Kintobor Posted June 26, 2013 Posted June 26, 2013 That's not my concern. Make him a toad!!! (Or at least a frog. ) ~Insectoid Aristocrat I thought your schtick was newts? Quote
Dannylonglegs Posted June 26, 2013 Posted June 26, 2013 I thought your schtick was newts? I'm branching out... It's all amphibians now... and plus, who would want to see Sorrow newt?!?! Yes, it was all just to make that joke. ~Insectoid Aristocrat Quote
Endgame Posted June 26, 2013 Posted June 26, 2013 Hey, he did have a kid at one point or another. Quote
Dannylonglegs Posted June 26, 2013 Posted June 26, 2013 Hey, he did have a kid at one point or another. But then he started rotting... ~Insectoid Aristocrat Quote
joeshmoe554 Posted June 26, 2013 Posted June 26, 2013 I wouldn't mind if you nullified some of my advantages, as long as they're built into the enemies and not built into me. (As in, takes away Encouraged on rolls of damage, etc.) Thus is how the game flows. I've considered it, but I didn't want to change any of the fights too drastically. I spent a lot of time deciding the party and every member brings something to the table to make the party better as a whole, it just makes balancing the battles a little more interesting. Quote
Dannylonglegs Posted June 26, 2013 Posted June 26, 2013 Question: If a sleeping target is bleeding, will it get a chance to wake up?' ~Insectoid Aristocrat Quote
JimBee Posted June 26, 2013 Posted June 26, 2013 How does the asleep-effect work exactly? Does an enemy wake up if they're targeted, or does the attack have to connect (i.e. do damage)? Quote
CMP Posted June 26, 2013 Posted June 26, 2013 How does the asleep-effect work exactly? Does an enemy wake up if they're targeted, or does the attack have to connect (i.e. do damage)? It says 'when attacked', but I guess that's ambiguous. Question: If a sleeping target is bleeding, will it get a chance to wake up?' I don't think so. Quote
Dannylonglegs Posted June 26, 2013 Posted June 26, 2013 I don't think so. Thanks. Oh, and while we're on the subject of nigh-impossible riddles, Answer me this: what's in my pocket? ~Insectoid Aristocrat Quote
CMP Posted June 26, 2013 Posted June 26, 2013 Thanks. Oh, and while we're on the subject of nigh-impossible riddles, Answer me this: what's in my pocket? ~Insectoid Aristocrat You're probably overthinking it. My riddles aren't very profound. Quote
JimBee Posted June 26, 2013 Posted June 26, 2013 It says 'when attacked', but I guess that's ambiguous. Yeah, and there are several moves which "connect" but don't necessarily do damage. I'm going to count a "Damage" roll as waking up for now then, and I can change it if it turns out to be wrong. Quote
Flare Posted June 26, 2013 Posted June 26, 2013 You're probably overthinking it. My riddles aren't very profound. Yeah I think I have the answer but I'm not sure Quote
Dannylonglegs Posted June 26, 2013 Posted June 26, 2013 Mwahahahaha!!! Bwahahahaha!!! AHAHAHAHA!!! I solved the impossible riddle! Time to go to bed. ~Insectoid Aristocrat Quote
joeshmoe554 Posted June 26, 2013 Posted June 26, 2013 (edited) Mwahahahaha!!! Bwahahahaha!!! AHAHAHAHA!!! I solved the impossible riddle! Time to go to bed. Bravo. I know the answer now and I still don't get it. Edited June 26, 2013 by joeshmoe554 Quote
Dannylonglegs Posted June 26, 2013 Posted June 26, 2013 Bravo. I know the answer now and I still don't get it. Bound to one hand and the other, can't be torn asunder (without being the hulk or superman or something.) is a savoir (by restraining criminals) and is a friend of a hutch... which I guess means it restrains your arms like a hutch restrains small animals. ~Insectoid Aristocrat Quote
Vash the Stampede Posted June 26, 2013 Posted June 26, 2013 Bound to one hand and the other, can't be torn asunder (without being the hulk or superman or something.) is a savoir (by restraining criminals) and is a friend of a hutch... which I guess means it restrains your arms like a hutch restrains small animals. ~Insectoid Aristocrat For the hutch part, I believe it means prison. Quote
Scorpiox Posted June 26, 2013 Posted June 26, 2013 Well, never thought I'd actually be saying this, but... My Scrolls and Lens? Complete waste of time and money. I can't believe I tried to buy even more before 66. What was I thinking?! I don't know. I found them pretty useful for working as a team in #53. This is a serious point, though, slapping immunities on an enemy shouldn't become the normal course of action when faced with a scroll mage. Negating their entire strategy - is that not a tad unfair? I doubt a QM would ever add something such as 'Ignores Aura' or 'Cannot be stolen from' to a foe. Thoughts? Quote
joeshmoe554 Posted June 26, 2013 Posted June 26, 2013 For the hutch part, I believe it means prison. Ah, I was thinking of a cupboard with drawers. Quote
Flare Posted June 26, 2013 Posted June 26, 2013 This is a serious point, though, slapping immunities on an enemy shouldn't become the normal course of action when faced with a scroll mage. Negating their entire strategy - is that not a tad unfair? I doubt a QM would ever add something such as 'Ignores Aura' or 'Cannot be stolen from' to a foe. Thoughts? Kintobor had an enemy whose loot was not stealable. And I agree, its really not fair. *cough*Endgame*COUGH* Quote
CMP Posted June 26, 2013 Posted June 26, 2013 This is a serious point, though, slapping immunities on an enemy shouldn't become the normal course of action when faced with a scroll mage. Negating their entire strategy - is that not a tad unfair? I doubt a QM would ever add something such as 'Ignores Aura' or 'Cannot be stolen from' to a foe. Thoughts? In small amounts it's good for curbing the total, instant decimation of the enemy team. In large numbers it turns battles into a grind. Quote
Palathadric Posted June 26, 2013 Posted June 26, 2013 This is a serious point, though, slapping immunities on an enemy shouldn't become the normal course of action when faced with a scroll mage. Negating their entire strategy - is that not a tad unfair? Absolutely. Quote
Flare Posted June 26, 2013 Posted June 26, 2013 "What do you know, even the demon stands by me." Shouldn't Pretzel be expecting treachery of some sort? After all, a demon agreeing with a most holy man is very unlikely Quote
Palathadric Posted June 26, 2013 Posted June 26, 2013 No! He's fully convinced that he has power over the demon and the demon is forced to submit to him. Quote
Flare Posted June 26, 2013 Posted June 26, 2013 No! He's fully convinced that he has power over the demon and the demon is forced to submit to him. Oh, I see. How humorous Quote
Vash the Stampede Posted June 26, 2013 Posted June 26, 2013 No! He's fully convinced that he has power over the demon and the demon is forced to submit to him. Oh, I see. How humorous I know right? Backstabbing in 3, 2, 1. I would've thought that if Pretzel did get a demon to submit to him he'd kill it on the spot rather than keep as a servant, but hey, it's peaceful right now and I don't want to spoil it. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.