View Profile: Maxperson - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Today, 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...
    96 replies | 2120 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Today, 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
    212 replies | 4848 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Today, 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.
    96 replies | 2120 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Today, 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...
    80 replies | 5041 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Today, 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:
    212 replies | 4848 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Today, 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
    212 replies | 4848 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Today, 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.
    154 replies | 3513 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Today, 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. ...
    96 replies | 2120 view(s)
    0 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Yesterday, 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
    212 replies | 4848 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:24 PM
    This.
    154 replies | 3513 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 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.
    96 replies | 2120 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 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...
    96 replies | 2120 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 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
    212 replies | 4848 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 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 | 826 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 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!"
    154 replies | 3513 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 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.
    154 replies | 3513 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 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.
    154 replies | 3513 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 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.
    154 replies | 3513 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 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 | 826 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:51 AM
    I picture the bite working as a vehicle for the necrotic damage. How do you picture it working?
    154 replies | 3513 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Yesterday, 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...
    154 replies | 3513 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
    212 replies | 4848 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
    212 replies | 4848 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...
    154 replies | 3513 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 | 826 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...
    154 replies | 3513 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....
    154 replies | 3513 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...
    154 replies | 3513 view(s)
    2 XP
  • OB1's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th July, 2019, 06:16 PM
    Lol. That’s what I get for posting before coffee!
    212 replies | 4848 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.
    154 replies | 3513 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
    212 replies | 4848 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.
    154 replies | 3513 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 | 826 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.
    150 replies | 5595 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
    212 replies | 4848 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.
    154 replies | 3513 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.
    154 replies | 3513 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...
    154 replies | 3513 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
    212 replies | 4848 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.
    150 replies | 5595 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
    212 replies | 4848 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...
    154 replies | 3513 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.
    154 replies | 3513 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...
    154 replies | 3513 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.
    154 replies | 3513 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...
    688 replies | 18938 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.
    688 replies | 18938 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 06:34 PM
    That seems reasonable, too.
    14 replies | 559 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 06:32 PM
    That seems very reasonable to me.
    14 replies | 559 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.
    154 replies | 3513 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...
    688 replies | 18938 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...
    688 replies | 18938 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
    212 replies | 4848 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...
    688 replies | 18938 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,...
    688 replies | 18938 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...
    688 replies | 18938 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...
    688 replies | 18938 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.
    688 replies | 18938 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...
    688 replies | 18938 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...
    688 replies | 18938 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 | 840 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
    212 replies | 4848 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.
    688 replies | 18938 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...
    688 replies | 18938 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.
    688 replies | 18938 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. ...
    688 replies | 18938 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.
    688 replies | 18938 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 | 3127 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 | 5855 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 | 5855 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Maxperson's Avatar
    Thursday, 11th July, 2019, 01:24 PM
    :eek: You're right.
    224 replies | 5855 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 | 5855 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 | 5855 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 | 5855 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 | 5855 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
    212 replies | 4848 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...
    688 replies | 18938 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?
    688 replies | 18938 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...
    688 replies | 18938 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
    688 replies | 18938 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. ;)
    232 replies | 9980 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.
    212 replies | 4848 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
    212 replies | 4848 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.
    688 replies | 18938 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...
    688 replies | 18938 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...
    688 replies | 18938 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.
    688 replies | 18938 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...
    688 replies | 18938 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...
    688 replies | 18938 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...
    688 replies | 18938 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
9,394
Posts Per Day
1.73
Last Post
2e, the most lethal edition? Today 09:19 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
0
General Information
Last Activity
Today 09:24 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

Saturday, 22nd June, 2019


Friday, 21st June, 2019


Thursday, 20th June, 2019




Monday, 29th October, 2018

  • 10:13 AM - pemerton mentioned Maxperson in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    ... DM might just say that the door opens and describe what lies beyond. But the door might be locked, the floor might hide a deadly trap, or some other circumstance might make it challenging for an adventurer to complete a task. In those cases, the DM decides what happens, often relying on the roll of a die to determine the results of an action. 3. The DM narrates the results of the adventurers’ actions. Describing the results often leads to another decision point, which brings the flow of the game right back to step 1. The description of (3) makes it clear that the outcomes of action resolution feed back into (1). In other words, the outcomes of action resolution are one crucial source of shared fiction. Step (2) is therefore the crux of it - it is the presence of step (2) that distinguishes the game as an RPG from (say) the GM just telling a story about some stuff that happens to some people. It's interesting to note that the full statement of Step 2 - including the bits that Maxperson left out upthread - includes the missing steps I identified, of (i) working out what actions the adventurers take, and (ii) working out what the results of those actions are. We can see this in the examples of opening the east door and perhaps having to deal with locks and traps. Moreover, and again quite consistent with what I posted earlier, nothing in the description of step (2), nor in the step (3) phrase the GM narrates the results of the adventurers' actions, states or even implies that the GM just makes stuff up about what happens to the PCs when their players decide that they want to do something. Likewise if we turn to the desciption of Ability Checks on p 58: The DM calls for an ability check when a character or monster attempts an action (other than an attack) that has a chance of failure. When the outcome is uncertain, the dice determine the results. For every ability check, the DM decides which of the six abilities is relevant to the task at hand and the diffi...
  • 03:21 AM - Hussar mentioned Maxperson in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    ... Weapon Fighting Style fighter potentially REROLLS damage AFTER the roll. No magic involved whatsoever. Rolled a 1 on your damage with your greatsword? No problem, reroll and get a 10. Whoohoo, your minimum damage attack now deals maximum damage. But, apparently that's time travel? Someone brings up an idea and adds an example to clarify - spend the next several pages taking the example to extremes that were obviously not intended. So, now backgrounding a bear companion results in the DM being forced to allow T-Rex's in every town. :uhoh: Someone suggests that maybe not forcing players to do stuff they don't want? - spend several pages claiming that DM will now be forced to run games they hate. On and on and on. It would be nice if there was just a smidgeon less bad faith arguing going on here, so we could actually have a discussion without screwing around page after page correcting faulty assumptions and blindingly stupid interpretations. -------- Oh, and btw, Maxperson, since someone else has also corrected you on your English usage, it's no longer an appeal to authority since multiple sources have been stated. I didn't bother, because, well, I have been teaching English for about 20 years and feel no real need to provide my bona fides. A more reasonable response on your part would be a reexamination of where you went wrong in your use of the language, rather than, again, ignoring the point, and simply attacking me. But, hey, that's been pretty much par for the course for this entire thread.
  • 12:15 AM - pemerton mentioned Maxperson in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    ...ury? Other than a book (= the dreaded "authority"!) But the key part is A2A can be reasonable- if the source is credible and supported by evidence.An argument that can be reasonable is not a logical fallacy. It's not even an informal fallacy. As Wikipedia notes, it's defeasible. Given that basically every argument anyone ever runs outside of mathematics is defeasible, that's not a very telling blow against it. As far as Hussar's claim is concerned, two things: (1) Either Hussar's an English teacher, or has been working hard to maintain the online facade of being an English teacher for over a decade. Given that there's little reason for someone to do the latter, and given that his reports about English teaching and challengs of cross-cultural education have always seemed coherent enough to me, I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt. (2) I'm not an English teacher - I'm an academic lawyer and philosopher - and I know that Hussar is 100% correct when he says that Maxperson is 100% wrong to say that " 'On a hit, roll damage' is equal to 'On a miss, don't roll damage.' It's just the way language works." The instruction that, on a hit, one must roll damage, doesn't forbid anyone from rolling damage on a miss. It probably implies that "On a miss, you don't need to roll damage" but the absence of an obligation isn't the same thing as being forbidden - the absence of an obligation is consistent with a permission. Which was Hriston's point. Of course if there is not hit, and damage is rolled, no hit point reduction will take place. But that's a different thing. Hriston's point is that the combat rules don't forbid rolling to hit and damage together (and the absence of doubt about this is simply reinforced by the fact that the DMG advises rolling them together!). Why would a fallacy not be treated as a fallacy? <snip> The fallacy would be if you presented as your only proof that France's capitol is Paris, that an authority said so. If you ...

Sunday, 28th October, 2018

  • 11:47 AM - pemerton mentioned Maxperson in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    Maxperson, you might want to reread my post noting that (i) and (ii) refer to some steps that your (1) to (3) left out, not to your (1) and (2). Working out what actions the adventurers take happens before step 2. The player works those out and then describes them to the DM. <snip.> Working out the results of those actions just means the details, like is the action automatic fail/succeed, or does it require a roll. That doesn't mean the action has occurred in the fiction, but instead is just informative to the DM and allows the DM to narrate the results. <snip> I didn't say the DM makes up whatever he wants, though he is within his power to do so, he probably will use the mechanics provided to figure it out. It doesn't matter at all to my argument, though. The action doesn't actually happen within the fiction until the DM narrates it during step 3.I find this a bit hard to follow, because you say that the players work some stuff out but that nothing changes in the fiction unt...
  • 01:07 AM - Hussar mentioned Maxperson in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    ...) is merely a subset of that argument. Lan-"shields up!"-efan Sorry, but, no. That's not a mistake. 5e is chock-a-block with these sorts of mechanics. There's tons of them. Virtually every class has at least one of them. Many races also have them. You mentioned the similarities to Magic The Gathering, and, well, that's pretty apt. There's a shopping list of interrupt mechanics that let you "go back in time" by your definition. IOW, this is a core element of play, not a mistake. I may not need to say that, but it does in fact say it. "On a hit, roll damage" is equal to "On a miss, don't roll damage." It's just the way language works. As an English teacher, I can categorically say that you are wrong here. No, language most certainly doesn't work that way. But, I can see why you would go down this road. This entire thread has been spent wasting time trying to teach the English language to you. I cannot see it as anything other than very bad faith on your part Maxperson.

Friday, 26th October, 2018

  • 02:05 PM - pemerton mentioned Maxperson in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    The ideal is not to have the foreknowledge of damage as that meta is likely to influence ones decision. By providing that information upfront you reduce the importance of the decision and by extension the fun IMO. The unknown variable provides a risk factor... If someone casts a Sleep spell on you and rolled the sleep damage upfront, you would know if you would be affected and then it would be obvious if you should Counterspell or not. If the sleep damage is rolled only after you declined to Counterspell it makes for a more exciting resolution.I agree that blind declaration is sometimes more exciting. If less tactical. But that's not the argument that Lanefan and Maxperson were running. They were talking about "time travelling", not what makes for more or less fun at the table.

Thursday, 25th October, 2018

  • 06:18 AM - pemerton mentioned Maxperson in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    For reasons already noted in this thread, that is a poor recommendation on the part of the DMG authors. To be pickier about it: there's nothing wrong with rolling both dice at the same time as long as the results are announced separately by the roller, with time between for interrupts. "Roll 18 for 6 damage!" is poor, as any reaction is going to force some sort of retcon. (part of this for me is that AFAIC once the damage has been announced at the table it's also occurred in the fiction, meaning it's now too late for reactions)This goes back to my comment about Maxperson's account of the 5e system. If you think that declaring the result of a damage roll ipso facto establishes some fiction; or that declaring a reduction to zero hp as unconsciousness rather than death is "time travelling"; then you're clearly interpreting the mechanics differently from how the 5e authors intended their mechanics to be interpreted. At which point I'm not that inclined to accept your readings of the system as reliable ones.

Wednesday, 24th October, 2018

  • 11:27 AM - Hussar mentioned Maxperson in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    To be fair, most of the reaction type powers in 5e specify that you use the reaction power before damage is rolled. Maxperson is right on this one.
  • 09:28 AM - pemerton mentioned Maxperson in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    Really @pemerton :erm: If you have 10 hit points and you know the damage will floor you then you'd raise a shield. If you have 10 hit points and you know the damage will not floor you and your ally cleric is going next who is going to heal you, then you might save your reaction (counterspell) for the evil mage whose turn is after your cleric friend. Maxperson's "time travel" argument relies on a distinction between rolling to hit and rolling the damage. I'm curious what he says if there is no damage roll. And more generally, I find it interesting that Maxperson is very quick to tell us how the 5e rules should be understood (on this thread vis-a-vis clerics and warlocks; on another current thread vis-a-vis initiative), and yet is revising/ reinterpreting these various rules because they don't fit with his picture of how the game works. That's not necessarily a fault in his picture, but it does strongly suggest that it's not a very good picture of 5e! (If there are all these features that it can't handle.)
  • 09:24 AM - Sadras mentioned Maxperson in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    What if it's an attack that does a static amount of damage? (Eg a blowgun) Really @pemerton :erm: If you have 10 hit points and you know the damage will floor you then you'd raise a shield. If you have 10 hit points and you know the damage will not floor you and your ally cleric is going next who is going to heal you, then you might save your reaction (counterspell) for the evil mage whose turn is after your cleric friend.
  • 06:39 AM - Hussar mentioned Maxperson in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    Just to put this in perspective: If playing "Dude, where's my dinosaur" is among the top ten most interesting things that happened in your last session with 17th level 3e characters, I'm going to go way out on a limb here and humbly opine that perhaps, just maybe, there is a chance that your game isn't as much fun as you think it is. :D ---------- As far as being against DM authority Maxperson, I'd say that's a fair cop actually. I'm very much not a "I'm in the big daddy chair, so you gotta do what I say" sort of DM. We left those kinds of games behind a long time ago, and, frankly, good riddance. Like I said, when everyone at the table is considered equally responsible for the table having a good time, games go a whole lot better. Consensus leads to much better games, IMO, than majority rules.

Monday, 22nd October, 2018

  • 01:10 PM - pemerton mentioned Maxperson in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    Flaw... "well acquainted with" and "did it myself" are not the same thing.Did you miss the bit where it says "meting it out". That = "doing it themselves". Maxperson didn't comment on that either, but just engaged in some special pleading to distinguish this stuff from clerics.

Sunday, 21st October, 2018

  • 11:52 PM - Hussar mentioned Maxperson in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    Folks, you are not going to get anywhere with this discussion with Maxperson. Not because anyone is being unreasonable, but, because you are fundamentally not speaking the same language. Maxperson sees the rulebooks through the lens of 3e where anything that is not specifically stated is verboten. The rules are prescriptive, not descriptive. Thus, all clerics must be this, all barbarians must be that, and all urchins must be something else. Now, to be honest, I disagree with this approach. 5e is pretty clearly not prescriptive, but, for anyone who cut their teeth on 3e I can totally see where they are coming from. 3e didn't work if you started trying to extrapolate from the rules. The whole King of RAW thing is very much a 3e approach to RPG's. And 5e has enough 3e DNA in there to actually work if you approach the game this way. It's not the way I personally would approach the game, but, it does work. Running at this wall isn't going to get you anywhere. The baselines are just too different. And: For you, perhaps, but a rule - any rule ...
  • 03:56 AM - Hussar mentioned Maxperson in post Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
    Well, from what I understand, Maxperson is insisting that as per RAW, a contest in 5e D&D can only be between two actors. That any time you have more or less than 2 actors, it cannot be a contest. It requires an extremely narrow interpretation of what's written there, but, from what I understand, that's the issue.

Friday, 19th October, 2018

  • 09:38 AM - Sadras mentioned Maxperson in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    I don't know much about Eberron, but you're wrong here about 4e. Gods in 4e are as tangible as you want them to be. In my 4e game, the PCs have killed two and visited the burial place of a third. The default cosmology of 4e makes the god's more active, and more "tangible", than any other D&D setting I know of. (And I'm including FR in this judgement.) Maxperson I was also wondering about your claim about 4e deities being distant. Do you make this distant claim because many of their stats have not been published, as opposed to the previous editions?
  • 09:12 AM - Aldarc mentioned Maxperson in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    ...high-level clerics, and b) give halfway detailed answers when hit with a Commune. I think the same is supposed to be the case in 2e but I'm not sure. And in at least one major setting (FR - in the 1e-2e-3e versions anyway; haven't got anything newer) the deities* are supposed to be close and tangible enough to manifest in the prime material now and then. I think, but am not sure, the same is in theory true in Greyhawk. * - or their avatars, pretty much the same as the deity itself only in recognizable physical form So saying Eberron, which came out in the 3.5 era, is an exception is true in one regard: it's an exception based on comparisons to what went before it and concurrently with it. 4e, and maybe 5e, have since made Eberron look like less of an exception than it was to begin with.What this says is that the cleric class changed between editions, which is hardly that meaningful or novel of an assertion. But that does not mean that Eberron changed the cleric class. But Maxperson is welcome to demonstrate where and how Eberron changes the rules of the cleric class.

Thursday, 18th October, 2018

  • 05:29 PM - Hriston mentioned Maxperson in post Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
    Ye gods, I'm having flashbacks to the rules arguments I sat through back when I was serious about M:tG...declaration of attack, resolution of attack, combat phase...next thing you'll both be on about is who's the active player and what order the reactions can happen in. Lan-"I'm not entirely sure this represents 5e in the way the designers had in mind"-efan I think the question is whether declaring an attack or some other action that triggers resort to the combat rules is constitutive of fiction in which the participants are in opposition to one another. I clearly think it is, as are many other sorts of action declarations such as trying to determine the true intentions of an NPC that's lying to you or trying to notice a hidden threat. Maxperson seems to think it isn't, due to his treatment of such action declarations as basically provisional until after initiative has been rolled. My problem with that is if there's no in-fiction conflict then why are combat rules like initiative being invoked?
  • 01:57 PM - Sadras mentioned Maxperson in post Survivor Halloween 2018 5e Undead- Wraith WINS!
    DOWN VOTES ARE 3 Ghoul 5 Skeleton 12 Wight 13 Wraith 22 Correcting for @Tallifer's and @Maxperson's posts Not accounted for Wraith's -3 and incorrectly dropped Wight by 1 (from 13 to 12) respectively.

Wednesday, 17th October, 2018

  • 10:53 AM - pemerton mentioned Maxperson in post Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
    ...s: If a player (for a PC) or the GM (for a NPC) declares a combat-ish action (attacking with a weapon, fireballing, etc) then (i) the combat rules are activated, and (ii) two sides (in the typical case, at least) are in opposition in respect of the just-commenced battle. The fact of (i) refers us to the combat rules, which say to do various stuff at the start of combat including determining initiative for each participant. The fact of (ii) helps us understand how and why determining initiative is a type of stat-check contest: we have these opposed entities, each trying (literally) to get and retain the initiative in the battle that has just commenced, and so we use DEX for this (because it's the quickness/reaction time stat) and we compare results to work out who wins (because that's how contests work); and, because there are (often) more than two participants, we rank the non-winners by result (which is a logical extrapolation from the simple case of only two opponents). Maxperson answers no to both questions, along the following lines: A contest depends upon opposition. (He also has views about direct opposition, but I think they can be set aside for economy.) Combat involves opposition; but combat doesn't commence until one entity attacks another; and an attack is not commenced/made until an attack action is declared; and an attack action cannot be declared until a character's turn comes up; and no one's turn can come up until an initiative order is established; and establishing such an order depends upon making initiative checks; hence initiative checks happen prior to combat commencing and prior to any opposition arising; hence initiative checks are not a stat-check contest, even though they might superficially look like it. An apparent consequence of Maxperson's approach is that the GM has to call for initiative checks based on some sort of intuition, or an apprehension of the possibility that an attack might be declared once the initiative sequence ...
  • 10:40 AM - pemerton mentioned Maxperson in post Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
    that's more than just thinking about attacking. That's an action declaration to attack. At that point in the fiction the character is attacking the merchant. Initiative is then rolled at the table as part of resolving that action declaration.I think Maxperson is from the school of thought that player action declarations don't in themselves change the fiction until they're mediated through whatever resolution process the GM calls for. As you note, this creates "mind reading" puzzles in some contexts, and Maxperson's response is that something happened in the fiction ("A body language shift and/or he's reaching for his sword") which is physical enough to perceptibly manifest an intention but muted enough to not violate the basic principle of this school of thought. The strongest proponent of this school of thought on these boards is Saelorn (I can't mention him because he has me blocked), but it's one I've seen advocated by other posters quite frequently. It is typically connected to other views about the roles of GM vs players in establishing the content of the shared fiction. In its strongest form, a player action declaration is best understood as a suggestion to the GM that the GM incorporate the occurrence of a certain event into the s...


No results to display...

Tuesday, 2nd July, 2019

  • 11:05 PM - Wightbred quoted 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. i absolutely agree, which is why I used the term GM-full (with a typo!), as in the table is full of GMs. I did also use GM-less as it was the term used by the poster I was responding to. Contrasting just with GM-full is probably a simplification of a spectrum, from the GM is a god whose word is unquestionable and is solely responsible for all fun at one end, through to the GM is running the game but is open to ideas and discussion, to AW MCing, and finally to equally shared responsibility for authoring at the other end. I doubt many groups are playing at the extremes of this spectrum most of the time. I forgot to mention a bunch of...
  • 06:33 PM - GrahamWills quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    So what I'm not understanding is if, "I bring a smile to the Queen's lips by playing a tune" would be challenged and possibly fail, why is it phrased that way at all. Why wouldn't the player just say, ""I try to bring a smile to the Queen's lips by playing a tune?" In both cases the intent is the same and there is going to be a challenge that could fail, but only in the latter does the phrase not contradict one of the possible outcomes. Because I have never played in any roleplaying game, ever, where the GM has not had final say. Yes, I could play D&D and say "I try and swing my sword at the orc" or "I try and walk across the room", or "so long as it makes sense to the GM, I'll drink the ale in front of me" but it's just a waste of words. Everything my character does is subject to challenge from the GM or other players, always. So the "I try to" is just straight assumed. Everything can fail. I have one player who very much likes to preflight things; they will say "my intention is to try and ...
  • 04:31 PM - Sacrosanct quoted Maxperson in post Why Rules Lawyering Is a Negative Term
    As a non-rules lawyer, I won't grind the game to a halt and argue like that. It's not fair to the DM or players. If the DM won't quickly see the light, I will stop arguing the incorrect ruling and have a discussion about it after the game. Huh. Judging by the Druid armor thread, this post strikes me as a bit odd because it describes the opposite of what you are doing in that thread.
  • 02:15 PM - Aldarc quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    I was right then, too. ;)Reads Maxperson's post: /disarm trap and continues with thread.
  • 01:45 PM - Aldarc quoted 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

  • 10:19 PM - GrahamWills quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    In a game, I don't get to declare that I am going to pull out my sword, threaten the prince, have him concede half of his lands to me, go farm those lands, harvest the crops, and then sell them all as a single action. It seems to me like this discussion is based on a certain assumption of scale; people saying "this seems like a single action" or "those are two actions" -- these depend heavily on the scale of the game. I have been in games where the above would be a fine description of an action; as an example, I was running DramaSystem and a player declared "I take control of the army, march to the coast, make a speech to my warriors before battle, kill the Black Knight in one-on-one combat and march home to a feast in my honor". That was a fine declaration and everyone was OK with it. If the same player had said "I bring a smile to the Queen's lips by playing a tune" then that would have been challenged and would need an entire scene to resolve. This is because DramaSystem is all about relat...
  • 03:50 PM - pemerton quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    In a game, I don't get to declare that I am going to pull out my sword, threaten the prince, have him concede half of his lands to me, go farm those lands, harvest the crops, and then sell them all as a single action.That sounds like it may be several actions eg that are separate in time and space. But (eg) threatening the prince and having him concede lands sounds like a single action, again perhaps falling under multiple descriptions. Whether or not one can do some or all of these things via a single episode of resolution in the play of a RPG would depend on the system.
  • 03:47 PM - Sacrosanct quoted Maxperson in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    What basis? Taboo? That was only brought up in the Sage Advice. It's not in the 1e PHB, 2e PHB, 3e PHB or 5e PHB. There is no mention of why it exists other than the part in 1e and 3e that say that it messes up their magical abilities. 4e I don't know about. If it's as the 1e and 3e PHB say it is and the only reason for not being able to wear metal armor is loss of magical abilities, nothing stop a PC from wearing it anyway. If it's as the 5e Sage Advice says and it's just a taboo like being kosher, then nothing stops a PC druid from wearing it anyway. It's no different than paladin and monk taboos, and there is no rules basis for a druid being more unable to wear metal armor if the PC is willing to put it on, than a paladin or monk. He cited sage advice, and then proceeded to say no rhyme or reason. His own citation provided the reason, he’s just choosing to ignore anything not convenient to him. Just like you’re doing now. I have no time to debate with people who aren’t ...
  • 03:44 PM - Celebrim quoted Maxperson in post Why Rules Lawyering Is a Negative Term
    Exploiting rules and loopholes makes you a power gamer. Optimizing is just picking the best option, not exploiting the game. I'm not going to quibble with that. Optimizer and Power Gamer are closely related terms, synonyms or near synonyms, with potentially negative connotations. Power Gamer generally just means something like, "A player focused on making his character as powerful as possible.", which pretty much is what Optimizer means. So basically, we'd be arguing over which slang term carries the most negative connotation. If you think Power Gamer is the more negative, OK, let's go with that. So long as I'm understood, I don't care what words we use.
  • 03:09 PM - Ovinomancer quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    Eh, no. That's not the same thing at all. This is not the case where the winker is committing several micro-actions that are all connected to form one single larger action. He is engaging in the action of winking. And then after that action(and all of its micro-actions) concludes, there is the result of that action, the softening of her heart. The act of winking concludes before there is a softening of the heart. In a game, I don't get to declare that I am going to pull out my sword, threaten the prince, have him concede half of his lands to me, go farm those lands, harvest the crops, and then sell them all as a single action. Is there, maybe, a middle ground between 'I pull my sword" and the entirely of what you posit? Could, maybe, discussion happen about things in that middle ground? In other words, no, you can't do the bottom in any game, but that's because you're not engaging the fiction of the scene or the genre of the game and are, in fact, being a jerk. Can we please dispen...
  • 02:09 PM - Paul Farquhar quoted Maxperson in post Druid Wild Shape and Banishment questions
    I'd think a brain would be necessary in order to keep the druid's intelligence and wisdom. But now that I'm perfectly sure I have none, Why, I do it again and again.
  • 08:52 AM - pemerton quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    Only one of those is a description of an action. The second is a description of both an action and the result of that action. The action is a wink, the result is the softening of the heart.Well, this goes back to the quote from Donald Davidson in the OP: A classic article on the analysis of actions (Donald Davidson, "Actions, Reasons, and Causes" (1963)) gives the following example: I flip the switch, turn on the light, and illuminate the room. Unbeknownst to me I also alert a prowler to the fact that I am home. Here I need not have done four things, but only one, of which four descriptions have been given. If the PC winks at the maiden and softens her heart the PC hasn't done two things (wink, and as a separate thing soften her heart) - that way lies madness because it will quickly lead to near-endless multiplication of the number of events that have occurred (eg you'll have each movement of an eyelash through each point of space as a separate and distinct thing that the PC did). ...
  • 06:46 AM - Hussar quoted Maxperson in post Why Rules Lawyering Is a Negative Term
    Since I know you wouldn't be attacking me personally here, I have to assume that for some reason you find being fair and impartial to be a horrifying thought. That seems really odd to me. Oh no. That was 100% personal based on the rules interpretations you’ve tried to argue in the past.
  • 05:36 AM - Ovinomancer quoted Maxperson in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    Only one of those is a description of an action. The second is a description of both an action and the result of that action. The action is a wink, the result is the softening of the heart. Yes, and the topic is about who gets to choose the outcome -- the GM or the player.
  • 03:05 AM - lingual quoted Maxperson in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    Literally nobody has said that, though. We're just saying exceptions can be made if there are in game reasons for an exception to be made, not that we are trying to stick our druids into metal armor to use on a regular basis. No. What "you" (plural) are saying is that it's perfectly acceptable to have CE druid riding around on motorbikes with flame throwers burning Bambi and Thumper because there are no explicit rules against that. Any DM who punishes that type of activity is a tyrant on a railroad.
  • 03:04 AM - Oofta quoted Maxperson in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    Literally nobody has said that, though. We're just saying exceptions can be made if there are in game reasons for an exception to be made, not that we are trying to stick our druids into metal armor to use on a regular basis. Seriously? There have been dozens of posts about how the DM can't dictate what the PC thinks, walls of text of how it's "just a taboo" and that people ignore taboos all the time. In any case, in all my years of playing I've never seen a scenario where a druid would be forced to put on metal armor no matter how many hypothetical castles we're trying to infiltrate. If a DM puts your druid into a situation where they have to put on metal armor, the DM is being a ****. But I'm not going to argue about this any more, have a good one.
  • 02:11 AM - Sword of Spirit quoted Maxperson in post Why Rules Lawyering Is a Negative Term
    As a DM I don't mind someone saying, "Wait, he had an arrow in his leg. How did he stealth?" As a DM, I'm tracking so many things that sometimes I forget the arrow and a reminder is good. If I respond, "I'm aware." and they keep continuing, that's when the line has been crossed. Sometimes the goblin is wearing Boots of Stealth Anyway. There is no rule in 5e that prevents stealth when legs are punctured by arrows. ;-)
  • 01:44 AM - Hussar quoted Maxperson in post Why Rules Lawyering Is a Negative Term
    For many years I held a similar position. I had a reputation for coming up with the right rule, even if it was good for the DM and bad for the players. Eventually, the DM recognizing that I was being fair and impartial with what I came up with, flat out assigned me the role of "rules lawyer" for the group. Whenever a situation came up that he wasn't sure about, he'd call on me to get the answer while he moved on to something else. This is a truly horrifying thought.

Sunday, 30th June, 2019

  • 04:05 PM - Oofta quoted Maxperson in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    A different shade of blue! We have a schism in the faith! Well it is just obvious that they're a member of the ORTHODOX UPPERCASE BLUE SECT
  • 03:53 PM - Oofta quoted Maxperson in post Why Rules Lawyering Is a Negative Term
    I'm not sure that's the best example. The DM is free to invent any abilities they want for a monster, so I'd never challenge a DM on that basis. I won't challenge a DM just because I disagree with a ruling, but I might if I consider that the ruling is unfair and is hurting the fun at the table. I don't try to twist the rules, but I will make the DM aware of the rules and even argue on the behalf of other players. If a rules call is ruining the fun at the table already, then IMO there's not much harm in taking the time to hash out the situation. But that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about goblins using their bonus action, orcs getting to close in on enemies, a phase spider phasing in. Or maybe I thought it would be more cinematic to have the PCs see the bad guy slip through a door just ahead of them only to have the challenge of "How did he do that? Did he have a readied action? If he did, he can't lock the door behind him!" In reality, the bad guy had plenty of movement and ...


Maxperson's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites