Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Altamont Ravenard" data-source="post: 4525329" data-attributes="member: 14700">A scared person might kill himself to avoid being tormented by the demon. A scared person might fall down and cower. A scared person might flee. A scared person might try to play dead. A scared person might step back and hide behind its shield/weapon(s). I can't conceive (maybe only by my fault, and I'm usually an open-minded DM) a plausible reason for a character, faced with a dire foe and on the verge of death, to hit himself on the head with the hope of falling unconscious so that the demon facing me would instantly forget about disemboweling me and direct its attention to one of my comrades.As a DM, assuming I would have thrown a Vrock against a 4th-level party, I would have let the player try the action, imposing some sort of penalty or will save for self-mutilation, or suggested that the character tried to play dead. If the player actually attacked himself, succeeding or not in knocking himself out, the Vrock would still have made an attack against the character (it's not a stupid creature [Int 14 in the 3.5 SRD]), but certainly not a coup de grâce.Another action, as a DM, that could have made the Vrock change target would have been for the character to (truthfully or not, either way some sort of Diplomacy or Bluff check would have been in order) pledge his life to the Vrock and start attacking his (once) allies.How could motivation come after the act? How could the cause come after the effect? I don't want to argue from a hardcore simulationist position, but if I want my character to do X, I should have a reason for this action. If not, then why the heck did I attempt what I just did?A player stating &quot;my guy does X&quot; is not motivation, nor justification for the character's action. It is the action.AR</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Altamont Ravenard, post: 4525329, member: 14700"] A scared person might kill himself to avoid being tormented by the demon. A scared person might fall down and cower. A scared person might flee. A scared person might try to play dead. A scared person might step back and hide behind its shield/weapon(s). I can't conceive (maybe only by my fault, and I'm usually an open-minded DM) a plausible reason for a character, faced with a dire foe and on the verge of death, to hit himself on the head with the hope of falling unconscious so that the demon facing me would instantly forget about disemboweling me and direct its attention to one of my comrades. As a DM, assuming I would have thrown a Vrock against a 4th-level party, I would have let the player try the action, imposing some sort of penalty or will save for self-mutilation, or suggested that the character tried to play dead. If the player actually attacked himself, succeeding or not in knocking himself out, the Vrock would still have made an attack against the character (it's not a stupid creature [Int 14 in the 3.5 SRD]), but certainly not a coup de grâce. Another action, as a DM, that could have made the Vrock change target would have been for the character to (truthfully or not, either way some sort of Diplomacy or Bluff check would have been in order) pledge his life to the Vrock and start attacking his (once) allies. How could motivation come after the act? How could the cause come after the effect? I don't want to argue from a hardcore simulationist position, but if I want my character to do X, I should have a reason for this action. If not, then why the heck did I attempt what I just did? A player stating "my guy does X" is not motivation, nor justification for the character's action. It is the action. AR [/QUOTE]

Verification