Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="5ekyu" data-source="post: 7555249" data-attributes="member: 6919838">I. Unreasonable I meant within the context of the game world.Put simply nobody would build a spell for combat where even if the spell took effect it would not do anything useful half the time. In a world where random reset initiative was the norm you would not see so many effects based on that hairs edge of adding "hit or pass the save:" **and** get the right init results next turn too. Spells and magic effects for such a world would be keyed for how many times they affected something or some other useful timing.It's not that combat need ABC degree of chaos but that the tools created within the game make a lot less sense for a world that works that way. You seem to want to see "unreasonable" as unpredictable or chaotic... but it was intended to mean "nonsensical" in the context of the system and what it presents. To be clear - let's give this same chaotic fun to fighters... you roll to hit the AC and if you hit then you do damage - unless you lose unit next round in which case you do zero.Yay yay yay... chaotic, unpredictable - gotcha covered. No, nonsensical for whether or not your "effect" works needing to also be the right combo of init rolls next turn. That's the difference between fog of war, chaotic and nonsensical results.</blockquote>