Quote from: Mr. GC;589851I see much useless threadshitting and I do not see direct comments about what is going on.

Nothing's going on. Your scenario isn't a roleplaying game scenario, its a tournament wargame. And if anyone wanted to play a wargame, there are better systems to use than D&D. The major disconnect here is that what your doing isn't how RPGs are meant to be played, and its providing a very limited experience. I'm usually not one for "badwrongfun"; I think everybody should game how they want and however is the most fun, but it saddens me that you seem to be completely oblivious to what RPGs potentially have to offer a player.

RPGs are about fantasy, imagination, and creativity, and your games seem to be devoid of those things, based on this and the example of another scenario of yours posted on the other thread. The concept of "being in character" is meaningless in such a game, and Immersion is frankly impossible. I just don't personally see what's enjoyable, or why I would give up all the possibilities RPGs offers me to adhere to such a myopic and limited experience.

In my time I've led armies into battle, negotiated treaties between kingdoms, seen the universe saved by an assistant pig-herder, rode on the backs of dragons, stormed a Deathstar, discovered new dimensions, foiled the schemes of supervillains, romanced an elven princess, chased murderers through the shadowy streets of 30s NY, invented a time machine, fended off sky pirates in a zepelin, called forth Elder Gods from the abyss, pantsed Darth Vader, freed a colony of slaves from alien overlords, danced in a graveyard with the lichqueen, found El Dorado: the lost city of gold,  met a talking mongoose named Gef, been slimed by ghosts, crafted a golem, gave it life,  and unleashed it upon a group of vicious witch-hunters, fended off The Orient Express from werewolves in the woods of Russia, tricked gods, seduced goddesses, slain angels, and exorcized demons...I could go on. It's been nearly 30 years of adventures. Glories.

If that's basketweaving, then I take that term gladly. The alternative you're offering is....simply not appealing.

Quote from: TristramEvans;589862Nothing's going on. Your scenario isn't a roleplaying game scenario, its a tournament wargame. And if anyone wanted to play a wargame, there are better systems to use than D&D. The major disconnect here is that what your doing isn't how RPGs are meant to be played, and its providing a very limited experience. I'm usually not one for "badwrongfun"; I think everybody should game how they want and however is the most fun, but it saddens me that you seem to be completely oblivious to what RPGs potentially have to offer a player.

RPGs are about fantasy, imagination, and creativity, and your games seem to be devoid of those things, based on this and the example of another scenario of yours posted on the other thread. The concept of "being in character" is meaningless in such a game, and Immersion is frankly impossible. I just don't personally see what's enjoyable, or why I would give up all the possibilities RPGs offers me to adhere to such a myopic and limited experience.

In my time I've led armies into battle, negotiated treaties between kingdoms, seen the universe saved by an assistant pig-herder, rode on the backs of dragons, stormed a Deathstar, discovered new dimensions, foiled the schemes of supervillains, romanced an elven princess, chased murderers through the shadowy streets of 30s NY, invented a time machine, fended off sky pirates in a zepelin, called forth Elder Gods from the abyss, pantsed Darth Vader, freed a colony of slaves from alien overlords, danced in a graveyard with the lichqueen, found El Dorado: the lost city of gold,  met a talking mongoose named Gef, been slimed by ghosts, crafted a golem, gave it life,  and unleashed it upon a group of vicious witch-hunters, fended off The Orient Express from werewolves in the woods of Russia, tricked gods, seduced goddesses, slain angels, and exorcized demons...I could go on. It's been nearly 30 years of adventures. Glories.

If that's basketweaving, then I take that term gladly. The alternative you're offering is....simply not appealing.

:hatsoff:
Pure awesome.

Quote from: TristramEvans;589862In my time I've led armies into battle, negotiated treaties between kingdoms, seen the universe saved by an assistant pig-herder, rode on the backs of dragons, stormed a Deathstar, discovered new dimensions, foiled the schemes of supervillains, romanced an elven princess, chased murderers through the shadowy streets of 30s NY, invented a time machine, fended off sky pirates in a zepelin, called forth Elder Gods from the abyss, pantsed Darth Vader, freed a colony of slaves from alien overlords, danced in a graveyard with the lichqueen, found El Dorado: the lost city of gold,  met a talking mongoose named Gef, been slimed by ghosts, crafted a golem, gave it life,  and unleashed it upon a group of vicious witch-hunters, fended off The Orient Express from werewolves in the woods of Russia, tricked gods, seduced goddesses, slain angels, and exorcized demons...I could go on. It's been nearly 30 years of adventures. Glories.

If that's basketweaving, then I take that term gladly. The alternative you're offering is....simply not appealing.

This is not basket weaving, none of what you described is that. What GC is describing is incomprehensible not only here but on TGD.What he's trying to say here is completely worthless. He's like the opposite version of Storm. As if you took all the nonsensical ways Storm posts and switched the subject from mindless grognardia and turned it into mindless munchkinian.

Quote from: MGuy;589864This is not basket weaving, none of what you described is that. What GC is describing is incomprehensible not only here but on TGD.What he's trying to say here is completely worthless. He's like the opposite version of Storm. As if you took all the nonsensical ways Storm posts and switched the subject from mindless grognardia and turned it into mindless munchkinian.

It's sweet you have so much residual rage over getting a thorough drubbing every time you post nonsense.  That last part is redundant, of course.
 Just (mostly) kidding!

I mean, you are getting better, I have to admit that.  But you are still dragging the paradigm of 'having to be right' around with you.  Like the others, you still tend to shit your pants when required to present evidence for your position.  However, it doesn't seem to be as much as before, so that is an improvement as well.

It is sad you are going to dismiss anything prior to 3.x as 'mindless grognardia' without considering the content, though.  Knowing where your game started and how it evolved really does make for a better game play experience; I am not saying I am the ultimate guru for that, but my views are not radically different than most others who play Vintage Games.  So you are either holding a grudge, or you simply dismiss other views out of hand.  Neither of which are winning strategies around here, but the place does tend to grind those out of you.  

If you want to get a feel for Vintage Gaming, the Castle Amber PbP thread is still dormant.  Perhaps a few others would like to resurrect that thread and join you.

Quote from: Mr. GC;589745The original remark was that weak classes/characters/parties cannot play D&D. If you cannot deal with a standard adventuring day, you lose.

Everybody sees the unexamined premise making this entire thread pointless and stupid, right?

Good. Let's move on.

Quote from: Mr. GC;589836Who said it'd be arena? Indeed, "standard adventuring day" suggests it isn't.

Well, I don't think there is such thing as a "standard adventuring day". What would that be? Some days you travel and nothing happens. Some other days you go to a dungeon and have 6 fights.

Right, so ignoring the irrelevant posts...

Old One Eye, you still there and working on that party?

And if not, any of you chucklehead chatterboxes care to step it up or step on out?

Quote from: Mr. GC;589998Right, so ignoring the irrelevant posts...

Old One Eye, you still there and working on that party?

And if not, any of you chucklehead chatterboxes care to step it up or step on out?

Stamping your feet and demanding someone participate does not change the fact that your fundamental strategy is profoundly flawed.

No one has denied that a 'weak' party can be defeated.  No one has denied a 'strong' party can be defeated.  These are not controversial.  What we have is your claim that an undefined 'weak' party will always suffer defeat; this conclusion is then to go on and support the further conclusions that 'strong' or optimized parties are better in all cases, and that versions of D&D prior to 3.5 are unplayable because all parties have some level of 'weak' that can't be compensated for.

Hence, this particular argument is based on a fallacy, so there is nothing that can be proved here.  Even if it weren't based on a fallacy, there is no direct connection between this conclusion and the other (often fallacious as well) statements you have presented.

Throw your tantrums, imagine your position is tenable, and prepare your 'victory' speech.  You have failed to even define the basic terms you are using and arbitrarily designated 'win' conditions without allowing for input or any mutual agreement.  The only purpose this thread could possibly have is trying to 'win' the FvW argument by proxy.  But what you have unintentionally proven is that your version of 'tough guy hardcore D&D' is every bit as dependant on MTP/DM pity as the other play styles you decry.

You might want to take this opportunity to step back, re-formulate your argument, figure out some evidence to support at least part of your hypotheses, and be prepared to not only present that information, but defend it as well.  Taking all these actions in good faith would be a major plus as well.

There is some derialment going on here, but frankly when the OP is so spectacularly clueless, has a thread title meant to troll and insult - and whose whole schick is the same - no we're not going to stop it Mr. GC. Now stop reporting every post you don't like.

Edit: Oh, this is one bit of threadcrapping i'll put a stop to. No ribbing GC about what i've said above please.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;589798Oh - 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.

Still having trouble with basic concepts like Proof I see.:rotfl:  How long are you going to be a whiny disingenuous cunt and claim Spike pussing out of the contest meant the original contention that a Bone Devil would ALWAYS TPK a party was somehow proved without a single HP being inflicted?

BTW, all this thread is going to prove is that the most "rules balanced" version of D&D is just as much dependent upon DM fiat as any other, if not more so.  

The DM can create a challenge...
1. Impossible for the players to beat.
2. Impossible for the players not to beat.
3. Possible for them to beat if played well (wide variance here).
Welcome to what you call MTP.

Quote from: Mr. GC;589998Right, so ignoring the irrelevant posts...

Old One Eye, you still there and working on that party?

And if not, any of you chucklehead chatterboxes care to step it up or step on out?

Absent the bullshit dogma of both sides (in which I have no specific stake, nor have I posted to any of these threads prior to this, so I would very much appreciate both sides avoiding claims that I'm a shill for their respective opposition), this sounds like it could be pretty fun as a game in its own right.  If OOE doesn't put something up by the time I can get to a 3.5 PHB, I'll give it a go, so people can stop whining about it.

Quote from: This Guy;590040Absent the bullshit dogma of both sides (in which I have no specific stake, nor have I posted to any of these threads prior to this, so I would very much appreciate both sides avoiding claims that I'm a shill for their respective opposition), this sounds like it could be pretty fun as a game in its own right.  If OOE doesn't put something up by the time I can get to a 3.5 PHB, I'll give it a go, so people can stop whining about it.

I'm going to give him 72 hours. It will be 48 tonight, so if by Wednesday morning I see nothing from him you can play the party.

Quote from: Mr. GC;590043I'm going to give him 72 hours. It will be 48 tonight, so if by Wednesday morning I see nothing from him you can play the party.

Understood.  Where do you want rolls recorded, by the way?

Quote from: This Guy;590047Understood.  Where do you want rolls recorded, by the way?

That is actually an excellent question. Most inline dice rollers (those built into forums) are very easily cheatable, typically by deleting the dice roll tag and then reposting it repeatedly within the 60-90 second window before it starts displaying last edited tags.

Stuff like Invisible Castle is the same way, since you can just only post the sets that actually give the results you want.

Now there's plenty of dice rollers out there, but not ones that display their results to all sides and aren't cheatable. I could just use one of those and roll for everyone... I don't need to cheat to win this as I am quite confident that the party will die unless they are cheated for. However, as I suspect no one, including you will believe that we'd need to find another arrangement. Right?

Quote from: Mr. GC;590051Now there's plenty of dice rollers out there, but not ones that display their results to all sides and aren't cheatable. I could just use one of those and roll for everyone... I don't need to cheat to win this as I am quite confident that the party will die unless they are cheated for. However, as I suspect no one, including you will believe that we'd need to find another arrangement. Right?

And what is preventing you from posting only the sets that give the results you want, and why can't the other person just do that?