Upgrading classes

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <OY2dnXP8mZfLvPvfRVnyiw@pipex.net>, Symbol <jb70@talk21.com> wrote:
>
>"David Alex Lamb" <dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca> wrote in message
>news:d43n82$fqd$1@knot.queensu.ca...
>> The first few Google references I found to Imhotep referred to him as an
>> "architect".
>>
>> For whatever that's worth.
>
>The first link title is "Egypt: Imhotep, Doctor, Architect, High Priest,
>Scribe and Vizier."

Sorry - don't know how I could have missed that.
--
"Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Matt Frisch" <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in message
news:47ac61lo9vppgeg84mauvpeksalr42tpcb@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 09:36:38 +0100, "Symbol" <jb70@talk21.com> scribed
into
> the ether:
>
> >
> >"Matt Frisch" <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in message
> >news:45ta61l90m9h81tteut0cn2cgivf20ggt0@4ax.com...
> >> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 13:09:56 +0100, "Symbol" <jb70@talk21.com>
scribed
> >into
> >> the ether:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"Anivair" <anivair@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:1113485526.891359.297810@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> >> >>
> >> >> Matt Frisch wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> b) so one NPC class is somehow supperior to another?
> >> >>
> >> >> What a ridiculous counterargument.
> >> >
> >> >So why make it?
> >>
> >> I didn't.
> >
> >I know that, I was taking the piss out of Anivair's strawman.
>
> By misquoting me...my feelings of lurve and kindlinessness are
withering.

I would apologize for the confusion but I'm more intent on KEELING YOU.

> >> Your quoting skills are poor.
> >
> >I WILL KEELL YOU FOR YOUR INSULTS!!1!
>
> Keelling sounds fun. Do you prefer with or without the lotion? I'm ok
with
> either, but really prefer the lotion.

Where's Kaos when you need her?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Michael Scott Brown" <mistermichael@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3Tp9e.11114$lP1.2764@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> "Symbol" <jb70@talk21.com> wrote in message
> news:OY2dnXr8mZfJvPvfRVnyiw@pipex.net...
> > "Michael Scott Brown" <mistermichael@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > > > There are guidelines however and breaking the spirit of the rules
is
> as
> > > > bad as breaking the letter.
> > >
> > > Please prove to the class how awarding story awards to great
works
> > > breaks the spirit of the rules.
> >
> > See the bit about story awards not exceeding a mission's encounter
award?
>
> You have misread the passage. The suggestion for setting the scale
of
> story awards is to the same scale as *all the XP in the mission*. Not
the
> XP of *an* encounter, buckwheat - ALL the XP for *ALL* THE MISSION'S
> ENCOUNTERS.

I missed the "s" off "awards" but thats what I meant. Note also that you
are the one advocating breaking the task down into mini missions.

> Now given that piddling things like bluffing a guard or disabling a
trap
> are actually considered CR encounters for PCs ... why, it's almost as if
> there might be opportunities for noncombat characters to overcome
challenges
> that don't involve combat! AMAZING!

Now explain how either of those examples are relevant to pyramid builders
(or builders of other great works) and how high level commoners have the
skills and abilities to overcome challenges of a level that will earn them
XP.

I find your bitching about commoners gaining BAB in a game where the
usual, general assumption is that more levels = at least some combat
extremely bizarre. If you want a high level commoner who isn't experienced
in combat why not just assign penalties to his BAB and AC for inexperience
or assume they start the fight shaken, frightened or panicked and have
them react appropriately? Your insistence that the core class *must* be
wrong is stupid.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"David Alex Lamb" <dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca> wrote in message
news:d45ep3$5i1$1@knot.queensu.ca...
> In article <OY2dnXP8mZfLvPvfRVnyiw@pipex.net>, Symbol <jb70@talk21.com>
wrote:
> >
> >"David Alex Lamb" <dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca> wrote in message
> >news:d43n82$fqd$1@knot.queensu.ca...
> >> The first few Google references I found to Imhotep referred to him as
an
> >> "architect".
> >>
> >> For whatever that's worth.
> >
> >The first link title is "Egypt: Imhotep, Doctor, Architect, High
Priest,
> >Scribe and Vizier."
>
> Sorry - don't know how I could have missed that.

Not to worry.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Symbol" <jb70@talk21.com> wrote in message
news:CYGdnWqA9_IJ2vvfRVnysg@pipex.net...
> I missed the "s" off "awards" but thats what I meant. Note also that you
> are the one advocating breaking the task down into mini missions.

Irrlevant. A campaign story arc is also broken down into mini missions
(modules, chapters, etc.).

> > Now given that piddling things like bluffing a guard or disabling a
trap
> > are actually considered CR encounters for PCs ... why, it's almost as if
> > there might be opportunities for noncombat characters to overcome
challenges
> > that don't involve combat! AMAZING!
>
> Now explain how either of those examples are relevant to pyramid builders
> (or builders of other great works)

Um, the part where they establish that there are challenges that don't
involve combat?
You don't think that managing the construction of a great work might
involve a little ... challenging negotiation?

>and how high level commoners have the skills and abilities to overcome
challenges of a level that will earn them XP.

Their skill points and feats? HELLO? <knock knock> Is there anyone in
this gourd?
Did you even read the rule? The reward and the challenge are based on
getting past the obstacle ... and the tougher the obstacle, the bigger the
challenge.
You don't suppose other talented individuals with different agendas
(different designs, control of resources, etc.) might be .. obstacles?

> I find your bitching about commoners gaining BAB in a game where the
> usual, general assumption is that more levels = at least some combat
> extremely bizarre. If you want a high level commoner who isn't experienced
> in combat why not just assign penalties to his BAB and AC for inexperience
> or assume they start the fight shaken, frightened or panicked and have
> them react appropriately? Your insistence that the core class *must* be
> wrong is stupid.

You seem to overlook the more fundamental point - it is not reasonable
to demand that the *only* way to get better at blacksmithing is violence
(which is what you advocate, given that you seem to have a strange bias
against the idea of overcoming noncombat challenges). The *hero* model PCs
use gain skills as a lesser included case; there must be _other_ mechanisms
for commoners lest we want to populate a world where people trying to
advance in the blacksmithing career have a staggering attrition rate.
Happily, the tools already exist, and we can use them - and when we do, any
argument for giving commoners combat training disintegrates.

-Michael

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Michael Scott Brown wrote:
>>> Now given that piddling things like bluffing a guard or disabling a
>>> trap are actually considered CR encounters for PCs ... why, it's
>>> almost as if there might be opportunities for noncombat characters
>>> to overcome challenges that don't involve combat! AMAZING!

Symbol wrote:
>> Now explain how either of those examples are relevant to pyramid
>> builders (or builders of other great works)

> Um, the part where they establish that there are challenges that don't
> involve combat?

Nice non sequitur.

> You don't think that managing the construction of a great work might
> involve a little ... challenging negotiation?

This is neither "bluffing a guard" nor "disabling a trap." Both of those
include the kind of risk that D&D normally awards XP for. Kindly show
how your "challenging negotiation" is actually challenging in the sense
that D&D XP uses.
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Michael Scott Brown wrote:
>>> There were 4000 of them. I don't think each one had to command that
>>> many men at once.

Symbol wrote:
>> At least one expert believes the labour force contained around 300,000 men
>> in total.

> Ooh! Tasty fallacy!

How is it a fallacy to point out that your claim is not universally
accepted by experts in the field, juicebag? You just aren't very good at
this whole critical-thinking thing, are you?
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Between saving the world and having a spot of tea Symbol said

>> So you haven't actually completed the challenge and you're expecting XP.
>
> Yes. I'm breaking down the challenge into a series of mini challenges and
> I want a story award too.

No story award for whining. I only award them for things like bad puns.

>> Bloody munchkins.
>
> Yes, yes I am.

That's the first step to getting help.

--
Rob Singers
"All your Ron are belong to us"
Credo Elvem ipsum etiam vivere

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Robert Singers" <rsingers@finger.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns963EEBEE66AEFrsingers@IP-Hidden...
> Between saving the world and having a spot of tea Symbol said
>
> >> So you haven't actually completed the challenge and you're expecting
XP.
> >
> > Yes. I'm breaking down the challenge into a series of mini challenges
and
> > I want a story award too.
>
> No story award for whining. I only award them for things like bad puns.

That sounds like an awfully HAMFISTED way of doing things.

> >> Bloody munchkins.
> >
> > Yes, yes I am.
>
> That's the first step to getting help.

Help? I'm proud!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Between saving the world and having a spot of tea Symbol said

> "Robert Singers" wrote
>> Between saving the world and having a spot of tea Symbol said
>>
>> >> So you haven't actually completed the challenge and you're
>> >> expecting XP.
>> >
>> > Yes. I'm breaking down the challenge into a series of mini
>> > challenges and I want a story award too.
>>
>> No story award for whining. I only award them for things like bad
>> puns.
>
> That sounds like an awfully HAMFISTED way of doing things.

When I'm the DM you don't want to bring up fisting.

>> >> Bloody munchkins.
>> >
>> > Yes, yes I am.
>>
>> That's the first step to getting help.
>
> Help? I'm proud!

Perhaps fisting is indeed your thing.

--
Rob Singers
"All your Ron are belong to us"
Credo Elvem ipsum etiam vivere

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"~consul" <consul@INVALIDdolphins-cove.com> wrote in message
news:d4610o$814$5@gist.usc.edu...
> Symbol wrote:
> > as a genius and was showered with titles. His full list is 'Chancellor
of
> > the King of Lower Egypt, First after the King of Upper Egypt,
> > Administrator of the Great Palace, Hereditary nobleman, High Priest of
> > Heliopolis, Builder, Sculptor and Maker of Vases in Chief'. Imhotep is
>
> The Maker of Vases confused me for a moment, but then I figure it's
probably
> related to urns and ashes storing, right?

Don't know, although the Egyptians used ceramic containers to store the
parts of the body that weren't mummified.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Robert Singers" <rsingers@finger.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns963F5FA9F3B4Ersingers@IP-Hidden...
> Between saving the world and having a spot of tea Symbol said
>
> > "Robert Singers" wrote
> >> Between saving the world and having a spot of tea Symbol said
> >>
> >> >> So you haven't actually completed the challenge and you're
> >> >> expecting XP.
> >> >
> >> > Yes. I'm breaking down the challenge into a series of mini
> >> > challenges and I want a story award too.
> >>
> >> No story award for whining. I only award them for things like bad
> >> puns.
> >
> > That sounds like an awfully HAMFISTED way of doing things.
>
> When I'm the DM you don't want to bring up fisting.

I thought Rupert was the evil one.

> >> >> Bloody munchkins.
> >> >
> >> > Yes, yes I am.
> >>
> >> That's the first step to getting help.
> >
> > Help? I'm proud!
>
> Perhaps fisting is indeed your thing.

I'll give it a try and post jpgs.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 09:30:36 +0100, Symbol wrote:

>
> "~consul" <consul@INVALIDdolphins-cove.com> wrote in message
> news:d4610o$814$5@gist.usc.edu...
>> Symbol wrote:
>> > as a genius and was showered with titles. His full list is 'Chancellor
> of
>> > the King of Lower Egypt, First after the King of Upper Egypt,
>> > Administrator of the Great Palace, Hereditary nobleman, High Priest of
>> > Heliopolis, Builder, Sculptor and Maker of Vases in Chief'. Imhotep is
>>
>> The Maker of Vases confused me for a moment, but then I figure it's
> probably
>> related to urns and ashes storing, right?
>
> Don't know, although the Egyptians used ceramic containers to store the
> parts of the body that weren't mummified.

Yep, the inner organs were stored in four so-called 'canopic jars'.

The four sons of Horus were the guardians of the organs:
- Imset (depicted as a human) was responsible for the liver;
- Hapi (a baboon) for the lungs;
- Duamutef (a jackal) for the stomach;
- Kebechsenef (a falcon) for the viscera of the lower body.

Sometimes their names or pictures of them were painted on the jars.
Tut Ankh Amun's jars were sculpted in the shape of these gods and
painted IIRC.

LL

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Symbol" <jb70@talk21.com> wrote in message
news:W-CdnYE0eetr4vrfRVnyvg@pipex.net...
{this is the only interesting part}
> > You seem to overlook the more fundamental point - it is not
reasonable
> > to demand that the *only* way to get better at blacksmithing is violence
> > (which is what you advocate, given that you seem to have a strange bias
> > against the idea of overcoming noncombat challenges).
>
> No. I have extreme bias against the idea that a 10th level character can
> rise to 20th without any combat what-so-ever.

And that settles the worth of your opinions decisively. Despite the
fact that NPCs gain experience just like PCs (explicit rule), and despite
the fact that mechanisms exist for gaining experience points without combat
.... you *insist* that commoners MUST FIGHT in order to become the best
blacksmith in the world. That's pretty nutty.

-Michael

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Bradd W. Szonye wrote:
> Michael Scott Brown wrote:
> > And that settles the worth of your opinions decisively. Despite
the
> > fact that NPCs gain experience just like PCs (explicit rule) ....
>
> Yes, just like PCs, which means that at least half of their XP must
come
> from encounter challenges with significant risk of life and limb.

<raises hand>
*Must*?
No. Please review the *guidelines* again.

> > ... and despite the fact that mechanisms exist for gaining
experience
> > points without combat ...
>
> But not without risk to life and limb.

<raises hand>
Really? *Every* gain of XP in D&D must be connected to risk to life
and limb? That's the *only* *possible* way to advance? Achieving
important goals is completely irrelevant? Then how on earth do
roleplaying awards factor in?

> > ... you *insist* that commoners MUST FIGHT in order to become the
best
> > blacksmith in the world.
>
> This "best blacksmith" argument has been a red herring from the
> beginning, since there's no practical difference between blacksmiths
> even at 10th level.

Bradd, you tried to make exactly this same claim about farmers and
were resoundingly shamed for your error in understanding the Profession
rules. Now we see that the Craft rules are also not something you
understand very well.
Please review the time required for a 1st, 10th, and 20th level
smith to make a suit of plate armor. There is a rather profound
difference in their production rates. Here's a hint: the 20th level
smith is a *lot* faster.

You are *wrong*. Stop tossing out empty charges of fallacy.

-Michael

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <W-CdnY40eeto4vrfRVnyvg@pipex.net>, Symbol <jb70@talk21.com> wrote:
>"Michael Scott Brown" <mistermichael@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:Gqw9e.9286$yq6.1842@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>> The soldier in the field does not get the general's story award.
>> Consequently, it is quite possible to justify a high level leader's
>> advancement while leaving the stonemasons and their small piece behind.
>
>A ship at sea flounders in a storm and begins to sink. The crew are forced
>to abandon it and take to the boats. In the ensuing confusion and poor
>conditions only two crew members survive. After days in the water the
>weather becomes even worse. The rain is driving down in sheets and the
>small boat is tossed around on ocean mercilessly. Without warning a giant
>hand rises from beneath the surface; tilts all the way to the left and
>straightens before tilting all the way to the right and sinking out of
>sight. One man turns to the other and says "DID YOU SEE THE SIZE OF THAT
>WAVE!"

LOL

But that's one HELL of a non-sequitur.
--
"Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Symbol wrote:
>> No. I have extreme bias against the idea that a 10th level character can
>> rise to 20th without any combat what-so-ever.

Michael Scott Brown wrote:
> And that settles the worth of your opinions decisively. Despite the
> fact that NPCs gain experience just like PCs (explicit rule) ....

Yes, just like PCs, which means that at least half of their XP must come
from encounter challenges with significant risk of life and limb. So
far, you have entirely failed to demonstrate that you can earn that in a
human lifetime without facing the kind of violent encounters that earn
you BAB, BSB, and hit points.

> ... and despite the fact that mechanisms exist for gaining experience
> points without combat ...

But not without risk to life and limb.

> ... you *insist* that commoners MUST FIGHT in order to become the best
> blacksmith in the world.

This "best blacksmith" argument has been a red herring from the
beginning, since there's no practical difference between blacksmiths
even at 10th level.
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

MSB wrote:
>>> Despite the fact that NPCs gain experience just like PCs ....

Bradd W. Szonye wrote:
>> Yes, just like PCs, which means that at least half of their XP must
>> come from encounter challenges with significant risk of life and
>> limb.

> *Must*? No. Please review the *guidelines* again.

If you break the guidelines, and it results in absurdity, it doesn't
indicate a problem with the game. The problem comes from your faulty
premise. This is a blatant case of begging the question.

>>> ... and despite the fact that mechanisms exist for gaining points
>>> without combat ...

>> But not without risk to life and limb.

> Really? *Every* gain of XP in D&D must be connected to risk to life
> and limb? That's the *only* *possible* way to advance? Achieving
> important goals is completely irrelevant?

It's not irrelevant. You can still get ad hoc awards, but they shouldn't
exceed the normal risk-based awards. If they do, the problem is your
fault, not the system's.

> Then how on earth do roleplaying awards factor in?

How are role-playing awards at all relevant to the advancement of
off-stage NPCs? This is a blatant red herring.

>>> ... you *insist* that commoners MUST FIGHT in order to become the
>>> best blacksmith in the world.

I missed this the first time: Fighting is not the only risk to life and
limb, and participants in this very thread have offered alternatives.
Try arguing against what people actually claim, instead of beating up
helpless straw men.

>> This "best blacksmith" argument has been a red herring from the
>> beginning, since there's no practical difference between blacksmiths
>> even at 10th level.

> Bradd, you tried to make exactly this same claim about farmers and
> were resoundingly shamed for your error in understanding the
> Profession rules --

Shamed? Don't lie about the discussion. I claimed that the Profession
rules were useless in a discussion of realism, since those rules are
themselves unrealistic. That's one of the reasons it's a red herring.

> You are *wrong*. Stop tossing out empty charges of fallacy.

Empty? How's that juice taste?
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

MisterMichael wrote:

> Bradd W. Szonye wrote:
>
>>Michael Scott Brown wrote:
>>
>>>And that settles the worth of your opinions decisively. Despite
>
> the
>
>>>fact that NPCs gain experience just like PCs (explicit rule) ....
>>
>>Yes, just like PCs, which means that at least half of their XP must
>
> come
>
>>from encounter challenges with significant risk of life and limb.
>
>
> <raises hand>
> *Must*?
> No. Please review the *guidelines* again.
>
>
>>>... and despite the fact that mechanisms exist for gaining
>
> experience
>
>>>points without combat ...
>>
>>But not without risk to life and limb.
>
>
> <raises hand>
> Really? *Every* gain of XP in D&D must be connected to risk to life
> and limb? That's the *only* *possible* way to advance? Achieving
> important goals is completely irrelevant? Then how on earth do
> roleplaying awards factor in?
>
>
>>>... you *insist* that commoners MUST FIGHT in order to become the
>
> best
>
>>>blacksmith in the world.
>>
>>This "best blacksmith" argument has been a red herring from the
>>beginning, since there's no practical difference between blacksmiths
>>even at 10th level.
>
>
> Bradd, you tried to make exactly this same claim about farmers and
> were resoundingly shamed for your error in understanding the Profession
> rules. Now we see that the Craft rules are also not something you
> understand very well.
> Please review the time required for a 1st, 10th, and 20th level
> smith to make a suit of plate armor. There is a rather profound
> difference in their production rates. Here's a hint: the 20th level
> smith is a *lot* faster.
>
> You are *wrong*. Stop tossing out empty charges of fallacy.
>
> -Michael
>

I find it completely irrelevant *HOW* the NPCs get their XP. The rules
are all about how PC's advance in level. We have an entire book
dedicated to it. What do NPC's get? A chapter in the DMG? Quite
honestly, this is an argument about angels dancing on pinheads. The
results, right or wrong, don't matter. All DM's will continue to just
MAKE UP the NPC's.

CH

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Bradd W. Szonye wrote:

> MSB wrote:
>
>>>>Despite the fact that NPCs gain experience just like PCs ....
>
>
> Bradd W. Szonye wrote:
>
>>>Yes, just like PCs, which means that at least half of their XP must
>>>come from encounter challenges with significant risk of life and
>>>limb.
>
>
>>*Must*? No. Please review the *guidelines* again.
>
>
> If you break the guidelines, and it results in absurdity, it doesn't
> indicate a problem with the game. The problem comes from your faulty
> premise. This is a blatant case of begging the question.
>
>
>>>>... and despite the fact that mechanisms exist for gaining points
>>>>without combat ...
>
>
>>>But not without risk to life and limb.
>
>
>>Really? *Every* gain of XP in D&D must be connected to risk to life
>>and limb? That's the *only* *possible* way to advance? Achieving
>>important goals is completely irrelevant?
>
>
> It's not irrelevant. You can still get ad hoc awards, but they shouldn't
> exceed the normal risk-based awards. If they do, the problem is your
> fault, not the system's.
>
>
>>Then how on earth do roleplaying awards factor in?
>
>
> How are role-playing awards at all relevant to the advancement of
> off-stage NPCs? This is a blatant red herring.
>
>
>>>>... you *insist* that commoners MUST FIGHT in order to become the
>>>>best blacksmith in the world.
>
>
> I missed this the first time: Fighting is not the only risk to life and
> limb, and participants in this very thread have offered alternatives.
> Try arguing against what people actually claim, instead of beating up
> helpless straw men.
>
>
>>>This "best blacksmith" argument has been a red herring from the
>>>beginning, since there's no practical difference between blacksmiths
>>>even at 10th level.
>
>
>>Bradd, you tried to make exactly this same claim about farmers and
>>were resoundingly shamed for your error in understanding the
>>Profession rules --
>
>
> Shamed? Don't lie about the discussion. I claimed that the Profession
> rules were useless in a discussion of realism, since those rules are
> themselves unrealistic. That's one of the reasons it's a red herring.
>
>
>>You are *wrong*. Stop tossing out empty charges of fallacy.
>
>
> Empty? How's that juice taste?


Brad, you are fundamentally confusing the PC advancement rules with the
NPC design rules. These are not the same thing. The PC advancement rules
are for the balanced advancement of player PC's, while the NPC rules
exis to help the DM's design discretion.

CH

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Michael Scott Brown" <mistermichael@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ccQ9e.9921$An2.749@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> "Symbol" <jb70@talk21.com> wrote in message
> news:W-CdnYE0eetr4vrfRVnyvg@pipex.net...
> {this is the only interesting part}
> > > You seem to overlook the more fundamental point - it is not
> reasonable
> > > to demand that the *only* way to get better at blacksmithing is
violence
> > > (which is what you advocate, given that you seem to have a strange
bias
> > > against the idea of overcoming noncombat challenges).
> >
> > No. I have extreme bias against the idea that a 10th level character
can
> > rise to 20th without any combat what-so-ever.
>
> And that settles the worth of your opinions decisively. Despite the
> fact that NPCs gain experience just like PCs (explicit rule)

Explicit rule applied to the standard system. The standard system contains
other rules that are obviously changed by using variant options. Your
flailing is amusing.

>, and despite
> the fact that mechanisms exist for gaining experience points without
combat

Gaining experience <> gaining 20 levels as the DMG discusses in a number
of places.

> ... you *insist* that commoners MUST FIGHT in order to become the best
> blacksmith in the world. That's pretty nutty.

What's pretty nutty is the plethora of logical fallacies you probably went
through to reach that conclusion. Who is the best blacksmith in the world?
Hmm? Prove that the 20th level commoners have maxed out that particular
craft skill (and that they aren't versed in a wide variety of skills which
would be more likely to allow them to experience a wide variety of
challenges).Your modelling and assumptions have been stupid from the
start.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"David Alex Lamb" <dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca> wrote in message
news:d48pjo$d8v$1@knot.queensu.ca...
> In article <W-CdnY40eeto4vrfRVnyvg@pipex.net>, Symbol <jb70@talk21.com>
wrote:
> >"Michael Scott Brown" <mistermichael@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> >news:Gqw9e.9286$yq6.1842@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> >> The soldier in the field does not get the general's story award.
> >> Consequently, it is quite possible to justify a high level leader's
> >> advancement while leaving the stonemasons and their small piece
behind.
> >
> >A ship at sea flounders in a storm and begins to sink. The crew are
forced
> >to abandon it and take to the boats. In the ensuing confusion and poor
> >conditions only two crew members survive. After days in the water the
> >weather becomes even worse. The rain is driving down in sheets and the
> >small boat is tossed around on ocean mercilessly. Without warning a
giant
> >hand rises from beneath the surface; tilts all the way to the left and
> >straightens before tilting all the way to the right and sinking out of
> >sight. One man turns to the other and says "DID YOU SEE THE SIZE OF
THAT
> >WAVE!"
>
> LOL
>
> But that's one HELL of a non-sequitur.

It isn't a non sequitur to point out he is handwaving again. No matter how
elaborately it was done. I was just getting bored!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Bradd W. Szonye" <bradd+news@szonye.com> wrote in message
news:slrnd6fv1b.uf5.bradd+news@szonye.com...
> Symbol wrote:

> > ... you *insist* that commoners MUST FIGHT in order to become the best
> > blacksmith in the world.
>
> This "best blacksmith" argument has been a red herring from the
> beginning, since there's no practical difference between blacksmiths
> even at 10th level.

First he would have to establish that any blacksmiths reached 10th level,
never mind 20th. It boggles the mind that he assumes that because there
are 20th level commoners they must be representative of all the
professions 20th level commoners could be (first farmers and now
blacksmiths!).

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Symbol" <jb70@talk21.com> wrote in message
news:reydndB8QtKuXPXfRVnyuw@pipex.net...
> "Michael Scott Brown" <mistermichael@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> What's pretty nutty is the plethora of logical fallacies you probably went
> through to reach that conclusion. Who is the best blacksmith in the world?
> Hmm?

RTFM.

-Michael

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Clawhound" <none@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:1w6ae.155$fZ5.376@mencken.net.nih.gov...
> Bradd W. Szonye wrote:
> Brad, you are fundamentally confusing the PC advancement rules with the
> NPC design rules. These are not the same thing. The PC advancement rules
> are for the balanced advancement of player PC's, while the NPC rules
> exis to help the DM's design discretion.

This is an interesting point, but on the other hand, ostensibly the PCs
and NPCs share a world with the same rules, and so continuity is an issue.

-Michael