
![]() |

Freehold DM |
4 people marked this as a favorite. |

And we finally have pics.
I'll work on getting more of NobodysWife (you can thank me later, Freehold). I think it came off rather well...
...and we're going to see Sabaton later this month, and everyone wants me to go dressed as Joakim. Should be hilarious or horrible...
Dammit Nobodyshome, STOP BEING SO F~%+ING HANDSOME!
YOU ARE MAKING ME WORRY FOR MY HETEROSEXUALITY

Mighty Pogonos |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |

And we finally have pics.
I'll work on getting more of NobodysWife (you can thank me later, Freehold). I think it came off rather well...
...and we're going to see Sabaton later this month, and everyone wants me to go dressed as Joakim. Should be hilarious or horrible...
MIGHTY POGONOS APPROVES OF THE SCULPTED HANDLEBAR/ELONGATED SOUL-PATCH COMBO. KEEP IT UP, AND HE MAY REWARD YOU WITH A SUNSET YELLOW 1998 VOLKSWAGEN POLO, OR THE EQUIVALENT IN FLOUR.

Tacticslion |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |

NobodysHome wrote:And we finally have pics.
I'll work on getting more of NobodysWife (you can thank me later, Freehold). I think it came off rather well...
...and we're going to see Sabaton later this month, and everyone wants me to go dressed as Joakim. Should be hilarious or horrible...
Dammit Nobodyshome, STOP BEING SO F%%+ING HANDSOME!
YOU ARE MAKING ME WORRY FOR MY HETEROSEXUALITY
HOLY CARP, I JUST REALIZED THAT THIS WAS ACTUALLY NH.
Dude, you look great! Have you lost a lot of weight? It seems like it!
(The healthy kind!)
Also, channeling the comic-style Mighty Thor via Sabaton...

Tacticslion |

I don't know what any of you are talking about.
Nothing is suspicious about this.
At all.
Not even a bit.
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/outsiders/manitou
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/aberrations/targotha
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/monstrous-humanoids/hag
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/fey/

NobodysHome |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Freehold DM wrote:NobodysHome wrote:And we finally have pics.
I'll work on getting more of NobodysWife (you can thank me later, Freehold). I think it came off rather well...
...and we're going to see Sabaton later this month, and everyone wants me to go dressed as Joakim. Should be hilarious or horrible...
Dammit Nobodyshome, STOP BEING SO F%%+ING HANDSOME!
YOU ARE MAKING ME WORRY FOR MY HETEROSEXUALITY
HOLY CARP, I JUST REALIZED THAT THIS WAS ACTUALLY NH.
Dude, you look great! Have you lost a lot of weight? It seems like it!
(The healthy kind!)
Also, channeling the comic-style Mighty Thor via Sabaton...
The first picture with the band is Joakim.
The second and third pictures in the yard are me.And no; I didn't lose weight. The mohawk and goatee are very thinning on the face, and even the "large" top is way too tight, so it's sucking me in like a heavy metal girdle.

NobodysHome |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |

So yesterday it happened again, and I'm still at a complete and total loss to explain it.
Sorceress: I Lightning Bolt this group of creatures (gesturing to the map)
Captain (incredulously): That's the only group we haven't hit yet.
Sorceress: I know. I want to make sure all of them are damaged.
What? WHY?!?!?! As I tiraded before, are there any RPGs or board games in history where damaging a group of healthy enemies is as effective as dropping a group of already-injured enemies?
I think a couple of people had some arcane examples before, but the predilection of so many of my gamers to target the uninjured continues to baffle me.
EDIT: I think this time her decision cost us around 60 hit points in damage and one poisoned character from the group of injured creatures she could have wiped out with said Lightning Bolt.

Freehold DM |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |

So yesterday it happened again, and I'm still at a complete and total loss to explain it.
Sorceress: I Lightning Bolt this group of creatures (gesturing to the map)
Captain (incredulously): That's the only group we haven't hit yet.
Sorceress: I know. I want to make sure all of them are damaged.What? WHY?!?!?! As I tiraded before, are there any RPGs or board games in history where damaging a group of healthy enemies is as effective as dropping a group of already-injured enemies?
I think a couple of people had some arcane examples before, but the predilection of so many of my gamers to target the uninjured continues to baffle me.
EDIT: I think this time her decision cost us around 60 hit points in damage and one poisoned character from the group of injured creatures she could have wiped out with said Lightning Bolt.
Any system that does wound penalties. White wolf caused a LOT of problems in pitched melee when a new group of uninjured foes showed up in the end of the combat round.
This game of ours does not do wound penalties and I think it would result in riots if it did. So yes, you can take a mace to the face several times and you're good so long as you have hit points. Cue whingey wizard whining.

NobodysHome |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

NobodysHome wrote:So yesterday it happened again, and I'm still at a complete and total loss to explain it.
Sorceress: I Lightning Bolt this group of creatures (gesturing to the map)
Captain (incredulously): That's the only group we haven't hit yet.
Sorceress: I know. I want to make sure all of them are damaged.What? WHY?!?!?! As I tiraded before, are there any RPGs or board games in history where damaging a group of healthy enemies is as effective as dropping a group of already-injured enemies?
I think a couple of people had some arcane examples before, but the predilection of so many of my gamers to target the uninjured continues to baffle me.
EDIT: I think this time her decision cost us around 60 hit points in damage and one poisoned character from the group of injured creatures she could have wiped out with said Lightning Bolt.
Any system that does wound penalties. White wolf caused a LOT of problems in pitched melee when a new group of uninjured foes showed up in the end of the combat round.
This game of ours does not do wound penalties and I think it would result in riots if it did. So yes, you can take a mace to the face several times and you're good so long as you have hit points. Cue whingey wizard whining.
I think that's the issue, then. I've never played a system with significant-enough wound penalties that it wasn't better to finish off the wounded. And I've played a lot of games. But not all of 'em.

Freehold DM |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |

Freehold DM wrote:I think that's the issue, then. I've never played a system with significant-enough wound penalties that it wasn't better to finish off the wounded. And I've played a lot of games. But not all of 'em.NobodysHome wrote:So yesterday it happened again, and I'm still at a complete and total loss to explain it.
Sorceress: I Lightning Bolt this group of creatures (gesturing to the map)
Captain (incredulously): That's the only group we haven't hit yet.
Sorceress: I know. I want to make sure all of them are damaged.What? WHY?!?!?! As I tiraded before, are there any RPGs or board games in history where damaging a group of healthy enemies is as effective as dropping a group of already-injured enemies?
I think a couple of people had some arcane examples before, but the predilection of so many of my gamers to target the uninjured continues to baffle me.
EDIT: I think this time her decision cost us around 60 hit points in damage and one poisoned character from the group of injured creatures she could have wiped out with said Lightning Bolt.
Any system that does wound penalties. White wolf caused a LOT of problems in pitched melee when a new group of uninjured foes showed up in the end of the combat round.
This game of ours does not do wound penalties and I think it would result in riots if it did. So yes, you can take a mace to the face several times and you're good so long as you have hit points. Cue whingey wizard whining.
White wolf penatlies go from laughable to JESUS CHRIST JUST STOP TOYING WITH ME AND END IT!
It is one of the few systems where a group of weakened enemies is preferable to one whole undamaged foe.
It does a good job of relaying the utter chaos of combat with superhuman beings for whom everything but a solid slug shotgun blast to the chest is inconsequential.

Sharoth |
4 people marked this as a favorite. |

Greetings all.
This seems to be a very tight knit thread, does everyone just know everyone?
Welcome to the insane asylum. Your room is down there. ~points to a dark and dank corridor with only one light at the midway point that flickers on and off~ Your room is padded. Pick up your jacket at the front desk.

Tacticslion |

Freehold DM wrote:I think that's the issue, then. I've never played a system with significant-enough wound penalties that it wasn't better to finish off the wounded. And I've played a lot of games. But not all of 'em.NobodysHome wrote:So yesterday it happened again, and I'm still at a complete and total loss to explain it.
Sorceress: I Lightning Bolt this group of creatures (gesturing to the map)
Captain (incredulously): That's the only group we haven't hit yet.
Sorceress: I know. I want to make sure all of them are damaged.What? WHY?!?!?! As I tiraded before, are there any RPGs or board games in history where damaging a group of healthy enemies is as effective as dropping a group of already-injured enemies?
I think a couple of people had some arcane examples before, but the predilection of so many of my gamers to target the uninjured continues to baffle me.
EDIT: I think this time her decision cost us around 60 hit points in damage and one poisoned character from the group of injured creatures she could have wiped out with said Lightning Bolt.
Any system that does wound penalties. White wolf caused a LOT of problems in pitched melee when a new group of uninjured foes showed up in the end of the combat round.
This game of ours does not do wound penalties and I think it would result in riots if it did. So yes, you can take a mace to the face several times and you're good so long as you have hit points. Cue whingey wizard whining.
I've not advanced enough Blue Rose games to field enough foes at a time for it to really be a concern, but that system (and the True20 it was based on) may well be the answer to all of this.

Tacticslion |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |

Deep.
1) A whole host of ways (not the least of which is that "free" will is an illusion postulated by an incomplete set of data; other views suggest that it's free insomuch as non-random; another suggests that it doesn't at all; and another suggests that it is the function that permits sinful action in an otherwise sinless existence within varying levels of "divine will", i.e., there is a Divine Will, a Divine will, and free will - the Divine Will cannot be altered and is a function of action, the Divine will is a desire albeit a desire tempered with the compassion to allow personal action and choices, and free will which is the one thing that can violate Divine will, even though "willpower" can't violate Divine Will - that which is absolute; and others)
2) To which Joker do you refer? [insufficient data]

Tacticslion |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

You know I hate?
Getting really irritable at someone driving poorly... and then doing something stupid yourself because of it.
Dang it.
(Nothing bad has happened. It's just one of those thighs where you recognize how stupid you were the instant after and happened and are keenly aware that it was stupid and literally netted you nothing - yeah, no penalty, but there could have been, and nothing was gained, either.)

NobodysHome |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |

You know I hate?
Getting really irritable at someone driving poorly... and then doing something stupid yourself because of it.
Dang it.
(Nothing bad has happened. It's just one of those thighs where you recognize how stupid you were the instant after and happened and are keenly aware that it was stupid and literally netted you nothing - yeah, no penalty, but there could have been, and nothing was gained, either.)
Last night on our way home I made the mistake of taking Solano Avenue. There were only two cars ahead of me. Unfortunately, the one directly in front of me proceeded to drive at 8 mph for the ENTIRE LENGTH OF OUR TRIP (about 1.1 miles), slowing and swerving frequently as if looking for parking, but then continuing.
NobodysWife's response to me: "Well, kudos to you for not leaning on your horn for that entire trip! I couldn't have done it."

Orthos |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Tacticslion wrote:Last night on our way home I made the mistake of taking Solano Avenue. There were only two cars ahead of me. Unfortunately, the one directly in front of me proceeded to drive at 8 mph for the ENTIRE LENGTH OF OUR TRIP (about 1.1 miles), slowing and swerving frequently as if looking for parking, but then continuing.You know I hate?
Getting really irritable at someone driving poorly... and then doing something stupid yourself because of it.
Dang it.
(Nothing bad has happened. It's just one of those thighs where you recognize how stupid you were the instant after and happened and are keenly aware that it was stupid and literally netted you nothing - yeah, no penalty, but there could have been, and nothing was gained, either.)
Similar happened to me on the drive home Saturday after the wedding. A paranoid-looking driver ahead of us was consistently 10-15 miles below the speed limit at all times. Oh and this is a narrow, winding two-lane country road with sparse, intermittent passing zones, during which there was always oncoming traffic so even if I'd wanted to risk passing I couldn't.
Was stuck behind them for about 45 minutes before finally getting to a turn at which they went straight.

Freehold DM |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |

Today was fun. I ended up staying an hour late at school because I had an emergency meeting with my daughter's teachers over a behavior incident today, and *then* I had to go out to run all the damned school shopping errands, and then come back and take care of the rabbit, and by then I'd worked yet another ten-hour day and I was so angry that I forced my poor children to listen to me rage-sing along to the Hamilton soundtrack in the car.
They fell asleep.
And then I woke them up and made them tacos.
And since mad can only last so long, after I put my son to bed, I sat up with my daughter going through my random box of old photos because she wanted a picture of Grandpa to take to class for the Dia de los Muertos celebration she argued her teacher into having tomorrow. (Why, I have no idea. We're Polish/Scottish/Danish. No Mexican anywhere. But she's obsessed.) She chose one of my dad doing one of his favorite Stupid Human Tricks, i.e. feeding bits of frozen hot dog to seagulls out of his hands. He would hold the hot dog up in the air and the seagull would swoop down and grab it.
I longed for the day he would lose an actual finger, the smug bastard.
I had an entire OOC adventure for this post that my phone lost.
damn.

lisamarlene |
5 people marked this as a favorite. |

Tacticslion wrote:Freehold DM wrote:NobodysHome wrote:And we finally have pics.
I'll work on getting more of NobodysWife (you can thank me later, Freehold). I think it came off rather well...
...and we're going to see Sabaton later this month, and everyone wants me to go dressed as Joakim. Should be hilarious or horrible...
Dammit Nobodyshome, STOP BEING SO F%%+ING HANDSOME!
YOU ARE MAKING ME WORRY FOR MY HETEROSEXUALITY
HOLY CARP, I JUST REALIZED THAT THIS WAS ACTUALLY NH.
Dude, you look great! Have you lost a lot of weight? It seems like it!
(The healthy kind!)
Also, channeling the comic-style Mighty Thor via Sabaton...
The first picture with the band is Joakim.
The second and third pictures in the yard are me.And no; I didn't lose weight. The mohawk and goatee are very thinning on the face, and even the "large" top is way too tight, so it's sucking me in like a heavy metal girdle.
No, Freehold is right.
A) you've visibly lost weight over the last four months.B) Yes, the facial hair and the Mohawk are slimming. They're also kinda hot.
C) A + B + switching from chefwear to camo, + the overall more pleasant demeanor (yes, your personality has changed), and you've gone from Flanders to daaaang. Which I have not mentioned in front of Goth Bard because that's not the sort of thing one is supposed to say out loud about a friend's spouse.
Edit: Which I am also not saying in front of Whingey Wizzard, because he's already jealous.

Tequila Sunrise |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |

Sharoth wrote:Deep.1) A whole host of ways (not the least of which is that "free" will is an illusion postulated by an incomplete set of data; other views suggest that it's free insomuch as non-random; another suggests that it doesn't at all; and another suggests that it is the function that permits sinful action in an otherwise sinless existence within varying levels of "divine will", i.e., there is a Divine Will, a Divine will, and free will - the Divine Will cannot be altered and is a function of action, the Divine will is a desire albeit a desire tempered with the compassion to allow personal action and choices, and free will which is the one thing that can violate Divine will, even though "willpower" can't violate Divine Will - that which is absolute; and others)
2) To which Joker do you refer? [insufficient data]
Oh man, I love the determinism v. free will debate! Though determinism makes a lot of people very uncomfortable -- including some of my closest friends & family -- I love to argue for it from both a monotheistic and a secular position.
:)
...Oh, and is it a copout to say that the Joker would be both overjoyed and utterly bereaved if Batman were to die? Because people are conflicted like that, and if any character is capable of being fundamentally conflicted it's the Joker.

Drejk |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |

So yesterday it happened again, and I'm still at a complete and total loss to explain it.
Sorceress: I Lightning Bolt this group of creatures (gesturing to the map)
Captain (incredulously): That's the only group we haven't hit yet.
Sorceress: I know. I want to make sure all of them are damaged.What? WHY?!?!?! As I tiraded before, are there any RPGs or board games in history where damaging a group of healthy enemies is as effective as dropping a group of already-injured enemies?
I think a couple of people had some arcane examples before, but the predilection of so many of my gamers to target the uninjured continues to baffle me.
EDIT: I think this time her decision cost us around 60 hit points in damage and one poisoned character from the group of injured creatures she could have wiped out with said Lightning Bolt.
Turn order and overkill. If you know that another ally will act soon and will have a significant chance of dropping the enemy you are attacking at the moment, you might want to blast fresh ones, while the more hurting enemy is left for later. If you can dish such damage that most of it would highly exceed the already wounded target's hit points, you might want to attack a fresh one to avoid your full effort from being wasted. Again, if there is significant chance that someone else will be able to finish either of those before they act.
But yes, in general it's usually better to finish an enemy than attack a fresh one. Usually.