Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 7375635" data-attributes="member: 6779196">Maybe you’re more likely to rule those ways depending on the game system, but you don’t speak for all DMs. I don’t care if Whirlwind Attack exists or not, the basic conversation of the game always comes first. If a player tells me his character is spinning around trying to hit all of the enemies surrounding him with his sword, I’m adjudicating that action as I deem most fitting by the core rules of the game, full stop. If a player tells me “I use my Whirlwind Attack,” I adjudicate the results of that according to the specific rules of Whirlwind Attack.The only thing an RPG needs in order for all actions to be possible is a robust, but ideally easy to use set of core rules that the GM can use to adjudicate the results of the actions the players describe. Giving players codified options of things they can do using a more specific set of rules, such as a spell or a combat maneuver, does not prevent other players from performing actions with similar intended results using the core rules of the game. Just because the Battlemaster in 5e has a disarm maneuver doesn’t mean only Battlemasters can disarm people. Just because the Rogue has Sneak Attack doesn’t mean only Rogues can attack people’s weak points from a hidden position. People seem to draw these weird arbitrary lines where it’s ok for characters other than the Ranger to follow tracks, but for some reason if a Feat called “Whirlwind Attack” exists, nobody who doesn’t have it is allowed to spin around in a circle when they attack. It’s bizarre.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Charlaquin, post: 7375635, member: 6779196"] Maybe [i]you’re[/i] more likely to rule those ways depending on the game system, but you don’t speak for all DMs. I don’t care if Whirlwind Attack exists or not, the basic conversation of the game always comes first. If a player tells me his character is spinning around trying to hit all of the enemies surrounding him with his sword, I’m adjudicating that action as I deem most fitting by the core rules of the game, full stop. If a player tells me “I use my Whirlwind Attack,” I adjudicate the results of that according to the specific rules of Whirlwind Attack. The only thing an RPG needs in order for all actions to be possible is a robust, but ideally easy to use set of core rules that the GM can use to adjudicate the results of the actions the players describe. Giving players codified options of things they can do using a more specific set of rules, such as a spell or a combat maneuver, does not prevent other players from performing actions with similar intended results using the core rules of the game. Just because the Battlemaster in 5e has a disarm maneuver doesn’t mean only Battlemasters can disarm people. Just because the Rogue has Sneak Attack doesn’t mean only Rogues can attack people’s weak points from a hidden position. People seem to draw these weird arbitrary lines where it’s ok for characters other than the Ranger to follow tracks, but for some reason if a Feat called “Whirlwind Attack” exists, nobody who doesn’t have it is allowed to spin around in a circle when they attack. It’s bizarre. [/QUOTE]

Verification