|
8 months ago ::
Oct 03, 2012 - 1:59PM
#21
|
Date Joined:
Sep 17, 2012
|
Keep in mind, my ruling on the lizardmen was based on the idea (posted by Iserith) that it WAS in established lore that they were cold-blooded.
In my games I wouldn't see many reasons to change a creatures biology just to accomodate a players plan to kill them. If my players are incapable of coming up with an alternate plan when the first one didn't work, then we'd be better off playing a simple series of battles than roleplaying a whole campaign. That's fine too.
Even cool plans can fail, or be off the mark completly. I suppose in this case I haven't seen any plan that is cool enough for me to change the lizardman (or dragon or beholder) biology. Since I would have ruled initially that the lizardmen ARE coldblooded, the previously mentioned plan to cast a ritual that subjected them to cold weather WOULD have worked. If I had ruled initially that they were warmblooded, then the ritual would NOT have worked, and the players could have tried something else.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 03, 2012 - 2:07PM
#22
|
Date Joined:
Sep 11, 2008
|
 Warm or cold-blooded would be an important detail regarding use of infravision and tolerance to climate change for example. If your party was using infravision and cold-blooded lizard-folk are holding still against the walls of a cave they would be room temperature and invisible. If you cast a cold spell on cold-blooded lizard folk they should be vulnerable to it. Maybe not by doing more damage but maybe it causes them to go into a coma like sleep. Cold-blooded lizard folk could also probably go without food a lot longer than if they were warm-blooded.  What do the Lizard-folk value in their society? Is it egalitarian, valuing prowess in hunting and providing for the entire tribe? What about a fishing contest? That could be a fun mini-game. Is it social dominance, the biggest and strongest get the most food/females? How about a bluffing competition where they brag with a lizard-folk champion about the most outrageous thing they can think of doing until the other calls their bluff and they are forced to prove themselves? It could be a right of passage that all lizard-folk go through to prove they have come of age. Defeat a wild creature. Swimming beyond the horizon to an island and retrieving one red seashell,a variety which only appears on that beach.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 03, 2012 - 2:59PM
#23
|
Date Joined:
Jul 21, 2004
|
I suppose in this case I haven't seen any plan that is cool enough for me to change the lizardman (or dragon or beholder) biology.
That's the key, as I see it: how cool does an idea have to be? Who decides that? As this is an adventure game, everyone involved is beholden to two causes: coolness and challenge. My players regularly come up with cool ideas that short-circuit the challenge I or the game intended for them. There's some indication that if I went with the first ideas they tried, that they'd walk right through everything, and even enjoy it as much as if they'd had to deal with the consequences of rolling dice. But, on the flip side, if I hindered or blocked every idea they came up with, or make the risks of trying the ideas too high, they'd be challenged, but wouldn't find the game particularly cool.
There's a balancing act. But, unless one has immense confidence that the challenge they designed is cool enough, there's a good chance it's bland compared to a player idea and expectations. And accepting, dealing with and adding to those ideas can carry longterm benefit for little cost, even if a particular challenge becomes suddenly easier.
So, in general, unless there's an overwhelmingly good reason not to, allow players to establish little details like this when they need them. It's "Yes, and..." again, which incidentally also means that players shouldn't get to invalidate previously established facts (such as stating that cold-blooded lizardmen would be dim-witted, when they've been shown not to be).
[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 03, 2012 - 7:42PM
#24
|
Date Joined:
Jun 25, 2009
|
This thread is a primary example of why I take issue with the solutions suggested on this board. As soon as evildungeonmaster provided his own methods as an answer, he was immediately hounded with post after post insisting that his way was bad.
My username should actually read: Lunar Savage (damn you WotC!)
*Tips top hat, adjusts monocle, and walks away with cane* and yes, that IS Mr. Peanut laying unconscious on the curb.
http://asylumjournals.tumblr.com/
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 03, 2012 - 8:24PM
#25
|
|
|
This thread is a primary example of why I take issue with the solutions suggested on this board. As soon as evildungeonmaster provided his own methods as an answer, he was immediately hounded with post after post insisting that his way was bad.
His solution was critiqued. If we can't critique each other's ideas, what is the point of this forum?
Now, maybe it was critiqued a little harshly, but he started it with his absurd dragon scales/beholder examples.
And, I think it is a good solution, and taking issue with the point simply because of how it is presented doesn't really make sense.
For example, I was recently playing in a game where we had a (my previous) character turned to stone by a peacockatrice. My (backup) character had a cool plan, however it required a hunk of limestone or some other calcitic rock, which he aimed to source from the previous character. So, the DM just said "ok, it's whatever you need it to be," my backup character carefully carved off a few chunks of limestone from my petrified character's pith helmet, and proceeded with the plan. The plan worked, and it made for a fun and cool scene (one which, by the way, involved a few d20 rolls as a kind of skill challenge).
But what if, tucked somewhere in some book written by a guy in a cube in the Wizards head office, it said that when a character is petrified like that, he is turned to granite, not limestone? Would we deny the possibility of some creative McGyvering fun, and the opportunity for a cool scene, just because of what someone at Wizards wrote? Or, would it be better to simply hand-wave the discrepancy and allow the rule of cool to apply? On that question, I'm definitely in the latter camp.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 03, 2012 - 8:36PM
#26
|
Date Joined:
Jun 25, 2009
|
This thread is a primary example of why I take issue with the solutions suggested on this board. As soon as evildungeonmaster provided his own methods as an answer, he was immediately hounded with post after post insisting that his way was bad.
His solution was critiqued. If we can't critique each other's ideas, what is the point of this forum?
Now, maybe it was critiqued a little harshly, but he started it with his absurd dragon scales/beholder examples.
And, I think it is a good solution, and taking issue with the point simply because of how it is presented doesn't really make sense.
For example, I was recently playing in a game where we had a (my previous) character turned to stone by a peacockatrice. My (backup) character had a cool plan, however it required a hunk of limestone or some other calcitic rock, which he aimed to source from the previous character. So, the DM just said "ok, it's whatever you need it to be," my backup character carefully carved off a few chunks of limestone from my petrified character's pith helmet, and proceeded with the plan. The plan worked, and it made for a fun and cool scene (one which, by the way, involved a few d20 rolls as a kind of skill challenge).
But what if, tucked somewhere in some book written by a guy in a cube in the Wizards head office, it said that when a character is petrified like that, he is turned to granite, not limestone? Would we deny the possibility of some creative McGyvering fun, and the opportunity for a cool scene, just because of what someone at Wizards wrote? Or, would it be better to simply hand-wave the discrepancy and allow the rule of cool to apply? On that question, I'm definitely in the latter camp.
I'm of the camp that the players should come up with a cool plan based around information the DM decides about the world. It requires more creativity and critical thinking, IMO. It's just far too easy to let them come up with any plan and finding a way to roll with it.
While it's fine to critique, is it really necessary or okay to repeat or critique it after evildungeonmaster said:
"Those are both examples the player sitting beside me came up with on their own.
I'm cool with my DM style/skillz, since we don't play together perhaps you could find it in yourself to do the same?"
And was iserith's statements of "I pity your players" really necessary? I thought we had all agreed to keep it civil?
My username should actually read: Lunar Savage (damn you WotC!)
*Tips top hat, adjusts monocle, and walks away with cane* and yes, that IS Mr. Peanut laying unconscious on the curb.
http://asylumjournals.tumblr.com/
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 03, 2012 - 10:26PM
#27
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2011
|
I think there was a fundamental misunderstanding of what was meant in the example. Evildungeonmaster said this: Keep in mind, my ruling on the lizardmen was based on the idea (posted by Iserith) that it WAS in established lore that they were cold-blooded.
But we have this statement by iserith:
Stealing their thunder on something so easy to give up, something so inconsequential to the game or to the DM. Something that'll make them feel great for coming up with a good plan that works, but you just can't do it because someone, somewhere may have written in a book that it wasn't so.
So, evildungeonmaster meant that he wouldn't modify established lore, meaning lore that the group had already accepted. Iserith thought he meant that he would never go against anything written in any manual ever. This seems like a pretty extreme position that not very many people would hold, and kind of ironic in a post criticizing extreme examples.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 04, 2012 - 12:27AM
#28
|
Date Joined:
May 12, 2009
|
I wouldn't define the bloodedness of Lizardmen, until it came up as an interesting issue.
If players had a cool idea, I'd hear it out before saying yes or no. I'd prefer to say yes, but if they were changing the lore as they previously understood it, simply for an advantage, then I'd likely say no. Of course my players might make assumptions and be wrong too. How would they know the bloodedness of Lizardmen? They should ask a Lizardman! It's probably not something taught in Fighter 101 or Cleric Basics.
Cool challenges - undergo initiation in the way of the Lizardfolk. Give up all equipment and armed with only spears hunt the great Dekubeast! Capture it's head to bring honour to the Lizardfolk's anscestors. To reach the beast you must traverse the Black Swamp, avoiding the quicksand, giant mosquitos and other natural perils. And you must identify the Red-eyed Orchid from which a poison can be made that significantly weakens the Dekubeast. Good luck!
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 04, 2012 - 1:04AM
#29
|
Date Joined:
Jan 11, 2007
|
First question:
Are Lizardmen Coldblooded or Warmblooded? Discuss.
Second question:
How can the players gain the respect of the Lizardmen Tribe?
The PC's are seeking information about a necromancer in the area. The clues will lead them into the swamp, where I will have them encounter a tribe of lizardmen. The players will need to ask the tribe for information and more clues, but the tribe will refuse to give out any information until the PCs "prove themselves". What sort of ways could the party prove themselves worthy and gain the respect of the Lizardmen? I was thinking they would have to beat one of the lizardmen champions in a duel, but what about other non-combat ideas? Something like a Trial of Fortitude or a Trial of Wisdom. Thoughts?
Note: as of now, I have the Lizardmen neutral and NOT involved in the Necromancer's activities. However, I'm open to interesting plot twists.
I'd like the responses to be edition-neutral, but I am tentatively running this as a D&D-Next playtest adventure.
Thanks!
I would have suggested that a Lizardman is cold-bloodied. But as others have mentioned there doesn't appear to be any text stating this. I'm basing my assumption about lizardmen, from what I know about reptiles. Truly, I'm not sure it really matters.
The second question will have to wait for another day, as it looks a bit more involved.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 04, 2012 - 1:59AM
#30
|
|
|
From why I remember, D&D Lore establishes lizardfolk as placing grate value on survival, survival of the individual and survival of the tribe. They also value strength which is often abused by evil creatures that use it to browbeat lizardfolk in becoming their footfolk. After all, survival is important and if raiding a few soft-skins was required to get that black dragon of your back, so be it. Besides those soft-skins are too weak to keep you out, they deserve it anyway  Some time ago I had setup something similar. The lizardfolk in question were a spiritual matriarchal society that had drafted several kobold clans as their servants/slaves. As a result they treated small sized characters as servants, and were really respectful towards priests and females (assuming they could recognize them). The PCs could earn their gratitude in a hunting skill challenge. The more dangerous the prey they catched the better. If the PCs were up to it, they could even opt to deal with a very troublesome hydra that was beyond the lizardfolks' ability to deal with. Finding it was a challenge, killing it even more. As for the cold bloodedness of lizardfolk, there is no biological reason for either warm or cold bloodedness. Unless I am misremembering things (or they changed their opinion again) scientist are pretty convinced dinosaurs were warmblooded, so there is no reason to believe lizardfolk could not be. Arguments could be made for sapience to develop, warmbloodedness would be a great boon. Mind you, it hardly matters unless your adventure is set in a temperate environment or your PCs can do something about the weather. Even then, D&D is a world of magic and anything goes. They might even have their own unique biology in this regards
|
|
|
