Quote from: Sommerjon;595782I'm not the one making all of the claims, am I?

Claims and talk. You make claims, you talk and nothing else.   When asked to show you merely point to your 'Team Gimp vs Standard Adventuring Day' thread and want someone to come play with you.  Like it is somehow hard for you to target one character "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."  Your kobayashi maru is juvenilely obvious to everyone here.

The only way to win against GCs scenarios is not to play.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;595786I think Mr. GC just jumped the shark.

That happened quite a while ago.

We already have the allocated GC gimp thread - it's in the design & development forum.

There can be only one.

Quote from: Sommerjon;595782I'm not the one making all of the claims, am I?

Claims and talk. You make claims, you talk and nothing else.   When asked to show you merely point to your 'Team Gimp vs Standard Adventuring Day' thread and want someone to come play with you.  Like it is somehow hard for you to target one character "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."  Your kobayashi maru is juvenilely obvious to everyone here.

So what you are saying is that a gimp party cannot survive basic intelligent play, namely focus fire?

Good, I'm glad you tapped the fuck out.

Quote from: Mr. GC;595750Likewise, I did not say infinite saves. I said high enough saves to pass on a 2. That is a high, but finite number.

Yes. We get it. You are really, really bad at math. You've set up an infinite sequence and you are incapable of understanding that. We've been over this before.

QuoteHow's about you show me the level 10 characters with an AC in excess of 35, that can still do relevant damage?

Oh, good. Another entry on the Stupid Shit Mr. GC Has Said About D&D. Today we have "every CR 10 monster has a minimum +34 attack bonus for every single attack in its full attack". (That's the number required to get -1 from PA and yet still hit AC 35 95% of the time.)

Let's check the Monster Manual...

Huh. It turns out this isn't even remotely true. The absolute highest attack bonus to be found from a CR 10 creature is +21, and even that creature finishes off its full attack with a +16 attack bonus.

You're full of shit again, Mr. GC. I'm shocked. Anybody else shocked?

Maybe you're talking about some mythical by-the-book NPC opponent that somehow gets a +34 bonus to hit (despite having a maximum BAB of +10) without benefiting from any situational bonuses? Sure. Okay. I'll bite. Go ahead and post that by-the-book CR 10 NPC build.

I'm guessing we'll see that right around the same time that we see your PC build with the infinite save bonus and AC 11.

Quote from: Mr. GC;595766As for the saves thing, another important factor to consider is that on average in standard D&D encounters are one level higher than the party.

For those who are curious: CR 11 creatures don't have +34 attack bonuses, either.

But this is yet another entry on the Stupid Shit Mr. GC Has Said About D&D list. The actual "standard" for encounter difficulty can be found on pg. 49 of the 3.5 DMG. If you run the math, you'll discover that at least 60% of encounters will have an EL equal to or lower than the party's level.

Even if every single encounter in the game featured solo encounters with CR = EL creatures, Mr. GC would be wrong. Again.

Here's the best part, though. Let's look at the table and pick exclusively overpowering encounters of EL +5 over the party's average level. According to the DMG, these should make up only 5% of all encounters. But let's pretend that these actually make up 100% of all encounters. And 100% of these encounters are against solo creatures.

This would mean that every single encounter in Mr. GC's 10th level game would feature solo encounters with CR 15 creatures. Does this allow us to find the mythical opponent who has a +34 on every single attack in its full attack sequence?

Nope.

If we bump this up to CR 16, we finally find one such opponent: A greater stone golem. Everything else, however, tops out with a maximum attack bonus of +25.

Conclusion: This guy is a moron who has never played D&D.

I just have to say, this thread is awesomely entertaining.

Anyway, I agree with Mr. GC's logic.  It seems a lot of you guys are getting frustrated with him because he's shedding light on an oft-avoided essential truth of D&D.  That is, if your character is born broken and doesn't have optimized statblocks, you can't really succeed in D&D as a game.  I'm talking balanced encounters, adherence to the rules as written gaminess.

Now if your "game" is basically a freeform campfire tale with a set of rules to be consulted whenever it is convenient, then sure, your 4th Level Half-Kobold Shoeshiner can go through the motions and stumble towards the finish line.  But it isn't really a game.  

So Mr. GC isn't interested in playing storytime, not a big deal.  But the fact that so many are getting so frustrated with him seems to indicate that "basket-weavers" actually think they are succeeding on their own merits.  Which I seriously doubt.

That being said, Mr. GC, your argument that optimizing your adventurer makes the most roleplaying sense...that only applies if in fact you're starting the game as an "adventurer".

What if the conceit of the game is that you're a former prisoner, exiled to a strange land and must find your way home?  These kinds of scenarios aren't that rare, and they lend themselves to being populated by characters that aren't built for heroism.

What's the over under on the amount of time it takes before a mod does an IP check?

Quote from: Sacrosanct;595854What's the over under on the amount of time it takes before a mod does an IP check?

Any truth GC sheds or does not shed is limited to 3.5e alone as that's the only edition he's ever actually looked at more then once.

There is no essential truth of "D&D", there's
Chainmail
0D&D
BD&D - 3 kinds - Holmes, Mentzer and Moldvay
1e
2e
2e w/powerz!
3e
3.5e
4e

Every single one of them with different rules that do not exist in other editions.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;595851Yes. We get it. You are really, really bad at math. You've set up an infinite sequence and you are incapable of understanding that. We've been over this before.



Oh, good. Another entry on the Stupid Shit Mr. GC Has Said About D&D. Today we have "every CR 10 monster has a minimum +34 attack bonus for every single attack in its full attack". (That's the number required to get -1 from PA and yet still hit AC 35 95% of the time.)

Let's check the Monster Manual...

Huh. It turns out this isn't even remotely true. The absolute highest attack bonus to be found from a CR 10 creature is +21, and even that creature finishes off its full attack with a +16 attack bonus.

You're full of shit again, Mr. GC. I'm shocked. Anybody else shocked?

Oh hey look, more BAB and Str only bullshit! Why am I unsurprised? Oh right, I called it. Be easier to outpredict.

QuoteFor those who are curious: CR 11 creatures don't have +34 attack bonuses, either.

But this is yet another entry on the Stupid Shit Mr. GC Has Said About D&D list. The actual "standard" for encounter difficulty can be found on pg. 49 of the 3.5 DMG. If you run the math, you'll discover that at least 60% of encounters will have an EL equal to or lower than the party's level.

The same chart tells you that by distribution, the average encounter is one level higher than the party. Regardless, as even the equal level stuff blasts out 30s, it hardly matters.

QuoteHere's the best part, though. Let's look at the table and pick exclusively overpowering encounters of EL +5 over the party's average level. According to the DMG, these should make up only 5% of all encounters. But let's pretend that these actually make up 100% of all encounters. And 100% of these encounters are against solo creatures.

This would mean that every single encounter in Mr. GC's 10th level game would feature solo encounters with CR 15 creatures. Does this allow us to find the mythical opponent who has a +34 on every single attack in its full attack sequence?

Nope.

Because by level 15 they're rocking high 40s. Meanwhile you at 15 have high 20s, possibly low 30s if you really try.

So yeah, more herpaderp from people that don't understand D&D.

Also, lol at the notion that anyone who doesn't entirely disagree with me is me. Sure I label you basket weaver fucks in the same group but aside from S&S which are joined dick to ass I at least recognize you are different people.

Quote from: Internet Death;595852I just have to say, this thread is awesomely entertaining.

Anyway, I agree with Mr. GC's logic.  It seems a lot of you guys are getting frustrated with him because he's shedding light on an oft-avoided essential truth of D&D.  That is, if your character is born broken and doesn't have optimized statblocks, you can't really succeed in D&D as a game.  I'm talking balanced encounters, adherence to the rules as written gaminess.

Now if your "game" is basically a freeform campfire tale with a set of rules to be consulted whenever it is convenient, then sure, your 4th Level Half-Kobold Shoeshiner can go through the motions and stumble towards the finish line.  But it isn't really a game.  

So Mr. GC isn't interested in playing storytime, not a big deal.  But the fact that so many are getting so frustrated with him seems to indicate that "basket-weavers" actually think they are succeeding on their own merits.  Which I seriously doubt.

That being said, Mr. GC, your argument that optimizing your adventurer makes the most roleplaying sense...that only applies if in fact you're starting the game as an "adventurer".

What if the conceit of the game is that you're a former prisoner, exiled to a strange land and must find your way home?  These kinds of scenarios aren't that rare, and they lend themselves to being populated by characters that aren't built for heroism.

The problem with that is that you either learn very quickly, or you leave the game somehow. In other words you step it up or step on out. Because this is a game about adventuring, meaning that if you are running away from the dangerous creatures you're for all intents and purposes an NPC.

And they do believe they are succeeding on their own merits. That's why they're reacting so strongly, because it's easier to nerdrage than to own up to their own failings.

Quote from: Mr. GC;595871Oh hey look, more BAB and Str only bullshit! Why am I unsurprised? Oh right, I called it. Be easier to outpredict.

I was going to post a list of all the CR 10 creatures and their attack bonuses, but I got too busy at work. But I'll take Justin Alexander's word about the attack bonuses - that's pretty much in line with what I think they should be.  

So, how do you propose to get a Greater Stone Golem to a +34?  Considering that it is not an intelligent opponent and immune to magic, I'm having trouble.  

....

Here's the thing.  Your point is generally true, but if you're not using 'standard monsters' then you're moving beyond 'standard play'.  Your observations of standard play become suspect if that's not what you're playing.  

Again, I think your point stands - Team Monster has some massive advantages, and characters that aren't at least somewhat well built won't last long if the DM doesn't pull punches.  I think there's plenty of room to make that point without exaggeration.

Quote from: Mr. GC;595871Oh hey look, more BAB and Str only bullshit! Why am I unsurprised? Oh right, I called it. Be easier to outpredict..

Noticeably absent in this is an example of a CR10 creature with anything approaching a +35 BAB.  Usually when people make a claim, they provide some examples.

So please give me 10 examples of CR10 creatures having anything close to a +35 BAB (+/- 2 if you like).  Certainly a level 10 party would fight more than 10 different types of equal creatures.  So can you list some?

Quote from: Mr. GC;595843So what you are saying is that a gimp party cannot survive basic intelligent play, namely focus fire?

Good, I'm glad you tapped the fuck out.

You build any PC you want and I can easily do the same.  You haven't shown anything ground-breaking.  Why do you think no one has taken you up on the offer?

Quote from: Internet Death;595852I just have to say, this thread is awesomely entertaining.

Anyway, I agree with Mr. GC's logic.  It seems a lot of you guys are getting frustrated with him because he's shedding light on an oft-avoided essential truth of D&D.  That is, if your character is born broken and doesn't have optimized statblocks, you can't really succeed in D&D as a game.  I'm talking balanced encounters, adherence to the rules as written gaminess.

No.

He ignores whole swathes of the game, changes or ignores RAW then declares  the results as the Onetrueway.

He makes lots of claims, when asked to show how, he does the "you show your work and I'll tell you where you're wrong" routine.(which is par for the course for this forum)

I told you. You ignored me.

We won't have every thread GC enters as a back and forth about his obsession. Especially not when it hijacks another thread.

Closed.

If you actually want to talk about fudging, knock yourself out in a proper thread.