Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Immediate Interrupts: Rule vs Etiquette?
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="SteelCoyote" data-source="post: 4544272" data-attributes="member: 21543"><p>I've been through the Core books and WotC's FAQ, but still can't get the answer I'm looking for...</p><p></p><p><strong>Problem:</strong></p><p>In order to create a sense of roleplaying's suspension of the mechanics behind the scenes, when my players are in combat, I describe NPC and PC attacks in flavor terms such as: "wild swing", "miss", "deflected by armor", "hit", and "ringing blow" instead of simply stating "22", "19", etc. </p><p></p><p>This tends to keep the game as something players from previous editions would recognize and enjoy rather than simply reducing it to a purely tactical level like D&D minis.</p><p></p><p>However, when the player wants to use an Immediate Interrupt like <strong>Shield</strong>, I'm not sure if I'm required to state the numerical value of the attack, or whether it's OK to simply state that the character has been hit, and it's up to the player to decide whether to use the power or not:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I've been playing it as "You've been hit, do you wish to use Shield or not?" but my player argued that it's not fair to make him decide unless he knows if the power would work and prevent him from taking damage.</p><p></p><p>I countered that it's the risk inherent in using the power, and if the attack would hit regardless of his expenditure (i.e. the attack was greater than the +4 bonus he'd receive), then at least Shield still grants him the bonus against any other attacks until the end of his next turn.</p><p></p><p><strong>Question</strong></p><p>Since the rules don't explicitly state whether the player must <strong><em>know</em></strong> if the use of an intermediate interrupt would be successful before using it, it seems to come down to a point of etiquette.</p><p></p><p>To keep with the flavor of the game, and in line with the idea that a character wouldn't know if his use of Shield would work until he tries it, I've been sticking to not telling the players if their interrupts would work before they decide to activate them...</p><p></p><p>I've been treating Shield the same way I treat the Swordmage's Aegis of Assault immediate reaction: nowhere does it imply that the basic attack granted by the power will always hit. It merely gives the player the <em>chance</em> to make the basic attack.</p><p></p><p>Likewise, opting to use Shield as your immediate interrupt offers no guarantee of success, just the <em>chance</em> of success (and the benefit that it stays until the end of your next turn).</p><p></p><p>Is this the correct way to do it?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="SteelCoyote, post: 4544272, member: 21543"] I've been through the Core books and WotC's FAQ, but still can't get the answer I'm looking for... [B]Problem:[/B] In order to create a sense of roleplaying's suspension of the mechanics behind the scenes, when my players are in combat, I describe NPC and PC attacks in flavor terms such as: "wild swing", "miss", "deflected by armor", "hit", and "ringing blow" instead of simply stating "22", "19", etc. This tends to keep the game as something players from previous editions would recognize and enjoy rather than simply reducing it to a purely tactical level like D&D minis. However, when the player wants to use an Immediate Interrupt like [B]Shield[/B], I'm not sure if I'm required to state the numerical value of the attack, or whether it's OK to simply state that the character has been hit, and it's up to the player to decide whether to use the power or not: I've been playing it as "You've been hit, do you wish to use Shield or not?" but my player argued that it's not fair to make him decide unless he knows if the power would work and prevent him from taking damage. I countered that it's the risk inherent in using the power, and if the attack would hit regardless of his expenditure (i.e. the attack was greater than the +4 bonus he'd receive), then at least Shield still grants him the bonus against any other attacks until the end of his next turn. [B]Question[/B] Since the rules don't explicitly state whether the player must [B][I]know[/I][/B] if the use of an intermediate interrupt would be successful before using it, it seems to come down to a point of etiquette. To keep with the flavor of the game, and in line with the idea that a character wouldn't know if his use of Shield would work until he tries it, I've been sticking to not telling the players if their interrupts would work before they decide to activate them... I've been treating Shield the same way I treat the Swordmage's Aegis of Assault immediate reaction: nowhere does it imply that the basic attack granted by the power will always hit. It merely gives the player the [I]chance[/I] to make the basic attack. Likewise, opting to use Shield as your immediate interrupt offers no guarantee of success, just the [I]chance[/I] of success (and the benefit that it stays until the end of your next turn). Is this the correct way to do it? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Immediate Interrupts: Rule vs Etiquette?
Top