Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="schnee" data-source="post: 7169475" data-attributes="member: 16728">This is a great conversation. I dig the chains of logic here, but I think this whole thing is getting to the point of splitting hairs to a degree that is contra-indicated by the simplicity of 5E.&nbsp; So, if you have to follow a decision tree of THAT level of complexity and detail, even if that might be the most logical thing to do - all things being equal - then it's better to rule on the side of simplicity, since the rules are unequally biased towards that.I admit, it's 'game-ist' more than 'simulationist', and you may not agree, but I saw the consequences of an overtly simulationist mindset most strongly expressed in 3E and that 'broke' the game. (Or, more accurately, gave really crafty optimizing people tons of rules support to 'break' the game.) 3E and 4E also suffered from a complexity problem of having to manage multiple status states in parallel that interacted in weird ways, that increased bookkeeping to a paralyzing degree at high levels.Since stacking has been nerfed, most other spells just 'overlap' in a way that doesn't give more than one effect, and an overall effort to eliminate complex bookkeeping has been built in, I would go one of two ways:1) Only highest Booming Blade takes effect, that one spellcaster rolls damage.2) Every Booming Blade caster rolls damage, and only the highest takes effect. (Basically, riffing off of 'Advantage'.)I'm leaning towards #2, because there should be *some* benefit to hitting someone with multiple Booming Blades, since it isn't a static numeric effect.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="schnee, post: 7169475, member: 16728"] This is a great conversation. I dig the chains of logic here, but I think this whole thing is getting to the point of splitting hairs to a degree that is contra-indicated by the simplicity of 5E. So, if you have to follow a decision tree of THAT level of complexity and detail, even if that might be the most logical thing to do - all things being equal - then it's better to rule on the side of simplicity, since the rules are unequally biased towards that. I admit, it's 'game-ist' more than 'simulationist', and you may not agree, but I saw the consequences of an overtly simulationist mindset most strongly expressed in 3E and that 'broke' the game. (Or, more accurately, gave really crafty optimizing people tons of rules support to 'break' the game.) 3E and 4E also suffered from a complexity problem of having to manage multiple status states in parallel that interacted in weird ways, that increased bookkeeping to a paralyzing degree at high levels. Since stacking has been nerfed, most other spells just 'overlap' in a way that doesn't give more than one effect, and an overall effort to eliminate complex bookkeeping has been built in, I would go one of two ways: 1) Only highest Booming Blade takes effect, that one spellcaster rolls damage. 2) Every Booming Blade caster rolls damage, and only the highest takes effect. (Basically, riffing off of 'Advantage'.) I'm leaning towards #2, because there should be *some* benefit to hitting someone with multiple Booming Blades, since it isn't a static numeric effect. [/QUOTE]

Verification