Continuing with the smiting of Fail ninjas.
Murtak wrote:Roy wrote:So to continue with the smiting of Sundertard Dumbfucks that have no business existing on the Den...
Murtak, at best all you're doing is making a good case for Good is Dumb by attempting to prove they cannot be competent. You're preaching to the choir. Your argument is self defeating in that even if you 'win' by proving that you still lose. Alternately you just lose outright. Either way, try again.
Would you mind stopping to be a raging asshole and littering your every sentence with belittling statements and outright insults?
Show me a goddamn argument, you inbred spineless motherfucker, or shut your useless face and quit your trolling.
Obvious Dumbfuck is Obvious.
To break down your opening Fail:
Putting idiots in their place is a duty. It does not evoke 'rage' or any other emotional response. Smacking down idiots is no different than killing insects - sometimes you do it just because, often you do it by pure accident without even realizing it, and you will happily nuke millions of them because their presence proved slightly bothersome to you. But in terms of reaction, it's barely a blip on the radar on a large scale and is completely inconsequential on any lesser scope.
Taking snark as insulting = Fail. Doing so on the Den, where snark is Common is triply so.
Whining about insulting while throwing random words together to try to inform an insult = Hypocrite Fail.
Seriously, get the fuck over your personal dislike of me and try to actually read what I wrote. I disagree with PhoneLobster on about 99% of his posts, but I don't feel the need to hurl random insults his way.
As already stated, you're just a nameless idiot to keep in check, until such time as you cease to be an idiot. Which in this case, requires you to stop defending Sundertards. You are too small to provoke reactions such as 'dislike' except in general, grand terms such as 'I dislike idiots'.
Roy wrote:In battle he refrains from breaking it because it's about as difficult to break their face, and that also rules out possibilities like 'Unholy Sword #2'. Not to mention NPC beatsticks aren't a threat anyways.
Things you missed:
- A credible percentage of opponents get useless without weapons.
- Not everyone with an unholy sword is in fact a fighter.
- Not everyone has quickdraw and a second identical unholy sword.
- Swords can in fact be broken after the fight is over.
Let's see... Enemy casters, humanoid or not don't give a fuck about their weapons. Enemy beatsticks of the non humanoid variety you literally can't Sundertard without breaking their face (and hands and so forth) because they're auto attacking with claw/claw/bite routines or something. That leaves humanoid beatsticks, who are the most laughable enemies on the field. Full stop. They're also Monty Hall, in that you get a truly obscene reward relative to effort required... unless of course you go Sundertarding it up and ruin that. So unless you define credible as something other than what it actually means, or are counting non credible opponents as valid examples, you Fail.
You'd get a little further if you attempted to use non weapons as an example, but then the chances that they are evil items drops dramatically, and you open the floor wide to a bunch of enemies spamming Sundertard Fail on you... since it takes very little to break anything that isn't a weapon or shield. Thus, one group of Barb 2 mooks later and your character is permanently ruined. So that would further annihilate your own points, as that stepping further made you hit a land mine. Oops.
It doesn't matter if they're a Fighter or not. If they're relying on weapons to auto attack with, you can pretty much just ignore them. As long as they have bad Will saves (and most do) they still get auto owned by Glitterdust.
They only need to have a comparable weapon. Since NPCs are getting most of their weapon stats from things like GMW, this isn't even that hard. Unholy is not a very good property to begin with, so it's not hard at all to one up it.
Breaking it after the fight is over eliminates any and all concern about the guy using it against you, which means you're just being a douchebag to YOURSELF.
Roy wrote:The church is rewarding him for turning it in. There is absolutely no proof that broken sword is anything other than a broken sword because the magic is gone. Sure he wouldn't lie if he's on the straight and narrow, but what if he isn't? What if he just thought it was an Unholy sword and it was actually unaligned, or the tool of some Duskblade channeling Vampiric Touch or whatever?
Oh yeah, and what if our stereotypical lying misled scoundrel paladin only thought he was lying when actually he was only misled into believing the sword was not evil. This is getting utterly ridiculous. As to your questions:
Obvious Dumbfuck is Obvious. Those are separate possibilities. He wouldn't lie if he were true to his faith, but he might not be, he might not know, and he might be confused.
- The clerics can divine whether the paladin speaks the truth and whether the sword was once evil.
- Unholy swords are evil. Negative energy isn't. Paladins get Detect Evil. More to the point, an unholy sword drains levels from good bearers. Picking it up will cause the paladin to lose spell slots.
If he's lying, Detect Lies and similar are easily fooled. If he's telling the truth but is wrong divinations work better but still can fail or be tricked without too much difficulty.
If he breaks the sword out of the owner's hands, he doesn't get to Detect Evil, unless he spends 3 rounds of combat doing so, at which point the fight is already over. Out of combat, he might be able to do that. Of course, it could be a sword with an evil (but temporary) spell on it, similar to how you can make anyone detect as evil by casting something like Wrack on them. So Paladin boy is still very fallible despite the lying fluff to the contrary, and any coherent world is going to take this into account.
Roy wrote:Lastly, that's an easy one Murtak. There Is No Saving Throw for Stupidity. If someone actually wants to burn cash bringing them back after that, then they can try again. Otherwise they can make a new character, and if they try it again they get the Folding Chair of Salvation for wasting everyone's time with dumbfuckery.
So in other words, you deal with it the same way me (and others) propose to deal with other out-of-character stupidity: namely out of game.
I'd say them not getting revived is an in game decision.
Continuing on with the smites.
Now would you mind answering these:
Murtak wrote:So you propose instead of the character destroying the sword outright he risks it falling into the wrong hands by keeping it for however long it takes him to get to a temple, only to have them destroy it?
By destroying it at once
- no evil person can get their hands on it
- no good person can be tempted to evilness by using it
- it can not be lost if he is killed/kidnapped/whatever
- no potentially corrupt person at the temple can use it
Logically, as long as it is feasible to destroy it it should be destroyed right away.
Oh, and another one: If the paladin is an idiot for destroying the sword, why does the fucking church destroy it for him? Are all of them idiots?
Edit: fixed quote tags
Presumably the church would instead do that Sanctify thing to make it a Holy weapon. I only included the possibility of them breaking it for completeness. But yes, they would be idiots for doing so. Just that their idiocy hurts them and not the Paladin, so at least he's ok.
Now, as for the other bits...
If he can't trust his own church or his own ability to get it to a church, he sanctifies the damn thing himself, as stated. Then he has his own holy weapon. Maybe it will even turn into a Holy Avenger if it was strong enough. Regardless of who sanctifies it, that makes good stronger and evil weaker... which is a better deal than just doing the latter even if you completely ignore the Sundertard Fail.
Other good people would be more concerned about instantly fucking dying and turning into a Wight or at least being weakened by the weapon. Not using it themselves.
Fun fact - if you die from negative levels, you turn into a Wight at the next sundown. And while it makes sense that Unholy swords inflict negative levels on Good users, Holy swords do exactly the same thing to Evil users. So you could seriously create a plague of undead with a Holy Avenger.
Edit: That took way too many tries to fix. Fucking quote tags.