I have a player who is a metagamer/min-maxer/etc. and he's right on these rules. How do I stop his thief of death?
Because of the thief's ability to Hide as a Bonus Action and the Lightfoot's ability of hiding behind a person one size taller, he's been hiding behind the majority of the party (2 humans & an elf) and conistantly attacking from hiding and then using his bonus action to insta-hide again.
So every round he's rolling Advantage (and rerolling any 1's), he's getting the Sneak Attack Bonus because the target he's attacking is engaged with one of the fighters, and then after hitting he just disappears again. He has a Sneak of +7 so on average he rolls a 17 which makes monsters pretty much unable to see him with any form of passive perception.
In a battle where I have 4-5 monsters I can't waste one for making a perception check to find the thief (and have a good chance of failing!) which wastes the monsters attack (since a perception check is an action). So the thief constantly vanishes, appears and if he hits with his Sneak Attack he does (on average) 9 damage! Yesterday he rolled crazy good twice, once for almost max damage with sneak attack which was 14 damage!!!
How do I combat this insanity?
Move an enemy behind the person the halfling is hiding behind. That's the simplest answer, as you can't hide if you're in plain view.
Otherwise, I'd talk to him and try to convince him to drop this tactic. It's silly. Allowed by RAW, yes, but there are few creatures in the world so stupid to be fooled by this situation.
Try to introduce more scenery to allow the rogue to use his high stealth ability (as this seems important to the player) as a compromise to dropping this hide-attack-hide tactic.
Reading the section on hiding on page 177, I don't think that should be possible. Also Perception checks only take an action if someone is actively looking for something. You should be using passive Perception checks most of the time with your monsters.
MagnusRex wrote:
It sounds like your munchkin/twink/min-maxer player has simply exploited one aspect of the rules to make a broken character. A player who deliberately does this gets awarded the pejorative terms listed above. The player is breaking the don't be a jerk rule if they are abusing it. If they're not abusing it, then no stress (and no label).
We've got one of these players for whom I have contempt in our PF group. He's always making broken characters and always has all the broken/min-maxed/twinky angles figured out. He has no respect for game balance, the other players, the GM or the game. His mission is to break the game and laugh at all the other players who want to have well-rounded characters (or gasp, skill-based characters) instead. I can barely put up with him and how the other players have not kicked him out of the group yet is beyond me. Decent human beings don't abuse holes in the rules unless it is to save the party, and then it is only as necessary, not every-single-round-of-combat.
In regards to the point of your thread though, yes, you are within your limits as a GM to let him have his moment in the sun, but he is obviously just exploiting YOU the GM. I'd be highly offended if a twinky player pulled that crap in my game repeatedly.
I suggest using other challenges periodically such as disease, insanity, mud, water and crap that will /periodically/ negate this character brokenness so the other players aren't
just always getting outshined. He's not the only character in the group, so make sure you focus on the people who aren't trying to break the game and disrespect the GM.
..
Its not an exploit of the rules. Its normally hard to hide as you must not be seen to do so, but with the right combination of race & class, it becomes more easily feasable and becomes a viable tactic, not a rules exploit like advanced by some. Halfling can hide behind creature, rogue can hide as a bonus action, which render hiding more easy and less costly to do so, with all pefectly legal and playing-as-expected abilities. Therefore, halfling makes optimal rogue, not surprising even the Starter Set pregen includes one among them!
Using Sneak Attack is very easy too. As long as an ally is within 5 ft of the target, the rogue gets it. The rogue in my party gets it on most rounds to be honest. So it becomes a question of ressource management, does the rogue use a bonus action to try hiding to disappear or get advantage on a single ranged attack (or disengage or dash for more/easier mobility), or does he go melee and use a bonus action to make a second attack with two-weapon fighting? As you can see many options compete for it, and he can use this ressouce to make good tactical decisions that are either offensive, or defensive.
RAW, he can't actually do what he's doing. I'm not sure why you guys are acting like he's exploiting the rules when he and his DM are just not following the rules correctly. Yes he can theoretically hide behind an ally every turn if that ally blocks line of sight to his enemies, but as soon as he reveals himself to attack he will be seen. Aside from the possible exception of his first attack he won't gain advantage on his attacks. Also enemies who move around the person he is hiding behind will see him and be able to attack him as normal.
Also min/maxers and metagamers deserve to be referred to pejoratively in my opinion.
He sure can RAW, he doesn't need to reveal himself, he's just attacking from behind his ally, with half cover, so his target has +2 AC.
I played exactly this using the very similar playtest rules for a few months.
Had a chat with my DM about whether it was the correct interpreation of the rules.
Being a fairly chilled out sort of guy he concluded it was fine. It was very effective but so was the Half-Orc Protection Paladin and Duel Weilding Barbarian.
Then after a very tough confrontation with some cultists my wounded death-midget chased after the remaining few and got slapped with an Inflict wounds and got Instakilled!
I wouldn't be surprised if guidance for the Stealth Rules and when you get advantage from it is one 9of the first things to appear in an Errata or FAQ.
Fundementally Rogues are glass cannons.
They punch increadibly hard but are relatively fragile once you hit them.
If monster has fallen for the trick, then enermy archers can set up their own Ready action to shoot the halfling as it reappears.
Mearls tweeted co tinuing to use this tactic more than once in a combat ought to be tempered with "common sense" and suggested the stealth check be made with disad. Also, seems to me mid combat the stealth check is a contest, active stealth vs active perception check. These two fatcors combined will make the tactic much less certain, and managable. Also ready actions, aoe, and moving enemies to positions with los to the thief (althiugh, theatre of the mind, not sure how well that works..another reason I dont like this ability.). My gut instinct is to just swap the halfling ability with the woodelf one.
Plaguescarred wrote:
Great ideas overall, thank you people. I like the idea of monsters readying actions to attack the thief but I'm worried the player will use his min/maxing to capatilze on it and stay hidden so the monster doesn't use his attack. "Oh, you said the monster used his ready action to wait for me, so he can't do anything else."
But just walking over to get LOS or the idea of disadvantage after the first stealth of a battle is a good idea.
Atheosis wrote:
Like iserith I don't really see the point in getting angry at a player who is just using a race/class power combo as it seems to be intended to be used. Now as it happens I think the Lightfoot Halfing racial is pretty darned stupid (you're hiding *behind the other guy's legs* what?) and I have a serious issue visualising this. I don't see how you can fire a bow from behind an ally with any kind of accuracy, especially not the kind of deadly pinpoint accuracy you're supposed to need for a Sneak Attack.
I would have no problem with this scenario if, instead of a Halfling hiding behind a party member, it was a Wood Elf hiding in the mist. But then mist is comparatively rare and party members are very much something you can bring with you.
I actually wouldn't feel too bad about simply disallowing advantage in this scenario on grounds of sheer plausibility. Everybody already expects an attack to come from the direction of one of your party members, the only surprise is that it comes from three feet off the ground, and that's only really a surprise once.
So, the player character's turn is this:
Hide behind pal as bonus action.
He would be revealed at the end of his turn. At best, as a DM, I'd allow him perhaps every other round.
The halfling ability is not a "bonus action." It just says that they can hide around lumps better than most.
jh
MagnusRex wrote:
Plaguescarred wrote:
I thought that this had already been settled on the forums here? It was established in an earlier thread that to attack you would have to come out of hiding and that the moment you did so, you were no longer hiding and therefore do not gain advantage on the attack since the target can, most likely, see you. The only disparity was whether or not targets had 360 degree vision due to the lack of facing rules and that this came down to DM adjudication. One of the very clear results, however, was that a halfling could not use this tactic since they would be in direct line of sight to any target that the person they were hiding behind was in melee with.
Currently the rules leave it up to the GM to say whether leaning out to attack makes the rogue visable.
The funny thing is currenly this GM call means the rogue can either be over powered (as you've noted) or under powered (always spotted at the start of combat if anyone fails a stealth roll)
Plaguescarred wrote:
Thank_Dog wrote:
MagnusRex wrote:
Btw there is a massive thread at enworld on hiding, adv while unseen, and peekaboo style tactics. I hope they just leave it up to DMs/tables and explicitly say so. That way everyone wins.
MagnusRex wrote:
MagnusRex wrote:
baronspam wrote:
I find this such a strange discussion. Two melee fighters do not stand in place when swinging swords. at best the rogue would have 1/2 cover but not be hidden after his first attack. Also if the fighter is facing two opponents then remaining hidden to one of them will always be impossible as you can only block LOS from one angle. Allow for the first attack to be from hiding and then just give the rogue +2 on counter attacks after that.
I am not trying to limit the power of the Rogue here, I am just saying that such a tactic is not possible even in the realm of fantasy.
Einiweini7 wrote:
Thank_Dog wrote:
Einiweini7 wrote:
Plaguescarred wrote:
Thank_Dog wrote:
Noon wrote:
Some thoughts:
Rule that, if the rogue hides behind Fred, then attacks, he has given away his location (behind Fred). He can't then hide behind Fred again (even though his bonus action allows him to try to hide somewhere) because "behind Fred" is already a discovered location for him. If he wants to hide again, he has to choose a different PC to hide behind. He will soon run out of hiding places.
Include some bats in the encounter. A few bats are neither here nor there for reckoning encounter difficulty. They fly around up in the sky/near the ceiling but they automatically track everyone by echolocation. They only have +1 on Wisdom(Perception) but they get advantage on echolocation checks. A handful of bats will be enough to make Hide almost impossible. To succeed in hiding, the rogue has to beat everyone's perception, including the bats'
Run an encounter with some NPCs, one of whom is a halfling rogue who uses the same tactics. Let the players figure out how to counter it.
Oops. Some people skipped past my edit. Page 177 of the PHB explains that hide cannot be used once the players location is known. He can find cover in it but he can't gain surprise. The mechanic is not broken, the rule is pretty clear. There is a nice green box that the player can't argue with.
Einiweini7 wrote:
I would not design an encounter to foil this tactic. However, I would interpret the rules differently as written.
If the halfling comes out from hiding and attacks, and then as a bonus action hides behind that or another player, I would ask myself if he is being observed. If the attack misses by lots, let him hide again as normal. If the attack hits, or if there are more then 1 target within 20' I would have him roll with disadvantage to hide again... or just say that he can hide there, but the opponents have a good idea that he is there and will not be fooled if he reveals himself from that location (meaning he can hide and not be a target, but he will receive no more sneak attacks against creatures that observe him hiding there).
Fair, and done.
Also, this is not to be critical, but I have had a number of min-maxers over the years, or those who seek some great combo of death. They are not immune to fireballs or other area of effect spells, and while not seen can still be targeted with these (as per the rules). Set new goals for them... a terrain effect controled by a lever (chains hanging in the cooler controlled by a lever). Challenge the thief that there is a benefit to get there and disarm or manipulate this area that is across the battlefield. Challenge them to kill the wizard protected in the back. Most times these players min-max because the world is not immersive for them. They have no desire to develop a broad character because we, as DMs, do not provide that for them. Consider what you are offering and challenge yourself to make it more immersive.
Most (not all games) I give each player individual challenges for extra XP. A good thief challenge from my last party:
As a child you were held down by a man bearing the tattoo of a serpent with a horned head coiled around a bladed dagger while a bandit bearing the same tattoo abused and killed your mother in front of you. There is a secret order which you desire to uncover and destroy. However, you are so filled with rage when you see this your first instinct is to seek and kill with your own hands people bearing this tattoo.
Then describe an encounter where the wizard in the back bears the mark of this order. If he ignores it, no XP bonus 
Plaguescarred wrote:
MagnusRex wrote:
Einiweini7 wrote:
Two surggestions which have been said but i think are fantastic so i will reiterate. If he doesnt move from the spot behind his friend then he still gets adavntage from being hidden, but the enemy gets +2 from cover due to it being an awkward shot to lean past his friend. Also after he hides in the same spot multiple times (you can decide how many) he gets disadvantage on Stealth checks as enemies wise up to his antics.
MagnusRex wrote:
ZezKai wrote:
There's no way he's hiding from every enemy. He'll only get the advantage on attacks against enemies he's hiding from. If you're letting him get advantage on the other enemies because he's hidden, that's your fault. If this isn't the case then, just have the enemies attack him after he pulls the trick once. "Not this time you sneaky little twerp." The ones that can't see him. I imagine they're ranged so just have them drop prone or get behind total cover. Now he doesn't have anyone to attack with advantage. Any Rogue using this tactic has their rights. If you envision your character as a skirmish fighter, then they'll do just that. It doesn't mean that it'll be the best tatic in every situation.
Sorxores wrote:
Plaguescarred wrote:
Atheosis wrote:
House Rules reflect the type of games DMs want to run/players want to experience, and this situation seems designed to foster a House Rule. Split the baby; give everyone a little of what they want. In my opinion, a good rule, based on a per encounter basis, would be:
Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice, shame on me.
Any time after that suffers disadvantage.
You can do it twice without penalty, but after that the learning curve kicks in. This assumes the opponent has some modicum of intelligence and ability to learn, so less powerful undead wouldn't benefit. Depending upon the DM, creatures with animal intelligence may be disallowed as well.
After that, it's time for a change in tactics. My reading of the rules would allow a rogue of at least 2nd level to move in to attack an enemy who's adjacent to an ally, add the sneak attack damage on a hit, then use the Disengage action to move away up to the remainder of his movement without provoking an OA. Still gets the bonus damage without any perceived abuse of the Hide action.
House Rules make the world go 'round.
Mearls said in the recent escapist interview that the hiding rules are intentionally vague to let the DM make the call.
Psikerlord wrote:
Are you letting the halfling make melee attacks through the other party member's space? I'd force a Dex save on the member being used to hide behind. Save or both tumble and fall prone. I know the halfling can move through the space, but moving is not attacking.
The halfling cannot hide if it is seen. Are you considering all of the light sources and their locations? Any light source behind the party member being hid behind would reveal the halfling's shadow in front of the two ... thus it cannot hide.
I would even consider this as something that does not provide advantage because the combative action is coming from a verified aggressive source. Basically, combatants would consider the party members as hostile, so hiding behind one does not grant advantage because the party member is expected to attack. Then I'd explain that bushes, barrels, rocks, pillars, nor other objects pose a recognizable threat so those would be better places to gain advantage from.
Still, I think I'd find some way to reward the player for being creative.
Plaguescarred wrote:
Psikerlord wrote:
One of the great things about 5e is that the rules are well thought out, there appear to be no "4e vampires" (e.g. character options that are fundamentally weak).
If Mearls meant that hiding is situation specific - that makes sense. However the specific racial and feat benefits are pretty clear cut and nominally useable many/most rounds of combat.
For the class-defining move of an iconic character, house rules should not be required. Sneak attack uses a simple mechanic to avoid the necessity for tracking specific location. Hiding is a pain, extra die rolls versus any other basic mechanic, relatively specific requirements to employ.
Absent a reliable hiding/attacking mechanism, from a practical charop standpoint I think it would become hard to argue for why a rogue would exist. Refluff another class, take the right skills, and get better damage and survivability. Requiring rogues to be frontline combatants is mathematically unsupportable given their lower than baseline damage, AC, HP (where baseline for an equivalent position is a barb, paladin, GWF).
Is there a math-based rebuttal of this statement or just a complaint that the mechanic feels off?
Compared with a moon Druid in dire wolf form, this halflings tactics seem rather tame. Thinking about it 9 damage is pretty average damage for any weapon user of level 2 unless you've really screwed up somewhere in character creation...I would even go so far as to say its on the low side.
To stay ranged: an archery ranger with hunters mark and horde breaker does d8+d6+mod with an extra +2 to hit and from level 3 can attack another target if it's within 5 of original target...without having to do anything but fire his bow.
Your rogues damage is average, not OP. How can the other players NOT do 9 damage average?? A d8+3 is an average of 7.5, with NO class features at all this is what a long sword does wielded in one hand, how have they managed to cripple themselves so hard?
Prism wrote:
Noon wrote:
Plaguescarred wrote:
Leugren wrote:
Noon wrote:
QuietNinja wrote:
Plaguescarred wrote:
Plaguescarred wrote:
I thought a whip was mentioned.
In terms of neutralizing this tactic, I would also add that having a single enemy move adjacent to the halfling will not only negate the halfling's cover, but will also impose disdvantage on any ranged attacks that the halfling might make against other enemies that he or she is still hidden from. The disadvantage imposed on the halfling because he is making a ranged attack while an enemy is within 5 feet of him will negate the advantage he gains from the fact that he is hidden with respect to his other potential targets.
QuietNinja wrote:
Leugren wrote:
QuietNinja wrote:
Danny_Montanny wrote:
Plaguescarred wrote:
QuietNinja wrote:
Psikerlord wrote:
Leugren wrote:
Napolean_Warlord wrote:
Leugren wrote:
So let me see if I get this (bound to reitterate .over some stuff, sorry)
The rogue in question is attacking from behind another party member, as such it is very very likely that his/her target has another enemy within 5 (i.e. the party member the rogue was hiding behind) so hiding for sneak is not needed..
If its a ranged or reach attack, no issues. Some cover involved, but totally doable. Advantage being up to the DM (I would probly grant it). Shoot or attack and as a bonus action hide.
If its a melee attack the rogue will have to move, attack and move back, where it can then use its bonus action to hide, but since it has to move away from its target it is likely to leave their reach and trigger an OA.. Advantage for the rogue once again being mostly up to the DM (I would probly still grant it even if the move should probly negate the hide.. but thats because I feel that advantage should be pretty easy to get on a crowded battlefield.. especially for a nimble halfling..).
In either case what the rogue is doing is trading their bonus action for advantage. So if there is one source of disadvantage (which are easy enough to create from envirionmental influences or monster abilities or even spells) the advantage is out. The tactic might (at a DM's option) keep sneak attack alive, but thats about it. It seems like an ok tradeoff that really does not make the rogue invincible or doing lots of damage.
All in all I just don't see that much of an issue, if it bothers you in combat situations, spill some oil, drop some caltrops, have the monsters block all positions the rogue could use to make an attack (if you are on a grid) or find some other way to add some disadvantage to the rogues list of issues aside from the monsters. Make stuff up If possible be descriptive about it and make sure you have no blocked off all tactical options for the players cause good thinking should pay off. Other than that, stay calm and have fun?
This is not 4e, solutions for things like this will generally be up to the DM, not the RAW. And I cannot even begin to express how happy I am with that
Napolean_Warlord wrote:
QuietNinja wrote:
iserith wrote:
Danny_Montanny wrote:
So the race desinged to hide with the class designed for sneak attack from hiding which is the default basic rules set pre gen in the starter box clone of some hobbit with a dagger that has been around in every edition ...
This is bad playstyle suddenly?
You dont "deal" with the theif ... their hiding is their defensive mechanic and the DM narrative cheat that allows you to focus monsters on the party tank (not that you can really tank anymore in 5E compared to the most recent editions)
Just as soon as the DM drops a few of their companions it gets easier to see the thief.
Also ... thiefs scout alone in dungeons and honestly with the new passive perceptions on some creatures and the way in which traps work ... eventually that poor scout will fail a check and simply get killed so let them have their moment to shine while they can before they stealth into a room while scouting with something nasty that one shots them.
MagnusRex wrote:
Leugren wrote:
I'm entierly baffled by people's opinions on this tactic being overpowered. It's what the racial is designed for. Oh no! The halfing rogue has advantage on his rolls that have -2 to hit and to do amongst the lowest of the melee damage! This is in no way overpowered. This is working exactly as intended. The issue is people want to think it is overpowerd but are not paying attention to what is actually going on.
As for everyone who keeps saying " Well, the monsters should ready actions to attack the rogue." , this is another case of overreacting. The barbarian who is killing 1 or 2 them per round is a large threat. The wizard who waved his hand and put 2 of them to sleep is a larger threat. The paladin who does almost as much damage pre-smite is at least an equal threat. Seriously, stop overreacting to a class that needs one or two other people for them to become a below average threat.
As for being verbally warned about someone's position, that is not discovering where the halfing is. That is being told where he is and by no means does it mean you now can see the halfing before the attack, so they would still get advantage. Acting on that information is another story. If enemies relay the information about the rogue's location and then they move to see the rogue, then we've got something. But just saying the rogue is there doesn't reveal the rogue. They are still unseen and unheard by the creatures that didn't have high enough passive perception.
Overreaction to Optimizing Player Syndome or OOPS, is a serious condition that afflicts many DMs in this hobby. Symptoms include Tourette-like use of the words "min/maxer" or "munchkin," knee jerking, aggression, and paranoia. The cure is a combination of understanding the rules, giving the clever player his due, and creating challenges where the tactic is useful, but not an automatic win.
Let's get an ice bucket challenge going for OOPS.
QuietNinja wrote:
iserith wrote:
Leugren wrote:
Leugren wrote:
QuietNinja wrote:
iserith wrote:
Leugren wrote:
How do you deal with a lightfoot halfling?
How do you deal with a lightfoot halfling?
How do you deal with a lightfoot halfling?
Early in the morning.
Shave his belly with a rusty razor...
Danny_Montanny wrote:
Psikerlord wrote:
Leugren wrote:
Noon wrote:
iserith wrote:
Noon wrote:
Zyph wrote:
Einiweini7 wrote:
Leugren wrote:
Psikerlord wrote:
Leugren wrote:
Noon wrote:
hello long time player (since 1st ed) and DM here, but new to the community.
I am currently running the HotDQ, and have a guerilla warfare rogue as well. we have both been reading and re-reading the rules on stealth, surprise, and the sneak att. ability of the rogue. and have agreed to the following rules.
1. the rogue(assassin) can only gain surprise once in an encounter,(and therefore his assassination die), unless he disengages from combat for the amount of rounds equal to the oponents perception bonus, spending those rounds moving to find a new location to hide. (at wich point he is in position to launch a new surprise attack from a new location).
2. if the rogue attacks from hiding, he gains advantage on his attck. for a split second giving away his position. the opponent has advantage to his perception to attempt to locate the rogue (as a reaction), and if he has not yet made an action can counter that round if he succeeds. other wise he did not catch sight of the rogue who has successfully re- hidden from view, though he still has a general idea of where the attack came from. if the creature makes a general 'location' attack i run it as if it was a mage with 5 mirror images and roll a 1d6 ( a 1 hits as long as he beats the rogues AC).
3. unless the rogue continues to move about the battle field (stealthing of course), in order to maintain surprise, and therefore advantage the miss chance continues to lessen from a d6 to d4 to disadvantage, and lastly discovery.
this lets my rogue player maintain the advantage of playing a rogue, yet forces him to role play his rogue sneaking around the feild of battle trying to gain advantage and pot-shotting the opponent(s).
To address the OP's issue I would let it go as is but remember to apply the issues of common sense. if the rogue is hiding behind a a tank who is engaged in melee combat, face it not possible in no example of sword play do fighters simply stand still, they constantly in motion. if the rogue engages using a mellee weapon his bonus action would be either to disengage, dash or hide, the latter 2 provoking an OA. reguardless if he is in the thick of mellee the creatures certainly should have advantage on their perception. If he is hiding behind a caster who is stating back from mellee, I would let him have no surprise or advantage simply because, though the NPC(s) may not see him they certainly see the caster, so no surprise there. not to mention the caster may not appreciate recieving aggro because of the halfling hiding behind him. so let the law of common sense determine the out come. either way avoid just saying no you can't do that.
to sum up my suggestion to the OP. sit down with your player, and come to an agreement of the rules and how/why they need to be adjudicated the way they are. dont attempt to 'nerf' the abilities of his character, instead come to an understanding of what is or is not in line with reason. it has worked for my players and I thus far. one of my biggest house rules is that if a player and I cannot agree to the adjudication of a particular rule, the whole table votes. I hope this helps.
Rogues are designed for DPR. They do not stand up well in toe-to-toe combat. Rogues are a one-trick pony: damage. Eliminate that aspect, and no one will ever play a rogue. Meaning ... don't change the rules ... adapt your DM tactics.
To limit the rogue when the monsters cannot perceive him, the very first time an arrow comes out of hiding from behind that elf, have them concentrate fire on the character doing the shielding. Have the NPC leader shout orders to get to that hidden archer; let the PC shielder know why he is being mass attacked. Make it obvious. Hammer the shielder with everything at your disposal every round. If the elf is shielding the little bugger, shoot every bow at the elf, hurl every javelin at him, use athleticism checks to push the scrawny elf aside or knock him flat (can't hide behind a prone elf), smash the elf with every mace you can rush at him. Do it every battle and watch the people start to move away from the rogue. Yes, the rogue does his damage, but when you drop the shielder, you then drop the rogue immediately after since he is just a soft squishy halfling.
Make PCs pay for the choices they make ... if they want to be a human shield, take them down like a human shield. Have no mercy. Monsters don't.
I am a firm believer 'that don't be a jerk' is one of the most fundimental rules of the game, and that optimal choice bias syndrome, where the first(and often only) question in decision making is 'is this optimal' as opposed to is this fun for every one or is this cool, is one of the sure fire ways to breaking that rule, but I have to say thatthis example does not appear to be optimal bias at work.
-The described benefits map closely with fiction surroundingthe class and race.
- the benefits are relatively easily achieve in other less cool and more optimal ways.
-It is just kinda a cool idea.
iserith wrote: