That's completely group dependent. My group is very old school in that regard and wouldn't bat an eyelash.
But, if they were that form of old school, they'd not expect to be able to get a bonus that way in the first place, so...
That's completely group dependent. My group is very old school in that regard and wouldn't bat an eyelash.
Right, so the rules make it clear that shoes/boots are a thing and how one gets them. But not so with gloves.
This thread has changed my mind from my initial stance. I've decided to never use contact poison, so that instead of having even a moment of discussion like this at the table, we can instead just continue to play the game.
I disagree that it's a retcon, as what happened is not entirely resolved at the time of the spell's usage. But even if someone does accept that it is a retcon, then that means retcons are within the player role, and there should be no problem with the gloves, presuming they are okay with shield. If they wish to remain consistent in their position, that is.Yes shield is a retcon. It's just one supported by rules. This hit has already happened and shield rewinds it so that it misses. Most abilities that affect rolls have to be used prior to knowing if you succeed or not.
There is no real action, though. A quick dodge and back behind the pillar because that's literally the only way a save is possible is just color, not action. It has zero impact on anything other than as a narration of the successful save.It is true that when a save is successful, something is happening in the fiction to avoid the effect being saved against. And, when a DM describes the PC as "dodging behind a pillar" to avoid the brunt of a fireball on a successful save, that DM is dictating what that something is. The DM, through narration, is literally controlling the PC's chosen action in that example. Now, at any particular table, the DM can certainly describe the PC's reaction, action, thoughts, or speech as part of a result - but it is certainly not required or even necessary as has already been shown.
If you avoid everything that has the possibility of generating even a moment of discussion/disagreement at the table, you aren't going to have much left to play the game with.Right, so the rules make it clear that shoes/boots are a thing and how one gets them. But not so with gloves.
This thread has changed my mind from my initial stance. I've decided to never use contact poison, so that instead of having even a moment of discussion like this at the table, we can instead just continue to play the game.
"Color" best avoided in my view because it may not align with what the player imagines their character as doing. It's unnecessary and sets up a potential problem. Better to leave it to the player. (And, players, don't leave a vacuum for the DM to feel obligated to fill.)There is no real action, though. A quick dodge and back behind the pillar because that's literally the only way a save is possible is just color, not action. It has zero impact on anything other than as a narration of the successful save.
The only thing left to resolve per RAW is damage.I disagree that it's a retcon, as what happened is not entirely resolved at the time of the spell's usage.
This is not at all true. The player doesn't get to just decide that he can cast mage armor 3 hours earlier AFTER he discovers he was hit because his AC is low. Retcons are not at all part of the player role. One spell that is part of the game as a whole makes an exception. That spell is just as much part of the DM side of things as the player side of things. It's in the PHB, but is not a player rule. The PHB contains 100% of the rules that the game runs on. The DMG contains none except for some optional rules that the game does not run on, but the DM can enact if he chooses.But even if someone does accept that it is a retcon, then that means retcons are within the player role, and there should be no problem with the gloves, presuming they are okay with shield. If they wish to remain consistent in their position, that is.
As I said, since the player didn't say he was doing anything, I either color it in or just fail his save because he's standing there doing nothing while the fireball hits. To save you have to be doing something to warrant the spell doing less or nothing."Color" best avoided in my view because it may not align with what the player imagines their character as doing. It's unnecessary and sets up a potential problem. Better to leave it to the player. (And, players, don't leave a vacuum for the DM to feel obligated to fill.)
I disagree. No damage roll, no retcon, as nothing is being rewritten in the fiction. I agree that retcons are not part of the player role, and shield isn't one.The only thing left to resolve per RAW is damage.
Step 3: Resolve the attack. You make the attack roll. On a hit, you roll damage, unless the particular attack has rules that specify otherwise. Some attacks cause special effects in addition to or instead of damage."
Shield is a case of specific beats general, but as the attack has hit and only damage is left to roll, rolling that attack back and making it a miss is a retcon.
This is not at all true. The player doesn't get to just decide that he can cast mage armor 3 hours earlier AFTER he discovers he was hit because his AC is low. Retcons are not at all part of the player role. One spell that is part of the game as a whole makes an exception. That spell is just as much part of the DM side of things as the player side of things. It's in the PHB, but is not a player rule. The PHB contains 100% of the rules that the game runs on. The DMG contains none except for some optional rules that the game does not run on, but the DM can enact if he chooses.
Better to say nothing at all in my view than to describe something for the player about their character doing something.As I said, since the player didn't say he was doing anything, I either color it in or just fail his save because he's standing there doing nothing while the fireball hits. To save you have to be doing something to warrant the spell doing less or nothing.