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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 2786309" data-attributes="member: 22779">Going swimming way back up thread for this bit.You know what?  Yup, that's exactly what I'm saying.  Roleplaying may not stop when initiative is rolled, but it sure as heck should be curtailed.  It has to be for several reasons:1.  Combat is the one time in a session when the game mechanics dictate character actions.  Players can only act in a particular order.  Players CANNOT do whatever they want, they are constrained by the mechanics of combat. 2.  Combat is also one of the few times when the player has no control over the outcome of his actions.  The results of his actions are entirely dictated by the dice.  Any narrative the player wishes to make must include the results of the dice.3.  DnD and d20 combat is abstract, making any narrative ultimately meaningless.  Saying that you wind up for a mighty blow and then doing 1 point of damage pretty much makes the narrative a farce at best.  Besides that, there is also the result that doing maximum damage, for example, to one opponent kills that opponent yet barely wounds the next.  How do you justify narrating two exactly identical actions with almost opposite results?While I truly appreciate high rp outside of combat, once initiative starts, rp should be IMO, kept to a minimum.  Combat is abstract.  What's wrong with using abstract language - AC, BAB, Power Attack etc, to describe an abstract?  Why should I be forced to narrate something which quite possibly is not occuring in any manner similar to what I'm saying?Since narration actually has no effect on combat, and, only serves to slow combat down, and, is not necessarily even accurately describing what is happening, how does rping combat add to anything?</blockquote>

Verification