« first day (2468 days earlier)      last day (2503 days later) » 
00:00 - 13:0013:00 - 23:00

1:01 PM
@SevenSidedDie "kleenexed into genericism"? Not xeroxed? What gives? =D
 
@nitsua60 yo dawg, I heard you like fake internet points, so I fake made a point tracker for fake fake fake internet fakeness points.
 
@Papayaman1000 Yeah, I reorder my day around an obsessive search for imaginary accomplishments like them. Thanks.
 
Aaand cue Fake sounding like a non-real word. A... fake word... AAUGH
@nitsua60 Don't we all?
 
Ben
Asked.
 
@nitsua60 Because xerox as a verb also has a different, more commonly used meaning, and kleenex as a verb has already been associated with this particular one and not really any other?
 
1:07 PM
kleenexed as in cleansed it right?
 
Ben
Also, on the topic of the GM liking us to be on the brink of death; my PC is quite tough - almost all my stat points are in Might, so taking him down is not an easy task. So in place of that, giving him so.thing as volatile as these situations can simulate that feeling. "I am the GM, I decide when you die."
 
(Support: google "xeroxed" and "kleenexed" separately, and see which gets more pings about brand dissolution.)
 
nwp
Apparently one can make a heavy armor caster in 5e. It seems so cheesy though.
 
Ben
English. What a language.
 
@doppelgreener kleenexed as in "appropriated a brand name for the wider class of all products that serve the same porpoise."
 
1:09 PM
@nwp that was my first thought when i read that arcane spell failure was gone and no mechanic replaced it.
 
@nitsua60 oh gotcha
 
A generic trademark, also known as a genericized trademark or proprietary eponym, is a trademark or brand name that, due to its popularity and/or significance, has become the generic name for, or synonymous with, a general class of product or service, usually against the intentions of the trademark's holder. A trademark is said to become genericized when it begins as a distinctive product identifier but changes in meaning to become generic. This typically happens when the products or services with which the trademark is associated have acquired substantial market dominance or mind share, such that...
 
i agree with SSD that exporting "difficulty class" as the term is a fairly D&D-centric notion
 
post-ited, for example.
 
i wouldn't want to call anything in Fate a difficulty class
ooooh.
 
Ben
1:10 PM
@nitsua60 sea mammals. Noice
 
This might explain why LEGO's branding guidelines say "call them LEGO bricks, not LEGOs"
Fun thing: There have been various legal challenges asserting that the Google brand name is now a generic trademark, because people use "google" as a verb synonymous with web searching. Google has so far not suffered genericisation because it has successfully argued that when people use the "google" verb, they mean specifically using the Google search engine, not just any generic search engine.
 
You mean, like when @BESW said "
(Support: google "xeroxed" and "kleenexed" ?
 
Ben
@doppelgreener and if someone said to "bing it", they would likely be laughed out of the building for several reasons.
5
 
@doppelgreener Fate and Lady Blackbird both call it an obstacle or task's difficulty level.
 
1:16 PM
@Ben i know right
@BESW thanks! I was wondering what Fate's canonical term for it was. :)
 
I did some quick research on it earlier today, in case it needed to be brought up.
 
nwp
@Ben Is "ask the duck" still too obscure?
 
Ben
That worked out very nicely
 
So "google (v.)" is in this liminal linguistic space where it's (a) being used as the generic term because it's so ubiquitous, (b) being used as a specific verb because friends don't tell friends to bing anything, and (c) being used as a generic term out of fear of mockery if one used the more-appropriate term. "Smithers! Ask Jeeves what the flow rate of the Amazon is!"
 
Ben
@nwp you mean... Plucka?
 
1:18 PM
I smell a PhD somewhere in there.
 
Great Ork Gods calls it difficulty, level of difficulty, difficulty level, and how hard the action is.
 
[mashes upvote button for tag]
5
 
I've always gone with "roll target"
 
nwp
@Ben Guess that is a yes. I meant this duck.
 
(I'd be pleased with those two stars, but I see that a C-SPAN link I dropped in here also garnered two stars. I'm starting to doubt this room's sanity.)
 
1:19 PM
Oh, hey, I just got the ANKUR pdf. [checks what it says]
 
Ben
I feel like Great Orc Gods should have gone with something more relevant like how hard to smash it
 
[quickly synonymizes to ]
 
Nah, smashing things is exclusively the domain of the gods of war and strength.
You need a term that also works for the gods of death, gab, movement, etc.
 
[CTRL-Z synonymization]
(alright, I'm stahping)
 
AKNUR uses Action Potential Number (APN).
 
Ben
1:23 PM
Fun idea I had involving orcs: I had a discussion with my late d&d group that led to imagining an orc inspecting oranges in the grocery store. He asked the very intimated store clerk if they were organic, and upon being told no, proceeded to rage, flipping several stands.
After a moment, he then moved to inspect the tangerines.
 
Demon Hunters uses "difficulty number."
 
@nwp "duck it." [person ducks] "no, i meant..."
 
Ben
I feel like that "critical fail" system is kinda synonymous to fire in videos games. In a video game, the first thing you do is walk into a fire to see if you get damaged. When checking out a new game system, you see what the consequence of rolling a 1 is
@doppelgreener more accurately "Huh?" [Turns and is hit in the face by a flying object]
 
@Ben haha!
"what do we do now?" "duck!" [pulls out phone, gets hit in the face by a swooping swan]
 
....Cthulhu Dark and Catthulhu don't have a concept like difficulty....
Call of Cthulhu also uses "difficulty level."
Bubblegumshoe uses "difficulty."
 
Ben
1:30 PM
@doppelgreener [searches a relevant image of a swan on Google] "That is clearly a swan dude"
Oh! D&D uses "difficulty class"
Beat ya to it ;)
 
"dude you've got more important things to deal with right now! a swan's attacking you!" "oh you're right. how... to.... handle..... swan.... attack. oh no, the wifi's out of range."
 
Ben
As I said. Relevant image of a swan
 
(I don't expect more than two people to get that reference.)
deadEarth calls difficulty "the odds."
The 1985 Doctor Who RPG has an Interaction Matrix on which the gamemaster cross-references the Performance Levels, Proficiency Levels, or Difficulty Levels of the Task being performed and the Ability being used, to get the Target Number to be rolled against.
 
@AnneAunyme About PFS, the library research rules are an optional system that has been used on two different PFS adventures, and on one official adventure path (sanctioned for PFS). While Kingmaker, which extensively uses optional rules (ie: kingdom building) is also sanctioned for PFS. So, I don't know if using PFS as base of what is raw or not (or canon or not) is a good idea.
 
1:40 PM
Doctor Who: Adventures in Time and Space calls it difficulty.
 
Ben
I still think GOG (note to self - next orc PC name) takes the cake
 
So does Mermaid Adventures.
Mouse Guard has obstacle difficulties.
 
@BESW this guy looks like a fabulous Bob Fossil, and I'm having fun imagining such a thing
 
Phantom of the Paradise is a 1974 American musical rock opera horror comedy film written and directed by Brian De Palma, and scored by and starring Paul Williams. In the film, a disfigured composer writes his music for a woman he loves so that she will perform his music. However, a record producer betrays him and steals his music to open his rock palace, The Paradise. Betrayed, the composer dons a new appearance and exacts revenge on the producer. It co-stars William Finley and Jessica Harper. The story is a loosely adapted mixture of several classic European works: Gaston Leroux's novel The Phantom...
 
Been messing with the Druid's Wild Shape. Thinking of replacing the restriction on Swim speed with a restriction on Climb speed for my Triton player.
That seems like it makes sense from a balance and flavor perspective.
 
1:46 PM
Og has difficulties.
(This is true on many different levels.)
 
@BESW well, it does
hahahaha
@BESW micro-rpg idea: cave men doing cave man things, including learning and inventing language, but done well and in the lite way such a game should be done
 
@doppelgreener - you mean like that?
"I like Mammo"
 
@ShadowKras: PFS was just an example, the point is an "optional rule system" is not supposed to be the default rule
 
nwp
@Papayaman1000 Does it? It seems to me like it doesn't add anything. Also character abilities like being able to swim shouldn't change druid powers, because the point is that you get different abilities for different shapes. If you make all shapes have the union of all abilities there is no point in having multiple shapes.
 
you can't quote it to assert that you are right (but you can use it when you don't know how to handle a situation)
I don't agree on how Jim is saying that, but he has a point, and I think you should edit your answer so it's clear you are using optional rules
I just read your comment, and that would explain why you are arguing
 
1:58 PM
@AnneAunyme nowhere in the book suggests its optional, other than the fact that as a GM you can always have the option to not use part of the rules.
 
explaining what you wrote in the last argument (that despite being listed as an optional system it isn't one) should be included in your answer
as it is it's not explained properly and someone reading your answer will think you missed the "optional" part
 
even saying its optional on the SRD is argueable, because it doesnt say so. It is on the same page as several optional systems, but the page (at the header) says that it "includes optional systems and other rules"
"other rules" are not necessarily optional or the page wouldnt need a distinction.
i will simply remove the SRD link
since paizo has no power on what is written there.
 
you should keep it and explain your point, really
 
@ShadowKras, what part are you talking about?
 
even just a sentence such as "despite what the SRD seems to imply by listing these rules under "optional rule systems" these rules are clearly presented in the book as a clarification of previous rules, not as an alternate rule system."
 
2:12 PM
Grr... A L1 (5e) PC can hit a skill DC of 37 or a save of 35. I'm giving up on gating on DC =(
 
@nitsua60 What combination of bonuses did they use to get there?
 
@nitsua60 really?
oh, and hello Monday!
 
nwp
guidance + inspiration + proficiency?
 
@Adam Roll a 20, +3 stat, +2 prof, +2 expertise, a little help from guidance, a little bardic inspiration....
 
wow
 
2:14 PM
I mean, it's a little unlikely, but drop the bardic inspiration and you're pretty easily hitting a DC 30 if you can try a few times. I mean, spamming guidance?
What bothers me about it is that it's so party-variable. You could have parties where L1 beatable DC tops out at 25, then others where it's 37.
 
If your obstacle allows for you to repeatedly just spam skill checks until you win, the problem isn't the DC, the problem is that it's a bad obstacle
 
how many classes get expertise at level 1?
 
@Adam I have no obstacle in mind.
@NautArch Just rogue, IIRC.
@Adam I'm thinking about gating theory.
 
@nitsua60, why are you trying to hard-gate?
 
@Adam agreed on this one. Multiple rolls to pass a skill-test seems to negate the need for the test itself.
 
2:17 PM
Cause imho, hard-gates never feel like good design.
 
But you could also say that someone who is an expert, has help (via help, guidance, bardic inspiration) and is lucky and rolls a 20 SHOULD pass the gate.
 
@godskook Contrast: every game that has an area behind a key that you need to find before getting there.
@NautArch Maybe. Again, there's no actual test in mind. Purely theoretical, here.
@godskook I've been trying, in the back of my mind, to come up with a good set of answers to Angry's challenge to come up with feasible gates in 5e.
 
nwp
@nitsua60 In that case make the gate a boulder that moves out of the way, not a lock that screams lock-picking.
 
@nitsua60 True - but theoretically, I also don't have an issue with those circumstances letting someone with those abilities make a high DC. If you don't want to them to make it, it's just an impossible task (or a DC of 45 :) )
 
@NautArch But either of those doesn't really fill the notion of a gate. "Lets through no parties below L4, but (virtually) all parties above L6," for instance.
 
2:21 PM
@nitsua60 ahhhh. I missed that part. Hmm. then the gate needs to be something outside of requiring a roll (because randomness can allow for too early entrance)?
 
@NautArch Sure--those are (relatively) easy: small crack in wall, latch accessible from other side, for instance.
 
The function of a gate in other games is something that you cannot pass until you reach a certain point. So it sounds to me like no DC is appropriate, because putting a DC on it suggests that it is at least possible to pass, which it isn't. Or isn't supposed to be.
 
@nitsua60 You could require a certain spell (if you have a caster) to open the gate and have it be level dependent (and not supply a scroll)
 
I've just been banging my head against whether skills could be used at all. Because I try to engage characters' skills as much as I can.
 
If you want to level cap a gate, make it open based on a skill the party doesn't get until a higher level. Case in point, I ran a dungeon last night and one of the doors can only be opened by using turn undead next to it.
 
2:24 PM
@AnneAunyme that sounds good by me.
 
@NautArch Whoops, sorry :p
 
@Adam Sunless Citadel, by any chance?
 
@Adam darn elderbrains.
 
@nitsua60 Yup :) A chunk of my normal group hasn't been free these last few weeks, so I told the DM that I would run a dungeon while the stragglers were away so he could be a player.
 
2:27 PM
@Adam The challenge, of course, is: how does a party without a cleric ever get through that gate? ("Hire a cleric," of course, is my answer!)
@Adam One of my RL groups just passed that door, too =)
 
nwp
@nitsua60 Or add more spells of other classes of the same level that also allow you to get through. Which turns it into "how will multi-classed characters ever get through the gate?"
 
@nitsua60 Well, if you are creating the dungeon for an existing party you know what classes the players are, so you can tailor the gates to open to whatever skill makes sense.
 
@Adam Ah, except I don't practice tailoring world to party =(
 
Ben
Actually, @BESW did you mention what Numenera's term for "difficulty" was? Or was that what started it all?
 
I don't have Numenera.
 
2:30 PM
@nitsua60 But if your world has freelancers, then as you said they can always hire one. The DC may be to determine what needs to be hired.
 
Yup. Big fan of hirelings, here. (And of farming out the RP of them, 'cause I don't have nearly the bandwidth to roleplay a half-dozen persistent characters.)
 
@nitsua60 Ever wanted to play a hireling?
 
@nitsua60, a fundamental point of contention: D&D, 3.5 and 5e, don't have have hard-gates for combat, where the system is fleshed out better. Why would we expect them to have hard-gates elsewhere?
 
@nitsua60 Then don't make those doors gates. Make them bonus rooms instead. Or make the party figure out how to get past those gates themselves, and intervene with some DM power if they get really stuck and can't figure it out on their own
@godskook To be honest, I kind of agree. This is starting to feel like more work than it's worth to me.
 
@nitsua60, almost every monster can be defeated by a sufficiently prepared party, even well above CR+4
And as I understand it, that statement is more true in 5e than it is in 3.5
 
2:36 PM
the opposite is also true, due to the nature of d20s
 
Sure, but less relevant in the search for hard-gating PCs :P
 
But we know from plenty of gaming that "an area that I know something about, and know I want to get to, but know I can't yet, but I know how to make progress to the point where I can" is a pleasurable thing to deliver when designing. Whether the system was designed with that in mind, I'm pondering ways to do it.
 
@nitsua60, there's a difference between "I definitely can't go there because I will never ever make a single check" hard-gating and "Its overly dangerous for me to go there now, so I choose not to" soft-gating. Only one of these requires the PCs be unable to make the first DC to even get-in in the first place.
 
@godskook My party would take "overly dangerous" as a challenge.
 
Then TPK
 
2:41 PM
@godskook Probably - but I think that's what @nitsua60 is trying to prevent. Save his players from themselves? :D
 
Or not, depending on how well they do it.
 
@NautArch I'm always torn about that. On the one hand, I certainly don't want to just slaughter everyone. On the other hand, characters who throw their lives away deserve to die.
 
Its also ripe story-telling ground.
 
@NautArch No, this is purely theoretical. No actual tests in mind, no party in mind, no particular group of players in mind.
 
@Adam Same - but if you dangle a really enticing piece of fruit that'll kill them, not expecting them to try and grab it seems unfair.
 
2:49 PM
@NautArch, I generally try to either give my players reasonably accessible outs to dangerous places or really obvious warning signs that they're walking to their deaths.
 
But the experience I'd be going for is what I mentioned in my last post: not "I got my butt handed to me by that thing, so let's grind a bit and go back for round 2" but rather "I can see this thing, I want to get past it because I can see the things past it, I can't get past it, I know what I have to do/have to get past it, I know the path to getting that capacity."
 
@NautArch Yes, it is. But that's why you wouldn't start enticing them to go in that direction until later.
 
@nitsua60 It sounds like that's handled better through exposition then skill tests?
 
@nitsua60 Sounds like you just need to give your party a long term goal, and a lot of that could fall into place naturally.
 
@Adam Right!
 
2:52 PM
Or, alternatively, your party needs to come up with their own long term goals. If none of the party has any ambition, then I'm not sure that concept of "getting where I need to go, but can't get to yet" means anything.
 
@nitsua60, which brings me back to my original assertion that imho, hard-gating never feels like good design.
 
It's official, lolfigsl is a thing now
 
Is there a handy way in data.stackexchange to filter posts based on whether it has at least one of a group of tags?
 
@Adam Did you catch the part where there is no party?
36 mins ago, by nitsua60
@godskook I've been trying, in the back of my mind, to come up with a good set of answers to Angry's challenge to come up with feasible gates in 5e.
7 mins ago, by nitsua60
@NautArch No, this is purely theoretical. No actual tests in mind, no party in mind, no particular group of players in mind.
 
@nitsua60 Yes! I know that! I UNDERSTAND IT! I'm just saying that this doesn't work in a vacuum. There is no one solution that works for every person or every group in this system. The solutions depend on the party. They depend on your friends
 
2:55 PM
We recently had a "gate" type of scenario. We needed to get into a cave, but were prevented by an environment that was not able to be bypassed safely. We needed to enter the cave on shadowfell plane.
 
That sounds like good gating.
 
Our "gate" required planar travel.
 
or dynamite
 
@ShadowKras Funny you should say that! We had been given dynamite by the DM and considered using it to close the cave - but we understood the shadowfell piece and that closing here, wouldn't contain what was inside or stop it. HOwever, during the fight there was a pit...so I tossed my dynamite in (it was the right move and hurt a creature before it got to us!)
 
nice
 
2:59 PM
As I strolled into fight one of the big guys, I just lit it and tossed it in. Felt pretty awesome :)
 
when playing star wars (FFG's), one of my players used explosives creatively several times, like blocking a wampa inside a room, or disabling the shield generators of communication station so others could destroy those.
 
3:25 PM
@kviiri Not without some distressingly inelegant SQL. I'd build it for you, but it's 1.30 and I need to sleep - feel free to ping me later and I'll fix it up.
 
@Miniman Super interesting question on the rogue/wizard!
makes me rethink a wizard build
 
@nitsua60 why not just put down a nice looking metal gate and put a sign on it saying "[treasure appealing to lower level characters] that way -->"
 
@Miniman Well I just did it the obvious way. I'm at work and try to devote my off-topic SQL magic to downtime like deployment :)
 
@doppelgreener They'd steal the gate if it looks too nice =D
 
@nitsua60 just as long as they don't go past the gate in search of even more nice-looking gates
 
3:36 PM
@doppelgreener or as @godskook said...Pearly Gates.
 
@Miniman In case you wonder why, I was making this horribly ugly query which tells you whether we should start calling our site DnD.Stackexchange: data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/690707/…
 
I said somethinhg about Pearly gates?
 
86% of question views go to DnD questions. That's a lot.
 
@godskook TPK :D
 
That last 14% are freedom fighters.
 
3:45 PM
@ShadowKras A village of Gauls with magic potion and powerful narrative-oriented gaming systems. Fate is on their side! (and so are the PbtA games, Microscope and all those)
 
Took me 3 reads to figure out the obelix reference, i was reading that as ghouls and wondering why ghouls.
 
@nitsua60, one soft-gate you can use is a well-hidden secret door, who's pattern is oft-repeated throuhgout the dungeon. Set the DC at say...35, but reduce it by 5 for each explicit clue you learn about what the doors look like. Have the oft-repeated part be difficult to discover(DC 35) even if you've discovered the secret door unless you know what you're looking for, in which case its trivial, by design.
 
Any particular reason why @KorvinStarmast has 1 rep atm?
 
@Ladifas weird!
They say everything is bigger in Texas...maybe 1 is bigger there?
 
Wait what?? Looks like his account is temporarily suspended for some reason...
 
3:51 PM
@Ladifas, iirc, running afoul of the rules such that you get a temp-ban also carries a temporary removal of Karma. Don't know if that's applicable here, but iirc, its one way to hit this state.
 
I didn't even know you could be suspended.
 
" This account is temporarily suspended to cool down. The suspension period ends in 7 days. "
 
"This account is temporarily suspended to cool down. The suspension period ends in 7 days."
 
- Korvin's account
 
nwp
Setting rep to 1 is a hack to temporarily remove all privileges.
Such as participating in chat.
 
3:57 PM
The odd part is I can't find any recent activity of his that's contentious in the slightest.
Not so odd, given how opaque posting history is here in the first place, but odd.
 
@godskook I'm surprised, too. He doesn't seem like he'd get to that point. But everyone has a bad day.
 
nwp
Probably because it has been deleted.
Or maybe a rogue mod is taking us one by one!
 
Ten little RPGers?
 
@nwp [suddenly nwp disappears and isn't seen again]
 
@nwp, pretty sure a mod can't go rogue effectively.
 
3:59 PM
but yeah if there's stuff which earned a person a suspension it is usually not the kind of thing we want to keep around, so it would be gone.
 
@doppelgreener Where's @Adam... :P
 
@NautArch that is a completely unrelated stalk-murder and has nothing to do with whatever's going on here.
 
How do these data.stackexchange queries get so high view counts o.O
 
bots?
 
There's dozens with 60k+ views, even though I'd figure they'd be of very niche interest compared to most of the questions on this site.
 
4:03 PM
@NautArch, do you have any comments for refining the question you voted to put on hold that this meta post is discussing?
6
Q: Refining "DM is playing mind games with us!"

Krzysztof SkibińskiToday I asked DM is playing mind games with us! under impulse, focusing on sharing concerns and not on overall quality. So varied answers and some comments made me think it's almost too opinion based or "not a question". Additionaly hasty translation provided early misunderstandings. I'd like to...

 
@godskook I'm tyring to remember why I put it on hold, but reading it again i think i selected "opinion-based". At the most, it seems like a rant and he's looking for support on how to challenge his DM - which would be considered a duplicate of other of those types of questions.
but I upvoted your answer on Meta.
 
4:32 PM
Just to be clear to everyone in the room: it's widely considered poor form to discuss a user and their suspension unless that user is initiating the conversation. Long story short: no matter how well-intentioned it tends to devolve into talking about someone behind their back, about issues that are patently contentious, fueled almost entirely by speculation (since mods won't comment on another user's suspension without very good reason). A good recipe for nothing good, plenty of bad.
3
See also
251
Q: Why don't we keep public records of suspensions?

Jon EricsonWhenever the topic of a suspended user crops up, there's often confusion about what information moderators ought to share and what they should keep private. Sometimes moderators are just as unsure as other users. This can cause all sorts of unnecessary problems. The immediate effect of a suspen...

and
Jeff Atwood on April 06, 2009

Are you familiar with the Penalty Box?

The penalty box (sometimes called the sin bin, bad box, or bin) is the area in ice hockey, rugby football and some other sports where a player sits to serve the time of a given penalty, for an offense not severe enough to merit outright expulsion from the contest. Teams are generally not allowed to replace players who have been sent to the penalty box.

It’s not something we looked forward to, but as of tonight, we’re instituting a penalty box on Stack Overflow. …

@godskook That's an interesting one, thanks! (Jots onto notecard that's been filling up all morning.)
 
it's for the reasons of preferring to avoid creating a public record, or talking about a user when they are incapable of defending themselves, that we avoid commenting on another user's suspension.
 
@kviiri HNQ magic =)
 
"magic" is best said with accompanying jazz hands
 
@doppelgreener or trophies
 
haha!
 
4:40 PM
George Clooney is a wizard
 
@nitsua60 Care to elaborate? Is there a separate HNQ for queries or something?
 
had to look up HNQ. Urban dictionary came up first...that was wrong.
 
@NautArch Nasty. Now I can't stop thinking about other stuff HNQ could stand for.
 
@kviiri Why oh why did I even click it? (it wasn't that bad, to be honest)
 
@nitsua60 "widely considered"? "Not only must Justice be done; it must also be seen to be done." - Lord Chief Justice Hewart. I've never known a medium who's reputation wasn't harmed by opaque moderation practices.
Speaking in a purely abstract context.
 
4:46 PM
@kviiri Sorry--didn't realize you were talking about the SEDE query. [retracts]
@godskook Sorry, meant "widely considered in the Stack." I.e. Stack policies all point to this, and Stack employees reinforce it. I'd agree in the abstract, and in my own career certainly see where opacity in moderation/discipline/judgment can be very troublesome.
@godskook Also, it's not that we can't ever talk about what's going on, just that we should do it when the person under discussion (a) wants to have facts disclosed and (b) can participate in the discussion. So it won't happen during the duration.
 
@nitsua60, I know for my part, I wasn't seeking to get anything but the most public of facts disclosed, as in, things that are still publically viewable.
 
5:17 PM
@NautArch I saw this message as an alert and thought you were talking about the SQL I posted earlier :D
 
@nitsua60, another soft-cap idea is to create situations where climbing/flying/exploring an area would be profitable, but there's clear high-ground threat which is not ideally dealt with from this side.

Such as archers along a castle wall defending a marketplace full of loot. PCs can either deal with incoming fire or go deal with the Archers directly first, but that distraction will take them long enough they might forget the shinies they thought were discoverable in the first area.
 
5:45 PM
@nitsua60, a third soft-gating option is NPCs with secrets they'd sell for X, Y or Z. PCs who're not too Chaotic or Evil would be willing to save these NPCs for a time when they could afford their secrets, although overly Evil or Chaotic parties might stab them out of expediency. Otoh, we're back to combat soft-gates!
 
 
1 hour later…
6:57 PM
@godskook these are good ideas--thanks. I'm heading out for the day, but feel free to ping me with any others that come up.
 
@nitsua60, regardless for if you agree on the usage of hard-gating, are you getting a feel for how I distinguish between hard-gating and soft-gating?
 
 
3 hours later…
10:27 PM
hey there @Anaphory
 
Hey you!
 
how're things going?
 
Just had a good “Winter Session” before the summer holiday break – and between IC spring and summer – in Mouse Guard. Should have gone to bed directly, but my computer was still on, so…
 
00:00 - 13:0013:00 - 23:00

« first day (2468 days earlier)      last day (2503 days later) »