Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 4013496" data-attributes="member: 22779">The only difference between a DM's fiat rule and an explicit rule would occur in the first instance where someone tried to jump.  After that first instance, everyone at the table would know how the rules work and what their chances are.  The only thing you gain is an "aha gotcha" moment the first time the rule is devised through fiat.  Nothing else.<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/paranoid.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":uhoh:" title="Paranoid    :uhoh:" data-shortname=":uhoh:" />That's the second time people have completely misread what I've said in this thread.  Is there some fundamental flaw in my language capabilities?You DO NOT NEED a "trap remover" when everyone is capable of removing a trap.  However, if you want to play "trap remover" you can.  And you'll be better at it than everyone else.  Instead of a simple binary - you do or you don't - now you have a range of choices, from "well, no one's an expert, but we can try" to "MacGyver".In your quote, you highlight the arguments that defeat your point.  He states clearly that there is a RANGE of numbers that make up its level.  That's always been true.  You don't have 1000 hp creatures that are meant to fight 1st level characters.What in that quote limits your ability to make new monsters?</blockquote>