NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 7809375" data-attributes="member: 16814">I have read the 5e Basic PDF fairly closely. Nothing in that PDF suggests that this is how combat is to be resolved:(1) Nothing suggests the player has to explain, in fictional terms, why s/he enters a rage (nor that, say, a non-barbarian PC might do the same thing by drawing on his/her hate for orcs);(2) Nothing suggests that the GM might call for a check as a necessary condition of successfully entering a rage (or using action surge, or second wind, or any other class ability).Here's the text I have in mind:Pages 69, 71-73: On your turn, you can move a distance up to your speed and take one action. You decide whether to move first or take your action first. Your speed—sometimes called your walking speed—is noted on your character sheet. The most common actions you can take are described in the “Actions in Combat” section later in this chapter. Many class features and other abilities provide additional options for your action. . . . When you take your action on your turn, you can take one of the actions presented here, an action you gained from your class or a special feature, or an action that you improvise. . . . Whether you’re striking with a melee weapon, firing a weapon at range, or making an attack roll as part of a spell, an attack has a simple structure. . . . You make the attack roll. On a hit, you roll damage, unless the particular attack has rules that specify otherwise.The second-person here is pretty unambiguous. Nothing here suggests that the player needs the GM to call for a check, direct the roll of an attack or damage die, etc. It does not set out the same procedure as is described in "the basic pattern" on p 3.  And it does not follow the same procedure as is described on p 58: "The DM calls for an ability check when a character or monster attempts an action (other than an attack) thathas a chance of failure."There is obviously nothing that stops a table from treating combat actions differently from how the rules set them out, from substituting GM judgement for the action economy, etc. But that is not the game that the Basic PDF presents.</blockquote>Just so I'm clear, do you no longer think D&D is a mother may I game and that, at keast in combat, is much more player-facing?I ask because your argument above is ignoring the much more general rules of DM says so arbitration because the combat rule is written in an engaging to the reader style.[/QUOTE]

Verification