Extended Quote Signature thread

[TuggyNE]

For all your funny/philosophical/random quote sig needs. I believe this quote says it all:

There can never be enough out-of-context quotes.

[TuggyNE]

So, here's mine so far:

Obviously it's not going to please everybody (have you met everybody? they are very disagreeable)

The great thing about quotes on the Internet is you can never be certain of their veracity.

It sounds sketchy, so it's probably in the RAW somewhere.

If the facts are against you, pound on the rules. If the rules are against you, pound on the facts. If the rules and the facts are against you, pound on the table.

What you should recognize - what everyone arguing anything should recognize - is that there is a possibility that you are wrong. Rather than just try to muster arguments against that possibility, try to give it a fair consideration; even if it doesn't change your mind, it can help broaden your perspective, which will make it easier to avoid destructive conflicts with your players in the future.

Don't confuse how people with an agenda present statistics with how statistics should actually be presented.

Obviously, the solution is that kobolds bestow the True Dragon property upon their ammunition.

Who is actually right is a meaningless question, and hence a good subject for the next ten pages of any thread.

On perspective changes and apparent size:

Think of it this way: if the lineality of the objectitude matches the inversal functiative, then the obtusal archetime rectomates across multidecimal projectinates, thereby reversionating spheritoid diagonicities. Got it?

On critical fumble tables:

"The king of the realm, having himself been a soldier, decided to forge an army of a few hundred, the best trained and equipped on the continent. When the hordes of their enemies washed over them, they simply raised their shields and waited for the battle to resolve itself.

It took three days of guarded vigil, but by the end the mighty hordes of the north had been broken by their own hand - axes flew through the crowd, killing dozens, slipped strikes cutting down the ones who were behind them..."

In reference to summoning Emperor Tippy:

Nah, the material component of that spell is a Mindraped Ice Assassin of a Rudimentary Intelligence Shadesteel Golem with a Craft Contingent Shapechange on it. Not worth the trouble.

On attempted quick fixes for spellcasting in 3.x:

Here's a list of things that already don't work:

• Making casting hard: If it takes a random chance to succeed, you're just making casting more swingy. Swingy casters just make rocket launcher tag feel worse and make casting feel less rewarding. It also doesn't do much about out-of-combat buffs and utility.
• Making casting dangerous: If casting will randomly cripple you, make you faint, or summon a demon to kill you, it's still just as overpowered as it was before, so now optimizers are encouraged to abuse the system and regular players don't want to touch magic at all. Bad bad bad.
• Slowing down casting progressions: This is the current flavor of the month for caster fixes, and it also doesn't work. It just pushes the problem with spells till later levels (solid fog and black tentacles still totally invalidate every tier 3 fighting class at levels 10-15), but it also totally screws SoD-casters while encouraging casters to use buff and utility. Any fix that encourages casters to use their most OP spells is not a good fix.
• Give everybody casting resistance: This is the least effective kind of fix. The problems with casters is not that they're good with fireball and flesh to stone, the problem is that they can use spells like stone shape, blasphemy, or summon a monster that deals twice as much damage as the fighter.
• Making casting hard to learn: If you give casters only 1 trick per level, you're encouraging them to pick the most overpowered tricks and spamming those in every encounter forever.

Nice things people have said about me:

I would just like to quickly say that I've found everything TuggyNE has said here to be awesome. (On the off-chance that he'll sig-quote this) :P

I think there's room for reasonably hardline stances in arguments. This is a case where the points have been well dissected and discussed in the past, so it's well known territory, and people thus have a good idea of what their stance is, and how to defend it. I think that people should always be willing to change their position with sufficient evidence, and I doubt that TuggyNE would maintain his opinion […] if some perfect argument were made by the opposition […] but in the absence of such an argument, adopting a firm stance makes sense.