D&D 5E What rule(s) is 5e missing?

[James Gasik]

wait did they loose there AC all attacks and spells with that sword?
and did the skilled character who lost his picks not have to replace them too?

I mean, what are you going to attack with if you're a Fighter and you lose your sword?

We're not exactly in the era where people lug around golf bags of different weapons, you know.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

why is it fair to take away 1 piece of equipment a character needs but not another?

You can still pick a lock without thieves tools, you just do so without the tool bonus. Also note I said "can get it open but you lose the tool" giving the player the option of locked door+tool OR open door.

 

[Vaalingrade]

So... when they pick a lock without the tools, do they break their fingers?

 

[James Gasik]

If it's a fail forward option, they probably make a lot of noise and summon wandering monsters.

 

[tetrasodium]

I mean, what are you going to attack with if you're a Fighter and you lose your sword?

We're not exactly in the era where people lug around golf bags of different weapons, you know.

Your other sword or the other other sword you used to use but still carry because you can carry quite a few hundred pounds before getting mildly inconvenienced?

 

[James Gasik]

Your other sword or the other other sword you used to use but still carry because you can carry quite a few hundred pounds before getting mildly inconvenienced?

What if my DM uses the Encumbrance variant and I'm a Hexblade with noodle arms but a charming smile? : )

 

[Lanefan]

I mean, what are you going to attack with if you're a Fighter and you lose your sword?

We're not exactly in the era where people lug around golf bags of different weapons, you know.

Maybe not golf bags, but a Fighter who doesn't keep at least one backup weapon on hand has only him-herself to blame should the first one break or get dropped off a cliff...or a ship.

 

[glass]

I must be missing the distinction, Holy Word can kill nongood creatures, isn't that causing suffering to neutral people?

Not specifically "targeting Neutral folks for suffering", which was @Vaalingrade's claim.

But that's okay because Fireball, also a notable Good Spell For Good People To Use also grievously wounds innocent bystanders.

I assume this is supposed to be sarcastic, but despite holy word having the Good descriptor and fireball not, using either to kill neutral enemies is fine and using either to kill innocent bystanders is not. Either way, nobody is getting "patted on the back" for the latter, which was also part of the original claim.

---

Again, nobody is required to like alignment mechanics, and nobody is required to justify there preferences. But is you do try to justify your preferences, try keep the justification accurate.

There is no need to mischaracterise spells like holy word - especially when sanctify the wicked is right there, in all its horrible glory. Nothing says double-plus good like a year of continuous brainwashing and torture!

_
glass.

 

[James Gasik]

Not specifically "targeting Neutral folks for suffering", which was @Vaalingrade 's claim.

I assume this is supposed to be sarcastic, but despite holy word having the Good descriptor and fireball not, using either to kill neutral enemies is fine and using either to kill innocent bystanders is not. Either way, nobody is getting "patted on the back" for the latter, which was also part of the original claim.

---

Again, nobody is required to like alignment mechanics, and nobody is required to justify there preferences. But is you do try to justify your preferences, try keep the justification accurate.

There is no need to mischaracterise spells like holy word - especially when sanctify the wicked is right there, in all its horrible glory. Nothing says double-plus good like a year of continuous brainwashing and torture!

_
glass.

But then they are Redeemed, so that's Good because they are Good! Wait...

 

[tetrasodium]

What if my DM uses the Encumbrance variant and I'm a Hexblade with noodle arms but a charming smile? : )

PHB107 "You can use your action to create a pact weapon in your empty hand. You can choose the form that this melee weapon takes each time you create it (see chapter 5 for weapon options). You are proficient with it while you wield it. This weapon counts as magical for the purpose of overcoming resistance and immunity to nonmagical attacks and damage.". Or you could use a cantrip, hexblade still gets those. Even with the variant encumbrance that should have been default or a lightly encumbered state like 3.x had a dagger is only one single pound if your hexblade is not blade pact. You could even grab a fallen weapon from a dead foe or something.