Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6983440" data-attributes="member: 42582">I guess I feel that this is more a vilainous than a heroic approach, given standard genre conventions.I realise all this, and hadn't intended to imply to the contrary. I was just struck by the contrast between the two posts -  [MENTION=12731]CapnZapp[/MENTION] complaining about genre "deraliment", and then you extrapolating from the mechanics in ways that I felt tended to reinforce CapnZapp's point (from CapnZapp's perspective).As we've already recently discussed (maybe in this very thread?), I prefer to settle genre expectations first and then have mechanics that will deliver them, rather than treat the mechanics as a model for the world and extrapolate out to find out what is possible. (A bit of the latter is of course inevitable in an even remotely mechanically sophisticated RPG, but I like to contain it to peripheral cases, not have it at the core.)So in that sense I'm sympathetic to CapnZapp in a way that you're not. Though, as I've also posted in this thread, I think there was already an edition that mostly solved his particular problems from a "genre first" perspective. And, conversely, if he thinks his two suggested house-rules (STR for damage with bows and crossbows, and OAs for shooting/throwing in melee) are enough to deal with the issue, then problem solved within the context of 5e and (as far as this thread is concerned) we can all go home!</blockquote>