Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 9615844" data-attributes="member: 6785785">It's not about what I think. It was based on an example that was shared where that's what the DM did. As you know and have advocated for, people tweak D&D and house rule it all the time. And the rules are vague enough in areas as to leave procedures entirely up to the DM. Well, I don't know if we can call an avalanche killing a giant a certainty because it's pretend and we can pretend anything we want. Having said that, I don't know how it was all presented or described and how that may have influenced your decision. I can absolutely see the logic behind your decision. I would have likely made the same call if it seemed the obstacle of the giant was resolved. But I could also likely see someone else decide that it lived. My point is that even when bypassing the standard mechanics, we can still disclaim decision making. You could do something like "I'm gonna roll a d6. On a 1-2 the giant is dead, on a 3-3 it has a third of its hit points, and on a 5-6 it has two thirds." But what makes it the best if other tools can accomplish the same thing?</blockquote>