From D&D Wiki
Why did you delete your talk page? --Redrum 14:29, 29 December 2018 (MST)
- I also don't expect myself to spend the time to correct your mistake "just you like it", if that's what you mean with your edit summary. --Green Dragon (talk) 09:49, 30 December 2018 (MST)
- I don't understand this comment, GD. I took GA's comment of "thanks for nothing" to be indicative of his frustration toward the wiki in general, and not referring specifically to your undeleting of this talk page. And I do think you should have blanked this page after restoring it; it takes literally two seconds to press Ctrl+A → Backspace. Though I'm not sure why GA deleted his talk page instead of blanking it. — Geodude (talk | contribs | email) . . 10:31, 30 December 2018 (MST)
- I deleted it because I thought I could, as it's my own talk page. There was no malice behind it; it quite literally has my name on it, so I assumed it was fine. I don't remember why I wanted to delete it, TBH. I also don't really care if it's deleted, which is why I acknowledged that maybe it'll be restored and that's fine; I just wanted it to be blanked if anyone wanted to go through the trouble of going against my wish to have my talk page deleted. Like Geodude said, it'd have been quick to do since you already spent the time to correct my "mistake."
- Again, no malice. Sorry if I offended, GD. Like Geodude said, I'm overall deflated these days and that edit summary could have been directed towards anyone, even myself.--GamerAim (talk) 16:04, 30 December 2018 (MST)
- It was a whole THING. There are a few different pages you should read if you want to catch up on the wikidrama; off the top of my head some important ones are GamerAim's RfA, the discussion surrounding GamerAim's Discord server, Jwguy's resignation as admin, the discussion around GamerAim's warning, and SgtLion's RfA. — Geodude (talk | contribs | email) . . 17:56, 17 January 2019 (MST)
- I must ask that you don't answer questions for me on my talk page, Geodude671. It was directed exclusively at me and my relationship with GD.
- But yes, there was drama over me disagreeing with how Green Dragon chose to run D&D Wiki and how he chose to let others run it as well. Jwguy's resignation isn't relevant, and there was also some stuff involving ConcealedLight's warnings, multiple discussions about Discord (they should be on that same page as the one linked) and probably more. However, I won't link them because at this point I don't care; GD made his decisions, and as much as it may hurt me, I accept that he and I have differing opinions on what D&D Wiki should be.
- I intend to be the last remaining D&D Wiki admin when Geodude671, ConcealedLight, BigShotFancyMan and Quincy are gone. Though honestly, I doubt I'll outlive Geodude; whatever our relationship, I have to admit he's a persistent little bugger ;) --GamerAim (talk) 07:17, 18 January 2019 (MST)
- @Cosmos, if you do read those pages, take them with a grain of salt. They are nothing but a blip of the things that occurred in the last 2 years and don't even begin to reveal the tip of an iceberg. GamerAim's reply is most appropriate for the matter and I hope you can focus on that versus anything else. ~ BigShotFancyMan (talk) 09:05, 18 January 2019 (MST)
- I hope this doesn't turn into Manga-style fights! --18.104.22.168 17:01, 23 January 2019 (MST)
How much "Force" will it take to start a tsunami by a man-made Device? --22.214.171.124 16:47, 9 January 2019 (MST)
- Sorry, I'm not a meteorologist. The "butterfly effect" posits that even a small amount of force could create a hurricane. A tsunami could probably be created with a couple megaton bomb.--GamerAim (talk) 12:29, 12 January 2019 (MST)
- Why would anyone (outside of a villain) want to create a GIANT tidalwave? --Redrum 18:02, 16 January 2019 (MST)
- Megatons is bigger than what I had in mind. I was hoping to create something that would take out a couple of coastal goblin "villages"!!!--126.96.36.199 17:24, 23 January 2019 (MST)
5e Wedding Crasher
My main 5e character has been hired to disrupt a wedding. I have access to a trick box that causes 1d4 fire damage when opened and some itching powder. I may want suggestions for other items (and/or spells). --188.8.131.52 13:05, 9 February 2019 (MST)
Has anyone thought of a mind switching carpet?--Redrum 13:56, 9 February 2019 (MST)
- I'm not sure I understand what kind of item you are talking about... I see it is a carpet, but what is the "mind-switching" part? Not sure what that is supposed to do. --Cosmos (talk) 14:57, 9 February 2019 (MST)
- I think he means when 2 people stand on it (and maybe move around the right way) their minds (and/or souls) switch bodies. --184.108.40.206 16:49, 13 February 2019 (MST)
There is nothing that says a crystal ball can't be in the shape of a crystal skull, right?--220.127.116.11 16:47, 13 February 2019 (MST)
- Right...? Also, I keep seeing you comment on this Talk page, you do know that 1. You can make an account (which I suggest, seeing how often you get on here) and 2. GamerAim isn't exactly quite as active anymore (from what I've seen anyways) and so you might get admin responses faster on the Talk pages of other admins such as Green Dragon, Geodude, BigShotFancyMan, Quincy, or Masmurine. --Cosmos (talk) 06:25, 14 February 2019 (MST)
- 18.104.22.168, There is nothing that says crystal balls can't be in the shape of crystal skulls. My question to you is why do you ask? --Redrum 14:51, 16 February 2019 (MST)
- Thanks. I'm not happy to see that the background (and indeed, the whole theme) has changed to something...well...not as aesthetically-pleasing. But I'm fine, otherwise.
Seriously, the site looks amateurish now. What's up with that? I guess it's a good visual representation of everything I did to improve our reputation going down the drain...--GamerAim (talk) 16:58, 30 May 2019 (MDT)
- the conversation died. I think summer time has made lives busy (?) ~ BigShotFancyMan 19:25, 30 May 2019 (MDT)
Turns out, I can in fact be reasonable and polite when I'm treated with the same respect! As Green Dragon says, I'm not experienced with the atmosphere here on the wiki, or with how things are done here. I'm just far too invested, as usual, and I'm trying to do what I think is right, regardless of what I'm being told to say or do. It's created some... Grating circumstances for a lot of parties, and I only wish things weren't that way... But it's as you've said: people seem to feel positively attacked that there are deletion requests. I'm aware that humans treat assaults on their world-view as physical attacks, based on psychology, but I wasn't prepared for it in this context! I could have handled things better sooner if I'd only realized that... --Max7238 (talk) 15:45, 4 June 2019 (MDT)
- FWIW, I was sincere. I do appreciate how you've conducted yourself and I am proud to have met/argued with you. Reminds me of the good old days, which I assure you were not as...grating as things can be today. I totally feel you on this, even if I disagree with your stances, and respect that you've taken to heart the things I said, even if you also don't entirely agree with it on a personal or technical level. Keep it up, my friend <3 --GamerAim (talk) 16:01, 4 June 2019 (MDT)
- Actually, following my last response, if you wouldn't mind some conversation here, I have a few things I'd like to hear from you regarding one of the topics you brought up. I'm that guy at the table always wanting to play weird races. I've got 53 character sheets on Myth-Weavers that are structured to be ready to play at a moment's notice, and none of them are the same race or subclass. Do you think it's possible for a race to be balanced even if it doesn't follow the conventions and standards set by WotC, so long as the numbers are accounted for and the DM is allowed to have the final say on balance - since the game world is ultimately their creation, and the race must fit with that world? Having played Varkarrus' dullahan on three separate occasions, like I said, it is truly a favorite of mine - to the point that I have a book character based on the idea now! --Max7238 (talk) 16:22, 4 June 2019 (MDT)
- I think that balance is objective, up to a point. A lot of it really depends, like you say, on the individual campaign. If you only run first-party modules, those might be designed with specific assumptions in mind that the dullahan breaks. But that isn't necessarily a fault of the race itself being unbalanced. ConcealedLight has tried to make the argument before that fire resistance is more powerful than cold resistance because more monsters in WotC's Monster Manual publication for D&D 5e has more monsters with fire attacks. He forgets that those monsters are optional and exist in a vacuum without context for if they'll be used by a DM. And if the DM runs an adventure in the arctic, which is probably more useful for a PC to have? I'd bet the arctic has monsters with cold attacks.
- It's good to design content with the assumption of it fitting in with Wizards of the Coast Approved Campaigns™, but D&D Wiki isn't WotC, and that's a good thing! WotC benefits more if all their stuff follows conventions, and so do players, frankly. But homebrew doesn't have to follow all those same conventions. It's enough to put a design disclaimer saying, "hey, this was designed outside of the assumptions first-party content makes but if you notice how it's different, you can still make fun adventures!" At the end of the day, the core rules are limited guidelines. They do not try to encompass all possible options or campaigns that may be run with them. They're used to run campaigns, and towards that end they're balanced against certain assumptions because you can't balance a game in a vacuum.
- And who is to tell a group they can't change those assumptions, huh? :) --GamerAim (talk) 17:38, 4 June 2019 (MDT)
- That's the most concise description of the situation I've ever seen. I love it! And you're absolutely right! That also helps put into context why a DM of mine I only had a short while had banned homebrew; she was going to run Dragon Heist, and adored the canon! I have a feeling I'll be revisiting this page several times in the near future. Especially about how balance is affected by context in tabletops, and how the first party stuff should be guidelines to help tables eventually tell original stories of their own. I started at a table like that, so I was confused when running content from a first-party book why things were so stuffy. It's both an argument for and against homebrew, and I love it to death, I gotta say. --Max7238 (talk) 17:49, 4 June 2019 (MDT)
- And who is to tell a group they can't change those assumptions, huh? :) --GamerAim (talk) 17:38, 4 June 2019 (MDT)
- I agree with the sentiment about the core rules being guidelines. D&D exists as a base to launch different adventures. But the fun doesn't stem from sticking to tradition. What makes D&D fun is how you can introduce outside factors and stir up the typical. Yeah, anyone can run up to an Orc and stab it in the face. But how many people can say they got their Succubus to charm a local guard into offing a judge while you get off scott-free with no one the wiser?
- I'm mostly around because I find there's still fun in making characters. There are a few interesting concepts about the site, but when a majority of things just feel like "Fighter derivative #3998", you tend to lose energy about these things.
- That's an excellent point, old friend! You can only make so many interesting things out of the same parts before you need to diversify. Look at D&D's own first-party backlog for examples: the 1e Unearthed Arcana book, the 2e Player's Option series, the 3.5e Book of Weeaboo Fightan Magic, and other supplements designed to extend the boundaries of the rules outside of the assumptions of the core rules. Variety is the spice of life; don't sanitize other peoples' food just because you prefer tofu :) --GamerAim (talk) 07:52, 5 June 2019 (MDT)
Hi, GA, I am concerned about this edit that you made to your userpage. Per our behavioral policy, ranting in all forms is not permitted. Also, on a personal level, I don't appreciate you using your userpage to spread vicious rumors about other users, including members of the administration. That kind of stuff isn't cool. Please don't post things like that on your userpage, OK? Based Quincy (talk) 12:49, 9 June 2019 (MDT)
- Upon further review of your actions, please consider this a formally administered warning. Based Quincy (talk) 12:51, 9 June 2019 (MDT)
- Since it's been asked that more detail be provided, please consider the following quotes. In the interest of fairness, I'll refrain from commenting on the sections of the message that pertain to myself.
|“||The truth is, [ConcealedWife] and Guy seem to have taken something I said the wrong way at first and decided to take everything I did then on as being hostile.||”|
|“||[Varkarrus] and [ConcealedLight] dislike me because I chose to tell them they were wrong.||”|
- I feel both of these quotes display an assumption of bad faith on the part of the mentioned users. While I agree with you that in the past or recently they've taken actions that are less than ideal, I'd hesitate to conclude that this means they are part of some shadowy cabal plotting your downfall. I find the following quote particularly problematic:
|“||[ConcealedLight] is...a liar and a manipulator who tries to play the victim to avoid any responsibility for his actions.||”|
- I consider this quote a personal attack, which is prohibited by our policy for obvious reasons. This quote alone, in my eyes, is reason enough to warn, per our behavioral policy: "Incivility consists of personal attacks, rudeness, and aggressive behaviors that disrupt the project and lead to unproductive stress and conflict. Incivility is disruptive and unacceptable, and as such D&Dwiki follows a zero-tolerance policy towards rude and uncivil behavior." Additionally, I feel the entire passage displays a level of defensiveness and combativeness that is not befitting of a staff member such as yourself. Per our behavioral policy: "Even during heated debates, editors should behave politely, calmly and reasonably, in order to keep the focus on improving the encyclopedia and to help maintain a pleasant editing environment." I do not feel you have done so in the past, nor are you doing so now. I'm not saying you're acting in bad faith, but I am saying that I believe you are exercising poor judgment.
- I will remove the passage, yet again. If you choose to restore it yet again, you risk incurring another warning. Please use this warning as a learning experience to improve the way you interact with other users. — Geodude (talk | contribs | email) . . 13:56, 9 June 2019 (MDT)
This is a second warning issued for ignoring the above complaints and re-instating the offending rant without any attempt at communication with the involved parties. As you are willfully ignoring the previous warning and refusing to engage this issue in a respectful and civil manner, I must administer a further warning. Please check yourself. Further conduct of this sort will result in a third warning and a subsequent ban. Based Quincy (talk) 15:17, 9 June 2019 (MDT)
- I haven't been active on the site for a long while, but judging by the fact someone's willing to risk this to get their side of things out there, it certainty doesn't paint the present community as "inviting" anymore. Policies and all that I get it, but sometimes you need to look at the situation and think "If someone's making a risky play like this, things must not be looking so hot right." More-so considering it's GA doing it. And they've been about since way before Geodude was an admin, so I think their word carries more.
- It really goes to show how things have fallen since 2016. Nightmares are dreams too... (talk) 17:57, 9 June 2019 (MDT)
GamerAim, I am asking you as a friend to take down the inflammatory material on your user page per Behavioral Policy. I understand your need to vent, but you ought to take this over to a personal blog or something. We are in a bad place if we've got admins warning and threatening to block each other. Marasmusine (talk) 08:00, 10 June 2019 (MDT)
- GamerAim we have already explained to you how rants do not have a place on D&D Wiki, but now it seems that you have choosen not to use a usersubpage but your userpage. It's the same thing, and not okay, and perfectly right to remove it and issue GamerAim a warning (and now a second). With a third warning your adminship will be revaluated with a RfA. --Green Dragon (talk) 22:46, 10 June 2019 (MDT)