Feel free to start your own AMA, and even make that the theme, but we have a thread for trivia! It's called, "Did you know..." and it lives here in Off-Topic! It's pretty cool, most of the time!
I don't need to focus on useless trivia! Suddenly remembering useless facts that add nothing to the topic at hand is my super-power!
It's even in my character profile! Check it out! XD
Either way, let me, you and try omega zero, and you Nico's, should all answer the superpower/superhero/etc. question!
Someone who always plays up the low Cha ends up being Jar Jar Binks. Players should show restraint and only play it up in small, character establishing doses.
One could argue that Jar Jar actually had a decent Cha modifier, considering how memorable he ended up being (although not in a positive light). He just had really low Int and Wis (and a terrible writer).
Low cha is... Someone completely forgettable. People notice their presence, but don't care about them or what they have to say.
I can roleplay literally any alignment as a character fighting "for the greater good". From a pragmatic "big-picture-seeing" LG to a deluded CE criminal willing to commit all sorts of atrocities "for the greater good". Even an insane CN lunatic who thinks his nonsensical and meaningless actions actually have a beneficial impact on the world.
Try not to chain yourself too much. Accept the fact that you will disagree with your GM and fellow players on one aspect of morality or another. No two people on this world see every moral issue the same.
She manipulates plant biology, though... Far more likely, it's:
- Hair dye.
I'll let you know I'm delightful in parties! XD
(all that said, I do recall an episode of Batman TAS where Ivy had "children" that were actually plant golems made to look and act like humans).
EDIT: NINJA'd by Ashiel's EDIT.
As revenge, I'll point out that Harley never really left the Joker. She broke up with him a few times, but always ended up coming back (until he died at the hands of Tim Drake).
You know... I just now noticed your nametag is "Tactics Lion" written as a single word. oO
To this day I've been mentally reading if it were just a random made up word... And in my head it sounded something like "Tah-ctic-seeleeon" (Like tactic-"zillion", but with an "S" sound).
- - -
Also, did you know "AMA" coincidentally means "loves" (as in "she loves cheeseburger") in Portuguese?
Killing it isn't difficult... The problem is keeping it dead. Oddly, enough, per RAW, it dies if it falls victim to an effect that would kill it instantly (e.g.: suffocation). Not just "fall unconscious and bleeds". It DIES. But its regeneration brings it back...
Luckily, turning something into an undead removes all defensive abilities, including regeneration. That means, per RAW, turning the Tarrasque into an undead works. It'll stay (un)dead. Then, you destroy it (undead creatures aren't killed, they are destroyed).
I don't think that's the intention, though. it's meant to be a moving plot device. Not that it matters... By the time you're 25th level, the Tarrasque isn't particularly dangerous.
This summer marks 40 years of playing D&D for me
Alex Martin wrote:
I look forward to your guidance and advice on shooing kids away and recalling how much bluer the sky was "back in the day". ;)
My Self wrote:
How about Neutral options? If you resolve a lot of things neutrally, you get protection from extremes.
You know... Being neutral actually has quite a few perks (can't be detected or smitten as easily, can cast any aligned spell, etc)... But they are probably not as good as getting constant effects...
Hmmm... A less powerful, but more encompassing version of the Protection From [Alignment] spells?
Sorry, my bad. Still, it still supports my argument.
Just because you need a higher bonus to succeed on whatever task, it doesn't mean that task suddenly involves more roleplay. All it changes is your chance of being successful.
But, well... I said my opinion. The OP is free to do as he pleases, anyway.
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
That's arguable... But in any case, is there any need for him to be a super-awesome lightsaber duelist? Isn't being super wise and having super powerful mind powers enough?
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Using the Force to telekinetically wield his sword would've been cool.
One problem you might encounter is fighting enemies with Deflect Arrows or things like Snake Style. Admittedly, these aren't common feats... But they aren't all that rare either, depending on setting.
Besides, concealment will make you downright useless 50% of the time, while a more orthodox archer will at least deal some damage most of the time.
IMHO, the best part of Protection From [Alignment] spells is the blanket protection against possession and mind control. And that can be gained with a wayfinder and an ioun stone for mere 4500gp... So it isn't anything too powerful or exotic, IMO.
If you think it's too much... You could split the benefits from the spell and gradually give it to players who have a high enough character level and/or enough alignment points. Like... They get the bonus to AC at 6th level, the immunity to possession/mind control at 12th and the shielding against evil summons at 18th. Or you could base it on your "alignment scale". Or both.
Maybe their attacks could count as their alignment after a while... Almost as if they were slowly turning into creatures with the Good subtype. The advantage of basing it on character level is that it's easier to balance... Sure DR 2/Evil is really good at 5th level... Not so much at 12th. And so on. :)
And of course, you can use that in conjunction with the alignment scale.
Well... It's a first level spell... It isn't all that good, honestly.
IMO, a good/evil deed should only count if it's actually large enough to count... Sure, holding the door open for your neighbor is Good and not returning that extra coin you got with your change is Evil... But are any of those acts enough to actually change that big "N" in your alignment chart?
I think there's a difference between being a generally nice person and being Good with a capital G. One of them is just being an overall pleasant person... The other is being notoriously and consistently Good. Someone obviously "Gooder" than the general population.
In any case... To facilitate your work, since there are no scaling levels of Good in the rules (it's all binary. Either you are good or you aren't), the perks should probably be dependent on level.
The existence of perks should be enough to make the players act out their alignment. Beware, though... This may lead to characters putting exaggerated emphasis on alignment out of fear of the GM taking away their toys (since there's no way to be sure what the GM thinks is "good enough"). That's how we end with Lawful Stupid Paladins.
...and more time for the GM to spend on the part of GMing that's actually fun and interesting, like creating NPCs and dungeons. :)
IMHO, a balanced Summoner would be the APG Summoner with the following changes:
- Unchained Summoner's spell list.
There! No need to add alignment restrictions and halve the amount of evolution points!
Bazinga? You're actually supporting my point: From a role-play perspective, there's no difference from getting an additional attack at BAB +6 or +3 or +X. Mechanically, it's quite different... But getting more of fewer iterative attacks does nothing to encourage role-play.
But if the OP thinks this idea will make the game more enjoyable for him and his friends... Well. So be it. More power to him, I guess.
If you only give the players one way to do something important (e.g.: acquiring essential plot information), then it's your fault for they being helpless when that one way fails.
Knowledge checks are just one of many means PCs have to acquire information. Diplomacy and divination spells are common alternatives. And you don't have to require a check for everything. If the check is easy (or unimportant) enough, just assume they succeed. Knowledge checks should give them additional useful information. They are not supposed to be the only way to know where to go next to get the plot moving.
NEVER make plot advancement depend on a single check. Always have at least 2~3 alternatives.
And what's the difference between not rolling Diplomacy because you don't have 1 rank and not rolling Diplomacy because you don't have 3 ranks?
Either way, you're not rolling because you don't have an arbitrary number of ranks assigned to Linguistics. Again: There's no more (or less) role-playing involved... All you managd to do was discourage character variety.
But, hey... If your goal is for everyone to have ranks in thr exact same skills, you're on the right track!
And if you want to sacrifice player fun and character variety for realism... Well done!
How is investing 3 ranks instead of 1 any more role-playing? It takes longer and costs more resources... But it doesn't change anything about roleplay.
In fact, I think it has quite the opposite effect. It's just another reason for players to stick to the usual skills and never break the mold. I often invest in Linguistics because it's a fun skill... If my GM used your rules, I surely wouldn't even consider doing it.
If you want to add variety and role-play to your game, then reward it. Making it more costly and less effective will achieve the exact opposite result.
I thought that episode eighteen was incredibly powerful. The sheer humanity of that episode, as Subaru finally hit rock-bottom, and finally began to climb back up, was awe-inspiring. It really cemented what I already knew: that this show is one of the greats, at least for me.
episode 18 was definitely very powerful... My point is that it (fortunately) didn't make me feel miserable, like pretty much every episode since the "election" arc started. :P
It was an emotional episode... Only it has a more positive tone. Before episode 18, this arc was very emotionally draining. Everything backfired and every character suffers and/or dies gruesomely... It was getting quite exhausting, actually.
Prince Yyrkoon wrote:
Or summons/undead minions to take the hit for them.
Exactly... The cool things about (good) stories about corruption is how the "evil" made is nearly (or completely) harmless at first, so the one falling down the alignment chart takes greater (and riskier) chances when using evil.
*Heals children with Infernal Healing*
And so on...
This is how corruption should work. Little by little, step by step... The corrupted character "falls" by being willing to go just a little farther than he went before... And before he realizes, he's deep into full evil territory and can't even pinpoint the moment when he got there.
OTOH, having your mind completely changed to hell and back again because you cast 3 spells in the same day is idiotic.
"Well... The evil wizard enslaved angels to fight us, so I'll use Protection from Good to allow us to get past the angels and punished the wicked mage... Oops! There goes my 3rd casting! Now I want to kill puppies! On the upside, the wizard became good after enslaving so many angels, so now he's a virtuous paragon of justice!"
Wouldn't an horror-themed game benefit more from having shades of grey, though? Allowing characters to slowly, but surely grow into a different alignment?
This rule pretty much ruins that. It becomes a video-game karma system, and not even a good one. It destroys all the nuance that makes stories about corruption/redemption interesting in the first place!
In my experience, the hardest part is actually starting the exercises... Once I finally manage to get up and start, I have no problem continuing it.
But getting up is so freaking difficult... XD
Kirth Gersen wrote:
In the words of Hitchens' editor, "That Christopher had friends who were evangelicals is testimony to his intellectual tolerance and largeness of heart, not to any covert religiosity." (Not that I claim to be half the intellectual powerhouse that Hitchens was.)
Oh, I agree. There's nothing wrong with having people with different religious views... I just wouldn't be very interested in going into a hyper-crowded religious event. I find most religious congregations to be rather boring, even more so when one doesn't share their faith... But most importantly, I hate crowds. I lived in huge cities most of my life... But i still hate overcrowded gatherings. :P
Hey! My friend found my save on his Wii... My fearmeter was 12%. My sissymeter was 94%!
I don't know if I should be proud or really embarrassed. XD
PS: Outlaw Star rocks! I found it many years ago while looking for "stuff similar to Cowboy Bebop"... And while they aren't all that similar past the type of setting where the story takes place, Outlaw Star remains among my favorite anime to this day.
Then it must be porn!
Kirth Gersen wrote:
I still don't understand the allure, but I see your point.
You were obviously replying to my argument. And intentionally misrepresenting it.
But you know what? I don't care. I believe my argument is clear enough to anyone who doesn't intentionally misunderstand it. So I won't participate in this discussion anymore. I don't care at all about Master Craftsman, anyway. It's just another poorly designed feat for me to ignore.
My response is also ultimately the same: If you want to have a honest discussion, then just read my damn posts and stop attacking damn strawmen!
Seriously... Don't you ever tire of misrepresenting my argument? When did I say a single feat should make a non-caster capable of crafting just as well as a full-caster?
How exactly is "spending a single feat to still not be as good at crafting" or "spending twice as many feats to be (almost) as good at crafting" the same "crafting like a full caster"?
Buri Reborn wrote:
Do you not read my posts past the first two words? Or did a strawman steal your girlfriend and now you're sworn to attack them at every opportunity?
Buri Reborn wrote:
MC gives you CL without being a caster for the purposes of magic item crafting. Which, that is actually a mechanical benefit. Just because you can't roll a d20 with it right away is secondary.
It doesn't give you CL... It allows skill ranks to count as CL in one very specific way... A way from which you can't benefit. At all.
You need yet another level and yet another feat just to be able to enjoy half the benefit.
Buri Reborn wrote:
Except casters gain CL for free. They aren't spending feats or any other resource for them. And their CL has many other benefits, they don't exist merely to be used with a feat you don't have. And if/when they do get a crafting feat... They spend a single feat and gain the full benefit.
MC does it job... But it does it badly.
Buri Reborn wrote:
Because you're trying to do something that is otherwise impossible in the game without that single feat. There is a necessary trade off.
A trade off is not the same as "a tradeoff + yet another unnecessary tradeoff".
Buri Reborn wrote:
There is also a practical benefit to the Master Craftsman feat. Take a paladin. The soonest they can take Craft Magic Arms and Armor is level 9. With MC, you can grab it at level 7.
And all it cost them is a whole feat... The scarcest resource in the game... Very practical, indeed. And let's not forget they could do the same with a trait.
Buri Reborn wrote:
No it sounds like MC is a s+%%ty feat. MC does nothing. If you take that feat and nothing else... It makes no difference whatsoever for your character.