The Gaming Den

Unlike real world authorities, they gain no more meaningful influence or control by perpetuating their reign over their lessers. In squirreloid's vision of D&D society, it is the power of the individual that is exalted, not the power of a collective. So why bother fighting for political authori...

It's not fantasy concepts, its the geometric power scaling which makes low level peons meaningless at the level of kingdom conflict. When just one of the opposition can teleport into the middle of your army and cast Wail of the Banshee before they even know what's going on, you have a serious probl...

Political favor has less importance because you still have to be able to stab things in the face. Don't get this relationship mixed up... face stabbing isn't an end to itself (usually), face stabbing and the threat of face stabbing are just Political Tools that you use to Force people to do what yo...

I love these sorts of discussions because people will start with a base assumption of [economics/warfare/stuff] from our history and then try to work magic into that system afterwards when you actually want to start with how Magic would influence everything from the very beginning. And it's not real...

That's because it Is the answer to everything pathfinder related.

Alternatively, if they're allowing Psionics Unleashed stuff, look into the Aegis, which is a bit more balanced imo.

Welcome back, Shadzar, you beautiful snowflake.

RPG Fanbases are shit because we, the players that make them up, are shit. That's all there is to it. There's no need to try passing off the blame.

Well, the closest thing to it in 3E D&D is the CR system and while the concept was sound, I don't think that anyone's going to argue that it was implemented well. 4E actually did a better job of this to where you could grab a monster of a certain level and then make it an elite or boss or not an...

I stated that the death rate in a campaign was determined by the "objective difficulty" and the PCs optimization level. Am I wrong about this or is this just one of those totally uncontroversial statements that Fuchs et al. sperg out over? Other than confusing terminology, you're just mis...

Only a very few enemies have the capability to kill on a failed save / crit. If character death was as big a problem as Fuchs or Wrathzog are making out it would be the major talking point on every gaming board Oh, don't get me wrong, I don't think character death is a problem at all (refer to: eve...

Frank wrote:What the hell is wrong with you?

Hyperbole. That's all. If you'd used a more reasonable comparison like "Get Ball Cancer," I'd have had no issues with it.

Fuchs, you should probably bail, dawg. This place ain't got nothing for you.

One element I'm noticing here is people quoting the chances of player death or even a TPK, citing stuff like 5%, 1%, or whatever. NOBODY here has that kind of precision in ascertaining encounter difficulty, and talking about setting encounters' death rate to 1% vs .01% is just so much talking out y...

Are you? There is a tremendous wealth of experiential proof that the death rate per encounter is less than 5%. I could explain why that is, but it sure the fuck isn't my fault that you don't know how probability works, and don't know how D&D works, so you think the existence of Finger of Death ...

Are you being purposefully ignorant?

Frank wrote:I can win the lottery, but I probably won't.

Comparing the odds of something that has less than a .0000001% chance of happening with something with at least a 5% chance of happening seems kind of unfair.

Personally, I'm terrible improvisation, so I tend to put a lot of time into planning out sessions and the campaign in general. I try to keep extensive notes on all the major factions, NPC's, and cities in the "world-space" of the campaign. The notes on the PCs tend to be fleshed out betwee...

Dude, you're so close to holding a reasonable position. But I am proud of you for making it this far. The next step is to look at this: My problems with Team Story-First are threefold. -their approach removes the G from RPG. -they are committed to using dishonest tactics both at the table to get wha...

-e-
Fuck it, I've had this dumb conversation before and Fuck it.

Also, the thread's broke.

Mistborn wrote:No because those "list types of players" exercises are always brain-shatteringly asinine.

You have no idea how ironic this is, do you.

because it is completely incomprehensible that a man can do awesome things through clean living, eating right, and training right. In a world with Angels, Devils, Dinosaurs, Vampires, etc.

http://axecop.com/index.php/acguest/read/AC_MC2/
http://drmcninja.com/archives/comic/19p4/

Axe Cop is literally written by a child (and is pretty awesome).
As such, Axe Cop is the Highest concept.

Yes, which is why it's easier to just get rid of character optimization (by not letting options as weak as base Monk exist, for example). You're not going to get rid of character optimization without also getting rid of character customization (on a mechanical level). I have a feeling that that's n...

If one person in unhomebrewed 3e wants to play a Monk, and another person wants to play a Druid, obeying the unified level progression will get you nothing but tears and regret. If you have a person who seriously wants to play Straight, Base-Monk in a 3E game, you're going to have as hard of a time...

Are you saying that these people would still be mad about one player getting to play a 20th level Monk while another player is an 8th level Wizard, despite knowing that the Monk isn't really stronger? Basically. Maybe other people have groups that are more accepting of something like that, but I kn...

Mistborn wrote:This is wrong. D&D is not a storytelling game, people may play it like it is but those people are wrong about the intent of the game.

[FullRetard.jpg]