Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 9620837" data-attributes="member: 7006">I don't mind complex mechanics necessarily... so long as they don't interfere with the story of the character I want to portray.&nbsp; Complex mechanics that reduce options in order to &quot;be complex&quot; to me are a complete waste.For instance, an example at the most baseline level:&nbsp; D&amp;D has multiple types of weapons, all with various types of statistics.&nbsp; That's &quot;more complex&quot; than just having a single statistic type that gets applied to all weapons.&nbsp; So in theory... having multiple weapons with multiple types of statistics should make those multiple weapons all worthwhile and give us more options for weapons.However... the game makes certain weapons that should be balanced against each other mechanically better than other ones for no reason whatsoever, and thus limit you to the weapons you in theory should be able to use.&nbsp; In 5E14... Handaxe and Mace are both 1d6 damage weapons.&nbsp; Great.&nbsp; Except that in addition to that damage, the former weapon also gets the Light and Thrown properties added to it, while the latter doesn't.&nbsp; Which means if one wanted to dual-wield a pair of 1d6 Simple weapons... they would be stuck with just the slashing Handaxe.&nbsp; That's it.&nbsp; Your only option.&nbsp; A very &quot;complex&quot; weapon chart but which only gives you a single choice.&nbsp; Want to dual-wield a bludgeoning weapon or a piercing weapon just because it makes more aesthetic or story sense for your PC?&nbsp; Whelp... gotta drop down to a 1d4 weapon in the Light Hammer and Dagger instead... for absolutely no reason other than having &quot;mechanical complexity&quot; in the game by having all the different types of weapons on their weapon chart.And D&amp;D has always done this kind of thing a lot... adding complexity for the sake of complexity, while not making that complexity actually worthwhile.&nbsp; See the 3E Grapple rules for a lovely example-- add complexity to the game by allowing PCs to do something different in combat with their turn rather than just hit someone with their weapon for hit point damage... but then make it so unlikely to actually work well or do something useful unless you spend oodles of feats on it that it ends up not being worth any of the trouble.Mechanical complexity is fine if it doesn't end up limiting you and your options.&nbsp; But more often that not the additional complexity just pushes one option to the top of the pile as the best one... and ends up actually reducing it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DEFCON 1, post: 9620837, member: 7006"] I don't mind complex mechanics necessarily... so long as they don't interfere with the story of the character I want to portray. Complex mechanics that reduce options in order to "be complex" to me are a complete waste. For instance, an example at the most baseline level: D&D has multiple types of weapons, all with various types of statistics. That's "more complex" than just having a single statistic type that gets applied to all weapons. So in theory... having multiple weapons with multiple types of statistics should make those multiple weapons all worthwhile and give us more options for weapons. However... the game makes certain weapons that [I]should[/I] be balanced against each other mechanically better than other ones for no reason whatsoever, and thus limit you to the weapons you in theory should be able to use. In 5E14... Handaxe and Mace are both 1d6 damage weapons. Great. Except that in addition to that damage, the former weapon [I]also[/I] gets the Light and Thrown properties added to it, while the latter doesn't. Which means if one wanted to dual-wield a pair of 1d6 Simple weapons... they would be stuck with just the slashing Handaxe. That's it. Your only option. A very "complex" weapon chart but which only gives you a single choice. Want to dual-wield a bludgeoning weapon or a piercing weapon just because it makes more aesthetic or story sense for your PC? Whelp... gotta drop down to a 1d4 weapon in the Light Hammer and Dagger instead... for absolutely no reason other than having "mechanical complexity" in the game by having all the different types of weapons on their weapon chart. And D&D has always done this kind of thing a lot... adding complexity for the sake of complexity, while not making that complexity actually worthwhile. See the 3E Grapple rules for a lovely example-- add complexity to the game by allowing PCs to do something different in combat with their turn rather than just hit someone with their weapon for hit point damage... but then make it so unlikely to actually work well or do something useful unless you spend oodles of feats on it that it ends up not being worth any of the trouble. Mechanical complexity is fine if it doesn't end up limiting you and your options. But more often that not the additional complexity just pushes one option to the top of the pile as the best one... and ends up actually reducing it. [/QUOTE]

Verification