Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Surprise and Sneak Attack
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8080443" data-attributes="member: 16814"><p>Of course. The GM should be considering the totality of the situation and making the call. They shouldn't, however, feel that because there are combat rules that they've lost that authority to consider the totality of the situation. This isn't a replacement "always" rule. A sleeping target MAY be killed instantly, if the fiction leads to that outcome. It's not a "a sleeping target is ALWAYS killed instantly." This is a false dichotomy -- there's a huge range of middle grounds being instantly killed in their sleep here. For instance, I'm pretty sure that my application of the combat rules would be indistinguishable from [USER=6788736]@Flamestrike[/USER]'s most if not almost all of the time. Just because I allow for an outcome within the rules does not mean it's a go to or very common at all. ON the other hand, it does sometimes happen.</p><p></p><p>When? Well, let's take your top example -- sleep is cast, the target fails the save. The target is then tied up and secured. If the other side wants to kill the target at this point, I'm not going to invoke the combat rules and roll for them until it's done -- it happens, the target is dead. This has come up in my games a few times, where the PCs have captured an enemy and been unable to convince the enemy to offer their parole and so have decided to kill the captive. I did not invoke the combat rules in this case, as this wasn't a combat at all. On the other hand, in a fairly recent game, all of the PCs were incapacitated in a combat and were captured, tied to posts, and were being left as sacrifices to a monster their foes worshipped. The PCs tried to escape, with some being still tied, but since some had escaped and combat was in place, I used the combat rules even for attacks on the still bound PCs -- because I was in that tight resolution with a melee ranging around, there was no need to do otherwise. However, if, for some reason I cannot imagine, I decided that the NPCs would just outright kill the tied and incapacitated PCs, I wouldn't have gone to the combat rules -- I used those already when they were captured to begin with. The fiction was already in a place that the answer was pretty straightforward and obvious. And also very uncommon for how the game's fiction is positioned. Follow the fiction, rule uncertainty on the totality of the situation, and use your authority as GM (according to the rules, no less) to make the call as for success, failure, or uncertainty. If uncertain, apply the mechanical test most suited for the situation. This really shouldn't be controversial or require the postulation of imaginary jerks to dismiss.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 8080443, member: 16814"] Of course. The GM should be considering the totality of the situation and making the call. They shouldn't, however, feel that because there are combat rules that they've lost that authority to consider the totality of the situation. This isn't a replacement "always" rule. A sleeping target MAY be killed instantly, if the fiction leads to that outcome. It's not a "a sleeping target is ALWAYS killed instantly." This is a false dichotomy -- there's a huge range of middle grounds being instantly killed in their sleep here. For instance, I'm pretty sure that my application of the combat rules would be indistinguishable from [USER=6788736]@Flamestrike[/USER]'s most if not almost all of the time. Just because I allow for an outcome within the rules does not mean it's a go to or very common at all. ON the other hand, it does sometimes happen. When? Well, let's take your top example -- sleep is cast, the target fails the save. The target is then tied up and secured. If the other side wants to kill the target at this point, I'm not going to invoke the combat rules and roll for them until it's done -- it happens, the target is dead. This has come up in my games a few times, where the PCs have captured an enemy and been unable to convince the enemy to offer their parole and so have decided to kill the captive. I did not invoke the combat rules in this case, as this wasn't a combat at all. On the other hand, in a fairly recent game, all of the PCs were incapacitated in a combat and were captured, tied to posts, and were being left as sacrifices to a monster their foes worshipped. The PCs tried to escape, with some being still tied, but since some had escaped and combat was in place, I used the combat rules even for attacks on the still bound PCs -- because I was in that tight resolution with a melee ranging around, there was no need to do otherwise. However, if, for some reason I cannot imagine, I decided that the NPCs would just outright kill the tied and incapacitated PCs, I wouldn't have gone to the combat rules -- I used those already when they were captured to begin with. The fiction was already in a place that the answer was pretty straightforward and obvious. And also very uncommon for how the game's fiction is positioned. Follow the fiction, rule uncertainty on the totality of the situation, and use your authority as GM (according to the rules, no less) to make the call as for success, failure, or uncertainty. If uncertain, apply the mechanical test most suited for the situation. This really shouldn't be controversial or require the postulation of imaginary jerks to dismiss. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Surprise and Sneak Attack
Top