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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 5225229" data-attributes="member: 2011">I understand the logic of your argument OT, but I think it has a flaw.Damage = Control. It is, in fact, the ultimate form of control because a dead foe cannot fight back. It is also a very strong form of soft control. How many DMs try to attack the Striker who just did 40 points of damage compared to the Defender who just did 10 points of damage?A power that can deal damage at the start of a foe's turn controls the battlefield more than one that deals damage at the end. It does so, even if only by a percentage, by occasionally killing and blooding foes.A power that deals damage at the end of the turn can be avoided. One can view such a form of soft control as more controlling (as you do) than the start of turn one where the damage cannot be avoided, but it's not the case.Let's take the example of a solo creature. With start of turn damage, it will both take damage and try to stun or kill the Controller. Its viable options are more limited because the Controller is doing auto-damage on it. It dies quicker if it allows the auto-damage to continue for many rounds. Its hand isn't forced, but it is strongly influenced.With end of turn damage, the solo has the additional option to just move out of the area and has more viable options as to what actions it takes. The group has to put other control on the solo in order to make the end of damage case more compelling. For example, having a Fighter mark the solo so that it is again incentivized to attack the Controller in order to make the Fighter mark less restrictive.Start of turn damage has one fewer options for the target than end of turn damage. The ability to just move out of the effect.That end of turn option is not forced, so end of turn damage doesn't have more control, it has less control. The option of not taking the damage exists for end of turn, hence, end of turn is both less useful and hence less controlling.As a DM, I'm going to often attack the Controller PC that is doing auto-start of turn damage, even it it means that the monster(s) have to take a few licks to do so. I may or may not attack the Controller PC doing non-auto end of turn damage. When the PC more strongly influences the actions of the monsters, he has more control.I can definitely see your idea that end of turn damage influences the monsters to move away more, but it does so at the expense of doing less overall damage hence less overall ultimate form of control. On the surface, it appears like it might have more control, but that is illusory.</blockquote>

Verification