PDA

View Full Version : Dumbest actions your pc did because they used Video Game Logic?



Pages : [1] 2

Akisa
2010-01-05, 09:00 PM
While playing a SW game and since everyone was currently in the military (though most of us were in the AF) the GM decided to have the Imperial behave more military like and less idiot like. So we were infiltrating an Imperial base to rescue a Jedi from the hands of an inquisitor, so come a across a camera.

One of the players decided to take out the camera with a silenced slug thrower. Needless to say the base/area went into high alert when previously Imperials haven't known we were inside the wire yet. The player thought someone heard the gun fire and reminded the DM it was silenced.

DM: "So if a camera suddenly goes out in a high secure area you wouldn't sound the alarm. Guarding a Jedi is like guarding a nuke, you'll treat it as security breach until you have men at the spot"

erikun
2010-01-05, 09:43 PM
Any action that used the reasoning: "Don't worry, I'm still at full health." I will admit that I'm not immune to such stupidity, either...

Arakune
2010-01-05, 09:50 PM
While playing a SW game and since everyone was currently in the military (though most of us were in the AF) the GM decided to have the Imperial behave more military like and less idiot like. So we were infiltrating an Imperial base to rescue a Jedi from the hands of an inquisitor, so come a across a camera.

One of the players decided to take out the camera with a silenced slug thrower. Needless to say the base/area went into high alert when previously Imperials haven't known we were inside the wire yet. The player thought someone heard the gun fire and reminded the DM it was silenced.

DM: "So if a camera suddenly goes out in a high secure area you wouldn't sound the alarm. Guarding a Jedi is like guarding a nuke, you'll treat it as security breach until you have men at the spot"

He never played splinter cell them. Just TRY to shoot a camera in that game.

Brendan
2010-01-05, 09:53 PM
Oh? my ally just fell down at negative three hit points after a bad saving throw? I am close enough to help easily? Charging would cause a nasty AoO? as a character, the average response if your friend is dying is to help? Okay, with this necessary info, I can make a good decision.

CHARGE!!!!!

Temotei
2010-01-05, 09:58 PM
Jumped off a building because he thought he could land on an awning below. The awning broke and the character ended up crushing the owner's dog. Sad day. Oh, and my character suffered 10d6 damage. It was halved from the awning and dog breaking his fall. Of course, the owner went ballistic, attacking my character, so I decided the best course of action was to climb back up the building and jump on top of the owner. Chaotic Neutral, naturally. It wasn't out of malice that he did this. It was to lighten the owner up. It didn't work. :smalltongue:

Dimers
2010-01-05, 10:31 PM
It wasn't out of malice that he did this. It was to lighten the owner up. It didn't work. :smalltongue:

Sounds much more likely to weight the owner down :smallwink:

Temotei
2010-01-05, 10:51 PM
Sounds much more likely to weight the owner down :smallwink:

:smallbiggrin: Indeed.

My character wasn't too mad that the owner attacked him after. He actually enjoyed the run towards the sun. :smallamused:

The Rose Dragon
2010-01-06, 05:47 AM
Cure Light Wounds to cure a vampire.

Because it says cure, and that's how it works in strategy games.

Kobold-Bard
2010-01-06, 07:31 AM
The girl playing the Tiefling Rogue/Swashbuckler assumed I wouldn't make her fight something she couldn't eventually kill.

So she snuck off from the party and stalked an Elven Noble (specifically looking for the "richest looking person in town") for a while. Despite warning her via Spot checks that he was carrying a very obviously magical longsword and had 2 bodyguards, she still tried to pick his pocket.

Half an hour later the party had a brand new Beguiler member.

Optimystik
2010-01-06, 07:53 AM
Cure Light Wounds to cure a vampire.

Because it says cure, and that's how it works in strategy games.

Do you mean "cure" as in, remove his vampiric curse, or cure as in Revive Kills Zombie?

Because the latter does work in D&D (i.e. healing spells do hurt undead.)

Totally Guy
2010-01-06, 07:58 AM
Cure Light Wounds to cure a vampire.

Because it says cure, and that's how it works in strategy games.

I've always thought of the cure spells hurting undead itself to be a type of video game logic.

A spell that sets bone mends flesh together would probably improve a zombie. Too bad there's no such spell.

Optimystik
2010-01-06, 08:03 AM
A spell that sets bone mends flesh together would probably improve a zombie. Too bad there's no such spell.

The problem is not the spell's end effect, but how that effect is achieved. Cure spells channel positive energy, undead are powered by its opposite. It is not merely a physical repair.

Totally Guy
2010-01-06, 08:05 AM
The problem is not the spell's end effect, but how that effect is achieved. Cure spells channel positive energy, undead are powered by its opposite. It is not merely a physical repair.

This is why I'm not a doctor.:smalltongue:

Longcat
2010-01-06, 08:06 AM
A Dwarfen Defender doing into defensive stance on open territory, assuming that the enemies would focus on him.

Boy, were our Rogue and Warmage pissed when they had to re-roll :smallbiggrin:

IonDragon
2010-01-06, 08:14 AM
This one is more about ridiculous DM NPC actions.

In a scifi game, the party was ambushed. Fortunately, the sniper was hidden and in a great position, the Rapid Shot, Two gun shooter was close to the ambushers, and the spotter had several high quality flying robots to locate the ambushers' sniper. We eventually get him more or less cornered, the sniper close by but out of line of sight with a video feed in case he runs, and our social character walks up with a primed hand grenade in each hand.

The social character is standing not 10 ft. from the guy, so he drops his rifle and bolts. At first we think he's giving up, but it turns out he had plastic explosives worked into his gun so it explodes killing out negotiator. HIS hand grenades go off flattening the building our sniper is on nearly killing him. The blast also demolishes the telepath's (not the same person as the negotiator) guard robot who happens to be holding a boat load of explosives for the rest of the party to "keep them safe". Luckily, the explosives were in an armored pack which resisted the explosions.

The GM was then unable to cope with how severely he demolished these 2-3 blocks of town and the game was scrubbed.

JaronK
2010-01-06, 08:19 AM
We had a DM in Shadowrun who ran missions like it was D&D, complete with zombie hordes. He was very annoyed when we just snuck around them. That was a lame start to a great campaign (when we swapped DMs).

JaronK

Mongoose87
2010-01-06, 09:07 AM
"I search the rats' bodies." Thanks NWN!

The Rose Dragon
2010-01-06, 09:10 AM
Do you mean "cure" as in, remove his vampiric curse, or cure as in Revive Kills Zombie?

Cure as in heal his wounds. Which I inflicted with cure moderate wounds just two seconds ago.

Pharaoh's Fist
2010-01-06, 09:11 AM
"I search the rats' bodies." Thanks NWN!

You find a +5 greatsword of super special awesomeness.

Optimystik
2010-01-06, 09:14 AM
Cure as in heal his wounds. Which I inflicted with cure moderate wounds just two seconds ago.

That's not bad use of video game logic though, that's actually ignoring video game logic. (healing spells hurt undead units in Warcraft, revive kills zombie in Final Fantasy etc.)

You, however, applied it correctly.


You find a +5 greatsword of super special awesomeness.

Wait, wait wait. Was it in his back pocket, or his front? :smallconfused:

Yuki Akuma
2010-01-06, 09:16 AM
That's not bad use of video game logic though, that's actually ignoring video game logic. (healing spells hurt undead units in Warcraft, revive kills zombie in Final Fantasy etc.)

Which is a direct result of Cure spells hurting undead in (wait for it) D&D! You know, granddaddy of all RPG clichés.

Optimystik
2010-01-06, 09:18 AM
Which is a direct result of Cure spells hurting undead in (wait for it) D&D! You know, granddaddy of all RPG clichés.

Which makes her player's/PC's actions all the more silly. :smalltongue:

Mongoose87
2010-01-06, 09:19 AM
You find a +5 greatsword of super special awesomeness.

It came with a free set of "The Plague," too!

The Rose Dragon
2010-01-06, 09:49 AM
That's not bad use of video game logic though, that's actually ignoring video game logic. (healing spells hurt undead units in Warcraft, revive kills zombie in Final Fantasy etc.)

You, however, applied it correctly.

Heal still heals the undead in Warcraft. It is only Holy Light that acts that way.

Pharaoh's Fist
2010-01-06, 10:08 AM
Wait, wait wait. Was it in his back pocket, or his front? :smallconfused:
Yes. :smalltongue:

Ernir
2010-01-06, 10:12 AM
My first character ever died when we found out that the dangerous forest was actually dangerous.

drengnikrafe
2010-01-06, 10:27 AM
I have the vague feeling somewhere in the back of my mind that somebody once was extremely careless in regards to the value of his life because he thought Phoenix Downs were available in the nearby everything shop for 200 gil... err, gp.

Longcat
2010-01-06, 10:29 AM
Another one from our group:

The party was fighting a blood elemental in a small room. They were ankle-deep in a river of blood, literally. Then the party Paladin shouts out his brilliant idea:
"I shall dilute this blood elemental!"
He proceeded to unzip his pants, and you can guess what he did next. The DM decided that this called for an AoO from the Elemental.

And it was a critical :smalltongue:

Xenogears
2010-01-06, 10:31 AM
Another one from our group:

The party was fighting a blood elemental in a small room. They were ankle-deep in a river of blood, literally. Then the party Paladin shouts out his brilliant idea:
"I shall dilute this blood elemental!"
He proceeded to unzip his pants, and you can guess what he did next. The DM decided that this called for an AoO from the Elemental.

And it was a critical :smalltongue:

I will admit that it seems rather dumb to do but what video game allows you to pee enemies to death?

clockworkmonk
2010-01-06, 10:32 AM
It sounds like Adventure game logic to me. Or text based. Not one in particular, but the general concept of it.

Mongoose87
2010-01-06, 10:34 AM
I will admit that it seems rather dumb to do but what video game allows you to pee enemies to death?

Postal 2, probably.

paddyfool
2010-01-06, 10:40 AM
This thread makes me want to build Super Mario based on Tashalatora, with lots of use of the Expansion Power and a refluffed Jump Kick...

IonDragon
2010-01-06, 10:43 AM
This thread makes me want to build Super Mario based on Tashalatora, with lots of use of the Expansion Power and a refluffed Jump Kick...

And a half-dragon Bowser BBEG.

drengnikrafe
2010-01-06, 10:46 AM
It sounds like Adventure game logic to me. Or text based. Not one in particular, but the general concept of it.

Shadowgate logic is roughly that twisted.
You encounter a beautiful maiden. She is shackled to the wall.
I say hello.
She turns into a wolf and tears at your throat. It's sad your adventure had to end here. Retry?
(Player says to self)Wait, what was I supposed to do?
(Looks at guide)
Stab her with an arrow? WHY?

Person_Man
2010-01-06, 11:32 AM
I once started a game I was DMing with the PCs as newly captured slaves. The campaign opens with the PCs in chains, with no equipment, on a boat being delivered to a prison on an island to work as miners. After a brief speech by the future BBEG, the 4 first level PCs are escorted by 8 orcs armed with saps.

I had spent a week writing out all of the ways that the PCs could escape - starting a worker rebellion, using wet blankets to break a rusty bar during a rain storm, stealing the keys from the warden, and literally half a dozen other ways. None of them involved combat, as I wanted to protect the squishy PCs at first level, and teach them that problems in my campaign can usually be resolved by creative thinking (something I explicitly told them before the game started).

So of course, as soon as the PCs were in their cell and had their chains removed, they start a fight with the 8 guards, reasoning that it was what they were "supposed" to do. I laughed and said ok, figuring that this would teach them a valuable lesson.

Long story short, the PCs won (though just barely - all but one of them ended in negative hit points) and managed to escape into the local town, thus wrecking all of my planning for the first MONTH of my campaign in 1 hour.

Grommen
2010-01-06, 12:18 PM
Ya know that was how we used to kill Vampires...

Well if a cleric takes a wizz on one can't you consider that Holy Water?

Ok so how about the reverse of this. How many times have you looked down from say 20 feet up and thought to your self. Ya know it's only 2d6. I can make it... :smallbiggrin:

Optimystik
2010-01-06, 12:19 PM
I will admit that it seems rather dumb to do but what video game allows you to pee enemies to death?

Conker's Bad Fur Day has you pee out some fire imps.

Kobold-Bard
2010-01-06, 12:31 PM
Ya know that was how we used to kill Vampires...

Well if a cleric takes a wizz on one can't you consider that Holy Water?

Ok so how about the reverse of this. How many times have you looked down from say 20 feet up and thought to your self. Ya know it's only 2d6. I can make it... :smallbiggrin:

Point 1. My d20 Modern experiences have taught me that if you drink 3 bottles of water stomlen from the font in a cathedral, your urinations will be accompanied by a choir of angels that will be so out of place that the pseudo-Men-In-Black agents who are after you to figure they might as well check it out. So yes, at least at my gaming table, Cleric pee is indeed a potent weapon vs. Undead.

Point 2. My Fighter named did just this. Except he was quite injured. And was jumping from 80ft. But luck was on his side (he voluntarily fought with a Dwarf's armoured carcass as a weapon, so frankly I feel he earned it). An average of 2.4 would have killed him stone dead. The DM rolled 6 1's and he made a small crater as he landed.

I miss him that guy.

Eldariel
2010-01-06, 12:43 PM
Robbed a spell shop in the Abyss... 'cause obviously all they need to deal with is the shopkeeper (let alone the fact that if you manage to keep a shop running in the Abyss, you're dealing with much worse than a bunch of midlevel adventurers on a daily basis).

Trellan
2010-01-06, 12:47 PM
Ok so how about the reverse of this. How many times have you looked down from say 20 feet up and thought to your self. Ya know it's only 2d6. I can make it... :smallbiggrin:

I have a player that routinely does this and it drives me crazy.

"How much damage would I take from the fall?"
"Would your character really want to jump from a four story building?"
"Well, how much damage would he take?"

*facepalm*

Aedilred
2010-01-06, 12:51 PM
One of my players in particular is fixated on the idea that they can insult/kill/steal whatever/whoever he likes because they're a PC and therefore a main character. I don't know whether this is from video games, RP games he's played in the past, or just a general misconception about the nature of the game, but he really should have realised by now that things don't work like that in this game at least. The most egregious instance of this was when he concocted a plan to steal a horse from a village and roped in one of the other PCs to help.

The plan they had actually wasn't bad, but unfortunately they didn't follow it, and it took no account of complicating factors. Or reality. Neither of the involved PCs could ride, knew how to deal with animals (including, say, saddling a horse) and neither of them had brought a light source. Neither of them had been inside the stables from which they would be stealing the horse. They hadn't anticipated that the horse might be branded with a mark of ownership, hadn't anticipated that there might be a guard dog, or that anyone might actually notice the theft and be annoyed about it for longer than twenty seconds. As a final flourish, they disguised themselves by sticking some cloth over their faces, ignoring the fact that both characters' most distinctive feature was their long red hair.

To cut a long story short, after many, many embarrassing and hilarious ****-ups they did succeed in stealing a horse by unintentionally frightening it so much that it ran away with one of them on its back. When it stopped, they fell off and broke an arm. As the icing on the cake, when they met up with the rest of the party, the party leader (a PC of scrupulous integrity) recognised the horse as stolen and marched it back to the village to return it to its rightful owner. The two thieves had to do some very fast talking to convince him that in fact they were innocent of the theft, otherwise he'd have turned them in too.

dsmiles
2010-01-06, 01:05 PM
Before I can answer, someone's going to have to gimme the rundown on what exactly video game logic entails. I don't play a whole lot of video games, I mostly play tabletop RPGs and tabletop wargames.

subject42
2010-01-06, 01:14 PM
I had a player running a warlock character with the +6 to jump invocation. She decided that she was going to kill a goblin that was climbing through a skylight by jumping on its head.

She was upset she didn't rebound off of the goblin's head and onto the nearby ledge.

akma
2010-01-06, 01:34 PM
Before I can answer, someone's going to have to gimme the rundown on what exactly video game logic entails. I don't play a whole lot of video games, I mostly play tabletop RPGs and tabletop wargames.

If you will write something funny enough, nobody will care if it`s video game logic or not. But the intention is something that is logical in a video game but stupid in a table RPG game.

Lapak
2010-01-06, 01:49 PM
Before I can answer, someone's going to have to gimme the rundown on what exactly video game logic entails. I don't play a whole lot of video games, I mostly play tabletop RPGs and tabletop wargames.Video games, like tabletop wargames, have their own set of natural assumptions and historical precedents. Things like the jumping example subject42 gave - ever since Mario, there have been a huge number of games where you jump on enemies to dispatch them and/or to launch yourself to greater heights. Or to take another example, in games ranging from Zelda to computer RPGs both eastern and western: it's standard procedure to claim any useful magical items or potions or cash that happens to be laying around in the houses of people you're helping. A player in game of D&D who decided to help himself to the sack of grain a peasant had saved for the winter would be following video game logic - if the DM mentions it at all, if it CAN be picked up, it must be for the use of the PC, right?

Just as in a tabletop wargame, ranged units often have an absolute range limit - your range is 12", say, and if an enemy is 13" away you just can't shoot it, even at a penalty. A player in a D&D game who was juuuust outside the range increment of a javelin and who was shocked and angry when a goblin chucked it anyway and hit him would be falling prey to 'wargame logic.'

Another_Poet
2010-01-06, 02:18 PM
My d20 Modern experiences have taught me that if you drink 3 bottles of water stomlen from the font in a cathedral, your urinations will be accompanied by a choir of angels that will be so out of place that the pseudo-Men-In-Black agents who are after you to figure they might as well check it out. So yes, at least at my gaming table, Cleric pee is indeed a potent weapon vs. Undead.

What's funny is that by real life theology (at least Catholic theology) drinking holy water is disrespectful and actually defiles it. So does any disrespectful use of it - basically anything other than sprinkling it on something with a prayer for blessing, or immersing something in it with a prayer for blessing.

Apply that logic to D&D magic and your holy water pee would more likely be Unholy water, burning off your tallywhacker as you pee or maybe just buffing/healing demons and undead.

Also I should point out that in the South Park video game for N64 you could add pee to your snowballs before knocking your opponents in the face with them. Despite that gleaming moment of humor, a terrible game.

Adumbration
2010-01-06, 02:33 PM
Robbed a spell shop in the Abyss... 'cause obviously all they need to deal with is the shopkeeper (let alone the fact that if you manage to keep a shop running in the Abyss, you're dealing with much worse than a bunch of midlevel adventurers on a daily basis).

Actually, my party did something very similar once. We were in abyss, and we needed a planar key quite desperately from a merchant, but were unwilling to buy it. The merchant was a gnome.

"Hey, you know, the definition of an extraplanar creature is that it's outside it's own plane..." Dismissal, grab all the stuff, plane shift out.

My cleric got shafted by a ranged death attack.

Kobold-Bard
2010-01-06, 02:35 PM
What's funny is that by real life theology (at least Catholic theology) drinking holy water is disrespectful and actually defiles it. So does any disrespectful use of it - basically anything other than sprinkling it on something with a prayer for blessing, or immersing something in it with a prayer for blessing.

Apply that logic to D&D magic and your holy water pee would more likely be Unholy water, burning off your tallywhacker as you pee or maybe just buffing/healing demons and undead.

Also I should point out that in the South Park video game for N64 you could add pee to your snowballs before knocking your opponents in the face with them. Despite that gleaming moment of humor, a terrible game.

In my defence the cathedral was the only place I could sleep without getting caught, and that was all they had to drink :smallbiggrin:

I loved that game. Press Select and you got the weapon's advanced form; pee covered snowballs, sniping option on the chicken-egg gun, delayed blast stink bombs etc.

clockworkmonk
2010-01-06, 02:46 PM
I have run characters who have challenged demons to pissing contests. That got a stare from the DM, followed by a few minutes where we had to stop, as no one at the table could stop laughing. Don't remember much about the character other than that act.

I do have an example too. A player at the table was a Paladin fighting a giant skeleton. Should have been a cakewalk, if had not tried to continuously turn it instead of simply hitting it.

The only way it makes sense is if he considered the turning a new upgrade, and that it had to be used immediately after receiving it.

taltamir
2010-01-06, 03:05 PM
Ya know that was how we used to kill Vampires...

Well if a cleric takes a wizz on one can't you consider that Holy Water?

did he drink 25gp worth of silver dust?

As for what "game logic" is:
1. Speak to everyone!
2. If someone has something to say, it is important. likewise, if someone doesn't have something important to say, he will not speak to you. (result, half an hour conversation with a dirt farmer about farming dirt... waiting for that quest hook that will never come)
3. Steal anything that isn't nailed down.
4. Dirt farmers have +5 swords of awesomeness and diamonds the size of your fist in barrels inside their house... they are too poor to eat regularly though.
5. There are barrels and crates everywhere, containing random loot.
6. You will face nothing that you cannot kill
7. Except for things which are a puzzle and not a combat, in which case hitting them is pointless, run around and look for something environmental to kill them with (there is always something)
8. Time only progresses when you perform certain actions (Me: we take a week to craft some armor... DM: um... you don't have a week, the world is ending TM in 2 days)

sofawall
2010-01-06, 03:14 PM
In my defence the cathedral was the only place I could sleep without getting caught, and that was all they had to drink :smallbiggrin:

I loved that game. Press Select and you got the weapon's advanced form; pee covered snowballs, sniping option on the chicken-egg gun, delayed blast stink bombs etc.

On the N64?

Kobold-Bard
2010-01-06, 03:17 PM
On the N64?

Mine was PS1 actually. Maybe urine soaked snowballs were a staple of all South Park games or something :smalltongue:

Oslecamo
2010-01-06, 03:25 PM
d
8. Time only progresses when you perform certain actions (Me: we take a week to craft some armor... DM: um... you don't have a week, the world is ending TM in 2 days)

This one is extremely common actualy.

Fighter:Ok, we know where the BBEG is, let's move on!
Wizard:Wait, first I'll spend one week worth of scrying, buffing, item crafting, and minion geting!
DM:You're sure?
Wizard: Of course I'm sure! I'm the freaking BATMAN!

One week later.

Wizard:TELEPORT! Hey, this is just an empty room!
DM: Of course. The BBEG finished his business here long ago. And he's also gained a couple extra levels while you sit down crafting stuff. Your next move?

Stompy
2010-01-06, 03:27 PM
Two Swords Ranger (DnD 3.5). Because all characters with two swords are really awesome in combat.

denthor
2010-01-06, 03:42 PM
Shadowgate logic is roughly that twisted.
You encounter a beautiful maiden. She is shackled to the wall.
I say hello.
She turns into a wolf and tears at your throat. It's sad your adventure had to end here. Retry?
(Player says to self)Wait, what was I supposed to do?
(Looks at guide)
Stab her with an arrow? WHY?

Since I have been playing D&D since 1981 that exact same set up was in the original pink box of basic D&D. You enter the hobgoblins prison portion.

All you see is a leg of a female if you approached it was a save vs. petrification.

It was a medusa that was chain up the hobgoblins had captured.

Cicciograna
2010-01-06, 03:44 PM
My PCs were to ambush an heavily guarded caravan: when I say heavily guarded I mean that there was a pack of many guards ready to intervene, helped by a party of other adventurers just in case. This means that my PCs had to reach their goal by trickery, not just by brute force.

Their tactic was a bit odd. They bought a wagon in a nearby town, carried it on the path of the caravan, in a place that they deemed suitable for a fight, and broke a wheel. Their plan was to pretend to be travellers, ask the guards for help to repair the wagon, and while a pair of guards was busy helping them, attack everybody.

Now, it's clear that this plan was doomed to fail, because from the description of the people guarding the caravan it was clear that in case of direct fight my PCs would have been destroyed. They didn't seem to understand.

They made up the stage, broke the wheel and waited: as the caravan approached, one of the players addressed the guards and asked for help. Since I didn't desire to end the campaign so prematurely I decided to save them foiling their plan, and told them that none of the guards stopped: one of the adventurers asked the PCs what the matter was, listened to them and told them that they couldn't stop, because they were in a hurry.

My players greatly complained about this: they really expected the caravan to stop and guards and adventurers help them. I told them that since this caravan was so heavily guarded, it had to carry something important: nobody carrying something important would stop so lightly, even if so heavily guarded. They didn't like my explanation.

But here comes the worst part. As evening approached my PCs, who were repairing the wagon, wishing to sell it again, saw in the distance three of the guards of the caravan coming back to help them. They promptly slaughtered the guards, feeling very satisfied. And then one of my players said: "Let's wait: they'll see that these guard aren't coming back and they'll send some other, we kill them and wait again for more guards!"

No more guards followed. In the night, tired of waiting, the PCs left the wagon behind, went after the caravan, spotted it in the distance, and while they were closing to it...they fell in an ambush against them. A deadly one.

Turns out that the the adventurers suspected about the players, but just to check their suspicions, they sent back three guards with the order to find the broken wagon and help, if it was necessary. As the guards didn't return the adventurers understood that their suspicions about the PCs were right.
When I explained my players this train of thought, they got mad at me.

Dienekes
2010-01-06, 03:45 PM
Rocket Jump

You had to be there.

Kobold-Bard
2010-01-06, 03:53 PM
Of course every player is guilty of the Final Fantasy Fallacy.

"I am a player character. Therefore my pockets are like those of a Time Lord, and no matter how much stuff I take with me (whether it be useful or a piece of random tat) I will never be noticeably affected by the weight."

So you're sure you want to take 15 spare weapons of every different type and material just in case, not to mention the 200ft of Masterwork chains and manacles? You realise you have a Strength of 13 right? Ok, you're the boss.

Optimystik
2010-01-06, 04:04 PM
Not to mention, the weight of gold.

Arakune
2010-01-06, 04:12 PM
Of course every player is guilty of the Final Fantasy Fallacy.

"I am a player character. Therefore my pockets are like those of a Time Lord, and no matter how much stuff I take with me (whether it be useful or a piece of random tat) I will never be noticeably affected by the weight."

So you're sure you want to take 15 spare weapons of every different type and material just in case, not to mention the 200ft of Masterwork chains and manacles? You realise you have a Strength of 13 right? Ok, you're the boss.

No bags of holding?

Thorcrest
2010-01-06, 04:13 PM
Of course every player is guilty of the Final Fantasy Fallacy.

"I am a player character. Therefore my pockets are like those of a Time Lord, and no matter how much stuff I take with me (whether it be useful or a piece of random tat) I will never be noticeably affected by the weight."

So you're sure you want to take 15 spare weapons of every different type and material just in case, not to mention the 200ft of Masterwork chains and manacles? You realise you have a Strength of 13 right? Ok, you're the boss.

My Rogue resents that! He manages to sneak around with about seven weapons and five daggers and remain unnoticed.

Probably players expecting that traps will glow.
DM: You enter a long hallway, at the end the [insert here] you have been searching for lies. To the right...
Player1: I go to the [insert here].
DM: Are you sure... I still have to...
Player1: Yup... I pick up the...
DM: No you are set upon by trap A,B,F,X,R, and Z you have died.
Player2: I cross the room all traps have been set off.
DM: You are set upon by trap C,D,E, you are unconcious.
Players: But you didn't say anything!
DM: You cut me off!
Player2: But Player1 set off all the traps.
DM: Nope. He only went 10 ft into a fourty foot room.
Players: But you didn't...
DM: Always let me finish. Traps are always lethal and PCs die.
Players: But we killed the BBEG!
DM: 6 billion people in the world you killed one...

Well you get how this goes. Players assume that the Boss is the last thing all the time... hehe.

Aldizog
2010-01-06, 04:17 PM
Since I have been playing D&D since 1981 that exact same set up was in the original pink box of basic D&D. You enter the hobgoblins prison portion.

All you see is a leg of a female if you approached it was a save vs. petrification.

It was a medusa that was chain up the hobgoblins had captured.
Oh, yes, Keep on the Borderlands. Though the medusa is actually in the Shrine of Evil Chaos, the toughest sub-dungeon in that module. Keep on the Borderlands is lethal.

Thorcrest
2010-01-06, 04:18 PM
The rule always was: you come to a door.
I use a mirror.
You see the statue of a stone woman.

taltamir
2010-01-06, 04:20 PM
Not to mention, the weight of gold.

it is a well known fact that gold has negative weight, that is why floating catles are made out of large deposits of gold


Well you get how this goes. Players assume that the Boss is the last thing all the time... hehe.

the inverse is to always send a summon monster 1 monkey to:
1. walk down the hall
2. trigger known traps
3. pick up the thing-a-ma-jigger

tbarrie
2010-01-06, 04:27 PM
No bags of holding?

At least in 3.5, bags of holding are ridiculously heavy. I once wanted to invest in one to relieve a modest-strength character's inventory woes only to realize that it weighed more than the stuff I wanted to put in it.

clockworkmonk
2010-01-06, 04:32 PM
And thats why when you get a bag of holding, you put it in your Handy Haversack.

Asheram
2010-01-06, 04:34 PM
Not to mention, the weight of gold.

I had a little chat with my gm a few days ago about that, actually.

I bought the Oblivion Collectors edition a couple of years back, and it came with a replica of a coin from the game. Now, I didn't think about it until a few weeks ago and picked up the coin again, that coin was Heavy... and then imagine it made of gold? 20 coins alone would make a pouch Very heavy.

Tyndmyr
2010-01-06, 04:35 PM
the inverse is to always send a summon monster 1 monkey to:
1. walk down the hall
2. trigger known traps
3. pick up the thing-a-ma-jigger

This is the sort of thing that mage hand is for. Or it's big brother.

Traps are ridiculously easy to detect/set off...thats the whole point of traps. It also tends to make them easy to bypass, tho.

Asheram
2010-01-06, 04:36 PM
This is the sort of thing that mage hand is for. Or it's big brother.

Traps are ridiculously easy to detect/set off...thats the whole point of traps. It also tends to make them easy to bypass, tho.

Bah. Make a ring of unseen servant, make him drag this sack of sand back and fourth through the hallway. It's also Great for opening doors. ;)
I think it was about 4000gp... but I think it's worth it, thinking about how dangerous some traps are,

unre9istered
2010-01-06, 04:37 PM
At least in 3.5, bags of holding are ridiculously heavy. I once wanted to invest in one to relieve a modest-strength character's inventory woes only to realize that it weighed more than the stuff I wanted to put in it.

That's what the Heward’s Handy Haversack is for. Only weighs five pounds and comes with the benefit of what ever your reaching for is always on top.

(ninja'd)

tbarrie
2010-01-06, 04:37 PM
And thats why when you get a bag of holding, you put it in your Handy Haversack.

Unless you're playing first edition, where doing that destroyed the universe or something.

Kobold-Bard
2010-01-06, 04:38 PM
And thats why when you get a bag of holding, you put it in your Handy Haversack.

Enjoy your stay on the Astral Plane :smalltongue:

Arakune
2010-01-06, 04:39 PM
Or reserve feats.

Tyndmyr
2010-01-06, 04:42 PM
Bag of holding in a hewards handy haversack is completely legitimate. No interaction.

That said, you can no longer draw stuff freely from the bag inside...just stuff actually in the haversack(including the whole bag of holding).

Likewise, you can happily nest bags of holding within each other.

This does lead to a very interesting design for a house that can be carried on one's back, of course.

Optimystik
2010-01-06, 04:42 PM
And thats why when you get a bag of holding, you put it in your Handy Haversack.

That would certainly solve your inventory problems. Permanently.

taltamir
2010-01-06, 04:45 PM
Enjoy your stay on the Astral Plane :smalltongue:

in the astral plane you need not eat, drink, or breath, you do not grow old, your mental stats replace your physical stats, and its full of an infinite random encounters including money and secret chests with loot...
I don't know why anyone would want to adventure on the prime material plane when you can adventure in the astral.

Asheram
2010-01-06, 04:46 PM
Enjoy your stay on the Astral Plane :smalltongue:

Edit: Ninjad.

Didn't they fix this in an errata or an article on the WOTC homepage?

Bags of holding being acceptable in other bags of holding, as well as the handy haversack counting as a bag of holding for this...

Or was it just a DM tip?

Kobold-Bard
2010-01-06, 04:46 PM
in the astral plane you need not eat, drink, or breath, you do not grow old, your mental stats replace your physical stats, and its full of an infinite random encounters including money and secret chests with loot...
I don't know why anyone would want to adventure on the prime material plane when you can adventure in the astral.

Eventually some Gith Wizard will cast Dismissal on you and you'll warp back to the Material Plane, and those couple of centuries you spend ravaging the Astral Plane will catch up to you real quick :smalltongue:


Didn't they fix this in an errata or an article on the WOTC homepage?

Bags of holding being acceptable in other bags of holding, as well as the handy haversack counting as a bag of holding for this...

Or was it just a DM tip?

It may have been, I couldn't say for sure. But frankly even if it was, I like the idea of them ripping a hole in the universe too much to take it away. I have a homebrew Vestige who was an Epic Level Rogue who tried putting 100 Bags of holdin into one another at the same time to try and steal some of the anti matter in the Vestige realm.

Things did not end well for him :smallcool:

taltamir
2010-01-06, 04:49 PM
Eventually some Gith Wizard will cast Dismissal on you and you'll warp back to the Material Plane, and those couple of centuries you spend ravaging the Astral Plane will catch up to you real quick :smalltongue:

1. get protections against that...
2. you are higher level, healthier, stronger, and have lived centuries beyond your natural point of death... "yea you can live to 300, but then someone will kill you" is not exactly an argument for staying here and dying at 80.

Tyndmyr
2010-01-06, 04:49 PM
Eventually some Gith Wizard will cast Dismissal on you and you'll warp back to the Material Plane, and those couple of centuries you spend ravaging the Astral Plane will catch up to you real quick :smalltongue:

Better than being, yknow, dead. Plus, in a coupla centuries, you can get a LOT of xp. Enough that you should have a way around old age.

Akisa
2010-01-06, 04:49 PM
it is a well known fact that gold has negative weight, that is why floating catles are made out of large deposits of gold



the inverse is to always send a summon monster 1 monkey to:
1. walk down the hall
2. trigger known traps
3. pick up the thing-a-ma-jigger

That brings me to my next video game logic.

Player: Alright we use a summon monster to check for traps
DM: Umm ok how is it going to check for traps
Player: By running through the hallway
DM: Are you sure
Player: Yeah *sends a summon monster*
DM: No traps go off
Player: Ok it's safe *walks*
DM: What you think designers of traps didn't take account of people using summon monsters as traps detector, and not design a trap around it?

Or when a trap resets...

taltamir
2010-01-06, 04:50 PM
how exactly does it account for it? and how come our character's didn't know about it (they have knowledge after all)

Kylarra
2010-01-06, 04:50 PM
Of course every player is guilty of the Final Fantasy Fallacy.

"I am a player character. Therefore my pockets are like those of a Time Lord, and no matter how much stuff I take with me (whether it be useful or a piece of random tat) I will never be noticeably affected by the weight."

So you're sure you want to take 15 spare weapons of every different type and material just in case, not to mention the 200ft of Masterwork chains and manacles? You realise you have a Strength of 13 right? Ok, you're the boss.Don't mock my leather TARDIS.


That brings me to my next video game logic.

Player: Alright we use a summon monster to check for traps
DM: Umm ok how is it going to check for traps
Player: By running through the hallway
DM: Are you sure
Player: Yeah *sends a summon monster*
DM: No traps go off
Player: Ok it's safe *walks*
DM: What you think designers of traps didn't take account of people using summon monsters as traps detector, and not design a trap around it?

Or when a trap resets...uh huh (http://agc.deskslave.org/comic_viewer.html?goNumber=357)

Kobold-Bard
2010-01-06, 04:50 PM
1. get protections against that...
2. you are higher level, healthier, stronger, and have lived centuries beyond your natural point of death... "yea you can live to 300, but then someone will kill you" is not exactly an argument for staying here and dying at 80.

I have no arguement against this. If riding around the Astral Plane indefinitely seems like a fun way to spend eternity to you, then more power to you.

Asheram
2010-01-06, 04:51 PM
It may have been, I couldn't say for sure. But frankly even if it was, I like the idea of them ripping a hole in the universe too much to take it away. I have a homebrew Vestige who was an Epic Level Rogue who tried putting 100 Bags of holdin into one another at the same time to try and steal some of the anti matter in the Vestige realm.

Things did not end well for him :smallcool:

Oh, this is just for the bags of holdings in bags of holdings. The portable hole... *coughs* mishap, is still very much alive and kicking

taltamir
2010-01-06, 04:52 PM
I have no arguement against this. If riding around the Astral Plane indefinitely seems like a fun way to spend eternity to you, then more power to you.

heck, ill like to lead a colonization expedition... get a bunch of settlers... you can advertise it quite easily and find plenty to accompany you.
And think how many children you can sire in infinite amount of time?

oh, here is another thing, it can be a retirement... are you 60 or 70? getting a little old there? have all those age penalties to physical stats and bonuses to mental ones? move to the astral plane... suddenly being a few years from natural death doesn't matter, and those bonuses to mental stats become automatic bonuses to "physical" stats

Tyndmyr
2010-01-06, 04:52 PM
That brings me to my next video game logic.

Player: Alright we use a summon monster to check for traps
DM: Umm ok how is it going to check for traps
Player: By running through the hallway
DM: Are you sure
Player: Yeah *sends a summon monster*
DM: No traps go off
Player: Ok it's safe *walks*
DM: What you think designers of traps didn't take account of people using summon monsters as traps detector, and not design a trap around it?

Or when a trap resets...

Right. Because there's a good way to filter all the races a character can summon from all the races a player could be, in the form of a trap trigger.

If it's heavy enough, it sets off pressure plates, and so forth. If it's auto-resetting, it becomes pretty obvious when your summon/whatever else comes back down the hallway. And then you know exactly where and what the trap is, and probably how it's triggered.

Optimystik
2010-01-06, 04:54 PM
Didn't they fix this in an errata or an article on the WOTC homepage?

Bags of holding being acceptable in other bags of holding, as well as the handy haversack counting as a bag of holding for this...

Or was it just a DM tip?

The tip concerned bags in rope tricks and MMMs. Bags in bags (and bags in holes, haversacks etc.) is still a no-no.


in the astral plane you need not eat, drink, or breath, you do not grow old, your mental stats replace your physical stats, and its full of an infinite random encounters including money and secret chests with loot...
I don't know why anyone would want to adventure on the prime material plane when you can adventure in the astral.

They do. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/astralProjection.htm)

taltamir
2010-01-06, 04:54 PM
Right. Because there's a good way to filter all the races a character can summon from all the races a player could be, in the form of a trap trigger.

If it's heavy enough, it sets off pressure plates, and so forth. If it's auto-resetting, it becomes pretty obvious when your summon/whatever else comes back down the hallway. And then you know exactly where and what the trap is, and probably how it's triggered.

specifically, that is a trap worth disassembling and carrying home... i want whatever magic item in it lets it filter races with such precisions, it allows me many ways to break the world.

clockworkmonk
2010-01-06, 04:55 PM
An easier thing to do is to have the trap check for a sentience malicious towards you. sure, you're giving your traps some decision making properties, but it is doable.

Tyndmyr
2010-01-06, 04:56 PM
Yes. Remember, if it's valuable, it's there for players to loot.

This includes traps, impassible doors, and so forth. Stone shape and shrink are great ways to make ANYTHING portable.

Kobold-Bard
2010-01-06, 04:57 PM
heck, ill like to lead a colonization expedition... get a bunch of settlers... you can advertise it quite easily and find plenty to accompany you.
And think how many children you can sire in infinite amount of time?

oh, here is another thing, it can be a retirement... are you 60 or 70? getting a little old there? have all those age penalties to physical stats and bonuses to mental ones? move to the astral plane... suddenly being a few years from natural death doesn't matter, and those bonuses to mental stats become automatic bonuses to "physical" stats

Of course all those children will never age past new borns, so you'll be stuck with an infinite supply of helpless infants and old people.

I think I'm ok on the Material Plane thanks :smallwink:

taltamir
2010-01-06, 04:59 PM
They do. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/astralProjection.htm)

I meant travel via:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/WondrousItems.htm

If a bag of holding is placed within a portable hole a rift to the Astral Plane is torn in the space: Bag and hole alike are sucked into the void and forever lost. If a portable hole is placed within a bag of holding, it opens a gate to the Astral Plane: The hole, the bag, and any creatures within a 10-foot radius are drawn there, destroying the portable hole and bag of holding in the process.

which:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/planes.htm

The Astral Plane

The Astral Plane is the space between the planes. When a character moves through an interplanar portal or projects her spirit to a different plane of existence, she travels through the Astral Plane. Even spells that allow instantaneous movement across a plane briefly touch the Astral Plane.

The Astral Plane is a great, endless sphere of clear silvery sky, both above and below. Occasional bits of solid matter can be found here, but most of the Astral Plane is an endless, open domain.

Both planar travelers and refugees from other planes call the Astral Plane home.

The Astral Plane has the following traits.

* Subjective directional gravity.
* Timeless. Age, hunger, thirst, poison, and natural healing don’t function in the Astral Plane, though they resume functioning when the traveler leaves the Astral Plane.
* Mildly neutral-aligned.
* Enhanced magic. All spells and spell-like abilities used within the Astral Plane may be employed as if they were improved by the Quicken Spell feat. Already quickened spells and spell-like abilities are unaffected, as are spells from magic items. Spells so quickened are still prepared and cast at their unmodified level. As with the Quicken Spell feat, only one quickened spell can be cast per round.


The "mental states used as physical" is from another source that goes into greater detail about different planes then the SRD does


Of course all those children will never age past new borns, so you'll be stuck with an infinite supply of helpless infants and old people.

I think I'm ok on the Material Plane thanks :smallwink:

bind an outsider with plane shift as an SLA... have it planeshift with the child to the material plane and back immediately... that one round in the material plane will cause rapid "catch up" of growth.

rings of sustenance might be needed too

Asheram
2010-01-06, 05:01 PM
The tip concerned bags in rope tricks and MMMs. Bags in bags (and bags in holes, haversacks etc.) is still a no-no.


I quote:

"Extradimensional spaces are notorious for creating spectacular and dangerous effects when placed inside each other; however, the dangers can be somewhat overrated. One bag of holding can be placed safely inside another (of course, the first bag's weight counts against what the second bag can hold). Likewise, one portable hole can be placed safely inside another.

A bag of holding placed inside a portable hole, however, creates a rift to the Astral Plane. (See the bag of holding excerpt.) Oddly enough, objects aren't drawn through the gate.

It's best to treat a Heward's handy haversack as a bag of holding when it interacts with a portable hole."

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20051101a

Optimystik
2010-01-06, 05:07 PM
I quote:

Ah, I missed that. So bags in bags are fine, just not bags in holes.

Seems arbitrary, but then, so is ripping a hole in reality.


I meant travel via:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/WondrousItems.htm

"The spell projects an astral copy of you and all you wear or carry onto the Astral Plane." (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/astralProjection.htm)

You don't age ("suspended animation") so provided your physical body is somewhere safe, you can have the best of both worlds.

Ravens_cry
2010-01-06, 05:24 PM
Ah, I missed that. So bags in bags are fine, just not bags in holes.
Seems arbitrary, but then, so is ripping a hole in reality.

That's Gygaxian DMing for you. In fact, the whole 'ripping reality a new one' came from a genuine Gary Gygax, rest in peace, ruling.

Sebastian
2010-01-06, 05:27 PM
Right. Because there's a good way to filter all the races a character can summon from all the races a player could be, in the form of a trap trigger.

If it's heavy enough, it sets off pressure plates, and so forth. If it's auto-resetting, it becomes pretty obvious when your summon/whatever else comes back down the hallway. And then you know exactly where and what the trap is, and probably how it's triggered.

use one or more Protection From <X> spells to stop summoned creatures to enter or freely move in the trapped places

Kylarra
2010-01-06, 05:33 PM
use one or more Protection From <X> spells to stop summoned creatures to enter or freely move in the trapped placesThat's homebrew/fiat territory though, unless your traps are animated objects.

Dr Bwaa
2010-01-06, 05:37 PM
"I search the rats' bodies." Thanks NWN!

LOL WIN.

also...

"Okay, I put the Huge Spiked Chain in my inventory."
*Don't you love how weights of items and actual physical ability to carry them are so very unrelated? :smallbiggrin: This has become the standard phrase for such occurrences in my gaming group.

Akisa
2010-01-06, 05:59 PM
Right. Because there's a good way to filter all the races a character can summon from all the races a player could be, in the form of a trap trigger.

If it's heavy enough, it sets off pressure plates, and so forth. If it's auto-resetting, it becomes pretty obvious when your summon/whatever else comes back down the hallway. And then you know exactly where and what the trap is, and probably how it's triggered.

You don't have to design a trap to filter out certain races. You can design a trap where it doesn't set off on the first sign of pressure or maybe the second, instead it goes off on the third. Or perhaps it's a manual trigger trap with someone waiting in the walls/ceiling peering through a lookout hole.

Claudius Maximus
2010-01-06, 06:08 PM
The "mental states used as physical" is from another source that goes into greater detail about different planes then the SRD does

What source is this? Manual of the Planes says nothing about it.

RebelRogue
2010-01-06, 06:17 PM
"Okay, I put the Huge Spiked Chain in my inventory."
You don't put things into inventories. You captchalogue them! :smallwink:

shadow_archmagi
2010-01-06, 06:44 PM
I think that heat-triggered-gas-trap raises a fair point about dungeons and dragons. With most people having a tenuous-at-best grip of physics to begin with, giving them narrator power AND access to magic will result in some.. odd decisions.

How precisely does one draw the line between "Hey don't blame me I'm just following things to their logical conclusion" and "I'm going to throw in some semi-real world physics unexpectedly to put you at a disadvantage. Bam! Ho ho ho I ham clever."

Jarawara
2010-01-06, 06:59 PM
Back in the good old days, video games were limited to linear paths to follow. Actually, many of them still are, though they are veiled by a seemingly open choice, but with locks and barriers to force you down a linear path. Two doors, but one is locked and the key is found by going down through the other door (which dead ends, forcing you back to the locked door, now with the key to open it).

Anyone who plays D&D knows this to not be true. (Which of course is a lie, as anyone who's ever bought pre-made adventures knows that most of them are as linear as a video game, but I digress.)

So, here I am describing the entryway to a old underground complex, now abandoned and in disrepair, filled with dank dripping water and who knows what horrors...

"As you open the main chamber doors, your torchlight reveals a large stonewrought chamber, built with intricate detail, though age has weathered it down somewhat. There are a pair of hallways leading from the chamber, one to the left and one to the right. Forward, you see a set of stairs leading down, with a barrier built into the stairs as the stairs split off in a curve to both the left and the right (effectively being two sets of stairs leading to two different destinations). There is a doorway in the far lefthand corner, and a matching door in the far righthand corner. You do not see an end to the righthand hallway, as it receeds into the darkness, but down the righthand hallway you see a smaller hallway branching off it, as well as a doorway set in the left-hand side of th...."

I'm drawing all this as I go on the playing board, so they can better see what I am describing, but I cannot finish my description - as one of the new players suddenly explodes in frustration! "Where are we supposed to go now?"

We all look at him, a bit astonished by the outburst, but I quickly recover. "You tell me. Do you wish to go to the left, to the right, down one of the stairways, or maybe through one of these doors?"

"Yeah, I see all that. But which one are we *supposed* to go through?"

"Uhhh... your choice. Which do you want to go through?"

"There's too many choices. Are these doors locked or something?"

"You don't know until trying them."

"Ok, fine. I go around and open them all up."

"None of them are locked... wait, did you just say you're opening them all up?"

"Yes. So if none of them are locked, how do we know which one we should go through first?"

I don't even get to answer that, as I'm looking in my notes, seeing how the doorway to the left opens into the hobgoblin's guardroom, while the doorway to the right had a unnamed shambling horror behind it. I decide to quietly ignore door #3, for the general well-being of the party, and I quickly decide that said unnamed shambling horror was currently in the bathroom and didn't notice the intrusion. But I can't ignore the hobgoblins.

"A hobgoblin guard takes note of the doorway being opened, and is coming to investigate. Actions, people?"

But the new player has an answer to everything. "Oh, I close that door again."

"Ok, and then what?"

"What do you mean. We still don't know where to go first." The other players seem a bit dumbfounded by this, and seem unable to react. The finally start to come out of their daze as the hobgoblin guard naturally opens the door again, and people start giving out battle-orders.

But new player stews a moment, then says the final peice of video-game wisdom. "I don't see how the hobgoblin can come out here to attack us. I closed the door!"

Another player, seeing where that line of logic was headed, asks him "Were you expecting him to 'reset' when you closed the door? That doesn't work in D&D."

"Yeah, I guess not. But that just proves my point. How are you supposed to know where to go, if every time you open a door, whatever inside is triggered to come out to fight you?"


Ahhhh... the joys of video games.


*~*

Edited 'cause I no can't speel guud.

Kobold-Bard
2010-01-06, 07:03 PM
Back in the good old days, video games were limited to linear paths to follow. Actually, many of them still are, though they are veiled by a seemingly open choice, but with locks and barriers to force you down a linear path. Two doors, but one is locked and the key is found by going down through the other door (which dead ends, forcing you back to the locked door, now with the key to open it).

Anyone who plays D&D knows this to not be true. (Which of course is a lie, as anyone who's ever bought pre-made adventures knows that most of them are as linear as a video game, but I digress.)

So, here I am describing the entryway to a old underground complex, now abandoned and in disrepair, filled with dank dripping water and who knows what horrors...

"As you open the main chamber doors, your torchlight reveals a large stonewrought chamber, built with intricate detail, though age has weathered it down somewhat. There are a pair of hallways leading from the chamber, one to the left and one to the right. Forward, you see a set of stairs leading down, with a barrier built into the stairs as the stairs split off in a curve to both the left and the right (effectively being two sets of stairs leading to two different destinations). There is a doorway in the far lefthand corner, and a matching door in the far righthand corner. You do not see an end to the righthand hallway, as it receeds into the darkness, but down the righthand hallway you see a smaller hallway branching off it, as well as a doorway set in the left-hand side of th...."

I'm drawing all this as I go on the playing board, so they can better see what I am describing, but I cannot finish my description - as one of the new players suddenly explodes in frustration! "Where are we supposed to go now?"

We all look at him, a bit astonished by the outburst, but I quickly recover. "You tell me. Do you wish to go to the left, to the right, down one of the stairways, or maybe through one of these doors?"

"Yeah, I see all that. But which one are we *supposed* to go through?"

"Uhhh... your choice. Which do you want to go through?"

"There's too many choices. Are these doors locked or something?"

"You don't know until trying them."

"Ok, fine. I go around and open them all up."

"None of them are locked... wait, did you just say you're opening them all up?"

"Yes. So if none of them are locked, how do we know which one we should go through first?"

I don't even get to answer that, as I'm looking in my notes, seeing how the doorway to the left opens into the hobgoblin's guardroom, while the doorway to the right had a unnamed shambling horror behind it. I decide to quietly ignore door #3, for the general well-being of the party, and I quickly decide that said unnamed shambling horror was currently in the bathroom and didn't notice the intrusion. But I can't ignore the hobgoblins.

"A hobgoblin guard takes note of the doorway being opened, and is coming to investigate. Actions, people?"

But the new player has an answer to everything. "Oh, I close that door again."

"Ok, and then what?"

"What do you mean. We still don't know where to go first." The other players seem a bit dumbfounded by this, and seem unable to react. The finally start to come out of their daze as the hobgoblin guard naturally opens the door again, and people start giving out battle-orders.

But new player stews a moment, then says the final peice of video-game wisdom. "I don't see how the hobgoblin can come out here to attack us. I closed the door!"

Another player, seeing where that line of logic was headed, asks him "Were you expecting him to 'reset' when you closed the door? That doesn't work in D&D."

"Yeah, I guess not. But that just proves my point. How are you supposed to know where to go, if every time you open a door, whatever inside is triggered to come out to fight you?"


Ahhhh... the joys of video games.


*~*

Edited 'cause I no can't speel guud.

I love your players :smallbiggrin: Such fun.

Rhiannon87
2010-01-06, 08:38 PM
Yes. Remember, if it's valuable, it's there for players to loot.

This includes traps, impassible doors, and so forth. Stone shape and shrink are great ways to make ANYTHING portable.

Ugh, valuable doors. Pre-written campaign I was running included copper doors in one of the dungeons. I had a pair of dwarves in the party, and they decided it would be IC for them to come back with a cart after clearing out the dungeon to pull out the doors. I let them do that for the first dungeon, but then after that the local blacksmiths refused to buy any more from them, for fear of devaluing the copper piece further and destabilizing the local economy.

Xzeno
2010-01-06, 08:59 PM
Me: "What's the bridge made out of?"
DM: "Fine, rainbows and gumdrops. Bad*** enough for you?"
Me: "I sell it."

It gets ugly from there.

Vizzerdrix
2010-01-06, 09:52 PM
Sigh. Weightless gold, no need for food, water and basic supplies, pockets that can hold cartloads of stuff and other heavy uses of video game logic abound in our group (both from player's and DM). I blew my DM's mind when I told him I was keeping track of the weight of the gold my last character was loaded down with.

Lycan 01
2010-01-06, 10:19 PM
During a Call of Cthulhu campaign set in Silent Hill, the players decided to split into two groups. Both groups did something stupid. Group 1 went into a police station, while Group 2 went to an art studio.

Group 1 ran into a locked gunlocker. I told them it was a combination system built into the locker. One player still assumed it was a padlock. So he proclaimed: "I shoot the lock."

Thankfully, they all passed their Luck rolls to avoid the ricochet. It wouldn't have worked if it had been a padlock, either, but still... They didn't break the lock, thankfully, and they finally realized they were supposed to get the combination off of a dead cop they'd seen when they'd first entered the building.

Group 2 had worst luck. They ran into Pyramid Head. He was just there to psyche 'em out, but they decided to make a stand and try to fight him off. Well, one guy actually tried to hold him off while the others escaped, but none of them decided to use his distraction to run. Soooo... He shot and pissed off Pyramid Head for nothing. Once he's riled up and starts swinging his 6-foot butcher knife at them, they realize they're in trouble. Two players have guns, so they just start firing at the metal-headed spirit of vengance. The other three just stand back and try not to get gutted. Well, one girl decides she wants to help out. Let me just tell you a quick bit of info about her character - she was good at nothing. She put all her points in Art, and a little bit in a bunch of skills. So she was okay with a bunch of things, but good at nothing useful. Her only combat skills were her Punching and Kicking skills, since she took Martial Arts as a skill, too. Sooo... Here's what she told me:

"I drop kick Pyramid Head."

I just stare at her. She wants to get close to this monster, and try to kick it, even though it is shrugging off bullets. "Are you sure?" She gets mad about how her character is good at nothing, and her only choice is to try and kick him since she's good at martial arts. I explain that she made the character, not me, and I'd told her what skills would be most useful. So she's already mad at me. Then she rolls to drop kick Pyramid Head. What do ya know, a 100 - a critical failure in CoC.

I try to be nice. I could have said PH got an opportunity attack, or he choke-slammed her out of the air. In the real Silent Hill games, if you got too close he'd grab you by the throat and either headbutt you or have a tongue-like barb come out of his helmet and stab you. I should have gone with that. But I didn't. I just had Pyramid Head sidestep her, so she flew across the street and landed badly, twisting her ankle.

She promptly gets pissed at me, claiming I'm picking on her and making it so she won't be able to do anything good. :smalleek:


Its not my fault she thought it was like a video game, and you could attack monsters up close and personal without any risk. And I was nice, and didn't use Silent Hill video game logic to have Pyramid Head execute her on the spot.

drengnikrafe
2010-01-06, 10:45 PM
What do ya know, a 100 - a critical failure in CoC.

...

She promptly gets pissed at me, claiming I'm picking on her and making it so she won't be able to do anything good. :smalleek:

You're telling me... that somebody hit a 1% chance that their character would epically fail, and then proceeded to get mad when their character failed? How can anyone possibly justify that?

golentan
2010-01-06, 11:22 PM
In a very realistic game, I once had to ask "So, you're charging the would be assassin, who is holding a firearm you don't recognize, across an open roof, while wielding your sword?"

"Don't worry, I have a high AC." *Roll*

"Don't worry, you just wind up lying in a pool of your own blood, with a punctured lung."

"WHAT!!!"

"Oh, quit whining. You'll live, and in a couple months you'll be almost as good as new."

Of course, by the end of that game they got out ASAP when they found an unknown alien egg in their starship. So they learned. Mostly (the campaign did end when they killed themselves going after a bounty and gunning themselves down).

Lycan 01
2010-01-07, 12:57 AM
You're telling me... that somebody hit a 1% chance that their character would epically fail, and then proceeded to get mad when their character failed? How can anyone possibly justify that?

Because it was her that it happened to, and not anybody else. She felt like she was being discriminated against because... I dunno. But she was also upset that she sprained her ankle, lost HP, and had a few movement and action small penalties because all she did was fail a roll.

IIRC, the last guy that rolled a 100 in one of my groups did it for a Perception test in a Dark Heresy game. He stood up in the back of a speeding truck to take a look at the desert around them. I ruled he got sand and grit in his eyes, fell screaming backwards into the bed of the truck, and had a massive Perception penalty for partial blindness for the next 24 hours.


Seriously, she rolled a 100 while attempting to tackle a BBEG who was bulletproof, wielding a macabre greatsword, and actually likes to grapple and rape things to death in the Silent Hill games. I let her off easy. :smalltongue:

Quincunx
2010-01-07, 06:28 AM
. . .sniping option on the chicken-egg gun. . .

Was this merely an eggflinger, or something a bit more special, a gun which fired grenades of existential doubt?

*zort* The egg came first! *zort* No, the chicken! *zort* EGG! (and an argument breaks out in the radius of effect of the gun)

Kobold-Bard
2010-01-07, 06:37 AM
Was this merely an eggflinger, or something a bit more special, a gun which fired grenades of existential doubt?

*zort* The egg came first! *zort* No, the chicken! *zort* EGG! (and an argument breaks out in the radius of effect of the gun)

It was a chicken that, through careful manipulation could be coaxed into firing eggs at your enemies. Sniping option increased reload time, but was more accurate.

BobVosh
2010-01-07, 06:47 AM
No matter how many times I read it, I can't stop laughing at the idiot who decided to drop kick pyramid head. He has been voted one of the most BA video game villain ever several times. Just seeing him rip the skin off in the movie before the game, or even as their introduction to seeing him should have had a D6 sanity damage, and make them realize that "stand and fight" is a silly option.

Basically any time my players assume my NPCs aren't horrible lying machines, especially if it is the villain doing it. They always, ALWAYS, fall for it. Probably doesn't help that I like handing out potions of glibness if they don't have bluff as a skill.

Avilan the Grey
2010-01-07, 06:59 AM
I have a player that routinely does this and it drives me crazy.

"How much damage would I take from the fall?"
"Would your character really want to jump from a four story building?"
"Well, how much damage would he take?"

*facepalm*

Hey, don't hate the perfectly logial player. And to answer your question: If my character knew he was strong / healthy enough to survive drops like that, of course he would do it regularly.

Roderick_BR
2010-01-07, 07:55 AM
Cure Light Wounds to cure a vampire.

Because it says cure, and that's how it works in strategy games.
It do works... But doesn't deal more damage than a longsword hit. Far, far from killing it in one go, and very likely to get him pissed off at you :smalltongue:


Jumped off a building because he thought he could land on an awning below. The awning broke and the character ended up crushing the owner's dog. Sad day. Oh, and my character suffered 10d6 damage. It was halved from the awning and dog breaking his fall. Of course, the owner went ballistic, attacking my character, so I decided the best course of action was to climb back up the building and jump on top of the owner. Chaotic Neutral, naturally. It wasn't out of malice that he did this. It was to lighten the owner up. It didn't work. :smalltongue:
A guy fall from a building, and the owner was busy *attacking* him? I dunno, myself, I would panic, both for my dog, AND for the guy suddenly falling from the sky in my front, not doing "you killed my dog, now I'll kick your ass".

My worst was to jump off a water tower thing with my fully armored low-dex dwarven fighter.

Avilan the Grey
2010-01-07, 08:08 AM
A guy fall from a building, and the owner was busy *attacking* him? I dunno, myself, I would panic, both for my dog, AND for the guy suddenly falling from the sky in my front, not doing "you killed my dog, now I'll kick your ass"..

Depends how genre-savy the npc is... living in a D&D world... maybe falling morons is common enough?

I have not any examples of stupid things "learned" from video games, but I had a friend way back then that tried movie stunts:

"I jump off the roof, sommersault and shoots the badguy before landing in the wagon transporting hay".

"Are you sure?"

"Yes!"

(Insert images of guy trying to shoot a guy while uppside down, backwards and landing head first into the stones of the street, missing the moving cart with hay)

Kobold-Bard
2010-01-07, 12:25 PM
I have been informed by a friend that one of her players once asked when they were going to get the compass and map whilst in a dungeon.

Typewriter
2010-01-07, 01:43 PM
In one of our Vampire games one of the players noticed one of the assault rifles was listed as a support weapon. He thought that shooting his allies would heal them. You know - because it's a support weapon. Pure video game logic right there.

Akal Saris
2010-01-07, 04:03 PM
This is a story from last Sunday.

I was part of a group of lvl 13 PCs who had just burned down a capital city and kidnapped the evil king, when the main BBEG of the campaign (an epic-level sorcerer) came flying in on an ancient red dragon to confront us. So essentially 5 PCs at level 13 (with the 2 spellcasters down to half their spells) vs. a pair of CR 22s or so.

We charged to the attack without any hesitation, with the druid jumping onto the sorcerer and grappling him, the party wizard teleporting in to disintegrate, and me unloading all of my arrows at the dragon. This, in turn, completely stunned the DM, who had to admit that he had never statted the sorcerer BBEG or the dragon, and had just assumed that we would all flee in terror. Panicking, the DM had the BBEG teleport away from us to safety, while the red dragon flew off as well.

I think this was more a case of me playing the DM's bluff and knowing that he's too big of a softie to kill the PCs so abruptly, but it was still pretty hilarious to see the main villain run away from our PCs (clearly my gryphon mount meant that we were serious business!) because we in turn were too dumb to run away from him :smalltongue:

FatR
2010-01-08, 04:54 AM
Ok so how about the reverse of this. How many times have you looked down from say 20 feet up and thought to your self. Ya know it's only 2d6. I can make it... :smallbiggrin:
This is not "video game logic". This is "knowing how the world works". Because it IS only 2d6 (if that).

FatR
2010-01-08, 04:59 AM
I do have an example too. A player at the table was a Paladin fighting a giant skeleton. Should have been a cakewalk, if had not tried to continuously turn it instead of simply hitting it.

The only way it makes sense is if he considered the turning a new upgrade, and that it had to be used immediately after receiving it.
No, this makes sense if he thought that the developers had enough brains and decency to not include completely worthless abilties in the game.

FatR
2010-01-08, 05:04 AM
This one is extremely common actualy.

Fighter:Ok, we know where the BBEG is, let's move on!
Wizard:Wait, first I'll spend one week worth of scrying, buffing, item crafting, and minion geting!
DM:You're sure?
Wizard: Of course I'm sure! I'm the freaking BATMAN!

One week later.

Wizard:TELEPORT! Hey, this is just an empty room!
DM: Of course. The BBEG finished his business here long ago. And he's also gained a couple extra levels while you sit down crafting stuff. Your next move?
And again, that has nothing to do with video game logic and everything with GM being a **** and shafting PCs for refusing to follow the logic of a (linear) video game, namely, that everything the plot throws at you is actually killable with your present resources.

Pharaoh's Fist
2010-01-08, 05:09 AM
He gained a couple of extra levels in the course of a week. Fascinating. This is why players must never make time consuming preparations and always just kick down the door to confront the enemy head on.

olentu
2010-01-08, 05:17 AM
If that boss can easily finish up some ritual or something and gain a couple of levels in a week said boss would probably be competent enough to kill the party.

kamikasei
2010-01-08, 05:22 AM
Eventually some Gith Wizard will cast Dismissal on you and you'll warp back to the Material Plane, and those couple of centuries you spend ravaging the Astral Plane will catch up to you real quick :smalltongue:

I think you're implying a Tir na nOg scenario, where you don't age so long as you're on the Astral, but your "real" age continues to increase and if you return to the Prime you get all that deferred aging back at once? That's not how the description reads to me.


Timeless. Age, hunger, thirst, poison, and natural healing don’t function in the Astral Plane, though they resume functioning when the traveler leaves the Astral Plane.

"Resume functioning", not "continue to accrue but the application of their effects is delayed".

And I have to agree with others above me that many of these examples seem to be just presenting something that the poster considers to have been stupid behaviour and claiming that means it's "video game logic". How exactly do you figure someone thinking that a villain from a video game in a campaign based on that video game wouldn't behave like he actually did in that video game... is "video game logic"?

J.Gellert
2010-01-08, 05:33 AM
You find a +5 greatsword of super special awesomeness.

Thanks Diablo II! :smallbiggrin:

BobVosh
2010-01-08, 05:34 AM
I think this was more a case of me playing the DM's bluff and knowing that he's too big of a softie to kill the PCs so abruptly, but it was still pretty hilarious to see the main villain run away from our PCs (clearly my gryphon mount meant that we were serious business!) because we in turn were too dumb to run away from him :smalltongue:

Hah, newb DM. I would utterly crush the party. However I never send the party up against "suppose to lose" fights. It is best to ensure if such a meeting occurs it is part of a batman/xantos gambit.

potatocubed
2010-01-08, 05:34 AM
And again, that has nothing to do with video game logic and everything with GM being a **** and shafting PCs for refusing to follow the logic of a (linear) video game, namely, that everything the plot throws at you is actually killable with your present resources.

It's just a difference of approach, really. Sometimes the BBEG is in the process of becoming Big and/or Bad, and the correct strategy is to kick in the door and stop him now. Sometimes he's already some sort of god-emperor safely tucked away in an impregnable Citadel of Doom and the correct strategy is to take your time, infiltrate, prepare, then kick in his door. The trick is knowing which kind is which kind.

BobVosh
2010-01-08, 05:37 AM
"Resume functioning", not "continue to accrue but the application of their effects is delayed".

Hmm. People in the astral plane can never get drunk. How sad.

Kesnit
2010-01-08, 07:18 AM
If that boss can easily finish up some ritual or something and gain a couple of levels in a week said boss would probably be competent enough to kill the party.

This is overlooking the fact that the BBEG has moved. Extra levels is a bit much, but the point is that taking all that time to prep caused their preps to become pointless. Nothing says the WIZ can't rescry the position and the party go after the BBEG, and the time required for preps would be less since the items have been crafted, but the extra time gave the BBEG time to progress his/her/its/their plans.

BTW, why WOULDN'T the ritual be finished in a week?

shadow_archmagi
2010-01-08, 07:41 AM
This is overlooking the fact that the BBEG has moved. Extra levels is a bit much, but the point is that taking all that time to prep caused their preps to become pointless. Nothing says the WIZ can't rescry the position and the party go after the BBEG, and the time required for preps would be less since the items have been crafted, but the extra time gave the BBEG time to progress his/her/its/their plans.

BTW, why WOULDN'T the ritual be finished in a week?

The point is that there are two people complaining about "Video Game Logic"

The DM says "Silly players using video game logic and assuming everything pauses when they're not trying to kill it. It's as if they think the world revolves around them! Next they'll start thinking that enemies can't chase them through doors"

The player says "Silly DM using video game logic. As if we could just assume that we only hear about problems after or just before we're capable of solving them. It isn't as if we think the world revolves around us. Next we'll start finding unpickable locked doors and silver keys the size of my head."

Yzzyx
2010-01-08, 07:42 AM
I think you're implying a Tir na nOg scenario, where you don't age so long as you're on the Astral, but your "real" age continues to increase and if you return to the Prime you get all that deferred aging back at once? That's not how the description reads to me.



"Resume functioning", not "continue to accrue but the application of their effects is delayed".


Timeless
On planes with this trait, time still passes, but the effects of time are diminished. How the timeless trait can affect certain activities or conditions such as hunger, thirst, aging, the effects of poison, and healing varies from plane to plane.

The danger of a timeless plane is that once one leaves such a plane for one where time flows normally, conditions such as hunger and aging do occur retroactively.

0123456789

Optimystik
2010-01-08, 07:53 AM
Yes - which is why Astral Projection is the best way to explore the AP, due to the "suspended animation" clause on your body overriding the retroactive aging of the Timeless trait.

kamikasei
2010-01-08, 07:56 AM
Thanks. Hmmm, that's something they really should restate in the trait summaries under each plane.

Totally Guy
2010-01-08, 08:28 AM
A couple of our characters were exploring the astral plane.

One said they'd been there a couple of weeks the other claimed it had been ten thousand years.

The "couple of weeks" guy is the comic relief so no one took him seriously. But considering that timeless trait...

Oslecamo
2010-01-08, 08:51 AM
The player says "Silly DM using video game logic. As if we could just assume that we only hear about problems after or just before we're capable of solving them. It isn't as if we think the world revolves around us. Next we'll start finding unpickable locked doors and silver keys the size of my head."

If they knew the BBEG was performing some evil ritual, waiting for him/her to finish it is pretty foolish in my book. I would even say it's the perfect window of oportunity.

The actual video game logic is waiting for the BBEG to finish his ritual and then attack after he has summoned the dragon of doom or whatever he was planning.

Radiun
2010-01-08, 08:56 AM
Hmm. People in the astral plane can never get drunk. How sad.

Then if you go in drunk, you'll never sober up?

Eldan
2010-01-08, 08:58 AM
Following the "all rumours are true" logic:

A monster is attacking people in town, always in the middle of the night. No one has seen it clearly, but there are various descriptions:

"It was eight feet tall, black, and jumped me from the top of a building!"

"It cast a spell on me, a curse!"

"It tried to bite me!"

"It had horns and claws, and wings!"

"It was small, with red fur!"

In the end, because all descriptions said completely different things, the party concluded it had to be a gnome illusionist, changing his disguises.

potatocubed
2010-01-08, 08:59 AM
EDIT: ^ Heeeeey... :smalltongue:


Then if you go in drunk, you'll never sober up?

Better yet, you can go in sober, drink ten gallons of grain alcohol with no effect, then come out and immediately die of catastrophic liver failure.

Obrysii
2010-01-08, 09:03 AM
I'm not sure if it was video-game like, but one of my characters did something extraordinarily stupid that paid off big time.

We were playing a gestalt eberron game. I was a Wood Elf Werebear 4// Monk 4, in partial hiding because of the religious hate towards lycanthropes.

Anyway: we had been captured by a vampire and were on a flying ship. Somehow we managed to break out and were battling on the deck. My character transformed into his hybrid form, and the sorceress flew down to the bottom of the hovering ship. We were 1500 feet in the sky.

So she's beneath the ship. We can't get to her 'cause we're too low of level for Fly. So what does my Int 6 Wood Elf do? He jumps off the edge, and using his crazy Climb checks due to his high Strength, brachiates down the side - finding the sorceress and begins to duel her while hanging from the bottom of the ship.

The insanity, good results, and good keeping with his character earned him an action point.

Narazil
2010-01-08, 09:57 AM
Some of my players have been shamefully guilty of this. One stands out in particular. Let's call him Jim:

The game was Vampire The Masquerade. Jim was playing his Nosferatu (which are known to be stealth) character Alex, somewhere around 11th Gen and having max 4 dots in stuff he was good at.
Jim serves as the party's Scout/Assassin.
The party was investigating a gathering of energy in Transylvania, and Alex volunteered to go take a peak at the scene. He climbs up a small hill, pulls forth his scoped and insanely expensive rifle, and scopes in on the sight.
Coming out of an underground complex is a methuselah-isq old (read: Extreme Epic Level) Tzimisce (Blood Sorcerer), a very well known individual to the party. As if that wasn't bad enough, he's just been through a ritual which basicly let him into Super Saiyan-mode - a fact illustrated by flares and brimming auras of magical energy.
Of course, Jim being Jim, he reasoned Alex didn't like that. Not one bit. And of course, being Jim, the only solution is to shoot the methuselah old Tzimisce in the face with his rifle.
Now, for non-Vampire players, this might not sound too bad. See it as a ~5th level character shooting an arrow at Elminster/Larloch.. While they are buffed.
I believe his reasoning was, that if the Vampire didn't see the bullet coming, he wouldn't really be able to survive it. Jim rolls hit and damage, resulting in something like 5 Lethal.
I start rolling the Tzimisce's massive soaking dices, resulting in 0 damage dealt, and point out that there now is an incredibly old Tzimisce looking around for his would-be assassin, hell in eyes and hand.
Of course, Jim being Jim, thought the Tzimisce just got lucky, and shot again. And again..

... I felt nice when the Tzimisce left, and Jim had to deal with a vozhd "trying to sneak up on him".


Jim later explained, that a bookworm magic user obviously wouldn't be able to resist a bullet like a real man Vampire.

IonDragon
2010-01-08, 10:19 AM
Ok so how about the reverse of this. How many times have you looked down from say 20 feet up and thought to your self. Ya know it's only 2d6. I can make it... :smallbiggrin:

Parkour. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x98jCBnWO8w) That is all.

PrGo
2010-01-08, 10:50 AM
Jim later explained, that a bookworm magic user obviously wouldn't be able to resist a bullet like a real man Vampire.

Can I sig this? :smallbiggrin:

Sipex
2010-01-08, 11:03 AM
One of my players, first level, tried to do a wall run because he had done it in Ninja Gaiden.

I explained to him how acrobatics worked after he failed his roll.

Jayabalard
2010-01-08, 11:15 AM
And again, that has nothing to do with video game logic and everything with GM being a **** and shafting PCs for refusing to follow the logic of a (linear) video game, namely, that everything the plot throws at you is actually killable with your present resources.I don't see that as the GM being an ass... there's no reason that players should expect to be able to put the game world on pause while they prepare, or that the BBEG is going to just is there and wait for them. He has his own agenda: he's got places to see, people to kill, and atrocities to do.

shadow_archmagi
2010-01-08, 11:36 AM
He has his own agenda: he's got places to see, people to kill, and atrocities to do.

This is true. At the same time, however, it is in my mind very very easy to imagine a DM laughing about how all his players were slaughtered because they decided to charge without preparing sufficiently. Given that scenario, I can imagine a variety of different scenarios:

1. Players spend a lot of time and effort thinking of ways to prepare. DM salutes their well-coordinated assault.

2. Players spend a lot of time and effort thinking of ways to prepare. DM was expecting this; has thrown in a few surprises. Victory is achieved, but at a cost higher than expected.

3. Players spend a lot of time and effort thinking of ways to prepare. DM criticizes them for wasting time, success is impossible.

4. Players charge in as they are. DM was planning for this; dungeon is appropriate to their abilities and everything goes smooth.

5. Players charge in as they are. DM expected them to put in a mild amount of preparation; things don't go smooth, but players achieve their goals despite heavy losses.

6. Players charge in as they are. DM critizes them for their lack of forethought, success is impossible.

Besides a general sense of metagaming "This is how my DM thinks" there really isn't any way for me to know which of these will happen and how to act appropriately.

Choco
2010-01-08, 11:36 AM
2 1st level PC's, a monk and a bard at that, open a door and see a room full of zombies and skeletons (like 7 total). They BOTH charge into melee, right away, no planning or second thoughts or anything. I eventually let the bard's player change his class because even though I told him that a bard is a support class, he took it anyway and then whined that he didn't want to be a healbot/archer/buffer/debuffer/everything else bards do and usually just charged into melee.

Jayabalard
2010-01-08, 11:43 AM
Besides a general sense of metagaming "This is how my DM thinks" there really isn't any way for me to know which of these will happen and how to act appropriately.Of course there is : players spend a little bit of time, finding out how much time they have to wait, and make a reasonable judgment based on information gathered. That's a far difference scenario than "take a week or more to prepare"

Kylarra
2010-01-08, 11:53 AM
Of course there is : players spend a little bit of time, finding out how much time they have to wait, and make a reasonable judgment based on information gathered. That's a far difference scenario than "take a week or more to prepare"Well it depends if the BBEG is on the verge of completing some horrendous ritual or if they're holed up in their lair. I mean, a week isn't very long at all to prepare for what might be a raid on your archenemy. So in a vacuum, I can't say that that's necessarily a bad tactic to take. Since the first thing on the list is scrying, I'm assuming that they're gathering information on the BBEG during that preptime, so if the ritual really was "about to finish", you'd normally give your players some sign of that, unless you're really just out to screw them in the name of "realism".

Random832
2010-01-08, 12:25 PM
This is overlooking the fact that the BBEG has moved. Extra levels is a bit much, but the point is that taking all that time to prep caused their preps to become pointless. Nothing says the WIZ can't rescry the position and the party go after the BBEG, and the time required for preps would be less since the items have been crafted, but the extra time gave the BBEG time to progress his/her/its/their plans.

BTW, why WOULDN'T the ritual be finished in a week?

What I don't get is the objection to the leveling. Four encounters per day (that's what the game is supposedly balanced for, right?), thirteen encounters per level (based on the XP table)... that's six and a half days.

2xMachina
2010-01-08, 12:31 PM
2 lvls per week. So, in a year, you'd be epic++...

Jayabalard
2010-01-08, 12:32 PM
Since the first thing on the list is scrying, I'm assuming that they're gathering information on the BBEG during that preptime, so if the ritual really was "about to finish", you'd normally give your players some sign of that, unless you're really just out to screw them in the name of "realism".I dunno, the DM saying "You're sure?" should generally be plenty of warning I'd think. It kind of implies to me that the DM has already given them the info to know that they don't have the time to do all of that. Given that the person posted that scenario to this particular thread, it seems extremely likely that this is the case, since he's offering as example of players using video game logic (the world is on pause waiting for us to get to the boss).

Pharaoh's Fist
2010-01-08, 12:33 PM
Given that the person posted it in this particular thread, it seems extremely likely that this is the case, since he's offering as example of players using video game logic (the world is on pause waiting for us to get to the boss)

Kicking down the door and taking on the evil villain without preparation isn't videogame logic how?

Cause it happens a lot in Diablo and Diablo 2, as well as in Lord of Destruction.

Aldizog
2010-01-08, 12:34 PM
What I don't get is the objection to the leveling. Four encounters per day (that's what the game is supposedly balanced for, right?), thirteen encounters per level (based on the XP table)... that's six and a half days.
Oh, I certainly get that objection. Unless you specifically say "It's Monday; you receive word that the lich has slain the High Priest of Pelor and a company of paladins." "It's Tuesday; you receive a Sending from Shimanyo the Gold that the lich is attacking his lair." And so on. The world can't be expected to contain an infinite number of CR-appropriate challenges for the BBEG, and those battles would be notable.

Even better would be when a BBEG or lieutenant is slain without the PCs doing anything; you generally only get XP from things that involve some degree of risk, after all. If they're adventuring "off-screen" to gain XP, there should be some chance of them dying "off-screen."

jiriku
2010-01-08, 12:36 PM
If every NPC leveled once per week, then all the NPCs in the world would be epic before they were out of diapers.

Even assuming the BBEG is unusual for the world, how realistic is it to expect that he is able to locate or even desires to locate 13-14 level-appropriate challenges per week? World-dominating types tend to be pretty goal-directed. If I'm conducting an evil ritual, I'm focused on finishing the farking ritual, not galivanting around the countryside getting violent with every monster and high-level humanoid in a 10-mile radius.

On the other hand, heavy-handed DMing, of the type that says "I expected you to do this, I wanted you to do this, and you didn't, so by golly I'm going to punish you!" ...I see that a lot.

Edit: ...and the ninjas. I see them too. Guess I made my spot check.

ZeroNumerous
2010-01-08, 12:37 PM
..., since he's offering as example of players using video game logic (the world is on pause waiting for us to get to the boss).

So everyone who posts in this thread has an actual example of Video Game Logic as opposed to merely what they believe is an example of Video Game Logic? Not everyone has the same definition of Video Game Logic, as this thread has proven.

IonDragon
2010-01-08, 12:40 PM
Even better would be when a BBEG or lieutenant is slain without the PCs doing anything; you generally only get XP from things that involve some degree of risk, after all. If they're adventuring "off-screen" to gain XP, there should be some chance of them dying "off-screen."

I think that would make for a really interesting dungeon crawl. Running into another lieutenant or other adventurers in a half cleared out stronghold... Traps but no monsters, loot rooms half cleared in a hurry... I'm going to bear this in mind next time I run D&D. I like it.

Dr Bwaa
2010-01-08, 12:53 PM
Kicking down the door and taking on the evil villain without preparation isn't videogame logic how?

Cause it happens a lot in Diablo and Diablo 2, as well as in Lord of Destruction.

No one claimed charging in without preparation wasn't VGL (in fact, many people have said it is). However, there's no reason that that's the only form of VGL that can exist, so I'm not sure what you're arguing.

...I viewed this thread more as another excuse to put amusing anecdotes of players doing ill-advised things, less than as a place to argue about what VGL is, but then again, I'm not surprised at where it's going :smalltongue:

On topic, the PCs (one in particular) in a game I ran stuck around in an Illithid lair for an excruciatingly long time past when they should have. They had stumbled into it accidentally, mind you, and just decided to go exploring. I had expected them to leave after the first group of four fighters and a low-level illithid mage nearly TPK'd them, but after some heals, they decided to just charge on in to the dungeon proper and keep on fighting increasingly difficult battles against increasingly well-prepared illithid magi. When I reminded them that this was something completely tangential to their actual reason for being there (in fact, they had already completed their objective while down there, then gone back to fighting mind flayers), one responded "Yeah, but we haven't found all the loot yet!" :smallbiggrin:

Pharaoh's Fist
2010-01-08, 12:56 PM
No one claimed charging in without preparation wasn't VGL (in fact, many people have said it is). However, there's no reason that that's the only form of VGL that can exist, so I'm not sure what you're arguing.

I just think it's a poor example for "videogame logic" because that could be applied to anything the PCs did.

Now, the part about pheonix downs earlier is a better example because that's clearly a bad decision based on the logic of videogames.

Jayabalard
2010-01-08, 01:02 PM
Kicking down the door and taking on the evil villain without preparation isn't videogame logic how?I don't really understand this statement... you seem to be offering it as some sort of counterexample but I'm not aware of anyone suggesting otherwise, so you seem to be arguing against a strawman.

There's plenty of middle ground between "kick down the door with no preparation" and taking a "week worth of scrying, buffing, item crafting, and minion geting!"


I just think it's a poor example for "videogame logic" because that could be applied to anything the PCs did.Personally, I think that's because you're assuming that the example tells everything about the situation, which isn't a reasonable assumption. IMO it's a far more reasonable assumption is that the poster left out details that should be taken as a given based on the fact that it's being presented as an example of PC's using videogame logic.

Pharaoh's Fist
2010-01-08, 01:04 PM
There's plenty of middle ground between "kick down the door with no preparation" and taking a "week worth of scrying, buffing, item crafting, and minion geting!"
Given that the villain not only had time to complete his evil ritual but gain several levels and travel far away over the course of that week, it would seem that anything other than a fairly immediate response would have resulted in the PCs arriving after the ritual of doom was complete.

Jayabalard
2010-01-08, 01:09 PM
Given that the villain not only had time to complete his evil ritual but gain several levels and travel far away over the course of that week, it would seem that anything other than a fairly immediate response would have resulted in the PCs arriving after the ritual of doom was complete.That's not a reasonable assumption at all; the ritual may have taken 10 minutes, or it might have taken 6 days, 23 hours, or anything in between. The levels gained may have been the result of the BBEG adventuring (which seems silly to me), or they may have been the result of the ritual itself (seems far more plausible to me, since the cliche ritual of gaining power should, in fact, result in the BBEG gaining power {levels/XP}). There's no reason to assume that it required an immediate response unless you're taking that as your premise, which is fairly circular reasoning.

Pharaoh's Fist
2010-01-08, 01:14 PM
The levels gained may have been the result of the BBEG adventuring (which seems silly to me)
Though that does seem to be what is implied.


or they may have been the result of the ritual itself (seems far more plausible to me, since the cliche ritual of gaining power should, in fact, result in the BBEG gaining power {levels/XP}).
1: This sort of thing is more likely to cost XP than give it (see: creating magic items, Gate, etc)
2: You can never gain enough XP from one encounter to advance more than one level, so to advance several levels, he had to either do multiple rituals (only one was mentioned though) or go adventuring (which, as previously mentioned, is silly).

Kungaloosh!

awa
2010-01-08, 01:18 PM
I think it really depends on what the scrying charecter saw and the context of the situation if the place the big bad was in was his lair and he was preforming generally evil then the wizards response was not entirely uncalled for. if the big bad was trying to preform an evil ritual, trying to find a hidden treasure or any similar thing then the wizards choice was the wrong one. since the poster is the only one who really knows the exact details i feel he should be given the benefit of the doubt rather then his gm style being immediately called screwing over the pcs.

rituals cast by big bad are often diffrent from the ones available for pcs
not every one plays a role playing game with the assumption that npcs follow the same rules they do. In my games npcs are whatever level i what them to be the villains dose not need to go kill kobolds to get a level if the plot calls for him to be higher level then he is and a ritual is an excellent in game way of describing why.

Pharaoh's Fist
2010-01-08, 01:21 PM
{Scrubbed}

Jayabalard
2010-01-08, 01:22 PM
Though that does seem to be what is implied.How so?


Rules for players that aren't necessarily applicable for BBEGThe game rules are designed to make players have to play the game for increases in power; but the reverse is very well known cliche: where a ritual grants PHENOMENAL COSMIC POWERS! (with or without the Itty-bitty living space) for some sort of vile deed. Switch to the dark side, we have cookies. Etc.

Pharaoh's Fist
2010-01-08, 01:24 PM
Rules for players that aren't necessarily applicable for BBEG
Are you quoting an authoritative source?


The game rules are designed to make players have to play the game for increases in power; but the reverse is very well known cliche: where a ritual grants PHENOMENAL COSMIC POWERS! (with or without the Itty-bitty living space) for some sort of vile deed. Switch to the dark side, we have cookies. Etc.

My lord.

Oscalemo's example was clearly a case not only of the PCs using videogame logic, but the DM as well.

Jayabalard
2010-01-08, 01:26 PM
Oscalemo's example was clearly a case not only of the PCs using videogame logic, but the DM as well.No, it's not. It might have been, but we don't currently know enough about the situation to reach that conclusion.


Are you quoting an authoritative source?what? The rules given apply to players; there is nothing to stop a DM from creating a particular ritual that the BBEG is going to use that don't follow the same patterns, and in fact, I'm fairly convinced that it's far more common for those sort of rituals to be totally outside of anything the game rules cover. So, using those rules as a basis for any sort of argument about the BBEG's ritual is absurd.

awa
2010-01-08, 03:45 PM
I don't feel an evil ritual that the pcs are not allowed to also do is video game logic its just narrative logic. The evil villain can do stuff the heroes cant trying to acquire ultimate power by sacrificing virgins (or what ever) has been around so long its a cliche.
And whether or not its "raw" does not matter i will tell you for a fact that i personally have had villains do evil rituals designed to make themselves more powerful and no others who have done so as well. Is it raw no would you have chosen to do it maybe not but its something that could happen in the context of a game very easily and if the party knowing that the villain was getting ready to start casting his evil ritual the wizard decided that hed take a week off to power up (something many video game basically require) assuming the villain would always be on the verge of completing the ritual no matter how much time he spent prepping then that's certainly video game logic.

olentu
2010-01-08, 03:49 PM
I don't feel an evil ritual that the pcs are not allowed to also do is video game logic its just narrative logic. The evil villain can do stuff the heroes cant trying to acquire ultimate power by sacrificing virgins (or what ever) has been around so long its a cliche.
And whether or not its "raw" does not matter i will tell you for a fact that i personally have had villains do evil rituals designed to make themselves more powerful and no others who have done so as well. Is it raw no would you have chosen to do it maybe not but its something that could happen in the context of a game very easily and if the party knowing that the villain was getting ready to start casting his evil ritual the wizard decided that hed take a week off to power up (something many video game basically require) assuming the villain would always be on the verge of completing the ritual no matter how much time he spent prepping then that's certainly video game logic.

What if the players happen to be neutral or evil.

Edit: Or good and yet overly tempted by power.

Akal Saris
2010-01-08, 04:03 PM
Hah, newb DM. I would utterly crush the party. However I never send the party up against "suppose to lose" fights. It is best to ensure if such a meeting occurs it is part of a batman/xantos gambit.

Agreed, it would have been awesome if running away from the PCs had been "part of his machiavellian plan all along" :P

He's been DMing for 6 years now, so it's not so much newb DM as poor thinking on his part. We took over the game from another group of PCs in the same storyline, and apparently they always fled in terror whenever they got the cue to do so, which means that our responses continually surprise the DM. I don't think he has the guts to completely TPK us though, so it's fun testing the limits.

Altair_the_Vexed
2010-01-08, 04:05 PM
Dumbest video-game-logic action I can think of?

Smashing all the plant pots in a hotel reception "because they might have cool stuff in them."

Korivan
2010-01-08, 04:06 PM
Anything Devil May Cry using Star Wars sourcebooks.

awa
2010-01-08, 04:25 PM
Well even if the parties evil the really good evil rituals are still not for them just beings their vicious jerks doesn't mean their the big bad.

olentu
2010-01-08, 04:30 PM
Well even if the parties evil the really good evil rituals are still not for them just beings their vicious jerks doesn't mean their the big bad.

So it is level of evil then.

chiasaur11
2010-01-08, 04:31 PM
Well, even if the party is evil, the really good evil rituals are still not for them. Just because they're vicious jerks doesn't mean they're the big bad.

Why not?

Seems "The players can't have (X) because it would be unbalancing, even though there's no good narrative reason" is more "video game logic" than "The villain won't gain two levels arbitrarily just to spite us."

I mean, the second one assumes a constant world. The first one assumes a world where the "needs" of the story (or, in this case, it seems, the need to punish the players) ignore systems otherwise somewhat constant, like, I dunno, some bosses in video games.

Jayabalard
2010-01-08, 04:55 PM
What if the players happen to be neutral or evil.Then you slip them rumors of a ritual involving the head of Vecna.

Neutral isn't really applicable... these sort of rituals are generally fully in the "Vile" category, so it's only really an issue for very evil characters.


Why not?Because, in general*, it's not fun.

*Remember "In general" doesn't mean always... I'm sure that there could be exceptions, and in fact I can think of a few situations where that sort of ritual would be the goal of the campaign for an evil campaign.

Sinfire Titan
2010-01-08, 04:58 PM
He gained a couple of extra levels in the course of a week. Fascinating. This is why players must never make time consuming preparations and always just kick down the door to confront the enemy head on.

Of course he did! Have you ever done the math for XP? It takes 2 months IC for a 4 person party to go from levels 1-20 (assuming all they fight is equal-leveled encounters and get 4 encounters/day). Gaining 2 levels in a week isn't that hard.


I think the best example I can give is that 3 of the people in my group have played the original .Hack games. One of them noticed a pattern with the dungeons: whenever you are presented with a fork in the road, go left if it is the first fork in the dungeon and you will always be on the right path. This mentality has transfered into his gaming logic; something the 4th person in our group has picked up on and used against us.


Never mind that, after reading through several premade modules, it seems to be correct 80% of the time.

Twilight Jack
2010-01-08, 05:08 PM
I don't quite know if this qualifies, but I have one player with a tendency to see plot hooks where none exist. Simply put, I like to run my games with the notion of a larger world that keeps spinning when the players aren't looking. So, even if it has nothing to do with the plot in which the PCs are involved, there will be wars and rumors of wars, NPCs will make small talk, small little dramas will play out around the characters, etc.

The video game logic comes in when one player hears a bit of throwaway flavor dialogue (perhaps about the bad harvest this year) and presumes it to be some sort of plot hook that he has to spend the rest of the session investigating. Invariably, he convinces the rest of the party that this is the thing upon which they should be focused, and we're off to the races investigating the "plot" contained within a throwaway line, which I must oftentimes create on the fly.

In a supers game I ran, the characters once took on and overthrew the dictatorship of North Korea because of one of these little miscommunications. An NPC ally of theirs suggested it as a joke, and that one player mistook it for my intended plot and rallied the troops. It was a very high power game, too, so they actually succeeded. The ramifications of their doing so were felt in that game world for years, and it turned into a defining moment for the group, but it was all started by an NPC making a joke.

olentu
2010-01-08, 05:11 PM
Then you slip them rumors of a ritual involving the head of Vecna.

Neutral isn't really applicable... these sort of rituals are generally fully in the "Vile" category, so it's only really an issue for very evil characters.

Because, in general*, it's not fun.

*Remember "In general" doesn't mean always... I'm sure that there could be exceptions, and in fact I can think of a few situations where that sort of ritual would be the goal of the campaign for an evil campaign.

The point was that neutral characters may choose to take the alignment change for power and as per my addition sometimes even good characters might if given sufficient incentive.

RebelRogue
2010-01-08, 05:14 PM
Actually, I consider that sort of "dumb D&D 3.5 logic": that players assume they have a goddamn right to anything anyone else ever does.

Twilight Jack
2010-01-08, 05:18 PM
Of course he did! Have you ever done the math for XP? It takes 2 months IC for a 4 person party to go from levels 1-20 (assuming all they fight is equal-leveled encounters and get 4 encounters/day). Gaining 2 levels in a week isn't that hard.

This is one of my least favorite aspects of 3.x, I don't mind telling you. I first really noticed it when the players in one of my games leapt from 1st to 7th level inside of a few weeks of gametime. Since then, I've modified the XP system somewhat for the games I run. Since all classes gain their levels at the same point totals, it's a fairly simple thing to slow down the progression to a manageable level.

Jayabalard
2010-01-08, 05:31 PM
The point was that neutral characters may choose to take the alignment change for power and as per my addition sometimes even good characters might if given sufficient incentive.I don't really agree there... certainly, people who have mislabeled the alignment on their sheet might do that.

Even most evil people will be unwilling to go that far, and say at thier BBEG class of 1205 reunion "I say, that was going a bit far don't you think?"


Actually, I consider that sort of "dumb D&D 3.5 logic": that players assume they have a goddamn right to anything anyone else ever does.Agreed.

Worira
2010-01-08, 05:38 PM
Personally, I think that's because you're assuming that the example tells everything about the situation, which isn't a reasonable assumption. IMO it's a far more reasonable assumption is that the poster left out details that should be taken as a given based on the fact that it's being presented as an example of PC's using videogame logic.

This is a hypothetical scenario. It has never actually happened, is of tenuous relation to the topic at best, and serves only as an opportunity for Oslecamo to snipe at Batman wizards. There are no more details.

olentu
2010-01-08, 05:49 PM
I don't really agree there... certainly, people who have mislabeled the alignment on their sheet might do that.

Even most evil people will be unwilling to go that far, and say at thier BBEG class of 1205 reunion "I say, that was going a bit far don't you think?"

Agreed.

So alignments are always static in your view.

Jayabalard
2010-01-08, 06:09 PM
So alignments are always static in your view.No; just that it's not possible to get to the point where you can do one of those rituals and still be neutral, let alone good.


This is a hypothetical scenario. It has never actually happenedActually, I'm pretty sure that it has actually happened (I seem to remember something very similar to that in one of the games I played in many years ago).

Feel free to report him if you think that's what his post is about, and it will probably be scrubbed.

Tyndmyr
2010-01-08, 06:13 PM
Then you slip them rumors of a ritual involving the head of Vecna.

Neutral isn't really applicable... these sort of rituals are generally fully in the "Vile" category, so it's only really an issue for very evil characters.

Because, in general*, it's not fun.

Neutral characters can definitely do evil things, even very evil things, in pursuit of say, a greater good end result. Obviously, truly good characters wouldn't really want to go down this path, but neutral? You betcha.

olentu
2010-01-08, 06:14 PM
No; just that it's not possible to get to the point where you can do one of those rituals and still be neutral, let alone good.

Ah ok I see the problem. You are saying that immediately before starting the ritual one must be evil because presumably evil alignment is a prerequisite or something of the sort. I on the other hand am saying that at the time that specifics of the ritual become known or enough information is found so that the details could be acquired characters that are not necessarily evil may choose to become evil so that they can preform said ritual and gain the power provided by such.

Jayabalard
2010-01-08, 06:18 PM
Neutral characters can definitely do evil things, even very evil things, in pursuit of say, a greater good end result. Obviously, truly good characters wouldn't really want to go down this path, but neutral? You betcha.Personal power is not "for the greater good" by even the largest stretch of the imagination. And "for the greater good" is the cliche mantra of the deluded evil guy even more than it is for the neutral guy.


Ah ok I see the problem. You are saying that immediately before starting the ritual one must be evil because presumably evil alignment is a prerequisite or something of the sort.No, I'm saying that evil rituals don't exist in a vacuum, and that to get to the point where you even know about the details and can contemplate going through with it, let alone actually have all the stuff to perform one, generally means that you've gone so far down the path to evil as to be virtually irredeemable.

pingcode20
2010-01-08, 06:25 PM
Personal power is not "for the greater good" by even the largest stretch of the imagination. And "for the greater good" is the cliche mantra of the deluded evil guy even more than it is for the neutral guy.

No, I'm saying that evil rituals don't exist in a vacuum, and that to get to the point where you even know about the details and can contemplate going through with it, let alone actually have all the stuff to perform one, generally means that you've gone so far down the path to evil as to be virtually irredeemable.

Isn't that a very classic fall?

Good person is in a pinch, evil person leads good person to believe evil ritual is only solution, good person eventually capitulates under pressure, performs ritual, becomes evil/insane.

olentu
2010-01-08, 06:25 PM
Personal power is not "for the greater good" by even the largest stretch of the imagination. And "for the greater good" is the cliche mantra of the deluded evil guy.

No, I'm saying that evil rituals don't exist in a vacuum, and that to get to the point where you even know about the details, let alone have the stuff to perform one, generally means that you've gone so far down the path to evil as to be virtually irredeemable.

Well as the players would at the least know of the existence of such a ritual given that they presumably have a reason for stopping it I do not see why they would not be able to research it. Sure the methods might require doing evil things to gain knowledge of the details but characters that are not evil could choose to do said evil things in order to gain said details.



Also while perhaps not completely relevant to the other I recall that one of the books has a lich that preformed the regular lich ritual complete with unspeakable evil for the greater good. I may however be remembering incorrectly.


Edit: This is also a good point.


Isn't that a very classic fall?

Good person is in a pinch, evil person leads good person to believe evil ritual is only solution, good person eventually capitulates under pressure, performs ritual, becomes evil/insane.

Jayabalard
2010-01-08, 06:32 PM
Isn't that a very classic fall?Nah, the classic fall generally has them slipping for a bit before the plunge. The fall itself is where the formerly good (now evil) character takes the step where they are pretty much past redemption.


Also while perhaps not completely relevant to the other I recall that one of the books has a lich that preformed the regular lich ritual complete with unspeakable evil for the greater good. I may however be remembering incorrectly.It's possible, but it sounds like a fairly standard "terribly written/contrived D&D plot element"

olentu
2010-01-08, 06:38 PM
It's possible, but it sounds like a fairly standard "terribly written/contrived D&D plot element"

Well whether it is or not as I said it is somewhat tangential to the discussion of non evil characters choosing to peruse the specifics of an evil ritual for their personal use.

Jayabalard
2010-01-08, 06:39 PM
Well whether it is or not as I said it is somewhat tangential to the discussion of non evil characters choosing to peruse the specifics of an evil ritual for their personal use.which itself is kind of tangential to the discussion of "Dumbest actions your pc did because they used Video Game Logic?"

olentu
2010-01-08, 06:44 PM
which itself is kind of tangential to the discussion of "Dumbest actions your pc did because they used Video Game Logic?"

Well I do generally prefer to stick to one tangent at a time though only generally. But yes the question as I recall it was something like, if having a ritual that was denied to the characters due to balance was "video game logic", which is somewhat tangential assuming there are no stories of players passing up a ritual because they assume that being the player characters it will not work on them or something like that.

Skaven
2010-01-08, 07:00 PM
While playing some underdark campaign, my group took out a squad of drow soldiers in a drow fortress thing. We were all a little drunk at the time. Almost out of spells and with HP not quite up there, we decided toi sleep in their barracks after barricading the doors with some beds since 'it works in Baldurs gate'.

Of course, this course of action nearly got us all killed.

Tyndmyr
2010-01-08, 07:18 PM
Personal power is not "for the greater good" by even the largest stretch of the imagination. And "for the greater good" is the cliche mantra of the deluded evil guy even more than it is for the neutral guy.

PCs routinely collect personal power for the greater good. With the exception of VoP types, they carry enough wealth on their person by high levels to feed entire kingdoms. Still, somehow they justify that they are doing more good by defeating the BBEG of the day. And they might be, depending on the situation.

Is it a good act to sacrifice one that you may save a thousand? Is it evil? Without getting too far into alignment, it's pretty clear that circumstances can matter for quite a lot.

Which, incidentally, ties into a video game logic rule, if you will. That things are essentially always the same, regardless of circumstances. If you start adventurers off rescuing hostages from orcs, odds are, they'll never bother to try to talk with orcs, or do anything other than kill them.

Jayabalard
2010-01-08, 08:24 PM
PCs routinely collect personal power for the greater good.I don't agree that this statement is true of any except a small minority of PCs. Generally, Good PC's collect personal power as a byproduct of working toward good. In some cases the PC's gain power for the sake of gaining power (common wizard archetype).


With the exception of VoP types, they carry enough wealth on their person by high levels to feed entire kingdoms.Wealth doesn't actually fix famine... it just puts a bandaid on it. And you can do a lot of harm by just throwing money at that kind of problem directly instead of addressing the root of the problem.

Nor do Characters necessarily have that kind of wealth in all games across the board; in many games you'll find that people have just enough to get by on, or even, not enough to get by on.

Kesnit
2010-01-08, 09:08 PM
Are you quoting an authoritative source?


Aren't there a few deities who used to be mortal and ascended to godhood through rituals? IIRC, Mystra and Kelemvor did this.

Demented
2010-01-08, 09:27 PM
I would just like to note that RPG video games do an awful lot of 'preparation and crafting new magic items', they've just refined it into a form of combat called 'grinding'.

In Hell difficulty, the number of runs to get sufficiently good equipment and experience is staggering.


Kicking down the door and taking on the evil villain without preparation isn't videogame logic how?

Cause it happens a lot in Diablo and Diablo 2, as well as in Lord of Destruction.

taltamir
2010-01-08, 10:35 PM
Since I have been playing D&D since 1981 that exact same set up was in the original pink box of basic D&D. You enter the hobgoblins prison portion.

All you see is a leg of a female if you approached it was a save vs. petrification.

It was a medusa that was chain up the hobgoblins had captured.

this doesn't make sense... medusa need to eat and drink or they die.
The petrifying power requires her to be alive
Hobgoblins who chained her up would turn into stone if they tried to provide her with food or drink...
also would turn into stone when they tried to chain her up I guess.

Tyndmyr
2010-01-08, 10:43 PM
I don't agree that this statement is true of any except a small minority of PCs. Generally, Good PC's collect personal power as a byproduct of working toward good. In some cases the PC's gain power for the sake of gaining power (common wizard archetype).

Partially. Leveling is generally a byproduct, but better equipment is pretty easily convertible to cash. Why are players walking around with a small fortune on their backs?

Because they need them to accomplish their ends more reliably.


Wealth doesn't actually fix famine... it just puts a bandaid on it. And you can do a lot of harm by just throwing money at that kind of problem directly instead of addressing the root of the problem.

Nor do Characters necessarily have that kind of wealth in all games across the board; in many games you'll find that people have just enough to get by on, or even, not enough to get by on.

It's a very rare game in which high level PCs are not fabulously wealthy in comparison to the average commoner. Consider the value of a single gold piece to a commoner in comparison to an adventurer.

"Just throwing money at the problem" is a bit of a strawman. The point is that you can use wealth for good. Ignoring the root problems is not necessary in pursuit of that good.

Thus, the question of why good characters keep fabulous amounts of treasure to themselves is pretty relevant.

2xMachina
2010-01-08, 10:47 PM
this doesn't make sense... medusa need to eat and drink or they die.
The petrifying power requires her to be alive
Hobgoblins who chained her up would turn into stone if they tried to provide her with food or drink...
also would turn into stone when they tried to chain her up I guess.

DON'T QUESTION VIDEOGAME LOGIC!

;)

Yeah, some game things doesn't make sense when thought thoroughly.

Choco
2010-01-08, 11:02 PM
Actually, I consider that sort of "dumb D&D 3.5 logic": that players assume they have a goddamn right to anything anyone else ever does.

I think you just nailed the problem spot-on.

Aldizog
2010-01-08, 11:17 PM
this doesn't make sense... medusa need to eat and drink or they die.
The petrifying power requires her to be alive
Hobgoblins who chained her up would turn into stone if they tried to provide her with food or drink...
also would turn into stone when they tried to chain her up I guess.

It's Classic D&D. It's not as legalistic "Everything is spelled out in precise language" the way 3.X is intended to be. So when the module says the priest's zombie guards captured here, you can pretty well infer that the creator of the module (Gary Gygax) considered zombies to be immune to a medusa's petrifying gaze. No, it isn't explicitly spelled out; skeletons also aren't noted as being immune to poison, for that matter.

It was a very different game; you didn't try to extrapolate nuances of wording into world-building. You made inferences and judgment calls. If the module says that zombies captured her, then clearly the intention is that her gaze doesn't affect zombies.

2xMachina
2010-01-08, 11:17 PM
I think you just nailed the problem spot-on.

Well, IRL, people are like that too. Anyone would whine if someone get extra privileges for no bloody reason.

Xzeno
2010-01-08, 11:29 PM
The thing that my players do is assume that anything that comes out of my mouth is plot essential, on the logic that I would never supply flavor to a scene for any other reason. This accusation is baseless, of course, or at least it was. Now, whenever I supply flavor, we get sidetracked for a good fifteen minutes and if I don't, I prove them right. The cunning webs the players weave.

In other news, this is shaping up to be an alignment thread, huh? Ah, what the heck: My barely relevant two copper: I would say that an evil for the sake of good is still evil. If a LG fighter kills one to save a thousand, it's evil. Sure, he might end up doing it and the results might be good, but the paladin would have saved the thousand and the one or died trying. WWPD?

Edited for punctuation error. baseless had two commas. Fixed that.

Eldariel
2010-01-08, 11:36 PM
The thing that my players do is assume that anything that comes out of my mouth is plot essential, on the logic that I would never supply flavor to a scene for any other reason. This accusation is baseless,, of course, or at least it was. Now, whenever I supply flavor, we get sidetracked for a good fifteen minutes and if I don't, I prove them right. The cunning webs the players weave.

In other news, this is shaping up to be an alignment thread, huh? Ah, what the heck: My barely relevant two copper: I would say that an evil for the sake of good is still evil. If a LG fighter kills one to save a thousand, it's evil. Sure, he might end up doing it and the results might be good, but the paladin would have saved the thousand and the one or died trying. WWPD?

In other words, the Paladin would've doomed them all. Yet another reason Good characters should stay far away from anything involving lives; they're just gonna get an unnecessarily large bunch killed trying to save few.

Tyndmyr
2010-01-08, 11:37 PM
The thing that my players do is assume that anything that comes out of my mouth is plot essential, on the logic that I would never supply flavor to a scene for any other reason. This accusation is baseless,, of course, or at least it was.


This means you need to mess them horribly. Someone recently mentioned an example where different witnesses to a monster attack all gave different descriptions, leading players in all sorts of weird directions when it turns out, they were just acting like people in real life do.

Use things like that, just to see what wild conclusions they come to.


In other news, this is shaping up to be an alignment thread, huh? Ah, what the heck: My barely relevant two copper: I would say that an evil for the sake of good is still evil. If a LG fighter kills one to save a thousand, it's evil. Sure, he might end up doing it and the results might be good, but the paladin would have saved the thousand and the one or died trying. WWPD?

A good justification, that can definitely be supported by the rules. That said, I can totally imagine a neutral character committing such an evil act.

Xzeno
2010-01-08, 11:54 PM
This means you need to mess them horribly. Someone recently mentioned an example where different witnesses to a monster attack all gave different descriptions, leading players in all sorts of weird directions when it turns out, they were just acting like people in real life do.

Use things like that, just to see what wild conclusions they come to.

I'll try that; thanks for the advise.


That said, I can totally imagine a neutral character committing such an evil act. I concur.


In other words, the Paladin would've doomed them all.

Yes. First off, kill one, save one thousand is a pretty impossible scenario. I don't really see how it could work out.

Secondly, a paladin fights evil. Even if it's easier to give up, even if lives will be lost, he must fight. Did the rebels flee from the Death Star as it destroyed their ships? Did they live as slaves, knowing that their lives would be spared? No! They fought, knowing that they would lose their lives if they failed, not for convenience today but for the hope of a better tomorrow. So too should the paladin.

OK, I got through that with a straight face.

taltamir
2010-01-09, 12:07 AM
I don't agree that this statement is true of any except a small minority of PCs. Generally, Good PC's collect personal power as a byproduct of working toward good. In some cases the PC's gain power for the sake of gaining power (common wizard archetype).

I completely and utterly disagree with your notion that intentionally gaining power is evil and that no good person would ever try to gain power for the greater good (while still being a good person)

I also think it is completely tangential to the subject of the thread. Such a philosophical discussion has nothing to do with game logic but with morality. If you really want to a new thread can be made for this.

When I originally stated that PCs assume time stands still when they are not interacting with something I meant it more along the lines of:

Setup: We got cut off from our main plot line, unable to pursue it due to a massive army and a deity standing in our way... so we decided to go and do some jobs to gather wealth and power in a far off city... after asking around we heard that some people are looking for adventurers to do some jobs.

Me: Ok, we have taken on the jobs from the wizard, the merchant, and the traders guild, lets stop by the adventurer guild to hear about their two assignment that needs doing.
PC2: we already have more then enough jobs, we should finish those first and then come back for those other jobs.
Me: But, 2 of the jobs we might not even want to do, and the wizard's job is just to travel 2 days out of town to retreive something...
PC2: so?
Me: So the job might not be there when we come back, it might be highly lucrative and time sensitive.
DM: you know guys, that is a very good point.

later in the same game:
Party: "ok, so we killed the 12 elite guards and the golem on this side of the door, we know the chief wizard run inside where the BBEG is at with an additional 12 guards... lets buff up and then charge"
Party: we buff, we plan, we alter plans, we start doing stuff...
DM: ok, so a few minutes have passed in game, right?
Party: uh, yea...
DM: suddenly the BBEG and a few of his guards appear behind you, they used dimension door; they are also fully buffed.
we should have seen it coming, but for some reason none of us did...


So, yea... that is what I meant... not that if you take a week to scry the BBEG and craft and rally your troops he would not be there (did your scrying provide false info?) and have gained multiple levels (new quest, we mindrape/dominate/charm person/whatever him to find out what the ritual was and perform it ourselves... we will be gods by the end of the month).

PS. if your BBEG can do some ritual for levels, it better be because he is "the evil chosen one TM"... you can easily deny PCs such options for power, but you should have a reason beyond "NPCs gain levels from rituals, you gain levels from killing stuff"... just tell them they have to be descendants of an evil god, and no, they cannot roll a demigod character.

Eldariel
2010-01-09, 12:13 AM
Yes. First off, kill one, save one thousand is a pretty impossible scenario. I don't really see how it could work out.

Easy, evil villain arranges Koboyashi Maru. Holds one hostage with gun to the head and kills the one if you press the button that would get the 1000 out of the gas chamber they're in right now. Any Evil Villain Hostage Situation really. Nuke about to be launched, Generic Hostage, if Pally acts, hostage dies. Pally tries to save 1, everyone dies. Pally tries to save 1000(0000), 1 dies.


Secondly, a paladin fights evil. Even if it's easier to give up, even if lives will be lost, he must fight. Did the rebels flee from the Death Star as it destroyed their ships? Did they live as slaves, knowing that their lives would be spared? No! They fought, knowing that they would lose their lives if they failed, not for convenience today but for the hope of a better tomorrow. So too should the paladin.

OK, I got through that with a straight face.

If the Rebels were pallies though, they couldn't let anyone else fight since their lives are likely to be lost. They also couldn't destroy the Death Star since there are bound to be thousands of non-evil people in the imperial army working out of necessity.

And they couldn't use Bothan spies since they always die, getting you that information. All in all, Rebels seem decidedly Neutral to me. As do the Imperials. Maybe some people in the Leadership are quite evil, but your average Imperial? Neutral.

If the embodiments of good weren't willing to sacrifice others for the greater good, the heavens would've been overrun long ago by a bunch of crafty evil outsiders arranging infinite Koboyashi Marus. If the pally isn't willing to sacrifice that one life to save a thousand, everyone dies; not exactly what Paladin's code states he should strive, eh?


Also, curse you for making me post here.

taltamir
2010-01-09, 12:19 AM
If the embodiments of good weren't willing to sacrifice others for the greater good, the heavens would've been overrun long ago by a bunch of crafty evil outsiders arranging infinite Koboyashi Marus. If the pally isn't willing to sacrifice that one life to save a thousand, everyone dies; not exactly what Paladin's code states he should strive, eh?

plus, it makes pallys the ultimate victims...
BBEG "my men have a random child at each end of this compound, if you resist, they will be killed. If you drop your weapons, and armor, and strap yourself into this here torture device I will let them go..."
*some hours later*
BBEG: "always a pleasure having one of you around... you are free to go, from now on you are to come by here every weekend on saturday, for every day you are late, my men will execute a random child"

PS. I am pretty sure it says explicitly that paladins are NOT required or supposed to do that.

Xzeno
2010-01-09, 12:35 AM
Easy, evil villain arranges Koboyashi Maru. Holds one hostage with gun to the head and kills the one if you press the button that would get the 1000 out of the gas chamber they're in right now. Any Evil Villain Hostage Situation really. Nuke about to be launched, Generic Hostage, if Pally acts, hostage dies. Pally tries to save 1, everyone dies. Pally tries to save 1000(0000), 1 dies.

Try to save the thousand, of course, and here's why: Whatever the bad guy does, it's on his soul, not the paladin's. The paladin is not killing a man, he is merely trying to solve the more pressing issue first.

Same goes for the children scenario: All the paladin can do is his best, and whatever monstrous things the villain does before he stops him are not his fault.


If the Rebels were pallies though, they couldn't let anyone else fight since their lives are likely to be lost.

If someone is willing to fight for good, more power to them. The risk is know and not for the paladin to bare alone.


Maybe some people in the Leadership are quite evil, but your average Imperial? Neutral.

Imperials are a special case: Clones are obedient, incapable of not working for evil. The non-clones are brainwashed. Still, even if they are neutral, soldiers die not because they deserve it but because that is what they risk to win: All they have.

Also, curse you for making me consult "Wookiepedia".

Eldariel
2010-01-09, 01:05 AM
Try to save the thousand, of course, and here's why: Whatever the bad guy does, it's on his soul, not the paladin's. The paladin is not killing a man, he is merely trying to solve the more pressing issue first.

Same goes for the children scenario: All the paladin can do is his best, and whatever monstrous things the villain does before he stops him are not his fault.

Technically, since the Paladin could just do what the villain bids him and thus avoid said hostage dying, it's totally his fault. But that's not really the point; scenario where it's the Paladin's responsibility can exist. Have you seen Sailor Moon Super, for example? All the mushiness aside, thing basically come down to one character housing an evil character and good guys either having to kill 'er or letting the world fall to ruin.

Of course, it being a shoujo anime and all, that's not how things work out, but the scenario is appropriate. Generic Evil World Destroying Abomination Even Gods Can't Stop #96 using Average Joe #1004951142 as a channel to enter this world in due time gaining control over Average Joe #1004951142 Who Hasn't Done Anything Wrong; the Pally only recently learned about this and it's too late to turn to anyone else, since they're the only people on Random Pocket Plane #123 due to Generic Imprisonment #0. Either Paladin kills Average Joe #1004951142 to seal the evil away or lets the evil get free and destroy the world.


If someone is willing to fight for good, more power to them. The risk is know and not for the paladin to bare alone.

And since the Paladin gave said someone mission that will most likely lead to his death, he is evil.


Imperials are a special case: Clones are obedient, incapable of not working for evil. The non-clones are brainwashed. Still, even if they are neutral, soldiers die not because they deserve it but because that is what they risk to win: All they have.

How does that vindicate the good guys killing the guys inside the Death Star? Well, obviously because the alternative is the Bad Guys Winning. If the Death Star is completed, it's GG.

So gotta blast it into oblivion and since you lack the strength to take it over and free people who wanna go free and so on, gotta blast it into oblivion with everyone in it. Necessary casualties for greater good.


Also, curse you for making me consult "Wookiepedia".

Curse you for cursing me.

taltamir
2010-01-09, 01:07 AM
Of course, it being a shoujo anime and all

DnD is not a shoujo anime, it is a role playing game typically played in a game not much like anime at all (unless you are playing D20 anime of course).
Now, you may choose to play it like a shoujo anime, but I don't get where you are pulling the notion that everyone does.

Eldariel
2010-01-09, 01:09 AM
DnD is not a shoujo anime, it is a role playing game typically played in a game not much like anime at all (unless you are playing D20 anime of course).
Now, you may choose to play it like a shoujo anime, but I don't get where you are pulling the notion that everyone does.

Because you didn't read my post at all and/or missed the next sentence? I'm specifically saying the scenario played out differently than it would in DnD or Real Life or Anything Else in said case 'cause SMS is a shoujo anime, but that does not render the scenario itself unusable for such a discussion; its use just requires considering the scenario rather than the given outcome in said anime.

Shardan
2010-01-09, 02:20 AM
My DM's would have been extremely HAPPY if I had a little viedogame logic when I was a PC. I had the habits of going off sideways.

I had a bard who spent half an entire night playing with a broken statue arm, using it to open doors, gesticulate when I talked, scratch my chin in thought....
I had an Athasian fire cleric who fire trapped his own mouth when he went to bed
I had a mage/thief who did a DFA backstab from a tree, 30' above the target
Improvised weapons, maneuvers, taking the entire plotline straight sideways.. hehehehe

my DM would have loved to put invisible walls up to guide me back to the plot.

taltamir
2010-01-09, 02:21 AM
Because you didn't read my post at all and/or missed the next sentence? I'm specifically saying the scenario played out differently than it would in DnD or Real Life or Anything Else in said case 'cause SMS is a shoujo anime, but that does not render the scenario itself unusable for such a discussion; its use just requires considering the scenario rather than the given outcome in said anime.

sorry, I don't know how I missed that bit


My DM's would have been extremely if I had a little viedogame logic when I was a PC. I had the habits of going off sideways.

extremely what? you are missing a vital word in that sentence.

Shpadoinkle
2010-01-09, 02:41 AM
I once started a game I was DMing with the PCs as newly captured slaves. The campaign opens with the PCs in chains, with no equipment, on a boat being delivered to a prison on an island to work as miners. After a brief speech by the future BBEG, the 4 first level PCs are escorted by 8 orcs armed with saps.

I had spent a week writing out all of the ways that the PCs could escape - starting a worker rebellion, using wet blankets to break a rusty bar during a rain storm, stealing the keys from the warden, and literally half a dozen other ways. None of them involved combat, as I wanted to protect the squishy PCs at first level, and teach them that problems in my campaign can usually be resolved by creative thinking (something I explicitly told them before the game started).

So of course, as soon as the PCs were in their cell and had their chains removed, they start a fight with the 8 guards, reasoning that it was what they were "supposed" to do. I laughed and said ok, figuring that this would teach them a valuable lesson.

Long story short, the PCs won (though just barely - all but one of them ended in negative hit points) and managed to escape into the local town, thus wrecking all of my planning for the first MONTH of my campaign in 1 hour.

You can plot and plan and make contingincies when you DM until your fingers bleed, bit it'll never matter. PCs will locate the one single most obviously stupid thing they could possibly do and persue it relentlessly, no matter how many hints you give them this it's an incredibly stupid thing to do.

Save yourself time and frustration and put yourself in the PC's shoes, then ask yourself what the dumbest thing you could do is, and plan around THAT.

Jarawara
2010-01-09, 03:39 AM
I don't know if this qualifies as video-game logic, but it's the dumbest thing I've ever seen happen, on many levels.

1st adventure out, with a new player, new PC's, 1st encounter.

Giant Frogs.

They avoid most of them (d&d logic usually implies that monsters always attack, no matter what. I don't do that. They stayed clear from the pool after the first one came out, so no other frogs attacked). But the biggest one is more aggressive, and comes out hopping, looking for a meal.

A tough battle ensues, and the party is roughed up but victorious.

New player then says: "So what treasure did it drop?"

"Huh? You think it had pockets or something?"

New player thinks it over, realizing the differences of how 'real' D&D is played, and thus has to use logic. "Right... so, I cut it open, to see if it had swallowed anything, from a previous victim."

I openly scoff at that, laughing out loud, telling her "no, you're not going to find anything in.... well, I be damned." I look down at the module, and sure enough, it describes what treasures can be found in the largest frog's stomach.

Crazy TSR premade adventure logic...

*~*

Actually, that wasn't so bad. It was actually a logical idea, kudus to the new player. But the real problem was that from that point afterwards, the player cut *everything* up to see what was in it's stomach. Kill a Giant Spider, cut it open for treasure. Kill an Orc, cut it open for treasure. Capture the bandits... "Can I cut open his stomach and look around, and then heal him back up to turn him over to the authorities?"

Serenity
2010-01-09, 05:03 AM
This one, oddly enough, might be more 'D&D' logic than video game logic, but it still tripped us up, since we were playing d20 Modern.

We've got one PC, the perennial rules lawyer, making an ass of himself as usual, so the DM, half in jest, has a thug jump out of an alleyway to attack him. Now me, fresh off slightly off-kilter lunchtime D&D games and Baldur's Gate, and flush with excitement over my badass gunslinger, my character whips out a .44 Magnum and splatters the thug's brains all over the alleyway. The residential alleyway. And I hadn't bought a silencer, because it was labeled as 'suppressor', so I didn't know that's what I needed.

Of course, the real stupidity was the aforementioned rules lawyer, who proceeded to empty a clip into the alleyway, in case there were more thugs waiting.

taltamir
2010-01-09, 05:12 AM
in regards to players insisting on jumping from really high because they know they can survive the damage...

In video games you either take no falling damage whatsoever, or insta die if you fall more then a few feet.

And IRL, people take military advantage on the ability to fall without dying. We call it para-trooping.

Grifthin
2010-01-09, 05:21 AM
This Thursday. We where playing Rogue trader. We enter the room and a group of Murder Servitors come swarming towards us. The floor is made of THICK stained glass so that you can view the stars outside (space station). The rest of us all pull out melee weapons and low strength las weapons so as not to shatter the glass with a stray shot. The priest pulls out a Multi Melta (massive anti tank weapon normally used by other vehicles or space marines). Rolls hits, massive damage Blast, melts through floor. Explosive decompression for all! Have fun in space without your space suits guys.

FatR
2010-01-09, 10:18 AM
Well even if the parties evil the really good evil rituals are still not for them just beings their vicious jerks doesn't mean their the big bad.
I would, at the very least, strongly consider quitting a game, where NPCs get blatantly NPC-exclusive powers and these powers are actually used to screw the party.

KillianHawkeye
2010-01-09, 10:34 AM
The simplest solution is to have the ritual be unique. I.E., the BBEG uses a ritual to absorb the essence of a powerful demon who has been trapped inside a magical crystal for 1000 years. The PCs might learn the ritual the BBEG used, but can't replicate it because the demon has already been absorbed. Maybe the ritual can be used to absorb the essence of any creature trapped within a magical crystal, but it's up to the DM whether or not the PCs can find any more such crystals and what types of creatures they contain, if any.

FatR
2010-01-09, 10:59 AM
Technically, since the Paladin could just do what the villain bids him and thus avoid said hostage dying, it's totally his fault.
So, basically, his fault is not being God Almighty, capable of rescuing everyone with 100% probability, as opposed to whatever percentage his actual level of ability allows?


But that's not really the point; scenario where it's the Paladin's responsibility can exist. Have you seen Sailor Moon Super, for example? All the mushiness aside, thing basically come down to one character housing an evil character and good guys either having to kill 'er or letting the world fall to ruin.

Of course, it being a shoujo anime and all, that's not how things work out, but the scenario is appropriate. Generic Evil World Destroying Abomination Even Gods Can't Stop #96 using Average Joe #1004951142 as a channel to enter this world in due time gaining control over Average Joe #1004951142 Who Hasn't Done Anything Wrong; the Pally only recently learned about this and it's too late to turn to anyone else, since they're the only people on Random Pocket Plane #123 due to Generic Imprisonment #0. Either Paladin kills Average Joe #1004951142 to seal the evil away or lets the evil get free and destroy the world.
This is not the Paladin's code being impractical. This is GM screwing with the Paladin, by specifically crafting situations to prove whatever point he think he has. If the Universe deliberately conspires to damn you, of course there is not much you can do (as OotS proved repeatedly).

This is also one of the reasons why I strongly prefer bad guys generally playing by the same rules as PCs.


And since the Paladin gave said someone mission that will most likely lead to his death, he is evil.
This is based on the obviously false presumption that the being in question has no free will of his own, and, by extension, that the Paladin is responsible for whatever $hit happens in his vicinty, because no one else has it.

Daimbert
2010-01-09, 11:09 AM
Sigh. Weightless gold, no need for food, water and basic supplies, pockets that can hold cartloads of stuff and other heavy uses of video game logic abound in our group (both from player's and DM). I blew my DM's mind when I told him I was keeping track of the weight of the gold my last character was loaded down with.

I hit that problem when I did my first char sheet a few years ago. So, I go through, take the wealth guidelines, get my character what armour and items I wanted, and then noted that I had a certain amount of gold left. And then noticed that it had a weight. Okay, fine, let's work this out ... wait, HOW much does it weigh? I'm encumbered just because of my GOLD?!?

So, quickly, buy things that are expensive but don't weigh anything, like the spyglass. Fortunately, it did fit the character, but it was enough to make me grumble at the time ...

taltamir
2010-01-09, 12:50 PM
This Thursday. We where playing Rogue trader. We enter the room and a group of Murder Servitors come swarming towards us. The floor is made of THICK stained glass so that you can view the stars outside (space station). The rest of us all pull out melee weapons and low strength las weapons so as not to shatter the glass with a stray shot. The priest pulls out a Multi Melta (massive anti tank weapon normally used by other vehicles or space marines). Rolls hits, massive damage Blast, melts through floor. Explosive decompression for all! Have fun in space without your space suits guys.

ha... I am guessing the video game logic here is that the floor is indestructible because the programmers didn't bother to program it being destructible?

Eldariel
2010-01-09, 12:56 PM
So, basically, his fault is not being God Almighty, capable of rescuing everyone with 100% probability, as opposed to whatever percentage his actual level of ability allows?

That's the ridicule I'm bringing up here; Paladin should be expected to do the best he can with what he's got, not save every person in existence and convert the Hells to Good while at it.


This is not the Paladin's code being impractical. This is GM screwing with the Paladin, by specifically crafting situations to prove whatever point he think he has. If the Universe deliberately conspires to damn you, of course there is not much you can do (as OotS proved repeatedly).

Eh, "Evil too great to be killed sealed within the purest soul available eventually starting to manifest and corrupt said person, released with time" is a fantasy staple; critizing your DM for using those just because you happen to be a Paladin and it's inconvenient to you is...not the answer if you ask me.

As far as I'm concerned, the Paladin, in this case, would be forgiven for killing said guy since the alternative is too horrible to contemplate. Yes, maybe the Paladin falls in some games but I see nobody denying him Atonement for saving the multiverse at any rate.


This is also one of the reasons why I strongly prefer bad guys generally playing by the same rules as PCs.

Aye, but being tied by your alignment is no rule, it's a choice the character makes that weakens him for whatever moralic highground and advantage it grants him (and the players make for playing the character they wanna play, of course, but that's a metagame consideration again).


This is based on the obviously false presumption that the being in question has no free will of his own, and, by extension, that the Paladin is responsible for whatever $hit happens in his vicinty, because no one else has it.

So you wouldn't hold a general responsible for what happens in campaigns he's ordered to be started? You wouldn't hold it against a commander-type person if he orders the use of nuclear weapons or the slaughtering of civilians, for example? 'cause there's a reason it's usually the leaders from a war considered war criminals.

In this case it was assumed that the person in question is acting in a position of military authority and gives orders his underlings are effectively compelled to follow; he's every bit responsible for the consequences of his orders. Though this I mostly used on the other discussion of pointing out that IMHO Rebels fall under Neutral alignment, unless fighting for Liberty-based values is inherently good.

elonin
2010-01-09, 02:00 PM
I've got a dumb action then a funny one. I was playing in a LARP playing a cleric like character who was resting (basically sitting there and not doing anything strenuous) when an evil cleric who I was friends with walked up and asked if I didn't mind having a conversation. I allowed it without running off (being more a healer non offensive type) and we sat together chatting when all of a sudden he started casting. I'm generally oblivious in RL and missed what was going on thinking that he was casting a defensive long term buff instead of an inflict wounds and grabbed my head. Just to explain in this system hit points are assigned per location and this spell is enough to incapacitate someone, in this case me. While he didn't kill me or do anything worse he did use one of his abilities to siphon off my casting abilities (its a mana system). Since I was in an obscure place having been hidden so stayed there unconscious for the rest of the event.

The funny bit that could also qualify as dumb happened just after the cleric incapacitated me when another cleric tried to use the same thing on him except that he was aware of the situation. In fact this guy was able to turn the tables on his attacker by calling "Jack, wait!!!". The other character stopped nonplussed for a moment. That was all the first evil cleric needed as he grabbed the other clerics hands and thrust them at his own head. The other player who was still confused when the player of the first cleric asked what spell was in his hands. "inflict wounds" then he appropriately dropped muttering da** it.

I guess these don't translate not having been there.

Jayabalard
2010-01-09, 02:48 PM
Easy, evil villain arranges Koboyashi Maru. Holds one hostage with gun to the head and kills the one if you press the button that would get the 1000 out of the gas chamber they're in right now. Any Evil Villain Hostage Situation really. Nuke about to be launched, Generic Hostage, if Pally acts, hostage dies. Pally tries to save 1, everyone dies. Pally tries to save 1000(0000), 1 dies.THat's not the same thing as "kill one to save 1000" ... its stop evil act #1, or stop evil act #2. There are valid arguments for both of them, but most people are going to with "stop the eviller of the 2"


If the Rebels were pallies though, they couldn't let anyone else fight since their lives are likely to be lost. They also couldn't destroy the Death Star since there are bound to be thousands of non-evil people in the imperial army working out of necessity.There were no innocents working on the death star.


And they couldn't use Bothan spies since they always die, getting you that information. Nah, a good person can allow another good person to sacrifice themselves; so they could certainly be good and utilize Bothan spies.

Starbuck_II
2010-01-09, 02:59 PM
THat's not the same thing as "kill one to save 1000" ... its stop evil act #1, or stop evil act #2. There are valid arguments for both of them, but most people are going to with "stop the eviller of the 2"

There were no innocents working on the death star.

Nah, a good person can allow another good person to sacrifice themselves; so they could certainly be good and utilize Bothan spies.

How do you know?

Jayabalard
2010-01-09, 03:06 PM
How do you know?I'm not sure what you're questioning.
1. Because they not the same.
2. Because the contractor said so.
3. Because they can.

Xzeno
2010-01-09, 03:23 PM
Curse you for cursing me.

You started it. I was merely playfully responding to what I hope was a flippant curse.




And since the Paladin gave said someone mission that will most likely lead to his death, he is evil.

No. Just... no. The paladin isn't forcing them to do anything. They, as the paladin, know that they may die if they fight.


Technically, since the Paladin could just do what the villain bids him and thus avoid said hostage dying, it's totally his fault.

Uh, no? The bad guy does it. The paladin didn't make him do it or anything. The bad guy did it. If the paladin fails to save the guy, the villain still did the crime.

How does that vindicate the good guys killing the guys inside the Death Star?

Well, the clones and brainwashed guys are not bad per se, but they unquestioningly work for evil.



Eh, "Evil too great to be killed sealed within the purest soul available eventually starting to manifest and corrupt said person, released with time" is a fantasy staple; critizing your DM for using those just because you happen to be a Paladin and it's inconvenient to you is...not the answer if you ask me.

I think it's safe to assume that the purest soul would be willing to sacrifice himself for the greater good.

hamishspence
2010-01-09, 03:30 PM
The novel Death Star makes it clear there are innocents- cantina workers, medics, slave laborers, etc.

However, most of those ones manage to get off the ship- once they know just what was done, they don't want to be a part of it in any way.

FatR
2010-01-09, 03:41 PM
That's the ridicule I'm bringing up here; Paladin should be expected to do the best he can with what he's got, not save every person in existence and convert the Hells to Good while at it.
And they are. Except you somehow confuse "doing the best he can" with "being a calculating bastard".


Eh, "Evil too great to be killed sealed within the purest soul available eventually starting to manifest and corrupt said person, released with time" is a fantasy staple; critizing your DM for using those just because you happen to be a Paladin and it's inconvenient to you is...not the answer if you ask me.
Except this staple is always followed by: "Even more pure soul can exorcise the evil once and for all". Or can you provide actual examples to the contrary? Note, that for the example to qualify the said person must still be there, i.e., trapped or mind-controlled, and not evil and insane on its own.


As far as I'm concerned, the Paladin, in this case, would be forgiven for killing said guy since the alternative is too horrible to contemplate. Yes, maybe the Paladin falls in some games but I see nobody denying him Atonement for saving the multiverse at any rate.
If I'm at the GM's chair (and assuming that paladins or similar characters do exist in the setting), the paladin is going to fall for taking an easy way out, no questions and no Atonement. Even assuming that your (again, entirely artifical and specifically aimed to shaft the paladin) scenario is actually true already means that the paladin's moral core is weak and he seeks an easy way out of situation. Realistically, he has no way to know that your calculation works as you have described it. Moreover, as the mere existence of paladins sort of assumes that the universe is not a crapsack world, where fate (or whatever passes for it) screws with mortals for giggles, he should suspect that it doesn't. And, you know, in my game he will be correct, because I think that going out of my way to deliberately, specifically and obviously shaft one of the PCs, which I already allowed into the game, is a dickish move.


So you wouldn't hold a general responsible for what happens in campaigns he's ordered to be started?
If he did whatever he realistically was able to do to prevent these things from happening, assuming we're talking about various crimes, no. Assuming otherwise means that any leader of a sufficiently large group of men is automatically damned no matter what he does.


You wouldn't hold it against a commander-type person if he orders the use of nuclear weapons or the slaughtering of civilians, for example? 'cause there's a reason it's usually the leaders from a war considered war criminals.
Now, that's some quite bizarre strawman. Explain, please, how the heck ordering a mass murder is in any way similar or relevant to ordering your followers to perform things they perform on their own will (assuming pseudo-medieval setting and the forces of Good, that's a given) in the most efficient way?


In this case it was assumed that the person in question is acting in a position of military authority and gives orders his underlings are effectively compelled to follow; he's every bit responsible for the consequences of his orders.
And that's assumption is wrong, not only because, again, his underlings aren't his drones or slaves, but because, again once more, he isn't a divine being that can perfectly control the consequences of his orders and make them all positive. In other words, you still hold the paladin responsible for the fact that the world is not perfect, and he cannot prevent every bad thing from happening.


Though this I mostly used on the other discussion of pointing out that IMHO Rebels fall under Neutral alignment, unless fighting for Liberty-based values is inherently good.
Serving the Galactic Empire is an evil act (even if it is not severe enough by itself to immediately make all of the Empire's servants Evil), and fighting for the Rebellion is a good act. The only possible mitigating factor that can make either of them neutral is brainwashing in the former case or strictly mercenary approach and motivation in the latter. There's no argument about this. By Ep.VI, it is entirely clear, that the Empire is a morally bankrupt engine of opression whose sole purpose is bending the Galaxy to the whims of its demonically evil ruler. Moreover, it is open enough about many of its true policies, such as, I don't know, blowing up whole planets for lulz in the movies or racial discrimination and genocide in EU. Therefore serving it is incompatible with clear conscience.

hamishspence
2010-01-09, 03:49 PM
But by Episode IV, this was not quite so clear. And the empire is often secretive in the EU, enough so that it is possible for people on many worlds to be not aware of its nature.

Its clear from the novels, and the gaming materials, that a large proportion of the population see the Rebels as terrorists, and the Empire's actions as responses.

So, at least some people "serve the empire with a clear conscience"- those who are unaware, due to its secrecy about some things, just how evil it actually is.

The stormtroopers in Allegiance (Timothy Zahn, set immediately after Episode IV) are a good example of those who deserted when they became aware of genocidal massacres.

Yukitsu
2010-01-09, 03:57 PM
I think a lot of people who think paladin's can never take the smart road are ignoring the old adage "Pray, but plant cabbages." Just because you have faith doesn't mean you should not do what is best.

Omegonthesane
2010-01-09, 04:00 PM
And they are. Except you somehow confuse "doing the best he can" with "being a calculating bastard".
How did you get that? Allowing one to die because there exists no possible way to save the thousand as well as the one is the best the paladin can do, and it is not "calculating bastard" for him to recognise that there is no perfect way out of the situation he's in.


Except this staple is always followed by: "Even more pure soul can exorcise the evil once and for all". Or can you provide actual examples to the contrary?
Can you provide examples to support this statement?


If I'm at the GM's chair (and assuming that paladins or similar characters do exist in the setting), the paladin is going to fall for taking an easy way out, no questions and no Atonement.
This assumes that there IS another way out. If the campaign is dark enough for my personal taste, there isn't, so you have to consider that possibility. Then again maybe you don't run campaigns that grim and have paladins, I dunno.


Even assuming that your (again, entirely artifical and specifically aimed to shaft the paladin) scenario is actually true already means that the paladin's moral core is weak and he seeks an easy way out of situation. Realistically, he has no way to know that your calculation works as you have described it.
Recall the exact situation:

Easy, evil villain arranges Koboyashi Maru. Holds one hostage with gun to the head and kills the one if you press the button that would get the 1000 out of the gas chamber they're in right now.
If you're saying it is a fall and never be able to repent offense to press the button in this situation, then please, tell me exactly WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE THE PALADIN DO?!


Moreover, as the mere existence of paladins sort of assumes that the universe is not a crapsack world, where fate (or whatever passes for it) screws with mortals for giggles, he should suspect that it doesn't.
The mere existence of paladins necessitates truly vile villains for them to fight. And truly vile villains will think of ways to screw over the paladin if his code is being enforced so rigidly, or simply to torture someone who is truly heroic. Simple as.


And, you know, in my game he will be correct, because I think that going out of my way to deliberately, specifically and obviously shaft one of the PCs, which I already allowed into the game, is a dickish move.
Well if you feel that way about it, the logical thing is for you to not make the paladin fall at all for doing his best - not to throw in an arbitrary third option that he has to fulfil to retain his powers.

Also, this thread has been heavily derailed.

Eldariel
2010-01-09, 04:22 PM
And they are. Except you somehow confuse "doing the best he can" with "being a calculating bastard".

I don't claim a Paladin should go through that train of thought, but to arrive at the same conclusion.


Except this staple is always followed by: "Even more pure soul can exorcise the evil once and for all". Or can you provide actual examples to the contrary? Note, that for the example to qualify the said person must still be there, i.e., trapped or mind-controlled, and not evil and insane on its own.

*shrug* Depends. I can certainly think of examples where the good guy is harboring evil deity or something that's just way beyond his powers to sptå.


If I'm at the GM's chair (and assuming that paladins or similar characters do exist in the setting), the paladin is going to fall for taking an easy way out, no questions and no Atonement. Even assuming that your (again, entirely artifical and specifically aimed to shaft the paladin) scenario is actually true already means that the paladin's moral core is weak and he seeks an easy way out of situation. Realistically, he has no way to know that your calculation works as you have described it. Moreover, as the mere existence of paladins sort of assumes that the universe is not a crapsack world, where fate (or whatever passes for it) screws with mortals for giggles, he should suspect that it doesn't. And, you know, in my game he will be correct, because I think that going out of my way to deliberately, specifically and obviously shaft one of the PCs, which I already allowed into the game, is a dickish move.

...of course the scenario is "designed to shaft the Paladin", what a Paladin would/should do in such a scenario was the starting point of the whole damn discussion; since people get stuck to irrelevant crap like DM, responsibility and such though, the discussion has been sidetracked from the actual "What should the Pally do?"-point which I've been trying to address here all along.

And if there's no fate, no screwing mortals, nothing of the sort but just an evil deity's plan that you gotta stop? Take DM out of this; what should the Paladin character do? Let the evil deity **** the world over or kill the good guy that's eventually going to get overwhelmed by the evil force gating through him? Can you really claim saving the world is an evil act at that point?

And no Atonement? I recall the spell specifically EXISTS for situations where something against the code had to be done, and was done.


If he did whatever he realistically was able to do to prevent these things from happening, assuming we're talking about various crimes, no. Assuming otherwise means that any leader of a sufficiently large group of men is automatically damned no matter what he does.

He's not responsible for generic actions of his followers he couldn't stop, of course. He is, however, responsible for the actions of his followers that he specifically orders himself...


Now, that's some quite bizarre strawman. Explain, please, how the heck ordering a mass murder is in any way similar or relevant to ordering your followers to perform things they perform on their own will (assuming pseudo-medieval setting and the forces of Good, that's a given) in the most efficient way?

Strawman? I'm just proposing that a commander is responsible for his orders, and if he orders a bunch of civilians to be killed, even if he doesn't kill one of them himself, their deaths are his responsibility. It was in response to:


This is based on the obviously false presumption that the being in question has no free will of his own, and, by extension, that the Paladin is responsible for whatever $hit happens in his vicinty, because no one else has it.

We have a Paladin who orders a mission leading to death. Said Paladin knows the mission is going to lead to a death. As such, the paladin is responsible for said death as its his orders that lead to it. The death would not have occurred had he not given said order.


Serving the Galactic Empire is an evil act (even if it is not severe enough by itself to immediately make all of the Empire's servants Evil), and fighting for the Rebellion is a good act. The only possible mitigating factor that can make either of them neutral is brainwashing in the former case or strictly mercenary approach and motivation in the latter. There's no argument about this. By Ep.VI, it is entirely clear, that the Empire is a morally bankrupt engine of opression whose sole purpose is bending the Galaxy to the whims of its demonically evil ruler. Moreover, it is open enough about many of its true policies, such as, I don't know, blowing up whole planets for lulz in the movies or racial discrimination and genocide in EU. Therefore serving it is incompatible with clear conscience.

And if you know nothing of the empire's evil acts? If the empire is just a military force ensuring your safety to you? If you wanna join said force to protect your loved ones? I don't think empire exactly willingly broadcasts "We ar evil!!!"-propaganda.

I don't think many imperials know that the Emperor is a deranged psycho. Hell, Palpatine got elected back then and everything he's done has been masqueraded as protecting the Empire/Then Republic. It isn't hard to imagine that such masquerade would sink to average people.

golentan
2010-01-09, 05:21 PM
Serving the Galactic Empire is an evil act (even if it is not severe enough by itself to immediately make all of the Empire's servants Evil), and fighting for the Rebellion is a good act. The only possible mitigating factor that can make either of them neutral is brainwashing in the former case or strictly mercenary approach and motivation in the latter. There's no argument about this. By Ep.VI, it is entirely clear, that the Empire is a morally bankrupt engine of opression whose sole purpose is bending the Galaxy to the whims of its demonically evil ruler. Moreover, it is open enough about many of its true policies, such as, I don't know, blowing up whole planets for lulz in the movies or racial discrimination and genocide in EU. Therefore serving it is incompatible with clear conscience.

By episode VI it's clear that the rebels are a bunch of royalist prigs, who in addition to consorting with criminals including murderers, smugglers, and traitors to their own cause, are willing to sacrifice entire worlds and innocent bystanders (seriously, using the ewoks against the 501st isn't an evil act?) and are perfectly willing to kick over the whole anthill without a better follow up strategy than shouting "WE WON!!! All remaining moffs please play nice with us?" Because they want to go back to the heady days of the republic. You know, the Republic that in addition to allowing slavery and mafia style rule of planets gave governing power to psychotic corporations who saw nothing wrong with conquering a planet to secure that juicy trade agreement and who, when faced with a large alliance of those who wished to secede waged a war of oppression using an army of cloned child soldiers (I don't care what they look like, they're only 10 years old, and have a life expectancy less than 30 even without the risk of being shot. There is nothing that isn't wrong with that) rather than allowing them self determination. Oh, and I might mention that there is also no requirement for senators to have democracy anywhere in the process: they're appointed by their sectors, planets, or corporations and member worlds of the republic have no democratic requirements levied upon them.

Sure, the empire isn't GOOD. But at least it isn't really hypocritical. Luke even wanted to be an imperial until he decided to smash the entire system out of vengeance for his family being executed for harboring fugitives. And Palpatine was at least elected to his position, and established a clear (if brutal) meritocracy. And he established rule of law in places that the republic was afraid to go. I'd honestly probably stay neutral in that conflict: there's very little to like on either side, and the one with the better rhetoric also provides next to no solutions.

KillianHawkeye
2010-01-09, 05:28 PM
How about this scenario? Spider-Man is facing off against the Green Goblin, who is at the top of a bridge holding Mary Jane in one hand and a cable car full of boy scouts in the other. Gobby tells Spider-Man that the good guy is stupid because he'll eventually fail, and to prove it, he drops both MJ and the kiddies. Spider-Man only has time to save one.

So what did Spidey do? He saved them both, of course. :smallwink:

FatR
2010-01-09, 05:29 PM
stuff
I'm not really interected in fanfiction.

golentan
2010-01-09, 05:44 PM
I'm not really interected in fanfiction.

What part of that was fanfiction? I didn't even go outside the movies! The EU has so much more that I could have drawn on.

Jayngfet
2010-01-09, 05:51 PM
One of my players decided to try being neutral. A lord was murdered and his now in charge son was getting them to investigate. They'd captured a few guys and were preparing to investigate. The two man party split up so one could go off and buy new gear for everyone, the other(attempted neutral) was doing investigation.

There were two people to be interviewed, both chained to the wall. He starts by slitting the first ones throat for an intimidate bonus and questioning the other. When that failed he killed him too because he was given a vague answer on first attempt.

When informed he was going to be switched to NE and leaning to CE he claimed he'd "do some good acts later".

The story ends with the dungeon guard noting that two prisoners were killed in front of him and going "what the hell". The player assumed that, being a PC, he could fight his way out of a lords manor at level two despite numerous references to well armed and armored guards. He made it to the second room before a couple of first level warriors kicked him into negative hitpoints and woke up in the dungeon chained to the same wall he killed the people he was questioning. A few people he'd also put away were in the next cell over laughing at him. They broke out the following night and left him behind as the only prisoner.

The next day IC he re rolled another character and they watched him being hanged, drawn, and quartered.

FatR
2010-01-09, 05:54 PM
What part of that was fanfiction? I didn't even go outside the movies! The EU has so much more that I could have drawn on.
The statement that you didn't go beyond the movies is so brazenly false, that it can be held as a golden standard of brazennes in false statements.

Serenity
2010-01-09, 05:58 PM
Well, for example the Ewoks chose to attack the 501st and help the Rebels; they weren't coerced. The Imperials were the only ones who ever 'sacrificed whole worlds'--y'know, they were the ones who had the gigantic space station explicitly designed for the sole purpose of blowing up planets.

Tatooine was not run by gangsters because the Old Republic wished it so--it was outside Republic jurisdiction--notice the fact that Republic credits are worthless on Tatooine in Episode 1. (And as for the Empire bringing the rule of law--Jabba still runs his operations with relative impunity.) As for the war with the seperatists and the Clone Soldiers--need I remind you that this happened due to the manipulations of the Sith Lord who went on to set himself up as Emperor? That those Clone Soldiers are now Imperial Stormtroopers?

As for an Imperial meritocracy...what's the last Imperial officer you saw who wasn't human? Even without the confirmation from the EU, it's pretty clear that the Empire is a racist fascist regime. And even if that were true, a bumbling bureaucracy is more Good-aligned than an efficient meritocracy where the penalty for failure is murder.

In short: your statements are not even twisting or distorting the facts. They are the opposite of what is presented in the movie.