Ruin Explorer
Legend
This is the first time you've asked for the quote, so you're mad about your own failure to ask for something lol! Amazing.And yet you still can't seem to quote where that was proposed, or explain how it somehow magically became part of the discussion that everyone else is participating in.
Post #173 - you could have found it yourself if you'd bothered to search!Hold on -- YOU brought up the pedantry of gloves being historically accurate, now you don't want to look too deeply into it?
Also -- if gloves are a fashion accessory, wouldn't you take them off before you do dirty work?
But, more importantly -- if you are going to rely on saving throws, then the dice are telling you something about how the situation played out.
For example, maybe the description of the chest looks like this: The chest has been smeared with an almost imperceptible, deadly contact poison. Any creature touching it with exposed flesh is killed instantly.
versus: The chest has been smeared with an almost imperceptible, deadly contact poison. Any creature touching it must make a saving throw versus poison or be killed instantly.
There's room to quibble, but in the first example the PCs need to approach the situation and potentially make a perception check/search for traps (at disadvantage perhaps?) to notice the poison. If they fail and the rogue tries to pick the lock -- boom, dead, UNLESS the character is established as wearing gloves. Which is up to the player.
In the second example, i would suggest the result of the saving throw could potentially inform us about the presence and efficacy of gloves. Are the worn from battle and adventuring -- that makes sense if they failed their save despite wearing gloves.
I am more of a second example GM most of the time. I like the die rolls to define the world state at times.
Importantly, what you are acknowledging by focusing on this is that your response would be different depending on the nature of the poison.