Disappointed in 4e

[Vyvyan Basterd]

Or is something only an action when you succeed?

In the example that was given, standing up is not a matter of success or failure. Since the character is Unconscious, he cannot stand up. So saying that he is trying to stand up does not violate RAW, because we know that he can't. Even if he rolls a natural 20 on his death save he can't stand up until his *next* turn when he is no longer Unconscious. This is a case of describing a known failure as an attempt that automatically fails. He doesn't actually stand up and isn't asking for an action that will allow him to stand up, so it's just flavor.

 

[Fifth Element]

I think I've already mentioned that, if it could be answered by a cut & paste from earlier in the discussion, I'm not doing the cut & paste.

I don't think you have addressed it, as I've been waiting for a response.

I think you tried to address it, again by looking at the hit points bottom-up. Something like "Gary still has way more hit points than Bob, so this wound means very little." But you haven't explained why it's not valid to ask the question "why does my 10th-level fighter take so long to fully recover from a scratch?"

Because if you ask that question, you expose an absurdity in the 1E hit point/healing system. From different perspectives, you get different degrees of absurdity. So if you choose to look at a system in a way to maximize absurdity, you'll see a lot of absurdity.

 

[Rel]

Hey, Joe, that's the second snarky macro you've posted in this thread since I warned people about being civil. How about you knock it off.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

On the contrary, I have played with hundreds of players who are quite happy that the game includes reasons for not pushing on, because it is not "fun and heroic for their characters to push on" after a certain point. It robs the game of verisimilitude. But it is the smart thing to do within the game structure if the game gives you no reasons not to.

And I play with people who have their characters think and act like real people. After saving the village they take time to relax, recuperate, bask in the glory of the grateful villagers, visit their families, serve their temples, conduct research, maintain their weapons, and train - even though the rules do not require them to do any of this. They may take a break as long as year depending on when their research turns up a new wondrous place to plunder that interests them or they receive a call for aid from people in trouble. The world is not in a constant state of impending doom and there aren't lost crypts littering the countryside like Walgreens drugstores.

 

[Lacyon]

On the contrary, I have played with hundreds of players who are quite happy that the game includes reasons for not pushing on, because it is not "fun and heroic for their characters to push on" after a certain point. It robs the game of verisimilitude. But it is the smart thing to do within the game structure if the game gives you no reasons not to.

I think if you were being perfectly honest, you'd acknowledge that it's not so much the smart thing to do as one option.

Unless of course you can show me where players get penalized for not pushing on.

 

[The Thayan Menace]

Word!

​

 

[LostSoul]

Well if it is "just colour and there was no conflict there" why can't I?

Because there is conflict?

The PC is dying. There's a fight going on. That smells like conflict to me.

If you argue that "Getting up from Prone is a Move Action, and you can't take any actions; you're Unconcious." then how can you also argue that trying to get up from Prone is not an action, so that's okay, even though you're Unconcious. Or is something only an action when you succeed?

"Trying to get up", in this case, has no impact on resolution. It's colour.

"Trying to get up", when it does impact resolution, is not colour. Then we use the resolution mechanics to see what happens.

If it is not breaking the rules to say that the fighter tries to get up and fails -- because it is just colour and has no game effect -- then it is not breaking the rules to say that the fighter gets up, dances a jig, and then falls where he started, and lies there blinking at the elf, so long as it is just colour and has no game effect.

Yeah, except that there's conflict: can you get up again or not? can you avoid being eaten by the Kuthrik?

If there was no conflict - if you were not dying and there was no giant insect monster from the underdark trying to eat you - then I'm sure you could get up, dance a jig, and wink at the elf.

Bob is allowed one action per turn.

BOB: I hit the orc with my sword.

DM: Roll a d20!

BOB: A "1". I miss.

DM: That's OK. Failure to hit an orc is not an action. You can try again.

BOB: WTF?!?

Remember how colour is that which does not impact resolution? This example is not just colour. His failure and the number of actions he gets is part of resolution.

Later on, Bob is knocked prone by an ogre. The ogre is standing over Bob, ready to knock him flat if he tries to get up. The DM has decided that Bob needs to make a Reflex save to successfully stand.

BOB: I try to stand up.

DM: The ogre attempts to push you down as you rise. Roll a Reflex save.

BOB: A "2". Dang.

DM: Don't worry. Standing up from prone is a move action. It seems quite clear to me that if standing from prone is a move action, then failing to stand from prone is not a move action. You can try again.

BOB: WTF?!?!?!

Once again, this is not colour. You are engaging the resolution mechanics.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Failure to hit an orc is not an action. You can try again.

Attacking an orc is an action. Failure to attack an orc is not an action.

DM: The ogre attempts to push you down as you rise. Roll a Reflex save.

BOB: A "2". Dang.

Oh, I see. You're equivocating on "failure".

Here:

fail⋅ure
–noun
1. an act or instance of failing or proving unsuccessful; lack of success: His effort ended in failure. The campaign was a failure.
2. nonperformance of something due, required, or expected: a failure to do what one has promised; a failure to appear.
3. etc.

I intended #2 in the text you quoted, and you're reading me as intending #1. Nonperformance, then. Bob attempts to perform the "standing from prone" action, which uses his move action. The ogre prevents him from doing so (apparently using some sort of immediate interrupt power). Bob remains prone. Had Bob been unconscious, he would not have been able to use his move action to attempt to perform the "standing from prone" action, would not have triggered the ogre's power, and the ogre would still have an immediate action left that round.

Could you perhaps not read my posts in the most ridiculous fashion you can come up with? That's certainly a good way to not see any sense in what I'm writing, but it's also a very poor way to conduct a conversation. Of course, it appears to me that the entire problem here is that you're attempting to construe not just my posts, but the 4e rules, in the most ridiculous fashion you can come up with, rather than doing what most of us are doing, and creating our narratives in a way that make sense, rather than trying to demonstrate that the rules are silly because we can contrive silly interpretations of them. It does not bother me if it is merely possible for bizarre explanations to be created for the results of the game mechanics. It would bother me if it were necessary, but it is not. That it is possible is a point rendered moot when a group of players sits down to a table and decides that unconscious people should not be allowed to tap dance.

I think that perhaps we have indeed gone as far as we're going to with this, considering that you're now simply trying to make fun of things I have posted without giving them a considerate read.

 

[La Bete]

That it is possible is a point rendered moot when a group of players sits down to a table and decides that unconscious people should not be allowed to tap dance.

Are you saying that this is an 'issue' that is only seen online, not actually in a game?

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Are you saying that this is an 'issue' that is only seen online, not actually in a game?

Why, just the other day I got into an argument with my players over whether a quadriplegic gibbon should be able to brachiate.

Kidding...