Please troubleshoot my rules wording for prone and move action:

[Whimsical]

"Failure: you fall prone and lose the rest of your move action."

Is this redundant? Can you think of anything you can do with the rest of your move action after it's been interrupted by becoming prone?

 

[Oompa]

"Failure: you fall prone and lose the rest of your move action."

Is this redundant? Can you think of anything you can do with the rest of your move action after it's been interrupted by becoming prone?

It has to be said because if you dont and drop prone after 2 squares of the 6 you have, you could still crawl 4 squares.. and with the "lose the rest of your move action" you stop the oppurtunity to continue further..

 

[Whimsical]

I've thought of this and then found that crawl is a move action, but not part of a move action (like jumping, swimming, climbing, and balancing are.)

But this is the kind of responses that I'm looking for.

 

[timbannock]

My rule of thumb: if there's even the possibility that a power might come along that makes it NOT redundant, then it's better to have the redundancy in there just in case.

Also, it allows for players to not be able to "interpret" the situation their way, as they are so often wont to do.

 

[Flipguarder]

Redundancy > Vagueness. Always and forever

 

[MarkB]

"Failure: you fall prone and lose the rest of your move action."

Is this redundant? Can you think of anything you can do with the rest of your move action after it's been interrupted by becoming prone?

Dwarves would be the major example. They get a saving throw to remain standing when they would be knocked prone. In this case, even if they remain standing, they lose the rest of their move.

Likewise, there may be other creatures that can avoid falling prone, or items that allow the wearer to do so. In such cases, the subject still loses its remaining movement.

 

[Starfox]

Dwarves would be the major example. They get a saving throw to remain standing when they would be knocked prone. In this case, even if they remain standing, they lose the rest of their move.

Which seems to be a good argument for NOT including the passage; the intent seems to be that you only lose the rest of your move if you actually do fall down.

I could be wrong; What Mark shows is that there is a difference in meaning, just not a clarification. Well spotted, Mark.