Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 7219326" data-attributes="member: 12731">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.</blockquote>