Search results

I don't care for the battle master mechanics for multiple reasons and sometimes I really enjoy playing a BDF. With the stress of real life, being half brain-dead from a challenging workweek on those occasions when I get to play instead of DMing? Playing a simple fighter and not having to think...

Just as important, why on earth would anyone choose to create a character that was so incredibly nerfed? Play a monk or a wizard so you don't have to rely on weapons.

It doesn't change anything. The fighter's thing is still going to be using a weapon to attack the enemy most rounds, it's just not going to be a sword that actually makes their class choice, build and actions worthwhile. If you really want to add creativity encourage maneuvers like shoving...

There are some players that will be unhappy if they aren't always getting what they want but in my experience it's primarily an issue when it's an issue for some but not others.

I've had a lot of good experiences with public play and a handful of bad ones. I like seeing how other people approach the game and even a mediocre DM can give me insight into what doesn't work well. It was especially nice to go play when I was stuck being a forever DM. I like DMing but I...

I guess that's simply something (rules penalties for casters) I've never seen. Then again a lot, but not all, of what I've seen has been with public games where the DMs are supposed to follow official rules. They can still add "flavor" and some people seem to really hate characters in heavy...

If the high quality weapons characters are assumed to have never break that is also consistent within the setting. If you want to add this kind of penalty, that's fine. I just think if we're talking about penalties, there should be ideas for similar penalties for all builds because far too...

It was an attempt at humor. We don't have to be serious with every post.

I assume that unless specified otherwise it's D&D as published by WotC. I'm well aware that you consider many games D&D that I, and most people, would not.

By martials I meant people that use weapons. You know, the ones affected by the proposed rules.

Isn't using different weapons depending on circumstances part of the logic behind weapon mastery? Because that to me feels like a better approach, a carrot rather than a stick. Especially when the stick only affects some classes.

If you want to start up a thread about how to apply "verisimilitude" to all classes go ahead. Except is there is no verisimilitude when it comes to magic because that works however the fiction says they work, just like equipment in most fiction. It's only with weapons and similar that we...

I don't remember ever using that rule, but then the rest of my arguments remain. Where are the penalties for the characters that don't rely on weapons?

A fighter would likely look something like the following if the rule was used

Accusing people of "getting worked up" about a topic is dismissive of them expressing their opinion and is not constructive in any way.

Depends on the DM. If magic weapons don't break then the rule is pointless once the characters affected get magic weapons.

Imagine making it difficult to find spell components or spell components getting ruined if the character fails a save or gets wet. Clerics needing to make regular sacrifices or somehow push the agenda of their god at a cost of not receiving spells if they don't make their religion checks. Monks...

I assume we're talking D&D on a D&D forum and the game has no encumbrance rules. I care about verisimilitude to a certain degree but not when it is only ever applied to martial characters.

Do you also have casters constantly scrounging for spell components? Make that monk risk bruising their knuckles or that cleric's god demanding proper sacrifices or obeisance in order to receive spells? Not a game I would be interested in but the issue is only one type of character having to...