Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Majoru Oakheart" data-source="post: 3966432" data-attributes="member: 5143">This is exactly what I don't like in a game.&nbsp; I like being able to use strategy to win.&nbsp; Strategy requires that I know the relative merits of every action I take.If I know that I do more damage when flanking, it lets me choose between moving to a flanking position and attacking from where I am.&nbsp; I might be able to hit the monster immediately this round or for more damage next.&nbsp; However, I might risk attacks of opportunity or being trapped behind the monster when my allies decide to flee.&nbsp; I might be too far away from the cleric to get healing if I take a big hit.&nbsp; All of those things I know because the rules tell me that's how it works.If I am fighting a monster that due to every rule in the book I cannot reasonably expect to beat all it does is make me want to run away and wonder why a DM would use a monster that we were unable to defeat.&nbsp; Either that, or if I know my DM is one who uses on the fly adjudication then I start guessing randomly at things the DM might accept as an answer:Me: &quot;I run underneath the dragon to a position where he can't hit me and attack his soft underbelly.&nbsp; That should ignore his DR.&quot;DM: &quot;No, you can't end your movement in an enemies square, sorry.&quot;Me: &quot;Damn, we're using that rule?&nbsp; Ok.&nbsp; I shoot arrows at the ceiling above its head.&nbsp; Does that cause rocks to collapse on him?&quot;DM: &quot;No, arrows don't do anything but chip the rocks.&quot;Me: &quot;Ok, I'm beginning to get it.&nbsp; *I* cannot defeat this monster, apparently the DM expects the wizard to fireball the ceiling to cause a collapse so we can beat it.&nbsp; I'll delay until after the wizard tries that.&nbsp; Until then, I'll be reading my novel and waiting until I can do something.&quot;Frankly, it's no fun to be useless or to be at the whim of the DM as to what will work and what won't.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Majoru Oakheart, post: 3966432, member: 5143"] This is exactly what I don't like in a game. I like being able to use strategy to win. Strategy requires that I know the relative merits of every action I take. If I know that I do more damage when flanking, it lets me choose between moving to a flanking position and attacking from where I am. I might be able to hit the monster immediately this round or for more damage next. However, I might risk attacks of opportunity or being trapped behind the monster when my allies decide to flee. I might be too far away from the cleric to get healing if I take a big hit. All of those things I know because the rules tell me that's how it works. If I am fighting a monster that due to every rule in the book I cannot reasonably expect to beat all it does is make me want to run away and wonder why a DM would use a monster that we were unable to defeat. Either that, or if I know my DM is one who uses on the fly adjudication then I start guessing randomly at things the DM might accept as an answer: Me: "I run underneath the dragon to a position where he can't hit me and attack his soft underbelly. That should ignore his DR." DM: "No, you can't end your movement in an enemies square, sorry." Me: "Damn, we're using that rule? Ok. I shoot arrows at the ceiling above its head. Does that cause rocks to collapse on him?" DM: "No, arrows don't do anything but chip the rocks." Me: "Ok, I'm beginning to get it. *I* cannot defeat this monster, apparently the DM expects the wizard to fireball the ceiling to cause a collapse so we can beat it. I'll delay until after the wizard tries that. Until then, I'll be reading my novel and waiting until I can do something." Frankly, it's no fun to be useless or to be at the whim of the DM as to what will work and what won't. [/QUOTE]

Verification