View Profile: Maxperson - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Today, 01:58 PM
    There are no rules, and there have never been any rules, that say a druid cannot don a suit of metal platemail in order to sneak into a castle. If a DM prevents me from taking that action, he is in fact railroading me by invalidating my decision.
    281 replies | 6102 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Today, 01:38 PM
    Why does this matter with guns and not melee weapons? In a melee, you will very rarely, if ever, see one swordsman run up to another one, stop adjacent to him, and then have the two just hack at each other without moving about in order to not get chopped. They will be moving forward and back, sideways, turning in circles and so on. Why a desire to see PCs move about over guns, but not move...
    307 replies | 8016 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Today, 01:25 PM
    Alchemy Jug 28 Bag of Holding 32-2=30 Bag of Tricks 24 Broom of Flying 24+1=25 Carpet of Flying 24 Cube of Force 5
    281 replies | 6698 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Today, 01:16 PM
    The check-out instructions and Gideon Bible?
    117 replies | 2525 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Today, 01:07 PM
    Alchemy Jug 28 Bag of Holding 32 Bag of Tricks 24 Broom of Flying 24 Carpet of Flying 24 Cube of Force 5
    281 replies | 6698 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Today, 01:50 AM
    And throughout D&D druids have had the ability to don metal platemail in order to sneak into a castle. Nothing you have said has so far been able to counter that fact.
    281 replies | 6102 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Today, 12:32 AM
    It's not even that belief system that I'm bothered by. It's that some people here think it's literally as impossible for a druid to wear a suit of platemail, as it is to exceed the speed of light. It's absurd.
    281 replies | 6102 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:08 PM
    Double post
    281 replies | 6102 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:06 PM
    Railroading is about removing choice. If I were in your game and I told you that my druid puts on the suit of platemail in order to sneak into the castle looking like a knight and you told me no I can't do that, you are railroading me. You have removed my choice based on nothing that has ever existed in D&D. Druids have ALWAYS had the choice to put on platemail if they wanted to accept the...
    281 replies | 6102 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:05 PM
    Yes it is. If you are forcing the players to go down the rails you provide(the game does not make it impossible for druids to put on metal armor), then you are in fact railroading that player. And the point goes flying over your head. D&D has precedent for allowing things in that "break the rules," so forbidding exceptions goes against that tradition. I am curious, though. Are your...
    281 replies | 6102 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:51 PM
    Alchemy Jug 29 Bag of Holding 29 Bag of Tricks 28 Broom of Flying 25 Carpet of Flying 25 Cube of Force 13
    281 replies | 6698 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:36 PM
    Just look at real life taboos and traditions. It was not uncommon for individuals to go against them and engage in those acts anyway. The vast majority obey, but not all. Because we understand the above. It never meant to be impossible for druids to put on metal armor. Just highly unusual. 1. railroading players is one the most frowned on things in D&D. 2. Cthulhu and space...
    281 replies | 6102 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:24 PM
    Except that it's not even taboo. 1e says they can't wear it, and that it interferes with their spellcasting. 2e just forbids it without saying anything. 3e says they can't wear it, and that it interferes with their spellcasting. 5e says opt not to wear it, and that it doesn't interfere with anything. There is never actually a taboo reason given for the restriction, and 5e removes it as a...
    281 replies | 6102 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:18 PM
    Great! Thanks for backing me up! You do realize, don't you, that you can't actually have those penalties unless you can in fact engage in non-class like behavior, right? So the fact that the druid can be penalized for wearing the armor, means that they can wear the armor. It's basic reasoning. It would be impossible for druids to know that it interferes with their magic if they could...
    281 replies | 6102 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:58 PM
    Alchemy Jug 29 Bag of Holding 33-2=31 Bag of Tricks 29 Broom of Flying 24+1=25 Carpet of Flying 25 Cube of Force 12
    281 replies | 6698 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:03 AM
    If you are going to make that claim, you will need to back it up. I already quoted the 1e PHB as telling us that they can wear armor. I'll quote it again since you have now both ignored it, and then cut it out of your quotes. "...unable to use any armor or shields other than leather armor and wooden shields (metallic armor spoils their magical powers)." Do you see the bolded and now...
    281 replies | 6102 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Saturday, 22nd June, 2019, 11:24 PM
    So you're just going to ignore that druids in 1e were free to wear metal armor if they wanted to. All it did was block their magical abilities, like wizards. Wizards who could also put on plate mail if they felt like it in 1e.
    281 replies | 6102 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Saturday, 22nd June, 2019, 05:11 PM
    And that's fine if it's how you want to model hit points. The game however, needs to model damage for guns in the manner it models hit points, and to the game luck and divine aid are also forms of hit points. How many times have we seen in a movie where the cross-hairs or red dot are on the hero's head, but he moves at the last second and the shot misses him by a fraction of an inch? Those in...
    307 replies | 8016 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Saturday, 22nd June, 2019, 04:27 PM
    Yeah. In the thread where he blocked me, he had already accused me of metagaming in an instance that wasn't actually metagaming, then gone on to describe himself metagaming. When I pointed it out, he got all bent out of shape that anyone would accuse him of metagaming and blocked me.
    117 replies | 2525 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Saturday, 22nd June, 2019, 03:26 PM
    I got blocked by him when I pointed out that one of his stances was metagaming. You all better watch out. :p
    117 replies | 2525 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Saturday, 22nd June, 2019, 03:14 PM
    I'm reasonably certain it's what a wizard does right before a fireball hits your face.
    117 replies | 2525 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Saturday, 22nd June, 2019, 03:03 PM
    So the problem with this is two fold. First, starting with 1e any druid could put on metal armor. It's why even though 1e through 3e used words like "can't" and "prohibited," they also informed the players and DM that metal armor kept the druid from casting his spells. You could in fact put it on from the get go, even with the restrictions. The second problem is that 5e has removed the...
    281 replies | 6102 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Saturday, 22nd June, 2019, 02:29 PM
    Alchemy Jug 28 Bag of Holding 28 Bag of Tricks 28 Broom of Flying 25 Carpet of Flying 27 Cube of Force 17 Cubic Gate 8 Sorry about yesterday guys.
    281 replies | 6698 view(s)
    1 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Saturday, 22nd June, 2019, 02:10 PM
    Alchemy Jug 28 Bag of Holding 30 Bag of Tricks 27 Broom of Flying 25 Carpet of Flying 27 Cube of Force 19-2=17 Cubic Gate 7+1=8
    281 replies | 6698 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Saturday, 22nd June, 2019, 12:08 AM
    It also clarifies what is plainly written in the PHB. Specifically that there is no restriction on wearing metal armor. Rather, it's a choice that druids make based on the line of fluff in the proficiency section.
    281 replies | 6102 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Saturday, 22nd June, 2019, 12:00 AM
    Sure. Let's keep going! Page 145 of the PHB. Chain mail, scale mail, breastplate and half plate. All medium metal armors that druids have proficiency with. Page 167 of the PHB. Heavily Armored feat. Doesn't say anywhere that druids can't take it. There is no rule in the PHB that restricts druids from wearing metal armor. There is only the blurb in the class that makes it a choice...
    281 replies | 6102 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 11:47 PM
    Says who? That PC can still shift shapes. Can still cast druid spells. Can still use the druid circle feature. And will still achieve Timeless Body when the metal wearing "non-druid" hits 18th level. Who says that PC is not a druid? Other druids? Sure, they can say that, but that doesn't necessarily make it true.
    281 replies | 6102 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 11:32 PM
    Enforce what? It's nothing but a choice.
    281 replies | 6102 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 11:22 PM
    We ran modules once in a while, but not as part of campaigns usually. The vast majority of our campaigns were with adventures we created in worlds we invented. It doesn't say "can be played with 3+" It says, "Ideal with 3+" Games like Monopoly are not ideal with 2 players.
    350 replies | 10604 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 10:35 PM
    It's not a word game. It's the way the class is written. There is no restriction. But okay, so the PC is a non-druid wearing metal armor, that can shapechange into animals, cast druid spells, etc.
    281 replies | 6102 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 02:13 PM
    The bolded means that they CHOOSE not to wear it, which means that PCs are free to choose otherwise. PCs are often exceptions to standard choices. That sentence is not a statement of "cannot wear," no matter how you try to portray it.
    281 replies | 6102 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 02:09 PM
    Alchemy Jug 28 Bag of Holding 25-2=23 Bag of Tricks 30 Broom of Flying 27 Carpet of Flying 27 Crystal Ball 4 Cube of Force 17 Cubic Gate 19+1=20
    281 replies | 6698 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 02:08 PM
    I had one of those come to my door last week and quack at me.
    281 replies | 6102 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 02:07 PM
    Except that there is no such rule in 5e. There is no rule saying druids cannot wear metal armor and still be druids. There is only one single line that makes wearing metal armor a choice and not a restriction. It seems you've changed the 5e rules to make it an absolute restriction, which is fine.
    281 replies | 6102 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 01:43 PM
    Alchemy Jug 28 Bag of Holding 26 Bag of Tricks 29 Broom of Flying 27 Carpet of Flying 27 Crystal Ball 5 Cube of Force 19 Cubic Gate 19
    281 replies | 6698 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 01:42 PM
    Yep. As soon as I pointed out that Hussar is jumping at shadows, he demonized me and then left the thread to get away from "Satan."
    350 replies | 10604 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 01:38 PM
    If you have to invent something that doesn't exist, like a real world connection that isn't there, how is it offensive? Not looking is probably why you are making connections that don't exist.
    350 replies | 10604 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 07:40 AM
    Or else Gygax and others understood that the PCs needed something to face and just picked monsters to stand against them. It had nothing to do with any sort of real world parallels at all. It seems silly to me to be offended by something that isn't actually there.
    350 replies | 10604 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 07:33 AM
    I disagree. Modules were largely created for tournaments and conventions. They are also not presumed by the game to be used. They were completely optional. It's also easier to tone down a module to make it fit a smaller group, than it is to ramp it up for a larger one. These are reasons why modules are at the high end of the number of players the game expects. They don't contradict the 3+...
    350 replies | 10604 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Thursday, 20th June, 2019, 05:33 PM
    Wow!
    76 replies | 3136 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Thursday, 20th June, 2019, 05:28 PM
    Let’s say melee, with each line of reinforcements 30’ further away. Assume wizard has no teleportation spells prepared. To keep it simple, no grappling or restraining allowed by the guards.
    76 replies | 3136 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Thursday, 20th June, 2019, 02:20 PM
    I like this! My only quibble is the line with lawful about benefiting society as a whole, as it doesn’t work with LE. How about this. Lawful - I work to increase Order. Neutral - I work to maintain Order Chaotic - I actively or passively embrace disorder. Or even more simply I create. I maintain.
    304 replies | 7708 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 20th June, 2019, 01:43 PM
    Hey. If you wanted to house rule the game based on modules(not rules) and ignore the actual rules(3 plus players = ideal), that was your call. The rules were there to serve you, not the other way around.
    350 replies | 10604 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Thursday, 20th June, 2019, 01:39 PM
    Alchemy Jug 28 Bag of Holding 27 Bag of Tricks 28 Broom of Flying 27 Carpet of Flying 27 Crystal Ball 7 Cube of Force 21-2=19 Cubic Gate 18+1=19
    281 replies | 6698 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 20th June, 2019, 01:28 PM
    It's not even a restriction at all in 5e. There's one line where it says that druids won't wear metal armor. Not can't. Won't. Making it a personal choice and not a restriction. What happens if a PC decides that he will? Nothing at all. All of his abilities work just fine with a druid wearing metal full plate and a metal shield.
    281 replies | 6102 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 20th June, 2019, 01:18 PM
    If all the things to spy on with that thing, you're choosing female sheep? :eek:
    281 replies | 6698 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 20th June, 2019, 01:17 PM
    Alchemy Jug 28 Bag of Holding 27 Bag of Tricks 28 Broom of Flying 27 Carpet of Flying 26 Crystal Ball 7 Cube of Force 23 Cubic Gate 18
    281 replies | 6698 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 20th June, 2019, 01:15 PM
    I've always gone with the rules as the official way to play, but that's just me I guess. Three or more includes 6-9, but doesn't require it or make 6-9 the baseline. The baseline presumption of the game is that 3 is as ideal as 9 is. Modules are a different beast. Many of them were written for convention and/or tournament play, and I suspect others just followed that model. Perhaps they...
    350 replies | 10604 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 20th June, 2019, 01:09 PM
    They were not rules at all. They were adventures. The game itself says it is, though. Iideal begins at 3 total players, so that number has to be part of the presumption or it is not ideal.
    350 replies | 10604 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 20th June, 2019, 05:22 AM
    3-5 depending on the PC mix and dragon, yes. You don't encounter half a dragon, and a dragon is an encounter for PCs of X level, depending on the age of the dragon. Given that 3 or more is the ideal number of players, you won't see encounters that are going to be auto death for 3 players. That's just not ideal.
    350 replies | 10604 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 20th June, 2019, 05:18 AM
    Perhaps you missed the part where I mentioned that modules were different. You shouldn't look to them for what the base game expects.
    350 replies | 10604 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 20th June, 2019, 05:15 AM
    It's really easy. I played 1e, 2e and 3e extensively with a variety of DM types. 3e was far easier across the board. I worried in most combats in AD&D. I worried in relatively few combats in 3e, and most of those were when facing things with CRs 2 or more higher than the party. Are you talking about epic levels in 3e? Because I played several campaigns to 16-20th level and saves were...
    350 replies | 10604 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Wednesday, 19th June, 2019, 09:35 PM
    Great stuff here. Would absolutely love to see the simulation using an 11th level wizard at the center. Also curious as to how a 20th level fighter fares. I’m guessing they could handle at least 30 on average.
    76 replies | 3136 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Wednesday, 19th June, 2019, 06:59 PM
    Late to the party here I know, but thought I’d put in my 2c The Good/Evil scale I can wrap my head around pretty easily Good = I sacrifice of myself to help others Neutral = I help others if it doesn’t require sacrifice of myself, I help myself if it doesn’t require sacrifice of others Evil = I sacrifice others to help myself Law/Chaos is a tougher one for me to get my head around,...
    304 replies | 7708 view(s)
    1 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Wednesday, 19th June, 2019, 03:35 PM
    Alchemy Jug 29 Bag of Holding 27 Bag of Tricks 27 Brazier of Commanding Fire Elementals 2-2=0 Broom of Flying 25 Carpet of Flying 27 Crystal Ball 10 Crystal Ball of Telepathy 10 Cube of Force 22 Cubic Gate 21+1=22
    281 replies | 6698 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Wednesday, 19th June, 2019, 02:09 PM
    How is reading what is says straight out as what it says straight out as "way too much?" If the game is ideal for three of more, a single dragon cannot be balanced against 6-9. That would not be ideal. Rather, one dragon is balanced against around three so as to be ideal and if you have more players than that, you add more dragons.
    350 replies | 10604 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Wednesday, 19th June, 2019, 01:31 PM
    Alchemy Jug 29 Bag of Holding 27 Bag of Tricks 27 Brazier of Commanding Fire Elementals 1 Broom of Flying 25 Carpet of Flying 27 Crystal Ball 10 Crystal Ball of Telepathy 10 Cube of Force 24 Cubic Gate 21
    281 replies | 6698 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Wednesday, 19th June, 2019, 01:27 PM
    Below is the presumption from 1e. You guys are looking at modules, often created for tournament or convention play, where you had more players than normal. From page 7 of the 1e PHB: "The game is ideally for three or more adult players: one player must serve as the Dungeon Master, the shaper of the fantasy milieu, the "world" in which all action will take place." That's it. That's the...
    350 replies | 10604 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Wednesday, 19th June, 2019, 05:09 AM
    Well darn. I guess I need to call up my 3 gaming buddies and tell them that all those years of playing 1e and 2e didn't count, because we didn't do it your way.
    350 replies | 10604 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Wednesday, 19th June, 2019, 03:29 AM
    Well, my example was for 4. If you're at 6-9 we up the number of dragons and treasure is all. The math still works out the same as far as XP from monsters vs. XP from treasure.
    350 replies | 10604 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Wednesday, 19th June, 2019, 03:28 AM
    It was and wasn't for me as a player. As a player I enjoyed risk and took great pains to scout and avoid ambushes, as well as avoiding undead when possible. Then 3e came out and saves were allowed against energy drain. At first I was very happy. Then I noticed how easy those saves were, how you got two chances to make them, and how easy it was to get restoration. I played 3e from the day it...
    350 replies | 10604 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Tuesday, 18th June, 2019, 10:01 PM
    Alchemy Jug 29 Bag of Holding 26 Bag of Tricks 29 Brazier of Commanding Fire Elementals 7-2=5 Broom of Flying 25+1=26 Carpet of Flying 28 Crystal Ball 10 Crystal Ball of Telepathy 10 Cube of Force 23 Cubic Gate 23
    281 replies | 6698 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 18th June, 2019, 02:09 PM
    This was the consensus of the non-conversational side in the other thread. Something short and evocative to describe the room and mood, and then questions/statements if necessary.
    117 replies | 2525 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 18th June, 2019, 01:33 PM
    Alchemy Jug 28 Bag of holding 29 Bag of Tricks 28 Brazier of Commanding Fire Elementals 8 Broom of Flying 23 Carpet of Flying 28 Crystal Ball 12 Crystal Ball of Telepathy 12 Cube of Force 25 Cubic Gate 23
    281 replies | 6698 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 18th June, 2019, 01:30 PM
    And worth nowhere as much XP. I went with ancient red dragon to illustrate just how piddly combat XP was. Especially vs. XP from treasure. You played with a generous DM, or perhaps one who didn't know how to run monsters. If the DM wasn't worried about killing you and used tactics that many of the monsters would know and use, combats were not easy, especially when you factored in save...
    350 replies | 10604 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 18th June, 2019, 01:25 PM
    A bag of holding or four. It's not as if most of that didn't come from gems, jewelry and platinum anyway. One of the largest bags of holding could hold 150k of the 250k with 1000 pounds left over. Death? Energy Drain? Save or die sucked and was all over the place with poison, and energy drain was hell. It had no save and you never got back all of your experience, even if you were...
    350 replies | 10604 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 02:55 PM
    Alchemy Jug 27 Bag of Holding 29 Bag of Tricks 28 Brazier of Commanding Fire Elementals 10-2=8 Broom of Flying 23+1=24 Carpet of Flying 27 Censer of Controlling Air Elementals 8 Crystal Ball 14 Crystal Ball of Telepathy 14 Cube of Force 24
    281 replies | 6698 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 02:24 PM
    In 1e an ancient red dragon was worth 7758, or 1939 xp each for a party of 4. An ancient red dragon can easily have 250,000gp worth of treasure, not including magic items. That equates to 62,500 xp each for that party of 4. Gaining the treasure is 32 times more xp than killing it, and you get that same exp if you steal the treasure rather than fight the dragon. D&D was originally...
    350 replies | 10604 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 01:56 PM
    Alchemy Jug 27 Bag of Holding 31 Bag of Tricks 28 Brazier of Commanding Fire Elementals 10 Broom of Flying 23 Carpet of Flying 27 Censer of Controlling Air Elementals 8 Crystal Ball 14 Crystal Ball of Telepathy 14 Cube of Force 24
    281 replies | 6698 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 06:39 AM
    You focus on tricking monsters, but ignore that it talks about avoiding/disarming traps as well. There are no monsters(typically) involved with traps, and yet the DM is supposed to come up with an encounter level for them in order to assign non-combat XP. Modules are a different beast. In order to appeal to the widest audience, they have to be written murderhobo and then DMs can add or...
    350 replies | 10604 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 01:56 AM
    I'm not sure about page 84. I'll look in a second. However, the intro section of the PHB says the following. "While initial adventuring usually takes place in an underworld dungeon setting, play gradually expands to encompass other such dungeons, town and city activities, wilderness explorations, and journeys into other dimensions, planes, times, worlds, and so forth." It's pretty clear...
    350 replies | 10604 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 16th June, 2019, 05:23 PM
    In my experience, this is less about the DM failing to be engaged, and more that the DM has failed to learn the box text in advance and just reads it as he goes. If he had learned it in advance and was able to describe the scene with the box text as the guide, the players would have been more engaged.
    1473 replies | 42145 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 16th June, 2019, 05:12 PM
    I agree. If nobody wants to engage with the content, then the content doesn't matter. If "it's the actual content that matters,'' content determines whether people engage or not. Now, I clearly do not agree that "it's the actual content that matters." I think both content and presentation matter equally. Of course, you can never guarantee engagement. 100% content, 100% presentation,...
    1473 replies | 42145 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 16th June, 2019, 05:06 PM
    Alchemy Jug 28 Bag of Holding 30 Bag of Tricks 27 Bowl of Commanding Water Elementals 4 Brazier of Commanding Fire Elementals 12 Broom of Flying 23 Carpet of Flying 26 Censer of Controlling Air Elementals 12 Crystal Ball 16 Crystal Ball of Telepathy 16
    281 replies | 6698 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Sunday, 16th June, 2019, 02:11 PM
    Alchemy Jug 28 Bag of Holding 30 Bag of Tricks 26 Bowl of Commanding Water Elementals 6 Brazier of Commanding Fire Elementals 12 Broom of Flying 21+1=22 Carpet of Flying 26 Censer of Controlling Air Elementals 14-2=12 Crystal Ball 16 Crystal Ball of Telepathy 18
    281 replies | 6698 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 16th June, 2019, 07:08 AM
    You ever read Spellsinger? It's not a world with no humans, but humans are definitely in the minority, with animals making up most of the intelligent population.
    307 replies | 8016 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 16th June, 2019, 03:47 AM
    I'd go bronze age.
    307 replies | 8016 view(s)
    1 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Saturday, 15th June, 2019, 05:22 PM
    Alchemy Jug 26 Bag of Holding 27 Bag of Tricks 27 Bowl of Commanding Water Elementals 10 Brazier of Commanding Fire Elementals 14-2=12 Broom of Flying 21+1=22 Carpet of Flying 26 Censer of Controlling Air Elementals 14 Chime of Opening 2
    281 replies | 6698 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Saturday, 15th June, 2019, 03:06 PM
    Alchemy Jug 26 Bag of Holding 27 Bag of Tricks 27 Bowl of Commanding Water Elementals 10 Brazier of Commanding Fire Elementals 14 Broom of Flying 21 Carpet of Flying 26 Censer of Controlling Air Elementals 14 Chime of Opening 4 Crystal Ball 16
    281 replies | 6698 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 05:41 PM
    Alchemy Jug 27 Bag of Holding 24 Bag of Tricks 24 Bowl of Commanding Water Elementals 14-2=12 Brazier of Commanding Fire Elementals 14 Broom of Flying 19+1=20 Carpet of Flying 26 Censer of Controlling Air Elementals 14 Chime of Opening 10 Crystal Ball 18
    281 replies | 6698 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 02:12 PM
    Okay. Thanks for the update!
    87 replies | 6887 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 02:07 PM
    Are there any plans to address them?
    87 replies | 6887 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 02:02 PM
    Alchemy Jug 27 Bag of Holding 27 Bag of Tricks 22 Bowl of Commanding Water Elementals 14 Brazier of Commanding Fire Elementals 14 Broom of Flying 20 Carpet of Flying 26 Censer of Controlling Air Elementals 14 Chime of Opening 12 Crystal Ball 18
    281 replies | 6698 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 07:43 AM
    I hear licking exploding toads can get you there, too.
    1473 replies | 42145 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 03:02 PM
    Alchemy Jug 25 Bag of Beans 10 Bag of Holding 24 Bag of Tricks 23 Bowl of Commanding Water Elementals 14 Brazier of Commanding Fire Elementals 14 Broom of Flying 21+1=22 Carpet of Flying 25 Censer of Controlling Air Elementals 16 -2=14 Chime of Opening 12
    281 replies | 6698 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 02:24 PM
    Alchemy Jug 25 Bag of Beans 9 Bag of Holding 26 Bag of Tricks 23 Bowl of Commanding Water Elementals 14 Brazier of Commanding Fire Elementals 14 Broom of Flying 20 Carpet of Flying 25 Censer of Controlling Air Elementals 16 Chime of Opening 14
    281 replies | 6698 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 02:21 PM
    Bad analogy. This thread debate using basketball would be... What's more important in playing basketball, offense, defense, shooting or dribbling? Theatrics in most sports is nearly non-existent. It shows up a little bit after touchdowns, goals and such, but for most of the game it's not there. If you wanted to use a "sport" where theatrics and the sport might be on equal ground, go with...
    1473 replies | 42145 view(s)
    4 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 01:18 PM
    It wouldn't be charisma if it didn't work. ;) Speaking of charisma. In my games I make note of the charisma of the PCs. Even if the most eloquent player gives me an amazing speech, if his PC has a charisma of 4 I'm going to filter that speech though his charisma and the NPCs will hear it different. Conversely, a stammering and stuttering player whose PC is a charisma 20 paladin, will have...
    1473 replies | 42145 view(s)
    1 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Wednesday, 12th June, 2019, 06:21 PM
    Alchemy Jug 26 Bag of Beans 14 Bag of Holding 21 Bag of Tricks 25 Bowl of Commanding Water Elementals 14 Brazier of Commanding Fire Elementals 16-2=14 Broom of Flying 21+1=22 Candle of Invocation 4 Carpet of Flying 24 Censer of Controlling Air Elementals 16
    281 replies | 6698 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Wednesday, 12th June, 2019, 02:17 PM
    Alchemy Jug 26 Bag of Beans 11 Bag of Holding 25 Bag of Tricks 25 Bowl of Commanding Water Elementals 16 Brazier of Commanding Fire Elementals 16 Broom of Flying 20 Candle of Invocation 4 Carpet of Flying 24 Censer of Controlling Air Elementals 18
    281 replies | 6698 view(s)
    0 XP
More Activity
About Maxperson

Basic Information

Date of Birth
April 19, 1970 (49)
About Maxperson
Location:
Los Angeles, CA
Disable sharing sidebar?:
No
Sex:
Male

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
9,136
Posts Per Day
1.69
Last Post
Chaotic Good Is The Most Popular Alignment! Today 02:10 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
0
General Information
Last Activity
Today 02:23 PM
Join Date
Friday, 3rd September, 2004
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0

1 Friend

  1. OB1 OB1 is offline

    Member

    OB1
Showing Friends 1 to 1 of 1
Page 1 of 13 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Monday, 24th June, 2019


Sunday, 23rd June, 2019


Saturday, 22nd June, 2019



Page 1 of 13 1234567891011 ... LastLast
Page 1 of 26 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Thursday, 20th June, 2019

  • 01:37 PM - Hussar mentioned Maxperson in post Why are we okay with violence in RPGs?
    Maxperson, you realize you have it backwards right? The tournaments came first THEN AD&D. AD&D was an attempt to codify what was happening at tournaments. That's why tournament play is actually mentioned more than a few times in the AD&D DMG. Look, we get it. You played AD&D with 3 people. Great. Can you not understand that that wasn't typical of the time? Tournament tables were MUCH larger than that. Heck, my home game was anywhere from 6-13 players for many, many years. You'd think that if most of the games were only 3 players, then they'd market the modules for 3 players. Seems kind of strange to baseline the game at 3 players and then produce absolutely nothing for that baseline.

Wednesday, 19th June, 2019

  • 04:29 AM - Hussar mentioned Maxperson in post Why are we okay with violence in RPGs?
    Whoops double post. My bad.
  • 04:28 AM - Hussar mentioned Maxperson in post Why are we okay with violence in RPGs?
    ...f holding or four. It's not as if most of that didn't come from gems, jewelry and platinum anyway. One of the largest bags of holding could hold 150k of the 250k with 1000 pounds left over. Death? Energy Drain? Save or die sucked and was all over the place with poison, and energy drain was hell. It had no save and you never got back all of your experience, even if you were lucky enough to be drained within a day of someone who could cast restoration. And you started encountering a lot of energy drain undead well before the party could cast restoration itself, assuming your cleric wasn't also drained. Sure, if it just hung out on the ground ready to duke it out. Played intelligently, that dragon would destroy a 9th level party. I also like how you made it a party of 6-9 NPCs, rather than the typical 4. Double the party size and you double the monsters. So 8 PCs against a pair or three of ancient red dragons. See this is why I have such a hard time taking you seriously Maxperson. You obviously never played adnd. 6-9 pcs was the standard group. Four pcs is a 3e thing.

Monday, 17th June, 2019

  • 03:43 AM - Oofta mentioned Maxperson in post Chaotic Good Is The Most Popular Alignment!
    Maxperson, you do understand that sometimes misunderstandings happen, right? My scenario was that the slave could realistically be freed and the way your response was phrased it sounded like the LG PC would not free them. That the only way to free the slaves was to overthrow the government and change the law. That until the law was changed, slavery should go unopposed. LG: Slavery is unjust and the tyrannical government enslaving the people should be overthrown. New just laws against slavery should be instated. While overthrowing the government may or may not be the LG thing to do*, in many cases it won't be possible. Freeing the slaves was possible. Forums are not always a great place to discuss topics, but when I say "I have no idea what you're saying" that's an admission on my part that, well, I have no idea what you're saying. Perhaps you should clarify before you start accusing people of constructing a strawman. *As much as my LG PC may hate the tyrannical government they may not ...

Wednesday, 12th June, 2019

  • 07:40 PM - uzirath mentioned Maxperson in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    ...I had the opportunity to do a two-year folklore study of RPGs. (This was amazing. Still pinching myself.) I referred in my last post to the "torture" of typing up transcripts. That was a big part of the project. I ended up with hundreds of hours of recordings of live D&D games. As I analyzed that data, it was surprising to me that some of the most compelling games (from the perspective of the players at the table) did not depend on strong rhetoric, great writing, lots of GM prep, etc. At the time, I wasn't primarily focusing on that element and didn't even have a vocabulary for talking about it (this thread is a couple decades late), but it stuck with me. To the extent you do not enjoy longer narration, that's fine! That's a preference! But ... and I'm going to say this one more time ... just because someone prefers Hemingway over Henry Miller doesn't mean that they are both effective at what they do. Follow me? Yes. I agree with you. My post was in response to the idea that Maxperson's maxim, "How you say something is very often more important than what you are saying," applies universally to all forms of communication. I think the statement is more applicable to communication styles that require the words to stand on their own. Written communication, especially, benefits from a better presentation because there are no conversational elements, no facial expressions, no gestures, no ability to interrupt and ask questions, etc. Speeches and theatrical performances create a similar separation of performer and audience, though communication can be achieved through things other than words. The playing of an RPG, at least when you're around a traditional tabletop, is more like a conversation, which is judged by different criteria. Not saying there ain't overlap. Not saying that a great voice actor can't add a lot to a game (personally, I like that stuff). Not saying that some groups might not play quite differently. But I'm largely sold on the premise that if I'm help...

Sunday, 9th June, 2019

  • 05:41 AM - pemerton mentioned Maxperson in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    But I’m beginning to see why we’re all having a hard time coming to a consensus....it’s because we actually seem to have one, it’s just that what I see as pretty basic communication, you’re viewing as carefully wrought wordplay.I don't agree that there's a consensus: I can't really tell what Maxperson thinks, but Imaro and Hussar have made claims about the need for entertaining/evocative narration that I think clearly contradict the position I asserted in the OP. But one complicating fact pertains to vocabularly: eg I wouldn't regard cadaverous as a word to describe a Githyanki as especially remarkable or a-conversational, but Hussar probably would, and maybe Bedrockgames also. What counts as every day vocabularly among a group of RPGers is pretty highly variable and contingent on a range of factors (social background/status, educational levels, occupation, etc). I'm a humanities/social sciene academic (philosophy and law) and many of the people I talk to on a regular basis (ie the people I work with, my students, etc) are lilkewise, or are aspiring to be. So I think my every day vocaublary is probably richer than the New York Times. This is why I have brought it back to what are we aiming for? What counts as success, as good RPGing? What should a GM focus on? And I'm sayin...
  • 05:33 AM - pemerton mentioned Maxperson in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    I’m sure mine and pemerton’s ideas don’t exactly match, no. But that’s fine. I don’t entirely agree with his premise, but I understand it, and I think he has a point. But I’m 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, 8th June, 2019

  • 09:02 AM - pemerton mentioned Maxperson in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    ...ith their evocative and engaging performances. To put it more genreally, you have said that RPG participants should keep in mind the literary quality of their narration, and aim at it being good. Of course you recognise that success will probably be mixed. That is what I'm disagreeing with when I say that RPGing is not a literary endeavour, that it doesn't aim at literary virtues, that situation and the call to action, rather than beauty or wordcraft, is central. I can cash this out by reference to rulebooks if you like. The 2nd ed AD&D PHB says that a player should try to bring his/her PC to life by entertaining portrayal and characterisation eg does s/he smell? does s/he belch? does s/he finger her prayer beads in moments of indecision? Unlesss I've badly misunderstood you, you agree with this. Whereas my claim is that that advice is at best tangential, and at worst actively bad, if we want excellent, exciting, engaging, RPGing. Or an example that came up in this thread. Maxperson said that a RPG gets better if the GM narrates the dust from the opening of the secret door, adding to the "depth and feel of the game". A lot of GM advice manuals say simiar things. Whereas, as I posted upthread, my advice to a GM on how to add to the depth and feel of the game would be very different: work on your situations, and your consequences, and let the narrative details take care of themselves.

Friday, 7th June, 2019

  • 10:29 PM - Lanefan mentioned Maxperson in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    ...ore unharmed. Which very neatly gets you out of having to describe much detail at all, as the mechanics can cover all sorts of things at once. Mechanics like this are a cop-out, I think - instead of just calling for Brawn tests (low granularity of detail) I'd far rather be told the actual situation and then asked what my character specifically does about it (higher granulartity of detail). 'How shallow?' is a very relevant detail - if it's 4' deep then the Humans can likely walk on the bottom but the Hobbits and Gnomes are going to have to swim or be carried. How long and-or beamy the ship is gives - for those the least bit familiar with anything maritime - a quick idea about how much room there is on board, about how the ship is likely to behave in rough weather, and about how fast it is or isn't likely to go; and simply saying "you're on a solidly-built 70-foot three-master, narrow beam for its length, two decks and a hold, and probably deep draft" takes maybe five seconds. Maxperson lists some examples where differences in imagination between DM and player have caused grief, and that's exactly the sort of thing I don't want to see happen. When the DM says the field is strewn with large rocks I-as-player shouldn't have to ask how big they are. I've had characters die due to just this sort of thing - in one instance I remember clearly even though I asked for more clarification several times the DM's description still didn't put his picture of the scene into my mind but instead left me seeing a different one; I based my actions around my-as-player's perception of the scene and my character was dead within the round. For the colourful Bard, as the colourful part is obviously intended to be significant I'd probably ask the player to note on the character sheet a few details of what pieces of clothing are usually what colours, just so it's locked in in case it ever becomes relevant later. ("we need a distress flag and that bright red tunic will do nicely - give it ...
  • 02:07 PM - pemerton mentioned Maxperson in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    ...ure. (Consider eg TS Eliot as a famous example.) But those are hardly typical teaching texts, and my guess is that the number of ESL classes that use this sort of literary criticism to try and teach English is pretty small. lacking any literary effort on the part of the DM, all these things are are bags of game stats. There's nothing distinguishing them. Or, to put it another way, what's the difference between a 5 hp orc and a 5 hp goblin?If I'm using the AD&D MM, one is brown and one is yellow. If I'm using DDG, one worships Gruumsh and one worships Maglubiyet. A person can describe and explain things without aiming at literary beauty. despite REPEATED requests that you clarify what "literary", "literary quality" and "wordcraft" and various other words you've tried to toss into the mix, you've never actually sat down and defined what you mean by these terms in a way that folks in the thread understand what you're on about. Clearly plenty of folks do - everyone but you, Maxperson and Imaro as far as I can tell. And frankly even Imaro seems to understand the point, despite protesting that it's unclear. He just disagrees with it - that is, he thinks that RPGing is a literary endeavour, and would find a game boring in which the GM didn't aim at literary quality in his/her narration. It seems worth mentioning at this point that not all disagreement is a result of unclear usage or uncertainty over definitions. Aesthetic debates aren't much like mathematics, in that respect at least. Anyway, to aim at literary quality is to try and produce pleasing, beautiful, evocative writing. Most poets do this. Most novelists do this. Fewer instructional writers do this - I've read recipe books that seem to aspire to literary quality, but never stereo or furniture assembly instructions. I've read a lot of academic papers over the years - these tend to aim at clarity, but many clearly do not aim at literary quality. Statutes, regulations, contracts and other legal instrument...

Saturday, 1st June, 2019

  • 05:48 PM - hawkeyefan mentioned Maxperson in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    Maxperson I feel like you care more about the technical definition than about if a GM or other adjudicator/facilitator is actually required. The way Fiasco works, no one would ever say there are 5 GMs. Also, there are other games that we can list besides Fiasco that don’t require a GM. I mentioned Microscope just a while ago, and that doesn’t require a GM. Nor does Kingdom, another RPG by the same author, Ben Robbins. Let’s not get hung up on semantics and start quoting definitions at people. There are enough games that don’t require a GM that we shouldn’t include it in the list of essential things for a RPG.

Tuesday, 28th May, 2019

  • 05:43 AM - pemerton mentioned Maxperson in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    So let's focus on what the actual lines of dispute are, rather than fight endlessly over the definition of literary.Yeah, I didn't expect this thread to be a debate about the meaning and scope of the term "literary". I thought it might be a discussion about whether or not wordcraft is a principal or essential means of evoking emotional responses in a RPG. The point of my OP is to deny such a claim. On the other hand, I believe that Hussar affirms such a claim, as does Imaro. I'm frankly not sure what Maxperson thinks about it. Everyone agrees with you @pemerton.This isn't true at all. Unless you've changed your mind, upthread you asserted that the use of wordcraft and associated performance is a key means of promoting emotional responses in RPGing. Which is what I am disagreeing with. ************************ On the issue of "playstyle arguments/agendas", which has been flagged by Bedrockgames and darkbard: I think (and hope) it's obvious that my OP is putting forward a view about where the aesthetic merit and aeshetic power of RPGIng lies, and therefore a view about what the point of RPGing ultimately is. I recognise that others will disagree. That's not uncommon in critical discussions. I'm not 100% sure that I agree with Eagleton that these "deep structures" of aesthetic evaluation correlate to, or express, social power relations and any resultant ideologies. That's a further, and harder, question. But as I posted upthread in reply to Aldarc, I do think that these aestheti...

Monday, 27th May, 2019

  • 10:20 AM - Hussar mentioned Maxperson in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    Sorry, Aldarc, but, which definition are YOU using? Until such time as you and Bedrockgames actually tell me which definition you want to use, then we can't actually have any sort of meaningful discussion. Are we going to use Maxperson's broader definition or not? Pick one and we'll stick with that. You say that I'm making a category error. That's only true if we're using the broader definition. And, well, I do think it's a complete dodge to say, "Well, pacing exists in other media, so, it's not literary". That's not true. It IS literary, as well as other things. Now, since TV, movies, books, short stories, etc, all have pacing concerns, then, it's fair to say that any narrative form (which is what I was arguing with Bedrockgames about, not simply literary form) will have pacing concerns. They have to. Now, Bedrockgames claims that he does not pay any attention to pacing whatsoever in his adventure creation, nor during play. Now, I have to take him at his word for that, but, to me, that sounds like a terrible game. And "ignore pacing" is advice I would never give to any DM. To me, that's horrible advice. But, in any case, can we at least just use ONE definition? Otherwise, we're just talking past...
  • 03:27 AM - Hussar mentioned Maxperson in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    Yeah. Again, the last six or seven pages of this "discussion" has all been because folks absolutely refuse to pin down what definition of "literary" they would like us to use. If Literary=high art, then this discussion is, for all intents and purposes, over because we all agree that RPGing isn't meant to be high art. So, Bedrockgames, Aldarc, and anyone else who cares to weigh in, would you PLEASE define your terms. What do YOU mean by "literary". Not, playstyle or any other dodge, or comparisons to baking a cake. What do YOU mean, and we'll discuss using THAT definition. Because, boys and girls, until such time as you folks want to plant the goal posts, this conversation is just going to keep circling the same rabbit hole. Maxperson is, if we use his definition of literary, 100% correct. But, if we use pemerton's definition, he's 100% wrong. So, which definition do you want us to use? Pick one, stick with it, and we can move on.

Friday, 24th May, 2019


Tuesday, 21st May, 2019

  • 03:14 AM - pemerton mentioned Maxperson in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    ...ady posted why crafted narration and conveying a situation that draws in the players might come into conflict. The first benefits from preparation (and the resulting opportunity to test, edit, etc). Whereas the second - like conversation, which has been my reiterated comparitor - benefits from spontaneous engagement within the back-and-forth at the table. EDIT: The description isn't what makes a situation in an RPG interesting: the situation is what makes interesting because it is interacting and part of a back and forth conversation. I honestly don't care if the GM is stumbling over words, uses the same adjective twice in a row for no reason, uses a ten dollar word that somewhat misses the mark, when a more precise 1 dollar word would do....those are all things I care about when I am reading quality books. When I am playing a game I am engaged with another human being and through them, a situation as my character.This is as good an account of the OP claim as any other. Imaro, Maxperson - you may disagree that what Bedrockgames describes here, and what I describe in the OP, is a good account of RPGing. That's fine and (it goes without saying) your prerogative. But I don't see why the discussion about this raises any issues about the meaning of words. I don't see how it helps the discussio by trying to argue that I, or Bedrockgames, is engaged in self-contradiction. Instead: tell us about how you see RPGs working. For instance, what do you see as the role of situation in RPGing. Why do you think the narratie crat with which a situation is presented is so important?

Monday, 20th May, 2019

  • 04:32 PM - Hriston mentioned Maxperson in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    If you're not sure what I mean refer to the last post by @Maxperson for a pretty succinct explanation. Well, here's Maxperson's last post: Descriptions are what make the situation interesting. I can give you a situation of 10 gargoyles on a hill. One DM will make it bland and dull, the other through descriptions will make it interesting and exciting. Yep. I've been in RPGs that were dull and played like a board game. Bored game? From this, it seems that what you and Maxperson mean by presenting a situation well enough is that the situation is described. I agree that description is necessary, but I fail to see how merely describing a situation makes the formal qualities of that description the focus of the activity. If what you are claiming above is true then if given the same quality content that is communicated clearly there should never be deviation in how players respond to it (either being interested or not interested)... which begs the question if it's purely a question of quality of content and clarity then why can numero...
  • 03:35 AM - CleverNickName mentioned Maxperson in post Survivor Magic Jewelry (PART I)- AMULET OF THE PLANES WINS!
    What Maxperson said, except my first choice was the Amulet of Proof Against Detection and Location.
  • 02:22 AM - Imaro mentioned Maxperson in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    I’m not sure what you mean by “well enough”. I’m claiming that as long as the situation is clearly understood by the players, which is an issue with communication, not with quality of form/literary merit, and it fails to interest them nevertheless, that focusing on the artistry of its presentation is unlikely to generate the desired interest in the situation and is more likely to resemble some other form of entertainment that relies on such artistry, like a novel or a movie. If you're not sure what I mean refer to the last post by @Maxperson for a pretty succinct explanation. If what you are claiming above is true then if given the same quality content that is communicated clearly there should never be deviation in how players respond to it (either being interested or not interested)... which begs the question if it's purely a question of quality of content and clarity then why can numerous DM's try to hook their players to interact with the same content and get totally different responses from their players insofar as interest is concerned? Are you saying any and every DM who can't get his players interested in quality content must not be clearly communicating with their players? If not what are you saying is the cause? My bad. I was using “flowery language” as a euphemism for formal quality in narration, which I thought was fairly obvious. Sorry if that has caused any confusion in the discussion. Oh I was just making sure you understood that one did not equate to the other but it appears you already knew that an...

Thursday, 9th May, 2019

  • 12:36 AM - pemerton mentioned Maxperson in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    I can't understand pemerton 's reference to playing rolemaster since 1990Because Rolemaster players feel that being lectured by a D&D player about what realism in RPGing means is like an Australian lecturing a Canadian about what cold and snow are all about. Or to put it another way: I've done 100s and 100s of hours of process sim RPGing - far more than Maxperson has. Maxperson has, as far as I know, never played RM, never played RQ, never played C&S, and maybe has played some GURPS or HERO (I can't remember on these last two). I've been part of a play culture that has a very robust sense of what realism in RPGing means, and that is very conscious of the difference between and relationships between mechanical process and fictional content. And I can't make sense of what Maxperson is saying.


Page 1 of 26 1234567891011 ... LastLast
No results to display...

Monday, 24th June, 2019

  • 06:47 PM - 5ekyu quoted Maxperson in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    There are no rules, and there have never been any rules, that say a druid cannot don a suit of metal platemail in order to sneak into a castle. If a DM prevents me from taking that action, he is in fact railroading me by invalidating my decision."Druids will not wear armor or use shields made of metal." 5e PHB. There is no reference to the circumstances of the thing - is it to sneak into a castle, win cosplay, mock the paladin etc. But then they dont list or try to list all the various reasons one may use things. So, for 5e, if you chose druid, knowing this rule and did not work out the details with your GM, then to me it's not railroading for the GM to hold this rule as applicable. Do you see an exception in that rule that says "except to sneak"?
  • 06:41 PM - JonnyP71 quoted Maxperson in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    And throughout D&D druids have had the ability to don metal platemail in order to sneak into a castle. Nothing you have said has so far been able to counter that fact. There are 3 specific places in the 1E PHB (1 on page 19, 2 on page 21) that state a Druid cannot wear metal armour, 1 place uses the word 'unable', another uses the word 'inability', another specific states that only leather is 'permitted'. Please find me one reference which categorically states that they CAN...
  • 05:37 PM - lowkey13 quoted Maxperson in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    There are no rules, and there have never been any rules, that say a druid cannot don a suit of metal platemail in order to sneak into a castle. If a DM prevents me from taking that action, he is in fact railroading me by invalidating my decision. So, there's this. And also, this- Actually, the reason for the limit in 1st edition was that druids had access to far more powerful offensive spells than clerics did. Paul Farquhar Let's examine the history a little, first. Druids are probably the most poorly-understood class in terms of history. Let's start with the actual text (Eldritch Wizardry, Supp. 3, OD&D) where the Druid first crossed over from monster to PC. Mistletoe takes a place of importance with them as a holy symbol or item as crosses and other like items do with other types of clerics. Druids have spells which are in general peculiar to them, although some of their spells are similar to those of magic-users or clerics in general. ... Upon reaching the 5th Circle druids then gain...
  • 03:08 PM - CapnZapp quoted Maxperson in post If you could put D&D into any other non middle ages genre, what would it be?
    Why does this matter with guns and not melee weapons? In a melee, you will very rarely, if ever, see one swordsman run up to another one, stop adjacent to him, and then have the two just hack at each other without moving about in order to not get chopped. They will be moving forward and back, sideways, turning in circles and so on. Why a desire to see PCs move about over guns, but not move about over melee weapons?You're talking about the ducking and weaving that's implied but not actually governed by the rules. But why would I be talking about that? I'm obviously talking about movement at range; very simply which square on the battlemat your character occupies. If every hit carries the potential to ruin your day (whether through pain penalties or outright unconsciousness) you're that much more likely to choose the longer, safer path to the position where you can engage the opposition. If, on the other hand, only the last hit carries any consequences (which is the case in games with ene...
  • 02:43 PM - Oofta quoted Maxperson in post Chaotic Good Is The Most Popular Alignment!
    River was also CN. Jayne was unreliable, even to Mal, which is why Mal was so upset with him all the time. I'll just have to plead "I don't remember every detail of a TV show I last watched over a decade ago."
  • 01:01 AM - Ohmyn quoted Maxperson in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    It's not even that belief system that I'm bothered by. It's that some people here think it's literally as impossible for a druid to wear a suit of platemail, as it is to exceed the speed of light. It's absurd. Amusingly it is possible to exceed the speed of light using the mechanics, but these same people would not allow it because using the rules in that way doesn't make sense. It's a neat little double standard.
  • 12:59 AM - JonnyP71 quoted Maxperson in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    Railroading is about removing choice. If I were in your game and I told you that my druid puts on the suit of platemail in order to sneak into the castle looking like a knight and you told me no I can't do that, you are railroading me. You have removed my choice based on nothing that has ever existed in D&D. Druids have ALWAYS had the choice to put on platemail if they wanted to accept the loss of abilities. I'd be pissed if you denied me based on a fiction you made up. ROFL Consistent? Let's look at druid consistency. 1e: Must be true neutral. 2e: Must be true neutral. 3e: Can be any neutral varient. 5e: Can be any alignment they feel like. No consistency there! 1e: Must have wisdom 12 and charisma 15. 2e: Must have wisdom 12 and charisma 15. 3e: No stat restrictions. 5e: No stat restrictions. No consistency there! 1e: Shapechange at 7th level 3x day. No more than once per animal classification, avian, reptile or mammal. Heal 10-60% of hit points when you change. Size from bu...

Sunday, 23rd June, 2019

  • 03:41 PM - JonnyP71 quoted Maxperson in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    Yes it is. If you are forcing the players to go down the rails you provide(the game does not make it impossible for druids to put on metal armor), then you are in fact railroading that player. And the point goes flying over your head. D&D has precedent for allowing things in that "break the rules," so forbidding exceptions goes against that tradition. I am curious, though. Are your paladins human only? Do female characters cap out at 17 strength? Can demihumans not go to max level? Those are all traditions every bit as old school and strong as the druid one. Your rails are squeaking. Maybe you shouldn't have made them out of metal. Looks like you don't understand the concept of railroading - it's where in game choices do not matter, it has nothing *whatsoever* to do with insisting that characters fit a game world in a thematic way. My point about a world having pre-determined themes seems to have evaded you too. Yes D&D has always been a tweakable framework, but the clear RAI ex...
  • 09:48 AM - JonnyP71 quoted Maxperson in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    If you are going to make that claim, you will need to back it up. I already quoted the 1e PHB as telling us that they can wear armor. I'll quote it again since you have now both ignored it, and then cut it out of your quotes. "...unable to use any armor or shields other than leather armor and wooden shields (metallic armor spoils their magical powers)." Do you see the bolded and now underlined portion? I hope so. That portion means that druids can in fact, and it is a fact, put on metal armor. Otherwise druids would be completely unaware that it affects their casting AND Gygax would not have bothered to tell players that it did so. That warning means that druids can put on metal armor, but it keeps them from casting and using their abilities. Further, there's not one roleplaying reason given for why druids would be unable to wear metal armor, other than the loss of their magical powers. I have backed up my claim. Can you back yours up? Read the bit in the DMG about training times an...
  • 12:21 AM - JonnyP71 quoted Maxperson in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    So you're just going to ignore that druids in 1e were free to wear metal armor if they wanted to. All it did was block their magical abilities, like wizards. Wizards who could also put on plate mail if they felt like it in 1e. Quoting the 1E PHB "... but they do suffer somewhat from their inability to wear protective armour of metal.." also "... druids are unable to use any armour or shields other than leather armour and wooden shields.." Then bring in the training rules, which ramped up the cost of training for play not pertaining to the class. It did more than just 'block their magical abilities'.

Saturday, 22nd June, 2019

  • 11:50 PM - robus quoted Maxperson in post If you could put D&D into any other non middle ages genre, what would it be?
    A knife strike that hits is also often a wound that does major damage and is often lethal, yet we're okay with hit points modeling those sorts of injuries. Not to me, HP loss is modeling the effort to turn that potentially lethal knife blow into just a scratch, requiring both mental and physical effort. For a gun fight I would say HP is simply tracking how long it is until your luck finally runs out. I could live with that I think. People with low HP are simply inexperienced in the art of gunfighting and are quick to dispatch with a single shot. Hmm that’s growing on me...
  • 10:36 PM - JonnyP71 quoted Maxperson in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    If you as the DM are forbidding players from doing that sort of thing, not only are you stepping over the line with regard to playing their PCs, but you are missing out on tons of great roleplaying opportunities. I totally disagree with this - both as a DM and a player, I thoroughly dislike the 'anything goes, anyone can be anything' approach of default modern D&D, I much prefer the limitations baked into 1E/2E and prefer to play in the Greyhawk setting from that era.... and yes, if I run a 5E game, I bring those same feelings with me. To me, a melting pot of a world is boring, and lacks any sense of character. Thankfully, 5E still works just fine with old school limitations applied. It doesn't break if Paladins have to be LG, neither do any cracks show if you only allow Humans to be Monks, and it's still working just fine with no Dragonborn or Tieflings. And balance? Naa, not bothered about that. I prefer to test player skill above character skill, allow 1st level PCs to adventure with l...
  • 04:46 PM - quoted Maxperson in post Chaotic Good Is The Most Popular Alignment!
    Name one thing that at the root, isn't motivated by what the doer wants or how it makes the doer feel. This isn't some nebulous philosophical question. The problem is that this philosophical belief believes exactly that. It believes it knows the root of what everyone is motivated by. A desire to be happy, a desire not to feel pain, so on and so forth. The problem is you can't know that. You can't know if Joe did a Good Thing because Good Things make Joe happy, or for some other reason. If Joe did the Good Thing for altruistic reasons then your entire philosophy implodes. Because your philosophy is arguing that altruism doesn't exist. And that, my friend is the kind of claim that philosophies make. You can't prove it to be true because you can't collect sufficient data on the subject because you are at best relying on self-selection responses. "Why did you do a Good Thing?" And that is something there is proof that humans rarely answer honestly, which is why self-selection surveys are ...
  • 04:22 PM - quoted Maxperson in post Chaotic Good Is The Most Popular Alignment!
    None of them really do. All good deeds, public and private, are motivated by selfishness. IF, and this is a big "IF" you subscribe to that philosophy. It's biggest flaw is that it's a philosophy of projection, developed by capitalist thinkers, who from other philosophical standpoints appear to be simply trying to justify the core element of capitalism "greed is good". I'm not going to engage in a deep ethics debate on real world philosophical systems. I'm just going to point out that like most philosophies it's as true as you believe it to be. I much prefer to continue to talk about fantasy philosophical systems and fantasy morality.
  • 03:34 PM - Aldarc quoted Maxperson in post GM DESCRIPTION: NARRATION OR CONVERSATION?
    I got blocked by him when I pointed out that one of his stances was metagaming. You all better watch out. :pI got blocked by him when I didn't roll over when he argued that Fate wasn't roleplaying game. (His issue also had to do with metagaming. ;))
  • 01:34 AM - Celebrim quoted Maxperson in post Chaotic Good Is The Most Popular Alignment!
    I know you want to avoid a real world discussion, and this is not to start one, but... All the time we hear stories of a pastor or other upstanding citizen who gets arrested for something like this. And many times those interviewed talk about how kind and upstanding the person was, and how he was constantly doing good deeds. The good person with a dark secret is a pretty common happening. Yeah, but people are not only really bad at evaluating their own alignment; they are really bad at evaluating the alignment of their friends and neighbors as well. Most people will identify as good people whom they like, and who are friendly. But a person who is amazingly friendly and cheerful and who makes you feel good and who is nice to you doesn't have to be good. Fundamentally, your alignment is revealed by what you do in secret when you have to make a choice about what you believe and making the choice like what you say you believe is costly. Alignment is something that is only revealed by t...
  • 01:06 AM - Charlaquin quoted Maxperson in post Chaotic Good Is The Most Popular Alignment!
    No. I've decided they are LE, because they fit the descriptions of LE to a T. So, where’s the disagreement?
  • 12:36 AM - dragoner quoted Maxperson in post Why are we okay with violence in RPGs?
    We ran modules once in a while, but not as part of campaigns usually. The vast majority of our campaigns were with adventures we created in worlds we invented. We played most of the modules, in the World of Greyhawk setting as a campaign, adding stuff too; we also war gamed the little states using the rules and counters from TSR's Battle of Five Armies. Played MERP, converted it first to AD&D then to RuneQuest. I still think that the D1-3/Q1 were pretty great series of modules.

Friday, 21st June, 2019

  • 11:46 PM - Charlaquin quoted Maxperson in post Chaotic Good Is The Most Popular Alignment!
    It really depends on what "group as a whole" means and there's no reason to suppose it would represent the nation as a whole. IRL nationalism is actually a pretty new concept, only really dating to after the Napoleonic era. The Mafia and other similar ethnic criminal organizations are actually not all that uncommon in terms of being hierarchically structured groups that think of themselves as being part of the only "tribe" that matters. The societies they live in are viewed as outsiders or prey, primarily. Revolutionaries often engage in organized crime, first to fund their activities and then over time they become criminals. The fact that they are an in group makes them function well. I think many of these organizations end up as essentially being Lawful Evil groups within the overall society. This person gets it. Um, no. I'm not. The Mafia is the classic example of a LE group. One used in many, if not most alignment threads that I've seen, yet rarely brought up by me. That is exactly what ...
  • 10:24 PM - Jay Verkuilen quoted Maxperson in post Chaotic Good Is The Most Popular Alignment!
    Because it falls apart when you apply it to groups smaller than a country. The Mafia is a classic lawful evil group that does not benefit society as a whole. They only work to benefit their smaller society. It really depends on what "group as a whole" means and there's no reason to suppose it would represent the nation as a whole. IRL nationalism is actually a pretty new concept, only really dating to after the Napoleonic era. The Mafia and other similar ethnic criminal organizations are actually not all that uncommon in terms of being hierarchically structured groups that think of themselves as being part of the only "tribe" that matters. The societies they live in are viewed as outsiders or prey, primarily. Revolutionaries often engage in organized crime, first to fund their activities and then over time they become criminals. The fact that they are an in group makes them function well. I think many of these organizations end up as essentially being Lawful Evil groups within the overall soc...


Maxperson's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites