Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Flat-Footed
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Arrowhawk" data-source="post: 5627853" data-attributes="member: 6679551"><p>So if the DM says I have a rule whereby you roll the dice and if you get the lowest roll, you suck...that's okay? Because essentially that's what the No Dex rule says.</p><p> </p><p> That's not true. The Ready action gives you the same option to flank...you just have identify the situation which triggers your flanking action. </p><p> </p><p> If you act first...you kill first and avoid retaliation. If you act last, you can die first...but you may be in a better position to retaliate. It's a trade off. </p><p> </p><p> First off, I'm talking about moderate imbalance, not cosmic. If spellcaster can't be killed, what would be the point of them playing with other adventurers. So your house rule has made all other characters obsolete. The other classes no longer serve a <em>purpose</em>. Gross imbalances in classes or in the rules can make other classes unnecessary. But in a PnP game, the adventures are supposed to be tailored to the party, so minor differences...like damage dealt by TWF first S&B...are minimized if even noticable. The problem arises in video games where stats are easily maintained and the majority of advancement comes from straight combat. In PnP, perfect, or even decent balance between classes is not mandatory. Purpose...is always mandatory.</p><p> </p><p> Which is the WotC explicitly saying we're not going to give you something for free. If you want to take advantage of a tactical situation...while retaining your other beneifts, there's a cost.</p><p> </p><p> The FF rule. Because that is what you're complaining about. You don't want to be caught FF'd. But you want to be able to act last with a Full Actoin. In the first round, those two are mutually exclusive. Why wouldn't WotC want to preserve the impact of the FF rule in the first round? Leting high dex characters not only avoid being FF and simultaneously get the full benefit of acting last...was something they obviously didn't want to allow. Kind of like making Rangers lose 1d8 of hit points at first level...then charging them for TWF...forcing them to wear light armore to get benefits...and a host of other things they did to the class. It's their art. They think the game is better because of it.</p><p> </p><p> So it seems odd that Delay only has this penatly of remaining FF in the first round because Ready doesn't suffer any additional penalty in the first round? </p><p> </p><p>My response is that what Delay and Ready do are independent of each other. They operate on two different completely different mechanics, so if one suffers or seems to have variable benefits...it's not relevant to the other. Ready is an "in-game" action. Delay is "I want a lower Initiative result." The may allow the same tactical outcomes...but that is coincidental. Remember, the Ready action allows you to "interrupt" someone elses actions. a Ready can stop a spellcaster from casting. You can't do that with Delay. They are designed for two different goals...even though there is overlap in how they can be used.</p><p> </p><p>If your'e asking why shouldn't Delay be the same benefit regardless....I don't have an answer. I still haven't seen an explanation why no Dex Bonus is better for the game the way it works now. I mean, the game could have said you roll for Init every round. The game could have said every round, you start FF because you don't know what's going to happen next. <shrug></p><p> </p><p> John is probably metagaming all over the place and just being arbitrary about what metagaming is acceptable and what is not. Is it in-character for a Fighter in the party to not recognize the benefit of helping his teammate flank? Deciding not to metagame and <em>specifically</em> picking a target you can't flank as a result....is metagaming. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></p><p> </p><p> Except that every credible statistical analysis I have seen involving TWF in a pure ranger shows it's weaker than any other combat oriented option. You can certainly create extreme cases where it holds its one...but Feat for Feat...it's weaker than S&B and THF. So you stick Rangers with a Combat style that does weaker damage on average and lowers their AC by as much as half a dozen against traditional S&B. Wait...why were Rangers even given TWF to begin with? Is Legolas is more representative of the class than Aragorn? Whatever.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Arrowhawk, post: 5627853, member: 6679551"] So if the DM says I have a rule whereby you roll the dice and if you get the lowest roll, you suck...that's okay? Because essentially that's what the No Dex rule says. That's not true. The Ready action gives you the same option to flank...you just have identify the situation which triggers your flanking action. If you act first...you kill first and avoid retaliation. If you act last, you can die first...but you may be in a better position to retaliate. It's a trade off. First off, I'm talking about moderate imbalance, not cosmic. If spellcaster can't be killed, what would be the point of them playing with other adventurers. So your house rule has made all other characters obsolete. The other classes no longer serve a [I]purpose[/I]. Gross imbalances in classes or in the rules can make other classes unnecessary. But in a PnP game, the adventures are supposed to be tailored to the party, so minor differences...like damage dealt by TWF first S&B...are minimized if even noticable. The problem arises in video games where stats are easily maintained and the majority of advancement comes from straight combat. In PnP, perfect, or even decent balance between classes is not mandatory. Purpose...is always mandatory. Which is the WotC explicitly saying we're not going to give you something for free. If you want to take advantage of a tactical situation...while retaining your other beneifts, there's a cost. The FF rule. Because that is what you're complaining about. You don't want to be caught FF'd. But you want to be able to act last with a Full Actoin. In the first round, those two are mutually exclusive. Why wouldn't WotC want to preserve the impact of the FF rule in the first round? Leting high dex characters not only avoid being FF and simultaneously get the full benefit of acting last...was something they obviously didn't want to allow. Kind of like making Rangers lose 1d8 of hit points at first level...then charging them for TWF...forcing them to wear light armore to get benefits...and a host of other things they did to the class. It's their art. They think the game is better because of it. So it seems odd that Delay only has this penatly of remaining FF in the first round because Ready doesn't suffer any additional penalty in the first round? My response is that what Delay and Ready do are independent of each other. They operate on two different completely different mechanics, so if one suffers or seems to have variable benefits...it's not relevant to the other. Ready is an "in-game" action. Delay is "I want a lower Initiative result." The may allow the same tactical outcomes...but that is coincidental. Remember, the Ready action allows you to "interrupt" someone elses actions. a Ready can stop a spellcaster from casting. You can't do that with Delay. They are designed for two different goals...even though there is overlap in how they can be used. If your'e asking why shouldn't Delay be the same benefit regardless....I don't have an answer. I still haven't seen an explanation why no Dex Bonus is better for the game the way it works now. I mean, the game could have said you roll for Init every round. The game could have said every round, you start FF because you don't know what's going to happen next. <shrug> John is probably metagaming all over the place and just being arbitrary about what metagaming is acceptable and what is not. Is it in-character for a Fighter in the party to not recognize the benefit of helping his teammate flank? Deciding not to metagame and [I]specifically[/I] picking a target you can't flank as a result....is metagaming. ;) Except that every credible statistical analysis I have seen involving TWF in a pure ranger shows it's weaker than any other combat oriented option. You can certainly create extreme cases where it holds its one...but Feat for Feat...it's weaker than S&B and THF. So you stick Rangers with a Combat style that does weaker damage on average and lowers their AC by as much as half a dozen against traditional S&B. Wait...why were Rangers even given TWF to begin with? Is Legolas is more representative of the class than Aragorn? Whatever. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Flat-Footed
Top