Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Imban" data-source="post: 4018993" data-attributes="member: 29206">Oh, certainly. However...Well, for the same reason flaming quarterstaves work differently: they're different items. For me, if it's ever been mentioned in any book ever, it must be able to be put in D&amp;D. I don't want to hear that &quot;magic imbued into staves creates charged items. Period.&quot;Well, that's really stupid? I mean, honestly I'd let it pass if you actually thought it would be cool or were trying to model source material, but that's Boots of Intellect level stupid there. As far as costing more, that's more or less the system trying to &quot;soft&quot; rule against that (by making it unfeasible to &quot;shift slots around&quot; so per RAW you don't see Boots of Intellect) rather than a hard rule - it's easy to remove if you don't care about associating items and their slots any more than &quot;That isn't retarded, right?&quot; without meaningfully affecting the mechanical working of the game at all.Uh, your head slot. Or your earrings slot. Or one of your accessory slots. Seriously, I've played in games where each of those has been true, because they were based around different things. I suppose that in the &quot;head slot&quot; one, it would indeed make a helmet stop working, because it would count the same as trying to stack any two helmets, both in terms of the mechanical reason and the in-game reason.And I mean, that's a reasonable in-game reason, since having people wear a skullcap, an earring, and a helmet would also be stupid.That's consistency in a way, yes, but as I said in my last post, this is one of the times where I definitely don't want the consistency of a single setting.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Imban, post: 4018993, member: 29206"] Oh, certainly. However... Well, for the same reason [b]flaming quarterstaves[/b] work differently: they're different items. For me, if it's ever been mentioned in any book ever, it must be able to be put in D&D. I don't want to hear that "magic imbued into staves creates charged items. Period." Well, that's really stupid? I mean, honestly I'd let it pass if you actually thought it would be cool or were trying to model source material, but that's Boots of Intellect level stupid there. As far as costing more, that's more or less the system trying to "soft" rule against that (by making it unfeasible to "shift slots around" so per RAW you don't see Boots of Intellect) rather than a hard rule - it's easy to remove if you don't care about associating items and their slots any more than "That isn't retarded, right?" without meaningfully affecting the mechanical working of the game at all. Uh, your head slot. Or your earrings slot. Or one of your accessory slots. Seriously, I've played in games where each of those has been true, because they were based around different things. I suppose that in the "head slot" one, it would indeed make a helmet stop working, because it would count the same as trying to stack any two helmets, both in terms of the mechanical reason and the in-game reason. And I mean, that's a reasonable in-game reason, since having people wear a skullcap, an earring, and a helmet would also be stupid. That's consistency in a way, yes, but as I said in my last post, this is one of the times where I definitely don't want the consistency of a single setting. [/QUOTE]

Verification