Irrational Hatreds in RPGs

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com
I always provide snacks and drinks for my home game, and sometimes full meals. If I were hosting any other event in my home, I would provide food and drinks for that, so I don't see why RPG night should be any different. Some of my players will bring food and drinks to share, or throw me a few bucks towards the refreshments I provide, which is great, but not really necessary.
 
I also hate Vancian magic, but I've finely found a way for my mind to make relative peace with it:

When I was in school, I would sometimes need to memorize formulas for math tests or chemistry tests or whatever, and as soon as the test was over, I would forget those formulas. So if I think of Vancian spells as being like those formulas, then it almost sort of just barely makes sense that a caster would forget a spell as soon as they use it.
 
Gronan of Simmerya said:
Reportedly an unpublished letter?

in other words, a fucking rumor.
Click to expand...

Published in Rateliff's book a dozen years ago and as far as I can tell not disputed; that's a little more than a rumor. But certainly a published letter and an interview you can go listen to is more than was acknowledged by some posters.

you know what I hate? People desperately sifting through somebody's work looking for flaws.
Click to expand...

I wasn't looking for any flaw in Tolkien's work, and I don't think anyone else was. But I have a very rational dislike for denying actual evidence.
 
Stan said:
I feel like everyone but the GM should provide snacks as a way to say thanks for making the extra effort to make the game possible.
Click to expand...
The issue is that as a GM, one is hosting the game, usually at their own home. That requires a decent amount of work to make sure everything is available. Chairs, table, books if necessary, and the time and effort to make sure everyone is having fun.

So what's wrong with the players, as a thank you for the amount of work that requires, to spring for some food? I always brought a gift, usually popcorn, to the groups if I was playing. And when I ran at my place, most people did the same for my table.
 
Stan said:
I feel like everyone but the GM should provide snacks as a way to say thanks for making the extra effort to make the game possible.
Click to expand...
I think the GM might or might not be exempt. But in the end, it's something to be decided on a case-by-case basis...
Some GMs are just too good at cooking to ever be exempt from providing the food:hehe:!
 
Magister said:
Is this really usual? If I have ever GM'd at home, it was only for immediate family.
Click to expand...

I GM @ my home because, in my group, I am the one with a large dining room with table big enough to accommodate eight people. Also no pets or roommates to distract us, and all my RPG stuff is already at my place. For us, it's the easiest situation.
 
Magister said:
Is this really usual? If I have ever GM'd at home, it was only for immediate family.
Click to expand...
Really? Wow. In my 35-ish years of running games, I've spent maybe 5 years running games outside of my own place. I always invited my friends to my house. And vice versa.

Now, if you're not hosting the game, but are running it, then I wouldn't argue with the host providing snacks. But if it's the GM's house, I would offer to bring snacks as a player.
 
Magister said:
Is this really usual? If I have ever GM'd at home, it was only for immediate family.
Click to expand...

It's always been standard that we game at the house of the person running the game.

I would consider GMing at a game store exempt from the obligations of being a good host, certainly.
 
E-Rocker said:
I GM @ my home because, in my group, I am the one with a large dining room with table big enough to accommodate eight people. Also no pets or roommates to distract us, and all my RPG stuff is already at my place. For us, it's the easiest situation.
Click to expand...

That might explain it for me; by the time I had a place large enough to host I also had pets for people to contend with. Or maybe I was too long in really small apartments and never adapted to a house with adequate space. My years of playing the most were at the university, where I lived too far off campus for it to be convenient for anyone else. After that I played some at one friend's house, who was GM sometimes, but he tended to host lots of friends, RPG and not, for various things so I didn't view it as usual, and I didn't live close enough for it to be a regular thing for me.
 
Oh. I really really hate games where the selling point/fiction suggests you can do something--I remember someone advertising their upcoming (early days KS) with a thing about flying through space with just YOU and magic, but the game didn't actually allow that. This is why I'm working on a game off and on that while its not "magic" so much as technology so advanced it LOOKS like magic. Want to fly through space on a winged armored lion and a glowing energy lance you blast ships out of the sky? Doable! Be a Space Dragon? Doable.

Humanity has mastered technology as thought and will--and even though they MOSTLY still look like us, they can take on forms they want, wrap themselves in armor and soar through the spaceways.

It's like taking Green Lantern/Lensmen to a mass point where all humanity is idealistic, shapers of the future of OTHER worlds. They don't interfere unless absolutely necessary. Shapeshift into an alien scientist and help them find a cure for a plague that's wiping out their species, subtly? Sure. Soar in looking like whatever they want and blast murdering space pirates/slavers out of the sky before they capture a species fleeing their dying world? Absolutely! I want Quantum webs/Singularity tech where they have sigils marking technology on otherwise human bodies (at least when defaulting to human form.)

Make love in the corona of a star? Have a family outing in the clouds of a gas giant? All the stuff I want in the game.
 
I hate non-Vancian magic.

I hate not having to select my spells in advance.

I hate having too many spells. Spells should be like HVAP rounds in WW2 gaming.
 
So, vancian magic works best if you use cards. Each card is a spell and you discard it when you cast it.

It does put me in mind of a pet peeve. Magic that is worse than just getting the skill and doing it the mundane way. Harry Potter's a big offender in this camp, the magic is almost always more complex and difficult than the muggle method.
 
Gronan of Simmerya said:
I hate having too many spells. Spells should be like HVAP rounds in WW2 gaming.
Click to expand...
So what is a Wizard supposed to do then? I never understood this. If a player wants to play a WIZARD, let them play a WIZARD.

I hate magic in general, but I'm not going to punish a player because they want to pew with their hands like they see in the comics, the various other novels and television/movies. All of which influenced D&D over the years.
 
E-Rocker said:
What is an HVAP round?
Click to expand...

TristramEvans said:
It's ammo for a 75mm tank gun.
Click to expand...

"High velocity armor piercing" rounds were an improvement for the Sherman tank late in WWII to use against Panther tanks but were in short supply, so tanks rarely had many of them. That seems analogous to preferring that wizards carry few but powerful spells.
 
Magister said:
That seems analogous to preferring that wizards carry few but powerful spells.
Click to expand...

Were spells in OD&D that much more powerful? I assumed they were the same as D&D

edit: Just looked and....nope, they are in fact, weaker.

so the "few but powerful" statement again, makes no sense.


Anyways, whatever, I guess I can't complain that people are taking the "irrational" part of the thread title so literally
 
Last edited:
Chris Brady said:
So what is a Wizard supposed to do then? I never understood this. If a player wants to play a WIZARD, let them play a WIZARD.

I hate magic in general, but I'm not going to punish a player because they want to pew with their hands like they see in the comics, the various other novels and television/movies. All of which influenced D&D over the years.
Click to expand...

Some of actually LIKE Dying Earth. Some of us like having to wait for the perfect moment. Not everyone shares my tastes but I have them, and they are mine. I've said before I've never played a magic user past 8th or 9th level because they get too many spells and become boring.
 
TristramEvans said:
so the "few but powerful" statement again, makes no sense.
Click to expand...

Well, powerful was my word; and I meant relative to lesser ammunition that was in more ample supply (although cantrips didn't exist, but magic-users could throw daggers). A lightning bolt or fireball could kill some pretty tough opponents (and sleep was a 1st level death spell against a lot of opponents), and those aren't the highest level spells from OD&D.

Edit: and Gronan in the next post says my understanding of his meaning was off, anyway.
 
Magister said:
"High velocity armor piercing" rounds were an improvement for the Sherman tank late in WWII to use against Panther tanks but were in short supply, so tanks rarely had many of them. That seems analogous to preferring that wizards carry few but powerful spells.
Click to expand...

Maybe, or maybe just "having to choose your moment" instead of "endless pew pew pew."
 
Similarly, if I'm playing WW2 I'd rather play early war than late war. Playing the Germans is way more interesting when my biggest gun is a 50 L40 or maybe a 75 L42 if I'm VERY lucky. I would rather play the Americans if it's late war because it's more challenging. And why I got rid of my Hundred Years War English army; it's too powerful.
 
More things I hate...

Drows

"Anti-Paladins" - the word itself. It's such a stupid, clunky, Gygaxian term.

The Wisdom stat in D&D - so badly named, so badly defined.

The constant mis-use of the terms "longswords" and "broadswords" in the hobby

Animals treated like nothing but vehicles

Games that introduce themselves by slagging off other games

The latest season of Stranger Things. It used to be a show that took place in the 80s. Now it's a show about the 80s.

This one is really f-ing specific: In Eden's Buffy The Vampire Slayer RPG, I hated that every character from the show was given the advantage: "Attractive", especially Willow and Xander. Yes, the actors were attractive of course, but in the context of the world of the show that makes no sense.

"Code of Honour" presented as a character flaw in a system.

Another pretty specific one: games based on an IP where you cannot play the main characters from the IP (this was one of the IndianaJones rpgs). Also games based on an IP where the character creation rules would never let you create the main characters in the IP, because of this weird notion that RPG charactrers have to start out sucking.

The fact that I'm never going to live long enough to run every game I want to run
 
Gronan of Simmerya said:
Maybe, or maybe just "having to choose your moment" instead of "endless pew pew pew."
Click to expand...
Assuming of course you've memorized the right spell. Which in my experience was akin to being able to read the DM's mind.

Don't get me wrong, you're very free to like what you like, I just wish I could understand why.
 
I hate the way non-combat and combat spells balance in 5e D&D. The non-combat stuff is weak and often severely nerfed though defensive spells like Shield are also pretty bad. Yet the damage spells are insanely powerful by comparison. I don't know, the whole thing feels badly off in play and the slot system doesn't really make it any better than the old memorization method because you still don't want to waste a 3d4 +3 never misses attack just to create a little darkness or climb a wall or something.
 
David Johansen said:
I hate the way non-combat and combat spells balance in 5e D&D. The non-combat stuff is weak and often severely nerfed though defensive spells like Shield are also pretty bad. Yet the damage spells are insanely powerful by comparison. I don't know, the whole thing feels badly off in play and the slot system doesn't really make it any better than the old memorization method because you still don't want to waste a 3d4 +3 never misses attack just to create a little darkness or climb a wall or something.
Click to expand...


I've always thought that in a world where magic was a known commodity, there should be far more practical spells, like those to help with farming, and other important tasks that a pseudo-medieval culture needs to survive.

Being able to turn invisible might be great for party pranks, but I can't help but think "Magic Fertilizer" or "Detect Birth Defect" would be in much higher demand.
 
TristramEvans said:
Were spells in OD&D that much more powerful? I assumed they were the same as D&D

edit: Just looked and....nope, they are in fact, weaker.

so the "few but powerful" statement again, makes no sense.


Anyways, whatever, I guess I can't complain that people are taking the "irrational" part of the thread title so literally
Click to expand...


In BECMI Magic Missile did 1d6 damage, which was a LOT more impressive. Other spells had some unique bits, not sure if more powerful or not but different. In TRUE Vancian magic (Dying Earth) spells were few and INCREDIBLY powerful if you weren't on the low end of the totem pole. I recall their Excellent Prismatic Spray or whatever wiping out an army in the first story.
 
I always liked the fact that magic users had to be careful with their spells, but enough players have objected that I gave up and came up with the following:

Cantrip rules for old school games.

Pick a spell you have memorised. You siphon off some of its energy to make a magical ranged attack. The damage type is the same as the spell (it must be a damaging spell - I'd probably insist on some kind of element based spell). Monster saves against spells.

Damage by siphoned spell level
1: d4
2: d6
3: d8
4: d10
5: d12


Have the magic user roll a d10 (or which ever die you prefer) when they use the cantrip. If they roll a 1 they lose the spell.

(If you want more fun have them make a save against spells and if they fail roll on some kind of magical mishap table).
 
Last edited:
Another option - just steal an idea from Symbaroum and give the magic-user a first level spell that lets them enchant 4+1 per level arrows that hover around them for a while. The magic user can use their action to direct one of those hovering arrows to fling itself at an enemy for 1d6 damage. Give the monster some kind of save rather than the magic user making at attack roll so it feels like magic.

(This is, mechanically, basically just spending a first level spell so the magic-user can upgrade from throwing darts to using a shortbow). But it satisfies somewhat the desire to be attacking with magic every turn.
 
Last edited:
TristramEvans said:
I'd just have magic cost HP.
Click to expand...
No one would ever use magic then. I'm pretty sure of that. It would increase the chance of character death and having to sit out.

To continue the Tank analogy, I see Cantrips like the little pintle mounted heavy machine guns that a crewman would use for anti-infantry use. You use it on the smaller, insignificant targets while saving your HVAPs for the big targets.
 
Chris Brady said:
No one would ever use magic then. I'm pretty sure of that. It would increase the chance of character death and having to sit out.
Click to expand...

It would be thematic, remove the need for memorizing spell as a balance option, it would keep magic as a strategic instead of "pew-pew" as Gronan describes it, and would balance out a fighter's need to get in close and take hits vs a wizard's ability to damage from afar.

Think of it this way - a spell costs a number of HP equal to its level. A caster's level ameliorates the HP cost of the spell (so a level 3 wizard could cast level 1 & 2 spells with no expenditure, and reduce the cost of level 6 spells to 3). The wizard would, after casting a higher-level spell require rest (like Merlyn?). And some spells would be beyond the reach still of lower levels, because it would literally kill them to channel that much energy. But, a wizard could sacrifice their HP for a well-placed coup-de-grace at any time. This suddenly makes the analogy to HVAP rounds very apt.

Wizards still increase in power as they grow in level, and magic comes with a simple risk-reward mechanism inherent without needing to add a new game mechanic (like "spell points").
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top