The Gaming Den

Maxus wrote:What I find pitiable is Zak S has been posting in this argument, pretty much constantly, for over twelve hours now.

Seriously, the largest gap in his posting for the past day was two hours.

Oh, it's worse than that -- he's got almost 150 consecutive post on the same topic.
Seems a bit obsessive.

Maxus wrote:What I find pitiable is Zak S has been posting in this argument, pretty much constantly, for over twelve hours now.

Seriously, the largest gap in his posting for the past day was two hours.

Coke bender?

Does the fact that I actually miss PR make me a bad person?

Am I the only one here that sees the ZOMFGWTF doublethink here? No, but we have all had sufficient dealings with Zak S that we are not even surprised, and actually expected such a stupid fucking answer that completely undermines his entire point. B-b-b-b-but it 2 consecutive sentences that complete...

We don't use much in the way of baseline. Spells, saves and to-hit and bonuses for sunday come out of 3.5 mostly (heavily modified) and spells, saves and to hit for monday come out of AD&D mostly (heavily modified), but everything is house-ruled as it comes up or is requested and comes from all...

Goddammit -- what edition of what game do you use as a baseline? You've never clarified this.

That is demonstrably a narcissistic delusion. The amount of narcissism required to think that was even a thing that could be seriously suggested in discussion is genuinely pathological. My suggestion, my serious suggestion, as a doctor, is to get psychological help. There is no magical cure that ma...

Is there any general guideline that can be made about how much an item that gives the benefit of a feat should cost? I looked at some published items and the cost is all over the place. I remember reading (I think in either DMG or RC) that the pricing guideline for replicating a feat is 10k +5-10K ...

Okay Zak, how fucking stupid are you ? It's been said multiple times that no one begrudges you having personal fun with any given rule, sucky or not. Also (since you seem to like to pretend to be able to recognize logical fallacies), just because it "works" for your group does not make it ...

I've always striven to answer your questions; you're the one that always tries to change the subject. Ask, and I will do my best to give satisfaction. Don't take this personal, or the wrong way, AH; but you're a sucker of the highest order. Either that, or the most masochistic SOB I've ever seen. M...

John Edward ain't got shit on this guy.

Whatever, jagoff.

Goddamn it -- I thought he was done. :sad: Incorrect. If there were no rule, then the bonus would not be static with a specific expiration time for all requests. What, specifically, is the expiration time? What, specifically, are your supposed static bonuses? I'm also going to reiterate my previous ...

infected slut princess wrote:You are all goddamn retarded assholes turning this board into a pathetic piece of shit.

We love you too, ISP.

Zak S wrote: [] I'm sorry, I didn't read carefully. I apologize for wasting everyone's time.

[] I did that because I'm not arguing in good faith. I'm a shitty person. I apologize for wasting everyone's time.

We hold that a higher level should intrinsically mean harder to defeat, or why even have levels?. Did you get the news about hit points, or has that news not reached The Gaming Den yet? Anyway: even if they're equally easy to disarm,the master will have more hit points than the student. That's one ...

We all know that rpg.net mods are capricious and arbitrary, but I stumbled across Zak's permaban citation, and it's worth reading, if only for the somewhat confounded tone. I'm not going to link it, but it's not hard to find, and it includes a critique of his argument style that's going to sound fa...

It is the consensus of the forum that the entire damn point of having a level system is that higher level opponents are harder to beat and lower level opponents are easier to beat. If that is so, then the forum has made a mistake--enemies should be unpredictable and require experiment to figure out...

But it has everything to do with demonstrating your flawed premise. Nope: in the economy in the D&D setting (which is what we're discussing: a game), people don't just give away land for trinkets just like monsters aren't generous guys who immediately give adventureres huge sums of xp-granting ...

Dude, European settlers were able to procure huge swaths of land for literally nothing more than shiny beads and pox-laden blankets (which, btw, wouldn't be accepted back for much of anything). This is a RL example of "apple a day for a kingdom" (granted, it was incremental, and there's a...

You asked for it, Shit-for-Brains: Okay, I am a bit offended on behalf of Ancient History -- you just got a dissertation that almost passes GitP guidelines. Perspective: you have none. Also, you need to find a new name-calling insult -- this one is wearing out quick. a bunch of bullshit about "...

TiaC wrote:That was my first thought, but they did wait quite a while. Does this puppeteer just make a few new accounts every month and activate them as needed?

That's my guess.

One more time: the Open "playtest" wasn't actually a playtest -- it was nothing more than market research via focus group(s). They called it a "playtest" for PR and data collection reasons. You can call a duck a ham sandwich, but it's still a duck. (sorry about that -- I couldn't...

There surely must be a middle-ground balance to be struck between "3-inch block of #s" and the "2-pages of verbose (yet vacuous) bullshit" of late-3.x. You mean the 2e MM format? 1 page per creature, combat stats in a block at the top and a section below on the creatures ecology...

There surely must be a middle-ground balance to be struck between "3-inch block of #s" and the "2-pages of verbose (yet vacuous) bullshit" of late-3.x. Cramming 300 random monsters in a book without providing any context is simply unacceptable. Sure, if you're in the "pro le...