8,380
edits
Changes
→What does the hallway full of runes actually do?
::Agreed mostly. A class that can teleport probably wins the hallway if it can see the end and skip the traps because it has bypassed them and moved on. Being able to run away is not the same as being able to get past the encounter though, and in cases where escape is trivial but moving forward is not, I would argue it is a loss. Which of those fit those criteria in the SGT is a good question. - [[User:Tarkisflux|TarkisFlux]] 03:32, September 28, 2009 (UTC)
::: How long is the hallway?
::: IMO it a loss, a using wand of invisibility and a scroll of silence could get you by most low-level encounter. Making say, a human paragon a wizard-level class (it not), a character should be able to defeat the encounter not avoid it. Also some encounter cannot be avoided, like a animated statue ready to crush the nearby town (Cr 5) if you avoid it you win? Nah it going to raze the town. The key of the treasure of GAHHAHAHLHA is around the mummy neck? Bypassing the mummy won't let you win. Avoiding a encounter is far to circumstantial to be a valid tactic for metagaming observation. --Leziad 03:39, September 28, 2009 (UTC)
: I always imagined it as explosive runes. To pass it, basically have infinite hp/fast healing, be able to dimension door or teleport some other way, or have trapfinding and search/disable device. --[[User:Ghostwheel|Ghostwheel]] ([[User talk:Ghostwheel|talk]]) 08:44, 28 August 2019 (MDT)
::How is this supposed to be a useful, objective test if it's left up to how each user "imagines it"? Why is this information not provided in the test itself? As is, the reader is given no indication how to actually run this test, making it useless.{{unsigned|172.58.14.243}}
:::Yeah, it's not really an objective test, and things like the hall of runes especially are maddeningly vague, but quickly running through what you think a character would do for each encounter in an hour has helped me get a better gut feeling for how strong and versatile a class is a few times. --[[User:Foxwarrior|Foxwarrior]] ([[User talk:Foxwarrior|talk]]) 14:29, 28 August 2019 (MDT)
::::How is anyone supposed to "run through what their character would do" when there's no indication of what kind of threat or problem they're facing? {{unsigned|172.58.14.243}}
::::That's idiotic, the whole point of a balance test is to provide a way of comparing relative balance.If everyone's making up their own test, it serves no purpose. {{unsigned|172.58.14.243}}
:::::Added some recommendations for information to add so that the test is actually coherent. {{unsigned|172.58.14.243}}
:::::: I'm not a huge fan of the SGT, but basically it's a bunch of benchmarks for a character to check themselves against to see if they have what it takes, and you can usually eyeball the result pretty easily if you understand the game decently.
:::::: Also, leaving just recommendations on a main page isn't something we want. Feel free to discuss adding things here, but until it's finished, it shouldn't be added to the article page. --[[User:Ghostwheel|Ghostwheel]] ([[User talk:Ghostwheel|talk]]) 08:21, 29 August 2019 (MDT)
::::::: How do you "eyeball" a hallway full of magical runes? That might as well say nothing at all. What if it's a bunch of arcane marks I can just walk past? How does this help anyone? {{unsigned|172.58.14.243}}
:::::::: Did you read what I said above? If you fulfill one of those criteria, or have something similar, you pass. If not, you don't. --[[User:Ghostwheel|Ghostwheel]] ([[User talk:Ghostwheel|talk]]) 08:59, 29 August 2019 (MDT)
::::::::: Ok, the hall is 10 feet long and contains a single rune that does nothing. Guess I pass. {{unsigned|172.58.14.243}}
:::::::::: Yeah, good luck getting anyone who's not a sock puppet to agree with that. --[[User:Ghostwheel|Ghostwheel]] ([[User talk:Ghostwheel|talk]]) 15:41, 3 September 2019 (MDT)
:::::::::: Yes, that was exactly his point. Since that interpretation of the test will not be accepted, there must be some minimum and maximum bounds that define an acceptable interpretation of the test. Since that must be the case, why not add these bounds to the test so that it actually becomes useful?
:::::::::: Hallway full of magical runes is: can you disable or somehow bypass magical traps? Then you pass. You can't? Then you (probably) fail. Not sure why you're having difficulty with this particular thing. [[User:Surgo|Surgo]] ([[User talk:Surgo|talk]]) 19:29, 3 September 2019 (MDT)
::::::::::: ANSWER ME.
::::::::::: What if the traps trigger immediately in the presence of carbon dioxide, or water vapor? Now you automatically fail unless you are a warforged, undead, or some other sort of non-typical race. What if every trap is Death Spell and has a DC of 600? Now you fail unless you're immune to death effects. What are the walls or floor made of? Does your character have passwall, or a burrow speed? Is the hallway in a dead magic zone? This is why the test is useless without specific definitions. It doesn't actually say anything.
::::::::::: The problem is that it is an arbitrarily large number of traps. Therefore, if the character has less than a 100% chance to find and disable each trap, they automatically fail. If they can automatically succeed but require a resource such as spell slots, they automatically fail. This is so obvious I can't believe you need it spelled out. Was this test written by an infant? {{unsigned|Gatorized}}
:::::::::::: Problem is, if you want to define the rune test (i.e. to specify which runes are there, how many and what's the DC) the test is as useless as a vague one as it only can give results regarding that particular, which is useless if in any case in which the DM uses another set of runes (which is almost everytime). Multiple users have pointed out that the tests it's not perfect and clearly establishes guidelines more than strict rules, exactly to give room to those that need to use it, and would otherwise find themselves with examples that don't fit their intended results. This is so obvious I can't believe you need it spelled out. Please, engage in discussions in good faith. --[[User:The bluez in the dungeon|The bluez in the dungeon]] ([[User talk:The bluez in the dungeon|talk]]) 23:58, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
::::::::::::: Problem is, the test as it is, is entirely non-functional. There exist changes that would make it functional. This is so obvious I can't believe you need it spelled out. Please, engage in discussions in good faith.
:::::::::::::: Ok Gatorized, go make your own, I've made you an empty page [[User:Gatorized|Gatorized's Same Game Test]]. When you are done we can evaluate it. --[[User:The bluez in the dungeon|The bluez in the dungeon]] ([[User talk:The bluez in the dungeon|talk]]) 23:27, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
(Reset Indent) Gator, why are you so angry?
I found this because I happened to come across angry messages on Surgo's user page and I was curious. You're complaining about a test which is intentionally open ended and vague being open ended and vague. There's no hard numbers to crunch here, and that's kind of the point.
Others already said it, but I'll try to spell it out. The number of runes in the hall doesn't really matter, it literally can be one. The type of rune could matter (cause maybe you're immune to X Y Z) but most fall into the general "trap does damage" category. Doesn't matter if it kills you, and making the DC itself is just luck. So the actual question being asked is "Can you disable or bypass a trap in your path?"
And.... can you? There are no other variables to consider, if you're in antimagic, or can't teleport, or can only speak in prime numbers of words, since the test doesn't involve that. Path, obstruction, method of egress. And if you can't, fail. And that's ok, cause sometimes the fail is still an ok result like the party meatshield just walking through and soaking the damage as it comes. -- [[User:Eiji-kun|Eiji-kun]] ([[User talk:Eiji-kun|talk]]) 10:03, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
: Why aren't you angry? Why do you have such low standards? Everything else in your comment, I've already covered before. I'm not going to engage further with people who are pretending to be stupid as a hobby. {{Unsigned|Gatorized}}
:: "I'm not going to engage further" -- then leave. We aren't here to entertain people being purposefully obtuse. [[User:Surgo|Surgo]] ([[User talk:Surgo|talk]]) 21:26, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
