Common Sense v. D&D

[atemu1234]

Name a few things that regularly happen (be they rules or behaviors) that defy common sense and logic.

I: An Umber Hulk Attacks! I roll to Disbelieve!

[lytokk]

2. You hear an explosion 100 feet away. "Lets go investigate"

[RolandDeschain]

3. I move and attack THEN you move and attack

[Psyren]

Pretty much the entire Dysfunctional Rules Thread is a chronicle of D&D's protracted war with common sense.

[Sneaky Hue]

Wearing Full Plate 24/7? Sure!

[jedipilot24]

By all rights, due to all their brushes with death and all the people they kill on a daily basis, D&D adventurers should have--at the very least--a severe case of PTSD.

[Psyren]

By all rights, due to all their brushes with death and all the people they kill on a daily basis, D&D adventurers should have--at the very least--a severe case of PTSD.

Not sure I agree with that - remember, in D&D settings, generally the adventurers know that there's a point behind it all (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0669.html) (or, depending on your point of view, that there isn't) but either way, they know for sure, and so the existential questions that end up plaguing many commandos and soldiers get more muted. Add to that many of the conveniences of high-magic society, such as not needing to amputate limbs or even deal with scarring in most settings, and age being less of a factor to military effectiveness thanks to magic gear/alchemy etc., and many of the physical ravages from heavy combat don't stick around either.

Untimely death of associates could definitely be a factor - but again, you pretty much know that if you and your buddy had the same patron or alignment that you're probably going to see them again.

[Galen]

My character has 121 hit points, Fortitude save of +14, and Steadfast Determination. He can fall from any height and not risk even a smallest chance of death.

[eggynack]

D&D isn't even in glaring angrily at common sense from across a crowded room territory, let alone in a reasonable relationship with the occasional yet understandable spat. Might take less time to list the places where outcomes perfectly match common sense, in other words.

[EisenKreutzer]

A 20th level Fighter is lying in his bed, soundly asleep.
A 1st lvl commoner sneaks into his room, draws his knife and slits the Fighters throat.
The Fighter mutters in his sleep, swats the commoner away from his face like an annoying fly (killing him instantly), turns over and sleeps on, completely unaffected.

Yay hit points!

[Lightlawbliss]

Wood is not damaged by fire.

Things that can live forever without any energy supply.

Merchants that trade items valuable enough to buy a small kingdom regularly, and don't own a small kingdom.

[eggynack]

Incidentally, I would put someone with a level of durability rougly comparable to that of superman surviving a fall from terminal velocity or the assassination attempt of some arbitrary guy off the street in that vanishingly small common sense category.

[sonofzeal]

Wearing Full Plate 24/7? Sure!

Common misconception, actually. A lot of DM's complain about players being unrealistic with how often they're armored with weapons drawn, but anyone who's been to a weekend LARP can tell you that, no, actually, people can and do wear real armor and have a weapon in their hand for pretty much their entire day if they think they're going to need them. Changing in and out of heavy armor is hard enough that it's easier just to leave it on, and well-made armor is neither uncomfortable nor excessively restricting on day-to-day activities. And depending on the weapon, the only reasons to have it sheathed are for politeness or if you're actively doing something with your hands. Many polearms even make decent walking sticks.

[Septimus Faber]

1st edition? Hit a werewolf over the head with a mountain? Nope, it's fine, you didn't use an enchanted mountain.

'I accept the quest foisted upon me by a random guy in a tavern.'

'I don't shoot the villain halfway through his monologue.'

'Stop a war? Sure! Negotiate an agreement with a band of goblins? You must be kidding!'

'Shall we go out for a little casual reptilian genocide of a night?'

'I go within a 1000-mile radius of the Tomb of Horrors.'

[EisenKreutzer]

Incidentally, I would put someone with a level of durability rougly comparable to that of superman surviving a fall from terminal velocity or the assassination attempt of some arbitrary guy off the street in that vanishingly small common sense category.

It only makes sense if the characters are supposed to be superheroes. If they're supposed to be regular people with extraordinary but human abilities (with the exception of actual magic) it makes no sense whatsoever.

[Svata]

I believe the assassination attempt would be a coup-de-grace. Still unlikely to kill, but at least it requires a DC 21-25 (DC of 15+ damage, auto-crit, max damage, 8-12 STR) fort save. At least a 5% chance to fail, probably more unless they're above ~15th level.

[eggynack]

It only makes sense if the characters are supposed to be superheroes. If they're supposed to be regular people with extraordinary but human abilities (with the exception of actual magic) it makes no sense whatsoever.
They're supposed to be the former though, at least at that level. These are characters capable of killing dragons barehanded, with martial abilities and health far in excess of anything that exists in our world. When people get stabbed in the night in our world, they usually do so as something like a 1st to 5th level character, usually a commoner, maybe some better NPC class. There is no human equivalent to these levels of potency.

[jjcrpntr]

wizard throws a fireball at a rogue, the rogue gets a decent roll and stands there spinning in place "evading" all damage.

[Vortenger]

2. You hear an explosion 100 feet away. "Lets go investigate"

Have done this several times in RL. The fact that the company I own deals in military equipment has much to do with this, but this does not strike me as a counter to common sense.

Human curiosity often points us to do things like, "What in blazes was that horrific sound?" " I don't know, let's run over and find out if everyone is okay!" Not really any red flags therein.



D&D isn't even in glaring angrily at common sense from across a crowded room territory, let alone in a reasonable relationship with the occasional yet understandable spat. Might take less time to list the places where outcomes perfectly match common sense, in other words.

...And done (http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/587/roleplaying-games/dd-calibrating-your-expectations-2)!

[EisenKreutzer]

They're supposed to be the former though, at least at that level. These are characters capable of killing dragons barehanded, with martial abilities and health far in excess of anything that exists in our world. When people get stabbed in the night in our world, they usually do so as something like a 1st to 5th level character, usually a commoner, maybe some better NPC class. There is no human equivalent to these levels of potency.

That will have to be an issue of interpretation and taste. I have always thought of high-level D&D characters more like Aragorn and Gandalf, supremely capable individuals who are still human.

[eggynack]

That will have to be an issue of interpretation and taste. I have always thought of high-level D&D characters more like Aragorn and Gandalf, supremely capable individuals who are still human.
It just seems like a false interpretation. It comes across as somewhat circular, but when you're dealing with characters that can fall out of a plane and live, and lift a bridge, you're no longer talking about normal humans. After all, you've basically come right out and said that the game doesn't actually match your interpretation of how it is. When the game works one way, and your thoughts of how it works are entirely another, it seems like the latter is what needs to change.

[EisenKreutzer]

It just seems like a false interpretation. It comes across as somewhat circular, but when you're dealing with characters that can fall out of a plane and live, and lift a bridge, you're no longer talking about normal humans. After all, you've basically come right out and said that the game doesn't actually match your interpretation of how it is. When the game works one way, and your thoughts of how it works are entirely another, it seems like the latter is what needs to change.

You are certainly entitled to that opinion.
I, on the other hand, do not see it that way or play it that way.

[eggynack]

You are certainly entitled to that opinion.
I, on the other hand, do not see it that way or play it that way.
I don't see how. If you're in the rules, then it's not like you can have characters not fall off a bridge and live, or do the same when stabbed in the night, or kill a massive demon in a single blow, or jeez, any of the things magic lets you do. It's just the way the game operates. I guess you can change the rules, but in that case, it's not the game failing to match common sense, but the game failing to meet your desires for the game. It also tends to distance the changed element of the game, in this case falling survival, from other elements, say magic, in terms of what's being modeled. You might be better off just using e6.

[Psyren]

Wood is not damaged by fire.

"Energy attacks do half damage to most objects." It's DM discretion which ones don't fall under that, and wood taking full damage from fire would probably qualify. (In PF it's a little more explicit but it's there in 3.5.)

[Lightlawbliss]

"Energy attacks do half damage to most objects." It's DM discretion which ones don't fall under that, and wood taking full damage from fire would probably qualify. (In PF it's a little more explicit but it's there in 3.5.)

What are you quoting? SRD and My PHB agree on
Acid and sonic attacks deal damage to most objects just as they do to creatures; roll damage and apply it normally after a successful hit. Electricity and fire attacks deal half damage to most objects; divide the damage dealt by 2 before applying the hardness. Cold attacks deal one-quarter damage to most objects; divide the damage dealt by 4 before applying the hardness.

The idea of your post is not violated by the quote, though I still do not consider your post to be an indisputable counter as you are requiring a house rule by the DM to allow common sense to occur.

[Galen]

It just seems like a false interpretation. It comes across as somewhat circular, but when you're dealing with characters that can fall out of a plane and live, and lift a bridge, you're no longer talking about normal humans. After all, you've basically come right out and said that the game doesn't actually match your interpretation of how it is. When the game works one way, and your thoughts of how it works are entirely another, it seems like the latter is what needs to change.
The thing is, in D&D ,"Epic" is actually a game term. You can't make it mean whatever you want it to mean. It has a specific meaning - level 21+.
And you're not Epic until level 21. You're a level 13 Barbarian with 121 hit points? Terminal velocity fall doesn't kill you. And you still have 8 levels to go pre-Epic. There are way bigger fish in the pond. Like the level 18 Barbarian with 170 hit points who can kick your rear end. And he's also not Epic.

By the way, another contradiction: "fall out of a plane and live" works, but "lift a bridge" doesn't. The former is available to most PC classes without the help of magic or supernatural abilities, while the latter is not (assuming a 50 ton bridge, it requires Str 60 to lift, outside the reach of non-magic-using PCs). The actual lifting capability of a PC would be probably closer to a real-world-very-strong-human than to Superman.

So in some aspects, a 13th level PC is a superman, in some aspects he's "merely" a world-champion weightlifter.

[Psyren]

What are you quoting? SRD and My PHB agree on

The idea of your post is not violated by the quote, though I still do not consider your post to be an indisputable counter as you are requiring a house rule by the DM to allow common sense to occur.

It's not a houserule unless you have a definition of "most" somewhere that explicitly lists wood as one of those objects. If you limited the definition to "everything except wood and glass" for instance, you would still be satisfying "most."

Thus it is an interpretation of RAW, not a houserule. It's not the only possible one, certainly, but sometimes the DM is required to do that in this game.

[eggynack]

The thing is, in D&D ,"Epic" is actually a game term. You can't make it mean whatever you want it to mean. It has a specific meaning - level 21+.
And you're not Epic until level 21. You're a level 13 Barbarian with 121 hit points? Terminal velocity fall doesn't kill you. And you still have 8 levels to go pre-Epic. There are way bigger fish in the pond. Like the level 18 Barbarian with 170 hit points who can kick your rear end. And he's also not Epic.

By the way, another contradiction: "fall out of a plane and live" works, but "lift a bridge" doesn't. The former is available to most PC classes without the help of magic or supernatural abilities, while the latter is not (assuming a 50 ton bridge, it requires Str 60 to lift, outside the reach of non-magic-using PCs). The actual lifting capability of a PC would be probably closer to a real-world-very-strong-human than to Superman.

So in some aspects, a 13th level PC is a superman, in some aspects he's "merely" a world-champion weightlifter.
Epic doesn't mean superhuman. Epic means godlike. As in, the characters are possibly challenging deities and fighting for the multiverse. Epic is a game term, but it doesn't mean what you think it means. As for lifting abilities, you do have to focus some to get results like that, but as you note, it's definitely possible. And besides, it makes sense that more characters would have super-toughness than super strength. The former is a thing that just an absolutely ridiculous number of superheroes have, and often just an assumed trait. Super strength tends to require specific allowances with much greater frequency.

[Galen]

As for lifting abilities, you do have to focus some to get results like that, but as you note, it's definitely possible.I didn't actually "note it's definitely possible". Allow me to clarify that I in fact noted that it's definitely impossible without the use of magic and supernatural abilities. Falling off a plane and surviving, on the other hand, is possibly even without focusing on "I'm going to build a character whose schtick is surviving falls"

[Slipperychicken]

[You are a thug with a knife and some leather. Your buddies are similarly equipped. You see five guys strutting around town in full body-armor, hawking the loot of the entire goblin-tribe they just personally murdered, and are packing enough heat to make an army think twice]

"Lets' jump them"

=========================

"Hey, you know that elite strike-team which effortlessly butchered half my army with no support, and never takes prisoners or parley? I should send my men at them in small groups, then tell them my plans, fight them all solo, and beg for mercy. I should also send my loved ones to fight them solo, one at a time. That's a great idea. I'm a tactical genius."

=========================

"Hey, you know how those guys are each killing one guy per second without taking significant injuries? And they've already killed half of us? Yeah, let's keep fighting them and getting murdered instead of running away."

=========================

[eggynack]

I didn't actually "note it's definitely possible". Allow me to clarify that I in fact noted that it's definitely impossible without the use of magic and supernatural abilities. Falling off a plane and surviving, on the other hand, is possibly even without focusing on "I'm going to build a character whose schtick is surviving falls"
But the issue is, that totally matches common sense (or at least regular sense). People have fallen out of plane and survived (http://www.cracked.com/article_19996_5-insane-falls-you-wont-believe-people-survived.html). People have been stabbed and survived (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/01/140102112039.htm).People have gotten shot in the head and survived (http://www.rationalskepticism.org/biology/25-of-people-survive-self-inflected-gun-shots-to-the-head-t39643.html). Nobody has currently lifted a bridge, to my knowledge. The reason common sense doesn't necessarily match the game rules is because common sense also doesn't match reality.

[TypoNinja]

That will have to be an issue of interpretation and taste. I have always thought of high-level D&D characters more like Aragorn and Gandalf, supremely capable individuals who are still human.

It's been brought up before, but generally LotR characters are not very high level. As you noted, they are still human (Or you know not, as the case may be, yay other races!).

D&D leaves normal human behind pretty quickly, 5th level or so tops. The power scale is just that high. First level PC's are Olympic Champions, you are the pinnacle of your species at 1st level, now start adding class levels.

By tenth level, we aren't even pretending to not be superhuman anymore, even stripped of magical gear and not including spell casters simple class features make characters superhuman. Even the rather mundane Barbarian has DR 2/- at this point, which means that while playing a drunken game of darts you could accidentally bury one in his eye (crit) and he'd just pull it back out and keep going, completely unharmed.

Think of the major problems for most of your favorite fantasy series, how low level do you have to be to solve them? The battle of Helms Deep could be ended by 5-6 guys with a wand of fireball, never mind the really nasty stuff like Cloud Kill. My D&D group actually played in a Westeros setting game. We bent it over fast, even with no caster PC's and no access to magic items. D&D just scales up that fast.

Its the difference between Hero and Superhero. And D&D leaves normal Hero behind pretty rapidly.

[Venger]

this article (http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/587/roleplaying-games/dd-calibrating-your-expectations-2) lays out pretty well how many iconic fictional characters, especially the lotr crew, are very low level when put in terms of D&D.

superheroes is putting it mildly. by level 20, even the worst classes are basically gods in D&D.

[TypoNinja]

this article (http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/587/roleplaying-games/dd-calibrating-your-expectations-2) lays out pretty well how many iconic fictional characters, especially the lotr crew, are very low level when put in terms of D&D.

superheroes is putting it mildly. by level 20, even the worst classes are basically gods in D&D.

If you are a 1st level commoner, how do you tell the difference between a 20th level caster, and a God?

Can he...

Bring back the dead? Check.

Stop time? Check.

Kill with a glance or a word? Check.

Bestow powers on others? Check.

Even your clerics would get spells, the only power you'd lack would be divine salient abilities, and those are pretty reproduceable until you you climb the Divine Ranks a bit.

[Mcdt2]

I didn't actually "note it's definitely possible". Allow me to clarify that I in fact noted that it's definitely impossible without the use of magic and supernatural abilities. Falling off a plane and surviving, on the other hand, is possibly even without focusing on "I'm going to build a character whose schtick is surviving falls"

While it is true that it's far more difficult to be that strong without magic, it's certainly doable. Off the top of my head:
Half-Minotaur (+1 LA) Orc Barbarian 6/Frenzied Berserker 1/War Hulk 10/Any 2
18 Base Str
+4 Orc
+12 Half Minotaur (+4 racial, +8 size)
+20 War Hulk
+5 level up bonuses
+4 Rage
+6 Frenzy
=69 Str while rage/frenzying, 59 otherwise, without any magic or supernatural abilities at all. Your large size gives x2 carrying capacity, so you could lift 179,200 lbs as a heavy load, allowing you to easily lift that 50 ton bridge over your head. While raging and frenzying, in fact, you could lift almost 360 tons.

Of course, you're a mindless hulking beast who's a TPK waiting to happen, but this was just a quick example. Probably a better idea to go with a Goliath and take Mountain Rage (assuming that it lets you qualify for Frenzied Berserker; dubious), and/or Reckless Rage for another +2 Str/Con in rage (along with -2 AC). That way, you can be intelligent when you need to and "hulk out" when it's bridge throwing time.

[Fax Celestis]

A 20th level Fighter is lying in his bed, soundly asleep.
A 1st lvl commoner sneaks into his room, draws his knife and slits the Fighters throat.
The Fighter mutters in his sleep, swats the commoner away from his face like an annoying fly (killing him instantly), turns over and sleeps on, completely unaffected.

Yay hit points!

Relevant to your post. (http://i.imgur.com/L9SfC.jpg)

[Necroticplague]

While it is true that it's far more difficult to be that strong without magic, it's certainly doable. Off the top of my head:
Half-Minotaur (+1 LA) Orc Barbarian 6/Frenzied Berserker 1/War Hulk 10/Any 2
18 Base Str
+4 Orc
+12 Half Minotaur (+4 racial, +8 size)
+20 War Hulk
+5 level up bonuses
+4 Rage
+6 Frenzy
=69 Str while rage/frenzying, 59 otherwise, without any magic or supernatural abilities at all. Your large size gives x2 carrying capacity, so you could lift 179,200 lbs as a heavy load, allowing you to easily lift that 50 ton bridge over your head. While raging and frenzying, in fact, you could lift almost 360 tons.

Of course, you're a mindless hulking beast who's a TPK waiting to happen, but this was just a quick example. Probably a better idea to go with a Goliath and take Mountain Rage (assuming that it lets you qualify for Frenzied Berserker; dubious), and/or Reckless Rage for another +2 Str/Con in rage (along with -2 AC). That way, you can be intelligent when you need to and "hulk out" when it's bridge throwing time.

Or on a somewhat Simpler Note:
Half-Goristro Human Fighter 5/Warhulk10/wwhatever1:
18 base.
+24 half-goristro (+8 racial, +16 size)
+20 War hulk
62 STR

However, your size is also set to Huge, which gives a x4 multiplier to your capacity. You could constantly lift that 50 tons over your head. It would constantly slow you down, but you could do it. With a mere 1 feat used (Natural Heavyweight), your capacity would double, turning that bridge into just a medium load.

But still, the point stands no matter how you cut it: "epic" deeds of superhuman ability are quite possible before the game technically hits "epic", even without taking magic into account.

[Arbane]

"Hey, you know how those guys are each killing one guy per second without taking significant injuries? And they've already killed half of us? Yeah, let's keep fighting them and getting murdered instead of running away."

Hiariously, Basic D&D (you remember, the 'kiddie' simplified version?) actually HAD rules for monster morale. Most enemies were likely to flee if you hurt them badly or killed enough of their allies. (Except undead, which tended to fight to the last zombie, which is part of why they were so scary.)

But really, the absence of rules for morale just means that the DM will have to (ugh) 'roleplay' those doomed mooks.

[Curmudgeon]

wizard throws a fireball at a rogue, the rogue gets a decent roll and stands there spinning in place "evading" all damage.
There's nothing relating to common sense about a Wizard throwing a Fireball. Given that the Fireball isn't sensible, the Rogue evading it is. :smallbiggrin:

[TypoNinja]

Hiariously, Basic D&D (you remember, the 'kiddie' simplified version?) actually HAD rules for monster morale. Most enemies were likely to flee if you hurt them badly or killed enough of their allies. (Except undead, which tended to fight to the last zombie, which is part of why they were so scary.)

But really, the absence of rules for morale just means that the DM will have to (ugh) 'roleplay' those doomed mooks.

Didn't Heros of Battle give us morale rules?


There's nothing relating to common sense about a Wizard throwing a Fireball. Given that the Fireball isn't sensible, the Rogue evading it is. :smallbiggrin:

I know a guy who stopped playing because this fact (and similar) just bugged him too much. Dude couldn't let go.

"Its a 20 foot room and a 40 foot fireball, where the hell are you evading to?"

Man, its magic, it doesn't have to be logical, it just has to say that's the way it works.

[eggynack]

Man, its magic, it doesn't have to be logical, it just has to say that's the way it works.
Alternatively, it actually is logical, because the fireball doesn't necessarily occupy the entire area it's in. Seems like an argument supported by the fact that there's a reflex save in the first place, because I don't think a passed save necessarily leads to movement out of your square. Either way, I suppose.

[Curmudgeon]

I know a guy who stopped playing because this fact (and similar) just bugged him too much. Dude couldn't let go.

"Its a 20 foot room and a 40 foot fireball, where the hell are you evading to?"

Man, its magic, it doesn't have to be logical, it just has to say that's the way it works.

The explosion creates almost no pressure. An explosion which creates almost no pressure is slow enough to evade. You can watch the individual tendrils of flame, and slip between them if you're sufficiently adroit (Evasion). Heck, even those who don't have that training (class feature) can bypass half the damage if they've got decent reflexes: the Fireball is just that slow.

[Svata]

I know there's no support for it anywhere, but I've always fluffed evasion as him being so damned good that he momentarily becomes ethereal, but can only maintain it long enough to dodge the blast.

[Necroticplague]

I know there's no support for it anywhere, but I've always fluffed evasion as him being so damned good that he momentarily becomes ethereal, but can only maintain it long enough to dodge the blast.

I always thought of it as being like dodges in some video games: with proper timing, you can make the attack hit you when your invincible against it. The reflex save indicates how good your timing was.

[Psyren]

Evasion explicitly states you must have room to move (RC 113). Having said that, a fireball does not perfectly fill every cube of its area either.

[Elkad]

Wearing Full Plate 24/7? Sure!

Dunno about full plate, but I've spent a fair amount of time wearing a flak vest, helmet, and wads of pouches and such with canteens, bayonet, ammo, pistol, etc.
You don't take the time to remove 60lbs of various gear until you are going to sleep for more than 2 hours straight. Pull your blanket out and drape it over everything. Leaving your helmet on is actually a fair substitute for a pillow.

(And wandering off-topic, sleeping in a helmet saved a friend of mine. 10 ton 6x6 truck ran over his HEAD. Cracked the Kevlar, no damage to him.)


2. You hear an explosion 100 feet away. "Lets go investigate"

"March towards the sound of the guns" is an old military adage.

More recently, look at the Boston Marathon bombing footage. Most people started running away. But a small percentage ran towards the explosion.

[Frozen_Feet]

Common misconception, actually.

"Common sense" has so much overlap with "common misconceptions" that they're almost synonymous.


Have done this several times in RL. The fact that the company I own deals in military equipment has much to do with this, but this does not strike me as a counter to common sense.

Any reason or rationalization specific to some vocation or field of expertise is excluded from "common sense" for the simple reason of being uncommon.

Common sense is not the same as "logical". Common sense is not the same as "possible within limits of physics". Common sense is intented to be "what even the average uneducated person could know", but in practice ends up being "what the average uneducated person believes he knows".

[Sir Garanok]

Having the chance to become a god among mortals and living a commoner's life because its dangerous.

And you have hit points.

[daremetoidareyo]

Evasion explicitly states you must have room to move (RC 113). Having said that, a fireball does not perfectly fill every cube of its area either.

Further, a rogue with quick reflexes can lift up a hewn cobblestone and use it as a shield at the last minute, or flip his back pack around and use that to absorb the flames, or simply dive behind another, slower party member, "drafting" them in a way for the heat sink their body provides behind themselves.

[TypoNinja]

Further, a rogue with quick reflexes can lift up a hewn cobblestone and use it as a shield at the last minute, or flip his back pack around and use that to absorb the flames, or simply dive behind another, slower party member, "drafting" them in a way for the heat sink their body provides behind themselves.

This is similar to the closest thing we got got logical with stuff like evasion and improved evasion. You manage to turn at the perfect angle to minimize the damage, that kind of thing.

[Vogonjeltz]

Eh, I think the D&D rules are actually common sense for the most part. Here's a smattering of the ones claimed that I don't agree with:


3. I move and attack THEN you move and attack

I don't think this one is fair. The rules themselves indicate the actions are happening simultaneously, this is just mechanics so that people can actually play the game. It's just a simulation of how it would work.


Wearing Full Plate 24/7? Sure!

Sleeping in plate armor fatigues the characters, that would tend to simulate this not being wise.

Or did you just mean wearing armor for long periods of time while awake should be exhausting? I don't know that I agree. Is there any reason armor isn't simply like having heavy clothes? Why wouldn't a very strong person be capable of functioning in it over long periods of time?

*thank you sonofzeal for the explanation further down.


Wood is not damaged by fire.

Things that can live forever without any energy supply.

Merchants that trade items valuable enough to buy a small kingdom regularly, and don't own a small kingdom.

1) What? "Vulnerability to Certain Attacks Certain attacks are especially successful against some objects. In such cases, attacks deal double their normal damage and may ignore the object’s hardness." Wood is fairly well known as being vulnerable to fire, and the PHB instructions on this provide several common sense examples where this occurs. For some reason the SRD20 fails to mention that this is all at DM discretion, so any failure of common sense is directly the fault of the DM.

2) Everything that's non-living (afaik) is explained as being powered by some other energy source (undead are powered by negative energy from the negative energy plane, for example).

3) Eh in whose rules? There are defined limits on the maximum gold value of items that can be sold/bought in settlements of given sizes, and there are also rules for the total wealth in those settlements. The total wealth vastly exceeds the maximum value of items sold/bought, and that's just for a single town/city, not a whole kingdom.


It just seems like a false interpretation. It comes across as somewhat circular, but when you're dealing with characters that can fall out of a plane and live,

I agree adventurers are remarkable people, but this has happened for normal humans: https://www.google.com/#q=man+survives+falling+6.5+miles
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/aviation/safety/4344036


Any reason or rationalization specific to some vocation or field of expertise is excluded from "common sense" for the simple reason of being uncommon.

So Common Sense isn't really that desirable a state of being anyway, because it's apt to be wrong or have misconceptions about how the universe and the things in it work?

[Wolfepuppy]

That will have to be an issue of interpretation and taste. I have always thought of high-level D&D characters more like Aragorn and Gandalf, supremely capable individuals who are still human.
Sorry Gandalf was not human, that is all

[Slipperychicken]

Hiariously, Basic D&D (you remember, the 'kiddie' simplified version?) actually HAD rules for monster morale. Most enemies were likely to flee if you hurt them badly or killed enough of their allies. (Except undead, which tended to fight to the last zombie, which is part of why they were so scary.)

But really, the absence of rules for morale just means that the DM will have to (ugh) 'roleplay' those doomed mooks.

3.5 does have some vestigial morale rules in Heroes of Battle, but I find them pretty lacking.

I haven't seen or played Basic, but WotC already confirmed that morale is going to be in the 5th edition DMG. I'm just hoping they get it right this time around.

[Venger]

Sorry Gandalf was not human, that is all

Neither was Aragorn, for that matter.

[eggynack]

I agree adventurers are remarkable people, but this has happened for normal humans: https://www.google.com/#q=man+survives+falling+6.5+miles
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/aviation/safety/4344036

Yeah, brought that argument back into it later. Really though, I think the claim holds up for any sort of common sense based on what one would reasonably assume of the character's capabilities. Unless a big discrepancy between capability in one area and capability in another can be shown, then it makes limited sense to argue that a given feat makes no sense for that character's nature.

[Vogonjeltz]

Yeah, brought that argument back into it later. Really though, I think the claim holds up for any sort of common sense based on what one would reasonably assume of the character's capabilities. Unless a big discrepancy between capability in one area and capability in another can be shown, then it makes limited sense to argue that a given feat makes no sense for that character's nature.

Agreed, I'm pretty willing to suspend disbelief for games.

[Deadline]

2. You hear an explosion 100 feet away. "Lets go investigate"

The best part about this quote is that I can't tell if you are mocking the "go towards the dangerous catastrophe" mentality, or if you are mocking the distance penalties to Listen checks. :smallbiggrin:

[Thanatosia]

A 20th level Fighter is lying in his bed, soundly asleep.
A 1st lvl commoner sneaks into his room, draws his knife and slits the Fighters throat.
The Fighter mutters in his sleep, swats the commoner away from his face like an annoying fly (killing him instantly), turns over and sleeps on, completely unaffected.

Yay hit points!
Coup de grace exists in D&D. lv1 commoner just needs to take a full round action. Poor fighter probably never had skillpoints to spare to invest in getting a higher Listen check then he had at lv1 too more the likely.

[Svata]

Coup de grace exists in D&D. lv1 commoner just needs to take a full round action. Poor fighter probably never had skillpoints to spare to invest in getting a higher Listen check then he had at lv1 too more the likely.

*cough* (beat you to it last page)


I believe the assassination attempt would be a coup-de-grace. Still unlikely to kill, but at least it requires a DC 21-25 (DC of 15+ damage, auto-crit, max damage, 8-12 STR) fort save. At least a 5% chance to fail, probably more unless they're above ~15th level.

[Vortenger]

Any reason or rationalization specific to some vocation or field of expertise is excluded from "common sense" for the simple reason of being uncommon.

Common sense is not the same as "logical". Common sense is not the same as "possible within limits of physics". Common sense is intented to be "what even the average uneducated person could know", but in practice ends up being "what the average uneducated person believes he knows".

I must agree to disagree. Most folks I know that show a modicum of common sense hold that sense of any kind is anything but common.

Common sense is that which sensible people hope everyone knows. YMMV.

How does the frequency of the explosions dealt with on a day to day basis change what is sensible in response? (Common or otherwise.) Are you saying that it would be less sensible to run towards the explosion if my occupation dealt with less explosive ordinance? The profession I'm in has no bearing on whether the instinct to check on my contemporaries regardless of personal risk is sensible or not.

[TheEmperor]

Neither was Aragorn, for that matter.

I don't usually post around here, but I have two things to say

One: Gandalf was a minor god. Maiar, to be exact. And Aragorn was essentially a higher form of human, but his bloodline was diluted enough for him to have been considered a very long living human by all accounts. You cannot distinguish between Edain, Atani, and all that jazz. Numenorians were... well, still human, but all that Valar messing around made them quite powerful.

Two: "I'm the best swordsman around!"
*multiple critical fails later*
"I've missed everything."

ADDITIONAL THREE: AC has never really made all that much sense to me. How hard you are to hit and harm. Incredibly weird, for me

[Venger]

I don't usually post around here, but I have two things to say

One: Gandalf was a minor god. Maiar, to be exact. And Aragorn was essentially a higher form of human, but his bloodline was diluted enough for him to have been considered a very long living human by all accounts. You cannot distinguish between Edain, Atani, and all that jazz. Numenorians were... well, still human, but all that Valar messing around made them quite powerful.

Two: "I'm the best swordsman around!"
*multiple critical fails later*
"I've missed everything."

ADDITIONAL THREE: AC has never really made all that much sense to me. How hard you are to hit and harm. Incredibly weird, for me

well, yeah, gandalf was a malar, like sauron. I didn't argue with that. the point is he was very far from human species-wise, but the point EisenKreutzer was making saying he and the fellowship were "still human" meant that they were not very powerful and had a lot of weaknesses and vulnerabilities, so would definitely not be represented by high lvl D&D characters.

Wolfepuppy's point about gandalf not being human was just a play on words since its original context meant "flawed and vulnerable" not "homo sapien." in the same spirit, I mentioned aragorn's numenorianness due to the character's own feelings.

while your point about aragorn stands, he felt removed enough from humanity as a numenorian to use that as an excuse to spurn eowyn's advances since he's actually like 80 years old, which is why he felt he had more in common with arwen than with her.

[NotScaryBats]

I like how dangerous bows and crossbows are in real life, but in D&D, they are practically useless (unless you really really specialize in them).

[Lightlawbliss]

I like how dangerous bows and crossbows are in real life, but in D&D, they are practically useless (unless you really really specialize in them).

Dangerous? If it didn't hit your armor then sure. Historically, bows were not a one shot kill weapon on the battlefield. Even when you go hunting with modern bows, it's the bleeding that kills the significant game, not the actual hit. In war, bows main advantage was the distance they could fight at and reducing the threat of a target. There is a reason turning somebody into a pin cushion was a rather common event in tales, that's what it took to make sure even a lightly armored person actually died.

And before you cite the movies: They use the rule of cool even more than DMs do.

[NotScaryBats]

I've always heard that crossbows revolutionized warfare, because even a peasant could use one, and it could kill someone dead with one hit that would punch through armor. Perhaps I have been misinformed.

[georgie_leech]

I've always heard that crossbows revolutionized warfare, because even a peasant could use one, and it could kill someone dead with one hit that would punch through armor. Perhaps I have been misinformed.

Mostly for the ease of use bit. A longbow could punch through armor fairly effectively at close range too, but the amount of training it took to be accurate with those things was uneconomical. That's why units of archers fired in volleys; they were trained to, rather than aim at a specific target, fire at the angle told by a commanding officers to hit a mass of targets.

[Lightlawbliss]

I've always heard that crossbows revolutionized warfare, because even a peasant could use one, and it could kill someone dead with one hit that would punch through armor. Perhaps I have been misinformed.

There are debates on if the bow of the crossbow was invented first. Aka: the crossbow existed for a long time before knights in shining armor. The crossbow simply became more popular as longbow archers became rare and armies needed people to shoot at their enemies. It took much less conditioning to use a powerful crossbow and you could keep a crossbow at full draw many times longer then a longbow without the archer getting exhausted, with the main downside being rate of fire. If an arrow or bolt killed in one hit, it typically wasn't an instant kill but rather death some time latter from bleeding or infections.

[Arbane]

ADDITIONAL THREE: AC has never really made all that much sense to me. How hard you are to hit and harm. Incredibly weird, for me

It is definitely a bit wacky that a knight in full plate with a shield and a monk in their pajamas are both equally hard to hit, and take the same amount of damage when hit, be it by arrows, axes, or a giant's club.

(In the Pathfinder main rulebook, there's a picture of two giants attacking some PCs. I keep imagining someone blocking a swing from one of their 15'-long swords with their shield... and getting knocked away like a golf-ball for their efforts.)

[The Viscount]

You cannot sneak attack an opponent you are grappling, even though the close quarters are usually a great time for a knife between the ribs. If you approach two guys grappling, you can SA either one with no problem though.

[Fax Celestis]

You cannot sneak attack an opponent you are grappling, even though the close quarters are usually a great time for a knife between the ribs. If you approach two guys grappling, you can SA either one with no problem though.

...unless you have wild shape, in which case, sneak attack away!

[TypoNinja]

You cannot sneak attack an opponent you are grappling, even though the close quarters are usually a great time for a knife between the ribs. If you approach two guys grappling, you can SA either one with no problem though.

Whats the problem here? A person you are grappling has their attention focused on you, a knife in the ribs would still hurt, but it can't be a precision strike because he sees it coming and is actively struggling with you.

On the other hand, grappling takes a lot of focus if you don't want to be on the short end of the stick real fast, not much attention to spare for anything other than the guy who's got you grappled.

There's a difference between "I've stabbed you" and" I've stabbed you with such precision as to piece a vital organ", especially when not only is your target moving, but hes got hands on you and is likely moving you as well. One little elbow jostle and your precision strike between the ribs slides off instead.

An outside opponent has the luxury of lining up the shot, waiting for the right moment. Hes not part of the grapple so you are not acting against him, not taking active steps to hinder him.

[Venger]

...unless you have wild shape, in which case, sneak attack away!

you've gotta pay for savage grapple, though.

[atemu1234]

You cannot sneak attack an opponent you are grappling, even though the close quarters are usually a great time for a knife between the ribs. If you approach two guys grappling, you can SA either one with no problem though.

Because you can't strike an absolutely vital point without paying attention to it at close range, which grappling does not provide.

[Ettina]

Any reason or rationalization specific to some vocation or field of expertise is excluded from "common sense" for the simple reason of being uncommon.

But you're not playing common people in D&D. You're playing adventurers, and adventurers are uncommon. You can't expect them to act like normal people - otherwise, they'd just be tilling the field or working the loom or whatever instead of going off on adventures.

[Slipperychicken]

But you're not playing common people in D&D. You're playing adventurers, and adventurers are uncommon. You can't expect them to act like normal people - otherwise, they'd just be tilling the field or working the loom or whatever instead of going off on adventures.

Not really. There are plenty of ways for the plot (and DM) get "normal" people into an adventure. It takes more work than just writing up a dungeon-diving psychopath and giving him a statblock, but it is possible to do it convincingly.

Some excellent examples are the hobbits from LotR. Bilbo, Frodo, and Sam were all reluctant to go along with Gandalf and his quests, would certainly have preferred to continue their idyllic country life if left to their own devices, and did exactly that. They were pressured into adventure for good reasons, completed it, and then went straight back home.

[awa]

to a degree normal people can be forced into adventuring but typical adventures would quickly change them into abnormal people. In my last session my players party killed over 200 people (human fanatics) over no more then a 24 hours period.

While that was kinda extreme the idea still holds true adventurers go through so much stuff that i find it hard to believe you could call them normal. (and that's assuming they are adventuring for some larger goal rather then to acquire enough money to buy better items to go on harder quests to get better items in an unending loop.)

[Spiryt]

Whats the problem here? A person you are grappling has their attention focused on you, a knife in the ribs would still hurt, but it can't be a precision strike because he sees it coming and is actively struggling with you.

On the other hand, grappling takes a lot of focus if you don't want to be on the short end of the stick real fast, not much attention to spare for anything other than the guy who's got you grappled.

There's a difference between "I've stabbed you" and" I've stabbed you with such precision as to piece a vital organ", especially when not only is your target moving, but hes got hands on you and is likely moving you as well. One little elbow jostle and your precision strike between the ribs slides off instead.

An outside opponent has the luxury of lining up the shot, waiting for the right moment. Hes not part of the grapple so you are not acting against him, not taking active steps to hinder him.

That makes decent amount of sense for D&D purposes, however, SA should absolutely be possible if you got opponent pinned, at least.