Search results

I've bounced off of A5e every time I've tried to read any of it, so take my feelings on ToV with as much salt as you feel relevant--but I did find the ToV Game Master's Guide vastly superior to either of WotC's variants, especially the Revised.

I think the obviousness of the choice is going to be related to how badly you think you screwed up your life, and how much of that you think you could avoid.

Man, you keep saying that as though you're the only expert on that, and not only am I convinced you're not the only expert on that here, I do not believe you are an expert on that.

I have A5e, and haven't been able to muster more than distant respect for it. ToV, as it happens, separates lineage and heritage pretty completely, best I can see. I'll stick with the game I've chosen to run, thanks.

I think it's a better revision of the 5e game than what WotC did--I especially think the way they handled moving things out of being "because you were born an elf" and such is better than in 5e 2024--and the Game Master's Guide is worlds better, especially if you're at all experienced running...

It's also possible to have real preferences and still be open to other things. I'm playing in at least one TRPG game I wouldn't normally, but they were a player short and I was at least curious--helps that the "they" here are friendly acquaintances, none of us are total strangers.

I intend to be a subject of some interest to my local medical examiner/s.

My cat, we need to actually open the Churu, but you are correct that at that point we basically have control of the cat.

I was going to ask what about gumbo would be a problem for someone with celiac, then I saw @CleverNickName put up their approach and saw the roux. I am not always smart, but I can sometimes understand what I read. (I guess some sausages might be a problem, but that seems much easier to work...

Well, that's an interesting way to understand that metaphor differently from just about everyone else. I'm not so sure it's conversationally useful, there, but it's interesting.

Yeah, when I'm hosting or otherwise cooking for people, I make it a point to ask about preferences, allergies, and other restrictions. Similar reasons.

I mostly can't stand anything raw. These days, I've learned to give people who are going to be cooking for me some warning about that. I know it's weird, I try not to be a pain in the ass about it (not that you were saying anything that direction).

Funny thing with me and apples: I cannot stand them raw--I cannot even choke them down. I like cider just fine, though, and I'm more than happy to cook with them (yes, apple pie, but other desserts, and especially savory stuff).

It's like a seasonal seasoning monsoon!

Look, I like pumpkin (pie) spice just fine as a seasoning blend, I just don't get obsessed with it. On the other hand, Burlap & Barrel just released their version, which has actual pepitas in it, and it sounds ... kinda amazing.

I have had players decide that some enemies were at least plausibly worth trying to rescue/redeem, depending on circumstances. While I don't try to punish them for killing things that attack them, I am happy to reward them a little more for trying to save those things.

For a moment I misread "unarmed" as "unnamed," which changed the behavior in question a bit. I agree it'd be an interesting question, but I also agree it'd likely get spicy.

Unrelated to anything above: I cannot even say here what I'd say in that thread, because everyone would know what thread I wasn't commenting on, and the fight I'd be trying not to start in that thread would happen in this one.

It also plausibly means they see the kind/s of play they expect, especially if their playtesting group is (or overlaps with) their primary gaming group.