| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would toss this to metagaming
The actual damage done is something calculated and tracked outside of game...using that knowledge IN game is disingenious to the game itself
I have played with many that metagame and it is not my cup of tea and not fun me at all
I may know that skeletons have DR 5/ bludgeoning but my character may not...so for me to decide to use my normal mace over my sword that I ALWAYS use is metagaming
I don't see a difference between that and waiting for a damage roll to decide my save...if my character actually sees a fireball go off and decides not to react (save) then he's not my character anymore...he's stupid and probably deserves the damage he's about to recieve
1. You absolutely can asses a threat as you seek to avoid it. Happens in sports ALL THE TIME. Running bacs are instantly evaluating decisions on whether to cut back, run through someone, run past them, or spin. More importantly, these reactions can be fine-tuned and trained.
2. You have no clue about how quickly someone's brain can assess something compared to the reflex save they are making in any given circumstance. I'll clue you in...according to a website source, it's 215 millisecond. Now, please tell me how long it takes a fireball to move from Point A to Point B?
Actually... NN959 that is simply the time the brain takes to recognize the threat. From there the brain then has to make a decision on whether to react to the threat, then the brain has to determine how to react, and finally the brain has to send the trigger to react.
In all, the average amount of time it takes for a normal human to recognize, decide, and react to a given threat/stimuli is approximately 2-3 seconds. For a trained individual, which we can assume an adventurer would be, the time drops to 1-2 seconds.
This website is an excellent study of reactions vs. actions. It is a L.E. study relating to reacting to the decision making process of when to use deadly force; however, I feel it relates well to this discussion.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Don't feed the Troll!!!!!
I may know that skeletons have DR 5/ bludgeoning but my character may not...so for me to decide to use my normal mace over my sword that I ALWAYS use is metagaming.Believing that your character couldn't see and feel the difference between a weapon doing full damage and one that was being less effective than it normally was is implausible.
I've played with GMs who have no concept of intuitive knowledge and isn't fun nor immersive. My character isn't my character, it's some set of numbers which lack any sensory perception and ability to understand the world around them.
Stupification (yes, I made that word up) of characters through cries of "meta-gaming" is rampant by GMs.
damage in game is itself metagamed
if you are playing a barbarian with 24 STR and you hit an enemy 4 times and do 52 damage...then I come along with my sorcerer/EK with a STR of 16 hits the enemy once for 6 damage that kills him...how would you argue in character that you did more damage? if your character started spouting numbers of damage in game he would be called insane and locked up.
It has nothing to do with "stupification"...the point of knowledge checks for creatures is to see for your character knows such things...saying that your character "feels" the difference between the blade and the mace in damage is metagaming
this is no different than a player knowing that a certain monster has 135 hp to start...tracking it himself...and then trying some stupid move or using a low damage spell to kill it when he knows it's only got 4 hp left...your character has no clue unless he has a special ability or spell that allows him/her to gauge hp mechanically
if your GM allows these things then that's fine...I'm not arguing right or wrong...it is metagaming if it's outside knowledge the character doesn't know that the player does
Given that you can trick people into accepting harmful spells by lying to them, I'd say you have to make all save-related decisions before you know any results.
You actually cannot do that.
Also, there are effects that could be very deceptive in magnitude. Some dragons' breath weapon is steam. Steam is invisible. Also, steam can be anywhere from a couple hundred degrees to thousands. You better believe that there is a jump in danger level there, and absolutely no way to tell the difference visually.
Uh...
Steam is very visible. Very, very visible.
I've seen a steam line rupture, it filled the room with steam so quickly, it just went white.
It was thick and very warm all of a sudden, like walking into a cloud whilst also being in death valley. All that could be seen was the steam. Why? Because steam is visible.
Boil a pot of water... you can see steam rolling up from it into the air.
As for visually telling the difference of temperature in steam, you can do that too. Hotter steam simply expands into the air faster. The hotter it gets the more energy it holds. You'd be able to tell, given the rate the steam encompasses the immediate area.
When you come up with a way to differentiate between the fireball of a 5th level wizard and a 10th level wizard (and who is probably using metamagic) get back to me. Until then it's just a fireball, and you have no idea how much damage it does. It's magic.
Just like you can't gauge how hard the barbarian is swinging his sword and whether or not he is using power attack, you have no idea how much damage he's about to do or how much damage the wizards fireball does.
You simply don't know. The onus of proof is on you. When you have some sort of actual proof I'll be willing to listen. Until that time....
By "you" are you referring to an actual person, or a character?
That is where this gets tricky. See, I'm not sure the whole choose to save or not thing specifically calls out whether it is a character decision or a player decision…. Nor does it call out if it is before or after random variables are determined. I think it is silent on that matter. But we can use some reasoning to figure it out.
The only clue we have to begin with is that "A creature can voluntarily forego a saving throw and willingly accept a spell's result."
So... the question we have to ask is this: What is the spell's result?
Is the spell's result 10d6, or is it the total of those dice after rolls, let’s say an average of 35 for this example. Is the result of the spell 10d6 damage, or is the result 35 damage?
I'm inclined to believe that the result is the totaled damage, in this case the 35 damage. So, if someone was to voluntarily forgo their save to willingly accept that result... they'd make that choice when they knew what the result was going to be. Otherwise the result isn't willingly accepted really, because they didn't even know what it was until they did... which is after the damage is totaled.
That is my gut instinct, anyway. The choice to forgo is when the result is known.
So, that gets us back to my objection to your post. Who do you mean by 'you'? The player or the character?
Because, the character might be totally unable to tell the difference between a 5d6 fireball and a 10d6 fireball, but a player can.
And, when we really get into it, how can a character ever really know the result of a spell? I mean, they might know the general idea, but does a character know the result of a fireball is exactly 35 damage? I doubt it. That sounds like player knowledge. Therefore it seems like the choice to forgo a save is in fact a metagame level option.
Believe it or not, this game is rather impossible to play without at least some metagame level decisions happening. And this seems like one of them, since to make the choice; you have to know the result of the spell, which a character cannot ever know. Clearly then it is the player who knows, and the player who willingly accepts to forgo the save for his character.
The character might be desperately trying to avoid the fireball, and yet is guaranteed to fail, because his player decided to forgo his save. Fate simply did not allow for the character to succeed. Try as that character might, it was an insurmountable challenge.
So, I think that this choice is a player choice, and he can make this choice when he knows what the exact result is going to be.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Here, let me help everyone out.
The Spell's Result
Once you know which creatures (or objects or areas) are affected, and whether those creatures have made successful saving throws (if any were allowed), you can apply whatever results a spell entails.
If this isn't clear, then using the rules is not for you.
When you come up with a way to differentiate between the fireball of a 5th level wizard and a 10th level wizard (and who is probably using metamagic) get back to me. Until then it's just a fireball, and you have no idea how much damage it does. It's magic.
Just like you can't gauge how hard the barbarian is swinging his sword and whether or not he is using power attack, you have no idea how much damage he's about to do or how much damage the wizards fireball does.
You simply don't know. The onus of proof is on you. When you have some sort of actual proof I'll be willing to listen. Until that time....
By "you" are you referring to an actual person, or a character?
The character.
In any event, Simon Legrande's post proves conclusively that the save must occur before the spell is resolved, meaning you cannot choose to see the result and choose whether or not to save based on the resolution of the spell.
|
Here, let me help everyone out.
If this isn't clear, then using the rules is not for you.The Spell's Result
Once you know which creatures (or objects or areas) are affected, and whether those creatures have made successful saving throws (if any were allowed), you can apply whatever results a spell entails.
Wow, nice find.
I think that is /thread there. Pretty cut and dry order of actions.
Here, let me help everyone out.
If this isn't clear, then using the rules is not for you.The Spell's Result
Once you know which creatures (or objects or areas) are affected, and whether those creatures have made successful saving throws (if any were allowed), you can apply whatever results a spell entails.
In any event, Simon Legrande's post proves conclusively that the save must occur before the spell is resolved, meaning you cannot choose to see the result and choose whether or not to save based on the resolution of the spell.
But it doesn't tell us whether you know how much damage the spell would do or not. The save of course has to come before the results are applied... but that isn't and hasn't been the question...
The question is do you save before the results are determined?
A question without an answer still.
The character.When you come up with a way to differentiate between the fireball of a 5th level wizard and a 10th level wizard (and who is probably using metamagic) get back to me. Until then it's just a fireball, and you have no idea how much damage it does. It's magic.
Just like you can't gauge how hard the barbarian is swinging his sword and whether or not he is using power attack, you have no idea how much damage he's about to do or how much damage the wizards fireball does.
You simply don't know. The onus of proof is on you. When you have some sort of actual proof I'll be willing to listen. Until that time....
By "you" are you referring to an actual person, or a character?
How is my character going to get in touch with you?
Common sense should have ended this last page. Unless you're allowing it from just a gameist-mechanics angle to give the PCs a gimmie, obviously the PCs in-character can't retroactively decide "oh noez too much HP hurtz!" and attempt to get out of the way.
Is taking a save or declining a save a player choice or a character choice? Does a character even know what a save is?
I'm reasonable sure that taking or declining a save is a player choice.
|
The Improved Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes and Great Fortitude feats all give evidence that the saving throw roll is before the results are revealed.
They all require that "You must decide to use this ability before the results are revealed." in relation to their ability to reroll the save. As a reroll necessarily requires a roll, this gives evidence that the roll is supposed to happen before the damage are revealed as the damage is "the result". Of coruse, given the way people can torture English and logic to get their desired result, I do not expect this to be the end of the matter.
The Improved Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes and Great Fortitude feats all give evidence that the saving throw roll is before the results are revealed.
They all require that "You must decide to use this ability before the results are revealed." in relation to their ability to reroll the save. As a reroll necessarily requires a roll, this gives evidence that the roll is supposed to happen before the damage are revealed as the damage is "the result". Of coruse, given the way people can torture English and logic to get their desired result, I do not expect this to be the end of the matter.
They require you to use them before the result of the saving throw is revealed. Ie, whether it was a successful save or not. That isn't relevant.
The 'result' in question for these abilities is the saving throw itself, not the effect of what is being saved against.
Maybe it is because I have GMd plenty, but it seems perfectly in line with the game to have a player decline a save, and yet have their character desperately trying to resist an effect.
As a player, I have declined a save vs a fireball before, and not for any particular min/max reasons, but because I wanted it to kill my character. Don't get me wrong, I wanted my character alive... but he was going to die that day, one way or another, and death by fireball seemed like the better way to go than the vampire sorcerer's energy drain. >.<
The character himself, I described, was so desperately trying to fly away that all of his attention was on the quickest escape route, and that he didn't even see the bead flying in, and with a look of shock and horror, a realization of his mistake, the flames engulfed him.
So, I as a player declined the saving throw, my character was doing everything he could to escape the danger... he just didn't though.
Is this duality too foreign for many people?
Maybe it is because I have GMd plenty, but it seems perfectly in line with the game to have a player decline a save, and yet have their character desperately trying to resist an effect.As a player, I have declined a save vs a fireball before, and not for any particular min/max reasons, but because I wanted it to kill my character. Don't get me wrong, I wanted my character alive... but he was going to die that day, one way or another, and death by fireball seemed like the better way to go than the vampire sorcerer's energy drain. >.<
The character himself, I described, was so desperately trying to fly away that all of his attention was on the quickest escape route, and that he didn't even see the bead flying in, and with a look of shock and horror, a realization of his mistake, the flames engulfed him.
So, I as a player declined the saving throw, my character was doing everything he could to escape the danger... he just didn't though.
Is this duality too foreign for many people?
Nobody said you weren't allowed to house rule it however you like. This is a rules question, the rules are clear on the order of operations.
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
Uh...
Steam is very visible. Very, very visible.
I've seen a steam line rupture, it filled the room with steam so quickly, it just went white.
It was thick and very warm all of a sudden, like walking into a cloud whilst also being in death valley. All that could be seen was the steam. Why? Because steam is visible.
Boil a pot of water... you can see steam rolling up from it into the air.
As for visually telling the difference of temperature in steam, you can do that too. Hotter steam simply expands into the air faster. The hotter it gets the more energy it holds. You'd be able to tell, given the rate the steam encompasses the immediate area.
Science pedant:
Actually you can.Given that you can trick people into accepting harmful spells by lying to them, I'd say you have to make all save-related decisions before you know any results.You actually cannot do that.
No... you can't.
Potions: If I drink a potion, do I automatically forgo my save against that potion?
No. Nothing in the potion rules says it changes whether or not you get a saving throw against the spell stored in the potion. Even if someone hands you a potion of poison and tells you it’s a potion of cure serious wounds, you still get a save.
Nobody said you weren't allowed to house rule it however you like. This is a rules question, the rules are clear on the order of operations.
Maybe it is because I have GMd plenty, but it seems perfectly in line with the game to have a player decline a save, and yet have their character desperately trying to resist an effect.As a player, I have declined a save vs a fireball before, and not for any particular min/max reasons, but because I wanted it to kill my character. Don't get me wrong, I wanted my character alive... but he was going to die that day, one way or another, and death by fireball seemed like the better way to go than the vampire sorcerer's energy drain. >.<
The character himself, I described, was so desperately trying to fly away that all of his attention was on the quickest escape route, and that he didn't even see the bead flying in, and with a look of shock and horror, a realization of his mistake, the flames engulfed him.
So, I as a player declined the saving throw, my character was doing everything he could to escape the danger... he just didn't though.
Is this duality too foreign for many people?
Did you just tell me to houserule a non-rules based, not-in-game player action?
Haha. Dude... That, is kinda sad that you don't see the difference between in game choices and out of game choices.
Rofl, I guess I'm going to houserule that I'm getting some pizza for dinner tonight too.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nobody said you weren't allowed to house rule it however you like. This is a rules question, the rules are clear on the order of operations.
Maybe it is because I have GMd plenty, but it seems perfectly in line with the game to have a player decline a save, and yet have their character desperately trying to resist an effect.As a player, I have declined a save vs a fireball before, and not for any particular min/max reasons, but because I wanted it to kill my character. Don't get me wrong, I wanted my character alive... but he was going to die that day, one way or another, and death by fireball seemed like the better way to go than the vampire sorcerer's energy drain. >.<
The character himself, I described, was so desperately trying to fly away that all of his attention was on the quickest escape route, and that he didn't even see the bead flying in, and with a look of shock and horror, a realization of his mistake, the flames engulfed him.
So, I as a player declined the saving throw, my character was doing everything he could to escape the danger... he just didn't though.
Is this duality too foreign for many people?
Did you just tell me to houserule a non-rules based, not-in-game player action?
Haha. Dude... That, is kinda sad that you don't see the difference between in game choices and out of game choices.
Rofl, I guess I'm going to houserule that I'm getting some pizza for dinner tonight too.
Oh Remy, you loveable scamp. Raising a week old thread to get the last word...
Design Manager
|
I'm sorry, but there is no way you'd be able to process the difference between minimum and maximum damage that you think might happen in that short amount of time enough to make a logical decision to dodge it or not. You either see the blast and decide to try and avoid it or not. It's that simple. You are looking way too deep and trying too hard to put realism into magic.Wow...that is just flat out wrong on so many levels.
1. You absolutely can asses a threat as you seek to avoid it. Happens in sports ALL THE TIME. Running bacs are instantly evaluating decisions on whether to cut back, run through someone, run past them, or spin. More importantly, these reactions can be fine-tuned and trained.
And yet I've never seen a running back stop and gauge how much an actively exploding grenade will hurt him and whether he should dodge out of the way, which is much closer to what we're talking about.
Forget your completely irrelevant sports analogy, go ask a soldier what it's like to react to a grenade or IED going off nearby. You don't have tiome to process what's occuring and make a measured reaction, your body reacts on instinct to escape the threat, and hopefully you've drilled the right instincts in.