Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 9262879" data-attributes="member: 7006">Although your statement assumes that every part of combat is happening in &quot;real time&quot; (in-world) as the story of the fight going along blow-by-blow... whereas other people might see the combat rules as merely the mechanical representation of what is happening and it's only after the mechanical part is completed that the story of how the fight goes is illustrated.So a Shield spell turning a hit to a miss wouldn't be &quot;turning back the clock&quot;... but rather the 'attack roll / hit declaration / Shield casting / hit negation' is all one packet of mechanical use that once calculated, results in the combat narrative of &quot;someone tried to hit the spellcaster with an attack but the caster got the Shield spell up in time to block it.&quot;Not saying looking at it one way over the other is better or preferable... but just that it explains why one way isn't objectively &quot;wrong&quot; and why WotC doesn't seem to mind the side they have chosen.&nbsp; Because there are people who look at how to represent combat from both sides-- where some think Shield et. al. are bad spells because of the issues you presented, and others who think it all works fine.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DEFCON 1, post: 9262879, member: 7006"] Although your statement assumes that every part of combat is happening in "real time" (in-world) as the story of the fight going along blow-by-blow... whereas other people might see the combat rules as merely the mechanical representation of what is happening and it's only after the mechanical part is completed that the story of how the fight goes is illustrated. So a [I]Shield[/I] spell turning a hit to a miss wouldn't be "turning back the clock"... but rather the 'attack roll / hit declaration / [I]Shield[/I] casting / hit negation' is all one packet of mechanical use that [I]once calculated,[/I] results in the combat narrative of "someone tried to hit the spellcaster with an attack but the caster got the [I]Shield[/I] spell up in time to block it." Not saying looking at it one way over the other is better or preferable... but just that it explains why one way isn't objectively "wrong" and why WotC doesn't seem to mind the side they have chosen. Because there are people who look at how to represent combat from both sides-- where some think [I]Shield[/I] et. al. are bad spells because of the issues you presented, and others who think it all works fine. [/QUOTE]

Verification