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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mistwell" data-source="post: 1986750" data-attributes="member: 2525">And, if you played your monsters a bit more intelligently...by having some waiting until the SECOND spell cast, you too could still blovk the shot even with a fake-out.No, if you followed my example, the concentration check comes in when the defender's readied action goes off WITHOUT the fake-out.  With the fake-out, the shot usually goes in.  This is, in fact, the primary reason so many players get fouled near the basket...defenders tend to just foul them before the shot rather than making the attempt to decide whether they should block the first apparent shot, or wait for the fake and try to block the second apparent shot.Of course, most Basketball players consider fouling under the basket, particularly against a person who is a poor free-thrower, to be gaming the system  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> That all comes into play with an attempted block of an actual shot attempt...not the fake-out. I totally 100% disagree.  Your defenders are fully capable of readying an action to attempt to block the second attempt to cast a spell in the same round...which is exactly what many basketball defenders try to do.  You just don't want them to ready the action that way, which is your own fault.Unless, of course, you do the obvious thing and ready against the second spell, not the first.Your sarcasm not withstanding, my analogy still stands, and still disproves your position.  Some defenders do not react to the first apparent shot/spell attempt.  Either it's because they can tell a fake-out (IE they make their spellcraft check), or their couch TOLD them to wait for the second one, or their experience tells them to wait for the second one (in which case their readied action goes off only for the second shot/spell attempt in the same round).This is not metagaming.  It's exactly what would happen in real life.  If people are constantly having their offensive moves interupted by defenders readying an action to interupt them, they are going to come up with their own tactics to fake-out the defender.  And, eventually, the defenders will come up with their own tactics to deal with that situation (such as readying only against the second apparent offensive move, or improving their skill in identifying an actual offensive move as it is happening).You just don't personally like the tactic, and are using a nonapplicable general argument against it to try and explain your position.  I think your position is not only flawed, but will come back to haunt you in the future.  If you decide in your game that this is "metagaming", then it is only a matter of time before your players point out something in your own DM'ing tactics that lets the monsters "metagame" according to this precedent you are setting up for them.  It will devolve into further arguments, and hurt your game in general.  If you don't like the tactic, either work on tactics to deal with it, or rule that swift/immediate/free actions cannot be the subject of a readied action, and be done with it.</blockquote>

Verification