Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5930454" data-attributes="member: 42582">As I read it, what [MENTION=386]LostSoul[/MENTION] found weird was not playing with turn-by-turn initiative, but playing with turn-by-turn initiative without OAs. Which means that orcs can rush in, take an attack, then rush out again to make room for their friends.He's not the only person to notice this. There is at least one current thread about it, maybe more than one.I think WotC are pretty bad at writing advice on how to play their games, and these documents live up to that legacy!The contest issue is a good example. As LostSoul notes, a contest requires an action opposed by another action (per the 1st para under the heading on p1 of the DM's guidelines). Which means that, in a stop motion combat, contest can't occur unless someone has readied an action to act at the same time as someone else. Otherwise it has to be a save, made in response to someone else's action (as per the 1st para under the relevant heading on p2 of the DM's guidelines).If it is intended that a tackle should generate a contest rather than a save, then the guidelines need rewriting. I think this is also a good illustration of a point that [MENTION=83293]nnms[/MENTION] made on another thread, namely, that &quot;GM rulings&quot; don't necessarily integrate smoothly into such a tightly structured and relatively comprehensive action resolution system as is being presented here.I'll plead guilty to arm-chair commentary, and will agree with you that actual play repots are good. I've always been a big fan of LostSoul's AP reports - they are very clear on how the mechanics are being used and what effect they had.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 5930454, member: 42582"] As I read it, what [MENTION=386]LostSoul[/MENTION] found weird was not playing with turn-by-turn initiative, but playing with turn-by-turn initiative [I]without OAs[/I]. Which means that orcs can rush in, take an attack, then rush out again to make room for their friends. He's not the only person to notice this. There is at least one current thread about it, maybe more than one. I think WotC are pretty bad at writing advice on how to play their games, and these documents live up to that legacy! The contest issue is a good example. As LostSoul notes, a contest requires an action opposed by another action (per the 1st para under the heading on p1 of the DM's guidelines). Which means that, in a stop motion combat, contest can't occur unless someone has readied an action to act at the same time as someone else. Otherwise it has to be a save, made in response to someone else's action (as per the 1st para under the relevant heading on p2 of the DM's guidelines). If it is intended that a tackle should generate a contest rather than a save, then the guidelines need rewriting. I think this is also a good illustration of a point that [MENTION=83293]nnms[/MENTION] made on another thread, namely, that "GM rulings" don't necessarily integrate smoothly into such a tightly structured and relatively comprehensive action resolution system as is being presented here. I'll plead guilty to arm-chair commentary, and will agree with you that actual play repots are good. I've always been a big fan of LostSoul's AP reports - they are very clear on how the mechanics are being used and what effect they had. [/QUOTE]

Verification