SPECIAL NOTICE
Malicious code was found on the site, which has been removed, but would have been able to access files and the database, revealing email addresses, posts, and encoded passwords (which would need to be decoded). However, there is no direct evidence that any such activity occurred. REGARDLESS, BE SURE TO CHANGE YOUR PASSWORDS. And as is good practice, remember to never use the same password on more than one site. While performing housekeeping, we also decided to upgrade the forums.
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.

Team Gimp vs Standard adventuring day.

Started by Mr. GC, October 06, 2012, 07:21:06 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Mr. GC

So here's the deal. I have a prewritten scenario. One person (Old One Eye, unless he taps out) will make the party and attempt to complete it successfully.

Here are the rules:

Party of 4.
Level 7, 32 PB.
PCs and enemies are restricted to the following classes: 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.
Sources are restricted to 3.5 books that are non campaign specific and non weather based.

The party you construct will run through a scenario designed to model a standard adventuring day. This means a number of things.

1: If the entire party dies, you automatically lose.
2: If it takes more than one day (defined as either 16 hours game time or resting to recover resources), you automatically lose.
3: If at least half the party dies but you beat all encounters, you automatically lose (as losing half the party every single day is clearly not sustainable).
4: If one person in the party dies but the rest then go on to win, you might get a judgment loss. If that person died in some consistent or reliable fashion, that's a loss as consistently having a death a day isn't sustainable either. If it was just bad luck, I won't hold it against them and therefore that would be a win.
5: Large amounts of struggling might result in a judgment loss. This is meant to be a standard adventuring day, something you get through without breaking a sweat. If you're having to go all out to deal with routine stuff, you stand no chance against the actually hard stuff. And sometimes you do deal with that even in standard play.
6: If the party beats everything without losing anyone, they win. Good luck with that though.

Let me know if there's anything I missed.
Quote from: The sound of Sacro getting SaccedA weapon with a special ability must have at least a +1 enhancement bonus.

Quote from: JRR;593157No, 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.

TristramEvans

#1
Quote from: Mr. GC;589733Let me know if there's anything I missed.

what's the setting? World background? where are the characters from? What's the "hook" of the scenario(i.e. what motivation do the adventurer's have for completing the quest?)

Quote from: Mr. GC;5897331: If the entire party dies, you automatically lose.
2: If it takes more than one day (defined as either 16 hours game time or resting to recover resources), you automatically lose.
3: If at least half the party dies but you beat all encounters, you automatically lose (as losing half the party every single day is clearly not sustainable).
4: If one person in the party dies but the rest then go on to win, you might get a judgment loss. If that person died in some consistent or reliable fashion, that's a loss as consistently having a death a day isn't sustainable either. If it was just bad luck, I won't hold it against them and therefore that would be a win.
5: Large amounts of struggling might result in a judgment loss. This is meant to be a standard adventuring day, something you get through without breaking a sweat. If you're having to go all out to deal with routine stuff, you stand no chance against the actually hard stuff. And sometimes you do deal with that even in standard play.
6: If the party beats everything without losing anyone, they win. Good luck with that though.

Why should anyone agree to those restrictions, as they have nothing to do with the original challenge and are just stacking things in your favour? Especially as they're exceptionally arbitrary? what happens (in the gameworld) in a day that means thee character's "lose"? Lose what exactly?

What criteria do you have for determining what's a "weak" monster?

MGuy

I also missed "the point" of this thread. I thought the argument was about whether playing "gimped" characters was legitimately roleplaying.
My signature is not allowed.
Quote from: MGuyFinally a thread about fighters!

Mr. GC

Quote from: TristramEvans;589740what's the setting? World background? where are the characters from? What's the "hook" of the scenario(i.e. what motivation do the adventurer's have for completing the quest?)

Generic campaign world. You're reading far too much into this.

QuoteWhy should anyone agree to those restrictions, as they have nothing to do with the original challenge and are just stacking things in your favour? Especially as they're exceptionally arbitrary? what happens (in the gameworld) in a day that means thee character's "lose"? Lose what exactly?

What criteria do you have for determining what's a "weak" monster?

The original remark was that weak classes/characters/parties cannot play D&D. I chose the absolute lowest standard possible for what that means.

If you cannot deal with a standard adventuring day, you lose. That includes taking more than a day to do a single day. That's what all of those mean, and it's so I don't have people saying hah, one guy has 1 HP left, we won!
Quote from: The sound of Sacro getting SaccedA weapon with a special ability must have at least a +1 enhancement bonus.

Quote from: JRR;593157No, 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.

MGuy

Quote from: Mr. GC;589745The original remark was that weak classes/characters/parties cannot play D&D. I chose the absolute lowest standard possible for what that means.
I'll save you some time. You can play D&D with a weak party (especially if we're going by your extremely broad definition of weak). People have been doing such a thing for years. You can technically play D&D and not even know all or even most of the rules.
My signature is not allowed.
Quote from: MGuyFinally a thread about fighters!

TristramEvans

Quote from: Mr. GC;589745Generic campaign world.

No such thing.


QuoteThe original remark was that weak classes/characters/parties cannot play D&D. I chose the absolute lowest standard possible for what that means.

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

QuoteIf you cannot deal with a standard adventuring day, you lose. That includes taking more than a day to do a single day.

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

 
QuoteThat's what all of those mean, and it's so I don't have people saying hah, one guy has 1 HP left, we won!

I think there's a big gap from that to what your rules define, though.

StormBringer

Quote from: Mr. GC;589733Sources are restricted to 3.5 books that are non campaign specific and non weather based.
Non-weather based?  What the fuck does that even mean?

QuoteThe party you construct will run through a scenario designed to model a standard adventuring day. This means a number of things.

1: If the entire party dies, you automatically lose.
2: If it takes more than one day (defined as either 16 hours game time or resting to recover resources), you automatically lose.
3: If at least half the party dies but you beat all encounters, you automatically lose (as losing half the party every single day is clearly not sustainable).
4: If one person in the party dies but the rest then go on to win, you might get a judgment loss. If that person died in some consistent or reliable fashion, that's a loss as consistently having a death a day isn't sustainable either. If it was just bad luck, I won't hold it against them and therefore that would be a win.
5: Large amounts of struggling might result in a judgment loss. This is meant to be a standard adventuring day, something you get through without breaking a sweat. If you're having to go all out to deal with routine stuff, you stand no chance against the actually hard stuff. And sometimes you do deal with that even in standard play.
6: If the party beats everything without losing anyone, they win. Good luck with that though.

Let me know if there's anything I missed.
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.

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.

Really, all you are admitting here is that the DM decides whether or not the party survives, even with your HARDCORE RAW BY THE NUMBERS style of play.  So, congratulations...?  You have conclusively proven that you play Mother may I.
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

One Horse Town

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


Believe it or not, there were actually sourcebooks that concentrated on certain conditions - desert, arctic etc. Not exactly weather based, but environment based.

StormBringer

Quote from: One Horse Town;589755Believe it or not, there were actually sourcebooks that concentrated on certain conditions - desert, arctic etc. Not exactly weather based, but environment based.
Ok.  I don't find that hard to believe, and if done well, I think it is probably a fairly good idea.  Tundra Ranger won't survive more than a few days in Desert Ranger's territory, and vice versa.  I can't say if each type of environment needs a separate book or not, but that would depend on the content.

That said, negating relatively obscure types of sourcebooks means the argument is pretty feeble to begin with.  I am surprised one of the conditions wasn't 'no ability score over 4, and minimum hit points at all levels'.

"I can beat you in a coin flipping contest.  You don't get to see the coin toss, I flip the coin and tell you the result; you can only call 'nachos' or 'bongos' and neither of them ever means 'heads' or 'tails'; I don't have to tell you what I called; and I will use a coin of my choosing to perform the flips."

:rolleyes:
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

One Horse Town

Quote from: StormBringer;589758Ok.  I don't find that hard to believe, and if done well, I think it is probably a fairly good idea.  Tundra Ranger won't survive more than a few days in Desert Ranger's territory, and vice versa.  I can't say if each type of environment needs a separate book or not, but that would depend on the content.

That said, negating relatively obscure types of sourcebooks means the argument is pretty feeble to begin with.  I am surprised one of the conditions wasn't 'no ability score over 4, and minimum hit points at all levels'.

"I can beat you in a coin flipping contest.  You don't get to see the coin toss, I flip the coin and tell you the result; you can only call 'nachos' or 'bongos' and neither of them ever means 'heads' or 'tails'; I don't have to tell you what I called; and I will use a coin of my choosing to perform the flips."

:rolleyes:

*shrug*

Take him up on it, or not.

Shit, i'd like more people to visit this sub-forum. ;)

StormBringer

Quote from: One Horse Town;589759*shrug*

Take him up on it, or not.

Shit, i'd like more people to visit this sub-forum. ;)
I've already stated why I won't be participating, just pointing out the blatant flaws in the conditions.

And this thread is a prime example of why Pundit doesn't want theoretical stuff in this forum.  That, and the Forgite design crap will almost certainly get dragged in at one point.  We really need a cohesive language for RPG design.
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

Sacrosanct

I'm surprised that you all are continuing to engage in this nonsense.

Oh well, more post count for the site, I guess?
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.

Old One Eye

Quote from: Mr. GC;589733Party of 4.
Level 7, 32 PB.
PCs and enemies are restricted to the following classes: 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.
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.

Doom

The funny part is these conditions would have made the bone party an auto-lose...and probably the other one, too.

I guess the player could just win by refusing to post, or by breaking actions down to the nearest 1/10th of a round, challenging every ruling.
(taken during hurricane winds)

A nice education blog.

deadDMwalking

Quote from: Doom;589774The funny part is these conditions would have made the bone party an auto-lose...and probably the other one, too.

I guess the player could just win by refusing to post, or by breaking actions down to the nearest 1/10th of a round, challenging every ruling.

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.
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