Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Cap'n Kobold" data-source="post: 7925566" data-attributes="member: 6802951">By the definition: if it is a mechanical rule (crunch), it is not fluff. However fluff can impact rules, and vice versa. For example I would regard the tenets of the Paladin oaths as crunch, but the tenets of the Oath of Devotion are what lead to the fluff statement &quot;A Paladin swears to uphold justice and righteousness, to stand with the good things of the world against the forces of darkness, and to hunt the forces of evil wherever they may lurk.&quot;Other Paladins such as Conquest for example, do not abide by that flavour text.&nbsp;I'd probably regard it as a rule, but one that the application and interpretation is hazy.For example I'd regard the example of the Star Wars Jedi (assuming built with valid D&amp;D mechanics) in the FR game as against the base precepts of the game as laid out by the DM. Its not technically against the rules in the same way that generating your character at 5th level when the DM says characters start at level 1, or rolling for ability scores when the group uses the point-buy variant are also not technically against the rules.&nbsp;I'd generally regard that as an &quot;ask your DM&quot; call. I've had a warforged character be the animated guardian of an ancient temple rather than a soldier created en mass through a semi-industrialised arms dealership for example, and not regarded that as homebrew or changing the rules. &nbsp;This opinion seems to be the major source of contention in this thread. You and some others believe that the flavour text is part of the rules. I and some others believe that it is simply a guideline. For example the class flavour text is there to &quot;broadly describe a character's vocation&quot;.&nbsp;True, but people draw that line differently, and in many cases there will be some things that are within the rules on the &quot;no&quot; side, and things against the rules on the &quot;fine&quot; side.I would like to think that most of&nbsp; us would draw that line in reasonably similar places, and it would just be whether they regarded it as homebrew or not where the main difference of opinion lies.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Cap'n Kobold, post: 7925566, member: 6802951"] By the definition: if it is a mechanical rule (crunch), it is not fluff. However fluff can impact rules, and vice versa. For example I would regard the tenets of the Paladin oaths as crunch, but the tenets of the Oath of Devotion are what lead to the fluff statement "A Paladin swears to uphold justice and righteousness, to stand with the good things of the world against the forces of darkness, and to hunt the forces of evil wherever they may lurk." Other Paladins such as Conquest for example, do not abide by that flavour text. I'd probably regard it as a rule, but one that the application and interpretation is hazy. For example I'd regard the example of the Star Wars Jedi (assuming built with valid D&D mechanics) in the FR game as against the base precepts of the game as laid out by the DM. Its not technically against the rules in the same way that generating your character at 5th level when the DM says characters start at level 1, or rolling for ability scores when the group uses the point-buy variant are also not technically against the rules. I'd generally regard that as an "ask your DM" call. I've had a warforged character be the animated guardian of an ancient temple rather than a soldier created en mass through a semi-industrialised arms dealership for example, and not regarded that as homebrew or changing the rules. This opinion seems to be the major source of contention in this thread. You and some others believe that the flavour text is part of the rules. I and some others believe that it is simply a guideline. For example the class flavour text is there to "broadly describe a character's vocation". True, but people draw that line differently, and in many cases there will be some things that are within the rules on the "no" side, and things against the rules on the "fine" side. I would like to think that most of us would draw that line in reasonably similar places, and it would just be whether they regarded it as homebrew or not where the main difference of opinion lies. [/QUOTE]

Verification