TNE and Centaurs

[shau]

No, it doesn't. why not? because somthing twice human dimisions is,

1. a foot from sternum to spine.
2. 10-14(if very large) feet tall standing straight up
3. 2 feet across at the shoulder blades.

this is in no way contradictory with somthing 8 feet from head to tail (equivlent to sternum to spine for turning purposes), about 9 feet tall, and a half-foot to a foot across at the widest point not making a turn.

Think carefully about how difficult it would be for something double the size of a man to fight in a small area. It would be a lot like you trying to fight in this.

[Crissa]

You too Stacy. Holy shit. 75 centimeters is less than 180 centimeters. By a lot. And if considering that fucking fact is "shit" then I have nothing more to say to you on this subject. Go write a game with Phone Lobster.

Stop bothering me about your horse fantasies.

-Username17

You're the one with the horse fantasies.

I'm the one who linked to actual pictures from the 'time' of Heracles showing him to be taller than Nessus.

-Crissa

[Calibron]

That's been brought up before, Ice9, and it's a perfectly reasonable compromise. Which is why it's been largely ignored.

[shau]

That's been brought up before, Ice9, and it's a perfectly reasonable compromise. Which is why it's been largely ignored.

We are debating whether or not fictional species can fit in an imaginary space that other fictional species can fit in.

There is no room for reasonableness here.

[virgil]

Unless the reflavouring is insect/crab/ogre like Frank and friends aren't on board.

I wasn't aware of people going against anything but those three. I've always proposed the compromise of using smaller equines for your stock, like bariaur or those conceptual llama people.

As far as compromise is concerned, PL seems to be the one most lacking (but not the sole one). Frank said he's on board with tauroids from page one of this thread, just not full-size horse ones; which directly counters PL's impression that it can't possibly be any kind of cloven creature.

[Username17]

You too Stacy. Holy shit. 75 centimeters is less than 180 centimeters. By a lot. And if considering that fucking fact is "shit" then I have nothing more to say to you on this subject. Go write a game with Phone Lobster.

Stop bothering me about your horse fantasies.

-Username17

You're the one with the horse fantasies.

I'm the one who linked to actual pictures from the 'time' of Heracles showing him to be taller than Nessus.

-Crissa

1. Those are pictures with "heroic perspective." That is, more important things are drawn larger, not larger things drawn larger or even closer things drawn larger. I can show you pictures from the same tradition that clearly show Arjuna standing taller than the elephants in his army. So no, showing that picture does not mean that Heracles was taller than Nessus.

2. It doesn't fucking matter, because I'm not even talking about Centaur height. Height is not really much of a problem for a biped because they can collapse their shoulders so much. I'm even willing to say that the Centaur bonus torso is enough like a biped's that they can do the same thing. That's not the problem. The problem is that a horse body cannot navigate a large amount of human buildings because the required turns are sharper than they can make.

I am willing to consider a species that can make turns inside a meter. All of the D&D giants up to possibly Fire Giants can do that. Centaurs can't. Centaurs are too long by about 80 centimeters or more depending upon what kind of horse you have them being. Ogres keep getting brought up, but they are within those stated limits by 20 centimeters or more.

Your objection doesn't address the point at all. It's like you have blinders on.

-Username17

[Draco_Argentum]

I overstate my horror, I've seen it all before, and more, twice. Hell I've mixed with furries in their natural environment (back when it was furry IRC chat communities) Not my kind of people in the end, but not bad people either.

Oh I'm a furry so I just find taurs awkward, I was just protecting that little shred of innocence that some people here might have left.

---

Can we get a little less useless bitching and a little more productive talk going here? Or are we going to run this out to 35 pages to beat Elennsar's efforts?

I don't give a shit about taurs, they're weird looking. If it wasn't for the Greek myth thing I'd be all for getting rid of them entirely. Can we just agree that something tauric can be in the game without arguing about how many inches long the quadrupedal section can be before its too long? Then maybe we can talk about facing or reach or what rules being as big as a Dragon gets.

[PhoneLobster]

Can we just agree that something tauric can be in the game without arguing about how many inches long the quadrupedal section can be before its too long?

Apparently not, and I don't know how often I can make this clear, that makes me angry.

Because it IS a stupid argument to have and Frank is making us have it by demanding certain standards about how many inches long a quadruped can be.

It is silly, he is being silly, in order to try and address him I am forced to be far too silly.

That's realism wanking for you. I either have to address it on its silly terms or simply attack it for being stupid, I've tried to do both. I think we have any amount of silly evidence of the realism aspect being not entirely as envisaged by those making the realism argument and I think we have plenty of consensus that having the realism argument is silly.

But it seems we still don't have an agreement from Frank and maybe Elennsar and maybe others who demand that we DO have an argument about things like (and often far sillier than) inches of length before they allow any given tauric critter into consideration.

I want to make it absolutely clear which side is being laughably unreasonable here.

[Roy]

At least the topic hasn't turned into Furry Porn Show and Tell. Yet.

[Username17]

We wouldn't even be talking in centimeters if certain elements on the board weren't too stubborn to accept that one of these things is substantially wider than the other:



As is, we apparently have to take a fucking measuring tape to demonstrate that the woman's breadth is substantially less than the horse's length. You'd think this would be god damn obvious, but I point out that these jack holes are still arguing that point even after exact numbers have been found and compared.

-Username17

[Bigode]

I am willing to consider a species that can make turns inside a meter. All of the D&D giants up to possibly Fire Giants can do that. Centaurs can't. Centaurs are too long by about 80 centimeters or more depending upon what kind of horse you have them being. Ogres keep getting brought up, but they are within those stated limits by 20 centimeters or more.

Compress the centaur so that the heroic perspective becomes true. Then, would it, reared, be able to do turns possible for a giant?

[Username17]

I am willing to consider a species that can make turns inside a meter. All of the D&D giants up to possibly Fire Giants can do that. Centaurs can't. Centaurs are too long by about 80 centimeters or more depending upon what kind of horse you have them being. Ogres keep getting brought up, but they are within those stated limits by 20 centimeters or more.

Compress the centaur so that the heroic perspective becomes true. Then, would it, reared, be able to do turns possible for a giant?

No.

-Username17

[ckafrica]

I think it's the problem that of all the leaps of faith one has to make whilst playing this game, that this one seems no more unacceptable than so many others. If we can accept a 180cm man swinging a 120cm two handed axe (so you can't argue you just stab with it)at an opponent on the other side of a 200cm by 100cm doorway without batting an eyelid than I don't get why the dimensions of the centaur gets your panties in such a bind.

I mean if we are going to be this anal, I want us to calculate the landing space needed for a garuda and the confined area penalty for fighting. I want charge bonus damage to take into account distance traveled in a round to take into consideration velocity and momentum. Dammit, I want a chart comparing my characters constitution to the bar wenches charisma to know how long I can nail her before I blow my load!!!!!

Edit: That was a pretty small horse body on that centaur

[angelfromanotherpin]

The difficulty with adjusting the centaur is that it stops being a centaur. If it can trade its horse parts for human legs, then it's a human with an ability. If the horse parts are modified (shrunken, flexied, etc.) to the point where they're workable, then they are no longer horse parts and the entire point of having it be a centaur (which is to tie the setting closer to the shared Greek myth/narnia-jumble headspace) is lost, and if you're tied to having a playable species with that body structure, you might as well go mantis-men or whatever so people don't get confused and think they might actually be dealing with a horse-person when you say Centaur to them.

And a halfling torso on top of a pony still fails at both climbing the Cliffs of Insanity and rescuing Buttercup from the lightning sand. Problematic.

[Bigode]

Frank: WTF? If that was able to walk for short periods on 2, wouldn't it be as maneuverable as a giant?

Angel: I don't even want centaurs in, I'm just trying to ascertain what's needed to make them possible in a non-retarded setting (i.e. has cramped spaces). And, the point of centaurs sure as hell isn't proximity to Greek myth for the interested - hasn't it become clear by now that the original source material, the one that actually says things about human history (maybe that's actually the problem), is proudly ignored by most players?

[Calibron]

Frank, I'm confused as to how that picture is supposed to be illustrating your point.

[angelfromanotherpin]

And, the point of centaurs sure as hell isn't proximity to Greek myth for the interested - hasn't it become clear by now that the original source material, the one that actually says things about human history (maybe that's actually the problem), is proudly ignored by most players?

Well, then what is the point of including them? Greek myth has them because they're actually part of the mythology. Narnia has them as a method of telling people: 'you're in crazy fantasy-land for realz now, maternal-copulator.' If you're not trying to evoke either 'this is Bronze-age Mythic Greece' or 'this is a kitchen-sink fantasy setting,' then there's literally no place for centaurs, because those two things are what centaurs mean.

You can have a setting where that's not what they mean, but it'll be like having vampires that sparkle in sunlight.

If you want to play a character with a different body structure, there's all sorts of ways to do that without including horse-people. I am fully down with there being class features that allow people to take on hybrid forms and shed them more or less as needed, for instance. That, in fact, is my proposed compromise.

[PhoneLobster]

If you're not trying to evoke either 'this is Bronze-age Mythic Greece' or 'this is a kitchen-sink fantasy setting,' then there's literally no place for centaurs, because those two things are what centaurs mean.

I love how you feel fully qualified to dictate the only terms on which such a widely recognised icon of fantasy is allowed to be used.

I mean how can you guys lose your side of the argument? You also spend all your time dictating what your opponents are allowed to argue!

[virgil]

I was hoping people wouldn't pull the example card when it came to centaurs, as far as when/where they're placed. Fictional references for backing up your argument never allows for actually banning anything, because there's been examples of essentially anything and everything.

[name_here]

Well, i have seen them used as random barbaric raiders, though in a setting that actually has magic powered space ships and time-travelling dragons.

But really, i haven't seen anyone put in a reason that can't just as easily justify requiring wands for spellcasting. Or telepathic hivemind insectoids if there are any insectoids, or pearly gates heaven, or cerberus, or bearded dwarves who hate elves because of a thousand year old wrong, or tree-hugging elves who act superior to humans and either get owned because they aren't as awesome as they think they are or are considered in the right all the time.

so, what reason is there for actually including them instead of mongols or huns?

[Bigode]

You can have a setting where that's not what they mean, but it'll be like having vampires that sparkle in sunlight.

Which, seemeingly, is widely desired, so this line of argument might not be viable. Trust me, it pains me to say that.

I am fully down with there being class features that allow people to take on hybrid forms and shed them more or less as needed, for instance. That, in fact, is my proposed compromise.

That, in fact, is the thing I support for really weird forms. Was covered by Tiryagyoni's shapeshifter.

[zeruslord]

The reasons for including centaurs instead of Mongols or Huns are precisely as valid as including orcs instead of Visigoths, Vandals, or, when Tolkien was writing, Germans. There are reasons not to include them, namely the number of people whose first reaction to a centaur is "How the hell did it get into the dungeon?"

In a game with no dungeon crawling they may be playable without breaking people's suspension of disbelief, but the derailment of a game while people google "horse inside" is a significant problem.

[angelfromanotherpin]

I mean how can you guys lose your side of the argument? You also spend all your time dictating what your opponents are allowed to argue!

See, this is why you fail. Your goal is not to win an argument. Your goal is to convince Frank to include the material you feel should be included. That's the only way he's going to include it, because he's writing the game and you aren't.

This is, as he pointed out some time ago, why insulting him is straight up counter to your goal. And when you kept doing it, he put you on 'ignore.' You have actually managed to remove yourself as a source of input by being a douche.

And now I'm putting you on ignore, because you can't be taught.

[PhoneLobster]

Your goal is not to win an argument. Your goal is to convince Frank to include the material you feel should be included.

I SEE now you inform me of the goals I must meet. Thank you o master arrogant man for informing me that I have to kiss Frank's ass.

This is, as he pointed out some time ago, why insulting him is straight up counter to your goal. And when you kept doing it, he put you on 'ignore.' You have actually managed to remove yourself as a source of input by being a douche.

AH the Piazo polite police defense! Let me just say "Fuck You Too"!

I do like how in the end it's never the insults but always the stuff like pointing out how this guy just arrogantly proclaims the only places in Fantasy we are allowed to argue in favour of Centuars that is always the thing which mysteriously is the "last straw" for guys like him.

It says alot.

[PhoneLobster]

In a game with no dungeon crawling they may be playable without breaking people's suspension of disbelief, but the derailment of a game while people google "horse inside" is a significant problem.

I will remind you that Frank sees no problem in Centaurs as monsters. The horse inside situation you mentioned can still happen.

Personally I think the odds of encountering a Centaur NPC inside triggering that sort of player reaction is slim. Players accept all sorts of large things in dungeons all the time with the vaguest hand wavings if that.

I DO however think that players are much more likely to argue such points and derail things when you answer a request, like "Can my PC be a Centaur" with "No horses inside, anything, ever". That's when it's googling horse inside derailment time.

Frank's "solution" involves BOTH those scenarios potentially coming up.

Indeed it even makes the first one more likely as players become more hostile to GM usage of Centaurs since they were banned from player use.

In fact I'm pretty sure if you use the horses inside argument against players wanting to play as centaurs you will get THIS THREAD worth of bullshit from them the second you throw an Ogre or Dragon at them inside anything. I dare you to tell me players won't try and hash this shit out on the first GM who pulls Frank's advice on this over on some group of players.

Effectively you are opening yourself up to realism disputes left right and centre by setting this sort of precedent.

This whole concept of Frank's is bad for game play on so many damn levels.