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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Belzbet" data-source="post: 5880712" data-attributes="member: 6678902">I am all for realism in the game but I just dont like the mechanics and just because someone can come up with a reason why his warforged SHOULDNT get the penalty to take 20 doesnt mean I should let it in the campaign. I would implement the take 20 penalty rule without needing to justify it using "realism." So the "immune to fatigue" bit would make no difference to me. If you use realism to justify house rules then your players are going to turn around and find holes in your reasons (and then abuse your house rules). Since in real life exceptions come a dime a dozen. I know many of you disagree but I dont think every house rule (or any house rule for that matter) needs to be justified using realism. I dare say that most house rules are not justifed using "real world logic" but "game world logic & a DM's intuition/decision/thought on the matter." Now, if I come to find out that my PC's hate the house rule THAT is important not a nod to realism.Quite frankly I dont see what you guys are trying to say with the realism bit anyway. If you search over and over then you still may not find what you are looking for, that happens all the time in the 'real' world. And skill and ability isnt really the issue either. In the REAL WORLD you dont need much skill to search for things so saying "well a PC should be able to find everything that their skill and ability allows" is actually NOT a nod to realism but a nod to the games mechanics that govern skills and abilities of PC's, (which is what I am upset with; just because the mechanics are emant to SIMULATE the real world to an extent doesnt mean they  should be checked against the real world).But, alas, I think we are just arguing about different play/Dming styles.</blockquote>

Verification