Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Do you plan to adopt D&D5.5One2024Redux?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Hriston" data-source="post: 9317353" data-attributes="member: 6787503"><p>Whether it's ludicrous or not depends on what happens next. There's nothing inherently ludicrous about travelers seeking shelter at a nearby dwelling or common folk protecting one another from an unjust authority. Rustic Hospitality says, "You can find a place to hide, rest, or recuperate among other commoners," so I assume in your example "the door of the nearest commoner" has been identified by the folk hero as a good place to hide after looking around for such a place. Now, whether the person who comes to the door agrees to hide the folk hero depends on whether the folk hero can overcome any natural suspicion of strangers they might have. Luckily, their feature states, "you fit in among them with ease", so it can be assumed the folk hero's mannerisms, way of speaking, and general demeanor transmits to other commoners a sense of trustworthiness and belonging, so the person at the door agrees to hide the folk hero. Whether they agree to hide the rest of the party is another matter because the feature doesn't cover that. I think it's a good beginning to a social encounter. The commoner agrees to hide the folk hero but isn't sure about the other party members, and it's up to the party to convince them to take the risk to help. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Who's to say time isn't spent at the door establishing such a (non-instant) connection. It isn't ludicrous unless you make it ludicrous. </p><p></p><p></p><p>I mean, sure, it states that <em>perhaps</em> a former crew mate captains the ship on which you secure passage. So you <em>might</em> know someone, but if for some reason it doesn't make sense for you to know anyone, there are other options, so I'm not sure why you're focusing on knowing someone. More important to the feature is your connection to the ship on which you gain passage. It could be someone you know, or it could be something else that makes sense in the established fiction. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, no, it wouldn't because you and your fellow gamer (afaik) are not part of an underground criminal network. The "local messengers, corrupt caravan masters, and seedy sailors who can deliver messages for you" are part of such a network. They might be identifiable to the criminal because of the tattoos they wear or any number of such things. They're motivated by their involvement in organized crime. It's their job. The network extends beyond their local city or district. </p><p> </p><p></p><p>This is complete and utter nonsense. Players being able to make stipulations about the fiction as part of the action declarations they make for their characters doesn't make a game any less logical or cohesive than yours. </p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't accept logical inconsistencies <em>are</em> required because I do this without logical inconsistencies. The only people who keep saying they're required don't seem to have much experience using background features to begin with.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Hriston, post: 9317353, member: 6787503"] Whether it's ludicrous or not depends on what happens next. There's nothing inherently ludicrous about travelers seeking shelter at a nearby dwelling or common folk protecting one another from an unjust authority. Rustic Hospitality says, "You can find a place to hide, rest, or recuperate among other commoners," so I assume in your example "the door of the nearest commoner" has been identified by the folk hero as a good place to hide after looking around for such a place. Now, whether the person who comes to the door agrees to hide the folk hero depends on whether the folk hero can overcome any natural suspicion of strangers they might have. Luckily, their feature states, "you fit in among them with ease", so it can be assumed the folk hero's mannerisms, way of speaking, and general demeanor transmits to other commoners a sense of trustworthiness and belonging, so the person at the door agrees to hide the folk hero. Whether they agree to hide the rest of the party is another matter because the feature doesn't cover that. I think it's a good beginning to a social encounter. The commoner agrees to hide the folk hero but isn't sure about the other party members, and it's up to the party to convince them to take the risk to help. Who's to say time isn't spent at the door establishing such a (non-instant) connection. It isn't ludicrous unless you make it ludicrous. I mean, sure, it states that [I]perhaps[/I] a former crew mate captains the ship on which you secure passage. So you [I]might[/I] know someone, but if for some reason it doesn't make sense for you to know anyone, there are other options, so I'm not sure why you're focusing on knowing someone. More important to the feature is your connection to the ship on which you gain passage. It could be someone you know, or it could be something else that makes sense in the established fiction. Well, no, it wouldn't because you and your fellow gamer (afaik) are not part of an underground criminal network. The "local messengers, corrupt caravan masters, and seedy sailors who can deliver messages for you" are part of such a network. They might be identifiable to the criminal because of the tattoos they wear or any number of such things. They're motivated by their involvement in organized crime. It's their job. The network extends beyond their local city or district. This is complete and utter nonsense. Players being able to make stipulations about the fiction as part of the action declarations they make for their characters doesn't make a game any less logical or cohesive than yours. I don't accept logical inconsistencies [I]are[/I] required because I do this without logical inconsistencies. The only people who keep saying they're required don't seem to have much experience using background features to begin with. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Do you plan to adopt D&D5.5One2024Redux?
Top