Mercule
Adventurer
This is a pretty fine line. RPGs are, IMO, different from other games in that the rules are more guidelines for making things work than hard and fast. I find that I really get burned out quickly when the rules are thrown around as justification for things that just seem silly, broken, or otherwise harm the narrative aspect of play. There's a balance, to be sure, and players should have reasonable expectation of a solid foundation/framework. I just strongly favor the human aspect of the GM being able to say, "Stop being a twit."And yet the rules clearly do allow the things I mentioned
I'll agree with this. My gut reaction was that you were posting something just to be contrary and the whole thing was rather absurd. When I actually looked at the rules and thought about it, I kinda came to a point of "Well, those rules work as well as anything I could come up with for certain actions." I'm not sure whether I'd really call it a "shove" or not, but I'm not opposed to appropriating rules that are "close enough" for a given task to avoid a stupidly complex system.The more I thought about it, the more I realized the whole concept isn't nearly as 'out there' as I first did.
Someone will always come up with something not covered, which is one of the reasons why I'm a proponent of rules as framework, GM as referee/arbiter (or abattoir, whatever).