Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 6782577" data-attributes="member: 7006">You're arguing a different thing.&nbsp; The possibility of &quot;defeat&quot; was already long past.Imaculata said that when the situation has come up that the players are going to win (like for example the monster has already lost 180 of 200 hit points and the party itself is fine)... if the way the battle is going might be more fun for the fight to end in a particular way for the players... delaying that final blow by tacking on some extra HP is not robbing them of anything, it's potentially helping form the story results of the fight.&nbsp; Like for example, if this monster was the Big Bad for a particular PC's background and history... and that PC is &quot;on deck&quot; for his turn right after another PC... if the first PC did enough damage to kill the Big Bad, I know that I (and I would imagine perhaps Imaculata) would have no problem tacking on a few extra HP to it so that it gives the player for whom this guy was the culmination of their story the chance to deliver the killing blow.&nbsp; Because it'd be more fun and (most likely) a better overall story for everyone to do so.Now... doing this does not guarantee the story ending exactly as I'm thinking it will.&nbsp; If the PC then whiffs on a couple attacks to take the Big Bad out, so be it-- the next guy or the guy after probably will do it (in other words, I myself wouldn't bother delaying the death the entire next round just to give the PC another &quot;chance&quot; at delivering the killing blow.)&nbsp; But for incredibly minor situations like this?&nbsp; Sure!&nbsp; Why not?&nbsp; There's no harm in it if your particular game world does not require absolute simulation.For some DMs and players, that simulation is critical.&nbsp; I understand completely.&nbsp; And that's cool.&nbsp; But it's definitely not a requirement for every game and every table.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DEFCON 1, post: 6782577, member: 7006"] You're arguing a different thing. The possibility of "defeat" was already long past. Imaculata said that when the situation has come up that the players are going to win (like for example the monster has already lost 180 of 200 hit points and the party itself is fine)... if the way the battle is going might be more fun for the fight to end in a particular way for the players... delaying that final blow by tacking on some extra HP is not robbing them of anything, it's potentially helping form the story results of the fight. Like for example, if this monster was the Big Bad for a particular PC's background and history... and that PC is "on deck" for his turn right after another PC... if the first PC did enough damage to kill the Big Bad, I know that I (and I would imagine perhaps Imaculata) would have no problem tacking on a few extra HP to it so that it gives the player for whom this guy was the culmination of their story the chance to deliver the killing blow. Because it'd be more fun and (most likely) a better overall story for everyone to do so. Now... doing this does not [i]guarantee[/i] the story ending exactly as I'm thinking it will. If the PC then whiffs on a couple attacks to take the Big Bad out, so be it-- the next guy or the guy after probably will do it (in other words, I myself wouldn't bother delaying the death the entire next round just to give the PC another "chance" at delivering the killing blow.) But for incredibly minor situations like this? Sure! Why not? There's no harm in it if your particular game world does not require absolute simulation. For some DMs and players, that simulation is critical. I understand completely. And that's cool. But it's definitely not a requirement for every game and every table. [/QUOTE]

Verification