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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aegeri" data-source="post: 5227872" data-attributes="member: 78116">Speaking as a DM, powers that deal damage at the end of a creatures turn are worse than those that deal damage at the beginning of an enemies turn. For one thing, a creature that takes damage at the start must consider that on low HP, it may not get a turn if it starts adjacent to the sphere period. So it must attempt to stay away or entirely lose its turn potentially once it gets to low HP. An effect at the end of the turn cannot enforce this, because no matter what happens the creature will get its turn before the damage can kill it.This makes end of turn far worse in terms of control than an effect at the start of the turn. Minions for example are still going to get a turn and worse, they will be able to dictate where they die if they have a death effect - potentially being able to maximize the number of PCs or other things they hit/effect.Additionally, damage at the start of the turn cannot be avoided and forces a creature to have to deal directly with the controller. It must spend actions to disable them so they cannot move the flaming sphere after them. In addition the flaming sphere continues to deal damage, occupies its square and can effectively block movement for larger creatures. On the other hand, without damage at the start it is trivially ignored by creatures that can fly, shifting away from the sphere and any number of other tactics. The flaming sphere as a result fails to control anything, as it's not forcing the creature into any particular course of action: This is precisely the opposite of what you're trying to argue!As a DM, start of turn effects are far more of a priority to shut down for monsters. They will deal automatic damage, cannot be avoided and will instantly kill minions and other creatures. This is the definition of control. An end of next turn effect cannot control jack. It doesn't force a creature to deal with it or take damage. It doesn't change a creatures tactics - except perhaps the requirement to wander away from it (but it's still going to get its turn anyway, it doesn't have to prioritize it as much). For example: Your defender is down on the ground bleeding to death and your flaming sphere is next to the monster. It has 6 HP. Tell me: Does your defender think it dealing damage at the beginning or end of the monsters turn is better? I can tell you that when his character is still alive one way and permanently dead in the other (And the party on its way to a TPK) he appreciates one far more than the other.Also that is an actual thing that happened in one of my games. Of course the wizards last ditch movement of the sphere to the monster and its death was widely cheered around the table. It swung a battle that was going very heavily against the PCs because the defender was dead on the monsters turn. Of course the wizard missed the creature as well, but that isn't as badly punished when you have an automatic damage conjuration. That's the point, your argument fails when it doesn't account for the fact one way a creature ALWAYS gets its turn (in my example = dead defender = likely TPK) and in the other will *not* get a turn.</blockquote>

Verification