D&D General Armour class and essentialism

[Steampunkette]

I'll take that under advisement if I actually think about doing that sometime.

Actually, its not intended as a strawman at all. I was in a game this was allowed and everyone started wanting to take the best option and refluff as something else. One person wanted to use great sword stats, but say they were wielding a dagger... Which is why we dont allow it anymore.

So long as he's willing to be treated as having both hands full while stabbing with the dagger that he can't easily hide or throw... I say go for it?

That's, like, sort of how 13th Age works, if you've ever played (or even heard) of it? Different classes do different damage with different weapons. Because the DPR is designed to about equal out if you're a rogue stabbing someone with a dagger or a fighter using a greatsword.

The issue, in the case you've provided, I feel isn't refluffing. The issue, there, was your party tried to min-max and fluff like they weren't, which apparently upset someone.

There are a lot of people who draw that line, and they have said on many occasions that there is a difference between blatant fantasy (like dragons and magic) and consensual pretending that the plate armor you're wearing is actually a pirate shirt. It's not that weird a line to draw.

Any line drawn by anyone is going to be entirely subjective and arbitrary, Micah. And thus weird to people who find it weird.

But, hey. That's your line to draw. And whether I find it weird or not it remains yours, and I'll respect it all the same.

 

[payn]

So long as he's willing to be treated as having both hands full while stabbing with the dagger that he can't easily hide or throw... I say go for it?

That's, like, sort of how 13th Age works, if you've ever played (or even heard) of it? Different classes do different damage with different weapons. Because the DPR is designed to about equal out if you're a rogue stabbing someone with a dagger or a fighter using a greatsword.

The issue, in the case you've provided, I feel isn't refluffing. The issue, there, was your party tried to min-max and fluff like they weren't, which apparently upset someone.

Any line drawn by anyone is going to be entirely subjective and arbitrary, Micah. And thus weird to people who find it weird.

But, hey. That's your line to draw. And whether I find it weird or not it remains yours, and I'll respect it all the same.

I have heard of 13th age, but not played. My take is that either you let players take whatever, and flavor however, or you have to mediate it somehow. Folks like myself who would want the mediation are both concerned with immersion and mechanics. I'd prefer the system to take that burden off my GM duties personally. Though, you are correct this is a subjective perspective and likely many tables wouldn't have a min/max problem with it. Also, many tables would be ok with a paper, rock, scissor approach where items don't matter at all and class contains all the mechanics. I think I would prefer that approach myself to policing 5E or other close fantasy derivatives. YMMV.

 

[Steampunkette]

I have heard of 13th age, but not played. My take is that either you let players take whatever, and flavor however, or you have to mediate it somehow. Folks like myself who would want the mediation are both concerned with immersion and mechanics. I'd prefer the system to take that burden off my GM duties personally. Though, you are correct this is a subjective perspective and likely many tables wouldn't have a min/max problem with it. Also, many tables would be ok with a paper, rock, scissor approach where items don't matter at all and class contains all the mechanics. I think I would prefer that approach myself to policing 5E or other close fantasy derivatives. YMMV.

Nothing in the world makes me sadder in myself with not being better versed in a wider variety of systems than statements like this... I would love to just pull out alternatives hand over hand just to offer you various systems, even to just slap them into 5e if it made you happy.

And yeah, I largely agree. It's gonna be based on the table. I just put it in the thread not as a "Shut up, everyone, and do this!" but as more of an "This hasn't been mentioned and can be a great way to do it so someone should say it and show how it's always been an option" post.

I worry I may have miscommunicated that in my first post.

 

[Arilyn]

I have found the reskinning, refluffing and ability to swap around class features in 13th Age solves a lot of problems. It's also very freeing.

 

[payn]

Nothing in the world makes me sadder in myself with not being better versed in a wider variety of systems than statements like this... I would love to just pull out alternatives hand over hand just to offer you various systems, even to just slap them into 5e if it made you happy.

And yeah, I largely agree. It's gonna be based on the table. I just put it in the thread not as a "Shut up, everyone, and do this!" but as more of an "This hasn't been mentioned and can be a great way to do it so someone should say it and show how it's always been an option" post.

I worry I may have miscommunicated that in my first post.

I likely overacted myself to bad experiences with this. I might have taken this as a general recommendation as opposed to a specific one. It's all good I'm happy to discuss it and glad you brought it up.

 

[James Gasik]

Yes changing the description of things only works if it's not used to bypass rules. A DM could allow a lightning-themed Wizard to have a "Shock Sphere"- a Fireball that deals Lightning damage, but it is still basically a fireball. Or the classic "my son, the Fire Archon", where a developer in a home game let his son play a "monster" that was actually just a Rogue, save that their attacks did fire damage. Oh did I perform a quick escape? Instead you vanish in a puff of smoke.

I played a game with a barroom brawler whose "sword" was a broken beer bottle and whose "shield" was a broken bar stool. It didn't cause any waves.

I also once played in a desert themed campaign where everyone was a human- you could still play other races, but now instead of being an Elf you were a "thin, agile human", instead of being a Halfling you were a child hero, that sort of thing. It still created a few oddities like, why did being thin and agile let me see in the dark, but overall, it didn't impact the game much.

Now if someone says, like payn pointed out, I have a dagger that does greatsword damage, that starts to step on game balance, and the DM had better watch out. Or allowing a "thunderball" instead of a Fireball- then you have to ask yourself how often resistance/immunity/vulnerability to thunder comes up, and if that's something you are willing to accept.

I don't actually engage in changing the descriptions of things myself often as a player- I'm usually happy to work my creativity around what the books say. But as a DM, I don't mind it at all, if it helps my players out. A thematic spellcaster who focuses on one element is something you see a lot in fiction, but the game doesn't really support this. Most of the best damage spells are fire- sometimes there's a good reason for this, sometimes not.

A radiant Flame Blade sounds cool as heck, but you have to ask yourself if that's going to cause problems down the road. A

 

[FrogReaver]

This is called an argument to ridiculousness. It's a type of logical fallacy, and you should avoid it going forward.

It's also a specific form of strawman argument.

Reductio ad Absrudum is a valid logical argument. It's just soo dang hard to set up correctly that usually the implementation makes the attempt into a logical fallacy instead of a sound logical argument. The absurdum part can quickly morph into a strawman if the rest of the argument wasn't properly set up. (On a side note: most people incorrectly call sound reductio ad absurdum arguments strawmen even when they are not).

 

[Voadam]

You don't need to tell your players that Warduke is wearing plate armor when you show them that image. Just let them try to hit his AC and see whether they manage it or not. Y'know?

And if they loot the body, just call it "Warduke's Armor" and offer no further explanation as to why it is as protective as plate armor. It just is.

Warduke is a pregen PC in that module, it is XL1 Quest for the Heartstone, so you do have to tell the PCs as they look over their options.

 

[James Gasik]

Just tell them he's so awesome he doesn't need armor, it's just so Strongheart doesn't feel bad.

I used to have Warduke's toy as a kid, I wonder what happened to it?

 

[Steampunkette]

Warduke is a pregen PC in that module, it is XL1 Quest for the Heartstone, so you do have to tell the PCs as they look over their options.

He's an NPC in The Wild Beyond the Witchlight, though!

Point being, you can fluff it because it's not really super important whether it's plate mail or splint mail or some other kinda armor. It -looks- cool, and that's enough.