Micah Sweet
Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
Houserules are always an option (unless you're chained to organized play), and thus always matter. I've pretty much never not used them or had them on the table.
D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.
- Thread starter Reynard
- Start date
- Status
kermit4karate
A strong opinion is still only an opinion.
How's it meaningless? The DM just creates a little table exactly like the one that you or someone else creates for a different game.
Thomas Shey
Legend
Its still meaningless when talking about a given game. You can houserule anything into any game whatsoever, but when talking about what "Game X does" that's meaningless. Its like all the people who talked about how AD&D played when it turns out almost none of the played the game as was actually written; you're effectively talking about different games.
Thomas Shey
Legend
That's the point. At that point comparing two games is meaningless and critiquing a game is meaningless, because houserules become the all-purpose trump card in discussion.
Micah Sweet
Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
They don't see it that way, and personally I believe how you play at your table, including what rules you use and don't use, matters far more than some Platonic ideal of perfect, 100% within the printed rules play, both for discussion and any other purpose.
But you and I have disagreed on this before.
kermit4karate
A strong opinion is still only an opinion.
Larger question: why are we always questioning what "Game X does"?
You're exactly correct about when people talk about how older versions played. No one played them strictly by the book. Does that still need to be clearly stated and clarified in every thread?
clearstream
(He, Him)
In 5e, a rogue starts with light armor training and (unless they invest a feat) would have disadvantage picking locks. So a penalty not a negation.
Sorcerers and wizards start with no armor training, warlocks start with light. Clerics have light and medium and some have heavy. Druids have light. Training in the armor worn is needed to cast spells. So a negation not a penalty.
D&D counts AC into class balance. I think the Lightly and Moderately Armored "half-feats" are fairly costed. Other games balance it in other ways. Daggerheart is an interesting example: some classes effectively benefit more than others from armor and mind less its intrinsic penalties.
Faolyn
(she/her)
What I always find hilarious about pictures like this is, in reality, women didn't start shaving their legs or armpits until the 20th century. I'd love to see a version of this where the artist embraced that fact.
James Gasik
We don't talk about Pun-Pun
In this instance, I kind of cheated- while her outfit is classic sword & sorcery, Jennifer Kale is actually a Marvel Comics character who debuted in the 20th century. She's actually the cousin of Johnny Blaze (Ghost Rider) and an ally of the Man-Thing.
But yes, fantasy (and official D&D) art are chock full of female spellcasters in similar outfits. I can only presume they use cantrips such as prestidigitation to eliminate unwanted body hair. As to why women in a fantasy setting chose to do so...well it's called fantasy for a reason!
Note: I know that while it was in vogue for many years, there are individuals who are less than pleased with "cheesecake" and sexualizing women (don't ask how hold Jennifer Kale was when she first wore that outfit!). I don't advocate or even suggest that characters in D&D actually dress this way- it's terribly impractical, where do you keep your spell components? People everywhere should dress in a way that is comfortable and practical for them! Also, think of the children!
Micah Sweet
Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
Well, that picture is of a women in the modern era.
- Status
