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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 6098017" data-attributes="member: 82106">This is always a potential hazard. OTOH there is much to be gained by facilitating more flexible use of conditions. I'm still not sure what the perfect answer is for a 4e-type system. I like the generality and power of keyword states. There does need to be some way to create an understanding that narrative explanations and additional effects are always possible/expected. I think maybe making the standard just Advantage/Disadvantage and then moving the rest of it to "this is narrative, but here's what Restrained normally does/represents" is about as good as it gets. So for instance you hit someone with Entangle, its effect is Restrained, and the narrative is "vines entwine the target, it can't move!" Restrained can be worded pretty much like it is in 4e, it has an effect on movement, etc, but ALL such conditions force disadvantage on the target, and maybe advantage against it (this can be situational but at least you always get one). The upshot being even if a target is say a water elemental and it just isn't held back by vines (as per the DM) there is still some significant mechanical effect. Sure, your power may be SOMEWHAT nerfed against a water elemental, but it isn't useless. I'd also note that power based mechanics always made it quite hard for a character to be heavily nerfed overall. Even if you make all undead immune to backstab/SA a 4e rogue still has many tricks. He'll be less good, but not worthless. Its still a problem if you use it TOO much, but in my proposal you are still getting some nice bennies.</blockquote>

Verification