View Profile: Maxperson - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Today, 08:27 AM
    Incorrect. You only multiply the static bonuses for strength, weapon plusses, etc. The extra crit dice were rolled. From page 134 of the 3.5 PHB. "His critical multiplier with a greataxe is ×3, so if he scores a critical hit with that weapon, he would roll 1d12+4 points of damage three times (the same as rolling 3d12+12)."
    141 replies | 3130 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Today, 07:38 AM
    The stat block has them with falchions, but I suppose you could give them a greataxe. Then have them get a lucky 1 in 20 crit. Then have them roll 3 12's in a row. I suppose. I don't see how that's any deadlier than 1e where the fighter rolled a 1 for hit points with no con bonus and then died at 0 hit points like people here are saying they constantly saw in game play. Let's face it. In...
    141 replies | 3130 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Today, 07:30 AM
    Nothing has been interpreted 40 years after the fact. It was interpreted during 1e back in the early 80's. Yes. The DM that dictated which rules were used. The PHB didn't have primacy. You also clearly haven't read the 1e DMG introduction which not only does not state that the rules inside it are all options, but in fact says otherwise. It states straight out that they supplement and...
    141 replies | 3130 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Today, 07:07 AM
    2d4+4 doesn't come close to doing 45 points of damage, even with a crit.
    141 replies | 3130 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Today, 01:48 AM
    Sure, but the DMG rule no more or less optional than the PHB rule. The DMG does not state you die if you are at 0 and then are hit for 1 more point of damage. The only rule in the DMG about it is that you die at -10.
    141 replies | 3130 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Today, 01:29 AM
    You still haven't proven that a rule not listed as optional was specifically an optional rule. All the two different non-optional rules from the PHB and DMG prove is that between the year the PHB was release and the DMG came out, Gygax had second thoughts about dying at 0 and changed the rule.
    141 replies | 3130 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Today, 01:17 AM
    Yep. The rule was only for "any creature." That includes PCs dude. I guess it wouldn't apply to rocks. Um, no. First, it's not an option. It's in the combat section, not some mythical "optional rule" section. Specifically, it's in the section talking about hit points and damage. It explains what happens when you drop to 0 hit points. What happens? You fall unconscious. Then it...
    141 replies | 3130 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:27 PM
    This is the 1e rule from page 82 of the 1e DMG. "When any creature is brought to 0 hit poinis (optionally as low as -3 hit points if from the same blow which brought the total to 0), it is unconscious. In each of the next succeeding rounds 1 additional (negative) point will be lost until -10 is reached and the creature dies." Going to -10 wasn't an option. It was the 1e rule. The up to -3...
    141 replies | 3130 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:19 PM
    The necrotic effect does not end instantly. Only the damage ends instantly. If the effect also ended, there could be no reduction in maximum hit points. There must be some sort of ongoing necrotic effect that reduces the maximum hit points and keeps them reduced. That ongoing effect is also what kills the PC at 0 maximum hit points.
    172 replies | 4227 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:28 PM
    But there is a rule about 0 max hit points AND necrotic damage FROM a vampire. You interpret that rule differently than we do. That's all. Let the rules lawyer go and just accept that it can be interpreted differently. Aha! This is the problem. The rule isn't code and was never intended to be. That's why they use natural language as the benchmark, not code.
    172 replies | 4227 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:15 PM
    Decanter of Endless Water 21 Dimensional Shackles 19 Driftglobe 5 Dust of Dryness 16 Efreeti Bottle 20 Figurine of Wondrous Power 20+1=21 Folding Boat 18 Heward's Handy Haversack 18-2=16 Horn of Valhalla 24
    226 replies | 5393 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:25 PM
    Decanter of Endless Water 21 Dimensional Shackles 19 Driftglobe 5 Dust of Dryness 16 Efreeti Bottle 20 Figurine of Wondrous Power 20 Folding Boat 18 Heward's Handy Haversack 18 Horn of Valhalla 24
    226 replies | 5393 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:41 PM
    Only when the rules can be interpreted multiple ways like the situation we are discussing. This is a False Equivalence. The first example has no ongoing condition. The second does, so the two examples are treated differently. Fortunately for us, it doesn't matter what it is to you. Your opinion on the matter doesn't stop what you are doing from being rules lawyering semantics. ...
    172 replies | 4227 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:41 AM
    Yep. Both ways are valid interpretations. You aren't going to convince those who think that semantical rules lawyering somehow constitutes absolute correctness and the other side is wrong, though.
    172 replies | 4227 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:41 AM
    I think this is one of those perception is greater than reality moments, and wives just SEEM to be 10'. Whatever you do, though, please don't tell my wife I said that. :eek:
    141 replies | 3130 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:18 AM
    I think one of the things you guys are forgetting when comparing save or die spells/effects/etc. vs. saves and other "lethal rules" is that in 1e and 2e you very often died before any of that came into play. Rolling for hit points at 1st level meant that you often had PC deaths and TPKs in the first encounter you came across as most hits would knock out even a fighter who didn't get a lucky hit...
    141 replies | 3130 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 12:54 AM
    I would be more inclined to cap the amount of XP you can get from a treasure haul, whether that's at 1 level, half a level or whatever. I think one of the joys of D&D is finding a large horde, especially when defeating a foe like an ancient dragon.
    84 replies | 5342 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 19th July, 2019, 09:33 PM
    20 to 1 in order to fix dragons would make orc experience average about 17, rather than 100, and I'm not sure the players would appreciate my changing the exp ratio for each monster. Relax dude. I just said I wasn't sure about it. That doesn't even come close to "slamming the whole concept." I liked gold for exp during 1e, since that was the only way to get to any reasonable level.
    84 replies | 5342 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 19th July, 2019, 09:19 PM
    You can go farther by expressing it as an alternative. This is from the NPC section a bit farther on. When creating general NPCs... "General Characters: Roll 3d6 for each ability as usual, but use average scoring by considering any 1 as a 3 and any 6 as a 4." You create general NPCs not by rolling 3d6 for each ability, but rather by rolling 3d6 as usual, since 3d6 for each ability is the...
    141 replies | 3130 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Friday, 19th July, 2019, 06:43 PM
    Decanter of Endless Water 22 Dimensional Shackles 19 Driftglobe 4 Dust of Dryness 16 Efreeti Bottle 22 Figurine of Wondrous Power 19+1=20 Folding Boat 21 Heward's Handy Haversack 20-2=18 Horn of Valhalla 27
    226 replies | 5393 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 19th July, 2019, 02:27 PM
    He mentions 3d6 BEFORE talking about the alternatives. That's clearly the default, given that 1e evolved from Basic. Correct. Gygax's words about 3d6 PRIOR to giving the alternatives establish 3d6 as the baseline. Look. I get it. 3d6 did suck and we almost always used the 4d6 alternative. That didn't change what the default was, though.
    141 replies | 3130 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 19th July, 2019, 01:45 PM
    I'm not sure I like the idea of XP for gold. An ancient red dragon is worth 36,500 XP, but it's horde will average around 720,000+ gold(in coin, gems and art), plus magic items. That's waaaaaay too much XP to hand out, so you're going to end up with a bunch of piss poor dragons(and other monsters) if you want to have any kind of leveling balance. Finding the large horde is one of the major...
    84 replies | 5342 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 19th July, 2019, 01:28 PM
    Now I'm imagining an efreeti and whipped cream. It's to early for this man. Not cool. Not cool at all. :blush:
    226 replies | 5393 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 19th July, 2019, 01:25 PM
    Decanter of Endless Water 22 Dimensional Shackles 20 Driftglobe 3 Dust of Dryness 16 Efreeti Bottle 22 Figurine of Wondrous Power 21 Folding Boat 20 Heward's Handy Haversack 22 Horn of Valhalla 27
    226 replies | 5393 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 19th July, 2019, 01:20 PM
    This is semantics. They are two different ways of saying essentially the same thing. There's a reason that rules lawyers often get kicked out of groups. Arguing semantics is a big part of it.
    172 replies | 4227 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Friday, 19th July, 2019, 07:10 AM
    You are in fact wrong. It seems you don't understand what alternative means. By definition, an alternative is not the default. It's an ALTERNATIVE to the default. I'm sure you saw how the sentence right before method I is mentioned, it explicitly says method I is an alternative. It also seems like you and @Jer are confused by Gygax recommending that you try an alternative to the default. ...
    141 replies | 3130 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 05:26 PM
    Decanter of Endless Water 21 Dimensional Shackles 20 Driftglobe 5 Dust of Disappearance 4-2=2 Dust of Dryness 16 Efreeti Bottle 23 Figurine of Wondrous Power 22+1=23 Folding Boat 23 Heward's Handy Haversack 21 Horn of Valhalla 25
    226 replies | 5393 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 02:24 PM
    This.
    172 replies | 4227 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 01:28 PM
    Now, as to which edition was deadliest. I had many more characters die in 1e than in 2e, and many more die in 2e than any following edition. I'm not sure if there were other rules which allowed 2e to be more survivable than 1e, but that was my experience.
    141 replies | 3130 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 01:25 PM
    No. That's incorrect. The PHB directs you to the DMG which says this... "While it is possible to generate some fairly playable characters by rolling 3d6, there is often an extended period of attempts at finding a suitable one due to quirks of the dice. Furthermore, these rather marginal characters tend to have short life expectancy - which tends to discourage new players, as does having to...
    141 replies | 3130 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 01:12 PM
    Decanter of Endless Water 23 Deck of Illusions 0 - Death is an illusion. Dimensional Shackles 20 Driftglobe 6 Dust of Disappearance 6 Dust of Dryness 16 Efreeti Bottle 22 Figurine of Wondrous Power 24 Folding Boat 21 Heward's Handy Haversack 23
    226 replies | 5393 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 01:10 PM
    The thing is, if you are limiting it to the number of spell slots per day, prepped in advance, and the spells go away when cast, you've re-created Vancian ;) I don't think that allowing the hanging throughout the day is enough to escape that. The key difference between Amber magic and Vancian magic is that Amber magic is almost limitless as long as you take time to hang spells.
    25 replies | 849 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 02:52 AM
    Only because they didn't consider this corner case. The reduces portion is not really relevant as it is only there to let us know that 0 max hit points from the necrotic damage causes instant death. All the conditions for death are still present. You can "rules lawyer" the technicality all you want. I'm going to go with RAI. Right after your, "Does not!"
    172 replies | 4227 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 02:44 AM
    Sure. If it wasn't ongoing, there could be no spawn. It has to persist after death or there would be nothing to cause a spawn to come back. Which is fine. I can see where you could interpret that way. I just don't myself. 5e is full of effects and abilities than can be, and are, interpreted multiple ways.
    172 replies | 4227 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 02:41 AM
    I don't need to change any rule. The rule is that if at 0 max hit points due to being drained by the vampire's necrotic damage, you die. You can(and have) interpreted the rule differently. Your alternative interpretation doesn't mean I have to alter the rule at all.
    172 replies | 4227 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 02:39 AM
    Someone needs to tell Blue that he can't "Bet that you will respond to just this and ignore the rest" and then block me. LOL. The bet doesn't work if I can't respond.
    172 replies | 4227 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 01:57 AM
    Merlin often put it off because it was a hassle. He wasn't the most focused wizard out there. That and he had bot Frakir and Ghost to help him out of trouble.
    25 replies | 849 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 01:51 AM
    I picture the bite working as a vehicle for the necrotic damage. How do you picture it working?
    172 replies | 4227 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 01:50 AM
    So you're saying that the raised PC doesn't have a max hit points of 0 that was caused by the necrotic damage reducing it to 0? This is an obvious corner case man. They didn't consider this. This is a pretty blatant False Equivalence. Being drained to an amount of max hit points greater than 0 and then dying is completely different from dying when max hit points reaches 0. Of...
    172 replies | 4227 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th July, 2019, 03:06 PM
    Decanter of Endless Water 24 Deck of Illusions 8 Dimensional Shackles 19 Driftglobe 5 Dust of Disappearance 8 Dust of Dryness 17-2=15 Efreeti Bottle 22 Figurine of Wondrous Power 25+1=26 Folding Boat 26 Heward's Handy Haversack 22
    226 replies | 5393 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th July, 2019, 01:30 PM
    Decanter of Endless Water 24 Deck of Illusions 7 Dimensional Shackles 19 Driftglobe 5 Dust of Disappearance 10 Dust of Dryness 17 Efreeti Bottle 22 Figurine of Wondrous Power 25 Folding Boat 25 Heward's Handy Haversack 24
    226 replies | 5393 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th July, 2019, 01:12 PM
    Everything you regain after a long rest is a benefit of that long rest. The reason you don't see things like spells, vampire bite recovery, etc. listed in the long rest section is that they are specific benefits, not general ones, and get added to the general rule if they apply to you. Spellcasting is mentioned in the general resting section above long and short rest, though. "Heroic though...
    172 replies | 4227 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th July, 2019, 06:00 AM
    If I remember correctly, raw power also took a lot more power to accomplish the same thing a refined spell could accomplish. So you hung a fireball, or used much more power to just destroy an area the size of a fireball.
    25 replies | 849 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th July, 2019, 01:58 AM
    And you die if you have 0 hit points due to the vampire bite. Clearly the long rest portion of the bite section wasn't intended for PCs who are at 0 max hit points, but for those who are drained and remain alive. You are in a grey area, so you really can't treat it as normal with regards to resting. You can certainly rule it that way for your table, but those who are viewing it as a benefit...
    172 replies | 4227 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th July, 2019, 01:52 AM
    There is no general. The 0 hit point max is also a specific rule. This is a False Dichotomy. It's not one or the other of those two options, especially since the effect of having max hit points due to the necrotic damage is still present, which we all know causes death. That's a third option right there that is more likely than either of the other two. And this is fine....
    172 replies | 4227 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th July, 2019, 01:49 AM
    Yes it is the condition. You are trying to make two things into one, and that doesn't work. The vehicle for the death is a separate item. Being bitten doesn't cause death. It's just the vehicle for the necrotic damage. The one and only condition for death is to have your hit point maximum hit 0 due to the necrotic damage. Look at it like this. If I inject you with a deadly poison, the...
    172 replies | 4227 view(s)
    2 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th July, 2019, 06:16 PM
    Lol. That’s what I get for posting before coffee!
    226 replies | 5393 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th July, 2019, 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.
    172 replies | 4227 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th July, 2019, 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
    226 replies | 5393 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th July, 2019, 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.
    172 replies | 4227 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th July, 2019, 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...
    25 replies | 849 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th July, 2019, 01:18 PM
    Probably not, but the Pixie penchant for wood gave us the Pixie Stick.
    156 replies | 6433 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th July, 2019, 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
    226 replies | 5393 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th July, 2019, 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.
    172 replies | 4227 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th July, 2019, 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.
    172 replies | 4227 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th July, 2019, 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...
    172 replies | 4227 view(s)
    1 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Monday, 15th July, 2019, 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
    226 replies | 5393 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 15th July, 2019, 02:17 PM
    Fine. I want my $0 back, and I'm charging 100% interest daily.
    156 replies | 6433 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 15th July, 2019, 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
    226 replies | 5393 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 15th July, 2019, 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...
    172 replies | 4227 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 15th July, 2019, 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.
    172 replies | 4227 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 15th July, 2019, 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...
    172 replies | 4227 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 15th July, 2019, 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.
    172 replies | 4227 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 15th July, 2019, 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...
    743 replies | 20592 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Monday, 15th July, 2019, 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.
    743 replies | 20592 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 06:34 PM
    That seems reasonable, too.
    14 replies | 571 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 06:32 PM
    That seems very reasonable to me.
    14 replies | 571 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.
    172 replies | 4227 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...
    743 replies | 20592 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...
    743 replies | 20592 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
    226 replies | 5393 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...
    743 replies | 20592 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,...
    743 replies | 20592 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...
    743 replies | 20592 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...
    743 replies | 20592 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.
    743 replies | 20592 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...
    743 replies | 20592 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...
    743 replies | 20592 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 | 853 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
    226 replies | 5393 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.
    743 replies | 20592 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...
    743 replies | 20592 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.
    743 replies | 20592 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. ...
    743 replies | 20592 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.
    743 replies | 20592 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.
    88 replies | 3174 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 | 5902 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 | 5902 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 01:24 PM
    :eek: You're right.
    224 replies | 5902 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 | 5902 view(s)
    1 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
9,411
Posts Per Day
1.73
Last Post
2e, the most lethal edition? Today 08:27 AM

Currency

Gold Pieces
0
General Information
Last Activity
Today 08:28 AM
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

Wednesday, 26th June, 2019


Tuesday, 25th June, 2019


Monday, 24th June, 2019


Sunday, 23rd June, 2019




Tuesday, 5th March, 2019

  • 11:32 PM - pemerton mentioned Maxperson in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    You keep projecting these pejorative onto peoples’ Preferences. Is it any wonder they don’t embrace your ideas?When you start policing tone and courtesy without discrimination (eg where is your outrage at Maxperson calling the levels of drama in my game ridiculous?) then I might take these sorts of comments seriously. As far as embracing my ideas is concerned, I'm very happy with the number of posters who, over the years, have acknowledged my contributions and/or thanked me for ideas that they have adapted into their games. EDIT: I notice that chaochou has made the same comment as I have done. Thanks chaochou!
  • 02:12 PM - pemerton mentioned Maxperson in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    On "ridiculous levels of drama that are unrleasltic" - the suggestion is nonsense, and upthread I already explained why. How much drama occurs in Maxperson's game? Let's call it D. How much ingame time passes per unit of such drama? Let's call it T. Taking it as a premise that the drama denstiy per unit time in Maxperson's game is realisitc - so now we know that a drama-density-per-unit-time of D/T is realistic. Now let's call the amount of real-world time spent playing P. Suppose I spend a greater amount of real-world time on dramatic stuff than Maxperson does. I can do that, while maintaining the ratio D/T. All I have to do, if I'm increasing D, is to similarly step up T. Which I can do, by simply increasing the value of T relative to P: that is, cover more ingame time per amount of real-world time. Maxperson and Lanefan seem to proceed on the assumption that the ratio of T to P is fixed in some fashion, but that assumption is baseless. For instance, in my Prince Valiant game months or even seasons pass between sessions. In my Cortex+ Heroic game, seasons pass, travel takes indeterminate amounts of time, etc. Traveller's ...
  • 01:46 PM - pemerton mentioned Maxperson in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    ... dramatic choice remain clear for players in the framing of the fiction and that these player choices will propel the narrative into a new set of dramatic frames where the process will (hopefully) repeat itself. And this will be made up of "small" dramatic decisions and larger ones.I think the account of the action of my Traveller session falls pretty well under this description. Maybe not all of your torches you bought are actually good working torches. Maybe a portion of your rations spoiled in the dungeon. Just because you bought 12 days of rations does not mean that all of your rations would naturally keep well in a warm, moist, moldy place. Does each attack action with a bow represent a single arrow or is the fiction more complicated? Or do all of your arrows remain intact through your dungeoneering? <snip> Overall, these are facets that are typically not given much attention even in the standard resource management game.This is why I don't agree with Lanefan and Maxperson that D&D-style resource tracking is more realistic. That degree of rational control over one's resources is unrealistic even for a modern bureaucracy, let alone the notional fiction of a typical fantasy RPG. I was also struck by the irony of this: Yeah, I'll willingly concede encumbrance is a bloody nuisance to track. Devices of Holding soon become everybody's best friend.D&D is full of elements whose principle function is to circumvent what would otherwise - at least notionally - be an element of play: quivers of endless arrows, bags of holding, continual light spells, Magnificent Mansions, etc. And typically these are gated behind levels in some fashion (either directly for spells, or indirectly for magic items). If tracking encumbrance is boring, then why make it (pseudo-)mandatory for the first N levels of each campaign before dropping it? Or if choosing when to rest is meant to be an exciting, skill-testing element of play, then why introduce a game element which mea...

Saturday, 2nd March, 2019

  • 01:42 PM - Numidius mentioned Maxperson in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    ...es in one camp. I think a good example of this is the Paladin Mount ability that Pemerton brought up. As posters stake more and more ground in favor of GM narrative authority in contrast to Pemerton's positions, if we think of it as this binary thing, then suddenly posters can start seeing a game with that mechanic as bad because they've gotten it into their head they are on the opposite side of Pemerton. I've seen this happen countless times in these discussion. So by all means, GM authority could be addressed. I would be cautious about overplaying its significance for most gamers. If it is addressed, maybe take a more objective approach than we've seen in this thread?I think you and pemerton made your points clear, so both your "sides" had spotlight here. Having said that, I believe that a shift in approach in mainstream rpg is needed. The issue of where realism comes from is real and palpable at the tables I sit to play. Dramatic, sometimes. I remark this also referring to what Maxperson said: Show me a rule and I will allow my players to do it.

Friday, 1st March, 2019

  • 06:31 AM - Hussar mentioned Maxperson in post Why does the stigma of the "jerk GM" still persist in our hobby?
    ... that DMPCs are a bad thing, then running one is a bad decision or mistake, but you are not a bad DM. To be a bad DM you need to rise above and know what you are doing is wrong, not care how what you do affects the players, or both. In short, you really do need to be a jerk. Well, I disagree. Bad DMing doesn't become good DMing just because it happens due to lack of experience. It's still bad DMing. Thing is, it's not a fatal flaw, nor is it even really a bad thing. Just something we all go through on the path to becoming a better DM. Once you fix your mistakes and learn what you did wrong, then you become a good DM. I agree that it's mistakes from inexperience are far more forgivable. I just disagree that somehow inexperience renders the mistakes not mistakes. It's no different than anything else. You were a bad driver once upon a time. You were a bad basketball player once upon a time. You were a bad pretty much everything once upon a time. But, you (not you Maxperson, the generic you, which is what I meant this whole post) learned from your mistakes and got better.

Thursday, 28th February, 2019

  • 12:50 AM - iserith mentioned Maxperson in post Polymorph is a bad de-buff spell
    Sure, you retain alignment and personality, but you don't retain memories or ability to reason at any level greater than a toad's. I wouldn't think that there are a lot of toads running around with a working understand of polymorph, or who are willing to impale themselves on swords. In my opinion that would be a very poor example of roleplaying. Maxperson - if you're just getting started on this thread, you might want to read it the whole way through before responding as you have a lot of catching up to do.

Wednesday, 27th February, 2019

  • 12:02 AM - Hussar mentioned Maxperson in post Why does the stigma of the "jerk GM" still persist in our hobby?
    ...ations with your left guard? But, if your DM is a douche, then you are stuck, having a face to face conversation, week after week, for tens, if not hundreds of hours with this person until such time as you break and walk away from the table. Maybe you're staying because you like the other players, and the DM is just good enough to make the time tolerable. Maybe the DM is a friend and it's really, really hard to tell a friend, "Hey, I like you, you're my friend, but, behind the DM's screen, you're a total douchebag and I'm walking." Really, IMO, it's the face to face time that makes the narrative so much more prevalent than in other hobbies. Very few hobbies expect the players to all talk to one player for several hours at a time. I mean, look at this really old thread: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?311020-quot-I-Quit-quot-Public-Play-Am-I-just-an-impatient-jerk-(LONG) - There are multiple examples of terrible behavior at a public table. And even if it's, as Maxperson says, only 3% of DM's (which, honestly, I think it's far, far higher, but maybe I'm just cynical), it's not that hard to run into a bad DM if you're playing public games. I remember polling on En World years ago about the number of people who had run into bad DM's and about 1/3 of respondents had had at least one bad DM over the years. I really don't think it's all that rare.

Friday, 22nd February, 2019

  • 03:50 PM - Ovinomancer mentioned Maxperson in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    Dogs is heavy prepped. I run it, and I found it very difficult to prep properly, following the structure provided in the book by the author. Heck there is even a flow chart to follow for the Sins of the Npc involved. It is like an investigation rpg with guns&sins to judge, so plot and relationships must be prepped in advance and in detail. There is prep in Dogs, yes, but not like a D&D module. You chart out details to engage the PCs, but also have to be ready to ditch it all if the players run off script. There's more prep than in, say, DW, but it's still not a heavily prepped game. In Dw I encourage my players to bring content and ideas, nonetheless there are no rules for dice to roll in those moments; "only" the principle for the Gm Ask Questions and Build On Answers. (So say yes or roll can not apply, anyway, who cares, it's just my opinion) As I said to Maxperson, if you're not adjudicating an action declaration, SYORTD is moot. You're talking about a different facet of play, here, namely finding out what's important to your players so you can use that to frame scenes. This, however, isn't the only way to introduce new fiction. New fiction (like the presence of a secret door not previously introduced) can be brought on through action declarations in DW, and should then be adjudicated using SYORTD as a maxim. In my games I don't really care about minutiae (like secret doors or where to find people), I try to foster meaningful decision making at the table with hard choices that might change the setting (not an easy task btw and seldom achieved). I don't follow. If the presence of a secret door is brought up in an action declaration and is minutia, then SYORTD says to say yes and move to a point that is important. If, however, it's not minutia, then call for a check and use the results for the action snowball. This is the exact kind of ...

Wednesday, 6th February, 2019

  • 02:48 PM - Manbearcat mentioned Maxperson in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    @Maxperson Do you mean something like “baseline familiarity centered around our own physical systems?” Gravity is a thing, some interactions transfer more energy than others, nonparasitic plants need light for photosynthesis, humans (and animals like them) express themselves based on biological and social imperatives. Stuff like that? I don’t think (broadly) that anyone would disagree with that (@Aldarc included). I think the friction arises when we try to sort out the nature of a certain paradox that seems to violate our baselines arbitrarily, what to extrapolate from it, what is the consequence/utility (from a gameplay perspective) of digging too deeply or hewing too closely/granularly (to our baselines). Further still, the more Through the Looking Glass components get ported to our games, the more friction there is (as even our seemingly trivially “true” baselines become challenged). EDIT - That isn’t even touching on the questions of: 1) Does hewing to x too closely cause gameplay issue...

Sunday, 3rd February, 2019

  • 02:11 AM - pemerton mentioned Maxperson in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    ... that, in a TTRPG, it is relatively uncommon for a GM's notes or a setting book to specify every patron of a teahouse at all times. Or to have an encounter table for each teahouse. (I own many setting books. None of them purports to offer comprehensive coverage of the teahouses and the like that they describe.) So the action declaration We go to the innhouse looking for sect members triggers a decision-making process on the GM's part which is more than just looking up and reciting a note, or even looking up and rolling on a table (eg even if the encounter table has a "cult" entry, the GM has to decide if the rolled cultist is a sect member). There are many principles that can govern the GM in making those decisions. But my contention is that none of them makes it like real life. A further point - related, but not the same: I think that, in practice, most of those principles make the gameworld far less varied and far more predictable than real life generally is. This comes out in Maxperson's post not far upthread: In real life if I go to the local tea house looking for members of the mafia, I may or may not find some there. If the mafia runs the tea house, the chances that I will find members there are high. If the mafia does not run the local tea house, then it's still possible that some member of the mafia likes tea and just happens to be there, but the odds are fairly slim that I will just happen to be there at the same time.On Friday I left some friends to head off and do my own thing. My own thing was a bust, so I went into a nearby library. I sat in there for about half-an-hour until my laptop battery went dead. Then, just as I was leaving, my friends were coming in so that I bumped into them at the entrance. This is a very big library on a very large university campus, so a minute either way for me or them and we would not have bumped into one another. Not to mention this was the first time I'd been in that library for over ten years, and the first time eve...

Thursday, 31st January, 2019

  • 08:06 AM - Hussar mentioned Maxperson in post Low Level Wizards Really Do Suck in 5E
    To be honest Maxperson, in, what is it now, five years of 5e? I've never seen anyone take warcaster. It's just never been an issue. Again, taking it at 4th level seems very, very pointless. Advantage on Concentration checks, when, presuming a 14 Con (not unreasonable for a wizard) we're talking about needing an 8 or better on a d20 if you get hit while concentrating on a spell seems rather gilding the lily. You're making the check twice as often as not, so, why bother burning a feat on it? Much better to bump Int, which makes all your spells more effective. I mean, in your example, the wizard would have to make, at most, 4 concentration checks per adventuring day. He's going to cast a LOT more spells than that. Mathematically, he should make 2 or 3 of those 4 checks without the feat. Taking the feat basically means he'll make one, maybe two extra Concentration checks. Seems a rather loss leader to me considering what else the character could be doing with feats. Higher level? Sure. That make...

Sunday, 27th January, 2019

  • 06:26 AM - LordEntrails mentioned Maxperson in post What is your way for doing Initiative?
    LordEntrails: Using software to automate the process would certainly make alternative initiative methods more appealing. Unfortunately for me, I don't use any software when I run my games, so we'd be stuck with stopping the combat at the end of each round, having everyone reroll, having me shuffle the initiative tents I hang on my DM screen around to reflect the new order, then commencing with the next round of combat. That's why I said: YEa, on paper it would such doing it our way. Of course I meant 'suck' and also Maxperson proved us both wrong with the way his group handles it. Initiative is one of the systems that is vastly overestimated in importance. The only time it matters is the first round. After that, the division of rounds is fairly arbitrary. That's why you only roll once. It depends on the players. I have one player who is a damn near genius. If we don't shuffle initiative and I don't do anything crazy with the NPCs and he can predict the other players actions then by the end of the first round he can pretty have the entire encounter resolved in his head. So, when I run cons and other players, static initiative is fine. But with my standard group, it pretty much needed. There is no right or wrong answer, just what works or doesn't work for any given group :)

Tuesday, 1st January, 2019

  • 09:26 AM - Harzel mentioned Maxperson in post Survivor Rods & Staves- STAFF OF THE MAGI WINS!
    ...t sideways here. First of all, for me the two following posts are sequential. Even if someone has me blocked, I don't see any way any series of votes could lead from the first to the second. Rod of Resurrection 11 Staff of Healing 14 Staff of Power 22 Staff of Striking 17 Staff of the Magi 22 Staff of the Woodlands 19 Rod of Resurrection 11-2=9 Healing has always been more useful than resurrection in my experience Staff of Healing 14 Staff of Power 24+1=25 My favorite since high school Staff of Striking 16 Staff of the Magi 18 Staff of the Woodlands 20 Nextly, a few posts later it looks like some very stale data got used. Rod of Resurrection 12 Rod of Rulership 5 Staff of Healing 20 Staff of Power 23 - 2 = 21 Staff of Striking 16 Staff of the Magi 18 Staff of the Woodlands 20 + 1 = 21 evening up the scores So, hoping that I am not wedging things even further, and so that you all can check my work, here is the result of applying the votes apparently intended, in sequence, to @Maxperson's post. @Maxperson: Rod of Resurrection 11 Staff of Healing 14 Staff of Power 22 Staff of Striking 17 Staff of the Magi 22 Staff of the Woodlands 19 @CleverNickName Rod of Resurrection 9 Staff of Healing 14 Staff of Power 23 Staff of Striking 17 Staff of the Magi 22 Staff of the Woodlands 19 @OB1 Rod of Resurrection 9 Staff of Healing 14 Staff of Power 24 Staff of Striking 17 Staff of the Magi 20 Staff of the Woodlands 19 @chrisrtld Rod of Resurrection 7 Staff of Healing 14 Staff of Power 24 Staff of Striking 17 Staff of the Magi 21 Staff of the Woodlands 19 @Ed Laprade Rod of Resurrection 7 Staff of Healing 15 Staff of Power 24 Staff of Striking 17 Staff of the Magi 21 Staff of the Woodlands 17 @Eltab Rod of Resurrection 7 Staff of Healing 15 Staff of Power 22 Staff of Striking 17 Staff of the Magi 21 Staff of the Woodlands 18 @Quartz Since you downvoted a contestant that had already been eliminated, I thought it best to just leave your votes out and suggest you just re...

Saturday, 29th December, 2018

  • 04:02 AM - 5ekyu mentioned Maxperson in post What is your campaign balance? Combat vs Social?
    I see what you're saying. That is one way to look at it. From my own perspective, I would amend that statement: The game has a stronger emphasis on combat, but the DMs can influence the play for their games. So without DM guidance or influence, a player looking just at the rules might assume that combat has the lion's share of the attention, and he would not be wrong. Rules are just rules. But the beauty of RPGs is the rules are just tools to be used as needed. Thus a campaign with heavy social interactions would make less use of the combat rules, which make up the majority of the game. That doesn't make it greater or better. It's just the way it is. DMs should inform their players what to expect as many will just assume combat will be in the cards regularly.The thing is this and I think Maxperson is inclined to agree with this... In play are there "solutions" and paths to achieve the goals and objectives (whether these problems or goals/objectives come from GM quests or PCs preferences - no matter) that rely on, require and/or benefit from explore, social and combat pillars or are these strongly biased to only feature one with the other two as fillers? That is a campaign defining "balance that is absolutely in the GM hands to most extent but driven by player choices as well and it is **not** really set by the rules or the page counts of rules in one book or another. The only case IMO for "combat pillar" import as system-defined top doggie would be a GM only giving xp for killing monsters by the rules and ignored all the other xp options - which is kind of within the rules but basically applying them rather myopically.
  • 03:44 AM - Hussar mentioned Maxperson in post What is your campaign balance? Combat vs Social?
    The trick is Maxperson, you don’t need any of that complexity in the combat rules. Lots of rpgs don’t have any of the rules for combat you’ve listed. The reason why dnd does have all these rules is because combat is quite clearly the most important pillar.

Friday, 28th December, 2018

  • 01:14 PM - Jacob Lewis mentioned Maxperson in post What is your campaign balance? Combat vs Social?
    @Maxperson You seem to come to a lot of wrong conclusions and assumptions from everything I write, so I'm not sure it is worth my time and effort continuously trying to correct you. I am not advocating one play style over another. I don't believe I would enjoy a purely combat-centric campaign. I much prefer roleplaying with like-minded players, but also enjoy some hack-n-slash fun with friends who enjoy that more. What I am advocating in this thread is for players to have their choice and not be criticized or shamed because the bulk of unthinking people who think the majority must be right. D&D has always been more focused on the combat and encounters, this edition is no exception. To its credit, it has increased some emphasis on the other pillars, which have always existed in every edition. But those areas have largely been left to individual groups to handle themselves. So if I, or anyone else, feels that combat options are more interesting or combat has more representations in a campaign, w...

Thursday, 20th December, 2018

  • 10:58 PM - Elfcrusher mentioned Maxperson in post No Magic Shops!
    ...s to the conversation and be able to respond to everyone in the thread if I desire. I totally get that and people should be able to block those that they don't want to see. I should not be blocked from seeing that person though, ESPECIALLY with all of the mechanical problems that this site has with regard to that feature. It's not just that they have forced me to block them I also cannot go into a thread that they have started to discuss with others. I cannot use the links to go to posts when people quote me or give exp. They don't work when someone who has blocked me is in the thread, so if I want to see who gave exp/laugh to a post, I have to slog through the entire thread manually. I can't use the button to go back to the post I just quoted. That breaks, too. And I don't think this would change if the person blocked could still see the posts of the person who blocked them. They would still not be having a back and forth that is disruptive. Thread necromancy! Maxperson, although I disagreed with you at the time that blocking == bullying in the general case, I'll acknowledge that it's a bit different when the blocker also started the thread, so that you can't continue to participate with others in the thread. I didn't quite understand that nuance when you wrote it the first time because it had never happened to me before. Until now. ("Achievement Unlocked!") It's especially ironic when it's the result of calling somebody out for bullying.

Saturday, 24th November, 2018

  • 10:39 PM - doctorbadwolf mentioned Maxperson in post Big Changes At White Wolf Following Controversy
    ...tler was the hero of his own story, to a pathological degree. The OSS created a psychological profile of him which concluded that saw himself as the protagonist of a Wagner epic, and based on that profile made several very accurate predictions of his behavior. Including his suicide -- which is something that people who "only care about what benefits them" by definition do not do. Hitler killed himself, and millions of other people before that, even when it did him personally no good at all. Why? To begin to understand that, you have to picture him as a youth sitting in an opera house and soaking up the apocalyptic romanticism of Twilight of the Gods. I would hope that you don’t think that no “villains” of the real world were/are apathetic to the notion of being good or bad, hero or villain. Plenty are motivated by power, petty revenge, or just simple greed. Whether Hitler specifically was motivated by X or Y or both wasn’t the topic of my comment about motivations. I agree with Maxperson on the idea that folks dehumanize servers wih any regularity.

Wednesday, 7th November, 2018

  • 10:08 AM - Sadras mentioned Maxperson in post What's the point of gold?
    @Maxperson, I think @Charlaquin's issue, and he may correct me where I'm misstating him, is that unless one incorporates the purchasing and management of castles, homesteads, ships, businesses and/or staff/crew the direct influence of gold is reduced to the acquisition of magical items (which I have to agree with him is hardly exciting), bribery (again mostly inconsequential), advice/services (not dynamic enough) and the purchasing of equipment (hardly relevant given its blandness). [Disclaimer: I have not gone through Xanathar's in depth] To Charlaquin the decision points the above spend necessitate are not exciting and meaningful enough. He believes it requires an active DM to stress wealth in the game that will encourage meaningful decisions. I kind of agree with him on this as I'm one of those DM's that had to work to make wealth matter. One of my campaigns was called Darokin: The Accounting, it doesn't get much more than that. :) Lifestyle tendencies, fine and masterwork items and interest...

Friday, 2nd November, 2018

  • 08:34 AM - Hussar mentioned Maxperson in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    I think I see where I've gone wrong here. People are phrasing things kinda from the other end of where I am. Just to repeat from last post: It's not about doing what you want. It's about not doing things that someone at the table doesn't want to do. It's about the table, as a group, putting forth the things that they don't want to do and then the group agreeing not to do those things. Now, that being said, I would say that there are differently levels of justification for things. I don't want X because I don't like X and I'm the DM so, what I say goes, is a pretty darn weak argument. If that's the best justification you can come up with, well, at that point, I'm of a mind that I'll just suck it up and let the player have their way because it means that the player will be more invested in the game. Which means that as a DM, I need to implicitly trust that the players are acting in good faith, same as they have to trust that I am too. No, Maxperson, it's not about power tripping. It's about DM's who are incapable of checking their ego at the door. Consciously deciding not to force their preferences on the players is the hallmark of a great DM, IMO. The ability of a DM to take what the players want and mold that into a campaign is what makes someone a great DM. Anyone can put on the Viking Hat and dictate to the group. That's easy. There's no challenge to the DM there. The DM sits perched comfortably in the middle of his or her comfort zone, secure in the knowledge that nothing can disturb the carefully crafted campaign. Consensus is messy as Hell. It's difficult. It's slow. It's never the easy way. But, it does give the absolute best results.


No results to display...

Sunday, 7th July, 2019

  • 05:03 AM - Ovinomancer quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    If my character is a sucker for a pretty face, I would ignore the wink and declare another action only if there were a valid reason for it. Perhaps I found out during the course of play that 6 of her last 7 husbands died mysteriously and the 7th was never found. If the DM doesn't have an idea on why I am not being influenced, then it's not out of line to question it that way. At that point I'd let him know the reason why it's not having the effect it would ordinarily have. So, not a flaw if it might hurt you.
  • 04:04 AM - hawkeyefan quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    If my character is a sucker for a pretty face, I would ignore the wink and declare another action only if there were a valid reason for it. Perhaps I found out during the course of play that 6 of her last 7 husbands died mysteriously and the 7th was never found. If the DM doesn't have an idea on why I am not being influenced, then it's not out of line to question it that way. At that point I'd let him know the reason why it's not having the effect it would ordinarily have. So would a valid reason never be "my character was able to overcome his urge to give in to the maiden"? I mean, that seems a more likely and potentially valid reason than the crazy example you've provided. If it's possible for the character to not give in, but it's entirely up to the player if they can do so, it seems a bit flawed.
  • 03:54 AM - hawkeyefan quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    Of course he can challenge it. That's what, "She winks at you." is. A challenge to that flaw. Now it's up to me to roleplay how my PC engages that challenge via his flaw. Neither. It's up to the player how to respond when it's introduced, though. That's what I meant by it's up to the player if it matters. I agree that they could have gone much further with this. However, as it currently stands, it has as much meaning as you give it. We often bring them up ourselves whenever we see moments that apply. If I'm playing a short tempered barbarian, I'm going to roleplay the short temper on a regular basis. We generally forget inspiration anyway, so these things are just roleplayed without any other reward than having fun roleplaying them. As a DM, though, I do give extra RP for that sort of thing, and even more when the appropriate moment is detrimental to the PC/Party, as it's harder to play up those flaws at those moments. I think Inspiration is forgotten by many groups, based o...
  • 03:51 AM - pemerton quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    With the wink forcing my PC to act a certain way, it removes every other way to roleplay and only offers up one opportunity, instead of many. It takes away opportunities. Unless you feel that roleplaying means you always get to decide exactly how your character acts at all times. But of so, then why bother with any mechanics at all? To resolve things that are in doubt.What's in doubt? That's not an a priori category. It's a function of genre conceits, table expectations, system design, probably other stuff too. A RPG could be designed where every time I get to decide whether or not the NPC influences me. Or not. It could be designed where every time I get to decide whether or not I dodge the bullets. Or not. Just as D&D has an armour class, and RQ has a parry/dodge roll, so a system could have a "harden my heart" roll - The Dying Earth uses a version of this; so does Marvel Heroic RP/Cortex+ Heroic. These design decisions go to the aesthetics of the play experience (eg a system ...
  • 03:44 AM - pemerton quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    This is just flat out wrong. There is no power inherent to a wink that allows the wink to override the PC. None. Nil. Nyet. Zero. Zilch. Nada. They are very different.I don't even know what this means. I'm talking about events in the fiction. In the fiction, there is no such thing as "overriding the PC". There is just one human affectig another. This is a real thing that happens in the real world all the time, so I have no trouble imagining a fantasy wold in which it happens. Galadriel melts Gimli's heart. Aragorn melts Eomer's heart. Frodo almost melts Gollum's heart. Etc. This is a recurrent them in classic fantasy stories.
  • 03:36 AM - Tony Vargas quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    For game purposes, it's up to me to decide whether or not my PC has an atypical emotional response. Only if the game gives you that option instead of providing a resolution system (or as part of it.) For example, there was a resolution mechanic for seduction - and quite a lot of other things that might play on emotions (3 of 9 stats were social, one of those was Manipulation), but you could also take a Merit, Blaise, that immunized you from a lot of them, even supernatural ones. Sure, but to me that extra functionality is functionally useless, Irrelevant. This would be an abuse of DM authority in a game like 5e No such thing, in a game like 5e: it simply has faith in the DM. It might mean you're a bad fit for that hypothetical DMs hypothetical campaign, which is totally legit.
  • 01:17 AM - hawkeyefan quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    As the player, I know how the PC will react to the wink. I think about the situation, the immediate history between the winker and my PC. I consider other factors like lack of sleep or other possible mitigating factors. And then I come up with how my PC will react, and that is in fact how he will react. If I think there are multiple valid ways that he could react, I will sometimes make a personal roll. If the DM just flat out decides that my PCs heart is warmed by the wink, he has overridden the PCs proper reaction, unless of course I have also determined that to be the proper reaction and would have roleplayed that anyway. The DM isn't in a position to know what the proper reaction for my PC is, so more often than not he will get it wrong. I said let’s say mechanics are involved, not that the GM just decides how the PC reacts. Maybe the maiden makes a Persuasion check or a Consort roll or a Diplomacy action....whatever mechanic may be relevant for the game. Let’s say the GM rolls well......
  • 01:03 AM - hawkeyefan quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    Sure, but if my PC is a sucker for a pretty face, then I've set that up in advance and let the DM and players know about it. That sort of character flaw is up to me to decide on, not the DM. And that goes for all of the other RPGs that I've played. If you’ve set it up in advance and let the DM know about it, then why can’t he challenge the character with that flaw? I mean, it’s literally a part of the 5E character sheet. Same as Strength and Armor Class and all the other things you decide about your character. Yet the DM can challenge those things (meaning put the character into situations that test those traits) and no one thinks anything of it. But list an actual flaw on the character sheet and then expect that to only be introduced by the player? Or that only the player decides if this weakness matters? It’s a missed opportunity on the part of 5E. Instead of doing something meaningful with the Traits/Ideals/Bonds/Flaws they tied it to Inspiration...the most ironically named game mec...
  • 01:00 AM - Tony Vargas quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    Frankly, it doesn't matter what the NPC fully represents. The only part that matters is what my PC can perceive. In this case a wink. Everything else unknown to me is irrelevant Your PC could hypothetically perceive more than the DMs description gets across to you. And there could be less perceptible, less readily articulated, factors that go into influencing his emotional response. I mean, we don't always understand the sources of our emotional responses, do we? unless it's magic, mind control or some other special power that could actually override what my PC is going to do. When there are conflicting vision of how a PC reacts, the player wins(unless playing a game where that doesn't happen). Unless the game in question gives final authority to the player of the PC, it'll go to a resolution system, or, in the absence thereof, to the more usual final arbiter: the GM. Not more functionality. Different functionality. More. Scope if fairly quantifiable. Whether a system i...

Saturday, 6th July, 2019

  • 11:14 PM - Tony Vargas quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    Of course not, but I'm the only one qualified to make that determination for my PC on a case-by-case basis.. The DM doesn't have the inside track to my PC the way that I do. OTOH, you may not fully apreciate what the NPC represents. When there are conflicting visions of, or other sources of uncertainty about, the fiction, complete/functional games provide mechanics to resolve them. D&D mostly does so for magic, and given it's history & place in the hobby, that prejudice has become pervasive. But, it's not absolute, and some games do try to deliver more functionality. For instance, storyteller notoriously introduced a dramatic system (resolution mechanic) for seduction. Hero Systems has a mind control power that needn't be supernatural in nature. FATE certainly goes there. Etc...
  • 10:42 PM - Ovinomancer quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    Me in direct response to you: "D&D has nothing to do with this. Here are at least a half dozen other RPGs that I've played that are the same way. You and Hawkeyfan: "So it's all D&D with you.'' C'mon guys, really? Yup. You're locked into a mindset that's best represented by D&D, even if you've played other games that support that same mindset (or, given some of the games on the list you presented, you've played those games and brought with you the D&D mindset and so didn't see a difference). I mean, you're defending taking authority away from the player so long as the mechanic used has the word "magic" associated with it. That's pretty locked in -- you can't even see that "magic" isn't doing any work there. I get it, you've played the game so long and had that be part of it that you've built up a set of rationalizations to excuse it from examination. It's just "magic," so of course it can take authority away from the player. And, because it's "magic," it's different from any ot...
  • 08:18 PM - hawkeyefan quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    This is just flat out wrong. There is no power inherent to a wink that allows the wink to override the PC. None. Nil. Nyet. Zero. Zilch. Nada. They are very different. What does “override the PC” mean? The PCs will? Their libido? The player’s desire to not face a specific kind of challenge? This is a genuine question. What is being “overridden”? Let’s assume some kind of mechanics are at play and it’s not a case of a GM dictating results, but let’s also assume it has nothing to do with magic in the fiction.
  • 08:08 PM - hawkeyefan quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    No it doesn't. Without it I have the opportunity to roleplay the wink as not affecting my PC or as melting his heart. I have two opportunities on how to roleplay(more than two really). With the wink forcing my PC to act a certain way, it removes every other way to roleplay and only offers up one opportunity, instead of many. It takes away opportunities. Unless you feel that roleplaying means you always get to decide exactly how your character acts at all times. But of so, then why bother with any mechanics at all?{/quote] To resolve things that are in doubt. Right. And sometimes, how people will behave can be in doubt. As for taking away options, I don’t think that’s really the case, but that can also be remedied by allowing degrees of success.
  • 08:04 PM - hawkeyefan quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    No, because charm is an accepted part of the game. I know going into the game that there are in-fiction mechanics such as charm, dominate, command, etc., to assert control over my PC. A wink is not one of those and shouldn't be. While a wink may not be one of those for a given game (D&D), it may be for others. Should or should it not be is another question. Why not? Haven’t we all known people who don’t always act in their best interests because there’s a person who can always get under their skin, or because they’re a sucker for a pretty face, or any other number of things? Sure, these things can be roleplayed without mechanical rules in place to promote them, but having such rules doesn’t deny roleplaying. It promotes it. I mean, take a character who is never swayed by anyone’s influence ever never unless there’s magic at play. Then take a character who may be influenced from time to time. Now tell me which character’s player will actually have to roleplay more often. I already sa...
  • 07:33 PM - Umbran quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    There is no power inherent to a wink that allows the wink to override the PC. None. Nil. Nyet. Zero. Zilch. Nada. They are very different. Do you think that human beings are under their own conscious control at all times? Were you under the impression that attraction to people is somehow governed by conscious will? There is plenty of power in the simplest of human interactions. If you really want to try to argue that, with someone who knows psychology, you probably lose. That, however, isn't really the point, so you shouldn't argue on that basis. There's a stronger argument: There are agreed upon areas of agency. This violates the agreement you have at your table. Period. Full stop. Done. This should not be a discussion about what forms of power are plausible. This should be about which person at the table has agency to do what, and when. This is about the social contract of play. Keep it there, and you can't lose the argument.
  • 07:05 PM - Satyrn quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    No it doesn't. Without it I have the opportunity to roleplay the wink as not affecting my PC or as melting his heart. I have two opportunities on how to roleplay(more than two really). With the wink forcing my PC to act a certain way, it removes every other way to roleplay and only offers up one opportunity, instead of many. It takes away opportunities. Unless you feel that roleplaying means you always get to decide exactly how your character acts at all times. But of so, then why bother with any mechanics at all? To resolve things that are in doubt. Aye. I do not want my DM telling me my PC is smitten by the maiden's wink. It's my character, my decision whether that's the case. Ideally the DM should tell me that's the maiden's goal for the wink so I can be better informed and choose to buy in to what the DM is selling. Also Aye: Playing D&D, the mechanics are there to resolve an action when the outcome is doubt. I might decide to ask the DM to roll some dice if I don't know how my cha...
  • 06:45 PM - Tony Vargas quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    This is just flat out wrong. There is no power inherent to a wink that allows the wink to override the PC. None. Nil. Nyet. Zero. Zilch. Nada. They are very different. The difference between subtle social queues overriding judgement & rational decision making and magic doing so, is that magic doesn't exist. We've all experienced doing things we knew were bad ideas at the time and later regretted bitterly, because we were manipulated into it, or psychologically vulnerable in some way. It's just part of being human. In fantasy magic does exist, can seize control over a mind- and is often overcome by more powerful forces, like courage, faith, or love. Why would a DM ever say “you lose 50 HP for no reason muhuhahahah!”? . I think the villain laugh is your answer. ;) Seriously though, hp loss can be used, arbitrarily, by the DM as a stick to shove a misbehaving player back in line, or punish inappropriate RP. It's crude code for "I'll throw you out of the game," but I've...
  • 05:15 PM - pemerton quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    In fiction is fine. Out of fiction is not fine. All you mentioned above are in fiction acts. Those are all fine.But having someone wink at you is also an infiction act. I don't understand what distiinction you think you're pointing to here. An in game reason that allows the DM to control my PC? Hardly. Absent some sort of mind control, I get to decide if the maiden's wink melts my heart. No, because charm is an accepted part of the game. I know going into the game that there are in-fiction mechanics such as charm, dominate, command, etc., to assert control over my PC. A wink is not one of those and shouldn't be.These are just bare assertions of preference. As Ovinomancer already noted. I already said that there are some games with out of fiction mechanics, that allows the DM to assert control over my PC via something a wink, and that I wouldn't want to play one of those.It's not "out of fiction". The wink occurs in the fiction. The melting of your PC's heart happens in the fi...
  • 04:18 PM - FrogReaver quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    No, because charm is an accepted part of the game. I know going into the game that there are in-fiction mechanics such as charm, dominate, command, etc., to assert control over my PC. A wink is not one of those and shouldn't be. I already said that there are some games with out of fiction mechanics, that allows the DM to assert control over my PC via something a wink, and that I wouldn't want to play one of those. I think what hawkeye is trying to ask is what for you is the difference between an in fiction charm person spell exerting control over your PC and an in fiction wink exerting control over your PC. I know what my answer is to that (magic can do anything it says it does, normal person to person interactions don't exert explicit control over a person) I think that's the point he's driving on about (and the answer should be so obvious he didn't even need to ask but apparently isn't so)
  • 03:59 PM - hawkeyefan quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    Because it's unnecessary. I am fully capable of deciding if my PC gets angry at something he wouldn't normally get angry at or if uncontrolled lust strikes him. I don't need a DM to force that on me. Do you view an attack from an opponent that does damage to your PC as something the “DM forces on you”? Or the aforementioned Charm spell....you fail the save, is the DM forcing the charm effect on you? If there are mechanics in place, then it’s not a case of the DM forcing anything. This is my point.


Maxperson's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites