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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="fusangite" data-source="post: 2809772" data-attributes="member: 7240">Except that fighting that well without weapons, moving that fast, etc. are intrinsically magical. When people can shoot magical bolts of fire out of their hands, D&D has to provide a magical explanation otherwise suspension of disbelief collapses. The same is true of people running up walls, etc. You can't sell the monk without the ki/chi. Any ability the monk has that is not simply a consequence of being really really really strong is essentially a magical ability. The monk doesn't become more credible shorn of flavour text anymore than the sorceror would. As for your anthropological reasoning...An overlord is far more likely to crack down on secret societies who teach his peasants to kill people with one blow than he is to start confiscating farm tools.Not true at all: (a) feudal lords were incapable on a personnel basis of running a weapons control program (for goodness sake, the Canadian government today doesn't have enough resources to actually regulate who has guns despite spending billions of dollars over 10 years!); (b) feudal lords liked having peasants they could march into battle; (c) northern European farming methods required the use of potentially lethal iron tools.So, explain to me why lords would set up a system whereby they couldn't defend their assets or make a profit for themselves. Nobody is going to tolerate a system where their labour supply is constantly being killed, their crops burned, etc. unless they absolutely have to. They are simply not going to enact laws, on a large scale, that will decimate their own economic base.That sounds like it could be a neat idea for a particular game world but that doesn't make it a legitimate core class.</blockquote>

Verification