Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="eamon" data-source="post: 5549650" data-attributes="member: 51942">There's also consistency.&nbsp; A power is merely &quot;something you can do&quot; (as opposed to properties which are always on).&nbsp; I'd argue it'd be best for all rules elements to consider that notion synonymous with &quot;power&quot;.&nbsp; So either consider all voluntary actions powers (e.g. including move, shift, charge, etc.), or better yet ban the use of the word &quot;power&quot; as a modifier to when a rule applies.Honestly, I expect the only reason such rules apply to &quot;powers&quot; is that it's easier to write that way.&nbsp; It reads uncomfortably to gain a +1 feat bonus to damage rolls on &quot;something&quot; with the necrotic or psychic keyword - you want to fill in the blank, and preferably with something clear and concise - hey power!In general, to prevent exactly this kind of confusion, it's best to never define rules purely in terms of intrinsically meaningless concepts.&nbsp; The raison d'etre of the term &quot;power&quot; it a metagame concept to be able to clearly communicate how the game functions.&nbsp;&nbsp; For that it works excellently, but involving a purely metagame concept in the mechanics resolution is just confusing.Anyhow, it's a PHB 1 feat; it's hardly reasonable to expect perfection, but neither should one read it as &quot;meaningful rule&quot; when it shows rather more resemblance to &quot;design oversight&quot;.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="eamon, post: 5549650, member: 51942"] There's also consistency. A power is merely "something you can do" (as opposed to properties which are always on). I'd argue it'd be best for all rules elements to consider that notion synonymous with "power". So either consider all voluntary actions powers (e.g. including move, shift, charge, etc.), or better yet ban the use of the word "power" as a modifier to when a rule applies. Honestly, I expect the [I]only[/I] reason such rules apply to "powers" is that it's easier to write that way. It reads uncomfortably to gain a +1 feat bonus to damage rolls on "something" with the necrotic or psychic keyword - you want to fill in the blank, and preferably with something clear and concise - hey [I]power[/I]! In general, to prevent exactly this kind of confusion, it's best to never define rules purely in terms of intrinsically meaningless concepts. The raison d'etre of the term "power" it a metagame concept to be able to clearly communicate how the game functions. For that it works excellently, but involving a purely metagame concept in the mechanics resolution is just confusing. Anyhow, it's a PHB 1 feat; it's hardly reasonable to expect perfection, but neither should one read it as "meaningful rule" when it shows rather more resemblance to "design oversight". [/QUOTE]

Verification