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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Geron Raveneye" data-source="post: 1893223" data-attributes="member: 2268">I have to say, there's a difference betwen comparing a simple maneuver that already has a "roleplaying" description, like Power attack, to cover for the metagaming aspect of the feat with a combination of spell and feat that, apart from it's metagaming aspect, can't really be explained by a roleplaying point of view. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> Your answer as a fighter also includes a metagame argument, namely that this tactic was prepared between him and the wizard because it "according to the rules should work." That's not really the answer I'm looking for when I'm asking why your fighter all of a sudden views allies as enemies, but hey, you gave me a second......which sounds more like an in-game answer to me. And yeah, as I stated before already, I'd probably let it stand...and see how often your fighter would slay celestial creatures who want to aid him to get one free swing at the bad guy, and when his alignment starts shifting. And how long it takes until some celestial might take offense at some wizard specifically abusing that summoning spell to create cannon fodder for a fighter who doesn't mind slaying his allies.Still think I need to house rule the feat? Rule abuse only happens if the player characters alone get an unfair advantage, which usually doesn't happen anyway, because every decision goes both ways.And of course everybody plays it their own way, there's no disagreement about that here. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification