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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6993920" data-attributes="member: 42582">With this sort of stuff, where the gnolls' planning turns on the way the round structure works, we some odd consequence of turn-by-turn, "stop motion" resolution.To bring the issue out, consider the following two scenarios:(A) The gnolls approach slowly and cautiously, not using their full movement but stopping short of the spirit guardians - and then move through at a modest jog (30' move, halved to 15' for the spell effect) to get close enough to attack and (for the sake of analysis) break the spell (by killing the cleric or otherwise disrupting concentration). They take only one lot of damage. (When they enter on their 2nd turn.) (B) Gnolls who charge through wildly (move + dash, to get adjacent to the cleric at the end of their turns), and then attack and break the aura, take two lots of damage (entering on turn 1, starting in the aura on turn 2).In the fiction, why do the second lot of gnolls get more badly hurt? - they've actually spent less time in the aura, because they moved through it at a greater pace!My Rolemaster players used to call this sort of thing "initiative purge" - where you suffer not because of the logic of the fiction but purely from the workings of the combat round mechanics.And, more generally, is it "munchkiny metagaming", or is it "good GMing", for the gnolls to time their actions not based on the logic of the fiction (how much time do I spend in the aura? how quickly do I want to get to its source, so I can end it?) but based on the logic of the mechanics (how can I pace my movement and actions so I hit the damage trigger only once rather than twice?)?</blockquote>

Verification