Still more Threads that make us Laugh, Cry, or Both

[Maxus]

Yes, I did. However, if someone were bad-mouthing me on another board, I wouldn't cry about how he was clearly trolling on this board because of it.

Amen.

[JonSetanta]

So somebody actually does use eMachines products.

I've admitted to it months ago and I'll repeat again, I only use this box of dogshit because it was a gift from my parents for college and I can't afford any better right now.

With that said, yes, I can attest to that; don't buy eMachines. Ever.

[Maxus]

So somebody actually does use eMachines products.

I've admitted to it months ago and I'll repeat again, I only use this box of dogshit because it was a gift from my parents for college and I can't afford any better right now.

With that said, yes, I can attest to that; don't buy eMachines. Ever.

I just turned my laptop all ways up and determined it doesn't have an eMachine logo on it. It's an Acer Aspire 5002 WLMi. It's the one where I had to replace the keyboard.

The desktop (which I'm currently on) is an eMachine, though.

It's functional. That's about all I can say about it.

[Psychic Robot]

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?t=234363

Thread closed; topic banned.

[JonSetanta]

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?t=234363

Thread closed; topic banned.

Good. I hate run-on fucktard debates.
A nice closed thread means I can pop over, save it, and close the tab without going back since nothing has changed later.

[K]

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?t=234363

Thread closed; topic banned.

Wow, that was a fun ride.

It's funny to me that several obvious points were missed like:

-It's Ok to have Pawns and Queens as characters as long as one player controls them all for his team.

-"Not having pets" is problem not because of the "no extra actions" things (which is a perfectly valid argument), but because they failed to create rules for pets which hurts everyone.

You seriously could create mechanics balanced against any number of unquestioned mechanics like Wall of Ice(reactive, stops people, requires damage to kill), Flaming Sphere(active, requires standard action to use each turn, can be destroyed w/ HP dmage), Ghoul Touch(active, requires your attacks).

-The OP was talking about trusting devs judgments. Almost the whole thread was a derail.

[Username17]

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?t=234363

Thread closed; topic banned.

Fucking economy of actions bullshit. Action economy means fuck-all. The important part is economy of screen time - which is influenced but not dictated by how many pieces you are moving around the board.

-Username17

[K]

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?t=234363

Thread closed; topic banned.

Fucking economy of actions bullshit. Action economy means fuck-all. The important part is economy of screen time - which is influenced but not dictated by how many pieces you are moving around the board.

-Username17

It's obviously bullshit, because immediate actions are still in the game and those slow the game down a great deal.

Seriously. I mean, moving more obejcts on the board is no different than drawing out a Fireball outline. It's action resolution that takes up game time, and it's total power that counts for balance, but they have failed to count both issues.

[Psychic Robot]

http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.ph ... st16299682

Apparently, warlocks aren't really strikers.

[Cynic]

http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.ph ... st16299682

Apparently, warlocks aren't really strikers.

P_R, I'm going to quit reading the posts you link to on the EN_world or the Wizo boards, they make me sad, angry, and irritated one after the other. Sometimes at the same time.

Nah, who am I kidding. I'll still effing do it.

[Psychic Robot]

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread ... ost4367236

Verisimilitude is over-rated. I always thought it was kind of funny that you could get gil from a wolf in Final Fantasy, but there has to be some level of abstraction. If you're just giving out trash items as a reward with the expectation players are going to sell them, what's the point?

I kind of think verisimilitude is used as a cover by GMs who want to be jerks. "Oh, you beat Orcus, he has 5 magic items... *roll roll roll* Oh, looks like you lucked out and got a +1 longsword, a tanglefoot bag, and a potion of cure light wounds."

The junk that adds so much wonderful flavor to the simulation just annoys players. The way parcels are decided now is like saying "Hey... give your players what they want, don't be a jerk, and take off the cape."

[cthulhu]

You need to fix your quote tag A_Cynic

FIX IT FOR THE LOVE OF GOD

[Username17]

Apparently, warlocks aren't really strikers.

Of course they aren't. Their at-will attacks do frankly bullshit damage that no one cares about.

However, some of their encounter and daily powers are actually really powerful and lock down enemies for a turn or so. I mean, not all of them, and indeed they go entire levels where they don't get anything good. But a Feylock or an Inferlock can get to 30th level as a very potent lockasaurus - asuming that they can wade through all the shit levels in between.

I mean let's face it: there is exactly one good Encounter power at 3rd level, and it's Otherworld Strike. That is Feypact only, and it's frankly just a slightly glorified Ray of Frost. And of your 1st level Encounter Power choices you have two good options, one of which is Starpact only (and only functions for a Bullysaurus character) and the other is Infernal Pact only (and is only good for a grindlock in any case).

It's a really really poorly designed class, and there's flat no way to make it pull its weight at low levels. After enough levels of cherry picking and ability trade ups, you can eventually make something decent. But at low levels you have like five builds to choose from and they all suck ass hard because you don't even get a relevant ability selection at every level.

---

But yeah, there's flat nothing you can do that will make a Warlock act like how a "striker" is supposed to. But hell, the entire role is kind of retarded in any case because damage output isn't ever going to keep up with enemy hit points no matter what you do, so everyone had better be a locker or a grinder because otherwise their contributions just won't matter.

A warlock plays pretty much exactly the same as a Wizard. Except that unlike a Wizard (who just maximizes Int and Wis), a Warlock has to choose a pact and a stat combination (Con/Int or Cha/Int) at first level that dictates which powers off the list will ever be good for him. So while a Wizard is cherry picking off the entire class list, any individual Warlock is cherry picking off a subset of the class list. So a Wizard can choose a power that passes for good at every level, and a Warlock can get a power that passes for good every other level or so.

-Username17

[Harlune]

It makes me sad that the Warlock is probably going to be the only caster striker class we'll see for a year or two unless they do something crazy and add some sort of Lazor Cleric II: the Electric Boogaloo divine striker class in the PHB 2.

[Psychic Robot]

Ah, Frank. Your posts are so quotable.

[Draco_Argentum]

I kind of think verisimilitude is used as a cover by GMs who want to be jerks. "Oh, you beat Orcus, he has 5 magic items... *roll roll roll* Oh, looks like you lucked out and got a +1 longsword, a tanglefoot bag, and a potion of cure light wounds."

Mother fucking straw man. Why do you still read that crap?

[Koumei]

I can't even figure out how that example of jerkery could be considered similar to verisimilitude. Wouldn't verisimilitude be "Okay, you beat Orcus. You get everything Orcus was carrying, including his staff (with the knob on the end), his freakish undead posse (those you didn't slaughter) and his hat. All are really magical."?

I mean, randomly rolling crap and saying "lol, Orcus dropped a +1 sword" sounds like what pro-verisimilitude people are arguing against. You could in fact say it's what the 4E people are defending.

[PhoneLobster]

You could in fact say it's what the 4E people are defending.

It creates confusion over the terms and the nature of the argument destroying all capability of meaningful dialogue.

Ultimately allowing sufficient bullshit obfuscation for the claim that it's all just subjective unverifiable opinion.

And thus the ones not liking 4th edition are like oppressive and negative and mean in the nature of their opinion and their treatment of the positive happy pro opinion holders.

It's all framing.

[Koumei]

Ah right. So I do indeed understand things correctly, and the explanation is seriously "These fuckwits either don't understand the words they're using (and insist on using them anyway), are misusing the words to cause confusion so they can declare some kind of no-contest victory, or both."

I wish there were medication to treat stupidity.

[Amra]

This is tickling me greatly. I used the word "verisimilitude" on the WoTC boards years back and ended up having to explain it to everyone because it certainly wasn't in common currency among RPG community users at the time.

Now absolutely everyone's using it and they don't have a friggin' clue what it means.

RPG boards are definitely becoming more jargon-heavy; and in this context, I'm referring to 'jargon' in the sense of 'mugging perfectly decent and worthwhile words, dragging them down dark alleyways and beating the meaning out of them with a stupid-stick', rather than 'inventing new terminology that you might reasonably expect to be understood by the target audience to succinctly present a complex topic'.

'Simulationist' is another word that's getting Rodney King'd all over the place. Long words make stupid people feel better. Long words also let slightly cleverer people confuse stupid people into thinking they're right. Long words can also usefully condense a complex idea into a handy-to-use form that saves time amongst the people who properly understand what it means. When all three groups get together and start throwing the same long words around, a Tower of Babel situation results.

The thing is, when I find myself in a situation (and this happens a lot in real life, working for a multinational) where I think terminological confusion may be the root cause of a difference of opinion, I stop and try to re-state the issue in longhand, as it were. On the Internets, that usually results in the discussion degenerating into a debate over who's right about the meaning of the word, rather than being a sensible way of getting everyone's feet under them so they're all talking about the same thing.

So yes, I suspect that *some* are getting the meanings of words wrong because they don't understand them, and that others are wilfully capitalising on others' incomprehension. In general, the people who really do understand what those words mean will be too baffled (or smart) to get involved so you only ever hear the stupid.

[The 13 Wise Buttlords]

But yeah, there's flat nothing you can do that will make a Warlock act like how a "striker" is supposed to. But hell, the entire role is kind of retarded in any case because damage output isn't ever going to keep up with enemy hit points no matter what you do, so everyone had better be a locker or a grinder because otherwise their contributions just won't matter.

That's not quite true.

Rangers, until they inevitably get errata'd, actually make fearsome (for this game) strikers once they get Blade Cascade. Not at first, but stunts like killing Orcus before he even gets a first attack are very possible. It's pretty much the only way I can recommend Epic Trickster anymore.

Also, Elven Ranger/Astral Weapons/Demigods can cheese the everloving hell out of Pray for More/Vorpal to pull out virtually the same trick.

But yeah. Strikers is pretty much a dead-end role until level 30, when Demigod Ranger/Warpriests can pretty much turn off an enemy's ability to attack and defend. But that's level 30, sigh.

[K]

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread ... ost4367236

Verisimilitude is over-rated. I always thought it was kind of funny that you could get gil from a wolf in Final Fantasy, but there has to be some level of abstraction. If you're just giving out trash items as a reward with the expectation players are going to sell them, what's the point?

I kind of think verisimilitude is used as a cover by GMs who want to be jerks. "Oh, you beat Orcus, he has 5 magic items... *roll roll roll* Oh, looks like you lucked out and got a +1 longsword, a tanglefoot bag, and a potion of cure light wounds."

The junk that adds so much wonderful flavor to the simulation just annoys players. The way parcels are decided now is like saying "Hey... give your players what they want, don't be a jerk, and take off the cape."

I like this quote:

"Let's remember this is not a videogame where you go buying items between levels a la Diablo."

Really? The last time I checked items had a GP value and that's exactly what you did.

[The 13 Wise Buttlords]

Really? The last time I checked items had a GP value and that's exactly what you did.

In fact, the treasure section of the PHB straight up says that you should let players buy/make magical items whenever you felt like.

Regardless, there's a ritual on the cheap you can use to turn treasure you hate into treasure you like. Due to the formula pricing of 4E treasure, you set fire to a level 16 item and get a level 14 item of your choice. This would've been a hell of a raw deal in 3E, but treasure is so astonishingly shitty in 4E that it makes you wonder why you would even bother.

[Psychic Robot]

So, apparently I got a warning for my response to the strawmanfag. Gee, I wonder if that punishment was given equally, or was the moderator too busy coming in CountPopeula's mouth to care?

[SphereOfFeetMan]

So, apparently I got a warning for my response to the strawmanfag. Gee, I wonder if that punishment was given equally, or was the moderator too busy coming in CountPopeula's mouth to care?

I think I'd rather have the warning.