View Profile: Lord Mhoram - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Thursday, 16th May, 2019, 02:18 PM
    No.
    67 replies | 2380 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 14th May, 2019, 03:18 PM
    I don't think that anyone asks this, especially given (1) the Greek etymology of "angel," and (2) the long history of "angels" in the West Asian religions (out-of-which came Christianity) that predate the Hellenistic thought you list. (Also, I'm fairly certain that the Chaldean Oracles and Neoplatonism are date to the time after early Christianity.)
    67 replies | 2380 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Sunday, 12th May, 2019, 10:38 AM
    This seems closer to the Eberron approach. Some of the deities are depicted as dragons that would not otherwise seem obvious based upon the alignment of the deities or the MM alignment of the dragons. And this phenomenon is likewise encountered with dragons in the world of Eberron. Eberron only suggests that chromatic dragons are more susceptible to the influence of the "daughter of Khyber" named...
    44 replies | 1322 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Saturday, 11th May, 2019, 04:37 PM
    It would potentially limit how they are called or how we understood their natures. But I'm not sure if it is reasonable that D&D (and its world of magic) would be restricted to a Middle Age conception of science, philosophy, or alchemy.
    44 replies | 1322 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Friday, 10th May, 2019, 01:37 PM
    Thankfully you have linked the article here. If you look under other names for Tiamat, you can see the tranliteration of the Akkadian cuneiform sign value "TAM.TUM" and TI.AMAT," both of which were names alternatively used for the mythological figure. The link between a TAM.TUM/TI.AMAT in Akkad (Mesopotamia) and a Têmtum in Ugarit (northern Levant) should not be difficult, especially given their...
    44 replies | 1322 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Thursday, 9th May, 2019, 03:27 PM
    Why? Do you find it unrealistic? :p
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Thursday, 9th May, 2019, 09:43 AM
    So here is the playlist for the Oblivion Oath PF2 Campaign led by Jason Bulmahn YouTube. You can tell that while there are more moving parts in PF2 than 5E, it honestly does feel lighter and more streamlined than PF1.
    158 replies | 9143 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Wednesday, 8th May, 2019, 11:42 AM
    But you proceeded all this by appealing to how these weapons would work in real life - your own subjective sense of what is "realistic" - and that assertion could be disputed by people who actually know better than you about the subject matter. You are just ignoring reality when it's inconvenient for your game while also appealing to your sense of reality about that same matter.
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 7th May, 2019, 03:06 PM
    Not all appeals to authority are irrelevant. The point being is that not everyone would necessarily agree with your assessment. Case in point proven. As long as you are not going into this expecting that your outcome is the only acceptable one.
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 7th May, 2019, 02:33 PM
    Honestly? Neither.
    62 replies | 2867 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 7th May, 2019, 02:31 PM
    From the perspective of "realism" I'm not sure if actual experts would necessarily agree with your assessments that mostly attempt to provide post hoc justifications for the provided weapon damage. If I merely muttered that water was wet, you would still feel compelled to tell me that my statement was a red herring/strawman/false dichotomy, that water is dry, and go out of your way to insult...
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 7th May, 2019, 02:10 PM
    But weapon size is not necessarily an indicator of damage. A spear does 1d8 damage but a common spear is larger than a longsword. A quarterstaff does 1d6 damage is but is also larger than a longsword. Why does a mace deal 1d6 damage when a longsword deals 1d8 damage?
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 7th May, 2019, 01:23 PM
    Not quite, though I extend my apologies for using the word "gamist" as an adjective as I had not intended to invoke or appeal to Forge terminology, simply an adjectival form of "games."
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 7th May, 2019, 09:39 AM
    You are presenting a strawman here (if not multiple ones), and I'm sure you will get some XP kudos from Maxperson for it. ;) The reason for comparing different TTRPGs is that a singular TTRPGs generally do not have multiple subsystems for whether they "model wind" or not. They usually either do or do not because systems generally come as pre-packaged systems. We can look at singular systems...
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Monday, 6th May, 2019, 07:35 PM
    We have had so many examples in this thread at this point and many of our positions have roughly remained the same. So I suspect that the differences of perspective run deeper than a matter of "fighting the example." You are again just restating/repeating your thesis unsupported as if it were self-evident. Based upon your above comment that "it's really not hard," you find it to be...
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Monday, 6th May, 2019, 04:45 PM
    I appreciate your attempts, but I'm not sure if I agree with them. Does it? Isn't this the debate? :confused: What if the prior "no wind" model was actually more realistic at simulating flight than the second program that attempted to crudely model wind? This latter one would simply make realism determined purely by intent rather than any actual accuracy of modeling reality. But as picked...
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Monday, 6th May, 2019, 02:25 PM
    Requoting this point for Max, hopefully adding to the point that pemerton made. If you are arguing that realism has increased in any objective sense, then you need to demonstrate how beyond simply repeating that point. I don't think that "someone will put it into a game" should be equated to mean "realism has increased." To rephrase my point above, it seems to some of us that you, Max, are...
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Saturday, 4th May, 2019, 08:41 PM
    Except that asserted assumption rests on a proposition that is neither inherently true nor logically consequential. :erm:
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Saturday, 4th May, 2019, 08:02 PM
    This seems like circular reasoning, Max. You assert something as being self-evident, namely in the bold. When asked for clarification or support for that thesis, you just repeat the thesis again as if it were objective truth. This sort of circular reasoning is the primary point of disconnect and frustration that I suspect many of us are having with your argumentation.
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Saturday, 4th May, 2019, 10:24 AM
    Lanefan, I find that there is sometimes disconnect between your assumption regarding how D&D should be played and how other tables often play it: i.e., your play preference vs. broader play praxis. Equipment is one such case. At many tables I have seen, and this may also be a generational thing (though hopefully you can refrain from past condescending attitudes about "newer" players), the table...
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Saturday, 4th May, 2019, 10:16 AM
    Given the prominent prior discussion of Blades in the Dark, I can point out one potential misconception here. Roleplay of in-character information gathering would be encouraged in BitD because the player characters would likely gain a greater Position for certain rolls when performing their heists through doing so.
    43 replies | 1921 view(s)
    4 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Friday, 3rd May, 2019, 12:32 PM
    Since the playtest we do have more information. We have seen more. There is an Oblivion Oath campaign on led by Jason Bulmahn using the upcoming PF2 rules that you can watch on YouTube. Post-Playtest versions of PF2 have also been played in various conventions and expos. There have also been comments made by Paizo employees on the website, including clarifications of those campaign streams. ...
    158 replies | 9143 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Friday, 3rd May, 2019, 08:23 AM
    Edit: Changed my mind. :erm:
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Thursday, 2nd May, 2019, 02:14 PM
    Most definitely agree. Position/Effect is, however, one but layer of the risk assessment process that transpires in BitD. I would also add that BitD also add that players in BitD have additional ways to increase their odds of success than PbtA/DW games, namely how BitD handles dice pools. Plus, the Devil's Bargain is diabolically delightful from the perspective of both players and the GM.
    43 replies | 1921 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 30th April, 2019, 02:37 PM
    Have you posted this on his subreddit yet?
    3 replies | 388 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 30th April, 2019, 12:02 PM
    I asked you a question, and I have yet to receive an answer. Do you know how spellcasting works in PF2? Can you communicate to me those changes that it makes in the playtest? Or are you just going to repeat your insubstantiated fearmongering?
    158 replies | 9143 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 30th April, 2019, 10:10 AM
    Into the Odd. I don't necessarily know if every attack drains your endurance. It's simply that there are no attack rolls, only damage. (Armor does mitigate damage.) So the fiction is loose with explaining and rationalizing the mechanics. "Draining your endurance" was one possible explanation among many rather than an official one.
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 30th April, 2019, 09:10 AM
    I don't necessarily think that it matters. From what I recall, and maybe Maxperson can clarify his views, but he plays (per RAW) in 5E that the first half of hit point loss is luck, fatigue, abstracted that do not reflect actually being "hit" while the second half of hit point loss are "meat" hits. However, 5E does not make a distinction with how the first half (fatigue/luck) are recovered...
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 30th April, 2019, 08:47 AM
    A desire to refrain from playing your "gotcha games" doesn't mean that you "got me." It means that I don't want to get roped into playing them by you. Please stop trying to turn every discussion into a competition to be won. Your "because if" still implies things about the game, reality, etc. that are not necessarily true. For example, your entire bit about 3 rounds of combat in "Into the...
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Monday, 29th April, 2019, 03:04 PM
    Max, I'm not interested in playing your gotcha games. The reason why I did not answer the only question you actually asked - "How does hit point recovery work?" - was because I can't recall the HP recovery mechanics by heart and don't have access to the book at work.
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Monday, 29th April, 2019, 02:23 PM
    I am amused that you don't let me first answer this before wildly charging blind with your own assumptions about how the game should work or what you deem realistic. You are assuming a lot about the fiction and what the mechanics are meant to reflect.
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Monday, 29th April, 2019, 01:28 PM
    Hahahahaha. No, you're doing everything but talking about Pathfinder 2. And when people actually try to get you to talk concrete things about Pathfinder 2, you ignore them and continue whining about how PF2, 5E, 4E, 3E, and every other system under the sun does not cater to your whims. If you were talking about Pathfinder 2, then that would be a relief to the rest of us.
    158 replies | 9143 view(s)
    4 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Monday, 29th April, 2019, 12:54 PM
    I apologize if it sounds as if I am talking about this obliquely or without candor, as I think that this issue is more complicated than more/less realism. If we look at D&D solely, then we are looking at a system (or series of related systems throughout time) that has its own set of assumptions about the cultural norms, rationalities of the game, and how it nominally should function. However,...
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th April, 2019, 03:58 PM
    An analogy where you compare us to bullies. So save your "dude" for someone else. There is no "keep seeing yourself" here, lowkey13. You insinuate that the people who liked Ovinomancer's post (i.e., me included) are living in bubbles and then accusing everyone in this thread of lining up to dunk on Max which is not necessarily true for those involved.
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th April, 2019, 03:43 PM
    Except no one is bullying Max while you are insulting people.
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th April, 2019, 03:08 PM
    So that you can clarify that your uncalled for hostility was uncalled for? Yes.
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th April, 2019, 01:58 PM
    Your veiled insults do not seem particularly civil.
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th April, 2019, 10:46 AM
    Instead of repeating this mantra ad nauseum, perhaps it would be benecial for discussion if you took time to familiarize yourself with PF2 and then explain to us how casting works differently between PF1 and PF2. Because right now you are talking abstractly about how you seem to be imagining PF2 rather than anything concrete about the playtest materials or subsequent details revealed.
    158 replies | 9143 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th April, 2019, 10:11 AM
    Right. I don't think that having rules for weapon breaking or maintenance is necessarily about "realism," but, instead, it's about how we choose to frame the fiction. We generally trust that there are things - like the warrior maintaining the quality of their gear - that the fiction does not focus on but nevertheless likely happen. Or more profanely, we never hear about the fact that the...
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Wednesday, 24th April, 2019, 03:17 PM
    It isn't a red herring in the context of Sadras's inquiry, Max, which is what both Ovinomancer and I are specifically replying to. We were asked whether we agreed with their position and then asked a follow-up question to explain ourselves if we disagreed. Please stop trying to argue from informal logic buzzwords. Please note Max that I said that "'Realism' has more to do with the game...
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Wednesday, 24th April, 2019, 11:51 AM
    I don't agree because this seems like a binary viewpoint of combat defense that evaluates realism in terms of whether a system has an AC mechanic or not. It's overly simplistic, lacking scope of how other games perform a similar function with different mechanics. Some games use counter combat rolls. The DM rolls (defense/combat) and the player rolls (defense/combat), and the success of the attack...
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Wednesday, 24th April, 2019, 09:56 AM
    And without further clarification, I think that their use is ambiguous. Feelings are not the basis of disagreement. They only You are the one who first put me through hurdles by asking initial questions regarding EnSider rather than jump to the heart of your inquiry. I said that I was familiar with it. Let's be clear: familiarity does not equate to understanding. And understanding of...
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Lord Mhoram's Avatar
    Wednesday, 24th April, 2019, 01:51 AM
    That's just target practice though - in a real fight bob would be able to half dodge lots of incoming arrows (higher hit point total) than his son. 5E combat keeps accuracy bounded but has experience in combat dealt with by other mechanics.
    118 replies | 3945 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd April, 2019, 04:57 PM
    I have remained consistent in my position regarding this realism debate throughout this entire thread, which is what I have been consistently arguing, and I even linked my initial post in this thread. Don't get frustrated with me just because I want to remain on topic. No, I said that I understand how/why the buzzword is used for the purposes of marketing the mechanics. I think that it is...
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd April, 2019, 04:15 PM
    Having played through a lot of the 3.X system and Pathfinder, I have a soft spot for the system framework. I may dabble in PF2, but I don't see that myself going heavily into PF2 either. Not because of 5E, but because I have other games on my shelves that tickle my fancy more. I am nevertheless hoping that PF2 does well because I loathe the hegemony that 5E is increasingly exerting on the...
    267 replies | 19741 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd April, 2019, 04:02 PM
    I am familiar with the use of the buzz phrase "more realistic," but I often don't find it exists as a particularly meaningful phrase. En5sider's use seems more like marketing jargon preying upon popular naivety than being indicative of actual substance, and I don't fault them for that. Edit: I would clarfiy that "more realistic" is mostly vacuous; however, the link saying that they will...
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd April, 2019, 03:35 PM
    I disagree. Everyone brings their own notions about what "more realism" means, but that does not mean that a singular understanding is equally shared. It just means that everyone has their own set of expectations. This brings us back to one of my first posts in this thread that started this mess with Max: Emphasizing here my earlier point that appeals to "realism" typically masks other play...
    2689 replies | 84772 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd April, 2019, 02:53 PM
    Though 2E Planescape gave us playable tieflings, 4E rebranded the tieflings that have since propagated in 5E. As to why they are popular? Probably because there is a more baked-in story with tieflings. The game can't just write "these are elves, and we already assume you know what and how elves are." So offering more baked-in story in the writing for tieflings gets a lot of imaginations...
    90 replies | 5371 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd April, 2019, 02:45 PM
    This likely ties into how and why PF2 developed as it did. 3.X had a lot of moving parts and subsystems (e.g., skills, feats, classes/PrCs, alt. racial/class features, etc.). Pathfinder took those and then introduced more (e.g., archetypes, traits, more class features, hybrid classes, etc.). Pathfinder 2 at least seems to be an attempt for Paizo to step back and ask, "Okay, how we do take all...
    267 replies | 19741 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd April, 2019, 01:19 PM
    Much like the WoW Vanilla concept of the "hybrid tax,"* what you describe here died in practice across subsequent updates. Damage in WoW (or other MMOs) was relatively equalized among roles because there was less incentive utilize some classes over others in group content (e.g., dungeons, raids, etc.). However, a DPS rogue and a DPS warrior will have different mechanics for how they distribute...
    158 replies | 9143 view(s)
    3 XP
No More Results
About Lord Mhoram

Basic Information

Date of Birth
January 10, 1967 (52)
About Lord Mhoram
Introduction:
RPGs: HERO, Genesys, D&D 5E
About Me:
Been gaming since I got the D&D box in '77, then moved to AD&D when that came out. Played and read many many systems. Married my GM (she was running a Champions game when I moved into the area).
Location:
Utah
Disable sharing sidebar?:
Yes
Sex:
Male
Age Group:
Over 40
My Game Details

Details of games currently playing and games being sought.

Town:
Ogden
State:
Utah
Game Details:
Weekly group game - HERO - one supers, one sorta fantasy.
GMing D&D5E fora second group.
Do solo play with Genesys with the wife.

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
1,396
Posts Per Day
0.23
Last Post
Crafting Items - Expert Craftsman vs Adventurers Wednesday, 24th April, 2019 01:51 AM

Currency

Gold Pieces
11
General Information
Last Activity
Today 06:17 AM
Join Date
Friday, 31st May, 2002
Home Page
http://home.attbi.com/~lordmho/
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
1

2 Friends

  1. Aldarc Aldarc is offline

    Member

    Aldarc
  2. Hyper-Man Hyper-Man is offline

    Member

    Hyper-Man
Showing Friends 1 to 2 of 2
My Game Details
Town:
Ogden
State:
Utah
Game Details:
Weekly group game - HERO - one supers, one sorta fantasy.
GMing D&D5E fora second group.
Do solo play with Genesys with the wife.

Friday, 26th April, 2019


Friday, 28th September, 2018

  • 09:41 PM - vicberg mentioned Lord Mhoram in post Why does 5E SUCK?
    Lord Mhoram, you're absolutely right. This isn't my first rodeo in being a GM. I started in 1983. This was my first foray into 5e, having taken a long hiatus from D&D (GOT 3.5 was the last D&D I ran) and I didn't limit feats or multi-class. If I ever jump into it again, I certainly would as it would have alleviated a lot of headaches. And yes, power gaming has been in an issue in every system since role playing started. That's not new. What really surprised me was the sheer number of people focused on the power gaming side, in large part due to feats and multi-classing. They were actively out there looking for builds that would do 800 HP in a single hit, stuff like that. So I can say, I shot myself in the foot. It was amusing, tbh.

Tuesday, 3rd July, 2018

  • 12:59 PM - Aldarc mentioned Lord Mhoram in post A discussion of metagame concepts in game design
    ...t on, and they invite them into their circle. Maybe the other characters use this as a distraction to get the information they need. But isn't that metagaming? Sure, but part of Fate's social contract is that a player creates the Troubles that the player wants their character to experience in the game. The player is getting rewarded for roleplaying the character they wanted. This "metagame" is important for Fate as a game. The mechanic engages the player to embrace and think as character. You can spend Fate points when you put yourself into opportunites that lean on your character aspects. You gain Fate points when you put yourselves into opportunities that lean on your character aspects. I do not doubt that this process can be immersion-breaking for some, but these transactions most often transpire in-character for most Fate games I have played or run. Not only has Emerikol raised how this makes him feel like they are playing a chess piece, I had a similar conversation with Lord Mhoram about this awhile back too. But several of players in my D&D group have said that D&D makes them feel more like minis in a tactical war game than characters, and they find Fate's mechanics more conducive for in-character roleplaying. (Though I wager that most people who game don't care.) My point here being that people have different preferences for mechanics that engender the in-character roleplaying experiences they want, and different games can produce different results depending on those preferences.

Wednesday, 5th July, 2017

  • 01:00 PM - Aldarc mentioned Lord Mhoram in post The Pride Of Blue Rose
    Lord Mhoram: I prefer to abstain from double-posting, so forgive me. I have been giving your fate point conundrum a bit more thought, particularly the issue of playing Fate without worrying about fate points. I may have an easy possibility that hopefully you would be willing to entertain. The biggest problems that you have raised regarding fate points has been (1) character compels and earning fate points (i.e. immersion breakers), and (2) what you perceive as its dissociative mechanics. So here is my suggestion. (1) Remove compels entirely from your Fate game. No "cheating" rewards for playing your character or having your immersion broken by fate point haggling. So how do you get fate points back? (2) Tie Fate points to the character via an X times per day/encounter mechanic. (You may have to adjust the standard.) Fate points are not earned via compels or refresh every session, but instead per the character in the world. This grounds fate points more closely to the character, namely ...

Thursday, 29th June, 2017

  • 04:02 PM - Aldarc mentioned Lord Mhoram in post The Pride Of Blue Rose
    Lord Mhoram, that's a lot to process in that post, and I wish that you had not deleted your far more congenial post that I tried to award an XP before you deleted it, as your most recent post feels like two steps backwards. If you feel that you are being unfairly targeted or that my tone is too confrontational, then I apologize. I am not saying that you should like Fate (points) or that you should play it. I admit, that it's not for everyone. I do get that. One of the problems, for me at least, has been a fairly persistent tone within some of the criciticism of Fate and its mechanics that often contains a veiled sense of "One True Wayism" or "Not True Roleplaying!" And some of the criticisms that I have seen lobbed at Fate do stem from misunderstandings or gross mischaracterizations of the system, and in manners that are somewhat hypocritical (as they ignore similar mechanics and issues in other roleplaying games).

No results to display...
Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast

Wednesday, 24th April, 2019

  • 03:32 AM - dnd4vr quoted Lord Mhoram in post Crafting Items - Expert Craftsman vs Adventurers
    That's just target practice though - in a real fight bob would be able to half dodge lots of incoming arrows (higher hit point total) than his son. 5E combat keeps accuracy bounded but has experience in combat dealt with by other mechanics. I am not talking about survivability or lethality, I am talking about pure odds of hitting. That's all. With the sole exception of the SS feat removing disadvantage at long range (a feat that Bob might have and Tim might not), Bob has very little advantage (only +2) over his neophyte son despite likely years of experience. I am also not saying I think it should still be a 1-1 level to bonus increase, but I do think bounded accuracy went too far in leveling the field between lower level characters and higher level ones. It goes back to the other philosophy of bounded accuracy: players will feel better if they hit more often even though since we gave pretty much every more hit points it takes just as long to bring it down. The trade-off is simple: you h...

Tuesday, 5th February, 2019


Wednesday, 12th December, 2018

  • 04:37 AM - guachi quoted Lord Mhoram in post Skills used by players on other players.
    Note that kind of situation came up in a game I was in. Everyone at the table loved it. It sounds like fun when everyone is on the same page. Players control their players. But the party controls the party, if that makes sense. And that's why I as a DM am hesitant (unless asked to adjudicate) to intercede in intraparty actions like convincing B.A. to go along with the plan (or your party's equivalent). The player and the rest of the party can resolve the persuading however they'd like and probably to a more enjoyable resolution when it doesn't have to be filtered through the DM. The DM controls everything else, let the party control itself. As a DM, I enjoy sitting back and being an observer for once and not being in control.

Saturday, 8th December, 2018

  • 10:14 AM - clearstream quoted Lord Mhoram in post Skills used by players on other players.
    To me using a skill (even a social skill) to influence another character is tantamount to using combat skills (like swinging a sword) at that character. Personally If I had a GM that made my character "go along" because another character used a social skill on me- thus taking away player (not character) agency and the GM allowed or encouraged that - I'd walk. If you allow PC vs PC combat and encourage that as easily as you did the social skill, then that is how your game works. But then I ban PC vs PC combat, so I am comfortable banning PC vs PC skill influence on agency. I think you're conflating two concerns here. One is - should a player character swing their sword at another player character? PC vs PC combat. That depends on groups, but for many groups the PCs agree they won't attack one another. A distinctly different concern is - if a player character swung their sword at another player character, and if they roll the attack die and it hits, then should that attack deal damage? Do...
  • 07:07 AM - Ratskinner quoted Lord Mhoram in post Skills used by players on other players.
    But social contract trumps role-playing, in my opinion. Making this player do something he doesn't want to do because of skill and "roleplaying" is no better than the CN jerk who screws everything up and says "I'm just roleplaying my character". Who knows - maybe the Barbarian had a situation like what happened in game as part of the player's mental construction of that character and backstory, and this sequence brings that up and he is "No, not gonna do that, it's not good". So he won't do what the charismatic guy wants. Then he is completely justified, in character and being a perfect roleplayer, to not go along. My characters often surprise me with attitudes and decisions I don't expect when I play them - that is the exact reason I play. As for the first part - anything imposed from outside that forces the player to act differently than he sees how his character would act/react is taking away player agency. Does your social contract include playing the character as written and developed...
  • 07:05 AM - GameOgre quoted Lord Mhoram in post Skills used by players on other players.
    I don't know if that is a typo, but it is perfect roll playing to make the character/player do what the charismatic guy wants, but bad roleplaying. So, you think listening to someone else and being convinced to do what they want instead of your original thought on the matter is out of character on any of your characters? See I just don't get it. This happens every single day in every single community in every single country in the entire world. Role playing this happening in game however is BAD Role Playing? and yeah just typo its like 2 am here. I will say I think it shouldn't even really be rolled for. It should actually just be role played. It's just like the other systems in the game however. If you didn't make players roll for things they would never ever get hit and always hit and do max damage and make every save. In this case they would NEVER be fooled or taken advantage of. THAT is simply bad role playing.
  • 06:39 AM - GameOgre quoted Lord Mhoram in post Skills used by players on other players.
    In my opinion the play has complete control of his character's choices unless affected by mind control/charm kind of spells. To me using a skill (even a social skill) to influence another character is tantamount to using combat skills (like swinging a sword) at that character. Personally If I had a GM that made my character "go along" because another character used a social skill on me- thus taking away player (not character) agency and the GM allowed or encouraged that - I'd walk. If you allow PC vs PC combat and encourage that as easily as you did the social skill, then that is how your game works. But then I ban PC vs PC combat, so I am comfortable banning PC vs PC skill influence on agency. To me it has nothing to do with Roleplaying good or bad, but about the social contract and player agency. I was in a game (Rolemaster) that the GM said about 6 months into the campaign that he was going to make all PC combat rolls behind his screen in secret - I handed him my characters sheet, and...

Wednesday, 31st October, 2018

  • 09:25 PM - Panda-s1 quoted Lord Mhoram in post Burning Questions: Why Do DMs Limit Official WOTC Material?
    Ah, so we're shifting goalposts. Twosix didn't say the entire group. He said a vote. A simple majority.[...] Are we really at this level of nitpicking now? One big thing is fairness. The rules of the campaign are set up at the beginning and DM and players agreed to it. Say everyone at the table (but one) hates dragonborn (for whatever reason) - so dragonborn are banned from the game (the one guy who likes them thinking "oh, I can play one in a different game". Then a new player comes in and wants to play a dragonborn - most everyone at the table hates them, and the one guy who would have played a dragonborn, but didn't because he was ok with waiting - would then have thier fun lessened by catering to the late-coming player. I don't get how working together with a player to figure out their race is "catering". This doesn't even address the same as the scenario(s) I presented. Another reason - Everyone's job at the table is to make sure everyone has fun - DM and players. And just as a D...
  • 09:07 AM - Panda-s1 quoted Lord Mhoram in post Burning Questions: Why Do DMs Limit Official WOTC Material?
    Man I stop paying attention for a day and people are still hung up on me saying "coward". Let's go over what I said again: In my experience some DMs are just cowards. Oh hey look, an important word here is "some"! I didn't say all DMs are cowards, but to be fair at this point I could be splitting a dichotomy between DMs who will and won't ban official material from their games. I mean okay some stuff might not make sense thematically, or sometimes things will gain a reputation for being problematic. I give some understanding here. I get why DMs might want to ban official material from their games. Hell, I like to be pretty open as a DM, but I've had to say X material won't be allowed for Y reason in my game before. But I've known DMs who take a look at some official material and their knee-jerk reaction is that it needs to be banned from their game. HUH in this sentence I'm pointing out a specific type of DM. Specifically, one that I've had to deal with before. Let's see if I elaborate ...
  • 04:20 AM - epithet quoted Lord Mhoram in post Burning Questions: Why Do DMs Limit Official WOTC Material?
    I'll admit I'm on the side of the fence that thinks the phrase DM entitlement is a non-sequitur, because putting those limits on is something I consider part of the GMs job (especially if it is non D&D game, Like HERO or GURPS that can easily be abused). But I do agree with you about consensus... I think we just completely disagree on when. The person in the group has an idea for setting/world and tone and approach. That person explains that idea to the group, lays out the rules limitation, and asks the group what they think. The group then agrees on whether or not to play - once that agreement has happened, then the game proceeds with the GM being the absolute final arbiter of what is allowed/banned. If in the initial pitch the players don't want to play that game, he doesn't run it, and someone else can GM. If the rest of the group doesn't have anyone who wants to GM, and it would dissolve without that person running the game - the players suck it up and play the way the GM wants... or they c...

Saturday, 20th October, 2018

  • 05:57 PM - gyor quoted Lord Mhoram in post Ravnica Table of Contents & More
    The way I look at it - this isn't the "Guide to MtG in D&D" it's about Ravnica - and that is all about the guilds. I didn't want to see any spells, or planeswalking in the book. I wanted the setting that informs those magic sets to be written for D&D. It looks like that was done. So I am happy for the way this looks. Look under the guilds in the table of contents and it lists Guild Spells and there is a section for magic items.
  • 05:47 PM - Kramodlog quoted Lord Mhoram in post Ravnica Table of Contents & More
    I don't want a super detailed timeline, a huge gazetter.I do. It gives me tools to make campaigns and aventures. It is also fun to read. Since 4e WotC has forgotten that lore is also one of the reasons people bought D&D products.
  • 05:28 PM - Kramodlog quoted Lord Mhoram in post Ravnica Table of Contents & More
    The way I look at it - this isn't the "Guide to MtG in D&D" it's about Ravnica. Ravnica isn't even in this book.

Sunday, 30th September, 2018

  • 07:03 AM - MNblockhead quoted Lord Mhoram in post How Do You Enjoy D&D Away From the Table
    Not much these days - I spend a bit of time here, and at Paizo's forums. For the last 20+ years - I spent hours reading books, including 3rd party books, building characters, designing house rules - For Pathfinder & 3.x. Did similar things with Hero too. But these days, I don't. I found 5E to be freeing that way - there isn't the huge amount of rules and options to engage with away from the table. So these days, instead of engaging with RPGs away from the table, I play board games or video games with the wife, read more fiction, watch more movies. With the free time 5e afforded, I picked up a few more TTRPGs. I'll fill the space created by efficiency and simplicity with more complexity. :-/

Thursday, 27th September, 2018

  • 08:12 AM - pemerton quoted Lord Mhoram in post Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
    But that is straying, almost in the opposite direction of a discussion of mechanics, which is the opposite of what the thread is about.Not at all! Isn't this thread about play experience? One of my main reasons for playing RPGs, is the roleplaying itself. Deep immersion, in becoming the character, feeling what the character would feel, being what the character is. That can be achieved with nothing but dialog and emotionI prefer to get that experience by engaging the situation, and having feelings about the outcome that mirror those being felt by the character. So if my PC would be anxious or uncertain, I want to have that same experience; if my PC would feel the pull of loyalty, then I want the mechanics to make me feel the same thing. Some games are more light-hearted than others in these respects: of systems I play/GM, I would say Prince Valiant and Marvel Heroic/Cortex+ Heroic are at the lighthearted end; 4e and Classic Traveller are intermediate; and Burning Wheel is intense sometimes t...
  • 06:25 AM - Charlaquin quoted Lord Mhoram in post Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
    I can understand where you are coming from, but I don't agree. There are plenty of places where roleplaying happens with no mechanical impact; interactions between characters as they get to know someone, dialog for a romantic scene with an npc that is done without dice rolls (just as a way to enjoy experiencing the conversation) as a couple of example. There are lots of situations where you just interact by roleplaying that have no stakes, and have no need for a mechanic widget tied to it. In D&D 5th Edition, however, that is still interacting with the game’s mechanics. The core mechanic of 5e is that the player describes what their character does, the DM determines the results of the described action, possibly calling for dice to be rolled to resolve any uncertainty in the outcome, and then describes the results. Even if the DM determines that a dice roll is not necessary to determine the results, describing what you do and having the DM describe the results is still interacting with D&D 5e’s co...
  • 06:21 AM - pemerton quoted Lord Mhoram in post Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
    I can understand where you are coming from, but I don't agree. There are plenty of places where roleplaying happens with no mechanical impact; interactions between characters as they get to know someone, dialog for a romantic scene with an npc that is done without dice rolls (just as a way to enjoy experiencing the conversation) as a couple of example. There are lots of situations where you just interact by roleplaying that have no stakes, and have no need for a mechanic widget tied to it.I think I might already have quoted Chrisotpher Kubasik's Interactive Toolkit in this thread, but I'll do so again, because it expresses where I'm coming from fairly well: The tales of a story entertainment [his term for a RPG] are based not on the success of actions, but on the choice of actions; not the manipulation of rules, but the manipulation of narrative tools. The primary tool is Character. Characters drive the narrative of all stories. However, many people mistake character for characterization...

Wednesday, 26th September, 2018

  • 05:33 PM - pemerton quoted Lord Mhoram in post Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
    if there are modifiers to that roll, then that helps, because some situations are harder than others - without modifiers then I would feel it is a bad rule. In the game that that rule comes from - Dungeon World - the way we find out whether or not one situation was harder than another is by seeing how the dice come out. (A bit like how, in Moldvay Basic, we learn if these goblins are friendlier than those goblins by finding out how the reaction roll pans out - it's "fortune in the middle" with the fiction being read, in part, off the result of the roll. Gygax uses the same approach for hit points and saving throws in his DMG - we learn if the poison got into the wound or not by seeing how the save comes out; we don't first decide how badly poisoned the PC was and use that to affect the saving throw.) There is one modifier, though: INT. So choosing to play a high-INT PC is choosing to play a PC who is more likely, more of the time, to be able to oblige the GM to tell one interesting and perhaps ...
  • 12:19 PM - pemerton quoted Lord Mhoram in post Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
    The whole point, as I see it, of ruling vs rules, is that you rely on the GM to tell you how the interaction with his world works, and the rules are a support for the GM to do this... as opposed to the rules defining how you interact with the world. To me that is a welcome change of pace, and a nice return to the "old days".How would you characterise the following rule: When you consult your accumulated knowledge about something, roll 2d6+Int bonus: ✴On a 10+, the GM will tell you something interesting and useful about the subject relevant to your situation; ✴On a 7–9, the GM will only tell you something interesting—it’s on you to make it useful; The GM might ask you "How do you know this?" Tell them the truth, now. I don't see how it fits into a dichotomy between "the rules supporting the GM telling you how your interaction with his/her world works" and "the rules defining how your interact with the world". My reason for asking is that because I don't think your ...
  • 05:12 AM - pemerton quoted Lord Mhoram in post Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
    When there are rules for everything (3rd and 4th) then you get constrained on what you can do by looking at character sheet. In a more freewheeling game, you just think up stuff your character would do, and the GM tells you what roll to attempt to do it. You present this as if it is a dichotomy that covers the field. Given that in my 4e game the PCs have set back ghouls with their prayers (other than by way of the Channel Divinity mechanics), used jellies at a banquet to illustrate the vulnerabilities of gelatinous cubes, opposed city officials in court cases, used their chaos sorcrery to seal the Abyss, tamed bears that were attacking them, stolen a triceratops from its hobgoblin handler and ridden it across the battlefield, and countless other stuff I can't recall - none of which is an action declaration mentioned in the rulebooks or on a character sheet - I don't recognise your characterisation. Like many other posters in this thread, you seem to equate uniform resolution system with a se...


Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast

Lord Mhoram's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites