View Profile: Imaculata - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • iserith's Avatar
    Today, 12:52 AM
    That sounds like an empty threat at first that he was forced to follow through on. Telegraphing a rival adventuring party is a ton of fun and I use that a lot as time pressure. And I use the same party in every campaign - the iconic characters from D&D 3.Xe i.e. Tordek, Lidda, Jozan, Mialee et al. It's kind of a running joke and a little competition is a fantastic way to encourage the players...
    44 replies | 752 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Today, 12:37 AM
    Did the DM telegraph to the players that there were rival adventuring groups in the area? That is also a good time pressure. I bet it was more the gotcha that made the players salty.
    44 replies | 752 view(s)
    1 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Today, 12:35 AM
    Then you go back to town every time you need a long rest, presuming you can do that in a town. This may increase the amount of time it takes to complete an adventure both in-game and in real time, depending on whether travel back and forth to town is played out. If there is danger on that travel, player may rightly decide to curtail the delve to conserve resources, potentially reducing the amount...
    44 replies | 752 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:25 PM
    The Five Minute Workday can be corrected with time pressure in the form of quest timers and/or wandering monsters.
    44 replies | 752 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:24 PM
    It depends on the scenario really.
    44 replies | 752 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:51 PM
    I do that right now in most dungeons. It works fine in my experience. Players figure out a way to deal with it and carry on. Typically that just means multiple trips back and forth to the dungeon, either resting nearby in the wilderness or back in town. Or they get a Leomund's tiny hut if they're of the appropriate level and have a caster that can cast it. Depending on how complex I want to...
    44 replies | 752 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Imaculata's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:26 PM
    Imaculata replied to Firearms
    I don't think that is true. Of course. But the players have plenty of access to healing and protection of all kinds. Deadlier combat simply means the players will have to play differently, and think more about their strategies. This is a fair point, which is why I think any spells and special abilities that work against projectiles, should also work against bullets. This includes...
    145 replies | 3993 view(s)
    1 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:00 PM
    This is supported by the "Degrees of Failure" rules in the DMG, page 242. What is old is new again!
    175 replies | 7672 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Yesterday, 07:43 PM
    Wow, I hadn't really thought about it in this way before, but that really is what's at stake. On the surface it's all "hey, we're just checking to see what your character knows, 'kay?" Which doesn't seem that unreasonable, especially if you are used to a paradigm where the DM just asks for checks sometimes without an action stated by the player and the player doesn't look too closely at the rules...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:21 PM
    Thinking of the overall situation and challenge instead of thinking of it solely as a combat challenge may help you build into the scene elements that encourage the players to try other things. Alternate goals for the monsters and PCs other than reducing enemies to 0 hit points, plus aligning your rewards accordingly help a great deal with this. Feel free to check out some of my short-form...
    20 replies | 606 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:01 PM
    How the character thinks is in the control of the player, not the DM. As a result, there is no uncertainty - the character thinks whatever the player says he or she thinks. No doubt. The players in the example did not attempt to recall lore. One said he or she wanted to go buy some scrolls. The other said, only after the incredulous DM raised an eyebrow or the like, that he or she...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Imaculata's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:47 AM
    Imaculata replied to Firearms
    The reason I disagree with you, is because I feel firearms should be the first and obvious choice for the players, and melee should be their backup weapons. As I said, I run a pirate campaign, and if all my players still ended up using bows and swords, then I'd feel like I had failed at establishing a pirate campaign. Historically guns were more deadly, so they should be a lot more powerful than...
    145 replies | 3993 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Imaculata's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:39 AM
    Just beautiful. I want to give more xp!
    4 replies | 247 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Imaculata's Avatar
    Sunday, 19th May, 2019, 07:48 AM
    Imaculata replied to Firearms
    How I handle firearms in my 3.5 pirate campaign, is to make them clearly better than regular D&D weapons. They do more damage, can fire multiple shots, and do triple damage on a crit. They can also be combined with weapon-specific feats/abilities, such as using the Quickdraw feat to draw multiple preloaded pistols in a round and fire them. You need to give firearms a strong advantage, or players...
    145 replies | 3993 view(s)
    4 XP
  • Imaculata's Avatar
    Sunday, 19th May, 2019, 07:40 AM
    Yeah, both actors were heavily criticised. People were furious about Ledger playing the joker... but turns out he might be one of the best Joker's of all time (second only to Mark Hamill in my opinion). Then again, DC is having an epic dance with failure lately. If they get Batman right with Pattison, it's probably on accident.
    25 replies | 508 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Imaculata's Avatar
    Sunday, 19th May, 2019, 07:34 AM
    Well, I still play 3.5, so my answer is obvious.
    116 replies | 3039 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Imaculata's Avatar
    Sunday, 19th May, 2019, 07:22 AM
    Yeah, when I watched the first episode for the first time, I wasn't convinced that it would become as good as it ultimately would. If it weren't for the cliffhanger ending, I might not have kept watching the show.
    6 replies | 206 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Quickleaf's Avatar
    Saturday, 18th May, 2019, 04:30 AM
    Hah. That would have been brilliant. :) No, this was Vecna telepathically contacting a PC who was carrying the Hand in her backpack but hadn't yet realized its true nature. I kind of was channeling my inner Dave Arneson Ė at least I've heard stories he'd DM behind a full-body DM screen. My intention was to model a disembodied voice which the player couldn't attempt to "discern if it's telling...
    51 replies | 1305 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Quickleaf's Avatar
    Friday, 17th May, 2019, 08:10 PM
    I guess I am guilty of all the above? I do voices, diction, expressive language, facial expressions, and body language as needed. For example, when portraying an eblis I adopted a zany silly voice, whereas for having the Hand of Vecna whispering to a PC, I spoke with my shirt pulled up over my mouth. I pre-write area descriptions as needed (usually no more than 1 per session), use...
    51 replies | 1305 view(s)
    1 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Friday, 17th May, 2019, 04:28 PM
    Yes, if the player declares an action that has an uncertain outcome and a meaningful consequence for failure. In this example, including what you added, we have two action declarations: (1) The barbarian wants to go to Ye Ole Magick Shoppe to buy some thunderwave scrolls for the wizard and (2) The wizard's player wants to retroactively give the barbarian a reason to take the aforementioned action...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Quickleaf's Avatar
    Thursday, 16th May, 2019, 10:14 PM
    My rule of thumb with NPCs joining the party is to begin with this as my rough guideline (and then adjust based on play experience of that particular NPC): CR = Level equivalent 1/4 = 1 1/2 = 2 1 = 3 2 = 4 3 = 5 4 = 7 5 = 9
    3 replies | 183 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Imaculata's Avatar
    Thursday, 16th May, 2019, 11:55 AM
    Usually what I do to get the creative juices flowing, is to imagine my world as Disneyland. Every location should be unique and interesting, as should every character. Its kind of like going sight seeing. If there's nothing to be seen, then why should your players care? So I often start with a location that I'm interested in. If for example the players are hired by a wizard, then where does he...
    12 replies | 443 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Imaculata's Avatar
    Thursday, 16th May, 2019, 11:37 AM
    It's a shame Solo was such a flop, because it was a pretty entertaining movie.
    9 replies | 281 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Imaculata's Avatar
    Wednesday, 15th May, 2019, 05:50 PM
    Oh, almost guaranteed. But I think George RR Martin will make the transition a bit more smooth, character motivated and logical, instead of the abrupt character assassination that we got this season... that is, if he ever finishes Winds of Winter and then some more books... which seems unlikely. It's not Dany's turn that I have a problem with. It is how it is presented in the show, which made...
    172 replies | 3798 view(s)
    1 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Wednesday, 15th May, 2019, 05:18 PM
    Man, I thought my preference for stupid names was well-known at this point. I'm firing my publicist. But just check out my short-form scenarios for examples of this (plus presentation in general).
    51 replies | 1305 view(s)
    2 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Wednesday, 15th May, 2019, 04:43 PM
    I have a penchant for silly names in my games, both as a player and DM, because I find them funny and, because others find them funny, they are more memorable. Presenting NPC names this way is good for retention. I struggle to remember NPCs with the usual fantasy RPG names, but you don't forget even minor NPCs like the Marguul bugbear gladiator, Dikpik the Unsolicited, who showed up without...
    51 replies | 1305 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Imaculata's Avatar
    Wednesday, 15th May, 2019, 12:04 PM
    They also need to be consistent. We have been shown how accurate or inaccurate the Scorpion is three or four times in the show (one of which was the episode before). And it is always as accurate as the plot requires at that time, which means not consistent at all.
    172 replies | 3798 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Imaculata's Avatar
    Wednesday, 15th May, 2019, 11:44 AM
    Ramsay's book counter part is every bit as evil as the one on the show. But some of his acts were switched from a character not featured on the show, to one that is; Sansa. The show indeed struggles a lot around season 5. The book on which it is based, Feast for Crows, struggles about just as much (although they also throw in some Dance with Dragons). There's a lot of aimless floundering about...
    172 replies | 3798 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Imaculata's Avatar
    Wednesday, 15th May, 2019, 09:36 AM
    If there is anything to be learned here, it is how important George RR Martin's writing was to the success of the show... without that backbone, the show stumbles towards the finish line in a hurry.
    172 replies | 3798 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Quickleaf's Avatar
    Wednesday, 15th May, 2019, 02:01 AM
    Everything you said is accurate. My introduction to D&D was with the Greyhawk "setting" Ė†though it was used more as a backdrop for adventuring. I was young at that time, but looking back I feel it kinda fit the "middle fantasy" mold, more similar to books like The Black Company or The Witcher than Forgotten Realms. I actually started a discussion on what constitutes "middle fantasy" here...
    67 replies | 2415 view(s)
    1 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Tuesday, 14th May, 2019, 08:18 PM
    I have no idea what your goal is with this. And yet here we are saying it. Except determine what their characters do, think, and say.
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Tuesday, 14th May, 2019, 07:19 PM
    No more than anyone should expect me to perfectly execute the approach I use and discuss here on enworld, especially after three or more Jamesons. But I know what I'm supposed to be doing per the rules and I try. A lot of words to say "People can play how they want." Which is and has never been in dispute. But if you want to say the rules support players establishing fiction outside their...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Tuesday, 14th May, 2019, 05:08 PM
    What is the Arcana check for? I don't see an action declaration from the wizard in your breakdown. That's not the DM's problem. It's up to the players to play their characters effectively. My car doesn't use gasoline. That is the smart play. :)
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Imaculata's Avatar
    Tuesday, 14th May, 2019, 11:57 AM
    This episode was one giant character assassination. I know that they were trying to build up to Dany's madness, but they had not built it up to the point where killing thousands of innocent civillians feels like something she would do. This feels completely divorced from her character up to this point. Also, apparently dragon fire behaves like a missile now, and has concussive force to blow...
    172 replies | 3798 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Quickleaf's Avatar
    Tuesday, 14th May, 2019, 10:47 AM
    Might be a good opportunity to subvert expectations. Everyone says Artus is possessed by the Ring, or an unreliable scoundrel, or whatever, and they're paying good money to see him captured. But when they meet Artus, he's a standup guy who is very concerned about the Death Curse and is willing to join them so long as their goals are aligned (his goal is always first and foremost to return to his...
    11 replies | 2654 view(s)
    1 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Monday, 13th May, 2019, 08:06 PM
    I can't really speak for the social contracts at anyone's table but my own. From the perspective of the rules though, that expectation does not hold up well in my view since the outcome of all action declarations are decided by the DM who is empowered to use the rules to inform his or her decision but is never beholden to them. (This necessarily includes something as simple as taking rope out of...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    1 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Monday, 13th May, 2019, 07:53 PM
    A D&D 5e DM who wants to act in the framework the rules provide in my view narrates the result of the adventurers' action without establishing anything new about what the player described as wanting the character to do. This is the effective limit for the DM in this regard, since he or she cannot determine what the character does, thinks, or says. One trick I do in an effort to avoid overstepping...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Monday, 13th May, 2019, 06:57 PM
    Right. My point being that nobody can really say that a social contract applies to all tables and, given how it will vary, it's not something that helps show an approach is a breach of the social contract. It might be for some and not for others. I think from the perspective of the rules the DM gets to say what the outcome of every action declaration is. Some might not like this or outsource some...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Imaculata's Avatar
    Monday, 13th May, 2019, 06:23 PM
    I would expect cargo to be a hazard. Imagine a big crane lifting heavy crates that the bad guys can swing towards the players, or use to drop the cargo on their heads. Also, I would expect the bad guys to use a small sloop to sneak their men into the city via the canals as backup, with some extra firepower. The fight on the docks would simply be a distraction while the sloop is the main...
    15 replies | 443 view(s)
    3 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Monday, 13th May, 2019, 05:42 PM
    "Social contract" exists as what the DMG calls "table rules" which are not the rules of the game. These will vary from table to table. I have already given good reasons, based on what the rules describe as the DM's role, why the DM may decide that the player's action declaration to take the rope out of the character's backpack may fail. Those reasons might be that the DM needs to mediate...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    1 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Monday, 13th May, 2019, 04:57 PM
    But who decides that there is an "automatic outcome" to casting a fireball or seeking help from the PC's temple? The DM, always.
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    1 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Monday, 13th May, 2019, 03:47 PM
    They may be listed on the character sheet, but as the outcome of all action declarations are decided upon by the DM, I don't think where they are listed says anything about the player controlling the fiction in this regard.
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Monday, 13th May, 2019, 02:35 PM
    I prefer maps and tokens and use Roll20 even for in-person games. But one thing I learned about TotM is that the standard play loop is even more important and the DM is well-served by internalizing that process and using it. The standard play loop is (1) The DM describes the environment, (2) The players describe what they want to do, and (3) The DM narrates the results of the adventurers's...
    44 replies | 1220 view(s)
    9 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Monday, 13th May, 2019, 02:34 AM
    Why? Does what the PC think have to be a truth about the game world or be permitted to create NPCs during play (over which the player has NO authority by the rules) in order for you to feel the player has "total authority over what the PC thinks and feels?" Why does this make the PC a "relative stranger" to the game world? The player can choose to use that knowledge to inform how he or she...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Sunday, 12th May, 2019, 06:47 PM
    I think Celebrim establishes a good line here: The player is free to draw upon hard-won knowledge to inform how he or she has the character act. The limit is when the player is not acting in good faith and has, as you suggest above, read the module and presumably didn't tell anyone. I think a player not being forthcoming about this many people would consider rude or worse. But sometimes my...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Sunday, 12th May, 2019, 06:04 PM
    I don't find any contradiction here that isn't created by the player. It is the player that has to yield since it is the player stating something about the world (e.g. "earth elementals are vulnerable to thunder damage"), which is under the purview of the DM. The obvious solution to me is for the player not to do that (nor declare the guard is Frances, an old friend) and, again, to verify one's...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    1 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Sunday, 12th May, 2019, 06:01 AM
    I don't understand what you're saying here in relation to my specific question that you quoted. If the DM does not care that the PC went to buy scrolls presumably good in a fight against earth elementals with no explanation whatsover, then why would someone care if they do so after saying "earth elementals are vulnerable to thunder" or words to that effect? Does something meaningful change about...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Saturday, 11th May, 2019, 11:27 PM
    If you're fine with the them going to buy the scrolls without explanation, why care with an explanation? The DM is just there to adjudicate the action of buying the scrolls, nothing more. A player might say "Hey, everyone, earth elementals are vulnerable to thunder damage." But there's nothing there for the DM to do. I don't say "player knowledge = character knowledge" though. I'm saying...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Saturday, 11th May, 2019, 09:20 PM
    The player's intent is clear; the character's is not. They don't have to be the same thing since player and character are separate, right? The player could know that earth elementals are vulnerable to thunder damage, but never say anything about the character's knowledge and just describe what he or she wants to do: "I want to go to Ye Olde Magick Shoppe to buy some scrolls of thunderwave." Just...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Friday, 10th May, 2019, 06:25 PM
    Yeah. To be clear, I actually prefer the players have some additional measure of control of the fiction outside of their characters and frequently build on offers the players make during play, especially when it comes to my regular players. But I also know that this is not supported by the rules of D&D 5e and so I can't honestly make the argument that it is when we're discussing what is or isn't...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Friday, 10th May, 2019, 04:29 PM
    I think they would inform but not constrain the DM's narration of the outcome of the adventurers' outcome. This may seem like splitting hairs, but we have to take any rule into the context of the idea that the rules serve the DM, not the other way around. In this case, it may well be likely that the DM always says the character can (for example) get an audience with a noble or help from his or...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Imaculata's Avatar
    Friday, 10th May, 2019, 03:12 PM
    Well, there goes the thread...
    73 replies | 6220 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Friday, 10th May, 2019, 02:42 AM
    Fair play, since I provided my own diagnosis for you as you say. However, I think it's more simple: I say what I do in my games e.g. players don't ask to make checks. Someone responds to ask why or to criticize my choice (fair enough), often someone who already knows the answer, perhaps adding that he or she does that and his or her game works fine. I say something like, "I do it because there is...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    1 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Friday, 10th May, 2019, 02:21 AM
    I'm not sure what you're saying here - the truth is a deflection? In the context of the game, it actually doesn't matter to the DM in my view. My assumption in this example is that the player is making an offer in good faith and with full knowledge of the rules of the game and the table rules. If, however, the player is under some misapprehension that, by the rules of this game or perhaps...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Friday, 10th May, 2019, 12:39 AM
    Again (and again and again...), me saying what I do as being something the rules books say to do isn't a judgment on how you play. But in a discussion about DMing approaches, especially one as meandering as some of the threads of late, it may be appropriate for any number of reasons to observe that someone's approach is clearly taken from some other game when it's obvious there is no support for...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Friday, 10th May, 2019, 12:17 AM
    Yeah, so you just keep saying things I'm not arguing against as if I am and, because I feel obliged to respond to someone who responds to me, I feel like I'm wasting my time now. Probably best to just ignore each other.
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Thursday, 9th May, 2019, 11:29 PM
    Already addressed upthread. And there are approaches that DMs take that simply cannot be derived from the plain English words on the pages of the D&D 5e rules books. Some certainly could if you were reading a rules book from some other game. When that happens, expect me to point it out, especially if the poster is reporting dissatisfaction with the game experience.
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Thursday, 9th May, 2019, 08:42 PM
    All your position means is that we're at an impasse and there's nothing left to discuss on this front. I won't be changing what I call the rules. I mean in a kind of postmodern sense, sure, anything can mean anything. But in a pragmatic sense, only some interpretations will actually be valid in that they actually work reliably in achieving the intended goal. If you're saying that some...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Thursday, 9th May, 2019, 07:57 PM
    And who among us old-timers haven't been in games like that?! I sure as heck have.
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Thursday, 9th May, 2019, 07:34 PM
    Yeah, we can play all kinds of word games if you want. But I don't think that's very interesting or helpful. More word games. It looks more to me that you're reading into my words an intent I do not have.
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Thursday, 9th May, 2019, 07:29 PM
    I agree. I think it may have been this thread where I mentioned that even if the DM "gives" the player the freedom to react however he or she likes after the DM establishes how the character feels about something, the DM still established a constraint in which the player may feel compelled to take into account when deciding what to do. As Chaosmancer points out, the rest of the table might be...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Thursday, 9th May, 2019, 07:11 PM
    Sure, but all of the organizations, locations, and NPCs are under the full control of the DM during play as are the outcomes of all action declarations by the player related to the background features above, since you still have to declare an action to seek assistance from the priests of your temple, get messages to your criminal contact, secure an audience with a noble, and so on. This does not...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    1 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Thursday, 9th May, 2019, 07:06 PM
    I would say anything that isn't specifically called out as a rules variant (e.g., encumbrance or different resting options) or the like is a rule. This includes the stuff that doesn't seem very "crunchy," such as the section on "How to Play" or what the player gets to determine about the character. I think to parse it into various other words like "guidelines" or the like doesn't really help and...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Thursday, 9th May, 2019, 03:45 PM
    There's a difference between before play and during play with regard to equipment. Yes, you get to pick your equipment before play during character creation, just like you get to pick your ability scores (if you're not rolling them), race, class, and so on. During play, the results of your action declarations are firmly in the hands of the DM. People other than player characters are non-player...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Thursday, 9th May, 2019, 02:23 PM
    I'm not trying to convince you of anything. And it's likely that more people understand my points than don't. Just a handful of folks are vocal in their objections and it's always the same posters in multiple threads. That strikes me as a clash of personalities more than anything else.
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Imaculata's Avatar
    Thursday, 9th May, 2019, 11:50 AM
    Yeti's! Make it a crypt with an ice/snow theme.
    11 replies | 354 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Imaculata's Avatar
    Thursday, 9th May, 2019, 11:45 AM
    The entire trailer makes it look like this was conceived in the 90's. Complete with Coolio's Gangsta's Paradise.
    25 replies | 655 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Thursday, 9th May, 2019, 01:35 AM
    What's not solid about it? Always right in that this is what the character thinks, anyway, since the rules say the player determines what the character thinks. Those thoughts themselves might be wrong. The player need not necessarily believe that Frances exists. The player could be portraying a character who is sometimes confused about what is or isn't real, a flaw that when so...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Wednesday, 8th May, 2019, 08:49 PM
    I truly think that is what your objection is all about - memories of a war in which you participated that ended long ago. It can be seen in a lot of your posts and it appears to color your reception of the viewpoints and positions of others. It's in your often backhanded or faint praise of D&D 5e, compared to the edition of the game you clearly prefer (and frankly so do I). I'm not a ghost...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Wednesday, 8th May, 2019, 08:06 PM
    Here we're just discussing how to discuss or arguing about how to argue and you know my feelings about that.
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Wednesday, 8th May, 2019, 07:51 PM
    Thanks for the kind words, but if that's your interpretation of my position, I'm afraid it will have to continue to bother you. I won't stop saying that I do what I do because the rules say to do that or suggest to people having issues that they try what the rules say to see if it corrects the problem.
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Wednesday, 8th May, 2019, 07:22 PM
    As far as D&D 5e is concerned, that's the definition. Other games might have other definitions. That the game works to varying degrees whether a DM follows the rules or not is something I do not dispute, especially since I've seen that be the case (even if it some cases it wasn't my cup of tea). But that comes at the risk of arriving at a game experience that is not intended or in some...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Wednesday, 8th May, 2019, 07:08 PM
    Sorry, dude, I'm the only authority here on what I care about. Please kindly leave off on this track. "Roleplaying is, literally, the act of playing out a role. In this case, it's you as a player determining how your character thinks, acts, and talks." (PHB, p. 185) Taken together with "How to Play," we see very clearly who gets to say what according to the rules. The DM's authority...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Wednesday, 8th May, 2019, 06:12 PM
    Please do not ascribe to me claims I am not making. As for showing where others are not following the rules and perhaps not achieving a desirable result, that's fair game as far as I am concerned. It's advice for correcting a problem the poster reports. They can take it or leave it. Further, me saying what I do is because I'm just following what the books say is not a judgment on what other...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Wednesday, 8th May, 2019, 05:59 PM
    I would say your impression is mistaken and perhaps, based on your previous posts in this and other threads, greatly influenced by your experience in the edition wars and related discussions of the past. My position is that the rules are like the directions of a recipe. If you don't follow them, you may get a different result than the recipe intended. Whether that's good or bad is a matter of...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Wednesday, 8th May, 2019, 05:14 PM
    And I'm saying it's absolutely true that you can work out what is or isn't permitted with the existing rules. The DM narrates the results of the adventurers' actions, always. If the player says he or she wants to have the character reach into the backpack and grab a rope, by the rules, the DM gets to say how that works out. As I said before, the DM may decide the character lacks the remaining...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Imaculata's Avatar
    Wednesday, 8th May, 2019, 07:49 AM
    Originally in the books, Bran was able to see through the faces of the weirdwood trees. That was how he was able to see his father during the events of the first book. I don't think there is a weirwood at King's Landing, thus explaining the limits to his sight. But it has not been established well in the show. I think after episode 3 we won't see Bran do anything useful any more in the show. ...
    60 replies | 1941 view(s)
    2 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Wednesday, 8th May, 2019, 04:01 AM
    What answer are you looking for? I stated what the rules have to say on the matter and have addressed the specific example in a reply to Elfcrusher upthread. You're welcome to read it. I hope you don't count me among them. If you do, then you've misunderstood (and now misstated) my position. Yes, the player determines what the character thinks and does, and particular knowledge is...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Wednesday, 8th May, 2019, 01:32 AM
    Another poster who stated that he or she deviated from the rules told me to call what he or she does "house rules" before. I refused. So I'm afraid you'll have to find someone else to push back on in this regard. This isn't me advocating slavish devotion to RAW for its own sake. The endless polling probably didn't hurt. There you go again parsing the rules and organizing them in...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Wednesday, 8th May, 2019, 01:02 AM
    It's all rules as I see it, and you're free to ignore the rules you don't want to use. Again, just be aware that this may impact the game experience negatively and require adjustment. There isn't much value in picking and choosing which are rules and which are not in my view. Accept them as one big bag of rules that are instructing you on how to play the game, then pare them down if you wish (or...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Wednesday, 8th May, 2019, 12:07 AM
    Yes, yes, heard it all before. This is a rule, but this isn't because I choose not to follow it, so it couldn't be a rule. That sounds like fluff, so ignore it or reflavor it however you want. And on and on. And yep, you can do all that and it's fine. Until it isn't. The D&D 4e DMG doesn't apply to D&D 5e. The D&D 3.Xe DMG doesn't apply to D&D 4e. And so on. Best to ignore other games when...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Tuesday, 7th May, 2019, 11:19 PM
    Rules are the things you find in the rules books. Unless you ignore them in which case they are just "advice." Or if you're an experienced DM, you don't bother reading anything anyway so none of it matters, especially not the DMG because what could you possibly learn by reading that? I don't hold a position that we must follow the rules, only that the rules inform us how the game is...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Tuesday, 7th May, 2019, 10:46 PM
    If you must put it in Forgotten Realms, the adventure says it is in the foothills nortwest of Thundertree and was once a secret stronghold of the Cult of the Dragon. It sunk when Mount Hotenow erupted.
    9 replies | 358 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Tuesday, 7th May, 2019, 10:43 PM
    Yeah man, probably most of us have done that. Some likely still do it and don't have a problem with it. It's a habit people pick up from other DMs or from other games.
    1672 replies | 59218 view(s)
    2 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Tuesday, 7th May, 2019, 10:39 PM
    I think it's quite possible to discern what is written in the book and what is not. I don't think it's a good idea to muddle that in a discussion about the rules. Of course as to whether what is written in the book is valued by the group will vary. That's a separate issue in my mind anyway. Yep, this is the argument I used in support of this sort of thing in D&D 4e where "Yes, and..." was...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Tuesday, 7th May, 2019, 09:46 PM
    Per the DMG, after the DM settles on what the campaign is about, the players work with the DM on how their characters' backgrounds and histories tie into the campaign. The DM is encouraged to say yes - if he or she can. If he or she can't, the DM is told to suggest alterations to the character's story so it better fits the world or figure out a way to weave the first threads of the campaign into...
    575 replies | 19956 view(s)
    1 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Tuesday, 7th May, 2019, 08:45 PM
    Yes! I've seen that a lot, too. Probably did it myself back in the day. Modules as I recall often presented information this way ahead of the boxed text (if I remember correctly). Make some rolls to determine what everyone knows and sees, then describe the environment accordingly.
    1672 replies | 59218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Tuesday, 7th May, 2019, 08:39 PM
    It shows. Reading and doing is my approach to the goal. Plus arguing on enworld.
    1672 replies | 59218 view(s)
    0 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Tuesday, 7th May, 2019, 08:30 PM
    Ugh, no choice, just a random number generator to determine the starting position for the fight. DM could have just rolled on a chart, put your characters where he or she wanted, and asked for initiative. The Dex saves and possibly passive Perception check is just a thin veneer that some choice you made during character creation or advancement mattered to the situation. And who knows if going...
    1672 replies | 59218 view(s)
    2 XP
  • iserith's Avatar
    Tuesday, 7th May, 2019, 08:07 PM
    This reminds me of the DMs who out of nowhere go "Uhhhh, give me a.... Perception check..." without an action declaration by the player preceding the request. It's like the DM is asking permission of the dice to describe the environment. Super common in my experience.
    1672 replies | 59218 view(s)
    2 XP
More Activity
About Imaculata

Basic Information

Date of Birth
July 17, 1981 (37)
About Imaculata
Introduction:
Game Designer and Level Designer
Location:
The Emerald Coast
Disable sharing sidebar?:
No
Sex:
Male
Age Group:
31-40
My Game Details

Details of games currently playing and games being sought.

Country:
Netherlands

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
2,176
Posts Per Day
1.62
Last Post
Firearms Yesterday 09:26 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
11
General Information
Last Activity
Yesterday 09:38 PM
Join Date
Thursday, 17th September, 2015
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0

4 Friends

  1. AaronOfBarbaria AaronOfBarbaria is offline

    Member

    AaronOfBarbaria
  2. Bawylie Bawylie is offline

    Member

    Bawylie
  3. iserith iserith is offline

    Member

    iserith
  4. Quickleaf Quickleaf is offline

    Member

    Quickleaf
Showing Friends 1 to 4 of 4
My Game Details
Country:
Netherlands
Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast

Tuesday, 21st May, 2019


Monday, 20th May, 2019


Sunday, 19th May, 2019


Saturday, 18th May, 2019


Thursday, 16th May, 2019



Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Monday, 20th May, 2019

  • 09:45 PM - Fenris-77 mentioned Imaculata in post Firearms
    ...nd a lot without everyone having a clear idea what it means. @Celebrim - you got a linky for that article? Maybe it'll help everyone get on the same page. I'd love to read it too! As for the console analogy, I'm with Kobold et al - the GM isn't a console at all. Fair arbitration is one of the GM's hats, but that's not the same thing as not having an opinion. As a GM I am doing a lot more work than everyone else involved in a game, so it's absolutely critical that I be enjoying myself. Generally that means that whatever contract and agreements that were set up between myself and the players in session zero are being adhered to, and everyone is on the same page with expectations and results. Even then, should I take steps as a GM to reign in players and get things back on track I'm still not railroading. Anyway, we've moved pretty far astray from firearms, but I do think we've hit upon one of the subterranean reasons why the arguments about firearms are so contentious sometimes. @Imaculata - you're making a category mistake. What is commonly true of most campaigns is one thing, and all of my points in that regard are on point, and accurate. Just because you want to do something different doesn't make me wrong. I'm not wrong. You want to push things with firearms? Go ahead, but it's got nothing to do with what works in a general sense.

Tuesday, 23rd April, 2019

  • 04:02 PM - Sadras mentioned Imaculata in post GAME OF THRONES SEASON 8--Final Run-- Part 2
    Jaime for Kingslayer and Queenslayer. Sansa will survive to depose Cersei as per the prophecy. I'm expecting Dani will likely be betrayed, perhaps by Jon or Jorah (or maybe Varys - not mentioned by you @Imaculata). I also expect Davos to survive.

Wednesday, 10th April, 2019


Monday, 1st April, 2019

  • 11:14 PM - Hussar mentioned Imaculata in post If an NPC is telling the truth, what's the Insight DC to know they're telling the truth?
    ... that way. I suspect, though, that iserith would not require the players to state that action...unless he had provided some sort of clue or signal that this is what they should do. Just like the existence of the office. Not quite. As I understand it, the way this would be done would be, if the players simply stated they were searching the office, the DC would be X. If the players stated they were checking out the furniture in the office, the DC would be Y. If the players stated they were taking out the drawers and looking at the bottom, they would automatically succeed. Is that a fair interpretation? iserith? Where X>Y, so, stating a general approach will succeed less often than a more specific approach and a very specific approach will always succeed, presuming it's the right approach? At least, that's how I'm interpreting what they are saying. Please correct me if I'm wrong. To me, it's not how I enjoy the game. For one, you see interpretations like Elfcrusher and Imaculata, where they look at the rules and interpret things a very different way than I would (like when the skill specifically calls out being able to discern lies but the DM says, nope, that's not what it says, I'm going to get frustrated), which lead to, IMO, artificially inflating difficulty in the name of "challenging" the players. And, funnily enough, IME, these "interpretations" always go against the players. The players can never jump more than is "realistic", the players never can do something that the DM thinks is unrealistic. And, it's the DM's sense of realism that is the bar that is set. It's not something I enjoy. You have a character who, for some reason, has a super set of jumping skills, and scores a 25 or 30 on a jump score - that's a legendary level of success. So, why not wuxia style jumping?

Monday, 25th March, 2019

  • 03:56 PM - DM Dave1 mentioned Imaculata in post If an NPC is telling the truth, what's the Insight DC to know they're telling the truth?
    ...s meant as an off the cuff remark that I was surprised that DM's do this. Just something I'd never run across. Which is at least somewhat surprising, since it is RAW (PHB p 174, emphasis mine): An ability check tests a character's or monster's innate talent and training in an effort to overcome a challenge. The DM calls for an ability check when a character or monster attempts an action (other than an attack) that has a chance of failure. When the outcome is uncertain, the dice determine the results. That said, I totally missed - or at least did not fully absorb - this passage when I started DMing 5e. I let players self-assign rolls which seemed ok as some of them had more RPG experience than I did and what did I know about D&D after not playing since 1e - but something just didn't feel right during our games for many months. I didn't recognize the solution until I started reading stuff from Angry and getting solid advice from folks here like iserith, Bawylie, Charlaquin, and Imaculata. Our games have gone from usually fine to consistently very good. And it has had a lot to do with my DM approach to dice rolls. Please don't misunderstand - I am in no way saying you are doing it wrong - if your group is having fun, you're doing it right! But you might give this way a try for a one shot or three to see how it feels for you and your group.

Tuesday, 19th March, 2019

  • 01:24 AM - Numidius mentioned Imaculata in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    This goes to a variation of player-imputes-knowledge-to-PC, which (at least in my experience), is helpful to first-person roleplaying: the player is entitled to make up setting elements and incorporate them into his/her roleplaying of his/her PC. I have one player in particular who likes to do this - sometimes drawing on his recollections of how a system or a setting works (he's been RPGing for over 30 years and so has a lot of such recollections), and sometimes just projecting his best sense (given past episodes of play plus genre logic) of how things should be in the setting. Right, and that is from player' side. I was asking from the Gm side, since I understand Imaculata is the Gm in the Death God example, and me being a bit provocative, like: how even if is the Gm, can he/she be sure if a Death God will take offense?

Sunday, 10th February, 2019

  • 03:58 AM - pemerton mentioned Imaculata in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    Outsider Perspective: Is this line of debate going anywhere productive? It seems like instead of debating the placement of goalposts or the number of angels that can dance on the AC of dragons, that the participants should reset and refocus their lines.From my point of view I've made my points and think they're clear. My exchange with Imaculata was brief but sensible, and I think we understand one another and our different ways into, and hence responses to, the issue. If you'd like me to elaborate or explain again, though, I'm happy to.

Saturday, 9th February, 2019

  • 08:27 AM - pemerton mentioned Imaculata in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    Why are you so fixated on what is power level x as compared to power level y? I don't understand.Because if I introduced 75th level characters into a game then I would also be introducing 75th level (or thereabouts) dragons, which - as I pointed out - would have natural armour bonuses that exceed the most powerful armour that can be forged by mages and godlings in the setting. Which is to say, the issue that I dislike - the simulationist veneer of "natural armour" - would still be there. If you're still confused by my concern, I recommend Imaculata's posts above. Imaculata doesn't get irritated in the way I do because he (? I apologise if that's an erroneous gender attribution) is able to treat the natural armour bonuses as purely mechanical devices to ensure the game maths works properly. I can't muster the same sanguinity, but Imaculata's response shows a clear understanding of the issue I'm raising and addresses it completely sensibly (and without any frustration on my part at least).

Thursday, 4th October, 2018

  • 04:40 PM - iserith mentioned Imaculata in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    ...olved until everyone sees the situation the same way and then roll the dice, or donít, as the situation requires. So at least as I read the DW rules, there is no reason why a player who declares I search the rubble shouldn't then pick up his/her 2d6 and roll them. If s/he gets an 11 or 12 (like the 20 in your example) then the GM is obliged to provide a certain sort of information, as specified in the rules (eg What here is not what it appears to be?). The pile of rubble matters (regardless of whether the GM thought it would or wouldn't) because the player has (i) decided to pay attention to it, and (ii) succeeded at a check. As I said, what strikes me in your example is that the player hasn't indicated what s/he is looking for, and so hasn't given the GM very much context to hang a response on. I find it easier to narrate successes (and failures) when I have some sense of what the player thinks is at stake in the situation. This isn't Dungeon World though. It's D&D 3.Xe (for Imaculata at least). What is missing from the player's example in a D&D context in my view is an approach to the goal (and to some extent the goal more specifically). I would prefer to hear something like "I want to use my shovel to move the rubble around to see if I find anything useful or valuable." Maybe there's something valuable there, maybe there's not (the example scenario suggests there isn't). But at least the DM isn't assuming or establishing what the character is doing. In another context, one where there's something potentially dangerous in the rubble, I'd want to know how the player is having the character go about searching as per my preferred statement. This avoids issues of the DM and player disagreeing about what the character was doing after the danger is revealed. The DM may have imagined the player digging into the rubble with his or her hands; the player may have imagined using a shovel. That's going to be a problem when being stricken with rot grubs or contact poison is on ...

Monday, 27th August, 2018

  • 07:41 PM - Loren Keely mentioned Imaculata in post Katana
    Imaculata This is just what I was thinking. I sent him a breakdown and this was almost exactly the concept I was thinking. Great minds think alike I guess. I will also look for that Dragon magazine issue.

Wednesday, 27th June, 2018

  • 09:39 AM - Jhaelen mentioned Imaculata in post Death and Storytelling
    No fudging or nerfing necessary. Unless your definition of nerfing is "modifying encounters to be something other than suicide-death-pacts." Allow me to first remind you of the original statement I've been responding to: During the early levels, all encounters are fairly balanced, so that deaths are just not going to happen. Also, please note that Imaculata is playing D&D 3.5. Now, to address your points: PCs can choose to run away from fights.Yep, they can do that. As a DM I may even suggest it. But it's not under my control whether they actually do try to flee or not. If a fight is unavoidable, PCs can throw down their weapons and beg for mercy.See above! PCs can enlist help to attain overwhelming odds.See above! GMs can provide level-appropriate encounters.There's a very clear definition how difficult encounters should be in the 3.5 DMG (page 48, I think). Unfortunately, I'm away from my books and failed to find the exact text. I only found the Encounter Calculator that is based on these assumptions. I.e. 10% of all encounters should be 'easy', 50% should be 'Challenging', 15% should be very hard, 5% should be overpowering. IIRC, the remaining encounters should be 'very hard', but there should be a way for the PCs to turn it into a 'challenging' encounter if they approach it in a clever way. GMs can play opponents int...

Sunday, 24th June, 2018

  • 12:54 AM - Maxperson mentioned Imaculata in post Everybody Cheats?
    Yes, exactly. Of course sometimes as a DM there is nothing you can do. We were playing many years ago and the players, of which I was one, could not roll dice for toffee. I have never seen an entire party roll like that in 30+ years of playing. Individuals certainly but not everyone! Poor DM didn't stand a chance. There wasn't even something subtle he could do. Something extreme on the DM's part wouldn't have helped because even if mysteriously the enemy were suddenly replaced by school kids, they still would have kicked sand in our faces. We really were that bad. Of course it has become legendary in the group and still makes us laugh to this day, but it also led to some interesting twists in the overall plot as we then had to work out how to continue to pursue the quest in the light of the abject failure. A silver lining. Yeah. Sometimes there's nothing you can do. I will also address something I missed in Imaculata's post. Solid strategies. If the players come up with a great plan and turn a challenging encounter into an easy, or even trivial one, so be it. I'm not going to negate player effort and planning.

Thursday, 21st June, 2018

  • 03:07 PM - akr71 mentioned Imaculata in post Need input on a ship based mini adventure
    ...here they want to go next, so that I know what to prepare. Once they reach such a location, I sprinkle various interconnected mysteries around, along with some sight seeing / exploration. It is up to them which of the clues they follow up on, but I'll usually also have an npc approach them directly, to provide a quest hook. Sometimes there's even more than one npc that approaches them for a quest, although one quest may lead straight into the next. I'm not sure either. I probably have as many sessions to fill as I want, but I'm not sure how long I can go before they want to get back to civilization and the mainland. The ship is a convenient 'left-over' from the previous DM and I thought I could try some things I never get to do on land. I was planning on sprinkling some things to explore or ignore as they saw fit. None of the characters or players have any sailing experience, so anything on-board the ship other than combat leaves them as bystanders, which I would like to avoid. Imaculata - you posted your hooks while I was writing. Thanks! I'll take a look at those and see what I can work with.
  • 11:38 AM - pemerton mentioned Imaculata in post Everybody Cheats?
    ...nnaturally, for that goes contrary to the major precepts of the game. I'm not saying that Gygax's advice is the only way to do it, but I think it's noteworthy that he draws such a strong contrast between the GM making decisions that regulate the introduction of new challenges into play (eg by ignoring wandering monster dice) and the GM fudging action resolution results. There are lots and lots of games that put Ēdonít cheatĒ explicitly in their game text. They go on to explain why itís a problem and why itís wholly unnecessary for that/those games (because they work without need for application of GM Force).Hm. I wonder if anyone can find me a quote reference of that from a game.Suggesting that certain GMing choices would go contrary to the major precepts of the game, and for that reason should not be done, comes well within cooee of what Manbearcat described. Here's another example, from Burning Wheel (Gold edition, p 30), which is directly relevant to the sort of example Imaculata gave: [W]hat happens after the dice have come to rest and the successes are counted? If the successes equal or exceed the obstacle, the character has succeeded in his goalóhe achieved his intent and completed the task. This is important enough to say again: Characters who are successful complete actions in the manner described by the player. A successful roll is sacrosanct in Burning Wheel and neither GM nor other players can change the fact that the act was successful. The GM may only embellish or reinforce a successful ability test. Slightly less portentously, the Marvel Heroic RP rulebook (p OM8) says: In some games, the person who runs the game rolls the dice in secret - but there are no secrets in the Bullpen. Roll those bones in full view, Watchers!
  • 05:06 AM - Maxperson mentioned Imaculata in post Everybody Cheats?
    So you are making a legal appeal to the rules as written to suggest that "rulings not rules" means that the GM is inherently incapable of cheating? :confused: Since all rules are guidelines and the DM has full power to alter them at will, it's not cheating if he does. He's just using his given ability as DM. Rulings over rules is just a part of that authority. This would make an interesting poll. Officially can a DM cheat? The online definition of cheating: 1. act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage. 2. avoid (something undesirable) by luck or skill. In (1), one might ask what advantage might the DM gain. Well DM's that act as the one described by @Imaculata tend to enjoy a DM-vs-player style and so there is room to say that cheating or fudging (whichever you prefer) provides an advantage to the DM in that roleplaying style. A few things. First, the DM is given an unfair advantage by the rules by virtue of being DM. He has the given ability to drop 10,000 monsters on a first level party if he wants. It's the DM's responsibility, though, to use that power wisely as bad DMs lose players fast. Second, I don't view what Imaculata is describing as a playstyle. Bad DMing is bad DMing, not a style of play. If a game devolves into DM vs. Player, the players lose. In (2), many DM's technically cheat or fudge to avoid undesirable outcomes for the table (whether it be to spare a PC or prolong an epic combat...etc). By that definition, everything you avoid that you don't like is cheating. Avoid eating a cheese sandwich that you dislike while at a party? Cheater!! Intercept a football headed for the end zone? Cheater!! Work hard to avoid...

Wednesday, 20th June, 2018

  • 02:39 PM - Sadras mentioned Imaculata in post Everybody Cheats?
    The DM is not cheating, though. He can't. Instead, he's being an asshat and bad DM. You respond to that by letting him know that you have better things to do and going elsewhere. The fact that the DM is given the authority to add, subtract or alter rules as he sees fit means that he literally cannot cheat. There's no rule for him to break. Rulings over rules and all that. It's messed up, but it's not cheating since he isn't breaking a rule. This would make an interesting poll. Officially can a DM cheat? The online definition of cheating: 1. act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage. 2. avoid (something undesirable) by luck or skill. In (1), one might ask what advantage might the DM gain. Well DM's that act as the one described by @Imaculata tend to enjoy a DM-vs-player style and so there is room to say that cheating or fudging (whichever you prefer) provides an advantage to the DM in that roleplaying style. In (2), many DM's technically cheat or fudge to avoid undesirable outcomes for the table (whether it be to spare a PC or prolong an epic combat...etc). However having said all that, the DM has the power to change/amend any rule of the game AND at any time. So can he really cheat? I'm not really asking you Max, just musing and upping my post count. :) EDIT: Wait, I got it, CAN GOD CHEAT?

Tuesday, 29th May, 2018

  • 02:34 PM - iserith mentioned Imaculata in post Poison needle traps
    It just looks badly worded to me, perhaps an editing error, so it's up to you how it will ultimately function. It seems like the goal here is to set up a challenge of (1) finding the proper key or (2) disabling the trap then picking the lock. Anyone going straight to picking the lock is going to have a nasty surprise. That's how I'd handle it, anyway. I would also be sure to telegraph the existence of the trap in some way so that it isn't a "gotcha." @Imaculata: A passive check does not imply that the character is being passive. "Passive" refers to their being no roll, not that the character isn't performing a task. In fact, the rules state that such checks resolve a character performing a task repeatedly. Whether the DM uses a passive Investigation check to resolve this situation depends on what, specifically, the player described the character as doing.
  • 02:12 PM - Li Shenron mentioned Imaculata in post Poison needle traps
    A poisoned needle is hidden within a treasure chestís lock, or in something else that a creature might open. Opening the chest without the proper key causes the needle to spring out, delivering a dose of poison. When the trap is triggered, the needle extends 3 inches straight out from the lock. A creature within range takes 1 piercing damage and 11 (2d10) poison damage, and must succeed on a DC 15 Constitution saving throw or be poisoned for 1 hour. A successful DC 20 Intelligence (Investigation) check allows a character to deduce the trapís presence from alterations made to the lock to accommodate the needle. A successful DC 15 Dexterity check using thievesí tools disarms the trap, removing the needle from the lock. Unsuccessfully attempting to pick the lock triggers the trap. Imaculata, how can you say the wording is "pretty clear"? :) It's not even clear whether the description here is for the trap only excluding the lock or if it is for trap and lock together. (CASE 1) If you assume the description is complete for the whole thing, then it sounds like you need only one check with thieves' tools for both disarming the trap and opening the lock, provided you first detect the trap. In this case the last sentence "Unsuccessfully attempting to pick the lock triggers the trap" suggests both checks are merged into one. If you instead don't detect the traps (your Investigation fails or you didn't ever think about it), you automatically trigger the trap, before you finish your lockpicking. After that, since the trap doesn't reset, you can continue without further danger, but you still need to make the DC15 lockpicking check. In this case the last sentence "Unsuccessfully attempting to pick the lock triggers the trap" is irrelevant because the trap is already spr...

Wednesday, 16th May, 2018

  • 01:48 PM - Coroc mentioned Imaculata in post Timelines in your Setting
    Imaculata The Thing with ancient Scenarios in the official Settings (FR Netheril, DL Ishtar, Eberron Giants vs Dragons, Greyhawk Twin Cataclysm, DS everything up till present :) ) is that it gives instant and believable Explanation for a lot of stuff: - Ruins aka dungeons - Unusual (powerful) Magic - Unusual Technology - Rifts (temporal, dimensional) - Forgotten cults - Ancient Villains rising again (not necessarily undead) etc. etc. It is not thought to be a fictionary history lesson in the first place but rather to consturct those bullets

Saturday, 21st April, 2018

  • 06:54 AM - pemerton mentioned Imaculata in post Why Worldbuilding is Bad
    ...the cabal called Jabal? It was established by way of an action declaration by the same player. How do we know that there are catacombs? Same answer. Why did I, as GM, describe the bazaar in Hardby as including a peddler trying to sell an angel feather? Because the same player had authored a Belief for his PC that said PC wouldn't leave Hardby without an item useful for confronting his balrog-possessed brother. Why did I, as GM, establish the feather as cursed? Because the player declared an attempt by his PC to read its aura, which failed - so the aura he read wasn't what he was hoping for! Why did I, as GM, establish that Jabal lives in a tower? Because the same player had authored an instict for his PC, cast Falconskin if I fall, and so it seemed appropriate to introduce a high place into the action. Etc. I think it is quite obvious that this is a different way of establishing setting, and a different approach to the role of setting in framing and in adjudication, from what Imaculata describes. Whether you want to label it "no myth", or "the standard narrativistic model" or simply "story now" doesn't seem that big a deal. (Strangely, the main poster who seems to want to argue this point has me blocked. Hence my lack of reply to that particular poster.)


Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
No results to display...
Page 1 of 57 123456789101151 ... LastLast

Monday, 20th May, 2019

  • 04:45 PM - Cap'n Kobold quoted Imaculata in post Firearms
    The reason I disagree with you, is because I feel firearms should be the first and obvious choice for the players, and melee should be their backup weapons. As I said, I run a pirate campaign, and if all my players still ended up using bows and swords, then I'd feel like I had failed at establishing a pirate campaign. Historically guns were more deadly, so they should be a lot more powerful than any other weapon in the campaign. If guns only did slightly more damage, that would not be enough to pursuade all players away from their default D&D weaponry. The best situation for me is one where there's plenty of gun-use, and the players are occasionally forced to fall back on melee (due to a misfire, a gun being empty, running out of ammo/powder, or a gun getting wet.) Because this allows me as a DM to set up interesting encounters where getting their precious guns wet is a high risk, and where enemies are trying to force them into a melee. This makes positioning extremely important in combat. ...
  • 03:35 PM - Raunalyn quoted Imaculata in post "I'm BATMAN!" - Robert Pattison
    Yeah, both actors were heavily criticised. People were furious about Ledger playing the joker... but turns out he might be one of the best Joker's of all time (second only to Mark Hamill in my opinion). Then again, DC is having an epic dance with failure lately. If they get Batman right with Pattison, it's probably on accident. Ledger was incredible...surprisingly so. He went to a dark place playing that character, and I honestly think it contributed to his death. Not so much with the DC failure on its last few movies. Wonder Woman and Aquaman were both surprisingly good. And while I haven't seen Shazam! I do hear that it is a fun and entertaining movie. Maybe RP will get it right...if they don't make him sparkle...
  • 03:29 PM - Celebrim quoted Imaculata in post Firearms
    The reason I disagree with you, is because I feel firearms should be the first and obvious choice for the players, and melee should be their backup weapons. As I said, I run a pirate campaign, and if all my players still ended up using bows and swords, then I'd feel like I had failed at establishing a pirate campaign. Historically guns were more deadly, so they should be a lot more powerful than any other weapon in the campaign. This is an example of how different persons can have very different perceptions of what makes sense and feels right. For you, owing to the power of firearms, pirates need to leap on to the decks of other ships armed with all manner of firearms, and to treat swords as a backup weapon. For me, I'm perfectly happy to have a band of cutthroats be mostly armed with all manner of stabbing and cutting implements, and to treat wheellock pistols as an expensive, somewhat unreliable, backup weapon - leaving most of the actual musket and blunderbuss fire to the moment before t...
  • 01:14 PM - Fenris-77 quoted Imaculata in post Firearms
    The reason I disagree with you, is because I feel firearms should be the first and obvious choice for the players, and melee should be their backup weapons. As I said, I run a pirate campaign, and if all my players still ended up using bows and swords, then I'd feel like I had failed at establishing a pirate campaign. Historically guns were more deadly, so they should be a lot more powerful than any other weapon in the campaign. If guns only did slightly more damage, that would not be enough to pursuade all players away from their default D&D weaponry. The best situation for me is one where there's plenty of gun-use, and the players are occasionally forced to fall back on melee (due to a misfire, a gun being empty, running out of ammo/powder, or a gun getting wet.) Because this allows me as a DM to set up interesting encounters where getting their precious guns wet is a high risk, and where enemies are trying to force them into a melee. This makes positioning extremely important in combat. I...
  • 04:23 AM - Yaarel quoted Imaculata in post Favourite D&D edition thatís not 5E
    Well, I still play 3.5, so my answer is obvious. Iím curious, what does 3e have for you that 5e lacks?

Sunday, 19th May, 2019

  • 08:45 PM - Fenris-77 quoted Imaculata in post Firearms
    You need to give firearms a strong advantage, or players won't bother to use them, and at higher levels you may even need to introduce magical or mastercrafted guns as loot. I think I'd disagree. A lot of players spend significant time eking out even a minor advantage based weapons and combos. If your firearms are even slightly superior then everyone will use them unless "story reasons". So sure. I think balance is way more important than selling the idea to the players.

Friday, 17th May, 2019

  • 12:39 AM - billd91 quoted Imaculata in post Star Wars: Rian Johnson Out?
    It's a shame Solo was such a flop, because it was a pretty entertaining movie. Solo was a flop mostly because of its enormous expense. Nearly $400 million world-wide would be fantastic for most movies - but not if the project was in such bad shape much of it needed to be redone at great expense. Plenty of people were entertained by it.

Wednesday, 15th May, 2019

  • 07:18 PM - lowkey13 quoted Imaculata in post GAME OF THRONES SEASON 8--Final Run-- Part 5
    (just like Euron's magical fleet appearing out of nowhere). NOBODY EXPECTS THE EUROTRASH INQUISITION! Oh, Euron, you off-brand Jack Sparrow, I will miss you.
  • 12:15 PM - Zardnaar quoted Imaculata in post GAME OF THRONES SEASON 8--Final Run-- Part 5
    Ramsay's book counter part is every bit as evil as the one on the show. But some of his acts were switched from a character not featured on the show, to one that is; Sansa. The show indeed struggles a lot around season 5. The book on which it is based, Feast for Crows, struggles about just as much (although they also throw in some Dance with Dragons). There's a lot of aimless floundering about in Dorne with new characters that no one really cares about, and the main cast is mostly abscent. And the ironborne aren't very interesting either, though I feel the show did both a disservice. I have read the books although it has been a while.
  • 12:03 PM - Kramodlog quoted Imaculata in post GAME OF THRONES SEASON 8--Final Run-- Part 5
    If there is anything to be learned here, it is how important George RR Martin's writing was to the success of the show... without that backbone, the show stumbles towards the finish line in a hurry. Dany will still be a murderous despote on the books.
  • 12:02 PM - Tormyr quoted Imaculata in post A Kraken Mini To Go With Your Nautical Adventures This Summer
    I came across that one when looking for a good representation of a kraken in my pirate campaign. While it is a fantastic looking miniature, it is also large enough as to make me wonder if it still qualifies as a miniature. That means it might just be big enough...barely.

Tuesday, 14th May, 2019


Monday, 13th May, 2019

  • 10:12 PM - BookBarbarian quoted Imaculata in post Mythological Figures: Anne Bonny (5E)
    It is widely disputed whether the two of them were actually 'disguised as men'. More likely they simply wore men's clothing and were accepted among the crew. It would be near impossible to hide your real gender in a culture so dominated by men. Also there are accounts that their breasts were quite pronounced, as to make it painfully obvious they were women:. It's also quite possible that traditionally male clothing was far more practical in day-to-day piratical work than fluffy skirts and corsets. I'll conduct an experiment on the subject and report my findings.

Wednesday, 8th May, 2019

  • 08:42 AM - jonesy quoted Imaculata in post Game of Thrones Season 8 Episode 4 "The Last of the Starks"
    Originally in the books, Bran was able to see through the faces of the weirdwood trees. That was how he was able to see his father during the events of the first book. I don't think there is a weirwood at King's Landing, thus explaining the limits to his sight. But it has not been established well in the show. I think after episode 3 we won't see Bran do anything useful any more in the show. To continue on this line of thought: In the books the trees were supposed to be windows that the Old Gods looked through to see what was happening in the world. That's why marriage ceremonies in the North took place beside them. Greenseers like Bran used that same method to see things. I don't remember exactly, but I think it wasn't like a exact window analogy, but more like they could see the surrounding "land" in a dreamlike way. Like, not just what was in the line of sight of the eyes in the tree. But I do remember that they said something like 'the trees have no understanding of time so through them yo...

Tuesday, 7th May, 2019

  • 01:50 PM - Maxperson quoted Imaculata in post Game of Thrones Season 8 Episode 4 "The Last of the Starks"
    It also feels like we've reached the point in this series where everything has become very predictable. I'm still hoping they'll pull a big twist from their hat, but so far the plot has been very by the numbers. I'm also tired of all the main cast death fake-outs. It's basically, fake, fake, fake, fake, death of minor character, fake, fake, fake, death of another minor character. They've taking the Martin's willingness to kill major character off and are using it as a weapon against viewers.
  • 12:03 PM - Zardnaar quoted Imaculata in post Game of Thrones Season 8 Episode 4 "The Last of the Starks"
    A ballista can have a huge range, but there's no way they would be that accurate against a moving target at that distance, and that you'd be able to fire them before Dany spotting that entire fleet. Euron's fleet basically materialized out of nowhere. That's not how that works. Plus you need time to get into the right position with the ship, and aim that thing. But he basically shot the dragon before coming into view. That is plot convenience at its worst. And its not like there aren't easy ways to write around that. I had a big surprise attack in my pirate campaign, that came from a dense fog bank. A small enemy fleet waited on the foggy side of an island, to surprise the players. But even then it took time to get into firing range. So the enemy ships used the wind direction to get the advantage on the players. It also feels like we've reached the point in this series where everything has become very predictable. I'm still hoping they'll pull a big twist from their hat, but so far the plo...

Thursday, 2nd May, 2019

  • 07:44 PM - Istbor quoted Imaculata in post GAME OF THRONES SEASON 8--Final Run-- Part 3
    She could have just straight up told her that she is going to kill the Night King. Why bother talking in mysteries at this point? Okay, I get that they're keeping it a surprise for us as an audience. But in the context of the story, it makes little sense to be so vague about it. I think this has to be chalked up to the medium through which it was presented. I think if we were to have the same arc as in the books, it would be spelled out rather than the show runners trying to get gasps of surprise from the audience. But otherwise yeah. I would have flat out told her. I have been burned by too many DnD players missing my no so subtle clues, to leave something important like that up to chance and believe that she would understand my meaning.
  • 04:15 PM - Tonguez quoted Imaculata in post GAME OF THRONES SEASON 8--Final Run-- Part 3
    She could have just straight up told her that she is going to kill the Night King. Why bother talking in mysteries at this point? Okay, I get that they're keeping it a surprise for us as an audience. But in the context of the story, it makes little sense to be so vague about it. Isnít talking in riddles The Red Womens whole shtick though? (Okay that and lighting fires and birthing night terrors) but yeah Iíve come to expect riddles and misdirects as standard faire for the show
  • 02:28 PM - Maxperson quoted Imaculata in post GAME OF THRONES SEASON 8--Final Run-- Part 3
    She could have just straight up told her that she is going to kill the Night King. Why bother talking in mysteries at this point? Okay, I get that they're keeping it a surprise for us as an audience. But in the context of the story, it makes little sense to be so vague about it. Maybe for the same reason that their plan was to charge light cavalry into the middle of an enemy in the middle of the night with weapons that couldn't hurt them. :p

Tuesday, 30th April, 2019

  • 01:44 PM - Morrus quoted Imaculata in post GAME OF THRONES SEASON 8--Final Run-- Part 3
    I enjoyed the episode, but the battle tactics were very poor. You'd think given how much they already knew about the Whitewalkers, that they'd focus on taking them out. But apart from having Bran in the godswood, there seemed to be very little strategy to taking them out. The Nightking being downed from his dragon seemed more of a convient outcome rather than a deliberate tactic. Also, why sacrifice the Dothraki in total darkness, when you are defending a castle?! Just die behind the castle walls and let them come. Dothraki don't do tactics. They rush and overwhelm the enemy - it's all they know. This is the first enemy that has ever not worked against.


Page 1 of 57 123456789101151 ... LastLast

Imaculata's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites