Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2017 16:19:08 GMT -5
I would like it if a lone Man was able to stave off a lone monster as that monster is charging at the Wizard. It seems appropriate to me that it should be so. But that doesn't require a rule, but only a common sense ruling: if a solitary monster is getting wailed on by a guy with a sword/ax/mace/panty hose/rubber chicken/whatever, the monster, whether intelligent or not, is not going to simply ignore being whomped on. As a general principle, I feel it is a bad idea to put in a rule if it is not absolutely needed. That's why I don't bother with "coup de grace" rules, either; "helpless" opponent means HELPLESS. If you find Evil McEvilface asleep in his bed and you hit him in the face with a two handed axe, he is DEAD. Hit points be damned; any other response is simply foolish. (unless he has some other sort of defenses) |
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Sept 13, 2017 16:32:04 GMT -5
I would like it if a lone Man was able to stave off a lone monster as that monster is charging at the Wizard. It seems appropriate to me that it should be so. But that doesn't require a rule, but only a common sense ruling: if a solitary monster is getting wailed on by a guy with a sword/ax/mace/panty hose/rubber chicken/whatever, the monster, whether intelligent or not, is not going to simply ignore being whomped on. As a general principle, I feel it is a bad idea to put in a rule if it is not absolutely needed. That's why I don't bother with "coup de grace" rules, either; "helpless" opponent means HELPLESS. If you find Evil McEvilface asleep in his bed and you hit him in the face with a two handed axe, he is DEAD. Hit points be damned; any other response is simply foolish. (unless he has some other sort of defenses) I can dig this. It would be near suicidal to expose your back to an opponent armed with a sharp metal object. No reasonable creature would willingly do this. However, if the monster in question wasn't under it's own control, that's when things would get REALLY fun and interesting. I like it. |
|
|
|
Post by scottanderson on Sept 13, 2017 18:29:55 GMT -5
coup de grace is less of a mechanical rule and more of a reminder of common sense.
After all, hit points only "exist" inasfar as they aid storytelling. If they don't make sense, then they don't make sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by Crimhthan The Great on Sept 13, 2017 21:25:10 GMT -5
However, no plan survives contact with the enemy, and I would like it if a lone Man was able to stave off a lone monster as that monster is charging at the Wizard. Why do you think they can't? Assuming they don't die in the attempt. |
|
|
|
Post by mormonyoyoman on Sept 14, 2017 0:38:04 GMT -5
I would like it if a lone Man was able to stave off a lone monster as that monster is charging at the Wizard. It seems appropriate to me that it should be so. But that doesn't require a rule, but only a common sense ruling: if a solitary monster is getting wailed on by a guy with a sword/ax/mace/panty hose/rubber chicken/whatever, the monster, whether intelligent or not, is not going to simply ignore being whomped on. As a general principle, I feel it is a bad idea to put in a rule if it is not absolutely needed. That's why I don't bother with "coup de grace" rules, either; "helpless" opponent means HELPLESS. If you find Evil McEvilface asleep in his bed and you hit him in the face with a two handed axe, he is DEAD. Hit points be damned; any other response is simply foolish. (unless he has some other sort of defenses) My next mastermind villain will be named Evil McEvilface! That name demands to be overused! |
|
|
|
Post by Crimhthan The Great on Sept 14, 2017 11:46:51 GMT -5
But that doesn't require a rule, but only a common sense ruling: if a solitary monster is getting wailed on by a guy with a sword/ax/mace/panty hose/rubber chicken/whatever, the monster, whether intelligent or not, is not going to simply ignore being whomped on. As a general principle, I feel it is a bad idea to put in a rule if it is not absolutely needed. That's why I don't bother with "coup de grace" rules, either; "helpless" opponent means HELPLESS. If you find Evil McEvilface asleep in his bed and you hit him in the face with a two handed axe, he is DEAD. Hit points be damned; any other response is simply foolish. (unless he has some other sort of defenses) My next mastermind villain will be named Evil McEvilface! That name demands to be overused! And you have already done that. Good Show! |
|
|
|
Post by magremore on Sept 14, 2017 17:43:39 GMT -5
Just to get this thread back on topic. I consider a shield an improvised weapon. Use whatever ruling you want for that. I'm going with 2d6 keep lower. That gives a nice symmetry when combined with one of the common house rules for two-handed weapons...
improvised weapon = 2d6 keep lower
normal weapon = 1d6
two-handed melee weapon = 2d6 keep higher
|
|
|
|
Post by scottanderson on Sept 14, 2017 18:48:36 GMT -5
Just to get this thread back on topic. I consider a shield an improvised weapon. Use whatever ruling you want for that. I'm going with 2d6 keep lower. That gives a nice symmetry when combined with one of the common house rules for two-handed weapons... improvised weapon = 2d6 keep lower normal weapon = 1d6 two-handed melee weapon = 2d6 keep higher Torches, shields, table legs = 1d6 with disadvantage, I love it. That's a great rule. |
|
|
|
Post by Hexenritter Verlag on Feb 7, 2018 2:27:27 GMT -5
A combat round is ONE MINUTE. A die roll does not represent one stroke, it represents the net effect of everything you do in that minute. Striking with a shield is part of that. There is no problem, and no need to change the rules. I agree with gronanofsimmeya. Add to that - since all weapons do d6 damage anyway, I'd include shields - whether the PC dropped their weapon or not; if they have a shield they can do damage unless the monster is immune to blunt damage. |
|
