When not to allow a reflex save?

[irdeggman]

That said, I (and pretty much everyone I have played with) have had enough common sense to know when to throw out the RAW in exchange for a RAI as makes..well..."common sense." Ergo, far as I can see, Stun=no action. NOT "Stun=No action except in the event you have to dodge a fireball."

Well in this case it is clearly not RAI but maybe rules as I intend (the FAQ quoted earlier)

Also take into account the "RAW" are not, nor have ever been meant to be, set in stone...especially when they contradict the "realism of the game world" (the "verisimilitude" I see used here all of the time) or "common sense."

True but not relevent to this issue since you are now classifying almost all conditions as being the same, i.e., not allowing any actions which is clearly not the RAW nor RAI.

OTOH, someone who is Prone is thought of to be helpless, yes? I would see no reason that they should lose any type of save (well, as long as they're conscious, I suppose).

Nope prone is not "helpless". Can someone delvier a coup de grace on someone who is prone? No way in any common sense world.


Heck you can be prone for "defensive purposes" to help against ranged attacks.



Note that saving throws are not "actions" as defined in D&D. IF you consider them actions what type are they?

Swift
immediate
move
standard
full round?

Can you make more than 1 saving throw a round?

If they are actions then you are making more actions than allowed per the RAW.

 

[steeldragons]

Holy gods.

And we'll finish here. This is the sort of rant you don't want to make. Well, you may want to make it, but it's inappropriate here. Whether you agree or disagree with someone, becoming condescending and insulting because they disagree with you is never okay. It's fine for people to disagree with you, seriously - just report the post if they're jerks about it, and use the Ignore function judiciously. Replying in kind only makes the situation worse.

Please ping me with any questions. We'd prefer not to see a reoccurrance of this sort of argument. - Piratecat

Ok. Look kiddles, I am not interested in arguing with anyone on these boards about, frankly, anything. Particularly what's "written" or "intended" or "I intend" or what "Prone" isn't or "Helpless" is, what action means versus action or that save doesn't count as an action (which, believe it or not, I knew)...and which action is it? There's already 5, why not one more? Hell, make it 10! Nice round number.

...Seriously?!

I was responding to the Original Poster's scenario and question...

Here is the general question: My cleric casts sound burst on an enemy, which then failed its Fortitude save. The enemy is now stunned. The Sorcerer casts fireball. I couldn't find anything saying that the stunned enemy couldn't roll a reflex save for half damage.

I'm thinking that a stunned character (momentarily unconscious) wouldn't be able to react to the fireball. etc...etc...

...which I agree with. A stunned character "wouldn't be able to react..." That is what makes sense...regardless of what page XYZ of the QRS says or who's RAI is another person's RAII.

Given the situation presented, that would be my call...and the OP seems to have enough common sense/gut reaction to make what, to my opinion, would be a correct determination, initially.

He wants to look it up or find some relevant RAW, then maybe he'll change his call/the way he runs his game. That's up to him.

I, probably, would not. I'd make the call, play through the round, probably lose my BBEG to some successful tactics by my players, curse my luck of the dice for failing the save on the Sound Burst, and we'd move on.

Now, I'll leave you to your RAW-lawyering, munchki-teering and RAI-ghteous indignation.

Enjoy.
--SD

 

[irdeggman]

I was responding to the Original Poster's scenario and question...



...which I agree with. A stunned character "wouldn't be able to react..." That is what makes sense...regardless of what page XYZ of the QRS says or who's RAI is another person's RAII.

The problem then is saying that stunned = unconsious.

It is not. Because of the presumption a lot of confusion has resulted.

Stunned: A stunned creature drops everything held, can’t take actions, takes a –2 penalty to AC, and loses his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any).


Unconscious: Knocked out and helpless. Unconsciousness can result from having current hit points between –1 and –9, or from nonlethal damage in excess of current hit points.

Now saying an unconsious person (aka helpless) can't make a reflex save is entirely reasonable but not a stunned one.

They are not the same thing nor obviously were they ever intended to be.

 

[Umbran]

Holy gods.

Ok. Look kiddles...

Folks,

One of the major tenets of EN World is that you are supposed to treat your fellow posters with respect.

The people around you are not "kiddles". They're your fellow posters - your peers. So, unless you want to declare yourself to be childish and immature, don't treat them like they are. Golden Rule, Wheaton's Law, call it what you like. It's called being polite, and we expect it of everyone, all the time.

I hope that's clear. Any questions, please take it to a mod in e-mail or PM. Thank you.

 

[Piratecat]

Simul-mod!

 

[Eldritch_Lord]

Ok. Look kiddles, I am not interested in arguing with anyone on these boards about, frankly, anything. Particularly what's "written" or "intended" or "I intend" or what "Prone" isn't or "Helpless" is, what action means versus action or that save doesn't count as an action (which, believe it or not, I knew)...and which action is it? There's already 5, why not one more? Hell, make it 10! Nice round number.

...Seriously?!

I was responding to the Original Poster's scenario and question...



...which I agree with. A stunned character "wouldn't be able to react..." That is what makes sense...regardless of what page XYZ of the QRS says or who's RAI is another person's RAII.

1) Most of the responses to you have been to clarify what seemed to be a misunderstanding on your part--namely, that stunned and nauseated and such don't mean helpless. If you are bashed upside the head with something and are too dizzy to hit someone with your own weapon, that doesn't prevent you from ducking out of the way of their next blow. You'll be slower, of course, but that's what that -2 to AC is for. If you're nauseated to the point that any time you try to speak magic words you feel like puking, that doesn't mean you can't leap out of the way of a fireball, stomach cramps and all.

2) Once again, "cannot take actions" is very specific in game terms, despite your seeming disdain of the actual rules as displayed above. There are standard actions, full-round actions, move actions, swift actions, immediate actions, free actions...and there are also not-an-actions, those things that don't require any appreciable effort on your part and can be done even during other actions. That is what saving throws fall under, as do most other reactive things that don't consume immediate actions. So when you "can't take actions," you can only do things that don't require actions, and saving throws don't.

Given the situation presented, that would be my call...and the OP seems to have enough common sense/gut reaction to make what, to my opinion, would be a correct determination, initially.

Valuing common sense or a gut reaction to give you the "correct" ruling in a rules-heavy and occasionally counterintuitive game is probably not the best approach.

Now, I'll leave you to your RAW-lawyering, munchki-teering and RAI-ghteous indignation.

1) You may call it righteous indignation, but no on thus far aside from you has brought that level of emotion into things. Called your rulings bad ones, attempted to point out the correct rules, yes, but not started ranting at anyone.

2) If they were really munchkins, they'd be agreeing with you! Your ruling turns any spell inflicting one of six or so conditions into an instant-win spell; what munchkin wouldn't like that? RAW-lawyering would be exploiting loopholes or vague rules to gain an advantage; pointing out "This condition does not deny you a Reflex save, thus it does not deny you a Reflex save" is not rules-lawyering, it is merely, as you said before, common sense.

 

[Dandu]

Valuing common sense or a gut reaction to give you the "correct" ruling in a rules-heavy and occasionally counterintuitive game is probably not the best approach.

Elitist. Don't you know you have more nerve endings in your gut than in your brain?

 

[lordxaviar]

I have gone round and round the rules trying to find exceptions regarding reflex saves. Am I completely overlooking them?

Here is the general question: My cleric casts sound burst on an enemy, which then failed its Fortitude save. The enemy is now stunned. The Sorcerer casts fireball. I couldn't find anything saying that the stunned enemy couldn't roll a reflex save for half damage.

I'm thinking that a stunned character (momentarily unconscious) wouldn't be able to react to the fireball. Then I got to wondering if at any point you become flat-footed or simply denied your dex modifier to armor if you should also lose your dex modifier to Reflex saves. Help me out.

Boy did you start a hot one. Many points have been brought up the best being the FAQ (my opinion) How about a little reality- I have been stunned by a flash bang and yet was able to notice that I was about to be shot and dove for cover. I don't think I was actually thinking so much as a instinctive move of self preservation. Back to game mechanics, you could give them a DC based on how badly they missed their save on the stun. This will add to the penalty of how badly they rolled.. I mean a 1 is a 1 after all. But they still get the save. you might increase the percent of damage from 1/2 too. Remember this is all moot if it interferes with the smooth play-- Fun! Dm's flub (on occasion - vary rarely- me im from the GG. school on that one having played once with him,,, he was tough...very) to not totally discourage players, besides being an evil Dm.. its more fun to keep them alive and make them pay over and over (insert diabolical laugh here) Biggest rule of them all.... Its the Dm's Call. there is my rant.. whew thanx love to get those out...

 

[lordxaviar]

Mod edit: We appreciate your feedback - but please don't use the XP system to give it. Thanks.

What the hell did i write that really needed to be addressed?

it actually annoys me that I have to write something to give xp...

 

[TheHypnoDragonToad]

Ok, so this thread is quite dated but in case anyone comes looking here in the future as I did:

While we can all appreciate that "stunned" does not mean "completely helpless", I think we can also all agree that if you are stunned, you are NOT going to be able to fully react to a threat!!!. Anyone who has any experience in combat or even any gamer who has experienced a flashbang-type effect in a game - for the non-combatants out there - should intuitively understand that, despite a lack of rules covering this case, it doesn't make sense that a stunned or similarly incapacitated creature would get their full reflex save. So at the very least, depending on the exact state (stunned/dazed/etc.) there should be a more of less steep penalty to Reflex saves (e.g.: -1 or -2 for dazed, -3 or -4 for stunned, etc.).


When considering other saves however, things are different: Fortitude saves can be understood as simply your body's natural resilience. Even a helpless creature is entitled to a Fort save (against a Coup de Grace, for example). Therefore, it should be obvious that in the OP's scenario, casts of a subsequent spell with a Fort based save would not be affected at all.


Will is an interesting case. While a stunned creature should probably have a penalty to Will saves (have you ever been knocked into a dizzied state? Any activity that is concentration based would be severely hampered), a creature incapacitated by a Hold Person or other similar effect would technically be fully in control of their will, although their body is not responding (as is described in the the Hold Person spell description).

Therefore, I personally would rule that a stunned creature would get a penalty to both Reflex and Will saves while a character under an effect such as Hold Person/Monster or any other effect that fully restricts movement would only have their reflex saves diminished while leaving the rest untouched.

Hopefully a happy medium for everyone.