Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="LostSoul" data-source="post: 4641136" data-attributes="member: 386">And if the DM is the gatekeeper to this, and he uses page 42 to guide his decisions?I'm not saying that player should be able to say, &quot;Well, he's metallic, my lighting powers should do more damage&quot;; that's outside the scope of the rules.&nbsp; What I am saying is that a player should be able to say, &quot;I shoot my lighting bolt at the water; I want to blast all of them in it.&quot;At that point the DM turns to page 42, picks a damage expression, and rolls with it.&nbsp; I don't see how that breaks the system, considering that the PC is using a Standard action to deal damage with an attack.That is, the action is not &quot;I apply Vulnerable 10 Lighting to the creature because it makes sense&quot;; it's more like &quot;I shoot my lightning bolt at the iron creature and, since everyone's standing on iron floor, they should take damage as well.&quot;&nbsp; Using a damage expression seems balanced; I'm not sure if it is, but that's the point of the thread.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="LostSoul, post: 4641136, member: 386"] And if the DM is the gatekeeper to this, and he uses page 42 to guide his decisions? I'm not saying that player should be able to say, "Well, he's metallic, my lighting powers should do more damage"; that's outside the scope of the rules. What I am saying is that a player should be able to say, "I shoot my lighting bolt at the water; I want to blast all of them in it." At that point the DM turns to page 42, picks a damage expression, and rolls with it. I don't see how that breaks the system, considering that the PC is using a Standard action to deal damage with an attack. That is, the action is not "I apply Vulnerable 10 Lighting to the creature because it makes sense"; it's more like "I shoot my lightning bolt at the iron creature and, since everyone's standing on iron floor, they should take damage as well." Using a damage expression [i]seems[/i] balanced; I'm not sure if it is, but that's the point of the thread. [/QUOTE]

Verification