Order of the Stick: How long will they put up with Miko?

[LordVyreth]

You know, I always worked under the assumption that the "DM" and "players" never existed. The characters are sentient entities inside a universe that just happens to obey all the rules of a D&D game; it's not necessarily a game in and of itself. Or, alternately, the "game" is existing somewhere in the world and the OOTS are just a group of classed individuals going about the normal lives of classed individuals with no bearing on the real group. Sort of a world-as-myth variant concept.

As for the actual strip, I have no problem with it. But then I had no trouble with similar storylines in KoDT.

 

[Corsair]

Holy crap you guys take this seriously.

Do you get as riled up when garfield manages to eat twice his weight in lasagna?

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

OOTS does not always follow DnD rules. Of course the fight went the wrong way, the same way V took on a chimera, casting three spells in one round. Rich Burlew says this himself.

As for lay on hands, DMs let paladins with a sword and shield use lay on hands the same way they let a cleric with a sword and shield use lay on hands. The game is supposed to be about fun, not being screwed by the DM.

 

[Yair]

I'm enjoying it. It laughs at railroading, which is something I can very much join into.

"stupid railroad plot" indeed.

 

[Lazarous]

Holy crap you guys take this seriously.

Do you get as riled up when garfield manages to eat twice his weight in lasagna?

If the comic strip creator tried to show an explanation using physics and biology as to why this would occur, yeah, that'd annoy me. Especially if he bent or outright ignored rules. If you're making stuff up, its all good...trying to justify it within the 'physics' of the world, but still cheating, just annoys me for some reason.

 

[Storm Raven]

OOTS does not always follow DnD rules. Of course the fight went the wrong way, the same way V took on a chimera, casting three spells in one round. Rich Burlew says this himself.

The mistake was when Rich tried to quantify the interim action and claim that it "wasn't a railroad" and defend the sequence as reasonable. If he hadn't, there wouldn't be any nitpicking.

As for lay on hands, DMs let paladins with a sword and shield use lay on hands the same way they let a cleric with a sword and shield use lay on hands. The game is supposed to be about fun, not being screwed by the DM.

Following the rules is "being screwed by the DM"? Interesting argument. Wrong, but interesting. A paladin needs a free hand to lay on hands, just as a cleric need a free hand to deliver a touch spell. Players should expect to follow the rules and not get lots of extra free actions.

 

[wedgeski]

Wait, hang on. I'm confused here. Are there folks in this thread who are:

a. Complaining about the 'direction' the comic is headed when, as far as I can tell, it's not doing anything it hasn't done before (and last week I re-read them all from issue #1);
b. Complaining about a plot railroad in a comic that is parodying plot railroading;
c. Complaining that they don't like a character who is written as the epitomy of unlikeable paladin PC's;
d. Nitpicking the actual combat mechanics behind a D&D comic strip where all of the PC's are aware of their own character sheets.

Have I got that right? I'll be over here with my head in my hands.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

The game is supposed to be about fun, not being screwed by the DM.

...as today's comic illustrates.

 

[Falkus]

You know, I'm thinking that some people take comics WAY too seriously.

 

[Storm Raven]

You know, I'm thinking that some people take comics WAY too seriously.

We play a game in which we pretend to be wizards and elves in a fantasy world. Doing silly things is part and parcel of what we are.