interests of his brother and father he only saw as tools. I think it was more interesting he wasn't written as a character that was very bitter about always being second fiddle.
@ColinGross Yes, like I said. But they had to resist. They didn't just shrug it off.
@ColinGross Frodo, Gandalf, and a variety of other characters don't particularly crave power either. Yet they feel tempted. Smeagol didn't, and the Ring's worse than heroin for him.
@kviiri I don't recall the details about the elves three rings, and how difficult it was for them to not wear their rings. It might be in the Silmarillion.
@kviiri Yeah, but the temptation is gradual and doesn't affect everyone the same. For some reason Faramir is predisposed to resist it more easily. At least enough that he doesnt talk about it
@kviiri Ah... maybe he's in denial? If he claims he doesnt want it he feels it might become true?
of course, this is all post-facto justification of writing... who knows what big T was thinking when writing it. Googling it i see this debate exists in a few forums so seems like nobody knows for sure
Which just goes to show you, when you're engaging in a cosmic war for the domination of the entire Universe, it is advisable to spend the time to get the weak nuclear force on your side.
@KorvinStarmast Both of them at least felt the temptation, and had to struggle
Instead of being essentially "haha no"
And they're bith exceptionally wise and ancient, well aware of the Ring's power --- and still they have to resist both through routine (minimizing interaction with the Ring) and sheer willpower. Faramir doesn't have the advantage of knowing for a fact the Ring is pure evil, he lacks the wisdom of the ages, he is of the notoriously corruptible human stock... why is it so easy for him?
I mean, he doesn't even show the need to resist. He shows all the attraction towards the Ring a pedestrian shows a dog turd.
Suppose I'm reading a question. It's interesting, I want to help, and I can immediately think of one or two insights that would be useful in constructing or improving a good answer to that question. Unfortunately, for some reason (say, there are system-specific aspects for a system that I perso...
Re: Above: like all adaptations, the Rankin/Bass Tolkien should be evaluated first on its ability to tell its own story independent of the source material, second on its ability to embody the essence of the source material, and never on its dedication to photocopying details of the source material.
I figured the others were tempted by the Ring because power could solve whatever problems they were dealing with. Gandalf wanted to defeat Sauron and I suppose Galadriel wanted the same.
Whereas Faramir wants the approval of his father and I suppose living in Boromir's shadow all his life gives him the understanding that no amount of power is going to convince Denethor that hey, Faramir's a cool guy too.
Thematically, Faramir's temptation is evidence that the Age of Man won't be a complete screw-up because Man has Hidden Depths hitherto known only to hobbits and Bombadilians.
Faramir isn't so much a fully-formed character as a "For all their faults humans can also rise to great heights" sermon.
In part because Tolkien, like so many writers, really LIKED the idea of a Truly Virtuous Man but had trouble imagining what such a person would actually be like in the flesh.
@Yuuki I'd buy that more if the books were actually interested in any of the romance plots.
When your Sprawling Epic Romance takes place mostly in the appendices...
I'm much more fond of the Flying Moose re-write where Pippin hits on Eowyn with the undying pickup line, "The hands of a hobbit are the hands of a healer too, you know."
Alternative theory: LotR is, in-universe, written by an author who felt a sense of duty or kinship towards Faramir or the newly-reinvigorated Throne of Gondor he serves. Therefore the author did a few tweaks to make Faramir's annoyingly-favored big brother a bit of a madman while the Ring is around, and vented their daddy issues by having Denethor be portrayed as a dangerously incompetent and insane leader.
Discrediting Denethor's rulership would make the book excellent propaganda material supporting Aragorn's reign.
Speaking of re-writes though, I think the thing I'm going to miss the most about MCU Spider-Man is the team-ups. Spidey and Wolverine along with Spidey and Captain Marvel made for some pretty funny comics.
We've got the Nova Corps, so Nova would be a logical extrapolation. Adam Warlock was teased in GoG2. They can phase in new faces behind familiar "masks," like Amadeus Cho as the new Hulk.
@Yuuki Comics-wise, Miles is a multiverse character and his backstory is full of relationships with non-Prime characters, including the death of Peter.
I mean, one of Miles' big hangups is that he blames Prime Venom for what an alternate-universe Venom did. The wibbly-wobbly is built in.
@Yuuki Miles began as an Ultimate character in his own what-if-verse, and got several multiverse-style-weirdness storylines before Secret Wars officially ported him into mainstream continuity. And other media continues the tradition; the Ultimate Spider-Man TV series, for example, has Miles visiting the show's Prime verse from his own (in 2012).
Oh, no, I think Peter's death is very significant for Miles. Just... historically Miles has worked alongside many other Peters without that significance being reduced in any way.
@doppelgreener Plot twist: Into The Spider-Verse was engineered by Miguel so he could make his own debut. The spider was created by Alchemax, after all...
But, again, all this is basically more-of-the-same. The Big Two are fun, but what I really want to see is film/TV digging into other kinds of comics without feeling embarrassed by them like they used to be embarrassed about superheroes.
Give me the Digger miniseries, the Paper Girls TV show, the Britten and Brülightly neo-noir film.
@trogdor Some still are. But it's becoming less common to the point that it's arguably surprising to see a film or TV show that's trying to hide or obscure its more blatant superhero elements, where it used to be the default.
@Yuuki And things like The Pack, where there's superpowered stuff but it's not superheroes.
Dig into the back-catalog of pre-CCA horror comics!
Suppose I'm reading a question. It's interesting, I want to help, and I can immediately think of one or two insights that would be useful in constructing or improving a good answer to that question. Unfortunately, for some reason (say, there are system-specific aspects for a system that I perso...
