« first day (3877 days earlier)      last day (1128 days later) » 
00:00 - 17:0017:00 - 00:00

12:01 AM
Hmm... [googles "mrs man"]
@bobble Half man, half squirm!
@Ben vaati?
vaatividya. Talks about the lore of the SoulsBorne series
@Ben oh and do you mean a YouTube channel then?
I wouldn't really know
12:07 AM
@BESW half cat, half snake, half man
@AncientSwordRage squints and zero percent math, I assume
I've had a couple of random thoughts over the last couple of years... the latest being that the reason Tyrael turns into a man after removing his wings is because he was no longer entirely an angel at that point
@bobble no no... it checks out. :P
Apr 10 '18 at 20:45, by BESW
The Triceraprops: One third prop comic, one-third prop comic, one-third comic prop.
There are quite a few youtube channels out there about Diablo lore and theories. So it's viable, but it wouldn't be unique.
@MikeQ I've seen a few about the lore, that just explain the actual lore... haven't seen any about theories though?
12:25 AM
@bobble I run on physics. And physics is just maths and lying.
@AncientSwordRage in what proportions?
@bobble who knows? Physics is just going to lie about them anyway πŸ™ƒ
12:46 AM
It's how i exist in multiple timelines at once
Today and tomorrow, to be exact
@Ben relative to when?
@bobble (it's a chat in joke, I'll see if I can clue you in)
Unfortunately I must be out now
@bobble maybe next time
1 hour later…
2:41 AM
Q: Can Monk Unarmored Movement walk/run through the rain?

AguiAt lvl 9 the Monk class gains this ability [...you gain the ability to move along vertical surfaces and across liquids on Your Turn without Falling during the move] Now my question is, if it can move acros liquids, why can't it run upward through a heavy rain? I keep having this discussion with...

@BardicWizard good seeing you back around, how've things been?
@Shalvenay today, horrible cause the second COVID shot disagreed with me badly. Otherwise okay
Been busy with stuff but it’s just almost done with the year so thank goodness
How’s things here?
@BardicWizard ah. been alright here for the most part, hope you get feeling better soon
@Shalvenay thanks
3:13 AM
@BardicWizard yay! Hullo there! A wild bardic wizard appears!
@BardicWizard oof, sorry to hear that... Get well soon
@HotRPGQuestions wild
One of those answers is not supported though
3:45 AM
quietly bobbles back in
3:57 AM
@AncientSwordRage thanks
2 hours later…
5:49 AM
Lucas Rolim wrote a short twitter thread about the value of worldbuilding that considers "how the flux of magic works, and how it is produced and consumed."
Amr Ammourazz is asking on twitter for "recommendations for indie TTRPGs that do a solid job of dual axis resolution."
6 hours later…
11:40 AM
@BESW I posted (a version) of what wrote here in response to Kazumi Chin's tweet wrt Verbs, processes and aesthetics, as a reply to that tweet. And they said it was helpful to them
I was pleased/surprised
11:54 AM
what do yall think of this dupe closure. Seemed pretty straightforward to me.
I'd say it's a dupe as well
I debate just actually asking my "Do AoEs target creatures inside them" question today
let me know so I can get first answer :P
Im just gonna copy paste my first section of this answer
My question will contain further evidence to support your claim btw
I guess my answer there contains most of it XD
I assume you've read this answer @ThomasMarkov ?
12:12 PM
Anything that I missed about why somebody wants to close this? rpg.stackexchange.com/q/11749/44723
@Akixkisu It could be shopping. But I believe they want rules?
@Medix2 ah, looks like a pretty close rules question.
@BESW yeah, but that doesn't tell me a lot.
Here's the thing: there's a terrible but comprehensive set of rules and guidelines for what they're asking, in a 3.0 book.
@Medix2 Yeah, not sure how id rule there.
12:15 PM
(I had a catfolk who used those rules to make adornments for his mane.)
@ThomasMarkov I'd probably say they just worded it poorly, unlike other features: "any spell that targets only him (not in an area of effect)"
@BESW that sounds vaguely familiar.
Can't wait to sell all of those books to a poor soul who thinks they want them.
I'm trying to remember the name of the book, I think it's the one that also had the Amulet of Ooze-Riding.
The Arms and Equipment Guide, that's the one.
@ThomasMarkov Yeah, it's definitely a dupe
It had a lot of tables for pretending that D&D economics weren't just using gold as a measure of expected utility in standard adventure scenarios, and that included a section on jewelry.
12:21 PM
I know someone who ended up in a work-group that still plays 3.5 and I don't envy him at all - such a horrible edition.
@BESW Equipment bloat was a real issue in those days. There was an overly specific magic item for everything
I cut my teeth on 3.x, it was my very first TRPG and we had a lot of fun playing almost nothing else for about five years.
It's claimed corners of my brain that I don't expect it to ever relinquish.
@BESW I'm glad that I played other things before it, though I also played so much of it.
I definitely had to un-learn a lot of habits as I moved into other styles and spaces.
@BESW yeah, So did I, and unfortunately, I dmed for so many people who had that edition and its quirks incorporated. Players get very specific ideas about how things work and that was in sanctioned 5e play almost as bad as JC on Twitter.
12:29 PM
Moving to 4e let me see that my problems with 3.5 weren't with the system so much as with the D&D franchise and its baggage as a whole, because even in a much better system I still had a lot of the same struggles at the table.
And I'm probably lucky that Fate was my major path into other kinds of TRPGs because it was very very clear about being Not That.
D&D is problematic in many regards, but there is also a quality difference in its good and bad editions.
Simultaneously the best and worst of D&D is that it provides so much structure with such ignorable guidance.
(as a system, of course, and ignoring all the real-world problems which cause, influence, and inflect around that quality)
@BESW maybe. I believe the best and worst is its market dominance. It makes it the most accessible game that is culturally and socially widely accepted and relatable. It is bad. But it makes inviting people to play the game and the likelihood that they will accept so much higher than any other ttrpg.
Yeah. As above: only speaking to the system itself and not the real-world space it occupies.
(DichotomousPrime and POCGamer were just talking earlier this evening about how the market presence of D&D is largely due to Gygax's talent as an IP rep and salesman which has perhaps never been equaled since in TRPG history.)
But I can also put on my Design Hat and look at how the systems themselves succeed and fail, what engages players and where it gives room for them to engage themselves, and I can try to learn from that.
(This is something I've noticed the last couple of years, as I write my own games and participate in designer spaces more; conversations on the same topics that happen between consumers of TRPGs, can be VERY different than between creators of TRPGs--and both of those inflect around access points like language and income.)
1:03 PM
@Medix2 What I was trying to describe is the following situation:
|                   : :
|--------------   : :
|                   : :
|                   : :
|                   : :
|                   : :
|                   : :
where the bottom line is ground, the dots represent the rain and the dotted line is the platform the Monk wants to reach.
It seems to me that the word "across" in the description of the feature does not have any role in saying that you can not rain walk
oh boy, all the dots should be aligned...
@BESW yes, also depending on where you have that conversation. This is also a phenomenon in academia - the where matters even more than the who.
@Eddymage Fixed it for you :)
The new fonts are so much better.
I thought, something still seems not quite right
@Eddymage Yeah I just cannot in any way get a reading that lets you run on raindrops
1:09 PM
@Someone_Evil Thanks! Better now! Even if they should be on the same column, but I hope that the idea is clear
I'm not really sure how to explain that any better
@Medix2 Agree: I wonder even if you can climb on waterfalls
Now that I can see being iffy but I would say you can't go across anything vertical
But I'd probably rule that it works anyway because it's cool (and my worlds aren't sprawling with waterfall puzzles)
Does 5e have a rule like the previous two editions, about allowing vertical movement as part of a normal move if a Strength/Climb check is made?
@Medix2 maybe they should be? πŸ˜‰
1:15 PM
Climbing costs double movement IIRC, but that's, of course, only if the GM says the surface is climbable in the first place
Generally speaking, anyway, I find that unique movement types in that sort of game are often limited simply by virtue of the entire party not being able to follow.
Enter: carrying capacity XD
@Medix2 Rule of cool Rules! :-D
@BESW that's what magic items are for!
Or rope. Rope is pretty magical, I guess.
Often a simple modification like "the lowest highest check applies to the whole party" rewards players for making unique characters whose different abilities complement each other, rather than forcing players to repeat abilities across the whole party in order for it to be useful.
1:18 PM
Yeah, I do a version of this with stealth. I make everyone check, and as long as there aren't any very low rolls and the majority succeeds, they're doing alright
Or you get to the kinds of games I write, and that sort of minutia is just left out. I'm fond of "I'm helping!" mechanics that invite the table to decide how far they want to stretch each case.
It can end up getting into a Metagame thing of "What skills haven't we covered?" But that's why I try to design parts of the world to actually make the character choices my players have made matter
Like, I'm not gonna just have a puzzle that requires XYZ skills if none of the PC's have any of those skills. Well, unless I'm making a point about "you can't do everything"
@BESW piggybacking
@Medix2 Yeah, I got a lot of learning mileage out of Do: Pilgrims of the Flying Temple because its entire schtick is "You have a single weird and niche way you help people, so every time you win a draw you have to come up with a new way your one thing is the right thing for the situation."
That really helped break me out of "puzzles and tools need to be designed to match" attitudes toward design, and pushed me into "the real puzzle is justifying how your weird tools are the right ones for the job anyway."
1:24 PM
My favorite TTRPG experiences are probably the ones spent in systems where you have to justify how your weird abilities skills and tools fit the job anyway
You can see that DNA in games like Puppy Day.
It's a game where you assume success no matter how strange or improbable, and spend your creativity collaborating to make it as strange and improbable as possible, then individually describing the triumphant success.
Feb 29 '20 at 13:19, by BESW
Played Puppy Day tonight. We adopted a snack-stealing fanihi (fruit bat), a hyperactive carabao (water buffalo), a glow-in-the-dark dragon, and a cactus with a severe underbite.
@BESW 5e basically does that with group checks which are clunky.
@Akixkisu Yeah, really I prefer 4e, where you had the highest modifier roll the dice and gave a bonus to the outcome for every additional PC trained in that skill.
"The active player rolls and everyone else justifies helping" makes me happy. I put something like it in Goblin Court.
@BESW 4e is probably the tightest D&D edition.
I generally dislike "roll to see if you invalidate someone else's build" approaches to group work.
It has its place in games where the point is slapstick comedy, or some other appropriate theme.
But in heroic-competence games.... meh.
1:37 PM
It is also locally the edition with the fewest players among the editions that people play (2e, 3.5e, Pathfinder 1&2e, Starfinder, 4e, 5e)
(of the D&D umbrella)
@BESW I make players do this when they want to help. I ask them to explain how they're helping, then I grant advantage to the other player or let the second player roll, their preference
> When you want to assist another goblin with their risky action, say how you try to help & give them one extra dice.
Locally DSA finally is less popular than D&D 5e since last year, which took longer than I thought it would.
The more I hear people's woes about finding groups to play non-D&D-family systems, the more I appreciate my friends.
What should I do if a SAC ruling invalidates a previously accepted answer of mine? Should I edit the existing answer to be correct or submit a new one and hope it gets accepted?
1:45 PM
@G.Moylan A lot of people block-quote their old answer or section it off and supply the correct answer at the top.
@Akixkisu This is going from a "yes you can" to a "no you can't". That's not too extreme to warrant a new answer?
If it's functionally an entirely different answer, I'd be inclined to treat it as a new answer and edit the old one to say "[thing changed], I'm wrong now."
@DevilsbestfriendisLunar Can you post a picture of your book here?
@G.Moylan this is what I have seen people do, but that doesn't mean that it is the best way to do it.
Generally we should act as if the answer always was the newest iteration of it.
So there is nothing wrong with that.
People can subtract their up/downvotes after a change.
@G.Moylan link it
1:47 PM
> "These facts are all true to the best of our knowledge, however since I am surrounded by weirdos, I take no personal responsibility."
- Sam the American Eagle, "The Muppet Show" season 1 DVD extras.
I answered this question and the answer was accepted. However I was reviewing it today and found in the new SAC that at some point they specifically calrified that Twinned Spell can't affect spells that can target objects. SAC page 6, top right
Id just add a section.
Also it's @Medix2's question, so maybe just ask them what they think.
Q: When rules change but votes don't, how to handle it?

AndrásSometimes, not that rarely, rules change in RPGs. Answers that were good become objectively, definitely wrong overnight, through no fault of their writer. The accepted course of action is to do nothing, hoping that the previous voters realize the change in the facts, and modify their votes accord...

Q: Is it OK to edit an outdated answer to facilitate a vote change?

AndrásA rule has been changed, and an answer that was correct became wrong. The recommended course of action is to downvote and wait. However, downvoting is not possible if you upvoted earlier, because your vote is locked1. I know it is discouraged to change an answer just to make your vote change p...

Q: Now that the 5e DMG is released, what is the best approach to revisit existing questions?

kbrimingtonThere are a great many questions about the 5th edition of D&D that were asked prior to the release of all of the core books. Some of those questions are now outdated, since additional detail is available in the DMG. For better or worse, these outdated questions have accepted answers. As a result...

Wait, what's the actual change? It doesn't seem to invalidate anything up the last paragraph before the hrule, and I see no issue with addending the SAC ruling there
@Someone_Evil SAC says a spell that can target an object isn't eligible to be twinned. My answer said as long as you aren't targeting an object, you can. But we know that spells that can target multiple creatures, like Chaos Bolt, don't count, so the same logic seems to apply
1:57 PM
Aw, there goes my 3.x wizard's twinned chained doublecast chain lightning.
I'm ready to make edits or write a new answer as needed, but I just want to handle it correclty
Can't twin Firebolt but you can twin Ray of Frost. Yes, that seems perfectly reasonable [eyeroll]
I'd say just edit in this case. I don't think the change invalidates the reasoning nor the approval your answer has recieved. You may wish to keep some indication that the SAC entry is newer that the original answer, and maybe some light on the ruling being ignorable for a given table
> Invoke Obscure Ruling. Select a combination of skill and action, like "Shoot" and "Attack." So long as you are in a scene, you always have permission to use Lore to Defend against (oppose) that action/skill combination regardless of whether the specific circumstances make sense for you to do so.
@RevanantBacon You can't twin firebolt?
Dont tell Nautarch, I twin firebolt all the time.
2:07 PM
@ThomasMarkov It can target objects
That's stupid.
I agree
Not "the spell is targeting an object" it's 'the spell can target an object"
Gonna ignore that.
@ThomasMarkov Fair and reasonable
Also, that's a statement of design intent, not rules proper.
(Id say the whole SAC is not rules proper)
2:11 PM
I also (mostly) believe that to be fair and reasonable
There are a few clarifications in there that I find helpful
Like "When does a creature stop being surprised?"
There's lots of good stuff in there.
> Arbitrary Arbiter. At the beginning of each session, roll 1d10 for each digit in your core manual's page count. Their result, in order, is the page of the manual which you can ignore or re-write for the duration of the session.
But there's some dumb stuff too.
I will work on an edit. Gonna be a while.
@ThomasMarkov That's the big thing there. It's not even a ruling
2:15 PM
@Medix2 Yes, that one in partiuclar isnt a ruling, its literally just "this is what we meant when we wrote it".
Which we already had in Crawford tweets and podcazts
@Someone_Evil Can you move the comments on this question into a chat room? It's getting rather long as we try to figure out what actual book the Op is talking about
@RevanantBacon Was just looking at that :)
Good timing I guess lol
But I also, I would delete my question if I still could since it wasn't understood what I was asking
2:18 PM
What, then, were you asking?
Well, you can see that I failed to ask my question three entire times
@Akixkisu days since TRPG chat praised D&D 4E: 0
Since when do we poo-poo the SAC here? I thought we had always considered it rules adjacent since it came out?
The SAC is official rulings. But that extremely particular section about Twinned Spell isn't even rulings, it's instead an explanation of design intentions intended to help a GM come to their own conclusions
@Medix2 gotcha
2:23 PM
But yeah, all my twin spell questions were completely irrelevant once Crawford was made no longer the official rulings maker. And nobody understood what I was asking to begin with, so yeah...
@Medix2 I mean, he still is, he just does it through teh SAC now instead of off-the-cuff garbage in Twitter and podcasts
the biggest change was that Chris Perkins and Mike Mearls were no longer considered to have a say
Oh is the SAC exclusively and entirely written by Crawford?
though I suspect Chris Perkins is still involved in the SAC.
They were never considered to have a say
@Medix2 Not officially, but given their station people still put stock in what they said. the first release of the SAC said to ignore them
I'd listen to Chris Perkins over JC any day, personally
2:26 PM
And that all said, I definitely am confused at times by people who think Crawford tweets are worthless
I admit i haven't seen JC DM a game, but the way Chris Perkins DMs is great, IMO, and I think he's got his head on straight
@Medix2 they're frequently self-contradictory or were stupid. See the original tweets about shoving
Like, I stopped using tweets because people would downvote answers for using them, not because I thought they lost a lot of value. Meanwhile, if somebody asks a question about something in another system and I have the means to ask the devs or find their insight on the matter, I just do so
@G.Moylan And people are human too
@Medix2 Right, but that's the point of slowing down, throwing all those "rulings" out, and saying "Ok, this document will fix all the questions. Give us some time to work on it and add things as we consider them more carefully"
Just seems like there's a big anti-Crawford crowd but I can go quoting the designers of other systems all I want and people don't leave comments explaining to me how useless dev insights are
@Medix2 Back when the tweets were official, the highest scoring answers were the ones with the tweets that didnt work with the rules at all.
Even if they were official, answers like that should be seen as bad.
2:32 PM
JC I'm sure is a fine person but he said a lot of stupid crap on twitter and it makes my life as a DM harder because people that don't know how to read the rules look at his ancient tweets and say "ThIs Is WhAt ThE rUlEs DeSiGnEr SaId!" as if he couldn't ever be wrong
Like yeah, here's the official ruling, but it gives me no insight into the written rules.
Other games also haven't actively retconned their own game designers, to my knowledge
so JC is in this position where there's an official document that says all his (and MM, and Chris P) previous comments are to be tossed in favor of said document.
For example, this answer is bad.
@ThomasMarkov I'm pretty sure the spell has been updated to say that, now. Let me see
> Any attack roll against an affected creature or object has advantage if the attacker can see it, and the affected creature or object can't benefit from being invisible.
I think community disdain for answers that are solely dev commentary is healthy.
2:38 PM
@ThomasMarkov idk though. If it was a different system and I quoted the designers stating something (which I've done), eh...
@ThomasMarkov Ah, and I absolutely do not
Other systems haven't explicitly said "the designer is wrong, don't listen to him"
@Medix2 A good answer utilizing dev commentary should put the dev's ruling into context. "Here's the dev's ruling, and here's how the official rules support this ruling". Answers that totally ignore the written rules and just quote dev commentary for the ruling aren't good.
Eh, I've written "RAW is unclear, here's the RAI" when a question has competing RAW answers. But I suppose that's it's own kind of support too, hmm
Q: I'm confused about how this rule applies here.
A: Let's ignore that rules text and just use this ruling.
@Medix2 Yeah, when you do that, you always present some meaningful commentary on why the RAW is unclear, and why the RAI support is helpful.
Like this one
2:44 PM
Im not talking about those kinds of answers.
Yeah, I see what you mean now. And believe I can agree with it
I'm talking about answers like this
@Medix2 Here, even though your RAW section just says "???", you put that confusion into context by mentioning the opposing answers that both claim to be RAW.
Yup, I see it now
I badly want to put "This answer has been modified from its original version. It has been formatted to fit this screen." in my edit but I know I shouldn't
@Medix2 And we have a lot of these answers floating around.
2:54 PM
My feeling on designer intent with D&D is that there is a really severe split between what is demonstrably "correct" according to officially published rules and what actually makes the game progress (or even work at all, in some cases). I'm not sure I've encountered a game where "the rules say [x]" was less useful. Not useless, exactly, but with a lot of purposeless formalism
I get why people are interested in that information, but it's preposterously overvalued
how can I single-space line break in a block quote in an answer?
@G.Moylan :double space at the end of the line
@ThomasMarkov thanks
@ThomasMarkov Is that the same effect as a blank line lead by ">"?
*led by
@Upper_Case Insert ThomasMarkov ideas about how rules help to align player values and expectations
2:58 PM
@Upper_Case No I dont think so
No, if you do that you get a new paragraph
> text welp nevermind, no idea how to linebreak on mobile
double space should be a single line break (no lines between sections), a line with ">" will be a whole blank line
Ah, got it. I don't know why I'm so bad at internet formatting
Because it's inconsistent and nothing is the same XD
Mutliline markdown doesnt work in chat
2:59 PM
I actually wanted it not to work, so it wouldve been great
two exceptions: multiline codeblocks and multiline blockquotes
@Medix2 Oh I'm 100% down for rules and expectations. But people seem to expect a chess-like level of precision, balance, and limitation in the rules for D&D. And it just isn't there. When there is a question or a dispute it is very rare that I see an officially correct answer which has much to offer beyond its official status
For a question with an obvious answer, like "can I destroy an object with Eldritch Blast", I simply don't see using the officially wrong answer as having much impact if it were chosen
Ah, yeah, I see what you mean
It's shades of "can my character wear a hat?" (in my game tonight, we spent the entire last session plotting to steal a hat and succeeded, so I've got hats on the brain)
3:06 PM
They go on your head, not your brain
That depends... this hat is made from a crocodile head, so it could probably work both ways
@Upper_Case welcome to the brain slug planet. here, I got you this cool hat
18 hours ago, by NautArch
I thought it was Seldomly Applicable Content
3:38 PM
@Medix2 I don't think they are worthless, but actively harmful more often than not.
3:51 PM
Is there a way to force all of my ebbedded links to update their numbering or do I have to do that manually?
Ctrl-L to add links
It should auto-update the numbers, not that it matters much
@ThomasMarkov concur. our dragon born sorc (I DM) uses twin on firebolt. And I don't do the stupid thing and say no. 😊
Alright folks, light me up: rpg.stackexchange.com/a/150714/50702
4:08 PM
@G.Moylan lit you up
@NautArch ??
@G.Moylan :D
oh I think I get it :P thanks
@G.Moylan Is your answer a yes or a no?
@GcL It is technically no, but I explain that I rule a particular exception. How can I clarify that?
It's no but I disagree with why it's no
4:22 PM
Probably by writing "No" at the top somewhere. I suggest in a title.
Same thing with the Aside that is longer than the answer. The lede is buried. I don't know what the point it is trying to make until the end. Actually, I'm still not entirely sure on the intent of that section. My guess at a succint point of it is "There are good reasons Sage Advice Compendium is now the sole source of official rulings."
OP mentions a podcast that established some erroneous beliefs that are partial reasoning for the question in the first place. I try to explain that that's flawed
Would reorganize that to avoid interleaving the nystul's and dragon breath examples. 1) SAC is sole source of official rulings. 2) Dragon breath is an example of why. 3) Here's how the SAC ruling affects nystuls
Can someone explain this answer to me
:57972325 Someone cast wall of text or transmute blog post to answer ?
Oh okay, I get it.
4:31 PM
@ThomasMarkov Rain falls at 500' so standing on top of a rain drop means you're falling at 500'. The other rain drops are falling at 500 as well, so to run up the "escalator of rain" you have to be moving faster than the escalator is going down.
Both that and Wuxia answer seem unsupported to me. But /shrug.
I mean, TECHNICALLY, the raindrops are inertial frames and the Earth is accelerating upwards to meet it, Buuuuuuut......
@NautArch Poke them about it. /S
@NautArch I just now realized you placed a bounty. Thank you!
@NautArch downvoted both lol
@G.Moylan youre gettin a lot from bounties
gonna get 700 rep from bounties this week
4:33 PM
yeah, jeez, but I'm not complaining!
@ThomasMarkov nice spot. I voted
@G.Moylan The accepted answer is just wrong.
I suppose I need to revisit this answer, too, now. There's more SAC stuff that backs me up now, instead of just tweets
I think that was my first answer here, actually
@G.Moylan Crawfords ruling on magic missile is just wrong
The darts hit simultaneously
= one save
4:43 PM
Yes, I need to remove that and focus on Eldritch Blast and the SAC clarification
Should I wait to edit that so I don't muck up the queue?
@G.Moylan lol no just do what you need to do
We can delete this answer
do I need to flag or is there a permission I don't have?
VLQ flag isnt available anymore
And NAA is technically not the right flag
so what do/can I do?
down vote lol
You have done your duty!
4:46 PM
@ThomasMarkov I think the each dart is separate rule is correct, totally cool with that.
Ten Towns is now Eleven Towns.
We have made some honest mistakes.
@NautArch I think I'm going to remove that bit anyway, since it still relies heavily on twitter and I can make the same argument with Eldritch Blast
We are now Kingmaker in our Icewind Dale game.
@Axoren Ten Towns about to be "Some Towns, sort of" in our game.
@NautArch This wont matter till Im level 7, but have I ever seen a giant ape
4:56 PM
We might actually end up with Ten Towns instead of Eleven very shortly, without having to destroy any of them!
@ThomasMarkov I still love that y'all left Easthaven to burn because they sent you out for a sacrifice :P
@Axoren Which chapter are you in?
Turns out the Oblex was counting itself as an entire town
@NautArch What even is book anymore?
@NautArch Big chaotic neutral move
So much has been added to the pot that anything that's still book is unrecognizable.
4:58 PM
I mean, it makes total sense for the party. Easthaven's only real positive attributes for you were that it was a defended town.
groan... People that claim to read 5 paragraphs of fluid dynamics in 33 seconds have not read anything
@Axoren So you're less doing Rime of the Frostmaiden and more just exploring ICewind Dale?
@Trish I read your whole post before I downvoted it.
@ThomasMarkov in 33 seconds, hmm?
@Trish Relying on real-world physics for issues like this is an automatic downvote for me.
4:59 PM
@NautArch terminology
We're about to go into an [spoiler](underground city) where [maybe spoiler?](http://a time conduit) has been discovered by Mindflayers and one of the party members [probably not a spoiler](is merged with Crenshinibon) and we're building an 11th Town.
@Trish Yeah, its only 318 words.
It is strict terminology. Rain is a mist, a sea of lava is a liquid.
00:00 - 17:0017:00 - 00:00

« first day (3877 days earlier)      last day (1128 days later) »