D&D 5E [ToA] Heat & Heavy (armor)

[Sacrosanct]

LOL you mean the stats that prove D and D 5e has finally arrived at the same sales figures 1e had 30 years ago? The stats that prove D and D has failed to evolve with the times and still only appeals to a small niche market, many of which are the same aging peeps from 1e? Sure, take a victory lap, 4e's attempt to reach out to the wider gaming audience has been soundly defeated - huzzah!

Pretty much everything you said here is factually inaccurate. Like, literally every single point, except maybe the part about appealing to a niche market, because that will always be true of something like a fantasy RPG no matter what. So it was pretty silly to bring up anyway. The rest is just wrong.

 

[shoak1]

Like, literally every single point, except maybe the part about appealing to a niche market, because that will always be true of something like a fantasy RPG no matter what. So it was pretty silly to bring up anyway.

Well we agree here - people who don't play well in the sandbox with others are doomed to not grow in population.

[Sacrosanct adjusts the sign on the corner of his 5e sandbox that says "Purist RPGers only - no Power Gamers allowed unless you BEHAVE!"]

 

[Sacrosanct]

Well we agree here - people who don't play well in the sandbox with others are doomed to not grow in population.

[Sacrosanct adjusts the sign on the corner of his 5e sandbox that says "Purist RPGers only - no Power Gamers allowed unless you BEHAVE!"]

This makes literally no sense at all. How did you get that assumption about me from me pointing out how you are factually wrong on just about everything you said? Secondly, it's not actually true at all. Are you just randomly making things up and pulling them out of the air, throwing them against the wall and hoping something will stick?

 

[Gardens & Goblins]

This makes literally no sense at all. How did you get that assumption about me from me pointing out how you are factually wrong on just about everything you said? Secondly, it's not actually true at all. Are you just randomly making things up and pulling them out of the air, throwing them against the wall and hoping something will stick?

Magic meth is one heck of a ride..



Actually on topic: Folks, throw in whatever rule tweaks & creations you want into your games! Go on, it's ok, I give you my blessing. Personally, when our lot are romping through dangerously hot areas, I'll be tapping into their water supplies and enjoying the cleric's glory as they bask in the light of Creat/Destroy Water.

On simulating reality/realism: Even this very line of simple text is only as realistic as the model you are making in your mind, right now.

Regarding editions: Editions? I prefer to consider them as 'suggestions.'

Happy gaming all!

 

[Tony Vargas]

LOL you mean the stats that prove D and D 5e has finally arrived at the same sales figures 1e had 30 years ago?

It's maybe possibly, perhaps, based on hearsay data, moved in the last three years, units comparable to what TSR was moving each year at the height of the fad.

D&D /probably/ hadn't done that since the end of the fad, but we'd need more vague hearsay to be 'sure.' ;P

The stats that prove D and D has failed to evolve with the times and still only appeals to a small niche market, many of which are the same aging peeps from 1e? Sure, take a victory lap, 4e's attempt to reach out to the wider gaming audience has been soundly defeated - huzzah!

Gotta take the bad with the good. There's a lot of good in 5e. It's OK to be happy that it's doing so well.

It's also OK to reject fallacious appeals to popularity in spite of that. ;|

 

[shoak1]

It's maybe possibly, perhaps, based on hearsay data, moved in the last three years, units comparable to what TSR was moving each year at the height of the fad.

D&D /probably/ hadn't done that since the end of the fad, but we'd need more vague hearsay to be 'sure.' ;P

Gotta take the bad with the good. There's a lot of good in 5e. It's OK to be happy that it's doing so well.

It's also OK to reject fallacious appeals to popularity in spite of that. ;|

LOL always can count on Tony to bring credibility to opposing viewpoints, well done sir. You're not by chance a mediator by trade are you?

 

[Saeviomagy]

Because we're not talking about being "slightly warm". Because out here in the real world heatstroke is a thing that drops people who aren't trekking through a jungle wearing a tin can.

At the end of the day this is all about how much "realism" people want to inject into their games. Some want to gloss over this kind of stuff because they feel like it doesn't add enough to the game to justify the extra hoops everyone has to jump through, but some people enjoy it. Personally I don't sweat this stuff, no pun intended, unless it helps to emphasize an interesting aspect of the adventure, but others like to use it all the time or perhaps not at all. We all do our own thing and it's all good.

The problem is that half-assedly adding rules for it based on personal experience with people of questionable fitness and adaptation isn't adding realism. It's more of the same stuff like the current rules that say that the average adventurer can't complete modern tourist hiking trails without half his party dropping dead.

As an aside, if people want to really put the hurt on the party for trekking through a sweltering jungle remember this: simply drinking an adequate amount of water isn't enough to dodge heatstroke and exhaustion. You also need to rest, a lot. Look up work/rest charts for working in high temps and you'll find that even when doing "moderate work" at temps around the high 80's you're supposed to rest about 30 minutes for every 30 you exert yourself. That's the sort of thing that will really slow down an adventure. If you want it to...

Wait... 31C is supposed to bring you down to a 50% work cycle? Don't tell anyone who lives in Australia that... we'd never get anything done.

Anyway, I'm not personally bothered either way. But if some people want to emphasize the difficulty of being active in a jungle, the more power to them.

I would advise them that armor is largely irrelevant to that, and that the exhaustion rules are far too coarse grained and solidly un-fun to be appropriate.

 

[CapnZapp]

The problem is that half-assedly adding rules for it based on personal experience with people of questionable fitness and adaptation isn't adding realism. It's more of the same stuff like the current rules that say that the average adventurer can't complete modern tourist hiking trails without half his party dropping dead.

You are making the false assumption that D&D should only be unrealistic on the side of super-human feats.

Yes, D&D characters can survive blows that certainly would kill the modern tourist, because D&D is much about combat, unlike (I hope) most real-life hiking trails.

No, D&D characters (and their water vessels, just to cue in another recent thread) move at a snail's pace compared to the reasonably-fit modern tourist, because D&D combat needs to fit on small battlemaps while modern tourists tend to flock to wide open vistas.

So, no, it's not about "realism" either way.

You can certainly add a rule that would make the average commoner drop dead from something that wouldn't bother a modern tourism if that makes for a better, more exciting, game for the adventurers, whose massive resilience NEEDS a more hostile environment if they are going to even notice that the environment is hostile at all.

So, just as with any other argument that tries to bring in real-life comparisons, yours fall flat. It isn't about "real" (objective) realism. It's about what feels right for the group.

And having (heavy) armor being penalized in a jungle setting feels right for a lot of gamers, and so there's all the justification for including it you'll ever need.

 

[Oofta]

And having (heavy) armor being penalized in a jungle setting feels right for a lot of gamers, and so there's all the justification for including it you'll ever need.

Would you have objections to any of the following?

• If you get hit with a critical and are not wearing heavy armor, you suffer a lingering injury from the DMG?
• If you are wearing heavy armor you get resistance to instantaneous area effects such as fire, acid and cold spells and breath weapons?
• If you are wearing heavy armor you take half damage from falling?
• If you are wearing heavy armor you have resistance to slashing damage?

Just a few things off the top of my head that seem like they would be "more realistic".

 

[CapnZapp]

Would you have objections to any of the following?

• If you get hit with a critical and are not wearing heavy armor, you suffer a lingering injury from the DMG?
• If you are wearing heavy armor you get resistance to instantaneous area effects such as fire, acid and cold spells and breath weapons?
• If you are wearing heavy armor you take half damage from falling?
• If you are wearing heavy armor you have resistance to slashing damage?

Just a few things off the top of my head that seem like they would be "more realistic".

While these are all worthy house rules I'm sure, this thread is the wrong place to discuss them.

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app