Search results

What's with the picture of Hodor? Was he even in this episode? It seems there is actually a good reason Tyrion didn't go immediately to trial by combat. He knows that he doens't have anyone good to fight for him. Now the odd thing is that Tywin (not in this episode) seems not to have foreseen...

Just was thinking of the whole trauma/abuse dynamic when I saw this. A pretty powerful conversation with Patrick Stewart talking about the connection between returning home from battle and being involved in domestic violence. It's a complicated and difficult issue.

That would be another one of those meaningless distinctions. Situations are not themselves inherently framed as anything. If a player says he wants to use some particular mechanical ability, and the DM doesn't think it's appropriate, there's a disagreement. You've noted who has the final word in...

I think it's pretty clear at this point that "fiat" is in the eye of the beholder. I find that degree of ignorance fairly unlikely. Moreover, even in the absence of knowledge, players are liable to make assumptions about these things.

Reasonable to who? You? Were you the DM in this scenario? The DM determined that it wasn't a situation that was amenable to that particular skill use. It is exactly the same thing. That's where you're wrong. The rules don't say that. They don't say that you, as a player are entitled to anything...

Since it is an actual rule, I don't see how that could be true. The contradiction embedded in that statement seems inherent to me. I usually don't see it brought up in a neutral context. Indeed, looking at this example here, pemerton has stridently defined that choosing whether or not a skill...

A definition that falsifies itself, given that the most important overriding rule of the game is that what the DM says, goes. Individual DMs may and do have their own distinctions about how and when they will exercise that authority, but there is no such thing as a DM overriding the rules...

The snark is the original term itself. It has no useful definition, it's just a way of insulting people that are different from you and hiding behind jargon that supposedly represents some objective value judgement.

"DM Fiat" (n): A decision, made by a DM other than the speaker, that the speaker does not like.

Of course it isn't. That was precisely my point. Neither is dictating outcomes, which you derisively refer to by that term. Both of them are variations of exercising the DM's power. It certainly does come into play, unless those resources result in an exactly equal chance of success for all...

I don't think so. I'm not a fan of bonus damage dice, for a variety of reasons I know I've expounded upon recently. It devalues base damage, devalues critical hits, devalues the tactical setup, and creates some wonky damage math. This, I've fixed, by creating a variety of abilities that...

Given that the arrow damage is random to begin with, there is already a range of possible numbers of arrow hits any character could take even if his own hp remains static. These different damage rolls are likely narrated as more or less impactful hits or hits that go to more or less important...

Phantom template (MMV)? Highly appropriate for Vecna and adds in a new layer of creepiness. Elven good lich who turned evil because her tribe was massacred by humans?

To me, the reason not to play a rogue is Sneak Attack. I've never liked the way the ability worked in any of the 3e iterations. If everyone plays a different cleric, it must be quite a challenge to get all those gods to get along! I think it is pretty clear that the cleric was a misfire, and...

Tangent, but that sounds like something a physicist would say. I know many psychologists that have no training in biology, chemistry, or physics, and plenty of psychology that has no identifiable basis in any of it. A psychologist would term this viewpoint "materialistic reductionism". Even the...

I don't know. Sometimes what makes for interesting roleplaying is failure, including preventable or unnecssary failure for reasons like this.

Given that the outcomes and the process used to achieve them are intertwined, this distinction really isn't persuasive. Any player could simply cry "fiat" if the DM chooses a framework that he feels was less favorable to him than some other possibility. Regardless of what definitions you'd like...

Doesn't the PF version have that?

I mean that healing is no longer an exclusive ability or part of a niche, as it pertains to this discussion. Given some level of class distinctions and niche protection, a "balanced" approach to healing would connote, to me anyway, that some characters have this in-combat instantaneous healing...

You may be right about that. I suspect 2e is by far the edition that requires this the most because the healing rate is still low and healing is not all that widely distributed. Admittedly, my experience is colored by good ol' Baldur's Gate, wherein the protagonist character gains bonus healing...