Threads that make us Laugh, Cry, or Both

[bitnine]

1178842179[/unixtime]]When tarkin sticks to just the rules, he very often can sound reasonable. The bullshit comes in when he starts that loose/power/anything goes crap.

But - for serious - those posts contain an assessment on the power of an element being decried as "OMGWTFBBQ overpowered!!" And... I agree with his assessment. Which caused me to read those posts like 5 times each. ("So, where's the part where he goes crazy with condescending nonsensical classifications? Seriously, did I miss it? WTF?")

By the by, I toyed with the idea of using heroics to grant an unwilling caster Mage Slayer to reduce their caster level, which at low levels is actually sort of neat (whee, no saving throw and now you cast at level 2!). But then I found that Mage Slayer is not a fighter bonus feat. Meh, but if your DM house rules it to be such, it might be something fun to pull sometimes.

[NineInchNall]

No love for the classics

There are some good signs that this will turn into another Fighter thread right quick.

[Leress]

1178928513[/unixtime]]No love for the classics

There are some good signs that this will turn into another Fighter thread right quick.

Too late, it is also going into the Rollplayer vs Roleplayer circle jerk.

[JonSetanta]

That guy CantripN is an conservative self-contradicting jerk.

I hate when he gets to my threads there before anyone else does... just ruins it for others, as they then eat the bait his trolling gives rather than comment on my work.

[NineInchNall]

ToB: Too Anime?. I'd come up with a Ceilingcat-esque 1337 name for it, but, um, I'm not in touch with that subculture.

[Draco_Argentum]

The proponents of fighters not getting nice things have to discredit ToB somehow. Otherwise 4e will fighters nice things and they'll cry.

[PhoneLobster]

The proponents of fighters not getting nice things have to discredit ToB somehow. Otherwise 4e will fighters nice things and they'll cry.

And so then we go back to where we were nine million pages back for the cycle to begin again...

blah

Which of course means that even if they get what they want when the game is screwed they'll cry anyway.

[SunTzuWarmaster]

This thread was going fine until:
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.p ... 0[br][br]I prefer teiflings myself... They get +2 to dex and int... so better spells, and easier to make those ranged touch attacks. Besides that, at higher levels, something alot of people don't really consider, though is completely doable with other races no doubt... that ability to speak infernal comes in handy when you start dealing with gate and stuff like that."

followed by:
"If LA of 1 is that big of a deal... oh boy. Cus you know, I play a perfectly fine Sorcerer with 3 LA... I have absolutely no problems."

[User3]

Why on earth *wouldn't* you count Jedi as a religion?

They believe in the supernatural. They have a council of high priests who interpet "the will of god the force".

They have a code of ethics that is religiously mandated and not based on utilitarianism. They have a set of myths, doctrines, and even prayers.

They're a religion.

[MrWaeseL]

If you actually start a thread criticizing a religion from some movies thirty years old you are a huge nerd and need to get out at all.

[bitnine]

1178986163[/unixtime]]If you actually start a thread criticizing a religion from some movies thirty years old you are a huge nerd and need to get out at all.

But I have real and passionate feelings about Klingon philosophy that I have a pressing need to express!

Oh god... what have I become?!

Seriously, though. Stovokor sucks.

[NineInchNall]

HD+LA vs. CR thread #1.253E37 : get in on the ground floor!

[Maj]

My snotty response to a thread like this is to ask why the designers didn't just make racial hit dice worth something. That way, PCs could have levels; monsters could have levels; and CR and ECL would be a little easier to figure out.

[NineInchNall]

Simple answer: because that would allow for the easy creation of a balanced polymorph chain, and they want to be able to point at polymorph as a scapegoat for why casters are better than martial types.

*grumble*

[Judging__Eagle]

1179012581[/unixtime]]HD+LA vs. CR thread #1.253E37 : get in on the ground floor!

I had my two bits. I'll probably give more there too.

[AlphaNerd]

The 'alternative SRD'

I feel special. Of course, you might also want to link to www.d20ragon.com/frank

Also, if anyone else feels like linking to the site, it might bring the pagerank above zero...

[Cielingcat]

Holy fuck. Holy fucking fuck, tell me I'm not fucking seeing this: the Warblade is broken because he has a d12 HD.

[User3]

If Warblade had d10 hit points, it would be balanced. But it doesn't.

Oh no, a hit point! Mommy, make it go away!

[User3]

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthre ... r][br]It's like an alignment thread, but they're pretending to talk about moral relativism instead. Also, near-infinite amounts of stupidity.

[Username17]

The basic claim that a finger of death doesn't really benefit from you having a second finger of death up your sleave while Toughness stacks with itself is "true". A lot of feats are set up to simply add up with all your other feats and to the extent that this happens it is actually true that getting 3 feats is better than getting 2.

But... a lot of spells stack too. And the bonuses they grant are bigger than the bonuses feats give. And a lot of feats give incompatible bonuses, which are in effect exactly the same as instantaneous spells in their lack of stackability.

So the fact that Dodge stacks with Mobility is kind of like how mage armor stacks with blink - except for the part where both mage armor and blink are massively massively better than having an entire feat tree could hope to be.

Similarly, the fact that Improved Trip is not something you can use simultaneously with Improved Sunder is a lot like the fact that fireball and evard's black tentacles exist as an either/or proposition. Except of course that throwing down black tentacles is a world changing event and tripping or sundering is just you being kind of a dick.

Feats and Spells don't work amazingly differently. It's just that you get more spells, they do better stuff, you have more to choose from, and the consequences of choosing poorly are not as severe.

-Username17

[Neeek]

1179034834[/unixtime]]http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthre ... r][br]It's like an alignment thread, but they're pretending to talk about moral relativism instead. Also, near-infinite amounts of stupidity.

That was painful to read. I only got halfway through the first page before I wanted to cry.

True moral relativists are pretty much entirely regarded as sociopaths and are extremely dangerous. You don't want those people around, ever.

Most people who think they have to be moral relativists, because the only other option is being a moral absolutist, are really moral absolutists who admit they don't know exactly what's right and wrong, so they don't want to say "this" or "that" is definitely wrong, even though they think some things are.

Alternatively, they are believers in situational ethics, which basically holds that what's right and wrong is dependent on the situation in which the action in question took place. Killing a person is wrong, generally. Killing someone to prevent them from killing someone else is not wrong, it's merely unfortunate. Situational ethics are actually a form of moral absolutism, that is just way more complicated than most people can grasp.

[MrWaeseL]

Fast healing 5 means that, in an encounter that lasts 15 rounds, you'll have to do an extra 75 damage to kill the creature.

Fast healing for a player means clerics are unnecessary.

This is to show how some abilities are nice for monsters, but broken for players.

[Neeek]

1179058726[/unixtime]]Fast healing 5 means that, in an encounter that lasts 15 rounds, you'll have to do an extra 75 damage to kill the creature.

Just curious, has anyone ever had an encounter in which a fast healing 5 entity has had the chance to heal 75 points of damage? That's so far beyond a reasonable expectation of combat than I'm having trouble fathoming the circumstances under which that might happen.

[tzor]

Clerics are still necessary for a PC with fast healing if he is in a condition where potential damage can be large. If he can go from OK to dead in one blow, he probably needs healing now, not some time later. Clerics also do more things than restore hit points. (My first major 1st edition campaign I ran eventually had one character with a ring of regeneration. The cleric was needed for the other character, who ironically had a hammer of thunderbolts. Thus the NPC cleric was dubbed the "Holy Hammer Healing Machine.")

But not all fatalities are instant death. Some are "he's negative ... he'll bleed." If you are negative but not dead fast healing allows you to live to sneak away and warn future encounters against the party, even having him reappear at another time.

[Catharz]

1179039506[/unixtime]]Most people who think they have to be moral relativists, because the only other option is being a moral absolutist, are really moral absolutists who admit they don't know exactly what's right and wrong, so they don't want to say "this" or "that" is definitely wrong, even though they think some things are.

That's just, like, your opinion, man. It's no more or less valid than any other opinion on Moral Relativism.


Seriously though, is moral relativism really an absolute, perfectly defined moral philosophy? Or is it simply the statement that there are no universal rights and wrongs, basically an idea like 'The sun isn't a god after all, and it doesn't really care what you do'?