Threads that make us Laugh, Cry, or Both, Continued

[Cielingcat]

In other words, it completely misses the point of /b/

[Koumei]

Yeah, it looks pretty lame.

Also, the pounce thing simply means very charger build takes a level of Barbarian, which they'd likely do anyway. It might even involve not taking levels of Druid now that they don't need to find some other way to pounce.

So no-one really cares.

[SunTzuWarmaster]

Not *completely* useless. A level 1 barbarian can dual wield and charge, getting two attacks.

Oh noes! Two Attacks! At level 1! Doing less damage than a Rapid Shot rogue while also placing himself in front of the monster!

So have the benefit be delayed until *character* level 5th or something. I just don't see this as anything too game breaking compared to what else is in the game.

How about delayed until they get a second attack for all of those non-Two-Weapon-Fighting Barbarians (hint: all of them).

Fast Movement is a good Special Ability but Pounce is way way better. But Pounce is way too good an ability to attain by just taking a 1 level dip. That is why it is overpowered. If it were available as a Special Ability at level 10 or 12, there'd be no problem here because that would take alot of devotion to a particular class and would be appropriate. A 1 lvl Barb dip, though? No. It is attained way too easily and the power is too good for that ease of selection.

Oh man, now all of the charging builds will take a level of barbarian! (hint: I have only seen one charging build that had no barbarian levels, and it was a druid, who get Pounce from a spell)

And now for the best:

Mynameisgrax
"Good god, it's the single most game breaking element they've ever introduced (the original 3.0 Psionics handbook comes in second)."

He goes on to make an example of a 9th level rogue with pounce, haste, and some other stuff that assures he slaughters a fighter of equal level in one round.

[MrWaeseL]

I think that 4chan game might be the single worst thread that has made me laugh, cry or both.

[Username17]

Ouch. Killing a Fighter in one round eh? That's got to be a misprint. Or possibly a simple acknowledgement of the fact that any Rogue who can land 3 sneak attacks in a round can defeat a fighter of their level in one round.

---

In any case, there are many Charge Builds which rely on Paladin levels and a mount, which requires a Lawful Alignment and is normally incapable of being a Barbarian due to alignment restrictions. They take Singh Ranger and get their Pounce with a 2 or 3 level dip.

-Username17

[tzor]

1194642145[/unixtime]]I agree. What does playtesting actually entail?

There really are a lot of different things to "play testing" and you really need different groups to cover them all. I think there are basically three different types of play testing.

There is the new guy play testing, generally speaking these are brand new eyes to the game that are not conditioned by previous versions. Often people are so used to the previous version that even when something says that they are doing something different this version that it doesn't really sink in so they actually play test a hybrid of old and new without realizing it.

I think I have heard this argument for 2nd Edition, that if you were used to the original AD&D, 2nd Edition wasn't all that much of a problem, but for someone seeing the game for the first time the edition was very confusing.

The second is the casual guy play testing. Simply put, sometimes you can't always check out every normal possible permutation in regular play.

I remember when the RPGA first came out. One of the ideas of the RPGA at the time was the formation of groups who would register to form official groups who would help out by getting pre-release editions of various game systems. The idea was a combination of play test and focus group which also gave the appearance of being in an "elite" status.

Finally there is the "break the bank" type of play testing. The example I can give from the video game genre is the tester whose job it was to smash his character's head against the walls to see if there was an area where polygon mismatches could cause the character to literally "fall off" of the game map. This is, if done right, boring and hard work. Things like checking the entire set of offensive and defensive manuevers, and so forth. I have never seen this for a Paper and Pen RPG. If you don't do this for an online game you will regret it ... often sooner than you think.

[SunTzuWarmaster]

I took out the tarrasque in one round!

Here's the short version, original poster claims to have taken out the Tarrasque in one round (who cares?) using Timestop and Delayed Fireblast (energy substituted) in order to "Impress the council of Great Wyyms" and asks for other "great damage combos"

The laughs hit about here, when questioned about how caster overcame the SR/fire immunity, the response was:

First, Energy Substitution, don't know what the energy type was. Second, he did enough damage to take him from full Hp to -10 in a single turn, and finally, regarding his SR, the caster was in his 60s or 70s, levelwise at the time, so SR really did not play an issue.

[MrWaeseL]

Ask my level 20 mage about killing a rat in one round!

[RandomCasualty]

1194844586[/unixtime]]4chan Game (Recruiting/OOC)

I couldn't bring myself to actually look at that thread, but I assume it's awful.

Lol, you really should have... This thread is some great stuff.

The percentage system is pure comic genius.

[Leress]

Can con loss kill characters indirectly?

[JonSetanta]

tzor: Many companies get games to release without such collision detectors.
Every game company on the entire peninsula of Korea fails in this aspect, for instance.

Perhaps CharOp gamers supply for this role indirectly. By seeking the best way for themselves and others to win, they reveal the loopholes and cheats inherent in the game system, which can then be removed or tweaked until the CharOp-ers leave the 'fixed' combos for new ones.

I recommend every gaming group to have at least 1-2 CharOp players. It's a must.

[Cielingcat]

WotC CharOp people are idiots.

[Leress]

1194923114[/unixtime]]WotC CharOp people are idiots.

I think Sigma just means a character optimizer not specifically one of the WoTC variety.

[NineInchNall]

Spellcasters are NOT made of win!

[Leress]

As strong as the "builds" are out their for these types of characters, most will never see completion through practical adventuring. The more optimal the build the more optimal the dungeon often becomes, turning the spellcaster into the architect of his own destruction.

yeah, because the melee characters will never be in that kind of position. Last time I checked the wizard is part of a group and if his ass is grass so is pretty much the rest of the party (well most likely not the cleric or druid)

As for power, well being able to have the kings' ear in a country is as good as any wish spell, just as the simple improved unarmed strike feat is worth a thousand 9th level spells when stripped of a spell component pouch. Power will forever be relative based on a situation.

umm, No that is not even close to having a wish spell (well unless the king or someone the king knows can cast wish). Improved unarmed strike is shit for a wizard, I rather have a cross bow or a sling.

[technomancer]

He said that "while it is true that wizards are more powerful than others as they level up; must notably the gap turns into a canyon at about 13th level. But how many wizards make it to that level, as compared to the amount of fighters or rogues?"

Apparently this was a revelation! Obviously wizards arn't made of win because you can't play them! Er... wait a second.. Isn't the core premise of the game that everyone gets to play? If that's the case, then the fact that a specific wizard dies at low levels doesn't mean jack. If wizards really were horribly underpowered until a certain level, couldn't one just make a fighter and have him 'charge in valiantly to save his friends!' and die, and just make a wizard? What do the lower levels have to do with the higher levels? Some people seem so stupid.

[Voss]

Nested fvcking spoiler tags for the lose!

Really. Styling pseudo-intellectual proofs for RPG arguments calls for a face stabbing.

[JonSetanta]

1194923424[/unixtime]]

1194923114[/unixtime]]WotC CharOp people are idiots.

I think Sigma just means a character optimizer not specifically one of the WoTC variety.

True, I was generalizing. Some of my friends are Op-ers and when we meet for game sessions I really don't know what I'd do without them; even if they lack in creativity or roleplay enjoyment, they point out the flaws so fast and make strategic combat a fun challenge (as player or GM) that such a diversity can never go wrong.

WOTC CharOps are a degenerate sub-breed that should stick to playing YuGiOh or whatever they did before discovering how to turn on a PC.

[Jacob_Orlove]

1194899599[/unixtime]]Can con loss kill characters indirectly?

i think 1 ton and led arent quite getting whats being said.dead.

thanks professor rulebook.
actually i did, i was just validating another notion of related subtext. you guys have covered the death out of the obvious dmg component, so, gold star for 'ya.
Con dmg and all is pretty much a universal game mechanic since, God, how long has it been? Hell, even 1st or 2nd ed maybe? who knows/cares.
Reply With Quote

He was just validating another notion of related subtext, people.

[CalibronXXX]

1194931983[/unixtime]]He was just validating another notion of related subtext, people.

Stringofmultisyllabicwithpuntuationthatdon'tmeananything FTW!

[MrWaeseL]

i think 1 ton and led arent quite getting whats being said.dead.

thanks professor rulebook.
actually i did, i was just validating another notion of related subtext. you guys have covered the death out of the obvious dmg component, so, gold star for 'ya.
Con dmg and all is pretty much a universal game mechanic since, God, how long has it been? Hell, even 1st or 2nd ed maybe? who knows/cares.
Reply With Quote

What

[angelfromanotherpin]

It's difficult for me to now make fun of 1 Ton Ghost's inability to understand things, since I don't understand a lick of what he says.

Well played, 1 Ton Ghost, well played.

[tzor]

1194973391[/unixtime]]What

I'm pretty sure there was something in 1E (apart from poisons or disease and that was rare in 1E most did HP damage) that did Con damage, but I can't think of what it was off hand.

Now in 1E the Con score had a real limit, it was the number of times you could be raised from the dead. You could never exceeed your original Con sore.

[Voss]

Unless you were playing a Cavalier from Unearthed Arcana, the cheating bitches. Str, Dex and Con went up by % every level, ticking over to a full point increase at 100%, to a max of 18. Or 18/100 for Strength.

Or, actually, the Manual of <gainful exercise/bodily health?> I always get those confused with the strength one. It was one-use-ever, but still +1 CON.

[CalibronXXX]

How much percent? Only 1? 'cause that seems completely useless.