Quote from: Mr. GC;585996http://www.wizards.com/dnd/DnDArchives_FAQ.asp



I was actually looking for the exact odds of a system shock check as I suspected around 20% any given person dies at least but wanted to confirm. Instead I found something much better. Vampire. Staked. Burn.

I still call BS on that.  What, exactly, does WIZARDS, know about AD&D?  Buying it doesn't make you Gygax.

Quote from: Bill;586219Haste is a powerful combat spell, but it ages you a year.

Most people would not want to lose a year of their life.


In my opinion, haste does not need a system shock roll.

Definitely true but in a game where you don't really care about your character aging a year is no big deal... yeah so I am now 25 not 17 have I lost any stats no well then carry on....

In early games Haste was very powerful and 'roleplay' was less critical so they looked to nerf it and the system shock was a suitable nerf.

There is no in game logic to it. some powerful effects get nerfed with a system shock roll other effects that 'logically' might be more of a shock to the system do not require a roll.

Quote from: Mr. GC;586221If that was all it was you'd just spam Haste on demi humans and never use Haste on humans and call it a day. But it isn't. It's just one more way the game tries to horribly kill you. The only reason people aren't bothered by it is because they're already dying non stop anyways so what's one more death source, and many are just pretending they won't die at all.

But really though Haste is worthless in every edition but third. Prior to third, it kills you so you don't use it. After third, it barely does anything so you don't use it.

On third you Haste yourself because casters weren't strong enough already... :rolleyes: No edition has a balanced and reasonable Haste.

Now shut up about Haste already.

I would never use a systemshock roll for Haste, so its not a problem.
And...demihumans like their long lifespans.

Every group I have played dnd with in 1e/2e/3e/pathfinder uses haste.

Quote from: jibbajibba;586223Definitely true but in a game where you don't really care about your character aging a year is no big deal... yeah so I am now 25 not 17 have I lost any stats no well then carry on....

In early games Haste was very powerful and 'roleplay' was less critical so they looked to nerf it and the system shock was a suitable nerf.

There is no in game logic to it. some powerful effects get nerfed with a system shock roll other effects that 'logically' might be more of a shock to the system do not require a roll.

Well, players that do not roleplay in my games tend to die.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;586009If I estimate a 50% chance of a total party kill and know the fighters of the party each have a 5% of dying when I cast Haste, and believe that giving them extra attacks has a good chance of taking out the thing about to wipe out the party, you bet I will cast Haste.

Particularly if the aging happens at the end of the spell, rather than the beginning. (And I honestly don't know, but that's how I would play it.)  Especially if resurrection is available.

Quote from: Lord Mistborn;586191What edition are you talking about again. The 3.5 version creates a magical sensor like Scrying. Those sensors can only be found via Intelgence check and they can only be destroyed via Dispel Magic. What are you supposed to send to scout a rogue.

It only lasts 1 min/level.  How do you get all that scouting done in so short at time?  It specially says you can only view 100 feet per level.

Per the example, it would cost five of those levels just to get to the tower, unless you weren't looking at what was in between here and there.

It doesn't seem plausible that you'd learn this much information from this spell alone.

Plus, it's fourth level.  That's a pretty large investment.

Quote from: Mr. GC;586221It's just one more way the game tries to horribly kill you. The only reason people aren't bothered by it is because they're already dying non stop anyways so what's one more death source, and many are just pretending they won't die at all.

Right, because those monsters aren't also trying to kill you.

Quote from: The Butcher;585190And good riddance, I say.

Now how do we flush them out of WoW? I really hope someday I'll find a group that's not in a maddening hurry to clear every dungeon. I want to enjoy the scenery and poke around.

That's one of the things I hate about MMOs. Even Secret World, which FUCKING REWARDS YOU for poking around and discovering things always ends up with a group that wants to run it as if they're in a race, and always there's one or two people who are setting the pace by running ahead as fast as they can and aggroing everything in sight as quickly as possible.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;586211This depends on the level of metgaming going on in one's group.

In my groups this sort of stuff we be dscussed by the party well before combat. "look i have a spell that might give us an edge by increasing everyone's speed, but it carries the risk of death. If everyone assents I can prepare it and cast it at on an agreed upon signal should it look like the battle isn't going our way"

That is if i am playing a character with a solid moral compass. A selfish bastard of a character might just cast haste or teleport to save his hide and not ask permission. In which case, you get the "what the fuck" scenario. But keep in mind, my group is role pay heavy. They expect me to play my character even if i puts me in skme conflict with them. The response wouldn't be "what the fuck brendan" but "what the fuck Pendrogast"

Yes, this exactly. We play the same way here.

Quote from: Mr. GC;586003It's called deductive reasoning.

...by some.  Carried too far, others call it 'metagaming'.

Quote from: Mr. GC;586003When the enemy is described as "turns nature against you" any experienced player automatically deduces "Druid" (the alternative, Ranger, is completely ignorable in 3.x and when the question that prompts this answer is something along the lines of what threats exist there, listing a Ranger as one is outright dishonest).

Why did you assume it was a humanoid?  What about a dryad, treant, etc?  Could be a swarm.  Or even a custom monster.

Assume too much at my table, and I'll change it on you, under your feet.

Dick move?  Yeah, maybe, but let's assume like-for-like and move on with the game.

Quote from: Mr. GC;586003Likewise, just knowing "a dragon" is there tells you much of what dragons do, and how to deal with that.

Your games assume every PC has a bestiary in his backpack.  Why is this?

Besides, 'dragon' means a lot of things.  From 'drake' to 'dinosaur', depending on the source.  And were it an actual dragon it could range from black to gold to Imperial.  You might not (gasp) even be expected to kill it.

Quote from: Mr. GC;586003Anything that even vaguely suggests psychic and out comes the anti mind affecting.

Many D&D games don't even include psychic features.  It was a bolt-on/add-on to each edition I've owned.  Not sure about 1st or 4th...

Quote from: Mr. GC;586003Something they've fought before and they know has insane melee attacks but no ranged ability = melee machine.

FFS, if you've fought it before then why are you scrying it?  "Yes, Jim, that's still Bill the Barbarian over there, he's still in your party, waiting for you to get done scrying.  Would you like to scry the tavern wench next, or can we get on with the adventure?"

Quote from: Mr. GC;586003Really, the divinations told them very little. It's just once you have that, you can easily extrapolate. You can easily predict and counter common tactics... and while they might do something uncommon, it might not work, etc you will still get further than you would otherwise by far.

If the party can predict and counter, why can't the GM?  Or rather, may you some day play under a GM that can...

You seem to be making an argument for the argument's sake alone.  It doesn't seem to stand up to scrutiny very well.  Maybe this is why people seem to be 'dodging' it from your point of view.

Quote from: Mr. GC;586003The bad party could at most determine there was a dragon there but they couldn't actually do anything about it as even if they attacked while the dragon was gone they still lose horribly to the everything else. The only reason the first clue there's a psychic there is when the party starts murdering each other/the first clue there's melee machines about is when people start dying in one round in close combat/the first clue there's a shadow demon about is when he starts trolling the party to death is not a problem is because the party will likely die to the mooks before accomplishing any of their objectives and before encountering any of these.

Honestly, your bad party example sounds like a lot more fun to play than to spend thirty minutes of my real life time waiting for the cleric to get done stealing the limelight.

"LOL!  You got killed by a KOBOLD!  I told you Wizards shouldn't melee, dude.  Next time buy that crossbow.  This res is coming out of your share of the treasure..."

Quote from: Bill;586225Well, players that do not roleplay in my games tend to die.

Not uncommon to discourage players who's game style you don't like through GM fiat.

I tend to try and create an environment where roleplay is the norm and encourage them to participate but horses for courses.

Quote from: Mr. GC;586210The default stance of these boards is:

If you don't know about older editions we don't give a fuck about you and will dismiss you out of hand even if not actually discussing those games at this time.
Only actual play matters, anything else is an OCD autist circle jerk.

Some posters feel this way. I dont personally care if peope know about older editions or not. I questioned whether you had played because we have had a number of people posting criticisms of 1E and 2E but who have stated they are not familiar with the rules and haven't played. I jumped the gun on asking that in this case, and I admit as much.

Regarding autism or aspergers insults I have consistently said I dislike them. I dont think most peopple who throw the words around are trying to be malicious but I believe for people living with autism or who have autistic family members that kind of name calling is hurtful.

OCD as an insult doesn't bother me quite as much, because I have it myself and was diagnosed at an early age. To me it isn't a big deal and I can see the humor in stuff like monk.

You don't tug on Superman's cape.

You don't spit into the wind.

You don't pull the mask off the old Lone Ranger
and you don't win at D&D....


Thats right

Yeah Mr. GC got his hat, find out where it's at and it's not hustlin' people strange to you. Even if you do got a big leatherbound book of RAW.

Quote from: jibbajibba;586233Not uncommon to discourage players who's game style you don't like through GM fiat.

I tend to try and create an environment where roleplay is the norm and encourage them to participate but horses for courses.

I encourage roleplay. It's when a player does not roleplay, and metagames excessively that I kill them off. Not immediately; I am quite forgiving.

Quote from: Bill;586237I encourage roleplay. It's when a player does not roleplay, and metagames excessively that I kill them off. Not immediately; I am quite forgiving.

Damn. You kill PLAYERS! Thats fucking hardcore man. :rotfl: