Search results

:ROFLMAO:

Well, vive la différence, right? For people who like the detail and crunch, it's not unnecessary. It adds to the experience. Ideally, there are games for everybody's preferences. People who like deeper military logistics can play Campaign for North Africa. People who don't can play Axis and...

At this stage in my life, I've been playing a lot of halflings alongside my humans. When I was younger, it was elves, then half-orcs, then dwarves, now it's halflings. And my halflings are hobbity - they're barefoot and they like their food/beer, comfortable surroundings, and a good pipe.

You know, aside from looking kind of dopey and comedic, the Bakshi version still captured Sam's essential character.

But then there was that one guy who wanted join the game to play an "enigmatic force of nature". He was extremely quirky, totally OP, and, for some reason, wore big yellow boots. Fortunately, he left the game after only a couple of sessions.

Maybe you should scroll through this Tumblr for a while: @reasonsmysoniscrying · Reasons My Son Is Crying

I don't think it's at all extreme to say "I've had enough running D&D for a while. So if you don't want to play Star Wars and would rather play D&D, that's fine, but I'm going to leave it up to one of you to DM for a while and I'll be on the players' side of the screen."

Kinda sad so see how pointless obstinacy can affect other people. And that's about the only way I can describe it - pointless obstinacy.

Knowing you need help is the first step to healing yourself.

And I doubt he would even think of it as gaining for himself at other people's expense. From everything I've seen, listened to, and read, virtually any gain anybody else could have gotten would have been at his expense in his mind. After all, he was TSR and TSR was him, right? EVERYTHING anybody...

Joyless? With Friar Tuck gleefully confronting Folcanet with "Welcome to Hell"?!? I think not.

Wait. There are posts in this thread that AREN'T hyperbole?!?

If a player is absent but we have enough of a quorum to play, the affected PC just kind of hangs out in the background - not really taking part in anything. For my 6 player group, if 1 or 2 are missing, they just carry on as if they're a 4-5 PC group until the player is present. There are times...

I think the nature of the individual task is getting kind of muddled here. There are some tasks where I think a group check would be appropriate, where treating things as a help action would be more appropriate, and some where neither really applies. Take the door opening issue. For one thing...

I've played some with MintMMs a while back when I was in high school and then mostly one-offs and board games because we lived farther apart. He passed away in 2016.

Well, we don't know how much a hassle the 18 months between the gate closing and the show's endings were. We also know that there were factions in the program that were in opposition, at least as far as methodology goes. So it's entirely possible that Dr. Kay's debacle in Hawkins enabled Dr...

I'm not yet a candidate for extra-large text, but I can sure say that the readability of the 5e.2024 rules was a nice perk of buying the new books over 5e.2014. I can understand an argument that doing a whole print run of large text rulebooks might be a tough sell with most game companies - but...

Not all conflicts and narratives are short term.

Having a player willing to push the envelope helps things happen - but some of those things aren't good in the long run. You've never played at a table where a player had a character do rash things that made things difficult for the rest of the group or the DM from time to time? Those players...

People contain multitudes. It's entirely possible to have fun during a session and yet regret some of the things that happened because of the headaches they cause for the overall campaign. And it's possible to have found a PC's antics amusing from one close-up perspective, but dumb from another...