As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options

Dungeons and Dragons 4th Edition

15859606163

Posts

  • Options
    DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Rend wrote: »
    Pony wrote: »
    Psycho wrote:
    Anyone who plays a Cleric that worships a philosophy instead of deity. Just worship power-gaming and quit the intellectual dishonesty.

    Lol.

    you know

    on a level

    i actually found this point kind of offensive

    it's like he's saying "you can't have a religious philosophy without a deity"

    it's actually bigoted, in a way.

    It's totally not realistic. I mean, nobody worships philosophies nowadays.

    Especially not buddhists.

    While the dude is a fucking idiot he has a point on that one. The question "Can I worship a philosophy?" is like 9 times out of 10 actually "Can I have whatever domains I like?"

    DevoutlyApathetic on
    Nod. Get treat. PSN: Quippish
  • Options
    KrataLightbladeKrataLightblade Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Rend wrote: »
    And taoists, i think, too.

    It does, however, allow for the worship of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

    KrataLightblade on
    LEVEL 50 SWORD JUGGLER/WIZARD!
  • Options
    Professor PhobosProfessor Phobos Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Well, that's just because most people don't realize that almost any given philosophical system is going to be more rigorous and limited than any given religion...

    Professor Phobos on
  • Options
    INeedNoSaltINeedNoSalt with blood on my teeth Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    The Holy Light is for power gamers

    INeedNoSalt on
  • Options
    InquisitorInquisitor Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Mushiwulf wrote: »
    I like his additional information too:
    Biography:
    Long time gamer trying to make the transition from brick to rouge

    whatever that means.

    To rouge? Like, the make up?

    Inquisitor on
  • Options
    DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Inquisitor wrote: »
    Mushiwulf wrote: »
    I like his additional information too:
    Biography:
    Long time gamer trying to make the transition from brick to rouge
    whatever that means.

    To rouge? Like, the make up?

    He did say from Brick. Maybe he wants to lighten up his coloring.

    DevoutlyApathetic on
    Nod. Get treat. PSN: Quippish
  • Options
    delrolanddelroland Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    100 pages ahoy!

    So who wants to make the new thread?

    delroland on
    EVE: Online - the most fun you will ever have not playing a game.
    "Go up, thou bald head." -2 Kings 2:23
  • Options
    RendRend Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    While the dude is a fucking idiot he has a point on that one. The question "Can I worship a philosophy?" is like 9 times out of 10 actually "Can I have whatever domains I like?"

    Yeah, but it's not cool to punish the masses for the sins of the few.

    And besides, krayta is right. Worship a philosophy and you lose a few things.

    Pray to... who again? Oh, right. Looks like you're on your own.
    Explain your actions? Uh, balance told me to do it...

    Rend on
  • Options
    DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    delroland wrote: »
    100 pages ahoy!

    So who wants to make the new thread?

    I don't think that's the rule anymore. I did ask Than about it earlier today but have gotten no response.

    DevoutlyApathetic on
    Nod. Get treat. PSN: Quippish
  • Options
    KrataLightbladeKrataLightblade Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    See, the problem with powergaming isn't the player themselves.

    The problem is the DM.

    Nothing gets into a game without DM approval. Nothing stays with a party but the DM allows it. No character can be played unless the DM lets it be so.

    A powergamey player can be bored out of a game by telling him no. However, a DM who doesn't have the stones to say no to rampant powergaming is a DM who encourages and exacerbates the tendency.

    And we all know exacerbation leads to blindness.

    KrataLightblade on
    LEVEL 50 SWORD JUGGLER/WIZARD!
  • Options
    PonyPony Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    I am an unabashed 4e shill. I'm pretty close to a plant, except I don't get paid by WotC to promote 4e.

    But I like 4e, I'm in favor of it, and I actively try to promote it and correct some of the wrong-headed bullshit that is out there.

    So naturally, this puts me at odds with whiney anti-4e pissants like shit-head there.

    Honestly, if there's one thing 4e will do that is definitively positive, it will cut people like that away from D&D, just like 3rd edition did to some of the assholes of 2nd edition.

    Pony on
  • Options
    RendRend Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    t. DevoutlyApathetic:

    I think it still is... right? Did it change at some point?

    We might want to anyway. The rule was there for good reason.

    Rend on
  • Options
    DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Rend wrote: »
    While the dude is a fucking idiot he has a point on that one. The question "Can I worship a philosophy?" is like 9 times out of 10 actually "Can I have whatever domains I like?"

    Yeah, but it's not cool to punish the masses for the sins of the few.

    And besides, krayta is right. Worship a philosophy and you lose a few things.

    Pray to... who again? Oh, right. Looks like you're on your own.
    Explain your actions? Uh, balance told me to do it...

    See, the number of people I would trust to do that properly...well it's pretty small. Most of them realize it'd be more work then just sucking up to a big beard in the sky.

    DevoutlyApathetic on
    Nod. Get treat. PSN: Quippish
  • Options
    DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Rend wrote: »
    I think it still is... right? Did it change at some point?

    We might want to anyway. The rule was there for good reason.

    The reason was for the database issues that no longer exist as far as I know. I'd offered to Than to make a new thread and keep it updated. We'll see what he says.

    Edit: I post all your base.

    DevoutlyApathetic on
    Nod. Get treat. PSN: Quippish
  • Options
    delrolanddelroland Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Nah, it just doesn't apply to Phallas, but still applies to everything else. At least, I think it does.

    Be proud! We haven't had a legit (i.e. non-Phalla) 100-page thread in a while.

    Except for Warhammer.

    And those guys are total elitist jerks.

    :P

    delroland on
    EVE: Online - the most fun you will ever have not playing a game.
    "Go up, thou bald head." -2 Kings 2:23
  • Options
    InquisitorInquisitor Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Eh, ever addition will shed some assholes, but it will probably create just as many. The net difference will be negligible.

    Inquisitor on
  • Options
    RendRend Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Rend wrote: »
    While the dude is a fucking idiot he has a point on that one. The question "Can I worship a philosophy?" is like 9 times out of 10 actually "Can I have whatever domains I like?"

    Yeah, but it's not cool to punish the masses for the sins of the few.

    And besides, krayta is right. Worship a philosophy and you lose a few things.

    Pray to... who again? Oh, right. Looks like you're on your own.
    Explain your actions? Uh, balance told me to do it...

    See, the number of people I would trust to do that properly...well it's pretty small. Most of them realize it'd be more work then just sucking up to a big beard in the sky.

    Obvious conclusion: Clerics with deities are wusses.

    Rend on
  • Options
    MushiwulfMushiwulf Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Pony wrote: »
    I am an unabashed 4e shill. I'm pretty close to a plant, except I don't get paid by WotC to promote 4e.

    But I like 4e, I'm in favor of it, and I actively try to promote it and correct some of the wrong-headed bullshit that is out there.

    So naturally, this puts me at odds with whiney anti-4e pissants like shit-head there.

    Honestly, if there's one thing 4e will do that is definitively positive, it will cut people like that away from D&D, just like 3rd edition did to some of the assholes of 2nd edition.

    I always figure that, no matter what, I still have my 3.5 books, so if, for whatever reason I hate 4.0 (which I actually think I am going to love), I can still play 3.5. But, some people just love to whine.

    Mushiwulf on
  • Options
    DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    delroland wrote: »
    Nah, it just doesn't apply to Phallas, but still applies to everything else. At least, I think it does.

    Be proud! We haven't had a legit (i.e. non-Phalla) 100-page thread in a while.

    Except for Warhammer.

    And those guys are total elitist jerks.

    :P

    Is it sad I still read those threads even though I know I'll never play the game?

    DevoutlyApathetic on
    Nod. Get treat. PSN: Quippish
  • Options
    DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Rend wrote: »
    Obvious conclusion: Clerics with deities are wusses.

    This is the only acceptable druid stance.

    DevoutlyApathetic on
    Nod. Get treat. PSN: Quippish
  • Options
    RendRend Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Rend wrote: »
    I think it still is... right? Did it change at some point?

    We might want to anyway. The rule was there for good reason.

    The reason was for the database issues that no longer exist as far as I know. I'd offered to Than to make a new thread and keep it updated. We'll see what he says.

    Edit: I post all your base.

    I think the reason was so that people coming into the thread would not be intimidated by mega-thread size. It's a wonder i came to post in here... i feel bad posting in a thread that I haven't read the whole way through, and it was up to 40 pages when i started.

    Rend on
  • Options
    delrolanddelroland Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Is it sad I still read those threads even though I know I'll never play the game?

    :lol:

    Not at all. My inner gamer has always had a chubby for Space Marines.

    Wait...

    delroland on
    EVE: Online - the most fun you will ever have not playing a game.
    "Go up, thou bald head." -2 Kings 2:23
  • Options
    DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Rend wrote: »
    Rend wrote: »
    I think it still is... right? Did it change at some point?

    We might want to anyway. The rule was there for good reason.

    The reason was for the database issues that no longer exist as far as I know. I'd offered to Than to make a new thread and keep it updated. We'll see what he says.

    Edit: I post all your base.

    I think the reason was so that people coming into the thread would not be intimidated by mega-thread size. It's a wonder i came to post in here... i feel bad posting in a thread that I haven't read the whole way through, and it was up to 40 pages when i started.

    I think that expectation is a little damped for megathreads like this thing.
    delroland wrote: »
    Is it sad I still read those threads even though I know I'll never play the game?



    Not at all. My inner gamer has always had a chubby for Space Marines.

    Wait...

    Thousand Sons are cool. Though I am not an arts and crafts type of guy so it'll never happen. (Barring me becoming stupid rich.)

    DevoutlyApathetic on
    Nod. Get treat. PSN: Quippish
  • Options
    InquisitorInquisitor Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    delroland wrote: »
    :lol:

    Not at all. My inner gamer has always had a chubby for Space Marines.

    Wait...

    You meant sisters of battle, right? Right?!

    Inquisitor on
  • Options
    KrataLightbladeKrataLightblade Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Pony wrote: »
    I am an unabashed 4e shill. I'm pretty close to a plant, except I don't get paid by WotC to promote 4e.

    But I like 4e, I'm in favor of it, and I actively try to promote it and correct some of the wrong-headed bullshit that is out there.

    So naturally, this puts me at odds with whiney anti-4e pissants like shit-head there.

    Honestly, if there's one thing 4e will do that is definitively positive, it will cut people like that away from D&D, just like 3rd edition did to some of the assholes of 2nd edition.


    Actually, in my experience, 3rd edition brought even MORE assholes in because they made the system "less complicated" (although let's be honest, I never had trouble with 2nd edition rules and I always found them to be much less complicated, but that's my personal feeling), and opened everything up, which encouraged powergaming. Multiclassing was something you did for kickass powers, now, where Dual-Classing was restricted to humans only and had some hefty penalties attached. Look at ANY "uber" character build and it's almost certain to be multiclassed somehow. To find a level 20 of one single class with no PrCs is extremely rare now, it seems.

    Not UNHEARD OF, so please don't regale me with tales of your advnetures as a level 20 whatever, guys. I'm just saying, it's significantly less common now, if you're not a pure caster.

    In my experience, d20 made the game much easier to min/max and powergame with. And that draws in the twink crowd, and the twink crowd is 45% assholes, 4% morons, 50% moronic assholes, and 1% actual roleplayers.

    I'm pretty sure that 4e will be no different.

    KrataLightblade on
    LEVEL 50 SWORD JUGGLER/WIZARD!
  • Options
    RendRend Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Pony wrote: »
    I am an unabashed 4e shill. I'm pretty close to a plant, except I don't get paid by WotC to promote 4e.

    But I like 4e, I'm in favor of it, and I actively try to promote it and correct some of the wrong-headed bullshit that is out there.

    So naturally, this puts me at odds with whiney anti-4e pissants like shit-head there.

    Honestly, if there's one thing 4e will do that is definitively positive, it will cut people like that away from D&D, just like 3rd edition did to some of the assholes of 2nd edition.


    Actually, in my experience, 3rd edition brought even MORE assholes in because they made the system "less complicated" (although let's be honest, I never had trouble with 2nd edition rules and I always found them to be much less complicated except for thac0 which was the most horrible rule ever to be concieved, but that's my personal feeling), and opened everything up, which encouraged powergaming. Multiclassing was something you did for kickass powers, now, where Dual-Classing was restricted to humans only and had some hefty penalties attached. Look at ANY "uber" character build and it's almost certain to be multiclassed somehow. To find a level 20 of one single class with no PrCs is extremely rare now, it seems.

    Not UNHEARD OF, so please don't regale me with tales of your advnetures as a level 20 whatever, guys. I'm just saying, it's significantly less common now, if you're not a pure caster.

    In my experience, d20 made the game much easier to min/max and powergame with. And that draws in the twink crowd, and the twink crowd is 45% assholes, 4% morons, 50% moronic assholes, and 1% actual roleplayers.

    I'm pretty sure that 4e will be no different.

    fix'd

    Rend on
  • Options
    DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Krata,

    You're assumption that those who value the tactical aspect of the game can't role play is pretty insulting generalization.

    DevoutlyApathetic on
    Nod. Get treat. PSN: Quippish
  • Options
    PonyPony Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Rend wrote: »
    Obvious conclusion: Clerics with deities are wusses.

    This is the only acceptable druid stance.

    my brother was playing a Druid who worshipped nature in a general sense, not any one deity

    he tended to actually cop an attitude towards most clerics

    especially ones of ascended deities

    like st. cuthbert

    Pony on
  • Options
    delrolanddelroland Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    In my experience, d20 made the game much easier to min/max and powergame with. And that draws in the twink crowd, and the twink crowd is 45% assholes, 4% morons, 50% moronic assholes, and 1% actual roleplayers.

    You forgot the actual roleplayers who play characters that are moronic assholes. :P

    Edit: and calculating THAC0 is what separates the men from the animals.

    delroland on
    EVE: Online - the most fun you will ever have not playing a game.
    "Go up, thou bald head." -2 Kings 2:23
  • Options
    DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Pony wrote: »
    Rend wrote: »
    Obvious conclusion: Clerics with deities are wusses.

    This is the only acceptable druid stance.

    my brother was playing a Druid who worshipped nature in a general sense, not any one deity

    he tended to actually cop an attitude towards most clerics

    especially ones of ascended deities

    like st. cuthbert

    Bitch, you just worship some fucking dude with a club. I'm a dude with a club, you should worship me!

    I've done the same. After traveling with a kick-ass Pelorite for a long time my druid amended his "Gods are for pussies....except for the Sun dude, he's alright."

    DevoutlyApathetic on
    Nod. Get treat. PSN: Quippish
  • Options
    PonyPony Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    4e seems to actually make the game less min/maxy

    For starters, all the races had the "Min" taken out of them. No racial stat penalties. All races are inherently more powerful than they used to be.

    Also, because ability scores have been changed in how they create modifiers, having a "dump stat" isn't very beneficial.

    Additionally, with the new multiclass and power rules, and the new BAB/AC/Defense/Skill progressions, and the lack of small bonuses from magic items, all in all "twinking" is taking a big hit.

    Now it's more about playing to your "role" than just getting big numbers.

    Pony on
  • Options
    KrataLightbladeKrataLightblade Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Krata,

    You're assumption that those who value the tactical aspect of the game can't role play is pretty insulting generalization.

    Actually, my assumption is that if you're a twink (defined, by the way, as someone who values the rules and dice rolling more than the RP, and thus "twinks out" their character regardless of character values or personality...), you're probably a terrible RPer almost by defintiion.

    KrataLightblade on
    LEVEL 50 SWORD JUGGLER/WIZARD!
  • Options
    DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    If it's still a game, "twinking" won't go anywhere. It's always been the product of the people rather than the system.

    I'm not sure how much I buy the argument that 3rd is 'better' to twink in. I find that the general power boost that everything got results in more extreme results.

    DevoutlyApathetic on
    Nod. Get treat. PSN: Quippish
  • Options
    INeedNoSaltINeedNoSalt with blood on my teeth Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    delroland wrote: »
    In my experience, d20 made the game much easier to min/max and powergame with. And that draws in the twink crowd, and the twink crowd is 45% assholes, 4% morons, 50% moronic assholes, and 1% actual roleplayers.

    You forgot the actual roleplayers who play characters that are moronic assholes. :P

    Edit: and calculating THAC0 is what separates the men from the animals.

    People act like it is hard

    It's not hard, it's just counter-intuitive.

    Here's your thac0! Roll a d20, subtract what you get from this, and that's the armor class you hit! -_-

    INeedNoSalt on
  • Options
    RendRend Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    I can see why they're rolling it back a bit, 3.5 is about the twinkiest thing since the gold piece.

    ...But by how much?

    Rend on
  • Options
    KrataLightbladeKrataLightblade Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Pony wrote: »
    4e seems to actually make the game less min/maxy

    For starters, all the races had the "Min" taken out of them. No racial stat penalties. All races are inherently more powerful than they used to be.

    Also, because ability scores have been changed in how they create modifiers, having a "dump stat" isn't very beneficial.

    Additionally, with the new multiclass and power rules, and the new BAB/AC/Defense/Skill progressions, and the lack of small bonuses from magic items, all in all "twinking" is taking a big hit.

    Now it's more about playing to your "role" than just getting big numbers.



    Thus why I'm hopeful for 4e.

    KrataLightblade on
    LEVEL 50 SWORD JUGGLER/WIZARD!
  • Options
    RendRend Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Krata,

    You're assumption that those who value the tactical aspect of the game can't role play is pretty insulting generalization.

    Actually, my assumption is that if you're a twink (defined, by the way, as someone who values the rules and dice rolling more than the RP, and thus "twinks out" their character regardless of character values or personality...), you're probably a terrible RPer almost by defintiion.

    Thats not necessarily true, I think. It's just the difference between someone who plays warhammer and D&D and someone who plays D&D and warhammer, i think.

    Rend on
  • Options
    DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Krata,

    You're assumption that those who value the tactical aspect of the game can't role play is pretty insulting generalization.

    Actually, my assumption is that if you're a twink (defined, by the way, as someone who values the rules and dice rolling more than the RP, and thus "twinks out" their character regardless of character values or personality...), you're probably a terrible RPer almost by defintiion.

    That doesn't really come through in your previous statements. You sounded like the type of GM who gets pissed at any effective characters. Being incredibly effective and having a complete character are not mutually exclusive.

    Though you are a bit of an elitist. Some dudes just want to kick back, bring out the beer and pretzels and kill some monsters.

    DevoutlyApathetic on
    Nod. Get treat. PSN: Quippish
  • Options
    delrolanddelroland Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Krata,

    You're assumption that those who value the tactical aspect of the game can't role play is pretty insulting generalization.

    Actually, my assumption is that if you're a twink (defined, by the way, as someone who values the rules and dice rolling more than the RP, and thus "twinks out" their character regardless of character values or personality...), you're probably a terrible RPer almost by defintiion.

    Twink = with my spear and magic helmet!
    Min/maxxer = sure, it's a 2, but who needs Charisma when you have a Strength of 47?

    Not like it matters, but that's how I generally believe them to be defined by the plurality. It doesn't change your point, but I just wanted to throw that out there. You know, for the noobs.

    delroland on
    EVE: Online - the most fun you will ever have not playing a game.
    "Go up, thou bald head." -2 Kings 2:23
  • Options
    KrataLightbladeKrataLightblade Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Rend wrote: »
    Krata,

    You're assumption that those who value the tactical aspect of the game can't role play is pretty insulting generalization.

    Actually, my assumption is that if you're a twink (defined, by the way, as someone who values the rules and dice rolling more than the RP, and thus "twinks out" their character regardless of character values or personality...), you're probably a terrible RPer almost by defintiion.

    Thats not necessarily true, I think. It's just the difference between someone who plays warhammer and D&D and someone who plays D&D and warhammer, i think.


    I'm a White Wolf player, though.

    So I'm automatically an elitist bastard emo whiner, y'know?

    KrataLightblade on
    LEVEL 50 SWORD JUGGLER/WIZARD!
This discussion has been closed.