Lhynn
Arcane
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2013
- Messages
- 9,825
Already told you why, they are two completely different mechanics. The first one is to test the characters skill, experience, resourcefulnes and physical prowess, the second one merely tests the monster degree of immunity to magical forces, without the monster actually having to do anything.I know it's a relatively (not extremely) rare defence. That doesn't answer why you have to have two rolls. It's an example of a completely arbitrary rule somebody slapped on "just because."
Saving throws function against different effects, like poison clouds, diseases, assasination, different creatures special abilities, environmental hazards, etc. MR only functions against magic. In most campaigns MR will absolutely never come up.
Also, its an extremely rare thing that takes years of playing to ever experience. Getting to level 9 is an achievement in AD&D.
Flavor text is just as shallow in terms of rules, entirely cometic as well, but it adds something to the game. Its like arguing to an autistic children that doesnt understand the difference that presentation makes.Exactly, and that's a really shallow form of variety. It's entirely cosmetic -- in terms of results, there is no difference between a d20 and a d100 with 5% increments. There is no reason at all to use both, just pick one and stick with it.
Because in this way level doesnt make you better at everything you fucking twat, it just makes you better at your given class. This means that you are not automatically better than the blacksmith at making weapons just because you spend your days murdering lizards in the sewers and get to level while he spends his time making weapons, and why he doesnt get extra hp every time he learns a new method of smelting or whatever the fuck.Yes, but why shouldn't NWPs be allowed to grow like class skills? How does making them rigid, static on/off things contribute to better gameplay?
Holy fucking shit, how is this hard to understand?
Taking a wizard level makes you from just a dude into someone capable of bending reality to his will, it is often agreed upon that you spent the days prior to your advancement getting familiar with the knowledge at hand. This is something thats common to every pnp system ever, you suddenly get better. Theres an understanding that you have spent some time studying whatever you now know.So taking an NWP in Religion makes you go from complete ignoramus to expert, just like that. Also clerics who don't take the Religion NWP don't know jack shit about religion. And that makes plenty of sense. Right.
Clerics get religion NWP for free you fucking twat.
I have, ive done it hundreds of times.Time it.
No. Couldnt be simpler.And that doesn't strike you as simultaneously complex, counterintuitive, and fuzzy?
Because they are simple enough that the DM can sort them out.Exactly: the rules don't say. There is no guidance from the rules for resolving this kind of simple variant of a situation specifically addressed in the situation.
Why would the rules say? im a human being, i can think, they help me plenty by giving me the base chance. Also the situation of bending bars is incredibly rare, very few warriors are that strong, im sure i can manage it if it comes up.The rules are only unambiguous for your set of "standard soft iron bars." If the bars are in any way different -- bronze, steel, rusty, thin, thick, set in crumbly mortar, greasy, etc. -- the rules don't say.
Common sense.They leave it completely up to DM arbitration, with no guidance on how the DM is expected to arbitrate it.
For starters? because then the DM becomes merely a tool, and an intermediate between the player and the rules, instead of the other way around.How is this not worse -- nay, abysmally bad -- compared to a system which (1) gives clear guidelines on how the GM should set a tasks difficulty
Dude, they are not needed. Theres a thinking breathing smart guy at the helm, let him sort it out.and (2) gives clear rules on how to resolve tasks with these difficulties?
Then why bother having rules at all?
Wat? WoD falls into rougly the same "asspulls", its called DMing you stupid cuck. Narrative is more important than rules, and mechanics only work to give a rough idea about what the character can do.This is precisely my beef with AD&D -- outside core combat, the rules are so bad you're falling back on DM asspulls all the fucking time.
There is a specific rule about how much weight a character can carry given their str score if they are doing nothing more than carrying that thing, and it goes far above max carry weight.Exactly: again, the rules don't say. You have to make something up. (I would've taken the Lift Gates probability as the baseline and compared the heft of the boulder to, um, a standard liftable gate, whatever that is, and added a bonus or penalty accordingly. DM asspull again: nothing in the rules to actually recommend, support, or suggest that solution, only because they chose to have a specific rule for "lifting gates" instead of a general rule for "feats of strength," or an even more general one for "resolving tasks with a binary outcome where success is chiefly determined by ability scores rather than skills.")
Sure it is. thats how roleplaying works.AD&D simply cannot resolve any gameplay situation not specifically addressed in the rules. It's all left to DM
You call it asspull, i call it DMing.asspull
They have those NWP for free you fucking twat.Conversely, if applied as they're written, the rules lead to all kinds of completely boneheaded results: the NWPs in particular are hyper-specific and hyper-narrow, so you get stuff like, say, farm boys who know how to milk a cow (Animal Husbandry) but don't have a clue about how to plough a field (Agriculture).
The system is good enough to provide for any situation provided a DM is there doing his job. A system that makes the DM superfluous is not a good system, not even in the context of a cRPG.Outside core combat and thief skills (which are merely clunky), the system is as good as useless.