|
This person frightens me somewhat.Whoa lady! posted:Limelight got captured, enslaved and gang-raped in the first session, and the group decided they couldn’t take on Mind Master to free her, and called the Crown Guard. Only the guard was busy with a Chlichinich invasion, and had to “get to it later.” The GM was just trying to encourage the players to do this themselves, but they took it as an insult and proof the Crown Guard didn’t like them or take them seriously. Limelight was largely written off by everyone but Airtight. When he tried to find and rescue her himself he got captured and treated similarly. When the group found out, Unseen became convinced Airtight was a mole, and the whole thing was a trap. So they didn’t go. Comments on that are similarly  .If you peruse the rest of that LJ she's got some other interesting tales; most of her games apparently include sex to a great degree (there's a thread on the Paizo boards about a 3.5 campaign that involves lots of loving, including LARPing..). Granted, she doesn't seem utterly wacko--I mean, the post above was a "bad game" in her opinion and she's pretty good at analyzing why it failed--but the whole nonchalance about rape is just..
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2009 16:56
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 07:16 |
|
|
RocknRollaAyatollah posted:Ugh, that chick is all kinds of hosed up. My bet is she was either touched as a child, claims to have been, and/or is over 200 pounds. I think there were similar things said when she first started posting the campaign journal but she denied it all. Just that her group was OK with everything they did and so on. She's got some pictures on the LJ that are theoretically her but hell, it's the internet.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2009 18:02
|
|
|
Yeah, pretty much. Not sure she's grognardy, but hot drat is that some poo poo.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2009 18:37
|
|
|
shotgunbadger posted:This thread just makes me love my group more and more, the only time 'rape' came up is as a joke when we got busted by Lonestar in Shadow Run and the GM laughed and said 'now you guys meet Bubba the Troll in jail' when the new guy asked what happened now. Not only that, there's the implication in the thread that girl posted that several players adjourned to a nearby bedroom and played out the scene.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2009 20:36
|
|
|
The General posted:Liking 3.x qualifies as grognard now? Jesus I'm old. Jesus, you didn't notice this before in this thread? I feel old because "grognard" used to mean you were talking about the portly bearded men playing SPI wargames that took years to resolve with carefully clipped counters on laminated maps, and now it's "anyone who doesn't play the latest version."
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2009 12:49
|
|
|
The General posted:I noticed, just tried to ignore it as it wasn't spelled out for me. I referenced the old meaning earlier, but god gamn 3.x isn't even cold yet. Not that I like it anways. As for old school wargames, sign me up. I just wish I had the basement space to do it. Yeah, I've got a ton of them myself, and fond memories. I wish more of them would do some online stuff, though; it seems perfect to address the big issues with them, namely space and opponent concerns. I'd love an online-only version of World in Flames or the East Front series, for example. Don't need AI, just an easy matchmaking system and a decent interface. We all know the game's going to take forever anyway; at least with an online version I can play several simultaneously. Cog05 posted:Not grognard: I'd just call the latter "douchebags" and go from there, since that's what they are. Times change, though, etc etc. It's amusing reading about them, though.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2009 13:22
|
|
|
Kayumi posted:Look the thread was nice when it was people posting grognardy stuff they found on the internet so we could make fun of it, and it stopped being nice when people started posting about how grognardy other people inside the thread are and then other people called those posts grognardy and the guys who were called grognards in the first place came in and called the third group grognards and it turned into a clusterfuck of everyone calling everyone else a grognard instead of posting hilarious grognard poo poo from all over the place. MMMMMMMMMMMETA!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2009 04:36
|
|
|
To be grognardy, the 1e Realms was pretty nifty. It was a great change of pace from Greyhawk, which started feeling ...cramped. Then they started adding in all the "named" people, and then 2e hit and they did the stupid Time of Troubles, and it's just gone kinda downhill from there. Didn't help when they killed all the other campaign worlds and threw all the stuff that might have gone elsewhere into FR. Ed's a pretty creative guy, and I'm looking forward to some of the stuff he's doing for Paizo early next year, but FR's been heading down the sewer line since the 1e->2e changeover at the least. And I'm kinda sad about the Paizo boards, because the Paizo folks themselves are pretty cool and non-grognardy; the Adventure Paths have some really cool stuff in them. Their fans make me want to rent an SUV and run them over sometimes, though. Pathfinder's fun, but so is 4e, and I don't begrudge anyone wanting to play one over the other. I wish WoTC was a bit more open with their licensing, but that ain't gonna happen, so...
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2009 04:30
|
|
|
h_double posted:Ha, yes, it's the Game Parlor in Woodbridge. So much potential, but between the shrink wrap and the staff, I really dislike shopping there. I do give them points for the table space even though I've never used it myself. Holy poo poo! The albino clerk there! Gaaah! (Well, he's not really an albino but he's insanely pale and large.) Yeah, the furry supplement is pretty scary. I don't think it sold well, though, thank god. He tries to offer it to everyone that engages him in conversation for more than a couple minutes. The one in Sterling is a bit more cramped and has slightly less maladjusted clerks. I play a Sunday game there every other week, and it's usually OK. The weekends are *really* crowded though, lots of miniatures geeks and there's like three RPG groups going who compete with the Magic folks for table space. Sad thing is there really isn't another decent store in the area. I used to buy all my games there, but online sales really makes the shrinkwrap thing look idiotic. I've been told they'll open it up for you if you ask, but I've never done it myself.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2009 01:50
|
|
|
fugacity posted:Yeah, I boggled at this too. And what the hell is Bildungsroman? I think it's more the sense of "starting small and ending big" which is inherent in D&D leveling. I wonder what DC making GBS threads your diaper would be, though. Hmm.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2009 18:05
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:Wouldn't it be fort to NOT do so? Maybe an opposed roll with your parents to see whether you did it at a convenient time or not.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2009 19:28
|
|
|
clockworkjoe posted:because it is a great game yep
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2009 03:52
|
|
|
Lugubrious posted:Oh look a grognard reads the core books and passes judgment on what the game "feels like" rather than playing it. What a surprise. Wow, you really missed the point of that, didn't you?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2009 17:48
|
|
|
Seftir posted:I was bored and busted out my 3.5 DMG and remembered another thing but the magic item making formulas are a bit much. How expensive would a unlimited charge wand of cure minor wounds cost? It sounds like not much, I think 5000 gp for all the free healing you'd ever need between fights. Well, wands are capped at 50 charges in 3.5. So cure minor wounds is sorta pointless for putting in a wand, since you're only getting 50 hp cured out of the wand. If you wanted to make it, though, it'd cost you 187g5s and 15xp. Cure light wounds would cost you 375g and 30xp and get you 50d8+50 hp of healing. Also requires a 5th or higher level cleric. Not incredibly uncommon, but they're not going to be all over the place, either. They also have to take the Craft Wand feat, which not all will.  Purchase price is 750g. So yeah, probably best not to think too much about this. I seem to recall one of the 3.5 guys (Monte Cook?) saying that the magic item creation rules were fairly broken.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2009 12:08
|
|
|
Eoris website posted:Eoris was conceived as a setting that players could truly make their own. This means players won’t find only one type of possible adventure to be played. On the contrary, Eoris is a setting where players may have many different types of adventures. The Essence System offers not only different character types but also different power levels. In this way, the adventures that can be played are primarily determined by the players themselves. Well, I've never seen anything like this before. Also, apparently the setting is "profoundly intellectual" though what that means is never really explained beyond "oh hay God's a woman and she's pissed and you have to fight her, 'kay?" Didn't Pendragon do the "emotional attributes" thing like 20 years ago? The maps are gorgeous, though, and the art's well done if you enjoy the style.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2009 19:21
|
|
|
Countblanc posted:anything with atheist overtones is "intellectual", didnt you know silly me
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2009 19:25
|
|
|
clockworkjoe posted:I run a game called Monsters and Other Childish Things where insults can hurt a character as much as physical attacks - of course the PCs are kids. It's fun. Eoris! Woo! posted:The system used to play in Eoris is called the ‘Essence System’. However, this system is not only suitable for Eoris Essence; it can be used for many different settings. It's all about relating profoundly to your fantastical counterpart and making "hack-and-slash" gamers ROLEPLAY GODDAMN IT. I'm all about decent social mechanics, but this is just ..ugh. It's also got a weird cadence that makes me think it's translated from something else.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2009 20:27
|
|
|
But but but it's made by ARTISTS so therefore it's GLORIOUS! There's actually three character sheets, one for each of the "angel" races, it appears.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2009 20:59
|
|
|
crime fighting hog posted:Tell him to quit being an rear end in a top hat and that the DM is there for the players not his own entertainment. If the players want to someone to entertain them they should go to the loving movies. The GM's just as much a player as the other people in a group, with just as much right to enjoy the game.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2009 16:39
|
|
|
http://www.acaeum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8714
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2010 23:44
|
|
|
Bieeardo posted:Greyhawk struck me as a frontier sort of setting-- lots of unsettled land, roamed by barbarians and goblins and things. There's the occasional Ancient Lost City-State of Pooj, but it's not like the Realms where it's all built up on top of itself. Really? If anything I think it's the opposite--Greyhawk was waaaay cramped, there's a city-state or gnome kingdom every three miles, and the only "open" areas are the swathes devastated by a magical disaster. Later products tried to correct this by blowing up the Great Kingdom and overruning chunks of it with humanoid hordes/Scarlet Brotherhood. Best thing about old Greyhawk was the weather tables, which were so hideously bad that the temperature at the equator of Oerth was something like 170. Really, the only cool things about Greyhawk are Savage Tide (which is only technically in Greyhawk, since about 80% of the action takes place a thousand miles south of the box set) and .. eh, that's about it.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2010 17:20
|
|
|
The General posted:Mother fucker, off topic but Mikan will care. I bought SSF4. I don't think it's possible for you to be off topic in this thread.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2010 20:52
|
|
|
Mikan posted:Earthdawn straight up owns Has anyone checked out the third edition? Worth getting?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2010 18:03
|
|
|
rantmo posted:Two different companies had the license for a while (and maybe still do) and basically just reprinted what was already written with a little bit of new stuff I think. Someone is working on an Earthdawn 4e but I don't remember if that was official or a fan project and I'm phone posting. I think it's a legit company project which I hope owns. Nah, Red Brick just released "Third Edition" through Mongoose's Flaming Cobra line, and it's the official current version. Looks legit, I'll probably pick up the PDFs. Was just curious if anyone had an opinion.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2010 19:42
|
|
|
Mikan posted:Old Geezer genuinely believes nostalgia has nothing to do with how much he likes old d&d The only thing good about basic D&D is that it takes approximately 30 seconds to create a character.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2010 06:41
|
|
|
bgaesop posted:To be fair, the SCA uses rattan, not boffer, and as someone who has been hit in the head with both, there's a pretty big difference. But neither is more than vaguely close to actual combat.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2010 05:13
|
|
|
Here's a thread on rpg.net (everyone's favorite!) that has some responses from Wick about the context of that campaign. The guy in prison stuck around because otherwise he'd have to quit the campaign entirely and give up his seat at the table.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2010 04:36
|
|
|
Of course he's the Master of the Game.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2010 23:24
|
|
|
Lugubrious posted:As someone who hasn't read the Pathfinder books, is the goblin's sword drawn with shaky, crooked lines in the actual art or were the tattooist's hands just shaking with laughter? That's a dogslicer, which is a goblin-made weapon (usually from whatever scrap they can salvage/steal from human refuse). Breaks on a natural 1. Based on this picture, looks like. So it's debateable whether that's a reflection of the artist's skill or the tattooist's.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2010 18:04
|
|
|
http://www.myjones.com/limited/wizards I wonder if they're 3.5 or 4e?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2010 17:22
|
|
|
homerlaw posted:Any specifics? Please--and I speak as someone that likes and runs Pathfinder--tell that guy to go gently caress himself if he can find his dick. So tired of edition wars...
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2010 19:37
|
|
|
Red_Mage posted:also this pamphlet sucks and deserves a line by line that it isnt going to get The burning in this document makes me want to run the author over with heavy equipment until his body stops twitching.Who really loving thinks it's fun to play a guessing game about what clue the GM "cleverly" has provided for the party? The whole reason skills and numbers are included in games is so my character can know or do things I personally can't. gently caress you might as well reduce combat to asking questions about how the orc is holding his sword and whether or not he forgot to buckle his greave on. And the only games that managed to successfully ignore game balance entirely are bad games. Everyone else realizes that you have at least make an effort that way or deliberately design your game around the imbalance (ala Ars Magica). Christ I hate old school gamers.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2010 02:13
|
|
|
Vanilla Bison posted:What does this even mean? "I don't know what the gently caress I'm talking about, but I'm angry and going to sperg out about meaningless poo poo."
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2010 19:38
|
|
|
Chainsawdomy posted:OK, so I have a vague idea of what's wrong with Pathfinder (It's still based on 3E), but I need a quick primer in the specifics of why it still sucks. A week or so from now I'll get one shot at converting some old friends of mine to 4E. I had previously drawn them away from 3.5 with Hackmaster (I realize that that's like weaning someone off Heroine with Meth, but I'll take the lesser of the two evils) but now they think Pathfinder fixed the old problems and have been suckered into the '4E is WOW' camp without actually playing it. Really? Honestly, if you can't convince them about 4e on its merits, it's not worth the effort. Pathfinder's 3.5 with a few of more fiddly subsystems tweaked. That's about it. No major overhauls or anything. It suffers from all the same problems that people complain about in 3.5, except that grappling/tripping/combat meanuevers in general are easier to resolve.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2010 22:13
|
|
|
Well, one important bit that was left out in the race to "OH GOD GROGNARD LOLOL":That guy from the Escapist posted:What was my opinion here? Well, the context of this interview is that Wizards of the Coast is releasing a new D&D Red Box. The release of that Red Box led us to publish an entire issue of The Escapist about the importance of the Red Box phenomenon. And that new Red Box is using the same brand name, logo design, box design, and artwork of a 1983 game. It's hard to look at the new Red Box and not conclude that it is aimed at people who liked the 1983 Red Box, telling them they'll like this too. Now, if it looks like the D&D Red Box, but isn't in any way similar to the old D&D Red Box, that would be pretty foul marketing, wouldn't it? Therefore, the central question of our interview was: "Will people who liked how the 1983 Red Box played also like this game?" Mearls' answer was affirmative: Yes, they will. In fact he seemed very happy to share how he had recaptured that classic D&D feel within the new mechanics. Which led me to ask how they had responded to criticisms that 4E was lacking characteristics of classic D&D, such as the core races being emphasized, or the different classes playing differently. And that was the majority of what we talked about. I personally found Mearls' answers uplifting. The interview led me to consider whether I should try running a Red Box campaign - that is, Mearls persuaded me. The parts of the interview I found most persuasive were the parts I included in the article. I can't write from someone else's point of view - I wrote from my own. Emphasis mine. Haven't gotten all the way through it yet, so we'll see if that's actually the way it comes across in the interview. Edit: Got through it, not sure where the grognardy stuff is coming from, really. Interview seems pretty interesting and Mearls is pretty clear what they're going for with the D&D Essentials box. Honestly, as someone who's probably a grognard as far as TGD is concerned, the interview makes me want to go out and take a look at the new Red Box.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2010 17:08
|
|
|
Mystic Mongol posted:The really grognardy stuff is the fact that the original, unedited interview is full of reactionary crap edited in to make what Mearles is saying seem less convincing and more reactionary. Hmm. I'm not seeing the original edited version(just went and read it) as being all that super-reactionary on Mearls' part. The interviewer's comments definitely have a more adversarial tone in the original, however. So if Macris' intent was to get across that as an "old skool" gamer Essentials appealed to him, well, that's a failure on all counts. Weird that they didn't just run the full drat interview. Oh well.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2010 17:49
|
|
|
ZeeToo posted:I do sort of like the quote that mentions Pendragon, though. In some systems I'd agree with that. But.. Pendragon *does* have a bunch of stats that affect how a character roleplays. In fact, it's one of the most structured games out there for that kind of thing, since they're pretty specific about aspects of your character's personality. I mean, check out the character sheet: http://www.gspendragon.com/images/knightcharactersheet.pdf The only thing that's not statted explicitly is intelligence in the brainpower sense.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2010 22:02
|
|
|
ZeeToo posted:I don't know Pendragon from a hole in the ground, so if that's the case... I wouldn't have known. Thanks for the correction. That whole Personality Traits section, not to mention Passions, does suggest the quoted guy was completely full of poo poo. It was that game's big innovation at the time, since otherwise it's just pretty straightforward Basic Roleplaying. It's an interesting game for a lot of reasons, and quite a bit of fun, but a lot of people recoil from the whole Personality Traits/Passions system because they can force a character to do things the player doesn't necessarily want them to do.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2010 22:38
|
|
|
LightWarden posted:How did Pathfinder handle Polymorph? http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells---final/polymorph Basically, limited the forms you could take and tried to nail down the ability gains/losses.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2010 23:06
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 07:16 |
|
|
Drox posted:I swear that I actually saw an AD&D branded card game in passing once. Like, I was in elementary school and another older kid had some and I didn't realize what they were until later when I learned about D&D. Spellfire, maybe?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2010 04:00
|
|