Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kithas" data-source="post: 6775829" data-attributes="member: 97587">@<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=6775031" target="_blank">Saelorn</a>Firstly good catch on the shield, I missed that.I'm glad we could see eye to eye on something finally. It is valuable to instill in new players respect for dm rulings and that is definitely how it should be. I disagree that making the rules unclear is the best way to accomplish that.Personally I wish the rules were much tighter, it would make theorycrafting more fun and easier to predict how the sheet(character) hits the fan. As is it's a toss-up sometimes and the over-vagueness is honestly a cause for constant annoyance in my playgroup. Two examples come to mind; (For reference my playgroup has been playing every week, or more, since last august)Only on this last session did we manage to find a concrete point of discernment on spells like Ice Knife, Hail of Thorns and Lightning arrow. The language is vague enough that one could see IK and LA doing the aoe damage to the one you shot too, only when we compared it to the wording on Hail of thorns did we decide that it didn't and that until it was made actually clear that is how we'll play with it.The wording on Improved Divine Smite. Honestly we have no clue what is intended. It's clear that on a normal melee attack you add 1d8 Radiant. The confusing part comes in when you use the normal Divine Smite. For instance if I use a 1st level slot and am wielding a Rapier I do 1d8P and 3d8R, what if I use a 4th level slot? Does this mean that the highest slot I can use goes down to 3rd level? Or does it bypass the original maximum because it is from a different source? Basically the question is does it limit the 5d8 from Divine smite and Then add the 1d8 from improved or does it add first and then limit to 5. It isn't clear and could easily be either way.For my group, we play a lot of different games from Mtg to Dominion, a more codified set of rules in actual rules language would have been sooo much better. Then you have the option to make rulings based on the dm's judgement even if it goes against the rules(as in my pushing attack example earlier) but as is the rules are so unclear you need your dm's interpretation to know what will happen. I don't like unpredictable tools. You know what you call a hammer that only works 95% of the time? trash. If I am trying to roleplay a character who goes into life-or-death combat on a regular basis I would never rely or even probably use something unpredictable to get the job done, and having the choices I make for a seasoned veteran not have the results he desired when he would know how it works just breaks the immersion for me.As to the balance between twf and greatswords, yes by the numbers on damage in a white-room they are about equal and you have to spend your Bonus action to get there with twf. However once you start adding on-hit effects(Hunter's Mark, Crusader's Mantle, Elemental Weapon, Flametongue weapons etc.) or things that care more that you got one hit this round than how many(sneak attack) two weapon fighting does pull ahead in damage. It's not a viable option for a straight fighter(maybe champion if you're lucky, or you find 2 flametongue shortswords ), however for rogues(sneak atk), rangers(hunter's mark), warlocks(hex), barbarians(Rage dmg), and even Paladins(crusader's mantle) it is definitely a viable option.I still disagree that you can do those things with your object interaction but clearly we aren't going to agree on that, to summarize our sides;For me the sentence "If you want to interact with a second object you need to use your action," clearly rules out drawing two swords as they are two objects, after the first sword the second is a second object and you need to use your action. For draw/sheathe I see it as two different actions, basically can you open a door, shoot someone then close the door? No, so the same goes for weapons.Also I see any text in green boxes in the phb as extra fluff and not part of the rules.For you the example of "fish a few coins from your belt pouch," contradicts the earlier limitation of one object, making it unclear. And without the dual wielder feat, which is optional, there is no mention of any ability that let's you do this so it is unclear whether you are allowed to or not. This un-clearness requires your dm's Ruling.</blockquote>

Verification