[OOC] Psionicle

Zhure · Jan 26, 2002

::scratches head::

Don't look at me. Maybe I used my psychic powers? Hee hee.
Looks like Gnomeworks added my initiative (5) to the save DC I set?

Greg

GnomeWorks · Jan 27, 2002

I thought he [Zhure] rolled 5?

Umm... my bad. I evidently thought that was his Dex score, so I rolled for him and got a 16, so 21 total.

Well, I screwed up, so that's your gain. But don't think that it will happen again...

Why are we using the OOC thread? ... Just a question, why are we using the OOC thread for the battle?

That's a darn good question... that sounds like a question for Hand, though, b/c he is the one who first posted here. I found it a little unusual, but I went with it... I suppose he thought it would be a good idea to keep mechanics out of the IC thread? I don't know.

However, we are a little devided. Dalamar has posted his action in the IC thread, and everyone else appears to be over here... not too much of a prob, as I can easily go over there and look at it (I always have the OOC, IC, and character threads up in different browsers), but we should decide how we're going to do this once the battle is over.

Hand of Vecna · Jan 27, 2002

EEK!

That's a darn good question... that sounds like a question for Hand, though, b/c he is the one who first posted here. I found it a little unusual, but I went with it... I suppose he thought it would be a good idea to keep mechanics out of the IC thread? I don't know.

Yes, actually, I did think the whole purpose of the OOC thread was to keep the 'mechanics' out of the actual Psionicle thread. Y'know, post the actual rolls in the OOC thread, but the results in the actual Psionicle thread. But, whatever you guys prefer is fine...

GnomeWorks · Jan 27, 2002

Hand of Vecna said:
Yes, actually, I did think the whole purpose of the OOC thread was to keep the 'mechanics' out of the actual Psionicle thread. Y'know, post the actual rolls in the OOC thread, but the results in the actual Psionicle thread. But, whatever you guys prefer is fine...

Well, what I did in the first battle was write the in-game actions in standard text, then write the mechanics and such in italics. It seemed to work out okay, so that everything was in one place - the IC thread -, but you could still determine which was which. For example...

Code:

Osius moves in to strike the insectoid beast, wielding his ichor-stained morningstar in both hands and bringing it down in a mighty swing.

[i]Osius gets a 20, a crit!  He then gets a 10, and +2 is a total of 12, which hits.  He inflicts a total of 10 points of damage to the Thri-Kreen.[/i]

I really don't mind what the group decides on, b/c I have all the threads up all the time, but I would think that the way we did it in the battle with the 'Kreens (the way I discussed earlier in this post) would be easiest on everyone, b/c then you all only need to be looking at one thread.

Hand of Vecna · Jan 27, 2002

that... actually sounds quite good!

Sollir Furryfoot · Jan 27, 2002

Edit-Ignore previous post, I go for posting mechanics here (but I vote only battles should be done here and do roleplaying in the other thread) and summaries of battle each round in the main thread.

GnomeWorks · Jan 27, 2002

Sollir Furryfoot said:
I go for posting mechanics here (but I vote only battles should be done here and do roleplaying in the other thread) and summaries of battle each round in the main thread.

So... what do you mean by "summary of each round"? Do you mean having the IC description of each character's action, or did you have something else in mind?

Jarval · Jan 27, 2002

Sollir Furryfoot said:
Edit-Ignore previous post, I go for posting mechanics here (but I vote only battles should be done here and do roleplaying in the other thread) and summaries of battle each round in the main thread.

I'm good with either approach, but I'd rather have the mechanics in the IC thread rather than separating them out. It just seems kinda messy to have battles going across two threads.

GnomeWorks · Jan 27, 2002

Osius stares blankly at Shardorn. "Ok. Magic. Got it."

Hmm.

I will not handle this in the IC thread, as that is not where this belongs. Your characters would all know this information (save that which is specific to the ethereal marauder, but you would understand the general principle behind the idea).

Magic, and psionics, and technology, are all very different, very powerful forces. They influence this world more than in any other, because they are greater purposes than good or evil, law or chaos. They are what make the cosmos go 'round.

The phenomenon of the ethereal is not inherently magical in nature. The ethereal and the astral are unique in that they make use of all four forces - magic, psionics, technology, and time - and that they are "neutral grounds" for the four.

Of course, there are other modifications beyond this. Besides Magical Beasts, there are also Psionic Beasts. Ethereal Marauders are normally magical in nature - however, given your location and the nature of how they shift, ethereal marauders are psionic creatures, rather than magical. There abilities are psionic, and they exude psionic ability. If the creature were magical, its ethereal shift ability would not work all the time, as the psionic nature of the area would impinge upon magic greatly - it would also be quite resistant to psionics and technology in general (thus, the ectoplasmic missiles from the drilbu probably wouldn't have affected it).

This may not seem like a very important distinction now, but it will become important later on, if you run into creatures that are magical or technological in nature, or even other people who have studied either of those two forces.

Remember... magic - ignores physical law to achieve its ends; psionics - finds loopholes in physical law to achieve its ends; technology - utilizes physical law to achieve its ends.