So, for those who missed the livestream, here it is:

[video=youtube_share;pgqKy5fwmTQ]https://youtu.be/pgqKy5fwmTQ[/youtube]

In this episode:

-The RPGPundit and Venger square off about how the OSR is supposed to work.

-Venger is uncovered to secretly be Curly from the Three Stooges

-We talk about the largest survey ever done of D&D-livestream viewers and what it proves, and what crucial question they failed to ask.

-Grim examines Cyberpunk 2077 and the controversies surrounding it

-We all tell Wesley to shut up.

-The Pundit reveals he's using strange wizardry on his NPCs.

and much more!


RPGPundit

Currently Smoking: Neerup Poker + Country Doctor

Good episode this...

Venger Vs Pundit - Round 1 FIGHT!

Some good tips about NPCs in there too.

Dude, seriously?

[ATTACH=CONFIG]2867[/ATTACH]

Works for me...

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;1055050Dude, seriously?

[ATTACH=CONFIG]2867[/ATTACH]

Yeah I got that too.

I had to ration my Punditry so I mostly watched the Ignorant Slut one. I think I get the general idea.

Pundit is basically right on this one I think, re what the OSR means, how OSR products work, why they are sucessful, and why the Gonzo is within a frame of meaningful choice. He was wrong when he picked a fight with Jeffro over Appendix N and seems to have misunderstood Jeffro's point - that the books Gygax lists are (mostly) good, worth reading, informed D&D, and are different from post-modern fantasy. But I think his calling out Venger on recent products, and demanding a more stringent OSR or O5R feel, is basically right and would be benefical if Venger chooses to take the advice.

Okay, I see what has happened here.

You need to actually watch it on youtube. I suspect, that it has been disabled by GJ or one of the team, because you don't get any ad revenue if it's viewed on another platform. Thanks youtube!

Quote from: The Exploited.;1055063Okay, I see what has happened here.

You need to actually watch it on youtube. I suspect, that it has been disabled by GJ or one of the team, because you don't get any ad revenue if it's viewed on another platform. Thanks youtube!

I don't think so, because we don't have ads or monetization on the channel. I'll mention this to him anyways.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1055193I don't think so, because we don't have ads or monetization on the channel. I'll mention this to him anyways.

Hmm... That's really weird. I'm sure it's some minor technical hitch. But it works fine if you play it on YT at least.

It seems to be some Youtube fuckery. I'm going through all the settings again just to be sure. I know I set it to be available everywhere.

GM describes situation
Players describe what the characters do in response to the system
GM uses system to resolve things
GM describes new situation

So from Pundit's perspective the random nature of the outcomes and the fact that none of the characteristics of the PCs are taken into consideration makes it a bad system to resolve things.

Venger's point seems to rest on the idea that once you get to step 3, how you do it doesn't really matter.  It can be a ruling or random table or a traditional use of AC/Saving Throws/etc.,.  Like a random table where you just have a character die as a result of participating in the activity regardless of your character's martial skill or whatever is equal to a system that actually takes the abilities of a character into consideration.

I've read some data from the British Armed Forces about WW2 casualties and what were the predictors of whether a given soldier was going to survive a given engagement.  A huge factor was whether or not they were injured in a previous engagement.  Those soldiers were far, far more likely to survive the very lethal fighting of WW2 than other soldiers.  The second greatest factor was whether or not they had experienced an actual battle before.  When you see those around you die and you survive by keeping your belly in the dirt you tend to do that in future battles.  And you take your dug in fortifications far more seriously and make sure the other people in your unit are preparing their positions properly.  A smattering of veterans in an otherwise green unit helped immensely.

If what the combatants know about fighting and what they do can impact their rate of survival on a lethal modern battlefield where positions suddenly are struck by artillery, bombed by aircraft, raked by machine gun fire or rolled over by tanks, I think it's probably also true of combat with more primitive weapons with a lower casualty rate.  So i think it's reasonable to say that a mass battle system that takes nothing into consideration is bad compared to one that does.  

Armour may actually be one of the most important factors in survival.  Especially access to hardened plate that has been shown to be proof against arrows.  Or the use of a large shield.

It probably would have been simple enough to have any result that was just death to instead refer to one other short table that has a few questions about combat experience, class and armour and armament and making some sort of additional check.  Even a simple attack on the AC of the participant.  Does the potentially lethal blow land?

Quote from: GRIM;1055207It seems to be some Youtube fuckery. I'm going through all the settings again just to be sure. I know I set it to be available everywhere.

I do have trouble imagining we're important enough to Youtube for this to be intentional, but you never know. Maybe there's some SJW gamer in the mix.