General Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
DangerousPuhson said:
What do you mean by "counts as two creatures"? As in XP value? CR balance? One goblin sitting on the other's shoulders?
Click to expand...
The first two. A goblin with a template becomes an "elite" goblin. A elite goblin is worth double the experience and is the equivalent in toughness to two regular goblins.

DangerousPuhson said:
I agree consistency is important - maybe the most important part of being an unbiased adjudicator. Players definitely pick up when you aren't being consistent.

I'm a little more pessimistic about players than you are, I think. The idea that some players would infer mercenary past or goblin training based on a creature's ability seems... uncommon. Especially if you don't announce the abilities (i.e. if you don't say "and this wolf uses Goblin Tactics, so he gets to move a square because he missed an attack"). Like, if I were trying to establish vampire family traits, I suspect players would more inaccurately ascribe those traits to just "vampires gonna vampire" rather than "oh, they used a Dominating Gaze rather than a Hypnotic Gaze - they must be of the Sorazorra vampire family". Just my experience though.
Click to expand...
The name of the power and some of the effects are displayed in the chat. Also, players do recognize things that hurt the PCs.

But it is true, from the player side they might not notice mechanical similarities, so if they don't notice and I want them to know, I can hint or outright tell them. Start with "you think you have seen this fighting technique before," and maybe eventually move on to "your dogsbody remembers the Poison Spider goblins using this technique."
 
Beoric said:
The name of the power and some of the effects are displayed in the chat.
Click to expand...

Ah right, the whole VTC thing. Yeah, that's pretty declarative. Don't get me wrong - I actually like the idea of dropping little connections or signature moves that players can deduce and leverage to their advantage. I'm just not optimistic they'll actually catch on to them very often.
 
Beoric said:
Also, players do recognize things that hurt the PCs.
Click to expand...
As an example of this, there are a number of creatures that get to do something with their dying gasp; an example is to get an attack on everyone standing next to them. So you don't want to stand next to them when they die. The first time one of those go off in a fight, the players say something like, "Ah, fuck, these are those things that explode!" [figuratively], at which point them as has polearms step up to do melee, and everyone else falls back to make ranged attacks.
 
There are a lot of TTRPGs out there. No wonder nobody can agree on what the OSR is or isn't.

My running count is presently at 607; someone pick a number between 1 and 607, and I'll tell you what to play!
 
There are a lot of systems out there - the laws of probability would dictate that many of them are actually good. In fact I'd wager that there's likely a slight skew towards better system products than worse ones, based on the premise that barrier-to-entry for system design is slightly higher than for adventure design (thanks Dyson and DTRPG), which naturally filters out the more amateur efforts.
 
When news about the 2026 Odyssey movie came out, I saw promotional materials, which I can't find now, that looked something like this:
Screenshot 2025-06-08 11.22.40.png
Someone posted that they couldn't wait to see the new movie, TES QDPSSSSPS.


To which someone else replied, "TIL you can call a cat by saying Screenshot 2025-06-08 11.49.40.png."
 
I have seen these for a few movies. They aren't released by the studio, they are a "concept trailer," but it's a fan's concept, not a studio/director concept. This one is generated by an account named "Royal Trailer." Here is the disclaimer:

⚠️ ATTENTION ⚠️: Kindly note, this video is a concept trailer created for artistic and entertainment purposes. We've incorporated diverse effects, sound design, AI tech, and movie analytics to realize our vision. It's meant solely for artistic enjoyment and engaging the YouTube community. Thank you for your support as we showcase our creativity and storytelling skills. The videos have been made with love by the Royal Trailer team. We do our own writing for the trailers, editing, sound design, VFX and thumbnail design - all to bring you the best concept trailer you can find online. Like, share and subscribe! But above all, share your thoughts and ideas!

How this content was made
Altered or synthetic content
Sound or visuals were significantly edited or digitally generated.
Click to expand...

So, the "trailer" likely includes no actual scenes from the movie.

I look forward to it's release, mainly to read Bret Devereaux' inevitable demolition of the gear and battle scenes. He had a go at Gladiator last week, I'm looking forward to reading it.
 
Beoric said:
He had a go at Gladiator last week, I'm looking forward to reading it.
Click to expand...

Like, the sequel film? I've heard bad things...

FYI any Wes Anderson fans out there, I heartily endorse The Phoenician Scheme - a real return to form for Anderson after the staleness of Asteroid City and the divisiveness of French Dispatch. Really takes after GBH in terms of tonality and humor.
 
DangerousPuhson said:
Like, the sequel film? I've heard bad things...

FYI any Wes Anderson fans out there, I heartily endorse The Phoenician Scheme - a real return to form for Anderson after the staleness of Asteroid City and the divisiveness of French Dispatch. Really takes after GBH in terms of tonality and humor.
Click to expand...
No, nitpicking the original. Also, his series on the Battle of Helm's Deep and the Siege of Gondor, and comparisons between the books and the movies, is really excellent.

@squeen you would really like his analysis of the books, if you haven't already read the articles. Read the Siege of Gondor first, it sets up some things for the Helm's Deep series. Also, lots of inspiration if you want to run a domain campaign. You will have to live with the fact that he does not hate the movies, but I think it would be worth it for you.

He also has a really great article on how cavalry actually functions, which I can't find but may actually be included in one of those series. TL;DR, running into a wall of infantry, or trying to trample people, just gets you and/or the horse killed. But infantry have a really hard time standing firm if they see a wall of horses running at them full tilt, and tend to break and run, at which point the cavalry outruns them and picks the runners off from behind. So the cavalry runs full tilt at the infantry, and if the infantry doesn't break, they turn away at the last minute. And the impulse to run is so strong that even if the infantry knows that is the tactic, and even if they have trained for it, and even if the tactic has failed against them before in the same battle, there is still a chance they will break, so in the absence of some other distraction for the cavalry, they just keep doing it over and over again, slowly working the infantry down.

So basically, the cavalry imposes a morale check every time it charges, but doesn't actually engage unless the infantry formation breaks.

Mounted archers are a different thing entirely, and he also has an article on that somewhere.


I think the only Wes Anderson movie I have seen is Rushmore. I didn't love it, but I was young and stupid so that doesn't mean anything.
 
Last edited:
Beoric said:
I think the only Wes Anderson movie I have seen is Rushmore. I didn't love it, but I was young and stupid so that doesn't mean anything.
Click to expand...

They're like black licorice - you either love it, or you believe the rest of the world crazy for loving it. Grand Budapest Hotel is his opus; if you watch it, you'll know which side you fall on. Life Aquatic is pretty approachable too, as a way to dip your toe in (pun intended).
 
While we're sort of randomly talking about media, I think Billie Eilish's "You Should See Me In A Crown" (Spotify) (YouTube) (Other YouTube) is a great basis for a villain.

Actually, three villains. I had never seen the video(s) until this moment when I looked it up for the YouTube links, but the villain I have in my head from listening without video is way different from either video, and the two videos are very different from each other (the animated one gets interesting at about 1:05).

I was going to say what I was thinking in terms of villains, but I'll wait until a few people weigh in (or not), I don't want to hijack your mind's eye.
 
Last edited:
That last link reminds me of this old video which also makes for some cool food-for-thought on monsters. Nevermind, the original video got taken down or something.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top