Upgrading classes

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Bradd wrote:
>> Sure, there's some leeway. However, there's the bigger problem that
>> these are not farming activities, not even remotely. MSB keeps
>> insisting that high-level farmers are a problem, but so far he's
>> failed to even demonstrate that they exist. While there are a few
>> higher-level farming challenges, they mostly involve nasty monsters
>> like ankhegs.

David Alex Lamb wrote:
> I must have read the thread in disjoint chunks, because I forgot we
> were talking about farmers.

Sort of. In the general discussion, there's more to commoners than just
farmers. The farmer stuff is a subthread dealing with MSB's silly
reductio straw man. He likes to invent absurd examples and then claim
that the absurdity comes from your premises rather than his own
imagination.
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Bradd W. Szonye" <bradd+news@szonye.com> wrote in message
news:slrnd4p6sg.vo8.bradd+news@szonye.com...
> Sort of. In the general discussion, there's more to commoners than just
> farmers. The farmer stuff is a subthread dealing with MSB's silly
> reductio straw man. He likes to invent absurd examples and then claim
> that the absurdity comes from your premises rather than his own
> imagination.

And Bradd likes to lie about MSB rather than actually have an honest
debate.

We get it, bitch. You don't like MSB. Now get off your fat ass and
level *accurate* criticisms.


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

Michael Scott Brown wrote:
> "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
> news:g6nn41puolrjd5fu6ehinvv3ffrpn2j6n8@4ax.com...
> > On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 06:29:03 GMT, "Michael Scott Brown"
> > I see no reason at all why use of common knowledge of a local area
> > wouldn't allow a check to predict the weather for the next 12 hours
or
> > so, and guess on the next day or two. Rural people do that all the
> > time.
>
> And *they* are just guessing.
>
> Knowledge/local covers "legends, personalities, inhabitants,
laws,
> customs, traditions, humanoids".
>
> *Please* stop making blatantly wrong statements.
>
> Survival is the skill. It can be used untrained, and it can be
used well
> by wise untrained persons, but the Best. Farmer. In. The. World never
misses
> a call.

Too complicated, Farm is a profesion skill IIRC. So income is open
ended and dependent on check result. That there is no single result
that requires a check result of 40 is irrelevant, the guy who can
consistently make checks of 40 on a take 10 makes double the income
of the guy who gets a 20 because the 40 is a better farmer.

Thus the best farmer in the world is not simply anyone who can manage
a +10 or so on his check total.

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

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 00:30:35 GMT, Matt Frisch <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com>
wrote:

>On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 03:04:02 GMT, Matthias <matthias_mls@yahoo.com> scribed
>into the ether:
>
>>On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 12:14:53 GMT, "Bradd W. Szonye" <bradd+news@szonye.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Matthias <matthias_mls@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> Seems to make sense to me, perhaps you need to reread my original post?
>>>
>>>What makes sense to you? Quote some context, dumbass.
>>
>>I can't help you if you're not willing to think.
>
>Ok, Matthias, comprehend the following:
>
>I think that he shouldn't do it.
>
>I've provided exactly as much context as you did, all you have to do is be
>willing to think.

Am I the only one who has a decent newsreader that orders articles by topic and
tree?

--

Matthias (matthias_mls@yahoo.com)

"Scientists tend to do philosophy about as well as you'd expect philosophers to
do science, the difference being that at least the philosophers usually *know*
when they're out of their depth."
-Jeff Heikkinen
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 23:54:39 GMT, "Bradd W. Szonye" <bradd+news@szonye.com>
wrote:

>Bradd wrote:
>>> I don't normally make fun of people for misspelling my name. However,
>>> the irony here is too great. My name is spelled correctly in the
>>> article you're replying to. Were you too stupid to copy it
>>> accurately, or just too lazy?
>
>Matthias wrote:
>> Too apathatic to return any common courtesy, Brad. Fair is fair, I think.
>
>I see that you're stupid /and/ rude.

Continue talking to the kettle, pot...

--

Matthias (matthias_mls@yahoo.com)

"Scientists tend to do philosophy about as well as you'd expect philosophers to
do science, the difference being that at least the philosophers usually *know*
when they're out of their depth."
-Jeff Heikkinen
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Matthias wrote:
> Am I the only one who has a decent newsreader that orders articles by
> topic and tree?

The newsreader has little to do with it, dumbass. Some articles show up
at a newsfeed very late (or not at all), and some news servers retain
articles for only a short time, especially in high-traffic groups.
Unless you quote context, some posters will have no idea what you're
talking about, regardless of what newsreader they use.

Furthermore, many newsreaders hide all of the articles you've ever read,
which makes it much easier to manage the threaded view.

In short, you are stupid, rude, and ignorant.
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

DougL wrote:
> Too complicated, Farm is a profesion skill IIRC. So income is open
> ended and dependent on check result ....

Which is broken, as I've already discussed at length. It's a poor model
even for modern farming, and even worse for feudal settings. To know the
farmer's trade well enough to practice it, you need a rank, but one rank
in Profession gives farmers a ridiculously high income.
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 03:02:43 GMT, Matthias <matthias_mls@yahoo.com> scribed
into the ether:

>On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 00:30:35 GMT, Matt Frisch <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 03:04:02 GMT, Matthias <matthias_mls@yahoo.com> scribed
>>into the ether:
>>
>>>On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 12:14:53 GMT, "Bradd W. Szonye" <bradd+news@szonye.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>Matthias <matthias_mls@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> Seems to make sense to me, perhaps you need to reread my original post?
>>>>
>>>>What makes sense to you? Quote some context, dumbass.
>>>
>>>I can't help you if you're not willing to think.
>>
>>Ok, Matthias, comprehend the following:
>>
>>I think that he shouldn't do it.
>>
>>I've provided exactly as much context as you did, all you have to do is be
>>willing to think.
>
>Am I the only one who has a decent newsreader that orders articles by topic and
>tree?

Irrelevant. If the old post has been read and removed prior to your reply,
then the context of that reply is not present.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 06:47:57 GMT, Matt Frisch <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com>
wrote:

>On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 03:02:43 GMT, Matthias <matthias_mls@yahoo.com> scribed
>into the ether:
>
>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 00:30:35 GMT, Matt Frisch <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 03:04:02 GMT, Matthias <matthias_mls@yahoo.com> scribed
>>>into the ether:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 12:14:53 GMT, "Bradd W. Szonye" <bradd+news@szonye.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Matthias <matthias_mls@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Seems to make sense to me, perhaps you need to reread my original post?
>>>>>
>>>>>What makes sense to you? Quote some context, dumbass.
>>>>
>>>>I can't help you if you're not willing to think.
>>>
>>>Ok, Matthias, comprehend the following:
>>>
>>>I think that he shouldn't do it.
>>>
>>>I've provided exactly as much context as you did, all you have to do is be
>>>willing to think.
>>
>>Am I the only one who has a decent newsreader that orders articles by topic and
>>tree?
>
>Irrelevant. If the old post has been read and removed prior to your reply,
>then the context of that reply is not present.

That's the reader's own fault, then.

--

Matthias (matthias_mls@yahoo.com)

"Scientists tend to do philosophy about as well as you'd expect philosophers to
do science, the difference being that at least the philosophers usually *know*
when they're out of their depth."
-Jeff Heikkinen
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 06:00:04 GMT, "Bradd W. Szonye" <bradd+news@szonye.com>
wrote:

>Matthias wrote:
>> Am I the only one who has a decent newsreader that orders articles by
>> topic and tree?
>
>The newsreader has little to do with it, dumbass. Some articles show up
>at a newsfeed very late (or not at all), and some news servers retain
>articles for only a short time, especially in high-traffic groups.
>Unless you quote context, some posters will have no idea what you're
>talking about, regardless of what newsreader they use.
>
>Furthermore, many newsreaders hide all of the articles you've ever read,
>which makes it much easier to manage the threaded view.
>
>In short, you are stupid, rude, and ignorant.

If your newsreader seems to be missing some info, you can always use Google.
That's not too difficult.
--

Matthias (matthias_mls@yahoo.com)

"Scientists tend to do philosophy about as well as you'd expect philosophers to
do science, the difference being that at least the philosophers usually *know*
when they're out of their depth."
-Jeff Heikkinen
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 17:51:48 GMT, Matthias <matthias_mls@yahoo.com> scribed
into the ether:

>On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 06:47:57 GMT, Matt Frisch <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 03:02:43 GMT, Matthias <matthias_mls@yahoo.com> scribed
>>into the ether:
>>
>>>>I've provided exactly as much context as you did, all you have to do is be
>>>>willing to think.
>>>
>>>Am I the only one who has a decent newsreader that orders articles by topic and
>>>tree?
>>
>>Irrelevant. If the old post has been read and removed prior to your reply,
>>then the context of that reply is not present.
>
>That's the reader's own fault, then.

I see...so it is the responsibility of the reader to anticipate when you
will not quote context, and to retain messages in case inconsiderate people
might be replying?

My, what an ego-centric little world you live in.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 20:15:15 -0500, Ophidian <oNpEhMiOdian23@cox.net>
wrote:

>I hate Commoners having levels above 1.
>
>Proposed solution:
>
>When gaining a level you may switch a previous class to a new one.
>You keep all skill points bought from that class/level and gain skill
>points equal to the difference in that class and the new one.
>(Ie, Commoner to Expert gains 16 skill points.)
>Class features, HP, BAB, and Saves change from the old one to the new.
>To do this you must switch the highest level of the old class and pay XP
>equal to 1000 x that level.
>
>First version:
>Commoners MUST do this on attaining 2nd level.
>
>Second version:
>NPC classes may do this.(?)
>
>Third version:
>Allow PC's classes to do this?
>
>Example:
>Rogue 2/Fighter 3 gains 6th level.
>Before leveling up deciding to become Rogue 3/Fighter 2.
>Cost 3000 XP.
>Remaining XP 10,000+, likely to low to become 6th yet.
>Result:
>Loses 1d10 HP gains 1d6 HP, difference not less than 1.
>Gains 6 Skill Points to spend as Rogue
>Fort Save +1, Ref -1
>Loses a bonus feat, gains +1d6 sneak attack, trap sense +1
>
>Comments?
>Suggestions?
>Corrections?

what happens if a rogue switches to warrior?
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 20:41:20 GMT, Matt Frisch <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com>
wrote:

>On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 17:51:48 GMT, Matthias <matthias_mls@yahoo.com> scribed
>into the ether:
>
>>On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 06:47:57 GMT, Matt Frisch <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 03:02:43 GMT, Matthias <matthias_mls@yahoo.com> scribed
>>>into the ether:
>>>
>>>>>I've provided exactly as much context as you did, all you have to do is be
>>>>>willing to think.
>>>>
>>>>Am I the only one who has a decent newsreader that orders articles by topic and
>>>>tree?
>>>
>>>Irrelevant. If the old post has been read and removed prior to your reply,
>>>then the context of that reply is not present.
>>
>>That's the reader's own fault, then.
>
>I see...so it is the responsibility of the reader to anticipate when you
>will not quote context, and to retain messages in case inconsiderate people
>might be replying?

>My, what an ego-centric little world you live in.

It is not my job to try to predict what kind of newsreader a complete stranger
is using, and whether or not they are reading all the articles in a particular
thread. Neither is it my job to make it totally unnecessary for someone to do
research on a thread if there is a message I write that doesn't provide context.

Since when has context in the form of quoted text become mandatory for posting?

You and Mr. Szonye have taken great pains to make a mountain out of molehill,
ONE post that did not include text. In the time that you wasted arguing with me,
you could have plugged in a few keywords at:

http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search

and find the whole thread in which the original post appeared.

As for why I am continuing to discuss the matter, I'm a pretty patient person,
though some need more than others.

--

Matthias (matthias_mls@yahoo.com)

"Scientists tend to do philosophy about as well as you'd expect philosophers to
do science, the difference being that at least the philosophers usually *know*
when they're out of their depth."
-Jeff Heikkinen
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 23:11:28 GMT, Matthias <matthias_mls@yahoo.com> scribed
into the ether:

>On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 20:41:20 GMT, Matt Frisch <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 17:51:48 GMT, Matthias <matthias_mls@yahoo.com> scribed
>>into the ether:

>>>>Irrelevant. If the old post has been read and removed prior to your reply,
>>>>then the context of that reply is not present.
>>>
>>>That's the reader's own fault, then.
>>
>>I see...so it is the responsibility of the reader to anticipate when you
>>will not quote context, and to retain messages in case inconsiderate people
>>might be replying?
>
>>My, what an ego-centric little world you live in.
>
>It is not my job to try to predict what kind of newsreader a complete stranger
>is using,

It is not everyone else's job to search back through posts to find out what
the hell you are talking about because you are inconsiderate.

>Since when has context in the form of quoted text become mandatory for posting?

Never. It has, however, always been polite.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 23:11:28 GMT, Matthias <matthias_mls@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>It is not my job to try to predict what kind of newsreader a complete stranger
>is using, and whether or not they are reading all the articles in a particular
>thread. Neither is it my job to make it totally unnecessary for someone to do
>research on a thread if there is a message I write that doesn't provide context.

You're right. It is not your job to predict how they are reading the
newsgroup. That is why it is best to follow common newsgroup etiquette
(This is usenet wide, not just some crazy idea by the people here at
rgfd) and leave some context. This allows people who don't have the
full thread in front of them to follow along. And it isn't so much
that it is distracting or annoying to those users that do have the
full thread.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <1rt051decc6ct0fn9cf5f4t34g4122bee2@4ax.com>,
Matthias <matthias_mls@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>Irrelevant. If the old post has been read and removed prior to your reply,
>>>>then the context of that reply is not present.
>>>
>>>That's the reader's own fault, then.

No. NNTP servers receive posts out of order, and sometimes (perhaps even
often) expire them at fairly tight intervals. So your reply can appear and be
purged before the thing it is replying to shows up. Google is probably unique
in never expiring anything.

Admittedly these days that's quite pathological, since propagation times are
much faster -- but you can't assume that every reader has access to the latest
technology.

>>My, what an ego-centric little world you live in.
>It is not my job to try to predict what kind of newsreader a complete stranger
>is using, and whether or not they are reading all the articles in a particular
>thread. Neither is it my job to make it totally unnecessary for someone to do
>research on a thread if there is a message I write that doesn't provide context.

More commonly, your reply can appear before the post to which it is replying,
and someone can read it and not understand what you are talking about. Do you
expect them to reread your post later when its antecedent finally shows up?
To me that's *real* egocentrism.

>Since when has context in the form of quoted text become mandatory for posting?

Since USENET news was created -- and I'm old enough to remember.

You'd be wiser to argue it is *no longer* necessary, but I think you'd still
be wrong.
--
"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...)
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 17:52:34 GMT, Matthias <matthias_mls@yahoo.com>
carved upon a tablet of ether:

> If your newsreader seems to be missing some info, you can always use Google.
> That's not too difficult.

Switching to my web browser from my news program, going to google, and
then digging through the groups to find the thread and post is a pain,
frankly. It's not hard, but it takes time, and I've yet to meet a post
from a person who deletes all context that's worth the bother.


--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 23:11:28 GMT, Matthias <matthias_mls@yahoo.com>
carved upon a tablet of ether:

> It is not my job to try to predict what kind of newsreader a complete stranger
> is using, and whether or not they are reading all the articles in a particular
> thread.

No it's not.

> Neither is it my job to make it totally unnecessary for someone to do
> research on a thread if there is a message I write that doesn't provide context.

However, if you want constructive comment, or to be able to
meaningfully participate in conversation you should avoid making
comprehension of your posts harder than it has to be. Trimming context
makes understanding you more difficult, and thus makes your posts less
likely to garner useful replies.

> In the time that you wasted arguing with me,
> you could have plugged in a few keywords at:
>
> http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search
>
> and find the whole thread in which the original post appeared.

Why should I bother taking the time to work out what you're trying to
say. You're the one trying to communicate, so you should take the
effort. If reading your posts becomes an effort, people won't bother -
it's that simple. You're expecting other people to put effort in so
that you can be lazy, and that just doesn't fly.


--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Bradd wrote:
>> Yeah, right. We're talking about a game set in alternate-Earth
>> medieval Europe, with medieval money, medieval prices, and medieval
>> demographics. The game's default setting, Oerth, only differs from
>> medieval Europe in two major respects: Its creator filed off the
>> serial numbers, and was a bit fast and loose with his history.

Anivair wrote:
> First: no we're not. We're talking about D&D as a game.

I'm talking about the game as written. If you'd rather discuss something
else, that's fine, but don't blame me when it leads to miscommunication.

> Also, you're off about the default as well. Unless you can
> demonstrate that the PHB makes good referance to the feudal system.

There are three examples in the paragraph quoted above. Maybe you don't
understand medieval society well enough to recognize the significance of
silver-standard economies and 10% agricultural margins, but again --
don't blame me for your problems.

> You need to understand that medieval is not the same as feudal ....

Right. Feudal is a subset of medieval.
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Symbol" <jb70@talk21.com> wrote in message
news:424a822b$0$371$cc9e4d1f@news.dial.pipex.com...

>> > Not at all. This is D&D, and it's about heroic adventure.
>>
>> *FARMER*.
>
> Please explain how he gained 20 levels if he is just a farmer.


How did the Mage gain 20 levels if he's just a mage? Classes get better by
practicing their class. Commoner is a perfectly valid class.




Why are you
> having such a problem with the idea that modelling a concept
> inappropriately produces absurd results?


We keep pointing out to you that modeling commoner as a 20 level class works
perfectly well.

BTW, why does the wizard get better at fighting? Because he's SEEN a lot of
it, even if he hasn't practiced much under stress himself. Maybe the 20th
level Commoner hasn't fought any ogres before, but he's dealt with a lot of
animals and been hurt and seen other be hurt and knows better how to avoid
getting hurt than the 1st level fighter, enough so that it takes three tries
for the Ogre to disembowel him instead of one.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Matt Frisch" <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in message
news😛hdm41h9f0gct3isoh4jr2unp1ies8oco3@4ax.com...

> A 20th level farmer is going to have to have endured some real fighting to
> get there, so having decent combat abilities is not out of line..if he
> couldn't fight well, then he'd be dead. Of course, it is relevant to note
> that 20th level farmers are going to be *REALLY* rare.



I don't think he should be any rarer than a 20th level Fighter. On the one
hand there are fewer obvious sources of XP, but that's balanced against not
facing things that are trying to kill you on a daily basis. Any farmer who
can reach 1st level will eventually reach 20th, barring death from old age.
He isn't likely to get eaten by a dragon in between.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Shawn Wilson" <Ikonoqlast@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:NrL4e.6084$Ut1.651@fed1read01...
> BTW, why does the wizard get better at fighting? Because he's SEEN a lot
of
> it, even if he hasn't practiced much under stress himself. Maybe the 20th
> level Commoner hasn't fought any ogres before, but he's dealt with a lot
of
> animals and been hurt and seen other be hurt and knows better how to avoid
> getting hurt than the 1st level fighter, enough so that it takes three
tries
> for the Ogre to disembowel him instead of one.

My gods, but you're a staggeringly moronic jackass.

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

Michael Scott Brown, Do you always have to tear someone down?
-Dragonkat
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Dragonkat <dragonkat2flame@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Michael Scott Brown, Do you always have to tear someone down?

Not always. Well-considered ideas and the designs coming from them he
usually supports.


Keith
--
Keith Davies "English is not a language. English is a
keith.davies@kjdavies.org bad habit shared between Norman invaders
keith.davies@gmail.com and Saxon barmaids!"
http://www.kjdavies.org/ -- Frog, IRC, 2005/01/13
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom