Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Chacal" data-source="post: 796751" data-attributes="member: 1349">That doesn't make any less sense than fighter not being able to hit vital areas (except on criticals). Game balance and differentiation of classes lead to strange things, I believe.I don't use kukri, so I don't really know what it's looking like. The rational (which I know comes from 2nd Ed, so sue me <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue&nbsp; &nbsp; :p"&nbsp; data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />) for this house rule is that a rogue is using its weapon differently than the fighter, and that the fighter training doesn't help him to use his knowledge on new weapons. We allowed SA with longbows, given that it's not very different from shortbows. If a kukri is quite similar to a rogue weapon, why not.&nbsp; IMC, this hasn't caused issues, and actually lead the Ftr/rogues to adapt their weapon to the circumstances, which we found a good thing. Chacal</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Chacal, post: 796751, member: 1349"] That doesn't make any less sense than fighter not being able to hit vital areas (except on criticals). Game balance and differentiation of classes lead to strange things, I believe. I don't use kukri, so I don't really know what it's looking like. The rational (which I know comes from 2nd Ed, so sue me :p) for this house rule is that a rogue is using its weapon differently than the fighter, and that the fighter training doesn't help him to use his knowledge on new weapons. We allowed SA with longbows, given that it's not very different from shortbows. If a kukri is quite similar to a rogue weapon, why not. IMC, this hasn't caused issues, and actually lead the Ftr/rogues to adapt their weapon to the circumstances, which we found a good thing. Chacal [/QUOTE]

Verification