The Horned Hunter

Darklord Morius's page

Goblin Squad Member. RPG Superstar 6 Season Star Voter, 7 Season Marathon Voter, 9 Season Star Voter. Organized Play Member. 519 posts. No reviews. 2 lists. 1 wishlist. 1 alias.


1 to 50 of 68 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge Star Voter Season 6, Marathon Voter Season 7, Star Voter Season 9

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Never had the intention to make a armor, the intent was to make a piece of cloth. As a kilt, it could not fit on "body" and i don't wanted it to be used with Belt of Giant's Strength. Maybe i could just make it a belt instead...

Yeah, i should have written "knee length" instead, i'll study English harder next time.

Finally, it's not a plot device. The ancestors thing it's just a way to explain in a nice way how the magic works. The kilt creates a connection with your belligerent parents or great-great parent and you. Giving you bonuses in battle. Like Prayer. Its a spell that give you bonuses because you pray. If my item is a plot device, so the spell Prayer.

About how Kilt is: Kilts have side buckles to fasten it to the waist (according to wikipedia, i don't have one). I've put some extra buckles because, you know, fantasy.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

One of mine colleagues here at work:

"Hey, any of you has a headset? I had one here but it evaporated". How?? It was liquid before it evaporated??? If not, it sublimated!! And hardly so, maybe you just misplaced it!!

Grand Lodge Star Voter Season 6, Marathon Voter Season 7, Star Voter Season 9

1 person marked this as a favorite.
michael patrick wrote:


Of course that leads me to wonder why he added the light. As a warning? To whom? His intended victim?

Anyway...I'm kind of rambling here.

It's to the user, to let him know that the explosive is armed (and he must dispose it of!)

Grand Lodge Star Voter Season 6, Marathon Voter Season 7, Star Voter Season 9

1 person marked this as a favorite.

:-3

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think my item was snarked, and i blame Cosmo for it.

Grand Lodge Star Voter Season 6, Marathon Voter Season 7, Star Voter Season 9

1 person marked this as a favorite.

GO FOR THE EYES!

Grand Lodge Star Voter Season 6, Marathon Voter Season 7, Star Voter Season 9

2 people marked this as a favorite.

[b][b][url][url][b][b][url][url][b][b][url][url][b][b][url][url]AAAARGHH!!![b][b][url][url][b][b][url][url][b][b][url][url]

Edit: This counts as item quote?

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Like it, rules are solid and well tested, making room to you make what you want with the system.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nordom Whistleklik wrote:
Tell him you're trying to conserve power by using less electrons in your emails.

Might work, they are making expenses cuts.

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Today i discovered why my boss keep saying my e-mails are "subpar".

They want me to write on it to whom the e-mail is for.

Like;

"To Mark,

Dear..."

But, this isn't already answered on the "To" space in the e-mail???

WTF!

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Most insanities are orderly and repetitive behaves and patterns.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The thread is kind of pointless, IMO, there is no problem with the martials, it's the casters that are too powerful.

In my game a simple rule change on invisibility and how concentration works made great changes towards casters and martials balance.

Woops, wrong thread!

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Most of them

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I like to see drows as the vilanous bastards that hate each other and find themselves the best race on the face of Earth. They kill each other with complex and elaborated schemes, outright coming and murdering the other abroad is tasteless, non-drow and they lose face on drow society (not for killing, but by killing in an unimaginative way). Probably being ridiculed by samrter drow and not gaining the intended power. So, they take years to assassinate a rival.

Secondly, only drows can kill drows. Another race doing this makes the drow society unite against the race that "dared" to kill a drow.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's o Role Playing Game, because of this, we ask players to roleplay their social skills. In my tables, i ask them to roleplay everything, knowledge skills, spellcasting, sword swings, so long the table is in the mood for it, or the player is in the mood for it. There is always a player who wants to roleplay the social interactions, others don't want to do it.

When this happens, i ask the player to roll and say the general idea of what their character wants. (Try to convince the baron to confess his son's fate, for example). And ask him to say how, more or less his character will try this (Subtlety, trying to circle subject, or direct to the point). He rolls and i create some sort of saying that might do the job, and ask the player to repeat in game, or just says that his character said it (if his approval).

I have a player like you, he made a rogue with high diplomacy and bluff, but he himself don't like to elaborate.

Firstly, he complained about his character having high diplomacy, but failing to use it, because other players jump in the talking first. I started to do this, the players who like to put on an argument tried to convince me if the argument is useful on the situation or not, if it is, a ask them to roll diplomacy to give a +2 to the roll of the rogue (Who, ingame, would do the final arguments, using some help of his friends). If i think their arguments aren't good enough, i ask the rogue player to roll sense motive, and say to him why the arguments of his friends fail/lack, and ask him a diplomacy roll. If he succeed i give to him the right argument line, who does the argument (some other player in the table, the argument came from a table consensus, etc) but this final argument is given ingame by the face character (he who was chosen to do the roll). That way i prevent your sad case in my table.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, someone said "reality" to short for "historical accuracy" and all went to hell.

First of, i value suspension of belief in my games, many do. If i'm playing on Golarion, and some player wants to create a Nuclear Physicist from Chicago, i'll ask him why he want's to play with this kind of character - maybe he wants to play something other than a fantasy campaign setting, maybe creating this character is his way to say this.

If he is aware that the campaign is medieval fantasy (or become aware), but still wants to play with a character like this, he obviously have something in mind. So i'll ask him how he plans to fit that kind of character in the proposed campaign. Maybe he has a very cool or crazy idea of how his character ended up on Golarion (consequences of a unusual explosion of a nuclear power plant core, or something the likes). I'll help him to polish the story to better fit the scenario.

If he wants their character story to be too crazy for my taste or for the purpose of the campaign (he wants that his nuclear physicist traveled to Golarion in a nuclear space-ship, still have the vessel in full functionality, and wants all modern gear listed on Reign of Winter, for example). I'll try to convince him otherwise, so his character is balanced with the other and don't brake the game's crunch and fluffy flavors.

If nothing of it helps, i ask him to do another character that better fits the game or seek another gaming table.

It's fine to create unusual things that go out of the way of reality. But the game has a purpose, a suspension of belief.It's the playing of a role that makes sense in the fantasy created that comes the fun. If the player's idea brakes that suspension of belief (I want play a LG Cthullu Anti-paladin who spews spaceships and has Luke Skywalker as an Animal Companion!), the game ends up unconvincing, senseless, having no point. Games like that can be fun for a over the top nonsensical one shot, but not for a campaign.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Storytime!

The first GMPC that appeared on my table and why:
It was when i GMed Into the Dragon's Den Adventure Box from Dungeons and Dragons, they faced and Lizardfolk that was kind of a character, they liked it and wanted him on the party, i played along and, since then i found out that NPCs that accompany the PCs can be useful and requested even. My NPCs are very lively, i blame Storyteller system for this, but thanks to that, the PCs love them and sometimes want them to hang out with the party.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Wow, now if the GM roleplays a lying monster, suddenly is the GM that is a liar and cannot be trusted? No, no, no, no, you cannot possibly meant that, did you?

NPCs controlled by the GM who helps, evolves and are friends of the PCs can be a very fun tool! My groups are small and i use this tools frequently. All players that experience this end up loving it, so a very positive opinion about them.

I know, i know, some GMs use it very badly. GMPCs are tools, so are hammers. Hammers can be used very badly, but, even so, they are still unquestionably useful.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I blame Cosmo for the crapy postal services here in Brazil!

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

My very best wishes to Sean and Jodi, from Brazil!

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The opposite of the Broken Soul would be nice. Like an "Enlightened Soul" a evil outsider that is good. Why it would be cool? To cause conflict wit the characters. To make them think the enlightened Barbazu is still a vile fiend and battle it until they realize their error. And because i'm a little sick of so much evil in the bestiaries.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Only the Paizonian gods can answer this question!

Paizonian gods, i summon thee! Hear yer olde servant and answer thy prayers!

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

You need not outbreed to be dominant.

Romans were less than slaves, but they were the dominant.

Politicians are just the 1%, but they have the 99% under their thumb.

So it can be a setting were elves are the dominant race but not the most populous. They could be seen as guides and leaders, and all other races strive to be like them, or obey them without question because are convinced that their guidance will lead to a better world for them.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
gustavo iglesias wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:
Being able to walk into lava and out again is certainly a magical event, no mere fleshy toughness can possibly explain such a thing...it's totally unrealistic. "toughness' would have to represent energy resistance, and that's not what we're talking about. You're just burning through hit points!

Of course it's totally unrealistic. That's the point. But it is not more unrealistic than Beowulf surviving one week holding his breath. Which is the point: it doesn't have to be realistic. The game *ISN'T* realistic. There are a LOT of situations where the game shows us how powerful a high level character is, without having any posibility to "hide" it with "the dwarf step aside"

Wanna examples?

The dwarf is sleeping. Some goblin sneak in, put a dagger in his neck, and slice it. Coup d'grace. 1d4 damage, autocrit, for 2d4. No way he dies unless he gets 1 in his d20. Fun part: at high level, even an a greatsword might not work.

Dwarf jumps, volutarely, into a lava pool.

Dwarf falls from the Niagara Falls.

Dwarf is attacked by poisoned daggers, get hit 50 times, make 50 poison rolls. That's 50 daggers he couldn't "be dodging", because he made 50 injury poison rolls.

Dwarf is landed upon by a great wyrm, weighting roughly 100 tons.

Dwarf being bite, then chewed, then swallowed by a tyrannosaurus.

DWarf being grappled and contriscted by a str 30 KRAKEN.

Dwarf being grappled then *rended* by monsters with such ability.

Dwarf voluntarely drinking cicuta.

The dwarf isn't "dodging" any of those. He survives, for the same reasons he can grapple, trip and pin a rhinoceros with one hand tied to his back. Because he's awesome, and not some pedestrian bound-by-reality mundane guy

Hah! This Dwarf guy is a sport!

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Talcrion wrote:
Elbedor wrote:

Why AoO the air? Aren't there enough gnats, flies, or ants around that may be moving through your threatened space? Heck, even a blade of grass swaying in the wind or a mote of dust or dandelion seed blowing along...

Wait, does this mean as GM I can have the air AoO anyone that decides to move?

Naturally! and since the air clearly has a deceptively high Str based on it's ability to throw buildings onto witchs when it feels like it, they should learn to fear the wind!

Can i cast magic missile against the air?

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Anzyr wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Friend of the Dork wrote:

The funny thing is, by RAW summoning the Lantern Archon is a GOOD act, and attacking the ship EVIL. So overall, that makes up for it.

Then again, summoning either good or evil creatures should not matter in my book, even if some may frown upon it.

Wise DM's know when to kick RAW to the curb. Despite the "good" subtype of the cast spell, forcing a good creature to do evil acts makes the act doubly evil.

BTW, I wouldn't change the Neutral Bard's alignment, just correct it to the one she's been playing all along.

Wow, bet those GMs are great with with Animate Dead as a Good character, because what are the odds it goes one way and not the other...

I haven't the faintest idea of what you're trying to say. A Good cleric can't cast that spell anyway.
Cleric? Those are kind meh Necromancers. But it's good to know such GMs would be ok with a Lawful Good Gravewalker Witch casting Animate Dead to fight bad guys. They would be ok with that right?
Not allowed in my games... Good gravewalkers simply do not exist in my worlds. Neutral ones have a fairly hard time not sliding down into evil. As the saying goes when you spend your time playing with swine don't expect the mud to stay out of your clothes.
Ah so casting a Good spell to do evil makes you evil, but casting an Evil spell to do Good doesn't make you Good. Knew there was probably some sort of bizarre hypocrisy going on somewhere. While I like being right about such things, still kinda sad to see.

The problem i see is the spell you choose to exemplify, you raise corpses to do your job (even if is a good job) you raise corpses! Did you care to know if the soul of the dead is ok with that? if their family is ok with that? If you did, then, ok, i would judge you are doing a good act.

Now, if you summon a imp to do good, you are doing good (IMO, not RAW).

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Hama wrote:

I don't get it. What is the problem of humans being the dominant or most widespread race in the setting?

Answering the OP question: There is no problem.

If the question is WHY this COULD be a problem, then you have a pletora of answers, going to "it's boring" ending in "because i like dwarves" and all the options in between.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I blame Cosmo for the Ivel!

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Argh, i also having trouble to understand why there is so many Crane Wing threads over here after UC Errata, but this thread turned to be big enough to me to follow, i think i will open a new Crane Wing thread to understand the explaining of the Crane Wing Threads... (jk)

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Marthkus wrote:
Vivianne Laflamme wrote:
Some people play a rogue because they want the word "rogue" at the top of their character sheet.
THIS is the only thing no other class can do.

You guys from these fancy classes can take from the Rogue EVERYTHING! But not this, NOT THIS! No sir!

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Feros wrote:
Darklord Morius wrote:

I'm trying to play Mass Effect on my PC. I'd bought it on last Origin winter sale, along with ME 2 and 3. Of course i wanted to begin with the first, but problems starts when i finally installed it on my computer...

The game simply don't loads, and the Origin support don't have a clue why. I recurred to a crack, finally the game had loaded, but it asked for a cd-key. Origin didn't provide one on my purchase, and i can't find it anywhere. So, for the second time i recurred to illegality and found a random cd-key that served well.

But now the games freezes frequently, about 1 to 30 minutes of gameplay.

I blame Cosmo because he don't work at Origin, because if he did, surely my problem would be solved already! Damn you Cosmo!

I had this problem as well. Then shut down Origin, and I ran the DirectX installer than is in the Installer folder in the Mass Effect folder in the Origin Games folder in the Program Files(x86) folder on the hard drive. Then I rebooted my computer and it worked!

I blame Cosmo for Darklord Morius not knowing about this relatively easy fix and going through all that @$#% to get his game playing.

Feros, thanks for the tip! I'll try that shortly. As for Cosmo, i blame him for not trying to solve my ME problem, AND for Origin.

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I blame Cosmo for the I hate Dwarves thread.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Arssanguinus wrote:


Still waiting dor somethig that says what you say was said. Differences are not equal to inferiority or superiority. They are just dufferences. There are also things that women tend to better at than men.

Totally agreed! With the plus side the your comment reminded me of beer!

Arssanguinus wrote:


(...)dufferences.

Hmmm, beer...

About the holding doors and other courteous actions: I'm courteous with anyone, regardless of gender, as thejeff seems to do. But, at least in my country, some men find this very strange (women too, it's very rare this type of behavior in Brazil nowadays).

Some type of odd behavior that i had roleplayed: The first time my character interacted with a black man was with the new character of a friend of mine (who also is black), she thought he might be evil, because drows and duergars she faced were. But then she talked with him and found out he was a nice guy (and her detect evil didn't tinged). She was trilled by the discovery.

If this roleplay was based on modern values, that awesome scene that both me and my friend found extremely fun, couldn't happen.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I still think that's a solid feat, i see many ways to exploit it. As it was, it was exceptionally powerful.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

MagusJanus, sir you and agree in disagree, and i respect you for that.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
MMCJawa wrote:

"Age of consent" seems to be one of those issues that just doesn't need to come up in games most of the time. I think a lot of gamers would feel a bit icky if you were regularly coming across NPCs with twelve year old wives. I know I would.

Heh, in my campaign, the emperor has 7 years old and he is scheduled to choose to marry between 2 women, one with 21 and another with 26, or choose one to be Shogun and marry with her daughter. And, hey, it's just news from the empire for the players!

And talking about Age of Consent, regarding Pathfinder (and Ultimate Campaign), rule for young character's age of consent can be really messed up.

What brings on Draco Bahamut's question: Yes, children can be villains - there are even rules for that in Ultimate Campaign.

My female character was proposed to marry against her will, she then challenged her "fiancee" to a duel, In the duel spot, he started to talk how he would treat her well and stuff. Before he ended his little speech she trowed a club on his face THEN run away!

Now, two years and 14 levels later, she wants to make amends to her family, because she thinks they overreacted, but didn't mean to make her unhappy, she will not marry with anyone against her will though, and now she has the brawl to enforce it.

About gender inequality in the real world. I think it will EVER exists but, i hope someday, it will ceases to be a problem.

Tacticslion, about slavery - Nowadays, we have illegal slavery in some few countries that it's just awful. But in many other places we have something that someone could say it is worst than slavery, that is forced labor. The employee is forced to work 20 hours a day to gain a meager wage that is paid only when their employers want. They are forced because the company he works pretty much owns the city, and will cause much grief on his life if he choose not to work on their factory or mine. I think this outrageous, and it's often used by the great companies to make production cheaper.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Sinking a german submarine

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Misroi wrote:

"What news do you bring, Mr. Mint?"

"It is as we feared, King Kandy. The enemy has come. They have swept down from the Gumdrop Mountains, crushing all candy resistance before them. We have already lost the Molasses Swamp and the Lollipop Forest. It is only a matter of time before they sail the Ice Cream Sea and lay siege to your castle, milord."

"Besiege Candy Castle? Preposterous! Our confectionary battlements are impenetrable, even for their army!"

"That's the worst news, milord. They...they have a second army."

"WHAT! Who! Who has allied with this rival king?!? I will have him caramelized!"

"Someone who has long desired your saccharine crown, milord. Someone who would step on the necks of any in their way to sit upon the Royal Icing Throne."

"Lord Licorice?"

"Aye, milord. He has already betrayed you. He has Jolly and Plumpy, and has beguiled Gloppy the Molasses Monster to join his cause."

"We are doomed."

Cant wait to read the second part!

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm trying to play Mass Effect on my PC. I'd bought it on last Origin winter sale, along with ME 2 and 3. Of course i wanted to begin with the first, but problems starts when i finally installed it on my computer...

The game simply don't loads, and the Origin support don't have a clue why. I recurred to a crack, finally the game had loaded, but it asked for a cd-key. Origin didn't provide one on my purchase, and i can't find it anywhere. So, for the second time i recurred to illegality and found a random cd-key that served well.

But now the games freezes frequently, about 1 to 30 minutes of gameplay.

I blame Cosmo because he don't work at Origin, because if he did, surely my problem would be solved already! Damn you Cosmo!

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tormsskull wrote:
Bruunwald wrote:
Unless you are creating stories about normal people having normal problems with say, relationships, work, and the like, it is going to be difficult to avoid making any protagonist in a fictional story "ordinary" or "normal."
Of course any PC (or even NPC) with advanced levels is going to be more "special" than a level 1 commoner. The question I'm really trying to figure out is, does the simple fact of being a PC makes that character more "special" than an NPC with the same race/class/stats/etc. Should the PC get additional benefits above and beyond what the equivalent NPC should get?

You mean, ingame? out of the box, or both?

If ingame, i would say no, there is no difference between the two.

Off game, i would say yes, story doesn't goes on if the PCs loose the adventure because a group of NPCs adventures were contracted first.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think that, what makes PCs special it's because they are the sole motor of the game. Without them, game over.

Of course, this is a "metagaming" explanation.

Speaking ingame, PCS are no better than any other NPCs around the gaming world. Depending on the setting, they can be seen as a bit above the normal person, or a bit worse than a normal person.

Economicaly-wise, a 1st level character that wants to go adventuring contributes in nothing with the society, people like that tend to be seen as vagabonds, errands, bandits or mercernaries. People tend to be cautious near them, because they don't know what to expect from a person that gave up trying to fit on society and "left for adventures". When their fame/infamy grows (with their levels), the common people starts to form a opinion about them and (given time) call them do gooders, and heroes. But the "Hero" staple take a while to be gained.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
DM Under The Bridge wrote:

As a dm, if you find you are getting a bit repetitive, it can be quite a fun exercise to go and read differing philosophies and belief systems, national geographic articles, anthropology, history texts on the ancient world, anything to facilitate the presentation in game of new societies, beliefs, ideas and values.

Avoid Rome though, Rome is overdone.

Go nuts in the search of difference, and have fun. I am always happy when the players are really surprised at the cultures I throw at them.

I agree, building a campaing based in a different culture can be a worthywhile challenge - the differences between modern culture and other cultures can also be used for comic relief, many many medias use that.

Someone might say: "So, you're sayin' tha' rape, torture, genocide an' cannibalism could be used as comic relief"? NO, i'm not saying that, if you find that funny YOU have a problem. Watch Monty Python Movies, feudal japan based anime, Mel Brooks' History of the World, part I, just to name a very few,

In my oriental campaing, i play social differences as comic relief, with exaggerated bows and mannerisms, and allowing players kick the but of the serf that carries their things when he is slopy or disrespectfull (intentionally or perceived).

Reading Deathquaker's post back on page 6, i don't even know how the discussion progressed.

Regarding male/female strengths and statistic differences (that bit is saturated). In my table i have a unspoken rule that i only enforce it (lightly) to myself. Women tend to have weaker strength than men. Even then, i allow to players put any number on strength they want be their character male or female.

About real world perfomance in sports: If i would care to have some difference in performance among gender (wich i don't), i would judge by the character height, if precision and speed is needed and by weight if strength and stamina is needed. The heavier/tallest gaining a +1, and the lighter/smallest gaining a -1. But i find this very uninteresting to bother.

Tormsskull wrote:
In real life, an average woman fighting hand-to-hand against an average man is going to lose 95% of the time.

There is ONE sport in real world that i know that women are equal, and many times even bested men competitors: Historical Fencing, yeah, with armor, shield, swords and hammers. (Google for Battle of Nations or Historical Fencing to know what i mean).

DM Under The Bridge wrote:


Yeah, that would be baffling.

Okay, er, the dragon destroys the town, but there are no scenes of destruction you notice. The dead innocents just disappear.

Maybe it was puff the magic dragon?

That reminded me the old 8 bit games, when the bodies simply blinked out or super mario enemies who fall out of scenario. You can GM like this: "The Rampaging dragon swoops in the town and breath fire over the innocents, you see many bodies blinking out or falling out of the scenario, unscatched, but definitely gone!

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Don't forget to read about the Naval Revolt! It's not always that rebel peasants take a Battleship by themselves and used it!

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

For the Brazilians, whom I don't believe were represented on the list of Peasant Revolts:

Ganga Zumba!!!

[Don Juan de Doodlebug]For those looking for more hawt chicks kicking ass, skip to 5:45. Vive le Dandara![/DJdD]

Oh, we had many commoners revolts - enjoy!

Patria Amada, Brasil!

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Draco Bahamut wrote:


I guess i am beginning to understand the issue. Let me put this in another way (and please, have a open mind about different cultural norms here). In the place where i was raised, men are not allowed to cook, we cant even get in the kitchen when women are working. And this is not because we think that only women should cook, it is because women think that men only cause trouble in kitchen, they ruin everything they touch. The case is, i like to cook, i like to invent new receipts, experiment with spices and etc... No one allowed me that. My entire life i was forbidden to touch the stove. I can't cook very well today, and i am sad because i dont want anyone cooking for me. Not cooking your food in Bahia is very different from not cooking in USA, we don't like to eat not-homemade food.

I can't play a character hurt by his expected gender role beucase there aren't expected gender roles. I never planned to have the issue in game, only a motivation that i can relate. To us, taking out expected gender roles diminish all the fight the gender had to make them equal. Woman had to fight so much to be equal, so let's forget them pretending that never were any issue with gender. Maybe this is a cultural thing, and we only having a misunderstanding.

Draco, i follow you, i'm from Brazil too, i know the drama. Happily, i never had this kind of problem, my father loves to cook.

Still, wanting or not, there are differences for gender, a man that wants to remain a man, but he wants to become pregnant. He cannot achieve that as easily as woman can. (Worst example EVER, i know, but illustrates that of course differences betwen men and women exists, no matter what.

Orthos, your example is funny, the say "you hit like a girl" could exist simply because boys like to be boys, girls like to be girls, so the saying "you hit like a boy" could exist, but only used by women.

And the why to have differences between men and women (apart for the obvious physiological, psychological ones) are:

1) Antagonism: A evil society that sees men or women as weaker are good to have another baddie to kick ass.

2) Cultural differences: They are good to make some good roleplaying, may they be funny, tense, just curious.

3) Another way to enrich your campaign: Have a kingdom run only by undead is enriching, have a kingdom run only by women, is also enriching.

4) More adventures hooks: More differences, more trouble, more trouble, more the need of problem solvers.

There are only a few examples, and there is no particular weight on the order.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
thejeff wrote:
Darklord Morius wrote:
Orthos wrote:
The question I would have for DB is why? Why is it a necessity to have some kind of gender roles established in the game/culture/setting? Why is there a need to have some sort of clear difference - mechanical, cultural, or otherwise - between genders? What's the point? What's to gain from it?

I'm not Draco Bahamut, although i know him from other foruns, but i will answer this saying what i think.

Campaigns were men and woman are equal in all aspects (except some obvious physiological and psychological differences) are fine by me, but condemn all to be that way, it's "meh".

In Golarion's drow society, women are dominant, orc society in the same setting, men are dominant. That makes Golarion "meh"?

Legend of the Five Rings we have woman samurai, but they are distinguished as "samurai-ko" and must make sacrifices, that samurai men didn't need to, like love and marry. That makes L5R "meh"? I really don't think so.

Though you'll note that both Golarion societies you mention are evil. Nor are they core PC races. Even PCs from those cultures are usually assumed to be rebels/outcasts - adventuring in the rest of the setting where discrimination isn't so prevalent.

Big difference between that and making defined gender roles the default for the setting so that all PCs have to deal with them, either by living within them or by facing all that comes with being the exception bucking society's rules.

Precisely, Why someone would be interested in some gender differences? One of the whys is antagonism. Cultures to fight against. There are plenty of another whys, many already posted on this thread, if you ask me examples i'll provide (just not now, i'm at work).

Oh, and one correction, there is no "necessity" to make gender differences, but, also, there is no necessity to prohibit groups that want to play with gender differences (provided they are mature, willing and informed) to play the way they want, isn't that true?

Personally? I'm done with non immersive games, they bore me easily and don't have enough life to draw my attention for long. But i'm ok with people who play non immersive games, you guys who chose that can keep playing it, you have my blessing!

Ellis Mirari wrote:


Being a druid is considered feminine. When you mention a druid, people assume they're female unless you say otherwise (not unlike a nurse or a dancer these days). A male druid may get teased a little by his friends, or get a little ribbing from new NPCs he encounters, but when the chips are down, no one doubts that he can do what he does well.

As an Asterix reader, i STRONGLY disagree here. Bards, on ohter hand... :)

The rest i agree with you :)

Orthos wrote:
Darklord Morius wrote:
In Golarion's drow society, women are dominant, orc society in the same setting, men are dominant. That makes Golarion "meh"?

I'm amused that you picked two of my least favorite parts of Golarion. Their orc culture is very meh and I don't like Drow (and have removed them from existence in my home setting). So... yes?

I don't play in Golarion. Those two specific reasons are very small parts of why, but I won't get into the other reasons here, as they're irrelevant to this thread.

Quote:
Legend of the Five Rings we have woman samurai, but they are distinguished as "samurai-ko" and must make sacrifices, that samurai men didn't need to, like love and marry. That makes L5R "meh"? I really don't think so.

I wouldn't enjoy it. And the samurai culture/east Asian influenced part of my homebrewed setting doesn't have these sort of restrictions. So... yes again?

I also don't play L5R.

Edit for answering Orthos.

I'm cool with your personal interests, but this doesn't mean that people who find those settings (or settings elements) interesting, appealing or cool are wrong, agree?

Those settings may be meh for you, but not for everyone, we agree with this?

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Alzrius wrote:

My belief is that the OP is attempting to ask a different question than the one they actually ended up asking.

I think that what was intended to be asked is "Is it immoral to create/play in/expect others to play in a game/setting where things that contemporary morality says are immoral are regarded as moral (or at least, amoral, rather than immoral)?"

In other words, do you find it objectionable to have something that we all commonly acknowledge to be bad (at this point in time) in real life be widely accepted within the context of your game?

I suspect that that's what's really under discussion here.

Well, if it is the question, i think the matter, if set to motion, may be handled with very care, with the consent, knowing and will of the entire gaming group and handled by a mature gamers. Then yes, it can be done.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

JonGarret, i disagree in some topics you stated, well, kind of, because it's just partial disagreement.

JonGarrett wrote:


A fantasy setting rarely has any connection to historic issues. Take homosexuality - it was perfectly acceptable in many places and many cultures until the spread of Christianity. We have solid records of Egyptian officials, Roman Emperors, Japanese Samurai and many other engaging in the homosexuality. Often on the side of marriage, true, because children were almost universally considered important to carrying on a legacy (and how many PC characters stick to that social custom?) but it was there.

Now take Golarion. The same level of homophobic behaviour makes no sense because at least three goddesses are engaged in a three way sexual relationship. How do you declare mortals are wrong to do it when the Gods themselves partake?

The opposite can also be true. BECAUSE only the gods partake, mortals cannot. It can be fun to have homophobic cultists antagonists that think like that.

JonGarrett wrote:


Same with woman. While there were exceptions to woman staying at home and being mothers, those women were often abused, raped and murdered for daring to be different. And that was considered a reasonable response. Again, something that makes no sense in setting like Golarion where there are female Gods - one of the primary warrior gods is Iomadae, a woman.

Like Nicos already stated, real world has it share of warriors godesses, including a female godess head of a pantheon. That didn't made real world less sexist.

JonGarrett wrote:


Mostly the excuse 'I wanna be realistic to medieval times' is just that - an excuse to get all those pesky non-white people out of the setting (Which is, historically, a massive mistake - there were plenty of non-white people wandering Europe) or putting women in subservient roles with maybe one or two exceptions - who are usually 'tamed' by marriage to the hero.

Now that was a bit overactive, many good RPG settings on the market deal with real world scenarios. And the people who played them are not all white supremacists. What about Blood and Honor or L5R? The first is in Feudal Japan, the other is in a similar setting. What about a campaign in Arabian States at the time of Mongol Invasion? Lot's of adventure and no white guy in miles (apart from one or another merchant). So, i think you exaggerated a little by saying MOSTLY. But i agree that some use that as an excuse (and really some - RPG is a hobby to complex and smart for fanatics or supremacists).

Regarding the discussion (or what it turned to be), i am with Ellis and Bunnyboy. Fantasy games have to many others races and cultures to suffer from inclusion problems. I think it's realistic to think that human race evolved enough to realize that they would not survive long enough fighting among themselves because color or beliefs - having so many others competitors being also sentient and nonhuman. Humans are also adaptive, so, if they observes an successful costume or behavior of another race, they would try their best to emulate. In dwarven, gnomish and elven societies, woman fares as well as men in all kinds of tasks - so humankind would quickly get ride of sexism in it's early eras.

Well, in synthesis, if you think about a Fantasy setting logic considering all it's elements, you can devise how humanity diverted from our past. Play a fantasy setting as it was our medieval time is simply not possible if elves, dragons, dwarven and magic mixed in.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I would put a example that an abolitionist crusader in a slave economic campaign it's like playing a desert dweller who has fear of water in a sailing campaign, but that is just silly, you play as you like, a paladin that abhors slavery and a paladin that accept it it's cool, so long you have fun.

The common people from Europe were in famine precisely because the industrial revolution punching up Europe, and slavery being abolished. Suddenly they found themselves useless because of the machination of farms and the loss of theirs serfs guarantees in exchange of meager wages that couldn't pay all it's needs, except if they (many times, litaraly) kill themselves working more and harder. The price of freedom, in the end, was more slavery.

Maybe, in your point of view, Louis, all real world (including our present way of life) is evil. But in fantasy, there can be a good society free from slavery, after all, it's fantasy. AND in fantasy, you can have a good slaver society, after all, it's fantasy!

Grand Lodge Star Voter Season 6, Marathon Voter Season 7, Star Voter Season 9

1 person marked this as a favorite.

A rich laborer's mithral inlaid gloves that requires no save...

1 to 50 of 68 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>