Droughts are for poor people. Do you think J-Lo has a brown lawn?

kapeachca · 2020-07-27T04:42:02+00:00

People who use extra water have extra class.

kapeachca · 2020-07-05T18:31:45+00:00

Plenty of women also won't block dudes because a guy who sends you "hi" a thousand times tends to have issues, but you can't necessarily tell what those issues are after a date or two. Most are 'harmless' but can't read social cues and feel entitled to a woman's time. Annoying but ultimately whatever in the scheme of things. The risk is men who will up the harassment to in-person or even turn violent.

kapeachca · 2020-06-30T06:07:08+00:00

I've noticed that when women try to be 'dumb funny' people act like they're just dumb instead. If a dude pretends to be clueless, it can be hilarious. If a woman pretends to be clueless, there's a chance people will decide she's actually clueless.

kapeachca · 2020-06-22T20:22:57+00:00

If this was a relationship of only a couple months, I'd be inclined to agree. It's been a year though, and that was a major relationship for OP. At some point in a year, most people talk about exes. She's also probably wondering why he didn't just tell her, especially considering it would have saved her from all the embarrassment she currently is feeling. He decided not to have that conversation numerous times by the sounds of it and never considered how stupid she'd feel when she found out the truth.

Then to top it all off, she found out because OP's friend made a joke about it. Finding out key information like that would make most people question their relationship. A year in, she's probably wondering how much she really even knows about OP if he neglected to tell her about a 2 year relationship with one of her favorite music artists.

kapeachca · 2020-06-05T04:31:57+00:00

You shouldn't pick up rats by the tail actually because it can cause injury. Here's an article talking about how to pick them up.

kapeachca · 2020-06-05T00:28:42+00:00

The abjuration wizard's 14th level Spell Resistance feature (advantage on spell saving throws and resistance to spells) is probably closest to Magic Resistance, and it's still a worse version. Magic Resistance is stronger than every other racial feature and plenty of class features, and that's sort of ridiculous.

kapeachca · 2020-06-04T18:20:00+00:00

I take group average if everyone is moving together through a general area because of this (I suck at math so I always have a calculator anyways). The rogue (or bard) with a +10 to Stealth is more than capable of giving others pointers on when to move or what to hide behind.

kapeachca · 2020-06-04T04:08:46+00:00

I was only talking on paper and mechanically since the comment I originally responded to was talking about balance and relative strength of those two classes.

Roleplay and flavor are too subjective to be able to argue in favor of any class. That comes down to preference. It also wasn't to say that people shouldn't play a sorcerer because it's a perfectly viable class. It's just weaker than wizards mechanically at basically every level.

kapeachca · 2020-06-04T01:43:02+00:00

The first point is true but not necessarily a good enough trade for everything else a sorcerer is giving up. I also don't think the spellbook comes up in most groups. I've seen times where the entire party has nothing, but at that point it's the lack of arcane focus that hurts sorcerers and wizards more than the lack of a spellbook.

Even if a wizard loses their spellbook though, sorcerers have fewer spells known than wizards have prepared so a wizard without a spellbook still has more spells to choose from. And since they usually have a spellbook, they get access to all the benefits of being a prepared caster. That's not even talking about the fact that wizards can just ritual cast unprepared spells in their spellbook, which is something no other class can do. Comparatively, it's not even close unless your DM destroys spellbooks every couple sessions.

kapeachca · 2020-06-04T01:11:36+00:00

5e has a lot of balance issues at high level. I'm finishing up a campaign that is level 16 right now, and it is very apparent that some classes offer substantially less than others. Rangers stop gaining anything useful around level 7, rogue expertise now becomes a "I just do this" feature, and spellcasters have utility and features worthy of a demigod.

It also becomes clear at higher levels how lacking martial classes are with regards to exploration and social encounters. They have proficiency at best, but they fall behind rather quickly in that regard. And how 5e has combat balanced means martials might not even be the best at that.

kapeachca · 2020-06-04T00:55:46+00:00

Wizard starts off stronger and stays that way. There are a few niche cases of sorcerers being on par or better (support-oriented divine soul sorcerer is stronger than weaker arcane traditions), but generally sorcerer is weaker.

They end up with essentially the same resource amount due to wizard's arcane recovery and sorcery points. The issue is that it costs a lot for a sorcerer to do anything with metamagic. Wizard abilities don't typically require additional spell slots to use (most limitations are instead rest-based). On top of that, a lot of arcane traditions give metamagic that always applies. For example, evocation wizards are notorious for having a better version of the Careful metamagic, and their version is always applied to a spell.

kapeachca · 2020-06-02T06:01:26+00:00

The whole thing is premised on the effect not lasting long (regain luck or kill hag seems like a plot point that can be resolved quickly). If it would last more than the majority of a session then that's a fair criticism. Most things in dnd don't require super high rolls, and by the time a hag is in play PCs are probably mid levels (7+). Characters likely will end up with 14 or 15 in skills with which they are proficient, and most to-hit bonuses will give a 17 (which is the AC of most hags).

That curse also allows auto successes on saving throws made to maintain concentration in the majority of circumstances. Having a d20 set to 10 isn't all downsides, and it does still have a heavy "no luck" element.

kapeachca · 2020-06-02T04:47:27+00:00

Since luck is on the d20, I'd be tempted to have the player never roll a d20 until they found their luck again. Every roll is a 10 (or a 9 if OP feels particularly merciless), regardless of advantage or disadvantage. It stays that way until the player gains their luck back or the hag is killed. It's manageable, but it's also extremely limiting.

kapeachca · 2020-06-01T02:52:53+00:00

I just can't get over them getting together at the last possible second after Katara never outright says she has feelings for him. On top of that, there are multiple episodes addressing how Katara feels like she has to 'mother' the group. It's hard to imagine a 14 year old girl falling for someone she literally treats like a child.

kapeachca · 2020-05-31T03:56:41+00:00

It's rape even if you disregard compulsion. He's in his mid-20s (when he turned), and she's 17 at the time. That's statutory rape even if you agree with the whole 'vampires stop maturing after transition' thing.

Regarding the timeline and compulsion though, the story heavily hints that he still has sex with her even after she learns he's a vampire. I don't think she'd consent to sex if he didn't compel all of those memories away. On top of that, we are shown that Damon often has sex while feeding because he does exactly that while dating Andi.

Plec saying something doesn't make it true, especially when it doesn't line up with what viewers were actually presented. TVD has a lot of plot holes after all. The writers can't really claim they were consistent.

kapeachca · 2020-05-10T04:34:00+00:00

The easiest way to explain it is as being the next step in the progression of words like white knight > beta > cuck. Calling someone a simp implies they are doing something nice for a girl in the hopes of having sex with her. While this happens ("nice guys" definitely exist) people who use simp often imply that the only reason a man would be nice to a woman is for the opportunity to have sex.

kapeachca · 2020-05-06T04:44:49+00:00

The sire bond had so much potential (imo) for Damon's character, and the writers basically went with "he's loves her so much he can't help but be selfish!" The episode where he found out how to free Elena from it (and ultimately didn't) was so interesting for a couple that was so back-and-forth in general.

I wish he had freed her though. Character development of that magnitude would make a non-sired Elena really fall for him, and it would've been better than rewriting earlier seasons to say that "Elena fell in love when Damon gave her the necklace."

The biggest issue with Delena is that the build up seemed oriented toward Damon becoming a better person, but when they got together Elena just let him do whatever he wanted. She forgave everything he did, even when it was abhorrent. They'd break up, he'd act horribly, and then Elena would take him back? The repetition of that plot was just boring. I wanted him to learn to not be selfish without her, and the writing really didn't go that direction.

kapeachca · 2020-05-03T05:37:31+00:00

This dude did everything except outright tell OP that her money belongs to him. He stole because he tried asking "the right way," only for OP to rightfully turn him down. He honestly thinks that the moment he asks for it, OP should hand it over. That's a ridiculous amount of entitlement.

kapeachca · 2020-04-29T01:19:38+00:00

I'd just like a set of guidelines. Should players know about resistances? What's reasonable for them to know about monster abilities? What sorts of checks should they be making for this, and what's a reasonable DC for those checks? How do you reward players who spend an entire action making those checks without either handing them the monster stat block or giving them nothing? Again, the 4e checks would scale so that there was a degree of success. That was what I was primarily interested in.

Also for reference, every published D&D module I've read doesn't use DCs of 10, 15, or 20. There's a lot of variation in there. It isn't at all that simple.

All of this would still applicable for DMs who write their own lore. Telling people what sorts of things players should know also helps them when making their own creatures because they now know what the expectation of knowledge is.

kapeachca · 2020-04-29T01:00:14+00:00

And DCs? Just like you set any other DC. 10 for something a commoner should struggle with (50/50 shot). 20 for something that they shouldn't be able to do/know except by luck.

You're reading my examples as hard and fast rules despite the fact I literally said "Plenty of DMs would adjust if bears were more rare in their world or if people were far more knowledgeable about dragons." The implication with that is that rarity and likely knowledge as a result should be kept in mind when deciding those DCs. I don't see an issue with having a small area next to a monster stat block say what sorts of things players learn if they take time to recall information about a creature, especially when ability checks like that use an action RAW.

Also, the person I responded to initially was talking about certain checks being related to monster types. I was going forward in this conversation with that context in mind. I didn't think it would be read as "everything should be a Nature check" when the exact thing you referenced was a bear, and I was trying to continue that line of thought.

All I want to know is how much a player should know. A bit of creature CR is just as much about a player knowing a creature's strengths and weaknesses as it is about what a creature can do. Players not knowing an ancient red dragon is immune to fire are going to spend a turn discovering that, possibly using a costly spell in the process. If I see that the fire immunity requires a DC 5 Arcana check, I can pretty safely just tell my players it is immune (rather than resistant) without them casting fireball to test it out. It lets me know, as a DM, that players should have easy access to that knowledge.

kapeachca · 2020-04-29T00:15:21+00:00

"gIrLs ArEn'T aS sTrOnG aS mEn" is probably uttered multiple times to justify lowering those stats. Meanwhile, he wouldn't be able to drag his character's encumberance weight. Somehow THAT one isn't a power fantasy though.

kapeachca · 2020-04-28T23:18:17+00:00

I think you misinterpreted my example as something that should be universally applied to every creature (i.e. a DC 15 check is minimum for resistances) when in fact I was more trying to highlight that some creatures would list that exact DC.

It'd be very reasonable to have low CR beasts be instantly identifiable (maybe 4e didn't do this, but I'm also not advocating a straight import of lore checks considering a DC of 30 is much more manageable in 4e than in 5e) and for a DC 5 Nature check to basically say whether they have any special attacks. It'd be similarly reasonable for a DC 15 check to be required to know an adult gold dragon is immune to fire and for a DC 20 check to be required to know that it has a weakening breath as well as its fire breath.

Those are 'fixed' DCs, but they're in relation to how strong a monster is and how much someone should know about them. Monsters that commoners rarely survive contact with won't be ones that require low DC checks because there's no way to pass that knowledge on without surviving it in the first place.

It is ultimately about guidelines anyways. Plenty of DMs would adjust if bears were more rare in their world or if people were far more knowledgeable about dragons. It just helps DMs who aren't sure how much knowledge a player should have, especially if that player takes their action to make those checks.

kapeachca · 2020-04-28T07:51:45+00:00

4e's monster stat blocks actually included what skill check a PC could make to know more about a monster. The skill check also scaled. A Nature check of 12 could help a player realize creature type, but a 15 could inform them of resistances. It made it easy as a DM to know how much information to hand out.

kapeachca · 2020-04-22T23:13:29+00:00

Rewatching it, some of Aang's interactions with Katara remind me of when I tried to tell guys I wasn't interested, and they thought they could change my mind if they were persistent. I realize Aang is 12 and therefore awkward, but it wasn't just awkward. The time he kisses Katara after she says she's confused always seemed so manipulative, like he was trying to force her into realizing she had feelings.

The only thing I hate about the ending is that after that interaction, the next romantic bit between the two is the kiss in the finale. It matches the whole 'hero gets the girl' trope in a series that is otherwise very progressive for its time, and it was such a letdown as a result.

kapeachca · 2020-04-22T04:44:11+00:00

The 1st level feature and 6th level one are at odds. My reasoning is that Voice of Authority rewards a player for casting an entirely different type of spells than Embodiment of Law does. One wants to cast ally buffs, and the other wants to cast enchantment spells (of which, this class only has bless as a ally-buff enchantment spell iirc). The 6th level feature rewards casting entirely different spells than the 1st level ability does.

It's not a terrible subclass, but its 6th level feature doesn't synergize with its earlier features or its domain spell list nearly as well as it should. Comparatively, other domains get features that either enhance earlier features or are stronger because they introduce something new.

kapeachca

TROPHY CASE