View Profile: Maxperson - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Today, 02:21 PM
    Sure, but we also know about draining and when something is drained to death, what is drained doesn't come back. Bringing a vampire/wight drained corpse back to life still leaves you at 0 max hit points due to the draining, which is the condition necessary for instant death.
    76 replies | 1577 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Today, 02:05 PM
    Decanter of Endless Water 25 Deck of Illusions 9 Dimensional Shackles 19 Driftglobe 7 Dust of Disappearance 12 Dust of Dryness 17 Efreeti Bottle 22 Eversmoking Bottle 4-2=0 Figurine of Wondrous Power 25+1=26 Folding Boat 24
    163 replies | 3425 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Today, 01:44 PM
    On the other hand, if something says, "When all your walls are turned to jell-o, the house collapses.", it is expected to be ongoing. Nobody is going to think that the next day the walls on the collapsed house are no longer jell-o. You are going to have to fix those walls before the house can be rebuilt.
    76 replies | 1577 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Today, 01:30 PM
    The spells don't go away until they are cast. Well, in the books they eventually go stale, but that takes weeks at least, possibly months. A high level wizard would not need to spend hours daily unless they ran themselves out of spells. Also, in the books there didn't appear to be any limit to the number you could hang as long as you spent the time to do it, but of course that wouldn't work...
    13 replies | 398 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Today, 01:18 PM
    Probably not, but the Pixie penchant for wood gave us the Pixie Stick.
    111 replies | 3214 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Today, 01:11 PM
    Decanter of Endless Water 25 Deck of Illusions 9 Dimensional Shackles 19 Driftglobe 7 Dust of Disappearance 12 Dust of Dryness 17 Efreeti Bottle 22 Eversmoking Bottle 4 Figurine of Wondrous Power 25 Folding Boat 24
    163 replies | 3425 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Today, 01:09 PM
    You seem to have missed the part early in the thread where it appears like corpses are intended to count as creatures. You can remove curse on an object, but not cure diseases, yet Raise Dead states you need to cure the corpse of magical diseases before raising. Just cast greater restoration or something on the corpse before it comes back to life.
    76 replies | 1577 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Today, 01:39 AM
    In this case neither is general, though. The specific beats general section lists both monster abilities and spells as examples of specific rules. Both the vampire drain and raise spell are specific rules, and there's no rule about what happens when two specific rules collide. It's clearly a DM call on this one.
    76 replies | 1577 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Today, 01:34 AM
    The blood portion was pretty irrelevant, though, which I mentioned in a prior post. The max hit points hitting zero and dying is the important part. Whether from a wight or from a vampire, the effect is the effect. That said, the OP is very clear that it was death by Vampire. No wight was mentioned. I agree that it works. Then, because the hit point maximum is 0 and death happens at...
    76 replies | 1577 view(s)
    1 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:25 PM
    Decanter of Endless Water 24 Deck of Illusions 10 Dimensional Shackles 21 Driftglobe 7 Dust of Disappearance 14 Dust of Dryness 16 Dust of Sneezing and Choking 5-2=3 Efreeti Bottle 22 Eversmoking Bottle 10 Figurine of Wondrous Power 25+1=26
    163 replies | 3425 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:17 PM
    Fine. I want my $0 back, and I'm charging 100% interest daily.
    111 replies | 3214 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:26 PM
    Decanter of Endless Water 24 Deck of Illusions 12 Dimensional Shackles 21 Driftglobe 7 Dust of Disappearance 14 Dust of Dryness 16 Dust of Sneezing and Choking 7 Efreeti Bottle 22 Eversmoking Bottle 9 Figurine of Wondrous Power 25
    163 replies | 3425 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:13 PM
    The mechanic, "Dies when max hit points are 0 from the vampire bite." remains, though. The blood loss was just mentioned, because it's a freaking vampire that just drained you via a bite. It's pretty obvious that no blood is why the PC died from that mechanic. You would only survive if the DM believes that the Raise Dead spell restores the hit point maximum to normal. Me, I don't see the...
    76 replies | 1577 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:34 AM
    As I pointed out, RAW states that temporary hit points do not stabilize people or restore consciousness, so they wouldn't work in this case. The victim would just die again. Aid might work since it raises the hit point maximum for 8 hours, which would allow him to both survive and take a long rest. At least as long as the DM doesn't rule that the victim dies again before the spell can be cast.
    76 replies | 1577 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:05 AM
    Coma isn't a condition, so I would think it would be death. They still meet all the necessary conditions to die. Drained to 0 max hit points by the bite. I can see that and I wouldn't argue such a ruling in a game. I'm just not sure if I would go that way or not as DM. I definitely would not allow temporary hit points to work. They specify that they don't stop unconsciousness or...
    76 replies | 1577 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:31 AM
    The rule is, though, that you die at 0 max hit points from the blood loss of the vampire bite. That 0 max hit points is still in effect the moment the Raise Dead is cast. The PC would just die again.
    76 replies | 1577 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:11 AM
    Okay. Again, I was talking in the context social interactions, since that's what pretty much the entire thread has been about. None of those examples is a social interaction. The social aspect of a PC is inextricably intertwined with the player. You can't separate the two in order to challenge the PC, but not the player. It used to be the case that you could choose to fail saves. 5e...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:59 AM
    At was an attack and uncalled for. If you don't have a constructive response to my arguments, don't mention or respond to me.
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 06:34 PM
    That seems reasonable, too.
    14 replies | 508 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 06:32 PM
    That seems very reasonable to me.
    14 replies | 508 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 06:15 PM
    My first thought was corpse seems like it should be an object, not a creature, so Greater Restoration wouldn't work. However, when I read Raise Dead, it mentioned needing to cure magical diseases on the target prior to being raised, so it does seem like a corpse can be the target of such spells.
    76 replies | 1577 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 05:15 PM
    This is where you go very wrong. Before the hard decision, I did not know X about my character. Until I made the decision, X was still unknown to me. After the decision, X is now known to me. That's a discovery about the character, which makes it something I learned. How many times over the years after someone ends up in a unique situation and makes a hard decision, have we heard, "So...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 04:28 PM
    Regardless of whether or not it was "semantics," and it wasn't, the two definitions of challenge are still of great importance to this thread. The claim that a challenge can't happen unless there is a win/loss scenario going on is outright false. You can in fact have a challenge of the difficult choice where there is no win/loss possibility. :yawn: Your Ad Hominems bore me. Either respond...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 03:57 PM
    Decanter of Endless Water 22 Deck of Illusions 14 Dimensional Shackles 20 Driftglobe 9 Dust of Disappearance 16 Dust of Dryness 15 Dust of Sneezing and Choking 10 Efreeti Bottle 22 Eversmoking Bottle 12 Figurine of Wondrous Power 23
    163 replies | 3425 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 03:54 PM
    Nor is it one unless you falsely accuse me of semantics and engage in an Ad Hominem attack against me like this one. Semantics is not different ways to define something. It's saying the same thing in a different way, which I did not do. The distinctly different definitions of challenge do not end up at the same place. They are different kinds of challenges. Take your false semantics...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 03:45 PM
    All of those ARE valid responses and within the social contract depending what it is that the supper suggester is suggesting. If for example, he's suggesting that the paladin murder his own sister, that suggesting is going to fail no matter how persuasive the NPC(barring magic of course). It could also result in being ignored, combat or something else entirely. Without an actual scenario,...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 03:34 PM
    By one limited definition of challenge, sure. By other definitions of challenge that's simply wrong. You can in fact be challenged without a win/lose scenario happening. verb verb: challenge; 3rd person present: challenges; past tense: challenged; past participle: challenged; gerund or present participle: challenging 1. invite (someone) to engage in a contest. "he challenged one...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 01:32 PM
    This is what I have been saying. Something happens outside of the control of the player that can have a profound effect on the PC. Now the hard choice is happening. In this example, there is one difference from what I have been talking about, and one possible difference. The difference is the multiple scene aspect. I agree with that actually. Generally(not always) it will take multiple...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 02:43 AM
    I said that in the context of the social challenge, though. Socially, I don't believe it is possible. That depends. If the PC is going to take a shot and the NPC goes for a steal or block, then it would be an opposed challenge in my opinion. You could term it a mini-challenge if you want, but it's still a contest.
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 02:21 AM
    But all that shared fiction is in the minds of the players and DM. Only the sheet, dice, etc. are independent of that. It might be possible to challenge the character purely mechanically, but not socially. The social construct of the character is entirely mental, and entirety of the character's personality is inside the player of that PC. Others can interact with the character in the shared...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 02:06 AM
    The character is really just a sheet of paper. It's the player inhabiting the idea of the character that gives it life. That's why I don't understand this idea that you can challenge the character socially, without challenging the player. When Umbran said that I was switching the challenge from the character to the player, I had a vision of Leslie Nielson in an interrogation room with a...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 02:05 PM
    There is always One Katana to bring them all and in the darkness bind them.
    24 replies | 758 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 01:19 PM
    Decanter of Endless Water 24 Deck of Illusions 11 Dimensional Shackles 20 Driftglobe 15 Dust of Disappearance 20 Dust of Dryness 17 Dust of Sneezing and Choking 13 Efreeti Bottle 22 Eversmoking Bottle 14 Figurine of Wondrous Power 21
    163 replies | 3425 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 01:06 PM
    By making the hard choice obviously. I you can't fail to pick a choice, but none of the choices may be what you want, so there is no success. Challenge has more than one definition and not of them are binary. Trying to limit a challenge to success or failure is a False Dichotomy.
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 07:20 AM
    I've seen this mentioned twice now. I ask "why" all the time. Not in an effort to police the action, but to understand the action. If the player is getting from A to C and I don't understand how the PC got there, I'm going to ask why. The follow-up explanation sometimes helps me narrate the response properly or better. I also award bonus XP based on good roleplaying, and a lack of...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 07:14 AM
    It's probably a good thing for me, then, that success/fail challenges are just one type of challenge and I can indeed be challenged in ways that are not success/fail.
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 07:07 AM
    I'm not changing anything. I AM the character, including its core. When I am in a roleplaying challenge, I'm viewing it from the point of view of my character and making a decision that my character would. The challenge is to the core of the character. I'm just making the decision, because I'm the one that best knows the circumstances and the PC himself. This isn't the same, though. ...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 06:39 PM
    That's simply untrue. I have been in a position where I can make the decision and I have been plenty challenged. I am frequently significantly challenged by situations that come up in game. Which way do I go with my character? It's not certain until the decision is made, which occurs after the challenge. The result of that challenge may be in my total control, but the challenge is there.
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 02:13 PM
    I don't often get the chance to play other games, so when I do get that chance, I jump on it. The chance of pace is refreshing and I get to see how other games do things.
    79 replies | 2470 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 02:03 PM
    I agree. When you live in a world where you know for a certainty that the other religions are as real as yours, you are less likely to to ignore them. It's easy in the real world for someone to just discount the others as false and focus on the one true way.
    224 replies | 5484 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 01:42 PM
    Pics of monsters you've killed or it didn't happen buddy! I think I'll pass on that. I'm secure in my knowledge. :p
    224 replies | 5484 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 01:24 PM
    :eek: You're right.
    224 replies | 5484 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 01:23 PM
    Sure, but that applies to most of the things that he does have proficiency in. I've had fighters use one and only one type of weapon from level 1-20(not in 5e yet, but the 5e is no different), but he got better in all of them. The same with some of the skills. There's no reason he should get better in those things with proficiency that he's not practicing at all just by virtue of having...
    224 replies | 5484 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 01:18 PM
    I've known a number of Rabbis and Preachers who not only studied other religions, but enjoyed meeting with leaders of other religions and engaging them in discussions. It's really interesting to hear them talk about it.
    224 replies | 5484 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 01:15 PM
    Joe is a barbarian. Haven't you ever read Chalker?
    224 replies | 5484 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 01:11 PM
    Because you're still 1st level. ;) On on even a less serious note, I'm better today at dodging fireballs and lightning bolts than I was 27 years ago.
    224 replies | 5484 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 01:06 PM
    Decanter of Endless Water 21 Deck of Illusions 15 Dimensional Shackles 20 Driftglobe 16 Dust of Disappearance 20 Dust of Dryness 18 Dust of Sneezing and Choking 14 Efreeti Bottle 22 Eversmoking Bottle 15 Figurine of Wondrous Power 24
    163 replies | 3425 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 05:59 AM
    Sure, and the DM can just say all the PCs are dead, too. Being able to do something doesn't mean that it's playing by the social contract. There is an expectation that the DM is going to be fair and follow the way the game is laid out. Sure. Games can build such things in. I've already said that those games aren't for me. I didn't deny their existence. There are many RPGs were that...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 05:14 AM
    Look through the Monster Manual and tell me how many mental/emotion control powers there are that don't give a save. D&D does demonstrate quite clearly that the DM is supposed to make these sorts of things resistible. And the comment on the number of saves is just odd. What does that have to do with anything we've been saying?
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 05:09 AM
    Yes it absolutely can happen if I don't want it do. I can approve all kinds of things I don't want to happen. For instance, even though I really don't want you to try and argue your incorrect position, I approve of your right to that kind of speech. I've not argued otherwise. If those sorts of games appeal to you, I'm truly glad that they exist for you to play. :) Again, I've...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 04:49 AM
    You really can't just say, "Nah, this has no impact." or it's not core to the personality of the character. A challenge to the core will have an impact either way it goes
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Wednesday, 10th July, 2019, 01:25 PM
    Considering that on an internet forum you probably can't get a consensus on what consensus means, I doubt it. ;)
    225 replies | 8885 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Wednesday, 10th July, 2019, 01:18 PM
    In my experience, those aren't horses, and trying to get one to wear horseshoes is a very, very bad idea.
    163 replies | 3425 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Wednesday, 10th July, 2019, 01:16 PM
    Decanter of Endless Water 22 Deck of Illusions 15 Dimensional Shackles 20 Driftglobe 17 Dust of Disappearance 20 Dust of Dryness 17 Dust of Sneezing and Choking 18 Efreeti Bottle 22 Eversmoking Bottle 16 Figurine of Wondrous Power 26
    163 replies | 3425 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Wednesday, 10th July, 2019, 06:12 AM
    Cool, but you've moved the goalposts. The debate is between zero risk and risk, not more risk and less risk. That you've acknowledged that there is at least some risk with me deciding the outcomes is enough for me. Some risk is all I've argued.
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Wednesday, 10th July, 2019, 06:09 AM
    It isn't about "want." I may want to remain a paragon of knightly virtue, but if the circumstances warrant a fall, it's going to happen whether I want it to or not. I'm not going to play in bad faith and avoid something that is warranted, just because I don't want it to happen. There's more risk with the random method. There is still risk with you deciding things..........if you're...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Wednesday, 10th July, 2019, 05:07 AM
    I have no control over what the DM does that might impact my character's character, though. As he challenges me, sooner or later things will happen that cause my character to deviate that I have no control over. But you have no control over if or when an orc attacks. Going outside is a risk, because you might be attacked and sooner or later, playing with swords causes someone to lose...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Wednesday, 10th July, 2019, 03:09 AM
    I can't think of any of my concepts that survived from conception to the end of the campaign without changes, often significant ones. People evolve and so do my characters.
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Wednesday, 10th July, 2019, 02:59 AM
    Yeah. I understand that there are some significant differences, but there are a lot of similarities as well. I also don't think, in fact I know, that you don't have to know how much of a challenge the tower is. It's a name on a map and as soon as the PCs express interest in finding out, you can improv it, roll it, or determine what challenge level it is while they are doing their research or...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Wednesday, 10th July, 2019, 02:55 AM
    Nah. You just somehow don't understand what it is that I do. You see, if my knight whose concept is a knightly paragon of virtue gets put into that situation, he may or may not succumb to the maiden's wiles. His character is indeed at risk, as if he does succumb, his concept is dead or dying. Not only that, but if he succumbs, I then have to struggle with he reacts to his fall. Does he do...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 9th July, 2019, 02:32 PM
    I never said that there was no risk or real failure. Don't put your assumptions onto me like that. There are consequences for almost everything. If you don't understand something, ask me. Spurning a maiden's love can also bit them in the ass, as can pissing off her father, not completing the quest or many other things that happen with what I am saying. You need to stop assuming that...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 9th July, 2019, 02:26 PM
    Sure, it's a complication, just like finding a dead body in your PC's room is a complication. I was just pointing out that it wasn't the test of character he was portraying it as. Nobody can detail out a whole world. It will just be outlines of stuff for the most part with a few things detailed out. Most of the time the party chooses where it wants to go and the sand(details) is filled...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 9th July, 2019, 02:10 PM
    Daern's Instant Fortress 7 Decanter of Endless Water 20 Deck of Illusions 15 Dimensional Shackles 20 Driftglobe 16 Dust of Disappearance 22 Dust of Dryness 18 Dust of Sneezing and Choking 18 Efreeti Bottle 21 Eversmoking Bottle 18
    163 replies | 3425 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 9th July, 2019, 02:08 PM
    My concept is always at risk. I don't need a mechanic for that. Maybe others do. I don't.
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 9th July, 2019, 01:46 PM
    Which is fully accomplished by, "The beautiful maiden winks at you, clearly favoring you with her affections." I don't need you to melt my PCs heart in order to put me in a position where I have to decide between possible love and the quest. Swearing a vow doesn't make my PC immune to love, so we will learn something about my character this way as well. I'm also not seeing how in your...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 9th July, 2019, 01:36 PM
    You don't NEED an mechanic for that sort of risk, and in my experience mechanics detract from it. The drama comes from me being put in the hard choice and deciding how my character reacts to the hard choice, not from a boring die roll or DM deciding if I'm good or bad this time around. I don't play perfect characters, because 1) perfect characters are boring, and 2) perfection doesn't exist in...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 9th July, 2019, 01:25 PM
    Er. It didn't miss the point of the OP, because it wasn't about the OP. The discussion has moved on in some parts of the thread. That's how threads work.
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 9th July, 2019, 01:21 PM
    If it's left to a die roll or the DM's decision, there is no real test of character. The test comes from the player in the role of the PC being caught in a situation which tests his PC's character. He and the others at the table are only really going to learn what the PC is made of if the player makes the decision. If it's left to the die roll or DM to decide, the drama virtually vanishes. ...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 9th July, 2019, 06:17 AM
    So to answer the first question, there will be some sort of save, so it will be apparent in the moment if something unusual is happening. However, the group I've played with has been together for 15 years, and a few of us go back more than twice that. If they pulled something like that without save or way to know right then, yes I'd extend the trust, because we're all similar enough in...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 9th July, 2019, 05:54 AM
    Sure, but one of the things about the battlemaster ability is that very few can actually do it. Lots of people can pick up a sword, but only a few very highly trained individuals can instill fear that way. I'd expect the same sort of in-fiction explanation for some sort of kiss warms the heart ability in this particular maiden. And it would have to allow a save.
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 9th July, 2019, 04:57 AM
    Special abilities with saves are okay. They are in the magic/supernatural/mental/etc. that I've been talking about. That's not the DM just telling me that my PC is frightened because the green hag winked at him.
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 9th July, 2019, 03:02 AM
    There is no such rule. The DM has a rule that allows him to narrate MY actions, but he cannot alter those actions. If I declare that my PC is running across the courtyard, he cannot narrate it as, "You run across the courtyard jumping and skipping while singing a little ditty about Jack and Dianne." He can alter things through in game fiction though, such as "While you run across the...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Monday, 8th July, 2019, 09:48 PM
    LEFTCOLOR=#333333FONT=VerdanaDaern's Instant Fortress 9/FONT/COLOR Does anyone know how to get rid of all this when quote replying in the app? Such a pain to delete letter by letter on my phone. Edited to remove brackets to show what Iím talking about
    163 replies | 3425 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 8th July, 2019, 02:21 PM
    Yeah, I was surprised to see that as well. I figured the alchemy jug would take the top spot.
    413 replies | 14030 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 8th July, 2019, 01:21 PM
    Daern's Instant Fortress 11 Decanter of Endless Water 20 Deck of Illusions 17 Deck of Many Things 3 Dimensional Shackles 20 Driftglobe 20 Dust of Disappearance 21 Dust of Dryness 17 Dust of Sneezing and Choking 20 Efreeti Bottle 21
    163 replies | 3425 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 8th July, 2019, 01:17 PM
    I disagree. Remember, aramis erak is assuming a valid social contract, "Part of the implicit social contract of play is that you have to cede control over some aspects of the character over to either dice or the GM (or both) in order to play." That means that the DM isn't going to be using that fiat to cause an attempt that has a chance to succeed to auto fail, as that would violate the social...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 8th July, 2019, 01:12 PM
    I haven't lost control of the character's action in that circumstance. I simply do not control the result. My character still takes the action I desire, and the DM states the action failed. I've never argued that I should have control over the result of the action. No, that's not what I'm expressing. You're just confusing the result of the action with the action itself. They are two...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 8th July, 2019, 04:42 AM
    Soooo, that's not a rule that says the DM can run my character. At all. That's a rule that says that the DM can create house rules, and nobody is disputing that the DM can create house rules. House rules, though, have no place in a discussion about rules, and there are no rules that say the DM can run my character.
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 8th July, 2019, 03:04 AM
    I don't bother. Sometimes the players do something and skip a large portion. Other times they putz around in an area for 5 sessions longer than I figured. I just roll with it until the campaign ends. My estimation here was based on the range of time my campaigns have historically lasted. They rarely go less than a year and we lose a few sessions due to life, so 48 on the low end, and rarely...
    47 replies | 2066 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 8th July, 2019, 02:57 AM
    My campaigns typically run about 48-70, 4-5 hour sessions.
    47 replies | 2066 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 8th July, 2019, 12:32 AM
    Right. Some modules explicitly add some rules. THOSE are rules, but the rest of the story is just adventure creation per the DMG. Sure, in highly limited amounts. The inclusion of naval combat rules doesn't suddenly mean that just because the module including(making this up since I've never seen it) 2 ogres, that the rules of D&D is now that 2 ogres have to be in adventures as a rule. ...
    960 replies | 46127 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 7th July, 2019, 10:34 PM
    Why do you think that people here are saying that emotional life of the PC should be excluded from testing? I find such tests to often be more engaging than the physical ones.
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 7th July, 2019, 10:29 PM
    I read about that sort of thing happening on pretty much an annual basis, often multiple times. Maybe not 7 times, but black widows aren't a crazy example. There are also other things that can influence reactions. I was working retail in a corporate store many years ago. One of the models came down to the department I was working in and was flirting with me. While the flirting was going on a...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 7th July, 2019, 09:04 PM
    Daern's Instant Fortress 11 Decanter of Endless Water 19 Deck of Illusions 19 Deck of Many Things 4 Dimensional Shackles 20 Driftglobe 20 Dust of Disappearance 20 Dust of Dryness 19
    163 replies | 3425 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 7th July, 2019, 09:03 PM
    No. I'm talking about having the PC engage in an action(not the mechanical term related to combat), which has absolutely nothing to do with conditions. It was an absurd comment, as is your response here. So you guys have been saying that if the DM says, "The woman winks at you and melts your heart," I can just say, "No she doesn't, it has no effect on me at all?" If that's the case,...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 7th July, 2019, 08:58 PM
    All of them are. Trust is necessary with any game. I have yet to see a game where cheating can't happen. Which is fine. I'm all for rewards and other encouragement to engage in that sort of roleplay. If you're playing in good faith, it runs quite well and is not a flawed system. If you have someone who is playing in bad faith, the system still is not flawed. The person playing...
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 7th July, 2019, 07:13 PM
    Well, Adam IS the Antichrist. If they don't know you from Adam, that might be where the trust issues come in. ;)
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 7th July, 2019, 07:09 PM
    Why?
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 7th July, 2019, 07:08 PM
    Seriously? You don't see that it's dictating the response of warming the heart? That precludes greater and lesser responses that I might want to give for my PC.
    638 replies | 15944 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 7th July, 2019, 07:05 PM
    I didn't provide a crazy example, but to answer your question, it would be a valid reason and here's why. Sometimes people who have flaws can just overcome those urges. Now, if the player is doing it all the time and/or only at times when it would be detrimental to the PC/party, then he's abusing the system and would need to be talked to after the game. If it's just once in a while, then it's...
    638 replies | 15944 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
9,369
Posts Per Day
1.73
Last Post
Death and 0 Max HP Today 02:21 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
0
General Information
Last Activity
Today 02:22 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 11 12345678910 ... LastLast

Tuesday, 16th July, 2019


Monday, 15th July, 2019


Sunday, 14th July, 2019



Page 1 of 11 12345678910 ... LastLast
Page 1 of 27 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Monday, 15th July, 2019

  • 10:02 AM - pemerton mentioned Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    ...of knowledge in this way: you can't get more out of knowledge than you put in. To discover something about my character requires something external to take place. I've given examples in this thread. So have others. It doesn't have to be done through random number generation. There are other resolution systems possible. But it does require some way of establishing salient elements of the fiction other than via decision-making by the player of the PC. To my mind this is actually not a radical thesis about RPGing, given that this type of game has relied on resolution mechanics, including random number generation, to establish external constraints on player choices and interpretation of the fiction from the outset. D&D is (though not necessarily should be) the baseline assumption. If we can't argue from a base of some sort, then there is no argument.By my count, there are only three recurrent posters in this thread who make D&D the baseline assumption: Lanefan, FrogReaver and Maxperson. I'm not interested in talking primarily about D&D. It's not a system I'm playing at the moment, and I doubt think that focusing on it is going to shed any particular light on the questions raised in the OP or subsequently in the thread. If you think that there is some aspect of D&D mechanics or play that will help address those questions, then by all means post it.
  • 08:21 AM - Hussar mentioned Maxperson in post The Evolution of Tieflings in D&D: Interviews with Zeb Cook and Colin McComb
    Nope its art expressing a dislike for something or is that not allowed now?? /snip "I'm with stupid" and a picture of a 4e tiefling that looks like it's just whaled a bag full of weed is "expressing a dislike"? Your protestations would ring a lot less hollow if you actually made even the slightest effort to be objective. But, the fact that not only does that image get a pass, but, it actually gets approved by you pretty much says it all. I mean, seriously, if you replaced that 4e tiefling with some sad, fat neckbeard in a I Heart Gygax t-shirt, you'd blow a gasket about how insulting that is. But, this? Oh, this is just "expressing a dislike". Just sad. But, yeah, Maxperson, you're 100% right. The best way to deal with this sort of thing is just to refuse to respond to it.

Sunday, 14th July, 2019

  • 01:33 PM - Ovinomancer mentioned Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    ...person. Then the players take the NPC's specific argument and the persuasion skill roll and filter that through the character they are playing and come to a conclusion of how to have their PC react. In this situation what is gained from actually requiring a persuasion contest with binding results for the PC in order to determine if he was persuaded? This reads very much like someone without experience in other play trying to suggest that other play must be more limited because, obviously, their play isn't limited at all! But, let's look at the outcomes that are okay in this example above. The PCs ignore the NPC. The PCs initiate combat with the NPC. The PCs agree with the NPC. The PCs do something else entirely. All of the above are good outcomes to your example because it's that person engine deciding, and they're the best deciderers. But, I'm absolutely certain that the above is not what you meant. Instead, you have a list of unspoken additional requirements. Maxperson's social contract probably shows up, in that you're expected to play within the social contract. Here, this would be that the players should accept the proposition and the roll and use the table's understanding (read GM's) of how their character acts to figure out a path that doesn't violate these things while still accomplishing something the player wants. But, this is all just a hidden set of controls on the game that you're ignoring -- it doesn't actually work how you describe, there's a huge number of unspoken limits in place. So, you argument boils down to "why speak the limits out loud." Lots of reasons. Everyone understands them, for one. Everyone can agree to them, for two. And, on the gripping hand, the GM is also held to them, something that isn't usually true in D&D. But, that's not to say that the above is bad. It's not, else the majority of gamers are bad. It isn't the best way, though, it's just the D&D way, and, even there, you're find plenty of arguments on ...

Saturday, 13th July, 2019

  • 02:32 AM - FrogReaver mentioned Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    Maxperson You said: " You cannot challenge a character without simultaneously challenging the player. " Fog of war style challenges will challenge both the character and the player. These are the challenges I propose as the most fun. I believe there also contests like a game of basketball, a game of athletic ability and skill, that is very challenging (aka difficult to win) provided the opposing team is about equal to you. A game of basketball is typically going to need to be resolved purely by mechanical randomization in an RPG. In this instance your character can be challenged while the player is not. That's not a particualarly interesting or fun challenge for the player but I think it's probably best to classify this as a challenge. I still don't think a single sword swing or single basketball shot should be called a challenge though.

Thursday, 11th July, 2019

  • 03:41 AM - pemerton mentioned Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    ..., clack, clack! Oh, look. This time he's an ass, maybe next time he'll be noble. *yawn*The second bit here suggest to me that you're not familiar with the play of any of the non-D&D games that Aldarc, Umbran, Ovinomancer and I have referenced - Fate, Pendrgaon, Prince Valiant, MHRP/Cortex+ Heroic, Bunring Wheel, etc. And the first bit is odd, because the way you find out whether a D&D character is tough enough to beat Orcus in a fight is (among other things) to roll some dice. Of course D&D combat is not nothing but die rolls. But nor is a skill challenge, or a Duel of Wits, or whatever other mechanic a system might use to find out whether or not your PC is steely-hearted enough to resist the maiden's wink. Consulting rules makes zero difference here. It's just a question of whether or not you trust the GM to set up the game to be fun. Adding a veneer of rules on top is just a comfort blanket for gamers who really like rulesI certainly find it interesting that FrogReaver and Maxperson are fine with the maiden melting a PC's heart of the GM has written down (i) that the maiden has such a special ability and (ii) it allows a saving throw. Given that there's no rule in D&D that limits the special abilities a GM can place on a creature or NPC, and no rules that limit the number of saves s/he can call for, this seems like a strange view to take - what you call a comfort blanket or even a fetish. You're insisting that there can be no consequences for character unless the player agrees. This just means that character is never at risk. I'm asking to you imagine what happens if it is -- what kind of game is that, how does that work, what can be accomplished? There's nothing wrong with not grappling with these questions, or grappling and finding them lacking, but you've straightjacketed yourself into a narrow view of games by insisting it should not be.This post in particular has some nice accounts of what is involved in putting a character at risk. In his discussion o...

Tuesday, 9th July, 2019

  • 01:04 PM - Ovinomancer mentioned Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    ...there simply as boundaries so that my character conception doesn't get broken mid game. It's not about protecting my PC from anything. It's about protecting me as the player. There's a great difference there. This is what I'm talking about. You, on the one hand, tell me I'm misrepresenting you looking to the mechanics for protection of your character concept and then immediately say that understanding the mechanics prevents your character concept from being "broken." You're saying exactly what I'm saying, only you think I'm saying something else. You're looking at mechanics as a way to determine what character concepts won't be challenged by those mechanics. As you say, you're looking to protect yourself from disappointment in not achieving the character you want to have. Or, at least, that your character concept won't ever change even if it might die. This is definitely looking at the game from the point of view of trusting the mechanics to protect your characterization. Maxperson's posts scream this -- you cannot alter my character at all except to harm/kill it, unless magic. This is an idea of an inviolable character, one that is static but played in a game where things are fluid (zero to hero for D&D). I'm saying that this is a poor way of considering the game -- you're putting on a straightjacket from the start. You might decide to play this way after consideration -- I still love playing and running 5e, for example, and it codifies inviolable character concepts (at least from the DM side). But, I don't codify how to play according to this, I just use this when I play a game because that's how that game plays. If I didn't want to play that way, I'd play a different game (and do). Understanding that the rules serve the game and not the other way around is huge, and I'm hoping you can make the step out to where character is at risk -- not just the life of the character, or its things, but the very nature of the character itself. This can happen rega...

Monday, 8th July, 2019

  • 12:14 AM - Hussar mentioned Maxperson in post No Magic Shops!
    Not sure I buy that Maxperson, since the last two modules I bought - Dragon Heist and Ghosts of Saltmarsh include rather lengthy rules additions. GoS contains all the rules needed for running naval combat, for example. So, it's not like modules are not a source of mechanics. Traditionally, as well, in D&D, modules have often served as the source for new mechanics or for adjustments of existing mechanics. But, it does kinda fly in the face of "D&D doesn't have magic shops" when several D&D modules published by WotC HAS magic shops. And, let's not forget, that buying magic items is now a downtime activity, as per Xanathar's. So, again, it's not like the concept is foreign to the game or limited to modules.

Saturday, 6th July, 2019

  • 07:16 PM - Ovinomancer mentioned Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    So, at this point, I see that the Maxperson, FrogReaver, Satyrn nexus is doing the following: 1) assuming D&D in their arguments, and 2) confusing choice/authority with roleplaying (at least Max and Frog are). No conversation is possible so long as these are the assumptions, as these are different from the assumption set of the other side, who is talking about all games, not just D&D and is also not confusing authority/choice with roleplaying -- in fact, this difference is the point of the OP, in part.

Tuesday, 2nd July, 2019

  • 01:45 PM - Aldarc mentioned Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    [/FONT][/FONT][/COLOR]Those games function by having players be GMs(even if they don't call them GMs specifically). The players step out of the duties that players have in RPGs and assume the duties that GMs have in RPGS when needed, effectively making people both a GM and a player, depending on what they are doing at the time. They aren't really games with no GM.It's probably not wise to resume this past debate, Maxperson, especially in a thread that has managed fairly well with keeping on topic. It's okay to disagree without comment. ;)

Monday, 1st July, 2019

  • 04:04 PM - lowkey13 mentioned Maxperson in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    Itís exasperating when not only do you ignore what everyone has cited for you out of the books, but youíre ignoring your own material youíre citing. Whatís the point in continuing? @Maxperson For example, you seem to forget the things pointed out to you when you refer back to 1e, everything from the basics (like how proficiency worked) to the more advanced, like how the rule/fluff mechanics worked together. Once again, we will use the MU as an example. Why can't a MU wear armor? Because- "Furthermore, they can wear no armor and have few weapons they can use, for martial training is so foreign to magic-use as to make the two almost mutually exclusive." That's right- MUs can't wear armor because they lack .... martial training. So, what happens if you have dual-classed, human F/MU? "The character may mix functions freely and still gain experience, although restrictions regarding armor, shield, and/or weapon apply with regard to operations particular to one or both classes. ... [Using the example of a fighter/magic user,] furthermore, the character can now carry (but not wear) armor and weapons not normally usable by magic-users, and resort to their use if the need aris...

Wednesday, 26th June, 2019

  • 02:53 PM - Aldarc mentioned Maxperson in post If you could put D&D into any other non middle ages genre, what would it be?
    Much like Maxperson, I like Bronze Age, early Iron Age, and Antiquity, but I think that most setting writers have a shallow historical grasp of these time periods beyond their aesthetics.* ("Look, here's a guy dressed like a Spartan hoplite fighting a minotaur!") And that's always disappointing to me. The same is probably true for D&D's relation to the Middle Ages. And other settings/systems do a better job emulating these other historical societies. Harn or even Pendragon will probably be better choices for Middle Age questing. RuneQuest takes a Bronze Age worldview of the mythos and turns it into a cosmic reality. So I would probably, instead, prefer if D&D explored its own sense of D&D-style fantasy. As such, I would like to see another setting like Dawnforge from the 3e era. Dawnforge was a setting about a world prior to the world that D&D frequently presumes: essentially D&D's "prequel setting." It presents a time before the drow became drow. It presents a world where there are no clerics but the...

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

Saturday, 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 ...


Page 1 of 27 1234567891011 ... LastLast
No results to display...

Tuesday, 16th July, 2019

  • 02:26 PM - jaelis quoted Maxperson in post Death and 0 Max HP
    Sure, but we also know about draining and when something is drained to death, what is drained doesn't come back. Bringing a vampire/wight drained corpse back to life still leaves you at 0 max hit points due to the draining, which is the condition necessary for instant death. No, being at 0 hp is not a condition for instant death. Being bitten by a vampire and getting reduced to 0 hp is. Not "having been bitten by a vampire," but actually being taken to 0 hp by a bite. Just like in "When all your walls turn to jell-o, the house collapses" the condition for collapsing is being turned to jello, not being jello.
  • 02:17 PM - jaelis quoted Maxperson in post Death and 0 Max HP
    On the other hand, if something says, "When all your walls are turned to jell-o, the house collapses.", it is expected to be ongoing. Nobody is going to think that the next day the walls on the collapsed house are no longer jell-o. You are going to have to fix those walls before the house can be rebuilt. Yes but that's not the form used here. The right analogy is "When all your walls turn to jell-o, the house collapses." Present tense, not a verbal phrase like "are turned." Now you might be saying, "yes but your house won't stand as long as the walls are jello." Sure I agree, but that is because of what I know about jello and houses, not because of what (my version of) the sentence says.
  • 04:20 AM - Harzel quoted Maxperson in post Death and 0 Max HP
    In this case neither is general, though. The specific beats general section lists both monster abilities and spells as examples of specific rules. Both the vampire drain and raise spell are specific rules, and there's no rule about what happens when two specific rules collide. It's clearly a DM call on this one. Yeah, I think that is more or less what I said, except that I don't regard "general" and "specific" as absolute attributes - they are relative. One could have three rules, A, B, and C, with A being the most general, B being more specific, and C being more specific yet. Is B specific or general? Depends on what you are comparing it to.
  • 04:12 AM - Harzel quoted Maxperson in post Death and 0 Max HP
    The mechanic, "Dies when max hit points are 0 from the vampire bite." remains, though. The blood loss was just mentioned, because it's a freaking vampire that just drained you via a bite. It's pretty obvious that no blood is why the PC died from that mechanic. You would only survive if the DM believes that the Raise Dead spell restores the hit point maximum to normal. Me, I don't see the death occurring from poison or nonmagical disease, so I would answer that with a no. Um, ok, you have reiterated your position, but you didn't respond to anything in my post. I could, in turn, repeat what I said, but that doesn't feel like progress.

Monday, 15th July, 2019

  • 05:18 PM - Oofta quoted Maxperson in post Death and 0 Max HP
    The mechanic, "Dies when max hit points are 0 from the vampire bite." remains, though. The blood loss was just mentioned, because it's a freaking vampire that just drained you via a bite. It's pretty obvious that no blood is why the PC died from that mechanic. You would only survive if the DM believes that the Raise Dead spell restores the hit point maximum to normal. Me, I don't see the death occurring from poison or nonmagical disease, so I would answer that with a no. The rules don't say anything about blood drain. In fact, we know that in this scenario the PC died because they had their max HP lowered by wights. Wights don't drain blood. Vampires do piercing and necrotic damage. They may do that by sucking blood but as far as the rules are concerned there is no mention of irrevocable blood loss. As for raise dead not working, I disagree with that as well. There is a clause in raise dead that if vital bits like your head are missing the spell doesn't work. There's no clause for ...
  • 10:02 AM - pemerton quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    ...of knowledge in this way: you can't get more out of knowledge than you put in. To discover something about my character requires something external to take place. I've given examples in this thread. So have others. It doesn't have to be done through random number generation. There are other resolution systems possible. But it does require some way of establishing salient elements of the fiction other than via decision-making by the player of the PC. To my mind this is actually not a radical thesis about RPGing, given that this type of game has relied on resolution mechanics, including random number generation, to establish external constraints on player choices and interpretation of the fiction from the outset. D&D is (though not necessarily should be) the baseline assumption. If we can't argue from a base of some sort, then there is no argument.By my count, there are only three recurrent posters in this thread who make D&D the baseline assumption: Lanefan, FrogReaver and Maxperson. I'm not interested in talking primarily about D&D. It's not a system I'm playing at the moment, and I doubt think that focusing on it is going to shed any particular light on the questions raised in the OP or subsequently in the thread. If you think that there is some aspect of D&D mechanics or play that will help address those questions, then by all means post it.
  • 09:48 AM - Harzel quoted Maxperson in post Death and 0 Max HP
    The rule is, though, that you die at 0 max hit points from the blood loss of the vampire bite. That 0 max hit points is still in effect the moment the Raise Dead is cast. The PC would just die again. Actually, the rule (vampire stat block) does not mention blood loss, it just says, "The target's hit point maximum is reduced by an amount equal to the necrotic damage taken. ... The target dies if this effect reduces its hit point maximum to 0." To me, in the plain reading of that the only condition (something that might persist) involved is "0 max HP"; everything else is events (things that happen and are then done). Your position seems to be based on having a condition that is something like "remains dead as long as max HP is 0", which is plainly language that is not in the rule. That position is more comprehensible if you consider the blood loss fluff to be part of the rule. The problem, of course, with dragging that fluff into the rules is that there are no corresponding mechanics for de...
  • 09:23 AM - Sorcerers Apprentice quoted Maxperson in post Death and 0 Max HP
    The rule is, though, that you die at 0 max hit points from the blood loss of the vampire bite. That 0 max hit points is still in effect the moment the Raise Dead is cast. The PC would just die again. As I interpret the rule death by vampire bite is triggered at the moment that max HP is reduced to 0, I see no reason to think it would trigger again if the character is resurrected with 0 max HP already.
  • 06:28 AM - LordEntrails quoted Maxperson in post Death and 0 Max HP
    Coma isn't a condition, so I would think it would be death. They still meet all the necessary conditions to die. Drained to 0 max hit points by the bite. I wasn't suggesting comma was a RAW "condition", rather a natural language idea that exists in the real world and could be used as an analog in game :) We do know that a character can be unconscious at 0 HP (or dead), and that is what I was implying. That a character could be unconscious, at 0 HP and effectively in a comma since they could not normally gain HP to become conscious. I don't know how I would rule, but this thread has been a good discussion with valuable ideas. As others have said, whatever the ruling, it needs to be decisive so the game can move on, and as always, it should lead to "fun".
  • 04:42 AM - LordEntrails quoted Maxperson in post Death and 0 Max HP
    The rule is, though, that you die at 0 max hit points from the blood loss of the vampire bite. That 0 max hit points is still in effect the moment the Raise Dead is cast. The PC would just die again. Or would they just be in a comma? i.e. unconscious and unable to become conscious because they can't get (normal) hit points? Hence why I might rule Raise Dead followed by Aid or other temporary hit points would get the character conscious, then either a long rest (if the tempo HP last that long) or Greater Restoration so that they can then take a long rest and regain their hit point max.
  • 04:26 AM - aramis erak quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    It used to be the case that you could choose to fail saves. 5e doesn't have that rule. I would personally allow it, but it's a house rule now. Actually, the text is ambiguously worded. Saving Throws Many spells specify that a target can make a saving throw to avoid some or all of a spellís effects. Generally, can is a choice word. If the save was obligatory, it should say "must," "shall," "will," or "neets to"... Noting that the PBR text is an exact subset of the PHB... and is electronically searchable... it can be interpreted either direction.
  • 04:11 AM - Umbran quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    Ad Hominem? I don't care about your argument. It was a dry comment that it would not be a pemerton megathread without your usual appeal to the lexicon at some point in this discussion. ;) At was an attack and uncalled for. If you don't have a constructive response to my arguments, don't mention or respond to me. Both of you decided to continue a personal dispute despite the warning. Time for both of you to take a walk - find another thread where you're not going to engage in personal sniping. Don't post in this one any further. Despite how clear this case is, one or both of you will likely disagree and want to argue with me. Take it to PM, please, and leave the thread alone. Anyone else?
  • 02:54 AM - Ovinomancer quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    By one limited definition of challenge, sure. By other definitions of challenge that's simply wrong. You can in fact be challenged without a win/lose scenario happening. verb verb: challenge; 3rd person present: challenges; past tense: challenged; past participle: challenged; gerund or present participle: challenging 1. invite (someone) to engage in a contest. "he challenged one of my men to a duel" enter into competition with or opposition against. "incumbent Democrats are being challenged in the 29th district" make a rival claim to or threaten someone's hold on (a position). "they were challenging his leadership" invite (someone) to do something that one thinks will be difficult or impossible; dare. "I challenged them to make up their own minds" As you can see, all it takes is a difficult situation. Without some serious brain damage going on, everyone is capable of making up their mind on something, so the bolded example is not one that is a success...

Sunday, 14th July, 2019

  • 11:57 PM - aramis erak quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    The character is really just a sheet of paper. It's the player inhabiting the idea of the character that gives it life. That's why I don't understand this idea that you can challenge the character socially, without challenging the player. When Umbran said that I was switching the challenge from the character to the player, I had a vision of Leslie Nielson in an interrogation room with a character sheet sitting on a chair, demanding that it confess. After a few minutes he turns to Nordberg and says, "I never thought it would be so hard to challenge a character." You cannot challenge a character without simultaneously challenging the player. A challenge where the DM takes control and informs the player that his PC's heart warms is no less a challenge to the player than what we are describing. It's just a different sort of challenge. There are a great many challenges for the character that are not for the player, and best resolved with simple mechanical considerations. Some are jus...
  • 11:21 PM - Aldarc quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    :yawn: Your Ad Hominems bore me. Either respond to the arguments I make or don't respond to me or talk about me.Ad Hominem? I don't care about your argument. It was a dry comment that it would not be a pemerton megathread without your usual appeal to the lexicon at some point in this discussion. ;)
  • 04:05 PM - Aldarc quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    Nor is it one unless you falsely accuse me of semantics and engage in an Ad Hominem attack against me like this one. Semantics is not different ways to define something. It's saying the same thing in a different way, which I did not do. The distinctly different definitions of challenge do not end up at the same place. They are different kinds of challenges. Take your false semantics accusation elsewhere.Actually, it is as "semantics" is fundamentally about 'meaning,' and you are currently doing what is referred to in the field of linguistics as 'lexical semantics.' For someone who likes to drop lexical entries into arguments, I'm surprised you don't know that. :D Again, using the mechanics of Burning Wheel's Duel of Wits, then Blades in the Dark, then Apocalypse World demonstrate how these claims manifest themselves in actual play. Again, you can't and won't because your claims are a) completely empty and false and b) the product of complete ignorance of the available mechanics.Yeah,...
  • 03:47 PM - Aldarc quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    By one limited definition of challenge, sure. By other definitions of challenge that's simply wrong. You can in fact be challenged without a win/lose scenario happening. verb verb: challenge; 3rd person present: challenges; past tense: challenged; past participle: challenged; gerund or present participle: challenging Ah, there we go. It's not a pemerton megathread until Maxperson gets into a debate of semantics and pulls out a lexicon so that he can argue definitions. We are also just missing Maxperson broadening the sense of a term such that it becomes meaningless in the discourse; let's say, something akin to "Everything is a challenge." ;)

Saturday, 13th July, 2019

  • 05:28 AM - Ovinomancer quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    By making the hard choice obviously. I you can't fail to pick a choice, but none of the choices may be what you want, so there is no success. Challenge has more than one definition and not of them are binary. Trying to limit a challenge to success or failure is a False Dichotomy. What do you have if there's no failure, and no success, though? Not a challenge. If you can't fail, if there's no risk, then it's not a challenge. Does it have to be abject, absolute failure? No, of course not, but there has to be something at risk and that risk has to be losing that something. And here's where we're having a disconnect: you insist that the player has 100% sole authority over characterizations. Taken as given, then nothing is ever risked if the player is making a choice about that characterization. If you chose to change your character, then you've chosen it. That characterization was never at risk -- there's no way you can lose the characterization. What I'm seeing is an argument that ...
  • 04:15 AM - Umbran quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    The character is really just a sheet of paper. It's the player inhabiting the idea of the character that gives it life. That's why I don't understand this idea that you can challenge the character socially, without challenging the player. That's because you are again swapping between different kinds of "challenge" willy-nilly. We typically talk about "challenge the player" and "challenge the character" in a rather game-centered* manner. If I had you a sudoku puzzle to solve, with no reference to the mechanics your character uses, I am challenging you, the player. If I give a strictly constructed skill challenge (make skill check one, make skill check 2...), I can challenge the character build, with the player agency front-loaded back in character generation and advancement, and little found at game runtime. In a complex combat, with many tactical options, I can challenge the combination. But, this branch started as we were talking about *challenging the core concepts* of the ch...
  • 02:54 AM - FrogReaver quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    I said that in the context of the social challenge, though. Socially, I don't believe it is possible. I'm pretty much in agreement, though there are some that are insisting you can run social encounters the same way you run combat encounters. I'm not 100% sure if you really can or not (I heavily lean toward not possible as well), but I'm more concerned with that's gained by running a social encounter as a combat encounter. It seems to me that if even possible, that it's an inferior way of handling that situation? Is there anything I'm missing? That depends. If the PC is going to take a shot and the NPC goes for a steal or block, then it would be an opposed challenge in my opinion. You could term it a mini-challenge if you want, but it's still a contest. I like the term contest there


Maxperson's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites