SKR quotables

[Kaelik]

Yeah, nocker, it is plainly absolutely wrong about the actual fucking rules for flurry to a painful extent. But you know those monks, always need a nerf.

[zugschef]

http://seankreynolds.wordpress.com/2014 ... haracters/

By getting rid of the idea that you have to define special abilities as either “magic” or “not magic,” you also get rid of the idea that “martial characters don’t have magic, and therefore can’t do amazing things because they’re limited to what nonmagical people can do in the real world.”

DAFUQ?! This can't be the SKR...

[RadiantPhoenix]

http://seankreynolds.wordpress.com/2014 ... haracters/

By getting rid of the idea that you have to define special abilities as either “magic” or “not magic,” you also get rid of the idea that “martial characters don’t have magic, and therefore can’t do amazing things because they’re limited to what nonmagical people can do in the real world.”

DAFUQ?! This can't be the SKR...

But with a brain instead of a heart

[Rawbeard]

Didn't they drop this "flurry changes weapons with every attack" non sense a while back? Because it was stupid? Or am I not understanding what SKR is trying to verbally vomit?

[hogarth]

http://seankreynolds.wordpress.com/2014 ... haracters/

By getting rid of the idea that you have to define special abilities as either “magic” or “not magic,” you also get rid of the idea that “martial characters don’t have magic, and therefore can’t do amazing things because they’re limited to what nonmagical people can do in the real world.”

DAFUQ?! This can't be the SKR...

Getting rid of (Su) abilities solves nothing; the people who think fighters shouldn't get magic abilities will still mentally sort abilities into "fighter-appropriate" and "non-fighter-appropriate", even if you swear up and down that the fighter's teleporting and scrying is not magical.

[RadiantPhoenix]

Getting rid of (Su) abilities solves nothing; the people who think fighters shouldn't get magic abilities will still mentally sort abilities into "fighter-appropriate" and "non-fighter-appropriate", even if you swear up and down that the fighter's teleporting and scrying is not magical.

I think the idea is that once you stop having "magic" vs "not magic", people will call things they think are "unrealistic" magical, as opposed to going, "it's an (Ex) ability, so it must be Realistic (TM), therefore it can't do what it says it does."

EDIT: Remember when WotC decided bears needed phlebotinium?

[ACOS]

This seems heartening:

I’m not sure if I’m
* a “reality martial guy who changed his mind,”
* a “low-level martials should be ‘reality martials’” guy who is clarifying his stance on higher-level martials, or
* if I’ve just been misunderstood this whole time.
I think it’s probably the second one, with a hint of the first.

I think that SU abilities have a place. I also think that he was focusing way too much on AMF, and the way he was invoking it was a bit of a red herring.
The thing is, there has to be a concerted effort (by game designers, and the RPG punditry) to establish proper expectations. You've got to actually come out and say shit like "Conan was at most never more than 6th level"; and really drive the point home that by time your Fighter hits 10th level, he's going to have abilities that are decidedly non-mundane - that's what it means to be 10th level.

And if some derpity grognards can't get that through their thick skulls ... well, you can't go out of your way to cater to the mentally afflicted, else you end up with a product, and the games that are played with that product, that is flat-out fucking stupid.

[Cyberzombie]

While I certainly agree that fighters need to be doing supernatural things, they should still feel like swordsmen. I'm not for the idea of writing mechanics first and then just applying flavor to them to give some weak justification. Even Magic the gathering has archetypes for its various colors, and D&D classes need to be the same way. At some point prior to designing the mechanics you have to decide what given things are possible for a class and what things a class can't do (and yes wizards need things that they can't do as well).

[codeGlaze]

That Runeclaw Bear is fucking sweet!

[darkmaster]

What should wizards be though? I could get behind the argument that wizard should be a straight support role. Their job should be to buff, debuff, and provide second string melee and ranged support with swording and bows.

[deaddmwalking]

What should wizards be though? I could get behind the argument that wizard should be a straight support role. Their job should be to buff, debuff, and provide second string melee and ranged support with swording and bows.

The wizard should vary depending on what types of spells they learn. The 3.x expectation is that all wizards have access to all spells, or a specialist wizard has access to all spells except some very few restricted spells. Even beyond that, even losing access to an entire school doesn't mean you don't have access to the same kind of effects. If you give up Evocation, you just use Conjuration [fire] and you do everything you could have done with an Evocation (except now you get to ignore Spell Resistance).

A wizard cannot be limited to a support role because their spells cannot be limited to support spells.

A better model for the wizard is a specialty class (like Beguiler) that has a limited spell list that is cohesive.

[MGuy]

What should wizards be though? I could get behind the argument that wizard should be a straight support role. Their job should be to buff, debuff, and provide second string melee and ranged support with swording and bows.

The wizard should vary depending on what types of spells they learn. The 3.x expectation is that all wizards have access to all spells, or a specialist wizard has access to all spells except some very few restricted spells. Even beyond that, even losing access to an entire school doesn't mean you don't have access to the same kind of effects. If you give up Evocation, you just use Conjuration [fire] and you do everything you could have done with an Evocation (except now you get to ignore Spell Resistance).

A wizard cannot be limited to a support role because their spells cannot be limited to support spells.

A better model for the wizard is a specialty class (like Beguiler) that has a limited spell list that is cohesive.

I agree with the sentiment around here where a 'Wizard' should be just split up between Necromancer, Beguiler, Pyromancer/Cryomancer/whatever, and the like instead of a catch all thing for all kinds of arcane magic.

[RadiantPhoenix]

What should wizards be though? I could get behind the argument that wizard should be a straight support role. Their job should be to buff, debuff, and provide second string melee and ranged support with swording and bows.

"Wizard" should be a category of classes.

[codeGlaze]

What should wizards be though? I could get behind the argument that wizard should be a straight support role. Their job should be to buff, debuff, and provide second string melee and ranged support with swording and bows.

"Wizard" should be a category of classes.

You mean like 'Warrior', 'Wizard', 'Priest' and 'Rogue'?

edit: Changed to proper 2e names.

[hogarth]

Getting rid of (Su) abilities solves nothing; the people who think fighters shouldn't get magic abilities will still mentally sort abilities into "fighter-appropriate" and "non-fighter-appropriate", even if you swear up and down that the fighter's teleporting and scrying is not magical.

I think the idea is that once you stop having "magic" vs "not magic", people will call things they think are "unrealistic" magical, as opposed to going, "it's an (Ex) ability, so it must be Realistic (TM), therefore it can't do what it says it does."

However you slice it, people who think "fighters shouldn't get nice things" would still believe they shouldn't get nice things whether (Su) abilities exist or not.

[RadiantPhoenix]

Getting rid of (Su) abilities solves nothing; the people who think fighters shouldn't get magic abilities will still mentally sort abilities into "fighter-appropriate" and "non-fighter-appropriate", even if you swear up and down that the fighter's teleporting and scrying is not magical.

I think the idea is that once you stop having "magic" vs "not magic", people will call things they think are "unrealistic" magical, as opposed to going, "it's an (Ex) ability, so it must be Realistic (TM), therefore it can't do what it says it does."

However you slice it, people who think "fighters shouldn't get nice things" would still believe they shouldn't get nice things whether (Su) abilities exist or not.

When your art shows your "warmaster" (or whatever) sending a giant flying dozens of meters into the air with one swing of half of a broken table (that is currently glowing), I think most people will get the idea.

[brized]

When your art shows your "warmaster" (or whatever) sending a giant flying dozens of meters into the air with one swing of half of a broken table (that is currently glowing), I think most people will get the idea.

Upon viewing that, a caster supremacist's ass lips will spontaneously chafe and chap, swell and snap, and he will not play your game.

But really, is that a loss?

[hogarth]

When your art shows your "warmaster" (or whatever) sending a giant flying dozens of meters into the air with one swing of half of a broken table (that is currently glowing), I think most people will get the idea.

Absolutely. The mundane fighter brigade will get the idea "I hate that weeaboo anime superhero MMORPG bullshit!!! I just want to play Conan the 20th level fighter as God and Gygax intended!"

[virgil]

Absolutely. The mundane fighter brigade will get the idea "I hate that weeaboo anime superhero MMORPG bullshit!!! I just want to play Conan the 20th level fighter as God and Gygax intended!"

Upon viewing that, a caster supremacist's ass lips will spontaneously chafe and chap, swell and snap, and he will not play your game.

Barring certain individuals that are largely ignored, is there a reason to remind people about grognards? What possible benefit could there be with drudging up the same damn line of "but they won't like it" every damn time? Of course they'll hate it, more than they hate women and self-grooming.

Just make the damn game and discuss what flavour of magic will flow through their sword-swinging veins as they progress in levels. Discuss what feats are necessary at a certain level and at what point Charles Atlas is supplanted with Qi-manipulation (IMO, before 10th level).

[RadiantPhoenix]

A Warmaster's superpowers don't necessarily need much more explanation than a Dragon's lightning breath or how an Air Elemental even lives

[brized]

That was my point, virgil.

[Lago PARANOIA]

When your art shows your "warmaster" (or whatever) sending a giant flying dozens of meters into the air with one swing of half of a broken table (that is currently glowing), I think most people will get the idea.

The idea being that while this new Paladin/Folk Hero class seems awesome, it breaks the flavor of their Conan/Batman/Elothar wannabe that they have in their head and also want a class that does that?

[RadiantPhoenix]

The idea being that while this new Paladin/Folk Hero class seems awesome, it breaks the flavor of their Conan/Batman/Elothar wannabe that they have in their head and also want a class that does that?

Then they play a Warmaster 6 in a low level world or something.

Maybe do the BECMI thing and divide the game up by level chunks or something (Classic Fairy Tale / Heroic / Epic / Mythic / Penis-Measuring), and then have a (version of the?) campaign setting for each one?

[hogarth]

Absolutely. The mundane fighter brigade will get the idea "I hate that weeaboo anime superhero MMORPG bullshit!!! I just want to play Conan the 20th level fighter as God and Gygax intended!"

Upon viewing that, a caster supremacist's ass lips will spontaneously chafe and chap, swell and snap, and he will not play your game.

Barring certain individuals that are largely ignored, is there a reason to remind people about grognards? What possible benefit could there be with drudging up the same damn line of "but they won't like it" every damn time? Of course they'll hate it, more than they hate women and self-grooming.

Naturally. That's why I don't understand why people are getting moist panties over SKR's "get rid of (Su) and (Ex)" suggestion: grognards will still do their grognard thing (where any cool stuff for fighter-types is verboten, regardless of whether it's SU or EX) and non-grognards will keep doing their non-grognard thing (where fighter-types are allowed to do cool stuff, regardless of whether it's SU or EX).

[ishy]

Absolutely. The mundane fighter brigade will get the idea "I hate that weeaboo anime superhero MMORPG bullshit!!! I just want to play Conan the 20th level fighter as God and Gygax intended!"

Well we did get ToB, a book all about creating martial spell casters, and while many do indeed call it a weeaboo book, there are also many people who dearly love it.

Oh and Conan was a 15th level fighter who had the thieving abilities of a 9th level thief in OD&D.