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="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 6469978" data-attributes="member: 1465">It's interesting that the 5e designers decided to handle Honor and Sanity as ability scores.I am not sure this is going to work smoothly, but in general I appreciate the idea of using an existing framework instead of adding more ad-hoc rules. On the other hand, I've been using d20 Rokugan's own Honor ad-hoc system and IMO it was very nice: there you didn't make Honor checks, but instead Honor worked a little bit like alignment, in the sense that it was primarily a roleplay guide (also to determine reactions to you, but typically without rolls, at least for us). Furthermore, Honor could increase or decrease depending on your actions, i.e. simply by doing honorable or dishonorable things. I can't imagine this to work very well with Honor as an ability score.Sanity sounds easier to make it work, the only issue is that I would expect a normal person to be maximally sane, while as an ability score it represents something different i.e. your ability to resist or overcome some effects (by making ST and checks). It's not the same thing... you'll get some people with high Sanity score to be very resistant and people with low Sanity score to be vulnerable. This is ok, but it is not the same as being sane vs being mad. Conceivable, one PC might be sane but vulnerable, and another might be already a bit mad but resistant to further progress into madness.Yes, how to represent "perceived honor" is a common issue in games with honor.L5R or Rokugan are not part of D&D 5e.</blockquote>

Verification