Tabletop Roleplaying Games (D&D, Pathfinder, CoC, ETC.)

[40 Year Old Boomer]

Eh, I can kinda dig it. "You know where the invisible thing is to within 5ft, but still take the -5 to hit"

I know it's fun to play devil's advocate, but do you really want to take the side of that cum guzzling faggot when he is explicitly wrong?

 

[Ghostse]

I know it's fun to play devil's advocate, but do you really want to take the side of that cum guzzling faggot when he is explicitly wrong?
View attachment 7097721

For me, I would agree: True Sight means true sight.
But I can also see someone deciding to treat it as "You see invisbile stuff but it doesn't negate the other advantages of it having the invisibility trait". You can see the light warping around the predator and know about where it is, but its still difficult to stab exactly.

But also the only GM I'm treating as having word with a greater weight than my own is Gygax, because I don't care if they're the lead designer to the "designated GM' or w/e they didn't create the whole system, they farmed that out. Least of all some Woke Coastie faggot.

I'm also going to say I dislike True Sight becasue I think it should be tiered or have some way of bypassing other than GM fiat "this negates true sight" but I digress.

 

[strawberry15]

For me, I would agree: True Sight means true sight.
But I can also see someone deciding to treat it as "You see invisbile stuff but it doesn't negate the other advantages of it having the invisibility trait". You can see the light warping around the predator and know about where it is, but its still difficult to stab exactly.

But also the only GM I'm treating as having word with a greater weight than my own is Gygax, because I don't care if they're the lead designer to the "designated GM' or w/e they didn't create the whole system, they farmed that out. Least of all some Woke Coastie faggot.

I'm also going to say I dislike True Sight becasue I think it should be tiered or have some way of bypassing other than GM fiat "this negates true sight" but I digress.

invisibility is not manuplation of light but an illusion. true sight is sight that disregards the illusion. we should not add physical mechanics to d&d magic. an illusion is an illusion and the counter counters it perfectly. otherwise a player stupidly spends a 6th level spell slot to gain nothing.

 

[40 Year Old Boomer]

But I can also see someone deciding to treat it as "You see invisbile stuff but it doesn't negate the other advantages of it having the invisibility trait". You can see the light warping around the predator and know about where it is, but its still difficult to stab exactly.

Well why have rules or descriptions at all if you're just going to ignore them? Invisibility/Greater Invisibility are level 2 and 4 spells vs a level 6 spell which is designed to negate the effects of these (and other) lower level effects?

Here's the better question: as a DM would you accept a player's logic that the invisibility effect should still give them a bonus to AC against an enemy that is immune to the effect?

 

[Ghostse]

Here's the better question: as a DM would you accept a player's logic that the invisibility effect should still give them a bonus to AC against an enemy that is immune to the effect?

Depends on game, system, and context but I wouldn't rule it out. So I wouldn't out agreeing that Player casts invisibility, enemies with True Sight know where they are its still harder for them to stab the PC exactly so AC bonus still applies. If an enemy has blind sight/temor sense/etc obviously not.

Whatever I ruled would go in both directions. If True Sight is a hard counter to invisibility, its hard counter no matter who. If you can see there is something out there that is cloaked but don't see it clearly, that's how it goes for players and enemies - unless there something that changes how that works.


Again, I don't like True Sight as usually written. The Spell version is usually fine, I have an adjudication method there, but I dislike creatures that have it as just as effect. Sort of the same for creatures that "are" invisible vs. getting it from an item/spell. I generally dislike absolutes, everything should have a bypass even if its just for edge cases.

edit: but for 5e specifically since I'm only running oneshots/megadungeons when I have to use the system, I'm just going to say "rules say it negates invisibility completely, so invisibility is fully negated" because I won't care enough about the long term implications or want to house rule around it.

 

[Tri-Tachyon'sClown]

The fuck I thought I posted this already, now it's super late.

It gives me a bit of a whiplash, since my last campaign as a DM was Egypt-themed and most of the players (even the wokies) liked it very much before they began injecting troon shit and led to the game being killed.

Should've ejected them out at the slightest whiff...assuming you haven't and that's why the game died, God I hate those kinds of people.

I do remember getting into a small argument with the most problematic player about skin color in Ancient Egypt. Look at my profile pic and tell me whether that's a good idea.

I'd imagine you cursed him by the end of it.
Was going to link a different one but the creator trooned out.

 

[#1 Hot Sauce of Kiwi Farm]

It gives me a bit of a whiplash, since my last campaign as a DM was Egypt-themed and most of the players (even the wokies) liked it very much before they began injecting troon shit and led to the game being killed. I do remember getting into a small argument with the most problematic player about skin color in Ancient Egypt. Look at my profile pic and tell me whether that's a good idea.

That is when you show them some real cultural enrichment and have the ones who offends the laws of the gods the sharp end of a Khopesh before feeding them to the crocodiles.

Well why have rules or descriptions at all if you're just going to ignore them? Invisibility/Greater Invisibility are level 2 and 4 spells vs a level 6 spell which is designed to negate the effects of these (and other) lower level effects?

Here's the better question: as a DM would you accept a player's logic that the invisibility effect should still give them a bonus to AC against an enemy that is immune to the effect?

If the enemy has true sight or any abilities that negate invisibility you should be punished for being retarded and trying to use invisibility on like a Lich or something. Even in my games invisibility is still very strong as while I have major settlements try to have wards or counters to stuff it does not mean that the wards are properly maintained or cannot be tampered with as people are lazy and hiring mages is expensive.
That being said while I make things harder aka actually having the population and npcs not be moronic I do reward the players more for achieving their goals.

Oh you got past the wards and traps well here's the nice things they were hiding. Oh you beat the bandits/ other party rival party members yes you get all the magic items they had on them as yes I do make and track other parties outside of the players as of course you are not the only other party in the world. (It's partly to make the world feel more alive and it is also helpful to fill a gap in the group when someone cannot make it so the others can hire or ask for help if they are friends with a certain group).

 

[strawberry15]

I created a great encounter once in ad&d. It was the groups first beholder. I created a labyrinth, there was no disarmable traps, because there was no traps at all! there were levers that can only be activated by beholders telekinesis eye. some parts of the wall(black obsidian like parts) had spears, rolling boulders etc in them. those parts were magical and the main eye of the beholder temporarily dispels them to let the spears fall on players, let the players fall to the pit etc. put 2 types of magical mirrors, in one of them they can see one specific area that another mirro covers, other type of mirrors which allows dimention door to a random other teleporting mirror. the plan was not engaging with the beholder, but find the exit as soon as they can. Loved the tension. they noticed beholder was behind a wall, cast passwall on it, charged the beholder, killed it in 2 rounds.
moral of the story is: sometimes players are stupid, sometimes they are stupid and successful, sometimes they are claver and dead. let them be, let the true sight see.

 

[#1 Hot Sauce of Kiwi Farm]

I created a great encounter once in ad&d. It was the groups first beholder. I created a labyrinth, there was no disarmable traps, because there was no traps at all! there were levers that can only be activated by beholders telekinesis eye. some parts of the wall(black obsidian like parts) had spears, rolling boulders etc in them. those parts were magical and the main eye of the beholder temporarily dispels them to let the spears fall on players, let the players fall to the pit etc. put 2 types of magical mirrors, in one of them they can see one specific area that another mirro covers, other type of mirrors which allows dimention door to a random other teleporting mirror. the plan was not engaging with the beholder, but find the exit as soon as they can. Loved the tension. they noticed beholder was behind a wall, cast passwall on it, charged the beholder, killed it in 2 rounds.
moral of the story is: sometimes players are stupid, sometimes they are stupid and successful, sometimes they are claver and dead. let them be, let the true sight see.

You have to think like a paranoid schizophrenic. Oh you tried to passwall well now you're in astral realm or something teach them to try to jump through something with no information. You are the DM you know what the players can and cannot do, now this does not mean you have to hard counter them, but it does help you along as no one is as crazy or intelligent as a beholder or whatever far smarter than you being you are trying to portray.

 

[Senwosret III]

Should've ejected them out at the slightest whiff...assuming you haven't and that's why the game died, God I hate those kinds of people.

I think I mentioned this on my first posts in this thread. Here they are. But yeah, looking back on it, I was hoping for the best and I hadn't been burnt as badly an directly by the woke stuff. Guess I was a bit too optimistic.

First post here, so I'm sorry if the formatting's wrong.
One of the players for my regular saturday 4e game I DM online (since we live on different countries now, we had to make the switch to Roll20, greatest mistake of my life), asked if she(?) could switch characters. "She" wasn't on the original roster of players, but came recommended to me by one of them after another had to drop out. I have the habit of interviewing any potential players to avoid gay retarded shit, but I must've had an off-day, because this is the garbage I was sent as a concept:

Drow Druid, troon, left the Underdark because the females don't recognize the troon as a female and muh oppreshun!!!!!

Seing these red flags, I said no, please don't inject alphabet garbage in my game. This is the first time as a DM that this happened to me. Does anyone know of better ways to dissuade the player from this retardation, or should I just boot the troon fetishist out of my game?

Had the conversation with the players. Probably could've handled it better, but eh. Two players called me a bigot, asked me to "do better" and be all inclusive, then left. One even claimed to extend an olive branch when he asked for me to bend over an beg for an excuse. Nigger it isn't my job to coddle your sensibilities, it is my hobby and I will run my games how I want.

Quite surprisingly, the player who wanted to play the troon apologized and backtracked, but eventually quit without saying a word. Game's dead, but no game is better than a bad game. I've probably been banned or blacklisted from the 4e discord server, but oh well. I prefer older editions, and troons infest that server anyway. It was just a question of time.

The two other players are the ones I'm genuinely sorry for. They apologized if they ever did something wrong, one seemed to agree and thanked me for drawing the line in the sand. Worse yet, they were the only players that never posed a problem, were always on time, didn't pull dumb stuff or try to abuse my goodwill. Hell, one's a great rules lawyer, keeping both DM and player in line with rulings. I will miss these two.

Fuck the clown world we live in, I want to go back when this type of stuff didn't permeate our hobbies. I think my hatred for tranny shit has peaked since a long while.

That is when you show them some real cultural enrichment and have the ones who offends the laws of the gods the sharp end of a Khopesh before feeding them to the crocodiles.

Should've absolutely done that. It would've been even more humiliating to have been burned at the stake, since burning leaves no bodies and for the Ancient Egyptians, no body to bury = no afterlife for ya.

 

[strawberry15]

You have to think like a paranoid schizophrenic. Oh you tried to passwall well now you're in astral realm or something teach them to try to jump through something with no information. You are the DM you know what the players can and cannot do, now this does not mean you have to hard counter them, but it does help you along as no one is as crazy or intelligent as a beholder or whatever far smarter than you being you are trying to portray.

Yep beholders are crazy, paranoid monsters, and maybe i could have done it. this was a bummer for me but eh, can always improve on the template. i really liked that dungeon tbh. the point was to escape and find the exit, never actually planned beholder to attack them, because if he did, because of the advantages he had, it would have been one sided. Still the mindflayer dungeon worked too well that 2 of my players accused me of rail roading lol.

 

[#1 Hot Sauce of Kiwi Farm]

Yep beholders are crazy, paranoid monsters, and maybe i could have done it. this was a bummer for me but eh, can always improve on the template. i really liked that dungeon tbh. the point was to escape and find the exit, never actually planned beholder to attack them, because if he did, because of the advantages he had, it would have been one sided. Still the mindflayer dungeon worked too well that 2 of my players accused me of rail roading lol.

Tell them that it's not Baldur's Gate 3 and you cannot fuck the Mindflayers. They are souless brain eating mind manipulating monsters that should be killed on sight as they are one of if not the most terrifying creatures to deal with. No not because they are the strongest though still quite dangerous less so in the modern editions, but you can say that about everything. They are a problem, because they are intelligent and have access to knowledge and abilities that can easily ruin anyone's day. If you are dealing with mindflayers you better make sure you are prepared and that your minds are protected. If not you're either getting enslaved or your brains eaten.

Once again it's just like dealing with beholders it's not the beholder that is the main issue it's all the bullshit they have set up that you have to deal with along side the monster. Sure a single mindflayer alone against a party is going to most likely lose unless maybe the party is extremely low level though this is the mistake of a lot of dms that just throw monster at the players.

You can easily wipe a high level party with goblins as the traps and ambushes can easily pick apart a party. Hags are and should be unless the party was smart and has the hags (with a few exceptions) completely trapped would be a threat for the entire campaign.

 

[40 Year Old Boomer]

Tell them that it's not Baldur's Gate 3 and you cannot fuck the Mindflayers. They are souless brain eating mind manipulating monsters that should be killed on sight as they are one of if not the most terrifying creatures to deal with. No not because they are the strongest though still quite dangerous less so in the modern editions, but you can say that about everything. They are a problem, because they are intelligent and have access to knowledge and abilities that can easily ruin anyone's day. If you are dealing with mindflayers you better make sure you are prepared and that your minds are protected. If not you're either getting enslaved or your brains eaten.

One of my favorite bits of old lore is how Aboleths look down their tentacles at every other sapient species but collectively shat themselves at Illithids because they had no memory of this species that popped up out of seemingly nowhere, complete with functioning society and filling a similar aberrational niche.

 

[Bâtard Consanguine]

Tell them that it's not Baldur's Gate 3 and you cannot fuck the Mindflayers. They are souless brain eating mind manipulating monsters that should be killed on sight as they are one of if not the most terrifying creatures to deal with. No not because they are the strongest though still quite dangerous less so in the modern editions, but you can say that about everything. They are a problem, because they are intelligent and have access to knowledge and abilities that can easily ruin anyone's day. If you are dealing with mindflayers you better make sure you are prepared and that your minds are protected. If not you're either getting enslaved or your brains eaten.

Are Mind Flayers still considered inherently evil and relegated to the Monster Manual in the new updates, or are has some hysterical freaks equated squid-faced brain-eating psychic slavers to some real world race and thus they too have been retconned as being a misunderstood minority like the orcs?

 

[East_Clintwood]

Are Mind Flayers still considered inherently evil and relegated to the Monster Manual in the new updates, or are has some hysterical freaks equated squid-faced brain-eating psychic slavers to some real world race and thus they too have been retconned as being a misunderstood minority like the orcs?

Still in the MM, still Lawful Evil Aberrations..

 

[w.a.m.s.]

Looking for game recs:

Is there such a thing as a crunch-light (or crunch-medium), character-drama-heavy/"cinematic"/"theater kid" type TRPG whose community is not pozzed?

 

[Ghostse]

crunch-light [ ... ]community is not pozzed?

Nope. Without math to gatekeep out the fags, trannies, niggers, and thots the game will be colonized by all of those groups eventually. Learn to use a graphing calculator or learn to like sucking lady penis, lumpy potato mystery meat character art, and wearing the cockcage. There is no middle ground.

I guess there's always RaHoWa.

 

[LovisXVI]

community

Well there is your problem. Caring about the online community will only lead to ruin and despair. No game outside of the most obviously chud-coded will be free from the taint of those people. Even "OSR" is like half fags. You really just need to learn to not care about them.

 

[Oddjob OTP]

The only problem is he will make some of these rulings completely off the cuff, without regard to how they interact with other rulings, or just be like "Lol fun!" Not realizing every retard is going to take these as concrete laws and loopholes to do the dumbest shit imaginable.

It's been a few years now since I read through them, but I just remember being incredibly pissed that to this day everyone treats him like this sage-like game design philosopher.

His autism tries to treat the DnD rules like it does MtG. The problem is that MtG rules were designed by lawyers and currently fill a 297 page PDF and DnD rules are like 3 kinds of D20 checks, a handful of general actions, and an awful lot of special exceptions and redefinition in the form of class abilities, spells, items, and monster stat blocks. Most of these exceptions were designed to work with the core rules and not really each other and the whole thing was written down by the smelly drama kids that work in the DnD department at WotC.

I've never heard anyone treat Mearls and Crawford as anything but retards but they are the only retards to include in your Mouth of God rules lawyering attempts so they get brought up a lot anyway.

 

[AnOminous]

Still in the MM, still Lawful Evil Aberrations..

I always treated those MF MFers as monsters, but the kind you're a moron if you decide to actually fight them rather than avoid or otherwise handle them in any way that does not involve their tentacles sucking out your brains. Or if you somehow didn't start out a moron and did this, you'd definitely end up a moron by the end of the encounter.

They weren't generally into active warfare against humans, they'd just collect slaves among races they found particularly tasty, and cull the most intelligent, and keep them as slaves, sometimes for years, occasionally sharing them with other MFs like at a fine wine tasting.

I portrayed it as something that made the Sarlacc pit look like a Club Med vacation. "Are you really sure you want to risk this?"

And if they would the general strategy wouldn't even be killing the party, it would be snatching a mage or a cleric or a paladin and then slipping off to another plane.

So when you had a party of Ogg the Barbarian, some half-orc thief, a couple generic fighters, and Johnny Poindexter the Super Smart Mage. . .you could bet that last guy would be "umm. . .let's umm. . .talk with this guy and see what he wants? Please?"

These could be really terrifying enemies, too, because you might have recurrent dealings with some genius-level monster who, on top of that, had all the memories of your friends he'd already killed (or still had captive).

Including memories of you. They were also really sadistic and would taunt you with that.

They were one of a very few kinds of monster (dragons and major demons among them) where instead of "okay guys let's just kill these chumps" the only proper response was terror.

Not because even a small group of them was a TPK in the making (though it was even if they didn't care about TPK or even revenge), but because what they could do was way worse than killing you. One of my favorite monsters but I only used them a few times for obvious reasons.