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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 6613975" data-attributes="member: 82106">Roughly, but why use different dice if you can simply achieve the same probabilities on a d20 (or something else, d100 used to be popular back in the 70's and 80's though it seems to have been a fad). So, in your games, no matter what a human does he cannot ever be a talented enough miner/engineer/whatever to have even a 1% chance of detecting a sloping passageway? If I have my character go along with a level and check the floors now and then he's just SOL because he isn't short and stubby?My assertion is that the rules need to actually accommodate adjudicating what characters ACTUALLY DO, which is a beef I have with a lot of the rules in older 'classic' D&D. It simply fails to provide for the actual needs of the players doing actual things, and its only excuse is "genre enforcement". Not buying any arguments that make this approach superior <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />People can do stupid things with any game subsystem, but the idea that something should be removed from the game because it might not be used properly is pretty easy to reductio ad absurdum, I won't even practice the exercise here. Nor can I help finding the "you just can't do that" approach that you are espousing to be a good idea. I'd spit if a GM in any modern game I play in these days said to me "no, you can't climb over there, go find a tree to fell in order to get across!" Frankly it made me want to spit back in the day too, there just wasn't much alternative.</blockquote>

Verification