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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Arrowhawk" data-source="post: 5628242" data-attributes="member: 6679551">This is a change to how Delay is described in the original source material and it certainly muddies the waters.  Skip has changed the definition of Delay to exclude anything about voluntarily lower the "result." To "put off your turn" takes it farther from a metagame decision and closer to a character decision, but not unequivocably. If you change how a rule is written and you change the words used in articulating it...that will often change what it means and how it is interpreted. It's odd there's nothing about whether that eliminates the FF status...because that's the biggest question. The way this is written, given with their deciding to create a "nonaction" it's still not clear whether this constitutes a condition to eliminate FF.  While the FF rule says when he "may act," I wouldn't be surprised to hear Skip say Delay still doesn't eliminate FF. The only caveat is that even under this new definition, your choice is quantized. In other words, you can't act upon your character becomeing aware of something...you can only act based on the new Init number you choose. This still comes off as a metagame process. You'll note that staying on a horse as result of a DC check is another "nonaction" and I'm pretty sure taking the nonactivity before your Init does not stop you from being FF'd before your Init turn came up.  With the WotC respone, I'd throw my hands up in the air and say I'm not sure whether a Delay is definitely an activity or qualifies as a decision not to act that would allow you to avoid FF'd. IMO, the WotC answer makes it ambiguous.</blockquote>

Verification