New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 91 to 119 of 119
  1. - Top - End - #91
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Earth
    Gender
    Intersex

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    Quote Originally Posted by Honest Tiefling View Post
    This is actually a genuine problem with third edition of DnD, if I remember correctly that adventuring (with overcoming encounters) is the only way to gain experience that was listed in the books. I don't think there were guidelines for roleplaying experience until later. It's an old joke.
    YES! That's it! You put it in parentheses but you got it. The only way to earn experience (outside story awards, ad hock, homebrew) was by over coming encounters. However

    Encounters =/= adventuring


    It's a common mistake among players. The Wizards forgot many things in their books but definitions was 99% correct.


    A young boy is tired of seeing his friend get picked on and fights the bully himself? He gets XP.

    A noblewoman goes through high society avoiding social traps? XP is earned.


    How does adventuring factor into those?

  2. - Top - End - #92
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Fyraltari's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    France
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alcore View Post
    A noblewoman goes through high society avoiding social traps? XP is earned.


    How does adventuring factor into those?
    We're adventurers, honey, everything we do is an adventure.
    Forum Wisdom

    Mage avatar by smutmulch & linklele.

  3. - Top - End - #93
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2015

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kish View Post
    Maybe. Maybe it requires a BAB of +15 and so when Horace died without any of a tiny number of really high-level adventurers learning it from him, it all but died out. Maybe it can only be learned by a single-classed fighter (or, for more consistency with existing mechanics, has Greater Weapon Specialization as a prerequisite*) and so most people who might have learned it one day went, "Fighter level eleven is dumb level. Thog not take."

    *This does run into the warblade problem, but still, if you need 12 fighter levels or 14 warblade levels to learn it, that's a tiny group of potential students in a world where very few characters ever make it to level 10.
    Maybe it also has a high int requirement. Greater Weapon Specialization, Int of 16+, and some other flavor tax feat nobody wants, combined, would exclude most people.
    Attention LotR fans
    Spoiler: LotR
    Show
    The scouring of the Shire never happened. That's right. After reading books I, II, and III, I stopped reading when the One Ring was thrown into Mount Doom. The story ends there. Nothing worthwhile happened afterwards. Middle-Earth was saved.

  4. - Top - End - #94
    Dragon in the Playground Moderator
     
    Peelee's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Washington D.C.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goblin_Priest View Post
    Maybe it also has a high int requirement. Greater Weapon Specialization, Int of 16+, and some other flavor tax feat nobody wants, combined, would exclude most people.
    Why stop there? No stat below 12, must have defeated an epic-level lich, and must be able to rub belly and pat head at the same time, why not?
    Cuthalion's art is the prettiest art of all the art. Like my avatar.

    Number of times Roland St. Jude has sworn revenge upon me: 2

  5. - Top - End - #95
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Jasdoif's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Oregon, USA

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    Quote Originally Posted by Peelee View Post
    Why stop there? No stat below 12, must have defeated an epic-level lich, and must be able to rub belly and pat head at the same time, why not?
    Hm. Still less absurd-sounding than "must have defeated a hippopotamus in single combat". Blessed by Tem-Et-Nu is a really weird feat.
    Feytouched Banana eldritch disciple avatar by...me!

    The Index of the Giant's Comments VI―Making Dogma from Zapped Bananas

  6. - Top - End - #96
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    ElfMonkGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2014

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    It would make a certain degree of sense, at least as much as anything ever does in D&D, if it required a few Spellcraft ranks. Y'know, since you need to be able to identify the point where the spell's energy peaks. And there's a bit in On the Origin of PCs that could be reasonably interpreted as showing Roy has said ranks.

  7. - Top - End - #97
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    RatElemental's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Gender
    Male2Female

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor West View Post
    It would make a certain degree of sense, at least as much as anything ever does in D&D, if it required a few Spellcraft ranks. Y'know, since you need to be able to identify the point where the spell's energy peaks. And there's a bit in On the Origin of PCs that could be reasonably interpreted as showing Roy has said ranks.
    Would make sense. As long as you can see the verbal and somatic components, a DC 15+(Spell Level) spellcraft check lets you identify a spell being cast, and with enough training I could see someone being able to use that knowledge to smack someone while the magic was at its height.

  8. - Top - End - #98
    Dragon in the Playground Moderator
     
    Peelee's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Washington D.C.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jasdoif View Post
    Hm. Still less absurd-sounding than "must have defeated a hippopotamus in single combat".
    I've defeated a hiphopopotamus in single combat. Well, a rap battle, but still. Obviously I was the Rhymenocerous.
    Cuthalion's art is the prettiest art of all the art. Like my avatar.

    Number of times Roland St. Jude has sworn revenge upon me: 2

  9. - Top - End - #99
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Honest Tiefling's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2011

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alcore View Post
    It's a common mistake among players. The Wizards forgot many things in their books but definitions was 99% correct.

    A young boy is tired of seeing his friend get picked on and fights the bully himself? He gets XP.

    A noblewoman goes through high society avoiding social traps? XP is earned.
    Because only stabbing or sneaking was ever covered by the books, IIRC. Overcoming mean defeat, not roleplaying. Through I guess that means that the child would get experience for beating up other children, but the system was VERY lackluster (if not outright non-existent) for most other methods which were often house rules. OoTS DOES have several house rules, so maybe Grandpa got experience that way. But the characters often talk bout killing monsters for experience, implying it's probably the best method to parody the system.

    Also, children probably shouldn't be encounters typically, but I don't think that's a rule anywhere.
    Quote Originally Posted by Oko and Qailee View Post
    Man, I like this tiefling.
    For all of your completely and utterly honest needs. Zaydos made, Tiefling approved.

  10. - Top - End - #100
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    Kish's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2004

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    The 3.x books made it clear that "overcoming a challenge" could mean disarming a trap or convincing a group of orcs to let you pass without a fight. There's nothing about "defeat" or "kill" or "overcome a creature," as distinct from "a challenge," in the books.

    Something I find puzzling is when people get attached to the notion that there's something bad and mock-worthy in a particular ruleset, such that if someone points out it doesn't actually say that they reach for ways to interpret what is there the way they initially read it. Surely if the rules are more functional than you thought that's a reason to be happy, not unhappy.

  11. - Top - End - #101
    Banned
     
    zimmerwald1915's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Lake Wobegon
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    Quote Originally Posted by Honest Tiefling View Post
    Overcoming mean defeat, not roleplaying.
    That is your interpretation. It's not an illegitimate interpretation, inasmuch it conforms with the observation that most of the D&D 3E rulebooks are about combat and the observation that many people play D&D 3E as if it were all about combat. But it ignores the text of the rulebooks which state that overcoming challenges does not necessarily mean beating people up; the designers' intent which was to expand the scope of actions for which a DM would be expected to give XP from those spelled out in earlier editions; and the purpose of 3E which was to cater to as many playstyles as possible (if to no one in particular very well). That being the case, I don't think it's a very good interpretation. Certainly it is an interpretation that is very ungenerous to the designers.
    Last edited by zimmerwald1915; 2018-04-08 at 12:14 PM.

  12. - Top - End - #102
    Banned
     
    zimmerwald1915's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Lake Wobegon
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kish View Post
    Something I find puzzling is when people get attached to the notion that there's something bad and mock-worthy in a particular ruleset, such that if someone points out it doesn't actually say that they reach for ways to interpret what is there the way they initially read it. Surely if the rules are more functional than you thought that's a reason to be happy, not unhappy.
    To be fair, there is conceivably more pleasure to be had in feeling smug about a superannuated edition of Dungeons and Dragons than in playing Dungeons and Dragons.

  13. - Top - End - #103
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    Certainly idea of XP for "story goals" and "adventure milestone rewards" has been commonly used since the ancient days of late 1e. I really have no idea whether that was an official or unofficial thing.

    3e specifically talks about challenges broadly. The detailed rules are around combat, because D&D is build around a wargame chassis, and that serves the more common playstyles well enough, most of the time. The idea of non-combat challenges is definitely there.

    4e does expand the concept of challenges into things that can be resolved by skill checks via explicit rules, where the skills available are up to the imagination of the players to make a good argument why such could apply if employed appropriately.

  14. - Top - End - #104

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    Quote Originally Posted by Snails View Post
    Certainly idea of XP for "story goals" and "adventure milestone rewards" has been commonly used since the ancient days of late 1e. I really have no idea whether that was an official or unofficial thing.
    A lot of the 2E adventure modules included specific XP awards for completing the module, with bonuses for meeting specific goals along the way. Stop the bad guy, +X, end the village's plague, +Y, save the peace treaty, +Z.

  15. - Top - End - #105
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    HalflingWizardGirl

    Join Date
    Jan 2016

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    Well, it's at least figuratively true that a wizard was responsible for the eradication of the technique.

    Eugene killed off the chance that it would be passed down from father to son when he chose to become a wizard instead of following the "Greenhilt family sword" tradition.

  16. - Top - End - #106
    Titan in the Playground
     
    KorvinStarmast's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Texas
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    Quote Originally Posted by Manty5 View Post
    Well, it's at least figuratively true that a wizard was responsible for the eradication of the technique.

    Eugene killed off the chance that it would be passed down from father to son when he chose to become a wizard instead of following the "Greenhilt family sword" tradition.
    Did he gain or lose XP by doing that?
    Avatar by linklele. How Teleport Works
    a. Malifice (paraphrased):
    Rulings are not 'House Rules.' Rulings are a DM doing what DMs are supposed to do.
    b. greenstone (paraphrased):
    Agency means that they {players} control their character's actions; you control the world's reactions to the character's actions.
    Gosh, 2D8HP, you are so very correct!
    Second known member of the Greyview Appreciation Society

  17. - Top - End - #107

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    Probably gained about as much as he does for killing dramatic moments.

  18. - Top - End - #108
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    ElfWarriorGuy

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    The sticks
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    I will say that if the wizards of the world got together to wipe out everyone who knew the Spellsplinter Manuver, they did a bad job of it because one of the bodyguards seems to recognize it when its used, and Wreckan had certainly at least heard of it.

    So, no one might know it, but the knowledge of its existence was certainly still around and possibly even somewhat widespread.
    "You are what you do. Choose again and change." - Miles Vorkosigan

  19. - Top - End - #109
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Fyraltari's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    France
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    You know a conspiracy starts at two people.

    Frankly this theory doesn't even require a conspiracy, to eliminate everyone who knew the technique you'd only need one high level determined wizard serial killer.
    Forum Wisdom

    Mage avatar by smutmulch & linklele.

  20. - Top - End - #110
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    Kish's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2004

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    This hypothesis does, however, require some smidge of evidence before it will become accurate to call it a theory.

  21. - Top - End - #111
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Fyraltari's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    France
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kish View Post
    This hypothesis does, however, require some smidge of evidence before it will become accurate to call it a theory.
    Sorry, I wasn't aware we were doing science here.

    I don't buy into this theory either, I'm just nitpicking.
    Forum Wisdom

    Mage avatar by smutmulch & linklele.

  22. - Top - End - #112
    Dragon in the Playground Moderator
     
    Peelee's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Washington D.C.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fyraltari View Post
    Sorry, I wasn't aware we were doing science here.

    I don't buy into this theory either, I'm just nitpicking.
    Well, a scientific theory isn't a well-backed guess so much as it is an explanation of something. For instance, gravity is a theory, but it's not really a well-backed guess.
    Cuthalion's art is the prettiest art of all the art. Like my avatar.

    Number of times Roland St. Jude has sworn revenge upon me: 2

  23. - Top - End - #113
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Fyraltari's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    France
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    Quote Originally Posted by Peelee View Post
    Well, a scientific theory isn't a well-backed guess so much as it is an explanation of something. For instance, gravity is a theory, but it's not really a well-backed guess.
    No. Gravity is a fact. The Law of Gravity F = G*M*m/Rē is a theory, or a well-backed guess.
    Fossils are a fact. Evolution through natural selection is a theory, or a well-backed guess.

    And so on and so forth.

    EDIT : But more importantly, this is science jargon not necessarily applicable outside of scinetific discussion. Which this is not.
    Last edited by Fyraltari; 2018-04-09 at 04:33 PM.
    Forum Wisdom

    Mage avatar by smutmulch & linklele.

  24. - Top - End - #114
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    Kish's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2004

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    You can use "wild-ass guess" instead of "hypothesis," if "hypothesis" sounds too scientific to you.

    The idea that someone has been killing off users of the Spellsplinter Maneuver is still overdignified by being called a theory.

  25. - Top - End - #115
    Dragon in the Playground Moderator
     
    Peelee's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Washington D.C.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fyraltari View Post
    No. Gravity is a fact. The Law of Gravity F = G*M*m/Rē is a theory, or a well-backed guess.
    ...No, you have it backwards. The Law of Gravitation is a law, which is not a theory. Laws are facts. Laws are not well-backed guesses. Gravity is a scientific theory, which is not a well-backed guess. A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can be repeatedly tested, in accordance with the scientific method, using a predefined protocol of observation and experiment.
    Cuthalion's art is the prettiest art of all the art. Like my avatar.

    Number of times Roland St. Jude has sworn revenge upon me: 2

  26. - Top - End - #116
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    RatElemental's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Gender
    Male2Female

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kish View Post
    You can use "wild-ass guess" instead of "hypothesis," if "hypothesis" sounds too scientific to you.

    The idea that someone has been killing off users of the Spellsplinter Maneuver is still overdignified by being called a theory.
    Technically, since it can be falsified (probably by word of giant, which seems unlikely, but still) or confirmed (also by word of giant) then it at least meets the bare minimum to be called a hypothesis.

  27. - Top - End - #117
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    PirateCaptain

    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Eaten by the Snarl
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    Quote Originally Posted by Peelee View Post
    ...No, you have it backwards. The Law of Gravitation is a law, which is not a theory. Laws are facts. Laws are not well-backed guesses. Gravity is a scientific theory, which is not a well-backed guess. A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can be repeatedly tested, in accordance with the scientific method, using a predefined protocol of observation and experiment.
    Laws aren't facts. Laws change if we get data that contradict them. Facts don't change as time goes by, even if our interpretation of them does. Newton's law of universal gravitation has been proven more inaccurate than general relativity. The data, the experiments and the observations, are facts. Laws and scientific theories are models that are used to make predictions that are then confirmed by experiments. These models have certain scopes, sometimes known, others unknown. Newton's theory, for example, assumes that the flow of time is the same for everyone. This is wrong and when that was discovered, new limits for Newton's theory were discovered. Another example, of people being aware of the limits of their model this time, is the ideal gas law. It assumes ideal gases that don't exist in reality but it can give us a sufficiently accurate approximation to reach some conclusions and it can be adjusted for further accuracy when faced with a real world situation.

    Scientific laws can be called facts only within the scope (but as I said, you might not know that scope even if you think you do!) they have been tested by experiments or observations, or, even better, you can say that it's a fact these laws have made only accurate predictions in every way they've been tested.

    I know this might look like an unimportant distinction and to you this might look "fact enough for everyday life" but inaccurate language like this is very useful to disingenuous people who can abuse phrases like what you said ("laws are facts") then counter with sensational and more inaccurate statements than yours, like "Newton's theories have been debunked" or "Newton was wrong, how do you know you're right this time?", to discredit science. If you then try to clarify or be more accurate, it's already too late. You can be made to look like you were made to retract your statement or that you got caught being wrong and you're trying to cover it up and generally be made to look bad.


    Sorry if I seem to be a bit overzealous about all this, it's just that yesterday I heard that one neighbour claimed that he "doesn't believe we evolved from monkeys" but I wasn't present when he said this so I could rip off his head, I mean, I wouldn't talk to him, I wouldn't know where to start... Mind you, my endeavour would fail miserably and painfully because he's a boxer and I'm not, but as long as you try your best, that is all that matters, right? Right.

  28. - Top - End - #118
    Dragon in the Playground Moderator
     
    Peelee's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Washington D.C.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    Quote Originally Posted by SilverCacaobean View Post
    Laws aren't facts. Laws change if we get data that contradict them. Facts don't change as time goes by, even if our interpretation of them does. Newton's law of universal gravitation has been proven more inaccurate than general relativity. The data, the experiments and the observations, are facts. Laws and scientific theories are models that are used to make predictions that are then confirmed by experiments. These models have certain scopes, sometimes known, others unknown. Newton's theory, for example, assumes that the flow of time is the same for everyone. This is wrong and when that was discovered, new limits for Newton's theory were discovered. Another example, of people being aware of the limits of their model this time, is the ideal gas law. It assumes ideal gases that don't exist in reality but it can give us a sufficiently accurate approximation to reach some conclusions and it can be adjusted for further accuracy when faced with a real world situation.

    Scientific laws can be called facts only within the scope (but as I said, you might not know that scope even if you think you do!) they have been tested by experiments or observations, or, even better, you can say that it's a fact these laws have made only accurate predictions in every way they've been tested.

    I know this might look like an unimportant distinction and to you this might look "fact enough for everyday life" but inaccurate language like this is very useful to disingenuous people who can abuse phrases like what you said ("laws are facts") then counter with sensational and more inaccurate statements than yours, like "Newton's theories have been debunked" or "Newton was wrong, how do you know you're right this time?", to discredit science. If you then try to clarify or be more accurate, it's already too late. You can be made to look like you were made to retract your statement or that you got caught being wrong and you're trying to cover it up and generally be made to look bad.


    Sorry if I seem to be a bit overzealous about all this, it's just that yesterday I heard that one neighbour claimed that he "doesn't believe we evolved from monkeys" but I wasn't present when he said this so I could rip off his head, I mean, I wouldn't talk to him, I wouldn't know where to start... Mind you, my endeavour would fail miserably and painfully because he's a boxer and I'm not, but as long as you try your best, that is all that matters, right? Right.
    No worries; I was being kind of flippant, and I deserved that.
    Cuthalion's art is the prettiest art of all the art. Like my avatar.

    Number of times Roland St. Jude has sworn revenge upon me: 2

  29. - Top - End - #119
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Fyraltari's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    France
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Slightly disturbing implication in #1003.

    Quote Originally Posted by Peelee View Post
    No worries; I was being kind of flippant, and I deserved that.
    No problem at all.
    Forum Wisdom

    Mage avatar by smutmulch & linklele.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •