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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="two" data-source="post: 1995898" data-attributes="member: 9002">You wonder why I was being defensive in the previous postOh brother.  Like, thanks dude, for reading my last 5 or so responses.  This is the kind of junk I was trying to avoid in advance.I went OUT OF MY WAY TO MAKE CLEAR IN PREVIOUS POSTS THAT I DON'T READY ACTIONS TO MAKE SPELLCASTERS "USELESS" NOR TO STOP ANYONE'S FUN.  I DON'T WANT TO STOP SPELLCASTING I DO HOWEVER WANT BAD GUYS TO DO INTELLIGENT THINGS WHEN LOOKING DOWN THE BARREL OF A MAGICAL HOWITZER.All caps because, well, it seems to be necessary to get through some preconceived notions.OK?  GOT IT?  GOT IT?  GOOD.I use readied actions when appropriate.  As I was at pains to explain (and find myself explaining again and again), if an intelligent NPC with means to use a readied action (with a bow, spear, other object) sees an OBVIOUS PC wizard about to open up a can of whoop-azz, about 50% of the time he will "ready" an action to try to mess up the wizard's spell while hurting him.  i.e. using a "readied action."  (That's if they can't grapple or throw a net or just decide to charge in, or full attack (with rapid shot or whatever)).  This seems perfeclty common-sensical to me; I know it's a higher percentage than most GM's, but nobody yet has convinced me it's a ridiculous bad tactic for low-middle D&D.  Because, honestly, it's not.  And it doesn't require the bad guys to have spellcraft, previous knoweldge of the PC's, any of that.  As stated, the Wizard faces a "readied" action on average every other fight.  It doesn't always stop him from casting; but it does complicated things (will he move, then cast something, cast and suck it up, cast feather fall and be safe, move and hope the guy misses and cast, etc. etc.etc., pull out a wand and zap it ...?)Nobody in my campaign is complaining that enemies "ready actions" too much or that it's boring, or unbelievable, or tedious.  On the contrary, they seem to be happy that their enemies are not video-game automatons who just "see enemy, charge in, attack, die."  That's boring for everyone, GM and Players -- beleive me.I brought the issue up originally because of Player X's cantrip tactic and wanted opinions/comments.  Please don't play the armchair psychoanalyst and attempt to judge my campaign given that you know nothing of it; nor to you know the personality of Player X; nor my player's general level of fun with the way I run my game (high).  Nor the fact that I'm having a good time with it as well -- with some caveats.  See post #1.</blockquote>

Verification