Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 NamelessHero May 29, 2015 9:17:31	So an interesting situation came up in a game where I was DMing last night, and I wanted to get some feedback from other DMs about whether this ruling was reasonable, unfair, or somewhere inbetween.   I was running one of the sidequests from  POTA for Adventurer’s league. The party of three, (barbarian, warlock, monk) all level 11 or higher, entered the cavern of an adult black dragon. The module calls for the dragon to be hidden before the characters arrive, and have the PCs interact with a Major Illusion of a humanoid. During that time the dragon remains hidden. One of my PCs wears a Robe of Eyes. So I ruled that he was able to see the dragon despite being hidden. So the Barbarian wearing the Robe of eyes points out the dragon to the other players. The Warlock (who cannot see the dragon and only has the general direction of it, as pointed out by the barbarian) lobs a fireball in that area, which initiates combat. I ruled that since the warlock cannot see the dragon and it is hidden from him, he has a 25% chance of the lobbing the fireball off target. If he rolled higher than 25% his fireball would go off without incident, if he rolled lower the fireball would miss. The player complained and made a big stink about  “that's not how fireball works” and argued that it should be able to hit that area without missing. I had him roll his percentage dice, he made it, and his fireball went off as usual. What do you guys think? Was this a fair ruling or completely unreasonable? What would you do? It seemed to me as though the player was using metagame knowledge to gain an unfair advantage. I don’t have a problem with players metagaming a little bit, and it is certainly par for course for our table; but I don’t think he should be able to perfectly hit a target he cannot see,  which is hidden from him, and only knows a general location through proxy.
#2 bawylie May 29, 2015 9:27:02	That's not how fireball works. You pick a point and there it goes. Did he pick the right point? It seems to me the Barbarian told him where it was.    Id have let it fly.   If, however, you believe there was a chance he might miss the point, the suggested method of resolution is an ability check, not a percentile check. Percentile takes the wizard's ability out of the equation. If I were a wizard trained in Arcana, I would resent a percentile chance to fail a spell I know and cast and prep on the reg. I'd have less antipathy on an ability check.    But. Truly. I pick a point. The dragon is in the blast radius or not. So I don't see where chance comes in.    For that matter, the dragon gets a save.
#3 DemoMonkey May 29, 2015 10:02:53	Heh. You could have had the barbarian make an INT or CHA check to see how well he described the point to the warlock. Or better yet, have the barbarian player turn away from the map and then describe where the dragon is to the warlock player.   Or just given the dragon advantage on it's saving throw.   But the "Percent miss" chance? Yeah, not a good call. Learning experience!
#4 Bumpo May 29, 2015 10:10:46	1) Robe of Eyes just gives Advantage on Perception checks - not an automatic success. Youu chose to rule that it was an auto success - which is within your right as DM - but not the necessary ruling. Does the module give the Dragon's stealth roll? It may have intended for there to be no chance of the party detecting the Dragon ('no uncertainty'=no perception roll), in which case the Robe of Eyes wouldn't help. Or you could have rolled the Dragon's Stealth (maybe with Advantage, since he had time to make sure he was well hidden?) cs the Barbarian's Passive Perception (+5 for the Advantage granted by the Robe).   2) I have no problem with the percentage miss chance - I would frame it more as the Barbarian and Warlock miscommunicating on where exactly they were talking about. Or maybe give the Dragon Advantage on its save... whatever.   3) Nothing happens until Initiative is rolled. Warlock says "I cast Fireball"; roll initiative. Maybe the Dragon gets to go first, maybe not. Maybe the Dragon chooses to attack when he hears the barbarian telling the Warlock where he is - roll Initiative.   How was the Dragon Hidden?
#5 NamelessHero May 29, 2015 11:10:18	Bumpo wrote:
#6 bawylie May 29, 2015 11:14:33	If total cover, then fireball wouldn't work, I believe.
#7 iserith May 29, 2015 11:26:53	I think the warlock player's objection is a valid one, even if I don't agree that it should necessarily be voiced during play. He picks the spot where it is centered. If that happens to be within 20 feet of the dragon, then that dragon is making a save. If it's not within 20 feet of the dragon, then the dragon does not make a save. Of course, you'd be within your rights to say that something about the barbarian's directions were unclear or inexact and ask for an appropriate ability check from the warlock to parse it sufficiently to target appropriately. Setting it a 25% chance of failure is kind of a backwards way of saying "Make a DC 10 Wisdom (Insight) check to understand the barbarian's ravings and target it such that the hidden dragon is in the blast radius" (where the warlock's Wisdom (Insight) bonus is +4) - or however the math works out to 25% chance of failure otherwise. This would allow the player to expend resources (if he had them) to improve the odds of being on target - Inspiration, bardic inspiration dice, or the like. You might also have just given the dragon advantage on its save to account for the uncertainty of the targetting.   I don't, however, see what "metagaming" has to do with this. This is all within the narrative: Barbarian can see dragon. Barbarian points out direction, distance to dragon. Warlock follows the barbarian's instructions and launches the fireball. Now it's on the DM to decide whether the outcome of the action is certain or uncertain.   At the end of the day, it sounds like it worked out fine, so no bigs. Thanks for sharing the adjudication!
#8 pukunui May 29, 2015 14:21:18	Firstly, as written, the dragon is technically a shadow dragon. (Among other things, this would've given her resistance to the fireball's damage).   Secondly, I wouldn't have ruled that the barbarian can automatically see anything and everything. I might have said that the shadows looked kind of draconic but that maybe it was just his eyes playing tricks on him.   Thirdly, when the warlock cast his fireball, I would've just given the dragon advantage on her save.
#9 Bloodscythe May 29, 2015 15:21:11	Not sure how any PC would see a dragon with total cover, in total darkness, and a 27 stealth roll... that's a pretty impactful houserule usage of the robe.   Assuming the barbarian could point out the wall of barrels, the warlock certainly can hit it with a fireball.  I would've likely ruled that the dragon didn't take any damage from the fireball since the fireball would've erupted on the other side of the wall and, though it can go around corners, it wouldn't have wrapped completely around the barrels and struck the dragon.  The wall of barrels, however, would now be engulfed in flame and falling all over the place.  Rolling barrels of fiery death, anyone?