Troglodyte Sorcerer

JTDIV's page

24 posts. Alias of JTDV.


RSS


In game I actually could do without AOO. I understand about balance, but still. I'd like to try a game without it to see how it speeds up combat. Feel free to discuss.

Out of game, it bothers me how me and my players all talk ourselves out of playing because we don't have a 5 hour block of time (with 1 hour on each side of that) dedicated to the game. Two hours? Nope can't play. One hour, Nope.


Not dumb. It's "Rules As Written". You'll often see it hand-n-hand with RAI, Rules As Intended. Then comes crunch (stats), flavor (descriptions), and much, much more. But those should get you started. Just wait. At some point you'll have an entire discussion using only acronyms!


IonutRO wrote:
https://www.wizards.com/dnd/dice/dice.htm

As IonutRO tacitly pointed out, dice generators are your friends.

And if speed is still your enemy, don't forget that some of us grew up in this genre with calculators in our front pockets, and we have the black eyes to prove it.

By the way, I love rolling dice.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

My son picked up a Blink Dog pup on an adventure because it was starving and raiding the party for food. He felt bad for it and purposely started feeding it to gain its trust. It never helped out in combat or anything like that, and unfortunately, after that adventure I never really heard about it anymore.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I like how you kept it short and sweet in your blog. You bring up the idea that everything should have a purpose in order to continue (or add to the immersion of) the story. I agree with you that the randomness should add a purpose (other than wearing down your characters before a bigger battle)...but not exactly in way that is suggested in your blog.

Random encounters do not have to be monster/battles. They most certainly can be opportunities for role playing.

As an example, the party beds down for the night, one of the characters steps past a tree to relieve herself, and stumbles upon a fresh corpse. No monster needs to appear. No maps. No pawns. So what is going on with this encounter? Well, with a freshly dead corpse, this can create tension because the characters might be thinking something dangerous is out there in the dark (and the players might be thinking that the GM is building up a battle). But, it can also be presented in such a way that the characters can feel empathy for the dead traveler. Perhaps, they can give him a proper burial? Or say a few words, giving a tough character a chance to show a more compassionate side of themselves.

With the above scenario, are they advancing the plot? No, not exactly. But they are creating a richer version of the game for the players. This is a random encounter that doesn't require a d20 to complete. You can decide to award xp or not, up to you.

I like these versions of random encounters better because my purpose for role playing is live out the story of another person. Don't get me wrong. I totally agree with you in that if it makes sense to have evil Fey trying to randomly pick off party members, then that is exactly what should be happening. I also agree that they should be used sparingly. I mean, characters have to sleep sometime. But ultimately, the random encounter's purpose should serve to be a very important part of the character's story arc.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Just a quick devil's advocate here with the understanding that I do agree these rules are much harder on martials...but isn't that the point?

Jedi mind tricks work on the weak minded, which proved to be the soldiers (sorry, I should have put that in a spoiler for those who haven't seen Star Wars). Wizard types are typically knowledge seekers, being high-minded and more self aware than most - they are attracted to the arcane arts. Whereas, people who charge in to battle with little regard for their own wellbeing are, well, less than high-minded - these folks are attracted to the martial arts.

In RPGs, I typically see people wondering how they can get their character concept to be perfect at everything, including changing the rules to suit their needs. But not every build will be perfect, which makes for some great roleplaying. Keep in mind that I understand the frustration of having your Barbarian stealing the Cleric's Holy Symbol and sucking their thumb, but at the same time that's pretty damn funny.

There is no perfect solution here, but ultimately we are the storytellers of this system. So if you want your Barbarian to have the same chance as your Wizard to avoid madness, I'm fine with that.


Looks good. Off the top of my head it needs:

Page numbers

Player Contact Information

Room to answer the questions (or use form fields if filled out online)


Ravingdork wrote:

Are you, as a player, sharing those character thoughts with the other players? If not, your actions can cause a lot of confusion. Players aren't mind readers, and usually don't know what you don't tell them.

Communication is extremely important for avoiding misunderstandings.

Yes, IC thoughts, but also some subtle (for now) verbal and physical interactions. Basically, all of the players know what my character is thinking. The Dhampir, I'm sure, suspects.

The reason, I said it wasn't awkward is because my character's thoughts haven't required the other player's character to respond (I purposely did it that way). I'm not forcing the player to role-play with me, but he is aware of my character's motivations. In addition, we've talked and I've thanked him in the discussion thread for the role-playing opportunity. Like I said, as long as it works for both of us then I'll continue for now.


In my current pbp, I play a male human Cleric of Sarenrae who is physically attracted to my buddy's female Dhampir Spiritualist who has issues with religious intolerance. LOL! It makes for some good role playing. It's not awkward yet because it's mostly kept to my character's thoughts. But it does affect his motivations, and as more things are revealed we'll all find out together what happens. Though, I suspect she will spurn him.

Having said that, I only do this for the role playing, and if it stops being enjoyable for both parties I would drop it. I'm not a method actor, just a role player. :)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Ten years of planning games only to have a player not show up because the player forgot? Ten years of this? Your friend either forgets to go to work, forgets to shower, forgets to eat, etc., etc., or something else is going on.

Keep in mind that we teach people how to treat us by allowing said behavior. By ending it, you did exactly what I would have done (although I might have done it nine years and nine months ago, and only for that player).

As for your other friend, I cannot imagine not hanging out and talking during the game. It is a social game after all. Having said that, you stated you are all friends outside of the game, which is where your friend could have caught everyone up on work life. I thought you handled this appropriately, but since your friend could not accommodate (or compromise if that's a less harsh word), then ending it (for that player) is what I would have done.

It's basically that whole, "If you kids don't knock it off I'm turning this car around." They didn't knock it off. You turned the car around. No problem.

Glad you can all remain friends because that's the hard part when tough decisions are made. And of course, all of us here feel bad for the other two players who were committed and ready. But maybe they felt the same way about the other two players. Hang in there.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

*Wakes up in one room at the inn. Suddenly runs out and into another room. Goes back to sleep.


Hilarious thread. I have a Catfolk named Bratton with the burglar archetype and definitely do the whole bathing/grooming thing, even as a swift action during combat.


Personality conflicts have the potential to stop a game too. <-- This is a problem that may not come out in the recruitment thread or even in someone's posting history. But once the game starts, some people do not get along. A lot of times, re-recruiting will fill a spot when someone quits, but it can also kill the momentum of the game.


shaventalz wrote:


Only once per day per person, and each attempt takes an hour. If this is before you get a happy stick, you're probably looking at 1 or 2 HP healed. I'd hardly call that useful in most cases.

Not picking on you, but since you brought it up: a character attacking at 1 hp is no different than a character attacking at 150 hp. Sure, their defense is affected, but their offense is unimpeded. Bringing someone back into the fight (from 0 hp to 1 hp) can turn the tide of the upcoming battle. In addition, a character with 1 hp can suggest things to you such as "Let's not get revenge today and go sleep it off," as opposed to you just deciding all by yourself to get revenge for your friend's corpse.


Same goes for a player, Hannibull Rektor. Imagine if all my characters in all my games were simply called JTDIV*. Sure, I might self-identify as Rotker LLubinnah in the text, but what if I never refer to my actual character name for several pages?

Having said that, it's your pbp, your players. Up to you. I don't have a dog in this fight, but I do like having a GM be in character as much as me.

*LOL, I'm only in one game.


Who owns the ship?

I do understand that starships are not tied to Starfinder credits. But the concept of sharing the starship can become problematic for a number of reasons.

For example, who has final authority (or veto) of the use of the vehicle? Perhaps the Captain is an Ahab type and wants revenge, but the Engineer feels the ship cannot successfully win the next skirmish. Or perhaps a character has to barter with ship-stealing pirates for the lives of the crew in exchange for the ship; but maybe the other characters would rather fight to the death than give up their ship. So who decides? Or is this a democracy? Do they cast lots? Roshambo to respect the authoriti? In Pathfinder, the players do not typically share a horse so I'm trying to understand what happens next.

Another example, a character acquires their own personal ship during a campaign and exits their original ship role on the original ship (Perhaps they were the captain and of course someone else will fill the role as captain - that's not the issue). What happens to the original ship when all the characters acquire personal ships? <-- this scenario, of course, might explain the whole not tied to Starfinder credits mechanic so that the last surviving role of the original crew doesn't sell the ship and keep the money for themselves. But it does leave a fully functioning ship somewhere, which seems like a waste of resources. What to do next?


Nice write up with some good observation. And I've read and enjoyed several of your other product reviews too. Couple of things though:

Endzeitgeist wrote:
Sitting around the table, munching pizza and pretzels with your best friends doesn't prove to be particularly conductive to creating fear.

One of the things I see a lot in gaming is a blending of character/player knowledge which this quote seems to be representing. The character can be terrified, and act that way. The player shouldn't be. And yes, I realize that only Hellknights deal in absolutes, but I cannot imagine enjoying a game where the GM literally terrifies me such that I think I'm going to die (or at the very least question my own existence). I probably wouldn't show up to the second session (or maybe I would? you know, just for the lols). One way to make peace with the character/player synthesization is to accept the idea of GIGO, which is an inelegant way of saying you get out of it what you bring to it. So I think horror can work very well in just the same way as a game that is supposed to be comical, as long as the player is actually buying in to it.

Also, your general thesis, while I mostly agree, I'll have to respectfully change some things to fit my perspective. My reasoning is that horror is subjective the same way that comedy is. What you've described—a lack of control—is more inline with depression for me. The very first time I had to pay taxes as a child (or as a minor working at McDonalds if you will), I realized I wasn't in control. And even that can be liberating simply because there is nothing to stress over. Not being in control doesn't generate fear for me. In fact, just the opposite has happened in our house before such as that time I saw a Black Widow that got away. In a very real sense, I'm in control of that situation: She'll have a hard time killing me and I have a number of advantages such as bug-killer chemicals, a much larger size than her, light bulbs (they drive her away), etc. She should be horrified by me! And yet, I experienced dread when I went to sleep that night. That was horror to me. Maybe it wasn't the lack of control, it was the struggle for control? But mostly the waiting...

Great write up.


Looking for ideas. During ship combat, the roles of captain, engineer, gunner, pilot, and science officer come in to play. I'm wondering how these responsibilities look during the gaming session.

I'm sure some sessions will look like this. And I heard that ship combat may only be a small part of the game. But how do you keep ship combat tense, lively, and engaging, while still giving all players a chance to do something?

Disclaimer: Never played Skull and Shackles, nor have I played Bridge Crew.


If you didn't get it from the Shaman's special ability, then it's possible it got mixed up with the special ability of DR:

"Whenever damage reduction completely negates the damage from an attack, it also negates most special effects that accompany the attack, such as injury poison, a monk’s stunning, and injury-based disease."

You were hit, your ability reduced the damage to naught. You negated the effect of poison.


Came for the artwork. Stayed for the artwork. Already preordered the SF CRB but will likely pick this up too.


This is actually a very interesting and inventive way of using transmutation! We always hear stories of a player confounding a DM with their clever ideas and this is a perfect example.

There is some text about altering existing magic items (Ultimate Campaign, pg. 172), mostly to do with creation feats. Then it offers some warnings if you wanted to change those properties.

But the short answer is there might not be explicit RAW for this.


Use Active Voice . LOL
By the way, I really do get why a suspicious-type person would title their post differently than the body. It's kind of clever.

And Pizza Lord (Harry Dresden, is that you?) is right that if it's online it should be only things you're willing to share. It's not all bad though because if someone tries to steal your intellectual property, you have a way (date-time) of proving you posted first.


Oh as I said, I've never done it in game for most of the same reasons you've all provided. Mostly it just complicates the game.

It only came up as a discussion point so I brought it here. But the funniest part of all of this is PK The Dragon's response about our 10 base AC. Now why that never occurred to me is beyond me, but it's the Occam's Razor of this whole thread.

Having said that, I do like the table you provided Gobo Horde. That's something to think about.

And PossibleCabbage's mithril waffle iron. I'll have to consider that too!

Thank you, friends.


Do the contents of your backpack add to your AC? This is not necessarily a rules question, but maybe speaks to how you and your DM play with this issue.

I ask this because we almost never drop our backpacks when we enter combat. And yet if you look in our backpacks, some of us carry cast iron pans, additional weapons, gold, bedrolls, food, and a sewing kit. The enemy, especially a flanking enemy, still has to get through all that before they even get to your armor.

For the record, I don't count any of that. But it's an interesting thought.

Bonus thoughts: What about breakables? If you're flanked and you have glass vials of some type of precious liquid, are they damaged during the attack?