I really hate whenever I try to explain how some bad rules can be abused and immediatelly get someone say shit like “If this happens in your group, change it” as if that would solve the problem. And whenever it is not soemthing you witnessed personally, then it means it never happens and could never happen.

  • eerongalA
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    A character is limited to one successful treatment of both First Aid and Medicine until further damage is taken.

    Pg. 65, under first aid.

    • ProfessorOwl_PhD [any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      So it is, I’d been looking at the damage and healing rules on 120. I’m sure that’s going to be fun to bring up at the table…

      Still, I don’t think that’s as egregious as something like pun-pun or sorlocks short resting to regain spells. There are exploits in other systems, but not at the level or frequency of D&D.

      • eerongalA
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        54 minutes ago

        yeah, unfortunately the CoC rules have always been kind of a mess. it still has a lot of that early RPG “stream of consciousness” aspect to it.

        But yeah, at the end of the day, the number of rules you have is far more relevant to how many “exploits” there are, so CoC/VtM being less “crunchy” will result in less exploits.

        • ProfessorOwl_PhD [any]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          32 minutes ago

          I’d disagree on the second part, because of my other example, PF2e - the original had most of 3.x’s problems, but the code-like specificity of 2e is really showing it’s possible to stop stuff slipping through the cracks. There is a level of interplay between crunch and the possibility of exploitability, but I don’t think it’s as strict as bigger systems and more rules inherently lead to more exploits.