Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="steenan" data-source="post: 4841471" data-attributes="member: 23240">I cannot agree with it. It would be true if the rules of the game were designed to reflect how the real world works. They are not approximation of the real world - in many aspects they are completely unrealistic. And I do not mean that they are an abstraction.They just describe world much different than our and characters much different than real people. Most tactics that would be effective in real world either depend on GM fiat or just plainly don't work. You need to either have your GM ignore a major part of rulebooks or think of tactics that would work in the game world as opposed to our world. And the rules of the game are the only information we may base these tactics on.That is why the rules should be simple and clearly state what they describe and what they don't. If one may destroy the game just by using the rules, it just means that these rules are bad. What most exploits are based on is extrapolating the rules outside of their designed range, like in the "barrel of alchemist fire" example.Some things described in this thread definitely aren't rule exploits from my PoV. There is nothing wrong with using dogs if one is able to buy appropriately trained dogs and is able to command them during a fight. It definitely won't work as a tactic used in every dungeon, just because the dogs will get killed and there is not many appropriately trained ones (silent, not running from monsters, accepting commands from a character who didn't train them) to buy. On the other hand, it will be very good to use from time to time, during missions the party perceives as especially hard.</blockquote>

Verification