PDA

View Full Version : The Roleplaying Things That Shall Not Be Named



8BitNinja
2016-10-30, 11:04 PM
TRPGs are great. They make a great pastime, way to socialize, and a good thing to make a forum about.

However, there are controversial/bad/embarrassing things this medium cooked up. Let's mention what those things are!

Book of Erotic Fantasy: Although I have never read this book, I know enough about it to stay away in order to avoid criticism. (Please mention more if you have read it)

Alignment: we all have our opinion on it, but talking about it starts wars.

AD&D Paladin item limits: "Hey fighter, can you carry this dancing vorpal short sword +3 for me?"

Lord Raziere
2016-10-30, 11:42 PM
F.A.T.A.L.

Manual of Exalted Power: Infernals Chapters 1-2.

Black Tokyo

Cthulhutech

Wraethu (I think thats the name, though I might've forgotten)

Samuel Haight from World of Darkness

Encyclopedia Arcane: Nymphology

all I can really remember. I'm not gonna go into why, just give you fair warning that you might not want to look any of these things up.

Urzamax
2016-10-30, 11:45 PM
Harlequin (Shadowrun), Drizz't (Forgotten Realms), and other narrative Mary Sues and Marty Stus.

Efrate
2016-10-31, 02:10 AM
Drizz't comes to mind. Not solely for being marty sue, but because he is oh so awesome...as a CR 20 that fights cr 1/2s a lot and is good at it. He has had all of like 1 encounter with something I would consider CR appropriate from what I read, in which chaotic evil stupid is beaten by marty stu, with lulz as his win con. I have no problem with high level characters, buts regular orcs at CR 20 are not a threat.

FATAL
CTECH's problem of combining everything, and having 3 entirely different combat systems that are supposed to somehow play nice and all be equally relevant.

Quintessential Temptress should be forgotten. BoEF and nymphology have some stuff that is actually good.

Knitifine
2016-10-31, 02:14 AM
Most things I was gonna mention have been named so I'll go with...

Munchkins (the actual kind, not the card game)

Socratov
2016-10-31, 03:25 AM
"But that's what my character would do!" following a certainly dickish manuever.

Batou1976
2016-10-31, 04:29 AM
The World of Synnibar (seriously, this game is terrible... even if it's not quite as bad as FATAL)

RP Snobs- "What, you guys actually entered combat!? But, that, like, means you actually used your dice! :smalleek: You're a ROLLplayer!!!1!11!!!!1one!!!1!!!!onehundredandelev en!!!!!"

Disruptive players who seem to only be able to have fun by spoiling other people's (such as deliberately seeking ways to break the DM's story/ world)

Pedantic rules lawyers (especially the ones who only engage in pedantry when it is to their PC's benefit, and keep silent if enforcing the RAW would hinder them)

Drown-healing :smallconfused:

AD&D 1E's artwork

Edition wars

PinkSpray
2016-10-31, 06:20 AM
Palladium's Megaverse and Paizo's Pathfinder. More like legal code than game systems.

Table Jedi who preach the only proper way to game is their way.

Vizzerdrix
2016-10-31, 01:34 PM
Most things I was gonna mention have been named so I'll go with...

Munchkins (the actual kind, not the card game)

Those little donuts? I love those!




https://ixquick-proxy.com/do/show_picture.pl?l=english&rais=1&oiu=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.newsday.com%2Fpolopoly_fs%2F1 .12143448.1470584458%21%2FhttpImage%2Fimage.jpg_ge n%2Fderivatives%2Fdisplay_960%2Fimage.jpg&sp=89b6c4918a672eacc8f3c9db42b33766

ellindsey
2016-10-31, 01:56 PM
Book of Erotic Fantasy: Although I have never read this book, I know enough about it to stay away in order to avoid criticism. (Please mention more if you have read it)


Of the various "adult" third-party rules supplements, the BoEF is probably the least offensive. I've actually incorporated a few things from it into my Pathfinder campaign.

Tiktik Ironclaw
2016-10-31, 02:38 PM
AD&D 1E's artwork

Hey, what's your beef with AD&D art? I like it even more than the 3.5 art. It makes for fun charcoal sketching.

As for the BoEF, it's pretty tasteful. The first couple of chapters talk about the sexual habits and reproduction cycles of D&D races, including kobolds, goblinoids, minotaurs, and other less-thought-about races. It includes a few deities, some for sex, marriage, and a goblin procreation goddess, as well as an evil rape god. There's also prices for prostitution, which comes in handy for post-adventure revelry, and a chastity feat that gives a +2 to any stat. Oh, and the disrobe spell is both funny and can cause defeat-by-modesty. Beyond that, the rules it adds are nonsensical or would be uncomfortable in the typical D&D group. So, a mixed bag, but it has some useful info.

JAL_1138
2016-10-31, 02:48 PM
I liked 1E artwork. Amateurish lineart, particularly for monsters, has sort of a "field guide made by some in-universe adventurer" feel. I miss charmingly-bad art.

However, I'd call 5e's halfling art a Thing That Shall Not Be Named. It's not charmingly-bad, it's outright uncanny-valley disturbing.

2D8HP
2016-10-31, 04:05 PM
Drown-healing :smallconfused: I have no idea on what that is and I'm scared to "Google" it.


AD&D 1E's artwork


:furious:

No it's 2e that should be ashamed!

What with its gaudy color and those dang-blast-it horned helmets!



Edition wars But there so fun! Half the fun of dimly remembered perfect games is ragging on currently actually played games, dagnabbit!


Palladium's Megaverse and Paizo's Pathfinder. More like legal code than game systems. Preach it!


Table Jedi who preach the only proper way to game is their way. Well isn't it?

:confused:

Arbane
2016-10-31, 04:32 PM
In before the lock!


However, there are controversial/bad/embarrassing things this medium cooked up. Let's mention what those things are!


Does it have to be things in books? Because if not, 'gamers with Issues with women' springs immediately to mind as a topic that could fill this entire thread forum.

AD&D2's Complete Book of Elves, aka the Elven Master Racebook. (Short form: "Elves are better than you. Period.")

Lots of game cover art. Especially the cover of Exalted's Savant and Sorcerer. 9_9

If just plain bad stuff counts, we could fill the thread with shovelware, failed attempts at exhaustive realism, and reams of boring backstory.

VoxRationis
2016-10-31, 04:46 PM
I liked 1E artwork. Amateurish lineart, particularly for monsters, has sort of a "field guide made by some in-universe adventurer" feel. I miss charmingly-bad art.

However, I'd call 5e's halfling art a Thing That Shall Not Be Named. It's not charmingly-bad, it's outright uncanny-valley disturbing.

I'm inclined to agree. Later-edition art, in my opinion, often suffers from "awesomeness inflation," with the exception of 5e halflings, which go in the opposite direction of "incredibly creepy."

JAL_1138
2016-10-31, 05:04 PM
I have no idea on what that is and I'm scared to "Google" it.
In 3e, drowning creatures had their HP set to 0 when they started to drown. So if they were at negative HP, you could "heal" them up to 0HP by drowning them. It was quite silly.



No it's 2e that should be ashamed!

What with its gaudy color and those dang-blast-it horned helmets!

2e art was hit-or-miss. When it tried for realism or seriousness (particularly realism and seriousness), it usually missed pretty bad. But when it got Tony DiTerlizzi's storybook-esque sketches and watercolors, it knocked it out of the park. Toss-up between him and Erol Otus (B/X and some early-ish 1e era) as to who did the best D&D art, to me.


I'm inclined to agree. Later-edition art, in my opinion, often suffers from "awesomeness inflation," with the exception of 5e halflings, which go in the opposite direction of "incredibly creepy."
"Awesomeness inflation" is a good term for the issue I have with a lot of it. It tries too hard to be cool or badass or amazing or what-have-you and ends up feeling overblown.

Cernor
2016-10-31, 06:05 PM
D&D 4E.

It's not bad (depending on who you ask, of course), but is certainly controversial. While I wasn't around personally for the edition wars, I've heard it was entertaining to sit back and watch the flames. :smallwink:

Rerem115
2016-10-31, 06:13 PM
I'm of the feeling that 4e had its place. Namely, as a tactical, gridded, turn-based wargame. As far as balance for balance's sake, 4e was fantastic; it just pushed the "tactical combat" aspect so far that comparing it to the (relatively) more open and role-play focused other variants is simply not fair. 4e is not bad, it's just a different game than every other edition.

PinkSpray
2016-10-31, 06:16 PM
Forgot: the Storyteller v. Power Gamer conflict that makes no sense.

It's the same thing people. It is ok to have different playstyle if the group embraces that.

Rerem115
2016-10-31, 06:21 PM
Quite possibly the greatest enemy of TTRPGs: the dreaded Schedule Monster. In my experience, work, exams, significant others, and illnesses have killed far more parties than the villains ever have.

Vizzerdrix
2016-10-31, 06:37 PM
Quite possibly the greatest enemy of TTRPGs: the dreaded Schedule Monster. In my experience, work, exams, significant others, and illnesses have killed far more parties than the villains ever have.
Amen to that. I havent gamed in a few years now, but not from lack of trying. Just hard to find a group that A-plays in the mornings after I get out of work, and B- likes to play optomized games.

And I have tried to do pbp, but I find my ability to tacticly respond is greatly deminished when things arent flowing at a faster pace.

Hunter Noventa
2016-11-01, 12:45 PM
Palladium's Megaverse and Paizo's Pathfinder. More like legal code than game systems.

Palladium is mostly garbage for rules, but they had great settings. but Pathfinder's not nearly on that level.

As for what's not to be named?

"I Iron Heart Surge Gravity"

Knaight
2016-11-01, 01:02 PM
Quite possibly the greatest enemy of TTRPGs: the dreaded Schedule Monster. In my experience, work, exams, significant others, and illnesses have killed far more parties than the villains ever have.

Amen to this. There's a reason that I don't even try to run games that last longer than 1 semester anymore, because if you've got more than one student in the group scheduling tends to explode the instant schedules get swapped - and that's without getting into cases like "people with kids".

Stealth Marmot
2016-11-01, 01:11 PM
Book of Erotic Fantasy: Although I have never read this book, I know enough about it to stay away in order to avoid criticism. (Please mention more if you have read it)

Actually, the book itself is rather mature about it's fluff content. It takes a very mature worldview on the ideas of sexuality, consent, and what degree of sexuality you want to have in your games. it talks about the things that most manuals are just too embarrassed to talk about, and does so in a very serious manner.

And then you get to the crunch, and there is a lot of stuff that is just comical in its kinkiness.

That said, there are actual things in it worth using. The Appearance stat as separate from Charisma is a nice option, and there are some good concepts addressing things that could actually come up, not the least of which is pregnancy.


As for things that shall not be named: Weapon vs armor types/Weapon initiative modifiers from 1st edition. Just. Wow. Just in case you were having fun, BRING OUT THE CHARTS AGAIN!

Then again, to this day I am STILL not certain how initiative and combat order works in first edition.

Spore
2016-11-01, 01:36 PM
Of the various "adult" third-party rules supplements, the BoEF is probably the least offensive. I've actually incorporated a few things from it into my Pathfinder campaign.

Book of Vile Darkness: All players have at least heard of it. No one dares to use contents in their campaigns. And my group is WAY beyond the age limitations.

JAL_1138
2016-11-01, 01:41 PM
Actually, the book itself is rather mature about it's fluff content. It takes a very mature worldview on the ideas of sexuality, consent, and what degree of sexuality you want to have in your games. it talks about the things that most manuals are just too embarrassed to talk about, and does so in a very serious manner.

And then you get to the crunch, and there is a lot of stuff that is just comical in its kinkiness.

That said, there are actual things in it worth using. The Appearance stat as separate from Charisma is a nice option, and there are some good concepts addressing things that could actually come up, not the least of which is pregnancy.


As for things that shall not be named: Weapon vs armor types/Weapon initiative modifiers from 1st edition. Just. Wow. Just in case you were having fun, BRING OUT THE CHARTS AGAIN!

Then again, to this day I am STILL not certain how initiative and combat order works in first edition.

2e had weapon vs armor (affected THAC0, IIRC, but I didn't use it much so I might be off) and weapon speed modifiers, which were added to your d10 initiative roll (lowest went first in 2e initiative). Essentially straightforward.

But 1e threw "segments" in there and did some other weird stuff with bizarre surprise rules and I have no idea how it worked; I never could figure it out either. Whenever the groups I played with ran 1e modules, we used 2e combat rules.

Lord Torath
2016-11-01, 02:15 PM
Tom Baxa's Dark Sun art. In fact, most of Tom Baxa's Art. I actually liked most of the 2nd Edition art (although it's not quite as fun as the 1st Edition stuff).

The cover art (https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/61jIFHjdtuL._SX388_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg) of the Thri-Kreen of Athas. These are supposed to look like giant (https://images.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.athas.org%2Fsystem%2Fuploads%2 Farticle_attachment%2Fattachment%2F98%2FThri-Kreen_Baxa.jpg&f=1) preying mantises (https://images.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fm1.paperblog.com%2Fi%2F180%2F18056 34%2Fthri-kreen-athas-L-Qf7Yym.jpeg&f=1), not... ant men. At least Tom Baxa could draw a decent Thri-Kreen.

Braininthejar2
2016-11-01, 02:56 PM
The charts in Anima: Beyond Fantasy

2D8HP
2016-11-01, 03:50 PM
But 1e threw "segments" in there and did some other weird stuff with bizarre surprise rules and I have no idea how it worked; I never could figure it out either. Whenever the groups I played with ran 1e modules, we used 2e combat rules.1e AD&D was actually easy all you had to do was.... throw up your hands in confusion, and use the rules from the Basic set instead.
See easy!

:smile:

Stealth Marmot
2016-11-01, 04:10 PM
1e AD&D was actually easy all you had to do was.... throw up your hands in confusion, and use the rules from the Basic set instead.
See easy!

:smile:



Step 3: PROFIT!

Mordar
2016-11-01, 04:18 PM
Grimtooth's Traps?

Or perhaps just the DMs who thought they were appropriate for sprinkling throughout dungeons...

8BitNinja
2016-11-01, 06:28 PM
I would love to reply to all of these, but this thread blew up. So I'll do what I can right now


F.A.T.A.L.

Manual of Exalted Power: Infernals Chapters 1-2.

Black Tokyo

Cthulhutech

Wraethu (I think thats the name, though I might've forgotten)

Samuel Haight from World of Darkness

Encyclopedia Arcane: Nymphology

all I can really remember. I'm not gonna go into why, just give you fair warning that you might not want to look any of these things up.

Encyclopedia Arcane: Nymphology and FATAL are books I have actually read. Great stuff there (and by great I mean horrible)


"But that's what my character would do!" following a certainly dickish manuever.

I get this a lot. I'm looking at you Chaotic Neutral Elf Rogue who took my Holy Blazing Lonsgsword +20


The World of Synnibar (seriously, this game is terrible... even if it's not quite as bad as FATAL)

RP Snobs- "What, you guys actually entered combat!? But, that, like, means you actually used your dice! :smalleek: You're a ROLLplayer!!!1!11!!!!1one!!!1!!!!onehundredandelev en!!!!!"

Disruptive players who seem to only be able to have fun by spoiling other people's (such as deliberately seeking ways to break the DM's story/ world)

Pedantic rules lawyers (especially the ones who only engage in pedantry when it is to their PC's benefit, and keep silent if enforcing the RAW would hinder them)

Drown-healing :smallconfused:

AD&D 1E's artwork

Edition wars

The good old edition wars. It's like you can't say "I mildly enjoyed 4E" without getting lynched.


In before the lock!



Does it have to be things in books? Because if not, 'gamers with Issues with women' springs immediately to mind as a topic that could fill this entire thread forum.

AD&D2's Complete Book of Elves, aka the Elven Master Racebook. (Short form: "Elves are better than you. Period.")

Lots of game cover art. Especially the cover of Exalted's Savant and Sorcerer. 9_9

If just plain bad stuff counts, we could fill the thread with shovelware, failed attempts at exhaustive realism, and reams of boring backstory.

It doesn't have to be in books.

So I googled Savant and Sorcerer. Is this a real thing?

Hawkstar
2016-11-01, 07:35 PM
That said, there are actual things in it worth using. The Appearance stat as separate from Charisma is a nice option, and there are some good concepts addressing things that could actually come up, not the least of which is pregnancy.The Appearance stat separate from Charisma is the absolute godawful worst idea that has EVER come up in a roleplaying game.

Arbane
2016-11-01, 07:43 PM
So I googled Savant and Sorcerer. Is this a real thing?

Yep, a real book for Exalted, with THAT cover. (It was just a sourcebook for sorcery and other magic stuff, but someone in WW's editorial staff got all 1s on their 'good marketing judgement' roll.)

NecroDancer
2016-11-01, 08:12 PM
"I Iron Heart Surge Gravity"

Can I sig this?

AnBe
2016-11-01, 09:02 PM
Taking 3-4 Hours doing ONE combat encounter in Pathfinder.

The GM idiotically telling you everything that is going to happen in the campaign before it actually happens. When GM does this, makes me yawn very hard at the thought of his/her campaign.

People playing with their dice and accidentally dropping them on the hardwood floor!

People taking it personally when the GM challenges the players and unintentionally kills off the players and/or causes them to lose some of their stuff. The GM is not picking on you, dude, it's just the GM trying to provide a bit of challenge for you, ok?

D&DPrinceTandem
2016-11-01, 09:16 PM
Pun-Pun......
That little :roach::roach::roach::roach: IS the worst :roach::roach::roach::roach: in a world of :roach::roach::roach::roach::roach:

Noje
2016-11-01, 11:39 PM
I liked 1E artwork. Amateurish lineart, particularly for monsters, has sort of a "field guide made by some in-universe adventurer" feel. I miss charmingly-bad art.

However, I'd call 5e's halfling art a Thing That Shall Not Be Named. It's not charmingly-bad, it's outright uncanny-valley disturbing.

Preach, 1E had such fun illustrations! I look through my old monster manual just for the art sometimes.

my biggest qualm with 5e's halflings is that they gave them shoes. halflings don't wear shoes! What ever happened to buying combs dedicated to your feet?

Mordar
2016-11-02, 06:05 PM
The Appearance stat separate from Charisma is the absolute godawful worst idea that has EVER come up in a roleplaying game.

Comeliness, from the book also featuring the Cavalier and Barbarian IIRC...boy, we loved that book when it first hit. Some good spells too...

PinkSpray
2016-11-02, 06:42 PM
Another vote for the 1e art. Dee, Trampier, and Otus made me want to play the game.

Also (maybe) unmentioned but exclusive to trpgs are our beloved power- gamers. They make combat quick and equally frustrating for everyone. Huzzah!

Cluedrew
2016-11-02, 07:06 PM
Is anyone else getting an overwhelming sense of irony from this thread?

...

Just Me? OK.

Lord Raziere
2016-11-02, 07:22 PM
Is anyone else getting an overwhelming sense of irony from this thread?

...

Just Me? OK.

Well on certain forums where people prefer certain DnD heartbreakers to the main game, DnD is often referred to as "The Other Game" or some such, reflecting how that forum does not wish to mention the game when they think the heartbreaker is better, given that this forum is strong main DnD-centric, you could make the argument that is where the irony comes from.

or your just referring to how we're naming things that shouldn't be named, but thats obvious, occam's razor-y and therefore boring. So I went with the less obvious guess for fun.

Katrina
2016-11-03, 04:49 AM
The charts in Anima: Beyond Fantasy

I second this with "finding an English translation of Core Exxet" Effectively the 2nd edition of the Core book where they cleared up a bunch of the crazy stuff from the first Edition Translation.

I know it will likely be an unpopular sentiment, but I'm prone to adding the Manual of Exalted Power: Alchemicals to this. Simply because it just feels so different that it should be its own game and not a splat for Exalted.

Also, everything in the 3.5 Monster Manuals that had a CR less than HD-10. (I'm looking at you, Drowned.)

jinjitsu
2016-11-03, 05:09 AM
Does it have to be things in books? Because if not, 'gamers with Issues with women' springs immediately to mind as a topic that could fill this entire thread forum.

It doesn't have to be in books, but it is: Strength penalties/caps and seduction bonuses for female characters.

Sir Chuckles
2016-11-03, 05:42 AM
The Appearance stat separate from Charisma is the absolute godawful worst idea that has EVER come up in a roleplaying game.

Eh, there's worse things out there. I feel that Appearance/Comeliness as an actual stat is a tad silly and can be very, very messy. Including it as part of Charisma is also a terrible idea due to it being used primarily for other things that have nothing to do with appearance.

Quertus
2016-11-03, 02:11 PM
Does "people who can't pre-add their modifiers" qualify for this thread?


Pedantic rules lawyers (especially the ones who only engage in pedantry when it is to their PC's benefit, and keep silent if enforcing the RAW would hinder them)

Now, when you say "pedantic", do you mean... :smallwink:

At least I tend to enforce RAW consistently, be that for or against myself / the party.


Does it have to be things in books? Because if not, 'gamers with Issues with women' springs immediately to mind as a topic that could fill this entire thread forum.

I don't have problems with women... as long as they aren't taking their clothes off, offering to have sex with everyone at the table, and/or so beautiful as to distract from the game.


As for things that shall not be named: Weapon vs armor types/Weapon initiative modifiers from 1st edition. Just. Wow. Just in case you were having fun, BRING OUT THE CHARTS AGAIN!

Then again, to this day I am STILL not certain how initiative and combat order works in first edition.

I don't remember these from 1e, but 2e had weapon vs armor tables. They were terrible.

I'm not seeing where having (2e) weapon initiative modifiers is any more complicated than all the modifiers you can get in, say, 3e. Was 1e worse? I don't recall.


The Appearance stat separate from Charisma is the absolute godawful worst idea that has EVER come up in a roleplaying game.

And being able to build a charismatic speaker with a face built for radio is the worst thing ever how, exactly? (bothering to make appearance a stat at all, otoh, seems a waste of time at best in some games).


It doesn't have to be in books, but it is: Strength penalties/caps and seduction bonuses for female characters.

Well, science tells us that men and women are different, in expected ranges for height, weight, strength, and in many other, often more difficult to quantify ways. So it feels... odd... to attempt to simply ignore that fact if it's a game mechanic.

To scientifically calculate estimate their relative seduction bonus or penalty, one would probably require a large sampling of promiscuous, bi men and women, and record / compare their number of... conquests... over a given period of time. Although even this runs into too much noise to likely have scientific merit.

Grod_The_Giant
2016-11-03, 06:57 PM
The Appearance stat separate from Charisma is the absolute godawful worst idea that has EVER come up in a roleplaying game.
It's not the worst; my Exalted GM explained the difference as:
Charisma: Your ability to interact with and connect to people, especially in small groups and prolonged conversations.
Appearance: Your ability to present yourself and make a good first impression, especially in speeches, parties, and other times where there's no real connection between you and your audience.

Low-Charisma, high-Appearance would be, say, your stock issue nasty courier, who's all beauty and confidence and poise but is just too nasty and selfish to really properly "do" people. The opposite would be, perhaps, a quiet-but-endearing type, who doesn't really stand out in a crowd and hates public speaking but is really engaging in a private conversation.

8BitNinja
2016-11-03, 07:43 PM
The Appearance stat separate from Charisma is the absolute godawful worst idea that has EVER come up in a roleplaying game.

People seem to argue over this one a lot here. Keep in mind this is why it is on this list. You guys can derail and argue it all you want, but just to let you know, in doing so you further justify the reason for it to be here.

Kane0
2016-11-03, 08:42 PM
That damned crab.

JAL_1138
2016-11-03, 10:07 PM
That damned crab.

Do you mean Giant Enemy Crab (massive damage, etc.), Giant Crabs with surprise bonuses, Mystaran Ice Crabs, Piscoloths, Trobriand's Automatons, Sea Hermits, the Emperor Crab shell that House Redoran from Morrowind built their hold Under-Skar in (in the town of Ald'ruhn on Vvardenfell), Elder Scrolls mudcrabs (I saw a mudcrab the other day...there was also the drunk one that had the most gold of any merchant in MW), Dwarf Fortress magma crabs, Krabby, Kingler, Zoidberg, or the Apparatus of Kwalish? (The last two are more lobster than crab, granted...)

Erit
2016-11-03, 10:12 PM
Do you mean Giant Enemy Crab (massive damage, etc.), Giant Crabs with surprise bonuses, Mystaran Ice Crabs, Piscoloths, Trobriand's Automatons, Sea Hermits, the Emperor Crab shell that House Redoran from Morrowind built their hold Under-Skar in (in the town of Ald'ruhn on Vvardenfell), Elder Scrolls mudcrabs (I saw a mudcrab the other day...there was also the drunk one that had the most gold of any merchant in MW), Dwarf Fortress magma crabs, Krabby, Kingler, Zoidberg, or the Apparatus of Kwalish? (The last two are more lobster than crab, granted...)

Yes. 10char

Tohron
2016-11-03, 10:23 PM
That damned crab.

The particular phrase was applied to a crab from Stormwrack that had a ridiculously low CR given it's crush attack that did a bunch of CON damage every round. It basically took ridiculous levels of optimization and/or extreme levels of round-1 damage for an "appropriately" leveled party of 4 to kill it without PC deaths.

And on the subject of under-CRed monsters: Adamantine Horrors

Also, on a slightly related note: Mordenkainen's Disjunction

JAL_1138
2016-11-03, 10:33 PM
The particular phrase was applied to a crab from Stormwrack that had a ridiculously low CR given it's crush attack that did a bunch of CON damage every round.

Ah, something out of 3.5...explains why I didn't get the reference. I didn't play much of 3rd.

An Enemy Spy
2016-11-03, 10:46 PM
Racial Holy War, a "game" made by a bunch of neo-nazis too busy jacking off to pictures of Hitler to actually bother making actual rules for fighting against the subhuman scum(aka nonwhite people, and probably even most white people too, if they're being honest), ironically meaning that the players are actually the inferior race in this game. I literally don't think this game is actually possible to play.

Coventry
2016-11-03, 10:55 PM
No one has mentioned the Truenamer class, yet?

Katrina
2016-11-03, 11:18 PM
It's not the worst; my Exalted GM explained the difference as:
Charisma: Your ability to interact with and connect to people, especially in small groups and prolonged conversations.
Appearance: Your ability to present yourself and make a good first impression, especially in speeches, parties, and other times where there's no real connection between you and your audience.

Low-Charisma, high-Appearance would be, say, your stock issue nasty courier, who's all beauty and confidence and poise but is just too nasty and selfish to really properly "do" people. The opposite would be, perhaps, a quiet-but-endearing type, who doesn't really stand out in a crowd and hates public speaking but is really engaging in a private conversation.

I can see both sides of the argument, and to me it comes down to if the System, setting and players are prepared to handle that. For Example: Exalted has a very clear mechanic and presentation for High Appearance as opposed to High Charisma. 3.0 is even better at it in my opinion, as it does away with the "you never really roll your Appearance" caveat. You actually can roll your Appearance as the stat for social actions that would depend primarily on it, such as seduction. A low Charisma High Appearance build would be Fluttershy or the other Shrinking Violet types, whereas a High Charisma Low Appearance would be either an Inspiring General (who is still socially competent, but doesn't actually do it by being pretty) or a Phantom of the Opera, depending on how low the Appearance is.

At the same time, the fact that many systems are simply not equipped for this means that people from those systems see very little reason to try and draw lines between the two. In my opinion, unless the game and players are equipped for it, simply abstract it. It's not that big of a deal unless it is made a big deal. If it is made a big deal, go steal the Exalted system for it. ^.^


On the subject of Crabs, can we add Grells and Allips to that list?

Vizzerdrix
2016-11-04, 01:34 AM
the Apparatus of Kwalish?

We crunched the numbers a few years back. Effigy seige crab is better in every single way. I think we even had enough cash left over for barding and a spell turret.

That damned crab is from an adventure path I thought, but god a poor upgrade in stormwrack (a sea critter that cant swim if i recall)

Cluedrew
2016-11-04, 07:02 AM
No one has mentioned the Truenamer class, yet?To be honest, I think that is more of a roleplaying things that shall not name. Or if the explanations of the problems with it are to be believe, never seen it in action.

Grod_The_Giant
2016-11-04, 07:45 AM
The particular phrase was applied to a crab from Stormwrack that had a ridiculously low CR given it's crush attack that did a bunch of CON damage every round. It basically took ridiculous levels of optimization and/or extreme levels of round-1 damage for an "appropriately" leveled party of 4 to kill it without PC deaths.
The suggested tactics were also "grapple a party member (with I think a +19 bonus) and drag them into the water to drown."

Hunter Noventa
2016-11-04, 08:01 AM
Can I sig this?

Go for it.

Khedrac
2016-11-04, 10:43 AM
"That Damned Crab" was actually one from a WotC 3.5 web article, the Stormwrack version was toned down a fair bit.

The Comeliness start in 1st Ed AD&D is worth mentioning because of one of the optional stat rolling mechanisms:
The stat order depended on your class, but one stat was roll 9d6 keep best 3, the next was roll 8d6 keep best 3 ... down to roll 3d6 keep all 3.
Now for a 7 stat 3-18 system that has some point to it, but they used Comeliness as the 7th stat which meant it had virtually no in game use yet varied where it came in the state order...

Other things worth a mention:

Traveller - oops your character died during character creation
Experience and character improvement (I did find rules for it once in the original traveler reprint, but the game was not designed for campaigns).

DragonQuest - choose a race, if not human roll to see if you can play that race (anything from about a 30% chance down to a 5% chance) if you fail play human.

Rolemaster - huge number of charts and tables that defeated most groups (I had a really good GM at school who made it work).

Pretty much any crit-based system with new characters.

Gamma World - hit point range between party members (con was 3d6, you had your con score in hide dice), any opponent with intensity 18 poison or radiation (auto kill against anyone with a con of 18 or below)

8BitNinja
2016-11-04, 11:12 PM
Racial Holy War, a "game" made by a bunch of neo-nazis too busy jacking off to pictures of Hitler to actually bother making actual rules for fighting against the subhuman scum(aka nonwhite people, and probably even most white people too, if they're being honest), ironically meaning that the players are actually the inferior race in this game. I literally don't think this game is actually possible to play.

I've read through the entire thing (about 20 pages) before and I think that it's not even a game. Not a playable one at least.

You see, on each end of the offensive spectrum, we have FATAL, which is unplayable due to massive detail (it takes literally up to 3 hours to roll a character), and then we have Racial Holy War, which is unplayable due to lack of detail.

Belac93
2016-11-04, 11:52 PM
The particular phrase was applied to a crab from Stormwrack that had a ridiculously low CR given it's crush attack that did a bunch of CON damage every round. It basically took ridiculous levels of optimization and/or extreme levels of round-1 damage for an "appropriately" leveled party of 4 to kill it without PC deaths.

And on the subject of under-CRed monsters: Adamantine Horrors

Also, on a slightly related note: Mordenkainen's Disjunction

In the same vein, the intellect devourer from 5e. I made the mistake of pitting my players against a pair of those things them they were level 5. Any character without at least 11 intelligence is pretty much instantly dead, and anyone with less than 19 intelligence is still at risk of dying in 2 rounds. And barbarians often have an intelligence of 8.

And those things are supposed to be a medium challenge for a group of level 2 characters.

No brains
2016-11-05, 12:14 AM
I've got one that stems from the comeliness/appearance debate: whether or not a certain piece of equipment is 'realistic' or not. Part of the idea of fantasy is that somethings look nice or interesting for the people imagining them. Not only that, but making gear for fighting inhuman monsters and magic may actually create demands that historical stuff can't meet. I actually think it's cool if someone goes through the effort to describe their character in a historically faithful way, but it can really drag down the fun if people discuss whether or not this is 'good'.

Katrina
2016-11-05, 12:52 AM
In the same vein, the intellect devourer from 5e. I made the mistake of pitting my players against a pair of those things them they were level 5. Any character without at least 11 intelligence is pretty much instantly dead, and anyone with less than 19 intelligence is still at risk of dying in 2 rounds. And barbarians often have an intelligence of 8.

And those things are supposed to be a medium challenge for a group of level 2 characters.

The 5E Intellect Devourer. The only thing that still does Stat damage. My group freaked when they found that, because they hadn't found anything that cured stat damage anymore. It was so funny to watch them panic and check books.

Now, to clarify, I've not gotten into their 5E games cause I don't have the scheduling. In fact, I've not even picked up the 5E books that much because the once over I gave them didn't impress me. That said, I've heard good things and bad things. But the CR 2 who flat-lines parties with something that apparently "Doesn't exist anymore" (as one player said) amused me.

Vrock_Summoner
2016-11-05, 03:45 AM
I don't have problems with women... as long as they aren't taking their clothes off, offering to have sex with everyone at the table, and/or so beautiful as to distract from the game.
You're being sarcastic, right? Especially with that last one. I really can't tell.

I mean, while I'm doubtful they've happened a statistically significant number of times in tabletop gaming history, I can at least agree that the first two would be disruptive if they hypothetically happened (though they'd be a problem if men did them too)... But being "so beautiful as to distract from the game"?

Whether or not an Appearance stat as a mechanic is a good thing, I hardly find it fair to ban people from your games for having a high one in real life. And in this context, it seems quite sexist. It's not at all fair to blame/exclude women because of your own inability to not ogle them.

Cluedrew
2016-11-05, 11:54 AM
To Vrock_Summoner: I think Quertus is referring to a tendency for some immature male players to play objects of sexual attraction rather than characters. I have played along a clerk whose only defining characteristics were having large breasts and being sexually suggestive at all times. Luckily we kept the action happening fast enough it never went beyond that.

Vrock_Summoner
2016-11-05, 01:39 PM
To Vrock_Summoner: I think Quertus is referring to a tendency for some immature male players to play objects of sexual attraction rather than characters. I have played along a clerk whose only defining characteristics were having large breasts and being sexually suggestive at all times. Luckily we kept the action happening fast enough it never went beyond that.
I'd certainly accept that interpretation much more agreeably. I read it as talking about female gamers, not badly-played female characters. But the ambiguity is there to make either interpretation possible, so thanks for pointing out that possibility to me.

8BitNinja
2016-11-06, 02:28 AM
To Vrock_Summoner: I think Quertus is referring to a tendency for some immature male players to play objects of sexual attraction rather than characters. I have played along a clerk whose only defining characteristics were having large breasts and being sexually suggestive at all times. Luckily we kept the action happening fast enough it never went beyond that.

What's wrong with that?

Okay, it was a joke, put the guns down.

Zalabim
2016-11-06, 04:23 AM
The 5E Intellect Devourer. The only thing that still does Stat damage. My group freaked when they found that, because they hadn't found anything that cured stat damage anymore. It was so funny to watch them panic and check books.

Now, to clarify, I've not gotten into their 5E games cause I don't have the scheduling. In fact, I've not even picked up the 5E books that much because the once over I gave them didn't impress me. That said, I've heard good things and bad things. But the CR 2 who flat-lines parties with something that apparently "Doesn't exist anymore" (as one player said) amused me.
Shadows still deal strength damage too, though theirs just takes rest to recover. FWIW, Greater Restoration is the way to heal Intellect Devourer damage. A level 5 spell to cure a condition caused by a CR 2 monster.

Whether or not an Appearance stat as a mechanic is a good thing, I hardly find it fair to ban people from your games for having a high one in real life. And in this context, it seems quite sexist. It's not at all fair to blame/exclude women because of your own inability to not ogle them.
Well there is that story about three men being deported from a country for being too handsome. Probably not fair either, but at least it's equal?

jinjitsu
2016-11-06, 09:17 AM
Shadows still deal strength damage too, though theirs just takes rest to recover. FWIW, Greater Restoration is the way to heal Intellect Devourer damage. A level 5 spell to cure a condition caused by a CR 2 monster.

The Monster Manual even explicitly calls out not using certain creatures that have abilities your players can't handle, usually citing them as an element of the creature's Challenge rating. Their example is a rakshasa (CR 13), who lower-level characters can't even affect with spells since it's immune to spells of 6th level or lower. So fine, it's meant to fight 13th-level characters and only 13th-level+ spellcasters can hit it; but a creature whose key damage method can't be healed in any way until 7 levels after its CR? I don't think the Intellect Devourer is dangerous enough to warrant granting 9th-level XP, but there should at least be a sidebar with a caveat in there.

Stealth Marmot
2016-11-07, 11:29 AM
Well there is that story about three men being deported from a country for being too handsome. Probably not fair either, but at least it's equal?

This has nothing to do with anything.

8BitNinja
2016-11-07, 04:53 PM
The Monster Manual even explicitly calls out not using certain creatures that have abilities your players can't handle, usually citing them as an element of the creature's Challenge rating. Their example is a rakshasa (CR 13), who lower-level characters can't even affect with spells since it's immune to spells of 6th level or lower. So fine, it's meant to fight 13th-level characters and only 13th-level+ spellcasters can hit it; but a creature whose key damage method can't be healed in any way until 7 levels after its CR? I don't think the Intellect Devourer is dangerous enough to warrant granting 9th-level XP, but there should at least be a sidebar with a caveat in there.

This is just wrong

Katrina
2016-11-09, 12:10 AM
This is just wrong

I think it's a case of a badly considered CR for what has been admittedly a very wonky monster through every version of D&D. The Intellect Devourer is a strange "All or Nothing" threat in almost every version of the game. Either it has always been able to wipe you out or it has stood no chance against you. The biggest problem here is that in 5E, the Devourer is a walking TPW at its recommended CR and there is a very low chance of defeating it without losing people unless you have every advantage. And my resident 5E Rules Lawyer pointed out to me over the weekend that a party is not supposed to lose a person on the average equal CR engagement.

8BitNinja
2016-11-09, 08:05 PM
I think it's a case of a badly considered CR for what has been admittedly a very wonky monster through every version of D&D. The Intellect Devourer is a strange "All or Nothing" threat in almost every version of the game. Either it has always been able to wipe you out or it has stood no chance against you. The biggest problem here is that in 5E, the Devourer is a walking TPW at its recommended CR and there is a very low chance of defeating it without losing people unless you have every advantage. And my resident 5E Rules Lawyer pointed out to me over the weekend that a party is not supposed to lose a person on the average equal CR engagement.

Like the Terrasque? Except this isn't Godzilla.

Katrina
2016-11-10, 12:29 AM
Like the Terrasque? Except this isn't Godzilla.

At least the Tarrasque has the decency to have the highest CR rating that is really reasonable. :smalltongue:

8BitNinja
2016-11-10, 06:01 PM
At least the Tarrasque has the decency to have the highest CR rating that is really reasonable. :smalltongue:

And most DMs are merciful enough to not use it.

JAL_1138
2016-11-10, 06:43 PM
If you have somebody with a magic bow (or the ability to cast some spell such as Magic Weapon or Elemental Weapon), and a wizard with 7th-level slots, the Tarrasque can be a pushover. Cast Reverse Gravity on it and plink away with the magic bow until it dies.

8BitNinja
2016-11-11, 11:40 PM
If you have somebody with a magic bow (or the ability to cast some spell such as Magic Weapon or Elemental Weapon), and a wizard with 7th-level slots, the Tarrasque can be a pushover. Cast Reverse Gravity on it and plink away with the magic bow until it dies.

I'm taking careful notes and drawing diagrams right now.

Tohron
2016-11-12, 12:10 AM
I'm taking careful notes and drawing diagrams right now.

If you want to get really cheap, the winner of a thread for cheapest Tarrasque-killing methods involved a 1st level Wizard with a scroll of Wish, and a 5th level Expert with Animal Handling who trained a War Elephant and equipped it with a special saddle holding 10 400lb iron weights on quick release, then gave it potions of Bull's Strength and Fly. Fly above the Tarrasque, drop the weights from the maximum 1-round falling distance (150ft), then once it's in the negatives, the wizard uses the scroll to keep it dead.

So, to keep that on topic:
* Encounter's that players were supposed to flee from that end up getting curb-stomped due to special tactics.

AnBe
2016-11-12, 12:24 AM
If you want to get really cheap, the winner of a thread for cheapest Tarrasque-killing methods involved a 1st level Wizard with a scroll of Wish, and a 5th level Expert with Animal Handling who trained a War Elephant and equipped it with a special saddle holding 10 400lb iron weights on quick release, then gave it potions of Bull's Strength and Fly. Fly above the Tarrasque, drop the weights from the maximum 1-round falling distance (150ft), then once it's in the negatives, the wizard uses the scroll to keep it dead.

So, to keep that on topic:
* Encounter's that players were supposed to flee from that end up getting curb-stomped due to special tactics.

Oh, that's brilliant. Goodbye, Tarrasque. I wish the people I game with would think of awesome stuff like that.

Hawkstar
2016-11-12, 01:09 AM
Oh, that's brilliant. Goodbye, Tarrasque. I wish the people I game with would think of awesome stuff like that.
The tarrasque just has one big, crippling flaw - It's a grounded, melee-only monster. Anything that flies above it or can otherwise outrange it can kill it at its leisure.

If they'd taken a cue from Godzilla and given it a radioactive beam breath, there wouldn't be a problem.

JAL_1138
2016-11-12, 05:15 AM
The tarrasque just has one big, crippling flaw - It's a grounded, melee-only monster. Anything that flies above it or can otherwise outrange it can kill it at its leisure.

If they'd taken a cue from Godzilla and given it a radioactive beam breath, there wouldn't be a problem.

It desperately needs ranged attacks to be fearsome. Otherwise it's subject to cheese.

As a note, Reverse Gravity won't work if it has something to grab on to, like a building. It'll Legendary Resistance the Dex save. You could spam spells that require a save until it's out of Legendary resistances; Polymorph works well because no DM wants the Tarrasque to be turned into a miniature giant space hamster or whatever; it's undignified. Once it's out, its Dex isn't terriffic, and you could force a fail with Portent if you're a Diviner. Once it's floating, though, it's helpless for up to an hour. Plink away with magic ranged weapons (to avoid the Reglective Carapace chance of a rebound from cantrips) until it's kaput. The 5e version doesn't have regen and nothing says you need a Wish to keep it dead, so you don't need 9th-level spells.

Fortunately for the Tarrasque, there aren't many spells that target Int that would be particularly helpful. You can maze it, but then it comes back unharmed soon after. Might be enough time to set something up to receive it, like ten thousand flasks of alchemist's fire, but that's not really practical. Luckily for the Tarrasque, the Intellect Devourer's ability Body Thief only works on humanoids. Depending on how your DM rules effects while Polymorphed, though, two Diviners (because portent) could possibly team up to True Polymorph the Tarrasque into a humanoid, and True Polymorph an ally into an Intellect devourer, and have them eat its brain, although that opens up a huge can of worms about how to rule what happens to a TP'd creature whose brain is eaten, whether it reverts or stays dead if it dies, or what happens if TP wears off with the Intellect Devourer still in its head.

If you follow the Sage Advice that Power Word Kill will kill a Wildshaped druid outright (rather than simply revert them to normal with their prior hit points), create a Simulacrum for extra slots (or to cast Fly on both of you) and spam Polymorph until you eventually turn it into a squirrel. Proceed to PWK it.

Vinyadan
2016-11-12, 10:29 AM
I liked 1E artwork. Amateurish lineart, particularly for monsters, has sort of a "field guide made by some in-universe adventurer" feel. I miss charmingly-bad art.

However, I'd call 5e's halfling art a Thing That Shall Not Be Named. It's not charmingly-bad, it's outright uncanny-valley disturbing.

Argh why did I search this, is that a creepy gnome race that stalks women at night? It reminds me of sharp things and fish looming in water ponds to bite you in the private parts.


If you want to get really cheap, the winner of a thread for cheapest Tarrasque-killing methods involved a 1st level Wizard with a scroll of Wish, and a 5th level Expert with Animal Handling who trained a War Elephant and equipped it with a special saddle holding 10 400lb iron weights on quick release, then gave it potions of Bull's Strength and Fly. Fly above the Tarrasque, drop the weights from the maximum 1-round falling distance (150ft), then once it's in the negatives, the wizard uses the scroll to keep it dead.

So, to keep that on topic:
* Encounter's that players were supposed to flee from that end up getting curb-stomped due to special tactics.

I seem to remember something about throwing an aboleth into its mouth, but I can't recall how it worked. Something about mud or mucus.

Cluedrew
2016-11-12, 10:49 AM
If they'd taken a cue from Godzilla and given it a radioactive beam breath, there wouldn't be a problem.I say give it a sonic roar attack, maybe with anti-magic properties. It seems like the most natural (as in from nature) ability for a creature like that. Given the size of its lungs it could probably drop the air pressure in the air for a moment by inhaling quickly. I don't have as clean of an explanation for the anti-magic, but it would probably be very effective and it make some internal sense that a creature like the tarrasque (which is big and less numerous and so has to have high survival rates) would have some defence against it.

Maybe trying to apply natural laws is a waste of time, but as it is supposed to be of this world (as opposed to say a demon) I think it holds to an extent.

Vinyadan
2016-11-12, 11:31 AM
I say give it a sonic roar attack, maybe with anti-magic properties. It seems like the most natural (as in from nature) ability for a creature like that. Given the size of its lungs it could probably drop the air pressure in the air for a moment by inhaling quickly. I don't have as clean of an explanation for the anti-magic, but it would probably be very effective and it make some internal sense that a creature like the tarrasque (which is big and less numerous and so has to have high survival rates) would have some defence against it.

Maybe trying to apply natural laws is a waste of time, but as it is supposed to be of this world (as opposed to say a demon) I think it holds to an extent.

I know that many reptiles musk when they feel threatened, and that the musk of certain crocodiles is strong enough to kill micro-organisms, and that it generally smells disgusting. So you could easily give it the power to emit a chocking stench that can cause various status effects.

Another option is shooting blood from its eyes, like certain lizards. And some snakes can spit poison. Or make it smart enough to throw boulders, give it a few levels in hulking hurler.

Belac93
2016-11-12, 12:21 PM
I would just give the tarresque a version of the Giant's rock throwing ability. Maybe they can use it instead of a claw attack.

8BitNinja
2016-11-12, 12:27 PM
Paladin magic item restrictions in AD&D

Erit
2016-11-12, 01:44 PM
Or make it smart enough to throw boulders, give it a few levels in hulking hurler.

Doesn't the Tarrasque have humanlike (albeit very very stupid) intelligence? Int 3 is smart enough to be a phenomenally dumb PC rather than an animal. Or is that unique to 3.5?

Belac93
2016-11-12, 01:52 PM
Doesn't the Tarrasque have humanlike (albeit very very stupid) intelligence? Int 3 is smart enough to be a phenomenally dumb PC rather than an animal. Or is that unique to 3.5?

No, intelligence 3 is like an intelligence animal. For example, a dog has an intelligence of 3, a mule has an intelligence of 2, and a spider has an intelligence of 1. So, a PC unlucky enough to roll a 3 on their intelligence (or an orc who rolled a 5), cannot speak or do anything more intelligent that a dog could manage.

chaoschronicler
2016-11-12, 02:15 PM
Apparently when I bring up the subject of firearms in fantasy (or any other "advanced" tech in fantasy) it just makes a lot of old players cringe. I understand it's wonky in Pathfinder (Gunslinger's not helping) but I like the idea of mixing things from different times or genres to my games.

8BitNinja
2016-11-12, 06:58 PM
Apparently when I bring up the subject of firearms in fantasy (or any other "advanced" tech in fantasy) it just makes a lot of old players cringe. I understand it's wonky in Pathfinder (Gunslinger's not helping) but I like the idea of mixing things from different times or genres to my games.

What are you talking about? Guns are cool.

AnBe
2016-11-12, 07:06 PM
Imagine being a Gunslinger and a Paladin at the same time. So cool.

The Pathfinder Gunslinger is not that wonky. A bit odd and out of place, perhaps, but mechanically it works fine.

8BitNinja
2016-11-12, 10:00 PM
Imagine being a Gunslinger and a Paladin at the same time. So cool.

A gun using paladin? That is what I want to be.

Lord Raziere
2016-11-12, 10:09 PM
A gun using paladin? That is what I want to be.

perfectly possible with the Paladin's Holy Gun archetype. you'll only get light armor though.

or if you want to be a Gestalt, try Paladin/Gunslinger with the Gunslinger's Mysterious Stranger archetype so that your Grit points is based on Cha rather than Wis so that it has synergy with Paladin Cha-based features.

8BitNinja
2016-11-13, 12:04 AM
perfectly possible with the Paladin's Holy Gun archetype. you'll only get light armor though.

or if you want to be a Gestalt, try Paladin/Gunslinger with the Gunslinger's Mysterious Stranger archetype so that your Grit points is based on Cha rather than Wis so that it has synergy with Paladin Cha-based features.

Why can't they use heavy armor? Heavy armor + guns = awesomeness.

Stealth Marmot
2016-11-13, 12:11 AM
Why can't they use heavy armor? Heavy armor + guns = awesomeness.

Wasn't this the exact pitch meeting for coming up with the tank?

Lord Raziere
2016-11-13, 01:20 AM
Why can't they use heavy armor? Heavy armor + guns = awesomeness.

The Holy gun Archetype? *shrug* I'm guessing to emulate this "holy cowboy/sheriff of judgement/justice" type of thing.

The Gunslinger class itself has an archetype to do exactly this called the Gun Tank Archetype. But no holy paladin powers.

so if you want your gun tank paladin, your going to have to go with the Gestalt I talked about as far as I can see on the Pathfinder SRD.

if your not gestalting, its a case of "paladin, gun, armor, pick two." there is another paladin ranged archetype that replaces your heavy armor with precise shot, so I guess the game dislikes you trying to be both tanky and ranged. which is annoying. because I agree, paladin super-soldier gunning fools down? sounds awesome.

....though I guess its possible to be a Holy Gun Paladin and still have heavy armor if you have two feats to spend on the proficiencie. so you can either be human and spend your first two feats on gaining back that armor, or you can be some other race with medium armor until 3rd level and use the second feat to get heavy armor then.

8BitNinja
2016-11-13, 10:39 AM
The Holy gun Archetype? *shrug* I'm guessing to emulate this "holy cowboy/sheriff of judgement/justice" type of thing.

The Gunslinger class itself has an archetype to do exactly this called the Gun Tank Archetype. But no holy paladin powers.

so if you want your gun tank paladin, your going to have to go with the Gestalt I talked about as far as I can see on the Pathfinder SRD.

if your not gestalting, its a case of "paladin, gun, armor, pick two." there is another paladin ranged archetype that replaces your heavy armor with precise shot, so I guess the game dislikes you trying to be both tanky and ranged. which is annoying. because I agree, paladin super-soldier gunning fools down? sounds awesome.

....though I guess its possible to be a Holy Gun Paladin and still have heavy armor if you have two feats to spend on the proficiencie. so you can either be human and spend your first two feats on gaining back that armor, or you can be some other race with medium armor until 3rd level and use the second feat to get heavy armor then.

There are always house rules.


Wasn't this the exact pitch meeting for coming up with the tank?

Except the first tank was not awesome. It was clunky and always broke down.

Knaight
2016-11-13, 11:56 AM
Apparently when I bring up the subject of firearms in fantasy (or any other "advanced" tech in fantasy) it just makes a lot of old players cringe. I understand it's wonky in Pathfinder (Gunslinger's not helping) but I like the idea of mixing things from different times or genres to my games.

There's already a lot of stuff in a lot of fantasy games that was contemporary with firearms - early ones, yes, but still firearms.

Ashes
2016-11-13, 01:30 PM
No, intelligence 3 is like an intelligence animal. For example, a dog has an intelligence of 3, a mule has an intelligence of 2, and a spider has an intelligence of 1. So, a PC unlucky enough to roll a 3 on their intelligence (or an orc who rolled a 5), cannot speak or do anything more intelligent that a dog could manage.

Could you clarify of which edition you are speaking? Because the above is not true for 3.x.

8BitNinja
2016-11-13, 02:01 PM
No, intelligence 3 is like an intelligence animal. For example, a dog has an intelligence of 3, a mule has an intelligence of 2, and a spider has an intelligence of 1. So, a PC unlucky enough to roll a 3 on their intelligence (or an orc who rolled a 5), cannot speak or do anything more intelligent that a dog could manage.

No, I'm pretty sure that a creature can speak if it has an INT of 3.

Erit
2016-11-13, 02:37 PM
No, intelligence 3 is like an intelligence animal. For example, a dog has an intelligence of 3, a mule has an intelligence of 2, and a spider has an intelligence of 1. So, a PC unlucky enough to roll a 3 on their intelligence (or an orc who rolled a 5), cannot speak or do anything more intelligent that a dog could manage.

3!=2 (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/dog.htm). If you're talking about an edition I'm not so familiar with then that's that, but I would like to know which one changed the Intelligence standards. Since I plan on poking 5e with a stick soon and if that's the one which changed it it might screw up my BSF idea.

Belac93
2016-11-13, 03:07 PM
Could you clarify of which edition you are speaking? Because the above is not true for 3.x.

Ah, sorry. I am speaking of 5e, where the tarresque has the same intelligence as a dog.

8BitNinja
2016-11-13, 04:21 PM
While not RPG material it is relevant

Jack Chick's Dark Dungeons.

JAL_1138
2016-11-13, 04:40 PM
While not RPG material it is relevant

Jack Chick's Dark Dungeons.

Actually, it is RPG material now. There's a retroclone of Rules Cyclopedia/BECMI D&D titled after it, that has mentions of the character Black Leaf throughout.

2D8HP
2016-11-13, 05:19 PM
Actually, it is RPG material now. There's a retroclone of Rules Cyclopedia/BECMI D&D titled after it, that has mentions of the character Black Leaf throughout.

It's even a movie now!

Dark Dungeons: The Movie (http://www.darkdungeonsthemovie.com/)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/ed/Dark_Dungeons_%282014%29_DVD_cover.jpg/220px-Dark_Dungeons_%282014%29_DVD_cover.jpg

It could double bill with the fine film Mazes and Monsters
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/47/MazesMonstersVHSCover.jpg/250px-MazesMonstersVHSCover.jpg

Vinyadan
2016-11-13, 05:49 PM
While not RPG material it is relevant

Jack Chick's Dark Dungeons.

Jack Chick passed away on the 23rd of October, at 92 years of age.

8BitNinja
2016-11-13, 06:11 PM
Actually, it is RPG material now. There's a retroclone of Rules Cyclopedia/BECMI D&D titled after it, that has mentions of the character Black Leaf throughout.

Now isn't that a bold reference


It's even a movie now!

Dark Dungeons: The Movie (http://www.darkdungeonsthemovie.com/)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/ed/Dark_Dungeons_%282014%29_DVD_cover.jpg/220px-Dark_Dungeons_%282014%29_DVD_cover.jpg

It could double bill with the fine film Mazes and Monsters
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/47/MazesMonstersVHSCover.jpg/250px-MazesMonstersVHSCover.jpg

I saw JonTron's review of the Dark Dungeons movie, but I am still looking for a copy to watch myself. However, due to the movie having a Dead Alewives and even an Order of the Stick reference, I'm pretty sure it was made as a joke.

Spore
2016-11-14, 02:32 AM
saw JonTron's review of the Dark Dungeons movie, but I am still looking for a copy to watch myself. However, due to the movie having a Dead Alewives and even an Order of the Stick reference, I'm pretty sure it was made as a joke.

For sure. Problem is: It is neither witty nor funny. The movie feels weird and cringy and I am not sure people understand it. Heck, I am not even sure what they wanted to poke at with the movie.

Stealth Marmot
2016-11-14, 07:06 AM
Except the first tank was not awesome. It was clunky and always broke down.

Theory does not always meet reality, at least not at first. But those first men had a dream, a dream of a giant slab of metal shooting ordinance at people with damn near impunity.

They would be proud of our tanks today. So proud.

Stealth Marmot
2016-11-14, 07:12 AM
I saw JonTron's review of the Dark Dungeons movie, but I am still looking for a copy to watch myself. However, due to the movie having a Dead Alewives and even an Order of the Stick reference, I'm pretty sure it was made as a joke.

I...is it not immediately obvious?

For one thing it was made by the same people who made The Gamers: Dorkness Rising.

You can buy it digitally for 5 bucks here (or rent it for 2.50):

http://www.darkdungeonsthemovie.com/

Watching it though, I got SUCH a laugh from when they had a bunch of leather jacket wearing punk looking "gamers" walk by the clean cut good guys. Good Girl asks "Who are they?" "They're the ROLEPLAYERS. We've been trying to get them kicked out of the school but they are just so popular."

I had to take a break to compose myself.

2D8HP
2016-11-14, 07:37 AM
"Who are they?" "They're the ROLEPLAYERS. We've been trying to get them kicked out of the school but they are just so popular."

It's funny because it's just so true.

:amused:



Is blue text really necessary?

8BitNinja
2016-11-14, 06:47 PM
I got SUCH a laugh from when they had a bunch of leather jacket wearing punk looking "gamers" walk by the clean cut good guys. Good Girl asks "Who are they?" "They're the ROLEPLAYERS. We've been trying to get them kicked out of the school but they are just so popular."

I had to take a break to compose myself.

As a roleplayer, I can confirm that this is 100% true to life.

chaoschronicler
2016-11-14, 10:32 PM
Ah here's another one for roleplaying faux-pas. My dad back in the day had a guy that used one of those "pin-up" miniatures to represent his character. And this was one of the more "suggestive" ones. Needless to say he told him to get another one cause they where holding the game at his old shop, during the day no less.

8BitNinja
2016-11-15, 07:29 PM
Ah here's another one for roleplaying faux-pas. My dad back in the day had a guy that used one of those "pin-up" miniatures to represent his character. And this was one of the more "suggestive" ones. Needless to say he told him to get another one cause they where holding the game at his old shop, during the day no less.

Those exist?

Why?

Cluedrew
2016-11-15, 09:08 PM
Because hormones. And maybe profit motive, aka greed.

8BitNinja
2016-11-15, 11:07 PM
Because hormones. And maybe profit motive, aka greed.

Yeah, but they're FIGURINES. You put them on a battle map so you can fight monsters! Since when did anyone fight monsters scantily clad or completely naked?

(Checks 1e handbook)

Never mind.

Spore
2016-11-16, 04:06 AM
Those exist?

Why?

Hormones aside it is a stylistic choice too. I don't like the dry Barbarian from 3.5 and Pathfinder. I much rather prefer the explicit versions from the Conan universe. While overdone in its own way I would say a barechested (male or female) barbarian is far closer to its historical roots of naked drugged-up Germanic warriors fighting the ironclad and organized forces of the Roman Empire. A sexy witch - representing the worldly temptations of a devilish or demonic pact - in stark contrast to the pure and armored up Paladin is another choice I agree upon.

Sexy ranger or sexy wizard flat out doesnt make much sense. Like these:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4rUiV_Hh74

Zanos
2016-11-16, 04:29 AM
F.A.T.A.L.

Cthulhutech

Somehow I find Cthulhutech to be worse than FATAL. Probably because the first had potential, and the later was bad from the outset. The guy who made FATAL sat down and just took a **** of all his weird racist sexual fantasies and mushed it between two covers. The folks who made Cthulhutech had some cool ideas that were ruined by chronic masturbation(real flaw) and terrible DMing advice. Dear lord, the DM advice in Cthulhutech is actually a great example of what not to do.


Samuel Haight from World of Darkness

Lots of game cover art. Especially the cover of Exalted's Savant and Sorcerer. 9_9
As much as I enjoy VtM, I am every once in awhile reminded that some of the folks responsible for it are complete idiots. There's a lot of stuff that's pretty obviously creepy fetish inserts, and then other stuff that's just dumb. I'm reminded that VtR has a merit(basically a feat) that lets female blood sorcerers use menstrual blood for bonus effects. Gee, thanks.

chaoschronicler
2016-11-16, 10:29 AM
Hormones aside it is a stylistic choice too. I don't like the dry Barbarian from 3.5 and Pathfinder. I much rather prefer the explicit versions from the Conan universe. While overdone in its own way I would say a barechested (male or female) barbarian is far closer to its historical roots of naked drugged-up Germanic warriors fighting the ironclad and organized forces of the Roman Empire. A sexy witch - representing the worldly temptations of a devilish or demonic pact - in stark contrast to the pure and armored up Paladin is another choice I agree upon.

Sexy ranger or sexy wizard flat out doesnt make much sense. Like these:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4rUiV_Hh74

Oh I agree with the Conan style barbarians and historical depictions. That's all fine and good, but from what my dad said of the indecent it was more of a pole dancer than fighter.

And 8BitNinja you would be surprised about how many manufacturers make them. Was Browsing Miniature Building Authority and they had a few (along with some really good weapon sprues), and I know for a fact Ground Zero Games has some too.

Stealth Marmot
2016-11-16, 10:36 AM
Oh I agree with the Conan style barbarians and historical depictions. That's all fine and good, but from what my dad said of the indecent it was more of a pole dancer than fighter.

And 8BitNinja you would be surprised about how many manufacturers make them. Was Browsing Miniature Building Authority and they had a few (along with some really good weapon sprues), and I know for a fact Ground Zero Games has some too.

Sadly, tabletop gamers are not known for being the most enlightened people when it comes to depicting women.

tomandtish
2016-11-16, 03:06 PM
A gun using paladin? That is what I want to be.

Someone like Sanya (http://dresdenfiles.wikia.com/wiki/Sanya) (Knight of the Cross from The Dresden Files).

8BitNinja
2016-11-16, 08:01 PM
Hormones aside it is a stylistic choice too. I don't like the dry Barbarian from 3.5 and Pathfinder. I much rather prefer the explicit versions from the Conan universe. While overdone in its own way I would say a barechested (male or female) barbarian is far closer to its historical roots of naked drugged-up Germanic warriors fighting the ironclad and organized forces of the Roman Empire. A sexy witch - representing the worldly temptations of a devilish or demonic pact - in stark contrast to the pure and armored up Paladin is another choice I agree upon.

Sexy ranger or sexy wizard flat out doesnt make much sense. Like these:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4rUiV_Hh74

I also can't see a sexy paladin

I know you may say differently because of that charisma score, but they are covered from head to toe in armor usually.

Cluedrew
2016-11-16, 08:23 PM
To 8BitNinja: As in "scantily clad" no, but it reminds me of a 5 five hottest women in gaming list. Number 1 was Samus Aran because, and I quote, "Worth playing the entire game just to see her with her helmet off." Then Zero Suit Samus became a thing and Metroid: Other M happened.

...

Wait, all the Metroid fans I know wish me to inform you Metroid: Other M didn't happen.

And there is my personal (negative) feelings about the Zero Suit. So add those to some other list of Things That Shall Not Be Named.

Efrate
2016-11-17, 12:16 AM
Sexy paladin can work. Sharess, Sune (both from forgotten realms 3.x), or most fertility deities can make a case for that to be a part of their shtick. A significant amount of real world religions with a fertility goddess set a precedent for that. Gilgamesh's Ishtar comes to mind immediately, as well as Shamhat who was a priestess.

That aside, any system reminiscent of Cthulhu Tech. Good ideas, but flawed to the point of nearly unplayability.

Most starting characters in the 40k universe, who can only do their assisgned role about 40% of the time, and that only if they are pretty decent. Reading starting stats from Dark Heresy 2nd edition recently made me shudder. When your average town cop is quite a bit better than you as a hand picked operative for vital and dangerous missions, you've done something wrong. There a point where grimdark becomes ridiculous.

Katrina
2016-11-17, 04:21 AM
Most starting characters in the 40k universe, who can only do their assisgned role about 40% of the time, and that only if they are pretty decent. Reading starting stats from Dark Heresy 2nd edition recently made me shudder. When your average town cop is quite a bit better than you as a hand picked operative for vital and dangerous missions, you've done something wrong. There a point where grimdark becomes ridiculous.

So you've read the 5E D&D monster book? Seriously, bandits with two attacks and 5 hit die are CR 2? and when is the last time any GM wrote an encounter with "a bandit"? Who uses Bandits in singular?

Khedrac
2016-11-17, 06:56 AM
Marc Miller's Traveller (T4)'s formulae book Fire Fusion and Steel (if I have the right book).

A book primarily consisting of formulae for things like rocket thrust v acceleration depending on the gravity of the planet.
Yes, most of this was quite complex physics.

And the "final proof" version used a different font to the printed version so 90% of the formulae went wrong...

I think it was the square root symbol and the divided by symbols got replaced by other things...

Cernor
2016-11-17, 09:07 AM
So you've read the 5E D&D monster book? Seriously, bandits with two attacks and 5 hit die are CR 2? and when is the last time any GM wrote an encounter with "a bandit"? Who uses Bandits in singular?

Erm... It appears you haven't. Standard bandits are CR 1/8 (so, takes about two to threaten a standard 1st-level adventurer) with 2 hit dice and one (weak) attack per round.

Now there are tougher bandits (Thugs stand out, with 5HD and 2 attacks/round), but those aren't meant to be standard bandits.

8BitNinja
2016-11-17, 08:09 PM
Marc Miller's Traveller (T4)'s formulae book Fire Fusion and Steel (if I have the right book).

A book primarily consisting of formulae for things like rocket thrust v acceleration depending on the gravity of the planet.
Yes, most of this was quite complex physics.

And the "final proof" version used a different font to the printed version so 90% of the formulae went wrong...

I think it was the square root symbol and the divided by symbols got replaced by other things...

Someone tried to play Traveller with what might literally be a rocket science textbook?

Oh crap, that's quite an INT requirement.

Lord Raziere
2016-11-17, 08:37 PM
Someone tried to play Traveller with what might literally be a rocket science textbook?

Oh crap, that's quite an INT requirement.

Worse: tried to play with what might literally be a completely screwed up rocket science textbook. meaning if your using the non-printed "final proof" version, you either have to know those formulae yourself, know enough about the fonts to translate them back to do them properly, or your just completely ignorant and think they're all accurate and cause probably no end of trouble when the actual game starts as the simulations starts going completely crazy.

8BitNinja
2016-11-17, 11:33 PM
Worse: tried to play with what might literally be a completely screwed up rocket science textbook. meaning if your using the non-printed "final proof" version, you either have to know those formulae yourself, know enough about the fonts to translate them back to do them properly, or your just completely ignorant and think they're all accurate and cause probably no end of trouble when the actual game starts as the simulations starts going completely crazy.

This definitely came from a plane of pure chaos

Katrina
2016-11-18, 02:07 AM
Erm... It appears you haven't. Standard bandits are CR 1/8 (so, takes about two to threaten a standard 1st-level adventurer) with 2 hit dice and one (weak) attack per round.

Now there are tougher bandits (Thugs stand out, with 5HD and 2 attacks/round), but those aren't meant to be standard bandits.

I apologize for confusing the two creatures with synonymous names. :smalltongue: Point still kind of stands.

I'm also tempted to vote for Anima's Fumble rules when combined with the Summon/Banish rules, which allowed a Paladin to destroy a nation in a game I ran when he fumbled the Banish check and summoned a "Legion" of more powerful Abominations. I understand that the high risk of the Summon/Control/Bind/Banish system is very key to theme, feel and mechanics, but it really seems like the power designed to send a creature away should not summon MORE POWERFUL versions when you muck it up.

Khedrac
2016-11-18, 06:11 AM
Worse: tried to play with what might literally be a completely screwed up rocket science textbook. meaning if your using the non-printed "final proof" version, you either have to know those formulae yourself, know enough about the fonts to translate them back to do them properly, or your just completely ignorant and think they're all accurate and cause probably no end of trouble when the actual game starts as the simulations starts going completely crazy.
Not quiet that bad actually - the formulae came out as garbage rather then incorrect. This meant that unless you know them you had to ignore them.
It wasn't just rocket science - there were other things like the range of artillery in there too.
I still have my copy (and I hope I still have the errata somewhere) - perhaps I ought to go back and see just what formulae they thought should be in an RPG...

The big problem with T4 was it tried to stick to real world physics for everything where possible, which is a bit silly in a game where the main power supply is cold fusion and more advanced ships use "thruster plates" rather than rockets (so you needed to know surface area when designing ships).
Add in Jump drive technology and to still be limited to speed-of-light radio for communications and radar/optics for detecting things was rather annoying.
That aside the game was a reasonable update of Traveller, but the rules for designing ones own ships etc. were just too complex.

The game had one hidden gem - the Pocket Empires rulebook - which basically was the rules for a strategic wargame building ones own little interstellar polities. Apart from Tech level and jump range it didn't really interface with the rest of the rules and looked as if it would make quite a good pbm game.

GungHo
2016-11-18, 11:54 AM
As much as I enjoy VtM, I am every once in awhile reminded that some of the folks responsible for it are complete idiots. There's a lot of stuff that's pretty obviously creepy fetish inserts, and then other stuff that's just dumb. I'm reminded that VtR has a merit(basically a feat) that lets female blood sorcerers use menstrual blood for bonus effects. Gee, thanks.
Games for "mature" minds.

Lord Torath
2016-11-18, 02:35 PM
Games for "mature" minds.Wait, can vampires reproduce in the normal human method? I thought usually they can only make more vampires by turning existing people. If that's the case, why would female vampires even have a menstrual cycle?

SirBellias
2016-11-18, 06:35 PM
DeadEarth? I read... A lot of that. Characters seemed to die quite often before play, which is strange, since you could only generate 3 characters. Ever.

8BitNinja
2016-11-18, 11:09 PM
Ravages and Afflictions

Anyone who has read the Book of Exalted Deeds knows what I'm talking about.

Katrina
2016-11-18, 11:19 PM
Wait, can vampires reproduce in the normal human method? I thought usually they can only make more vampires by turning existing people. If that's the case, why would female vampires even have a menstrual cycle?

Your ideas concerning vampiric reproduction are correct. Normal (living) human methods are out. Though Blood and Smoke introduces the concept of "Unintentional Embrace", the resulting "Revenants" (which no longer refers to a Vampire who has lost all his Humanity, that's a "Draugr" now) are near mindless blood craving monsters. They can be Embraced normally into a Clan by a Kindred who wishes to do so.

The merit in question is actually designed with Order of the Crone Blood magic in mind. The horror factor is...well, I'm pretty sure it's intended too, but there are no mechanics for it. :smallyuk:


Ah, Ravages and afflictions. Those things that were poisons, but not. Especially Touch of Golden Ice.

Spore
2016-11-19, 08:48 AM
Your ideas concerning vampiric reproduction are correct. Normal (living) human methods are out. Though Blood and Smoke introduces the concept of "Unintentional Embrace", the resulting "Revenants" (which no longer refers to a Vampire who has lost all his Humanity, that's a "Draugr" now) are near mindless blood craving monsters. They can be Embraced normally into a Clan by a Kindred who wishes to do so.

The merit in question is actually designed with Order of the Crone Blood magic in mind. The horror factor is...well, I'm pretty sure it's intended too, but there are no mechanics for it. :smallyuk:


Ah, Ravages and afflictions. Those things that were poisons, but not. Especially Touch of Golden Ice.

And then there are Dhampirs which are offsprings of a mortal and a vampire which honestly is the weirdest crap ever. I have never felt so insulted by a paranormal imaginary predicament. You have this tragic story of a creature unable to reproduce...until they introduce splatbook Y which suddenly allows said reproduction and comes up with special snowflake type vampires.

Arbane
2016-11-20, 01:22 AM
And then there are Dhampirs which are offsprings of a mortal and a vampire which honestly is the weirdest crap ever. I have never felt so insulted by a paranormal imaginary predicament. You have this tragic story of a creature unable to reproduce...until they introduce splatbook Y which suddenly allows said reproduction and comes up with special snowflake type vampires.

They're from Balkan folklore (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhampir). Apparently, not all walking dead lose their sex drives.

8BitNinja
2016-11-20, 01:55 AM
They're from Balkan folklore (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhampir). Apparently, not all walking dead lose their sex drives.

This is actually really messed up once you think about it for a second