It's Personal...

Count Arioch the 28th · Sun Jul 10, 2011 5:08 am

A guy in my D&D group is DMing for the first time.

Thus, my new character is created: Grom the Barbarian, half-orc (battle) sorcerer of Garyx! With him as always is his trusty bat, Scrambles the Death-Dealer. He only has one 1st level spell, but it's okay because Color Spray is all I'll need, heh heh.

Interesting thing I learned: A familiar bat is capable of wearing padded silk barding (but nothing else). However, my sorcerer has a strength of 18, I can be a pack mule if needed.

Psychic Robot · Post by **Psychic Robot** » Sun Jul 10, 2011 5:38 am

how the hell is that character going to function, should have gone psywar or even eldritch knight

Count Arioch the 28th · Sun Jul 10, 2011 12:48 pm

I'll make it function, believe me.

RobbyPants · Post by **RobbyPants** » Tue Jul 12, 2011 12:26 pm

It depends on the rest of the group, too. That type of guy with the right spells would still outshine some of the groups I've seen or played with.

Count Arioch the 28th · Tue Jul 12, 2011 12:52 pm

My fellow players include one guy that tries on purpose to make shitty characters but then argues to the DM to change rules to make his character get a small bonus in marginal situations, a guy who isn't experienced, a third guy who is all flash and no substance, and another character who nearly exclusively plays monks.

Juton · Post by **Juton** » Tue Jul 12, 2011 1:22 pm

Count Arioch the 28th wrote:My fellow players include one guy that tries on purpose to make shitty characters but then argues to the DM to change rules to make his character get a small bonus in marginal situations, a guy who isn't experienced, a third guy who is all flash and no substance, and another character who nearly exclusively plays monks.

That's the most damning criticism of all.

RobbyPants · Post by **RobbyPants** » Tue Jul 12, 2011 2:36 pm

Juton wrote:
Count Arioch the 28th wrote:My fellow players include one guy that tries on purpose to make shitty characters but then argues to the DM to change rules to make his character get a small bonus in marginal situations, a guy who isn't experienced, a third guy who is all flash and no substance, and another character who nearly exclusively plays monks.
That's the most damning criticism of all.

I ran games for one of those guys once. He insisted it was the most broken class ever because of all the abilities they got. I explained several times why this wasn't true, and he wouldn't listen. When I threw him bones to help his PC, he wouldn't take them. It was literally impossible for him to make a semi-competent PC.

Avoraciopoctules · Post by **Avoraciopoctules** » Tue Jul 12, 2011 9:34 pm

Delicious aggressive basket-weaving. One of the things that kept D&D entertaining enough not to want to switch systems for quite some time.

Psychic Robot · Post by **Psychic Robot** » Wed Jul 13, 2011 3:24 am

new players should be forced to play monks so they understand the importance of optimization. I will never understand the draw of the monk class to new players though, they flock to that shit DUDE LOOK AT ALL THESE ATTACKS whoah 2d10 DAMAGE huge fast move speed I CAN OUTRUN YOU

Maxus · Post by **Maxus** » Wed Jul 13, 2011 5:07 am

Psychic Robot wrote:new players should be forced to play monks so they understand the importance of optimization. I will never understand the draw of the monk class to new players though, they flock to that shit DUDE LOOK AT ALL THESE ATTACKS whoah 2d10 DAMAGE huge fast move speed I CAN OUTRUN YOU

And the whole martial-arts vibe. Don't forget that appeal, too.

Cynic · Post by **Cynic** » Wed Jul 13, 2011 6:08 am

I always like my monks as Bawdy Trappist (about alcohol, so... semi NSFW) or even as a dour Black Friar. (Wiki, ok.)

RobbyPants · Post by **RobbyPants** » Wed Jul 13, 2011 12:39 pm

Psychic Robot wrote:I will never understand the draw of the monk class to new players though, they flock to that shit DUDE LOOK AT ALL THESE ATTACKS whoah 2d10 DAMAGE huge fast move speed I CAN OUTRUN YOU

That, and there's always the "I can do all this naked!" claim. That's only remotely cool if the MC is the type who likes to throw you in "lol you're captured and have no gear" situations every other session, and if the MC is like that, the game sucks anyway.

Basically, without realizing it, those players are saying their character can perform average in a crappy game.

Count Arioch the 28th · Wed Jul 13, 2011 6:56 pm

It seems that if you believe in Dr. Maslow, I am correct in my insistance that I need to find a better job before I can try to have a better self-esteem. I'm still on step 2...

EDIT: Also, http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=1562

Maj · Post by **Maj** » Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

So my family is going to see the musical Cinderella for Christmas this year, and while I understand and respect the theater's right to deny admittance to children under the age of four, I think it's chicken shit that they claim on their website that "Rodgers & Hammerstein's Cinderella is considered a family show" and that the show "will be the perfect holiday treat for the entire family."

Except the entire family can't actually go.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Thu Jul 14, 2011 6:23 am

Count Arioch the 28th wrote:

It seems that if you believe in Dr. Maslow, I am correct in my insistance that I need to find a better job before I can try to have a better self-esteem. I'm still on step 2...

EDIT: Also, http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=1562

Er, unless we count masturbation (which I don't, since it's not as satisfying), I'm still on step 1...

Psychic Robot · Post by **Psychic Robot** » Thu Jul 14, 2011 6:54 am

problem with maslow is that it's bullshit. the basic idea is sound--you need to have your base needs satisfied to become a fully productive citizen--but then it gets fucked up with bullshit. first it imnplies that sex is a basic physiological need that must be met before someone can have morality, which is nonsense. then it implies that the poor don't have the capacity to solve problems, accept facts, or be creative because their basic needs aren't met, which is pretty fucking arrogant. it also implies that a "lack of prejudice" is somehow the end result of having one's needs met, which is bullshit because a lack of prejudice can only come about through swift and sure indoctrination into a bland pudding of moral relativism and mainstream liberal ideology

also maslow's hierarchy also very quickly leads to the idea that it is the duty of the government to provide the basic needs of the people, which results in a clusterfuck of failed policies aimed at doing so.

Neeeek · Post by **Neeeek** » Thu Jul 14, 2011 7:21 am

Count Arioch the 28th wrote:

It seems that if you believe in Dr. Maslow, I am correct in my insistance that I need to find a better job before I can try to have a better self-esteem. I'm still on step 2...

Hmm. I seem to have achieved stage 3 and 5 without ever hitting stage 2 or 4.

Count Arioch the 28th · Thu Jul 14, 2011 7:42 am

Well, I'm still going to put my entire efforts into not being poor anymore, like I've always done as an adult (as a sub-adult, my primary goal was to get the hell away from the people that were making my life a living hell, no matter how long I ignored them without any emotional reaction).

I don't care how many people say it, it's is NOT true that you need self esteem before success. It is the opposite, you need to succeed to have self esteem. And I don't care how many times fuckers try to slap me down because they perceive I "have self esteem issues" (I live in a fucking run-down building, my landlord is a dirty lying slumlord, and I get shit on the entire time I'm at work for next to no pay, how the fuck should I feel about that?), and that I "hate women" (Pointing out how I've been treated like crap is NOT fucking misogyny, fuckers. And they most certainly did NOT look in the fucking future when I was born and said "Hey, this guy is going to be an angry, bitter 30 year old man. Let's shit on him until it comes true. That would imply women both have super powers and have levels of malice that I can't even imagine).

Props to the people who have worked hard to support me in my times of need (this wasn't directed towards you), but I am tired of people telling me to "be thankful for what I have", I'm tired of people telling me "everyone is miserable", and I'm damn sure am tired of people giving me lectures about "wealth takes hard work, being attractive takes hard work". What the sam fuck do you think I've been putting my efforts into? (Except now it's 100% put forth getting my life better. I have seen the women I attract, and I'd rather be celibate than fuck them again. When high quality women get off their high fucking horses and give someone else a chance, I'll be waiting. Most likely to tell them to fuck themselves since they obviously don't need me to do it for them).

Count Arioch the 28th · Thu Jul 14, 2011 7:51 am

Prak_Anima wrote:
Count Arioch the 28th wrote:

It seems that if you believe in Dr. Maslow, I am correct in my insistance that I need to find a better job before I can try to have a better self-esteem. I'm still on step 2...

EDIT: Also, http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=1562
Er, unless we count masturbation (which I don't, since it's not as satisfying), I'm still on step 1...

I would. To me, masturbation is in every way better than sex. I can't count on anyone but myself to put forth even a modicum of effort when it comes to sex.

Count Arioch the 28th · Sat Jul 16, 2011 3:53 am

And some decent news:

The student loan people (in a rare instance of ruling something in my favor) is giving me a forebearance until August of 2012. The goal is to (at the very least) have a better job by then.

This will make the third paycheck in a row where I managed to take care of all my needs and bills and have some left over by the time next paycheck rolls in. I have mastered living the broke-ass life.

erik · Post by **erik** » Sun Jul 17, 2011 11:21 am

Just finished my move.

Managed to start of the day right by running the U-Haul into the old house. Damages: one corner gutter crushed, ruining 2 gutters at once. Guy at the U-Haul place said the scratched paint was no big deal tho.

Still have a headache from mild sunburn and a sore back. The cats were traumatized by the whole moving of stuff and abundance of noisy strangers. It took me a good long while to coax one out of the ceiling of the old house (was tempted to leave her for new owner as a surprise).

Still have much to organize, rearrange, and bring out of storage from my parent's basement, but at least everything is out of the old place. More importantly I now have house internet once again at least until the tree leaning on my power *and* phone lines pulls them down in a storm... but that is drama for later that can hopefully be prevented.

PoliteNewb · Post by **PoliteNewb** » Mon Jul 18, 2011 5:38 am

Count Arioch the 28th wrote:I don't care how many people say it, it's is NOT true that you need self esteem before success. It is the opposite, you need to succeed to have self esteem.

I agree with this 100%

and that I "hate women" (Pointing out how I've been treated like crap is NOT fucking misogyny, fuckers.

You are correct, pointing out that specific women in the past have treated you like crap is not misogyny.
What IS misogyny is when you use your past shitty experiences to make generalizations about every other woman out there.

When high quality women get off their high fucking horses and give someone else a chance, I'll be waiting. Most likely to tell them to fuck themselves since they obviously don't need me to do it for them).

See? That right there is the shit I'm talking about.
Women are not on any high horse just because they don't want to fuck you. You're not special. No one owes you a handjob.

If you can't get satisfying sex, it is 100% you. Period. There is no conspiracy among the female community to sexually frustrate you. Blaming women (either those you have had relationships with or those you haven't) for your unsatisfying sex life is misogyny.

If you honestly feel that masturbation is better than dating, that is a valid life choice. Plenty of women make it as well.

Vnonymous · Post by **Vnonymous** » Mon Jul 18, 2011 8:15 am

Maslow fucks up a bit there too. A lack of regular sexual activity makes males more productive - Oscar Wilde pointed out that married men stop making good stuff, and science shows that men both commit less crime and are less productive in science after marriage.

Men do half the shit they do in life to get regular access to sex, which also complains the current trend of articles complaining about how men have turned into manchildren that just play videogames and hang out with their bros instead of going and getting steady respectable jobs, marriages and families - those men are getting regular access to sex anyway, so they don't feel the need to get all the rest of that crap. I'm willing to bet if you gave most men a choice between celibacy and a mansion or tons of hot sex and a run-down shack in the woods, the shack in the woods would be a lot more popular.

K · Post by K » Mon Jul 18, 2011 8:49 am

Vnonymous wrote:
Men do half the shit they do in life to get regular access to sex, which also complains the current trend of articles complaining about how men have turned into manchildren that just play videogames and hang out with their bros instead of going and getting steady respectable jobs, marriages and families -

Who has all that crap in this economy? Living-wage jobs are so 2007.

Koumei · Post by **Koumei** » Mon Jul 18, 2011 10:40 am

I fell while walking the dog, and fractured the neck of my right shoulder in three places. So the arm is in a cuff and collar? A sling-type thing, for about 4-8 weeks.

Yeah, my dominant arm. I can still manage the essentials - typing, pouring tea, vacuming (yes, I helped clean the house with one arm in a sling. It's not a blank cheque for laziness), carrying shopping, masturbating and so on.

But annoyingly, drawing is somewhat out of the question.