Post/Author/DateTime	Post
waywreth 02-14-07, 12:45 PM	:inlove:Fights of the Week: February 14th:inlove: Please don't edit the sheet after the deadline or you will lose the match. 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 Part 1 and Part 2. 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 it, there is a nice template ready to use that will help. You could find the Battle Map Tag Generator (http://www.hwx.it/coco) for dynamic Maps very useful. You must post a link to your fight in this thread when it is complete. If you need a quick and dirty tool to calculate distances between two points (in 2-D or 3-D), this tool (http://wormhole.ath.cx/coco/coco_dist.php) should suffice. Another useful link is the Quick Access tables for XP and Gold. If a fight needs to be rerun, the Pitlord has to inform the Pitlords account. He cannot react to requests from Players because the other player and the pitlord might disagree. He has no time to read the fight and the discussion. Please keep that in mind. PMs from players with rerun requests won't have an impact. Recent News and Developments The World Event has ended Also if you're interested in the guild system please vote in the "Discussion: What should the guild system be like?" The Iron Man (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=790318) tournament is scheduled to start on March 14th. Get your characters active now to advance those last few levels as soon as possible! More details forthcoming. Comments & Concerns Post any comments or concerns for this weeks fights in this thread. Be kind and courteous to your fellow posters, and don't feed the pitlords. Please remember that they do hard work and consume a lot of time to let you play. Above all, have FUN! If you have questions or comments on any of the changes, please make your posts be heard in the Council of Gladius!
Vathelokai 02-14-07, 06:15 PM	Wow. I'm not used to not seeing the pairings when I get off work... Whoever I pitlord for; I need those tactics yesterday.
Zevox 02-14-07, 06:21 PM	Wow. I'm not used to not seeing the pairings when I get off work... Whoever I pitlord for; I need those tactics yesterday. They're not actually done yet. Those are just the held over fights from last week. Zevox
TheMagister 02-14-07, 06:22 PM	Whoever is Hood's Pitlord, his tactics will be submitted tomorrow between 0530 and 1730. They will be served with a side of arse-whoopin' and sprinkled lightly with ground essence of in-ya-face. Dessert will be extra dice of untyped damage.
Rauul 02-14-07, 06:30 PM	Whoever is Hood's Pitlord, his tactics will be submitted tomorrow between 0530 and 1730. They will be served with a side of arse-whoopin' and sprinkled lightly with ground essence of in-ya-face. Dessert will be extra dice of untyped damage. And if Hood is ECL 3 and fights me... may your Dice always roll 1's.. (since he isn't ECL3 Good luck and all that stuph)
MindWandererB 02-14-07, 06:33 PM	And if Hood is ECL 3 and fights me... may your Dice always roll 1's.. (since he isn't ECL3 Good luck and all that stuph) It looks like Hood may be in far, far more danger than a mere deluge of 1's. There's only one other ECL 8 character active this week.... I was going to warn TM to be careful not to gain so much XP that he levels himself out of partnership with Harvey in the Iron Man, but I guess that's not likely to be a problem.
Zevox 02-14-07, 06:41 PM	It looks like Hood may be in far, far more danger than a mere deluge of 1's. There's only one other ECL 8 character active this week.... I was going to warn TM to be careful not to gain so much XP that he levels himself out of partnership with Harvey in the Iron Man, but I guess that's not likely to be a problem. :mymy: Woah - wasn't expecting Cat to have Harvey active. Well, that should be an interesting one anyway. Hood hurts - maybe he can manage to break Harvery's winning streak. Not likely, but maybe... Zevox
Pitlords 02-14-07, 07:22 PM	Sorry but there was Stargate Night on TV ...4 hours non-stop :) and I had only the commercial breaks. I'm done soon.
Pitlords 02-14-07, 07:27 PM	Done
Zevox 02-14-07, 08:29 PM	@ Maraxus - Tactics for Ceilia Durrol (vs Toron Brightstar) have been PMed. That'll be an interesting one - a match between the two highest-rated characters in that league, marking Toron's arrival to it and Ceilia's departure from it. :cool: Zevox
jjones 02-14-07, 08:37 PM	Apsect's Tactics PM'd to Rauul. Good luck to my opponent. JJ
Rauul 02-14-07, 08:58 PM	@Tactics Sent for Graashnak and Rauul this should be fun.. masked man week 2, and another Elf for Graashnak.. (still think the elves are out to get him) Looking forward to ECL 4 next week with at least 1 of them.. Maybe both.. :P GL to the mask and the Elf.. IF i have your fights, can i please get tactics before Saturday Please Thank you and have fun
Eluria 02-14-07, 09:35 PM	@TelinArtho - Tactics sent for Qwogi vs. Le Petit Guepe... may the shorter gladiator win!
Macbrea 02-14-07, 09:51 PM	@Vathelokai Antalya will be facing 1 Huge Monster. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11490934&postcount=571)
Vathelokai 02-14-07, 10:05 PM	Need help with monster fight... When you have multiple monsters do you give them treasure for their EL and divide it, or give treasure appropriate to each individual EL? On the monster lore; do you base the DC to identify the monster on their individual CR or their combined CR?
Maraxus 02-14-07, 10:23 PM	Ceilia Durrol's Tactics Received, Zassl's Tactics sent.
NiQil 02-14-07, 11:21 PM	@ Rauul: Tactics for Tamis Ruhl, Truls Rohk and Tyden Rayn all sent via PM. @ MitzaVolchenko: Welcome back...glad it wasn't a long absence. Let me know if you need Blizzard's tactics again and I will forward them.
MindWandererB 02-15-07, 12:38 AM	Need help with monster fight... When you have multiple monsters do you give them treasure for their EL and divide it, or give treasure appropriate to each individual EL? On the monster lore; do you base the DC to identify the monster on their individual CR or their combined CR? It's per monster in all cases. So each one gets gear based on its CR and treasure entry, and the DC to identify them is based on the CR of each one. Always remember: there's no such thing as a combined CR (that would be an EL), and no such thing as an individual EL (that's a CR).
Vathelokai 02-15-07, 12:47 AM	Well, that just doubled Team Tieflings equipment. Still going to have a tough time vs. Loddick. Thanks!
Erithmu 02-15-07, 12:54 AM	@Vath: Team Loddick's Tactics away.
Iced 02-15-07, 03:01 AM	@ Maraxus - Tactics for Ceilia Durrol (vs Toron Brightstar) have been PMed. That'll be an interesting one - a match between the two highest-rated characters in that league, marking Toron's arrival to it and Ceilia's departure from it. :cool: Zevox Wow, this is the crappiest matchup i could have hoped for... *looks suspiciously at Cat* I've pulled off crazy stuff with Toron before, now it looks like i'll have to do it again. @Zevox - Sure those losing xp awards will bump you even with the penalty from your overpowered griffin ally? :D ~Iced
Zevox 02-15-07, 03:15 AM	Wow, this is the crappiest matchup i could have hoped for... *looks suspiciously at Cat* I've pulled off crazy stuff with Toron before, now it looks like i'll have to do it again. Its not exactly an easy one from my end either. The terrain favors you (what I wouldn't give for this thing to be in the plains, or the arena, temple, or even the city), after all, and your saves are rather high against my spells, not to mention that AC. @Zevox - Sure those losing xp awards will bump you even with the penalty from your overpowered griffin ally? Hippogriff, actually (couldn't have a Griffon at this level), which is far from overpowered (in this fight I'd actually probably be better off if I'd brought my two horses instead). And yes, I calculated that out before making that statement - Ceilia levels here, win or lose. I don't say things like that to sound cocky, I say them when they're literally true. Zevox
Iced 02-15-07, 03:20 AM	Its not exactly an easy one from my end either. The terrain favors you (what I wouldn't give for this thing to be in the plains, or the arena, temple, or even the city), after all, and your saves are rather high against my spells, not to mention that AC. Hippogriff, actually (couldn't have a Griffon at this level), which is far from overpowered (in this fight I'd actually probably be better off if I'd brought my two horses instead). And yes, I calculated that out before making that statement - Ceilia levels here, win or lose. I don't say things like that to sound cocky, I say them when they're literally true. Zevox Fair :D This one's looking to be a good fight, i'm interested to see who comes out on top. ~Iced
MindWandererB 02-15-07, 03:27 AM	@Sauro and Rauul: Tactics sent. It's one of those weeks where I'm either thinking too much or not enough. I hope it's the former--I don't get to be undefeated very often.
Rauul 02-15-07, 07:10 AM	Aspect of St-Cuthbert (jjones) vs. Truls Rohk (NiQil) [ECL3] Done and up.. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11493288&postcount=572) take a look and tell me problem and complaints Still waiting on tactics for the rest of the fights... :P
Sjiggie 02-15-07, 07:13 AM	@ Rauul tactics received no problems with it. @ Milov I need your tactics for the Mask Man before the deadline that way I can run it on saterday and have it done before the downtime of the boards. Thanks
TheMagister 02-15-07, 07:20 AM	:censored: !! What happened to the darned arena map? I thought that fights were supposed to be hosted there like, 60% of the time? Ya buy a pegasus, and then ya get tha sewer. TWICE. Turns an easy fight into a damned hard one (I'm gonna lose to that wand of magic missile [CL9]...you watch).
MitzaVolchenko 02-15-07, 08:14 AM	@All I still have the tactics sent last week and apologies once again for the delay. @MWB I'll get tactics for Zwei out sometime today.
McJarvis 02-15-07, 10:43 AM	I will be attempting to write up tactics tonight. Should be an interesting week for the Progeny of Zo..I've been getting lucky in the last few months. No longer! ~M~
waywreth 02-15-07, 11:04 AM	@Rauul - Tactics for Matthis III "the Unlucky" sent via PM.
TelinArtho 02-15-07, 11:14 AM	Burglary information for Ilendil vs TIM has been sent to both the player and the pitlord. Tactics shall be forthcoming.
TelinArtho 02-15-07, 11:29 AM	@Maraxus - Durin's monster lore is up.
TelinArtho 02-15-07, 02:17 PM	So far I have only received Qwogi's tactics from Eluria. I would love to run one of my fights today... (hint hint hint...)
TheMagister 02-15-07, 02:22 PM	@Erithmu - tactics for Hood vs. Harvey sent by PM.
sonofzeal 02-15-07, 02:35 PM	@MitzaVolchenko - Hajj's tactics vs Liardes The Gray sent via PM. Oh, and I pray to Oben-Hai I'm not fighting an invisible silenced charging brute this time. jjones, you scare me.
Milov 02-15-07, 04:20 PM	Abyssal: Tactics for Ihdald in his and Relanex's weirdly confined fight have been send. Sjiggie: Mask's tactics for his likely second loss against Rauul will be out soon. On the other hand... We'll see who loses this time. Tactics are out!
Horatius 02-15-07, 06:13 PM	So far I have only received Qwogi's tactics from Eluria. I would love to run one of my fights today... (hint hint hint...) @TelinArtho: Tactics sent to you 11:13 GMT. Thanks for Pitlording!
TelinArtho 02-15-07, 06:20 PM	Received. Also - I have received Durin's tactics for the monster fight as well (and I must say - good deduction ability there...). I'll try to get through both fights tomorrow.
Sjiggie 02-15-07, 07:42 PM	Abyssal: Tactics for Ihdald in his and Relanex's weirdly confined fight have been send. Sjiggie: Mask's tactics for his likely second loss against Rauul will be out soon. On the other hand... We'll see who loses this time. Tactics are out! One minor issue with your tactics. Please respond by PM asap. Thanks
NiQil 02-15-07, 09:37 PM	Aspect of St-Cuthbert (jjones) vs. Truls Rohk (NiQil) [ECL3] Done and up.. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11493288&postcount=572) take a look and tell me problem and complaints Still waiting on tactics for the rest of the fights... :P A few issues... First...you need to either link your rolls or you need to include a breakdown of the rolls you made and the modifiers added to them each round. I have no way to see what is what in the fight with neither being there. Second...your sequencing is way off. I have no problem with you using mass notation for the ms+h vs l+s checks, but the way your rounds are numbered, some of my opponents buffs should not have worn off yet. Third...and probably most important...I have a very large issue with Truls actions in round 23. Given that my basic tactic is to snipe for as long as possible before being forced to melee, why on earth would he trot out into the open to pick up an unattended spear? That sorta goes against the whole tactic I had submitted. I have to ask you to review and revise this. If you could address these issues, it would be appreciated.
McJarvis 02-15-07, 09:50 PM	@Raul: tactics sent for Artificer. I tried to make them as short as possible...hope they are clear!
Rauul 02-15-07, 10:09 PM	A few issues... First...you need to either link your rolls or you need to include a breakdown of the rolls you made and the modifiers added to them each round. I have no way to see what is what in the fight with neither being there. Second...your sequencing is way off. I have no problem with you using mass notation for the ms+h vs l+s checks, but the way your rounds are numbered, some of my opponents buffs should not have worn off yet. Third...and probably most important...I have a very large issue with Truls actions in round 23. Given that my basic tactic is to snipe for as long as possible before being forced to melee, why on earth would he trot out into the open to pick up an unattended spear? That sorta goes against the whole tactic I had submitted. I have to ask you to review and revise this. If you could address these issues, it would be appreciated. Take a Look at the rolls and tell me what you would of done different.. Note, Round 23/24 is when the spells started wearing off (this is why he dropped the silenced spear and steped back to recast his enlarge, and it's also when you either had to act or be spotted.. But i could back up and give the orc his charge attack with you flat footed for 1 round i guess.. wouldn't change the outcome thou.. Rolls are now posted.. basicly i walked him around looking for you (he was in silence so you could of yelled and dropped a muntain in the arena.. he would of had to see it to react. and with your hide rolls he couldn't see you. 1/4 of the time you were in silence.. i gave your none spellcaster with 12 int, the benefit of the dought that he knew he was facing a invisible/silenced orc.. you can't snipe what you can't see.. (if there is a rule that states otherwise.. please point me to it)
NiQil 02-15-07, 10:35 PM	Take a Look at the rolls and tell me what you would of done different.. Note, Round 23/24 is when the spells started wearing off (this is why he dropped the silenced spear and steped back to recast his enlarge, and it's also when you either had to act or be spotted.. But i could back up and give the orc his charge attack with you flat footed for 1 round i guess.. wouldn't change the outcome thou.. Rolls are now posted.. basicly i walked him around looking for you (he was in silence so you could of yelled and dropped a muntain in the arena.. he would of had to see it to react. and with your hide rolls he couldn't see you. 1/4 of the time you were in silence.. i gave your none spellcaster with 12 int, the benefit of the dought that he knew he was facing a invisible/silenced orc.. you can't snipe what you can't see.. (if there is a rule that states otherwise.. please point me to it) Now that you add the rolls, what you did makes a lot more sense. One thing I do want added, however. In the final round (round 25 in the roller), Aspect's attack on Truls puts at exactly 0 hp, meaning he can take a standard or a move action before going unconscious. I also noticed that the attack you rolled in that round for Truls is a critical threaten (a 20). I would ask that you roll the confirmation check on that critical. The reason being is that if it does confirm, and the damage roll on the extra d6 along with the Str bonus added in again rolls max damage (needing a 6 on the extra d6), then we are both at -1 and you then will need to roll stabilization checks to see who bleeds out first.
Milov 02-15-07, 10:53 PM	One minor issue with your tactics. Please respond by PM asap. Thanks Replied. Sorry 'bout the confusion...
Rauul 02-16-07, 09:46 AM	Now that you add the rolls, what you did makes a lot more sense. One thing I do want added, however. In the final round (round 25 in the roller), Aspect's attack on Truls puts at exactly 0 hp, meaning he can take a standard or a move action before going unconscious. I also noticed that the attack you rolled in that round for Truls is a critical threaten (a 20). I would ask that you roll the confirmation check on that critical. The reason being is that if it does confirm, and the damage roll on the extra d6 along with the Str bonus added in again rolls max damage (needing a 6 on the extra d6), then we are both at -1 and you then will need to roll stabilization checks to see who bleeds out first. Your are Right, i edited it.. and did the rolls and dmg.. crit didn't confirm but you did do 10 damage.. no change in outcome but it's correct.. now
TelinArtho 02-16-07, 12:42 PM	Durin (Maraxus) vs Human Werebear (unknown monster) is up. That was just... ugly.
jjones 02-16-07, 12:45 PM	Durin (Maraxus) vs Human Werebear (unknown monster) is up. That was just... ugly. What a nail-biter. Keep me at the edge of my seat the whole fight. JJ
MindWandererB 02-16-07, 02:50 PM	@All I still have the tactics sent last week and apologies once again for the delay. @MWB I'll get tactics for Zwei out sometime today.I still don't have them, Mitza, and I need to get started. Zwei has no defaults, so please don't make me give you a forfeit.
Maraxus 02-16-07, 03:27 PM	Durin (Maraxus) vs Human Werebear (unknown monster) is up. That was just... ugly. Arg, yes, the net vs. opponents with reach is a bad idea. I will remember that. ;) Looks like there was nothing to win. Against an equipmentless Werebear I would have had odds of roughly 1:2 to 1:3, probably 1:1 if I had went all-out with power points and expendables. With the potion of Mage armor and the reasonable tactic to attack my horse first it allready got worse. With two melee-smashers the odds can be easily calculated. I think I used the right tactic and was "lucky" Sleipnir survived it. :D Durin wants to make a Miniquest next week, any volunteering-questlords?
TelinArtho 02-16-07, 04:43 PM	Qwogi Drellfarrow (Eluria) vs Le Petit Guepe (Horatius) is up. Two archers going at it... a rogue/wizard and a cleric?
NiQil 02-16-07, 09:14 PM	Your are Right, i edited it.. and did the rolls and dmg.. crit didn't confirm but you did do 10 damage.. no change in outcome but it's correct.. now Actually, it does confirm. His AC is only 13 because he is expanded, and the roll was a 14. Round 25 Aspect Attemps to again Skear him like a hog! Hits! Dmg 2d6+14=24! Trules hits like his life depends on it, (crit dosen't confirm) dmg 1d8+1d6+4=10, Truls fulls to the ground skeared like a pig. Aspect(7,35) 09/25 hp 15(13) ac (invisibility expired)(bulls strength 30)(enlarge person expired) (silence expired)(enlarge person 44) Trules(31,43) 0/24 hp 20 ac (mindblade) (Psychic Strike) Also, my opponent's hp are incorrect, as per this post in the Prison. This means that instead of needing a 6 on damage to also put him at -1, I only need a 4, 5 or 6 on that crit damage roll. 4 Str + 4 or more to the 10 damage already done on that attacks would put him at -1 with the correction to his hp, and you are back to rolling stabilization checks to see who bleeds out first. So if you could edit the fight to reflect the critical strike, and include a damage roll, that would be super. I've got a 50% chance of making this real interesting. Edit: Actually, everything I said above is incorrect, but it pointed out a larger error that will require changes. Now that I look more closely at the fight, there is no way that the damage done by his massive attack is correct. His Enlarge person scrolls are only CL 1, meaning they only last 10 rounds each. Even if he stopped to renew it with another scroll when the first one ran out, it still would have been expired when he hit the attack in round 25 (and this is not called for in his tactics). That means the damage dealt to Truls in that round is wrong. He had dropped his longspear. So the attack done in round 25 should only have been with the normal spear + bull's Str which would have dealt 1d8+12 damage that round. There is no d8 roll for damage already available, so a new damage roll needs to be there. Either way, this fight isn't over as even a max damage roll would still leave Truls up and fighting. So what needs to happen is the fight needs to get adjusted from round 25, with the damage corrected, as well as my opponent's hp corrected as per the prison post mentioned in the sblocks above. The fight should then continue.
jjones 02-16-07, 09:28 PM	Actually, it does confirm. His AC is only 13 because he is expanded, and the roll was a 14. Also, my opponent's hp are incorrect, as per this post in the Prison. This means that instead of needing a 6 on damage to also put him at -1, I only need a 4, 5 or 6 on that crit damage roll. 4 Str + 4 or more to the 10 damage already done on that attacks would put him at -1 with the correction to his hp, and you are back to rolling stabilization checks to see who bleeds out first. So if you could edit the fight to reflect the critical strike, and include a damage roll, that would be super. I've got a 50% chance of making this real interesting. I would like to counter that my first charge attack does indeed hit. +9 str, +2 bab, +2 charge, +2 invis, -1 size = +15 hits his flat-footed AC of 14 quite easily. As it was not a 1! that was rolled. The second hit, would have possibly put u even below -10. JJ
NiQil 02-16-07, 09:37 PM	I would like to counter that my first charge attack does indeed hit. +9 str, +2 bab, +2 charge, +2 invis, -1 size = +15 hits his flat-footed AC of 14 quite easily. As it was not a 1! that was rolled. The second hit, would have possibly put u even below -10. JJ And I will counter right back with the fact that you cannot draw a weapon as a part of a full round action, of which a charge is. So the attack should not have even occurred, because you had no weapon in hand at the time. Which also means that those rolls move downward to future rounds. Also, your expansion was gone at this point. So if the attack doesn't occur because you held no weapon, then the attack never happened, your invisibility never breaks.....yeah....more edits are needed. Even more than what my edit above states. Edit: I guess you could have made the attacks with your armor spikes, but then everything else done after that has to change. So there are a ton of edits that need to be made on both sides here. Edit 2: Except you have no spikes, even though you wrote them in on your sheet. No gold was spent for them that I can see, and they are not listed in your attacks. So we have to rewind to round 24 and basically start fresh from there.
jjones 02-16-07, 09:55 PM	And I will counter right back with the fact that you cannot draw a weapon as a part of a full round action, of which a charge is. So the attack should not have even occurred, because you had no weapon in hand at the time. Which also means that those rolls move downward to future rounds. Also, your expansion was gone at this point. So if the attack doesn't occur because you held no weapon, then the attack never happened, your invisibility never breaks.....yeah....more edits are needed. Even more than what my edit above states. Edit: I guess you could have made the attacks with your armor spikes, but then everything else done after that has to change. So there are a ton of edits that need to be made on both sides here. Edit 2: Except you have no spikes, even though you wrote them in on your sheet. No gold was spent for them that I can see, and they are not listed in your attacks. So we have to rewind to round 24 and basically start fresh from there. I do have spikes...they are paid for. I do have enlarge active, it was recast. And my attack roll still counts, it just goes one round later. It's not a wasted roll and everything still happens in the same order, which kills u before you get your next attack. JJ
NiQil 02-16-07, 10:05 PM	I do have spikes...they are paid for. I do have enlarge active, it was recast. And my attack roll still counts, it just goes one round later. It's not a wasted roll and everything still happens in the same order, which kills u before you get your next attack. JJ As I pointed out in my posts above, your enlarge person scrolls are CL 1. They last 10 rounds. You only asked to use 1, and you cast it in round 3, meaning it went away just before your action in round 13. Even if you refreshed it in round 13 (which is not in the fight), it would still go away just before your action in round 23, which means no Enlarge. And yes, I see now that you do have the spikes, so you could have attacked in round 24. But the damage in round 25 will then be really different from what it is now. Edit: Also, you only have one spell of Bull's Strength, which also would have run out before those attacks. So that has to go away as well. That second casting of BS in the fight may have been the renewal of EP, but it is not written that way. Yanno.....forget about this. This fight is so screwed up it's just not worth my time pointing out the errors. Leave it as it stands.
jjones 02-16-07, 10:09 PM	As I pointed out in my posts above, your enlarge person scrolls are CL 1. They last 10 rounds. You only asked to use 1, and you cast it in round 3, meaning it went away just before your action in round 13. Even if you refreshed it in round 13 (which is not in the fight, nor in your tactics), it would still go away just before your action in round 23, which means no Enlarge. But that is all moot, because you can't draw a weapon as a part of a charge, which is a full round action. So everything from round 24 onward has to be redone. Nope...read my tactics. I asked to recast it when it ends. And it is in the fight, he just accidently typed Bull's Strength. It is in my tactics...plz read again. And no, you are wrong that all attack rolls are moot. Everything just happens one round later. you still don't spot me, or able to attack me. So i still charge-attack you invisibly before you can. After reading your above comments, i will also relinquish. JJ
Rauul 02-16-07, 10:49 PM	Ok i made a few mistakes and i did go back and correct them.. Aspect, you need to fix your bonuses and things.. Both of you.. take a deep breath and count to 10.. I acually when back and redid the fight made the changes ect.. and this is what i came up with.. Now before you ask... Aspect hit the Flat footed ac, with his invisble charge, BUT Truls, got his attack cause he was not caught by surpise IE he heard you but couldn't defend against it.. This has taught me 2 things... 1) don't run combat on 2 hours sleep, and 2) watch what i cut and paste.. Now if you find any more mistakes... TELL ME.. i am human.. i make mistakes.. and i fix them when i am told them.. fight is here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11493288&postcount=572)
McJarvis 02-16-07, 10:50 PM	This has taught me 2 things... 1) don't run combat on 2 hours sleep A-men to that, brotha.
Rauul 02-16-07, 10:52 PM	Ok i made a few mistakes and i did go back and correct them.. Aspect, you need to fix your bonuses and things.. Both of you.. take a deep breath and count to 10.. I acually when back and redid the fight made the changes ect.. and this is what i came up with.. Now before you ask... Aspect hit the Flat footed ac, with his invisble charge, BUT Truls, got his attack cause he was not caught by surpise IE he heard you but couldn't defend against it.. This has taught me 2 things... 1) don't run combat on 2 hours sleep, and 2) watch what i cut and paste.. Now if you find any more mistakes... TELL ME.. i am human.. i make mistakes.. and i fix them when i am told them.. fight is here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11493288&postcount=572) And i have the feeling i messed something up still... So tell me.. i will be running my other fights tomorrow.. i learn something with each fight..
Rauul 02-16-07, 11:05 PM	Yanno.....forget about this. This fight is so screwed up it's just not worth my time pointing out the errors. Leave it as it stands. IF errors aren't being pointed out... how do I keep from making the same mistakes, or anyone else for that matter.. I screwed the pooch.. i fixed it.. And if somehow i messed up and Aspect does an extra 4 damage then it will come down to Stablize rolls... shrug..
sonofzeal 02-16-07, 11:29 PM	*looks over the fight* In round 24, aspect does 14 damage, right? And Trules had 24 hp, right? So he should be down to 10, right? And then it all comes down to stabilization rolls, right? Or am I missing something?
jjones 02-16-07, 11:40 PM	*looks over the fight* In round 24, aspect does 14 damage, right? And Trules had 24 hp, right? So he should be down to 10, right? And then it all comes down to stabilization rolls, right? Or am I missing something? Yup, ur missing something. IF errors aren't being pointed out... how do I keep from making the same mistakes, or anyone else for that matter.. I screwed the pooch.. i fixed it.. And if somehow i messed up and Aspect does an extra 4 damage then it will come down to Stablize rolls... shrug.. Here is what is missed...I am always using the weapon two-handed, as the dmg indicated, and well, it's a two-handed weapon, so the str dmg is multiplied by 1.5 Which means, i still win, and there is no need for me to stabilize. JJ
jjones 02-16-07, 11:57 PM	Lets just assume for 2 seconds you're right that i stood around for almost 20 rounds to let 2 spells expire (judging from map, that's what it looks like i did instead of circling the central obstacle as i would like to have), then the str*1.5 was definately discounted adding 8 pts of dmg...meaning he dies. Oh, i totally understand that mistakes can be easily made and that pitlords seem to have to do a lot of guesswork on the behalf of gladiators, so i don't hold any grudge or ill feelings. It's all a learning lesson for me too as this is my first gladiator, and very first fight on this board, so i'm learning how to write out all these tactics to minimize this sort of miss-communications as well. Without mistakes, we would never learn. So it's all good. JJ
Rauul 02-17-07, 01:06 AM	Lets just assume for 2 seconds you're right that i stood around for almost 20 rounds to let 2 spells expire (judging from map, that's what it looks like i did instead of circling the central obstacle as i would like to have), then the str*1.5 was definately discounted adding 8 pts of dmg...meaning he dies. Oh, i totally understand that mistakes can be easily made and that pitlords seem to have to do a lot of guesswork on the behalf of gladiators, so i don't hold any grudge or ill feelings. It's all a learning lesson for me too as this is my first gladiator, and very first fight on this board, so i'm learning how to write out all these tactics to minimize this sort of miss-communications as well. Without mistakes, we would never learn. So it's all good. JJ I walked you around the map for all those rounds, regular movement while trying to find him (hide rolls are listed with his +10 modifer.. Now we do have a Problem.. even with the +damage, if you step back to use the long spear, he gets a Aoo on you, because you can't use the long spear when in ajacent squares A longspear has reach. You can strike opponents 10 feet away with it, but you can’t use it against an adjacent foe. So you would have to do more than a 5ft move to attack with it, and that would give him the Aoo Moving Moving out of a threatened square usually provokes an attack of opportunity from the threatening opponent. There are two common methods of avoiding such an attack—the 5-foot step and the withdraw action. your total damage on the charge would of been 21, moving to use your long spear again would of been his Aoo that drops you to -1.. And you walked around the center, it took you 23 rounds to find him, most of the time you had no chance of finding him with his +10 hide and your +2 (rolls are labeled).. So unless someone shows me something else with the longspear that i have missed... the battle stands..
MindWandererB 02-17-07, 01:26 AM	Unfortunately, your locations in the fight aren't updated, so I can't tell where they are--but there's no way a medium-sized opponent can be adjacent to an opponent and not be able to step back and use a reach weapon, unless they're backed into a corner.
jjones 02-17-07, 01:44 AM	I walked you around the map for all those rounds, regular movement while trying to find him (hide rolls are listed with his +10 modifer.. Now we do have a Problem.. even with the +damage, if you step back to use the long spear, he gets a Aoo on you, because you can't use the long spear when in ajacent squares So you would have to do more than a 5ft move to attack with it, and that would give him the Aoo your total damage on the charge would of been 21, moving to use your long spear again would of been his Aoo that drops you to -1.. And you walked around the center, it took you 23 rounds to find him, most of the time you had no chance of finding him with his +10 hide and your +2 (rolls are labeled).. So unless someone shows me something else with the longspear that i have missed... the battle stands.. Hunh? That's not right. U are contradicting yourself. There are too many options and permutations, so i'll go with a couple of the obvious ones... 1) you said i'm not enlarged, so i can still take a 5' step back (assuming longspear) and attack safely. 2) if i just have spear (as u gave me and had me attack with) it's not a reach weapon (but still a 2-handed weapon for the 1.5 str dmg) and i can attack him while basing him. 3) if i am enlarged, and have longspear in hand, i can still attack him with armour spikes (which i said to use as contingency in tactics, but a no-brainer anyhow) 4) if enlarged, and regular spear, i can still step back 5' and attack him with it, as it's not a reach weapon. So, yeah, you still have something wrong with the fight. Any 4 of the options, means i win. So plz fix that. I think it's only fair since you've radically changed the fight and permutations to suit my opponents justifiable greivances, that the countermeasures that would naturally accompany them be done in kind. JJ
MindWandererB 02-17-07, 03:08 AM	Anakala vs. Zwei und'Vierzig is up. Not much to tell, really.
Horatius 02-17-07, 07:56 AM	@Rauul: I'm not going to join the argument about the fight, but Aspect actually gets 3 spell levels/fight: 7/3 = 2.33, and CoCo rules state you round up. @TelinArtho: Thanks for Pitlording. I don't see any problems with the fight. Just want to point out a) on my 1st poison save I should be at +12 to save (+6 normal, +1 resistance, +5 antitoxin) can't tell about the 2nd because you didn't break it down. Also, why would you have me move away from him (revealing that I'm slower) after my Exp Ret ran out? - I would have been happier continuing to just trade shots. WRT that, is it assumed that one's opponent can "see" the effects you're under (in a metagame sense) so he would know anyway, and try to close? Thanks again and please don't take this as a complaint - that was my 1st fight here and I'm still trying to get a feel for some of the etiquette/unwritten rules.
sonofzeal 02-17-07, 10:05 AM	Can Aspect and Trules get a rematch? Same tactics, same start position, whole new set of roles. Rauul could still DM (or not, if he's sick of this by now). It seems like the only fair way to resolve all the mess.
Rauul 02-17-07, 10:15 AM	Can Aspect and Trules get a rematch? Same tactics, same start position, whole new set of roles. Rauul could still DM (or not, if he's sick of this by now). It seems like the only fair way to resolve all the mess. Acually after rerunning the fight 4 times, and talking with 2 others experinced dm's this last one is the last one.. every option has been used and explained.. ie it came down to a Bleed out.. Sorry for any hurt feelings..
Abyssal Stalker 02-17-07, 10:17 AM	Basically if the fight isn't held over, then the result is what it is and it can't be changed afterwards. If fights were changed afterwards, it might lead to complicated situations (levelling up, used expendables, etc). This may sound harsh, but it's better that way. Mistakes happen and sometimes they just need to be ignored for the sake of keeping things going on. (God knows how many fights there are whose result is biased due to a mistake that no one noticed)
TelinArtho 02-17-07, 12:25 PM	@Rauul: I'm not going to join the argument about the fight, but Aspect actually gets 3 spell levels/fight: 7/3 = 2.33, and CoCo rules state you round up. @TelinArtho: Thanks for Pitlording. I don't see any problems with the fight. Just want to point out a) on my 1st poison save I should be at +12 to save (+6 normal, +1 resistance, +5 antitoxin) can't tell about the 2nd because you didn't break it down. Also, why would you have me move away from him (revealing that I'm slower) after my Exp Ret ran out? - I would have been happier continuing to just trade shots. WRT that, is it assumed that one's opponent can "see" the effects you're under (in a metagame sense) so he would know anyway, and try to close? Thanks again and please don't take this as a complaint - that was my 1st fight here and I'm still trying to get a feel for some of the etiquette/unwritten rules. 1. I am fully aware. The +5 you see in the fight is the addition to the online roller's result - because I had originally forgotten about the antitoxin. If you look in the CoCo roller - you should be able to see this. In the second one, you didn't have your resistance bonus at that point, but you still passed it - so no matter. 2. On the issue of running away when your exp. retreat ran out - consider that portion of the fight shorthand. Your opponent could do nothing to you while you were faster, so he had to wait it out. Since you are both aware of your effects and their durations before hand - it is no more than just an estimation. Given that I had ruled in your favor previous to this point, I felt it was reasonable to give him that chance. This is also the same reasoning I used when you stopped instead of running away further after a couple of rounds. As to etiquette - you get more by being courteous than by "yelling" - and in that respect you did just fine.
TelinArtho 02-17-07, 12:41 PM	@MWB - in round 10, I don't understand why you didn't have Vent fly by attack as specified in my tactics. If he does this - Zwei does not automatically know where he is and therefore possibly avoids death. From what I read on the map - that should be possible with his movement as well. Also - I notice that her saves seem to be off - it should only be +6 on the will save I think.
McJarvis 02-17-07, 01:18 PM	...and I'm still trying to get a feel for some of the etiquette/unwritten rules. Unwritten rules(until now!) 1) If you go up against Cat in the arena, you lose. 2) If you're arguing with Sauro in the forums, you will lose or die(from old age) trying. 3) If you think something is unbalanced, it will remain this way until you abuse it.(no matter how unbalanced it is) 4) Despite how tempting it is, calling the GM, an elder, or guildmaster a poopy-head will usually not further your goals on this forum. That's all I could think up on the spot... :-)
jjones 02-17-07, 02:37 PM	Acually after rerunning the fight 4 times, and talking with 2 others experinced dm's this last one is the last one.. every option has been used and explained.. ie it came down to a Bleed out.. Sorry for any hurt feelings.. WTF????1!!! Oh plz. What you're telling me is that you are screweing me over intentionally cuz ur too lazy and don't care about accuracy. You seemed to be pretty high up on accuracy when it came to my opponents grievances and did everything in your powre to fix his areas of concern even if it meant doing things erroneously against me so intentionally. Now, you are saying, you know u made errors and i'm screwed.>?!!!nolihSDE dsaHTJ-REW] G.A'gfe LA'EG' EAG EAGH' ;EA GTRY;'543QYJK- EWF 34T 3Q'T5 3'1T4-9U0943UT OV This is pure bullchit. You guys talk on your high horses about accuracy and rules detail and that i'm an idiot for making ONE-HALF of a mistake. Now this? What a joke. I get str *1.5 on my weapons...read the fricking PHB Rauul. Read it and read it again when ur done. That means my opponent dies. And you say to me tough bananas? Wow.WOW WOWOWOWOWOWOW LAME LAME LAME!!! JJ see ya'z...keep ur baby playground and powertrips. After reading all week long on a ton of fights and trying to get a sense of the boards, i see that's what this is all about anyhow. Powertripping. SO keep playing in ur sandbox children. JJ ---outa this clown tent...l8rs
Horatius 02-17-07, 02:57 PM	1. I am fully aware. The +5 you see in the fight is the addition to the online roller's result - because I had originally forgotten about the antitoxin. If you look in the CoCo roller - you should be able to see this. In the second one, you didn't have your resistance bonus at that point, but you still passed it - so no matter. 2. On the issue of running away when your exp. retreat ran out - consider that portion of the fight shorthand. Your opponent could do nothing to you while you were faster, so he had to wait it out. Since you are both aware of your effects and their durations before hand - it is no more than just an estimation. Given that I had ruled in your favor previous to this point, I felt it was reasonable to give him that chance. This is also the same reasoning I used when you stopped instead of running away further after a couple of rounds. As to etiquette - you get more by being courteous than by "yelling" - and in that respect you did just fine. 1. Right, seen. Did not look at the roller - my bad. 2. Thanks for the explanation. That's what I figured, and I have no problem with that, especially since I see it as better to encourage contact/engagement rather than encourage constant evasion of one's opponent. My question stems from the fact that in a 'real' game, opponents wouldn't know caster levels, etc. But I suppose in retrospect we've already made that info available on the char sheet (and my tactics certainly took note of them) so it makes sense to apply them 'in theatre'. Cheers.
MindWandererB 02-17-07, 04:13 PM	---outa this clown tent...l8rsI was wondering how long that would take. Some people.... @MWB - in round 10, I don't understand why you didn't have Vent fly by attack as specified in my tactics. If he does this - Zwei does not automatically know where he is and therefore possibly avoids death. From what I read on the map - that should be possible with his movement as well. Also - I notice that her saves seem to be off - it should only be +6 on the will save I think.As to the former: because I completely missed that the elementals have that feat, even though I was looking for it. Well, it didn't actually die anyway, so no need for the correction. And you're right, that Will save does look wrong. She made her Doom save by a landslide anyway.
Rauul 02-19-07, 10:00 AM	Tyden Rayn (NiQil) vs. Harbinger (templer10) [ECL3] is done and up.. Look at it here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11505619&postcount=575), comments welcome
Maraxus 02-19-07, 10:48 AM	HEY! My fight is missing... I mean Durins total loose vs. a large humanoid with a big, evil axe! Furthermore, it got strokethrough in the fights of the week. Could I humbly ask, that - since the fight is very easily reconstructable, he get's posted (and linked) again? I mean it could be as short as "Durin spend 1 pp into force screen then tried to entangle the werebear but a horrible critical split him into for 69 damage. Rolls are here (http://www.hwx.it/wizards.com/dice.php?sid=1105)."
TelinArtho 02-19-07, 10:52 AM	@Maraxus - I'll go look for it. If its not there, I keep a copy on my computer to repost anyway - so no worries. Give me a moment. Its there: Durin's fight
templer10 02-19-07, 11:04 AM	Tyden Rayn (NiQil) vs. Harbinger (templer10) [ECL3] is done and up.. Look at it here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11505619&postcount=575), comments welcome iam new at COCO so i might be unfamiliar with some stuff but i have a couple of questions - first- at round 6 tyden tumbles away and get up - how far did he tumble? i have 20 feet reach at that point (a spiked chain doubles natural reach which is 10 when i am large from expansion) so if he tried to get up in threat range he needed to roll tumble again as i understand it or take an AOA. second- i cant really understand how u calculated my touch attack rolls- u put in round 6-7 there +17 and at round 8 - +12- and in actually it was +7 the +17 is my bonus to the STR check not to the touch attack - it doesnt make a practical diffrence in round 6. in round 7 if you calculated my touch attack as +17 i dont hit with the touch attack but if the second roll was for the touch attack it does hit. and in that case you should note that in an opposed ability roll a natural 20 does not mean you win it and a natural 1 does not mean you lose it (check the section in the SRD that refers to natural 1 and natural 20 at skill rolls- it mentions that only at saves and attack rolls 1 or 20 means something speciel) and at that time i had +17 to the STR check becuase of my str (+5), Size (+4 - large), (+4 - racial trait), +4 (imp trip feat). so a result of 11 on the str d20 roll means i have 28 against 20 of tyden which means he is tripped and i have a free attack on him. (with his AC at -4). if he is doen that means at round 8 he need to tumble up again and roll it taking an AOA if he doesnt make it. for my attack roll in round 8 my touch attack to trip hits even with correct modifier 12+7=19 and my str check is 18 - 1+17 against tyden 12 (again a natural 1 at opposed ability rolls does not means fauilre) and i get a free attack and if he survive he need to try to stand up again. only if he survived those 2 round of trips that did in fact trip (or maybe just 1 round - depend on round 7) + related AOA if they occured from standing up he made that attack that killed me. ty.
Maraxus 02-19-07, 11:08 AM	Whoops looks like I just got the post number wrong in my fight history that plus the strokethrough in the character-thread and the long downtime this weekend confused me.
TelinArtho 02-19-07, 11:43 AM	[LOG] ML: TelinArtho : Sybil (MitzaVolchenko) befriends Kelartus for WAR [Week 1/3] When was this added to the pairings? I'll create a mission shortly for it...
MindWandererB 02-19-07, 04:47 PM	iam new at COCO so i might be unfamiliar with some stuff but i have a couple of questions - first- at round 6 tyden tumbles away and get up - how far did he tumble? i have 20 feet reach at that point (a spiked chain doubles natural reach which is 10 when i am large from expansion) so if he tried to get up in threat range he needed to roll tumble again as i understand it or take an AOA. second- i cant really understand how u calculated my touch attack rolls- u put in round 6-7 there +17 and at round 8 - +12- and in actually it was +7 the +17 is my bonus to the STR check not to the touch attack - it doesnt make a practical diffrence in round 6. in round 7 if you calculated my touch attack as +17 i dont hit with the touch attack but if the second roll was for the touch attack it does hit. and in that case you should note that in an opposed ability roll a natural 20 does not mean you win it and a natural 1 does not mean you lose it (check the section in the SRD that refers to natural 1 and natural 20 at skill rolls- it mentions that only at saves and attack rolls 1 or 20 means something speciel) and at that time i had +17 to the STR check becuase of my str (+5), Size (+4 - large), (+4 - racial trait), +4 (imp trip feat). so a result of 11 on the str d20 roll means i have 28 against 20 of tyden which means he is tripped and i have a free attack on him. (with his AC at -4). if he is doen that means at round 8 he need to tumble up again and roll it taking an AOA if he doesnt make it. for my attack roll in round 8 my touch attack to trip hits even with correct modifier 12+7=19 and my str check is 18 - 1+17 against tyden 12 (again a natural 1 at opposed ability rolls does not means fauilre) and i get a free attack and if he survive he need to try to stand up again. only if he survived those 2 round of trips that did in fact trip (or maybe just 1 round - depend on round 7) + related AOA if they occured from standing up he made that attack that killed me. ty.I, too, have a hard time following this fight (as well as the criticisms). There are a lot of mistakes, but they all come out to be a wash as far as I can tell. Round 2: What happened to Offensive Precognition? You never said he manifested it, but it made it into the round summaries. Round 6: The map is clearly wrong, since it shows Harbinger moving into Tyden's square. Templer asked to move to base contact, so you're only off by a square. Also, that +17 for the touch attack makes no sense to me, either. His touch modifier should be only +7, but his opposed trip modifier (Strength check) is +17. And also, Tyden's action in round 6 is impossible. If he's tripped, he can't stand without provoking an AoO (even with Tumble--the FAQ mentions this, contrary to NiQil's assertion). You also have Tyden taking two move actions (stand and move), although Tyden's tactics only call for him to stand (since using the dorje doesn't provoke an AoO anyway). This is the only major problem, because either Tyden provokes an AoO for standing, or he is prone for the round. In the former case, Harbinger gets an extra chance to attack and deal damage, and in the latter, his attack in round 7 hits (and deals damage) due to Tyden's AC penalty for being prone already. Round 7: That is an unsuccessful trip, but for the wrong reasons. The touch attack is [9]+7=16 vs. Tyden's touch AC of 17, so the whole thing fails. Round 8: Here the trip again fails: [14]+7=21 for the touch attack, but [1]+12=13 (Expansion being over) vs. [12]+4=16 for the trip attempt. So the only thing that needs fixing is the Round 6 movement, which could cause changes in rounds 7 and 8 if Tyden remains prone.
TheMagister 02-19-07, 06:04 PM	Looking over the tactics for the Harvester, and all I can say is: "Wow". If 'Rith forgets some of your intricate tactics, you can always argue it to death. =) Question: Can you order a mindless undead to follow intricate tactics? For example: "Don't attack the enemy. Attack his quivers, starting with the fullest one, and working your way down. THEN disarm his bows." Just seems kinda complex for a skeleton with an Intelligence of "-". I am flattered that I warrant such a plethora of tactics.
templer10 02-19-07, 06:08 PM	true about round 8- didnt notice expansion was over, only thing that needs to be worked out is what exacly happend in round 6 since i either hit in round 7 becuase tydan was prone or i have an attempt to trip/hit becuase of the AOA.
MindWandererB 02-19-07, 06:10 PM	Question: Can you order a mindless undead to follow intricate tactics? For example: "Don't attack the enemy. Attack his quivers, starting with the fullest one, and working your way down. THEN disarm his bows." Just seems kinda complex for a skeleton with an Intelligence of "-".Well, it's a free action to speak, so Harvey can just say, "Attack the fullest quiver!" "Attack the fullest quiver!" "Disarm the bow!" in successive rounds. Edit: Looking at Harvey's tactics, there are in fact some mistakes. 1: Bob's BAB is in fact wrong--but in the wrong direction. It has 8 HD, which means a +6 BAB as a construct. 2: Pegasi, being intelligent, do not use or require tricks of any kind. 3: You cannot gain improved cover from a creature, only from a wall or similar "hard" obstacle. 4: I cannot think of any reason why a buckler would give Hood an attack penalty. He has no reason to attack with an off-hand weapon at any time. Bear in mind, a right-handed person firing a bow holds the bow in the left hand.
TheMagister 02-19-07, 06:15 PM	Right, then.
TelinArtho 02-19-07, 06:30 PM	I do find it funny, even hilarious, that Cat consistently mentions not to have Msr Hood "metagame" knowledge about certain things, and then includes a number of metagame pieces in his own tactics...
MindWandererB 02-19-07, 06:44 PM	I do find it funny, even hilarious, that Cat consistently mentions not to have Msr Hood "metagame" knowledge about certain things, and then includes a number of metagame pieces in his own tactics... I think Cat is drawing a distinction between knowing your opponent before the fight, and during. He's right that if Hood is shooting blind, he has no way of knowing that he's just hitting a tower shield. (And I see only one reference to metagaming.)
orsono 02-19-07, 07:05 PM	@MitzaVolchenko is this fight going to take place this week? I already sent my tactics last week but I can send them again if you need them. Blizzard (NiQil) vs. Ghashara (orsono) : MitzaVolchenko [Temple] [Week 2]
Hirumajoe 02-19-07, 07:05 PM	I think Cat is drawing a distinction between knowing your opponent before the fight, and during. He's right that if Hood is shooting blind, he has no way of knowing that he's just hitting a tower shield. (And I see only one reference to metagaming.) Actually, wouldn't that be a DC 0 listen check (plus distance modifiers). Hitting a Tower shield is going to have distinctly different ring from a hitting someone in full plate. Also, if his sighted psicrystal is in range, it should be able to tell the difference, or even note that shield is up (since by having total cover he *can't* see the medium creature, just a wall). I mean, there are other sources of information other than sight. :-)
Rauul 02-19-07, 07:06 PM	I, too, have a hard time following this fight (as well as the criticisms). There are a lot of mistakes, but they all come out to be a wash as far as I can tell. Round 2: What happened to Offensive Precognition? You never said he manifested it, but it made it into the round summaries. Round 6: The map is clearly wrong, since it shows Harbinger moving into Tyden's square. Templer asked to move to base contact, so you're only off by a square. Also, that +17 for the touch attack makes no sense to me, either. His touch modifier should be only +7, but his opposed trip modifier (Strength check) is +17. And also, Tyden's action in round 6 is impossible. If he's tripped, he can't stand without provoking an AoO (even with Tumble--the FAQ mentions this, contrary to NiQil's assertion). You also have Tyden taking two move actions (stand and move), although Tyden's tactics only call for him to stand (since using the dorje doesn't provoke an AoO anyway). This is the only major problem, because either Tyden provokes an AoO for standing, or he is prone for the round. In the former case, Harbinger gets an extra chance to attack and deal damage, and in the latter, his attack in round 7 hits (and deals damage) due to Tyden's AC penalty for being prone already. Round 7: That is an unsuccessful trip, but for the wrong reasons. The touch attack is [9]+7=16 vs. Tyden's touch AC of 17, so the whole thing fails. Round 8: Here the trip again fails: [14]+7=21 for the touch attack, but [1]+12=13 (Expansion being over) vs. [12]+4=16 for the trip attempt. So the only thing that needs fixing is the Round 6 movement, which could cause changes in rounds 7 and 8 if Tyden remains prone. Thanks for pointing out the FAQ on tumbling from prone, the fight is updated and fixed, the Aoo is nasty on trips..
Erithmu 02-19-07, 07:07 PM	Hush all ... this fight is a pain in the rear end as it is ... I don't need 'pre-fight completion' comments ... I would like to say that I'm in the endgame, but it feels more like midgame to me. (That and having to build an 'arrow randomizer')
MindWandererB 02-19-07, 07:13 PM	Hush all ... this fight is a pain in the rear end as it is ... I don't need 'pre-fight completion' comments ... I would like to say that I'm in the endgame, but it feels more like midgame to me. (That and having to build an 'arrow randomizer') We know it's a pain, that's why we're commenting now. If there's a mistake that needs correction, better to find it before you have to redo half the fight.
Maraxus 02-19-07, 07:28 PM	The Fight: Toron Brightstar vs. Ceilia Durrol is here.
hogarth 02-19-07, 07:43 PM	Looking over the tactics for the Harvester, and all I can say is: "Wow". If 'Rith forgets some of your intricate tactics, you can always argue it to death. =) :heehee That's always my favourite part of every fight -- the debate competition.
Erithmu 02-19-07, 07:59 PM	Harvester vs Msr. Hood Bring on the pain ...
McJarvis 02-19-07, 08:03 PM	Harvester vs Msr. Hood Bring on the pain ... Aw... :(. *tears up his betting tickets*. I had my money on Hood... But then again, if Cat wins my earlier comments about him always winning stay true. I win no matter what! :)
McJarvis 02-19-07, 08:22 PM	Question: Can you order a mindless undead to follow intricate tactics? For example: "Don't attack the enemy. Attack his quivers, starting with the fullest one, and working your way down. THEN disarm his bows." No. When you control a [mindless undead] being, you can communicate only basic commands, such as “come here,” “go there,” “fight,” “stand still,” and so on. I see nothing to indicate that this restriction is reserved to this spell alone. (since it doesn't specify commanding with this spell, just when you command mindless beings in general) I would find specific modes of attack suspect(like sundering, in this case)
Erithmu 02-19-07, 08:25 PM	Wrong Reference: Clr 3 This spell turns the bones or bodies of dead creatures into undead skeletons or zombies that follow your spoken commands. He can't give complex commands. In the fight Knell was given Sunder quivers and then was given the Disarm Bow command after the quivers were gone. That had no effect since Hood was dismounted getting arrows, and Hope was in the way. Sunder is a technical term, but the command to attack certain objects I figure are reasonable ... If Elders rule against this ... I nominate McJ to rerun this fight :D
MindWandererB 02-19-07, 08:26 PM	That's a good point. I hadn't realized that the "basic command" stricture was so... strict. "Attack his quiver" is certainly more complex than "fight." That's pretty strong grounds for an appeal, there, TM--and definitely something Cat should bear in mind. Edit: The "Animate Dead" reference says nothing about how complex the spoken commands can be. Surely there is some limitation.
McJarvis 02-19-07, 08:30 PM	@Rith: I know it isn't the spell Cat is using, but Command Undead clearly defines what "basic" commands unintelligent beings can understand.(and since it is a related spell, IMO should be considered by the elders)
Erithmu 02-19-07, 08:36 PM	@Rith: I know it isn't the spell Cat is using, but Command Undead clearly defines what "basic" commands unintelligent beings can understand.(and since it is a related spell, IMO should be considered by the elders) You mean Command Undead as in the opposite of Turn Undead?
McJarvis 02-19-07, 08:36 PM	You mean Command Undead as in the opposite of Turn Undead? Command Undead as in the 2nd level Wizard spell.(one of the most broken spells in the game! Watch as my level 3 wizard commands an epic level mindless undead.... ;) who for some reason does not have spell resistance...)
Erithmu 02-19-07, 08:46 PM	Command Undead as in the 2nd level Wizard spell. Ok ... How can a Cleric (granted he has the magic domain) cast Command Undead. I think the wording on Command Undead is a very different spell than Animate Undead. Command Undead reads more along the lines of 'Charm' Undead. I also notice that he quested for his Nightmare right after leveling up with the ability to cast Animate Undead. An indication of the duration on the two spells leads me to this conclusion as well. Although the fact that I can't find the Material component expenditure on Harvey for the spell makes me wonder.
McJarvis 02-19-07, 08:50 PM	Erm...I'm not saying that's how he controlled the thing in the first place. I'm saying that since Command Undead is so much like Animate Dead, certainly the general statements Command Undead says in regards to commanding unintelligent creatures must apply as well. ((On the Wizard side of things, you get Command Undead as a second level spell, then Animate dead as a 4th level spell. On the cleric side of things you get command undead as an ability at first level, then animate as a spell as a 3rd level spell. Clear progression....)) That aside: (the following is the real issue at hand) The Elders need to decide on this, and I'll leave it to TM to bring it to the courtroom. The problem I see clearly laid out right now is that for the Nightmare skeleton(mindless) to do what Cat asked(Sunder), a regular horse(not mindless) would need to be trained a specific trick in order to do it. The 2nd level wizard spell Command Undead gives us the answer for limitations that we need...
hogarth 02-19-07, 08:58 PM	That's a good point. I hadn't realized that the "basic command" stricture was so... strict. "Attack his quiver" is certainly more complex than "fight". In my opinion, an undead with no intelligence shouldn't be able to follow more complex commands than an animal with 2 intelligence. However, I think this is the type of issue where it's up to the pitlord to adjudicate on a case-by-case basis.
Rauul 02-19-07, 09:45 PM	Gakhnalak vs Matthis Can be seen here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11505937&postcount=576).. dice rolls linked.. Matthis, i swear to god my dice have a love hate relationship with you.. near max damage for you, yet allows him to hit the right image.. .. Sorry man..
NiQil 02-19-07, 10:42 PM	Thanks for pointing out the FAQ on tumbling from prone, the fight is updated and fixed, the Aoo is nasty on trips.. Alright...my turn.... In round 5, Harbinger moves towards Tyden and manifests expansion. This is in direct contradiction with his tactics. 1 round after i located and near opponent(right next to him), move 5 feet back manifest expansion from memory. So he should not have manifested expansions until he based me, as per his tactics. Here is what should have happened: when i spot him if i can charge to him do so and attempt a trip if he's farther then charge range run right up to him. In round 6, for some inexplicable reason, the order of initiative changes. Tyden should still be acting first in this round, as there were no ready actions that could have changed the order we act. Tyden should have been able to retreat and attack, as per tactics, before any of those attacks occurred. Due to the error I pointed out above regarding his requested use of expansion, he would still need to move to base me before expanding. This would mean that I should have at least another attack beyond the one I am missing in round 6, To summarize: In round 5, expansion should not have been used. Instead, as per Harbinger's tactics, he should have charged me, since I would have been in charge range at that point. In round 6, Tyden should be retreating and firing (if not tripped), while Harbinger expands. In round 7, Tyden should again be retreating and firing while Harbinger advances and attempts to trip (if he can get there in a move action). The fight should then proceed from there, depending on the outcome of these actions. If you could look at that, it would be appreciated. Edit: Also, in the summary, Tyden has already used 1 charge from a dorje that needs to be added, and pending the actions above, may have more that need to be noted. Also, his pp usage needs to be added (4 so far, pending the above actions)
Zevox 02-19-07, 10:46 PM	The Fight: Toron Brightstar vs. Ceilia Durrol is here. Ouch - a 20s fight at level 6. In melee. Now theres something you don't see every day. Ah well, looks good to me, thanks for the run. Only thing that needs editing is the wrap-up - Ceilia also cast Shatter from memory (converted to Inflict Moderate Wounds, if you recall), so that needs to be noted in there. Zevox
Rauul 02-19-07, 11:54 PM	Tamis Ruhl (NiQil) vs. The Artificer of Gladius (McJarvis) [ECL 3] Done and here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11506028&postcount=577)... a one sided fight, outrun and pecked to death with magic missiles.. gawd i forgot to manifest your force screen and Prescience Offensive.. let me know if you want me to redo it with them or leave it and save you 2 PP's..
MindWandererB 02-19-07, 11:55 PM	Gakhnalak vs Matthis Can be seen here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11505937&postcount=576).. dice rolls linked.. Matthis, i swear to god my dice have a love hate relationship with you.. near max damage for you, yet allows him to hit the right image.. .. Sorry man.. Should any correction be necessary (possible with 1 HP at the end), you followed my tactics a round off: Round 7, he did his Scorching Ray, so I should have immediately moved in for melee. The movement looks odd, too--partially because Matthis is on blue text, but he's the red dot. But Gakh should be moving back a lot more in rounds 5 and 6, which would delay the Scorching Ray. But as I said, no corrections necessary unless waywreth calls for them.
NiQil 02-20-07, 12:03 AM	Tamis Ruhl (NiQil) vs. The Artificer of Gladius (McJarvis) [ECL 3] Done and here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11506028&postcount=577)... a one sided fight, outrun and pecked to death with magic missiles.. gawd i forgot to manifest your force screen and Prescience Offensive.. let me know if you want me to redo it with them or leave it and save you 2 PP's.. No...leave it...I knew this one was going to be one-sided if he went the MM route, so no reason to change anything since the outcome wouldn't change.
Rauul 02-20-07, 12:20 AM	Should any correction be necessary (possible with 1 HP at the end), you followed my tactics a round off: Round 7, he did his Scorching Ray, so I should have immediately moved in for melee. The movement looks odd, too--partially because Matthis is on blue text, but he's the red dot. But Gakh should be moving back a lot more in rounds 5 and 6, which would delay the Scorching Ray. But as I said, no corrections necessary unless waywreth calls for them. Acually when i read his tactics.. i was confused.. he wanted to be close to Matthis to get the Scorching ray out of the way and then hammer him with trip and Aoo's.. if you can read his tactics and see different, please point them out to me..
Rauul 02-20-07, 12:27 AM	Ok with the fight... Tyden Rayn vs. Harbinger, i read and reread and reread the tactics, read the rules on manifesting and tripping.. and i have a headache.. THANKS GUYS But i stand by the Expantion when i had him do it, for the simple reason his tactics were written as if he had won inititive.. i made a pitlord (dm judgement) call, as it would of been impossable for him to do his tactics as written without winning inititive.. As for the rest of the I have corrected, put in the charges you used ect.. Sorry i am standing by my call on this.. if you would like the fight rerun.. thats your call.. Sorry i can't make anyone/everyone happy this week..
MindWandererB 02-20-07, 01:04 AM	Acually when i read his tactics.. i was confused.. he wanted to be close to Matthis to get the Scorching ray out of the way and then hammer him with trip and Aoo's.. if you can read his tactics and see different, please point them out to me..Well, obviously I can read them differently, since I wrote them! What I meant to convey was, move back each round so as to delay the Scorching Ray as long as possible and try to take down some images, then close for melee after the Ray. @NiQil: The change in sequence on Harbinger wouldn't affect much. If the attack preceded the Expansion, the trip still succeeds, and the next attack is still a confirmed crit. Those would do less damage since he's not Expanded, but it wouldn't be by much. I'm not saying you shouldn't pursue this, just adding a comment.
Caterane 02-20-07, 07:59 AM	It's pretty simple: The Animate Dead description says nothing about a limitation as to the complexity of spoken commands thus we have to assume that there is none. Anything else would be making up houserules based on no ground. You cannot compare it with other effects of similar kind. Just compare the 'standard action' command of a Rebuked Undead with the 'free action' command of Command Undead/Animate Dead. If we follow your logic, those two must be the same action but they ain't. In making it the same action we would directly go against a written rule. We can likewise assume that Animate Dead cannot be compared with a different spell. Secondly, it's the way we treated animated dead from the beginning on till today and any change in this treatment would not be applied to this fight retroactively, just like the hoverboard pegasus normally impossible flight was not retroactively applied to this fight. Same thing for both; not 'always to Cat's disadvantage'. And of course, it won't be changed anyway. I'd also like to thank Rith for running this fight even though he has adepted Hood's tactic to a huge extend. Were his tactics be followed as written, the fight would have been over much quicker.
Hirumajoe 02-20-07, 08:12 AM	While you are correct that spell puts no restrictions on the command type, the Skeleton description does. Skeletons are the animated bones of the dead, mindless automatons that obey the orders of their evil masters. A skeleton is seldom garbed in anything more than the rotting remnants of any clothing or armor it was wearing when slain. A skeleton does only what it is ordered to do. It can draw no conclusions of its own and takes no initiative. Because of this limitation, its instructions must always be simple. A skeleton attacks until destroyed. It may not be a part of the spell, but its certainly a part of the skeleton and I would argue a part of the fact that its non-intelligent. While I'm not arguing you can't issue an order to sunder (I'll leave that to others if they want), to say that there are no limitations on the orders you can give a mindless undead is not correct. Edit: And I'd like to point out all these rulings are not just against you. I started a fight 3 weeks ago against an opponent in the sewer with a pegasus (which is still going on and is likely to go into week 4 at this rate). Who has full use of his mobility. I had asked about the wingspan and got the same response. And I was content with the Elder consensus at the time. I think we're all just arguing for the proper interpretation of the rules. All these ruling will affect everyone's characters. There other people using large flying mounts or mindless undead. I personally think the order, "Attack Quiver" is simple. You have to issue a verbal order for each one, since "Attack all the quivers" requires a decision on the skeleton's part (I.e. which one). But since thats a free action, its not a problem.
McJarvis 02-20-07, 08:13 AM	It's pretty simple: The Animate Dead description says nothing about a limitation as to the complexity of spoken commands thus we have to assume that there is none. Anything else would be making up houserules based on no ground. I that's the case, then Animate Dead is the most powerful spell in the game. Command: "Instantaniously destroy my enemy using thoughts" And the Undead has to do it.[since we're just ignoring the capabilities of the undead.] Instead, I suggest that you can give the undead any command you want(as animate dead states), but it has the limitations of commands it can actually follow because it is mindless.(and in our earlier example, does not have any ability that allows it to destroy foes with mind-bullets) Command Undead(the 2nd level wizard spell) clearly states what kind of commands mindless undead are capable of following.
Maraxus 02-20-07, 08:29 AM	Ouch - a 20s fight at level 6. In melee. Now theres something you don't see every day. Ah well, looks good to me, thanks for the run. Only thing that needs editing is the wrap-up - Ceilia also cast Shatter from memory (converted to Inflict Moderate Wounds, if you recall), so that needs to be noted in there. Zevox A 20th fight it was only for Rook and Toron, Celia Had hit on a 19 and 20 while the shield of faith was up and even 17-20 after it was down (1 minute buffs are dangerous). Had Toron not fought defencivly, it would have been another 3 better, and in rounds, where Celia failed her ride for cover check, he could have had quite good chances to hit. With +10 Ride vs. DC 15 however, I think 3 chances for a 20 were quite good to take, hoping for a 1! on one of your saves vs. the poisons (You almost had your second save vs. the first one). Note, that unconciousness is not like sleeping, you can't simply get woke up. Like having enough nonlethal damage to loose conciousness. Therefor while the odds were against Toron, they probably were as high as they could get. Attacking your mount could allowed him to at least kill something, but the odds of winning would have been lower, probably. Overall it was an interesting setup. :) Expended spells fixed. And now, we should come to the little rule-issue, I almost forgot: Dear people of Gladius, first I'd like to get opinions, befor it (probably) goes to the Courtroom: Does the mounted overrun cost you your standart action? Overrun You can attempt an overrun as a standard action taken during your move. (...) Mounted Overrun (Trample) If you attempt an overrun while mounted, your mount makes the Strength check to determine the success or failure of the overrun attack (and applies its size modifier, rather than yours). If you have the Trample feat and attempt an overrun while mounted, your target may not choose to avoid you, and if you knock your opponent prone with the overrun, your mount may make one hoof attack against your opponent. Overrun: Performing an overrun while mounted works just like making a melee attack. You and your mount function as a single creature when resolving the overrun. Use your mount's size and Strength modifier for the opposed Strength check you make to resolve the overrun. So, it should definitly cost the mount's action to Trample someone. But does it also cost your action? Is the mount's intelligence of any importance?
Macbrea 02-20-07, 08:37 AM	If you check Table here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm), you will see that overrun is on the standard action table. Therefore, it is a standard action If the hypertext version of the SRD isn't useful. You can find it on the official one we use here (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/actionsInCombat.html).
Abyssal Stalker 02-20-07, 08:43 AM	Without further investigation, I remind you that everything you do mounted must follow some simple (or not so simple) rules: -You and the mount act on the same initiative count. This means that your and the mount's actions happen simultaneously. -The time it takes to do these actions must not be more than what a single creature can do on his round. When determining this, you must also check the point in space where the actions take place. So, that leads to a conclusion: -You can, for example, let your mount double move (move+move) and attack in the end (none+standard) because that fits the time frame. -You can't let your mount double move (move+move) and full attack (none+full) in the end, because that would exceed the time frame. Now, before you start saying that there isn't anything in the rules about some strange time frame, please check the all about mounts -articles. This hass been clarified there, allthough not using the same wording, but the basic idea is the same. There are strict explanations on what and when you can do if the mount moves in the same round (and those are the rules that create the time frame). At least this is how I see the system (allthough my explanation isn't perfect), someone correct me if I'm wrong.
Zevox 02-20-07, 08:47 AM	If you check Table here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm), you will see that overrun is on the standard action table. Therefore, it is a standard action Actually, the question he was trying to make is: Does using Trample (mounted Overrun) cost both you and your mount your standard actions, or just your mount? Personally, I would argue no, it should not. No other action performed by the mount while mounted takes both of your actions (except only withdrawing, which is not even required; simply set that if you don't withdraw as well, you aren't protected from AoOs by the mount's moving that way). It is the mount that is performing the movement; it is the mount that is doing the overrunning; the rider is just guiding the mount and along for the ride. Maraxus interprets the phrase "You and your mount function as a single creature when resolving the overrun." from the Rules of the Game article as meaning you both use your standard action to do it; I would argue it is simply there as a clarification that things like AoOs provoked from the overrun apply to both the mount and rider (in much the same way as with withdrawing). Zevox
Macbrea 02-20-07, 08:48 AM	Now, it could be argued that a trample is a move and standard action for the mount. And the rider is allowed a move and a standard action as per the rules. There is specificly an exception to this rule, that applies to ranged weapons and the ability to take a full attack action with them.
Maraxus 02-20-07, 08:49 AM	Good to see you, Macbrea, I have a problem with Noko's fight (I just now saw it was posted allready): ...Or more likely multiple. The Black tentacles are not make of Cold Iron and they do not say, that they hit as a spell to negate damage reduction (like spiritual weapon). They are summoned things (that's why no spell resistence works), just like creatures only ... that they lack 5 out of 6 ability scores and are immune to damage. ;) But that aside, why does Noko only move with 5 ft speed after she escaped? Even creatures who aren’t grappling with the tentacles may move through the area at only half normal speed. So after the escape artist (a standart action) I can make one move at half speed for 30 ft distance. PS. Yes, I know it's a frozen fight, but we don't fight for rewards, we fight to win, don't we? ;) About the trample-thing: At least the move, the rider shares ... when melee is concerned but yes, that could still allowthe rider to use his standard action for the attack while the mount tramples with it's standard action. It's just that the wording "If you attempt an overrun while mounted...", as well as this "funktioning as a single creature" implies to me, that it is (also) your action.
Macbrea 02-20-07, 09:06 AM	Actually, those tentacles are Conjuration (Creation) not Conjuration (Summoning). The creature takes normal damage from energy attacks (even nonmagical ones), spells, spell-like abilities, and supernatural abilities. How do spells like Evard’s black tentacles and ice storm affect a creature with damage reduction overcome by magic and bludgeoning? Do the tentacles and hailstones deal magical bludgeoning damage? Any damage dealt by a spell or other magical effect is unaffected by damage reduction. And if you read escaping a grapple.. Hmm, I may have errored. But I am not quite sure with the tentacles. Escape from Grapple You can escape a grapple by winning an opposed grapple check in place of making an attack. You can make an Escape Artist check in place of your grapple check if you so desire, but this requires a standard action. If more than one opponent is grappling you, your grapple check result has to beat all their individual check results to escape. (Opponents don’t have to try to hold you if they don’t want to.) If you escape, you finish the action by moving into any space adjacent to your opponent(s). Because the rules to movement state you are grappled in that square. Escaping moves you to the square adjacent to your opponent. The rules to a Move type Move action says if you haven't moved already in the turn you may move.
Rauul 02-20-07, 09:16 AM	You cannot compare it with other effects of similar kind. Just compare the 'standard action' command of a Rebuked Undead with the 'free action' command of Command Undead/Animate Dead. If we follow your logic, those two must be the same action but they ain't. In making it the same action we would directly go against a written rule. We can likewise assume that Animate Dead cannot be compared with a different spell. And of course, it won't be changed anyway. Hey you will hear no complaining from me.. hehe just remeber that when the evil cleric with undead comes to visit Harvey :) But I do agree with Simple commands.. IE a command should = a trick taught to a Animal (animal rembers it undead just does it once, then must be commanded to do it again ect..) Tricks don't equal feats thou... so sundering something on a charater leaves the undead open to Aoo, as does tripping ect.. But as a Evil cleric player who is Planning on Undead i would like to know what an Undead can do... Nightmare is a good touch (no winged flight) think it is about the only flying mount that can keep flying as a skeleton.. heheh
Maraxus 02-20-07, 09:19 AM	For the first part: Okay, the AQ says it. To me, this clearly says, that summoned creatures can overcome damage reduction, too (hey, the summon Monster spell says: "Effect: One summoned creature" so they are a spell-effect). But it's got to be okay. About the second part, however: Definitly not, that movement into a grapple and out of a grapple is allways free. - It's not even a 5 ft step. But beside that, where does the move - move action say, that you can't move if you allready have moved? The concept of a double move is, that you can do that (note, that there is no full round action called double move). Move The simplest move action is moving your speed. If you take this kind of move action during your turn, you can’t also take a 5-foot step. Well, but since you showed, that this mistake (-s?) did not happen through lazyness, I'll leave it to you to correct this or not. Just tell me, so I know, if it promising to wait, updating my sheet. :)
Macbrea 02-20-07, 09:32 AM	Actually, a double move is a move action with a replaced standard action for another move action. And while grappling you don't get a standard and a move action. As per the grapple rules: When you are grappling (regardless of who started the grapple), you can perform any of the following actions. Some of these actions take the place of an attack (rather than being a standard action or a move action). If your base attack bonus allows you multiple attacks, you can attempt one of these actions in place of each of your attacks, but at successively lower base attack bonuses. I did an escape the grapple action. Which states you move to the adjacent square. Now, what you could argue is Black Tentacles one creature that takes up a single 20ft radius area or a collection of tentacles that each take up their individual squares. I cannot make a ruling on that one it would require an elder decision. If it is a single entity then moving adjacent to the creature would move you out of the entire area of the spell with one escape artist check.
Maraxus 02-20-07, 10:08 AM	Tentacles are not creatures like that, they have a BAB and Strength and size but not space. Note, that you can't be in one space with another creature, unless one is helpless. For that reason, somebody escaping a grapple "pops out". Now, if the tentacles would have a space, then I would be forced 5 ft away after the grapple but then, I could not end in the same space as another tentacle (or creature) and would be moved to the next open space. Since tentacles do not have any space, however, there is no need to move me at all. And that you have a limited choise of actions in a grapple does not effect the fact that you have a standard + a move action, or a full round action. Standart action to escape grapple and move action to get away is a totally basic thing. Hehe, another good use for the Minor Creation: It looks like a normal quarterstaff but strikes true vs. any damage reduction. (In fact, that major creation lists how items of silver, adamantine and cold iron are made (or not made) is an indication for me, that the FAQ in that point is wrong, but of cause, I know we must life by some rules, even if they are wrong).
Macbrea 02-20-07, 10:23 AM	Actually, there is a few cases you can be in the same square as another opponent. You could trample them or you could be three sizes smaller then them. A creature with a base 40ft in diameter is at least Collosol in size. As a result a Small Fae could hang out in the same square as him. Without causing any real issues. WotC changed it's opinion of what items are effected by Damage reduction. Over the last few months. For awhile they said crystal shards were affected. Now, they have: Does damage reduction help against powers that deal slashing, piercing, or bludgeoning damage, such as crystal shard (Expanded Psionics Handbook, page 89)? Spells (and powers), spell-like abilities, and energy attacks ignore damage reduction (Dungeon Master’s Guide, page 292). Thus, even if a spell or power describes its damage as bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing, it is still a spell (or power) effect, and thus damage reduction does not apply (unless the spell or power’s description specifically states otherwise).
Macbrea 02-20-07, 10:29 AM	I think strictly reading the rules a monster summoned with Summon's Monster 1+. Would be a spell and because of such immune to damage reduction. In my actual campaign I can guarrentee I don't allow such foolishness. Summoned monster are real monsters not just magical copies of them.
Maraxus 02-20-07, 10:32 AM	And with "be in" you mean "move through" in both cases, while I mean "end in". (But even if - after a grapple - you would be moved into a space of another creature, you could still move away from there because moving in and out of a grapple is free) Yes, I know, that the rules say "spells/powers overcome damage reduction" at the moment. And if my only chance to fight that rule is, to get a spellcasting service to cast true creation for me to get a weapon, that can pierce any damage reduction, then I will have to think about this. ;) It's bad but it is the rule.
Macbrea 02-20-07, 10:46 AM	Odd, the grapple rules are wonky. 1) If your Grappled your considered in a grapple. 2) If you Grapple you are considered in a grapple. 3) Either way your only way to escape a grapple appears to be escape a grapple action. 4) if you pin an opponent your allowed to release a grapple, dropping both of you out of a grapple. Oddly, it appears to figure a DM will assume if both characters stop grappling that they drop the grapple for free. The Grappler has to escape a grapple to get away from the person they grappled.
hogarth 02-20-07, 10:52 AM	Oddly, it appears to figure a DM will assume if both characters stop grappling that they drop the grapple for free. The Grappler has to escape a grapple to get away from the person they grappled. The Sage talked about this in a Rules of the Game article (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20050308a). Release Your Hold: Curiously, the Player's Handbook says nothing about voluntarily relinquishing your hold on a foe, so here's a rule to cover that. You can release your foe as a free action. You are still considered to be grappling, however, unless your foe also decides to release you at same time. If your foe does not want to release you, you can escape by winning an opposed grapple check that you make instead of a melee attack. When you and your foe release each other, one of you must go to a space adjacent to the space the two of you once shared. The movement provokes attacks of opportunity from foes who threaten the space the character leaves, but the movement doesn't count against the character's speed for the current turn. If you made a successful opposed grapple check to end the grapple, you decide who moves. If you both decide to release each other, make an opposed grapple check and the winner decides who moves.
Macbrea 02-20-07, 11:00 AM	Ah, so according to that. Because he escaped he should move to beside the creature for free. I will edit the fight later tonight to move him ouside of the radius of the spell and proceed from there. I cannot do it at this point as I am at work. So, I also, need to apply all the damage from the summoned bats through the damage reduction. Unless they aren't considered spells?
Maraxus 02-20-07, 11:16 AM	Thanks for that. About the bats: That was definitly never meant to be, when the summon spells were written and was very likely still not meant to be, when the rule of "spells overcome damage reduction" was written but if only the most literal interpretation of the rules is, what concerns you, then you will have to do this. :) And don't forget, that nowhere in the rules it says, that a dead character can't take any actions. :D ;) Scnr.
Macbrea 02-20-07, 11:22 AM	Well, we can ask the question in the elders thread. And very likely they will make a common sense house rule stating that they are affected by the Damage reduction. Because, currently how the rules are written and how the FAQ reads they are spells. I agree fully with you that they where never meant to be counted as spells. Problem is they aren't called into being. They are images of the creatures that cannot be permanently killed. by the rules of Conjuration (Summoning) vs Conjuration (Calling).
TelinArtho 02-20-07, 11:25 AM	Thanks for that. About the bats: That was definitly never meant to be, when the summon spells were written and was very likely still not meant to be, when the rule of "spells overcome damage reduction" was written but if only the most literal interpretation of the rules is, what concerns you, then you will have to do this. :) And don't forget, that nowhere in the rules it says, that a dead character can't take any actions. :D ;) Scnr. Umm... A dying character immediately falls unconscious and can take no actions. If you are looking for a ruling against Summoned Creatures facing DR, even though I use summoned creatures frequently, I'd have to go with a "common sense" item here - and say that the summoned creature would not be able to ignore DR for its physical attacks. If you want a ruling saying that Black Tentacles ignores DR, I'd have to look into that further. In any case, bring it up in the courtroom when/if you are ready.
Zevox 02-20-07, 11:28 AM	@ Macbrea - Actually, no, even with the rules as written, summoned creatures aren't spells in and of themselves. The spells just conjure them - they're still monsters. If you want proof (outside of the common sense that the Summon Monster spells don't say the monsters they summon aren't monsters but magical replicas), take a look at the Detect Magic spell - it mentions that Outsiders and Elementals are not magical in their own right, but if they are summoned, the spell that summoned them is detected by the spell. Not them, the conjuration spell. Which means they are distinct from it; i.e. not a spell. Zevox
Maraxus 02-20-07, 11:42 AM	@ Macbrea - Actually, no, even with the rules as written, summoned creatures aren't spells in and of themselves. The spells just conjure them - they're still monsters. If you want proof (outside of the common sense that the Summon Monster spells don't say the monsters they summon aren't monsters but magical replicas), take a look at the Detect Magic spell - it mentions that Outsiders and Elementals are not magical in their own right, but if they are summoned, the spell that summoned them is detected by the spell. Not them, the conjuration spell. Which means they are distinct from it; i.e. not a spell. Zevox Okay, that is great. I like that. We all do. But now tell me, where is the diffrence to Black Tentacles? They are also not the spell itself, just the result. This spell conjures a field of ... ...Treat the tentacles attacking a particular target as a Large creature with a base attack bonus equal to your caster level and a Strength score of 19.... Any rule that says... Summons: No Tentacles: Yes True creation: Maybe ...will be quite cumbersome. I'd like to hear it.
Erithmu 02-20-07, 12:11 PM	I'd also like to thank Rith for running this fight even though he has adepted Hood's tactic to a huge extend. Were his tactics be followed as written, the fight would have been over much quicker. You adapt not having any quivers ... it would be like Harvey rolling a 1! on a saving throw vs Fireball and having his wand go Pop with tactics that use it as a primary means of dealing damage. @TM: I know you haven't said anything here (I know you had limited time), but I am out of physical time to rerun anything major. Minor maybe, but not major. Although I would appreciate any comments if nothing else but for improvement as a pitlord.
SauroGrenom 02-20-07, 12:43 PM	Maraxus and MWB, The weekend got away from me, but I've started your fight already. I think I'll be able to finish it this evening when I get home after work. Cheers, Sauro
waywreth 02-20-07, 12:57 PM	Gakhnalak vs Matthis Can be seen here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11505937&postcount=576).. dice rolls linked.. Matthis, i swear to god my dice have a love hate relationship with you.. near max damage for you, yet allows him to hit the right image.. .. Sorry man.. Seems to be quite a bit more hate than love! No worries though, having a bad power rating won't affect him anyway, and wizards are better at higher levels. I don't plan to take the only required feat in the CoCo.
MitzaVolchenko 02-20-07, 01:47 PM	@ All...working on it...real world and a lot of pain have me far behind schedule.
McJarvis 02-20-07, 02:04 PM	Tamis Ruhl (NiQil) vs. The Artificer of Gladius (McJarvis) [ECL 3] Done and here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11506028&postcount=577)... a one sided fight, outrun and pecked to death with magic missiles.. gawd i forgot to manifest your force screen and Prescience Offensive.. let me know if you want me to redo it with them or leave it and save you 2 PP's.. Thanks for running the fight! No complaints on this end.((Hey! I have yet another ECL 4 character! :D))
sonofzeal 02-20-07, 02:05 PM	@ All...working on it...real world and a lot of pain have me far behind schedule. Thanks for the heads up. If/when you know when you'll have time to run my fight, let me know?
Abyssal Stalker 02-20-07, 02:10 PM	Ihdald vs Relanex is done. Link.
Macbrea 02-20-07, 02:17 PM	I noticed Rewards are wrong. Ihdald grants Relanex +25% bonus for allies and Relanex gains +29% for political career. 2100/3 = 700 x 1.54 = 1078 xp and 1325.94gp Ihdald should gain 2100 x .75 = 1575xp and 1937.25gp
Abyssal Stalker 02-20-07, 02:20 PM	Like you didn't remind me with the PM. Sorry about that. Fixed.
Macbrea 02-20-07, 02:21 PM	Yeah, I know.. he wins the fight and almost gains less then Relanex.. :P
hogarth 02-20-07, 02:32 PM	MitzaVolchenko: There's no rush to fix this, but I think Balthazar Picsou's loser rewards were a little too high in his fight. He's listed as getting 472 xp, 472.5 gp, but I believe it should be 300 * (1 + 0.25 + 0.26) = 453 xp/gp.
MitzaVolchenko 02-20-07, 02:40 PM	MitzaVolchenko: There's no rush to fix this, but I think Balthazar Picsou's loser rewards were a little too high in his fight. He's listed as getting 472 xp, 472.5 gp, but I believe it should be 300 * (1 + 0.25 + 0.26) = 453 xp/gp. 300*1.25=375*1.26=472.5 As Iunderstand it the bonus comes afte reward is figured as normal for the fight.
TelinArtho 02-20-07, 02:42 PM	300*1.25=375*1.26=472.5 As Iunderstand it the bonus comes afte reward is figured as normal for the fight. That was clarified via PM in another instance. I can tell you for certain that you should add all of the % changes together before applying them to the reward.
MitzaVolchenko 02-20-07, 02:51 PM	That was clarified via PM in another instance. I can tell you for certain that you should add all of the % changes together before applying them to the reward. I'll fix it later...and sheesh am I tired of trying to decipher the rewards rules and just about every other rule at the moment. thanks for the clarification. At the moment I am taking more drugs and laying back down. All tactics for my fights are posted if anyone feels like picking up a fight. I thought the first round of painkillers was going to be sufficient.
Zevox 02-20-07, 03:14 PM	I noticed Rewards are wrong. Ihdald grants Relanex +25% bonus for allies and Relanex gains +29% for political career. 2100/3 = 700 x 1.54 = 1078 xp and 1325.94gp Ihdald should gain 2100 x .75 = 1575xp and 1937.25gp Actually Mac, Ihdald's ally is only CR 3, so at level 7 he should just give him a 15% adjustment (3CR/5CA x 25 = 15). So: Relanex: 700x1.44 = 1,008 xp and 866x1.44 = 1,247 gp. Ihdald: 2,100x.85 = 1,785 xp and 2600x.85 = 2,210 gp. Zevox
Macbrea 02-20-07, 03:17 PM	Heh.. just going with what his tactics said. Ah, well. will re-edit Relanex when the rewards are correct.
Milov 02-20-07, 03:36 PM	Apart from my misunderstanding of how ally penalties work, I've a question. I want to have Ihdald's dire ape learn how to grapple an opponent on command, can I just teach him a "Grapple" trick in that case, or is there some specific trick that must be taught instead?
TelinArtho 02-20-07, 03:39 PM	Grapple would certainly do the trick. Personally - I prefer the Pin trick. Granted it won't allow you to pick and choose between grapple and pinning - but I generally find pinning to be OH so useful...
Zevox 02-20-07, 03:51 PM	@ Mitza/Hirumajoe - I PMed this to Mitza, but just to make sure she sees it and Hirumajoe knows its coming, I'm having Istima surrender his fight Valen. With how many fights Mitza has to run, how complex that one is likely to be, and how long we've been in it, its just not worth either having it run before the time limit this week or going into yet another week on it. Besides, I want Istima to get through his current cycle (and to ECL 8) in time to team with my brother's Sea Elf Ihdald for the Iron Man, and the window on that is rapidly closing. Can't afford to lose another week on it if I want him through his cycle in time. Zevox
Hirumajoe 02-20-07, 04:46 PM	@ Mitza/Hirumajoe - I PMed this to Mitza, but just to make sure she sees it and Hirumajoe knows its coming, I'm having Istima surrender his fight Valen. With how many fights Mitza has to run, how complex that one is likely to be, and how long we've been in it, its just not worth either having it run before the time limit this week or going into yet another week on it. Besides, I want Istima to get through his current cycle (and to ECL 8) in time to team with my brother's Sea Elf Ihdald for the Iron Man, and the window on that is rapidly closing. Can't afford to lose another week on it if I want him through his cycle in time. Zevox I hear ya. Sorry the fight seemed to get dragged out for so long. On the bright side, with 22 extra pp, you should have good odds of winning your next fight. I hope you do get him leveled for the Iron Man. He's a solid gladiator.
MindWandererB 02-20-07, 05:13 PM	Actually, there is a few cases you can be in the same square as another opponent. You could trample them or you could be three sizes smaller then them. A creature with a base 40ft in diameter is at least Collosol in size. As a result a Small Fae could hang out in the same square as him. Without causing any real issues. WotC changed it's opinion of what items are effected by Damage reduction. Over the last few months. For awhile they said crystal shards were affected. Now, they have: Does damage reduction help against powers that deal slashing, piercing, or bludgeoning damage, such as crystal shard (Expanded Psionics Handbook, page 89)? Spells (and powers), spell-like abilities, and energy attacks ignore damage reduction (Dungeon Master’s Guide, page 292). Thus, even if a spell or power describes its damage as bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing, it is still a spell (or power) effect, and thus damage reduction does not apply (unless the spell or power’s description specifically states otherwise). Actually, itwas the other way around. The FAQ rather quickly stated what you have quoted. However, Complete Psionic and a few other sources have "officially" stated that any spell that deals slashing, piercing, or bludgeoning damage is affected by DR. Since the errata in Complete Psionic isn't part of the errata document, it leaves us in an awkward position.
hogarth 02-20-07, 05:30 PM	--
TheMagister 02-20-07, 06:13 PM	You adapt not having any quivers ... it would be like Harvey rolling a 1! on a saving throw vs Fireball and having his wand go Pop with tactics that use it as a primary means of dealing damage. @TM: I know you haven't said anything here (I know you had limited time), but I am out of physical time to rerun anything major. Minor maybe, but not major. Although I would appreciate any comments if nothing else but for improvement as a pitlord. Thanks for running the fight, 'Rith! Other than the "Can a skeleton sunder?" question, I only have three problems with the fight. A) In round 2 and round 3: The AC of Hood's quiver is 20. "How?" you ask? Hood's new trick! 1) Always ride for cover. B) I'm pretty sure that trying to sunder when you don't have the Improved Sunder feat provokes an AoO from the target of the sunder and anyone else who threatens you and is an enemy. I know Hood is owed a couple of gauntlet punches (which deal piercing damage and are subject to DR, and probably won't affect anything, but should be there for the sake of completeness and the capriciousness of the dice). Shouldn't Hope also get a couple of kicks in at Knellstriker while the skelliehorse is hunting quivers? C) Round 4: isn't Hope owed an AoO when Knellstriker moves away? I had a brief moment when I wondered, "If Hood has all that free time, why on earth didn't he take a moment to search for the seeking arrows while he was picking them up?", but I'm not going to be that picky UNLESS he has surviving quivers. In that case, yeah, I'd think that Hood would want to take a round or two to locate his seeking arrows and set up his rapid shot assault tactic again. Well, that's all I've got. It was very well run, 'Rith. Why no maps? I like those maps... TM
Sjiggie 02-20-07, 06:35 PM	I'm sorry but I have no time to run my fight anymore. I had planned to get it done on the weekend but work called me and I had to work 2 extra shifts so that left me with no time to run the fight. I'm really tired right now just got back from work and have to get up in 7 hours again. I will post the tactics here if somebody can pick this fight up. Thanks Sjiggie Start as close to center as possible, holding scythe with one hand, potion of shield of faith in the other. Rd. 1: Drink potion, draw oil of magic weapon. Rd. 2: Apply oil onto the scythe, move toward center. Rd. 3-?: Get to center, and find Rauul. Once Rauul is found... -RAGE! -Charge asap. Basing is good. -Hack him up. If, he manages to stay at a range for 3-4 straight rounds after being seen.... -Fire Energy Ray if close enough. Otherwise ranged attack with bow. OR IF NOT CLOSE ENOUGH -Switch to bow and fire away. That's it. Thanks for running the fight! With all due respect, Milov Ok this is my last fight of the cycle... win or loose Darkstar gets to level and this is his last fight of the cycle so all gloves are off OK Second battle vs the Bug.. So lets try something different.. 1) Draw crossbow.. Use scroll of magic weapon at the crossbow 2) double move to the center, crossbow loaded and ready for him when in the center, Start moving counter clockwise around the center till i spot him, trying to draw no Aoo's but Rauul is not hiding.. once spotted if within 130ft, cast Doom on him, and then Move towards him.. Fire the crossbow even at range, to try to get him in close.. If i can get close to him, Spontaniusly cast "Inflict moderate wounds" and attempt to grapple him with the touch spell.. IF at all possable, drop back 5ft and use wand of clw if i get below 10 hp's.. Use Wand as much as needed.. Only thing i ask is that Rauul shows no mercy.. Thank you for Pitlording, and have fun..
Caterane 02-20-07, 06:41 PM	@TM: Rith already adepted your tactics tremendously which basically broke down on round 3. Additionally, there are several mistakes in executing my tactics in there. I haven't said anything because I know it's a hell of work but I can start to list them all here. From the top of my head... ...the elemental should not have been in LOS (I explicitely mentioned it; even added a map) thus it would have survived the battle. ...the elemental while in whirlwind stopped in your square instead of executing my tactic (getting your psicrystal+arrows and deliver them into the acid pool). ...Hood withdrawing ...Hood attacking my allies ...Hood manifesting Dissolving Weapon ...Hood manifesting Vigor+30 and so on and so on. There are many other such things in this fight. I'd say be glad that Rith took over your character when your tactic was ready for the trashcan on round 3. From there on I battled Rith, not you.
Erithmu 02-20-07, 06:42 PM	Thanks for running the fight, 'Rith! Other than the "Can a skeleton sunder?" question, I only have three problems with the fight. A) In round 2 and round 3: The AC of Hood's quiver is 20. "How?" you ask? Hood's new trick! B) I'm pretty sure that trying to sunder when you don't have the Improved Sunder feat provokes an AoO from the target of the sunder and anyone else who threatens you and is an enemy. I know Hood is owed a couple of gauntlet punches (which deal piercing damage and are subject to DR, and probably won't affect anything, but should be there for the sake of completeness and the capriciousness of the dice). Shouldn't Hope also get a couple of kicks in at Knellstriker while the skelliehorse is hunting quivers? C) Round 4: isn't Hope owed an AoO when Knellstriker moves away? I had a brief moment when I wondered, "If Hood has all that free time, why on earth didn't he take a moment to search for the seeking arrows while he was picking them up?", but I'm not going to be that picky UNLESS he has surviving quivers. In that case, yeah, I'd think that Hood would want to take a round or two to locate his seeking arrows and set up his rapid shot assault tactic again. Well, that's all I've got. It was very well run, 'Rith. Why no maps? I like those maps... TM A) I thought about it, but in the sunder item the AC was listed as size bonus + Dex of rider + 10. I mean ... even defection doesn't play a part in it. That is my take on it. B) Sunder states only the target draws an AoO, Since the quivers are an extension of Hood, I gave (or didn't give) Hood the AoOs. I can see one punch for the first and last sunders, but the middle one where you are provoking, two hands on bow. I can roll these if you Really want me to, but I don't see a major change in the fight result because of it. C) Withdraw action D) I thought about this, but then again all the arrows were in the open where Harvey could see you. Not to mention that one of those squares is water. That and there are 100+ of them. I'm not even sure what the search check would be to find it. Maps) *shrugs* never have done them, I use the mapper during the fight to get positions and stuff, but I never post maps since I keep coordinates. EDIT: @Cat: I can speak for myself thank you ...
Caterane 02-20-07, 06:51 PM	@Rith: Sorry. My nervous tension... you know :D
TheMagister 02-20-07, 07:06 PM	Thanks for being so prompt! In regards to A): deflection may or may not (it doesn't matter here), but cover certainly would. If (for the sake of making my point) Hood were behind Hope and Knellstriker had a 15' reach, the quiver would gain a +4 cover bonus to AC, wouldn't it? B) No major change unless Hood rolls (1d4+2-5=1) max damage on both punches. This would reduce Knellstriker to 0 HP and destroy him earlier, which might allow me to attack Harvey at an earlier point. C) Okie-fine. D) I think I understand. Lacking a map or the desire to reconstruct the fight in the mapper so as to nit-pick every detail, I really didn't understand where the arrows were (having been in a whirlwind, I figured there were scattered over a 10' area). I'm sure you did your best with that situation. @Cat: I'm really flattered to be evoking such responses from you. Easy, tiger... TM
TheMagister 02-20-07, 07:14 PM	The Harvester meditates to form a wall of spirits around him that block incoming missiles. He gives up on his portfolio to double the duration of a spell. (Exchange Extend Spell with Deflect Arrows). I need an Elder who sets a credit cost and confirms this. {laughs} :cool:
Zevox 02-21-07, 12:01 AM	@ Mitza/Hirumajoe - I PMed this to Mitza, but just to make sure she sees it and Hirumajoe knows its coming, I'm having Istima surrender his fight Valen. With how many fights Mitza has to run, how complex that one is likely to be, and how long we've been in it, its just not worth either having it run before the time limit this week or going into yet another week on it. Besides, I want Istima to get through his current cycle (and to ECL 8) in time to team with my brother's Sea Elf Ihdald for the Iron Man, and the window on that is rapidly closing. Can't afford to lose another week on it if I want him through his cycle in time. Zevox So, since Mitza hasn't shown back up yet, anyone care to post this? I'll be in class all tomorrow morning and most of the afternoon, so I'll have limited chances to update Istima tomorrow. The setup is here, so it'd only take a moment. Zevox
MindWandererB 02-21-07, 12:13 AM	So, since Mitza hasn't shown back up yet, anyone care to post this? I'll be in class all tomorrow morning and most of the afternoon, so I'll have limited chances to update Istima tomorrow. The setup is here, so it'd only take a moment. Zevox I'll handle it. Edit: Done.
Zevox 02-21-07, 12:49 AM	Muchas gracias MWB. :) Zevox
NiQil 02-21-07, 12:51 AM	Hi ho, hi ho, it's on to week 3 we go.... (heard being sung in unison by a drunken Blizzard and Ghashara in closing down the Tavern)
MindWandererB 02-21-07, 01:00 AM	Hi ho, hi ho, it's on to week 3 we go.... (heard being sung in unison by a drunken Blizzard and Ghashara in closing down the Tavern) Phht. At least you're in a duel. Maya's been stuck in a little temple with three shocker lizards for three weeks. Speaking of which, might as well hash this out now as any other time. Mitza and I disagreed about how the shocker lizards' Lethal Shock ability works. Quoted for your convenience:Lethal Shock (Su): Whenever two or more shocker lizards are within 20 feet of each other, they can work together to create a lethal shock. This effect has a radius of 20 feet, centered on any one contributing lizard. The shock deals 2d8 points of electricity damage for each lizard contributing to it, to a maximum of 12d8. A Reflex save (DC 10 + number of lizards contributing) reduces the damage by half.I interpreted this to mean that each of the two or more lizards need to use a standard action to produce one shock (so basically, the only advantages to having more than one lizard are the increased area of effect, save DC, and changing the damage from nonlethal to lethal). Mitza felt that as long as the lizards were within 20 feet of each other, each one could take a standard action to produce a shock. So three lizards could do a total of 18d8 damage in one round, if they each did this. For the partial fight that's posted, we went with a compromise: it takes a standard action from each participant, but they can center it on a lizard that isn't actually contributing (so one lizard was able to double-move to within 20 feet of Maya, and the other two were able to single-move to within 20 feet of the first one, and hit her that way with a 4d8 shock). I don't agree with her interpretation, or even with the compromise, but since it looks like she won't be finishing it, I'd like to have some opinions in case the next pitlord I get agrees with her original stance.
NiQil 02-21-07, 01:24 AM	I would agree with your interpretation. My problem with Mitza's reasoning (as you have explained it above, anyway), is that in order to produce the shock, the others around the central lizard must contribute their shocks, and therefore would not be able to produce one of their own, which would be required for her reasoning to work. It's kind of like the difference between pouring two different liquids down a funnel to mix them at a focul point (your interpretation) vs having those two liquids move back and forth through the funnel to their original contributers (her interpretation). Maybe that's a bad analogy, but it's the best I have this close to bedtime LOL.
Abyssal Stalker 02-21-07, 01:45 AM	Heh.. just going with what his tactics said. Ah, well. will re-edit Relanex when the rewards are correct. Edited, once more.
Vathelokai 02-21-07, 02:17 AM	Loddick Saffrion vs 4 tiefling wizards This is quite possibly the most intense battle I've ever run. Difficult, but I enjoyed it. I do have one complaint for the elders; It's a real pain to have monsters like this on the rolls. Not only did I have a super-crazy fight to run, I had to make 4 characters from scratch before I could even run it.
SauroGrenom 02-21-07, 02:30 AM	Not what I expected for an outcome considering the tactics I got, but this fight is done now.
templer10 02-21-07, 02:31 AM	At the moment I am taking more drugs and laying back down. All tactics for my fights are posted if anyone feels like picking up a fight. I thought the first round of painkillers was going to be sufficient. anyone feel like picking up the ECL 3 fight between liardes the grey and haji? (found here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11535952&postcount=585)) ty
Rauul 02-21-07, 03:04 AM	anyone feel like picking up the ECL 3 fight between liardes the grey and haji? (found here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11535952&postcount=585)) ty Gonna try... she is where she can answer questions.. In pain but able to help..
Rauul 02-21-07, 03:07 AM	Ok end fight and results here... (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11543543&postcount=592) Only 1 comment... BBQ Dwarf....
NiQil 02-21-07, 07:38 AM	Ok end fight and results here... (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11543543&postcount=592) Only 1 comment... BBQ Dwarf.... One problem...when starting with at least 20 ft of running room, the DC for the jump is only 5, because it is only 5 ft across that he is jumping, and Blizzard made it. There was a reason I specified to stop where I did.....I can't *not make the jump at that DC. So this will need to be edited. Long Jump Distance Jump DC1 5 feet 5 10 feet 10 15 feet 15 20 feet 20 25 feet 25 30 feet 30 1 Requires a 20-foot running start. Without a running start, double the DC.
Hirumajoe 02-21-07, 08:28 AM	Does someone other than Zevox or myself want to post Istima's surrender to Valen (ECL 7 Fight) (as indicated previously in this thread) to avoid going into week 4? I'm not sure if Mitza is going to be on before the deadline.
Zevox 02-21-07, 08:32 AM	Does someone other than Zevox or myself want to post Istima's surrender to Valen (ECL 7 Fight) (as indicated previously in this thread) to avoid going into week 4? I'm not sure if Mitza is going to be on before the deadline. MWB did it already - take a look about ten or so posts up. Zevox
Maraxus 02-21-07, 08:41 AM	Not what I expected for an outcome considering the tactics I got, but this fight is done now. Zassl officially declares d100s to be mean things that are not on the list of Kobold-friends, but he does like all those little d4s and the d20s were very nice in this fight, too. If he was exhausted or enfeebled, I could have seen him dying in the web while I pepper missles from outside, but with that lot of strength, there was quite some luck involved. Damn, if I had known before writing tactics, that my Black Tentacles could have hurt him ... Nah - wouldn't necessarily have made any diffrence.
Hirumajoe 02-21-07, 09:57 AM	MWB did it already - take a look about ten or so posts up. Zevox I am apparently blind... Thanks.
TelinArtho 02-21-07, 10:09 AM	Any sight or sound from Etiquette Gnome? Just curious...
TelinArtho 02-21-07, 10:14 AM	I'm going to see what I can do with some of the posted leftover fights. I'll start with Maya's fight and see how far I get.
McJarvis 02-21-07, 10:17 AM	Any sight or sound from Etiquette Gnome? Just curious... I have not heard from him, but I am in no particular hurry to get our fight done. Unless you want to concede, since I have the obviously better character.(ie-> my character has artwork! Lovingly stolen from my favorite video game...)
Erithmu 02-21-07, 10:26 AM	Loddick Saffrion vs 4 tiefling wizards This is quite possibly the most intense battle I've ever run. Difficult, but I enjoyed it. I do have one complaint for the elders; It's a real pain to have monsters like this on the rolls. Not only did I have a super-crazy fight to run, I had to make 4 characters from scratch before I could even run it. Yea... Loddicks bane came out again, Glad I over came it this time. Rewards would be nice, and I'll tweak my sheet if I got them wrong. He just needs to be ready this week.
TelinArtho 02-21-07, 10:31 AM	I have not heard from him, but I am in no particular hurry to get our fight done. Unless you want to concede, since I have the obviously better character.(ie-> my character has artwork! Lovingly stolen from my favorite video game...) Nah - I'm not that hopeless... I was just curious. @MWB - I noticed some errors in the first few rounds of the Maya fight, so I need to fix those before going on. (For example, Maya's seemingly random HP total and the total PP used)
McJarvis 02-21-07, 10:38 AM	Nah - I'm not that hopeless... In all honesty, this fight has me more worried than any of TIM's previous fights. I can see how getting into higher levels and facing off against more experienced opponents is more exciting :) (I can scarely imagine what it'll be like after I'm out of the suck-leagues)
TelinArtho 02-21-07, 10:43 AM	Ironically enough though Ilendil really isn't that much of an opponent... still if I get lucky on a couple or three rolls - you're toast...
McJarvis 02-21-07, 11:13 AM	Ironically enough though Ilendil really isn't that much of an opponent... still if I get lucky on a couple or three rolls - you're toast... Which is more than most(if not all?) of my previous opponents have been able to say. Poison is one thing that I really didn't design a defense against in TIM-> and his alpha-striking capabilities is rather effective at these low levels.
TelinArtho 02-21-07, 12:33 PM	Maya Redwine (MindwandererB) vs 3 Shocker Lizards (unknown monster) is up. Anyone who would like to complain about my decision here can take it up with me later...
McJarvis 02-21-07, 12:35 PM	Maya Redwine (MindwandererB) vs 3 Shocker Lizards (unknown monster) is up. Anyone who would like to complain about my decision here can take it up with me later... Thanks for doing this. I have vested interests in getting Maya out of limbo :)
TheMagister 02-21-07, 02:04 PM	In regards to A): deflection may or may not (it doesn't matter here), but cover certainly would. If (for the sake of making my point) Hood were behind Hope and Knellstriker had a 15' reach, the quiver would gain a +4 cover bonus to AC, wouldn't it? B) No major change unless Hood rolls (1d4+2-5=1) max damage on both punches. This would reduce Knellstriker to 0 HP and destroy him earlier, which might allow me to attack Harvey at an earlier point. Any response to these concerns, 'Rith? While I have already edited Hood's sheet and set him ready for next week, I would still appreciate an answer... TM
Erithmu 02-21-07, 02:39 PM	Any response to these concerns, 'Rith? While I have already edited Hood's sheet and set him ready for next week, I would still appreciate an answer... TMUmm .. School is kicking my rear this week? Apologies: A) I have no concrete answer to this one ... I can see it both ways, and made a pitlord decision. My reasoning is that Sunder didn't list that it is treated like a 'normal' AC, just the specifics. Regarding the 15ft reach option: I'm not sure again. In a home game as a DM I would rule differently than I do here in the CoCo. In the CoCo, I would probably end up at the very literal translation of Sunder vs Object AC and run it the same way. I try to keep very aware of the difference between DMing by myself (Home) and DMing with everyone else (CoCo). Rulings here have the tendency to get lost in the mix of the chaos of 4 common discussions. B) I 'just' rolled them, you missed once. I should have done this initially, I just have had little time this week, and as a result my thinking and actions don't always put two and two together.
MindWandererB 02-21-07, 02:45 PM	Not what I expected for an outcome considering the tactics I got, but this fight is done now. I do have some criticisms, but in the interests of time I will accept the loss. The one thing that does need to be corrected is the rewards: Zassl brought Ossf, which results in a +/- 4.167% rewards modifier. The other big ommission was the tattoo of Chameleon. An extra +10 Hide would have made a difference in whether Zassl would have had a target for his Magic Missiles. However, it was really those failed Str checks vs. the Web that did it--I think that actually worked better than any Black Tentacles would have. Also, Zassl was only on Fight 2, so stabilization checks were needed for Ossf, to see if he made it to Fight 3. @Telin: Thanks! Edit: Rewards are off. Three CR 2 monsters for ECL 4 is 1800 xp/gp, -12.5% = 1575 gp/xp. Please correct at your leisure.