Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Theo R Cwithin" data-source="post: 5051512" data-attributes="member: 75712">Criminy.  I'm assuming you're not being disingenuous here.  Fair enough, your point is valid assuming we're playing with rules that support a difference between stone age and iron age weaponry... though if your playing core D&D, there is in fact no differentiation.  And I clearly stated that for the example.So, try again.  <ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">The guard's realmspike is 6ft long, steel tip affixed to a sanded oak shaft with rivets, and a red tassle dangles from the neck.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">The orc's urgsticker is 6.5ft long, with treantwood shaft surmounted by a pitted duskiron point collared with tiny spikes and vulture feathers.</li> </ol>Mechanically, both are "spears/1d8/x3", though I don't tell the players this, of course, just as I wouldn't tell them if the orc's spear was poisoned or magical.Exactly how is this different than the Merlin's Magic Missile versus Sauron's Sorcerous Slap of Force issue?  By most reckonings, there's no difference save the presentation.  I sincerely don't understand the viewpoint that a fluff difference must reflect a mechanics difference, and am very much trying to.</blockquote>