Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="canucksaram" data-source="post: 6920480" data-attributes="member: 6778026">My term "common sense" is meant as "rulings, not rules...suspension of disbelief, not total disregard for disbelief."Another example:  A Ranger's 11th level class feature Volley: If the player were using a crossbow and wanted to use this ability, I'd say no. A combat round isn't long enough to do this, notwithstanding the fact that it's a game with magic and fairies and dragons and such. Suspension of disbelief, not total disregard for it. Thrown knives? Sure. Arrows from a bow? Sure. I'd go further re: arrows and limit the number of targets to the character's Proficiency Bonus (in this case, 4).As for one's mystical nature or inherent toughness being the basis for Unarmored Defense, I disagree with sourcing them so. There was a need to model the ability of a Conan-esque "barbarian" to wear little to no armor in a fight and still be effective (ditto for a monk or "martial artist"), thus the class feature of Unarmored Defense. It allows for a character to have little to no armor and maintain unimpeded stealth and athleticism because of that lack of encumbrance, along with combat effectiveness in spite of not wearing armor. The class feature was never intended to be a super-defense--and if it was, that was a mistake from the get-go.</blockquote>