Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mesh Hong" data-source="post: 5002643" data-attributes="member: 73463">Sorry I wan't clear enough. I fully understood the &quot;longer&quot; rather than &quot;more dazed&quot; concept I just didn't express it correctly. I can also appreciate that you might not be effected for that much longer because you are making a save against each occurrence every round, so you have a reasonable chance of removing multiple similar effects.&nbsp;Like I said I see this as a logical approach, just different to my own.&nbsp;&nbsp;It's a question of responsibility really. My general approach is that any person is responsible for the conditions they generate. That means I am responsible for tracking conditions on the players and the players are responsible for remembering conditions on the monsters. This means that me or my players are not gaining an advantage by &quot;accidently forgetting&quot; a condition in the heat of combat, if any of us do it is to our personal detriment not advantage.&nbsp;In the case of ongoing fire damage say, if I forget a player is taking it then I am the one losing out on the extra damage. If the player was tracking it on themselves and they forgot it then they are the one that would be getting the advantage of not taking damage.&nbsp;It just seems like a fair approach that allows us to just carry on with the game without worrying about the occasional mistake. It also helps keep everyones attention on whats going on.&nbsp;&nbsp;It's an interesting point. Does this mean that if the same creature confers an effect on the same PC two rounds in a row then it adds to the saves? I suppose it must do with your house rule because it might be difficult to track otherwise.&nbsp;eg: a PC is slowed by an attack, doesn't make the save and then is slowed by the same attack on the next round meaning that the PC now has two lots of slow (save ends) to contend with.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Again I can see the logic here. This is something I havn't until now given any thought to, everything seemed so simple <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/angel.png"&nbsp; class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":angel:" title="Angel&nbsp; &nbsp; :angel:" data-shortname=":angel:" />&nbsp;Don't get me wrong I think your approach is a valid response to the situation, and is certainly balanced as it applies to PCs and Monsters equally. My concern about it maybe being overpowered is that it is naturally weighted in favour of the monsters because they are more likely to have multiple powers that do the same thing. Again this is not necessarily a bad thing as monsters generally need an edge to make interesting encounters.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mesh Hong, post: 5002643, member: 73463"] Sorry I wan't clear enough. I fully understood the "longer" rather than "more dazed" concept I just didn't express it correctly. I can also appreciate that you might not be effected for that much longer because you are making a save against [U]each occurrence[/U] every round, so you have a reasonable chance of removing multiple similar effects. Like I said I see this as a logical approach, just different to my own. It's a question of responsibility really. My general approach is that any person is responsible for the conditions they generate. That means I am responsible for tracking conditions on the players and the players are responsible for remembering conditions on the monsters. This means that me or my players are not gaining an advantage by "accidently forgetting" a condition in the heat of combat, if any of us do it is to our personal detriment not advantage. In the case of ongoing fire damage say, if I forget a player is taking it then I am the one losing out on the extra damage. If the player was tracking it on themselves and they forgot it then they are the one that would be getting the advantage of not taking damage. It just seems like a fair approach that allows us to just carry on with the game without worrying about the occasional mistake. It also helps keep everyones attention on whats going on. It's an interesting point. Does this mean that if the same creature confers an effect on the same PC two rounds in a row then it adds to the saves? I suppose it must do with your house rule because it might be difficult to track otherwise. eg: a PC is slowed by an attack, doesn't make the save and then is slowed by the same attack on the next round meaning that the PC now has two lots of slow (save ends) to contend with. Again I can see the logic here. This is something I havn't until now given any thought to, everything seemed so simple :angel: Don't get me wrong I think your approach is a valid response to the situation, and is certainly balanced as it applies to PCs and Monsters equally. My concern about it [I]maybe[/I] being overpowered is that it is naturally weighted in favour of the monsters because they are more likely to have multiple powers that do the same thing. Again this is not necessarily a bad thing as monsters generally need an edge to make interesting encounters. [/QUOTE]

Verification