Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="TaranTheWanderer" data-source="post: 7525188" data-attributes="member: 15882">I was pretty sure I clarified what I'd said earlier.&nbsp; I was avoiding using another example because this conversation seemed to be derailing the thread but since you insist on bringing it up:A character finds or buys a broach of shielding which makes him immune to magic missile(and resistant to force damage) .&nbsp; Afterwards, every time they have an encounter that can use MM, the DM makes a point of NOT using magic missile against the PC - despite the fact the enemy should not really know that character is immune to magic missile.&nbsp; The DM does this because it's a better tactic.&nbsp; He ensures the opposition never wastes an action on casting a spell that won't do anything.&nbsp; And there's plenty of justification because MM can target anyone, so why waste an action on the one PC who has protection?Now, you can argue that the broach of shielding is doing exactly what it's supposed to:&nbsp; protecting the player from magic missiles.&nbsp; And since the DM never attacks the player with magic missiles, that's exactly what it does.&nbsp; That argument ignores the fact that part of the advantage of a broach of shielding is it also protects the party as a whole by occasionally soaking up damage from MM that would otherwise have hurt someone else. So, avoiding using those actions on that PC renders the item slightly less useful than it could be.So, if you want to use Out of Character knowledge to make the most advantageous actions every encounter, that's fine.&nbsp; That's a personal choice.&nbsp; I personally, would occasionally have an enemy target the person with the broach if it made sense to do so - even if I knew it would waste an action.&nbsp; Once that happens, the caster would avoid making the same mistake twice.In any case, Being defensive is pretty obvious in most situations so it's probably a moot point.&nbsp; I personally wouldn't have zombies make the distinction between dodging and non-dodging characters but maybe some people play smarter zombies than I do.&nbsp; Does that make the dodge action any more or less useful?&nbsp; I don't know anymore, honestly.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="TaranTheWanderer, post: 7525188, member: 15882"] I was pretty sure I clarified what I'd said earlier. I was avoiding using another example because this conversation seemed to be derailing the thread but since you insist on bringing it up: A character finds or buys a broach of shielding which makes him immune to magic missile(and resistant to force damage) . Afterwards, every time they have an encounter that can use MM, the DM [I]makes a point[/I] of NOT using magic missile against the PC - despite the fact the enemy should not really know that character is immune to magic missile. The DM does this because it's a better tactic. He ensures the opposition never wastes an action on casting a spell that won't do anything. And there's plenty of justification because MM can target anyone, so why waste an action on the one PC who has protection? Now, you can argue that the broach of shielding is doing [I]exactly[/I] what it's supposed to: protecting the player from magic missiles. And since the DM never attacks the player with magic missiles, that's exactly what it does. That argument ignores the fact that part of the advantage of a broach of shielding is it also protects the party as a whole by occasionally soaking up damage from MM that would otherwise have hurt someone else. So, avoiding using those actions on that PC renders the item slightly less useful than it could be. So, if you want to use Out of Character knowledge to make the most advantageous actions every encounter, that's fine. That's a personal choice. I personally, would occasionally have an enemy target the person with the broach if it made sense to do so - even if I knew it would waste an action. Once that happens, the caster would avoid making the same mistake twice. In any case, Being defensive is pretty obvious in most situations so it's probably a moot point. I personally wouldn't have zombies make the distinction between dodging and non-dodging characters but maybe some people play smarter zombies than I do. Does that make the dodge action any more or less useful? I don't know anymore, honestly. [/QUOTE]

Verification