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!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7007152" data-attributes="member: 42582">For an NPC it's colour. (Unless you're talking about a henchperson or similar - I was meaning an off-screen NPC, or one whom the PCs see fighting the dragon as they approach to do their heroic thing.)It's analogous to legs being broken, hands severed, etc in combat. The default D&D combat rules have never allowed this as an outcome of combat (unless using some of the most powerful magic swords). So it never happens to PCs by default, just as - in 4e using a MV black dragon - by default a PC's weapon is never corroded by the acidic blood.But narrating grievous injuries to PCs is just colour. When the PCs in my main 4e game reached 11th level (ie paragon tier) the dwarf fighter took the warpriest paragon path. It seemed appropriate to me (as GM) to have some llittle vignette occur that recognised and built on this - so an angel of Moradin appeared to the PCs and told them of a group of dwarven soldiers in the foothill who needed help. When the PCs travelled to the place the angel had indicated, they found a half-dozen dwarves who had fought off a band of hobgoblins, but suffered grievous injuries in the process (I can't remember all the details, but one had a broken leg, another was blinded, etc).The fact that this can't be an outcome that occurs via the default D&D combat resolution rules isn't an obstacle to introducing this colour into the situation. And similarly, had instead the dwarves been fighting a black dragon, I might have described their weapons and armour as corroded by its acidic blood.Then you as GM don't declare the breath weapon attack. And on your turn you have the dragon take to the air. (Whether, in these circumstances, your dragon gets to keep the benefit of the breath weapon recharge is not clear as a matter of rules interpretation. The GM would have to make a ruling.)No. It's no different from an OA in 3E, or a reaction in 5e.Page 70 of the 5e Basic PDF says "A reaction is an instant response to a trigger of some kind". That doesn't mean that you have to take an OA, or use your Uncanny Dodge, if you don't want to. And the use of the word "trigger" is in fact one of the marks of continuitu between 4e and 5e.With respect, your response to what I said is a non-sequitur. I said "The GM has to decide the degree of staying power; and on that basis assign hit points". That has nothing to do with scaling anything up! If you think that a bear shouldn't have much staying power against some high level PCs, then why would you contradict your own desire and scale up its hp? The rationale thing in those circumstancs would be to make it a minion.Choosing level is key to deciding what degree of staying power the creature should have - which is a key question about a creature as a combatant (which is what the 4e stab block is for). Choosing a role does define the creature, in terms of its basic outlook/method in combat.If you're not interested in the creature as a combatant - eg you're thinking about a wood sprite who might advise the PCs about the layout of a forest - then that chapter is irrelevant, because you don't need to mechanically design non-combatants in 4e. Because, as I've explained several times now, there are no monster-side mechanics that are relevant to non-combat resolution in 4e. It's handled either by GM narration of the fiction, or by player-side skill challenge resolution.I've alreayd posted, several times, that in 4e non-combat resolution has nothing to do with monster stat blocks. It is by way of skill challenge, where all the mechanics are onthe player side, and all the GM has to do is narrate the fictional situation in a way that s/he thinks is appropriate and respects the successes/failures of the players' checks.I don't follow this. It is possible to play the game from the books as written. I know, because I did it.D&D has never had mechanics that tell the GM when a village is or isn't having a festival; yet has always been playable, and GMs have never had any trouble deciding whether or not a village the PCs come to is having a festival.It has never had rules for how villagers build their hovels, yet GMs have been including villagers' hovels in their games for a long time now.Similarly, no rules are needed in 4e for a GM to decide that a black dragon has corrupted the water of the pool in which it lives. You just describe it, the same as you describe the hovels or the festival.I assume there is an implicit "if I'm going to enjoy it" in this sentece. I assume you're not making a blanket assertion about how RPGs should be designed and played.</blockquote>

Verification