Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 4971830" data-attributes="member: 4937">Obviously, to prevent this argument over whether or not someone is flatfooted.I know what you are saying, and you are wrong.  There are actions like 'feint' and feats like 'flick of the wrist' that allow you to flatfoot even an aware opponent, but more importantly nothing I have said prevents a character from ambushing another character at which point neither of us disagree over how the game works.  Additionally, as I've said, there is no reason to suppose that every one goes around ready for combat and I consider it completely appropriate that if you attack someone who has no belief that you are a threat, that if you win initiative you'll catch them flatfooted.  Moreover, the rogues main source of sneak attack damage is usually flanking a foe.  The only area where my interpretation elimenates flatfootedness is one narrow set of circumstances - the one you claim is 'your favorite image...ever'.  For the simple reason that you claim that a being alert to a threat that has taken an action is still flatfooted, which is a clear violation of both the intention of and letter of the rules.  And you've been very clear about why you want to bend the rules, because you think that rogues aren't powerful enough without your interpretation and because you are clearly emotionally invested in a certain cinematic outcome.No, but there is nothing that says you shouldn't either and quite abit that implies that you should.  Precisely because not rolling initiative leads to this sort of argument over the physical state of the inhabitants of the room and leads the player to imagine a world that is more or less frozen in place until the player takes the initiative to launch an attack it is a very good practice to do so. But clearly any time you plan on attacking one of the inhabitants, its important or we wouldn't be having this discussion.It wrecked the one where the DM was forced to remove flatfootedness from the game.  That's an extreme reaction, and my guess is the DM did it because he recognized how broken your account of the rules is and didn't realize that the world as you described it is not the world as the rules describe it.Really, I should stop answering you, but I suppose that's a fair question.  By surreal I mean the experience I have when a person uses a word but then immediately claims that the word doesn't mean what it means.  For example, they might say, "It's rape but not rape rape." or they might say, "Its being prepared but not you know really being prepared."  On of the funniest is asking a person who is looking at an aligator what color it is, because many people will reflexively say something like, "Green.", and then look at the aligator again and say, "But not you know green green."  It's the name I have for the experience of hearing someone deny what they just said because what they just said doesn't conform to what they wish or think they know.  I don't know if there is a better word, but it conjures for me the image of a melting quivering reality.</blockquote>

Verification