« first day (3901 days earlier)      last day (1361 days later) » 

AncientSwordRage
AncientSwordRage
00:28
@BESW that's cool
@bobble either that or a guild, or secret cult
@G.Moylan I got you
BESW
BESW
01:35
Indie bundle for Palestinian Aid by Tybawai and 865 others. 1020 items for $5.00. This is a grassroots bundle by indie devs who want to help Palestinians.
4
All priced Monkey's Paw Games got 999 community copies added to their pages. N. Masyk's games seek to inject anti-colonial, anti-racist, and anti-fascist narratives into the lens of science fiction, fantasy, and horror.
TTRPG Charity Bundle for Trans Support A bundle hosted by Cat Elm with content from 46 creators. This bundle's goal is to raise money for two amazing charities that do incredible work to support and uplift transgender people: Mermaids, and the Transgender Law Centre.
3
Heroes of the Moebius Guild by Jon East. Bad news: There's way too many dungeons. Good news: We have some eager volunteers to take care of them.
G. Moylan
G. Moylan
02:34
@AncientSwordRage jeez, smoked 'em
AncientSwordRage
AncientSwordRage
02:49
@G.Moylan it seemed fair at the time
They seem stunned
G. Moylan
G. Moylan
@AncientSwordRage it seems fair to me
 
2 hours later…
Medix2
Medix2
05:21
TIL there are super secret edits that don't bump questions time to find more
Oh now it's bumped.... I blame caching
The Oracle
The Oracle
05:38
0
Q: Can we generalize our policy on linking system-specific rules, toolsets, etc. as clearly stating the system?

Stop Being EvilWe have this question about reopening a question and tagging it pathfinder-2e on the grounds that the OP linked to the system-specific rule document. As much as I've been on the side of waiting for explicit mention of a system, I'll agree that this counts as such mention. We do have this policy s...

discussion policy game-systems
Hot RPG Questions
Hot RPG Questions
05:58
2
Q: What is an orb of dragon's breath?

KirtMy players have just started Rise of Tiamat and are likely to encounter a Dragonsoul in their next session. The Dragonsoul NPC in Rise of Tiamat has an Action called "Orb of Dragon's Breath" which gives them "Ranged Spell Attack: +7 to hit, range 90 ft., one target. Hit: 27 (6d8) damage of the ty...

dnd-5e equipment npc hoard-of-the-dragon-queen rise-of-tiamat
 
3 hours later…
AncientSwordRage
AncientSwordRage
08:54
@Medix2 shouldiblamecaching.com
 
4 hours later…
KorvinStarmast
KorvinStarmast
13:20
I think that every new DM ought to read this post by enkryptor regarding the 'camping at night ambush' scenario. Lots of good advice in there.
Medix2
Medix2
13:52
I can't say I agree with "It still requires a lot of checks for NPCs, which isn't considered a good practice." But the rest is great
Trish
Trish
14:37
@Medix2 rule of large numbers: even if something is extremely unlikely to happen, once you have enough(TM) itterations that can make something happen, it will happen.
2
Medix2
Medix2
14:50
And that has nothing to do with the idea that NPCs shouldn't make checks?
I get what you're saying, I think: that having all the NPCs roll means somebody will succeed. But that doesn't mean the entire group succeeds
@Trish I think the answer just states something without explaining why it states that and also without supporting that part, I'll go leave a comment
RevanantBacon
RevanantBacon
@Medix2 Yeah, that bit confused me. Like, what NPC's are you tolling checks for the watch? Most parties consist of a handful of players and generally no NPC's, or only one or two.
Medix2
Medix2
@RevanantBacon It's not the watch, it's the bullywogs. Having them make a group stealth check would still be a lot of rolls for NPCs which is, for some reason, bad practice
RevanantBacon
RevanantBacon
@Medix2 Ah, well in that case, the DM should be using the passive stealth, or making a single roll for the whole group
Medix2
Medix2
To which I ask, why?
When the PCs sneak, i feel many GMs have them roll stealth
RevanantBacon
RevanantBacon
Because if making that many rolls is such an onerous task on the DM (I don't think it is) then it will reduce the number of required rolls that they make
Medix2
Medix2
15:01
It's not especially onerous to me. Actually, it's not difficult at all. Just roll some dice, even pre roll the dice beforehand
RevanantBacon
RevanantBacon
I personally would roll each one and give the party a pass/fail based on how the bullywogs roll
Medix2
Medix2
And apparently that's bad practice. Which is why I'm confused and have now left a comment
RevanantBacon
RevanantBacon
But coming from the point of view that it is an onerous task (as implied in Enkryptors answer) then my suggested solution is to use their passive score, or to roll once and apply to all of them.
Medix2
Medix2
I mean, the answer seems to say "NPCs shouldn't roll because the story isn't about them"
Whereas I've had tables who specifically want the NPCs actions to involve rolls because they want their actions to be just as governed by chance as their own are
RevanantBacon
RevanantBacon
@Medix2 Rather than that, I think it's saying that rolling a bunch of rolls for NPC's is unnecessary
And it should be consolidated to less total rolls
Medix2
Medix2
15:05
I mean, I almost literally quoted the answer
RevanantBacon
RevanantBacon
Which I still disagree with, but that's the vibe I get from it
Medix2
Medix2
Yeah that's fair. I'll just wait for a response to my comment
RevanantBacon
RevanantBacon
Yeah
I too am curios to see exactly what was meant by it
doppelgreener
doppelgreener
15:23
@TheOracle i'm totally at a loss for words that this is how we're operating
KorvinStarmast
KorvinStarmast
@Medix2 roll a handful of d20's is a way to do it, and VTT allows that. Depending on your dice supply, it can be a pain at the table. (But I always have oodles of dice .... ) - It's cleaner to have the PC make the roll, and takes fewer rolls. KISS principle in action.
Medix2
Medix2
@doppelgreener tbh, your comment sound like an excellent answer
doppelgreener
doppelgreener
i considered posting it as one, I might do so now
Medix2
Medix2
I thought on your comment about policy not meaning we have to strictly adhere and rollback and whatnot and I don't know if I'm just sick and tired of comments saying "If you don't like the policy, why are you following it??" or what, but thanks for at least showing me that as an option
Trish
Trish
@Medix2 Rule of large numbers.
doppelgreener
doppelgreener
15:37
0
A: Can we generalize our policy on linking system-specific rules, toolsets, etc. as clearly stating the system?

doppelgreenerYes we can, and we shouldn't even need to ask this meta in order to do that. We already discussed that we should "let experts be experts". Stack Exchange isn't meant to run on absolute objective rigid adherence to black-and-white law, we're meant to be the people synthesizing our available guidan...

Medix2
Medix2
@Trish I already responded to that. I majored in math and am well acquainted with the law of large numbers. But I'm also just going to wait on a comment from Enkryptor explaining what they meant, because, to me, it is unclear
Trish
Trish
@Medix2 Ok. But as a rule of thiumb: if you let anyone roll repeatedly for something, then they are doomed to fail/succeed eventually, no matter how good/bad they are.
doppelgreener
doppelgreener
@Medix2 Conscious decision to not comply has been something I've exercised regularly on all kinds of fronts, nothing new to this system or this topic.
it's the same principle as, say, we may believe that use of marijuana should not be illegal, and if we do, nobody's going to arrest us if we just walk on by someone using it and don't say anything to the cops. There's nobody keeping tabs on us like that.
likewise nobody's keeping tabs that i saw that question and didn't roll it back
Anyway, I don't want to talk your ear off of it. I'm happy my comment made a difference for you.
Stop Being Evil
Stop Being Evil
16:04
I'm sorry if I sound completely off-base by saying this
But getting told twice that I shouldn't have posted that meta in the first place - and by the person whose side I was taking by posting it - had me this close to just deleting it and walking away from the site for a long time
I get that this is how strongly you feel about it, but can we please avoid biting each other's heads off over it?
Medix2
Medix2
For what it's worth, I do not, in the least, read that as being directed at you
KorvinStarmast
KorvinStarmast
@StopBeingEvil I thought it was a good question.
doppelgreener
doppelgreener
16:40
I've got no intention to be biting peoples' heads off. I don't know who or what to be frustrated with, and I am sure that question was asked for a good reason, but it had me flummoxed that it was needed and my frustration is that it was needed, perceived as needed, or had impetus to be asked.
I don't think I can say you should not have asked it, but I want us to be in a place where it is something we don't need to be asking about.
When I said I was at a loss for words... I meant it, I really did not even know what I could say about it other than that.
(evidently I figured some out)
KorvinStarmast
KorvinStarmast
@nitsua60 falling homebrew; having trouble finding it... got a link?
doppelgreener
doppelgreener
So @StopBeingEvil if you feel harangued for even asking it, sorry, that's not my intent. My intent is just ... wherever we are with this stuff such that this is a question that's getting asked, it is not a good place for us to be.
in fact I was pretty shocked someone said that the answer I linked was exclusively about D&D 5e (that was in another meta, not this one)
The question might've been only about a D&D 5e question, the answer was no such thing
Stop Being Evil
Stop Being Evil
@doppelgreener thank you for this, I've had a while to cool down and sort my thoughts out, and... maybe it would help if I said the question is primarily for the folks among us who still support the 'wait until system tagged' approach? That the question I linked about PF2e introduced an edge case they hadn't thought of?
You did say in your answer that there's no popular support for the position anymore, but we did have that minor edit war in said linked question, so even if it's not a majority or plurality of people, it's still someone
KorvinStarmast
KorvinStarmast
@StopBeingEvil That's people being people, I suspect.
Stop Being Evil
Stop Being Evil
16:57
I might also be thinking differently of what 'policy' even means on RPGSE
doppelgreener
doppelgreener
Avoiding the edit war was why I followed our guidance and brought it to meta in fact
Stop Being Evil
Stop Being Evil
mxyzptlk's comment was something I initially had wanted to reply to by recounting all the disagreement there had been over the past week as evidence that 'just leave it up to the community' was in some sense not working. My understanding is that the whole point of policy is to address those conflicts and get everyone's deeds, if not their thoughts, in the same direction to minimize those conflicts
Medix2
Medix2
@StopBeingEvil Yeah I agree with all that. There's just, as I'm sure you know, cases where people's deeds don't follow the policy which... I'm still somewhat trying to figure out how to feel about
KorvinStarmast
KorvinStarmast
17:14
@StopBeingEvil it's a word we should not use, IMO, since 'best practices' is what we've learned to advocate for - again, we don't do this for pay, and it's about playing games.
Stop Being Evil
Stop Being Evil
@KorvinStarmast I have no problem with calling them best practices, that's fair enough, but I don't see how that changes much else
@Medix2 And I'm not sure what that is a symptom of - is it the best practice which is incorrect and needs updating, is it something that can even be objectively correct or is it a decision about which values we're going to uphold and at what cost, etc...
doppelgreener
doppelgreener
17:51
My thoughts on it are like this: "policy" is a concept that's relevant for separate governance bodies. For example, a workplace has a finance department. People in this department are qualified, equipped, and authorised to create policies for the rest of the company as pertains to financial matters. Similarly, so is the HR department on human resource matters. Others do not have the appropriate qualification, tools, or authority to create any such policy, so their lot is to follow the policy.
In our case however, we do not have separated governance bodies. We are the governance policy—each of us and all of us. We are the ones creating the guidelines and executing on them. There is no separation of qualification or authority whatsoever.
This means if we're not allowed to exercise our own judgment, question things, shape policy, decide how it's supposed to be applied... who is, exactly?? It's meant to be us doing all of that! There's nobody else doing it for us. It's us and nobody else.
This is why it's not about policy, and instead about guidance and best practice. We, all of us, are those responsible for determining and carrying out collectively what the best thing is for the site. We collectively are part of one big, continuous, 10 year long conversation about what the best way to do that is. There is no separation of "this is the rules and I have no choice" because it is you who is trusted to make conscious choices and determine where and how our guidance gets applied.
In the past, the norm was that we'd run into corner cases, make judgement calls, and sometimes when it was particularly difficult or contentious we'd have discussions before and/or after those judgement calls were made to determine the best course of action. There were always times we decided that collectively, guidance would usually say X, but we can agree the best case resolution for this situation is Y, because we trusted ourselves and each other to be able to make those calls—and it worked.
KorvinStarmast
KorvinStarmast
@doppelgreener thank you for saying what I was thinking again. :)
doppelgreener
doppelgreener
I've been thinking about this a lot :P
bobble
bobble
thinking ain't a crime, last I heard
KorvinStarmast
KorvinStarmast
18:11
@bobble There is a Mr Orwell Mr Big Brother on the phone, he'd like to have a quiet word...😛
@doppelgreener You bring both a long time user perspective and a mod side perspective
doppelgreener
doppelgreener
:)
Stop Being Evil
Stop Being Evil
18:27
@doppelgreener so if I'd called it best practice, instead of policy, it wouldn't have been nearly as infuriating?
doppelgreener
doppelgreener
@StopBeingEvil no, it wasn't that. plus it's not the label we're putting on it that's the issue, just the way we're relating to it. (and, like, i've said before, we for several years deliberately cultivated an atmosphere where nobody was allowed to question the policy, and boy did it work—and backfire on us. it's not anyone's fault that we're relating to the policy this way, we tried to make it happen!)
it's just ... we already had that "let experts be experts" discussion that made it pretty clear how people felt, and then it was described as exclusively about the phrase "5e" when it wasn't, then a meta that (to me) was like "can we confirm we have permission to do the thing we already talked about and agreed on", and this building on lots of prior issues with how we've been relating to our meta recently
our discussion around the don't-guess-the-system policy has been a hotspot for this (because, again, we succeeded at saying nobody was allowed to question it), but there's also been other issues.
like i discovered recently that the homebrew review guidance i wrote, which is noncomprehensive guidance built to help people suceed, was apparently being used like a set of criteria questions absolutely had to meet and failure to meet the criteria was grounds for closure in and of itself. none of what i wrote was meant for that or is even fit for purpose for doing that!
Stop Being Evil
Stop Being Evil
@doppelgreener others like?
Stop Being Evil
Stop Being Evil
18:49
It's starting to sound like the only thing I could have done was not post that meta
doppelgreener
doppelgreener
There's nothing you need to have done differently. I expect under the circumstances someone would have to have asked a meta like this. My frustration is not with you or that meta, it's with the circumstances, and with the fact the circumstances are leading to stuff like this.
I could have left it as "yes, we have permission to do that" but I needed to also spend some of my answer to say "we should not even need to be asking permission to do that"
because otherwise i wouldn't be speaking to the circumstance as well, in fact my uncritical compliance would suggest everything was fine here
KorvinStarmast
KorvinStarmast
@doppelgreener My reception of how the term 'policy' has been used is as a bludgeon, and in absence of the use of judgement (which you covered very well a few comments up)
It's also a rhetorical trick, oft used by small time bureaucrats, to avoid accountability by blaming an abstraction. (I've voiced that analogy - the petty bureaucrat - no few times, and I suspect some folks find that grating when I do)
Stop Being Evil
Stop Being Evil
19:28
Alright... thanks again
Thomas Markov
Thomas Markov
19:47
Two 5e books leaked on Amazon.
reddit post
nitsua60
nitsua60
20:06
@KorvinStarmast Does this do the trick: homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/BJ79Xy491z ?
Hot RPG Questions
Hot RPG Questions
8
Q: Ambushed while Sleeping (with a Watch)

cbaerThe party goes to sleep around the campfire, and one member volunteers to take the first watch. A couple of hours later, a dozen bullywugs try to stealthily ambush them. The DM makes stealth rolls for each of the attackers and compares them to the passive perception of the character keeping watch...

dnd-5e initiative surprise
 
1 hour later…
BESW
BESW
21:31
Zoopolitan Future Blues - Undercover Edition by Role Over Play Dead. Play detectives in the Zoopolitan Finder's Bureau. Find missing critters in the big city.
"Indie Bundle for Palestinian Aid now live, offering over 1,000 games for $5" article by Chase Carter for Dicebreaker. Proceeds benefit the United Nations Relief and Works Agency.
Pandatheist wrote a twitter thread about "evaluating RPGS."

« first day (3901 days earlier)      last day (1361 days later) »