Menu

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.

Show posts Menu

Messages - Easy

#1
Suggestions /
April 14, 2009, 12:50:59 AM
Charges of Expeditious Retreat is better IMO.  I sort of dislike the idea you can take another classes formidable/unique feat just by throwing on an item.
#2
Suggestions /
April 09, 2009, 06:50:24 AM
Sometimes things do not show on the character sheet, but will still apply when the roll is actually called for.  I would recommend double checking the combat log as this might be the case.
#3
Suggestions /
April 04, 2009, 10:27:37 AM
I don't mind tough spawns, and their loot is reasonable.  Though using hundreds of gold in potions for only 2-5 experience is a bit disenchanting.
#4
Suggestions /
April 04, 2009, 04:48:50 AM
I play a monk currently, and at low levels I find they were difficult.  Though if there were more accessible "usables" (per day items are entirely lame in my opinion and do not encourage class cooperation) perhaps one way to address this would be to offer some 1st circle spell usables for a cheaper than normal price at the starting shop, just to help people get to their feet.  This would be something that benefits everyone really, without being unbalanced in any way.
#5
Suggestions /
March 29, 2009, 09:17:48 PM
It has never happened to any of my normal humans.
#6
General Discussion /
March 20, 2009, 08:46:18 AM
Should be a warning, or made obvious IC for full death.  Not that I am against full death, but it is good to be mentally prepared for it as I tend to multitask.  Other than that, all good most people like a challenge.
#7
Suggestions /
November 20, 2008, 08:03:05 PM
moar arrowz pleasesz
#8
Suggestions /
November 19, 2008, 07:45:35 PM
Barbadin ftw?

That aside, I did not mean to spurn an alignment discussion.  Only that in reading a lot in source booky stuffs, you find that actions generally determins alignment, and intent has an extremely simplified or nonexistent role.  If your paladin accidentally kills a child, it's still an evil act (barring extreme circumstances), no matter what the intentions may have been.  Alignment is entirely tangible in DnD.  This is also a reason many paladins go through processes of falling and atonement, because alignment is not self determined or up for discussion, the gods take a birds eye view on your actions, they don't know what your intent is, and probably don't care.

I do not believe any conversations need alignment shifts, it sounds just like a way for the system to be exploited to shift/recover their desired alignment.
#9
Suggestions /
November 19, 2008, 12:11:52 AM
Intent plays no role in DnD alignment.

Only action.  Thus why most dialogue options wouldn't work.
#10
Off-topic Discussion /
November 18, 2008, 10:36:32 PM
#11
Off-topic Discussion /
November 18, 2008, 10:26:32 PM
Chaotic Good
Arcane Trickster (Although I was hoping for bard >_<)
#12
Screen Shots & Obituaries /
November 18, 2008, 06:49:59 AM
Pure awesomesauce.
#13
General Discussion /
November 12, 2008, 09:52:30 PM
I believe the discussion has migrated from it's initial intent to a discussion about intelligence.

Going back to comments for the OP.

I couldn't disagree with Cruzel more.  We are not our PCs.  We play them, but we are not them.  When we make personal consolidations to be more and more like our PCs it becomes more and more like "playing yourself" than "role playing".

Do I think intelligent people should limit themselves to playing intelligent characters?  No.  Why is the importance of the strength stat any different than the important stat.  To say so would be a move to incredible bias in the stat system.  Why can a strong person play a weak character, but a dumb person not play an intelligent character?  Unfair to the stat system.

There is something to be said about intelligent/hawt(err... charismatic) players playing intelligent/charismatic characters.  Given they may have more real world experience in those fields, they MIGHT do a better job representing those fields, but to say that one should limit their character by their own abilities as a player is folly.  It causes a fundamental break in what role-playing really is.  It is a given some of our characters might take on the similar styles, because we have to represent them all through the same medium, and it is very much an art form.

No, people should not limit themselves.  This is a fantasy game afterall.  To me one of my favorite parts about role-play is playing that which is vastly different from myself.  Im not a genius but I love racking my brain for a few long words when I am playing a wizard.

How are we ever going to become better role-players if we consistently limit ourself to our own abilities?  Many of which don't even translate to a DnD setting.