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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Al'Kelhar" data-source="post: 4970180" data-attributes="member: 7884">As a couple of posters have observed, the answer is about whether the rest of the players are "cool" with it.In my long-term gaming group, I have traditionally played the wizard, from 2E, 3E through to 4E.  I have a well-known reputation for playing neutrally-aligned wizards who view combat as a numbers game - which in D&D it is.  My wizards are therefore quite prepared to include allies in an AoE attack if the net outcome of that attack is likely to be beneficial for the party.Given that, once initiative is called, everyone in the group forgets role playing completely and becomes a tactical wargame expert, counting squares and assessing the optimum combinations of movement and attack, we don't care.  As far as I'm concerned, if the rogue happens to move into a position to get a sneak attack - i.e. optimising his damage output - and that happens to put him somewhere in the optimum area for an AoE attack, he can suck it up.Also, in our group, instances of friendly fire have become part of the enjoyment of the game - frankly, we find AoE attacks gone wrong hilarious.  Seldom a session goes by when I am not reminded of my wizard's attempt at clearing the walls and ceiling around her and the party of giant rats using a scorching burst centred on her - that proceeded to hit her and every party member but missed every single rat.  But we don't play a serious game.So, "is it ever a good idea to hit the party".  Damn straight.  Just make sure you're still friends with everyone at the table afterwards.Cheers, Al'Kelhar</blockquote>

Verification