Dragon Breath Recharge Question

[Hypersmurf]

I agree that the wording is ambiguous, but I don't know that anyone is arguing that the wording in MMII should replace the wording in MMI. Well, at least I'm not (never was).

Wait... what are we arguing about, then?

-Hyp.

 

[kreynolds]

Wait...

You stopped reading on the first page and skipped over much of the discussion when you jumped back in, didn't you?

In reply to Quidam...

I'm not saying that the MMII text trumps the MMI text.

In reply to you, one post later...

I never said that the text in the MMII trumped the SRD or the MMI.

...see?

...what are we arguing about, then?

Also in reply to you, on the first page, in the same post...

I simply pointed out that they were different. Then when someone stated that there was no conflict, I asserted that there was. I've since been supporting my standpoint that a conflict exists. Nothing more and nothing less.

...come on man, get in the game! However, part two of what I'm arguing is specifically the implications of the wording from MMII. In other words, what the text from MMII itself means. Personally, I'm just really curious about both because I think I might have ruled dragon's both ways in the past. It's been a long time though, so I can't remember specifics at all.

 

[demiurgeastaroth]

However, part two of what I'm arguing is specifically the implications of the wording from MMII. In other words, what the text from MMII itself means. Personally, I'm just really curious about both because I think I might have ruled dragon's both ways in the past. It's been a long time though, so I can't remember specifics at all.

So, putting aside semantic discussion of terminology, and disagreements between official sources, how do you, kreynolds, think it should work?
When a dragon breaths in round 1, and rolls a 1, do you believe it should be able to breath in round 2 or round 3?

Darren

 

[Pielorinho]

*whew* Okay, I'll chaulk it up to the fact that I was at work and half brain dead that I didn't seem to be able to figure out that we were on the same page.

I think your wizard example confused me because I didn't know that you were talking about the NEXT round. I thought you were saying:

[snip]

when I think you meant to be saying
[snip]

That's exactly it! Sorry I wasn't explaining myself more clearly before; it made perfect sense in my head.

Daniel

 

[Hypersmurf]

However, part two of what I'm arguing is specifically the implications of the wording from MMII. In other words, what the text from MMII itself means.

If it were the only piece of text describing the phenomenon, it could, conceivably, be interpreted either way.

Since it is not, the ambiguity is resolved by the other sources.

-Hyp.

 

[kreynolds]

So, putting aside semantic discussion of terminology, and disagreements between official sources, how do you, kreynolds, think it should work?
When a dragon breaths in round 1, and rolls a 1, do you believe it should be able to breath in round 2 or round 3?

That question has already been answered (i.e. MMI, see my reply to Hypersmurf above).

 

[kreynolds]

If it were the only piece of text describing the phenomenon, it could, conceivably, be interpreted either way.

Since it is not, the ambiguity is resolved by the other sources.

We're still not on the same wavelength, so I'll try to be more clear (I'm trying). I'm not saying that the MMII is the correct method. I never did. I am simply arguing what the text of MMII actually means. The text of the other sources does not change what the text of the MMII means, just as the text of the MMII does not change what the text of the other sources mean. The text of MMI wins due to consensus. It is supported by other sources, but that still does not change what the text in MMII means.

 

[Hypersmurf]

And I'm saying that the text of MMII, as it is written, can be interpreted in two ways.

I'm not saying it's wrong - I'm saying it's poorly phrased and ambiguous, as the past three pages indicate.

But since the other sources are not ambiguous, they tell us what the correct interpretation of the ambiguous text in MMII must be.

-Hyp.

 

[demiurgeastaroth]

I am simply arguing what the text of MMII actually means. The text of the other sources does not change what the text of the MMII means, just as the text of the MMII does not change what the text of the other sources mean. The text of MMI wins due to consensus. It is supported by other sources, but that still does not change what the text in MMII means.

To me, what the text in MMII means, is that if the dragon rolls a 1 on its recharge roll, it acts the very next round, because it has indeed waited one round.
Hypersmurf's example of haste gives one example of why the "wait till next round" limit is needed.

The recent discussion of DnD sequential actions and lack of simultaneity take is to the explanatoion of why this is so.

Example:
Dragon breathes in 1 round. Rolls a 1 for recharge.
Next round: dragon must wait 1 round, so cannot breath.

However...

This assumes that when the dragon acted, it's action lasted some time between the begining of its last turn and the beginning of next turn.
However, this assumes "beginning of action" is a phrase that has meaning. In DnD, I submit it doesn't.
The beginning, middle, and end of an action all occur instantly - out of time.

What actually happens:

Round 1: Initiative 20, the Dragon acts.
This action is instantanous, taking no time. Before this initaitive moment, the dragon is frozen in time. After this initiative moment, the dragon is again frozen. Somewhere between, the dragon acted - moving, breathing, casting spells, whatever, - it all happened in an instant.
Round 2: Initiative 20, the dragon again acts. Since it has been frozen, waiting, for one entire round, it may now breath again.

While not acting, the dragon isn't lierally frozen (it might make opportunity attacks, etc), but for the purposes of the initiative system, it is.

That's why I said, oh so long ago , that I see no conflict between the MMII text and other sources.

Darren

 

[kreynolds]

And I'm saying that the text of MMII, as it is written, can be interpreted in two ways.

Oh, ok. I gotcha now. Just to make sure you know what _I'm_ saying, I really don't see how it can mean anything but one thing, and I especially don't see how it supports the text in MMI at all. That's been my position this entire time, and it hasn't changed.

I think we're on the same wavelength now.