Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 kimby Jun 11, 2009 13:52:41	The other day I had a "debate" at the table with a player about what I call the "Ask First" rule in the CCG. I was informed all you have to do is ask, the answer is "not important," that all you had to do was ask. I looked up the rule and showed it to the player, especially the part where it said if it's "OK or not to damage or hinder" the other player's PC. I was told that the meaning was "ambiguous" and it could be interpreted any number of ways. I was also accused of playing "word games." If this is true, then why would the powers that be put it in such words? I take the rule to mean, if player 1 says "NO!!!, you can't drop that fireball on my PC" and the wizard's player does it any way, then that's disrespecting player 1. Is there a more clear ruling on this? If so, where? Again, I'm tired of "debating" rules like this when I would rather playing the game. Sorry, if this has been addressed before. I didn't have time to sort all the posts. Thanks in advance...
#2 rexracerjr Jun 11, 2009 13:54:52	This should be on the RPGA section of the boards...
#3 Stigger Jun 11, 2009 13:57:11	Why would anyone in their right mind drop a fireball on another player... damn. Someone doesn't play well with others...
#4 red_wizard Jun 11, 2009 14:04:19	Why would anyone in their right mind drop a fireball on another player... damn. Someone doesn't play well with others... Depends on how many Enemies you can hit/ damage, and how much HP the PC has VS any IC conflict between the two. Personally, I've found this a shaky bit of ground, as more often than not, the inclination of many players, is to run in swinging, and be the first one to take something down. Everyone likes to be the star, but they don't often realize that the caster in the back, can't drop what he'd like, for fear of injuring his head strong companions. At the end of the day, if teams don't work together, then everyone must be responsible for the damage they give and take, regardless of it's source. -RW
#5 trobon Jun 11, 2009 14:08:27	Depends on how many Enemies you can hit/ damage, and how much HP the PC has VS any IC conflict between the two. Personally, I've found this a shaky bit of ground, as more often than not, the inclination of many players, is to run in swinging, and be the first one to take something down. Everyone likes to be the star, but they don't often realize that the caster in the back, can't drop what he'd like, for fear of injuring his head strong companions. At the end of the day, if teams don't work together, then everyone must be responsible for the damage they give and take, regardless of it's source. -RW This. I don't think anyone is planning on dropping the center of a fireball on another player. However, we're talking about bursts of 3, 4 or 5 here for some spells. This doesn't exactly make it easy to avoid other players always, especially if some ranger is trying to get in the middle of the enemies.
#6 newpaintbrush Jun 11, 2009 14:25:20	The other day I had a "debate" . . . I was informed all you have to do is ask, the answer is "not important," that all you had to do was ask. . . . I was told . . . I was also accused of playing "word games." I'm tired of "debating" rules. Ban the player. The DM has to run the show. If the DM is going to say that the rule should be interpreted "x" way, it is interpreted "x" way. That's all there is to it. There must be ONE person that determines the rule, and at a table of D&D, it's the DM. That's all there is to it. Of course I encourage allowing players to show the rule. After all, let's all be reasonable here! But allowing the players to dictate to you what this is and that is? Unacceptable. Anyways - if you ban the player, if you as the DM were really being unreasonable, at worst, the players will find another DM. Oh well. Anyways, problem solved. If it's the player that's unreasonable, well, problem solved.
#7 Stigger Jun 11, 2009 14:26:47	I guess... still strikes me as one of those times when you use a different tactic instead of hitting your own guys. As to the matter at hand, I'd say it was the other guy who was playing word games by trying to exploit ambiguity to get their own way. No idea what the actual rules say though, as I'm completely unfamiliar with the RPGA or its guidelines.
#8 tallric_kruush Jun 11, 2009 14:40:19	I guess... still strikes me as one of those times when you use a different tactic instead of hitting your own guys. This immediately made me think of Acquistions, Inc. of podcast fame. Binwin, the dwarf Fighter, is known for being toasted by Jim Darkmagic, the party's Wizard. I mention this because it sets a good example. Binwin's player (I can't remember who played whom) wasn't thrilled to be constantly fried by Jim Darkmagic, but he generally took it with mild grumbling because it was a tactically sound choice. If Binwin had objected, Jim probably wouldn't have made a habit of singeing him every encounter. If a player objects to be the target of willful "friendly fire", then his fellow players shouldn't make a habit of nuking him. Maybe, under certain circumstances, he'll agree to it now and then. Maybe, the other PCs occassionally nuke him anyway if the rest of the group is in agreement that it's by far the best option. It should never become a practice, though, if the victim objects. Disrespecting another player is a quick way to wreck a campaign. Like Stigger, I can't speak to RPGA Rules. I will say that the above principle of mutual respect should be all you need, in my opinion. If a player doesn't want to respect his fellow gamer's wishes in this regard, maybe he shouldn't be at the same table.
#9 archtyrant_terevoth Jun 11, 2009 15:03:39	Why would anyone in their right mind drop a fireball on another player... damn. Someone doesn't play well with others... Plenty of good reasons. Sometimes the PC will take very little damage from it (fire resistance, high reflex, evasion) and the monsters will be damaged, meaning the risk is acceptable. If you can deal potentially 70 damage to the enemy at the cost of 15 damage to your party member, you're probably better off doing it than tossing a magic missile.
#10 Chris24601 Jun 11, 2009 15:05:33	I generally avoid dropping it on a PC like the plague. The only exception in our LFR group is the tiefling paladin and then only if I'm using a fire spell and even then I always ask first and if he says no, I do something else. Once I get war wizardry at level 11 I imagine it will be much less of an issue though (-5 to hit your allies and half damage even if you do will make dropping fire spells on the tiefling paladin pretty much a non-issue... Even if I did hit him, I'd have to 20 points of fire damage on a direct hit to even scratch him).
#11 CCS Jun 11, 2009 15:28:05	Ah, RPGA silliness.... Were I to ever find myself in an RPGA game with this question I'd start by asking the DM.... If I had to ask the player, & it turned out that they chose to veto my action? Then I'd make it a point to never do anything that could directly affect them - including attacking "thier" enemies, using my resources on them, etc. Nothing bad, AND nothing good. If that resulted in them having a tough fight? Oh well.... But the chances of me ever being in an RPGA game? 0%.
#12 Istaran Jun 11, 2009 15:35:01	I see the OP has got Shawn Merwin's response on the RPGA issue in the RPGA forums. (Shawn Merwin is a global administrator for the campaign.) In short, you cannot attack another PC without permission (with a specific exception for being mind controlled by an NPC of course). In my local area we attack each other occasionally in LFR, always with permission. We have a lot of tactically minded players and can usually agree to whether the risk to the PC is worth the potential benefit of hitting additional targets. The PC being targetted is always respected if he wishes to not be hit, but usually the question isn't even asked unless it's something the victim would agree to.
#13 Vyvyan_Basterd_02 Jun 11, 2009 15:59:24	Ah, RPGA silliness.... Were I to ever find myself in an RPGA game with this question I'd start by asking the DM.... If I had to ask the player, & it turned out that they chose to veto my action? Then I'd make it a point to never do anything that could directly affect them - including attacking "thier" enemies, using my resources on them, etc. Nothing bad, AND nothing good. If that resulted in them having a tough fight? Oh well.... But the chances of me ever being in an RPGA game? 0%. Would you insist that your tactic is superior to your ally's? Or would you discuss your tactic with him first? The rule is there to keep asshats from killing other player's characters just because they think it is funny. I don't play LFR, but our home table has the same respect for each other to ask if it's OK to burn an ally before doing it. Most of the time it does happen is because the targetted player actually asks to be fireballed.
#14 lofgren Jun 11, 2009 16:11:51	The other day I had a "debate" at the table with a player about what I call the "Ask First" rule in the CCG. I was informed all you have to do is ask, the answer is "not important," that all you had to do was ask. I looked up the rule and showed it to the player, especially the part where it said if it's "OK or not to damage or hinder" the other player's PC. I was told that the meaning was "ambiguous" and it could be interpreted any number of ways. I was also accused of playing "word games." Your player is, not to put too fine a point on it, a ****ing moron. If the rule was that you could hurt somebody whenever you please as long as there is fair warning, it would say "Tell the player before you hurt them." The very fact that is says, "Ask the player if you can hurt them" implies a conditional. I find it extremely difficult to believe that this player could believe that the statement above does not implicitly suggest that you may only harm another player depending on the answer to the question. Honestly, I'd ban this guy based on this information. Anybody so desperate to kills PCs that he would rely on reasoning this slippery – and even try to turn around and accuse you of playing word games! – is almost certainly not a good team player.
#15 xxphilosopherxx Jun 11, 2009 16:12:18	This is kind of silly. The rules aren't going to tell you what is and is not respectful. That kind of thing is decided upon by general consensus and should be common sense. Obviously, in my thinking, if somone says, "no, i don't want you to burn my character crispy with a fireball," and the other player says, "too bad, i asked and that's all i need to do," then there's a problem with respect. Practically no games provide rules of respect, but where they do, they're minimal, at best... ultimately, it's up to us to consider the feelings of others and act accordingly. If we fail too often, we won't have friends to play with.
#16 midgardserpent Jun 11, 2009 16:13:32	Why would anyone in their right mind drop a fireball on another player... damn. Someone doesn't play well with others... The Dragonborn Fighter in our party has "Thank You" written on the back of his armor. He WANTS the wizard to blast him, since he doesn't get bloodied fast enough in his opinion.
#17 rayoman Jun 11, 2009 22:47:39	Why would anyone in their right mind drop a fireball on another player... damn. Someone doesn't play well with others... There is a feat in Arcane Power or the PHB2 that gives the caster a +1 to hit or +1 to damage if an ally is in the Area of the spell. Don't worry, if I was a Tiefling defender in the party I would probably say, "Center the fireball on me!"
#18 trismagestus Jun 11, 2009 23:22:01	The Dragonborn Fighter in our party has "Thank You" written on the back of his armor. He WANTS the wizard to blast him, since he doesn't get bloodied fast enough in his opinion. My Shifter Fighter agrees totally. PS. The sign is an awesome idea - I might leave it at buying the mage some nice ingredients for his spells occasionally, though ;)
#19 Kensan_Oni Jun 12, 2009 1:35:41	I remember back in 3.5 when I wanted the Fireballs dropped on my Rogue... and there are still times where you want it to happen... and you know, if I am about to be swamped by lots of minions, go ahead and drop that fireball. I can take it. Just make sure the Leader is ready to fix me up if that fireball duds on everyone but me. Besides, this is what War Wizard and all those reduce damage to ally feats are for.
#20 Stigger Jun 12, 2009 1:42:25	I guess I'm from a different school of gaming... that sort of thing just wasn't done where I gamed. But hey, if you're good with it, fair play.
#21 cyberianhusky Jun 12, 2009 2:05:23	Even though its clearly NOT permitted in the RPGA rules the way that player was claiming, I just want to add that its an incredibly arrogant and disrespectful thing to do... noone in my D&D group would ever do such a thing without the player's permission... hell, on more than one occasion Ive suggested it to the wizard player to drop a fireball on me, if its tactically advantageous and if Im likely to still be standing afterwards... but not if Im in a precarious position with regards to hitpoints or its effectively trading my hitpoints for potentially equal or less hitpoints from a tougher enemy.
#22 festivus Jun 15, 2009 12:45:07	I see the OP has got Shawn Merwin's response on the RPGA issue in the RPGA forums. (Shawn Merwin is a global administrator for the campaign.) In short, you cannot attack another PC without permission (with a specific exception for being mind controlled by an NPC of course). In my local area we attack each other occasionally in LFR, always with permission. We have a lot of tactically minded players and can usually agree to whether the risk to the PC is worth the potential benefit of hitting additional targets. The PC being targetted is always respected if he wishes to not be hit, but usually the question isn't even asked unless it's something the victim would agree to. This is exactly how I run it. You can drop a area effect on a friendly only if you have their blessing. Often times, it leads to a short tactical discussion (which I allow a little more time for than what might normally be accepted), where the friendly target offers to evacuate the area if the caster would just ready for that to happen.
#23 markusdark Jun 18, 2009 15:45:23	One of my group comes from the cold north defender, so when he's surrounded by baddies, I drop some cold damage AOE's on him. He likes it. I do, though, check with him first to make sure that he'll like the damage or not. On another side note, a player whose character my character was constantly mocking/tormenting verbally decided that when we all got Filth Fever to use Glittergold's Gambit to have me reroll my successful heal check and I then failed it. I laughed so hard, I nearly... well anyways - and here is a nice 'harassment' usage of a power that actually is intended TO target an ally.
#24 bverji Jul 01, 2009 18:24:17	Your player is, not to put too fine a point on it, a ****ing moron. If the rule was that you could hurt somebody whenever you please as long as there is fair warning, it would say "Tell the player before you hurt them." The very fact that is says, "Ask the player if you can hurt them" implies a conditional. I find it extremely difficult to believe that this player could believe that the statement above does not implicitly suggest that you may only harm another player depending on the answer to the question. Honestly, I'd ban this guy based on this information. Anybody so desperate to kills PCs that he would rely on reasoning this slippery – and even try to turn around and accuse you of playing word games! – is almost certainly not a good team player. I agree with you for the most point, lofgren. However, this type of functional illiterate is common. A lot of people out there do such little reading they just can't grasp the logical flow of writing conventions. I'm would not be surprised if the player actually interpreted it this way (although granted, shadowed by his own bias).
#25 WolfStar76 Jul 02, 2009 12:18:37	I agree with you for the most point, lofgren. However, this type of functional illiterate is common. A lot of people out there do such little reading they just can't grasp the logical flow of writing conventions. I'm would not be surprised if the player actually interpreted it this way (although granted, shadowed by his own bias). The point remains the same - regardless of interpretation - that the LFR Global Admins have spoken on the subject multiple times. While it doesn't explicitly state you need to both ask and receive permission - receive it you must. Any and all Dungeon Masters for the RPGA/LFR are strongly encouraged to rule in this manner, and I can promise you that if it comes up at a convention where RPGA HQ is present, we'll expect it to be run as such.