I don't quite understand milestones

[SableWyvern]

Your clarification is a bit shady, but your intent is crystal clear!

 

[hong]

Yeah, the nerve! Imagine someone coming to a D&D message board and asking for clarification on a rule they feel they may have misinterpreted! The OP should be ashamed of himself, dirty little cheat that he is. I mean, the way he poses the question, he even appears to be passing himself off as a DM who is tempted to rule in a fashion that makes life easier for the players. How low can you get?

[Just in case, let me clarify that I am being SARCASTIC.]

You didn't use enough smileys.

 

[SableWyvern]

You didn't use enough smileys.

I wanted to (I was really keen on a roll-eyes, at the least), but the default options are limited, and the [More] link doesn't work for me.

 

[ozziewolf]

Yeah, the nerve! Imagine someone coming to a D&D message board and asking for clarification on a rule they feel they may have misinterpreted! The OP should be ashamed of himself, dirty little cheat that he is. I mean, the way he poses the question, he even appears to be passing himself off as a DM who is tempted to rule in a fashion that makes life easier for the players. How low can you get?

[Just in case, let me clarify that I am being SARCASTIC.]

Clarification or justification for breaking the game. The forums are getting riddled with people trying to exploit the rules.

My sarcasm meter wasn't working properly so I'm glad you clarified that for me.

 

[SableWyvern]

Clarification or justification for breaking the game. The forums are getting riddled with people trying to exploit the rules.

This:

I don't see the harm in doing it my way, but I could easily be mistaken.

looks to me to be about as genuine an attempt as can be made to make the best possible decision for the good of the game. To turn around and essentially accuse the person asking such a question of cheating and breaking the game seems like a huge over-reaction, and not condusive to a welcoming, happy community.

Personally, I kind of agree with your overall point -- ruleslawyering is nonsense. If you want to screw with the game in any way you see fit, there's no need to manipulate the text of the rules to do it. If I decide everyone gets 50 Action Points a day, and my players are happy with that, I just say, "Let it be so." Trying to find some loophole so I can then tell everyone, "The rules allow it!" is an entirely redundant task at that point.

 

[ozziewolf]

This:



looks to me to be about as genuine an attempt as can be made to make the best possible decision for the good of the game. To turn around and essentially accuse the person asking such a question of cheating and breaking the game seems like a huge over-reaction, and not condusive to a welcoming, happy community.

Personally, I kind of agree with your overall point -- ruleslawyering is nonsense. If you want to screw with the game in any way you see fit, there's no need to manipulate the text of the rules to do it. If I decide everyone gets 50 Action Points a day, and my players are happy with that, I just say, "Let it be so." Trying to find some loophole so I can then tell everyone, "The rules allow it!" is an entirely redundant task at that point.

It's completely possible that I jumped the gun and it's a DM trying to get clarification and if that's the case I do apologize to the OP.

With all of the rules lawyering that's been going on lately it's been extremely frustrating to wade through. That's not ment as an excuse to justify my harshness but a clarification on what brought it about.

 

[Praesul]

I'm with SableWyvern, really seemed to me that he was just trying to get a clarification on his confusion about the rule. He admitted right in his post he might be doing it wrong, why do we need to jump all over the guy for trying to make sure he's playing as the rules are intended?

 

[Rith the Wanderer]

I don't really see how this breaks the game, as long as the encounters are hard. In our game we do the every other rule, or occasionally if an encounter is really tough we get it after one, but honestly action points (especially in heroic tier) are something that are nice to have, but not as much of an "incentive" as they were described to be.

We've started ruling that you can save up action points and use more than one per encounter. This may change if it becomes broken at paragon tier, with all the fancy things attached to it. But as of now, it actually makes people to want to continue without resting (I want to use my two action points to do something cool, if we rest I lose it).

 

[ozziewolf]

I don't really see how this breaks the game, as long as the encounters are hard. In our game we do the every other rule, or occasionally if an encounter is really tough we get it after one, but honestly action points (especially in heroic tier) are something that are nice to have, but not as much of an "incentive" as they were described to be.

We've started ruling that you can save up action points and use more than one per encounter. This may change if it becomes broken at paragon tier, with all the fancy things attached to it. But as of now, it actually makes people to want to continue without resting (I want to use my two action points to do something cool, if we rest I lose it).

So you guys can save up all of your action points and then unload on a boss and kill him before he even gets a turn?

 

[Olorin]

*didn't read previous posts closely enough*