View Profile: I'm A Banana - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
  • Raunalyn's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 04:45 PM
    Yeah, like I said...I was unable to click on the link to verify. Looks like they are starting up April Fools early this year :p
    8 replies | 509 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Raunalyn's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 02:40 PM
    The timing is suspect, too. WoTC and the D&D devs are well known for having fun during April 1st.
    8 replies | 509 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Raunalyn's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 02:24 PM
    This is unconfirmed as I have not been able to click on the link to verify the source, but according to the blurb on this article: "Starting in April 2020, the iconic Dungeons and Dragons (D&D) will instead be called Dungeon(s) and/or Dragon(s), abbreviated D&/D." http://www.boardgamelinks.com/links/news_link/133336 Has anyone been able to confirm this? What are your thoughts if it is...
    8 replies | 509 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Raunalyn's Avatar
    Wednesday, 12th June, 2019, 06:48 PM
    "That's my secret captain...I'm always angry." -Bruce Banner/The Hulk
    53 replies | 1759 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Raunalyn's Avatar
    Wednesday, 12th June, 2019, 02:14 PM
    I've always been a fan of house-ruling that Berserkers don't feel the effects of exhaustion while raging. Thematically appropriate, and it makes using frenzy a bit more tempting.
    53 replies | 1759 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Raunalyn's Avatar
    Monday, 10th June, 2019, 04:10 PM
    No, but Nic Cage's teeth weren't included on the list. An oversight, methinks...
    33 replies | 921 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Raunalyn's Avatar
    Monday, 10th June, 2019, 02:54 PM
    "Mother is the name for God on the lips and hearts of all children." Eric Draven - The Crow "Childhood ends the moment you know you're gonna die." Top Dollar - The Crow
    71 replies | 5436 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Raunalyn's Avatar
    Friday, 7th June, 2019, 08:48 PM
    I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, "... I drank what?" ~ Chris Knight (aka Val Kilmer) - Real Genius
    71 replies | 5436 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Raunalyn's Avatar
    Thursday, 6th June, 2019, 06:28 PM

    68 replies | 2435 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Raunalyn's Avatar
    Thursday, 6th June, 2019, 03:42 PM
    What does the fox say?
    68 replies | 2435 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Raunalyn's Avatar
    Thursday, 6th June, 2019, 02:28 PM
    It does? Where?
    68 replies | 2435 view(s)
    5 XP
  • Raunalyn's Avatar
    Wednesday, 5th June, 2019, 05:27 PM
    This is pretty much how my Tomb of Annihilation game went. We had a Grave Cleric, a Rogue, and a Diviner. At one point (the group was 5th level at the time), they encounter the King of Feathers. Cue the synergy. Grave Cleric uses Path of the Grave. Diviner had rolled one 20 for his portent. Rogue attacks KoF with a sneak attack. Diviner grants his portent, turning it into a crit. Path of the...
    10 replies | 441 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Orius's Avatar
    Tuesday, 4th June, 2019, 11:25 PM
    Core yes. But I'm talking core, and splats, and PO, and that's not even getting into supplements. That was a problem for me BitD when I didn't have enough experience to balance and customize things properly. These days, I can handle that better, but much of what I want to do 3e does already.
    162 replies | 6276 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Raunalyn's Avatar
    Monday, 3rd June, 2019, 02:18 PM
    I've only watched the first few episodes, but I have loved it so far; I am a huge fan of the irreverent British humor. Tennant is, of course, completely on point.
    31 replies | 1126 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Orius's Avatar
    Friday, 31st May, 2019, 11:29 PM
    My current game is 2e having last played 3e and some PF previously. I'm reminded of just why I went fully over to 3e BitD. 2e has a lot of great ideas, but the rules, well they have problems. 1e has a lot of passionate fans, and I think it's because the early edition is fairly consistent, largely being under Gary's direction. From some of the discussions I've seen over on Dragonsfoot, the...
    162 replies | 6276 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Raunalyn's Avatar
    Tuesday, 28th May, 2019, 04:49 PM
    I enjoyed the first movie a lot. It had that World of Darkness feel to it that really appealed to me. The second movie seemed a bit over the top; many of the action/fight sequences seemed too choreographed to me (example: John flips mook #2786, who proceeds to just sit there while John wiggles around and shoots mook #2787 - 3000 before shooting mook 2786 in the face. Mook 2786 does nothing at...
    33 replies | 921 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Raunalyn's Avatar
    Tuesday, 28th May, 2019, 04:42 PM
    It would be absolutely wonderful and well worth it to see John De Lancie show up as Q. He was always one of my favorite "villains" in TNG.
    49 replies | 1324 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Raunalyn's Avatar
    Friday, 24th May, 2019, 03:20 PM
    A Half-Elc?
    54 replies | 8957 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Raunalyn's Avatar
    Thursday, 23rd May, 2019, 09:20 PM
    Watch out, you might get what you're after Cool, babies! Strange but not a stranger I'm an ordinary guy Burning down the house
    68 replies | 3374 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Raunalyn's Avatar
    Thursday, 23rd May, 2019, 08:32 PM
    Holy Thread Necromancy, Batman!!
    126 replies | 12112 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Henry's Avatar
    Thursday, 23rd May, 2019, 06:11 AM
    Yeah, the reason WotC gave up the magazine publishing in the first place was a desire to divest it completely, so they sold all that to Paizo along with the licensing contract. As to why Paizo didn’t continue a magazine, it was already not a great money-maker for them to produce in that format (paper costs, subscription prices, etc.) they already had the vending web site by the time the license...
    13 replies | 750 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Henry's Avatar
    Thursday, 23rd May, 2019, 05:58 AM
    No, I think the monsters by and large did not play well with one another, but one of them (won’t spoil it) was trying to get them to work together. By and large, it was pretty much a monster apartment building where you could go from door to door with impunity, as originally written.
    22 replies | 1008 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Raunalyn's Avatar
    Wednesday, 22nd May, 2019, 09:05 PM
    Computer/Console: Final Fantasy series (6 being my favorite) Ultima series (7 and 7.5 being my personal favorites) Planescape: Torment Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines Tabletop: D&D 5e Vampire the Masquerade Mage the Ascension (I have a tendency to mix in the Cthulhlu Mythos in my games...so fun) Shadowrun
    53 replies | 5043 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Raunalyn's Avatar
    Wednesday, 22nd May, 2019, 03:31 PM
    I can say that my group went through Sunless Citadel and Forge of Fury as the first part of Storm King's Thunder (I was underwhelmed at the opening chapter in the book) and had a fantastic time. Got them up to 5th level quite nicely.
    22 replies | 1008 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Henry's Avatar
    Tuesday, 21st May, 2019, 05:19 AM
    I voted 2E, but I like several for different reasons: - I said 2E because I ran two of my longest-running campaigns on it; it’s flexibility was such that I could pull in a lot of 1E material without throwing it out of whack, and I home-brewed that system the most by far. It was also the system under which some of the most awesome campaign settings ever were created. - I love Basic D&D...
    288 replies | 9924 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Raunalyn's Avatar
    Monday, 20th May, 2019, 03:35 PM
    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...
    25 replies | 691 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Raunalyn's Avatar
    Monday, 20th May, 2019, 02:24 PM
    The show ended pretty much how I expected it to (I called Bran winning the throne 2 seasons ago). I do have some complaints about the continuity. Last episode, especially...what was the point of Arya finding the white horse? Did she become death? Was she dead and the horse was taking her home? D&D: "Nah, my bad...forget that scene! Red herring and all. Oooo, look!! Shiney Dragon...
    110 replies | 3620 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Henry's Avatar
    Sunday, 19th May, 2019, 11:23 PM
    I can’t take credit for it, sadly — Stu Venable from Happy Jack’s RPG Podcast is friggin’ hilarious. :)
    1468 replies | 38601 view(s)
    0 XP
No More Results
About I'm A Banana

Basic Information

Date of Birth
October 31, 1981 (37)
About I'm A Banana
Introduction:
Looking to play and run all sorts of games in all sorts of systems.
Location:
Brooklyn
Age Group:
31-40

Signature


[RIGHT]Jacob J. Driscoll
[B][I]Astral Plane Campaign[/I][/B]: Take [URL="http://www.dmsguild.com/product/193314/Hereos-of-the-Eternal-Classes-of-the-Astral-Plane"]your heroes[/URL] and [URL="http://www.dmsguild.com/product/190331/People-of-the-Eternal-Races-of-the-Astral-Plane"]your people[/URL] and come to [URL="http://www.dmsguild.com/product/198238/The-Athar-Citadel"][B]The Athar Citadel[/B][/URL], where those who reject the gods learn to wield divine magic!
[/RIGHT]

Contact


This Page
https://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?2067-I-m-A-Banana&s=df7ad83445701ff19b99de6fda90747d
Instant Messaging

Send an Instant Message to I'm A Banana Using...

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
15,847
Posts Per Day
2.50
Last Post
Nonstandard Races You Love And Want Back Friday, 28th April, 2017 08:05 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
63
General Information
Last Activity
Thursday, 29th November, 2018 05:08 AM
Join Date
Sunday, 27th January, 2002
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
1

19 Friends

  1. architectofsleep architectofsleep is offline

    Member

    architectofsleep
  2. Arctic Wolf Arctic Wolf is offline

    Member

    Arctic Wolf
  3. Ashy Ashy is offline

    Member

    Ashy
  4. Creamsteak Creamsteak is offline

    Member

    Creamsteak
  5. dimonic dimonic is offline

    Member

    dimonic
  6. Emirikol Emirikol is offline

    Member

    Emirikol
  7. Gfreak2x9 Gfreak2x9 is offline

    Member

    Gfreak2x9
  8. Henry Henry is offline

    Autoexreginated

    Henry
  9. Horacio Horacio is offline

    Member

    Horacio
  10. Klaus Klaus is offline

    Member

    Klaus
  11. Lynda Lawless Lynda Lawless is offline

    Member

    Lynda Lawless
  12. Maldur Maldur is offline

    Member

    Maldur
  13. MurderHobo1 MurderHobo1 is offline

    Member

    MurderHobo1
  14. Orius Orius is offline

    Member

    Orius
  15. Piratecat Piratecat is offline

    Writing Fantasy Gumshoe!

    Piratecat
  16. Raunalyn Raunalyn is offline

    Member

    Raunalyn
  17. Sammael Sammael is offline

    Member

    Sammael
  18. Southern Oracle Southern Oracle is offline

    Member

    Southern Oracle
  19. surfarcher surfarcher is offline

    Member

    surfarcher
Showing Friends 1 to 19 of 19
No results to show...
Page 1 of 13 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Monday, 10th June, 2019

  • 12:34 AM - Hussar mentioned I'm A Banana in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    ...oom and I just want the party to move on, or, I'm tired (which happens) or my brain just decides to phone it in. :D Which also happens more often than I'd like. Stupid brain. But, if I'm actually prepping the scenario? Yeah, it's going to be the first one all the way. The more information I can get into the player's hands the better and the better it will engage the players. And it works both ways. I just recently parted ways with a player who absolutely refused to engage in the game at any level higher than basic conversation. Every interaction was essentially your second example. It was incredibly frustrating as a DM because it totally sucked any emotion out of every scene. I talked several pages back about the dice bot with a heart beat. That's pretty much what it's like when players refuse to engage in the fiction with any language beyond the most bare bones, basic information exchange. Heck, one of my most memorable D&D experiences was with a former Forumite I'm A Banana who ran the first haunted house scenario of the recent Ravenloft WotC offering. It was FANTASTIC. Scenario wise it was pretty much bog standard haunted house. Fairly bog standard stuff - nastiness in the attic and basement, rising tension, yeah, usual haunted house stuff. But, he was so able to bring it to life with excellent description and prose that it remains one of my favorite gaming memories.

Saturday, 10th March, 2018

  • 02:29 AM - Greg K mentioned I'm A Banana in post Favorite Old Supplements you Still Use
    As a DM, as I prepare a campaign: 1e: Unearthed Arcana 1e for the Barbarian, but in combination with David Howery's Dragon Magazine artilce: Tracking down the Barbarian 2e supplements: The Complete Fighter's Handbook, Complete Priest's Handbook, and Complete Thief's Handbook. I'm A Banana made it easier with his conversions of those supplement. Also, Complete Bard's Handbook, Complete Druid's Handbook, Witches (Mayfair Games) 3e: Unearthed Arcana, Shaman's Handbook (Green Ronin), Witch's Handbook (Green Ronin) Experts 3.5 (Skirmisher Press), From Stone to Steel (Monkey God Enterprises/ High Moon Media), Noble Steeds: A d20 Guide to Horses & Mounts. There are a few others that I am forgetting at the moment

Wednesday, 2nd August, 2017

  • 06:08 AM - Mistwell mentioned I'm A Banana in post Anyone Using Adventures in Middle Earth Journey/Rest Rules in Regular 5e Game?
    ... of their ideas. The GM will need to be good at making up these tables, because with only 12 options things will get fairly repetitive. It is a very interesting way to design a game, and builds in a guaranteed differentiation between a journey and exploring a specific locale or dungeon (or interaction with the world with the Audience rules). The Fellowship Phase provides options for gaining some things without gaining a level too. It is definitely much more prescriptive than D&D, in that a very specific feel and style of play is being promoted by the rules, and it does remind me of some of the Story Now games in that regard, although it's still very much a D&D base. Some of the mechanics feel a bit forced to me, but I can certainly see the appeal for many. I definitely recommend checking it out, overall I think it's really, really well done and will use a lot of ideas from it myself. There is more to the resting rules than simply not being able to long rest during a Journey, as I'm A Banana explains elsewhere. Got my loremaster's PDF today, and so I figured it'd be a good opportunity to talk about all the cool ideas from the game - from either of the books! No Long Rests in the Wilderness AiME basically says you need three things for a long rest: safety from threat of an attack (so no long rest in an area with monsters where you need to post guards), comfort (so no long rest in a dank dungeon), and tranquility (an air of peace). A fourth requirement is that you can't long rest while on a journey. They point out that places to take a long rest might include an Elf camp in Mirkwood, a Dwarven hall, and, more interestingly, a place in the wilderness like an old Elf ruin or a nice campsite next to a bright river. I love the focus on morale this provides, and how it explicitly links taking a long rest to being somewhere pleasant. I really love these rules, but I've never played Adventures in Middle Earth. So I am curious what others have experienced with these ...

Sunday, 26th March, 2017

  • 05:55 PM - innerdude mentioned I'm A Banana in post The role of organizations in RPGs
    ... generally ignore this kind of setup. Since the GM isn't really giving them what they really want (a chance to just go kick butt and get rich), the campaign just stalls out in this nebulous, half-baked "plot," everyone sort of just gets bored (including the GM), and things sort of implode and the campaign dies. This has happened so often in sooooo many campaigns I've joined (including the one I'm in now), that as a GM I've just adopted the rule that all PCs will either be recognized members of an existing faction, or be directly aligned with a current faction. This is not optional, and I make it very clear to the players during Session Zero that this is the case, and if they're not interested in that, they should look for another group. In my experience this has been a significant boon to my campaigns, as it has created a much greater sense of player engagement and involvement. One of the major "root causes" for me taking this approach can be found in an OP so eloquently stated by @I'm A Banana (the former Kamikaze Midget) here: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?373913-I-Am-SO-Over-The-quot-Rootless-Vagabond-quot-Archetype

Wednesday, 1st March, 2017


Thursday, 16th February, 2017

  • 03:36 AM - Hussar mentioned I'm A Banana in post Whatever "lore" is, it isn't "rules."
    Ok, let me step back for a second and see if I can explain myself without annoying people. :p Hopefully. At least give me points for trying. :D What confuses me the most about all these canon discussions is how time can be considered a valid criteria for judging change. There are all sorts of ways you can judge a new idea - I'm A Banana outlined a number of excellent ones a few pages back, and I'm just going to piggy back on his ideas. You can judge the idea as to whether or not it makes sense, is it consistent, does it actually do what you are trying to do, does it interact in good or bad ways with other ideas. These are all perfectly valid and generally accepted criteria for judgement. But, why is time considered valid? If the 4e archons, for example, had come first, then everyone's arguements in this thread would flip. 4e archons would be the "true" archons and the earlier edition ones would be bad changes. :uhoh: In other words, the criteria has absolutely nothing to do with the ideas themselves, but rather, which one came first. The quality of the idea doesn't matter. It could be great, it could be terrible, but, since it came first, it cannot be changed. How can that be justified as a valid criticism? Yup, the Great Wheel came first. Absolutely. No one is arguing that it didn't. Does that automatic...

Monday, 13th February, 2017

  • 04:26 AM - Hussar mentioned I'm A Banana in post Whatever "lore" is, it isn't "rules."
    .... Person A says X, Person B disagrees. Argue, argue, argue, Person A shows that he's right. Person B then moves on to the next point, argue, argue, argue, Person A shows he's right. Person B then moves on to the next point and continues to repeat until he can finally find some inconsistency and then say, "AHA! I told you you were wrong all the way along." Considering the canon is largely vague and unspecific, doing that is generally not all that hard. But, ok, Maxperson, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. What are you actually trying to prove then, if not that pemerton is not actually running a Greyhawk campaign? That his addition of lore changes the setting so much that it's no longer truly that setting? Is that your point? Not truly that setting according to whom? You? Someone who has absolutely no connection to the campaign in question at all? To put it another way, how is what you're doing to Permerton any different than what I was doing in the other thread to I'm A Banana?
  • 03:28 AM - Hussar mentioned I'm A Banana in post Whatever "lore" is, it isn't "rules."
    ...hing though. Every edition of D&D has strongly encouraged DM's to change mechanics. Either to add new mechanics or replace existing ones. Hundreds of books of new classes, variant classes, races, feats, spells, new mechanics to deal with waterborne adventures, or what have you. And no one's ever tried to tell me that I'm not playing D&D if I add a Binder to my 3e game, despite the fact that this changes all sorts of stuff. But, if I try to change some of the flavor of the game, then it's a bad thing? So, let me get this straight. I can add dozens of classes, hundreds of player character races, thousands of feats and I'm still just playing 3.5e D&D. But, if I add a new kind of spell casting to Forgotten Realms (adding Dark Sun Defiling for example - not replacing the Weave, just adding), I'm completely changing the experience of the game? Seriously? You folks are seriously trying to tell me that this isn't all tied to personal preference? That the "cost of change" to use I'm A Banana's phrasing, isn't based 100% on personal preference? Of course it is. We've got three Adventure Paths set in Forgotten Realms that pull major elements from other settings and they're probably the best selling modules in decades. We've got a PHB filled with classes that are complete reworking of earlier version classes and no one is bothered one whit. You don't think so? Really? Build a 5e paladin and take it to a 3e table that has never seen 5e rules. Tell them that's a paladin and watch the reaction. Warlocks that ganked Binders and stole their stuff? Flying barbarians? Monks that throw walls of ice? Fighters that can heal themselves? On and on and on. If change came with a cost that was relative to the size of the change, 5e would have crashed and burned. But, instead, 5e is a huge success. Why? Because people LIKE the changes 5e made. The cost is only an issue when someone isn't happy with the change. In a group that like Eladrin, there was no cost to the change....

Friday, 10th February, 2017

  • 04:11 PM - pemerton mentioned I'm A Banana in post Whatever "lore" is, it isn't "rules."
    What if I was playing the son of a Cormyrean Noble though? I would expect some kind of mechanic to support that bit of background lore and that is what we find in 5e.AD&D has no such mechanic (until the introduciton of cavaliers in UA, but that won't be relevant if your noble's son is a cleric, or a ranger, or some other non-generic warrior. Neither 3E nor 4e has any such mechanic in its PHB. So for most of D&D history, your expectation has not been met. Yet people have been playing PCs, some but not all of whom are nobles' sons. (Which speaks also to I'm A Banana's comment about wizards. For most of D&D's history, differences in the fictional background of PCs have not been mechanically expressed at all. 3E really starts to individuate fighting style, for instance, but that doesn't mean that, in the fition, all AD&D fighters were indistinguishable in their martial arts techniques.) What about say African Lions? Where would I expect to find African Lions? The most obvious place would be Africa of course but say I was watching the Madagascar movie in which I discover that they could also be found in New York or even Madagascar. This is weird for two reasons. (1) D&D has had stats for lions in many editions, yet Africa has never been part of the core gameworld (the original MM has Sumatran rats, evil spirits from India, Japanese ogres and Chinese dragons, but no reference to Africa). (2) Madagascar is part of Africa.

Wednesday, 8th February, 2017

  • 04:20 PM - Imaro mentioned I'm A Banana in post Whatever "lore" is, it isn't "rules."
    I agree. Official changes are canon. The argument put forth against that(By @Imaro I think) wasn't that they weren't canon, but rather than changes to canon can be negative and should be carefully considered by the company. No that wasn't my point about Eladrin. I argued that I didn't like the change because I liked the previous race known as Eladrins and that 4e unecessarily repurposed the name for High Elves when they could have chosen a different name and still kept the Eladrin of old and had the new teleporting elves. I was then drilled on why I liked them, what the differences were and so on. But no my argument was never "because canon"... I'm actually having a hard time remembering anyone in this thread that put forth that as their reason for disliking a change... I think it was @I'm A Banana that put forth that particular argument concerning canon and I believe it was along the lines of some of the points I've brought up... Consistent canon facilitates the ease of dropping into a game... it alleviates the necessity for spending time going over the campaign setup and character options allowed... and so on but he can probably speak to the specifics of his argument better than I can. EDIT: I think part of his argument was that new canon must not only be good it must also be good enough to outweigh the conveniences lost from constantly changing canon.
  • 01:07 AM - Hussar mentioned I'm A Banana in post Why do so many DMs use the wrong rules for invisibility?
    I'm totally on board with I'm A Banana on this one. I guess my answer would be, which ruling makes the game more fun? And, yup, that's going to differ by table. Like I'm a B, the idea of forcing one side (usually the players) to flail around blindly while they play Marco Polo with imaginary elves is about as much fun as watching grass grow. It's extremely frustrating. And, IMO, makes invisibility extremely powerful. If the group (bad guys or good guys) loses an entire round of actions while leaving the other group completely free to do whatever it wants, that's a HUGE benefit. But, again, AFAIC, I go with, "What would be the most fun here?" rule - flailing around blindly or simply imposing a penalty to attack and treat invisibility as a strong, but not overwhelming, buff? So, yeah, I tend to lean on the 4e style interpretation of invisibility. You can't be directly targeted and attacks have disadvantage on you. If you spend the action to Stealth, THEN you are Hidden and require the other side to take actions...

Friday, 3rd February, 2017

  • 12:57 AM - Hussar mentioned I'm A Banana in post Whatever "lore" is, it isn't "rules."
    ...ry that I change my view to accept your parameters of what is canon and accept your game as a canon game... even if I don't think it is. But if you truly don't care about canon... why does it matter if I say your game is or isn't canon as long as you're calling it whatever you want? That doesn't seem like an attitude of not carring... it seems to insinuate you care alot about canon and that your changes and modifications be considered canon... or at the least that I not call them out as distinct from canon... EDIT: Again this isn't directed at you but I'd be interested in what you think but it is more directed at posters like @pemerton, @Hussar and @lowkey13 But, the question that comes to my mind is, so what? What is the end goal here? What is the benefit or result or whatever for you telling pemerton that his game isn't "really Greyhawk"? What is he getting out of it? What are you getting out of it? See, in that other thread that shall not be mentioned, I did to I'm A Banana exactly what you're doing to pemerton - questioning the canon "authenticity" of his decisions. The difference though, is that I was doing it to prove a point - that such canon distinctions are a giant time wasting wank and make the questioner look like a giant flaming douche bag. I repeatedly stated that I didn't actually believe nor care about the canon. That I was doing what I did specifically to show what it looks like when you start beating someone around the head and shoulders with the canon beatstick. OTOH, though, you seem to have a genuine goal in mind for telling @Permerton (and Maxperson as well seems to have some goal in mind) that his game isn't really canon. So, even assuming that you're 100% right and @Permerton's game isn't canon kosher, so what? Is you telling him that going to improve his game? Is taking a big steaming dump on his ideas going to make him a better DM? Is it going to make the game he's running more interesting? At the end of the day, wha...

Saturday, 28th January, 2017

  • 08:32 AM - Hussar mentioned I'm A Banana in post Do you care about setting "canon"?
    ...hole 4e kerfuffle. Another poster insisted that the 4e medusa was a huge diversion from canon medusae because you could resist the medusa's gaze. Hang on, I said, that's not actually a change, you've always been able to resist a medusa's gaze. This went back and forth for a while until I (and a few other posters) actually went back and posted the relevant text from EVERY SINGLE edition of D&D up to that point - all the way from OD&D to 3.5. And the lore was surprisingly consistent. You could resist a medusa's gaze in every single edition of the game. His interpretation of medusa's was not based on the actual canon of the game. The only change (in this specific case) was that a medusa's gaze was somewhat slower (Save Save or die vs simply SoD), but, that was it. Despite quoting chapter and verse from every single edition, the other poster still refused to accept the facts of the situation. Now, we are here with this gnome wildmage example. Two separate posters (myself and I'm A Banana) have posted the relevant sections from canon. The canon isn't ambiguous. It's not like we're trying to say that slave and servant are synonyms. The facts are right there - wild magic casters exist in the setting in two time periods, neither of which is the Age of Despair which is when the game is set. Now, I'm A Banana freely admits to not having deep knowledge of the setting and simply made a mistake. Fair enough. He got the timeline of the setting wrong. No worries. But, all these kind folks in this thread have repeatedly told me that I was 100% wrong. That I didn't understand the setting and my knowledge of the canon was too out of date to be relevant. Yet, when shown in black and white, again, quoting chapter and verse of the setting, posters are now tripping over themselves to rewrite and reinterpret canon. "Oh, well, wild magic does exist all the time, so, maybe this one caster is just an exception". But, if we can do that, then canon doesn't really mean anything doe...
  • 12:29 AM - pemerton mentioned I'm A Banana in post Whatever "lore" is, it isn't "rules."
    ...Age, he looked up one of his books (and Patrice Louinet has tracked down most of the references in the appendices to his critical edition of the Conan stories). A GM who adds something in - a new god, a new cult, some element of Perrenland that they stole from a B-documenary about Swiss halbedeers s/he once saw - is not breaking the canon, s/he's simply following the process that generated it in the first place! In other words if I answer a flyer in the LGS that says D&D Greyhawk game and I get there and the are using FATE and have replaced the gods some of the major historical events and the factions but retain the map and broad lore I am going to feel like the claim was misleading and probably not stick around to play because IMO it's neither a D&D game or a Greyhawk game.These comments keep coming up, in this and the other thread. They're red herrings. Who in the history of RPGing has ever advertised their FATE game set in a GH adaptation as a "D&D GH game"? Or, to refer back to I'm A Banana's example, who has ever advertised his/her apocalyptic Mad Max-style game as a "D&D FR game"? Me posting on a message board about my GH game, which happens to include WoHS, has absolutely zero in common with some purely imaginary false advertisement posted on a "players wanted" board.

Friday, 27th January, 2017

  • 06:53 AM - Hussar mentioned I'm A Banana in post Do you care about setting "canon"?
    When the Age of Mortals began and the magic of the deities was lost, the poeple of Ansalon found their own magic in these energies. Though the Scions are long forgotten, their legacy endures with the mystics and sorcerers of the Age of Mortals. Read more: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?492891-Do-you-care-about-setting-quot-canon-quot/page199#ixzz4WwDFgwIi From your own quote I'm A Banana. It states that wild mages make a come back AFTER the beginning of the Age of Mortals. But, now, apparently, it's the writer's fault for using different Ages for delineating the time line of the setting. It's not like there's a handy timeline http://www.dlnexus.com/lexicon/13099.aspx anywhere to be found? You're arguing that it's lore changes that make thing difficult. True, to a point, I suppose, particularly when you cannot be bothered to actually read the setting and learn the changes. I mean, your stated goal is to create a character using the lore of the setting, but, then turn around and make a mistake in using that lore, and apparently now I'm a bad person for pointing that out? Look, you made a mistake. A fairly minor one and one that certainly doesn't really take anything away from the character. It happens. But, it's still your mistake. What you seem to be trying to do here is to beat someone else with the canon bat that you hate so much: to say "AHA! Gotcha! C...

Tuesday, 24th January, 2017

  • 02:59 PM - pemerton mentioned I'm A Banana in post Whatever "lore" is, it isn't "rules."
    I mean, if IAB throws out his gnome wizard because Hussar said mean things about him here, that would be a disruption. But that's probably giving our little forum too much credit.Quite. On both counts. I haven't taken Hussar to be mean - and I hope I haven't been. But knowing nothing of I'm A Banana's character other than what has been posted, I can see where Hussar is coming from. I can see how it's something of a quirky or even avant garde spin on the idea of a gnomish lifequest, but it doesn't scream DL to me.
  • 10:33 AM - pemerton mentioned I'm A Banana in post Whatever "lore" is, it isn't "rules."
    A pure Phantasm that spawned a 100 page (and on-going) thread that has now determined, as far as I can tell, that Flint, Caramon and Riverwind were not authentic Dragonlance characters.Whose game did this disrupt? Not mine, and by Hussar's testimony not his - and presumably not I'm A Banana's either, given that he didn't learn how Hussar felt until it came out in a 100 page thread.
  • 09:01 AM - pemerton mentioned I'm A Banana in post Do you care about setting "canon"?
    ...is was about as generic as it gets in that regard. Riverwind and Caramon don't get passed on generic just because they have ties to non-generic membersWhy not? Judgements of authenticity, or of "generic-ness", are not about lists of facts (at least, not solely and generally not primarily). They are aesthetic judgements, about the meaning of a work, a setting, etc; and how some newly-added element, or some element within it, fits with it. This is why a critic can describe a particular character, or event, in a story as "jarring" or "misplaced" or otherwise at odds with the rest of the work. Like many AD&D fighters, Caramon is a helper/"meat-shield" for a magic-user. It is the framing of this as a relationship, and to some extent a struggle, between twins that the DL story makes Caramon more than just another fighter. There is the family drama; but Caramon also gets drawn into the distinctive DL milieu by way of vicarious participation. I'm not a participant in Hussar and I'm A Banana's game, so I can't judge what, if anything, about the gnome wild mage PC makes DL distinctiveness emerge out of the play of the character. Yeah, I think I'm beginning to better appreciate this distinction. The issue is obfuscated because points like this... ...are quite clearly points about the facts of the setting, not about aesthetics. I think like many a forum poster, Hussar is an adherent of the "multiple leaky buckets" approach to argumentation. And I'll accept that I'm interpreting and regimenting his comments in a way that he himself hasn't. (And of course am subject to correction!) But what is informing my interpretation is the fact that, a long way upthread now, I went through the material that you relied on and pointed out how - as far as factual elements are concerned - it departed relatively little from what is in DL. Having gone back to find that post, here is the relevant bit again: The issue you are having with your gnome who hates the gods could have a...
  • 04:39 AM - pemerton mentioned I'm A Banana in post Whatever "lore" is, it isn't "rules."
    He can also play around with canon, it's just more likely to disrupt thingsWhat things? I've never had disruption issues.You are not everyone.OK - I'll try a more literal take. Who is reporting "disruption of things" resulting from departing from canon in using a setting? No one in this thread. No one in the other thread, where Hussar has been quite clear that I'm A Banana's departure from canon (as Hussar sees it) is not a disruption to the game. These "issues" are, in my view, purely phantasms.

Saturday, 21st January, 2017

  • 03:26 PM - Maxperson mentioned I'm A Banana in post Do you care about setting "canon"?
    ...ify a trait of (what I think Hussar would take to be) a key villain (Raistlin), who only redeemed himself by abandoning his plan to oppose and destroy the gods. This is not a difference of opinion about what DL permits. It's a difference of opinion about what DL, at its core, is. However, by making his character a wild mage he succeeds in exemplifying what is distinct about DL magic due to the Greygem and The Chaos War. Those two events are also distinctively DL, so his gnome character is authentic DL. Your difference of opinion is one of interpretation/thematic reading, not of facts. The commentator on Tom Sawyer and I have both read the same Mark Twain book. We've both read the same story about Tom getting his friends to help him whitewash the fence. What we disagree about is what it means in thematic terms.I disagree. Canon is pretty factual, and the loss of magic and subsequent return via the Greygem and The Chaos War are canon events. It's not a thematic interpretation. @I'm A Banana is not trying to interpret what it means that magic came back that way. He's just using the factual return of magic.


Page 1 of 13 1234567891011 ... LastLast
No results to display...

Wednesday, 31st October, 2018

  • 09:51 PM - squibbles quoted I'm A Banana in post [Forgotten Realms] The Wall of the Faithless
    My main issue here is that this is basically a punishment in the lore for any character whose player doesn't want to bother wading through the massive list of deities and picking one that they like. No matter how noble their deeds, no matter how many lives they save, no matter how much good they do, no matter how many evil plots they stop, a character can't get a good afterlife without checking a box on a form that says "Prayed to a god sometimes." The BEST a character can hope for is to be a guide, which basically means escorting others to paradises that they'll never actually be a part of. I mean, the first thing I want to do when hearing about this wall is to have an adventure all about destroying it and slapping the collective pantheon in its face for thinking this was a good idea. Even supposedly "good" deities like Mystara and Ilmater are totally on board with punishing everyone who doesn't massage their egos on a regular basis. Discovering that the faithless are being put into a wall...

Friday, 17th August, 2018

  • 01:21 AM - ad_hoc quoted I'm A Banana in post Help Me Grok Slaad
    And of course both of these are different from, say, the CN bard who visits town, or the CE rogue. Slaadi and demons are alien -- from another reality. They drive to more extreme examples of these alignments than most mortals express. Part of the thing you're dealing with when you deal with anything extraplanar is that they are not overly concerned with mortal problems. Perhaps the celestials take mortal concerns into account and try to do little damage, but even an angel is a dangerous creature whose logic is foreign to the concerns of an LG person just trying to live their life. I think it might also be good to think of what a being of LN essence might do in this situation. If such a being finds themselves in a town in the Prime Material they might go about creating absolute order. Using the market example they might impose their will to make it an ordered place. No crowds, only lines, everyone walking a designated pace, prices set, etc. Attempting to remove individuality from the town, to...

Thursday, 9th August, 2018

  • 05:28 PM - Mike R quoted I'm A Banana in post What is adamantite, and why is it so special?
    it's rarity. An upgraded form of Silver is Mythral, which the elves fashion well. GOLD is the Blessed Metal of the Sun. Highly skilled weaponsmiths can make versions of this metal that are basically as functional as a steel weapon. Such blades hold heat well, and are said to be especially potent when used against water-based elemental creatures or oozes. It is especially potent when opposing the Metal of the Moon (silver), and is effective in piercing illusions and seeing truth in it's reflection. “it’s” is a contraction of “it is”. “its” is a possessive pronoun.

Monday, 25th June, 2018


Monday, 9th April, 2018

  • 03:36 AM - JacktheRabbit quoted I'm A Banana in post Why Worldbuilding is Bad
    Sci-fi writer M John Harrison tells you why you don't need to spend hours crafting your campaign setting: From here. Discuss. Oh look, someone made the critical and laughable mistake of stating THEIR PERSONAL OPINION as FACT. Do we mock them or just shake our head and walk away?

Sunday, 8th April, 2018

  • 07:19 PM - Caliburn101 quoted I'm A Banana in post Why Worldbuilding is Bad
    Sci-fi writer M John Harrison tells you why you don't need to spend hours crafting your campaign setting: From here. Discuss. 1. Scifi writer and not a GM. He may be right about the kind of stories he wrote, but he was in control of where the characters went and how much needed to be known for that. Players rarely oblige with such 'script-on-rails linear progression through the story... 2. He never achieved the vast success of the LoTR stories and they had vast amounts of world building... 3. I have been GM'ing for 40 years and every time I have homebrewed having more detail in an evocative and inherently cohesive gameworld has led to a better campaign than those which didn't have that. Every time...

Wednesday, 7th February, 2018

  • 08:31 PM - Satyrn quoted I'm A Banana in post Sanctuary useless?
    It's handy defensively. If the enemies are targeting the squishy (low AC, low HP), this forces them to do something else. Tryin' ta be clever and taking out the healer can also be thwarted. Oh. And you could cast it on the fighter with the Protection fighting style, so that you force the enemy to attack the guy beside him, at which point the fighter imposes disadvantage.

Wednesday, 2nd August, 2017

  • 06:08 AM - Mistwell quoted I'm A Banana in post Anyone Using Adventures in Middle Earth Journey/Rest Rules in Regular 5e Game?
    ... of their ideas. The GM will need to be good at making up these tables, because with only 12 options things will get fairly repetitive. It is a very interesting way to design a game, and builds in a guaranteed differentiation between a journey and exploring a specific locale or dungeon (or interaction with the world with the Audience rules). The Fellowship Phase provides options for gaining some things without gaining a level too. It is definitely much more prescriptive than D&D, in that a very specific feel and style of play is being promoted by the rules, and it does remind me of some of the Story Now games in that regard, although it's still very much a D&D base. Some of the mechanics feel a bit forced to me, but I can certainly see the appeal for many. I definitely recommend checking it out, overall I think it's really, really well done and will use a lot of ideas from it myself. There is more to the resting rules than simply not being able to long rest during a Journey, as I'm A Banana explains elsewhere. Got my loremaster's PDF today, and so I figured it'd be a good opportunity to talk about all the cool ideas from the game - from either of the books! No Long Rests in the Wilderness AiME basically says you need three things for a long rest: safety from threat of an attack (so no long rest in an area with monsters where you need to post guards), comfort (so no long rest in a dank dungeon), and tranquility (an air of peace). A fourth requirement is that you can't long rest while on a journey. They point out that places to take a long rest might include an Elf camp in Mirkwood, a Dwarven hall, and, more interestingly, a place in the wilderness like an old Elf ruin or a nice campsite next to a bright river. I love the focus on morale this provides, and how it explicitly links taking a long rest to being somewhere pleasant. I really love these rules, but I've never played Adventures in Middle Earth. So I am curious what others have experienced with these ...

Monday, 26th June, 2017


Tuesday, 13th June, 2017

  • 06:38 PM - schnee quoted I'm A Banana in post Healer feat
    Sure, RG, I was more replying to the overall tone of the thread. :) I think a game like 5e needs to be built acknowledging that different people have different definitions for "hit points," and that the game can't presume or assume any one definition -- which is why I'm happy that, as far as I can tell, a healer's kit isn't exactly an essential thing. But maybe there'd be something even better for those who want more concrete believability there? Sure, there are many possible ways to do it. You just have to house rule. People do that all the time. If you look at the game itself, there's a variation of short/long rest that moves it from one hour/overnight, to one overnight /one week. In that context, just house rule this feat usable on a short rest. You will reduce the power of the feat, but that's realistic. The thing is, this feat is *literally unbelievable*. No clever phrasing or brainstorming will change that. So it's not worth it to try, which is why people are getting silly, because - wait...

Tuesday, 28th March, 2017

  • 02:13 PM - Gwaihir quoted I'm A Banana in post CoS Ideal Tarokka Reading Storywise
    since they gave the PC's the quest to the Wizard of Wines to prove their worth before they rewarded the symbol. A big arc of the campaign was about this. Im strongly considering placing something in the Wizard of the Wines, since the whole Bring us Wine before we let you in the town plot, seems like a bad WOW quest to me. G

Tuesday, 21st March, 2017

  • 11:15 PM - Havelok quoted I'm A Banana in post How did you handle the Aarakocra?
    Ye gods, yes. Folks are too skittish by and large. Running your game in fear of the OP bogeyman is kind of limiting... I agree wholeheartedly. Embrace the unexpected. Experienced GMs know that improv is central to the game. This includes "balance".

Tuesday, 14th February, 2017

  • 04:34 AM - Hussar quoted I'm A Banana in post Whatever "lore" is, it isn't "rules."
    In a game with Rule 0, how can you possibly argue that there are any "core mechanics"? What is good for one is good for the other (because they're not really different). Is telling someone that encumbrance is "core rules" One-True-Wayism? Because, if not, then telling somone that in Eberron, the Last War was two years ago in the "core lore" falls under the same logic: just because you can easily change it at your own table doesn't mean there isn't a baseline assumption that tells you how to play the game (including how to portray your character and how to account for all the gear they're lugging around). No, but, telling someone they aren't using the encumbrance rules then they are making a "poor GMing decision" and they aren't really playing D&D, but, an Alt-D&D, is. Isn't it?

Sunday, 12th February, 2017

  • 01:30 AM - pemerton quoted I'm A Banana in post Whatever "lore" is, it isn't "rules."
    If you want a different experience, you're going to want different rules for gameplay.2nd ed AD&D uses nearly identical mechancis to Gygax's AD&D. But the experience is clearly intended to be quite different, and at least at many table it was.

Saturday, 11th February, 2017

  • 11:13 PM - Lanefan quoted I'm A Banana in post Whatever "lore" is, it isn't "rules."
    When a goblin dies to a fireball but doesn't die to a 2-hp longsword wound, it's "lore."No, it's straight mechanics: The goblin has 5 h.p., the fireball does 16. End of goblin. The next goblin has 5 h.p., the longsword does 2. Goblin fights on. Fireballs more reliably kill goblins than longswords in the lore because they do so in the mechanics.Lore has nothing to do with it. The goblin lives or dies in these examples by sheer numerical mechanics, nothing else. Where lore comes in is the narration of the in-game effects of these mechanical events: "The goblin screams briefly then falls silent as its charred corpse crumples to the floor." "The sword hits the goblin hard, staggers it a bit, and puts a small cut in its shoulder; but the creature looks determined to fight on.". And there's nothing whatsoever that says these narrations have to be the same every time, or even ever the same twice...the narration is not bound by any rule saying what they must be or say. The only expectation is t...
  • 07:10 PM - Mirtek quoted I'm A Banana in post Whatever "lore" is, it isn't "rules."
    When a goblin dies to a fireball but doesn't die to a 2-hp longsword wound, it's "lore." Fireballs more reliably kill goblins than longswords in the lore because they do so in the mechanics. Unless lore doesn't care about the current mechanics and just has goblins die with equal frequency from single longsword wounds and fireballs. Maybe because that was how the mechanics were when the first lore about goblins vs. longswords/fireballs were written and just because the current edition's mechanics no longer support that there is no reason to change the lore. The lore can just continue as it always had and ignore the most current mechanics. Maybe the next edition's mechanics happen to once again translate the lore more precisely, maybe they're even more off. In either case the lore doesn't need to be touched. This goblin vs. longsword/fireball is a good example, because the lore is actually full of fights/kills that completely ignore the current combat mechanics from day one. No novel ever had "and...
  • 06:44 PM - ProgBard quoted I'm A Banana in post Whatever "lore" is, it isn't "rules."
    It's not that everything that affects the experience of play is a rule. If all the queens in your chess game were slick with human saliva, that would affect the experience of play pretty profoundly, but it's not a rule of chess that queens not be coated in a layer of drool. It is, perhaps, a very important aesthetic. It's that rules describe how a game is meant to be played - they create a play experience. Part of the play of D&D is describing your character. When you say "Rath is a dwarf," that's part of the play of D&D - everyone has some idea of what Rath looks like now, because they know the rules for how a dwarf looks (no one imagines him to be a twenty-foot tall column of eerie glowing gas). According to at least one formal definition, all rules for all games have the following characteristics: They limit player action. They are explicit. They are shared by all players. They don't change during play. They are an authority. They are portable (in that anyone can use them to play...
  • 02:08 PM - pemerton quoted I'm A Banana in post Whatever "lore" is, it isn't "rules."
    They invite you to change all the rules, which includes the height of dwarves as much as it includes what you add to something you're proficient inThe height of dwarves has never been a rule, though, in the sense in which RPGs present themselves as containing rules. No D&D book has ever presented it as such; and even when I first read Moldvay Basic it was obvious that stuff like the colour of a halfling's hair is not a rule in the same way as the stat requirements for playing a halfling. The ways in which this is so are myriad, but here's one salient one: the rules for stat requirements for races in Moldvay Basic and AD&D are clearly meant to play some sort of balancing function as well as ensuring that races hue to archetypes; the descriptions of hair and skin colour are flavour. There are outer boundaries somewhere - halflings and dwarves, inherently in their names and in the former's STR limits in AD&D, are clearly shorter than humans. Elves, given their CON penalty in AD&D, must be slight...
  • 09:50 AM - Lanefan quoted I'm A Banana in post Whatever "lore" is, it isn't "rules."
    I don't agree that the consequence of defining these things makes it harder to engage. I think it makes it easier, because it helps define the experience you'll be in for.Assuming, of course, you want that experience to be the same as what you had before. In chess, a valid expectation. In D&D, anything but. Part of how you communicate better about expectations is by making those expectations less flexible, so that they can be safe assumptions.Which, while it seems to be important to you, might not be nearly so relevant to others. My examples here would include pemerton 's game, where his players didn't seem to notice or care what he'd done to Greyhawk; or my own players who, when informed my previous campaign was using a much-modified version of FR, came back with a mighty (and paraphrased) "whatever, let's play". It's not that everything that affects the experience of play is a rule. If all the queens in your chess game were slick with human saliva, that would affect the experience of ...
  • 07:45 AM - Mirtek quoted I'm A Banana in post Whatever "lore" is, it isn't "rules."
    I don't think that separating lore from rules achieves this goal. In fact, I think separating lore from rules undermines that goal. It creates a second class of game mechanics (the lore) that "doesn't matter" and so can be changed and trod on and disregarded and trivialized, while the "more important" rules (roll 1d20 to hit; six ability scores; fighters are a class) become unreasonably entrenched and unable to be changed. True diversity is, in part, a recognition of the value of different experiences - including the experience of lore being important. I see it exactly the opposite way. The lore and rules should be separated and this means that the rules become the part that don't matter and can be can be changed and trod on and disregarded and trivialized, while the "more important" lore becomes entrenched and unable to be changed. Whether a longsword deals 1d8 slashing damage or a fireball 10d6 fire damage doesn't matter for the lore. There may be some interactions, but mostly the lore is more t...


I'm A Banana's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites