OOTS #281 - The Discussion Thread

[Alfryd]

The point of the comic is to be fun. And Miko provides none of it. Look at her actions. She has not done anything amusing, like ever.

"Actually, I am quite chilly in these northern climes."
"The proper term is Smite Evil, not Bump Uglies."
"Fear not, small weasel..."
"Perhaps we could compare respective wisdom modifers?"
"You should not give into your so-called Needs!"
"Perhaps your majesty would like to be faned by servants or fed grapes?"
"No, it's a class feature."
Ring any bells?
Are all comments that at the least proved humorous in retrospect, to me. Her humour value has not, thus far, been deliberate.

A quick question, if during her first fight with Roy with that last "Smite evil" Miko had rolled a critical and killed Roy with it, would have that been enough to lose her paladinhood even only temporarily?

No, since she genuinely believed Roy to be evil.

[Lasombra]

Personally i just think it was funny :)

anyway, belkar could have delt enough Non-lethal to put her on the deck, he had supprise for that last attack, so no dex-bonus for miko, and i'm still betting that he has favoured enemy - Human.

besides, Lead-Sheet Jokes are my new favourite over curde chatup lines :P

hhehehehe

[Starbuck_II]

"Actually, I am quite chilly in these northern climes."
"The proper term is Smite Evil, not Bump Uglies."
"Fear not, small weasel..."
"Perhaps we could compare respective wisdom modifers?"
"You should not give into your so-called Needs!"
"Perhaps your majesty would like to be faned by servants or fed grapes?"
"No, it's a class feature."
Ring any bells?
Are all comments that at the least proved humorous in retrospect, to me. Her humour value has not, thus far, been deliberate.

The thing is:
We are laughing at her not with her. (I am at least)
We are laughing at her naivity. But yes, she has brought humor.

No, since she genuinely believed Roy to be evil.

She was trying to kill Roy: if Roy had died she would have committed a evil deed.
I can't believe that has to be argued (earlier).

If Miko didn't act bad: i wouldn't be angry at her.

I wiuldn't say Miko should fall for standing still. I'd praise it: it would stop her from acting bad.

[captheather]

Argh! I'm going through withdrawal. I so want to know what happens next on all the concurrent plot lines. Just in case Rich is reading, I wanted to let him know that he's formed an addictive substance that greatly reduces my productive activitiy at work on Monday, Wednesday and Friday since I continually check the website hoping that the new comic is up. :)

Kudos to you for doing such a good job of capturing my interest and activating obsessive tendencies.

[Amalthea]

The thing is:
We are laughing at her not with her. (I am at least)
We are laughing at her naivity. But yes, she has brought humor.

It was claimed that Miko provided no humor (fun) to the strip. However Alfryd provided several lines of Miko's that were quite humorous. It doesn't matter whether we're laughing at her or with her - indeed we seldom laugh with the OotS, we usually laugh at them.

[The_Weirdo]

Ultimately it's a battle over which side does one like more: Super-ego or ID. Belkar is ID. He does what he wants, when he wants, how he wants, with whom he wants, where he wants, because he wants. Miko does what she thinks (or rationalizes as) LG, when she thinks (or rationalizes as) LG, how she thinks (or rationalizes as) LG, with whom she thinks (or rationalizes as) LG, where she thinks (or rationalizes as) LG because she thinks (or rationalizes as) LG. The difference being that Belkar doesn't try to force everyone around to be like him. Belkar could be CG and the pro-Miko people would still be pro-Miko. Miko could be ACTUALLY LG and the anti-Miko people would STILL be anti-Miko.

[theKOT]

She was trying to kill Roy: if Roy had died she would have committed a evil deed.
I can't believe that has to be argued (earlier).

It has to be argued because she knew three things: The Oots had destroyed a gate, Roy had detected as evil, and people had been telling her about this terrible group of adventurers fitting their description. Her decision to kill them was at least somewhat justified.

If Miko didn't act bad: i wouldn't be angry at her.

I wiuldn't say Miko should fall for standing still. I'd praise it: it would stop her from acting bad.

How does she "act bad"? She has NEVER commited an evil act!

[The_Weirdo]

How does she "act bad"? She has NEVER commited an evil act!

Hypocrisy is evil...

[Denaes]

Quote:
100 hp (a good amount for a 10th level Fighter) is that it's a measure of luck, skill & toughness. So you can't just get a single punch and KO someone who is that skilled.

Skill should be covered by *skills* that deflect, evade, or reduce a blow. Toughness should be measured by quasi-random damage reduction or AC boni. Luck should be measured by the ability to tweak dice rolls. *Most of which already exist.* Mashing all these factors into a single undifferentiated attribute is neccesarily grossly unrealistic. It's survived purely as the embedded relic of an earlier, cruder, far more rudimentary RP system. Accept it, and you'll sleep better.

It could. There alternative mechanics. There are many ways things can be done.

Personally I prefer the Wounds/Vitality because it does basically the same thing as HP basically, while allowing you to bypass the Luck & glancing blows. It also flat out spells out to someones face "That's vitality damge, so no the sword is not sticking into your lungs"

I'm fine with HP though because I understand them and I can run a game that makes sense with them. Counter intuitive? Yeah, especially with the video game generation. But it's no worse than other game mechanics I've seen.

Quote:
You'd want a game that was less "heroic" and more "grim/gritty"...

There is no neccesary confilct between the two if you actually leverage Plot and Role-Play over mass carnage. Not that I have a fundamental objection to mass carnage, but it should carry certain risks. Heroism is about displaying courage and insight, neither of which are required when risks are negligible. The Hero is the guy running up the stairs in a burning building when everybody else is running down, not the Hulk smashing howitzers because his near-infinite HP-regen make them roughly as hazardous as mosquitoes.

Heroic doesn't mean "having heros" when you're talking about the scope of a RPG. That is a meaning for it. In that sense you can have very heroic games of CoC because they're doing heroish things.

But D&D is a Heroic RPG in this sense:
1. Impressive in size or scope; grand: heroic undertakings.

It means that players play larger than life characters that do totally incredible things that are far beyond the scope of reality.

It means that you can wade into combat with 20 kobolds and reasonably expect to actually defend all your flanks. Clearly not realistic. You just don't have to sweat the small things.

A grim/gritty game covers making things less heroic in the sense I mentioned. CoC would be a very grim/gritty game. Cyberpunk is another. Games where you *do* have to sweat the small things. A single knife could take you out. You could get KOed. Even if you survive a bladed attack, you can bleed to death.

Quote:
the character falls off a cliff and on the way down starts to grab at roots and rocks, acheiving nothing more than scraping his hands.

That is the 'Slow Fall' ability of Monks. Strike 1.

No, not "strike 1".

I didn't give him an ability.

It's flavour text. A class ability doesn't give you (or by virtue of lack deny you) the ability to describe something basic.

Anyone falling down next to a cliff can grab at things, but it's only flavour.

The Monks ability grants them to take less damage due to their ability if they're near a wall. Also how they describe it is up to them.

Quote:
The character notices the rocky base of the cliff and knows it spells certain doom, so in a last ditch effort he pushes off the cliff away from the rody base area going into a tumble and crashing into the ground at a 40 degree angle reducing the damage by quite a bit.

That is the 'Tumble' skill, stretched to it's limits. Strike 2.

Nope. Tumbling (in regards to a fall) is used to take less HP damage. Don't confuse flavour text with game stats.

I only stated flavour text. Not a single game stat in the description.

The person took a fall, but since the game rules allowed survival based on the die rolls, it's up to the GM to explain how the survival took place.

Quote:
Suddenly a booming sound erupts from it's cannon and the barbarian throws himself to the ground to get raked over with a wave of heat and shards of broken rock & metal.

That is the Evasion ability, which he can't get. Strike 3.

What are you talking about? Evasion doesn't do anything close to that.

Evasion is a special class ability which turns "reflex save for half damage, fail for full damage" into "reflex save for no damage, fail for half damage" Again, as logic permits, you explain how it occured.

I merely explained in flavour text how HPs work and how it's explained that he survived.

Not every single strike is a direct body blow. Many strikes are near misses or glancing blows or damage from throwing yourself out of the way and taking scrapes rather than blades (or solid metal shell in this case).

The effect on mechanics is what matters and how you explain it. They're that much closer to death/KO. Thats it. You describe it as you see fit.

If you describe it like a git "He stood up and took a sword through his throat and shrugged it off because he still has 98 hp left" then you get what you put into it. People imagining superhuman feats that totally defy reality. If you describe it more in tone with the actual effect that happened, it actually makes sense.

Quote:
Bit by bit the barbarian finds softer areas to tear apart as his Axe starts to break apart under the strain...

That is a Critical Hit description, to which constructs are immune. Strike 4.

Maybe in your games. If we roll damage, we describe it however we like so long as it makes sense.

This is more accurately a description of a solid strike against a heavily armoured opponent.

If something has amrour, and you deal damage, you hit an unarmoured spot. It's not a description of a crit.

Quote:
Bad descrption making the rules look really stupid.

No, stupid rules neccesitate bad descriptions. You're just stretching the bounds of probability to the point where HP mean 'the bizarrely fortuitous always occurs,' which is utterly meaningless.

I wouldn't say they were bad descriptions at all. Quite heroic like something you would see in an Indiana Jones movie or something.

If by "Bizarrely fortuitious always occurs" you mean that a trained adventurer leverages their skills, tricks & abilities (not only named abilities, but just the fact that they have more HP) to prevent from being killed, then I wouldn't say that's meaningless.

It has extraordinary meaning. Primarily it means that a 10th level character is tougher, smarter, faster and just a bit luckier than a 1st level character. They're better at avoiding and turning away blows. They're better at turning their bodies so that their physical body takes less damage (as they get more HP, their skin doesn't harden).

I can fully understand you not liking this sort of game. Thats fine.

Rules and stats exist to quantify and apply consistency to the DM's decisions, rather than making things up all the time, which you are effectively doing. There's nothing wrong with this per se, it's just pointless to lug around a bunch of mechanics-related baggage with you for such purposes. Go get onto IRC and Freestyle.

Role playing games as they commonly exist follow a certain pattern:

1. You anounce what you intend to do.
2. You generate something randomly (dice, cards, rock paper scisors, etc).
3. Based on your random result, and the situation the character is in, the GM and/or player describes what actually happened.

This isn't unique to D&D or d20 or even games with HP's. This happens in:
M&M (Damage Saves),
Star Wars/Spycraft (Wounds/Vitality),
Unisystem (Wounds that JUST represent physical damage),
WoD (which used wound boxes, arguably a limited version of static HP),
Vampire/Werewolf Live Action (wound boxes, but based on acting within the rules)

and really this also happens the same way with different power levels:

BESM (street level frail humans to near godlike beings),
D&D (Normal humans advancing to a far more mythic status),
Cat (cats trying to manipulate humans)
Ice Breaker (dating role playing game)
Exaulted (crazy uber powered things)
CoC (extremely frail people figuring things out and dying)
Burning Wheel (gritty fantasy where if you're fighting more than 2:1 odds you're pretty much guaranteed death or begging for your life)

You're not escaping it. You say what you want to do, you randomize and consult the rules and explain how it goes down.

You can escape the rules by going to another system that jives better with what you want, but no matter what commercial RPG you play, you'll be looking at the outcome and describing how it happns.

If you're playing a Heroic/Cinematic/Over the Top game, you'll be describing those sorts of things. If you're playing a more grim/gritty/"realistic" game, you'll be describing things the way they make sense in that style of play. If you're playing a game based around being a cartoon, you'll describe things based on how the "toon universe" in your game works.

[kradman]

loved it, it was awesome, loved on monday and still loving it.. could i love the new one too now please? leaving very soon and wont have a box for couple of days.. need fix.. need it man...

[fwiffo]

It was claimed that Miko provided no humor (fun) to the strip. However Alfryd provided several lines of Miko's that were quite humorous. It doesn't matter whether we're laughing at her or with her - indeed we seldom laugh with the OotS, we usually laugh at them.

In almost all provided cases, the joke is that Miko did not get the joke. The humor is provided by someone else - Miko's contributuon to humor is that we, the audience, find her complete lack of sense of humor funny. The fun is not provided by her character, it is at the expense of her character.

OK, maybe she made a few sarcastic lines that were intentionally amusing. But very few.

[CaptN]

Okay you people are confusing me. The general feeling i'm getting is that if you don't like a rule, you shouldn't fix it. No, you should get on a nice man's web site and complain about it. Thats kinda wierd, imho. And it isn't insulting to say that many if not all DM's Change rules. Many DM's do! Ad-hoc dicisions, houserules, using something from a previous edition or another game. I, personaly, have never met anyone that HASN'T done something like that. If you don't like a rule and it's disrupting gameplay, why use it?

But I digress.
The problem with KO'ing is a problem that the current D&D edition has. Just like EVERY other game ever made, it has it's problems. You can change the rules, fiddle around with them till they work better for you; Ignore the problem and just work around it; or even switch games.

But going back and forth about the subject is ultimatly an useless gesture of "Yeah huh!" "Nah UH!". /mytwobits

Moving on (hopefully)

CaptN, The Game master and Original Idea Man for the Board Campiegn.

[Melnor]

edit: oh...
If their positions were reversed, I suspect that Miko would do the coup-de-gras (especially in her state of mind). Mr chaotic-evil, nope![/quote]

And that is why all of us evil folk love Belkar so much ;D

[Melnor]

In almost all provided cases, the joke is that Miko did not get the joke. The humor is provided by someone else - Miko's contributuon to humor is that we, the audience, find her complete lack of sense of humor funny. The fun is not provided by her character, it is at the expense of her character.

OK, maybe she made a few sarcastic lines that were intentionally amusing. But very few.

That's right! Everyone needs a self-righteous wench to laugh at! The Giant knows all.....*cue spooky music*

[Sylvius]

The damage isn't to the dead, but to the living. Please try to grasp this.

How? Show me the harm.

In almost all provided cases, the joke is that Miko did not get the joke.

That makes her the straight man. Straight men are comedic.

[crippits]

i loved it, and i am rooting for Belkar. I find him to be the most interesting of thr Order. Everyone seems to fit, but poor little Belkar. And i do love the constant strife within the Order. The bickering is always fun.

[Swashbuckler]

Argh! I'm going through withdrawal. I so want to know what happens next on all the concurrent plot lines. Just in case Rich is reading, I wanted to let him know that he's formed an addictive substance that greatly reduces my productive activitiy at work on Monday, Wednesday and Friday since I continually check the website hoping that the new comic is up. :)

Kudos to you for doing such a good job of capturing my interest and activating obsessive tendencies.

What SHE said! ;D


[rant]
... and yet again, to all those people who cannot seem to get over the lead-sheet sound (and who cut and paste responses to my previous post without including the last part):

GET OVER IT! Learn what "Artistic License" means. It's a comic! The funniest, most clever, intriguing, addictive comic since Bloom County and The Far Side! It will involve un-realistic things! Like lead sheets that go "WANG!" when they connect with equally-dense matter! (sorry, couldn't resist)

*pantpantpantpant*

[/rant]

*sigh* I'm better now ... really.

[Alfryd]

How? Show me the harm.

Psychological damage. No, I can't objectively display it. I can't objectively demonstrate that emotional attachment to other sentient beings is directly, physically beneficial either, but it's the same deal.

I'm fine with HP though because I understand them and I can run a game that makes sense with them...

Only by making things up as required. Rules should exist so that you don't have to do so.

It means that players play larger than life characters that do totally incredible things that are far beyond the scope of reality.

Beyond a certain point, this enters the clearly farcical.

I didn't give him an ability...

But this capacity is already covered for. Why does a 'Slow fall' ability exist when extra HP are supposedly equivalent? That's like saying, 'Monks aren't actually any better at grabbing walls, but they forfeit extra HP as a class feature.'

It's flavour text...

I.e, making bizarrely unlikely things up.

The Monks ability grants them to take less damage due to their ability if they're near a wall. Also how they describe it is up to them.

No, the decription is 'I grab on to the passing wall to slow my descent.' That's what the ability means. Period. No, really.

Don't confuse flavour text with game stats.

I *don't* confuse the two. You're using HP to confuse the two.

The person took a fall, but since the game rules allowed survival based on the die rolls, it's up to the GM to explain how the survival took place.

Which is a strong sign the rules are flawed in the first place. Rules EXIST to make the DM's rulings easier and more consistent.

What are you talking about? Evasion doesn't do anything close to that.

Avoiding Area-of-Effect attacks? It certainly does, which is how you have chosen to describe his taking reduced but not completely mitigated damage. Projectiles don't change direction in mid-air, so you've turned a tank cannon into a 'spray of fire and shrapnel' which grazes our protagonist. I.e, AoE attack.

Many strikes are near misses or glancing blows or damage from throwing yourself out of the way and taking scrapes rather than blades (or solid metal shell in this case)...

Yeah, or jumping directly into lava.

The effect on mechanics is what matters and how you explain it...

I should not HAVE TO explain it. The rules should do the explanation, that's what they exist for. It is their SOLE purpose in life.

Maybe in your games. If we roll damage, we describe it however we like so long as it makes sense.

Then don't bother with stats at all.

This is more accurately a description of a solid strike against a heavily armoured opponent.

Weak spots on a crature are intended as the neccesary criteria for crits.

I wouldn't say they were bad descriptions at all. Quite heroic like something you would see in an Indiana Jones movie or something.

Yes, they just had no relation to the set of skills and proficiencies that the character has actually invested in or developed or what the situation would have rendered feasible.

...it means that a 10th level character is tougher, smarter, faster and just a bit luckier than a 1st level character.

We have these things called classes, feats, skills, abilties and attributes that differentiate the different activities in which varying characters are likely to be tougher, luckier, faster or smarter. HP, as it stands, just mungs things together with no designated purpose.
Now, in moderation, with proper crit-hit rulings, etc, it can be a useful tool. My personal preference is base HP of 10 for all characters, with diminishing gains with each level, so a maxxed out human fighter is unlikely to gain more than 55 HP or so, ever, which is pretty generous. But constant-averaged gains every level eventually lead to patent absurdities.

This isn't unique to D&D or d20 or even games with HP's...

There is a vast difference between adding a little text description for flavour to what is essentially a well-understood and defined outcome, and desperately rationalising something that makes virtually no sense and/or undermines much of the character development process.

[The Giant]

The Voice of Mod: This entire quote-filled discussion is off-topic to this thread. Take any and all discussions of game mechanics in the general to the Gaming board. The next person to post on the topic of rules systems or play style or especially the d20 mechanics on this thread gets a warning.

[Lady_Orc]

Exactly. It was mainly one *cough*Aaron*cough* poster leading that brigade, and it's not regular to see "I hope to see Belkar on the end of miko's sword soon!" posts, now is it? Your post does little to disprove the bloodlust theory though.... Upper intestine.... It's called the small inestine.

Actually, I believe it can be called either. Since English is not my native language, I'm prepared to concede that I might be mistaken. Would it suit better if I'd said 'the jejunum'? Or 'the ileum' - either will do, really.

And when did I ever say there was anything wrong with bloodlust? :D People can want Belkar dead as much as they like, I don't give a toss if they feel that way. Sadly, I suspect Miko will probably live, but a girl can still dream.

[Vampire_Boy]

Actually, I believe it can be called either. Since English is not my native language, I'm prepared to concede that I might be mistaken. Would it suit better if I'd said 'the jejunum'? Or 'the ileum' - either will do, really.

All this talk about internal organs makes me think about harvesting Miko's liver and serving it with a nice Chianti and some fava beans. ;)

[FreeloadingSausage]

Well, I was going to reply to some of the alignment debate that has gone on in my absence (off topic though it may be) but I just read the latest comic and, unsurprisingly, The Giant has summed up the alignment conflict perfectly. I would quote Celia's entire closing argument, but we all know that would be redundant (and horribly off-topic by its very nature). Therefore, I think that The Giant's closed this argument as far as I'm concerned.

Thanks Rich, you put the words right in my mouth.

See you all on the OOTS # 282 thread.

[Marller]

All this talk about internal organs makes me think about harvesting Miko's liver and serving it with a nice Chianti and some fava beans. ;)

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam. *yawn*

[Amalthea]

True to my word, my house rule on knock-out blows is here.

I'm not trying to make this thread off topic, please don't smite me, Mr. Giant. :-[

[Vampire_Boy]

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam. *yawn*

Careful now, you know how Carthage was utterly destroyed and razed to the ground, don't you?

[Marller]

I know and Cato told his opinion in every single speech he held (in his older years).


EDIT: spelling

[Sebastian]

When has Miko ever done something evil that any Mikoers have defended? Because you know that Miko has never commited an evil act, right?

a) I never said she did. Mine was a humoristic exageration as the presence of the smile ( ;) ) should have told, but, that said:

b) while she never did anything Evil, with a capital E, I think she did a lot of things that I find questionable for a Paladin to do (attacking unprovoked the OotS with lethal force not once but twice, killing Samantha and her father when other options where availlable, enjoying other people misfortune (Haley speech problem and Belkar falling the walls), attacking Elan with lethal force while he was not a direct threat to her (and when other options where availlable to her), etc) now, none of these things by itself would be enough to make her fall, but they add up, and there would have been a poitn where, I being the Gm I would have take Miko's characters aside and warned him that he was only so much far away to play a monk/fighter if he didn't start play Miko more like a Paladin and less like a Samurai. (Yes, many of those actions where the most sensible course of action but while being a Paladin don't stop you from doing the smart thing, being a paladin is not about doing what is more convenient, but what is right (like for example, don't risk to kill a Good (or even neutral) person because that would make things more easy for you).

[Sebastian]

No, since she genuinely believed Roy to be evil.

I thought that a paladin that kill a lawful good character would have at least to atone for it, but apparently I was wrong. It is obvious that a Paladin can do anything as long as he believe is doing a good act (The Gm don't have voice in it, for obvious reasons) so if I play a delusional paladinI can go away with everything,from stealing to mass genocide and still keep my paladin's abilities?
Judging from Miko the answer is yes.

[Vampire_Boy]

I thought that a paladin that kill a lawful good character would have at least to atone for it, but apparently I was wrong. It is obvious that a Paladin can do anything as long as he believe is doing a good act (The Gm don't have voice in it, for obvious reasons) so if I play a delusional paladinI can go away with everything,from stealing to mass genocide and still keep my paladin's abilities?
Judging from Miko the answer is yes.

It's not that much different than with Kore in the Goblins comics. He's a paladin, though many don't understand how he can stay a paladin. Well, the reasoning goes similar to this: well, clearly, the author states that he's a paladin, which means he must be Lawful Good, furthermore, if he had done something contrary to the paladin's code (apparently it includes killing children who have as much as talked with orcs and ogres) surely he would have already Fallen. Thus, since he has not fallen, he must be a LG and a true paladin.

Similar reasoning can be applied to defend Miko. As long as she hasn't fallen, she has done nothing wrong and should be considered the living embodiment of perfection. ;)

[Kish]

It's not that much different than with Kore in the Goblins comics. He's a paladin, though many don't understand how he can stay a paladin. Well, the reasoning goes similar to this: well, clearly, the author states that he's a paladin,

No. In fact, quite the contrary. The author states that he's an evil, corrupted villain; he's never demonstrated any paladin powers, and we only have the word of one (now-dead) character that he even thinks he's a paladin.