Post/Author/DateTime	Post
TelinArtho 08-09-06, 11:05 AM	Fights of the Week: August 9th Sheets Deadline for editing characters sheets is 21:00 CET. Central European Time (http://wwp.centraleuropeantime.eu/) shows the time. Please don't edit the sheet after the deadline or you will lose the match. Currently, you have about 4 hours. Rules of Gladius All that you need to know is written in the Rules of Gladius. It could be useful also to give a look to the Court Decisions. Please do not make fake accounts or insult the Elders. Pairings GM Caterane will pair the active Characters of Gladius after the deadline. Make sure that your character is not in Prison (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=571107&goto=lastpost). Pitlording You should use the CoCo Dice Roller (http://www.hwx.it/wizards.com) for the fight. If you need, there is a nice Template ready to use that will help. You could find very useful the Battle Map Tag Generator (http://www.hwx.it/coco) for dynamic Maps, You must post a link to your fight in this thread when it is complete. Other useful links are Skills and Feats, Quick Access tables for XP and Gold. Comments & Concerns Post any comments or concerns for this weeks fights in this thread. Be kind and courteous to your fellow posters, don't attack pitlords. Please remember that they do hard work and consume a lot of time to let you play and above all, have FUN! Latest News Guilds Rules: With the new guild rules as good as finished, pay close attention to the several guild threads the coming weeks. Also, activate your characters if they are guildmembers and haven't been active lately before 16th of Aug or your guild will be fined. Guilds Active: If I am not mistaken this marks the first week of the new Guild System. I have put this here in expectation that Cat will request more information to be included... If you have questions or comments on any of the changes, please make your posts be heard in the Council of Gladius!
TelinArtho 08-09-06, 01:42 PM	Well, we're down to about 80 minutes now. Finish up your changes and get ready to RUMBLE!
TelinArtho 08-09-06, 02:56 PM	Give or take a few minutes and Time is Up folks. Pass your sheets to the front of the class so they can be ripped apart by your opponents...
lonewolf 08-09-06, 03:13 PM	just finished editing The Chameleon. I hope that this is acceptable considering the late fight post ...
bgt 08-09-06, 03:20 PM	I just edited Neidr's sheet 15 minutes after the deadline. Between her fight going up so late and me being at college registering for classes today, I didn't have time to do it sooner. All I did was change the header so that Neidr can fight this week. I'll understand if she can't fight this week, but it would be nice if she could.
Erithmu 08-09-06, 03:21 PM	Ditto w/ Ignatius ... late quest ending
Iced 08-09-06, 04:14 PM	Anixx is late for deadline also, but i'd appreciate it if he was able to get something accomplished this week (Trying to stay w/ the EHTC)
TelinArtho 08-09-06, 04:26 PM	Unless you've fixed the outstanding violations - Annixx should still be in prison.
Iced 08-09-06, 04:35 PM	They've been fixed for a long time Telin, but the prison tag remains and there's no link to the violation post anywhere. I assume it was you who posted on the subject of Anixx's allies and if that's the case then the problem no longer exists. ~Iced
TelinArtho 08-09-06, 04:39 PM	Actually that's not true. If you go back to the violation post (which is conveniently linked through the 2nd post of the prison thread), you'll see the comments about the allies. All of the "not a valid ally" allies have errors in them. Regardless of that - your half-giant zombie allies ALSO have errors in them. Ergo - you are behind bars until it is fixed.
Iced 08-09-06, 05:03 PM	lol, alright Telin. I'll take a look at it.
Iced 08-09-06, 05:13 PM	@Pitlords - Osiris is EL4 and still as of now in the EL3's and my title line says EL3 (I forgot to change it) but she is in fact EL4 and shouldn't be paired with a 3.
Pitlords 08-09-06, 06:10 PM	PAIRINGS DONE Credit Changes +9: Caterane +4: Uther, Zevox +2: Ayyiniwindrider, bgt, DSugui, Iced, MWB, Pittbull, Vath, Stormwind +1: Erithmu, Myrridin, Zelck, NiQil +0: Telin -1: Dracazar, lonewolf We have a pitlord shortage again. I've assigned two extra fights to Telin and myself to compensate.
Milov 08-09-06, 06:30 PM	Unless I'm mistaken, you cannot pitlord your own fight, which sorta makes this, Darrgon (TelinArtho) vs. Ihdald (Milov) : TelinArtho [Cavern] [Week 2] a violation. Figured I'd point it out so that it could be changed and I can resend my tactics to the new pitlord.
Erithmu 08-09-06, 06:33 PM	Unless I'm mistaken, you cannot pitlord your own fight, which sorta makes this, a violation. Figured I'd point it out so that it could be changed and I can resend my tactics to the new pitlord. @both ... swing my way .. I'll pick this fight up, no classes next week.
Caterane 08-09-06, 07:17 PM	Changed that to Erithmu
Milov 08-09-06, 07:37 PM	Alright, I'll send the tactics out now.
MindWandererB 08-09-06, 07:40 PM	@Zevox: Tactics sent. Yay! You don't get Zero this week! @Telin: You do get Zero... but in the Temple, where he sucks. <sigh> Tactics sent.
Zevox 08-09-06, 07:44 PM	@Zevox: Tactics sent. Yay! You don't get Zero this week! Indeed :D . Tactics recieved. Zevox
NiQil 08-09-06, 09:19 PM	Indeed :D . Tactics recieved. Zevox On the other hand, you get two FFAs and a Hunter fight....blech On a related note, how is it that one of my characters always seems to end up in the team/hunter/ffa group every week? I am almost ready to just concede the damn thing...if my characters could stay away from these damn group fights and stick to 1v1 fights, they'd be golden....instead they're barely hanging on :weep:
TelinArtho 08-09-06, 09:23 PM	@NiQil - its a factor of having too many characters active. If you only had 1 or 2 - you'd probably find it fairly irregular to be in a "special" fight. That being said - I think I haven't had a week with just 1v1 since before I left in February... although I tend to have 5-6 characters active... @Erithmu - tactics forwarded. @Caterane and Vathelokai: Burglary! has been sent. Also - I asked whether part of a multi-spell scroll can be stolen. It doesn't make a difference this week - but would certainly matter to me later. EDIT: @Cat - tactics for Ilendil have been sent. @the rest of my pitlords - I've got some work to do - but I should be sending my tactics in a few hours - or at the latest tomorrow by noon.
NiQil 08-09-06, 09:59 PM	@ Zevox: Tactics for Famine sent via PM @ King Uther: Tactics for Pestilence sent via PM
Zevox 08-09-06, 10:27 PM	On the other hand, you get two FFAs and a Hunter fight....blech I'd much rather have that than Zero. Particularly since two of them are only 3 combatants, not 4. On a related note, how is it that one of my characters always seems to end up in the team/hunter/ffa group every week? The ironic this week is that Famine's FFA is almost identical to Death's hunter match last week. Its just Famine instead of Death, in the forest instead of the sewer, and with Kitty thrown in. Almost scary, actually. Anyway, tactics for that recieved. @ Iced - Tactics for Archdevil Asran (vs Saffron Brass) have been PMed. The Devil vs the Dragon - I have a feeling that will be an interesting match. @ bgt - Tactics for Istima Telarc (vs Quesis) have been PMed. I almost feel sorry for Quesis - her winning is likely about to be broken just because I have double my normal pp due to being taken out early last week by dumb luck. Of course, I could win without the doubled pp too, but it would be harder. @ Telin - Tactics for Ceilia Durrol (vs Osiris) have been PMed. I smell a perfect cycle for my mounted Priestess :D . @ bgt (again) - Tactics for Destra Stormwind (vs Enoch the Prophet) have been PMed. Druid vs Cleric - should be interesting. @ Myrridin - Still working on Eraca's tactics. Seems both Loddick and Eraca have counters to each other's counters - makes things complicated. They'll be in your PM box either tonight or tomorrow morning. Zevox
hogarth 08-09-06, 10:57 PM	Why didn't Gom Golagoog get paired? I didn't think that Treetall counted as activated (since it's just a holdover of last week's fight; Pittbull confirmed this), so I figured that I could have two other characters fighting this week. I'm not complaining -- I'm just wondering what to avoid next week.
King Uther 08-09-06, 11:12 PM	@MB Can you believe a FFA with 3 melee fighters? That never happens. This one is going to be exciting. Crafting tactics now. Edit: Tactics for Alagar sent via PM.
Erithmu 08-10-06, 12:06 AM	@Hold over fight: got both tactics, I might have to send a question out in the morning (schoolwork tonight) @KU: yea .. the half dragon vs two spiked chain wielders ... I'm extatic ... oh and you forgot you have your little gnome in tow. @Zevox: yea ... I know how I 'want' to write tactics but I can see like 10 different contingencies that I have to write. @MWB/Myr(my pitlords): tactics tomorrow after class for me ....
Zevox 08-10-06, 02:17 AM	@ Myrridin - Tactics for Eraca Moralta (vs Loddick Saffrion) have been PMed. I've got my fingers crossed - luck is going to be needed to win that one. @ Erithmu - Yeah, an yet still I find myself wishing I had more possible contigencies for this one - another memorized spell or two for instance. If you had your normal 15 pp this week I'd be more confident about this, but with 22 theres just so much more you can do. It'll be a close one I expect, though the arena favors you since it makes hiding tough on Eraca. Zevox
Zevox 08-10-06, 03:04 AM	Why didn't Gom Golagoog get paired? I didn't think that Treetall counted as activated (since it's just a holdover of last week's fight; Pittbull confirmed this), so I figured that I could have two other characters fighting this week. I'm not complaining -- I'm just wondering what to avoid next week. Might have to do with the fact that hes not on the character roster. Did you remember to PM Pitlords and ask him to add this character to it? If not, that would be your problem. @ lonewolf - Tactics for Kitty recieved, quick query PMed. @ bgt - Tactics for Neidr recieved. Zevox
Usurpator 08-10-06, 03:47 AM	@Zevox: Tactics sent. Yay! You don't get Zero this week! @Telin: You do get Zero... but in the Temple, where he sucks. <sigh> Tactics sent. About Zero, after looking him over I saw you have equipped him with a bow. Was there any special permission given to do this? Dragon's are not humanoid, nor do that have truly prehensile claws, which should effectively prohibit them from using things like bows. I don't remember seeing any WoTC source where a true dragon wields a melee weapon, much less a bow. The only (non-core) official source I can quote is the Draconomicon: A dragon's four feet resemble those of a great bird, each has three or four clawed toes facing forward, plus an additional toe, also with claw, set farther back on the foot and facing slightly inward like a human's thumb. Although a dragon's front feet are not truly prehensile, a dragon can grasp small objects with its front feet, provided they are not too small. This grip is not precise enough for tool use, writing, or wielding a weapon, but a dragon can hold and carry objects. A dragon is also capable of wielding magical devices, such as wands. It seems to me that dragons cannot use bows, it cannot wield it properly, much less get arrows from the quiver and nock them. I think it is one of the disadvantages of playing one. I we do allow dragons to wield weapons, I guess we can see were-eagles (in eagle form) shooting bows as well, since they have the same type of claws. Cross-posting in the 'Ask an Elder' thread. EDIT: I'm also seeing gloves of dexterity. These things would make it impossible for a dragon to do claw attacks, right? Because I was thinking of getting those for Tezca, but assumed I wouldn't be able to do claw attacks anymore, and was thinking of paying credits for custom gloves that would still allow that. I'll look further into your equipment. Dragons are not simply humanoids with wings, superior speed, armor etc. you know.....
Pittbull 08-10-06, 04:06 AM	@Zevox: Morathor's tactic has been sent. Waiting for Little Daisy's.
Usurpator 08-10-06, 05:00 AM	@King Uther: So we meet again at last. Unfortunately Flamehair's worst opponent is a dwarf. AC 28/26 or +8/+13 to resist trips is not good. Grappling not an option. Ranged combat not an option. I think I need to pull out all the stops to come out on top in this one. Additionally, I had a tactic with good odds thought up already, but though we fought in the Temple, not in the Cavern (mixed it up with the Zero fight) so have to rethink now. EDIT: and what happened in Bilk's last fight? I assumed Expansion and Vigor, but didn't read it in the 3FC expenses. Then reread and saw it in your buff cycle, but somehow they were not applied in the fight?
Pittbull 08-10-06, 05:10 AM	Izumi vs a gray ooze (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=9801584&postcount=825) is finished. It is an funny coincidence that bluemage and me rolled the same monster for this fight.
hogarth 08-10-06, 06:43 AM	Might have to do with the fact that hes not on the character roster. Did you remember to PM Pitlords and ask him to add this character to it? If not, that would be your problem. Ah, that's probably it. Thanks!
Vathelokai 08-10-06, 09:05 AM	@Iced: PM about Denshi sent. Tactics for Dragon vs. Devil sent. @Cat: Tactics for (hopefully) quick fight between Zodiac and Ilendi sent. @Stormwind: Working on quest now... may be late; RL concerns.
Vathelokai 08-10-06, 09:09 AM	Izumi vs a gray ooze (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=9801584&postcount=825) is finished. It is an funny coincidence that bluemage and me rolled the same monster for this fight. I'm confused... how does a half giant wield a Gargantuan Kusari-Gama? I don't have a DMG handy so I cannot look at the oriental weapons.
Myrridin 08-10-06, 09:12 AM	@Zevok: Tactics for Eraca Moralta received. At least I'm already familiar with the character, as this is the second week in a row I'll be running her. :)
Pittbull 08-10-06, 09:31 AM	I'm confused... how does a half giant wield a Gargantuan Kusari-Gama? I don't have a DMG handy so I cannot look at the oriental weapons. I don't know either, I just assumed that this is right, since Izumi is a character who fought allready some fights. MacBrea uses it with a -4 penalty for non-profiency, but he might be the one who states this clear.
TelinArtho 08-10-06, 09:56 AM	I asked about the gargantuan weapons when I first came back. Apparently the weapon is light for a medium sized wielder. So increase its size category by two and you get a huge one wielded in two hands at a -4 penalty. Since a half-giant can use one size category larger - that gives you a gargantuan one at -4. That is correct. I happen to think the weapon is two-kinds of broken - but that's a discussion for another day...
Caterane 08-10-06, 10:26 AM	@Pittbull: Tactics sent.
TelinArtho 08-10-06, 10:39 AM	@DSugui - tactics sent for Kraegin and Anakala. I have now sent all of my tactics as far as I know. If someone has not received them, let me know.
orsono 08-10-06, 10:45 AM	Ghashara's Tactics sent to Zevox
TelinArtho 08-10-06, 10:49 AM	I have received tactics for both Zero and Celia. Waiting on each character's opponent.
TelinArtho 08-10-06, 10:53 AM	@Usurpator and MWB - I have sent a PM to Cat to get an official ruling on the Zero wielding a bow issue. Assuming he replies forthwith - I will let the two of you know his answer.
Pittbull 08-10-06, 10:57 AM	@Cat: Tactics received! Did you inform Zevox about the staff?
Zevox 08-10-06, 11:11 AM	@Cat: Tactics received! Did you inform Zevox about the staff? I think you mean DSugui - hes the one fighting the Harvester. @ Pittbull - Tactics and addendum for Morathor recieved. I now have all tactics for that fight, so I'll run it tomorrow (work today). @ lonwolf - Answer recieved, thank you. @ orsono - Tactics for Ghashara recieved, a couple of problems PMed. @ hogarth - Tactics for Kilp recieved, thank you. Zevox
Pittbull 08-10-06, 11:15 AM	Oh :embarrass , sorry, yes, I meant DSugui.
Caterane 08-10-06, 11:26 AM	@DSugui: My staff has also Entropic Shield as a spell at CL 8.
DSugui 08-10-06, 12:46 PM	@DSugui - tactics sent for Kraegin and Anakala. Received. @King Uther: Tactics for Dronnar sent by PM. @Pittbull: Tactics for Daisy sent by PM. @ayyiniwindryder: don't know if you need them, but Tactics for Krug sent by PM anyways.
Milov 08-10-06, 12:47 PM	Zevox, tactics are sent for Genia.
Stormwind 08-10-06, 01:10 PM	@TheMagister: Miniquest for Mssr Hood is up here. @Vathelokai: No problems.
ayyiniwindryder 08-10-06, 01:37 PM	@TelinArtho and DSugui - tactics received @Zevox - will send Ivan's tactics later tonight Still waiting on Andurwin (Zelck) and Ba'al (Book5). I'll run whichever I get first as soon as I get it. Probably Saturday night at the latest for both fights.
orsono 08-10-06, 01:54 PM	@ orsono - Tactics for Ghashara recieved, a couple of problems PMed. @ Zevox - I sent updated tactics. thanks for the heads up. let me know if they are acceptable now.
Zevox 08-10-06, 02:31 PM	@ Orsono - Updated tactics recieved. Yep, they're good now. @ Milov - Tactics for Genia recieved. Zevox
MindWandererB 08-10-06, 03:35 PM	@MB Can you believe a FFA with 3 melee fighters? That never happens. This one is going to be exciting. Crafting tactics now. Edit: Tactics for Alagar sent via PM.FFAs with 3 melee fighters are pretty common, actually--but not above ECL 4 or so. At ECL 8, it should be pretty exciting. In the city, no less, which is perhaps the most fun place for melee fights. Tactics received.
Sunwolf 08-10-06, 03:44 PM	The dreaded double post....
Sunwolf 08-10-06, 03:46 PM	@Erithmu Tactics for Leif vs Cyra Val sent by PM
Myrridin 08-10-06, 04:26 PM	@Erithmu - tactics received. @my gladiators, the fight will most likely be run tomorrow, during the day. Good tactics from both of you, and I appreciate the contingencies and such that you included. Should be fun. :)
Erithmu 08-10-06, 04:39 PM	@Sunwolf: Tactics ... Got em @Myrridin: I think those might be close to what Eraca and Loddick had for team tactics vs Perius a few weeks ago @MWB: But these take the cake, I think they are roughly a page an a half in a word doc. Either way, this will be a good fight and the paying crowd will get their moneys worth. @Stromwind: your is the only stuff I'm missing ... probably going to run the held over fight here in a bit, as I need some sanity after writing those tactics.
Caterane 08-10-06, 04:45 PM	Ilendil vs Zodiac is up. Monster fight for Uther is set.
Vathelokai 08-10-06, 04:48 PM	I see ZOdiac vs. Ilindi is up. So I forgot he was an elf... Could of sent me a PM. Looking at the rolls, shouldn't Ilendi be frightened for 1 more round? Shouldn't Zodiac have taken a shot with his drow poisoned bolt? I know the tactics are a bit messy, but that is the most rational thing to attack with (I ment the axe as a last resort, after the arrow.)
TelinArtho 08-10-06, 04:54 PM	There's one thing I see as an issue: Ilendil's shot in round 6 hits AC10 - versus my opponent's impressive AC of 8.
ayyiniwindryder 08-10-06, 05:35 PM	@Zevox - tactics for Ivan sent via PM
Erithmu 08-10-06, 06:02 PM	If you are in base contact with a large creature, can you attack that creature with a reach weapon (assuming you have nowhere to move)
MindWandererB 08-10-06, 07:55 PM	@Rith: I don't think that's the intent, but I've never been able to come to a firm conclusion based strictly on the RAW. @Rith, Uther, lonewolf: All tactics received; will start plugging away at it now.
Erithmu 08-10-06, 07:59 PM	N/M I read the table wrong ... this could be scarry if this trend continues ... I haven't been able to do anything right these past few days ...
Caterane 08-10-06, 08:01 PM	I see ZOdiac vs. Ilindi is up. So I forgot he was an elf... Could of sent me a PM. Looking at the rolls, shouldn't Ilendi be frightened for 1 more round? Shouldn't Zodiac have taken a shot with his drow poisoned bolt? I know the tactics are a bit messy, but that is the most rational thing to attack with (I ment the axe as a last resort, after the arrow.) You're right. Unfortunately, Telin's also right with his hit in round 6 which drops you before you can cast cause fear. It's a long time since I had an AC 8 character so you hopefully forgive me that I assumed such a crappy hit hits. As for the sleep, that's clearly not my job to tell you. It's a rule issue, not a tactic issue.
Erithmu 08-10-06, 08:11 PM	Darrgon vs Ihdald is up Dice gods ... good grief ... Double check, my math, logic, DnD skills have been off the past couple of days.
TelinArtho 08-10-06, 09:22 PM	After buffing I want to cast my summon monster spells if I haven't already. If I have, position myself to cast Color spray without affecting any of my summons and cast it on him - repeat if necessary. Cast Acid Arrow from memory, draw and cast the acid arrow scroll and cast all acid splashes from memory. After the acid arrow scroll, draw my quarterstaff. Once done with all of the above - attack in melee. Well the issue I have is with the order of operations. In the tactics, you'll note that I wanted to cast Color Spray before the acid arrow so that I could benefit from the stunning/blindness when the summons were still there. Although the first acid arrow would have missed anyway - I do want to point out it was against the wrong AC - as it is a ranged touch and he is denied his dex bonus because of my invisibility. However, the first point definitely switches things around a fair amount and I would appreciate that being taken into account.
Erithmu 08-10-06, 09:30 PM	Telin if you look at where I had your summons, you will find that there was no way to not hit them. Ihdald was trapped w/ 5 ft of breathing room between the two of them. http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=cavern;a=Name,M,7,22;b= Name,M,11,22;c=Name,L,9,22;d=Name,L,12,2 2 Red = Dar Blue = Ihd Green/Pink summons The green one was summoned first, and while I see your point I will state that the section in question is slighly confusing. If you would like me to look at it I can, but I'll keep thematic rolls. Which would mean that 'maybe' the other centipede get another attack (haven't detail deconstructed it)
TelinArtho 08-10-06, 10:00 PM	Well there's something about it I probably should've mentioned - Color Spray is a mind-affecting spell. Vermin are not subject to mind-affects. In other words - it doesn't matter if they are in the area of effect or not. Keeping thematic rolls - this means that Ihdald drops his trident and shield while both centipedes are alive in round 8 when he is stunned and one centipede hits in that round. In round 9, the 2nd centipede gets an attack since it isn't dead and now Darrgon casts his acid arrow - which will hit because Idhald is stunned (AC10 vs my 11 attack). Darrgon follows that up with his next acid arrow - which won't crit but will still hit, then he'd cast his 2nd color spray - and then he'd finish him off with the acid sprays.
Erithmu 08-10-06, 10:22 PM	The only problem I have is that the fiendish template does two things. 1) Gives them an int score 2) Changes them into magic beasts the first gives them a mind, and second takes away the vermin style. Thoughts?
TelinArtho 08-10-06, 10:46 PM	Hmm - hadn't thought of that. The only counter I would have is that Vermin traits are listed under Special Qualities and the template says that it retains all of the special qualities of the base creature.
King Uther 08-11-06, 01:27 AM	@ PLs Tactics for Bilk and Cyalin sent via PM. @Usurpator Long time since we've faced off. I'll give you a hint. Bilk is going to try and hit Flamehair in the head. A lot. Flamehair has a lot more options available, but here's hoping for a nice average melee fight that I can win.
Erithmu 08-11-06, 09:17 AM	Hmm - hadn't thought of that. The only counter I would have is that Vermin traits are listed under Special Qualities and the template says that it retains all of the special qualities of the base creature. Part of my statement is that they loose the vermin qualities when the 'change' into magic beasts. This in only in the case of animals and vermin. Since the mindless trait is part of the vermin 'type' I would think that this quality is lost. I would say that the special qualities would be something inheriant like darkvision or scent which is attached to the creature itself rather than it's type. I am willing to entertain other opinions besides our own on this one.
TelinArtho 08-11-06, 10:09 AM	I wouldn't fret over it. The more I think about it - the more I think I am the one in error. I accept the fight as is. Well run.
TelinArtho 08-11-06, 10:22 AM	Having just checked my email to be sure - I have not yet received tactics from either Iced for Osiris or Usurpator for Tezca. Although I don't tend to automatically forfeit matches - I would appreciate getting the tactics soon, since it is unlikely I'll get to them over the weekend.
Usurpator 08-11-06, 11:09 AM	Having just checked my email to be sure - I have not yet received tactics from either Iced for Osiris or Usurpator for Tezca. Although I don't tend to automatically forfeit matches - I would appreciate getting the tactics soon, since it is unlikely I'll get to them over the weekend. I'm at home again now, so I have them before the deadline.
TelinArtho 08-11-06, 11:10 AM	Cool - PM them as soon as they are ready.
Myrridin 08-11-06, 11:35 AM	The fight Loddick vs Eraca Moralta is now up. It was pretty short. If there are any issues, please let me know. Contingencies kicked in pretty quickly in this fight.
TelinArtho 08-11-06, 11:46 AM	@Myrridin - although I was not involved in the fight, I would like to point out that when you fail to cast due to ASF - the spell is lost. (Unlike for a CL check - where it might not be lost): Arcane Spell Failure: Armor interferes with the gestures that a spellcaster must make to cast an arcane spell that has a somatic component. Arcane spellcasters face the possibility of arcane spell failure if they’re wearing armor. Bards can wear light armor without incurring any arcane spell failure chance for their bard spells. Casting an Arcane Spell in Armor: A character who casts an arcane spell while wearing armor must usually make an arcane spell failure roll. The number in the Arcane Spell Failure Chance column on Table: Armor and Shields is the chance that the spell fails and is ruined. If the spell lacks a somatic component, however, it can be cast with no chance of arcane spell failure. Shields: If a character is wearing armor and using a shield, add the two numbers together to get a single arcane spell failure chance.
Zevox 08-11-06, 12:17 PM	The fight Loddick vs Eraca Moralta is now up. It was pretty short. If there are any issues, please let me know. Contingencies kicked in pretty quickly in this fight. Just one question - why didn't you have Eraca start healing after she dropped below 18 hp? I was rather specific in my tactics that the only reason not to heal would be if I had already cast True Strike; anything else would be interrupted by the healing continegency. Given that the third EM only killed me by 3 hp a good healing roll or two could well change this completely, since Loddick will only have enough pp for 1 more missile shot. Edit: Correction, I have one other, big problem. You never rolled any reflex saves for Eraca to half the damage of these missiles. That could make all the difference too, since she has a 50/50 chance of making that (+8 vs DC 19 for the augmented missiles). Zevox
Myrridin 08-11-06, 01:18 PM	@Zevok: I missed the Reflex save, and I'll go back and add that. Though apparently once you fail the Mirror Image from spell failure, you can't re-try to cast it. That will actually change a lot of things; since you won't have Mirror Image running, he'll start to Ego Whip you, instead of Energy Missile. I'll go back and re-run the fight. As for the healing; you have 2, contradictory things in your tactics. One is to begin healing at 18hp, the other is to hurry up and get your spells up, and shoot a poisoned arrow. I'll make sure to give the healing the highest priority from now on.
TelinArtho 08-11-06, 01:28 PM	Enoch’s Protection from Good scroll does not ward against neutral summons – only Protection from Evil does. @Zevox - this has been argued before but is not true. Protection from Evil will ward all non-good summons; Protection from Good will ward all non-evil summons, etc. If you want, I can go back and dig up the discussion about it specifically but it was from back when I first started Kraegin...
Zevox 08-11-06, 01:55 PM	@Zevox - this has been argued before but is not true. Protection from Evil will ward all non-good summons; Protection from Good will ward all non-evil summons, etc. If you want, I can go back and dig up the discussion about it specifically but it was from back when I first started Kraegin... Seems we have two contradictory discussions here. Last time it came up when I was around, it was pointed out that while Prot. Evil specifically says that "good creatures are immune" to the warding (i.e. meaning all non-good are kept out), the other three simply say that they keep thier respective alignment out, nothing more, and no one argued that any further. This was a few months back, during the time you were absent - it'd take some digging to find it, but I suppose I could. Zevox
Zevox 08-11-06, 01:57 PM	As for the healing; you have 2, contradictory things in your tactics. One is to begin healing at 18hp, the other is to hurry up and get your spells up, and shoot a poisoned arrow. I'll make sure to give the healing the highest priority from now on. Meh, guess I forgot the "this overrides all other tactics" note I usually put on my healing contingencies. I'll need to be more careful about that. BTW, my user name ends in an x, not a k. Since I notice you seem to be making that error consistantly. ;) Zevox
TelinArtho 08-11-06, 02:12 PM	Seems we have two contradictory discussions here. Last time it came up when I was around, it was pointed out that while Prot. Evil specifically says that "good creatures are immune" to the warding (i.e. meaning all non-good are kept out), the other three simply say that they keep thier respective alignment out, nothing more, and no one argued that any further. This was a few months back, during the time you were absent - it'd take some digging to find it, but I suppose I could. Zevox Well, my discussion was admittedly short when I brought it up back in August of last year (3 posts...): [Post 2212] Author : TelinArtho Date : 08-23-05 12:40 PM Okay - here's a bit of a problem. Does the protection against summoned creatures for the protection from [alignment] spells protect against all creatures except the opposed alignment, or only against those of the alignment. Here's the relevant text from the SRD: Protection from evil Third, the spell prevents bodily contact by summoned creatures. This causes the natural weapon attacks of such creatures to fail and the creatures to recoil if such attacks require touching the warded creature. Good summoned creatures are immune to this effect. The protection against contact by summoned creatures ends if the warded creature makes an attack against or tries to force the barrier against the blocked creature. Spell resistance can allow a creature to overcome this protection and touch the warded creature. Protection from good This spell functions like protection from evil, except that the deflection and resistance bonuses apply to attacks from good creatures, and good summoned creatures cannot touch the subject Protection from chaos This spell functions like protection from evil, except that the deflection and resistance bonuses apply to attacks from chaotic creatures, and chaotic summoned creatures cannot touch the subject. Emphasis mine. This would affect the fight I have this week, but also, since I have a lot of summoners, this is a major difference. Bear in mind, I am fine with it either way - I just want to know precisely which one it is. /d -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 2213] Author : Gonbow Date : 08-23-05 12:43 PM Pro: Blah Each protection spell has the alignment opposite that it is protecting from; Thus, Pro: Law is a Chaotic spell and chaotic extraplaner/summoned creatures are not affected by it. Neutral, Good and Lawful summoned creatures would be hedged out by it, however. Thus, good creatures can go through pro-evil, etc, etc. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 2214] Author : TelinArtho Date : 08-23-05 12:58 PM That's what I thought, but the non-protection from evil spells had a different reading to it. Regardless - it looks fine. Anyway, onto my next question. If a summoned creature (with SR) goes up to a guy with Prot. from blah - would the creature get a single chance to break the barrier (one SR check) or would it be several (over several attacks)? /d Looking through (quickly I might add) the taverns 4-6 and the ask the elder thread, I did not find any further discussion. I would appreciate if the discussion can be found, because this is a point that has been handled consistently as far as I knew - and now this indicates something different. [EDIT] BTW, my user name ends in an x, not a k. Since I notice you seem to be making that error consistantly. Funny - I usually try to end your user name with an 's'... [EDIT2] Just did a quick search of Council 1 and 2 as well - nothing...
Zevox 08-11-06, 02:16 PM	The discussion I saw was in a FotW thread. I'll try to dig it up after I finish the fight I'm running (or if/when I take a break from it, if it becomes a pain). Zevox
MindWandererB 08-11-06, 02:22 PM	The last time I recall this discussion--and I certainly don't know where to find it in old threads--we were going with the RAW reading of the rules, which is that Prot. Evil is simply not phrased the same way as Prot. Good/Law/Chaos. The first says that only Good creatures are immune; the other three say that only creatures of the specified alignment are warded. And, in my experience, I have typically seen folks use Prot. Evil to ward everything but Good summons. Tactics against my druid have usually read, "use Prot. Evil to protect against summons, except for giant eagles and owls, in which case use Prot. Good." Saying that all four spells work the same way is a perfectly reasonable house rule, but that's just not what they say.
TelinArtho 08-11-06, 02:22 PM	I'll take the discussion into the ask an elder thread. Frankly - with the "new" ruling - it makes Protection from Evil a more powerful spell since it offers greater protection - this is the primary reason why I would disagree with this "ruling." In any case, if you do find the discussion - I would very much like to see it.
Stormwind 08-11-06, 03:36 PM	@Erithmu: Cyra's tactics for Cyra vs Leif sent via PM. Sorry that I couldn't get them to you earlier.
TelinArtho 08-11-06, 03:48 PM	@Usurpator and MWB - I want to commend you both on fine tactics. That being said - don't expect this fight to be done before some time in 2012... At least I'll have some fun working with it though.
Usurpator 08-11-06, 03:59 PM	@Usurpator and MWB - I want to commend you both on fine tactics. That being said - don't expect this fight to be done before some time in 2012... At least I'll have some fun working with it though. I was afraid of something like that. Well, good luck to Zero, since he needed good tactics to shift the odds more to his favor.
Erithmu 08-11-06, 04:08 PM	@Zevok: I missed the Reflex save, and I'll go back and add that. Though apparently once you fail the Mirror Image from spell failure, you can't re-try to cast it. That will actually change a lot of things; since you won't have Mirror Image running, he'll start to Ego Whip you, instead of Energy Missile. I'll go back and re-run the fight. As for the healing; you have 2, contradictory things in your tactics. One is to begin healing at 18hp, the other is to hurry up and get your spells up, and shoot a poisoned arrow. I'll make sure to give the healing the highest priority from now on. While I forgot to include this in my tactics, I'm going to note it here but do not expect it to have any (immediate) effect on the changes in the fight. If my PP total goes to 0, I lose focus and will not have the ability to use my focus feats. I 'should' have included a 'keep 1 pp' clause, but forgot to do so. Otherwise carry on w/ rerun.
MindWandererB 08-11-06, 04:47 PM	Ignatius (Erithmu) vs. Alagar (King Uther) vs. Karen (lonewolf): MindWandererB [ECL 8, City] ... is up: Setup Fight Very, very interesting fight. Even with three melee warriors, none of them fully anticipated how things would play out.
Vathelokai 08-11-06, 04:52 PM	@Iced: Your PM box is full and I have tactics for you.
hogarth 08-11-06, 05:04 PM	Can one use the power Dissolving Weapon on a ranged weapon? The description of the power says: As dissolving touch, except your weapon is charged with acid until you make a successful attack. So wouldn't that mean the description would be: Your [weapon] is corrosive, and sizzling moisture visibly oozes from your [weapon]. You deal 4d6 points of acid damage to any creature or object you touch with your successful melee touch attack. So from my reading, it looks like Karen could do a melee touch attack with her bow, but it wouldn't affect any arrows she fired. How is she getting around the "successful melee touch attack" wording?
TelinArtho 08-11-06, 05:18 PM	Tezca vs Zero is up. Let me know if there's any issues with it.
Vathelokai 08-11-06, 05:19 PM	So from my reading, it looks like Karen could do a melee touch attack with her bow, but it wouldn't affect any arrows she fired. How is she getting around the "successful melee touch attack" wording? You mean I get to make melee touch attacks with my glaive after manifesting disolving touch!? Rock! Obviously there is bad wording in the psionics rules. I remember this comming up before, but don't remember the conclusion. It might be in the prison.
MindWandererB 08-11-06, 05:19 PM	This is a discussion we had before. The problem lies in this difference: As dissolving touch, except your weapon is charged with acid until you make a successful attack.Your [weapon] is corrosive, and sizzling moisture visibly oozes from your [weapon]. You deal 4d6 points of acid damage to any creature or object you touch with your successful melee touch attack.Dissolving weapon doesn't say "melee" any more than it says "touch." Clearly it's absurd to have DW require a touch attack, so why have it require a melee attack? We needed a court decision--which IMO, was somewhat arbitrary--to declare that you couldn't use it on a bow, because it lacked the "a ranged weapon with this effect transfers the effect to its ammunition" text. The other argument is that it says "one held weapon" as the target. Unfortunately, it does not state that the weapon must remain held to benefit. For instance, many spells have a target of "one touched creature," but we've never inferred that the spell ends as soon as the creature is no longer touched. So it's ambiguous; in the absence of a past ruling, I made a judgment call. Could go either way; I erred in favor of granting it because the faulty effect (using DW on the bow) had been carried over for the past two weeks, and neither previous pitlord fixed it.
MindWandererB 08-11-06, 05:24 PM	Tezca vs Zero is up. Let me know if there's any issues with it.Heh... I knew when it went up so quickly that it was bad news for me. DC 40 Jump check, yeah. Didn't see that coming. With that in mind, there was really no way to pull this one off. @Elders: Please hurry up and have a vote about whether or not dragons can use bows. If the conclusion is "no," then there's no need to update Zero, since he'll make a beeline for the Graveyard of Gladius.
Erithmu 08-11-06, 05:32 PM	Ignatius (Erithmu) vs. Alagar (King Uther) vs. Karen (lonewolf): MindWandererB [ECL 8, City] ... is up: Setup Fight Very, very interesting fight. Even with three melee warriors, none of them fully anticipated how things would play out. Yea .. I noticed the rolls ... I have no problems with 'my portion' of the fight. I think the rewards are way off. Ig should get losers rewards 800xp Alagar should get 2x losers 1600xp And Karen should get winners + 2 losers = 4000xp then adjust for allies and give gold from there.
MindWandererB 08-11-06, 05:48 PM	Yea .. I noticed the rolls ... I have no problems with 'my portion' of the fight. I think the rewards are way off. Ig should get losers rewards 800xp Alagar should get 2x losers 1600xp And Karen should get winners + 2 losers = 4000xp then adjust for allies and give gold from there.Yeah... brain fart there, I gave rewards like a team battle. Lemme fix that now. Edit: Done.
bgt 08-11-06, 05:54 PM	Destra vs Enoch (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=9813515&postcount=830) is up. I have the feeling that alot is wrong with it, so let's get this over with.
Usurpator 08-11-06, 05:58 PM	Tezca vs Zero is up. Let me know if there's any issues with it. Thanks for running it, hard fight indeed. I didn't use any sniping, because that would really turn into a 100+ round battle with both characters having difficulty spotting and hurting each other. @MindWandererB: my compliments your tactics, it was a good try indeed. I always wanted to use that jump skill to good effect once, and this was a fine occasion for it.
MindWandererB 08-11-06, 06:16 PM	Destra vs Enoch (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=9813515&postcount=830) is up. I have the feeling that alot is wrong with it, so let's get this over with.I do note one thing: You can't dump a domain spell to spontaneous cast. Also, those rewards need some work. I want 100,000 gp for beating an ECL 5 opponent! Both have a single CR 1 non-class ally, so the rewards are nothing fancy (400/400 and 1200/1200).
Zevox 08-11-06, 06:45 PM	I do note one thing: You can't dump a domain spell to spontaneous cast. Also, those rewards need some work. I want 100,000 gp for beating an ECL 5 opponent! Both have a single CR 1 non-class ally, so the rewards are nothing fancy (400/400 and 1200/1200). Um, Destra does not have a non-class ally with her, just her animal companion. So she gets a bonus. I haven't looked at the fight myself yet, but I will when I finish the fight I'm currently running (its almost over, but I'll need an answer to the question I just posted in the tavern most likely). Zevox
Erithmu 08-11-06, 06:53 PM	Cyra vs Sunwolf is up. One really really lucky set of rolls.
MindWandererB 08-11-06, 06:56 PM	Um, Destra does not have a non-class ally with her, just her animal companion. So she gets a bonus.Sorry, didn't notice that she only brought one wolf with her (that "pre-fight" section can be hard to spot, since it's so few lines). Plus, I thought they were ECL 4 for some reason. So that's an 8.33% bonus to her and a corresponding penalty to Enoch: 1625 xp and 1733 gp, and 459 xp and 489 gp, respectively.
Zevox 08-11-06, 07:19 PM	Famine vs Morathor vs Kitty vs Neidr is up. A natural 20 brings a surprise winner. Well, that and the first case I've ever seen of someone successfully poisoning a Dwarf. Sorry, didn't notice that she only brought one wolf with her (that "pre-fight" section can be hard to spot, since it's so few lines). I know what you mean there - I totally missed that Enoch was only bringing his horse to this fight. Ah well. I'll take a look at that now and see whats what. Zevox
Stormwind 08-11-06, 07:20 PM	Cyra vs Sunwolf is up. One really really lucky set of rolls. Thanks for running the fight ... just two things: 1) This is minor, but the tanglefoot bag means that Leif can't fly and should take falling damage as he falls to the ground. 2) This is the major point, Ray of Emfeeblement and Ray of Exhaustion both give a strength penalty, it does not actually cause ability damage, and thus I believe that it does not stack. This would then have a major impact on the fight. Storm
Zevox 08-11-06, 07:25 PM	@ bgt, Re: Destra vs Enoch - Well, I hadn't thought of having the Hippogriff dive, but I suppose that certainly works. Since Enoch had no contingency for Entanglement I don't think he can complain much about using the crossbow, particularly since casting a spell would lose him the inflict spell. I did notice that you forgot his dex and attack penalties for being entangled, but they hardly matter since he missed anyway. Beyond that, looks good to me. Thanks for the quick run. Edit: Woops, one thing in the wrap-up: Destra dropped Flaming Sphere for SNAII, not Produce Flame (Produce Flame is just a 1st level spell, Flaming Sphere is a 2nd level, which is what she needs for SNAII). Edit 2: Oh, and please put in Destra's free activity - using Profession (Hunter) to gain 125 gp. Zevox
Usurpator 08-11-06, 07:26 PM	2) This is the major point, Ray of Emfeeblement and Ray of Exhaustion both give a strength penalty, it does not actually cause ability damage, and thus I believe that it does not stack. This would then have a major impact on the fight. Penalties always stack, unless from the same source. Both penalties come from different sources (different spells) so both are applied. However, a penalty from ray of enfeeblement (however you stack it) cannot bring the target's Str below 1.
Pittbull 08-11-06, 07:34 PM	@Zevox: Thanks for running the fight, it was a huge workload. In my opinion you made two mistakes, I can see so far: (1) Neidr must be penalized for inactivity, she did nothing but waiting for a snipe for 16rounds, to avoid this behaviour we invented the 10rounds-violation rule. If she would not be allowed to snipe and get Morathor flat-footed, he would have been able to deflect the arrow. (2) Round16: If get the coordinates right, it is this situation: http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=forest;b=Mor,M,4,17;c=N ei,M,3,14;los=3,14,4,17,1;style=s Why does Morathor get no cover-bonus or a misschance? I might be wrong here, but just wanted to ask. Please, rethink your decisions, I'll accept every call!
MindWandererB 08-11-06, 07:38 PM	Famine vs Morathor vs Kitty vs Neidr is up. A natural 20 brings a surprise winner. Well, that and the first case I've ever seen of someone successfully poisoning a Dwarf.Little question: Round 18, why and how does the lion appear in mid-air? The fuzzball only comes to life when it hits a solid object, and the ground is only 30 feet away.
Zevox 08-11-06, 07:49 PM	(1) Neidr must be penalized for inactivity, she did nothing but waiting for a snipe for 16rounds, to avoid this behaviour we invented the 10rounds-violation rule. If she would not be allowed to snipe and get Morathor flat-footed, he would have been able to deflect the arrow. As I mentioned, I decided not to count the time she spent climbing the tree (the first 3 rounds), since she really wasn't avoiding anyone or sitting inactive then. When the penalty kicked in I had her start moving to look for foes, but she failed a balance check and got stuck for another round - not her fault there. If you think there should have been something other than forcing her to move out rather than sit, care to give an example of what? I tend not to give too harsh a punishment for such when just getting a character to go out into the fight will spoil what they were hoping for anyway, and were it not for the freak failed balance check this would have happened to Neidr here. (2) Round16: If get the coordinates right, it is this situation: http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=forest;b=Mor,M,4,17;c=N ei,M,3,14;los=3,14,4,17,1;style=s Why does Morathor get no cover-bonus or a misschance? I might be wrong here, but just wanted to ask. You have the coordiantes/situation right, yes. You get no cover or concealment because both of you are in the canopy, so the cover/concealment it normally provides against foes outside of it do not apply, and unless I'm terribly mistaken simply being next to that tree does not give you cover. Zevox
Erithmu 08-11-06, 07:50 PM	Thanks for running the fight ... just two things: 1) This is minor, but the tanglefoot bag means that Leif can't fly and should take falling damage as he falls to the ground. 2) This is the major point, Ray of Emfeeblement and Ray of Exhaustion both give a strength penalty, it does not actually cause ability damage, and thus I believe that it does not stack. This would then have a major impact on the fight. Storm Penalties always stack, unless from the same source. Both penalties come from different sources (different spells) so both are applied. However, a penalty from ray of enfeeblement (however you stack it) cannot bring the target's Str below 1. @TF bag: Yes he can. He made his DC 15 reflex save to maintain flight. @Str stuff: It seems I have concluded this incorrectly, as such I'll need to go back and adjust from the Ray of Enfeeblement as that action was only taken due to my incorrect assumptions. The Exahustion ray rolls will be mantined just adjusted for no true strike and vs your FF AC (which I think still hits)
Zevox 08-11-06, 07:51 PM	Little question: Round 18, why and how does the lion appear in mid-air? The fuzzball only comes to life when it hits a solid object, and the ground is only 30 feet away. Ah, that would be me interpretting the "throw it up to 20ft" clause of the bag a might bit more literally than I perhaps should have :embarrass . Doesn't change anything though anyway. Zevox
Dracazar 08-11-06, 08:02 PM	@DSugui: Dracazar's tactic sent @Bgt: Quesis's tactic sent @King Uther: Shaz's tactic sent
Pittbull 08-11-06, 08:02 PM	First of all, I'll accept your decision. Regarding the delay, I think you are really too nice to Neidr. She did nothing but waiting, climbing on a tree or failing balance-checks is no meaningful interaction with an oponent. This way Morathor get penalized because he moves around searching for an oponent, while Neidr is allowed to do her ambush. But of course it is situation where you, the pitlord, has to make a call and there will be no moaning anymore. Again thanks for running the fight. BTW, the word Zwengerl is a creation of mine. It is a combination of Zwerg (dwarf) and Engerl (dialect=little angel).
Zevox 08-11-06, 08:10 PM	First of all, I'll accept your decision. Regarding the delay, I think you are really too nice to Neidr. She did nothing but waiting, climbing on a tree or failing balance-checks is no meaningful interaction with an oponent. This way Morathor get penalized because he moves around searching for an oponent, while Neidr is allowed to do her ambush. But of course it is situation where you, the pitlord, has to make a call and there will be no moaning anymore. Again thanks for running the fight. Well, as I said, I really can't penalize her for failing a balance check. That may not be meaningful interaction, but it also isn't her fault; at that point she was looking to try and find an opponent, its just that the dice didn't let her. Had she made that check she would have wandered right into Morathor's field of view that round rather than getting a chance to shoot him, and her whole plan would be ruined - that was what I had intended when I made her move as she did. Only the freak roll prevented that from happening. I also don't want to penalize her for the rounds spent climbing, since that was just getting into the area she wanted, not delaying - I'd no more penalize Morathor for the rounds he spend ascending to the canopy than her for the rounds she spent climbing. BTW, the word Zwengerl is a creation of mine. It is a combination of Zwerg (dwarf) and Engerl (dialect=little angel). Ah, cool :cool: . Zevox
Erithmu 08-11-06, 08:35 PM	Cyra vs Leif rerun is up ... no change
TheMagister 08-11-06, 08:56 PM	Cyra vs Sunwolf is up. One really really lucky set of rolls. @Erithmu - I would like to make a respectful observation on a situation in this fight, I think that being covered in tanglefoot goo would pretty much negate a character's invisibility. If flour can do it, I think tanglefoot goo would do it even better. If you do decide to rule this way, Cyra's ready vs. spellcasting tactic would kick in. Round 2+: Draw a tanglefoot bag (move action). Continue to search for Leif and move beneath him (or within 40ft). Throw tanglefoot bag at Leif. ... Round ?: Remanifest mindblade (free action). Charge mindblade with psychic strike (move action). Ready to throw mindblade on spellcasting (standard action). Leif would in all probability be hit, and the ray of exhaustion would never be cast (that'd be an insanely high concentration check). Thought I should speak up. TM
ayyiniwindryder 08-11-06, 09:10 PM	Ba'al vs Krug is up. A case of Rock, Paper, Scissors...subtract one...or something...yeah. @TelinArtho and Zelck - Farig vs Andurwin should be up by around this time tomorrow
Erithmu 08-11-06, 09:10 PM	Dumb lucky hit causing all these problems Ok ... now that I have that out of my system: @TM, Stormwind, Sunwolf: I have three opinions on the subject, all of which have their valid points and could be used in this situation. 1) Fight as it is. 2) My Rule 0 DM side: Roll an attack for Cyra (note: invis + mirror imaged don't stack, so the TF hit Leif regardless of which Image it would have hit, would probably use the same rule in this place.) Incedently I still think that Cyra would have a miss chance due to invisiblity maybe not 50 but 20. This would be done sunday when I calm down some and am thinking clearly. 3) Request an Elder ruling. The minor question I have then is also ... since the mirror images are figments, does the goo appear on them so it looks like invisible mirror imaged floating goo. I am leaning toward options 1 or 3. Note: if I was DMing or PCing at a Table top game I would probably push for number two. However, 'I' do not want to set CoCo presidence without the ruling of an elder.
Salrantol 08-11-06, 09:14 PM	@ bgt, Re: Destra vs Enoch - Since Enoch had no contingency for Entanglement I don't think he can complain much about using the crossbow, particularly since casting a spell would lose him the inflict spell. I did notice that you forgot his dex and attack penalties for being entangled, but they hardly matter since he missed anyway. Bah, I forgot entangle contingencies and the instructions to use protection from good, all because these stupid boards drop at 5:08 AM CDT and I needed to send tactics before going to work. I am offended at myself. Also, though, can someone tell me where the rules are for a dive? I was certainly not aware that hippogriffs had a "pounce-like" ability to use 3 attacks while moving.
TelinArtho 08-11-06, 09:20 PM	A dive is not a pounce-like ability. I have not looked at the fight, but that is not how a dive is supposed to be used. First of all, for your reference, it is in the types, subtypes and abilities, under the movement section: A creature that flies can make dive attacks. A dive attack works just like a charge, but the diving creature must move a minimum of 30 feet and descend at least 10 feet. It can make only claw or talon attacks, but these deal double damage. A creature can use the run action while flying, provided it flies in a straight line. If your pitlord treated it as a pounce, then that would be incorrect.
MindWandererB 08-11-06, 09:21 PM	Also, though, can someone tell me where the rules are for a dive? I was certainly not aware that hippogriffs had a "pounce-like" ability to use 3 attacks while moving.You're quite right--they don't. That's griffons, not hippogriffs. It should get only one attack, and since it can't hover, it will have to land to get all three (and possibly get entangled itself).
Zevox 08-11-06, 09:22 PM	Also, though, can someone tell me where the rules are for a dive? I was certainly not aware that hippogriffs had a "pounce-like" ability to use 3 attacks while moving. !!! You've hit something there. Hippogriffs don't have pounce, so they can only make one attack at the end of a dive. Somehow, I missed that. So Enoch is still around, and now we get into the Hippogriff attacking normally and Destra tossing flames at his mount. @ bgt - Sorry man, but the fight isn't over because of that. You'll have to edit in the Hippogriff just getting its claw and then go on from there. As for the dive rules, they're here (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/monsterTypes.html), under "Movement Modes". Zevox
MindWandererB 08-11-06, 10:05 PM	I just happened to poke my head in on "Nothing Here but Dust and Shadows," and saw a large problem: Varjo has NPC services used to put Dissolving Touch and Dissipating Touch on him. That doesn't work; touch spells aren't used to enchant someone's touch, they're used to target a creature, with a range of touch. If someone manifested Dissipating Touch on Varjo, it would deal the damage to him. Unless he's someone's psicrystal, he can't deliver someone else's touch powers--and even a familiar couldn't carry the charge on two powers at once. Compare to Shocking Grasp, for example. The range isn't "personal," because that would mean you were attacking yourself--the target of the power is its victim.
Vathelokai 08-11-06, 10:31 PM	I just happened to poke my head in on "Nothing Here but Dust and Shadows," and saw a large problem: Varjo has NPC services used to put Dissolving Touch and Dissipating Touch on him. That doesn't work; touch spells aren't used to enchant someone's touch, they're used to target a creature, with a range of touch. If someone manifested Dissipating Touch on Varjo, it would deal the damage to him. Unless he's someone's psicrystal, he can't deliver someone else's touch powers--and even a familiar couldn't carry the charge on two powers at once. Compare to Shocking Grasp, for example. The range isn't "personal," because that would mean you were attacking yourself--the target of the power is its victim. I noticed that myself. Could someone second this?
Book5 08-11-06, 10:33 PM	I noticed that myself. Could someone second this? :nonono: Your running that quest yo, and I think B seconded ya ... already ;)
Iced 08-11-06, 11:06 PM	Tactics for Osiris vs Ceilia pm'd to Telinartho. This one will be interesting...
TelinArtho 08-11-06, 11:11 PM	Clarifications will be needed.
Zevox 08-11-06, 11:15 PM	@ Telin - Found that Protection from X vs summons conversation. Fights of the Week: March 1st, 2006. Pages 6 and 7. @Dracazar and lonewolf I promise the result will not change. Ajora would not shoot at anyone but Leif as soon as possible, except for when Essence gets annoying. Shaz would be tied up with multiple enemies, all the while Leif, who was assumed to be more of a threat, will be dead. Also, Protection From XXX spells only protect against summons of the opposed alignment. Hippogriffs are neutral, and therefore immune to the effect. Leif would get ravaged by the summons, which was the real reason for summoning them. Shaz, at the very least, will be kept in check by Idrai(his entire purpose in this battle), and it is very likely Leif will die before killing Ajora as he will be assaulted by arrows and Hippogriffs. Word. Actually, protection from XXX does not protect against neutral summons. It protects against all summons. This is the description: Third, the spell prevents bodily contact by summoned creatures. This causes the natural weapon attacks of such creatures to fail and the creatures to recoil if such attacks require touching the warded creature. Good summoned creatures are immune to this effect. The protection against contact by summoned creatures ends if the warded creature makes an attack against or tries to force the barrier against the blocked creature. Spell resistance can allow a creature to overcome this protection and touch the warded creature. As you can see, it says taht only good summoned creatures are immune. But the thing is that my summons will last 12 rounds with my rod of extend. Your spell lasts 10 rounds, but then you can't take total defense for ten rounds becuase of the delay. You can actively interact, but i think using the total defense option to wait out a spell is breaking the 10 round rule.... but I could be wrong. @Kaigan Nope. You still have it wrong. Read Protection From Chaos, Good or Law. Chaos specifically protects from chaotic summons, good from good ones, and Law from lawful ones. It would be unfair for evil to protect against all but good. Uh... All pros protect against all summons except the one alignment they are created by. They don't give AC/etc bonus against everything, but they do keep summoned creatures from touching you. this from protection from evil; In this particular case Kaigan is correct neutral summons are repeled by protection from good, evil in the good evil axis and from prootection from law, chaos in the lawful/chaos axis. Third, the spell prevents bodily contact by summoned creatures. This causes the natural weapon attacks of such creatures to fail and the creatures to recoil if such attacks require touching the warded creature. Good summoned creatures are immune to this effect. The protection against contact by summoned creatures ends if the warded creature makes an attack against or tries to force the barrier against the blocked creature. Spell resistance can allow a creature to overcome this protection and touch the warded creature. Actually, you're all wrong. P.Evil ward away nongood creatures, but the others only ward against the creatures of their speciic alignment. Unfair? Yes. But that's the way it's written. ...the spell prevents bodily contact by summoned creatures...Good summoned creatures are immune to this effect. ...good summoned creatures cannot touch the subject. True; only protection from evil wards of neutral creatures according to the descripton in the srd. it's not even in the faq or the errata. Zevox
Iced 08-11-06, 11:18 PM	Clarifications will be needed. Clarification sent. ~Iced
TelinArtho 08-11-06, 11:27 PM	@iced - thanks. @Zevox - thanks for finding it. I still don't agree. Yes I know how it is written, but that doesn't mean I should accept it. Still - as long as it is consistent - I can live with it. Heck, it just means that things are easier for my summoners...
DSugui 08-12-06, 12:22 AM	Ba'al vs Krug is up. A case of Rock, Paper, Scissors...subtract one...or something...yeah. I didn't expect that it would be that easy, so I won't complain about the slight tactics change. Thanks for the run.
King Uther 08-12-06, 01:33 AM	@MB When Alagar used the Djorge of Energy Missle, it hits the pegasus also, which means the pegasus has to make a reflex save or take the damage. That would knock the pegasus out, leaving the fight between just Karen and Alagar. Also, shouldn't Eresh have some soft cover in Round 15, negating both attacks? Maybe I have the LOS off, but it seems that way. Having the pegasus move as far away as he does means there is no LOS for arrows unless he flies high enough to be killed instantly by the town guard. But that isn't nearly as important as the pegasus being dead in round 21 before Karen fires her Nat 20s. That does mean some Nat 20s are coming, but hopefully they will be negated by some trip+sunder action. Tell me what you think.
MindWandererB 08-12-06, 02:19 AM	When Alagar used the Djorge of Energy Missle, it hits the pegasus also, which means the pegasus has to make a reflex save or take the damage. That would knock the pegasus out, leaving the fight between just Karen and Alagar. This is something I thought about quite a bit, and I think I may need others' input. See, nowhere in Alagar's tactics did it say anything about attacking the pegasus. While it would not be unreasonable to have him include the pegasus in his attacks, the fact that no such thing was even hinted at disinclined me from doing so. Since Alagar had apparently no intentions whatsoever of dealing damage to the pegasus--until the improvisation necessitated it--I hesitated to add that. It may not matter--Alagar is in pretty bad shape by this point--but then again, it may, if he gets lucky with the trips. I welcome further opinions on the matter in any event. Now, what I probably should have done, again since Alagar's tactics said nothing about attacking Thrandiul, was to have him shoot at Karen instead. This would, of course, result in things going even worse for him, but I was giving him the benefit of the doubt. Also, shouldn't Eresh have some soft cover in Round 15, negating both attacks? Maybe I have the LOS off, but it seems that way. Having the pegasus move as far away as he does means there is no LOS for arrows unless he flies high enough to be killed instantly by the town guard.No, definitely not. Karen is due North of Eresh, and Alagar is South. There's a straight alleyway in the line of sight, no obstruction whatsoever. Karen's shooting in the middle of her shot, not at the end. The only round in which Alagar is between Karen and Eresh is in round 17, but he's dead in 16.
Stormwind 08-12-06, 02:26 AM	I noticed that myself. Could someone second this? I'll second this. MW's argument is makes sense. I'll edit them off Varjo's sheet once the miniquest is over. Please make whatever changes you need to in the thread. Storm
Stormwind 08-12-06, 03:07 AM	@Erithmu: Well, I think I can now say for sure that the dice gods hate me. With regards to the tanglefoot/invisibility thing, I would go along with the school of thought that say's that you can pinpoint your opponent but that they still have the 50% miss chance. Now that my attention has been drawn to the mirror image thing, I have noticed some problems with the rolls: Round 4: 7 mirror images, roll 1d8 leif hit ... incorrect, mirror image doesn't stack with invisibility. Roll unecessary. Round 5: 7 mirror images, roll 1d8, image hit ... ok Round 6: in Round 7 rolls, 6 mirror images, roll 1d7, image hit .... ok Round 10: 5 mirror image, roll 1d7, image hit ... incorrect (should have rolled 1d6) Round 11: 4 mirror image, roll 1d6, image hit ... incorrect (should have rolled 1d5) Round 13: 3 mirror image, roll 1d5, image hit ... incorrect (should have rolled 1d4) Round 14: 2 mirror image, roll 1d4, image hit ... incorrect (should have rolled 1d3) Round 16: 1 mirror image, roll 1d3, image hit ... incorrect (should have rolled 1d2) If you reuse the rolls then Cyra should hit Leif (and not an image) in round 5, forcing a very difficult concentration check. Either way, I believe that these points could change the fight. Also, shouldn't the secondary poison damage in round 17 be rolled separately from the initial poison damage in round 7? Finally, thanks again for running the fight. Your efforts are appreciated. Storm
Pittbull 08-12-06, 08:45 AM	@CAT/DSugui: Please give me your comment about the 1.Round-Dilemma, I posted in the fight. I want to keep it fair, thus I'll wait until you comments. The fight is posted here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=9819728&postcount=840) !
Erithmu 08-12-06, 09:35 AM	@MWB: I would have the djore hit the pegasus as well, it does not cost Alagar anything more to do that and is well within pitlord adjustment. If you look at the tactics I think everyone thought it was going to be a slugfest on the ground. @Stormwind: I'm still working out the invis + goo issue. I am to the point with the situation where I am looking for a result on the order of something that gets put up in the prison thread as presidence. As for the fight, I have a few more issues from the pitlord side before I work out the details. Remember that you will still have a miss chance. As for the poison in round 17, that is a new batch, so I need to roll another save for the secondary poison. At that point it was kinda moot in that you were already down. In dealing with the multiple issues that have come up from this fight, I don't want to have to run the fight 3 more times as new stuff comes in, so find what you got now.
Stormwind 08-12-06, 09:51 AM	@CAT/DSugui: Please give me your comment about the 1.Round-Dilemma, I posted in the fight. I want to keep it fair, thus I'll wait until you comments. The fight is posted here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=9819728&postcount=840) ! @Pittbull I think that I must be missing something here because I don't see the dilemma. As I understand it, assuming that Knellstriker starts hovering, he must begin hovering at 0ft. Thus the entangle would entrap him if he fails his save regardless. What am I missing?
Pittbull 08-12-06, 10:40 AM	As far as I know are hovering creatures immune against entaglement, since they have no contact to the ground.
Usurpator 08-12-06, 11:12 AM	@CAT/DSugui: Please give me your comment about the 1.Round-Dilemma, I posted in the fight. I want to keep it fair, thus I'll wait until you comments. The fight is posted here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=9819728&postcount=840) ! Pittbull, this might not be an dilemma after all, since there is nothing that forbids entangling plants from grasping creatures that hover just off the ground.... The spell actually says 40 ft. radius, but I always interpreted it that the plants can grasp anyone in the squares immediately adjacent to the surface (up to 5ft. high). I have never before seen it ruled or played before that hovering makes you immune to entanglement. I have seen rulings the other way, in which entangle grasps flying and/or hovering creatures. There is nothing in the spell that indicates that targets must be in contact with the ground. And it makes sense that grasping plants can just as easily graps someone who is hovering slightly of the ground. At least, that is my opinion
Caterane 08-12-06, 11:43 AM	Entangle doesn't reach 5ft upM; not even 1ft. Evard's Tentacles have 10ft reach which is clearly mentioned. Since entangle doesn't say anything about how high they can reach, we have to assume that they mean 'creatures on the ground' and a hovering creature is not on the ground. It's in the air. What else is the hover rule for?
lonewolf 08-12-06, 11:47 AM	Famine vs Morathor vs Kitty vs Neidr is up. A natural 20 brings a surprise winner. Well, that and the first case I've ever seen of someone successfully poisoning a Dwarf. YAY! two FFAs won this week! GO TEAM!! :cheer: :cheer:
Usurpator 08-12-06, 12:10 PM	Entangle doesn't reach 5ft upM; not even 1ft. Evard's Tentacles have 10ft reach which is clearly mentioned. Since entangle doesn't say anything about how high they can reach, we have to assume that they mean 'creatures on the ground' and a hovering creature is not on the ground. It's in the air. What else is the hover rule for? What rules do you have to support your conclusion? I think it is simply not clear in the rules. It makes sense to you that plants, branches and bushes only grasp something that is in contact with the ground? To me it makes sense that they grasp anything within their reach. For example: casting entangle in the forest map will cause all plants in the radius to try and grasp those who move near. Flying through the overgrowth and trees will make you susceptible to entangle (from above, below and the sides). Flying is not an automatic entangle counter in my book. In my campaign I have had encounters high up in the trees, and in these case I let entangle work fine, even though the casters nowhere near to the ground. But I think it is not clear in the rules either way, so it is a Pitlord's call, whatever Pittbull decides is fine.
Caterane 08-12-06, 12:39 PM	I agree that it is not in the rules, one way or the other. But we have the hover rule for a reason. This is one of them. If it would make things clearer we could allow to start at 5ft altitude from now on; to resemble the advantage of perfect or good flight. Because that's why we have the rule.
King Uther 08-12-06, 01:05 PM	When I was crafting the tactics I had a contingency for the pegasus, but as I was formatting and editing it looks like it was entirely deleted. I did expect the fight to eventually result in a melee fest, as once the pegasus was down there would be no choice. Energy Missile can also target the pegasus, so there is no reason that it shouldn't. I feel it only makes sense because in any TT game you're not going to choose not to target the mount also. This could change the result of the fight, but it would take a lot of luck as Karen has a stack of 20s coming my way.
MindWandererB 08-12-06, 01:39 PM	@MWB: I would have the djore hit the pegasus as well, it does not cost Alagar anything more to do that and is well within pitlord adjustment. If you look at the tactics I think everyone thought it was going to be a slugfest on the ground. All right, I'll make some adjustments. May take me a little while.
Usurpator 08-12-06, 02:05 PM	I agree that it is not in the rules, one way or the other. But we have the hover rule for a reason. This is one of them. If it would make things clearer we could allow to start at 5ft altitude from now on; to resemble the advantage of perfect or good flight. Because that's why we have the rule. That is probably the best solution, I was not aware that the intention of the hover rule was to make starting characters immune to entangle. We still need to clarify how entangle works though, because according to your current reading the spell will not entangle anyone that is climbing in a tree on the forest map, because of your 'must touch the ground' condition. My proposal for the spell: since entangle doesn't mention any reach, which we can assume this means a reach of 0 ft. Since creatures with a reach of 0 ft. can only attack others in the same square, we can assume that entangle can only attack creatures that share a square with the entangled area. Hovering creatures at 0 ft. will thus be entangled in the future (since they share the square), while creatures hovering at 5 ft. will not. (Remember that entangle affects a 3D area, not a certain number of squares). Flying creatures moving through an area thick with plants (like the canopy of the forest map) will be entangled in the future though. Is that ok with you?
Caterane 08-12-06, 02:29 PM	I think that is a good solution for entangle. We say entangle affects whole squares (provided there is a considerable amount of vegetation in that square) and in return, we let creatures start at up to 5ft altitude (if good or perfect flight). Niqil, can you please add the entangle clarification to the FAQ?
King Uther 08-12-06, 03:04 PM	Pestilence vs Kimahri is up. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=9821597&postcount=843) I thought the fight would go one way, and well......it didn't. The Dic Gods decided this one in but a few rounds.
NiQil 08-12-06, 04:31 PM	Pestilence vs Kimahri is up. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=9821597&postcount=843) I thought the fight would go one way, and well......it didn't. The Dic Gods decided this one in but a few rounds. You have the rewards in this fight incorrect...it is an ECL 6 battle. Edit: Also, there are some issues. At the end of round 3, Kimahri is 75 ft away from Pestilence, and they are on opposite sides of the hedges there. There is no way that Kimahri can charge through the hedge, so there is no reason for Pestilence to spend his round 4 changing weapons, when he could instead be attacking twice more with the bow. Starting Boxes: The Starting Positions are surrounded by low obstacles that provide cover to any medium or smaller character. This also means that Pestilence cannot charge in round 5, nor should he have, since I specified in my tactics to not leave my starting box. This will mean that Kimahri is subject to a round or two more of ranged attacks before melee ever ensues. Please take a look at this. Edit 2: Also, I don't see any rolls for arrow recovery of all the misses.
MindWandererB 08-12-06, 05:05 PM	Ignatius/Alagar/Karen has been edited. It was exciting before, and it's even more so now.
Zevox 08-12-06, 05:13 PM	Ivan => Genia => Kervan is up. @ Dr. Funk - Tactics for Geoffrey recieved. I'll see about running that tomorrow afternoon. Zevox
MindWandererB 08-12-06, 05:39 PM	Ivan => Genia => Kervan is up.One minor complaint: Why did you have Kervan attack Genia? Not in my tactics. However, it wouldn't have made any difference, since those would have been misses no matter who they were directed against. Little things about the grapple: Round 52, there seems to be no opposed check to prevent Kervan from moving the grapple. Low chance, but non-zero. Also, all of Ivan's grapple checks to resist should be at +6, not +8 (flurrying affects all your attacks in the round, including reactive ones), but I don't think it matters anywhere (results in one tie, which goes to the higher modifier). I don't think these things will matter, but they're there. <sigh> I always knew grapplers would be the toughest foes for Kervan. I was just hoping to avoid them for a while... an FFA with a grappler was the worst possible news, and Kervan got it as his first fight....
King Uther 08-12-06, 06:11 PM	I realized that when I was out running errands. I was hoping to edit the fight before anyone noticed. Got me.
King Uther 08-12-06, 06:27 PM	@MB Dang. I guess my contingency about my own Chains was also edited out. That cannot be helped. I did have one question before I didn't voice. When Eresh began to get attacked, his only real contingency was to go into hide mode to prevent being easily targetted. I don't really know if it would've been helpful in half of the rounds anyway due to the sheer movement of the pegasus, but particularly in rounds 15 and 16 those attacks could've been pushed a few rounds later since the readied action is vs Eresh. Advantage? The pegasus would've taken an extra 6d6+6 damage, possibly being knocked out prior to Eresh's unconsciousness. And if Eresh kept fining cover every other round the pegasus would take even more damage. However, as you are the designated Pitlord, I trust your judgment as far as this is concerned. If you feel that the hiding contingency wasn't clear enough, or that Eresh possibly dodging being shot for a couple of rounds isn't pertinent, then I stand by the fight as is. Have fun rescuing the Prince. Edit: The last sentence was in no way supposed to be propaganda. Just wanted that disclaimer. Further edit: No mention of pre-buffing Dissolving weapon on Karen's sheet, and as far as I know I thought you couldn't pre-buff your arrows(although her tactics do say bw). That means the first shot fired expends the acidic shot, or isn't allowed at all.
MindWandererB 08-12-06, 06:52 PM	When Eresh began to get attacked, his only real contingency was to go into hide mode to prevent being easily targetted. I don't really know if it would've been helpful in half of the rounds anyway due to the sheer movement of the pegasus, but particularly in rounds 15 and 16 those attacks could've been pushed a few rounds later since the readied action is vs Eresh. Advantage? The pegasus would've taken an extra 6d6+6 damage, possibly being knocked out prior to Eresh's unconsciousness. And if Eresh kept fining cover every other round the pegasus would take even more damage.Here's your tactics on the matter: "6. Eresh has a high hide. He also has a tattoo of chameleon if necessary. Make use of it if Alagar has to retreat and Eresh becomes a target." This did not happen; Alagar did not have to retreat, and Eresh was a target from the get-go (by both opponents, I might add). In addition to which, even if he hid, Karen was deliberately targeting him, and with her 120' fly speed, she can get an auto-spot pretty much no matter what. In fact, this would have only penalized you; Eresh would have spent a round tapping the tattoo, and Karen would have shot him anyway. Further edit: No mention of pre-buffing Dissolving weapon on Karen's sheet, and as far as I know I thought you couldn't pre-buff your arrows(although her tactics do say bw). That means the first shot fired expends the acidic shot, or isn't allowed at all.I mentioned this at the end of the setup post; I made it an arrow rather than the bow because of the court decision on the matter. Irrespective of which, the acidic shot would not be wasted: if it were on the bow, rather than the arrow, the power would be discharged only by a successful attack. So, same result. For future clarification, another Elder/Court decision might be appropriate, but for now, there's nothing prohibiting it from being used on an arrow. As for the pre-buff, it's a holdover from her first fight in the cycle, and is clearly designated as such in the "ongoing effects" part of her 3FC history. However, as you are the designated Pitlord, I trust your judgment as far as this is concerned. If you feel that the hiding contingency wasn't clear enough, or that Eresh possibly dodging being shot for a couple of rounds isn't pertinent, then I stand by the fight as is. Have fun rescuing the Prince. Edit: The last sentence was in no way supposed to be propaganda. Just wanted that disclaimer.If I didn't trust you, KU, I would say that sounded more like a threat than propaganda (fix my fight or the Prince dies!). Good thing I do. :)
Zevox 08-12-06, 07:15 PM	One minor complaint: Why did you have Kervan attack Genia? Not in my tactics. However, it wouldn't have made any difference, since those would have been misses no matter who they were directed against. Mostly the fact that Genia was right up in melee with him and he couldn't have done 5' steps to continue shooting at Ivan for more than a round or 2. I suppose I probably should have had him do that for as long as possible, but oh well. Little things about the grapple: Round 52, there seems to be no opposed check to prevent Kervan from moving the grapple. Low chance, but non-zero. Also, all of Ivan's grapple checks to resist should be at +6, not +8 (flurrying affects all your attacks in the round, including reactive ones), but I don't think it matters anywhere (results in one tie, which goes to the higher modifier). Its there, I simply apparently forgot to change the label from "damage" to "opposed grapple" - its the 1d20+8=15 roll right below yours. And sorry about getting the reactive modifiers wrong, but as you say it won't change the outcome of any rolls. You actually had a pretty god chance here since Ivan for some reason didn't want to grapple with you; its just that when his arrows ran out without you ever hitting him, those odds plummeted. Not much you could do in the face of that kind of bad luck. Zevox
MindWandererB 08-12-06, 08:08 PM	You actually had a pretty god chance here since Ivan for some reason didn't want to grapple with you; its just that when his arrows ran out without you ever hitting him, those odds plummeted. Not much you could do in the face of that kind of bad luck.Mostly I was hoping that he would grapple Genia first, and I could stab him without his Dex modifier helping. But yeah, I needed some luck for that one, and I didn't get it.
ayyiniwindryder 08-12-06, 09:51 PM	Farig vs Andurwin is up. Was a pain to run because they started in opposite corners and didn't want to rush to meet each other, heh. Was pretty close at the end - but he who shot first wins the day. @Zevox - Thanks for running the fight. You're right, I got lucky. As for the Tattoos, I wasn't aware of that rule or that I was in violation. Doesn't matter much now - I don't have any left.
Zevox 08-12-06, 09:57 PM	@Zevox - Thanks for running the fight. You're right, I got lucky. As for the Tattoos, I wasn't aware of that rule or that I was in violation. Doesn't matter much now - I don't have any left. I mentioned it in the wrap-up of Ivan's fight last week. And actually it does matter, since he still needs to pay the remaining amount he owes for those tattoos (on 6 tattoos thats 300 gp). Zevox
bgt 08-12-06, 10:33 PM	Destra Vs Enoch is fixed. Same result, but longer and slightly worse for Destra. I can't help but feel sorry for Enoch on this one.
TelinArtho 08-12-06, 11:10 PM	Farig vs Andurwin is up. Was a pain to run because they started in opposite corners and didn't want to rush to meet each other, heh. Was pretty close at the end - but he who shot first wins the day. Couple of minor points, ones that don't matter to the fight - but mostly for future reference. Although you can share spells/powers with familiars/psicrystals/animal companions/etc, you can only share them with spells/powers that you manifest of your own ability. That means - not from scrolls/powerstones/potions/tattoos. Also, sharing vigor would also be a share of the same power pool - so if Andurwin takes a point, Thalac would also lose a point from his pool. With regard to your comment about round 8, you have misunderstood my intent. I wanted to full out move in the 5 rounds like I specified. For after that, I wanted to move and ready. Not a biggie though. I will strive to be more clear in my tactics in the future though. In round 20, when Andurwin moves away, he would draw an AoO from Whirlwind for leaving Whirlwind's threatened area. Also, the energy missile could not target both Farig and her horse at that point because they are 60ft apart and energy missile can only target creatures that are within 15ft of each other. I'm fine with the fight as run, but if you are a perfectionist and want the torture of fixing those things - feel free.
Zelck 08-12-06, 11:51 PM	Farig vs Andurwin is up. Was a pain to run because they started in opposite corners and didn't want to rush to meet each other, heh. Was pretty close at the end - but he who shot first wins the day. Wow. Just... wow. I thought the fight was on the Cavern map, so I wrote tactics for the Cavern map. Ouch. http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/2779/knifemm9.gif Anyway, I think some things could be changed. First, Farig began the delay at round 7/8, and so would hit 10 rounds of delay on round 16/17. He would have either been forced to move afterwords and/or his position would have been revealed. This may have given me a shot at him first. Second, Energy Missiles can only target things within 15' of each other, meaning according to the current movements, I couldn't have hit Whirlwind as well with the second EM. However, the horse couldn't have moved as far as it did because it was in heavy undergrowth which costs 4x movement. The map was off; the horse should be one square to the left. Thus, it couldn't have moved more than 15' away from Farig with 120' of movement. Finally, I think I should have been doing something evasive after shooting the second EM and dropping the horse. It would have cost nothing to drop prone (it was clearly a ranged battle at that point, with him in Heavy Undergrowth) or behind cover (I can shoot, then move since the horse isn't in my face, and I can move, then shoot to negate the cover). Granted, it would be improv and up to your discretion, thanks to my massive messup on tactics. Anyway, sorry for putting you through these bad tactics. I seriously thought it was the cavern map. I think I got it confused with my PL fight, lol.
TelinArtho 08-12-06, 11:56 PM	Anyway, I think some things could be changed. First, Farig began the delay at round 8, and so would hit 10 rounds of delay on round 17. He would have either been forced to move afterwords and/or his position would have been revealed. This may have given me a shot at him first. Well, as I pointed out above - the way he handled Farig was a misunderstanding of my intent. He took my wanting to ready as "stay put and ready" when I intended "move each round and ready." Since my intent was still to find my opponent - no penalty should be implemented (especially when I am deliberately staying out in the open and the map is immense).
Zelck 08-13-06, 12:13 AM	Well, as I pointed out above - the way he handled Farig was a misunderstanding of my intent. He took my wanting to ready as "stay put and ready" when I intended "move each round and ready." Since my intent was still to find my opponent - no penalty should be implemented (especially when I am deliberately staying out in the open and the map is immense). Well, you were hardly open, hiding in the heavy undergrowth :tongue:. And your actions certainly showed no attempt to find me, although your intent may have been to do so. Heh, I just wish I could have a chance to submit new tactics ;).
TelinArtho 08-13-06, 12:14 AM	Actually, I was just looking at that. In my tactics I specifically mention staying on the path - so in all consideration, I shouldn't have been there in the first place...
ayyiniwindryder 08-13-06, 12:54 AM	@Zevox - Sorry, never caught that note on the last fight. Will fix it when I update my charsheet. @TelinArtho and Zelck - After looking over your comments, it is apparent that I made some mistakes. Forgive me, I'm still kinda new at this. The devil is in the details, eh? Things of note 1 - Misinterpreted Zelck's "After 5 rounds of movement, ready to shoot on sight if I haven't seen him" tactic, and forgot to keep track of delaying. My fault there. 2 - Second EM shot would have only targetted one of the two opponents. Either way, Farig made his save and still would have hit with his bow. 3 - It also appears that I messed up on undergrowth types...*sigh* 4 - bungled a bit on Andurwin's tactics If either of you wants me to re-do the fight, say so, and I will (with brand new rolls...easier than trying to fix it). Zelck, that sucks about the map mixup - if TelinArtho isn't opposed, I'd be willing to accept new tactics for Andurwin (and Farig too, if you want TelinArtho). If I don't hear anything by around noon on Monday (EST), I'll assume that you both want the fight to stand as-is.
TelinArtho 08-13-06, 01:26 AM	If you do end up redoing the fight, you MUST keep thematic rolls - that's part of the obligation you have as a pitlord. There's not too many - and you can reassign them in the roller, so its not really that difficult. I would be very opposed to the rewrite on the tactics - as Farig's can't really change too much - while knowing more about my own tactics can help him significantly. Redoing the fight is ultimately your prerogative. I am fine with it either way, assuming thematic rolls and tactics are kept as is. I doubt very much the result will change, since Farig would have made her save and my horse would have been able to close to melee quickly (and not die since the EM would be targetted at Farig). This is doubly true when you add the fact that Andurwin fails to spot Farig first.
Zelck 08-13-06, 01:37 AM	I'd prefer you redo the fight. I think I'd have a better chance with the changes. The horse would still get hit because it's moving through undergrowth, and I might actually see Farig before he sees me especially since he's moving. As for changing tactics, I don't think that's allowed :). If anything, I'd add a forfeiture if he hits me first, but I think even that's a bit cheesy. ETA: I'm also not sure if I see anything in the rules regarding keeping rolls, but I also think it's best if you kept the old ones as best as possible. If it's allowed and more convenient for you, I'm not going to stop you from rerolling, but I think it's more fair if you kept them the same.
ayyiniwindryder 08-13-06, 01:56 AM	Alright guys, I'm gonna redo the fight for ya (hopefully catching the dumb stuff I did the first time). Keeping existing tactics and thematic rolls as best I can. Not sure how much will change - my bet goes to whoever shoots first will win again. An extra energy missile from Andurwin might to the trick though. Expect it tomorrow around the same time. Sorry for the mess, this is only my second fight as Pitlord, and I'm still trying to get used to following other's tactics rather than my own intuition. There is more to keep track of than I anticipated, but meh.
Caterane 08-13-06, 05:39 AM	Cyalin vs 2 Troglodytes is done.
Erithmu 08-13-06, 10:52 AM	@Erithmu: Well, I think I can now say for sure that the dice gods hate me. With regards to the tanglefoot/invisibility thing, I would go along with the school of thought that say's that you can pinpoint your opponent but that they still have the 50% miss chance. Now that my attention has been drawn to the mirror image thing, I have noticed some problems with the rolls: Round 4: 7 mirror images, roll 1d8 leif hit ... incorrect, mirror image doesn't stack with invisibility. Roll unecessary. Round 5: 7 mirror images, roll 1d8, image hit ... ok Round 6: in Round 7 rolls, 6 mirror images, roll 1d7, image hit .... ok Round 10: 5 mirror image, roll 1d7, image hit ... incorrect (should have rolled 1d6) Round 11: 4 mirror image, roll 1d6, image hit ... incorrect (should have rolled 1d5) Round 13: 3 mirror image, roll 1d5, image hit ... incorrect (should have rolled 1d4) Round 14: 2 mirror image, roll 1d4, image hit ... incorrect (should have rolled 1d3) Round 16: 1 mirror image, roll 1d3, image hit ... incorrect (should have rolled 1d2) If you reuse the rolls then Cyra should hit Leif (and not an image) in round 5, forcing a very difficult concentration check. Either way, I believe that these points could change the fight. Also, shouldn't the secondary poison damage in round 17 be rolled separately from the initial poison damage in round 7? Finally, thanks again for running the fight. Your efforts are appreciated. Storm @Stormwind: I'm still working out the invis + goo issue. I am to the point with the situation where I am looking for a result on the order of something that gets put up in the prison thread as presidence. As for the fight, I have a few more issues from the pitlord side before I work out the details. Remember that you will still have a miss chance. As for the poison in round 17, that is a new batch, so I need to roll another save for the secondary poison. At that point it was kinda moot in that you were already down. In dealing with the multiple issues that have come up from this fight, I don't want to have to run the fight 3 more times as new stuff comes in, so find what you got now. Fight has been finished but the info at the roller is very messy: Summary of new stuff: Cyra's attack vs invis exhaustion casting: missed via invis (if Elders rule to 20% he is still allowed a rflx save) Cyra's first attack vs summon swarm: deflected via arrow deflecting shield (thematic 1 on the d8 held over) Cyra's second attack vs summon swarm: mirror Image After that all the image attack rolls fell back into place. I added one roll (2nd swarm attack) so that I didn't have to go back and redo all the others. I will try to clean up the roller today, but I make no promises. Are there any other concerns here? Strangely enough the dice decided that all the goo and visibility issue were moot.
Stormwind 08-13-06, 11:44 AM	Fight has been finished but the info at the roller is very messy: Summary of new stuff: Cyra's attack vs invis exhaustion casting: missed via invis (if Elders rule to 20% he is still allowed a rflx save) Cyra's first attack vs summon swarm: deflected via arrow deflecting shield (thematic 1 on the d8 held over) Cyra's second attack vs summon swarm: mirror Image After that all the image attack rolls fell back into place. I added one roll (2nd swarm attack) so that I didn't have to go back and redo all the others. I will try to clean up the roller today, but I make no promises. Are there any other concerns here? Strangely enough the dice decided that all the goo and visibility issue were moot. @Erithmu: Thanks for your time and effort ... @Sunwolf: Congrats on the win ... it seems the dice were on your side today.
bgt 08-13-06, 02:26 PM	Istima vs Quesis (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=9827289&postcount=845) is up. It bears a striking similarity to the pattern my other fight this week took. Oh, and happy birthday to me. :w00t: :king:
Zevox 08-13-06, 03:49 PM	Istima vs Quesis (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=9827289&postcount=845) is up. It bears a striking similarity to the pattern my other fight this week took. Oh, and happy birthday to me. :w00t: :king: Happy birthday indeed :D . On fights, Istima vs Quesis looks good. I wasn't expecting her to give me the time to buff, since with his AC boosters up it'd be near impossible to hit Istima (AC 27 with mount as cover), but that certainly works for me. Ego Whip finally came in handy. :) Edit: Oh, for future reference, in that fight you got the durations on Istima's buff powers wrong. Force Screen was ML 2 from his powerstone, and Skate uses his ML (4), so they would've lasted 20 and 40 rounds respectively, had it come to that. Destra vs Quesis looks good too. I imagine Salrantol may have wanted to heal, but his tactics don't allow for it (asked not to do so if he was holding a charge unless he got hit a second time after falling below 18 hp, and that doesn't happen until the killing claw strokes). Thanks a lot again for running those fights! Zevox
King Uther 08-13-06, 09:19 PM	@MB Well, the only thing I have to say is......it sucks to lose a nice record in an FFA. But, as it so often is proven true, no build, however good, can win every single time.
Zevox 08-13-06, 09:35 PM	Well, I've started Kilp vs Geoffrey vs Ghashara, and am stopping now since its becoming annoying (too many allies) and its getting a bit late here. If any of the players would care to look over it to make sure I haven't screwed up yet, go right ahead. So many things to keep track of in that fight... Zevox
MindWandererB 08-13-06, 09:52 PM	@MB Well, the only thing I have to say is......it sucks to lose a nice record in an FFA. But, as it so often is proven true, no build, however good, can win every single time.With FFAs, the 3FC, and the maps, I think perfection is going to be a pipe dream for most characters. Even Harvey can't last forever at this rate. I try to run every fight as fairly as I know how, and I'm sorry that apparently some of your plans never made it through to me, but I do my best to make decisions I can live with.
hogarth 08-13-06, 11:47 PM	Well, I've started Kilp vs Geoffrey vs Ghashara, and am stopping now since its becoming annoying (too many allies) and its getting a bit late here. If any of the players would care to look over it to make sure I haven't screwed up yet, go right ahead. So many things to keep track of in that fight... Zevox Hi Zevox. A few things so far: mounting a horse doesn't cause an attack of opportunity -- was that caused by something else? Also, it says in Kilp's tactics that if Brunellus is wounded, they will withdraw to cover and heal; of course, if Brunellus is entangled, this won't work. The fight so far doesn't say if Brunellus was entangled or not; it also doesn't say if Geoffrey is entangled.
NiQil 08-14-06, 12:42 AM	You have the rewards in this fight incorrect...it is an ECL 6 battle. Edit: Also, there are some issues. At the end of round 3, Kimahri is 75 ft away from Pestilence, and they are on opposite sides of the hedges there. There is no way that Kimahri can charge through the hedge, so there is no reason for Pestilence to spend his round 4 changing weapons, when he could instead be attacking twice more with the bow. This also means that Pestilence cannot charge in round 5, nor should he have, since I specified in my tactics to not leave my starting box. This will mean that Kimahri is subject to a round or two more of ranged attacks before melee ever ensues. Please take a look at this. Edit 2: Also, I don't see any rolls for arrow recovery of all the misses. :bump: @ King Uther: I haven't seen a response to this at all...I would very much appreciate if you could look at these things. If you did respond, I must have missed it somewhere, but I figured I would ask again since the deadline is looming.
ayyiniwindryder 08-14-06, 02:37 AM	Farig vs Andurwin v2.0 is up. I hope you guys are satisfied with this one moreso than the first. A very close fight from start to finish, with three natural 1s in a row for one character! Sorry this is later than promised, but life intervened.
TelinArtho 08-14-06, 02:56 AM	(What is below is my reaction to things as I see it, the final result is that you have misunderstood what my dire flail is - a double weapon. I would appreciate if you took the time to look at it.) I don't understand what Farig does in round 17. It is a full attack, but the first is a touch and the second a regular attack? I'm curious as to the reasoning there. Regardless, the 2nd attack should be at +6 = which would be a total of 18 and a hit. Looking at the rolls, it seems like you are having me attack with my flail as a 2-handed weapon and my armor spikes. Considering those have a lower attack bonus than attacking with both heads of my dire flail - I think that's a pretty bad decision and quite against my character. Why else would she have a double weapon? Reading over your notes it seems like you do not understand double weapons or did not note that it was a double weapon. I would really appreciate if you fixed that.
ayyiniwindryder 08-14-06, 03:17 AM	Wow, really sorry about that. Somehow, dire flail -> heavy flail in my mind. I fixed it, and, despite the fact that you rolled a 1 for damage, it made the difference. I'm sorry for this mess of a fight - it's been a looong day...like that's an excuse. I just looked over it like 3 times and everything *appears* in order (just like the other 100,000 times that it seemed fine...).
Myrridin 08-14-06, 10:31 AM	Loddick vs Eraca Moralta is up and rerun, due to me missing some pretty big things in the fight. Read it, let me know what's wrong, and I'll try to fix what I can.
Erithmu 08-14-06, 10:44 AM	Loddick vs Eraca Moralta is up and rerun, due to me missing some pretty big things in the fight. Read it, let me know what's wrong, and I'll try to fix what I can. A failed Will save vs ego whip also results in the subject being Dazed. So all of Eraca's actions would be moved down a round, allowing another ego whip, and another possible dazing
Myrridin 08-14-06, 10:56 AM	I'll keep the second Ego whip, and made Will save, which will occur while she's dazed from the first failed Will save. Then I'll move from there.
Myrridin 08-14-06, 11:02 AM	@Erithmu - Thanks for the clarification on the Dazing effect of missing a save on Ego Whip. It didn't change the outcome of the fight, but I do appreciate having it, for completness sake, if nothing else. @All - Thanks for bearing with me as I've come back to Pitlording. I know it hasn't been a smooth ride, and I appreciate your patience.
Erithmu 08-14-06, 11:07 AM	No Prob, you might just send a PM to pitlords that there was a change in the result of the fight, I know he moved Loddick up a league and adjusted our records EDIT NM he got it....
Zevox 08-14-06, 11:44 AM	Loddick vs Eraca Moralta is up and rerun, due to me missing some pretty big things in the fight. Read it, let me know what's wrong, and I'll try to fix what I can. Looks good to me. I wasn't actually expecting the result to change, but I'm all for pleasant surprises like that! :D @ Erithmu - We'll have to have a rematch one of these days - maybe in a level or two? Obviously this was a fight that could go either way, and I just happened to be the lucky one this time. Fights like that are always fun to see. :) Hi Zevox. A few things so far: mounting a horse doesn't cause an attack of opportunity -- was that caused by something else? Also, it says in Kilp's tactics that if Brunellus is wounded, they will withdraw to cover and heal; of course, if Brunellus is entangled, this won't work. The fight so far doesn't say if Brunellus was entangled or not; it also doesn't say if Geoffrey is entangled. Re: AoO - I simply thought that, as a move action, mounting would draw an AoO, but upon checking the rules' actions list you are correct. Not that it matters since it missed, but I'll edit that out. Re: Healing - missed the withdraw part in your tactics. And it looks like I forgot to roll to see if your mount was entangled, which will decide whether you can. Rolled it, Brunellus failed his save (rolled 3+4=7 vs DC 11), so the match continues as is. Re: Geoffrey and entangle - Its my interpretation that an entangle spell will not affect the rider of a mount, since they are off the ground atop thier mount. Only the mount would be affected. If you disagree or know of a rule to the contrary, feel free to say so. Zevox
hogarth 08-14-06, 12:19 PM	Re: AoO - I simply thought that, as a move action, mounting would draw an AoO, but upon checking the rules' actions list you are correct. Not that it matters since it missed, but I'll edit that out. Re: Healing - missed the withdraw part in your tactics. And it looks like I forgot to roll to see if your mount was entangled, which will decide whether you can. Rolled it, Brunellus failed his save (rolled 3+4=7 vs DC 11), so the match continues as is. Re: Geoffrey and entangle - Its my interpretation that an entangle spell will not affect the rider of a mount, since they are off the ground atop thier mount. Only the mount would be affected. If you disagree or know of a rule to the contrary, feel free to say so. Zevox Thanks for the changes. Everything looks O.K. to me now, except according to my tactics you should have used one of Kilp's power points to boost her save vs. Entangle (although she succeeded anyway). Also, she has taken a point of damage from falling off her horse.
TelinArtho 08-14-06, 12:28 PM	Osiris vs Ceilia is up. If there's issues - just let me know.
DSugui 08-14-06, 01:01 PM	Sali Kan (ayyiniwindryder) vs. Treetall (hogarth) is up HERE Sorry for the delay, guys.
Zevox 08-14-06, 01:04 PM	Osiris vs Ceilia is up. If there's issues - just let me know. Ow - I hadn't thought of her using Ray of Enfeeblement on my horse. That could've hurt. Still, otherwise it went more or less as I expected. Thanks for running it. And yeah, I noticed the CL mistake when I was writing my tactics. Forgot to update it when Ceilia leveled last week. It'll be fixed. Edit: Actually, in the wrap-up, you forgot Ceilia's 2 used CLW wand charges, and however arrows/bolts we used and didn't recover. Zevox
ayyiniwindryder 08-14-06, 01:24 PM	@DSugui - Yeah, I had noticed the potion problem, but couldn't do anything about it until you finished the fight. I intended Sali to ignore the summons, but not Wumpus while the protection was up ("Completely ignore the summons and BoT animals and go straight for Wumpus."). Unfortunately, however, my prot ran out before I even really found him - something that I, stupidly, didn't even think about. Not that it matters, but in round 13, Sali cannot draw crossbow [move], load it [move], and fire [stan]. I don't really think that the above would have changed anything in the end. He simply had superior tactics...and numbers, heh.
TelinArtho 08-14-06, 01:29 PM	Well, since moving wasn't too big of a deal once you got into melee, even a maximum penalty ray would only drop the horse to a 9 str - which would be a heavy load - still manageable. Since Osiris wasn't looking to get away from you in the first place- this isn't a problem.
hogarth 08-14-06, 01:30 PM	I don't really think that the above would have changed anything in the end. He simply had superior tactics...and numbers, heh. I prefer to call them "cheesy tactics", but thanks. You didn't expect me to just stand there and take a beating, did you? :D By the way, I don't think Sali's double move on round 12 would have provoked an Attack of Opportunity (she should have been able to withdraw safely from both wolves by moving west and then north, for instance).
DSugui 08-14-06, 01:55 PM	I intended Sali to ignore the summons, but not Wumpus while the protection was up ("Completely ignore the summons and BoT animals and go straight for Wumpus.") I know I made some mistakes, sorry. Somehow I read "ignore" and applied to all his allies... Sali cannot draw crossbow [move], load it [move], and fire [stan]. Well, I always assume that the crossbow is pre-loaded. I don't know if this is correct, but I always did this way and nobody ever complained. I don't think Sali's double move on round 12 would have provoked an Attack of Opportunity (she should have been able to withdraw safely from both wolves by moving west and then north, for instance). But since no AoO ever hit him, it doesn't really matter, does it? :rolleyes: Yeah, another mistake fom my part... I could fix the fight, but since I still have two more fights to run and it seems both of you are confortable with the results, I will leave it as it stands.
hogarth 08-14-06, 02:03 PM	But since no AoO ever hit him, it doesn't really matter, does it? :rolleyes: Yeah, another mistake fom my part... Actually, Sali did get hit by an AoO in round 12: Sali ignores the wolves and goes after Treetall [2x Move] but opens his guard and Wumpus bites him viciously I'm fine with the result as-is, though; I think Sali wouldn't have lasted much longer.
ayyiniwindryder 08-14-06, 02:18 PM	@DSugui and hogarth - Yeah, result is fine. Sali's violations have been fixed.
Zevox 08-14-06, 03:49 PM	Kilpquabjeg vs Geoffrey vs Ghashara is complete. A couple of sharp swings in luck at the end decided it. Let me know if theres any problems Zevox
hogarth 08-14-06, 05:15 PM	Kilpquabjeg vs Geoffrey vs Ghashara is complete. A couple of sharp swings in luck at the end decided it. Let me know if theres any problems. Thanks for pitlording! I don't have any problems with the rest of the fight. (By the way, the "instant kill" that Ghashara was afraid of was a scroll of Sleep, not a scroll of Color Spray.)
Guildmaster (EHTC) 08-14-06, 05:20 PM	Thanks for pitlording! I don't have any problems with the rest of the fight. (By the way, the "instant kill" that Ghashara was afraid of was a scroll of Sleep, not a scroll of Color Spray.) Oh. Heh, I thought you'd used that all up in the fight with Ceilia last week - silly me not to check, eh? Edit: Damn, wrong account. Thought I'd logged off this one... Zevox
Zelck 08-14-06, 07:49 PM	Farig vs Andurwin v2.0 is up. I hope you guys are satisfied with this one moreso than the first. A very close fight from start to finish, with three natural 1s in a row for one character! Sorry this is later than promised, but life intervened. Many thanks for doing the rerun :). Unfortunately, I still think I see some potential issues :(. In round 17, I could have taken a 5' step. That would have put me beyond his 5' step range, and I would have avoided his full attack. This would have given me another 5' step + reload + shot. Also, I'd like to have shot one last time and forced Farig to hit me and down with his one AoO in the last round. The forfeiture issues were to potentially save PPs or items; since they've all been used, it didn't matter. Attempting one last shot would have cost me nothing. I'm kind of disappointed that you improv'd Farig to melee. In round 16, when I dropped prone, Farig would not have been able to see me fall prone since I was out of LOS. Additionally, none of his tactics mention melee; in fact, they seem to imply a preference for ranged combat, especially the "If at all possible, fire from cover or fire then move to break LOS." line. Regardless, it's your prerogative, and if you feel that it was justified, I won't argue this further. I'm also not sure if I would have dropped prone at my location. It didn't give me cover, and I was only 5' away from a nearby tree. I could easily have gotten there next round and dropped. Granted, my tactics concerning dropping prone next to cover mentioned small statuettes, but they're close enough to trees, right? ;) If I didn't drop prone on round 16, I could have potentially readied to shoot upon sight - note that the crossbow should initially be loaded as per my prebuffs. Farig would have probably moved to LOS and shot at me, which would have given me an extra shot back at him, or potentially two extra shots (or potentially more if he didn't decide to melee). For future reference, when someone at a lower initiative count readies and gets his action before someone at a higher initiative count next round, they don't get their next action. However, their initiative goes up to when their action triggered. This had no effect on this fight, but for 3+ person fights, it might be something to keep in mind :). Anyway, sorry I keep bugging you about changing stuff, and many thanks to you for putting up with it ;).
King Uther 08-14-06, 08:54 PM	@NiQil I thought I responded. I plan to edit tonight and run my other fight.
orsono 08-14-06, 09:10 PM	Zevox thanks for Pitlording man. I will fix all the notes that you made about the character and Summons. this is my second fight so I am still learning. still wasting all those spells for last place was very bad... My tactics could of been better, but it was still close. I don't have many spells for next week I think conservation will be in action for my next cycle. the scroll of sleep and color spray is what I was woried about. so I guess I got it half right :-).
ayyiniwindryder 08-15-06, 01:10 AM	In round 17, I could have taken a 5' step. That would have put me beyond his 5' step range, and I would have avoided his full attack. This would have given me another 5' step + reload + shot. Also, I'd like to have shot one last time and forced Farig to hit me and down with his one AoO in the last round. The forfeiture issues were to potentially save PPs or items; since they've all been used, it didn't matter. Attempting one last shot would have cost me nothing. You can take a 5' step when "...you don’t perform any other kind of movement." I don't see how you could not consider standing up a kind of movement (and if you hadn't stood up, both attacks would have hit and you would be dead). As for the final shot - loading provokes, firing provokes, and moving away provokes. There was no way for Andurwin to fire without taking an AoO...and he was prone too. I'm kind of disappointed that you improv'd Farig to melee. In round 16, when I dropped prone, Farig would not have been able to see me fall prone since I was out of LOS. Additionally, none of his tactics mention melee; in fact, they seem to imply a preference for ranged combat, especially the "If at all possible, fire from cover or fire then move to break LOS." line. Regardless, it's your prerogative, and if you feel that it was justified, I won't argue this further. Well, any Joe knows that hitting a prone target with ranged attacks is difficult. While true that he says he prefers ranged, nowhere does it say ranged only. I made what I thought was a logical Pitlord call and TelinArtho has no problems with it. I'm also not sure if I would have dropped prone at my location. It didn't give me cover, and I was only 5' away from a nearby tree. I could easily have gotten there next round and dropped. Granted, my tactics concerning dropping prone next to cover mentioned small statuettes, but they're close enough to trees, right? If I didn't drop prone on round 16, I could have potentially readied to shoot upon sight - note that the crossbow should initially be loaded as per my prebuffs. Farig would have probably moved to LOS and shot at me, which would have given me an extra shot back at him, or potentially two extra shots (or potentially more if he didn't decide to melee). I'm still new at pitlording (fight 2), and I'm bound to make mistakes. Pitlords who have been here for ages do it too. I don't think there has been a single fight for my characters that I was completely satisfied with - but, IMHO, thats what happens when someone else controls your character. It's the nature of the beast. That said - I've already run the fight twice, and, as far as I can tell, there is nothing mechanically wrong with it. I tried to follow the given tactics to the best of my abilities, and don't really know what else to tell you. And, not to be heartless about it, but I don't see any arguments here that make me want to stay up all night "fixing" a few character action decisions that you disagree with and re-organizing all those rolls...again. I'm really trying to be as accommodating as I can about this, but I don't know what else to say.
King Uther 08-15-06, 01:28 AM	Pestilence vs Kimahri edit is up. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=9821597&postcount=843) The fight remained relatively the same but was somewhat closer. @NiQil In case you wanted to argue attacking via bow another round I added in an extra set of rolls in IC. Both were misses. I also rolled to salvage the arrows, and only one made it above 50%.
King Uther 08-15-06, 01:35 AM	@Zelck Bilk deals 2d8 damage with a Glaive instead of 1d10. So the crit was 6d8+21. Average damage kills Flamehair on the crit.
NiQil 08-15-06, 01:36 AM	Pestilence vs Kimahri edit is up. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=9821597&postcount=843) The fight remained relatively the same but was somewhat closer. @NiQil In case you wanted to argue attacking via bow another round I added in an extra set of rolls in IC. Both were misses. I also rolled to salvage the arrows, and only one made it above 50%. Still one error to fix. In round 5, the attack against Pestilence no longer hits, because Pestilence is no longer having his AC lowered due to charging. His AC would be at a 24 that round, and the attack roll was a 23. So that 16 damage goes away, causing the fight to continue. Also, you still have the rewards incorrect.
Zelck 08-15-06, 01:36 AM	Bilk vs. Flamehair (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=9841353&postcount=851) is up. @ayyiniwindryder: Standing up should not count as movement for the purposes of 5' steps. From the SRD: You can move 5 feet in any round when you don’t perform any other kind of movement. Taking this 5-foot step never provokes an attack of opportunity. You can’t take more than one 5-foot step in a round, and you can’t take a 5-foot step in the same round when you move any distance. [...] You can only take a 5-foot step if your movement isn’t hampered by difficult terrain or darkness. Bold mine. Interpreting movement to mean "standing up" would render the second part of that quote rather meaningless, no? :) I'd also like to reload and fire in the last round anyway (he only gets 1 AoO, he doesn't have Combat Reflexes) and hope I get lucky. I have nothing to lose; if he hits me, I lose anyway, but if I hit him, I have a chance to win. This shouldn't take too long to check; roll an attack roll for my xbow, roll two two more attacks vs. a prone target for him. If I'm still alive, roll another attack roll for my xbow, then 3 more attacks vs. a prone target for him. I don't like my chances, but I'd like to see if I get lucky ;). Regarding the other stuff, it's your prerogative. The bad tactics were my fault; I should have looked at the pairings closer. If you don't want to deal with that, that's perfectly fine with me :).
King Uther 08-15-06, 01:43 AM	@NiQil I hear you. As soon as I set the other fight up to run I'll go back and make the final rolls to see what happens.
DSugui 08-15-06, 01:50 AM	Kraegin (TelinArtho) vs. The Chameleon (Lonewolf) is up HERE Somewhat fun fight, could go one way or the other.
King Uther 08-15-06, 02:01 AM	@NiQil Rewards corrected for an EL6 fight. Since the attack rotation was altered because Kimahri initiatived the fight, he had a second attack in rd 8(at 1d20+8; 2d4+9) that also connected(due to insane luck) for 13 damage, still ending the fight. I don't know if I've ever seen so many 16+ rolls for one character in a short period like that in a while. @Zelck Did you see my above comments/PM?
Zelck 08-15-06, 02:06 AM	Bilk vs. Flamehair (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=9841353&postcount=851) is up. Shoot, Bilk CAN attack with both the Bite of the Wolf and his Glaive! I rolled some d20s for the 10 bites you got, and all of them missed (you only hit on 20). So, nothing changes, except my little endnote. I'll fix it tomorrow.
TheMagister 08-15-06, 02:06 AM	Kraegin (TelinArtho) vs. The Chameleon (Lonewolf) is up HERE Somewhat fun fight, could go one way or the other. Elementals are not subject to sneak attack damage. Torrent should be around, and should go whirlwind as soon as it can after it is hit, possibly catching the halfling up in the vortex. TM
Zelck 08-15-06, 02:09 AM	@Zelck Did you see my above comments/PM? Ahhh... so the weapon deals 6d8+21... which would hit for 52 damage and kill him instantly. OK, lemme change that.
King Uther 08-15-06, 03:16 AM	Dronnar vs Shaz is up. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=9841497&postcount=852) Defense vs Offense. And an air elemental.
ayyiniwindryder 08-15-06, 03:37 AM	Ok Zelck, I edited and gave Andurwin the desparation shot in round 18...and Farig critted on the AoO. I hope you all are satisfied, because I'm not editing it any more. Maybe I am simply incompetant, or maybe I just can't handle the endless issues, but I'm PMing Pitlords to remove me from the Pitlord roster (for a while, anyway). I thought it would be fun, and it was everything but. It seems you both wanted a perfect fight - something that doesn't, and can't, exist - and definately something that I can't give you. I hope fake gold and experience on the internet was worth the trouble.
Iced 08-15-06, 03:44 AM	anyone up for running the Saffron vs Asran fight on the plains map go for it. Info is posted.
Vathelokai 08-15-06, 04:23 AM	anyone up for running the Saffron vs Asran fight on the plains map go for it. Info is posted. Saffron vs. Asran setup I hate it when I read my tactics later and realize I forgot one or two things. :mad: Since I can't edit my tactics, I'll edit my RP stuff... If she wins, Saffron will take notes in her 'spellbook' from her object reading experiment. This would, no doubt, bring a lot of pain on the EYE from the direction of Habari.
Usurpator 08-15-06, 05:58 AM	Bilk vs. Flamehair (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=9841353&postcount=851) is up. Thank you for running the Flamehair vs. Bilk fight. Sorry you didn't catch that crit damage earlier, would have saved some rolling! I do have some comments on the fight: 1. Metapsionicked powerstones We PM'ed about this, and my opinion still is that you must be careful if you (as a Pitlord) implement a house rules because you think something is unbalanced. House rules, even sensible ones, need to be known in advance to the players so that they can adapt builds and tactics. This remains true even though I approve of your solution in this case. 2. Pitlord Improvisation You have Bilk dive in the pool to save himself from an unknown burning. To me this falls in the realm of Pitlord improvisation. King Uther had not specified a counter to my tactic, and it would have worked perfectly had you not decided to counter it creatively. While it might make sense to you (and the character), I always advocate extreme care with such improvisation. It is really the job of King Uther to come up with such a counter, and not have the Pitlord provide one on the spot. My usual MO is writing tactics that suprises my opponent (see the Tezca vs. Zero fight earlier this week), if the Pitlord compensates for my surprise by improvising and/or altering tactics, that would be quite detrimental to my style of play. I have written several guidelines concerning Improvisation in the past, and I will post them when I find them. In this case, I am suprised King Uther didn't include a counter, and I fully expected he would, since Flamehair did use it before. 3. The Steam Cloud The pond is only 1 ft. deep. It furthermore only creates steam when hit by a fire area effect (see description). Matter agitation does not have the fire descriptor, nor is it an area effect. This means that the steam would never have been created, LOS was never broken, and damage would continue to accrue (27 points on average if max. duration). I can see the logic for arguing for that Matter Agitation is treated like a fire effect, but it is certainly not an area effect. Also, a 10 ft. dwarf dunking himself 1 ft. deep pool? And it's not just his hair, all of his skin smolders too... 4. Tower Shield and Heavy Flail? I wrote that Flamehair starts out with only a dorje of vigor in her hand (I specifically don't mention the Tower Shield). Without a tower shield, her base attack is +8, or +10 with the animal affinity. I also specified to draw the large heavy flail, while you have Flamehair fight one-handed with her regular flail, which is not what I said. This means that damage on that crit is actually 4d8+18 and not 4d6+16 (6 more on average). AC I see Flamehair's AC mentioned as 28. I think it should be 24/28, since her Ride check for +4 cover bonus to AC is not an automatic success (70% chance of AC 28). Reach Problems I see Bilk's reach mentioned as 40 ft. This should be 20 ft. As King Unther mentioned, 5 ft. stepping would indeed allow Bilk to attack with both the Glaive and Bite, since Flamehair occupies a 10 ft. square (at 15 ft. with the Glaive, and at 10 ft. with the Bite) Even though there are some problems, the confirmed crit in round 14 pretty much seals the deal. However, a reroll on Flamehair's crit damage, combined with accruing damage from the Matter Agitation (total 33 on average) could just get Bilk at or below 0 though, winning the fight for Flamehair. I'll leave it up to you if you want to look into the matter, please don't feel obligated to do so. @King Unther: +8 vs. AC 24/28 against +10 vs. AC 27 is risky business to say the least. I think you were fortunate with that crit. Congrats on the win (if it isn't overturned that is). I sort of expected you to write a contingency for the Matter Agitation, otherwise I would have tried to use both stones (only wrote to use one in my tactics). Also, please don't ask the Pitlord to improvise if you don't cover all the bases with your tactics, it is you job to do cover the bases, and not the Pitlord's job to improvise. I don't know if this line cause Zelck to improvise on the dunking, but if so, I consider specifically asking for improvisations in your tactics not fair play. I don't think you did it intentionally though.
hogarth 08-15-06, 06:56 AM	Also, a 10 ft. dwarf dunking himself 1 ft. deep pool? And it's not just his hair, all of his skin smolders too... Actually, it's a 2 square foot (approx. 1.4 x 1.4 feet) patch of skin/hair that smolders.
DSugui 08-15-06, 09:23 AM	Dronnar vs Shaz is up. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=9841497&postcount=852) Defense vs Offense. And an air elemental. Well, can't argue with the dice gods... Thanks for the run, KU.
DSugui 08-15-06, 09:27 AM	Elementals are not subject to sneak attack damage. Torrent should be around, and should go whirlwind as soon as it can after it is hit, possibly catching the halfling up in the vortex. TM Hmmm... forgot about that. But that doesn't really change anything. With +4 Spot, Torrent wouldn't be able to locate Chameleon anyway, and if he turned into a whirlwind, he would catch Kraegin too. Since he had a contingencie to withdraw if shot and unable to find, and the elemental wasn't doing much anyways, I had him withdraw from battle.
Traevanon 08-15-06, 09:41 AM	2. Pitlord Improvisation You have Bilk dive in the pool to save himself from an unknown burning. To me this falls in the realm of Pitlord improvisation. King Uther had not specified a counter to my tactic, and it would have worked perfectly had you not decided to counter it creatively. While it might make sense to you (and the character), I always advocate extreme care with such improvisation. It is really the job of King Uther to come up with such a counter, and not have the Pitlord provide one on the spot. My usual MO is writing tactics that suprises my opponent (see the Tezca vs. Zero fight earlier this week), if the Pitlord compensates for my surprise by improvising and/or altering tactics, that would be quite detrimental to my style of play. I have written several guidelines concerning Improvisation in the past, and I will post them when I find them. In this case, I am suprised King Uther didn't include a counter, and I fully expected he would, since Flamehair did use it before. Pitlords - Improvisation Sometimes you have to adept and improvise. Pitlord adaption is a common thing and is used in many fights. Sometimes a situation arises that is not covered by the players tactic, or the tactic a player wrote clearly doesn't work (anymore). In this case, you can take over the character and adept with basic tactics accordingly. Perhaps you might want to take a look at the characters description (behaviour) and his mental stats for guidelines on how he might react. Try to think yourself into this character but also try to find a good balance. A pitlord adaption shouldn't be a boon to the one whose tactics broke down, nor should the character act like a fool. In any case, it is up to you to decide. From an outsider's perspective: Usurpator is right on the vapors from his flaming hair being put out not breaking LoS. This goes beyond the rules and should be deleted. However, submersing yourself in water does break line of sight (see Zero's fights I believe) since the power affects only a particular part of you, submersing that part aught to break LoS to it. Note that I would rule that someone's hair is not a "nonpsionic, nonmagical object," but a part of a person. As such it is not a legal target for this power. It may give an example of hair igniting, but that may be from agitating someone's helmet or other headgear. Although, the Area of the power mentions objects and creatures, but that conflicts with the text of the power. I'm really not sure. Overall I feel that using it to agitate someone's body directly is a bit shady. In any case, even with the most generous reading, the most you can affect is 2 sq ft of the Dwarf's surface area (ML1), which can easily be dunked. I'm not sure about Metapsionic Powerstones. I couldnt find anything allowing or disallowing them. I think you can make a Metamagic Scroll, which would seem to suggest (but not prove) that Metapsionic Powerstones are viable but right now I cant find that either. Can you cite the sources that allow characters to create Metapsionic Powerstones?
Usurpator 08-15-06, 10:18 AM	From an outsider's perspective: Usurpator is right on the vapors from his flaming hair being put out not breaking LoS. This goes beyond the rules and should be deleted. However, submersing yourself in water does break line of sight (see Zero's fights I believe) since the power affects only a particular part of you, submersing that part aught to break LoS to it. Thanks, I appreciate the extra input. If what you say would be true, submersing breaks LoS (or Line of Effect), nobody would be able to cast spells underwater, which I think is not intended, so I'll have to reject that theory. Water is not opaque. Additionally, as far as I know, only line of effect is required, not line of sight. Darkness or fog does not break line of effect. Furthermore, the water is only 1 ft. deep, there is no way that a expanded dwarf can submerse himself in a 1 ft. pool (even though this is irrelevant). It is possible that in the fight with Zero mistakes were made, I haven't looked through them that closely. Note that I would rule that someone's hair is not a "nonpsionic, nonmagical object," but a part of a person. As such it is not a legal target for this power. It may give an example of hair igniting, but that may be from agitating someone's helmet or other headgear. Although, the Area of the power mentions objects and creatures, but that conflicts with the text of the power. I'm really not sure. Overall I feel that using it to agitate someone's body directly is a bit shady. I agree, but matter agitation specifically mentions creature as a valid target, and the examples that speak of burning skin and hair clearly support it. It would probably be better if it read: Target: 2 sq. ft. of surface area of an object or one creature. That would clear any confusion. To me it seems they intented a creature to be targetable by it. In any case, even with the most generous reading, the most you can affect is 2 sq ft of the Dwarf's surface area (ML1), which can easily be dunked. As I said, in my reading they meant 'a creature'. But even so, dunking does not stop matter agitation. I'm not sure about Metapsionic Powerstones. I couldnt find anything allowing or disallowing them. I think you can make a Metamagic Scroll, which would seem to suggest (but not prove) that Metapsionic Powerstones are viable but right now I cant find that either. Can you cite the sources that allow characters to create Metapsionic Powerstones? I truly have no idea. But I don't think using Metamagic on scrolls is mentioned anywhere either, and that is fairly accepted. It certainly isn't in the SRD as far as I can tell. Since psionic item creation says that in most respects they work as regular magic items, and I see no exception stating that it can't be done, I assumed it can. About the Improvisation, I'll post my guidelines when I get home (and if I can find them). You'll see they are quite reasonable.
Zevox 08-15-06, 10:31 AM	However, submersing yourself in water does break line of sight (see Zero's fights I believe) since the power affects only a particular part of you, submersing that part aught to break LoS to it. Permit me (as one of Zero's most reluctant yet as luck would have it most frequent pitlords) to chime in and mention that this is incorrect. Submersing something in water does not, to my knowledge, break LoS. The reason no one can see Zero in his sewer fights is because the water is granting him improved cover for being at least chest deep in it (hes a tiny dragon...), which in turn allows him to hide in it (with a +10 bonus from the improved cover). Barring a spot check that would shame an epic-level ranger or druid, no one could see him in those conditions. Actually, due to his size (tiny creatures take up a 2 1/2 ft cube), Zero couldn't submerse himself totally even if he wanted to except in the forest map. Zevox
Usurpator 08-15-06, 12:06 PM	Usurpator's Improvisation Guidelines 1. Improvise in the spirit of the submitted tactics Don't decide you know a far better tactic for this fight than what was submitted. If a gladiator's primary goal is melee, Pitlord's should improvise tactics to get him to melee and (for example) only switch to ranged when no melee seems possible even after improvisation, even though *you* might think ranged is a far better option. 2. Improvisations should be basic Please save your fiendish and/or complicated tactics for your own characters and don't reward players for writing inapplicable tactics or failing to mention contingencies. Basic improvisations only. 3. Improvisations must be beneficial An improvisation by a Pitlord should always attempt to bring the gladiator in a better position. No improvisations should be worse than the failing tactic. 4. Improvisations only need to be acceptable A Pitlord has a multitude of options available when improvising. He is not required to choose the best of these options (he might not even be aware of the best option). He just needs to choose an acceptable option. 5. Minimize use of expendables A Pitlord should never use costly expendables when improvising, unless the player has given him permission. Even then Pitlords should exercise caution. 6. One improvisations deserves another If you improvise for one player, you should be prepared to make equal improvisations for the other player (if neccessary). This is especially true if your improvisation causes the other's players tactics to fail or become less effective. Some players may actually count on opponents being unprepared for their fiendishly crafted tactics. If you improvisation negates that tactic or makes it significantly less usefull, you are rewarding the player with didn't write comprehensive tactics, and punishing the player who wrote an novel/suprising tactic, so be careful with that! 7. Never include player suggestions when you edit The Pitlord should never edit a fight using improvised tactics that are suggested by one of the players in the fight. Players should refrain from suggesting tactics after they have seen the fight. Players can ask a Pitlord to improvise, but not to improvise with a certain tactic (unless given in the submitted tactics of course, but then it's not an improvisation). If they had wanted a particular improvisation, they should have included it in their tactics, if they don't mind, they shouldn't attempt to push the Pitlord in a certain direction, it is not fair to their opponents. 8. Some things are not improvisations This is a difficult guideline, because it will vary from Pitlord to Pitlord, but generally players shouldn't be expected to include basic combat tactics. For example: archers and wizards should always take a 5 ft. step to avoid drawing an AoO if they can, riders should always use their ride skill to get a +4 cover bonus to AC etc. (unless mentioned otherwise in tactics of course).
TelinArtho 08-15-06, 12:13 PM	@DSugui - Regarding Kraegin vs Chameleon The sblocked items are really minor and definitely are subject to interpretation. If you want to consider them, great. If not - the final point is definitely a valid one and I would like that edited in accordingly. Well, sniping is a full round action. As a result of that, since Chameleon couldn't hide after the AoO - she probably just wouldn't have made the AoO. In other words, while I disagree with your ruling, I don't see it helping me any... In round 1 however, Chameleon manifests Chameleon and nothing else - at that point she is 15ft from the nearest cover - so there's nothing for her to hide in plain sight with. Of course, if she moved at all - that changes it - so again, not going to help me at all... In round 3, when Chameleon is moving - he is at two spots further than 10ft from cover - so he should be autospotted in those places. Since he can effectively rehide even when right next to me - I don't think that helps too much - but at least I would have an idea of where he is. In round 5, when the spider attacks Chameleon - I think Torrent should be attacking that square as well. Even if Torrent doesn't understand that the spider can detect him, Kraegin does - so he should be relaying that information to his ally. In round 6, I disagree that Chameleon can stay hidden when in the web - that should clearly indicate him - for that matter when he escapes from it - that should also clearly indicate him. Since Kraegin had a readied Hold Person at that point - that would put the hold person there - and would give him a chance to CDG before Chameleon has a full round to try to escape the hold person. In round 9, you say that Torrent cannot find Chameleon - but since Chameleon is held - he cannot hide in plain sight any longer. That means Torrent can CDG him right there. Lastly, Kraegin's Magic Vestment had 16 hours left after week 1 and with the 5 hours of this current week means there should be 11 hours left - not 6 as you have listed. [EDIT] Even if Torrent can't see Chameleon, since Chameleon failed to "snipe" and Kraegin saw him - the ready action triggers - and Kraegin's initiative is reset to just before Chameleon - meaning Kraegin can CDG Chameleon before Chameleon gets a full round action to free himself. [EDIT2] Also, not that this really matters, but since Elementals are not subject to critical hits, they are also not subject to Sneak attacks. Also, I'm not sure that Chameleon can use HiPS while immediately next to Kraegin. The "Sniping" option from the hide skill requires at least 10ft of space for the hider to remain hidden. The invisibility ability states that if an invisible attacker is within 5ft of its target - the target knows the location of the opponent - so it would stand to reason that once Chameleon attacks Torrent/Kraegin - he is "auto-spotted" "auto-pinpointed" because of the attack. Chameleon could then move to hide or something similar - but readied actions would be working much more frequently in this case. Rewards seem to be a little off. Kraegin and Chameleon are ECL8 and Torrent is CR3. Kraegin's MaxCA is 6 (8-2), so his penalty should be 12.5%. 800 - 12.5% is 700xp. ECL 8 has a 1.41 gp/xp factor - so he would get 987gp. For Chameleon, he would get 2400xp +12.5% = 2700xp and 3807gp.
lonewolf 08-15-06, 12:43 PM	Kraegin (TelinArtho) vs. The Chameleon (Lonewolf) is up HERE Somewhat fun fight, could go one way or the other. one MAJOR concern: With Hide in plain sight there is no need for sniping. Thats exactly what Hide in plain Sight is for. Thus the -20 penalty to hide is not correct => Kraegin can never cast Hold Person on The Chameleon. EDIT: I want to add that the whole character concept is build around HipS. If this is somehow ruled differently I will probably want to refund the credits I used to make this character.
TelinArtho 08-15-06, 12:47 PM	one MAJOR concern: With Hide in plain sight there is no need for sniping. Thats exactly what Hide in plain Sight is for. Thus the -20 penalty to hide is not correct => Kraegin can never cast Hold Person on The Chameleon. Umm... no. It’s practically impossible (–20 penalty) to hide while attacking, running or charging Since HiPS says that you use the hide skill, then the -20 penalty definitely applies.
hogarth 08-15-06, 01:06 PM	Also, I'm not sure that Chameleon can use HiPS while immediately next to Kraegin. The "Sniping" option from the hide skill requires at least 10ft of space for the hider to remain hidden. The invisibility ability states that if an invisible attacker is within 5ft of its target - the target knows the location of the opponent - so it would stand to reason that once Chameleon attacks Torrent/Kraegin - he is "auto-spotted" because of the attack. He wouldn't be "auto-spotted" if he attacked you in melee; he would be "auto-pinpointed". You still can't cast a targeted spell on a creature you can't see: Target or Targets Some spells have a target or targets. You cast these spells on creatures or objects, as defined by the spell itself. You must be able to see or touch the target, and you must specifically choose that target. That's my interpretation, at least.
TelinArtho 08-15-06, 01:08 PM	You are correct - poor word choice on my part (fixed above...)
lonewolf 08-15-06, 01:25 PM	hmm It appears that you are right on this. I will have to boost my hide skill further in the next fights to offset that penalty. nonetheless: I dont have to use the "sniping" option from the Hide skill and thus take a full-round action to attack. I can simply attack and hide in plain sight(with the -20 penalty). Round9: The Chameleon is paralyzed from the Hold person but he is still hidden from Torrent is he doesnt make the spot check => no CDG for Torrent. And Kraegins Initiative doesnt reset in front of The Chameleon. Otherwise he would have two actions in a row while The Chameleon has none. => also no CDG for Kraegin.
TelinArtho 08-15-06, 01:36 PM	Round9: The Chameleon is paralyzed from the Hold person but he is still hidden from Torrent is he doesnt make the spot check => no CDG for Torrent. And Kraegins Initiative doesnt reset in front of The Chameleon. Otherwise he would have two actions in a row while The Chameleon has none. => also no CDG for Kraegin. Once the Chameleon is paralyzed, he can no longer use his HiPS ability - so he should be auto-spotted by Torrent and Kraegin. And I'm not sure about the initiative resetting. This isn't invisibility - you don't become visible after your attack - but rather you become visible during your attack - which to me indicates that Kraegin should interrupt it. After Kraegin interrupts your action, you still get a move action, but since you would've been held, you wouldn't be able to do anything. I'm actually more of the opinion that Kraegin's hold person would interrupt your attack action - making the attack fail completely and wasting your standard action, but it is certainly a gray area.
MindWandererB 08-15-06, 01:49 PM	On water and LOS: Actually, the rules do say that anyone completely immersed in water has total cover from anyone outside it. The oddity here is that Matter Agitation does not target an entire creature, but only a portion of them. 2 square feet isn't much. Since total immersion of the affected part of the body is possible, then LOS to that part (i.e. the target) is broken. Of course, this sets up an odd precedent with that power. The way it is phrased, an affected character could simply turn around, or cover themselves with a shield or piece of clothing, just to get the 1.4x1.4 foot affected area out of LOS. But I believe that the way it is phrased, this would be the way it works. On improvisation: There are no strict rules. I'm of the opinion that dowsing yourself in water is a perfectly reasonable solution to being set on fire; in fact, I would be somewhat surprised if that weren't used as an improvization. "Hmm, I'm on fire. There's a nice pool of water here. Nope, I don't see a solution, better just keep fighting." Even 6-Int Zero isn't that dumb.
hogarth 08-15-06, 01:54 PM	Once the Chameleon is paralyzed, he can no longer use his HiPS ability - so he should be auto-spotted by Torrent and Kraegin. I'm not so sure about this. Isn't the arena policy that Hide takes effect whenever it applies without any action at all required on the part of the gladiator? Of course, he would have an effective Dex of 0, so that would hurt his hiding chances somewhat.
lonewolf 08-15-06, 02:09 PM	Once the Chameleon is paralyzed, he can no longer use his HiPS ability - so he should be auto-spotted by Torrent and Kraegin. How do you come to this conclusion? If a character is hidden behind a tree and becomes paralyzed is he also autospotted by everyone? I guess not. How is this different from my situation? about when does my character becomes visible: IMHO this is a gray area in the rules. I think this is up the pitlord to decide for this fight and I want an Elder ruling for future fights.
MindWandererB 08-15-06, 02:16 PM	My opinion: if you are paralyzed, you don't get to make any skill checks that involve Dex or Str--after all, you can't move. You can use "purely mental" abilities, but I don't think HiPS qualifies as purely mental. I would say that a paralyzed character behind a tree is auto-spotted (unless there's total cover). At the very most, they might be able to make a Hide check with a 0 Dex and 0 ranks (your skill is irrelevant if you can't move).
TelinArtho 08-15-06, 02:25 PM	Someone who is paralyzed behind a tree would be spotted on a DC of Distance + Cover bonus + Dex bonus (-5 if paralyzed). However, this would not be a spot vs a hide check - but rather just a spot check. Someone who is paralyzed cannot make a hide check because it is not a purely mental action. Furthermore, using a supernatural ability is outside of your abilities while paralyzed (unless it is a purely mental action), so HiPS cannot be used either. The result is that since Chameleon is not behind cover and directly in front of his opponents - he is auto-spotted.
lonewolf 08-15-06, 02:34 PM	The thing is, I dont have to make the check while paralyzed. I made the check while not paralyzed and was successful against Torrent but unsuccessful against Kraegin. I am already successfuly hidden from Torrent at that point and should stay so until my next turn. I dont see any reason why becoming paralyzed should force me to renew my "beeing hidden" status.
hogarth 08-15-06, 02:43 PM	However, this would not be a spot vs a hide check - but rather just a spot check. Someone who is paralyzed cannot make a hide check because it is not a purely mental action. Furthermore, using a supernatural ability is outside of your abilities while paralyzed (unless it is a purely mental action), so HiPS cannot be used either. It certainly doesn't say that any sort of "action" (mental or otherwise) is required to activate Hide in Plain Sight; it just says that you can hide while being observed. So cover/concealment (or lack thereof) is a moot point. I think the issue is the language "Normally, you make a Hide check as part of movement [..]" in the Hide skill; if you can't move, then maybe you can't hide. If I had to rule on this, I might give him the benefit of his size bonus and the +10 bonus from the Chameleon power but not from his skill ranks and he would have a -5 Dex penalty. But that would just be a house rule. I'm interested to see how this turns out!
DSugui 08-15-06, 03:47 PM	Regarding Spot/HiPS: My opinion at the time I run the fight was the same as lonewolf's; however, Telin's and MWB's arguments also make sense to me. I would like a Elder ruling on this one: if Chameleon can be spotted when held, then I will roll CdG for Torrent; if not, the fight will stand as it is unless another relevant mistake is found. Dracazar (Dracazar) vs. Anakala (TelinArtho) is on Round 14 HERE and HERE. Since it's becaming a hell of a fight, I'd like to hear opinions before I procceed any further.
TelinArtho 08-15-06, 04:01 PM	Regarding Spot/HiPS: My opinion at the time I run the fight was the same as lonewolf's; however, Telin's and MWB's arguments also make sense to me. I would like a Elder ruling on this one: if Chameleon can be spotted when held, then I will roll CdG for Torrent; if not, the fight will stand as it is unless another relevant mistake is found. Dracazar (Dracazar) vs. Anakala (TelinArtho) is on Round 14 HERE and HERE. Since it's becaming a hell of a fight, I'd like to hear opinions before I procceed any further. I am fine with waiting for an elder ruling on it. If no response has been had by tomorrow's deadline, I would appreciate if the fight were held over. For the Drac vs Ana fight - I do have a question: I know that the Share spells ability specifies that the spell must be cast by the wizard/sorcerer from memory not from an item or a spell-like ability. What about the deliver touch spells ability? I was under the impression it was, but I don't see the same text in the ability (which leads me to believe that I was wrong). Otherwise - I think the fight is going excellently well! Hopefully my luck will hold out... [EDIT] After looking through the rules of the game articles, it seems that the deliver touch ability is not reliant on the master casting it from memory - so the above issue is not a problem for me.
TelinArtho 08-15-06, 05:04 PM	@DSugui - actually, just noticed that the hawk is attacking the elemental with an AC listed as 14. That's the elemental's touch AC. Therefore, the hawk's attack in round 14 is actually a miss. Also, note the violation I posted about the hawk's armor in the prison. Since it is tiny, the armor bonus is halved - meaning the studded leather only provides a +1 AC bonus instead of +3. It hasn't made a difference so far in the fight though.
Zelck 08-15-06, 07:48 PM	1. Metapsionicked powerstones We PM'ed about this, and my opinion still is that you must be careful if you (as a Pitlord) implement a house rules because you think something is unbalanced. House rules, even sensible ones, need to be known in advance to the players so that they can adapt builds and tactics. This remains true even though I approve of your solution in this case. I'll remember to do that next time. I was hoping for an elder ruling, but then time started running out :(. 2. Pitlord Improvisation You have Bilk dive in the pool to save himself from an unknown burning. To me this falls in the realm of Pitlord improvisation. King Uther had not specified a counter to my tactic, and it would have worked perfectly had you not decided to counter it creatively. While it might make sense to you (and the character), I always advocate extreme care with such improvisation. It is really the job of King Uther to come up with such a counter, and not have the Pitlord provide one on the spot. My usual MO is writing tactics that suprises my opponent (see the Tezca vs. Zero fight earlier this week), if the Pitlord compensates for my surprise by improvising and/or altering tactics, that would be quite detrimental to my style of play. I have written several guidelines concerning Improvisation in the past, and I will post them when I find them. In this case, I am suprised King Uther didn't include a counter, and I fully expected he would, since Flamehair did use it before. I fully understand. In this case, my decision was made on a couple of factors. First, it did not make sense for Bilk to vainly chase you around the arena. He's not stupid, and it should have been relatively clear that Flamehair used a power and is now concentrating. And his hair is feeling hot. It's likely not a coincidence. Second, it kind of made sense for a person to dunk burning flesh into water. Now, I didn't know how to address the first factor. I considered rolling a Knowledge (Psionics) check (hmm... my hair is feeling hot, I've heard of this and this power before that might be responsible) or an int check (he's doing something to me that requires concentration, which probably requires LOS, so I better negate it), but I had no clue what the DC should be. If we can agree on a suitable DC, I'd be more than happy to change the fight and roll it. 3. The Steam Cloud The pond is only 1 ft. deep. It furthermore only creates steam when hit by a fire area effect (see description). Matter agitation does not have the fire descriptor, nor is it an area effect. This means that the steam would never have been created, LOS was never broken, and damage would continue to accrue (27 points on average if max. duration). I can see the logic for arguing for that Matter Agitation is treated like a fire effect, but it is certainly not an area effect. Also, a 10 ft. dwarf dunking himself 1 ft. deep pool? And it's not just his hair, all of his skin smolders too... Area: 2 sq. ft. of surface area of an object or creature You're right that it doesn't have a fire descriptor though. If you can find an example or something that shows "fire effect" = "fire descriptor", I'll alter what happened there. 4. Tower Shield and Heavy Flail? I wrote that Flamehair starts out with only a dorje of vigor in her hand (I specifically don't mention the Tower Shield). Without a tower shield, her base attack is +8, or +10 with the animal affinity. I also specified to draw the large heavy flail, while you have Flamehair fight one-handed with her regular flail, which is not what I said. This means that damage on that crit is actually 4d8+18 and not 4d6+16 (6 more on average). Yea, I wondered about that. I looked through your notes and ended up thinking that since you specifically didn't mention NOT using the tower shield, you wanted to use it. I also missed the "heavy" part of your flail. And didn't realize how dumb it would be to use the shield and Force Screen together. More changes... AC I see Flamehair's AC mentioned as 28. I think it should be 24/28, since her Ride check for +4 cover bonus to AC is not an automatic success (70% chance of AC 28). Because tower shields obviously stack with Force Screen! Yup, that's right... uh huh... um, yea... ;). Sigh, more rolls :P. Reach Problems I see Bilk's reach mentioned as 40 ft. This should be 20 ft. As King Unther mentioned, 5 ft. stepping would indeed allow Bilk to attack with both the Glaive and Bite, since Flamehair occupies a 10 ft. square (at 15 ft. with the Glaive, and at 10 ft. with the Bite) Yup. I realized that. And yea, I meant 4 squares, not 40 ft. Even though there are some problems, the confirmed crit in round 14 pretty much seals the deal. However, a reroll on Flamehair's crit damage, combined with accruing damage from the Matter Agitation (total 33 on average) could just get Bilk at or below 0 though, winning the fight for Flamehair. I'll leave it up to you if you want to look into the matter, please don't feel obligated to do so. If we can come up with some sort of int check DC or knowledge check DC to move out of LOS, I'll gladly rerun it. Otherwise, I don't think you can down him fast enough to avoid the ubercrit. Also, please don't ask the Pitlord to improvise if you don't cover all the bases with your tactics, it is you job to do cover the bases, and not the Pitlord's job to improvise. I don't know if this line cause Zelck to improvise on the dunking, but if so, I consider specifically asking for improvisations in your tactics not fair play. I don't think you did it intentionally though. It wasn't, but yea, the tactics were a bit meager. I do understand that you have lots of characters and quests and such to run though, but you didn't give this noob PL much help ;).
Zelck 08-15-06, 09:51 PM	I rerolled the Flamehair crit; came up as 32, which isn't enough to matter. +2 attack bonus isn't enough for any of the misses to hit. I don't think this fight needs any more changes, but I could be wrong.
DSugui 08-15-06, 10:25 PM	Dracazar (Dracazar) vs. Anakala (TelinArtho) is up HERE and HERE.
Zevox 08-15-06, 11:46 PM	I hate it when I read my tactics later and realize I forgot one or two things. :mad: You mean like a way to actually end the battle with Saffron winning? ;) No, seriously, nothing in your tactics ends the fight, unless you intend on having the thunder gauntlets do that. Even if you put Asran to sleep, it only lasts 1d6+1 rounds, so at most every 7 rounds you'll have to either put him back to sleep (which may or may not actually occur based on the save) or deal with him fighting back (even without his weapons and with his hands manacled he has his bite attack, which used as a primary weapon is +11 for 1d6+6 - by the way, you didn't actully think someone whos lived for 250+ years in Hell would just sit and talk to something he percieves as the mortal version of a hyperactive bored Imp, did you?). And CDGs will be problematic, since your only way to bypass his DR is to use your magic fang potion, and I'll almost guarantee you Asran won't fail a fortitude save vs the crit damage from your claw or bite. You could use your axe for that, but then it does -5 damage for his DR. And no matter what you won't get sneak attack damage due to the 50-minute-long darkness SLA. So... yeah, how did you intend on winning again? And anyone interested in taking that fight before the new pairings? I'd rather like Asran to not have to deal with delays in this 3 fight cycle, since right after it hes off on another quest... Zevox
Usurpator 08-16-06, 03:31 AM	I rerolled the Flamehair crit; came up as 32, which isn't enough to matter. +2 attack bonus isn't enough for any of the misses to hit. I don't think this fight needs any more changes, but I could be wrong. Thank you for responding to my questions. I don't think the fight needs more changes too. King Uther had the better build, and sufficient luck to go with it, he deserves the victory.
Usurpator 08-16-06, 04:03 AM	On water and LOS: Actually, the rules do say that anyone completely immersed in water has total cover from anyone outside it. The oddity here is that Matter Agitation does not target an entire creature, but only a portion of them. 2 square feet isn't much. Since total immersion of the affected part of the body is possible, then LOS to that part (i.e. the target) is broken. Say what!? You mean that in D&D you cannot spear fish swimming in a stream? That in D&D once you drop something in the water, you are unable to retrieve it unless going underwater too? Of course you have LOS to something immersed in water (unless murkiness+depth prevents it). And LoE too. Of course, this sets up an odd precedent with that power. The way it is phrased, an affected character could simply turn around, or cover themselves with a shield or piece of clothing, just to get the 1.4x1.4 foot affected area out of LOS. But I believe that the way it is phrased, this would be the way it works. You own equipment never breaks LOS or LoE. That is why you can still target someone that uses a Tower Shield for total cover. On improvisation: There are no strict rules. I'm of the opinion that dowsing yourself in water is a perfectly reasonable solution to being set on fire; in fact, I would be somewhat surprised if that weren't used as an improvization. "Hmm, I'm on fire. There's a nice pool of water here. Nope, I don't see a solution, better just keep fighting." Even 6-Int Zero isn't that dumb. That is why I called my post guidelines and not rules. Bilk's goal seemed to be straigth out melee, so I would have him try to get to melee the presumed source of the burning ASAP. My objection to the current improvisation that, even although it makes sense, it is a pretty specific and pretty effective at foiling my tactics. Consider this contingency: - If Flamehair uses Matter Agitation on me, use the pool of water to dunk myself and thereby creating a steam cloud breaking LOS and ending the power. If I read that in tactics, I would say: wow, pretty good contingency, well done King Unther! But King Uther didn't include such things, but now he is rewarded as if he did! His tactic was to close with Flamehair for melee as soon as possible, that was not done, but a counter to the burning was sought almost immediately. The power only lasted or 2 rounds. What if Flamehair shot globs of flame at Bilk. Would Bilk seek cover after two rounds? Would he improvise something then? I don't think so, the improvisation came because the Pitlord realises it was an ongoing effect that would last for some time. Consider this fight for example. Pretty stupid way too lose, sure. And the Pitlord could have improvised something but didn't. In our fight this week: TelinArtho could have easily decided Zero would change tactics after he saw Tezca jumping at him and almost reaching him the first time. Zero is smart enough, that if his tactics are to stay out of reach, and he sees that staying at the center of the starting squares probably isn't going to be effective, he would try something else in the spirit of his tactics. After that changed he could maybe have Tezca adapt to change back to hybrid form and start sniping. Etc. etc. Pitlords can easy make decision that our characters would really have made were they in the confrontation with another. And those decisions would probably be better, because the Pitlords can judge the situation moment by moment. Why does the Pitlord decide to go dunk after two rounds of damage, but not decide not to attack Flamehair but go for a grapple after two rounds of inneffectual attacks? The point I am trying to make is that a Pitlord improvisation robbed me from a lot of potential damage, damage that could have swung the fight. I cannot prepare for that in my tactics, I cannot counter such things in any way. Sure it was a smart thing to do (even though it shouldn't have worked as I pointed out), but I often run fights were characters could have done smarter things than were stated in tactics, or have thought up no counter against a tactic of an opponent.
Vathelokai 08-16-06, 04:33 AM	You mean like a way to actually end the battle with Saffron winning? ;) And anyone interested in taking that fight before the new pairings? I'd rather like Asran to not have to deal with delays in this 3 fight cycle, since right after it hes off on another quest... ZevoxWait, you didn't get the memo? Manacles, Masterwork: Manacles can bind a Medium creature. 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). Dexterity 0 means that the character cannot move at all. He stands motionless, rigid, and helpless.Now even if we ignore the memo and go rationally, Saffron would just use up Asran's clw wands to heal up what ever bite damage he delt out (since they are returned to Asran unused at the end of the fight). The cdg save range, after DR, for Saffron's axe is 11-19. Sure, Asran has a fort of +10, but Saffron can CDG all day long. I guess I got a little RP happy while writing the tactics. If it weren't for the arena rules, Saffron would just talk to him until she got bored, then leave him in the middle of the field tied up.
Dracazar 08-16-06, 05:06 AM	Dracazar (Dracazar) vs. Anakala (TelinArtho) is up HERE and HERE. DSugui thanks a lot for your nice seeing run There are some irrelevant issues but nothing that could overcome Anakala impressive luck. I accept the surrend. The only thing I would ask is that I would use only 2 Blindness attempt and not 3. I admit it could be not very clear in the tactic but if you could edit it would be fine.
Traevanon 08-16-06, 08:19 AM	Say what!? You mean that in D&D you cannot spear fish swimming in a stream? That in D&D once you drop something in the water, you are unable to retrieve it unless going underwater too? Of course you have LOS to something immersed in water (unless murkiness+depth prevents it). And LoE too. On the other hand you are saying that spell or power effects from the deck of a ship can target a small fish swimming 40' deep and 100' away, by moonlight, in the rain. I still dont know if there are rules somewhere for the effect of the surface of water on LoS. After a look through all three basic books I found none. That doesnt mean that water allows LoS just like air though, omitted rules require DM interpretation. As with Metamagiced Powerstones the ability to create them isnt explicit but it is reasonable to you. So with the surface of water breaking LoS it isnt explicit but it is reasonable to me. It sounds a bit like a double standard. You sound like you want to have what is reasonable but not allow the pitlord or anyone else to go beyond what is explicit.
DSugui 08-16-06, 08:26 AM	DSugui thanks a lot for your nice seeing run There are some irrelevant issues but nothing that could overcome Anakala impressive luck. I accept the surrend. The only thing I would ask is that I would use only 2 Blindness attempt and not 3. I admit it could be not very clear in the tactic but if you could edit it would be fine. Done.
hogarth 08-16-06, 08:33 AM	I still dont know if there are rules somewhere for the effect of the surface of water on LoS. After a look through all three basic books I found none. Here's a link: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/wilderness.htm#underwaterCombat The relevant part is this: Attacks from Land Characters swimming, floating, or treading water on the surface, or wading in water at least chest deep, have improved cover (+8 bonus to AC, +4 bonus on Reflex saves) from opponents on land. Landbound opponents who have freedom of movement effects ignore this cover when making melee attacks against targets in the water. A completely submerged creature has total cover against opponents on land unless those opponents have freedom of movement effects. Magical effects are unaffected except for those that require attack rolls (which are treated like any other effects) and fire effects.
DSugui 08-16-06, 08:35 AM	Sali Kan (ayyiniwindryder) vs. Treetall (hogarth) : DSugui [City] [Week 2] [LATE] This fight is up since Monday here I PMed Pilords about this, but it seems it was not read.
Usurpator 08-16-06, 08:41 AM	On the other hand you are saying that spell or power effects from the deck of a ship can target a small fish swimming 40' deep and 100' away, by moonlight, in the rain. I still dont know if there are rules somewhere for the effect of the surface of water on LoS. After a look through all three basic books I found none. That doesnt mean that water allows LoS just like air though, omitted rules require DM interpretation. As with Metamagiced Powerstones the ability to create them isnt explicit but it is reasonable to you. So with the surface of water breaking LoS it isnt explicit but it is reasonable to me. It sounds a bit like a double standard. You sound like you want to have what is reasonable but not allow the pitlord or anyone else to go beyond what is explicit. When there are no clear rules, I try to use the most reasonable option. In the case of powerstones, it seems reasonable to me that you can metapsionic them. I am not sure about how to 'pay' for that, since I don't think that paying nothing is not reasonable. The solution Zelck suggested, using up your own focus while using such a stone, sounded fine to me (and I said so). Unfortunately, there are multiple rules in the CoCo I personally find less than reasonable. My philosophy has been: 'if you can't beat them, join them'. I don't like that new UA rules are going to be added, but I will surely take the rules and optimize my characters with them if they are introduced anyway. If I think a certain rule is unclear or unbalanced, I prefer to 'show' people that disagreed in practice why I think it is unbalanced, rather than leaving it at that. I do have my limit, because some currently possible abuses just would ruin the fun here. As a DM, I would adjucate the water in a case by case scenario. If you submerged yourself in very murky water, a shallow depth would provided concealment (not cover), and that to get concealment in clear water, you have to be pretty deep (depending on light conditions). In the example you give, you would need a good spot check to see the fish (-10 for above water distance, -8 for below water distance, -4 for poor lighting, -4 for the rain = -26 vs. the fish Hide skill (+x for Dex and size), so it would be quite hard indeed to see and locate said fish and cast a spell on it, but not impossible. What I am saying that in theory it is possible to target a fish with a spell, *if* you can see said fish. The seeing is the hardest part, not the targeting in itself, as if the water would provide total cover. The same goes for targets in the air, you simply cannot target a gnat from a mile away, even though the skies are perfectly clear. You could target a Roc from a mile away though, just common sense. When rules are lacking, you try to use common sense to come at a reasonable solution. It seems reasonable to me that 1 ft. of normal water does not break LOS or LoE.
Traevanon 08-16-06, 08:50 AM	Thanks Hogarth. I'm not sure where that quote is in the real books, but its gotta be in there somewhere. But it doesnt change the point I'm trying to make. I agree that if you can see the target you can hit it with a spell regardless of intervening water. I dont think you can see it though. Its all very murky... :rimshot:
Zevox 08-16-06, 10:40 AM	Wait, you didn't get the memo? :twitch: You're kidding. So for some reason just because you have your hands bound you suddenly can't move at all?? I could see that if you were thoroughly bound with rope, but just some manacles on your hands?! Somehow, I doubt that was the intention behind it. As for CDGs, well, you did forget to mention this anywhere in your tactics ;) . Ah well, I guess my hope is basically not to get put to sleep. Or to score a crit with a bow shot or two - 3d8+21 damage could really ruin Saffron's day. This would be so much easier if we were fighting someplace I could catch Saffron for melee... or if we were ECL 12 so Asran could have his charisma added to his saves... or just ECL 10 so he'd have an ally capable of awakening him if he gets put to sleep... or if being an extraplanar outsider made Asran immune to sleep rather than just not needing to sleep... *sigh* Zevox
TelinArtho 08-16-06, 10:50 AM	@DSugui and Lonewolf - I have received an answer from an elder and even though I disagree with it, I am forced to accept that decision for the time being. I accept the fight as is. Nice luck there Chameleon - until we meet again...
Caterane 08-16-06, 11:14 AM	Sali Kan (ayyiniwindryder) vs. Treetall (hogarth) : DSugui [City] [Week 2] [LATE] This fight is up since Monday here I PMed Pilords about this, but it seems it was not read. Oh sorry. I'll undo your late penalty. Ever since I can edit all posts I don't use the Pitlord Avatar all too often :)
Pitlords 08-16-06, 11:21 AM	Is there a chance that someone can run the battle between Saffron and Asran before the deadline? Late fights are just a drain on our pitlord roster. Tactics and Sheets are already up.
TelinArtho 08-16-06, 01:07 PM	Is there a chance that someone can run the battle between Saffron and Asran before the deadline? Late fights are just a drain on our pitlord roster. Tactics and Sheets are already up. I'll start it now. Not guaranteeing it will be done in two hours, but I'll try.
Usurpator 08-16-06, 01:25 PM	Thanks Hogarth. I'm not sure where that quote is in the real books, but its gotta be in there somewhere. But it doesnt change the point I'm trying to make. I agree that if you can see the target you can hit it with a spell regardless of intervening water. I dont think you can see it though. Its all very murky... :rimshot: I think the crucial reasoning error here is that total cover breaks LOS or Line of Effect. It is actually the other way around: something that breaks Line of Effect gives total cover. Let me quote the PHB: Total Cover: If you don't have line of effect to your target (for instance, if he is completely behind a high wall), he is considered to have total cover from you. You can't make an attack against a target that has total cover. Which means you indeed cannot spear or shoot at something swimming in 1 ft. of water, but can still cast spells at it. Total Cover does not break LoE, but no LoE does mean someone has Total Cover. Since this is only true for attacking from outside the water, and not the reverse, let's see if we can make a build that can carry it's own mini-pool of water with it, since that makes you immune to attacks.
hogarth 08-16-06, 01:44 PM	Say what!? You mean that in D&D you cannot spear fish swimming in a stream? I also think there should be an exception for using piercing weapons in water, but I couldn't find one.
TelinArtho 08-16-06, 03:13 PM	I swear I've been trying to post the Asran vs Saffron Brass fight for 20 minutes... It'll be in the battles thread soon... Setup can be found here [Prefight Locations and Initiative] Saffron Brass starts in area 1 at the default location with a wand of invisibility and a potion of hide from animals. Initiative 2 Asran starts in area 4 at the front corner with his furies beside him. He hold's Cania's Icicle and a potion of Protection from Good. Initiative 17 [Round 1] Asran drinks his potion and order Wrath to heel. [HA autosuccess] Wrath heels. Malice looks about waiting for orders. Saffron taps her wand and moves out. Saffron 72/72, Invisibility (ends 31) (Flying at 5ft) Asran 49/49, Prot. from Good (ends 11) --Wrath 30/30, (heel) --Malice 30/30, (no command) [Round 2] Asran orders Malice to seek in the northeast, and then uses his darkness SLA. Wrath heels. Malice moves out looking for something to eat. Saffron lands and draws and drinks a potion of Bear's endurance. Saffron 86/86, Invisibility (ends 31), Bear's Endurance (ends 32) Asran 49/49, Prot. from Good (ends 11), Darkness (ends 502) --Wrath 30/30, (heel, flying at 5ft altitude) --Malice 30/30, (seeking - northeast, flying at 5ft altitude) [Round 3] Asran doesn't see Saffron, so he moves and readies to attack with his bow on sight. Wrath heels. Malice keeps seeking. Saffron draws and drinks a potion of Blur. Saffron 86/86, Invisibility (ends 31), Bear's Endurance (ends 32), Blur (ends 33) Asran 49/49, Prot. from Good (ends 11), Darkness (ends 502) {readied} --Wrath 30/30, (heel, flying at 5ft altitude) --Malice 30/30, (seeking - northeast, flying at 5ft altitude) [Round 4] Asran doesn't see Saffron, so he moves and readies to attack with his bow on sight. Wrath heels. Malice keeps seeking. Saffron draws and drinks a potion of Mage Armor. Saffron 86/86, Invisibility (ends 31), Bear's Endurance (ends 32), Blur (ends 33), Mage Armor (ends 604) Asran 49/49, Prot. from Good (ends 11), Darkness (ends 502) {readied} --Wrath 30/30, (heel, flying at 5ft altitude) --Malice 30/30, (seeking - northeast, flying at 5ft altitude) [Round 5] Asran doesn't see Saffron, so he moves and readies to attack with his bow on sight. Wrath heels. Malice keeps seeking. Saffron flies upward and towards an intercept with Asran up to a height of 15ft. [MS 9] [Listen (Asran (40ft), Wrath (50ft), Malice (180ft)) 13,26,-3] [Asran hears within 20ft, Malice within 5ft] Saffron has to move more than a move action to get into position and can essentially chose a position that is of her liking. I chose a point that is outside of the blindsense of the bat from the start, but that will be within range of the sleep breath weapon on a 5ft "step" Saffron 86/86, Invisibility (ends 31), Bear's Endurance (ends 32), Blur (ends 33), Mage Armor (ends 604) {flying 15ft altitude) Asran 49/49, Prot. from Good (ends 11), Darkness (ends 502) {readied} --Wrath 30/30, (heel, flying at 5ft altitude) --Malice 30/30, (seeking - northeast, flying at 5ft altitude) [Round 6] Asran stops in his tracks and calls Malice back with a seek in the area in front of him. He then readies to attack on pinpointing. Wrath heels. Malice seeks closer. Saffron resists the urge to talk about how she needs a better ability to move quietly. She flies directly above Asran and breathes sleep down on him, catching Wrath in its wake. [Sleep Will (Asran, Wrath) 5+2,16 vs DC16+2=18, both fail] Saffron becomes visible during the attack, which would trigger the defend trick. Unfortunately, Malice isn't trained for attacking dragons. Saffron 86/86, Invisibility (ended), Bear's Endurance (ends 32), Blur (ends 33), Mage Armor (ends 604), Breath weapon recharge (usable in round 9) {flying 15ft altitude) Asran 49/49, Prot. from Good (ends 11), Darkness (ends 502), Sleeping (ends 11) --Wrath 30/30, Sleeping (ends 10) --Malice 30/30, (seeking - northeast, flying at 5ft altitude) [Round 7] Asran and Wrath sleep. Malice runs closer. Saffron drinks her potion and lands on Asran softly. Saffron 86/86, Bear's Endurance (ends 32), Blur (ends 33), Mage Armor (ends 604), Breath weapon recharge (usable in round 9), Hide from Animals (ends 107) Asran 49/49, Prot. from Good (ends 11), Darkness (ends 502), Sleeping (ends 11) --Wrath 30/30, Sleeping (ends 10) --Malice 30/30, (defending, flying at 5ft altitude) [Round 8] Asran and Wrath sleep. Malice guards. Saffron draws her manacles and starts to put them on Asran. As far as I can tell, manacles do not have an action describing how long to put them on. That said, I am ruling it a Full round action in order to do it carefully enough to not wake up Asran. [Round 9] Asran and Wrath sleep. Malice guards. [Breath weapon is usable] Saffron finishes putting on the manacles Asran, when he wakes up, makes the strategic choice to surrender, vowing revenge upon Saffron for this injustice. I'll just have him surrender then. Not something he'd normally do, but I've no real choice if I want him to fight this week. [Free Activities] Asran tortures people for 180gp. [Fight Summary] Saffron wins and gains 2700xp/4500gp + 14.28% = 3085xp/5141gp. This is the first fight of her cycle. She used a charge from her wand of Invisibility, a potion of Bear's Endurance, a potion of Blur, a potion of Mage Armor and a potion of Hide from Animals. Asran loses and gains 900xp/1500gp - 14.28% = 771xp/1285gp. This is the first fight of his cycle. He used a potion of Protection from Good and his darkness spell-like ability.
Usurpator 08-16-06, 03:34 PM	I also think there should be an exception for using piercing weapons in water, but I couldn't find one. No matter, I have found a trick that would overcome this problem. Because the cover clause applies only to creatures standing *outside* of said water, you just have to get into the water as well (knee-deep if you like) and the whole cover clause disappears. In D&D you don't stand on rocks to spear fish, you stand a bit in the water. Taken very literally, flying creatures also have no problem shooting arrows, spells or whatever at swimming or submerged creatures, since they are not 'land-bound'. Weird, but if we are taking rules literally anyway, let's go all the way! :confused: