Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FrankTrollman" data-source="post: 1144779" data-attributes="member: 14225">No. It's not.It is because the rules don't have a specific "real world" interpretation - they are just rules. You hit or do not hit because the dice tell you so, then you inflict damage if you hit, and don't if you don't. Whether you struck cleanly into your opponent's chest or struck against their weapon several times, herding them into your ally's shield opening up a strike to their shoulder is situationally dependent - and within the descriptive realms of the players at the table.The rules don't make a distiction between those two "hits" - and game mechanically it isn't important.Right. Presumably because the flanking bonus represents actual interference by the other flanker and not the target's state of mind.Fireballs do 1d6 of damage per caster level. How hot are they? They are hot enough to do 1d6 of damage per caster level. If you assign it a temperature in the game based upon your first impression of a "Fireball" - and that temperature later feels unrealistic at 1d6 of damage per caster level - you have simply assigned the wrong temperature.Flanking is about real interference, not subjective discomfort. We know this because things give a flanking bonus if they are really interfering, and don't stop giving flanking bonuses just because the target does or does not acknowledge the presence of one or more of the attackers.It's about objective position, not subjective position. Otherwise the flanking bonus would have rules and descriptive text consistent with subjective location - and it does not.I honestly can't tell whether you are serious or just trying to hack people off - I don't think it matters.-Frank</blockquote>

Verification