Search results

The intent of OP is to create more gradation in armour types. Differentiating between scale and brigandine is one way of doing so.

Katana is fine where it is. Perhaps you're thinking of the tachi.

My point was that your table has padded and leather being identical mechanically. So adding gambeson, when that's just padded, makes little sense when you could just assign the gambeson mechanics to padded instead, for example. Rather than having two mechanically identical armours on the list.

It's often said to be based on a misunderstanding of bringandine, which does have "studs" on the outside - because they attach the metal plates on the inside.

Brigandine (and the very similar jack of plate) are distinct enough from Eurasian style scale (which is how scale is described typically) for D&D purposes to be sure.

They said "revival." The LJN figures were part of the vival. There is no disrespect implied.

Gambeson is padded armour, but scale armour and brigandine are both historical and distinct, if that's what you're referring to. It's things like studded leather and ring mail that are ahistorical.

Padded and leather are mechanically identical. And a gambeson is padded armour already.

To determine a random number between 1 and 30 inclusive.

It's only badass if you use rules from 1974 and you don't trust anyone at the table.

No, it doesn't make sense in canon. There is a canonical explanation, but that explanation just reveals the "good" gods are pretty monstrous. Peoples' lives don't become worthless even if they are under the sway of an "evil" cult leader.

Between the iconic Parkinson painting and the computer game referenced above, there's plenty of existing lore for them. Take off the gloom-coloured glasses.

Nope. It would be a three-quarterling. I called them treilings when I did a d20 thing that included them years ago.

If your DM doesn't allow Tasha's, you're playing D&D. If your DM does allow Tasha's, you're playing D&D. So....yes. I think we can handle it.

If you believe they are minor tweaks then your assertion that it's not really a playtest because of the short time frame isn't even internally consistent (leaving aside all of the other baseless speculation and conspiracy theorizing in your post). Why would they need an extended playtest for...

Yes, fandoms do tend to engage in a level of gatekeeping that discourages innovation.

Baseless speculation it is then.

Only if you pretend that the meaning of the word "edition" in this context is clear-cut, which of course it is not. The vast majority of words in English have nuances and fuzziness to their meanings, and you shouldn't pretend otherwise.

Some DMs back in the 2E days refused to allow character kits from the PHBR books. That didn't make the PHBR books a seperate edition.

These are all non-sequiturs, since they refer to very different things to fantasy worlds. You're also largely confusing labels for definitions.