Post/Author/DateTime	Post
TelinArtho 01-17-07, 12:44 PM	Fights of the Week: January 17th 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. 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 If you're in a guild (or just interested in it) the World Event is in its Xth week, where X is a random number between 0 and 457. Also if you're interested in the guild system please vote in the "Discussion: What should the guild system be like?" 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!
waywreth 01-17-07, 12:58 PM	Recent News and Developments If you're in a guild (or just interested in it) the World Event is in its Xth week, where X is a random number between 0 and 457. Cynic! Personally I have been entertained by the PCs getting smushed by various monsters on a weekly basis.
TelinArtho 01-17-07, 01:01 PM	I'm not being a cynic. I just don't know what week it is in since last week it was in week 2, the week before in week 2, and for the 2 weeks before that week 1 (I think - I'll go back and double check...). I was just being thorough and covering myself :)
waywreth 01-17-07, 01:20 PM	I'm not being a cynic. I just don't know what week it is in since last week it was in week 2, the week before in week 2, and for the 2 weeks before that week 1 (I think - I'll go back and double check...). I was just being thorough and covering myself :) That's just due to whomever is doing the new thread copy/pastes. That would include my lazy self as well.
MindWandererB 01-17-07, 01:31 PM	It's in week 4 now, I believe.
Abyssal Stalker 01-17-07, 01:39 PM	It's in week 4 now, I believe. Great. Our Guildlords believes it's in week 4. We must be in good hands... :P
MindWandererB 01-17-07, 02:32 PM	Okay, yes, we're in week 4. Declaring actions that affect week 5.
Pitlords 01-17-07, 04:27 PM	Pairings Done I'll assign credits later
SauroGrenom 01-17-07, 04:35 PM	Pitlords/Guildlords, There should be a new mission for PSI on the world event, Raskos is the character, and Vath the ML. This week is the last chance for any guild to start on the event and finish. PSI reported the CAP for it back on Jan 3rd. Please list the mission in the pairings post. Thanks, Sauro :blush: Silly me... it's right there.
Macbrea 01-17-07, 04:44 PM	Easy one for tactics Maraxus. Set-up for the fight can be found here! Heh...
Macbrea 01-17-07, 05:08 PM	All tactics are sent....
Zevox 01-17-07, 05:17 PM	@ Cat - Pairings problem. Featylec Elendi has been paired in the ECL 8 league, but he leveled to ECL 9 last week. Since his opponents are a team of ECL 6s, I'm guessing this will just become them fighting each other and him against a monster at ECL 9. Zevox
TelinArtho 01-17-07, 05:25 PM	@Erithmu - tactics for Bulgar sent @Zevox - preliminary ideas for tactics in team fight with Jar-red sent @Maraxus - preliminary ideas for tactics in team fight with Zax sent. /d
Erithmu 01-17-07, 05:28 PM	Kervan Sheharath (MindWandererB) vs. Torel Silvanus (Erithmu) : DSugui [Forest] Why can't we be friends.... @Zevox: the question is which one has a better chance of beating Loddick, and I think Eraca does, as she has done it once already.
MindWandererB 01-17-07, 05:31 PM	Kervan Sheharath (MindWandererB) vs. Torel Silvanus (Erithmu) : DSugui [Forest] Why can't we be friends....It was inevitable, I suppose. Fitting that it's in the forest. This'll be a pretty hefty challenge.
Guildmaster_LOY 01-17-07, 05:33 PM	@ Cat - Pairings problem. Featylec Elendi has been paired in the ECL 8 league, but he leveled to ECL 9 last week. Since his opponents are a team of ECL 6s, I'm guessing this will just become them fighting each other and him against a monster at ECL 9. Zevox That was going to be one hell of a fight, but not having to work with three allies will be preferable anyway. :)
Milov 01-17-07, 05:36 PM	Tactics for Ihdald's team fight sent. Mask's will be out soon. Mask's are sent. G'luck to all fighters!
Caterane 01-17-07, 07:02 PM	Battlesong Duet (Party) vs. Balrog (Maraxus) : MindwandererB [City] Featylec Elendi (Zevox) vs. Unknown Monster : MitzaVolchenko [Temple]
orsono 01-17-07, 07:08 PM	Damn I think I activated my Gashara too late :-(
Maraxus 01-17-07, 08:05 PM	Battlesong Duet (Party) vs. Balrog (Maraxus) : MindwandererB [City] (...) That's good, I think, massed assoult on Featylec Elendi in the city could have been quite dangerous. :)
Etiquette_Gnome 01-17-07, 08:06 PM	@ McJarvis, Kaigan - Tactics for Hiisi and Sabra, respectively, sent.
Vathelokai 01-17-07, 09:37 PM	@Telin: tactics for zodiac sent. @Sauro: will have Raskos' quest up within 24 hours.
Zevox 01-17-07, 09:56 PM	@ Telin - Tactics for Mithos Durrol (vs Zodiac) have been PMed. That's good, I think, massed assoult on Featylec Elendi in the city could have been quite dangerous. :) What, two Fighter-types and a Bard engaging a Shadowdancer in his second favorite map would be dangerous? Nah, never :) . @Zevox: the question is which one has a better chance of beating Loddick, and I think Eraca does, as she has done it once already. Oh, Eraca definitely has better odds than Featylec - unlike him, she doesn't have a will save lower than Sdentch's for you to Ego Whip abuse ;) . I'll be looking forward to this one, really - this time the map is more to my liking, so I won't need to rely on natural 1 poison saves, and we've both gotten some new tricks to try. Should be fun :) . Zevox
Sjiggie 01-17-07, 10:47 PM	@ my fighters please send tactics quick have a busy weekend and don't have that much time on monday and thuesday. Preferd is to sent them in a PM Thanks
NiQil 01-17-07, 11:11 PM	@ TelinArtho: Tactics for Blizzard sent via PM @ MitzaVolchenko: Tactics for Wildfire sent via PM
renlim 01-18-07, 12:42 AM	@MitzaVolchenko - Tactics for Corbin in fight: The Mask Man (Milov) vs. Corbin are sent. Thanks for pitloarding:D
MitzaVolchenko 01-18-07, 02:39 AM	Wildfire, Corbin, Mask tactics received. I'll get started on fights tomorrow night after work.
TheMagister 01-18-07, 07:59 AM	All my tactics will be sent before 5:30 pm today. I'll be chippin' away at them. @McJ - look for Battlesong Duet tactics suggestions and conversation in your PM box...I so wish I could get an IM program to work on this computer...
hogarth 01-18-07, 11:04 AM	@SJiggie: tactics sent for Treetall Oakleg
TelinArtho 01-18-07, 11:25 AM	@Zevox - Zax's portion of Team tactics sent.
Zevox 01-18-07, 11:32 AM	@Zevox - Zax's portion of Team tactics sent. Got it. Also sent my reply on ideas for Istima + Jar-Red vs Ihdald + Relanex. Zevox
TelinArtho 01-18-07, 11:50 AM	And responded... GO GO GO!
Erithmu 01-18-07, 11:53 AM	Oh, Eraca definitely has better odds than Featylec - unlike him, she doesn't have a will save lower than Sdentch's for you to Ego Whip abuse ;) . I'll be looking forward to this one, really - this time the map is more to my liking, so I won't need to rely on natural 1 poison saves, and we've both gotten some new tricks to try. Should be fun :) . Zevox You have the advantage as I have already written an essay this week, and I'm not in the mood to write another ... yet ...
Maraxus 01-18-07, 12:01 PM	Tactics for Durin (team fight) and Balrog are out, too.
Zevox 01-18-07, 12:29 PM	And responded... GO GO GO! Tactics compiled, finalized, and PMed to you and Sauro. We're good to go on that fight :) . Tactics for Durin (team fight) and Balrog are out, too. Got Durin's, thanks. Zevox
McJarvis 01-18-07, 01:22 PM	@McJ - look for Battlesong Duet tactics suggestions and conversation in your PM box...I so wish I could get an IM program to work on this computer... I got nothing so far....? Or did you mean to expect that by 5:30?
TheMagister 01-18-07, 01:39 PM	I got nothing so far....? Or did you mean to expect that by 5:30? Oh, no. We need to get them finalized and submitted before 5:30 pm. It's been busy at work. Ideas sent in response to your ideas. We gots cumm-yOOn-ee-KAY-shun here. :cool:
MitzaVolchenko 01-18-07, 01:46 PM	@Zevox Hrothmund hasn't been on since Tuesday :( I've sent him some ideas, but he hasn't responded yet. If I don't have any word from him by the time I get home from work, I will send solo tactics for Sybil with suggestions for possibles for Maelosh.
SauroGrenom 01-18-07, 02:04 PM	Istima (Zevox) & Jar-red (TelinArtho) vs. Relanex (Macbrea) & Ihdald (Milov) : SauroGrenom [Plains] [Team] Alright girls and boys, I have the tactics now. Look for the fight on sunday evening. I may get it started this evening but not likely to finish it tonight.
MitzaVolchenko 01-18-07, 02:11 PM	@ Usernamer tactics for Luciano received.
Sjiggie 01-18-07, 03:33 PM	@ hogarth tactics received
MitzaVolchenko 01-18-07, 04:06 PM	Featylec Elendi (Zevox) vs. Unknown Monster : MitzaVolchenko @Zevox Crap! Just noticed this one... Featylec will be facing a Large Monster.
MindWandererB 01-18-07, 04:18 PM	@Maraxus: Got Balrog's tactics. Edit: @TM and McJ: Got tactics for Battlesong, too. I'll work on that as time permits. @Telin and DSugui: I have a ton of crap to do. Tactics will be in sometime before deadline, but perhaps not by much.
Zevox 01-18-07, 05:03 PM	Featylec Elendi (Zevox) vs. Unknown Monster : MitzaVolchenko @Zevox Crap! Just noticed this one... Featylec will be facing a Large Monster. Any items for him to steal with his burglary free activity? Zevox
TwoPi 01-18-07, 06:39 PM	@McJarvis Tactics for Gell Thokk sent
MindWandererB 01-18-07, 07:28 PM	@Telin and DSugui: Tactics sent. Yet another challenging week....
Sutro 01-18-07, 08:27 PM	@Mitza - Weapon's tactics sent.
hogarth 01-18-07, 11:07 PM	@Macbrea: Tactics sent for Kilpquabjeg (vs. the Undertaker)
Erithmu 01-19-07, 12:22 AM	@Dsugui: Tactics for Torel sent Now to write Loddicks, or at least start to. Edit: @Abyssal: Loddick's Tactics sent. I would start as soon as you have all the tactics for that match, I get the feeling it could be a very long fight.
TelinArtho 01-19-07, 01:10 PM	Zodiac (Vathelokai) vs Mithos Durrol (Zevox) is up... @Vath - for situations like the one you had in this fight, I'd recommend a solid route to get the mount out of the equation first. Had the order of operations been different, you might have had a decent chance here - namely - Grease on the saddle, Cause Fear on the horse, Sleep/Enlarged sleep on Mithos and his familiar. Still - having some sort of offensive capability would've been huge here...
Zevox 01-19-07, 02:26 PM	@ Abyssal - Tactics for Eraca Moralta (vs Loddick) have been PMed. That should be an interesting one - here I thought we had too many options between us to predict each other last time. This time theres just no telling what'll happen. @ Telin - Looks good to me, thanks for running it. Zevox
rowsdower44 01-19-07, 02:53 PM	@Erithmu - Tactics sent for The Red Mage
TelinArtho 01-19-07, 03:22 PM	Blizzard (NiQil) vs Maya Redwine (MindWandererB) is up. I just reused that double post - so as to conserve space...
MindWandererB 01-19-07, 06:46 PM	The Battlesong Duet vs. Balrog is here. When tactics fail, the one with the best luck--and the best build--wins. And the luck gods weren't just fickle on this one; they were downright schizophrenic. I rarely see 19's and 20's all over like that.
McJarvis 01-19-07, 08:08 PM	The Battlesong Duet vs. Balrog is here. When tactics fail, the one with the best luck--and the best build--wins. And the luck gods weren't just fickle on this one; they were downright schizophrenic. I rarely see 19's and 20's all over like that. As a general point-> Our tactics specifically revolve around Tessero creating full cover with his enlarged tower shield & forcing our opponent into melee in this fashion. As far as I can tell these type of tactics were ignored. (this is the reason we had no stipulation for ranged tactics-> We felt the combination of our tower shield tactics and the cities' narrow passageways would be enough to force this into a melee battle. By my count, Round 6 is when you officially deviated from our tactics by stipulating that we "realized our opponent would make it a ranged battle", rather than holing up & taking cover from the shield. Our tactics should have made our opponent realize it was going to be a melee battle :) )
Erithmu 01-19-07, 08:13 PM	Red Mage vs Bulgar is up here.
MindWandererB 01-19-07, 08:32 PM	As a general point-> Our tactics specifically revolve around Tessero creating full cover with his enlarged tower shield & forcing our opponent into melee in this fashion. As far as I can tell these type of tactics were ignored. (this is the reason we had no stipulation for ranged tactics-> We felt the combination of our tower shield tactics and the cities' narrow passageways would be enough to force this into a melee battle. By my count, Round 6 is when you officially deviated from our tactics by stipulating that we "realized our opponent would make it a ranged battle", rather than holing up & taking cover from the shield. Our tactics should have made our opponent realize it was going to be a melee battle :) ) The problem is that with those same narrow passages, creating total cover with a tower shield made both ranged and melee combat impossible. Balrog had no choice but to focus his ranged attacks on Cupid (who did not, and could not, benefit from the shield's total cover in any event), and then wait for Tessero to put the shield down, either voluntarily or due to a delay penalty. I understood your tactics, I think--they just didn't work. If you had some way of protecting Cupid from ranged attacks, as well as Tessero, you might have fared better. For instance, had she gone prone in addition to having cover, it would have taken a 20 to hit her (instead of all those 19's Trillian kept rolling). Another option might have been to hand the tower shield over to Cupid and have her turtle behind it while Tessero used archery with the partial protection of his Deflect Arrows feat. But as it was, Cupid was your weakest link, and Team Balrog took advantage of it. Once she was down, you got the melee you wanted, but not the way you wanted it.
McJarvis 01-19-07, 08:34 PM	The problem is that with those same narrow passages, creating total cover with a tower shield made both ranged and melee combat impossible. Balrog had no choice but to focus his ranged attacks on Cupid (who did not, and could not, benefit from the shield's total cover in any event), and then wait for Tessero to put the shield down, either voluntarily or due to a delay penalty. I understood your tactics, I think--they just didn't work. If you had some way of protecting Cupid from ranged attacks, as well as Tessero, you might have fared better. For instance, had she gone prone in addition to having cover, it would have taken a 20 to hit her (instead of all those 19's Trillian kept rolling). Another option might have been to hand the tower shield over to Cupid and have her turtle behind it while Tessero used archery with the partial protection of his Deflect Arrows feat. But as it was, Cupid was your weakest link, and Team Balrog took advantage of it. Once she was down, you got the melee you wanted, but not the way you wanted it. Perhaps TM and I are unclear on the rules. You're saying that if Cupid is behind a large sized opponent taking full cover from a towershield(effectively a 10x10 wall) while in a 10-ft alleyway, she does not get full cover as well? That just seems barmy. edit-> At the very least, when Tessero figured out it was going to be a ranged battle he could have yelled to cupid as a warning. Cupid would not have moved to gain LOS with enemies: she would have activated her scroll of alterself since she was going to be shot at by arrows. (since we DID stipulate that if Cupid was going to be engaged in ranged battle she would be using this buff) double edit-> Just looked over our tactics...apparently the stipulation for alterself was changed to being attacked. Regardless-> in the face of a total breakdown of a mechanic we were obviously depending on that didn't work like we thought it did, I think reading into our tactics would have been acceptable. It's all interpretation from this point on out...I guess if you don't want to edit TM and I will have to do the walk of shame due to our ignorance of the rules :(
MindWandererB 01-19-07, 08:51 PM	Perhaps TM and I are unclear on the rules. You're saying that if Cupid is behind a large sized opponent taking full cover from a towershield(effectively a 10x10 wall) while in a 10-ft alleyway, she does not get full cover as well? That just seems barmy. edit-> At the very least, when Tessero figured out it was going to be a ranged battle he could have yelled to cupid as a warning. Cupid would not have moved to gain LOS with enemies: she would have activated her scroll of alterself since she was going to be shot at by arrows. (since we DID stipulate that if Cupid was going to be engaged in ranged battle she would be using this buff) double edit-> Just looked over our tactics...apparently the stipulation for alterself was changed to being attacked. Regardless-> in the face of a total breakdown of a mechanic we were obviously depending on that didn't work like we thought it did, I think reading into our tactics would have been acceptable. It's all interpretation from this point on out...I guess if you don't want to edit TM and I will have to do the walk of shame due to our ignorance of the rules :( For the first part: barmy or not, that is indeed the rule. And if it weren't the rule, the total cover would cut both ways, and you wouldn't be able to attack back, leading us back to the delay penalty issue. As for the Alter Self, it wouldn't have mattered. Cupid was dropped to 0 HP immediately upon being attacked, so using the scroll would have killed her, unless she healed up first, which she was trying to do. As you could see from the results, I had no problems with improvising your intention, but there just wasn't any way to make it work. There's simply no way to benefit from total cover while still being able to attack, which is what you wanted. And even if it were possible, Balrog would have had no offensive options whatsoever, and would have had to just withdraw and wait for you to come to him.
McJarvis 01-19-07, 08:54 PM	For the first part: barmy or not, that is indeed the rule. And if it weren't the rule, the total cover would cut both ways, and you wouldn't be able to attack back, leading us back to the delay penalty issue. As for the Alter Self, it wouldn't have mattered. Cupid was dropped to 0 HP immediately upon being attacked, so using the scroll would have killed her, unless she healed up first, which she was trying to do. No..I mean when Tessero got to change tactics because he "realized it was going to be a ranged battle", Cupid should have drawn/cast Alterself instead of moving up to tessero & the horse. It(in my opinion) is obvious that the intent was that Cupid would be free from attacks the entire fight due to our tactics...in light of them not being valid, I think it should be appropriate for her to get to use her backup tactics right away instead of waiting to be attacked. Of course, this is totally your call. On a personal note, it always amazes me how many ways we can misunderstand how totally useless tower shields are. :( edit-> There's simply no way to benefit from total cover while still being able to attack, which is what you wanted. Actually, what we wanted was to use a feature of our equipment to force the beast to approach us in melee. This tactic(by my eyes) only works when you can hole up...the city and the sewer are two of the only places this is possible. Note that our tactics start off with the centaur basing us-> thus Cupid wasn't going to be taking actions until such an event happened. I never for a moment thought that cupid could attack the centaur/other until the tower shield/wall came down.
MindWandererB 01-19-07, 09:05 PM	No..I mean when Tessero got to change tactics because he "realized it was going to be a ranged battle", Cupid should have drawn/cast Alterself instead of moving up to tessero & the horse. It(in my opinion) is obvious that the intent was that Cupid would be free from attacks the entire fight due to our tactics...in light of them not being valid, I think it should be appropriate for her to get to use her backup tactics right away instead of waiting to be attacked. Of course, this is totally your call. On a personal note, it always amazes me how many ways we can misunderstand how totally useless tower shields are. :( edit-> Actually, what we wanted was to use a feature of our equipment to force the beast to approach us in melee. This tactic(by my eyes) only works when you can hole up...the city and the sewer are two of the only places this is possible. Note that our tactics start off with the centaur basing us-> thus Cupid wasn't going to be taking actions until such an event happened. I never for a moment thought that cupid could attack the centaur/other until the tower shield/wall came down. Sorry... I just don't see it. Your tactics say, "Conditionals (Cupid): ...Cast Alterself(Troglodyte) from scroll if attacked." Nothing about doing this if it looks like it's going to be a ranged battle. And as for it being "obvious that the intent was that Cupid would be free from attacks the entire fight," that seems to be to be mutually exclusive with having Cupid get right in the fray with her Magic Missile wand, as you instructed. Tower shields are, in fact, very useful, but there are problems with them in our arena context. One is the delay penalty, another is the predetermined tactics, and yet another is the artificial nature of our battles. In a real D&D game, you can turtle all day behind a tower shield. If your opponent is trying to overrun your position, they need to improvise by trying to get around you, sunder the shield, or something to that effect. If you're trying to take their position, the shield will let you approach at a slow pace and keep them from peppering you with ranged attacks, or else force them to give up their position to flank you. It's a very powerful option. But take away the ability to improvise, force the battle to be resolved within a short time frame, and put both parties in the position of hunting the other rather than one being the aggressor and one being the defender, and it all changes. Re: your edit: and again, sure, you could have holed up in a corner. But that would just have forced Balrog to withdraw and wait for you to come to him, since attacking you in melee would be just as dumb as attacking you at range. He could do that due to the delay penalty. In a real D&D game, it would depend on your and his superordinate goals.
McJarvis 01-19-07, 09:07 PM	And as for it being "obvious that the intent was that Cupid would be free from attacks the entire fight," that seems to be to be mutually exclusive with having Cupid get right in the fray with her Magic Missile wand, as you instructed. Note that these instructions don't come until after Tessero is actively in melee with the Centaur & grappling him. Tower shield are, in fact, very useful, but there are problems with them in our arena context. The only way they are useful is if you're in a hallway that is exactly your-size. Anything else & your opponent can five foot step to the side & only suffer you getting +4 AC for you having partial cover...which you already had from the towershield itself(unless you think you get a cover bonus & a shield AC bonus from the towershield, which doesn't make sense either) If your tower shield acted like a wall they would at least be marginally useful for formations-> 3 dwarven fighters with tower shields could front-line an assault down a 15' hallway. However, if they don't provide cover for anyone else on the battlefield this too doesn't work. Illustrated: Red gets total cover from blue via tower shield: http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=temple;a=Name,L,9,22,To wer Shield Guy;b=Name,L,9,13,Ranged Attacker;los=9,13,9,22,4 Blue counters with a 5' step: http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=temple;a=Name,L,9,22,To wer Shield Guy;b=Name,L,9,13,8,13,Ranged Attacker;los=8,13,9,22,4 Now red gets a +4 cover AC and +2 reflex save vs blue. But he also loses his +4 shield AC & ability to attack. Tower shields suck. Another conditional situation in which it might serve a purpose is if you're peeking around a corner: http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=cavern;a=Name,M,8,21,To wer Shield;b=Name,M,11,16,Archer;los=11,16,8 ,21,1 Obviously the archer can't move to negate the total-cover in this situation(or if the hallway is your size exactly) Oh-> and they effectively give you two "free" points of activation of combat expertise...and if you're lucky and face a dumb wizard who doesn't place fireballs behind you, they will give you a +2 to reflex saves. All that aside-> I guess it's ok as-is. I just wish this fight had happened last week so we could have cleared up the tactics before the fight was posted.(obviously our tactics would have been completely different if we had known about this)
MindWandererB 01-19-07, 09:23 PM	Note that these instructions don't come until after Tessero is actively in melee with the Centaur & grappling him.No, they don't. "If Team Balrog elects to make this a ranged battle, Cupid can use her MM wand to target Trillian...." I don't see any other way of interpreting that. The only way they are useful is if you're in a hallway that is exactly your-size. Anything else & your opponent can five foot step to the side & only suffer a -4 attack penalty for you having partial cover...which you already had from the towershield itself(unless you think you get a cover bonus & a shield AC bonus from the towershield, which doesn't make sense either) If your tower shield acted like a wall they would at least be marginally useful for formations-> 3 dwarven fighters with three tower shields could front-line an assault down a 15' hallway. However, if they don't provide cover for anyone else on the battlefield this too doesn't work.In that case, you'd be in an even worse position. Balrog could have done this: http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=city;a=Cupi,M,32,3;b=Te ss,L,32,7;c=Balr,L,33,26;d=Tril,M,34,25; e=Equa,L,32,5;los=34,25,33,6,2That gives him the option of shooting Tessero down through the corner of his square, over the hedge, and no one could counterattack at all. Tessero would have been a sitting duck until he put the shield down. I suppose you could have moved a bit further back the alley and formed a wall with the buildings instead of the hedge. But again, you would have been untouchable in melee as well as ranged combat, and Balrog would have been forced to withdraw and wait for you. Incidentally--there's no way you could have gotten into that position. Equalizer was told to "heel," not "walk around me to that side." He would have stayed put right in front of Tessero, and be a clean target.
McJarvis 01-19-07, 09:30 PM	But again, you would have been untouchable in melee as well as ranged combat Except he could have spirited charged/sundered the towershield. In my eyes this is being "forced into melee"...which his tactics allow for. Hell, he could have charged/sundered it & then retreated...though Tessero would have at least gotten a chance to grapple properly. Reading the map was my error in this case-> I have always thought that that gray area to tessero's right was a part of the building. edit-> And Cupid likely could have tried to handle equalizer in order to get him to move where we wanted.(or given our eventual plans, cupid could be the one to tell equalizer to heel, then stay.) double edit-> As I said...I guess this all doesn't matter. In the end TM and I made the mistake in the rules by thinking that Tower shields are actually useful. Any edits on your part at this point would be improvisation more or less, though it should be noted that everything Tessero & Cupid did after seeing Bal was improvisation on your part anyway.(Tessero never said he wanted full defense, cupid never said she wanted to pepper Bal with a magic missile wand at range(only after he was in a grapple), etc, etc) Essentially, given that the towershield/cover tactic was illegitiment, you ran the fight with no tactics from Cupid/Tessero(and improved everything). We have no right to complain about *anything* you did because of this.
MindWandererB 01-19-07, 09:36 PM	Both of these are where the predetermined-tactics aspect of our game present problems. Sundering the tower shield is just a bit exotic of an improvization for my tastes, unless you really did figure out a way to attack him while using it and he had no other choice. As it was, it was better for him to wait until you were slapped with the delay penalty first. And pushing an animal to walk around you, when it's not in your tactics to do anything but "heel," is also a bit of an improvization, although I can see both sides of that--although making a DC 20 check would have taken either of you a few tried, in all likelihood, while in the meantime Equalizer would likely have been attacked, and have charged out in self-defense. Not a pretty scene.
McJarvis 01-19-07, 09:40 PM	Both of these are where the predetermined-tactics aspect of our game present problems. Sundering the tower shield is just a bit exotic of an improvization for my tastes, unless you really did figure out a way to attack him while using it and he had no other choice. As it was, it was better for him to wait until you were slapped with the delay penalty first. But he was choosing not to sunder our towershield & then retreat to perform his tactics again, so he should be slapped with just as much of a delay penalty. We didn't make it impossible for him to reach us, after all...and he _could_ just fire at the tower shield all day. What if a Monk w/deflect arrows were to face off against an archer that could only fire 1 arrow a round & was faster than the monk said he wanted to wait for the archer to base him, instead of engaging in back and forth ranged combat? Would you slap him with a delay penalty, or the speedy archer for not just cutting to the chase and engaging in melee? A tower shield is somewhat similar to deflect arrows in this situation, except it makes the attacks impossible instead of making them completely ineffective. o_O Edit-> This has been bothering me alot about our delay rules. If Tessero and Cupid had no ranged weapons would you have forced us into a ranged fight, or judged that since the centaur had no way of hurting us through the tower shield that he had to charge? If we had a wind wall up & no ranged weapons ourselves would you force the centaur to charge, or would you let him wait out the duration of the effect? The fact that our delay rules seem to change based on what the defenses of the other person are make them inconsistent & bad, in my opinion. And pushing an animal to walk around you, when it's not in your tactics to do anything but "heel," is also a bit of an improvization, although I can see both sides of that--although making a DC 20 check would have taken either of you a few tried, in all likelihood, while in the meantime Equalizer would likely have been attacked, and have charged out in self-defense. Not a pretty scene. Not walk around-> follow cupid instead of tessero. Tessero could have just allowed the horse to walk through his square. It's obvious from our movements what we wanted to happen...and cupid giving a heel command would have been no more difficult than tessero giving it, surely... edit-> I don't even know what I'm arguing about anymore. I've already said multiple times that the fight is so screwed up that Tessero & Cupid can do nothing but just take the loss.(erm...screwed up in the sense of our ignorance being the source, not your pitlording) I guess my only point is that Tessero & Cupid effectively had no tactics at all due to this miscommunication, so I am unsatisfied at the results :(
MindWandererB 01-19-07, 09:53 PM	But he was choosing not to sunder our towershield & then retreat to perform his tactics again, so he should be slapped with just as much of a delay penalty. We didn't make it impossible for him to reach us, after all...and he _could_ just fire at the tower shield all day. What if a Monk w/deflect arrows were to face off against an archer that could only fire 1 arrow a round & was faster than the monk said he wanted to wait for the archer to base him, instead of engaging in back and forth ranged combat? Would you slap him with a delay penalty, or the speedy archer for not just cutting to the chase and engaging in melee? A tower shield is somewhat similar to deflect arrows, except it makes the attacks impossible instead of making them completely ineffective. o_OYes, he'd get the delay penalty, too. But you started it, so you'd get hit one action earlier. The difference in your example is that the Arrow Deflecter doesn't have to give anything up to use his feat--he can launch attacks just fine as long as he can use only one hand. If his only weapon was a crossbow, and he'd have to leave himself vulnerable to load it, and he opted not to, then yes, I'd give him a delay penalty, too. Ultimately, there's no way to force someone to do what you want by making their attacks impossible, unless you can present yourself as a threat while doing so. In which case, they have the option of trying to endure your attack until it runs out, or trying something they didn't want to do. Not walk around-> follow cupid instead of tessero. Tessero could have just allowed the horse to walk through his square. It's obvious from our movements what we wanted to happen...and cupid giving a heel command would have been no more difficult than tessero giving it, surely...Hmm.... this raises an interesting point. Will animals follow the commands of their team members? I don't know if we have a rule for it. I can see both sides--they've been trained to obey only one person, but they should know who's friendly to them. What if ex-teammates fought each other later on? Could they give commands to each others' animals? We might need a ruling on this. For the sake of simplicity, I would lean towards only the PC and any "on-sheet" allies being able to give commands to an animal ally. And if it helps, Balrog also had the option of going on the rooftops. I didn't have him try, because he couldn't take 10 as Maraxus wanted, but that was the closest thing in his tactics, and it's what I would have done before having him try a sunder. It would have been bad news for you if he'd succeeded--and meanwhile, he'd be trying to get around the shield that way while you were racking up a delay penalty. Probably would have been even worse for you in the long run.
Etiquette_Gnome 01-19-07, 09:55 PM	Wait, so a tower shield is totally useless if the two combatants couldn't attack each like rooks (as far as placement), barring noticeably limited terrain variation?! Does that medium creature standing behind a large at least get 'a' cover bonus (+4 AC)? Damn, that tower shield is getting crappier by the day.
MindWandererB 01-19-07, 10:00 PM	Wait, so a tower shield is totally useless if the two combatants couldn't attack each like rooks (as far as placement), barring noticeably limited terrain variation?! Damn, that tower shield is getting crappier by the day. Not quite. Here's the FAQ entry:When you use the shield for cover, choose one edge of your space (not a corner). You have total cover against any attack’s line of effect that passes through that side of your space. If an attack’s line of effect goes through the corner of the side of your space that the shield blocks, you get cover from the shield (+4 AC, +2 on Reflex saves) instead of total cover. If an attack’s line of effect passes through a side of your space that the shield does not block, you get no cover from the shield at all. To determine where the line of effect enters your space, draw a line from the attacker’s center to your center.So I made a mistake before; you don't necessarily have to be perfectly lined up, unlike the usual cover rules. Anything less than a 45o angle will work. So the example I used would have kept Tessero safe.
McJarvis 01-19-07, 10:05 PM	Ultimately, there's no way to force someone to do what you want by making their attacks impossible, unless you can present yourself as a threat while doing so. In which case, they have the option of trying to endure your attack until it runs out, or trying something they didn't want to do. Now I'm arguing from a general sense rather than to change the outcome of this one fight. The example I'm using is as follows: A Soulknife Barbarian Zeph with speed of thought. Speed: 50 ft. A halfling monk with deflect arrows. Speed: 20 ft. If the monk has no ranged attacks for some reason & says "I want to engage him in melee. Just wait until he approaches me since he can't hurt me no matter what" and the barbarian says "I have unlimited ammo & a greater speed, just throw blades at him all day", who exactly is at fault here? In CoCo we have an unsettling precident of penalizing the monk more, when really both builds are flawed. Both characters are effectively trying to force the other to do something(I dunno-> the barbarian is trying to get the monk to be flat footed on purpose?), but in reality both have very serious flaws. As a pitlord, the decision I'm forced to make is this: If the monk has no ranged weaponry-> Tough luck to the barbarian, he has to engage in melee. If the monk has ranged weaponry-> Engage at range even if it's a terrible attack. But what if there is a long 5' hallway with an opening such that he can't approach the barbarian without giving up that 5' tunnel & that monk is a fighter with a tower shield? Suddenly the barbarian is allowed to take ranged attacks & the fighter is forced to move forward, yet we would never have forced the monk to remain flat footed. All because of...what? Why is using a towershield defensively in a smart manner any different than a character with deflect arrows, if both are equally inept? It effectively makes towershields useless, for reasons detailed above.(during which, I made one ommision-> tower shields can potentially be used to set off traps safely if you know where the attack is coming from.)
McJarvis 01-19-07, 10:07 PM	Not quite. Here's the FAQ entry:So I made a mistake before; you don't necessarily have to be perfectly lined up, unlike the usual cover rules. Anything less than a 45o angle will work. So the example I used would have kept Tessero safe. ? I don't read that in there at all...where does it talk about a 45o angle? edit-> I'll admit ignorance at this point...does line of effect go from the middle of the attacker's square to the middle of the defender's square? I've been doing total cover/partial cover during my pitlording of fights wrong for a long time then. edit 2-> Except by middle-of-the-square rules, the following would result: less than 45o: total cover 45o: partial cover more than 45o: no cover. That doesn't make sense...nor is line of effect defined this way in the cover section of the SRD...
McJarvis 01-19-07, 10:32 PM	Wait, so a tower shield is totally useless if the two combatants couldn't attack each like rooks (as far as placement), barring noticeably limited terrain variation?! Does that medium creature standing behind a large at least get 'a' cover bonus (+4 AC)? Damn, that tower shield is getting crappier by the day. If you have a similar sized creature between you and your opponent you get a +4 soft cover bonus regardless of whether that in between creature is using a Tower Shield. As far as Tower shield being crappy: If you ever need an AC monster, the Dwarven fighter with combat expertise, dodge, and a tower shield should still come out 2 or so AC higher than most. The "I can create cover" feature of the tower shield is a nice thought-> but functionally irrelevant the more I learn about it. You are correct-> Unless facing your opponent rook style or taking advantage of cover from terrain, it is functionally useless against intelligent opponents.
MindWandererB 01-19-07, 10:35 PM	I agree. I even remember one situation where a land-bound character facing a flying opponent would have won a fight if he had thrown his own sling on the ground and sundered it. Since it would have been impossible for him to attack, his opponent would have been forced to take the initiative. Ludicrous, because of our arena format. In your current example... the halfling would actually be at the advantage. Having no ability at all to close to melee, and lacking ranged attacks, he simply can't do anything at all without the xeph's cooperation. The xeph can't attack at range unless he has even a 1/400 chance to succeed at a snipe attempt, so he's forced to close to melee. If the halfling had a sling, he'd have to use it, which would leave him vulnerable while reloading. A strong reason to pack shuriken or other thrown weapons. In the hallway example, the situation is unchanged. The halfling fighter will still stay in the hallway behind his shield, because leaving the hallway doesn't change anything--he still can't catch up to the xeph. If there's anything at all that the halfling can do, however many hands it requires, he has to try it, and put down the shield to do so. Especially since, in this situation, the xeph barbarian can't do anything at all--closing to melee in this situation doesn't get him around that shield either. Maybe he could sunder it (if he had a weapon other than a shortsword), but that would depend on tactics. Either way, the turtle started delaying first, so he gets the delay penalty first. So, no, they're not any different, except that a Defect Arrows-user can make attacks, while a tower shield-user cannot. It does make a difference. Are tower shields useless? Hardly. Here are ten of them: 1) Force opponents to attack the character that isn't using the shield (i.e. protect the weakest link). 2) Grant yourself immunity to attacks while using a move action (e.g. regaining psionic focus). 3) Restrict your opponent to attacking you from a certain angle. http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=arena;a=Towr,M,28,8 Face the shield toward the east, and your opponent must approach from the South. The furthest they can be from you is 50', allowing you to base or even attack them next round. 4) Approach your opponent safely (especially if you have a very high speed or an ally with which to flank them, you can close to melee with them without fear of being hit with ranged attacks on the approach). 5) Make sure that you, not your opponent, get the alpha strike (ready an action to attack on LOS, then drop your own shield...). 6) Narrow down the options of a sniper (again, like #3, you force them to be closer than they want. Or, it could be a good anti-Zero tactic: wall yourself in with no way to be attacked, since you can't attack anyway, and put the burden on the sniper). 7) Force a sunder (if they have an adamantine greataxe and Improved Sunder, you bet the pitlord will consider closing to sunder the shield a viable improvisation). 8) Counter your opponent's tower shield.... 9) Protect yourself when using summons, mercenaries, or other "expendable" allies. 10) Two words: quickened spells. That doesn't make sense...nor is line of effect defined this way in the cover section of the SRD...You're right, it's not, but then, tower shield are barely discussed in the SRD, and not at all adequately. This FAQ ruling makes them work, whereas the normal cover rules make them useless. Your assessment is correct: Exactly 45o is cover, less is total cover, more is no cover.
McJarvis 01-19-07, 10:50 PM	I'm not sold on your definition of line of effect in this circumstance. That we're talking about cover at all implies we should use the definitions of line of effect given in the cover section of the rules-> which do not state anything about the center of either attacker or defending squares...just the corners. The Tower Shield FAQ doesn't redefine line of effect, it just talks about it. Given a strict reading of the rules, most of your ten reasons to use a tower shield are invalidated. ( I think-> though I've been wrong plenty of times...)
MindWandererB 01-19-07, 11:18 PM	As near as I can tell... the tower shield FAQ does try to redefine LOE. Which is stupid--if it doesn't like the LOE rules as written, it should use a different term. But with what it says, I think we do have to use centers, rather than corners, even though the SRD/PHB don't mention using centers at any time. Besides, as you say, tower shields are almost totally worthless if you do use corners.
Etiquette_Gnome 01-19-07, 11:23 PM	1) Force opponents to attack the character that isn't using the shield (i.e. protect the weakest link). 2) Grant yourself immunity to attacks while using a move action (e.g. regaining psionic focus). 3) Restrict your opponent to attacking you from a certain angle. http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=arena;a=Towr,M,28,8 Face the shield toward the east, and your opponent must approach from the South. The furthest they can be from you is 50', allowing you to base or even attack them next round. 4) Approach your opponent safely (especially if you have a very high speed or an ally with which to flank them, you can close to melee with them without fear of being hit with ranged attacks on the approach). 5) Make sure that you, not your opponent, get the alpha strike (ready an action to attack on LOS, then drop your own shield...). 6) Narrow down the options of a sniper (again, like #3, you force them to be closer than they want. Or, it could be a good anti-Zero tactic: wall yourself in with no way to be attacked, since you can't attack anyway, and put the burden on the sniper). 7) Force a sunder (if they have an adamantine greataxe and Improved Sunder, you bet the pitlord will consider closing to sunder the shield a viable improvisation). 8) Counter your opponent's tower shield.... 9) Protect yourself when using summons, mercenaries, or other "expendable" allies. 10) Two words: quickened spells. It seems like a number of these options would be negated due to either delay penalties & whether or not the cover rules are interpreted as rook style or 45 degree style for losing the total cover.
McJarvis 01-19-07, 11:24 PM	It seems like a number of these options would be negated due to either delay penalties & whether or not the cover rules are interpreted as rook style or 45 degree style for losing the total cover. #5 is impossible as well. If you are using the shield for cover you can't ready an action. Regarding corners vs center: After reading through the section of the FAQ regarding AoO's granted during using the shield as cover, I think the center thing might be correct...but in the end, the rules-as-written support corners. It's likely an issue that needs to be judged on from the elders(though I doubt any of them would vote to nerf the shields...heh)
Zevox 01-19-07, 11:31 PM	@ Hrothmud - Tactics for Maelosh received, thanks. @ Mitza - Tactics for Featylec PMed. Also, please try to get me tactics for Sybil by tomorrow afternoon so that I can run that fight tomorrow. Zevox
MindWandererB 01-19-07, 11:51 PM	#5 is impossible as well. If you are using the shield for cover you can't ready an action.Hmm... the timing is a bit strange. When does the total cover end? The instant you decide to use your standard action for something else, or when you actually do, or only once you already have? I think I agree, though--if your opponent was readying, they'd hit you first. @EG: I specifically had delay penalties in mind. Each one either 1) allows you to attack some way (e.g. through an ally), 2) should go on for less than 10 rounds, or 3) puts the burden of delaying on your opponent.
McJarvis 01-20-07, 12:05 AM	Hmm... the timing is a bit strange. When does the total cover end? The instant you decide to use your standard action for something else, or when you actually do, or only once you already have? I think I agree, though--if your opponent was readying, they'd hit you first. From what I read in the FAQ the impression I got was that every round you can spend a standard action to either start gaining total cover or maintaining total cover. This means you can not ready any actions while maintaining cover from the tower shield. As far as the delay penalties are concerned-> I see little difference between only allowing one avenue of attack & keeping your tower shield up until your opponent agrees to base you & try to sunder it. Either way you're giving up any way of attacking your opponent in return for defensive ability.
Vathelokai 01-20-07, 01:07 AM	Zodiac (Vathelokai) vs Mithos Durrol (Zevox) is up... @Vath - for situations like the one you had in this fight, I'd recommend a solid route to get the mount out of the equation first. Had the order of operations been different, you might have had a decent chance here - namely - Grease on the saddle, Cause Fear on the horse, Sleep/Enlarged sleep on Mithos and his familiar. Still - having some sort of offensive capability would've been huge here... Even then I don't think it would have worked; the familiar would still have awoken him before I could get rid of the familiar. As for offense... yeah. Burned up all my other spells on that last fight. Zodiac is more of an experiment of the pure save-or-die caster. I wondered how it would work out in the long term. As expected, at low levels he's won about 1/3rd of his fights. (1 per cycle actually). The next level is where I expect that to change a bit. Thanks for the run. In other news; anyone have the time to run an out of cycle quest for Zodiac to level up? I was thinking EL 5, but EL 6 might be fun (looking for a boost to money... )
MitzaVolchenko 01-20-07, 03:13 AM	@ Hrothmud - Tactics for Maelosh received, thanks. @ Mitza - Tactics for Featylec PMed. Also, please try to get me tactics for Sybil by tomorrow afternoon so that I can run that fight tomorrow. Zevox I'll toss what I have at ya in a few. I *hate* team fights because it is tricky to get togethr with your partner. Note my response on Featylec...let me know by sometime tomorrow evening if I am running a fght or a surrender.
TelinArtho 01-20-07, 12:09 PM	@Erithmu - for Bulgar vs Red Mage In round 3, once RM uses the wand, the touch spell that is charged in the familiar dissipates. He could ready to use the wand after the touch, but that will affect initiative order. I haven't read over most of the rest of the fight - but I'll get to that later.
MitzaVolchenko 01-20-07, 12:25 PM	Bazili gets lost on his way to the arena. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11238324&postcount=483) Sorry, when I am at max fights, I have to be able to run on Saturdays (which incidentally is also when ya'll have Macbrea near me to check my work).
MitzaVolchenko 01-20-07, 01:51 PM	Ikhain's MQ is started here. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?p=11238951#post11238951)
TheMagister 01-20-07, 02:56 PM	@MWB - I can't say I have no problem with the Battlesong fight, but I can see that you guys have discussed it to death. So be it. McJ brought this up earlier and I'd like a more thorough exploration: If in a 10' wide space and an enlarged Tessero takes total cover (which blocks LOS) from a direction, how is it that anything behind Tessero that's 10' tall or shorter can even be SEEN? I admit, it's logical (which usually means "wrong" in DnD rules-lawyering), but since the towershield effectively blocks LOS, how can Cupid even be targetted as long as we move into the alleyway as planned? Our team did have a method of offense (the MM wand and/or Cupid's bow) which could've been implimented with use of ready actions: Tessero: Take total cover. Cupid: Ready action to fire at Trillian (or Balrog) when total cover comes down. Tessero: Ready action to take total cover after Cupid fires. Cupid: Ready action to fire at Trillian (or Balrog) when total cover comes down. {Rinse/Repeat} Just because we elect not to chase him, doesn't mean we're the ones avoiding combat. It just means we're forcing combat (ranged or otherwise) on our terms. Do you see? TM
MindWandererB 01-20-07, 03:11 PM	First of all--that plan of action was not very carefully spelled out. Secondly, use of such precise timing would have forced me to improvise a response on Balrog's part--namely, to also ready actions to shoot when the total cover went down. This would have prevented Trillian from using Rapid Shot, which would have changed the sequence of events slightly--Cupid would have used Alter Self, Trillian would have been hit by one or two more Magic Missiles--but I think the overall sequence would have been the same. This is all assuming that a tower shield can be used to grant cover to characters other than the wielder, which is simply not justified. A tower shield is not a 5x5 wall segment, although it shares properties of one. A Large character is not like a gelatinous cube--it doesn't completely fill its 10x10x10 space. I could make these changes, if the tower shield ruling went against my call... but even then, I don't think it's justified. Apparently you had a very, very specific timing sequence in mind which didn't actually make it down on paper. I'm sorry that you disagree, but I feel like I followed your tactics as far as they went.
TheMagister 01-20-07, 03:13 PM	Fair enough. We learn as we go, right? That's why this wonderful place is here! TM
McJarvis 01-20-07, 08:51 PM	but I feel like I followed your tactics as far as they went. That is to say, you improvised the Duet completely due to our tactics being invalid.
MindWandererB 01-21-07, 02:45 AM	That is to say, you improvised the Duet completely due to our tactics being invalid. My opinion is that I didn't improvise at all, but followed your tactics to the letter, until Cupid was reduced to 0 HP. You never specified that you wanted to get total cover for Cupid; I didn't even realize that was your intention. You did say you wanted her to have cover (not full cover) behind Tessero, and you got it. In other words, your actions were not invalid, and I obeyed them precisely; they just didn't have the effect you thought they would. Had it been explicit that you intended to give Cupid the benefit of the tower shield somehow, then I might have improvised, or more likely and time permitting, asked you for a change in strategy.
McJarvis 01-21-07, 08:52 AM	You obviously knew something was up, hence your comment on us "not planning for ranged battle" at the end of the fight... And regardless, our tactics said to bunker up in the corner & made no mention of using magic missile tactics until after tessero was grappling. (and even then, the magic missile was against Bal) From round 6+ it was improvisation on your part, but you were given no choice to do otherwise. (as you stated, the only other thing you could have done was contact us regarding the entire matter...but it was your choice not to, since our mistake shouldn't decide what you do on your sunday/monday, and I'm aware that you have much more important things than CoCo hovering around in your life :) ) edit-> Actually, I hope all of us here have more important things than CoCo hovering around in our lives.... ^¿^
MindWandererB 01-21-07, 03:49 PM	You obviously knew something was up, hence your comment on us "not planning for ranged battle" at the end of the fight... And regardless, our tactics said to bunker up in the corner & made no mention of using magic missile tactics until after tessero was grappling. (and even then, the magic missile was against Bal)Let me quote your own tactics, then, since you seem to have forgotten: If Team Balrog elects to make this a ranged battle, Cupid can use her MM wand to target Trillian (limit 10 charges), and then her bow to return fire (at Trillian). From round 6+ it was improvisation on your part, but you were given no choice to do otherwise. (as you stated, the only other thing you could have done was contact us regarding the entire matter...but it was your choice not to....As I said, I didn't have any indication that I wasn't following your intention. The problem is that you thought you'd have total cover, but you never said as much and I didn't infer it (especially since you mentioned cover, but not total cover). I gathered that you wanted Cupid to get the +4 bonus for having soft cover, and no more. Had you mentioned Cupid getting total cover at any point in the tactics, I would have asked (especially since you, McJarvis, are available on IM most of the time). Enough. I'm done explaining myself. I don't honestly believe that any pitlord would have done anything different from what I did.
Zevox 01-22-07, 01:05 AM	Zax & Durin vs Maelosh & Sybil is finished. Hope theres no real problems with it, because my spare time from now until after Wednesday is almost nil. Zevox
Kaigan 01-22-07, 03:15 AM	Sabra Marana (Etiquette_Gnome) vs. Daniel Ocean (UserNamer) : Kaigan [Sewer] I have received your tactics, thanks. I will be running the fight tomorrow afternoon/evening so look for it then. Thanks, Kaigan
TelinArtho 01-22-07, 10:19 AM	Zax & Durin vs Maelosh & Sybil is finished. Hope theres no real problems with it, because my spare time from now until after Wednesday is almost nil. Zevox @ Telin - Ugh... so many allies... so many rolls each round... I'm just glad I didn't get to summoning those wolves. I normally don't mind summoners, but do yours need to use so damn many little allies? For the record, Zax is not a summoner. Yes he has that option - but the original way I wrote up my tactics did not include anything about casting SNAI - you can thank my teammate for that. And I don't think that my other summoners use "so damn many little allies" - Kraegin's Huge Centipedes are anything but little... Thanks for the fight.
TelinArtho 01-22-07, 11:59 AM	I realize he hasn't full posted the fight yet, but I thought this was funny: Starting locations counting clockwise from top left. Starting location of Istima is area 1 at (7,90). Starting location of Jar-Red is area 3 at (89,8). Starting location of Relanex is area 4 at (8,8). Starting location of Ihdald is area 2 at (93,93). Kimahri wins initiative followed by Eraca and Perius respectively. Anyway, for the fight itself, I'm not sure why Jar-red heads northward first, when my tactics indicate heading towards Relanex first - but given how quick Istima takes Relanex down, I suppose it won't make a huge difference. In the final round of the fight, Ihdlad hits with "Three arrows hit for 35 hp" - but when I look at the rolls, I'm fairly certain he should've only hit with 2 of them, as Jar-red's AC was 23 + 4 (Mage Armor) + 1 (dodge) = 28. This would reduce his damage taken by 10 from what I can tell in the roller. Round 5 would've also missed, since he would've been shooting against AC26 (-2 from charging). Of course, since we won, I don't think that changing any of this will change the result - but I point it out in case an edit needs to be made for other reasons.
Maraxus 01-22-07, 04:53 PM	Izumi vs Valen It did not work exactly as anyone wanted. Was a lot harder to pitlord as expected (especially thanks to the tactics of one involved party. :rolleyes: )
Zevox 01-22-07, 04:55 PM	And I don't think that my other summoners use "so damn many little allies" - Kraegin's Huge Centipedes are anything but little... Physically, no. On the other hand, at his level, they're none too powerful, and none too likely to hurt anything with the kind of AC someone at that level can easily obtain, which qualifies them in my mind as "little" in the sense of not being terribly helpful as anything but more bodies to go around. Re: Istima/Jar-red vs Relanex/Ihdald - I had two minor complaints about that too. First, Istima's vigor was 4pp, so he should've gotten 20 hp out of it, not 10. And second was that I noticed that he was making DC 20 checks to ride for cover, but it should've been only DC 15 (and thus auto-passed). No effect on the fight by either though, so just things to note for the future. Zevox
TelinArtho 01-22-07, 05:06 PM	Physically, no. On the other hand, at his level, they're none too powerful, and none too likely to hurt anything with the kind of AC someone at that level can easily obtain, which qualifies them in my mind as "little" in the sense of not being terribly helpful as anything but more bodies to go around. Well, it all depends on the opponent. Sdentch didn't have a sky-high AC really - so I wasn't too concerned about it. I think I might've done just as well with a band of Bearded Devils which have been her scourge for a while... Bearded devils are a pretty nasty summon, as is the Achaierai. I admit - for the other SMV creatures - there's not a lot of other good options, but they can be situationally effective as well. SMVI starts getting REAL interesting with a nice selection of vermin (gargantuan centipede, huge spider, 1d3 large scorpions) and other beasties (Chain Devil, Xill, 1d3 Bearded Devils, 1d3 Achaierai). In point of fact though, I don't remember Kraegin's summons ever having difficulty hitting a target that they could actually reach... Speed, flight, etc have all been a more decisive factor than AC. Of course, I tend to believe most of the characters in the CoCo sacrifice a "decent" AC in order to work out a more effective offense (alpha-strike) or a more effective hidden defense (invisibility, gr. invisibility, hide checks at +40 or more, etc).
Zevox 01-22-07, 05:18 PM	Sdentch didn't have a sky-high AC really - so I wasn't too concerned about it. True, but then again, Sdentch was hardly a typical specimen of a level 10 character around here. Of course, I tend to believe most of the characters in the CoCo sacrifice a "decent" AC in order to work out a more effective offense (alpha-strike) or a more effective hidden defense (invisibility, gr. invisibility, hide checks at +40 or more, etc). Huh - my own experience is that ACs do tend to get pretty high. Especially with casters (alter self/polymorph is incredible for AC - just look at what heights I can get Senorda and Asran's ACs to with it), but also with warriors. Maybe its just because thats a goal I usually set for my own characters (see: Eraca (AC at 29-31 with 2-3 spells), Istima (AC at 29 with 1 power and ride for cover), Asran (AC at 27-29 with 1 or 2 items, much higher if he polymorphs), and so on). Zevox
MitzaVolchenko 01-22-07, 05:58 PM	@Zevox I need to go through that one a little closer, but I don't see anywhere that you used withdraw or double moves or really anything to avoid standing around with Durin charging in and beating on Sybil. I am also curious at the auto-spot early on when she is behind cover from his direction and should automatically have a hide check. The key to our tactics was DO NOT GET BASED. Now that is tough to do in that arena, but certainly not impossible. There is no rason not to just outrun attackers using Tumble or withdraw to pass through crowded spots. @ Mitza - Tried to maneuver as best I could figure here, but there were two major problems with trying to outmaneuver/outrun your foes here. First, that Durin could double-move 80' on his horse and still attack where you could only single-move 60' if you wanted to attack, and second that this map is far too small to expect double-moving 120' to help you much either. Once you were tripped, it was all over. With two people focusing onthe horse, it is gone fairly fast...double moving to provide something to chase is effective, even if I am not getting arrows off. I am not sure what move toward a dead end with an approaching enemy was supposed to do...frankly, I wish pitlords would stop second guessing me when I say avoid being based...had I hit a 10 round delay, fine...but anything short of it is second guessing my tactics in an unacceptable fashion. Yes double move on the defensive is a pain in the rear end. I run it for others...I expect it to be run for me. Thanks for the run regardless...Sybil is about to be come Maven for several levels so everyone can breathe a sigh of relief where dealing iwth my tactics and expectations is concerned.
SauroGrenom 01-22-07, 08:30 PM	Istima (Zevox) & Jar-red (TelinArtho) vs. Relanex (Macbrea) & Ihdald (Milov) : Sauro I think I've finished it now. I noticed Telin's comments, but unless someone makes a realy good argument that the fight needs to be rerun I'll leave it as it is now. Sorry about the mis read on the tactics Telin. I though that your team was splitting up. It only ended saving probably one round of combat.
Hirumajoe 01-22-07, 08:42 PM	Izumi vs Valen It did not work exactly as anyone wanted. Was a lot harder to pitlord as expected (especially thanks to the tactics of one involved party. :rolleyes: ) Thank you very much for the run. Apologies for the tactics and the difficulty in pitlording them. :(
Macbrea 01-22-07, 09:17 PM	well, my tactics weren't quite followed to the letter but I don't really care. The reason for the Kill horse first then grapple the opponent is because opponents not in a grapple get to strike against no dex. But shrug.. no biggy. Onward! Oh, and on a side note.. Izumi is a female and has defect arrow feat. So, throwing daggers at her is a bad choice. One more item: That is an easy fix. On the last round you should only step away after killing Izumi. With how it is currently written, Izumi would get a full swing on Valen before valen gets to swing. The reason is you must make a 5ft+ movement before and after a springing attack as per the rules to springing attack. This means you cannot be standing next to a person swing at them and spring away. You must step 5ft left swing, then spring away.
Zevox 01-23-07, 12:29 AM	Istima (Zevox) & Jar-red (TelinArtho) vs. Relanex (Macbrea) & Ihdald (Milov) : Sauro I think I've finished it now. One note for the wrap-up: Istima used a charge of his Dorje of Force Screen, not a powerstone of Force Screen. Zevox
MitzaVolchenko 01-23-07, 01:00 AM	Ikhain runs a quick errand for Lady Indivara. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=775917) The dromite gets unlucky. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11220886&postcount=476) Lucky vs. Weapon is here. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11263073&postcount=492)
Maraxus 01-23-07, 03:26 AM	well, my tactics weren't quite followed to the letter but I don't really care. The reason for the Kill horse first then grapple the opponent is because opponents not in a grapple get to strike against no dex. But shrug.. no biggy. Onward! Oh, and on a side note.. Izumi is a female and has defect arrow feat. So, throwing daggers at her is a bad choice. One more item: That is an easy fix. On the last round you should only step away after killing Izumi. With how it is currently written, Izumi would get a full swing on Valen before valen gets to swing. The reason is you must make a 5ft+ movement before and after a springing attack as per the rules to springing attack. This means you cannot be standing next to a person swing at them and spring away. You must step 5ft left swing, then spring away. Well, the horse was avoiding you. you could have probably got one AoO every 3 or 4 rounds, but ignoring your opponent in the while could have been equally dangerous, that's why I've choosen to go for him. Oh, and why do I always forget, that deflext arrows is no Monk-exclusive thing? :) About the last thing: Yes, on the map I even made it 5ft. - attack - 40ft. (I rarely write the details of movement, just the result) But then the fight was over and I didn't post the last map. Gender issues will be corrected, even for Half-Giants. ;)
Macbrea 01-23-07, 08:15 AM	Istima (Zevox) & Jar-red (TelinArtho) vs. Relanex (Macbrea) & Ihdald (Milov) : Sauro Also, Relanex cast see invisible from memory not from a scroll. He doesn't use expendables.
hogarth 01-23-07, 08:24 AM	@Macbrea: Regarding Kilp vs. Undertaker, I believe that Kilpquabjeg's Energy Wall would only do 2d6+7 damage (2d6+5 for passing through a ML 5 wall + 2 for being cold energy), not 4d6+5. The Undertaker should survive for one more round, I think. Also, she should be manifesting Energy Walls from memory, not from her dorje, since she still has plenty of power points (as mentioned in her tactics).
Macbrea 01-23-07, 08:48 AM	Upon manifesting this power, you choose cold, electricity, fire, or sonic. You create an immobile sheet of energy of the chosen type formed out of unstable ectoplasm. One side of the wall, selected by you, sends forth waves of energy, dealing 2d6 points of damage to creatures and objects within 10 feet and 1d6 points of damage to those beyond 10 feet but within 20 feet. In addition, anyone passing though the energy wall takes 2d6 points of damage +1 point per manifester level (maximum +20). If you manifest the wall so that it appears where creatures are, each creature takes damage as if passing through the wall. If you manifest this power in the form of a ring of energy, you choose whether the waves of energy radiate inward or outward from the ring. As noted above you take 2d6 cold damage for being within 10ft of the wall plus an additional 2d6+5 damage for passing through the wall.
hogarth 01-23-07, 08:51 AM	As noted above you take 2d6 cold damage for being within 10ft of the wall plus an additional 2d6+5 damage for passing through the wall. Let me change the emphasis on your quotation: Upon manifesting this power, you choose cold, electricity, fire, or sonic. You create an immobile sheet of energy of the chosen type formed out of unstable ectoplasm. One side of the wall, selected by you, sends forth waves of energy, dealing 2d6 points of damage to creatures and objects within 10 feet and 1d6 points of damage to those beyond 10 feet but within 20 feet. In addition, anyone passing though the energy wall takes 2d6 points of damage +1 point per manifester level (maximum +20). If you manifest the wall so that it appears where creatures are, each creature takes damage as if passing through the wall. However, if you want to rule that it does 4d6+9 damage, I won't complain too loudly. :D
Macbrea 01-23-07, 08:52 AM	You are still within 10ft of the wall. So, it would be 2d6 + 2d6 + manifester level. I missed the +1 per die.. will fix that.
hogarth 01-23-07, 08:55 AM	You are still within 10ft of the wall. So, it would be 2d6 + 2d6 + manifester level. Your manifester level though isn't 9. A cold (or fire) wall does +1 damage per die.
Zevox 01-23-07, 09:08 AM	@Zevox I need to go through that one a little closer, but I don't see anywhere that you used withdraw or double moves or really anything to avoid standing around with Durin charging in and beating on Sybil. In none of the circumstances she wound up in could she have avoided being based by doing either of those, but to be technical she did try in round 3 (double-moved, simply tumbling along the way to avoid AoOs). Which is why in round 2 I had her take advantage of the cover she had negating Durin's AoO chances to fire then single-move around. The key to our tactics was DO NOT GET BASED. Now that is tough to do in that arena, but certainly not impossible. There is no rason not to just outrun attackers using Tumble or withdraw to pass through crowded spots. As above, because the positioning she wound up in from round 2 on simply would not allow her to get away from Durin and not be based the following round. Even had the positioning wound up more in her favor, she could have kept it up for only a round or two tops before she was forced either to move herself back into one of those start box areas, which would be easy for Durin to corner her in, or choose between being based by Durin and being based by Zax's ape friend, either of which would likely be disasterous. With two people focusing onthe horse, it is gone fairly fast...double moving to provide something to chase is effective, even if I am not getting arrows off. If it were just Durin, maybe, but as-is theres two problems with that. The first being that if Sybil is just trying to lead Durin on a chase, aside from it being hard for her to avoid being based, theres no longer two people focusing on the horse. The second is Zax and his friends - even without the Wolf summons he had planned, they'd have become an obstacle eventually (and on a map that small, eventually would likely be in only a couple of rounds tops). I am not sure what move toward a dead end with an approaching enemy was supposed to do... In round 2? I was hoping to give her cover, as per your request in your tactics, and the only other way to do that would have gotten her charged. In retrospect, not the best movement, but then I don't always see what the exact "best movement" is. frankly, I wish pitlords would stop second guessing me when I say avoid being based...had I hit a 10 round delay, fine...but anything short of it is second guessing my tactics in an unacceptable fashion. The only instance where I feel it could be argued I did that was with the attack in round 2, which I figured would be preferable since it could've helped get rid of the horse faster and you couldn't avoid being based with a double-move that round. Had that "do not end based no matter what" clause not been in there, I probably would have had her make a 5' step and rapid-shoot in round 3 to try and get rid of the horse so run-and-gun tactics like you and your partner both wanted would become more feasible, honestly. I am also curious at the auto-spot early on when she is behind cover from his direction and should automatically have a hide check. Now that one you're totally correct on, I did miss that for some reason (guess thats what I get for running this late at night). As I mentioned above, I won't have time to fix this if it proves to be a potentially fight-altering issue, but to check I'll roll it now... ...and the hide would indeed have succeeded. Oh boy. Well, if you'd like this to be held over for it, go ahead and contact Pitlords. My sincerest apologies for missing something like that. Zevox
Abyssal Stalker 01-23-07, 09:22 AM	You are still within 10ft of the wall. So, it would be 2d6 + 2d6 + manifester level. I missed the +1 per die.. will fix that. No need to fix anything. I losed and that's about it. Reminds me why I dislike psionics so much. They are better than magic in several ways. Compare ML2 vigor vs CL2 cure spell: flat 10hp vs 1d8+2hp Compare energy powers to spells: pick an energy type out of four vs pre-determined prepared spells that deal energy damage Manifesters are much more versatile than casters. Just pick a list of powers with effects that can be altered freely. Casters need to either prepare their spells beforehand or stick with the same spells forever (that's why sorcerers suck vs psionics, no free altering like with psionics). Yes I know that manifesters have access to a limited variety of powers. But they are much more versatile and usable in different situations. Think about a situation where a character faces a red dragon. The sorcerer has no chance with his fireball and scorching rays, when the psionic character can rock with his energy spells, altered to cold damage. Oh, the great energy substitution... sucks because it uses higher spell slots. And do I need to mention psionic shot+deep crystal combos at low levels? I mean come on, don't give me any lists about spells/level vs powers/level. Just look at the options psionics have compared to magic.... :rant: :rant: :rant: :rant: Yes, I am dumb because I don't use more of them because of the clear advantages... And I am making a jerk out of myself, ranting like this because I lost (which was expected because hogarth has a better build) :)
hogarth 01-23-07, 09:36 AM	:rant: :rant: :rant: :rant: Yes, I am dumb because I don't use more of them because of the clear advantages... And I am making a jerk out of myself, ranting like this because I lost (which was expected because hogarth has a better build) :) I agree with your rant 100% -- psions have more versatility than wizards in the Core Coliseum. That's why I like 'em. :D However, in table-top games, I find wizards and clerics definitely have the versatility edge because of the sheer number of spells they can know without needing to specialise on 1-on-1 combat. Just a note: if the Undertaker had picked up a wand (or a bunch of scrolls) of Acid Arrow, Kilp would have been sunk. There are almost no psionic powers with a range of Long.
McJarvis 01-23-07, 09:41 AM	Gell vs Hiisi is up & rewards are completed(all at once, for once!) Toron vs Rub will have to wait to get started until 2:30, due to a family emergency that I have to deal with right now.
Macbrea 01-23-07, 09:43 AM	That's not entirely true. You could have kept up vigor for awhile. One of the losses the Kilp actually suffered he should not have. I just didn't see the point of Relanex loosing the match by me stating the obvious. Kilp has an ability that you don't seem to ever mention in your tactics. Example: Relanex dropped a 22pt fireball that Kilp failed his savings through on awhile back. Kilp had 38pp laying around. The pitlord and yourself forgot the Elan Resilience exists. As a result, Kilp should have expended 11pp to reduce the damage to 0 and energy walled Relenex to death. Even on a good day Relenex couldn't do 100pt of damage before taking 23 from energy walls. The defense against the random energy type is pretty much impossible. There isn't any real way to defend against it.
Zevox 01-23-07, 09:47 AM	Compare ML2 vigor vs CL2 cure spell: flat 10hp vs 1d8+2hp But since that vigor hp is temporary, you can't keep using it to get more, the way you can with a cure spell, so its useless for truly healing wounds (say, after a battle), just good for granting you a temporary boost in mid-fight (which is why it shows up as so useful here). Plus its a range personal power, so in a party situation its useless for anyone but yourself. Compare energy powers to spells: pick an energy type out of four vs pre-determined prepared spells that deal energy damage But also look at the need to spend extra power points to get anything but the base damage out of it, effectively increase the power level of anything you manifest above minimum damange potential. On the reverse, Wizards and Sorcerers don't need to make their Fireballs use 5th level spell slots to get them to 9 or 10d6 damage - they can get that much out of a 3rd level slot, or more out of a 5th by empowering it. Think about a situation where a character faces a red dragon. The sorcerer has no chance with his fireball and scorching rays, when the psionic character can rock with his energy spells, altered to cold damage. Oh, the great energy substitution... sucks because it uses higher spell slots. Actually, Energy Substitution does not use higher-level slots - it uses the same slot as the spell normally does. And if the Sorcerer only selected fire-type spells for his arsenal anyway, he made poor choices to begin with. Should've grabbed an Ice Storm or Lightning Bolt or the like somewhere in there. I mean come on, don't give me any lists about spells/level vs powers/level. Just look at the options psionics have compared to magic.... Considering the vastly larger number of spells out there compared to psionic powers, and the number of spells that can't be duplicated by Psionics (ever seen Psionics do Blacklight? Ghoul Touch? How about Blindness? Mirror Image?), I'd say magic has far more options than psionics myself. Psionics are undeniably good for direct-damage energy powers, and in most ways more versatile in that respect than magic, but magic has a lot more it can do that psionics can't. I expect that at higher levels, when casters have access to so many more spells and can prepare several direct damage, several save-or-die, and several utility spells, the differences will become clearer for you. And especially if you were in a tabletop game, the differences would be immediately clear, as spellcasters can buff, heal, and otherwise aid their allies in non-damaging ways, but due to the proliferation of personal-range powers psionicists rarely can. Zevox
Abyssal Stalker 01-23-07, 09:49 AM	I agree with your rant 100% -- psions have more versatility than wizards in the Core Coliseum. That's why I like 'em. :D However, in table-top games, I find wizards and clerics definitely have the versatility edge because of the sheer number of spells they can know without needing to specialise on 1-on-1 combat. Just a note: if the Undertaker had picked up a wand (or a bunch of scrolls) of Acid Arrow, Kilp would have been sunk. There are almost no psionic powers with a range of Long. Nah. Not enough damage to get pass your vigors. 2d4 per round vs 10 is just not enough, or otherwise I would've needed at least an CL4 wand, and that would've been quite expensive (compared to your oh-so-expensive ML2 dorje). And I would've needed to hit every round with a touch attack (that isn't needed with energy missiles and such, BTW). Yep, CoCo is the worst, because you know you're enemy. In a TT game you don't know what energy type his spells will be. You probably noticed that I didn't want to spend the energy resistance that I had with Undertaker, because I had no chance to counter four different types of energy. I thought you would use cold, but then you could've just swapped to another type. And it was pretty obvious that you would resist fire. Things like this really kick me in the nuts with psionics...
hogarth 01-23-07, 09:52 AM	Kilp has an ability that you don't seem to ever mention in your tactics. Example: Relanex dropped a 22pt fireball that Kilp failed his savings through on awhile back. Kilp had 38pp laying around. The pitlord and yourself forgot the Elan Resilience exists. As a result, Kilp should have expended 11pp to reduce the damage to 0 and energy walled Relenex to death. Even on a good day Relenex couldn't do 100pt of damage before taking 23 from energy walls. The elan resilience thing is nice, but I'd rather use my pp for Vigor or offensive powers. As far as failing a save vs. a fireball, you should note that using Elan Resistance and Elan Resilience are both immediate actions -- you only get one immediate/swift action each round, so you can't use both resistance and resilience vs. the same spell.
Abyssal Stalker 01-23-07, 10:01 AM	@Zevox: You have some good points there, but on the other hand, the psionic versatility easily counters several of them. Just pick up Elan, and you are immune to many so-called save or die -spells. I have no idea why the heck they have to be aberrations... Easy way to get rid of everything humanoid-related. Blindess (and actually Blacklight, now that I think of it) are easily countered with Synesthete. Try to find something from the magical section against that. (Like I didn't have both Blindness and Ghoul Touch readied, but both were useless...) OK, I was wrong with the energy substitution. But it's a feat anyway, and there aren't too many of them to spend. You see the use of extra PP as a burden, I see it an option. No need to overkill with the 10d6 fireball when 2d6 is enough. Spells provide a pre-determined effect every time, depending on the CL. Powers can be altered to provide a needed effect with augmentation (that is really cheap in the case of vigor, for example. Just look at augmented dorjes)... :)
Etiquette_Gnome 01-23-07, 10:03 AM	I've had to ask this before, but nobody ever responded. Could somebody PLEASE post a direct link for the Gell vs Hiisi fight, as I am incapable of viewing the Battles Thread (only one post a time).
Macbrea 01-23-07, 10:07 AM	It's Here and Here
Etiquette_Gnome 01-23-07, 10:08 AM	Thank you
Zevox 01-23-07, 10:18 AM	Just pick up Elan, and you are immune to many so-called save or die -spells. Only the ones associated with humanoids only, which essentially amounts to Ghoul Touch and Hold Person. But then again, thats not an advantage of Psionics, just an advantage of being a non-humanoid. Blindess (and actually Blacklight, now that I think of it) are easily countered with Synesthete. Try to find something from the magical section against that. Blacklight is most definitely not countered by Synsthete - Synsthete can either provide spot or listen bonuses, or negate the effects of being blinded or deafend. Neither helps with Blacklight. And you're right, no magic duplicates Systhete, but thats why I said magic has more it can do that psionics can't, not that only magic has things it can do that psionics can't. You see the use of extra PP as a burden, I see it an option. No need to overkill with the 10d6 fireball when 2d6 is enough. Spells provide a pre-determined effect every time, depending on the CL. Powers can be altered to provide a needed effect with augmentation (that is really cheap in the case of vigor, for example. Just look at augmented dorjes)... But if you can't do with just the base damage, you're paying extra to get your full potential, which hurts - even in the arena here, psions can frequently expend their per-fight allotment of pp in about 3 manifestations of energy missile/ball/etc. If the enemy saves against too many of those or they're in a multi-foe fight, well, that may leave them SOL pretty fast. As for augmented Dorjes, those get either much less useful very fast, or very expensive very fast. For my own Psion, Istima, for instance, I've repeatedly turned down the temptation to pick up a ML 2 Dorje of Vigor, because I know that long before I use up all its charges, that 10 hp is going to be a waste of time to put up against all the damage mid and higher level foes can inflict per round. At lower levels those are good, but just wait until wizards are packing CL 7 or 9 MM wands, 7-10d6 fireballs/lightning bolts, spells like polymorph to let them do good damage physically, etc, or fighters are capable of doing 20 damage per attack easily, or archers are rapid shooting 3 or 4 shots per round for about 10 damage average each. They start to look pretty useless then. Zevox
Abyssal Stalker 01-23-07, 12:26 PM	OK, OK, you've proven your point :) Just felt like ranting... I'll try to go and finish your fight now that I got home.
Hirumajoe 01-23-07, 12:58 PM	@Maraxus: Just noticed on the Izumi vs Valen fight, Valen's XP reward is too high. Instead of 1787, it should be 1687 xp. Thanks, Hirumajoe
MitzaVolchenko 01-23-07, 01:16 PM	@Zevox, Hrothmund If Hrothmund does not object to the hold over, I would like to see the team fight edited from the point where the lack of hide check gives away Sybil & Maelosh's position. If they take the horse down and follow it up with Zax, that fight becomes a VERY different animal.
Abyssal Stalker 01-23-07, 01:31 PM	Eraca vs Loddick is done.
Erithmu 01-23-07, 02:02 PM	Eraca vs Loddick is done. A minor issue: Loddick has to spend his other 7 pp 6/2 = 3 +4 = 7: Eraca has 8 cha. She will go down, but I don't have any knowledge how how much cha she has left so I would need to just run another 7pp hit. Otherwise no issues
Abyssal Stalker 01-23-07, 02:22 PM	Fixed. I somehow thought that Eraca failed that first save.
TheMagister 01-23-07, 02:26 PM	@ Iced - !! I can't believe you went with the quarterstaff/kama thing!! You could've absolutely decimated Rubicanti in a grapple. The multiple-poison thing is neat, though. I think you'll need 18s or better to hit, though. Still, it only takes one failed save, right? :D TM
Sjiggie 01-23-07, 02:26 PM	Wisp vs Treetall is up here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11266941&postcount=498) Please check the fight and tell me when something is wrong. It's my first fight I did. rewards coming...
hogarth 01-23-07, 02:31 PM	Wisp vs Treetall is up here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11266941&postcount=498) Please check the fight and tell me when something is wrong. It's my first fight I did. rewards coming... Wow -- that Share Pain + Vigor combo took a long time to break through... The one thing I noticed was that you didn't roll any DC 11 Fort saving throws vs. nausea for Wisp whenever he started his turn in the swarm. I don't think it would have made much difference to the fight, though.
TheMagister 01-23-07, 02:47 PM	Wow -- that Share Pain + Vigor combo took a long time to break through... The one thing I noticed was that you didn't roll any DC 11 Fort saving throws vs. nausea for Wisp whenever he started his turn in the swarm. I don't think it would have made much difference to the fight, though. I have a question that I don't think has ever really come up. If damage is done to a character with a reservoir of temporary hitpoints, but it is not enough to carry over to his actual hitpoints, has the character that took the damage actually been injured? If not, then the bleeding damage doesn't really happen until the swarm does actual damage to Wisp's real HP. It seems plausible when I think about it... Edit: actually this could have ramifications for Rubicanti's fight vs. the poison-slinging Toron Brightstar! A weapon coated with injury poison has to actually deal damage or it is not considered delivered. Damage reduction or immunity to the weapon-type renders the poison useless. TM
Kaigan 01-23-07, 02:49 PM	Sabra Marana (Etiquette_Gnome) vs. Daniel Ocean (UserNamer) : Kaigan [Sewer] I have received your tactics, thanks. I will be running the fight tomorrow afternoon/evening so look for it then. Thanks, Kaigan Can anyone take this fight? I've had a rough night, family emergency and I've been up for a long time now. I'm gonna get some sleep, and to tell you the truth, I'm really not in the mood to run the fight, i'll post the tactics below. Hi Kaigan, here you got ym tactics for Danny Pre-fight notes: - My DC weapons are ment to be crafted, therefore the 500gp instead of 1000gp. Starting Location & Position: Start at the back of my box, unarmored, with loaded crossbow(elven bane bolt) ready to raw, holding scroll of expeditious retreat, mount left from me. Buffs & First Rounds: Round 1: Go invisible using the psi-like ability. Round 2: Cast expeditious retreat, draw stone of prescience, offensive. Round 3: Manifest prescience, draw scroll of truestrike. Round 4: Move out to find him as quick as possible(dont forget I got a +6 move silently). Round 5+: Once found, cast truestrike, draw my crossbow and take him down with a truestrike+deepcrystal+elven bane+prescience. +20(truestrike)+3(normal)+2(bane)+2(inv) = +29 to hit, he has no way to raise it more than that. Damage should be: 2d6+2d6+2+2+1d8 = 24 average. Extras: If I roll a 1 on this shot, use luck domain. If he finds me before I have taken the shot, just continue with these tactics. My horse will just attack him. Might anything else go wrong use my CL3 wand and anything else whats needed to win. That about it, thanks for running and good luck, if there are any questions or if there is something wrong with my tactics, please PM me. I highly doubt I'll be able to win this; a bolt of elven bane and drow poison does not equal a happy elven psion. I will, however, do what I can. First, since Sabra won his first fight, he'll have 10 extra power points to spend here. Start the fight with a lit torch in hand and the tower shield wielded. Activate maximum Vigor (4pp, 20 hp), making sure it gets shared with the psicrystal so he'll have temporary hit points too. Then, activate Share Pain with my psicrystal being the recipient. This should give me effectively 70 hit points to work with. Move slowly (as if I have a choice), one move action at a time. The standard action will be to used for a ready action to manifest Aversion as soon as I see Daniel Ocean; telling him to be averse to attacking me (won't stop his horse, but better it than him). If he makes the save, try again. If I'm by some freak of nature I'm still standing, try one more time. Thus, I try to cast Aversion thrice upon him. Once he's affected by Aversion (or I give up from three attempts), activate Control Flame, using the spare move action to stick my torch into it for a relighting. Have the flame double move along the walls to avoid the water, entering Daniel Ocean's space as soon as possible to set him on fire. This will likely be with him on his horse, thus allowing me to set both on fire at once (as they share the same space). If and when the flame goes out, take a step back and reactivate Control Flame, using either my move action or its to step onto the extinguished torch to relight it before moving out. If there are any problems with my understanding of the rules, please PM me so I can adjust my tactics accordingly, rather than give my opponent a hollow victory. Apologies to everyone, but we're kinda worried at the moment, so prayers for my family would be great. Thanks guys and Cat if you could take me off pitlording for the time being, at least until all of this is over, thanks. Kaigan
hogarth 01-23-07, 02:55 PM	I have a question that I don't think has ever really come up. If damage is done to a character with a reservoir of temporary hitpoints, but it is not enough to carry over to his actual hitpoints, has the character that took the damage actually been injured? If not, then the bleeding damage doesn't really happen until the swarm does actual damage to Wisp's real HP. I would say that he went from bleeding with extra vigor to bleeding with no extra vigor. He's still bleeding. There's nothing in the rules (AFAIK) that say you have to hurt someone's "real" hit points in order to have a certain effect. It seems plausible when I think about it... Common sense vs. D&D rules: an argument just waiting to happen. ;)
TelinArtho 01-23-07, 02:56 PM	I have a question that I don't think has ever really come up. If damage is done to a character with a reservoir of temporary hitpoints, but it is not enough to carry over to his actual hitpoints, has the character that took the damage actually been injured? If not, then the bleeding damage doesn't really happen until the swarm does actual damage to Wisp's real HP. It seems plausible when I think about it... Edit: actually this could have ramifications for Rubicanti's fight vs. the poison-slinging Toron Brightstar! A weapon coated with injury poison has to actually deal damage or it is not considered delivered. Damage reduction or immunity to the weapon-type renders the poison useless. TM The simple is the temporary hit points are not Damage Reduction. So if you have 100 temporary hit points and are hit with 1 point of damage and poison, you have to make the save versus poison. If you have no temporary hit points but have DR1/-- and take 1 damage plus injury poison - you don't have to make the save. @Kaigan - best wishes my friend - may you and your family weather the storm.
TheMagister 01-23-07, 02:57 PM	I should be considered a rules lawyer that hasn't passed the bar exam. :D I posted a query in the Oracle thread.
Sjiggie 01-23-07, 03:00 PM	Wow -- that Share Pain + Vigor combo took a long time to break through... The one thing I noticed was that you didn't roll any DC 11 Fort saving throws vs. nausea for Wisp whenever he started his turn in the swarm. I don't think it would have made much difference to the fight, though. You're right but as you say it won't make any changes to the outcome maybe speed them up a bit but I won't edit the fight for it. Yeah the share pain vigor combo was nasty. Rewards are up
McJarvis 01-23-07, 03:25 PM	The battle for TIM(ECL 4) has not been posted yet(nor has Dsuigi been on in a week or so)...but if someone wants to pick it up, it was a default! My opponent edited/retired his character earlier in the week :) I'd rather not extend into week 2 on a fight that only needs a note put up saying that TIM won.
McJarvis 01-23-07, 03:32 PM	Starting the Iced vs TheMagister fight now...my "emergency" got prolonged a little bit, but everything is settled now. In addition, while I was going to retrieve the family member that was in trouble, I got a call & was formally invited to start working tomorrow. No more jobless bum me B-)
Zevox 01-23-07, 03:34 PM	Eraca vs Loddick is done. I do have one issue with it: in round 11, Eraca could dive Loddick. She has enough height, and between the height and horizontal distance to Loddick enough to dive. Even though Loddick is behind the hedge, because Eraca is flying, the hedge is not in her way. That probably won't affect the fight, though - it'd need to be a crit to do so, and it wasn't. Also, in the wrap-up, you forgot Eraca's used scroll of fly. Beyond that, looks good. Though I'm finding I like Ego Whip less every time I run up against Loddick... Zevox
Hrothmund 01-23-07, 03:35 PM	Uh, who decided to put Bazili Stasha in a fight. He is listed as ready for January 3rd which definately means that he was not going to fight January 17th. I am not taking the auto-lose or including it in his history of fights. He was not designated ready to fight and therefore there was no fight.
MitzaVolchenko 01-23-07, 03:37 PM	Uh, who decided to put Bazili Stasha in a fight. He is listed as ready for January 3rd which definately means that he was not going to fight January 17th. I am not taking the auto-lose or including it in his history of fights. He was not designated ready to fight and therefore there was no fight. That explains why I didn't get tactics from you. PM Pitlords...something has to be done for your opponent (probably just held over and re-paired, but that is Pitlords' call).
Hrothmund 01-23-07, 03:40 PM	@Zevox, Hrothmund If Hrothmund does not object to the hold over, I would like to see the team fight edited from the point where the lack of hide check gives away Sybil & Maelosh's position. If they take the horse down and follow it up with Zax, that fight becomes a VERY different animal. I think you are pretty deep into wishful thinking. We are archers on the wrong map with all kinds of enemies to block our escape routes, but if you want to holdover and have Zevox re-edit I have no objection. I need to know by tonight (US time) as I have no opportunity to update my character tomorrow before pairings.
Erithmu 01-23-07, 03:43 PM	I do have one issue with it: in round 11, Eraca could dive Loddick. She has enough height, and between the height and horizontal distance to Loddick enough to dive. Even though Loddick is behind the hedge, because Eraca is flying, the hedge is not in her way. That probably won't affect the fight, though - it'd need to be a crit to do so, and it wasn't. Also, in the wrap-up, Eraca did not use 3 scrolls of Mirror Image (didn't have that many), just 2, and you forgot her scroll of fly. Zevox Actually you do have 3 of them (1 on DVII and 2 on DV III) I have to say that thinking about the tactics took longer than writing them ... it really was a matter of if I wanted to be fighting 8 cha points or your hp and a CLW wand. One thing I have noticed w/ Eraca over the past few times (fighting her 2x and running her in the arena like 3x) is that her buff cycle is way to long for what she really needs, which then gets compounded by ASF. I'm not sure of the solution to the problem, but just an observation.
Etiquette_Gnome 01-23-07, 03:51 PM	I just realized a problem with the tactics above with Sabra's opponent...Daniel Ocean is applying poison to his weapons as a prebuff. I had attempted to do a similar thing with one of my characters, but the possibility of exposure prevented me and was not allowed. While his character is immune to poison, he retains the ability to be exposed, which uses up the dose of poison and thus the chance of failure should prevent him.
Zevox 01-23-07, 03:59 PM	I just realized a problem with the tactics above with Sabra's opponent...Daniel Ocean is applying poison to his weapons as a prebuff. I had attempted to do a similar thing with one of my characters, but the possibility of exposure prevented me and was not allowed. While his character is immune to poison, he retains the ability to be exposed, which uses up the dose of poison and thus the chance of failure should prevent him. Except that being exposed to it yourself does not prevent the poison from being used on the weapon. It still gets coated, you just may accidentally poison yourself while doing so, which means squat if the poison cannot affect you. Zevox
McJarvis 01-23-07, 04:13 PM	The battle for TIM(ECL 4) has not been posted yet(nor has Dsuigi been on in a week or so)...but if someone wants to pick it up, it was a default! My opponent edited/retired his character earlier in the week :) I'd rather not extend into week 2 on a fight that only needs a note put up saying that TIM won. Repeated for emphasis :)
MitzaVolchenko 01-23-07, 04:14 PM	Repeated for emphasis :) I'll post it for you. All done.
McJarvis 01-23-07, 04:32 PM	I'll post it for you. All done. Thanks a bunch :) I didn't realize it was on the plains...shame the match was a default. I really would love to see TIM work on the plains. (160 ft charge for double damage on plains= wowzer damage)
TelinArtho 01-23-07, 04:35 PM	Thanks a bunch :) I didn't realize it was on the plains...shame the match was a default. I really would love to see TIM work on the plains. (160 ft charge for double damage on plains= wowzer damage) Apparently you haven't seen Sir Valkin's work... 180ft charge for triple damage... mixed with divine might, power attack and smite evil for death-dealing goody-two-shoes smackdown...
McJarvis 01-23-07, 04:37 PM	Apparently you haven't seen Sir Valkin's work... 180ft charge for triple damage... mixed with divine might, power attack and smite evil for death-dealing goody-two-shoes smackdown... This is akin to watching your kids play league baseball when they're 7. It doesn't matter what other kids have done: I've never gotten a chance to see my TIMmy hit a ball out of the park. (True strike+enlarge person+bulls strength+full two handed power attack+lance= :D )
Erithmu 01-23-07, 04:40 PM	This is akin to watching your kids play league baseball when they're 7. It doesn't matter what other kids have done: I've never gotten a chance to see my TIMmy hit a ball out of the park. (True strike+enlarge person+bulls strength+full two handed power attack+lance= :D ) Yea but .... You require buffs .... *shrugs* But alas I digress ... You need multiple buffs ....
McJarvis 01-23-07, 04:42 PM	Yea but .... You require buffs .... *shrugs* But alas I digress ... You need multiple buffs .... I have no problems with using buffs in professional sports the arena :)
Erithmu 01-23-07, 04:45 PM	Can we start having drug screening for the CoCo? ... Arena Guard: Any illegal subtances? Fighter: nope Arena Guard: Next: Any illegal subtances? Mage: nope Arena Guard: Next: Any illegal subtances? Any of McJ's characters: Essence of Bull, Cat hair, and leg of Cheetah Arena Guard: Please step over to the testing booth ...
TelinArtho 01-23-07, 05:01 PM	Well, McJarvis - if I had continued to use the Countess Ural, you might've seen something similar to yours as well, just with the added bonuses of being a paladin as well (divine might, smite evil) combined with the power of Enlarge Person (shared with the mount), Bull's Strength and even invisibility... But yes - Sir Valkin would be able to close with TIM before he gets his buffs up and probably strike him down twice over... (remains to be seen as TIM levels up obviously...)
McJarvis 01-23-07, 05:08 PM	Well, McJarvis - if I had continued to use the Countess Ural, you might've seen something similar to yours as well, just with the added bonuses of being a paladin as well (divine might, smite evil) combined with the power of Enlarge Person (shared with the mount), Bull's Strength and even invisibility... But yes - Sir Valkin would be able to close with TIM before he gets his buffs up and probably strike him down twice over... (remains to be seen as TIM levels up obviously...) Well...unless Sir Valkin had see invisibility early in life, TIM would likely use that invisibility scroll to close on such a dangerous opponent. That aside, TIM has high intimidate that removes most mounted opponents from the competition. (though a paladin will provide a challenge...) We'll see what happens as TIM levels, though :) I admit, TIM is not one of my "thought banks" that try to defeat every single possible opponent. He is more a conglomeration of buffs/effects that I've always wanted to see work together on a mounted opponent. edit-> What was the Countess Ural? The Druid/Wizard Mystic Theurge?
TelinArtho 01-23-07, 05:20 PM	I just checked - at ECL3 (Fighter 1/Paladin 2) - you certainly could have intimidated Foreman out of the arena. At ECL4, Fighter 1/Paladin 3 - Foreman's Courage Value would be (1 + 1 + 4 = 6). With your current check on intimidate at +14, that's not enough to scare him out of the arena. Frightened for a few rounds though would be annoying... At ECL6, I don't think you can intimidate Overseer before I summon him and if I have already summoned him, I always have Foreman as a "backup" mount - yes - I would be reduced in speed a bit - but the mounted portion still comes into play. I don't know what his CR would be - as after he has received bonus HD, he clearly isn't CR 2 anymore... As to invisibility - Sir Valkin had that licked as of ECL6 as well. Sir Valkin has his weaknesses - but I wouldn't try to test them while he's on horseback...
McJarvis 01-23-07, 05:23 PM	As to invisibility - Sir Valkin had that licked as of ECL6 as well. At ECL 6 TIM will be getting Fly & a cohort :D Though admittedly, my plans for higher levels go along the lines of: "Well, he's a full spell caster...so I'm sure I'll be able to figure something out that'll work good." Anyway, it's all just word games until I get there. I hope it's soon! :) PS-> Rubby vs Torin just wrapped up. Though I've seen poison radically end fights plenty of times, it always is someone unsettling when it does. edit-> PSS-> Also note that Sir Valkin does NOT have a cool picture, which is obviously necessary for any good build. :)
McJarvis 01-23-07, 05:27 PM	Does Torin get 3 poison buffs as "ongoing effects"? I can never remember whether we allow that or not...
c00lz3 01-23-07, 05:31 PM	I only have one problem with my fight. I could of made heal checks avoiding bleeding to death as per my tactics I have a +10 heal check.
TelinArtho 01-23-07, 05:34 PM	Does Torin get 3 poison buffs as "ongoing effects"? I can never remember whether we allow that or not... As long as it is within the cycle - yes.
hogarth 01-23-07, 05:40 PM	I only have one problem with my fight. I could of made heal checks avoiding bleeding to death as per my tactics I have a +10 heal check. I think the issue is that you can't bandage your wounds and fight with a torch at the same time, so Sjiggie picked fighting over bandaging; you'd need to make a new Heal check every round. On the other hand, maybe your psicrystal could have made the Heal checks for you, but (a) it's not clear if you need hands to use the Heal skill and (b) you didn't mention that in your tactics.
Etiquette_Gnome 01-23-07, 05:45 PM	Except that being exposed to it yourself does not prevent the poison from being used on the weapon. It still gets coated, you just may accidentally poison yourself while doing so, which means squat if the poison cannot affect you. Zevox That's the thing though, exposure to a single dose of poison uses up the poison, whether or not it does anything to do you is a seperate matter (auto-Fort saves). Just because he's immune to poison doesn't mystically grant him the ability to handle the poison without any chance of exposure. This means that any and all poison he applies will have a chance to be wasted as it enters his immune body.
McJarvis 01-23-07, 05:46 PM	That's the thing though, exposure to a single dose of poison uses up the poison, whether or not it does anything to do you is a seperate matter (auto-Fort saves). Just because he's immune to poison doesn't mystically grant him the ability to handle the poison without any chance of exposure. This means that any and all poison he applies will have a chance to be wasted as it enters his immune body. I was thinking this as well: but change the format a bit. If a poisoned sword is used to sunder something(objects are immune to poison, obviously), is the poison used up? I'm unsure...so I'd be willing to tip my hat to Zevox as a more experienced player...
MindWandererB 01-23-07, 05:47 PM	That's the thing though, exposure to a single dose of poison uses up the poison, whether or not it does anything to do you is a seperate matter (auto-Fort saves). Just because he's immune to poison doesn't mystically grant him the ability to handle the poison without any chance of exposure. This means that any and all poison he applies will have a chance to be wasted as it enters his immune body. ATM, we have a precedent that poison-immune characters can't risk poisoning themselves, and thus can't use up the poison by accident. Unless that rule is overturned (and I understand your argument), that's the way it stands.
Sjiggie 01-23-07, 05:49 PM	I only have one problem with my fight. I could of made heal checks avoiding bleeding to death as per my tactics I have a +10 heal check. I made you attack the swarm because every round you heal you also get a bleeding wound back so you would have to get rid of the swarm first before a heal check would have worked to stop you from bleeding. With your levitate up you could move only 10ft along the ceiling (half base movement) and on the ground the hungry wolf was still waiting for you so you would have to fight 2 opponents. I don't see a other way to let you benefit from the heal checks since you couldn't defeat the swarm in time.
c00lz3 01-23-07, 06:29 PM	I made you attack the swarm because every round you heal you also get a bleeding wound back so you would have to get rid of the swarm first before a heal check would have worked to stop you from bleeding. With your levitate up you could move only 10ft along the ceiling (half base movement) and on the ground the hungry wolf was still waiting for you so you would have to fight 2 opponents. I don't see a other way to let you benefit from the heal checks since you couldn't defeat the swarm in time. okay but what about my movement why do I just stay in one place for so many rounds from round 10. I could of moved toward the center area taking 4 or 5 rounds and I can move 10ft down to hide behind a statue to break los without fear of wolf attacks. The fact that I could of moved away and have the swarm attack the wolf is important, in round 10 for example if I moved toward the center to try and break los the swarm would of attacked the wolf.
Zevox 01-23-07, 10:27 PM	@ Hrothmund, Maraxus, Telin: To make sure you three know too, Mitza's request to have the team fight held over looks like its going through. Zevox
Zevox 01-23-07, 10:31 PM	I was thinking this as well: but change the format a bit. If a poisoned sword is used to sunder something(objects are immune to poison, obviously), is the poison used up? I'm unsure...so I'd be willing to tip my hat to Zevox as a more experienced player... Eh, might not want to be quite deferring to me that much in this regard, since I'm just repeating how it was explained to me. It does make sense if you ask me though - the weapon gets coated, you just get exposed to part of that poison as it is. Much like in theory sundering something with a poisoned blade would cause it to lose some of the poison in the realistic, physical sense, but shouldn't use it up as game rules go (I think). The poison isn't used up until its struck deliberately into a creature's flesh, if that helps envision it in RL terms. Zevox
Etiquette_Gnome 01-23-07, 10:50 PM	As a more relevant question, does this mean I can coat a sword with poison and attack a creature immune to poison without having to worry about losing the poison until I finally attack something that would actually have to make a save? I only ask this to fully understand it, since I'm discovering whole new worlds of information regarding stuff like tower shields. And let me tell you, I still find it weird that there's a 5% chance of jamming poison into open wounds when I apply it to a round lead ball (well, 5% with a DC 15 Reflex save, but still).
Abyssal Stalker 01-24-07, 12:55 AM	I do have one issue with it: in round 11, Eraca could dive Loddick. She has enough height, and between the height and horizontal distance to Loddick enough to dive. Even though Loddick is behind the hedge, because Eraca is flying, the hedge is not in her way. That probably won't affect the fight, though - it'd need to be a crit to do so, and it wasn't. Also, in the wrap-up, you forgot Eraca's used scroll of fly. Beyond that, looks good. Though I'm finding I like Ego Whip less every time I run up against Loddick... Zevox Eraca couldn't dive because of the hedge. It's just like Loddick would be behind a corner (the hedges are 5ft high). You see him but you can't charge because of the corner.
Zevox 01-24-07, 01:12 AM	Eraca couldn't dive because of the hedge. It's just like Loddick would be behind a corner (the hedges are 5ft high). You see him but you can't charge because of the corner. Um, if the corner isn't inhibiting my movement, yes I could. In this case, the hedge isn't either - she could end hovering right over it and still be able to attack Loddick. Zevox
Sjiggie 01-24-07, 04:46 AM	okay but what about my movement why do I just stay in one place for so many rounds from round 10. I could of moved toward the center area taking 4 or 5 rounds and I can move 10ft down to hide behind a statue to break los without fear of wolf attacks. The fact that I could of moved away and have the swarm attack the wolf is important, in round 10 for example if I moved toward the center to try and break los the swarm would of attacked the wolf. You're movement was only 10 ft a round and when you're 20ft from the ground where the wolf is you're still gonna be the closest target. You simply didn't have the speed to get rid of the swarm to attack the wolf since you would have been closer to the swarm at all times. The swarm also have blindsense so even if you hide behind a statue the swarm could still feel your presence and now where you are.
hogarth 01-24-07, 08:22 AM	Um, if the corner isn't inhibiting my movement, yes I could. In this case, the hedge isn't either - she could end hovering right over it and still be able to attack Loddick. Zevox Here's the relevant line from the charging rules: Second, if any line from your starting space to the ending space passes through a square that blocks movement, slows movement, or contains a creature (even an ally), you can't charge. So if any line from your space passes through the hedge, you can't charge.
Zevox 01-24-07, 08:44 AM	Here's the relevant line from the charging rules: So if any line from your space passes through the hedge, you can't charge. Aye, I'm aware. But if you're flying and your end space is the space above the hedge, as it could be to attack someone behind it, clearly no line from your space passes through the hedge. Ergo, you could dive in that situation. Zevox
hogarth 01-24-07, 08:48 AM	Aye, I'm aware. But if you're flying and your end space is the space above the hedge, as it could be to attack someone behind it, clearly no line from your space passes through the hedge. Ergo, you could dive in that situation. I haven't read the fight in question, but the square above your opponent is probably not "the closest space from which you can attack the opponent".
Zevox 01-24-07, 08:52 AM	I haven't read the fight in question, but the square above your opponent is probably not "the closest space from which you can attack the opponent". If I'm flying at a high enough altitude to potentially dive them, sure it is. Simple 3D movement - you can attack an opponent when adjacent with 5' reach, and being adjacent above them still works (3D movement basically raises the number of "adjacent" spaces to a character from 8 to 26 - 8 on the same level, 9 above and below them. I'd just be using one of those above them). Zevox
hogarth 01-24-07, 08:59 AM	If I'm flying at a high enough altitude to potentially dive them, sure it is. Simple 3D movement - you can attack an opponent when adjacent with 5' reach, and being adjacent above them still works (3D movement basically raises the number of "adjacent" spaces to a character from 8 to 26 - 8 on the same level, 9 above and below them. I'd just be using one of those above them). Zevox It still works, but unless you're directly on top of your opponent (or coming from the non-hedge direction) then you're having to move one more space horizontally to be on top of them rather than on top of the hedge (from where you can also attack), yes? Here's a crude diagram: http://server3.uploadit.org/files/cwooff-diagram.JPG Which path is shortest? Obviously there's something simple that I'm not getting here.
Macbrea 01-24-07, 09:14 AM	If a person is behind a hedge they cannot be charged except by straight down. For a very good reason. http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=arena;a=Name,M,28,55;b= othe,M,24,62;los=24,62,28,55,1;style=s You must have a clear path toward the opponent, and nothing can hinder your movement (such as difficult terrain or obstacles). Here’s what it means to have a clear path. First, you must move to the closest space from which you can attack the opponent. (If this space is occupied or otherwise blocked, you can’t charge.) Second, if any line from your starting space to the ending space passes through a square that blocks movement, slows movement, or contains a creature (even an ally), you can’t charge. (Helpless creatures don’t stop a charge.) You will note that you cannot draw a line from anywhere on that block to anywhere at his foot closest to the hedge without going through the cover. Therefore you cannot charge.
TelinArtho 01-24-07, 10:05 AM	@ Hrothmund, Maraxus, Telin: To make sure you three know too, Mitza's request to have the team fight held over looks like its going through. Zevox I kind of figured as much. I have waited to edit my character just in case.
Zevox 01-24-07, 11:44 AM	The problem is, I think, you're not thinking of it in 3D. The hedge is only 5' in height, so it does not exist or impede movement above the ground-level spaces (which are themselves 5' x 5' x5'). Therefore, charging to the space above the hedge is perfectly possible, and permits attacking the foe (due to being adjacent to them). On a 2D map it appears you cannot draw a line without passing through the hedge, but if you think of it in 3D you're going over the hedge, never through it, so its not an obstacle. Theres no reason you'd have to move to directly over the target's head. They'd probably get cover from the hedge still in technical terms, due to it acting sort of like a wall corner below you, but its perfectly legal by the rules you've quoted. @ Macbrea - Also note that it says you need a clear path to the end space (aka the nearest space you can attack them from), not to their space itself. That may be a source of confusion here too. Zevox
hogarth 01-24-07, 11:54 AM	Theres no reason you'd have to move to directly over the target's head. They'd probably get cover from the hedge still in technical terms, due to it acting sort of like a wall corner below you, but its perfectly legal by the rules you've quoted. Ah -- I see the simple point I was getting stuck on. I was interpreting the phrase "ending space" as the space your enemy is in, not the end point of your movement. It had nothing to do with 2D vs. 3D movement.
Abyssal Stalker 01-24-07, 01:23 PM	The problem is, I think, you're not thinking of it in 3D. The hedge is only 5' in height, so it does not exist or impede movement above the ground-level spaces (which are themselves 5' x 5' x5'). Therefore, charging to the space above the hedge is perfectly possible, and permits attacking the foe (due to being adjacent to them). On a 2D map it appears you cannot draw a line without passing through the hedge, but if you think of it in 3D you're going over the hedge, never through it, so its not an obstacle. Theres no reason you'd have to move to directly over the target's head. They'd probably get cover from the hedge still in technical terms, due to it acting sort of like a wall corner below you, but its perfectly legal by the rules you've quoted. @ Macbrea - Also note that it says you need a clear path to the end space (aka the nearest space you can attack them from), not to their space itself. That may be a source of confusion here too. Zevox I'm not getting your point. This can be considered in a 2D manner quite easily. Just look things in x,z -coordinates, like you were looking from the side. First, think about this in a situation, where both RED and BLUE are moving normally on the ground. Can BLUE charge RED? According to my understanding, the answer is no. http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=arena;a=Name,M,39,38;b= Name,M,36,43 Now turn the situation 90o, so that BLUE is Eraca and RED is Loddick. I don't understand why that situation would differ from the first, because everything is basically 5x5x5ft cubes. Anyway, this won't have any effect on the fight because the hit wasn't critical. You hit with that attack, but no way would it deal enough damage to take Loddick down.
TelinArtho 01-24-07, 01:28 PM	Abyssal - Zevox is right. The charge movement must all be free of obstacles - but it says nothing about preventing a charge if the opponent has cover. So in a situation like the above, if we treat blue at (0,0) - and red at (3,-5), the charge movement passes through to the closest square (2,-4) - and all of that is unhindered.
Abyssal Stalker 01-24-07, 01:32 PM	Abyssal - Zevox is right. The charge movement must all be free of obstacles - but it says nothing about preventing a charge if the opponent has cover. So in a situation like the above, if we treat blue at (0,0) - and red at (3,-5), the charge movement passes through to the closest square (2,-4) - and all of that is unhindered. So you can charge creatures that have cover? That's new to me. Then it is my mistake.
MindWandererB 01-24-07, 01:49 PM	Right--as long as you don't have to move through or around that cover, you can charge. In AS's and Macbrea's illustrations, a charge is possible. Let me take this opportunity to point out that there is a contradition in the rules. They say that you must move directly toward your opponent, but also that you must attack from the closest square from which you can attack. Take this example: http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=arena;a=Ogre,L,12,34,16 ,33,Ogre w/reach: close;b=Vict,M,20,29,Hapless victim;c=Ogre,L,12,34,16,32,Ogre w/reach: direct The red line represents the closest spot from which the ogre can attack with a reach weapon--he moves 20 feet to get there. The green represents the route he'd have to take to move directly toward his opponent, but he has to move 25 feet to attack that way. I think the spirit is that you have to move directly toward your opponent, and then attack immediately upon being able to. This means that given an angle like this: http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=arena;a=Ogre,M,12,34,9, 29;b=Vict,M,8,28;c=Ogre,M,15,30,9,28 Red can charge, but green cannot, because the most direct line between green and his target puts him inside a wall. He can't take an even slightly less direct route (to where red ended up).
c00lz3 01-24-07, 01:52 PM	You're movement was only 10 ft a round and when you're 20ft from the ground where the wolf is you're still gonna be the closest target. You simply didn't have the speed to get rid of the swarm to attack the wolf since you would have been closer to the swarm at all times. The swarm also have blindsense so even if you hide behind a statue the swarm could still feel your presence and now where you are. okay becuase my tactics relied on summon swarm going away after I break los. It moves into my square then it should dissipate unless..... Can you maintain consentration on summon swarm without line of sight or line of effect? With any spell for that matter?
MindWandererB 01-24-07, 01:58 PM	No, you can't, but I think the problem was that you weren't able to break LOS with your limited speed. Or rather, you could break it for a moment, but then your opponent would re-establish it, then the swarm would move into your space again. Since LOS was never broken between the swarm and its caster, it never went away.
hogarth 01-24-07, 02:10 PM	No, you can't, but I think the problem was that you weren't able to break LOS with your limited speed. Why would you need line of effect to concentrate on a spell? All I see about line of effect is: You must have a clear line of effect to any target that you cast a spell on or to any space in which you wish to create an effect. You must have a clear line of effect to the point of origin of any spell you cast. It doesn't say anything about needing to keep line of effect once a spell has already been cast. Is there a rule that says so?
MindWandererB 01-24-07, 02:17 PM	Why would you need line of effect to concentrate on a spell? All I see about line of effect is: It doesn't say anything about needing to keep line of effect once a spell has already been cast. Is there a rule that says so? Hm. We've been playing that way, but I can't find it....
c00lz3 01-24-07, 05:16 PM	No, you can't, but I think the problem was that you weren't able to break LOS with your limited speed. Or rather, you could break it for a moment, but then your opponent would re-establish it, then the swarm would move into your space again. Since LOS was never broken between the swarm and its caster, it never went away. rounds 10-14 I could move behind the center statue drop down 15ft break los and If I am over the lava negate the wolf , not to mention if I did stay closer to the main area the wolf needs to jump over the lava to reach me. Moving around I could also get a Aoo from the swarm every round.
TheMagister 01-25-07, 03:23 PM	PS-> Rubby vs Torin just wrapped up. Though I've seen poison radically end fights plenty of times, it always is someone unsettling when it does. Thanks for running the fight, McJ! I hope your emergency cleared up okay. On a more serious note, I have some requests: 1) May I please have map coordinates (at least) or actual maps to look at? 2) Rubi was supposed to wait up to 5 rounds to see how Toron handled crossing the stream. Instead he waited until he SAW Toron, and then jumped right to him (which was stupid!). 3) regardless of #2, Toron was obviously holding his quarterstaff when he was seen by Rubi, so Rubi should've drawn/manifested Force Screen per tactics. This would obviate the hit in Round 9 (Toron would need a 25 until round 29) and the blown save in the same. I understand the time crunch you were in because of RL intervention. However, since Rubi was not set to ready, I am more than willing to petition to hold this one over in order to see it done according to my tactics. TM
McJarvis 01-25-07, 06:21 PM	Thanks for running the fight, McJ! I hope your emergency cleared up okay. On a more serious note, I have some requests: 1) May I please have map coordinates (at least) or actual maps to look at? 2) Rubi was supposed to wait up to 5 rounds to see how Toron handled crossing the stream. Instead he waited until he SAW Toron, and then jumped right to him (which was stupid!). 3) regardless of #2, Toron was obviously holding his quarterstaff when he was seen by Rubi, so Rubi should've drawn/manifested Force Screen per tactics. This would obviate the hit in Round 9 (Toron would need a 25 until round 29) and the blown save in the same. I understand the time crunch you were in because of RL intervention. However, since Rubi was not set to ready, I am more than willing to petition to hold this one over in order to see it done according to my tactics. TM H'mm...perhaps I did misinterpret your tactics...but all the same, the save would just carry over to when he eventually DID hit you. It's a little late to go back and change it...and I doubt you'll go the entire fight without getting hit. (since in the case of us already knowing the result of the saving throw, as soon as you get hit by him you die.)
TheMagister 01-26-07, 09:33 PM	Well, do me a favor and roll some rounds of attacks. We'll see if Rubicanti can drop Toron before Toron gets lucky. If he does, fine. If not, I want a holdover and an edit that includes all of Rubi's tactics (the waiting at the stream, most of all...if Rubi stuns him while he's on the log or stones, things tilt even more in Rubi's favor).
TheMagister 01-28-07, 06:43 PM	Bump.