Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Wulf Ratbane" data-source="post: 4997791" data-attributes="member: 94">Only insofar as the rules provide details on how to avoid the negative consequences arising from such actions. The rules provide little guidance with respect to &quot;stunting&quot; as the term is generally understood-- that is, doing something crazy in combat to gain an advantage.In other words, given the choice between fighting the spider while balancing on two immovable rods or while standing on terra firma, there's no reason to stand on the immovable rods. If you have no choice but to stand on those rods in order to attack the spider, then the best the rules can do for you is tell you how not to fall and break your neck.It's a system, not of interesting options, but rather ways to avoid unpleasant consequences. I don't consider that a stunt system.The closest the rules come to &quot;stunts&quot;-- that is, using a skill to gain a combat advantage-- is Bluff/Feint or Intimidate; both of which have too high an opportunity cost (spend an action for a little benefit). It's worth noting that we expanded the utility of both of these a bit.We also added &quot;stunt-like&quot; or &quot;feat-like&quot; analogs for power attack, cleave, combat expertise, etc.&nbsp;That's because the rules don't adequately encourage such behavior. But I agree with you that they should, and will further expand such options in a later work. My approach, however, isn't to focus on any particular skill (which would leave some classes out of the action), but rather on the creativity of the player and what he's willing to risk to gain a reward. (If you search around here on ENworld and elsewhere, you'll find other such &quot;wagering&quot; systems.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Wulf Ratbane, post: 4997791, member: 94"] Only insofar as the rules provide details on how to avoid the negative consequences arising from such actions. The rules provide little guidance with respect to "stunting" as the term is generally understood-- that is, doing something crazy in combat to gain an advantage. In other words, given the choice between fighting the spider while balancing on two immovable rods or while standing on terra firma, there's no reason to stand on the immovable rods. If you have no choice but to stand on those rods in order to attack the spider, then the best the rules can do for you is tell you how not to fall and break your neck. It's a system, not of interesting options, but rather ways to avoid unpleasant consequences. I don't consider that a stunt system. The closest the rules come to "stunts"-- that is, using a skill to gain a combat advantage-- is Bluff/Feint or Intimidate; both of which have too high an opportunity cost (spend an action for a little benefit). It's worth noting that we expanded the utility of both of these a bit. We also added "stunt-like" or "feat-like" analogs for power attack, cleave, combat expertise, etc. That's because the rules don't adequately encourage such behavior. But I agree with you that they should, and will further expand such options in a later work. My approach, however, isn't to focus on any particular skill (which would leave some classes out of the action), but rather on the creativity of the player and what he's willing to risk to gain a reward. (If you search around here on ENworld and elsewhere, you'll find other such "wagering" systems.) [/QUOTE]

Verification