| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| TelinArtho02-21-07, 01:03 PM | Fights of the Week: February 21st 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 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! |
| Tellish_of_Ket02-21-07, 03:00 PM | ...and the last few seconds have ticked away. Are we all ready for more blood and mayhem? Tellish |
| sonofzeal02-21-07, 03:10 PM | ...and the last few seconds have ticked away. Are we all ready for more blood and mayhem? Tellish I'm still waiting for my first taste. *sniffles* :weep: |
| hogarth02-21-07, 03:11 PM | I'm still waiting for my first taste. *sniffles* :weep: This is what we call the "trial by fire". If you're still interested after this, you'll probably be hooked for a good, long while. :D |
| Guildmaster_LOY02-21-07, 03:16 PM | ...and the last few seconds have ticked away. Are we all ready for more blood and mayhem? Tellish My opponents better be, at the very least! :) |
| TelinArtho02-21-07, 04:33 PM | I just love how I got penalized two credits for the miniquest operation that was assigned to me last week... @Cat - can I get those credits back - Mitza has only been online to say she doesn't have the time. If not - I could always have her surrender (I'm just kidding of course). I would also like some consideration for the full mission with Zevox and Mitza - since it is entirely possible that I need to depart due to the birth of my son. Since I didn't sign up for either of these, I think both of these requests are within reason... EDIT - well I mixed the mission and operation up - but you get the point. Mitza wasn't online enough to even post - so unless I'm supposed to hand out auto-losses for guild operations and missions, I'd like some consideration to my credit total... |
| Milov02-21-07, 06:07 PM | This is what we call the "trial by fire". If you're still interested after this, you'll probably be hooked for a good, long while. :D I can vouch for that. I tried it awhile ago... I've been active basically every week since ;) |
| McJarvis02-21-07, 06:22 PM | *whew*..don't have to face Telin's little ally-mancer in the ECL 4 bracket. :-) (these are bad for MM wand users...hah) /me goes to look at his real opponent. |
| Zevox02-21-07, 06:28 PM | Istima Telarc (Zevox) vs. Valen Sky (Hirumajoe) : SauroGrenom [Cavern] Oh, the irony. Well, at least we got a new map. Ihdald Seaslash (Milov) vs. The Harvester (Caterane) : Maraxus [Cavern] Oh, the pain. I wish you all the luck in the world hermano. It won't be enough, but I wish it to you nonetheless. @ My pitlords - Tactics should be out tonight. Zevox |
| Pitlords02-21-07, 06:29 PM | Pairings done @Telin: Either surrender or the other player takes over, in any case I need to be informed. I'll redock your credits but please keep that in mind. |
| Zevox02-21-07, 06:42 PM | @ Pitlords - Just noticed you have Rauul as Featylec's ML for his mission, but if you look at his title line Sauro has already agreed to do this. No need for the randomly chosen one. Zevox |
| MindWandererB02-21-07, 06:54 PM | @Pitlords: Similarly, Vath is signed up to do the Vandelar/Aerryl mission, as indicated in the title lines. |
| Erithmu02-21-07, 06:57 PM | Wheew .. that works well for me since I have a busy school week. Please don't gimme another task this week. @Iced: Solan's Mission |
| Milov02-21-07, 07:21 PM | Ihdald Seaslash (Milov) vs. The Harvester (Caterane) : Maraxus [Cavern] Well well, my first level 8 beating... And my first fight against Cat. Well, here we go... tactics out soon Maraxus... |
| Eluria02-21-07, 07:33 PM | @TM: Tactics for Qwogi sent. Be gentle. @Rauul: Tactics for Mohmat sent. @NiQil: I have a feeling with your plethora of new ECL3's, I'll be seeing you across the battlefield quite a bit... good luck! |
| Rauul02-21-07, 07:37 PM | @ Pitlords - Just noticed you have Rauul as Featylec's ML for his mission, but if you look at his title line Sauro has already agreed to do this. No need for the randomly chosen one. Zevox *blinks* I only have 2 fights this week, and none involve Featylec.. Unless i am missing something and or it was changed before i woke up.. heh i don't even have to right my own tactics since I have 1 held over and the other I didn't wake up intime to update the sheet.. let me know if i am missing something.. |
| MindWandererB02-21-07, 07:39 PM | *blinks* I only have 2 fights this week, and none involve Featylec.. Unless i am missing something and or it was changed before i woke up.. heh i don't even have to right my own tactics since I have 1 held over and the other I didn't wake up intime to update the sheet.. let me know if i am missing something.. Yup, it's fixed already. |
| Zevox02-21-07, 07:51 PM | *blinks* I only have 2 fights this week, and none involve Featylec.. Unless i am missing something and or it was changed before i woke up.. heh i don't even have to right my own tactics since I have 1 held over and the other I didn't wake up intime to update the sheet.. let me know if i am missing something.. Its in the quests/missions section of the pairings. Its been changed now (thank you Pitlords!), but you had been assigned to run the mission for Featylec Elendi. Apparently, silly as it sounds, those are getting passed out at random nowadays... Zevox |
| Milov02-21-07, 08:12 PM | Alright, tactics for Ihdald in his fight* against Harvester are out... *=Fight in this sentence is being used as a substitution for "vague attempt at survival". |
| Vathelokai02-21-07, 08:18 PM | @Pitlords: Auburn vs Noko was finished in week 2; here. However it was not reposted after it was finished. Also, Auburn is continuing crafting for week 2 of 3. |
| False_Keraptis02-21-07, 08:37 PM | Fnorri the Miser (False_Keraptis) scribes two scrolls of scorching ray [CL3] and a scroll of reduce person [CL1] [Week 1/1] @Pitlords: Um, actually Fnorri's crafting four total scrolls of scorching ray [cl3] - he's making two scrolls, each with two castings on it. Thanks. |
| Zevox02-21-07, 08:38 PM | @ TM - Tactics for Ceilia Durrol (vs Izumi) PMed. Looking forward to trying out all her new spells :plotting:. @ Sauro - Tactics for Istima Telarc (vs Valen Sky) PMed. Hope I made that one much easier on you than the match they were supposed to have the past 3 weeks would have been. ... hm, irony. Both of my arena-active characters are being pitlorded by their Guildmasters this week. Zevox |
| False_Keraptis02-21-07, 08:46 PM | @Rauul: Tactics for Gundmir will be forthcoming tomorrow. @McJarvis: Oh dear, paired with a McJarvis creation, what a rude reawakening! Don't write Gundmir off yet though, I've got a couple options. |
| McJarvis02-21-07, 08:58 PM | @Rauul: Tactics for Gundmir will be forthcoming tomorrow. @McJarvis: Oh dear, paired with a McJarvis creation, what a rude reawakening! Don't write Gundmir off yet though, I've got a couple options. Yeah, major props to you for being able to pose TAG's greatest threat yet :) [[Do I say this about every fight? hmmmm.....]] edit-> Thanks for feeding my ego, btw. Nobody around here ever does...all these old farts have probably seen all my tricks. :rolleyes: |
| hogarth02-21-07, 09:47 PM | @nickbeat: Tactics sent for Balthazar Picsou (such as they are). |
| NiQil02-21-07, 11:05 PM | @ Rauul: Tactics for Tamis Ruhl sent via PM @ nickbeat: Tactics for Truls Rohk sent via PM @ TheMagister: Tactics for Tyden Rayn sent via PM @ everyone: For those of you running fights, make sure when you are doing fight summaries that you are using the required template listed in the rules thread. It was designed that way so that players can just cut and paste it right onto their sheets. This is a required aspect of pitlording, and I am seeing more and more parties not using it. |
| Rauul02-22-07, 01:22 AM | Its in the quests/missions section of the pairings. Its been changed now (thank you Pitlords!), but you had been assigned to run the mission for Featylec Elendi. Apparently, silly as it sounds, those are getting passed out at random nowadays... Zevox Ok... well i dun have a problem running a miniquest... except that i have never been in or or run one on here... so i would be totally lost.. heck i have barely started reading about the quests.. Not to say i dun have ideas :) So if a The Boss Pitlords reads this Please no quest things till i have been on one... thank you.. |
| Zevox02-22-07, 01:29 AM | Ok... well i dun have a problem running a miniquest... except that i have never been in or or run one on here... so i would be totally lost.. heck i have barely started reading about the quests.. Not to say i dun have ideas :) So if a The Boss Pitlords reads this Please no quest things till i have been on one... thank you.. Actually, a mission is a full 3-week quest, not a miniquest. So, yeah, thats a little more commitment than a miniquest (hence why I'm not fond of the idea of randomly assigning them). Zevox |
| Rauul02-22-07, 01:30 AM | @ everyone: For those of you running fights, make sure when you are doing fight summaries that you are using the required template listed in the rules thread. It was designed that way so that players can just cut and paste it right onto their sheets. This is a required aspect of pitlording, and I am seeing more and more parties not using it. NiQuil.. i tried to tell you that the link to the fight template in the first post of this is unusable... so please either fix it or give me a working link to the template... -Thank you |
| Rauul02-22-07, 01:31 AM | Actually, a mission is a full 3-week quest, not a miniquest. So, yeah, thats a little more commitment than a miniquest (hence why I'm not fond of the idea of randomly assigning them). Zevox Ouch.. yea well i would need to read up on that... So yea NO Quests for this crackmonkey yet... gimme a week or 2.. i will try to get up to speed on that.. |
| NiQil02-22-07, 01:53 AM | NiQuil.. i tried to tell you that the link to the fight template in the first post of this is unusable... so please either fix it or give me a working link to the template... -Thank you I'm not referring to the fight template, but rather the fight summary template located in the Rules thread. The fight template is purely optional. The fight summary template is not. Edit: For your edification, the fight summary template can be found here. |
| MindWandererB02-22-07, 02:54 AM | @Vath: Tactics in the battle of the unpronouncable names sent. I'm waiting for a quest intro before posting in "Friends of the Forest." @Telin: Waiting on a random monster from you. |
| Rauul02-22-07, 02:54 AM | I'm not referring to the fight template, but rather the fight summary template located in the Rules thread. The fight template is purely optional. The fight summary template is not. Edit: For your edification, the fight summary template can be found here. Ahh ok thanks |
| Tellish_of_Ket02-22-07, 02:57 AM | Durin vs 3 Dire Bats is complete....with summary. lol Tellish Question: why are my maps all messed up? It never shows anything past the first round, even though i hit (next round) etc.. The position of the bats are never shown. |
| MindWandererB02-22-07, 02:59 AM | You can't use numbers in the names. Change "Bat1" to "BatA," and so on, and you'll be okay. |
| Abyssal Stalker02-22-07, 03:01 AM | You can, but don't hit space. "Bat1" should be OK, but "Bat 1" not. |
| MindWandererB02-22-07, 03:05 AM | You can, but don't hit space. "Bat1" should be OK, but "Bat 1" not. No, "Bat1" is not okay, not in the name. That's what ToK already has. It's okay in the label, I think, but not in the 4-character name. |
| Abyssal Stalker02-22-07, 03:07 AM | Gotcha. :) (I had to chime in, because I just used terms "Chuul1" and "Chuul2" with the mapper. But you're right, I used them in the label.) |
| templer1002-22-07, 06:18 AM | my tactics for harbinger(me) VS ahab with a piggyback(usernamer) are posted. please pm me with any questions. |
| hogarth02-22-07, 06:56 AM | Durin vs 3 Dire Bats is complete....with summary. lol You need to adjust Durin's rewards for the horse and the mercenary (-16.667%). |
| Abyssal Stalker02-22-07, 07:08 AM | And add the expenditure of hiring a mercenary. |
| McJarvis02-22-07, 08:19 AM | And add the expenditure of hiring a mercenary. Speaking of which, does anyone else think that the cost for a merc is too high? a flat GP cost + a reduction in rewards seems...like alot. But then again, I guess we don't have many mercs. |
| Hirumajoe02-22-07, 08:22 AM | @Sauro: Tactics sent for Valen vs Istima. Oh, the irony. Well, at least we got a new map. I've included a clause that if Sauro can't finish the fight this week, Valen surrenders. Just in case. :) And I thought 22 power points was bad... I think Istima is going to have a good target to vent his last 3 weeks frustrations on. :D |
| Abyssal Stalker02-22-07, 08:29 AM | Speaking of which, does anyone else think that the cost for a merc is too high? a flat GP cost + a reduction in rewards seems...like alot. But then again, I guess we don't have many mercs. That's probably why they are seen so rarely used. On the other hand, they are quite good allies: they don't require any kind of commitment, they are easy to obtain and you don't need to spend money on their equipment. And they can cover some flaw in your character for a short period. This is good for characters that have issues on certain levels. But they could be more attracting, nevertheless. Maybe if we had more variety in their cost, so that certain things would benefit more those who have them. Eventually, some mercs would be better for some people and not so good for others. But if there were enough of them, it would probably be in balance. I'm thinking of something like Jazer's "will work for half price for characters with desert background". This is too limiting and it has no use. If it was something like "will work for half price for characters with druid or ranger levels", they might see more use. |
| hogarth02-22-07, 08:45 AM | Speaking of which, does anyone else think that the cost for a merc is too high? a flat GP cost + a reduction in rewards seems...like alot. But then again, I guess we don't have many mercs. The flat GP cost is not very high. For example, you can hire Grauerholz for 300 gp (or 150 gp if you're a Failure). In exchange, you get a scroll of invisibility, a scroll of mirror image, a couple of CL 3 magic missiles, a glitterdust, a familiar for scouting, an extra pair of hands for wielding a wand or scroll, and so forth. I wish there was more variety in the mercenaries, but it's a catch-22: people don't use mercenaries because the choices are limited, and the choices are limited because people don't use mercenaries. |
| McJarvis02-22-07, 10:08 AM | The flat GP cost is not very high. At ECL 3-leagues a merc typically hires for ~100gp and will reduce your win rewards to 675gp/xp. I consider this pretty high....other specific examples aside. [[personally I don't intend to spend 100gp in expendibles per fight at ECL 3]] On the other hand, however, I see where bolstering a gladiator that got nailed in the first two fights of his 3FC could be useful. What about having horses for rent?[[so mounted characters don't need to buy two mounts]] |
| McJarvis02-22-07, 10:10 AM | Yet another post-> Given that EG has gone AWOL(to my knowledge -- edit-> and yes, pitlords require my giving them leave to leave! ;) ), is there any chance the fight with TIM could get assigned another pitlord?((If Telin Agrees with this, of course)) |
| hogarth02-22-07, 10:16 AM | Yet another post-> Given that EG has gone AWOL(to my knowledge -- edit-> and yes, pitlords require my giving them leave to leave! ;) ), is there any chance the fight with TIM could get assigned another pitlord?((If Telin Agrees with this, of course)) His profile says that he was logged in yesterday. Is he not responding to private messages? If he is definitely gone, Treetall Oakleg might need a different mini-questlord, too. |
| McJarvis02-22-07, 10:41 AM | His profile says that he was logged in yesterday. Is he not responding to private messages? If he is definitely gone, Treetall Oakleg might need a different mini-questlord, too. I haven't seen him post on the forums at all regarding his fights..and he never sent a msg out to me last week about the TIM vs Telin fight that got held over. I guess I haven't really tried PMing him about it, though. Too much work for my blood. :bored: |
| SauroGrenom02-22-07, 10:47 AM | Zevox and hirumjoe, I've received tactics. My wife will be coming home really late tonight, so I think I'll be able to get started on this fight tonight. Depending on how things go, it could be done tonight. |
| Sindorin02-22-07, 10:51 AM | Would anyone be willing to take over Va'ria's miniquest to finish it up? It's really just a trivial matter and I haven't pushed it much because when Mitza came back she said she'd be able to do it and then vanished. Let me know via PM or post in this thread. Or I could just check to see if the pairings change. |
| TelinArtho02-22-07, 11:00 AM | @MWB - you may have lucked out because a creature wasn't in the SRD... In any case, your Monster Lore is up. |
| Horatius02-22-07, 11:33 AM | @Erithmu: Tactics for Guepe vs Matthis PM'd 1631 GMT. Please let me know if you have any problems. @Telin: Good luck with the birth of your son, my first arrived Feb 13. Wow. |
| TelinArtho02-22-07, 11:48 AM | @MacBrea - tactics for Anakala have been sent. @Vathelokai - tactics for Zax and crew have been sent. @Hortatius - thanks. Congratulations to you as well. Three kids should be interesting, that is for sure... |
| Zevox02-22-07, 12:28 PM | Yet another post-> Given that EG has gone AWOL(to my knowledge -- edit-> and yes, pitlords require my giving them leave to leave! ;) ), is there any chance the fight with TIM could get assigned another pitlord?((If Telin Agrees with this, of course)) If he doesn't show back up (and yeah, try PMing him before assuming I'd say), I could take it. Spring Break just started for me, so I have some extra time on my hands. Zevox |
| MindWandererB02-22-07, 01:46 PM | @UserName and templer10: I have tactics from both of you for Harbinger v. Ahab. I'll run that today, and thanks for the promptness. |
| sonofzeal02-22-07, 03:26 PM | Any word on Hajj vs Liardes the Grey? *crosses fingers* |
| McJarvis02-22-07, 03:27 PM | If he doesn't show back up (and yeah, try PMing him before assuming I'd say), I could take it. Spring Break just started for me, so I have some extra time on my hands. Zevox I PM'd him...I'll post again if he doesn't respond by...Sat. night? |
| MindWandererB02-22-07, 03:32 PM | Any word on Hajj vs Liardes the Grey? *crosses fingers* Oops, sorry, I missed that those tactics were already posted. Since I have only two fights to do, apparently, I'll have plenty of time. It'll be done before the weekend. |
| TelinArtho02-22-07, 04:52 PM | Hmm, I have an unfortunate question, given the recent ruling about flying and tight spaces: The map is a grand hall of 150 feet and a height of 20 feet. The walls, ceiling, and floor are assumed to be 20 foot thick at a minimum. Each number along the grid represents 5 feet. Each square has the same size; don't be misled by the graphic where the walls or fences seem to reach into a square. Obstacles: the huge central statue is 15ft tall, the medium statues next to the boxes are only 5ft high. They block Line of Sight just as a normal pillar would. All statues can be climbed with a Dc 15 climb check, and you can sit on the shoulder of the statues if you have a humanoid shape and are one size smaller than the statue. In this case, your elevation is 15ft (for the huge statue) and 5ft (for medium statues), respectively and you are considered 'sitting' (-2 melee AC, +2 ranged AC, move action to 'stand up'), having cover (+4 cover AC), and on higher ground (+1 melee attacks vs opponoments below you). Both statues have AC 3, Hardness 8, and 240 hp (huge) or 40 hp (medium). So the ceiling is 20ft high and the statue is huge. If you sit on it - you have an elevation of 15ft. The question? Can a large flyer fly up to and land on the statue, despite having to squeeze to do it? [EDIT] While we're at it - where's the ruling on what bows qualify for in a sunder attempt? |
| MindWandererB02-22-07, 05:17 PM | Well, here's how it got phrased: Flight (winged): Creatures with wings need twice their vertical base to pass by an obstacle or fly through a narrow passage. Umm... I think Cat meant "horizontal." Vertical makes no sense. Nice to see he took all our suggestions into consideration, yes? I think this needs to go back to the Council eventually.... but in any event, there's apparently no rule preventing squeezing vertically at this time. As for the bows, Cat ruled it as a one-handed, non-melee weapon in the Hood fight, I think. |
| TelinArtho02-22-07, 05:28 PM | But the problem is that you would still need to squeeze even to get to the area - regardless of that ruling. If he has a problem with something being too narrow for wings to fly, how could he not have a problem with something too tall to fit normally? I'll just go with my first instinct and let you squeeze on top. Not sure why you wanted to be there though - since being large size means that you have to squeeze up there. |
| MindWandererB02-22-07, 05:35 PM | Yeah, I actually didn't figure that when I wrote my tactics. Squeezing would be a horrible mistake... I don't suppose you could void that bit, since I still have no knowledge of the monster and I just didn't put that together? |
| TelinArtho02-22-07, 05:41 PM | Hmmm... I tell you what - offer me revised tactics without looking at the roller and I'll see what I can do. |
| MindWandererB02-22-07, 05:46 PM | Will do. Edit: Done. |
| TelinArtho02-22-07, 06:18 PM | Received. The fight is not yet done, but I've run out of time for now... stay tuned tomorrow. Bear in mind that the roller lists several rolls out of order now with the adjustment. Adjustments started in round 10. |
| False_Keraptis02-22-07, 06:24 PM | @Rauul: Tactics send for Gundmir. @McJarvis: I thought of trying to kidnap TAG's bird, but I wasn't quite that desperate this time. I think I've got a lot of options; none of them are great, but only one needs to work. |
| McJarvis02-22-07, 06:50 PM | @McJarvis: I thought of trying to kidnap TAG's bird, but I wasn't quite that desperate this time. I think I've got a lot of options; none of them are great, but only one needs to work. Heh...cheers to fond memories :) Good luck with the fight! (and I pretty much mean that. Unlike with TIM, TAG isn't taking leadership eventually so I don't care too much about his record) |
| Etiquette_Gnome02-22-07, 08:08 PM | Blargh, just got back from a close to two-week hectic fest (family car wrecks + quantum mechanics class = bad), and completely forgot about you guys (sorry, RL). I finally have enough time to breathe, but since stuff has only marginally calmed down, I'll take up Zevox's offer to take my fight and only do that miniquest thing for Hogarth. Edit: As for my seeming to log on, that's because my roommate uses my computer every so often and reads the WotC forums (along with general surfing). |
| McJarvis02-22-07, 08:10 PM | Blargh, just got back from a close to two-week hectic fest (family car wrecks + quantum mechanics class = bad), and completely forgot about you guys (sorry, RL). I finally have enough time to breathe, but since stuff has only marginally calmed down, I'll take up Zevox's offer to take my fight and only do that miniquest thing for Hogarth. Cool! Don't forget to forward him all three of my PM's of tactics for TIM... <_< >_> What? I like to be thorough... |
| Etiquette_Gnome02-22-07, 09:32 PM | Tiny question, I've got a rules question to ask, but it's in direct relation to the miniquest I'll be running and would give information my player should't know...is it possible to PM somebody? |
| MindWandererB02-22-07, 10:24 PM | I'm here. Send me a PM. You can IM me if you prefer; my usernames on Yahho and AIM are the same as my name here. In other news: Ever had a fight that just left you scratching your head? Behold one here, in Ahab vs. Harbinger. |
| Tellish_of_Ket02-22-07, 11:08 PM | I'm here. Send me a PM. You can IM me if you prefer; my usernames on Yahho and AIM are the same as my name here. In other news: Ever had a fight that just left you scratching your head? Behold one here, in Ahab vs. Harbinger. VERY tough decision you had to make and in the end, i also feel as though you made the right one. I was once put in a similar circumstance and used the delaying initiative rule and the one with the highest initiative modifer acted first (or was given the chance to draw first blood), which in this case was Ahab and he was allowed to make a decisive blow first. So, i don't think i can fault ur logic on any level for that decision. Tellish |
| Zevox02-23-07, 12:07 AM | @ Etiquette_Gnome, McJarvis, & Telin - I've received the tactics from EG. I'll run the fight either tomorrow or Saturday. Zevox |
| MindWandererB02-23-07, 02:18 AM | And my other fight is done: Liardes the Gray (templer10) vs Hajj (sonofzeal) is here. The result was fairly predictable, really. |
| templer1002-23-07, 04:45 AM | In other news: Ever had a fight that just left you scratching your head? Behold one here, in Ahab vs. Harbinger.[/QUOTE] your'r right about that scrach of head lol - althrough i killed his horse there for exacly to be able to keep out of his range, about the only 15 arrows things- iam a bit noobish here- but i cant change it before next 3fc true? |
| waywreth02-23-07, 11:25 AM | In other news: Ever had a fight that just left you scratching your head? Behold one here, in Ahab vs. Harbinger. your'r right about that scrach of head lol - althrough i killed his horse there for exacly to be able to keep out of his range, about the only 15 arrows things- iam a bit noobish here- but i cant change it before next 3fc true?[/QUOTE] That is correct. That's why I suggest next time you buy a few hundred arrows and keep them at home. You can access your "at home" stuff between fights, but can't shop. |
| Horatius02-23-07, 11:40 AM | That is correct. That's why I suggest next time you buy a few hundred arrows and keep them at home. You can access your "at home" stuff between fights, but can't shop. Did not know this - must have missed it - very useful. |
| TelinArtho02-23-07, 11:52 AM | Besthirah Lafali (MindWandererB) vs Half-Orc Cleric 7 and 3 Orc Fighters 4 (unknown monster) is up. |
| hogarth02-23-07, 12:13 PM | Besthirah Lafali (MindWandererB) vs Half-Orc Cleric 7 and 3 Orc Fighters 4 (unknown monster) is up. I've complained about this before, but I'll take this opportunity to repeat my dislike for the practice of equipping monsters to specifically counter a gladiator's abilities. Personally, I'd prefer if all monsters were given stock equipment to work with (but I doubt that would be feasible). |
| TelinArtho02-23-07, 12:15 PM | Just for the record - the only thing I picked was specifically the silver weapons. Without them - the group was a reroll - since they would've had no chance to overcome both her astronomic AC AND her 10/silver DR. I addressed this with MWB before the fight and he accepted my decision on the matter. I even gave him the choice of having me reroll again. |
| hogarth02-23-07, 12:30 PM | Just for the record - the only thing I picked was specifically the silver weapons. Without them - the group was a reroll - since they would've had no chance to overcome both her astronomic AC AND her 10/silver DR. I addressed this with MWB before the fight and he accepted my decision on the matter. I even gave him the choice of having me reroll again. I wouldn't have a problem with a fighter on the monster list having a quiver of silver arrows, a quiver of cold iron arrows, etc. like a normal arena fighter would. But for them to only have silver weapons in their arsenal? That sounds a little narrowly targeted to me. Of course, I don't like the "reroll the auto-win fights" system anyway. If we have to have monster fights, my pipe dream would be to have a much shorter list of fully-statted, fully-equipped monsters that are good "all-rounders", weeding out the real losers (*cough*sea cat*cough*) or bruisers (1d100 dragons ;)). Then you wouldn't have any futzing around with rerolling or wondering what equipment to buy vs. which gladiator. Of course it'll never happen, but a man can dream, can't he? :D |
| TelinArtho02-23-07, 12:37 PM | Well, the fighters all had money left over enough to buy a regular weapon and/or a masterworked regular weapon - so if it makes you feel better - that is just as good. Add in a few regular javelins and is there a problem now? I actually like the monster fights the way they are now. I could forego the reroll auto-wins, but I prefer (as a player) to have my characters face challenges. If my characters could ensure auto-wins - why have them fight? Take the arranged match between Kraegin and Sdentch - if I don't agree to not use my Doom/hold person combo - it is an auto-win for Kraegin. So why have the fight happen? |
| hogarth02-23-07, 12:47 PM | I actually like the monster fights the way they are now. I could forego the reroll auto-wins, but I prefer (as a player) to have my characters face challenges. That's why I'm saying that every monster on the list should be as challenging as the "average" gladiator. "Auto-win" matches happen all the time in the arena. If you really don't like it, you can fight challenges/quests only and be quite happy, I imagine. |
| McJarvis02-23-07, 01:20 PM | @Raul: Tactics for TAG sent. |
| TelinArtho02-23-07, 01:42 PM | That's why I'm saying that every monster on the list should be as challenging as the "average" gladiator. "Auto-win" matches happen all the time in the arena. If you really don't like it, you can fight challenges/quests only and be quite happy, I imagine. That's funny - I don't think I've had very many auto-wins at all in my time here - neither against nor for my characters... That said, if the monsters were "regulated" as you say - it is pretty likely that they would cease to be challenging as the "average" gladiator. A smaller list could be exploited fairly well - a single character might be able to nullify the opposing monsters in his creation with one or two minor things. By having a massive list, it creates so much variety that it can't completely be planned for. This means that in order to make your character successful, you should have a certain number of "backup" plans. In other words - the presence of the unlikely possibility of monster fights necessitates that the few one-hit wonders have a bit more diversity. In my opinion - this is fresh and good to have. |
| McJarvis02-23-07, 02:01 PM | Let's face it-> Hogarth and I make characters with horses of a whole different color ;) |
| hogarth02-23-07, 02:08 PM | That's funny - I don't think I've had very many auto-wins at all in my time here - neither against nor for my characters... I was thinking more along the lines of "fast archer vs. slow melee guy" (which I've seen a few times) or "super-sniper vs. guy with low Spot/Listen" (thankfully the annoying snipers have coooled off here lately). A smaller list could be exploited fairly well - a single character might be able to nullify the opposing monsters in his creation with one or two minor things. I already think that there are some creatures in there (fully equipped dragons, outsiders, and spellcasters who can use all of their spell levels mostly) that are quite a bit more powerful than the average gladiator. I'd like to see the "one or two minor things" that can nullify those! |
| McJarvis02-23-07, 02:56 PM | (thankfully the annoying snipers have coooled off here lately). Only because the current listen check rules(house-ruled, I might add..) make the strategy near-impossible at low levels and completely impossible at higher levels. o_O |
| hogarth02-23-07, 03:08 PM | Only because the current listen check rules(house-ruled, I might add..) make the strategy near-impossible at low levels and completely impossible at higher levels. o_O I was actually thinking more along the lines of ghosts and pixies, actually. |
| McJarvis02-23-07, 03:14 PM | I was actually thinking more along the lines of ghosts and pixies, actually. Right...those listen rules prevented me from bringing my full dreams & ambitions to the higher ranks :( I was this close to being well known for that, though... |
| MindWandererB02-23-07, 03:38 PM | For the record, I'm okay with the results of that fight. I don't really agree with the AoOs that Besthirah provoked--it would have been better to begin melee eariler in that situation. And there was my comment, which was more ambigious than I thought, in retrospect, of "Target the most annoying first," which would have been the cleric in this case. But it was really the early Chaos Hammer plus natural 20 on a seriously buffed orc that did it. (Although technically, the CL 5 potion is higher than their CR of 4.) With a high-AC, low-HP character (like so many of mine, now that I think of it), it's the spells and the 20's that get you. The only thing I really dislike is that this is treated as a powerrating 1000 PC for the purposes of my record.... |
| hogarth02-23-07, 03:44 PM | The only thing I really dislike is that this is treated as a powerrating 1000 PC for the purposes of my record.... Indeed, if the monster is supposed to be a challenge for any given PC, shouldn't it have the same power rating at the PC in question? |
| MindWandererB02-23-07, 03:47 PM | Indeed, if the monster is supposed to be a challenge for any given PC, shouldn't it have the same power rating at the PC in question? That's always been my opinion. Having it be a flat 1000 is unnecessary penalizing to PCs with good ratings, and unnecessarily beneficial to ones with low powerratings. |
| TelinArtho02-23-07, 03:53 PM | I seriously considered firing at the cleric. However there were three problems with this: 1. On your first shot (round 3), not one had been annoying to you. Your best shot was against the enlarged orc - so you took it. After this - the cleric was clearly more annoying due to the chaos hammer... 2. After that, until round 7, when you kill that fighter - I am not sure which has higher priority - taking down additional targets or taking out the annoying one. That said, the cleric would've had a better AC until it moved away from the starting area (19+2+4 vs 19-2+2+4) - so the only net result from this change would be to see the third fighter still be standing. 3. By round 8, you were starting to feel excessive pressure from being cornered in. At this point, given that the cleric's spells were having 0 success versus you (and a spiritual weapon that needed a 20 to hit), it is arguable that the two buffed fighters are "more annoying." Even if not though, given the range, the cleric's AC would still be the same as the fighters. However, if you want me to edit in an earlier melee tactic (starting in round 10) - I can certainly do that. If you want the other things changed too - its not going to help you - so that would be self-defeating... |
| MindWandererB02-23-07, 04:12 PM | Sure, switching to melee eariler couldn't hurt, and I do feel like it would be more in the spirit of what I intended, anyway. I doubt it would help--I'd have to kill them both before theu work their way up to that 20--but why not. In any event, rewards are off. You keep forgetting that you don't get standard rewards when fighting multiple foes... the win reward would be (506*3 + 1350) = 2868 xp, and thus 4760 gp. Loss would be 956 xp and 1587 gp. |
| TelinArtho02-23-07, 04:16 PM | Except in a loss - your exp is capped. Or did that rule change? I did forget, but I think they are still correct, since you are capped at 100* ECL I'll edit in the earlier melee - upon looking back it does seem more applicable. |
| MindWandererB02-23-07, 04:23 PM | Oh yeah, the loss cap. I always forget about that--it's there to prevent abuse, but it applies when it shouldn't, really. Nemmind. |
| TelinArtho02-23-07, 04:24 PM | Actually, looking at it some more, editing in the melee wouldn't help you at all. Either a) you drop your bow to draw the quarterstaff and oil (in which case, the drawing of the oil is an AoO against either your bow (if you keep it in hand before drawing the oil) or against you (in which case, that 20 moves up and up). or b) you move to provoke the AoO (in which case the AoO is still against the bow), and draw the oil. In this case, Fighter 1 gets to charge you (since you didn't double move away) - and again, the 20 moves up and up. |
| MindWandererB02-23-07, 04:31 PM | Hm. I wish you used maps, it'd be easier to spot all those AoOs--but it seems like you're right. I'd get one more attack against me, and gain at most one extra flurry, which could take down one orc at best. It might be a smidge closer, but only if I got lucky. Meh. At least this way, if I win next week, I'll have a bit more cash going into the Iron Man. |
| TelinArtho02-23-07, 05:24 PM | Is using a spell-like ability covered as casting a spell in a grapple? I assume it is - but if there's disagreement with it - let me know. |
| SauroGrenom02-23-07, 05:41 PM | Is using a spell-like ability covered as casting a spell in a grapple? I assume it is - but if there's disagreement with it - let me know.Sort of. There are difference. With respect to using a concentration check, it is the same. The difference is that you don't need material components for a SLA. I'm not sure if you need any components (Verbal or somatic) for SLA's. There is the limitation on casting a spell in a grapple that it cannot require any somatic components. If SLA's don't have somatic components, then you have more freedom to use them in a grapple. Edit: Found the reference, no components at all for SLA's. So you can use any SLA in a grapple if you make the concentration check. |
| TheMagister02-23-07, 06:52 PM | @my pitlords (whoever you may be) - RL kinda jumped on me, so I haven't been able to get my tactics out as quickly as I would've liked this week. I'll be working on them right this very second! Please allow me a little extra time (a few hours, tops) and they'll be in your PM box. Thanks! TM |
| TheMagister02-23-07, 08:50 PM | @Abyssal Stalker - tactics for Hood vs. all the nasty possibilities sent via PM. Here's hopin'. @TelinArtho - Rubicanti's comprimise with Zodiac sent via PM. You're welcome. Roll well. @my gladiators - I'll be working on fights starting now. Expect at least one (maybe two) to be completed tonight! If I don't have your tactics yet, I can hold off until Saturday night at 8 p.m. (US Central). After that I start handing out the auto-losses. I have received tactics from: Macbrea re: Izumi Niqil re: Tyden Zevox re: Ceilia Eluria re: Qwogi So I know I'm missing tactics from at least two gladiators, who seem to be fighting each other. That is, unless I was only assigned two fights, in which case Everything is copacetic. :) Edit: WHOA! I'm a Missionlord?! How'd that happen?! Well, um...ok,I guess. This is the best week for it to happen. The details'll be up as soon as I get around to it. TM |
| sonofzeal02-23-07, 10:48 PM | Hey, I see my fight has finally been posted! *checks it out* ....teh YAY! :D MWB, good choice there on the sling; it's better than doing nothing, and the dogs are quite comfortable there without me spending spells or whatnot. Any comments for next time (besides straightening out my character sheet)? |
| MindWandererB02-23-07, 10:56 PM | Hey, I see my fight has finally been posted! *checks it out* ....teh YAY! :D MWB, good choice there on the sling; it's better than doing nothing, and the dogs are quite comfortable there without me spending spells or whatnot. Any comments for next time (besides straightening out my character sheet)? Not really. The tank strategy won't work every time--against a focused warrior it's not so helpful, and against an offensive spellcaster, you need to make sure they don't kill you first, but against low- to mid-level summoners and gish, it will work fine. And after that, druid spells come into their own. Oh, and BTW, with DSugui apparently missing, he has until next Wednesday to activate Daisy, or Hajj gets her slot in TLT. Which is oddly appropriate. |
| sonofzeal02-23-07, 11:37 PM | Not really. The tank strategy won't work every time--against a focused warrior it's not so helpful, and against an offensive spellcaster, you need to make sure they don't kill you first, but against low- to mid-level summoners and gish, it will work fine. And after that, druid spells come into their own. Oh, and BTW, with DSugui apparently missing, he has until next Wednesday to activate Daisy, or Hajj gets her slot in TLT. Which is oddly appropriate. Yeah, tanking is not supposed to be a long-term strategy. It seemed the right choice for this guy though; once he's out of PP, he's fairly easy to take down, and I had more staying power. I'm quite fond of the Ranged Touch nature of Produce Flames though; it'll be put to good use against things I can't outlast. ...oddly appropriate? |
| MindWandererB02-23-07, 11:40 PM | ...oddly appropriate?Take a look at Little Daisy's sheet, you'll see what I mean. |
| TheMagister02-24-07, 02:11 AM | Izumi vs. Ceilia is completed, along with its shiny new and totally legal rewards section! {nods to Niqil} Ah, the dice! How fickle they be... On another note, instead of running my ECL 3 fight tonight, I'm off to research the Black Hole Killers, or whatever their name is. @Iced and Abyssal Stalker - get the boys ready. That ECL 11 chart is just beggin' to be unleashed on a pair of unfortunate gladiators. TM |
| Abyssal Stalker02-24-07, 02:14 AM | It should be EL10, at least that's what I signed for. Unless I'm missing something? |
| TheMagister02-24-07, 02:30 AM | [LOG] ML TheMagister : Jonathan (Abyssal) & Anixx (Iced) befriend the Shadow Star Assassins for EHTC [Week 1/3] I didn't get any PM or anything specifying a requested ECL, so I figured 9+9=11. The Shadow Star Assassins are an EL 10 paramilitary group, but a "Befriend PMG" Mission can be held at any ECL you want. Only the initial contact specifies that it should be at the group's EL. If you want an ECL 10, though, that's fine by me. |
| MindWandererB02-24-07, 03:06 AM | I didn't get any PM or anything specifying a requested ECL, so I figured 9+9=11. The Shadow Star Assassins are an EL 10 paramilitary group, but a "Befriend PMG" Mission can be held at any ECL you want. Only the initial contact specifies that it should be at the group's EL. If you want an ECL 10, though, that's fine by me. Actually, it's not fine. Both characters are mid-cycle, so the quest has to be at least their ECL. Two ECL 9 characters are 11 combined--you can't get around the rule with a multiplayer quest. |
| TheMagister02-24-07, 03:30 AM | Actually, that helps you guys. Rolling on the EL 10 table would've resulted in a really hard fight, IMO. |
| Abyssal Stalker02-24-07, 04:20 AM | I didn't get any PM or anything specifying a requested ECL, so I figured 9+9=11. The Shadow Star Assassins are an EL 10 paramilitary group, but a "Befriend PMG" Mission can be held at any ECL you want. Only the initial contact specifies that it should be at the group's EL. If you want an ECL 10, though, that's fine by me. Oh, that's right. I somehow thought that it would've been listed in the pairings, but now that I look at it, it doesn't mention the EL. But like MWB said, it looks like it needs ot be EL11. |
| TheMagister02-24-07, 04:27 AM | Actually, that helps you guys. Rolling on the EL 10 table would've resulted in a really hard fight, IMO. I take it back. The EL 10 fight was easier. Not by much, but easier. Damn. Is this what Telin feels like? |
| Zevox02-24-07, 12:12 PM | Izumi vs. Ceilia is completed, along with its shiny new and totally legal rewards section! {nods to Niqil} Ah, the dice! How fickle they be... TM Looks good to me TM. Nice commentary too. The natural 1 on the Blindness save pretty well sealed it, I think, but its nice when a plan comes together as a whole like that. Thanks for running it! :) Zevox |
| Zevox02-24-07, 03:25 PM | The Illustrated Man vs Ilendil Oratith is complete. Pretty much saw this one's end the moment I read the tactics. Zevox |
| McJarvis02-24-07, 04:07 PM | @ Zevox: Thanks for the run! I'll see what I can do about cleaning up TIM... edit-> Oh..the SRD quote? I think when you use Unearthed Arcana stuff you're required to include text concerning it. |
| Zevox02-24-07, 04:38 PM | @ Zevox: Thanks for the run! I'll see what I can do about cleaning up TIM... edit-> Oh..the SRD quote? I think when you use Unearthed Arcana stuff you're required to include text concerning it. Not that I've ever heard. I have brief descriptions of what Mithos gets on a Paladin of Tyranny thats different from the typical Paladin, but nothing quoted, and I've not seen other UA-using characters with such. Anyway, its your choice to include it, I was just noting it takes up a lot of space in its own right. Zevox |
| MindWandererB02-24-07, 04:58 PM | @Zevox: Can you find me the source that says personal-range spells can't be shared? I don't know what supports that; I've never seen that restriction. |
| Tellish_of_Ket02-24-07, 05:12 PM | @Zevox: Can you find me the source that says personal-range spells can't be shared? I don't know what supports that; I've never seen that restriction. I think he might be misinterpreting the "additionally" part. Though it's not a bad idea to cast it on the horse instead of himself (sharing with the horse). There can be some tactical advantages to it. He definately would not be able to use his scroll of alterself (trog), as his animal companion is not a legal allowed to xform into a trog. He'd had to leave it as a horse or some other mount of sorts. Tellish |
| McJarvis02-24-07, 05:12 PM | @Telin: Thanks for giving me my first lance kill :-) That was exciting! |
| Zevox02-24-07, 06:07 PM | @Zevox: Can you find me the source that says personal-range spells can't be shared? I don't know what supports that; I've never seen that restriction. Quoth SRD: Share Spells (Ex): At the druid’s option, she may have any spell (but not any spell-like ability) she casts upon herself also affect her animal companion. The animal companion must be within 5 feet of her at the time of casting to receive the benefit. If the spell or effect has a duration other than instantaneous, it stops affecting the animal companion if the companion moves farther than 5 feet away and will not affect the animal again, even if it returns to the druid before the duration expires. Additionally, the druid may cast a spell with a target of “You” on her animal companion (as a touch range spell) instead of on herself. A druid and her animal companion can share spells even if the spells normally do not affect creatures of the companion’s type (animal). That seems to me to say you get to cast such spells on yourself or your companion, but not both. Else why not just share the spell? Zevox |
| hogarth02-24-07, 06:10 PM | Quoth SRD: That seems to me to say you get to cast such spells on yourself or your companion, but not both. Else why not just share the spell? If you share the spell, you have to stay within 5' of the companion or the sharing ends. If you just cast it on the companion, it can go wherever you want. |
| Tellish_of_Ket02-24-07, 07:00 PM | I'll second Hogarth's opinion as well. I think ur reading too much into the "additonally" part. It's in addition...meaning you can either cast it on just the familiar, or yourself and share it. I know many mages (in TT), that cast mage armour/shield, false-life and stuff on their familiar when using it to scout ahead. It increases their survivability. I myself have used vampiric touch on my familiar to heal myself. They have all kinds of fun uses. Tellish |
| MindWandererB02-24-07, 07:07 PM | I've seen other tricks, too, especially with an Improved Familar or animal companion, or one of those combat-geared psicrystals from Complete Arcane. I've seen an Arcane Trickster cast Enlarge Person on their familiar (using both the ability to cast on the familiar, and the ability to treat it as a humanoid) to use it as a flanker for sneak attack. I've seen a psion put Vigor on a psicrystal to soak up an alpha strike from a bad guy they knew was waiting for them. And druids do it all the time. |
| TelinArtho02-24-07, 10:53 PM | Was the rule about sharing spells changed recently? Specifically, last I knew, you couldn't share a spell from a scroll on your familiar or animal companion. |
| Zevox02-24-07, 10:57 PM | Was the rule about sharing spells changed recently? Specifically, last I knew, you couldn't share a spell from a scroll on your familiar or animal companion. Basically, yep. An FAQ update contradicted the Rules of the Game article we've been using for that ruling thus far, saying you could share spells from scrolls. Since the FAQ is more solid than the Rules of the Game articles, thats what we're going by. You might note that this was something McJarvis even had to send an extra PM about to change his tactics (its the 3rd PM he spoke of, and at the bottom of the tactics in the post I made). Zevox |
| TheMagister02-24-07, 11:04 PM | Tyden Rayn vs. Qwogi Dwellfarrow is complete. It had to be posted in two posts (been a blessedly long time since I've had a fight that long), but there's a link to part 2 from part 1. Congratulations to the winner on a close, close fight. TM |
| MindWandererB02-24-07, 11:12 PM | Tyden Rayn vs. Qwogi Dwellfarrow is complete. It had to be posted in two posts (been a blessedly long time since I've had a fight that long), but there's a link to part 2 from part 1. Congratulations to the winner on a close, close fight. TM You need to fix an sblock there: the whole endgame is hidden. I wasn't clear if you understood the hide ranks rule correctly: you can only hide behind an object within 1'/rank of you while moving, or when bluffing. It doesn't work when just standing there. |
| TheMagister02-24-07, 11:17 PM | I wasn't clear if you understood the hide ranks rule correctly: you can only hide behind an object within 1'/rank of you while moving, or when bluffing. It doesn't work when just standing there. Fixed the sblock...thanks! However: Care to expound on that? If you have cover, you can hide. If you don't move from your cover, and the spotter's position doesn't change, you remain hidden. If the spotter's position changes, but not enough to eliminate your cover, you remain hidden. If the spotter's position changes enough to eliminate your cover, you are spotted. If you move to cover again, you hide again. What am I missing? |
| Zevox02-24-07, 11:26 PM | If you move to cover again, you hide again. What am I missing? I haven't read the fight, but that statement is slightly incorrect. If you move to cover again, you're still in sight of your foe, so you cannot hide (unless you have hide-in-plain-sight, which is another matter). To do that you need to break line-of-sight first. Zevox |
| NiQil02-24-07, 11:34 PM | Tyden Rayn vs. Qwogi Dwellfarrow is complete. It had to be posted in two posts (been a blessedly long time since I've had a fight that long), but there's a link to part 2 from part 1. Congratulations to the winner on a close, close fight. TM Wow. I gotta say....that was a fun fight to read, win or lose. Once you got to the point of remembering my opponent's healing, I thought Tyden was done. But yeah....the dice gods giveth (saving throws) and taketh away (first vigor). Stupid enervation. Can't we houserule that away? LOL |
| MindWandererB02-24-07, 11:36 PM | What am I missing?I'm not sure what you're missing--I didn't understand the comment you made in the fight about the 1 foot/rank rule, since it didn't seem to apply. I was confused, but as near as I can tell, you did it correctly. |
| TheMagister02-24-07, 11:46 PM | I haven't read the fight, but that statement is slightly incorrect. If you move to cover again, you're still in sight of your foe, so you cannot hide (unless you have hide-in-plain-sight, which is another matter). To do that you need to break line-of-sight first. Zevox That doesn't sound right at all. You can use cover to make a hide check. Without cover, you usually need concealment (see below) to make a hide check. You need cover or concealment (see pages 150-152) in order to attempt a Hide check. Total cover or total concealment usually (but not always; see Special, below) obviates the need for a Hide check, since nothing can see you anyway. If people are observing you, even casually, you can't hide. You can run around a corner or behind cover so that you're out of sight and then hide, but the others then know at least where you went. All I see here is that total cover obviates the need for a Hide check, and regular cover allows you to attempt a Hide check. It even mentions "running around a corner or behind cover" (notice it doesn't say "running around a corner to total cover"!) so that you're out of sight and then being able to hide. Sure, they know where you went, but you have the skill necessary to take advantage of your cover and use it to hide. |
| TheMagister02-24-07, 11:47 PM | I'm not sure what you're missing--I didn't understand the comment you made in the fight about the 1 foot/rank rule, since it didn't seem to apply. I was confused, but as near as I can tell, you did it correctly. OH! I was referring to the situation he found himself in. He was fast enough to circle the boulder and hide, but was spotted after a double move by his opponent. If he had 5 ranks in hide, he could have remained hidden after successfully hiding the first time. |
| MindWandererB02-24-07, 11:48 PM | Here's what you want, TM:If people are observing you, even casually, you can’t hide. You can run around a corner or behind cover so that you’re out of sight and then hide, but the others then know at least where you went. If your observers are momentarily distracted (such as by a Bluff check; see below), though, you can attempt to hide. While the others turn their attention from you, you can attempt a Hide check if you can get to a hiding place of some kind. (As a general guideline, the hiding place has to be within 1 foot per rank you have in Hide.) This check, however, is made at a –10 penalty because you have to move fast. |
| TheMagister02-24-07, 11:51 PM | Wow. I gotta say....that was a fun fight to read, win or lose. Once you got to the point of remembering my opponent's healing, I thought Tyden was done. But yeah....the dice gods giveth (saving throws) and taketh away (first vigor). Stupid enervation. Can't we houserule that away? LOL I'm glad you liked it! No quibbles? If I ran something that long and didn't spark your argument engine, then I'm really proud of myself! Speaking of being proud of myself: Abyssal called me "ancient" the other day. I'd just like you guys to know that my 29 yr-old-married-for-8-years-with-2-kids arse got hit on today on the way to work. I was just drivin' along, jammin' out to my old school Def Leppard classic rock, and three young ladies in a Volvo pulled up next to me smiling and waving. So I flirted back. {shrug} Pretty much made my day. :cool: |
| MindWandererB02-24-07, 11:55 PM | I'm glad you liked it! No quibbles? If I ran something that long and didn't spark your argument engine, then I'm really proud of myself!Of course not. He won. :gah: |
| TheMagister02-24-07, 11:55 PM | :rofl: |
| NiQil02-25-07, 12:00 AM | Of course not. He won. :gah: :ahem: :censored: :headexplo Of course you know, this means war. :fight!: Them's fightin' words where I come from! :duel: :P |
| MindWandererB02-25-07, 12:10 AM | You know, I am truly glad you people know how to take a joke. |
| TheMagister02-25-07, 12:19 AM | Well, it's funny until somebody's feelings get hurt. Then it's hilarious. :D |
| NiQil02-25-07, 12:40 AM | <coughjcoughjonescough> |
| Erithmu02-25-07, 12:43 PM | Matthis vs Le Petit Guepe (or LPG for short) is up. Shorter than expected. |
| waywreth02-25-07, 12:47 PM | Matthis vs Le Petit Guepe (or LPG for short) is up. Shorter than expected. Now I'll be honest, I didn't really expect to win that one... but what's with all the 20s? I think it's a conspiracy between pitlords against wizards. :D Maybe I'll just have him pull a Maven until he's level 5. @Horatius - Thanks for the update, I'll fix the fight link. |
| Horatius02-25-07, 02:34 PM | @waywreth - Sorry about that... at least I missed a couple due to concealment. @Erithmu - Can't see any problems, except you didn't give us a time between fights. Thanks for running. |
| Erithmu02-25-07, 03:08 PM | Now I'll be honest, I didn't really expect to win that one... but what's with all the 20s? I think it's a conspiracy between pitlords against wizards. :D Maybe I'll just have him pull a Maven until he's level 5. Your telling me ... I was all ready to switch into multi round rolling and then the 20s start showing up. There were many verbal comments that came out of my mouth as I was rolling. Mostly along the lines of "Good grief!" or "Again?!?" I was amused only in the fact that Matthis had been having a horrible streak of bad dice luck. I was glad that I didn't have to start the fight back up after going out for church. |
| Maraxus02-25-07, 03:27 PM | Ihdald Seaslash (Milov) vs. The Harvester (Caterane) in the Cavern done. |
| Milov02-25-07, 03:42 PM | Wow... I had never actually looked at any of Cat's tactics before... I got a little dizzy looking at those. And then Zevox mentioned that those weren't the longest he's ever done. I am beginning to see why the Harvester is undefeated.... |
| McJarvis02-25-07, 03:48 PM | Wow... I had never actually looked at any of Cat's tactics before... I got a little dizzy looking at those. And then Zevox mentioned that those weren't the longest he's ever done. I am beginning to see why the Harvester is undefeated.... Yeah...he talks too much & has bad breath. You know the rest. -_- |
| SauroGrenom02-25-07, 04:19 PM | Valen sky vs Istima |
| Zevox02-25-07, 04:23 PM | Valen sky vs Istima Yup, thats what I figured. Still don't like that power, but at least it made this fight quick and easy. Thanks for the run! Edit: Minor corrections to the rewards - Istima should be getting 2,375 gp and craft gets him 189 gp. Zevox, That Ego Whip is a really effective power. I’d like it if you could bet the “-pitlords cut-“ mark on your sheet as well as the CR of your allies. Some people have advanced pegasuses, and listing the CR would be helpful for me working out rewards. Actually, I mention the CR of my allies and the rewards adjustment they incur in the prebuff section of the sheet already. I can add it to their sblocks too if that'd help though. Zevox |
| Hirumajoe02-25-07, 05:22 PM | @Sauro Wow. Natural 20 save then a natural 1 save. I don't think *any* tactics would have made a difference with dice like those. :-) Looks fine. In regards to the fight comments: The grappling was more to get a touch attack rather than prevent manifesting. Istima's AC is so high when he rides for cover on his pegasus (28? 29?) that even a +12 to hit isn't that good. And I agree, the psicrystal driving had no affect on this fight, nor would I request a rematch on it. However, I would like it clarified if the majority of Elders feel if its an approriate thing to do. If they don't think so then I'll stop writing it in my tactics. I would just like to know my tactics will be interpreted consistently across pitlords. I personally think the rules allow it, but thats my reading of it and I'm only one person who has been wrong many times in the past. And I'll remove the size modifications from the character sheet. I only use them because the default sheet had them in there. I'm not attached to them in any way. Anyways, no objections, curse those dice, and thanks for the run! :) |
| Eluria02-25-07, 05:58 PM | @TM - thanks for the run; you're right, it was a costly loss, but I liked how you stuck to the spirit of my tactics... sorry for vagaries like "if it's going well" :) I appreciate your clarification in the tactics; I realize rapid shot is a full round action, and I thought by delaying to "act on his initiative" that would mean we went simultaneously and I could just fire regardless of what he was doing, and hope that by chance that would happen to hit him if he should, on his turn, ever be manifesting - I didn't mean it to be a ready action, and I'm glad you interpreted it as such. I love the information - I definatley have less of a grasp on many rules, in particular some of the nitty gritty, and it's one of the great things about CoCo that you all point out errors in a kind and "constructive/instructive criticism" fashion. ... as a side note, you're a very entertaining pitlord, and that was very fun to read. Thanks for the fight! (one gripe: Qwogi is a boy :) |
| MindWandererB02-25-07, 06:51 PM | Cat made this assertion in his tactics: "A Dire Ape is not a suitable mount so it can’t be ridden. See DMG, Unusual Mounts." I don't think that's in the 3.0 DMG, and I don't own the 3.5. As near as I can tell with the SRD, unsuitable mounts incur a Ride penalty, but don't prevent it entirely. Can someone tell me what the 3.5 DMG has to say on the matter? |
| Zevox02-25-07, 07:09 PM | Cat made this assertion in his tactics: "A Dire Ape is not a suitable mount so it can’t be ridden. See DMG, Unusual Mounts." I don't think that's in the 3.0 DMG, and I don't own the 3.5. As near as I can tell with the SRD, unsuitable mounts incur a Ride penalty, but don't prevent it entirely. Can someone tell me what the 3.5 DMG has to say on the matter? 3.5 DMG Page 204: Suitable Mounts: You [the DM] have the final decision on what is or is not a suitable mount. At its most basic level, a mount should have the following characteristics: Able and willing to carry its rider in a typical fashion. (A camel is able and willing. A tiger might be capable but may not be willing. A giant might be willing but not truly able.) At least one size category larger than the character. Also, a flying mount can carry no more than a light load aloft. The mount's Challenge Rating should be no more than 3 less than the rider's character level. If the mount can fly, its Challenge Rating should be no more than 4 less than the rider's character level. It then goes on to give the info about alternate Paladin special mounts. Obviously, we ignore the CR thing here since we have our own ally rules (and those would prohibit anyone at level 3 from getting any mount at all), but the "able and willing" thing is the big one. I think Cat's right about the Ape - it might be willing, but like a Giant wouldn't truly be able. Not that Milov wanted to ride it anyway (I have no idea why Cat thought he might - Ihdald doesn't even have ranks in ride or a saddle on his sheet). Zevox |
| Tellish_of_Ket02-25-07, 07:28 PM | Well, if my opinion means anything, Cat and you are both wrong. They only say "might", not "cannot". We've always had dire ape and deino mounts throughout all of CoCo's life. Those that weren't fully suitable, you obviously suffered the requisite penalties. Why Cat would say that (other than to confound and create illusion of confusion to win), i cannot phantom. It's always been allowed, and rightfully should be so long as the rider is willing to accept the penalties that accompany it. Tellish |
| MindWandererB02-25-07, 07:29 PM | Hmm... an ape is basically a quadruped, so that might be a bit questionable. I only ask because I had a concept about a half-giant, ape-riding druid once. Probably won't end up doing it (too weak at range), but it was a cool idea. |
| Tellish_of_Ket02-25-07, 07:33 PM | Hmm... an ape is basically a quadruped, so that might be a bit questionable. I only ask because I had a concept about a half-giant, ape-riding druid once. Probably won't end up doing it (too weak at range), but it was a cool idea. We've had lots of ape-riding druids in the past. They would climb up the pillards, vs melee gladiators and rain down fire and lightning and summons. In case of emergency they'd surround themselves in obscuring mist, climb a bit, buff, silent/climb around the other side of the pillar, drop down, and rush into melee. It didn't always work, but it was pretty neat the first time it happened. Tellish |
| Maraxus02-25-07, 08:10 PM | Wow, I really did not question that, I think Apes are a very good example of an impossible mount. I'd call an Ape a biped, even through they use their long arms for sprints, the back and the hip and the whole stature, I'd say they walt to upright. Or in other words: If Apes can make mounts, almost every creature should be (incorporeal and maybe oozes could be exceptions.) |
| Guildmaster_LOY02-25-07, 08:15 PM | (maybe oozes could be exceptions.) Obviously you don't know how Mrs. Butterworth originally got famous. |
| Milov02-25-07, 10:16 PM | Well, for this whole riding a Dire Ape thing, I've a few things to mention. A Dire Ape, assuming it takes the same postures and whatnot of a regular ape, would technically be ABLE to bear a rider if it's on all fours, but would be UNABLE to if it goes onto it's rear legs only to use it's hands for something. It's willingness is another issue entirely. Also, Ihdald, which is the owner of the Dire Ape that Cat mentioned in his tactics, has no want to ride it, no skill to ride it, and just to be sure I'm getting this through, is not going to be riding the dire ape :tongue: |
| TelinArtho02-26-07, 12:39 AM | @Zevox - about the Ilendil vs TIM fight I just realized that you have marked off the poison as used. Since this is week 1 for Ilendil, the three arrows are still poisoned and should be marked as such in the Ongoing effects section of the fight result. Thanks. |
| Zevox02-26-07, 01:20 AM | @Zevox - about the Ilendil vs TIM fight I just realized that you have marked off the poison as used. Since this is week 1 for Ilendil, the three arrows are still poisoned and should be marked as such in the Ongoing effects section of the fight result. Thanks. *raised eyebrow* Don't we have a rule around here that poison doesn't remain between fights? Edit: Nevermind, found it. They don't remain between cycles, but do between fights in the same cycle. Will edit that. Zevox |
| TheMagister02-26-07, 01:26 AM | When does a just cast summon spell's subject actually arrive? My understanding of a 1 round casting time spell is that it comes into effect just before the beginning of the turn after you began casting it. Ex: Anixx starts casting SMIV on Round 2, initiative count 20. Fiendish Dire Wolf arrives on Round 3, initiative count 21. Anixx acts normally. Right? |
| Tellish_of_Ket02-26-07, 03:14 AM | When does a just cast summon spell's subject actually arrive? My understanding of a 1 round casting time spell is that it comes into effect just before the beginning of the turn after you began casting it. Ex: Anixx starts casting SMIV on Round 2, initiative count 20. Fiendish Dire Wolf arrives on Round 3, initiative count 21. Anixx acts normally. Right? They arrive on initiative count 20, but before Anixx acts. Anixx still acts normally. Tellish |
| TheMagister02-26-07, 03:55 AM | Duh. You're right. |
| Tellish_of_Ket02-26-07, 04:02 AM | I still can't find a MQ for Jur. Don't suppose someone wants to put me through a quick fight? It's vs a Kraken to get its body, to turn it into a zombie. Tellish |
| hogarth02-26-07, 07:04 AM | I still can't find a MQ for Jur. Don't suppose someone wants to put me through a quick fight? It's vs a Kraken to get its body, to turn it into a zombie. Tellish I'll save you the trouble. You can't make a kraken zombie -- zombies are limited to creatures with 10 HD or less. Hit Dice Drop any Hit Dice from class levels (to a minimum of 1), double the number of Hit Dice left, and raise them to d12s. If the base creature has more than 10 Hit Dice (not counting those gained with experience), it can’t be made into a zombie with the animate dead spell. Besides, a kraken doesn't have a land speed so it doesn't seem like it would be very speedy in the arena. Quite possibly you have something cooked up to get around that, though. EDIT: Maybe you'd just sit within its 60' reach. |
| Abyssal Stalker02-26-07, 07:07 AM | That's odd. How are the example zombies with 10+ HD created? |
| Zevox02-26-07, 07:08 AM | That's odd. How are the example zombies with 10+ HD created? Becoming a Zombie doubles the base creature's HD. Its the base creature that can't have more than 10 HD, not the resulting Zombie. Zevox |
| hogarth02-26-07, 07:10 AM | Actually, it just says that "If the base creature has more than 10 Hit Dice (not counting those gained with experience), it can’t be made into a zombie with the animate dead spell". So I guess you could make a kraken zombie if you were a morhg. |
| Abyssal Stalker02-26-07, 07:12 AM | I see. Edit: ...dead people :) |
| Macbrea02-26-07, 08:39 AM | Hmm, not sure an ape shouldn't be rideable. :P http://www.seaworld.org/animal-info/info-books/gorilla/images/pic-ride.jpg http://courses.umass.edu/anth103/images/gorilla.jpg |
| hogarth02-26-07, 08:46 AM | Hmm, not sure an ape shouldn't be rideable. :P http://www.seaworld.org/animal-info/info-books/gorilla/images/pic-ride.jpg To quote Erithmu: "That's just a bad camera angle." ;) |
| Macbrea02-26-07, 09:19 AM | To quote Erithmu: "That's just a bad camera angle." ;) Heh.. Added another angle. Though, I am using pictures of 'Great Apes' instead of dire apes. :P |
| Erithmu02-26-07, 09:25 AM | I'm worried when people start to quote me in a sarcastic tone ... That's my job ... |
| hogarth02-26-07, 10:11 AM | Heh.. Added another angle. Though, I am using pictures of 'Great Apes' instead of dire apes. :P Riding an ape is at least a thousand times more believable than McJarvis's character who rode a snake! (Please send all double entendres to me via private mail.) |
| Abyssal Stalker02-26-07, 10:21 AM | Riding an ape is at least a thousand times more believable than McJarvis's character who rode a snake! (Please send all double entendres to me via private mail.) Yeah, that was kinda funny. I could see a small character riding a gargantuan snake, maybe. I mean, the snake should be about 3ft thick so that it could be ridden... |
| Maraxus02-26-07, 10:44 AM | Hmm, not sure an ape shouldn't be rideable. :P http://www.seaworld.org/animal-info/info-books/gorilla/images/pic-ride.jpg http://courses.umass.edu/anth103/images/gorilla.jpg And now imagine the big Ape sprinting ... or fighting. And the little one fighting alongside ... or even trying to "guide with it's knees." I think, this is a better example for: "Apes can be grappled." ;) |
| Hirumajoe02-26-07, 10:48 AM | @Sauro: I think Valen's rewards are too high for the Valen/Istima fight. Istima brought a CR 3 pegasus. MaxCA is 5 at ECL 7. Pegasus is (3/5)*25% = 15% rewards. Valen brought a CR 1 Light Warhorse. (1/5)*25% = 5%. So 1 + 0.15 - 0.05 = 1.1 multiplier. 700 xp * 1.1 = 770. 866* 1.1 = 952 gp. In any case, that's 1/3 of what he got last week when Istima surrendered to him. If you could fix that listing, that'd be great. Thanks again. |
| Macbrea02-26-07, 10:54 AM | And now imagine the big Ape sprinting ... or fighting. And the little one fighting alongside ... or even trying to "guide with it's knees." I think, this is a better example for: "Apes can be grappled." ;) I am not sure that is a horridly valid point. If we are going to say that the ride is too rough, Then dragons, griffons and hippogriffons should be impossible to ride. The exotic saddle allows the person to ride the mount. Anything with wings has to pound the living daylights out of it's rider. |
| hogarth02-26-07, 10:59 AM | And now imagine the big Ape sprinting ... or fighting. And the little one fighting alongside ... or even trying to "guide with it's knees." I certainly would agree that an ape is "ill-suited as a mount" and would thus give a -5 to Ride checks. But with an exotic saddle of some kind, why not? |
| TelinArtho02-26-07, 12:09 PM | Rubicanti (TheMagister) vs Zodiac (Vathelokai) is up. Don't expect too much... |
| Tellish_of_Ket02-26-07, 12:24 PM | I'll save you the trouble. You can't make a kraken zombie -- zombies are limited to creatures with 10 HD or less. Besides, a kraken doesn't have a land speed so it doesn't seem like it would be very speedy in the arena. Quite possibly you have something cooked up to get around that, though. EDIT: Maybe you'd just sit within its 60' reach. Crap, i must of missread that part. Back to the drawing board i guess. Tellish |
| Etiquette_Gnome02-26-07, 01:00 PM | Tiny question, can the spell suggestion be used on an animal if the caster has Telepathy as a special quality? I ask this since animals are capable of being given commands by people through Handle Animal and similar. Heck, could the spell be used if the caster used a Handle Animal check? And would it even work on a summoned animal (such as a Bag of Tricks)? |
| TelinArtho02-26-07, 01:08 PM | I would say yes, but the suggestion would have to be on the relatively short list of handle animal commands. So using suggestion to "Down" would be fine, but don't bother with suggestions that are a sentence or more. I would never apply the reasonable save modifier here, and the animal could still be handled to go back to the original action. |
| hogarth02-26-07, 01:14 PM | Tiny question, can the spell suggestion be used on an animal if the caster has Telepathy as a special quality? I ask this since animals are capable of being given commands by people through Handle Animal and similar. Heck, could the spell be used if the caster used a Handle Animal check? And would it even work on a summoned animal (such as a Bag of Tricks)? I don't think that Imps have telepathy. Only certain devils do (as listed in their description); note that telepathy isn't listed in the monster description for chain devils, lemures or imps. |
| TelinArtho02-26-07, 01:23 PM | Hogarth is correct - Imps do not have telepathy. |
| Etiquette_Gnome02-26-07, 01:31 PM | But the Devil section says that most have a certain list of abilities, unless the specific description says otherwise, and there's nothing in the imp description that precludes that prior list. |
| hogarth02-26-07, 01:37 PM | But the Devil section says that most have a certain list of abilities, unless the specific description says otherwise, and there's nothing in the imp description that precludes that prior list. It looks like the phrase "unless otherwise noted" is poor phrasing. I think omitting the property from the monster's description is what they meant by "otherwise noted". Going by your logic, imps can summon devils as well (since it isn't specified that they can't). |
| Etiquette_Gnome02-26-07, 02:41 PM | I don't try to understand the logic that goes on here sometimes, as the letter of the rules seems to hold precedence most of the time, which is why I ask to begin with. As for the part on imps being able to summon devils, the details on general summoning were left in the individual monster descriptions, so the lack of any detail is the judging factor there; but no such extra detail is required for something like 'telepathy'. You could theoretically argue that this is similar to the fact some creatures don't need to breath because of their creature type, yet the specific monster relies on the reader to be aware that creatures of that type don't need to breath, and thus isn't explicitly listed. |
| TelinArtho02-26-07, 02:52 PM | @EG - my reasoning is fairly simplistic: It says that if it isn't mentioned otherwise, they have it. However, the actuality is that all of the devils that are supposed to have it, actually have it in their descriptions. Now, as pitlord, it is within your discretion to execute a ruling on this for the fight - since the wording is clearly not-clear and we can get this resolved officially afterwards. |
| Tellish_of_Ket02-26-07, 04:20 PM | OK, so i've gone back to the drawing board and it seems like the most bang for my buck that i can get via animate dead for the purpose of proccuring a zombie is a Very Young 10HD - Red Dragon. Anyone willing to run a quick fight? I'll PM tactics when i get back from the movies tonight assuming someone wants to take it on. Tellish |
| MindWandererB02-26-07, 05:14 PM | @Telin: I find it extremely humorous that although the Stygian Strikers are supposed to have an association with fiendish heritage, and you rolled a half-celestial wild elf and two celestial fey. That's just a bizarre coincidence.... |
| TelinArtho02-26-07, 05:21 PM | Isn't it though? It was a very interesting and complicated fight to run. For the most part, I took the default spells for the celestial nymphs (I think I replaced one or two of them), and that made it a much easier fight - since they would never have been able to use Hold Animal, Speak with animals, etc, etc. That said, the sorcerer had potential on his own to win the fight had he succeeded in a combination of SR checks (1d20+8+2 vs DC16) and a failed will save from Asran (1d20+3 vs DC18...) - but after 4 tries and not succeeding - perhaps it just wasn't meant to be. The sorcerer failing the concentration check in the end was a real decisive factor though... |
| TelinArtho02-26-07, 05:37 PM | @TM - about the miniquest - there's a couple of things: 1. First of all, in situations like that - I would've suggested rolling twice on the EL9 charts, mostly because the 10+ charts haven't been redone. 2. Secondly, for treasure, it is based on the CR, not the HD of the creature in question. In this case, the salamandars would have double the CR10 treasure (11k*2 = 22k each) - which makes things much more different. For the amount of treasure you gave them, for sure the encounter was going to be nigh impossible for most people. That said, with the treasure they should have had - the story is likely quite different. |
| TheMagister02-26-07, 06:56 PM | @TM - about the miniquest - there's a couple of things: 1. First of all, in situations like that - I would've suggested rolling twice on the EL9 charts, mostly because the 10+ charts haven't been redone. 2. Secondly, for treasure, it is based on the CR, not the HD of the creature in question. In this case, the salamandars would have double the CR10 treasure (11k*2 = 22k each) - which makes things much more different. For the amount of treasure you gave them, for sure the encounter was going to be nigh impossible for most people. That said, with the treasure they should have had - the story is likely quite different. Actually, it's 16000x2=32000 each, but still, that makes me feel better. Really, I tried to chew up as much money as possible on defensive things, like the +1 large mithril chain barding of improved cold resistance (47,400 gp). The offense they had really revolved around their rings of spell storing (18000 gp apiece). Without those, it'd be a different fight altogether (no full power attack with a for-sure hit rate). Heck, Anixx might still be alive after round 3! TM |
| Rauul02-26-07, 07:58 PM | this was posted last week... dun know if Cat missed it... but does or can someone do the fight this week... or are they still in Limbo? 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.. |
| MindWandererB02-26-07, 08:19 PM | I just want to comment on this: As for rolling twice on the EL 9 chart: I asked MindWandererB about this before, and unfortunately he said NOTHING about rolling twice on the EL 9 chart, and (in fact) rather emphasized that I was supposed to roll on the EL 11 chart because it's an EL 11 quest and that's what it's there for.It's true that I didn't consider that option, and it's a perfectly viable one. Mea culpa. However, there are three problems with that. 1) You can end up with a lot of monsters that way--up to 9 or 10 on a couple of bad rolls. That's darn hard on the questlord. 2) On average, the EL should be the same. The old tables have the extra randomness, which will be fixed--if no one else does it, I'll create new ECL 11-15 tables when I have time, which would be after March 7. But other than that, you could still end up with an elder stone giant and a half-celestial remorhaz. It's all luck. 3) Whether to use 1 monster roll or 2 is up to the players, but they have to let the questlord know. In the absence of that input, they have to make their own call. |
| Rauul02-26-07, 10:01 PM | Mohmat Iptomor vs. Tamis Ruhl ECL 3 is here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11600344&postcount=611) Comments, complaints, flaming.. I am used to it... |
| McJarvis02-26-07, 10:06 PM | Comments, complaints, flaming.. I am used to it... That's only because you keep getting NiQil fights. ***biiiiiiig wink*** |
| Rauul02-26-07, 10:22 PM | That's only because you keep getting NiQil fights. ***biiiiiiig wink*** Acually... coughjonescough gave me more of a headache |
| NiQil02-26-07, 10:34 PM | @ Rauul: Please make sure you are using the required summary template located in the Rules thread that I mentioned right after pairings came out this past Wednesday. |
| Rauul02-26-07, 10:47 PM | @ Rauul: Please make sure you are using the required summary template located in the Rules thread that I mentioned right after pairings came out this past Wednesday. fixed... really don't see much difference but ok it's fixed |
| Rauul02-26-07, 10:50 PM | Btw.. the City map needs to be color coded as to what the balconys ect are... this is really the first time at working on the city map.. and i am surprised there is no color codes in the discriptions on the bottom... Just my 2 cents |
| Vathelokai02-26-07, 11:22 PM | Gakhnalak Strongjaw (MindWandererB) vs. Zax Kar Nissex (TelinArtho) : [Plains] Not the fight I was expecting, but why not... |
| Tellish_of_Ket02-27-07, 12:08 AM | Gakhnalak Strongjaw (MindWandererB) vs. Zax Kar Nissex (TelinArtho) : [Plains] Not the fight I was expecting, but why not... Dang, i was hoping for a nice bloodbath. Paint the plains red, until i read someone's tactics and saw the end result of those. Damn, MWB, i just took a look at Strongaw. I was thinking, dang...he stole my new idea...but that's hardly not likely as you've been playing him for a bit. Grr...now i need another idea for a new gladiator. That guy looks like a bad-a$$. Tellish |
| Tellish_of_Ket02-27-07, 12:45 AM | Just curious if someone wants to QL my mini-quest of killing a 10-HD red dragon this coming wednesday. I realize it's too short of notice to do it tonight or tomorrow, so wednesday is cool. I won't be playing him until the iron man anyhow afterwards so, plenty of time. Tellish |
| Rauul02-27-07, 01:33 AM | the battle is here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11603584&postcount=614) I expect complaints from one or both.. be gentle please.. |
| MindWandererB02-27-07, 01:52 AM | Damn, MWB, i just took a look at Strongaw. I was thinking, dang...he stole my new idea...but that's hardly not likely as you've been playing him for a bit. Thanks! That's two of my characters that impress you... I must be doing something right. I'm really looking forward to when his Str is in the 30s after a few levels of Dragon Disciple. Add the spellcasting cohort he'll be getting, and I'm hoping he'll end up being one of my better characters. Sometimes I wish I'd gone with a Power Attack-based build (beautiful with True Strike), but I'm pleased with him so far.the battle is here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11603584&postcount=614) I expect complaints from one or both.. be gentle please..I don't really follow what happened with the Prot. Evil, but it certainly doesn't negate Hold Person. It only protects against spells that grant ongoing control over the target. Command grants control, granted only for a round, but it's still considered ongoing, but Hold Person only paralyzes, rather than granting control. |
| Guildmaster (WAR)02-27-07, 01:56 AM | the battle is here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11603584&postcount=614) I expect complaints from one or both.. be gentle please.. There is (actually) a FAQ question about whether or not Protection from Evil prevents Hold Person. And it doesn't prevent Hold Person. There's a copy of that decision in our Court Decisions, too, if I'm not mistaken. Lemme go look...brb. Q: Does Protection from <alignment> work against the spell Hold Person? A: As per the 3.5 FAQ, no. linky to the Courtroom of Gladius Sorry bro. What-'is-name the cleric deserves to force TAG to make a Will save. If he makes it, you're golden. If not, the battle might last just a bit longer... TM |
| Guildmaster (WAR)02-27-07, 02:00 AM | Thanks! That's two of my characters that impress you... I must be doing something right. I'm really looking forward to when his Str is in the 30s after a few levels of Dragon Disciple. Add the spellcasting cohort he'll be getting, and I'm hoping he'll end up being one of my better characters. Sometimes I wish I'd gone with a Power Attack-based build (beautiful with True Strike), but I'm pleased with him so far.I don't really follow what happened with the Prot. Evil, but it certainly doesn't negate Hold Person. It only protects against spells that grant ongoing control over the target. Command grants control, granted only for a round, but it's still considered ongoing, but Hold Person only paralyzes, rather than granting control. As far as Gakhnalak is concerned, I'm kinda frothing at the mouth waiting for him to mature as well. I can USE that kind of firepower. :fight!: |
| NiQil02-27-07, 02:04 AM | As far as Gakhnalak is concerned, I'm kinda frothing at the mouth waiting for him to mature as well. I can USE that kind of firepower. :fight!: Also, in the same fight with the issues of the Pro: X spells vs Hold Person, there is also rampant misuse of pearls of power. It takes a standard action to recall a spell with a pearl, meaning that TAG can't recall and refire the spell in the same round. Those actions are going to have to be spread out, meaning that his opponent is going to have that many more rounds to act. |
| Tellish_of_Ket02-27-07, 03:10 AM | Thanks! That's two of my characters that impress you... I must be doing something right. I'm really looking forward to when his Str is in the 30s after a few levels of Dragon Disciple. Add the spellcasting cohort he'll be getting, and I'm hoping he'll end up being one of my better characters. Sometimes I wish I'd gone with a Power Attack-based build (beautiful with True Strike), but I'm pleased with him so far.I don't really follow what happened with the Prot. Evil, but it certainly doesn't negate Hold Person. It only protects against spells that grant ongoing control over the target. Command grants control, granted only for a round, but it's still considered ongoing, but Hold Person only paralyzes, rather than granting control. If you have 10 credits to spare you can chose a minor bloodline that grants power attack...there are quite a few of them, and you don't even have to waste a level for it. You get it automatically at 8th. I like this guy better than the bat. Most the earlier were-bat builds i seen discussed were rogue'ish types. Yours is definately unique though. Power Attack/Combat Expertise/Improved Expertise are very nice with True Strike-Quickened. If you have quickdraw, you can even get the quickened Via a wand. Quickened-truestrike, drop wand, quickdraw "Gladiator-Killer" and carve 'em up. Tellish |
| TelinArtho02-27-07, 10:18 AM | Gakhnalak Strongjaw (MindWandererB) vs. Zax Kar Nissex (TelinArtho) : [Plains] Not the fight I was expecting, but why not... Just a note (that doesn't make a difference in the fight), but I stated to have them move forward at the speed of the slowest animal - not the slowest member. So Zax's speed shouldn't have mattered there. Other than that - I guess I should've done it a little differently, but I don't regret it. Zax's record is of no importance to me at the moment - he's just a pet I play with from time to time... |
| Abyssal Stalker02-27-07, 01:20 PM | Hood's fight is done. |
| hogarth02-27-07, 01:26 PM | Hood's fight is done. This isn't terribly important, but psicrystals (as constructs) are immune to mind-affecting effects. |
| MindWandererB02-27-07, 01:30 PM | If you have 10 credits to spare you can chose a minor bloodline that grants power attack...there are quite a few of them, and you don't even have to waste a level for it. You get it automatically at 8th. I like this guy better than the bat. Most the earlier were-bat builds i seen discussed were rogue'ish types. Yours is definately unique though. Power Attack/Combat Expertise/Improved Expertise are very nice with True Strike-Quickened. If you have quickdraw, you can even get the quickened Via a wand. Quickened-truestrike, drop wand, quickdraw "Gladiator-Killer" and carve 'em up.TellishDo you mean a metamagic rod of Quicken? You can't have a wand with a 5th-level spell. The minor bloodline would cost me a level at 12th, which will be unfreezing soon, and it's not worth that price. I haven't picked Gakhnalak's level 9, 12, and 15 feats yet, so Power Attack could still make it in. But then again, there's Improved Grapple, Deflect Arrows, Improved Disarm, and Knockdown on that list, as well. Tough choice. |
| Tellish_of_Ket02-27-07, 01:36 PM | Do you mean a metamagic rod of Quicken? You can't have a wand with a 5th-level spell. The minor bloodline would cost me a level at 12th, which will be unfreezing soon, and it's not worth that price. I haven't picked Gakhnalak's level 9, 12, and 15 feats yet, so Power Attack could still make it in. But then again, there's Improved Grapple, Deflect Arrows, Improved Disarm, and Knockdown on that list, as well. Tough choice. Yup, meant rod...serves me right for typing that at 2am. As for the bloodline, it doesn't cost you any level at 12th. If you do not take the level at 12 (which i reccomend you don't), you simply stop advancing in the bloodline, but retain what you've gained thus far....hence the free 4th and 8th level bonuses. They aren't huge or broken bonuses, just a +2 to a skill and a feat...for 10 Credits, it's very much balanced. Tellish |
| hogarth02-27-07, 01:39 PM | Yup, meant rod...serves me right for typing that at 2am. As for the bloodline, it doesn't cost you any level at 12th. If you do not take the level at 12 (which i reccomend you don't), you simply stop advancing in the bloodline, but retain what you've gained thus far....hence the free 4th and 8th level bonuses. Note: as a CoCo house rule, you MUST take the bloodline level. Don't read the UA version of stuff, read the version in the "Rules of Gladius". It's different in several important ways. |
| Etiquette_Gnome02-27-07, 03:30 PM | Dag nab it, I just realized that I didn't update my psion's crafting quest thing to be 3/3 last week. Do I have to wait a week before I can use him and his equipment now, or can I get a post on the battle thread to link and get the equipment this week, since I didn't use Sabra this week because I was expecting to be crafting? |
| TelinArtho02-27-07, 03:38 PM | Hmm - quick question: Does a supernatural ability detect with detect magic? Supernatural abilities are magical but not spell-like I guess that indicates yes. Any views on this to disagree? |
| McJarvis02-27-07, 03:42 PM | Hmm - quick question: Does a supernatural ability detect with detect magic? I guess that indicates yes. Any views on this to disagree? They shouldn't. Since SU abilities are anulled by anti-magic fields, it would make sense that you could detect them via detect magic. |
| Zevox02-27-07, 03:42 PM | Looks straightforward to me. Detect Magic detects magic (duh). Supernatural abilities are magical. Therefore detect magic detects supernatural abilities. A=B. B=C. Therefore, A=C. Zevox |
| MindWandererB02-27-07, 03:43 PM | That makes sense to me, too, although it seems strange in some cases (e.g. breath weapon). @Etiquette Gnome: Quest summaries go in the quest log, not the battles thread. |
| hogarth02-27-07, 03:45 PM | Looks straightforward to me. Detect Magic detects magic (duh). Supernatural abilities are magical. Therefore detect magic detects supernatural abilities. If it were in my campaign (not that any of you asked), I'd say "sometimes yes, sometimes no". For instance, DR 5/magic is a supernatural ability, but I wouldn't let it be detected by detect magic. But I'd probably let an aboleth's Enslave ability or an angel's Protective Aura be detected. |
| sonofzeal02-27-07, 03:47 PM | That makes sense to me, too, although it seems strange in some cases (e.g. breath weapon). Heh. DM: "The dragon rears back and unleashes its firey breath at you." PC: "I cast Detect Magic to see if it's magical breath!" DM: "Congratulations, your face gets burned off." |
| Etiquette_Gnome02-27-07, 03:55 PM | Where's the Quest Log? Edit: Nevermind |
| Rauul02-27-07, 04:30 PM | the battle is here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11603584&postcount=614) I expect complaints from one or both.. be gentle please.. redone and redone... don't agree but then it's not my job to agree.. |
| McJarvis02-27-07, 04:34 PM | redone and redone... don't agree but then it's not my job to agree.. No complaints here. I was hoping to save some money & charges of MM by relying on natural 20's to hit him with my crossbow, but I understand that you probably didn't have the time/patience to put up with such nonsense. edit-> And thanks for the kind words towards TAG's char concept in the comments after the fight :) |
| Tellish_of_Ket02-27-07, 04:50 PM | If it were in my campaign (not that any of you asked), I'd say "sometimes yes, sometimes no". For instance, DR 5/magic is a supernatural ability, but I wouldn't let it be detected by detect magic. But I'd probably let an aboleth's Enslave ability or an angel's Protective Aura be detected. Agreed. If you tried to detect magic on a naked wizard (no buffs), you would not detect anything strange. Same principle applies if you tried detect magic on a naked 10th level monk. You would not detect any magic. Simply having a supernatural ability does not mean you detect as magic. Tellish |
| McJarvis02-27-07, 04:51 PM | Agreed. If you tried to detect magic on a naked wizard (no buffs), you would not detect anything strange. Same principle applies if you tried detect magic on a naked 10th level monk. You would not detect any magic. Simply having a supernatural ability does not mean you detect as magic. Tellish On the other hand, if someone had Vow of Poverty as a feat(non-core, duh :P ) I would have them detect as magic. -_- |
| Rauul02-27-07, 04:56 PM | No complaints here. I was hoping to save some money & charges of MM by relying on natural 20's to hit him with my crossbow, but I understand that you probably didn't have the time/patience to put up with such nonsense. edit-> And thanks for the kind words towards TAG's char concept in the comments after the fight :) hehe acually I Like his Concept.. is very well thought out.. Don't mean i wouldn't be cussing him right and left if I faced him.. :schemes: :censored: :duel: :mrt: |
| TheMagister02-27-07, 05:20 PM | Thanks for getting the fight up, Abyssal! Appreciate it! TM |
| McJarvis02-27-07, 05:59 PM | hehe acually I Like his Concept.. is very well thought out.. Don't mean i wouldn't be cussing him right and left if I faced him.. :schemes: :censored: :duel: :mrt: I was just trying to make a wizard that didn't take a spell focus, use divination as his specialty, or take grey elf as his race. This was, of course, the inevitable outcome ;) |
| Macbrea02-27-07, 07:34 PM | Odd, question for people... Does green and red auto spot each other on that last movement on this map? http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=forest;a=Torl,M,45,16,4 1,10,36,4,28,3;b=Anak,M,23,52,23,48,27,4 8,31,48;c=Vent,S,23,51,23,47,28,48,32,48 ;d=Souf,S,23,53,23,49,27,47,30,48;style= s |
| MindWandererB02-27-07, 07:39 PM | No. The line of sight passes through squares that grant concealment. There's almost never an auto-spot in the forest, technically. If you ignored that, then yes--there's a straight line between the trees South of green. This might be okay if neither character is trying to avoid being seen. |
| Macbrea02-27-07, 07:45 PM | Nah, I will just keep up with the pattern I am running. Both characters are seeking each other. I refuse to delay anyone because the map won't let them fight. |
| NiQil02-27-07, 10:01 PM | Anyone want to pick up a really easy fight? nickbeat posted the sheets and tactics for this fight, and judging by the tactics, it should be short and bloody. I'd really love to not have this held over if I can help it....any takers? |
| sonofzeal02-27-07, 10:13 PM | Anyone want to pick up a really easy fight? nickbeat posted the sheets and tactics for this fight, and judging by the tactics, it should be short and bloody. I'd really love to not have this held over if I can help it....any takers? Is there any reason I couldn't take it? I haven't Pitlorded before but I was about to start anyway. *gets working on it, just for the practice* |
| hogarth02-27-07, 10:36 PM | Anyone want to pick up a really easy fight? nickbeat posted the sheets and tactics for this fight, and judging by the tactics, it should be short and bloody. I'd really love to not have this held over if I can help it....any takers? In fact, I'll even change Balthazar's tactics to say "Balthazar kills himself." if that helps. But I don't think that'll be necessary. |
| sonofzeal02-27-07, 11:03 PM | Wow, finished.... I think. DC15 fort save from massive damage if you lose over half your hitpoints in a single hit, right? |
| Tellish_of_Ket02-27-07, 11:05 PM | Wow, finished.... I think. DC15 fort save from massive damage if you lose over half your hitpoints in a single hit, right? wrong. Massive Damage: If you ever sustain a single attack deals 50 points of damage or more and it doesn’t kill you outright, you must make a DC 15 Fortitude save. If this saving throw fails, you die regardless of your current hit points. If you take 50 points of damage or more from multiple attacks, no one of which dealt 50 or more points of damage itself, the massive damage rule does not apply. Tellish |
| MindWandererB02-27-07, 11:05 PM | Wow, finished.... I think. DC15 fort save from massive damage if you lose over half your hitpoints in a single hit, right?No, that's only if you lose 50 HP in one attack. |
| Macbrea02-27-07, 11:06 PM | Hmm, can a swarm be entangled? |
| Tellish_of_Ket02-27-07, 11:06 PM | Hmm, can a swarm be entangled? no |
| sonofzeal02-27-07, 11:08 PM | Ah, must have been a houserule that got enshrined in my local gaming circle. Shouldn't be much longer though. So should I actually post it to the battles thread when I'm done? |
| Macbrea02-27-07, 11:10 PM | Well, it says it cannot be grappled. But entangled with an entangle spell which targets and area might. But not sure on that one. Will assume they are not for now. |
| Tellish_of_Ket02-27-07, 11:12 PM | Well, it says it cannot be grappled. But entangled with an entangle spell which targets and area might. But not sure on that one. Will assume they are not for now. It also says they are immune to spells and effects that target individual creatures. And at the beginning, it says they can move through the tiniest cracks and crevases. I'm gonna assume (and rightly), that an entagle spell is not a solid 40' diameter solid block of vines without any space between them. lol. I would classify this one as "in the spirit of the rules" catergory. Tellish |
| MindWandererB02-27-07, 11:12 PM | Ah, must have been a houserule that got enshrined in my local gaming circle. Shouldn't be much longer though. So should I actually post it to the battles thread when I'm done? No reason why not... as long as you can take some criticism. But this one's pretty one-sided, so it's a great trainer fight. |
| sonofzeal02-27-07, 11:25 PM | Fight is here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11614224&postcount=616). *crosses fingers* ^^ |
| Tellish_of_Ket02-27-07, 11:32 PM | Fight is here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11614224&postcount=616). *crosses fingers* ^^ Lemme get this straight... Balthazaar is crafting stuff... Top Hat of Comprehend Languages and Read MagicC [2,600 gp][3 lb] ...and then using court connections, selling them back at a profit. Feb 21: Sell Helm of Comprehend Languages and Read Magic for 2,886 gp (2600 * 1.11) -- Sell Item skill package gives +11% on resale value. Is that allowed under the new system? Is that the new maven'ing? Tellish |
| NiQil02-27-07, 11:36 PM | Fight is here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11614224&postcount=616). *crosses fingers* ^^ Thanks for the quick pickup....MWB is right...good fight to learn on, as it was short and bloody. One thing to look at, but not worth changing as it won't change the outcome. In each round, Truls also gets to add his Psychic Strike damage, giving an additional 1d8 damage each round. So the fight could have been over on the first attack with a good roll. Just something to keep in mind for the future. A few things to fix: The time between fights is 6 hours, not 2 as you have listed. The rewards are incorrect. An ECL 3 winner gets 900 xp/gp, and the loser 300 xp/gp. And then Balthazar will get his bonus stuff on top of that. Make sure to send a PM with a link to your post to Pitlords to advise him that you took over the fight from the originally assigned pitlord so that you get the credits earned for the fight. |
| Macbrea02-27-07, 11:39 PM | Awards should be 900xp/900gp and 378dp/378gp. |
| Macbrea02-27-07, 11:41 PM | Lemme get this straight... Balthazaar is crafting stuff... ...and then using court connections, selling them back at a profit. Is that allowed under the new system? Is that the new maven'ing? Tellish It's a sale of 288gp for 5 credits. If it's a new maven, I am willing to let that one go.. :P |
| sonofzeal02-27-07, 11:44 PM | It's a sale of 288gp for 5 credits. If it's a new maven, I am willing to let that one go.. :P So I should edit him to 378xp/666gp? |
| Zevox02-27-07, 11:46 PM | So I should edit him to 378xp/666gp? No - just note that as his free activity. (His political career is automatic, not his free activity.) Zevox |
| sonofzeal02-27-07, 11:48 PM | No - just note that as his free activity. (His political career is automatic, not his free activity.) Zevox Editted. Anything else? |
| NiQil02-27-07, 11:52 PM | Editted. Anything else? The time between fights still needs to be changed from 2 hrs to 6 hrs |
| sonofzeal02-27-07, 11:55 PM | The time between fights still needs to be changed from 2 hrs to 6 hrs Changed, but I'm not quite sure why. I thought it was 1d6 hours, and I rolled a 2... |
| NiQil02-27-07, 11:58 PM | The time is rolled by Pitlords when he does pairings. If you look at the banner at the top of the post made this past Wednesday, you will see it. The time roll is the same for all fights that week. |
| Macbrea02-28-07, 12:44 AM | Torel vs Anakala in the forest may be found here. I can safely say, hunting a druid in the woods isn't an easy task. |
| Erithmu02-28-07, 03:09 AM | Torel vs Anakala in the forest may be found here. I can safely say, hunting a druid in the woods isn't an easy task. Brutal fight there ... I have no complaints but then again I'm staring down a paper that needs to get written. Thanks for being detail oriented. |
| hogarth02-28-07, 06:45 AM | Sonofzeal, Balthazar is selling his helmet for 2,886 gp, not 288 gp. It's a sale of 288gp for 5 credits. If it's a new maven, I am willing to let that one go.. :P 5 credits? How do you figure? It's just a Helm of Comprehend Languages and Read Magic. Don't tell me it costs 5 credits to substitute the word "Top Hat" for "Helm"... :eek: I was just trying to be whimsical. :weep: At any rate, Monsieur Picsou is just my attempt to see how much money a character can make if he really tried. Currently the answer is "not that much". |
| Macbrea02-28-07, 08:38 AM | Heh.. didn't realize there was a Helm, ah, well. |
| Rauul02-28-07, 09:40 AM | And the masked man vs rauul go into week 3 :weep: |
| TelinArtho02-28-07, 11:35 AM | About the Ana vs Torel fight: Well, my issue with the fight is having Vent and Souffle caught by entanglement in the first place. From my tactics - they should be flying: Start off at the default location with my elementals nearby and hovering. Q: How does the spell Entangle interact with flying creatures? A: Entangle is considered to not have any reach, therefore it may only affect those subjects that share it's space. Entangle can therefore affect anything in a 5 ft cube that it has been cast upon. Any flying creature that is hovering above these spaces is going to be affected depending upon their maneuverability rating. Good and Perfect flyers can hover at a height of 5 ft above the ground (or whatever surface the entangle spell has been applied to), and therefore would be outside of the area of affect of the spell (unless they intentionally chose to go closer than 5 ft). Creatures with Average or below maneuverability would be considered to have entered the area of affect if they do not have the ability to hover at 5 ft of height, and therefore would be affected. I would appreciate if the fight could be edited to reflect this - since the added pressure on Torel could very well be the difference in the fight. [EDIT] Also, I don't see actions for the elementals in round 29. Also there's a bit of an issue about the range of things. Given that the range on the Summon Swarm is close (25+5ft/level = 25+15=40ft) and the radius of the entangle is 40ft - either Torel is within the area of his own entangle, the entangle is not centered, or the concentration ceases once the swarm moves on to Ana. Given that - and that my elementals were close to me and hovering, they should be able to move and attack in the same round that Torel casts the entangle. [EDIT some more] The damage on the spiritual weapon should be 1d8+2, not 1d8+3. |
| sonofzeal02-28-07, 12:14 PM | Sonofzeal, Balthazar is selling his helmet for 2,886 gp, not 288 gp. 5 credits? How do you figure? It's just a Helm of Comprehend Languages and Read Magic. Don't tell me it costs 5 credits to substitute the word "Top Hat" for "Helm"... :eek: I was just trying to be whimsical. :weep: At any rate, Monsieur Picsou is just my attempt to see how much money a character can make if he really tried. Currently the answer is "not that much". How much money? Not overwhelming, but probably a decisive edge if you keep it up for a few levels, especially if you stay expendable-free. If I was doing it, I'd try to maximize gold-per-xp and drop Political Carreer. Do you have any particular plan for what to do with the gold later on? I can imagine a few things that could be done by a character swimming in gp. |
| nickbeat02-28-07, 12:31 PM | @sonofzeal: Thanks for pickin up that fight. I dropped the ball this week and you caught it. I won't be able to pitlord for a little while, and I will tell the powers that be. |
| Macbrea02-28-07, 01:16 PM | About the Ana vs Torel fight: Well, my issue with the fight is having Vent and Souffle caught by entanglement in the first place. From my tactics - they should be flying: I would appreciate if the fight could be edited to reflect this - since the added pressure on Torel could very well be the difference in the fight. [EDIT] Also, I don't see actions for the elementals in round 29. Also there's a bit of an issue about the range of things. Given that the range on the Summon Swarm is close (25+5ft/level = 25+15=40ft) and the radius of the entangle is 40ft - either Torel is within the area of his own entangle, the entangle is not centered, or the concentration ceases once the swarm moves on to Ana. Given that - and that my elementals were close to me and hovering, they should be able to move and attack in the same round that Torel casts the entangle. [EDIT some more] The damage on the spiritual weapon should be 1d8+2, not 1d8+3. Edited. I missed actioins for them on round 29. That has been corrected. The swarm is allowed to appear and move in the same action. It appeared next to Anakala during the turn with Torel against the edge of his entangle. I moved the elementals as if they are not affected by the entangle at all. This resulted in one getting a slam and a second one getting a flanking in most rounds that they could attack. The final results of the fight was a closer fight and souffle living through it. |
| TelinArtho02-28-07, 01:39 PM | The swarm is allowed to appear and move in the same action. It appeared next to Anakala during the turn with Torel against the edge of his entangle. However, once Torel steps away, concentration ends - because he is now more than 40ft away from the swarm. I don't know positions, but given my specifics on where I wanted the elementals to attack from in my tactics, I suspect that at least one should get an AoO against Torel in round 29. It also looks like Vent is attacking at +5 but it should be +7 like Souffle (+1 from bless, +1 from higher ground). For any flanking - that should be further adjusted by +2 (I don't think they'd be flanking - given my conditions on where I wanted them). It looks like there needs to be a few more concentration checks, given the extra attacks on Torel though. I'm confused about the DC on the round 30 concentration check - it almost looks like you are summing the damage for the round and making one concentration check. It should be one check per hit against Torel. In round 33, given the positions I wanted the elementals in - Torel should not be able to withdraw without suffering at least one AoO. This would also happen in the following round - since with a 50ft move - they can easily catch up to 80ft of total movement from Torel. Same in round 36 and again in round 38. I don't understand the -2 attack modifier for Vent and Souffle in round 35, but I see that it wouldn't matter since they would be misses anyway (but I am curious on what it is). In round 37, given the position and movement available for the elementals, Torel should not be able to 5ft step safely to cast. I don't see an action for Souffle in round 38. In round 39 and 40, throwing flame would be a ranged attack while engaged in melee - so Torel should suffer AoO for that as well. Basically the current issues I have boil down to the 40ft move of the druid is not enough to stay away from the 50ft fly (perfect) speed of the elementals. Thanks for the current edits, but I still feel the above needs to be addressed. |
| MindWandererB02-28-07, 01:52 PM | Okay, plainly we need a consistent ruling abount Entangle in the forest. I have been told by some pitlords that since the forest is basically all foliage--trees and undergrowth as well as grass--that Entangle will snag you even if you are flying, or on the path. Since Entangle does specifically affect trees and whatnot, I would tend to agree with this ruling. Now Telin is arguing the opposite. If he is willing to recant, then we're done; if not, we go to the Council. |
| TelinArtho02-28-07, 01:58 PM | Go to the council if you like - but bear in mind there is a current ruling in the court decisions that states that as long as you are flying (above 0' altitude) you will not be caught by entangle. Meaning - it can be voted on but should not affect this fight in particular. |
| Macbrea02-28-07, 02:00 PM | However, once Torel steps away, concentration ends - because he is now more than 40ft away from the swarm. Hmm, I didn't realize that. That will change the fight drasticly as I will need to move the produce flame up considerably. It was my error. I won't be able to work on the fight any more til tonight. As I am currently at work. I don't know positions, but given my specifics on where I wanted the elementals to attack from in my tactics, I suspect that at least one should get an AoO against Torel in round 29. I made withdraw moves to move away from the elementals. This doesn't result in AoO for moving out of the square. It also looks like Vent is attacking at +5 but it should be +7 like Souffle (+1 from bless, +1 from higher ground). For any flanking - that should be further adjusted by +2 (I don't think they'd be flanking - given my conditions on where I wanted them). I did miss the bonuses in this case, Your numbers should have been +1 higher in all cases by the method that i did run. Which was flanking the opponent. I will correct it later this evening to account for your elementals being higher above the target and not flanking. It looks like there needs to be a few more concentration checks, given the extra attacks on Torel though. I'm confused about the DC on the round 30 concentration check - it almost looks like you are summing the damage for the round and making one concentration check. It should be one check per hit against Torel. Sorry, reread concentration again. Am used to a house rule were all concentration checks are made after all incoming damage is done on full round spells. Will fix it this evening. In round 33, given the positions I wanted the elementals in - Torel should not be able to withdraw without suffering at least one AoO. This would also happen in the following round - since with a 50ft move - they can easily catch up to 80ft of total movement from Torel. Same in round 36 and again in round 38. Note, you don't provoke and AoO while making movement out of a square during a Withdraw maneuver. I don't understand the -2 attack modifier for Vent and Souffle in round 35, but I see that it wouldn't matter since they would be misses anyway (but I am curious on what it is). Torel was underwater at bottom of stream. The elementals were attacking from above the water at a target that was totally submerged. In round 37, given the position and movement available for the elementals, Torel should not be able to 5ft step safely to cast. I don't see an action for Souffle in round 38. In round 39 and 40, throwing flame would be a ranged attack while engaged in melee - so Torel should suffer AoO for that as well. Basically the current issues I have boil down to the 40ft move of the druid is not enough to stay away from the 50ft fly (perfect) speed of the elementals. Thanks for the current edits, but I still feel the above needs to be addressed. Will look over the rest of the fight this evening. I need to remove myself from pitlording as I don't have time to do it at this time. |
| MindWandererB02-28-07, 02:04 PM | Go to the council if you like - but bear in mind there is a current ruling in the court decisions that states that as long as you are flying (above 0' altitude) you will not be caught by entangle. Meaning - it can be voted on but should not affect this fight in particular. Meaning there are at least two fights that I lost, and argued this point with the pitlord unsuccessfully, that I should have won. Grrr. |
| TelinArtho02-28-07, 02:05 PM | Thanks for your patience MacBrea. About the withdraw, note that in my tactics I called for one elemental to be directly overhead of Torel while the other is just above Torel and in one direction. Withdraw doesn't provoke an AoO for leaving the first threatened square, but does provoke normally for leaving the second and further squares. Withdrawing from melee combat is a full-round action. When you withdraw, you can move up to double your speed. The square you start out in is not considered threatened by any opponent you can see, and therefore visible enemies do not get attacks of opportunity against you when you move from that square. (Invisible enemies still get attacks of opportunity against you, and you can’t withdraw from combat if you’re blinded.) You can’t take a 5-foot step during the same round in which you withdraw. If, during the process of withdrawing, you move out of a threatened square (other than the one you started in), enemies get attacks of opportunity as normal. |
| Tellish_of_Ket02-28-07, 02:39 PM | Sonofzeal, Balthazar is selling his helmet for 2,886 gp, not 288 gp. 5 credits? How do you figure? It's just a Helm of Comprehend Languages and Read Magic. Don't tell me it costs 5 credits to substitute the word "Top Hat" for "Helm"... :eek: I was just trying to be whimsical. :weep: At any rate, Monsieur Picsou is just my attempt to see how much money a character can make if he really tried. Currently the answer is "not that much". Well, i have a new maven coming soon. She's better than the last one i guarantee you. By my calculations, i'd be 50k gp up on my opponents once i read 8th level. Or is it 10th? Not sure. but it's around that mark. That's HUGE. Lets just say, bringing in max allies, craft/sell bonus %, and having an xp/gp penalty for odd levels to slow the level progression....lol muwhahahha. Tellish |
| TelinArtho02-28-07, 02:48 PM | Lets just say, bringing in max allies, craft/sell bonus %, and having an xp/gp penalty for odd levels to slow the level progression....lol muwhahahha. Tellish Well having mismatched levels is just a gp penalty - read the house rules... |
| MitzaVolchenko02-28-07, 02:53 PM | Go to the council if you like - but bear in mind there is a current ruling in the court decisions that states that as long as you are flying (above 0' altitude) you will not be caught by entangle. Meaning - it can be voted on but should not affect this fight in particular. Here is the relevant ruling. I would read it to mean the elementals would have to be hovering 5' above any foliage in the affected area, including trees to avoid the effects. Trees are specifically mentioned in the spell description. It is certainly possible for them to hover above the canopy and be unaffected, but that does not seem to be the goal with them. I haven't checked the map of this particular fight/round to measure the distances, but saying that only the grass is affected by that spell in a forest seems to be a little limiting and against the intent of the spell. Q: How does the spell Entangle interact with flying creatures? A: Entangle is considered to not have any reach, therefore it may only affect those subjects that share it's space. Entangle can therefore affect anything in a 5 ft cube that it has been cast upon. Any flying creature that is hovering above these spaces is going to be affected depending upon their maneuverability rating. Good and Perfect flyers can hover at a height of 5 ft above the ground (or whatever surface the entangle spell has been applied to), and therefore would be outside of the area of affect of the spell (unless they intentionally chose to go closer than 5 ft). Creatures with Average or below maneuverability would be considered to have entered the area of affect if they do not have the ability to hover at 5 ft of height, and therefore would be affected. |
| Macbrea02-28-07, 02:58 PM | Ok, that is as far as I can edit this fight without it having to be rerun. It is done one way or the other. fight |
| MindWandererB02-28-07, 03:00 PM | Here is the relevant ruling. I would read it to mean the elementals would have to be hovering 5' above any foliage in the affected area, including trees to avoid the effects. Trees are specifically mentioned in the spell description. It is certainly possible for them to hover above the canopy and be unaffected, but that does not seem to be the goal with them. I haven't checked the map of this particular fight/round to measure the distances, but saying that only the grass is affected by that spell in a forest seems to be a little limiting and against the intent of the spell.The canopy is still within the trees, so that wouldn't help. The ruling does say "whatever surface the entangle spell has been applied to," which could be the trees, the vines, etc. IMO. Well having mismatched levels is just a gp penalty - read the house rules...Yes, please do: Q: Do penalties for multiclassing apply? A: Yes. They apply to both XP and GP in order to prevent abuse. |
| TelinArtho02-28-07, 03:01 PM | Whoops... |
| Tellish_of_Ket02-28-07, 03:03 PM | Well having mismatched levels is just a gp penalty - read the house rules... Ok, so it'll cut my profits from 50k to about 32k. I can live with that. Tellish **EDIT Just read MWB's reply...looks like i'm back to 50k+ woot! |
| TelinArtho02-28-07, 03:05 PM | Ok, that is as far as I can edit this fight without it having to be rerun. It is done one way or the other. fight Except that in round 34, Torel starts at 0hp and moves, taking an AoO for 4 damage. Then both elementals can CDG him. |
| Erithmu02-28-07, 03:07 PM | However, once Torel steps away, concentration ends - because he is now more than 40ft away from the swarm. Since when? Range does not indicate how far a spell has to be. Most of the spells indicate when something would end due being out of range (ex: Spiritual Weapon). I have never seen Summon Swarm used in the sense that its caster must remain within 40 ft of the target. |
| MindWandererB02-28-07, 03:07 PM | @ToK: Do remember that you have to at least try to win. Maven is no longer allowed, although Balthazar technically is. Cat might have something to say about that if he ever notices.... @Rith: I have never been able to find that in the spell rules, but it is in the psionics rules. The same philosophy should apply. And it's been done that way a lot around here in the past. |
| Tellish_of_Ket02-28-07, 03:13 PM | @ToK: Do remember that you have to at least try to win. Maven is no longer allowed, although Balthazar technically is. Cat might have something to say about that if he ever notices.... @Rith: I have never been able to find that in the spell rules, but it is in the psionics rules. The same philosophy should apply. And it's been done that way a lot around here in the past. NO, no suicides. I will try to win...HAHAHAHAHAHAH! (snickers) Yup..i'll try REAL hard. lol Tellish |
| Macbrea02-28-07, 03:17 PM | Bah, fight results changed. I am not sure I like the look of that fight as the pitlord the ran it. I would argue against it personally. :P |
| Erithmu02-28-07, 03:19 PM | @Rith: I have never been able to find that in the spell rules, but it is in the psionics rules. The same philosophy should apply. And it's been done that way a lot around here in the past. :confused: Ok ... But the psionics refer to a target moving out of range, when Summon swarm has none, just an effect. I take a nap and everything goes wonky... |
| Tellish_of_Ket02-28-07, 03:20 PM | Bah, fight results changed. I am not sure I like the look of that fight as the pitlord the ran it. I would argue against it personally. :P It is amazing how even just one little error (maybe not in this case), can have a tremendous trickle down effect. I have been on both ends of those kind of things. Its never good. Tellish |
| Erithmu02-28-07, 04:03 PM | @MWB/Telin: Comments about my above statement? Which would shift back to the original fight ... I have to go and prep for 5 hrs of class tonight, so I'll be back later, but I don't agree w/ the swarm limited to a range. |
| MindWandererB02-28-07, 04:13 PM | :confused: Ok ... But the psionics refer to a target moving out of range, when Summon swarm has none, just an effect. I take a nap and everything goes wonky...Summon Swarm Conjuration (Summoning) Level: Brd 2, Drd 2, Sor/Wiz 2 Components: V, S, M/DF Casting Time: 1 round Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels) Effect: One swarm of bats, rats, or spiders Duration: Concentration + 2 rounds Saving Throw: None Spell Resistance: NoI see a range. But I still think Telin's argument about Entangle is supported by neither the rules nor the Court Decisions. |
| Erithmu02-28-07, 04:23 PM | I see a range. But I still think Telin's argument about Entangle is supported by neither the rules nor the Court Decisions. What I'm asking you to consider is that there is no 'summon swarm' type of effect in psionics. Most of the concentration spells 'have' a target listing that then deals damage or moves an object. Since Summon Swarm has no 'target' there is no range from which to continue concentration on the spell. I bring this issues up since it has 'never' been questioned in a FotW thread, but rather there have been questions of if concentration on the swarm after it has left LoS is legal, and when it has been proved legal, the statement has turned to that the caster can't know when/if the swarm is done with it's 'food' |
| MindWandererB02-28-07, 04:26 PM | What I'm asking you to consider is that there is no 'summon swarm' type of effect in psionics. Most of the concentration spells 'have' a target listing that then deals damage or moves an object. Since Summon Swarm has no 'target' there is no range from which to continue concentration on the spell. This argument, I don't buy. Concentrating on the target of a spell should be no different from concentrating on the effect of a spell, for this purpose. |
| TelinArtho02-28-07, 04:30 PM | I have been looking through the SRD and it does seem that the concentration thing is really a psionics only thing... It specifically says that conjuration spells can exceed the range of the spell after the spell has been cast - so it would seem that I am in error. If MacBrea is not too tired of it - he has my blessing to revert the fight's rewards. My apologies to all involved for the confusion on all subjects here. |
| Erithmu02-28-07, 04:35 PM | This argument, I don't buy. Concentrating on the target of a spell should be no different from concentrating on the effect of a spell, for this purpose. *sigh* Ok ... I don't have the energy to fight this (nor the time to deal with a holdover), and I have to take care of school ... (more than anything I didn't want to have to unlevel Torel) ... Can you do me a favor an record this information in TLT front page, as I'm sure we will need to reference it many times over. @Telin: GG EDIT: Telin w/ the ninja ... Your call. I have to go study and ancient dead language before my quiz. |
| False_Keraptis02-28-07, 04:40 PM | Hmm.... This crafting stuff, then selling for a profit has a lot of potential if you have the necessary discipline. If you don't mind a few crafting full actions every cycle, and you don't spend any money but rather reinvest the profits, it could get really sick. I'm not sure how I feel about that. |
| False_Keraptis02-28-07, 04:44 PM | Also, can anyone tell me, what is "mavening?" |
| MindWandererB02-28-07, 04:48 PM | Also, can anyone tell me, what is "mavening?" There was a character named Maven who used Craft to make money every week, and always surrendered her fights. The plan was for her to be ridiculously wealthy by high levels, but Cat finally said no--it wasn't fair to the players that wanted an arena fight, not an auto-win. He may say something similar about builds that attempt the same strategy, and while not surrendering, clearly have no chance of winning. |
| sonofzeal02-28-07, 04:53 PM | There was a character named Maven who used Craft to make money every week, and always surrendered her fights. The plan was for her to be ridiculously wealthy by high levels, but Cat finally said no--it wasn't fair to the players that wanted an arena fight, not an auto-win. He may say something similar about builds that attempt the same strategy, and while not surrendering, clearly have no chance of winning. So I guess the question is, how low a chance of winning does it take? Balthazar's sleep strategy has something like a 50% chance of working against non-elves, which is quite respectable. Granted, elves are highly frequent, but even if he's down to a 25% win chance, that's still not much worse than a number of "serious" gladiators. |
| Macbrea02-28-07, 04:58 PM | Not sure it's easy to tell what character is going to be successful and what isn't. Relanex has a (2 win 4 loss) record. He was built to take advantage of the Career packages. This optimized how much money he has made. It could be argued though, he isn't a winning build. Which is true. Does that make him a Mavin? |
| False_Keraptis02-28-07, 05:01 PM | [...] even if he's down to a 25% win chance, that's still not much worse than a number of "serious" gladiators. Hey, I resemble that remark! |
| McJarvis02-28-07, 05:05 PM | Hey, I resemble that remark! With a comment like that, you can't be all that serious of a gladiator ;) |
| McJarvis02-28-07, 05:08 PM | He may say something similar about builds that attempt the same strategy, and while not surrendering, clearly have no chance of winning. The easy way to clearly define this is to just have a minimum rating that equals execution in gladius for crimes against humanity. |
| MindWandererB02-28-07, 05:10 PM | Not sure it's easy to tell what character is going to be successful and what isn't. Relanex has a (2 win 4 loss) record. He was built to take advantage of the Career packages. This optimized how much money he has made. It could be argued though, he isn't a winning build. Which is true. Does that make him a Mavin? Relanex's strategy doesn't involve charging at an opponent with 13 hit points, AC 12, Str 6, and a nonproficiency penalty. Or sniping with a sling and a +8 Hide. Although granted, Sleep does have a chance of success, when he uses it, so I guess he barely squeaks by legitimacy. |
| Tellish_of_Ket02-28-07, 05:20 PM | I am the king of being nerfed. I have been nerfed more times than anyone else i know. I made maven as a venerable/phrenic, with multi-class penalty, max allies, and tossed every fight. Even at ECL 4, she was making around 200+gp per fight tossed if i remember correctly. History of my nerfings.... 1) Kelek....massive hide/ms...impossible to spot, would snipe you while standing 5' away from u. <nerfed after beating Cat twice, cuz you know, it's not allowed to win vs cat, :P ) <nerfed to allow easier spotting> 2) Original Memorex (130 int/wis/cha), 12x reincarnated venerable gnome. <nerfed>...banned reincarnate 3) Handle Animal...Level 3 druid with Polar bear...by level 7 would be a Purple Worm or Roc <nerfed, maxCA> 4) Kelek....expendables limited. After, yet again beating cat, this time with readied prismatic wall on his flying mount with poor maneuverability and him being unable to stop in time. As the harvester lay on the arena floor with 4hp, begging for his life, no quarter was given. Muwhaha...<nerfed expendables> 5) Candle of Inv - Gate <nerfed, banned> 6) Maven - Uber crafter/money maker. <nerfed with skill limitations> 7) Soon to Come...Nerfing #7. He'll make more money than maven used to. Plus at higher levels he'll use moment of prescience as a prebuff to be used for crafting...+25 woot!! Tellish |
| MindWandererB02-28-07, 05:30 PM | I am the king of being nerfed. I have been nerfed more times than anyone else i know.Wow... no kidding. It looks like you spend more effort trying to find loopholes in the rules than actually winning fights! 4) Kelek....expendables limited. After, yet again beating cat, this time with readied prismatic wall on his flying mount with poor maneuverability and him being unable to stop in time. As the harvester lay on the arena floor with 4hp, begging for his life, no quarter was given. Muwhaha...<nerfed expendables>Phooh, that's easy enough to avoid. Fast dismount. So the mount dies and you take falling damage, Harvey could handle that. Unless Harvey was riding untrained, of course... but that's just asking for trouble. 1) Kelek....massive hide/ms...impossible to spot, would snipe you while standing 5' away from u. <nerfed after beating Cat twice, cuz you know, it's not allowed to win vs cat, ) <nerfed to allow easier spotting>How was that nerfed? We don't have any house rules about stealth at the moment, except for the 1 foot/rank while in motion rule, which actually makes stealth better. |
| McJarvis02-28-07, 05:31 PM | 1) Kelek....massive hide/ms...impossible to spot, would snipe you while standing 5' away from u. <nerfed after beating Cat twice, cuz you know, it's not allowed to win vs cat, :P ) <nerfed to allow easier spotting> I had a similar experience with uberhiders-> I've now managed to make it so they made listening to pinpoint retardedly easy. :( 7) he'll use moment of prescience as a prebuff to be used for crafting...+25 woot!! Tellish I would expect this to never be allowed. Current crafting rules(to my knowledge) assume you take a 20 on the check, thus any +skill 1-time use deal is invalid(like the +skill psionic shards, already been done small-scale...) |
| Zevox02-28-07, 05:33 PM | How was that nerfed? We don't have any house rules about stealth at the moment, except for the 1 foot/rank while in motion rule, which actually makes stealth better. Eh, do the works "DC 0 listen check to hear an attack" ring any bells? Not related to Tellish's character, but we've definitely got an anti-stealth house rule right there. Zevox |
| Tellish_of_Ket02-28-07, 05:34 PM | Wow... no kidding. It looks like you spend more effort trying to find loopholes in the rules than actually winning fights! Well, seeing as how my last 4 characters totalled for 53-3 record i do win fights. And only the last two (maven/memorex) builds were CoCo loopholes. And to be honest, via the rules, nothing i've done was a loophole. It was just maximizing what i could do within the rules. Unfortunately because of the unique environment within CoCo it presented an unfair advantage (only by virtue of noone coming up with a viable strategy to stop it). So NERFING is easier. Loopholing was jindl's specialty. Bend it to the most favourable interpretation for personal exploitation. Tellish |
| MindWandererB02-28-07, 05:35 PM | Eh, do the works "DC 0 listen check to hear an attack" ring any bells? Not related to Tellish's character, but we've definitely got an anti-stealth house rule right there. Zevox Not technically a house rule, just an interpretation. We weren't able to find an official DC for that, so we found the closest thing we could. It's based purely on a reading of the RAW. Everything ToK mentioned was a real house rule. |
| sonofzeal02-28-07, 05:36 PM | 3) Handle Animal...Level 3 druid with Polar bear...by level 7 would be a Purple Worm or Roc <nerfed, maxCA> When I first heard about this place, "Handle Animal" was dead top of my priority list to try. A lvl1 char can have a +15 to Handle Animal; 12 HD animals at lvl3 are totally doable. Figures you'd have beat me to it though. |
| MindWandererB02-28-07, 05:45 PM | When I first heard about this place, "Handle Animal" was dead top of my priority list to try. A lvl1 char can have a +15 to Handle Animal; 12 HD animals at lvl3 are totally doable. Figures you'd have beat me to it though. Oh, yeah. You can see the archives for such nonsense. Tyrannosauri were major portions of a few builds for a while, until allies were nerfed (and thank goodness, IMO). |
| Tellish_of_Ket02-28-07, 05:47 PM | I remember a fight with Kelek where a pitlord just said (and openly)..."I don't have time for all this sneaking around crap." The end result..."While hiding in an obscuring mist, a barbarian raged...charged through the mist (impossible cuz of movement impedence), attacked the square i just happen to be in (without making any checks), crited, and made the 50% concealment roll, and killed me." So tell me how's that fair? I'm not saying ur critizing me MWB, but i have always and always will play within the rules. Will i try to maximize them to my advantage? Absolutely. Isn't that what trying to be the best is? I will never cheat or misinterpret a rule to my unfair advantage. It will always be within the boundaries of fair play. But when a couple of elders gang up against you, it's pretty hard to do anything within the boundaries of fair play when they can't come up with good strategies to beat you, and instead nerf everything saying i am taking unfair advantage of the rules. Which is totally untrue. Tellish |
| MindWandererB02-28-07, 06:02 PM | You're right, I'm not criticising. But we all have to remember that this is a game, and if we're not having fun, the rules need to be changed. If Handle Animal allows you to have allies stronger than you are, so that opposing PCs are really fighting your allies first and you second, it's not fun, and it's not fair. It might be legal, but it would have to be made illegal or everyone will quit. If high-powered expendables mean that the probability of winning is based more on your willingness to spend money than your build, it is again not fun. And this is not even mentioning obvious cheese like spending XP to stay low-level and make infinite money. Now, maybe the then-Elders were unnecesarily accusatory toward you for using those strategies. I don't know, I wasn't there. I do know that when someone uses an obviously broken strategy against me--such as CL 9 magic missile wands at ECL 5--then I'm going to suggest a nerf. Not because that player cheated or did anything wrong, but because it's just not fun to play in the same arena as them. I remember a fight with Kelek where a pitlord just said (and openly)..."I don't have time for all this sneaking around crap." The end result..."While hiding in an obscuring mist, a barbarian raged...charged through the mist (impossible cuz of movement impedence), attacked the square i just happen to be in (without making any checks), crited, and made the 50% concealment roll, and killed me."As for this, the pitlord was right on one count: there is no movement penalty for moving through Obscuring Mist. That applies only when you're blind. If you can see 5' in front of you with a 20% concealment chance, there's no movement penalty. Now, having him effectively auto-spot Kelek was definitely uncool. |
| Hirumajoe02-28-07, 06:13 PM | Not technically a house rule, just an interpretation. We weren't able to find an official DC for that, so we found the closest thing we could. It's based purely on a reading of the RAW. Everything ToK mentioned was a real house rule. I'm curious how many people would use that interpretation in their home games. Arguably any listen check given to any action other than movement and the listed actions is a house rule. And yes, I'd call the DC 0 to hear an attack a house rule, because its not listed on the chart and also since, as you point out, you were unable to find an official DC. Hmm... Actually, if you really want to get really literal, no where in the rules does it explicitly say you need a listen check at all for the attack action. And if you say that its obvious that such an action makes noise, I'd like to point out that breathing obviously also makes noise. Whats the DC to hear breathing? Closest thing I can find is whispering, implying a capped MS check of 15 for living creatures. :D But anyways, this is why we have elders. So they make the tough rulings and the rest of us can get on with our characters bashing each other senseless. :) |
| McJarvis02-28-07, 06:40 PM | Well, seeing as how my last 4 characters totalled for 53-3 record i do win fights. Hah! What a n00b, my last 4 characters totalled for 18-0. I'm infinitely better than you! ;) Loopholing was jindl's specialty. Ah, Jindl. How I miss that crazy kid. Speaking of people I miss: where is jonesjones-soda, or whatever his name was? ;) |
| McJarvis02-28-07, 06:44 PM | If Handle Animal allows you to have allies stronger than you are, so that opposing PCs are really fighting your allies first and you second, it's not fun, and it's not fair. It might be legal, but it would have to be made illegal or everyone will quit. You're right. Cat's tactics should be made illegal, because they are bigger than everyone else's character sheet & thus it's like you're fighting TWO characters... ;) |
| McJarvis02-28-07, 06:45 PM | And yes, I'd call the DC 0 to hear an attack a house rule, because its not listed on the chart and also since, as you point out, you were unable to find an official DC. Actually, the smart person that came up with the DC of 0 that killed all of my stealth characters was me. I found a chart under the section on invisibility in the SRD. |
| Maraxus02-28-07, 07:13 PM | ...that said, hearing a battle going on was DC 0, wasn't it? I still think this is wrong, it was not clearly worded and DC0 is simple a lot to loud. |
| Tellish_of_Ket02-28-07, 07:23 PM | You're right, I'm not criticising. But we all have to remember that this is a game, and if we're not having fun, the rules need to be changed. If Handle Animal allows you to have allies stronger than you are, so that opposing PCs are really fighting your allies first and you second, it's not fun, and it's not fair. It might be legal, but it would have to be made illegal or everyone will quit. If high-powered expendables mean that the probability of winning is based more on your willingness to spend money than your build, it is again not fun. And this is not even mentioning obvious cheese like spending XP to stay low-level and make infinite money. Now, having him effectively auto-spot Kelek was definitely uncool. RED COLORED QUOTE: True...and i was actually one of the advocates to nerf HA. I was an advocate to nerf it BEFORE it got out of control and since the Elders weren't listening to me, saying it's not broken and not out of the spirit of the rules, i felt it was my job to show them how it could be abused. The same was true with reincarnation. Everyone guffawed when i mentioned to ban it (before anyone used it). Even Cat didn't want to ban it. Then i made my 130 mental stat character and everyone was like WHOA! So i wasn't trying to break the rules to make it unfair or not fun for anyone. In fact he was never played. Just shown how it could be abused. GREEN COLORED QUOTE: Again, i agree. The thing is, it never happened until then, and only when cat lost. That's the strange part. It was never thought of as abuse until then. BOLDED PART: That happened at least 4 times in his career. And as for the Kelek's hide/ms, he was just good at what he did because of my tactics. I could have made his h/ms even better, he wasn't fully optimized for it, just really good. I honestly believe it was me as a player that made him good, as opposed to the character build. 53-3 was achieved with "normal" optimized characters with sound tactics, and no cheese-balling. And i can't stress tactics enough. Tactics/Tactics/Tactics. I'm far from a cheese-ball. If i request to ban/nerf something, it's cuz it should be. It was comical on the characters i created to prove my point, but sometimes drastic changes require drastic measures. Tellish |
| hogarth02-28-07, 07:31 PM | RED COLORED QUOTE: True...and i was actually one of the advocates to nerf HA. I was an advocate to nerf it BEFORE it got out of control and since the Elders weren't listening to me, saying it's not broken and not out of the spirit of the rules, i felt it was my job to show them how it could be abused. The same was true with reincarnation. Everyone guffawed when i mentioned to ban it (before anyone used it). Even Cat didn't want to ban it. Then i made my 130 mental stat character and everyone was like WHOA! So i wasn't trying to break the rules to make it unfair or not fun for anyone. In fact he was never played. Just shown how it could be abused. [..] I'm far from a cheese-ball. If i request to ban/nerf something, it's cuz it should be. It was comical on the characters i created to prove my point, but sometimes drastic changes require drastic measures. I'm with Tellish -- if you suggest a rule be changed before anyone abuses it, you get no response. The only way to show that a rule is problematic is by demonstration. |
| Zevox02-28-07, 07:53 PM | Not technically a house rule, just an interpretation. We weren't able to find an official DC for that, so we found the closest thing we could. It's based purely on a reading of the RAW. Everything ToK mentioned was a real house rule. As others have said, theres no indication in the rules that you can make a listen check to hear an attack (and if we try to go by the argument that anything we can imagine making noise should have a listen DC, we run into very ridiculous things, as Hirumajoe pointed out with breathing). Ergo, its a house rule. And to be honest, its one of the few we have that I have a low opinion of. It just makes no sense whatsoever, and completely nerfs anyone attempting stealth. ...that said, hearing a battle going on was DC 0, wasn't it? I still think this is wrong, it was not clearly worded and DC0 is simple a lot to loud. A battle is listed as DC -10, actually. And if memory serves, one of the reasons we wound up with the DC 0 for attacks is because someone was advocating using that DC -10 for a "battle" to mean the individual attacks in the "battle" between characters in the arena because it was the only thing in the core rules close to a listen check for attacks. Yeah :rolleyes: . Zevox |
| McJarvis02-28-07, 08:54 PM | The results of Mask vs Rauul are up (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11623490&postcount=618). Rewards forthcoming. |
| Rauul02-28-07, 09:02 PM | The results of Mask vs Rauul are up (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11623490&postcount=618). Rewards forthcoming. Just looked at it, seems ok up to the last round.. Grapple gives Aoo, then Rauuls gets his attack then masked man gets his, Unless Aoo changes the Inisitive..? |
| McJarvis02-28-07, 09:03 PM | Just looked at it, seems ok up to the last round.. Grapple gives Aoo, then Rauuls gets his attack then masked man gets his, Unless Aoo changes the Inisitive..? if the AoO hits, the grapple attempt is ruined. That is my understanding, anyway... |
| Rauul02-28-07, 09:07 PM | if the AoO hits, the grapple attempt is ruined. That is my understanding, anyway... Ok.. pretty much makes a touch attack worthless while grappling.. Ok thanks for running it :) |
| False_Keraptis03-01-07, 03:19 AM | It just makes no sense whatsoever, and completely nerfs anyone attempting stealth. Yeah, I see that it is pretty questionable, but mark me down in the "strongly in favor" column. Stealth and arena combat are not the best mix; it's such an ungodly pain to run, and so frustrating to auto-lose to a stealth character! The board is healthier because of this ruling. A stealth character can put everything he has into pumping the stealth skills, and unless other characters put equally much into their detection skills (which I don't even think is possible), they have literally zero chance. |
| Tellish_of_Ket03-01-07, 06:54 AM | Yeah, I see that it is pretty questionable, but mark me down in the "strongly in favor" column. Stealth and arena combat are not the best mix; it's such an ungodly pain to run, and so frustrating to auto-lose to a stealth character! The board is healthier because of this ruling. A stealth character can put everything he has into pumping the stealth skills, and unless other characters put equally much into their detection skills (which I don't even think is possible), they have literally zero chance. Not true. You have to just think about it is all really. Here's how i've been beating and i've beaten stealth builds using various builds. Summon Monster II (d3 spiders). Riding Dog (scent). Max Spot/Listen skills. Cohort (touchsight). ...and about 4 more ways i can count. Easy as pie. Imho, there wasn't a real need to nerf stealth, its just that people were unwilling to come up with a way to beat it, so nerfing is asier. Tellish |
| hogarth03-01-07, 07:06 AM | Easy as pie. Imho, there wasn't a real need to nerf stealth, its just that people were unwilling to come up with a way to beat it, so nerfing is asier. What I find incredibly lame is that if you see a big ball of darkness, you can't attack the centre of it. Because...because..."Waah, waah, no fair guys! I'm telling!" ;) |
| Abyssal Stalker03-01-07, 07:07 AM | ...Area effects: -fireball -entangle ...Allies: -dire bat -bat familiar ...Other: -Detect magic -Arcane sight There are creative ways to go around them. Maybe the real reson we don't see them too much anymore is that they are a pain in the arse to run and no one could withstand the massive amount of burned-out pitlords... And of course the listen DCs. |
| Abyssal Stalker03-01-07, 07:11 AM | What I find incredibly lame is that if you see a big ball of darkness, you can't attack the centre of it. Because...because..."Waah, waah, no fair guys! I'm telling!" ;) On the other hand, how can you exactly pinpoint the center of the effect. If you are inside it, you can't see a thing. If you are outside it, there's no way telling where's the center. But that's just logic. And it doesn't work with D&D. Here you can determine ranges and geometry with unbelievable accuracy. "I'll toss the fireball there, so that the flames reach only the square in front of me." You just need to pick the right cross-section of those little lines that are drawn to the world around you. |
| Tellish_of_Ket03-01-07, 07:28 AM | What I find incredibly lame is that if you see a big ball of darkness, you can't attack the centre of it. Because...because..."Waah, waah, no fair guys! I'm telling!" ;) I second that vote. lol The way around it is to close your eyes and take the 50% miss chance...oh wait a second...why does it matter? You get a 50% miss chance even if your eyes are open. lemme get this straight...i can target an invisible dude in a square...50% chance....if blinded i can still fire an arrow and target a square, 50% miss chance...but suddenly because you are surrounded by a ball of blacklight, i cannot attack the center of it for the same miss-chance? Absolutely ridiculous. That goes totally against the grain of giving the 50% miss chance anyhow. So, a blinded caster can NEVER EVER EVER cast a spell, cuz he can't see? Not picking on anyone in particular, but i read the harvesters fight this week and i almost fell off my chair laughing at the notion of what's being implied. The same LAME rule should apply to anyone in an Obscuring mist too...cuz it's 100% concealment. Makes no difference of the source (blacklight or fog). If i'm in the middle of it, you can never target a square within it. OMG...i'm trying to stand straight...getting dizzy from all the laughing and rules-bending ideas. Tellish |
| Vathelokai03-01-07, 07:44 AM | Speaking of people I miss: where is jonesjones-soda, or whatever his name was? ;)You mean SodaGuy (http://boards1.wizards.com/member.php?u=328948)? Looks like he last logged in around Christmas. |
| McJarvis03-01-07, 07:56 AM | I second that vote. lol The way around it is to close your eyes and take the 50% miss chance...oh wait a second...why does it matter? You get a 50% miss chance even if your eyes are open. lemme get this straight...i can target an invisible dude in a square...50% chance....if blinded i can still fire an arrow and target a square, 50% miss chance...but suddenly because you are surrounded by a ball of blacklight, i cannot attack the center of it for the same miss-chance? Absolutely ridiculous. That goes totally against the grain of giving the 50% miss chance anyhow. So, a blinded caster can NEVER EVER EVER cast a spell, cuz he can't see? Not picking on anyone in particular, but i read the harvesters fight this week and i almost fell off my chair laughing at the notion of what's being implied. The same LAME rule should apply to anyone in an Obscuring mist too...cuz it's 100% concealment. Makes no difference of the source (blacklight or fog). If i'm in the middle of it, you can never target a square within it. OMG...i'm trying to stand straight...getting dizzy from all the laughing and rules-bending ideas. Tellish You misunderstood what he said. The ruling is that you can't determine which square the center is....so I guess the pitlord has to roll a 1d9 or something to figure out if you guess right, then you get a 50% miss chance. And even then, much of the time the actual steal character in question isn't in the center of the darkness... @Hogarth: I'm pretty sure I was the only frontrunner of "mega-hide" builds other than Zero(who got nerfed for other reasons). I retired them all because the listen check rules were making them impossible to run without submitting at least 5 pages of tactics. |
| Tellish_of_Ket03-01-07, 08:09 AM | You misunderstood what he said. The ruling is that you can't determine which square the center is....so I guess the pitlord has to roll a 1d9 or something to figure out if you guess right, then you get a 50% miss chance. I'm gonna temporarily disagree with that statement. It is very easy to figure out where the center is...just close ur eyes. It's the same miss chance. lol. Same thing when you come across someone with mirror image in melee/missile. If he has like 6 images, you're better off just closing your eyes for the attacks and taking the 50% miss over the 90% miss. Then like other singular person advantage build (coughcoughkelekstealthcoughcough), it should be banned because it presents an unfair advantage. Tellish |
| McJarvis03-01-07, 08:16 AM | I'm gonna temporarily disagree with that statement. It is very easy to figure out where the center is...just close ur eyes. It's the same miss chance. lol. According to the ruling, even if you closed your eyes your character wouldn't "know" which square to attack. |
| Hirumajoe03-01-07, 08:18 AM | @Hogarth: I'm pretty sure I was the only frontrunner of "mega-hide" builds other than Zero(who got nerfed for other reasons). I retired them all because the listen check rules were making them impossible to run without submitting at least 5 pages of tactics. I'm pretty sure you could still do them, it'd just require a bit of additional equipment or a class level. Heck 1 level of bard allows you to use a Wand of Silence (5 credits) at 90g a fight (and perform could earn you 120g a fight even at ECL4) and even eventually cast it yourself, which is what I thought Mort Noir Reborn's direction was going to be. Admittedly it shuts down your own casting, but thats why you put it on a arrow, to get rid of it when you need to. About the only thing I thought Mort really needed was dodge and mobility instead of the two hide boosting feats, in order to grab Shadow Dancer early. So that she could hide no matter the map. As it stands, you can still make megahide builds, its just they require the silence spell. |
| Tellish_of_Ket03-01-07, 08:19 AM | post moved to courtroom |
| Hirumajoe03-01-07, 08:23 AM | I'm gonna temporarily disagree with that statement. It is very easy to figure out where the center is...just close ur eyes. It's the same miss chance. lol. Same thing when you come across someone with mirror image in melee/missile. If he has like 6 images, you're better off just closing your eyes for the attacks and taking the 50% miss over the 90% miss. Then like other singular person advantage build (coughcoughkelekstealthcoughcough), it should be banned because it presents an unfair advantage. Tellish Actually, you have a 50% miss chance only *if* you've pinpointed the target's square correctly. Closing my eyes and shooting off in the direction opposite my opponent gives me a 100% miss chance. As far as I can tell, those Mirror Images are all in the same square as the caster, thus there's no problem in pinpointing him. You'd still need something like your traditional DC 0 listen check when he attacks to pinpoint him. Of course, I wonder what happens when the AoE is *smaller* than the listen check's inaccuracy? Do you get a bonus on listen checks to pinpoint if the darkness is only a small area? |
| McJarvis03-01-07, 08:25 AM | I'm pretty sure you could still do them, it'd just require a bit of additional equipment or a class level. Heck 1 level of bard allows you to use a Wand of Silence (5 credits) at 90g a fight (and perform could earn you 120g a fight even at ECL4) and even eventually cast it yourself, which is what I thought Mort Noir Reborn's direction was going to be. Admittedly it shuts down your own casting, but thats why you put it on a arrow, to get rid of it when you need to. About the only thing I thought Mort really needed was dodge and mobility instead of the two hide boosting feats, in order to grab Shadow Dancer early. So that she could hide no matter the map. As it stands, you can still make megahide builds, its just they require the silence spell. I thought about all of that, but the silence spell will allow an enemy to effectively pinpoint you with a simple detect magic or arcane sight spell. Since Mort was based on attrition(rather than alpha striking), being able to locate her down to a 10 ft radius every turn would effectively destroy her vs most gladiators in the arena. To my knowledge, there really is no way to completely negate a silence spell's magical aura... All that aside-> As far as I'm concerned, the only really decent hiding build at this point would be some sort of a forest gnome Cleric/trickery domain kind of thing(full casting, hide as a skill, silence in the spell list)...but I just don't have the energy or the time to dedicate to yet another stealth concept that will be nerfed to the point of 5-page tactic spamming. |
| Abyssal Stalker03-01-07, 08:28 AM | Arcane sight and detect magic are very useful against hiders anyway. Show me a CoCo character with nothing magical (other than something from the EL3 list :)) |
| McJarvis03-01-07, 08:28 AM | Arcane sight and detect magic are very useful against hiders anyway. Show me a CoCo character with nothing magical (other than something from the EL3 list :)) Poe was able to avoid these methods of detection. Unfortunately for him, he didn't have silence in his class list & he relied on SA'ing with spells...which apparently even when silenced have a DC0 listen check attatched. Essentially, the Elders don't want submarine-type builds in the CoCo. I've come to terms with the fact that no matter how creative I am and how much I do to work with what I'm presented, they will ultimately make some ruling that will make the build worthless. (Which is a shame, because I really like the concept) |
| hogarth03-01-07, 08:49 AM | You misunderstood what he said. The ruling is that you can't determine which square the center is....so I guess the pitlord has to roll a 1d9 or something to figure out if you guess right, then you get a 50% miss chance. In fact, I believe the current ruling is that you can't even make an educated guess. You actually need to pinpoint the character somehow. @Hogarth: I'm pretty sure I was the only frontrunner of "mega-hide" builds other than Zero(who got nerfed for other reasons). I retired them all because the listen check rules were making them impossible to run without submitting at least 5 pages of tactics. Don't forget various unnamed people using Darklight shenanigans. |
| Erithmu03-01-07, 09:11 AM | Poe was able to avoid these methods of detection. Unfortunately for him, he didn't have silence in his class list & he relied on SA'ing with spells...which apparently even when silenced have a DC0 listen check attatched. Essentially, the Elders don't want submarine-type builds in the CoCo. I've come to terms with the fact that no matter how creative I am and how much I do to work with what I'm presented, they will ultimately make some ruling that will make the build worthless. (Which is a shame, because I really like the concept) McJ: you do know that you got either a FAQ or a rules update about that right. That if the opponent is FF at the start of your attack, then they are flat footed even if they 'hear' your attack. (I'm think it might have been a Ask wizards with more thought) |
| Macbrea03-01-07, 09:17 AM | Arcane sight and detect magic are very useful against hiders anyway. Show me a CoCo character with nothing magical (other than something from the EL3 list :)) Detect magic isn't horridly useful. It takes too long to actually figure out where someone is at. And there have been characters that are just hard to see. Marcus was my quest assassin. I mostly retired him because I wasn't planning on pitlording to have the credits to be able to run him on quests. Funny at the time he was a member of EHTC. With the changing of rules he to not require the credits to go on missions he would be viable now. |
| waywreth03-01-07, 10:01 AM | Some characters don't lose fights on purpose even... my gladiator Matthis is a wonderful 0-4 due to a combination of unlucky pairings, Rauul's dice rolling, and poor tactics on my part. Of course he's a wizard... if I can get him to a higher level, his record will likely improve. |
| Zevox03-01-07, 12:17 PM | Stealth and arena combat are not the best mix; it's such an ungodly pain to run, and so frustrating to auto-lose to a stealth character! I'm sorry, but that is a very, very poor reason for this. Removing the viability of an entire character concept - and one which would promote the use of classes we don't see much around here, such as Rogues and Bards, to boot - just because it can be difficult to pitlord is just not right. I pitlorded a number of fights for the worst of the snipers, Zero, and yes, they were a pain, yet I'd still never endorse this rule. There are entire character classes devoted to stealth we have - Rogue, Assassin, Shadowdancer - so there should be stealth-based characters as a viable strategy around here. Its ridiculous to say that any given strategy should be made less viable just because its a difficult one to work with. A stealth character can put everything he has into pumping the stealth skills, and unless other characters put equally much into their detection skills (which I don't even think is possible), they have literally zero chance. As Abyssal and Tellish said, theres plenty of ways to beat stealth without just pumping spot/listen. Anyone with psionics has the best way - unless you're a Ghost or a 6th level Warmind, Touchsight screws stealth. Arcane Sight is good if they forget to pack potions of misdirection. Summons or allies with blindsight/blindsense/tremorsense work wonders as well. Glitterdust is a 2nd level spell that can shut down hiders if you get an inkling of their location. And thats just scratching the surface. If you auto-lose to a hider, thats your fault for not preparing to face one, just as it would be if you auto-lose to an invisible alpha striker because you have no counter to invisibility. Zevox |
| MindWandererB03-01-07, 01:42 PM | Essentially, the Elders don't want submarine-type builds in the CoCo. I've come to terms with the fact that no matter how creative I am and how much I do to work with what I'm presented, they will ultimately make some ruling that will make the build worthless. (Which is a shame, because I really like the concept)Okay, I really feel like this deserves a response. 1) As an elder myself, I can say that that statement is an overgeneralization at best. I think stealth builds should be just as viable as any other, even if I hate running them as a pitlord. 2) I honestly don't think that's the issue from any of the elders' perspectives. The DC 0 Listen check was based on a couple of elders' arguments, not because they felt stealth should be nerfed, but because that was honestly their best appraisal of how it should be handled based on the rules. And it was not a decision made lightly. 3) I would personally rather see a house rule that made stealth attacks more viable, than cling to a questionable-at-best interpretation of the RAW that makes stealth impossible. At least then we could come clean about the fact that we were using a house rule, and not claim we're just following the rules. |
| False_Keraptis03-01-07, 02:05 PM | Not true. You have to just think about it is all really. Here's how i've been beating and i've beaten stealth builds using various builds. Summon Monster II (d3 spiders). Riding Dog (scent). Max Spot/Listen skills. Cohort (touchsight). ...and about 4 more ways i can count. Easy as pie. Imho, there wasn't a real need to nerf stealth, its just that people were unwilling to come up with a way to beat it, so nerfing is asier. Yeah, there are ways, but easy as pie they are not. Of the above, the summoned monster strategy is not great, because any stealth character with a lick of sense will just run until the tremorsense beasties disappear. The maxed spot/listen is not enough, even if you have them as class skills, because you simply cannot match what the opponent will put into the stealth skills. The scent-tracking ally is nice, but it's too slow; the stealth character is just going to move away when you start getting close. I dunno, there's not a single character on the ECL 4 roster that I would give a better than 5% chance vs. Mort Noir. At the higher ECLs, true, there's a lot more that can be done with spells and psionics, but I've yet to advance a character past 4, so my perspective may be a little skewed. |
| MitzaVolchenko03-01-07, 02:12 PM | Stealth is actually underpowered in CoCo. There are a thousand and one ways including the delay rule to negate stealth. A stealthy character cannot for instance hide and lay in ambush until her opponent walks into the ambush. With the DC for hearing attacks, no matter what kind of attack, set so low you can't reasonably snipe. With simple expendables, cheap allies, etc. hide becomes very easily negated...not just challenged, negated. I continue to play dex/hide builds because frankly blasters and tanks bore me to tears and I despise psionics and the transparency rules. My desert running darksun elf is rolling in her grave over what they have done with psionics...and don't get me started on just how upset the bugs are about it. |
| Zevox03-01-07, 02:20 PM | the summoned monster strategy is not great, because any stealth character with a lick of sense will just run until the tremorsense beasties disappear. Depending on where the battle is taking place and how to summoner does it, the sneak may not even get that chance. Take a look at the way Auburn used Tremorsense spiders to screw Featylec in their battle in the sewers, for instance. No way he could "just run away" from that. The maxed spot/listen is not enough, even if you have them as class skills, because you simply cannot match what the opponent will put into the stealth skills. Oh, I beg to differ. I have a character who doesn't even have her spot skill maxed out, but has +20 to it at level 10. Even with hiders getting their skill up to +40 and beyond, when they attack they take -20 to that, which puts them well within her spotting reach. Miscellaneous modifiers like alertness from a familiar, elven racial boosts, or a cheap (at later levels) investment in Eyes of the Eagle can make a big difference, even to those with low wisdom (my above-mentioned character has just wisdom 12). The scent-tracking ally is nice, but it's too slow; the stealth character is just going to move away when you start getting close. I dunno, there's not a single character on the ECL 4 roster that I would give a better than 5% chance vs. Mort Noir. *raised eyebrow* Funny, I'd peg scent as Mort's biggest problem at low levels, given that horses are three times as fast as her (and even with her scrolls of expeditious retreat, she can't outrun one ever). Ride up to her, sniff, have the horse attack, and you know where to shoot/swing with your own attacks. Most likely the only reason for that not work against her is her killing the horse first to prevent it. Zevox |
| Tellish_of_Ket03-01-07, 02:24 PM | Oodles of ways of beating stealth. Oodles and oodles. Various SM's. Max spot/listen even if they aren't class skills. (i have a straight classed wizard has +17 to spot, not too bad). HA allies with scent/tremorsesne Dip allies with super speed to eliminate cover (air ele's) A mounted character with custom mount (fleet/run, horseshoes of speed), can cover a LOT of territory to eliminate cover very quickly before the stealther can be set up. Ambush/Outmaneuver pkg (start in already favourable conditions) to spot and overrun. touchsite spot-boosting magic items. custom spot-boosting magic items (+10). ****good tactics**** (can't stress this one enough). tracking as a ranger (duh, that should be obvious) druids.....almost all permutations wind wall flying pc's. ...................really do i need to go on? Stealth got totally nerfed in the early days because i was good with tactics, not because i had awesome stealth. I wish ppl would realize that. Tellish |
| hogarth03-01-07, 02:25 PM | *raised eyebrow* Funny, I'd peg scent as Mort's biggest problem at low levels, given that horses are three times as fast as her (and even with her scrolls of expeditious retreat, she can't outrun one ever). Ride up to her, sniff, have the horse attack, and you know where to shoot/swing with your own attacks. Note that a horse cannot move, use Scent as a move action and attack in the same round, though. |
| Zevox03-01-07, 02:28 PM | Note that a horse cannot move, use Scent as a move action and attack in the same round, though. Only needs to use the move action for scent to note the direction of it when within 30'. Get to within 5' of her and shes pinpointed by it, no move action required. Just urge your horse to keep going through the darkness till it finds her. Zevox |
| hogarth03-01-07, 02:30 PM | Only needs to use the move action for scent to note the direction of it when within 30'. Get to within 5' of her and shes pinpointed by it, no move action required. Just urge your horse to keep going through the darkness till it finds her. Of course, psicrystals are the kings of negating magical darkness -- they just ignore it altogether! Too bad they can only see things 40' away. |
| Zevox03-01-07, 02:30 PM | @ Tellish - Actually, some of those suggestions you made wouldn't work against current stealth characters. McJarvis' tactic with it (made famous by Mort Noir), for instance, was to use Deeper Darkness to always have concealment, so theres no way to auto-spot by eliminating it unless you can dispel it. And both myself and lonewolf have used the Shadowdancer ability Hide in Plain Sight to eliminate the need for cover/concealment entirely. Zevox |
| False_Keraptis03-01-07, 02:31 PM | Ride up to her, sniff, have the horse attack, and you know where to shoot/swing with your own attacks. Most likely the only reason for that not work against her is her killing the horse first to prevent it. I don't see that working - first you have to get within 30 feet of her, then spend a move action to get her general direction. Next round, move in that direction and spend a move action to pinpoint. Next round, the horse attacks and you learn where Morty is. I don't think she's going to stand still for two rounds while this is lining up. More likely, she moves so that she's over thirty feat away, and it will again take two move actions again for the horse just to find her general direction. Where am I going wrong in my understanding of the situation? Edit: I see your reply to horarth below, but I still don't see why Mort would ever let a scent creature start its round within 30 feet of her. |
| Zevox03-01-07, 02:33 PM | I don't see that working - first you have to get within 30 feet of her, then spend a move action to get her general direction. Next round, move in that direction and spend a move action to pinpoint. Next round, the horse attacks and you learn where Morty is. I don't think she's going to stand still for two rounds while this is lining up. More likely, she moves so that she's over thirty feat away, and it will again take two move actions again for the horse just to find her general direction. Where am I going wrong in my understanding of the situation? Like I said, no move action needed to pinpointed by the scent description. Just get within 5' of her and the horse detects her. The move action is just to note the general direction when within 30' of the scent, and when you just need to search within a known area darkness its easy enough to ignore that. Zevox |
| Tellish_of_Ket03-01-07, 02:36 PM | @ Tellish - Actually, some of those suggestions you made wouldn't work against current stealth characters. McJarvis' tactic with it (made famous by Mort Noir), for instance, was to use Deeper Darkness to always have concealment, so theres no way to auto-spot by eliminating it unless you can dispel it. And both myself and lonewolf have used the Shadowdancer ability Hide in Plain Sight to eliminate the need for cover/concealment entirely. Zevox Some might not work against HiPS, but many of them do. As for deeper darkness, well...at least i know where you are. It would make no difference if you were a rogue with +100 hiding/ms, or a peasant in full plate/tower shield holding a stone with deeper darkenss on it. And you can't snipe and HiPS anyhow, but then i guess there wouldnt' be much need for sniping at that point. But MANY of those strategies will still work against HiPS. Kelek also used HiPS. So, 9 of the 13 options i suggested are still viable against HiPS. So, still unsure what the problem is. Tellish |
| Zevox03-01-07, 02:43 PM | And you can't snipe and HiPS anyhow, Huh? Why on earth not? The ability simply lets you hide even while observed and/or lacking cover/concealment so long as you're within 10' of a shadow. Nothing about it prevents sniping (fire then use a move action to rehide instantly with -20 to the hide check). So, 9 of the 13 options i suggested are still viable against HiPS. So, still unsure what the problem is. I was just pointing out that those based on removing cover/concealment aren't viable against some stealth characters is all. Zevox |
| Zevox03-01-07, 02:51 PM | As for deeper darkness, well...at least i know where you are. It would make no difference if you were a rogue with +100 hiding/ms, or a peasant in full plate/tower shield holding a stone with deeper darkenss on it. Not unless you've got an area-of-effect ability, at least until/unless our current "no firing at the center of an area" rule is repealed. :rolleyes: Zevox |
| TelinArtho03-01-07, 02:53 PM | Didn't Mort start off most battles throwing the pendant with DD on it to another location and only sometimes actually hide inside of that AoE? |
| Tellish_of_Ket03-01-07, 02:58 PM | Huh? Why on earth not? The ability simply lets you hide even while observed and/or lacking cover/concealment so long as you're within 10' of a shadow. Nothing about it prevents sniping (fire then use a move action to rehide instantly with -20 to the hide check). Zevox Yes it does actually. Sniping is a full-round action. You don't have a move action left to move. Within the sniping action is the act of firing and hiding where you are....not moving to hide. HiPS is a move action on it's own. Hmmm...thinking thinking....maybe i'm wrong. I just remember Cat never allowing me to Snipe and HiPS. I'll have to research that one up again. Tellish |
| Zevox03-01-07, 03:00 PM | HiPS is a move action on it's own. Um, not according to the descriptions of it it isn't. It just says it lets you hide without cover/concealment or while observed so long as you're within 10' of a shadow. Thats it. No extra movement/actions beyond what is normally required is said to be required by the ability. Zevox |
| Tellish_of_Ket03-01-07, 03:02 PM | Um, not according to the descriptions of it it isn't. It just says it lets you hide without cover/concealment or while observed so long as you're within 10' of a shadow. Thats it. No extra movement/actions beyond what is normally required is said to be required by the ability. Zevox I would agree with you. In the few minutes i've spent, i haven't seen anything that would make it not so. But either way, the origianl debate was over Blacklight and targetting, which is now slowly getting lost in other debates. Here's a list of arguments from other rules lawyers opinions. Which validate what i was saying and contradicts Cat "immunity" arguements. > 1) targeted spells Targeting requires line of sight; ranged attacks require lune of effect. If there is total concealment but no cover and no ranged attack roll, you can't use a targeted spell. > 2) AoE spells {within} to radius Ao E spell normally require line of effect but not line of sight, anddon't target anyone. You can designate a grid point within range to which you have line of effect as the origin for te AoE even if you can't see it, but those you want affected may or may not be in the area. > 3) ranged weapons Ranged weapons or weaponlike spells can target a creature, requiring less than total concealment, or just a square, which can be designated even if you can't see it. You need line of effect (less than total cover) to have any chance of hitting anything. If you target a creature (less than total concealment), you may have a concealment miss chance, Uf you are attacking blinddly into a square, you are penalized for a blind attack, you attack targets a random creature in the square (if there are any), and you suffer the miss chance for the concealment. Tellish |
| Zevox03-01-07, 03:08 PM | But either way, the origianl debate was over Blacklight and targetting, which is now slowly getting lost in other debates. Here's a list of arguments from other rules lawyers opinions. Which validate what i was saying and contradicts Cat "immunity" arguements. Trust me, I'm in agreement with you on that one. Just looking at Cat using that in The Harvester vs Little Daisy was enough for me - claiming Daisy couldn't target the center of the Blacklight with Call Lightning. Even though she was flying on an Eagle mount and could probably easily maneuver to see the top or bottom of the Blacklight and so determine the center even more easily than usual :rolleyes: . If you can get that rule repealed, more power to you my friend. I'd love to see a little nonsensical pain-in-the-arse go away. Zevox |
| McJarvis03-01-07, 06:53 PM | Didn't Mort start off most battles throwing the pendant with DD on it to another location and only sometimes actually hide inside of that AoE? Nod. Both Mort and Poe used things like invisible servants & psicrystals & animal companions, etc to keep the deeper darkness "center" away from them. Though I never thought to have my psicrystal ride the snake, then give the psicrystal mounted combat..... :-) |
| McJarvis03-01-07, 06:54 PM | Trust me, I'm in agreement with you on that one. Just looking at Cat using that in The Harvester vs Little Daisy was enough for me - claiming Daisy couldn't target the center of the Blacklight with Call Lightning. Even though she was flying on an Eagle mount and could probably easily maneuver to see the top or bottom of the Blacklight and so determine the center even more easily than usual :rolleyes: . If you can get that rule repealed, more power to you my friend. I'd love to see a little nonsensical pain-in-the-arse go away. Zevox Call lightning is a vertical column, isn't it? All she would have to do is target the 5ft square above the blacklight & the lightning would just travel on through.(like putting a fireball to its side) |
| TheMagister03-02-07, 08:01 AM | Oh, and as for the reason that Mort Noir couldn't get away from that horse: Mort was a forest gnome with a 20' speed. While hiding/sneaking, moving your full speed (20') as a move action nets a -5 to the hide/ms check. At low levels, that was a pretty big hit to the check. As for not being able to aim at the center of an AoE...yeah. I'm pretty ticked about that one, too. The only people that like that ruling are the ones that use it. TM |
| McJarvis03-02-07, 09:46 AM | Oh, and as for the reason that Mort Noir couldn't get away from that horse: Mort was a forest gnome with a 20' speed. Speed doesn't matter if the horse never gets near you in the first place.(it actually has to know where to go to find her, after all...) The only time any version of Mort lost(vs hood) was when specific directions in my tactics of "staying as far away as possible" were ignored & the pitlord had mort approach every round. -_- Then a rules debate started and it was too much of a headache for me to even bother with anymore.(which, as stated before, is the reason I don't do stealth anymore.) |