Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 6941308" data-attributes="member: 6785785">This all relies on such awareness of the game mechanics on the part of the characters....some of which is observable, yes, but quantifiable? Not sure. I prefer for the rules to be a representation of some kind of physics, rather than determining the physics. Most of the time, when someone is hit or stabbed by a sword, they suffer a wound. The severity of the wound has as much or more to do with the location of the hit, the strength of the attacker, and other factors as it does with the weight and/or design of a blade.For me this applies equally to the aspects of the game that are purely fictional...when a cleric looks at a wounded ally he doesn't think &quot;wow, he's down 53 HP, I better cast Cure at 4th level!&quot; Instead, he sees a gravely wounded fellow, and decides to expend more of his magical energy to heal his friend. I mean, people don't generally take 8 to 16 hits from a longsword before finally dropping dead...so the rules are clearly meant to be a representation, and designed with providing a fun game in mind. I don't think we're supposed to assume you should alter what we know about human physiology and so on in order to match the rules. So really, for me, having a character view another character's choice of weapon as being a poor one because they picked the less damaging weapon is pretty silly. It's the tail wagging the dog.A player can complain about it as a suboptimal play option....but given that we're talking about a maximum damage differential of 2 points, they're being pretty nitpicky at that point, in my opinion.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="hawkeyefan, post: 6941308, member: 6785785"] This all relies on such awareness of the game mechanics on the part of the characters....some of which is observable, yes, but quantifiable? Not sure. I prefer for the rules to be a representation of some kind of physics, rather than determining the physics. Most of the time, when someone is hit or stabbed by a sword, they suffer a wound. The severity of the wound has as much or more to do with the location of the hit, the strength of the attacker, and other factors as it does with the weight and/or design of a blade. For me this applies equally to the aspects of the game that are purely fictional...when a cleric looks at a wounded ally he doesn't think "wow, he's down 53 HP, I better cast Cure at 4th level!" Instead, he sees a gravely wounded fellow, and decides to expend more of his magical energy to heal his friend. I mean, people don't generally take 8 to 16 hits from a longsword before finally dropping dead...so the rules are clearly meant to be a representation, and designed with providing a fun game in mind. I don't think we're supposed to assume you should alter what we know about human physiology and so on in order to match the rules. So really, for me, having a character view another character's choice of weapon as being a poor one because they picked the less damaging weapon is pretty silly. It's the tail wagging the dog. A player can complain about it as a suboptimal play option....but given that we're talking about a maximum damage differential of 2 points, they're being pretty nitpicky at that point, in my opinion. [/QUOTE]

Verification