+ Log in or register to post
Results 91 to 100 of 138
Thread: Proposal: Arcane Power
Thursday, 23rd July, 2009, 05:10 PM #91
#1 Common sense isn't a universal. What makes sense for you, isn't the same for me or anyone else. There needs to be a meeting of the minds, and the easiest way to do that is have it in print.
#2 Even if all the judges are of like mind, the players still have to know beforehand how their abilities work before they pick them. You could easily upset someone if they build a character around something only to find out your common sense doesn't match theirs and what they wanted to do doesn't work.
As Illusory Wall and Planar Gateway are higher level [10 and 11] than we are now, I think they'd be fine to put on hold. No one could use them right away anyway. Grease though is 1st. I rather like the spell and it'd be a shame to have it permanently shelved if WOTC never puts out an errata on it OR it have it take as long as Rain of Blows to get errata.
- EN World
- has no influence
- on adverts that
- are displayed by
- Google Adsense
Thursday, 23rd July, 2009, 05:28 PM #92
Defender (Lvl 8)
If someone built their character around Grease, then came into a game I was DMing and tried to claim that it was an auto-hit because, on a miss, they could infinite-loop with sliding and re-attacking... Yeah, that wouldn't happen. "Nice try, who's up next?"
If the player was so crushed by such a ruling that they couldn't wait until they leveled up to retrain away to a non-exploit-based power, couldn't be bothered to use their overhaul, and got upset about it... Well, again, I find myself pretty unsympathetic. Too bad.
I can't really seriously imagine any DM doing otherwise. But suppose an inexperienced or overworked DM did let themselves get fooled into allowing it. A judge could alert them to it, or an interested onlooker by PM (this has happened to me more than once -- I make my share of mistakes, and then some) or, worst case, it could just go uncorrected. The next time, it might be a different DM, or the DM might be paying more attention, and make a different ruling. If the player tried to claim that it had been allowed before and therefore must always be that way... Again, I am still without sympathy. If they cry nerf: yep, still no love.
What I'm saying is, in order for this -- Grease -- to be a problem, you have to have a) a player who's actively trying to exploit, and b) a DM who doesn't want to stand up to them, and c) a judge who's not willing to back the DM. I don't feel particularly compelled to write proposals into the charter to handle such a situation.
Thursday, 23rd July, 2009, 06:04 PM #93
Thursday, 23rd July, 2009, 08:01 PM #94
Thursday, 23rd July, 2009, 08:47 PM #95
And honestly, are you going to say that you can only use 1 free action in a round to stop people from attacking with grease again? So an elf wizard can't use his racial ability on the attack? It doesn't say you can restrict types of free actions, just free actions as a whole. Or are you going to have different kinds of free actions? Sounds WAY more complicated that actually ruling on the power.
Thursday, 23rd July, 2009, 09:16 PM #96
Defender (Lvl 8)
See also: Rule 0. Rule 0 is still in effect here, IMO, with the tiny exception that a judge can, if he or she chooses, overrule the DM when there is a dispute.Nope. PHB p267, under the heading Free Action: "The DM can restrict the number of free actions in a turn."
Thursday, 23rd July, 2009, 09:33 PM #97
Thursday, 23rd July, 2009, 09:44 PM #98
DM's will have some variation in how they interpret certain rules/powers. That's the nature of the game. The point is to have fun. If a player is intentionally building a super-abusive twinked out cheesy PC the DM has every right to run the game how he/she feels the rules are to be interpreted (after all they are the ones running the game). The judge aspect is in place to add another opinion to the DM's if there is a discrepency. If a player really disagrees with the DM's ruling they can always leave the game, if its that much of a problem. Personally, I think the tone is very aggressive and should be more open elecgraystone. I know its easy to get irritated (cov & I had a pretty heated discussion earlier this year as well), but we really gotta all be cool. After all this is our fun time, if it ain't fun, we should go back to work
Thursday, 23rd July, 2009, 09:55 PM #99
I'm not a big fan of after the fact house rules is all. Just let me know up front, and I'm all happy.
Thursday, 23rd July, 2009, 10:50 PM #100
Acolyte (Lvl 2)
I have to say that I agree with elecgraystone. I would much prefer to have a concrete rule that everyone knows about, written in stone (i.e. the charter) than to have somehing written in mud. Sure, it may only be a puddle to be avoided, but eventually...someone's going to get messy!