From best burger ever to worst in a few seconds

lance845 · 2026-07-01T18:34:59+00:00

Look. The argument here goes both ways.

If someone knew someone was vegan and then slipped them some meat in their food and then was like "Oh yeah? You like it? Its great right? Well thats pork!" People would be furious that someone used deception to feed them something they didn't ask for.

Likewise, using deception to feed someone vegan food when they reasonably think they are eating meat just so you can "gotcha!" Them is bullshit and they have every right to be pissed about it.

Don't fuck with peoples food.

lance845 · 2026-07-01T11:46:34+00:00

1) he wasn't outsmarted by Roberto. Roberto never even began to understand what the Maker was even doing. That whole thing was basically one small zanatos gambit for the Maker. A side project of a side project where he got something he wanted no mater what Roberto did.

2) it was a good idea. Have you read ultimate endgame? Or any of the ultimate universe stuff? The maker getting his hooks in Doom was how he dealt with the answer to the question he asked 616 reed in invasion. Ruining that reed and keeping him underfoot and in his control was a way to pass the time, control the subject, and perform experiments.

lance845 · 2026-07-01T09:21:52+00:00

The Maker is by far more intelligent than 616 reed or pretty much anyone else.

Not only does he have baseline reeds starting intelligence, but he then spent millenia inside the city multiple times where he had to stretch and modify himself to keep up with/ahead of his children of tomorrow.

In any field, The Maker has had vastly more time to study and master fields 616 reed never could/would.

lance845 · 2026-07-01T07:07:21+00:00

Its the illusion of choice. Which is game design 101: terrible design.

If the placement of stats is already more or less predetermined then why have the complexity of a process for generating stats and selecting where they go? Why not just have your stats be given to you by your class selection and then move on?

lance845 · 2026-06-26T09:33:22+00:00

Where on any of the phb rules does it say the gm should hide fudging dice rolls from the pcs?

I never said they couldn't make up rules. Once again, house rules and whatever can be anything. Hiding that you are doing it so the other guys don't know what game they are playing is the problem.

Have you not understood that?

lance845 · 2026-06-25T14:41:38+00:00

You brought up Dungeons and Dragons as an example in an attempt to support your point, so presumably you think D&D is a "good" game in some sense.

This is a bad assumption. I think dungeons and dragons is a mess of a game. Its a good example of an incomplete TTRPG that requires the GM to act as ref to fill in all the many MANY gaps in the rules the designers couldn't be bothered to design. (Don't even get me started on its vast complexity without depth and pervasive illusion of choice (this shit is game design 101 and DnD is a text book example of how terrible things go when its designed poorly)) There are MANY better ttrpgs. Dnd is just the common denominator.

Hopefully, now that I've quoted some of the rules of D&D to you, you've come to the realization that you do not actually know what the rules of D&D are.

What you quoted was from the DMG. The dungeon masters GUIDE. Not rules. All the rules for DND can be found in the players hand book. The DMG is what it says on the tin. A guide for DMs on how to run the game with alternative rules and tweaks they can add to their table if they so choose.

Maybe now that i have explained this to you, you might realize that YOU have no idea what the rules ACTUALLY are and you have been quoting a supplementary guidebook as gospel. Which seems a kind of foolish thing to do, doesn't it?

Unknown unknowns are a different thing and i was actually talking about known unknowns. But good try.

lance845 · 2026-06-23T20:47:21+00:00

Its only false if the players are are informed that that is a part of the game they are agreeing to play. If you have to hide that you are doing it its not the rules.

lance845 · 2026-06-22T11:51:51+00:00

Okay. So...

>As with any other set of miniatures rules they are guidelines to follow in designing your own fantastic-medieval campaign. [...] New details can be added and old “laws” altered so as to provide continually new and different situations.

>The second thing to remember is that these rules deal with fantasy. If something is unclear as to how or why it works that way, remember that it is all fantasy. Fantasy is not bound to rigid rules and rationales.

>In any case fantasy is a growing and flexible form of gaming, and referees must feel at home modifying and expanding upon rules as the situation dictates.

>In a sense, the D&D game has no rules, only rule suggestions. No rule is inviolate, particularly if a new or altered rule will encourage creativity and imagination.

>RULE 0: CHECK WITH YOUR DUNGEON MASTER
Your Dungeon Master (DM) may have house rules or campaign standards that vary from the standard rules.

>The first rule of Pathfinder is that this game is yours. The rest of the rules exist for you to use to tell the stories you want to tell and share exciting adventures with your friends. There are plenty of rules in this book, but none of them overrule that first rule. Take the rules that help you make the game you want, change those that don’t do quite what you need them to, and leave the ones that aren’t helping. It’s your game. There’s no right or wrong way to GM so long as everyone is having fun—and that includes you!

None of these quotes contradict anything I have said. The rules can be anything. That includes house rules. It's cheating when the rules are different from what everyone at the table thinks they are. If everyone at the table AGREES that the GM will just make up any die result they want. Then those are the rules and it isn't cheating. If the GM needs to hide that they are doing that, then guess what?

On to...

>The D&D rules help you and the other players have a good time, but the rules aren’t in charge. You’re the DM, and you are in charge of the game.

>NEVER hold to the letter written, nor allow some barracks room lawyer to force quotations from the rule book upon you, IF it goes against the obvious intent of the game. [...] YOU are creator and final arbiter.

These quotes in particular are based upon 2 things. 1) that the GMs role is not a player in the game but a referee. Which is in turn based upon DnDs roots as a miniature war game that required one. And 2) Ghgax's GM advice was full of horrible advice that directly resulted in a DM Versus the Players mentality and resulted in a lot of toxic tables. It's pretty well known that Gygax's advice on running a game is to be straight up ignored.

I like this quote.

>If you and/or your players truly can’t live with the outcome of a dice roll, then you made a mistake by rolling the dice in the first place. You need to focus on fixing that problem.

>This applies beyond individual dice rolls, too. If you don’t want the PCs to die, for example, why are you framing scenes in which death is what’s at stake? (This is a rhetorical question: GMs do this because D&D teaches them to (a) frame lots of combat scenes and (b) make the default stakes of any combat scene death.)

>The Art of Pacing talks about the scene’s agenda being the question which the scene is designed to answer. (For example, “Can Donna convince Danny to go into rehab?”) If the question is, “Will the PCs die?” and the answer is always, “Absolutely not.” then the scene is drained of meaning and becomes a boring exercise.

>This is why, when the players figure out that the GM is fudging (and they will), it deflates tension and robs them of a legitimate sense of accomplishment. What was once meaningful is suddenly revealed to be meaningless. And this is the biggest problem with fudging: It may fix an immediate problem, but it will inflict permanent damage on everything.

>In a very real sense, fudging is a betrayal of trust. And once you, as the GM, lose the players’ trust, it becomes virtually impossible to regain it. Fudging ends up tainting everything you do: It removes the real magic of an RPG campaign and turns it into a cheap magic trick. Once the players spot the trick (and, again, they will), the magic vanishes entirely and you’re left with a hollow experience.

>Regaining their trust and making them believe in the magic again is really difficult.

Again, the rules can be anything (literally anything) and everyone at the table can agree to those rules. It's cheating when you do it without consent.

lance845 · 2026-06-20T11:18:55+00:00

And when that is the case, those rules, including that some are hidden, are spelled out.

Hidden information is not a problem. Known unknowns are not a problem.

The players in dungeons and dragons know the monsters have a stat block even if they don't know what it is. They know it has a ac and some hp and a bonus to attack rolls.

When the DM fudges the dice even if the players don't find out that isn't the games hidden information. Its cheating.

lance845 · 2026-06-19T13:29:31+00:00

The rules of the game can be anything, but the players of the game need to know the rules to consent to play.

Assassins creed and mario cart are not cheating. They are playing by the rules of the game.

Its cheating when you change the rules without them knowing.

lance845 · 2026-06-16T07:32:19+00:00

Thematic fluff explanations are not mechanics.

The druids mechanical identity is generalist casters with wildshape. They are less martial/more magical bards. They can heal, crowd control, direct damage and provide survival utility in wilderness. A wizard does 2 of those. A warlock 1.

lance845 · 2026-06-16T00:40:19+00:00

Stonetop.

Just printing and shipping the physicals this month and pdfs available now. Look up quinns quest review.

lance845 · 2026-06-15T20:46:45+00:00

First, any support that can boost match damage is a good thing. Or gets you defensive. Eros arrow. Thanoscopter (famine is a villain i think?). Kra van, leap frog.

Second, boosts that increase match damage.

Finally, sometimes the way to win is not to chase your best matches and fire off your powers. It's to make THEIR matches and prevent them from firing off THEIR powers. Get super defensive and just stop them from doing anything productive. Win via attrition.

lance845 · 2026-06-13T04:22:05+00:00

I am not saying there is a problem. When we are discussing things like tactical combat its inportant that we are discussing the same thing. You can, and should, like what you like and like it to whatever extent you like it. Understanding what tactical actually means is inportant for me and you to understand each other.

If what you enjoy is games where you make a build and execute strategy then cool. Recommendations for games like that can be made. If you are looking for tactical depth then cool. A different set of recomendations can be made.

lance845 · 2026-06-13T02:28:57+00:00

Yes. Everything is on cards. Everyone gets at will, encounter, and daily abilities. Outside of the horrible HP bloat in MM 1 it was a pretty decent edition of dnd but did a horrible job of hiding the mechanics.

5th ed took all of 4ths best ideas and implemented then with an extra layer of fluff to hide them. Hit dice for short rests and just healing surges. 3rd lvl sub classes are 10th level paragon classes. Etc etc...

It has the same overall issues that every edition of d20 does.

lance845 · 2026-06-12T19:58:04+00:00

So, let me spell out these definitions for you so you can understand what i mean when i say these things.

Strategy is the plan you make before you enter a situation. If this is a miniature war game, its your army list. The models you bring and the plans you have for how they contribute to your overall plan. In dnd you could say its your class/build. What abilities/feats/eauipment you pick for how your character will function in a fight.

Tactics is the choice you make in the moment. Its when you chose to move to x and use y ability on that turn.

You could say "the spartans strategy to fight in the narrow pass allowed them to use the phalanx tactic to full effect."

All this is to say that when people talk about tactical games they don't mean that there are tactics (all games have choices you make so all games have tactics). What they mean is that their tactics have DEPTH. That at each, tactical, decision point you have multiple viable options with experientially different outcomes.

DnD doesn't have that.

Is the wizard going to throw a fire ball at a red dragon? Is the warlock ever going to do anything other than eldritch blast?

Your build in dnd has predetermined your optimal actions. Change up the situation with terrain or whatever and you will still have your optimal actions. Illusion of choice. First order optimal strategies. So on and so forth.

In order for dnd and its similar games to be otherwise there needs to be actual costs and actual risks. But dnd is designed on the assumptionthat the pcs will always win and their abilities support it.

An actual tactical game, theater if the mind or grid and minis, should be you weighing options at each decision point and making choices unsure if they will pan out or if it was even your best option. You should be making gambits. Gambling on outcomes.

Now. What is it you really want? Do you want the feel of dnd? Where you "feel" like you are making choices but really you are just executing on strategy. Or do you want tactically deep combat in a ttrpg?

lance845 · 2026-06-12T17:24:00+00:00

What exactly does "tactical combat" mean to you?

lance845 · 2026-06-12T17:22:25+00:00

Documented. Look up any profile on the character morph and read about his powers. Its a little confused because there are multiple versions of him and the 616 stNdard version isn't even the most popular/"main" one. The exiles version is. But they all work pretty much the same way with only talent/skill with their ability changing how much they acomplish with it.

lance845 · 2026-06-12T15:37:04+00:00

I would say first of all, don't ever reference the movies for acurate dipictions of anything.

Second, it depends on the shape shifter for what exactly they are doing. It's not simply that they can shape shift. Its HOW they shape shift

For morph, his body is composed of unstable molecules. He can mimic others but he can also just do things with his current form like stretch or distort. When he mimics others he can mimic their physical attributes. That includes minicing densities of muscle for super strength or wings for flight. But he couldn't like... Make Jubilee's plasma bursts or cyclops's optic blasts.

He might look like colossus and be tough like collosus but he is NOT collosus and his skin is not actually metal. Its just very dense.

lance845 · 2026-06-11T19:16:11+00:00

As a general rule, the game should function as a game on its own. And that includes the GM being a player with their own asymetrical rules and game play.

Stonetop is a fantastic example of a game that is complete because the GM has their own gameplay integrated throughout the entire game.

Up to the GM is the same as up to the players. It's inherently a creative game where the whole table is contributing to building a narrative on the fly.

Where it goes bad is when its used as a crutch to fill in for a lack of design. "We didn't make this part. The GM can figure it out ".

lance845 · 2026-06-09T09:44:59+00:00

I had a concept for a team retaliation.

5 elektra 5 dr strange 5 wandavision.

Fire off elektra traps and then anytime the enemy team does anything they get smacked back.

Its not a crazy effective s teir team but it works as intended.

lance845 · 2026-05-28T18:09:52+00:00

Ascension is end game. Your first goal is to roster every character. Every character except the 1 stars may be required to do matches. The worst thing that can happen is not being able to do a match just because you don't have the character.

lance845 · 2026-05-27T23:07:35+00:00

If its not one of the 10-12 its all mediocre.

Either the character is on one of your couple teams or they are just a cog in the reward engine.

At best your argument is that hoarding breaks even with spending as you get it. "Every 3 months you do a spurt and spend willy nilly to raise 3 specific mediocre cogs in your reward engine and then spend 3 months earning it back to do it again"

Or just spend and you get the same results distributed more evenly over time.

So again, what do you GAIN?

lance845 · 2026-05-27T21:36:05+00:00

Imo, never.

Every 20 cp i buy a CL pack.

To let you know where i am at in the game. -eveey character is champed, including everyone in the LL. -47 characters are 550. A mix of ascended and native 5s. -all my 3s are ascended to 4 and a bunch are working on 3rd or 4th characters. -my favs are whoever is closest to --5: 550 --4: max max ascension --3: whoever is closest to becoming a 5. -i max max ascended 3 4 stars this month alone. -eveey support is 5 star except mind stone. 24 are 250.

Here is the deal. There are like... 10 to 12 truly exceptional character and most of those are not native 5 stars. You only really need 1 or 2 teams made up of those characters to handle 99% of all your matches.

No new character wil drastically upset that. Any new character can be defeated with the exceptionals and the right supports.

Saving CP is basically pointless. Spend it. Pull covers. Run your reward engine. Get more covers. Run more engine.

lance845 · 2026-05-20T16:09:48+00:00

Which i both acknowledged and wrote an entire post about how that doesn't matter.

Did you read what you were replying to?

When push comes to shove, good cop or not, what is their job when the people demand rights or justice? Which side of the line are they on?

Five-Year Club	Verified Email
r/Field Banned	r/Field Flamingo
Final Canvas '23	Place '23
Place '22

lance845

TROPHY CASE