Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="P1NBACK" data-source="post: 5563686" data-attributes="member: 83768">I think we're being a little hard on <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/members/eamon.html" target="_blank">eamon</a>. I'm sure he has good intentions. There is no right or wrong answer here. Ultimately, it's up to the DM to make the right decision, and we all have our different playstyles. I feel the game has provided the tools to adjudicate this situation (and maybe the game falls a little flat in providing serious examples), and the particulars should largely be left up to each individual group at the table and what playstyle they use. If eamon's group doesn't allow maneuvers outside of what is on their sheet, then it makes sense that he might not allow someone to remove a cloak or pull back a cloak. If our group makes liberal use of custom maneuvers and DMG page 42, then it seems absurd that we wouldn't allow this action as it makes perfect, plausible sense in the fiction. Either way, these are all just suggestions and I don't think there's a definitive answer. It's largely preference. I keep seeing these threads 10 pages long in 4E forums about something that should be a simple judgment call by the DM. There's a "definitive" answer, right? And, yet, 10 pages later, we're still arguing about what is "right". This is why I think the "hard-coded" approach falls flat for me. And, why I think 3.5-4E have gone the wrong way in trying to hard-code every single action you can possibly take. Let's give the DM tools for making judgment calls like this. DMG page 42 is a tiny step in the right direction, but it's clearly not enough.</blockquote>

Verification