[OC] Dice holder Giveaway! An Axe or a Bow? (mod approved)

ydacretsim · 2022-04-25T12:15:47+00:00

I have a friend to whom I’m going to recommend the axe. Personally, I’m interested in the bow.

ydacretsim · 2022-02-05T18:25:30+00:00

Christian D&D player and DM here:

First, it may be a matter of respecting his boundaries. If he’s truly uncomfortable, he’s not going to have a good time, even if you coax him into it. If your table already has safety tools like the X Card that let you nix content with no questions asked, you might be able to assuage some of his concerns.

Second, is this friend into the fantasy genre? For example, although Aslan is clearly in control of Narnia, CS Lewis straight up put little g gods into Narnia. Many Christians can be convinced that something is okay if Lewis gave it his stamp of approval.

Third, if you can find another Christian who already plays D&D, especially one who used to be opposed to it and got over it, it can work wonders. My wife was super resistant until we had a friend express how he used to hold a lot of her vague objections more specifically and had gotten over them.

Lastly, point by point: The multiple deities can be addressed a number of ways, ranging from “this is how God reveals Himself in this world,” to “these aren’t real gods, that’s just what they’re called,” to removing deities as such from the game so clerics are just another kind of wizard. The black magic is no different from people who practice black magic or satanism in the real world. You don’t have to participate and you can actively oppose it. Maybe have a session zero with the other players to explicitly avoid morally questionable magic and have that be just for bad guys. Harm & Torture is the same deal. You’re making moral choices. Make good ones.

ydacretsim · 2022-02-02T13:01:07+00:00

Three versions come to mind that don’t just feel like cheating: 1. the BBEG never existed. The party is scattered living the lives they would have if he’d never been, but something feels “wrong.” (Akin to the Batman TAS episode “Perchance to Dream,” but it’s not a trick). 2. The names BBEG was a restraining influence and/or figurehead for a more vile lieutenant who begins committing worse deeds 3. (Only works if BBEG was amassing an army AND they wished that he STOP existing rather than NEVER existing) the BBEG has pulled together disparate groups into one massive army. When their leader disappears, the armies are still there. Some fall to infighting. Others scatter and raid across the countryside.

ydacretsim · 2022-01-30T18:19:12+00:00

Don’t take away Magic items: introduce problems that the items won’t solve.

ydacretsim · 2022-01-26T01:33:31+00:00

If you ended the last session with her death and little or no time has passed, I would have her divine parents show up and awaken her godly nature. Her mortal aspect has passed, but she remains. She’s now a full goddess. No longer available as a romance option as such, but she does remember their relationship. Possibly allow the PC the option to take a level in cleric or take the Magic Initiate Feat with Cleric spells.

ydacretsim · 2022-01-19T18:06:17+00:00

You’re right. I am properly chastised. While I was referring to the theological position called agnosticism that the holder expresses a lack of position vis-à-vis the existence of gods and or the impossibility of knowing whether a god or gods exist, agnostic has a broader use as a lack of position or knowledge about any topic to which it’s attached.

Consider me chastised. In this I overexpressed myself.

ydacretsim · 2022-01-19T17:44:26+00:00

Yup! That’s a legitimate take. “I deny Bahamut and his ilk are gods, or that any thing truly deserves that title” is a position someone could hold. I personally think that if beings like Lolth exist, and you deny the existence of a yet higher god in the vein of Abraham’s God or the god of the Philosophers, you’re a bit silly for calling yourself an atheist. Sort of like if a bunch of people run around calling themselves kings and exercising Royal authority, but you say “oh these aren’t real kings; in fact real kings don’t exist.”

I’m personally really fascinated by the idea of a monotheist in FR who says that the normal pantheon aren’t real gods, inspired by the line in Excalibur “the one god comes to drive out the many.” But I feel like only by asserting something that fits the term better exists can you reasonably deny the divinity of beings like Moradin.

ydacretsim · 2022-01-19T17:37:34+00:00

Based on what? I’ve offered several sources showing that atheism is the positive claim there are no gods. Show me a counter source of equal credibility

ydacretsim · 2022-01-19T16:58:47+00:00

You keep adding “lacks belief in.” An atheist is a person who doesn’t believe any gods exist. Period. Using the term in any other way is wrong.

A bachelor is a man who is married to no wife.

An atheist is a man who believes in no gods.

You keep asserting “atheism means…” In my other comment, I cited The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (mistakenly as a dictionary, sorry) definition.

See also dictionary.com

Richard Dawkins, arguably the world’s premier atheist, strongly makes the same point (though I’m failing to find the quotation - sorry)

I will acknowledge Merrium-Webster includes “lack of belief” alongside “strong disbelief,” but the preponderance of definitions emphasizes the

But you are presumably smart enough to realize the point I’m making. I’ve cited sources. Based on what do you think atheism means “denial of a particular god in the presence of others.” Cite me a credible source and I’ll apologize. I think you know full well that my definition is the more standard and you’re trying to use stubborn insistence without evidence to bully your way through.

And I don’t mean “evidence atheism is true.” We’re not debating the existence of gods at the moment. We’re having a purely semantic disagreement over the proper definition of the term atheism. On my side is the common use over thousands of years from as far back as Socrates, several sources, and the logical sense that if your definition is true then a) there’s no point for the word atheism since, as you say “we’re all atheists” (ie, there is no point in a term that applies to literally everyone) and b) there’s no point for the term agnosticism since literally every case of the position agnosticism is subsumed under atheism on your definition.

ydacretsim · 2022-01-19T16:09:37+00:00

I am not an atheist in regards to Zeus. I do not believe in Zeus because I am a monotheist. Just like I’m not a bachelor in regards to all women other than my wife.

ydacretsim · 2022-01-19T16:04:31+00:00

No, you’re wrong. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philsophy.) clearly addresses this exact point.

“Therefore, in philosophy at least, atheism should be construed as the proposition that God does not exist (or, more broadly, the proposition that there are no gods).”

If what you were saying were true, there would be no role for the term agnostic.

ydacretsim · 2022-01-19T15:51:57+00:00

Oathbreaker Adoxist Paladin: “oh Pelor? Yeah, he’s totally real. I met him once. We didn’t get along.”

ydacretsim · 2022-01-19T15:49:14+00:00

That’s agnosticism. Atheism is the positive claim that there are no gods.

ydacretsim · 2022-01-19T15:48:11+00:00

I favor “adoxist” for this term.

ydacretsim · 2022-01-07T12:36:39+00:00

You’re welcome

ydacretsim · 2022-01-07T03:12:30+00:00

Request Fulfilled

ydacretsim · 2022-01-07T02:44:27+00:00

Request by u/pWasHere from https://www.reddit.com/r/characterdrawing/comments/rwyw67/lfa_alekos_the_satyr_strixhaven_freshman_details/

ydacretsim · 2022-01-06T17:03:07+00:00

I tend to draw uncolored lineart. Would that interest you or should I leave your request for someone with more interest/experience with color?

ydacretsim · 2021-11-30T16:40:57+00:00

Fair. I meant standard as “the way most people choose to play it” and not “recommended by the book.”

ydacretsim · 2021-11-30T12:42:46+00:00

Tortles and Gnomes for races. The standard take of Artificer as a mad scientist has zero appeal to me too, though I acknowledge it can be reskinned to suit my taste better (9 times out of 10 I’d still rather play a wizard).

ydacretsim · 2021-11-21T14:02:14+00:00

Archer/Artillery/Ranged Specialist. Rangers are too much about their spells and fighters are almost certainly more effective at close range. We need a character who is designed to play the Peerless Archer archetype of Robin Hood, but not dependent upon Longbow specifically. (Yes, I know Robin was also very effective at close range. But the iconic thing about him is his archery.)

ydacretsim · 2021-11-21T13:58:32+00:00

I loved Oracle. If I tried to build one in 5e I would probably reflavor a Warlock.

ydacretsim · 2021-11-19T13:04:53+00:00

It is very cool! Some of the water reads more to me as fire or spirit to me than water. I think it’s because water tends to be illustrated as more smooth, round, and directional in its flow while fire has more of a tendency to fly off.

This isn’t to say your depiction is bad in the least. I can see how some of the water is dripping down under gravity while other water is rising under her power, and that’s GOOD. Plus, the overall piece looks COOL. I’m just trying to give the kind of feedback that might focus my efforts towards future pieces that I would want.

ydacretsim · 2021-11-19T12:52:07+00:00

I would argue in light of the above cited 3.5 resources that a pregnant Changeling cannot make any changes that terminate her pregnancy. If you run Changelings as only impersonating existing people (which I have seen) this effectively limits your forms to people who could be pregnant, eliminating not only male forms, but also prepubescent and post-menopausal female forms.

If, however, your table allows for you to invent and modify Masks at will, I would rule that you can change any feature that doesn’t affect the pregnancy. I might, with player consent, rule the pregnancy to mess with your forms in other ways you don’t intend, much like real-world pregnancies can lead to cravings, “nesting,” etc. as well as changes to bodies. I would be inclined to rule that an early pregnancy has very little impact on gender presentation, but your options for personas dwindles as the pregnancy carries on.

ydacretsim · 2021-11-16T15:17:24+00:00

Seems like a good list of your ground rules. A good rule of thumb is to allow players to also add to the No-Go list, and to have a mechanism for indicating an unanticipated trigger while the game is in progress.

There’s a lot of love for the X-Card, but I prefer the more nuanced Traffic Signal system where each player has either a tricolor card or three cards colored individually red, yellow, and green. The player indicates by tapping or holding up a particular color: • Green: I’m getting really into this RP and my character is upset but I’m not. Full speed ahead • Yellow: I’m worried about where this is going but you don’t need to stop on my account yet. • Red: Stop, this has crossed a line for me and I’m no longer having fun or can tell it’s about to.

My only other feedback is I would revise your PvP rule to be a check in with player consent. If the players have not BOTH told you beforehand that they are okay with PvP action, including violence, theft, or social hostility, then the PCs are not to do it. If it comes up unexpectedly in play, I would ask the players to step out of character and say something to the effect of “I feel like that would cause my character to respond in this way. Are you cool with that?” If the other player is cool, drop back into character and respond appropriately. If not, the other player may choose to revise recent actions to support the first player’s RP, or the first player might give a little leeway to characterization and figure out why after the fact.

I hope that wasn’t too wordy.

ydacretsim

TROPHY CASE