Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 7760149" data-attributes="member: 71699">This is a feature of bounded accuracy that some players have picked up on: it produces a modifier range that paints characters as capable of heroic feats - such as out arm-wrestling a Storm Giant. An egregious failing in a game mechanic can point to mistaken interpretation, as the designers might be expected to have fixed anything obvious. But this isn't an egregious failing. Think of Beowulf wrestling and ripping the arm off Grendel, a monstrous creature of giant-strength that no other man could match, directly descended from Cain. It's just the rules working as written.Two examples -<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Say we have a level 1 character, Strength 11, no Athletics. Their modifiers are +0 vs +14. The giant wins in roughly 24 out of 25 attempts. Or with Athletics, their modifiers are +2 vs +14. The giant wins roughly 23 out of 25 attempts.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Or say instead we have the sort of higher-level hero capable of arm-wrestling a Storm Giant and odds-on winning: the question for each DM is - do they want that in their campaign? Some do, some don't. It's in the scope of heroic fantasy to happen, I think.</li>
</ul>A DM who dislikes that has a couple of good options. One is to rule that arm-wrestling is a form of Grapple. For me that kills a bit of fun, so I might instead say that a first win is needed to start a push or resist being pushed, bringing arms back to vertical, and a second win is needed from a pushed position, to press the arm to the table. A contest in multiple parts is often a good way to create tension. Especially if there are chances to raise the stakes in each position. (Giant, allows the character to push and makes a Deception check, &quot;I think I still have a chance - what say we double our wager?&quot;)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 7760149, member: 71699"] This is a feature of bounded accuracy that some players have picked up on: it produces a modifier range that paints characters as capable of heroic feats - such as out arm-wrestling a Storm Giant. An egregious failing in a game mechanic can point to mistaken interpretation, as the designers might be expected to have fixed anything obvious. But this isn't an egregious failing. Think of Beowulf wrestling and ripping the arm off Grendel, a monstrous creature of giant-strength that no other man could match, directly descended from Cain. It's just the rules working as written. Two examples - [LIST] [*]Say we have a level 1 character, Strength 11, no Athletics. Their modifiers are +0 vs +14. The giant wins in roughly 24 out of 25 attempts. Or with Athletics, their modifiers are +2 vs +14. The giant wins roughly 23 out of 25 attempts. [*]Or say instead we have the sort of higher-level hero capable of arm-wrestling a Storm Giant and odds-on winning: the question for each DM is - do they want that in their campaign? Some do, some don't. It's in the scope of heroic fantasy to happen, I think. [/LIST] A DM who dislikes that has a couple of good options. One is to rule that arm-wrestling is a form of Grapple. For me that kills a bit of fun, so I might instead say that a first win is needed to start a push or resist being pushed, bringing arms back to vertical, and a second win is needed from a pushed position, to press the arm to the table. A contest in multiple parts is often a good way to create tension. Especially if there are chances to raise the stakes in each position. (Giant, allows the character to push and makes a Deception check, "[I]I think I still have a chance - what say we double our wager?[/I]") [/QUOTE]

Verification