Memes that need to die

>Quests want / need / justify separate board.
It has been in "trial" limbo for 3 months now, quality of either board has not improved in the slightest since.

>Quests want / need / justify separate board
And it has very odd rules

Quest threads are still littering the board and have not been properly moved off as the mods continue to ignore them.

I have no idea why Quests are still tolerated here now that they have their own board.

Because it's still a "trial", of course

The trial successfully quarantined them and we should sweep the remaining waste of space questfags through the door

>-4 STR
>a meme

reality isnt a meme

Problem is /qst/ is still trial, that means it's optional to use, until there is a final word on this quests are fine on either board.
I guess mootwo just forgot.

>Thread complaining about 3.x edition system problems
>The most recent two editions already fixed those problems
>Almost no other game even has those issues

Seriously now. It's like griping about windows vista being shit when you could easily upgrade to 8, install a patch, or switch to mac or linux.

What I don't get is just how long a "trail" board is supposed to remain that way before either getting rid of it or just making it a real board

As a fan of 3.5, the most annoying 3.5 gripes are those gripes that were already addressed within 3.5. Its usually by people who don't play 3.5, too. "Oh noes, why do people play a system with such a bad Fighter and Monk!" ...we don't use those classes. There are other classes.

>If you don't do [thing] in this specific way which appeals to my sensibilities and mine alone, you're a shit GM/player/person

Bitch you don't know me or my group shut up.

>Hey Veeky Forums, how do you think [fantasy rule] should work?
But they NEVER say that. Instead, they say:
>How does [fictional thing] work?
Do you see the difference? It's not a "you think should" question, it's not asking for an opinion, it's asking for objective facts.
This was posted yesterday: It doesn't say "how do YOU THINK magic SHOULD work?", it says "how does magic work?", as though there were a single correct answer.

>being this autistic

That is not an argument.
If you ask "what is the capital of Australia?", that is not the same question as "what do YOU THINK the capital of Australia SHOULD BE?".

It's arbitrary, I guess. Who can be sure when the statistically-savvy administrative powers-that-be are satiated by a sufficient sum of posts/threads?

I hear /qst/ is full of shitlords from Veeky Forums anecdotes but I guess that's what you get when you increase the density of something shitty.

How was it determined that they were unbreakable, though: through an "Omniscient Narrator" or millennia of careful study? In the latter case, "magical breakthroughs" are just as plausible as scientific breakthroughs. It's not like the local magic academy knows literally everything about magic.

>I need things phrased a certain way before I respond, even though I know what they mean
>I have no autism

Still not an argument. You might as well have called me a poopy-head.

I agree with you and you're still a poopy head.

>not an argument

this meme needs to die

At least it's an easy indication that the ones who say that are shitposters/have nothing to say.

>Moral complexity is bad

It's usually more along the lines of "you shouldn't play a dickass thief or baby-eater because it's disruptive, results in OOC drama, and is not in line with what our game is about", but people don't know how to articulate that idea so they try to express it with simplistic and inaccurate language.

>depends on the setting
No fucking shit. No one asks the damn questions expecting a single objective truth.

I have plenty to say, and you're not addressing any of it.
When you want answers to a question, but you deliberately ask a different question, that's your problem.
If you ask "how would you prefer that magic work?", I'll give an answer to that.
If you ask "how does magic work?", I'll give an answer to that, but of course the only answer that can be given without lying is "depends on the setting".

Not an argument

not even a question

>DM says you don't get to bring friends
>they do anyways

How is it not an argument? Please tell me.
I have explained logically the fault in the behavior that was defended here and all I've gotten since then was name-calling.

Not an argument

>magic is explained clearly and in detail so there is no longer any mystery to it

"Not an argument" is also not an argument.
I have provided an argument. You have not. You are clearly mocking me.

Obviously

>implying this isn't a good thing
retards that think that mystical magic is good worldbuilding need to go die in a hole

These are cliches, not memes.

>deviate from generic setting in any way
>reeee nothing is relatable, up is down, hot is cold, I smell purple

>nothing is really original, so don't you dare trying to come up with stuff, go reskin history

>list on character sheet is long
>this system is so clunky even though every list item works with exactly the same resolution

To be clear, I'm talking about settings where magic is mysterious and often malevolent, and the heroes generally don't have access to it, so there's little risk of magical deus ex machina. I'm not sure why that's a problem for you.

Can you name some good settings where the magic is explained in detail and there's no mystery to it whatsoever? Literally the only one I can think of is the worlds from Zelazny's Amber series.

Literally any magic system in Japanese SFF.

>kingdoms are good
>empires are evil

But the best Japanese works that use magic are magical realism, which eschews explanation entirely.

Such as? Give me one example please.

Haruki Murakami's "A Wild Sheep Chase."

Holy fucking hell I couldn't agree more. I'm so damn tired of people talking in absolutes when it comes to how games should be run/players should behave/problems should be solved.

I've always seen people express it by complaining about some amorphous "le subversion" trend they think exists. Bonus points for some random complaint about GoT.

They're the kinds of people who pretend they were in games where GMs scold the players for killing the innocent orcs who dindu nuffin.

So, how extreme are and being?

Literally "it's magic, I ain't gotta explain shit!" where the heroes can do whatever the fuck they want suddenly and out of nowhere sounds terrible. By the same token, absurdly detailed infodumps about how your magic works that take away any sense of wonder and excitement are also less than ideal.

Anywhere in between those extremes can probably be very good or very bad depending on execution.

>Sun god is always evil, even if he's listed as X Good.
>Humans are either speshul snowflakes or don't even have the flavor of vanilla
>I'm going to kickstart the industrial revolution with magic! Nobody's ever thought of that before!
>Psionics are somehow different from other forms of magic
>Everything is either a grimdark hellhole or high magic bullshittery

>I'm going to kickstart the industrial revolution with magic! Nobody's ever thought of that before!
I'd like to see that done welp without going towards over the top Eberron magitech style, but d&d magic probably doesn't lend itself well to that.

>Psionics are somehow different from other forms of magic
Mind explaining this one? Are you saying they shouldn't be any different whatsoever? Not even in the way that, to use a D&D example, arcane and divine magic differ from one another?

Or do you mean something more specific by this?

>Everything is either a grimdark hellhole or high magic bullshittery
I like badasses in grimdark hellholes, trying to get rich but in the process, also making the world a better place (sometimes intentionally and sometimes incidentally).

*done well

Excuse me, my reply had nothing to do with whether magic in a given setting is explained or not.
I just said that the question "how does magic work?" and the question "how would you prefer that magic work" ARE NOT THE SAME QUESTION, so a thread saying the former when the OP actually wants answers to the latter is a failure of communication entirely on the OP's fault.

Sorry about that. I quoted the wrong person. I meant to quote and

But it's what they meant. Not everyone is a careful wordsmith, they just do well enough to get the idea across. Which they do in this instance, it's just the likes of you being anal over it.

It doesn't take a careful wordsmith to know the difference between a question of facts and a question of opinions.

>Mind explaining this one?
Whenever I have a conversation about what makes psionics psionics, it usually goes something like this:
>>Psionics is power drawn from the person themselves, it's not magic
>So like a sorcerer, you know, with that inherent magical power?
>>No, sorcerers get their power naturally, psions have to train it
>So they're wizards, who study magic and use it.
>>But the power is drawn from the person themselves, they just, you know, use the power of their wills.
>...Like a sorcerer does?
>>It's not magic, it's willpower and discipline!
>Where does all this theoretical power COME from, though?
>>From the person's willpower!
>That doesn't make any sense. Plenty of people have willpower, so wouldn't that make anyone who thinks hard enough a latent psion?
>>They have special willpower because they're incredibly intelligent.
>Okay, fine. So how is it functionally different from magic?
>>It just is. It's psionics. It's like the difference between arcane and divine magic.
>So you're telling me that while magicians use energy from the weave or whatever and clerics are granted favors from their god, the psions just... make energy out of nowhere?
>>From their willpower.
So psions are some sort of class that takes the internal power of sorcerers and the magical brains of wizards, giving the presumption of both being speshul snowflakes (because they've got 'special wills') and the snobbishness of wizards (we earned our power rather than just getting it like sorcerers).
And even though they have powers that look like and taste like magic, it's definitely not magic, because they're psions.
Hell, it pretty much lends itself to 'I deserve to rule over everything because I don't have to rely on magic. The world bows before my will because I'm just that awesome.' It's like the asshole wizard meme squared.

>unbreakable rules of nature
AND THEY RUN

In my setting, arcane magic is complex ritual shit, divine magic is rare enough that there isn't even always someone alive who can do it, and psionic talent comes from sensitivity to what are basically the brain waves of the sleeping planet (which hates all sentient life and wants to kill us all). It requires effort and such but consists largely of cool little tricks, not crazy shit like what wizards in D&D can do at high levels.

...

>Murakami
Yeah it's fucking shit.

Everything that is magical is supernatural
Not everything that is Supernatural is magical.

Psions are literally casty Monk types. That's it.

Also Sorcerer power isn't internal. They just have an innate understanding of magic rituals.

Why don't you name some examples of what you consider good fantasy where the magic is explained in excruciating detail?

>They're the kinds of people who pretend they were in games where GMs scold the players for killing the innocent orcs who dindu nuffin.

My GM didn't ever scold us, but he used to go for that idea in a more subtle way. He is however a black man in the USA, accustomed to being bothered by police despite being smart, having a clear record, decent education, stable IT job, and overall good life choices, so I get where he's coming from.

He cooled off that beat since, accepting sword & sorcery tropes, and playing them more straight. I think it's part of accepting what "fantasy" means in terms of taking a few hours to set aside our real-world problems and have fun instead. We get more than enough reality during the other 6 days in the week, we don't need as much of it during game time.

>I'm fishing for /r/, the post
Yeah how about no.

If you stupid faggot knew anything about reality you would know that a cap on strength would be way more accurate.

>Also Sorcerer power isn't internal. They just have an innate understanding of magic rituals

This isn't true. Sorcerers are described as having naturally occurring magical talent. Either because of their blood or being born on a magical leyline, or AS a magical leyline, or some such nonsense. They cast magic without trying.

Referances or it never happened.

Depends on the setting cucklord.

Also Psionics use energy from their own soul/body. They also can't interact with the world the same way as anyone else because they don't draw from the Gods/Weave.

Psions can't summon demons, make golems, or raise the dead. They can't turn water into wine. Their powers are often "personal" and can't effect others as easily unless it's a direct application of force.

A lot of magical aids and such are cut off from them, no metamagic rods or scrolls for Mr.Psionic. He can only really use what he learns himself, unlike a Sorcerer who can use the same equipment as a wizard. The sorcerer is also benefiting from a variety mutations because of their magical bloodline.

The only thing Psions really beat out other casters at is blasty/direct combat type stuff.

I.E a Psion can make themselves feel full, but they can't conjure a large elegant feast like a wizard or a cleric could. They can't really buff others like a Wizard could. Psionic powers come online later "equivalent" wizard spells and are often weaker than said unless it's a discipline specialty or until the Psion can augment it at later levels.

Ultimately look at it like this
>Wizard reads a manual to operate tool to pick up a boulder
>Sorcerer just knows how to operate tool to pick up boulder
>Cleric gets his buddy to pick up bolder
>Psion picks the boulder up himself, but it takes a FUCKLOAD more effort and is overall less efficient than if he had done the above.

And that magical talent is them not needing to "know" the rituals that a wizard does. That's the extent of their "internal power"

The way I've figured is that magic always comes from somewhere else. A wizard's studied rituals, a sorcerer's magicaly altered bloodline, a cleric's god-given prayers and so on.

Now with a Psion it comes all from you. One of the things I actualy liked about 4e was how they linked psionics with a monk's ki so I go with that, that they come from the same "inner strength" just that a Psion focuses more on expressing it through powers than in punching things harder than a sword swing, not getting old age penalties, immunity to poision and all those other things Monks do.
Going from that, yeah just about anyone in theory has the capabiliy to become a psion, but just like anyone in theory has the capaility to become a monk, not many have the discipline/willpower/whatever to actualy go and DO it.

yes, just like everything else in this thread? Your point?

Young Wizards books. Good even though they're young adult stuff. It does fall into the usual "magic is language-based" trap, but does it surprisingly well for all that - instead of saying "stone burn boom" or something like that, they say "This is what we want to happen, this is the energy we are supplying to pay for this effect, and this is how we suggest that it happen."

Fair enough. I haven't read them, but I'm willing to believe you that they're good.

I'm still not sure where this weird idea comes from that, in order for a setting to be good, magic ABSOLUTELY MUST be explained in detail, though.

Magic isn't really mysterious in D&D (default). It's pretty much just physics with words and things instead of numbers and applications of force/ A level 1 wizard could know about Reverse Gravity, but he doesn't have the power to cast it, he just knows some day he wants to learn it.

that's a much better way to say it, I might have to steal-I mean borrow that explinataion for my next game

because some people are afraid that if any detail whatsoever is hidden from them on a meta-level, then those sneaky sneak GMs will use it to screw them over and any and all possible opportunity.

I know. And while I love D&D (well, OSR anyway), it's one of the things I would change about it. When a D&D setting is good, it's despite, not because of, the detailed magic system.

Don't, I'm just bitching.

The only reason magic is broken in D&D is because DMs don't have the balls to tell casters they can't sleep every 15 minutes.

>races have no base & can be anything from not-humans to lovecraftian horrors yet still be a part of said race
>unless you're the Dwarves, you're all the same
I'm so happy Dwarf Fortress didn't do this.

Magic being this powerful thing with zero real costs and yet only being used by a small percentage of people who decide that their time is better spent altering reality than swinging swords really well.

Either give magic an actual cost or have a setting where anyone can and probably does pick some up.

Maybe magic eats away at your essence and hurts you, so sword dudes are justified because while they're not as flashy their methods don't slowly (or sometimes rapidly) kill them.

Maybe almost every serious player character type dabbles in magic a little, even the most dedicated fighter can see the advantages of setting his sword ablaze or being able to levitate.

Maybe iron and its derivatives has natural weird anti-magic properties, keeping your wizards in robes and giving a guy in steel armor with a steel weapon a legitimate and dangerous purpose.

There are a great number of ways this can be done to make sense, but "Some people spend a decade learning how to alter the forces of reality at their whim and some people would rather spend that time swinging swords better" doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me

>technology and magic can't properly coexist because magic fucks with physics and physics fuck with magic

>teaches high school history
>willingly admits it
There's, like, a 90% chance your ineptitude is responsible for almost all of the ignorant shit on this website.
Thanks a lot, asshole who couldn't qualify to teach anything else.

As someone who doesn't really enjoy 3.5, I am quite happy to not complain about 3.5, and not bother those who do play 3.5.

this post is a meme I'd like to see die too.

The cost should be years and years of study to even make a minute change in reality. That a level 1 wizard should be at least be minimum 50 years old, because that's long it takes for an average pleb to understand magic at it most basic level. That most wizards don't live long enough to learn the spells to de-age themselves, or don't specialize in the schools of magic necessary.

>Sun god is always evil, even if he's listed as X Good.
Blame the satanic panic. Designers taking over games they didn't create gotta hate on muh Born-Again Parents somehow...

Honestly?
Sorcerers were a dumb.
Sorcerers were SOOOOOO a fucking dumb.

Thanks nasu

THIS IS NOT A MEME
This is a trope.
Stopit OP.

The way 4e handles it is that psionics is explicitly power from the world's reaction to the far realm (and the far realm itself, if you aren't careful.)

And Arcane is basically every power source.

Of course, everyone taps into Elemental power, the power of the defeated creators of the world.

>shitlords
That term has a whole lot of attached meaning to it. From the way you're using it, I assume you're not after those attached meanings, so take a fair warning that calling someone a "shitlord" will get the wrath of /pol/ down on you because tumblr likes the word.

It's dumb, but there's no reason to have a thread all shit up because someone got bothered by a word that really shouldn't have attached meanings to it.

Threads where either the question OP is asking or the subsequent questions/responses given in the thread are all things covered by the rulebooks for the game or system.

This is most common with GMing advice, where the 3.5 DMG and equivalent do honestly cover most of the common issues.

I mean they're pretty similar words, user