Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 7608435" data-attributes="member: 4937">As far as I can tell, you aren't actually disagreeing with me.For example, I said: &quot;Addiction and other things like that should be treated as color unless they are established mechanically by some process of play.&quot;For example, if the player in a hypothetical rule set had taken a defect 'Addiction (Alcohol)' on character creation in exchange for getting an extra feat (say 'Power Attack'), then presumably that feat would under certain conditions force a saving throw on the PC, which if failed would result in alcohol intoxication.&nbsp;&nbsp; But in the absence of such a thing, alcohol addiction is the explanation for the PC's low wisdom, and exists as color - no additional mechanical penalty is required unless the player chooses to have his PC drink to excess for whatever reason.&nbsp;&nbsp; Thus, even if the persuasive Belgian Monk is around with a couple of extra kegs, as I'm advising people here there is no saving throw, no additional penalty to wisdom, and no compulsion on the player to drink beyond their own choice in the matter.&nbsp;&nbsp; Thus, someone with low wisdom and the color of an alcohol addiction doesn't get a double penalty on his perception check to stand a watch.On the other hand, a player that had established as part of the color of his character that he was a hard drinker, if a spell like suggestion was used to compel the PC to drink, the player could not claim that to the PC the suggestion was unreasonable and so receive any sort of saving throw bonus.&nbsp;&nbsp; Whereas, a player who had strictly played his character as a sober ascetic could reasonably make this claim.&nbsp;&nbsp; Likewise, one could easily imagine a magic brew which if sipped resulted in some sort of charm effect which mimicked the mechanics of suggestion, and upon sipping such a brew the same logic would apply.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 7608435, member: 4937"] As far as I can tell, you aren't actually disagreeing with me. For example, I said: "Addiction and other things like that should be treated as color unless they are established mechanically by some process of play." For example, if the player in a hypothetical rule set had taken a defect 'Addiction (Alcohol)' on character creation in exchange for getting an extra feat (say 'Power Attack'), then presumably that feat would under certain conditions force a saving throw on the PC, which if failed would result in alcohol intoxication. But in the absence of such a thing, alcohol addiction is the explanation for the PC's low wisdom, and exists as color - no additional mechanical penalty is required unless the player chooses to have his PC drink to excess for whatever reason. Thus, even if the persuasive Belgian Monk is around with a couple of extra kegs, as I'm advising people here there is no saving throw, no additional penalty to wisdom, and no compulsion on the player to drink beyond their own choice in the matter. Thus, someone with low wisdom and the color of an alcohol addiction doesn't get a double penalty on his perception check to stand a watch. On the other hand, a player that had established as part of the color of his character that he was a hard drinker, if a spell like [I]suggestion[/I] was used to compel the PC to drink, the player could not claim that to the PC the suggestion was unreasonable and so receive any sort of saving throw bonus. Whereas, a player who had strictly played his character as a sober ascetic could reasonably make this claim. Likewise, one could easily imagine a magic brew which if sipped resulted in some sort of charm effect which mimicked the mechanics of [I]suggestion[/I], and upon sipping such a brew the same logic would apply. [/QUOTE]

Verification