@KorvinStarmast maybe :) wondering how someone would go about teaching someone who's only ever commanded ships under sail or oar how to handle a ship under power
@Shalvenay A lot of the principles are the same, but a huge problem to deal with is 'what is you energy source and what is your energy state?' Kind of like a fuel plan when you fly.
With oar and sail that additional planning concern isn't an issue. You also have to teach a new risk management scheme for dealing with weather. Powered ships have a different problem from sailing ships who have a different problem from oared ships.
@Shalvenay Tactical use of the weather gage was huge in Nelson's victories. the weather is a huge tactical piece of any sea battle under sail; for oared ships, some weather renders battle utterly moot. Lepanto as well, which was a combination of oars and sail.
@KorvinStarmast yeah, Nelson would recognize pretty well some of the tactical uses of weather in more modern naval battles as well (the Battle off Samar comes to mind with the Johnston ducking in and out of squall weather)
I'm yet to decide. I was late to work due to the public transport system, but I also got my Tax Return... then when I got into work my job was to update our EDMS finally (I have been wanting to for weeks now), but when I got in, the provider had not given me the serialisation information.
This time around, Auntie Beeb gave up trying to stagger Doctor Who releases so British viewers would get first dibs, and the episodes are just released on all the platforms everyone all at once.
> Common adhesives include beeswax, shellac, and other resins; plant starches; gelatins; and pressure-sensitive or heat-sensitive synthetic materials. Clay and mud are used similarly in earlier examples of document security. (source)
Sorry--I mean what it gets you that the barbarian doesn't already have. That's just Second Wind, Fighting Style, maybe Heavy Armor (if you trade saves).
@Ben You only get the Strength and Constitution bumps to 24 (+2 to each modifier; retroactively giving you 40 more HP max and a +2 bump to unarmored defense) if you don't take any fighter level.
@Ben I do like the visual of running in throwing two handaxes (Attack, bonus action off-hand attack), drawing battleaxe, and laying in with Extra Attack.
(Which probably works out better with the pure barbarian build than with the MC; if the bonus action attack only comes in during first round its modified damage is less important than the to-hit bump from strength-->24.)
(I still think 20's hard to give up, but if you're multiclassing, I'm hard-pressed to pick between 19/1 and 18/2.)
(This, of course, is where I feel like class balance shows itself pretty well. It's soooo easy to keep going down this road and say "17/3 loses me barbarian indomitability but gets me either maneuvers or expanded critical (on top of my brutal crits)....")
(I think that argument peters out at "trade third brutal crit die to regain an ASI at ftr4.")
I think I'd limit it to 18/2... Can you throw weapons with TWF?
In all honesty, I am aiming for a PC with as much versatility as possible. So far my characters have all been just "I attack... Damage... OK turn over"
In this question we see that two-weapon fighting with darts is not possible because they are not melee weapons. Let's replace the darts in that scenario with daggers, which are valid light melee weapons for two-weapon fighting, and also have the thrown property.
Two-weapon fighting says:
...
And now I'm back in the age-old loop. "Why not dip a level of Fighter for a Fighting Style?" "Hey, if you're losing a Bard level anyway, why not dip 2 levels of Paladin for a Fighting Style and Divine Smite?" "Hey, you don't want to lose those all-important ASIs! Better make it 4 levels!" "Hey, Aura of Protection is only 2 more levels of Paladin..." "For one more level you could get Aura of Warding! "You still don't want to lose ASIs, buddy. Better make it 8."
Though slots work out okay as long as you're full-caster/full-caster. So I guess that actually gives you a couple of levels to play with before you start losing access to levels of spell. So we're back to capstone abilities &c.
I think it was Mxy who first told me (and I've since found my experience supports this) that a single downvote on an answer can be regarded as white noise from the cosmos.
but also "this question is not useful" is a legitimate subjective downvote reason
I once wrote a very controversial post on a video game forum that supports up- and down votes. I got a very even score with far more votes than typical. A friend who also visits said forum said he was impressed, because "lots of upvotes means you're just pandering to the masses. A real controversial post means you're actually making a strong case enough to rouse the detractors".
haha. no. You can't get to 20 if you're wearing any clothing at all
I assumed it meant "you lose 60% of your max hp per day"
so, you'd be downed on day 2
hrm.... actually
that's not right.
100 % life
Day 1: lose 60%, rest : at 40% Day 2: gain 50%, lose 60%, rest : at 30% Day 3: gain 50%, lose 60%, rest : at 20% Day 4: gain 50%, lose 60%, rest : at 10% Day 5: gain 50%, lose 60%, rest : at 0% - downed
Then I assume you start making death saves.
If you succeed, I guess you're stable that day? Then you gain 50% and lose 60% again the next morning.
Hot take: you could do better than this system by just introducing a "really cold" and "freezing" environment condition and ensuring people dress appropriately for each condition.
I'm not exactly sure what the desired experience of the freezing thing is, gameplay-wise. Is it supposed to be a resource drain, narrative tension or what?
We figured out Where and when did "the GM is always right" get codified first? to the early days, or more precisely, it predates the main bulk of AD&D and can be pinned to have shown up in the 1970s.
This question is about the general rule Have Fun. We find it nowadays in a lot of games. Some ...
Also, I'm really curious. does OP expect the PCs to be changing clothes often enough to justify an entire system around it? Or that they would be going there without the proper clothes to begin with?
@kviiri So I remember recently Mike Mearls tweeting about how he creates features by adding complexity until they reach the breaking point, and then dials back to just before that point. It's not a philosophy I agree with, but it's one that crops up in a lot of homebrew. Especially when something "isn't simulated enough". Ironically adding spreadsheets and calculations usually simulates things worse than much simpler systems.
@Rubiksmoose Take a look at the first revision if you haven't already. That one was POB. Now the question is just closed while people address its issues, and will get reopened if/when people think it's workable and start voting to reopen it.
I mean, given that D&D evolved out of tabletop wargames and such competitive games, I could see in the early stages of the hobby that this was a distinction which needed to be made
@Carcer I dunno - people still enjoy competition. Whether it's in the winning, competing, or training - they do it because they enjoy it. Not including outliers who are forced to do it.
@NautArch I meant to say that people sometimes need to be reminded that the intent of the game is to have fun. I'm kind of confused what you are saying here because yes an individual person's confusion on the matter would indeed be an individual problem. Unless of course that person is the DM and is subjecting an entire group to un-funness.
@Carcer A product of social dynamics. I have been to a LOT of parties where I had little to no fun. (And no few of them were related to work, or I was there since we had been invited and had a social obligation to fulfill)
@Carcer In golf, I can play a hard, good match and regardless of who wins, can have a good time. I've not been that good at it for a couple of years, but I find your view on this a bit narrow. there's a thing called sportsmanship. Do they still teach that?
For example, everyone who sits down at a table (let's just assume) is expecting or hoping to have fun. This makes sense. However, when the DM turns a campaign into a brutal slog (as an example) or when a DM/player is being a crazy rules lawyer to the point of diminishing fun it is always helpful to have a directive to point to that can recenter the group around a common goal: having fun.
@Carcer In fact, I think that learning good sportsmanship when young will help people enjoy RPGs. Hmmm, you have me thinking ... and that's a good thing. As to not enjoying losing, indeed, it can make something less fun. (Particularly if one is playing a lot less well than one knows one can play ... see golf example above).
@nitsua60 @doppelgreener if I opened a chatroom in a comment thread under a question, would OP automatically gain access to that? Or is that still locked behind a rep wall?
I'm aware of the preference for 'general answers to general questions' attitude on SO, and wholeheartedly agree that questions that are focused on specific, one-time issues are not as valuable to the site. However, where an issue is potentially useful but getting to the heart of it is taking som...
@Rubiksmoose I guess i'm saying it's a general life rule and it's not tied to RPGs, sports, or anything else. The question seems silly to me because of that.
It's the sort of thing that would be nice to have, but it's such an edge concern that I doubt more than half an hour of dev-time would ever make sense to dedicate to it, and I assume the amount of dev-time required to make any change is much greater than that =\
@Rubiksmoose New users should be focused on writing excellent questions and answers, not conversation. That's why you must have 50 rep to post comments everywhere. – Robert Harvey Jul 29 '11 at 15:58 That attitude still exists.
It is at least interesting from a historical standpoint to see when this was codified. 5e can easily be seen as lowering a lot of bars to entry (or at least trying to) and I am actually a little surprised to find that sentiment codified in the 1e version honestly (having the reputation of being a lot more "hardcore" and "brutal" than modern "kinder" RPGs). But that is just my personal take on it. And important to note as one who has never played any edition older than 3.5.
@doppelgreener @doppelgreener oh hi :) I didn't know this chat existed. yes there are many typos in my script. I am not a native speaker. If there are still questions please pin me.
@NautArch Hmm... I don't know about "enjoy." I can appreciate and even seek an experience that isn't enjoyable. (I don't enjoy A Grief Observed, but I still reread it each decade.) But this is obviously an edge case, speaking of dev-time =)
@NautArch "Fun" might not be the most accurate metric of all games since it does imply some sense of joy and happiness. I can't think of a words that encapsulates all of them though.
I mean at this point we are entirely arguing about terminology here to be clear. Enjoyment by definition entails some sort of happiness or..well joy at particiapting.
I've played games on ridiculous difficulties (and had a very frustrating and unfun time while doing so) purely for the purpose of getting the dumb steam achievement that says I did it
@Rubiksmoose I don't think happiness is necessarily the definition. Taking enjoyment (getting pleasure, keen satisfaction) is more the definition. Some people get enjoyment from feeling things that other swould not say are happiness.
@KorvinStarmast yup. It's just that the assumption too often seems to be that realism is always the goal, or that it goes without saying everyone wants or needs more.
There are certainly groups that will enjoy as realistic gameplay as possible, but I would guess there are even more groups that are trying to get there just because they think that's the point.
@NautArch thanks for the Divine Sense tip. That is a great comparison. Sidenote: am I being silly or does the other answer really not support their RAI part at all?
@kviiri there's definitely a market for that kind of realism in games, but I don't think it makes a lot of sense when you don't have a computer which is taking care of that
I will happily install a mod for Skyrim which tracks how much protein I'm eating and I'll play dwarf fortress and marvel at the health tracking of individual fingers
I have no interest in having to manage that level of detail in a tabletop rpg
@Carcer I continue to be astonished and infuriated that every time there's a Minecraft mod that adds new food and farming options, they never add a nutrition system to the game.
"Congratulations at adding 100 new foods to the game. Now let me just find the one that restores the most Hunger + Saturation, and ignore the other 99 for the rest of the game"
Creatures was one of the games with an actually deep nutrition system
It tracks several nutrients along with a separate sense of hunger (multiple types in later installments)
Once a mutation caused a Norn of mine to never grow hungry. It still starved, because never feeling hungry doesn't mean your body doesn't need carb and protein intake.
Cheating a bit, I "resurrected" it and taught it to eat by rewarding it for doing so.
@goodguy5 Credit where credit is due. I didn't draw the map myself i've got it from a drawing tutorial. I wanted to draw it myself but It looked like a potato :) source: online-tabletop.com/art/custom-map
I can still remember the damn song those aspiring mariners on the first island sing
"oooh / we've got this notion / that we'd quite like to sail the ocean / so we're building a big boat to leave here for good / now we're not keen on sinking / so we're all sitting here a-thinking / cause we built it too big and we've run out of wood"
Unrelated: my SO started playing Minecraft and watching her hyperoptimizations was so painful to me that I installed Factorio just to balance it out with a game where optimization is the point
Just looked up the latest Gentleman Bastards book to find it still hasn't been released :(
user357094
@kviiri Man, I love that game, but I have the problem I always run into with grindy games. Once I've done the first grind and figured out all the things I did wrong, I never want to go back through the grind to correct my mistakes :/
because once you've really got going in factorio you're not building anything by hand. You're setting blueprints for everything and letting an army of construction robots do it
also destruction blueprints to remove all the old garbage you built
user357094
@Carcer Yeah, I probably could go back to that save and redo everything, but idk, doesn't feel quite right.
@AVeryLargeBear It hasn't been as bad as I thought, tho. My first factory went so organic messy so fast I hadn't had time to actually build it up, so cleaning the mess was fast. The replacement factory was already so much better that I had unlocked the mass construction bots
They don't make everything easy, but at least copypasting designs and mass removal gets quicker
I guess I can see how that would happen thematically, but that is still frusterating.
@NautArch Honestly what bugs me most is that the other question is getting upvotes purely for saying "it was intended to allow it" without any support (despite saying the same as me up top).
DAE this sounds like a party full of "My Guy Syndrome", and blame isn't necessarily appropriate to direct at the DM? rpg.stackexchange.com/q/135376/42386
@NautArch Yeah, that's my general instinct. I know from (relatively recent) experience how frustrating flying creatures can be if the party lacks proper ranged power, but that doesn't seem to be the case here.
the DM does have a position of social responsibility in the game - it is somewhat on them to try and make sure that everyone's in the same page about how to play the game
In this question we see that two-weapon fighting with darts is not possible because they are not melee weapons. Let's replace the darts in that scenario with daggers, which are valid light melee weapons for two-weapon fighting, and also have the thrown property.
Two-weapon fighting says:
...
We figured out Where and when did "the GM is always right" get codified first? to the early days, or more precisely, it predates the main bulk of AD&D and can be pinned to have shown up in the 1970s.
This question is about the general rule Have Fun. We find it nowadays in a lot of games. Some ...
