Quote from: Blazing Donkey;492330

Quote("you did something I didn't like, so the gods kill you") has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion at hand.

-very confused look- What are you talking about?

That's twice now you've claimed to have forgotten what you posted in this thread.

So at this point we're left with a few options:

(1) You have Alzheimer's. (My condolences.)
(2) You're an idiot. (Ditto.)
(3) You're a troll. (Well played.)
(4) There are actually multiple people posting from your account.
(5) You're actually just an instantiated instance of Cleverbot.
(6) You're a time traveler who is posting to this thread out of linear temporal sequence.

QuoteYou came up with some really odd example of a five-year-old playing a video game as unbeatable evidence that a person living in the 12th century could conceptualize a "mass driver".  That is your argument. Trying to say that it is somehow my  argument is completely outside of all reasoning.

Or possibly you're just illiterate. (Hint: I said exactly the opposite of what you're claiming I said. Is it the contractions? Do just not understand that "wouldn't" and "would" aren't the same word?)

Upon reflection, this is most likely the explanation. After all, you claim that it would take a super-computer for you to understand simple English sentences.

Quote from: David R;492342See, some of these ideas are pretty far out (in an interesting way) but creative spell use in my campaigns have been pretty mundane. I remember years ago, one player created these rings which were really some sort of comm devices (telepathy magic I think) so the characters could keep in touch when they were separated. It's small stuff like this (which has probably been thought up before) which adds a little something to the game. I admit I'm pretty easy going when it comes to stuff like this.

That is exactly what I intended the gist of this thread to be about; not a quantum physics of magic discussion with a impromptu showing of knuckle-draggers-on-parade as we've seen here..

I'm going to start another thread on this subject about exactly that: how we have or have seen spells used in a creative way or funny way. Most of the things I've seen are often mundane or even in direct cohesion with the intent of the spell, but done so in a amusing way.

For example, the party had been picked up by pirates, escaped from their cell, and were crawling through a ventilation shaft. They accidentally came up on the bridge, & were seen. A player cast "Summon Locust Swarm" *inside* the bridge..!

Suddenly the room was plunged into chaos as every square-inch of space in the room was filled with jumping locusts. They couldn't pilot the ship, they couldn't work the controls, they couldn't communicate with other ships or call the guards; it was a mess and they didn't have weapons on hand suitable for quickly getting rid of the locusts. -- The players escaped.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;492345Upon reflection, this is most likely the explanation. After all, you claim that it would take a super-computer for you to understand simple English sentences.

My own theory is that he and later Daniel had basically a gut reaction to the expression "mass driver", which basically made their brains tilt screaming "muuunchkin!!!!" and from there, the whole "game world consistency" thing was just (bad) rhetoric used to make sense of that reaction. It didn't work, so now we're down to various attempts at derision, humour and insults to camouflage the failure of their arguments. Classic internet conversation.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;492345That's twice now you've claimed to have forgotten what you posted in this thread.

How does that link relate to what you are talking about? In fact, what does it relate to at all? You're all over the place with this.

Remember when I asked you to be "coherent"? This is what I was talking about. I hate to have to ask this, but are you drunk right now?

QuoteSo at this point we're left with a few options:

(1) You have Alzheimer's. (My condolences.)
(2) You're an idiot. (Ditto.)
(3) You're a troll. (Well played.)
(4) There are actually multiple people posting from your account.
(5) You're actually just an instantiated instance of Cleverbot.
(6) You're a time traveler who is posting to this thread out of linear temporal sequence.

Can it be?? -- Yes, another batch of Ad Hominems! There shall be much merriment.

Oh, BTW, I notice that every time I rebut your silly arguments, you just drop them and come up with new ones. Believe it or not, you're not the first person to come up with this tactic. Many a young chap has employed the same technique since the BBS days. I remember a guy who ran a robocom board who used to pull it all the time back in '89; you remind me of him.

Same fetish for Ad Hominems, same redirection, same silly rebuttals. Of course, he was 16 at the time, but I'm hoping you are older than that. You are, aren't you?

QuoteOr possibly you're just illiterate.

Yes, this discussion is happening telepathically.

Hold on...  Mom! Get off the line! I'll feed the dog when I feel like it!

Ok, back to you.

Quote(Hint: I said exactly the opposite of what you're claiming I said. Is it the contractions? Do just not understand that "wouldn't" and "would" aren't the same word?)

Said about what? Which thread and which response are you refering to this time? -- Your lack of cohesion is really becoming taxing to deal with, and then, on top of it, you keep changing your argument like Martha Stewart trying to pick out just one pair of shoes at DSW.

QuoteUpon reflection, this is most likely the explanation. After all, you claim that it would take a super-computer for you to understand simple English sentences.

Yes, if they're brayed by someone who refuses to stay within the conventions of logic & coherence & rationality. Most people find that a lack of those things makes communication 'difficult'.

Uhm... Reverse Gravity has been a spell in D&D ever since 1st Edition AD&D. I think that is sufficient that a Wizard with that spell could have an excuse to study gravity and its observable effects. Plus EVERY Adventurer knows that the deeper the pit, the more damage you take.

Quote from: greylond;492358Uhm... Reverse Gravity has been a spell in D&D ever since 1st Edition AD&D. I think that is sufficient that a Wizard with that spell could have an excuse to study gravity and its observable effects. Plus EVERY Adventurer knows that the deeper the pit, the more damage you take.

Yeah, but if the skinny guy fell, the fat guy might think he could jump down and catch up to him (;

Quote from: Blazing Donkey;492357Oh, BTW, I notice that every time I rebut your silly arguments

Look. I think Justin is making a lot of sense, actually, while I am not seeing you formulating any kind of actual rebuttal. What I see is screaming about "ad hominem attacks", "incoherence", then making silly attempts at derision, making fun of the points people are making, etc. You're tap dancing, mate.  

Making fun at other people's arguments and calling them "incoherent" is NOT, in itself, a rebuttal. That's a deflection. That's camouflage, empty rhetoric, dick waving, in other words. Sure, Justin is quickly losing patience with you, as am I, but do you actually get the difference between these things and an actual rebuttal?

Quote from: Cranewings;492359Yeah, but if the skinny guy fell, the fat guy might think he could jump down and catch up to him (;

Actually, I think that would be a perfect line of research for a Wizard with a Reverse Gravity spell and wanting to learn more about it. I can see a Wizard making a variant "Reverse Gravity" spell that allows it to be cast on an angled surface. Or an area with a combination "Reverse Gravity" and "Push" at the same time that launches an item at an angle.

Quote from: Benoist;492362Look. I think Justin is making a lot of sense, actually, while I am not seeing you formulating any kind of actual rebuttal. What I see is screaming about "ad hominem attacks", "incoherence", then making silly attempts at derision, making fun of the points people are making, etc. You're tap dancing, mate.  

What a completely objective analysis that was. Good work, ace.

QuoteMaking fun at other people's arguments and calling them "incoherent" is NOT, in itself, a rebuttal. That's a deflection. That's camouflage, empty rhetoric, dick waving, in other words.

Whatever, man. You completely ducked the issue when Daniel Ream pointed out that the spell doesn't work the way you want it to. I even quoted the spell right out of the PH and didn't reply to that at all.

Justin's only means of communicating seems to be throwing out insults and ignoring any argument that he can't rebut - which is all of them - and hence, no rebuttals.  Both you and he and have been throwing out logical fallacies since the beginning. But, now, suddenly, I am the one who is using "camoflauge" and "deflection" -- according to you.

You guys are a laugh riot. You guys are like: "Blazing Donkey! You can't debate! All you can do is talk circles around us logically! Big difference!"

Tell me, Benoist: is there a Culiseta longiareolata that you are trying to impress with all this posturing? -- I hope you get lucky.

QuoteSure, Justin is quickly losing patience with you, as am I,

How terrible for you.

Quotebut do you actually get the difference between these things and an actual rebuttal?

LOL!! This coming from the guy got all butt-hurt because he didn't understand a joke that I told (which someone else got).

Yes, Benoist, you are certainly one to chastize others for not properly rebutting people. I bow before your majestic grace in this matter.

Quote from: greylond;492366Actually, I think that would be a perfect line of research for a Wizard with a Reverse Gravity spell and wanting to learn more about it. I can see a Wizard making a variant "Reverse Gravity" spell that allows it to be cast on an angled surface. Or an area with a combination "Reverse Gravity" and "Push" at the same time that launches an item at an angle.

Sounds like a very workable idea.

Quote from: Blazing Donkey;492367Whatever, man. You completely ducked the issue when Daniel Ream pointed out that the spell doesn't work the way you want it to. I even quoted the spell right out of the PH and didn't reply to that at all.

HOLY FUCK A COGENT REMARK. :eek:



No mate. It's Daniel who completely ignored my point about innovation and analogy, lateral thinking and association, and you who then jumped on the bandwagon because it was convenient for you to get a buddy on the thread to give you ammunition you sorely needed.

Answer my point about analogy. If you can use analogical reasoning, lateral thinking and association to come up with creative uses of spells, then the creation of such an effect is, in theory, actually possible. Nevermind the exact combo of spells required. That is, in fact, neither here nor there.

Blazing: You claimed a couple of the analogies I used were false analogy - I was wondering if you could clarify that for me.

I said:

QuotePlayer: I'm going to cast fly on myself, and then, when I'm up in the air, I'm going to light lanterns and drop them on the monsters.
GM: No, that's a modern notion, it's a plane dropping napalm, your character wouldn't know what a bomber plane is.

And then you said:

QuoteThat's a false analogy. Greek fire.

My analogy was that if you disallow modern concepts to be mimicked by creative spell combinations, etc, then you invalidate many normal D&D tactics.

Flight is a D&D spell. Magic Missile is a D&D spell. Combine them, and you are mimicking a fighter plane with guided missiles.

Teleport is a D&D spell. Spider Climb is a D&D spell. Combine them, and you are mimicking Nightcrawler from the X-Men.

If you don't disallow these creative spell uses, then "You're using magic to mimic something modern" is not a sufficient reason to disallow something. It happens all the time.

If you want to disallow a "light-speed" mass driver? There's all sorts of reasons that wouldn't work. No need to simply tell players they can't try it.

If my players actually tried such a thing in a hypothetical 3E game, it would probably go like this:

Players: Hey, you notice that if you use big rocks, or throw them really hard, the damage goes up without limit? Let's figure out a way to throw rocks at lightspeed!

DM: What do you expect to accomplish by this?

Players: We'll be able to blow up entire cities with a rock!

DM: Okay. Give it a try.

Players: We cast dimension door, and it passes through...

DM: Doesn't work that way.

Players: We get some ring gates...

DM: Only 100 lbs per day. No light speed.

Players: We craft a custom spell to...

DM: You're crafting a spell that will enable city destruction. It's an epic-level spell, it will require special feats, and you'll need to be epic level yourselves, and it will cost a million gold pieces.

Players: But we're only level 5...

DM: D&D magic is difficult based on what it can ultimately accomplish. It's result-based. So, while it may seem easy to create a simple variant of Telekinesis that smashes atoms together instead of big objects, the difficulty of creating a spell that lets you make a nuclear bomb is based on the damage a nuclear bomb does - not how complicated it is to make.

Players: But, vacuum, rocks... city explosion!

DM: I guess you'll have to level up if you want to destroy cities.

I've never heard D&D magic described as effect-based, before.

Quote from: Benoist;492375No mate. It's Daniel who completely ignored my point about innovation and analogy, lateral thinking and association [...] Nevermind the exact combo of spells required. That is, in fact, neither here nor there.

It's entirely the point.  The OP was about the creative use of existing spells.  There are no official spells in any version of D&D[1] that will allow the gravity-driven mass driver effect so beloved by some of you.

If a player wants to invent such a spell, hey, that's great.  It's hard and it takes time, and the payoff is you have a spell that can be used for cool shit that will be unexpected, because you made up a new spell.  But Teleport and Dimension Door and the various other transport magic spells explicitly do not work in the way that would be needed to create a mass driver[2].

This use of Teleport and Dimension Door is, to use Benoist's own words, explicitly forbidden by the spell description.

Here, Ben, I'll address your precious point: players who want to try to gain some kind of temporary quick win by exploiting an anachronistic understanding of grade school physics will have their plan evaluated by my anachronistic understanding of grad school physics.[3]  Or, we can just play the damn pseudo-medieval fantasy game we all agreed to in the first place.



[1] That I could find quickly; fuck me, I do not care enough.
[2] Gate might, it's unclear; but it's also a 9th level spell, at which point just fireballing the town is a more effective option anyway.
[3] No, that's not a typo.

"Temporary quick win".

Yeah. You're right. There's nothing more to discuss. It never was about the use of these particular spells, or portable holes and anti-grav effects, or any of that nonsense. I've said my piece.