Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Piratecat" data-source="post: 4026486" data-attributes="member: 2">{Brutal hijack: Sorry, Shin!} Slaved, for a really quick breakdown of simulations vs. other gaming styles, you can always <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNS_Theory" target="_blank">hit Wikipedia.</a> But the easiest way to think of it is that games which strive for realistic details tends towards simulations. If you have a DM who changes falling damage to make it more realistic, and who requires you to list out all of your material components, you probably have a DM who leans towards simulationism. My point is that a one round delay in mounting your horse simply isn't fun. Missing a round of combat is a HUGE disadvantage in a fight. As a result, the in-game cost of the saddle (taking an extra round to mount or dismount) far, far outweighs the in-game benefit of the saddle (+2 to checks for staying in the saddle.) No reasonable character would use such a thing, because the penalties far outweigh the benefits -- and thus we've created a realistic saddle that is neither fun nor useful. To me is seems like the easiest and most consistent solution for the DM is to call the saddle masterwork. As pointed out above, there are already rules and costs for masterwork items. Even better, it doesn't come with an in-game penalty that outweighs its usefulness.I'm sorry that I gave the impression that the problem was with your GP costing or the bonuses you'd get; that wasn't what I'd meant to get across. I find this subject really interesting, but I'm reluctant to hijack Shin Okada's thread any further. If you want to knock the idea around further, we can always start a new thread on the subject. (And if not, that's cool too. I just like talking game theory.){/hijack}</blockquote>

Verification