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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="LostSoul" data-source="post: 5958034" data-attributes="member: 386">So I'm thinking about this... (out loud, apparently)This seems to fit in more with IIEE: In A you state your Intent (the first "I") in "I attack!"; in B it's determined by the rolling of the dice: "*roll dice* I attacked".I wonder if that's true for 4E: the choice of Power (+ result on the d20 roll, if there is one) determines your character's Intent.  Question: does it also determine other character's Intent, e.g. the oft-maligned Come And Get It?What's interesting: in order to maintain character integrity, there have been times where, as DM, I have narrated a PC's miss like so: "You wait for a good opportunity to strike, but none presents itself."  That would mean the d20 roll determines Initiation.  This, however, would not be true of a 3E Trip attempt, or other attacks that had similar mechanics.  (AoOs not being one - a miss on an AoO can mean anything.)Hmm... looking at the anyway. blog post I and chaochou linked to, when he asks this questionAt the real-world moment of resolution, what fictional stuff have we bindingly established, and what's up for grabs? Of what I've said, what can you potentially negate, and what must you let stand?it seems to me that we never have to bindingly establish the fiction of the "to-hit" roll.  Position?  Yup.  Who goes first?  Sure.  Meta-resources expended?  Got it.  What your character is actually doing?  Sometimes, but often not.This makes some sense to me - and it links to what Minigiant was saying about the Encounter in 4E - that only after the encounter is complete do we have to say anything; and even then we don't have to say much.  e.g. "Well, since you were in a combat and lost some HP, you're bleeding and the orcs can easily track you down now."  "What?  All that HP damage was just bruises."  Combat resolution - physical combat resolution - in D&D doesn't care about those sorts of fictional details.  Considering its roots in Chainmail, this makes sense.  "You encounter some goblins."  *melee melee* "Okay, now that your resources have been drained, let's get back to the game.  There's a green devil face down the corridor..."It seems to me that there are two ways to deal with this: embrace the abstraction; point out that no-one cares about what your guy does in a fight, we only care about the resources you expend (though magic can mess this up); or have resolution include binding fictional details.  There are benefits and drawbacks to both methods.I think the latter is much more of a break with traditional D&D than the former.</blockquote>

Verification