Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
Playing the Game
Talking the Talk
[OOC] A Game of Trust
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Guilt Puppy" data-source="post: 1991397" data-attributes="member: 6521"><p>Throwing the bead is using a magic item, which does not provoke an attack of opportunity; it is a far simpler action than either a spell or a ranged attack, requiring neither focus nor aim, and so it doesn't constitute enough of a distraction for me to Rule 0 an AoO in. Were a player the one using the bead in a critical situation, I'm sure I'd hear complaints for ruling otherwise.</p><p></p><p>As for readied actions, see my response to DrZ below.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The orc's trigger/response was "if anyone moves, toss the bead" -- specifically, if anyone moves at least five feet. The action was readied at the time he said "if I see anyone move, things get ugly." Prior to that, he had no action readied, which is why the others had been able to move without triggering anything, as there was nothing at the time to trigger.</p><p></p><p>As for the backtrack, I don't like doing it either, but it was a matter of "do I vastly change the outcome of an encounter in order to maintain continuity through two posts?" Really, doing so would have just been an excuse for me to get away from carrying out this conclusion...</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>First, readied actions actions require a specific trigger condition... If "sees something he doesn't like" is an acceptable trigger, there's no point having triggers at all, you know? The idea of a readied action is that you can react more quickly to something because you're watching for it, specifically, and not employing any discretion in the matter... Waiting for something potentially unexpected to happen and reacting to it is what Delaying is for.</p><p></p><p>Given the post itself, it's not clear if Raven even has a readied action, or if he's simply delaying his initiative (which doesn't require any specific conditions, but would have him act after the orc)... As a readied action, the conditions would appear to be "any orc moves or attacks," based on both the IC and OOC text. Reaching for a necklace is neither of those; further, if he'd been reaching for a holy symbol to say a prayer or something, and I'd ruled that Raven attacked, I imagine you'd still be annoyed with me. While the action itself could definitely be considered an attack, it wouldn't be clear that it was one until after the fact.</p><p></p><p>If you did intend for a genuine <em>don't think, just shoot</em> readied action, it seems fair that Raven should have some chance to recognize the action as an attack, and attempt to prevent it. <strong>Sense Motive DC 15</strong> for Raven to recognize the motion as hostile; if so, go ahead and make an attack, as your triggered action. It'll be tough odds to actually prevent the explosion, but it's something. (BTW, the Bless is still active)</p><p></p><p>I see no clear indication that anyone else has a readied action to attack. The closest I can find is "Hiritus has his longsword drawn, and Fendric has a hand on his holy symbol." I'm definitely not going to interpret a statement like that as a readied action (which you'd be committed to take) in cases where it's unfavorable to you (if Nurthk were bleeding out in need of LOH, for instance), so it would be very inconsistent of me to do so now. I don't want to discourage people from posting free-form, in lieu of referencing specific rules, but if you do want me to invoke specific rules after the fact, it needs to stand out clearly as the most sensible rule-interpretation of the text. So in Raven's case, sure, in Hiritus' case, no.</p><p></p><p>...</p><p></p><p>Anyway, I'd anticipated there would be some teeth bared about this, so I did take an exceptional amount of time consulting the rules pre-emptively... It's possible I overlooked some angle, but overall, I feel pretty confident that this "event" is by the book. The only point of real ambiguity I could find was with Raven's nocked arrow versus the not-clearly-an-attack action... I'd considered the Sense Motive option, as well, but initially it felt like I was just tacking on an extra out, which I personally hate doing. I am the sort of DM who prefers to see his players succeed, but not if it's because I intervened to ensure it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Guilt Puppy, post: 1991397, member: 6521"] Throwing the bead is using a magic item, which does not provoke an attack of opportunity; it is a far simpler action than either a spell or a ranged attack, requiring neither focus nor aim, and so it doesn't constitute enough of a distraction for me to Rule 0 an AoO in. Were a player the one using the bead in a critical situation, I'm sure I'd hear complaints for ruling otherwise. As for readied actions, see my response to DrZ below. The orc's trigger/response was "if anyone moves, toss the bead" -- specifically, if anyone moves at least five feet. The action was readied at the time he said "if I see anyone move, things get ugly." Prior to that, he had no action readied, which is why the others had been able to move without triggering anything, as there was nothing at the time to trigger. As for the backtrack, I don't like doing it either, but it was a matter of "do I vastly change the outcome of an encounter in order to maintain continuity through two posts?" Really, doing so would have just been an excuse for me to get away from carrying out this conclusion... First, readied actions actions require a specific trigger condition... If "sees something he doesn't like" is an acceptable trigger, there's no point having triggers at all, you know? The idea of a readied action is that you can react more quickly to something because you're watching for it, specifically, and not employing any discretion in the matter... Waiting for something potentially unexpected to happen and reacting to it is what Delaying is for. Given the post itself, it's not clear if Raven even has a readied action, or if he's simply delaying his initiative (which doesn't require any specific conditions, but would have him act after the orc)... As a readied action, the conditions would appear to be "any orc moves or attacks," based on both the IC and OOC text. Reaching for a necklace is neither of those; further, if he'd been reaching for a holy symbol to say a prayer or something, and I'd ruled that Raven attacked, I imagine you'd still be annoyed with me. While the action itself could definitely be considered an attack, it wouldn't be clear that it was one until after the fact. If you did intend for a genuine [i]don't think, just shoot[/i] readied action, it seems fair that Raven should have some chance to recognize the action as an attack, and attempt to prevent it. [b]Sense Motive DC 15[/b] for Raven to recognize the motion as hostile; if so, go ahead and make an attack, as your triggered action. It'll be tough odds to actually prevent the explosion, but it's something. (BTW, the Bless is still active) I see no clear indication that anyone else has a readied action to attack. The closest I can find is "Hiritus has his longsword drawn, and Fendric has a hand on his holy symbol." I'm definitely not going to interpret a statement like that as a readied action (which you'd be committed to take) in cases where it's unfavorable to you (if Nurthk were bleeding out in need of LOH, for instance), so it would be very inconsistent of me to do so now. I don't want to discourage people from posting free-form, in lieu of referencing specific rules, but if you do want me to invoke specific rules after the fact, it needs to stand out clearly as the most sensible rule-interpretation of the text. So in Raven's case, sure, in Hiritus' case, no. ... Anyway, I'd anticipated there would be some teeth bared about this, so I did take an exceptional amount of time consulting the rules pre-emptively... It's possible I overlooked some angle, but overall, I feel pretty confident that this "event" is by the book. The only point of real ambiguity I could find was with Raven's nocked arrow versus the not-clearly-an-attack action... I'd considered the Sense Motive option, as well, but initially it felt like I was just tacking on an extra out, which I personally hate doing. I am the sort of DM who prefers to see his players succeed, but not if it's because I intervened to ensure it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
Playing the Game
Talking the Talk
[OOC] A Game of Trust
Top