-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
I primarily burn oak in the woodstove at my dad's place. It's also a very common wood in weapons like clubs.
Of course, the time you spend gathering a bunch of oak "clubs" to sell as oak "firewood" is the difference where that copper piece comes from.
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
a club is meant to hit things, therefore it would need to be some-what flexible, strong, and heavy.
Firewood is not just any log. if you chop down a tree, cut it to size and split it nicely you still don't have proper firewood. it will still burn (some what), but it is not firewood.
It would need to be aged for a decent amount of time. You will want to reduce the water content to about 25-30% (some say less, but when it is too dry it will burn faster, blowing most of the heat out the chimney). This varies depending on external humidity and temperature, and can range from less then 3 months (west Texas) to over a year (Washington state). At this point firewood has many radial cracks coming from the center, it sounds hollow when hit against each other and only weighs half of its green weight.
both a club and firewood burn and both hurt if you would hit someone; but they are not the same.
BTW: IRL you can go outside, pick up a few branches and chuck it in your fireplace; and yet you can go to some gas-stations or grocery stores and buy yourself some firewood.
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
Quote:
Originally Posted by
VGLordR2
The only distinguishing factor between common wine and fine wine (in the PHB) is the container.
:smallconfused: So, the fact that one is labelled as "common" and the other as "fine" is not a distinguishing factor?
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Canarr
:smallconfused: So, the fact that one is labelled as "common" and the other as "fine" is not a distinguishing factor?
The label is almost certainly on the container.
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jack_Simth
Firewood and clubs are not the same thing. Just because something burns doesn't make it good firewood. For a weapon, you probably want a particularly hard wood - Oak, maybe - and while yes, it'll burn, for a fire, you want something that'll throw off a decent amount of heat, and will light easily.
LOL! Oak makes great firewood: it's heavy and dense and thus releases plenty of energy. You might need to work a little to get the heat up for it to burn since it isn't resinous and therefore is a little harder to light, unless it is very dry and finely chopped up.
I spend this time of the year chopping wood to dry over the summer and early fall. I usually burn a mix of pine, birch and oak.
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Agent 451
I've never come across wood that couldn't be burned before, care to enlighten us?
well, D&D wood won't burn very easily since mundane fire does 1d6 dmg/rd and wood has hardness 5.
but on the subject of nobility checs making a commoner ignorant of his parentage, local is also not a class skill, so a commoner is unable to identify anything with a DC of higher than 10 (any monster since it starts at 10+HD) so the commoner doesn't know what he is. this explains why there's so many half-whatevers in D&D.
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
I just found one while looking at the description of the Brimstone Blast essence invocation for warlocks. The target has to pass a Ref save or get lit on fire for an extra 2d6 for a couple of rounds. But CArc says that creatures burning because of that effect can never take more than 2d6 fire damage in a round.
This was obviously meant to keep players from layering multiple Brimstone Blasts on their enemies at once, but it actually gives them effective immunity to all other fire effects for the duration of the burning. Should probably be tweaked.
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Etrivar
I just found one while looking at the description of the Brimstone Blast essence invocation for warlocks. The target has to pass a Ref save or get lit on fire for an extra 2d6 for a couple of rounds. But CArc says that creatures burning because of that effect can never take more than 2d6 fire damage in a round.
This was obviously meant to keep players from layering multiple Brimstone Blasts on their enemies at once, but it actually gives them effective immunity to all other fire effects for the duration of the burning. Should probably be tweaked.
Only useful if the fire damage it prevents is going to be more than that.
Also, is the limit on damage the same as the damage done, or is it a separate 2d6? Either way can have problems.
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Canarr
:smallconfused: So, the fact that one is labelled as "common" and the other as "fine" is not a distinguishing factor?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Amphetryon
The label is almost certainly on the container.
yup and that's pretty much it. Its a label. A marketing thing. The amount of money someone is willing to sell/buy something has nothing to do with the quality of the item in question.
Just Because someone sells a wine for 100gp($) does not mean it is any better then the wine for 5gp($).
As a DM i would even allow to let that happen with either good role-playing, a Cha check, a profession check in something related, or a diplomacy/bluff check. This is about good marketing not about how good the wine is.
Rant:
Spoiler
Show
now don't get me started on the 10,000 gp worth of diamond for a resurrection. A while back in a mid level campaign (i think) we managed to secure a diamond mine and build a base on top and somewhat into it, anyway the DM SERIOUSLY wanted me to go out and buy diamonds for the spell because he said we didn't pay for THOSE diamonds so we could not use them! :smallfurious:
end rant
I hate to bring IRL in this again, but:
http://bayesianheresy.blogspot.com/2...and-price.html
http://www.drinkhacker.com/2008/04/0...ality-in-wine/
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gn...rice-negative/
http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs...ce-and-quality
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
Y'know, you could pull the wine trick in our world, too: Buy some cheap wine, pour it into fancy bottles, and sell it as expensive wine. Of course, if you got caught, you'd be in trouble with the law, but then, the same is true in D&D. How is this a rules dysfunction?
And the Brimstone Blast one would be handy if, say, you're fighting a red dragon. 2d6 a round is a small price to pay to be otherwise immune from all the dice a dragon throws around.
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Chronos
Y'know, you could pull the wine trick in our world, too: Buy some cheap wine, pour it into fancy bottles, and sell it as expensive wine. Of course, if you got caught, you'd be in trouble with the law, but then, the same is true in D&D. How is this a rules dysfunction?
And the Brimstone Blast one would be handy if, say, you're fighting a red dragon. 2d6 a round is a small price to pay to be otherwise immune from all the dice a dragon throws around.
bold and cross out mine.
You can buy cheap wine and sell it for more under a different name. if you get into trouble or not depends if you are lying.
IRL stuff:
I want to limit IRL examples so this is spoilered
Spoiler
Show
For example; Buy the cheapest wine from southern France and say that it is an exquisite French wine that has a fantastic taste, is wonderfully complex and uses only the finest southern grapes. You are good, you did not break the law, as all the facts you stated (that it is from France) are correct, the other descriptions are subjective and therefore within a VERY wide gray-zone.
I hope i am not breaking too many bobbles, but that is how most wine is sold. One type of grape, one vine yard, one winery, 5 different labels and all are at different price points.
And this does not even include wine blending. Just because it says Califorian Cabernet Sauvignon on the lable means that there are only grapes from California in it. The wineries only need to use a certain percentage of Californian grapes. This % depends on the region you are in, but can be as low as 35%.
ergo: buy wine by what you know you like, not by how much it costs, or how fancy the label is (or even if it is in a battle of box). Unless you want to give it an honest try, which is fun,too! Just don't expect a 100$ wine to taste any better then a 10$ wine.
Rant:
please don't read if you are intent on answering a pointless off topic rant.
Spoiler
Show
sorry to break some more bobbles, but that is how most things are sold. One OEM makes a rough product, this is then combined and altered to different degrees by individual companies, every company gives it a 'unique' look, gives it a cool name and calls it part of its own brand. This is true for wine, cars, computers, power tools, firearms, food, pharmaceutical, soap, and much much more.
CPUs for example usually come in a variety of power levels even though it is the same CPU generation. Why so? Well, they usually downgrade some of them and make it impossible to overclock it above a certain level. The production costs are the same for all of them, but this way they can sell more, and make more money. It also has to do a lot with giving the consumers the illusion of choice within a brand, to keep them from looking into the competition, but i don't want to go into that to much.
I did this for a living, and trust me when i say that whatever you have bought or will buy in your entire life, you choose because marketing people want you to buy it, and the better marketing wins. not the better product.
To say it simpler: why do you think Apple is so popular when every computer that they make can be bought cheaper (and sometimes for less then half) from another company without the fancy apple look and the same internal components? Please no Apple-fan-boy hate storm.
Also, while we are at bursting bobbles:
http://www.convergencealimentaire.info/map.jpg
end of rant.
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
Maybe the issue is that there is no actual distinction between wines than what kind of bottle they are in. I'm not a wine person but are all real world wines actually interchangeable outside of their containers?
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
Has anyone brought up the particularly cheap price of service npcs or chickens? chickens cost 2 coppah'. A pig is worth 3g. 50 chickens for a single coin? Who needs the chicken infested flaw, just bring a bunch of chickens into any dungeon near a farm and let them loose. Not exactly gamebreaking, but a very funny thought...
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Steward
Maybe the issue is that there is no actual distinction between wines than what kind of bottle they are in. I'm not a wine person but are all real world wines actually interchangeable outside of their containers?
There is actually a good bit of psych research that found raters rate wines based on the bottles; crappy wines in nice bottles get a bonus, nice wines in ugly bottles get a penalty. I'm not sure offhand the degree of the difference, but it's true IRL.
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
Errr, what? I used to be quite good at accurately decide the origin of (Old World/New World) and grape used for the wine in blind tastings. As for the taste of the wine (good/bad) that is entirely subjective and rarely has anything to do with the price. Quality however can be measured and some wine houses acheive impressive quality. This however does not mean the wine tastes better, just that the quality of the product is as intended.
To say that wine is interchangeable is simply wrong.
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
Obviously there are differences in quality and taste, but that doesn't mean the psychological effect is negligible. We fool ourselves on a daily basis on any number of subjects.
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gwendol
Errr, what? I used to be quite good at accurately decide the origin of (Old World/New World) and grape used for the wine in blind tastings. As for the taste of the wine (good/bad) that is entirely subjective and rarely has anything to do with the price. Quality however can be measured and some wine houses acheive impressive quality. This however does not mean the wine tastes better, just that the quality of the product is as intended.
To say that wine is interchangeable is simply wrong.
Here's the study.
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
Cats have a climb of +6, and a jump of +10.
Elephants have a climb of +10 and a jump of +10. Due their larger size, they can jump higher.
Try having your next party ambushed by elephants leaping at them from trees.
A shadowcast leomand's secure shelter makes for an excellent combat spell.
Spoiler
Show
To say it simpler: why do you think Apple is so popular when every computer that they make can be bought cheaper (and sometimes for less then half) from another company without the fancy apple look and the same internal components?
Because the customers are practicing good risk management. While the computer sold by company X may be just as good as Apple's, it also may not be. Absent of the ability to easily tell the difference between the two, you go with the trusted company, so that you know you get a computer that works.
Computer experts of course, may choose to build their own computer out of parts, as many of my friends do. Why pay for a company to assemble parts for you when the components are easy to match yourself?
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Amphetryon
So what: in general it is quite trivial to taste the difference between, say, pinot noir, merlot, and cabernet sauvignon. That said, because wine taste etc are so very much affected not only by the variety of grapes used, but by the soil, climate, and processing, you can have wines that go well outside the norm of its peers. Those are outliers.
Please note that I make a very definite distinction between that and the pleasure derived from drinking the wine; that is a subjective measure and is certainly dependent on a number of factors not necessarily related to the wine itself.
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gwendol
So what: in general it is quite trivial to taste the difference between, say, pinot noir, merlot, and cabernet sauvignon. That said, because wine taste etc are so very much affected not only by the variety of grapes used, but by the soil, climate, and processing, you can have wines that go well outside the norm of its peers. Those are outliers.
Please note that I make a very definite distinction between that and the pleasure derived from drinking the wine; that is a subjective measure and is certainly dependent on a number of factors not necessarily related to the wine itself.
So you're entirely dismissing the study. Good to know. Back to the topic of the thread, maybe?
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
No, I'm not. I'm saying that the one does not disprove the other. I'm objecting to the way real world examples are being presented as support for this or that dysfunctional rule (or dissmissal thereof) while being wrong.
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Togo
Cats have a climb of +6, and a jump of +10.
Elephants have a climb of +10 and a jump of +10. Due their larger size, they can jump higher.
Try having your next party ambushed by elephants leaping at them from trees.
The truly astounding thing about this is that elephants are not physically capable of jumping at all.
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Amphetryon
So you're entirely dismissing the study. Good to know.
The thing is, previous studies have shown that given the correct social setup, and a suitable amount of peer pressure and misdirection, people can be pursuaded to say quite outrageous things. I did an experiement where I convinced people to give a series of quiz answers which they knew or strongly suspected were entirely wrong, (e.g. The US has 52 states) simply by leaving a fake set of previous answers on the test paper. Even when the answers were annonymous, and the questions trivial, you could get remarkable conformity just by pretending other people had consistently given a different answer. In the study you quote, with experts giving their opinion in front of their peers, in an unfamiliar enviroment, for social scientists, with only the experimental conditions giving them any clue, and being asked for an essentially subjective opinion, and of course the normative pressures would be enormous.
It's an interesting set up, but it's a reprise of a known psychological phenomenon, and I don't think it says anything useful about wine per se.
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Szar_Lakol
The truly astounding thing about this is that elephants are not physically capable of jumping at all.
Correction:
No one has seen an Elephant jump and lived to tell about it.
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
Quote:
Cats have a climb of +6, and a jump of +10.
Elephants have a climb of +10 and a jump of +10. Due their larger size, they can jump higher.
Try having your next party ambushed by elephants leaping at them from trees.
In the real world, for the most part, all animals can jump about the same height regardless of size (elephants being one of the rare exceptions). So a flea, a housecat, a human, and a tiger can all jump roughly as well-- There's no scaling involved. This isn't really reflected in D&D physics, though.
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
Idk, tigers at the zoo have huge enclosures for a reason- they can take massive leaps.
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rickshaw
Idk, tigers at the zoo have huge enclosures for a reason- they can take massive leaps.
They have huge enclosures because they are relatively large creatures. Their enclosures have high walls because jumping vertically is much harder than jumping horizontally. They can jump farther than humans, but that is because they have a biology more suited for it, not just because they are larger.
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
what i mean is that relatively speaking, a tiger jumping 25 feet is a lot more than what a human can jump
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
If using a scale of physical height compared to height it can jump, small animals will tend to jump many times their own height/length, whereas large animals can only jump smaller distances proportionally.
Animals which are outliers on this scale would be "great jumpers". Cats in general are better jumpers than other animals of the same size- massive leg muscles, exceptionally flexible spinal columns, etc.
Fleas are great jumpers of the insect world.
-
Re: "Wait, that didn't work right" - the Dysfunctional Rules Collection
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jindra34
Actually flat-footed only negates a Dex bonus to AC not a penalty.
Is this true? Our campaign has a cleric with a negative dex modifier!!!