Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Forrester" data-source="post: 111740" data-attributes="member: 1279">My original post was made before ANYONE advocated playing the &quot;official&quot; way, and/or claimed that there weren't problems with it. So my original post's original point was not to be insulting -- merely to say, in a creative way, that a lot of broken-ness lies in that direction. And there's a lot more to being a bad DM than saying touch-attacks should allow sneak-attack damage. Really, I'm not saying that any of you who play by-the-book with regard to this rule are bad DMs. I don't think you should play it this way, but as I said, there's a lot more to being a DM than how you handle this bit of minutia. On the other hand, I think we've seen ample evidence of how twinkie characters can abuse this little hole in the system <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=":)" />. P's excellent Death To The Tarrasque analysis was one, and we also now see what happens to White Dragons (re Alchemist's fire) and Fire Giants (re Ray of Frost) when touch-attacks are allowed to have sneak-attack damage added on. Icky.EDIT -- I'm sure that B.A.D.D. has to be disturbed about the Death-to-Dragons smackdown presented here, whether it's the Ray of Frost smackdown or the Alchemist's Fire smackdown. By the way, maddman, did you get my application?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Forrester, post: 111740, member: 1279"] My original post was made before ANYONE advocated playing the "official" way, and/or claimed that there weren't problems with it. So my original post's original point was not to be insulting -- merely to say, in a creative way, that a lot of broken-ness lies in that direction. And there's a lot more to being a bad DM than saying touch-attacks should allow sneak-attack damage. Really, I'm not saying that any of you who play by-the-book with regard to this rule are bad DMs. I don't think you should play it this way, but as I said, there's a lot more to being a DM than how you handle this bit of minutia. On the other hand, I think we've seen ample evidence of how twinkie characters can abuse this little hole in the system :). P's excellent Death To The Tarrasque analysis was one, and we also now see what happens to White Dragons (re Alchemist's fire) and Fire Giants (re Ray of Frost) when touch-attacks are allowed to have sneak-attack damage added on. Icky. EDIT -- I'm sure that B.A.D.D. has to be disturbed about the Death-to-Dragons smackdown presented here, whether it's the Ray of Frost smackdown or the Alchemist's Fire smackdown. By the way, maddman, did you get my application? [/QUOTE]

Verification