rpg.net forums down

Pierce Inverarity · February 02, 2007, 05:20:08 PM

PS: Aha.

J Arcane · February 02, 2007, 05:20:41 PM

Quote from: jrientsI don't know what that's supposed to mean. I'm running my second 3.5 campaign right now and playing in someone else's 3.5 game. But I'm also running '81 Basic/Expert D&D at a con next weekend. (aside - Crap! I gotta write some adventures!) Both are D&D. I don't see how the existence of a new edition of D&D makes an older version somehow less dungeony and dragony.

I think what he's referring to is the tendency of a lot of the uber-grognards to deliberately pretend you're talking about OD&D when you refer to the term.

They refuse to acknowledge that 3.0/3.5 are ALSO D&D.

It's one of those idiotic little conversation ploys that they think is so clever, but is mostly over used and stupid.

And I must also concur on the RC twaddle. RC got to be as bad as Exalted after a while there, and I was very sad and frustrated when it seemed for a short bit there that some of that constant crap was bleeding over into the forums here, though thankfully it seems to have subsided.

GoldenApe · February 02, 2007, 05:20:46 PM

Quote from: jrientsYeah, I go by jrients or Jeff Rients pretty much everywhere I hang out on the internet. It helps me behave myself to use my real name.

BTW, I love your pink robotar.

Thanks.

Pink's my favourite colour, and robots just kick ass all around.

droog · February 02, 2007, 05:21:59 PM

American Badass told me I rocked. Obviously the fellow was slightly insane, but it's a nice thought.

RedFox · February 02, 2007, 05:23:14 PM

Quote from: J ArcaneI think what he's referring to is the tendency of a lot of the uber-grognards to deliberately pretend you're talking about OD&D when you refer to the term.

They refuse to acknowledge that 3.0/3.5 are ALSO D&D.

It's one of those idiotic little conversation ploys that they think is so clever, but is mostly over used and stupid.

And I must also concur on the RC twaddle. RC got to be as bad as Exalted after a while there, and I was very sad and frustrated when it seemed for a short bit there that some of that constant crap was bleeding over into the forums here, though thankfully it seems to have subsided.

Y'know, I went out and bought a copy of the RC on ebay because of that twaddle (thankfully for cheap) and... I don't see what's so great about it.

A friend's copy of Castles & Crusades looked worlds better.

J Arcane · February 02, 2007, 05:27:23 PM

Quote from: RedFoxY'know, I went out and bought a copy of the RC on ebay because of that twaddle (thankfully for cheap) and... I don't see what's so great about it.

A friend's copy of Castles & Crusades looked worlds better.

Frankly I'm not interested in C&C either.

It frankly didn't look like anything I wanted to spend money on. The atrocious layout and editing alone scared me off, and the focus of the game is towards an audience that is not me.

I'm what I suppose you could call a "new school" D&D player. I think 3.0 was the epitome of the series.

RedFox · February 02, 2007, 05:34:09 PM

Quote from: J ArcaneFrankly I'm not interested in C&C either.

It frankly didn't look like anything I wanted to spend money on. The atrocious layout and editing alone scared me off, and the focus of the game is towards an audience that is not me.

I'm what I suppose you could call a "new school" D&D player. I think 3.0 was the epitome of the series.

My head gets spinny with all the feats and options and whatnot, but I think D20's a solid system.

I couldn't even say what the difference is between 3.0 and 3.5. I think 3.5 has easier notation for facing/reach, or sommat?

I just use the SRD for all my needs, honestly. It's free.

James McMurray · February 02, 2007, 05:42:48 PM

There's tons of differences between 3.0 and 3.5, but most are easily missed and won't cause you much trouble if they're not used.

J Arcane · February 02, 2007, 05:46:15 PM

Quote from: RedFoxMy head gets spinny with all the feats and options and whatnot, but I think D20's a solid system.

I couldn't even say what the difference is between 3.0 and 3.5. I think 3.5 has easier notation for facing/reach, or sommat?

I just use the SRD for all my needs, honestly. It's free.

3.5 is like moving to a new group, and they've already got a bunch of wierd random house rules in place that've built up over several years.

It's a lot of little changes, some good, some bad, but none terribly obvious, which can really throw you off.

Personally, I would've been happy to stick with 3.0, but I use d20SRD.org a lot, as well as e-Tools, and that sort of led to a grudging migration and acceptance of the new version simply because it was what I had rules for.

Sort of like upgrading a Microsoft OS. You really don't want to, but eventually you have no choice.

Consonant Dude · February 02, 2007, 05:49:31 PM

Quote from: Hackmastergeneralumm...no?

if you don't go with the group think and act like a cockmunch, you get dogpiled and banned.

Again, you can disagree, butthe only people who get banned are people who just can't stop acting like cockmunches. People who disagree, but don't act like a cockmunch, get along just fine.

You're in such a state of denial it's not even funny.

You really don't need to be a cockmunch to get dogpiled. All you need to do is state something unpopular. That's all. The groupthink effect over there can be quite strong.

Wake the fuck up and stop lying to yourself. Or shut the fuck up and stop lying to everybody else.

One Horse Town · February 02, 2007, 06:37:39 PM

Quote from: Consonant DudeWake the fuck up and stop lying to yourself. Or shut the fuck up and stop lying to everybody else.

I just wanted to quote that for no other reason than it is a cool quote. Carry on.

jdrakeh · February 02, 2007, 07:00:58 PM

Quote from: jrientsI don't know what that's supposed to mean. I'm running my second 3.5 campaign right now and playing in someone else's 3.5 game. But I'm also running '81 Basic/Expert D&D at a con next weekend. (aside - Crap! I gotta write some adventures!) Both are D&D. I don't see how the existence of a new edition of D&D makes an older version somehow less dungeony and dragony.

I think that he might be referring to the recent spate of threads at ENWorld and RPGnet wherein self-professed "old-school gamers" refused to acknowledge that D&D 3x was D&D. This is something that I discuss on my blog with great frequency and is, possibly, my largest hobby-related pet peeve. . . the "If it's new, it's crap!" battle cry isn't only bitter, it's rooted in extremely irrational fear.

David R · February 02, 2007, 07:06:24 PM

Quote from: droogAmerican Badass told me I rocked. Obviously the fellow was slightly insane, but it's a nice thought.

Was it American Badass who once said:

"Games should be played like pussy eaten"

Regards,
David R

el diablo robotico · February 02, 2007, 07:20:49 PM

Quote from: RedFoxA friend's copy of Castles & Crusades looked worlds better.

That wouldn't be mrlost's copy would it? Cuz if so then that would've actually been *my* copy, cuz he was borrowing it from me for a while (unless he went out and bought it afterwards). Just mentioning that cuz it's a funny coincidence.

And thanks to everyone for pointing out that pundit = nisarg. Nice to have the frame of reference.

Quote from: Consonant DudeYou really don't need to be a cockmunch to get dogpiled. All you need to do is state something unpopular. That's all. The groupthink effect over there can be quite strong.

True to the dogpiling. But not true to the banning, unless you subsequently become a cockmunch as a result of the dogpiling (which isn't hard to do if you get pissed off enough at the dogpilers).

jdrakeh · February 02, 2007, 07:23:33 PM

Quote from: el diablo robotico. . . unless you subsequently become a cockmunch as a result of the dogpiling (which isn't hard to do if you get pissed off enough at the dogpilers).

Honestly, that's how most (but not all) of the bans I've seen go down over there happen.