View Profile: Eirikrautha - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
No Recent Activity
About Eirikrautha

Basic Information

About Eirikrautha
Sex:
Male
Age Group:
Over 40
My Game Details

Details of games currently playing and games being sought.

State:
Virginia
Country:
USA

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
148
Posts Per Day
0.09
Last Post
Dragon Reflections #11 - The Sorcerer Speaks! Sunday, 16th September, 2018 04:03 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
1
General Information
Last Activity
Tuesday, 13th November, 2018 02:31 AM
Join Date
Friday, 25th July, 2014
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0
My Game Details
State:
Virginia
Country:
USA
No results to show...

Wednesday, 25th April, 2018

  • 01:58 AM - Doug McCrae mentioned Eirikrautha in post Killing In The Name Of Advancement
    Eirikrautha The following quotes are from the 1e DMG. Good is best defined as whatever brings the most benefit to the greater number of decent, thinking creatures and the least woe to the rest. This is the 19th century idea of utilitarianism. NEUTRAL EVIL: Similar to the neutral good alignment, that of neutral evil holds that neither groups nor individuals have great meaning. This ethos holds that seeking to promote weal for all actually brings woe to the truly deserving. Natural forces which are meant to cull out the weak and stupid are artificially suppressed by so-called good, and the fittest are wrongfully held back, so whatever means are expedient can be used by the powerful to gain and maintain their dominance, without concern for anything. Social Darwinism, another 19th century notion. Good And Evil: Basically stated, the tenets of good are human rights, or in the case of AD&D, creature rights. Each creature is entitled to life, relative freedom, and the prospect of happin...

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

Monday, 17th September, 2018

  • 01:39 AM - pemerton quoted Eirikrautha in post Dragon Reflections #11 - The Sorcerer Speaks!
    D&D has always played better as a cooperative game. When the game was "simpler" (in concept, if not in mechanics), that cooperation was easier to come by. In some ways, the cooperation was almost a default assumption of playing. D&D was almost boardgame-like: you know when you play "Sorry" that you are going to try to move around the board and get all your pieces home. If that isn't what you want to do, then you pick another game. Early D&D was like that; you're going to kill stuff and take its loot in order to up your characters' level. That was the end "goal" of the game.Gygax's discussion of "Successful Adventuring" at the end of his PHB (before the Appendices) fits this model exactly. It is all framed in metagame terms - ie as advice to players getting ready to play a game, not as advice to players in the play of their PCs - and it talks about choosing a party who will work well together (not in personality terms, but in terms of abilities and alignments) with well-matched spell load out...

Friday, 7th September, 2018

  • 12:09 PM - Imaculata quoted Eirikrautha in post X & O For More Fun
    These cards (especially the X) are the embodiment of the flight from responsibility and the assertion that others must conform to whatever is best for you. Are you being serious?

Sunday, 29th July, 2018

  • 09:10 PM - RobJN quoted Eirikrautha in post Strange Machine Games Announce New Robotech RPG
    Opposed rolls and "rolling with the punch" for five attacks in a round slowed the pace to a crawl, which is the exact opposite of the anime' space. Hopefully the new mechanics will capture the pacing of the anime better... Just wait till you have to roll to hit for each missile in that Macross Missile Massacre you just launched..... :erm:

Wednesday, 25th July, 2018

  • 01:40 AM - SkidAce quoted Eirikrautha in post Eberron It Is? [UPDATED & CONFIRMED!]
    .. Neither is hamfisted corporate IP-sharing products designed to "expand" the player-base, potentially at the expense of the core audience and the long-suffering fans who have put 5e in the position for its resurgence by buying the products to this point. As a customer, I prefer to be engaged, not milked... I am using your quote as an example...my point is not directed at you specifically.... Where the heck is this hamfisted evil corporate forced idea upon us to suck us dry of all money "muhahahahahahha" meme coming from. I've wanted a MtG based setting since MtG came out. I wanted and expected it when WotC took over. As a customer, this is like forcing me to accept an ice cream cone on a hot day, THANKS!

Tuesday, 24th July, 2018

  • 03:35 AM - Remathilis quoted Eirikrautha in post Eberron It Is? [UPDATED & CONFIRMED!]
    That's what worries me. An early access PDF sold to us to playtest is NOT the template that I'd like to see. Neither is hamfisted corporate IP-sharing products designed to "expand" the player-base, potentially at the expense of the core audience and the long-suffering fans who have put 5e in the position for its resurgence by buying the products to this point. As a customer, I prefer to be engaged, not milked...Don't fret, there's plenty of Forgotten Realms to explore if these experiments are a failure...

Monday, 23rd July, 2018

  • 09:13 PM - Bacon Bits quoted Eirikrautha in post Eberron It Is? [UPDATED & CONFIRMED!]
    Hmmm, I seem to remember someone from WotC suggesting that grognards would be happy with this release. "Grognard" = French for Napolean's "Old Guard." Old guard does not translate to me as a setting developed for 3.5. Same. Eberron was the most recently published new campaign setting*. It's really difficult to call it "classic" or "old school" even if it was 15 years ago when every other campaign setting is at least 20 years old! [*: No, Points of Light doesn't count, even if you really liked it. The material for that was "published" in about a dozen adventures (basically 2 adventure paths) and in the ones I have the most significant indication that they take place in Nentir Vale is the names of the god on the temple doors in town. Beyond that there was one monster supplement, and I think a novel. The gazetteer was cancelled when D&D Next started and it never saw print. Both Mystara and Red Steel have more material published about them, and that's saying something.] That said, Ke...

Monday, 9th July, 2018

  • 09:15 PM - Mistwell quoted Eirikrautha in post An Army in the Dungeon
    What parts of his quoted statements are incorrect? I don't know a thing about this guy, but what he said reflects the game as I remember it back then. This knee-jerk acceptance of ad hominem attacks as an alternative to debate that seems to be endemic to the Internet is getting old quickly. If Adolf Hitler said the world is round, that doesn't make it flat. Tell me what this guy said that is untrue or mistaken and you've provided a service. Otherwise, your opinion of him is irrelevant to the point being made. I wonder how many of the personal attack-slingers would be silenced if subjected to equivalent scrutiny themselves? Your second paragraph is a knee-jerk ad hominem. If you had just asked why it's inaccurate as you did in your first paragraph, I could have answered you. But by then immediately assuming it's an ad hominem rather than waiting for an answer to your first paragraph, I am not sure why I should answer? I mean, as you said, it's getting old. Why couldn't you just ask me wh...

Monday, 28th May, 2018

  • 07:40 PM - Jester David quoted Eirikrautha in post We Were All New D&D Players Once
    And I do see lots of articles on various websites telling veteran players that we are playing the game wrong if any new players suffer the slightest inconvenience Can you provide any links to said articles?
  • 03:23 PM - Jester David quoted Eirikrautha in post We Were All New D&D Players Once
    You've said a lot, but not really anything to the purpose. I'll try to simplify my issues (as admittedly I've written voluminous posts to this point): When a new player joins an established group, how much of the responsibility for helping that player fit in falls on the group and how much on the player? Note that I am assuming good faith on both parties (your response and several above seem to assume that one or more parties isn't acting in good faith). Is the new player's fun more important than the present players' fun? If so, for how long and to what extent? Why? In an ideal world, everyone's fun matters equally. But, yes, in practice, there will need to be some compromise. However, this is not an either/or situation. If the game goes all-in for advanced play then that will not be fun for the new player that is still learning the basics. But that doesn't mean a less intense game will be no fun to the more experienced players. Similarly, the campaign does not have to have a single cons...
  • 06:12 AM - Jester David quoted Eirikrautha in post We Were All New D&D Players Once
    Well, I certainly agree that making players feel welcome is an important part of the game. But this particular topic is not as cut and dried as some posters here would like to make it. As someone who frequently has new players at my table (including one now who has only a few sessions in), I think it is important to remember that the job of the DM is to make sure ALL of the players have a good time. I've noticed in many discussions I've seen/read lately that there is a fetishization of new players nowadays, often at the expense of the old. I notice this a lot with folks who are themselves transitioning from newer players into veteran ones. I think this might be the result of your perspective. The game is doing well and more people are coming in that any time in recent history. That's exciting. It's not just new people, it's the sudden wave of new people: the fact the game is a hit with a new generation. It's not that they're valued more, just that their presence is an exciting sign for the he...
  • 04:30 AM - quoted Eirikrautha in post We Were All New D&D Players Once
    Hyperbolic? Absolutely, but intentionally. When someone has a guest over, they often will make strides to make that guest feel more comfortable. They might change certain habits or practices (like changing the food offeringsat their meals for someone with a different diet). The guest, were they polite, might also endeavor to disrupt the lives of their hosts as little as possible, even if it meant slight discomfort on their part. This balanced compromise makes the event possible. You seem to believe that the guest can demand a complete change in diet, throw out all of the host's music and consoles, a complete remodel of the house, and repainting of the rooms, just so they experience no discomfort at all. The only word I can think of to describe that attitude is "entitled." Not surprisingly, that word is often used to describe people's behavior nowadays... Jesus mate.
  • 03:44 AM - quoted Eirikrautha in post We Were All New D&D Players Once
    That is your opinion, which you have every right to. But I personally do not believe that those who join an established culture have the imprimatur to expect the culture to bear the totality of the change. I believe that's the definition of colonization... Jesus mate.
  • 02:09 AM - quoted Eirikrautha in post We Were All New D&D Players Once
    True. But it's not a matter of if, but to what extent. Almost every table I've ever been at has been flexible with the newbies. The question is how far you go. Do you play a different style for a session or two until the newbie gets a little more comfortable? Or six months? Or should you change your table in perpetuity to fit the style of the newcomer? I've seen no discussion of these issues at all; the assumption in all of the articles I've read ignores the growing together of newbie and group and instead focuses solely on the compromises the group must make. Some discussion of ways to help the newbie grow towards your group is warranted, even if directed to the veterans (who are the folks that read articles on this, anyway). At some point I'm playing this game because I enjoy it, not to increase WotC's profits. I like having more folks to play with, but that's a balance, not an imperative. I think these are mostly silly make-believe "issues". The newbie has no "compromises" to ma...
  • 01:47 AM - quoted Eirikrautha in post We Were All New D&D Players Once
    Agreed. But I don't see lots of articles on various websites belaboring this. The general attitude is one of sorry, hope you find a table that fits your style, go in peace. But with new players, the attitude seems to be change your table culture as much as it takes to retain that one new player... I think that's because if Old Joe doesn't fit at your table, there's a good chance he understands why, and can peacefully move on to another table, somewhere. Or create his own game to get the kind of experience he wants. With New June there's a risk that if the table doesn't make something of a wide berth for their newness, they'll leave the hobby entirely.
  • 12:39 AM - ad_hoc quoted Eirikrautha in post We Were All New D&D Players Once
    Now, I haven't directly seen anyone say "Screw the six people you've been playing with for three decades, make the new guy feel happy!" but some of the responses so far definitely have an element of privileging the new over the old. In fact, I would say that, were the question put directly to the respondents on this thread, "Who bears the greatest responsibility to compromise in order to please the rest of the table?" many of you would respond with the veterans as opposed to the newbie. The way I look at it is that if we have to change in order to accommodate a player who is new to the game then we are already doing it wrong. The second example directly addresses a point in the OP's article: the influence of web series like Critical Role. Several of my veteran players have been in this group since the mid-eighties, and have never played at a table like what you might see on Critical Role. In fact, most of us would not come back after the first session. The style, focus, and tenor of ...

Friday, 27th April, 2018

  • 06:36 AM - evileeyore quoted Eirikrautha in post Killing In The Name Of Advancement
    Perhaps you would like to be more specific? Because I'm having a hard time finding which "modern conventions" if removed, make for fun roleplay. Treating women as property? Killing people who look different? Slavery? Thievery? Conquest? Looting, Breaking-and-Entering, Vigilante behaviour, Judge Jury and Executioner, Property Damage, Might vs Right, Pushback against Authority, Killing/Slaying beings for all sorts of reasons - differing ideologies, racism, extinguishing evil...etc Yeah, that all sounds [-]good[/-] fun. Nothing is obligatory but in the first example of D&D gaming I ever read in the Elmore Box set there was an evil human magic user who really needed killing for what he did to Aleena. Aleeeeeeeeeeeenaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!! *screams at the sky* :( Bargle can't die enough deaths for killing Aleena. Not enough deaths.

Wednesday, 25th April, 2018

  • 02:46 AM - quoted Eirikrautha in post Killing In The Name Of Advancement
    Thievery? Conquest? If I like the neighbor's house, I can't just go take it. In D&D, sometimes it is even encouraged to do so (how many ruined castles have you "liberated" in TSR or WotC's own published adventures?)! There are all kinds of actions that are frowned upon in modern civilization that are practically mandatory in D&D. Oh, and the funny thing about "dog whistles"? If you can hear it, you must be a dog... Funny. I don't think I've ever played a game of D&D where looting and conquering were practically mandatory.
  • 01:38 AM - quoted Eirikrautha in post Killing In The Name Of Advancement
    Au contraire! Part of the fun of roleplaying (for some/many of us; experiences may vary) is exactly the opportunity to shed modern conventions and restrictions. Perhaps you would like to be more specific? Because I'm having a hard time finding which "modern conventions" if removed, make for fun roleplay. Treating women as property? Killing people who look different? Slavery? I'm dying to know, really. ....and also secretly hoping the first thing out of your post isn't "PC culture".
  • 01:29 AM - Doug McCrae quoted Eirikrautha in post Killing In The Name Of Advancement
    But "killing" is not a "problem" in heroic RPGs, especially when you understand that part of the enjoyment for some of us is roleplaying those different cultural values, ones that are out of place in the modern world...I agree with everything you wrote except for the last paragraph. D&D takes a modern perspective on good and evil, as expressed by its alignment system. In Beowulf's world, slavery was moral. In the High Medieval period it was sometimes (whenever a crusade was called) perceived as moral, indeed essential, to execute Jews who refused to convert to Christianity. That's not the world of D&D.
  • 01:11 AM - Arilyn quoted Eirikrautha in post Killing In The Name Of Advancement
    First of all, this article reads as if the definition of "hero" is something that is, if not universally agreed upon, concrete enough that it doesn't need to be mentioned. That is the primary flaw that creates the false tension addressed by the rest of the article. The fact is that the term hero, as used in a modern context, can most accurately be defined as "someone who reflects the dominant cultural values (or my cultural values, depending on the context)." For example, most fantasy RPGs privilege violence as heroic action because of the influence of Tolkien, who himself was reflecting the Anglo-Saxon values system of the stories he loved (and knew well). Beowulf was not a "hero" for saving Hrothgar; he was a hero for killing Grendel. The idea of the "sacrificial" hero is primarily a construct of Christianity in the Western world. The hero who sacrifices himself for others would be unrecognizable outside of a cultural values system that did not center on the sacrifice of notable cultural...


Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast

Eirikrautha's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites