A Merc's Life [OOC 01]

[Scott DeWar]

*siiiigh* I so hate having a weapon that I have plans for and something like this happens and screws every thing all to hell. That kind of happend in my table top game too. It stinks in my personal humble opinion.

I forgot to ask:

if the pugnatious pugwumpi is cavorting about and then moved to attack, then does that mean he is moving about where the caltrops are?

and if so, should there be some rolling done?

 

[Maidhc O Casain]

The pugnacious pugwampi never actually moved to attack - his covorting took place w/in a very small space (being Tiny, he doesn't even threaten his own square), and Aodhán actually moved to him. He's now pinned to a cactus and quite thoroughly dead, so the only covorting he's doing now is the subtle movement of his limbs in the cool desert breeze.

 

[Leif]

Yeah, DeWar, you really got a raw deal there! I hate that for ya. As much as I truly love giving you nine kinds of hell, I hate to see a humongous crap sandwich like this one force-fed to an ally!

 

[Maidhc O Casain]

It does indeed suck. Not as bad as some other things that could have happened, and not nearly as bad as what you did to the poor Pugwampi in the end, but it's not an easy thing to swallow, I know.

 

[Scott DeWar]

*shrug*
I know it is only a game, but I still hate losing nice equipment. Now if it had been his bonded item, then there would be all kinds of verbal response to that. and at least the spell he cast was a cantrip, so no loss of spell there either.

 

[Maidhc O Casain]

*shrug*
I know it is only a game, but I still hate losing nice equipment. Now if it had been his bonded item, then there would be all kinds of verbal response to that. and at least the spell he cast was a cantrip, so no loss of spell there either.

I actually thought about this, and decided that since you didn't specifically state that he was using his wand to cast the Caltrops cantrip the Pugwampi would feel more threatened by the axe.

I have lots of thoughts about the significance of different forms of 'damage' to PCs in RPGs - I actually thought I'd posted many of them a few minutes ago but it appears that my diatribe is lost somewhere in the ether (it never appeared after I submitted it). For those interested, here's the gist of it:

[sblock=Mowgli's Rambling Random Thoughts On RPGs (NOT required reading - those uninterested should just skip this)]I generally believe that while taking HP is an integral and vital part of the game it is a very short term type of damage and has little lasting effect or emotional impact. I don't really like killing characters (though I've done it before and will again). Players put too much time and invest too much emotion into them for me to be too blasé about taking them out. But if you're not going to kill them (at least not often) HP damage becomes almost meaningless.

Used in moderation, I like longer term 'damage' such as loss of items, physical disabilities, etc. because I believe that such things contribute far more in the way of richness of character development and campaign story as well as emotional impact. They help put the 'RP' back in 'RPG.'

Also, I see the 'monsters' as multidimensional.

1) They have their own motivations and personalities, and they get just as pissed off by characters mowing them and their friends and families down and stealing their stuff as the PCs get about the monsters doing it to them. The last thing going through the poor little Pugwampi's poor little brain before it was split in two by Keeland's arrow was probably something along the lines of "Turn about's fair play!"

2) Many monsters are smart and have a multitude of strategies and tactics available to them. Those tools and tactics go into the challenge rating, and failing to use them lowers that challenge rating. It also makes monsters carbon copies of each other. I'm not always very good at it, but I do try to play smart monsters smart.[/sblock]

We now return you to your regularly scheduled gaming . . .

 

[Leif]

I generally believe that while taking HP is an integral and vital part of the game it is a very short term type of damage and has little lasting effect or emotional impact. I don't really like killing characters (though I've done it before and will again). Players put too much time and invest too much emotion into them for me to be too blasé about taking them out. But if you're not going to kill them (at least not often) HP damage becomes almost meaningless.

Used in moderation, I like longer term 'damage' such as loss of items, physical disabilities, etc. because I believe that such things contribute far more in the way of richness of character development and campaign story as well as emotional impact. They help put the 'RP' back in 'RPG.'

Also, I see the 'monsters' as multidimensional.

1) They have their own motivations and personalities, and they get just as pissed off by characters mowing them and their friends and families down and stealing their stuff as the PCs get about the monsters doing it to them. The last thing going through the poor little Pugwampi's poor little brain before it was split in two by Keeland's arrow was probably something along the lines of "Turn about's fair play!"

2) Many monsters are smart and have a multitude of strategies and tactics available to them. Those tools and tactics go into the challenge rating, and failing to use them lowers that challenge rating. It also makes monsters carbon copies of each other. I'm not always very good at it, but I do try to play smart monsters smart.

Players' Response:

Why is it that many DMs (Mowgli being the one that immediately comes to mind) claim that pcs have more "personality" when they are dealing with severe injuries/disabilities or struggling to overcome the most rotten luck the universe can throw at them? It takes just as much skill to roleplay happy, pleasant feelings, and it is much, much, much more fun as a general rule. I'm not saying that I think you're sick or higly disturbed because you like to torture characters. NO! Far be that from me! All I am doing is reminding you that there are many excellent anger management programs available for a surprisingly low cost.

 

[Maidhc O Casain]

Why is it that many DMs (Mowgli and J. Paul Zimmer being the two that immediately come to mind, sorry, Mowgli, for the comparison, but.....)

That's it . . . I'm bringing out the Redcaps!

I know it takes as much skill to play happy, but happy doesn't often make for an interesting story. When's the last time you went to a movie or read a book in which the protagonist didn't struggle and or suffer and which you came out of (movie) or finished (book) saying "Wow, what a fantastic story!"

The happy feelings that need to be played just seem to have a lot more meaning and impact when they are bought and paid for and come at the end of mighty struggles. Heroes just aren't, well, heroic if they don't have to do anything hard. The struggle is part of the story.

And I don't think physical disability is the only way - or even the best way - to emphasize that struggle. I just know that basic straightforward fights with nothing on the line but hit points become a bit boring after a while. Especially when those hit points are a fairly easily renewable resource. Make no mistake - I intend to take hit points in plenty from y'all. And I meant what I said about 'in moderation' when speaking of other sorts of damage.

 

[Scott DeWar]

[sblock=personal rant]Ya know, I noticed the mention of putting the rp back into the RPG and though of something I always liked. In A Dand D 2nd ed (players options) combat and tactics I remember a critical hit system that was rather topugh to deal with at times. I hve character the have been on the receving side of critical hits using those rules and some have the scars to prove their hardships. I find that a battle that is hard won is the battles most oft retold.

I have characters that were laid up for like 3 months dealing with broken hips and such from crabmen in a game. I loved that game. we only had one character to do running around and playing nurse maid to the rest of the party. It was not the cleric, it was the meat shield. the cleric was the worst for wear! Those were the most memorable moments. we have the Keep that is on the lakes edge where we had to hole up for healing. We are now the lords of that keep. It has great worth!!

Happy moments that require rp as leif mentioned are great, but they make me want to just tip my hat at the end of the encounter and move to the next scene of the play. But that is just me.[/sblock]

 

[Leif]

That's it . . . I'm bringing out the Redcaps!
I know it takes as much skill to play happy, but happy doesn't often make for an interesting story. When's the last time you went to a movie or read a book in which the protagonist didn't struggle and or suffer and which you came out of (movie) or finished (book) saying "Wow, what a fantastic story!"
The happy feelings that need to be played just seem to have a lot more meaning and impact when they are bought and paid for and come at the end of mighty struggles. Heroes just aren't, well, heroic if they don't have to do anything hard. The struggle is part of the story.
And I don't physical disability is the only way - or even the best way - to emphasize that struggle. I just know that basic straightforward fights with nothing on the line but hit points become a bit boring after a while. Especially when those hit points are a fairly easily renewable resource. Make no mistake - I intend to take hit points in plenty from y'all. And I meant what I said about 'in moderation' when speaking of other sorts of damage.

Whatever, man. You're either not getting my meaning or else you're deliberately distorting it. But it's just not worth it to sort out, so you win, I'll hush now.