Sarren wrote:I beg to differ on manuever while tied to a chair. In certain circumstances, you could actually do a maneuver.
Such as when you feint to bob one way but shift the other, with an outstanding being you shift and the chair breaks or something, and releasing you.
So this got me thinking about maneuver some more. This is exactly the sort of thing a player will try to do. And I don't blame them. It makes sense. They want to use it to get a card from an approved action, with a player's call of escaping. I think that's legit and fun, and I might allow it. (And I think the idea here is that you ARE immobile for the most part, you're trying to break free, but obviously not totally immobile.)
But why is the villain stymied/vulnerable from it, especially if they aren't in reach? And why do they have to oppose the villain's Dex/Maneuver to get this effect, since they could do this when the villain isn't in reach? And if they don't, is it really a maneuver? Shouldn't it just be a Dex check? It gets a little weird.
I'd say by RAW the answer is that this clearly isn't a maneuver. But hey, GM's call is a thing that is even called out in the skill description (wisely in this case) so it's still legit.
But I dislike the position this particular GM's call puts me in, as I feel like some uses of Maneuver are cheesy and require too much suspension of disbelief. And players are motivated to put me into those situations where I have to make that call because they are motivated to get that card due to power gamer urges (which I'm ok with, not criticizing them...that type of play can be fun too.)
I digress though, I've derailed this thread way too much and apologize for that, I seem to be guilty of it more than most.