Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="2eBladeSinger" data-source="post: 4291420" data-attributes="member: 65432">Yes, it’s an inherent disadvantage of armor that it occasionally has to be removed; it isn’t part of one’s body.&nbsp; Any equipment, in general, has this disadvantage.&nbsp; An armor-dependant defender is more vulnerable to this than say, one that has a higher DEX or INT, light armor and a shield.&nbsp; &nbsp; So if I understand, a DM would never be allowed to separate any character from any weapon or any of his gear because of the inherent unfairness (read: unfunness) of such a challenge.&nbsp; Ropes can’t break, spellbooks can’t get stolen, backpacks can’t fall into the drink, because it’s not fair.&nbsp; The only scenario that is fair is having the characters face off against bad guys in a basically even fight with all of the equipment that they’ve so far acquired.&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; If a party is attacked while camping, it will either happen before the armor-dependant defender has had a chance to rest or after he has had a chance to rest.&nbsp; If it is before, then he’ll have to be careful in the fight because of his limited resources, but he’ll have a chance to rest assuming he survives.&nbsp; If it happens after he has had a chance to rest, he’ll probably have his armor on (since he no longer needs to have it off to rest).&nbsp; Essentially, a night-raid won’t deplete the defender of anything for the next day but it will represent a significant challenge.&nbsp; Parties who have been raided at night will get much more clever quickly, IME.&nbsp; They’ll invest in protective magic, sentry rituals, set snares, pick ideal camp sites, think about their watch rotations, etc.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="2eBladeSinger, post: 4291420, member: 65432"] Yes, it’s an inherent disadvantage of armor that it occasionally has to be removed; it isn’t part of one’s body. Any equipment, in general, has this disadvantage. An armor-dependant defender is more vulnerable to this than say, one that has a higher DEX or INT, light armor and a shield. So if I understand, a DM would never be allowed to separate any character from any weapon or any of his gear because of the inherent unfairness (read: unfunness) of such a challenge. Ropes can’t break, spellbooks can’t get stolen, backpacks can’t fall into the drink, because it’s not fair. The only scenario that is fair is having the characters face off against bad guys in a basically even fight with all of the equipment that they’ve so far acquired. If a party is attacked while camping, it will either happen before the armor-dependant defender has had a chance to rest or after he has had a chance to rest. If it is before, then he’ll have to be careful in the fight because of his limited resources, but he’ll have a chance to rest assuming he survives. If it happens after he has had a chance to rest, he’ll probably have his armor on (since he no longer needs to have it off to rest). Essentially, a night-raid won’t deplete the defender of anything for the next day but it will represent a significant challenge. Parties who have been raided at night will get much more clever quickly, IME. They’ll invest in protective magic, sentry rituals, set snares, pick ideal camp sites, think about their watch rotations, etc. [/QUOTE]

Verification