Stunting and the Bag of Flour Connundrum

[Pbartender]

How do you make it clear to players they can't just get away with carrying a bag of flour for free blindness attacks? And, we're not talking about just In-game responses - to me, that's passive aggressive (and leads to frustration on both sides of the screen). How do you communicate to the players, and make it clear, without squashing their ambition to use stunts in the first place?

My other method for discouraging this sort of behavior...

"So let me get this straight... You are planning on hauling around several ten to twenty pounds sacks of flour, just so you can throw them at enemies' faces in order to blind them? Why don't you just use Blinding Bombs from Adventurer's Vault or Eyesting Poison from Dragon 373? Unless, of course, you'd rather be known far and wide as the Balmy Baker of Brindol."

 

[Bumbles]

As you prepare to use your bag of flour....you notice that your improper storage procedures lead to an infestation of deadly blood flies!

Or....have some Wizard research a spell...Bake. Fun to turn that flour into Bread.

And if you're feeling mean enough, there's always the Flour Explosion.

 

[Oni]

My other method for discouraging this sort of behavior...

"So let me get this straight... You are planning on hauling around several ten to twenty pounds sacks of flour, just so you can throw them at enemies' faces in order to blind them? Why don't you just use Blinding Bombs from Adventurer's Vault or Eyesting Poison from Dragon 373? Unless, of course, you'd rather be known far and wide as the Balmy Baker of Brindol."

Is it weird that the idea of being known throughout the land as the Balmy Baker of Brindol actually increases my desire to lug around sacks of flour?

 

[Greg K]

My other method for discouraging this sort of behavior...

"So let me get this straight... You are planning on hauling around several ten to twenty pounds sacks of flour, just so you can throw them at enemies' faces in order to blind them? Why don't you just use Blinding Bombs from Adventurer's Vault or Eyesting Poison from Dragon 373? Unless, of course, you'd rather be known far and wide as the Balmy Baker of Brindol."

Maybe, there DM doesn't allow them- I wouldn't.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

How do you make it clear to players they can't just get away with carrying a bag of flour for free blindness attacks?

1) Encumbrance rules, for one.

Yeah, I know that once you get to a certain level, encumbrance rules seldom matter in most frpgs...but it does break the habit.

2) Another way is to give them foes that aren't affected by the non-stunt stunts. Most constructs wouldn't be affected by a faceful of flour or pepper, or what have you. (Aerosolized flour that is exposed to an open flame is another mater entirely...BOOM!)

3) What is good for the goose is good for the gander. Flour them. Heck, flour and hot oil them and call them fried chicken.

4) After many successes with the stunt, they get known for using it. Then, crafty opponents will take countermeasures.

Thief 1: "Oy, mate! You're rollin' big booty tonight! You score? Land a whale?"

Thief 2: *waves to barmaid* "Liquid gold for me & me main man!" *whispering* "Bud, I got the strangest job I've ever gotten. The boss told me a Guild client would pay big clank if I'd just relieve a bunch of fancyboy wanderers of all their flour."

Thief 1: *sitting down hard, nearly missing barstool* "Flour? Flour?"

Thief 2: "Yep- my share of the bounty was 200 heavy ...and I got to keep the white stuff meself- gave it to my ladyfriend for brekkers on the morrow. I loves waffles!"

OTOH, I wouldn't worry about it too much if that turns into the PC's shtick. Warrior-Chief? No...Warrior-Chef!

 

[LostSoul]

One thing about the "bag of flour" trick is not so much that it's overpowered, it's that it's silly. I don't think it would really work. Was it a common trick that people who actually fought used? Does Conan (or whoever your "genre star" is) use it?

Tackling someone is not silly. It makes a lot of sense. You should be able to knock someone prone with an attack.

What do you do in that situation - when the action the PC is taking makes perfect sense yet can be "exploited"?

 

[Umbran]

Was it a common trick that people who actually fought used? Does Conan (or whoever your "genre star" is) use it?

Like Conan ever entered a kitchen? He was a barbarian, not a baker.

Replace "flour" with "sand" - how often have fighting heroes (in fiction, at least) tossed dirt in each other's eyes for a momentary advantage?

 

[LostSoul]

Like Conan ever entered a kitchen? He was a barbarian, not a baker.

Replace "flour" with "sand" - how often have fighting heroes (in fiction, at least) tossed dirt in each other's eyes for a momentary advantage?

All the time! But it's a very situational thing; they don't carry sand around with them to throw in someone's eyes as a standard combat technique*. It only seems to work if the bad guy is not expecting the sand in the face.

* - unless they are a ninja. But in that case the "sand" or "gas" or whatever comes out of a hidden sleeve pocket or something.

 

[Pbartender]

Maybe, there DM doesn't allow them- I wouldn't.

That's not the point. The point is toe A) discourage the silly exploit by enforcing common sense rules, such as suggesting they will have to lug around 100+ pounds of flour, and 2) reinforce it by presenting an alternative that works similarly, but is more in line with the rules and balance of the game*.


*Blinding Bombs from Adventurer's Vault, for example, force all targets within a burst 1 to treat non-adjacent creatures as having concealment until the end of your next turn. They cost at least 30 gp each, for the lowest level version... They have a less powerful effect than the flour-sack situation, and cost considerably more. Eyesting blinds a single target for a round, and then inflicts a -2 penalty to attacks (save ends), for at least 80 gp a dose. I'm using these two examples mainly as comparisions of similar effects from consumable items.

 

[pming]

Hiya.

When I first read the post, I thought..."Ok...so...uh...what's the problem again? Are you upset that the players are being smart and using their brains?".

Then I reread it and read some other posts. IIRC, there was a statement of "So I ruled on the spot that the opponent was blinded". If that is literally what you did, *that* was your mistake, not letting them try it.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with players wanting to carry a large belt pouch full of flour in hopes of using it to blind their opponent. However, it shouldn't be automatic. Have a simple to hit roll need to be made, and the target gets a save to resist/avoid it. Don't forget, if a PC is trying this, they have to have *at least* one hand (likely two; they have to open the pouch, remember?). This would be "dangerous", to say the least, in combat.

If players come up with clever and effective plans and tactics...GREAT! *That* is one of the points of the game. And, IMHO, that point trumps rules crap *any* day of the week.

Bottom line: always let your players try reasonable things if they want to. It's NOT the DM's job to say "No" just because he doesn't like something the players are doing...the DM's job is to remain neutral and say "Ok, here's what you have to roll/do...[stuff]...do you still want to try it?". Sure, sometimes there are "No" moments (ex; a fighter decides he wants to unfurl the scroll of Fireball and read it...), but, as I said, "reasonable things" should always be given a chance.

^_^

Paul L. Ming