Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 3814524" data-attributes="member: 18280">JK's post didn't provide the details needed to answer the question.Yours however did: On a mechanical level the fact that they were sure they wouldn't lose let them indulge in trying things mechanically that they normally don't. PCs tried - and succeeded - at tripping foes, sundering an enemy's weapon, flipping a dagger out of a rogue's hand and then catching it and then handing it back with a suggestion to try again, picking up an unconscious enemy and bludgeoning another one with it, etc. The wizard picked up a weapon for the first time in ages and beat down an enemy, and then summoned a creature he'd normally never use in a fight and had it chase another of the enemies around.That is an answer to the question posed.  It's evem a good answer.  <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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />  I have long endorsed letting players have a chance to beat up folks that have no chance against them, so that they could measure their growth.  I had never considered that to be a "mechanical" issue, but of course it is one.With more data, JK's answer might be more important, though, simply because he sustains his entire game using these encounters, whereas I doubt you could do so in D&D by using the above method to sustain mechanical interest.  Do you believe that you could sustain mechanical interest using only (or mostly) the above tactic?RC</blockquote>

Verification