Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 5949807" data-attributes="member: 1465">I agree but that's already taken care by the playtest rules: disadvantage when using a ranged weapon in melee. I don't remember what is the equivalent penalty but it was quite significant, something like -5. The difference between disadvantage and provoking an AoO is the difference between being ineffective and being punished. I can see that each approach has its own appeal in the game. Anyway if 5e goes with the first, then the same principle can be applied to the other cases as well: - if the dangerous action within a threatened area requires a roll (ranged attacks, using certain skills), you get disadvantage- if the dangerous action within a threatened area doesn't require a roll, and has a yes/no effect (casting a spell, drinking a potion), you need a Concentration check or fail to complete the action- if the dangerous action within a threatened area doesn't require a roll, and has a numeric effect (moving a certain distance), the effect is e.g. halved, so it would be double movement cost to rush past the guard or manouver aroundIn some way, this a different rules philosophy, because instead of telling you &quot;if you do this you drop your guard&quot;, it instead assumes your characters are doing their best at defense, at the cost of failing/weakening their other action.The good part IMHO of the suggestions above, is that they only use existing rules.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Li Shenron, post: 5949807, member: 1465"] I agree but that's already taken care by the playtest rules: disadvantage when using a ranged weapon in melee. I don't remember what is the equivalent penalty but it was quite significant, something like -5. The difference between disadvantage and provoking an AoO is the difference between [B]being ineffective [/B]and [B]being punished[/B]. I can see that each approach has its own appeal in the game. Anyway if 5e goes with the first, then the same principle can be applied to the other cases as well: - if the dangerous action within a threatened area requires a roll (ranged attacks, using certain skills), you get disadvantage - if the dangerous action within a threatened area doesn't require a roll, and has a yes/no effect (casting a spell, drinking a potion), you need a Concentration check or fail to complete the action - if the dangerous action within a threatened area doesn't require a roll, and has a numeric effect (moving a certain distance), the effect is e.g. halved, so it would be double movement cost to rush past the guard or manouver around In some way, this a different rules philosophy, because instead of telling you "if you do this you drop your guard", it instead assumes your characters are doing their best at defense, at the cost of failing/weakening their other action. The good part IMHO of the suggestions above, is that they only use existing rules. [/QUOTE]

Verification