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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 1984645" data-attributes="member: 2011">It is metagaming because it is the avoidance of one game rule by the use of another unrelated game rule.So, you think it is ok for ALL spellcasters to say:"I use my move action to wave my arms as if casting a spell, just to be sure there are no archers out there. I then use a standard action to cast the spell."For a readied archer, does he shoot on the move action (which emulates spell casting), or on the standard action (which is the spell casting).Taking it one step further, the ONLY reason this tactic works is because the rule does NOT say "If you get hit at all during a round, any spell casting you attempt requires a concentration check.".If that were the rule, then this "bluff action" as you call it wouldn't work either.The only reason it works is because that is how the rules are written (hence metagaming, doing an action that takes advantage of the rules as opposed to doing a reasonable roleplaying action). It is not reasonable to take damage in order to safely get a spell off. Would you in the real world take a knife wound to the chest, just in order pull out your own knife. No. You would back away to pull out a knife and do it at a point in time where you wouldn't get wounded attempting it. Just like to ensure a spell goes off, you duck behind cover. You don't play games with how the readied action works.If it were a reasonable roleplaying action to create a Screw U spell, everyone would have been doing it for years and it would be part of the game already. Instead, the player found a loophole in the rules and created a spell to take advantage of it.That is metagaming.</blockquote>

Verification