Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 6862947" data-attributes="member: 48965">I never said your logic was puzzling, though I am asking for you to further explain your reasoning in the context of 5e... To clarify...I'm asking why, the monk foregoing the ability to use other weapons and with the unarmed attack being one of a monk's viable options (that does in fact increase in damage as he goes up in level and cannot be disarmed, is naturally hidden etc.)  why he should get some kind of advantage for that because of his "vow" but if I am in turn limiting myself to two-handed weapons, when I have a much wider repertoire I could use (the same thing our hypothetical monk is doing) you don't see this as this as a disadvantage... why is that??In other words...1. what is your original logic behind the fact that something like the vow for inspiration is even necessary.2. Where does the line get drawn once you do something like that?  What if I limit myself to 1-handed weapons... or blunt weapons or... well I think you get the point.  What is the criteria where one is allowed to have thus type of vow and another isn't in 5e. None specifically but I've played both HeroQuest and FATE and unsurprisingly enough they are similar enough in the area of free-form descriptors that I don't think the particulars are all that relevant for the point I am trying to make.If you go back and read the post you are referencing, I am quite clear in that I am talking about mechanical weight (though you wouldn't know it by the sentence you chose to selectively pick without context)...I never claimed it wasn't located in the fiction... go back and read my posts, they are about mechanical weight. Now what I did say about weight in the fiction was that the game in and of itself doesn't give any weight to that either, instead the heavy lifting of whether a particular descriptor has weight in the fiction is shouldered by either the GM and/or the play group consensus... Emphasis mine... since you used the term "might"...what determines if it does or doesn't matter?  Do FATE or HeroQuest give hard and fast rules for determining the fictional weight of descriptors?  Or is it basically up to the group as I said earlier? Again that word might... how does this work for someone who wants abilities that allow him or her to affect or impact the fiction without having to relyy on the GM/ player groups consent?  Honestly this seems like the exact opposite of what the OP is talking about.We're still using words like probably... That again makes me feel as if this stuff is kind of up in the air until the GM or the group makes a ruling.  You say Dagger Devrish probably couldn't be used to attack from across the road as a procession goes by.... but why not?  I could see part of Dagger Devrish being a wild whirlwind like attack of multiple throwing daggers that whizz and whip through the unaware participants in the procession... but another GM might find that unacceptable.  That's what I mean when I say the weight is pushed to the participants.  From the above you (the GM) or the group are actually determining when and if my descriptors are effective... is that correct?  If so what weight are the actual rules determining when it comes to fiction? I disagree... When I use daggers in 5e I know they can be thrown, I know how far, I know how much damage they do.  There are rules for attacking through cover (the procession) if I want to throw them at a sword saint on the other side of it.  For skills there are descriptions (under ability checks) that set the baseline for what they should encompass and for some actions under them (such as swimming, climbing, spotting something, etc.) hard rules... there are none for free-form descriptors.  IMO that's the difference I am pointing too when I say in one (5e) I am adjudicating in the other (FATE, HeroQuest) I am creating the "rules" for what descriptors can accomplish, whole cloth.</blockquote>

Verification