• 0 Posts
  • 337 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: June 21st, 2023
  • cryptiod137@lemmy.worldtoThe Armed Gay Agenda@lemmy.blahaj.zone•Please do not.English
    3·
    3 days ago

    It was in Louisiana, there are vaguely similar cases from few years ago, which is making it harder to find the one I’m referring to. This one was from the 80s.

    Nevermind I found it:

    https://casetext.com/case/landry-v-ascension-parish-school-bd#:~:text=In Landry v. Ascension Parish School Board%2C 415,of a teacher on a finding of incompetency

    Both teacher and student were originally convicted of aggrivated assault, teacher was eventually acquitted by the state supreme court.

    Similar cases happen somewhat frequently. Without context, all of a sudden having a gun appear can make you look like the aggressor. It’s a very nuanced topic, although that’s probably for a good reason.

    Depending on the jurisdiction, other evidence like cameras, and disparity between you and the aggressor, you might just be able to whip it out like a rapper with “lil” in thier name.

    Conversely, someone seeing the corner of it when you reach up to grab something from the top shelf at the grocery store might get you arrested and stripped of your ability to carry.

    I know there must be some kind of language that would work there, but I’m really not sure what is it would be. “We won’t take this lying down” or “It will be better for you if this ends peacefully” sound good to me, but might not to a jury.

  • cryptiod137@lemmy.worldtoThe Armed Gay Agenda@lemmy.blahaj.zone•Please do not.English
    4·
    3 days ago

    showing you’re armed as intimidation, they’re as good as any other.

    IANAL BIPONTV

    The circumstances of your concealed firearm not being concealed have to amount to “Imminent threat of great bodily harm or loss of life”.

    Revealing you have a gun, placing your hand on where it is, even “printing” as in it being visible under your clothing, has been considered Brandishing, sometimes a felony and likely a “gun crime”.

    Specifically, trying to intimidate is very much illegal, so certianly don’t put it like that, lol.

    Circumstances may get you out of jail, maybe even with your rights intact, but even showing your gun after being chased with a bat has been ruled aggrivated assault.

  • cryptiod137@lemmy.worldtoRPGMemes @ttrpg.network• English
    02·
    7 days ago

    Your using a bad rule most people don’t know about, which leads to a lot of bad outcomes, from a source a lot of tables won’t have.

    I think it’s truly best for the game to just not use this rule. As in, it’s dumb. The designers clearly agreed, given they didn’t bring this rule forward, but did bring the diving into liquid rule off the same page. TCoE 170.

    This rule breaks peoples intuition of how they expect falling objects to behave. It’s harder to dodge a larger falling thing, and that it would do more damage. And of course easier to dodge a smaller falling thing, that would do less damage. Object still follow that rule, per the improvized damage rules, but for some reason creatures don’t? If you take that farther, at some point you’d have to put a stop to it, or else you’d end up ruling it’s a DC15 to dogde a city sized creature creature landing on you. So, where is that line?

    If I had known ahead of time that we were using that rule, I wouldn’t have done the above combo. If I wanted to something similar in this scenario, I’d use conjure animals to drop 8 giant owls on top of the BBEG, because size doesn’t matter with this rule. You rolled one 16, but you still have to roll 7 more times to dodge the other creatures falling on you. That’s a potential 80d6 (8*20d6 split between the creature and the BBEG).

    In the brontosaurus scenario as above, I would argue the falling player has advantage as a sort of unseen attacker, which means your rolling that saving throw at disadvantage. And most high(er) CR creatures have low dex mods. Doing the math here, this will work 84% of the time. Even if there dex mod is +5, it will still work 70% of the time. Even without advantage, 60%. It won’t be enough damage on to kill everything, but on average you can still kill some creatures up to CR12.

    RAW, with only 1 player making 1 attempt with, it’s going to work out most of the time. You can say “you fools, I rolled a 16” all you like, but that only potentially saves your BBEG from the worst version of this combo. That’s without players debuffing dex saves through something like hex, using multi conjure spells, or trying multiple times.

    Imagine how you would feel if your players did this to every one of your boss encounters, or even just your BBEG. I don’t think you would feel very respected at that point. I know I wouldn’t.

    I’ve never met a player at a table who knows about this rule, the community clearly doesn’t know about this rule, hence the above meme, and the insect plague meme recently, and the old fairy/polymorph memes. Odds are this is going to be a surprise for one party or another, usually both. And it won’t be a fun surprise for either. I’m sure you’ve gone over this niche rule with your tables, but I find it much more likely that players expect to work like described in all these memes and posts, and yeah, they are gonna be mad when it doesn’t work like they would expect it to.

    That’s why I’m telling you to not use these rules at all, to just avoid the whole concept that has been problematic for the entire history of the edition. Otherwise the optimal build for every charecter is to get as many 3rd level spells slots as they can.

  • cryptiod137@lemmy.worldtoRPGMemes @ttrpg.network• English
    02·
    8 days ago

    • That’s what all the new content for the next 10 years will be based on. The old core rules are still there, but everything new will be based on the new books. That’s a lot like saying not everyone will be playing a sequel, which is true, but the community will shift over to it in time. The new PHB is there fasting selling book ever, so that gonna be pretty fast. Especially once more new content comes out and is incompatible with the old rules

    • I don’t care about your moral argument here, even if I agree with your stance, that’s not what I’m here for. If your stance is that strong, I would recommend leaving DnD behind and moving to Pathfinder or another alternative, otherwise every new discussion will be covering materials you refuse to consume (for completely understandable reasons). Your players are going to want to something from the new rules at some point, and you will have to be the bad guy there. Even by being here and discussing the game, you are consuming the new rules and driving engagement with them.

    • Ok? The new DMG is out. This rule is not in there.

    • I find that unlikely. Everyone has the free rules, and a lot of the DMG content is in the free rules. You’d have to find some way of doing encounter math, which the free rules has, but I’m sure a lot of paper players have the DMG, even if just for that.

    • They updated falling in the new PHB, including adding a DC15 (Athletics) or (Acrobatics) to change a fall into a dive when falling into a liquid to take half damage. Your telling me they couldn’t have added a very similar rule, or even added onto that section to include falling onto other creatures if they wanted to?

    Your right, all of this doesn’t matter. This rule takes the fun out of dropping something big onto someone as size doesn’t matter for fall damage. Players might as well drop themselves onto the BBEG, same effect. You killed my fun, so I’m not participating with you.

    If a simple nope ticks you off that much, I’m not sure who you could play with. Do you remember every rule interaction off the top of your head? Never get anything wrong? I play with players and DMs of vastly varying skill and experience levels and everyone gets something wrong every session. If someone corrects them and they snap about respect, whether DM or player, that’s a bridge too far and we would all be having words afterwards, if it didn’t derail the session right then and there.

    Respect is something which is earned and goes both ways. Saying your rule is law like your Aku doesn’t seem very respectful.

  • cryptiod137@lemmy.worldtoRPGMemes @ttrpg.network• English
    14·
    8 days ago

    First of all, lol, we are probably not very compatible.

    Secondly, they are literally outdated in an official capacity. I find they are improved for the most part, but have fun being so self-righteous about them.

    Thirdly, no, they have improvised damage rules, which they specifically list large objects falling on players as examples. Improvised damage under Combat in chapter 8.

    That rule was optional in an add-on book most tables won’t have, and didn’t get brought forward into the new core rules, unlike the other optional rules. There’s probably a good reason for that.