Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 6634340" data-attributes="member: 97077">Yes. In practice, a player is describing what he or she is doing in the fiction, then suggesting a mechanic that applies. The DM then agrees or disagrees (most often the former) with the mechanic being used. For example, a player might say &quot;Rosemary holds up three fingers and utters arcane incantations to create three glowing darts of magical force that she will hurl at the goblins. I'm casting magic missile.&quot; That's fiction first, and the DM will probably agree that the mechanics involved in the magic missile spell apply to resolve the action.As it applies to the original post, the character is fictionally trying to do extra damage and nothing more. So it's not a Maneuvering Strike, but the DM feels obliged to &quot;let&quot; the player use that class feature like a power card and it &quot;gnaws&quot; at said DM. The method I suggest may ease this tension. In other words, don't say you're doing a Maneuvering Strike even though you're not actually maneuvering - this may come off as cheese. Just say you how you try to do extra damage in the fiction and then work out the mechanics with the DM to be spending a superiority die for that extra damage (or whatever). I provided several examples in my first post in this thread.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="iserith, post: 6634340, member: 97077"] Yes. In practice, a player is describing what he or she is doing in the fiction, then suggesting a mechanic that applies. The DM then agrees or disagrees (most often the former) with the mechanic being used. For example, a player might say "Rosemary holds up three fingers and utters arcane incantations to create three glowing darts of magical force that she will hurl at the goblins. I'm casting [I]magic missile[/I]." That's fiction first, and the DM will probably agree that the mechanics involved in the [I]magic missile[/I] spell apply to resolve the action. As it applies to the original post, the character is fictionally trying to do extra damage and nothing more. So it's not a Maneuvering Strike, but the DM feels obliged to "let" the player use that class feature like a power card and it "gnaws" at said DM. The method I suggest may ease this tension. In other words, don't say you're doing a Maneuvering Strike even though you're not actually maneuvering - this may come off as cheese. Just say you how you try to do extra damage in the fiction and then work out the mechanics with the DM to be spending a superiority die for that extra damage (or whatever). I provided several examples in my first post in this thread. [/QUOTE]

Verification