View Single Post

Thread: "Common Sense" approach to rules (RACSD)

  1. - Top - End - #14
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2006

    Default Re: "Common Sense" approach to rules (RACSD)

    Rule 001: Drowning for Health Purposes

    Yes, this rule is just stupid.

    Rule 002: My Thesis: More Complex Is Easier

    Yes, I don't care if it's a corner case, "invisible spell" or "energy substitution" makes a spell EASIER to cast than it would be were it closer to the base spell is simply stupid. It fails common sense which is what was asked for.

    Rule 003: Bonus Legacy Class Levels

    The progression simply does not exist past the maximum level unless there's an epic progression. You can't apply a progression that doesn't exist.

    Rule 004: Superior Unarmed Strike

    Yes, monk training does not make you less capable at hand to hand.

    Rule 005: Dead is Dead

    Yes, it's an oversight that the condition is defined, but not defined properly.

    Rule 006: Using What Comes Naturally

    Yes. I can see declaring that commoners aren't proficient with natural attacks, but I can't see this as worth putting in the rules. Everything should be proficient with natural attacks.

    Rule 007: Wolves with Hooves

    Yes, just a modification for the fact that the writer didn't take into account that not all mounts are horses.

    Rule 008: Dragonblood and heritage

    No opinion.

    Rule 009: It's not armour, it's thick clothing

    Not correct by common sense or history or usage of the language (the first definition I get on dictionary.com is "any covering worn as a defense against weapons"). At what point in "you can enchant it for defense" is this NOT a covering worn as a defense against weapons? Seriously. Heavy cloth was FREQUENTLY used as armor and was considered armor by the makers and the wearers. I simply see no justification for the proposed rule.
    Last edited by Doug Lampert; 2012-04-20 at 12:05 PM.