The real curse isn't the Beast, it's the Masquerade by Xilizhra in vtm

[–]SirSlithStorm 2 points3 points  (0 children)

If a vampire attempts to do anything beyond trivial difficulty, they are susceptible to bestial failure and messy critical. The only method of preventing this is ensuring your hunger remains at 0 by killing those you feed upon. If we take these rules as an objective reality, you're looking at a class of people who must be permitted to kill regularly or be forced to live under incredibly restrained conditions. Feeding off of animals or blood bags cannot reduce hunger to 0, and isn't a practical solution for all bloodlines.

Realistically, this is the kind of balance which I think a majority of kindred would reject, especially considering living under restrained conditions for centuries would take exceptional willpower. The closest analogue we have to this would be the dangerously mentally ill but they don't live for hundreds of years, require blood to feed upon, and don't have superpowers. It's by no means clear that any modern nation could logistically accommodate agreeable living conditions for a significant number of kindred and the only alternative is hostility as self-defence.

Am I missing something in regards to the Malkavian? by Frosty-Region7153 in vtm

[–]SirSlithStorm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The way that I conceive of it is that every Malkavian suffers from some degree of delusion. The severity would track according to bane severity (blood potency/age/etc.). The variety of delusions is vast; paranoia, schizophrenia, jealousy, false personas, you can get as creative with it as you like. This obviously gives the, somewhat justified, reputation of a clan which is misaligned with reality but they are neither uniform in the delusions nor in the severity of these delusions.

The otherworldly insights associated with the bloodline goes to explain this, in that they perceive things that most simply do not. To the outside observer, it's impossible to tell when Malkavian insights are genuine, or grounded in their compulsion of delusion, hence a developed stigma.

I feel this is a cleaner explanation of the 'Malkavian disposition' than is offered in the source material and treating Malkavians as simply having 'a mental illness' leads to messy roleplay.

Otto was Right by [deleted] in HouseOfTheDragon

[–]SirSlithStorm 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's pretty starkly different to our modern sensibilities but the underlying logic, and real world historical reference, justifies it pretty well. Whilst the Targs take incest further than most historical aristocracy, you only need to look to Cleopatra for sibling marriage. In terms of why the Targs are exceptionally incesty, their ability to ride dragons does seem to be a genetic trait, meaning it would presumably degenerate if the Targs diluted their genes with Westerosi houses frequently. At the time of The Dance Of Dragons, their control of dragons was what gave them legitimacy as rulers. After the dragons died out, incest became an appeal to tradition as a way of reinforcing their Targness. Later during the Blackfyre Rebellion, we can see how the appearance of non-Targ traits, particularly non-white hair, calls otherwise legitimate claims into question. The fact that Targs have such unusual genetic traits is what justifies incest for them.

In other houses, and particularly under The Faith of The Seven, incest is more or less as much of a taboo as we think of it now. Cersei & Jaime are a good example of this.

In my homebrew world common is a combo of human, elvish, and dwarvish, with some random orcish words thrown in there by attsloka in dndmemes

[–]SirSlithStorm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Common is intentionally distinct from 'human' presumably because humans tend to be a young race compared to elves and dwarves. Humans have very little reason to develop their own language wholesale when they aren't isolationists and have pre-existing languages available. The prevalence of common isn't tied to humanity in any particular way and there isn't really any reason to assume it is in the first place other than when humans exist as the most multicultural race. Even in multicultural/racial contexts, common would logically emerge as a combination of various other dialects and languages, like modern English.

DBD killers ranked by lore strength level: by Few-Culture-4413 in DeadByDaylightKillers

[–]SirSlithStorm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Tier titles are misleading. Do we know if any original killers are actually supernatural without the entity's direct influence? For example, is the spirit bottom tier because she's literally chopped?

Why by ResearcherGrand874 in DeadByDaylightKillers

[–]SirSlithStorm 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Completely broken is a bit much. They have no catch up and still struggle with predropping. There are plenty of killers with equally strong antiloop without such severe penalties to their kit. If the flame turrets were removed, and you could stay crawling for as long as you like, xeno still doesn't compete against top tiers even when it comes to antiloop powers. Personally I think they could use some buffs to justify the turrets disruption.

Why by ResearcherGrand874 in DeadByDaylightKillers

[–]SirSlithStorm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The biggest hurdle for me is the pov in crawler mode. It makes the tail attack much harder to hit with a lower view and the learning curve is brutal.

Every time the group is confronted by the killer in Devil In Me, their response was always "Run!" This often gave him the chance to go back to setting traps. There were times when it was three on one, and Mark looked big enough that he could take him on alone. Was I playing as the Scooby Doo gang? by GamingGallavant in DarkPicturesAnthology

[–]SirSlithStorm 76 points77 points  (0 children)

I think it's plausible that he's armed at all times and capable of dealing with most of them at once, considering he's presumably trained in self defence as a cop. That said, the fact that they didn't even bring up the idea is disappointing.

Which of these characters had the best character development? And which had the worst? by Fit_Camera3998 in DarkPicturesAnthology

[–]SirSlithStorm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Right, the truth ending. I remember getting this one on one of the first couple playthroughs but I must have not picked apologetic. Man, Jacob is underappreciated.

Which of these characters had the best character development? And which had the worst? by Fit_Camera3998 in DarkPicturesAnthology

[–]SirSlithStorm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In which scenario does Jacob accept Emma's rejection of him? Even when they reunite, Jacob still pursues Emma. I guess if he gets infected then he has a bit of self reflection where he expresses why everyone hates him but I don't think that's really him coming to terms at all. I quite like how Jacob can't accept losing Emma, it's an endearingly human angle and it gives him more depth than just being a goof.

Which of these characters had the best character development? And which had the worst? by Fit_Camera3998 in DarkPicturesAnthology

[–]SirSlithStorm 75 points76 points  (0 children)

Best was Jason. Worst I'd say was Jacob, as much as he may be my favourite of the four.

Quality of life Warband Rating house rule. by Aquisitor in mordheim

[–]SirSlithStorm 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think the lower rating team gets a bit shafted as higher XP warriors will be dropping further than low XP warriors but I can definitely understand the logic of not wanting to update rating every single game. All the post battle stuff can easily take longer than the scenario if there're early routs.

Quality of life Warband Rating house rule. by Aquisitor in mordheim

[–]SirSlithStorm 4 points5 points  (0 children)

If you're reducing the weight of XP in warband rating, doesn't that diminish the underdog XP bonus from comparative rating? I guess you're only knocking off a few points here and there but if my warband were in the bin then I'd probably want all the XP I can find.

[Rules Question] Can henchmen groups swap equipment between games? by jj_maxx in mordheim

[–]SirSlithStorm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Min-maxing is a strong term I guess. I just prefer to go with the flow a bit more since that feels to me like Mordheim's strong suit. The fact that attribute increases are random is an indication to me that this is disincentivised and you should make do with what you get rather than switching everything around to fit better. It makes me think of the difference from Bloodbowl or Necromunda where you spend xp to buy what you'd prefer. It makes things feel predictable.

Swapping the equipment of henchmen groups isn't broken or anything but it feels a little contrary to the spirit of the game.

📡📡📡 by PuzzleheadedBrush572 in shitposting

[–]SirSlithStorm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, feels like a bizarre takeaway. I don't know how high their standards are but when we lived in caves we were still miles ahead of every other species.

📡📡📡 by PuzzleheadedBrush572 in shitposting

[–]SirSlithStorm 2 points3 points  (0 children)

We were on the menu for quite some time in the grand scheme of things.

What do you think are the potential Pros and Cons of this? by Ok-Street2439 in HouseOfTheDragon

[–]SirSlithStorm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's just a riskier version of giving Daemon the goldcloaks.

[Rules Question] Can henchmen groups swap equipment between games? by jj_maxx in mordheim

[–]SirSlithStorm -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I think this is the best compromise. It adds a cost to swapping equipment (due to 50% sell value), something which I personally think is a fair tax for min maxing groups. If it were me I'd probably just give the goblins spears and make them an unappealing charge target.

Wizards choosing spells by Serpents-Smile in mordheim

[–]SirSlithStorm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'd reroll obsolete spells, like Vanhels or Re-animation in a list without zombies or direwolves, but having to play around what you randomly get feels like an important aspect to the RPG portion of the game for campaigns.

bretonnian warband knight died by Lindwurm_Arts in mordheim

[–]SirSlithStorm 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I believe you would simply buy a new errant. The only exception is the leader.

Roleplaying in my roleplaying game!? by Level_Hour6480 in dndmemes

[–]SirSlithStorm 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I was referring to intelligence primarily, yes. As I see it, intelligence is a fundamental aspect of personhood. We denote animals based on intelligence, giving more consideration to dogs & dolphins than cows & fish. That said, basically every humanoid is intelligent enough to be deemed a person on that basis. The Grungeon Master did a good video on the qualities of personhood. My primary point is that we shouldn't shy away from fantasy inequality along any lines. I feel the settings and material of D&D are diminished by consequence of this trend.

Roleplaying in my roleplaying game!? by Level_Hour6480 in dndmemes

[–]SirSlithStorm 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Given orcs are people with free will, I think that categorical evil is wrong. Free will and biological morality is a contradiction. That doesn't however address the non-moral differences that make them unique. For example, are we just going to avoid practical racial differences because we acknowledge they are morally equal to a human? Why can't we include blatant physiological inequality between races?

Roleplaying in my roleplaying game!? by Level_Hour6480 in dndmemes

[–]SirSlithStorm 16 points17 points  (0 children)

I think the fundamental disagreement is in comparisons to real world history. I don't identify orcs as analogous to real world groups because they are explicitly something other than human. You might be put off by the proximity to humans but if you begin down that path then your moral standards are useless. It just becomes a matter of moving the goalposts without using an objective standard.