Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Gargoyle" data-source="post: 106596" data-attributes="member: 529">Cool, glad that's cleared up.&nbsp;&nbsp; I had a feeling there was a misunderstanding there.&nbsp; And I knew you weren't trying to squash anyone's freedom to customize the game for their own personal use.&nbsp; (and don't worry, I'm trying not to let my personal POV influence the book too much.&nbsp; That's why I started this poll.)Agreed.&nbsp; But &quot;Bad things&quot; is pretty vague; it's figuring out what is bad (ie dishonorable or evil) that is subjective.&nbsp;Depends on whether you consider that to be a &quot;bad thing&quot; or not. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />&nbsp; If you consider it a bad thing, then using such a tactic is the end justifies the means.&nbsp; So it's all relative. Please note that I said you and others had &quot;more of an 'end justifies the means' attitude.&quot;&nbsp; I'm not accusing you of allowing Dirty Harry paladins.&nbsp; I'm just saying you're somewhere farther towards that extreme than I am; didn't mean to imply you were anywhere near that extreme.&nbsp; Who'd be stupid enough to do that? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin&nbsp; &nbsp; :D"&nbsp; data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />As long as the interpretation is done objectively, and still gives the DM lots of leeway on matters of honor, I think it would be useful.&nbsp; The poll indicates to me that there is quite a bit of misunderstanding going on between players and DMs.&nbsp; That's the biggest problem.Correct me if I'm wrong on the below combat; I've been wrong before:Round 1Paladin has initiative 20, knight has initiative 1.On 20 - paladin makes a 5ft step, uses a free action to speak, then readies a Bluff action in case the black knight doesn't surrender.On 1 - black knight moves 10ft, attacks and hits, wounding the paladin.&nbsp; The paladin bluffs pretending to be mortally wounded, and succeeds, so the black knight has lost his Dex modifier to AC against the paladin's next attack.&nbsp; The paladin's action goes first, but the nature of the action leads me to describe it as happening at the same time.&nbsp; This is known as artistic license.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />&nbsp;&nbsp; Initiative counts are now both on a 1.Round 2On 1 - They both have the same initiative, but the paladin has a higher Dex, so he goes first.&nbsp; He uses a sneak attack against the bluffed knight.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Gargoyle, post: 106596, member: 529"] [B][/b] Cool, glad that's cleared up. I had a feeling there was a misunderstanding there. And I knew you weren't trying to squash anyone's freedom to customize the game for their own personal use. (and don't worry, I'm trying not to let my personal POV influence the book too much. That's why I started this poll.) [b][/b] Agreed. But "Bad things" is pretty vague; it's figuring out what is bad (ie dishonorable or evil) that is subjective. [b][/b] Depends on whether you consider that to be a "bad thing" or not. :) If you consider it a bad thing, then using such a tactic is the end justifies the means. So it's all relative. [b][/b] Please note that I said you and others had "[b]more[/b] of an 'end justifies the means' attitude." I'm not accusing you of allowing Dirty Harry paladins. I'm just saying you're somewhere farther towards that extreme than I am; didn't mean to imply you were anywhere near that extreme. [b][/b] Who'd be stupid enough to do that? :D [b][/b] As long as the interpretation is done objectively, and still gives the DM lots of leeway on matters of honor, I think it would be useful. The poll indicates to me that there is quite a bit of misunderstanding going on between players and DMs. That's the biggest problem. Correct me if I'm wrong on the below combat; I've been wrong before: Round 1 Paladin has initiative 20, knight has initiative 1. On 20 - paladin makes a 5ft step, uses a free action to speak, then readies a Bluff action in case the black knight doesn't surrender. On 1 - black knight moves 10ft, attacks and hits, wounding the paladin. The paladin bluffs pretending to be mortally wounded, and succeeds, so the black knight has lost his Dex modifier to AC against the paladin's next attack. The paladin's action goes first, but the nature of the action leads me to describe it as happening at the same time. This is known as artistic license. :) Initiative counts are now both on a 1. Round 2 On 1 - They both have the same initiative, but the paladin has a higher Dex, so he goes first. He uses a sneak attack against the bluffed knight. [/QUOTE]

Verification