Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lizard" data-source="post: 4236153" data-attributes="member: 1054">It is.However, when the rules come into conflict with player expectations, that's where the problem lies. An immobilized character can't move, and CAN do anything else. This makes sense if, say, he's immobilized by a glue trap. But if he's being grappled/held, and does something which, intuitively, he shouldn't be able to do in that situation, you get arguments.&quot;OK, you've got the hobgoblin in your grip. He smashes you with his two-handed battleaxe. Take 12 points of damage.&quot;&quot;Wait, how does he swing it when I'm holding him?&quot;&quot;Nothing in the rules says he can't.&quot;(And here the argument starts. So, fine, I houserule that he can't. A week later, the grappling PC is himself grappled. He wants to attack the monster holding him. I say, &quot;You can't.&quot; He says, &quot;But I'm only using a tiny dagger! I should be able to!&quot; So another house rule is made. And another, and another...and soon the &quot;simple&quot; rules become a complex hodge-podge of ad-hoc rulings. Or, you could just say, &quot;Suck it down. The hobgoblin hits you. Who's next in the initiative?&quot; but that has its own problems...)Well, yes, and if it's not day, it's night. Not really sure of the relevance here.My personal preference is to shrug and accept the RAW. If an elephant grappled by a halfling can't move, so be it. If soldier with a pike is just as effective using it when being held, so be it. Game balance will mean these things will tip for the players as often as against them.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lizard, post: 4236153, member: 1054"] It is. However, when the rules come into conflict with player expectations, that's where the problem lies. An immobilized character can't move, and CAN do anything else. This makes sense if, say, he's immobilized by a glue trap. But if he's being grappled/held, and does something which, intuitively, he shouldn't be able to do in that situation, you get arguments. "OK, you've got the hobgoblin in your grip. He smashes you with his two-handed battleaxe. Take 12 points of damage." "Wait, how does he swing it when I'm holding him?" "Nothing in the rules says he can't." (And here the argument starts. So, fine, I houserule that he can't. A week later, the grappling PC is himself grappled. He wants to attack the monster holding him. I say, "You can't." He says, "But I'm only using a tiny dagger! I should be able to!" So another house rule is made. And another, and another...and soon the "simple" rules become a complex hodge-podge of ad-hoc rulings. Or, you could just say, "Suck it down. The hobgoblin hits you. Who's next in the initiative?" but that has its own problems...) Well, yes, and if it's not day, it's night. Not really sure of the relevance here. My personal preference is to shrug and accept the RAW. If an elephant grappled by a halfling can't move, so be it. If soldier with a pike is just as effective using it when being held, so be it. Game balance will mean these things will tip for the players as often as against them. [/QUOTE]

Verification