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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6962741" data-attributes="member: 42582">I was re-reading <a href="https://www.rpg.net/oracle/essays/gamesatplay.html" target="_blank">Christopher Kubasik's "interactive toolkit" essay</a> and came across this, which seemed apposite to the discussion of the STR-based, scimitar wielding fighter:The obsession with one caliber or weapon type over another: Although there are gross differences that can be taken into account between weapons, in a piece of fiction all that matters is whether you or your opponent goes down. Weapons are currently focused on so that a certain kind of player can think himself wise and clever in matters paramilitary. Character-based games don't need this baggage. It shifts focus from character and character goals to thoughts about how to get an extra two points of damage in the next fight.If we want a player's choice of weapon to express something about the character (eg cultural tradition), then why do we add elements to that choice (like variable weapon dice) that create incentives that push in other directions?I can see why WotC does this: they are trying to publish rules with maximum market appeal, and some players will insist on variable weapon dice.But for those who don't care about DPR or which sword is bigger than which, why not just give the STR-scimitar guy a d8 to damage like the longsword wielders get?The only reason I can see is because variable weapon dice have become fetishised in the same way as XP-for-kills.</blockquote>

Verification