Avatar of Lalliman
  • Last Seen: 7 days ago
  • Old Guild Username: Lalliman
  • Joined: 11 yrs ago
  • Posts: 546 (0.14 / day)
  • VMs: 3
  • Username history
    1. Lalliman 11 yrs ago

Status

User has no status, yet

Bio

User has no bio, yet

Most Recent Posts

@NuttsnBolts But you're describing a length ceiling, a maximum post length, and I'm 99% sure this doesn't exist anywhere in the Guild. No one is forcing you to write short posts if you RP in Casual or Free, so that logic doesn't fly.

No, but you're still likely to get a short post in return, which he just established he doesn't want. The Advanced section isn't defined by posting length (at least it shouldn't be), but it is statistically much more likely for long posts to occur. Ergo, if you like posts of great length and depth, why gamble by going to the casual section? The logic seems solid to me.

Anyways, putting "no one-liners" on your profile or interest check seems fine to me. You're just communicating what you're looking for. It's a way for the poster to attract the partners they want, and for the people browsing to determine whether this poster is a good partner for them. It only becomes a problem if you act snobby about it, or you enforce it with a zero-tolerance policy.
Let's meet each other halfway folks...

It sometimes frustrates me when there's an interest check, and people respond to it in PM without leaving any trace in the thread, thus making it impossible to estimate how much interest the poster already has. In some twisted way, they might be trying to avoid that sort of confusion.

Or they might just have their head up their ass, I dunno.
@pugbutter You sure know how to make someone curious. ლ(ಠ益ಠლ)
I recently decided to tutor a newbie with his writing. Bad decision.

There’s people who refuse criticism, like Macabre said, and then there’s this guy. He eagerly accepted my help at first, but from there on he’s done nothing but be uncooperative while trying to convince me that he’s cooperating. Like, I gave him some very specific tips on how to improve his writing, and advised him to practice with those tips. A while later, I asked him if he’d been practicing. He said something like “yes, and it helped a bit”, but when I asked him to demonstrate, it was very obvious that he didn’t read my advice at all. Like, dude, this isn’t high school homework. If you don’t feel like doing something, don’t lie and say that you did it.

I’ve tried to talk to him, to find out why he didn’t do it or what exactly he wants to learn, but he just talks circles around me and avoids telling me anything constructive, all the while maintaining that he wants to be taught. I feel like I’m talking to a cat, or maybe an alien who dropped out of the how-to-be-human academy. I’m done chasing him. If he wants my help, he can come and get it.
We could do that. Now, the fake-OP's question is specifically about the Plane of Shadows as seen in D&D cosmology, and that question seems to have a fairly clear answer: the Plane of Shadows is stated to be constantly shifting, gradually changing shape, which makes creating an exact map impossible. That implies to me that the Plane of Shadows is mirroring the Material Plane, not the other way around, since the Material Plane is the "solid" one. Ergo, if you were to burn down a forest in the Plane of Shadow, it would probably reform to remain consistent with its material counterpart.

As for general, I prefer to take a nihilistic approach to world-building and not objectively confirm the existence of souls (as a separate thing from the body), the afterlife, or any such thing. If alternate planes are involved, they probably overlap with the known plane in the sense that opening a portal in plane A will consistently bring you to the equivalent location in plane B, but they don't generally mirror one another. As such, I've never faced the fake-OP's issue.
@helenedwards is a bot who reposts threads from Giant in the Playground forum to here. I know this because I've seen the original posts and they're all from different people. So there's no point in replying.
@Shoryu Magami Well this is the arena, so yes, it is about competition.

@ELGainsborough To be blunt, you’ve still given no reason for why you would use 3.5. I interpret that your reason for using it is that you already own and understand it. Which is likely to backfire because 1) you have to spend time houseruling the crap out of it and 2) it has a steep learning curve for those not familiar, thus putting up a barrier to entry. So why use 3.5 over a game that’s inherently more suited to this concept?

Thing is, a less convoluted version of 3.5 exists. It’s called D&D 5e. If you haven’t, look into it, seriously. Both editions have their pros and cons, but 5e strikes me as a straight-up better choice for the purpose of this concept. 3.5’s focus on number crunching, which is considered a positive by most who still play it, is nothing but a hindrance when you want to focus on creating cinematic combat scenes.

(As a petty side note, granting gold for equipment does not alleviate imbalance if both parties get it. And besides, in your example, whoever said the wizard was the underdog? :P At early level, sure, but they’re god-tier by mid-level.)

Anyways, regardless of system choice, I’ve been considering the practical implications of applying dice mechanics to an arena game, and the main problem that comes to mind is: When a player tries a special maneuver to gain an advantage on their attack, e.g. leaping to attack from above, how do you rule this? You can’t let the player grant themselves a bonus arbitrarily, and you can’t make a list of roll modifiers for every possible situation. Have you considered this?
I'm probably late to the party, but I'd like to contribute to this. I haven't in a long time, but I used to fight in the arena section, and my god does the unwillingness of people to lose make it hard to enjoy. So I appreciate an attempt to introduce roll-based mechanics into this sort of cinematic fighting format.

But I think that out of all possible options, D&D 3.5 is a terrible system to execute this in. The main reason is that while it offers lots of character customization options, your options in combat (as a martial, at least) are extremely limited. The system often requires significant investment just to let you do fairly basic things. In a free-form battle, things like tripping, grappling and disarming are just some of the tools at everyone’s disposal for combatting their enemy. You don’t need to state on your CS that your char is good at tripping to be able to use it in-game. But in 3.5, each of those requires a feat to be able to do it without provoking an opportunity attack.

As a result of this design philosophy, low-level martials are one-trick ponies. This gets better at later levels, but there’s still little improvisation to be had: All the tools at your disposal are pre-determined. The issue of the battle being won in character creation has already been brought up, and is inherent to many systems, but D&D 3.5 suffers from this problem more than any system I’m familiar with.

Other problems that make 3.5 a poor choice for this kind of game:
- The class balance is quite poor and there is enormous potential for power gaming.
- It’s a slow and tactical game with a strong focus on grid-based movement. Opportunity attacks are not so much a single mechanic as they are an entire subsystem within the game. This design clashes with the cinematic nature of arena battles.

Point is, it would take tons of adaptation to make D&D 3.5 usable in a cinematic arena format. I suggest using a lighter system. D&D 5e is an option, since it’s easier to digest, more balanced, and less restrictive. But one of my favourite RPGs is the incredibly light-weight Barbarians of Lemuria, which has simple and unrestrictive character creation, an emphasis on creativity in combat, and a free-form magic system that lets you replicate almost any character concept. It strikes me as perfect for this purpose. The downside is that because it’s so rules light, you often need to make rulings on the fly. There is, for instance, no definitive ruling on the effect of being prone. So it requires a lot of goodwill and cooperation between players. It also needs a few houserules for balance, but it’s very easily modded due to its simplicity. You can easily find the Barbarians of Lemuria basic edition online if you want to take a look. There are other editions, but I use the basic.

Let me know what you think of my thoughts. I’m interested in making this idea work.
(Scrubbed)
Since Rumiko just did the same, I'm gonna take this opportunity to say that even though I haven't roleplayed on this site in a long time, I too enjoy reading this thread and feeding off the hate like a Sith lord. So please, never stop the bitching. Maybe I'll pitch in sometime.
The general bitching that is. I'm not encouraging this recent exchange to continue.
© 2007-2024
BBCode Cheatsheet