Jester David
Hero
But the point is that the game works through willing suspension of disbelief. "Does ___ make sense?" is basically "how does this conform to the accepted and established rules of this fantasy world?" The game presents elements as factual and non-adherence to them is potentially problematic.No. Only those discussion based on "sense" or "realism". And, when the game is neither sensical nor realistic, my point is valid. I mean, think about it - historical accuracy on space hippos? That's a problem? The fact that the DMG calls one renaissance and the other modern matters?
Because discrepancy between expected rules can break immersion at the table.
Given the question was about an anachronistic weapon, the wielder is potentially irrelevant. After all, the statblock could easily be applied to a pirate. Cross out "Giff" at the top and replace it with "Captain Jack". And the original question remains: how is a person wielding a primitive musket also weilding a fragmentation grenade?
If a monster statblock had, say, a chainsaw attack, pointing out that the item was associated with a magical elf doesn't negate the anachronism.
You haven't. But you could.If you have an issue of game balance, or other functional aspect of it in the game, my point does not hold. If it had been, "Gee, i find those grenades are well outside the range for the critter's CR. Do you all find it the same? What do you think of using this less powerful weapon from the DMG?" I'd have made no such comment as I did.
"Gee, i find those grenades are well outside the range for the critter's CR."
"It's a fantasy game where you play an enchanted pixie. Why does balance matter?"
Seems just as relevant.