Order of the Stick - General Discussion

Zurai · Post by **Zurai** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 4:43 pm

Shinjin wrote:

I'm speechless

+1!

Technical geekery:

Spoiler:

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 5:21 pm

I'm not sure that V killed *every* black dragon. The spell is called "Familicide" not "genocide," so my inference is that V's spell killed every living black dragon with blood ties to the original dragon - i.e. killed that dragon's extended family.

It sure does seem like a lot of dragons, but I suppose if the spell extended to every living black dragon with any blood ties, no matter how distant, that would be a lot of dragons.

Zurai · Post by **Zurai** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 5:32 pm

Spoiler:

Meghan · Post by **Meghan** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 7:29 am

Spoiler:

Don't give up, V - try to be the shepherd!

craterus · Post by **craterus** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 9:54 am

Meghan wrote:
Spoiler:
What's the XP gain on 62 black dragons? Average adult say, since there were kiddies and elders in that batch?

What level would V need to be to, with the help of his new friends, kill the three fiends? If I was one of those fiends, I would be starting to be a little nervous. They can't hurt V if he gets them first.

IIIRC V was about 14 or 15th level before accepting the soul splice.
Don't give up, V - try to be the shepherd!

I think there was a reference in an earlier episode that the level of newV being so high, that any experience it gained would be minimal...

Odin · Post by **Odin** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 10:05 am

craterus wrote: I think there was a reference in an earlier episode that the level of newV being so high, that any experience it gained would be minimal...

Purple: And third, you won't get any XP from anything you defeat while you're spliced.

Yellow: Well, you could, technically, but your effective level would be so high that it's pretty unlikely.

Purple: Nitpicker.

So it's kind of debatable. Clearly Rich knew this was going to happen and he made a point of mentioning it in advance, but then again the demon-dudes probably didn't plan on her killing 63 black dragons. I'm betting it will have negligible impact on the story.

Meghan · Post by **Meghan** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 12:18 pm

I'm glad you people have functioning memory systems because clearly my own is on its last days.

I'm still betting V has an ace up his sleeve for dealing with the fiends. I'd also bet that (V+3s) > (3f +1I) where
I = Imps
F = Fiends
S = Souls
V = V

Zurai · Post by **Zurai** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 6:31 pm

More technical geekery:

Spoiler:

Padre · Post by **Padre** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 7:13 pm

Zurai wrote:More technical geekery:
Spoiler:
You don't get any XP for creatures that are 8 or more CR under your level. The Big Mama black dragon is at least a Wyrm, as she cast Antimagic Field (6th level Sorcerer spell; black dragons don't get enough effective sorcerer levels for 6th level spells until Wyrm). That pegs her CR as at least CR26. The three devils clearly expected V to kill Big Mama, and said that V likely wouldn't get any XP, so it's reasonable to assume that V's effective character level is, at a minimum, 34. I would peg it more in the 40's to 50's, honestly, just off the sheer power of that Familicide epic spell and the feats and skill ranks needed to cast it.

In short: it's highly unlikely that V earned a single drop of XP for casting that Familicide spell, despite killing 60+ black dragons with a single standard action.

She cast Finger of Death also, which from memory is a 7th level spell.

I think it is more likely she actually has some class levels, rather than her being even older still. She mentioned a few strips back on the island that she has more magical skill than most of her race.

Zurai · Post by **Zurai** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:16 pm

Padre wrote:She cast Finger of Death also, which from memory is a 7th level spell.

I think it is more likely she actually has some class levels, rather than her being even older still. She mentioned a few strips back on the island that she has more magical skill than most of her race.

Dragons with class levels are .... messy. There aren't, and never have been, any good, solid rules for having classed dragons. Even the Council of Wyrms setting (which was all about PCs playing dragons) had all kinds of headache-inducing inconsistencies.

That said, Rich doesn't have to actually build the characters, so it doesn't matter that much. Yeah, she's probably got some levels of sorcerer in there. That actually raises her CR higher faster than gaining hit dice and aging, amusingly; sorcerer is an associated class for dragons since they get sorcerer spellcasting, so every sorcerer level is +1 CR.

Odin · Post by **Odin** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 8:13 am

Even after reading through the 4th Ed PHB, I feel like I don't understand the game at all. I miss 2nd Ed. I knew those rules by heart.

IceBear · Post by **IceBear** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:32 am

I don't really see that much different - at the core - from 2nd to 3/4E. You roll a 20sided dice, add bonuses and if you roll equal to or higher than the target number (the armor class in an attack roll - no longer need to do a THAC0 conversion) you succeed. The main thing is, reading the 4E PHB in a vacuum won't let you understand the rules - you actually need to play to really understand them. Lots of stuff didn't make sense when I read the 3E PHB until I played my first 3E game, and the same was true when I went from 3E to 4E. It would be much, much harder to have gone from 2E to 4E without playing for over a decade. And, if you really know and like the 2E rules, you can keep playing them. There are people still playing OD&D and 1E

Odin · Post by **Odin** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 11:35 am

Yeah, I strongly considered sticking with the old 2nd Ed rules. I don't have a gaming group anymore and am planning to, at some point, play with my kids. I figured if I started with the current rules, that would allow them to go off an play with school friends and such if they're so inclined. But yeah, going from the 2nd ed rules to the 4th ed rules with no gaming in between for 15-20 years is a huge jump. All of the feats and spells work far differently than they used to, the classes and even the races are different. Yeah, you still roll d20 to hit, but that's about the only real similarity I saw. All of the lingo and terminology is different enough that I don't even understand it. And yeah, reading the PHB in a vacuum probably isn't the most effective way to learn the new rules, but then again it's all I've got.

IceBear · Post by **IceBear** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 12:12 pm

I'm always here if you have questions - just pop one in one of the threads in GiG. Making characters would help you learn some of the rules as well. Reading all the rules is overwhelming; it's easier when you play with them as it isn't important to know all the rules - the the section that matter for the current encounter - can learn in pieces then. Maybe I'll try to find some time to run some one shot games online for those that what to learn

Odin · Post by **Odin** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 12:40 pm

I'd likely sign up for that if the timing worked out. I'll keep an eye on GiG, thanks.

Little Raven · Post by **Little Raven** » Thu Mar 26, 2009 6:51 pm

Awesome.

V, you are so very, very damned.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Thu Mar 26, 2009 8:51 pm

Little Raven wrote:Awesome.

V, you are so very, very damned.

V is definitely not a good person.

Odin · Post by **Odin** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 6:31 am

El Guapo wrote:
Little Raven wrote:Awesome.

V, you are so very, very damned.
V is definitely not a good person.

No doubt. Although at this point, Neutral is also in question.

ohbalto · Post by **ohbalto** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 10:03 am

Meh, if someone fucked with my family, I'd fuck back, ten-fold.

The title of the last comic was, "If They Pull a Knife . . ."

Maybe V's from Chicago?

Little Raven · Post by **Little Raven** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 10:06 am

Sith Lord wrote:No doubt. Although at this point, Neutral is also in question.

Really? I mean, it's been a while since I played D&D, but I would have thought V went quite outside the bounds of Neutral on that last action.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 10:13 am

Little Raven wrote:
Sith Lord wrote:No doubt. Although at this point, Neutral is also in question.
Really? I mean, it's been a while since I played D&D, but I would have thought V went quite outside the bounds of Neutral on that last action.

Well, if you were going to argue V's case, Black Dragons are in the Monster Manual (last time I checked, which was admittedly a long time ago) as an "evil" race. So is wiping out a quarter of a powerful evil race, at least in part to protect your family, an evil action? And good adventurers do go around basically killing black dragons to loot their treasure.

Of course, it's not exactly clear that V is doing this on the best of motives. And certainly D&D's assignment of alignment to entire sentient races/monsters is dubious. But within the context of D&D, I suppose there's an argument that V's actions, while ruthless, aren't necessarily evil. In some ways it might be harder to defend V's arbitrary killing of a person (Kubota?) merely for inconveniencing their quest.

Although the fiends' response seems to indicate that they regard V as pretty damn evil now, or at least heading down that path rapidly.

Little Raven · Post by **Little Raven** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 10:27 am

El Guapo wrote:Well, if you were going to argue V's case, Black Dragons are in the Monster Manual (last time I checked, which was admittedly a long time ago) as an "evil" race. So is wiping out a quarter of a powerful evil race, at least in part to protect your family, an evil action? And good adventurers do go around basically killing black dragons to loot their treasure.

But I thought that even a label of 'evil' in the Monster Manual meant that 90% of a given race was evil, with a 10% possibility of another alignment. Given how many dragons V killed, it seems likely he hit some of the odd ones. And V's spell didn't just target black dragons...there were clearly some half-breeds in there, who's alignment is less well-defined.

Then again, does Neutral even concern itself with good and evil? I remember something about striving for balance above all...

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 10:37 am

Little Raven wrote:
El Guapo wrote:Well, if you were going to argue V's case, Black Dragons are in the Monster Manual (last time I checked, which was admittedly a long time ago) as an "evil" race. So is wiping out a quarter of a powerful evil race, at least in part to protect your family, an evil action? And good adventurers do go around basically killing black dragons to loot their treasure.
But I thought that even a label of 'evil' in the Monster Manual meant that 90% of a given race was evil, with a 10% possibility of another alignment. Given how many dragons V killed, it seems likely he hit some of the odd ones. And V's spell didn't just target black dragons...there were clearly some half-breeds in there, who's alignment is less well-defined.

Then again, does Neutral even concern itself with good and evil? I remember something about striving for balance above all...

I'm not sure - maybe someone who's more up to date with the latest D&D can shed more light on alignment. You do have a point, though, and you figure that V's response at this point regarding any non-evil dragon(oids) would probably be something like "fuck 'em."

Plus, I heard that earlier, V only allowed his extended family to stay with him for like 10 months or so...so pretty evil right there.

Little Raven · Post by **Little Raven** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 10:42 am

El Guapo wrote:I'm not sure - maybe someone who's more up to date with the latest D&D can shed more light on alignment.

Well, not the LATEST D&D. I'm pretty sure OOTS hasn't upgraded to 4th edition. (of course, I haven't played since 2nd, so my information on alignment is probably WAY out of date)

Plus, I heard that earlier, V only allowed his extended family to stay with him for like 10 months or so...so pretty evil right there.

Odin · Post by **Odin** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 11:52 am

El Guapo wrote:Plus, I heard that earlier, V only allowed his extended family to stay with him for like 10 months or so...so pretty evil right there.

Ha!

TiLT · Post by **TiLT** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 12:02 pm

Little Raven wrote:Then again, does Neutral even concern itself with good and evil? I remember something about striving for balance above all...

Neutral is neutral, at least since D&D 3rd Edition. AD&D had the idiotic rule where being neutral meant you strived for balance in all things, which is one of the things I hate the most about that system (and believe me, there's a lot I don't like about AD&D). Have you ever even heard of someone in real life who actively works to balance every good action with a bad, and vice-versa? I thought not. It's a gamey concept that is impossible to roleplay in a convincing fashion simply because it's so implausible.

[/rant]

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 12:16 pm

I find it interesting that Erfworld is coming to a dramatic climax at about the same time.

Spoiler:

Odin · Post by **Odin** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 12:50 pm

Isgrimnur wrote:I find it interesting that Erfworld is coming to a dramatic climax at about the same time.

Spoiler:
TPK

Can you elaborate on that spoiler? I saw it in the comic and just ignored it as I didn't catch the reference.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 12:53 pm

Sith Lord wrote:
Isgrimnur wrote:I find it interesting that Erfworld is coming to a dramatic climax at about the same time.

Spoiler:
TPK
Can you elaborate on that spoiler? I saw it in the comic and just ignored it as I didn't catch the reference.

Spoiler:

Little Raven · Post by **Little Raven** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 1:22 pm

Spoiler:

yossar · Post by **yossar** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 3:18 pm

TiLT wrote:
Little Raven wrote:Then again, does Neutral even concern itself with good and evil? I remember something about striving for balance above all...
Neutral is neutral, at least since D&D 3rd Edition. AD&D had the idiotic rule where being neutral meant you strived for balance in all things, which is one of the things I hate the most about that system (and believe me, there's a lot I don't like about AD&D). Have you ever even heard of someone in real life who actively works to balance every good action with a bad, and vice-versa? I thought not. It's a gamey concept that is impossible to roleplay in a convincing fashion simply because it's so implausible.

[/rant]

It kinda made sense for druids, and it definitely makes sense for outer planar beings, but it was stupid for everything else. I think my group had some loose interpretations of all the neutral alignments.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 3:26 pm

yossar wrote:
TiLT wrote:
Little Raven wrote:Then again, does Neutral even concern itself with good and evil? I remember something about striving for balance above all...
Neutral is neutral, at least since D&D 3rd Edition. AD&D had the idiotic rule where being neutral meant you strived for balance in all things, which is one of the things I hate the most about that system (and believe me, there's a lot I don't like about AD&D). Have you ever even heard of someone in real life who actively works to balance every good action with a bad, and vice-versa? I thought not. It's a gamey concept that is impossible to roleplay in a convincing fashion simply because it's so implausible.

[/rant]
It kinda made sense for druids, and it definitely makes sense for outer planar beings, but it was stupid for everything else. I think my group had some loose interpretations of all the neutral alignments.

What makes a man neutral? Is it power? Lust for gold? Or were you just born with a heart full of neutrality?

IceBear · Post by **IceBear** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 3:47 pm

They finally got rid of alignments in 4E (more or less)

Bakhtosh · Post by **Bakhtosh** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 4:26 pm

V's actions could fall into Chaotic Good or Evil depending on how it was role-played.
Chaotic Good says, "Hey, were moving generally in the direction of good here - even if we had to crack a few eggs along the way."
Chaotic Evil would say, "Woo Hoo! Stuff died!"

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 5:04 pm

Bakhtosh wrote:V's actions could fall into Chaotic Good or Evil depending on how it was role-played.
Chaotic Good says, "Hey, were moving generally in the direction of good here - even if we had to crack a few eggs along the way."
Chaotic Evil would say, "Woo Hoo! Stuff died!"

While Chaotic Neutral says "Wow, that spell made some neat sounds and colors! Oooo, pancakes!"

yossar · Post by **yossar** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 5:31 pm

Couldn't V be some form of neutral in the "Do whatever it takes to protect my family" sense? Maybe chaotic neutral (another alignment I hated) since he doesn't care about what rules he breaks to do so.

Zurai · Post by **Zurai** » Sat Mar 28, 2009 5:08 am

Little Raven wrote:
Spoiler:
Except, of course, that's NOT a TPK....not even close, really. All of Parson's most powerful assets remain intact, though he does have to figure out how to separate the casters without damaging them. Not that I blame Parson for telling Charlie that everyone's going down. Sometimes, pretending to be dead is the best defense.

This assumes, of course, that Parson somehow survives.

Spoiler:

Odin · Post by **Odin** » Sat Mar 28, 2009 7:52 am

I really ought to thank you guys for making me go give Erfworld another look. I have to admit I've warmed up to it and am enjoying it now quite a bit.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 8:50 pm

641 is up. Let's see what the bill's first line item is, shall we?

And Erfworld has updated as well.

Odin · Post by **Odin** » Mon Mar 30, 2009 6:43 am

Bah, ingrate.