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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DracoSuave" data-source="post: 4898217" data-attributes="member: 71571">Preponderance of the evidence, on the other hand.  Damn I need to read that ability.Dominating would daze the opponent which might have defensive benefits for the attacked dude.  And it wouldn't avoid the opportunity attack, because OAs trigger off of using ranged powers AND making ranged attacks.  Most of the time they overlap, but there are outliers in both directions that do not.Indeed.  Not to mention, there's a benefit to the other players in having that enemy dominated.  If I had a rogue in the party, I'd be upset if the bard (who's job it is is to help -me- do better as a leader) decided he didn't want to try to give an enemy a status that directly affects my role's ability to work (i.e. give me that juicy sneak attack)... or even just that +2 to hit from Combat Advantage.As a DM, my duty isn't to the bard, but all the players.This much is true.  In -this- instance, on second thought, I'd probably say 'Look, Fansy the Fabulous.  Stabby mcShanker, Wizzer vanOrbinson and Beefroy Tankkins over here wouldn't mind that +2 to hit and that sneak attack.  Just roll the damn dice.  Geez.'Truth.Both types are bad for party cohesion.Heh.  I once had a DM assign a penalty to the dwarf rogue in the party of -8 to climb checks because his legs were short.That player still complains about it to this day.Heh.  I'd have just said 'Take the damn Versatile feat.'   When the rules have the solution to the problem, I'm not often in favor of going outside them unless the solution itself sucks.On a bard?  I'd not really allow that... simply because bards are already legend-kings in the divination department.  Unless you're talking about a specialist wizard, in which case I'd say go for it, simply because the rules tell you to do that anyways.True enough.</blockquote>

Verification