Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 4604326" data-attributes="member: 12731">The issue here is that &quot;save ends&quot; is directed towards the sustaining bit. How are we supposed to know this? Because the effect of sustaining is not ongoing.This is very confusing for newbies. It would have been a great help if there was explicit text to address this, such as &quot;If the target saves, you cannot sustain this power&quot; to separate this case from the more usual case for &quot;save ends&quot;, namely that a save ends the condition or ongoing damage you're currently suffering from.In this case, what you're suffering from is the evils of a sustainable power, and this is what the save ends. Probably too subtle - a case where cutting down on verbose rules language probably was a bad call. Specifically: having to process the effect in order to understand what &quot;save ends&quot; is directed at introduces a somewhat complicated extra step that I would say is not good design.---Contrast with a hypotethical power with either of these lines:Sustain minor: Target take ongoing 5 damage (save ends)Sustain minor: Target is pulled 1 square (save ends)Sustain minor: Target is slowed (save ends)Do you see the fundamental difference between cases 1 &amp; 3 on one hand, and case 2 on the other? Well, a newbie might easily miss this.In fact, this is exactly what made me start this thread... :-/</blockquote>

[QUOTE="CapnZapp, post: 4604326, member: 12731"] The issue here is that "save ends" is directed towards the sustaining bit. How are we supposed to know this? Because the effect of sustaining is not ongoing. This is very confusing for newbies. It would have been a great help if there was explicit text to address this, such as "If the target saves, you cannot sustain this power" to separate this case from the more usual case for "save ends", namely that a save ends the condition or ongoing damage you're currently suffering from. In this case, what you're suffering from is the evils of a sustainable power, and this is what the save ends. Probably too subtle - a case where cutting down on verbose rules language probably was a bad call. Specifically: having to process the effect in order to understand what "save ends" is directed at introduces a somewhat complicated extra step that I would say is not good design. --- Contrast with a hypotethical power with either of these lines: Sustain minor: Target take ongoing 5 damage (save ends) Sustain minor: Target is pulled 1 square (save ends) Sustain minor: Target is slowed (save ends) Do you see the fundamental difference between cases 1 & 3 on one hand, and case 2 on the other? Well, a newbie might easily miss this. In fact, this is exactly what made me start this thread... :-/ [/QUOTE]

Verification