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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5627666" data-attributes="member: 54877">Assume a character with a rapier and buckler, wearing light armor, well-trained in its use, must hold a short, 10 foot wide corridor against a few heavily armored, spear-wielding opponents who--according to the system--are collectively an equal match for the character, roughly. (If he doesn't hold it, then the other foes crowding behind his current opponents will fan out into a larger room and overwhelm his wizard and thief buddy before than can finish whatever they are doing that will let them get away.) In any version of D&D, for a person reasonably understanding of weapons, this is likely to lead to "disassociation"--assuming the theory is to have any meaning. Even using Jameson's version, which is shedding all the bad baggage of the original, every version of D&D will have elements in this scenario that lead to "disassociation". Pin this guy in place, and he can't win the scenario as listed. No version of D&D has provided movement mechanics (not even 4E) that gets around this objection. So same as when this kind of thing came up in Basic, some 30 years ago, we either arrange to have a longer corridor or something better to work with, or we shorten the time needed on the wizard and thief end, to make it work out, or if we are playing a killer game--maybe leave it up to luck in a bad situation, possibly leading to a TPK.  Thing is, you can always contrive a situation where the fiction seems a little out of joint with the mechanics. If you don't want this, one of the best ways to avoid it is to complicate the situation enough so that it doesn't come down to fighter chained to a floor in an empty room dodging a fireball. But yes, people have blissfully played out exactly that scenario and suffered no such feeling of disassociation. That's because they don't know what spears in competent hands are going to do the poor fencer, stuck in a relatively narrow place. That is, what they brought to the table was more important. Only in this case, it let them ignore a potential simulation hole in the mechanics. If it bothered them enough 30 years ago, they probably did go to RuneQuest. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /></blockquote>

Verification