Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="PJ-Mason" data-source="post: 2412368" data-attributes="member: 12285">LOL. Which proves what? I think you have me mistaken with people who prefer another edition of D&D. That ain't me. If i do play D&D again, it'll be 3.0. Though i might try 1.0 again, just because its been so long since i played. Heck, if i played D&D again, it would be Arcana Evolved. Its fairly much the same, but the differences are enough to make it a lot of fun.My personal version of that would be:Player: I attack him.ME: Go for it.Player: Wait, i try to disarm.Me: Ok. Roll to hit, if it succeeds, you disarm him.I don't see the need to have a fighter specialize by taking a feat, just so he can try to disarm people with efficiency or to avoid getting penalized (AOO) for trying something different than just attack....again. Making alternate manuevers harder than just to attack or even inaccessible by way of requiring them to get a feat to do something (like swinging harder) a trained warrior should already be able to do is no way to encourage them to do it. Which was exaclty the point i was trying to make in regards to the other posters supposition that 3E's extensive rules allowing players more freedom of action than DM's Fiat. The feat mechanic is a great idea that is terribly wasted and under-utilized.The grappling rules aren't exactly a simple roll in 3rd edition, either.</blockquote>