Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="LostSoul" data-source="post: 6066088" data-attributes="member: 386">Yeah, that makes sense.&nbsp; I was looking at the one example in isolation - thinking that, if it's a dragon, then it should be able to act like a dragon and mechanically you'd just use contests or saving throws to deal with resolving its actions.&nbsp; But since they have specific mechanics in other places for taking those specific actions, you have to assume they left them out for a good reason.Which reminds me of the &quot;How do you disarm someone in 4th edition?&quot; question.I would prefer it if they made it explicit that &quot;If you can do it, you can do it&quot; and designed rules that allowed the DM to easily select mechanics that resolved actions.&nbsp; Like you say, I would prefer it if you didn't need to look up the earthquake spell to resolve a character (or dragon) collapsing the ceiling.&nbsp; Then you wouldn't need to include specific mechanics to allow monsters to bite and grab, or tail sweep, or wrap someone up in their wings, or whatever you can think of.&nbsp; You'd just describe the monster and let its actions flow from there.&nbsp; But it seems like they are designing the game to give players (and the DM) a list of options, and only those options, to choose for your action for the round.&nbsp; (In spite of shaded paragraphs about &quot;Improvised Actions&quot;; it pushes against the direction of the rest of the game.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="LostSoul, post: 6066088, member: 386"] Yeah, that makes sense. I was looking at the one example in isolation - thinking that, if it's a dragon, then it should be able to act like a dragon and mechanically you'd just use contests or saving throws to deal with resolving its actions. But since they have specific mechanics in other places for taking those specific actions, you have to assume they left them out for a good reason. Which reminds me of the "How do you disarm someone in 4th edition?" question. I would prefer it if they made it explicit that "If you can do it, you can do it" and designed rules that allowed the DM to easily select mechanics that resolved actions. Like you say, I would prefer it if you didn't need to look up the earthquake spell to resolve a character (or dragon) collapsing the ceiling. Then you wouldn't need to include specific mechanics to allow monsters to bite and grab, or tail sweep, or wrap someone up in their wings, or whatever you can think of. You'd just describe the monster and let its actions flow from there. But it seems like they are designing the game to give players (and the DM) a list of options, and only those options, to choose for your action for the round. (In spite of shaded paragraphs about "Improvised Actions"; it pushes against the direction of the rest of the game.) [/QUOTE]

Verification