NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="keterys" data-source="post: 4634411" data-attributes="member: 43019">Rationalize1: to bring into accord with reason or cause something to seem reasonable: as a: to substitute a natural for a supernatural explanation of <rationalize a myth> b: to attribute (one's actions) to rational and creditable motives without analysis of true and especially unconscious motives <rationalized his dislike of his brother> ; broadly : to create an excuse or more attractive explanation for <rationalize the problem>It certainly works to make an excuse or explain away why the decision was made... but that doesn't make it a good decision in the first place. Would dwarves have been unduly harmed by a version of the feat that didn't include superior weapons? Clearly not, as witnessed by the PHB. Is there a notable balance difference between a dwarf in a group that allows AV superior weapons and one that does not? Yes. Is that a preferable situation? No. Etc.Obviously, it gives dwarves toys to play with and people like toys, but dwarves would have been fine spending a feat to use the toys same as anyone else (not like bastard sword didn't gets its fair share of feat expenditures, for instance). Disallowing it would potentially "nerf" some builds, and that's a good reason for players of those builds to not like it... but that doesn't make it a good idea. From a design standpoint, though, is really the worst case. But oh well, some people like it, some people don't.</blockquote>

Verification