I...uh....wait...ummm...hold on....wait...
-
My GM solution: the rust is actually blood, and the crown needs a fresh coating to activate its narrative. If need be, make it belong to a certain bloodline, such as royalty.
-
Technically, rust can only occur on iron-heavy metals and alloys. Otherwise it's just called oxidation.
The difference with "rust" is that rust will eat into the metal and change its shape, while oxydation only changes the surface color and texture.
Edit: yeah... Rust is a specific type of oxydation, it wasn't really clear from my comment. What I wanted to say is that rust implies the material is iron-based!
wrote last edited by [email protected]Well, not quite. Rust eats into iron because oxidised iron is larger and much more brittle than unoxidised iron, physically ripping itself out of place.
Many oxides arent that much larger than their base metals and form a nice patina protecting the metal underneath, like in aluminium.
Other oxides destroy the structural integrity of the metal and eat into it, forming corrosion. Rust is just corrosion specific to iron.
-
DM: Scribbles a note "Without the rust it seems like a serviceable crown, but not too fancy."
Note to lost heir: "You see the crown and you think as it... looks at you. This should be your crown. You wants it. They shouldn't keep it from you. Steals it, hides it, it came here for you".
DM: "Probably worth some gold."
The player: GUYS! I'M A KING NOW!!! BOW TO MEEEEEEEE!!!
-
....
A) this makes no sense to describe as railroading, apparently finding anything plot or backstory related is railroading?
B & C) Players not doing what a dm expects isn't railroading. If the dm then turned around and said "no you don't do that" or decides to make it impervious to prestidigitation, that might fit the definition.
Railroading is removing player agency and not giving players choices. Players just doing something unexpected that throws you for a loop? That's called DMing.
My main point is that the DM gave them a crown but then for some reason panicks when they do something very mundane with it. It implies the DM has a rigid story set, rather than a sandbox for the players to explore.
-
You've triggered my trap card. I'm going to do the special interest info-dump now. Apologies in advance.
It's good. It's written a little weird -- it uses inheritance, like computer programming, which can be a little more difficult to wrap you head around than it needs to be if you're not at least a little familiar with coding, and it's written as if it's doing everything possible to shut down rules lawyers, so whatever doesn't read like API documentation reads a bit like legalese -- but the actual system is nice.
It's highly balanced, which is an awful word that its fanbase doesn't seem to understand, but it means that it totally shuts down winning in character creation, and shifts the power game to one of tactics rather than build. The result is that much of the discussion about the game treats it as if it's exclusively a tactical combat game (because most discussing the game are crypto-power-gamers), rather than a fantasy RPG, and the most enthusiastic players push back hard against any kind of reframing. But it has a ton of support fo roleplay focused tables, and it pares down easily for casual tables.
Plus, you know, it's free! And it's fairly easy to convert from 3.x/PF1, meaning that there's a whole generation of content out there for it beyond first party offerings, for just a little more effort than standard prep.
Neat! I'll have to take a look sometime. Thanks for the explainer.
I GM a fair bit, so the idea of a healthy collection of modules is compelling.
-
I'm extremely naive when it comes to tabletop RPGs
Is there any kind of "plot says no" response to magic? Something like the doors in oblivion where you need a key to unlock
Technically there could be. After all, the GM has final say. But players will want to search for a reason, because they expect consistency. Spells don’t typically fail without reason. That reason can be a low die roll if the spell description calls for it, but many spells (like Prestidigitation) don’t require a roll.
So having the spell fail “because the plot says no” is inconsistent. It would immediately throw up a giant red flag in the players’ minds, and make them think the item is much more important than they initially realized. After all, if the plot says the spell doesn’t work, then that means something in the world is preventing it from working.
It makes more sense to have the item be cursed, or haunted, or protected by a god, or any other number of things that would give the players some sort of explanation to latch onto. If you keep it vague, the players will inevitably spend a lot of time trying to figure out why it can’t be cleaned. Because they expect consistency, and will keep throwing things at it until they find a reason. So it’s better to just give them a reason (even if you just came up with it in a panic) because that at least gives them some resolution, and they can file it away in their quest list for later.
-
You've triggered my trap card. I'm going to do the special interest info-dump now. Apologies in advance.
It's good. It's written a little weird -- it uses inheritance, like computer programming, which can be a little more difficult to wrap you head around than it needs to be if you're not at least a little familiar with coding, and it's written as if it's doing everything possible to shut down rules lawyers, so whatever doesn't read like API documentation reads a bit like legalese -- but the actual system is nice.
It's highly balanced, which is an awful word that its fanbase doesn't seem to understand, but it means that it totally shuts down winning in character creation, and shifts the power game to one of tactics rather than build. The result is that much of the discussion about the game treats it as if it's exclusively a tactical combat game (because most discussing the game are crypto-power-gamers), rather than a fantasy RPG, and the most enthusiastic players push back hard against any kind of reframing. But it has a ton of support fo roleplay focused tables, and it pares down easily for casual tables.
Plus, you know, it's free! And it's fairly easy to convert from 3.x/PF1, meaning that there's a whole generation of content out there for it beyond first party offerings, for just a little more effort than standard prep.
You forgot the most important part: it isn't owned by Hasbro! Even if it didn't have any of the advantages it does over 5e, this alone would be huge.
-
Technically, rust can only occur on iron-heavy metals and alloys. Otherwise it's just called oxidation.
The difference with "rust" is that rust will eat into the metal and change its shape, while oxydation only changes the surface color and texture.
Edit: yeah... Rust is a specific type of oxydation, it wasn't really clear from my comment. What I wanted to say is that rust implies the material is iron-based!
This is not true. Oxidation is a broad type of chemical reaction involving the loss of electrons. Rust is a type of oxidation, much as a square is a type of rectangle. Oxidation can occur on the surface level (tarnishing of some metals, passivation of aluminum) or throughout (combustion). Rust actually only occurs on the surface as well, but the iron oxide is less dense than the metal and it increases the available area of the surface exposed to oxygen.
-
You forgot the most important part: it isn't owned by Hasbro! Even if it didn't have any of the advantages it does over 5e, this alone would be huge.
Touché! A truth I have really started to take for granted.
-
This is not true. Oxidation is a broad type of chemical reaction involving the loss of electrons. Rust is a type of oxidation, much as a square is a type of rectangle. Oxidation can occur on the surface level (tarnishing of some metals, passivation of aluminum) or throughout (combustion). Rust actually only occurs on the surface as well, but the iron oxide is less dense than the metal and it increases the available area of the surface exposed to oxygen.
Yeah... Reading back my comment, it was badly written... I know rust is a type of oxydation, but that's not what I wrote!
-
Well, not quite. Rust eats into iron because oxidised iron is larger and much more brittle than unoxidised iron, physically ripping itself out of place.
Many oxides arent that much larger than their base metals and form a nice patina protecting the metal underneath, like in aluminium.
Other oxides destroy the structural integrity of the metal and eat into it, forming corrosion. Rust is just corrosion specific to iron.
I didn't know of other type of oxides that eat into the metal like rust does...
But it's true that a "rusted crown" implies that it is iron-based, so the cantrip should work!
-
Yeah... Reading back my comment, it was badly written... I know rust is a type of oxydation, but that's not what I wrote!
Lol thermite is my favorite oxidation & rust remover reaction
-
wrote last edited by [email protected]
It’s artifact level - a cantrip simply doesn’t work on it. When the players ask why, you just tell them they don’t know - neither does anyone in the town/city whatever they’re in.
-
Lol thermite is my favorite oxidation & rust remover reaction
Ah yes, removes the rust, the object, and the table it was sitting on...
-
So a player that told you from beginning what he wants to do, which doesnt fit into your story, should they be forbiden to participate?
I never said anything even vaguely approaching that?
What do you even mean by "told me from the beginning what he wants to do"? If I'm prepping a fantasy campaign and one of my players tells me, "I'd kinda prefer we do something sci-fi" then I have no obligation to change my entire campaign because a player isn't happy with it. I might still do it, if I felt interested in running that and the rest of the table does too, but imo I'm well within my rights to tell him no.
If you mean that he wants a plotline of his own then I'd do my best to accommodate that, assuming it doesn't clash with the rest of the campaign horribly. If it does, then I'd just say that and offer alternatives if I can think of any. If I can't, then of course he can still play if he'd like.
-
How tf do I pronounce that*
-
Easy. He needs to roll 100 on a single d20 or the spell fails and creates a big neon sign above the player characters head that follows them everywhere and reads "annoying little shit"
-
How tf do I pronounce that*
I don't know if you're joking, but just for fun:
Press-T-digi-tay-shun -
The idea was to have some kind of urgency but only once the players were far enough to understand the basics of what was going on. To that end, the date was supposed to be vague so that the GM was free to say "you figured out that the ritual will happen right after summer ends – which is in less than a week".
Then he forgot that the timeframe was vague when I wrote the letter and told me to pick a date.
Unfortunately, this cut out a side plot where our party would've hired another party to hunt down some artifact. That artifact retroactively got downgraded to a red herring for time reasons.
On the other hand, we got an absolutely precious scene where the one party member who wasn't magic-affine and didn't want to be involved with any supernatural stuff had to ride an unnaturally fast six-legged half-demon horse in order to catch up with the bad guys.
Also, it cut down on all the "three wizards and a vintner have breakfast and discuss the state of the investigation" episodes. We had a lot of those.
On the other hand, we got an absolutely precious scene where the one party member who wasn’t magic-affine and didn’t want to be involved with any supernatural stuff had to ride an unnaturally fast six-legged half-demon horse in order to catch up with the bad guys.
Ardo still thinks that we should just leave this whole mess to the sun god's holy inquisition and get the fuck out of town, thank you very much.
