>"I'm gonna draw aggro">"Hey GM can we respec?">"Can we fast travel to the location?">"You gotta check out these three different builds"Video game culture has done irreversible damage to this hobby.
>>97775734>Nooooo how dare you discuss mechanics!!!
>>97775734>I'm gonna taunt the guy>Hey GM can I buy new gear?>Can I attack the terrain to make cover?>You gotta check out these spell optionsCharacter building has done irreversible damage to the wargaming hobby
>>97775787Case in point.
why is that man playing dota 2 with a gamepad?
>>97775734>>"I'm gonna draw aggro"This literally predates videogames. Where the fuck do you think games got that from? Are you retarded? Not every game is D&D 5e where enemies have no reason to not run past the warrior and beat the wizard to death.
>>97775734>"I'm gonna draw aggro"if you make yourself look like a threat, then obviously enemies will prioritize you whether you are one or notits even immortalized as DISTRACTION CARNIFEX in wargaming>"Hey GM can we respec?"possibly the only thing on your list thats firmly a video game thing instead of a tabletop thingbut thats because in TTRPGs, you dont need to respec, you can just make a new character at the level you are playing at entirely with respecced stats>"Can we fast travel to the location?"unless you are playing a session where the travelling is the entire point, like an odysseyyou will have some abstraction in your travel>"You gotta check out these three different builds"where do you think builds came from?any game where you can customize stats will have builds
>>97775985For a guy who goes into every thread even remotely related to 5e just to shitpost about it, you certainly don't know anything about it.What's more surprising is that you're still doing it after all these years.
>>97776057>1 reaction per round>fighter hits like wet noodleSounds like the enemies have no reason to run past the warrior to me. Maybe you're the one who doesn't know anything about it.
>>97776152>hits like wet noodleWhere do these secondaries even come from? Just take GWM baka
>>97776057Anon the only thing that can let you tank in 5e is the GM making the enemies fight like retards. You get one opportunity attack that will hit like a toothpick and matter less and less as levels increase. There's just no mechanical reason why enemies shouldn't just flat out ignore the barbarian and fighter and walk straight past them to beat the spellcasters to death, and unless you're fighting in a one-square wide corridor there's nothing positioning or environmental factors can do to change that fundamental game logic.Compare this to Lancer's extremely elegant "any movement action ends immediately when you move past someone with a mech the same size as your or bigger", or even to 4e's marked mechanic, which mechanically penalized enemies who attacked anyone other than the marker. In 5e you need to rely on the DM just passively agreeing to have the enemies play poorly and focus their damage on the token damage sponge without having any good reason to.
>>97776201>There's just no mechanical reason why enemies shouldn't just flat out ignore the barbarian and fighter and walk straight past them to beat the spellcasters to deathYou typed a lot and it all depends on a pretty flimsy piece of misinformation.You're not arguing in good faith. I will not argue with you at all now, mostly because anyone else who is curious about the truth of the matter doesn't need to blindly decide whether to trust you or me but can find it quite easily in the rule books. As far as you and I, you and I both know you're a bit of a liar, and if you don't want to fix that, that's the end of this little talk.
>>97776293I note that you have yet to refute even a single one of my arguments.
>>97776323Consider your bait unbit.I'm not here to explain to you what you should already know. If you want to play that game, find someone else to read the books to you.
>>97776198Look at enemy HP sometime, they can easily power through a single hit to fuck up someone in the backline.
>>97776293Nah. You've never seen a game where a character can actually interfere with enemies trying to kill the backline if you think 5E is one of them.
>>97775734Who are you quoting?
>>97775873Case not in point.
>>97775734What kind of video games do your characters play in your setting?
>>97776577League
>>97776027>immortalized as DISTRACTION CARNIFEXbig kek Not only is it 40k which barely if at all qualifies as wargaming, carnifexes have been around for only about 30 years. It's not widely known let alone immortalised. Bullet magnet and bullet sponge are more common than your barely exists outside 1d4chan joke name.
>>97776787TRVTHNVKE
>>97775734None of those things are remotely specific to video games.
>>97775824>>Can I attack the terrain to make cover?Are you artillery cannon?
>>97776787>Not only is it 40k which barely if at all qualifies as wargaming,its only the most popular one> carnifexes have been around for only about 30 years.thats still 75% of all of 40ks existence> Bullet magnet and bullet sponge are more common than your barely exists outside 1d4chan joke name.the point is that drawing aggro predates its use in video games and has been a core concept in tabletop gaming
>>97775734Nah, it's cool. Shit thread.
>>97776356I accept your concession. Next time try addressing the actual arguments instead of straw-manning on every single point.
>>97777666>troll cries because no one wants to argue with himThere there. You'll trick someone next time.
>>97777183My last PC quite literally owned a 75mm howitzer, mounted on an armoured Canal boat.He could, in fact, attack the ground to make cover. Though it was more about dropping warheads on undead foreheads.
>>97776404Just take Sentinel or in 5.5 a weapon that slows/causes Prone
>>97777894>sentinel so something that isn't in 5e?>proneThat's not tanking. You're dealing a debuff.
>>97775734...is bro playing Dota 2 with a controller?
>>97778026>so something that isn't in 5e?The fuck? Read, nigga
>>97778053Regardless, sure, Sentinel is a tank. The only fucking tank in the entire game, and one that relies on hitting attacks of opportunity to do any tanking, which, like I said, are terrible and useless.
>>97778026>You're dealing a debuff.One that prevents the enemy from reaching the backline on that turn, which is important here
>>97775734Unironically blame 3.X, rather than vidya. It was two separate, distinct things... and then Cook and Co. showed in town and started the whole build autism and vidya references, precisely to get vidyafags into the hobby.
>>97778177But that's not tanking. An unit that casts a spell that reduces all enemies' speed is not tanking. If anything that prevents the enemies from killing you is tanking, then tanking doesn't mean anything. A wizard blowing shit up with a fireball is tanking, because enemies that are dead cannot damage you.
>>97778177No that stops one enemy and one enemy alone. You use your reaction and suddenly you no longer exist as an obstacle beyond blocking one 5 ft square.
>OP (a faggot) imagines something and gets mad about it again
>>97775734>"I'm gonna perform my gay dance">"Hey GM can we decolonize?">"Can we skip combat to get to the faggot parade?">"You gotta check out these three different dildos"OP culture has done irreversible damage to this hobby.
>>97778581>if there isn't a taunt mechanic copypasted straight from WoW that magically mind controls the target into attacking me and only me then it isn't tankingYou don't want a tabletop RPG. You want WoW. Go play WoW.
>>97779518I don't have to swing a sword IRL at my enemy every time I want to hit them. Games have "abstractions" to handle concepts.Again, if you don't have a mechanic to handle tanking then tanking cannot exist unless the DM makes every enemy play like a complete retard.
>>97779574Oh, you're legit autistic. The in-game monsters don't know the ttrpgs game rules.
>>97778710>You use your reaction and suddenly you no longer exist as an obstacle beyond blocking one 5 ft square.That sounds realistic.
>>97775734>"I'm gonna draw aggro"This is an ability dedicated tanks or frontline combatants should have. There's nothing wrong with this at all, because the scary motherfucker with a giant axe should be your priority because if he isn't he's going to fucking cut you in half.>"Hey GM can we respec?"Depends on the system, but again I don't see an issue with this, especially with people new to a system or TTRPGs in general. Not everyone is going to make an optimal character first try, and not every system lends itself to being easy to pick up and learn. 3.5 for example has a ton of trap options that can really fuck up a new player's experience if they don't know what they're doing.>"Can we fast travel to the location?"This depends on the game and setting. In a higher magic game in, say, a major city, it makes sense that it and other major cities would link teleportation circles or runes or whatever to move around quickly, and in sci-fi, especially softer sci-fi, transmat systems might be entirely common tech. In a low-magic or no-magic game, or one without sci-fi tech, this is a less reasonable request, but there's no reason you couldn't overlook travel if the road is safe, patrolled, and peaceful or a short jaunt between two places.>"You gotta check out these three different builds"This is probably the worst thing to happen to TTRPGs, and it's got its roots in them as well - not in video games. The idea of making an optimized character dates back to at least 3.5, if not earlier, and is a sickness upon the hobby because it leads to players making stat block with no actual character, somehow thinking that one is divorced from the other. TTRPGs are unique in that your numbers are a mechanical representation of your character, so you should either make a concept and build around it or make a build and create a character around it. A lot of these types of players only do the mechanics and ignore what that means for their character.
>>97778581It's very much tanking, because you're in the front, with lots of HP and armor, and you can protect your allies with one of your abilities. The tank's job is to be the first line of defense, and an ability that forces enemies to attack them or stops their movement entirely is very much in the spirit of a tank.
>>97777199There's a difference between presenting a hard-to-ignore target and mind-controlling the enemy into ignoring the fireball-flinging wizard.Also, I wargame outside of the 40k scene and have never heard about a distraction carnifex. I'm guessing it's mostly just a Warhammer term. >>97779688Definitely realistic, but people who want to "tank" aren't looking for realism. They're looking to magically cause all enemies to ignore the bigger threats on their team. >>97777077Aggro is a video game mechanic. I've never seen a traditional game that tracks aggro to determine which unit the enemies are obliged to target on any given turn. It's a mechanic that was created because real-time video games don't really enable smart positioning and sometimes don't even have collision detection, which means that you literally can't block enemies, thus necessitating an artificial way of capturing enemy attention.
>>97779672Okay, so why are they going for the armored guy instead of the guy who is built like a twig?
>>97778281No, they were trying to get MTG deck builders into the hobby. That's why 3.x has so many trap options; they genuinely thought that TTRPGs needed pack fillers so that players could demonstrate "system mastery" (by netdecking).>>97779845>This is an ability dedicated tanks or frontline combatants should have. There's nothing wrong with this at all, because the scary motherfucker with a giant axe should be your priority because if he isn't he's going to fucking cut you in half. Horseshit. The bad guys know that the backline caster is the real threat.
>>97775985Nope, it was introduced in EverQuest as the idea was completely absent in D&D and AD&D. EQ added as warriors in that game did shit damage and needed a mechanism to get aggro onto themselves.
>>97780590yes, because D&D is the only tabletop game who ever existed. everquest invented the idea of being the big guy who protects his friends. nobody ever thought of that before. ever. shield walls on the front, archers on the back? just for fun.
>>977762014e has it even more explicitly for Fighters. A Fighter hits you with an opportunity attack and you stop moving by default. Pair that with being able to make one opportunity attack per enemy and attacks being provoked just by moving within your reach and you can actually control space.>>97776198Dealing 22 damage on average isn't that much against a lot of enemies, especially when you're giving yourself a penalty to hit in the process.It might be enough if you're fighting lots of smaller enemies, but then what's going to fuck you over is only having one reaction. So you kill one goblin and then the rest run past you to shank the wizard anyway. Same principle applies with Sentinel, where you can halt an enemy's movement, but only a single enemy.
>>97780640EQ invented taunt. You can go through 1st and 2nd edition AD&D, Holmes D&D, B/X, BECMI, 1st through 3rd edition RuneQuest, 1st through 3rd edition GURPS, etc. and look try to find the fighter-that-hits-like-a-wet-noodle-and-magically-taints-his-opponent.
>>97776201Getting rid of marks was a mistake, that's was a legitimately good mechanic
>>97775824Character building existing has nothing to do with you being too retarded to play tabletop games.
>>97777183Well, I could kick a table to turn it over.
>>97780492>Horseshit. The bad guys know that the backline caster is the real threat.Only starting in 3e when Saving Throws and Magic Resistance were nerfed. Prior to that Magic-Users where annoying but not necessarily a serious threat to high level creatures. MUs were better at dealing with large groups of weaker enemies.
>>97775734>playing a stream of dota 2 on a controllerhow are peoole not utterly embarassed to not only generate but share sloppa
>>97779688If you're a fat neckbeard whose idea of 'realistic' is 'annoying bullshit that makes the game worse for martials' maybe.
>>97775734Old timer here. It was like this at least from the ninties: specific terminology like aggro and respec aside, the concept was there.(no respec tough, but I highly doubt dndfags even use the idea)
>>97775734I've never had this happen while playing D&D or any other game. Why do you insist on playing with shitsuckers?
>>97780452>here's a difference between presenting a hard-to-ignore target and mind-controlling the enemy into ignoring the fireball-flinging wizard.both of them are the same concept of presenting oneself as more threatening to draw attention away from team matesits not hard to understand
>>97783172>MUs were better atAoE and support utility was the idea.Yet another reason 5e has been so bad.
>>97780492>Horseshit. The bad guys know that the backline caster is the real threat.And to get to him, they have to get past the big scary motherfucker who can instantly kill them in one swing, because your average low-level bandit or mook has dogshit AC and HP and a raging barbarian can easily roll average and one-tap one of these fuckers.Like a Bandit has AC 12 and HP 11 in 5.5e. A Barbarian with a Greataxe and +4 STR who's raging has a 65% chance to hit (higher if they have reckless attack) and a 58.33% chance to instantly kill a Bandit. Those bandits are absolutely going to want to put the barbarian down before they worry about the guy they can stab to death in two hits.
>>97784297>b-b-but one reaction per roundPeople don't think in rounds, it's all the same period of time. They don't know who he will attack during the charge.>but numbers and group tacticsIts bandits, not a military. They are out for themselves.And if played correctly (as in, character goals and motives) bandits shouldnt fight to the death anyway.Man i miss morale checks.
>>97781093Sir I present to you the taunting proficiency from 2E the Complete Gladiators Handbook.'This proficiency enables the gladiator to taunt, goad, and in all ways be annoying and offensive to the enemy. If the gladiator makes the proficiency check and the opponent fails a saving throw vs. paralyzation, the foe becomes enraged. An enraged foe receives a —2 attack penalty, but +1 to damage. In addition, enemies are generally so blinded by rage that they fail to notice the small details essential to good combat, and therefore suffer a —1 to ACNPCs with Wisdom of 14 or greater are immune to this effect, as are those 5 or more levels higher than the gladiator.'Granted this doesn't say they are forced to attack the taunter but I think that the purpose, also considering there is literally the spell "taunt" who's whole purpose is to draw people into fighting you.
>>97784337This is an incredibly stupid cope argument. Fuck you.
>>97784297>>97784337If the bandits are ambushing the party outdoors, then they can simply walk around the Barbarian with a greataxe, stab the wizard, and then not have to worry about getting blasted by the Wizard while they're fighting the Barbarian. They're also in a better position to stab the Cleric who might similarly blast them, or who might heal the Barbarian and make him even more impossible to kill. >Its bandits, not a militaryPlenty of times bandits are former military. It's people who decided that fighting and looting like they did during the war was better than going back to being a farmer.But if you want to argue that the bandits simply are complete cowards with no coordination, then obviously they're all going to be standing far apart from eachother and simply pelting the party with crossbows. That way it's easy to run away and if one of them gets charged by an angry barbarian, the others can still easily escape. Of course, all this applies just fine at level 1 when you're fighting cowardly bandits. But the further into the game you go, the less a single opportunity attack matters, because eventually you're fighting monsters who have HP designed to soak up several attacks. Spells growing stronger also means that 'this guy could kill me if he hits me four times' is a lot less scary than 'that guy can incinerate an entire room'. But more to the point, why can't this sort of idea simply be implemented in a mechanical way? If Barbarians are meant to be big and scary, they can get a feature that prevents enemies from running past them unless they're brave enough. If the Barbarian is frightening the bandits, make them frightened. If he's making it difficult to move past him, make it so weak enemies treat the spaces near him as difficult terrain. There's so many ways to actually address this that don't rely on the GM simply inferring that the bandits just aren't feeling up to it today.
>>97784504>pelting the party with crossbowsWhich shouldn't have with 6 second rounds btw
>>97784473I would like to add on to this that Merriam Webster says that the word "taunt" actually predates the English language so clearly the "tank" role has existed since ancient times.
>>97778034>>97783386And? I play TTRPGs with a controller.
>>97784504>But more to the point, why can't this sort of idea simply be implemented in a mechanical way?That's what I'm saying. They should have some sort of AoE Taunt that forces enemies to attack them.Hilariously, the game OP posted - DOTA 2 - has an axe-wielding berserker who is literally meant to do that, and it makes him take less damage while he does it (or did, I haven't touched DOTA in like 4 years now), along with a passive that gives a percent chance to do damage that ignores resistance and his ultimate, which instantly kills anyone he targets under a certain HP threshold.So if you were to adapt this for a TTRPG:>AoE Bonus Action that forces a save else all targets that fail must move to and attack you>Upgrades so that any creature that attacks you has a chance to take damage, either via save or a fixed die roll with a success range that the defender rolls when they're hit>Upgrades again to reduce the damage you take from attacks made against you by enemies taunted with this feature somehow>Further upgrades the size of the AoE and the damage dealtThe specifics would be system-dependent, but OP acting like nothing good can come from mixing ideas from vidya into TTRPGs is retarded. It's about actually adapting them rather than trying to port them 1:1.
>>97784778>The specifics would be system-dependent, but OP acting like nothing good can come from mixing ideas from vidya into TTRPGs is retarded. It's about actually adapting them rather than trying to port them 1:1.Name a single way Vidya has benefitted TTRPGs
>>977848074E
>>97784810This has to be bait
>>97779672Yes they do. Just like your character knows how far he can jump because this information is in the leaping table, the monsters know that heroes might attack their flanks as they run past because the rules say they can. The rules are a representation of the intuitive understanding beings in the world have about their world as a result of experience from living in it.
>>97779845what front line? enemies can teleport.why should any monster be afraid of an axe being wielded by someone who can't reach, hit, or even see it, and would deal fuckall damage even if he could? especially when there's a cleric right there that could instantly destroy it with a single word with no save?
>>97785644>knows because tableThey know from personal experience you idiot
>>97785746Yes. That's what I just fucking said.
>>97775734I don't necessarily disagree, but people becoming so ingrained with the game mechanics they lose sight of the game was a problem that goes back to at least the 80s.
>>97777077They don't have to be. The point is that someone who uses those terms constantly betrays that they think of RPGs as paper-based vidya, and thus are unlikely to gain the benefits that come from the hobby.
>>97775734Less vidya in ttMore tt in tactics vidya
>>97779845This fucking case in point of vidya-brain in our hobby. You don't know how to roleplay.
>>97776577>>97776708The Scarlet King showed up at one point in my campaign and he spent his free time playing league. There's also a guild of "boomers" who spend all day "playing old video games", which is just Quake.
>>97785873>RPGs as paper-based vidyaIt's all games. It's all just games. Ttrpgs aren't special.
>>97775734Fast travel is just when the DM is asking >Okay guys, nothing's going to happen you want to skip walking those two miles to the next enemy spawn?
>>97775734I will call the average amount of damage a character can do in a turn as their DPS more regularly now just to piss you off.
>>97786559Everything in his post is roleplaying.
>>97785859A game is its game mechanics.
>>97786894The travel is part of the game>alright guys, nothing will happen in this dungeon. Want me to skip to the boss fight?Sounds shit doesn't it?
>>97787020Things are definitely going to happen in the dungeon. That's the point of the dungeon. Less things are going to happen in the trek from the city to there. I don't want to slog through some repetitive bandit encounters just to pad time
>>97786863Which quake, actual quake or are they playing quake 3?
>>97787020>implying dungeons and the overworld are in any way equalLmao-ing
An old buddy of mine wanted to play RPGs, and we were trying the new Traveller at the time so it worked out great. He was upset that there was no 'tank' role, and no 'taunt' ability, and did not respond to arguments that "You can just wave your hands and shout at people to make them shoot you". He also did not bother buying heavy armour and decided to facetank a bunch of mutants who proceeded to hospitalise him, he then dropped out of the game because he "didn't have time" any longer. He comes around once in a while and shit talks Traveller saying it's "very different" and "old school", and that it's "very rules minimal", and nothing at all like his favourite game: Pathfinder 2e.
>>97787042Why are repetitive bandit encounters the only thing you can imagine happening during a journey?
>>97787072They are, just in the opposite of the way that guy is imagining.
>>97787302If it's not in the rules it doesn't matter.
>>97775734The concept of taunting an enemy to only hit the person you want is not something exclusive to videogames. Pic related is a 23 year old Magic the Gathering card with the exact same mechanic and class fantasy as "tanking". The mechanic is actually even older than 2003, the first Provoke card in Magic was printed in 1998 which is literally an entire year before EverQuest even existed, so the idea it's purely a videogame mechanic is just nonsense. "You're not allowed to hit the guy you want, you have to hit who I want you to" is not something invented by videogames
>>97776404My fighter hits for an average of 30 hp per hit so unless we are dealing with an ogre or something its either gonna die in one hit or get severely fucked up.
>>97775961Maybe you'd rank better if you also played dota with a chadpad.>>97777826I'd rule you need at least a 105mm to create cover, even then you better be using ground pen timers rather than airburst.
>>97787302I had a dnder play Traveller and they were upset by the question 'what do you want to do?'Like the DM of their DnD game had never not railroaded them on the story before and the fact that they might have agency freaked them out.
>>97787586I will accept that some people like strictly linear games, but I do not understand why people struggle with the idea of choice. Your choices are almost always going to be pretty limited if you intend to be sensible: money, gear, or pursuing a goal. So why is it that the universally accepted response to>So what do you do?is to quietly wait for someone else to talk, possibly briefly complaining about aimlessness. Not an original take, but it drives me up the fucking wall. Must be something in the water.
>>97787348What else is going to happen that won't distract from the dungeon entirely?
>>97787415It's even older then that. Lure is from Limited Edition Alpha, 1993.
>>97775734>Aw dude we don't have a tank>Yeah man I'll dip into fighter for a bit until we get a proper tank in the group>Why don't we just play to our character's strengths instead?>Pic related >Okay so who's healer?
>>97775787Discussing mechanics imwith gay video game slang is the problem.
>>97787709all of these words mean things that make sense for TTRPGs.
>>97787718NTA but people who use the words in that image are 82% likely to be insufferable dicks regardless of the applicability of that terminology.
>>97787655I find the problem is more common in people who got into the hobby via listening to a podcast around the Covid period (just before, during, after etc) and women.
>>97787744no i think you're retarded. "tone", "flavor", "broken" are normal words to use. stop being a pedantic little bitch. Moon Druid in 5e is broken. The tone of Blades in the Dark is different then the one of Ryuutama. The flavor of a given ability matters, which is why people meme about 4e's Bloody Path.
>>97787415>>97787684Really the entire game of MtG is this concept, because the players are Planeswalkers summoning creatures to block for them. Any creature capable of blocking is 'tanking' for the summoner.
>>97787744"skill monkey" is completely innocuous and is a decades old way of describing characters with a lot of utility and skills, even in systems without explicit skill lists and skill points/proficiencies there is often an equivalent role. Shadow of the Demon Lord doesn't have skills and all non-contested checks are against a static target number.....but you still have the "skill monkey" in rogue who get an unconditional bonus to the first attack or challenge roll made in a round including out of combat, so they still serve the same role as a versatile jack of all trades who is the go-to problem silver for the same things you'd want your skill monkey in d&d to be good at, or your phys adept in Shadowrun, or your hive scum in Dark Heresy. "If women don't find you handsome they should at least find you handy."Having a party face is in a similar vein of cross-game descriptive utility. Even in a superhero game it's unusual for EVERYONE to be exactly as equally attractive and likeable and suave when interacting with figures of authority or trying to talk your way out of problems. Even in systems that are PRIMARILY about social interaction and have combat as a tertiary concern like Vampire the Masquerade, there's still those who are even more specialized in it like a Toreador social butterfly or Venture nepo baby compared to a sneaky hacker and information gathering Malkavian or a scary brute Brujah who's great at scaring people into submission and beating them up if they don't cooperate but who is a terrible idea to send to negotiate with a thousand year old schemer at Elysium.
>>9778755230 HP per hit is not a lot.
>>97787744No, the people whining about them are.
>>97787552There are CR 1/2 enemies with 32 hitpoints. Also the biggest problem with 5e mechanically in this instance is that you are only given 1 opportunity attack, and so if you have 5 1hp goblins and they all just run past you you can at most smite one while the other 4 shank the wizard or ranger squishy in the back. It’s even worse if you actually are in the open because enemies will just run past you outright as there’s no mechanical way to actually protect someone without heavy character investment and specific builds and even if you do that in 5e it’s still dogshit compared to most other combat focused systems. Hell even Exalted, dumpster fire that it is mechanically, has defend other be a basic action anyone can take. D&D started as a dungeon delver with cramped corridors and narrow caves and even though that’s now not really how it goes the system doesn’t help much for a skirmish in the plains or an ambush in the woods and relies on the DM playing around the system instead of actually running it RAW.
If it makes the game more mechanically interesting to play I don't give a fuck where you got the idea from. Video games and tabletops have been taking inspiration from each other for fucking decades now, it's genuinely not worth getting mad about.
>>97786943No it wasn't. You also don't know how to roleplay.
>>97787415In spite of the obvious overlap in proximity, I think MtG is similar to Vidya in that it rots the brain of the roleplayer. Magic players are among the worst roleplayers in the hobby.
>>97787552How the fuck does your character average 30 dmg per hit?
>>97791506Why do you have to roleplay when you're playing a tabletop game? Do you mutter stories to yourself like a retard when you're playing chess?
>>97784473>granted the rules clearly indicate a general debuffer and have NOTHING to do with mechanical aggro, but it's a word that I (now, decades later) associate with aggro management, so if you read between the lines...jesus christ man how do you live with 3 INT reasoning capabilities
>>97787676What do you mean by distract?
>>97787709not a problem.
>>97791498Yes it is, and you don't.
>>97775734>fast travel Do you make your players actually pretend to walk the entire way between plot points? A three day trip dosnt have a time jump for you? I get the post but thats a stupid example.
>>97793357Post an example of you roleplaying (or an example you admire)
>>97794111NTAThere's a difference between "What route do you take during travel? Let's see if we get lost, see if things happen during our travel, see if we find other locations or shortcuts. Let's figure out how to ration and if we need to forage or hunt" and... "After a week of travel you arrive at X"I don't think anyone is suggesting you "pretend to walk" each step.
>>97794125>What route do you take during travel?Mandatory>Let's see if we get lostBoring filler after the first time it happens>see if things happen during our travelGood if you have a roll table or an idea of an encounter, see above otherwise>see if we find other locationsPassable in a theatre-of-mind game, dogshit in a game with maps>Let's figure out how to ration and if we need to forage or huntOnly do this if there are native rules for it and your players actually want to engage with these mechanics>After a week of travel, you arrive at XA beautiful tool in any GM's toolkit. Not everything has to be a roll or a big event.
>>97794125>What route do you take during travel? Let's see if we get lost, see if things happen during our travel, see if we find other locations or shortcuts. Let's figure out how to ration and if we need to forage or hunt"Doing this for every minor trek is retarded. We are not going to get lost, we can just get enough food beforehand, and there isn't any point to "shortcuts" if we already know a road to say, a dungeon. If you're trying to FIND a place, sure. But if you're going to a dungeon whose location is already known or walking towards a king's castle there is absolutely no point in wasting time and effort filling the space between two points with rote bullshit and chores.
>>97794114Why?
>>97794155wow, you're really bad at games.
>>97775734Wait!Is he playing dota 2!?On a controller?!?!!?!?
>>97787709all of these terms are perfectly innocuoussword and board is just a rhyming way to say sword and shield
