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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ahnehnois" data-source="post: 6067847" data-attributes="member: 17106">Like [MENTION=48965]Imaro[/MENTION], I'm unclear in what you mean here. It seems readily apparent to me that any action a character takes dictates a part of the narrative. If you say "I move 30 ft." you've just dictated that your character moved 30 ft. If you say "I attack", you've dictated that your character attacked, and the DM is essentially bound by the results of the attack roll in the same way you've described. The player of a fighter has the same amount of control over his character and that character's actions that a player of any character does.There are some effects in the game world that a spellcaster can create, but which a noncaster cannot. I'm unclear as to what you're saying in this context.For example, are you saying that a fighter should be able to produce effects equivalent to those of spells? For example, if a wizard can cast Otto's Irresistible Dance, are you saying that a fighter character should likewise be able to touch an opponent and effectively disable him for several rounds without a die roll? I hope not; I share [MENTION=91812]ForeverSlayer[/MENTION] 's viewpoint on this that doing so makes the whole concept of magic rather pointless. Clearly, magic can do things that can only be accomplished with magic.Or are you saying that the player of a fighter should be able to produce such effects regardless of the in-game reality, through some sort of metagame mechanic? This is not an entirely invalid viewpoint, but it would certainly be a radical departure from D&D, and implementing that is a whole new can of worms.I guess I still can't tell what the ideal is that you're advocating.</blockquote>

Verification