Post/Author/DateTime	Post
waywreth 02-28-07, 12:43 PM	Fights of the Week: February 28th/March 1st Pairings postponed! Hi guys, I'm sitting at an internet cafe right now so I have to make it quick. I've moved to another city and won't have internet access until tomorow noon. For that reason we have to postpone pairings by 24 hours. The new deadline is Thursday 9 PM CET. Cat 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!
MindWandererB 02-28-07, 02:05 PM	The deadline for Guild GAPs is not extended, however, and I don't have them all yet....
McJarvis 02-28-07, 02:10 PM	The deadline for Guild GAPs is not extended, however, and I don't have them all yet.... LOY isn't last? :D *does a little jig* :bounce: :w00t: :bounce:
Zevox 02-28-07, 02:57 PM	Oh, :censored: , thats right! Damn me for a fool, getting no sleep last night... I'll have those off in a minute MWB. Zevox
MindWandererB 02-28-07, 03:02 PM	LOY isn't last?Often not. I usually post the GAPs in the order in which they come in, so you can see for yourself. However, I'm still missing one... ah, I see the guildmaster in question is currently logged into his guildmaster account. I'll wait a few minutes. Edit: heh... I see he figured it out on his own.
Abyssal Stalker 02-28-07, 03:03 PM	Heh, who might it be... :) Abyssal Stalker, Guildmaster (EHTC), Hirumajoe, Macbrea, McJarvis, Milov, MindWandererB, MitzaVolchenko, MysticMonk2005, Rauul, SauroGrenom, sonofzeal, Sunwolf, TelinArtho, Tellish_of_Ket
MindWandererB 02-28-07, 03:09 PM	Heh... Abyssal, you might just be the only person here who gets the entire active user list in alphabetical order....
McJarvis 02-28-07, 03:17 PM	the Freedom fighters are attacking CEF or WAR.
MindWandererB 02-28-07, 03:19 PM	the Freedom fighters are attacking CEF or WAR. Not quite that ironic, but close. A clever investigator could figure it out, if you were so inclined....
Zevox 02-28-07, 03:34 PM	Not quite that ironic, but close. A clever investigator could figure it out, if you were so inclined.... Ow, yeah. That is ironic. Unless somebody asks, I keep the secret too, but yeah, thats almost funny in its irony. Edit: Upon reading this week's Guild Actions posts, I have to amend that. It is funny its irony. Almost OotS level funny. Unlike the random event. That hasn't been funny for a long, long time. Yeesh. Zevox
sonofzeal 02-28-07, 03:41 PM	Not quite that ironic, but close. A clever investigator could figure it out, if you were so inclined.... I take it all will be revealed in time?
MindWandererB 02-28-07, 03:46 PM	I take it all will be revealed in time? The random events and related stuff are posted with the week's pairings, so they'll be up tomorrow. But it's hardly "secret;" the information is there if you know where to look for it.
TelinArtho 02-28-07, 03:50 PM	Well, its a secret to me... I've looked over the numbers and am officially confuzzled... (wait - isn't that someone's snake?) Its okay though - I am patient enough to wait and find out...
waywreth 02-28-07, 03:55 PM	I could be wrong but I assumed it was... WAR. Reason being if you look at their CAP actions, one of them is: [1 CAP]: [OPERATION] |=> Ihdald Seaslash [ECL8] (Milov) |=> Strengthen Paramilitary Group |=> The Order of the Open Handed Way [EL 6] And they're being attacked by a Paramilitary group. Ironically I think they're using an action to strenghten the group that's attacking them.
Erithmu 02-28-07, 10:43 PM	@Sauro: Your welcome to start some RP over here for Retikos @Vath/MWB: I know MWB found the threads, but they are located Here and Here for the joint TAO/TLT Missions. I will add character sheets tomorrow w/ pairings.
MysticMonk2005 02-28-07, 11:48 PM	I dont suppose some one could glance over Lissa and Tueor and make sure they are compliant with all the new rules and what not. Though I think I got all covered.
Erithmu 02-28-07, 11:56 PM	I dont suppose some one could glance over Lissa and Tueor and make sure they are compliant with all the new rules and what not. Though I think I got all covered. Lissa looks fine Tueor needs a minor tweek: We have a new gp expendable cap, which means that you can only have a certain amount of expendables on your person based upon your ECL^2 * 50 For Tueor that would be 1250gp max, and you have 1400 (I think if my math is right) which would mean that 150gp of those expendables are illegal, which you can sell back at full price, but need to mark that in the blackmarket thread. (won't cost credits) One other minor thing is the addition of Balance, Jump and Climb into the required skill listings for characters now, (and adding Hide and Move Silent to Lissa)
MindWandererB 03-01-07, 12:01 AM	I dont suppose some one could glance over Lissa and Tueor and make sure they are compliant with all the new rules and what not. Though I think I got all covered. Well, the title lines aren't compliant: they have to say "Ready for Feb. 28 (Fight 1); Free Activity XXX". As they are, they could be overlooked. And speaking about that, you'll have to ask Pitlords to get them put back on the roster. You need a 3FC section in sblocks, at either the top or bottom of the sheet. Having your fight results in sblocks has always been against the rules, but folks still do it anyway. Tueor doesn't have 5 ranks in Profession, so he can't use it for money. You need a Max Expendables line. I count 1300 gp, and you can have only 1250. And don't you need to indicate somewhere that you have a multiclassing XP/gp penalty? Edit: Oh yeah, forgot the skills. Those too.
MysticMonk2005 03-01-07, 12:12 AM	Mmm thanks for the replys. I've already PM'd pitlords Though what do u mean by a 3fc sblock? I'll fix up the other stuff later tonight.
MindWandererB 03-01-07, 12:15 AM	Mmm thanks for the replys. I've already PM'd pitlords Though what do u mean by a 3fc sblock? I'll fix up the other stuff later tonight. Check any other currently active character sheet and you'll see it.
MysticMonk2005 03-01-07, 02:35 AM	Well that should fix everything that was pointed to me, so I should be ready to rock and roll!
Caterane 03-01-07, 03:02 PM	Deadline is up! No more editing. Anything I missed that has been posted in this thread?
MindWandererB 03-01-07, 04:19 PM	Deadline is up! No more editing. Anything I missed that has been posted in this thread? Nope, just banter. Although the Courtroom and Council have been unusually lively these days... mosly due to Tellish's return. I like having someone around who doesn't just bow his head at all our strange rules....
Tellish_of_Ket 03-01-07, 04:30 PM	Nope, just banter. Although the Courtroom and Council have been unusually lively these days... mosly due to Tellish's return. I like having someone around who doesn't just bow his head at all our strange rules.... I believe in fairness AND fairplay...despite my multiple nerfings. lol I'm a man of action and words....hence my part as a Special Forces soldier whom i might add, i just signed up for another tour. So i'll be shipping out in about 2 months time. Don't know where yet, but two months isn't very long to prepare. I like to fight the good fight. Bring justice to those that have been wronged. Tellish
Macbrea 03-01-07, 04:34 PM	Hate when you look over your league your in and the fight looks like it's going to be a rough one. League 7 has Izumi, Valen Sky and Jar-red. Sheesh, If that ends up a hunter fight it will be a short one.
TelinArtho 03-01-07, 04:35 PM	I admit it - I looked over who might be active and thought to myself... I have a decent shot here... Of course, if mean short with someone other than Jar-red winning... well I guess we'll just have to see :)
Macbrea 03-01-07, 04:37 PM	I admit it - I looked over who might be active and thought to myself... I have a decent shot here... Of course, if mean short with someone other than Jar-red winning... well I guess we'll just have to see :) Jar-red isn't that hard to beat. Just have to hit him really hard!
TelinArtho 03-01-07, 04:38 PM	The same could be said of the harvester... yet his name invokes fear regardless...
Hirumajoe 03-01-07, 04:50 PM	The same could be said of the harvester... yet his name invokes fear regardless... True, true. :) Jar-red's AC is going to be hard to beat. Plus he's got that silver DR. Valen is going to have to dig into his adventuring bag and grab those two quivers of Silver Arrows. Or, I guess I have him start with them in hand, then take a move action each to slip them over a shoulder? Oh and the silver dagger... Hmm... Oh, just great, the plains. And no scouting either. Hmm... So Jar-red arrives in on what, round 3? Gah...
Macbrea 03-01-07, 04:52 PM	Darn.. Izumi vs an Unknown monster. I really wanted to play with Valen and Jar-red at the same time! Well, at least my tactics are going to be easy to write. I guess I can send them before Abyssal posts my fight. :P
TelinArtho 03-01-07, 04:55 PM	True, true. :) Jar-red's AC is going to be hard to beat. Plus he's got that silver DR. Valen is going to have to dig into his adventuring bag and grab those two quivers of Silver Arrows. Or, I guess I have him start with them in hand, then take a move action each to slip them over a shoulder? Oh and the silver dagger... Hmm... Oh, just great, the plains. And no scouting either. Hmm... So Jar-red arrives in on what, round 3? Gah... No - probably round 4... He needs a round to shift form. :) Good luck - off to look at the pairings now.
Macbrea 03-01-07, 05:05 PM	@Abyssal Stalker: Tactics for Izumi vs Unknown monster sent. Have fun! And no I didn't surrender. Her tactics could be written by a monkey! - Admantine Kusuri-Gama in hand! -- Manifest skate (40 rounds) -- Move toward center of city map -- Manifest Expansion 3pp (40 Minutes) -- Move toward center of city map -- Manifest Force screen (40 rounds) --- Deflect any arrows, bolts or thrown weapons -- Stand in center of arena and wait for monster --- If I hear monster move toward it. --- If monster comes out to play beat it til dead ----- Expend focus for greater weapon focus on first swing to hit. ----- Regain focus if monster isn't available to swing at (full round action) -- If grappled. Expend focus for greater weapon focus while swinging Gauntlets at opponent. Gauntlets come with all Full plate armor. ----- If still grappling Spend full round action to regain focus ----- Repeat
Pitlords 03-01-07, 05:08 PM	PAIRINGS DONE Credit Changes: +7: Caterane +5: Erithmu, Sauro, Magister, Vathelokai +4: Rauul +3: Abyssal, Tok +2: Maraxus, McJarvis, Mitza, Sonofzeal, MWB +1: Etiquette, hogarth, Telin, templer -1: Zevox -2: Niqil @UserNamer: You cannot miniquest at ECL 3 @TheMagister: Rubicanti can have only 1 questgoal @Guildmasters: Note that you have to find your own questlord. If not, I can try to assign someone but if there's no one available, I leave your quest blank. Same for normal questers. @all ECL Players: I want to inform you that I've deleted the title lines for some of the ECL 10 characters. The pairingsmaker lists them all and especially with 27 characters it's sometimes hard to read and I miss stuff. I apologize for that but it was easier then to send out PMs to everyone. Thanks for understanding. Oh and try to keep the titles lines clear if you don't fight. @all:
TelinArtho 03-01-07, 05:18 PM	@TM - tactics for Jar-red sent. Should be fun. And when I say fun I mean: "Jar-red gets a new play-thing to rip to shreds..." Good luck hirumajoe - find something simple and you should be able to beat me - I'm too overconfident to deserve to win this one...
SauroGrenom 03-01-07, 05:19 PM	Maraxus, Have fun with that big fight in the forest. You've got an alpha strike archer with a pegasus, a psion with a pegasus and a halfgiant melee build stomping around on foot. At least a flying pegasus has a movement speed equivalent to a light horse even with the movement penalties.
TelinArtho 03-01-07, 05:36 PM	@Mitza - tactics for Zax have been sent.
MitzaVolchenko 03-01-07, 05:53 PM	@Maraxus Catch me on IM for Harvey tactics session, please. May not be worth writing much...even just the CL9 MM wnad pretty much finishes this fight. @Telin tactics received.
MindWandererB 03-01-07, 06:06 PM	@Vath: Tactics for Besthirah against Lissa have been sent.
Maraxus 03-01-07, 06:17 PM	The same could be said of the harvester... yet his name invokes fear regardless... The Harvester[EL8] (Caterane) vs. Zwei (MitzaVolchenko) & Balrog (Maraxus) : SauroGrenom OMG we R pnd wtf BBQ!!!!° ;):D
MitzaVolchenko 03-01-07, 06:24 PM	The Harvester[EL8] (Caterane) vs. Zwei (MitzaVolchenko) & Balrog (Maraxus) : SauroGrenom OMG we R pnd wtf BBQ!!!!° ;):D What? Just because he now has deflect and expendables that we aren't even allowed to have? And we are on the plains where Zwei hasn't a prayer ever? I am sure it is a completely wonderful pairing :P Hit me on IM and lets see if we can at least make him waste resources.
Milov 03-01-07, 07:01 PM	Tactics for Ihdald in his Free-For-All against Hood and Istima (Dern you psionic peoples :P ) are out, g'luck you two... Mask's tactics will be served up as soon as I go look at my opponents sheet. Mask's tactics are out too. It's kinda sad how short they were though... after what I did for the other fight, that is... *le sigh*
Eluria 03-01-07, 07:44 PM	@Rauul: Tactics sent for Mohmat vs. Hajj. Also, I sent a PM with my minimally hopeful and probably equally minimally helpful ideas for Qwogi + Rauul vs. Torel. If you can, PM me back today - I'm going to be at work Friday 6am-Sat 2pm and won't be able to have much of a dialogue.
templer10 03-01-07, 08:06 PM	sonofzeal - tactics sent for lord lorian Vs le petit guepe - Archer fun all around. tellish - waiting on that monster roll (if i deserve any knowladge lol) for harbinger VS unknown monster - i just know iam getting something nasty.
Etiquette_Gnome 03-01-07, 08:28 PM	@Erithmu - Tactics for Sabra sent. My opponent doesn't stand a chance! *cackles*
sonofzeal 03-01-07, 08:42 PM	@Rauul - sent preliminary PM. Tactics will follow tomorrow @templer10 - recieved. Best of luck; I like this build much better than the one I stomped last week. ;) @Milov - no complaints on the short tactics! @Eluria - I hope you realise your character is pretty close to worst-case scenario for me. That Touch AC of yours is going to be a giant pain in my backside.
False_Keraptis 03-01-07, 08:46 PM	@ Etiquette Gnome and MitzaVolchenko: I'll have my tactics sent by midnight tomorrow at the latest, CST (7 AM, Saturday CET). I need to mull things over for just a bit.
Erithmu 03-01-07, 08:54 PM	@Erithmu - Tactics for Sabra sent. My opponent doesn't stand a chance! *cackles* Response sent
Rauul 03-01-07, 09:42 PM	@Rauul: Tactics sent for Mohmat vs. Hajj. Also, I sent a PM with my minimally hopeful and probably equally minimally helpful ideas for Qwogi + Rauul vs. Torel. If you can, PM me back today - I'm going to be at work Friday 6am-Sat 2pm and won't be able to have much of a dialogue. Receieved and sent back.. take a look and lets talk about the death of a druid in the woods :)
NiQil 03-01-07, 10:04 PM	@ Cat: Slight Problem... In ECL 5 you have Armen Tarmik (Zevox) paired against Durin (Maraxus) In ECL 3 you have the same ECL 5 character Armen Tarmik (Zevox) paired against the ECL 3 Tamis Ruhl (NiQil) You have an ECL 5 character linked and paired in the ECL 3 league. It looks like the character was rebuilt and elevated to ECL 5, but never removed from ECL 3. Can we get that fixed so Tamis has a valid opponent?
MitzaVolchenko 03-01-07, 10:12 PM	Anyone that has thoughts on how to beat Harvey with what Balrog and Zwei have at their disposal, feel free to send PMs to me & Maraxus. We are working on several possibilities, but I am sure there are other great ideas out there that we might miss :P
Rauul 03-01-07, 10:17 PM	@templer10 Tactics for Graashnak Sent, have fun and NiQil.. i wish you the worse of dice roll luck on this one.. :P
Zevox 03-01-07, 10:27 PM	Maraxus, Have fun with that big fight in the forest. You've got an alpha strike archer with a pegasus, a psion with a pegasus and a halfgiant melee build stomping around on foot. At least a flying pegasus has a movement speed equivalent to a light horse even with the movement penalties. Half-Giant meleer? Ihdald's a Sea Elf Horizon Walker with an archery focus and a Dire Ape ally... But anyway, that should be interesting. With the excess pp he has from the last two weeks plus his level up, Istima would've stomped just about anyone 1-on-1 (can't guarantee the Harvester, but I was eying him as a potential foe and seeing a number of ways I could've won even there), but a free-for-all is another story. I'll enjoy it. @ Cat: Slight Problem... In ECL 5 you have Armen Tarmik (Zevox) paired against Durin (Maraxus) In ECL 3 you have the same ECL 5 character Armen Tarmik (Zevox) paired against the ECL 3 Tamis Ruhl (NiQil) You have an ECL 5 character linked and paired in the ECL 3 league. It looks like the character was rebuilt and elevated to ECL 5, but never removed from ECL 3. Can we get that fixed so Tamis has a valid opponent? Yeah, thats an issue. I figured when I PMed him and mentioned I'd rebuilt the character from ECL 3 to ECL 5 he'd know to remove him from that league. Guess I should've mentioned it a bit more explicitly. Zevox
Tellish_of_Ket 03-01-07, 10:28 PM	@TEMPLAR 10 - You have been PM'd what you know about your unknown monster fight...which was didly squat. I await your tactics. ToK
Erithmu 03-01-07, 10:28 PM	Receieved and sent back.. take a look and lets talk about the death of a druid in the woods :) @Rauul: Tactics sent for Mohmat vs. Hajj. Also, I sent a PM with my minimally hopeful and probably equally minimally helpful ideas for Qwogi + Rauul vs. Torel. If you can, PM me back today - I'm going to be at work Friday 6am-Sat 2pm and won't be able to have much of a dialogue. Bring it on ... @TM: Tactics for Torel sent via PM.
Milov 03-01-07, 10:34 PM	Maraxus, Have fun with that big fight in the forest. You've got an alpha strike archer with a pegasus, a psion with a pegasus and a halfgiant melee build stomping around on foot. At least a flying pegasus has a movement speed equivalent to a light horse even with the movement penalties. Ihdald turned into a Half-Giant Meleer? Woah... he's been doing things without my knowledge.... :eek: Bah, Zevox beat me to it.
MitzaVolchenko 03-01-07, 10:44 PM	TIM is missing a mission for WAR. I'll pick it up if that is okay.
McJarvis 03-01-07, 10:46 PM	TIM is missing a mission for WAR. I'll pick it up if that is okay. ok with me
NiQil 03-01-07, 11:12 PM	@ Rauul: Tactics for Tamis forthcoming pending assignment of a new opponent (most likely a monster fight) @ sonofzeal: Tactics for Truls Rohk sent via PM @ templer10: Tactics for Tyden Rayn sent via PM
Rauul 03-01-07, 11:43 PM	@ Rauul: Tactics for Tamis forthcoming pending assignment of a new opponent (most likely a monster fight) @ sonofzeal: Tactics for Truls Rohk sent via PM @ templer10: Tactics for Tyden Rayn sent via PM Acually i am thinking it should go against harbringer, since he has a monster fight.. ECL 3, i heard don't normally have monster fights... but we will see..
Rauul 03-01-07, 11:46 PM	Ok my 2 miniquests are up.. i think i did the set ups right, as these are my first, and i have been assigned 2, if anyone has any comments please PM me.. Miniquest: A Smell of Death [EL 4] (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=801424) MiniQuest:The Flaming Paladin [ECL 5] (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?p=11636812#post11636812) Hope to hear from you both... thanks :)
NiQil 03-01-07, 11:48 PM	Acually i am thinking it should go against harbringer, since he has a monster fight.. ECL 3, i heard don't normally have monster fights... but we will see.. Good point...I didn't see that there already was a monster fight in place for someone. You are probably correct, it will probably be changed to Harbinger vs Tamis. @ ToK: I would hold off on posting a monster fight yet pending the resolution of the Tamis fight...that monster fight might get repaired. @templer10: Same thing...wait until the morning when Cat can see these posts...there's a good chance Harbinger will be fighting Tamis Ruhl...but I've been wrong before.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-01-07, 11:50 PM	Good point...I didn't see that there already was a monster fight in place for someone. You are probably correct, it will probably be changed to Harbinger vs Tamis. @ ToK: I would hold off on posting a monster fight yet pending the resolution of the Tamis fight...that monster fight might get repaired. @templer10: Same thing...wait until the morning when Cat can see these posts...there's a good chance Harbinger will be fighting Tamis Ruhl...but I've been wrong before. Yup...no problem. I've rolled for the monster already just in case. If he fights Tamis i will be more than happy to Pitlord the fight. ToK
NiQil 03-01-07, 11:53 PM	@ MitzaVolchenko: Tactics for Blizzard in the ECL 4 clusterpuck...err..hunter fight sent via PM @ Etiquette_Gnome: Tactics for Wildfire sent via PM
MitzaVolchenko 03-01-07, 11:55 PM	@NiQil Tactics received. @McJ Mission will be rolling as soon as I re-read the rules to missions. Don't be surprised if he passes a pair of snarling temporally challenged hyenas on his way into the district. EditMission thread is here. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?p=11638930#post11638930)
templer10 03-02-07, 08:05 AM	i already sent my tactics for the monster fight for harbinger but as seeing as i dont have a chance in hell i wouldnt mind fighting a gladiator if it does change i wont see it until late today probably and ill get tactics soon after that.
waywreth 03-02-07, 09:18 AM	@Telin - Tactics for Matthis III sent via PM. @Never_On_Time - See my PM, you have some serious errors on that character.
TheMagister 03-02-07, 10:38 AM	Man, Zevox... This is Istima at his very best, isn't it? Sixty four pp to spend. Just...wow... So, we'll be lookin' at 101 hp (61+40temp), gads of 7pp Ego Whips, Energy Resistance 10/everything, and loads of energy damage wherever you feel the need to do it. Yuck. It all comes down to time, doesn't it? Can we chop through all that Vigor before you Ego Whip us to death? The pegasus isn't a smart target with that +19 Ride check plus Mounted Combat. Draining your Strength score only stops Mounted Combat and Energy Ray and Crystal Shard...nothing else. I KNOW Hood can deal the damage. But can he do it fast enough to outpace 12 Cha damage? Man, I just don't think so, barring crits. {shakes head} TM
Horatius 03-02-07, 01:45 PM	@sonofzeal: tactics PM'd 1840 or so GMT.
TheMagister 03-02-07, 01:48 PM	@Maraxus - tactics for Hood vs. the pp battery vs. Ihdald sent via PM.
Zevox 03-02-07, 02:50 PM	@ Mitza - Tactics for Arden Tarmik (vs Durin) have been PMed. The battle of the future Warminds. Meh, a pity Durin's more likely to win at this level. Darn Dwarf bonuses vs trips. @ Maraxus - Tactics for Istima Telarc (vs Hood vs Ihdald) have been PMed. Heres hoping - Istima could use the kind of cash a win there would generate to prepare for the Iron Man. @ TM - At this level, almost. Just imagine if he'd upgraded his headband of intellect to +2 before starting this cycle - even more pp and +1 DC to everything ;) . But he gets a lot scarier as time goes on, of course. What I wouldn't give for him to be level 10 for the Iron Man... oh well. Zevox
False_Keraptis 03-02-07, 03:18 PM	@ Etiquette_Gnome: Tactics for Fnorri v. Wildfire sent by PM. @ Niqil: Oh man, I turn to the dark side and buy a horse, and who's my first opponent? A Niqil dwarf with a principled objection to allies. It will serve me right if the dice gods strike me down.
TelinArtho 03-02-07, 03:19 PM	I have not received tactics for Dekry yet...
sonofzeal 03-02-07, 05:19 PM	@everyone I'm pitlording for - I've recieved all my tactics, and I expect to run both fights Sunday. I look forward to seeing how both turn out. Best of luck to all!
Etiquette_Gnome 03-02-07, 05:28 PM	@ False_Keraptis & Niqil: Got your tactics for your fight, and will run it either Sunday evening or Monday afternoon. I've got an Irish festival to attend this weekend.
False_Keraptis 03-02-07, 06:08 PM	@MitzaVolchenko: Tactics for Gundmir in the hunter battle sent by PM. @Sutro: Nice kobold! Do you remember R'y Mund? He was a kobold wilder who specialized in a devastating energy ray alpha strike and had a little rivalry going with Gundmir.
McJarvis 03-02-07, 06:09 PM	@Sutro: Nice kobold! Do you remember R'y Mund? He was a kobold wilder who specialized in a devastating energy ray alpha strike and had a little rivalry going with Gundmir. Heh. It's really a shame I can't get NedtheDestroyer back into playing. I should give him a call sometime... :-)
False_Keraptis 03-02-07, 06:19 PM	Heh. It's really a shame I can't get NedtheDestroyer back into playing. It is, but if he's not here to accuse me, maybe I'll create a blatant clone of R'y... E'd Mund the wilder? I really liked that character.
Sutro 03-02-07, 08:20 PM	LOL, not a whole lot of need to make a clone, Weapon's pretty much the exact same. I would argue that perhaps Weapon's build is a little tighter and more versatile - her focus is being able to last for the long haul, which hasn't really been tested yet - but this Hunter fight will show me in exacting detail how successful I've been at trying to preserve PP and potency. :) -Sutro
McJarvis 03-02-07, 09:44 PM	Shortest "fight" in history of CoCo is up (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11647147&postcount=621). At least, to my knowledge.
Rauul 03-02-07, 09:48 PM	Shortest fight in history of CoCo is up (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11647147&postcount=621). honestly, i would of given them an extra day to send tactics since we had a 1 day delay on pairings.. but cool fight
McJarvis 03-02-07, 09:49 PM	honestly, i would of given them an extra day to send tactics since we had a 1 day delay on pairings.. but cool fight Friday night was my only time to do fights this week. This is why my last few fights before I took off Pitlording were late-> I wasn't accounting for my very busy Saterday/Sunday/Monday night schedules. (and I am incredibly tired even now....work is running me ragid.) Otherwise, I would have made a post about it.
Rauul 03-02-07, 09:50 PM	Friday night was my only time to do fights this week. This is why my last few fights before I took off Pitlording were late-> I wasn't accounting for my very busy Saterday/Sunday/Monday night schedules. (and I am incredibly tired even now....work is running me ragid.) Well then you did good :)
McJarvis 03-02-07, 09:52 PM	Darn right I did. I'm the best Pitlord E V E R :):ayyyy!:
Rauul 03-02-07, 09:54 PM	Darn right I did. I'm the best Pitlord E V E R :):ayyyy!: I wouldn't go that far.... your just human... :lop: :coolcthul
templer10 03-02-07, 10:31 PM	wants to see a rather pretictable fight? go check out Graashnak Vruuurk (Rauul) vs. Tyden Rayn (NiQil) here. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11639502&postcount=620)
Tellish_of_Ket 03-02-07, 10:46 PM	@ ToK: I would hold off on posting a monster fight yet pending the resolution of the Tamis fight...that monster fight might get repaired. @templer10: Same thing...wait until the morning when Cat can see these posts...there's a good chance Harbinger will be fighting Tamis Ruhl...but I've been wrong before. I'm holding on as long as i could. I'm afraid i'm gonna have to run his monster fight very shortly, cuz i won't have time after tomorrow. I'll give it an extra day. Shortest "fight" in history of CoCo is up (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11647147&postcount=621). At least, to my knowledge. Nope. We've had many auto-loss fights in the past due to similar circumstances. I've faulted at least two, and i know a few others as well. ToK
NiQil 03-02-07, 10:47 PM	wants to see a rather pretictable fight? go check out Graashnak Vruuurk (Rauul) vs. Tyden Rayn (NiQil) here. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11639502&postcount=620) No need to change this as it will not change the outcome, but DR does not apply to spells, so the DR that my opponent had would not apply to the crystal shard damage. Something to note for the future. Other than that, a fairly solid job for your first time out. Thanks for the run.
McJarvis 03-02-07, 10:47 PM	I Nope. We've had many auto-loss fights in the past due to similar circumstances. ToK I was refering specifically to the briefness of the default tactics that won the winner his fight. 5 words were the difference between a win and a loss.
NiQil 03-02-07, 10:49 PM	I'm holding on as long as i could. I'm afraid i'm gonna have to run his monster fight very shortly, cuz i won't have time after tomorrow. I'll give it an extra day. Nope. We've had many auto-loss fights in the past due to similar circumstances. I've faulted at least two, and i know a few others as well. ToK The other pitlord, Rauul, may also have it assigned to him as well. I sent a PM to Cat, but have no reply. We may just want to go ahead and fix it ourselves and let Cat know about it after the fact. If you and templer are ok with that, we can go ahead and send you tactics and then I can follow up with Cat with a PM. Besides....not much he can do with it if we run the fight on our own LOL
Tellish_of_Ket 03-02-07, 10:56 PM	The other pitlord, Rauul, may also have it assigned to him as well. I sent a PM to Cat, but have no reply. We may just want to go ahead and fix it ourselves and let Cat know about it after the fact. If you and templer are ok with that, we can go ahead and send you tactics and then I can follow up with Cat with a PM. Besides....not much he can do with it if we run the fight on our own LOL Nope, i don't mind at all....by all means send me the tactics. I'll get started on it asap. ToK
templer10 03-02-07, 11:05 PM	No need to change this as it will not change the outcome, but DR does not apply to spells, so the DR that my opponent had would not apply to the crystal shard damage. Something to note for the future. Other than that, a fairly solid job for your first time out. Thanks for the run. ןi remmber from somewhre (might not be Core books) that i read that while DR doesnt apply to magic normally it does apply if the spell does physical dmg which crystal shard does, but as you said it doesnt change outcome. tellish- ill get new tactics to you (for the gladiator fight) about 8-9 hours from now as it's 6:00 am here and iam going to sleep.
MindWandererB 03-02-07, 11:06 PM	I was refering specifically to the briefness of the default tactics that won the winner his fight. 5 words were the difference between a win and a loss. How about no words? I recall a fight where both participants lost due to post-deadline edits. And wasn't there one where one person had not tactics, but the other one was a late edit? Victory in zero words, there. @templer: that's a rule that WotC endorses, and is in some books like Complete Psionic, but was never put into any official source, so we don't follow it. The current FAQ contradicts it, so that's what we go with.
Rauul 03-02-07, 11:07 PM	The other pitlord, Rauul, may also have it assigned to him as well. I sent a PM to Cat, but have no reply. We may just want to go ahead and fix it ourselves and let Cat know about it after the fact. If you and templer are ok with that, we can go ahead and send you tactics and then I can follow up with Cat with a PM. Besides....not much he can do with it if we run the fight on our own LOL LOL i will let ToK take it... less work on my part..
McJarvis 03-02-07, 11:08 PM	@templer: that's a rule that WotC endorses, and is in some books like Complete Psionic, but was never put into any official source, so we don't follow it. The current FAQ contradicts it, so that's what we go with. Which is another example of us being 'tards, 'cause there's no reason for a spell to specify the type of physical damage the way we play it.
MindWandererB 03-02-07, 11:13 PM	Which is another example of us being 'tards, 'cause there's no reason for a spell to specify the type of physical damage the way we play it. Yeah, but WotC was 'tards first.
Rauul 03-02-07, 11:29 PM	Yeah, but WotC was 'tards first. So basicly Biofeedback being a DR 2/-- means it's a worthless power... wish i had known that before i wasted my 1 of 2 slots on it... o-well maybe someday it will be useful on a miniquest or something
Rauul 03-02-07, 11:31 PM	@magister Tactics sent for Rauul and Qwogi for Silvanus[EL6] (Erithmu) vs. Qwogi (Eluria) & Rauul (Rauul) in the forest (rather have sewers)
NiQil 03-02-07, 11:32 PM	Which is another example of us being 'tards, 'cause there's no reason for a spell to specify the type of physical damage the way we play it. Actually, in either the RotG articles, the FAQ, or a recent Ask Wizards (I forget where I read it), WotC stated that the listing in that power (crystal shard) was purely flavor text and that it did not have any bearing on the type of damage the power dealt. I'll see if I can find where I read that. Edit: @ ToK: Tactics for Tamis vs Harbinger sent via PM. Edit 2: Found it in the FAQ: Does damage reduction help against powers that deal slashing, piercing, or bludgeoning damage, such as crystal shard (Expanded Psionics Handbook, page 89)? Spells (and powers), spell-like abilities, and energy attacks ignore damage reduction (Dungeon Master’s Guide, page 292). Thus, even if a spell or power describes its damage as bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing, it is still a spell (or power) effect, and thus damage reduction does not apply (unless the spell or power’s description specifically states otherwise).
Zevox 03-02-07, 11:58 PM	So basicly Biofeedback being a DR 2/-- means it's a worthless power... wish i had known that before i wasted my 1 of 2 slots on it... o-well maybe someday it will be useful on a miniquest or something Oh hardly. It still works against physical attacks, just not magic spells or psionic powers. Zevox
Rauul 03-03-07, 12:10 AM	Graashnak levels mid cycle... so do i adjust him for taking fighter 2 or not?
Zevox 03-03-07, 12:18 AM	Graashnak levels mid cycle... so do i adjust him for taking fighter 2 or not? Of course you do. Why wouldn't you? The only things you can't do in mid-cycle are buy new items, full activities, or full 3-week quests. Zevox
MindWandererB 03-03-07, 12:21 AM	Actually, in either the RotG articles, the FAQ, or a recent Ask Wizards (I forget where I read it), WotC stated that the listing in that power (crystal shard) was purely flavor text and that it did not have any bearing on the type of damage the power dealt. I'll see if I can find where I read that. Edit 2: Found it in the FAQ:Right. But that FAQ entry is a bit old. More recent pubications, such as Complete Psionic, rescind that statement. But since Complete Psionic and those other sources aren't official errata, we ignore them. Graashnak levels mid cycle... so do i adjust him for taking fighter 2 or not?Yes, you do.
Rauul 03-03-07, 12:22 AM	Of course you do. Why wouldn't you? The only things you can't do in mid-cycle are buy new items, full activities, or full 3-week quests. Zevox thanks :) Edit => thanks guys... leveling up him was a ton easier than my cleric.. sheesh..
Tellish_of_Ket 03-03-07, 12:23 AM	tellish- ill get new tactics to you (for the gladiator fight) about 8-9 hours from now as it's 6:00 am here and iam going to sleep. Doh, i just sent you a PM asking for tactics...didn't see ur post...ignore PM then. NiQil's quote of the FAQ is actually from the updated FAQ that was just last released. It wasn't in the FAQ previous, so that's prolly why it wasn't seen earlier. (afaik) ToK
Vathelokai 03-03-07, 01:37 AM	Besthirah Lafali (MindWandererB) vs. Lissa Longfellow (MysticMonk2005) : Vathelokai [City] Anyone hear from MysticMonk in the last few days? If you can hear me MM2005, sooner the better on tactics.
MitzaVolchenko 03-03-07, 02:31 AM	@Sauro Maraxus and I have sent tactics. If you have questions, feel free to PM or IM me.
templer10 03-03-07, 07:10 AM	tactics for harbinger VS tamis ruhl sent- lumbering half giant (me smash) against quick and puny archer
TheMagister 03-03-07, 02:44 PM	For anyone following the Jar-red vs. Valen fight, I just found an error in my running of the fight, had to scrap what I had and start over. So the rolls don't matter (I deleted a bunch). Sorry for the delay. TM
TheMagister 03-03-07, 05:05 PM	linky Jar-red vs. Valen Sky is up for your perusal. Tear it up. :) TM
Hirumajoe 03-03-07, 05:19 PM	Thanks for the run TM. As for the invisibility problem, I can't see spending money on it now when I'll have a solution next level (i.e. Touchsight). I would've prioritized the entangling ectoplasm above the Vigors, since a full attack is much worse than a single attack when you're only doing a 5 point vigor. But I doubt it would have changed much in the long run. Edit: Actually, looking at the attack rolls it might have. Well, it'd depend on Valen's attack rolls. If we assume Valen's entangling priority is more important than the vigor, we wind up with entangle, move away 1st round with a miss (assuming entangling hit and because of mobility. Valen uses his psionic focus to manifest defensively). Next round Jar-red attack again, but misses once (since he can't charge). Valen again moves away and manifests vigor now. Jar-red again misses due to the mobility. Jar-red moves and attacks again, missing again. Then it comes down to the backup plan of entangling and spring attacking, each of us getting off 1 attack at a time. Edit2: However, thats depends on if you interpret my tactics in a favorable way or not. I suppose modification might take priority over main tactics section. Ah well. Edit 3: Here's an error. Jar-red becomes visible after the first attack. At which point the dodge feat and Valen's dexterity kick back in, raising his AC back to 26, so the 3rd attack in the pounce attack should have missed. Which means his Vigor contingency should not have kicked in yet! *Valen does the happy dance*. Which gives him a fighting chance still.
TheMagister 03-03-07, 05:48 PM	Hmm. I didn't think it was like that at all. With a pounce, all the attacks kinda happen at the same time, vs. the same AC. But then again, that's not true with a normal full attack; why would it be true with a pounce? Hmm. Can I get a few opinions?
MindWandererB 03-03-07, 05:50 PM	Hmm. I didn't think it was like that at all. With a pounce, all the attacks kinda happen at the same time, vs. the same AC. But then again, that's not true with a normal full attack; why would it be true with a pounce? Hmm. Can I get a few opinions? I think you're on the right track here; only the first attack (talons in this case) would gain the benefit of invisibility.
Hirumajoe 03-03-07, 05:53 PM	Hmm. I didn't think it was like that at all. With a pounce, all the attacks kinda happen at the same time, vs. the same AC. But then again, that's not true with a normal full attack; why would it be true with a pounce? Hmm. Can I get a few opinions? Given that a pounce *is* a full attack, I think the normal rules should apply. From the SRD: Pounce (Ex) If a deinonychus charges, it can make a full attack.
Rauul 03-03-07, 05:59 PM	What are the normal rewards for an EL 5 miniquest... besides a house to burn down... are they normal for a EL 5 fight?
TaggIIV 03-03-07, 06:01 PM	wanted to post this series of PMs, my purpose being the bolded part. (regarding Nyphanalith vs Tueor) Hey there. I injured my eye yesterday and actually am not supposed to be reading/on computer but I thought short tactics would be better than none... The gist is to stay airborne, flying Zaqh and using ranged spells, call lightning then produce flame and then weapon, if he is outrunning cast entangle. if I am grounded wild shape into deinonychus. If required to heal, use scrolls. Sorry to hear about your plight-> but I'm afraid Friday night was the only night I had available for the fight. Since neither you or your opponent sent tactics, I had to deliver a default to the one who had default tactics. ~McJarvis~ Ahhh. While I know it isn't your fault and you don't have to change anything, would you mind offering up the fight to another pitlord who could run it over the weekend? Or if a default is necessary, set it at a draw?
NiQil 03-03-07, 06:07 PM	Draws are not possible...there must always be a winner and loser. As to allowing another pitlord to run the fight, that it is entirely up to the assigned pitlord. Note that even if he it is put out there for someone else to run, and no one runs it, then the posted result will stand.
TheMagister 03-03-07, 06:08 PM	I think you're on the right track here; only the first attack (talons in this case) would gain the benefit of invisibility. Right then. I'm off to edit.
TheMagister 03-03-07, 06:45 PM	Aight, I fixed it. No change; sorry Hirumajoe. Valen did get an extra hit in, though.
Hirumajoe 03-03-07, 06:49 PM	Ah well. Although I think you did forget the Point Blank Shot feat, providing a +1 to hit on that last entangling ectoplasm. Admittedly, its basically Valen fishing for a lucky crit, but I'd like to see him run out the clock at least. And thanks for taking time to do the edits. Its much appreciated. Edit: I probably should include a Ranged Touch attack line in Valen's attack stats. Sorry about that. Edit2: Nevermind, a 3 still misses. 16 Touch + 1 Dodge +2 Deflection - 2 Entangle = 17. I still only rolled a 16. Thanks again!
TheMagister 03-03-07, 07:52 PM	Ah well. Although I think you did forget the Point Blank Shot feat, providing a +1 to hit on that last entangling ectoplasm. Admittedly, its basically Valen fishing for a lucky crit, but I'd like to see him run out the clock at least. And thanks for taking time to do the edits. Its much appreciated. Edit: I probably should include a Ranged Touch attack line in Valen's attack stats. Sorry about that. Edit2: Nevermind, a 3 still misses. 16 Touch + 1 Dodge +2 Deflection - 2 Entangle = 17. I still only rolled a 16. Thanks again! I was out taking care of my business when I thought, "Oh, damn! I forgot PBS! :doh:" I'm glad you remembered the Dodge though. I was right for the wrong reason. ;) TM
Rauul 03-03-07, 08:42 PM	Well my First MiniQuest is done... you can find it at the "Flaming Paladin (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?p=11655805#post11655805)" post..
MysticMonk2005 03-04-07, 02:34 AM	Besthirah Lafali (MindWandererB) vs. Lissa Longfellow (MysticMonk2005) : Vathelokai [City] Anyone hear from MysticMonk in the last few days? If you can hear me MM2005, sooner the better on tactics. Sorry sorry sorry! Sending tacrics now! x.x i completly forgot untill tonight! *Edit* Tactics sent off! sorry again about the lateness. Shortest "fight" in history of CoCo is up (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11647147&postcount=621). At least, to my knowledge. Mmm this is my second or third win like this. Makes me wish that i had kept out the parenthesies so i could win with just 'hug', but i feared for pitlords who wouldn't understand. I'm definatly happy about such an easy and expendable free fight, but I wouldn't say no to a rerun. Just if u do, send me a PM so I can write up tactics. Anyway and interesting way to start off my return.
TaggIIV 03-04-07, 11:42 AM	I would very much appreciate a rerun, or rather a run at all. While it is not the pitlord's fault, it is certainly unfair for such an, for all intents and purposes, arbitrary "default" decision to be made. It seems more than safe to assume my default tactics would have been anything other than commit suicide, and if this was assumed, Nyphanalith would have had at least an equal advantage to the tactics posted for Tueor.
TheMagister 03-04-07, 11:56 AM	I would very much appreciate a rerun, or rather a run at all. While it is not the pitlord's fault, it is certainly unfair for such an, for all intents and purposes, arbitrary "default" decision to be made. It seems more than safe to assume my default tactics would have been anything other than commit suicide, and if this was assumed, Nyphanalith would have had at least an equal advantage to the tactics posted for Tueor. Hey, man; good to see new (returning?) names in the CoCo. Before I start, I want to preface my statement with the disclaimer of: We want you to stick around. We do like you. We hope you'll have lots of fun, too. That said, you didn't submit your tactics on time. Yes, it's because life happened to you. Life happens to all of us, at times. It also happens that your assigned pitlord only had a small window of time in which he could run your fight. So he did what he had a perfect right to do: he called it an auto loss. Now, I'm gonna say something you already know (now), and could've known before (it's advice that's buried in the new-people-read-this section of the rules): write some default tactics. But all that is only tangentially linked to your desire right now. You would like a rerun; more specifically, you'd like someone to run the fight. Let me tell you why that's unfair: 1) you could have possibly known (after the fact) that your opponent had nothing but default tactics. I'm not sayin' you're a cheater, I'm just sayin' it's possible. So that's no good. 2) You didn't have default tactics, and your opponent did. Your opponent was better prepared than you, and so he won. Taking that away from him would be bad form. All that aside: if your pitlord (McJarvis) doesn't have a problem with it, and (more importantly) your opponent doesn't have a problem with it, AND if someone else volunteers to run it, you could have the fight rerun. But it would be a gift, and you'd be begging for it. You have no right to a rerun, and neither your opponent nor your assigned pitlord is obligated to give you one. I'm sorry that life happened to you. My advice is to roll with it and come back next pairings with a vengeance. After all, you've got more resources to draw from because you used none on your first fight of the cycle, which is an advantage all of its own. Again, I'm not trying to be mean, or nasty, or to alienate you. It's impossible to convey tone or body language in type, so you can't hear the genuine-ness of my thoughts, or the care? sympathy? in the words. Send a PM to McJarvis asking him to post in the Fights of the Week thread that he gives his permission for someone else to pick up the fight. Send a PM to your opponent and ask him/her if they don't mind a rerun. IF all of that comes together AND someone volunteers to run it, you've got your fight. If it doesn't, you have to suck it up and truck on. With respect, TM
MitzaVolchenko 03-04-07, 12:05 PM	Ooooh TM! You are so mean! Actually I was about to post something similar, and Magister is a big sweetheart with a well ordered mind and far more tact than about three quarters of the rest of us. :) That being said, if my hunter fight is up by tomorrow morning as planned, and McJ agrees, both of them can submit fresh tactics to me (makes it fair for both parties if they are now writing blind again), and I will pick it up. Note that all of those ifs have to be met, and as was said earlier, the auto-loss may still stand.
Vathelokai 03-04-07, 12:11 PM	Tactics for Besthira vs Lissa recieved. Expect it sometime past midnight tonight..
Tellish_of_Ket 03-04-07, 02:11 PM	Tamis vs Harbinger It's "The Battle of Who Could Roll 5 or more first". lol If there are any errors, by all means, post here or PM me. I shall take a look at them. -ToK
sonofzeal 03-04-07, 03:21 PM	Working on LPG vs Lorian now... Question - If the manifester of Share Pain is hit for 7 damage, does he take 4 and the target take 3, or vice versa? The only precedence I can think of right now is the (non-core) Retributive Amulet, which would imply that the extra point goes to the target, not the caster. Any thoughts?
TheMagister 03-04-07, 04:43 PM	Torel vs. Qwogi and Rauul is up here. That was one of the less painful multi-character forest fights I've had the dubious privilege (lol! how do you spell that damned word again?) of pitlording. The lack of allies (thanks 'Rith!) made it considerably easier. To all involved, I was kinda rushed, and had to make some (possibly questionable) pitlord calls. I explained myself in the text of the fight, and made my position clear. If you doubt the outcome of the call, I'm afraid you'll have to take it up in the Council and get the rule changed/clarified for future matches; I'm firm on my decisions. Not that I'm unwilling to discuss them, but I'm unwilling to change them unless you can prove to me that it's a clear rules violation and not just a matter of interpretation. Anyway, I'm getting longwinded. {looks around} Where's my Mssr. Hood free for all? {taps foot} :) TM
TheMagister 03-04-07, 04:46 PM	Ooooh TM! You are so mean! Actually I was about to post something similar, and Magister is a big sweetheart with a well ordered mind and far more tact than about three quarters of the rest of us. :) That being said, if my hunter fight is up by tomorrow morning as planned, and McJ agrees, both of them can submit fresh tactics to me (makes it fair for both parties if they are now writing blind again), and I will pick it up. Note that all of those ifs have to be met, and as was said earlier, the auto-loss may still stand. If you're buttering me up, I feel it's my duty to let you know that: 1) It's working, and; 2) Not everyone agrees with you. Of course, they're wrong, but you can't please all of the people all of the time, right? :bravo: TM
Horatius 03-04-07, 06:00 PM	Working on LPG vs Lorian now... Hi, note that my exp ret and shield scrolls are CL2, so they won't run out as quick as you're currently showing...
sonofzeal 03-04-07, 06:18 PM	Hi, note that my exp ret and shield scrolls are CL2, so they won't run out as quick as you're currently showing... Ah, so they are. There's no credit cost for that? (edits anyway until further notice)
TheMagister 03-04-07, 06:21 PM	nah, they're limited to CL=ECL is all. So an ECL 3 can have a CL 3 scroll. Or is it ECL+2? Drat. I can never keep track. TM
SauroGrenom 03-04-07, 06:27 PM	nah, they're limited to CL=ECL is all. So an ECL 3 can have a CL 3 scroll. Or is it ECL+2? Drat. I can never keep track. TM I think scrolls are CL=ECL+2. Wands have CL=ECL.
sonofzeal 03-04-07, 06:32 PM	Ah, so wands and potions are only as listed, but scrolls are anything?
SauroGrenom 03-04-07, 06:37 PM	Ah, so wands and potions are only as listed, but scrolls are anything? The list of scrolls in the SRD is complete, or nearly so. The only spells not on the scrolls list are those that appear in the psionics and divine books.
Erithmu 03-04-07, 06:59 PM	Torel vs. Qwogi and Rauul is up here. That was one of the less painful multi-character forest fights I've had the dubious privilege (lol! how do you spell that damned word again?) of pitlording. The lack of allies (thanks 'Rith!) made it considerably easier. To all involved, I was kinda rushed, and had to make some (possibly questionable) pitlord calls. I explained myself in the text of the fight, and made my position clear. If you doubt the outcome of the call, I'm afraid you'll have to take it up in the Council and get the rule changed/clarified for future matches; I'm firm on my decisions. Not that I'm unwilling to discuss them, but I'm unwilling to change them unless you can prove to me that it's a clear rules violation and not just a matter of interpretation. Anyway, I'm getting longwinded. {looks around} Where's my Mssr. Hood free for all? {taps foot} :) TMThanks for the run. Your welcome for the allies Explanations are well within pitlord adjustment. Where's Torel's response from Mssr. Hood? {taps foot} :) EDIT: 3FC for Torel: Delay Poison is a 3hr duration if you could add that to the continuing effects
sonofzeal 03-04-07, 08:05 PM	LGP vs Lord Lorian is here. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11663338&postcount=634) Crit multipliers r teh pain.
templer10 03-04-07, 08:28 PM	LGP vs Lord Lorian is here. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11663338&postcount=634) Crit multipliers r teh pain. iam sorry to say i found some pretty major errors in this fight first- on round 4 when i said in the tactics that i want to manifest force screen on myself the intention was fro my powerstones - through i wasnt 100% clear but it's also no brainer considering i dont even have force screen as a power. second in round 9 - the roller said i got on the result 14/20 which including my +9 to hit is 22 which should have hit and caused dmg and considering by round 11 he only had 4 hp the dmg from this shot could have took him to or below 0 hp. third in round 11- the first shot shouldnt have confirmed becuase force screen should be active so it only caused 8 dmg splitted between me and powercrystal (share pain + vigor) BUT even if it did confirm and DID cause 24 dmg it should go 12 dmg to me and 12 dmg to powercrystal since i have share pain + vigor(shared with crystal) and the second shot should also be splitted 5 dmg to me and 5 dmg to crystal and at the end of that round it should be: 22/12 HP (me) and 17/6 (crystal) if the shot didnt confirm or 10/12 hp to me and 4/6 hp to crystal if the shot did confirm last- the rewards didnt take into account my political career automatic skill package which is marked correctly on the sheet for +18% xp/gold ty
MindWandererB 03-04-07, 08:32 PM	I think scrolls are CL=ECL+2. Wands have CL=ECL. Actually, scrolls are CR = Player's CL + 2. A wiz1/ftr9 only gets CL 3 scrolls.
sonofzeal 03-04-07, 08:50 PM	iam sorry to say i found some pretty major errors in this fight first- on round 4 when i said in the tactics that i want to manifest force screen on myself the intention was fro my powerstones - through i wasnt 100% clear but it's also no brainer considering i dont even have force screen as a power. second in round 9 - the roller said i got on the result 14/20 which including my +9 to hit is 22 which should have hit and caused dmg and considering by round 11 he only had 4 hp the dmg from this shot could have took him to or below 0 hp. third in round 11- the first shot shouldnt have confirmed becuase force screen should be active so it only caused 8 dmg splitted between me and powercrystal (share pain + vigor) BUT even if it did confirm and DID cause 24 dmg it should go 12 dmg to me and 12 dmg to powercrystal since i have share pain + vigor(shared with crystal) and the second shot should also be splitted 5 dmg to me and 5 dmg to crystal and at the end of that round it should be: 22/12 HP (me) and 17/6 (crystal) if the shot didnt confirm or 10/12 hp to me and 4/6 hp to crystal if the shot did confirm last- the rewards didnt take into account my political career automatic skill package which is marked correctly on the sheet for +18% xp/gold ty Ah, my mistake(s). I'll get right on those. (edit) Done. Next time mark what source you're using for the power; it'll save a lot of headache.
Zevox 03-04-07, 09:15 PM	I think scrolls are CL=ECL+2. Wands have CL=ECL. Slight correction: scrolls/powerstones are CL = CL+2 or ECL, whichever is lower. Zevox
MindWandererB 03-04-07, 09:21 PM	Slight correction: scrolls/powerstones are CL = CL+2 or ECL, whichever is lower. Zevox Yeah, forgot about that. I'm rarely willing to spend that much on an expendable.
Zevox 03-04-07, 09:35 PM	Yeah, forgot about that. I'm rarely willing to spend that much on an expendable. As am I. I think the only expendables I've ever bought above 2nd level spells are Senorda's stoneskin and flame arrow scrolls, Istima's touchsight powerstones, and the fly, flame arrow, and haste scrolls Eraca has scribed. Zevox
Rauul 03-04-07, 10:18 PM	Torel vs. Qwogi and Rauul is up here. That was one of the less painful multi-character forest fights I've had the dubious privilege (lol! how do you spell that damned word again?) of pitlording. The lack of allies (thanks 'Rith!) made it considerably easier. To all involved, I was kinda rushed, and had to make some (possibly questionable) pitlord calls. I explained myself in the text of the fight, and made my position clear. If you doubt the outcome of the call, I'm afraid you'll have to take it up in the Council and get the rule changed/clarified for future matches; I'm firm on my decisions. Not that I'm unwilling to discuss them, but I'm unwilling to change them unless you can prove to me that it's a clear rules violation and not just a matter of interpretation. Anyway, I'm getting longwinded. {looks around} Where's my Mssr. Hood free for all? {taps foot} :) TM Rauul takes his Gold and runs, and learns a valuable lesson.. And Plots to Hire a Pyromanic to burn the woods to the ground.. make it a wasteland of ash..
McJarvis 03-04-07, 10:38 PM	I'm definatly happy about such an easy and expendable free fight, but I wouldn't say no to a rerun. Just if u do, send me a PM so I can write up tactics. I would very much appreciate a rerun, or rather a run at all. Since both gladiators have expressed interest in a re-run, I will allow another Pitlord to pick up this fight...if you can find one by the Tuesday deadline. Let me know if you guys do, because I will need to notify Pitlords. ~McJarvis~ If anyone wants to pick up Nyphanalith (TaggIIV) vs. Tueor Amplexus (MysticMonk2005) : [Arena], reply to this. If it isn't picked up by late Monday night, the default will stand. To any future gladiators I have: Let it be known that Friday nights are the ONLY nights I am free to Pitlord. I have them reserved especially for CoCo Pitlording, and will not let CoCo infringe on other parts of my life!(nor will I allow fights to infringe on my other duties on these boards)
Tellish_of_Ket 03-04-07, 11:10 PM	If anyone wants to pick up Nyphanalith (TaggIIV) vs. Tueor Amplexus (MysticMonk2005) : [Arena], reply to this. If it isn't picked up by late Monday night, the default will stand. To any future gladiators I have: Let it be known that Friday nights are the ONLY nights I am free to Pitlord. I have them reserved especially for CoCo Pitlording, and will not let CoCo infringe on other parts of my life!(nor will I allow fights to infringe on my other duties on these boards) Plz forward me BOTH tactics asap. I will finish it during those odd hours of boredome at 2:00am instead of making annoying, off-topic, posts in the Tavern again, like i've been doing for the last 3 or 4 days. lol lol. ToK
NiQil 03-04-07, 11:18 PM	Given that one party (MysticMonk) still has to actually write tactics, I wouldn't count on this happening tonight.
sonofzeal 03-05-07, 12:21 AM	Truls Rohk vs The Masked Man is here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11668313&postcount=636). A loooooong fight, but not too bad to run. Using the map for the chase scene was fun.
MysticMonk2005 03-05-07, 12:31 AM	I'll write them now, I don't have any free time other then when I get home at night.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-05-07, 12:38 AM	Truls Rohk vs The Masked Man is here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11668313&postcount=636). A loooooong fight, but not too bad to run. Using the map for the chase scene was fun. Just one thing i saw that struck me right away from just quickly reading it. In round 8, Masked could have based Truhl instead of ending his run where he did. It's 80' exactly. Not sure he would have wanted to do that anyway since he'd give up an AoO vs a dex-less AC. Otherwise, looks good. I don't see any obvious glares. -ToK
sonofzeal 03-05-07, 12:43 AM	Just one thing i saw that struck me right away from just quickly reading it. In round 8, Masked could have based Truhl instead of ending his run where he did. It's 80' exactly. Not sure he would have wanted to do that anyway since he'd give up an AoO vs a dex-less AC. Otherwise, looks good. I don't see any obvious glares. -ToK Very perceptive; I did fudge that slightly, but only because I'd already made the call to throw the mindblade that round, and had rolled the dice. It didn't seem fair to let Truls be based because I'd misjudged by half a square. At any rate, it would have merely changed the whole thing from run-run to withdrawl-run, with the same results.
MysticMonk2005 03-05-07, 01:02 AM	Tactics for Tueor sent.
MindWandererB 03-05-07, 01:28 AM	Very perceptive; I did fudge that slightly, but only because I'd already made the call to throw the mindblade that round, and had rolled the dice. It didn't seem fair to let Truls be based because I'd misjudged by half a square. At any rate, it would have merely changed the whole thing from run-run to withdrawl-run, with the same results. However, bear in mind that running must be done in a straight line. Several of those movement paths cross obstacles. It probably doesn't matter this time, but bear it in mind for the future.
sonofzeal 03-05-07, 01:36 AM	However, bear in mind that running must be done in a straight line. Several of those movement paths cross obstacles. It probably doesn't matter this time, but bear it in mind for the future. Thanks, I'll do that in the future. For this one, I assumed benifit of the doubt on diagonals or where it only partially goes through a blocked square, and I got a bit lax at points - round 10 especially, but round 6 too. Given that the mapper doesn't explicitely say what squares they went through, is there a standard rule of thumb for those awkward diagonals?
MitzaVolchenko 03-05-07, 02:04 AM	It should show their line of travel. If they cross any obstacle, they can't run. I usually mark each segment of their move with a marker. So for a run a given character would have all 4 of his pins on the board. You canalso plug two positions intot he LOS calculator, and it will show the line from any corner of one square to any corner of another square.
sonofzeal 03-05-07, 03:27 AM	It should show their line of travel. If they cross any obstacle, they can't run. I usually mark each segment of their move with a marker. So for a run a given character would have all 4 of his pins on the board. You canalso plug two positions intot he LOS calculator, and it will show the line from any corner of one square to any corner of another square. The problem with adding all four pins is it may not be possible to make it exactly straight (especially if the total x or y shift is a prime number of squares). In that case, would it be okay to bend the path slightly around obstacles, as long as the overall movement is more or less straight?
Tellish_of_Ket 03-05-07, 03:48 AM	The problem with adding all four pins is it may not be possible to make it exactly straight (especially if the total x or y shift is a prime number of squares). In that case, would it be okay to bend the path slightly around obstacles, as long as the overall movement is more or less straight? Actually, i would not reccomend adding all four points...that will make it tough to draw a straight line. When you plot both your pins down, a straight line is drawn for you from one pin to the next. If that straight line crosses a solid object, then you need to move the pin over slightly. I could be one square or two, but after a couple of tries, you'll see where they can go. Take a look at the following rounds and you will see the straight dotted line cross points of cover. Round 6, Mask crosses a point of cover. Round 10, both characters cross cover. Round 12, mask crosses cover. ToK
Vathelokai 03-05-07, 03:55 AM	Random update: Besthira and Lissa will be late; but it will be done.
MitzaVolchenko 03-05-07, 03:56 AM	I LOS point 1 and point 4. The intervening points ake it easier to count off movement in another direction as needed and determine if they have crossed LOS to another character in their movement.
McJarvis 03-05-07, 08:29 AM	Plz forward me BOTH tactics asap. I will finish it during those odd hours of boredome at 2:00am instead of making annoying, off-topic, posts in the Tavern again, like i've been doing for the last 3 or 4 days. lol lol. ToK I don't have time to hunt them down, but you should have Mystic Monk's now, and the other fellow posted his tactics in this thread when he complained about the lack-of-fight.
Erithmu 03-05-07, 08:40 AM	@Sauro, MWB, Vath, Iced, EG, McJ: I have a final this afternoon. After that I'll be coming home and working on fights/quests. Sorry for some of the delays.
McJarvis 03-05-07, 11:14 AM	@Sauro, MWB, Vath, Iced, EG, McJ: I have a final this afternoon. After that I'll be coming home and working on fights/quests. Sorry for some of the delays. Good luck with that
TaggIIV 03-05-07, 11:37 AM	tactics sent to ToK thank you for the cooperation of everyone that allowed rerun.
Horatius 03-05-07, 01:22 PM	Hi, Sonofzeal, I've got a few problems with the fight too, I'm afraid... Fist of all, what happened to my hide? Considering my hide is better than his spot (especially with range penalties), he should at least have to check to spot me. Second, what happened to my hold person? I specifically stated that if he interrupted my buff routine (which he did) I would hit him with hold person and also that I would if he came in range (which he did) - both conditions were met yet no hold person. Round 7: I have cover against his attack making my AC 29 - a miss. From SRD: To determine whether your target has cover from your ranged attack, choose a corner of your square. If any line from this corner to any corner of the target’s square passes through a square or border that blocks line of effect or provides cover, or through a square occupied by a creature, the target has cover (+4 to AC). Round 8: I should be healing, not casting, according to my tactics, but why can't I cast in any case? Round 9 & 10: I should still have cover, making my touch AC 19. This doesn't matter in rnd 9, but does in rnd 10. Also, you forgot my entropic shield for rnd 9. Also, rewards don't take his ally into account.
Abyssal Stalker 03-05-07, 01:34 PM	Izumi's fight is done!
TelinArtho 03-05-07, 01:46 PM	Hmm - just need someone to check for me, since I am unaware (despite all of my kills in quests...) - if a player dies on a quest while within the Nimbus (ie a guild mission to improve the relations of a particular district), does the player gain any rewards for himself? (ie - he defeated both of the first 2 encounters, but not the third). The only item I see in the rules says that if the player dies outside of the Nimbus, he gains no rewards.
sonofzeal 03-05-07, 02:06 PM	Hi, Sonofzeal, I've got a few problems with the fight too, I'm afraid... Fist of all, what happened to my hide? Considering my hide is better than his spot (especially with range penalties), he should at least have to check to spot me. (edit - forgot that the sequence of events got changed) If I have time I'll go back and roll you that one initial hide check, but from then on if you hide behind something, he still saw you go back there and can move around it and negate your cover. Second, what happened to my hold person? I specifically stated that if he interrupted my buff routine (which he did) I would hit him with hold person and also that I would if he came in range (which he did) - both conditions were met yet no hold person. Given that you have 4 spell levels per fight, and had already used 3 (Bull's Strength and Magic Weapon)? And that Hold Person is a 2nd level spell? If I'm missing anything here, let me know. Round 7: I have cover against his attack making my AC 29 - a miss. The LOS is him seeing you; the attack was launched from the third movement peg. I agree you have cover from the second peg, but it really doesn't look to me like you should have cover from the third peg. I'll change it if someone else backs you up on it. Round 8: I should be healing, not casting, according to my tactics, but why can't I cast in any case? "- If he interrupts my buff routine, hit him with hold person (if in range) and kill him, or skip entropic shield (unless scroll already out), and magic weapon steps (rounds 4 and 5)." - to me that specifically tells me NOT to skip Spiritual Weapon. Round 9 & 10: I should still have cover, making my touch AC 19. This doesn't matter in rnd 9, but does in rnd 10. Also, you forgot my entropic shield for rnd 9. Also, rewards don't take his ally into account. As for the cover, same as before, but even if it's ruled that you have cover when he's there, his position can be changed to negate it. With 75 base land speed, he's got a heck of a lot of options. In what way didn't I take his ally into account? Without the ally, he would have gotten over 900. I did forget the Entropic Shield on that one round though; if I get a chance I'll roll for it.
MindWandererB 03-05-07, 02:10 PM	Hmm - just need someone to check for me, since I am unaware (despite all of my kills in quests...) - if a player dies on a quest while within the Nimbus (ie a guild mission to improve the relations of a particular district), does the player gain any rewards for himself? (ie - he defeated both of the first 2 encounters, but not the third). The only item I see in the rules says that if the player dies outside of the Nimbus, he gains no rewards. That is unfortunately correct. The only 3-week mission in which you can gain partial rewards is the World Event.
McJarvis 03-05-07, 02:13 PM	That is unfortunately correct. The only 3-week mission in which you can gain partial rewards is the World Event. Glad I learned of this now rather than later after using lots of expendibles.... Though as more people learn of this, perhaps missions will be less sought-after(or at least ones where Telin is the missionlord ;) ) edit-> As a general point, this makes ECL 10 chars(or any frozen characters) far more potent on missions than other types of characters(absolutely nothing to lose, don't need to worry about a lack-of-rewards not making up for expendible use)
MindWandererB 03-05-07, 02:19 PM	True. Fortunately, ECL 10 is thawing very soon.
hogarth 03-05-07, 02:19 PM	edit-> As a general point, this makes ECL 10 chars(or any frozen characters) far more potent on missions than other types of characters(absolutely nothing to lose, don't need to worry about a lack-of-rewards not making up for expendible use) Bingo. Someone was making this point just the other day, with Cat's character's Symbol of Pain spell that lasts forever (due to being frozen).
Rauul 03-05-07, 02:20 PM	can someone point me to the missions rules ect... i have read Questlords rules, but a mission seems different.. or do they follow the same rules got rewards-exp/gold (gold can be items that they can sell or keep) ect...?
Macbrea 03-05-07, 02:22 PM	Izumi's fight is done! Thanks, that fight I had a feeling was going to seem like an auto-win for Izumi.
Erithmu 03-05-07, 02:24 PM	Bingo. Someone was making this point just the other day, with Cat's character's Symbol of Pain spell that lasts forever (due to being frozen).Yea .. but it will be a hefty expense come April.
MindWandererB 03-05-07, 02:25 PM	can someone point me to the missions rules ect... i have read Questlords rules, but a mission seems different.. or do they follow the same rules got rewards-exp/gold (gold can be items that they can sell or keep) ect...? Hm, you may have run across some outdated quest rules. Rewards should always be cash now, and missions are no different.
McJarvis 03-05-07, 02:30 PM	True. Fortunately, ECL 10 is thawing very soon. Bingo. Someone was making this point just the other day, with Cat's character's Symbol of Pain spell that lasts forever (due to being frozen). Don't be supprised if I buy the lowest frozen ECL of character for LOY to do missions with after the ECL10+ leagues thaw.
Rauul 03-05-07, 02:57 PM	Hm, you may have run across some outdated quest rules. Rewards should always be cash now, and missions are no different. i read all the posts in QUESTS under the rules.. if there is other rules, then please point them out.. i don't wanna make a mistake and screw up a mission...
Abyssal Stalker 03-05-07, 03:00 PM	Exactly when have these rules been changed? I'm asking because I am using the same thing on my quest. (Giving stuff instead of gold)
SauroGrenom 03-05-07, 03:02 PM	You can give out stuff as a reward for a quest, but the player has the option to sell it at full value before his next 3FC. So it's equivalent to cash.
Abyssal Stalker 03-05-07, 03:04 PM	I have to say I wonder why we shouldn't give items other than gold as rewards on a quest. There are several things that make them different comapred to normal fights/miniquests/missions. The biggest one is that you don't get healed between your fights. And that in itself is enough reason to toss some potions of CLW to the character. And, I at least haven't noticed any discussion on the subject. If this has been altered, it would be at least nice to know and even more important, update the rules according to these decisions. Edit: No need to rant, as Sauro explained my concern... :)
Abyssal Stalker 03-05-07, 03:08 PM	Thanks, that fight I had a feeling was going to seem like an auto-win for Izumi. Well, it looked quite easy. On the other hand, Izumi killed 3 of them outright, with pretty lucky rolls. She critted once and hit with an 18 and a 19 if I recall correctly. Her opponents could easily boost their AC up to 23 or 24, and with a +8 to hit that's not easy anymore, I think. On the other hand, their attack boni weren't that great. But it's nice to see some fair monster fights occasionally.
Rauul 03-05-07, 03:09 PM	You can give out stuff as a reward for a quest, but the player has the option to sell it at full value before his next 3FC. So it's equivalent to cash. Cool so i am not crazy (dun even say it:P ) thanks for the update
Horatius 03-05-07, 03:55 PM	(edit - forgot that the sequence of events got changed) If I have time I'll go back and roll you that one initial hide check, but from then on if you hide behind something, he still saw you go back there and can move around it and negate your cover. Thanks - that's what I was looking for - it prevents him from getting the jump on me (unless he spots me, which is unlikely) and gives me concealment (50% miss chance) on that first attack even if he pinpoints me by sound. Given that you have 4 spell levels per fight, and had already used 3 (Bull's Strength and Magic Weapon)? And that Hold Person is a 2nd level spell? If I'm missing anything here, let me know. Yes, I am allowed to use unused spell levels from previous fights - this is my 3rd fight of the cycle, so I have 10 unused spell levels (even though I only have 8 levels of spells to cast - I mention that in my tactics). The LOS is him seeing you; the attack was launched from the third movement peg. I agree you have cover from the second peg, but it really doesn't look to me like you should have cover from the third peg. I'll change it if someone else backs you up on it. According to the SRD (I quoted it before, so I won't again) I do get cover from the third peg. "- If he interrupts my buff routine, hit him with hold person (if in range) and kill him, or skip entropic shield (unless scroll already out), and magic weapon steps (rounds 4 and 5)." - to me that specifically tells me NOT to skip Spiritual Weapon. The question was why I couldn't cast it - I assume you thought I was out of spells, as mentioned above. As for the cover, same as before, but even if it's ruled that you have cover when he's there, his position can be changed to negate it. With 75 base land speed, he's got a heck of a lot of options. I agree with you here - he can probably move to negate my cover, just that from where he is I think I still have it. In what way didn't I take his ally into account? Without the ally, he would have gotten over 900. Edit: my mistake, I thought my rewards should be multiplied because of his ally. I did forget the Entropic Shield on that one round though; if I get a chance I'll roll for it. Thanks.
sonofzeal 03-05-07, 05:10 PM	Can anyone else verify that LPG gets to toss all his unused spells around and totally disregard the spell levels per fight restriction on his third fight of the cycle? Also, can I get a second opinion on the question of cover and whether it warrents a redo? Thanks
Zevox 03-05-07, 05:13 PM	Can anyone else verify that LPG gets to toss all his unused spells around and totally disregard the spell levels per fight restriction on his third fight of the cycle? This is correct. Unused spell levels/pp carry over between fights, and you can always use anything you have left in your 3rd fight. This is part of why we have the cycle, rather than just restricting casters to 1/3 spells as we used to - they have to prepare their spells such that they'll be useful over 3 full fights. Zevox
TelinArtho 03-05-07, 05:13 PM	If you have unused spell levels from earlier week fights of the 3FC, then yes, you can use them in the later fights. In fight 1, you get 1/3rd In fight 2, you get 1/3rd + any remaining spell levels from week 1 In fight 3, you can use all spells you have remaining. So for a caster with 4 SLs, he gets 2 per fight. In week 1, he casts nothing. In week 2, he can cast all of his spells if he wishes. Regardless, in week 3 - he has anything he didn't cast in week 2. Etc, etc.
sonofzeal 03-05-07, 05:21 PM	Good to know, seeing as how I'm playing a full caster! I'll try to fix the fight later tonight. (edit) Okay, fixing it now. I'll reverse the failed spells, add cover (when appropriate), and roll for Entropic Shield, but the SRD implies that Hiding is a move action or part of a move action, and your tactics don't say anything about attempting to hide before moving out. You will get a chance to Hold Person though. (edit2) Fixed. Hold Person failed, Entropic Shield failed, and while you got cover for one round it didn't change anything (remember it's touch AC on the ray). Maps are also fixed.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-05-07, 11:40 PM	Nyph vs Tueor is up and done. ToK
NiQil 03-05-07, 11:45 PM	Nyph vs Tueor is up and done. ToK Don't forget to include the character sheets for the PC's in the fight posts...those have to be there in every fight.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-05-07, 11:46 PM	Don't forget to include the character sheets for the PC's in the fight posts...those have to be there in every fight. Uh..they are. lol Look at the post above. ToK
NiQil 03-05-07, 11:51 PM	Uh..they are. lol Look at the post above. ToK But you need to link the two posts.
MysticMonk2005 03-05-07, 11:53 PM	Nyph vs Tueor is up and done. ToK Thanks for the run. One thing to note is Tueor doesn't have 5 ranks in prof so he can't earn munnies with it.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-06-07, 12:02 AM	Thanks for the run. One thing to note is Tueor doesn't have 5 ranks in prof so he can't earn munnies with it. Done But you need to link the two posts. Ooops...done. ToK
NiQil 03-06-07, 12:11 AM	Now if I could just figure out where Mitza and Etiquette_Gnome are with my other fights....
SauroGrenom 03-06-07, 01:02 AM	Harvester vs Zwei and Balrog
MitzaVolchenko 03-06-07, 01:17 AM	Harvester vs Zwei and Balrog Still reviewing, but I notice that Balrog was only healed once...there were two potions that shoulda gone down his throat (one on Trill and one on Zwei). I need to read it a bit more closely, but there may be a few missing spot/hide checks in there as well.
MitzaVolchenko 03-06-07, 01:20 AM	Now if I could just figure out where Mitza and Etiquette_Gnome are with my other fights.... Having a hideous headache...I'll get my fights done before I sleep, but I am an insomniac so don't bother refreshing the page every two seconds...it may be a while.
templer10 03-06-07, 01:25 AM	if anyone is missing fights i have time to run 1 fight later in the afternoon so write it in here get me the tactics etc and ill run it. (first come first pitlorded)
sonofzeal 03-06-07, 01:33 AM	if anyone is missing fights i have time to run 1 fight later in the afternoon so write it in here get me the tactics etc and ill run it. (first come first pitlorded) My fight (Hajj vs Mohmat) needs doing, but I don't know if Rauul still plans to do it tomorrow, and even if he isn't you'll have to get the Mohmat's tactics from him or Eluria. I don't know what timezone you're in, but it's past midnight here and I'm heading off to bed. I'll check in some time in the morning, and if it's confirmed you'll be taking over the fight then I'll toss you the tactics if you haven't gotten them by then.
MitzaVolchenko 03-06-07, 01:40 AM	Problem with square picking for finding the center of blacklight...when cast on a person, not a location, it emanates from the person...one square not an intersection of four squares, or at least logic says so...gonna have to dig through the FAQ, etc. to see if that has ever been clarified. IF it does emanate from one intersection and that intersection's realtionship to the caster remains constant, any hit should identify where from center the caster is, though honestly that still boggles logic.
MindWandererB 03-06-07, 02:09 AM	Problem with square picking for finding the center of blacklight...when cast on a person, not a location, it emanates from the person...one square not an intersection of four squares, or at least logic says so...gonna have to dig through the FAQ, etc. to see if that has ever been clarified. IF it does emanate from one intersection and that intersection's realtionship to the caster remains constant, any hit should identify where from center the caster is, though honestly that still boggles logic. I've never managed to figure this out, either. Emanation rules say it comes from a corner, but how that works when the target is a Medium creature, I've never figured out. I figure, the pitlord randomly picks one of the four corners of the creature's square, which would give a 25% chance of guessing right. If you're Large, though, you're screwed.
Erithmu 03-06-07, 02:22 AM	Sabra vs TAG Fastest 151 round fight clocking in at just under 45 min. All hail Turbo rolling.
MitzaVolchenko 03-06-07, 02:31 AM	I've never managed to figure this out, either. Emanation rules say it comes from a corner, but how that works when the target is a Medium creature, I've never figured out. I figure, the pitlord randomly picks one of the four corners of the creature's square, which would give a 25% chance of guessing right. If you're Large, though, you're screwed. Burst or Emanation: The area extends from the point of origin in a sphere whose radius is specified in the entry (though some bursts are cone-shaped areas). Anything that blocks line of effect from the point of origin also blocks the burst or emanation. If it is a carried object or a creature the point of origin has to be on them, not on some random corner of their square. While the person would still gain concealment, their location should be viable to locate as the center point of the effect. Now, area effects are centered on intersections to make drawing them simpler, but that sould not in effect mean that they provide more than the concealment miss chance...in essence they give 75% miss chance on top of 50% miss chance. That is not so very kosher.
Rauul 03-06-07, 04:07 AM	My fight (Hajj vs Mohmat) needs doing, but I don't know if Rauul still plans to do it tomorrow, and even if he isn't you'll have to get the Mohmat's tactics from him or Eluria. I don't know what timezone you're in, but it's past midnight here and I'm heading off to bed. I'll check in some time in the morning, and if it's confirmed you'll be taking over the fight then I'll toss you the tactics if you haven't gotten them by then. Usually a Pitlord Puts up a note on here if they can't... and since i have been posting almost every day what makes you think i wouldn't get to it.. *mutters* it will be done.. Some of us are old and cranky.. :P
McJarvis 03-06-07, 07:06 AM	Sabra vs TAG Fastest 151 round fight clocking in at just under 45 min. All hail Turbo rolling. I believe you need to put up how many bolts TAG used.
Rauul 03-06-07, 07:28 AM	Mohmat Iptomor (Eluria) vs. Hajj (sonofzeal) :ECL 3 [Arena] Can be seen here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11680422&postcount=644)... isn't pretty..
Eluria 03-06-07, 07:50 AM	Mohmat Iptomor (Eluria) vs. Hajj (sonofzeal) :ECL 3 [Arena] Can be seen here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11680422&postcount=644)... isn't pretty.. @Rauul - thanks for running the fight. I have a few issues with it, however: In my tactics I say: "When he's spotted, close to distance for crystal shard (gaining PBS bonus to hit and damage) and fire, in order of rounds of combat: 1: Crystal shard 3pp + 2 Wild Surge + Psionic Shot 2: Crystal shard 1pp + 2 Wild Surge 3: Crystal shard 1pp (have one left over from F1) + 2 Wild Surge If he summons a monster, try to hit him with a crystal shard while he's casting to disrupt. If it's after all 3 crystal shards have been fired, try to ride away and run out the duration of the summons." Movement is a little hard to interpret 100% accurately, because the icons change color in the midst of the fight, but I don't really see why, even once the hippogriff was summoned, Mohmat couldn't have closed to attack Hajj. Even as early as round 2, I don't see why Mohmat wouldn't have closed to approach him, since the goal was to get into combat as soon as possible. When he was spotted, instead you had me shoot at the hippogriff; it's not explicitly clear, but I would've rather avoided the hippogriff and closed to fire only at Hajj, as sort of stated above (try to ride away and run out the duration of the summons, i.e. not try to kill them); this was stated under "if it's after all 3 crystals shards have been fired", so I can see the confusion... however, the reason for stating it like that is that, no matter what, the plan was to ride up and fire shards, in order as described, at Hajj. Also, you have me regain psionic focus in both round 7 and 8 - no where in my tactics does it say to spend time regaining focus at this point - it explicitly says, round by round, to fire crystal shards + wild surge; once out of shards, then focusing restarts; also, I shouldn't ever use consecutive rounds to regain focus if I'm successful - I only have one psionic focus. On the roller I don't see an attack roll for my attack in round 10. In round 12, Hajj hits me with produce flame; that spell ended on round 11. If you do correct anything, please note also that in both round 10 and 11 you have me expend my focus; that's not possible, since I only ever have one focus to expend. I hope that's a legitimate, and kindly phrased request to take a few things into account. Since my tactics didn't explicitly describe what to do if a summons appears before I can attack Hajj, obviously you don't have to feel obliged to re-do that part of things, but I do think that the statement was pretty clear, from when he's spotted, do x,y,z; the intent was to ignore dogs/summons/etc and just kill Hajj. Let me know what you think Rauul.
Maraxus 03-06-07, 09:07 AM	Harvester vs Zwei and Balrog H: Starts at location (39,59) with wand in hand. He runs to (60,78). ZB/T: Start at location (69,96) with bows in hand. They all know they cannot outrun the Harvester any longer. Uhm??? They can! ...At least with the requested "Trillian spurs me, if necessary" Same counts for the first time I'm hit by the missles, for the others, maybe, too. Harveys first spot check to spot Balrog is missing. Further the second spot check (the fatal one in round 18) should be a failure (hide 4 vs. spot 12, distance penalty 11). Any spot roll vs. Zwei and Trillian failed, too. The distance penalty for spot checks is -1 per 10 ft. I think this included could change everything. Likewise, the tactics ask you to spur Balrog and to hide again, after running away (should be at a save moment obviously, don't know, if we had such one), this is a secondary thing, since the interpretation of tactics is up to you. However the distance penalty for spotting is very important! In another think: I should not write so much, because basicly I'm supposed to be totally busy. My fight in the forrest will be late, I'll have some time this evening, but fear, that 3 players with lot's of allies in the evil forrest will take to long. However, tomorrow, it will be done.
SauroGrenom 03-06-07, 09:38 AM	Problem with square picking for finding the center of blacklight...when cast on a person, not a location, it emanates from the person...one square not an intersection of four squares, or at least logic says so...gonna have to dig through the FAQ, etc. to see if that has ever been clarified. IF it does emanate from one intersection and that intersection's realtionship to the caster remains constant, any hit should identify where from center the caster is, though honestly that still boggles logic. As far as I understand it, all spells eminate from a intersection on the grid. For large creatures, that's the center of the creature's area. Bot medium creatures, it can be any intersection. Also it can easily change... Turn 90 degrees and you can still see ahead just fine. Or have the emanation be from your hand and hold the hand alternatively at the forward or rear parts of your square... I derive that interpretation from the details of an anti-magic field on a big creature. If you cast anti magic field on a colossal dragon, only part of it's body is necessarily inside of the AOE.
SauroGrenom 03-06-07, 09:47 AM	Uhm??? They can! ...At least with the requested "Trillian spurs me, if necessary" Same counts for the first time I'm hit by the missles, for the others, maybe, too. Harveys first spot check to spot Balrog is missing. Further the second spot check (the fatal one in round 18) should be a failure (hide 4 vs. spot 12, distance penalty 11). Any spot roll vs. Zwei and Trillian failed, too. The distance penalty for spot checks is -1 per 10 ft. I think this included could change everything. Likewise, the tactics ask you to spur Balrog and to hide again, after running away (should be at a save moment obviously, don't know, if we had such one), this is a secondary thing, since the interpretation of tactics is up to you.I'm sorry, but Balrog is an intelligent mount and he's a main character. I just cannot have anyone "spur" him. That's taking the whole riding thig too far. I'm not requiring the riders to make ride checks every time Balrog moves, so consider this a boon. However the distance penalty for spotting is very important!Alright. I'll put in distance penalties. It only delays the inevitable. You guys cannot attack him with any serious chance of hurting him in any way, he can replenish all his buffs several times. And once you start sniping, it's a -20 on the hide check. You all will fail almost every time. Edit: Also it's pointless to try and hide when running. There's a huge penalty on that (-20).
Erithmu 03-06-07, 10:10 AM	I believe you need to put up how many bolts TAG used. And done ...
TelinArtho 03-06-07, 11:25 AM	Matthis Dar'ath III (waywreth) vs Dekry the Second (Never_on_Time)
waywreth 03-06-07, 11:30 AM	Matthis Dar'ath III (waywreth) vs Dekry the Second (Never_on_Time) Bah I hate winning that way, make sure you send updates when requested Never_on_Time! Thanks for the run Telin.
hogarth 03-06-07, 11:38 AM	Matthis Dar'ath III (waywreth) vs Dekry the Second (Never_on_Time) Just a comment: a druid wearing metal does not lose his animal companion, only spells, supernatural or spell-like abilities. Also, I was under the impression that gladiators never suffered bright light penalties in the arena (e.g. there's enough light that there's no concealment, but not so much that it hurts orcs/kobolds/deep dwarves).
sonofzeal 03-06-07, 12:16 PM	Mohmat Iptomor (Eluria) vs. Hajj (sonofzeal) :ECL 3 [Arena] Can be seen here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11680422&postcount=644)... isn't pretty.. Good fight, and I apologize for jumping the gun on looking for other pitlords; given my track record with fights being held over, I get skittish by Tuesdays. No disrespect was meant, I just wanted to cover my bases. I'm pleased how well the Hippogriff turned out. There's a couple things that wern't according to my tactics though, in case you were going to rerun the fight after Eluria's comments. First, I never intended to move outside my starting box, except to hide around the pillars. Second, when the hippogriff goes, my dogs go too and I go for cover behind the pillars. I'm not asking for a rerun, but if you were going to do one anyway.... ;)
Tellish_of_Ket 03-06-07, 12:23 PM	Just a comment: a druid wearing metal does not lose his animal companion, only spells, supernatural or spell-like abilities. Also, I was under the impression that gladiators never suffered bright light penalties in the arena (e.g. there's enough light that there's no concealment, but not so much that it hurts orcs/kobolds/deep dwarves). That is 100% correct. You do not suffer dazzled penalties in the arean. Just like it doesn't matter if you choose Owl or Eagle as your familiar, you still gain the spot bonus. The lighting conditions are always "optimal". And a druid does not lose it's animal companion for wearing metal armour. ToK
TelinArtho 03-06-07, 12:28 PM	I didn't take into account the penalties anyway - though I probably should've mentioned that in the summary. As to the animal companion, I left him out due to the line in the tactics saying to. He may have wanted him in if he knew I was willing to let him cast spells, but I didn't want him to go into the fight severely hindered already and then get his animal companion killed.
Horatius 03-06-07, 12:48 PM	@sonofzeal: Thanks for the re-run. You still missed the hide, though, FYI. Cheers
MindWandererB 03-06-07, 12:51 PM	In round 12, Hajj hits me with produce flame; that spell ended on round 11.This is the only inaccurate complaint--but only because the round summaries are wrong. Round 8, the remaining duration is 30 rounds, so it expires in round 38. Rounds 9 and 11, Hajj attacks, which reduce the duration by 10 rounds each. Expiration is now round 18. Round 12, he throws one more time, and it expires.
McJarvis 03-06-07, 12:53 PM	And done ... Thanks for the run :) And a special thanks for putting up with my xbow tactics, you saved me about 50 gp! :) ~McJ~
sonofzeal 03-06-07, 12:56 PM	@sonofzeal: Thanks for the re-run. You still missed the hide, though, FYI. Cheers See my comments in this thread; I don't concider a character as hiding until they specifically ask to hide, and you hadn't at the point he saw you. The SRD only covers hiding as part of moving, or hiding as a move action after a snipe, both of which require an explicit action on your part to gain the benifits of hiding.
MindWandererB 03-06-07, 01:05 PM	See my comments in this thread; I don't concider a character as hiding until they specifically ask to hide, and you hadn't at the point he saw you. The SRD only covers hiding as part of moving, or hiding as a move action after a snipe, both of which require an explicit action on your part to gain the benifits of hiding. Unfortunately, we have a rule about that here. A character gets to make Hide checks automatically.
sonofzeal 03-06-07, 01:10 PM	Unfortunately, we have a rule about that here. A character gets to make Hide checks automatically. Ah, drat. In the future I'll do that then, but I won't have time to update this fight. I don't think it'll make a difference anyway. If someone else wants to fix it, that's okay with me.
MitzaVolchenko 03-06-07, 01:17 PM	As far as I understand it, all spells eminate from a intersection on the grid. For large creatures, that's the center of the creature's area. Bot medium creatures, it can be any intersection. Also it can easily change... Turn 90 degrees and you can still see ahead just fine. Or have the emanation be from your hand and hold the hand alternatively at the forward or rear parts of your square... I derive that interpretation from the details of an anti-magic field on a big creature. If you cast anti magic field on a colossal dragon, only part of it's body is necessarily inside of the AOE. I am saying that you are overpowering a spell and defying logic. There are no facings in D&D except tower shields and aerial maneuvering, so the 90 degrees is bunk. The conealment should be giving a 50% iss chance, not 75% then 50%. This was put to the elders earie in the blacklight debate. Personally, if I am running a power that is on everyone's nerf list except Cat's I wouldn't give it a boost by refusing to allow any sort of targetting. I'm sorry, but Balrog is an intelligent mount and he's a main character. I just cannot have anyone "spur" him. That's taking the whole riding thig too far. I'm not requiring the riders to make ride checks every time Balrog moves, so consider this a boon. Alright. I'll put in distance penalties. It only delays the inevitable. You guys cannot attack him with any serious chance of hurting him in any way, he can replenish all his buffs several times. And once you start sniping, it's a -20 on the hide check. You all will fail almost every time. Edit: Also it's pointless to try and hide when running. There's a huge penalty on that (-20). Good to know you had a foregone conclusion on this fight. If we take it to extra rounds, we get more shots to hit him. If he can't spot, he has no option but to try to close. As long as we are not in his range, and he is not given the advantage of just standing in the middle of the arena, he has to pursue and waste rounds of blacklight. Since Zwei can potshot him from anywhere on the map, he takes delay which in most pitords' cases is generally a dispel (which I would deem to be a little exessive). We have the mobility to prevent him from using the MM's almost entirely. As for deciding that a mount cannot be spurred as the rules say it can, making no mention of the intelligence of the mount on whether or not you can do it, that is rather writing one's own rule set. I will grant that our chances are minimal in a gross mismatch like this one (2 low record characters against a top record is rally absurd), but we wrote sound tactics that actually forced you to deviate for Harvester. Some pitlords would have just run what Cat wrote and let the breakdown of tactics hurt him. I don't object to the improvisation, but I do think that we should get to use every possible edge we managed to scrape up between us.
SauroGrenom 03-06-07, 02:08 PM	I am saying that you are overpowering a spell and defying logic. There are no facings in D&D except tower shields and aerial maneuvering, so the 90 degrees is bunk. The conealment should be giving a 50% iss chance, not 75% then 50%. This was put to the elders earie in the blacklight debate. Personally, if I am running a power that is on everyone's nerf list except Cat's I wouldn't give it a boost by refusing to allow any sort of targetting.I'm allowing all the targeting you want (except targeted spells). You just have to pick the right square. I'm being generous here by allowing you to pick from among the 4 "central" squares. Good to know you had a foregone conclusion on this fight. If we take it to extra rounds, we get more shots to hit him. If he can't spot, he has no option but to try to close. As long as we are not in his range, and he is not given the advantage of just standing in the middle of the arena, he has to pursue and waste rounds of blacklight. Since Zwei can potshot him from anywhere on the map, he takes delay which in most pitords' cases is generally a dispel (which I would deem to be a little exessive). We have the mobility to prevent him from using the MM's almost entirely. As for deciding that a mount cannot be spurred as the rules say it can, making no mention of the intelligence of the mount on whether or not you can do it, that is rather writing one's own rule set.Look I already said I'll run the extra rounds. If you want to insult me and suggest I ran the fight with bias, then I'm tempted to tell you tough luck. It's not my fault your tactics failed. Just look at the situation you all are in. Zwei is no threat to the Harvester at all... He's got deflect arrows, and Zwei can only fire one arrow a round. You'll never hurt him with that. Look at all the things that must happen for Zwei to get in a hit. You've got to pick the right square to target, then defeat the miss chance on total concealment, then defeat the miss chance on entropic shield, then roll a natural 20, and snipe with a good enough hide check (at -20) to beat his spot. Then consider that he's a cleric and can convert healing spells with his many remaining spell levels. Then consider that he's got replacement scrolls and stones for all his buffs... There's nothing you can do to seriously kill him. I'll roll the dice a bunch more and spend a few more hours on this fight, but unless an extremely unlikely event takes place (like a crit confirm with maximum damage), I'll come to the same conclusion with a few more resources expended.I will grant that our chances are minimal in a gross mismatch like this one (2 low record characters against a top record is rally absurd), but we wrote sound tactics that actually forced you to deviate for Harvester. Some pitlords would have just run what Cat wrote and let the breakdown of tactics hurt him. I don't object to the improvisation, but I do think that we should get to use every possible edge we managed to scrape up between us.If I follow the letter of you tactics, Balrog just keeps running. You say to keep distance as the highest priority. So he gets gunned down in the same round instead of using a CLW potion. Your tactics vastly overestimated the significance of your slightly higher run speed. It's just not possible for you to stay at range and ever get a chance to snipe. Snipe is a full round action. It takes the Harvester only one round to run into range for his wand anywhere. On any cat and mouse chase on an Arena map the chasing party gets the inside line on the race track. That allows them to overcome a slightly lower movement speed. It just takes him two or three rounds to get into range for the wand (instead of every round). Also he won't take delay penalties as long as he's trying to close into range for an attack or spot you (besides delay penalties are never dispell magic in my experience). If and only if you had ride bye attack and a movement speed of about 100, this general tactic could conceivably work. The only reason I had to improvise a bit on Cat's tactic is because you guys never were willing to do the only thing that could have given you a chance... go in for melee where Balrog would dominate the Harvester and have a chance to grapple. Just because you wrote long tactics doesn't mean that it's a winning strategy, and just because I can predict the nearly certain outcome given the situation of the battle at this point doesn't mean that I'm biased. This is not an issue of Cat vs Mitza and Maraxus, or Sauro having any preference one way or another in this battle. It's an issue of a badly wounded mount with a slightly higher movement speed being chased in circles by guy with a long range weapon. As long as your running, you cannot hide for **** and your unable to snipe (the only kind of attack you ask for in your tactics). Then once your mount goes down you've still got to deal with a host of problems attacking at range and trying to snipe a guy with deflect arrows. As I said before. I'll run the extra rounds when I get home this evening, but unless you go and sacrifice a goat to the dice gods and they hear you and produce a nearly impossible confluence of dice rolls in your favor then the outcome won't change at all.
Hirumajoe 03-06-07, 02:09 PM	I'm sorry, but Balrog is an intelligent mount and he's a main character. I just cannot have anyone "spur" him. That's taking the whole riding thig too far. I'm not requiring the riders to make ride checks every time Balrog moves, so consider this a boon. There's a few things about the above which are bothering me, mostly from a rules stand point. I don't actually have any opinions on the fight itself. First, if Balrog can't be ridden or spurred, why can a pegasus be ridden or spurred, considering a Pegasus is *smarter* than Balrog? (No offense Maraxus. :D ) Or if they can't, then why the heck does mounted combat apply to pegasi? Secondly, I thought the point of D&D rules was they applied equally to NPCs and PCs, unless otherwise explicitly stated. Could you point me to the "Main character as mount" rules? If not, I humbly submit that the normal riding rules apply. Also, the only rule I could find in regards to riding a friendly intelligent mount that lets you ride him states ride checks are not needed when they move. Intelligent Mounts According to the Dungeon Master's Guide, a mount with an Intelligence score of 3 or higher acts like an NPC ally rather than a mount. Riding such an ally works much like riding an aggressive mount in battle (see Part Two), except that you don't have to make a Ride check to act while riding. (If your mount carries you willingly, the ride is smooth enough so your actions aren't restricted.) You also cannot make a Ride check to control the mount's actions, but you can make a Diplomacy (or possibly a Wild Empathy) check to get the mount to accept your direction. If you do, your mount acts just like a mount trained for combat riding. Even if you cannot (or do not choose to) direct your mount's actions, you still can ride along, making your own initiative roll and possibly delaying until after your mount acts, as noted in Part Two. Also, it seems fairly explicit that Balrog could be treated like a mount trained for combat riding. Which means he could be spurred, as far as I can tell. Ok, so Zwei und'Vierzig might need to make a diplomacy check, but given that Balrog is working with her, I figure the DC would be low. :)
Etiquette_Gnome 03-06-07, 02:13 PM	Tiny comment on Sabra vs. TAG, I specifically had my tactics to give myself total cover from the tower shield. I'm assuming that you were using the version of the tower shield rules where a non-rook formation means it only gives cover? Oh, and the fight between Fnorri and Wildfire is up, with what I consider the most awesome scene in the CoCo on the last round.
McJarvis 03-06-07, 02:46 PM	Tiny comment on Sabra vs. TAG, I specifically had my tactics to give myself total cover from the tower shield. I'm assuming that you were using the version of the tower shield rules where a non-rook formation means it only gives cover? I think the thought behind this was that I was riding a horse. You had to spend every turn with a standard action to ready the shield, then you'd have 30 ft of movement. When I had a full turn I could move 120 ft(60ftx2) & still shoot. So it would be easy for Art to strafe around you. Since my horse had a duration of 8 hours, I don't think the outcome would change....
Etiquette_Gnome 03-06-07, 03:00 PM	I still disagree with the state of the tower shield having facing in a system that seemingly did away with such a mechanic (or at the very least be able to choose one target you've got cover against and automatically rotate as they move around), but sies le vies...
False_Keraptis 03-06-07, 03:07 PM	Oh, and the fight between Fnorri and Wildfire is up, Looks good to me; one minor quibble: Fnorri gets a 12.5% penalty to his GP and XP due to his horse ally. Thanks.
SauroGrenom 03-06-07, 03:13 PM	Hirumajoe, That cheese is just too stinky for me. There is no section in the rules about characters as mounts. If we allowed it to happen and had all the mount and ride rules and feats apply, then everyone with a psicrystal or cohort would be having the main character ridden by the ally. This would result in many of these characters gaining the benefits of the mounted combat feat and increased movement speed from being "spurred". IMO that's far too steep of a slippery slope. We cannot allow it.
Abyssal Stalker 03-06-07, 03:17 PM	...then everyone with a psicrystal or cohort would be having the main character ridden by the ally... Hey, don't steal my idea! :) (Probably someone has come up with this before, it just popped in my mind during some conversation in the tavern)
McJarvis 03-06-07, 03:26 PM	Krytos can vouch for me on this one(whenever he logs on)-> I was talking to him on the phone last week about a character I was going to make that would involve a Psi-war/barbarian that rides an exotic saddle & uses a psicrystal to ride him. The result was both of us laughing for about fifteen minutes and then me mumbling something about my "not being enough of a gimp to ever even suggest something like that in an official sense..." :-)
TelinArtho 03-06-07, 03:37 PM	Hirumajoe, That cheese is just too stinky for me. There is no section in the rules about characters as mounts. If we allowed it to happen and had all the mount and ride rules and feats apply, then everyone with a psicrystal or cohort would be having the main character ridden by the ally. This would result in many of these characters gaining the benefits of the mounted combat feat and increased movement speed from being "spurred". IMO that's far too steep of a slippery slope. We cannot allow it. I'm sorry to speak up as a voice of dissent here, but let's look closely at what all of this means: If the supposition is that an intelligent mount cannot benefit from the rider's feats related to mounted ability (spirited charge, ride-by-attack, mounted combat, mounted archery, trample and the variable uses of the ride skill) - then where is the line drawn for "intelligent mount?" If a player cannot ride a centaur in this way, well what about a pegasus? Or how about a unicorn, or a nightmare or - better yet - the paladin's special mount? I'm not going to say that I like the idea of a psicrystal riding a humanoid, but I like it a heck of a lot better than getting rid of the paladin's feats with regard to his special mount.
McJarvis 03-06-07, 03:39 PM	I'm not going to say that I like the idea of a psicrystal riding a humanoid, but I like it a heck of a lot better than getting rid of the paladin's feats with regard to his special mount. But we're allowed to make the rules here. Why not just say PC's can not be mounts?
Zevox 03-06-07, 03:47 PM	Hirumajoe, That cheese is just too stinky for me. There is no section in the rules about characters as mounts. If we allowed it to happen and had all the mount and ride rules and feats apply, then everyone with a psicrystal or cohort would be having the main character ridden by the ally. This would result in many of these characters gaining the benefits of the mounted combat feat and increased movement speed from being "spurred". IMO that's far too steep of a slippery slope. We cannot allow it. Note on this Sauro that the DMG's few rules for a viable mount is include that the mount be "able to carry its rider in the typical fashion." A humanoid with a psicrystal definitely doesn't qualify as "the typical fashion" - especially when they specifically list a Giant (just a larger humanoid in form) as an example of a creature that would be unable to do so. Zevox
MitzaVolchenko 03-06-07, 03:48 PM	Durin vs. Arden is here. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11652514&postcount=626)
Tellish_of_Ket 03-06-07, 03:49 PM	But we're allowed to make the rules here. Why not just say PC's can not be mounts? Because RoTG cover intelligent mounts VERY well imho. Balrog, being a PC, and a centaur is quite advantageous. And cheese? Darklight/MM(CL9) doesn't get any cheesier. As per a very good section of RoTG giving concrete examples of intelligent mounts, Balrog can and should have been used as a mount with all the benefits attained there from. Strong? Yup...and for good reason. It SHOULD be strong, because Balrog is a PC and intelligent and would easily comply with his riders wishes without the need to make diplomacy/HA checks etc.. It's not that it's cheesy, that's the ADVANTAGE of choosing a centaur PC. Broken? Hardly...not even close. Benefecial and advantageous? Absolutely. But there's a price...LA+, and a cohort/ally that can ride. I think what Balrog was trying to accomplish to be fully within the rules, and not even abusive. Not even remotely, imho. ToK
Zevox 03-06-07, 03:52 PM	Durin vs. Arden is here. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11652514&postcount=626) Aw, crud. And those dice almost gave Arden a fair chance too. Theres no arguing with two natural 20s though, especially when one confirms for more damage than I have pre-vigor hp. Thanks for the run. Zevox
MitzaVolchenko 03-06-07, 03:54 PM	@SauroGrenom Your commentary is what led me to believe you ran the fight with a foregone conclusion as to its end. Don't get snarky at me whenyou said yourself what was inevitbale. If you can't run the fight without bias, hold it over and ask that it be reassigned. I know what our chances were in that fight. I also think that you are running Blacklight in an overpowered manner, but fine. You skipped hide checks and made up rules regarding whether or not a legal action can or can't be taken. Yes, running extra rounds sucks. Yes, it is likely that the result will remain the same. Yes, I do want to see that run in its entirety with all rolls present and without pitlord bias. As for mounts not being PC's, Willowmoon flicks her unicorn tail at you in disdain as she gets ready to quest for her Leadership jockey.
Maraxus 03-06-07, 04:05 PM	Hirumajoe, That cheese is just too stinky for me. There is no section in the rules about characters as mounts. If we allowed it to happen and had all the mount and ride rules and feats apply, then everyone with a psicrystal or cohort would be having the main character ridden by the ally. This would result in many of these characters gaining the benefits of the mounted combat feat and increased movement speed from being "spurred". IMO that's far too steep of a slippery slope. We cannot allow it. Yes, since "everybody and everything is able to carry a rider", if you brought yourself an ally with enought ranks in ride to overcome the "unsuided mount" penalty you impose and if you are willing to accept 1+ damage every time you get spured (btw. does damage reduction aply? :)), then, you could expect to get spured all the time. :)
Sutro 03-06-07, 04:18 PM	Note on this Sauro that the DMG's few rules for a viable mount is include that the mount be "able to carry its rider in the typical fashion." A humanoid with a psicrystal definitely doesn't qualify as "the typical fashion" - especially when they specifically list a Giant (just a larger humanoid in form) as an example of a creature that would be unable to do so. Zevox There is dissension in WotC material, however. The Arms & Equipment Guide gives examples of a grey renders and and ogre as mounts. -Sutro
Hirumajoe 03-06-07, 04:23 PM	Hirumajoe, That cheese is just too stinky for me. There is no section in the rules about characters as mounts. If we allowed it to happen and had all the mount and ride rules and feats apply, then everyone with a psicrystal or cohort would be having the main character ridden by the ally. This would result in many of these characters gaining the benefits of the mounted combat feat and increased movement speed from being "spurred". IMO that's far too steep of a slippery slope. We cannot allow it. Ok, basically you feel that a PC gaining the benefits of Mounted Combat are too great. I can respect that opinion. I personally don't share it. In my mind, if its too good for a PC, why isn't it too good for an ally mount or an NPC? Doesn't this imply that the mounted combat feat itself and the ride skill should be banned for being too powerful? The only difference I can find between the PC rider/ NPC mount vs NPC rider/ PC mount is that CoCo fights end when the PC is taken out, irregardless of the NPC's status. Is that what makes the above too cheesy in your mind? Basically, I happen to like the physical principle that the laws of nature should behave the same in all reference frames. I like applying that principle to D&D rules. If its good enough for the NPCs, its good enough for the PCs. And vice versa. And I do second Zevox's point that humanoids are generally not shaped right to be mounts, so you won't see a proliferation of that. (Might see a proliferation of Centaurs with psicrystals or the leadership feat...) @Mitzavolchenko: I would love to see that Unicorn with leadership ally. And wow... +14 to Cha? Grab some Paladin of Freedom levels...
MitzaVolchenko 03-06-07, 04:28 PM	@Mitzavolchenko: I would love to see that Unicorn with leadership ally. And wow... +14 to Cha? Grab some Paladin of Freedom levels... Depending on whether I have time after I finish the hunter fight, Willowmoon may be up and activated tomorrow...and yes Paladin of Freedom is the intent...mid-high, double digit saves across the board. I haven't decided on class for rider yet...probably a tricked out ranger with archery feat string.
Zevox 03-06-07, 04:43 PM	There is dissension in WotC material, however. The Arms & Equipment Guide gives examples of a grey renders and and ogre as mounts. -Sutro Thats a non-core book though, so its a moot point here (and I thank God for that for once, since that makes no sense whatsoever in my opinion). Zevox
MindWandererB 03-06-07, 04:44 PM	You've got to pick the right square to target, then defeat the miss chance on total concealment, then defeat the miss chance on entropic shield, then roll a natural 20, and snipe with a good enough hide check (at -20) to beat his spot. Just one correction here: this was discussed before, and eventually came up in Ask Wizards. The conclusion (with which we had independently agreed) was that you do not need to snipe successfully to catch your opponent without their Dex bonus, and thus beat Deflect Arrows (or use sneak attack). They see you afterwards, but for that attack, you only have to beat their Spot with your Hide, without the -20 penalty.
McJarvis 03-06-07, 04:49 PM	Thats a non-core book though, so its a moot point here (and I thank God for that for once, since that makes no sense whatsoever in my opinion). Zevox You never play piggyback as a kid? I guess a saddle would make it akward.
Zevox 03-06-07, 04:51 PM	You never play piggyback as a kid? I guess a saddle would make it akward. Not often, and it was awkward to begin with. Theres no way you're convincing me something like that comes anywhere close to working in a combat situation, or that it could be considered carrying a rider "in the typical fashion" like the DMG requires. Zevox
SauroGrenom 03-06-07, 04:54 PM	Mitza, Your tone is terribly accusative. Here is the recent decision about how to use AoE spells that block LOS. There is no interpretation to be done. You simply have to choose the correct square, and you cannot know if your last choice was the right one or not. From outside of the blacklight you cannot even see if you hit, or targeted the correct square. There is no feedback the character can use to determine what happened after the arrow goes into the blacklight area. Your protest relies entirely on rather shaky meta-game information that the character doesn't have. I did not miss hide checks, rather I missed a modifier on some hide checks. I'll fix that, and it will extend the battle. My commentary came after the fight was run and over, therefor any perceived bias is entirely misplaced. It was simply post fight commentary, not prejudice. Maraxus pointed out a few missing hide check modifiers, and I agreed to put them in, but also pointed out that they are unlikely to be fight changing. The very idea of spurring a character is a gray area in the rules. In any case if it had been allowed and been possible to use in the way you request which it isn't), it would just result in delay penalties imposed on Balrog and co. I think the idea opens the door for other rather untenable implications, and I rule in this case to not allow it. If you are passionate about it, hammer out the rules in the Courtroom and get an elder majority to approve it. Note that your tactics assume that it's possible to run to a location, then have a full round where you can act unmolested and then run to another safe place. This isn't possible if the map is 400' wide and your foe has a run speed of 150' and an attack range of 190'. There's only 60' left! Obviously such a strategy cannot be effective for more than one or two rounds in a row. Also note that you cannot request a rerun just because you don't like the outcome of a fight or the way it was run. You can only request a rerun if there were serious rules violations or deviations from your tactics. I've agreed to correct the rules violations when I get home. After those edits are complete, you have no further grounds for complaint.
SauroGrenom 03-06-07, 04:55 PM	Just one correction here: this was discussed before, and eventually came up in Ask Wizards. The conclusion (with which we had independently agreed) was that you do not need to snipe successfully to catch your opponent without their Dex bonus, and thus beat Deflect Arrows (or use sneak attack). They see you afterwards, but for that attack, you only have to beat their Spot with your Hide, without the -20 penalty. Now that's news to me... Is this in our court rulings?
Horatius 03-06-07, 04:57 PM	Ah, drat. In the future I'll do that then, but I won't have time to update this fight. I don't think it'll make a difference anyway. If someone else wants to fix it, that's okay with me. @ sonofzeal: Don't bother - it's too late now anyway, I was just pointing it out FYI. But also FYI, I did specifically state in my tactics that I was hiding: Round by Round Start: 1. Hide behind pillar, cast Expeditious Retreat from scroll I think my tactics were pretty clear and organized (subject to debate, obviously) but you missed a few important details from them. Please PM me in future if there's something you don't get or the tactics don't make sense to you (like using too many spell levels). Still, I appreciate the effort you have put into trying to sort it out. H.
Hirumajoe 03-06-07, 05:04 PM	There is no feedback the character can use to determine what happened after the arrow goes into the blacklight area. I again don't want to step into the fight itself, but just want to point out a rules issue: Since when does blacklight include a silence effect? I'm pretty sure you can hear if you get a thunk in a wooden tower shield, a clang if you hit platemail, and pretty much nothing if you hit dirt. Admittedly, in this particular case range probably adds too many listen penalties. But in general, if I'm a character with a +10 listen check 50' away from someone in a Blacklight area, I think I'd have decent odds on hearing if I hit them, their shield, or the dirt. Presumably if you miss the AC by the shield bonus you've hit the shield. If you miss it by more than that, you've missed completely and get dirt, and if you hit you should get a clank or thud or something. I mean if a DC 0 listen check is good enough for an attack, it should be good enough for a hit.
False_Keraptis 03-06-07, 05:07 PM	Yes, since "everybody and everything is able to carry a rider", if you brought yourself an ally with enought ranks in ride to overcome the "unsuided mount" penalty you impose and if you are willing to accept 1+ damage every time you get spured (btw. does damage reduction aply? :)), then, you could expect to get spured all the time. :) Oh, for the love of Moradin, that's even worse than the grappling horses! Are psicrystals not already ridiculous enough as played here? Intelligent, mount-like creatures like unicorns and centaurs are one thing, but I sincerely hope we never see the day a psicrystal (or anything else) "rides" a humanoid in the coliseum. Arguably, it's technically legal, but it is such a monumentally stupid image as to beggar belief... (Okay, so the midgets riding the blind guys in Gene Wolfe's Book of the New Sun were kind of cool, but he can do that because he's the master, and also they weren't frickin' crystals with spider legs.) Rules-wise, it's a benefit for no sensible reason, and it's only arguably legal, so I say we house-rule this loophole closed before it opens.
SauroGrenom 03-06-07, 05:09 PM	Just one correction here: this was discussed before, and eventually came up in Ask Wizards. The conclusion (with which we had independently agreed) was that you do not need to snipe successfully to catch your opponent without their Dex bonus, and thus beat Deflect Arrows (or use sneak attack). They see you afterwards, but for that attack, you only have to beat their Spot with your Hide, without the -20 penalty.I've looked in both the ask wizards archive and our own court rulings, and I see no mention of this.
SauroGrenom 03-06-07, 05:10 PM	I again don't want to step into the fight itself, but just want to point out a rules issue: Since when does blacklight include a silence effect? .This is semantics. How can you tell the difference at that range from hitting the ground or hitting a shield of faith effect? It meaningless to suggest there is a game mechanic to tell the difference. Besides at the range these attacks are taking place, most of the listen checks are nearly impossible to hear anything, let alone distinguish between hitting one kind of material or another.
MindWandererB 03-06-07, 05:10 PM	Now that's news to me... Is this in our court rulings? ...I can't find it. I know it came up, and in fact I was the victim of said ruling, and now I can't find it. In fact, the FAQ suggests otherwise (it says you snipe to remain during the attack, not after). Anyone else remember where that was?
TelinArtho 03-06-07, 05:13 PM	Here's the post where you mentioned it EDIT: Oops - wait I don't think that's the one - hold on. EDIT again: That's the only one I found...
Zevox 03-06-07, 05:15 PM	Oh, for the love of Moradin, that's even worse than the grappling horses! Are psicrystals not already ridiculous enough as played here? Intelligent, mount-like creatures like unicorns and centaurs are one thing, but I sincerely hope we never see the day a psicrystal (or anything else) "rides" a humanoid in the coliseum. Arguably, it's technically legal, but it is such a monumentally stupid image as to beggar belief... (Okay, so the midgets riding the blind guys in Gene Wolfe's Book of the New Sun were kind of cool, but he can do that because he's the master, and also they weren't frickin' crystals with spider legs.) Rules-wise, it's a benefit for no sensible reason, and it's only arguably legal, so I say we house-rule this loophole closed before it opens. As I've stated before, this isn't a loophole to begin with if we take into account the DMG's requirement that a mount be able to carry its rider in the traditional sense (which definitely means straight-standing bipeds are out of the question IMO). ...I can't find it. I know it came up, and in fact I was the victim of said ruling, and now I can't find it. Anyone else remember where that was? The FAQ's answer to you about whether hearing the attack counted for deflection might be what you're thinking of. I don't recall anything for spot in particular, but thats a sort of precedent I suppose. Zevox
hogarth 03-06-07, 05:19 PM	...I can't find it. I know it came up, and in fact I was the victim of said ruling, and now I can't find it. In fact, the FAQ suggests otherwise (it says you snipe to remain during the attack, not after). Anyone else remember where that was? It was in the "Sage Advice Online" archive. http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ask/20070201a
MindWandererB 03-06-07, 05:21 PM	It was in the "Sage Advice Online" archive. http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ask/20070201a Bleagh! I even searched for those terms (sneak attack, flat-footed), and it denied me. It's a conspiracy, I tell you.
Rauul 03-06-07, 05:30 PM	@Rauul - thanks for running the fight. I have a few issues with it, however: In my tactics I say: "When he's spotted, close to distance for crystal shard (gaining PBS bonus to hit and damage) and fire, in order of rounds of combat: 1: Crystal shard 3pp + 2 Wild Surge + Psionic Shot 2: Crystal shard 1pp + 2 Wild Surge 3: Crystal shard 1pp (have one left over from F1) + 2 Wild Surge If he summons a monster, try to hit him with a crystal shard while he's casting to disrupt. If it's after all 3 crystal shards have been fired, try to ride away and run out the duration of the summons." Movement is a little hard to interpret 100% accurately, because the icons change color in the midst of the fight, but I don't really see why, even once the hippogriff was summoned, Mohmat couldn't have closed to attack Hajj. Even as early as round 2, I don't see why Mohmat wouldn't have closed to approach him, since the goal was to get into combat as soon as possible. When he was spotted, instead you had me shoot at the hippogriff; it's not explicitly clear, but I would've rather avoided the hippogriff and closed to fire only at Hajj, as sort of stated above (try to ride away and run out the duration of the summons, i.e. not try to kill them); this was stated under "if it's after all 3 crystals shards have been fired", so I can see the confusion... however, the reason for stating it like that is that, no matter what, the plan was to ride up and fire shards, in order as described, at Hajj. Also, you have me regain psionic focus in both round 7 and 8 - no where in my tactics does it say to spend time regaining focus at this point - it explicitly says, round by round, to fire crystal shards + wild surge; once out of shards, then focusing restarts; also, I shouldn't ever use consecutive rounds to regain focus if I'm successful - I only have one psionic focus. On the roller I don't see an attack roll for my attack in round 10. In round 12, Hajj hits me with produce flame; that spell ended on round 11. If you do correct anything, please note also that in both round 10 and 11 you have me expend my focus; that's not possible, since I only ever have one focus to expend. I hope that's a legitimate, and kindly phrased request to take a few things into account. Since my tactics didn't explicitly describe what to do if a summons appears before I can attack Hajj, obviously you don't have to feel obliged to re-do that part of things, but I do think that the statement was pretty clear, from when he's spotted, do x,y,z; the intent was to ignore dogs/summons/etc and just kill Hajj. Let me know what you think Rauul. As your tactics said IF you could, even when his dogs spotted you you were to far out to get to him without a double move on the horse (meaning you can't double move the horse and still blast) and if you were to ignore the hippogriff it would get full attacks on you instead of just claws with dogs flanking giving it flanking, I choose to have you take it's wings out from under it As at less than 1/2 hps it can't fly, so then it can just barely keep up with you and you can attempt to outrun it.. and regain focus.. Now i can rerun the fight with you choosing to ignore the animals completely (they won't be ignoring you.. and possibly ripping you off the horse ect..) or i can let the fight stand.. As for the Mapper changing colors... i have no clue.. the summoned monster messed that up.. you went from red to blue back to red, I cleaned up some of the my working in the dark mistakes i made, an MWB is quite correct on the produce flames.. and i attempled to clean that up 1min per level =3 minutes, 2 attacks = -2mins, means he acually had 1 more attack left with it.. at 120 ft and +7 to hit(furthur than your xbow range) I have rerun it 3 different times on the mapper with dice, and using the same rolls as the roller gave me, and the outcome is always the same.. (except it adds 4-6 rds of Mohmat riding around looking for Hajj in his start square)...
McJarvis 03-06-07, 05:52 PM	As I've stated before, this isn't a loophole to begin with if we take into account the DMG's requirement that a mount be able to carry its rider in the traditional sense (which definitely means straight-standing bipeds are out of the question IMO). If you attempt to ride a creature that is ill suited as a mount, you take a –5 penalty on your Ride checks. Seems to me that if something is ill-suited as a mount(yet willing), then it's a -5 penalty. Does the DMG go on to forbid it, or just label giants as ill-suited?
Eluria 03-06-07, 06:01 PM	I'm not being hostile, I'm just pointing out the issues I had with the fight. Honestly, Hajj had better tactics. However, the point is not for you to interpret what you think would be most sensible (shooting a hippogriff so it can't fly), but to execute the listed tactics. If you were going to do what you thought made most sense to deal with a hippogriff, you could've drank a potion of protection ... I'm not asking you to do this, because it wasn't in my tactics -- because I thought avoiding the summons was clear, even at the expense of them hitting me for a few rounds. But also not in my tactics was using my most devastating attack on a hippogriff that would last for 18 seconds. As your tactics said IF you could, even when his dogs spotted you you were to far out to get to him without a double move on the horse (meaning you can't double move the horse and still blast) well, I could, but at huge penalties, and I would miss. Now i can rerun the fight with you choosing to ignore the animals completely (they won't be ignoring you.. and possibly ripping you off the horse ect..) or i can let the fight stand.. Again, honestly, and I know tone of voice doesn't come across well over the forums, you are welcome to do whatever you want. It's got to be an insane amount of work to run a fight; I have come to the conclusion that I really can't do it, personally, at least not at my current state of knowledge and personal time. I'm just pointing out my objections; if you think they warrant re-running the fight, then please do so. I cleaned up some of the my working in the dark mistakes i made, an MWB is quite correct on the produce flames.. and i attempled to clean that up 1min per level =3 minutes, 2 attacks = -2mins, means he acually had 1 more attack left with it.. at 120 ft and +7 to hit(furthur than your xbow range) That is a range increment, not a max range; not that I think this point would change the fight - I only mentioned the produce flames because with the notation originally used it looked like it had expired, then killed me - that would be a problem. I have rerun it 3 different times on the mapper with dice, and using the same rolls as the roller gave me, and the outcome is always the same.. (except it adds 4-6 rds of Mohmat riding around looking for Hajj in his start square)... That's fine then; in any case, thanks for running it, and doing your best with the tactics sent - if I want things to be done more explicitly/precisely, I'll try to post it more clearly in the future.
Hirumajoe 03-06-07, 06:11 PM	This is semantics. How can you tell the difference at that range from hitting the ground or hitting a shield of faith effect? It meaningless to suggest there is a game mechanic to tell the difference. Besides at the range these attacks are taking place, most of the listen checks are nearly impossible to hear anything, let alone distinguish between hitting one kind of material or another. Oh, I don't disagree in this particular fight that the range penalties make it a non-issue. I totally agree in that regard. (I indicated as much in the previous post). However, in a more general view (which encompases cases where the attacker/target are much closer or where there are extremely good listen skills involved) I think you should be able to tell at least a few things by sound. And you're probably right the reason why you missed (whether shield or deflection bonus or whatever) isn't going to be clear. And I guess in the case of sight thats true too. But I do think an actual hit where the target takes damage and a miss are going to sound different. I personally can tell the difference at 30' to 60' (and possibly farther) between hitting an archery target, a glancing hit on the wooden struts, and the ground. Why shouldn't this be true of heroic fantasy characters (who are capable of far more impressive feats of detection than I). I guess I'm just being overly wary of a blanket statement that no information can be gained from an area of blacklight. Edit: Thinking about this some more, I might guess that hearing the arrow impact something is a DC 0 check. It seems reasonable that this is still part of an attack, and thus should use the same DC. Now its seem like you're indicating that telling the material you hit is more difficult. Although its not clear what information an exact success (i.e. rolling a net 0 for a DC 0 check) on a listen check provides. The only guide I can find is beating a listen check by 10 to understand what people are speaking are saying. So I might suggest that a DC 0 + 10 plus range modifiers would let you know what kind of material you hit with an arrow.
sonofzeal 03-06-07, 06:38 PM	@ sonofzeal: Don't bother - it's too late now anyway, I was just pointing it out FYI. But also FYI, I did specifically state in my tactics that I was hiding: I think my tactics were pretty clear and organized (subject to debate, obviously) but you missed a few important details from them. Please PM me in future if there's something you don't get or the tactics don't make sense to you (like using too many spell levels). Still, I appreciate the effort you have put into trying to sort it out. H. Many thanks in being understanding about this; I know I'd hate if I lost a fight because of misunderstandings. I didn't send a PM because I only had one opening to run the fight, and by the time I noticed it was too late. In the future, I'll go through the tactics farther in advance in order to catch things like that and fire off a quick PM before things get out of hand. My apologies that you had to end up on the wrong side of my learning process. One question though: I know a little french, but what does "Guepe" mean?
SauroGrenom 03-06-07, 07:22 PM	Just one correction here: this was discussed before, and eventually came up in Ask Wizards. The conclusion (with which we had independently agreed) was that you do not need to snipe successfully to catch your opponent without their Dex bonus, and thus beat Deflect Arrows (or use sneak attack). They see you afterwards, but for that attack, you only have to beat their Spot with your Hide, without the -20 penalty.I need a clarification on this. So where does it say that if you are denied a dex bonus that you cannot use deflect arrows? That's a leap that I do not follow?
TheMagister 03-06-07, 07:23 PM	Pretty sure that that one came with one of the recent FAQ updates. Recent being with one of the last (say) three or four.
SauroGrenom 03-06-07, 07:28 PM	Pretty sure that that one came with one of the recent FAQ updates. Recent being with one of the last (say) three or four. Alright. I found it in the FAQ.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-06-07, 07:34 PM	Oh, for the love of Moradin, that's even worse than the grappling horses! Are psicrystals not already ridiculous enough as played here? Intelligent, mount-like creatures like unicorns and centaurs are one thing, but I sincerely hope we never see the day a psicrystal (or anything else) "rides" a humanoid in the coliseum. Arguably, it's technically legal, but it is such a monumentally stupid image as to beggar belief... (Okay, so the midgets riding the blind guys in Gene Wolfe's Book of the New Sun were kind of cool, but he can do that because he's the master, and also they weren't frickin' crystals with spider legs.) Rules-wise, it's a benefit for no sensible reason, and it's only arguably legal, so I say we house-rule this loophole closed before it opens. Actually this is a good point. If we give listen checks DC 0, for "COMBAT" which imho includes using the wand for snipers, then it's no different for Harv in blacklight. PLUS, he's running (-20ms check)...that's HUGE...even with their poor listen checks. I mean, with their listen modifiers and range modifiers, i don't think it will make much difference when he attacks, but all the difference in the world when Harv RUNS after Balrog. Balrog {might} have a chance to pinpoint, turn and fire. It's something to keep in mind if you have a wildshaped druid with +40 listen. Harv with be pin pointed almost everytime (running -20 ms) or attacking (DC 0). ToK
Tellish_of_Ket 03-06-07, 07:35 PM	I need a clarification on this. So where does it say that if you are denied a dex bonus that you cannot use deflect arrows? That's a leap that I do not follow? Not in all circumstances. The rules is being aware of the attack to deflect it. If you are unaware of the attack (sniping is one way), then you cannot deflect and you lose ur dex bonus. ToK
Zevox 03-06-07, 07:37 PM	Actually this is a good point. If we give listen checks DC 0, for "COMBAT" which imho includes using the wand for snipers, then it's no different for Harv in blacklight. Oh, no need even for that (though it would give them each a 2nd reactive listen if it counts). Activating a wand requires speaking a command word, which is a DC 0 listen check itself (since for some reason I've never understood we don't allow whispering such things...). Zevox
Zevox 03-06-07, 07:38 PM	Not in all circumstances. The rules is being aware of the attack to deflect it. If you are unaware of the attack (sniping is one way), then you cannot deflect and you lose ur dex bonus. ToK Check the FAQ for a clarification on this. The "aware of the attack" clause in the feat is redundant since it means the same as not being flat-footed (which is also in the feat). Zevox
Horatius 03-06-07, 07:42 PM	One question though: I know a little french, but what does "Guepe" mean? Wasp. No problem. I'm happy we were able to communicate without becoming antagonistic. This is, after all, a game; it would be sad to let one's blood pressure spike over it. Cheers
Tellish_of_Ket 03-06-07, 07:49 PM	Oh, no need even for that (though it would give them each a 2nd reactive listen if it counts). Activating a wand requires speaking a command word, which is a DC 0 listen check itself (since for some reason I've never understood we don't allow whispering such things...). Zevox Either way, it seems like non-snipers have a better chance of hiding/ms than sniper/stealthers. Not critisizing Sauro, he ran a really good and complicated fight, and i know how it is to overlook some of the little things when the battle is raging on and you have many things to focus on. I certainly didn't like the attack he recieved from one of the combatants...didn't someone just get booted for that? lol j/k. Seriously though, Sauro is a very intelligent and reasonable pitlord. He did the best he could, and made a couple of mental errros...we all do. Heck i make them too, almost every second fight. I'm sure he's more than willing to look into the fact that Harv made a TON of noise by either running for firing his wand and i know he's professional to make those small changes. On the flip-side, i doubt it will impact the fight in any way shape or form...this time. It would make the world of difference though with someone with +40 listen...that's for sure. ToK
MitzaVolchenko 03-06-07, 08:08 PM	Either way, it seems like non-snipers have a better chance of hiding/ms than sniper/stealthers. Not critisizing Sauro, he ran a really good and complicated fight, and i know how it is to overlook some of the little things when the battle is raging on and you have many things to focus on. I certainly didn't like the attack he recieved from one of the combatants...didn't someone just get booted for that? lol j/k. Seriously though, Sauro is a very intelligent and reasonable pitlord. He did the best he could, and made a couple of mental errros...we all do. Heck i make them too, almost every second fight. I'm sure he's more than willing to look into the fact that Harv made a TON of noise by either running for firing his wand and i know he's professional to make those small changes. On the flip-side, i doubt it will impact the fight in any way shape or form...this time. It would make the world of difference though with someone with +40 listen...that's for sure. ToK What you have missed ToK, is that both Sauro and I are likely to assume intent where it may or may not be. Ever since the first fight I ran here (which happened to be one with Sauro's character in it) we have argued over rules and interpretations. For the record after 6 edits of that very first fight, he still lost and it took a couple of weeks for me to stop hearing about it. Post fight commentary is the only place I have to see intent. I do believe that Sauro took it as a foregone conclusion that Harvester would get the win. That tends to make one assume certain things and overlook others. Two people contacted me privately prior to my response post to see if I had seen his "inevitable" comment which may have caused me to react more strongly to it than I might have otherwise. Either way, the hides need to be there, and I do agree that if you actually hit for damage, the target makes some noise...thus it allows future correct square targetting. If the person in the middle of blacklight gets to keep shifting which intersection the spell is on at their square, you are granting yet another miss chance stacked with its already 50% miss chance. That IMO makes it more powerful than the spell is intended to be. I am not personally attacking Sauro, but I do not appreciate a foregone conclusion at any point in a fight. I try my level best to never draw such conclusions...as it seems every time I think I know at a glance who will win a fight, it goes a different direction once I am actually running it. Clearly we have some rules that need clarification.
SauroGrenom 03-06-07, 08:16 PM	Not in all circumstances. The rules is being aware of the attack to deflect it. If you are unaware of the attack (sniping is one way), then you cannot deflect and you lose ur dex bonus. ToKUgh, let's just let this discussion die now. I've figured out the rules on it, and I'm putting them to use. If you loose the dex bonus, then you're unaware of the attack (as defined by the FAQ). Also about the listen DC's...At the distances in play, the DC to hear the command word or the "attack" is 19-17. To pinpoint better than the middle of the area of blacklight would require rolling a 32 or better on a listen check. None of the combatants has any possibility of rolling that high on a listen check. So I'm not wasting my time rolling them.
MitzaVolchenko 03-06-07, 08:54 PM	Hunter Fight (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11652376&postcount=625)
Sutro 03-06-07, 09:34 PM	One kinda big thing Mitza: In round 10 when I critted on Gundmir, the damage from that should be 8d6+8, 4d6+4 from the e-ray times two for the crit, giving me a decent shot to drop him that round (negating the 13 damage) and definitely dropping him the next. I'd appreciate it if this could be edited in, obviously it may have to stand considering the late date. -Sutro
NiQil 03-06-07, 09:34 PM	@ Etiquette_Gnome: I'm afraid that there is one glaring error that is probably going to require a complete rerun. You have me starting in the portion of my starting box closest to center. I specifically asked to start in the portion furthest away from center. There is a reason for this. By putting me in the back corner, it gives me running lanes at 90 degree angles to either side, which gives me the best chance of getting to the base contact I wanted. Had this been done as requested, this means that I can run from one corner of the upper level to the other in a single round. Since the horse, in a double move, can only move 120, I will eventually catch up with it, or else if it starts running then my opponent is gonna have some trouble casting. And running was not mentioned in my opponent's tactics, as it was in mine. Since you can only run in a straight line, the small arena works to my advantage here. I'm going to have to ask for a rerun of this fight...with it being held over if necessary.
MitzaVolchenko 03-06-07, 09:53 PM	One kinda big thing Mitza: In round 10 when I critted on Gundmir, the damage from that should be 8d6+8, 4d6+4 from the e-ray times two for the crit, giving me a decent shot to drop him that round (negating the 13 damage) and definitely dropping him the next. I'd appreciate it if this could be edited in, obviously it may have to stand considering the late date. -Sutro Edited...rewards need to be re-checked by someone that understands them...sorry about that.
NiQil 03-06-07, 09:56 PM	Edited...rewards need to be re-checked by someone that understands them...sorry about that. Seconded...I'm not sure how everyone's ally penalties and bonuses affect things...someone wanna take a crack at that?
Tellish_of_Ket 03-06-07, 09:56 PM	@ Etiquette_Gnome: I'm afraid that there is one glaring error that is probably going to require a complete rerun. You have me starting in the portion of my starting box closest to center. I specifically asked to start in the portion furthest away from center. There is a reason for this. By putting me in the back corner, it gives me running lanes at 90 degree angles to either side, which gives me the best chance of getting to the base contact I wanted. Had this been done as requested, this means that I can run from one corner of the upper level to the other in a single round. Since the horse, in a double move, can only move 120, I will eventually catch up with it, or else if it starts running then my opponent is gonna have some trouble casting. And running was not mentioned in my opponent's tactics, as it was in mine. Since you can only run in a straight line, the small arena works to my advantage here. I'm going to have to ask for a rerun of this fight...with it being held over if necessary. If EG doesn't have time to look at it (unless he doesn't think there's anything wrong and doesn't think it validates a re-run), i can redo it tonight so as to avoid any delays. I didn't read the fight, so i dunno the error...but if it is as you say and EG agrees, but doesn't have the time to redo it, i'll most certainly step up to the plate and run it tonight. ToK
MitzaVolchenko 03-06-07, 09:59 PM	Seconded...I'm not sure how everyone's ally penalties and bonuses affect things...someone wanna take a crack at that? MWB figured the first set...he is now afk or I'd bug him again.
NiQil 03-06-07, 10:00 PM	If EG doesn't have time to look at it (unless he doesn't think there's anything wrong and doesn't think it validates a re-run), i can redo it tonight so as to avoid any delays. I didn't read the fight, so i dunno the error...but if it is as you say and EG agrees, but doesn't have the time to redo it, i'll most certainly step up to the plate and run it tonight. ToK I sent a PM to him linking that post as well... The only reason I say rerun as opposed to correction is that the error is in round 0...meaning that everything after that will change. If yer lookin for something to do in the odd hours of the night, feel free to rerun and the post it if EG says he can't or offers it up to others to fix...might save time that way...and give you something to do LOL Either way, I appreciate the offer.
Zevox 03-06-07, 10:09 PM	Edited...rewards need to be re-checked by someone that understands them...sorry about that. Zax -20.833%, Gundmir -4.166%, Blizzard & Weapon + 12.5%. 4th Place: Zax +316 xp/gp 3rd Place: Gundmir +766 xp/gp 2nd Place: Weapon +1350 xp/gp 1st Place: Blizzard +2700 xp/gp Zevox
MindWandererB 03-06-07, 10:09 PM	MWB figured the first set...he is now afk or I'd bug him again. So Gundmir and Weapon swapped? Weapon gets 1350, and Gundmir gets 767. Edit: Zevox rounded the rewards down, I rounded the penalties down. I don't know which is the official policy.
NiQil 03-06-07, 10:12 PM	So Gundmir and Weapon swapped? Weapon gets 1350, and Gundmir gets 767. Edit: Zevox rounded the rewards down, I rounded the penalties down. I don't know which is the official policy. Actually, there shouldn't be any rounding at all of the penalties...whether the rewards are rounded is up to the PC, but the fight should reflect the proper gold, silver and copper earned.
MindWandererB 03-06-07, 10:15 PM	Actually, there shouldn't be any rounding at all of the penalties...whether the rewards are rounded is up to the PC, but the fight should reflect the proper gold, silver and copper earned. XP doesn't come in copper pieces....
NiQil 03-06-07, 10:19 PM	XP doesn't come in copper pieces.... True...but the rounding should still only occur at the end.
MitzaVolchenko 03-06-07, 10:44 PM	Edited rewards again...and I decline to ever try to figure out the arcane formula for hunter rewards again. Thanks, MWB.
NiQil 03-06-07, 10:46 PM	Edited rewards again...and I decline to ever try to figure out the arcane formula for hunter rewards again. Thanks, MWB. And now to completely ruin your day.... Don't forget to use the required rewards template.
MitzaVolchenko 03-06-07, 10:49 PM	And now to completely ruin your day.... Don't forget to use the required rewards template. When did a "required" template come into existence? Edit: I see the standard, I don't see the word "required" anywhere in there.
Zevox 03-06-07, 10:50 PM	When did a "required" template come into existence? When the 3FC came into existence. Its in the sblock in this post in the rules thread. Zevox
Tellish_of_Ket 03-06-07, 11:26 PM	I sent a PM to him linking that post as well... The only reason I say rerun as opposed to correction is that the error is in round 0...meaning that everything after that will change. If yer lookin for something to do in the odd hours of the night, feel free to rerun and the post it if EG says he can't or offers it up to others to fix...might save time that way...and give you something to do LOL Either way, I appreciate the offer. Just had a quick peek at the fight. In fact there are far more errors than you possibly realize. There are range errors, skill check errors, and targetting errors galore. Rife with them. Since i'm here, i will quickly re-run it, and hold it until we here back from EG. By no means am i trying to usurp EG's pitlording or anything, i'm simply offering my services if he deems it necessary. If he fails to reply and give any kind of OK, i'm afraid my hands are tied, unless a majority of the elders look at it and say it deserves it. ToK
SauroGrenom 03-06-07, 11:27 PM	FYI, I've revised the Harvester, Balrog and Zwei fight. Since the roller doesn't allow me to revise the modifiers on the rolls, I have to do it on my own and record the correct outcome. The outcomes are correct, but the roller may be missing the distance modifier on hide checks.
NiQil 03-06-07, 11:28 PM	Just had a quick peek at the fight. In fact there are far more errors than you possibly realize. There are range errors, skill check errors, and targetting errors galore. Rife with them. Since i'm here, i will quickly re-run it, and hold it until we here back from EG. By no means am i trying to usurp EG's pitlording or anything, i'm simply offering my services if he deems it necessary. If he fails to reply and give any kind of OK, i'm afraid my hands are tied, unless a majority of the elders look at it and say it deserves it. ToK LOL thank you...once I got past the issue in round 0, I sorta stopped looking.
Etiquette_Gnome 03-06-07, 11:39 PM	I will admit that I did a boo-boo, however it was not a mistake that changed the outcome of this fight. http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=temple;a=Name,M,2,14,14 ,29;b=Name,M,2,2,2,29 If you look at this map, after five rounds of movement following your description that request, it gets to the point where Fnorri's 120' of movement will be precisely getting to the respective location and you cannot get any closer because of the requisite sprint; thusly not changing the fight at all. Going to have to deny that rerun request. Edit: I'm curious as to what errors there were. I had that one round of sling throwing that was a range increment short, but I mentioned that mistake.
Sutro 03-06-07, 11:41 PM	LOL, my investment in AC for Weapon's second 3FC didn't do me a whole heck of a lot of good. :/ Thanks for editing, Mitza, I really appreciate it. NiQil, your dice god's hatred for my characters is astounding. All the crits against Scallas, and now min damage on the e-ray confirm and enervation, not to mention good damage rolling and hitting my not-bad AC... it's getting creepy. I don't think I had enough gas in the tank left to take you down anyway, but still. -Sutro
TheMagister 03-06-07, 11:45 PM	LOL, my investment in AC for Weapon's second 3FC didn't do me a whole heck of a lot of good. :/ Thanks for editing, Mitza, I really appreciate it. NiQil, your dice god's hatred for my characters is astounding. All the crits against Scallas, and now min damage on the e-ray confirm and enervation, not to mention good damage rolling and hitting my not-bad AC... it's getting creepy. I don't think I had enough gas in the tank left to take you down anyway, but still. -Sutro HA! Check out Durin's string of fights ended or decided by waraxe crits. Maraxus's dice pwn TheMagister's dice. TM
NiQil 03-06-07, 11:47 PM	I will admit that I did a boo-boo, however it was not a mistake that changed the outcome of this fight. http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=temple;a=Name,M,2,14,14 ,29;b=Name,M,2,2,2,29 If you look at this map, after five rounds of movement following your description that request, it gets to the point where Fnorri's 120' of movement will be precisely getting to the respective location and you cannot get any closer because of the requisite sprint; thusly not changing the fight at all. Going to have to deny that rerun request. Edit: I'm curious as to what errors there were. I had that one round of sling throwing that was a range increment short, but I mentioned that mistake. I would very much like to see how arrive at that result. Blizzard has enough movement to go from end to end on the map if the correct starting location is used. Fnorri and mount can't get to the square you show because the mount is large, meaning it has to swing wider than you calculated in order to get around the obstacles. Blizzard will get closer and closer each round as a result.
NiQil 03-06-07, 11:50 PM	LOL, my investment in AC for Weapon's second 3FC didn't do me a whole heck of a lot of good. :/ Thanks for editing, Mitza, I really appreciate it. NiQil, your dice god's hatred for my characters is astounding. All the crits against Scallas, and now min damage on the e-ray confirm and enervation, not to mention good damage rolling and hitting my not-bad AC... it's getting creepy. I don't think I had enough gas in the tank left to take you down anyway, but still. -Sutro pffft....you wanna see hatred...I can't count the number times Telin's characters have bested me on nothing but the luck of the dice. I would say he and I are pretty evenly matched, both in tactics and in character creation....but the dice always want to seem to take a big fat chocolate starfish on me everytime I go up against him....
Tellish_of_Ket 03-07-07, 12:08 AM	I will admit that I did a boo-boo, however it was not a mistake that changed the outcome of this fight. http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=temple;a=Name,M,2,14,14 ,29;b=Name,M,2,2,2,29 If you look at this map, after five rounds of movement following your description that request, it gets to the point where Fnorri's 120' of movement will be precisely getting to the respective location and you cannot get any closer because of the requisite sprint; thusly not changing the fight at all. Going to have to deny that rerun request. Edit: I'm curious as to what errors there were. I had that one round of sling throwing that was a range increment short, but I mentioned that mistake. Actually, there were quite a few other errors, such as the range he cast the MM even in round 1. If the opponent casts on a double moving mount, he does so at the half-way point. Which means you had the mount casting before moving (at times) and still double moving away. For Fnorri to cast where they sat, that would essentially have to be the "half-way" point of the mounts movement, meaning it could only move away 60'. Another thing i noticed is that you didn't roll startig squares, nor the direction of movement since Fnorri didn't have LOS, he in fact COULD have started going the wrong way and would have had to turn around after seeing his opponent. I did re-run the fight, error-free, and the outcome was still the same. Fnorri (even given proper movements) was still able to keep his distance from Wildfire long enough to whittle him down some before eventually being based and melted on the temple floor by a scorching ray. ToK
NiQil 03-07-07, 12:12 AM	Actually, there were quite a few other errors, such as the range he cast the MM even in round 1. If the opponent casts on a double moving mount, he does so at the half-way point. Which means you had the mount casting before moving (at times) and still double moving away. For Fnorri to cast where they sat, that would essentially have to be the "half-way" point of the mounts movement, meaning it could only move away 60'. Another thing i noticed is that you didn't roll startig squares, nor the direction of movement since Fnorri didn't have LOS, he in fact COULD have started going the wrong way and would have had to turn around after seeing his opponent. I did re-run the fight, error-free, and the outcome was still the same. Fnorri (even given proper movements) was still able to keep his distance from Wildfire long enough to whittle him down some before eventually being based and melted on the temple floor by a scorching ray. ToK Given that information, I will let the original fight stand. However, the results are incorrect. Wildfire gets a bonus to his rewards due to the mount just as Fnorri gets a penalty...I believe Wildfire's rewards should be 450 xp/gp (though you may want to double-check my math).
Etiquette_Gnome 03-07-07, 12:18 AM	http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=temple;a=Name,L,4,4,3,2 6,24,29,29,7;d=Name,L,7,2,1,23,22,30,29, 10 This is seven rounds into it (red is the first four, then blue), you never had the time to get close enough. As for LoS, I thought he had it, since those statues only give cover, not total. As for starting position, that's what I rolled (physically), but that was before I remembered to start using the online dice roller.
MindWandererB 03-07-07, 12:44 AM	@Vathelokai: You okay, buddy? You haven't done your fight or your guild stuff for tomorrow....
Erithmu 03-07-07, 01:00 AM	@Vathelokai: You okay, buddy? You haven't done your fight or your guild stuff for tomorrow.... He is trying to figure out how to stall for 7 min against a salamander and temporal filcher with only 7 hp remaining
MindWandererB 03-07-07, 01:04 AM	He is trying to figure out how to stall for 7 min against a salamander and temporal filcher with only 7 hp remaining Yeah... not much chance of that. Freedom of Movement, just one more level....
Abyssal Stalker 03-07-07, 01:34 AM	Oh, for the love of Moradin, that's even worse than the grappling horses! Are psicrystals not already ridiculous enough as played here? Intelligent, mount-like creatures like unicorns and centaurs are one thing, but I sincerely hope we never see the day a psicrystal (or anything else) "rides" a humanoid in the coliseum. Arguably, it's technically legal, but it is such a monumentally stupid image as to beggar belief... (Okay, so the midgets riding the blind guys in Gene Wolfe's Book of the New Sun were kind of cool, but he can do that because he's the master, and also they weren't frickin' crystals with spider legs.) Rules-wise, it's a benefit for no sensible reason, and it's only arguably legal, so I say we house-rule this loophole closed before it opens. Hey, don't forget Mad Max 3 and MasterBlaster. There was that little guy riding the big fellow... Now should we apply this to D&D? No.
MysticMonk2005 03-07-07, 03:45 AM	@Vath thanks for the run. No errors do I see. Heres to hoping week 2 will be better for me. Like a nice easy wizard, that would bring my spirits up.
Etiquette_Gnome 03-07-07, 04:02 AM	Fixed the reward part, my bad. And boy do I feel like a moron, incapable of even doing simple fights...:(
Maraxus 03-07-07, 08:06 AM	FYI, I've revised the Harvester, Balrog and Zwei fight. Since the roller doesn't allow me to revise the modifiers on the rolls, I have to do it on my own and record the correct outcome. The outcomes are correct, but the roller may be missing the distance modifier on hide checks. Uh, what a childish rerun. Main points ("spuring is legal till court decision" and "The Harvester did not have to make any spot checks to spot Balrog in the first place") were not addressed, but instead, you made a turn of pointlessly running without any reason to escape and call it "more closely to our tactics." Is this another game of "No matter how detailed your tactics are, the pitlord will find a hole and make you act stupid and loose"? You might not believe, that a big unsneaky Centaur can run with -20 to hide and stay unnoticed, however with the big distances in the fields and the Harvesters terribly bad spot-check, this could have been possible. Looking at the right place, the tactics allow you to rehide if necessary, likely increasing the intervalls in which Balrog gets shot and maybe even allowing him to take two potions in between, making another survival round. ;) You are not dedicated enough in bringing the Harvester a first loose. ;) Well, anyway, I guess the fight is okay. Overall, the critic points are minor enough to let that stand as it is, even through I think the way you replied to the critic is a bad one.
waywreth 03-07-07, 08:45 AM	@Vath thanks for the run. No errors do I see. Heres to hoping week 2 will be better for me. Like a nice easy wizard, that would bring my spirits up. Hey! I resemble that remark.
Zevox 03-07-07, 08:55 AM	"The Harvester did not have to make any spot checks to spot Balrog in the first place" Eh, no, he didn't have to. Actually, you two shouldn't have been able to hide at all to begin with. Nothing on the Plains blocks LoS, so he had auto-spotted you in round 1, and Darkness is only 20% concealment, so it doesn't block LoS either. Without Hide-in-Plain-Sight, no one can hide under those conditions. Zevox
Maraxus 03-07-07, 11:03 AM	Eh, no, he didn't have to. Actually, you two shouldn't have been able to hide at all to begin with. Nothing on the Plains blocks LoS, so he had auto-spotted you in round 1, and Darkness is only 20% concealment, so it doesn't block LoS either. Without Hide-in-Plain-Sight, no one can hide under those conditions. Zevox As far as I read it, you need only cover or concealment. We had concealment.
MitzaVolchenko 03-07-07, 11:04 AM	Eh, no, he didn't have to. Actually, you two shouldn't have been able to hide at all to begin with. Nothing on the Plains blocks LoS, so he had auto-spotted you in round 1, and Darkness is only 20% concealment, so it doesn't block LoS either. Without Hide-in-Plain-Sight, no one can hide under those conditions. Zevox You need cover or concealment in order to attempt a Hide check. I brought my own concealment with me. The only spells that CoCo disallows for hiding are those that are personal range such as Blur. We can effectively hide with the 20% provided by darkness. I expect we will see new rulings as a result of this fight, which is all to the good. The fact that a pair of near failure (actually I think Zwei will end up witha failure tag this week due to this) mismatches hurt the Harvester at all is comforting. There should still be spot checks for Harvester every round. He should not be able to just run toward them at any point. Sure we, are all running, and it is -20 after a charge/run to hide but the distance is at least that great in most cases and Balrog's +1 Hide vs. Harvey's +3 spot doesn't look quite so absurd. Oddly I don't see the added tactics that I tossed to Sauro that were Zwei specific reminders. I am fairly certain that had if nothing else, take the shot regardless of penalties. That meas there are a fair number of attacks missing in there. Mounted on Balrog, she is pulling a DOnak style running shot. *shrugs* Either way, this one certainly brought up some points for clarification which is a part of what this board is about.
McJarvis 03-07-07, 11:08 AM	I brought my own concealment with me. The only spells that CoCo disallows for hiding are those that are personal range such as Blur. We can effectively hide with the 20% provided by darkness. I don't have time to look up the specifics on this, but in the plains you need to block LOS completely before you can hide. Since you start off flat-footed, you start off auto-spotted.(regardless of partial conceilment such as darkness provides) You can't start hiding in conceilment while observed. (though using smokesticks can effectively create cover so you can hide, so if you did something akin to this I apologize for my intercession)
TelinArtho 03-07-07, 11:08 AM	You need cover or concealment 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. Meaning that just concealment will not allow you to make a hide check unless you are also able to break LOS.
MitzaVolchenko 03-07-07, 11:29 AM	I don't have time to look up the specifics on this, but in the plains you need to block LOS completely before you can hide. Since you start off flat-footed, you start off auto-spotted.(regardless of partial conceilment such as darkness provides) You can't start hiding in conceilment while observed. (though using smokesticks can effectively create cover so you can hide, so if you did something akin to this I apologize for my intercession) Smokesticks create concealment, not cover. If you can hide in smoke, you can hide in the shadowy darkness. I see your point. However, reading the bolded portion of Telin's message, it should be noted that the "total" part obviates the need for a hide check, it doesn't mean that it is required to be able to hide.
Hirumajoe 03-07-07, 11:36 AM	Basically it goes like this: You can't be pre-hiding on a map since you're flat footed. If you're not hiding in an area of concealment you're auto-spotted. Once you are spotted, you cannot hide unless you get out of sight, implying total cover or a blocked LOS. Or you succeed on a a bluff check at a -10 penalty. People seem to always forget that one for some reason. So it is possible to hide on the plains without blocking LOS, you just have to convince your opponent to look the other way for a second. Also, you can't hide in normal smoke without breaking LOS or using a bluff check either. Smoke sticks however don't produce normal smoke, they effectively create the Fog cloud spell effect. Which *does* provide total concealment and hence blocks LOS although not LOE.
MindWandererB 03-07-07, 11:38 AM	Smokesticks create concealment, not cover. If you can hide in smoke, you can hide in the shadowy darkness. I see your point. However, reading the bolded portion of Telin's message, it should be noted that the "total" part obviates the need for a hide check, it doesn't mean that it is required to be able to hide. You need only cover or concealment to be hiding, but you need total cover or concealment to begin hiding (or a Bluff check), because if you don't have that, you're "being observed." And as for the spurring thing, the current RotG implicitly prohibit it, so it would take a Court Decision to allow, not prohibit it. (The RotG says you don't make Ride checks on an intelligent mount, and spurring requires one.)
Hirumajoe 03-07-07, 11:43 AM	And as for the spurring thing, the current RotG implicitly prohibit it, so it would take a Court Decision to allow, not prohibit it. (The RotG says you don't make Ride checks on an intelligent mount, and spurring requires one.) Except there's this little clause in the RotG, All about Mounts part five: According to the Dungeon Master's Guide, a mount with an Intelligence score of 3 or higher acts like an NPC ally rather than a mount. Riding such an ally works much like riding an aggressive mount in battle (see Part Two), except that you don't have to make a Ride check to act while riding. (If your mount carries you willingly, the ride is smooth enough so your actions aren't restricted.) You also cannot make a Ride check to control the mount's actions, but you can make a Diplomacy (or possibly a Wild Empathy) check to get the mount to accept your direction. If you do, your mount acts just like a mount trained for combat riding. Even if you cannot (or do not choose to) direct your mount's actions, you still can ride along, making your own initiative roll and possibly delaying until after your mount acts, as noted in Part Two
Zevox 03-07-07, 11:58 AM	As far as I read it, you need only cover or concealment. We had concealment. As Telin's quote shows, that isn't all you need. You also need to be unobserved, and since Harvey auto-spotted you, you weren't. Which means without Hide-in-Plain-Sight (which explicitly lets you hide while observed), you're outta luck. Zevox
TelinArtho 03-07-07, 12:08 PM	So Mitza has finished her first encounter in the Mission "Ode to a Flower." Due to my known RL responsibilities, I need to take a leave from that quest, so Mitza is currently looking for a replacement questlord.
TheMagister 03-07-07, 07:45 PM	moved to the other FotW thread. move along. nothing to see here.
SauroGrenom 03-07-07, 09:06 PM	Except there's this little clause in the RotG, All about Mounts part five: According to the Dungeon Master's Guide, a mount with an Intelligence score of 3 or higher acts like an NPC ally rather than a mount. Riding such an ally works much like riding an aggressive mount in battle (see Part Two), except that you don't have to make a Ride check to act while riding. (If your mount carries you willingly, the ride is smooth enough so your actions aren't restricted.) You also cannot make a Ride check to control the mount's actions, but you can make a Diplomacy (or possibly a Wild Empathy) check to get the mount to accept your direction. If you do, your mount acts just like a mount trained for combat riding. Even if you cannot (or do not choose to) direct your mount's actions, you still can ride along, making your own initiative roll and possibly delaying until after your mount acts, as noted in Part Two All that really means is that the mount doesn't flee from combat (like untrained mounts do). That means that the mounts actions are more like the combat trained mounts actions rather than the untrained mounts actions. In other words the intelligent mount will fight and not flee, and you don't have to make ride checks to hold on. The entire section applies to the mounts actions, not the rider's actions. This really says nothing about what actions the character can take to effect the mount (ride checks and mounted combat and such).
Hirumajoe 03-07-07, 10:25 PM	All that really means is that the mount doesn't flee from combat (like untrained mounts do). That means that the mounts actions are more like the combat trained mounts actions rather than the untrained mounts actions. In other words the intelligent mount will fight and not flee, and you don't have to make ride checks to hold on. The entire section applies to the mounts actions, not the rider's actions. This really says nothing about what actions the character can take to effect the mount (ride checks and mounted combat and such). I guess you're interpreting the phrase "your mount acts just like a mount trained for combat riding" differently than me. That phrase suggests, at least to me, that you can treat it just like a heavy warhorse (or similar) with the combat riding skill package and it will react in the same way, and thus you can use the mounted combat feat and the ride skills with it. All assuming you can convince your intelligent mount to let you. Also, the second paragraph of that excerpt reinforces that belief for me. Since it says even if you don't get it to accept your direction (and thus act on the same initiative and act as a unit) you can alternatively delay your actions (and thus act on different initiatives as seperate units). When acting as a single unit, as rider and mount, I would tend to think that the ride skills and feats would apply. Although without concrete examples in the text itself, I don't think I can make a iron clad argument for that viewpoint. Also as stated before, the interpretation that intelligent mounts can't benefit from the ride skill and feats has rather negative implications for pegasus riders (or intelligent mounts in general) and for Paladin special mounts.