Search results

Or just create a slightly different magic item with a very similar ability, but different prerequisities.

Somewhat off topic from your post, but in the same vein of thought...based on this line in the "Unarmed Strike" description... I've heard someone ask if they would be able to have their fists enchanted as if they were magical weapons. Specifically they wanted "+2 Holy" placed on their fists...

The Star Trek the Next Generation collectable card game had just come out recently...and of course, my friends and I had bought quite a bit of it and were having fun with it. Not long after that the first of the next generation Star Trek movies came out...Generations, and we'd gotten...

Rules aside, I'll give you just my opinion. I would allow it because I feel that monks are not in any way overpowered and that adding this feat to a monk (even a "Large" race Monk) would not make them overpowered. I think monk's best shine under situational conditions and outside of those...

For what it's worth...EVERYTIME I am CERTAIN I provided all the information I needed to get good, solid answers, the first three posts point out something obvious I should have included. :)

Actually, I really had no point to prove with my poll. I posted it more to see if people's playstyle represented (from a percentage standpoint) what I figured they did...and largely I think it has. The options of this poll are fine and from the descriptions I can confidently choose which...

First of all, excellent feedback, thank you. I see what you mean. Everything is subject to interpretation, what is clear to some will be ambiguous to others (if nothing else this thread should make that clear, heh). My intention here was that you use the "Rules as Written" as precisely as you...

First, I apologize if it seemed that way. I never meant to alienate people with my choices. I just intended for "Rules as Written" to be an absolute. I dislike using analogies to make an example, because I usually find them inadequate, but in this case I'm drawn to using one. If you consider...

I'm always up for agreeing to disagree. :)

Then how do you play? If you describe it in your own words, I may see where my examples are lacking or see which of my examples I intended to account for your playstyle.

"Following the RAW unless clearly defined in an HR Document" would fall under the umbrella of "An interpretation of the rules based on what the players and GM can agree to. This may sometimes include going against the RAW, if the group thinks it makes sense." I bolded the word may, because that...

Honestly, I guess because no one has bothered to point out what specifically is ambiguous in my choices. They continue to address how they would have worded it...which I appreciate, because that will help me word things in the future. But no one has pointed to what I wrote and indicated parts...

Ok...so how is what you said different from: Casual Rules - An interpretation of the rules based on what the players and GM can agree to. This may sometimes include going against the RAW, if the group thinks it makes sense. EDIT: My intent for this option is that the changes would not be so...

The choices are described in the first post: Having written, read, reread and edited those...I think they are very clearly stated.

That's how I defined Casual Rules (I won't repost my definition, but I thought it was clear). That's what I called Casual Rules with House Rules. I've admitted that I could have found a better term than casual, though in all honesty I have yet to think of a better word. I agree it's...

My thought process was, if you are adding to or taking away from the "rules as written" ...then, you not are using the "rules as written". All or nothing.

I do understand your point of view, but I intended "Casual Rules" (perhaps a misnomer) to be exactly what you described. I described casual rules as: An interpretation of the rules based on what the players and GM can agree to. This may sometimes include going against the RAW, if the group...

I don't mean this to sound abrupt, but I'm afraid it's going too. This is my poll, with my questions, I'm afraid that you are the one missing the point.

*nods* Which is why it surprises me that anyone uses the RAW.

I see your point, but my basic assumption in establishing the poll is that RAW is exact and precise...ANY deviation from or addition to RAW, however slight, is significant enough that you are no longer using the Rules As Written. With that assumption as the basis for defining usage of RAW, I...