Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Why the Great Thief Debate Will Always Be With Us
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="payn" data-source="post: 9478689" data-attributes="member: 90374"><p>What if the spirit is actually a target being knocked flat? I think sometimes it makes sense why something is immune to a particular ability rule. If the entire identity/ability of a character is "knock things prone" and the character is invalidated by immunity, then the system isnt terribly robust for an RPG.</p><p></p><p>"Lenient bounds of reason" are going to vary exceedingly. Which is why I can envision players who will argue that their character's fire attack is so hot it can even kill a fire elemental, or that their trip ability is so good it can even trip snakes. Sort of a mental gymnastics to make sense of a character combat power that makes the game function. Now, on the flip side, I can also see GMs using immunity as a way to counter an ability that is too good/powerful. The GM is making the game function with a ruling thats not favorable to the player. </p><p></p><p>Which ever rules/rulings or rulings/rules philosophy you ascribe to will inform your take on the above.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I think there is too much of a gulf between does and doesn't belong under those skills. The player doesn't know where the guidelines are, and the GM doesn't know how to adjudicate an action made up on the fly. (<em>Insert nobody reads the DMG here</em>) This is particularly difficult since combat is entirely made up of guidelines and strictly written out abilities. The contrast is difficult to parse, so actions are declared in the strictest sense or just assumed not possible.</p><p></p><p></p><p>This sort of flies in the face of #2 though. What is the point of chunky and open ended if the eventual destination is specific and concise? I think this adds to what I was saying, if gameplay hasnt demanded a ruling in a consistent need, then its ambiguous for both player and GM. That leads to a lot of anxiety about treading new territory. If the game was all open and chunky and the point was for the GM and player to narrow through exercise, you;d see it more. Though, the combat system being so precise and detailed makes for a game mode code switch that is confusing for a lot of folks.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="payn, post: 9478689, member: 90374"] What if the spirit is actually a target being knocked flat? I think sometimes it makes sense why something is immune to a particular ability rule. If the entire identity/ability of a character is "knock things prone" and the character is invalidated by immunity, then the system isnt terribly robust for an RPG. "Lenient bounds of reason" are going to vary exceedingly. Which is why I can envision players who will argue that their character's fire attack is so hot it can even kill a fire elemental, or that their trip ability is so good it can even trip snakes. Sort of a mental gymnastics to make sense of a character combat power that makes the game function. Now, on the flip side, I can also see GMs using immunity as a way to counter an ability that is too good/powerful. The GM is making the game function with a ruling thats not favorable to the player. Which ever rules/rulings or rulings/rules philosophy you ascribe to will inform your take on the above. I think there is too much of a gulf between does and doesn't belong under those skills. The player doesn't know where the guidelines are, and the GM doesn't know how to adjudicate an action made up on the fly. ([I]Insert nobody reads the DMG here[/I]) This is particularly difficult since combat is entirely made up of guidelines and strictly written out abilities. The contrast is difficult to parse, so actions are declared in the strictest sense or just assumed not possible. This sort of flies in the face of #2 though. What is the point of chunky and open ended if the eventual destination is specific and concise? I think this adds to what I was saying, if gameplay hasnt demanded a ruling in a consistent need, then its ambiguous for both player and GM. That leads to a lot of anxiety about treading new territory. If the game was all open and chunky and the point was for the GM and player to narrow through exercise, you;d see it more. Though, the combat system being so precise and detailed makes for a game mode code switch that is confusing for a lot of folks. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Why the Great Thief Debate Will Always Be With Us
Top