Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Psion" data-source="post: 1283157" data-attributes="member: 172">Outdoors adventuring doesn't have to be overland travel. An adventure can be exploring a new area, survival, or investigating activities. Adventures old (X1) and New (Standing Stones) use this as a major element.Those rules are used by you as speed bumps. Not everyone shares your approach to their use. If that's how you like to play, more power to you, but I think it is a mistake to force everyone into one playstyle.Your observation about how the game is run is hardly universal. In various published and homebrew adventures, the placement of outdoor encounters is often planned and deliberate, and various monters books have not skimped on monstrous encounters that are only appropraite outdoors. The staple MM included.Never?Again, you presume to speak for everyone and pidgeonhole them into your playstyle. Further, you still seem to conflate the outdoor elements with "travel". They need not be the same thing! The whole adventure or significant parts of it can occur outdoors.The problem here is the presumption that this particular ability needs to be universally useful. It doesn't. Again, it's okay to have abilities that are only useful in certain situations. If it's only that useful, the rest of the paladin's abilities should be strong enough that on average, the paladin is a competant member of the party (and in 3.0, I have never failed to beleive that they are, based on direct observation of a paladin in the game that was progressed into the high teen levels.) Morphing the ability so it belies the basic concept of the paladin in order to make the ability universally meaningfully is a mistake AFAIAC. It's putting the cart before the horse. Concept should drive the rules, not vice versa.No such thing happened. Unlike 3.0, 3.5 was not based on massive playtesting.Fair enough, but my contention it does not make the game better. It limits the scope of the game, which is inherently less variety. Which is generally a bad thing. You are not the only one who plays the game. It's all well and good that you feel you are served well by this change, but there are a significant members of the D&D playing audience for whom the dungeon is not the end-all be-all of adventuring and such a change is not worth conceptually distorting the paladin.The rules should serve the game, not vice versa.</blockquote>

Verification