| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| Jindl04-22-04, 09:37 AM | Please post any comments and concerns for the Fights of the Week of 4/21/2004 below. Oh, and BE NICE !! :D - Jindl |
| Jindl04-22-04, 11:43 AM | Re: Shiaan vs Golratha - 1. Shiaan is using a tower shield. This provides a +4 shield bonus to AC, a +2 max Dex, a -2 penalty to attacks and a -10 acp. None of these were applied in the fight. 2. In Rnd 1, Shiaan's AC should have been 22 (+4 armor +2 dex +4 shield +2 deflection). Shiaan could have made a Ride check to use her mount as cover (no action required) to add another +4 bonus to that AC. The Ride check DC is 15, so she would pass on a 5 or more. This would have prevented the crossbow from hitting. @Cellardweller - I would suggest including this in your tactics next time. 3. In Rnd 2, Shiaan's attack should have included a +1 bonus for higher ground and a -2 penalty for the Tower shield, for a total modifier of +5. The attack would still hit and the damage is the same. 4. In Rnd 3, Shiaan cannot charge. It requires 10 feet of movement in order to charge. If Shiaan + Flamestrike moved 10 feet straight towards Golratha, then their opponent would be 5 feet away and Shiaan would not be able to attack with the lance. This should be a regular move + attack. The attack would still hit, but the damage would be different (13 pts instead of 25 pts). Golratha would still be alive after this attack. 5. There should actually be some time left in the fight. Since it is so early, perhaps you should continue the fight to its proper conclusion. I would also suggest, that since it is Thursday, you allow Kedi to skip shooting the crossbow after round 1 as he requested (prior to your posting of the fight, I might add), and in round 2 allow Golratha to drop the crossbow, pull out and drink the SoF potion, then proceed (in the following rounds) to pull out the hold person scroll, and try to cast it, as described in the post-crossbow section of Kedi's tactics. Just a note: The DC on that scroll is 13 (10 +2 spell level +1 minimun Wis) and Shiaan has a +4 Will save. Also, Golratha has to make a DC 4 caster level check to successfully use the scroll. Even if Shiaan fails the save, Flamestrike would still attack (the Defend trick would activate). 6. I don't see the alignment of Golratha's diety anywhere. Thus the alignment could be NE, CE, or CN. If her diety is CN, then she could still spontaneously cast cure spells and turn undead. Evil clerics of nuetral dieties can channel positive energy. Perhaps you can take a few minutes and try to correct these things? -Jindl |
| Myrridin04-22-04, 11:51 AM | Originally posted by Jindl Re: Shiaan vs Golratha - 1. Shiaan is using a tower shield. This provides a +4 shield bonus to AC, a +2 max Dex, a -2 penalty to attacks and a -10 acp. None of these were applied in the fight. 2. In Rnd 1, Shiaan's AC should have been 22 (+4 armor +2 dex +4 shield +2 deflection). Shiaan could have made a Ride check to use her mount as cover (no action required) to add another +4 bonus to that AC. The Ride check DC is 15, so she would pass on a 5 or more. This would have prevented the crossbow from hitting. @Cellardweller - I would suggest including this in your tactics next time. 3. In Rnd 2, Shiaan's attack should have included a +1 bonus for higher ground and a -2 penalty for the Tower shield, for a total modifier of +5. The attack would still hit and the damage is the same. 4. In Rnd 3, Shiaan cannot charge. It requires 10 feet of movement in order to charge. If Shiaan + Flamestrike moved 10 feet straight towards Golratha, then their opponent would be 5 feet away and Shiaan would not be able to attack with the lance. This should be a regular move + attack. The attack would still hit, but the damage would be different (13 pts instead of 25 pts). Golratha would still be alive after this attack. 5. There should actually be some time left in the fight. Since it is so early, perhaps you should continue the fight to its proper conclusion. I would also suggest, that since it is Thursday, you allow Kedi to skip shooting the crossbow after round 1 as he requested (prior to your posting of the fight, I might add), and in round 2 allow Golratha to drop the crossbow, pull out the hold person scroll, and try to cast it, as described in the post-crossbow section of Kedi's tactics. Just a note: The DC on that scroll is 13 (10 +2 spell level +1 minimun Wis) and Shiaan has a +4 Will save. Also, Golratha has to make a DC 4 caster level check to successfully use the scroll. Even if Shiaan fails the save, Flamestrike would still attack (the Defend trick would activate). 6. I don't see the alignment of Golratha's diety anywhere. Thus the alignment could be NE, CE, or CN. If her diety is CN, then she could still spontaneously cast cure spells and turn undead. Evil clerics of nuetral dieties can channel positive energy. Perhaps you can take a few minutes and try to correct these things? -Jindl Yeah, I can make the changes. As to the evil cleric worshipping a neutral god. In the description of clerics, it specifically stats that an evil cleric spontaneously casts inflict spells. Given that Golratha is Chaotic Evil, I thought it fair to say that his diety was evil, as it's also not listed on the character sheet, and go from there. The -10 ACP didn't come into the fight, as he never used a skill that applies to. I'll make the changes to the fight, and we'll see where it goes from there. According to Kedi, I should attack with the crossbow in round 1, which I'll keep the same. Then follow his tactics, which say to drink a potion of Shield of Faith, then cast Hold Person on him. I believe that I should follow that as well. The requested changes are being made to the fight. |
| Myrridin04-22-04, 11:55 AM | Hmmm, does Shiaan get an AoO when Golratha moves away from Flamestrike 5', 10' from Shiaan? Shiaan's readying an action, so I'm thinking no. |
| Myrridin04-22-04, 12:05 PM | Originally posted by Jindl 4. In Rnd 3, Shiaan cannot charge. It requires 10 feet of movement in order to charge. If Shiaan + Flamestrike moved 10 feet straight towards Golratha, then their opponent would be 5 feet away and Shiaan would not be able to attack with the lance. This should be a regular move + attack. The attack would still hit, but the damage would be different (13 pts instead of 25 pts). Golratha would still be alive after this attack. Perhaps you can take a few minutes and try to correct these things? -Jindl Jindl, Kedi: I'm correcting these things. Shiaan wouldn't charge, according to her tactics. If she can't charge. I'm picking up with those, and trying to use Golratha's tactics to the best of my ability. |
| kedi04-22-04, 12:19 PM | Originally posted by Myrridin Jindl, Kedi: I'm correcting these things. Shiaan wouldn't charge, according to her tactics. If she can't charge. I'm picking up with those, and trying to use Golratha's tactics to the best of my ability. Thx! Btw, edited my char sheet. And please, despite the fact that I am male, golratha is female. So not "he" :) |
| Myrridin04-22-04, 12:36 PM | Kedi: Heh, missed the gender, I'll go back and change that. The fight has been edited, it took 2 more rounds, and the outcome was the same. The Hold Person didn't work, and the horse was deadly. Thanks for the corrections, it should be a legally run fight now. :) |
| kedi04-22-04, 01:17 PM | Originally posted by Myrridin Kedi: Heh, missed the gender, I'll go back and change that. The fight has been edited, it took 2 more rounds, and the outcome was the same. The Hold Person didn't work, and the horse was deadly. Thanks for the corrections, it should be a legally run fight now. :) Thanks for the re-run :) Ok kids, what did we learn today? That's right: Never fight a mounted gladiator! |
| Myrridin04-22-04, 01:22 PM | Originally posted by kedi Thanks for the re-run :) Ok kids, what did we learn today? That's right: Never fight a mounted gladiator! Actually what we learned is that adding a mount, especially at low level fights, if the other player doesn't have one, can win the whole match for you. Witness: Shiaan's tactics. Charge if she could, otherwise take cover behind the tower shield and let the horse win it. |
| ^Rayne^04-22-04, 02:30 PM | Yeah the mount used against Aiki in last weeks match was almost worse than the Sundering monster riding it. The mounts do pose very substantial threats at low levels. |
| Myrridin04-22-04, 02:35 PM | Rayne: I noticed that too. It's made me think that if I ever create another low level character who's a fighter type, that I'm going to buy a mount. The advantage in mobility and damage output is huge at low levels. |
| Jindl04-22-04, 03:04 PM | Hey, let's keep it on topic, eh guys? We can discuss allies + mounts in the Tavern. BTW: The way to defeat the mount is to attack its saves. Something as simple as a tanglefoot bag can work wonders. Now, off to the Tavern :D -Jindl |
| cellardweller04-23-04, 06:09 AM | Originally posted by Myrridin Hmmm, does Shiaan get an AoO when Golratha moves away from Flamestrike 5', 10' from Shiaan? Shiaan's readying an action, so I'm thinking no. Just for future reference readying an action doesn't prevent you from threatening. There should have been an AoO from casting in threatened area. |
| Myrridin04-23-04, 08:21 AM | Originally posted by cellardweller Just for future reference readying an action doesn't prevent you from threatening. There should have been an AoO from casting in threatened area. Cellar: That's kind of what I thought, but I wasn't sure. I rolled the AoO's anyways, and you didn't hit with the lance. |
| ^Rayne^04-23-04, 09:04 PM | Note to Elders: Vryk has just lost his 3rd fight in a row at level 4 and will be bumped to the next level. Also one note to Kedi about your tactics... Now, checking his spell list, the most effective spell he can cast on me is ray of frost. But he can cast ray of enfeblemind, which requires a fort save so not a big deal. There is no Saving Throw against Ray of Enfeeblement. If Vryk had ever got the chance to use this against your PC all he would have had to do is succeed in a Ranged Touch attack and your PC would be Enfeebled. I just thought I would point that out to you so in the future you weren't surprised if your PC wasn't given a Fort Save against this spell. Nothing left to add about the fight, as usual my PC's are the victims of to many awesome rolls by the competition and are almost never lucky. |
| Jindl04-23-04, 09:52 PM | Originally posted by ^Rayne^ Note to Elders: Vryk has just lost his 3rd fight in a row at level 4 and will be bumped to the next level. Also one note to Kedi about your tactics... There is no Saving Throw against Ray of Enfeeblement. If Vryk had ever got the chance to use this against your PC all he would have had to do is succeed in a Ranged Touch attack and your PC would be Enfeebled. I just thought I would point that out to you so in the future you weren't surprised if your PC wasn't given a Fort Save against this spell. Nothing left to add about the fight, as usual my PC's are the victims of to many awesome rolls by the competition and are almost never lucky. And a note to Rayne about your tactics: 1. Using scrolls that allow saves is usually not effective, as the DC's are much too low. 2. You cannot CDG a stunned character, so it would have been no big deal even if he had failed his save. -Jindl |
| ^Rayne^04-23-04, 10:14 PM | Thanks for the advice Jindl. I actually thought that since his Will save was 0 or +2 after Rage that maybe luck would be on my side. As for the Coup-de-Grace thing, I thought a PC could be CDGed if they were stunned. I see we are not following all of the core rules listed in the book after all. A stunned opponents is a Helpless opponent by every definition I can imagine and by the books own description... A stunned creature drops everything held, can't take actions, takes a -2 penalty to AC, and loses his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any). I thought that sounded like helpless to me? I guess we are using house rules around here in regards to Coup-de-Grace attacks then? |
| Jindl04-23-04, 11:40 PM | It's not a house rule. Stunned characters are not helpless, according to the core rules. -Jindl |
| MotherBast04-24-04, 01:04 AM | Jindl is right. Helpless characters are completly unable to defend themselves. Stunned characters just get negatives to doing so. Also, helpless characters can't make opposed rolls, and stunned characters can. Lots of little differences. |
| ^Rayne^04-24-04, 01:33 AM | It says in the book under stunned that a PC can take "no actions", how does that not sound like helpless. No actions means they can't take a standard action, a move action, a free action, speak, nothing. Sure they can think and resist Will types of affects but a Coup-de-Grace attack is not a Will based affect. They may be able to resist poisons but again not the affects of a Coup-de-Grace attack. I don't see in the rules where it says that a Coup-de-Grace attack can't be made against a stunned PC. It seems to say just the opposite. Please point to the source material for this ruling. I see both of you don't agree with me but it would seem that all reflex saves are impossible and there is no way for them to take any action to avoid a coupe-de-grace attack. They are in affect in a frozen state and vulnerable to attacks that will kill them outright. How are they going to defend someone slicing their throat open or sticking a sword into their belly? This ruling sounds like a house rule to me? |
| daemones04-24-04, 02:11 AM | From the SRD, "Abilities and Conditions": Helpless: A helpless character is paralyzed, held, bound, sleeping, unconscious, or otherwise completely at an opponent’s mercy. A helpless target is treated as having a Dexterity of 0 (–5 modifier). Melee attacks against a helpless target get a +4 bonus (equivalent to attacking a prone target). Ranged attacks gets no special bonus against helpless targets. Rogues can sneak attack helpless targets. Stunned: A stunned creature drops everything held, can’t take actions, takes a –2 penalty to AC, and loses his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any). So the basics of it are that a stunned character takes penaltyies to AC (-2 and looses dex), can't act and must drop stuff. Other folks don't get a bonus to hit him other than the penalties to AC listed. A stunned character can defend himself (AC bonuses from earlier expertiese still apply, for example) just not very well. EDIT: Grammar bad, kay. |
| MotherBast04-24-04, 02:18 AM | Exactly. A stunned character does not meet the reques for being helpless. Opponits do not get +4 to hit him, his dex is not 0, and can still make opposed rolls. Not just saves. For instance, a stunned character can make an opposed grapple check if you attempt to grapple him. He can make an opposed trip check if you try to trip him, so forth and so on. A helpless character can do none of these things. |
| ^Rayne^04-24-04, 02:37 AM | Okay I sort of see what you are talking about but it says that a stunned character can take "no action" so how could they make an opposed grapple check or trip check? These are actions and under the Stun description it says "Can't take actions". Those things you mentioned are actions and shouldn't be allowed. I see that under helpless they didn't list stunned so there must be some of the most basic rudimentary actions but the no actions part makes me think that even taking actions to oppose a grapple or aviod a trip attack are taking their abilities too far. or otherwise completely at an opponent’s mercy. This part bothers me a bit because it seems to give more merit to the idea that a stunned PC is at the mercy of the opponent. They can't take any actions according the definition of stunned. I already feel more enlightened thanks to you guys taking the time to show me what the book rules but this no action part makes me wonder how a stunned PC could really do anything to stop a coup-de-grace. Even a 5 foot step is an action as is lifting ones arm. I guess the rules don't want to call it helpless but it sounds like they are helpless in every way accept through exact wording. I believe you guys must be right if they didn't include stunned in the helpless section. Still it sure sounds to me like they would be at the mercy of someone who is about to coup-de-grace them. I sometimes feel like some of the definitions are inconsistant and leave too much up to interpretation. Thanks for filling me in on the details. |
| MotherBast04-24-04, 04:12 AM | Opposed checks are not actions because they are made during your opponit's turn. You can take no actions during your opponit's turn. Not even free actions. Check "free actions" in the PHB. You can only preforem them during your own turn. So anything you can do during your opponits turn must then be not an action. |
| daemones04-24-04, 03:05 PM | @TaggIIV: Overall a great fight, though three small problems: -- I don't start mounted, since there is no way I can reach the other side in one round if I do; it wouldn't have made a difference here, since he won initiative. -- When a combatant succeeds in initiating a grapple, they do damage the first round as if with an unarmred strike. -- Toward the end of the fight, Arkin casts Magic Missile while grappled to end it. Though he did succeed in the Concentration check, one of the constraints to grappling is that you cannot cast (non-stilled) spells with somatic components. It's the great advantage of hugging a mage, that there isn't much he can do unless he's prepared for it. Again, it's a good fight, and thanks for running it! |
| kattattack2204-24-04, 03:46 PM | @Tagg IIIV I also noticed a couple mistakes, but nothing truly fight altering in my opinion. In my tatics you mentioned shield and mage armor don't stack but they do. from 3.5 SRD Shield Abjuration [Force] Level: Sor/Wiz 1 Components: V, S Casting Time: 1 standard action Range: Personal Target: You Duration: 1 min./level (D) Shield creates an invisible, tower shield-sized mobile disk of force that hovers in front of you. It negates magic missile attacks directed at you. The disk also provides a +4 shield bonus to AC. This bonus applies against incorporeal touch attacks, since it is a force effect. The shield has no armor check penalty or arcane spell failure chance. Unlike with a normal tower shield, you can’t use the shield spell for cover. daemons is right about not being able to cast a spell in a grapple. from 3.5 SRD Cast a Spell: You can attempt to cast a spell while grappling or even while pinned (see below), provided its casting time is no more than 1 standard action, it has no somatic component, and you have in hand any material components or focuses you might need. Any spell that requires precise and careful action is impossible to cast while grappling or being pinned. If the spell is one that you can cast while grappling, you must make a Concentration check (DC 20 + spell level) or lose the spell. You don’t have to make a successful grapple check to cast the spell. When Arkin failed to activate the first Magic Missile scroll unless there is a mishap then the scroll is not used up. From 3.5 SRD Determine Effect: A spell successfully activated from a scroll works exactly like a spell prepared and cast the normal way. Assume the scroll spell’s caster level is always the minimum level required to cast the spell for the character who scribed the scroll (usually twice the spell’s level, minus 1), unless the caster specifically desires otherwise. The writing for an activated spell disappears from the scroll. It was a very good fight and very close. @daemons - Good fight. |
| Vilawyn04-24-04, 05:08 PM | ah shield, didnt catch that - thought they were both armor bonuses as for the not being able to cast in grapple, im not sure i want to go back and rehash it since like round 7, would anyone else be comfortable in assuming that Arkin would have used the scroll of magic missiles (i thought it got used up in the faillure) and finished off Irwin from the extra 3 missiles that aren't in a regular magic missile? im nto sure what you mean by not wanting to start mounted... because a horse's full round run distance is 200' if im adding correctly.. (50' times 4) which means that Steve could cover the field in a single round quite easily oh, lol, the writing disappears, eh.. i'll have to be sure i remember that in future rp ;) |
| daemones04-24-04, 05:26 PM | Horses have the run feat, making it 5x50'. When running, however, you must move in a straight line. If I'm mounted on the horse, I have a pillar between myself and the opposite starting point. The only way I can see to reach the other side on round one would be to fast-mount a horse that was to my right or left, and have the horse run adjacent to the opposite starting position - since the horse starts to the right or left, it isn't in front of the pillar so needn't avoid it. Edit: No need to re-run any of it; just notes for future reference. :) |
| kattattack2204-24-04, 07:25 PM | I concur with my esteemed oppoent that there is no need to rerun or change anything. Just check in mind what we pointed out. |
| Kazzaroth Pan'theon04-25-04, 01:38 PM | I posted the Krhoir and Delayar figth. Sorry TaggVIII, Krhoir haves horrible dice luck (expect in fort saves ;)). |
| Beldin04-25-04, 05:42 PM | why did my horse not full attack? |
| Magagumo04-25-04, 07:00 PM | Hmm, yes, Kazzaroth, when crit fails are rolled, they simple fail or miss, there's no tripping or other penalty involved (unless they have poison on their weapon). However, while this error did cause 4 extra dmg to Khoir, the heavy warhorse was using its weakest attack (bite) rather than its two massive hooves. I say the fight result is still clear, but do watch these things, I believe the horse's attack progression was listed on Delayar's sheet. |
| Arstimis04-26-04, 02:08 AM | @Limit- Looks like a pretty good fight. I made some mistakes when writing my tactics for overrun and always wanting to be behind cover, but thats my fault, not yours. Good job. I was just happy i made it through..how many arrows was that? although there is one thing from my tactics that i think might not have been followed. When he was 10 ft away and attacking i should have first tried to overrun him. That might have made a difference, possibly getting rid of his horse..... |
| Kazzaroth Pan'theon04-26-04, 06:04 AM | Originally posted by Beldin why did my horse not full attack? Can your horse make more than one attack? I asumed that either the horse bites or uses hooves (and it cannot use hooves if he is facing his foe, so he must move 180 degree to able to kick his foe whit hooves). Tell me if I have mistake in here. I made the battle after I was visting whit my friends and I had not slept for 36 hours (so you quess that I was tired :P). Is there other mistakes wich I must change? I do want to make all of them in single editing........ |
| Limit04-26-04, 08:21 AM | Originally posted by Arstimis @Limit- Looks like a pretty good fight. I made some mistakes when writing my tactics for overrun and always wanting to be behind cover, but thats my fault, not yours. Good job. I was just happy i made it through..how many arrows was that? although there is one thing from my tactics that i think might not have been followed. When he was 10 ft away and attacking i should have first tried to overrun him. That might have made a difference, possibly getting rid of his horse..... @Arstimis - Thanks! I considered that Zaphod would probably want to continue dancing around the rock to stay on the opposite side of his opponent, but your attacks did say "Stay there" and I didn't want to violate that. It was 32 arrows total :-( I didn't invoke the overrun bit of your tactics because he went from being out of the range you specified, to five feet away. His horse is a Large (long) creature and was directly adjacent to you at one square, or five feet away. |
| Arstimis04-26-04, 09:45 AM | Originally posted by Limit @Arstimis - Thanks! I considered that Zaphod would probably want to continue dancing around the rock to stay on the opposite side of his opponent, but your attacks did say "Stay there" and I didn't want to violate that. It was 32 arrows total :-( I didn't invoke the overrun bit of your tactics because he went from being out of the range you specified, to five feet away. His horse is a Large (long) creature and was directly adjacent to you at one square, or five feet away. ya, the cover was my fault, some bad wording in my tactics. I just figured we were 10 feet away because of mine and his reach was 10 ft, and also by the coordinates giving, being at least 10 ft (bottom left +16,-2) (14,-4) It was a very good error free fight though, considering the length |
| Jindl04-26-04, 11:53 AM | @Battousai - In the Lillith vs Sarah fight, wouldn't Lillith's wolf Lucy have been affected by the entangle spell? I assume the effect was centered on Sarah, and so the wolf would have to move through it to attack her. If the wolf failed a save upon entering the entangle, then it is likely that it would never have reached / attacked Sarah. Since the majority of the damage was done by the wolf, I would appreciate it if you could look into this. Of course, if the wolf passes its first save, the later saves are irrelevant, since it will be beside Sarah (and within reach to continue attacking). So, could you check and see if the wolf makes the first save against the entangle, as it moves up to make its first attack on Sarah? -Jindl |
| Myrridin04-26-04, 12:03 PM | Cellardweller: Corinthus can't double move out of the Sleet storm. He has to make a balance check, DC 10, if he fails by 5 or more, he falls prone. If he makes it, he can move at half speed out of the storm. That's why I wanted to cast it, so that I could have him in it, then fireball him a couple times, then buff; which is what should have happened. Not to mention the DC's on the scrolls of Fireball are wrong. I crafted them, and put the DC's of the spell behind them. He still makes the first save, as that DC was only a 16, but the second save DC is a 19, so he fails that one. Just wanted to bring those to your attention, as my buffed AC is a 22, which means only 1 of the Hippogriffs hits, and Corinthus' HP are lower than listed. Another note, you didn't use Default tactics for Corinthus, or he would've cast Produce Flame, then held Entangle. |
| Jindl04-26-04, 12:14 PM | Originally posted by Myrridin Cellardweller: Corinthus can't double move out of the Sleet storm. He has to make a balance check, DC 10, if he fails by 5 or more, he falls prone. If he makes it, he can move at half speed out of the storm. That's why I wanted to cast it, so that I could have him in it, then fireball him a couple times, then buff; which is what should have happened. I think cellar rolled the balance check, and Corinthius passed. I haven't checked the distance, but for a halfling, double moving in a sleet storm should be 20 feet total distance. Originally posted by Myrridin Not to mention the DC's on the scrolls of Fireball are wrong. I crafted them, and put the DC's of the spell behind them. He still makes the first save, as that DC was only a 16, but the second save DC is a 19, so he fails that one. Actually, the DC's on a scroll are the same regardless of who crafted the item. The DC for a scroll is always: 10 + spell level + ability mod for the minimum ability score required to cast the spell. For a fireball scroll the DC is always: 10 + 3 + 1 (the ability mod for a score of 13, which is the minimum score required to cast a 3rd level spell). The only way to increase the DC for a scroll is to scribe a heightened version of the spell (which of course increases the spell level and minimum ability score to cast). -Jindl |
| Myrridin04-26-04, 01:09 PM | Originally posted by Jindl I think cellar rolled the balance check, and Corinthius passed. I haven't checked the distance, but for a halfling, double moving in a sleet storm should be 20 feet total distance. Actually, the DC's on a scroll are the same regardless of who crafted the item. The DC for a scroll is always: 10 + spell level + ability mod for the minimum ability score required to cast the spell. For a fireball scroll the DC is always: 10 + 3 + 1 (the ability mod for a score of 13, which is the minimum score required to cast a 3rd level spell). The only way to increase the DC for a scroll is to scribe a heightened version of the spell (which of course increases the spell level and minimum ability score to cast). -Jindl Huh, gotcha on the scrolled spell. I thought it mattered who scribed it. As for Sleet Storm; it says in the description of the spell that they are only able to take a half move if they pass the balance check. Even if they can take a double move, 20' does not get them out of the sleet storm, it's a 40' cylinder. Another question, if you leave a spell slot blank when sending your character, it stays blank. Shouldn't the unfilled spell slots from Corinthus stay blank then too? Or can they just fill in anything? I'd also like a look at the default tactics done. As they state to cast Produce Flame, then Entangle upon approach. It may only buy me one more round, but if I get two more rounds, then I have Mage Armor and Shield up, giving me a 22 AC, and most of the attacks on me miss then. If you don't want to rerun the fight cellar, I understand. I know that I've made a lot of errors in the past. I'm just pointing out one that I think had a major effect on the fight, that is getting out of the sleet storm. |
| Hatzinger04-26-04, 01:58 PM | @Snackhunter: Thanks for running my fight. It looks to me like you forgot to roll damage for some arrows who hit Pale-Rider. Round 1 and 2 i think. Additionally, i do 1d8+10 damage vs. humans. I have no idea how you got to those damage numbers. Could you please explain? |
| KerlanRayne04-26-04, 02:07 PM | Originally posted by Kazzaroth Pan'theon Can your horse make more than one attack? I asumed that either the horse bites or uses hooves (and it cannot use hooves if he is facing his foe, so he must move 180 degree to able to kick his foe whit hooves). #1) A warhorse (which I assume this is) can use a full round action to make a full attack, which is listed under it's entry as two hooves and one bite. #2) Nowhere dows it say that the hoof attacks are with it's back hooves, it could very well bring it's front hooves up and attack with them. #3) Facing does not exist in 3.0 or 3.5 so they are assumed to be facing every direction at once. Technically, the only way to stand behind someone is to flank them. KerlanRayne |
| Magagumo04-26-04, 03:00 PM | Unearthed Arcana actually dealt with facing rules, and they are sheer pain and madness. Avoid at all costs ;) (Unless you're truly hardcore and use minitures) @Snark Only mistake I saw was that Oetzi is still considered grappled in Pale-Rider's stomach, thusly he must make an opposed grapple check to withdraw the sword. |
| Kazzaroth Pan'theon04-26-04, 03:46 PM | Okey, I edited the match and made horse make full attack 3 turn (two hooves and one bite rigth?) it cutted figth over half shorter and made twice ironic. When I next time meet a wizard on a horse, then I shall KILL the horse first then the mage (I have new respect for warhorses). |
| Jindl04-26-04, 04:29 PM | Withdrawn. <sigh> It's been a long day. -Jindl |
| SnarkHunter04-26-04, 04:31 PM | Hey Oetzi-you actually don't get your bonus damage against PAle rider because when he polymorphed his type changed to Magical Beast, which I don't believe is one of your favored enemies. The way I did the damage is, all dice rolled together in most cases that was 2 d8's, then for the 1st attack I seperated base damage (+4) and PBS shot damage. Then doubled each (+8), (+2). For all subsequent roles I just made it +10. I did notice that I made one mistake no one else picked up. I included the size penalty to Pales AC but not his attack. Didn't make a difference though (given his early roles, jeez). |
| Hatzinger04-26-04, 07:06 PM | @Snackhunter: Hmmm... interesting question... I think that polymorph doesn´t change your type. I think that you can assume the form of creatures of different types with this spell, but not their type itself. My argument is that polymorph is a spell that was created/nerfed in 3.5 with all the loopholes of 3.0 in mind. Thus i argue that the description of especially this spell of all other spells, which has been errata´d so often until it developed into its current form, is correct in that it lists what it should do and doesn´t list what it shouldn´t do. And as it does not list that you change the type, i assume that you don´t do it. What do you think? PS: hey, the name Snackhunter gets a totally new meaning when you look a bit to the left, to the picture under my name... :D |
| Jindl04-26-04, 07:21 PM | Sorry Hatz. But the Polymorph spell specifically says "The subject's creature type and subtype change to match the new form." So, no favored enemy damage on this one. -Jindl |
| Druid Roxors04-26-04, 07:32 PM | As I posted on the Taver thread, I did send in my tactics but I recieved no notification that they were not recieved. Default Tactics you are refering to are for a level 2 character, common sense tells us that he is using the same tactics I used on my last fight. Its only logical that he wouldn't try using the level 2 tactics. In all honesty, these are the tactics I sent to Cellardweller at: cyberknight@thevortex.com Hey, I havn't had much time to develop tactics in teh last 3 weeks. Heavy school work for now. Maybe thats why im on a loss streak... In any case, these are the tactics for this fight. **Notes** - Weight: As you can see my character sheet says im on Medium load, Ill factor it into my equpment and return to full speed. ** Prepared Spells ** 0. Flare (DC 15), Cure Minor Wounds x3, Detect Magic 1. Entangle (DC 16), Produce Flame x2, Goodberries (b), Faerie Fire (b) 2. Fog Cloud, Cat's Grace (b), Flaming Sphere, Resist Energy 3. Call Lightning, Call Lightning, Call Lightning (b) **Preparations** Enter the arena with shield on hand. Perductoris should be besides me. Leave 15 of my bullets in my locker, this brings my speed back to full. Initiative Won: - Cast "Entangle" from memory upon his space and move forwards if successful. - Upon successful entanglement cast "Resist energy Fire" from memory and move forwards. Initiative Lost: - I suspect he cast fly. If he did, cast resist energy "Fire" and move forwards. Once in range, cast Dispel Magic from scroll. Buff while closing in. Subsequent rounds: - If Entangled, move behind a rock taking full cover and cast call lightning. Should he become immune, switch to summon hippogriph or use dispel magic (if I still have lots of bolts to go). - If flying try to dispel, if unsuccessful, cast call lightning and produce flame and turn into an eagle. Follow him and kill him with those spells. All Else Fails: - Attempt to use Dire wolves (if grounded, otherwise 1d3 hippos), hippogriphs or wolves from my summons. (in that order) **Things of Note** - I have Goodberries within me, use them (or potions, but berries first) If I get below 10 hp AND am NOT under melee. - Entangle reduces speed by 50% on a successful save. - Entangle reduces the victim's dexterity by 4, AND his attacks by 2. So, ranged attacks -4 - Faerie Fire Negates Concealment granted by the fog, If he tries to use partial concealment or cover to hide cast this. - Perductoris and summons are better than the common folk. Check their improved stats within the character page. - Perductoris will allways grant me cover, thats his priority (and get the +4 dex bonus) - Do not use any equpment not specified in tactics - Please msg me with any doubts about spells or tactics. - Should he use Resist energy (Lightning), Cast Dispel magic from scroll. If successful continue with bolting, if not, resort to dire wolf summons while hiding in casting within a fog cloud. Thanks for running the fight and have fun! As you can see, I was considering Resist energy Fire and Dispel as my weapons. So it wouldn't have been a mindless fight |
| Druid Roxors04-26-04, 08:12 PM | Also, About the fireball and SleetStorm: You forget that Sleetstorm blocks all vision and that Fireball has a 20ft radius. Technically, If I moved 20ft, I would be outside your Fireball range and you wouldn't know. |
| Arstimis04-26-04, 11:02 PM | @ Limit: another good fight, too bad i had really unlucky rolls in bad times, and he had lucky ones with perfect timing. I just had one question. Round 7 Kage charges and attempts to sunder Laucian’s sheathed ranseur. (34 ( +10 +4 sunder) vs 11 (10 + 0size +1dex)) Confirm: (34 ( +10 +4 sunder) vs 11 (10 + 0size +1dex)) Crit! Damage: 23 (5+5) + (8+5) The ranseur’s haft splinters into two pieces. Im not exactly sure about the rules of this...it seems legal..but really stupid that its easie to sunder something that is on my back, impossible for him to reach as its on the other side of my body, and sheathed, than it is to sunder something held in my hands in front of him |
| SnarkHunter04-26-04, 11:13 PM | Well aside from that the Ransuer is an item and you can't crit inanimate objects :D. |
| Battousai200504-26-04, 11:58 PM | Originally posted by Jindl @Battousai - In the Lillith vs Sarah fight, wouldn't Lillith's wolf Lucy have been affected by the entangle spell? I assume the effect was centered on Sarah, and so the wolf would have to move through it to attack her. If the wolf failed a save upon entering the entangle, then it is likely that it would never have reached / attacked Sarah. Since the majority of the damage was done by the wolf, I would appreciate it if you could look into this. Of course, if the wolf passes its first save, the later saves are irrelevant, since it will be beside Sarah (and within reach to continue attacking). So, could you check and see if the wolf makes the first save against the entangle, as it moves up to make its first attack on Sarah? -Jindl Ooops. Forgot to show the save on the page. No, the wolf passed its save. I rolled it, I just forgot to put it on. |
| Hatzinger04-27-04, 03:28 AM | EDIT: Silly me didn´t spot the passage you pointed to, Jindl. Thanks for pointing this part of the spell´s description out. |
| Hatzinger04-27-04, 05:16 AM | Arstimis, i noted some minor errors in this fight: Round 3 - Lions don´t know the "seek" trick and have to be pushed to do it. The DC for that is 25, not 15. I think that with the DC 15 you wrote you accidentally used the DC to teach the animal the trick instead. (skill check outcome would still be the same) - Also, pushing an animal is a full-round action. So he wouldn´t have been able to let the lion "seek" in the same round that he created it. (the lion wouldn´t have been able to attack Heinrich anyway) Round 4 I think you overestimated the power of the "scent" ability. SRD: When a creature detects a scent, the exact location of the source is not revealed; only its presence somewhere within range. [... which is 30 ft., btw.] The creature can take a move action to note the direction of the scent. Whenever the creature comes within 5 feet of the source, the creature pinpoints the source’s location. So the lion would have only sensed Heinrich´s presence (he had already spend his move action) IF he was within 30 ft. of Heinrich then. But he would not have known that Heinrich was in the air. Thus, Jo'Li would not have known it. (Not of big importance; but as many inexperienced pitlords use the "scent" ability wrong, i want to point this out here again.) Round 9 Heinrich had AC 10 +4(dex) vs. touch attacks, not 13. Thus, Jo'Li´s flames would have missed. |
| Arstimis04-27-04, 05:32 AM | Originally posted by Hatzinger Arstimis, i noted some minor errors in this fight: Round 3 - Lions don´t know the "seek" trick and have to be pushed to do it. The DC for that is 25, not 15. I think that with the DC 15 you wrote you accidentally used the DC to teach the animal the trick instead. (skill check outcome would still be the same) - Also, pushing an animal is a full-round action. So he wouldn´t have been able to let the lion "seek" in the same round that he created it. (the lion wouldn´t have been able to attack Heinrich anyway) Round 4 I think you overestimated the power of the "scent" ability. SRD: So the lion would have only sensed Heinrich´s presence (he had already spend his move action) IF he was within 30 ft. of Heinrich then. But he would not have known that Heinrich was in the air. Thus, Jo'Li would not have known it. (Not of big importance; but as many inexperienced pitlords use the "scent" ability wrong, i want to point this out here again.) Round 9 Heinrich had AC 10 +4(dex) vs. touch attacks, not 13. Thus, Jo'Li´s flames would have missed. ahh....thank you Hatzinger. If you dont mind though, and the mistakes werent fight altering, i wont change them. I forgot about the push thing...ya...i just looked up seek, and used that dc, i see i was wrong. I realized the lion was basically useless against Heinrich, so i didnt pay much attention to what he was doing. Im not looking at the fight right now...but i think the lion used a move action to see Heinrich flying up...i guess i could have made the listen checks against your spell casting..that might have been a pain, hehe. sorry about that last hit...i was getting tired, and i think for some reason i looked quickly at the wrong character sheet for touch ac...i dont know what was srong....thanks for pointing out the errors you had good tactics |
| Smergel04-27-04, 06:07 AM | From the Smergel vs. The Voiceless fight: Smergel takes out another scroll and utilizes the words. However, his arcane energy fails him as the scroll blows up, scorching his face. ugh.. sorry man, two nat 1s - failed the caster lvl check and the anti-mishap. 5 (1d6) damage See Invis is a level 2 spell, so it's caster level 3. I'm a level 3 sorcerer. Shouldn't need a caster lvl check. I was also suprised to see Smergel casting MM and firing his crossbow when he could have cast more sleep spells (while The Voiceless was stunned by the pretty colors). However that's my fault for not stating it more clearly in the tactics.. Smergel |
| TaggIIV04-27-04, 08:18 AM | as for the caster lvl check: a nat 1 is automatic failure. on any check. that means its always necessary to roll. you couldve been a level 20, a nt 1 would still fail it. as for the sleep things: im really sorry about that, i was under the impression you were a wizard or something and only had one prepared. i'll go back and redo this much |
| Limit04-27-04, 08:18 AM | Originally posted by Arstimis @ Limit: another good fight, too bad i had really unlucky rolls in bad times, and he had lucky ones with perfect timing. I just had one question. Im not exactly sure about the rules of this...it seems legal..but really stupid that its easie to sunder something that is on my back, impossible for him to reach as its on the other side of my body, and sheathed, than it is to sunder something held in my hands in front of him The dice roller over at brinkster doesn't like you Arstimis, I think thats it :-( I agree. I kept rereading the sunder rules in an attempt to understand them better, and it said the difficulty to hit a worn object is: 10 + objects size modifier + Wear's Dex Mod. Which seems awful low to me. The passage doesn't mention what an object's size modifier is, so I went with "Both weapons are sized for medium creatures, so they balance out". If anyone wants to shed some light on this subject, I'd appreciate it. |
| Limit04-27-04, 08:19 AM | Originally posted by SnarkHunter Well aside from that the Ransuer is an item and you can't crit inanimate objects :D. Hmm, didn't see that mentioned in the PHB under sunder or the SRD under crits. You'd think they'd put information like that in one of those two places. :confused: |
| Limit04-27-04, 08:23 AM | @TaggIIV: To be honest and fair, The Voiceless can't use flurry of blows if he takes more then a five foot step. In one of the later rounds, he was ten feet from his opponent and not enlarged, so he could have only used a normal attack. That being said, flurry of blows wasn't in my tactics, which wern't followed in the later rounds at all. |
| TaggIIV04-27-04, 08:25 AM | well your tactics said "stunning blows" i didnt know if you meant stunning fist or flurry of blows, it was a 50/50 shot at choosing correctly :p |
| Jindl04-27-04, 08:29 AM | Originally posted by TaggIIV as for the caster lvl check: a nat 1 is automatic failure. on any check. that means its always necessary to roll. you couldve been a level 20, a nt 1 would still fail it. Smergel was correct. You do not roll a caster level check if they are the same caster level or higher than the scroll. A 3rd level sorceror can use a 2nd level scroll without rolling a caster level check because his caster level is equal to or greater than the scrolls caster level. <Mental note: One of these days I need to find the time to compile all this stuff and link it into the rules.> -Jindl |
| Smergel04-27-04, 08:29 AM | Originally posted by TaggIIV as for the caster lvl check: a nat 1 is automatic failure. on any check. that means its always necessary to roll. you couldve been a level 20, a nt 1 would still fail it. as for the sleep things: im really sorry about that, i was under the impression you were a wizard or something and only had one prepared. i'll go back and redo this much From the SRD: If the user meets all the requirements noted above, and her caster level is at least equal to the spell’s caster level, she can automatically activate the spell without a check. If she meets all three requirements but her own caster level is lower than the scroll spell’s caster level, then she has to make a caster level check (DC = scroll’s caster level + 1) to cast the spell successfully. If she fails, she must make a DC 5 Wisdom check to avoid a mishap (see Scroll Mishaps, below). A natural roll of 1 always fails, whatever the modifiers. I may lose all my fights, but I try to at least win the rules discussions :) Smergel |
| TaggIIV04-27-04, 08:32 AM | okok, so i was wrong about that too. i'll go back and redo this stuff later, right now i gotta go ta schooll... |
| Jindl04-27-04, 08:36 AM | Originally posted by Hatzinger Round 3 - Lions don´t know the "seek" trick and have to be pushed to do it. The DC for that is 25, not 15. I think that with the DC 15 you wrote you accidentally used the DC to teach the animal the trick instead. (skill check outcome would still be the same) - Also, pushing an animal is a full-round action. So he wouldn´t have been able to let the lion "seek" in the same round that he created it. (the lion wouldn´t have been able to attack Heinrich anyway) From the DMG, under Bag of Tricks (pg 248): "The animal serves the character who drew it from the bag for 10 minutes (or until slain or ordered back into the bag), at which point it disappears. It can follow any of the commands described in the Handle Animal skill (page 74 of the Players Handbook)." So this lion does know the seek trick; it knows all the tricks (perhaps that's why its called a Bag of Tricks). The Handle Animal DC should have been 10 to get the lion to seek and it would have taken a move action to give the command. -Jindl |
| Myrridin04-27-04, 08:55 AM | Originally posted by Druid Roxors Also, About the fireball and SleetStorm: You forget that Sleetstorm blocks all vision and that Fireball has a 20ft radius. Technically, If I moved 20ft, I would be outside your Fireball range and you wouldn't know. Except that you can't move 20ft. You can only walk at half speed, which is 10 feet for you. So I'd get you with both fireballs, then still have 2 rounds untill you got out of the storm when I could buff. I'm invisible and moving, so the dispel is harder, at least until I'm visible. I also had provisions to cast Dispel Magic once Protection (Fire) was cast. I had Resist Energy (Electricity) and (fire) as spells to cast as well. From the SRD: A creature can walk within or through the area of sleet at half normal speed with a DC 10 Balance check I'm fine with losing the fight, I'm just saying that it would have went differently. No rerun needed, just a couple clarifications that I had. Also, this is a question I sent to cellar. Dispel Magic is a fourth level Druid spell. It's listed on the scrolls table as a 3rd level spell, cleric level is the default. Can Druids cast it from a scroll as if it were a third level spell? i.e. Corinthus is a 6th level caster. Dispel Magic should be a 4th level spell for him, so he'd have to buy Dispel Magic scrolls of 4th level to cast it. If that's not the way it goes, then Druids can cast the spell 2 levels earlier by investing in a couple scrolls. |
| Myrridin04-27-04, 09:13 AM | It's already Tuesday. Druid Roxers, nice fight; just had a few questions about it. I'll start preparing for this week's fight. |
| Magagumo04-27-04, 09:17 AM | @Artismis, I'm afraid there are major errors in the Grimlock & Angosh fight, dude :-/. You handled the sundering of the shield well, but attacking the spiked chain and flail function in the exact same manner. In your fight, it appears that you had Grimlock simply attempt to hit an AC twice to destroy the chain.. I honestly think this needs to be remidied, as this is a clear Mod error of rules. Not to sound harsh, just the fact that its Wednesday means one must move quickly on this :) Also, there is no hardness for tower shield, since Grimlock's sword is adamantine (not a big deal, just noting), good noting that since the weapons and shields are enlarged, they have 2x hp. |
| Jindl04-27-04, 09:34 AM | @Myrridin - It says the creature moves at half speed. That means his speed is 10 and a double move is 20 feet. The spell does not say he moves at half speed and can take only a single move. The halfling can double move within the sleet storm to move 20 feet. I hope you understand this, because it may factor in to your future tactics. Also, scrolls are divided into arcane and divine. A druid can use a divine dispel magic created by a cleric which is a 3rd level spell and 5th level caster. A cleric can use a divine flamestrike scroll created by a druid which is a 4th level spell and 7th level caster. There was a couple of pages debate about this a long time ago (when Jindl was 5th level) and the answer was determined and explained then (and we didn't even have to vote :D ) @Magagumo - You know its Tuesday, right? -Jindl |
| Myrridin04-27-04, 09:41 AM | Jindl: Thanks for explaining that. I saw that it said the creature could walk, and figured that meant only a single move action as I thought double moving was more than walking. Noted for future tactics. He still wouldn't have been out of the storm, but I couldn't have fireballed him. Eh, call it a draw I guess. Hmmmm, interesting for druids and clerics then. That's a nice bonus, to be able to cast a spell easier, before you should be able to. |
| Pitlords04-27-04, 09:58 AM | @Hatzinger and Arstimis - There's a pretty big problem with the Jo'Li vs Heinrich fight, which I guess nobody has realized yet. Heinrich has both an empowered magic missile and an empowered scorching ray memorized. The problem is, empower adds 2 to the spell level, and he memorized these spells as if it only adds 1. An empowered magic missile is a 3rd level spell (not second level). An empowered scorching ray is a 4th level spell (not third level, and Heinrich is not capable of casting this.) So, Jo'Li would actually have sustained quite a bit less damage, and possible could have had a couple more rounds to throw produce flames at Heinrich. @Arstimis - Please take a look at this and try to fix it. I would suggest making the scorching ray a normal 2nd level spell (taking up the 2nd level spot formerly held by the empowere magic missile), and having the empowered magic missile remain empowered (taking up the 3rd level spot formerly held by the empowered scorching ray.) This results in Jo'Li taking less damage from the scorching ray (but the same damage from the empowered magic missile), and giving him at least one more round to throw produce flame or heal or whatever. -Jindl EDIT: Drat, wrong login... |
| Hatzinger04-27-04, 10:05 AM | Originally posted by TaggIIV as for the caster lvl check: a nat 1 is automatic failure. on any check. that means its always necessary to roll. you couldve been a level 20, a nt 1 would still fail it. as for the sleep things: im really sorry about that, i was under the impression you were a wizard or something and only had one prepared. i'll go back and redo this much This topic was discussed a few weeks ago. I thoughed the same as you now. But the rules only say that a nat. 1! or 20! on ATTACK ROLLS are auto-hit/misses. You will find no rule saying that any other rolls are auto-hit/misses on natural 1! or 20!. All rolls that are not attack rolls ignore the natural 1! and 20!. So, for example, a skill check of 20!+X could still not be enough if it doesn´t beat the DC. |
| Jindl04-27-04, 10:09 AM | Originally posted by Hatzinger This topic was discussed a few weeks ago. I thoughed the same as you now. But the rules only say that a nat. 1! or 20! on ATTACK ROLLS are auto-hit/misses. You will find no rule saying that any other rolls are auto-hit/misses on natural 1! or 20!. All rolls that are not attack rolls ignore the natural 1! and 20!. So, for example, a skill check of 20!+X could still not be enough if it doesn´t beat the DC. Attack rolls (including grapple checks) and Saving Throws are the only rolls subject to automatic success or failure (natural 20's and 1's). Skill checks, ability checks (including Tripping checks), caster level checks, etc ... do not function under the automatic success / failure rules. -Jindl |
| Hatzinger04-27-04, 10:12 AM | Awwww..... they changed the empower feat in 3.5... Sorry i didn´t notice that. I just assumed it would be as it always has been... @Arstimis, then i would like to have no spell empowered, if you please. @Jindl: may i exchange this feat with something other if i never used it? With +2 spell level, it hardly seems useful to me now. |
| Myrridin04-27-04, 10:25 AM | The thing with a Caster Level check is that a 1 is a mishap, so I guess you could say that it's automatic failure. |
| SnarkHunter04-27-04, 10:40 AM | Originally posted by Limit Hmm, didn't see that mentioned in the PHB under sunder or the SRD under crits. You'd think they'd put information like that in one of those two places. :confused: Not sure where it is in the SRD but in the PHB page 165 on the section Breaking and Entering, Immunities: Objects are immune to nonlethal damage and to critical hits. Hope that clears this up! |
| Arstimis04-27-04, 10:54 AM | Sorry about my bad pitlording everyone...im going to fix the errors now @Magagumo..im not sure where you get saying that i only made Grimlock hit the ac to sunder the chain...there are clearly opposed rolls there from Angosh...Dang..didnt see it was adamantine...as if it really mattered doing 50 damage a round, ya i didnt include the 2x hp @Hatzinger and Jindle: Im going to take some damage off the scorching ray and magic missle...the fight will probably last a couple rounds longer |
| Jindl04-27-04, 10:59 AM | Originally posted by Hatzinger Awwww..... they changed the empower feat in 3.5... Sorry i didn´t notice that. I just assumed it would be as it always has been... @Arstimis, then i would like to have no spell empowered, if you please. @Jindl: may i exchange this feat with something other if i never used it? With +2 spell level, it hardly seems useful to me now. Okay. Though I will tell you from experience that my wizards have always enjoyed empower spell. The Elder used to really dish out some damage with empowered shocking grasp. And empowered scorching ray is capable of dealing 18d6 as a 4th level spell with no save (better than any other 4th or 5th level spell). Plus, I know Bruno (Magagumo) is a big fan of empowered vampiric touch. But, if you think the cost is too high, then you can certainly switch out the feat for another (but only because you didn't use it in the final version of the fight). -Jindl |
| Arstimis04-27-04, 11:04 AM | Fight changed....i was really surprised at how little it effected anything |
| Limit04-27-04, 12:02 PM | Originally posted by SnarkHunter Not sure where it is in the SRD but in the PHB page 165 on the section Breaking and Entering, Hope that clears this up! Thanks Much! |
| Magagumo04-27-04, 01:05 PM | First of all, I'm clearly a bit loopy as this is my last week before three finals (and major paper) so I am seemingly unable to even tell the date ;) Seconldy, @ Artismis, my apologies, I misread how you displayed the opposed rolls (see insanity above and realize I read this in around 5 mint his morning). Sorry for the false alarm, I promise to be good now :) Also, Zorander accepts a challenge from 2nd Havester, and I would like no fights this week (2 fighters= -1 cred, so I'll be square again). Alright, that's it for me. Re: Empower, yea, this feat has been surprisingly useful, I would change it if you don't plan on using it more tan once or twice on a 1-3rd level spell per fight (Thus why bruno uses the Rod). BUt, if you're an evocationist or possible transmuter (Disinitegrate ;) perhaps invest in the feat for higher levels. I know Bilo is beginning to use it to good effect once he gets the fun 6th lvl slots, allowing him to empower 4th spells (v. expensive that Normal Rod). SO yea, spell levels and amount of spells empowered is critical. |
| Mercy04-27-04, 06:02 PM | Originally posted by Arstimis Fight changed....i was really surprised at how little it effected anything Well there was one other thing that could have affect the outcome and that is the Broach of Shielding that Jo'Li wears. Please don't modify the fight anymore though |
| Arstimis04-27-04, 06:56 PM | Originally posted by Mercy Well there was one other thing that could have affect the outcome and that is the Broach of Shielding that Jo'Li wears. Please don't modify the fight anymore though dan it, I'm sorry. Are you sure you don't want me to fix that...it woulnt be a problem at all |
| TaggIIV04-27-04, 10:42 PM | ok i finished the edits for smergel v. voiceless. my errors actually ended up altering the outcome of the match, i am extremely sorry. |
| Limit04-27-04, 11:02 PM | Fight Edit: I didnt feel like going down below and fleshing everything out, but i did roll for will saves. now since smergel was supposed to automatically succeed the caster lvl check on the see invisibility check, he, well, could see invisibility. so during the rounds "3-??" Voiceless would've been a sitting duck while Smergel tried casting on him. At least, that is, until he gets targeted. So, during that time Smergel casted sleep. will save successful. Smergel's invisibility at this time wears off. so at this time lets follow what happened after the round 3-?? stuff. while voiceless was color sprayed, Smergel once more tried to cast sleep (in place of MM + heavy xbow). this time, it was successful. Smergel's coup de grace attempted with heavy xbow dealt 15 damage. fort save = 14 vs DC 25. Smergel wins. sorry about having such an error it ended up altering the entire result.. revised expenditures Emphasis mine. :eek: Well, I'd like to say that I thought the purpose of this forum was to learn about my build and see how well it stands up in combat. I'll be perfectly honest with you, and tell you that I didn't learn anything at all this week. One of my primary goals with The Voiceless is to make a melee character that high saves, but I don't know how much I failed each spell by - You didn't show any dice rolls. The other goal is to utilize stunning fist, which didn't get used. If you had questions about my tactics (which you admitted above) then you could have replied to me and asked, seeing as I sent my tactics four days or so before the fight was posted. You didn't edit the actual rounds to explain to us what happened, and you've still made mistakes. For example, The Voiceless has a pretty decent listen check. If his opponent moved or cast a spell, he'd have a chance of hearing him, thus giving him a good chance of targetting to throw his thunderstone and possibly interrupt all other spells cast for the rest of the fight. Perhaps I'm just a bit on edge because I put a good number of hours into each of my fights to make sure that they were accurate for the contestants in them, in hopes that they'd accomplish their goal of actually participating in CoCo - and I don't feel like my fight was treated with the same respect. My first suggestion? If you desire to continue running fights, find the suggested format for posting fights, which includes dice rolls, spell durations, positions, etc, and use it. Alternatively, look at the fights of the elder mods and follow their example to the best of your ability. But in any case, don't worry about editting the fight again. Smergel has won! And he needs to get ready for the next fight! |
| TaggIIV04-27-04, 11:35 PM | Look, I really do apologize for all the inconvenience on both players' parts for my errors. But in my defense, it takes the same amount of these Hours to judge fights, and I know it was my fault for erring in the first place, but going back down in the round-by-round with the edits would have doubled the original hours taken (considering the edits were on 2 very different parts of the fight which consequently change almost everything in between them), hours i did not have to spare this particular day. I am sorry in any case and I truly am sorry you feel that way. I will try to be more careful in future fights, and I'll use the examples. As for editing the actual rounds with what happened, i thought my explanation was at least fairly coherent in what happened. in the round labelled "3-??", it is replaced by the scenario that you are both invisible but smergel can see invisibility, then he casts sleep, and etc. I thought i had labelled all the actions in this order.. anyways from the time invisibility wore off for smergel, go to rounds A through after the first time Smergel casted sleep while voiceless was dazed in color spray. from then the battle was redone with what i had stated - smergel had casted sleep once again, this time successfully. now smergel approaches, and CDG's voiceless, also successfully. now im not sure what your point of listening is, because in the edited fight smergel didnt even stay invisible for most of his spells. and the first one he did cast, he lost invisibility so you can simply look at him to see that he is casting... as for stunning fist, it didnt have the opportunity to get used (in the edited scenario. in the primary one, i cannot be completely at fault because your tactics stated 'stunning blows' which i interpreted as flurry of blows rather than stunning fist, which i see now as what you meant to be done). First voiceless was stuck in the position of being seen but not being able to see, and he cant stunning fist air, then almost immediately once he would normally have the chance to strike he is put to sleep and killed. im fairly confident you cant use stunning fist while unconscious, either. |
| Jindl04-30-04, 07:11 PM | This thread is closed. Any additional discussion should be continued in the Tavern. Thanks! -Jindl |