D&D 5E The Gloves Are Off?

[aco175]

These last several pages seem to remind me why I stopped playing MagicTG.

 

[Lanefan]

That'd be weird if it happened but, also, is not what was being discussed.


What we were discussing: the DM taking narrative control of a PC when describing the results of a successful save.

Yes, if the player didn't take that narrative control first.

The character either did something to try to dodge the fireball (this is the built-in assumption) or it didn't (very rare but I've seen it done).

What's being posited is that if neither the player nor the DM narrates how the character tried to dodge, the dodge attempt didn't happen. No dodge attempt = no save, or a house ruling, or something else non-standard.

It's an odd take, to be sure, but I see the reasoning behind it; and so if the player doesn't narrate how the character dodged the DM - in keeping with the base assumption that the character did in fact try to dodge and that (in this case) doing so allowed it to make its save - the DM is free to (and, one could argue, has to) narrate it instead.

Still seems fine to me.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Searching a room, literal physical investigation, is "vague game mechanics"? You are the one that wrote, "I can simply let the player say they have the item in question and move on with the game." That leap is far more extreme than any I proposed.

No, the presence of gloves or not is what's vague as they don't exist on the standard list of items. They are not described as being included with any outfit kits.

The game is vague about how it handles gloves. Then there's also how potent of protection gloves would be against contact poison, and how to mechanize that. It's something that can be handled in play... several folks made quick and easy summaries earlier in the thread such as "Okay you have gloves... roll with advantage." But it's not something the game text makes explicit, and clearly the responses here indicate there are some folks who would not be okay with a given ruling.

I'm a reasonable enough GM that I think if I made such a ruling, my players would be fine with it. However, I'm also interested in avoiding any possible conflicts like this... so rather than put myself in a situation where I have to make a ruling, I'll instead create a situation that's clearer and doesn't potentially create a chance for such conflicts.

That this alternate situation must be in some way "artificial" or easy were the claims you made, and they are wrong.

 

[Voadam]

That sounds far too M:tG-like for my tastes.

The game works (in any edition, even if not codified as such) on a basic declaration --> resolution --> narration loop.

There's rarely if ever any need to add much complication to that, but WotC - steeped as they are in their M:tG background - have insisted on doing so in each of their editions, ending up with more of a declaration --> [reaction? --> resolution? --> [narration?]] --> [reaction? --> resolution? --> [narration?]] --> [resolution?] --> [narration?] multi-loop system where the declaration is (in theory) certain to occur first and it's uncertain at what point or in what sequence resolution(s) and-or narration(s) will occur thereafter.

Trying to map that to the fiction - which in theory is what we're trying to emulate here - gets needlessly messy.

My experience in practice is that it is fairly straightforward.

"He shoots you, 17 a hit!" "I use my dodge, 18!" turns into narratively the guard shot at Neo, the bullets sped right towards his heart, but Neo reacts quickly enough so that he is no longer there when the bullet arrives.

This much more viscerally feels like actively dodging something rather than the always on but quick to resolve dex bonus to AC factor in the original attack roll.

This is a matter of taste that will vary for many.

One of the advantages of AD&D over Palladium for many is not stopping for more opposed defense rolls on every round of combat for every combatant.

 

[Celebrim]

The game is vague about how it handles gloves. Then there's also how potent of protection gloves would be against contact poison, and how to mechanize that. It's something that can be handled in play... several folks made quick and easy summaries earlier in the thread such as "Okay you have gloves... roll with advantage." But it's not something the game text makes explicit, and clearly the responses here indicate there are some folks who would not be okay with a given ruling.

Ok, that. Well, all you need is a better equipment list for that. Granted, that's a ton of work, but that problem is fixable.

 

[Lanefan]

Ok, that. Well, all you need is a better equipment list for that. Granted, that's a ton of work, but that problem is fixable.

It's not even a ton of work, given the number of lists already out there you could crib from.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Shield isn't the only thing that can turn a potential hit into a miss in 5e.

As such rather than saying "the orc hits you..." perhaps a better statement would be "the orc will hit unless you can do something about it..." and give the player (or another player who might have an ability) a second to see if there is something they can and wish to do.

That way, you're not backing up and there is no retcon.

Are you supposed to do that every time? I can't think of a better way to disrupt narrative flow.

 

[Mort]

Are you supposed to do that every time? I can't think of a better way to disrupt narrative flow.

Is it better to say "the orc hit you..." and have the player interject 'well actually..."?

Personally, I go the non-RAW route of announcing the AC hit and letting the player tell me if it was a hit or not. Makes spells like shield and abilities like Parry a bit more powerful, but I feel it's worth the tradeoff. And flow is pretty smooth.

 

[Maxperson]

I'd be curious to know which ones don't apply. Death saves if Unconscious through damage, I suppose, but that's a special case.

Mainly the one where you drop your weapons and fall prone. I mean I suppose he could be sleepwalking, but...

The first one is also not completely accurate. You aren't truly incapacitated when sleeping. You CAN move and speak if you wake up. Someone with the unconscious condition which is pretty clearly combat aimed, has been reduced to 0 somehow and can't wake up, so is truly incapacitated

I mean, dunno 'bout you but when I'm asleep I can't speak, move, cast spells, use items, hear noise, perceive things, attack, defend myself, or do anything else that requires conscious thought and-or awareness.

My wife has carried on conversations with me while she sleeps, and she has moved into me a number of times.

You can also hear while sleeping, which is why noises will often wake you and/or those sounds make it into your dreams.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

Is it better to say "the orc hit you..." and have the player interject 'well actually..."?

Personally, I go the non-RAW route of announcing the AC hit and letting the player tell me if it was a hit or not. Makes spells like shield and abilities like Parry a bit more powerful, but I feel it's worth the tradeoff. And flow is pretty smooth.

I mean, if the DM is rolling in the open, the DM can declare to the player “16 - does that hit?” And the player can groan or retort with shield or whatever. Flow is pretty smooth, as you said.