TRPG General Chat

David Coffron

14:00

When I first log in and I'm already at the rep limit from an answer yesterday

BESW

Praxis is the way you do things, especially according to a commonly accepted custom.

vicky_molokh

So it's bad because it implies people use it?

BESW

No, it's bad because the way it's phrased implies a specific set of RPG customs and perpetuates the mistaken idea that those customs are default or universal.

Colin Gross

@DavidCoffron Do you need downvotes so you can get more points today? We can do that. Usually I only do that kind of thing for @Rubiksmoose when he asks.

kviiri

@ColinGross Yea exactly. And like BESW, I advocate ongoing in-table discussions :)

David Coffron

14:04

@ColinGross thank for the offer, but not today. Super busy anyway, not sure I can do much answering :P

BESW

For example, one thing "Session 0" does is, by calling it "Session Zero," we separate talking about the game from playing the game, and normalize the (very toxic, in my experience) idea that talking about the game happens before you start but you don't need to keep checking in:

Dec 30 '18 at 0:26, by BESW

You need to establish a baseline, but it often doesn't need a whole session all to itself. And you need to remember it IS a baseline--session 0 divorces the "establish expectations" part from the "play the game" part by implying you only ever have to establish expectations once.

Colin Gross

@BESW Some people just get it right the first time and don't mess it up later. /S

vicky_molokh

Interesting point of view. While the term Session Zero is new to me, my immediate understanding was to point out that the discussion must begin before the immersion begins (in campaigns which feature S0).

David Coffron

@BESW I've even started doin mini-session 0s for non-RPGs. Like it'll be family game night I'll always ask stuff like "how serious are we gonna take this game" or "so... houserules?"

vicky_molokh

There's also implication from the word session that it's something that's done with the party, and not one on one with this player then the next one.

BESW

14:07

@DavidCoffron It's a massively useful concept! But framing it as "session 0" both limits the reach of its application AND implies certain implementation elements that are actually unnecessary.

kviiri

@DavidCoffron One lesson learned from my previous campaign is, talking to the GM privately between sessions is valuable (in lieu of / in addition to having something like a shared IRC channel)

vicky_molokh

(Recruiting a bunch of players and then running them through chargen in solitary is a recipe for running into incompatibility later.)

kviiri

@vicky_molokh Yea. Doing chargen as a group and openly accepting feedback and suggestions from each other really helped our DnD group

BESW

@kviiri These are the sorts of lessons that a lot of groups don't learn because they happen organically at first (like a highschool or college group of friends who socialize together constantly and wind up coincidentally having check-in conversations without noticing, and then things go haywire when the group dynamic changes outside the game and they aren't having those conversations anymore.)

Yuuki

One running problem I've had is people trying to keep their plans secret so they can "surprise" the other players.

BESW

14:12

A lot of successful groups stumble into social-structure good practices but don't know how to make it happen again when the original circumstances change, and they try to codify social elements like "If there's a guy we all trust to make fun choices, we should let him do the thing" into rules because it's a game with rules and so that's the tool they see.

vicky_molokh

Secrets and surprises can work out both very well and very poorly.

kviiri

Cont. re. me and GM one-to-one talks, we had a pretty bad campaign, with lots of frustrating content that made the game incredibly frustrating to me. The GM tried, I believe genuinely, to be a type accepting of feedback, and when the campaign started to progress incredibly slowly, I started whining about it on our group's IRC channel between sessions.

David Coffron

@Yuuki Ooh. I second that. Right off the bat, I discussed with my players in my current game the type of game they wanted, and how i would implement it. And the fact that they know there is a rival treasure hunter group (a la National Treasure 2) hasn't made my surprises any less fun, and has made the immersion for them and me so much greater.

BESW

@DavidCoffron Four times out of five, I've had better games when we're not trying to juggle secret knowledge between participants.

Yuuki

@DavidCoffron I mean, it's not just DM stuff. I've had players try to spring character decisions on other people out of some mistaken ideal of spontaneity.

BESW

14:14

Emergent surprises are so much more rewarding anyway because we can all enjoy them.

kviiri

There was another player, probably the most serious player in the group after myself, who invariably chimed in with "I don't think it's that bad", "c'mon we had a fun session" etc type of mentality. His mentality seemed to be that "RPGs are like pizza --- even when it's bad it's pretty good", which wouldn't be a problem but the GM just browsed through our looong conversations and decided "well, one vote for, one against --> change nothing".

BESW

Dec 3 '12 at 22:14, by BESW

There... was the time that the bard had a five-page backstory he didn't tell the DM about in which he was really a spy for an as-yet-unknown organization. We found out when he used animal messenger to send a (very damaging) report to his superiors.

David Coffron

@Yuuki Yeah. I think players can know things even if characters don't. It is ~~sometimes~~ often easier to roleplay a character ignorant of secrets if you know what they are ignorant of

Yuuki

While it's not to say that nothing should be kept secret, you should really really consider how much that secrecy is worth (read: it's often not much).

BESW

Dec 3 '12 at 22:15, by BESW

A needle-thin bolt of pure fire lanced down from the heavens and disintegrated the weasel in its tracks. The DM turned to the bard's player and said "Next time, talk to me first."

Colin Gross

14:16

@DavidCoffron I award points for that. Players have no secrets, but characters can.

BESW

@DavidCoffron All of this yes please.

@Yuuki I think a lot of this over-valuing of secrets and surprises comes from poor intersemiotics.

David Coffron

It should never be a player vs player mentality, even if characters have tensions or competition (or even outright rivalry or opposition if that's what everyone wants)

But only the characters, a friendly environment for the players is vital to good gaming

Yuuki

@BESW How people interpret symbolism differently?

kviiri

Overall the feeling of never getting my feedback across because another player was ever-vigilantly dismissing it added a lot of frustration towards the game. That really ticked me off and in retrospect, I probably would've been happier just leaving the campaign.

BESW

@Yuuki The translation of concepts between forms of symbols. That is, trying to apply things that work in films or novels or video games, to one's RPG campaign.

Yuuki

14:19

Ah, okay.

BESW

We love movies with surprise twists! We are REALLY bad at understanding what makes them work, the difference between a surprised character and a surprised audience, and how to translate each of those effectively into an RPG.

We also (for some reason) love long meandering epic novels with a lot of worldbuilding and not much character, which get resolved conveniently by forces largely beyond the protagonist's control.

Yuuki

Yeah, the thing about surprise twists in movies is that barring some really out-there auteurs, most people working on the movie (actors, writers, etc.) know that the twist is coming.

David Coffron

@BESW And if a game is streamed (i.e. there is an audience), then those twist endings are great, but usually the best ones are when the players (performers in this case) themselves are in on the twist and can make the performance more enjoyable.

vicky_molokh

52 secs ago, by BESW

We also (for some reason) love long meandering epic novels with a lot of worldbuilding and not much character, which get resolved conveniently by forces largely beyond the protagonist's control.

We do?!

Yuuki

And in fact, sometimes, they shoot the twist before a lot of other scenes because movies aren't filmed in order.

BESW

14:22

These make for awful RPG campaigns which usually fall prey to the monster Lack Of Interest long before they reach their NPC-laden denouement, but we keep acting like they're the golden standard of RPGs.

Yuuki

@vicky_molokh I mean, Lord of the Rings does kinda fall into that category.

Tiggerous

Good afternoon

kviiri

And to clarify, I don't think feedback should be exempt from meta-critique --- but it should be exempt from dismissal. Defending the status quo in terms independent of the content of the feedback is not constructive.

vicky_molokh

I just thought it's not as loved a resolution as the protagonist overcoming a challenge.

David Coffron

@BESW Personally, my favorite twists in RPGs are just little side things, like oh that noble is actually dealing with another kingdom. That's not vital to the plot, but discovering that secret twist can maybe help us negotiate with the king.

Yuuki

14:24

@DavidCoffron My favorite twists in RPGs are cinnamon.

David Coffron

@Yuuki bravo

I would have also accepted licorice :)

BESW

Like, how many times have we heard someone lament (or lament themselves) that they've never been in a campaign that lasted multiple years?

vicky_molokh

Oh, the short-campaign people seem to show up around me with surprising frequency.

BESW

How many of our flagship systems gate the most interesting features behind exhaustive playtime sinks?

kviiri

@BESW The feedback-dismissing guy does this from time to time!

vicky_molokh

14:26

Probably once a month or two.

Yuuki

Those can be fun and I think my younger self would've definitely seen the appeal, but I don't think I'd sign myself up for a multi-year campaign these days.

BESW

How many pre-made adventures are designed to hook together into campaigns that span months or years?

We're surrounded by materials and conversations which present Wheel of Time level epic storytelling as the ideal, and short-form campaigns as a compromise for those who would do the long-form thing if they could.

Me, I think one of the best things about a story is a good solid ending and I increasingly dread the idea of telling an interminable never-ending story.

Tiggerous

If anyone is able to suggest a relatively succint edit to help me account for criticism on this answer it'd be much appreciated. I'm not sure I completely understand the commenters concern. No worries if not.

David Coffron

@Tiggerous I think the question is why you can't apply the +2 damage to the thunder damage (pre-level 5)

Since it is a consequence of the melee weapon (at least according to the commenter)

That's just how I read it though

kviiri

@BESW Ooh yes, and the ending, using the usual conventions, has to be something where the fate of entire multiverses is decided in a roaring battle with the gods themselves, or somesuch. So something inconceivably huge :|

BESW

14:34

@kviiri Right, because after so much buildup there's a sense of obligation that the payoff be ridiculously high stakes.

Which in turn limits the kind of stories you can tell even further.

Yuuki

@kviiri Sometimes, I think about a campaign that just ends with the protagonists returning a cup of sugar to the neighbor.

David Coffron

@Tiggerous I think the last sentence could be fixed to "since the thunder damage didn't result from additional melee weapon attack, the Dueling bonus cannot be added." Switching the clauses makes it read a bit more clearly to me

hohenheim

What else should 20th-level characters do, other than battle gods and decide the fate f the entire multiverse?

Xirema

@Tiggerous I think the trick is that the Dueling bonus applies to "an attack made with a melee weapon", not "a melee weapon attack". That appears to be the discrepancy.

Yuuki

@hohenheim As stated above, return a cup of sugar to their neighbor.

BESW

14:35

@Yuuki I long for a time when Golden Sky Stories doesn't seem radically subversive.

kviiri

@Yuuki One of my favorite things in LotR is how it follows up the quest to defang an evil demigod with a really small-time adventure to rescue a politically-insignificant realm most people haven't even heard of from mundane bad governance.

David Coffron

@hohenheim Literally whatever they want. They are among the most powerful mortal beings in the multiverse

hohenheim

That seems anticlimactic.

Tiggerous

@DavidCoffron @Xirema thanks both.

Xirema

@Tiggerous It doesn't change the conclusion of your answer ("The Dueling Bonus only applies to the attack and not to the secondary damage"), it just results in some confusing terminology in the answer.

David Coffron

14:36

@hohenheim Some people might want some anticlimax after levels of adventuring

Yuuki

@hohenheim Getting to 20th level seems pretty climactic in and of itself.

David Coffron

My favorite "retired" characters became master trainers

vicky_molokh

@kviiri I am yet to experience a campaign with such a build-up and finale.

BESW

@hohenheim That's pretty much my point: the long-form epic narrative with world-threatening conclusion is built into many of the most commonly used systems, to the point that the story form seems synonymous with the medium itself.

kviiri

@hohenheim The question I'd be asking: is the DnD kind of level 20 a sensible default to stage one's assumptions around?

David Coffron

14:37

Then later campaigns have visited those trainers at around level 12 or so to receive specialized training. But that is only possible with a dedicated group for years (2.5 years in my case)

kviiri

@vicky_molokh Same here, although our group periodically pines for epic level adventures that go like this.

hohenheim

I see your point. But my players love that stuff. They get very excieted when they think about the epic ending. And they are looking forward to a huage fight with like 30 different characters on each side.

David Coffron

@hohenheim Hmm... That is tough to run. Even 6-8 distinct characters on each side can drag on

Yuuki

Nobody's saying you can't do that.

David Coffron

Might be more fun to do a multi-tiered battle

hohenheim

14:38

Indeed. No idea how I will pull that off ^^.

BESW

@hohenheim Nobody's saying the story form is bad in and of itself. Just... it's sad that it's so ubiquitous that it obscures the vast variety of potential in the RPG medium so that games like Golden Sky Stories and Hot Guys Making Out seem radically subversive.

David Coffron

@hohenheim Do it like Marvel's Avengers: Infinity War. Do one fight at a time, and then bring them all together for a short finale

hohenheim

@DavidCoffron I thought so too. I could split the party and their allies in smaller group. And each group has to tackle a different task simultaneously.

vicky_molokh

My experience with the epic narratives, or rather lack thereof, can be grouped into the following categories:
1. There is epic stuff happening, but we play little people who cover in fear of it all.
2. 'Sure, you will get epic stuff, but start small'; 30-50 weeks and about 30 sessions later, the campaign dies, never reaching the epicness promised.
3. 'You are big damn heroes!'; cue opposition being about the same level, de facto making the 'heroes' pretty average in the setting.

kviiri

Yea, 2. is quite common :-)

David Coffron

14:39

@vicky_molokh I recommend higher level starts on occasion for exactly this reason

Yuuki

Solution: start with 20th level characters at the final battle.

BESW

@DavidCoffron My second or third game running a player character started at level 30 in D&D 3.5.

David Coffron

If everyone is already an established adventure of say... level 8-10 who have come together to tackle a more powerful challenge, you get to the epic-ness prety quick

Colin Gross

@Yuuki Pretty much the only way to play ever /S

vicky_molokh

@DavidCoffron Edited variant 3.

BESW

14:40

It was... an experience. If I wanted that level of power now, I'd probably use Fate and just narrate everything super gonzo.

Colin Gross

@BESW So that campaign was entirely about filling in 7 pages of character sheet?

doppelgreener

Way back when, I was considering porting an epic D&D campaign to Fate. The campaign in question had lots of filler narrative so that the players would have enough time to level up. When I moved to fate, I realised I could cut all the filler because levels didn't exist. Then BESW pointed out I could even just skip most of the less interesting parts of the narrative, and optionally even jump right to near the end of it, without adding any complexity to our characters.

BESW

@ColinGross My first character died on the second round of the first combat.

goodguy5

nooooooooooooooooooob

kviiri

But it's kinda telling that eg. when I told my group about e6 (the "mod" to DnD 3.5e where linear level progression stops at L6, and after that characters gain smaller feat-like power-ups in lieu of levels), their first impression was "What the heck's the point of that?!" or "Who'd want less power?!" and after explaining, they'd just mellowly point out "Hmm I guess it makes sense"

Colin Gross

14:41

@BESW That sounds a lot like 2nd ed. Either you die or the enemy dies in a hurry.

BESW

@doppelgreener That was a revelatory experience for me, too.

David Coffron

@vicky_molokh I do see that problem from time to time. My solution has been to spend a lot of pre-session time fleshing out what made them epic heroes (writing up some short stories about the characters that a bard sings in the tavern they meet at, or developing a lengthy exposition-ary decree to summon them or something)

vicky_molokh

Like, I'm playing in a FATE game where we're gifted immortals. Not Exalted-level, but allegedly in the top percent of a very unequal world. But the average opposition (both active and the passive for doing stuff like CaA) is 2-3, so it doesn't feel like the party are epic heroes shining compared to the world.

David Coffron

@ColinGross so like real life battles between only a handful of trained people?

hohenheim

@doppelgreener I would love to play my current campaign with FATE rules. But my players want all those D&D options. FATE seems boring to them, because they don't get choices every level. I tried to convince them, but to no avail.

Yuuki

14:42

@kviiri I mean, we ran into that in this chatroom just a few days ago, IIRC.

kviiri

@Yuuki Yea, that's why it was fresh in my memory :)

goodguy5

@ColinGross back when a wizard's hit die was d4

doppelgreener

@hohenheim Yeah it's not for everyone and crunch is fun.

Colin Gross

@goodguy5 And you had stuff like power word kill and lightning bolt could hit the same target multiple times... it was save or die.

David Coffron

@hohenheim I really want to try Fate, but no gaming groups near me, and learning online is hard.

doppelgreener

14:44

FWIW my plan involved a bit of Fate homebrewing to adapt it to heroic fantasy stories, which included regular drops of loot, some of which was permanent and some of which was consumable.

21

Q: In Which we add Loots to Fate Core

Loot is a pretty fun part of some RPGs. Not the math-tuning loot that keeps characters’ weapons and armor at the required values, but the remarkable and empowering loot that lets them do new things they were not capable of before. Fate… doesn’t really do loot, but I’d like to introduce this the ...

This meant there would still be a sense of progression and choices.

hohenheim

Only problem I have with running D&D-stuff in FATE is the magic system. I havent found a way to make it the way I want it to be. Magic via skills, Magic via Stunts, Magic via something else? Magic Stress?

doppelgreener

@hohenheim Magic can work through any of those.

Different kinds of magic will require different kinds of mechanics.

kviiri

Unstructured magic is hard

like, design wise

goodguy5

agreed

Colin Gross

@kviiri Build your own magic system?

Is that what you have to do in Fate?

David Coffron

14:45

@kviiri Yeah. I love novels that have unstructured magic, but making it "balanced" for play is all but impossible

vicky_molokh

Unstructured magic is scary to GM because it tends to interact reductionistically with the way the party now solves many issues.

hohenheim

@doppelgreener Makes sense. But I can't decide which mechanics I should use for which type of magic. That's why we fell back to D&D.

Colin Gross

@DavidCoffron Sounds like something you'd pay a game company to build and playtest for you.

doppelgreener

@hohenheim Yeah, fair.

Honestly in porting D&D, I would just take all of its approach to magic and throw it all in the bin.

Yuuki

@DavidCoffron I used to really like books with a whole bunch of magical rules but these days, I feel like it's too much worldbuilding for not enough reward.

doppelgreener

14:47

And then not port D&D magic at all and then just find a coherent magical narrative out of whatever magic the group's interested in.

vicky_molokh

IME common problems with unstructured magick are:
1. Scry-and-die.
2. See a problem? Have time and resources to cast the magicks? Now the mage outshines other roles even if they're normally suitable to this task.

David Coffron

@Yuuki Agreed. Especially when they inevitably have to make exceptions to keep the story interesting.

Colin Gross

@vicky_molokh What is scry-and-die?

Rubiksmoose

@doppelgreener Gods yes. What a conceptual and mechanical mess.

Colin Gross

You stare into the void, and the void casts magic missile back at you? Should have cast magic missile at the darkness first.

2

vicky_molokh

14:48

MtA example: Correspondence to find where the enemy is, Entropy to kill it remotely.

David Coffron

@vicky_molokh I was toying with the idea that in order to create or learn a new spell, a person must be able to perform the action it replicates, and then the spell simply reduces the time to do that action

kviiri

@ColinGross Yeah, building one (as game design). Because narratively, we often want so many different things from magic. It's simultaneously a way to accomplish things impossible, but has to come with strings attached that make it powerful and exotic, but not an easy solution to all one's problems. The last point, traditionally, mingles with the idea that magic comes with a complex hierarchy of requirements and limitations that allow savvy muggles to counter unwary witchin' folk.

David Coffron

So, only a lock-pick could learn knock, and only an acrobat could learn jump

hohenheim

@DavidCoffron What do I have to do in order to learn FIREBALL?

vicky_molokh

@DavidCoffron Ah, the Solar Exalted Charms way. Yes, I like that one.

Yuuki

14:49

@DavidCoffron Fun aside, this is what is considered "magecraft" in Fate/stay night.

vicky_molokh

Exalted counterexample which I dislike: Sorcery. Where we summon a dæmon for any task we need solving.

David Coffron

@hohenheim in that magic system, fireball may not be a spell xD

hohenheim

@DavidCoffron I see. Not sure if I would want to play that system, ... because Fireball ^^

Yuuki

"Magecraft" consists of magic that accomplishes things that could be performed mundanely but in a shorter amount of time or with less effort. Like you could conceivably make a fireball with a lighter and a lot of combustibles. "Magic" or "sorcery" consists of magic that accomplishes things that are currently not achievable through mundane efforts.

kviiri

@vicky_molokh Yep. Dungeon World kinda works its way around 2 with its rituals --- it allows the PCs to transform quite literally any problem into "how do I cast a spell that <solves it>", but the effort of completing the ritual may be far, far worse than the task itself would've been. It's up to the GM to come up with the requirements to cast the ritual. (DW wizards also have an assortment of more traditional DnD-ish magic as a structured option)

Colin Gross

14:51

@DavidCoffron So... basically it's a synonym for "practice"

vicky_molokh

A maxim I saw about magic:
'Magic is a bad class. We have a fighting man, who swordfights, and the thief who steals, but what exactly is the niche that the magic-user is limited to?!'

And while I wouldn't take it quite literally, I think it raises an important question about the design of magic.

hohenheim

@vicky_molokh Unlimited Power!

vicky_molokh

No, that's Force.

kviiri

@vicky_molokh Yep, that's it. at least without heavy stipulation about what "magic" means in this context, you're right

vicky_molokh

Totally not magic.

hohenheim

14:53

Dammit.

Colin Gross

The ars magica system just starts out saying the magi are the most powerful characters, but in practice the trade off for them is... go adventuring, or advance magic. When they go adventuring, they kick ass, but at the cost of not really advancing their own skills so much.

doppelgreener

Brief rant: the way D&D settings tend to handle Magic is B/S. Here's the setting conceit: the world is extremely high magic, and there's magical creatures and things and equipment everywhere. There are magical people who can transform the entire world with a few words. HOWEVER, any actual knowledge of magic, or use of it, is exclusively the domain of either the specifically trained (clerics, wizards, warlocks) or naturally gifted (sorcerers). Anyone else has almost no clue or doesn't use it.

Here's why that's B/S: in a setting that magical, where magic permeates everything, it should be a …

Yuuki

Further fun aside, flight used be considered true magic or sorcery because people couldn't fly through non-magical means before hot-air balloons, airplanes, etc.

Colin Gross

Also, casting spells in inherently dangerous in the am5 system. You get warping points and eventually die from it.

doppelgreener

In a setting where magic is omnipresent, an assassin of course learns magic that helps them be sneakier and deadlier, because why wouldn't they. A soldier of course learns magical takedown techniques. A cook of course uses magic to help cook their food.

Colin Gross

14:54

@Yuuki luck dragon was the preferred mode of transport for a while there.

David Coffron

@doppelgreener I agree. In a D&D-type setting every trade should teach a couple cantrips, and experts would know a couple level 1 spells (basically the Magic Initiate feat, or something similar, would be given to all the master tradesman)

kviiri

I think it'd help a lot if DnD just admitted none of its classes are exactly muggles.

Colin Gross

@doppelgreener technology is ubiquitous, but very few know how to build new software. The concept of issuing commands to a computer and it follows your instructions is foreign to most. Most people describe programs and computes as having some sort of will of their own when interacting with them.

3

David Coffron

And the best of the best (like the king's guards, or the leaders of guilds), at the very least are level 2-3 casters

Yuuki

@kviiri It would definitely help with the "I fumble around with my Wii-mote so I think weapon cords should take a move action" line of thought.

Colin Gross

14:58

@kviiri Eberron stated that outright. The player characters are all exceptional. Keith Baker expounds upon that point frequently in his writing.

David Coffron

@ColinGross That's also fair. There is a high barrier to entry (education or self-teaching) for coding. A similar barrier for entry may exist for magic

Colin Gross

@DavidCoffron And it's time consuming and research intensive. However some magic made up language on a page in the right way can change the reality around you.

David Coffron

The non-exceptional high elves spend centuries learning 1 cantrip

doppelgreener

@ColinGross I understand, but do not believe that is an apt comparison.

Yuuki

@DavidCoffron I don't think the barrier to entry for coding is that high.

Colin Gross

14:59

@DavidCoffron Also, you can teach yourself, but there are gotchas that will bite you hard which you would otherwise learn from academic instruction.

doppelgreener

Magic is not like computer code. In our world, if everything involved computer code, everyone would know a bit about using it — we'd be in the Matrix.

Magic in those settings is a force of nature like gravity. Everyone knows how to use gravity.

Yuuki

Granted, socioeconomic status is keenly involved here but let's not get into that discussion.

Colin Gross

@doppelgreener There's not a lot left that isn't at least indirectly affected by software.

2

David Coffron

@Yuuki The skill or intelligence requirement isn't, but the time is. Most people today don't have time to learn to code (or they want to spend what time they do have on other skills); in a pseudo-medieval setting, there is even less time

doppelgreener

@ColinGross Magic is not like computer code in those settings.

David Coffron

15:01

@doppelgreener Right. I know I could create a pully system to make doing my laundry more efficient, but I don't have the time to figure out how to make it work, or the resources to put it together

doppelgreener

I understand the analogy you're drawing, but you're introducing a super specialised field that is less than a century old in our reality and which does not permeate literally all of the fabric of existence.

Colin Gross

@doppelgreener I mean in the world we inhabit. Technology is pervasive already. Code can literally affect the world around you, even if not the basic laws of reality.

David Coffron

@ColinGross But it's not required to do certain mundane things. Magic is

doppelgreener

@DavidCoffron Right. You're using physics in your day to day life without even thinking about it, because it's just a normal force of nature to invoke.

Colin Gross

Since we don't have anything outside of fantasy that actually alters the basic laws that govern reality, any analogy is going to fall short if that's the standard.

Yuuki

15:02

@ColinGross I mean, that change between "not affecting the basic laws of reality" and "affecting the basic laws of reality" is a pretty serious divide.

Xirema

Pay no attention to me, I'm just writing down this whole conversation for the novel I've been spending the last 10 months or so writing...

Colin Gross

@doppelgreener Same as your cell phone and any app. Most people don't understand how they work, but they know how to use them.

kviiri

@ColinGross Yea but I mean beyond exceptional. I think the Fighter, for instance, should be closer to a legendary knight or a samurai of mythic proportions than just an exceptionally good fighter. They should have some mystique around them, to dispel the urge to police their actions on grounds of realism

doppelgreener

@ColinGross I'm not comparing magic to "altering the forces of reality". I'm comparing magic to being a normal part of the forces of the fabric of reality available to leverage to get things done. I roll a ball down a hill, I am leveraging gravity to get things done. I say words that help the ball roll, I am using magic to get things done.

Yuuki

@DavidCoffron If we continue on this argument, then the average person should know how to cast magic to make doing laundry faster, but they don't have the time to spend casting nor do they have the material components.

Colin Gross

15:04

@kviiri I like that take on things. I play Eberron when I play dnd. The characters are without mundane equal.

Yuuki

But this isn't the case in D&D. The average person doesn't know how to cast the magic.

Colin Gross

@Yuuki But the average person could use a magic item.

An artifact that encapsulates a set magical function

Yuuki

@ColinGross That's a bit of a misdirect.

Colin Gross

Sure you've got to attune to your ipod or android or whatever to figure it out for a bit first.

doppelgreener

I'm not talking about magic items, either.

Those are of course already a normal thing in either interpretation of the setting.

Colin Gross

15:06

@doppelgreener I do a task manually or I write a program to do it for me.

doppelgreener

I'm talking about how average people understand and leverage magic in their day to day lives or work as a normal force of nature as relevant to their job.

Ok, let me just flat out say I'm completely uninterested in further talking about magic as a computer system, since we're having a communication breakdown there.

5 mins ago, by doppelgreener

I understand the analogy you're drawing, but you're introducing a super specialised field that is less than a century old in our reality and which does not permeate literally all of the fabric of existence.

It is flatly not relevant to anything I'm talking about.

I find "but magic is a computer system" is an inadequate framing.

Colin Gross

Okay. I'm contending that software and technology permeates the vast majority of our current existence. Including the underlying systems we're using to have this conversation.

David Coffron

@doppelgreener Right. Let me use an example. If a plumber could say some words and sprinkle some seeds to glue two pipes together, that would be part of the normal training for that trade.

Especially after millenia where that was an option

A plumber could teach a robot to do that using coding, but that isn't the same kind of task, nor would it be necessarily more efficient, but the spell definitely is

Programs are only more efficient (presently) at select tasks, while magic is more efficient at almost everything it does

goodguy5

@DavidCoffron plumbers only know how to teach turtles to steal princesses

Colin Gross

@DavidCoffron why is the spell guaranteed to be more efficient?

doppelgreener

15:10

Sorry, on reflection that was pretty rude of me. I get you're trying to engage in a discussion about how magic might be managed in such a setting — just not the kind of discussion I was looking for, and it looks like my stress levels are a bit too high right now to adjust.

David Coffron

@ColinGross Name a single spell that is less efficient than the mundane version of its effect

doppelgreener

I gotta afk a bit to take care of the stress things.

Colin Gross

@goodguy5 And plunder castles where said princesses do not reside.

David Coffron

No one wants to learn those spells

doppelgreener

@DavidCoffron also, yes, exactly

kviiri

15:11

Eg. If I was designing DnD, the Fighter would be permeated with magic that allowed them to, for instance, cut through iron bars with a single, concentrated slash of their blade, or smash through a dungeon wall with a solid body slam or a hefty weapon

David Coffron

@kviiri Sounds like 4e's power system

doppelgreener

@DavidCoffron I agree.

kviiri

@DavidCoffron Incidentally (!) I like it a lot ;)

goodguy5

I like putting in "discount spells" in my games. usually things that sound like real spells.

"Magic Mist Aisle"
"Indivisibility"

Yuuki

@DavidCoffron 4e's power system was great but it went up against the specter of Preconceived Notions.

Colin Gross

15:12

@DavidCoffron any spell with a non-permanent duration where the mundane effect would be permanent.

David Coffron

@Yuuki That sounds like a terrifying Mythal cast in the Age of unReason

Yuuki

I remember my first 3.5e campaign in college had players that would complain about 4e in the off-time.

And how it made all the mundane classes special.

David Coffron

@ColinGross That just means you don't use that spell if you need it to be permanent

That's not less efficient, it's tuned to a different task

Colin Gross

@DavidCoffron So if you need something permanent, magic is less efficient because you have to keep casting it.

goodguy5

@ColinGross sometimes

Colin Gross

15:14

So don't use the less efficient thing

David Coffron

You wouldn't call a for-loop inefficient because it can't do the same things as a while-loop. They are just for different tasks (excuse my highly-amateur programming attempt at an analogy)

Tiggerous

10K rep and my 50th answer on the same day :). With great power comes great responsibility etc....

GreySage

@DavidCoffron While those 2 things are actually almost identical, I think the analogy is clear.

Tiggerous

Thanks for everyone's help getting me here.

GreySage

@Tiggerous Huzzah!

David Coffron

15:16

@GreySage for-loop works n times, and while-loops have a condition. A temporary spell works n times (the number of times you cast it), and permanent spells have a condition (until dispelled)

At least that was my train of thought. It's not a perfect analogy

GreySage

@DavidCoffron A for loop also has a condition. it just so happens that their condition is usually "When an otherwise useless variable hits a certain number", and that number increases each loop. It could be anything.

Yuuki

Ternary operators are single-line conditionals. Doesn't mean you don't still use if-elses.

David Coffron

@GreySage so a for-loop is just a while-loop that says "while i<target" (crappy psuedo-code is best pseudo-code)

GreySage

@DavidCoffron When I was taking my first Comp Sci course the instructor got mad at me because I kept getting too much pseudo-code in my algorithms.

Yuuki

I don't know if that's apropos, I think I lost the train of thought a long time ago.

Point is, people should know magic in high-magic settings.

doppelgreener

15:21

Ok, stressful things dealt with, I think.

GreySage

@Yuuki Meh, that's a setting detail, not a requirement.

Yuuki

If computer code is considered to shape the world around us, mathematics does moreso. And the average person knows how to add.

doppelgreener

@ColinGross In the setting I'm picturing would unfold from magic as an all-permeating force, there would absolutely be situations where the mundane is more efficient. Really, magic would be part of the mundane though, the way we don't think of using physics as "magical" -- it's just another part of the world we use.

vicky_molokh

@Rubiksmoose To avoid cluttering comments, how exactly does 'Are investigating, as a priority, literal interpretations of the rules, even if they lead to absurd situations. Are not usefully answered solely by homebrew or house rules, or speculation of intent.' not fit into asking about the effects of one or the other engine under the most literal interpretation of rules while avoiding rulings and bending?

David Coffron

@GreySage I do the (probably poor practice) of typing up my pseudo-code in the coding tool I'm using, and then writing the actual code right beneath it.

@doppelgreener And then high level magic would just be the experts in those fields

doppelgreener

15:29

@ColinGross Also, now that I can take the time to think this through a bit better and not just be bad-tempered about it: I can totally see where the "computer programmer" perspective comes from. It makes a lot of sense in examining why D&D reserves magic for a select few. It's a good analogy to consider that from! It's just that... I think magic as an all-permeating force in a setting would not result in a setting where magic is for the select few.

David Coffron

@doppelgreener Unless.... Mystra made it so (because deities are a thing)

doppelgreener

The same way physics is not for the select few here in our world. Studying physics in depth might be, but not basic usage of it — I use physics to go running or cook dinner!

GreySage

@doppelgreener So, you think sorcerers would be really common, or you think that basic magical education would be available for everyone?

doppelgreener

@GreySage I think basic magical education would be available for everyone, the same you and I learn to cook, tidy, and read and talk. (Although not everyone learns all these things, we at least learn some of it.)

David Coffron

@doppelgreener And in such a world, there would be machines (like the stove) that help make those simple spells more useful. (think the create bonfire spell but in a stove instead)

KorvinStarmast

15:32

@nitsua60 If it's flown by Southwest, I'll go in a heartbeat. It is sometimes the sniper, not the rifle, that makes the difference.

GreySage

@doppelgreener So parents would teach their children little bits of magic?

doppelgreener

@DavidCoffron Yep, there'd be people who were deep experts in a subject, or naturally just more powerful than everyone else at various things, or who simply get things better. The way some people in our world have better coordination than some others, or are smarter than some others.

Rubiksmoose

@vicky_molokh so first, a little history. The tag used to do what you want it to do here. But it didn't work. People fought, and answers were deleted, and there's was lots of arguing and unpleasantness.

vicky_molokh

OK . . . but how that makes my question not rules-literalist? (I mean the matter of answer-restriction is in addition to the matter of the question-classification, and I primarily don't get how it doesn't fit the classification.)

KorvinStarmast

@doppelgreener Hmm, should I have tossed in a delete vote when I went there? I wasn't sure at the time, and I didn't want to be overly hasty since vicki was engaging (I thought) constructively with the respondent.

doppelgreener

15:34

@GreySage Right! When I teach my kids how to make soup, I teach them all kinds of tricks for cutting vegetables the right size, keeping the soup at a good temperature, show them how to light the stove, teach them to leave the wooden spoon across the top to manage a boil-over. I also teach them to put the lid on while it's boiling so it boils sooner. Wouldn't I also teach them the magic spell that makes the water boil sooner, improves the texture of the soup, prevents a boil over, etc?

Rubiksmoose

@vicky_molokh Let me ask you the same question: what makes your question rules literalist without refering to anything about answers?

doppelgreener

(sorry for all the pings in those edits)

@KorvinStarmast I think you wouldn't have been able to anyway: you can only vote to delete answers that are negatively scored and have downvotes from someone else.

I think, anyway.

vicky_molokh

@Rubiksmoose The fact that I fully understand that spaceships move by a more complex curve than those mechanics would indicate, but I'm interested in understanding those mechanics from a literal PoV, including the benefits I may have missed (that may still not match reality).

Counterquestion: what is a literal reading of rules if not that?

Yuuki

@doppelgreener And then we get into the effects of socioeconomic status on magical education and how most wizards are predominantly from noble classes because their parents have the financial wherewithal to send their kids to magic study prep courses.

doppelgreener

@Yuuki yes lol

Rubiksmoose

15:36

@vicky_molokh That is simply asking "what do the rules say about this topic"

David Coffron

@vicky_molokh The default assumption for questions is to use a rules-interpretation rather than a real world one. The tag is for when a hyper-literal interpretation of the rules may be contrary to another reading of the same rules

vicky_molokh

Then maybe our understanding of a literalist and a normal reading differs.

KorvinStarmast

@doppelgreener profitable is a better choice of word. ;)

vicky_molokh

How do you understand the distinction then?

doppelgreener

and richer kids tend to be more adapt at magic because they have more spare time they might spend studying it, but the kid who works 9 hours every single day scrubbing pots at the local restaurant to help make ends meet probably still knows a mean spell for wiping the design off your fancy t-shirt.

@KorvinStarmast lol, also that.

Rubiksmoose

15:38

@vicky_molokh A literal reading would be something like "Table X says that the spaceship can move at 1800 but never says any units. Is there any reason according to the rules that I can't have my spaceship move at 1800 light years/ms then?" (when the obvious cause is a missing m/s eg)

GreySage

@Yuuki Or we get into a Terry Pratchett situation, where Wizards exist but don't reproduce. No Wizard-parents means no teaching magic to children.

doppelgreener

Fate trains its players to not actually need more than 1 book, D&D leaves players in a position they need many because it's difficult to understand how to produce material the system needs themselves. The second is a pretty profitable model.

vicky_molokh

@Rubiksmoose I feel that 'hyper-literal' and mere 'literal' is not a very clear distinction.

Rubiksmoose

@vicky_molokh Let's step back a bit. Why do you want the tag on your question?

KorvinStarmast

@doppelgreener like electricity or magnetism?

doppelgreener

15:39

@KorvinStarmast precisely

vicky_molokh

@Rubiksmoose Because it identifies the category of my question: a question that only cares about the literal text of the rules, with no 'GMicial activism' in bending them or the like. It pretty much says so in the last paragraph of the question (which happens to closely match the meaning of some notes from the RAW tag).

Yuuki

You could just not accept those answers.

And by "accept", I mean "green checkmark".

Rubiksmoose

@vicky_molokh "caring about the literal text of the rules" here means that you are trying to dictate the answers, which is not what that tag is for.

vicky_molokh

It means I emphasise which part of the mechanics I'm asking about.

Rubiksmoose

Does it though? What other part is there?

David Coffron

15:43

@vicky_molokh Having it in the question is good enough to limit what types of answer you get to the style of reading you want. Here's some more reading on the topic if you have a while to sift through: What, exactly, is the RAW tag for?

KorvinStarmast

@doppelgreener You can trace that concept to Arneson's attempt to free games from rules. (See Kuntz's book from a couple of years back). It may be counter intuitive to you (or to me) to go against the game paradigm "a game is defined by its rules" but that's where Arneson was headed. It even caused Gygax trouble, hence some of the friction between the two after the first published trio emerged ... heck as a long time addicted golfer "game defined by its rules" is nearly in my blood

Rubiksmoose

The default assumption is that you are asking about the rules and that answers will adress that accordingly.

The RAW tag is only for question about taking the rules to ridiculous or absurd ends.

David Coffron

I especially like KRyan's statement of "It is for questions that want literal accuracy over usefulness"

vicky_molokh

> The rules are the only authoritative source of information. Authorial intent is not significant to a RAW study, nor is the experience of an individual in using the rules.

> Justification is irrelevant. RAW is a tool for describing what the rules say. Its users may try to explain why the rules say certain things but this is not the goal or purpose of RAW.

> Value judgements are irrelevant. RAW describes the rules, but offers no comment on their quality.

David Coffron

Take this question for example: rpg.stackexchange.com/q/140705/41726

vicky_molokh

15:46

^ Seems to match what I'm aiming at.

Rubiksmoose

@vicky_molokh No it is what you are aiming for your answers to be which is not what the tag is for.

David Coffron

The tag describes the question. If your question itself required a strict reading of RAW to even be asked sensibly, then the tag fits. Otherwise, just describe the type of answer you wants in the question (like you did)

vicky_molokh

@Rubiksmoose But it's what the supported answer of what RAW is describes it to go for.

CTWind

I used the tag recently- rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/141536/… is hopefully an appropriate use of the tag?

David Coffron

@CTWind I don't think it was. That's just a rules question

CTWind

15:49

It's a rules question where I'm asking if the RAI is different than what is written, though.

doppelgreener

@Rubiksmoose @vicky_molokh You're both digging into a super nebulous area of the RAW tag's existence, and you're both sorta right, is the thing. (Hence why this is super nebulous.) As SSD also mentioned: the main sticking point is the RAW tag can't be equivalent to [rules], so an apparently normal “explain the rules to me” situation doesn't warrant the tag.

CTWind

As I already know what the RAI is.

vicky_molokh

I have an impression that some people are pushing a more . . . caricaturical definition of what RAW is (with descriptors such as 'absurd' and 'rules-lawyer').

Rubiksmoose

@vicky_molokh Only because the question asked can only be answered effectively by using those approaches. It is inherently because of the content of the question itself that the answers are limited not because of the tag itself. The tag just embodies that.

David Coffron

@CTWind Ah I missed your addendum. Seems fitting in that case.

doppelgreener

15:51

@vicky_molokh I wish we had one singular interpretation of what the RAW tag was for.

20

Q: What, exactly, is the RAW tag for?

As the title says. I'm starting to think that there are a few different views of what "RAW" means here on RPG.SE. I think that it is time to sit down and pinpoint the "correct" way to use the corresponding tag, so we can prevent further confusion. I will list how I see some people using this tag...

discussion rules-as-written

Yuuki

@CTWind Ah, that most mystical of wizardly financial statistics: the return of arcane interest.

David Coffron

@vicky_molokh My personal requirement is if the question is relying on rules-as-written beyond just normal rules

Because if we had a [rules] tag then almost every question would have it

vicky_molokh

@doppelgreener Yeah, that question was linked to. And I still fail to see how the top answer's bullet points don't overwhelmingly apply to my question.

Rubiksmoose

@vicky_molokh @doppelgreener In all honesty, IMHO rules-as-written is not a useful tag and causes more problems than it adds value by a large margin. But there are people here that really like it and it would be incredibly contentious to remove or modify it again.

David Coffron

@Yuuki Is that in APY or APR

Yuuki

15:53

@doppelgreener I think the solution to every nebulous tag is to release a new system with that exact name.

Look forward to my new RPG coming this fall: RAW.

The Oracle

1

Q: Should comments that revolve around improving an answer be kept or deleted?

In the last few days to weeks, I've come across multiple cases where someone commented on an answer with e.g. a clarification request, change proposal or other type of attempt to improve an answer. Subsequently, the answer's author or someone else replied, leading to a 3-4 comment conversation. L...

discussion comments

doppelgreener

@Rubiksmoose I think the main reason it still exists is out of concession that its existence is very important to the RAW community as a signal that this site is a safe place to discuss their topic. There's a lot of history wrapped up in that, especially since in the beginning this site was seen by the RAW community as a sort of safe haven for themselves.

Rubiksmoose

@doppelgreener Yeah that is kind of the way I am seeing it as well (though much better phrased than my attempt)

David Coffron

This is my only [rules-as-written] question: Can I make a melee attack with a ranged weapon?, and without a strict reading, it wouldn't even make sense to ask that question.

Rubiksmoose

And in the end, tag or no tag, it doesn't change the answers really at all since the content should already be in the question.

KorvinStarmast

15:57

@vicky_molokh @Rubiksmoose @doppelgreener I think this answer on the main site, not meta, by KRyan is a great way to understand RAW.

doppelgreener

@KorvinStarmast That it is.

KorvinStarmast

@doppelgreener I also think keeping the tag is a good signal that "we support a plurality of play styles" which is I think a different way to say something similar to what you just did.

doppelgreener

@Yuuki Thank you. Excellent.

Rubiksmoose

tl;dr @vicky_molokh I get it, it is confusing and contentious topic. And you have valid points. But your question just doesn't seem to me to fit the type we usually add it to. Perhaps it is because of my lack of knowledge of the system, but I just don't see it. I wouldn't start an edit war over it myself because in the end, tags don't really matter in that they don't change anything a bout the question.

doppelgreener

@KorvinStarmast I agree. There's a real problem that if we remove it, that could be interpreted to mean we no longer support RAW playstyles.

vicky_molokh

16:00

@Rubiksmoose I didn't start the edit war, but apparently one was started on me.

GreySage

@Yuuki If it's not an exploration of the Pro Wrestling lifestyle I will be severely disappointed.

KorvinStarmast

@GreySage Or sushi / sashimi chef shennanigans in RPG form

vicky_molokh

Now that it started, there's only one thing I have left to do: defend myself. Thus I start with asking why a question that matches the usage principles is considered worthy of being editwarr'd.

Yuuki

@GreySage @KorvinStarmast why not both?

GreySage

@vicky_molokh You could always walk away, since it is just a question on a random site on the internet.

@Yuuki Up next! The Dynamite Roll takes on Salmon Sashimi!!!

Rubiksmoose

16:03

@doppelgreener and that is real value as well! Something I didn't take into consideration in my previous statement.

@vicky_molokh well it's not really an edit war at this point, just a contentious edit. Edit wars are usually when something gets added and removed by multiple users who disagree. Luckily this moved to discussion before going fun that road.

vicky_molokh

@GreySage Or the person who started the edit could just walk away, since it's just a question. I used to have a much more 'vacate the conquered land and walk away' attitude in the past, but now I'm reconsidering my life choices.

doppelgreener

@Rubiksmoose Right. So we're left in this spot where we have the tag but to ensure the tag's survival (it cannot be like rules) we have to give it a fairly absurd definition that is well beyond the norms of how the term usually gets used and applied.

vicky_molokh

I reverted, my reversion got reverted. At this point it's no longer a singular edit.

Rubiksmoose

@vicky_molokh ah ok. Well your option now is to elevate it to meta to get it resolved.

(in fact that should have been your next step instead of remaking an edit that a mod especially specifically disagreed with)

vicky_molokh

@Rubiksmoose Sure. I'm fine if this results in the people who rely on the tag decide to rewrite the wiki because it doesn't match how they use it. In which case I'll conform to the way these people use the tag.

KorvinStarmast

16:07

@Yuuki Yeah, I can see a John Belushi / Hulk Hogan hybrid Samurai Sushi Chef / WWE fusion based RPG being quite popular.

Rubiksmoose

@vicky_molokh (or to let it go obviously)

KorvinStarmast

@vicky_molokh @vicky_molokh It took me a while to learn on SE sites that once I posted a question, due to the editing norms on SE sites, I no longer owned it. It had become community property. When I began to see the comments as "let me help you make this question better for the community's sake" I got less worried about edit wars.

8

I had a recent question get a bunch of comments and help from NautArch and some others -- about earth elementals -- that got a lot of churn but it was not "an edit war." It was "the continuous improvement process" at work.

Rubiksmoose

@vicky_molokh The tag description honestly seems acceptable from where I'm sitting and how it's applied by the community. It applies to a specific class of questions where the rules must be applied absolutely literally without common sense. And in those cases the tag generally recommends (not dictates) that answers hew to RAW.

David Coffron

I wanted to bounty this question/answer, but it won't let me. I thought the timer was 24 hours. Is it longer?

Rubiksmoose

@DavidCoffron I thought it was a couple of days?

David Coffron

16:15

@Rubiksmoose Ah 2 days. Nvm

vicky_molokh

Incidentally, is there a way to see how much a given user scored in a given tag?

Like how wiki edits depend on rep in a given tag.

KorvinStarmast

@vicky_molokh Further my previous chat comment, it did help that I have already learned who, in my view, are trusted agents in this community (so I knew Naut's intent right up front) but I had also learned how to simply look at feedback and edits on my questions differently early on thanks to a prompting from the same mod who offered you guidance on your question: @SevenSidedDie.

Rubiksmoose

Speaking of great answers, it looks like we've been doing really well this week with 6 people getting the Great Answer badge! Nice work!

KorvinStarmast

I was in an early comment spat when I first got here, he correctly surmised what was behind my response, and offered me a few pointers on how to receive comments on this SE site.

That helped to inform my view on the community involvement on the rare question that I ask.

Rubiksmoose

@vicky_molokh hmmm let me check. Are you looking at yourself or someone else? (It might change the process)

Sdjz

16:25

@vicky_molokh Is this what you mean?

Depending on the user you may need to search through the tags a bit

vicky_molokh

@Rubiksmoose Pre-emptively interested in the tag scores of people who'll reply to my meta to evaluate the expertise of repliers in the context of the tag.

doppelgreener

Transcript for