View Profile: Hussar - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
No Recent Activity
About Hussar

Basic Information

About Hussar
Location:
Fukuoka, Japan
Sex:
Male
Age Group:
Over 40

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
21,624
Posts Per Day
4.15
Last Post
Worlds of Design: Fantasy vs. Sci-Fi Part 2 Today 03:27 AM

Currency

Gold Pieces
31
General Information
Last Activity
Today 03:27 AM
Join Date
Monday, 9th August, 2004
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
1

10 Friends

  1. Aldarc Aldarc is offline

    Member

    Aldarc
  2. God Returns God Returns is offline

    Member

    God Returns
  3. Manbearcat Manbearcat is offline

    Member

    Manbearcat
  4. Merkuri Merkuri is offline

    Member

    • Send a message via MSN to Merkuri
    • Send a message via AIM to Merkuri
    • Send a message via Yahoo to Merkuri
    Merkuri
  5. MurderHobo1 MurderHobo1 is offline

    Member

    MurderHobo1
  6. Raunalyn Raunalyn is offline

    Member

    Raunalyn
  7. Rechan Rechan is offline

    Member

    Rechan
  8. sev sev is offline

    Member

    sev
  9. Southern Oracle Southern Oracle is offline

    Member

    • Send a message via AIM to Southern Oracle
    Southern Oracle
  10. steenan steenan is offline

    Member

    steenan
Showing Friends 1 to 10 of 10
Page 1 of 11 12345678910 ... LastLast

Tuesday, 13th November, 2018


Monday, 12th November, 2018


Sunday, 11th November, 2018



Page 1 of 11 12345678910 ... LastLast
Page 1 of 50 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Monday, 12th November, 2018

  • 07:53 AM - pemerton mentioned Hussar in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    I keep saying that this is a problem with 3e/4e/PF and you keep focusing on 4e, trying to turn this into a vs 4e Edition war. But this isnt 2008 and I have zero interest in that kind of discussion...I don't have any views about 3E. I've played only a very small amount of it, and as a design I think it has a number of well-known problems. The most interesting thing to be about 3E is that if you apply a level-bonus to AC but call it "natural armour" then many RPGers will regard that as a simulation even though it is just a label with no meaning in the fiction whatsoever (ie the best possible magic armour is +5 plate for around +14 AC, while there are natural armour bonuses in the 30s - what is "natural armour" that is so much better than what the best smith can possibly forge?). Mutatis mutandis for many other aspects of 3E. I agree with Hussar (from past threads, not this one) that PC build in 4e owes quite a bit to 3E. But encounter build/design and action resolution in 4e is wildly different from 3E - very much to the benefit of 4e!

Sunday, 11th November, 2018

  • 07:08 AM - Sadras mentioned Hussar in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    @pemerton and in part @Hussar You have pushed for the merits of a defined skill table at various levels and/or mentioned 5e DM's giving varying DCs on skill checks as issues of the game. I'm wondering if you have the same contempt, because it can only be described as contempt after so many posts, with TotM. Let us face it TotM can produce some varied results, not all DMs will have the exact same picture in their mind and certainly players will have different ones. I'm wondering if you are consistent in your contempt for unsurety across the board or if you're just cherry-picking?
  • 04:43 AM - Imaro mentioned Hussar in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    ...hat the examples that I have in mind as illustrating what 4e permits, and as thereby marking the difference between the systems (eg 15h level fighters cutting down phalanxes of hobgoblins (statted as swarms), the forge scene, etc) are properly not feasible in 5e (because even a 15th level fighter should be threatened if surrounded by 20 hobgoblins, should most likely have his/her hands burn off if shoved into a forge, etc). I don't care whether or not anyone else wants to play a game in which 15th level fighters are capable in that sort of way. I'm simply explaining why the 4e framework makes stuff possible - encourages it, even - which the 5e framework does not. I want that stuff even if no one else does. To put it even more bluntly - I'm not trying to show that 5e players are irrational. I'm rebutting the suggestion that 4e does not offer anything different from 5e. It obviously does, and this thread has only underlined that fact. Which is why I was replying specifically to Hussar who seems to want a different conversation than you do.

Saturday, 3rd November, 2018

  • 06:21 PM - Imaro mentioned Hussar in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    I don't give my wife special treatment, her character has the same risk and rewards as anyone else. She wouldn't want it any other way, nor would I when she'd DMing. However, I'm realistic in that as much as I like my players they could get a job out of state (or I could) tomorrow. I know my wife is going to be in my campaign for the long haul. So yes, her vote on what the next campaign is going to be and whether we allow option ___ has more weight than others. This brings up another interesting axis on Hussar 's objective player over DM stance... What if the DM is more committed to playing than the player? If I have a player who hates horror games but is often late or cancels often enough to be noticeable (but we still enjoy playing with him in a casual sense)... should their preference still be held in higher regard than mine as the DM who shows up to every session? Should their preferences hold as much weight as everyone else's in the group? This is why I don't like this blanket... "Not catering to a player" = "Bad DM" rhetoric. Way to many factors to make that a blanket statement.

Friday, 2nd November, 2018

  • 01:04 PM - Imaro mentioned Hussar in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    Now, that being said, I would say that there are differently levels of justification for things. I don't want X because I don't like X and I'm the DM so, what I say goes, is a pretty darn weak argument. If that's the best justification you can come up with, well, at that point, I'm of a mind that I'll just suck it up and let the player have their way because it means that the player will be more invested in the game. I'll address the direct response to me a little later but I did want to touch on this... Does this work in reverse? If a player's justification is that I don't want to play X because I don't like X and we agreed to only play games everyone liked so what I say goes do you as a DM consider that an equally weak argument? Is there a point where the player should just suck it up and let the DM have their way? If so what is it. This is what I'm trying to figure out with you Hussar, because while I get where you're coming from in a general sense I am also getting the impression that compromise from your point of view is the DM always conceding to the players. Now if that;s the case just state it as opposed to claiming compromise when the player never has to. It's similar to the question I asked previously... if you always concede to the player at what point do they actually need to be open minded or adaptable?

Thursday, 1st November, 2018

  • 01:05 PM - jasper mentioned Hussar in post Burning Questions: Why Do DMs Limit Official WOTC Material?
    Hussar Every Dining out hussar votes steak, steak, steak, steak, steak, steak,. Some times Fried shrimp with steak. The rest of us vote on variety. Sooner or later Hussar is going lose the vote. So he has to learn to got along with reasonable demands. Or hit Steak and Shake alone this Taco Tuesday. Sorry If I told the group the Convoy/Train/Plane leaves at 1600 hrs 2 times before the event, 2 times in the ride to the event. 2 times at the event. And at 1545 I tell you to be ready, you turn and run away deeper in the con. You are the one with problem. So Matt Mercer must allow me to use my Vulcan with wolverine claws, phaser, and magical missile or he is a bad DM. Got it.

Tuesday, 30th October, 2018

  • 03:11 PM - Imaro mentioned Hussar in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    ...sagree with you, I do also think refusing to play in a game that everyone in your (presumably stable and long-standing) social group wants to play is a bit gauche. Unless the game or campaign concept is bringing up some kind of psychological issue, the fun of hanging with your social group should trump the relative negative feeling towards the game as a whole. I think they key here isn't the DM's pet campaign or the player for whom the particular system is a bte noire, but the other players in the group. If they're ambivalent about the DM's concept, better for the DM to make a change. If they're enthusiastic, though, the player with the problem may have to be the one to change their attitude. Granted, this probably points more to the importance of saving strong aesthetic considerations for the internet, and not bringing them into casual social encounters. Nobody wants to hear your "TLJ ruined Star Wars" diatribe at the office Christmas party. :) This is pretty much where Hussar 's blanket "Bad DM" characterization of this falls flat for me. There seems to be this sentiment that the DM is supposed to be extraordinarily flexible, accommodating, not really own anything, cater to players, etc. But I don't see this line of thinking ever reflected back towards players (admittedly by some though not all posters in this thread). As a player if I'm not feeling what the DM has suggested but the rest of the group is cool with it... why would I force him to change it and why is he a bad DM if he doesn't cater to me specifically? If I have that big of a problem with it (to the point that I refuse to play) why am I not being held to the same standard of... friendship, camaraderie and social enjoyment should trump your lpersonal wants... that apparently DM's should be held to?

Monday, 29th October, 2018

  • 06:05 AM - pemerton mentioned Hussar in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    There is a difference in arguments between, "X is true, because Y is an authority" and "X is true, because of X, Y, and Z reasons", even if those reasons are from various authorities. One is a fallacy, and the other is not.In the abstract, sure. But here is Hussar's argument: X is true because I believe X, I'm an English teacher, and therefore I would know. And here is your argument: X is true because I read it in a book, and the book is right because the people who wrote it would know. Those arguments are both appeals to authority. Fallacies are fallacies. Period. If you engage in one it doesn't automatically make you wrong or right, but it does make the argument logically invalid.Maxperson, every argument I have ever seen you run is logically invalid. (I have never seen you make an argument in mathematics or logic.) Practally every argument every human being has ever made in the history of humanity is logically invalid. The argument that If you jump off the roof of a bulding, you will fall is logically invalid. That doesn't make it a bad argument; it just means that it is defeasible by contrary emprical evidence. That an argument is not logically valid doesn't make it a bad one. That my best reason to believe X is that someone w...
  • 01:32 AM - Maxperson mentioned Hussar in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    ... the status of Paris as the capital of France are authorities is enough to prove my point! There is a difference in arguments between, "X is true, because Y is an authority" and "X is true, because of X, Y, and Z reasons", even if those reasons are from various authorities. One is a fallacy, and the other is not. I'm not an attorney. I'm an academic lawyer. And yes, authorities can be wrong. That's why argument from authority is defeasible. But as I already posted, practically every bit of inference you engage in is defeasible. For a good discussion of what bits of your "knowledge" you would have to erase if you resolved to accept only non-defeasible inference I recommend Bertrand Russell's The Problems of Philosophy. Short answer: practically all of it. Fallacies are fallacies. Period. If you engage in one it doesn't automatically make you wrong or right, but it does make the argument logically invalid. All of these things you are mentioning are irrelevant to whether or not @Hussar made an Appeal to Authority as his only response to my argument. Not only was it an Appeal to Authority, but his next response was an Ad Hominem attack. If he really is an English teacher, he should know better.
  • 12:15 AM - pemerton mentioned Hussar in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    ...hematics, and stuff that happens every day outside your hometown. If you argument hinges on nothing more than "that's what folks say" (with presumably your choice of folks being credible) the whole of your argument boils down to their credibility.]"What foks say" is largely the opposite of authority (unless you're talking about stuff that happened at the shopping centre down the street). The key being this - is there evidence other than the perceived authority?Evidence available to whom? What's the evidence that New York was settled before the 18th century? Other than a book (= the dreaded "authority"!) But the key part is A2A can be reasonable- if the source is credible and supported by evidence.An argument that can be reasonable is not a logical fallacy. It's not even an informal fallacy. As Wikipedia notes, it's defeasible. Given that basically every argument anyone ever runs outside of mathematics is defeasible, that's not a very telling blow against it. As far as Hussar's claim is concerned, two things: (1) Either Hussar's an English teacher, or has been working hard to maintain the online facade of being an English teacher for over a decade. Given that there's little reason for someone to do the latter, and given that his reports about English teaching and challengs of cross-cultural education have always seemed coherent enough to me, I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt. (2) I'm not an English teacher - I'm an academic lawyer and philosopher - and I know that Hussar is 100% correct when he says that Maxperson is 100% wrong to say that " 'On a hit, roll damage' is equal to 'On a miss, don't roll damage.' It's just the way language works." The instruction that, on a hit, one must roll damage, doesn't forbid anyone from rolling damage on a miss. It probably implies that "On a miss, you don't need to roll damage" but the absence of an obligation isn't the same thing as being forbidden - the absence of an obligation is consistent wit...

Sunday, 28th October, 2018

  • 03:15 PM - Maxperson mentioned Hussar in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    ENWorld is the only forum I know where "appeal to authority" is treated as a fallacy rather than good evidence! Why would a fallacy not be treated as a fallacy? Also, @Hussar claimed to be an English teacher, but that he immediately engaged in an Appeal to Authority in his post, and then in the following post engaged in an Ad Hominem attack, causes me to doubt that claim. An English teacher should know better. I've never been to France or spoken to a French government official. How do I know France's capital is Paris? I learned it from an authority! Fallacious me! The fallacy would be if you presented as your only proof that France's capitol is Paris, that an authority said so. If you engaged other arguments, such as maps, news sources, a french citizen you spoke with, and so on, it would not be an Appeal to Authority to also mention that a geography teacher taught that to you. Edit: Authorities can also be wrong. As an attorney, you should be well aware of that fact, since your profession engages in dueling experts on a regular basis, where you have authorities making opposing claims on important parts of the case. They both can't be right, and it'...

Thursday, 25th October, 2018


Monday, 22nd October, 2018

  • 11:51 PM - pemerton mentioned Hussar in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    And do we also wind up with message boards choked with hyperbolic unrealistic examples like these? No thx.Right. If one reads Hussar's post, or the text of the game he posted, T-Rexes walking unnoticed through town has nothing to do with it.

Saturday, 20th October, 2018

  • 08:15 AM - pemerton mentioned Hussar in post Shootout at the D&D Corral
    Hussar, absolutely. I've never lived in a non-settler colony country, but I've been a tourist in Egypt, in Morocco, in Zanzibar, in Palestine and Israel. And I have run an interesting campaign set in a fantasy version of feudal Japan!

Thursday, 18th October, 2018

  • 09:02 AM - Sadras mentioned Hussar in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    @Hussar, I think the background idea has some merit. At session 0 most of what comes up is - selecting a setting, cosmology, level of magic, the difficulty, playable races/classes, published material allowed, house rules, genre...etc. What hardly or never comes up (at least at my table) is what each player perhaps likes least. It would be a good way for the DM to gauge what would be most enjoyable at the table by backgrounding some of these story components Whether I'd agree to background something as pivotal as a Warlock's patron would largely depend primarily on my knowledge of the player and his/her maturity level, length of the campaign and the overall campaign story.

Wednesday, 17th October, 2018

  • 03:57 PM - Aldarc mentioned Hussar in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    ...t the GM wasn't hands off regarding the deity... he created history, setting, icons, etc. about the deity. that's not hands off that's very much hands on. You were hands off about a very specific aspect of the deity but this is more akin to collaboration (which many posters including myself are ok with to an extent) as opposed to the deity being backgrounded by the player so that the DM must be hands off. You can't argue these things are part of a players concept and not be touched when it comes to the father example but then claim they are irrelevant in this one.Reading this, I wonder if you may be talking from different senses or understandings about "hands off" or "hands on" regarding Backgrounded elements, and this may be leading to some of the all-around confusion or disagreement. But based upon most discussion from the various positions, it would seem that most agree that player/DM cooperation for establishing characters and their anchor into the world is good and healthy. Hussar, to save a bit of time with hunting for a needle in a haystack, what was the name again of the RPG you mentioned that had this Background mechanic? It may be helpful to examine how the mechanic or rule is worded. It could help us all re-focus our efforts in this thread.
  • 03:34 PM - pemerton mentioned Hussar in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    I am responding to the thread as I read it. To me it seemed very clear in a range of posts that the technical device of "backgrounding" that Hussar mentioned was just an instance of, or useful expostiroy proxy for, a broader range of considerations about how fiction is established, handled etc. I feel that my discussion with Sadras is operating under that understanding and while obviously we have different views about what makes for good GMing I don't think there are any conceptual or terminological confusions affecting our discussion. (Maybe Sadras will correct me on that!) The argument about whether "backgrounding" prevents consequences was premised not on the fact that it is "not a focus of play" (as per Imaro's post just upthread) but on the fact that "the DM is hands off about it" (from the same post). I have posted an example in which the GM was hands off about the demands of allegiance - ie the players decided this - but in which consequences most definitely ensued. That is sufficient to refeute the claims made. If soemone now wants to say that all the action really is not in regard to the GM being hands off but rather t...

Tuesday, 16th October, 2018

  • 06:10 AM - pemerton mentioned Hussar in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    ...ead my example of having the warlock make a side trip to the Old Man of the Woods as the party goes through the forest.What's the point of that, from a gameplay perspective, in circumstances where the player has already flagged that s/he is not interested in this sort of stuff? And how could it be that a GM can't enjoy the game unless it includes this - does that mean s/he always insists that at least one player play a feypact warlock? I get what your saying. I was in a game once where we were playing pirates. The problem? The DM started us without a boat and not even near the water. Several sessions later and we never did mange to get a boat for the pirates campaign. However, there's a world of difference between having your bike stolen, and running out of gas and being inconvenienced. Jumping to the horrible DM example that almost never actually happens, doesn't give you a win in the discussion.Well, the threat of the bike being stolen was the actual example given from Hussar's actual play. But let's take running out of petrol. What does that add to the game? Do you keep track of how much leather is left on the soles of PCs' shoes? You might think that that is a snide question, but it's intended literally. In real life, shoes wear out - I know this from the experience of wearing them out by running in them. But I've never played in a RPG where this "consequence" is kept track of, and where the players therefore risk having their PC suddenly inconvenienced by a hole in his/her shoe. The bigger point is that, in RPGing, we "background" stuff - as in, disregard it and/or take it for granted - all the time. If a player has said that s/he wants to treat his/her PC's motorcycle in this way, what reason does a GM have for doing otherwise?
  • 02:05 AM - pemerton mentioned Hussar in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    ... player to adapt to the table if you wish to play.I think there are two cases. If it's a case that the game is already about X, and the player asks to join in - a new player to an existing group, a pick-up game, or whatever - then the player is forewarned. But if (as in the examples that have been discussed) the X is something that only comes into the game because it's an element of the new player's PC - a motorcycle, dear old dad, the Lord of Battle as divine patron, etc - then I stand by my view. The game was proceeding swimmingly without the GM having anything to say about the Lord of Battle, so why does that have to change? What is wrong with a game where Vlad's motorcycle never gets stolen? In one game, the pcs can start as humans, in another as older vamps hundreds of years old with established territories. In one game, they can be members of a well structured principality. In another scrambling for survival on the run in a chaotic region.And do you think that the game Hussar was describing, where the player just wanted his PC's bike to be an element of character colour that didn't get stolen, was a game of hard-knock scarbbling for survival on the run in a chaotic region?
  • 12:31 AM - pemerton mentioned Hussar in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    ...umably if no one described his/her PC's motorcycle the issue wouldn't even come up - certainly in the few V:tM sessions I've played the mode of transport didn't seem to matter.) That may be a somewhat more extreme example than wanting to keep a motorcycle free and pristine from any and all interference or wanting to take a huge pet dinosaur into any densely packed urban environment, but it's the same sort of topic.No it's not. Wanting to have a motorcycle that doesn't get stolen isn't a game style thing at all. Wanting to have a warlock whose patron doesn't hose him/her isn't a game style thing at all. If the player never mentioned the motorcycle, the game woud progress identically but with no cycle theft. Mutatis mutandis if the player played a fighter rather than a warlock. As far as the ranger's animal companion is concerned, you are the only poster to mention taking a huge dinosaur into a densely packed urban environment - which is an actual contradiction in the fiction. Hussar suggested that the ranger's bear not cause any headaches or issues when left hanging around the fringes of the village, or something along those lines. The bottom line: I think GMs who want to micromanage their players' colour and backstory for PCs are bad GMs full stop. And those who want to micromanage the actual fiction that unfolds in the game - so that a good chunk, or even most, of the players' play experience becomes finding out what the GM has decided the fiction shall become - are GMs whose games I will avoid or walk from. (As per my three examples in my first post in this thread.)


Page 1 of 50 1234567891011 ... LastLast
No results to display...

Monday, 12th November, 2018

  • 03:34 PM - Aldarc quoted Hussar in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    Oh, hey, I get that. 5e is FAR more accessibly written. And it comes paired with really excellent adventures that take advantage of the best parts of the system. 4e's biggest failure was in how it was presented. Skill Challenges are a fantastic idea, but, the first 4e DMG didn't present them that way at all. Rituals were a fantastic idea that never really went anywhere. I'm now curious how 4e would fare if it was given a revamp or rewrite that properly/more naturally communicated its design principles. Though it would still be lipstick on a pig for some, it seems like it would be an "ah ha!" moment for others. The closest we may have to that end is likely 13th Age, which is not purely 4e or 3e, but certainly has a degree of familiarity for both. So, for some, the notion that you'd use the skill system and a "fightery" character to produce magical effects makes intuitive sense. These are fantasy heroes and legendary ones at that. Of course they can wrestle death. Of course they ca...
  • 11:00 AM - Lanefan quoted Hussar in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    Has nothing to do with bad DMing or railroading or anything else. It's just not going to happen. Imagine that conversation at the table. The fighter players says, "Ok, Bob's character just died, so, I'm going to travel to the underworld and get him back." Yeah, that's going to fly at any table. :erm: There isn't a chance in hell that any DM is going to let that go.Don't be so quick to judge, sir. :) In a previous campaign of mine something similar actually happened: a PC died and couldn't be revived by conventional means, so another character - a non-caster! - decided she was going to find a way to get into Niflheim and somehow retrieve the soul from Hel. She did her research and found a means of getting there - a long journey on this world followed by a walk through a very dangerous tunnel to a planar gate through which you had to in some combination fight and bribe your way through, then very likely another long journey once in Niflheim. She rounded up a party and off they w...
  • 05:26 AM - Jay Verkuilen quoted Hussar in post Worlds of Design: What Makes an RPG a Tabletop Hobby RPG?
    AFAIK, you have this backward. They played the adventures then wrote the story. The tropes, like wizards getting tired, were a way to try to get around the derivative nature of Vancian casting. Funnily enough, in Raistlin's D&D stats, his Con was average. The whole "Sick Raistlin" thing was from how the player played the character. As is usually the case, the player basically ignored the character sheet. :D I haven't seen Raistlin's stats in a long time. That's pretty amusing, though. I don't think I had it backwards, but may have said it in a confusing way. Dragonlance started as a D&D setting and they added the stories. Vancian casting really doesn't describe well in fiction. I've read Vance and mages don't actually cast all that many spells so it's hard to tell how it affects them. It's been a while since I read it, though, so I con'd recall how consistent Vance is.
  • 03:39 AM - Shasarak quoted Hussar in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    It's just not going to happen. What will actually happen is that the player will say, "I want to wrestle Death" and the DM will say, "You got a magic item for that? No? Sorry, you can't." Just thinking about this point a little. Can you force the DM into doing anything? Maybe. Your Magic User gets the spell Fireball and then, by coincidence, all of a sudden no two enemies are ever positioned close enough together to hit more then 2 or 3 at a time. Wotc releases a book that has Gnomes and Monks and then, by coincidence, all of a sudden all the Gnomes and Monks get eaten by the DM Grudge Monster. Frankly it would be easier to just get a good DM then trying to rules lawyer a bad DM into throwing some crumbs.
  • 02:36 AM - Garthanos quoted Hussar in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    What will actually happen is that the player will say, "I want to wrestle Death" and the DM will say, "You got a magic item for that? No? Sorry, you can't." Sadly true. I mentioned the PC having a personal theme about seeing death? and presenting the combat medic as him fending off a shadowy figure nobody else sees. The idea being if this is part of the story directional for that character. In other words it provides the set up. Something I think about wrt a downed hero is the problem of Party Death Spiral... the party action economy takes a hit essentially a way for the Dead hero to take part by using a inspiration almost like they are currently a disembodied lazylord beconning from the other heroes parties memories as flashbacks, some he gives extra attacks to and its like they are raging over his death and other lazylord effects. It might give a player something to do at least for a bit when his character is dead maybe even till the end of this immediate sub arc.
  • 12:59 AM - Shasarak quoted Hussar in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    Your assumption here is that every DM would go ahead and create an adventure where you go and wrestle death instead of just looking at the player and saying, "No." Which, IME, is FAR more likely. No, my assumption is that sounds like a cool idea how can we narratively tie that into the story. Then the immediate push back from you that I get is that "you dont want to faff about" actually doing it. In contrast the feedback from Garthanos is that it would be perfect. The acquistion of rituals and practices both in 4e are in story like magic items and the first time you do it I think yes that binding it up in a quest is perfect The knights travel into the other world and recover the Grail is one version of this. So what is it? Do you want to do Epic stuff or do you just want to say that you do Epic stuff. Very, very few DM's IME are going to just drop whatever adventure they've got prepared, and create an entire new adventure which means traveling into some sort of Hell, fighting ...
  • 12:32 AM - Shasarak quoted Hussar in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    And, here again, THIS is the problem. The cleric spends some money and a spell slot and poof, problem solved. The fighter wants to do the same thing, and now he has to spend an entire adventure faffing about. THIS is the problem? You have a chance to do something truly epic by wrassling Death into returning your dead friend to life and the problem is that you actually have to play it out rather then making an Athletics check and spending 1000gp so you dont have to "faff about"? What I am hearing is that you want your character to "do" epic things with the proviso that you do not have to actually do epic things, just say that you have done them. Is that more or less correct? presumably one where the dead PC's player is warming the pines. My fake answer to this is, that he should have played a better game so his loser character did not die then. My actual answer to this is, that it is a complicated topic that probably should at least be mentioned in session 0 so that Pla...

Sunday, 11th November, 2018

  • 11:55 PM - Parmandur quoted Hussar in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    Wow. You had a terrible 4e DM. Yeah, probably: but, innspite of having a robust tool set for DMs, that seems to have been relatively common as an experience. I know from personal experience that any idiot can run 5E without the game breaking, because I've done it.
  • 03:17 PM - Jay Verkuilen quoted Hussar in post Worlds of Design: What Makes an RPG a Tabletop Hobby RPG?
    Now that's a new one. Never heard that before. Not sure what other game it would be grounded on considering they were playing in the late 70's. Some of the classic modules are clearly directly inspired by novels or stories. The most notable example of this is G1: Steading of the Hill Giant King, which is very clearly based on the first de Camp and Pratt Incompleat Enchanter novel. The claim though (responding to my post about Raistlin) was that Dragonlance was originally played in a different game, not D&D. At least from the Wikipedia entry, Dragonlance was conceived by Tracy and Laura Hickman on their way to Lake Geneva for a job interview in 1982. I would not be surprised if the "Raistlin being tired when he got low on spells" trope was RP fluff that whoever played Raistlin in the original games put on combined with the fact that Raistlin's Con was fairly low. Certainly it's the kind of thing that Tolkien had had Gandalf say in LotR so it makes sense that it was a way to RP. But it...
  • 04:27 AM - Imaro quoted Hussar in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    Really? Because that's not the conversation I was having. My point is, of the four PC's at the table, two are bounded by bounded accuracy to either potentially succeed or fail depending on DM fiat while the other two (i.e. magic using classed PC's) get to ignore the DM and declare success whenever they feel like it. And somehow that's not a problem. I'm not sure how it isn't a problem. Tradition maybe? But, that's the fundamental issue right there and it's wound in with the bounded accuracy rules. Why should a high level character be challenged by a low level skill check? The magic using characters aren't and never have been. I mean, a 20th level champion fighter can NEVER push a giant. Ever. Not without some sort of size increasing magic anyway. On his own? Not a chance. But, a 3rd level Way of the Open Hand monk spends a ki point and poof, that same giant flies back 15 feet. There's a save, sure, but, that 3rd level monk can do it. Why do fighters never get anything ...
  • 03:26 AM - Parmandur quoted Hussar in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    Which is fine to a point. Unfortunately, the whole resource management issue goes out the window at higher levels which is, I thought, what we were talking about. See, the 1st level fighter and the 15th level fighter don't have too different chances of success of throwing that rope. 20%, 30% difference by and large? Meanwhile, that 15th level wizard has so many spell slots that burning a low level one, or, simply using some ritual is such a trivial expenditure that it isn't really a resource management issue at all. Let's be honest here, how often is a 15th level caster going to blow his or her full load out of spells in a single day? That's one hell of a lot of destruction. :D And, heck, you keep insisting on levitate. Why? I can mage hand the rope 30 feet and hook the grapple, silently and successfully every single time. Doesn't even cost me a resource. What I would like to see is high level fighters be able to have a sort of free form power which lets them do amazing physic...
  • 03:15 AM - Shasarak quoted Hussar in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    Which is fine to a point. Unfortunately, the whole resource management issue goes out the window at higher levels which is, I thought, what we were talking about. See, the 1st level fighter and the 15th level fighter don't have too different chances of success of throwing that rope. 20%, 30% difference by and large? Meanwhile, that 15th level wizard has so many spell slots that burning a low level one, or, simply using some ritual is such a trivial expenditure that it isn't really a resource management issue at all. Let's be honest here, how often is a 15th level caster going to blow his or her full load out of spells in a single day? That's one hell of a lot of destruction. :D And, heck, you keep insisting on levitate. Why? I can mage hand the rope 30 feet and hook the grapple, silently and successfully every single time. Doesn't even cost me a resource. If you want to talk about high level play, then by 15th level my Fighter has all sorts of items that bypass all those norma...
  • 02:58 AM - Garthanos quoted Hussar in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    I feel a great disturbance in the snark. :D Tony Vargas isn't around so much.
  • 01:49 AM - dragoner quoted Hussar in post Worlds of Design: Fantasy vs. Sci-Fi Part 1
    Not sure I agree with this. Doctor Who is SF but certainly not a plausible world. Yes, England, is entirely not a plausible place; whoever thought up that should be drummed out of the BBC. ;)
  • 01:43 AM - Parmandur quoted Hussar in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    Really? Because that's not the conversation I was having. My point is, of the four PC's at the table, two are bounded by bounded accuracy to either potentially succeed or fail depending on DM fiat while the other two (i.e. magic using classed PC's) get to ignore the DM and declare success whenever they feel like it. And somehow that's not a problem. I'm not sure how it isn't a problem. Tradition maybe? But, that's the fundamental issue right there and it's wound in with the bounded accuracy rules. Why should a high level character be challenged by a low level skill check? The magic using characters aren't and never have been. I mean, a 20th level champion fighter can NEVER push a giant. Ever. Not without some sort of size increasing magic anyway. On his own? Not a chance. But, a 3rd level Way of the Open Hand monk spends a ki point and poof, that same giant flies back 15 feet. There's a save, sure, but, that 3rd level monk can do it. Why do fighters never get anything ...
  • 01:25 AM - Shasarak quoted Hussar in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    On and on and on. It's frankly baffling to me why this isn't a bigger issue for people. People just shrug and go, "Well, it's magic, so it's okay." Buh? It's okay that half the players get to play a different game than the other half? Seriously? I always thought that the Player gets to choose what she wants to play when she chooses her character class. If you think that your Fighter should be Ki punching Giants off cliffs then yes I can see that there is a problem between character concept and execution at the table.
  • 01:22 AM - pemerton quoted Hussar in post Worlds of Design: Fantasy vs. Sci-Fi Part 1
    Not sure I agree with this. Doctor Who is SF but certainly not a plausible world.Nor is the world of Dune.
  • 01:16 AM - Shasarak quoted Hussar in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    Nope, not all day long. That 5e fighter with a 15 strength (that was the example) cannot jump 20 feet EVER. Not unless the DM says so. And, what is the DC in 5e? How, as a player, do I judge the difficulty of that jump without consulting the DM? Answer is, I can't. The DC is entirely in the hands of the DM. And as ten different DM's and you'll get eleven different DC's because it's all about DM empowerment. And, AGAIN, totally missing the point. If the caster can do something without needing to ask the DM, why can't the non-caster EVER do the same thing? My 20th level Champion fighter regenerates, but has no idea whether or not he can clear a Strength+1 distance by jumping until I get the approval of the DM. I am not unsympathetic to your complaint. It would be good to have good clear rules that gave every DM (and Player) the same idea of what was possible and on the other hand it just does not seem possible to get everyone to agree. In the Conan story 'The Tower of the E...
  • 01:14 AM - Garthanos quoted Hussar in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    Really? Because that's not the conversation I was having. My point is, of the four PC's at the table, two are bounded by bounded accuracy to either potentially succeed or fail depending on DM fiat while the other two (i.e. magic using classed PC's) get to ignore the DM and declare success whenever they feel like it. And somehow that's not a problem. I'm not sure how it isn't a problem. Tradition maybe? But, that's the fundamental issue right there and it's wound in with the bounded accuracy rules. Why should a high level character be challenged by a low level skill check? The magic using characters aren't and never have been. Because handwave handwave... it's his game world the dm can set trivial difficulties for high level martial types to do awesome stuff or just let them do it by asking see see see. If he wants to and will magically balance the classes with the awesome advice in the DMG he needs no other tools but that and the reason it's not implemented except as vaguery is t...

Saturday, 10th November, 2018

  • 11:19 AM - Garthanos quoted Hussar in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    Only if you squint REALLY hard. How many casters in JRRT can blow a spell every six seconds all day long? While the PHB does have a nice selection of Martial Powers classes, you have to chuck out about 80% of the game in order to do any genre very well. The fact that Gandalf - the archetypical fantasy wizard - isn't even a wizard in your example speaks volumes. Well the primary wizard feature i want for Gandalf is the cantrips ;) and 4e just cordoned that off too much (should be accessible with a feat like the psionic ones), He was divine magic based in the stories though... so Invoker is a better fit and Inorder to make him a sword swinger I went with hybrid Avenger (another divine archetype), in Early D*D that mount of his called for Paladin multi. He actually killed goblins in flashes of light that sound like lightning in the Hobbit before the one ring was discovered to be awakening (so I ended up building him as hybrid avenger and Invoker... he could choose to still do t...


Hussar's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites