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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Zak S" data-source="post: 6512110" data-attributes="member: 90370">I've already answered this:You don't answer "Would you want this if it's free?" with "But it isn't!" That's something you say after first establishing whether you want it. Which we still don't know because you still refuse to answer.Again, I am not asking any of these questions yet...Not "Do you think it will be easy to change the loophole?"Not "Is your first priority changing the loophole?"Not "Do you think your game will fall apart if you close the loophole?"Not "What are all the ways you might close the loophole wrong?"Not "Do we call the loophole 'rules' or 'content' before changing it?"I am not asking for various catastrophizations about imaginary problematic rules that you can think up. That would be the next step after figuring out whether closing the loophole is desirable in the first place.There are a great many games that include that idea in their rules (for example: many games have stake-setting mechanics which mean a combat can only be deadly when a player gambles their life on a combat). Which (if any) are right for your group or what new and novel modifications of the existing D&D rules would suit your particular group would depend on a lot of things about your group that I don't know yet because you haven't said. If I give one random solution, it could be easy to shoot down because of requirements unique to your group, but that doesn't mean there is no possible solution. But before we can get into those more complex questions, it's important to know:Were such a solution available at no cost, would you take it--yes or no?If no: then we can talk about why not (I, as yet, have no idea why not).If yes: we can talk about what kinds of costs are too high and which aren't and which situations you would and would not consider a "cost".</blockquote>

Verification