Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="mlund" data-source="post: 6065937" data-attributes="member: 50304">Actually, Indy seldom fells any foes outside of a punch to the jaw. The one time they tried to make a spectacular melee combat scene for Indy, Harrison Ford did a brilliant ad lib to draw a gun and shoot the big bad swordsman and the stunt-man sold it beautifully.But more to the point, the image of a whip-cracking adventurer that he evokes should be accommodated in the D&D system (which is much more combat oriented and less chase-prone than an Indiana Jones movie) - not penalized.Likewise the Great Sword is part of a signature image of Conan. Then there's the functional role of the Elven Archer. I don't want a system that tells him to stick it in his pointy ear and use that sling, javelin, or crossbow or pay the price. It's his character.What I'm asking for is that options be left open for everyone to do their own thing unmolested. Taking an attitude of "Your character will take what I want to give you," is forcing things down the throats of others. My position is simply that the Core game's loot-management and weapon damage infrastructure should not penalize characters, directly or indirectly, who take on a signature weapon - especially not considering the numerous tropes of things like awakened items, ancestral weapons, and racial weapon preferences that are already well established.I've played a fair share of those types of characters and enjoyed them. I've also played character concepts and with other people that had character concepts that didn't function that way. Both style of play should be free to play without penalty. It's up to the individual player, not anyone else.That's an unnecessary failure of game balance, and frankly it can come across to a player as being petty so I avoid it like the plague. It violates the Rule of Cool and the Rule of Fun so that people can enforce their vision on someone else's character - even to the point of aesthetics.Since its narrative fiction just about anything can be rationalized to make sense if you spend about a minute on back-story when appropriate. The real point isn't that you need quantum loot all the time, but rather that a sub-set of characters shouldn't be suffering the imbalance of losing out on 50, 80, or 100% of the value of what they do find due to exchange rates (or a lack thereof) when they want to stick to their image for their own character. If they aren't gaining undue advantage from it the rules shouldn't get in the way.- Marty Lund</blockquote>

Verification