Something, I think, Every GM/DM Should Read

[Mallus]

The folks I game with take readily to the concept of separating out a mechanical condition from an in-game description, so for us "prone" can mean "sprawled inconveniently on its back," and "punch" can mean "grab behind the head, lift halfway up and throw into the ground." One of the nice side effects of this approach is that you effectively gain a wider variety of scenes that happen in an in-character context, while still keeping track of a relatively limited pool of mechanics. Quite fond of that approach, personally.

Me too.

The other benefit of this approach, aside from elegance and simplicity, is that it shuts down a myriad of other questions that reasonably follow once you ask: how can you knock a snake prone?

Questions like: how can a single man with a sword fight a bear? Or a rhino? Or a dinosaur? I'd bet a lot of gamers wouldn't bat an eye at those match-ups, assuming the man had sufficient fighter levels (or access to 1e Unearthed Arcana -- I recall a lethal 2-dagger fighter w/double specialization from an old AD&D college game). Or what about a gentleman in a robe armed only with his open palms and a surfeit of chi?

But knock a snake prone? Heavens to Betsy, that sure is implausible!

Gamers can be a funny lot vis-a-vis logic (note: I've been as guilty of this as anyone).

However, one of my take-aways from playing games like d20 Modern is that I prefer systems in which the mechanics specifically reinforce the experience of the game-world. The elegant fencing rules in Flashing Blades, the brutally lethal firearms and knife-fighting rules of Boot Hill - in my experience, these contribute to both genre-emulation and verisimilitude in the game-world in ways that more abstract systems do not, which is one of the reasons I moved away from d20 Modern, still my favorite generic roleplaying game, toward more purpose-built games.

Good stuff, TS. The less a system tries to model, the better job it can do. And the more it models, the less it models well -- unless it goes the FATE route and place the focus on narrative outcomes and not the specifics of the acts themselves, which, for some people, is the very definition of modeling something badly/unsatisfactorily.

(I'm guessing your Flashing Blades players don't often decide to go bear hunting armed only with rapiers?)

I think D&D, as a rules set, is stuck in the "model a lot, but not all that well" category. It wouldn't be D&D without sword-armed men --and women, and, umm, transgendered PC's!-- squaring off against snakes, bears, silverback gorillas, flying dragons and cubes of pissed-off acid Jello. Neither would it be D&D if the game had a lot of specific rules for fighting non-human sized/shaped things -- that would make it Rolemaster, no?

 

[TheUltramark]

ok, I am going to try one last time to "plead my case"

if you (a player) say "I am going to punch the snake" - I (the dm) would first roll my eyes, but then say "whatever dude, go ahead" - the player would roll and tell his 'number' vs the app. defense and I would say (for argument sake) "ok, ya hit the thing"
The player then doesn't have license to then say "I get behind the thing, grab it by the neck, step on the other end and stretch it like laffy taffy"
No, Im sorry, you punch the thing.

we played last night, and I started a new thing, when the player says "I am going to do kick ass super power number 47 on the bad guy" before they roll, I ask what it does, I think waiting until after is the actual root of the problem in the now seemingly age old debate of knocking the snake prone...players would be far less upset (I suspect) if they are told prior to wasting something that it wouldnt work, and to try something else.

 

[Neonchameleon]

ok, I am going to try one last time to "plead my case"

if you (a player) say "I am going to punch the snake" - I (the dm) would first roll my eyes, but then say "whatever dude, go ahead" - the player would roll and tell his 'number' vs the app. defense and I would say (for argument sake) "ok, ya hit the thing"
The player then doesn't have license to then say "I get behind the thing, grab it by the neck, step on the other end and stretch it like laffy taffy"
No, Im sorry, you punch the thing.

we played last night, and I started a new thing, when the player says "I am going to do kick ass super power number 47 on the bad guy" before they roll, I ask what it does, I think waiting until after is the actual root of the problem in the now seemingly age old debate of knocking the snake prone...players would be far less upset (I suspect) if they are told prior to wasting something that it wouldnt work, and to try something else.

You've got a good point here.

Before the campaign starts:
DM: Snakes can't be knocked prone.
Me: Thanks. I'll have to rethink my "flying snake" polearm momentum/polearm gamble build for the Temple of the Snake Goddess. (For those who don't know 4e, think a character with a polearm with a large flat end who every time a snake (or anyone else) comes too close gets an opportunity to hit the enemy sending them flying ten feet and knocking them prone).

Before the session starts:
DM: You can't knock snakes prone because of their anatomy.
Me: *shrug* I'll just knock the priests prone instead. Or cut the snakes in half.

Before the roll:
DM: Sorry. Forgot to point out you can't knock snakes prone.
Me: A little late but thanks. I'll do something else then.

After the roll:
DM: No, sorry, the snake wasn't knocked prone. It's a snake.
Me: Now you tell me. Jerk. Either my character looks like an idiot or we rewind history - both bad.

Now I'm on the side of claiming that the reason you'd be unable to knock a snake prone is because they are already prone and should get the corresponding modifiers (other than the speed problems).

Edit: Would the following racial trait suit everyone for snakes:

Slithers
The snake always counts as prone for the purposes of attacks and powers unless it is actively grabbing a creature. Snakes take no movement penalty for being prone.

 

[TheUltramark]

You've got a good point here.
.

thanks!
it's about time I did

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

ok, I am going to try one last time to "plead my case"

if you (a player) say "I am going to punch the snake" - I (the dm) would first roll my eyes, but then say "whatever dude, go ahead" - the player would roll and tell his 'number' vs the app. defense and I would say (for argument sake) "ok, ya hit the thing"
The player then doesn't have license to then say "I get behind the thing, grab it by the neck, step on the other end and stretch it like laffy taffy"
No, Im sorry, you punch the thing.

To me, this is no different than:

Player: "I attack the snake with my sword."
DM: "Okay, roll."
Player: "I rolled a [Foo]."
DM: "Okay, you hit - damage?"
Player: "24!"
DM: "That'll kill it. Wanna describe it?"
Player: "Um, Sir Sternivus smacks the snake in the face with his shield as it lunges at him, momentarily stunning it. Stern takes advantage of the opening and lunges into the snake's neck just below the head; as it coils down to the ground, I step over it and finish it off with a chop, beheading the creature."
DM: "Nice - you're covered in snake blood, by the way. Might want to wash that off at some point. Susan - your action?"

Why can't a player describe their actions flavorfully?

 

[Spinachcat]

If you don't think you can knock a snake prone, you haven't watched enough nature videos. A mongoose can easily knock a snake off balance with a quick flip that messes with its spatial orientation.

Just expand your definition of "prone"

The Old School Primer is a good read for any GM. There is a lot of power in the more relaxed, more freeform style of GMing that can be incorporated in your 4e games. Is it the Holy Bible of GMing? Nope, just some fun ideas.

The more you engage the fantasy behind the numbers, the better your game will be for both GM and players. Since everything is abstracted, use that to your advantage!

 

[Fifth Element]

Are you making that up, or is that an actual rule in 4e?

Neither. I didn't say 4E attack powers can only be used in combat, just that the vast majority of their uses are in combat.

This is the general forum, rather than the 4e forum, after all! One shouldn't imagine that every response is based on a narrow subset of rules.

The question arose from discussion of 4E, of course, because that edition is the one that allows players to determine whether something can be knocked prone (a defined term in 4E), rather than the DM. If the DM doesn't think a snake can be knocked prone, it's absolutely not an issue unless he's playing 4E, where the players have powers that specifically counter that. Context, etc.

Sure, if you like. But this is a specific method of modelling that is, IMHO, inferior to several others available.

No it ain't. It's one way of imagining a -2 penalty to hit. You don't need to imagine it the same way every time. IMHO and YMMV and all that.

 

[TheUltramark]

If you don't think you can knock a snake prone, you haven't watched enough nature videos. A mongoose can easily knock a snake off balance with a quick flip that messes with its spatial orientation.

Just expand your definition of "prone"

does the mongoose punch the snake or use its 'quick flip power'

The Old School Primer is a good read for any GM. There is a lot of power in the more relaxed, more freeform style of GMing that can be incorporated in your 4e games. Is it the Holy Bible of GMing? Nope, just some fun ideas.

The more you engage the fantasy behind the numbers, the better your game will be for both GM and players. Since everything is abstracted, use that to your advantage!

so you disagree about the prone rule, but you agree that rules arent the be all end all of the game...interesting

 

[pemerton]

The Old School Primer is a good read for any GM. There is a lot of power in the more relaxed, more freeform style of GMing that can be incorporated in your 4e games.

<snip>

The more you engage the fantasy behind the numbers, the better your game will be for both GM and players. Since everything is abstracted, use that to your advantage!

so you disagree about the prone rule, but you agree that rules arent the be all end all of the game...interesting

I read Spinachat's position somewhat differently - it seems to me that s/he is saying that, because 4e is abstracted in certain respects, it permits freeform/Old-School-Primed GMing without needing to leave the rules behind.

Of course, it may be that I'm reading Spinachat that way only because that would make his/her view the same as the one that I have been putting forward in this thread!

 

[Raven Crowking]

Neither. I didn't say 4E attack powers can only be used in combat, just that the vast majority of their uses are in combat.

So, then, whether or not a snake can be knocked prone when attempting to escape, or when just encountered slithering around, is an issue in 4e. Assuming, of course, that 4e "is the one that allows players to determine whether something can be knocked prone (a defined term in 4E), rather than the DM" and, of course, that a snake can be encountered in 4e while not coiled to strike. Like, say, a snake can move around the battlefield?

The question arose from discussion of 4E, of course, because that edition is the one that allows players to determine whether something can be knocked prone (a defined term in 4E), rather than the DM. If the DM doesn't think a snake can be knocked prone, it's absolutely not an issue unless he's playing 4E, where the players have powers that specifically counter that. Context, etc.

I know that the question arose due to the 4e ruleset. Which is why, specifically, I pointed out that there are better models out there. But the 4e rules do not apply to those better models. Context again.

BTW, you seem to be claiming above that if the DM doesn't think a snake can be knocked prone, that this is an issue in 4e. I'm not sure that I buy that. Surely, according to the 4e RAW, the DM can overrule powers in situations where he feels them inappropriate?

And, if this is the case, surely the meme of this being "the one that allows players to determine whether something can be knocked prone....rather than the DM" is really much more illusion than fact.

Actually, for the record, 2e and 3e also had rules that allowed the players to knock something prone. They were just not automatically successful.

4e isn't is "the one that allows players to determine whether something can be knocked prone" (a defined term in almost every edition of D&D, and even discussed in 1e).....it is the edition that allows for auto-success, unless the DM says otherwise.


RC