[012]
Quijotesca
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
I deleted the intro quote since it was a joke about the Jim Jones massacre. The page goes out of the way to establish that that\'s not what the expression is about so it was out of place and just plain confusing. Maybe there\'s an appropriate Ken Kesey quote that could be used instead.
ETA: And then I put it back because, eh, I think I misfired. Sorry.
ETA: And then I put it back because, eh, I think I misfired. Sorry.
to:
Eh, nothing. Sorry.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
I deleted the intro quote since it was a joke about the Jim Jones massacre. The page goes out of the way to establish that that\'s not what the expression is about so it was out of place and just plain confusing. Maybe there\'s an appropriate Ken Kesey quote that could be used instead.
to:
I deleted the intro quote since it was a joke about the Jim Jones massacre. The page goes out of the way to establish that that\\\'s not what the expression is about so it was out of place and just plain confusing. Maybe there\\\'s an appropriate Ken Kesey quote that could be used instead.
ETA: And then I put it back because, eh, I think I misfired. Sorry.
ETA: And then I put it back because, eh, I think I misfired. Sorry.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
I deleted the intro quote since it was a joke about the Jim Jones massacre. The page goes out of the way to establish that that\'s not what the expression is about so it was just out of place and just plain confusing. Maybe there\'s an appropriate Ken Kesey quote that could be used instead.
to:
I deleted the intro quote since it was a joke about the Jim Jones massacre. The page goes out of the way to establish that that\\\'s not what the expression is about so it was out of place and just plain confusing. Maybe there\\\'s an appropriate Ken Kesey quote that could be used instead.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
I deleted the intro quote since it was a joke about the Jim Jones massacre. The page goes out of the way to establish that\'s not what the expression is about so it was just out of place. Maybe there\'s an appropriate Ken Kesey quote that could be used instead.
to:
I deleted the intro quote since it was a joke about the Jim Jones massacre. The page goes out of the way to establish that that\\\'s not what the expression is about so it was just out of place and just plain confusing. Maybe there\\\'s an appropriate Ken Kesey quote that could be used instead.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Newsflash: Did you actually run the #\'s, in detail? Killing Dzarumazh is flat-out laughable for any remotely sane party of Changeling [=PCs=], even with an entire chronicle\'s worth of prep time. (And sure, go ahead, assemble your army of allies. Its not like he doesn\'t have his ow-... oh, wait, he does, and they\'re specifically listed as \
to:
Did you actually run the #\\\'s, in detail? Killing Dzarumazh is flat-out laughable for any remotely sane party of Changeling [=PCs=], even with an entire chronicle\\\'s worth of prep time. (And sure, go ahead, assemble your army of allies. Its not like he doesn\\\'t have his ow-... oh, wait, he does, and they\\\'re specifically listed as \\\"innumerable\\\".) Unless you are playing a chronicle where your players have access to nuclear weapons. Their sidebar is full of shit: the foe is not \\\'seemingly\\\' insurmountable, he is \\\'\\\'actually\\\'\\\' so.
As for your rebuttal against Unholy Splendor, you missed something. Notably, that the max amount of Willpower any PC can have is ten, but Dzarumazh has \\\'\\\'one hundred\\\'\\\' Glamour -- and Unholy Splendor in its higher form costs only 3 Glamour/turn. So, he spams 30 points of that for ten turns of Unholy Splendor, congrats: you\\\'re completely out of Willpower, and he\\\'s still got 70% of his mana pool. By the mechanics of the system, \\\'\\\'you have absolutely zero percent chance of beating this thing unless the DM deliberately has him not use all his powers\\\'\\\'. He fits the definition of CanonSue like few others. His other stats are likewise impossibly higher than any [=PCs=] can reach: its not merely that he has \\\'superhuman stats\\\', its that he has stats and abilities its mechanically impossible for player characters to compete with. Not to mention that using your initiative hax to deal in one hit is effectively pointless; the opposed die rool necessary to damage him is in \\\'vastly unlikely\\\' territory, and Lord knows he has enough health levels to soak any one hit. Your only hope of downing this thing is attrition, and that\\\'s not possibe when you\\\'re spending 99+% of your time in his stunlock aura.
Pretty much all of the other objections fall along the same lines: his \\\'limitations\\\' are not actually limitations. Sure, he only has access to his full physical stats in his warform, but why in the name of God would he ever fight a PC party in anything \\\'\\\'else\\\'\\\'? Its not like you can prevent him from shifting into it!
So, the \\\'its like great wyrms in D&D!\\\' objection doesn\\\'t fly: Great Wyrms might be [=CR26=] creatures, but D&D rules allow for the existence of level 26 PC parties. In [=CtL=], on the other hand, there\\\'s a hard stat cap for player characters, and its well short of the league where you can take this thing on.
As for your rebuttal against Unholy Splendor, you missed something. Notably, that the max amount of Willpower any PC can have is ten, but Dzarumazh has \\\'\\\'one hundred\\\'\\\' Glamour -- and Unholy Splendor in its higher form costs only 3 Glamour/turn. So, he spams 30 points of that for ten turns of Unholy Splendor, congrats: you\\\'re completely out of Willpower, and he\\\'s still got 70% of his mana pool. By the mechanics of the system, \\\'\\\'you have absolutely zero percent chance of beating this thing unless the DM deliberately has him not use all his powers\\\'\\\'. He fits the definition of CanonSue like few others. His other stats are likewise impossibly higher than any [=PCs=] can reach: its not merely that he has \\\'superhuman stats\\\', its that he has stats and abilities its mechanically impossible for player characters to compete with. Not to mention that using your initiative hax to deal in one hit is effectively pointless; the opposed die rool necessary to damage him is in \\\'vastly unlikely\\\' territory, and Lord knows he has enough health levels to soak any one hit. Your only hope of downing this thing is attrition, and that\\\'s not possibe when you\\\'re spending 99+% of your time in his stunlock aura.
Pretty much all of the other objections fall along the same lines: his \\\'limitations\\\' are not actually limitations. Sure, he only has access to his full physical stats in his warform, but why in the name of God would he ever fight a PC party in anything \\\'\\\'else\\\'\\\'? Its not like you can prevent him from shifting into it!
So, the \\\'its like great wyrms in D&D!\\\' objection doesn\\\'t fly: Great Wyrms might be [=CR26=] creatures, but D&D rules allow for the existence of level 26 PC parties. In [=CtL=], on the other hand, there\\\'s a hard stat cap for player characters, and its well short of the league where you can take this thing on.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Newsflash: Did you actually run the #\'s, in detail? Killing Dzarumazh is flat-out laughable for any remotely sane party of Changeling PCs, even with an entire chronicle\'s worth of prep time. Unless you are playing a chronicle where your players have access to nuclear weapons. Their sidebar is full of shit: the foe is not \'seemingly\' insurmountable, he is \'\'actually\'\' so.
to:
Newsflash: Did you actually run the #\\\'s, in detail? Killing Dzarumazh is flat-out laughable for any remotely sane party of Changeling [=PCs=], even with an entire chronicle\\\'s worth of prep time. (And sure, go ahead, assemble your army of allies. Its not like he doesn\\\'t have his ow-... oh, wait, he does, and they\\\'re specifically listed as \\\"innumerable\\\".) Unless you are playing a chronicle where your players have access to nuclear weapons. Their sidebar is full of shit: the foe is not \\\'seemingly\\\' insurmountable, he is \\\'\\\'actually\\\'\\\' so.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
As for your rebuttal against Unholy Splendor, you missed something. Notably, that the max amount of Willpower any PC can have is ten, but Dzarumazh has \'\'one hundred\'\' Glamour -- and Unholy Splendor in its higher form costs only 3 Glamour/turn. So, he spams 30 points of that for ten turns of Unholy Splendor, congrats: you\'re completely out of Willpower, and he\'s still got 70% of his mana pool. By the mechanics of the system, \'\'you have absolutely zero percent chance of beating this thing unless the DM deliberately has him not use all his powers\'\'. He fits the definition of CanonSue like few others. His other stats are likewise impossibly higher than any [=PCs=] can reach: its not merely that he has \'superhuman stats\', its that he has stats and abilities its mechanically impossible for player characters to compete with.
to:
As for your rebuttal against Unholy Splendor, you missed something. Notably, that the max amount of Willpower any PC can have is ten, but Dzarumazh has \\\'\\\'one hundred\\\'\\\' Glamour -- and Unholy Splendor in its higher form costs only 3 Glamour/turn. So, he spams 30 points of that for ten turns of Unholy Splendor, congrats: you\\\'re completely out of Willpower, and he\\\'s still got 70% of his mana pool. By the mechanics of the system, \\\'\\\'you have absolutely zero percent chance of beating this thing unless the DM deliberately has him not use all his powers\\\'\\\'. He fits the definition of CanonSue like few others. His other stats are likewise impossibly higher than any [=PCs=] can reach: its not merely that he has \\\'superhuman stats\\\', its that he has stats and abilities its mechanically impossible for player characters to compete with. Not to mention that using your initiative hax to deal in one hit is effectively pointless; the opposed die rool necessary to damage him is in \\\'vastly unlikely\\\' territory, and Lord knows he has enough health levels to soak any one hit. Your only hope of downing this thing is attrition, and that\\\'s not possibe when you\\\'re spending 99+% of your time in his stunlock aura.
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
So, the \'its like great wyrms in D&D!\' objection doesn\'t fly: Great Wyrms might be CR26 creatures, but D&D rules allow for the existence of level 26 PC parties. In CtL, on the other hand, there\'s a hard stat cap for player characters, and its well short of the league where you can take this thing on.
to:
So, the \\\'its like great wyrms in D&D!\\\' objection doesn\\\'t fly: Great Wyrms might be [=CR26=] creatures, but D&D rules allow for the existence of level 26 PC parties. In [=CtL=], on the other hand, there\\\'s a hard stat cap for player characters, and its well short of the league where you can take this thing on.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
As for your rebuttal against Unholy Splendor, you missed something. Notably, that the max amount of Willpower any PC can have is ten, but Dzarumazh has \'\'one hundred\'\' Glamour -- and Unholy Splendor in its higher form costs only 3 Glamour/turn. So, he spams 30 points of that for ten turns of Unholy Splendor, congrats: you\'re completely out of Willpower, and he\'s still got 70% of his mana pool. By the mechanics of the system, \'\'you have absolutely zero percent chance of beating this thing unless the DM deliberately has him not use all his powers\'\'. He fits the definition of CanonSue like few others. His other stats are likewise impossibly higher than any PCs can reach: its not merely that he has \'superhuman stats\', its that he has stats and abilities its mechanically impossible for player characters to compete with.
to:
As for your rebuttal against Unholy Splendor, you missed something. Notably, that the max amount of Willpower any PC can have is ten, but Dzarumazh has \\\'\\\'one hundred\\\'\\\' Glamour -- and Unholy Splendor in its higher form costs only 3 Glamour/turn. So, he spams 30 points of that for ten turns of Unholy Splendor, congrats: you\\\'re completely out of Willpower, and he\\\'s still got 70% of his mana pool. By the mechanics of the system, \\\'\\\'you have absolutely zero percent chance of beating this thing unless the DM deliberately has him not use all his powers\\\'\\\'. He fits the definition of CanonSue like few others. His other stats are likewise impossibly higher than any [=PCs=] can reach: its not merely that he has \\\'superhuman stats\\\', its that he has stats and abilities its mechanically impossible for player characters to compete with.
Changed line(s) 5 from:
n
Pretty much all of the other objections fall along the same lines: his \'limitations\' are not actually limitations. Sure, he only has access to his full physical stats in his warform, but why in the name of God would he ever fight a PC party in anything \'\'else\'\'? Its not like you can prevent him from shifting into it!
to:
Pretty much all of the other objections fall along the same lines: his \\\'limitations\\\' are not actually limitations. Sure, he only has access to his full physical stats in his warform, but why in the name of God would he ever fight a PC party in anything \\\'\\\'else\\\'\\\'? Its not like you can prevent him from shifting into it!
So, the \\\'its like great wyrms in D&D!\\\' objection doesn\\\'t fly: Great Wyrms might be CR26 creatures, but D&D rules allow for the existence of level 26 PC parties. In CtL, on the other hand, there\\\'s a hard stat cap for player characters, and its well short of the league where you can take this thing on.
So, the \\\'its like great wyrms in D&D!\\\' objection doesn\\\'t fly: Great Wyrms might be CR26 creatures, but D&D rules allow for the existence of level 26 PC parties. In CtL, on the other hand, there\\\'s a hard stat cap for player characters, and its well short of the league where you can take this thing on.
