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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DumbPaladin" data-source="post: 5227370" data-attributes="member: 90770">You should probably go with that instinct.  Unless your players are wholly unreasonable, they will understand when you very politely point out that you feel rules are being abused.I play a Paladin 6 / Sorcerer 1 / Abjurant Champion 4 who uses Protection Devotion, to the party's benefit, on a frequent basis.  I always take my immediate action in response to the DM saying, "The monster attacks Player X...", provided Player X is within 30' of me.  (I have the highest AC in the party, so I no longer activate it when monsters attack me.)The one luck feat -- Advantageous Avoidance -- that allows you to force an opponent to reroll an attack roll goes out of its way to say: "Unlike other luck feats, you can use this feat after seeing the success of the roll to be affected."  I've always felt this meant this particular feat was rather unusual, and that's why they were pointing this out.To me, the intention is rather clear, even if the wording isn't: players aren't supposed to be able to interrupt the DM after he's made a roll in order to try and futz their way out of a bad result, waiting ONLY until such a situation to utilize their special abilities.  If you don't want to stop rolling your dice in the open, how about simply declaring that monster Z is going to attack player X, and then waiting to see if anyone wishes to take an immediate action, before you roll?</blockquote>

Verification