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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ilbranteloth" data-source="post: 7100949" data-attributes="member: 6778044">5e has a handful of disassociated mechanics (fighter's superiority dice when tied to maneuvers). While it's possible to describe what happens when they use the Trip Attack for example, my issue is explaining why the fighter routinely forgets how to trip people. Yes, there is no specific restriction that anybody can attempt to trip somebody, and that you can uses the same mechanic minus the superiority die, but there are a great many people that argue RAW only a fighter with this maneuver can attempt a trip, because otherwise it would invalidate the fighter.In terms of viscious mockery I don't think everybody would agree that it's the words themselves that cause damage - it's the magic. It's the spell energy behind the words. The bardic inspiration would be the same thing.As to whether the bard player has to spout insults, poetry, or song every time they use one or the other is up to the table and their style. Describing the exact nature of viscious mockery each time it's used would be the same as describing the exact way your fireball or magic missile looks each time you use it. Or each swing of your sword for that matter.Sure, I know that a lot of DM's now describe each swing of the sword, and it's an approach I can't stand. First because I still see your attack roll as the one attempt that gets through their defenses among many, rather than the 1 swing per die roll approach that it seems many players/DMs equate. But also because it gets really old after a while, and either repetitive, or ever more absurd in a player's or DM's approach to describe the same thing that's happened a thousand other times differently. Instead we establish the fictional aspect of a given mechanic (spell, whatever) once, and then describe it when it's important. Otherwise we already know what it looks like in the fiction and can imagine that on our own.Since I don't like disassociated mechanics, I've changed the way superiority dice and maneuvers work in our game. But once we understand how the mechanic relates to the fictional world, we don't have to consistently repeat it. Another example would be a short rest following a battle. We establish early on what the party does following a battle once they feel there is no remaining imminent threat - looting the bodies, healing, collecting ammunition, how they deal with the bodies, cleaning weapons, adjusting armor, a swig of water or wine, a snack, or whatever. Once we know what occurs following a battle, then it occurs after every battle unless otherwise changed. There is no need to repeat it over and over.</blockquote>

Verification