Quote from: Mr. GC;590853I love how Mr. One Post guy is instantly taken as legit, just because he's bitching about me.

No, it's because he provided a link.  You know, that 'evidence' thing we have to keep reminding you about.

Quote from: Mr. GC;590870Really? You don't even know what that term means after all this time?

after all what time? I've mostly been out having a life, I'm only online maybe 2 hours a day tops, and I don't spend all that time reading these threads.

QuoteA trap option is something that seems good but is actually a trap. All this stuff about bad classes, bad feats, bad weapons... trap options.

Okay, so something MOST RPGs don't have.

Also, I thought Basketweaving was a choice ("lifestyle" I think someone said)? Now you're saying the game itself creates "traps"; doesn't that imply there are no Basketweavers, just people who don't know how a shitty system is going to screw them over?

Quote from: TristramEvans;590878Also, I thought Basketweaving was a choice ("lifestyle" I think someone said)? Now you're saying the game itself creates "traps"; doesn't that imply there are no Basketweavers, just people who don't know how a shitty system is going to screw them over?

Hey, if you follow through on the logical consequences of his statements, he will just flip out again.

Quote from: TristramEvans;590878after all what time? I've mostly been out having a life, I'm only online maybe 2 hours a day tops, and I don't spend all that time reading these threads.

All this time this and other threads have been going on and all this time you personally have been participating in them.

QuoteOkay, so something MOST RPGs don't have.

:rotfl:

QuoteAlso, I thought Basketweaving was a choice ("lifestyle" I think someone said)? Now you're saying the game itself creates "traps"; doesn't that imply there are no Basketweavers, just people who don't know how a shitty system is going to screw them over?

Nope. If someone blunders into the traps unwittingly, they're not a basket weaver. Someone who willingly walks into them/believes they should exist/tries to lie and say they don't exist, typically to lure others into taking them? They are indeed basket weavers.

The people that blunder into them by accident will correct their mistakes once aware of them. Those that endorse those mistakes? Not so much.

Quote from: EddieValentine;590841Nah according to Frank, Mr. GC = Mr. BPD, also known as...Roy! dumdumdummmmm!

 http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=53689&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=425

See? He's just a trolley troll mctrollenstein with severe mental issues.

Turns out the Den is less bad than I thought. Even though it did take GC to show it in comparison so if it's not damning with faint praise I don't know what is.

Quote from: vytzka;590961Turns out the Den is less bad than I thought. Even though it did take GC to show it in comparison so if it's not damning with faint praise I don't know what is.

I misspoke earlier in the thread by overgeneralizing to add some humour to the discussion.  The posters there aren't really terribly different than anywhere else, certainly not as different from here as it sometimes seems.  And they are pretty damn good about teasing out small mistakes, moderate flaws, and catastrophic rules convergences alike.

When they get on a roll, however, it's similar to reading an entire language made of shibboleths derived almost entirely from moderate to severe clanging.  

Quote from: Mr. GC;590808I know that they have even fewer good options and even less appeal even with those options.

I highly doubt you have any such knowledge. I don't think you know how RuneQuest (any edition) works, or Call of Cthulhu, or Vampire or... well, any game.

Actually, an given how the only thing that matters to you is how abstract numeric values run in simulations against other numeric values with no background, environmental modifiers or other factors added in, I would doubt you know anything about the roleplaying part of the game, at all.

QuoteBut really, what do you expect? If you're a tabletop game writer, and your 16 year old son just got a job at McDonalds last week he's probably getting paid more than you. It isn't a field that attracts talent, so of course there's no quality work.

This is a very cretinous thing to say, which comes to show how you don't have an actual clue on how human beings work. You get to sound more and more like a pedantic version of C3PO, with each post, if C3PO was obsessed with games and number crunching instead of good manners.

Specially in this Internet age where you can find projects like Wikipedia where most contributors are not paid, but you can find (apart from shit articles and flames, of course) really talented people and experts making contributions.

There is no relation between talent and salary, and pretending that shows that you are a dumbot. If you can stand reading about human beings being human, I recommend you "Drive" by Dan H. Pink, to better understand what motivates people to do stuff.

By the way, the book explains why people can get different things from a game, from charopping to emulation to other things. It's a very good read.

Quote from: StormBringer;590823Runequest?  Swine!  

What are your opinions on Openquest?

I think is pretty sweet. If RQ is too crunchy for you, OQ is the way to go. It's very ellegant and streamlined, and I definitely recommend it. Pseudoephedrine has several great articles on it on his blog, and I got to know it due to his recommendations.

I'd run RQ (either AH RQ or MRQ II, or probably RQ 6 when I get it) before OQ, but just because I already know them by heart. OQ is totally great.

Quote from: EddieValentine;590841Nah according to Frank, Mr. GC = Mr. BPD, also known as...Roy! dumdumdummmmm!

 http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=53689&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=425

See? He's just a trolley troll mctrollenstein with severe mental issues.

From the link:

QuoteI'm pretty sure that he was banned because he refused to stop spamming posts that were empty except for "Hi, Welcome" over and over again. In short, he got convinced that he was in some sort of Fantasy argument that he was going to "win" by repeatedly spamming the board with Passive Aggressive "Hi, Welcomes" (itself an apparently meaningless term that he thought would have some resonance with other people because of personal associations he apparently had plus Projection). Then when the moderator asked him to stop doing that, he began Acting Out by daring the ban hammer just by doing it even more.

:jaw-dropping:

I've seen that before... was it in the Fighter v.Wizard thread? Was it here? Correlation is not necessarily causation. But it raises some real questions!

I'm not sure what part of this is most hilarious - the part where a one post sock puppet makes accusations of sock puppetry and is immediately regarded as totally legit, the part where "OMG, some guy I don't like is actually some other guy that some other people don't like!" is taken as if it means something to you personally, or the part where people here try their own take on the armchair shrink, including such highlights as "Wikipedia is a credible source, honest."

What next, Fox News is a quality source of unbiased information?

The sun is cold?

Basket weavers don't suck at everything?

Quote from: Mr. GC;590989I'm not sure what part of this is most hilarious - the part where a one post sock puppet makes accusations of sock puppetry and is immediately regarded as totally legit, the part where "OMG, some guy I don't like is actually some other guy that some other people don't like!" is taken as if it means something to you personally, or the part where people here try their own take on the armchair shrink, including such highlights as "Wikipedia is a credible source, honest."

What next, Fox News is a quality source of unbiased information?

The sun is cold?

Basket weavers don't suck at everything?

Didn't you deny being a poster at the den? Assert that swamps don't have trees? Claim to have completely described a scenario where it was clear that you did not (on this site, at least)?

Seems that contradictions should be something you can handle, and I don't see how your calling them out contributes much.

Quote from: mcbobbo;590993Didn't you deny being a poster at the den? Assert that swamps don't have trees? Claim to have completely described a scenario where it was clear that you did not (on this site, at least)?

Seems that contradictions should be something you can handle, and I don't see how your calling them out contributes much.

I denied being a Denner. Which is true. What I actually said was that I post there but don't identify with them. Which is also true. You're starting to see why now what with them entirely unable to handle basic in game scenarios.

I denied that the swamp being discussed has trees because it doesn't (and at the same time pointed out that people were arguing to destroy their own arguments).

For the last thing I don't even know what the fuck you're talking about.

So you see, the contradictions exist only in your own mind, much like how basket weavers think they are good players.

Quote from: Bill;590810Don't bother. He does not understand.

I am starting to think this is very true.

Quote from: Mr. GC;590803If you were really paying attention, you'd know that game value comes from actual depth,

If game value(of type III D&D) comes from actual depth, why use so little of the system?

Quote from: Mr. GC;590803and that games in which everyone dies randomly by pure luck are bad.

Hmmm, this makes me start to assume things about you.
Do you not like to play at low level where random die rolls 'of pure luck' can kill you?  Is that what this means?

Quote from: Mr. GC;590808Often, when something good does come of it it's by pure accident... the D&D designers hardly imagined the emergent gameplay that resulted from their ruleset, instead they thought things like "Fighters tank herpityderp, even though we totally forgot to give them aggro mechanics and totally forgot to make them hittable on something better than a negative 10!"

Yet you think type III D&D is the shnizzle?  This system where AC and HP by level 5 is completely worthless?  Where BAB is worthless?  Where skills are worthless?  Where the only thing that truly matters is spells?

Quote from: Sommerjon;590999I am starting to think this is very true.

If game value(of type III D&D) comes from actual depth, why use so little of the system?Hmmm, this makes me start to assume things about you.
Do you not like to play at low level where random die rolls 'of pure luck' can kill you?  Is that what this means?

Yet you think type II D&D is the shnizzle?  This system where AC and HP by level 5 is completely worthless?  Where BAB is worthless?  Where skills are worthless?  Where the only thing that truly matters is spells?

You still haven't explained what those terms actually mean, so I am going to ignore them.

That said: Yes, I despise being screwed over by bad luck, as do all good players.

As for the flaws in D&D: Yes, BAB was severely overvalued. AC and HP alone are useless because you can't get enough of either of those things, and the only way to do anything, including survive attacks is spells. All of this is true by RAW.

Now, what makes you think I play RAW, especially given I've specifically said I don't and specifically said I houserule the game to fix these very problems?

And yeah sure, it's not perfect. Even with massive buffs skills still suck fairly badly but at least are not entirely useless, which in turn means non casters can't do that much besides fight.

If you want an actual array of options you still do have to be a caster as that's the only way you'll get a large amount of meaningful tricks. This is an unavoidable flaw of RPGs as a whole, not even tabletop games or D&D.

But you can make someone who both does not cast spells and does not embarrass themselves. Someone that can actually take a round or two of attacks and live.

In other words, you can make HP and AC matter, so surviving isn't Mirror Image/miss chance/Abrupt Jaunt/Wings of Cover... or GTFO.

So what happens is the level 8 melee guy has like 130 HP and an AC around 40 or so, and he doesn't need to be babysat by his party, he can handle himself. He still can't "tank" of course, as enemies will attack whoever they think is the greatest threat and even if he's spamming Wraithstrike PAs that probably is not him. But if something does attack him, he won't just fuck off and die like a non caster in a RAW game would.

And even in a RAW game, making it all spellcaster vs spellcaster actually only removes about 10% of the game by diverse content, and it's the least interesting 10%, so you're not losing that much depth wise. However it's also a solved equation, so there's little to be gained by playing it.

Quote from: Mr. GC;590997So you see, the contradictions exist only in your own mind, much like how basket weavers think they are good players.

Here's a contradiction that ought to be floating around in your own mind:

a) Basketweavers are bad players
b) You possess adequate eloquence and perseverance to argue this point across multiple Internet forums for dozens of hours, at least
c) Nobody seems convinced
d) You continue to try

Why?

Quote from: Mr. GC;590989I'm not sure what part of this is most hilarious - the part where a one post sock puppet makes accusations of sock puppetry and is immediately regarded as totally legit, the part where "OMG, some guy I don't like is actually some other guy that some other people don't like!" is taken as if it means something to you personally, or the part where people here try their own take on the armchair shrink, including such highlights as "Wikipedia is a credible source, honest."

What next, Fox News is a quality source of unbiased information?

The sun is cold?

Basket weavers don't suck at everything?

I'll tell you what is hilarious. You are.

It is hilarious to see a sad sack of shit crawl out of the woodwork to school us on how a good player plays when it is painfully obvious that you have no actual experience with anything paart 3.5. It is hilarious to see how you boast of being an Internet warrior when you are just a sad laughingstock everywhere. Everywhere. You have failed to persuade anybody, anywhere. You are a laughingstock here, you are a buffoon at the Den, and probably everyone laughs at you every time you show up at a messageboard boasting how no one gets to "your level."

And the most hilarious thing is how, in the process of trying to show how 3.5 is TEH BEST GAME EVAR you make it look like a pile of shit.The more you whine and complain about how it is rotten to the core, how core classes don't work, skills that don't work, spells and feats and... someone who reads oyur screeds can only ask himself, why bother?

You are the worst defender of D&D that ever wrote on a messageboard For fuck's sake, D&D was not my favourite fantasy RPG, and 3.x was my least favourite version of it, but you are making me more and more happy of not wasting my time with it EVER.

That is why you are hilarious. Probably you don't game as much as you pretend, and if you do, is probably an experience in misery for you and your fellow players.

And you think of yourself as someone who culls gimps How are you culling them, buffoon, making them laugh at you until they die?

Quote from: Sommerjon;590999Yet you think type II D&D is the shnizzle?  This system where AC and HP by level 5 is completely worthless?  Where BAB is worthless?  Where skills are worthless?  Where the only thing that truly matters is spells?

Seriously, he should stop defending 3.5, because he's making every other game look well by comparison.