View Profile: Ovinomancer - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Today, 02:24 AM
    I'm confused. You were looking for a PDF, but to buy? Did you think that the publishers would just give it away?
    32 replies | 584 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Today, 01:11 AM
    You can buy the PDF from Evil Hat Games.
    32 replies | 584 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Today, 01:00 AM
    Really? I guess it could be a bit hard to find. Here's the URL for the SRD: bladesinthedark.com Hope that helps!
    32 replies | 584 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:57 PM
    If only someone had recommended Blades' tech before....
    32 replies | 584 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:17 PM
    The best firm of your argument I can divine is that, given equal empathy and faithfulness to the character portrayed, that speaking in first person with affectations of mannerism and accent, is prima facie superior to presenting the character in 3rd person. Both characters presentations are equally "true" reoresentations of the character, but one adds a performative act the other lacks, and that...
    290 replies | 7890 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:32 PM
    Yes, and good luck. 5e has no rules for what you're asking for (and rules tgat actively fight it) but you can always houserules around it. Or try to. My initial suggestion is to look for a ruleset that already does what you want, but I understand the appeal of sticking with the familiar. I was talking about 5e as core, where binary results are the norm, even with the above about success at...
    32 replies | 584 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:06 PM
    Well, yes, that's how it works -- your preference isn't objective just because you have it. And having an argument doesn't make it so, either. If acting is the superior form of roleplay as you claim, where is the evidence for such? I'm a bit surprised that you're actually arguing this. You've already acknowledged that roleplaying includes non-acting performances, so let's both ackowledge...
    290 replies | 7890 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:45 AM
    Hmm. It appears FOX executives have infiltrated DC.
    6 replies | 341 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:44 AM
    Okay bear with me here, because this is going somewhere. D&D is NOT a good system for this kind of game. Some of the reasons for this are listed above, but to reiterate, almost all of the abilities in D&D are provided to bypass, overwhelm, or convert challenges to the players' benefit. This means that the system, as a whole, is focused on the PCs defeating a challenge. The result of this is...
    32 replies | 584 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:14 AM
    Good roleploy, as in invested in the character and with strong advocacy, does not require acting. Acting may be sufficient (although I don't believe it is), but it is certainly not necessary. You are arguing a preference as objective fact. And it's a fine preference. I enjoy acting in character as much as the next person. But roleplaying isn't defined as or by acting.
    290 replies | 7890 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Tuesday, 18th June, 2019, 01:28 PM
    Well, sure, you said there's only 8 of them.
    56 replies | 1853 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 11:54 AM
    In your unseemly haste to get your digital boot in, you seem to have forgotten the context of my remark. Here it is: Your saying Hriston's actually said that how content is presented cannot affect if people wish to engage with that content. It's the only way that you can keep this e-peen wagging contest going. Well, okay, then. Yours is the biggest. Really. None larger.
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 03:36 AM
    This is as far I as bothered to give you.
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 02:38 AM
    Sorry, did you miss where Hriston said he was taken out of context and wasn't saying what LMaro was claiming? It's been a busy thread, and people have trued to address things in multiple shifting frameworks as conversation has progressed. If you are trying to claim that people have actually advanced that being a jerk doesn't matter, then I don't see how a conversation can continue.
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 11:45 PM
    Amusing. It's mostly those you'd kneejerk into "storygamers" that are on the no side and the process-sim follks on the yes side. I'm on the "you can call it literary, if you want, but it's at best mediocre literature." I don't call my games, story or otherwise, literary at all. Maybe take the hint that you've already removed all doubt twice now and stop continuing to do so?
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 10:41 PM
    Given what I know of your preferences, you probably still won't like it. Damage is very abstract, in the form of dramatic wounds that aren't necessarily wounds and PCs can't die unless they've expressly risked death themselves. Those two alone make me think you'd be disinclined.
    79 replies | 3069 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 10:23 PM
    Dude. Stop posting right now and go write this paper! You will be famous for all time! Imagine, I've posted 8n the same thread as the person with the right answer to what literature is (or at least conclusively is not)! To be so lucky!
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 10:18 PM
    Absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Maybe one of the sorcery knacks? Those are powered by drama die, which usually are used as floating extra dice for rolls, or for a heroic effort to ignore the nasty death spiral penalties for a round. Unless it's something I haven't heard, drama dice can't be spent for any narrative control outsude of a few sorcery knacks (which are magic). I...
    79 replies | 3069 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 03:34 PM
    Get yer own shtick.
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 02:25 PM
    Hmm. Are you talking about 7th Sea 2e? That's the one with the kickstarter; 1e was published by AEG 15ish years ago? If so, I get you. I lurve 7Sea 1e and have kitbashed it and houseruled it for soecial applications. Also played it without knowing the setting much at all. But, 2e? Wasn't impressed and be much more likely to use a 1e bash than 2e. If you mean 1e, then you are a...
    79 replies | 3069 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 12:21 PM
    If there's an honest question in there, could you fish it out for me?
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 03:12 AM
    Yep. I still think you've missed the point.
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 01:39 AM
    Sure. Literally no one in this thread has said otherwise. I'm starting to think you've maybe missed the point.
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 01:00 AM
    Don't think anyone's disputed that being a jerk has an effect... :erm:
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Wednesday, 12th June, 2019, 11:52 AM
    Cool. Of course you can. My point was that you didn't. Can you make changes to target hp, PC damage, PC hit chance, PC number of attacks, and also adapt to changes from those to the number of rounds needed to kill? The PC1/PC2 sheets are pretty easy to do if you're limiting the range of possible inputs so that you can hard code things. It's when you have to create the probabilities...
    135 replies | 4125 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Wednesday, 12th June, 2019, 10:52 AM
    Show your work.
    135 replies | 4125 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Wednesday, 12th June, 2019, 04:14 AM
    According to what I've put up, it shows that certain DPRs are equivalent against a particular foe. PC1, for instance, has the same kill ratio for 8 damage as for 5 damage against the 5hp foe. Thus, overkill doesn't hasten kill rate. This will be very specific to the foe, though.
    135 replies | 4125 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Wednesday, 12th June, 2019, 04:03 AM
    No, this is the weighted average of the "chance to kill on round X", not the weighted average of the" number of rounds to kill". Your metric shows that a kill is most likely to occur sometime in round 2, because that's the weighted average of the chance to kill across all rounds (assuming the later rounds are essentially zero). You can't shift what you've measured into something new with a...
    135 replies | 4125 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Wednesday, 12th June, 2019, 03:49 AM
    Sigh. You can't declare your answer to be the right one by fiat. Explain why you think this is so. Following my own advice, it's because the assumptions are slightly different. I'm assuming at least one more enemy, so the case on a round where there was 1 previous hit and two hits on that round carries the second hit into the new target, This reduces the overall average because I'm not...
    135 replies | 4125 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Wednesday, 12th June, 2019, 03:02 AM
    No, weighted averages take into account what you've decided to measure and how you've decided to weight it. If I take the weighted average of the volume of a cat from tip to tail, I haven't said much about the dietary requirements of the cat, although some information towards that may be gleaned. Being able to take a weighted average does not, at all, mean you've successfully measured...
    135 replies | 4125 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Wednesday, 12th June, 2019, 02:06 AM
    Okay, but you didn't show this. You shows something that wasn't about overkill damage and then claimed that since this not-overkill thing exists, asking about overkill (focusing on overkill?) is a fallacy. That's not how that works. Your thing can be true AND overkill can still be an issue worth investigating. Your effort, while interesting in a technical sense, don't illuminate overkill at...
    135 replies | 4125 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Wednesday, 12th June, 2019, 01:45 AM
    Yes, I know what a weighted average is, I'm questioning whether or not what you did actually says what you think it does. I'm still not sure. And, no, I expect that you spending 1 post explaining your methods and intent is not spending 3. It's just the one. Another thing that's interesting is just how much your analysis is dependent on the numbers chosen. For instance, if you go over 8...
    135 replies | 4125 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Tuesday, 11th June, 2019, 02:37 PM
    Dammit! My thumb keeps hitting the laugh button. Honestly, this is embarrasing. Yeesss... but is this a useful question? I mean, further to the point that I'm pretty sure you can't sum the odds of "kill this round" and have it turn into "average rounds to kill." Only pretty sure because I haven't worked out if this is one of thise things where it happens to simplify out that way. I don't...
    135 replies | 4125 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Tuesday, 11th June, 2019, 01:15 PM
    Sorry, was meant to be XP. Um, not sure where you're going here. Weighted average of what? Depends on what question you're asking. I don't think "chance to kill this round only" does a good job of illuminating your premise. Actually, I don't think this entire exercise illuminates your title premise at all, although it is interesting and different from previous looks at damage per round.
    135 replies | 4125 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Tuesday, 11th June, 2019, 05:02 AM
    It took me a bit to figure out what you did to get it, but I did recreate your numbers. First, let me explain what I understand you did so we're on the same page. The above charts look only at the chance that the PC kills the target in that round. For the single big attack, it's straighforward enough. You kill it or you don't. The cases are round 1 hit, round 1 miss round 2 hit, round 1&2...
    135 replies | 4125 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Monday, 10th June, 2019, 12:36 PM
    I get your argument, Max. It's not hard. You've assigned a potency metric based either on spell level or total damage done (I think both, maybe?) that you use as a gauge for likelihood of setting things on fire. My issue was that you've used this preference of yours to argue against what flammable means and a reading of the rules of the game. It's absolutely fine that you do things that...
    32 replies | 734 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Monday, 10th June, 2019, 01:57 AM
    <blink> So, if the 150 hp character takes 20 points of damage, it's just as lethal to them as it is to a character with 10 hitpoints? They both die, then? Or, is this a case where you're using a different definition of "lethal" than one might expect. ``
    32 replies | 734 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Sunday, 9th June, 2019, 11:10 PM
    I doubt this uncited list of flammable objects just list wood and clothing. Certain wood and certain clothing, sure, and I'll bet they'll fail the match test. I can't tell if you're intentionally misrepresenting my argument or if you genuinely failed to grasp it. Either way, I wasn't talking about type (although, even there, it's still abstract as Fire damage represents damage from heat,...
    32 replies | 734 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Sunday, 9th June, 2019, 06:27 PM
    Well, then, I'm very happy your house rule works for you. In the meantime, the definition of flammable is not tied to spell level or damage value in game. In the real world, flammablity is easily demonstrable with the match test. If you want to add houserules to your game to get the feel you want, have at, but none of your arguments so far appear in the rules, which are the baseline I'm...
    32 replies | 734 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Sunday, 9th June, 2019, 05:21 PM
    I... what? Why do you keep hitting youself?!?
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Sunday, 9th June, 2019, 03:37 PM
    Does it? Describe a fireball. Is it a raging inferno of fire that sits in an area for six seconds, or is it a brief flash of high temperature? Describe the damage done to a character with 103 hp that is inside the blast of a 42 hp damage fireball. Do the same for a 30 hp character in the same fireball. Now, describe the damage to the iron anvil in the same fireball. To the heavy wooden door. ...
    32 replies | 734 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Sunday, 9th June, 2019, 07:20 AM
    The trigger isn't damage, though, it's the property of being "flammable." This has a meaning, and the match test is a reasonable way of explaning the meaning of "flammable." Besides, hitpoints have no meaning in and of themselves. 12 hp out of 13 is the sane, finctionally, as 13 hp out of 13. The increase in damage might just be a measure of application rather than increased scale. The...
    32 replies | 734 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Saturday, 8th June, 2019, 08:15 PM
    Yes. No. No. Maybe -- if we're talking absolutely dead and desiccated, then sure. If a bit droughty, then no. No.
    32 replies | 734 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Saturday, 8th June, 2019, 08:10 PM
    Flammable means can be easily set on fire. I use the match test -- if a lit match touches the object, does it catch fire? Not held onto, but touches. If so, the item catches fire. Oil is flammable. Paper is flammable. Thatch roofs are generally not flammable (despite what movies show -- people tend not to make their houses firetraps). Wooden doors are not flammable. Curtains may be...
    32 replies | 734 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Saturday, 8th June, 2019, 03:58 PM
    Which part was the important part? I figured it was the question, but that question is based on the strawman argument you've shortened pemerton's points down into. And the response to that question is literally go re-read pemerton's post again and try not to strawman it -- he answers your question quite well. Why is it you feel that you can ignore large parts of people's posts and that this...
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Saturday, 8th June, 2019, 05:20 AM
    Seriously. :| Okay, I suppose your point in the last few threads was: "he thing is, those times where it doesn't matter.......don't matter." This looks like perfect agreement with pemerton, so we're done here? Or, maybe, is there a lot more than a single line in your posts and the rest might have some context or expansion of the idea? I wouldn't want to strawman your argument by taking a...
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Saturday, 8th June, 2019, 01:12 AM
    Right, but the argument wasn't skipping key details, it was, in fact, about non-key details not being those that can be elided or glossed. You presented scenarios where key details were left out as if it was countering this claim, when it was part of the claim that the focus should be on those details necessary for the character to engage the challenge. You argued against an argument not made....
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Friday, 7th June, 2019, 09:25 PM
    Sorry, on tapatalk it's not in color. Missed the tags in the quote block.
    419 replies | 17109 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Friday, 7th June, 2019, 07:58 PM
    Um... he was using liberal in the classical sense, not in the modern American polemic sense. I know because I'm usually nowhere near billd91 politically, but understand his point about liberal values. It's Enlightenment liberal, not politics liberal.
    419 replies | 17109 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Friday, 7th June, 2019, 06:19 PM
    I'd say lack of key detail, which is a different thing from specifics. The post you presented this to as a counter wasn't talking about lack of key detail, but uneccesary specifics. The example was of a jeweled sword where it being richly appointed is the key and not the specifics of the jewels. You presented a scenario that had missing key information as a counter to this. It's not. As I...
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Friday, 7th June, 2019, 05:53 PM
    I don't fully agree with pemerton's argument, but you nailed it that you don't have to precisely define a line on a spectrum to be able to say something is at one end or the other. I read pemerton to be analyzing at the least literary end of the spectrum and looking at whether RPGs can exist there. This is valid, but I don't think any existing RPGs do exist there even if they could...
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Friday, 7th June, 2019, 04:57 PM
    Your examples are not one that require specificity of detail but are, in fact, errors by the GM to present the information in terms of your character's interests. I'd say that your second example is one where inappropriate specificity caused the problem (if the rocks were too small to matter, why introduce them?). In both of your examples, your GM was at fault both in not providing neccessary...
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Wednesday, 5th June, 2019, 03:06 PM
    Righto, then! Carry on.
    42 replies | 1584 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Wednesday, 5th June, 2019, 12:12 AM
    Just to quibble with your math, a 90% hit rate on 3d20 is needing 10+ to hit. Which may be what you meant. But the chance to crit on 3d20 is ~14%, not 27%. You take the odds of not rolling a 20 on 3d20 and subtract from 1. Thats' 1 - (19/20)^3 = 14.3%. You'd have to roll 5d20 to get to 27%.
    42 replies | 1584 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Tuesday, 4th June, 2019, 01:40 PM
    This is from another thread, but I think I'll leave it here. For posterity.
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Tuesday, 4th June, 2019, 01:26 PM
    They've blocked you.
    231 replies | 12291 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Tuesday, 4th June, 2019, 01:19 PM
    Ah, the Ad Hominem. That /is/ a good one. Let's try more directly, then: what are the specific GM functions?
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Tuesday, 4th June, 2019, 12:33 PM
    No one ever thought of houserules before. Look, yelling at people to change rules when the point of the discussion is to examine the rules as they are written is not constructive. You haven't stumbled one some new truth everyone else has missed.
    124 replies | 7558 view(s)
    4 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Tuesday, 4th June, 2019, 12:07 PM
    I take it back, Max -- do not explain fallacies, just keep using the titles. While that's a habit that indicates a lack of argumentative ability, better that than to remove doubt. I mean, while building your cases for the fallacies here, you completely missed the thrust of hawkeyefan's argument and actually helped him land it more solidly. That main thrust was at the gooey, shifting center of...
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Monday, 3rd June, 2019, 11:10 PM
    Yup, you've cut it to the quick. Still hoping for Max to answer that.
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Monday, 3rd June, 2019, 06:51 PM
    Rand....
    10 replies | 553 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Monday, 3rd June, 2019, 04:24 PM
    If you don't have PCs, then they aren't NPCs, they're just Cs.
    44 replies | 1323 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Monday, 3rd June, 2019, 03:13 PM
    Well, yes, which is why I said acting is sufficient but not necessary to roleplay. Nope, first person is not required to roleplay, although you may prefer it. The player saying, "Bob the Fighter swings his sword," is engaged to the role of a Fighter and declaring actions against the fictional positioning of the scene from the standpoint of that role. A token in Monopoly lacks any such role...
    106 replies | 3531 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Monday, 3rd June, 2019, 11:35 AM
    It was Lanefan's definition, and it was the impetus fir this spur of the discussion. I neither invented it, nor particularly cared for it because there are examples of RPGs without Lanefan's defined role. Just like there are RPGs without your preferred role. Oh, Max. Didn't you just say the GM is also a player in your special pleading against hawkeyefan? Yet, here you are backing...
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Monday, 3rd June, 2019, 03:47 AM
    For one that has a bit of both, so it might be a good entry, look at Blades in the Dark. This is a game where you play criminals doing criminal things to, mostly, other criminals. The setting is pretty thin -- a single city post magical apocalypse with a little bit of history (which may or may not be correct). And I mean a little bit. The city has some thumbnail sketches of neighborhoods, a few...
    106 replies | 3531 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Monday, 3rd June, 2019, 02:10 AM
    Oh, I disagree (I know, in this thread it's shocking!). If the players are involved in world generation, then their PCs are already hooked into the world from the start -- they've helped build it to challenge their PCs. Again, this takes a system that actively challenged fundamental PC build choices so that the world continues to evolve in play to challenge the PCs, and D&D is not one of these...
    106 replies | 3531 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Monday, 3rd June, 2019, 02:01 AM
    Um, no. Roleplaying is not acting. The definition you posted doesn't say "acting" or any form of act anywhere. Roleplaying is the act of playing a role. That doesn't require acting. If you say, "Bob the Fighter swings his sword," that's roleplaying -- you're playing the role of Bob the fighter. It isn't, however, acting. And, no, again, you do not have to charismatic to roleplay a...
    106 replies | 3531 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Sunday, 2nd June, 2019, 10:42 PM
    No, Max, it's /a/ definition. There really are no "the" definitions. Words are like that. Given that it was essentially the same are your quote with the notable exception that it was an attempt to define traits of RPGs so it didn't include the circular reasoning, it was a perfectly fine definition. Fine enough that only you are arguing against it, and then only because you want to win...
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Sunday, 2nd June, 2019, 09:32 PM
    Sorry, I didn't actually expect you to argue in a circle. I mean, your saying role playing games have a GM, but a GM is defined as a role in a role playing game. So, which comes first, the GM or the RPG? Talk about begging the question. No, that would be silly, especially since my argument for this spur is that the role of a GM as you've shared it out is part of every game. It's only...
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Sunday, 2nd June, 2019, 09:02 PM
    Then this is true of all games, which still aligns with my argument, even though you've decided to ignore the definition that was provided and spurred this side discussion and substituted your own. It doesn't change my point -- after you've shared this role out to everyone, then it's now part of all games, including solo games. And, it also completely skips over your last argument that a GM...
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Saturday, 1st June, 2019, 04:12 PM
    Responding out of order because it making things flow better. No, I disagree. Well, I'll agree that this is how it works in D&D land, and in many other games, but it's not a category error because you can build the world around the PCs. Answering the below at the same time, there's the model of No Myth, where nothing in the game world is set until play begins, and then it's defined in play...
    106 replies | 3531 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Saturday, 1st June, 2019, 03:58 PM
    And strawmen are strawmen. Never once said moving pieces is the same as creating a scene, I said the role of "A key person who co-ordinates/organizes/runs things and-or keeps things going" is common to all games if you're insisting that if it's not assigned to a single person it still exists in a shared format. I mean, if you're going to try argument by informal fallacy, it really helps if you...
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Saturday, 1st June, 2019, 02:44 AM
    I disagree. Or, from a non-D&D game standpoint, at least. D&D has no mechanics for challenging the kind of building that focuses entirely on the PC. It is a system that requires some form of external to PC design, and so it fights against any real attempt to build a world around the PCs. This is where your point of feeling 'off' comes from -- the system itself fights against this. There are,...
    106 replies | 3531 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Friday, 31st May, 2019, 10:17 PM
    All 5 do that in that game. It does not apply to every game. Chess for example does not have such a person. Nor does checkers, and so on. GMing in RPGs involves more than just set up or handing out money and deeds. Again, the criteria is " key person who co-ordinates/organizes/runs things and-or keeps things going...." This is a tasked shared by both players in chess, who both must...
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Friday, 31st May, 2019, 03:15 PM
    Confused, if the "GM's role" is shared, then there's no GM -- the game is GM-less. Here'e the reference to the GM that's been proposed for this line of discussion: "A key person who co-ordinates/organizes/runs things and-or keeps things going" You're now contending that if the game is co-ordinated, organized, and keeps running but these tasks are not assigned to any person specifically,...
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Friday, 31st May, 2019, 01:21 PM
    I did it by playing Fiasco. There's a number of other ways.
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Thursday, 30th May, 2019, 05:48 PM
    Um, this thread is over a decade old. You're largely responding to forum ghosts.
    62 replies | 5204 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Wednesday, 29th May, 2019, 05:47 PM
    Ah. I'm experiencing that rare moment when a misunderstanding corrected lessens your appreciation. Stance theory, with my now corrected understanding, is much less useful as a tool to analyze play. This is evidenced by the fact that i can play a game with some form of plot point mechanic entirely in pawn stance, except when I use the plot point I'm momentarily in director stance. This...
    664 replies | 26482 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Wednesday, 29th May, 2019, 03:38 PM
    Dude, you just complained about making points in an unnecessarily disparaging manner. Physician heal thyself!
    664 replies | 26482 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Wednesday, 29th May, 2019, 03:36 PM
    I understood Director stance to be making choices for the betterment of the fiction, and then retroactively inventing character motivation. You can use fiction authoring authority from within the other stances (pawn being obvious), so that can't be the defining line. In Director stance you choose actions that make for a better story, vice following player or character goals.
    664 replies | 26482 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Wednesday, 29th May, 2019, 01:54 PM
    I don't see the connection between knowing about in-game things like earth elementals to jumping to players introducing without challenge out-of-game knowledge like milled gunpowder. The firmer is within the scope of the game, the latter is not. Not to mention that a GM that allows players to dictate that gunpowder is even a thing, or that it's formulation is exactly like the real world's, or...
    664 replies | 26482 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Wednesday, 29th May, 2019, 11:50 AM
    Hmm. I used to be big about the PC/player knowledge divide, but then I came to the conclusion that this was immature of me and I could make intruguing and challenging ganes without expecting my players to have to pretend they don't know something to preserve the challenge of my games. Now, I look at situations like the barbarian buying scrolls not as a point where the player has to justify the...
    664 replies | 26482 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Wednesday, 29th May, 2019, 02:24 AM
    This is like teaching someone checkers and telling them they can move a piece on their turn only to be interrupted with, "I play a Draw 4!" You politely point out that's not checkers but Uno and are met with a, "so I can't move a piece on my turn then?"
    664 replies | 26482 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Tuesday, 28th May, 2019, 04:03 PM
    No, you're presenting degenerate play as a necessary outcome, if only on the edges, of the presented idea. This is only true if there are no other constraints on play like genre assumptions or shared play goals.
    664 replies | 26482 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Tuesday, 28th May, 2019, 02:02 PM
    It's fair to pull out narration or storytelling as components of literary endeavour, perhaps as necessary but not sufficient. However, I think your focus here on the format sidesteps the question a bit -- would this be "literary" in a different format? Would tge sane oresentations in a play-by-email or play-by-post or play-by-chat format change you evaluation because it's now a written work? ...
    1470 replies | 40320 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Tuesday, 28th May, 2019, 12:52 PM
    Interesting. Normally, the only authority a player has is over their character's action declarations -- not success, obviously, but in what they attempt. You're placing restrictions on what they can attempt through NPC social skills (and perhaps other things), thereby reducing the only authority players have. Do you compensate by sharing authority in other areas? This is also ignoring that...
    26 replies | 998 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Tuesday, 28th May, 2019, 11:55 AM
    I fail to see how this example wouldn't be equally bad in any approach, nor how you should expect to deal with this using an in-game approach. This problem seems much better dealt with out of game.
    664 replies | 26482 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Tuesday, 28th May, 2019, 02:48 AM
    If I may, at this late juncture... This argument is about something that's entirely downstream of the real issue, which isn't being address clearly enough (although iserith has touched on it repeatedly): what a character thinks is irrelevant to the game structure. The game let's players have the authority to declare actions for their characters. This is, really, the only authority players...
    664 replies | 26482 view(s)
    5 XP
  • Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Saturday, 25th May, 2019, 02:43 PM
    I'm more interested in who the OP is intending to address with this request.
    16 replies | 704 view(s)
    1 XP
No More Results
About Ovinomancer

Basic Information

Date of Birth
October 28
About Ovinomancer
Location:
Charleston, SC

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
4,442
Posts Per Day
0.79
Last Post
[5E] Urban Intrigue Campaign - Gating the Sandbox Today 02:24 AM

Currency

Gold Pieces
2
General Information
Last Activity
Today 02:47 AM
Join Date
Monday, 16th February, 2004
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Thursday, 20th June, 2019


Wednesday, 19th June, 2019


Tuesday, 18th June, 2019


Friday, 14th June, 2019


Thursday, 13th June, 2019


Wednesday, 12th June, 2019



Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Page 1 of 11 12345678910 ... LastLast

Wednesday, 19th June, 2019

  • 02:25 PM - Fenris-77 mentioned Ovinomancer in post [5E] Urban Intrigue Campaign - Gating the Sandbox
    Or you forge an invitation; though that probably requires borrowing a valid invitation, to copy its layout and style, and to copy the signature on the valid original. This is exactly how I want the players to think, yes. Forging the invitation carries a significant set of possible consequences, and would also require, potentially, disguises and other skulduggery. That sounds like a strong role playing opportunity to me. When you're talking about society events it's more complicated than just forging an invitation. People in 'society' tend to know each other, and the hosts know who they invited and didn't, so odd people out will need to find a way to not get asked awkward questions. Ovinomancer - I realize that D&D isn't optimized for this style of play. However, I do think it will support it just fine with some tweaking. Results doesn't have to be binary. Pretty much anything can be run based on X number of successes, like 5E chase mechanics. That can work as straight roles or opposed roles. Also, there are situations where several smaller goals might need to be accomplished before a major one, and there are a bunch of ways to avoid those being save or lose propositions. For example, PCs might need to make X number of successful PER checks over the course of a party to sway opinion, that doesn't mean they only get X chances. Your comments about factions is pretty much what I was thinking, although I was planning to start based a little more on background than you as far as PC affiliation. As for the gating, we're also thinking along similar lines, as are we about plotting. Linear plots are a fools errand in most campaigns, and doubly so in this kind. I'll have important in...

Sunday, 16th June, 2019

  • 01:29 AM - Hriston mentioned Ovinomancer in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    Even so, when Ovinomancer denied that anyone had said any such thing - well, as a matter of fact, you HAD said that thing. Ovinomancer denied that anyone in this thread had said that how content is presented cannot determine whether people wish to engage with it. Hereís what I said: Because color (dungeon dressing) is content that provides atmosphere when imagined by the participants at the table. The quality of form with which itís expressed isnít whatís important but rather whether the odors, noises, furnishings, and items found in an area suggest a torture chamber, a harem, or a wizardís laboratory. In other words, itís the actual content that matters, not the particular words that are used and the way they are said. NOT the same thing!

Friday, 14th June, 2019

  • 05:30 AM - pemerton mentioned Ovinomancer in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    when Ovinomancer denied that anyone had said any such thing - well, as a matter of fact, you HAD said that thing. That sentence, as written, says that content matters, and wording doesn't matter. I'm not asking you to stand by or renounce that sentence as the sum of your thoughts on form and content; I was challenging Ovinomancer's assertion that no one had said anything along those lines.If someone says "All the cheese is gone" before the dinner party, and then the next day you and a friend are debating whether or not anyone has ever thought that there's no cheese left in the world, the person who said "All the cheese is gone" doesn't count as an example of such. It's not that they said as much but didn't mean it. It's that anyone who thinks that's what they said doesn't understand the relevant semantic features of natural language. Hriston literally did not assert that the particular words used by a speaker never matter to the effectiveness of communication. Which is the assertion that you and ...
  • 05:21 AM - pemerton mentioned Ovinomancer in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    ...hen the same might be true. Much the same things applies to dinner parties, boardgame nights, attending tutorials, and really any occasion where people get together to interact. Is anyone asserting, on this basis, that all human interaction and communication is a literary endeavour? Is anyone asserting, on this basis, that speaking loud enough to be heard or choosing the right word to accurately describe something is an aspect of literary quality? Or in other words, is anyone asserting that the concept of literary as an adjective applied to endeavour and/or quality is empty, and adds nothing to the general notion of human interaction and communication? Does anyone who read the OP, which includes the following - RPGing requires narration: GMs describe situations, and players declare actions for their PCs that respond to those situations - think that I'm unaware that RPGing involves communication and interaction? I'm frankly at a loss as to what you want me, or Hriston, or Ovinomancer, to take away from your posts on this matter.

Wednesday, 12th June, 2019

  • 04:18 AM - FrogReaver mentioned Ovinomancer in post The Overkill Damage Fallacy
    Ovinomancer, by the way I can account for multiple enemies etc in my formulas. The only thing I can't implement yet is variable damage dice. My formula is surisingly easy to use. Simply list rounds out. Find first round enemy can be killed and then copy paste my formula in every cell.

Tuesday, 11th June, 2019

  • 04:59 PM - FrogReaver mentioned Ovinomancer in post The Overkill Damage Fallacy
    Ovinomancer im still on phone the method to obtain a weighted average is simple Calculate (chance X happens) * X sum each value whala you have a weighted average that tells you the average oh whatever X is. If x is damage the. Itís average damage. If x is kill round then x is average kill round. I Shouldnít have to spend 3+ posts wxplainjng how weighted average works and that what I calculated was a weighted average.
  • 01:06 PM - FrogReaver mentioned Ovinomancer in post The Overkill Damage Fallacy
    Ovinomancer i will reply more detail later to find weighted average you donít use cumulative probabilities. Doesnít that affect your analysis?

Sunday, 9th June, 2019

  • 05:33 AM - pemerton mentioned Ovinomancer in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    Iím sure mine and pemertonís ideas donít exactly match, no. But thatís fine. I donít entirely agree with his premise, but I understand it, and I think he has a point. But Iím only speaking for myself. I would tend to think of "rictus grin" as falling on the literary side of things, as does Hussar. As I've posted, it does no harm if it doesn't impede (what I regard as) the real point of play. It has a face like a skull might do just as well. I personally can't remember how I've described githyanki in the past - I suspect I'm more likely to have shown a picture, such as the one on the front of the Fiend Folio. More generally, and feeding this into the current Maxperson - Ovinomancer interaction, I think that the role of description in RPGing is easily overestimated. It prioritises immersive imagination orver protagonistic inhabitation. Whereas the latter is the distinctive virtue of RPGs as games that are about producing a shared fiction. All this said, I think you've fully understood my points in this thread, seem to agree at least to some extent, and have made many helpful posts into it for which I thank you.

Saturday, 1st June, 2019

  • 02:56 AM - Fenris-77 mentioned Ovinomancer in post Does the world exist for the PCs?
    Ovinomancer So, when you say "build around the PC", what are you actually referring to? That's the kind of phrase that could mean a lot of different things depending on who's talking.

Tuesday, 28th May, 2019

  • 03:42 AM - Fenris-77 mentioned Ovinomancer in post What does it mean to "Challenge the Character"?
    Ovinomancer I agree with everything you just said. However, i do have a lingering issue with point buy 5e. INT is a dump stat for a lot of classes, but that doesn't stop whole parties of shortbus INT 8 characters from quoting chapter and verse from the MM or coming up with diabolically fiendish plans on a regular basis. No, the game doesn't care, and as a GM running actual games, neither do I, but conceptually, or perhaps even philosophically (ecumenically?) it sets my teeth on edge.

Friday, 10th May, 2019

  • 05:20 PM - robus mentioned Ovinomancer in post Blowing up my campaign
    @Ovinomancer - I do love the idea that as soon as they liberate the wizard for this one infraction, he's immediately arrested by the Marut for meddling with the timeline. It has taken all this time for them to track down who caused the schism. :) A nice twist to lead into a level 20 adventure. Edit: Though I've no idea what that entails... a court case as you say is the most logical outcome, but that would go down like a ton of bricks. So I think it would have to be a prison break/heist thing (and perhaps the wizard wishes himself a duplicate that can do the time... :) ) Or perhaps the group would just wash their hands of him and say he deserves it!

Wednesday, 1st May, 2019

  • 11:45 AM - pemerton mentioned Ovinomancer in post Stakes and consequences in action resolution
    ...hat if my chance of success is 1 in 20, then advantage nearly doubles that (39/400 is near enough to 1 in 10); while if my chance is already good, then advantage doesn't increase it as much (eg if its 50/50 it goes to 3 in 4, which is only 50% more likely; if its 4 in 5 then it goes to 24/25, which is only 20% more likely). But if I'm following properly, the general experience is that doubling a small chance doesn't, in practice, make much difference (eg because those checks don't come up often enough for the doubling to show through) while the more modest increase in to big chances does make a difference (eg because those checks come up a fair bit and already weren't too likely to fail and now are even less likely). You mean 'Bounded Accuracy?' Or the nominal easy/hard/etc guidelines?The two in combination, I think, because its the relationship between bonuses and DCs that determines the prospects of success, which matter to the viability of conflict resolution for the reasons Ovinomancer has given. Thinking through some more maths: Suppose a DC of 15 and a bonus of +1. Then the chance of success is 7 in 20, but with advantage is 231/400, or about 11.5 in 20. The latter sort of odds is enough to support conflict resolution in Burning Wheel, but the result is that the players (and their PCs) do fail a lot and hence the play experience can be pretty demanding on them. And demanding on the GM too, because it puts a lot of pressure on the GM to effectively narrate failures. I think D&D (and I include 4e here) has never provided a lot of support to the GM in narrating failure effectively. I don't have a good sense of how much better 5e might be in this respect, but if the general tendency in play is to incline towards making checks with significantly better than 50/50 odds then maybe it doesn't come up too much? I think this also touches on another corollary to your posts, that task -> conflict resolution, when well coupled, doesn't imply that a successful task ...
  • 03:53 AM - AbdulAlhazred mentioned Ovinomancer in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    ...in effect limit the GM as to how many different-gear-requiring types of obstacles she can put in the way, or is a truly nasty GM allowed to put in 8 or more and thus guarantee failure? EDIT TO ADD: Another aspect is information. The BitD version seems to assume that if the character happens to have some meat on hand then the character knew there was (or could be) a dog involved. The D&D version allows for this information to either have been a) kept intentionally hidden or b) be available to discover but outright missed during the research-and-casing phase. To me this makes the D&D version more authentic in that the character can make a mistake or be caught by an oversight. I'm far from an expert on BitD, but I would think there are 2 relevant comments here. One is that it may well have many other subsystems which provide ways to produce the things you're asking about. I know it has 'stress' and some other types of currency, as well as an SC-like (in some ways) mechanic. I'm sure Ovinomancer will tell you about how these work. The other thing though, is that maybe this is the type of story the game is aimed at. No game is good for everything. It is very difficult to do some types of fairly obvious stories in D&D, at least without them seeming very contrived, unless you subscribe to some unusual interpretations of hit points and other things. Finally, this is not by any means the last word in possible mechanics of this ilk. Looking at my own game, HoML, I don't find any trouble in having things happen in various ways, even though most of the things that do happen have some kind of dynamic associated with them where the players can 'change the situation', much in the way that BitD allows you to choose a piece of gear when you need it. These actions all have consequences. For instance a player could expend their Inspiration to have their PC come up with a piece of gear, but then it is spent, and getting it back will require leveraging a character attribute in an unfavorabl...

Sunday, 28th April, 2019

  • 03:26 AM - AbdulAlhazred mentioned Ovinomancer in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    ...can't really be quantified for the reasons I've given, but they can tell if something is becoming more or less realistic. But, if you read the posts earlier discussing the way BitD introduces an element into the game via its architecture and mechanics which could be seen as more realistic, but where that realism is in terms of 'authenticity of the narrated outcome' vs 'authenticity of the process' (which Lanefan argued for) then you must know that at least these two deeply differing sorts of realism exist, and yet not everyone seems to recognize them, or consider them to be effective at increasing authenticity. It is really just not as simple as 'subsystem X which arbitrates injection of element Y into the game, where element Y exists in the real world is the definition of realism and everyone recognizes that'. Where that true, then your criticisms, or those of lowkey13 etc. would all be super accurate, but they're not because there really truly is no one single agreement about this. Ovinomancer cares about reality of outcomes, but Lanefan cares about process (and I assume he would say that outcomes take care of themselves to some degree).

Saturday, 27th April, 2019

  • 02:40 AM - Maxperson mentioned Ovinomancer in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    ...g my head permanent this time. I appreciate that you recognize that. :) Sure thing! They do the same thing to me, so I know what you're talking about. I'm just a bit more stubborn than you are about this sort of thing. :) Anyway, I apologize if you thought I was indicating that people were bullying you; I really was using that as an analogy in that prior post, and you have shown you are more than capable of standing up for yourself (as shown in this thread!). I do think that there is something distasteful with a group of people that have an insular and (not necessarily) widely-shared opinion taking turns being, at times, rude and dismissive* to a fellow forum member and then bolstering each other with XP; that's what I meant when I wrote that "the majority of people looking at this thread will just see a circular firing squad of people high-fiving each other without cause." I didn't think you were saying that they were bullying me, so no worries. I was My response was to Ovinomancer who was equating the analogy with the accusation of bullying. It was to let him know that I wasn't taking it the same way he was. Anyway, whether it's called "more realistic" or "more authentic" or "more asdwfnksaedjk," I have always preferred a level of abstraction in my games and favored fast gameplay over simulation/realism; that's why I played a stripped-down 1e and pretty much checked out when they published the DSG and WSG. I personally think it would be helpful to, instead of concentrating on this sole issue, to discuss how different goals in TTRPGs have to balanced against each other, and different goals have different costs; something which is familiar in almost every endeavor. I agree, which is why I have repeatedly said here that while I enjoy more realism than 5e has at it's core, I won't engage realism to the point where the players' enjoyment of the game starts to suffer. It might be interesting to even ask whether the weighting of realism/simulation has cha...

Friday, 26th April, 2019

  • 11:43 AM - Sadras mentioned Ovinomancer in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    ...ure up differing mechanics which are attempting to do the same thing (AC versus Absorption for instance). it does come down to subjectivity. Would you agree though, for the sake of the argument, if we look at D&D solely and said the next edition of D&D will either have an AC mechanic (as it does now) or every attack will be considered successful, no die roll required. If you have to compare those two scenarios - is one more realistic/authentic than the other or do you feel that still comes down to preferences: those that wish to role dice and those that don't. Personally I feel at this point it cannot be just preferences and that there is a case for insert preferred buzzword, either wearing armour protects your character in some way, however abstract, or it is just cosmetic. SYNOPSIS My conversation starter was AC vs No AC which is more real. @Aldarc suggested its preferences as you cannot measure what is more real between AC vs Absorption mechanic. Mostly dealt with above. @Ovinomancer said he would measure more realism at the fiction level not via processes and described a 'GM decides' game which inputs realistic results via GM narration. Have to give this more thought. @hawkeyefan is ok with the terminology more realism except when measuring system vs system, a little similar to Aldarc as he follows the line of preferences which I understand, but probably no surprise to him, I disagree with the BitD example he used - it is TOTALLY gamist and we probably won't agree. In this specific instance I would probably side with Max. @AbdulAlhazred returns to the semantic debate and prefers the term more authentic giving his reasons for the use of either term as he views it. I may not agree entirely, but my interest does not lie in the semantic debate. I'm ok with the term more authentic as I've said many times, I was using the more realism term as a shorthand for a great many things. @pemerton reiterates everyone else's point in his first two replies (which is whe...

Thursday, 25th April, 2019

  • 04:27 AM - pemerton mentioned Ovinomancer in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    Blades in the Dark, fir example, has no AC mechanic at all, much less any specific mechanics for combat that are in any way different from sneaking past a guard. Yet, you can have broken or damaged weapons, sucking chest wounds, minor scratches, and many other interesting and "realistic" outcomes of a fight with deadly weapons. 5e, for example, has detailed, combat specific rules, yet generates none of these things. Which is the more "realistic"? You seem to be focused on game processes being the way to introduce "realism". I disagree this is appropriate. There's a dufference between process and resultant fictions. "Realism," to me, can only be judged at the fiction, not the process. However, all of your arguments so far about adding "realism" have been about adding additional processes. I'm pointing out that process is not required for "realism." Sadras, Ovinomancer here is saying to you much the same things as I said to Maxperson upthread. I didn't mention BitD, as I don't play that game - I mentioned Prince Valiant, Cortex+ Heroic and BW as games that permit these various things through a mixture of processes (especially important in BW) and GM narration of consequences - which is my guess as to how it is handled in BitD. (If that guess is wrong then hawkeyefan or Ovinomancer can correct me.) Isn't the shorthand for this realism. Will you be happy with more authentic? more immersive? more RL illusionary? more dramatic? I mean looking for a better description/buzz-word is just playing silly buggers...It's not just playing silly buggers - the fact that you think it is means that maybe you've missed AbdulAlhazred's point. That point was the following: one effect of the AD&D DMG disease system may be that a PC, on some occasion of play, suffers a disease which debilitates him/her for a little while. And that may increase the player...

Wednesday, 24th April, 2019

  • 01:33 PM - Maxperson mentioned Ovinomancer in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    ...games perform a similar function with different mechanics. Some games use counter combat rolls. The DM rolls (defense/combat) and the player rolls (defense/combat), and the success of the attack is in the difference. Is that more or less realistic than AC? Other games have the player roll defense, whether using dice polls or defeating a static difficulty number. Is that more realistic than AC? Many systems use armor as damage absorption/reduction. Is that more or less realistic than AC? I can't say for certain, because this does not fundamentally strike me as a debate on realism, but, rather, a debate on gaming preferences and aesthetics rather than some silly, vacuous notion of realism being on a scale, which unsurprisingly seems to having moving goalposts and arbitrary standards. The "realism scale" has as much "meat" as talking about the invisible hand of the market, the leviathan of the state, the state of nature, or the social contract of governance. This and the response from Ovinomancer are Red Herrings. It's irrelevant which one is more realistic. You can't point to a different system that adds realism to combat and ask "Which is more realistic?" as a reason to answer that 5e's system is not realistic. It's just a deflection. Even though Blades in the Dark has a different system that adds realism to its game, 5e's combat system still adds realism to the game. Which system is more realistic is irrelevant. IMHO, "Realism" has more to do with the game fiction than the mechanics, though the mechanics may attempt to support and reinforce that fiction. Realism has to do with both the game fiction AND the mechanics. Where there are mechanics and those mechanics interact with the game fiction, those mechanics must match the game fiction or you get nonsense. If you have a bow in the game fiction and use it, the mechanics must allow for ranged attacks and shooting. I think that cultural tradition has largely given the AC mechanic a post hoc justification...

Friday, 19th April, 2019

  • 07:29 AM - pemerton mentioned Ovinomancer in post If an NPC is telling the truth, what's the Insight DC to know they're telling the truth?
    ...d the wizard has to start declaring melee attacks. At some point in this rambling conversation it was brought up that players who would worry about failing a roll and making a situation worse would simply choose not to roll. They would remain neutral as a counter to the consequences of failure. So, it was proposed, that there should not only be consequences for failure, but consequences for doing nothing. So, exactly what I said. Consequence for failing and consequence for doing nothing.That was me, not Charlaquin. As per a post I made not too long ago days-wise but maybe 100+ posts upthread, there are different approaches possible and this thread is bringing out some of those differences. Just to mention some of the posters I've interacted with: The approach I'm describing (which I use in 4e and which I think could be ported to 5e) has some similiarities to 5ekyu's, but is not identical (as can be seen in the discussion of the Audience With the Troll King scenario). Ovinomancer also does some things similar to me - eg in some recent posts mentions the idea of keeping up the pressure on the players via their PCs - but not identically I don't think. I also have some similiarites to Elfcrusher and Charlaquin - eg regarding the fictional specification of the declared action as very important - but some differences - eg I call for more checks than they do (see my quote upthread from Luke Crane for the reasons why). I have had far too many players who are so scared of failing and making things worse for the party that instead they opt to do nothing. So, when I see people saying that by adding more consequences for failing a roll than simply defaulting to the status quo, and that makes their players more eager to act, that goes against everything I have seen with new players. The more consequences there are, the more likely they are to withdraw. <snip> Failing forward is great, I love that style. But that was not the style I was addressing. This...

Monday, 15th April, 2019

  • 10:15 AM - pemerton mentioned Ovinomancer in post If an NPC is telling the truth, what's the Insight DC to know they're telling the truth?
    ...nce. I might say ďok, you could break the leg off the table with a DC 10 Strength check, and you could apply Athletics proficiency if you have it. But the noise might attract the guardís attention if you fail. What do you do?Ē Now you have enough information to make an informed decision, whether you want to accept the risk or try a different approach. Youíre not blindly making checks, the results of which you canít predict. Youíre thinking about your character as an entity existing in a world, making decisions as you imagine that entity might. You succeed and fail based on your decisions and the risks you accept or donít accept.Here we can see the outlines of different approaches to RPGing. I want to draw out one contrast: between (1) consequences for failure as a prior, necessary condition to call for a check (Charlaquin's approach) and (2) consequences for failure as a subsequent condition mandated by a prior decision to call for a check (my preferred approach, perhaps sometimes Ovinomancer's approach). In approach (1), part of deciding whether or not to call for a check is inspecting the "causal" state of the fiction to determine whether or not it contains implicit consequences (eg guards who might be attracted by noise in a cell). This is one aspect of what I was trying to get at upthread in talking about an approach that focuses on "engineering" aspects of the fiction, like who is where when, and what causal processes are they participating in. This is not an aspect of approach (2). Approach (2) determines whether or not to call for a check on a different basis (I'll say what in a moment). If a check is called for, and fails, then consequences will be narrated, which may require establishing new fictional elements (like guards, or a cursed sarcophagus) to be constituent elements of those consequences. To put it another way, if a consequence is needed then the GM establishes the requisite in-fiction "causal" conditions that will be part of that. On approach (2)...


Page 1 of 11 12345678910 ... LastLast
No results to display...

Thursday, 20th June, 2019

  • 01:35 AM - Fenris-77 quoted Ovinomancer in post [5E] Urban Intrigue Campaign - Gating the Sandbox
    You can buy the PDF from Evil Hat Games. I do not purchase new RPGs sight unseen. If your bookcase is anything like mine it is littered with the dead dreams of hundreds of impulse RPG purchases. I try to be a little more discerning about that now than I was in my more intemperate youth. I'm combing through the SRD now though, and I will, as seems appropriate, purchase a copy if I like it. Again, thanks.
  • 01:08 AM - Fenris-77 quoted Ovinomancer in post [5E] Urban Intrigue Campaign - Gating the Sandbox
    Really? I guess it could be a bit hard to find. Here's the URL for the SRD: bladesinthedark.com Hope that helps!Why thank you good sir. Failing a PDF the SRD will do me just fine. I do love new rule sets.
  • 12:06 AM - Fenris-77 quoted Ovinomancer in post [5E] Urban Intrigue Campaign - Gating the Sandbox
    If only someone had recommended Blades' tech before.... Sure, be hurt about it.;) I've never played and couldn't find a copy online when you mentioned it (yes, I did look, rather hard). I also live thousands of miles from the closest FLGS. So unless someone gives me specifics...

Wednesday, 19th June, 2019

  • 02:51 PM - Celebrim quoted Ovinomancer in post Why are we okay with violence in RPGs?
    Well, yes, that's how it works -- your preference isn't objective just because you have it. Nor is it merely a preference and subjective just because you claim it is so. Even the very definition of role-playing suggests a strong and natural connection between acting and the act of role-playing: "the acting out of the part of a particular person or character, for example as a technique in training or psychotherapy" To suggest therefore that this connection is therefore only a preference, and not in some way closely connected to the act of role-playing and in particular to the degree and quality of the role-playing requires a very high burden of proof on your part. At the very least, you have to address the argument I have developed showing why it was the "superior form of role-playing" (as you put it). And though I'm not one, I'm inclined to think that a therapist or an occupational trainer would agree and encourage the more immersive, more literal experience, for much the same reason...
  • 01:49 AM - Celebrim quoted Ovinomancer in post Why are we okay with violence in RPGs?
    You are arguing a preference as objective fact...But roleplaying isn't defined as or by acting. You are stating that as if it was an objective fact. I at least have an argument for why it isn't. I could make further ones.

Friday, 14th June, 2019

  • 03:17 AM - Riley37 quoted Ovinomancer in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    Sorry Apologies mean more and go further, when you also stop practicing the behavior for which you apologize. did you miss where @Hriston said he was taken out of context and wasn't saying what @LMaro was claiming? I did not miss that. Hriston said what he said, in the words he used. You can stand by your assertion that no one has said any such thing; you can walk it back; or you can deflect, dodge, distract and dissemble. I only rarely see a "no one is saying that" claim which holds up to rigorous factual examination. More often than not, someone somewhere IS saying that (for whatever value of "that"). If you are trying to claim that people have actually advanced that being a jerk doesn't matter I haven't said anything on that topic. AFAIK you're the only one using that particular word in this thread. I'd rather not become the second.
  • 01:29 AM - Riley37 quoted Ovinomancer in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    If there's an honest question in there, could you fish it out for me? You need the step by step? Can do! You asserted the following, in reference to Imaro's assertion about communication of content: Sure. Literally no one in this thread has said otherwise. Imaro then quoted Hriston asserting that only content matters, without regard to what words communicate that content. So if you still stand by your "no one in this thread has said otherwise" assertion, does your assertion now stipulate that when you said "no one", you meant Hriston? A simple "yes" or "no" response should suffice. Thanks in advance for your clarity and brevity!

Thursday, 13th June, 2019

  • 11:27 PM - BronzeDragon quoted Ovinomancer in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    Dude. Stop posting right now and go write this paper! You will be famous for all time! Imagine, I've posted 8n the same thread as the person with the right answer to what literature is (or at least conclusively is not)! To be so lucky! Ah, the strong aroma of "Pretentious Storygamer".... You may wanna ease up on the cologne just a tad.
  • 10:24 PM - Saelorn quoted Ovinomancer in post Systems You'd Never Play after Reading Them
    Absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Maybe one of the sorcery knacks? Those are powered by drama die, which usually are used as floating extra dice for rolls, or for a heroic effort to ignore the nasty death spiral penalties for a round. Unless it's something I haven't heard, drama dice can't be spent for any narrative control outsude of a few sorcery knacks (which are magic). I mean, you can not like it (you soulless monster!), but this shouldn't be a reason.That's good to hear, then. Perhaps I was misinformed. I should look further into it. Edit: It may have been an example of spending a Raise in order to create an Opportunity.
  • 06:16 PM - Elfcrusher quoted Ovinomancer in post Systems You'd Never Play after Reading Them
    Hmm. Are you talking about 7th Sea 2e? That's the one with the kickstarter; 1e was published by AEG 15ish years ago? If so, I get you. I lurve 7Sea 1e and have kitbashed it and houseruled it for soecial applications. Also played it without knowing the setting much at all. But, 2e? Wasn't impressed and be much more likely to use a 1e bash than 2e. If you mean 1e, then you are a soulless monster, but I'm okay with that. Agreed. 7th Sea 2e felt kinda "meh." My gaming group in Austria loved 7th Sea 1e, but 2e left them feeling flat and uninspired to run it. Oh, yeah, I meant the 2e KS. My bad.
  • 03:47 PM - Imaro quoted Ovinomancer in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    Get yer own shtick. Imitation is the greatest form of flattery ;)
  • 03:18 AM - Imaro quoted Ovinomancer in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    Yep. I still think you've missed the point. Uhm... *shrug*... ok
  • 02:13 AM - Imaro quoted Ovinomancer in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    Sure. Literally no one in this thread has said otherwise. I'm starting to think you've maybe missed the point. Really?? Because I literally brought up this idea that how content was presented could in fact determine whether a group would be interested in the content earlier in the thread (and one of the reasons I thought of it as core to the game) and these were the replies... Emphasis mine. Because color (dungeon dressing) is content that provides atmosphere when imagined by the participants at the table. The quality of form with which itís expressed isnít whatís important but rather whether the odors, noises, furnishings, and items found in an area suggest a torture chamber, a harem, or a wizardís laboratory. In other words, itís the actual content that matters, not the particular words that are used and the way they are said. ... My take on this is the same as @Hriston's - it sounds to me like the situation is not interesting enough! As I've already posted in this thread, my advice to ...
  • 01:06 AM - Imaro quoted Ovinomancer in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    Don't think anyone's disputed that being a jerk has an effect... :erm: Sooo... Are you agreeing that how content is presented can determine whether people wish to engage with it?

Wednesday, 12th June, 2019

  • 03:57 AM - FrogReaver quoted Ovinomancer in post The Overkill Damage Fallacy
    Sigh. You can't declare your answer to be the right one by fiat. Explain why you think this is so. Following my own advice, it's because the assumptions are slightly different. I'm assuming at least one more enemy, so the case on a round where there was 1 previous hit and two hits on that round carries the second hit into the new target, This reduces the overall average because I'm not stopping at one enemy so that the difference in distributions matters -- by assuming at least one more bad guy, I've removed the artifact of the different distributions of hit probability. I've applied mine to the continuum, not just the one specific situation. I've also accounted for that third wheel of a third hit. To go back to an earlier point, have you investigated the region where target hp is from 9-12 in your construction? PC2 is ahead of the game, there. This means that bigger stick isn't always faster to the kill. What do you think this says (not snark)? I didn't. I showed my calculations. The...
  • 03:24 AM - FrogReaver quoted Ovinomancer in post The Overkill Damage Fallacy
    No, weighted averages take into account what you've decided to measure and how you've decided to weight it. If I take the weighted average of the volume of a cat from tip to tail, I haven't said much about the dietary requirements of the cat, although some information towards that may be gleaned. Being able to take a weighted average does not, at all, mean you've successfully measured everything. This is reification -- you've done math and confused the concrete outcome of the math as applying to your assumptions. Nothing in stats will correct your assumptions -- tools will gleefully let you lie to yourself with the absolute certainty of a math equation. Don't confuse "I did math!" for "I did it right!" You keep saying things like that but it's simply not true. Calculating a weighted average for chance to kill on round (X) results in a value that is the number of rounds to kill. There's no misinterpreting what that means. It means exactly what I'm claiming it means. For example, if you l...
  • 03:01 AM - FrogReaver quoted Ovinomancer in post The Overkill Damage Fallacy
    As for overkill, you addressed my suggestion above and said it fails for multiattacking characters. It does not. Switch "rounds to kill" to "attacks to kill" then divide the result by number of attacks per round to determine "rounds to kill". I tried that before I posted. It gives an incorrect value of 1.667 rounds. The actual number of rounds is below: 106992
  • 02:42 AM - FrogReaver quoted Ovinomancer in post The Overkill Damage Fallacy
    You're excluding information, namely the chance that a kill event occurred earlier, to focus on a specific round's chances. It's statements like the one above that make me question whether you really understand what a weighted average is. Weighted averages by definition does take into account EVERYTHING. That's why I'm very puzzled when you make statements like these. My average rounds to kill takes into account rounds 1 to infinity. Your chance to kill by round X only takes into account rounds 1 to X.
  • 01:17 AM - FrogReaver quoted Ovinomancer in post The Overkill Damage Fallacy
    However, in both cases, I think you've made an error in analysis. Each round should have the cumulative chance that the creature is killed in that round or in any previous round, not just the chance that the target is killed in that round. You're essentially ignoring all the cases where the killing is done already. But, let me drop some illustrations first. I did not. As already mentioned, chance to kill by round X doesn't help with computing average rounds to kill. This figure is the more important one for evaluating the 2 PC's. I account for the killing being done on round 1 in my probability for round 1. I account for the killing being done on round 2 in my probability for round 2. I am simply not interested in the chance the enemy is dead by round X. I'm not sure why you think looking at cumulative probabilities instead of exact value probabilities is better. You can see that the column marked % Kill the round shows the numbers you presented. The column marked % Kill Overall is ...
  • 12:49 AM - FrogReaver quoted Ovinomancer in post The Overkill Damage Fallacy
    Dammit! My thumb keeps hitting the laugh button. Honestly, this is embarrasing. Yeesss... but is this a useful question? I mean, further to the point that I'm pretty sure you can't sum the odds of "kill this round" and have it turn into "average rounds to kill." Only pretty sure because I haven't worked out if this is one of thise things where it happens to simplify out that way. I don't see it, but I could be missing something. I've already commented on this part. Please let me know if something with the calculation still doesn't make sense to you. But, back to "average rounds to first kill" being a useful question to illuminate overkill. I don't think it is, because it doesn't address overkill but instead shows that single big hit is swingier (ie flatter) than 2 little hits. Of course an example showing overkill wasn't being cared about in my OP. My argument was that a mechanic other than overkill exists and so there shouldn't be so much focus on overkill (at least until it can rea...


Ovinomancer's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites