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.
NOTICE: Some online security services are reporting that information for a limited number of users from this site is for sale on the "dark web." As of right now, there is no direct evidence of this, but change your password just to be safe.

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
11
Greetings!

The Guardian is in the same group of cock-sucking Marxists that the NYT and CNN. I don't trust a thing the Guardian says. Overall, I have found Project Veritas to be far more accurate and truthful than the aforementioned Liberal media sources.

Are the Liberal, cock-sucking Marxist media going to attempt to lie, smear, and disparage organizations like Project Veritas?

Yes, of course. They collectively hate organizations like Project Veritas because Veritas exposes their lying, their deception, and fucking corruption, and then broadcasts it out to the public, for all to see what fraudulent, corrupt bastards they are.

I love it when the Liberal cunt media gets fucked! It's always a great day whenever that occurs. ;D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

They aren't cunts. They lack both warmth and depth.
12
The RPGPundit's Own Forum / Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
« Last post by yancy on April 22, 2021, 09:41:07 PM »
We're all replying to ourselves.

Don't you fuckin' mouth off to me.
13
Reviews / Re: The Stygian Library - New vs Old Comparison and Review
« Last post by maderschramm on April 22, 2021, 09:36:21 PM »
Thanks for reading, Vidgrip!

I downloaded the latest from DTRPG for you; it has no hyperlinking within.  It's just the text.
14
The RPGPundit's Own Forum / Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Last post by Brad on April 22, 2021, 09:35:56 PM »
Another issue worth mentioning is that, while the usefulness of most cheap masks for preventing the wearer from contracting airborne viral illnesses is probably modest to nil, the evidence is clear that they are more useful at preventing the wearer from spreading disease to others. So, if you are a complete sociopath you might question whether or not you need to wear one, but otherwise it is obvious you should. It's a little like imagining that you could only wear a car seatbelt if someone else puts it on you (kinky...?).
Or maybe if you’re that worried about it you should stay the fuck home. What a novel concept!
15
Yeah, there's a lot of overlap between skills and "ability scores", and a great deal about this line of discussion is really all about "where do we draw the line?" Were does 100% RAW innate talent ends and training start? And to what extend could someone with seemingly low "raw" talent realistically develop high levels of ability with training and conditioning alone?

Over time I've come to think of attributes, stats, "ability scores" or "whatever they're called in any given game" more as "core abilities", or the central base from which more specialized "skills" spring from.

However, arguably some degree if "innate" ability does seem to be exist in real life. Question is: to what extend? And how does that fit in the game? To what degree are ability scores innate or a measure of general training and conditioning? Do we even need to draw the line, or just treat it all as potentially trainable?

Regardless of how much innate ability exists in real life, it isn't a part of RPG mechanics. In nearly every RPG that I can think of, character advancement doesn't follow from realistic training times and limits. Even the few that do have skill training times (like classic Traveller), they aren't trying for realism.

If a GM really wants to simulate their view of Nature versus Nurture, that seems like something for house rules or just GM-declared limits.

That doesn't necessarily follow.  One can try to model the effect of a thing realistically without also realistically modelling how it changes.
16
The RPGPundit's Own Forum / Re: Here's your Mask Protocol
« Last post by GeekyBugle on April 22, 2021, 09:31:52 PM »

Air flows into the cabin vertically — it enters from overhead vents and is sent downward in a circular motion, exiting at floor level. Once air leaves the cabin, about half is dumped outside, and the rest is sent through HEPA (high-efficiency particulate air) filters, similar to those used in hospitals, before being mixed with fresh outside air and entering the cabin again.

Studies before Covid showed air at an airplane seat is incredible pure, relative to almost any other place you will find yourself around other people. It's one of the only places you can go where your seat's air is constantly on and continually filtered for you. You are not in an "enclosed space" in terms of the air, nor are you "breathing the same recirculated air" as it's continually refreshed.
And each person effectively gets their own ventilation system, because each seat has its own airflow directed at them. That's why it really stands out to me -- like GeekyBugle, my initial reaction was that airlines would be hotbeds of disease. But the evidence was really clear, and once you think about it a little further, it does make sense.

So, assuming you're both correct...

What's the pretext to perpetuate the use of masks outside? Are you telling me I'm at more risk at a park than on an airplane?

And it begs the question, what's the reason then for the ban on smoking on airplanes? Those wornderful filters can filter viruses but not the smoke of cigarretes?
18
Yeah, there's a lot of overlap between skills and "ability scores", and a great deal about this line of discussion is really all about "where do we draw the line?" Were does 100% RAW innate talent ends and training start? And to what extend could someone with seemingly low "raw" talent realistically develop high levels of ability with training and conditioning alone?

Over time I've come to think of attributes, stats, "ability scores" or "whatever they're called in any given game" more as "core abilities", or the central base from which more specialized "skills" spring from.

However, arguably some degree if "innate" ability does seem to be exist in real life. Question is: to what extend? And how does that fit in the game? To what degree are ability scores innate or a measure of general training and conditioning? Do we even need to draw the line, or just treat it all as potentially trainable?

Regardless of how much innate ability exists in real life, it isn't a part of RPG mechanics. In nearly every RPG that I can think of, character advancement doesn't follow from realistic training times and limits. Even the few that do have skill training times (like classic Traveller), they aren't trying for realism.

If a GM really wants to simulate their view of Nature versus Nurture, that seems like something for house rules or just GM-declared limits.
19
Okay! Managed to archive the article, link will be below, WP recorded the woman, posted reporters to follow her, yet they provide ZERO evidence of their claims that she entered Project Veritas building...

And, even if she had, she was trying to sell a story to a newspaper, so, without evidence to back their insinuation that she works for PV we must believe the WP that she didn't went there to try and sell the story to PV...

Nah, that shit doesn't fly.

https://archive.is/ci0pb
20
Everything she does a person with enough time and focus who starts at an average baseline of athletic ability could do, even with regard to flexibility, she is not an outlier among females who have dedicated serious time to pursuing flexibility.   The "talent" is hard to measure in the things she displays.  I know numerous women and several men who can do a split past parallel between two chairs for instance.  One of them was super flexible at the start, but most of them were not exceptional regarding flexibility and worked on it for a couple years.  An example I will give is I have a buddy, who wondered if he could do a backflip (as a 27 year old adult who had never tried it) and he just did it, no warm up, no attempt with a spot, nothing past a Lady there told him to tuck his legs tight.  he just did it.  That IMO is a good measure of natural ability.  Similar is punching power.  You can enhance it with training, but people are born with the "touch of death", they dont develop it.   

Edited to add:  However I have no baseline for how long she has been training either.  If you told me she took an interest in this stuff 6 months ago and is at this level now, 18 dexterity is within a possible stat (still want to see a few more tests), if you tell me she has been training 5+ years, well that allows a whole lot less of a measure for me than a skill vs talent assessment.  Thus, as I said, I need more information.

This is one of the reasons why I favor redefining abilities as "general competence in that area" rather than "innate talent".

In various games, raw dexterity is often used for things like dodge bonus and miscellaneous athletic feats. Likewise, raw strength is used for how much someone can lift.

In games, it isn't really relevant how many months or years it will take you to realistically learn a new skill. The important question is: how good are you *now* at miscellaneous physical tasks.

Yeah, there's a lot of overlap between skills and "ability scores", and a great deal about this line of discussion is really all about "where do we draw the line?" Were does 100% RAW innate talent ends and training start? And to what extend could someone with seemingly low "raw" talent realistically develop high levels of ability with training and conditioning alone?

Over time I've come to think of attributes, stats, "ability scores" or "whatever they're called in any given game" more as "core abilities", or the central base from which more specialized "skills" spring from.

However, arguably some degree if "innate" ability does seem to be exist in real life. Question is: to what extend? And how does that fit in the game? To what degree are ability scores innate or a measure of general training and conditioning? Do we even need to draw the line, or just treat it all as potentially trainable?

And can innate ability be improved, or is it a static thing?  I'd argue the former.  Intelligence can be defined as one's skill at learning mental skills, and I know from personal experience that the more I've learned the easier it's become to learn new things.  Similarly athleticism could be defines as the ability to learn new physical skills, and again from personal experience, as I've engaged in weight training, it's become easier to learn all other physical skills.  One could argue that this is a cross-skill benefit or synergy rather than innate ability, but I would see this as a bit of a semantic argument.  For an RPG, after doing game designs with skill synergy and designs with skills increasing attributes, I'd days the latter is superior as it's easier to implement and can be used to achieve almost identical results.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10