Yeah, asshatery would be the body of work that comprised earning the title of asshat.
Asshatation, on the other hand . . .
Not to be confused with the asshat, which is a dance, as in "Do the asshat".
I always assumed asshat was the vector quantity for stupidity.
Some say assuming is a species of asshattery.
Asshattation is also good, though not as fun.
Douchebaggery is great. What we need now are good definitions to distinguish Asshattery from Douchebaggery. I suggest that we have strictly set applications for each.
I have seen this thread has derailed but it cool
The begining threads about Char Op are great and I hope we keep them up
|
Asshattery? That's amazing. You guys just turned asshat into a verb. It's like magic or something.Isn't that a noun?
Shh. He's trying!
Being all pedantic and grammar-cop and stuff is worth jerk points, doncha know?
I think, in the spirit of Chicken-Infested, we should make a magical Hat of Asses, which works like a Bag of Tricks, only it's not plural, since there's only one 'trick' which is to produce a medium-sized donkey on command.
And then, we can can make a Char Op forum about how, using infinite donkeys, Awaken and the Aid Other Action, we can make an infinite Diplomacy check and convince Ao the Overgod (who, being omniscient, can't help but be aware of our infinite Diplomacy appeal) to give our character all the portfolios, ever, and fire all the rest of the gods.
We'll call it 'The Asshattery Gambit.'
|
Asshattery? That's amazing. You guys just turned asshat into a verb. It's like magic or something.Isn't that a noun?Shh. He's trying!
Being all pedantic and grammar-cop and stuff is worth jerk points, doncha know?
I think, in the spirit of Chicken-Infested, we should make a magical Hat of Asses, which works like a Bag of Tricks, only it's not plural, since there's only one 'trick' which is to produce a medium-sized donkey on command.
And then, we can can make a Char Op forum about how, using infinite donkeys, Awaken and the Aid Other Action, we can make an infinite Diplomacy check and convince Ao the Overgod (who, being omniscient, can't help but be aware of our infinite Diplomacy appeal) to give our character all the portfolios, ever, and fire all the rest of the gods.
We'll call it 'The Asshattery Gambit.'
Ahem...that's "she". I like the idea.
Douchebaggery will always reign supreme.Douchebaggery is probably one of my favorite insults. Right up there with asshat.
I like 'fncktard' myself. Has such a nice insulting ring to it.
For less insulting fare, or to confuse the knuckledraggers a good 'Jackanape' can always serve ...
to confuse the knuckledraggers a good 'Jackanape' can always serve ...
"Cretin" is a personal fave. Not to be confused with "Curtin," of course! ;)
Or we could do Cager Cant: Yeh addle-pated leatherhead!
Or we could do Cager Cant: Yeh addle-pated leatherhead!
Or oft-quoted line from the punks facing "Dirty Larry," in Hollywood Shuffle: "Whatchu say, honkysuckerpigheadjiveturkeyfool?!"
Ah...jiveturkey...
to confuse the knuckledraggers a good 'Jackanape' can always serve ..."Cretin" is a personal fave. Not to be confused with "Curtin," of course! ;)
Which leads me to one of my favorite counter-points: "Jane, you ignorant slut."
For less insulting fare, or to confuse the knuckledraggers a good 'Jackanape' can always serve ...
For less insulting fare, or to confuse the knuckledraggers a good 'Jackanape' can always serve ...
Lighten up, Francis ...
"The name's Francis Soyer, but everybody calls me Psycho. Any of you guys call me Francis, and I'll kill you."
"Woah, girl, this ain't the Riviera."
I haven't read this entire thread yet, but from what I've seen, I think I should draw your attention to the Stormwind Fallacy.
Here's a link to the best explanation I could find on short notice: http://forums.gleemax.com/wotc_archive/index.php/t-822626
But basically, in short, it can be summarized like this:
Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean he cannot also roleplay well. Just because a character plays his character well does not mean he cannot be optimized. As a corrollary, characters who are min/maxed are not automatically played worse than those who are not, and characters who are deliberately handicapped are not automatically played better than those who are not. It's easy to imagine players who are good at either one of those things, or bad at both, or good at both.
I enjoy optimization, to an extent. I like playing a character who is as effective at what he does as he can. D&D is, by it's nature, epic. So I want to play an epic hero. If I am going to be a wizard, I don't want to be any old wizard- I want to be Gandalf, or Belgarath. I want to play Achilles or Sparhawk. I want to be able to pitch in and not let my allies down.
I don't want to break the game. I find it fun to hunt for loopholes and the like, not so that I can play a character that can infinite Wish with the gate spell but for the joy of saying "hey! guys! look what I found!" Security experts spend their time looking at alarms and locks in order to find problems, not so that they can break into houses, but so that they can improve security in the future (and because they enjoy it).
I optimize, and I roleplay at the same time. Also, I try to be as nice as I can on forums.
As a side note, this is my first post on the Paizo boards. I go by dbay on WOTC.
Aaaaa! No! Don't start the Stormwind thing up again! Please!
Stormwind Fallacy.
First off, welcome to the Paizo boards Azrael, I'm sure Lilith will be by with cookies at some point.
We long-term posters were made aware of the "Stormwind fallacy" and the "Oberoni fallacy" and all the other fallacies during a very contentious period when the Beta testing of Pathfinder rules was occuring. Many on these boards still have a bad taste in their mouths from the folks that ran rampant over the playtesting, especially their tone.
That being said, besides a certain group that detests 'gaming' RPGs, most folks here welcome CharOp folks as long as they are polite and respectful. There are even a few threads sparking up in the Pathfinder General Discussion subforum. I think I speak for most folks when I say there is no problem discussing Character Optimization, it is more of granting an entire subforum that is the issue. The CharOp folks need to post sufficiently to justify splitting off a subforum for them, not have Paizo make a subforum for them to have just on the spot. Certain folks are attempting just that in the General Discussion.
As someone who is currently agitating for a subforum for my own group's purposes on this board, I feel the CharOpers' frustration, but we have been agitating for months with almost 20 threads with 500+ posts, and still we have no subforum. There needs to be a provable demand for a subforum before it materializes.
My advice is if you wish to have a subforum is to go to the General Discussion subforum of Pathfinder post early, post often. Get those CharOp threads going. I imagine the debates will really start up once the core rules are released come mid August.
I'm sorry! I didn't know there was a history here.
"The name's Francis Soyer, but everybody calls me Psycho. Any of you guys call me Francis, and I'll kill you."Lighten up, Francis ...For less insulting fare, or to confuse the knuckledraggers a good 'Jackanape' can always serve ...
LOL...Stripes....great movie
"Wears your Sergeant soldier?"
"Blown up sir!"
Btw....I have no problems with a character optimization thread... Some folks are great at Building without the Powermunchkin issue... BEAR in mind certain folks will abuse this regardless... but someone elses build has bears little impact on ones campaign if you don't allow the builds you consider unbalancing...admittedly we've all run across childish players who spend all their effort on builds and don't bear in mind that its background that builds the world not character builds and people love to rationalize their power gamer builds are relevant. These are often the same people that expect a +8 Keen Vorpal, Holy, Undead Bane Adamantine Spiked Chain as well, and that in the hands of their Barbarian/Paladin/Cleric/Frenzied Berserker/Exotic Weapon Master/Kensai 2/2/1/2/3/2
I'm sorry! I didn't know there was a history here.
No need to apologize, you couldn't have known. I hope you stick around, we are in exciting times here with the imminent relesase of the Core Rules and we will need smart CharOp folks to run the math for those of us who are dense about those things, like myself. :)
And those with keen eyes to see why something that may look like too good of a thing really doesn't work.
As a side note, this is my first post on the Paizo boards. I go by dbay on WOTC.
Welcome to the boards Azrael! *offers virtual cookies*
|
|
I'm sorry! I didn't know there was a history here.
Fear not. Most of us recognize that for everyone who likes to play or watch football, there is someone who enjoys running the statistics or playing fantasy football. For everyone who likes to race cars, there is someone who can't wait to get under the hood and tinker with the engine. So it is with gaming. Some like to experience really in-depth role-playing experiences, with minimal 'gaming' involved, others like to tinker and fuss with rules and mechanics, and test them out in delves and 'arena' style games. Some freaks even like *both!*
Nobody who is having fun is 'doing it wrong,' we've just gotten a little touchy about those (on either side of the fence) who insist that there is only one way to play the game, and that sub-optimal choices are 'stupid' or that number-crunchers are 'missing the point of role-playing.'
RPG. There's indeed 'role-playing' in the title, but there is also 'game.' It's not meant to be an either / or choice. It's supposed to be a(n occasionally squabbling and fractious) marriage of imagination *and* mechanics.
I want to be able to pitch in and not let my allies down.
Although I realize Im not making some substantial contribution one way or another...just wanted to note that this is probably the largest reason why I find myself scouring the internet looking for an optimized build for X class. I've only been playing DnD since, February, really, and the people I play with are veterans, to say the least. I don't want to show up with my TWF Dance-Fighting Bard or Draconic Gnome Melee Sorcerer and I end up forcing a class to do something it just plain isn't going to do as well and, as a whole, is really just going to let down my party. Couple this with the fact that, to date, I haven't really played with a party larger than 4 people where one person not pulling their weight can make things very difficult, and you can see where my guilt complex might come from!
Now, on the other side, CharOp's can be pretty dangerous for a newbie. I remember back when I was designing my Summon-y druid for a PFRPG beta game back in February(my first DnD experience for all practical purposes) and every feat I asked for that looked so delicious was shot down by my DM as it was just plain OP (I can't remember them all, but they were feats that were considered in a RP-Vacuum, I think...Greenbound summoning, Some evil-aligned feat that gave Augmented Summoning without the Spell Focus Conj req, VoP, etc etc). This was frustrating to me as I didn't understand why my "good ideas" kept getting shot down, and Im sure it was frustrating to my DM because she probably just wanted me to design a character I'd be happy with---not a character that the internet told me I'd be happy with.
For the record I think that Paizo has done a good job giving people plenty of reasons to finish a class instead of dipping all over the board.
Instead of a "Character Optimization" board, maybe a Design Focus board. My reason for the name difference to show what we want focused on. We want people to post the following:
"Hi, I'm new, and I was looking to play a Ulfen fighter from Taldor. I would like to take the falacata and be able to be more flexible with my skills. I was thinking of multiclassing rogue, but I really see my character as more of a straight fighter just with more skill points. The DM is allowing any pathfinder book and we are using the 20 point buy. What do you think?"
As opposed to:
"Hi, I want an Uber el77t wizard that will break my DM's world, cause I don't like him, and I'm a jerk that way. Kthxbai."
The first could be response could be answered with ideas on the background story, a reccomendation of the campaign settings fighter variant, maybe some feat and stat help. The player could get help on all sides at once. The second... well isn't what we want.
Design Focus could also help look over the rules and see where there are gaps or glitches in the math and mechanics. As opposed to looking for loopholes to exploit, we would be looking for problem areas to fix or watch out for at least.
Welcome, Azrael.
I read through a fairly large amount of this thread, and I can't come up with any argument that hasn't already been said- and I don't want a fight to keep going once everything's been said. Whatever happens, happens.
Also, thanks for the warm welcome! Even though I made a sort of botched entrance.
Nah...no worries.
I don't think an argument in the strict sense will work. The real "argument" is to produce charop threads that are constructive and fit in the community--at worst, that won't drive the hard core role-players nuts, and at best, ones that even they (we!) will appreciate! And of course that don't make life more difficult for our beloved hosts.
|
I'm actually on the fence about this one. While I do enjoy CharOp I don't see the need for a separate board. Just tagging a given topic as [CharOp] may be enough. Then again, for the sake of those who don't enjoy CharOp such a forum may be useful so they don't have to sift through posts which they have no interest in reading.
So, yeah.
...hard core role-players nuts...
You rang?
I recently referred to myself as a militant narrativist. It seemed appropriate.
Yeap. The play[story]'s the thing. That was my whole bailiwick over in Gygaxian Naturalism land.
Ahem! Yes...welcome to the boards and all that. Forgive my horrified reaction. It was a horrible flashback.
Character optimization is okey-dokey by me. As a DM, I find that optimizers and "munchkins" challenge me to a greater familiarity with the rules and the different ways of manipulating them. I myself am guilty of abusing the concept of "non-associated levels" which is a polite way of referring to DM optimization.
Haven't got the stamina to read through the entire thread so I apologize if I am just repeating others.
I don't really thing a CharOp forum is necessary, there is plenty room in the general discussion. What I think is a problem is that some people has a tendency to start flaming as soon as CharOp threads are made. There really need to be a little more respect about how people choose to play their game.
Haven't got the stamina to read through the entire thread so I apologize if I am just repeating others.
I don't really thing a CharOp forum is necessary, there is plenty room in the general discussion. What I think is a problem is that some people has a tendency to start flaming as soon as CharOp threads are made. There really need to be a little more respect about how people choose to play their game.
QFT and Amen to that. One thing I like about this board is that people usually [emphasis on usually] are polite and respectful of others, at least in relation to other RPG boards.
We are all gamers, some love the story elements, others love the math. Many love both, it's not exclusive. We need to focus on what we have in common, rather than continually subdividing ourselves into armed camps.
I am a Narrativist. I could really care less about unbalancing wishes, summoning creatures to kill and loot, etc. etc. as I live and die by Rule Zero: My game, my say, my way. That being said, I welcome the folks that work the corner cases, that run the probabilities, that build the shiny BBEGs and the characters that can take them down. Why? Because they enhance the game just as much as detailing the political undercurrents of the city of Absalom does.
We all bring different skills to the table, and we can all learn and profit by accepting others and syncing our efforts together. We have a big rollout in three weeks of our core rules, and we need to be ready for the inevitable wave of newcomers and their opinions and questions. Let's make sure they feel welcome here.
Good point, Pat. Plus the potential for us all to go a little nuts around such a big event.
Yeap. The play[story]'s the thing. That was my whole bailiwick over in Gygaxian Naturalism land.
Off Topic