Search Results
6/14/2025, 12:12:18 PM
>>95865870
>I'm the DM here, what I say goes.
And if you aren't? That's not the assumption WE have of the discussion, after all.
>Yes, I quite literally am.
No you are not, houserules and Rule Zero are not rules written in the book. The book having a framework for extension that permits such scenarios be constructed does not change that it's actively distructive for discussions of the default state of play absent use of such.
>Nothing but random meaningless jabber-jawing.
"Can be meaningfully discussed with online randos" is not meaningless in a discussion between online randos. Your volatile response to being called out is EXACTLY why it's important to remove DM variability from the subject.
>That's nice, but I'm the DM and it's banned.
No you are not. You are not permitted to move this goalpost, because we are not playing a specific scenario, we are discussing the general case implied by the contents of the rulebook.
>That's nice, but I'm the DM and it's banned.
It's actually shit like pic related as a mundane variable-strength composite bow, specifically to avoid the -4 I mentioned.
>>95865997
>>95866730
Nice of you to start giving citations, but we're not talking about AD&D because those rules are an utter mess, and the arguments of DM-specificity being dogshit for the subject in question remain.
>I'm the DM here, what I say goes.
And if you aren't? That's not the assumption WE have of the discussion, after all.
>Yes, I quite literally am.
No you are not, houserules and Rule Zero are not rules written in the book. The book having a framework for extension that permits such scenarios be constructed does not change that it's actively distructive for discussions of the default state of play absent use of such.
>Nothing but random meaningless jabber-jawing.
"Can be meaningfully discussed with online randos" is not meaningless in a discussion between online randos. Your volatile response to being called out is EXACTLY why it's important to remove DM variability from the subject.
>That's nice, but I'm the DM and it's banned.
No you are not. You are not permitted to move this goalpost, because we are not playing a specific scenario, we are discussing the general case implied by the contents of the rulebook.
>That's nice, but I'm the DM and it's banned.
It's actually shit like pic related as a mundane variable-strength composite bow, specifically to avoid the -4 I mentioned.
>>95865997
>>95866730
Nice of you to start giving citations, but we're not talking about AD&D because those rules are an utter mess, and the arguments of DM-specificity being dogshit for the subject in question remain.
Page 1