Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celtavian" data-source="post: 898369" data-attributes="member: 5834">ReWe will have to disagree because I see stuff like this as nonsense...Do you really think a person climbing or running should be able to take AOO's? Ever climb or run fast? I have, you wouldn't be able to do it. I guarantee it.The point I am trying to make is that it should be looked at from the perspective of "if this were actually happening".I am speaking only about AOO's, which I should clarify, in this particular instance. I am going off not the literal interpretation of the rule, but the literary interpretation of the rule. As in "what sort of logical reasoning are the game designers giving for this rule?" I am saying that it is logical to deny AOO's for the loss of dex, period, because the assertion is that the loss of dexterity comes from the inability to act. All situations that you lose your dexterity from are situations in which you are somehow inhibited from acting.  The way I see it is that "flat-footed" and "loss of dex to AC" are synonmymous not from a literal perspective, but from a pseudo-realistic perspective. That is the difference in our opinions.For example, if I am a DM, and a player wishes to use Bluff to get past a guard who is defending a hallway without provoking AOO's. I let him do this, even if the rules don't perfectly indicate that they should be able to. I must admit that I am beginning to agree with Gary Gygax and a few others on this board who say that D&D is becoming far to legalistic for many players such as Hypersmurf. This is a rules forum. There is room for exact interpretations and other perspectives of how a rule should run. Why? The House Rules forum , in my experience, is for pure House Rules, rules that do not exist in the game or are vastly different from the exact rules.My interpretation of the "flat-footed" versus "denied dex" does not fall into this category save for legalistic players who follow the rules like they are playing a video game or debating the law. Rules are situational for those who like to think about the actual situation rather than the mechanic. The mechanic is a guideline to help you arbitrate situations.I feel that it is valid viewpoint and a logical one to assess that "flat-footed" and "denied dex bonus" would disallow AOO's. If I or anyone else voice this interpretation, then it should be left for the person reading to decide whether they feel such a ruling better fits THEIR vision of how AOO's should happen.</blockquote>

Verification