Search results

Beware the Ides of April?

That's a bit harsh. "If shoulds were shoulders, we'd all be singing 'Lean On Me.'"

Because I'm a big believer in open source anything. And I'd argue that everything in the SRD is IP and they released it to the CC. But I'm not interested in debating the topic of open source IP. Simply stating my wish.

yes, i acknowledged that. and i think having that attitude in the universe towards a soulless species is a good plot-hook, like the prejudices against mutants in comics.

Now if only WOTC would release Gamma World into the CC if they're not going to do anything with it

I know that via the Metamorphosis Alpha Facebook Group that Craig J. Brain was working on a Large Print edition of MA with Mr. Ward. Hopefully something can come about with that so all of his work is not for naught.

Then I mistook the "one who thinks that" for "I think that." For that I apologize. BUT it is a natural attitude to exist in a milieu where souls are everywhere and seem to be key in differentiating between self-awareness, or it wouldn't have been addressed with Constructs. It's great for...

and Gamma World

If I really wanted to, I could achieve Pact of the Host just with reflavoring and a finely tuned spell list, but there are a couple unique subclass features that I want to try out that definitely need to be playtested to make sure that they're not over-powered, and I can't do it yet until the...

And I interpret that as "getting power from an outside source" What I think can be left to interpretation is the power dynamic between the caster and the source. Given that Warlocks have a high CHA, it would stand to reason that they could also command and control those power sources, instead...

Between SF and comic books, I've never seen it used any other way. It's only been in the last year online that I've ever seen the distinction.

Yeah, I've seen that complaint before, and I just don't agree with it. There's plenty of narrative space between 1st and 3rd to explain it.

I think there's design space to keep it within Warlock without needing to create a new class. The power-dynamic aspect of Warlock's source of power, when viewed through the right lens, can be seen as pure lore/fluff. The old Shaman 2e class is a really bad example of the concept. You could go...

Earlier, the word "gross" was used for describing soulless-ness as well, and the pedantry around sentience and sapience has started to get a little superior as well. (It is possible to be pedantic and not dismissive). Can we all just take a step back please?

85 pages of discussion, and a random sampling of them reveals to me that nobody knows what the real issue is. It's the fact that the Warlocks are only in the subservient position, dependent on a higher power for their magic. What about the Warlock-as-master? I demand recognition of those who...

Which isn't my point. No soul, no tabula rasa reboot. Just a biological self-reprogrammable self-aware very sophisticated computer with a finite existence, to use an analogy. It's atheism as fact, not philosophy.

And even the orientation term has been redefined to "to both people of the same gender and different genders" encompassing the broad spectrum of gender identity instead of the kinsey definition of both male and female.

Yes, I was using sentient in the classic SF way - 'self-aware' - regardless of the pedantic correctness of it. All of which has nothing to do with my original point. It would be nice to have a species that is both soulless and self-aware, just as equal as any 'ensoulled' creature. One shot at...

I don't see a difference.

That's all psychology, isn't it?