Stunting and the Bag of Flour Connundrum

[Hussar]

Put me in the "guys lets talk camp".

Say, for arguments sake, I did make the rule that flour (or sand - actually, there are 3e feats in the Sandstorm book - Sandskimmer? Sand Dancer? - that allow you to do EXACTLY this) that chucking flour in the guys face caused blindness.

Now they want to carry flour bombs.

Yeah, I'm going to put the cards on the table and say, "Look, guys, I know I made that ruling that one time, but, that was my bad. Not to take anything away from you guys, it was a cool idea and all that and I most certainly don't want to scotch that, but, if I let this become a standard attack, it's WAY overpowered. Look, causing blindness is a pretty high powered ability, far beyond your levels and it's a (encounter/daily) for (pick a class). Not something you should be able to do with 15 cp worth of ground grain."

The people I play with would be groovy with that and move on.

 

[Miphon]

The issue is a PC using a spur-of-the-moment stunt and turning it into a constant battle tactic which they are not spending resources to use.

I think a lot of it comes down to what level of benefit the players think they can obtain from a stunt or non-standard combat tactic. It's hard to adjudicate this in the midst of a game session, but I think that most repeatable stunts should only be as powerful as an at-will power, while stunts that are heavily dependent on environmental factors could provide more benefit as a way of rewarding players for thinking of interesting ways to interact with the combat's setting/terrain.

Despite whatever ruling you might come up with in the middle of the game, hopefully your players are open to you coming back to them afterwards with a more "formalised" ruling on how a particular stunt or tactic works. For repeatable tactics, this gives you an opportunity to research powers or abilities with similar effects so that you can make sure that you're not giving your players too much benefit for something they don't have to spend a feat or power to obtain.

An example from my game is when I decided that the bad guy wanted to get out of combat with the PCs but couldn't do so without drawing 3 attacks of opportunity. I noticed that he had a high Acrobatics skill so I decided that he would try to perform some kind of tumble as part of his move. I didn't want this maneuver to give him the same benefit as the rogue utility power Tumble, so I decided that he would make a Acrobatics check and gain +2 to AC against a PC's opportunity attack if he suceeded against their Reflex defence. The bad guy rolled successfully, but still got hit with one of the OAs and was subsequently taken down before he could flee the combat.

Later on, the party's rogue decided that he wanted to try the same tactic to get into a better position without taking a lot of opportunity attacks and asked if he could try to perform the same stunt he'd seen the NPC use. I allowed him to try and his maneuver was successful, but unfortunately for him, he still got hit with 3 of the 4 opportunity attacks his movement provoked.

After the game was over, I decided I needed to write up a formal version of this stunt and used some of the abilities provided in the skills section of the PHB as a template. In this case, I haven't changed the level of benefit the player receives if the maneuver is successful, but have instead put a restriction on the number of times it can be used per encounter similar to the use of the Bluff skill to feint in combat or to create a diversion to hide. I'm now satisfied that this ability will provide a benefit to the player when he attempts to use it, but that it's not going to be something he will use constantly. Admittedly, his last experience with trying this stunt may discourage him from ever trying this again...

 

[tomBitonti]

...snip...

The constant replies are missing the forest for the trees. The issue is not the blindness ruling. The issue is a PC using a spur-of-the-moment stunt and turning it into a constant battle tactic which they are not spending resources to use.

I'm finding the idea of at will/encounter/daily as a control over narrative spotlight to resonate strongly. I also like the limitations based on circumstance have a good sense to them. I think a good rule is to match the difficulty of the action or the rareness of circumstance with the power level of the effect. After all, any ability that is powerful and easy to perform should already be in the player's repertoire.

I still have difficulty with certain effects that stray outside the boundaries of the game mechanics. For example, any attack to a specific body location seems out of bounds, at least within the skirmish part of the game. Anything much beyond the skirmish mechanics might have to turn into a narrative effect, and would have to be subject to the GM's approval and within the bounds of what the player's and the GM see as fitting their game.

I also am seeing that players are not very well coached about thinking in terms of their environment, and what they can do within that environment.

Let me modify the example: Not only is there a sack of flour in the kitchen, there is a hot oven and a shelf full of pans and another with knives. A player could try to push a monster onto the oven, or could try to upend either of the shelves on their opponent.

The question is, do players ever get that level of detail, or, do they stay within the bounds of the battle grid and the limited terrain that the battle grid presents. (In effect, is their view of the battle grid the same as what you would see if you had an online gaming grid: rather limited.) Players who see a limited amount of detail might never have an opportunity to think of clever tricks or stunts, and, even if the detail is there, they might not think to use it, or the GM might downplay the effects, giving them weak results, which would discourage their use.

 

[Jack99]

"Never forget... If you can do it, so can the monsters. Don't overdo it."

Let some of the monsters pull the same style of tricks, if the players take it too far.

Not really pertaining to the OP, but my monsters stunt all the time. It's a great way to keep combat alive and fluid.

As for the OP - I guess it can be a problem, but only if the DM makes the stunt too good.

I mean, in the example of the flour, it would be a stat vs defense attack, with no implement bonuses. Meaning at higher level, you would easily be 3-4 behind on the to-hit scale, making it hard to complete. Also, tossing a handful of flour could be considered a ranged attack of 1, thus provoking OA's. It should also take up a minor action (grab a fistful of flour in bag) as well as a standard action.

Basically, my point is, if you make decent judgement and sound rules for the stuff that they attempt, you shouldn't run into this kind of problem.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Basically, my point is, if you make decent judgement and sound rules for the stuff that they attempt, you shouldn't run into this kind of problem.

That seems to be asking a little much, though. I think when stunting, a DM should not be required to think long about how to rule it. I think it ruins the flow of the game.

The better thing would be to make it clear to everyone that stunts are not reliable. A DMs ruling do not set the "physics" of the game world. Stunts work they way they seem appropriate at the moment they are used.

Your first use of a bag of flour fighting in a kitchen is nothing but a Dex vs Ref attack and blinds the target.
When you use it while you are carrying around bags of flours, it doesn't work that way. It might become a Ranged 1 Dex vs Ref attack, and you need a minor action to draw the flour, and it would only cause a -2 penalty to attacks. Or it doesn't work at all.

Everyone should know: Stunts are there to be cool, to be fun. They are not there to cheat. And if you keep that in mind, and try to be cool and fun, the DM will appreciate that and make your stunt an effective thing to do. If you try to cheat, the stunt will not be an effective thing to do.

 

[xortam]

Don't know if anyone has suggested it but what if a dungeon door slams creating a gust that blows the flour back at the PC and blinds them. Even worse bag of floor splits open in PCs hand - close burst three and blinds the whole party. Might make them think twice about it in the future...

 

[Doug McCrae]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with players wanting to carry a large belt pouch full of flour in hopes of using it to blind their opponent.

Yes there is. It's boring.

If players come up with clever and effective plans and tactics...GREAT!

It's too effective and, if it's so clearly overpowered then it's not clever at all. It's blindingly obvious.

 

[Rel]

So, just to reiterate my earlier advice, this is why I've created a sort of "tiered" stunt system. And it has more or less solved any potential problems like this.

The PC's may always avail themselves of p42 style stunts, which can have difficulties and outcomes based roughly on the DC's and damages listed there. For something that is repeatable then I'll have the effects be fairly small to remove temptation to spam that tactic.

But for "Power Stunts" I require them spending an Action Point + Healing Surge. Here is where I let them bring the awesome, cinematic stuff because I needn't worry about establishing a bad precedent as much. These tricks are not nearly as repeatable because they need to expend a very limited resource in order to pull them off.

In the instance of the blinding flour, if they want to carry around a sack of flour and try to blind one bad guy by spending an Action Point + Healing Surge every few fights, I guess that's fine. But I don't have to worry about them doing it every round because they don't have an Action Point every round.

 

[webrunner]

"As you round the corner into the open cavern, you see a group of goblins discussing the relic they just unearthed. There is advanced magical machinery around, presumably for excavating."

"I ready my bag of flour"

"They hear you rustling in your pack and the four goblins all wearing work goggles turn around..."

 

[tomBitonti]

"As you round the corner into the open cavern, you see a group of goblins discussing the relic they just unearthed. There is advanced magical machinery around, presumably for excavating."

"I ready my bag of flour"

"They hear you rustling in your pack and the four goblins all wearing work goggles turn around..."

Hehe ...

While behind the four goblins, the boss goblin pulls out an odd mechanical device that looks like four blades on a stick. The blades start to spin ...