View Single Post

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

  1. - Top - End - #91
    Troll in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGirl

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Bristol, UK

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

    I've numbered Siosilvar's proposals, but not the thing on chakra binds or the query about natural weapons.

    16 -- On Tower Shields. Disagree, although they do need work. The intent, as far as I'm aware, is that the total cover is mutual: you "give up your attacks" because you're denied LoE.

    17 -- Non-Floating Armour. Agree.


    In answer to Siosilvar's proposals:

    18 (S1) -- On Feats. Agree.

    19 (S2) -- On Multiclassing. Agreed. As far as I'm aware, this was a genuine screw-up.

    20 (S3) -- Temporary Qualifications. Agreed. This seems acceptable to me.

    21 (S4) Abstained.

    22 (S5b) -- On Aptitude. The second version seems reasonable.

    In answer to hamishspence:

    23 -- On Lava and Immunities. Agree. I imagine the wording should be:

    A resistance or immunity to fire is also effective against damage dealt by lava or magma.

    In answer to Erikun's proposals:

    24 -- My Weapon Is My Shield: Agreed.

    25 -- Animate Alignment Debate: Agreed. An outright house rule, but again, I'm still willing to rubber-stamp it.

    26 -- Death Watches No Evil: Agreed.

    27 -- Positive Drawbacks to Undead: Agreed.

    28 -- Enchanting Enhanced Projectiles: Disagreed. I agree with the need for a fix, but I prefer Ashtagon's solution of simply banning ammunition from having those enhancements.

    29 -- Swordsaging in Leather or No: Agreed.
    Last edited by lesser_minion; 2012-04-21 at 03:12 PM.