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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Storyteller01" data-source="post: 2326910" data-attributes="member: 20931">No such thing as an objective rule,or else we wouldn't be discussing interpretation. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />This would be where subjectivity and common sense come into play. Using a pole arm as a lance isn't that much of a stretch (they are the same size and average damage). Using a longbow as a crossbow is a bit different (as is using a shortsword as a great sword, or a glaive as a spiked chain), and goes against the intent of the orignal arguement. <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=";)" />Although, is is rumored that the three-sectional staff came into being because a monk was forced to use a broken quarterstaff. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> Goes back to applied common sense.Read combat journals and training manuals. Weapons use IS application of method and technique. It's why similar weapons were easier to learn individually: the same principles could be applied to each weapon.PS: note the statement says 'similar'. That would apply to weapons using the same general physics, which the glaive/spiked chain comparisons do not. The crossbow/longbow comparison is similar, except for the crossbow providing a 'third hand' to hold the string while you aim. So if you can create a means for another appendage to hold the string (say a mouth or foot) go for it. Your game. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />The greatsword/shortsword is a bit of a stretch, but you've misinterpreted my original statement. In my glaive/lance example, the glaive used the reduced damage rate of the lance. If you feel the need to use a greatsword for 1d6, at a -4 to hit, go for it. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Again, this goes to semantics and interpretation. The listed rule does not specifically state this.But dealing in terms like 'must' and 'by the rules' (as ambiguous as they are) leaves little room for player creativity. YMMV <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification