For the purposes of this hypothetical let us assume both GMs

The second one although they sound like a storyfag. Knowing the game supersedes all else.

File: Mantis Shrimp.jpg (20KB, 274x184px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 274x184px

>>55170016
I will genetically combine eggs from each one and forcibly impregnate them and breed the perfect GM.

>>55170016
>For the purposes of this hypothetical let us assume both GMs are equally cute anime girls
Well that was an easy decision.

File: Laughing girls.gif (948KB, 500x250px) Image search: [Google]

948KB, 500x250px

>>55170016
They both suck equally. I will be GM

>>55170048
Get out of there, you horrible gribbly.

>>55170016
GM1 I detest being constrained to some joyless faggot's "human only, no magic. Sword and shield fighter" scenario. I'm smart enough to keep within a broad pool of acceptable decisions. Provided they are mine to make

>>55170016
GM2 sounds good to me, I like bouncing off a story with RP

I choose GM1.
I appreciate home baked snacks more, I don't like my character creation being restricted, I don't mind GM's occasionally forgetting details that haven't come up in a while, and I appreciate that even though I came up with a method they didn't prepare for that they're willing to come up with a way for it to work.
Fucking hate DMPC's though.

On a related note as a GM would it be considered over the top to serve beef stroganoff to my players? Like say I prepared it before they arrived and served it as they arrived by putting the saucepan containing it on a wooden board on the table with a serving spoon and some plates and forks?

>>55170084
It's a better option than the binary one the OP presented.

>>55170142
>over the top to serve beef stroganoff
Yes, but I have no idea why anyone would complain holy fuck what kind of GM serves goddamn proper meal food to their players?
Are you a mother?

>>55170016
>For the purposes of this hypothetical let us assume both GMs are equally cute anime girls that smell equally good
Clearly "Neither" is the only correct answer, because anime girls can't GM.

GM2, but I would still headpat GM1.

GM1, he sounds like a cool guy. Magic realming is fine, as long as he does not explain how the dick penetrated.

>>55170016
GM 2 sounds like my cup of tea.

File: headpats.jpg (968KB, 1652x1205px) Image search: [Google]

968KB, 1652x1205px

>>55170284

>>55170016
Depends on the setting and system that they intend to run.

File: Screen05.png (201KB, 641x429px) Image search: [Google]

201KB, 641x429px

>>55170016
What's a RAWfag?

>>55170716
>but anon, it doesn't say that you CAN'T do this...
>munchkinisms ensue
>game breaks
>gee I wonder what happened

>>55170716
"rules as written"

Like,
"I want to punch someone as a monk."
"That's a -4 penalty."
"Why?"
"You're wielding unarmed strike, which the monk doesn't have proficiency in. They've got proficient with club, crossbow (light or heavy), dagger, handaxe, javelin, kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shuriken, siangham, and sling proficiency, but no proficiency in unarmed strike."

"That's dumb."
"That's rules as written."

>>55170780
Wait what?
Which edition/rules set is this?
Because in 3.5 Monks have Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat at 1st level

>>55170240
When I've played at my friends' house, we've usually made dinner. Although normally with ingredients we bought together. Only once the GM made dinner for us from the stuff he had left over in the fridge.

>>55170805
Not him but I'm pretty sure that's 2e

>>55170805
Improved Unarmed Strike only removes the AoO you'd usually eat, not the non-proficiency penalty.

>>55170780
In case you're wondering, unarmed strike is a simple weapon, and monks are the only player class that doesn't have proficiency in simple weapons. Everyone else gets simple weapon proficiency, so don't suffer -4 to hit with their fists. Monk's list of proficiency is very specific about what weapons they can or cannot use.

Look it up on http://www.d20srd.org. This is 100% accurate.

They didn't fix this in pathfinder.

>>55170805
>Which edition/rules set is this?
>Because in 3.5 Monks have Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat at 1st level
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#improvedUnarmedStrike

>Improved Unarmed Strike [General]
>Benefit
>You are considered to be armed even when unarmed —that is, you do not provoke attacks or opportunity from armed opponents when you attack them while unarmed. However, you still get an attack of opportunity against any opponent who makes an unarmed attack on you.

>In addition, your unarmed strikes can deal lethal or nonlethal damage, at your option.

>Normal
Without this feat, you are considered unarmed when attacking with an unarmed strike, and you can deal only nonlethal damage with such an attack.

>Special
A monk automatically gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat at 1st level. She need not select it.

>A fighter may select Improved Unarmed Strike as one of his fighter bonus feats.

Ctrl-f that and tell me where it says "Improved unarmed strike gains you unarmed proficiency".

Go on, tell me.

>>55170740
>>55170780
Thanks for your enlightenment.

Therefore I'd choose GM2. A DM who doesn't know the system but who insists on playing 100% by the rules is a pain in the ass. He will spend hours looking for rules in the rulebook and argue to make his point.

>>55170844
>>55170871
Fair enough, I stand corrected.
Unarmed strike is in a weird limbo between being a light weapon and a natural attack, but humanoids are not proficient with natural attacks.
What an odd oversight.

GM1 and play Risus

>>55170871
Autism must be pretty difficult to deal with on a day to day basis anon

>>55171019
No. He makes a perfect point on why "rules as written" is autistic shit.

>>55171041
Agreed

>>55171041
Only for crunchfags. Playing some narrative or rules light game there is no problem playing 100% by the rules

>>55170016
GM 1
>completely new to the system
bad
>not very good at giving the party direction
bad
>hardcore RAWfag
bad
>will accept any character as long as they're within rules
arguable
>might forget the name of an NPCs if they haven't been used in a while
bad
>"Wait, you guys are going in from above? I didn't think of that give me a sec..."
bad
>will try to work in elements from character backstories
good
>50/50 chance of DMPC hogging the spotlight
bad
>tendency to magical realm
bad
>prepared homemade baked goods for a snack
good

GM 2
>knows the system inside and out
good
>tendency to railroad
bad
>fan of giving players bonuses for RP
good
>restricts char creation based on the campaign/plot they have in mind
good
>will take notes on every little thing, especially if it could have consequences for the party
good
>"Which tile did you step on? Which direction were you facing? Perfect~"
arguable
>will have the BBEG and lieutenants hold hostage and execute loved ones from character backstories
arguable
>will attach generic healbot to party if needed
arguable
>might encourage player's magical realm if bored
arguable
>will order pizza
good

>>55171019
Yeah, you see that sort of RAW autism crop up along when you stay on /tg/ too long. Fortunately I can get away from autism by closing the browser. I feel sorry for those who can't.

File: imply.png (94KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 512x512px

>>55171090
Cmon anon we're all here forever

>>55170597
source?

>>55170016
GM 1
>Newbie

GM 2
>Dedicated Vet
Is it really a choice? If railroady and CC restriction is the only thing. That's really not a problem. Lots of games break because there is no direction and everyone flounders in the chat room

>>55170848
Under the sections of weapons, under "unarmed strike" are the words "everyone is profiecient in unarmed strikes". So PF did in fact fix this problem. 3.5 never did.

File: 1412197056515.gif (1003KB, 450x329px) Image search: [Google]

1003KB, 450x329px

>>55170016
>GM 1
>completely new to the system
>not very good at giving the party direction
>might forget the name of an NPCs if they haven't been used in a while
>"Wait, you guys are going in from above? I didn't think of that give me a sec..."
>will try to work in elements from character backstories
>prepared homemade baked goods for a snack
Ore no GM1 ga Konnani Kawaii Wake ga Nai !

>>55170815
There were no proficiency penalties for punching people in 2e.

>>55170848
>They didn't fix this in pathfinder.
Under Weapons, page 141: All characters are considered proficient in unarmed strikes.

What is their stance on coasters? This is important.

>>55170016

GM1 is far better. I'll always take a slightly boring vanilla experience over somebody who thinks the players are actors in a movie he's directing.

>>55170016
Why does any of these matter when they're both equally cute anime girls that smell equally good?

>>55172782
The one on the left is obviously cuter.

>>55172804
The one on the right will suck your dick without persuasion.

>>55172804
Sluts are best therefore the one on the right wins

>>55172857
>>55172861
That's a negative, not a positive.

File: 1449291288338.jpg (67KB, 800x449px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 800x449px

>>55172861

>>55172872
You're a negative.

>>55172882
I'm not the one who thinks a slut is a positive, so no.

>>55172882
You're mom's a negative.

>>55170780
last I checked for 3X and beyond unarmed strikes didn't incur proficiency penalties

>>55172948
You're the one with the Madonna-Whore complex, so yes.

>>55173248
Slut lover, please go.

>>55173253
Okay

>>55170016
GM2 is literally me. In my defense, elves and dwarves don't fit so good in a devil survivor campaign

File: 1462130114831.png (632KB, 900x1045px) Image search: [Google]

632KB, 900x1045px

>>55170016
GM1, otherwise:
>>55170048
>I will genetically combine eggs from each one and forcibly impregnate them and breed the perfect GM.
YES!

>>55171086
Also, a bit of railroading may be good.
So, GM 2.

>>55172857
But the one on the left will probably suck your dick with persuasion.

>>55173557
She doesn't know what she's doing.

>>55173626
Are you so incompetent you can't teach a little girl how to suck cock?

>>55173638
Quite frankly, she looks like the kind of person who bites their lollipop.

>>55173680
Do I need to repeat myself?

>>55173144
>Simple, Martial, and Exotic Weapons
>Anybody but a druid, monk, or wizard is proficient with all simple weapons. Barbarians, fighters, paladins, and rangers are proficient with all simple and all martial weapons. Characters of other classes are proficient with an assortment of mainly simple weapons and possibly also some martial or even exotic weapons. A character who uses a weapon with which he or she is not proficient takes a -4 penalty on attack rolls.

Unarmed strike is a simple weapon, and there's nothing about unarmed strike not incurring proficiency penalties.

>>55173723
I'm not gonna train her. You go first.

>>55173756
Well then, she's mine forever. Soon, I will have the biggest collection of lolis in the world.

>>55173756
Literally a cuckold. Neck yourself.

>>55173769
And one of them is guaranteed to bite your dick off.
>>55173779
It's not cuckoldry, it's sharing.

>>55173779
>literally
>cuckold
You literally have no idea what either of these words mean.

>>55170844
>>55170848

Because you are always proficient in your unarmed strikes. The attack of opportunity is not from being non proficient, it's from an unarmed attack, it's a special caveat to that kind of attack.
Non proficiency has never given an opponent an aoo in 3.X.

>>55173828
How dare you. I'll have you know I'm an excellent teacher.

>>55170597

I see you are a man with fine taste.

>>55170016
GM2

>>55173965
>Because you are always proficient in your unarmed strikes.
Mind providing a page number or an SRD link for that?

>The attack of opportunity is not from being non proficient
Nobody said it was. The -4 to hit are from being non-proficient.

>Non proficiency has never given an opponent an aoo in 3.X.
Again, that's not the issue.

I take GM1, since she's still learning and I can help her unfuck her mistakes as she goes along. GM2 is already set in her ways as a filthy "GM vs. players" asshole.

there is any tag in hentai where the father is cuckolded by the daughter
i mean his daughter fucks with other guys without the father knowing or with the father watching?

>>55174196
That's called life

>>55174209
but with hentai
i want to fap

>>55173965
>Because you are always proficient in your unarmed strikes
It says that nowhere in the game.

In fact, here.
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#attack
Tell me where under unarmed strike it says you are proficient in unarmed strikes.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#unarmedStrike

Tell me where it says you're always proficient in unarmed strikes.

An unarmed strike is a simple weapon, and characters proficient in simple weapons are therefore proficient in unarmed.

Monk is not one of them.

>Simple, Martial, and Exotic Weapons
>Anybody but a druid, monk, or wizard is proficient with all simple weapons. Barbarians, fighters, paladins, and rangers are proficient with all simple and all martial weapons. Characters of other classes are proficient with an assortment of mainly simple weapons and possibly also some martial or even exotic weapons. A character who uses a weapon with which he or she is not proficient takes a -4 penalty on attack rolls

Please, tell me where it says all characters are proficient.

Here, even take this search function to look at each and every page where it says "unarmed strike" and "proficient" on the same page.
http://www.d20srd.org/search.htm?q=%22unarmed%20strike%22%20proficient

They SHOULD all be proficient, but it doesn't say that, rules as written.

>>55170016
GM2 sounds a better off the bat, but GM1 sounds easier to adjust over time.

>>55174095
Here you go
Nowhere does it speak of proficiency, it says it is a melee attack similar to a weapon with the following exceptions.
By saying like it means it is not, well combat refrences melee weapon attacks unarmed strikes are explicitly not weapon attacks.

>Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon, except for the following:
>Attacks of Opportunity
>Attacking unarmed provokes an attack of opportunity from the character you attack, provided she is armed. The attack of opportunity comes before your attack. An unarmed attack does not provoke attacks of opportunity from other foes nor does it provoke an attack of opportunity from an unarmed foe.
>An unarmed character can’t take attacks of opportunity (but see "Armed" Unarmed Attacks, below).
>"Armed" Unarmed Attacks
Sometimes a character’s or creature’s unarmed attack counts as an armed attack. A monk, a character with the Improved Unarmed Strike feat, a spellcaster delivering a touch attack spell, and a creature with natural physical weapons all count as being armed.
>Note that being armed counts for both offense and defense (the character can make attacks of opportunity)
Unarmed Strike Damage
>An unarmed strike from a Medium character deals 1d3 points of damage (plus your Strength modifier, as normal). >A Small character’s unarmed strike deals 1d2 points of damage, while a Large character’s unarmed strike deals 1d4 points of damage. All damage from unarmed strikes is nonlethal damage. Unarmed strikes count as light weapons (for purposes of two-weapon attack penalties and so on).
>Dealing Lethal Damage
>You can specify that your unarmed strike will deal lethal damage before you make your attack roll, but you take a -4 penalty on your attack roll. If you have the Improved Unarmed Strike feat, you can deal lethal damage with an unarmed strike without taking a penalty on the attack roll.

>>55174274
>By saying like it means it is not, well combat refrences melee weapon attacks unarmed strikes are explicitly not weapon attacks.

>Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon, except for the following:

So, you're attacking with much like with a weapon, except for the following (AoO). IE, it's exactly the same as attacking with a weapon, except for that one rule that you get AoO'd.

When you attack with a weapon, if you're nonproficient, you take -4 to hit.

When you attack with your fists, much like when you attack with a weapon, if you're nonproficient, you take -4 to hit.

Monks are explicitly not proficient with unarmed strike, as their proficiency list is very specifically laid out. Unarmed strike is a simple weapon, which monks don't have a proficiency with. And, much like a weapon, if you're not proficient in something much like a weapon, you take a -4 to hit.

>>55174338
Weapons also call out unarmed strikes as not a weapon.
>Unarmed Strike
>A Medium character deals 1d3 points of nonlethal damage with an unarmed strike. A Small character deals 1d2 points of nonlethal damage. A monk or any character with the Improved Unarmed Strike feat can deal lethal or nonlethal damage with unarmed strikes, at her option. The damage from an unarmed strike is considered weapon damage for the purposes of effects that give you a bonus on weapon damage rolls.
>An unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon. Therefore, you can use the Weapon Finesse feat to apply your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier to attack rolls with an unarmed strike.

>>55174417
I'm failing to see where it says "unarmed strikes are not weapons".

I'm seeing that it says
>"unarmed strikes are always considered light weapons",

ie they're light, and they're also weapons.

And
>The damage from an unarmed strike is considered weapon damage
because it's hitting someone with a weapon, with the exception of you getting AoO'd in the face if you're not a monk or have IUS.

Isn't that literally the opposite of what you're saying? Where does it say that unarmed strikes are not weapons?

It's just badly worded shit that RAW is fucked up. We both know what they meant, but they just didn't realise anyone would be stupid enough to argue that you should take a -4 penalty on top of eating an AoO attack.

>>55170016
Advantages (or in bad cases eg. magical realm, which is preferable)

GM 1
>"Wait, you guys are going in from above? I didn't think of that give me a sec..."
>will try to work in elements from character backstories
>tendency to magical realm
>prepared homemade baked goods for a snack

GM 2
>knows the system inside and out
>tendency to railroad
>fan of giving players bonuses for RP
>restricts char creation based on the campaign/plot they have in mind
>will take notes on every little thing, especially if it could have consequences for the party
>will attach generic healbot to party if needed

GM 2 wins 6 to 4.

>>55170016
The second. I can handle some railroading and character restrictions if they're actually putting in the effort to tie things into play. Holding hostage loved ones also implies there's a chance to save them.

It sounds a lot better than wandering aimlessly with a DM who is completely new, can't handle it, and enforces RAW so it isn't even very freeform.

>>55170016
GM 1

>>55174271
also applies to >>55173626

>>55174479
Under weapons they are listed as an unarmed strike, which is also not a weapon.
>they just didn't realise anyone would be stupid enough to argue
Admission is the first step to recovery.

>>55174591
No, it's a simple weapon. That's why it's listed in the Table: Weapons under simple weapons.

File: lawful consequential.png (111KB, 485x305px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 485x305px

>>55174591
>under the weapons category, is the item "unarmed strike"
>Weapon Categories
>Weapons are grouped into several interlocking sets of categories.
>Simple, Martial, and Exotic Weapons

>unarmed strike is under the simple weapons category, when it says weapons are grouped in these categories

>it-it's not a weapon and doesn't count under nonproficiency rules h-honest I say it isn't

just say you're a filthly Rules As Intended person like the rest of us

>>55174032
A teacher should know better than to stick his dick in a loli.

The second one. I specifically mention things from my characters backstories so that the GM can fuck with it. GM 1 doesn't sound too bad, but I would like a GM with more experience.

>>55170016
GM2.

>>55170016
I would choose DM 1 any time. They clearly are just getting the ropes for the system, and probably DMing too by the sound of it. Sounds like the easier case of the two to guide towards better DMing.

>>55170042
Storyfags are shit tho

>>55174479
>>55174417
>>55174338
>>55174274
>>55174266
>>55174095
>>55173965
RAWfags: literally the worst since forever

>>55173343
>devil survivor
Please expand anon. I am a fan of the game.

>>55179920
shit rules = shit game

>>55180491
Rules lawyers = shit game night

>will try to work in elements from character backstories
This is literally all I ask of a DM. That one. Even if the other on is cuter.

>>55180689
Good, clean Rules = no Rules Lawyers.

Rolled 3271475088835131905 (1d999999999999999999991)

>>55170016
0 left 1 right

>>55180761
Bunk. There are ALWAYS rules lawyers.

>>55181081
Ah! But there aren't always holes in the rules for the lawyers to slip through.

Frustrated Lawyers = nice, fun game.

File: 1376505108664.jpg (172KB, 720x720px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 720x720px

>>55174503

How the fuck are you counting "tendency to railroad" as an upside? Do you have brain damage?

>>55170016
GM2 wins hands down, is this even a contest?

>>55181284
Some people are just that dumb, senpai.

>>55181192
Rules lwayers don't need holes to slip through. They'll argue a fucking comma for three hours straight if they have to. A good ruleset does nothing to hamper them.

>>55174160
>>55176776
This. GM 1 is very likely to get better over time. GM 2, on the other hand, possesses the sort of faults that preclude self-improvement.

More importantly, however, both GMs are cute nice-smelling anime girls. I'd have lots of potential reasons for hanging around GM 1: she might be interested in some advice, or some information about other roleplaying systems, or old campaign stories; she might even be willing to help me learn how to bake things. Furthermore, I might also know something about her fetishes, given her realm-y tendencies. The situation is very different with GM 2, who clearly wouldn't have much interest in my experiences or opinions, wouldn't care about helping me bake things (or be able to help at all, possibly), and— horrifyingly— might have gleaned some insight into MY fetishes. So I suspect that choosing GM 1 enables me to spend more time around a cute, nice-smelling anime girl.

>>55171624
that is an excellent question anon

File: we just don't know.png (377KB, 768x389px) Image search: [Google]

377KB, 768x389px

>>55171949
>GM has a plot
>this is a bad thing

File: The Human Condition.png (34KB, 201x160px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 201x160px

>>55170016
Number two.

>>55170016
GM2 wins, but any GM that smells good is a rare and valuable asset.

>>55172857
>>55173557
Anon no

>>55170142
I can't think anyone in the world would complain about good food.

>>55181284
Because if she want's us to follow path X, she's presumably actually worked out what path X consists of beforehand instead of having to put shit together as the party speeds directly into the least fleshed out areas possible.

>>55181822
"smell equally good" doesn't actually imply you'd like their smell, so they might both smell like neckbeards or something.

>>55185913
If they were a good GM all areas would be fleshed out

>>55186025
Put it does make the direct implication that they smell good. Otherwise it would say 'smell equally terrible.'

>>55181753

It's a game, not a fucking book.

>>55186459
>Games can't have plots

>>55170780
What is improved unarmed strike. That monk gets at first level.

>>55174266
Y'know, there's one giant misconception here.

Unarmed strikes aren't weapons.

>Unarmed
>Weapon

Choose one.

>>55190039
My body is a weapon

>>55190069
No, it can be CONSIDERED as one. Thats the key difference here.

>>55181753
What is reading comprehension.

>will try to work in elements from character backstories

This means there's a plot to GM1.

Its just that GM2 will force you into it exactly how they want it.

>>55181753
>>55186459
>>55189204
I mean, yes and no to both of you. RPG narratives should be things that emerge naturally over time. Planning some things out, like characters, locations, or even events, isn't inherently bad, but you need to keep the planning open ended and make sure it doesn't hinge on the PCs being in a certain location at a certain time, or assuming they'll make certain choices in a given situation. A lot of people associate "plot" with what happens when you don't do that.

>>55170016
I guess 2? They both sound terrible but having to listen to a 10 year old's sexual fantasies sounds unpleasant enough to just barely tip the balance

File: 1496445972682.jpg (192KB, 850x1024px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 850x1024px

>>55170016
Now slow down a minute, they're both little girls, and GM chairs and screens are designed for fat fucks. I bet they'd both fit comfortably behind the screen.

GM2 runs with GM1's help. Having a second voice lets NPCs banter without it getting weird, and they might cancel out each others' flaws.

File: w2FLxNE.jpg (35KB, 480x321px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 480x321px

>>55171295
Dat gif...

>You'll never know what its like to drive around in a tank with your bros fighting to liberate your country, getting in crazy adventures, and meeting qt field medics.

>>55170016

>DMPC
>Magical Realm

these flaws outstrip all others.

Also DMs who keep notes on fucking everything are great, it makes you actually consider the consequences of your actions.

>>55170815

2e fag, unarmed combat isn't a proficiency, it's assumed everyone can punch, and monk isn't a class in 2e. What the fuck are you talking about?

Also I don't think 2e ever had raw fags, considering how much it says "at gm discretion" and "optional rules are...", I think they'd have a fucking heart attack just reading the book.

>>55190069
Your body is a wonderland.

>>55190976
>DMPC

Depends on how its handled. Admittedly, its bad most of the time.

>Magical realm

Depends on how overt it is. Sometimes, the magical realm is something incredibly common to a setting. So long as they don't try to start some shit, its all good. For example, if your fetish is mind breaking people, then something where sanity is actively a thing is probably your game of choice.

Its only when it starts to get weird that its a problem

>>55170016
Leaning towards 1

>am largely DM1
>trying to be less shit
>playing Shadowrun with other people who have never played it before
>so Rules As Written is unclear as well as Rules As Intended
>also my players keep wanting a DMPC
fug

>>55194032
>Shadowrun

Man, that ruleset is fucking complicated. there's like, 12 steps to just making a regular ass attack. Fuckin hell.

>>55190231
You took the wrong kinda creative license anon

>>55189930
>What is improved unarmed strike
Something that doesn't grant proficiency. Unless you're going full RAI.

>>55194192
>shadowrun
>complicated

Step 1: declare action. Step 2: roll enough sixers to kill a small elephant

>>55170016
2 looks like she sucks a mean dick

>>55174095
If PF Core, 141, under "Weapons", in the light weapon section it states "all characters are prioficient in unarmed strikes".

Simple, Martial, and Exotic Weapons
Most character classes are proficient with all simple weapons. Combat-oriented classes such as barbarians, cavaliers, and fighters are proficient with all simple and all martial weapons. Characters of other classes are proficient with an assortment of simple weapons and possibly some martial or even exotic weapons.
>All characters are proficient with unarmed strikes and any natural weapons they gain from their race.
A character who uses a weapon with which he is not proficient takes a –4 penalty on attack rolls with that weapon.

>>55173367
Oh, Ritz.

>>55170597
I can't find the sauce. Source plz?

>>55170016
I don't get it GM 2 seems better in everyway why wou
>tendency to magical realm
TAKE ME THERE DOKI-DOKI DUNGEON MASTER

>>55199123
IT'S NOT WORTH IT ANON

>>55170716
anon where is this image from please tell me
I'm into robot limbs

>>55190231
They are surprisingly interesting, and rather cute. Especially if they're innocent.

>>55173367
Source?

File: A Yuri Mangakas dream.jpg (305KB, 866x1202px) Image search: [Google]

305KB, 866x1202px

>>55173367
Ritsu, get back to work.

>>55201824
A manga called Ritz, written by Kobayashi Ritsu, the mangaka behind Saki: Underwater Mahjong.

>>55202262
...doesn't she ever sleep?

>>55190039
>>55190095
If you consider unarmed strikes to be like weapons, then you consider them to follow weapon rules such as rolling a d20 to hit the enemy with and using str to hit as normal and taking a standard action to make an attack with, or a full action to make up to your attacks to hit with. Or take a proficiency penalty if you aren't proficient with it.

Do you think you can ignore any of the above rules? Do you think you can take infinite attacks with your fists because it doesn't say "unarmed attacks are considered like weapons but you still need to use a standard action to attack"?

>>55202609
>Unarmed
>Weapon

Choose one.

You don't need proficiency to walk, do you? to talk? to run? In the same vein that most regular actions are simply done, punching is just an action that a person can do. You don't take a non-proficiency bonus to running because you aren't proficient with your feet, after all.

>>55170016
GM2 by far, the only real problem with her is the tendency to railroad. I am a fan of rp and agree with dm restricting character choices to fit the campaign.

>>55202280
>A manga called Ritz, written by Kobayashi Ritsu, the mangaka behind Saki: Underwater Mahjong.
Thanks

File: 1433105372968.jpg (44KB, 301x267px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 301x267px

>>55190275
Finally someone with some sense.

>>55170016
the brown haired loli

>>55202939
>loli
Anon...

>>55170061
The one on the left is cute

>>55202959
what? is it a trap? even better

>>55170016
I can't believe there are people here who would rather game with GM1.

>System knowledge
GM2
>Pacing
Mild railroading is better than complete absence of motivation or plot. GM2.
>Rules preference
A RAWfag new to the system will be shit. Bonuses for good roleplaying is good, if done fairly. GM2.
>Chargen
Cohesiveness and thematic appropriateness is a good thing to keep in mind. If the GM decides on a plot/campaign the players don't, the players simply talk with the GM before game and tell them what they would like to play.
GM2
>Note-taking
A GM which remembers details is one that can plan and build on details. GM2 is strictly superior here.
>Preparedness
GM2 has planned everything in advance, while GM1 is willing to wing it. GM2's only issue is suffering a greater amount of work for barely any advantage, if any at all, but in this hypothetical scenario, GM2 is assumed to not flake because they bit off more than they could chew. GM2 takes it again.
>Backstory
GM1 by far. No contest. GM2 is a prick here.
>DMPC policy
50/50 of a horrible DMPC, or generic mechanics-fixers so that the party can do what they like without being constrained by mechanical issues? GM2 again, baby.
>Perversion
Tendency to magical realm regardless vs. only doing magical realm bullshit if the players are being shit? GM2, yo.
>Snacks
GM2 but only because I hate sweets and most people only know how to bake sweets. For anyone else, GM1 would be the obvious choice, but I just really hate sweet food.

>>55174591
>>Admission is the first step to recovery.
They're playing the devil's advocate you absolute fucking braindead mongoloid.

No one's saying that you SHOULD take a -4, they're saying the RULES are written to say that, if not fudged.

>>55203711
>implying they aren't intentionally ignoring the point.

But seriously, even if they aren't there's a fair few people who cannot grasp the idea of not fudging stupid rules automatically.

And then insist the books contain the fudged rules instead of the actual text, because containing stupid rules would be dumb.