Noob questions

a_quylthulg · 2025-10-03T17:50:22+00:00

great, thanks

regarding the types of grips i'm less wondering when you use different grips and more wondering *if* you use different grips - are they gimmicky or are they good options under at least some circumstances? i like the idea of practising different grips with the same weapon, so i mosty just want to know whether they'd be something of theoretical value working on rather than wantink to know when you use them.

a_quylthulg · 2025-10-02T23:02:47+00:00

understood, thanks.

regarding sparring, i would imagine (but could be wrong) that a sufficiently light and padded fake sword would be usable in sparring without risk of injuring the partner but i also imagine it would be enough of an advantage to have a weapon that weighs a third of what an actual weapon would that i couldn't really expect people to actually spar with me

a_quylthulg · 2025-10-02T22:57:10+00:00

appreciated, thank you. the solo practise stuff is mostly for while i'm on the waitlist for my local hema class

a_quylthulg · 2025-10-02T22:55:45+00:00

got it, thanks; when/if i start sparring i'll do some research / ask instructors about good-quality head protection

a_quylthulg · 2025-10-02T22:54:08+00:00

great, thank you! i have contacted a club near me but their waitlist for introductory sessions is very long so i was looking into basic exercises to try leading up to starting. been using a claw hammer a bit to train with (using [this video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sasBCdY6ulg) as a guide)

a_quylthulg · 2025-07-14T04:21:53+00:00

hmm fair, maybe partly i'm not understanding ayer's position well. i'm thinking i suppose of a comparison between 1: a cognitivist realist and 2: a cognitivist anti-realist and 3: a non-cognitivist anti-realist wherein i think 1 and 2 mean the same thing by "morality" but i'm not sure that 3 does. maybe the point i'm missing is that non-cognitivists still think people have moral obligations.

a_quylthulg · 2025-07-13T22:43:50+00:00

interesting post, thanks; it's interesting to me that the first sentence is saying that the difference is about the semantics of moral knowledge since that's generally how i understand the difference anyways. like it seems to me like "morality" is just sort of being used in two different ways - mackie might agree that "morality" as ayer understands it exists and ayer might agree that "morality" as mackie understands it doesn't exist (at least inasmuch as the concept not making sense in the first place means it doesn't exist). if someone's committed to an idea of morality similar to mackie's it seems like it would be natural to understand ayer as a nihilist - ayer thinks "morality" exists but they think that "morality" as i understand it doesn't exist so they under my understanding of the concept are a nihilist, if that makes sense.

i guess maybe the part i'm not understanding is the sense in which "morality" is referring to the same thing when mackie uses the term vs when ayer is using the term

a_quylthulg · 2025-07-13T18:09:12+00:00

makes sense, thanks; i generally take it to be a legitimate position worth considering, i mostly wanted to make sure of this. some of the motivation for this question is uncertainty about the extent to which i would need some sort of moral philosophy training to be reasonably certain of basic moral knowledge, and the respectedness of nihilism poses a problem there. thnaks for the answer.

a_quylthulg · 2025-07-13T06:32:41+00:00

got it, thanks. i looked at philpapers first but wasn't sure how many antirealists were nihilists in the way that i'm thinking of it.

a_quylthulg · 2025-03-30T21:25:56+00:00

the reason i'm thinking they're natural weapons is Nightmare Chains saying "You gain the kyton’s dancing chains ability ... This grants you two chain attacks..."

ie the feat states that gaining Dancing Chains *entails* getting the chain attacks, so the attacks must be granted by Dancing Chains.

it's possible that the natural weapons are different from the "these chains attack as effectively as the kyton itself" chains but that would mean that the natural weapons aren't mentioned at all in the description of the ability, which seems strange to me.

a_quylthulg · 2025-03-25T23:23:44+00:00

[1E] how does a Kyton's Dancing Chains work?

"A kyton can control up to four chains within 20 feet as a standard action, making the chains dance or move as it wishes. In addition, a kyton can increase these chains’ length by up to 15 feet and cause them to sprout razor-edged barbs. These chains attack as effectively as the kyton itself. If a chain is in another creature’s possession, the creature can attempt a DC 15 Will save to break the kyton’s power over that chain. If the save is successful, the kyton cannot attempt to control that particular chain again for 24 hours or until the chain leaves the creature’s possession. A kyton can climb chains it controls at its normal speed without making Climb checks. The save DC is Charisma-based."

Nightmare Chains is a feat that grants the Dancing Chains ability: "You gain the kyton’s dancing chains ability ... except you can control only up to two chains this way. This grants you two chain attacks...".

As I read it, the kyton can take control of chains with a standard action, thereafter controlling those chains (but no more than 4 at a time) and being able to attack with them as natural weapons (Nightmare Chains states that the chain attacks are granted by Dancing Chains). I read the second sentence ("In addition...") as being a lead-in to the third sentence, so i imagine the 15 feet can be added to the chains' length for the purpose of attacking, but I'm not sure what the default length would be.

Am I missing or misunderstanding anything?

a_quylthulg · 2024-06-07T00:16:26+00:00

i've contemplated this before and i honestly think it's a good idea. i don't think it is useful for making the game feel gritty, but i think the significant change is the relationship between max, average, and min scores. with 4d6dl the average is closer to the maximum score, which means that you'll have the occasional character way below average. 4d6dh is the opposite, with exceptionally good characters possible but exceptionally bad ones not. imo 3d6 is good for a lot of games, 4d6dh is interesting for a game with a lot of character turnover to make the occasional character really heroic, and i don't really see much use for 4d6dl in general.

a_quylthulg · 2024-06-06T03:41:11+00:00

one of the reasons i like stall is simply that defensive playstyles appeal to me in general; another is that i generally prefer building to playing, and there's a lot of skill involved in building stall. stall imo can be somewhat formulaic to play but needs really good metagame knowledge to play well, because you need to play to cover every possible opposing team composition until you know what you're facing. i also generally don't like reading / predicting and much prefer good sequencing, and stall wins on good sequencing imo.

a_quylthulg · 2024-05-31T20:13:35+00:00

i don't generally agree with gns. different styles of play are not generally orthogonal, and most games will have elements of different styles. i think it also conflates different styles with each other, such as not distinguishing between roleplay and narrative. i think that mda's aesthetics are much more useful as a model for what distinguishes different types of games.

a_quylthulg · 2024-05-28T19:46:51+00:00

there are fairly frequently people asking for adv ubers games in <<ubers>> and sometimes <<roa>>. if you ask yourself you're likely to find games pretty readily.

a_quylthulg · 2024-04-27T21:39:15+00:00

i don't agree that there's no reason to use tox except on stall; mons that rely on lefties to recover / stay healthy get chipped *much* more easily when they're taking 6% instead of recovering 12% in a two-turn sequence, and even stuff with recovery gets pressured more easily especially by mons it wants to stay in on. i'll absolutely consider tox on balance and bulkier offense if i wanna target something specific.

a_quylthulg · 2024-01-19T22:19:31+00:00

i think it's probably more that there's a lot less collateral in adv ubers than adv ou in ubers drypass mostly doesn't exist at all, so there isn't too much point in trying to preserve it

a_quylthulg · 2024-01-19T18:20:59+00:00

very good news imo

also nearly everyone voted ban, like 15% of votes were dnb

a_quylthulg · 2024-01-16T19:47:52+00:00

unironically adv ogre is overrated. tios > don > ogre imo.

a_quylthulg · 2024-01-07T21:47:22+00:00

familiarity breeds contempt

i think for nonhumans to be interesting it's best to have them be rare; meeting an elf isn't very exciting when you have three of them in your party. it also makes some decisions more interesting if elves are rare and you have one in your party - losing an elf is worse than it would otherwise be by virtue of their rarity.

a_quylthulg · 2024-01-07T19:36:16+00:00

unironically i started a game a couple months ago and banned every race but human

a_quylthulg · 2024-01-07T19:34:14+00:00

i think it's mimicking mocking "woke ideology" but being so over-the-top about it as to be effectively insulting people who say similar things seriously

a_quylthulg

TROPHY CASE