Quote from: DavetheLost;909161It doesn't take any training to walk around in a metal suit if that is all you are doing and have someone to help you on and off with it.

I like the out-of-the-box thinking. Though I suspect training (mostly in the form of practice) is needed to be able to walk around in a metal suit without exhaustion.

I've seen PCs use a similar tactic, only with a mail shirt that be put on/taken off quickly.

Bob Ross and his happy little trees is actually cool, mmmkay? And he already had niche protection for mountain vistas down cold.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;909133When anyone wonders why I posted once in a year-and-a-half, re-read this post - Opa nails it.

Over the past three years the level of abject stupid on this site broke whatever gawddamned meter you use to measure abject stupid. Then it rebuilt the meter with chewing gum and packing tape and broke it again, only harder the second time, like dropping a cargo [strike]container[/strike] ship on it, and then nuking the meter and the ship from orbit, 'cause it's the only way to be sure.

See you in the funny pages.

No shit.  Between "pedantic use of language to so many decimal places it's indistinguishable from stupidity" and "all the fucking sense of humor of a ruptured testicle," it's no wonder I spend most of my time in Chirine's little corner.

Quote from: Elfdart;909052I'm sure most predators (tigers, crocodiles) would go for meat that's not in a can.

My point (and I do have one) is that unless they're in an area frequented by adventurers, how would they recognize "a can" until they tried to bite it?

Quote from: JesterRaiin;908677Still, there's no contradiction. All I need is one species, one example that proves that not EVERY animal (etc, etc). I find tiger sharks a good example of what I have in mind - an animal that's not very "smart" in its dietary choice. You might say that it doesn't have to be smart, that it's an effect of evolution, specialization, or that external elements influence its behavior, and you're gonna be right about that... But it's not the same discussion.

You are conflating several different things.  Having a developed prey selection or hunting model doesn't involve having lots of "smarts" in the human sense.  The great majority of predators are, essentially, mindless.  By the numbers, most of them are predatory insects.  They are driven by simple, instinctive behaviors.

For every species, there is a theoretical optimal hunting strategy out there that gives that species the most return for the least effort and risk.  That includes avoiding competition for prey with other species.  We will make that optimal strategy the dot in a center of a map representing various strategies.  Individuals start out all over the map.  They pursue a random assortment of strategies,  That's not really how it is but this is just for visualization.  Individuals with strategies that are closer to the optimal will do better and produce more offspring.  The next generation will vary from their parents and be clustered around where their parents were.  Some will be closer to optimal and some will be further away.  The ones closer will have an advantage and there off spring will be clustered even closer.  Repeat this for many generations and you will get strong clustering around the optimal strategy.  No "smarts" are involved but the result is the same.  of course this is very simplified.  It assumes the optimal strategy remains stationary and it probably wouldn't in real life but the principle still holds.

However, these are small predators that have short life spans and produce large numbers of offspring.  The sort of predators that would be a threat to something the size of a human are quite different.  They are large, sophisticated, have long lifespans and produce small numbers of offspring in each generation relative to something like a predatory insect.  They have sophisticated, learned hunting behaviors that they pass on to their offspring.  They are a small minority of predatory species but they are also the only relevant ones if we are talking about predators that would prey on something the size of a humanoid.  Any large predator that has lived alongside humanoids for any length of time will likely avoid them though.  The ones that don't are likely to be hunted to extinction quickly.  We used to have Grizzly Bears in California.  They made a habit of breaking into human dwellings and eating people.  California became part of the US in 1848.  The last California Grizzly sighting was in 1924.  Contrast this with the California Black Bear which avoids humans and has a population of 10,000-15,000 statewide,.

You keep saying "animals" but I am talking specifically about predators.  Herbivorous species can be very dangerous because of their size and power or aggressiveness but they do not hunt.

Of course a lot of this goes out the window when we are talking about a fantasy world where you have things like spiders the size of small horses (or bigger) and weird things like gibbering mouthers.

Quote from: JesterRaiin;908677The point is that tiger sharks are beasts known of being "garbage eaters", willing to swallow just about anything ranging from tires to metal buckets. Which is relatively dumb. And this proves the claim I made.

Then again, tiger sharks are merely first example that came to my mind. I'm sure, given enough time, I could find a better one. :cool:

That's a misnomer.  It's one of those things that is widely repeated but not really true.  Sometimes they misidentify such items as prey

The dead horse has been beaten to the point that it is nothing but a stinking pool of rotting sludge.

Why should a wizard wear armor when they can carry a manlet?

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;909189My point (and I do have one) is that unless they're in an area frequented by adventurers, how would they recognize "a can" until they tried to bite it?

Given the sheer crushing power their jaws have, most 'cans' pop relatively easily.  Also, they have other available weapons, like mass and natural ability to leverage it, for example the Bengali Tiger gets between 6-12ft long (Head to tail tip) and weighs in at about 3 to 500lbs, and that's not including their claws, which although may not rip through plate, but can shred chain armour reasonably well.

Thing is, predators stalk their prey looking for weakness.  If they don't find any, they don't attack and look for easier prey.  They plan, if crudely, and wait until they are at an advantage, or what they consider an advantage (because animals can fall for feints and tricks too.)  This is what we call cunning.  If you treat animals like bags of XP, that's your table, not real life.  Watch a nature show, get educated.

Quote from: Bren;909168I like the out-of-the-box thinking. Though I suspect training (mostly in the form of practice) is needed to be able to walk around in a metal suit without exhaustion.

Quote from: Elfdart;909169I've seen PCs use a similar tactic, only with a mail shirt that be put on/taken off quickly.

Last week one of my players finished repair work on a chain mail shirt for a costume shop that had seen some use in some sort of combat game or LARP. We dont know what the hell happened but the armour had taken a beating and required a fair amount of repair. I got to try it on once it was done so he could check for missed spots and so I could get to see for real what it is like to wear chain mail and move around in it.

The whole thing, shirt and coif weighed I believe around 30lb or more of galvanized steel. On me its more like a chain-mail coat as it came down to my knees. Interesting experience. Definitely slows movement from the added weight. But its also very different from say wearing a 30lb backpack. I think it would be tiring to a person with a lower STR and/or CON score. Like alot of wizards are. But with practice its not too bad. And here is where 5e shines as PCs can with practice pick up proficiency via normal feat or via training.

As for just taking it off when trouble starts. Having tried to get out of the stuff now on my own I can say it might take more than a 6 second round to get out without proficiency/practice. Its not like pulling off a sweater. A full suit of Chain Mail though? Not going to happen in 6sec as you have to shuck not only the shirt but the padding under it, gauntlets, coif and whatnot. more like 2 rounds total? hmmm. Something to test later if the chance arises again.

Quote from: David Johansen;909204Why should a wizard wear armor when they can carry a manlet?

Even a 5'5" manlet is going to be too heavy for the average MU to carry very far.

Quote from: yosemitemike;909190You are conflating several different things.

I agree with you.

Quote from: Opaopajr;909177Bob Ross and his happy little trees is actually cool, mmmkay? And he already had niche protection for mountain vistas down cold.

That's why he has been chosen for the task of soothing the pain originating from Black Vulva's existential crisis. Bob Ross heals.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;909187it's no wonder I spend most of my time in Chirine's little corner

It's no wonder you spend time in the suburbs, if all you've got are grotesque attempts at being edgy at all cost.

Don't squeeze your buttocks that hard all the time. Allow yourself to fart every now and then. Make a fun of yourself - nobody is too old for that and it certainly doesn't hurt. In the end it's what you deliver matters, not what you know and own but decide to keep for yourself.

Quote from: Omega;909212As for just taking it off when trouble starts. Having tried to get out of the stuff now on my own I can say it might take more than a 6 second round to get out without proficiency/practice. Its not like pulling off a sweater. A full suit of Chain Mail though? Not going to happen in 6sec as you have to shuck not only the shirt but the padding under it, gauntlets, coif and whatnot. more like 2 rounds total? hmmm. Something to test later if the chance arises again.

But probably not too bad for a 60 second round I'm guessing. What are the 5e rules on donning and doffing armor?

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;909189My point (and I do have one) is that unless they're in an area frequented by adventurers, how would they recognize "a can" until they tried to bite it?

Old Dragon cartoon:  One dragon, holding an armored knight, gestures to another dragon:  "I love these things, crunchy on the outside, chewy on the inside!"  (A parody of an ad for a particular brand of candy, IIRC).

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;909203The dead horse has been beaten to the point that it is nothing but a stinking pool of rotting sludge.

Welcome to the internet.  Here's your standard issue crash helmet.

Enjoy your stay.