Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Guest 6801328" data-source="post: 7315195">Ok, so harder/easier versions of the same thing, when the harder version comes with mechanical benefit, are also harder/easier to execute in terms of game mechanics.  I think we can both agree on this.I don't know why you think my version is "new".  Can you name for me another reaction in the game where the player gets to fine-tune when the reaction takes place, with differing results?Attack of Opportunity: "Can I wait until he reaches the trap before I take it?"  Nope.Mage Slayer: "Can I wait until I find out if my ally makes his saving throw?"  Nope.I may very well be wrong that there isn't another example, and if you can point out an unambiguous exception it will go a long way toward making your argument sound more reasonable, but in the absence of such an example I have a really hard time believing that this one reaction works differently from all the others.  For the Nth time, we are both quoting the spell "as written" we are just interpreting "falls" differently.  Unless you can provide additional evidence to why your interpretation is correct there's no point citing "as written".  No, but they are potentially asking to not miss a turn while falling, not be a sitting duck for ranged attacks, etc.  (Otherwise why would you be so keen on being able to do this?)Here (as I mentioned before) I think we have a different conception of what 'training' looks like.  I picture nerds in robes reading books, practicing pronunciations, and getting lectured on the foolishness of adventuring.  To be trained to time a landing from a great height I picture something more like Dr. Xaviers, with wizards going into combat simulations and learning...well...acrobatics.Yeah, I shouldn't have gone down the road with trying to apply real physics to the problem.  But...that's also where I end up when I start thinking about wizards trying to target a specific 1/14th of a second.  Speaking of which... A digital stopwatch is entirely different because it doesn't speed up as the square of time elapsed.  Please tell me you understand that part.I would actually be ok with a wizard stopping in the last 5 feet of a 20 or 30 foot fall, except that I wouldn't want to worry about exceptions.  (Which makes me realize, maybe, what the trap is 5ekme or whatever his handle is was trying to set.)  At that height you're not going that fast at the bottom.  But of course at that height you don't need to get fancy anyway.  It's the big falls, where you're going really fast at the end, where I'm skeptical.Right.  And because that is counter-intuitive and even physically impossible, they phrased the language to work that way in the rule book.Not quite.  It's "falls", not "falling".  Small difference, but I think it leads to most of this debate.Again, falls not falling.  But that aside, I agree there is no roll required to time it perfectly: you get to cast it when you fall without having to roll to see if you're so startled you forget to do it, or become tongue-tied from terror, etc.  You automatically succeed. However there is nothing in there that says you get to decide where in the fall it happens.No.  Completely false.  There is nowhere in the rules that say they occur "when you say they do".  It says they occur in response to something else happening.  And every single other example in the game is a very discrete something.  No other case that I know of (as I pointed out above to 5ekme) occurs over a time continuum in which the "reactor" gets to makes a decision, with mechanical consequences, about exactly when it occurs.I really will reconsider all of this if you can point me to one.I'm not randomizing when FF gets cast.  It gets cast when you fall.  In all those other (moronic) examples you are adding the skill check without also adding a temporal choice.  They're not even remotely analogous.Is it possible you didn't even remotely understand my example, or are you being willfully ignorant?Again, if you think your version is "playing by the rules", find another example where a player gets to choose when a reaction takes place in a way that has mechanical impact (no double-entendre intended).</blockquote>

Verification