Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Andor" data-source="post: 4103709" data-attributes="member: 1879">... If I was at your table and you told me my fighter had extra penalties on top of normal non-proficiency to use the harpoon I would accept it. If you told me it took up a minor action to hold the rope as well as my standard one to tug on it I would be fine with that. If you required special training to pick up a proficiency feat to use the harpoon I wouldn't complain.If you told me I simply couldn't, under any circumstances use the gobbo's harpoon because that was a feature of the goblin I would walk out of your game on the spot. Perhaps you came into the game with 3e and don't know any better, but I've already put up with plenty of that crap under poor GMs in 1st and 2nd edition. No more. For that matter I put up with it in videogames where the bad guys stuff can never be recovered, but they'll drop things they never used. It doesn't make sense in a crpg, but you put up with it because you have to. In D&D if you attack me with 30 orcs wearing plate mail, I am by god going to scavange 30 suits of orc plate. Don't tell me it's gamist and I don't understand it. I understand it. I've seen it before, and I'm sick of it. There is a minimum about of simulation that I must see in an RPG or it's not an RPG anymore, and I won't play it. Period. In the 1st and 2nd editions of D&D the situational nature of the rules meant that it depended on the individual GM whether or not a given campaign was 'simulationist' enough for me. 3rd edition fixed that. The consistency of the rules meant that I never had to put up with nunchucks that automatically disarmed you if a Flind was weilding them, but weren't even a good club in the hands of the PCs. Now we may be going back to those days, and if so it will not be a step forward, I promise you.</blockquote>

Verification