View Profile: Maxperson - D&D, Pathfinder, and RPGs at Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • OB1's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:53 PM
    Not sure the bounce back is necessary, but I love this concept of negative hit points. Perhaps though, add death saves to the equation? You make a Death Save at the end of your turn, doubling your negative total on a failure. If you are prone and did not move or take action in your turn, you make this check at advantage. If you take damage while at negative HP, you reduce your Hp the...
    118 replies | 3412 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:26 PM
    Blink Dog 26-2=24 dogs are too loyal to be fey Boggle 15 Dryad 26 Green Hag 10 Korred 22 Meenlock 18 Pixie 22 Satyr 21+1=22 Sprite 22
    234 replies | 3919 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:51 PM
    That's not true. In D&D a rock is just a rock, but an earth elemental is magical. A tree is just a tree, but a treant is magical. A person is just a normal mundane person, but a wizard uses magic. And so on. There's lots of magic in the D&D world, but the world itself is not magical as a whole. This holds true even with the other planes. If your PC went to Hell and encountered a river of...
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:39 PM
    They aren't opposite, really. Just very different. If you wanted to, you could combine them into a style that is different than either one. For instance, you could create a town, but have a rule where each player gets to create one building and 2 NPCs to give the town a different flavor from pure world building. Or you could allow the players to each, once per session, add or remove an...
    336 replies | 10595 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:34 PM
    Blink Dog 25 Boggle 15 Dryad 24 Green Hag 14 Korred 22 Meenlock 18 Pixie 24 Satyr 22 Sprite 22
    234 replies | 3919 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:30 AM
    I've seen games where you just have statuses, such as unhurt, lightly hurt, moderately hurt, severely hurt, unconscious, dead. You'd of course have different combat mechanics to determine how you reach those statuses.
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:27 AM
    CHaochou This is untrue. Having fun is the result of playing the game. It's not part of playing the game. There are no rules that say you have fun at X time, but not Y time.
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Wednesday, 18th July, 2018, 02:47 PM
    Bheur Hag 7 Blink Dog 24 Boggle 17 Dryad 24 Green Hag 17 Korred 21 Meenlock 18 Pixie 25 Satyr 24 Sprite 23
    234 replies | 3919 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Wednesday, 18th July, 2018, 01:51 PM
    Bheur Hag 9 Blink Dog 24 Boggle 19 Dryad 24 Green Hag 17 Korred 21 Meenlock 18 Pixie 24 Satyr 23 Sprite 23
    234 replies | 3919 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Wednesday, 18th July, 2018, 03:15 AM
    You're missing the step where the creature is seen first. The entire reason that the perception check works and the creature becomes unhidden is due to being seen with normal vision. You're argument is.... creature hides-->other creature makes perception check-->creature becomes inexplicably unhidden-->creature is seen. That's just nonsensical. You don't see the creature after it becomes...
    199 replies | 6758 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Tuesday, 17th July, 2018, 02:56 PM
    FrogReaver My house rule for this is that you no longer drop unconscious at 0 HP. Instead, players roll a death save when they reach 0 HP or take damage while at 0 HP, gaining a level of exhaustion on a failure (I also added a few exhaustion levels and fiddled with the order, and allow spending half your level in hit dice after a short or long rest to remove a level of exhaustion, but won't get...
    118 replies | 3412 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 17th July, 2018, 02:26 PM
    Threads wander and you brought it up as an example of a skill challenge. That makes it fair game for discussion here, but okay... I'm not going to bother looking up the thread to necro it.
    336 replies | 10595 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Tuesday, 17th July, 2018, 02:20 PM
    Bheur Hag 17 Blink Dog 23 Boggle 19 Dryad 26 Green Hag 19-2=17 Korred 21 Meenlock 17 Pixie 27 Satyr 26+1=27 Sprite 22
    234 replies | 3919 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 17th July, 2018, 01:49 PM
    So your example of a party working together in a skill challenge is a party working at odds with itself? You have two players trying to calm the bear and one trying to intimidate the bear, which regardless of success, isn't calming. The sorcerer is negating the efforts of the first two PCs.
    336 replies | 10595 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 17th July, 2018, 01:39 PM
    Bheur Hag 17 Blink Dog 23 Boggle 19 Dryad 26 Green Hag 19 Korred 21 Meenlock 17 Pixie 27 Satyr 26 Sprite 22
    234 replies | 3919 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 17th July, 2018, 01:38 PM
    Correct. In the game that success translates into the PC seeing a hider with normal vision. In the real world, following the game mechanics as described in the PHB2, it goes more-or-less like this: Y's player rolls a Perception check, and X's player rolls (or has already rolled) a Stealth check. The roll for Y beats the roll for X, and so Y's player succeeds on the opposed check. Hence X is...
    199 replies | 6758 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 17th July, 2018, 01:33 PM
    @Lanefan has said straight out that his way is the only way to roleplay, and he's said it more than once. That's One True Wayism. You're either playing it his way if you want to roleplay, or you aren't roleplaying.
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 17th July, 2018, 01:28 PM
    In How I Met Your Mother, Ted often starts to narrate a bit. He's telling the stories to his kids. There are a few other shows and movies where the actors stop in the middle, turn to you and narrate a bit. It's not common, but it happens. Ted above does. He's himself in the show narrating what is happening in the stories he is telling. At all times he's still portraying the character...
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 17th July, 2018, 05:55 AM
    I have to side with everyone else on this one. Your way(which is also my way) is just one way to roleplay. It's the only style where I can immerse myself into the game, so I enjoy it much more than the other methods. So does a narrator. It's just a different role. Heck, I've seen actors play roles where the character talks in third person. Are they not acting or playing a role?
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 17th July, 2018, 02:44 AM
    Horse pucky! From perception: "Opposed Check: Perception vs. Stealth when trying to spot or hear a creature using Stealth. Your check might be modified by distance or if youíre listening through a door or a wall (see the table)." From skill training: "Training in a skill means that you have some combination of formal instruction, practical experience, and natural aptitude using that...
    199 replies | 6758 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 17th July, 2018, 02:35 AM
    That's not precisely true. A linear adventure is one where you have to go from say A to Z. There's nothing that says that B can't also have a B1, B2, and B3, where the door to B3 is locked and where B3 has no exit. The players can get "stuck" at that door, and still go back to B and progress to C. Perhaps C has a C1, C2, C3, and C4 where C4 comes re-enters the line at E, allowing the group to...
    336 replies | 10595 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 17th July, 2018, 02:08 AM
    X can be seen by Y's normal vision. It just takes a perception roll, and if that fails, then try again until you find Y. You're still confusing "is not seen," which results from a failed roll, with "can't be seen," which means that it's not possible to ever see. Yes, it means that X is no longer hidden BECAUSE X WAS SEEN BY NORMAL VISION. The seeing happens first. Also, I note you left...
    199 replies | 6758 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Monday, 16th July, 2018, 07:51 PM
    Bheur Hag 19 Blink Dog 25 Boggle 19 Dryad 28 Green Hag 19 Korred 21 Meenlock 16 Pixie 25 Satyr 27 +1=28 Sea Hag 4-2=2
    234 replies | 3919 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 16th July, 2018, 02:03 PM
    Being stuck at a door has nothing inherently to do with railroading. You might as well say parrots are a feature of railroad play, since DMs can railroad you with a parrot.
    336 replies | 10595 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 16th July, 2018, 01:27 PM
    Bheur Hag 22 Blink Dog 23 Boggle 19 Dryad 27 Green Hag 19 Korred 21 Meenlock 17 Pixie 25 Satyr 29 Sea Hag 8
    234 replies | 3919 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 16th July, 2018, 06:39 AM
    The name is fine. The mechanic is flawed. Change it to a percentage of max hit points, minimum of 1, or something similar.
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 16th July, 2018, 05:29 AM
    It's a bad name for the spell.
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 16th July, 2018, 03:59 AM
    It's not my thing and I didn't enjoy 4e, but I'm all for everyone playing the type of game that they enjoy, and 4e had its place.
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 16th July, 2018, 03:49 AM
    I agree. Years ago on the D&D forum a DM was asking about railroading, because his players wanted to play in a "Quantum Leap" campaign where they just hopped from one place to another and couldn't leave until they fixed the problem that brought them there. That's a fine way to do a railroading scenario. If the players are on board, have at it. By and large, though, it's a DM with an issue...
    336 replies | 10595 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 16th July, 2018, 03:23 AM
    Name is concept, though. If a game calls a long distance run over several miles a sprint, rather than a marathon, either the name or concept is wrong. The name sprint evokes one concept, a short, fast race, and the name marathon evokes a completely different concept. The name has to match the concept or the game has failed in that instance.
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 16th July, 2018, 03:19 AM
    I believe that railroading is an exceedingly unsatisfactory experience in any edition of pretty much any RPG. I only say "pretty much any RPG," because I suppose there might be one out there I don't know enough where you're supposed to railroad and it's fun. :p
    336 replies | 10595 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 16th July, 2018, 02:27 AM
    This is giving the DM who isn't going to railroad more tools to play the game. A DM who is going to railroad in one system, is probably going to railroad in all of them. Who he is isn't going to change just because more tools are given to him.
    336 replies | 10595 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 16th July, 2018, 01:34 AM
    That's not a second wind, though. Read the link above. There are different methods you use when being physical. Focusing willpower to go beyond your normal stamina limit is not the same as a second wind kicking in.
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 15th July, 2018, 10:48 PM
    Yes, I was a bit focused on normal vision. Other vision types do work with perception. No it isn't. That's absolutely the important part. The wording of invisible is "You canít be seen by normal forms of vision." Not isn't seen. Not won't be seen. Not will not be seen. But can't be seen. As in, it's not possible to see an invisible person with normal vision. That means that...
    199 replies | 6758 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 15th July, 2018, 06:23 PM
    Depends. Sometimes rages are triggered by something happening to you. Sometimes, though, you can psych yourself into a rage. It generally takes longer than 6 seconds, though. :p
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 15th July, 2018, 06:21 PM
    Dogs and cats began living together.
    336 replies | 10595 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 15th July, 2018, 06:17 PM
    And it also appears that they don't do it on purpose. It just happens. ;)
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 15th July, 2018, 06:12 PM
    Those runners aren't engaging second wind when they do that. They have paced themselves and have not exhausted themselves to the point where second wind kicks in. That pacing leaves them a reserve to call on when they need it. They aren't getting renewed energy(the definition of second wind), they are engaging energy that is still there from their pacing. If second wind is like an athlete...
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Sunday, 15th July, 2018, 03:20 PM
    Bheur Hag 23 Blink Dog 23 Boggle 19 Dryad 26 Green Hag 21 Korred 22 Meenlock 21 Pixie 28 Satyr 26 Sea Hag 9
    234 replies | 3919 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 15th July, 2018, 03:10 PM
    Strawman. I didn't say you couldn't control when you go, only that you can't control when you have to go. The urge strikes when the urge strikes and you can only hold it or go.
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 15th July, 2018, 03:07 PM
    Okay. I'm done. You've dodged my argument sufficiently to show people that you know I am correct here. Peace!
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 15th July, 2018, 03:05 PM
    Bheur Hag 23 Blink Dog 23 Boggle 19 Dryad 26 Green Hag 21 - Too much haggis in this voting block! Bleh! Korred 22 Meenlock 21 Pixie 28 Satyr 25 Sea Hag 11
    234 replies | 3919 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 15th July, 2018, 02:56 PM
    Yes they do, and invisibility requires that you be unable to be seen by normal vision, which hiding doesn't provide. When you hide you can be seen with normal vision by walking around the object the rogue is hiding behind or making a perception check. An invisible person cannot be seen by precise, clear 4e definition via normal vision. Therefore, hiding cannot be invisibility as 4e defines it....
    199 replies | 6758 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 15th July, 2018, 02:46 PM
    That's a false in two ways which I have shown. First, a perception check doesn't use x-ray vision, super telescopic vision, or any other type of vision other than normal, so using it sees the hider with normal vision. Second is this gem, which doesn't even require a perception check. "Keep Out of Sight: If you no longer have any cover or concealment against an enemy, you donít remain hidden...
    199 replies | 6758 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 15th July, 2018, 06:34 AM
    He's using that argument in a vain attempt to refute the fact that you can see a hidden person with normal vision. The only way it refutes my argument is if the order of events is hidden-->unhidden-->perception check(normal vision). If he is acknowledging that the order is hidden-->perception check(normal vision)-->unhidden, then he is admitting that the person is not invisible, since to be...
    199 replies | 6758 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 15th July, 2018, 05:42 AM
    For the same reason a PC can't control when he has to go to the bathroom. Some things are not controllable. A second wind comes to a person unbidden. It just happens without the person causing it to be. That's different than psyching yourself into being upset, or training yourself to slow down your heart rate.
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 15th July, 2018, 05:40 AM
    If that's your response to me, then you clearly did not understand what I was saying. What I said takes that all into consideration.
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 15th July, 2018, 05:39 AM
    The definition that I've seen used pretty reliably is not a player deciding something for his character that the character could not know about because it is not an in world concept. The definition is when a player decides something for his character that the character does not know. For example, a PC who has never heard of vampires preparing a stake to stab it in the heart, trying push it into...
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 15th July, 2018, 05:35 AM
    That is one of the most preposterous arguments I've seen on this forum. The idea that the hider has to become unhidden before he is seen by a perception check is just absurd. That's not the order of events. The order of events is hidden-->seen by normal vision-->unhidden.
    199 replies | 6758 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 15th July, 2018, 02:48 AM
    The rules didn't say anything about them. They only listed them after levels, and mentioned them a few times with regard to the "name levels." Nothing was said that I ever saw about how to use them. False Equivalence. You know very well I'm talking about people who are not only not as good, but are significantly worse. How many sons of owners got positions as CEO or some other chief...
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 15th July, 2018, 02:45 AM
    Huh! See, I totally got that wrong. I didn't realize you were talking about total score and thought it was in reference to the individual stat rolls. You'd have to be careful with those advantages, though. I could see the potential for players to be shouting, "C'mon 8! Gimme an 8!", rather than 18 like I usually hear. :D
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 15th July, 2018, 02:43 AM
    But what makes that more likely than there being 3 levels? Low level, which begins with level 1 spells, hits level 2 spells midway, and ends with level 3 spells. Mid level, which is levels 4-6, and high level, which would be 7-9. Or some other method of tracking than 1 new level every time you get more spells? That's my point. Level as listed in the PHB is for the players only. ...
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Sunday, 15th July, 2018, 01:32 AM
    Bheur Hag 23 Blink Dog 22 Boggle 21 Dryad 26 Green Hag 23 Korred 21 Meenlock 21 Pixie 29 Satyr 26 Sea Hag 13
    234 replies | 3919 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Saturday, 14th July, 2018, 10:22 PM
    This sounds interesting, but I don't understand it completely. What are the advantages? How would you rate them?(i.e. if the max is 17, what does an 11 score get vs. a 15)
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Saturday, 14th July, 2018, 03:33 PM
    Bheur Hag 25 Blink Dog 22 Boggle 21 Dryad 25 Green Hag 22 Korred 21 Meenlock 21 Pixie 29 Satyr 23 Sea Hag 13
    234 replies | 3919 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Saturday, 14th July, 2018, 03:29 PM
    The problem is, no level is required for that. At all. For all the wizard knows, spellcasting is based on a skill percentage. His spellcasting skill starts at 1%, and at 5% he gains the ability to cast a second first level spell. When he gets to 10%, he gets strong enough to cast a second level spell. At 15% he gets strong enough to cast a second second level spell. When he hits 20% he can...
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Saturday, 14th July, 2018, 03:22 PM
    Yes, the fighter would feel himself get the second wind. The fighter would not have control over when that happens. I don't think that means what you think it means. You start saying this, then describe a gradual increase below There are no in game class levels to correlate it with. The gradual increase which you just described, and I described to you in my post, could just as...
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Saturday, 14th July, 2018, 03:13 PM
    You didn't. Not really. Those titles were for the player to have fun with. That's why, if you read the DMG, 9th level fighters are not really lords. They have no noble status unless born with it, in which case they were a lord from level 1, regardless of "class title." People didn't play the game and have their character walk up and say, "Hey, I'm Poopy Thunderpants the Superhero. Pleased...
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Saturday, 14th July, 2018, 02:55 PM
    Or by normal vision by simply walking around the box you are hiding behind. "Keep Out of Sight: If you no longer have any cover or concealment against an enemy, you donít remain hidden from that enemy." Or by normal vision with with a simple perception check on the part of the person you hid from. "An enemy can try to find you on its turn. If an enemy makes an active Perception check and...
    199 replies | 6758 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Saturday, 14th July, 2018, 07:27 AM
    My players don't metagame, so it's not bothersome to me at all. I'm just pointing out how it COULD be used to metagame, not how it is used in my game. In my games, monsters are exceedingly rare. If they were not, the PC races would have been wiped off the map thousands of years ago. Monsters just seem more plentiful to PCs, because their job takes them to places where such things can be...
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Saturday, 14th July, 2018, 06:46 AM
    I've proven through the definitions, context and more that I am right on this. Stealth, with no other special ability acting on it, does not make you invisible. It ONLY makes you unseen and/or unheard. I love how you are now claiming the discussion is about being unseen, when you were clearly arguing that it makes one invisible. Invisibility is defined in the 4e book and stealth does not fit...
    199 replies | 6758 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Saturday, 14th July, 2018, 06:43 AM
    You're reading too much into this. I pulled that example out of my ass to show that some DMs do have predictable behaviors. It could have been dragons in the mountains, kraken on sea voyages, or any other such behavior. Myself, I tend to use more undead than is probably healthy. There are just so many good ones out there and tombs and such would have them roaming about. I'm trying to use...
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Saturday, 14th July, 2018, 06:40 AM
    It absolutely is different. On one hand you have a magic system explained in the game world that allows the wizard to know about his spells. On the other hand you don't have that for the fighter. He has the power, but no such in game explanation for how his character could or would possibly know about it. This is objectively false. You start with 2 first level spells, then gradually...
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Saturday, 14th July, 2018, 04:46 AM
    You are the one that doesn't seem to want to hear. These are the facts about 3e with regard to caster vs. non-caster, at least with regards to this discussion. 1. there is a significant power disparity between the two in favor of casters. 2. casters are more effective than non-casters. That's it. Them's the facts. There is no objective point at which non-casters become ineffective. That...
    336 replies | 10595 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Saturday, 14th July, 2018, 04:40 AM
    I get all of that. My point is that to the wizard, fireball might happen at level 2, 6, 12 or 18 for all he knows. All he is aware of are those changes as he gradually grows stronger. In fact, to the wizard there probably are no levels at all. He just gradually gets stronger and more knowledgeable. Think of yourself in your career. If you have been in it for any length of time, you are very...
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Saturday, 14th July, 2018, 12:58 AM
    You act as if they've gone out and scientifically researched how many goblins it takes to "level up." It's not like they tested 15 goblins with a wizard solo, then added wizard and one companion, all the way up to a party of five. A wizard isn't going to have any idea how many more of anything it will take to gain a level. They will be aware when their power increases, though.
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 13th July, 2018, 11:11 PM
    Fair enough. I guess I misunderstood you. It sounded to me like you were saying that it was going to be to 4e, what Pathfinder was to 3e. I hope you enjoy it. For my group, we're starting to really dig 5e. It took us this long to begin playing it. :P
    336 replies | 10595 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 13th July, 2018, 11:05 PM
    It corresponds to an in-game reality, but the PC can't know that it has 18000xp, or that he's level 3 vs. level 5. Those numbers are representative of metagame ideas. The PC has them and uses them, but doesn't really have a basis for knowing them. He can just know that he's capable of doing more now and has learned a bunch of stuff since he started.
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 13th July, 2018, 11:04 PM
    No, this really isn't something that the character can know. It's nonsensical that you can only ever have one, and as an in-game thing, it defies reason. It's purely a metagame ability that the player uses that the PC doesn't know about. People can't decide, "Hey, I'm now going to get my second wind!!" This is true. There is a reasonable in-game explanation for why this happens, so...
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 13th July, 2018, 09:42 PM
    People from 3e went to 4e, but the mass exodus to Pathfinder was because Pathfinder was actually 3e 2.0. Pathfinder 2 is not 4e 2.0, even if there are some similarities. Note, I never said nobody from 4e would make the switch. I was saying that you aren't going to see the mass exodus to Pathfinder 2, because it just isn't 4e 2.0. You considering(you haven't even committed yet ;) ) the switch...
    336 replies | 10595 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 13th July, 2018, 09:37 PM
    It's a habit of his. He likes to redefine terms or use them in oddball ways, and then to try and prove that people using the terms as they are normally used are incorrect.
    199 replies | 6758 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 13th July, 2018, 09:32 PM
    As are experience points and levels. A few things you kinda just have to accept. I don't agree about vancian casting itself, though. It's entirely in character.
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 13th July, 2018, 09:29 PM
    If you know that the DM very often does use invisible creatures in the mountains, it's a very good bet to make. Your only loss if you are wrong is a see/detect invisible spell memorized that might have been something else. If on the other hand the high odds of encountering an invisible creature occurs, you are FAR better off with the spell than without. No. Metagaming is never inevitable....
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 13th July, 2018, 09:21 PM
    Character knowledge isn't a justification. It's quite literally the entirety of whether something is metagaming or not. If the character knows about something, the character making a decision based on the knowledge cannot be metagaming. I disagree. The entirely of the system exists with reasonable game world explanations of why it happens that way. Those explanations take away any...
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    1 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Friday, 13th July, 2018, 06:32 PM
    Bheur Hag 24 Blink Dog 22 Boggle 23 Dryad 27 Eladrin (Summer) 4-2=2 Green Hag 23 Korred 20 Meenlock 20 Pixie 27 Satyr 23+1=24
    234 replies | 3919 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 13th July, 2018, 01:59 PM
    An Igor hound. "Yeth, marthter! The brain ith coming."
    234 replies | 3919 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 13th July, 2018, 01:51 PM
    Right. It would be metagaming if the player in my example above had said, "The DM likes to hit us with invisible creatures in the mountains. I'm also going to memorize see invisibility." Vancian casting itself is not metagaming, but how you use it can be." Been there! More times than I can count.
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 13th July, 2018, 01:47 PM
    How is it metagame for the PC wizard to say to his companions, "We are about to set foot into the Mountains of Unfriendly Giants. I'm going to memorize rock to mud in case we need to clear out some stone, reduce in case I need to shrink a giant to manageable size, and flight in case we need to cross a chasm?" The player making the decision on what to memorize as the PC and based on what the PC...
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 13th July, 2018, 01:40 PM
    Absolutely. The DM cannot cheat, but if he abuses his power he will soon find himself without players.
    336 replies | 10595 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 13th July, 2018, 01:38 PM
    That's unlikely. 3e fans turned to Pathfinder, because it was essentially 3e. Pathfinder 2 is being billed as similar, even compatible with Pathfinder, which means that it is not essentially 4e, so it's not really something that 4e fans would turn to. More likely they will just go to a new system altogether or continue playing 4e.
    336 replies | 10595 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 13th July, 2018, 01:32 PM
    Bheur Hag 24 Blink Dog 22 Boggle 23 Dryad 27 Eladrin (Summer) 4 Eladrin (Winter) 0 - Lord Stark! Winter is going! Green Hag 23 Korred 20 Meenlock 20 Pixie 27
    234 replies | 3919 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 13th July, 2018, 01:31 PM
    Delete
    234 replies | 3919 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 13th July, 2018, 01:28 PM
    More evidence that I'm correct. Thanks! If someone was invisible from hiding, no such distraction is needed. Distraction would only be required if you could be seen by normal forms of vision, which means that it cannot be invisibility as defined by 4e. He's not invisible. He's unseen. There's a difference. Unseen does not equal invisible in 4e. I provided the definition, and...
    199 replies | 6758 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 13th July, 2018, 07:31 AM
    That's why I allow the players if they want to choose two stats to roll at 5d6 drop 2, two stats at 4d6 drop 1, and two stats at 3d6. They have to choose which rolls go into which stats before they start rolling. The 3d6 are the "dump" stats, but I've seen rolls there that are higher than the 5d6 rolls. Now, I also allow the swapping of one pair of stats, because I want them to be able to play...
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 13th July, 2018, 07:23 AM
    Sure, I guess if you want to completely ignore context it makes you "invisible." For those of use who understand the rest of the stealth rules in the PHB which clearly show that you are not invisible, but merely out of sight, we understand that it's not the same as the spell. From the stealth rules. "Becoming Hidden: You can make a Stealth check against an enemy only if you have superior...
    199 replies | 6758 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Thursday, 12th July, 2018, 07:19 PM
    Bheur Hag 23 Blink Dog 22 Boggle 23 Dryad 29 Eladrin (Spring) 2 Eladrin (Summer) 7 Eladrin (Winter) 6-2=4 Green Hag 23 Korred 18 Meenlock 20
    234 replies | 3919 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 12th July, 2018, 02:17 PM
    Bheur Hag 24 Blink Dog 22 Boggle 22 Dryad 29 Eladrin (Spring) 4 Eladrin (Summer) 7 Eladrin (Winter) 6 Green Hag 21 Korred 22 Meenlock 20
    234 replies | 3919 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 12th July, 2018, 01:52 PM
    You're deliberately missing the point I think. An invisibility spell is intended to make you invisible. Stealth is not. Unlike the invisibility spell, to become invisible requires something beyond "make a stealth check." It requires an additional high level rogue ability for example. If the DM says, "make a stealth check" to a party consisting of a rogue, a paladin, a monk, a wizard and a...
    199 replies | 6758 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 12th July, 2018, 06:12 AM
    I've been toying with the idea of making it a percentage of your max hit points. Something like 20-100%(d6+d4x10%) of hit your points as a base, then adding 20% for every 10 feet beyond the first 10. A fall of 30 feet will give you 50-160% of your max hit points, with an average of 100%, making it likely that you will fall unconscious or die at that distance, unless you are playing 5e. It...
    482 replies | 10418 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 12th July, 2018, 05:16 AM
    You can say that, and you can disagree with me, but you can't change the facts. The fact is that I was never irrelevant, whether I played a caster or non-caster. Nobody in a game I ran was irrelevant, caster or non-caster. Sure the power imbalance doesn't itself render anyone relevant or irrelevant. Only way a person will be relevant or irrelevant is through his perceptions of that imbalance....
    336 replies | 10595 view(s)
    1 XP
More Activity
About Maxperson

Basic Information

Date of Birth
April 19, 1970 (48)
About Maxperson
Location:
Los Angeles, CA
Disable sharing sidebar?:
No
Sex:
Male

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
6,202
Posts Per Day
1.22
Last Post
A discussion of metagame concepts in game design Yesterday 01:51 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
0
General Information
Last Activity
Yesterday 02:22 PM
Join Date
Friday, 3rd September, 2004
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0

1 Friend

  1. OB1 OB1 is offline

    Member

    OB1
Showing Friends 1 to 1 of 1
Page 1 of 9 123456789 LastLast

Thursday, 19th July, 2018


Wednesday, 18th July, 2018


Tuesday, 17th July, 2018


Monday, 16th July, 2018



Page 1 of 9 123456789 LastLast
Page 1 of 17 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Tuesday, 17th July, 2018

  • 02:25 PM - Aldarc mentioned Maxperson in post A discussion of metagame concepts in game design
    ...if I did because that was my preferred playstyle what would be wrong with that? You see setting up a game with a set of preconditions is not wrong.Probably the adjective "draconian." I got perhaps two people offering genuine advice. The rest are just bent out of shape that I dare play in a way that doesn't suit their model of good right fun.It's more complicated than that. At the outset, you asserted that certain mechanics of the fighter were metagame mechanics. Those were controversial claims. People naturally disputed that they were as they do rationalize these mechanics from in-character perspectives. It does not constitute metagame for them even from your provided definition. But you also phrased a lot of these claims a questions that people naturally used as opportunities to push back on these mechanics as metagame. And a lot of the subsequent discussion spurred from that disagreement pertained to what constitutes metagame mechanics and when they are acceptable or, as per Maxperson's wording, "necessary evils." Yes and no one has said that on this thread. No one is trying to force everyone else in every other group to play their way. They are talking about what they prefer in THEIR games only. That is not onetruewayism. Not sure how anyone could possibly enforce such an idea anyway.I'm sorry, but when someone says that only one particular playstyle constitutes roleplay while excluding others, that constitutes onetruewayism in these forums regardless of their ability to enforce it at other tables. No. I have not badmouthed metagame mechanics. I have said that I don't want them in my game. I am not trying to extinguish them from the universe. In fact they are useful because players who really love them are likely a poor fit in other more nebulous areas of my game so it makes a nice way to identify players for my group.If you say so... So? That doesn't make you morally superior. If I was ruining everyone else at the tables fun I would want t...

Thursday, 21st June, 2018

  • 11:38 AM - Sadras mentioned Maxperson in post Everybody Cheats?
    But the 2nd definition specifically states avoid (something undesirable) by luck or skill. i.e. To all who witnessed the accident, many were of the opinion that James cheated death I don't see how it could be used in your example for someone to avoid eating a cheese sandwich, although I don't know why anyone would want to do that. EDIT: Perhaps the synonyms provided will be clear by what I mean by the other use of the word cheat. synonyms: avoid, escape, evade, elude, steer clear of, dodge, duck, miss, sidestep, bypass, skirt, shun, eschew "Tilly saw the waiter approaching, ready to make yet another insistent offer of a cheese sandwich. But once again she cheated culinary fate - a stray olive on the rug sent the waiter stumbling and the sandwiches tumbling." Yes correct. @Maxperson I see where the complication lies - the definitions I used for cheating refer to the use of the verb cheat. You were then using examples of avoidance (verb) to imply someone is a cheater (noun), which of course sounded ridiculous, it was never meant to be used that way. Apologies for the confusion.

Tuesday, 5th June, 2018

  • 06:13 PM - pming mentioned Maxperson in post Will you make transsexual Elves canon in your games ?
    ...ics or favourite hockey team is (ok, the latter can get folks into some pretty heated debates...but that's ok, it helps keep us warm in winter... ;) ). As for the second bold: I couldn't agree more. The only "problem" I see is when one side/person makes a big deal out of it so much, pushes their view/stance so hard, that others feel like they are being attacked or denigrated because they have different views. THAT, imnsho, is the bigger issue; intolerant people...on all sides. Intolerance is the enemy of acceptance, after all. I deal with it all by washing my hands of it and going hard-core I don't care. If someone plays a transexual elf in my game, I can deal with it...but they better not expect to be treated "special/blessed/with honour" or otherwise be given special consideration and special exemptions. Not going to happen. But this is all "real life" stuff trickling into the D&D game by designers who...well...I'm not sure why, exactly I guess it's a trend or something. Like Maxperson said, he/we use it as a: "...restful escape from reality that I use D&D for". This is a fantasy RPG. If a group wants to explore " ...a kind of a psycho-drama, you might say, where people deal with problems in their lives by acting them out", to quote one intrepid reporter named Bud Hayden down at Peekquad Caverns ( @0:45, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VgqZB8u3h4 ;) ), then go for it. What I vehemently oppose is official products trying to "force" me to use D&D to address real life issues. No thank you, Evil! It's a slippery slope WotC is treading...the majority of D&D players, I would guess, want to play D&D; they want to make a character that isn't them, take that PC into deadly areas they would never go, kill monsters that don't exist, and recover vast treasure they will never have. "...and have deep, meaningful conversations about real-world issues that affects their real lives" is probably waaaaaaaaaaay down on the list. ;) I just want to DM an orc that defends against t...

Wednesday, 23rd May, 2018

  • 04:59 PM - lowkey13 mentioned Maxperson in post Harassment Policies: New Allegations Show More Work To Be Done
    ... that's neither here nor there. You seem unfamiliar with history, which is unfortunate. That is not a "poor artist brief," that was Keith Parkinson. It's not one illustration- that's just synechdoche (I don't like using tons of pictures on enworld servers). It's a stand in for other artwork of the drow that has been problematic; "If it's not the racism, it's the sexism." And as for the Drow in general, whatever. You sometimes have to pay attention when you use certain old associations, like, "The White Elves are the Good Ones, and the Black Elves are the Baddies." To the extent this is informed by older fantasy tropes .... this is true, but a lot of older fantasy tropes also had certain racist roots as well. This doesn't mean playing a Drow is racist, or need to be excised by the game ... but, as shown by that 1986 illustration, and other missteps, you have to at least recognize the issues. And, since you seem unaware of why I introduced the topic, it was in response to Maxperson who wrote, and I quote- "as well as the color of drow skin, have nothing to do with any real world racial or gender issues." I wish I could agree, but that's not true. I assumed that was an obvious example, and it would avoid the heated rhetoric that would occur if I started up with the cosplay/blackface issues.

Tuesday, 22nd May, 2018

  • 02:34 PM - Hussar mentioned Maxperson in post Harassment Policies: New Allegations Show More Work To Be Done
    Perhaps you can quote where I said that the history of gaming isn't mostly white. I can't find it anywhere. Maaaaaybe, that was part of the "demographic of gaming" that I mentioned. I'm not convinced that it's mostly white due to racism, but it is and has been mostly white, though that's slowly changing. Seriously? Not due to racism? Ok, let's list the ways shall we? We have the grandfather's of the genre, all those kind folks who Gygax listed in the Appendix of the DMG as the sources of inspiration for the game, who, number among them, some of the most virulent bigots in print. And that's just the start. Let's not forget, what, about thirty years of art and art direction that was pretty much 100% white. Granted, that's been shifting in the last decade or so, but, there was about forty years before that where the art was certainly not inclusive. I could go on, but, what's the point? Like I said, it's a pretty known issue. But, Maxperson, my point wasn't really directed at you, but, at Correia. That was the source of the "gimme a break".

Monday, 21st May, 2018

  • 11:26 PM - robus mentioned Maxperson in post Magic Missile vs. Mirror Image
    Magic missile obviously has some kind of homing mechanism that directs it to a living creature. So just sending it toward the general area of a creature will do the trick. I agree with Maxperson that there are distinct duplicates that can confuse an attacker relying on sight. This is not a case of a shimmery armor, but actual deception (even though the duplicates occupy the same grid space but as that is a five foot square thereís plenty of room :) )

Saturday, 19th May, 2018


Thursday, 17th May, 2018

  • 03:58 PM - Imaro mentioned Maxperson in post What is *worldbuilding* for?
    I do mostly agree with your summation. My point of contention is how the Troubles/Compels are being characterized as hurdles for play. Troubles are self-selected to engender the play experiences the player wants for their character. So it seems unintuitive for how Fate works to say that Troubles are preventing a player from playing their character as they envision them. Why should a player be frustrated by Troubles they selected themselves? Well as @Maxperson and @Hawkeye stated in earlier posts I was moreso talking at a high system level. The thing is there are games where there are no mechanics to dictate or push your character's behavior and there are games (most being , at least IMHE, narrativist games that want to deliver "story") where your character's personality/behavior is pushed or even forced in certain directions. For people who don't want the mechanics enforcing or pushing for particular behaviors on their characters...these games don't allow them to play the way they want to at a system level. Now to address troubles and compels specifically in FATE and why I feel that even when self selected they can be a hurdle... First let's look at FATE points... Fate Points You use tokens to represent how many fate points you have at any given time during play. Fate points are one of your most important resources in Fateótheyíre a measure of how much influence you have to make the story go in your characterís favor. You can spend f...
  • 02:27 PM - Aldarc mentioned Maxperson in post What is *worldbuilding* for?
    I took the original comment to be more about the system/mechanic in general. Not about specific compels but just about them in general.Thank you and Maxperson for your own readings. That helps. I think there is something to offer for both approaches; one that tries to deliver an experience that feels like the fiction it draws upon, and another that sheds some tropes to allow gamers to play however they want.Though I understand your intent, at least presumably, I do take some issue with the bold, namely that it somewhat contradicts the rest of your statements. System and mechanics will inherently place limitations on how a player can play such that the idea that one system permits players to play their character "however they want" while the other doesn't seems iffy. But nice tie-ins with overarching topic.

Sunday, 13th May, 2018

  • 03:11 AM - pemerton mentioned Maxperson in post Why Worldbuilding is Bad
    ...Y-ing that - even if not usual - doesn't need X, wouldn't you at first assume that the someone is talking about that way of Y-ing? And then maybe try to extrapolate from that instance that you're famiiar with to see what else they have in mind? Rather than just assume they're talking about the mode of Y-ing that does require X, and are idiots? are the adventures run each week supposed to be connected in any way (e.g. the same PCs, and-or a continuing storyline) or are they completely independent of each other. If the latter then you're talking about each week just being a one-shot. If the former, then sooner or later someone - be it the DM or one or more players - is going to start considering how these various adventures might be connected plot-wise or in-game-world history-wise or geographically. <snip> A campaign where play stops at the end of one dungeon and starts at the entrance to the next with nothing in between is, I posit, severely lacking.I'm interested in Maxperson's take on this - how is "severely lacking" different from "bad"?

Saturday, 12th May, 2018

  • 11:39 AM - pemerton mentioned Maxperson in post Why Worldbuilding is Bad
    I think what he's saying is that the lore tying Hobgoblins and Elves together forces one of two things to happen if you decide to use Hobgoblins in your game. Either: 1. You by default will also have Elves in your game world, as the lore states there is a known relationship between Hobs and Elves and thus the existence of one drags the other in by default; or 2. You have to specifically change the lore under "Hobgoblin" to remove the reference to Elves (and at your option put another species in their stead, or not).What does "you by default will also have elves in your game world" mean? Who is writing them in? Is the spirit of D&D descending on the land and making unbidden entries in my note book? And riddle me this: in my OA game I used hobgoblins and never used elves. And I don't think the players were shocked by this. Where did I specificially change the lore? At what point in time? You and Maxperson are advocating a type of Platonism that can make sene in mathematics (if I say there are 4 hobgoblins, then it's true that the number of hobgoblins equals 2 squared, even if I never thought of that) as if it also applies in fiction. It's ridiculous, and creates nonsense ideas like someone specifically doing something that they never even turned their mind to.

Friday, 11th May, 2018

  • 10:33 PM - Hussar mentioned Maxperson in post Why Worldbuilding is Bad
    ...then later as the campaign goes on they can be expanded upon until soon enough you've the genesis of a game world. Me, I just prefer to move that work from within the campaign to before it starts. That way I can think through the in-play implications of what I've designed* and tweak it to suit. * - a process I manage to mess up at every opportunity, but hey - live and learn... :) Lanefan But, in my mind, none of that is world building. That's just basic adventure design because all of that material is going to be used in the adventure. Totally agree that this is necessary and a good use of DM prep time. Note what you leave out though. No mention of the history of the area. What happened here ten years ago? Fifty? A hundred? Who, other than world builders, cares? It's not needed for the adventure, it's not important, so, skip it. IOW, you didn't need to do any world building to run your In Search of the Unknown adventure. None. ((Well, unless you go with Maxperson's rather broader definition that everything you do is world building)) It's all necessary stuff that you should do as a DM. Who runs the town? Who lives in the town? Again, who cares? It's not important. Add as needed. It's a town. In the town you can find anything you would normally expect to find in a town. End of story.
  • 06:26 AM - Hussar mentioned Maxperson in post Why Worldbuilding is Bad
    This isn't a political negotiation. It is a discussion about world building. People are not going to concede basic facts about what they believe world building means, especially with some of the definitions being proposed. No one is digging in their heels. They just know what they like, what works, and what they consider world building to be when they prep their games. No amount of linguistic wrestling is going to change that sort of thing. And yet, I'm expected in this thread to ignore the accepted definition of world building and use the one presented by Maxperson which is far, far broader than what is typically defined as world building.

Thursday, 10th May, 2018

  • 12:44 AM - Hussar mentioned Maxperson in post Why Worldbuilding is Bad
    /snip Dune /snip It's interesting that you mention Dune. Because if you read the original novel - heck even the original Frank Herbert (not his son's stuff), there is surprisingly little world building. Virtually none. It's a very strongly plot based story that's heavy on character. For example, what does a Guildsman look like? I know you're probably thinking of the movies here when you envision it, but, in the novels, they are never actually really described. We know nothing about where they come from or how they got that way other than "Spice did it". A major element of the story is completely absent of any world building. Maxperson - please, can you answer the question? What part of an RPG is excluded from your definition of world building. ---- And, as far as bringing up Phantom, there's nothing stopping a campaign being one adventure long, for one. In which case, you certainly don't need world building. But, for another, there's nothing stopping you from running an episodic campaign where each adventure is self contained. Hell, that's the way I grew up playing D&D. Go from Keep on the Borderlands to the Isle of Dread to Against the Giants. Or Cult of the Reptile God to the Slave Lords series to a couple of home brew adventures to Tomb of Horrors for a campaign capper. The notion that world building is required for play is pretty easily disproven.

Tuesday, 8th May, 2018

  • 12:52 PM - Sadras mentioned Maxperson in post Why Worldbuilding is Bad
    @Maxperson although I understand your definition of worldbuilding and have no issue with it really, I seem to believe the general practice is that when one adds something to the fiction/game if it is predominantly in favour of adventure design or something else then one generally would classify it as that and not worldbuilding. i.e. Character creation is character creation even though those characters will live and breathe in the world. i.e. The prince is secretly planning to overthrow the king is Plot even though said prince's actions affect the world. i.e. The rocky trail to the dragon's lair is littered with the bones of its victims, mostly stolen cattle but the remains of humanoids and failed adventurers are all too common. However hidden among the bones and carcasses one may find small trinkets and baubles which were overlooked by the dragon. Investigation DC 10 will uncover 2d6 gold coins worth of treasure with every 5 above the DC 10 uncovering an additional 1d6 worth. Although this is d...
  • 11:11 AM - Hussar mentioned Maxperson in post Why Worldbuilding is Bad
    Adventure building is just a subsection of worldbuilding, though. The adventure(dungeon, inhabitants, story, etc.) is built into the world. See, that's the thing though. It doesn't need to be. Back in the day, you had the town and you had the dungeon. That was it. There was no real attempt to create a functional world (which is the goal of world building) and it wasn't even remotely expected that you would. IOW, you certainly don't need a world to run a campaign. Particularly if you run episodic campaigns. It's just completely unnecessary. edit to add: And, this is why I have such a problem with your definition Maxperson. You're including STORY in world building? Seriously? That's plot. That's not world building AT ALL. Basically, you're trying to say that every single thing committed to paper is world building. Heck, you've even included character here as well with "inhabitants". That's far, far too broad of a definition of world building.

Monday, 7th May, 2018

  • 12:52 AM - pemerton mentioned Maxperson in post What is *worldbuilding* for?
    ...ination.But I think we can talk meaningfully about processes of establishing constructs of the imagination. We can - and people often do - talk eg about how a film was scripted, filmed, etc. Its the construct itself which is held to have value. If you want to make it concrete, then we can talk about mental activity, which obviously has a concrete physical basis, but I'm not entirely sure where that analysis can goI think talking about mental activity is not that productive in the sort of conversation we can have on these boards! That's why I tried to focus on talking, which is the shared, social manifestation of that mental activity. There's very little similarity between 'playing in a world' and 'reading a novel'. Playing in a world means depicting the actions of a character or characters, as constrained by the parameters of this artificial constructed world. The parameters are EMBODIED IN the Game Master, literally.The "embodied in the GM" claim is obviously controversial eg Maxperson described it as worse than a "red flag" (a "red neon sign" I think was the phrase used). But again the notion of "embodiment" heads towards imponderables. That's why I've tended to focus on narrating or telling. These, again, are shared, social events. As you present it, but with my translations into terms of talking, it seems to look like this: a player says "I do X", where "I" denotes the PC; the GM narrates results/consequences, having regard to the parameters of the world. I think there are three main types of X in RPGing. (1) I go to . . . .. The relevant parameters are the world map/key/encyclopedia-like description. The GM tells the player what his/her PC see/encounters. There is a difference between this and just reading the notes/description the GM is working from. What underpins the difference? I've conjectured that second-personality is part of that. (2) I look for/recall information about . . .. Knowledge and search checks are the paradigm here. This is more...

Sunday, 6th May, 2018

  • 11:42 PM - Hussar mentioned Maxperson in post Why Worldbuilding is Bad
    Thanks for that second link Maxperson. Will definitely check that out. The first one, not so much since I don't do modern. But this point, Another thing to consider is that when WotC or TSR writes 100 pieces of fluff for an area, even if I use 1, you use one, @Hussar uses 0, we are not all that will be using it. With millions of players, each and every piece of fluff that they write will see plenty of use, so it's not pointless to the company to include it. Means that 99% of everything WotC or TSR writes is not getting used at any given table. Isn't that a huge waste of time? For me, this is thre reason that I rarely buy WotC books. Other than core, all I've bought of 5e is Xanathar's, and even then, it was the electronic form for Fantasy Grounds - something I'm going to get considerable use out of. Like I said, books are meant to be used, not read. Well, game books that is (ahem).

Friday, 4th May, 2018

  • 04:15 PM - Hriston mentioned Maxperson in post What is *worldbuilding* for?
    The very genesis of the story is also QUALITATIVELY different, and this gets back to what Hriston said before, there's a qualitative dimension to this whole 'agency debate' thing. You cannot simply spit out numbers, or even relative measures, like Maxperson is doing. It simply doesn't work. He's also correct, IMHO, in his analysis of the very nature of 'agency' itself, which is that nobody who seriously has the sort of philosophical credentials to be serious about defining it is going to say that actual humans have '100% agency'. Many might say exactly the opposite! I think it was Aldarc who said that stuff, not me, but I'm generally in agreement. I think Maxperson's "100% agency" argument is silly and seems designed to stifle analysis by positing a sameness for all systems/games with regard to agency, which he seems to define as whatever that particular game lets the player do. I mean, sure, in a game of chess I have "100% agency" to move my knight according to the rules of chess. That really doesn't tell us anything of value about chess relative to Monopoly, for example.
  • 01:48 PM - Imaro mentioned Maxperson in post What is *worldbuilding* for?
    ...eing used here)? Because I can assure you from actual play that's not the case. I can only speak to my style of running a game but I have run traditional games that leaned heavily on worldbuilding and what they had wasn't plot but instead situations that the PC's were free to deal with, not deal with or do something else entirely. I don't think what can happen in DL1 is enough to describe either of our styles and thus why there's umbrage around the statement that a traditional game with worldbuilding is a "Choose your own adventure" game. It's like me claiming Story Now is just a "Let the dice make whatever up in the moment" game. It's a simplistic statement that's mildly insulting and fails to capture the nuances of the playstyle. The very genesis of the story is also QUALITATIVELY different, and this gets back to what Hriston said before, there's a qualitative dimension to this whole 'agency debate' thing. You cannot simply spit out numbers, or even relative measures, like Maxperson is doing. It simply doesn't work. He's also correct, IMHO, in his analysis of the very nature of 'agency' itself, which is that nobody who seriously has the sort of philosophical credentials to be serious about defining it is going to say that actual humans have '100% agency'. Many might say exactly the opposite! Yes and I (as well as a few other posters who have addressed this)am recognizing that qualitative component by addressing the fact that pemerton's limiters on player agency are different. However when one starts from a position of wanting to understand something (I assume that was the point of the OP in this thread) but then turns it into a comparison/competition where not only do they use negatively skewed language to describe the other playstyle but also define the parameters of the comparison and the nature of the "win" conditions well it's apt to irritate those who probabnly feel like the entire thread was a bait and switch that has been pulled on them in bad faith. ...


Page 1 of 17 1234567891011 ... LastLast
No results to display...

Thursday, 19th July, 2018

  • 08:34 PM - Zeromaru X quoted Maxperson in post The roots of 4e exposed?
    "I felt a great disturbance in the Thread, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror, 'Oh Heavens, not this debate again.'" Oh, not a debate at all. I' m just trying to understand this "Story Now" concept, at it's the first time I've read about it. They aren't opposite, really. Just very different. If you wanted to, you could combine them into a style that is different than either one. For instance, you could create a town, but have a rule where each player gets to create one building and 2 NPCs to give the town a different flavor from pure world building. Or you could allow the players to each, once per session, add or remove an encounter of their choice. The rest of the encounters would be yours. There are many ways to mix the two styles together to create a game that might be enjoyable to all of you. It all depends on what your preferences are. That would be an intersting idea. It would be like some sort of shared world-building.
  • 03:42 PM - Aldarc quoted Maxperson in post A discussion of metagame concepts in game design
    That's not true. In D&D a rock is just a rock, but an earth elemental is magical. A tree is just a tree, but a treant is magical. A person is just a normal mundane person, but a wizard uses magic. And so on. There's lots of magic in the D&D world, but the world itself is not magical as a whole. This holds true even with the other planes. If your PC went to Hell and encountered a river of lava, that lava would be mundane lava, not magical lava.Ah, but it is true. The world of D&D presumes that said world is inherently magical. Some things may have more magic than others, but that does not mean that everything is mundane and devoid of magic by our sensibilities. It is a world influenced by other planes of existence and you can use portals in the world to traverse them. The stars may have a bearing on the fate of mortals. The world may follow a magical destiny foretold from before. Magic is an inherent part of the physics of the world. For us it is metaphyics, but for D&D characters, it is p...
  • 02:12 PM - Aldarc quoted Maxperson in post Everybody Cheats?
    It's not a fallacy.Circular reasoning is a fallacy, though you probably intend to argue that your circular reasoning is not circular. Perhaps by cleverly insisting that it's not circular reasoning because it is in fact oval reasoning. I happen to know a game where the rules allow you to cheat(it's not an RPG). If I engage that rule and cheat, am I cheating?Unless I am mistaken, you answered your own question: you engaged in that rule and cheated ergo you cheated. That's how it would really go down.If that were the case, then we would not be at 30+ pages of listening to people bending over backwards to justify their cheating as GMs, would we? :erm: Um, no goal posts are shifted there.Um, yes they were because the GM is being evasive about their cheating and shifting the goal posts to that end. That's a False Equivalence. If they ignore cheating, that's different from a rules change.False Equivalence? You asked if you were authorized to cheat whether or not it would be cheati...
  • 10:38 AM - Aldarc quoted Maxperson in post Everybody Cheats?
    Just out of curiosity Hussar, if the rules say you can cheat, is it cheating to cheat?How do you not see this as a fallacy of circular reasoning? And this is the sort of circular reasoning that "the GM cannot cheat" relies upon to perpetuate itself. Players: "You're cheating!" GM: "I'm not cheating; I'm fudging." Player: "What's fudging?" GM: "It's when I lie and respond dishonestly about dice results and mechanics." Players: "How is that not cheating?" GM: "The rules permit me to cheat." Players: "So if you are permitted to cheat, then you can cheat?" GM: "Yes, but I am authorized to cheat." Players: "So you are cheating?!" GM: "No, because I can cheat." or even "No, because I cannot cheat." Players: /facepalm The GM just shifts the goal posts as convenient to excuse and justify their actions. If you are authorized to cheat and then engage in that act, then I would say that, yes, you are still cheating. Being authorized to do something so does ...

Wednesday, 18th July, 2018

  • 04:19 AM - Tony Vargas quoted Maxperson in post Would you allow this?
    You're missing the step where the creature is seen first. The entire reason that the perception check works and the creature becomes unhidden is due to being seen with normal vision No, Max, you are inserting that step where it does not exist. Maybe you're still stuck in 3.0, when Spot & Listen were separate skills, but in 4e & 5e any senses can all fall under perception - probably the 6th sense EGG alluded to, also - so a successful Per check means you've located the Hidden creature, at which point you'll be able to see him if he's not got invisibility or heavy obscurement or blocked LoS from something else. Them's the rules, and they're clearer than most in D&D history. . You're argument is.... creature hides-->other creature makes perception check-->creature becomes inexplicably unhidden-->creature is seen. Nothing inexplicable about it, we've explicted it to you repeatedly. It's perfectly clear. Try thinking about this: when you are magically invisible in 4e, everyone kno...

Tuesday, 17th July, 2018

  • 08:03 PM - Tony Vargas quoted Maxperson in post Would you allow this?
    Correct. In the game that success translates into the PC seeing a hider with normal vision. Incorrect, that success means the stealthy character /is no longer Hidden/, thus no longer Invisible, and, now, the successful creature knows where he is and can see him (as long as he doesn't have total concealment from some other source that is). In the real world, following the game mechanics as described in the PHB2, it goes more-or-less like this: Y's player rolls a Perception check, and X's player rolls (or has already rolled) a Stealth check. The roll for Y beats the roll for X, and so Y's player succeeds on the opposed check. Hence X is no longer hidden from Y. Hence X is no longer invisible to Y. Hence Y can see X with normal vision, and does so. Correct. And in the game world it goes like this. Y's character walks into the room. X's character has already hidden(13 stealth). The roll by Y's player was a 15, so Y's character sees X with normal vision, which means that X is no longer ...
  • 01:54 PM - pemerton quoted Maxperson in post The roots of 4e exposed?
    So your example of a party working together in a skill challenge is a party working at odds with itself? You have two players trying to calm the bear and one trying to intimidate the bear, which regardless of success, isn't calming. The sorcerer is negating the efforts of the first two PCs.If you want to have that discussion, you can necro the thread and respond to the posts there.
  • 10:46 AM - Lanefan quoted Maxperson in post A discussion of metagame concepts in game design
    So does a narrator. It's just a different role. Except I don't see a narrator as actually having a character role in the show itself, with the exception of when the narration is done in character by a character who legitimately-within-the-show's-fiction could do it - example: Galadhriel, in character, narrating over the beginning of the first LotR movie. Heck, I've seen actors play roles where the character talks in third person. Are they not acting or playing a role?I mentioned this as an unusual possibility that somebody's likely tried. And there you've got an odd situation: yes they are acting, but they're playing the role of a speaker or narrator who is in turn telling the audience what a character does and-or says. They're not directly portraying the character itself. This three-tier process (actor-speaker-character) can't happen in a typical RPG because the actor and speaker are always the same person - the player at the table. Look at Deadpool. When he breaks the fourth wall ...
  • 07:53 AM - pemerton quoted Maxperson in post Would you allow this?
    Succeeding at the perception check is in fact(no matter how much you protest otherwise) an in fiction example of the PC seeing the hider with normal vision.Succeeding at a check is something that takes place sitting around the table, in the real world, where a die was rolled, some number added to it, and the result compared to a difficulty. None of that happens in the fiction. In the real world, following the game mechanics as described in the PHB2, it goes more-or-less like this: Y's player rolls a Perception check, and X's player rolls (or has already rolled) a Stealth check. The roll for Y beats the roll for X, and so Y's player succeeds on the opposed check. Hence X is no longer hidden from Y. Hence X is no longer invisible to Y. Hence Y can see X with normal vision, and does so. In the fiction, it might unfold along the following lines: Y peers intently at the place where s/he believes X to be. Whether by dint of visual acuity, or perhaps because X does something to give him-/herself ...
  • 02:28 AM - pemerton quoted Maxperson in post Would you allow this?
    X can be seen by Y's normal vision. It just takes a perception roll, and if that fails, then try again until you find Y. You're still confusing "is not seen," which results from a failed roll, with "can't be seen," which means that it's not possible to ever see.The 4e rules are not a statement of in-fiction causal processes. They are a statement of processes of mechanical resolution. In this partiuclar case,succeeding on the Perception check (which is something a person at the table does, not something that a character in the fiction does) means that X loses hidden status, thus ceasing to be inivsible, and thus being able to be seen by Y's normal vision. Yes, it means that X is no longer hidden BECAUSE X WAS SEEN BY NORMAL VISION. The seeing happens first. Also, I note you left out perception checks which I have also mentioned.No. X is no longer hidden because X lost cover and/or concealment. As a result, X ceases to be invisible to Y and hence can be seen by Y's normal visioun. The r...
  • 12:32 AM - pemerton quoted Maxperson in post Would you allow this?
    The wording of invisible is "You canít be seen by normal forms of vision." Not isn't seen. Not won't be seen. Not will not be seen. But can't be seen. As in, it's not possible to see an invisible person with normal vision. That means that the only important part is whether you can(as in it's possible) see someone who is hidden.And if X is hidden from Y, then X can't be seen by Y's normal vision. You keep talking about Y defeating X's cover (by "walking around the box X is hiding behind") - but doing that means that X is no longer hidden from Y, which of course means that (assuming that X has no other source of invisibility) X is no longer invisible to Y, and hence it is no longer true that Y cannot see X with normal vision. There is no contradiction or ambiguity here. The interesting questions in 4e generally are not about how basic hiding or invisilbility works, but rather adjudication of the fiction. Eg suppose that a person using the Invisibility spell (who is thereby eligible to ...

Monday, 16th July, 2018

  • 05:52 PM - Tony Vargas quoted Maxperson in post The roots of 4e exposed?
    Just as a point of intellectual history: you do realise, don't you, that The Forge is quite hostile to White Wolf/Storyteller, and largely indifferent to D&D but with a mild sympathy for its classic/OSR version. It seems reasonably hostile to D&D, too, describing both as "incoherent." you don't hold back in posting nonsense about The Forge and the "threefold model". In this particular instance I was posting my impressions of how the boards tend to (miss)use Forge terminology. And, no, I have made a small effort, but never found much sense in the Forge. The Threefold Model made a little sense to me back in the day, but it still mainly came off as intellectualizing the essentially bogus Role v Roll 'debate.' "Pound for pound, Basic Role-Playing from The Chaosium is perhaps the most important system, publishing tradition, and intellectual engine in the hobby - yes, even more than D&D. It represents the first and arguably the most lasting, influential form of uncompromising Simulationist ...
  • 03:22 PM - Aldarc quoted Maxperson in post The roots of 4e exposed?
    Being stuck at a door has nothing inherently to do with railroading. You might as well say parrots are a feature of railroad play, since DMs can railroad you with a parrot.You may be more fixated on his use of "railroad" here - likely due to its pejorative connotation - but keep in mind that the "/" designates "and or," with the first element in that phrase being "GM-driven play" and I would personally place greater emphasis in what pemerton said on that than "railroad." I would estimate that a lot of GM-driven play does entail "being stuck at a door," because it derives from a sort of board or puzzle game mentality that may not even apply to your sandbox approach. The GM is driving the campaign and the PCs into a particular direction: e.g., campaign arrows point to the dungeon. A frequent feature in GM-driven play in such scenarios is that a given room has to be "solved" to progress to the next room. There is one locked door. You are stuck. There are often set solutions that the GM or adventur...
  • 08:46 AM - Saelorn quoted Maxperson in post A discussion of metagame concepts in game design
    If that's your response to me, then you clearly did not understand what I was saying. What I said takes that all into consideration.Alright, I'll take your word for it, that I'm just not getting what you're saying. In any case, I've hit my limit on the number of conversations I can follow within this thread, and I think that this is more an issue of semantics than principle. Of course, given that I'm not sure what you're trying to say, I could be wrong about that.
  • 06:24 AM - Shasarak quoted Maxperson in post A discussion of metagame concepts in game design
    It's a bad name for the spell. That is true, especially if characters dont take wounds! ;0)
  • 05:43 AM - pemerton quoted Maxperson in post A discussion of metagame concepts in game design
    It's a bad name for the spell.What would be a good name that was consistent with hp not being metagame?
  • 05:24 AM - pemerton quoted Maxperson in post A discussion of metagame concepts in game design
    Name is concept, though. So how come, then, a Cure Light Wounds spell can heal most ordinary people (in classic D&D, B/X, AD&D and 3E) from dying or on their last legs, to full health?
  • 04:41 AM - Shasarak quoted Maxperson in post The roots of 4e exposed?
    I believe that railroading is an exceedingly unsatisfactory experience in any edition of pretty much any RPG. I only say "pretty much any RPG," because I suppose there might be one out there I don't know enough where you're supposed to railroad and it's fun. :p There are definitely degrees of Railroading. Honestly I dont see anything wrong with the DM saying that they have brought this Adventure path and who wants to jump on the Adventure train. There is still plenty of Player agency within the concept to have fun as long as you are not bringing a Paladin to a Pirate fight.
  • 03:56 AM - heretic888 quoted Maxperson in post A discussion of metagame concepts in game design
    Name is concept, though. If a game calls a long distance run over several miles a sprint, rather than a marathon, either the name or concept is wrong. The name sprint evokes one concept, a short, fast race, and the name marathon evokes a completely different concept. The name has to match the concept or the game has failed in that instance. That's fine, I'm certainly not attached to the name. I can only speak from my own personal experiences, where drawing upon one's willpower to do something intensely physically demanding is a) definitely a thing, b) something human beings can do of their own volition with practice and experience, and c) not something you can do as often as you want to (i.e., its a "limited use" ability we might say). I have no problem abstracting such athletic or martial exploits as "encounter powers" or "short rest abilities" or whatever. It 100% matches my experience in sports and martial arts.
  • 03:46 AM - heretic888 quoted Maxperson in post The roots of 4e exposed?
    I believe that railroading is an exceedingly unsatisfactory experience in any edition of pretty much any RPG. I only say "pretty much any RPG," because I suppose there might be one out there I don't know enough where you're supposed to railroad and it's fun. :p Well, as I said before, I consider railroading to be much more common than most would probably be willing to accept. And it can be good fun with the right group and the right GM, so there's nothing inherently "wrong" with it.


0 Badges

Maxperson's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites