Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="nonsi256" data-source="post: 5065625" data-attributes="member: 86164">>> don't call it like I see it, I call it like it is.If you wish people to take what you have to say seriously, don’t use such statements on a regular basis.>> If you want me to explain the SBG to >> you, then send me a money order for $25>> (typical tutoring session fee)Interesting. You’re wasting quite a lot of calories on calling me an idiot in so many words (double meaning), rather than using an examplementary quote to show that what I’m looking for is already there.An example would:1. Not remotely amount to a session2. Strengthen your claim.3. Be more useful to the receiver of your reply.>> you are more concerned with criticizing the>> book rather attempting to understand it and>> use its information.If that’s how you figure people out, then I’d suggest you don’t go for a career that requires figuring people out. You’re not good at it>> Your issue seems to be that you're not satisfied>> with them without even understanding what>> you're unsatisfied withLet’s play a game of “what if” for a moment and assume you’re correct.What relevancy does this have to this forum?Here in the realm of house rules, everything’s legit. Nobody needs legitimacy from anyone else.The only two things matter:1. Do you have any suggestion of improvement(s) while going with the flow?2. Will my suggested rule be counterproductive to the purpose of enjoying the game?Zealously defending the core rules makes no sense and has no place in the realm of house rules.And if you feel the need to shout at somebody – please, not here.>> You admit ... that you don't understand the book.Now way, now how.My claim was that I was looking for something and never found it.>> What you're doing is like saying Shakespeare sucks- Shakespeare sucks- Hendrix sucks- Picasso sucksThose are my opinions. I don’t need to have their expertise or your permission to have an opinion.>> All of those questions can be answered in the>> DMG on the table for creating items and their prices.Ditto on the “idiot” issue.>> I pointed this out to you in your other threadAnd never backed up that claim.>> If you don't understand something, disagreeing>> with it or calling it wrong is an emotional response,>> subjective, and thus neither objective nor logical.We’ll get back to the “logical” issue in a moment.>> Don't know what your "WBL" thing isWealth By Level.>> And yes, a shrewd merchant may get a kazillion>> gold, but if he's doing that, he's merchanting and>> not adventuring and would be an NPC, not a PC.>> PCs don't have the luxury of making money, they>> go out and get it and spend it on the next best>> thing that will let them kill the next toughest>> thing to get more money....Reading this makes me wonder why you even play RPGs.As far as my experience goes, there are a lot of challenges in D&D and a lot of fun things around the gaming table – killing monsters is just one of them. The RPG you're portraying is a mad arms race. What's the fun in that?And a DM that tells a player what to do with his character's downtime or jam a wedge in his cart wheel (the WBL hoolahoops I was talking about) is an ass and one who's group I'd never join.>> Hmm...dragons might like a flying island and>> would likely see the people on it as nothing>> more than snacks. Fiends would like it. Cloud>> or Storm Giants might take an interest in it.>> Titans, possibly. I'm sure there are hundreds>> of other monsters that can fly, teleport or gate>> to that flying island and lay a dang good siege>> on it!An appropriate answer to this issue would be too long for me to manage in a few minutes (or even an hour), so I’ll just say this:Look for articles regarding dungeon ecology (hundreds of results with google search) and read several of them. I hope that after 4 or 5 of them you’ll see the problem with your analysis (tip: you’d probably have to deduce the insight rather than be spoon fed, but I’m counting on your intellectual facilities to be sufficient).>>You accuse the authors of not providing>> enough information,Not only did I not phrase things as an accusation – I also gave a probable reason why (time to the market).>> but your opinion is in the very tiny minority>> in that regardBack to the “logical” issue.“The majority” is one of the more known and common logical fallacies.Furthermore, I never cared for the opinions of the majority (be thankful that neither did Kepler and Galileo).</blockquote>

Verification