Quote from: Benoist;535549Well I think he's on the mark here. Part of the problem is this crap gaming culture and mentality that assumes everything must be played by the book all the time or you're "cheating", that you can't possibly house rule anything without wrecking the game because the game publisher and designer knows best, that the GM is "just this other player that should shut the hell up and enable my awesomeness", that assumes guidelines are rules, and options guidelines... it's this shit mentality that needs to be taken down and shot in the face, once and for all.

I definitely started noticing a cult of the RAW creeping up in 3e but it exploded along with virtual balance between classes with the fulcrum being combat as the balancer. You can't have a serious discussion about the game without one or the other dominating the direction of the discussion.

So yes, it needs to be shot dead, burned in the fire of a thousand suns. I would like to volunteer for the job if no one else will.


@CRKrueger, My point is proven.

Quote from: Marleycat;535551@CRKrueger, My point is proven.

Heh, oh you meant literally the sig might have been on to something.  Sorry, the sig itself is entertaining, but usually quotes like that are used ironically, almost always by people who are attempting to deny any distinction between generations or age groups.  Kind of a pet peeve since that gets used in place of an actual argument around here at times by the 4vengers.

I was just thinking, we need some Sommerjon to make this thread more alive with discontent.

Quote from: CRKrueger;535554Heh, oh you meant literally the sig might have been on to something.  Sorry, the sig itself is entertaining, but usually quotes like that are used ironically, almost always by people who are attempting to deny any distinction between generations or age groups.  Kind of a pet peeve since that gets used in place of an actual argument around here at times by the 4vengers.

Stop talking intelligently to me it goes right over my head.*

*I was specifically talking about the world degenerating.

U not unde-stand wo'ds anymoar?

Quote from: Benoist;535558U not unde-stand wo'ds anymoar?

Nope.

It's work that does it. The dumber I act the better it is for me.

QuotePart of the problem is this crap gaming culture and mentality that assumes everything must be played by the book all the time or you're "cheating", that you can't possibly house rule anything without wrecking the game because the game publisher and designer knows best, that the GM is "just this other player that should shut the hell up and enable my awesomeness", that assumes guidelines are rules, and options guidelines... it's this shit mentality that needs to be taken down and shot in the face, once and for all.

While I agree with you, the problem is that most people who take this mentality do so in a way that fosters enmity between the DM and players.  Rather than clearly laying out how the game will be working, they do not say that they are changing a rule because it is problematic.  Instead, the players are left with dozens of invisible house rules that they feel are unfair because they aren't aware of them until it crops up...and even then, the rules are applied in a slipshod, half-retarded manner with no regard to the consequences of the game.

For instance, critical failures in combat.  Had a DM who did this once.  If you roll a natural one, you suffer a critical failure.  It's funny when the archer breaks her bow once.  It's not funny when the archer breaks half a dozen bows on the course of an adventure.  It's not funny when you're at half HP and you go to take a full attack and you roll a one and you hit yourself and lose the rest of your attacks for a round.  It's not funny when you roll to hit with a touch spell and your attack hits your ally, killing him.  It's annoying, especially when you consider that the players are cumulatively rolling a lot more natural ones than an individual monster will.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;535456Generally speaking, and allowing for the dozens of exceptions that others will come up with immediately after I post this, a skill is something your character can do, and a feat is something that affects how well you do it.

I am not arguing how they turned out, but I am pretty sure WotC originally intended feats to be binary, and primarily for weapon proficiency or class ability stuff.

I am open to correction, however, and I am not about to sift through 12yrs of internet archives to find where that was said.  

I don't, in general, like binary skills/talents (unless they're quite subtle and/or make sense from the point of view of accurate simulation) or "once per encounter/day"-style powers/feats.

Quote from: RPGPundit;535531The main thing I want is for there to be the option of themes being randomly determined.

RPGPundit

Oh, now that would be nice.

Quote from: B.T.;535566It's annoying, especially when you consider that the players are cumulatively rolling a lot more natural ones than an individual monster will.

That's the problem with critical hits and fumbles in general, the sheer number of rolls made against the players.  Sure the more criticals the goblins roll, the more fumbles they will roll too, but when a player gets a crit, or a monster gets a fumble, it's a very small success compared to everything else they do that session.  If a monster gets a crit or a player gets a fumble, every single one can turn into a campaign-ending result.

That's why I like systems where crits or fumbles are not uber either way, and/or the ability to crit gets higher and fumble gets less as you gain in skill.

Quote from: CRKrueger;535602That's the problem with critical hits and fumbles in general, the sheer number of rolls made against the players.  Sure the more criticals the goblins roll, the more fumbles they will roll too, but when a player gets a crit, or a monster gets a fumble, it's a very small success compared to everything else they do that session.  If a monster gets a crit or a player gets a fumble, every single one can turn into a campaign-ending result.

That's why I like systems where crits or fumbles are not uber either way, and/or the ability to crit gets higher and fumble gets less as you gain in skill.

This is why I like Fantasy Craft you choose whether or not to confirm a critical from your limited pool of action dice which both the GM and players are strictured to.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;535456Generally speaking, and allowing for the dozens of exceptions that others will come up with immediately after I post this, a skill is something your character can do, and a feat is something that affects how well you do it.

Thanks for this (and to the others who replied). So 'Pick Locks' would be a skill, and 'Deft Fingers: Add +10% to Pick Locks' would be a feat.

I'm still left scratching my head a bit about the need for two separate rules terms, espically a term as clunky and inappropriate as 'feat'. Personally I'd just call them all skills and be done with it!

Quote from: Glazer;535670Thanks for this (and to the others who replied). So 'Pick Locks' would be a skill, and 'Deft Fingers: Add +10% to Pick Locks' would be a feat.

I'm still left scratching my head a bit about the need for two separate rules terms, espically a term as clunky and inappropriate as 'feat'. Personally I'd just call them all skills and be done with it!

That's all I have to say. Your wish is so wrong that it may even work, God be with you.

Quote from: Marleycat;535672Your wish is so wrong that it may even work, God be with you.

I wish that were true. Sadly, in my experience game systems gain rules clunk over time, rarely the other way round.