Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FormerlyHemlock" data-source="post: 7022462" data-attributes="member: 6787650">Briefly, yes, assuming he declares something more complicated ("charge") than your initial proposal, and the guard doesn't also declare something more complicated than your proposal (like "I'll run away, shooting back if I don't need to Dash"--I generally wouldn't have a guard declare something this complex unless he was a veteran of lots of mobile skirmishes). If the Barbarian wins initiative, he gets an attack and an opportunity attack but winds up not in melee; if he loses initiative, the guard gets a free shot at him this round but next round they're in melee. That outcome seems pretty reasonable to me on two counts, based on my fencing experience--you can almost always charge someone successfully (although you might get stabbed on your way in); and those who are thinking ahead about their options react faster and better than those who are just responding to what's right there in front of them in the instant. The Barbarian's player is being rewarded for player skill, which sounds reasonable to me. (And the Barbarian's player probably won't develop that skill right off--the first three or ten combats will probably play out as per your original post, which again is why I wouldn't have the guard automatically use sophisticated tactics either.)If it doesn't sound reasonable to you, don't allow it.That sounds like it would be over the line of what I would consider plausible. I'd probably raise my eyebrows at a player and go, "Really? You think you can hold all of that in your head simultaneously? It sounds to me like you should just Delay instead to cut down on the uncertainty before committing to your action." I might not forbid it, especially if it only happens occasionally, but if it's really egregiously complex I might ask for a DC 15 Int check.That sounds like a fine way to run things. As a player I'd have no problem with that.In a general sense, overkill is a positive feature, especially with ranged attacks. It's not like you know when you fire your arrow that somebody else is going to have fired another arrow at the target in the meantime and killed it. Nor will you necessarily even realize immediately when something has been fatally wounded, not until it topples over. Speaking as a DM, I'd be more resistant to someone trying to declare contingency ranged attacks than contingency melee attacks vs. dash, although I don't have any codified methodology to draw a bright line between what I would and wouldn't allow there.</blockquote>

Verification