The Gaming Den

shirak wrote:Jerry, I'm curious about something. You say we take the game too seriously and complain too much about rules. So why do YOU come here?

Alright, I'll start contributing in my own way. I just needed to get "the feel" of this place first.

Leress wrote:

NoDot wrote:

shirak wrote:I feel like when we write the annals of the Gaming Den we'll put "Jerry was there too" at the end of a few paragraphs.

I'd hate to ask, but where am I in these annals of the Gaming Den?

I would like to know too?

I would... ah fuck it.

Jerry is fine. I like his contributions and I don't consider him trolling for the lulz or unwanted in any way. In fact, I can't help but grin when I see that Frank and K both make a point to respond quickly to his rational questions and statements on many recent threads.

But be careful folks, this thread is descending into Paizo-like circlejerkdom fast.

NoDot and Koumei: No idea where you guys stand but I'm rooting for the position of Keeper of the Names :twisted:

Book of Nine Swords needs to be changed to Book of WEEABOO FIGHTAN MAGIC!

Koumei wrote:Book of Nine Swords needs to be changed to Book of WEEABOO FIGHTAN MAGIC!

::Segway to perry bible fellowship link::

And now we're well off topic.

Catharz, I was just talking normally having such anatomy, not even game-balance wise.

Having that much.... I guess 'mass' would be one way to describe it, down there would probably get uncomfortable. Unless you're a creature designed to have their groin accommodate eleven testes.

sigma999 wrote:But be careful folks, this thread is descending into Paizo-like circlejerkdom fast.

Pretty much.

I'm sure we'll get back on topic once they decide to make another stupid decision regarding balance.

Koumei wrote:Book of Nine Swords needs to be changed to Book of WEEABOO FIGHTAN MAGIC!

Why do so many people hate competent melee?

Because they're grognards, LotR fanboys, or WOTC sycophants. If what you meant is why do so many people hate Bo9S, well that's simple, it's a trap.

Caliborn wrote:Because they're grognards, LotR fanboys, or WOTC sycophants. If what you meant is why do so many people hate Bo9S, well that's simple, it's a trap.

LotR had some kickass melee combat. You didn't see Gandalf saying to Aragorn and Legolas "oh, an Orc army? No worries, I'll just invoke 'battlefield control.'"

What you fail to understand is that LotR is low level, like level 5 at the most. LotR fanboys want warriors at all levels to fight like a level 5 warrior does. Perhaps you see the problem now?

Caliborn wrote:What you fail to understand is that LotR is low level, like level 5 at the most. LotR fanboys want warriors at all levels to fight like a level 5 warrior does. Perhaps you see the problem now?

I understand.

Not so much low level as low magic. The only wizards ever presented in the books are servants of the gods who have limits placed on the use of their powers. The reason Gandalf never told Aragorn to sit tight and let him do battlefield control is that he appears to have had little in the way of battlefield control, or even offensive, magic. When the orcs are storming the castle in Gondor, he doesn't throw magic missiles; he fights them with sword and staff.

The problem is that Lord of the Rings has a little internal consistency as most D&D fluff.

Caliborn wrote:What you fail to understand is that LotR is low level, like level 5 at the most. LotR fanboys want warriors at all levels to fight like a level 5 warrior does.

This.

And the few real spellcasters are either god-like elves or elf-like gods, a fad that unfortunately carried over into the wonderful world of elf fandom.
Don't get me wrong, I love to play as frail, pointy eared characters forced to rely on magical power and wit, but the race is typically used by LOTRtards as an entitlement to be born better, live better, and die better than everyone else.

Yeah, people forget that Tolkien didn't have to balance his world because nobody was playing in it.

NoDot wrote:Why do so many people hate competent melee?

Just for the record, I like competent melee, and was just making fun of the book, using the standard title that is used these days.

sigma999 wrote:

Caliborn wrote:What you fail to understand is that LotR is low level, like level 5 at the most. LotR fanboys want warriors at all levels to fight like a level 5 warrior does.

This.

And the few real spellcasters are either god-like elves or elf-like gods, a fad that unfortunately carried over into the wonderful world of elf fandom.
Don't get me wrong, I love to play as frail, pointy eared characters forced to rely on magical power and wit, but the race is typically used by LOTRtards as an entitlement to be born better, live better, and die better than everyone else.

A good book/show may not make a good game. For example, who wants to play as Scotty when Captain Kirk is hitting on all the alien girls and acting cool?

Wait, I've played in games like that!

SunTzuWarmaster wrote:Wait, I've played in games like that!

Were you "Scotty" or "Kirk?"

Been on both sides of that.

As far as I can tell, LotR is around level 3-5. Gandalf is seriously tossing down Pyrotechnics and Knock and stabbing people with a sword most days. Ring Wraiths are CR 5 Wraiths who are wearing NPC equipment and a pack of those is hardcore when you are 3rd level but by the end they get killed because people are finally high enough level. Saruman is 6th level and has Leadership and we never see Sauron because he's a lich (and liches have to be at least 10th level so he needs to be behind the scenes or he'd kill PCs).

Which leads to my point: low level does not have to mean weak and sucky. You really can have epic adventures and combats at low level. RPG video games have convinced people that at 1st level you should be fighting rabid badgers and three foot tall kobolds as real combat actions and counting coppers just to get a magic sword.

Hell, in LotRs the hobbits just find enough magic weapons and armor in a barrow to equip the whole party before any real adventuring even starts. How anti-DnD is that?

Then here's a question:

Disregarding some of the aesthetic changes (such as dragonbortions), is 4e more or less like D&D? And is this a good thing or a bad thing?

K wrote:As far as I can tell, LotR is around level 3-5. Gandalf is seriously tossing down Pyrotechnics and Knock and stabbing people with a sword most days. Ring Wraiths are CR 5 Wraiths who are wearing NPC equipment and a pack of those is hardcore when you are 3rd level but by the end they get killed because people are finally high enough level. Saruman is 6th level and has Leadership and we never see Sauron because he's a lich (and liches have to be at least 10th level so he needs to be behind the scenes or he'd kill PCs).

The main problem I have with that argument is the mass numbers of orcs and trolls that the Fellowship ends up killing. A 3rd level character just isn't going to kill off mass numbers of orcs like that without getting taken out themselves, especially with no healing.

Don't go by Gandalf, he's a DMPC with plot device abilities. Go by what the warriors do.

RandomCasualty2 wrote:
The main problem I have with that argument is the mass numbers of orcs and trolls that the Fellowship ends up killing. A 3rd level character just isn't going to kill off mass numbers of orcs like that without getting taken out themselves, especially with no healing.

Don't go by Gandalf, he's a DMPC with plot device abilities. Go by what the warriors do.

-strongly reminded of DM of the Rings-