The Gaming Den

I'm entirely willing to concede I'm communicating badly, but: Everyone is reading way to much into my mention of 3.5; I only used it as a reference point(as a problem ) for what’s happened in the past. But fuck it, that’s not the point my post, so fuck 3.5, let’s make very simple example: We’re maki...

Dropping the issue with Chamomile to avoid further shitting up the thread, my original points were: My first point lot of shit in the past dealt STR/DEX/CON damage moreso than things that dealt INT/WIS/CHA damage. If STR damage is straight replaced with Fatigued while drawing from a similar pool of ...

Can anyone one confirm that Chamomile is reading the same thread?

Chamomile wrote:Your reading comprehension is abysmal. Firstly, no, Nockermensch did not suggest that a cockatrice should do DEX damage,

nockermensch wrote:I don't think anybody would care much if a cockatrice's touch dealt 1d6 dex damage (Fort Save negates).

Chamomile, can you re-read the thread? Ability damage is a stupid mechanic. You've abstractified general injury to hit points, and you've abstractified a range of other impairments to various conditions , why do you need yet a third orthogonal system of keeping track of impairments that don't stack ...

1) Historically, way more stuff targets Strength/Dexterity/Constitution than it does Intelligence/Wisdom/Charisma. If the condition tracks are potentially very crippling or dangerous, then it’s more likely that Strength/Dexterity/Constitution based classes(read: Martial classes) get shit on. Is tha...

I do see some potential pitfalls with escalating conditions as a replacement for ability damage: 1) Historically, way more stuff targets Strength/Dexterity/Constitution than it does Intelligence/Wisdom/Charisma. If the condition tracks are potentially very crippling or dangerous, then it’s more like...