I am become Pun-Pun, destroyer of multiverses

[JRRNeiklot]

Or its what happens when you forget that the rules aren't the game.

They're a set of tool used to create the game. Which first have to be parsed through, and implemented by, a living, breathing DM...

au contraire:

Quote:

In many ways, development assumes that an individual DM is like a computer who heartlessly applies the rules.

 

[Mallus]

In many ways, development assumes that an individual DM is like a computer who heartlessly applies the rules.

Do you believe that, or are you just quoting someone who is completely wrong?

(BTW, who are you quoting?)

 

[Graf]

I love Pun pun.
He’s good for two (related) reasons:

1. Fixing Polymorph
(Divine Minion and the super-high-level FR monster aren’t part of most games or worlds; but there was one avenue to Pun-pun that is present in the PhB: Polymorph) He encouraged WotC to actually sit back and get back “under the hood” and fix a few problems. Polymorph, with it’s you-must-have-house-rules-for-this-spell-to-work, flavor was always a DM headache.

2. Better work on checking new rules in supplements
Most of the new supplement books (PhB2, etc) are pretty well checked nowadays. While that process has had a “gimping impact” (see: shadowcaster, Complete Psionic feats) it’s also meant there were few serious threats to the overworked DM who wants to let players play with new toys but can’t say on top of all the new rules variants coming out.

 

[Edena_of_Neith]

I say, whatever is fun for the players, works fine for me.

As for Pun-Pun ... hmmm ... let's assume one player wants a Pun-Pun. Then it's only fair to give all the other players Pun-Puns too. But if all the PCs are Pun-Puns, then all the NPCs must be Pun-Puns too. And if all the NPCs are Pun-Puns, then everyone in the multiverse is a Pun-Pun.
This leads to the Big Crunch and a new Big Bang for the Multiverse as the Pun-Puns annihilate each other and all of Reality ... and then we actually start rolling up characters for the game.

 

[Edena_of_Neith]

I remember those characters with Girdles of Giant Strength, Gauntlets of Ogre Power, and Hammers of Thunderbolts, plus Haste and a lot of other nasty items and spells to stack.
I should remember. A character of mine had all these items himself.

I found out the hard way there is an easy solution to such powermongering.
It was known as Mordenkainen's Disjunction.
An Anti-Magic Shell, surrounded by a spherical Wall of Force, also did the job. Disintegrate worked wonders too (a character can be Wished back, but multiple Wishes for the items too? Wizards won't do it.) Or immersion in acid, lava, or a breath weapon under circumstances that made a failed saving throw likely (thus forcing repeated item saves.) Or how about just a fall off a cliff (no amount of strength or number of mighty weapons mitigates the splatter effect of a 1,000 foot fall.) ?

It was almost wondrously ghastly, how quickly a Christmas Tree Character could be stripped of his ornaments, reduced to mundane nakedness, and put in the Dead Book.

Morale of Story: Pride goeth before a fall.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

Do you believe that, or are you just quoting someone who is completely wrong?

(BTW, who are you quoting?)

That's a direct quote from Mike Mearls on the (one of the)design thread(s).

And no, I don't believe it.

 

[shadow]

Does anyone find it ironic that 3.5e was supposed to "fix" all these loopholes? It seems like all these 3.5 splatbooks are just creating more "broken" and unbalanced options.

 

[genshou]

No, I don't find that ironic at all.

Cheers!
~genshou, Third Edition Cultist

 

[Thanee]

Does anyone find it ironic that 3.5e was supposed to "fix" all these loopholes?

Was it? It was supposed to fix many problems... and did so.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Hussar]

Originally Posted by Mallus
Or its what happens when you forget that the rules aren't the game.

They're a set of tool used to create the game. Which first have to be parsed through, and implemented by, a living, breathing DM...



au contraire:

Quote:

In many ways, development assumes that an individual DM is like a computer who heartlessly applies the rules.

Yet, heartlessly applying the rules in this case would disallow Pun Pun from existing since its existence requires the misuse of a rule. What yer point?

I'm still bewildered that anyone would think that developers should assume that DM's aren't going to use the baseline when developing material. That simply leads to the madness that was 2e where I could have a priest of Kossuth in chain mail, using a sword and chucking fireballs without a spellbook while using Druid xp tables.

I think I prefer the assumption that DM's follow RAW thankyouverymuch.