ideas that need to go away

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Thu Oct 13, 2011 7:53 am

ok, yeah, that's essentially what I would do.

...You Lost Me · Post by **...You Lost Me** » Thu Oct 13, 2011 9:08 am

Yes, I do believe shadzar accused your idea of being bad and then restated your idea as his replacement.

Desdan_Mervolam · Post by **Desdan_Mervolam** » Thu Oct 13, 2011 11:24 am

shadzar wrote:thigns that need to go away, is people that dont know the purpose of D&D to begin with, and try to force their method of play onto everyone. that way it can go back to being generic play method and concept, and EVERYONE can play the way they like, provided they find a group of like minded people to play with, rather than being forced to play something like a video game, or STG, when they want an RPG.

Ooooh, irony.

Desdan_Mervolam · Post by **Desdan_Mervolam** » Thu Oct 13, 2011 11:28 am

So, Shad. If D&D is not about collaborating with others to create a story, and it's not about rolling dice to succeed at tasks, then what is it?

I'm gonna go ahead and assume the answer isn't "A little of both" since you seem to abhor dierolling as something you do once roleplaying has failed; and at the same time seem to consider people who create compelling, thought-out characters to be self-absorbed pricks.

Whatever · Post by **Whatever** » Thu Oct 13, 2011 2:09 pm

Isn't it obvious? Die rolling and collaboration BOTH interfere with the DM's ability to railroad the players. And isn't that what D&D is all about?

Shadow Balls · Post by **Shadow Balls** » Thu Oct 13, 2011 2:38 pm

Whatever wrote:Isn't it obvious? Die rolling and collaboration BOTH interfere with the DM's ability to railroad the players. And isn't that what D&D is all about?

Sounds like an idea that needs to go away.

Strung Nether · Post by **Strung Nether** » Thu Oct 13, 2011 4:58 pm

Whatever wrote:Isn't it obvious? Die rolling and collaboration BOTH interfere with the DM's ability to railroad the players. And isn't that what D&D is all about?

Exactly. Why don't we just let the DM decide what attacks hit, what skills/feats/spells do and how the rules work. Knowledge of game mechanics is for ROLLplayers!

Stubbazubba · Post by **Stubbazubba** » Thu Oct 13, 2011 5:33 pm

Yeah, once you let the players see the rules, they get all rulez lawyery and chain the DM, whose game it is, with their sense of entitlement. The 2e DMG specifically says the purpose of the game is to have players acquiesce to all the DM's fantasies, but I can't find the book right now to give you a page number.

RadiantPhoenix · Post by **RadiantPhoenix** » Thu Oct 13, 2011 5:59 pm

Idea that needs to go away: "We can see each other's faces and hear their voices over the Internet, so of course we can get away with not clearly indicating sarcasm in our posts."

Whipstitch · Post by **Whipstitch** » Thu Oct 13, 2011 8:16 pm

Some Dude On Dumpshock wrote: I think social skills are one of the most misunderstood aspects of the game. They are not mind control and should not be treated as such, and sometimes NPCs will react to a good social roll in a way not intended by the face. For instance, an elf pornomancer who seduces a Humanis goon won't have him eating out of her hand back at his place, but instead will have him violently showing her why humans are supreme in a back alley, quite possibly with some friends along for the (pardon the pun) ride.

So, yeah, I nominate that raping player characters should go away. Particularly if you're doing it because they rolled successes.[/i]

koz · Post by **koz** » Thu Oct 13, 2011 8:20 pm

Whipstitch wrote:
Some Dude On Dumpshock wrote: I think social skills are one of the most misunderstood aspects of the game. They are not mind control and should not be treated as such, and sometimes NPCs will react to a good social roll in a way not intended by the face. For instance, an elf pornomancer who seduces a Humanis goon won't have him eating out of her hand back at his place, but instead will have him violently showing her why humans are supreme in a back alley, quite possibly with some friends along for the (pardon the pun) ride.
So, yeah, I nominate that raping player characters should go away. Particularly if you're doing it because they rolled successes.[/i]

Seconded.

Seerow · Post by **Seerow** » Thu Oct 13, 2011 8:50 pm

Whipstitch wrote:
Some Dude On Dumpshock wrote: I think social skills are one of the most misunderstood aspects of the game. They are not mind control and should not be treated as such, and sometimes NPCs will react to a good social roll in a way not intended by the face. For instance, an elf pornomancer who seduces a Humanis goon won't have him eating out of her hand back at his place, but instead will have him violently showing her why humans are supreme in a back alley, quite possibly with some friends along for the (pardon the pun) ride.
So, yeah, I nominate that raping player characters should go away. Particularly if you're doing it because they rolled successes.[/i]

Wow, really.

RadiantPhoenix · Post by **RadiantPhoenix** » Thu Oct 13, 2011 9:11 pm

Whipstitch wrote:
Some Dude On Dumpshock wrote: I think social skills are one of the most misunderstood aspects of the game. They are not mind control and should not be treated as such, and sometimes NPCs will react to a good social roll in a way not intended by the face. For instance, an elf pornomancer who seduces a Humanis goon won't have him eating out of her hand back at his place, but instead will have him violently showing her why humans are supreme in a back alley, quite possibly with some friends along for the (pardon the pun) ride.
So, yeah, I nominate that raping player characters should go away. Particularly if you're doing it because they rolled successes.[/i]

Yes. (Unless, you know, the player actually wants that to happen)

Although it might make sense if it changed the 'failure condition' (i.e., if the check fails and the PCs lose the fight) to that...

shadzar · Post by **shadzar** » Thu Oct 13, 2011 9:28 pm

Desdan_Mervolam wrote:So, Shad. If D&D is not about collaborating with others to create a story, and it's not about rolling dice to succeed at tasks, then what is it?

I'm gonna go ahead and assume the answer isn't "A little of both" since you seem to abhor dierolling as something you do once roleplaying has failed; and at the same time seem to consider people who create compelling, thought-out characters to be self-absorbed pricks.

when you take the cock out of your mouth, go back and read the quote you posted of me prior to this post of your own, and ask for help from your guidance counselor or english teacher.

you are beginning to sound like you are as stupid as K.

Seerow · Post by **Seerow** » Thu Oct 13, 2011 9:38 pm

Wow Shadzar telling somebody else to go ask their english teacher for help.

Desdan_Mervolam · Post by **Desdan_Mervolam** » Thu Oct 13, 2011 10:33 pm

I am starting to suspect that Shadzar hasn't actually played D&D since '01 or '02. Surprisingly little of what he says seems to actually apply to a real game.

shadzar · Post by **shadzar** » Thu Oct 13, 2011 10:55 pm

Desdan_Mervolam wrote:I am starting to suspect that Shadzar hasn't actually played D&D since '01 or '02. Surprisingly little of what he says seems to actually apply to a real game.

the games that people have played since '01 and '02 havent been "real games" so why bother playing them?

im not interested in the Pokemon of RPGs, so why play them is that is al people are playing. Nor the MtG of RPgs, yet i had to play in some of those such as my Githzerai Monk, Kender Thief, etc.

I much prefer the Heresy and NWO of RPG, but people just don't play good games anymore like AD&D. and not the right kind of people can be found in OpenRPG, and maptools to play a decent game because they do like some here have said "we play AD&D, but it doesnt look like AD&D or uses another game rules for it'.

not interested in that kind of trash of a game.

not to mention it sort of isnt legal for people to get their hands on the books anymore to play since the RPGNow fiasvo Greg LEeds pulled with "piracy" as the excuse, and OSRIC doesnt relaly do it right when it takes time to looka t OSRIC and explain what isnt right compared to the actual books. and i dont need ot learn a clone, when i have the original.

just because the filth and trash that has come out since '00 (products and people) is not something i use, doesnt mean i don't know what the game is about. its as stupid to comment that way as the morons playing only 4th trying to claim they know anything about OD&D, by just regurgitating the lies of blogs they read somewhere on it a gospel truths.

i have played, read the books, discussed them, and gamed longer than you have i am sure. and by far, i am betting with better people/gamers.

"no game is better than a bad game" ~ author unknown

Ice9 · Post by **Ice9** » Thu Oct 13, 2011 11:38 pm

You know, speaking of games that are discussed on this forum, I've never played Dominion 3. But I don't go into threads about it and start arguing about how things are/aren't balanced.

shadzar · Post by **shadzar** » Thu Oct 13, 2011 11:44 pm

Ice9 wrote:You know, speaking of games that are discussed on this forum, I've never played Dominion 3. But I don't go into threads about it and start arguing about how things are/aren't balanced.

and how many people posting in this very thread are speaking of Pathfinder?

that is what PRak started talking about, but as with ALL threads on forums the conversation can change or become more generic.

this thread Prak didnt specify what game was only to be talked about and has grown to encompass D&D itself, as MANY of the mentions are to things not present in 3rd, the pathfinder original, nor 4th, the current edition of D&D, but of D&D in general and its "sacred cows" as well as default assumed playstyles.

some ideas even reach out to OTHER RPGs.

as Prak like to design things, as well as use ideas for DMing...i am sure there is content in here which is productive for the thread creator alone, even if not to its majority posters.

but this is between Prak and "F" to decide...

i dont go into shadowrun RPG threads either By the by...

...You Lost Me · Post by **...You Lost Me** » Fri Oct 14, 2011 2:52 am

shadzar wrote: the games that people have played since '01 and '02 havent been "real games" so why bother playing them?

I... I had to stop reading and cry for a minute.

Can we get shadzar off this thread please?

Orion · Post by **Orion** » Fri Oct 14, 2011 3:45 am

If the alternative is listening to Shadzar I will opt to keep the cock in my mouth, thanks.

Count Arioch the 28th · Fri Oct 14, 2011 4:35 am

According to another thread in this forum, there's lots of people that like having cock in their mouth.

koz · Post by **koz** » Fri Oct 14, 2011 4:42 am

Count Arioch the 28th wrote:According to another thread in this forum, there's lots of people that like having cock in their mouth.

Shadzar loves cock in his mouth. Among other things, since words clearly don't come out of it coherent.

shadzar · Post by **shadzar** » Fri Oct 14, 2011 5:04 am

Mister_Sinister wrote:
Count Arioch the 28th wrote:According to another thread in this forum, there's lots of people that like having cock in their mouth.
Shadzar loves cock in his mouth. Among other things, since words clearly don't come out of it coherent.

so says the fruit, how ironic.

Orion · Post by **Orion** » Fri Oct 14, 2011 5:07 am

Sinister is a fruit now? Like what, a Cantelope?

... can I be a papaya?

(But seriously what is Shadzard even talking about?)