This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.

Author Topic: Team Gimp vs Standard adventuring day.  (Read 20895 times)

deadDMwalking

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2499
Team Gimp vs Standard adventuring day.
« Reply #15 on: October 07, 2012, 08:12:52 AM »
Oh - my prediction for the events.

1) You created the thread in good faith.
2) People who agreed to participate in the thread refuse to participate.
3) Insults start getting thrown about.
4) This thread gets locked.
5) A new thread is created by someone who agreed to participate or a perceived 'ally'.  Once that thread is created, the story will be 'oh, we actually won' and/or 'your point was proven to be entirely false' - this despite the fact that they didn't even participate.
6) That thread will get locked, preventing any further discussion.  But it will always be at least 1 full page closer to the 'top' of the forum, so anyone browsing the forum will always find the 'we won' thread before finding the thread that proves they didn't.  

1 & 2 - check.  3?  Getting close.
When I say objectively, I mean 'subjectively'.  When I say literally, I mean 'figuratively'.  
And when I say that you are a horse's ass, I mean that the objective truth is that you are a literal horse's ass.

There is nothing so useless as doing efficiently that which should not be done at all. - Peter Drucker

Mr. GC
BANNED

  • BANNED
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 519
Team Gimp vs Standard adventuring day.
« Reply #16 on: October 07, 2012, 08:34:29 AM »
Quote from: TristramEvans;589748
No such thing.




Um, no, you added a bunch of rules that don't exist in D&D . That's hardly the "lowest standards possible".

So you are arguing that if half the party dies every single day they are a viable party? Since the goal is to demonstrate weak parties are weak, viable would be not losing people every single day. If there's one death to bad luck that's fine, if there's any sort of consistent death that is not.

Quote
I have no idea what that means. How is time determined? What is the goal of the day? I mean, is there a schedule?

By the rules of the game. You won't hit the 16 hour time limit unless you're deliberately stalling (the adventure is completable in under 30 minutes) so that's really just there to say no resting.

If you want the adventure hook make a party, I'm not letting you custom build to handle this specific scenario.

Quote from: StormBringer;589752
Non-weather based?  What the fuck does that even mean?

Sandstorm, Frostburn, and Stormwrack are all weather based.

Quote
Yeah, your scenario doesn't model a 'standard adventuring day'.  Primarily because there is no 'standard' for adventuring days.  Plus, you have five conditions for loss and only one condition for victory, which you already admit you have stacked against the party with your bizarre conditions.  You haven't defined 'weak' in regards to the characters, the party, or the opposition.  And I have grave doubts that you would consider an encounter successfully passed if the party was able to garner the loot or whatever without killing the opposition, which is a primary survival technique in older versions.

Sure there are. The reason the conditions are listed as they are is because basket weavers are weasels. They will seriously attempt to claim that if one guy has 1 HP left but they beat all encounters they won.

Getting the loot off something without killing it would be immensely more difficult than just killing it, so I consider it irrelevant.

Quote
To summarize:  You want a low-ish hit point party to run a WoW type raid on the desktop, where the resource they need the most is the one that can't be marshaled because you are pushing them into no-way-out combats of attrition.

Lowish HP party? If you actually care about HP of all things...

"Adept, Aristocrat, Barbarian, CA Ninja, Commoner, CW Samurai, Expert, Fighter (dungeoncrasher or not), Healer, Hexblade, Knight, Marshal, Monk, Paladin, Ranger, Rogue, Scout, Soulknife, Spellthief, Swashbuckler, Warlock, Warmage, Warrior."

Anything with D8 or better is bolded.

If you're worried about HP attrition then not only was I correct in assuming you fail at D&D, but you also are not nearly as "creative" as you claim.

Seriously, this entire scenario can be facerolled by a solo Bard, so stop being pussies.

Quote from: Old One Eye;589773
Alrighty, NPCs from the 3.5 DMG, clearly a non-optimized party:

Jugs the Barbarian 7th lvl mostly wants to drink and hit things.
Swordmeister the Fighter 7th lvl really, really likes his sword.
Goodguy the Paladin 7th lvl wants to get Jugs off the sauce and on to the straight and narrow.
Filthy Peeks the Rogue 7th lvl wants to make enough seed money to start a brothel.

Ok. Post exact statblocks including all items, and we'll start.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;589797
Actually, the Bone Devil party would not necessarily have to lose, given these conditions.  If the point of the mission was 'kill this particular enemy', they would have had to complete the mission in a single day without losing anyone, but they shouldn't have lost anyone to a creature of their CR.  They should have expected to expend around 20-25% of their daily resources to win.

I won't count one death as a loss if it's a bad luck death. If it isn't, if it's something that'd happen every day a death a day to routine stuff is not sustainable either. If this were the Bone Devil thing (which was a single fight, and a level lower) any death at all should have really been an automatic loss. And since it could have easily killed one of those guys... but let's focus on the actual point of this thread?

And you're probably right. These are standard basket weavers so I fully expect for them all to act the part of such. I am inviting them to prove me wrong, let's see if they can.
Quote from: The sound of Sacro getting Sacced
A weapon with a special ability must have at least a +1 enhancement bonus.

Quote from: JRR;593157
No, but it is a game with rules.  If the results of the dice are not to be accepted, why bother rolling the dice.  So you can accept the good rolls and ignore the bad?  Yeah, let's give everyone a trophy.

Quote from: The best quote of all time!
Honestly. Go. Play. A. Larp. For. A. While.

Eventually you will realise you were a retard and sucked until you did.

Doom

  • Fact and Truth Ideologue
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2675
Team Gimp vs Standard adventuring day.
« Reply #17 on: October 07, 2012, 10:31:39 AM »
Quote from: deadDMwalking;589797
Actually, the Bone Devil party would not necessarily have to lose, given these conditions.  If the point of the mission was 'kill this particular enemy', they would have had to complete the mission in a single day without losing anyone, but they shouldn't have lost anyone to a creature of their CR.  They should have expected to expend around 20-25% of their daily resources to win.


You missed that thread, I guess. The bone devil just bounced around forever, losing by these terms.
(taken during hurricane winds)

A nice education blog.

TristramEvans

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8440
Team Gimp vs Standard adventuring day.
« Reply #18 on: October 07, 2012, 12:01:50 PM »
Quote from: deadDMwalking;589798
Oh - my prediction for the events.

1) You created the thread in good faith.


One look at the conditions obliterates that premise.
"Playing Role-Playing Games counts as partying."
-Andrew WK

Visit my website at Pariedolia
Come visit Doodling D&D's new home!

Imperator

  • Say hello!
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4000
    • http://elblogdelemperador.wordpress.com
Team Gimp vs Standard adventuring day.
« Reply #19 on: October 07, 2012, 12:18:05 PM »
Quote from: deadDMwalking;589798
Oh - my prediction for the events.

1) You created the thread in good faith.
2) People who agreed to participate in the thread refuse to participate.
3) Insults start getting thrown about.
4) This thread gets locked.
5) A new thread is created by someone who agreed to participate or a perceived 'ally'.  Once that thread is created, the story will be 'oh, we actually won' and/or 'your point was proven to be entirely false' - this despite the fact that they didn't even participate.
6) That thread will get locked, preventing any further discussion.  But it will always be at least 1 full page closer to the 'top' of the forum, so anyone browsing the forum will always find the 'we won' thread before finding the thread that proves they didn't.  

1 & 2 - check.  3?  Getting close.


Thing is, I don't even understand what is the alleged point of this thread. What people are supposed to create some 3.5 PCs and then Mr. GC will throw some arena encounters without any other background info or anything? And what the fuck is that supposed to prove?
My name is Ramón Nogueras. Running now Vampire: the Masquerade (Giovanni Chronicles IV for just 3 players), and itching to resume my Call of Cthulhu campaign (The Sense of the Sleight-of-Hand Man).

TristramEvans

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8440
Team Gimp vs Standard adventuring day.
« Reply #20 on: October 07, 2012, 12:28:53 PM »
Quote from: Imperator;589825
Thing is, I don't even understand what is the alleged point of this thread. What people are supposed to create some 3.5 PCs and then Mr. GC will throw some arena encounters without any other background info or anything? And what the fuck is that supposed to prove?


Apparently that is what Mr. GC thinks roleplaying is.

It's just kind of sad that he's missing out on so much. I mean, I don't understand why anyone wouldn't rather play a videogame if that's all their games consist of.
"Playing Role-Playing Games counts as partying."
-Andrew WK

Visit my website at Pariedolia
Come visit Doodling D&D's new home!

The Butcher

  • Cyborg Shock Trooper
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7183
Team Gimp vs Standard adventuring day.
« Reply #21 on: October 07, 2012, 12:49:46 PM »
I thought there was nothing in this thread for me, but GC's stringent criteria, so far removed from anything that resembles what happens at my gaming trouble, at least beg a question from me.

Why not 4e?

I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, your suggest to me that you approach D&D as a competitive series of combat encounters between GM-built opponents and the PCs, with the GM bound by encounter balance guidelines and the players by an encounter/resource ratio -- both of which hinge on strict adherence to the RAW. And isn't that what 4e set out to do? What do you fell 3.5e brings to the table, that 4e doesn't do better?

Not a threadcrap. Honest question.

Of course, those who identify with GC's criteria and/or the playstyle behind them, feel free to take the question.

Sacrosanct

  • cisgrog
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7224
    • http://www.sacrosanctgames.com
Team Gimp vs Standard adventuring day.
« Reply #22 on: October 07, 2012, 12:56:34 PM »
Is anyone really surprised?  I mean, look at the thread title.  "Standard adventuring day."  Mr. GC's definition of that phrase is nothing like I've ever seen in game play.  Ever.  So is it any surprise that this thread would be worthless and nothing more than another rehash of the same stupid arguments?  I.e., if you consider it a standard adventuring day to sit in an arena and go against monster after monster, then sure playing a character weak in combat will have problems.  But most standard adventuring days I've every played often have very little or no combat at all, but a lot of exploration and interaction with the game world.  And having a min/max'd character doesn't give you an advantage at all over a weaker character.
« Last Edit: October 07, 2012, 12:58:40 PM by Sacrosanct »
D&D is not an "everyone gets a ribbon" game.  If you're stupid, your PC will die.  If you're an asshole, your PC will die (probably from the other PCs).  If you're unlucky, your PC may die.  Point?  PC's die.  Get over it and roll up a new one.

Mr. GC
BANNED

  • BANNED
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 519
Team Gimp vs Standard adventuring day.
« Reply #23 on: October 07, 2012, 12:56:53 PM »
Quote from: Imperator;589825
Thing is, I don't even understand what is the alleged point of this thread. What people are supposed to create some 3.5 PCs and then Mr. GC will throw some arena encounters without any other background info or anything? And what the fuck is that supposed to prove?


Who said it'd be arena? Indeed, "standard adventuring day" suggests it isn't.

Quote from: The Butcher;589831
I thought there was nothing in this thread for me, but GC's stringent criteria, so far removed from anything that resembles what happens at my gaming trouble, at least beg a question from me.

Why not 4e?


Because I like good combat and good non combat and not shitty combat and shitty non combat.

Because I'd like to finish a fight and not have it drag on so long I don't even remember why we were fighting these guys or why we are here and we don't have enough time to do anything else this session.

Quote
I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, your suggest to me that you approach D&D as a competitive series of combat encounters between GM-built opponents and the PCs, with the GM bound by encounter balance guidelines and the players by an encounter/resource ratio -- both of which hinge on strict adherence to the RAW. And isn't that what 4e set out to do? What do you fell 3.5e brings to the table, that 4e doesn't do better?


Do tell, when Sir Righteous is trying to kill some Orcs and some Orcs are trying to kill him and the people he is trying to protect, in what way is this not a competition? A literal fight for survival?

In my actual games everything would be much, much more difficult than this. This scenario is something I've seen 9 year old children faceroll.

In my actual games if you fuck up you get level +5 or more encounters, very easily, and those were hard enough when they weren't dogpiling you.

In my actual games... 4 encounters per day? Is that all you think there is? *evil grin*

But none of this is relevant. This is really between me and Old One Eye. If people want to directly comment on what is happening fine, but irrelevant bullshit spamming up the thread is not.
Quote from: The sound of Sacro getting Sacced
A weapon with a special ability must have at least a +1 enhancement bonus.

Quote from: JRR;593157
No, but it is a game with rules.  If the results of the dice are not to be accepted, why bother rolling the dice.  So you can accept the good rolls and ignore the bad?  Yeah, let's give everyone a trophy.

Quote from: The best quote of all time!
Honestly. Go. Play. A. Larp. For. A. While.

Eventually you will realise you were a retard and sucked until you did.

StormBringer

  • Harbinger of Chaos
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9320
Team Gimp vs Standard adventuring day.
« Reply #24 on: October 07, 2012, 01:28:45 PM »
Quote from: Mr. GC;589836
Who said it'd be arena? Indeed, "standard adventuring day" suggests it isn't.
Just calling it a 'standard adventuring day' doesn't make it so.  This is a white-room series of highly contrived encounters that have nothing to do with an ongoing game or campaign.

Quote
Because I like good combat and good non combat and not shitty combat and shitty non combat.
How is 4e 'shitty non combat', and what does 3.x have that makes it better?  4e's rules for skill challenges didn't seem to settle down on anything that worked well, but why would you use them anyway?  How is the role playing part of 3.x any better than the role playing part of 4e?  Neither uses any actual rules.

Or can you not even get through ordering an ale at the local inn without rolling dice?  This is the part where everyone wonders why you are involved in role playing games to begin with, when boardgames seem much more your speed.

Quote
Because I'd like to finish a fight and not have it drag on so long I don't even remember why we were fighting these guys or why we are here and we don't have enough time to do anything else this session.
3.x is hardly a panacea for that.  You should try 1st or 2nd edition, maybe even B/X.  Combat pretty much never lasts more than 30mins, and rarely takes more than 15.

Quote
Do tell, when Sir Righteous is trying to kill some Orcs and some Orcs are trying to kill him and the people he is trying to protect, in what way is this not a competition? A literal fight for survival?
Because it's an imaginary avatar in a game?  I mean, is 'competition' so integral to your identity that the thought of Sir Righteous suffering a temporary or permanent setback is rage-inducing anathema?  You can't so much as consider the possibility that a loss for Sir Righteous could actually be a benefit to the game overall?

Quote
In my actual games everything would be much, much more difficult than this. This scenario is something I've seen 9 year old children faceroll.
In other words, the DM has control over whether or not you succeed.

Quote
In my actual games if you fuck up you get level +5 or more encounters, very easily, and those were hard enough when they weren't dogpiling you.
As long as you are doing what the DM thinks is correct, then, you get the easier encounters.  Sounds like Mother-may-I.

Quote
But none of this is relevant. This is really between me and Old One Eye. If people want to directly comment on what is happening fine, but irrelevant bullshit spamming up the thread is not.
You don't get to decide that.  You get to start a thread and see where it goes.  Pundit and his team get to decide what is spamming and what isn't.  Even the smallest loss of control, and you start whining at the mods?
If you read the above post, you owe me $20 for tutoring fees

'Let them call me rebel, and welcome, I have no concern for it, but I should suffer the misery of devils, were I to make a whore of my soul.'
 - Thomas Paine
'Everything doesn't need

MGuy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • M
  • Posts: 949
Team Gimp vs Standard adventuring day.
« Reply #25 on: October 07, 2012, 01:39:42 PM »
I am equally confused as to why this is a "thing". If it's to prove that regular characters can't survive in DnD then that's provably false just by thinking about how people do it all the time whenever they play. If the point is that you can possibly kill a regular party or make it so they fail at whatever they were trying to do that day, that is equally pointless because I'm sure that shit happens all the time as well (though I'm also willing to bet it happens much less than a party just straight up succeeding). The idea that this thread will singularly prove that a bunch of non optimized heroes can't play the game is ridiculous right out of the box because while people "can" fail on any given adventuring day people general succeed all the time. Everyone in this thread right now can drum up a story or ten about how they had characters who were not optimized or even particularly good and met with success.
My signature is not allowed.
Quote from: MGuy
Finally a thread about fighters!

jibbajibba

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9098
Team Gimp vs Standard adventuring day.
« Reply #26 on: October 07, 2012, 01:46:57 PM »
So as far as I can tell this is Mr CG explaining to the rest of us why his roleplaying is better right.

He is basically saying this is a simple 'dungeon' your job as a party is to clear out all the encounters. Becuase there is no setting you will not have the option of negotiating with the monsters or cutting a deal. You will not have the option of bypassing them you only have the option of defeatign them becuase that is the scenario.

The problem is that in building a scenario like this you have already established a set of play conditions that determine a certain playstyle. I do not doubt that you as the DM will win the scenario I mean I have killed a party of 6 5th level PCs with 2 dozen kobolds, so what?

If you set actual in play setting say the setting is the King's daughter has been kidnaped by a group of lizard man cultists and they have dragged off to their swampy lair and will sacrifce her tonight at midnight so you have but 16 hours to find and free her.  Then you give the players some idea of how they 'win' in the scenario.
If the only win condition is to kill everything and you have to go to where everything is in order to kill it then you have already reduced the same to a combat fest. You are not allowing negotiation, you are not allowing the characters to use the adventage of the environment etc etc ...

You are in effect saying that gimped characters are weak in an arena combat... well what a surprise.
No longer living in Singapore
Method Actor-92% :Tactician-75% :Storyteller-67%:
Specialist-67% :Power Gamer-42% :Butt-Kicker-33% :
Casual Gamer-8%


GAMERS Profile
Jibbajibba
9AA788 -- Age 45 -- Academia 1 term, civilian 4 terms -- $15,000

Cult&Hist-1 (Anthropology); Computing-1; Admin-1; Research-1;
Diplomacy-1; Speech-2; Writing-1; Deceit-1;
Brawl-1 (martial Arts); Wrestling-1; Edged-1;

Mr. GC
BANNED

  • BANNED
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 519
Team Gimp vs Standard adventuring day.
« Reply #27 on: October 07, 2012, 02:10:24 PM »
I see much useless threadshitting and I do not see direct comments about what is going on.
Quote from: The sound of Sacro getting Sacced
A weapon with a special ability must have at least a +1 enhancement bonus.

Quote from: JRR;593157
No, but it is a game with rules.  If the results of the dice are not to be accepted, why bother rolling the dice.  So you can accept the good rolls and ignore the bad?  Yeah, let's give everyone a trophy.

Quote from: The best quote of all time!
Honestly. Go. Play. A. Larp. For. A. While.

Eventually you will realise you were a retard and sucked until you did.

StormBringer

  • Harbinger of Chaos
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9320
Team Gimp vs Standard adventuring day.
« Reply #28 on: October 07, 2012, 02:49:03 PM »
Quote from: Mr. GC;589851
I see much useless threadshitting and I do not see direct comments about what is going on.
'What is going on' is everyone commenting on how absolutely moronic this idea of a white-room arena proving anything.  You are desperately trying to salvage any sort of 'victory', so you are going to obliquely appeal to the mods with a charge of 'thread crapping', with the likely result that the thread is closed and you can claim a win, because no one took you up on your challenge.

Which is still an appeal to ignorance, despite your attempts to goad people into participating.  No matter how many times you use it, 'you can't prove me wrong' isn't a valid tactic under any circumstances.
If you read the above post, you owe me $20 for tutoring fees

'Let them call me rebel, and welcome, I have no concern for it, but I should suffer the misery of devils, were I to make a whore of my soul.'
 - Thomas Paine
'Everything doesn't need

StormBringer

  • Harbinger of Chaos
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9320
Team Gimp vs Standard adventuring day.
« Reply #29 on: October 07, 2012, 02:55:15 PM »
Quote from: deadDMwalking;589798
Oh - my prediction for the events.

1) You created the thread in good faith.
'Good faith' clearly does not mean what you think it means.  You really can't start a thread in good faith when it is entirely based on an appeal to ignorance.
 
Quote
2) People who agreed to participate in the thread refuse to participate.
One person agreed, and they did participate.

Quote
3) Insults start getting thrown about.
4) This thread gets locked.
5) A new thread is created by someone who agreed to participate or a perceived 'ally'.  Once that thread is created, the story will be 'oh, we actually won' and/or 'your point was proven to be entirely false' - this despite the fact that they didn't even participate.
6) That thread will get locked, preventing any further discussion.  But it will always be at least 1 full page closer to the 'top' of the forum, so anyone browsing the forum will always find the 'we won' thread before finding the thread that proves they didn't.  

1 & 2 - check.  3?  Getting close.
Considering this is the exact playbook used by your crew to pretend that 'prove me wrong' is a valid technique, I am not surprised you managed to predict the chain of events.

Then again, claiming a 'victory' before the clusterfuck even gets underway is a more efficient use of time, I guess.
If you read the above post, you owe me $20 for tutoring fees

'Let them call me rebel, and welcome, I have no concern for it, but I should suffer the misery of devils, were I to make a whore of my soul.'
 - Thomas Paine
'Everything doesn't need