D&D thread
-
@Applied-Mediocrity But then the issue arises of "Good looking according to WHO?", as attractiveness is a highly subjective stat to which an objective value is applied in these cases. DnD is not the only offender here, as my character in Werewolf is described as having "photo model-like beauty" by the rulebook.
-
@Atazhaia said in D&D thread:
I wonder from where this whole thing where charisma (and similar) == looks/attractiveness comes from.
A shallow interpretation of the concept of charisma, I would say.
The real problem is that it’s hard to find an objective way to handle something like charisma, IMHO. Should dwarfs get to ignore the −1 Charisma when dealing with other dwarfs? Maybe, that kind of makes sense in a fantasy setting where people would not travel out of their own areas very much. But what about a more modern setting, where people mix a lot and there’s mass media? Shadowrun elves have +2 Charisma, while orks get −1 and trolls −2. Chances are that a lot of orks actually believe orks (including themselves) to be less charismatic/attractive/pretty/etc. than everyone else — largely because the media portrays them as such. Then you would get to use that −1 Charisma in all cases, not just when dealing with other races.
And then there’s the issue of all this sort of stuff applied to races that aren’t even human at all. For some reason, games typically assume that, say, the difference between a male and a female lizard
manperson is immediately obvious to everyone … I highly doubt it, especially to non-lizardpersonspeople (such as humans) who don’t deal with them a lot. Good luck reading their emotions or judging how attractive they are …
-
@Atazhaia According to the writer, which is subjective. Rulebooks without such sprinklings of lore tend to sound dry and detached, but the stat block is always invariably right. Without stats you wouldn't have a game, only poor attempts at theater.
The whole point of primary stats is to be generic. Then secondary stats can be derived that can govern more specific interactions. But individual perspective isn't considered. Everyone thinks alike and acts alike. It's a necessary crutch to move the game along. At any point a GM and players together can elect to play out particularly interesting bits as they see fit.
-
@Applied-Mediocrity The things I am questioning is why physical attractiveness have to be a primary stat, or a stat at all? And if it is based on the creator's views if I am to take to to the extreme, then I in my system would apply a charisma bonus to races I find more attractive than humans which would lead to orcs having increased charisma and elves having reduced, going all counter to the "popular" view.
Physical attractiveness can bestow a bonus to charisma, let's say in like a special abilities/background table rolled at creation where you can get something like "you are very good-looking and get a +2 bonus to charisma", but if having full stats dedicated to it you start going closer to erotic RPGs or even FATAL with its myriad of base stats showing different levels of "attractiveness".
-
@Atazhaia Then I believe we were actually largely in agreement from the get-go (but perhaps failed our CHA checks, as it were, to express it properly
:tro:).If there is such a general RPG system that has a physical attractiveness stat, it's a shit system and I want nothing to do with it.
As for FATAL, nerds are gonna nerd.
Where does the general idea come from, though? I suppose because IRL, where there are largely agreed-upon beauty standards and there's no interspecies problem at all, it's a greater contributor. And some - I don't know how many - players (including me, to a painful extent) fail to separate themselves from their characters and fully immerse in the setting. I mean, dwarves are basically short fat humans and halflings are short thin humans, aren't they? Never even mind those mean-looking toothy types with skins the color of pea-soup puke...
-
@Applied-Mediocrity I did ask my DM who is a bit more well-versed in the history of RPGs and he thinks it comes from when they changed the rules for AD&D 2nd edition. He also mentions the removal of a "Comeliness" stat that happened at the same time, which saw it merged into Charisma instead of just being removed outright (I guess).
-
@Applied-Mediocrity said in D&D thread:
If there is such a general RPG system that has a physical attractiveness stat, it's a shit system and I want nothing to do with it.
You might want to avoid post-Unearthed Arcana AD&D 1e, then.
Seriously, though, I always found Comeliness to be a relatively useful secondary stat.
BTW, is Cyberpunk 2020/Interlock general enough for you? 'Coz that one's got an actual Attractiveness stat.
(I'm also now remembering that The Fantasy Trip has Sex Appeal as a skill.)
-
@Atazhaia According to the wiki "comeliness" was always optional. I figure it was invented by some pimply hack that wanted to bonk fantasy photo models and took the nerd-appropriate approach that there must be solid math behind it.
But evidently sometimes they were overthinking so hard that didn't really even look in the dictionary on the first meaning of the words. From the very same page:
Strength was split into "stamina" and "muscle".
Dexterity was split into "aim" and "balance".
Constitution was split into "health" and "fitness".
Intelligence was split into "reason" and "knowledge".
Wisdom was split into "intuition" and "willpower".
Charisma was split into "leadership" and "appearance".
-
-
@GOG said in D&D thread:
BTW, is Cyberpunk 2020/Interlock general enough for you?
No, it isn't. Being a cool-ass hipsterpunk is explained and makes sense in universe, but I have a very difficult time imagining using the system in a setting with swords and elves and shit. Or shooting aliens.
Was the AD&D all Gygax's work? Anyway, being a pimply nerd isn't a time in one's life, but a disposition. A character trait, if you will.
-
@Applied-Mediocrity The dumb thing is that continues to be used,and not just in D&D. As I mentioned earlier, the equivalent of charisma in Werewolf (forgot the name) directly describes a higher value as the character being more beautiful in the rulebook. So my character which has 4 (out of 5) is on the level of a photo model, just because I wanted to make my character good at leadership.
-
@GOG According to the article, this pimply hack (with no opposition):
In Dragon #67 (Nov 1982), p.61-62, Gary Gygax attributes the invention of a "beauty" statistic to Francois Marcela-Froideval. Gygax instead uses the name "comeliness" for the statistic, on the reasoning that low "beauty" score would merely imply a lack of beauty, while a low "comeliness" would imply ugliness.
-
@Atazhaia I suppose if there is no good in-universe explanation of objective physical attractiveness and why would that mean being better at leading people (and I mean not just convincing them, but actively leading people and organizations, which is what leadership in my little mind really is; words mean things, gdammit), I suppose I'd try and have a word with the GM that I don't want to be super-cutesy-tootsy and ask to consider other options like confidence or psychopathy (cult leader type) if that makes better sense.
-
@Atazhaia said in D&D thread:
Meanwhile, I wonder from where this whole thing where charisma (and similar) == looks/attractiveness comes from. It feels like a very dumb interpretation of what charisma should be. Charisma should be the ability to influence others based off well-chosen words and mannerisms, not because of "hurr durr elf women be hot".
Well
- the BoEF does distinguish this with a new score. Also the RAW clearly states Cha to be the ability to influence in abstract. So, this must come from you, the players.
-
@Applied-Mediocrity said in D&D thread:
if there is no good in-universe explanation of objective physical attractiveness and why would that mean being better at leading people
Uh... genetics. As a superman, my ability to lead, inspire, and shoot lasers from my eyes derive from a confluence of large numbers of perfect genes. These also, and one cannot say incidentally in the absence of intent, grant me a nigh-supernatural degree of physical beauty. Sorry, whittles.
-
@Gribnit No. The gods in my universe didn't believe in genetics. I am a sack of meat animated by the breath of pneuma through one of my fingers, with emergency venting through the arse.
-
@Applied-Mediocrity said in D&D thread:
Was the AD&D all Gygax's work?
First edition was mostly Gygax. More importantly - Unearthed Arcana, which introduced Comeliness, is attributed to Gygax alone.
@Atazhaia said in D&D thread:
In Dragon #67 (Nov 1982), p.61-62, Gary Gygax attributes the invention of a "beauty" statistic to Francois Marcela-Froideval. Gygax instead uses the name "comeliness" for the statistic, on the reasoning that low "beauty" score would merely imply a lack of beauty, while a low "comeliness" would imply ugliness.
It's worth rememembering that UA came out in 1985, so whatever the inspiration was, Gygax prolly redid it his own way, because that's what he always did.
I wouldn't treat this too seriously. IME, Com is a decent enough secondary characteristic that mostly helps with initial reactions.
Interestingly, the generated score is modified for Cha, so in most cases the most charismatic characters will be found to be at least moderately attractive.
-
@Gurth said in D&D thread:
But what about a more modern setting, where people mix a lot and there’s mass media? Shadowrun elves have +2 Charisma, while orks get −1 and trolls −2. Chances are that a lot of orks actually believe orks (including themselves) to be less charismatic/attractive/pretty/etc. than everyone else — largely because the media portrays them as such.
Counterpoint: studies have shown that many traits of what Americans tend to consider "American standards of beauty" are held in high regard all over the world, even in areas with very little influence from American media, such as Iran. For example, it's a bit politically uncorrect to talk about it these days, but preferences for women with light hair, light eyes, and large breasts seems to be universal. This suggests that some form of "objective standard of beauty" does indeed exist, and it's not just an image being pushed by the media.
-
@Atazhaia said in D&D thread:
@Applied-Mediocrity But then the issue arises of "Good looking according to WHO?", as attractiveness is a highly subjective stat to which an objective value is applied in these cases. DnD is not the only offender here, as my character in Werewolf is described as having "photo model-like beauty" by the rulebook.
There have, of course, attempts to add mechanics to sex in D&D. They invariably end up using Charisma as a nigh-mind-control stat when it comes to finding someone to sleep with, and also usually fail to consider differences between species. The upshot, if you follow the numbers, is that trolls (and most other monstrous species) should have died out centuries ago, because they don't have the Charisma to be able to successfully flirt with someone.
-
@Mason_Wheeler said in D&D thread:
@Gurth said in D&D thread:
But what about a more modern setting, where people mix a lot and there’s mass media? Shadowrun elves have +2 Charisma, while orks get −1 and trolls −2. Chances are that a lot of orks actually believe orks (including themselves) to be less charismatic/attractive/pretty/etc. than everyone else — largely because the media portrays them as such.
Counterpoint: studies have shown that many traits of what Americans tend to consider "American standards of beauty" are held in high regard all over the world, even in areas with very little influence from American media, such as Iran. For example, it's a bit politically uncorrect to talk about it these days, but preferences for women with light hair, light eyes, and large breasts seems to be universal. This suggests that some form of "objective standard of beauty" does indeed exist, and it's not just an image being pushed by the media.
Having a symmetrical face (and also other bits) is a sign of good health, and people like producing healthy kids. Other signs of good health are also attractive. (Related: clean-looking water is beautiful because we kinda need it.)
The upshot here is that beauty is at least partially objective in Earth humans. There's still plenty of wild opinions about the details.
-
-
@Applied-Mediocrity I did look it up and Werewolf does have two stats, I had forgotten about that they made a difference. So Charisma for the ability to lead and inspire and Appearance for good looks.
Been too long since the C4K9s made Canada insecure.
-
@Atazhaia Hmm. Yeah. "Mysterious allure". What a convenient fallback. At least average looks are unassuming and can help, there's that. It feels arbitrarily picked and limiting. I remain convinced that this kind of thing is better entered as character's description, free-form, and handled by GM and players on a case-by-case basis.
-
@PotatoEngineer said in D&D thread:
They invariably end up using Charisma as a nigh-mind-control stat when it comes to finding someone to sleep with
So, just like real-life, then?
-
@Mason_Wheeler said in D&D thread:
In a long-gone game store I used to frequent, there once upon a time was a player who thought that for his WH40K Leman Russ tanks, the optional “track guards” meant having Imperial Guard figures positioned right up against the tank.
TBF, he was something like 12 years old at the time and so his English wasn’t the greatest.
-
@Mason_Wheeler said in D&D thread:
Counterpoint: studies have shown that many traits of what Americans tend to consider "American standards of beauty" are held in high regard all over the world, even in areas with very little influence from American media, such as Iran. For example, it's a bit politically uncorrect to talk about it these days, but preferences for women with light hair, light eyes, and large breasts seems to be universal. This suggests that some form of "objective standard of beauty" does indeed exist, and it's not just an image being pushed by the media.
That's not too surprising if you actually know some people of Iranian extraction. They have quite a bit of influence from the Caucasus region; it's right next door.
You'd need to ask somewhere with a lot less strong rooted European cultural influences to get a better sample. I suggest somewhere like Ghana, Nigeria or Thailand.
And bear in mind that I definitely agree with what :@PotatoEngineer: said in D&D thread.
-
-
Just found out that Erica Lindbeck, who played Morrighan on Critical Role: Exandria Unlimited, was the voice of Jessie on Final Fantasy VII Remake. And now I keep expecting her to say "Wow, Cloud, your sword is so big! It's the biggest sword I've ever seen!"
-
-
@boomzilla
Problem thread is 
-
This is second-hand so I may have some details a little off.
My son's DM did not have a good night. His party had an encounter with a death dragon. It did considerable damage with its first attack. I'm not sure just how bad it was, but I heard my son talking about rolling a death save as if more than one player needed to do that. (He said 4 players were knocked unconscious.) I guess he succeeded (he got 10 HP back due to warlock deity shenanigans), because he then burned all his level-1 and level-2 spell slots casting cure wounds. (I'm not sure whether he was casting the spells on himself, the other party members, or both.)
The dragon then attempted not one, but two dive attacks, and rolled nat 1s for both. The DM then rolled against a Critical Fumble table to see how badly the dragon failed. It promptly impaled itself on a tree and died instantly. The entire party got an unplanned level-up for "defeating" a dragon in combat.
Edit: The session ended early tonight. The party went through a portal into the Earth elemental plane. It's a home-brew campaign, and the DM hadn't figured out what's supposed to happen next, because this session deviated so much from his plan.
-
@HardwareGeek said in D&D thread:
It's a home-brew campaign, and the DM hadn't figured out what's supposed to happen next, because this session deviated so much from his plan.
Y'all plan out your sessions?
-
@GOG said in D&D thread:
@HardwareGeek said in D&D thread:
It's a home-brew campaign, and the DM hadn't figured out what's supposed to happen next, because this session deviated so much from his plan.
Y'all plan out your sessions?
Every DM does. Then they cry alone in a corner after every game session when the plan was thrown out the window and the players do something insane.
On another note: I watched Bright yesterday and now I have the urge to play Shadowrun again. Damn.
-
@e4tmyl33t said in D&D thread:
Then they cry alone in a corner after every game session when the plan was thrown out the window and the players do something insane.
My favorite tactic is to immediately travel a long distance at the start of each session.
-
@e4tmyl33t said in D&D thread:
@GOG said in D&D thread:
@HardwareGeek said in D&D thread:
It's a home-brew campaign, and the DM hadn't figured out what's supposed to happen next, because this session deviated so much from his plan.
Y'all plan out your sessions?
Every DM does. Then they cry alone in a corner after every game session when the plan was thrown out the window and the players do something insane.
On another note: I watched Bright yesterday and now I have the urge to play Shadowrun again. Damn.
And then, slowly, they learn to plan less and ad lib more.
Personally, I plan high level stuff and some low-level stuff, but the latter really only JIT (ie for that one session, once they've confirmed what they're planning to do). All the stuff in between I ad lib based on my knowledge of the setting, the NPCs, etc.
-
@Gribnit said in D&D thread:
My favorite tactic is to immediately travel a long distance at the start of each session.
Anecdote once told to me by people I used to play RPGs with around 20 years ago:
Long before I met them, they got started in RPGs with MERP, and from there, naturally progressed to RoleMaster because MERP’s rules are a simplified version of that. At some point, their characters were given a mission to travel to another continent on the other side of the world. They took a ship to do so, because this was about 10,000 miles away. RoleMaster apparently gives 1 XP per mile travelled, so that was 10,000 XP earned the very easy way — and, IIRC, each level was 10,000 XP.
Then they get to the other continent, and realise that they had seriously completely forgotten to take the thing they were hired to bring to this continent in the first place … Take a ship back, get the item, return once more.
Another 20,000 XP …
-
@e4tmyl33t said in D&D thread:
now I have the urge to play Shadowrun again. Damn.
If you can make it this Wednesday afternoon, you’re welcome to join in my group …
-
@e4tmyl33t said in D&D thread:
Every rookie DM does.
The most useful DM skill one can develop is making up random bullshit on the fly. I tend to do very little session planning these days - better to develop broad-strokes ideas for setting, characters, etc., than to plan specific things that will happen during an individual session (spoiler: they won't.)
In a way, it's like the dungeon maps of yore - it shouldn't matter how the players choose to explore the dungeon. This can be because it is stateless, but it doesn't need to be - provided you aren't making yourself dependent on it being in any particular state.
-
@GOG said in D&D thread:
The most useful DM skill one can develop is making up random bullshit on the fly.
QFT. I’ll add that the ability to make up random but good-sounding justifications on the fly is an even more useful skill to have.
I tend to do very little session planning these days - better to develop broad-strokes ideas for setting, characters, etc., than to plan specific things that will happen during an individual session (spoiler: they won't.)
One GM skill I have only at very low level is making up good stories, so I tend to run adventures written by other people. Some of those are very suitable for running by people with little improvisational skills (which I don’t lack, BTW), while others have me wondering if the writers actually played through them with people who weren’t intent on following the plot.
Last adventure I ran for my small current Shadowrun group was an old one from over twenty years ago, that sees the PCs hired to go to Boston and steal something from a building at MIT&T. Once they’ve done this, they get pursued by a whole bunch of different groups who want the item back and/or for themselves, and when they end up cornered somewhere, they get help from an unexpected direction. The adventure gives the impression of having been written by people familiar with MIT and how universities work.
So sure, OK. I think I can count the number of times in my life that I’ve been to a university on the fingers of one hand, and without having to use binary. Luckily, out of the three of us in the group, one did actually go to university so he could explain some things that the rest of us didn’t have a clue about. So far, so good.
Where the adventure started to break down, though, was in assuming anything at all about where the PCs would run to after the heist, and how. I mean, it somehow fails to mention entirely that MIT(&T) is located right next to a river — which I learned in time from looking it up in a map app, and so did the players during the game. That lead to them deciding to make the getaway using a fast boat instead of over land (the adventure having clearly told them that Boston’s streets are essentially one big traffic jam), and thereby ended up way outside of town. A possibility the adventure completely doesn’t take into account, because their unexpected benefactor is someone who is very powerful in Boston but not at all outside of it …
After some encouragement by their employer (through the medium of the GM) to return to Boston to hand over the stolen item, they did. A big shootout erupts and the players try to escape by using a Levitate spell on a crate they all sat on, going through the air over the tops of buildings rather than down on the streets where everybody is shooting at each other. Around this point the benefactor’s agent approaches them and is supposed to win their trust. But how, exactly? “Yeah, there’s all these guys gunning for you, but come with me and you’ll be safe.” Sure, guy, we only just met you in the middle of a firefight — let’s go! Of course, they ended up booting (literally) him off the crate and studiously avoiding the alley he wanted them to go down.
Instead of meeting the powerful entity feared throughout Boston (but which neither the players nor their characters had ever heard of, given that they were not from there), they just phoned their employer again and arranged for her agents to meet them nearby and take delivery of the goods. Done. That cut off the whole last act of the adventure, which meant that the players didn’t learn things they might have found interesting and that they’ve made an enemy of someone they don‘t know and will never run into again, but they did perform the mission they were hired to. Which, oddly, isn’t what the adventure expects to happen …
-
Must... not... mention... The... Law
-
@Gurth said in D&D thread:
make the getaway using a fast boat instead of over land
I've read enough accounts of dumb criminals trying to escape the police to know that if your escape plan involves water, you should probably think of a better plan. I'd assume the same considerations apply whether you're the bad guys trying to escape the good guys or the good guys trying to escape bad guys.
-
@Gurth said in D&D thread:
RoleMaster apparently gives 1 XP per mile travelled, so that was 10,000 XP earned the very easy way
If an ocean voyage that long constitutes "earning EXP the very easy way," the DM is
. There are so many opportunities for things to go terribly wrong on an ocean voyage...
-
@Gurth said in D&D thread:
Around this point the benefactor’s agent approaches them and is supposed to win their trust. But how, exactly? “Yeah, there’s all these guys gunning for you, but come with me and you’ll be safe.” Sure, guy, we only just met you in the middle of a firefight — let’s go! Of course, they ended up booting (literally) him off the crate and studiously avoiding the alley he wanted them to go down.
This is because he forgot to say the magic words.
-
@Mason_Wheeler said in D&D thread:
If an ocean voyage that long constitutes "earning EXP the very easy way," the DM is
. There are so many opportunities for things to go terribly wrong on an ocean voyage...That’s what I thought too, but apparently they got 30,000 XP for sailing halfway around the world three times. Had I been the GM, they would have gotten that once, but not more times for doing the same trip again. In any case, XP for just travelling makes levelling up really easy.
I’m level 1, I think I’ll put off adventuring for a while. I’ll just walk from my village to the local city and back once every day, that’s what, 20 XP each time? Fine, I’ll do that a few thousand times.
OK, you’re now level 5, but you’re also not getting any younger.
What do I have to lose? Let’s do that for ten more years!@Mason_Wheeler said in D&D thread:
This is because he forgot to say the magic words.
Literally, the adventure has him say, “if you wanna live, follow me.” But at the same time it gives them no real reason to believe him, because the various NPC parties in the firefight have plenty of reasons to shoot at each other, but to avoid doing anything directly against the PCs — since all of them want to keep the stolen items absolutely safe from harm.
-
-
Status: I seem to have found a local TTRPG meetup. So I've signed up for the next one-shot event this Sunday. Currently digging through 5e books and stuff, creating my character, because I know very little about 5e, both the ruleset and the lore. For reasons that should be all too obvious I've decided to go with a Tabaxi.
I rolled for stats and the sum I got was exactly the same as that of the Standard Array (with insignificant distribution differences). Well, what can I say - username checks out
Now, for the class... eh, going to be a Monk, on the Way of the Drunken Master at that.
I mean, it's a one-shot, what could go wrong (famous last words of every unassuming player).
Almost got the numbers right, according to the calculator on the internets. Not sure which 2 additional languages should I pick. Metagaming (booo) would suggest Sylvan, but I can't quite figure out if my background can support that. Then again, I'm not sure of almost everything else, too.
-
@Mason_Wheeler said in D&D thread:
If an ocean voyage that long constitutes "earning EXP the very easy way," the DM is . There are so many opportunities for things to go terribly wrong on an ocean voyage...
On the one hand, you are absolutely correct. On the other hand, have you ever tried RoleMaster?
-
@Mason_Wheeler said in D&D thread:
There are so many opportunities for things to go terribly wrong on an ocean voyage...
Like being attacked by a giant sea monster. Although the worst thing to happen in that fight was a PC having a crossbow misfiring and hitting the PC behind(!) which is thoroughly impressive!
But the worst part of that journey being my (in-game) friend trying to entertain my character every day with a song and dance, but failing almost every roll to the point where everyone was thinking of throwing him overboard.
-
@Atazhaia “A pirate I was meant to be, trim the sails and roam the sea!”
-
@Atazhaia said in D&D thread:
Although the worst thing to happen in that fight was a PC having a crossbow misfiring and hitting the PC behind(!) which is thoroughly impressive!
Suddenly remembering a scene in one of the Serpentwar books where the author did that and played it entirely straight. It was not "impressive" or amusing at all, just senselessly sad.
MCs are part of an army that's been drafted and sent overseas (literally across an ocean) to fight a world-threatening evil wizard. After a major victory, they're back at their camp, celebrating. All of a sudden, right out of nowhere, The Captain's head just basically explodes. Guy's dead instantly, not due to enemy action or some sort of betrayal, but because one of the men had carelessly rested his crossbow on his shoulder and it went off.
