Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
I asked you a direct question. You've yet to dare answer it. But, who knows, maybe you'll answer it. Up to you.
You're really good at abusing the laugh button. Should I report that abuse?
I asked you a direct question. You've yet to dare answer it. But, who knows, maybe you'll answer it. Up to you.
Your hypocrisy knows no bounds, sir!
View attachment 81545
Where's my other 5 or 6? XP is XP. I work hard for those!Once in response to one of your 6 or 7 laughs.
Expert swordsmen did that. They didn't always want to kill their opponents. First blood and not to the death. Sound familiar?
Then don't hack. More than one way to use a sword.
You really think it's unreasonable for all the wood in a fire to be on fire?
A club is specially balanced and shaped for easy use. A random stick has low odds of being able to function well as a club.
Why would a stick in the fire be more at hand that the sword worn on the waist?
I would point out to the new player that his sword would be more a more effective weapon. The new player would most likely not follow through with the attempt to use the inferior fire stick. The fire stick is still the inferior weapon against the troll by the way. The troll is far more likely to kill and eat the PC while he plinks away at it with a stick than if he just beat it down with a much more damaging sword.
Picking up a dropped weapon is no more efficient than pulling one out of the sheath. Grabbing the stick out of the fire is the equivalent of picking up a dropped weapon. The only way it could be quicker is if it was already in hand.
Fear and morale are mechanics. Show me the existing rule that says wolves in D&D are afraid of fire.
Incorrect. An archer can shoot AT a shoulder rather than the heart. Once the arrow is in flight, though, the archer cannot control the arrow OR the moving target, so the arrow can and often does strike where the archer didn't aim. A sword, however, can be altered in mid swing to take the movement of the target into account.
Sure it does. Blood loss often causes loss of consciousness.
If it's not cheating, then why the directive to discourage and curb the behavior?
It's really so overly broad and vague that it's useless.
Just try getting those wolves to agree to first blood! And don't you dare go into the encounter having pre-cast speak with animals. That would be metagaming!So two people agreeing to a limited duel is the same as actual combat? And didn't people still die sometimes in such duels?
@Maxperson: did you ever answer my question? If so, somehow I missed it in amidst the banter.
Here's another version of the same question:
1) Brand new player, literally first session, with zero metagame knowledge. (For example, doesn't even know the rules for detecting secret doors.)
2) No in-game information he could be acting on. (E.g., no hints that there might be a secret door.)
3) Picks an improbable action at exactly the right time. (E.g., deep in a dungeon without any of the experienced players having made any secret doors checks, he suddenly announces "I'm going to look for a secret door"...right when his mini is on the grid next to a secret door! Amazing.)
Do you allow this? Does it bother you?
Two simple Yes/No questions. Commentary also welcome, of course, but please don't change the details of the scenario.
But it better hadn't be on fire, or...well, you know...Sounds like you need a bigger stick!
And maybe that's the problem everyone's having here...the 5e DMG just doesn't go into it deep enough and most people aren't looking anywhere else.This is the one and only definition of metagaming in 5e. It provides no other definition.