Quote Originally Posted by Quertus View Post
Why does the opportunity to resist the spell make its existence sit better with you?
One of the nice trends ive seen happen with D&D is for magic to be less automatic. There are more chances of failure in the form of attack rolls and saving throws rather than relying on magic to counteract magic (spell resistance, miss chance, contingencie, etc). The fewer instances of ‘nope, it just happens’ the better for me, as TTRPGs for me derive a lot of their enjoyment from their uncertainty, that chance of success and failure. The roll of the dice is interesting, automatically reading someone’s morality takes a chunk of fun out of it.
Like, having no save leads to things like Belkar’s trusty sheet of lead.

Quote Originally Posted by Quertus View Post
Grrr…

IMO, the trolley problem breaks down as follows:

If I do nothing, I am not at fault. I did not set this trolley on this path. If I act, I am at fault.

Moreover, if I act, I am *legally* at fault, and can be charged accordingly.

Moreover, I may be *wrong*, and what I *perceive* as a threat might not actually be a problem (shooting a film, for example). If I am wrong, then it could be a choice between 0 deaths and 1 death.

In order to remove all those excess variables… well, it depends on which aspect you *want* to evaluate.
Ah, so you’d glow purple then :P