| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
High-Five for X-Men time on ABC Family.
Also, I've said it before and it still rings true: Robert Downey Jr. IS Tony Stark. Maybe an alternate reality version without the genius, but still.
lol what? Not X-Men the new generation or whatever that new crap was. I'm talking about the one that was on Fox years ago.
THIS ONE Not this one and the other ones that came later with that outsourced crappy animation.
Yeah. THe first one. Came on ABC Family right after The Incredible Hulk and right before the 90's Spiderman on Saturday mornings.
That second one is Wolverine and the X-Men, it's from like '09.
It's actually pretty decent though.
The one you're thinking of is X-Men Evolution, where they're all in high school. It wasn't terrible either but not as good as the previously mentioned two.
One of the fun things about alignment in the D&D game is the fact it is NOT subjective.I'd say that's an opinion and that most of your statement doesn't reflect the games actual values, but of your own.I think what he means is that there are spells in the game that will tell you, non-subjectively, a character's alignment. There are also spells that the rules text labels as good or evil, spells that only -- objectively -- affect good/evil/neutral/lawful/chaotic creatures, and so on.
While what *constitutes* good or evil might be subjective according to how a GM rules, there are creatures and magical effects that are objectively good or evil according to magical means of determining these things.
Aye, I would think that, and I can't argue with that. Its something people already stated and were talking about, however the examples used in his post were of things unrelated to what the game deems evil(outsiders, infernal healing, etc.), and more so to things that vary depending on the situation(marauding armies).
Getting kind of tired of this talk about alignment if you would believe it.
Another sacred cow for the list- the 3E skills. The skills are a huge improvement over 2E, but could be improved. There was thread a few months ago about skill overlap. There can be a lot of overlap between knowledge, craft, and profession. PF improved skills (a lot) over 3E, but I think they could be further improved. Physical skills could be based on CMB (like use rope). The overlap between craft, knowledge, and profession could be improved.
I like how skills have evolved over time.
It's a circular argument. A spell tells you the bad guy is Lawful Evil. Why is he lawful evil? Based on his actions that could be interpreted many different ways and is still not objective other than the moral, subjective interpretations of who wrote said character.
Yet everyone gets the same answer (irrespective of their views on the morality of the actions - the hellknight and the Andoran freedom fighter both get the answer "yes" when they cast detect evil on an Asmodean high priest).
.Nobody is saying the definition of good might not be different in different campaigns. The point is it's objective within the game world. (That the choice of objective standard is made subjectively isnt relevant to the point being made).
I think it just went *poof* after the Phoenix storyline had everyone going "What the f%&~ was that?"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
lol what? Not X-Men the new generation or whatever that new crap was. I'm talking about the one that was on Fox years ago.
Whippersnappers. THIS is a Saturday morning comic book superhero cartoon!
Wasn't he supposed to faithfully serve the queen too?
*Suggestive eyebrow wiggle*
How else is a lancer meant to serve faithfully?
It's a circular argument. A spell tells you the bad guy is Lawful Evil. Why is he lawful evil? Based on his actions that could be interpreted many different ways and is still not objective other than the moral, subjective interpretations of who wrote said character.
Yes, but the interpretations and arguments matter not, because that guy is an evil actor, with a commitment to lawful philosophical beliefs.
We can say, today he is nice, he only ordered 2 executions, but in dnd your alignment is a part of your very being, and change is slow (unless the dm says you killed a goblin baby, "think of the children, you are now CE." "But my character did it as an act of mercy, and isn't chaotic at all". "No, you are now playing a CE character, I the dm says so".
Basically the big problem with alignment is players being pushed around by dms or other players.
Once I had a very disturbed character who had been through a lot, was tempted to take him in the direction of a CN cleric of Lamashtu. Started the rp to go in that area (the things he had seen, he knew the old evil gods had power, so he wanted to affiliate, but not go full evil). Some in the party went ape, suddenly witch burning trials.
By the rules, could be CN and get away with it, others had other ideas.
lol what? Not X-Men the new generation or whatever that new crap was. I'm talking about the one that was on Fox years ago.Whippersnappers. THIS is a Saturday morning comic book superhero cartoon!
I actually owned a backpack with the eight members of the JLA coming out of it.
The challenge of the superfriends is still one of the most AWESOME songs to start any cartoon, ever. That music is just pumping.
=========
My comment on "Good defines itself" does not mean "Good is the same between every campaign." Of course the DM is the ultimate definer.
But the PC's are not. If something Detects as Good (barring spells to mislead) it's Good regardless of what the PC's want to define it as. Likewise, if something is evil, and the PC's want to protest and interpret their own way, too bad.
They don't get to shade of grey their way through stuff. They have to know they are actually working with evil stuff, using evil methods, and it's going to cost them. They literally can only fool themselves if they are insane.
I LIKE that. I think it's so different to be in a world where you can actually know if something is good or bad, for real. Your decisions are INFORMED.
==+Aelryinth
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
CN is generally seen as the 'I want to screw with the other players and do whatever I want, without being Evil' alignment, that's why. Someone playing CN is usually a warning sign to everyone else in the party that they want to grief the others, then blame it on their alignment.
CN has a bad history among PC's.
==Aelryinth
1) No one really lives their life as if they believe morality is simply in the eye of the beholder. Not even (especially) people who claim in the abstract to believe that is true. Especially since their position is internally incoherent (they believe it is objectively true that there is no objective truth). But be that as it may because
2) certainly in the game there are all kinds of abstract mechanics which do not faithfully capture "reality" or this or that person's conception of "realism." But the general run of people who have played the variations of this game for over thirty years, while yes having disagreements on this or that aspect of it (not unlike their disagreements on almost other aspects of the game), have managed somehow to be able to play the game with alignments.
I guess there are some who simply cannot get enough outside of their own. . .subjective view. . .to be able to role-play this. Or at least that kind of person posts as if it were the case in forums. (I actually believe that in actual play they manage just fine to be able to do so, somehow overcoming their protestations that it's unworkable. I give them more credit for their abilities than they give themselves, at least rhetorically).
In this game, alignment is a mechanic that quite a lot of people manage just fine to be able to play with, even so. Now there are tons of good games with no alignment systems. . .but even those tend to have "good guys" and "bad guys," even a game like Shadowrun. (I will concede that there are some extreme "anti-hero grim & grity" systems where everyone in the game universe is dickish); so simply getting rid of the alignment system would in no way get rid of the supposed "problem" of heroic fantasy, or other RPGs, being, well, heroic fantasy RPGs, with in-universe ethos and expectations of the sorts of play that are expected (even if some campaigns go against the grain), the sort of outcomes that are considered "positive" (I.E. thwarting an evil megacorp's plan to use SINless as subjects of some experiment, or some such. Oh, wait, not "evil," because they're not explicitly called that, but everyone gets the point); you're not going to eliminate the supposed insurmountable obstacle to enjoyable play of "morality is subjective" by taking out alignments. Nor is it a good counter-example to say "well, in our campaign, the PCs decided not only to betray their client and sell-out to the corp for more cash, but after the experiments were over, they sold the now brain-damaged SINless victims to organleggers" - you know what kind of campaign that is as well as I do, and it's not "good, from their subjective point of view."
Now I'm sure some will come up with a rhetorical, sophistic argument why "well you just don't understand, taking out Alignments would too fix the problem and in these other games that don't explicitly have alignments but do have an in-universe ethos of what expectations of positive, right outcomes are vs. negative, bad outcomes are, well those aren't objectionable because [whatever rationalization]."
But such a response would be simply that. Now, personally, I can enjoy games without an alignment system, and enjoy games with an alignment system (and even play happily at tables where people's ideas of what the alignments are differ from what I think is right, though I'll certainly argue my position in forums like this one, that's a matter of a difference in venues - just as I might discuss with fellow gamers different rule interpretations when we're having drinks & discussing the game, outside of the game table, but not bring such discussions into the RP session). But I can certainly see that some people may not be able to handle that maturely, may not be able to RP with alignments. But that's not a problem for the majority of the people who have successfully played & enjoyed this game, so I don't see it as a reason to kill that particular sacred cow.
But, again, I certainly understand the position of those for whom RPing the alignment system is a problem they cannot seem to wrap their heads around. They can always find ways to play without it, at their tables. And it wouldn't bring ruination to the system (though it might make certain classes less playable, in that campaign, but ones that may not have a real place in that type of campaign anyhow; and, if they do, I'm sure there would be a way to work it out. The game is more flexible than some people give it credit for). After all, even with campaigns that do use alignments, sometimes it's useful to remove alignment-detecting spells and the like (such spells can certainly be abused, though, in practice, again I haven't seen many players who do so; - except, perhaps, the type of player who will abuse any game feature if allowed to. So set that type of player aside; once you've done that, the "problem" is revealed to be a non-problem).
as for subjectivity, to paraphrase G. A. Cohen, "If you are indeed so convinced, then do not blame me for thinking otherwise … do not, indeed, blame, or praise, anyone for choosing to do anything, and therefore live your life, henceforth, differently from the way that we both know that you have lived it up to now."
@Aelyrinth: The thing is, I DON'T like black and white morality and inherently evil acts (Casting Evil spells for Good is Evil! Good spells for Evil are Good!).
I think the whole idea is silly and I've said so and will continue to say so until such a day that it is no longer the truth (which should be right around the same time Paizo replaces their entire development staff since SKR and JJ at the very least love it. =/).
The absolute morality system is, hands down, the most harmful and ridiculous (in my eyes) "Sacred Cow" in the game.
CN is generally seen as the 'I want to screw with the other players and do whatever I want, without being Evil' alignment, that's why. Someone playing CN is usually a warning sign to everyone else in the party that they want to grief the others, then blame it on their alignment.
CN has a bad history among PC's.
I'd agree with that, at least in my experience from early campaigns - campaigns that had immature players.
The problem then I think is the type of player, and not necessarily the alignment; the type of player looking for a way to be disruptive/abusive will find one.
Personally I'm not fond of CN, but, again, possibly as a personal backlash against having experienced this kind of play. Sort of the same way some people have an instinctive "groan" response any time they see someone bring "That Paladin" to a game. But intellectually I can separate this - which is a problem that a certain type of player creates - from the alignment in-and-of-itself, as a game mechanic.
|
Interesting...so why do I remember that one of those combat tables was for monsters, and they cross referenced their Hit Dice with the target AC? It was near the bottom of p77.First edition did not have THAC0Ahh, but it did; and from the very beginning no less...
At first, THAC0 was listed in the back of the 1st edition DMG (pages 196-215) as one of the stats used in the monster listings. Then later, in 1983, it was introduced to the game in Module "UK2: The Sentinel" as an alternative that the players could use to the combat tables (It was actually introduced to the game earlier than 1983, but its first appearance was in an article in "White Dwarf Magazine", and not in an "official" TSR release)...
It was "officially" added to the rules of 1st edition in 1986 with the release of the "Dungeoneer's Survival Guide"...
Because they were both there. THAC0 was just a variable in an algebraic function. The table had was a graph of the function. THAC0 was annoying to people who didn't like to do the math or were, weren't comfortable with their skills or didn't have them. I don't recall there being an explanation of how to use the data, but is was in the monster Appendix in the back of the DMG. We figured it out and used it while in first year algebra.
CN is generally seen as the 'I want to screw with the other players and do whatever I want, without being Evil' alignment, that's why. Someone playing CN is usually a warning sign to everyone else in the party that they want to grief the others, then blame it on their alignment.
CN has a bad history among PC's.
==Aelryinth
It was the religion that was the issue, my char was not screwing with other players, he was the front line tanker, he was however, descending into madness.
Ramen to that.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Another sacred cow for the list- the 3E skills. The skills are a huge improvement over 2E, but could be improved. There was thread a few months ago about skill overlap. There can be a lot of overlap between knowledge, craft, and profession. PF improved skills (a lot) over 3E, but I think they could be further improved. Physical skills could be based on CMB (like use rope). The overlap between craft, knowledge, and profession could be improved.
I don't see much, if any overlap. Profession and craft are wildly different beasts, and knowledge isn't even in the same yard with them.
Lest we make fun of alignment again...what are your takes on
Alyosha Karamzov-NG
Ivan Karamzov-LN
Dmitri-True Neutral
-Smerdyakov-CE
-Father, Fyodor Karamzov-NE
Grushenka-CN
Eldar Zozimov-LG(He's a monk)
Katarina Ivanova-CG
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I love alignment.
I used to hate it.
That's true about almost every rule in the game, actually.
I tried talking to a dragon once, it only wanted kang kong.
I'd say:
----------
Str, Dex, Con, Int, Wis, Chr
stats rated on a 3-18 (ish) scale
ablative hit points
armor class (as opposed to armor as DR)
character classes
I think many others would also add:
------------------------------------
Vancian casting
Saving throws
Arcane/Divine split
I'd say:
----------
Str, Dex, Con, Int, Wis, Chr
Philistine! It's Str, Int, Wis, Dex, Con, Cha. And that johnny-come-lately Cms.
Nothing on magic, Bugley?
Fireballs that fill available volume, like in narrow hallways.
Lightning bolts that fork and bounce.
Magic missiles that pick off mirror images and are fast enough to disrupt enemy spellcasting.
Ranges that get tripled outdoors.
Philistine! It's Str, Int, Wis, Dex, Con, Cha. And that johnny-come-lately Cms.
Argh! I am well chastised.
Nothing on magic, Bugley?
Not for me, personally, though I went back and added what I think are frequently sacred cows. I'm tricky!
Savages is a politically incorrect term >_>As the orcs and ogres come down from the hills to pillage and terrorise, political correctness towards the savages has not developed in my worlds.
The "Savage" Tide AP should be reframed as The Demonized Other Tide, with Demogorgon and his followers recast as victims of persecution by so-called "heroes" who refused to understand the perspective of Demogorgon and his supporters.
Added plot twists:
Demogorgon is leader of the Demon Liberation Front, while Orcus is in charge of the Liberation Front of Demonkind (splitters!)
Can we all have cookies & hugs again if I admit to being totally unkewl, both IRL and in gaming?
I admit to being unfashionable. Cookies & hugs all around!
Eh, in this hobby social awkwardness seems to be a common gig. Would stereotypes be another sacred cow?
Sounds like a good enough reason for cookies and hugs to me btw, but its hard to argue with free food.
