Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Felon" data-source="post: 3581819" data-attributes="member: 8158">Wow, two or three times a session, huh? Anyone else want a piece of this? Most of the time they get in their land speeder or spaceship and zoom off to where they need to go. You can come up with "marooned" or "enslaved" scenarios where characters are deprived of their possessions, but Endurance is kind of a weak skill for the same reason Spell Mastery is described by D&D designers as a weak feat. Characters are almost never without their gear.Well, you've homed in on why Endurance won't come up every session and won't be of vital importance. Not for most folks anyway. In all the years of playing 3rd edition, I've found it's a rare thing to have a DM ever invoke the fules for forced marches, extended running or swimming, extreme enviironmental conditions, or malnourishment. That seems odd on face value, because long treks across wilderness is par for the genre. Yet, the DM generally doesn't even take note of how many miles the party can travel in an hour. It's usually "a day/week's travel", and then cut to the chase. Maybe there's a random monster encounter before getting there, but that's about it. And this is a game where characters lack mundane means of fast travel. I suspect the DM simply views theses rules as nuisances rather than challenges. They're in dsifavor much the same way traps seem to be falling into disuse. The DM doesn't want the character to *not* get to where the adventure is. He doesn't want the party starving to death, dying ignominiously from exposure, or giving up and going home. But the ironic thing about this discussion is that proving Endurance to be a wonderful skill to train would actually reinforce the discrepency between the scout and scoundrel. I was actually making a concession.</blockquote>

Verification