![]() Most questions of this nature usually end up with multiple interpretations because the interpreter cannot come up with the order of specificity. It's heavily implied by the way the rules are written, and it's the only way a DM can consistently come up with results for any combination of rules. Note: The rules don't call out a LIFO stack specifically. The Darkstalker ability wipes out the all-around vision ability in this conflict, leaving the flanking ability to apply its +2 bonus. In this way, we can think of conflict resolution as a last in, first out (LIFO) stack. We know that this must be true because if all-around vision was more specific than Darkstalker, the feat would literally be useless, because any all-around vision creature would trump the feat that was designed to defeat all-around vision. There's only one logical order that we can apply these rules, so we stack them up: flanking, all-around vision, Darkstalker. Third, we know that Darkstalkers specifically target creatures like Bob. Second, we know that Bob cannot be flanked. First, we know that Derek has an assistant, Nancy, who is threatening Bob, so Derek is flanking. Again, we turn to SBG to determine which one is correct. ![]() Now, thanks to the Darkstalker feat, we have three rules in play, with multiple contradictions. We're already set up for flanking, so Derek decides to attack. Notice how the general rule was observed first, followed by the specific rule, which was observed second, but applied first, negating the flanking rule. The all-around vision rule is a specific exception to the flanking rule, thus negating the bonus. The most general rule is obviously the flanking rule. Since there's a conflict in the rules, we depend on Specific Beats General (SBG) to determine which rule applies in this case. Second, we also know that the beholder's vision is an exception to flanking. First, we know that they are in flanking position. So, since it's still Nancy's turn, she decides to attack. For each attack, we determine which rules apply from least specific to most specific, then resolve them in reverse order. I've included the relevant text and links below.įlanking targets any creature in the correct formation, all-around vision targets flankers, and Darkstalker targets all-around vision. ![]() Rules are always evaluated from most specific to least specific, through a process I refer to as "targeting," and what is specifically referred to as "specific beats general." In other words, a rule that targets another rule is more specific than the rule or rules it targets, and will apply first. However, it's still Nancy's turn, so she is designated as the flanker, Derek is the assistant, and Bob's the potential victim. Now, both Derek and Nancy could flank, according to the rule on flanking. It's Nancy's initiative, however, so she takes a free 5 foot step to her left. = 5 ft squareĪt this point, neither Derek nor Nancy are flanking Bob. It's the middle of combat, and the map currently looks like this. ![]() We have Derek the Darkstalker, Bob the Beholder, and Nancy the non-Darkstalker. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |