(Discussion) General Part IV

[Creamsteak]

3/4 Is what I wanted to go with. I think that's a suitable amount. I'd be willing to roll it as well, but I think that's too much confusion and delay for leveling up. We should just go with 3/4.

Also, by the way... I'm thinking that the official limits on Inn thread should be 100 posts. The reason for this is obvious. To keep recruiting more cleanly and active. I wouldn't want to jump in and recruit for a game right now, not knowing how many people were around, and were only at 150 posts. Opinions?

 

[dpdx]

Oh! Okay, then! Pardon me for thinking the worst, like that pretty new Evil Ranger character getting knifed in his sleep.

1) I don't know how individual DMs feel about this, but in the most egregious instances ('Ishmael! Put DOWN the human sacrifice or you WILL fall!'), DMs do have the right to change alignments of PCs (or otherwise enforce the rules) on a temporary basis. In this world, that isn't to say that they can't be changed right back again by the next DM, if that isn't in keeping with how the next DM sees things. The ultimate arbiter is the DM, and in this world, alternately the Judge. But the SRD provides guidance, too. That's a good place to start. (And, yeah, it's 'semantics'. Arguing the semantics of alignment in DnD in-game can make for great roleplay. I've seen it.)

2) 'Any Lawful' for monk bothers me, too. Let's change it to 'Any Neutral!' Isn't a monk (in the traditional sense) all about balance, anyway? Maybe I've let Kung Fu inform my thinking (I heart Kwai Chang Cain), but we could still work with it (alignment) instead of nuking it altogether. And I'm so there on making a champion for each alignment. I've got free time.

3) Lessee, Chaotic Evil. Disrespect/disregard for law, willing to do harm if it serves one's ends, all about the self, it seems to me. Could function within a party if there was something in it for him, or the town organizes a posse if there are too many incidents. Sounds like an opportunity for XP! Anyway, I'm sorry, what was the question?

 

[Uriel]

Judges, I also wanted to make sure 3/4 of us agree to accept Gnomeworks final proposal for his character's feats. I'm OK with them, I believe.

I suppose they are Ok .

 

[Uriel]

3/4 Is what I wanted to go with. I think that's a suitable amount. I'd be willing to roll it as well, but I think that's too much confusion and delay for leveling up. We should just go with 3/4.

Also, by the way... I'm thinking that the official limits on Inn thread should be 100 posts. The reason for this is obvious. To keep recruiting more cleanly and active. I wouldn't want to jump in and recruit for a game right now, not knowing how many people were around, and were only at 150 posts. Opinions?

I support 3/4 HP as well.

 

[dpdx]

I support 3/4 HP as well.

So where our hit dice is ten, we take eight per, or seven?

 

[Uriel]

The key thing I was thinking about when I prosed the alignment question was a combination of these reasons:

1) People have such varied degrees of belief in alignment. 3e has made most people more agreeable, but people still want to argue semantics (sp? right word?).

2) Alignment restrictions for certain classes bother me. Monk more than Paladin (though I would like to see someone attempt what Uriel mentioned above, champions for each alignment or diety). I can see how a character could train much like a monk without using a code. Prestige classes as well. I just have something against choosing alignment because it's a requirement.

3) Well, although I think it's obvious that Always chaotic evil means "Mostly" chaotic evil... I don't like arbitrating exceptions to the rules. Also, theres always the chance of too many exceptions... it's a general thing.

It's a combination of these three reasons and 50 other little things that make me at least consider (don't assume I'm going either way, I'm CONSIDERING all options) dropping alignment. I want to know what's best for everybody. I don't pay much, if any, attention to alignment unless it's called for. It's an aspect of the game that I absolutely ignore until detect-evil or such is cast, so I don't have any personal problems with dropping alignment.

Edit: and I'm caught up on my first game! Whoohoo! Uriel, the only comment I have concerning that game is such: do you have excel? If you do, I can teach you how to make quick maps if you want, though your methods is fine, I guess (try using the {code}{/code} script to keep it more shapely).

Um, my players like my cool 'old school' graph-paper maps So, There!

At least they said that they did...
:|

New Pointless Point for Discussion: Should Uriel change from Graph Paper Scans to Excel/some other Map form?

 

[dpdx]

As one of his players, I vote NO.

But I vote yes on the 'Image Size: Reduce' command in your favorite graphics application.

 

[Creamsteak]

4 = 3
6 = 4.5 (4 then 5)
8 = 6
10 = 7.5 (7 then 8)
12 = 9

Right?

And Uriel, keep with what you like to do. I was just pimping that I could always teach anyone that is curious how to use Excel... I think I could teach them online, at least...

 

[nimisgod]

Frankly speaking, I have no problem with Sir Ishmael not becoming a blue dragon. I think I'm pretty callous with my characters as players go and I don't really think I would even feel a bit sad less Courage or Violet got destroyed. There will be a lot of gnashing of teeth and mourning from the Deep Halfling Paladin to be heard though.

I could always go for Silver dragon (my other favorite color) which is LG.

If alignment is removed because of PrC requirements or bec. a Bard can't be Lawful, then one has to look at the consequences on the entire system. I think that simple exceptions to the rule might be preferable to across the board changes.

One of the reasons why this game is so fun is because it is familiar (it uses Core Rules) and yet not so (setting info). IMO, playing a game whose rules are too unfamiliar would just alienate some new players or at least, lengthen the time it would take to get used to the game.

I'm okay with whatever decision is handed out, but if I had my vote, it would be to keep alignment. My main reason? The judges can concentrate on the wonderful fluff instead of trying to fix the crunchy bits that the loss of alignment would imbalance. The rules are (relatively) good as is, I would rather enjoy exploring the setting and the stories therein than mess around with the balances already laid out.

Re: evil alignments, I'm fine with evil characters in general (my character would think otherwise). I say let the evil characters go, but the moment they screw around with any of the other PCs, let the dice fall where they may. I'm not exactly sure whether there's any bias on heroic characters here, but for the most part, I'd rather not have my character molested (unless it's in the interest of fun rather than "griefing".

I guess this ramble is over.

 

[Uriel]

As one of his players, I vote NO.

But I vote yes on the 'Image Size: Reduce' command in your favorite graphics application.

I just scan and save, then attach.

I have such a nifty Comp here, I really should learn how to use it..Haha Ahem...:|