BhilJhoanz said:
And what wrong with being an invulnerable barroom brawler? Seems to fit the Conan theme to me. And when DIDN'T (or shouldn't) a barroom brawl turn into a lethal fight with weapons drawn as soon as possible -- this is the Hyborian Age after all. Don't make me start quoting Howard on your asses. Didn't Conan cleave an Argossean judge's head in twain merely for asking him to testify against another man?
Well, avoiding your quoting Howard on my ass, how many times do we have Conan starting a story waking up in a cell after having been beaten down by guards, soldiers, enemies, etc.? How does someone get taken prisoner or take prisoners when you have a feat that totally negates the only form of combat that subdues an opponent? Not to mention games I have played in where the fight was between two players doing the "beat hell out of each other to gain mutual respect" schtick.
Now, as written, it is impossible for a character w/ this feat to be knocked unconscious, starve to death, die of thirst, die from heat exhaustion or cold. They suffer no ill effects what-so-ever where as a mere damage reduction of 2 or 3 points makes the character tough - but not inhumanly so.
In any event, it is the GM's obligation to decide what material is appropriate for his own campaign and what isn't. Publications are not intended to present law but option.
I understand that. But its a game company's
obligation to present
internally consistant and workable options for GM's to choose from. And before this gets any more nasty - I was only providing my opinion as to why I won't be using this feat and probably most of the feats from this book in my games. I am also more than a little frustraited seeing the same cut and paste mistakes in yet another book in the game line after the admitted fiasco of the Core Rulebook.