Kichae

11 definitely gets closer to 11 than 12 does.

voroxpete@sh.itjust.works said in Just don’t: > According to the creator - who vociferously defended this stance claiming it was based on “research” - bisexual men like me don’t exist.

I, too, spent much time 15 year ago sitting at the back of the bus reading Savage Love on my way to work. Research scientists, unite!

Ooo, sounds like a coven of Seneschal Witches from Pathfinder 2e!

HOW COULD YOU DO THIS TO US?!??!? Don’t you know it’s game night??

Just bring your doctor to the session. Do you think he’d play a Cleric?

You guys play D&D? I thought people only ever played the Scheduling Conflict game.

iamthetot@sh.itjust.works No. But you should binge season 1 ASAP before people start telling you why it doesn’t.

stamets@lemmy.dbzer0.com I was going to do this to my table. We only have 2 PCs currently (my wife and stepson), so I gave them a GMPC guide who was supposed to be the BBEG in disguise.

But they came to love the GMPC, and I can’t do that to them, so now he’s just their pet human.

If you pick feats in a vacuum, based on how impactful you expect them to be in the mean average of all sessions across all tables, sure.

But you probably shouldn’t pick feats that way. They should either be an expression of your character concept, or a reaction to the campaign you’re currently playing.

tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip I interviewed someone for a jr data analyst roll once, and one of the questions I asked was to explain the Monty Hall problem.

They told me the odds were 50:50, so I rolled out the 100 door version.

They told me the odds were 50:50.

Management decided to hire him, anyway.

brian@lemmy.ca The die doesn’t know it just rolled a 1. History doesn’t matter to it.

Ok, that’s it, for my next character I’m going to play as a Lepton Ranger.

No, it’s also better if you want an internally consistent system built on top of sensible principles. Or a system with reliable baseline for power scaling. Or if you want to invite an optimizer or a newbie to your table.

It’s not a “tactical combat RPG”. That’s a wild misconception propagated by both tactical combat fans and people who have looked over the hedge and been scared away by somethings being different. It is, instead, a well crafted systemic RPG, designed with reliability at its centre.

Reliability enables tactical combat, which is why TC fans flocked to the system, but it enables a hell of a lot more, too.

It’s also better if you want a steady stream of new content without paying Hasbro or relying on randos.

See, I don’t think that 20 does make up for that 1, any more than your 20 on an attack roll lets me roll damage on my 1.

The party isn’t some cohesive, singular unit that catches or avoids attention based on some average of the total behaviour. It’s instead a cloud of actors that are only as strong as its weakest member.

Like, if they were 4 kids sneaking cookies from the cookie jar, and the youngest knocked the jar off the counter, it really doesn’t matter how quiet the other 3 were, the shattering of the jar is going to get them all caught.

Pathfinder fixes th… Wait, which forum was this again?

No, you’re not alone. There has been much ink spelled in defense of the removal of geneaological morality from the game, and from Pathfinder before it. It’s just that most of that ink has been in replies to people being cranky about the removal in the first place.

Good and evil being a racial trait is just something that about 1/3 of society seems to take for granted. It’s a belief they may not even know they have until someone does something that stops reinforcing that belief. These silent, often unnoticed beliefs are often the corner stones of ideologies, and people don’t like having their ideologies questioned or challenged. Or even highlighted, in many cases.

So, people who have an ideological belief that good and evil are simple concepts, that good and evil are inherent qualities of a person, and that good and evil are tied to heritage are going to be primed to be giant whiny babies about racial alignment being removed, and to put up a giant stink,while those who see it as a commom sense move are not going to be front and centre making headlines about it. They’ll be in the comments, getting down-voted by the tilted reactionaries who like their simplistic, black-and-white world.

It’s only a TTRPG if you can win it in character creation. Everything else is just sparkling video game.

Aye. And there are things the player can do that lets them take 2 attacks for one action, but you get a normal Multiple-Attack-Penalty progression between each attack, and there are things that let them take 2 attacks for 2 actions – as would be normal – but which do not progress the MAP until after the second attack is done. And there are a lot of each. Or rather, there’s functionally 1 of each, but it’s often named different things for different classes.

The single-action variety can be seen, in-world, as being very fast, taking multiple individual attacks in very quick succession, like with Flurry of Blows. The two-action variety can be seen as hitting someone with two different weapons at the same time, as with Double Slice.

It does bother me that both let/make you pool your damage for dealing with resistances/weaknesses. Given the choice, I’d probably have the two-action varieties pool damage, and the single-action ones count as multiple instances. But nobody asked me.

The baker’s dozen is 13, because one of them is sacrificial.

Not sure how you’re supposed to use them while carrying around that heavy armoire.

His name translates to Ubermensch!