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.
The message boards have been upgraded. Please log in to your existing account by clicking here. It will ask twice, so that it can properly update your password and login information. If it has trouble recognizing your password, click the 'Forgot your password?' link to reset it with a new password sent to your email address on file.

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - HappyDaze

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 212
1
I just looked through the copies of D&D that I have on hand, and none of them describe Detect Evil as detecting evil alignment. Only one of the games even has Evil as an alignment (Blueholme).

Old School Essentials:
"Objects enchanted for evil purposes or living beings with evil intentions are caused to magically glow."

Blueholme Journeymanne Rules:
"The caster can sense the presence of evil objects, as well as evil intentions or thoughts of any creature within range of the spell. The spell also gives some idea of the degree of evil, and possibly whether the source is lawful or chaotic."

ODND:
"A spell to detect evil thought or intent in any creature or evilly enchanted object. Note that poison, for example, is neither good nor evil. Duration: 2 turns. Range: 6”."


Does noone read spell descriptions anymore? Or is everyone playing different games than myself? All this hand-wringing over such a straightforward spell that actually has very little to do with alignment is silly.
I'm certainly not playing the same games as you.

2
The RPGPundit's Own Forum / Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
« on: April 09, 2021, 05:50:11 PM »
You fucking sheep amuse me.
Everybody's got their kinks, but voyeuristic bestiality is exactly what I imagined would amuse Brad.

I vaguely remember Brad being less stupid than this, what happened
The issue is likely your memory; Brad has always been this stupid.

3
Pretty much. The illithid feeding requirements from Lords of Madness specify one fresh brain a month minimum, ideally one fresh brain a week. How illithids  sustain any population is beyond me, particularly as they live underground and hidden. They'd make more sense as solitary predators.

2e's Illithiad goes into alot of detail about how the mind flayers pull all this off. They've had a lot of time to get very good at this too.
That was a fun book. Don't see too many products like that now, at least not from WotC.

4
Overwhelmingly, both scientists and governments agree that covid-19 has more lethal power than a nasty cold, and that vaccination against it is a good idea.

More lethal power than a nasty cold for who?

If you are 80 years old.
I am aware of at least seven healthcare workers that I have worked alongside that have died in the last year from Covid. The youngest was 36, the oldest 61. These are people that I knew by name and interacted with, not just names on a list. In the case of three of them, I have met their families as well. I am only aware of one similar death in the last 10 years from the flu (back in 2016), and none from a cold in that time.

5
Pen and Paper Roleplaying Games (RPGs) Discussion / Re: Detect Evil
« on: April 09, 2021, 05:52:31 AM »
If your world has a well-defined pantheon then each god could grant a version of "detect evil" that works against "enemy" gods. The first sentence is really just a simplified version of this.
That could almost be a parody of sadly common real-life thinking where it would simply be called detect them (i.e., anyone that is no one of us).

Age of Sigmar (and its Soulbound RPG) somewhat has this where the gods of Order, Chaos, Death, and Destruction form the primary divide among the factions. That doesn't make Order good--it includes a crazy-ass cult of murderous she-elves and bands of god-hating, soul-stealing sea elves right alongside the righteous hold crusaders of the setting.

6
Pen and Paper Roleplaying Games (RPGs) Discussion / Re: Detect Evil
« on: April 08, 2021, 08:22:36 PM »
There's a pretty big difference in disagreeing with the morality of a world law that defines morality. One that disagrees with the morality of aging still ages and one that disagrees with the morality of gravity is still at risk of falling. Is one that disagrees with the morality of a world law of absolute good/evil still bound by it? In the fantasy world of absolute good/evil, I say they are. The Sith is still evil even if he claims the Jedi are the bad guys because that's the world law of the setting.
That's what you seem to be missing -- yes, if good and evil are objectively defined in a world, you're bound by it. If you ping as evil, then smite evil will burn. You'll show up on thoughtcrimeI mean detect evil maps. You might be ignored by certain creatures, subject to certain afflictions, and so on.

That doesn't mean people have to agree that the classification is just. That it exists doesn't mean it's right.
I would say that in that world, it does make it right (and those in that world that don't agree are therefore wrong). Like I said before though, it's a very fantastical take that requires divergence from how good and evil are (hopefully) viewed IRL.

7
The RPGPundit's Own Forum / Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
« on: April 08, 2021, 07:30:25 PM »
You fucking sheep amuse me.
Everybody's got their kinks, but voyeuristic bestiality is exactly what I imagined would amuse Brad.

8
Pen and Paper Roleplaying Games (RPGs) Discussion / Re: Detect Evil
« on: April 08, 2021, 07:17:40 PM »
Let us rehash this old chestnut.

How do you run Detect Evil in your campaign? Does it only detect innate evil? Can it ever be mistaken? Is it used as a justification for slapping some sod in the head?
Are people on the ball about having a spell cast on them, and consider it an invasion of privacy?

I never liked the idea that a pretty low level spell could divine someone's nature, and potentially short circuit a mystery. The Ravenloft setting just threw up their hands and said 'It don't work! Stop that!" Even so, if it does work, is someone justified in killing someone because a magic spell caused a red buzzer to sound off over their heads? Or merely imprisoning them because they're generically "evil"? Does any kind of due process enter the picture? What's to stop a cleric from saying that they detected evil in order to get at someone they don't like?

In looking up how 5th edition does it, I note the latest version only detects supernatural evil. That's a bit more my style.
If detect evil works without fail (no false positives) then nobody that wasn't evil would view it as an invasion of privacy.
i would. It's still thoughtcrime, and that's even without considering there's no universal definition of good and evil, so even if good and evil are objectively detectable, you can still challenge the definition being used.

Agree about the degree of social impact.
If detect evil works without fail, it creates the universal definition.
Only in the most trite and literal sense. The morality of that definition will always remain up for debate.
Not to someone within that world. To do so would be to apply real world workings to a fantasy world. That's why I said it would be a world radically different from ours more than one in which people shit out fireballs.
Completely disagree. You'd still have iconoclasts and heretics who disagree with the justice and correctness of the metaphysical laws. The existence of a natural law of morality doesn't magically mean everyone is going to agree with it.

Though the degree to which there would be disagreement would be heavily based on culture. If the culture was stifling and uniform, which seems fairly likely given how often that's cropped up in human history based on purely subjective assessments, the amount and degree of dissent would probably be fairly minor. If they somehow passed through their own Enlightenment, it would be far more significant. Though it's a lot more likely the world would be hidebound and intolerant to a degree that makes the medieval Catholic church seem like libertines.
If you're familiar with Torg, then the idea here is akin to the "world laws" each cosm (alt reality) has that dictate how various things simply do not work the same way that they do in Core Earth (the not-quite-the-real-world-but close-enough base setting).
And you can disagree with the morality of world laws. Gravity's the classic world law, but it's a little too abstract for this purpose. But all kinds of people think aging is terribly unfair and unjust, while others try to rationalize it, and others just try to deal with it. Same would be true if certain things pinged evil and others pinged good.
There's a pretty big difference in disagreeing with the morality of a world law that defines morality. One that disagrees with the morality of aging still ages and one that disagrees with the morality of gravity is still at risk of falling. Is one that disagrees with the morality of a world law of absolute good/evil still bound by it? In the fantasy world of absolute good/evil, I say they are. The Sith is still evil even if he claims the Jedi are the bad guys because that's the world law of the setting.

9
White Wolf games were always like that. I have heard more dumb stories out of that shop than anywhere else on the planet.

Nobody wants to think about how or who Kevin Siembieda fucks.
But he never releases too soon.

10
Pen and Paper Roleplaying Games (RPGs) Discussion / Re: Detect Evil
« on: April 08, 2021, 07:09:21 PM »
Let us rehash this old chestnut.

How do you run Detect Evil in your campaign? Does it only detect innate evil? Can it ever be mistaken? Is it used as a justification for slapping some sod in the head?
Are people on the ball about having a spell cast on them, and consider it an invasion of privacy?

I never liked the idea that a pretty low level spell could divine someone's nature, and potentially short circuit a mystery. The Ravenloft setting just threw up their hands and said 'It don't work! Stop that!" Even so, if it does work, is someone justified in killing someone because a magic spell caused a red buzzer to sound off over their heads? Or merely imprisoning them because they're generically "evil"? Does any kind of due process enter the picture? What's to stop a cleric from saying that they detected evil in order to get at someone they don't like?

In looking up how 5th edition does it, I note the latest version only detects supernatural evil. That's a bit more my style.
If detect evil works without fail (no false positives) then nobody that wasn't evil would view it as an invasion of privacy.
i would. It's still thoughtcrime, and that's even without considering there's no universal definition of good and evil, so even if good and evil are objectively detectable, you can still challenge the definition being used.

Agree about the degree of social impact.
If detect evil works without fail, it creates the universal definition.
Only in the most trite and literal sense. The morality of that definition will always remain up for debate.
Not to someone within that world. To do so would be to apply real world workings to a fantasy world. That's why I said it would be a world radically different from ours more than one in which people shit out fireballs.
Completely disagree. You'd still have iconoclasts and heretics who disagree with the justice and correctness of the metaphysical laws. The existence of a natural law of morality doesn't magically mean everyone is going to agree with it.

Though the degree to which there would be disagreement would be heavily based on culture. If the culture was stifling and uniform, which seems fairly likely given how often that's cropped up in human history based on purely subjective assessments, the amount and degree of dissent would probably be fairly minor. If they somehow passed through their own Enlightenment, it would be far more significant. Though it's a lot more likely the world would be hidebound and intolerant to a degree that makes the medieval Catholic church seem like libertines.
If you're familiar with Torg, then the idea here is akin to the "world laws" each cosm (alt reality) has that dictate how various things simply do not work the same way that they do in Core Earth (the not-quite-the-real-world-but close-enough base setting).

And you're right that having a natural law of morality doesn't mean that everyone will agree with it...but it does mean that those that oppose it are objectively evil within the world laws of that world.

11
Pen and Paper Roleplaying Games (RPGs) Discussion / Re: Detect Evil
« on: April 08, 2021, 05:14:06 PM »
Let us rehash this old chestnut.

How do you run Detect Evil in your campaign? Does it only detect innate evil? Can it ever be mistaken? Is it used as a justification for slapping some sod in the head?
Are people on the ball about having a spell cast on them, and consider it an invasion of privacy?

I never liked the idea that a pretty low level spell could divine someone's nature, and potentially short circuit a mystery. The Ravenloft setting just threw up their hands and said 'It don't work! Stop that!" Even so, if it does work, is someone justified in killing someone because a magic spell caused a red buzzer to sound off over their heads? Or merely imprisoning them because they're generically "evil"? Does any kind of due process enter the picture? What's to stop a cleric from saying that they detected evil in order to get at someone they don't like?

In looking up how 5th edition does it, I note the latest version only detects supernatural evil. That's a bit more my style.
If detect evil works without fail (no false positives) then nobody that wasn't evil would view it as an invasion of privacy.
i would. It's still thoughtcrime, and that's even without considering there's no universal definition of good and evil, so even if good and evil are objectively detectable, you can still challenge the definition being used.

Agree about the degree of social impact.
If detect evil works without fail, it creates the universal definition.
Only in the most trite and literal sense. The morality of that definition will always remain up for debate.
Not to someone within that world. To do so would be to apply real world workings to a fantasy world. That's why I said it would be a world radically different from ours more than one in which people shit out fireballs.

12
Still, taking a company or battalion in to storm a dungeon doesn't feel like the way I want to play regularly.
My players usually opted for taking six guards with them into dungeons. Just enough to boost them with things like Inspiring Leader and still have a blocking wall to control monster movement to a fair degree.

13
Pen and Paper Roleplaying Games (RPGs) Discussion / Re: Detect Evil
« on: April 08, 2021, 06:06:38 AM »
Let us rehash this old chestnut.

How do you run Detect Evil in your campaign? Does it only detect innate evil? Can it ever be mistaken? Is it used as a justification for slapping some sod in the head?
Are people on the ball about having a spell cast on them, and consider it an invasion of privacy?

I never liked the idea that a pretty low level spell could divine someone's nature, and potentially short circuit a mystery. The Ravenloft setting just threw up their hands and said 'It don't work! Stop that!" Even so, if it does work, is someone justified in killing someone because a magic spell caused a red buzzer to sound off over their heads? Or merely imprisoning them because they're generically "evil"? Does any kind of due process enter the picture? What's to stop a cleric from saying that they detected evil in order to get at someone they don't like?

In looking up how 5th edition does it, I note the latest version only detects supernatural evil. That's a bit more my style.
If detect evil works without fail (no false positives) then nobody that wasn't evil would view it as an invasion of privacy.
i would. It's still thoughtcrime, and that's even without considering there's no universal definition of good and evil, so even if good and evil are objectively detectable, you can still challenge the definition being used.

Agree about the degree of social impact.
If detect evil works without fail, it creates the universal definition.

14
My google fu is terrible or else the "mainstream media" aren't admitting it...but Project Veritas just got the NYT to admit in court that they are opinion and not verifiable fact.  The video I'm watching had an opinion piece from the Washington Examiner which I imagine is not up to snuff for the resident dipshits.
It was a repudiation of what some like to call the 'clown nose' technique pioneered by Jon Stewart, among others. 'Oh, we're just voicing our opinions, not delivering a blatantly slanted report on something we don't like!'.

Ruling can be found here: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20518694-order_denying_motion_to_dismiss

It's one thing to deliver opinions and editorials. But the NYT article was very much in their news section, and trying to hide behind 'opinion' was just pathetic.
It would have been even more pathetic if they had declared that no reasonable person would have believed it as their defense.

15
Really?

medicalkidnap.com?

Really?

If you can't tell that is a fake news site filled with conspiracy nutter bullshit, you're definitely past help.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 212