Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How do YOU handle a Fastball Special, and other team manuevers?
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="Immortal Sun" data-source="post: 7589521"><p>Not terribly concerned if the distance is exciting or not. One human (even a 20 STR strong-man) throwing another human being 30ft is complete absurdity on it's face in 5E in my book, throwing any further than that is the sort of insanity that belongs in places like 3.5 or a supers game. </p><p></p><p></p><p>It is an attack made by the Thrower as part of their Attack Action. Hence when I said "it's an attack". </p><p></p><p></p><p>The Throwee must make a check as a result of the Thrower's action. Nothing more, nothing less.</p><p>The latter portion of the question was answered <em>twice</em>.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Aside from the distance issue, there is no interpretation issue except where you are creating one.</p><p>Step 1: Can you lift the Throwee? If yes, proceed to Step 2.</p><p>Step 2: The Thrower makes an attack roll against the target. </p><p>Step 3: The Throwee makes an acrobatics check as a result of the attack to put their pointy end first. Then the Throwee deals damage based on weapons...size...etc...depending on the specifics of the situation.</p><p>*situational notes: If the Thrower misses, the Throwee lands near the target but doesn't hit it and does no damage.</p><p>**If the Throwee fails their save they deal improvised weapon damage.</p><p></p><p>There is no interpretation issue.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Sorry, it was a general "you" as it sounded just like all the powergamers I've ever played with who always tried to wiggle around the rules to get something for nothing.</p><p></p><p></p><p>True, but as I point out to [MENTION=6704184]doctorbadwolf[/MENTION] the response of the player to the DM laying out how things are going to happen determines which the player is putting priority into. Are they looking to gain power with little effort, or are they looking to do something potentially awesome regardless of the outcome? Where is their game priority?</p><p></p><p>As I said, I've played with powergamers before, heck I generally consider myself one. It gets tedious after a while. Are we here to have fun and do neat things regardless of how we have to do them, or are we here to argue about rules and rulings? I'm a strict DM because over the years I've lost patience for the latter. Someone wants to do something "cool" but wants to argue about the ruling then they can either choose not to do it or toss off. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, in the example I gave there wasn't much cost (an attack) and a check. So the results reflect that. Heck, the Throwee still has their whole turn...after they land.</p><p></p><p></p><p>And I suppose I just don't see the players re-enacting the Gimli toss or the Fastball Special to be very creative. It's not "my character wants to try something unique just to them!" It's "I want to do this thing I saw on TV!" which to me is sort of the <em>opposite</em> of creativity. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Again, I addressed this further down. It's all covered by the simple rules I detailed and the rules already existing in D&D. Size increases increase carrying capacity. More strength increases carrying capacity and makes it easier to hit a target. 5E is about <em>simplicity</em>. Throwing other people as a means of attack just...doesn't strike me as within 5E's intended realm. It seems to be steering away from the zany fantasy, of which "throwing people as an attack"<em> is</em>.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I will always lay out the "rules" of how something will work before the players attempt it. Thrower needs to make an attack, don't Nat 1. Throwee needs to make a check, don't Nat 1. Then Throwee gets to deal damage appropriate to whatever the specific details of the situation are. Probably weapon + strength in most situations. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Which is why I kept it simple and not resource intensive. I can't really stop players from investing more into it, but these resources already have specific effects. I'm not going to give them bonus effects just because they decided to use them in this situation. That just promotes the idea that players can get <em>extra stuff </em>when they do crazy things.</p><p></p><p>And I'm really trying not to promote crazy things.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, the default carrying capacity rules in 5E are 15xStr. Certainly more room than I allowed. But the rules are also more precise, you just <em>can't</em> carry more than that. It's a hard cutoff. So at 20 Str that's 300lbs. Certainly enough to toss the <em>average</em> character. My rules above still work. You just have a larger range to work with. Halfling McScrawnyarms still won't be throwing Big Bill, but Big Bill might be able to toss several halflings.</p><p></p><p></p><p>5E is in large part, elegant in its simplicity. I try to design rulings to echo that. It's not perfect, but I'd rather have one rule that covers 90% of situations than attempt to design for corner cases.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I <em>am</em> open with my players. I'm up-front with the fact that I start out strict and open things up as I get a feel for how the players like to play. Am I playing a game with a bunch of reasonable sound-minded fellows or a bunch of rules-lawyering murder-hobos? One of these groups will get more leeway than the other, and it's not the second group.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Immortal Sun, post: 7589521"] Not terribly concerned if the distance is exciting or not. One human (even a 20 STR strong-man) throwing another human being 30ft is complete absurdity on it's face in 5E in my book, throwing any further than that is the sort of insanity that belongs in places like 3.5 or a supers game. It is an attack made by the Thrower as part of their Attack Action. Hence when I said "it's an attack". The Throwee must make a check as a result of the Thrower's action. Nothing more, nothing less. The latter portion of the question was answered [I]twice[/I]. Aside from the distance issue, there is no interpretation issue except where you are creating one. Step 1: Can you lift the Throwee? If yes, proceed to Step 2. Step 2: The Thrower makes an attack roll against the target. Step 3: The Throwee makes an acrobatics check as a result of the attack to put their pointy end first. Then the Throwee deals damage based on weapons...size...etc...depending on the specifics of the situation. *situational notes: If the Thrower misses, the Throwee lands near the target but doesn't hit it and does no damage. **If the Throwee fails their save they deal improvised weapon damage. There is no interpretation issue. Sorry, it was a general "you" as it sounded just like all the powergamers I've ever played with who always tried to wiggle around the rules to get something for nothing. True, but as I point out to [MENTION=6704184]doctorbadwolf[/MENTION] the response of the player to the DM laying out how things are going to happen determines which the player is putting priority into. Are they looking to gain power with little effort, or are they looking to do something potentially awesome regardless of the outcome? Where is their game priority? As I said, I've played with powergamers before, heck I generally consider myself one. It gets tedious after a while. Are we here to have fun and do neat things regardless of how we have to do them, or are we here to argue about rules and rulings? I'm a strict DM because over the years I've lost patience for the latter. Someone wants to do something "cool" but wants to argue about the ruling then they can either choose not to do it or toss off. Well, in the example I gave there wasn't much cost (an attack) and a check. So the results reflect that. Heck, the Throwee still has their whole turn...after they land. And I suppose I just don't see the players re-enacting the Gimli toss or the Fastball Special to be very creative. It's not "my character wants to try something unique just to them!" It's "I want to do this thing I saw on TV!" which to me is sort of the [I]opposite[/I] of creativity. Again, I addressed this further down. It's all covered by the simple rules I detailed and the rules already existing in D&D. Size increases increase carrying capacity. More strength increases carrying capacity and makes it easier to hit a target. 5E is about [I]simplicity[/I]. Throwing other people as a means of attack just...doesn't strike me as within 5E's intended realm. It seems to be steering away from the zany fantasy, of which "throwing people as an attack"[I] is[/I]. I will always lay out the "rules" of how something will work before the players attempt it. Thrower needs to make an attack, don't Nat 1. Throwee needs to make a check, don't Nat 1. Then Throwee gets to deal damage appropriate to whatever the specific details of the situation are. Probably weapon + strength in most situations. Which is why I kept it simple and not resource intensive. I can't really stop players from investing more into it, but these resources already have specific effects. I'm not going to give them bonus effects just because they decided to use them in this situation. That just promotes the idea that players can get [I]extra stuff [/I]when they do crazy things. And I'm really trying not to promote crazy things. Well, the default carrying capacity rules in 5E are 15xStr. Certainly more room than I allowed. But the rules are also more precise, you just [I]can't[/I] carry more than that. It's a hard cutoff. So at 20 Str that's 300lbs. Certainly enough to toss the [I]average[/I] character. My rules above still work. You just have a larger range to work with. Halfling McScrawnyarms still won't be throwing Big Bill, but Big Bill might be able to toss several halflings. 5E is in large part, elegant in its simplicity. I try to design rulings to echo that. It's not perfect, but I'd rather have one rule that covers 90% of situations than attempt to design for corner cases. I [I]am[/I] open with my players. I'm up-front with the fact that I start out strict and open things up as I get a feel for how the players like to play. Am I playing a game with a bunch of reasonable sound-minded fellows or a bunch of rules-lawyering murder-hobos? One of these groups will get more leeway than the other, and it's not the second group. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How do YOU handle a Fastball Special, and other team manuevers?
Top