Mixing
Is it balanced to allow “called shots†to occur on a natural 20 on attack rolls?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
While running a session, I found that some of the players would like to "call shots".
Now while I don't want to allow "crit on desire" by always aiming for the head/eyes/etc., I was thinking about allowing it on a natural 20 - it's already guaranteed to hit & also do critical damage (most of the time), so what would be the effect of allowing this, assuming that the extra damage from "hitting in the head" would be the same as the normal crit bonus?
Has anyone tried running something similar to this? Does anyone see potential issues? I'm looking at it as a way to allow the "fluff" without really changing the mechanics of it at all.
Related question: Aiming at specific body parts
dnd-5e balance house-rules critical-hit locational-damage
edited 2 hours ago
V2Blast
16.2k239104
asked 2 hours ago
user2813274
393139
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
While running a session, I found that some of the players would like to "call shots".
Now while I don't want to allow "crit on desire" by always aiming for the head/eyes/etc., I was thinking about allowing it on a natural 20 - it's already guaranteed to hit & also do critical damage (most of the time), so what would be the effect of allowing this, assuming that the extra damage from "hitting in the head" would be the same as the normal crit bonus?
Has anyone tried running something similar to this? Does anyone see potential issues? I'm looking at it as a way to allow the "fluff" without really changing the mechanics of it at all.
Related question: Aiming at specific body parts
dnd-5e balance house-rules critical-hit locational-damage
edited 2 hours ago
V2Blast
16.2k239104
asked 2 hours ago
user2813274
393139
3
For clarification...what extra effects do you see striking body parts to have? From your post, I can't tell if you're talking pure fluff, or if you have a table of extra effects...
– guildsbounty
2 hours ago
Purely fluff, but in general the normal crit damage
– user2813274
1 hour ago
1
To clarify, there would be no mechanical benefit to the called shot? It's just like a regular critical hit but with a narrated target?
– David Coffron
1 hour ago
1
"Purely fluff, but in general the normal crit damage" So the question is — is your fluff balanced?
– enkryptor
1 hour ago
3
@user2813274 I'm confused-- if it's just a narrated target with no additional mechanical features, what question remains? And if you intend to potentially allow other effects, do you have any guidelines on what those might be?
– Upper_Case
1 hour ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
While running a session, I found that some of the players would like to "call shots".
Now while I don't want to allow "crit on desire" by always aiming for the head/eyes/etc., I was thinking about allowing it on a natural 20 - it's already guaranteed to hit & also do critical damage (most of the time), so what would be the effect of allowing this, assuming that the extra damage from "hitting in the head" would be the same as the normal crit bonus?
Has anyone tried running something similar to this? Does anyone see potential issues? I'm looking at it as a way to allow the "fluff" without really changing the mechanics of it at all.
Related question: Aiming at specific body parts
dnd-5e balance house-rules critical-hit locational-damage
edited 2 hours ago
V2Blast
16.2k239104
asked 2 hours ago
user2813274
393139
While running a session, I found that some of the players would like to "call shots".
Now while I don't want to allow "crit on desire" by always aiming for the head/eyes/etc., I was thinking about allowing it on a natural 20 - it's already guaranteed to hit & also do critical damage (most of the time), so what would be the effect of allowing this, assuming that the extra damage from "hitting in the head" would be the same as the normal crit bonus?
Has anyone tried running something similar to this? Does anyone see potential issues? I'm looking at it as a way to allow the "fluff" without really changing the mechanics of it at all.
Related question: Aiming at specific body parts
dnd-5e balance house-rules critical-hit locational-damage
dnd-5e balance house-rules critical-hit locational-damage
edited 2 hours ago
V2Blast
16.2k239104
asked 2 hours ago
user2813274
393139
edited 2 hours ago
V2Blast
16.2k239104
asked 2 hours ago
user2813274
393139
edited 2 hours ago
V2Blast
16.2k239104
edited 2 hours ago
V2Blast
16.2k239104
edited 2 hours ago
V2Blast
16.2k239104
16.2k239104
asked 2 hours ago
user2813274
393139
asked 2 hours ago
user2813274
393139
asked 2 hours ago
user2813274
393139
393139
3
For clarification...what extra effects do you see striking body parts to have? From your post, I can't tell if you're talking pure fluff, or if you have a table of extra effects...
– guildsbounty
2 hours ago
Purely fluff, but in general the normal crit damage
– user2813274
1 hour ago
1
To clarify, there would be no mechanical benefit to the called shot? It's just like a regular critical hit but with a narrated target?
– David Coffron
1 hour ago
1
"Purely fluff, but in general the normal crit damage" So the question is — is your fluff balanced?
– enkryptor
1 hour ago
3
@user2813274 I'm confused-- if it's just a narrated target with no additional mechanical features, what question remains? And if you intend to potentially allow other effects, do you have any guidelines on what those might be?
– Upper_Case
1 hour ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
3
For clarification...what extra effects do you see striking body parts to have? From your post, I can't tell if you're talking pure fluff, or if you have a table of extra effects...
– guildsbounty
2 hours ago
Purely fluff, but in general the normal crit damage
– user2813274
1 hour ago
1
To clarify, there would be no mechanical benefit to the called shot? It's just like a regular critical hit but with a narrated target?
– David Coffron
1 hour ago
1
"Purely fluff, but in general the normal crit damage" So the question is — is your fluff balanced?
– enkryptor
1 hour ago
3
@user2813274 I'm confused-- if it's just a narrated target with no additional mechanical features, what question remains? And if you intend to potentially allow other effects, do you have any guidelines on what those might be?
– Upper_Case
1 hour ago
3
3
For clarification...what extra effects do you see striking body parts to have? From your post, I can't tell if you're talking pure fluff, or if you have a table of extra effects...
– guildsbounty
2 hours ago
For clarification...what extra effects do you see striking body parts to have? From your post, I can't tell if you're talking pure fluff, or if you have a table of extra effects...
– guildsbounty
2 hours ago
Purely fluff, but in general the normal crit damage
– user2813274
1 hour ago
Purely fluff, but in general the normal crit damage
– user2813274
1 hour ago
1
1
To clarify, there would be no mechanical benefit to the called shot? It's just like a regular critical hit but with a narrated target?
– David Coffron
1 hour ago
To clarify, there would be no mechanical benefit to the called shot? It's just like a regular critical hit but with a narrated target?
– David Coffron
1 hour ago
1
1
"Purely fluff, but in general the normal crit damage" So the question is — is your fluff balanced?
– enkryptor
1 hour ago
"Purely fluff, but in general the normal crit damage" So the question is — is your fluff balanced?
– enkryptor
1 hour ago
3
3
@user2813274 I'm confused-- if it's just a narrated target with no additional mechanical features, what question remains? And if you intend to potentially allow other effects, do you have any guidelines on what those might be?
– Upper_Case
1 hour ago
@user2813274 I'm confused-- if it's just a narrated target with no additional mechanical features, what question remains? And if you intend to potentially allow other effects, do you have any guidelines on what those might be?
– Upper_Case
1 hour ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
As long as the crit is unchanged, then it is balanced.
If nothing is different besides the narration, then by definition the mechanics of the game remain balanced, at least to a first approximation.
Crits are meant to represent great successes in the midst of combat, so in most cases they are a nice fit for called shots. It's a cool opportunity for you or the player to add some flair to the combat.
Beware of extreme called shots.
There are some called shots that simply cannot be successful without any mechanical implications. Consider these examples, where a player crits and wants the called shot to be: a decapitation with a greatsword; an arrow in the enemy's only eye; a strike that cripples a wing.
These called shots are admittedly extreme, but nonetheless it's clear that if they are successful they must come with unbalancing consequences: death, blindness, and loss of flight respectively.
If you want to preserve the balance, your narration will have to undermine called shot like those so that the enemy only takes damage. The problem is that those called shots now feel like relative failures instead of unequivocal successes because the player hoped for something more besides damage.
You have to manage your player's expectations
"Called shots" is not the term I would use to manage such expectations, because the default assumption is that called shots can include extra effects besides damage. Instead, ask "Why don't you describe this crit?" or "How do you want me to describe this crit?". Questions like these provide just as much opportunity for flair and narration, without any of the expectations of a called shot.
answered 35 mins ago
Ruse
3,700541
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
You're the GM, and so if your decision is that called shots are narrative flavor only, and no mechanical effects are allowed, then gameplay won't change in any way and there will be no balancing issues to deal with.
If you allow for any mechanical changes then the balance question comes down to what specific new things you allow, and not a general-case sort of answer.
That in mind, in general I would think that there are two issues, the former relevant if you do not allow any mechanical changes and the latter relevant if you do:
A called shot is a just a more difficult kind of shot, one that tries to hit a smaller and/or more mobile target. You try for the harder shot because there is some benefit to doing so-- maybe you damage an opponent's leg, slowing them down, or knock the weapon out of their hand, etc. I can't imagine any table bothering with a called shot that does nothing-- why not just let them narrate their combat moves however they want, if there is no mechanical difference? So I would think that any table where called shots are possible is one where players will constantly want them to do things beyond a garden-variety crit. If your players expect more than nothing from this, then you can expect regular conflict and disappointment from them.
Calling a shot after the roll seems odd to me. Since called shots are more just a harder kind of regular shot, I would expect a called shot to have a higher difficulty than a regular one. If you allow the called shot declaration after rolling, then a player will essentially be taking the "easier" shot, and its associated difficulty, and getting the outcome of a "harder" shot, perhaps one difficult enough that the player might not have attempted it. Again, if there are no mechanical changes at all then it's all irrelevant flavor and no need for varying difficulties. But if there is any mechanical change then I would think that called shots should be harder, not luckier.
answered 1 hour ago
Upper_Case
37017
I think #1 is the key issue here - OP might want them to have no mechanical benefit, but if there's no mechanical benefit, there's no reason to actually do any more than just flavoring attacks as normal. This doesn't seem like much of a houserule.
– V2Blast
47 mins ago
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
As long as the crit is unchanged, then it is balanced.
If nothing is different besides the narration, then by definition the mechanics of the game remain balanced, at least to a first approximation.
Crits are meant to represent great successes in the midst of combat, so in most cases they are a nice fit for called shots. It's a cool opportunity for you or the player to add some flair to the combat.
Beware of extreme called shots.
There are some called shots that simply cannot be successful without any mechanical implications. Consider these examples, where a player crits and wants the called shot to be: a decapitation with a greatsword; an arrow in the enemy's only eye; a strike that cripples a wing.
These called shots are admittedly extreme, but nonetheless it's clear that if they are successful they must come with unbalancing consequences: death, blindness, and loss of flight respectively.
If you want to preserve the balance, your narration will have to undermine called shot like those so that the enemy only takes damage. The problem is that those called shots now feel like relative failures instead of unequivocal successes because the player hoped for something more besides damage.
You have to manage your player's expectations
"Called shots" is not the term I would use to manage such expectations, because the default assumption is that called shots can include extra effects besides damage. Instead, ask "Why don't you describe this crit?" or "How do you want me to describe this crit?". Questions like these provide just as much opportunity for flair and narration, without any of the expectations of a called shot.
answered 35 mins ago
Ruse
3,700541
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
As long as the crit is unchanged, then it is balanced.
If nothing is different besides the narration, then by definition the mechanics of the game remain balanced, at least to a first approximation.
Crits are meant to represent great successes in the midst of combat, so in most cases they are a nice fit for called shots. It's a cool opportunity for you or the player to add some flair to the combat.
Beware of extreme called shots.
There are some called shots that simply cannot be successful without any mechanical implications. Consider these examples, where a player crits and wants the called shot to be: a decapitation with a greatsword; an arrow in the enemy's only eye; a strike that cripples a wing.
These called shots are admittedly extreme, but nonetheless it's clear that if they are successful they must come with unbalancing consequences: death, blindness, and loss of flight respectively.
If you want to preserve the balance, your narration will have to undermine called shot like those so that the enemy only takes damage. The problem is that those called shots now feel like relative failures instead of unequivocal successes because the player hoped for something more besides damage.
You have to manage your player's expectations
"Called shots" is not the term I would use to manage such expectations, because the default assumption is that called shots can include extra effects besides damage. Instead, ask "Why don't you describe this crit?" or "How do you want me to describe this crit?". Questions like these provide just as much opportunity for flair and narration, without any of the expectations of a called shot.
answered 35 mins ago
Ruse
3,700541
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
up vote
3
down vote
As long as the crit is unchanged, then it is balanced.
If nothing is different besides the narration, then by definition the mechanics of the game remain balanced, at least to a first approximation.
Crits are meant to represent great successes in the midst of combat, so in most cases they are a nice fit for called shots. It's a cool opportunity for you or the player to add some flair to the combat.
Beware of extreme called shots.
There are some called shots that simply cannot be successful without any mechanical implications. Consider these examples, where a player crits and wants the called shot to be: a decapitation with a greatsword; an arrow in the enemy's only eye; a strike that cripples a wing.
These called shots are admittedly extreme, but nonetheless it's clear that if they are successful they must come with unbalancing consequences: death, blindness, and loss of flight respectively.
If you want to preserve the balance, your narration will have to undermine called shot like those so that the enemy only takes damage. The problem is that those called shots now feel like relative failures instead of unequivocal successes because the player hoped for something more besides damage.
You have to manage your player's expectations
"Called shots" is not the term I would use to manage such expectations, because the default assumption is that called shots can include extra effects besides damage. Instead, ask "Why don't you describe this crit?" or "How do you want me to describe this crit?". Questions like these provide just as much opportunity for flair and narration, without any of the expectations of a called shot.
answered 35 mins ago
Ruse
3,700541
As long as the crit is unchanged, then it is balanced.
If nothing is different besides the narration, then by definition the mechanics of the game remain balanced, at least to a first approximation.
Crits are meant to represent great successes in the midst of combat, so in most cases they are a nice fit for called shots. It's a cool opportunity for you or the player to add some flair to the combat.
Beware of extreme called shots.
There are some called shots that simply cannot be successful without any mechanical implications. Consider these examples, where a player crits and wants the called shot to be: a decapitation with a greatsword; an arrow in the enemy's only eye; a strike that cripples a wing.
These called shots are admittedly extreme, but nonetheless it's clear that if they are successful they must come with unbalancing consequences: death, blindness, and loss of flight respectively.
If you want to preserve the balance, your narration will have to undermine called shot like those so that the enemy only takes damage. The problem is that those called shots now feel like relative failures instead of unequivocal successes because the player hoped for something more besides damage.
You have to manage your player's expectations
"Called shots" is not the term I would use to manage such expectations, because the default assumption is that called shots can include extra effects besides damage. Instead, ask "Why don't you describe this crit?" or "How do you want me to describe this crit?". Questions like these provide just as much opportunity for flair and narration, without any of the expectations of a called shot.
answered 35 mins ago
Ruse
3,700541
edited 21 mins ago
answered 35 mins ago
Ruse
3,700541
answered 35 mins ago
Ruse
3,700541
answered 35 mins ago
Ruse
3,700541
3,700541
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
You're the GM, and so if your decision is that called shots are narrative flavor only, and no mechanical effects are allowed, then gameplay won't change in any way and there will be no balancing issues to deal with.
If you allow for any mechanical changes then the balance question comes down to what specific new things you allow, and not a general-case sort of answer.
That in mind, in general I would think that there are two issues, the former relevant if you do not allow any mechanical changes and the latter relevant if you do:
A called shot is a just a more difficult kind of shot, one that tries to hit a smaller and/or more mobile target. You try for the harder shot because there is some benefit to doing so-- maybe you damage an opponent's leg, slowing them down, or knock the weapon out of their hand, etc. I can't imagine any table bothering with a called shot that does nothing-- why not just let them narrate their combat moves however they want, if there is no mechanical difference? So I would think that any table where called shots are possible is one where players will constantly want them to do things beyond a garden-variety crit. If your players expect more than nothing from this, then you can expect regular conflict and disappointment from them.
Calling a shot after the roll seems odd to me. Since called shots are more just a harder kind of regular shot, I would expect a called shot to have a higher difficulty than a regular one. If you allow the called shot declaration after rolling, then a player will essentially be taking the "easier" shot, and its associated difficulty, and getting the outcome of a "harder" shot, perhaps one difficult enough that the player might not have attempted it. Again, if there are no mechanical changes at all then it's all irrelevant flavor and no need for varying difficulties. But if there is any mechanical change then I would think that called shots should be harder, not luckier.
answered 1 hour ago
Upper_Case
37017
I think #1 is the key issue here - OP might want them to have no mechanical benefit, but if there's no mechanical benefit, there's no reason to actually do any more than just flavoring attacks as normal. This doesn't seem like much of a houserule.
– V2Blast
47 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
You're the GM, and so if your decision is that called shots are narrative flavor only, and no mechanical effects are allowed, then gameplay won't change in any way and there will be no balancing issues to deal with.
If you allow for any mechanical changes then the balance question comes down to what specific new things you allow, and not a general-case sort of answer.
That in mind, in general I would think that there are two issues, the former relevant if you do not allow any mechanical changes and the latter relevant if you do:
A called shot is a just a more difficult kind of shot, one that tries to hit a smaller and/or more mobile target. You try for the harder shot because there is some benefit to doing so-- maybe you damage an opponent's leg, slowing them down, or knock the weapon out of their hand, etc. I can't imagine any table bothering with a called shot that does nothing-- why not just let them narrate their combat moves however they want, if there is no mechanical difference? So I would think that any table where called shots are possible is one where players will constantly want them to do things beyond a garden-variety crit. If your players expect more than nothing from this, then you can expect regular conflict and disappointment from them.
Calling a shot after the roll seems odd to me. Since called shots are more just a harder kind of regular shot, I would expect a called shot to have a higher difficulty than a regular one. If you allow the called shot declaration after rolling, then a player will essentially be taking the "easier" shot, and its associated difficulty, and getting the outcome of a "harder" shot, perhaps one difficult enough that the player might not have attempted it. Again, if there are no mechanical changes at all then it's all irrelevant flavor and no need for varying difficulties. But if there is any mechanical change then I would think that called shots should be harder, not luckier.
answered 1 hour ago
Upper_Case
37017
I think #1 is the key issue here - OP might want them to have no mechanical benefit, but if there's no mechanical benefit, there's no reason to actually do any more than just flavoring attacks as normal. This doesn't seem like much of a houserule.
– V2Blast
47 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
You're the GM, and so if your decision is that called shots are narrative flavor only, and no mechanical effects are allowed, then gameplay won't change in any way and there will be no balancing issues to deal with.
If you allow for any mechanical changes then the balance question comes down to what specific new things you allow, and not a general-case sort of answer.
That in mind, in general I would think that there are two issues, the former relevant if you do not allow any mechanical changes and the latter relevant if you do:
A called shot is a just a more difficult kind of shot, one that tries to hit a smaller and/or more mobile target. You try for the harder shot because there is some benefit to doing so-- maybe you damage an opponent's leg, slowing them down, or knock the weapon out of their hand, etc. I can't imagine any table bothering with a called shot that does nothing-- why not just let them narrate their combat moves however they want, if there is no mechanical difference? So I would think that any table where called shots are possible is one where players will constantly want them to do things beyond a garden-variety crit. If your players expect more than nothing from this, then you can expect regular conflict and disappointment from them.
Calling a shot after the roll seems odd to me. Since called shots are more just a harder kind of regular shot, I would expect a called shot to have a higher difficulty than a regular one. If you allow the called shot declaration after rolling, then a player will essentially be taking the "easier" shot, and its associated difficulty, and getting the outcome of a "harder" shot, perhaps one difficult enough that the player might not have attempted it. Again, if there are no mechanical changes at all then it's all irrelevant flavor and no need for varying difficulties. But if there is any mechanical change then I would think that called shots should be harder, not luckier.
answered 1 hour ago
Upper_Case
37017
You're the GM, and so if your decision is that called shots are narrative flavor only, and no mechanical effects are allowed, then gameplay won't change in any way and there will be no balancing issues to deal with.
If you allow for any mechanical changes then the balance question comes down to what specific new things you allow, and not a general-case sort of answer.
That in mind, in general I would think that there are two issues, the former relevant if you do not allow any mechanical changes and the latter relevant if you do:
A called shot is a just a more difficult kind of shot, one that tries to hit a smaller and/or more mobile target. You try for the harder shot because there is some benefit to doing so-- maybe you damage an opponent's leg, slowing them down, or knock the weapon out of their hand, etc. I can't imagine any table bothering with a called shot that does nothing-- why not just let them narrate their combat moves however they want, if there is no mechanical difference? So I would think that any table where called shots are possible is one where players will constantly want them to do things beyond a garden-variety crit. If your players expect more than nothing from this, then you can expect regular conflict and disappointment from them.
Calling a shot after the roll seems odd to me. Since called shots are more just a harder kind of regular shot, I would expect a called shot to have a higher difficulty than a regular one. If you allow the called shot declaration after rolling, then a player will essentially be taking the "easier" shot, and its associated difficulty, and getting the outcome of a "harder" shot, perhaps one difficult enough that the player might not have attempted it. Again, if there are no mechanical changes at all then it's all irrelevant flavor and no need for varying difficulties. But if there is any mechanical change then I would think that called shots should be harder, not luckier.
answered 1 hour ago
Upper_Case
37017
answered 1 hour ago
Upper_Case
37017
answered 1 hour ago
Upper_Case
37017
answered 1 hour ago
Upper_Case
37017
37017
I think #1 is the key issue here - OP might want them to have no mechanical benefit, but if there's no mechanical benefit, there's no reason to actually do any more than just flavoring attacks as normal. This doesn't seem like much of a houserule.
– V2Blast
47 mins ago
add a comment |Â
I think #1 is the key issue here - OP might want them to have no mechanical benefit, but if there's no mechanical benefit, there's no reason to actually do any more than just flavoring attacks as normal. This doesn't seem like much of a houserule.
– V2Blast
47 mins ago
I think #1 is the key issue here - OP might want them to have no mechanical benefit, but if there's no mechanical benefit, there's no reason to actually do any more than just flavoring attacks as normal. This doesn't seem like much of a houserule.
– V2Blast
47 mins ago
I think #1 is the key issue here - OP might want them to have no mechanical benefit, but if there's no mechanical benefit, there's no reason to actually do any more than just flavoring attacks as normal. This doesn't seem like much of a houserule.
– V2Blast
47 mins ago
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f133160%2fis-it-balanced-to-allow-called-shots-to-occur-on-a-natural-20-on-attack-rolls%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
3
For clarification...what extra effects do you see striking body parts to have? From your post, I can't tell if you're talking pure fluff, or if you have a table of extra effects...
– guildsbounty
2 hours ago
Purely fluff, but in general the normal crit damage
– user2813274
1 hour ago
1
To clarify, there would be no mechanical benefit to the called shot? It's just like a regular critical hit but with a narrated target?
– David Coffron
1 hour ago
1
"Purely fluff, but in general the normal crit damage" So the question is — is your fluff balanced?
– enkryptor
1 hour ago
3
@user2813274 I'm confused-- if it's just a narrated target with no additional mechanical features, what question remains? And if you intend to potentially allow other effects, do you have any guidelines on what those might be?
– Upper_Case
1 hour ago