Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="delericho" data-source="post: 6209329" data-attributes="member: 22424">Actually, that's not true.Not necessarily. In theory, one could have the shield allow the character to impose disadvantage on one or more incoming attacks per round. Because it does something different from armour, stacking then doesn't need to apply.Again, not necessarily. Since there's no such thing as a ring of protection in our world, the rules for one can be entriely arbitrary. There's no reason it has to stack with anything.It's not entirely unreasonable to say "nothing stacks". That just means that if multiple defensive measures apply, you use the best.This works even better if you then introduce attacks that can bypass one or more of those forms of protection. Then, characters have a choice - do they go for one defense that's "good enough", or do they invest in multiples to cover them for the odd times their main defense is negated? (And, incidentally, it would give an in-game explanation why the proliferation of firearms gradually led to the disappearance of armour.)Of course, both of these cases are very much in theory. On balance, my preference would indeed for a keyword system (albeit with a very tightly constrained set of keywords). However, I dispute the argument that "no stacking" simply doesn't work.</blockquote>