Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jaelis" data-source="post: 7384899" data-attributes="member: 60210">I see the point of this, and it seems like reasonable game design. It doesn't feel like dnd to me though. I think part of the game for me is the specific level of abstraction it applies to combat, which has been there from the beginning I think. Contemplating your suggestion, it strikes me that the different properties of different weapons is part of what sets that level of abstraction. To try to explain it a bit further, consider a fighter with a sword vs a fighter with a dagger. In the real world I'm pretty sure the sword wielding will have a big advantage. Using damage to reflect that advantage isn't particularly realistic, but it is something. I think in your system, you would say that expertise with the dagger means knowing how to fight effectively against someone with a sword. In some sense, you have the skill to make up for the weapon difference. I don't have any logical beef with that, but it means that expertise with a sword is somehow different than expertise with a dagger which seems a little weird.Maybe the best way to say it is, I would be willing play a game that used this system. But I think I would be disappointed if the next version of dnd used it.</blockquote>