Post/Author/DateTime	Post
TelinArtho 01-04-06, 02:13 PM	Good morning all. This the thread to discuss this week's fights. Usual rules apply (play nice or else...). The rules of Gladius can be found here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=448520). Please take note of the Community Vote (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=552366) thread. Not only is it a place to voice your vote on a particular subject (that has been initiated by Cerebus), it is also a great resource for frequently asked questions. There are two active questions about tower shields and the cost of items requiring xp (powerstones/tattoos in particular). The deadline is in about 1 hour and 45 minutes - so finish up!
Altaris13 01-04-06, 02:27 PM	No fights for me this week. I should've known better to take any fights this last week, let alone max. Bleh. Bleh bleh bleh. I look forward to facing a new challenger with Thelgar. I can think of a few people I'd like to face off against especially.
Snommelp 01-04-06, 02:37 PM	This week, I was going to create a cleric that specialized in raising the dead. Then I remembered that he wouldn't be able to use most of the undead under his command; the most I could get him by HD would be 4 HD (two medium zombies) at CR 1 or by number three skeletons at CR 1. But that's neither here nor there. I'm only nine credits away from bringing in my level 11 character! Hurry up and get to the ECL 11 league, everyone! I need opponents!
Warclone 01-04-06, 02:43 PM	What do you do if your PL hasn't finished your fight for the previous week?
TelinArtho 01-04-06, 02:48 PM	It gets pushed another week.
Usurpator 01-04-06, 02:58 PM	I think I am going to have only one gladiator fight in the arena this week, to take the pressure of the Pitlords a bit. I would still like it if there was a way a gladiator can just use the entire week to train animals as a main activity instead of as a free activity. This week I have Nexa crafting something and selling some random magic item just to make use of the free activity that I can get with the crafting to train her Dire Bat animal companion. Sigh.... I guess that I you can spend 3 hours each day training one animal as a free activity, you would be able to train up to three animals if you could do is as main activity.
SoulLord 01-04-06, 03:39 PM	@usurpator i can see tracking complications to what you suggest. how about crafting then or all the other skills to earn money? also is it me or is only Vandelar ready to fight in the ECL 8 league?
Vathelokai 01-04-06, 03:42 PM	@usurpator i can see tracking complications to what you suggest. how about crafting then or all the other skills to earn money? also is it me or is only Vandelar ready to fight in the ECL 8 league? Saffron will fight you. I just don't have her active right now because of credit costs. *EDIT* Just set her to active.
Snommelp 01-04-06, 03:46 PM	@usurpator i can see tracking complications to what you suggest. how about crafting then or all the other skills to earn money? also is it me or is only Vandelar ready to fight in the ECL 8 league? Grik and Sam from the ELC 6 league can buddy-up against Vandalar! Barbarian and Monk against Necromancer, how can you refuse?
Usurpator 01-04-06, 03:56 PM	@usurpator i can see tracking complications to what you suggest. how about crafting then or all the other skills to earn money? also is it me or is only Vandelar ready to fight in the ECL 8 league? There are tracking complications regardless. What kind of tracking complications do you fear? Crafting as sole activity can already be done, why not training? Other skills to earn money obviously not. Anything that earns money should only be possible in conjuction with fighting. Training animals or crafting can never earn money, so it should be doable as sole activity.
Vathelokai 01-04-06, 04:25 PM	So we are past deadline, yes? I'll start writing my Saffron vs. Vandalar tactics now then.
TelinArtho 01-04-06, 04:33 PM	@usurpator i can see tracking complications to what you suggest. how about crafting then or all the other skills to earn money? also is it me or is only Vandelar ready to fight in the ECL 8 league? Well since 3 of the ECL8 characters are still held up in a fight, it kind of makes the field smaller. Of course, I'm only bitter because Daeren's quest is postponed AGAIN... If only he had won his fight against Saffron...
SoulLord 01-04-06, 04:36 PM	So we are past deadline, yes? I'll start writing my Saffron vs. Vandalar tactics now then. It should be an interesting fight if we are paired; perhaps we both end up fighting in different leagues. a quick question tough I notice ECL 8 [4HD +2LA +1Rogue +1 Horizon Walker] and Refl +6 [+4race +2rogue +0 dex] so which is it?
Vathelokai 01-04-06, 04:50 PM	Well since 3 of the ECL8 characters are still held up in a fight, it kind of makes the field smaller. Of course, I'm only bitter because Daeren's quest is postponed AGAIN... If only he had won his fight against Saffron... Completely unexpected irony... I was thinking of having Saffron invite Daeren on a dragon hunting expedition, as an appology for the arena fight. Saffron isn't much in the damage department and would need some backup. What kind of quest is Daeren going on?
Vathelokai 01-04-06, 04:52 PM	It should be an interesting fight if we are paired; perhaps we both end up fighting in different leagues. a quick question tough I notice ECL 8 [4HD +2LA +1Rogue +1 Horizon Walker] and Refl +6 [+4race +2rogue +0 dex] so which is it? ECL 8 = 4 racial HD, +1 rogue, +1 Horizon walker, +2 level adjustment. Reflex save 6 = +4 dragon HD, +2 rogue lv., +0 horizon walker, +0 dex The reflex save is the total modifier, not the levels that went into it.
TelinArtho 01-04-06, 04:53 PM	Daeren is going on a quest to save a desert city from a blue dragon. He is questing with a new character in the ECL8 league (hasn't fought in the arena): Morgan MacNiven (Myrridin) - an eldritch knight archer. It should be an extremely difficult quest and both of us are expecting to die. However, until I am able to get the funds to purchase the items specific to that quest - I keep getting delayed...
Vathelokai 01-04-06, 04:58 PM	Daeren is going on a quest to save a desert city from a blue dragon. He is questing with a new character in the ECL8 league (hasn't fought in the arena): Morgan MacNiven (Myrridin) - an eldritch knight archer. It should be an extremely difficult quest and both of us are expecting to die. However, until I am able to get the funds to purchase the items specific to that quest - I keep getting delayed... Saffron would love to tag along, if you're interested in a 3 person quest. If not, then she'll just come by TLT and be obnoxious for a while anyway.
TelinArtho 01-04-06, 05:06 PM	Well, I suppose that's up to the questlord (Waywreth) and Myrridin. I'm fine with it. Just so you know it is an ECL11 quest I believe.
TelinArtho 01-04-06, 05:20 PM	Deadline has come and past. In case anyone was still worried about a lack of pitlords, here's the numbers for this week (rough estimate): Level 3 30 gladiators (15) Level 4 14 gladiators (7) Level 5 17 gladiators (9) Level 6 9 gladiators (5) Level 7 4 gladiators (2) Level 8 (3) +2 gladiators (3) 41 total fights Pitlords: 36 + 2 (MQ only) + 3 Max If all goes as appears - I should get 1-2 fights... Of course - if Cat puts up a whole bunch of those 3+player fights - there could be substantially fewer fights total.
Altaris13 01-04-06, 05:37 PM	Heh, I guess we inspired some people. That, or the holidays are over. :D And Mitza! Goodness, five fights? A brave soul to just dive right in. Impressive, and you did a good job with Thelgar last week. I hopes to get you again this week. If so, you can probably use the same tactics. :P
Ariel23 01-04-06, 05:50 PM	:dice: I'm willing to try a fight this week. Last time I tried to PM the Pitlords the box was full (I CC'd Caterane, as well).
MitzaVolchenko 01-04-06, 05:59 PM	Heh, I guess we inspired some people. That, or the holidays are over. :D And Mitza! Goodness, five fights? A brave soul to just dive right in. Impressive, and you did a good job with Thelgar last week. I hopes to get you again this week. If so, you can probably use the same tactics. :P Best way to learn the rules is to run the fights and look them up as I go or drive Macbrea (I blame him for beinghere at all) crazy with stupid questions. I am hoping to get tactics quickly so that I can rerun anything I completely nerf. Regardless I need to learn the rules better as I have jsut startedintothe wonderful world of Living Blackmoor and while I don't care f my local DM nerfs things, if I am at a paid con playing, I don't want to be either delaying the game looking up rules or killed by a bad rules call. Besides, volunteering for more seemed like a good way to reduce the number of multiplayer fights. Those seem to be the most messed up and end up being the latest posted which inconveniences everyone.
Altaris13 01-04-06, 06:09 PM	Best way to learn the rules is to run the fights and look them up as I go or drive Macbrea (I blame him for beinghere at all) crazy with stupid questions. I am hoping to get tactics quickly so that I can rerun anything I completely nerf. Regardless I need to learn the rules better as I have jsut startedintothe wonderful world of Living Blackmoor and while I don't care f my local DM nerfs things, if I am at a paid con playing, I don't want to be either delaying the game looking up rules or killed by a bad rules call. Besides, volunteering for more seemed like a good way to reduce the number of multiplayer fights. Those seem to be the most messed up and end up being the latest posted which inconveniences everyone. True, very true. Thanks to Macbrea for bringing another cool person. :D Heck, I've DM'ed since 3.5 came out, and played for far, far too many years. Trust me, we are always learning. It is insanely difficult to learn the rules by just 'reading' them. You have to /use/ them actively, and I really find that just participating here on any level provides an insight to the rules that most TT games will never attain.
Altaris13 01-04-06, 06:21 PM	Hey Telin! Looks like you get to face Thelgar again. If I read the rolls right, Valkin's streak is about to end. ;) Saves me a credit for the challenge.
nightbanegod 01-04-06, 06:22 PM	just out of curiosity.... what is the official ruling on what can and cannot be done with a towershield... that way i will customize my tactics accordingly....just for clarification....
SoulLord 01-04-06, 06:26 PM	just out of curiosity.... what is the official ruling on what can and cannot be done with a towershield... that way i will customize my tactics accordingly....just for clarification.... The Way I see it you use a standard action to get total cover (as per the FAQ) you can use a Move action before or after; this does not cause you to lose your cover If they attack you from the sides or rear to where you put the shield facing; you only get the shield bonus instead.
NiQil 01-04-06, 06:26 PM	just out of curiosity.... what is the official ruling on what can and cannot be done with a towershield... that way i will customize my tactics accordingly....just for clarification.... The only thing that I know of that is restricted is readying an action to take total cover vs attacks, which violates the "no readying to dodge incoming attacks" rule. You can still take total cover as normal, you just can't ready an action to do so against attacks. Youcan still use it as a shield normally, as well.
Macbrea 01-04-06, 06:28 PM	Marcus Tallfellow (Macbrea) miniquests for something: x [Miniquest] I am hoping to have that as a full quest for killing someone for the assassins guild (Prestige class requrements) and joining EHTC. Altaris13 had volunteered to run it. But, I need to make sure with him that he was going to do such. If not, I will need to hunt down another Questlord that is willing to run a slightly dark Quest.
Altaris13 01-04-06, 06:31 PM	Marcus Tallfellow (Macbrea) miniquests for something: x [Miniquest] I am hoping to have that as a full quest for killing someone for the assassins guild (Prestige class requrements) and joining EHTC. Altaris13 had volunteered to run it. But, I need to make sure with him that he was going to do such. If not, I will need to hunt down another Questlord that is willing to run a slightly dark Quest. Provided that you join the EHTC, I'd be happy to. Iced also volunteered, and he is a more experienced questlord so I'll defer to him if he would prefer to run it.
nightbanegod 01-04-06, 06:49 PM	The Way I see it you use a standard action to get total cover (as per the FAQ) you can use a Move action before or after; this does not cause you to lose your cover If they attack you from the sides or rear to where you put the shield facing; you only get the shield bonus instead. i should still get a +4 partial cover bonus if they attack from the sides...
Snommelp 01-04-06, 06:54 PM	Pairings are up! My tactics will be late (for me); I've got people coming over in about five minutes.
SoulLord 01-04-06, 06:56 PM	i should still get a +4 partial cover bonus if they attack from the sides... But... do you get the partial cover ac bonus of +4 * the Shield ac bonus of +4 Both the partial cover ac bonus & the shield ac bonus for +8 ac * you foe would also get this bonus to ac against you
Snommelp 01-04-06, 06:59 PM	I just noticed a rather amusing typo... I somehow listed Hennan as having 9 spell levels per fight. He should have 3.
Luni 01-04-06, 07:14 PM	@Huan: Talari tactics and Roleplaying stuff sent.
Pitlords 01-04-06, 07:16 PM	PAIRINGS DONE Credit Changes: +10: Huan +6: Caterane, Iced +5: KingUther, MitzaVolchenko +4: DTFarstar, Warclone +3: Book5, Kaigan, Luni, Macbrea, Snommelp +2: SauroGrenom, Begferdeth, Dr.Funk, Maraxus, TelinArtho, Altaris13 +1: Ayrynthyn, Ariel23, Cerebus13, Mal-2, Papapeperoni, Pittbull, Skojar, Turin, Zevox +0: Usurpator, Vathelokai, Dracazar -1: Gonbow, Stormwind, NiQil Send me a PM if you want to know your credit breakdown. Like last week, the ECL 3 league contains only All vs All fights in order to level some to the higher leagues faster. Remember that Free Activities are now posted by the Pitlord in the fight summary to which you have to link it. Special Thanks to TelinArtho, Kaigan, and Iced for running <max> fights. Have fun! Cat
Macbrea 01-04-06, 07:22 PM	Ahm, did we get credits for last week? You never actually got around to doing them. errr, nevermind, I think they are in that list.
Caterane 01-04-06, 07:34 PM	I am pretty sure I've assigned them.
Sindorin 01-04-06, 07:42 PM	"Defining the Enemy" anyone? I would rather have the quest count as starting whenever we start it, if that is okay... Saying that there is a timeframe for something when we never made a timeframe for it would be a bit forward, don't you think? I wanted to post to get it bumped up, but I figured that King Uther should post intro first. Basically, what I am saying is that the questlog should probably be adjusted since it was never started last week and say it starts this week, or whenever we get around to starting it.
^Rayne^ 01-04-06, 07:42 PM	Krayko's Tactics sent to Warclone for All vs All fight Krayko (^Rayne^) vs Weiniete (Skojar) vs Amaryllis (Snommelp) vs Anakala (TelinArtho)
DTFarstar 01-04-06, 07:46 PM	Uhg.... this week looks bad for my people, I'm almost tempted to just send in surrender tactics. On the upside, Ariel23, it looks like Trixie can beat the crap out of Challak if she wants, will save of +0. Neither of my ECL 3 characters is really set up for these mass battles, especially my wizard, luckily he just needs like a little under 400 exp to hit level 4. Challak is just not going to do so well. I really wish Skate did not have a weight limit, it would allow him to actually catch spell-casters once in awhile.
Sindorin 01-04-06, 07:47 PM	Looks like I wasn't around in time to catch Aranor's fight from last week and edit him for this week. He is now edited, and if anyone from the level 6 league would like to be paired, Aranor is available... or people from other leagues, that works too...
MitzaVolchenko 01-04-06, 08:00 PM	I am disappointed with the continuation of the multiplayer madness in ECL 3. ECL3 is where new players start out. They have no clue what to expect (see Troublewolf's fight last week with Sven) and then get overwhlemed with situations that have no solutions. It doesn't help them level up. It doesn't help them learn the ropes. It doesn't improve their outlook on CoCo. Add into that the fact that in multiplayer fights there is a greater chance of errors which requirecorrection...well you getthe point. I personally volunteered for extra fights so that there wouldn't be a shortage of pitlords to handle the load. I have two fights this week. I managed 3 with few or no complaints last week. If I had been handed 3 more ECL 3 fights, there would be three people that would be looking at winner shares and be closer to leveling up. The fights would all be up by Sunday evening, and everyone would have time to review them and request corrections. On the pitlording side of things. My fighters please PM tactics as soon as possible. I'll get your fights up and running as soon as I have the tactics for both parties.
waywreth 01-04-06, 08:04 PM	Vathoki (Guildmaster of TAO) said he'd do Histal's Mini-Quest. I put in subject line but it was missed. Should he do it or should Book5 do it as assigned? Thanks,
Macbrea 01-04-06, 08:13 PM	Mektos will make Ch'Chilli pay for that loss! Tactics sent.
Turin 01-04-06, 08:18 PM	Ivangar the Exile (Turin) vs Hassan Sabbah (Vathelokai):Mal-2 My tactics are PM'd to Mal-2, but I noticed Hassan has been paired even though he has Miniquest noted on his character sheet.
DTFarstar 01-04-06, 08:28 PM	I've had 2 hours sleep in the last 48, and my head hurts really bad, Sleepy time is now, I'll write and PM out tactics for my characters tommorrow(Thursday) morning.
NiQil 01-04-06, 08:58 PM	Uhg.... this week looks bad for my people, I'm almost tempted to just send in surrender tactics. On the upside, Ariel23, it looks like Trixie can beat the crap out of Challak if she wants, will save of +0. Neither of my ECL 3 characters is really set up for these mass battles, especially my wizard, luckily he just needs like a little under 400 exp to hit level 4. Challak is just not going to do so well. I really wish Skate did not have a weight limit, it would allow him to actually catch spell-casters once in awhile. Skate, when manifested on yourself (from either memory, powerstone or tattoo) has no weight limit. The weight limit only applies when manifesting on objects. This was part of the rationalization that went into making Skate tattoos cost double just like every other personal tattoo.
Luni 01-04-06, 09:00 PM	@TelinArtho: Simple tactics for Lunoria sent. Remember to have fun!
Mal-2 01-04-06, 09:22 PM	Ivangar the Exile (Turin) vs Hassan Sabbah (Vathelokai):Mal-2 My tactics are PM'd to Mal-2 Tactics recieved from Turin
TelinArtho 01-04-06, 09:46 PM	@Cat, Book5 - I've already started Dr. Hobo's miniquest. I will PM accordingly.
Huan 01-04-06, 09:55 PM	@Luni Your speedy tactics and RP received, thank you very much.
TelinArtho 01-04-06, 10:04 PM	Hey Telin! Looks like you get to face Thelgar again. If I read the rolls right, Valkin's streak is about to end. ;) Saves me a credit for the challenge. For what its worth, I've been surprised that he's been so successful - but it is less to do with the strength of the build and more to do with either ill-prepared opponents or simply failing tactics on their part (like starting in the front area so I can charge or at least close in the first round. Good luck to you. @my pitlords - I will be sending tactics tomorrow.
TelinArtho 01-04-06, 10:19 PM	Delaria was not supposed to be paired - I will be sending a PM to NBG, Papapepperoni and Cat about it.
Altaris13 01-04-06, 10:21 PM	For what its worth, I've been surprised that he's been so successful - but it is less to do with the strength of the build and more to do with either ill-prepared opponents or simply failing tactics on their part (like starting in the front area so I can charge or at least close in the first round. Good luck to you. @my pitlords - I will be sending tactics tomorrow. That, and Valkin has been awfully lucky at times. So if I slaughter Foreman, does he get brought back by the Nimbus? I'd hate to rob Niqil of his revenge. :cool:
Book5 01-04-06, 10:32 PM	Umm .. wow. Looks like both the mini's I was slated for were already "in progress" via another questlord. Im having technical difficulties at home (am at work right now) so Im gonna say @Cerburus13 - stick with telin he is already got everything started @Wayreth - check with vath but Im pretty sure he is cool to do your mini @Pitlords - Abort the credits, Retry next week, Ignore? hehe get it? abort retry ignore.. ooh too much tech supporting for me today
Zevox 01-04-06, 10:53 PM	Mektos will make Ch'Chilli pay for that loss! Tactics sent. Recieved. I'll run the fight as soon as I get tactics from Begferdeth - I'm free all day tomorrow and Saturday, and most of the day Friday. This is going to be my first pitlorded match, however, so you'll have to bear with me - I'll probably be looking up a lot of rules, which means I've the potential to misinterpret them. @ Macbrea & DTFarstar - I'll send tactics for Featylec and Sir Alboreth tomorrow (provided my fight either doesn't get run then or doesn't take too long for me to come up with good ones, in which case they may arrive as late as Friday). Zevox
One_Winged_Angel 01-04-06, 11:06 PM	@Iced: Tactics for Kailia sent via E-mail. Should have Azriel's sent by tomorrow. @Kaigan: Looking foreward to this match, I must say.
MitzaVolchenko 01-04-06, 11:12 PM	@ Macbrea tactics for Zwei sent @Snommelp I'll decide on tactics or send surrender tonight or tomorrow. Do not run by default tactics, please. @ NiQil tactics for Methos received and understood. I will start that as soon as I get TBH's tactics.
MitzaVolchenko 01-04-06, 11:17 PM	Tatyana Malvont (Gonbow) vs Kracknol (SauroGrenom): MitzaVolchenko Inactive January 4th, active January 11th. Tatyana is not supposed to be paired according to her sheet.
NiQil 01-04-06, 11:22 PM	@ Gonbow: Tactics for Kronos MacLeod sent via PM @ MitzaVolchenko: Tactics for Methos MacLeod sent via PM (I see you received them) @ DTFarstar: Tactics for Silas MacLeod sent via PM @ Dr. Funk: As soon as I see an equipment list for the Xill, I will get you tactics. They indicate standard treasure in their MM listing in the SRD, so I assume that means equipment. If I am wrong, someone let me know so I can crank those out.
DTFarstar 01-04-06, 11:39 PM	*punches himself in the face* I hate misreading things. Well, Challak is buying a tattoo of Skate next week. Not that it will help his will saves, but still.
MindWandererB 01-04-06, 11:45 PM	@Skojar and TelinArtho: tactics sent. This is going to be a rough week. @DTFarstar: I wouldn't write out Challack just yet--most likely the worst he'll do is a tie for first with Trixie after she charms him. I don't expect to beat him myself, he's a monster, especially on a small map like the Great Hall.
SauroGrenom 01-04-06, 11:48 PM	I just noticed that Kracnol(ECL6) is pared with an ECL5 opponent (Tatyana). It appears he wasn't moved up into the next ECL after he leveled last week. I've got no problem with the paring, but it appears that Tatyana is intended to be inactive this week. Atleast that's what the heading on her character post says. So if I'm going to write tactics for a fight, who is Kracknol fighting this week?
MitzaVolchenko 01-05-06, 12:57 AM	@Snommelp tactics for Sybil sent. @SauroGrenom I have posted here and PM'd Pitlords about your lack of opponent. I'm sure we'll get you someone or something to tussle with ;)
NiQil 01-05-06, 01:56 AM	If push comes to shove, Kracknol can fight Caspian....he has a monster pairing right now...he's only ECL 5, and will probably lose to either Kracknol or the Xill.....but he can at least have some fun with it LOL Edit: A PM was sent to Pitlords with this idea as well.
Ravashack 01-05-06, 01:57 AM	Tactics for Perius sent in via PM to Snommelp.
Ariel23 01-05-06, 03:15 AM	@telinartho Tactics sent for Trixie @dtfarstar Tactics sent for Evaine @Warclone & Waywreth: [i][Re-edit: Got rid of all the confusion. Tactics received from Waywreth.] I'm ready for tactics any time. I also have email enabled on my user account. Please try to provide an overall/general strategy as a guideline if your tactics become not applicable due to unforeseen circumstances. I'll try to PM if I have any questions, but I don't want a fight that's finished on Tuesday. I need it done by Sunday so I can rerun by Monday. ;)
Vathelokai 01-05-06, 04:21 AM	Vathoki (Guildmaster of TAO) said he'd do Histal's Mini-Quest. I put in subject line but it was missed. Should he do it or should Book5 do it as assigned? Thanks, Yeah, I'm running it. I'll get the intro up shortly.Ivangar the Exile (Turin) vs Hassan Sabbah (Vathelokai):Mal-2 My tactics are PM'd to Mal-2, but I noticed Hassan has been paired even though he has Miniquest noted on his character sheet.I'm guessing that this will get figured out in the morning, with all the other "pairings cleanup activities". I'll PM pitlords... I'd rather do the miniquest, but I can wait a week to join a guild... rooms won't be open till then anyway.
MysticMonk2005 01-05-06, 04:56 AM	Lissa's Tactivs for Grik have been Emailed.
Papapeperoni 01-05-06, 05:38 AM	Isn't this just great. My first pitlord fight, and one of the characters (1 vs. 1) is inactive. What to do? Just skip the fight? :weep: Good luck all, --Papapeperoni, God of Pizza's
waywreth 01-05-06, 09:05 AM	@Pitlords, Warclone & Waywreth: I'm ready for tactics any time. I also have email enabled on my user account. Please try to provide an overall/general strategy as a guideline if your tactics become not applicable due to unforeseen circumstances. I'll try to PM if I have any questions, but I don't want a fight that's finished on Tuesday. I need it done by Sunday so I can rerun by Monday. ;) @Ariel23 - Tactics Sent via PM for Gaston.
Dracazar 01-05-06, 09:25 AM	@Luni: Uilo's tactic sent @Kaigan: Drac's tactic sent @Turin: Shaz's tactic sent
Cerebus13 01-05-06, 09:37 AM	@Begferdeth Tactics sent for Pirotess. @Maraxus & Snommelp No tactics received yet.
Turin 01-05-06, 09:50 AM	I'm not sure if this should go here or in the Tavern, but I have a player who's tactics include wearing to the arena armor that he has listed on his character sheet as "left at home". Is this permitted?
Book5 01-05-06, 11:06 AM	@Turin - No need to get too persnickity. Other players will call foul if that player keeps trying to "sneak" stuff into the arena. Seeing as I have run fights where a key peice of equipment wasn't even paid for... the "at home" equipment section seems more flavor text than technical.. that said... heading to the tavern to comment on "shoulda coulda wouldas"
NiQil 01-05-06, 11:13 AM	I'm not sure if this should go here or in the Tavern, but I have a player who's tactics include wearing to the arena armor that he has listed on his character sheet as "left at home". Is this permitted? This is something that has been wrangled over a lot. As it stands now, it is allowed that if you have something listed on your sheet as "at home" to be able to swap it out for things you are carrying after pairings. This is something that some, including myself, strongly disagree with, as it does nothing more than create a cheat around being encumbered but still having all of your options open. Being able to use equipment listed at home sorta defeats the purpose of having an at home section to begin with. But as it stands, it is legal.
Altaris13 01-05-06, 11:59 AM	@Kaigan: Tactics for Thelgar were emailed.
Mal-2 01-05-06, 12:01 PM	@Vathelokai: Hassan Sabbah was paired to fight this week, even though you had him set to do a mini-quest. I haven't seen the mini-quest started, and haven't heard anything from you about what's going on. Should I, as the assigned pitlord, be trying to get Ivangar re-assigned to another fight or possibly a monster fight? I'm perfectly happy to wait for tactics if you're going to have Hassan fight, but if not, I'd like to know ASAP so we can try to get Ivangar something to do this week.
TelinArtho 01-05-06, 12:41 PM	Trixie (Ariel23) vs Challack (DTFarstar) vs Aerryl (MindWandererB) vs Mistique (Popcorn): TelinArtho [All vs All] Rethun (Kaigan) vs Lunoria (Luni) vs Tsiuzues (Skojar) vs Solomon (Warclone): TelinArtho [All vs All] Received most of my tactics - but still missing one for each fight... I've sent tactics for: Anakala (to Warclone via PM) Ural (to Luni via PM) Sir Valkin (to Kaigan via PM) Kraegin (to Iced via PM) Also - sent Huan a PM about the Level 8 hunter fight - he should be using the tactics as already posted.
Abyssal Stalker 01-05-06, 12:54 PM	@DTFarstar: Tactics for Manzarf the Loathsome PM'ed!
Abyssal Stalker 01-05-06, 01:12 PM	@macbrea: tactics of Jonathon Raven PM'ed for the all vs. all match!
Macbrea 01-05-06, 01:30 PM	Jonathon (Abyssal Stalker) vs Marcos (Iced) vs Zwei (MitzaVolchenko) vs Featylec (Zevox): Macbrea [All vs All] Have tactics for Jonathon and Zwei need tactics for Marcos and Featylec!
SoulLord 01-05-06, 01:41 PM	@Caterane Tactics for Vandelar the red vs Saffron Brass sent. Good Luck Vath.
TelinArtho 01-05-06, 02:04 PM	@Warclone and Kaigan - clarification requests sent.
Zevox 01-05-06, 02:58 PM	@ DTFarstar - Tactics for Sir Alboreth PMed. @ Macbrea - Tactics for Featylec Elendi PMed. Tactics recieved for Mektos (Macbrea), awaiting tactics for Ch'ch'ili (Begferdeth). The sooner I have those tactics the better, as I'll run the fight as soon as I have them and would like to have it set between now and saturday so you two can pick at it for errors I'm sure I'll make (this being my first pitlorded fight and all). Zevox
Ariel23 01-05-06, 03:00 PM	If you had an arrow of Goblinoid Slaying at home, and got paired with a Goblin, and had 3 days to plan your strategy while sitting at home I would think you could reach over, pick it up, and put it in your quiver. I have two sets of armor: one heavy and one light. I switch if I need extra move or extra AC. You can pre-buff with 16 hour spells or Dissolving Weapon, so you should be able to pre-buff by choosing which armor you want to wear. Armor lasts a lot longer... I usually try to tell the pitlord that whatever I don't wear may be dropped at my feet to begin the encounter, but if the pitlord would rather not deal with that, they have the option to leave those items at home. I don't think it is "cheating" to drop your tower shield once you realize you don't need it. You could just bring everything you might need and then drop whatever you don't. That's a little more inconvenient to the pitlord, but achieves the same result...
NiQil 01-05-06, 03:13 PM	If you had an arrow of Goblinoid Slaying at home, and got paired with a Goblin, and had 3 days to plan your strategy while sitting at home I would think you could reach over, pick it up, and put it in your quiver. I have two sets of armor: one heavy and one light. I switch if I need extra move or extra AC. You can pre-buff with 16 hour spells or Dissolving Weapon, so you should be able to pre-buff by choosing which armor you want to wear. Armor lasts a lot longer... I usually try to tell the pitlord that whatever I don't wear may be dropped at my feet to begin the encounter, but if the pitlord would rather not deal with that, they have the option to leave those items at home. I don't think it is "cheating" to drop your tower shield once you realize you don't need it. You could just bring everything you might need and then drop whatever you don't. That's a little more inconvenient to the pitlord, but achieves the same result... In my opinion, that is exactly what should be done. If you want access to it in the arena, then you need to be carrying it on your person. If it's listed at home, then it stays at home. If I really wanted, I could just list my characters as carrying nothing, and leave everything at home, knowing that I can go get what I need after the fact. All that does is create an environment where you don't have to worry about encumbrance. It defeats the purpose of having an "at home" section of the character sheet altogether. In tabletop games, how many times has your character been pushed into battle, and been able to go out and get stuff from home to bring along? In all the tabletop games I have been involved in, if you want access to something, then you either need to carry it yourself or find someway to bring it along. Swinging home to pick up your light armor so you have something to sleep in on night watch because you normally wear full plate during the day just doesn't happen. Either you bring it, or you go without. In my opinion, that is what the equipment at home section should reflect...things that you own, but that you left behind. Of course, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.
Mal-2 01-05-06, 03:35 PM	In my opinion, that is exactly what should be done. If you want access to it in the arena, then you need to be carrying it on your person. If it's listed at home, then it stays at home. I don't see how this fixes anything though. If I list my character as "carrying" 3 sets of armor, 15 different weapons, 3 different types of shields, and written out as heavily encumbered, can't I just write in my tactics: "Leave behind 2 of the sets of armor, all but 2 of the weapons, and all the shields". That leaves the pitlord in the same position of having to re-calculate encumbrance, and the opponent in the same position of not knowing what equipment the character is going to have with them. I thought the idea of listing equipment "at home" was so we could write a character sheet for the "most common" configuration when entering the arena, to make things easier on both pitlords and opponents.
Usurpator 01-05-06, 03:40 PM	In my opinion, that is what the equipment at home section should reflect...things that you own, but that you left behind. Of course, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong. I agree completely wit NiQil. I don't think that have gladiators should have hundreds of arrows (silver, normal, adamantine, cold iron etc.) lying at home, and pick exactly what they need for a particular fight after looking over their opponent. Logic would say they could also go out and buy a specific magic item after they are paired, but we all know that logic has nothing to do with the arena matching procedure and gladiators shouldn't be allowed to buy items at the last instant. And if the swapping rule continues to be allowed, I will do exactly as NiQil says, and leave all my equipment at home and leave the encumbrance calculations up the the Pitlord after I inform him what I will bring.
Usurpator 01-05-06, 03:44 PM	I don't see how this fixes anything though. If I list my character as "carrying" 3 sets of armor, 15 different weapons, 3 different types of shields, and written out as heavily encumbered, can't I just write in my tactics: "Leave behind 2 of the sets of armor, all but 2 of the weapons, and all the shields". That leaves the pitlord in the same position of having to re-calculate encumbrance, and the opponent in the same position of not knowing what equipment the character is going to have with them. I an firmly opposed the 'I leave X behind' option too. You wear what you wear, and if you bear two extra shields, you can drop them, but *only* once you're in the arena. And once in the arena, it might cost you precious time to divest you of all that extra gear. Sure, you can bring two suits of armor, but you can only wear one, and switching armor while in the arena is usually too time consuming to even attempt. That should fix things pretty neatly, while still allowing options for those people who absolutely want to start with all their 10 weapons.
NiQil 01-05-06, 03:47 PM	I don't see how this fixes anything though. If I list my character as "carrying" 3 sets of armor, 15 different weapons, 3 different types of shields, and written out as heavily encumbered, can't I just write in my tactics: "Leave behind 2 of the sets of armor, all but 2 of the weapons, and all the shields". That leaves the pitlord in the same position of having to re-calculate encumbrance, and the opponent in the same position of not knowing what equipment the character is going to have with them. I thought the idea of listing equipment "at home" was so we could write a character sheet for the "most common" configuration when entering the arena, to make things easier on both pitlords and opponents. Except that in the case of carrying that much stuff, it is going to take rounds of the fight to drop it all. Because, again...you aren't leaving it behind, because no trips home. You are dropping it in the arena. That also provides the opportunity to have that stuff used against you, and makes you really think about what you want sitting in that starting box that you won't use but that your opponent might use. I'll give you an example. A low strength wizard owns a crossbow, but rarely uses it. Each fight, he normally drops it on the ground as soon as the fight begins, so that he is not encumbered. In a particular fight, he is facing an archer build, and decides to use alter self into an ice mephit, and then hit the archer with a color spray. The color spray works, causing the archer to drop his bow. The wizard swoops down and picks up the bow, denying the archer his only weapon. Now what happens? If I were that archer, I would be racing toward that starting square, looking to see if that crossbow is there, since I have no other means of attacking something in flight. Under the current system, in the same situation, that crossbow never makes it to the arena because the wizard doesn't want to risk that very thing, and the archer is forced to surrender. Under the above scenerio, it makes the wizard think about things like what happens if he can't get the archer's bow, and has no way to attack from range other than the crossbow. It also gives the archer in that situation an option other than surrendering immediately after he loses his bow. It just makes things a little more like how it should be, and how it would occur in a tabletop game. That's why I think as I do. As it stands now, we might as well get rid of the equipment at home section and just have an equipment section, and not worry about encumbrance at all.
Altaris13 01-05-06, 03:49 PM	Swinging home to pick up your light armor so you have something to sleep in on night watch because you normally wear full plate during the day just doesn't happen. Either you bring it, or you go without. In my opinion, that is what the equipment at home section should reflect...things that you own, but that you left behind. Of course, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong. Sure it happens? Do all of your games happen in the wilderness? I've often played in and ran TT set in Urban settings. And it is perfectly viable to stop by your and alter your gear if you know the circumstances your going into. I agree completely wit NiQil. I don't think that have gladiators should have hundreds of arrows (silver, normal, adamantine, cold iron etc.) lying at home, and pick exactly what they need for a particular fight after looking over their opponent. Logic would say they could also go out and buy a specific magic item after they are paired, but we all know that logic has nothing to do with the arena matching procedure and gladiators shouldn't be allowed to buy items at the last instant. And if the swapping rule continues to be allowed, I will do exactly as NiQil says, and leave all my equipment at home and leave the encumbrance calculations up the the Pitlord after I inform him what I will bring. And that would be both rude and unneccesary. As your pitlord, I would forget to recalculate your encumberance and default it as being heavy. It is one thing to stop by your own home to pick up what you need. It is entirely different to go /shopping/ for something you suddenly decide you want. Being able to swap out things at home is just a benefit of being prepared.
Mal-2 01-05-06, 03:50 PM	I agree completely wit NiQil. I don't think that have gladiators should have hundreds of arrows (silver, normal, adamantine, cold iron etc.) lying at home, and pick exactly what they need for a particular fight after looking over their opponent. Shrug. Instead, I just carry all the arrows into the arena with me, and ask my pitlord not to use the expensive ones. As far as I understand it, I'm also allowed to ask my pitlord to just leave them outside the arena and pick them up on my way out, if it matters for encumbrance purposes. And if the swapping rule continues to be allowed, I will do exactly as NiQil says, and leave all my equipment at home and leave the encumbrance calculations up the the Pitlord after I inform him what I will bring. Gee, thanks. Way to make things easier on our Pitlords. :rolleyes:
Dracazar 01-05-06, 03:50 PM	I thought the idea of listing equipment "at home" was so we could write a character sheet for the "most common" configuration when entering the arena, to make things easier on both pitlords and opponents. /sign A gladiator may have a rack of armor/weapon/items and should choose what to use BEFORE the fight start.
Snommelp 01-05-06, 04:10 PM	All of my tactics have been sent. Tactics have been received from MitzaVolchenko, Ravashack, and Papapeperoni. And now my 2 cp on the "at home" debate: if we had been meant to be able to switch things out for free, then the default sheet would not have made a distinction between what is carried and what is left at home. Left at home means just that: you leave it at home. I know that I'm just parroting other arguments, but think about it for a second. If the intention was to allow you to switch out whatever you needed, then why was the default sheet written with two seperate equipment sections? And you'll notice that on the default sheet, all of the equipment left at home are things that wouldn't be used in the arena, such as smithing tools and money. It's the same in the Streamlining Initiative's character sheet. So there's the answer, as far as I'm concerned. The makers of the CoCo never intended the Equipment at Home to be available for fights, and I have yet to see a convincing argument to change it; most arguments seem to be "I want my opponents to have no clue what I'm planning so that they can't write tactics." In that case, you might as well buy items after pairings; it's the same intention, the same effect.
NiQil 01-05-06, 04:11 PM	Sure it happens? Do all of your games happen in the wilderness? I've often played in and ran TT set in Urban settings. And it is perfectly viable to stop by your and alter your gear if you know the circumstances your going into. Counterpoint: Do all of your games happen in the city that your character is from, or is there travelling involved? When a character travels away from his home city, does he take everything with him, or leave stuff behind? If he travels to another city to do something, somehow I don't see him swinging home to pick up that cold iron sword he might need or that scroll he left behind. Your point is indicitive of an environment where you know ahead of time what you will be facing, and can plan your equipment accordingly. The environment I am describing is that of random encounters, which in my opinion is the backbone of the D&D world. That is what the arena is designed to emulate with random pairings, and random fight types. By removing the ability to swap out equipment from home after pairings, it helps promote the random encounter environment. As it stands, it does the opposite.
Usurpator 01-05-06, 04:17 PM	Shrug. Instead, I just carry all the arrows into the arena with me, and ask my pitlord not to use the expensive ones. As far as I understand it, I'm also allowed to ask my pitlord to just leave them outside the arena and pick them up on my way out, if it matters for encumbrance purposes. Well, if you cannot pick up equipment from your home, I think you also should not be able to leave any at home (or just outside the arena for that matter) Gee, thanks. Way to make things easier on our Pitlords. :rolleyes: I hope you understand I was just making a point, I normally have no intention of doing that, because I think it is cheesy. Apparently I could have done that already in the past, but the only time I ever asked a Pitlord to bring something from home was in a fight against the Harvester, since I noticed he was regularly bringing in items from home (like his Tower Shield). Gladiators who swap out things kept at home are already making it hard on the Pitlords, they have to recalculate encumbrance, to hit bonuses, skills that have armor check penalties, etc. etc. But the swappers are also making it hard on their opponents, since they have to write tactics for several contingencies. And this in turn makes it harder for Pitlords to run fights, since they have more extensive tactics to read through.
Usurpator 01-05-06, 04:22 PM	The makers of the CoCo never intended the Equipment at Home to be available for fights, and I have yet to see a convincing argument to change it; most arguments seem to be "I want my opponents to have no clue what I'm planning so that they can't write tactics." In that case, you might as well buy items after pairings; it's the same intention, the same effect. Well, Cat is a notorious swapper, and he is currently as close to the title 'makers of CoCo' as anyone I can think of. Not swapping (either taking from home or leaving at home) makes it easier on everyone, opponents ans Pitlords alike. I clearly remember Tellish longish tactics from the Bastion vs Flamehair fight. Almost half of it could be ditched immediately, since I didn't bring my armor. He was thoughtfull enough to write tactics for both situations, but I don't think he should have to.
NiQil 01-05-06, 04:23 PM	Well, Cat is a notorious swapper, and he is currently as close to the title 'makers of CoCo' as anyone I can think of. Not swapping (either taking from home or leaving at home) makes it easier on everyone, opponents ans Pitlords alike. Which is why the ruling won't get changed anytime soon :rolleyes:
Snommelp 01-05-06, 04:30 PM	Well, Cat is a notorious swapper, and he is currently as close to the title 'makers of CoCo' as anyone I can think of.The true creator of the CoCo is Moherijuyx (or some unspellable name similar to that), but he is no longer here. Not swapping (either taking from home or leaving at home) makes it easier on everyone, opponents ans Pitlords alike. I clearly remember Tellish longish tactics from the Bastion vs Flamehair fight. Almost half of it could be ditched immediately, since I didn't bring my armor. He was thoughtfull enough to write tactics for both situations, but I don't think he should have to.You and I agree completely, Usurpator. Shall we make a pact between at least the two of us, that when our characters meet we will not swap out equipment?
NiQil 01-05-06, 04:38 PM	The true creator of the CoCo is Moherijuyx (or some unspellable name similar to that), but he is no longer here. You and I agree completely, Usurpator. Shall we make a pact between at least the two of us, that when our characters meet we will not swap out equipment? The three of us...I'm in.
TelinArtho 01-05-06, 04:47 PM	Hmmm... If you are manifesting a power/casting a spell and are tripped during the casting/manifesting - do you need to make a concentration check beyond just the damage you took (if you took any)? If so, what DC is the check? Prevalent in a fight I'm running... quick answers would be appreciated.
Altaris13 01-05-06, 04:52 PM	Hmmm... If you are manifesting a power/casting a spell and are tripped during the casting/manifesting - do you need to make a concentration check beyond just the damage you took (if you took any)? If so, what DC is the check? Prevalent in a fight I'm running... quick answers would be appreciated. Roughshod mate. I know of no actual rules regarding that, but maybe reference the ride rules for casting while mounted?
NiQil 01-05-06, 04:57 PM	Hmmm... If you are manifesting a power/casting a spell and are tripped during the casting/manifesting - do you need to make a concentration check beyond just the damage you took (if you took any)? If so, what DC is the check? Prevalent in a fight I'm running... quick answers would be appreciated. I could call it two checks...the first, for the trip itself, I would classify as violent motion (see the Concentration skill), which would require a DC 15 check. Second, if the follow up attack after the trip hits, then there should be a check of DC 10 + damage dealt. That's what I would rule.
Mal-2 01-05-06, 04:59 PM	Hmmm... If you are manifesting a power/casting a spell and are tripped during the casting/manifesting - do you need to make a concentration check beyond just the damage you took (if you took any)? If so, what DC is the check? The SRD says about Concentration Checks: DC 10 - Vigorous motion (on a moving mount, taking a bouncy wagon ride, in a small boat in rough water, belowdecks in a stormtossed ship). DC 15 - Violent motion (on a galloping horse, taking a very rough wagon ride, in a small boat in rapids, on the deck of a storm-tossed ship). DC 20 - Extraordinarily violent motion (earthquake). And also: If you are trying to cast, concentrate on, or direct a spell when the distraction occurs, add the level of the spell to the indicated DC. In my home games, I would call for a Concentration check, DC 15 + Spell Level. I don't know that the RAW have anything else to say on the matter.
SoulLord 01-05-06, 05:00 PM	Hmmm... If you are manifesting a power/casting a spell and are tripped during the casting/manifesting - do you need to make a concentration check beyond just the damage you took (if you took any)? If so, what DC is the check? Prevalent in a fight I'm running... quick answers would be appreciated. Perhaps if you can detail a bit more the particular round in question? Concentration DC1 Distraction 10 + damage dealt Damaged during the action.2 10 + half of continuous damage last dealt Taking continuous damage during the action.3 Distracting spell’s save DC Distracted by nondamaging spell.4 10 Vigorous motion (on a moving mount, taking a bouncy wagon ride, in a small boat in rough water, belowdecks in a stormtossed ship). 15 Violent motion (on a galloping horse, taking a very rough wagon ride, in a small boat in rapids, on the deck of a storm-tossed ship). 20 Extraordinarily violent motion (earthquake). 15 Entangled. 20 Grappling or pinned. (You can cast only spells without somatic components for which you have any required material component in hand.) 5 Weather is a high wind carrying blinding rain or sleet. 10 Weather is wind-driven hail, dust, or debris. Distracting spell’s save DC Weather caused by a spell, such as storm of vengeance.4 at most I Would add +2 to the dc for unfavorable conditions
Usurpator 01-05-06, 05:03 PM	The true creator of the CoCo is Moherijuyx (or some unspellable name similar to that), but he is no longer here. You and I agree completely, Usurpator. Shall we make a pact between at least the two of us, that when our characters meet we will not swap out equipment? Done! Anybody want to join the 'Pact of the No Swappers'?
NiQil 01-05-06, 05:04 PM	Done! Anybody want to join the 'Pact of the No Swappers'? Methinks ya both missed my post...I'm in. Edit: I feel a new guild coming on....call it Leave It At Home LOL Or maybe a companion location to the dwarven tavern thing Altaris is starting up....same name LOL
Iced 01-05-06, 05:12 PM	MiniQuest 2: Augmented Mithril Breastplate an additional +1 3,000gp Purchased Potion of Fly 750gp Total GP this week: 3,750/900 Fight 1: Total GP this week: 0/666[/COLOR] Quest 2: Added Shadow to Armor 3,750gp Added Silent Moves to Armor 3,750gp Total GP this week: spent 7,500/6,783[/sblock] @Upsurpator - I purchaed a potion of fly (and paid for it) but it doesn't appear on my potions list (no idea why that is). I'm going to write tactics as if I had it against Nexa, just a heads up so that you know and can attempt to kill Galagith without resorting to entangle... :cool: At first when I saw the pairings I groaned (take as compliment), but now looking at the sheets you'd better plan well man. I think The Gatekeeper has a good shot at shattering Nexa's perfect record. My average damage output can have Nexa gone in three rounds. Can't have you passing Validi for most fights won in a row now. Good luck, looking forward to the fight it'll be a good one. @my pitlords - Tactics will be sent later today. @my players - Tactics received for Kraegin and Noko. Fight going to be up sometime in the next couple of days. ~Iced
TelinArtho 01-05-06, 05:16 PM	Well, it ends up not mattering - since the player got taken out before finishing the casting anyway - but it would be nice to know. Essentially a wolf came along and tripped the character after a successful hit for damage - I just wanted to know if that trip constituted a second concentration check or not. Anyway - not so urgent anymore - but would be nice to know for the future.
Vathelokai 01-05-06, 05:21 PM	@Vathelokai: Hassan Sabbah was paired to fight this week, even though you had him set to do a mini-quest. I haven't seen the mini-quest started, and haven't heard anything from you about what's going on. Should I, as the assigned pitlord, be trying to get Ivangar re-assigned to another fight or possibly a monster fight? I'm perfectly happy to wait for tactics if you're going to have Hassan fight, but if not, I'd like to know ASAP so we can try to get Ivangar something to do this week.Well, I havn't heard back from pitlords or the questlord, so I will assume Pairings stand. I'll get you the tactics soon. I have to go to work in 10 minutes, so probably in the morning. @Caterane Tactics for Vandelar the red vs Saffron Brass sent. Good Luck Vath. Good luck to you mate. And since both tactics are out, might I ask, Why don't you carry a scroll of shield... for those pesky magic missle wands?
Usurpator 01-05-06, 05:28 PM	@Upsurpator - I purchaed a potion of fly (and paid for it) but it doesn't appear on my potions list (no idea why that is). I'm going to write tactics as if I had it against Nexa, just a heads up so that you know and can attempt to kill Galagith without resorting to entangle... :cool: At first when I saw the pairings I groaned (take as compliment), but now looking at the sheets you'd better plan well man. I think The Gatekeeper has a good shot at shattering Nexa's perfect record. My average damage output can have Nexa gone in three rounds. Can't have you passing Validi for most fights won in a row now. Good luck, looking forward to the fight it'll be a good one. @my pitlords - Tactics will be sent later today. @my players - Tactics received for Kraegin and Noko. Fight going to be up sometime in the next couple of days. ~Iced Iced, I saw your sheet, and saw that you failed to mention the potion of fly even though you paid for it. Didn't check if you used it in any recent fight. Did notice the price on your armor is a bit off. Without the potion, and with your breath weapon as only ranged option, you would be one dead dragon vs. Nexa. But unfortunately, hold on just a minute..... This is Nexa's subject line: 4 Jan: Craft+sell something random, training Duskseeker to guard I wanted to Craft something as primary activity and train my animal companion as free activity, since I got those troubles not being able to ride it, and while I don't want to craft anything, I need to do so because I cannot train animals as many activity. Ergo: I was not ready for fighting in the arena. I justed wanted to make, say, three horns of fog and sell them immediately for no net loss in gold and train my animal companion. I want to return to the arena once I have properly trained at least my dire bat. I was unpleasantly surprised last fight against Balbanes, where TelinArtho ruled I had to spent a move action each round to control the Dire Bat, not funny, almost lost me the fight. I don't want to go through that again. If Pitbull allows me to ride the Dire Bat without Duskseeker having the Combat Riding package, I might be tempted to forego the crafting and fight with Galgalith, otherwise, I must refuse and shall inform Cat of the erroneous pairing. Shall PM Cat and Pitbull right now. Thanks for the compliment, but if you look at the past fights the 8-0 is also due to no small amount of luck. Kitaya is a better variant of Nexa's build considering this arena, but it seems that she will be coming in second in last week's fight and thus taste her first defeat, although Huan still hasn't answered a few minor remaining issues. She did almost defeat all three of her opponents, despite horrendously bad rolls (averaging a 6 on d20 for about 16 attacks). If I had just spent that scroll of Fly, that whole all vs. all would have been peanuts, but I am trying to gauge how effective the build is when trying to use minimal resources. If a build has a decent chance to defeat three same ECL opponents when using minimal resources and having bad rolls, it must be ok. I must admit I am sometimes a bit scared by the gold Validi burns up in a fight.....
NiQil 01-05-06, 05:33 PM	That kinda sounds like what my new characters will do (Cat hasn't added them to the roster yet...see my sig)...I designed characters who will only have curing and ammunition for expendables. That, and I wanted to try some prestige classes I have never done before as well (Horizon Walker, Dwarven Defender, Slayer). I'm curious to see how they do, especially if the Last Man Standing matches at level 3 continue. I think they have some staying power.
SoulLord 01-05-06, 05:37 PM	Well, I havn't heard back from pitlords or the questlord, so I will assume Pairings stand. I'll get you the tactics soon. I have to go to work in 10 minutes, so probably in the morning. Good luck to you mate. And since both tactics are out, might I ask, Why don't you carry a scroll of shield... for those pesky magic missle wands? He he it was always on my "I should buy that Shield spell next" but I always forgot to do it, maybe after this Fight Vandelar will remember to do it. As for Saffron besdides the blindsense 60 how does it deal with invisible oponents?
NiQil 01-05-06, 05:48 PM	@ Dr. Funk: Still waiting on the Xill equipment list...the sooner I see it, the sooner you get tactics.
Warclone 01-05-06, 05:58 PM	@TelinArtho, Ariel23, Turin: Tactics sent.
Luni 01-05-06, 05:59 PM	Also - sent Huan a PM about the Level 8 hunter fight - he should be using the tactics as already posted. They were already posted? I never noticed that. :(
Iced 01-05-06, 06:03 PM	Iced, I saw your sheet, and saw that you failed to mention the potion of fly even though you paid for it. Didn't check if you used it in any recent fight. Did notice the price on your armor is a bit off. Without the potion, and with your breath weapon as only ranged option, you would be one dead dragon vs. Nexa. But unfortunately, hold on just a minute..... This is Nexa's subject line: 4 Jan: Craft+sell something random, training Duskseeker to guard I wanted to Craft something as primary activity and train my animal companion as free activity, since I got those troubles not being able to ride it, and while I don't want to craft anything, I need to do so because I cannot train animals as many activity. Ergo: I was not ready for fighting in the arena. I justed wanted to make, say, three horns of fog and sell them immediately for no net loss in gold and train my animal companion. I want to return to the arena once I have properly trained at least my dire bat. I was unpleasantly surprised last fight against Balbanes, where TelinArtho ruled I had to spent a move action each round to control the Dire Bat, not funny, almost lost me the fight. I don't want to go through that again. If Pitbull allows me to ride the Dire Bat without Duskseeker having the Combat Riding package, I might be tempted to forego the crafting and fight with Galgalith, otherwise, I must refuse and shall inform Cat of the erroneous pairing. Shall PM Cat and Pitbull right now. Thanks for the compliment, but if you look at the past fights the 8-0 is also due to no small amount of luck. Kitaya is a better variant of Nexa's build considering this arena, but it seems that she will be coming in second in last week's fight and thus taste her first defeat, although Huan still hasn't answered a few minor remaining issues. She did almost defeat all three of her opponents, despite horrendously bad rolls (averaging a 6 on d20 for about 16 attacks). If I had just spent that scroll of Fly, that whole all vs. all would have been peanuts, but I am trying to gauge how effective the build is when trying to use minimal resources. If a build has a decent chance to defeat three same ECL opponents when using minimal resources and having bad rolls, it must be ok. I must admit I am sometimes a bit scared by the gold Validi burns up in a fight..... To tell you the truth, it's not as fun to play a character that depends on expendables to win fights. As soon as the EL10 league opens, I think I'm going to "retire" him in favor of an advanced form of the same character (same character and basic build, but with the lycanthrope [dire bat] template added). The total level adjustment is four [add half-giant], four animal HD will put me at EL8 and starting at level two will put me at EL10. He'll stay with the same guild alleigences etc, but have the skills to excell on his own without boosts. ~Iced
Begferdeth 01-05-06, 06:18 PM	Oh really? Well, your gonna regret it if you use that reduce person thing you do, cuz then Chili will have the height advantage! :D Mektos will make Ch'Chilli pay for that loss! Tactics sent.
Zevox 01-05-06, 06:29 PM	Tactics recieved for Ch'Chilli. I'll run Mektos vs. Ch'Chilli shortly, but I'm heading out for dinner first. I'll try to finish it tonight, if not it'll be up early tomorrow. Zevox
Gonbow 01-05-06, 06:43 PM	@ Pitlords, SauroGrenom, MitzaVolchenko My apologizes, but Tatyana was supposed to be inactive this week, as per her sheet. I'll be following this up with a PM.
NiQil 01-05-06, 06:50 PM	@ Pitlords, SauroGrenom, MitzaVolchenko My apologizes, but Tatyana was supposed to be inactive this week, as per her sheet. I'll be following this up with a PM. Seems like Cat must have been in a hurry this week or something...seems like 5-6 inactive characters got paired. @ Pitlords, Sauro, Mitza: My offer of inserting Caspian in as Tatyana's replacement instead of him fighting the Xill stands...I already sent Pitlords a PM indicating much the same last night.
Begferdeth 01-05-06, 06:51 PM	Whats this about the leave stuff at home section? Its a pretty basic thing there. Dont bring up arguements about "well, its not like a random encounter if you can pick your gear". Its NOT a random encounter. If it was, you shouldnt be buffing before you can see the opponent. Especially not with expendables. "Uh oh, a scary noise... Drink the 250 gp invisibility potion!" If I have a tower shield, and only use it in 1 out of 20 fights, should I add it into EVERY stat I have, and tell the pitlord about not using it every time? Or just put in in the "leave it at home" section, and mention the differences the one time I do bring it? Which one makes it easier? If it comes down to it, Ill have to get my guys to buy a wagon and leave that in the starting block just so I can be prepared to take on more than one type of opponent. Covered in oil for that desperate archer who tries to steal my stuff... burn baby burn! The "too much variation to plan against" arguement doesnt carry much weight to me either, after seeing a spellcaster with 30+ scrolls on them. Try to figure out the ones they use in there. Only difference is they dont have a penalty for carrying a small library with them.
TheMagister 01-05-06, 09:04 PM	@Begferdeth: Quickly compiled tactics for: The White Hand vs. Pirotess sent via PM.
Zevox 01-05-06, 09:09 PM	Eh, any chance somebody can help me out? I'm trying to post the setup (char sheets and tactics) for Ch'Chili vs Mektos, but the forum keeps telling me I have too images in my post (when in fact I have none). Any advice? Zevox
NiQil 01-05-06, 09:12 PM	Eh, any chance somebody can help me out? I'm trying to post the setup (char sheets and tactics) for Ch'Chili vs Mektos, but the forum keeps telling me I have too images in my post (when in fact I have none). Any advice? Zevox Do the character sheets and/or tactics have any in them? That could be it. If no, then I would close and reopen the forum. If still nothing, then I would save it all to a .txt file and reboot and try again.
Zevox 01-05-06, 09:14 PM	Do the character sheets and/or tactics have any in them? That could be it. If no, then I would close and reopen the forum. If still nothing, then I would save it all to a .txt file and reboot and try again. Nope, none whatsoever (I checked before posting, which is why I said I have none). I'll try closing and reopening the forums then. Cut & paste time. Edit: Nope, no help. Rebooting... Edit 2: Nope, still having that problem. I'll try posting just one of thier sheets and tactics at a time and see what happens... if anyone else gets any ideas of what the problem might be, please let me know. Edit 3: The problem seems to be ocurring just when I try to post Ch'Chili's character sheet. Strange. Anybody ever have this problem with him before? Edit 4: Got it - Ch'Chili had too many smilies in his character sheet (I forgot they counted towards images). Problem fixed. Zevox
TelinArtho 01-05-06, 09:39 PM	Lunoria vs Tsiuzues vs Rethun vs Solomon (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8168181) is up. Just remember - just because there's only two visible characters - doesn't automatically mean that they will start fighting each other on sight...
MindWandererB 01-05-06, 09:57 PM	Lunoria vs Tsiuzues vs Rethun vs Solomon (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8168181) is up.I see a problem with this. The Display on Astral Construct is "Visual; see text." Whenever "see text" appears, that means that the display is described in the text of the power. In this case, that means the visual display is the construct. In fact, this is the example given on page 59 of the XPH ("The construct, as a visible object, is the visible display for the astral construct power"). So Tsui's tactic of pinpointing by visual display doesn't work.
TelinArtho 01-05-06, 10:05 PM	Poor choice of words on my part then - since Solomon would be moving at a -5 MS while Lotek would listen at +3 and Tsiuzues would listen at +7. As long as one of them hears the direction, they would move in that direction and Lotek would pinpoint Solomon at 5ft.
Kaigan 01-05-06, 10:06 PM	Tactics Sent: Tactics for Rethun sent to TelinArtho via PM. Tactics for Feradeth sent to Warclone via PM. Tactics for Eiletha sent to DTFarstar via PM. Tactics for Gundir sent to Iced via PM. Tactics Received: Tactics for Drac received from Dracazar. Tactics for Cid not received from Dr. Funk. Tactics for Darius not received from DTFarstar. Tactics for Speedy not received from Popcorn. Tactics for Thelger received from Altairs13 Tactics for Sir Valkin received from TelinArtho. Thelger vs. Valkin should be up tonight.
Ariel23 01-05-06, 10:38 PM	Dropping items is a free action. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#dropanItem) There were a lot of hypotheticals about tabeltop D&D but how do things actually work in Gladius? I thought pairings are announced Wednesday, and gladiators fight over the weekend. Meanwhile they ply their crafts and trades, visit the market, and so forth. I guess from Wednesday to the weekend, spectators have time to decide which fights to watch, buy tickets, lay odds, and place bets. It seems as though the participants would have ample opportunity to contemplate their coming opponent, devise tactics, select equipment, etc. As for my character, I make sure that I give the proper statistics for the armor I'm wearing, including encumbrance. I would be more than willing to post/PM so that my opponent knows which set of armor I'm wearing--I'm not doing it as a trick. But some opponents have a 15/20' move while some have 40/45', even 60'...it's just common sense. Why should I have to fight the same way against different opponents each week because of a character sheet convention? I paid for all my equipment, I should gain the advantage of all of it. I'm happy to do that in the way most convenient to my pitlord and fair to my opponent. ["Fair" being relative. Nobody is going to PM with which spells they are going to cast.] ...after seeing a spellcaster with 30+ scrolls on them. I still say finding the proper one during the fight is a Search or Spot check (Sleight of Hand?). I don't think in 6 seconds you could possibly grab the papers in a stack of 30+ each time without error or without drawing an AoO.
Luni 01-05-06, 11:07 PM	Lunoria vs Tsiuzues vs Rethun vs Solomon (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8168181) is up. Just remember - just because there's only two visible characters - doesn't automatically mean that they will start fighting each other on sight... Oooh. First Question: Did you have fun? And about jump. You only fall prone if you are untrained, and not getting a running jump is only double the DC. So jumping back would be a DC 10. Lesson Learned: Don't insist on climbing statue and shoot back next time. :)
SauroGrenom 01-05-06, 11:14 PM	Seems like Cat must have been in a hurry this week or something...seems like 5-6 inactive characters got paired. @ Pitlords, Sauro, Mitza: My offer of inserting Caspian in as Tatyana's replacement instead of him fighting the Xill stands...I already sent Pitlords a PM indicating much the same last night. Thanks for the offer. To be perfectly clear, Kracknol is actually ECL6. He leveled last week, and it appears he wasn't listed as ECL6. So Kracknol has a bit of an advantage on Caspian. If I had the choice, I would perfer that Kracknol would get pared with an encounter at his own ECL, but I wouldn't complain about being pared with Capsian. Right now, there are a number of PM's flying around, and hopefully it will all get worked out soon to everyone's satisfaction.
Warclone 01-05-06, 11:44 PM	@TelinArtho: Regarding this fight. Thanks for running the fight. First of all, I would have gotten two extra listen checks (instead of the extra one you gave me). One is from my move action I took to listen, and the other is from the wolf approaching BEFORE we gain LOS. Solomon double-moves away to (25,18) [MS1][Listen (Tsiuzues, Lotek) 19,7 - success; (Rethun) 17 - success; (Lunoria) 15 - success] Tsuizues draws another bola while Lotek closes to (26,17) and growls for Tsiuzues to throw to the right location [27% vs 51%, fail] It is very hard to hide when you are playing the druid and his animal companion with telepathy. You are having them share listen checks without any actions. Also, you are allowing the wolf to make scent checks as free actions when they are move actions. They are pinpointing and chasing me entierly too easy. Given the preceding I think the situation is very unfair to my character, and instead of dragging out and analyzing a bunch of minutae I would like to ask you to voluntarily rerun on that basis. However, there are additional things below. Round 5 Rethun moves to (29,24) and sees Tsuizues and Lotek growling. He deduces Solomon is invisible near them, but he isn't close enough to make an attack worthwhile - so he stays put. Solomon - seeing that double moving away hasn't really worked, moves away to (21,22) and starts to manifest a level 1 Astral Construct. Tsuizues sees the visual displays of manifesting, so he has Lotek close in and attack [64% vs 51%, success; 18 vs AC12, hit; Dmg 1d6+1=2; Trip 5 vs 2] Tsiuzues draws his shillelagh along the way and attacks [99% vs 51%, success; 19 vs AC12, hit; Dmg 1d8+1=7] Solomon tries to maintain concentration [20 vs DC12; 21 vs DC17, 2 successes] Lunoria climbs quickly [13 vs DC20, fail] but makes no headway. Lunoria (14,15) 29/29, Mage Armor (ends 601) Tsuizues (22,21) 26/26, Shillelagh (ends 11), mounted -- Lotek (22,21) 13/13 Rethun (29,24) 21/21, Elixer of Hiding (ends 101), Chameleon (ends 102) Solomon (21,22) 0/9, Invisibility (ends 32), prone Visual The manifester’s eyes burn like points of silver fire while the power remains in effect. A rainbow-flash of light sweeps away from the manifester to a distance of 5 feet and then dissipates, unless a unique visual display is described. This is the case when the Display entry includes “see text,” which means that a visual effect is described somewhere in the text of the power. Astral Construct Metacreativity (Creation) Level: Shaper 1 Display: Visual; see text Manifesting Time: 1 round Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels) Effect: One created astral construct Duration: 1 round/level (D) Saving Throw: None Power Resistance: No Power Points: 1 This power creates one 1st-level astral construct of solidified ectoplasm that attacks your enemies. It appears where you designate and acts immediately, on your turn. It attacks your opponents to the best of its ability. As a free action, you can mentally direct it not to attack, to attack particular enemies, or to perform other actions. The astral construct acts normally on the last round of the power’s duration and dissipates at the end of its turn. Astral constructs are not summoned; they are created on the plane you inhabit (using ectoplasm drawn from the Astral Plane). Thus, they are not subject to effects that hedge out or otherwise affect outsiders; they are constructs, not outsiders. Augment For every 2 additional power points you spend, the level of the astral construct increases by one. As you can see (and ask anybody, or see solomon's previous fight for an example) the visual display of Astral Construct is the summoned Astral Construct, and does not give away my position. There are more game-changing problems, but I believe given the above that would be moot. I understand what a pain FFAs are, but I request that you rerun the fight. Edit: Additionally, if you are going to deviate from my tactics in order to help me (the thought of which I appreciate) then what I would have done is not step back and summon but x4 run away and sneak from there. ALSO, you have my move silent modifier wrong. I have +5 move silently but you are playing me with +0 move silently (as evidenced by your comment above saying I have a -5 move silently when moving more than half speed). Also, given your above post, you did not roll the move silent rolls for everything. This is a quagmire and I am tired at the moment. While I understand how stressfull an FFA can be, I feel you were cutting my character everywhere you could get away with to get one of the combatants off your plate as soon as possible. However, I'm not interested in anything but a fair rerun. I can analyze the fight line by line and pick out all the problems one by one, but I believe the evidence above is enough to warrant a rerun.
TelinArtho 01-06-06, 12:07 AM	1. Listening on your move action doesn't help - as it is not a continuous sound - so you would have heard nothing. 2. You get a single listen check during another's actions: MS (Tsiu and Lotek) vs Solomon during move before LOS is established (1d20+7=11, 1d20+3=5, 1d20=8) (http://invisiblecastle.com/find.py?id=328993) If the listen check is made at the beginning of the move - you fail. If it is made in the middle of the check (they are 45ft away) - you fail. If I take it at the end of the move - you succeed, but then again - you are already seen. It is very hard to hide when you are playing the druid and his animal companion with telepathy. You are having them share listen checks without any actions. Also, you are allowing the wolf to make scent checks as free actions when they are move actions. They are pinpointing and chasing me entierly too easy. Given the preceding I think the situation is very unfair to my character, and instead of dragging out and analyzing a bunch of minutae I would like to ask you to voluntarily rerun on that basis. However, there are additional things below. While the wolf can only tell direction with a move action, it automatically detects you within 30ft and since they both heard you moving and in which direction - it is not hard for the wolf to move directly towards you. And then, once you are within 5ft - it automatically pinpoints you. As you can see (and ask anybody, or see solomon's previous fight for an example) the visual display of Astral Construct is the summoned Astral Construct, and does not give away my position. There are more game-changing problems, but I believe given the above that would be moot. I understand what a pain FFAs are, but I request that you rerun the fight. As I said above in response to Mindwanderer - this was a poor choice of words on my part. The fact of the matter is your MS is -5 and their listens are +7 and +3. Here's what that roll would have been: MS (Solomon) vs Listen (Tsiu and Lotek) (1d20-5=-1, 1d20+7=22, 1d20+3=8) (http://invisiblecastle.com/find.py?id=329010) So they both heard you and Tsiuzues pinpointed you. First Question: Did you have fun? And about jump. You only fall prone if you are untrained, and not getting a running jump is only double the DC. So jumping back would be a DC 10. I always have fun - that's why I do this. I apparently needed to refresh my knowledge on the jump stuff- thanks for pointing it out.
TelinArtho 01-06-06, 12:20 AM	Edit: Additionally, if you are going to deviate from my tactics in order to help me (the thought of which I appreciate) then what I would have done is not step back and summon but x4 run away and sneak from there. Well, when deviating from a player's tactics, I only have a handful of choices. Since your tactics seemed to want to maintain your anonymity as an invisible person - running would not have been a good idea - since it would have allowed all of your opponents to pinpoint you - and since you have to run in a straight line - you wouldn't get the full extent of your movement. By moving greater than 30ft and moving off of the upper level - you had your best chance - you just didn't make the move silently roll you needed. I'll note that had I done this - you were in range for Rethun's sneak attack and he would have had you pinpointed nicely for a few alchemist's fires. In the future - you might want to include a clause of "If my tactics break down because I'm being followed closely, run away to reestablish a hiding place." ALSO, you have my move silent modifier wrong. I have +5 move silently but you are playing me with +0 move silently (as evidenced by your comment above saying I have a -5 move silently when moving more than half speed). Also, given your above post, you did not roll the move silent rolls for everything. I have been saying this incorrectly. Although I was speaking to this as if I had treated your MS incorrectly, I got all of them correct except the one I just made when I was posting above. There - instead of pinpointing you, Tsiu gets you within 5ft and still closes close enough for Lotek to pinpoint you. This is a quagmire and I am tired at the moment. While I understand how stressfull an FFA can be, I feel you were cutting my character everywhere you could get away with to get one of the combatants off your plate as soon as possible. However, I'm not interested in anything but a fair rerun. I can analyze the fight line by line and pick out all the problems one by one, but I believe the evidence above is enough to warrant a rerun. I'm sorry you feel slighted - but I'll tell you - I approach fights as objectively as I can. FFA do not stress me out anymore - especially when I have plenty of time to work on them.
Zevox 01-06-06, 12:28 AM	Ch'Chili vs Mektos (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8168197&postcount=956) is up, and I now have a lot more respect for the pitlords around here, especially those of you who deal with pitlording max fights each week. Took me five danged hours getting that thing to where it is. Feel free to pick at it, poke at it, rip it shreds, or whatever else need be done to get it right. I'm unfamiliar with some of the rules I was forced to use and could easily have done them wrong. In the meantime, I'm getting some sleep (I'm on EST, and its past midnight here). Zevox
Macbrea 01-06-06, 12:47 AM	It was a good job. What basicly, should have happened by the way if we had reached the delay would have resulted in exactly the same effect. A strong wind would have blown away they Obscuring mist revealing an entangled Kobold for Ch'Chilli. That kobold clutching a wand with a readied action. Resulting in the exact same shots. My initiative was higher then his and if we both readied the actions to shoot each other, Mektos' shot would have gone off first. Exact same result. You are correct though, it is a very disreputable way to win. Most of that combat was done by pets. That was on purpose. As Hassan and Ch'Chilli had gunned Felan and Mektos down like dogs in our last matchup.
MindWandererB 01-06-06, 12:53 AM	Ch'Chili vs Mektos (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8168197&postcount=956) is up, and I now have a lot more respect for the pitlords around here, especially those of you who deal with pitlording max fights each week. Took me five danged hours getting that thing to where it is.I have a question and a comment. The question: is using minions to attack considered "meaningful interaction?" I seem to recall other people not counting it as such, but Zevox and Macbrea did. An official statement on the matter would be nice. Regarding Chili entering the entanglement, I do have a better alternative: wait it out. Take an occasional potshot, or even shoot every round--the Entangle and Mist have another 20 rounds or so left to them, and Chili has 28 bolts left. Also, once the owl and eagle are dead, Mektos has no excuse for delaying and is subject to prejudice for doing so by round 16 (Chili is not subject to delaying penalties until round 20). Having the audience shout out his exact location would be quite appropriate at this point, and would turn the tables--Mektos can dismiss the Entangle and move, or be a sitting duck. Mektos would probably end up winning anyway, sheerly due to having more HP at this point, but it's not a sure thing (although if I were pitlording, I'd have Chili drink his Cure potions while waiting--that's a judgment call, though). A successful Energy Stun would make Mektos lose a round and drop the wand, giving him some time to at least level the field with Psionic Shot Energy rays. Also, in round 12, Chili casts Energy Stun from a Cog. Crystal, which is impossible because the crystal stores 1 pp and Stun costs 3 (you can't split the costs between sources, and I don't think even Wild Surge can work this way).
Macbrea 01-06-06, 01:03 AM	Actually, Mektos isn't a sitting duck in the middle of the Mist. The Pitlord could Point him out on round 18 as that was the round in which he wasn't meaning fully attacking anyone. But, It should be noted that dropping the entangle only allows Mektos to move slightly and fire that same shot. Magic missile has no chance of missing in this case and did 7 of his 6 hps damage. Your right, there is many alternatives. Dispelling all my spells is about the same as just making me dispel my entangle. In truth I would never have moved Ch'Chilli into the Entanglement. As he knows it is a trap. His best bet is to move over to a rock and hide. Then wait for the Cloud to be blown away the delay and shoot the entangled Kobold. This would have given him one shot assuming sniping before the kobold hit him.
Zevox 01-06-06, 01:29 AM	Actually, Mektos isn't a sitting duck in the middle of the Mist. The Pitlord could Point him out on round 18 as that was the round in which he wasn't meaning fully attacking anyone. But, It should be noted that dropping the entangle only allows Mektos to move slightly and fire that same shot. Magic missile has no chance of missing in this case and did 7 of his 6 hps damage. Your right, there is many alternatives. Dispelling all my spells is about the same as just making me dispel my entangle. In truth I would never have moved Ch'Chilli into the Entanglement. As he knows it is a trap. His best bet is to move over to a rock and hide. Then wait for the Cloud to be blown away the delay and shoot the entangled Kobold. This would have given him one shot assuming sniping before the kobold hit him. Round 17, actually (Alister died in round 6, from 7 on you had no allies harassing Ch'Chili). But regardless the point remains the same: the only way Ch'Chili could have defeated Mektos in this situation is for the delay penalty to serious damage Mektos, and then for Ch'Chili to get in a shot or two from his crossbow. Otherwise that magic missile shot, which Mek would make as soon as he spotted Ch'ili, kills him regardless. So unless some other problem can be located which could change the match, the only thing altering it to a delay penalty would do would be to lengthen the battle and possibly make Ch'Chili use up another bolt. The result would remain. Heck, even activating a delay penalty at round 11 (which I won't do unless the opinion of the majority here and/or Cat/an elder is against me) would likely give the same thing - Kobold either spots Dromite (fog dispelled/blow away, entanglement removed and Ch'Chili moves in for melee) and shoots him down or moves out of fog once he starts taking missile fire (position pointed out to Ch'Chili) and shoots him down. If something else that could potentially change the game is located, let me know, but if thats the only objection then I think I'll have the result stand. Zevox
Warclone 01-06-06, 02:02 AM	Well, when deviating from a player's tactics, I only have a handful of choices. Since your tactics seemed to want to maintain your anonymity as an invisible person - running would not have been a good idea - since it would have allowed all of your opponents to pinpoint you - and since you have to run in a straight line - you wouldn't get the full extent of your movement. By moving greater than 30ft and moving off of the upper level - you had your best chance - you just didn't make the move silently roll you needed. I'll note that had I done this - you were in range for Rethun's sneak attack and he would have had you pinpointed nicely for a few alchemist's fires. In the future - you might want to include a clause of "If my tactics break down because I'm being followed closely, run away to reestablish a hiding place." I have been saying this incorrectly. Although I was speaking to this as if I had treated your MS incorrectly, I got all of them correct except the one I just made when I was posting above. There - instead of pinpointing you, Tsiu gets you within 5ft and still closes close enough for Lotek to pinpoint you. I'm sorry you feel slighted - but I'll tell you - I approach fights as objectively as I can. FFA do not stress me out anymore - especially when I have plenty of time to work on them. Regarding my move action hearing his sound, this is from the listen skill description: Action Varies. Every time you have a chance to hear something in a reactive manner (such as when someone makes a noise or you move into a new area), you can make a Listen check without using an action. Trying to hear something you failed to hear previously is a move action. So I would get my listen checks versus them every round I took an action to listen. regarding the listen skill from Rules of Gladius: For the distance modifier, use the closest distance the opponent was to the spotter in the round. Normally this would be at the point where he ends his move since his move would not be interrupted, but since I will be interrupting his action if I hear him, the distance is the closest before LOS is established. In this case, I would have made my listen check and drunk the potion of invisibility before they ever saw me. On the above I can't see how I would be incorrect, and if I am correct, I believe this requires significant changes or a rerun.
Luni 01-06-06, 02:23 AM	@Warclone and Maraxus: Tactics sent!
Vathelokai 01-06-06, 04:13 AM	*EDIT* Tactics for Hassan vs. Ivangar sent to Mal-2 He he it was always on my "I should buy that Shield spell next" but I always forgot to do it, maybe after this Fight Vandelar will remember to do it. As for Saffron besdides the blindsense 60 how does it deal with invisible oponents? Hmmm... I think I just paint a big target on my head and wait for the invis to discharge :D Oh really? Well, your gonna regret it if you use that reduce person thing you do, cuz then Chili will have the height advantage! You are correct though, it is a very disreputable way to win. Most of that combat was done by pets. That was on purpose. As Hassan and Ch'Chilli had gunned Felan and Mektos down like dogs in our last matchup. Funny... Ch'ch'ili and Hassan can beat Mektos and Felan as a team, but in solo matches Mektos and Felan both wailed on us.
Iced 01-06-06, 04:24 AM	I've received tactics from One-Winged-Angel and Kaigan. @ OWA - I prefer tactics by PM instead of E-Mail.
Mal-2 01-06-06, 07:47 AM	*EDIT* Tactics for Hassan vs. Ivangar sent to Mal-2 Recieved. I'll start the fight this evening.
Turin 01-06-06, 10:27 AM	Shaz (Dracazar) vs Thwap McSmash (Warclone) (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8171241&postcount=958) is up. I expect there will be some discussion about this one. The two items of contention: 1. I allowed Shaz to switch out his armor with the "at home" armor. On further consideration, I'm not sure I agree with allowing this on a regular basis in the arena. 2. Shaz and I had a bit of a dispute via PM about using ranged attacks (in this case the energy ray power) to sunder held items. I disallowed this move... ranged attacks cannot be used to sunder attended items in the core rules. Edit: also, I seem to have an extra "color" tag somewhere in the fight, but I can't seem to track it down... anyone who can lend a hand and point it out to me, that'd be swell!
Zevox 01-06-06, 10:39 AM	Well, even not going into the energy ray option, I see one problem - Thwap can't ready an action to both rage and shoot. Both are standard actions. He can either ready to shoot, or ready to rage, not both. I don't think that'd make much of a difference to the results with that critical hit though, unless he readied to rage but not shoot. Zevox
SoulLord 01-06-06, 10:41 AM	Shaz (Dracazar) vs Thwap McSmash (Warclone) (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8171241&postcount=958) is up. I expect there will be some discussion about this one. The two items: 1. I allowed Shaz to switch out his armor with the "at home" armor. Frankly I agree with those who say that this should not be allowed in general, however. 2. Shaz and I had a bit of a dispute via PM about using ranged attacks (in this case the energy ray power) to sunder held items. I disallowed this move. what damage was energy ray doing? by any chance sonic or acid? Sunder You can use a melee attack with a slashing or bludgeoning weapon to strike a weapon or shield that your opponent is holding. If you’re attempting to sunder a weapon or shield, follow the steps outlined here. (Attacking held objects other than weapons or shields is covered below.)
Turin 01-06-06, 10:42 AM	Well, even not going into the energy ray option, I see one problem - Thwap can't ready an action to both rage and shoot. Both are standard actions. He can either ready to shoot, or ready to rage, not both. I don't think that'd make much of a difference to the results with that critical hit though, unless he readied to rage but not shoot. ZevoxRaging is not a standard action... it's not an action at all. He's not "readying to rage" he's readying to shoot and raging when he does so (per his instructions). Perhaps my wording could use an adjustment?
TelinArtho 01-06-06, 10:44 AM	8O O @ @ @ O O o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O O @ @ @ O O 7O O O O O O O O o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O O O O O O O O 6O O O O O O O O O o o o o o o o o o o o o O O O O O O O O O 5O O O O O O O @ O o o o o o o o o o o o o O @ O O O O O O O 4O O O C O O O @ O o o o o o o o o o o o o O @ O O O s1O O O 3O O O O O O O @ O O O O O O ^ ^ O O O O O O @ O O O O O O O 2O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O t3O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 1O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 0 1 2 3 When is LOS established? t3 is moving eastward and will end a move action at (23,2) s1 is readying to drink a potion either on LOS or sound within 100ft. Is there LOS at (22,2) - 30ft away from s1 or (21,2) - 35ft away from s1. If it is established at (21,2), the listen check for that round would have been at 40ft - just before LOS is established - and therefore would have failed. If it is established at (22,2), the listen check for that round would have been at 35ft - and therefore would have succeeded. From my math skills and observation - it looks to me like it is established at (21,2) - however I would appreciate if someone could confirm this for me.
Zevox 01-06-06, 10:46 AM	Raging is not a standard action... it's not an action at all. He's not "readying to rage" he's readying to shoot and raging when he does so (per his instructions). Perhaps my wording could use an adjustment? *frowns* Thought it was, but I looked it up and was mistaken. However, it appears there is something else preventing him from readying to rage while he fires (bolding mine): Entering a rage takes no time itself, but a barbarian can do it only during his action, not in response to someone else’s action. Zevox
Turin 01-06-06, 10:47 AM	what damage was energy ray doing? by any chance sonic or acid?Yes, it was (sonic)... but that's irrelevant because of the text you quoted which talks about using a melee attack to sunder.
NiQil 01-06-06, 10:48 AM	Raging is not a standard action... it's not an action at all. He's not "readying to rage" he's readying to shoot and raging when he does so (per his instructions). Perhaps my wording could use an adjustment? Rage can not be started in a ready action at all. First, as you said, raging is not a standard action or a move action, and you can only ready a standard or move action. Secondly, Entering a rage takes no time itself, but a barbarian can do it only during his action, not in response to someone else’s action. this quote specifically prohibits using rage in a ready action. A ready action is, by definition, in response to someone else's action. At least that's how I read it.
Turin 01-06-06, 10:50 AM	Oops... looks like you're correct there. I'll make the adjustment (it doesn't affect the outcome, however).
waywreth 01-06-06, 11:00 AM	Yes, it was (sonic)... but that's irrelevant because of the text you quoted which talks about using a melee attack to sunder. And there's this entry in the FAQ as well: Question: Can Energy Missile be used to sunder attended objects/equipment on a character? Answer: No, it can only target unattended objects such as a dropped sword or a chair. Contributors: King Uther, Tellish of Ket It refers to energy missle, but energy ray/ball/cone, etc are very close to the same.
NiQil 01-06-06, 11:04 AM	8O O @ @ @ O O o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O O @ @ @ O O 7O O O O O O O O o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O O O O O O O O 6O O O O O O O O O o o o o o o o o o o o o O O O O O O O O O 5O O O O O O O @ O o o o o o o o o o o o o O @ O O O O O O O 4O O O C O O O @ O o o o o o o o o o o o o O @ O O O s1O O O 3O O O O O O O @ O O O O O O ^ ^ O O O O O O @ O O O O O O O 2O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O t3O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 1O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 0 1 2 3 When is LOS established? t3 is moving eastward and will end a move action at (23,2) s1 is readying to drink a potion either on LOS or sound within 100ft. Is there LOS at (22,2) - 30ft away from s1 or (21,2) - 35ft away from s1. If it is established at (21,2), the listen check for that round would have been at 40ft - just before LOS is established - and therefore would have failed. If it is established at (22,2), the listen check for that round would have been at 35ft - and therefore would have succeeded. From my math skills and observation - it looks to me like it is established at (21,2) - however I would appreciate if someone could confirm this for me. As far as I can tell after plotting this out on the actual arena map, LOS is established at 21, 2 (using your example coordinates). Even 20, 2 might have it, but my poor eyesight doesn't allow me to tell for sure.
Turin 01-06-06, 11:04 AM	It refers to energy missle, but energy ray/ball/cone, etc are very close to the same.While agree with you in general, the FAQ entry refers to a power (like energy ball/cone) that doesn't have a ranged touch attack to hit, which ends up being the crux of the issue.
NiQil 01-06-06, 11:04 AM	And there's this entry in the FAQ as well: It refers to energy missle, but energy ray/ball/cone, etc are very close to the same. Yes...that decision was meant to include all psionic energy powers that don't specifically say otherwise.
SoulLord 01-06-06, 11:22 AM	Yes, it was (sonic)... but that's irrelevant because of the text you quoted which talks about using a melee attack to sunder. Actually there is a way to damage Items but i don't think this was the case 1.- (object) The spell can be cast on objects, which receive saving throws only if they are magical or if they are attended (held, worn, grasped, or the like) by a creature resisting the spell, in which case the object uses the creature’s saving throw bonus unless its own bonus is greater. (This notation does not mean that a spell can be cast only on objects. Some spells of this sort can be cast on creatures or objects.) A magic item’s saving throw bonuses are each equal to 2 + one-half the item’s caster level. 2.- Automatic Failures and Successes A natural 1 (the d20 comes up 1) on a saving throw is always a failure, and the spell may cause damage to exposed items (see Items Surviving after a Saving Throw, below). A natural 20 (the d20 comes up 20) is always a success. Items Surviving after a Saving Throw Unless the descriptive text for the spell specifies otherwise, all items carried or worn by a creature are assumed to survive a magical attack. If a creature rolls a natural 1 on its saving throw against the effect, however, an exposed item is harmed (if the attack can harm objects). Refer to Table: Items Affected by Magical Attacks. Determine which four objects carried or worn by the creature are most likely to be affected and roll randomly among them. The randomly determined item must make a saving throw against the attack form and take whatever damage the attack deal. If an item is not carried or worn and is not magical, it does not get a saving throw. It simply is dealt the appropriate damage.
TelinArtho 01-06-06, 11:37 AM	Okay - so with the LOS issue clarified - then I guess the only thing left is whether the active listen check in round 3 is needed to be made. Here's the scenario: In round 2, Tsiuzues and Lotek move 35ft to x - which is 60ft away from Solomon. Lotek and Tsiu make MS rolls - Lotek is lowest with a 7. Solomon rolls a 9 for his listen - which when the distance is taken into account - he fails. Now, in round 3, Solomon acts before Tsiu - and takes a move action to listen. Does he a) listen vs the same DC or b) listen to nothing because no one is taking an action? I always thought that the move action for listening was really for ongoing sounds - a waterfall, someone casting a full-round spell, etc. However, if I am incorrect on this matter - I guess Solomon gets one more chance to change the fight (40% chance). And Warclone - I am not including round 2's active listen check since the DC would be 17+distance (~95ft=+9)=26.
Dracazar 01-06-06, 11:41 AM	about the fight Shaz (Dracazar) vs Thwap McSmash (Warclone): Really ugly to be one-shooted with AC 25... ...the dice killed an interesting fight about the Rage: IMO Thwap can ready to shoot and rage. The text says that he can do it only during his action, not in response to someone else’s action. This means that he can't go in rage in response of Shaz's hit (to gain on-the-fly hp). But if he readies an action, the action occurs while in his turn, and he can rage while hitting. You are too scrict to the RAW, and not to the RAI. about the Energy Ray: Sunder action != Spell used to broke an object (where != means different) If we don't harden this there nothing to add. If you use sunder action, you use sunder rules If you use a spell, you use the spell rules (i.e. Shatter) You are saying that with a spell I could hit a foe, but no what he carries? This is non-sense. Obviously I could hit what I want, the result is determined by the rules, but by the spell rules. This seems as saying that you can't use a spell to destroy an undead, but you must use the turning damage to destroy them (perhaps this doesn't wear weel, but I hope that gives the idea). EDIT: rewards are wrong, should be 1200/400
Turin 01-06-06, 11:42 AM	Actually there is a way to damage Items but i don't think this was the caseThe SRD quote about (object) saving throws applies to spells & powers that have (object) in the saving throw entry. Energy ray has no such entry, as it is Save: None. If you take a look through the SRD, you'll find that any spell or power with (object) saving throws is a Target (not Effect) spell/power, with objects explicitly called out as suitable targets. Example: shatter.
NiQil 01-06-06, 11:45 AM	Okay - so with the LOS issue clarified - then I guess the only thing left is whether the active listen check in round 3 is needed to be made. Here's the scenario: In round 2, Tsiuzues and Lotek move 35ft to x - which is 60ft away from Solomon. Lotek and Tsiu make MS rolls - Lotek is lowest with a 7. Solomon rolls a 9 for his listen - which when the distance is taken into account - he fails. Now, in round 3, Solomon acts before Tsiu - and takes a move action to listen. Does he a) listen vs the same DC or b) listen to nothing because no one is taking an action? I always thought that the move action for listening was really for ongoing sounds - a waterfall, someone casting a full-round spell, etc. However, if I am incorrect on this matter - I guess Solomon gets one more chance to change the fight (40% chance). And Warclone - I am not including round 2's active listen check since the DC would be 17+distance (~95ft=+9)=26. When I ran fights, and in home games, when using my own actions to actively listen, I have always had the DC be 1d20 + Listen mod - distance vs 1d20 + Move Silently mod....and then any other mods go in there as well (hearing through walls, etc). I don't believe there has to be an ongoing noise to hear something when active listening, since ongoing noise could include your opponent breathing or moving about (which is then opposed by his move silently check, to see how well he masks the sound). Action: Varies. Every time you have a chance to hear something in a reactive manner (such as when someone makes a noise or you move into a new area), you can make a Listen check without using an action. Trying to hear something you failed to hear previously is a move action. Try Again: Yes. You can try to hear something that you failed to hear previously with no penalty.
Turin 01-06-06, 11:50 AM	about the Rage: IMO Thwap can ready to shoot and rage. The text says that he can do it only during his action, not in response to someone else’s action. This means that he can't go in rage in response of Shaz's hit (to gain on-the-fly hp). But if he readies an action, the action occurs while in his turn, and he can rage while hitting. You are too scrict to the RAW, and not to the RAI.The issue in dispute seems to be whether or no "his action" means "during his turn" or "the moment that he performs his action". I could see an argument for either side, frankly. about the Energy Ray: Sunder action != Spell used to broke an object (where != means different) If we don't harden this there nothing to add. If you use sunder action, you use sunder rules If you use a spell, you use the spell rules (i.e. Shatter)Shatter is completely different, because it's a Target spell that specifically calls out attended objects. Playing Devil's advocate here, assuming you can break an object with a ray spell, okay, then what's the to-hit roll required? If you're saying that Thwap would deserve an opposed attack roll in this case, then you're clearly using the Sunder rules. If you're saying that the to-hit roll is the AC of the object, then you're saying it's going to be (in most cases) easier to hit the bow a character is holding that it is to hit the character. That might change the arena just a tad, eh?
SoulLord 01-06-06, 11:51 AM	The SRD quote about (object) saving throws applies to spells & powers that have (object) in the saving throw entry. Energy ray has no such entry, as it is Save: None. If you take a look through the SRD, you'll find that any spell or power with (object) saving throws is a Target (not Effect) spell/power, with objects explicitly called out as suitable targets. Example: shatter. Agreed which leaves only the other way to affect objects. To fail a saving throw by rolling a 1 since energy ray does not allow a save to begn with; it is as I stated before. Not applicable in this particular case
NiQil 01-06-06, 11:52 AM	The SRD quote about (object) saving throws applies to spells & powers that have (object) in the saving throw entry. Energy ray has no such entry, as it is Save: None. If you take a look through the SRD, you'll find that any spell or power with (object) saving throws is a Target (not Effect) spell/power, with objects explicitly called out as suitable targets. Example: shatter. Let me repeat: All psionic energy attacks (missile, cone, ball, etc) were ruled to not be able to attack attended equipment. You may only attack unattended equipment with them. This rule came into place when Gonbow's Tatyana used his 5d6 Energy Missile to attack someone's armor, weapon, potion, scroll and something else all in the same attack. This was deemed to be extremely overpowered, and it was ruled at that time that the psionic energy attacks could only damage unattended items (such as items dropped) in this fashion.
Huan 01-06-06, 11:54 AM	@Caterane Tactics for Dameon vs the Hydra have been emailed. (Fast Healing 16... not cool.)
MitzaVolchenko 01-06-06, 11:58 AM	I still need an opponent for Sauro's Kracknol ECL6. @Nightbanegod I still need TBH's tactics unless you want me to use whatever his default is.
TelinArtho 01-06-06, 12:03 PM	Alright - @Warclone and the rest of the people involved in the posted fight: Active Listen check for Solomon vs DC13 (1d20=13) (http://invisiblecastle.com/find.py?id=329267) This means that Solomon - just barely - makes his listen check and drinks his potion in round 3. I'll let you know when I'm done fixing the fight.
NiQil 01-06-06, 12:05 PM	I still need an opponent for Sauro's Kracknol ECL6. @Nightbanegod I still need TBH's tactics unless you want me to use whatever his default is. Since Cat hasn't been around (and if memory serves I think he said he wouldn't have internet until today or tomorrow due to his moving...he was accessing from an internet cafe), I don't think you are going to be able to get a quick answer. If Sauro and you are agreeable, since I have heard nothing from Dr. Funk regarding Caspian's monster fight, even though they are a level apart I can go ahead and fight Kracknol, if you want to run it. We can send PMs to Pitlords for notification and just proceed on our own, since he may not even be around until tomorrow.
Dracazar 01-06-06, 12:07 PM	If you take a look through the SRD, you'll find that any spell or power with (object) saving throws is a Target (not Effect) spell/power, with objects explicitly called out as suitable targets. Example: shatter. Wrong. Example: Disintegrate, it has Effect and not Target The issue in dispute seems to be whether or no "his action" means "during his turn" or "the moment that he performs his action". I don't see the question. He attack on his action, this is obvious, so, on his action he goes in rage, no matter about action/turn. The RAW simply say that he can't go in rage if the foe says that he is a pig, or if the foe jumps over his foot. All psionic energy attacks (missile, cone, ball, etc) were ruled to not be able to attack attended equipment Ok, I'll agree, but lets say that this is another non-written CoCo-house-rule, as the one that doesn't allow use use NPC service spells to craft items.
MitzaVolchenko 01-06-06, 12:10 PM	Since Cat hasn't been around (and if memory serves I think he said he wouldn't have internet until today or tomorrow due to his moving...he was accessing from an internet cafe), I don't think you are going to be able to get a quick answer. If Sauro and you are agreeable, since I have heard nothing from Dr. Funk regarding Caspian's monster fight, even though they are a level apart I can go ahead and fight Kracknol, if you want to run it. We can send PMs to Pitlords for notification and just proceed on our own, since he may not even be around until tomorrow. I am not sure we are allowed to do that, but if everyone agrees, the worst case scneario is that I waste my time running a fight that doesn't count for anything.
NiQil 01-06-06, 12:20 PM	Ok, I'll agree, but lets say that this is another non-written CoCo-house-rule, as the one that doesn't allow use use NPC service spells to craft items. It *is a houserule, because though the energy powers seem to be written with this thought in mind, none of them say anything about unattended items vs attended items, or make any clarification like the shatter spell does. So it was ruled this way for balance purposes, since a 2nd level power like Energy missile should not be able to destroy every piece of equipment that someone is wearing in a single round.
TelinArtho 01-06-06, 01:16 PM	Okay fight (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8168181) has been edited. Changes: Not much 1. Solomon went invisible essentially at the same time, but before he was seen. This means that Lotek spends a move action to determine his direction before being able to close. 2. The extra round that is generated allows Rethun to throw one more Alchemist's Fire (which misses) at Tsiu. 3. The extra round that is generated allows Lunoria to try to climb once more (but I elected to give her another opportunity to shoot :) ) - but she misses the attack (and would've failed climbing if you'd rather I go that route. 4. The final fight between Lunoria and Tsiuzues essentially is pushed out one round. All rewards stay the same.
Warclone 01-06-06, 01:23 PM	@Turin: Thanks for running the fight! It looks like I did get lucky, although I would like to think I wouldn't have needed it (we may never know). I believe you got the rewards wrong, however. You gave us the reward of an ECL3 fight when this is an ECL4 fight. The rewards should be 1200/1200 max. (I believe, you may want to doublecheck).
TelinArtho 01-06-06, 01:29 PM	Apparently in updating the fight, I accidentally cut off the character sheets... fixing it presently...
Warclone 01-06-06, 01:36 PM	Okay fight (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8168181) has been edited. Changes: Not much 1. Solomon went invisible essentially at the same time, but before he was seen. This means that Lotek spends a move action to determine his direction before being able to close. 2. The extra round that is generated allows Rethun to throw one more Alchemist's Fire (which misses) at Tsiu. 3. The extra round that is generated allows Lunoria to try to climb once more (but I elected to give her another opportunity to shoot :) ) - but she misses the attack (and would've failed climbing if you'd rather I go that route. 4. The final fight between Lunoria and Tsiuzues essentially is pushed out one round. All rewards stay the same. The reason I was so eager to get this change is becaue I don't believe the wolf would have used his action to scent. They had no reason to believe I was invisibile in that location, and it was much more likely that I already moved around the corner heading north or jumped down into the center. The only way the wolf would have scented instead of continued moving in search of opponents is if it suspected that I was invisible and waiting in 1 spot the whole time--an assumption that wouldn't happen. Hell, he didnt even know it was my starting box. Otherwise, after 4 rounds have passed and someone is not in their starting position, the last place an invisible opponent would be is in his starting box. I strongly disagree with the idea that the wolf would choose to scent at that time, ESPECIALLY since Tsi does not include Lotek using scent in his tactics and there are 0 indicators to think there is an enemy in that area. TelinArtho?
TelinArtho 01-06-06, 01:48 PM	Here's my analysis: 10O O O o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O O O 9O O O O O O o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O O O O s5O 8O O @ @ @ O O o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O O @ @ @ t5O 7O O O O O O O O o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O O O O O O O O 6O O O O O O O O O o o o o o o o o o o o o O O O O O O O O O 5O O O O O O O @ O o o o o o o o o o o o o O @ O O O O O O O 4O O O C O O O @ O o o o o o o o o o o o o O @ O O O s1O O O 3O O O O O O O @ O O O O O O ^ ^ O O O O O O @ O O O O O O O 2O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O t3O O O O O O t4O O O O O O O 1O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 0 1 2 3 A creature with scent automatically detects something when it is within 30ft. The wolf senses you at (22,2) for the first time. it then moves to (23,2). Before that it had LOS to the lower area - so it knows you couldn't be there. During that time, it has had LOS to all of the possible locations a visible opponent could be. Therefore - it doesn't trust its senses and tries to get a better whif. When it does - it detects that Solomon appears to be to the east-north-east.
Warclone 01-06-06, 02:04 PM	Here's my analysis: 10O O O o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O O O 9O O O O O O o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O O O O s5O 8O O @ @ @ O O o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O O @ @ @ t5O 7O O O O O O O O o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O O O O O O O O 6O O O O O O O O O o o o o o o o o o o o o O O O O O O O O O 5O O O O O O O @ O o o o o o o o o o o o o O @ O O O O O O O 4O O O C O O O @ O o o o o o o o o o o o o O @ O O O s1O O O 3O O O O O O O @ O O O O O O ^ ^ O O O O O O @ O O O O O O O 2O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O t3O O O O O O t4O O O O O O O 1O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 0 1 2 3 A creature with scent automatically detects something when it is within 30ft. The wolf senses you at (22,2) for the first time. it then moves to (23,2). Before that it had LOS to the lower area - so it knows you couldn't be there. During that time, it has had LOS to all of the possible locations a visible opponent could be. Therefore - it doesn't trust its senses and tries to get a better whif. When it does - it detects that Solomon appears to be to the east-north-east. That seems like a reasonable explination. I think I will let my issues end here, while I may disagree with the speed and efficiency at which they found me, that is too subjective and analog. I'll chalk it up to a lesson learned.
TelinArtho 01-06-06, 02:32 PM	@Iced regarding the ongoing Kraegin vs Noko fight. In round 19, you have a critical hit noted for Noko. The critical of a shortbow is 20/x3 - not 19-20/x2 - so it is not a critical hit. Also, since I do have healing in my tactics - you should probably be recording regular damage (such as from the sneak attack) separate from the physical damage - because healing spells restore physical and subdual equal to the physical healed.
Turin 01-06-06, 02:38 PM	Regarding Thwap vs Shaz: 1. I'm going to edit the fight to allow Thwap to rage during his readied action as it stood originally. I've been convinced on this one. 2. The energy ray issue seems like it's been put to bed. I assume that this should hold for spells of similar mechanics, such as scorching ray, Melf's acid arrow, and disintegrate? 3. Warclone I checked the rewards and you are correct. You should be getting 1200XP + 1200gp. I will edit this.
Altaris13 01-06-06, 02:43 PM	That seems like a reasonable explination. I think I will let my issues end here, while I may disagree with the speed and efficiency at which they found me, that is too subjective and analog. I'll chalk it up to a lesson learned. I don't know that it has been considered or not, but both the All vs All and the Hunter maps are designed to promote exactly that sort of situation. Just a thought.
SoulLord 01-06-06, 02:49 PM	Regarding Thwap vs Shaz: 1. I'm going to edit the fight to allow Thwap to rage during his readied action as it stood originally. I've been convinced on this one. 2. The energy ray issue seems like it's been put to bed. I assume that this should hold for spells of similar mechanics, such as scorching ray, Melf's acid arrow, and disintegrate? 3. Warclone I checked the rewards and you are correct. You should be getting 1200XP + 1200gp. I will edit this. True as long as 1.- the spell doesn't have the (object) tag 2.- the spell does not allow a saving throw otherwise check my previous post about failing saving throws with a natural 1
Iced 01-06-06, 02:57 PM	@Iced regarding the ongoing Kraegin vs Noko fight. In round 19, you have a critical hit noted for Noko. The critical of a shortbow is 20/x3 - not 19-20/x2 - so it is not a critical hit. Also, since I do have healing in my tactics - you should probably be recording regular damage (such as from the sneak attack) separate from the physical damage - because healing spells restore physical and subdual equal to the physical healed. will take into account. *sigh* with your healing and Noko's mobility it is extremely doubtful that a winner can be decided. After all the ammunition is gone Noko can simply avoid Kraegin. Is there such a thing as a draw? Even xp/gp and everyone goes home happy? Just a thought...
King Uther 01-06-06, 03:14 PM	EDIT: Ha, after some more research I discovered I was wrong(despite arguing ranged weapons cannot sunder without a feat 5 minutes before). I thought certain spells/powers could target worn items(some can, but not the ones in this case). What's really ironic to me is that Energy Ray cannot target worn items for the same reason Energy Missile can't, and I was leading the charge for proving Energy Missile can't be used that way.
NiQil 01-06-06, 03:19 PM	@Turin, Warclone, Zevox, Everyone for that matter Energy Ray can target worn weapons, armor, etc. Energy Missile, Cone, etc...cannot. Energy Ray allows an attack roll, and thus can be aimed. Melf's acid arrow can target weapons and armor. Regardless of what anyone is saying, anyone at all, the strategy to use Energy Ray(and Energy Ray alone) to sunder weapons is not only possible but a sound strategy. Because of the way ranged touch spells/powers are treated, Energy Ray can target weapons and armor. The only person who can say otherwise is Cat, and that would make it a silly houserule. Except that you can't sunder with ranged attacks, and a ray is a ranged attack.
Mal-2 01-06-06, 03:20 PM	Energy Ray can target worn weapons, armor, etc. So this section fo the SRD does not apply? You can use a melee attack with a slashing or bludgeoning weapon to strike a weapon or shield that your opponent is holding. If you’re attempting to sunder a weapon or shield, follow the steps outlined here. (Attacking held objects other than weapons or shields is covered below.) ... You can’t sunder armor worn by another character. Can you explain to me why those quotes don't apply?
Iced 01-06-06, 03:23 PM	SUNDER You can use a melee attack with a slashing or bludgeoning weapon to strike a weapon or shield that your opponent is holding. If you’re attempting to sunder a weapon or shield, follow the steps outlined here. (Attacking held objects other than weapons or shields is covered below.) Ummm... What happened to the part about melee attack. A ranged attack cannot be a sunder attempt.
Warclone 01-06-06, 03:31 PM	@Turin, Warclone, Zevox, Everyone for that matter Energy Ray can target worn weapons, armor, etc. Energy Missile, Cone, etc...cannot. Energy Ray allows an attack roll, and thus can be aimed. Melf's acid arrow can target weapons and armor. Regardless of what anyone is saying, anyone at all, the strategy to use Energy Ray(and Energy Ray alone) to sunder weapons is not only possible but a sound strategy. Because of the way ranged touch spells/powers are treated, Energy Ray can target weapons and armor. The only person who can say otherwise is Cat, and that would make it a silly houserule. Honestly, I would love for you to be correct King Uther. Because if you can do that with energy ray, then I can target your equipment with my adamantine arrows. But alas, if I can't target equipment or weapons with adamantite arrows attack rolls then I also can't target equipment or weapons with energy ray attack rolls.
NiQil 01-06-06, 03:39 PM	@ anyone: So I have this monster fight that my character is supposed to be in. And it has standard equipment listed as it's treasure which, to my understanding, means that the pitlord should be generating an equipment list for me (please correct me if I'm wrong). What happens if I never see that list to send in tactics? My pitlord has been on the forums since pairings, so he should be aware of the fight, and I've posted a couple of requests for the equipment list and gotten no response thus far. How should I proceed? To further compound the issue, I will most likely not be around tomorrow, as tomorrow is my tt game, which means Sunday would be the earliest I see the list if it doesn't show up tonight. Suggestions?
King Uther 01-06-06, 03:50 PM	Targetting with a spell like that shouldn't be a sunder action. I went and checked every rule I could think of for that loophole that would prove I was right. At the end of the day it doesn't say anywhere one way or another, and thus I would have to say you can't do it. I swear I've seen it discussed by a rules guru that it could be done, but if and when I saw that I cannot find it now. Well, there went that.
DTFarstar 01-06-06, 03:51 PM	I've always thought not being able to sunder with ranged weapons was silly, I think it should be way more difficult, but an option, but that is just my opinion. My interpretation of this issue is this, You can smash or break any unattended object with most ray spells and such, same with ranged weapons, but when it comes to breaking something someone has on their person you have to refer to the sunder rules, because that is what that is, and as such if it's not a melee weapon then you are out of luck. Thankfully, otherwise Wilder's would become the best sunderers from a huge distance. I mean seriously, having your weapon take 5d6-5 before you can even get next to someone, potentially 10d6-10.... That would be very bad for any and all melee characters.
King Uther 01-06-06, 03:57 PM	Well, it truly would be unbalancing, when considering it is a 1st level power. After reading 50 pages worth of material, I'm for certain it cannot be done in the sense I was discussing it. Unattended items: sure. But attended items can only be sundered by a melee weapon or a spell/power that specifically says it does, such as shatter.
Turin 01-06-06, 03:58 PM	At the end of the day it doesn't say anywhere one way or another, and thus I would have to say you can't do it. I swear I've seen it discussed by a rules guru that it could be done, but if and when I saw that I cannot find it now. Well, there went that.When the issue came up in Drac's tactics, I did a Google search and dug up a thread from about a year ago where Cat had tried this with energy ray. The thread I found with Google was incomplete, but it looked pretty clear to me that Cat was in the wrong, and others had commented that it was a long-running discussion dating from when someone had tried it with melf's acid arrow and had been ruled against. So not just my understanding of the RAW, but as much precedent as possible was also part of my decision. I've always thought not being able to sunder with ranged weapons was silly, I think it should be way more difficult, but an option, but that is just my opinion.Don't get me wrong, I think there should be a rule-valid (albeit difficult) way to sunder with ranged weapons. But like you, I don't think there actually is one.
TelinArtho 01-06-06, 04:03 PM	@ anyone: So I have this monster fight that my character is supposed to be in. And it has standard equipment listed as it's treasure which, to my understanding, means that the pitlord should be generating an equipment list for me (please correct me if I'm wrong). What happens if I never see that list to send in tactics? My pitlord has been on the forums since pairings, so he should be aware of the fight, and I've posted a couple of requests for the equipment list and gotten no response thus far. How should I proceed? To further compound the issue, I will most likely not be around tomorrow, as tomorrow is my tt game, which means Sunday would be the earliest I see the list if it doesn't show up tonight. Suggestions? I've been in contact with Dr. Funk and he was asking me what to do for it (this is his first). Anyway - I suggested an equipment list for him to pass along to you - though I admit I didn't check it for total gold cost - I'll make sure it was under the total allowed and then post it for you.
NiQil 01-06-06, 04:03 PM	Don't get me wrong, I think there should be a rule-valid (albeit difficult) way to sunder with ranged weapons. But like you, I don't think there actually is one. In one of the Complete books, there is a feat that allows you to sunder at range. But as far as core rules are concerned, no dice.
DTFarstar 01-06-06, 04:05 PM	Wow, looks like we've all managed to agree on something in the FotW thread, in my experience this is pretty rare.
Mal-2 01-06-06, 04:05 PM	Don't get me wrong, I think there should be a rule-valid (albeit difficult) way to sunder with ranged weapons. But like you, I don't think there actually is one. Like many of the seldom-used combat options, it's expanded in other books. I'm pretty sure there's a feat in Complete Warrior that allows this, for instance. It's just not available to us in our core-only arena.
NiQil 01-06-06, 04:06 PM	I've been in contact with Dr. Funk and he was asking me what to do for it (this is his first). Anyway - I suggested an equipment list for him to pass along to you - though I admit I didn't check it for total gold cost - I'll make sure it was under the total allowed and then post it for you. That's a step in the right direction...I see that Pitlords is...or was...logged on, so pending what happens with the Kracknol issue, it may not even be necessary, but since, until I hear otherwise, I am paired with the Xill, then I am gonna plan on how to lose to the Xill (yanno...AC close to mine...4 full attacks to my one in melee....2 to 1 in range....yeah...cause I stand a chance there :rolleyes: )
NiQil 01-06-06, 04:10 PM	Like many of the seldom-used combat options, it's expanded in other books. I'm pretty sure there's a feat in Complete Warrior that allows this, for instance. It's just not available to us in our core-only arena. I don't remember which Complete book it's in...Warrior sounds right...but not only is there a feat for ranged sunders, there is also a feat for ranged disarms (joygasm!)
TelinArtho 01-06-06, 04:12 PM	@NiQil Here's what I had sent to Dr. Funk as an idea (though bear in mind this isn't official): Potion of Cat's Grace (300gp) Mighty (+2 Str) Comp. Long Bow +1 (2600gp) Mighty (+2 Str) Comp. Long Bow (300gp) 60 arrows (3gp) 2 Shortswords (20gp) Having looked at the money entry - he could easily make the other bow magical or make the two shortswords masterworked - but that is at least what I suggested.
SauroGrenom 01-06-06, 04:12 PM	Since Cat hasn't been around (and if memory serves I think he said he wouldn't have internet until today or tomorrow due to his moving...he was accessing from an internet cafe), I don't think you are going to be able to get a quick answer. If Sauro and you are agreeable, since I have heard nothing from Dr. Funk regarding Caspian's monster fight, even though they are a level apart I can go ahead and fight Kracknol, if you want to run it. We can send PMs to Pitlords for notification and just proceed on our own, since he may not even be around until tomorrow. I'm willing to do this. I'll write up tactics for Kracknol vs Caspian and send them out tomarrow morning. If this isn't going to happen, let me know with a PM.
Maraxus 01-06-06, 04:37 PM	will take into account. *sigh* with your healing and Noko's mobility it is extremely doubtful that a winner can be decided. After all the ammunition is gone Noko can simply avoid Kraegin. Is there such a thing as a draw? Even xp/gp and everyone goes home happy? Just a thought... About healing: Basicly weapons that deal subdual damage also make sneak attacks deal subdual damage. I'm very sure, this counts for merciful weapons, too. Then: Noko has lots of arrows and Kraigin has only very limited healing - I bet on my fairie. Should I run out of arrows, however ... the last time that happened, the pitlord simply had me comitting suicide by attacking with my fist. This time I have a spiked chain in my bag - you can use that.
TelinArtho 01-06-06, 04:40 PM	About healing: Basicly weapons that deal subdual damage also make sneak attacks deal subdual damage. I'm very sure, this counts for merciful weapons, too. Oh - that's right... nevermind then. Then: Noko has lots of arrows and Kraigin has only very limited healing - I bet on my fairie. Yes - but you also wasted a bunch of arrows on the bat... Should I run out of arrows, however ... the last time that happened, the pitlord simply had me comitting suicide by attacking with my fist. This time I have a spiked chain in my bag - you can use that. And that's what I'm hoping for- you to come into range...
Begferdeth 01-06-06, 05:12 PM	Well, my first look-over seemed ok... but just one thing. Mektos was hiding in his fog for 10+ rounds. Does that break the 10 round rule and give Chili his location for the energy stun? Or does the animal attacks count? Ch'Chili vs Mektos (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8168197&postcount=956) is up, and I now have a lot more respect for the pitlords around here, especially those of you who deal with pitlording max fights each week. Took me five danged hours getting that thing to where it is. Feel free to pick at it, poke at it, rip it shreds, or whatever else need be done to get it right. I'm unfamiliar with some of the rules I was forced to use and could easily have done them wrong. In the meantime, I'm getting some sleep (I'm on EST, and its past midnight here). Zevox
Macbrea 01-06-06, 05:53 PM	I am not sure, delay entirely is upto the pitlord in question. I personally would have removed all my spells to allow you a chance to take the shot at me or moved you to the rock and sniped at me. But each pitlord has their way of doing things perfectly fine. The 10 round delay rule is only there to keep the flow of the fight. What he did wrong in reality is not inform Mektos when the empathic link to both his animal companion and familiar was broken. At which point the natural thing to do is not delay, drop the entangle and hunt Ch'Chilli with the wand.
Ariel23 01-06-06, 06:18 PM	@warclone @waywreth Tactics received and look fine. Pre-fight is up here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8175247&postcount=959). I won't post tactics until I'm done with the fight. That way if I have any questions, I haven't created a "player knowledge" issue. This will be done by SAT morning, barring complications.
MitzaVolchenko 01-06-06, 06:41 PM	Someone decide what is supposed to be what please. Sigh. Why does he always write such a thing into the headline. Between Active for January 4 and Inactive for January 4 are not many letters. Well, I hope Gonbow forgives me and sends some tactics. Due to an error in pairings, the originally scheduled matches between Kracknol and Tatyana pitlorded by MitzaVolchenko and Caspian MacLeod vs 1 Xill pitlorded by Dr. Funk will not take place. A new pairing has been set by Pitlords, and is reflected in the Character's pairings post. Caspian MacLeod (NiQil) vs Kracknol (SauroGrenom) > MitzaVolchenko @ Dr. Funk: Yer off the hook for the monster fight. @ Mitza, Sauro: Cat agreed this was the easiest way to fix the problem. I should have tactics in sometime tonight (before deadline). Message sent to SauroGrenom, MitzaVolchenko and Dr. Funk First Horseman (Nightbanegod) vs Kracknol (SauroGrenom): MitzaVolchenko Bounty Hunter (Nightbanegod) vs Methos MacLeod (NiQil): MitzaVolchenko The only tactics I have received are for Methos. I suggest that everyone involved send me tactics. When It comes time, I will run whatever is decided upon, but I am running all fights tomorrow if I can, so get them in tonight or early tomorrow, please.
DTFarstar 01-06-06, 06:45 PM	I'm still looking for tactics from Greefe(Ribking). I'll start my fight in about 24-ish hours and should have them done by about 30 hours from now.
TroubleWolf 01-06-06, 06:51 PM	@Luni - Tactics for Sven are on the way. I don't have Internet at home, and I couldn't devote the concentration on Tactics at work, so I had to run over to a friend's house to write them. They'll be in your PM box shortly. Edit: Sent.
Usurpator 01-06-06, 06:53 PM	@MindWandererB: @Sjokar: I have just looked over Bolrak Soulbare for his fight against Shazzelin, but I see you have Psionic Weapon and you probably intend (and have used it before) in conjuction with Unarmed Strike. Some weeks ago it was decided here (but probably not noted in a place that is easy to find) that Psionic Weapon does not work in conjuction with unarmed strike, since otherwise Psionic Fist would be an obsolete an nonsensical feat. I am fine that you use it for this coming fight as either Psionic Weapon or Psionic Fist, your choice. But you cannot use it as both. Sorry. I really wish all these 'agreements' get a place somewhere in the Rules of Gladius, so that we don't see the same errors and have the same debates over and over again and that people put effort in character builds that might suddenly not work out as intended. Cerebus13 made a good start, but I think all the rulings need a better home than in his thread(s).
Cerebus13 01-06-06, 07:10 PM	Went ahead and posted it in my FAQ thread anyway. The list is getting rather long...
NiQil 01-06-06, 07:19 PM	Someone decide what is supposed to be what please. The only tactics I have received are for Methos. I suggest that everyone involved send me tactics. When It comes time, I will run whatever is decided upon, but I am running all fights tomorrow if I can, so get them in tonight or early tomorrow, please. Here's the final decision. Since both Tatyana (Gonbow) and Delaria (TelinArtho) were incorrectly paired and had to be removed, their opponents where put together into one match. Caspian is still losing to the Xill, which is being run by Dr. Funk. Methos MacLeod vs The Bounty Hunter > MitzaVolchenko Kracknol vs The First Horseman > MitzaVolchenko Caspian MacLeod vs 1 Xill > Dr. Funk I apologize for the confusion, but I hope that straightens everything out.
NiQil 01-06-06, 07:23 PM	@MindWandererB: @Sjokar: I have just looked over Bolrak Soulbare for his fight against Shazzelin, but I see you have Psionic Weapon and you probably intend (and have used it before) in conjuction with Unarmed Strike. Some weeks ago it was decided here (but probably not noted in a place that is easy to find) that Psionic Weapon does not work in conjuction with unarmed strike, since otherwise Psionic Fist would be an obsolete an nonsensical feat. I am fine that you use it for this coming fight as either Psionic Weapon or Psionic Fist, your choice. But you cannot use it as both. Sorry. I really wish all these 'agreements' get a place somewhere in the Rules of Gladius, so that we don't see the same errors and have the same debates over and over again and that people put effort in character builds that might suddenly not work out as intended. Cerebus13 made a good start, but I think all the rulings need a better home than in his thread(s). I was thinking about this the other day, and I am going to see what I can do about finding some room to move the FAQ into the Prison thread. I make no guarantees, but it would seem that if the rulings aren't in the Rules thread, then they should be where errors are reported.
Macbrea 01-06-06, 07:32 PM	Ok, this fight could end up a long back and forth dance between a rogue and a monk. The rogue cannot take shots at the monk unless he catchers her flat footed and she has tactics that say move about on top of the statue and hide and snipe. Sheesh.
MindWandererB 01-06-06, 09:15 PM	I have just looked over Bolrak Soulbare for his fight against Shazzelin, but I see you have Psionic Weapon and you probably intend (and have used it before) in conjuction with Unarmed Strike. Some weeks ago it was decided here (but probably not noted in a place that is easy to find) that Psionic Weapon does not work in conjuction with unarmed strike, since otherwise Psionic Fist would be an obsolete an nonsensical feat. I am fine that you use it for this coming fight as either Psionic Weapon or Psionic Fist, your choice. But you cannot use it as both. Sorry. I really wish all these 'agreements' get a place somewhere in the Rules of Gladius, so that we don't see the same errors and have the same debates over and over again and that people put effort in character builds that might suddenly not work out as intended. Cerebus13 made a good start, but I think all the rulings need a better home than in his thread(s).I'm sorry, but I have to object in the strongest possible terms. It is very clearly stated that a monk's unarmed strike is treated as both a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon. Both psionic fist and psionic weapon should work just fine on it. Psionic Fist exists primarily for Psychic Warriors who fight with the Claw and Bite powers, although it also works for non-monks who fight with unarmed strikes. It is therefore in no way "obsolete and nonsensical." It is very, very clear that by the RAW, both powers should work for monk unarmed strikes, and anything else would be a house rule. As for "agreements," there are two places they can go. There is a listing in the WAR guild of such understandings, as long as they are based on RAW. House-rules that are in contradiction to the RAW belong in the Rules thread--there's a section there on house rules.
NiQil 01-06-06, 09:40 PM	I'm sorry, but I have to object in the strongest possible terms. It is very clearly stated that a monk's unarmed strike is treated as both a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon. Both psionic fist and psionic weapon should work just fine on it. Psionic Fist exists primarily for Psychic Warriors who fight with the Claw and Bite powers, although it also works for non-monks who fight with unarmed strikes. It is therefore in no way "obsolete and nonsensical." It is very, very clear that by the RAW, both powers should work for monk unarmed strikes, and anything else would be a house rule. As for "agreements," there are two places they can go. There is a listing in the WAR guild of such understandings, as long as they are based on RAW. House-rules that are in contradiction to the RAW belong in the Rules thread--there's a section there on house rules. Call it a house rule if you prefer, but Usurpator is correct. It was determined that Psionic Fist is what is required to use this ability with unarmed strikes, rather than Psionic Weapons, since the Psionic Fist feat specifically mentions unarmed strikes. It was determined that the RAI was to have unarmed strikes covered under the Psionic Fist feat. By the RAW, you are correct in that the wording allows unarmed strikes to be covered by either feat, but this ruling was made to balance the two feats. As Usurpator stated, if Psionic Weapon is allowed to cover unarmed strikes, then Psionic Fist would almost never be used, and Psionic Weapon would be overpowered in comparison. I don't know if you were around when this decision was made....it was recent, but I don't remember how recent. So it may have been done before you ever began participating here. Edit: This was added to Cerebus' FAQ thread, I believe....and I am trying to work on getting a permanent location for those rulings. Until that happens, however, this is bound to happen from time to time.
Vathelokai 01-06-06, 09:48 PM	Tactics recieved for Rebreg... @One_Winged: still waiting on Azriel's tactics
MindWandererB 01-06-06, 10:07 PM	Call it a house rule if you prefer, but Usurpator is correct. It was determined that Psionic Fist is what is required to use this ability with unarmed strikes, rather than Psionic Weapons, since the Psionic Fist feat specifically mentions unarmed strikes. It was determined that the RAI was to have unarmed strikes covered under the Psionic Fist feat. By the RAW, you are correct in that the wording allows unarmed strikes to be covered by either feat, but this ruling was made to balance the two feats. As Usurpator stated, if Psionic Weapon is allowed to cover unarmed strikes, then Psionic Fist would almost never be used, and Psionic Weapon would be overpowered in comparison. I don't know if you were around when this decision was made....it was recent, but I don't remember how recent. So it may have been done before you ever began participating here.It must have been before my time, but my time only began a few weeks ago. I disagree that Psionic Fist would almost never be used. Of the four classes described in the XPH, only two of them are martial classes, and one of them relies heavily on claw and bite powers. Such a character would choose Psionic Fist. A non-monk who uses unarmed strikes might also choose it. Psionic Fist specifically mentions unarmed strikes because unless you are a monk, your unarmed strikes do not count as manufactured weapons. Let me use an analogy: Magic Fang vs. Magic Weapon. Like Psionic Fist, Magic Fang also mentions fists specifically, as well as slams, bites, and "other natural weapons." Magic Weapon only works on weapons, but it has this to say about monk fists: "a monk's unarmed strike is considered a weapon, and thus it can be enhanced by this spell." Is Magic Weapon more useful than Magic Fang? Yes. Does that mean that there is no role for Magic Fang in the game? No. These two spells are exactly analagous in every way to the feats. If you house-rule that monk unarmed strikes do not count as manufactured weapons in one instance, you should do it for all parallel cases as well, thus effectively removing a class feature. Also, if we start using the RAI instead of the RAW, we open up a whole can of worms. Should Psionic Shot work on ranged spells? I'd argue that the RAI is no. Should Improved Natural Attack work on monks? I can guarantee that they never intended for this to work, yet even the FAQ supports a literal reading. Would it help if I asked Andy Collins? I'm a regular over on his personal board, and I can guarantee that he'd support a literal reading of the rules--and he's the Sage, responsible for the FAQ. I'm going on vacation tomorrow, or else I could promise you an answer from him within a few days. I wish I could stick around and argue the point, but trust that I'll resurrect it when I come back if I have to. In any event, if a group decision is ever made that is in direct contradiction to the RAW, there needs to be a public place for such rulings. This is absolutely a house rule and should be recorded as such in the Rules thread. Personally, I see no reason for this house rule at all. A fighter would never choose Psionic Fist, but they can use Psionic Weapon with their greatsword, their dagger, their armor spikes, shield bash, or anything else. A ranged specialist can use Psionic Shot equally well on a crossbow, a Ray of Frost, a Disintegrate, a dart, a thrown flask of acid, or a hocked loogie if you really wanted to argue the point. Why limit monks, especially when they have a class ability that specifically allows them to benefit from weapon-enhancing effects?
Zevox 01-06-06, 10:36 PM	Well, my first look-over seemed ok... but just one thing. Mektos was hiding in his fog for 10+ rounds. Does that break the 10 round rule and give Chili his location for the energy stun? Or does the animal attacks count? Personally, I'm saying that the ally attacks count, largely because they're class allies (and thus a class feature). Even if I didn't, however, the 10-round rule wouldn't be broken in time for you to get his location for your energy stuns: I'd definitely count Mektos' actions in rounds 1 and 2 as meaningful, since his fog cloud and entangle were meant both to defend him and trap you. Therefore the earliest the delay penalty would be enacted is round 13, the round after your energy stun shots finish. What he did wrong in reality is not inform Mektos when the empathic link to both his animal companion and familiar was broken. At which point the natural thing to do is not delay, drop the entangle and hunt Ch'Chilli with the wand. Ah, good point. I forgot he should feel the empathic link connection fall when his birds died. In which case yes, I suppose I should have had him shut down his entangle and go bug hunting. In which case the 10 round delay penalty would never enact regardless, and the first magic missile shot Mektos got would bring Ch'Chili down. Of course, there is the chance that Ch'Chili would get his Energy Stun off successfully before Mektos could fire, which may stun him, giving Ch'Chili a chance to win after all. If either or both of you would like, I'll rerun the fight with that occuring after round 6, and see what happens. Zevox
Skojar 01-06-06, 10:56 PM	I have to agree with MindWandererB on the Psychic Fist thing. I don't see how it makes any sense to institute that house rule, especially when the RAW are so clear. Where can we see the debate? Were there more than jsut the 'obsolescence' argument, as that leaves something to be desired.
NiQil 01-07-06, 12:42 AM	@ Dr. Funk: Losing tactics for Caspian MacLeod sent via PM.
Ariel23 01-07-06, 03:39 AM	@Psionic Fist people: Regardless of whether Psionic Fist is exclusive of Psionic Weapon, even if we allowed both to work on Monk unarmed strikes, you would never be able to use both at once because your Psionic Focus would be spent on one or the other but not both. So why would it matter? The only way it would "double stack" is if you had a Psi Crystal that held a Psionic Focus for you, which is 2 more feats on top of Psionic Fist and Psionic Weapon. @waywreth @warclone Gaston v. Savour is up. Not that this is different from any other fight, but one of you will be happy: http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8175247&postcount=959
Ariel23 01-07-06, 04:16 AM	*sigh* with your healing and Noko's mobility it is extremely doubtful that a winner can be decided. After all the ammunition is gone Noko can simply avoid Kraegin. Is there such a thing as a draw? Even xp/gp and everyone goes home happy? Just a thought...Is it possible to recover ammunition during a fight at a 50% rate? Putting Search/Spot checks aside and AoO's and so forth, just is it possible? I always wondered about spears, axes, and so forth, those don't break at all...surely you can go pick them up. Regarding Thwap vs Shaz: 1. I'm going to edit the fight to allow Thwap to rage during his readied action as it stood originally. I've been convinced on this one.This is not against Turin, I just chose to quote him since it was the last quote on the matter... Can a Barbarian then ready an action to Rage if he is forced to make a WIL or FORT save or to Rage if he takes damage or to Rage if he is forced to make a STR-based check? @Telinartho Philosophical question: Do you think someone could ready to Listen if there were something to hear? It's pretty stupid sounding, but would explain the Move action thing. While your opponent is Invisible, you "Ready to Listen" and then when your opponent moves, you get your automatic Listen check and your readied Listen check...? You're not doing anything else if you can't See Invisible, why not gain an extra Listen check? Also, I think that rounds do not actually consist of one person running, then one attacking, then one sneaking, while they all watch and wait for the person to finish. You actually run/move/attack over the course of the whole 6 seconds, so there should always be something to listen to. :P Are minions (et al) attacking "meaningful interaction?" That's up to the crowd, but I'd be content to watch someone fight off wolves and celestial badgers if I was at an ECL 3 fight. Gladiators fighting Lions is a spectator event. Just like you don't get extra XP for someone with a class ally, the ability to summon, or a demon/devil who can Gate...this would be considered "using" your powers to fight. What I would find boring as a spectator is everybody going Invisible all the time...
NiQil 01-07-06, 05:51 AM	@Psionic Fist people: Regardless of whether Psionic Fist is exclusive of Psionic Weapon, even if we allowed both to work on Monk unarmed strikes, you would never be able to use both at once because your Psionic Focus would be spent on one or the other but not both. So why would it matter? The only way it would "double stack" is if you had a Psi Crystal that held a Psionic Focus for you, which is 2 more feats on top of Psionic Fist and Psionic Weapon. @waywreth @warclone Gaston v. Savour is up. Not that this is different from any other fight, but one of you will be happy: http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8175247&postcount=959 I think the reason it matters is that if you allow Psionic Weapon to include unarmed strikes, you now have a feat that can be used on weapons and unarmed strikes, which basically allows a monk to use it on just about anything he wields. If you allow Psionic Fist to cover the unarmed strike portion, then you would need one for the unarmed strikes, and one for the weapons. @ MindWanderer & Skojar: Let me put it to you in these terms...maybe this will help you see where we were coming from when the ruling was made. On one side we have Fist, which covers unarmed strikes and natural weapons. On the other we have Weapon, which covers all melee weapons. First...which of the two do you think gets used more often here, weapons or unarmed strikes? I would bet weapons do, hands down...probably by an overwhelming margin. Now, we take the monk, who has these fists that count as both natural weapons and manufactured weapons. He falls into both categories with his fists. But he also has the ability to use all of these cool weapons as well, and they fall to one side of the line (Weapon). So, since he is already covered by Weapon for all his cool monk toys, we decided that it would be fair to have his fists be covered by Fist to even things out. Monks are oddballs to begin with in this regard...they are the exception. But think about it from a CoCo perspective. How many characters do we have around here using melee weapons? Now compare that to how many we have using unarmed strikes or natural weapons. Probably a pretty big margin there, with the melee weapon side winning. So since the monk could use both, we decided to make it so he *had to use both, to have all of his toys benefit. Otherwise, you have to pick an option....just like most every other class around. Now, I don't mean for the above to be condescending or anything...I'm just trying to lay out, in the simplest terms I can think of after being awake for 24 hours, the reasoning behind the decision. Monks are the oddball exception to the two feats....so we split the difference. They can use either one to cover a part of their toys...but for all their toys to be uber cool, they gotta burn that extra feat and take both.
Usurpator 01-07-06, 06:03 AM	@MindWandererB: I don't think you have an unreasonable position, but my first priority now is to have rules that are consistent, predictable and findable. This ruling was made in the past, and while you (and others) can debate to have it overturned, it has to stand for this fight. It unfortunate that you weren't notified in advance, but I am allowing you to choose between both feats for this fight, since I don't think it is fair that you have to conform to a rule that wasn't easily findable, and your character will be minimally hampered.
Vathelokai 01-07-06, 06:51 AM	Not disagreeing with Usurpator, just continuing the debate... A monk’s unarmed strike is treated both as a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons. I don't see how the RAW could be any more clear. In fact, this is one of the more logical sentences in the PHB. Yet somehow every time someone tries to use this particular extraordinary ability it gets shot down. I disagreed with this house rule when it first came up, and still do. Monks have a tough enough time as it is. Why make it harder? What other class would we ban the use of a class ability? Secondly, this rule was never posted; does that make it a house rule that we all follow, or does that make it a ruling that was made for one fight? Can we come up with some kind of system so that all of the house rules/rule interpretations are listed somewhere? Cerebus13 is making a valiant effort with the FAQ, but it dosn't cover all, not to mention that it should be linked into the house rules post.
NiQil 01-07-06, 07:27 AM	Not disagreeing with Usurpator, just continuing the debate... I don't see how the RAW could be any more clear. In fact, this is one of the more logical sentences in the PHB. Yet somehow every time someone tries to use this particular extraordinary ability it gets shot down. I disagreed with this house rule when it first came up, and still do. Monks have a tough enough time as it is. Why make it harder? What other class would we ban the use of a class ability? Secondly, this rule was never posted; does that make it a house rule that we all follow, or does that make it a ruling that was made for one fight? Can we come up with some kind of system so that all of the house rules/rule interpretations are listed somewhere? Cerebus13 is making a valiant effort with the FAQ, but it dosn't cover all, not to mention that it should be linked into the house rules post. I am in the process of doing that very thing in the Prison. I have received permission to add a list similar to Cerebus' to the Prison, so that there is an official clarification/house rule/ruling on ambiguous rules post somewhere. I will post more when it is completed.
TheMagister 01-07-06, 07:48 AM	Concerning the Psionic Fist/Psionic Weapon thing: I know this isn't even a "debate" anymore (its already been decided to be a house rule) but I agree with MindWandererB. I'd support a petition to get this house rule removed. TM
TroubleWolf 01-07-06, 09:50 AM	NM
Skojar 01-07-06, 09:54 AM	@ MindWanderer & Skojar: Let me put it to you in these terms...maybe this will help you see where we were coming from when the ruling was made. On one side we have Fist, which covers unarmed strikes and natural weapons. On the other we have Weapon, which covers all melee weapons. First...which of the two do you think gets used more often here, weapons or unarmed strikes? I would bet weapons do, hands down...probably by an overwhelming margin. Now, we take the monk, who has these fists that count as both natural weapons and manufactured weapons. He falls into both categories with his fists. But he also has the ability to use all of these cool weapons as well, and they fall to one side of the line (Weapon). So, since he is already covered by Weapon for all his cool monk toys, we decided that it would be fair to have his fists be covered by Fist to even things out. Monks are oddballs to begin with in this regard...they are the exception. But think about it from a CoCo perspective. How many characters do we have around here using melee weapons? Now compare that to how many we have using unarmed strikes or natural weapons. Probably a pretty big margin there, with the melee weapon side winning. So since the monk could use both, we decided to make it so he *had to use both, to have all of his toys benefit. Otherwise, you have to pick an option....just like most every other class around. So does magic weapon not work on monk's fists in CoCo? This ruling seems to indicate that it shouldn't. Your rationale is based on the argument that monks are too powerful and certain of their class features should be eliminated to improve balance. Why not simply rule that that line is removed from the class description of the monk if it's too troublesome? Of course I'll run and play according to the rules (when they can be found...I see there's progress on that), but that doesn't mean that I'll not speak up when those rules don't make sufficient sense. I see exactly wherer you're coming from and I don't think that the two arguments I've heard are anywhere close to enough to justify the ruling. Edit: I see that there are only two cases when a base classes' features have been specifically limited (excluding the 1/3 rule): monk's unarmed strike counted as manufactured weapon and bard's fascinate. Now the description of fascinate explicitly says that 'any obvious threat' breaks the effect, so the ruling that it can't be done in the arena makes sense and follows the RAW. It seems rather unprecedented, then to rule against RAW for balance reasons in specific case of a multiclass monk (who's already got the 'no multiclassing out of and back into monk' problem), when there are zero other such rulings. Tell me again how we can initiate the process of opening this back up?
DTFarstar 01-07-06, 10:27 AM	I really have to say, I kind of understand where you guys are coming from on the not allowing Psionic Weapon with monk's unarmed strike. It does seem almost unfair for monks to cover everything with the one feat, but honestly, it is obviously RAW, and it falls in line with everything else for the monk and thus also seems RAI. However, I really don't think it is unbalancing to the point of needing a house rule, or unbalancing at all. I want to say I'm really neutral on this, if I ever make a monk it will probably be a monk/druid or a monk/psychic warrior(claws) so I'm pretty much either going to just want to use it on my q-staff(and never pick up the feat anyway) or just want Psionic Fist for the claws. Anyway, I just really don't think that whatever tiny unbalancing effect this could potentially have warrants a house rule. I really don't care one way or the other, but I just really don't want to see house rules popping up everywhere. There are very few things in straight core that truly require house ruling in this environment, and I don't want to start seeing peoples personal prejudices(I am by no means saying this is the case) pop up in the form of house rules for or against a certain class or ability. The more RAW this place is the easier it will be for people to get the hang of it, and the harder it will be for people to feel slighted. I mean this is the place where you are supposed to be able to test any core build and see if it's worthy. The more we deviate, for whatever reason, from core material the less we are able to truly test "Core" builds. Eventually, if we follow what could become a slippery slope, we might as well not bother because it will be just like every home game ever where there are just too many house rules to even consider it official DnD anymore. I realize this has not happened yet, and I hope it never will. I enjoy this place and what I get to do here immensely, but the longer I have been here the more arguments against RAW have shown up. The Spell-Sunder argument, which thankfully got resolved as not RAW- for a moment I thought it was going to be ruled in, the tower shield argument, people are even arguing about listen checks now. So... I just fear for the future of this establishment if we allow Official CoCo House Rules to be made for something so minor. I feel it sets a dangerous precedent. Anyway, sorry for the long post, and that is just how I feel. I'm certain someone else could say it better, and I didn't mean to offend anyone. If it did offend you, I apologize. An English Major I am not.
Kaigan 01-07-06, 11:29 AM	Edit: Never mind...
Macbrea 01-07-06, 11:55 AM	If either or both of you would like, I'll rerun the fight with that occuring after round 6, and see what happens. Zevox I don't care it is upto my opponent. As it stands I am fine with the fight. I truthfully wrote my tactics to delay with the kobold. So, by the spirit of my tactics they were to delay in the center of the obsuring mist and take that shot from him at a 50% miss chance. But, it is actually suppose to be illegal to delay. But there is no set penalty for it.
Skojar 01-07-06, 12:13 PM	Can a Barbarian then ready an action to Rage if he is forced to make a WIL or FORT save or to Rage if he takes damage or to Rage if he is forced to make a STR-based check? Well, that depends on what type of action a rage is, technically (I think). I have been under the impression that raging is a free action, but when I went to go look it up that is not made clear. It looks more likely that by RAW it's not an action, but that seems counter-intuitive. Anyway, once you determine that, the definition of the Ready action will make all clear. Ready is a standard action, to perform a single standard, move-equivalent, or free action when a set condition is met. If raging is a free action, then you can ready to rage, but you can't rage during a readied action (as is the case in the case in question) because you can't ready a set of actions. If raging is not an action, then a character can rage during another action, but the class description seems quite clear that raging can only take place during your turn. Although the compromise presented isn't possible in either of these cases, it seems like it could be acceptable under the definition of rage as not an action, with the caveat that when a readied action is triggered, it is essentially part of the reading character's turn, but that seems to be stretching a little...man this can get confusing.
TelinArtho 01-07-06, 01:31 PM	I've received all of my tactics for my remaining fight. I'll be running when I get a chance - either tonight, tomorrow or Monday. /d
Macbrea 01-07-06, 01:44 PM	Entering a rage takes no time itself, but a barbarian can do it only during his action, not in response to someone else’s action. As that seems to state that it does take any time at all. One you would have to guess it's a free action. But, it isn't specified in the description.
Begferdeth 01-07-06, 01:44 PM	Well, I would ask for a rerun there... but that would ruin Chili's near perfect record. :D Plus its a lot of work to go through when he has a 100' range advantage, and very little chance of going down from one attack. Next time, kobold, NEXT TIME!!!! I don't care it is upto my opponent. As it stands I am fine with the fight. I truthfully wrote my tactics to delay with the kobold. So, by the spirit of my tactics they were to delay in the center of the obsuring mist and take that shot from him at a 50% miss chance. But, it is actually suppose to be illegal to delay. But there is no set penalty for it.
Pittbull 01-07-06, 01:45 PM	There is a non-core feat which grants rage when it's not the characters turn. I would handle rage as a free action. Therefor it can be readied.
Snommelp 01-07-06, 02:01 PM	There is a non-core feat which grants rage when it's not the characters turn. I would handle rage as a free action. Therefor it can be readied. It is a free action, yes. However, there is the clause about not being able to rage in response to an opponent's action. Maybe I'm too used to seeing the phrase "in response" in M:tG but I would consider a readied action to be responding to an opponent's action.
Skojar 01-07-06, 02:22 PM	As that seems to state that it does take any time at all. One you would have to guess it's a free action. But, it isn't specified in the description. Yes, the description of raging seems to be a more drawn out way of saying: 'rage is a free action' without actually saying so explicitly. However, if it is a free action, then Thwap can't ready to both rage and shoot, only one or the other. The only interpretation that allows for doing both at once is the one in which raging is not an action, making it impossible to ready. I'm not saying this is a huge deal or anything, but I just want things to be clarified for the future. Of course if the barbarian class were introduced now, I'm guessing that raging would be a swift action, but that's neither here not there.
Usurpator 01-07-06, 02:53 PM	@SKojar Sent tactics for Shazzelin @All What's up with all the Duergar all of a sudden. When I made Shazzelin, he was the only one of his kind, now there's a whole bunch of them running around, I even mistakenly looked at Ivangar the Exile initially instead of Bolrak Soulbare when writing my tactics. Both Duergar monks. By the way, excellent names for those two Duergar! You can recognize what they are by their names alone.
Usurpator 01-07-06, 02:56 PM	Yes, the description of raging seems to be a more drawn out way of saying: 'rage is a free action' without actually saying so explicitly. However, if it is a free action, then Thwap can't ready to both rage and shoot, only one or the other. The only interpretation that allows for doing both at once is the one in which raging is not an action, making it impossible to ready. I'm not saying this is a huge deal or anything, but I just want things to be clarified for the future. Of course if the barbarian class were introduced now, I'm guessing that raging would be a swift action, but that's neither here not there. Well, he would ready to shoot, and then rage while he is shooting. If it truly is a free action, that wouldn't be a problem anymore than shouting: 'look out!' when you are launching a readied arrow at an opponent, since speaking is also a free action. Drawing ammunition is another typical example of a free action that can be done 'during' another action. In any case, I would allow it.
TelinArtho 01-07-06, 03:03 PM	Is it possible to recover ammunition during a fight at a 50% rate? Putting Search/Spot checks aside and AoO's and so forth, just is it possible? I always wondered about spears, axes, and so forth, those don't break at all...surely you can go pick them up. Yes it is - sometimes you even see that someone retrieves missed shots against him if they are up against a flying opponent with not too much for ammunition. @Telinartho Philosophical question: Do you think someone could ready to Listen if there were something to hear? It's pretty stupid sounding, but would explain the Move action thing. While your opponent is Invisible, you "Ready to Listen" and then when your opponent moves, you get your automatic Listen check and your readied Listen check...? You're not doing anything else if you can't See Invisible, why not gain an extra Listen check? Also, I think that rounds do not actually consist of one person running, then one attacking, then one sneaking, while they all watch and wait for the person to finish. You actually run/move/attack over the course of the whole 6 seconds, so there should always be something to listen to. Well whether I feel the fight is a consistent flow of actions or one person then another - my question was more about how the rules actually worked with regard to active listen checks. I admitted I wasn't sure - so that's why I asked. As to readying to listen - I'd say that most of the time no it wouldn't be allowed - because you wouldn't have a concrete trigger. If you ready to listen when someone moves - you'd need to succeed on your initial listen check. If you are trying to get a better handle on where the person is - I suppose it is fine - but I think that most of the time, you just wind up readying for nothing. Personally, I'd rather ready to shoot on sight, ready to move towards on sight, or something similar.
Skojar 01-07-06, 03:26 PM	Well, he would ready to shoot, and then rage while he is shooting. If it truly is a free action, that wouldn't be a problem anymore than shouting: 'look out!' when you are launching a readied arrow at an opponent, since speaking is also a free action. Drawing ammunition is another typical example of a free action that can be done 'during' another action. In any case, I would allow it. I'm not sure that's how it works. I think you're giving too many actions.
Ariel23 01-07-06, 03:28 PM	Entering a rage takes no time itself, but a barbarian can do it only during his action, not in response to someone else’s action. Readying an Action You can ready a standard action, a move action, or a free action. To do so, specify the action you will take and the conditions under which you will take it. Then, any time before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition. So, "In response to someone else's action" = A "readied action in response to that condition?" A readied action is by definition a response. There can be no debate about that. The problem is that "Ready Action" is a technical term with specific in-game meaning while "Response" is not. When they use words like that, we have to get into RAI. It doesn't make us bad people, it makes WotC bad people. So if they didn't mean "A Barbarian cannot rage as a readied action," what did they mean? They'd already said a Barbarian can only Rage on his own action--that should have been the end of that sentence and none of this would be under discussion:Entering a rage takes no time itself, but a barbarian can do it only during his action. [End of paragraph and everyone is happy. Especially people who took "Instantaneous Rage" out of CW.]The "in response" phrase adds nothing...unless they meant he cannot do it as a readied action, because the only way to take an action when it's not your turn is the ready action. How could you ever do something as a response on your own action? By definition, you're the only one acting. Combat is a series of actions and reactions. Every action taken in a combat is in response to something, so they must have meant something more specific. If it has absolutely no meaning, why is it in there?
Pittbull 01-07-06, 03:28 PM	@All What's up with all the Duergar all of a sudden. When I made Shazzelin, he was the only one of his kind, now there's a whole bunch of them running around, I even mistakenly looked at Ivangar the Exile initially instead of Bolrak Soulbare when writing my tactics. Both Duergar monks. By the way, excellent names for those two Duergar! You can recognize what they are by their names alone. WHAT? ;) What was the race of the former King of Gladius? At the beginning of CoCo-LG there was KoRn, but I retired him. And.... when the ECL-10 league opens, my personally revenge of the duergars take place with Willbrock Stoneshaper. You see, duergars have quite a tradition here in Gladius.
Maraxus 01-07-06, 03:36 PM	About the rage thing: One quick thought, don't know if it came up allready but is rage really an action (free or whatever)? If it was no action by itself, there is nothing that forbits to take it during a readied action, or is it?
DTFarstar 01-07-06, 06:06 PM	@Ariel23 - It's your turn you provoke an AoO, it hits you and you will die from the damage without rage. You cannot rage in response to the hit and save your butt, you would have to rage before you provoked the AoO or survive and rage after, but you couldn't rage in response to an AoO or someone's readied action, even if all that happens on your turn. Can't rage in response to a readied hold person, though that happens on your turn. etc. etc. Just thought I would throw a little oil on the fire.
Usurpator 01-07-06, 06:15 PM	If it has absolutely no meaning, why is it in there? Sure it has meaning. It means the barbarian can only rage on his own turn, unlike say, casting feather fall or manifesting empty mind.
Snommelp 01-07-06, 06:39 PM	@Ariel23 - It's your turn you provoke an AoO, it hits you and you will die from the damage without rage. You cannot rage in response to the hit and save your butt, you would have to rage before you provoked the AoO or survive and rage after, but you couldn't rage in response to an AoO or someone's readied action, even if all that happens on your turn. Can't rage in response to a readied hold person, though that happens on your turn. etc. etc. Just thought I would throw a little oil on the fire. Your oil just doused the flames, I think. As you said, you couldn't rage in response to a readied action, even though it happens on your turn. And since a rage can only happen on your turn, you can't ready to rage, because the readied action happens on your opponent's turn. It looks to me like the debate is over.
Mal-2 01-07-06, 06:52 PM	The first 12 rounds of Ivangar vs Hassan are up here. I'm hitting the 50,000 character limit, so I'm going to post what's done and continue working on finishing in a second post. Please take a look over the first part and see if I've missed anything.
Usurpator 01-07-06, 06:53 PM	Your oil just doused the flames, I think. As you said, you couldn't rage in response to a readied action, even though it happens on your turn. And since a rage can only happen on your turn, you can't ready to rage, because the readied action happens on your opponent's turn. It looks to me like the debate is over. Possible, depends on your definition of turn. When your readied action triggers, I think it will be your turn to act, and the opponent has to wait finishing his turn until your readied characters has had his turn. You cannot rage in response to a readied action, because it is your opponents turn when he takes his readied action. That is the way I read it. Readied actions delay your turn until a trigger happens or your next initiative comes around. AoO's are examples of actions that you can take that truly don't happen on your turn. So no raging during an AoO.
MitzaVolchenko 01-07-06, 07:09 PM	Alrighty...all tactics finally received. I will runfights tonight or tomorrow and get them up. I appreciate everyone's patience on this one.
MitzaVolchenko 01-07-06, 07:43 PM	Finished checking through Zwei's fight part deux...only objection (and not a request for re-run by any stretch of the imagination) is that the map is completely fubarred. There is no place for a horse to stand on that island, nor really is there much room for a person other than that the rules say you can. Obviously I would have preferred the first running of it, but the second is perhaps more fair to the mage. On another note, I will not particpate in any further FFA fights. The map is only quasi legal and the collection of loser tags ticks me off. Thanks for struggling through that mess, Macbrea.
Zevox 01-07-06, 09:48 PM	@ Macbrea: after looking through the all vs all, I do have a few points to bring up: First, you did the smokestick all wrong. It produces an effect idetical to the Fog Cloud spell in a 10' radius. It does not give off the choking effect of heavy smoke (unless I missing something major in the description - if anyone knows something about it I don't, feel free to correct me). Further, while Featylec was in it he should have total concealment from anyone more than 5' away (50% miss chance and attackers could not locate him by sight). This would change a number of things. First, Jonathan wouldn't be able to throw his Javelins at Featylec while he was within the cloud (and consequentially Featylec wouldn't use round 6 to drop in the lava). Second, Featylec wouldn't spend rounds 7&8 choking, and would therefore be able to shoot Marcos in round 8 since he pinpointed him in round 7. Third, Marcos wouldn't be able to use Scorching Ray on Featylec, since he was within the fog when he did that. There may also be other instances I missed where Featylec was within the fog and it should have affected the battle. Second, I noticed you didn't add the +1 modifier from magic weapon to Featylec's bow shots. Not a big deal save in round 9, where Featylec missed Jonathan by 1, and thus would have hit him if itwere added (and he bypassed Darness' 20% miss chance). Third, I must agree with MitzaVolchenko: its quite clear from the map in the characters thread that there is only 5' between the statue and lava onall sides. As such, Jonathan shouldn't have been able to jump over while on his horse. I know its asking a lot (as MitzaVolchenko said, that is one mess of a fight), but as these are major effects (particularly Jonathan's inability to leap to the isle and the shot Featylec would have gotten on Marcos, which would be a sneak attack [and potential 1-hit kill at 1d8+1d6+2 damage] if Featylec was successfully hidden as he wished to try and be whenever possible) is there any chance you can rerun it with these changes? Zevox
Luni 01-07-06, 09:52 PM	@Kaigan: You sent Feradeth's tactics to the wrong person. :( I PM you about it, so hopefully you can send me tactics before I start the fight.
Mal-2 01-07-06, 10:21 PM	Ivangar the Exile (Turin) vs Hassan Sabbah (Vathelokai): Mal-2 [ECL 4] is complete [Part I, Part II]. This is my first fight, so I'd appreciate it if people would take a close look and see if I screwed anything up.
Skojar 01-07-06, 10:36 PM	Third, I must agree with MitzaVolchenko: its quite clear from the map in the characters thread that there is only 5' between the statue and lava onall sides. As such, Jonathan shouldn't have been able to jump over while on his horse. Can't a large creature fit into a 5ft x10ft rectangle, just sufferring the -4 from squeezing?
Zevox 01-07-06, 10:50 PM	Can't a large creature fit into a 5ft x10ft rectangle, just sufferring the -4 from squeezing? *looks this up in his PHB* True, that does seem to be the case. But then this -4 to his ac and attacks (and to his horse's) would need to factored in while he is on the isle, which it doesn't seem to be. Just with a cursory scan, that could affect some of his attacks, and would have caused a couple of Zwei's shots to hit (and furthers Featylec's one shot that magic weapon should have caused to hit) . Zevox
TelinArtho 01-08-06, 12:32 AM	[Aerryl vs Challack vs Mistique vs Trixie (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8184343) is up. I'm PMing Pitlords for a ruling - but if someone knows of another tie - please point it out to me so I can accurately figure out the rewards. /d
TelinArtho 01-08-06, 01:41 AM	This post is meant to be helpful to Iced's task in fixing Noko's damage which was discovered to be in error. If it is not helpful - please just ignore. For the first set of attacks, here's the damage that should be removed: 3+5 (http://invisiblecastle.com/find.py?id=329305) 5+4 (1 minimum less) (http://invisiblecastle.com/find.py?id=329309) 6+1 (2 minimum less) (http://invisiblecastle.com/find.py?id=329310) killing spree damage (http://invisiblecastle.com/find.py?id=329493) [3,2] = (5) [6,2] = (8) (at least 2) [3,6] = (9) [4,1] = (5) (max) [3,6] = (9) [4,1] = (5) (max) [6,2] = (8) (at least 2) [5,6] = (11) (at least 1) [4,2] = (6) (max) - crit [4,2] = (6) (max) [2,1] = (3) [5,5] = (10) (at least 1) [4,2] = (6) (max) [4,3] = (7) (max) [4,1] = (5) (max) [4,6] = (10) (max) [5,4] = (9) (at least 1) However, for the confirmed crit - the extra 1d6 from the merciful weapon would not be included. This, unfortunately for me only makes a difference of 3 damage. The minimum this adjusts the fight (even accounting for the rolls that are not at the maximum already) is 10 (damage over the maximum possible) + 3 (2d6's that need to be removed because the merciful damage would not be critted) - 6 (damage below the maximum) = 7. This means that at a minimum, I take 7 damage less from the initial volleys - putting me at 21hp before the 2nd set of arrows (the special ones) Here's the 2nd volley: (http://invisiblecastle.com/find.py?id=329514) [18,12] = (30) - hit [6,2] = (8) - (at least 2) [18,12] = (30) - hit [1,6] = (7) - (up to 3 more) [14,12] = (26) - hit [4,1] = (5) - max [1,12] = (13) [4,1] = (5) [8,12] = (20) [6,2] = (8) [2,12] = (14) [4,3] = (7) [3,12] = (15) [6,3] = (9) [12,12] = (24) [6,1] = (7) [3,12] = (15) [3,1] = (4) [10,12] = (22) [5,4] = (9) [14,12] = (26) - hit [6,5] = (11) - (at least 2) [5,12] = (17) [2,4] = (6) [5,12] = (17) [2,5] = (7) [17,12] = (29) - hit [5,2] = (7) - (at least 1) [19,12] = (31) - hit [1,6] = (7) - (up to 3 more) [18,12] = (30) - hit [2,1] = (3) - (up to 2 more) [9,12] = (21) [6,1] = (7) [18,12] = (30) - hit [4,4] = (8) - max [12,12] = (24) [2,2] = (4) [19,12] = (31) - hit [6,6] = (12) - (at least 2) # of hits: 9 Total damage of above: 68 DR total: 27 (9*3) Net change: 41 Total above maximum possible: 7 Total under maximum: 8 However, 10 of these must be silver - but to make it the most favorable to my opponent - the first 10 rolls will be used (meaning 3 hits deal 1 damage less - but one of them can't do less - so the net is -2) So in the end, if Noko deals max damage of all of the d4 damages dealt, Noko will drop me to -19 over 3+15+9 =27 hits. I think it is more than reasonable to expect that I'll survive the damage when it is rerolled. For Iced - there's 27 d6s that you need to reroll and associate with the rolls above - then apply the -3 to each one. I hope this analysis has helped some - if not I apologize for confusing the issue.
Warclone 01-08-06, 02:50 AM	Sorry if this response is delayed, I have been playing p&p d&d for 13 hours today. There is no dobut in my mind raging can be taken as part of a readied action. This is why: Entering a rage takes no time... not in response to someone else's action... can't, for example, fly into a rage when struck by an arrow in order to get the extra hit points I'll explain why I bolded 'no time' in a moment. First, when it says 'not in response to someoen else's action', it means that entering a rage is not an immediate action (immediate actions are described in expansion books and are basically free actions you can take on anyone's turn such as speaking or feather fall). It doesn't mean that you cannot take it while you are acting, which you are when you ready an action. Not an Action: ...litterally don't take any time at all Free Action: ...consume a very small amount of time As you can see from the above, RAW described entering a rage as a non-action. Because free actions take time, and non-actions take no time, and entering a rage takes no time. Simple as 1+1=2. And since the above unequivocaly proves Rage to be a non-action, you can take it while you are readying an action. Edit: to drive the nail in the coffin moreso, taking a 5ft step is a nonaction. This is why you can take it with a readied standard action (outside of CoCO). If moving your body 5ft is a nonaction and vibrating your vocal cords is a nonaction, I think a gland excreting adrenaline is also a nonaction. (rules of the game) Nonaction: ... A 5-foot step is a nonaction you can use to move a short distance when you don't otherwise move during your turn; see Rules of the Game: All About Movement. (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040608a)
MitzaVolchenko 01-08-06, 03:13 AM	Harbinger...er, the First Horseman vs. Kracknol is up here. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8183682&postcount=963)
MitzaVolchenko 01-08-06, 03:29 AM	[Aerryl vs Challack vs Mistique vs Trixie (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8184343) is up. I'm PMing Pitlords for a ruling - but if someone knows of another tie - please point it out to me so I can accurately figure out the rewards. /d I don't know about previous rulings, but Trixie has to break her charm person and attempt to kill Challak in order to actually win. I would grant that she can ask Challak to sleep (while she takes first shift as guard, of course) and take a CDG attempt on her. If we are all allowed to agree to ties, then maybe I will continue in the FFA's and just talk my opponents into agreeing to ties. If Trixie is unwilling to attack Challak in 10 rounds delay of game ends the spell.
Vathelokai 01-08-06, 03:37 AM	Is it possible to recover ammunition during a fight at a 50% rate? Putting Search/Spot checks aside and AoO's and so forth, just is it possible? I always wondered about spears, axes, and so forth, those don't break at all...surely you can go pick them up. I've always allowed it. Durring one extremely drawn out archer fight (ch'chi'ili vs. one of llmadcow's psiwarriors) MadCow actually included tactics to go around stomping his opponents arrows, just incase they both ran out of ammo. It is a free action, yes. However, there is the clause about not being able to rage in response to an opponent's action. Maybe I'm too used to seeing the phrase "in response" in M:tG but I would consider a readied action to be responding to an opponent's action.So, "In response to someone else's action" = A "readied action in response to that condition?" A readied action is by definition a response. There can be no debate about that. Possible, depends on your definition of turn. When your readied action triggers, I think it will be your turn to act, and the opponent has to wait finishing his turn until your readied characters has had his turn. As you can see from the above, RAW described entering a rage as a non-action.READY The ready action lets you prepare to take an action later, after your turn is over but before your next one has begun. Readying is a standard action. I was going to argue to allow the ready/rage, but then I went and looked up the rules; a standard action allow you to ready, then (it seems) you get a free standard action on your opponents turn to do whatever you readied to do. I guess you can't ready/rage. I would agree that rage is "not an action", but you are still prohibited from doing in durring "not your turn." As to readying to listen - I'd say that most of the time no it wouldn't be allowed - because you wouldn't have a concrete trigger. If you ready to listen when someone moves - you'd need to succeed on your initial listen check. If you are trying to get a better handle on where the person is - I suppose it is fine - but I think that most of the time, you just wind up readying for nothing.Action: Varies. Every time you have a chance to hear something in a reactive manner (such as when someone makes a noise or you move into a new area), you can make a Listen check without using an action. Trying to hear something you failed to hear previously is a move action. Try Again: Yes. You can try to hear something that you failed to hear previously with no penalty.I believe that you can take the move action to listen a second time to a sound, using the same DC. Remember; it dosn't have to make sense if it's a rule :D
Vathelokai 01-08-06, 04:05 AM	Ivangar the Exile (Turin) vs Hassan Sabbah (Vathelokai): Mal-2 [ECL 4] is complete [Part I, Part II]. This is my first fight, so I'd appreciate it if people would take a close look and see if I screwed anything up. Could you put a link at the bottom of the first post, connecting it to the second post; makes linking the fight on my sheet easier. Usually when I have the 10 rounds of looking around and buffing, I put something like this Round 3-11 SneakBoy drinks potions of x, y, and z while moving southward. TowerShieldMonkey reads scrolls of a, b, and c while 5 ft. stepping around. ending coordinates for sneaky (0,0) ending coordinates for tank (0,0) Round 12 SneakBoy sneakattacks. TowerShieldMonkey et ceteras Really cuts down on word count. @All: There are a couple of places I'm concerned about how I applied the rules. First, I know there is some debate over how a monk's flurry ability and grappling interacts. I chose to go with the (slightly) more popular interpretation from the Vote thread. I would love to have an Elder or GM ruling on this though. Second, should there have been a miss chance of some sort for the second grapple check, since Hassan was invisible? I've voted for the "improved flurry grapple" so I support your use of it. That dosn't mean it's the house rule, but I won't push for a re-run. As for the invisible grappler; Wow... I never even considered that before. Anybody know? Won't change the fight, since even if it gives me an extra attack, I'd have to crit and roll max damage with 4d6. If I would have spent one of those rounds buffing, it would have been different; bad tactics on my part. Congrats to Turin. Good job running the fight.
Dracazar 01-08-06, 04:15 AM	just a question about: The First Horseman (nightbanegod) vs. Kracknol (SauroGrenom) Kracknol uses a +1 Deep Crystal Heavy Flail of PowerStoring but that weapon isn't listed on the expenditures I only found this: Deep Crystal MW Heavy Flail (c) [10 lbs][657.5 gp]
Skojar 01-08-06, 05:06 AM	Bolrak vs Shazzelin (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8183893&postcount=964) is up. My first attempt at PitLording. It's more effort than I expected.
Macbrea 01-08-06, 08:48 AM	@ Macbrea: First, you did the smokestick all wrong. It produces an effect idetical to the Fog Cloud spell in a 10' radius. It does not give off the choking effect of heavy smoke (unless I missing something major in the description - if anyone knows something about it I don't, feel free to correct me). A smoke stick does produce smoke. And therefore the effect of heavy smoke should be taken into effect. Yes, it produces a cloud of smoke that is a 10ft cube. Secondly, Jonathon was moved to a location that you only had 20% concealment. Sadly, you got to choose between the 20% concealment of smoke or the 20% concealment of darkness. Second, I noticed you didn't add the +1 modifier from magic weapon to Featylec's bow shots. Not a big deal save in round 9, where Featylec missed Jonathan by 1, and thus would have hit him if itwere added (and he bypassed Darness' 20% miss chance). That is what that extra +1 at the end of your attacks are. Third, I must agree with MitzaVolchenko: its quite clear from the map in the characters thread that there is only 5' between the statue and lava onall sides. As such, Jonathan shouldn't have been able to jump over while on his horse. There are 4 squares on both sides of the lava. Technically by the rules 2 of those squares touch lava and 2 of those have 20% of the stone taken up by the statue. This also means half of the the rest of the squares are unenterable. The only other possibily on that map is we treat the statue as a Gargatuan (4x4) inanimate object. In which case any creature 2 size categories smaller may enter it's squares. So, your choose is either there is no palce to land that isn't statue or isn't lava or we treat this statue as a inanimate figure. I know its asking a lot (as MitzaVolchenko said, that is one mess of a fight), but as these are major effects (particularly Jonathan's inability to leap to the isle and the shot Featylec would have gotten on Marcos, which would be a sneak attack [and potential 1-hit kill at 1d8+1d6+2 damage] if Featylec was successfully hidden as he wished to try and be whenever possible) is there any chance you can rerun it with these changes? Rogues as much as it makes no sense may not sneak attack if they have any concealment. As per the description of sneak attack class feature.
Pittbull 01-08-06, 09:22 AM	Nexa vs Galagith (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8185675&postcount=967) is up.
Zevox 01-08-06, 09:56 AM	A smoke stick does produce smoke. And therefore the effect of heavy smoke should be taken into effect. Yes, it produces a cloud of smoke that is a 10ft cube. Smokestick: This alchemically treated wooden stick instantly creates thick, opaque smoke when ignited. The smoke fills a 10- foot cube (treat the effect as a fog cloud spell, except that a moderate or stronger wind dissipates the smoke in 1 round). The stick is consumed after 1 round, and the smoke dissipates naturally. SMOKE EFFECTS A character who breathes heavy smoke must make a Fortitude save each round (DC 15, +1 per previous check) or spend that round choking and coughing. A character who chokes for 2 consecutive rounds takes 1d6 points of nonlethal damage. Smoke obscures vision, giving concealment (20% miss chance) to characters within it. The description of the somestick and the smoke choking effects certainly seem to say otherwise. According to this, smokesticks are supposed to be treated as producing a fog cloud effect, and nothing more. Further, according to the smoke effects entry, only heavy smoke causes choking, not all smoke (and though the smoke released by a smokestick is descibed as "thick" and "opaque", it is not said to be "heavy"). Secondly, Jonathon was moved to a location that you only had 20% concealment. Sadly, you got to choose between the 20% concealment of smoke or the 20% concealment of darkness. Once he was on the island, true. But when he was throwing his javelins I was within the smoke, and by definition the smoke (since it has the same effect as a Fog Cloud spell) grants full concealment from anyone over 5' away. Ergo I should have had full concealment. That is what that extra +1 at the end of your attacks are. Ah! My apologies on that one then - I'd expected it to be factored into the die roll at invisible castle. My mistake. There are 4 squares on both sides of the lava. Technically by the rules 2 of those squares touch lava and 2 of those have 20% of the stone taken up by the statue. This also means half of the the rest of the squares are unenterable. The only other possibily on that map is we treat the statue as a Gargatuan (4x4) inanimate object. In which case any creature 2 size categories smaller may enter it's squares. So, your choose is either there is no palce to land that isn't statue or isn't lava or we treat this statue as a inanimate figure. Very well then, I'll withdraw that objection. Rogues as much as it makes no sense may not sneak attack if they have any concealment. As per the description of sneak attack class feature. *looks this up* Well, thats strange. Rogues can't sneak attack foes if thier target has concealment.... God, I need to read these footnotes more closely. Oh, while I'm on the subject, something I forgot to post last night - you forgot to list Featylec's smokestick as having been used up. Zevox
TheMagister 01-08-06, 10:19 AM	As for the invisible grappler; Wow... I never even considered that before. Anybody know? I'd say that you'd only deal with the miss chance if you decided to use the "attack your opponent" option, since it is a melee-type attack. Once the inital touch attack succeeds, you have ahold of your opponent, and can make grapple checks with no miss chance (twisting and gouging, etc.). TM
TheMagister 01-08-06, 10:26 AM	The description of the somestick and the smoke choking effects certainly seem to say otherwise. According to this, smokesticks are supposed to be treated as producing a fog cloud effect, and nothing more. Further, according to the smoke effects entry, only heavy smoke causes choking, not all smoke (and though the smoke released by a smokestick is descibed as "thick" and "opaque", it is not said to be "heavy"). Once he was on the island, true. But when he was throwing his javelins I was within the smoke, and by definition the smoke (since it has the same effect as a Fog Cloud spell) grants full concealment from anyone over 5' away. Ergo I should have had full concealment. Zevox Yeah, and heavy smoke only grants 20% concealment all the way through (see the last line of the "Smoke Effects" entry). Smoke thick enough to be equivalent to a Fog Cloud spell is even more "heavy" since it obscures vision TOTALLY between characters/objects more than 5' away. I can't see how you'd say that the chemical smoke from a smokestick can obscure vision to a higher degree than regular smoke and yet not be considered "heavy" enough to produce the effects of smoke. It just don't make sense (the Texan in me). Besides, there's NOTHING that says that you can't simply hold your breath after making your first Fort save, and thus avoid having to make more in later rounds. Even a 10 Con character can hold his breath for a full minute without making a Con check. TM
Usurpator 01-08-06, 11:08 AM	Nexa vs Galagith (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8185675&postcount=967) is up. Hi Pitbull, thanks for running the battle! I agree with you that going for a +17 vs. a +16 grapple is rather risky, that is why I asked to pin first and only do grapple damage after pinning. My tactics even give the statistics for such a combination. With two chances at +17 to disable Galgalith entirely, since he can do nothing but escape the pin on his round with his one check, it would be fairly save. I won this now due to the dice, but it should be a more convincing win with the flurry-pin combination. Pinning is not to be underestimated as a tactic. If Iced desires, you can rerun it with the pinning instead of two grapples, but that would not change the results. Round 6 Here Galgalith breathes acid, and you accidentally have him doing 8d8 instead of 6d8. Additionally, Nexa has evasion, so she would get no damage if she makes her save (sort of counted on that). Do you get a 20% miss chance from blur in a grapple? I thought grapple checks are not attacks, and concealment miss chances only apply to attacks, not opposed checks. Logic says his blurred outline would not help him if I have him in a headlock. Oh, and I keep forgetting, I think I better mention it in my sheet next time, due to uneven class levels Nexa has a 20% penalty on XP/gp, so it should be 1680 xp/2080 gp. With the breath weapon damage gone, Nexa will win this contest without taking a single point of damage, and only expending 300 gp. worth of expendables (against 1400 gp. for Galgalith). Jay! :) EDIT: I think Galgalith also used a potion of blur, and a potion of shield of faith that are both not mentioned in the expendables used section. And I see Nexa is doing 1d6 instead of 1d8 damage on the grapple checks.
TheMagister 01-08-06, 11:13 AM	On a side note of the Nexa v. Galagith rumble: @Iced - you can breathe your acid in a grapple. As a pitlord, I would disregard an opponent's evasion/improved evasion abilities if you breathed on them while you were engaged in a grapple with them. I'm pretty sure the ability descriptions back me up on this (something about if the evading character has his/her movement restricted then evasion doesn't work comes to mind...). TM edit: and don't feel bad...Nexa did this same thing to Sdentch early in her career. I seem to remember rolling like a 3 on my reflex save to avoid an entangle spell, and then her critting Sdentch with an arrow and killing her in like, one shot. Darned dice are cruel sometimes... tm
Usurpator 01-08-06, 11:26 AM	Nexa did this same thing to Sdentch early in her career. I seem to remember rolling like a 3 on my reflex save to avoid an entangle spell, and then her critting Sdentch with an arrow and killing her in like, one shot. Darned dice are cruel sometimes... Well, it was actually the same tactic (enlarge person and then grapple and pin before grappling for damage), that I used against Sdentch. My animal companion Silverfur (who was sadly killed by a White Dragon in a quest while trying to protect Daeren) also did some damage on that occasion. And Sdentch did break immediately free of the entangle on her action even though failing the initial Reflex save. Look here. You did have a few low rolls on your attacks, though. No critical arrows, though.
Usurpator 01-08-06, 11:39 AM	Bolrak vs Shazzelin (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8183893&postcount=964) is up. My first attempt at PitLording. It's more effort than I expected. Hi Skojar, thanks for having the honor to have my character fight in your first fight as a Pitlord. It must have been a difficult fight to run, with all the invisibility and hinding, and with MindwandererB not expecting Shazzelin to use the powerstone of Wall Walking and having no contingencies at all for that occasion. You have to improvise something, but run the risk that you get complaints about the improvisation chosen. I'll wait for editing my sheet until MindwanderB has had a chance to comment on the improvisation. These fights take a long time to run, especially if you write it out as detailed as you did, my compliments! I do see you have Bolrak making full moves while MindWandererB specified moving at half speed (to avoid the -5 penalty to move silently). That shouldn't matter for the outcome of the fight. Additionally, sniping is a full round action, and cannot be combined with rapid shot. But that also doesn't matter for the only time that it occurs (round 13) the second arrow missed anyway. Also, when Bolrak shoots Shazzelin from invisibility in round 12, Shazzelin cannot use his Dex to avoid, so his AC would be 18. And Bolrak would get an additional +2 to hit because he was invisible, bringing his total to 17, just missing Shazzelin....
TheMagister 01-08-06, 11:41 AM	Well, it was actually the same tactic (enlarge person and then grapple and pin before grappling for damage), that I used against Sdentch. My animal companion Silverfur (who was sadly killed by a White Dragon in a quest while trying to protect Daeren) also did some damage on that occasion. And Sdentch did break immediately free of the entangle on her action even though failing the initial Reflex save. Look here. You did have a few low rolls on your attacks, though. No critical arrows, though. You're right. It was some other druid entangle build that arrow critted me. Lemme look. edit: It was Luni's Shakari. 27 damage on an arrow crit out of 29 hp. Killed Sdentch on the next shot. (sigh) TM
SauroGrenom 01-08-06, 11:59 AM	MitzaVolchenko, I noticed a number of error's in the fight with Kracknol. First in round 5 the order of events is all wrong. Basically the Horseman cannot sunder an invisible flail. True, the Horseman has had a very high spot check but not good enough to pinpoint his invisible(+20hide) opponent. So Kracknol should get invisibility bonuses on his attack and atleast have concealment against the Horseman's attacks if they happen before Kracknol's attack. They should happen after Kracknol's attacks though. Kracknol doesn't become visible untill after his attack. This is unlikely to change much, but could be very important in other fights. Then in round 7 and all following rounds, Kracknol's trip check modifier is incorrectly calculated. Kracknol is enlarged so it should be +4strength +4dwarf+4size=+12total. You are only using a +4 modifier for all of Kracknol's trip checks. The correct modifier will prevent a trip from happening in round 7 or in round 8. All those hits related to Kracknol falling or standing from a prone position will all never happen because Kracknol never is knocked prone. Also every time a trip attempt is failed, Kracknol gets a chance to respond with a trip attempt as well and that may either trip the Horseman or require him to drop his flail to prevent being tripped. Also mounts and riders act in the same place in the initiative. One of the combatant's must delay to act in the inititiave of the slower one. This will likely move all of the Horseman's attacks to be after Kracknol's actions in the turn. I'm not sure how much will be changed by that, but it may become a factor in the battle as well. In the least the trip modifiers will likely change the outcome of the fight. Also I just noticed that Kracknol's AC is incorrectly calculated in a couple places. Kracknol is a dwarf and the Horseman is a giant. So Kracknol gets a +4 dodge bonus on his AC vs all of the Horseman's attacks. Neither of Harbinger attack roles in round 9 are actually high enough to hit Kracknol's AC of 16 in that round. The horseman's attack and Harbinger's AoO's in round 7 would both miss due to incorrect calculation of Krackno's AC against those attacks. Again proper calculation of Kracknol's AC will likely change the outcome of the fight.
Cerebus13 01-08-06, 12:24 PM	Zassl vs. Sam (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8187128&postcount=970) is up. Let me know if there are any problems.
Warclone 01-08-06, 01:00 PM	I was going to argue to allow the ready/rage, but then I went and looked up the rules; a standard action allow you to ready, then (it seems) you get a free standard action on your opponents turn to do whatever you readied to do. I guess you can't ready/rage. I would agree that rage is "not an action", but you are still prohibited from doing in durring "not your turn." You must not have read my explination... The stipulation included in the description of rage is to make sure it isn't interpreted as an immediate action, which it would be without the stipulation. When readying an action, it is effectively your turn while you take the action you readied.
Abyssal Stalker 01-08-06, 01:20 PM	@DTFarstar: There might be an error in Evaines tactics for the all vs. all fight: Default Evaine's tactics (vs Manzarf, Eiletha, Alboreth) ECL 3 Evaine's Tactics Jan 4 Thanks for running again. Sorry the tactics are kind of splintered, but that's the nature of a FFA. Wielding weapons 2H: +1 damage, +4 to resist Sunder Mwk Deep crystal longsword +5 melee, 1d8+4 [19-20/x2] [+2d6 damage for 2 PP] Deep crystal has 30 hit points per inch of thickness and a hardness of (less than 20). I think that wielding a one-handed weapon with two hands doesn't give the +4 in opposed sunder rolls. Opposed Rolls. You and the defender make opposed attack rolls with your respective weapons. The wielder of a two-handed weapon on a sunder attempt gets a +4 bonus on this roll, and the wielder of a light weapon takes a -4 penalty. If the combatants are of different sizes, the larger combatant gets a bonus on the attack roll of +4 per difference in size category. Wielding a weapon 2-handed doesn't make it a 2-handed weapon, since the effort needed to wield the weapon effectively doesn't change. Light, One-Handed, and Two-Handed Melee Weapons This designation is a measure of how much effort it takes to wield a weapon in combat. It indicates whether a melee weapon, when wielded by a character of the weapon’s size category, is considered a light weapon, a one-handed weapon, or a two-handed weapon. ... Two-Handed Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively. Apply 1½ times the character’s Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with such a weapon. So it seems to me that a longsword doesn't turn into a 2-handed weapon for a medium-sized character unless its size category turns one step larger. And it doesn't make sense that the weapon gets more hit points (since 2-handed blades have 10 hp and one-handed blades only 5 hp) and is harder to brake if it's wielded in some other way than the normal. Are there any other opinions on this issue?
MitzaVolchenko 01-08-06, 02:04 PM	MitzaVolchenko, I noticed a number of error's in the fight with Kracknol. First in round 5 the order of events is all wrong. Basically the Horseman cannot sunder an invisible flail. True, the Horseman has had a very high spot check but not good enough to pinpoint his invisible(+20hide) opponent. So Kracknol should get invisibility bonuses on his attack and atleast have concealment against the Horseman's attacks if they happen before Kracknol's attack. They should happen after Kracknol's attacks though. Kracknol doesn't become visible untill after his attack. This is unlikely to change much, but could be very important in other fights. Charging negates the bonus to hide granted by invisibility, hence the fresh hide check for Kracknol. A spot check must only be made by one in order to spot, not 20 as it is with listen. Then in round 7 and all following rounds, Kracknol's trip check modifier is incorrectly calculated. Kracknol is enlarged so it should be +4strength +4dwarf+4size=+12total. You are only using a +4 modifier for all of Kracknol's trip checks. The correct modifier will prevent a trip from happening in round 7 or in round 8. All those hits related to Kracknol falling or standing from a prone position will all never happen because Kracknol never is knocked prone. Also every time a trip attempt is failed, Kracknol gets a chance to respond with a trip attempt as well and that may either trip the Horseman or require him to drop his flail to prevent being tripped. Since Kracknol is expanded, his modifiers are taken from that. I will look at it again. I may have missed something. Also mounts and riders act in the same place in the initiative. One of the combatant's must delay to act in the inititiave of the slower one. This will likely move all of the Horseman's attacks to be after Kracknol's actions in the turn. I'm not sure how much will be changed by that, but it may become a factor in the battle as well. I chose to offset Harbinger's initiative due to not allowing him to get the same bonus his master did from readying. This allowed Kracknol's action before the horse's full attack. In the end that had no bearing on the fight, but another pitlord suggested that I would hear all manner of complaints were I to move Harbinger's initiative with TFH's. Also I just noticed that Kracknol's AC is incorrectly calculated in a couple places. Kracknol is a dwarf and the Horseman is a giant. So Kracknol gets a +4 dodge bonus on his AC vs all of the Horseman's attacks. Neither of Harbinger attack roles in round 9 are actually high enough to hit Kracknol's AC of 16 in that round. The horseman's attack and Harbinger's AoO's in round 7 would both miss due to incorrect calculation of Krackno's AC against those attacks. Again proper calculation of Kracknol's AC will likely change the outcome of the fight. TFH is a half-giant and Kracknol is expanded. It has no effect as TFH is treated as a large creature for most of his combat modifiers and Kracknol is a large creature at that point. For expanding he loses 1 dex modifier to AC and 1 size modifier to AC. At the point that Harbinger attacks, Kracknol is down and bleeding out. He has a 0 dex, is prone, etc. Harbinger in effect is CDG there, but it was suggested that I simply make his attacks as normal rather than declaring a CDG for a horse. I will review the fight further when I have completed my other fight. If anyone else would like to review TFH vs. Kracknol (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8183682&postcount=963) and comment on it, I would appreciate the extra eyes. It was tricky to run because Kracknol's tactics were written for a different opponent and did not cover the trip contingency. Additionally there were minor calculation errors on both sheets. I will have to go back through and recalc all of Kracknol's to hits thanks to the equipment listed under his attacks not matching the equipment purchased and check to see if that had any bearing on the fight as well.
Turin 01-08-06, 02:05 PM	I've voted for the "improved flurry grapple" so I support your use of it. That dosn't mean it's the house rule, but I won't push for a re-run. As for the invisible grappler; Wow... I never even considered that before. Anybody know? Won't change the fight, since even if it gives me an extra attack, I'd have to crit and roll max damage with 4d6. If I would have spent one of those rounds buffing, it would have been different; bad tactics on my part. Congrats to Turin. Good job running the fight.I'm pretty much in agreement with Vathelokai on the flurry-grapple issue. I'm not sure about the invisible grappling, either. The concealment rules refer to "when making a melee attack" whereas the grappling check rules says a grapple check is "like a melee attack." Well, how "alike" is it, right? Weird situation. One minor item: Ivangar also used one dose of scorpion poison (as part of his pre-buffs), so I'll be sure to remove that as well.
TheMagister 01-08-06, 02:18 PM	@DTFarstar: There might be an error in Evaines tactics for the all vs. all fight: I think that wielding a one-handed weapon with two hands doesn't give the +4 in opposed sunder rolls. Wielding a weapon 2-handed doesn't make it a 2-handed weapon, since the effort needed to wield the weapon effectively doesn't change. So it seems to me that a longsword doesn't turn into a 2-handed weapon for a medium-sized character unless its size category turns one step larger. And it doesn't make sense that the weapon gets more hit points (since 2-handed blades have 10 hp and one-handed blades only 5 hp) and is harder to brake if it's wielded in some other way than the normal. Are there any other opinions on this issue? An object (a weapon in this case) is assigned HP based on its size as an object, and hardness based on its composition. Wielding a one-handed weapon in two hands effectively changes its "status" into a two-handed weapon (it is being wielded in two hands), though it does not change its size or hardness (that's just silly). For an example of other times a weapon's "status" can change, look at "Light, One-Handed, and Two-Handed Melee Weapons" in the PHB, pg. 113. Under "One-Handed Weapons", it mentions that a one-handed weapon can be wielded in the primary or the off-hand. When a one-handed weapon is wielded in the off-hand, it becomes an off-hand weapon and only gets 1/2 a character's strength bonus to damage. The weapon now has a "status" as an off-hand weapon, though this doesn't change its classification as a one-handed weapon. It is simply a one-handed weapon wielded in the off-hand. The same is true if a one-handed weapon is wielded in two hands. It's still a one-handed weapon, but it gets all the benefits of a two-handed weapon: 1.5 Str damage, +4 vs. disarms, +4 vs. Sunders, etc. But it is still a one-handed weapon, and is not as hardy as a larger two-handed weapon. A further good example would be a double weapon. Double weapons can be treated as a one-handed weapon and a light weapon when you attack with them, but they're still two-handed weapons, with two-handed weapon HP and benefits. That's why adamantine double swords make awesome sunder weapons for a TWFing fighter, because he gets the +4 to sunder even on his off-hand weapon attacks. It's pretty cool. Hope this helps, and you guys correct me if I messed anything up... TM
Zevox 01-08-06, 02:45 PM	Yeah, and heavy smoke only grants 20% concealment all the way through (see the last line of the "Smoke Effects" entry). Smoke thick enough to be equivalent to a Fog Cloud spell is even more "heavy" since it obscures vision TOTALLY between characters/objects more than 5' away. I can't see how you'd say that the chemical smoke from a smokestick can obscure vision to a higher degree than regular smoke and yet not be considered "heavy" enough to produce the effects of smoke. It just don't make sense (the Texan in me). Besides, there's NOTHING that says that you can't simply hold your breath after making your first Fort save, and thus avoid having to make more in later rounds. Even a 10 Con character can hold his breath for a full minute without making a Con check. TM Hm... well, when you put it like that, I suppose it does make sense. *sigh* I guess I'll just have to include instructions to hold my breath when using smokesticks from now on. If the total concealment thing is all thats left of my objections, I suppose its not enough to warrant a rerun (it might save Featylec in the short-term from Marcos, but I doubt it would ultimately if he couldn't bring him down). Rerun request revoked then, and thanks to Macbrea for running the fight and putting up with my protestations. Zevox
DTFarstar 01-08-06, 03:05 PM	Alboreth vs. Evaine vs. Eiletha vs. Manzarf (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8186161&postcount=969) I know you guys have heard alot of complaining from me about the way I feel, but prepare for more. I guess I end up doing this stuff on days when I feel bad because I stay at home on those days and have time. Anyway, I need sleep and heavy duty pain meds(like it would work anyway). So, unless there is some insane glaring error besides the roll confusion I ended up having, please just live with it. Edit: @TM : all that sounds right, but it didn't come up anyway because everyone wanted to kill Manzarf.
Vathelokai 01-08-06, 03:15 PM	You must not have read my explination... The stipulation included in the description of rage is to make sure it isn't interpreted as an immediate action, which it would be without the stipulation. When readying an action, it is effectively your turn while you take the action you readied. READY The ready action lets you prepare to take an action later, after your turn is over but before your next one has begun. Readying is a standard action. It does not provoke an attack of opportunity (though the action that you ready might do so). Readying an Action: You can ready a standard action, a move action, or a free action. To do so, specify the action you will take and the conditions under which you will take it. Then, any time before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition. The action occurs just before the action that triggers it. If the triggered action is part of another character’s activities, you interrupt the other character. Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action. Your initiative result changes. For the rest of the encounter, your initiative result is the count on which you took the readied action, and you act immediately ahead of the character whose action triggered your readied action. You can take a 5-foot step as part of your readied action, but only if you don’t otherwise move any distance during the round. Initiative Consequences of Readying: Your initiative result becomes the count on which you took the readied action. If you come to your next action and have not yet performed your readied action, you don’t get to take the readied action (though you can ready the same action again). If you take your readied action in the next round, before your regular turn comes up, your initiative count rises to that new point in the order of battle, and you do not get your regular action that round.A barbarian can fly into a rage only once per encounter. At 1st level he can use his rage ability once per day. At 4th level and every four levels thereafter, he can use it one additional time per day (to a maximum of six times per day at 20th level). Entering a rage takes no time itself, but a barbarian can do it only during his action, not in response to someone else’s action.First, when it says 'not in response to someoen else's action', it means that entering a rage is not an immediate action (immediate actions are described in expansion books and are basically free actions you can take on anyone's turn such as speaking or feather fall). It doesn't mean that you cannot take it while you are acting, which you are when you ready an action.... And since the above unequivocaly proves Rage to be a non-action, you can take it while you are readying an action. Edit: to drive the nail in the coffin moreso, taking a 5ft step is a nonaction. This is why you can take it with a readied standard action (outside of CoCO). If moving your body 5ft is a nonaction and vibrating your vocal cords is a nonaction, I think a gland excreting adrenaline is also a nonaction. I think you mis read my point. Even though I agree that Raging is a non-action, it still specificly says in the rage description that you cannot do it on some elses turn. Secondly, the ready action description says that the readied action happens on the other characters turn. The wording of ready is quite clear; the adjustment of initiative happens after the action is taken, not before. Conclusiion: The fact that raging is a non-action does not change the fact that the class ability says you can only do it durring your turn. You could rage while you are setting up the ready, but you cannot rage when the ready is triggered.
Snommelp 01-08-06, 03:25 PM	I will be beginning Perius vs. Santos soon. In case anyone wanted to time me or something silly like that. And on the topic of raging, I can only say that I agree with Vathelokai. To add an argument that probably won't matter in the long run: the stipulation which Warclone says is to ensure that Rage is not seen as an immediate action cannot be so, because the Core rulebooks make no mention of immediate actions; as far as the Core rules are concerned, no such term exists.
Zevox 01-08-06, 03:28 PM	Alboreth vs. Evaine vs. Eiletha vs. Manzarf (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8186161&postcount=969) I know you guys have heard alot of complaining from me about the way I feel, but prepare for more. I guess I end up doing this stuff on days when I feel bad because I stay at home on those days and have time. Anyway, I need sleep and heavy duty pain meds(like it would work anyway). So, unless there is some insane glaring error besides the roll confusion I ended up having, please just live with it. Edit: @TM : all that sounds right, but it didn't come up anyway because everyone wanted to kill Manzarf. Looks good to me. No problems seem apparent. I knew Alboreth's low will save would come back and bite him sometime before he could get to level 4 and add his charisma to his saves, and it looks like this was the time. Still, 3rd place isn't too bad given what Eiletha could have done to me while fighting Manzarf. Thanks for running it, especially if you're not feeling well. Hope you get better. Zevox
Snommelp 01-08-06, 03:38 PM	Cerebus13: Just saw Sam vs. Zassl. Two problems, but neither will change the fight at all, so just for future reference. First, Zassl doesn't get a height bonus on ranged attacks. That's only for melee. Second, how/why did Buba get an attack against a flat-footed Sam?
DTFarstar 01-08-06, 03:48 PM	@Zevox - Yeah, well, the weird rolling didn't help. Thanks for being nice. I'll talk to everyone later. Goodnight.
Vathelokai 01-08-06, 03:50 PM	I still havn't recieved tactics from One_Winged_Angel for Azriel vs. Rebreg. One-Winged hasn't been on for 3 days, but did intend to write tactics. I have to run the fight tonight, so if I havn't seen anything by then, I will have to go with default tactics, which are "Fly! Scythe! Trip! Kill!!!"
SauroGrenom 01-08-06, 04:06 PM	Charging negates the bonus to hide granted by invisibility, hence the fresh hide check for Kracknol. A spot check must only be made by one in order to spot, not 20 as it is with listen. Where to begin? Fine Kracknol is pinpointed, but that does not negate his invisibility. Kracknol should gain all the benefits of being an invisible attacker regardeless of whether he has been pinpointed. That doesn't change the outcome of his attack role, but Kracknol should gain a +2 attack bonus as an invisible attacker regardeless of being pinpointed. Since Kracknol is expanded, his modifiers are taken from that. I will look at it again. I may have missed something. This comment is confusing to me. Kracknol is enlarged. When enlarged his strength is 19. So he has a +4 strength bonus to trip checks. Also Kracknol is a dwarf, and being enlarged has no effect on his racial abilities, so he gains a +4 stability bonus on trip checks as a dwarf. Lastly Kracknol is large and that grants him an additional +4 on his trip checks. There should be a total of +12 modifier on all his trip checks. TFH is a half-giant and Kracknol is expanded. It has no effect as TFH is treated as a large creature for most of his combat modifiers and Kracknol is a large creature at that point. For expanding he loses 1 dex modifier to AC and 1 size modifier to AC. At the point that Harbinger attacks, Kracknol is down and bleeding out. He has a 0 dex, is prone, etc. Harbinger in effect is CDG there, but it was suggested that I simply make his attacks as normal rather than declaring a CDG for a horse. The only issue is that the Horseman's type is "Giant" and Kracknol, as a dwarf racial ability, gains a +4 dodge bonus vs all opponents with the "Giant" type. Simple as that. That Kracknol is enlarged has no effect on kracknol's racial type or racial abilities. He should gain a +4 dodge bonus vs all attacks by the Horseman. Yes he is enlarged and his dex decreases by -2 and he takes a -1 size mod to his AC so he has a net -2 AC vs the horse. Even when Kracknol is prone he should be granted an additional +4 dodge modifier vs all attacks from the Horseman. Also if the Horse man is unconcious, he should have a good chance of falling from his horse and taking falling damage that may kill him. If The horseman is dead, then the riderless horse flee's from combat and Kracknol wins even if he is bleeding. I will review the fight further when I have completed my other fight. If anyone else would like to review TFH vs. Kracknol (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8183682&postcount=963) and comment on it, I would appreciate the extra eyes. It was tricky to run because Kracknol's tactics were written for a different opponent and did not cover the trip contingency. Additionally there were minor calculation errors on both sheets. I will have to go back through and recalc all of Kracknol's to hits thanks to the equipment listed under his attacks not matching the equipment purchased and check to see if that had any bearing on the fight as well. Well you don't have to recalculate all of Kracknol's hit because he actually payed for his +1deepcrystal powerstoring flail. A carefull audit will reveal that he has payed for the equipment he has. I simply forgot to update the cost of the item listed in the equipment section when it was enchanted last week. Look at the character sheet in Kracknol's fight last week and you will see that Kracknol had 6600gp at the beginning of last weeks fight. After the fight Kracknol had over 8000gp that was spent to enchant his weapon. I deducted the enchantment cost from Kracknol's gold and everything, so there should be no problem with Kracknol's equipment actually. I simply made a small error in updating Kracknol's sheet. I appologise for any confusion it may have caused.
Cerebus13 01-08-06, 04:07 PM	Cerebus13: Just saw Sam vs. Zassl. Two problems, but neither will change the fight at all, so just for future reference. First, Zassl doesn't get a height bonus on ranged attacks. That's only for melee. Second, how/why did Buba get an attack against a flat-footed Sam?Oops on the height bonus, always get that confused. Buba got a flat-footed attack because he was invisible from Zassl's spell.
Maraxus 01-08-06, 04:14 PM	Imperi Vahalla vs Boraxx is up. Feedback appreciated.
Iced 01-08-06, 04:23 PM	A pearl of power 1 restores a spell level that can be used with any other prepared spell correct? say I cast mage armor and then recall it. I have a spell level that I can use for a magic missile or a level to combine with another and allow me to use a scorching ray.
Snommelp 01-08-06, 04:26 PM	Per Mitza's request, I have taken a look at TFH vs. Kracknol. Here is what I have found: Things that will not change the fight: -Invisible attacks happen before the attacker becomes invisible, so readied actions against invisible opponents happen after the invisible person attacks. Things that may change the fight slightly: -After round 5, The Horseman should be acting after Kracknol -A spot check needs to beat the hide roll by 20 to spot an invisible creature, and even then, it does not pinpoint. Things that will definitely change the fight: -Kracknol's opposed trip rolls are too low by 8. As Guildmaster for both gladiators in question, I attest that I am an impartial judge. And as an impartial judge, my verdict is as follows: give them both a winner's share and boost the guild coffers! Jokes aside, the errors above were all of the errors I found. Unfortunately for Mitza, one of them may very well add several new rounds to the fight. @ Cerebus: I missed the invisibility. Make that one error that has no effect on the fight, then. And a new one. What's the point in paying off a pitlord if he's going to run the fight fair? I want my money back! ;) And now I can get back to my fight.
Usurpator 01-08-06, 04:51 PM	Grik vs. Lissa is up. Copying and pasting the sheets, tactics, making the map and posting it here (including this message) cost me more time than running the actual fight..... New record for me. If there are comments, go right ahead.
TheMagister 01-08-06, 05:00 PM	A pearl of power 1 restores a spell level that can be used with any other prepared spell correct? say I cast mage armor and then recall it. I have a spell level that I can use for a magic missile or a level to combine with another and allow me to use a scorching ray. Unfortunately, you are currently correct. Hopefully, this will get changed soon. TM
SauroGrenom 01-08-06, 05:04 PM	MitzaVolchenko, Let me help you a bit by giving a few check modifiers and AC's that you are going to need. Kracknol's AC vs Horseman: 10-1size+1dex+4dodge+4Armor=18 Kracknol's AC vs Horseman when prone: 10-1size+1dex+4dodge+4Armor-4prone=14 Kracknol's Touch AC vs Horseman: 10+4dodge+1dex-1size=14 Kracknol's Opposed attack role for a Sunder Attempt: +8bab+4(2handed weapon)+4size=+16 Kracknol's Trip Check modifier:+4strength+4large+4dwarf=+12 Kracknol's AC vs Harbinger: 10-1size+1dex+4Armor=14 Kracknol's AC vs Harbinger when prone: 10-1size+1dex+4Armor-4prone=10 If you need me to validate every single part of this short list, then I can supply you with a large battery of SRD quotes that describe all the necessary parts of the rules. Believe me these are correct. I'm not sure if a person's AC takes the -4Prone penalty while they are in the process of standing and taking AoO's for that action. Obviously I would argue that they are not prone while getting up, but there may be a previously argued decision on this.
Pittbull 01-08-06, 05:13 PM	Imperi Vahalla vs Boraxx is up. Feedback appreciated. [sblock=Borrax's tactic]The fight: Try to get cover for Lara whenever it's possible. Use his riding-skills to deny hits on Lara and to gain cover for himself. Lara will defend her rider if it comes to close combat, the Boraxx switches to battleaxe. Use the rage wise.[sblock] Sorry, Boraxx's AC is 10+5armor+3dex+4force-screen+4cover(riding)=26. That means that some hits didn't hit (round8[5damage],round9[6damage],round10[3damage]). Why can't you tap a tattoo of force-screen, while raging, you can drink potions too. So you should have reactivated force-screen with the tattoo. That means none of the attacks hit in round13 and 14. Last but not least, where have been Lara's attacks? Healing might be a option too. Regarding the arrows, what's the right price?
TheMagister 01-08-06, 05:13 PM	Since the AoO happens before the action that triggers it, you are considered prone during the AoO you provoke for standing up. Otherwise, Mitza, everything that Sauro has notated is completely correct, and should be figured in to the fight. TM
Snommelp 01-08-06, 05:15 PM	Grik vs. Lissa is up. Copying and pasting the sheets, tactics, making the map and posting it here (including this message) cost me more time than running the actual fight..... New record for me. If there are comments, go right ahead.Grik's shortest fight... I want a rematch! And speaking of fights, Perius vs. Santos is up.
Begferdeth 01-08-06, 05:22 PM	Pirotess vs The White Hand (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8189077&postcount=975) is up! This is the longest fight Ive ever done. Blah.
MitzaVolchenko 01-08-06, 05:28 PM	MitzaVolchenko, Let me help you a bit by giving a few check modifiers and AC's that you are going to need. Kracknol's AC vs Horseman: 10-1size+1dex+4dodge+4Armor=18 Kracknol's AC vs Horseman when prone: 10-1size+1dex+4dodge+4Armor-4prone=14 Kracknol's Touch AC vs Horseman: 10+4dodge+1dex-1size=14 Kracknol's Opposed attack role for a Sunder Attempt: +8bab+4(2handed weapon)+4size=+16 Kracknol's Trip Check modifier:+4strength+4large+4dwarf=+12 Kracknol's AC vs Harbinger: 10-1size+1dex+4Armor=14 Kracknol's AC vs Harbinger when prone: 10-1size+1dex+4Armor-4prone=10 If you need me to validate every single part of this short list, then I can supply you with a large battery of SRD quotes that describe all the necessary parts of the rules. Believe me these are correct. I'm not sure if a person's AC takes the -4Prone penalty while they are in the process of standing and taking AoO's for that action. Obviously I would argue that they are not prone while getting up, but there may be a previously argued decision on this. I appreciate the offer to help, but I will have to calculate each item on both sides for myself. I am going to have to re-read several of the entries on racial types as well as the rules for attacking from invisibility. I did miss the stability bonus for dwarves. Additionally, there is nothing in the expenditures on the sheet to indicate the +1 for the Flail. This may be a clerical error, but I cannot allow the weapon's bonus without it at least being in the expenditures section. I will get to the revisions before deadline. As for your question on prone AC while getting up, you are prone until you are standing. You cannot be re-tripped as one of the AoO's as far as I have found so far. I have an invite to dinner, and I am going to accept it, so it will be a few hours at the least. Sorry for the delay.
Ravashack 01-08-06, 05:33 PM	Grik's shortest fight... I want a rematch! And speaking of fights, Perius vs. Santos is up. I just need to double check on this one. Is that a NATURAL 20 on the touch attack or just a normal rolled 20? Because if it's the latter it misses.
Luni 01-08-06, 05:35 PM	[sblock=Borrax's tactic]The fight: Try to get cover for Lara whenever it's possible. Use his riding-skills to deny hits on Lara and to gain cover for himself. Lara will defend her rider if it comes to close combat, the Boraxx switches to battleaxe. Use the rage wise.[sblock] Sorry, Boraxx's AC is 10+5armor+3dex+4force-screen+4cover(riding)=26. That means that some hits didn't hit (round8[5damage],round9[6damage],round10[3damage]). Why can't you tap a tattoo of force-screen, while raging, you can drink potions too. So you should have reactivated force-screen with the tattoo. That means none of the attacks hit in round13 and 14. Last but not least, where have been Lara's attacks? Healing might be a option too. Regarding the arrows, what's the right price? Special Ammunition is sold individually, therefore a single silver arrows is 2.05 gp, and a single cold iron arrow is 0.1 gp. A single adamantine arrow is 61.05 gp. In round 6, Boraxx started to rage, which lowers his AC to 24. As for Lara's attacks, they should be in there. Nat 20's to hit, and needs a critical to damage. And your link is wrong Maraxus. Proper link is here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8188543&postcount=972)
NiQil 01-08-06, 05:39 PM	MitzaVolchenko, Let me help you a bit by giving a few check modifiers and AC's that you are going to need. Kracknol's AC vs Horseman: 10-1size+1dex+4dodge+4Armor=18 Kracknol's AC vs Horseman when prone: 10-1size+1dex+4dodge+4Armor-4prone=14 Kracknol's Touch AC vs Horseman: 10+4dodge+1dex-1size=14 Kracknol's Opposed attack role for a Sunder Attempt: +8bab+4(2handed weapon)+4size=+16 Kracknol's Trip Check modifier:+4strength+4large+4dwarf=+12 Kracknol's AC vs Harbinger: 10-1size+1dex+4Armor=14 Kracknol's AC vs Harbinger when prone: 10-1size+1dex+4Armor-4prone=10 If you need me to validate every single part of this short list, then I can supply you with a large battery of SRD quotes that describe all the necessary parts of the rules. Believe me these are correct. I'm not sure if a person's AC takes the -4Prone penalty while they are in the process of standing and taking AoO's for that action. Obviously I would argue that they are not prone while getting up, but there may be a previously argued decision on this. A portion of this is incorrect...Kracknol's trip modifier is different, depending on the situation. Here's why: • Stability: A dwarf gains a +4 bonus on ability checks made to resist being bull rushed or tripped when standing on the ground (but not when climbing, flying, riding, or otherwise not standing firmly on the ground). So when Kracknol is attacking with a trip, he does not get the +4 for being a dwarf....only when he is defending against it. Also, regarding the concealment/grapple issue...a grapple attempt is like a melee attack, but in the FAQ it specifically says that it is *not a melee attack. The initial touch attack to begin a grapple is subject to any miss chance based on concealment, since it is an attack, but if successful the opposed grapple checks are not subject to those miss chances because the opposed checks are not attack rolls. Edit: I will shortly be adding two new additions to the Court Rulings post: 1) Raging cannot be done as a part of a readied action, due to the fact that a ready action is specifically described as occuring on your opponents turn, which the rage description specifically prohibits. 2) Opposed grapple checks are not attack rolls, but rather opposed checks.
Snommelp 01-08-06, 05:40 PM	I just need to double check on this one. Is that a NATURAL 20 on the touch attack or just a normal rolled 20? Because if it's the latter it misses. It's a natural 20. Any roll other than natural 20 or natural 1, I show the addition used to get the result. Still, I apologize; that could have been clearer.
TheMagister 01-08-06, 05:41 PM	Pirotess vs The White Hand (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8189077&postcount=975) is up! This is the longest fight Ive ever done. Blah. Sorry you're not thrilled about it...you did a great job of making it interesting to read! Some concerns: Round 11: Did Pirotess really RUN? If so, the AoO should include sneak attack damage because a running character is denied their Dex to AC. In Round 13, the only way Pirotess can outrun The White Hand is if she actually RUNS (see AoO + sneak attack), and regardless, she couldn't draw or cast a scroll unless she takes only a single move. Alla that stuff aside, this is the most important: Several rounds: Long and Shortbows have a x3 crit multiplier. That's it. Tell me what you think. Whoohoo! TWH has a shot (pun intended).
Pittbull 01-08-06, 05:43 PM	Special Ammunition is sold individually, therefore a single silver arrows is 2.05 gp, and a single cold iron arrow is 0.1 gp. A single adamantine arrow is 61.05 gp. In round 6, Boraxx started to rage, which lowers his AC to 24. As for Lara's attacks, they should be in there. Nat 20's to hit, and needs a critical to damage. And your link is wrong Maraxus. Proper link is here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8188543&postcount=972) Oh yes, stupid me! Then everything is OK, if Maraxus wants to do Lara's attacks, he can fill them in, but they won't change the result.
Ravashack 01-08-06, 05:53 PM	It's a natural 20. Any roll other than natural 20, I show the addition used to get the result. Still, I apologize; that could have been clearer. It's ok, was just making sure. Stupid lucky natural 20s /grumble Edit: I almost forgot to mention--the link goes to a totally different post. I had to manually dig through the fights page.
Ariel23 01-08-06, 05:56 PM	@Abyssal Stalker I'm not convinced it means "Two Handed" according to the equipment list, not whether or not it was wielded in 2H. Food for thought: oversized weapons such as a Half-Giant might wield. Bastard sword. I think that the weapon is harder to sunder as far as opposed d20 but is easier to sunder as far as HP goes. Obviously moot for this fight, since no sundering took place. As for the weapon getting extra HP, I definitely didn't say anything about that in my tactics, I merely quoted "Deep Crystal". I have no idea how thick my sword is.
Maraxus 01-08-06, 06:08 PM	(...) Then everything is OK, if Maraxus wants to do Lara's attacks, he can fill them in, but they won't change the result. Right, what he said about the attacks that hit you: Nat. 20 and rage AC-penalty. Lara's attacks: Oh, there I had really forgot, that a critical could do damage. I saw: 1d4+4 vs damage reduction 10 - no need to try. So, should I edit the fight to do that with the force screen (you can do that in a rage? Okay, I trust you), I can add that in, too. But you have to say so (and remember, that your rage will run out in round 15, costing you 12 hit points, so it would only cost you more).
Ariel23 01-08-06, 06:12 PM	2) Opposed grapple checks are not attack rolls, but rather opposed checks. This is borne out by reading the grapple entry and noting that the only time it says "attack" is for the Touch Attack: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/specialAttacks.htm#grapple One thing I've always wanted to point out is that you don't suffer any size penalties to Escape Artist checks (if there were such a thing, you'd get a bonus, anyway) which is what you do in place of a grapple check. Now, that's not much help against a flurrying monk, but if you're a small creature (-4 Grapple) with a good DEX, poor BAB, and/or low STR, you're better off doing Escape Artist to resist than Grappling. Even untrained, most of the time.
Begferdeth 01-08-06, 06:36 PM	Well, round 11 was a run, so I guess you get some extra damage in there. Round 13, TWH was just a bit short of basing Pirotess. So she just single moved away and read her scroll. But... x3 crit multiplier? Dammit! Thats gonna be about 15 rounds of fight I didnt have to run... Ill start fixin it tomorrow. That will give Cerebus some time to pick up a problem in round 2 also... :( Sorry you're not thrilled about it...you did a great job of making it interesting to read! Some concerns: Round 11: Did Pirotess really RUN? If so, the AoO should include sneak attack damage because a running character is denied their Dex to AC. In Round 13, the only way Pirotess can outrun The White Hand is if she actually RUNS (see AoO + sneak attack), and regardless, she couldn't draw or cast a scroll unless she takes only a single move. Alla that stuff aside, this is the most important: Several rounds: Long and Shortbows have a x3 crit multiplier. That's it. Tell me what you think. Whoohoo! TWH has a shot (pun intended).
Snommelp 01-08-06, 06:50 PM	Edit: I almost forgot to mention--the link goes to a totally different post. I had to manually dig through the fights page.Yeah, I noticed that myself. It's fixed now; it was almost entirely right, but the second to last digit should have been a 5; I wrote a 9 by mistake. EDIT: You don't notice how many words use the letter L until your L button stops working.
SauroGrenom 01-08-06, 06:56 PM	Additionally, there is nothing in the expenditures on the sheet to indicate the +1 for the Flail. This may be a clerical error, but I cannot allow the weapon's bonus without it at least being in the expenditures section. Alright this is starting to realy torque me off. Kracknol payed for the item. If you want to claim that it is unavailable because it wasn't payed for then prove that it wasn't payed for. You will find that you are wrong. I made a clerical error in updating the sheet, for that I am sorry. But I did not commit any "Violations" of any kind, and I should not be punished for crimes not commited. I also indicated a clear method that you could use to verify that it was payed for in full. Look at the sheet listed in Kracknol's previous fight and the gold he had at that time, then add in his winnings and you see that 8000gp was spent last week. The exenditures section of the sheet is used to list expenses that are nolonger listed anywhere else on the sheet, not to list expenses of items listed already somewhere on the sheet. I should have put the altered price of Kracknol's flail next to the item in the equipment section, but I forgot and I am sorry for that. There is no reason for me to put 8000gp payed last week for enchanting the flail into the "Expenses" section of the sheet. I did remove the necessary gold from Kracknol's total available gold and there should be an edit next to the flail in the equipment section. This is a critical issue for a number of reasons. If the flail is not atleast +1 enchanted then it cannot be a powertstoring item. Even if not magical it is a masterwork item so it has a +1 enhancement bonus to attack modifiers but not damage. There will be no difference in resolving attack roles, but the damage of the weapon will be signifigantly decreased due to the loss of the powerstoring ability.
Zevox 01-08-06, 07:05 PM	A pearl of power 1 restores a spell level that can be used with any other prepared spell correct? say I cast mage armor and then recall it. I have a spell level that I can use for a magic missile or a level to combine with another and allow me to use a scorching ray. Unfortunately, you are currently correct. Hopefully, this will get changed soon. TM Actually, hes not correct. Did everyone involved in that Pearl of Power debate forget that it was originally sparked by Cat's ruling (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8099644&postcount=2066) on the matter? To paraphrase the above-linked post: Pearls of Power restore the spell you choose to use them on and allow you to use that spell again for free (no spell level cost). They do not restore used spell levels usable on any other spell available to you. Zevox
Vathelokai 01-08-06, 07:07 PM	Starting Rebreg vs. Azriel now using default tactics for Azriel. If I recieve something I'll take it into consideration. Anyone know what a (good) mauverability for flight speed actually means? I remember seeing a minimum forward speed and a "x degree turn" durring the round thing, but I don't know where it is.
NiQil 01-08-06, 07:08 PM	Alright this is starting to realy torque me off. Kracknol payed for the item. If you want to claim that it is unavailable because it wasn't payed for then prove that it wasn't payed for. You will find that you are wrong. I made a clerical error in updating the sheet, for that I am sorry. But I did not commit any "Violations" of any kind, and I should not be punished for crimes not commited. I also indicated a clear method that you could use to verify that it was payed for in full. Look at the sheet listed in Kracknol's previous fight and the gold he had at that time, then add in his winnings and you see that 8000gp was spent last week. The exenditures section of the sheet is used to list expenses that are nolonger listed anywhere else on the sheet, not to list expenses of items listed already somewhere on the sheet. I should have put the altered price of Kracknol's flail next to the item in the equipment section, but I forgot and I am sorry for that. There is no reason for me to put 8000gp payed last week for enchanting the flail into the "Expenses" section of the sheet. I did remove the necessary gold from Kracknol's total available gold and there should be an edit next to the flail in the equipment section. This is a critical issue for a number of reasons. If the flail is not atleast +1 enchanted then it cannot be a powertstoring item. Even if not magical it is a masterwork item so it has a +1 enhancement bonus to attack modifiers but not damage. There will be no difference in resolving attack roles, but the damage of the weapon will be signifigantly decreased due to the loss of the powerstoring ability. I must point out here that the situation being described is, in fact, a violation. If the price paid for an enhancement is not noted somewhere on the character sheet, that is a violation, regardless of other ways to verify the expenditure. As such, as has always been done here, when there are violations on a sheet as it relates to items used in fights, it is entirely at pitlord discretion as to whether the item is allowed or not, or if another item is substituted into the fight in place if the item in question. If the enchantment costs are not noted on Kracknol's sheet, this is a violation and MitzaVolchenko, as pitlord for Kracknol's fight, is well within his rights to disallow the item entirely or allow the substitution of a similar item in place of the item in question.
Snommelp 01-08-06, 07:10 PM	Starting Rebreg vs. Azriel now using default tactics for Azriel. If I recieve something I'll take it into consideration. Anyone know what a (good) mauverability for flight speed actually means? I remember seeing a minimum forward speed and a "x degree turn" durring the round thing, but I don't know where it is. Looking it up right now. I'll edit this post with the answer within five minutes' time. EDIT: Good maneuverability: No minimum forward speed Can hover Can move backward (5 feet to start reverse) Can turn 90 degrees after 5 feet Can turn in place at 90 degrees per five feet spent No maximum turn Any up angle (half speed) Any down angle (double speed) Can move from down to up instantly
Zevox 01-08-06, 07:11 PM	Anyone know what a (good) mauverability for flight speed actually means? I remember seeing a minimum forward speed and a "x degree turn" durring the round thing, but I don't know where it is. I had to deal with that in my match this week as well. If you're using the same SRD (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/home.html) as I am, you can find it under Carrying, Movement, and Exploration under the heading "Moving in Three Dimensions". Zevox
Maraxus 01-08-06, 07:11 PM	Starting Rebreg vs. Azriel now using default tactics for Azriel. If I recieve something I'll take it into consideration. Anyone know what a (good) mauverability for flight speed actually means? I remember seeing a minimum forward speed and a "x degree turn" durring the round thing, but I don't know where it is. Look here: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/movement.htm#tacticalAerialMovement PS: @Zevox: Grmurnx... only seconds, you have beaten me by. But my prefered SRD looks better. ;):rolleyes:
Vathelokai 01-08-06, 07:31 PM	Actually, hes not correct. Did everyone involved in that Pearl of Power debate forget that it was originally sparked by Cat's ruling (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8099644&postcount=2066) on the matter? To paraphrase the above-linked post: Pearls of Power restore the spell you choose to use them on and allow you to use that spell again for free (no spell level cost). They do not restore used spell levels usable on any other spell available to you. Zevox It's on page 69 of Tavern IV, and the debate continues for some 15 pages. I still disagree with it. I still stand by my demand for an elder vote. A 15 page debate with elders weighing in on opposite sides deserves no less.
Vathelokai 01-08-06, 07:32 PM	Thanks everyone for the flightspeed stuff. And in case anyone cares, I prever the Solilar and Sage SRD, as linked by Zevox. Will be taking a break on the fight... will finish it in the middle of the night sometime.
TheMagister 01-08-06, 07:33 PM	@Begferdeth Another thing... How on earth is Pirotess getting 4 magic missiles out of a CL 3 scroll? CL 3 nets a caster 2 missiles. TM
SauroGrenom 01-08-06, 07:55 PM	If the price paid for an enhancement is not noted somewhere on the character sheet, that is a violation, regardless of other ways to verify the expenditure. You are PrisonLords, and I suppose you have some power with regard to interpretation. However this "Violation" would easily be clasified as a Orange violation with it being improperly listed gold for an item. These Orange violations are classified as anything that is not going to have an impact on the outcome of a fight. Strictly speaking it is within the powers of those at hand to deny Kracknol his expensive flail with its various magical abilities. If such an action were to be taken, it would be analigous to elevating this to a Red violation because it will have a very decent chance of altering the outcome of the fight. Highly unfare in my opinion. If this pedantic ruling is applied I shall remember it and apply simular measures when minor clerical errors are observed on the sheets of some of those whom I pitlord. We are all at some point placing our characters in the hands of our fellows to pitlord them well. As a general rule I attempt to play each character in the most advantagious manner possable for the build and tactics submitted. I have on several occasions seen sheets that include minor clerical errors, some of which that could mislead a pitlord into believing that characters have abilities or resources that are not usable by CoCo rules. In each case in the past I have simply played the character as its abilities and equipment would be if properly recorded. If Kracknol is screwed by this, it would frankly **** me off. All I can realy say is that if you are willing to make a power-play of this kind and cripple another character's build over a small clerical error, then you need to be prepaired to be held to the same exacting standards with regard to all your characters. That this option is being discussed is actually sad to me. Generally we have a very forgiving and cooperative environment around here. That MitzaVolchenko has proposed such a severe punishment for such a small error is mystifying to me. It seams contrary to our spirit in the CoCo. Then for NiQil to pipe up that it is within MitzaVolchenko's power to choose the most severe punishment is reasonable in a certian sense. However he neglecting to mention that most pitlords would not choose the most severe response. That's what set me off. If I made anyone mad, sorry. Sauro
Prisonlords 01-08-06, 08:09 PM	You are PrisonLords, and I suppose you have some power with regard to interpretation. However this "Violation" would easily be clasified as a Orange violation with it being improperly listed gold for an item. These Orange violations are classified as anything that is not going to have an impact on the outcome of a fight. Strictly speaking it is within the powers of those at hand to deny Kracknol his expensive flail with its various magical abilities. If such an action were to be taken, it would be analigous to elevating this to a Red violation because it will have a very decent chance of altering the outcome of the fight. Highly unfare in my opinion. If this pedantic ruling is applied I shall remember it and apply simular measures when minor clerical errors are observed on the sheets of some of those whom I pitlord. As far as the type of violation, you are correct in assessing that this would be a PBJ (orange) violation. I am not attempting to state one way or the other that the actions taken by the pitlord are correct or not, but rather attempting to clarify that the error in question is a violation and that it is at pitlord discretion as to how the error is handled in the fight. The Prison has no control over how a pitlord rules to handle this issue in a fight they run. I only made the comment I did for purposes of clarifying the issues that would fall under the Prison purvue. I would agree that the pitlord's actions here may not necessarily be that of the majority of the pitlords here. However, ultimately it does fall to pitlord discretion in these matters, and, unless overruled by Cat/Pitlords, the pitlord ruling is final as far as the fight in question is concerned.
Kaigan 01-09-06, 01:36 PM	@My gladiators: I was going to run my fights last night, but the boards were down, so I'm going to have to run them tonight. I have class till 2, then work from 3:30 till 7ish PST. So look for them tonight after 8ish PST. Sorry about this, but I blame the boards. Haha. Kaigan
MitzaVolchenko 01-09-06, 01:37 PM	If this pedantic ruling is applied I shall remember it and apply simular measures when minor clerical errors are observed on the sheets of some of those whom I pitlord. Am I to take this to mean that you intend to not apply the rules fairly on all characters? I have not yet completed my research on what to do with this one. When I have, I shall edit the fight accordingly. I have also asked nightbanegod's opinion on on the fight as his character is the other one involved. It is not the pitlord's job to go back and read through your previous character sheets to find an expenditure. I would expect to take a loss of the item for the fight in such a case on my characters. It would bother me that I messed up editing (as it already bothers me that I have some minor miscalcs left on Sybs and Zwei). I certainly would not blame my pitlord for my error. We are all at some point placing our characters in the hands of our fellows to pitlord them well. As a general rule I attempt to play each character in the most advantagious manner possable for the build and tactics submitted. I have on several occasions seen sheets that include minor clerical errors, some of which that could mislead a pitlord into believing that characters have abilities or resources that are not usable by CoCo rules. In each case in the past I have simply played the character as its abilities and equipment would be if properly recorded. If Kracknol is screwed by this, it would frankly **** me off. All I can realy say is that if you are willing to make a power-play of this kind and cripple another character's build over a small clerical error, then you need to be prepaired to be held to the same exacting standards with regard to all your characters. Noted. As above, I do expect it. What I do not expect is a poor attitude being displayed toward the volunteer that is already working to correct their errors. That this option is being discussed is actually sad to me. Generally we have a very forgiving and cooperative environment around here. That MitzaVolchenko has proposed such a severe punishment for such a small error is mystifying to me. It seams contrary to our spirit in the CoCo. Then for NiQil to pipe up that it is within MitzaVolchenko's power to choose the most severe punishment is reasonable in a certian sense. However he neglecting to mention that most pitlords would not choose the most severe response. That's what set me off. If I made anyone mad, sorry. Sauro Have I misread in some way how violations are supposed to be posted in the Prison? My understanding is that no violation causes an auto-loss and there is no penalty for violations unless they remain uncorrected over a period of time. As I understand it, I am to run the fight with corrected numbers (as with the AC correction on TFH) and post the violation with the fight and in the Prison thread. On a side note, if you don't want to make people mad, you might try phrasing things in such a manner as to say that you respectfully disagree or that you understand that the error is your own, but you would appreciate it if the time were taken to check on it and allow it. I have spent a lot of time reading rules for this fight and will be spending more to correct the errors that I made. I have to thank you for keeping me for making another one in that I hadn't gotten far enough into it to notice that the flail had to have the +1 in order to have the other power and thus was going to re-run without removing the additional powers merely adjusting your attack rolls. As previously stated by me, and with no insults to anyone else, and with thanks to the pitlords that helped me review the fight for mistakes, I am going to edit it appropriately. I have no bias for or against either character, though I will admit a bias in favor of the valiant Harbinger (who may or may not continue to be the hero of the revised fight). Horses like that are hard to come by (and incidentally I trained an Andalusian named Harbinger to perform several traditional martial moves and it does my heart good to see a fictitious version performing them now). Everyone relax, enjoy themselves, and let things roll out as they will. This is a GAME.
Vathelokai 01-09-06, 02:13 PM	Rebreg vs. Azriel is up.
TelinArtho 01-09-06, 02:23 PM	@Sauro - as has been stated - remember this is a game - so please keep it calm and respectful. Mind you the first post of the thread. As to the violation, having run some 80+ fights at this point and having seen it happen from time to time- it is entirely up to the Pitlord on how to handle an item that was not marked correctly on the player's sheet. Pitlords are not required to perform audits - so checking a character's previous fights isn't expected when deciding what to do about the matter. For all parties involved: I would have recommended that the pitlord send a PM to both players about the issue and get it resolved there (or even in the FOTW thread). If Sauro had not responded to them in a timely matter - yes I would have restricted the item to the lesser version noted on the sheet (Deepcrystal (so Masterworked - but not +1 and Powerstoring). Had a conversation been made about the problem - I think it would have been resolved without heated argument. However, Sauro - as has been said - this is within the powers of the pitlord. You may not like it - but that is the way it has been done in a number of situations. You are supposed to browse over the character sheet briefly and check for mistakes. You should at least check the ability scores, the saves and hitpoints, and take a look at the equipment. If he wants to bring an ally, you have to check wether this ally is allowed or not (see FAQ: Allies). If you have found a mistake, mark it red and write the correct value behind it. You can also post a comment. The more the character sheet matches the Default Sheet, the better. You are also supposed to run the fight with the mistake corrected. If you have enough time, you can send a note to the player and remind him of this mistake. This is especially advised in case the player relied on a certain ability in his tactic which is now not possible anymore. It is not mandatory for you but is considered a convenience, and it might save you a lot of headaches in the after-fight discussion. Post all mistakes you found in the Prison of Gladius thread. In an ideal world, Mitzo would have had a conversation with you. However, it is ultimately up to you to provide all correct information on your sheet.
Ariel23 01-09-06, 03:41 PM	@Abyssal Stalker @Kaigan @Zevox @DTFarstar Manzarf (Abyssal Stalker) vs Evaine (Ariel23) vs Eiletha (Kaigan) vs Alboreth (Zevox): DTFarstar [All vs All] (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8186161&postcount=969) Probably not a big deal except for the Sleep arrows, and this may not be 100% accurate, but add this to your fight results: Evaine: Used 10 arrows Manzarf: Used 4 arrows Eiletha: Used 5 arrows and 3 sleep arrows
NiQil 01-09-06, 04:03 PM	Wow...is it just me...or are there lots of fights still outstanding? Seems like everyone still has holiday hangover LOL. Been a long time since I hit a Monday and hadn't had any of my four fights posted yet...
SauroGrenom 01-09-06, 04:10 PM	For all parties involved: I would have recommended that the pitlord send a PM to both players about the issue and get it resolved there (or even in the FOTW thread). If Sauro had not responded to them in a timely matter - yes I would have restricted the item to the lesser version noted on the sheet (Deepcrystal (so Masterworked - but not +1 and Powerstoring). Had a conversation been made about the problem - I think it would have been resolved without heated argument. I would like as much as everyone else to put this issue to bed. Infact I was first notified about my error on Kracknol's sheet by a PM from MitzaVolchenko. He indicated that he'd made a post in the prison. I responded the same day with an explination that it was a clerical error on my part and I appologized for any confusion. I also explained exacitaly what the nature of my mistake was. MitzaVolchenko kindly replied with a short comment to the effect that my explination was "good enough". Later he appeared to reverse his position here in the FoTW thread. That came as a shock, and I got a little hot under the collar. Argument ensued. However, Sauro - as has been said - this is within the powers of the pitlord. You may not like it - but that is the way it has been done in a number of situations.Even when I was most irate, I recognized this as a fact. I suppose that some of my previous comments were too frank. I should have tried to be more diplomatic. My argument is not at all about the powers of a pitlord, but rather about the issue of fareness. If the fight can be completed in a fare manner, then I will be satisfied. Even if Kracknol looses an expensive loss. I'm sorry that some of my comments were threatening in a sense. No one should feel a need to defend themselves. I've been a round for a few months now and this week is the first time that I've seen MitzaVolchenko. I'm sorry that our first interaction was so confrontational. Perhaps next week we can start fresh. Sauro
TelinArtho 01-09-06, 04:16 PM	Wow...is it just me...or are there lots of fights still outstanding? Seems like everyone still has holiday hangover LOL. Been a long time since I hit a Monday and hadn't had any of my four fights posted yet... Well combined with the holidays and the boards' flakiness over the last few days - it has certainly not helped. I've got 5 characters active this week and 4 of the fights are still outstanding and the one that was posted still has open issues... though looking at IC's past rolls I see that both Ana's and Ural's fights are being run as we speak... @Sauro - well, obviously without knowing about the PM conversation - that changes things, especially if Mitzo agreed that it was a clerical error. Glad to see that you have calmed down some. Lastly @all my questors for next week (and this includes miniquests) - make sure to include that I am your questlord in the title of your character sheet. (This is both for Pitlords and for myself - I've got a lot of quests/miniquests starting soon and I need to know who is who... Thanks
Macbrea 01-09-06, 04:23 PM	(15regular,11acid,10electricity) would seem to indicate that the flail was used with the spell stored in it.
Usurpator 01-09-06, 04:33 PM	Last week the two fights my characters were in were done on tuesday, unbelievable this week both of them were ready by sunday. Haven't had all my fights done by sunday in many weeks. Thanks Pitbull and Skojar! @Begferdeth: What an incredibly long and funny fight you Pitlorded. Has anyone already pointed out that you have the White Hand is doing x2 damage on a crit with his bow instead of x3? Might change the outcome....
MitzaVolchenko 01-09-06, 04:38 PM	Alright, lots of editing and a ton of pain later, look this over : Kracknol vs TFH (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8183682&postcount=963) @Sauro, I said fine with me before I ran the numbers and still can't come up with the right gold for you to have the flail. I let the flail stand as it had no impact on the fight. No hard feelings, feel free to send me into yet another edit if I am still missing something, but please ask nicely.
SauroGrenom 01-09-06, 04:44 PM	MitzaVolchenko, I see that you have edited the fight. I appreciate your efforts. In the spirit of consiliation, I will not ask for you to further edit the fight. However there are still errors that remain that have the potential to swing the result and I feel obligated to notify you of those. Round 7: It appears that Kracknol gets up when he was never knocked down. The extra move action should be used to regain psionic focus as I requested in my tactics. Also in the original version of the fight TFH attempts to trip and fails a trip check at this point. Those roles have disappeared. It would be more fare in my opinion of the roles were kept and applied to the first trip check in the battle. Right now it appears that you are simply dropping the roles where my opponent has failed and keeping those he succeeded. Round 8: Kracknol uses his Vigor stone prematurely. In my tactics I asked for it to be used when he has 30hp or less. In this round he begins with 44hp. Also when Kracknol uses his Vigor stone he should take a 5'step back as I specified in his tactics. This way he can use the stone without provoking any AoO's. Instead of using a stone he should be using a move action to recover his focus and attacking using the roles that are currently in the 9th round. Also as previously mentioned I think the trip checks that were previously used in round 7 should now be used in this round instead of discarding them. Round 9: Kracknol should in all fareness not have been triped last round, so he does not stand up in this round or take an AoO's. It is likely that he will take a 5'step back and use his stone of vigor if his HP are below 30. If not he should try to focus and attack. Infact his stone is ML4 so he needs to make a ML check to see if he can use the stone. That check is not included. Also TFH doesn't trip this round. THis is his tactic, and should probably be followed. The touch attack obviously hits, but the trip checks from round 8 should be used here and should be followed by an attack role. Round 10: By now Kracknol is tripped and spends time standing up taking AoO's. THen he needs to attack again. His attacks will be followed by TFH's attacks. Further rounds will probably go back and forth with trip attempts.
Macbrea 01-09-06, 05:12 PM	Round 1:41 Round 2:41 Round 3:41 + 20 (vigor) Round 4:61 Round 5:61 - 4 (horse) Round 6:57 Round 7:57 - 13 (horse) Round 8:44 - 8 (TFH) = 36 + 20 vigor = 56 - 14 TFH = 42 - 8 horse = 34 Round 9:34 - 6 (TFH) = 28 - 10 TFH = 18 Round 10:18 - 6 (TFH) = 12 - 15 = -3 Yup, appears round 8 and 9 could simply be reversed on your actions. Assuming the same rolls for those actions. It should just change the round in which you stand up. I could be wrong.
Snommelp 01-09-06, 05:24 PM	Wow...is it just me...or are there lots of fights still outstanding? Seems like everyone still has holiday hangover LOL. Been a long time since I hit a Monday and hadn't had any of my four fights posted yet...My free-for-all fight will be up today, but not soon. I've got a trombone lesson to teach in about an hour, and even at level 3 expecting to finish a four-way fight in an hour is extremely optimistic.
TelinArtho 01-09-06, 05:27 PM	I don't know about previous rulings, but Trixie has to break her charm person and attempt to kill Challak in order to actually win. I would grant that she can ask Challak to sleep (while she takes first shift as guard, of course) and take a CDG attempt on her. If we are all allowed to agree to ties, then maybe I will continue in the FFA's and just talk my opponents into agreeing to ties. If Trixie is unwilling to attack Challak in 10 rounds delay of game ends the spell. Well, since this is ground-breaking territory (as far as I know) for the CoCo - I wanted to get an official ruling. As it stands, I have not heard from Cat on the matter - so its staying as is for now.
SauroGrenom 01-09-06, 05:31 PM	Round 1:41 Round 2:41 Round 3:41 + 20 (vigor) Round 4:61 Round 5:61 - 4 (horse) Round 6:57 Round 7:57 - 13 (horse) Round 8:44 - 8 (TFH) = 36 + 20 vigor = 56 - 14 TFH = 42 - 8 horse = 34 Round 9:34 - 6 (TFH) = 28 - 10 TFH = 18 Round 10:18 - 6 (TFH) = 12 - 15 = -3 Yup, appears round 8 and 9 could simply be reversed on your actions. Assuming the same rolls for those actions. It should just change the round in which you stand up. I could be wrong. When Kracknol uses his Vigor stone is not of tremendous signifigance, though it should definately be used at some time when Kracknol can recieve the full benefits (ie when the previous vigor hp have been all used). What is important is that I asked for Kracknol to take a 5'step back and use the stone. That 5'step action costs him nothing and saves him 2AoO's one causing 8hp damage. Those AoO roles should be kept as well and used at the next time Kracknol grants an AoO standing up in round 10. What is of greater signifigance is tossing out the trip check that failed in the first draft of the fight on round 7. If that trip check is preserved there should be one less round where Kracknol stands up and takes a bunch of damage. Also if kracknol's actions are properly tracked, there is a decent chance that he can get the move actions to refocus and cause an additional 2d6 damage on his hits because of psionic weapon. TFH should get hit with Kracknol's attack in the 8th round instead of the 9th and if Kracknol's focused at that time the hit may cause enough damage to knockout the Horseman and drastically change the corse of the fight. Basically Kracknol shouldn't be tripped untill the 9th round and should have an extra 20hp at the beginning of that round. THen he gets tripped and hit for 14 damage. Then in round 10 kracknol stands up and takes another 8 damage from the AoO's currently used in round 8. Then he 5'steps away and uses his stone of Vigor. Then TFH takes a 5' step up and attacks him with a trip
MitzaVolchenko 01-09-06, 05:48 PM	This argument seems to be based on asking me to move all dice rolls down. I am not going to go back and dig up rolls deleted for being made when none should have been then apply them where I made checks that were supposed to be made.. I will review the fight one more time and see what is what. If I need to add or re-add dice rolls, I do have the original posting of the fight stored for reference. *IF* anything significantly changes in the fight, I will post it here for further review.
NiQil 01-09-06, 05:55 PM	This argument seems to be based on asking me to move all dice rolls down. I am not going to go back and dig up rolls deleted for being made when none should have been then apply them where I made checks that were supposed to be made.. I will review the fight one more time and see what is what. If I need to add or re-add dice rolls, I do have the original posting of the fight stored for reference. *IF* anything significantly changes in the fight, I will post it here for further review. Thematic dice rolls from fights that are then edited are supposed to be kept the same. In Sauro's example, if there was a trip attack roll in the first run of the fight that missed hitting Kracknol, then that roll should get used before any new rolls for trip attacks are used. Sauro is 100% correct in this regard. All thematic rolls are kept.
MitzaVolchenko 01-09-06, 05:58 PM	TBH vs. Methos (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8188282&postcount=971) is up. Thank you to nightbanegod for not forcing me to run everyone in circles for hours attempting to get the unlikely number of flat-footed hsots he would need to defeat the arrow deflecting monk at range.
NiQil 01-09-06, 06:15 PM	TBH vs. Methos (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8188282&postcount=971) is up. Thank you to nightbanegod for not forcing me to run everyone in circles for hours attempting to get the unlikely number of flat-footed hsots he would need to defeat the arrow deflecting monk at range. I felt really bad writing that tactic too....but I can't *not write a tactic that will allow me to succeed... @ NBG: Look at it this way....both of your ECL 5 characters have faced Methos....so ya shouldn't see him again for awhile LOL. Just the rest of his kin, who you should have a much easier time with.
Luni 01-09-06, 07:09 PM	My 4 way level 3 FFA will be finished later tonight. It is a headache to run this time. :(
Macbrea 01-09-06, 07:18 PM	Can we please go back to one on one fights for a bit? We have enough pitlords willing to run single fights that we don't really need to punish everyone with the utter mess that the big fights produce.
NiQil 01-09-06, 07:21 PM	Can we please go back to one on one fights for a bit? We have enough pitlords willing to run single fights that we don't really need to punish everyone with the utter mess that the big fights produce. This should probably be a request sent to Pitlords, since Cat doesn't always have time to read all these threads. Anyone with this type of request or something similar would probably be better served sending a PM there.
Usurpator 01-09-06, 07:26 PM	TBH vs. Methos (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8188282&postcount=971) is up. Thank you to nightbanegod for not forcing me to run everyone in circles for hours attempting to get the unlikely number of flat-footed hsots he would need to defeat the arrow deflecting monk at range. @Nightbanegod: Next time ready to shoot Methos when he shoots you. That way he will not have a hand free to Deflect your arrows. Might not win you the match, but at least gives you a fighting chance.
nightbanegod 01-09-06, 07:28 PM	@MitzaVolchenko and Saru i missed the entire first running of the fight as i could not log on to this website yesterday... and as i can tell from this running these are my official complaints/issues/"eye-stigmatas" of this fight... 1st ... energy cone is an illegal stored power for his flail.. and as such i call that there is NO stored power in his flail as he has not specified anything in tactics or otherwise... powerstoring weapons specifically state that the power has to be targeted.. and last time i checked ... cones are the most target specific shapes/bursts/eminations/area effect ranges.... get my point there? 2nd ....INIT does SO reset after a readied action goes off... it does not matter that he was INVIS ... it wouldnt matter if he hopped in from a teleport spell.. if i am readying for something to happen... then he does something to set of my readied action... even if it is in the middle of his action... i take my action and then init resets with the completion of his action ... REGARDLESS OF CIRCUMSTANCE..... if being invisible was all that it took for readied actions to not reset init... do you not think that it would SAY SO under readied actions.... and as such that it doesnt ... init resets..this was covered a few weeks ago in a FoTW thread.. where someone outlined step by step what happens when someone invisible triggers a readied action by becoming visible. and if you would like i can go hunting for it... i do not remember which week it was but its there... which brings me to my next point.... 3rd....i am able to make a ride check to take cover with my horse... DC 15 ride check.. reactive ...when attacked... if you have a problem with Cover: You can react instantly to drop down and hang alongside your mount, using it as cover. You can’t attack or cast spells while using your mount as cover. If you fail your Ride check, you don’t get the cover benefit. This usage does not take an action. i can explain it to you...but i think some things are self explanitory....
NiQil 01-09-06, 07:34 PM	@Nightbanegod: Next time ready to shoot Methos when he shoots you. That way he will not have a hand free to Deflect your arrows. Might not win you the match, but at least gives you a fighting chance. This would be debateable, since a ready action occurs immediately before the act that triggers it, and removing a hand from a weapon is a free action (as well as placing your hand back on your weapon). I would suggest that Deflect Arrows would still work.
Warclone 01-09-06, 07:51 PM	Krayko (^Rayne^) vs Weiniete (Skojar) vs Amaryllis (Snommelp) vs Anakala (TelinArtho): Warclone [All vs All] is up.
Macbrea 01-09-06, 08:10 PM	This should probably be a request sent to Pitlords, since Cat doesn't always have time to read all these threads. Anyone with this type of request or something similar would probably be better served sending a PM there. Yeah, I know... it doesn't really matter.
Ariel23 01-09-06, 09:05 PM	This would be debateable, since a ready action occurs immediately before the act that triggers it, and removing a hand from a weapon is a free action (as well as placing your hand back on your weapon). I would suggest that Deflect Arrows would still work.But then if you ready to attack when your opponent is casting a spell, you would shoot them before they begin casting, and we all know that such fire interrupts casting. Your readied action interrupts their action, but because 3.5 does not allow simultaneous actions, the success or failure of the readied action is determined first. Doing it in the reverse order makes no sense. If the triggered action is part of another character’s activities, you interrupt the other character. Distracting Spellcasters You can ready an attack against a spellcaster with the trigger "if she starts casting a spell." This is one case where the monk can't get out of it: that feat specifically says "You must have one hand free (holding nothing)", in this case they are trying to get the best of both worlds. The monk has to fire the weapon with 2 hands, he does not have a hand free at all times. You could ready to fire "When the other character fires" or "reloads" or "when they hold an item in each hand." Yes, taking a hand off a weapon is a free action, but if you are holding a bolt and a crossbow, you must drop one or the other. The way I see it, a character with Deflect Arrows has the following options against such a tactic: Have an empty hand as per the feat Drop one ammunition to Deflect Throw shuriken (et al) rather than firing a 2H weapon Learn to fire a bow with his feet (just brainstorming here) Grow a third hand
SauroGrenom 01-09-06, 09:42 PM	1st ... energy cone is an illegal stored power for his flail.. and as such i call that there is NO stored power in his flail as he has not specified anything in tactics or otherwise... powerstoring weapons specifically state that the power has to be targeted.. and last time i checked ... cones are the most target specific shapes/bursts/eminations/area effect ranges.... get my point there? I'm sorry nightbanegod, but you are wrong here. Kracknol specified in his prebuff section that he would pay 150gp for spellcasting services to charge up his flail's powerstoring ability. Energy Cone is a valid option to be stored in a powerstoring weapon. It is a power that can be targeted. I know that Energy Cone has an area of effect, but that does not prevent it from being a targeted power as well. After all the Area does have to be targeted to be in a specific place. There are examples in the SRD to support this interpretation. Take crawling tattoo's of Energy Bolt listed under Universal Items. The Crawling Tattoo section specifies that only powers that can be targeted can be scribed into crawling tattoo's. If you look up Energy Bolt you see that it does not have a "Target" entry instead it has an "Area" entry. Obviously crawling tattoo's of Energy Bolt are viable options because one is listed as an example Crawling Tattoo. The same criterion for targeting must be met by both the crawling tattoo and the Powerstoring weapon. Energy Cone is a viable option for both. 2nd ....INIT does SO reset after a readied action goes off... it does not matter that he was INVIS ... it wouldnt matter if he hopped in from a teleport spell.. if i am readying for something to happen... then he does something to set of my readied action... even if it is in the middle of his action... i take my action and then init resets with the completion of his action ... REGARDLESS OF CIRCUMSTANCE..... if being invisible was all that it took for readied actions to not reset init... do you not think that it would SAY SO under readied actions.... and as such that it doesnt ... init resets..this was covered a few weeks ago in a FoTW thread.. where someone outlined step by step what happens when someone invisible triggers a readied action by becoming visible. and if you would like i can go hunting for it... i do not remember which week it was but its there... which brings me to my next point....I would appreciate a link here. It has been my experience for several months as both a Player and a Pitlord that if a character readies an attack against an invisible opponent to trigger upon spotting them, that the invisible attacker must attack before becoming visible and suffering the readied action's effects. If the defender's tigger allows an attack action before invisibility is exausted, they can easily attack the wrong square and if they attack the correct square they suffer a 50% miss chance due to concealment. In any case that can only happen if the trigger for the readied action is something that is possable to happen while the attacker is invisible. If I and MitzaVolchenko are correct in our interpretation of the rules, the readied action happens after the attack (that triggers the readied action), so in this specific instance there is no reset of the initiative. This is realy an issue of when the defender is able to preceve that the trigger is taking place. Let me create a hypothetical situation to illustrate this issue. Say for example that Tom is an archer who is working to kill the vile thief Leo. Tom readies an action to shoot Leo if Leo attacks. Then Leo snipes Tom successfully so that Tom is attacked but doesn't know where the attack came from. Question is, "Does Tom's readied action trigger?" The answer is no. Yes the trigger took place, but Tom cannot see it take place nor has a location to target with his attack. So Tom doesn't know it happened and he does not act. In our case Horseman readies an action to attack Kracknol when he is spotted. What happens is that Kracknol is not spotted before he attacks due to his invisibility. So Horseman cannot precieve the trigger happening. The Horseman instead gets his attack as soon as he precieves the trigger happening, in this case after Kracknol's attack. 3rd....i am able to make a ride check to take cover with my horse... DC 15 ride check.. reactive ...when attacked... if you have a problem with Cover: You can react instantly to drop down and hang alongside your mount, using it as cover. You can’t attack or cast spells while using your mount as cover. If you fail your Ride check, you don’t get the cover benefit. This usage does not take an action. i can explain it to you...but i think some things are self explanitory....I agree that you can take the ride check to gain cover when attacked at any time. MitzaVolchenko noticed that any time that you succeed on the ride check you are denied the opportunity to attack in any way. You cannot succeed on a ride check to gain cover then also use your readied action. The readied action is an attack, so if the ride check succeed, then attacks are not an option. He thought that you would probably rather attack than take cover every round. If you insisit on taking ride checks all the time, then the Horseman is unable to attack in most rounds because he will make his ride check 70% of the time.
Warclone 01-09-06, 10:10 PM	Shakari the Warrior Maiden (Luni) vs Barthleby (Pittbull): Warclone is up.
MitzaVolchenko 01-09-06, 10:50 PM	Okay a new version is up...follow the old link it is in the same post. Here is the bottom line. I have five versions of the fight stored as docs on my computer. I have adjusted every way that I have been asked to adjust by both sides except for the last round from nightbanegod because they made absolutely no difference. I went back and pulled the numbers down from round 7 or so onward. Because of the insistence that I move the healing contingency, Kracknol loses without getting a swing in as it takes effect while he is tripped forcing him to take AoO's to get back and then leaves him open to attack while he uses the stone. I agree with nightbanegod that an area effect should not be placed in a powerstoring weapon, but I will let that debate go to the tavern. I also feel that since he was not unaware of Kracknol's charge that the readied action should go off and the inits should swap, but as it is debateable I left that change for last to wait and see what happened when I changed the healing contingency to match tactics and carried the old numbers down on the trips. Nightbanegod is correct that he can use the ride attempt to take cover and still act. The epic check allows one with multiple opponents to never lose cover while he is swinging. I am not going to put all of the quotes from the SRD up to back that up. It is immaterial to the fight. Kracknol got very unlucky with his rolls. Harbinger fought like a small god. TFH had a moderately low AC to hit and good rolls for his attacks. I apologize for overlooking the items that I overlooked in the beginning. They did not ultimately change anything, but I feel silly for having missed them. At this point while commentary is good for learning, I am not goingt o edit to yet another version of the fight. Kracknol conceded earlier, I merely did the last revise because I did not want to cheat him out of anything.
Warclone 01-09-06, 11:38 PM	Okay a new version is up...follow the old link it is in the same post. Here is the bottom line. I have five versions of the fight stored as docs on my computer. I have adjusted every way that I have been asked to adjust by both sides except for the last round from nightbanegod because they made absolutely no difference. I went back and pulled the numbers down from round 7 or so onward. Because of the insistence that I move the healing contingency, Kracknol loses without getting a swing in as it takes effect while he is tripped forcing him to take AoO's to get back and then leaves him open to attack while he uses the stone. I agree with nightbanegod that an area effect should not be placed in a powerstoring weapon, but I will let that debate go to the tavern. I also feel that since he was not unaware of Kracknol's charge that the readied action should go off and the inits should swap, but as it is debateable I left that change for last to wait and see what happened when I changed the healing contingency to match tactics and carried the old numbers down on the trips. Nightbanegod is correct that he can use the ride attempt to take cover and still act. The epic check allows one with multiple opponents to never lose cover while he is swinging. I am not going to put all of the quotes from the SRD up to back that up. It is immaterial to the fight. Kracknol got very unlucky with his rolls. Harbinger fought like a small god. TFH had a moderately low AC to hit and good rolls for his attacks. I apologize for overlooking the items that I overlooked in the beginning. They did not ultimately change anything, but I feel silly for having missed them. At this point while commentary is good for learning, I am not goingt o edit to yet another version of the fight. Kracknol conceded earlier, I merely did the last revise because I did not want to cheat him out of anything. I'm so sorry you had to go through that. Kudos on the dilligence, though.
Kaigan 01-10-06, 12:13 AM	@Iced: I am very disappointed that you ran the Gundir vs. Kailia fight that way. Last time I checked Jan 3, 06 was a tuesday. So I edited way before the deadline. Check carefully.
SauroGrenom 01-10-06, 12:18 AM	Thanks MitzaVolchenko, You've edited the fight a number of times now, and I'm satisfied. Reviewing the fight a last time I discovered something. I'd like to discuss it with everyone for future reference. To be clear it is of no signifigance for this fight. No more edits are requested or expected. I've often wondered what happenes when a trip check is tied. In the grapple check entry there is a clear rule to cover this possibility. However in the trip rules there is nothing to handle this possibility. There is also nothing in the disarm, bullrush and sunder rules to cover a tie. In the Grapple rules the tie goes to whoever has the higher modifier and if that is a tie there is a reroll. It appears that the grapple check is actually the unusual case here. All other opposed checks simply state that a success has a particular effect and a failure has another. It would be natural to assume that a tie has neither effect, but that would just be an assumption. Here are the relevant SRD passages:Step 3: Hold. Make an opposed grapple check as a free action. If you succeed, you and your target are now grappling, and you deal damage to the target as if with an unarmed strike. If you lose, you fail to start the grapple. You automatically lose an attempt to hold if the target is two or more size categories larger than you are. In case of a tie, the combatant with the higher grapple check modifier wins. If this is a tie, roll again to break the tie. So we have a precident for rerolling tied opposed rolls. If your attack succeeds, make a Strength check opposed by the defender’s Dexterity or Strength check (whichever ability score has the higher modifier). A combatant gets a +4 bonus for every size category he is larger than Medium or a –4 penalty for every size category he is smaller than Medium. The defender gets a +4 bonus on his check if he has more than two legs or is otherwise more stable than a normal humanoid. If you win, you trip the defender. If you lose, the defender may immediately react and make a Strength check opposed by your Dexterity or Strength check to try to trip you.This suggests to me that if you don't win the role, then nothing. If you don't fail the role, then nothing either. So in the case of a tie nothing happennes. After some digging I found this passage in the FAQ on the Wizards websight:Although the defender’s roll is called an “opposed attack roll,” the defender is really just setting the DC for the attacker: This suggests that "attackers" should win all ties on opposed roles. If the defenders check sets the DC, then the attacker's check only needs to meet that DC for success. What's your oppinon?
MitzaVolchenko 01-10-06, 12:25 AM	Failing to find anything else, I went with simply re-rolling. There are other items wherein ties are resolved by a re-roll...initiatives when the modifiers are all equal for instance. I did consider defaulting to the precedent set by grapple, but grappling is a different animal practically speaking than a weapon assisted trip. *shrugs* I appreciate you not asking for any further revisions because as much as I don't want to, I would do it again if needed. If anyone has a fight that needs to be picked up, I am awake and able to run an extra yet tonight. Just drop me an IM.
Snommelp 01-10-06, 12:29 AM	If anyone has a fight that needs to be picked up, I am awake and able to run an extra yet tonight. Just drop me an IM. Tempting, but my fight has your character in it. Cheater. :P Don't worry, I'm starting it now. I got distracted by Starcraft (a very poor excuse, but the truth).
Iced 01-10-06, 12:31 AM	@Iced: I am very disappointed that you ran the Gundir vs. Kailia fight that way. Last time I checked Jan 3, 06 was a tuesday. So I edited way before the deadline. Check carefully. 01-06-05, 08:55 AM = Friday - this is yours 01-08-05, 03:26 PM = Sunday - this is One-Winged-Angel. It is my understanding that if characters are edited after deadline they automatically gain a loss. I will leave his up to the GM and still run the fight but it won't be resolved until late tonight or tomorrow.
Kaigan 01-10-06, 12:34 AM	01-06-05, 08:55 AM = Friday - this is yours 01-08-05, 03:26 PM = Sunday - this is One-Winged-Angel. It is my understanding that if characters are edited after deadline they automatically gain a loss. I will leave his up to the GM and still run the fight but it won't be resolved until late tonight or tomorrow. Well I don't know what it shows for you, but for me I have this: 01-03-06, 1:53 PM = Tuesday. I would like someone else to double check please. Because this is truly bizarre and I would never do such a thing, neither would One_Winged_Angel.
Erithmu 01-10-06, 12:35 AM	@Iced: I am very disappointed that you ran the Gundir vs. Kailia fight that way. Last time I checked Jan 3, 06 was a tuesday. So I edited way before the deadline. Check carefully. I think Iced made an honest mistake and looked at the original post time for each of these characters (upper left corner when you click from the Characters thread) Both of em were posted in '05. Last I checked we were a little later than that. Happy bday to both those characters. I dunno if they have to add one to their age.
Iced 01-10-06, 12:43 AM	I think Iced made an honest mistake and looked at the original post time for each of these characters (upper left corner when you click from the Characters thread) Both of em were posted in '05. Last I checked we were a little later than that. Happy bday to both those characters. I dunno if they have to add one to their age. Oh :censored: my bad, i'm sorry Erithmu's right. It looked as if both were edited after deadline because of their original post date. :rolleyes: Fight will commence immidiately. Sorry again Kaigan. ~Iced
Luni 01-10-06, 12:44 AM	Shakari the Warrior Maiden (Luni) vs Barthleby (Pittbull): Warclone is up. Only thing that bugs me is this. If he doesn't get wings, he can't fly because Alter Self doesn't grand Supernatural Abilities (Which would be flight without wings)
MitzaVolchenko 01-10-06, 12:44 AM	Tempting, but my fight has your character in it. Cheater. :P Don't worry, I'm starting it now. I got distracted by Starcraft (a very poor excuse, but the truth). *blinks innocently* What, you don't think I'd run it fair? Considering that I fully expect to lose outright in that one, I would just surrender Sybs from the start and move on from there, but since your excuse for not being done with the fight is Starcrack, you run it! For anyone else out there with a better excuse than Snommelps's I am still awake and will be for several more hours.
Iced 01-10-06, 01:23 AM	If anyone's up for it, an EL4 fight: Kailia (One-Winged-Angel) vs Gundir Malakas (Kaigan) (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8194797&postcount=983) If I run it then it won't be out for some time because I find myself beset by a homework load of truly epic proportion. Let me know if you can take the fight. ~Iced
Ariel23 01-10-06, 01:24 AM	After some digging I found this passage in the FAQ on the Wizards websight: This suggests that "attackers" should win all ties on opposed roles. If the defenders check sets the DC, then the attacker's check only needs to meet that DC for success. What's your oppinon? That has been my interpretation as well. I don't know anyone who says "Spot 22 vs. Hide 22 = tie/reroll" it is always a success in every game I have been in. In the rest of the game system, the actor or attacker needs to equal or exceed the DC or target's AC, which in the case of an opposed roll, DC = the target's roll. However, there is that pesky line in "Opposed Skill Checks" of An opposed check is a check whose success or failure is determined by comparing the check result to another character’s check result. In an opposed check, the higher result succeeds, while the lower result fails. In case of a tie, the higher skill modifier wins. If these scores are the same, roll again to break the tie. This says that the winner is the person who had the worst roll, not the person who got "lucky". Or, you could have a re-roll. In TT D&D (well, pitlording for that matter) fewer rolls tends to be better than more rolls, so I'm not a big fan of that option.
NiQil 01-10-06, 01:26 AM	But then if you ready to attack when your opponent is casting a spell, you would shoot them before they begin casting, and we all know that such fire interrupts casting. Your readied action interrupts their action, but because 3.5 does not allow simultaneous actions, the success or failure of the readied action is determined first. Doing it in the reverse order makes no sense. This is one case where the monk can't get out of it: that feat specifically says "You must have one hand free (holding nothing)", in this case they are trying to get the best of both worlds. The monk has to fire the weapon with 2 hands, he does not have a hand free at all times. You could ready to fire "When the other character fires" or "reloads" or "when they hold an item in each hand." Yes, taking a hand off a weapon is a free action, but if you are holding a bolt and a crossbow, you must drop one or the other. The way I see it, a character with Deflect Arrows has the following options against such a tactic: Have an empty hand as per the feat Drop one ammunition to Deflect Throw shuriken (et al) rather than firing a 2H weapon Learn to fire a bow with his feet (just brainstorming here) Grow a third hand Except, by your own logic, it still works. Monk gets ready to fire against opponent with readied action to fire upon the monk firing. Ready action triggers, and opponent fires. Monk drops arrow (free), deflects, draws new arrow (free), and fires. Still works.
Ariel23 01-10-06, 01:48 AM	Except, by your own logic, it still works. Monk gets ready to fire against opponent with readied action to fire upon the monk firing. Ready action triggers, and opponent fires. Monk drops arrow (free), deflects, draws new arrow (free), and fires. Still works.For that one round, it works. But how much ammunition does he have? That is a ranged combat with an opponent who is using twice as much ammunition as you... Also, picking up those arrows off the floor is a move action (and an AoO if threatened). This would turn firing a bow into 2 actions (M+S), light crossbow into 3,(M+M+S) and heavy crossbow into 4 (M+FR+S). Add 1 action if you want to make a Full Attack/Rapid Shot. It would also mean the monk cannot move position if he needs that ammunition.
Ariel23 01-10-06, 01:50 AM	Only thing that bugs me is this. If he doesn't get wings, he can't fly because Alter Self doesn't grand Supernatural Abilities (Which would be flight without wings) That's definitely an issue that needs to be resolved, considering that it's been done so often. Alter Self is clear that you only gain "Flight with wings."
Snommelp 01-10-06, 02:04 AM	FFA is finished. Figuring rewards out now... Fjord brought all of his dogs and nobody else brought an ally. EDIT: It's up. I really don't like the outcome; two characters had tactics that actually involved fighting, and they got first and last place. By the way, please note all of you delayers that there is a ten-round rule. If you delay for ten rounds (one minute in-game) something bad happens. I was going to light the invisible culprit up with faerie fire every round starting at round 11, if the fight had lasted that long.
Iced 01-10-06, 02:20 AM	If anyone's up for it, an EL4 fight: Kailia (One-Winged-Angel) vs Gundir Malakas (Kaigan) (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8194797&postcount=983) If I run it then it won't be out for some time because I find myself beset by a homework load of truly epic proportion. Let me know if you can take the fight. ~Iced I just finished writing a 5 page paper on landmines. I'm out. If someone runs this before i drag myself out of bed in 5 hours from now for swim practice you will have gained my most true and profound adoration. ~Iced
Kaigan 01-10-06, 02:23 AM	Thelgar vs. Sir Valkin is up. Please look over it for errors and such. I hope there aren't too many, but if there are any significant fight changing ones, I will look over and rerun tomorrow sometime before evening. Now to run the FFA and the MQ.
MitzaVolchenko 01-10-06, 02:37 AM	I am taking Iced's ECL 4 Kailia (One-Winged-Angel) vs Gundir Malakas (Kaigan). I have PM'd him. If anyone else is already working on it, please please please send me an IM...my aim and msn are both lsited.
Vathelokai 01-10-06, 02:39 AM	That's definitely an issue that needs to be resolved, considering that it's been done so often. Alter Self is clear that you only gain "Flight with wings." You acquire the physical qualities of the new form while retaining your own mind. Physical qualities include natural size, mundane movement capabilities (such as burrowing, climbing, walking, swimming, and flight with wings, to a maximum speed of 120 feet for flying or 60 feet for nonflying movement)... As shown in the picture from the MM (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/MM35_gallery/MM35_PG183.jpg), all mephits are winged. Alterself considers flightspeeds below 120 to be non-magical, so if an outsider alterselfs into a mephit, they can fly. Vargouilles and juvenille arrowhawks are also possibliities for flying outsiders, but neither of them has hands. The full list of shapes and their bonuses can be found at TAO post 13. Of course that brings up an interesting question: is the art on the MM a valid source? Otherwise, any creature with a flight speed below 120 could be fair game.
Warclone 01-10-06, 02:41 AM	Only thing that bugs me is this. If he doesn't get wings, he can't fly because Alter Self doesn't grand Supernatural Abilities (Which would be flight without wings) Unfortunately, mephits do have wings. All mephits appear as small, winged creatures with more or less humanoid features. You may find the above here (http://d20srd.org/srd/monsters/mephit.htm), where you may also find a picture of a mephit (click the eye icon next to the big word "Mephit")
DTFarstar 01-10-06, 02:42 AM	Silas MacLeod vs. Greefe (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8195515&postcount=986) is up. I think everything in it is good, but if someone finds something, I'll check for problems in the morning. Or later if I can't sleep. Which is probably what will happen. I'm anxiously awaiting the official rewards to Challak's fight and the running of Darius's fight(not that I'm optimistic). So, hopefully I'll see it before I sleep.*cough*Hurry up, Kaigan*cough* Just kidding, man. Take your time, FFA's are horrible sometimes, I know.
Pittbull 01-10-06, 02:55 AM	Sorry for all that confusion with the mephits, I was two times wrong with having no wings and can't fly without wings.
Vathelokai 01-10-06, 02:59 AM	Well, this is highly disappointing. @Caterane: Could you add Vandalar's tactics? I'm curious as to what might have happened if I won initiative. See next post.
DTFarstar 01-10-06, 03:09 AM	Hmmm, trying to find the wrong tag place so I can tell Cat and have this fixed.... There we go, was one missing /sblock, one too many /sblocks, and one missing set of sblock and /sblock. If you want to Cat you can just Quote this and then copy and paste it over the sheets and tactics in the Battles thread so make it neater. Vandelar the red Optional: Slender Elf (Male+elf grey) (Neutral) (Wizard necromancer 8, ECL 8) (height 5 feet, weight 100 pounds) xp 28,479 /28,000 Member of the Arcane Order Arcane Order (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=500767) STR...06 [-2]...(0 pts) [06, -2racial] DEX...18 [+4]...(10 pts) [18, +2racial] CON...14 [+2]...(10 pts)[16, -2racial] INT...24 [+7]...(16 pts)[18, +2racial][+1 lvl 4][+1 lvl8][+2 headband] WIS...08 [-1]...(0 pts) CHA...08 [-1]...(0 pts) Hit Points: 37 [3 HD] (4 +2.5 +2.5+2.5+2.5+2.5+2.5+2.5+16) AC 15 [+4dex][+1 ring], Touch 15, Flat 11 Initiative: +4 [4dex, 0feat] BAB/Grap: +4/+2 [+3 bab, -2str] Speed 30 Saves: Fort +6 [2 class +2con +2 cloak] Refl +7 [2 class +3 ref +2 cloak] Will +7 [6 class -1 wis +2 cloak] +2 save vs enchantment, inmune to sleep Attacks: MW crossbow +9 (4 base +4 ranged +1 mw) dmg 1d8 19-20 x2 range 80 Ranged Touch +8 (4 base +4 Ranged) Touch +2 (4 base -2 Str) Feats: (scribe scroll) [1st wizard] (summon Familiar) [1st wizard] (spell focus necromancy) [1st character] [+1 dc necromancy spells] (tatoo focus necromancy) [3rd character] [+1 dc necromancy spells][+1 caster level check to overcome spell resistance] (empower spell) [5th wizard] (energy substitution)(Sonic) [6th character] Racial and Class Abilities: Immunity to magic sleep effects, and a +2 racial saving throw bonus against enchantment spells or effects. low light vision Weapon Proficiency: Elves receive the Martial Weapon Proficiency feats for the longsword, rapier, longbow (including composite longbow), and shortbow (including composite shortbow) as bonus feats. +2 racial bonus on Listen, Search, and Spot checks. An elf who merely passes within 5 feet of a secret or concealed door is entitled to a Search check to notice it as if she were actively looking for it. Skills (56 Points Class Wizard, 28+7+7+8+8+8+8+9): +19 Spellcraft [10 rnks, +7(int) ] [Wiz 8] +2 knowledage arcana synergy +13 Concentration [11 rnks, +2(con)] [wiz 11] +6 Spot [5 CCrnks, -1 (wis)]+2 race [wiz 10]+3 when in bright light and familiar is within 1 mile / +2 when familiar is within 5 ft +6 Listen [5 CCrnks, -1 (wis)]+2 race [wiz 10]+2 when familiar is within 5 ft +9 Move silently [5 CC rnks, +4(dex)][wiz 10] +9 Tumble [5 CCrnks, +4(dex)][wiz 10] +9 hide[5 CCrnks +4(dex)][wiz 10] +12 Knowledage Arcana [5 rnks, +7(int) ] [Wiz 5] +14 Craft Clocks [5 rnks, +7(int) ] [Wiz 5] +2 mw toolschanged (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7556235&postcount=7) Speaks (common), (elven) Gnoll, Gnome, Goblin, Orc, Sylvan, celestial(2). opposite schools enchantment/charm,transmutation Memorized: 0.-ghost sound,detect magic, resistance, touch of fatigue. 1.-Shocking Grasp, Shocking Grasp, Obscuring mist,magic missile, ray of enfeeblement, protection from evil, Grease 2.-Ghoul Touch ,Acid Arrow, Spectral Hand, Mirror Image, [Sonic] Scorching ray,Scorching ray 3.-Fear,Dispel Magic x 2, [sonic] fireball, Fireball 4.- Fear, Greater Invisibility, Evards black tentacles, dimension door Spells (7*1+6*2+5*3+4*4) (7+12+15+16=43) (50/3 = 16.6 = 17) wizard 8th 4,4,3,3,2 | specialist +1 1st , +1 2nd, +1 3rd, +1 4th = 4,5,4,4,3 | 24 int +2 1st +2 2nd, +2 3rd, +1 4th = 4,7,6,5,4 0- resistance,acid splash, detect poison, detect magic, read magic, dancing lights,flare,light,ray of frost, ghost sound, disrupt undead, touch of fatigue, arcane mark, prestidigitation. 1st 1- Obscuring Mist,2-shocking grasp, 3.-magic missile, 4.-true strike, 5.-mage armor, 6.-grease (dc 18),7.-summon monster 1, 8.-protection from good, 9.-protection from evil 10-color spray (dc 18) 11-protection from law 12-protection from chaos 13- ray of enfeeblement 2nd 1- Ghoul touch (dc 21), 2-invisibility, 3-web (dc 19), 4-summon swarm, 5-Blindness/deafness (dc 21), 6-scorching ray, 7-shatter (dc 19), 8-False Life, 9-see invisibility, 10-protection from arrows, 11-resist energy, 12-scare(dc 21), 13-spectral hand, 14- mirror image, 15- Acid Arrow, 16-Minor Image(dc 19) 3rd 1.-Ray of exhaustion (dc 22) 2.-stinking cloud (dc 20) 3.- dispel magic 4.- summon monster III 5.- vampiric touch 6.-blacklight 7.-fireball (dc 20) 8.-Major Image(dc 20) 4th 1.-Fear (dc 23) 2.-Evard's black tentacles 3.-Greater Invisibility 4.- Solid Fog 5.-Dimension Door 6.-Phantasmal Killer(dc 21) 7.-Globe of invulnerability lesser Evard's black tentacles Bab +8/+3 Grapple check +15 Hawk Familiar Ganon Hawk Familiar Ganon hp 18 init +3 fly 60 BaB +4 AC 24/15 (touch)/21 (flat footed) (4 natural base,+4 natural (familiar), 3 dex , 2 size, 3 MW studded leather) attack +9 (1d4-2) +4 bab, +3 dex, +2 size , low light vision saves +2 Fortitude /+5 Reflex /+6 will abilities Str 6, Dex 17, Con 10, Int 9, Wis 14, Cha 6 skills +9 Listen [5 CCrnks, +2(wis), +2 alertness ] [Wiz 10] +17 Spot [5 CCrnks, +2(wis),+8 racial, +2 alertness ] [Wiz 10] +7 Spellcraft [8 rnks, -1(int) ] [Wiz 8] +11 Concentration [11 rnks, +0(con)] [wiz 11] +8 Move silently [5 CCrnks, +3(dex)][wiz 10] +8 Tumble [5 CCrnks, +3(dex)][wiz 10] +16 hide [5 CCrnks +3(dex)][wiz 10] +8 size modifier +4 Knowledage Arcana [5 rnks, -1(int) ] [Wiz 5] feats Alertness, Weapon Finesse Alertness, improved evasion, share spells, empathic link Deliver touch spells speak with master speak with animals of it's kind Equipment MW studded leather armor 175gp 2lb Miscellaneous Statistics: Encumberance: 0-20 (light), 21-40 (medium), 41-60 (heavy) Weight carried: 7 lb Buffs and Prefight actions: start with loaded crossbow. Equipment: (Free weightless outfit) (Armor)spell component pouch x2 (Weapon)dagger [1 lbs][ 2 gp] Pearl of power 1,000 gp (1st level) headband of intellect +2 4,000 gp Blackmarket (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6796322&postcount=74) Cloack of resistance +2 4,000 gp light crossbow MW 330 gp 4lb crossbow bolts 19 2 gp 2lb ring of protection +1 2000 gp lesser metamagic rod of silence 3000gp slippers of spider climbing 4800gp 1/2 lb Expendable Items: [CL] Scribed Scroll of Obscuring Mist x2 [(wiz 1)] [- lbs][25 gp]C Scroll of Shocking Grasp x1 [(wiz 1)] [- lbs][25 gp]C Scroll of Shocking Grasp x2 [(wiz 5)] [- lbs][125 gp]C Scroll of Sonic Shocking Grasp x3 [(wiz 5)] [- lbs][125 gp]C Scroll of True Strike x2 [(wiz 1)] [- lbs][25 gp]C Scroll of Mage Armor x3 [(wiz 1)] [- lbs][12.5 gp]C Scroll of Invisibility x2 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75 gp]C Scroll of Summon Swarm x1 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75 gp]C Scroll of scorching ray x0 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75 gp]C Scroll of sonic scorching ray x1 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75 gp]C Scroll of spectral hand x0 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75 gp]C Scroll of Minor Image x1 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75 gp]C Scroll of see Invisibility x1 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75 gp]C Scroll of protection from arrows x1 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75 gp]C Scroll of resist energy x2 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75 gp]C Scroll of protection from chaos x0 [(wiz 1)] [- lbs][25 gp]C Scroll of protection from evil x3 [(wiz 1)] [- lbs][25 gp]C Scroll of Dispel Magic x0 [(wiz 6)] [- lbs][225 gp]C Scroll if BlackLight x1 [(wiz 5)][- lbs][187.5 gp]C Scroll if Major Image x1 [(wiz 5)][- lbs][187.5 gp]C Other universal solvent x1 [50gp] Tatto of Synesthete x3 [ML1] [-- lbs][100/300 gp] Tatto of Skate x1 [ML1] [-- lbs][100/600 gp] potion of cure light wounds x6 [8][50/350 gp] potion of hide from undead [50/50 gp] Tatto of Chameleon x1 [ML1] [-- lbs][100/500 gp] tangle foot bag x1 [100gp] potion of invisibility [300gp] potion of pass without trace [50gp] Crawling Tatoo of Entangling Ectoplasm [50gp]¨Ganon Elixir of hiding x0 [250gp] spell failure 0% Equipment at home: [Cold Iron] crossbow bolts 15 4 gp 2lb Bolts of Asmeroviel slaying [CAlchemical Silver] crossbow bolts 20 3 gp 2lb Bolts of Devil slaying Gold: 7148.5 Candy central poster of the collectors' edition SpellBook (Other item) Miscellaneous Statistics: Encumberance: 0-20 (light), 20 (medium), 60 (heavy) Weight carried: 7 1/2 lb Mount weight carried: 0 lb Character Background: The elven training in the magical arts was not good enough so he ventured far and wide until he reached Gladius in there a stranded wizard made him his apprentice, at the beginning extracting much of his magical power for his benefit which tired him quickly. and so he left in search of more mystical knowledage Default Tactics familiar holds charge of ghoul touch send familiar to attack cast scorching ray from scrolls on target Fights results: 1: (N'rik Hathindar), (Deadly assasain): (Win (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6557771&postcount=63) ) [+900XP] [+900 gold] Attack of the Rat Swarm I 2: (Xaseus Soulrendir), (Sindorin):Win (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6609371&postcount=78) [+1125XP] [+1125 gold] Burning Paladin! 3: (Terminus Est), (gonbow): Win (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6659823&postcount=93) [+900XP] [+900 gold] Attack of the Bat Swarm II 4: (Zerone), (Saya): Loss (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6743584&postcount=127)[+450GP][+450xp] The Dagger of doom! 5: (mUGEN): loss (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6793220) [+450gp][+450 xp] Who Took My walls away! 6: ( Talari -> Vandelar -> Xyanthraxia -> Inihe) loss (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6833816&postcount=166)[+400 gp][+400 xp] Entangle! 7: (Talari leafwhisper) Loss (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6899859&postcount=203) [+400 gp][+400 xp] Entangle! 8: (Czernobog) Win (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6977501&postcount=243) [+1200 gp][+1200 xp] Inmune to Hold person .....whew.... 9: (Maylee) win (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7042857&postcount=276) [+1200 gp][+1200 xp] A paralizing shocking Touch part I 10: (grakk mighty fist) Win (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7116518&postcount=310) [+1500 gp][+1500 xp] Attack of the Bat swarm III 11: (quest a Real necromancer)Sucess! (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=496063) [+6400 gp][+6000 xp] 12: (2 locust swarms)win (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7327853&postcount=414) [+1200xp][+1600gp] [+147gp engineering] 13: (Talari, Va'ria and Vandelar vs 7 shocker lizards and 1 babau demon) Victory (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7423556&postcount=64)[+1519 xp][+2066gp] 14: Aquin Win (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7453763&postcount=479)[+1800xp][+2000gp] Repeat after me monstuous humanoids not the same as humanoids 15: (quest Foundations of the order) sucess (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7495957&postcount=1) [+933xp][+1600gp] [+133 gp clockmaking] 16: Against 4 Salamander Flamebrothers Victory (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7702318&postcount=612) [+2100xp][+2600gp] [+133 gp clockmaking] 17: Vs Vampire Fighter 5 victory (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7734746&postcount=626) [+2100xp][+2600gp] [+133 gp clockmaking] 18: vs Krunch Victory (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7915614&postcount=746) [+2100xp][+2600gp] [+133 gp clockmaking] Impressive fortitude Save 19: vs Va'ria Loss (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7978420&postcount=786) [+700xp][+866gp] [+147 gp clockmaking] 20: vs Dameon Victory (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8027591&postcount=827) [+2100xp][+2600gp] [+147 gp clockmaking] Overcome Hubris prepare better Vandelar! 21: vs 2 Jann Victory (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8087615&postcount=883) [+1400xp][+2400 gp][147 gp] Never forget see invisibility Again! [B]Past Expenditures. Bolts 4 cold iron bolts 5 tatoo of skate 4 tatoo of chameleon 4 tanglefoot bag 1 potion of clw 1 elixir of hiding 1 Summon Familiar 100 spellbook 15 Copied Spells vampiric touch scribe 300 = 300 Solid Fog copy 200 scribe 400 = 600 Dimension Door copy 200 scribe 400 = 600 Invisibility greater copy 200 scribe 400 = 600 Summon Monster III copy 150 scribe 300 = 450 Major Image copy 150 scribe 300 = 450 Dispel Magic copy 150 scribe 300 = 450 Spectral Hand copy 100 scribe 200 = 300 Mirror Image copy 100 scribe 200 = 300 summon swarm copy 100 scribe 200 = 300 Blindness/deafness copy 100 scribe 200 = 300 Minor Image copy 100 scribe 200 = 300 Acid Arrow copy 100 scribe 200 = 300 scorching ray copy 100 scribe 200 = 300 shatter copy 100 scribe 200 = 300 False Life copy 100 scribe 200 = 300 see invisibility copy 100 scribe 200 = 300 protection from arrows copy 100 scribe 200 = 300 resist energy copy 100 scribe 200 = 300 Protection from good scroll 25 scribe 100 = 125 Protection from good scroll 25 scribe 100 = 125 protection from Chaos scroll 25 scribe 100 = 125 ray of enfeeblement scroll 25 scribe 100 = 125 Scribed Scrolls Scroll of Obscuring Mist x2 [(wiz 1)] [- lbs][12.5/25 gp][1/2 xp]C Scroll of Shocking Grasp x2 [(wiz 1)] [- lbs][12.5/25 gp][1/2 xp]C Scroll of Shocking Grasp x3 [(wiz 5)] [- lbs][62.5/187.5 gp][5/15 xp]C Scroll of sonic Shocking Grasp x3 [(wiz 5)] [- lbs][62.5/187.5 gp][5/15 xp]C Scroll of True Strike x2 [(wiz 1)] [- lbs][12.5/25 gp][1/2 xp]C Scroll of Mage Armor x6 [(wiz 1)] [- lbs][12.5/75 gp][1/6 xp]C Scroll of Protection from evil x3 [(wiz 1)] [- lbs][12.5/37.5 gp][1/3 xp]C Scroll of Invisibility x10 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75/750gp][6/60 xp]C Scroll of Summon Swarm x5 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75/375 gp][6/30 xp]C Scroll of scorching ray x6 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75/450 gp][6/36 xp]C Scroll of sonic scorching ray x1 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75/75 gp][6/6 xp]C Scroll of Spectral Hand x1 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75/75 gp][6/6 xp]C Scroll of see Invisibility x7 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75/525 gp][6/42 xp]C Scroll of Minor Image x1 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75/75 gp][6/6 xp]C scroll of protection from arrows x3 [(wiz 1)] [- lbs][75/225 gp][6/24 xp]C scroll of resist energy x2 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75/150 gp][6/12 xp]C Scroll of protection from chaos x1 [(wiz 1)] [- lbs][12.5/12.5 gp][1/1 xp]C Scroll of Dispel Magic x1 [(wiz 6)] [- lbs][225/225gp gp][18/18 xp]C Scroll of BlackLight x1[(Wiz 5)][- lbs][187.5/187.5 gp][15/15 xp]C Scroll of Major Image x1[(Wiz 5)][- lbs][187.5/187.5 gp][15/15 xp]C Hi Caterane thanks for pitlording and have fun. I'm going to take a Gamble that If sucessful can end this fight quickly. Start at (0,22) or equivalent with Gannon on Shoulder Have Gannon fly(run action) from my location to (19,-13) or equivalent and tell Vandelar where Saffron is(free) and if he is flying above evard's black tentacles range 10ft. (delay vandelar 1 step in iniatiative so gannon can go first if you feel it's nessesary fot this to work) If Saffron is In evard's black tentacles range Then Vandelar will move closer to the location of Saffron and following the indications of Gannon he will cast Evards black tentacles on the area Saffron is. Offer Saffron to surrender and if he desists cast ray of enfeeblement on him (to make his grapple check even worse) and then Kill him with my damage spells except. fire spells and magic missiles. The Plan Fails! *Gannon & vandelar will tumble when nessesary to Avoid AoO *Vandelar is inmune to sleep 1.-Oh well it was worth the try Cast Invisibility and ask Gannon to return. 2.-cast see invisibility from scroll Share with Gannon 3.-Once Saffron is located move silently close to him (use slippers of spider climbing if nessesary) then give gannon a shocking grasp spell and ready an action to cast sonic scorching ray on saffron as soon as gannon is away from saffron as to avoid the shooting into melee penalty. 4.-chase saffron and cast either acid arrow or sonic fireball if unable to see him *acid arrow will force concentration checks 5.-from here on chase saffron giving gannon Sonic shocking grasp,recalling and giving away shocking grasp. Feel free to use any resources at my disposal. Contingencies reduced to 8< hp Cast obscuring mist, Hide and heal back as much as possible Can't Find Saffron for a long while. Cast ghost sound & minor Image to encourage him to show up. Getting hammered by spells cast greater invisibility Saffron Brass http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/Vathelokai/CoCo%20Maps/Saffron1.jpg Female Brass Dragon Wyrmling Age 5 Chaotic Good ECL 8 [4HD +2LA +1Rogue +1 Horizon Walker] XP 29,800 Next lv.: ??,000 Stats STR...10 [+0]...(2 pts) DEX...10 [+0]...(2 pts) CON...18 [+4]...(10 pts)[+2 race] INT....17 [+3]...(10 pts)[+1 4th HD] WIS...10 [+0]...(2 pts) CHA...16 [+3]...(10 pts) Combat Stats Hit Points: 63.5 [6 HD]12 +(6.5race x3) +(3.5rogue)+(4.5 Horizon) +(4con x HD) AC 15 Touch 12, Flat 15 +2size, +3 natural armor Initiative: +0 [+0 dex] BAB/Grap: +5/-3 [+5bab, +0str, -8size] Speed 60 ft., burrow 30 ft., fly 150 ft. (average) Saves: Fort +10 [+4race +4 con +2 Horizon] Refl +6 [+4race +2rogue +0 dex] Will +4 [+4race +0 wis] Immune to sleep, paralysis, fire Vulnerable to cold +4 vs. environmental hazards [endurance feat] Attacks: Bite threatens 5 ft., Claws do not threaten Bite +7 melee, 1d4(+str mod)[20/x2][+5 BAB, +2 size, +0 str] Claw +7 melee, 1d3(+1/2str mod)[20/x2][+5 BAB, +2 size, +0 str] Tiny Greataxe +3 1d8 [20/x3] +5 BAB, +2 size, +0 str, -4 non proficient BW: Line of fire 1d6 [30x5x5 ft.][DC16 reflex for 1/2 dmg.][1d4 rnd. recharge] BW: Cone of sleep [sleep for 1d6+1 rnds.][15 ft. length and diamater] [DC16 will negates][1d4 rnd. recharge] Full attack: bite +7, claw +2, claw +2 Sneak Attack +1d6 Feats: Hover (Monster) (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/monsterFeats.html) [1st race]:Start hover is a move action. Once started it is a free action. A hovering creature can change direction regardless of manuverability. Track (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/featsAll.html#track) [3rd HD]: Use the survival skill to track in any terrain. Endurance [6th HD]: +4 on numerous environmental checks and saves Special Abilities: Eat anything Tire at 1/2 speed during overland travel Breath Weapon (fire, sleep) Speak w/ animals (at will) Immunities (sleep, paralysis, fire) Vulnerability (cold) Blindsense 60 ft. Darkvision 120 ft. Low-light vision (quadruple human range) Keen senses (double human range) Trapfinding Sneak attack +1d6 Terrain mastery: Desert Immune to fatigue, and anything that would cause exhaustion causes fatigue instead. Also +1 insight to hit/damge creatures with "environment: desert" in their statblock. Size Modifiers:Tiny +2 Att +2 AC +8 Hide checks -8 Grapple checks Uses smaller equipment Carries 1/2 the weight of medium creatures Class Skills (63 Racial Pts., 11 Rogue, 7 Horizon Walker): +12 spot 6 rnks, +1 rogue rnks., +0 wis, +5(eyes of eagle) +5 listen 5 rnks, +0 wis +8 hide +0 dex, +8 size +1 move silent +1 rogue rnks., +0 dex +9 concentration 5 rnks, +4 con +1 tumble +1 rogue rnks., +0 dex +16 diplomacy 6 rnks, +1 rogue rnks.,+2 horizon rnks., +3 chr, +2 syn(bluff), +2 syn(sense motive) +11 gather information 5 rnks, +1 rogue rnks., +3 chr, +2 syn(know:local) +10 knowledge: nature 5 rnks, +3 int, +2 syn(survival) +10 search 6 rnks, +1 rogue rnks., +3 int +11 knowledge: geography 5 rnks, +12-cc rogue.,+2 rnks. horizon, +3 int +8 knowledge: local 5 rnks, +3 int +8 bluff 5 rnks, +3 chr +5 sense motive 5 rnks, +0 wis +7/9/11 survival 5 rnks, +2 horizon rnks., +0 wis +2 syn(search), +2 syn(know: geog), +2 syn(know: nature) +4/6 disable device +1 rogue rnks., +3 int+2 tool +3 sleight of hand +1 rogue rnks., +0 dex +2 syn(bluff) +1/3 open lock +1 rogue rnks., +0 dex+2 tool +X speak language 2 race, +1 horizon rank, +3 int Speaks Draconic, Common, Sylvan, Ignan, Animal, Celestial Base - draconic; int bonus - common, sylvan, ignan; spell like ability - Animals; skills - celestial +5 intimidate +3 chr, +2 syn(bluff) +5 disguise +3 chr +2 syn(bluff) +3/5/7 appraise +3 int+2/4 tools +3 craft +3 int +3 forgery +3 int +3 perform +3 chr +0 escape artist +0 dex +0/2 use rope +0 dex+2 tool +0 balance +0 dex] +0 climb +0 str +0 jump +0 str +3 knowledge(any) +3 int +3 use magic device +3 chr +3 use psionic device +3 chr +3 decipher script +3 int +0 profession +0 wis +3 handle animal +3 chr +0 heal +0 wis +0 ride +0 dex +0 swim +0 str +3 spellcraft +3int +3 psicraft +3 int +2 autohypnosis +0 wis +2 syn(concentration) Buffs and Prefight actions: None at present Equipment Worn: Broach of Shielding [1500gp] [absorbs 101/101 magic missile damage] Goggles Eyes of the Eagle (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7146656&postcount=95) [2500gp] [+5 comptence, spot] Handy Haversack [2000gp] [holds 120 lbs., 10 cu. ft.] [filled with 52lbs, 3(?) cu. ft.] Gloves of Object Reading [3000gp] [as the psi-power object reading with 30 minute durration. Learn race, gender, age, alignment, and loss/aqusition of an item for up to 6 previous owners] Tiny Greataxe [20 gp][3 lbs.] 5 bags of flour [.1 gp][5 lbs.] 20 wooden holy symbols (20 different dieties) [20gp] Thieves tools, masterwork [100 gp][2 lbs.] mirror [10gp] [.5lbs] Ma Manacles [50 gp][2 lbs.] Lock, amazing [150 gp][1 lb.] Bag of holding type 1 (15 lbs) [holds 250 lbs, 30 cu. ft.] [holding 86.5 lbs, 10 cu. ft.] [2375gp] [2500 - 125gp: skill discount] (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7811475&postcount=679) [sblock=items in bag of holding] block and tackle 5 (5lbs) crowbar (+2 circumstance to str) [2gp] [5lbs] 100 chalk [1gp] fishing net [4gp] [5lbs] black ink [8gp] 3 colored ink (red, yellow, blue) [48gp] 10 empty vials (5 stained with mixed colored ink)[1gp] [1lbs] 5 ink pen [.5gp] 10ft. pole [.2gp] [8lbs] hammer [.5gp] [2lbs] grappling hook [1gp] [4lbs] 50 silk rope (+2 use rope checks) [10gp] [5lbs] whistle [.8gp] wax [1gp] [1lbs] sewing needle [.5gp] sledge [1gp] [10lbs] shovel [2gp] [8lbs] tent [10gp] [20lbs] blank spell book (diary/notebook) [15gp] [3lbs] spell component pouch [5gp] [2lbs] scale [2gp] [1lbs] hourglass [25gp] [1lbs] magnify glass [100gp] 3423 gp in gems 26 gp (50 coins=1lb) 4 silver Expendable Items: Items on this list are in Haversack except tatoos 5 acid [50gp] [5lbs] 2 antitoxin [100gp] 5 smokestick [100gp] [2.5lbs] 2 thunderstone [60gp] [2lbs] 10 tindertwig [10gp] 5 full waterskins [5gp] [20lbs] wand det.magic [375gp] [50/50 charges] wand CLW [750gp] [45/50 charges] wand magic missile (CL 3) [2250gp] [50/50 charges] wand det. secret doors [750gp] [49/50 charges] wand invisibility [4500gp] [46/50 charges] wand ray of enfeeblement (CL 2) [5 credits][49/50 charges] 4 feathertoken anchors [200gp] universal solvent [50gp] Incense of obsession (w/ casting spells) [200gp] psionic shard: disable device +6 [360gp] potion resist elements: cold (10) [300gp] potion resist elements: sonic (10) [300gp] potion bull's strength [300gp] potion lesser restoration [300gp] potion prot. good [50gp] potion prot. evil [50gp] potion mage armor [50gp] 3 potion hide (animals) [150gp] potion hide (undead) [50gp] potion magic fang [50gp] potion pass w/o trace [50gp] potion remove fear [50gp] elixer of love [150gp] tatoo synesthete [100gp] Equipment at home: No home; just wanders around Gladius. Keeps everything in Handy Haversack. Load:Total Carried: 5 lbs. Light 0-16.5 Medium 16.6-33 Heavy 34-50 Default Tactics Talk them to death Quest to reach Gladius [Tellish of Ket] Win! (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=501551) [+7200 xp] [+8000 gp] Mini-Quest: Episode 1 - The silver soldier [TelinArtho] Win! (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=521601&page=1&pp=30) [+1500 xp] [+1600 gp] Mini-Quest: Episode 2 - The Golden Golem [TelinArtho] Win! (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=529972) [+1500 xp] [+1600 gp] vs. Orc Vampire, fighter lv. 5 [Monster Fight] Loss - [+600 xp][+666 gp] vs. Krunch [Tellish_of_Ket] Loss ??? [+700 xp] [+ 866 gp] vs. Pale Rider [Tellish_of_Ket] Loss (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7934041) [+700 xp] [+ 833 gp] vs. Daeren Stronghammer [TelinArtho] - Win - [+2100 xp] [+2600 gp] 4 potions mage armor [50gp each] [200gp] potion invisibility [300gp] 5 acids [10gp each] [50gp] [s]tatoo clairvoyant sense [300gp] cannot be made into tatoo wand magic.miss [44/50 charges][value 660gp][330 gp] Monsters as Player Races (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/monstersAsRaces.html) [sblock=Dragon Type:]A dragon is a reptile-like creature, usually winged, with magical or unusual abilities. Features: 12-sided Hit Dice. Base attack bonus equal to total Hit Dice (as fighter). Good Fortitude, Reflex, and Will saves. Skill points equal to (6 + Int modifier, minimum 1) per Hit Die, with quadruple skill points for the first Hit Die. Traits: A dragon possesses the following traits (unless otherwise noted in the description of a particular kind). Darkvision out to 60 feet and low-light vision. Immunity to magic sleep effects and paralysis effects. Proficient with its natural weapons only unless humanoid in form (or capable of assuming humanoid form), in which case it is proficient with all simple weapons and any weapons mentioned in its entry. Proficient with no armor. Dragons eat, sleep, and breathe. A dragon can always use its breath weapon while grappling, as well as its spells and spell-like or supernatural abilities, provided it succeeds on concentration checks. Dragons do not tire as quickly as other creatures when moving overland on the ground. If a dragon attempts a hustle or a forced march, check for nonlethal damage once every 2 hours instead of every hour. A dragon’s metabolism operates like a highly efficient furnace and can metabolize even inorganic material. Some dragons have developed a taste for such fare. Using a breath weapon is a standard action. Once a dragon breathes, it can’t breathe again until 1d4 rounds later. If a dragon has more than one type of breath weapon, it still can breathe only once every 1d4 rounds. A blast from a breath weapon always starts at any intersection adjacent to the dragon and extends in a direction of the dragon’s choice, with an area as noted on the table below. If the breath weapon deals damage, creatures caught in the area can attempt Reflex saves to take half damage; the DC depends on the dragon’s age and variety, and is given in each individual entry. Saves against nondamaging breath weapons use the same DC; the kind of saving throw is noted in the variety descriptions. The save DC against a breath weapon is 10 + 1/2 dragon’s HD + dragon’s Con modifier. A tiny brass dragon has two types of breath weapon, a line of fire (30 ft) and a cone of sleep (15 ft). Creatures within the cone must succeed on a Will save or fall asleep, regardless of HD, for 1d6 rounds plus 1 round per age category of the dragon. The fire damage for the brass dragon's breath weapon is 1d6 x the age catagory of the dragon. A dragon’s spell-like abilities depend on its age and variety. It gains the abilities indicated for its age plus all previous ones. Its age category or its sorcerer caster level, whichever is higher, is the caster level for these abilities. The save DC is 10 + dragon’s Cha modifier + spell level. All spell-like abilities are usable once per day unless otherwise noted. Speak with Animals: Divination CL 1 Components: V, S Casting Time: 1 standard action Duration: at will You can comprehend and communicate with animals. You are able to ask questions of and receive answers from animals, although the spell doesn’t make them any more friendly or cooperative than normal. Furthermore, wary and cunning animals are likely to be terse and evasive, while the more stupid ones make inane comments. If an animal is friendly toward you, it may do some favor or service for you. All dragons have immunity to sleep and paralysis effects. Each variety of dragon has immunity to one or two additional forms of attack no matter what its age, as given in its description. Brass dragons are immune to fire and vulerablility to cold(+50% dmg). Bite: Bite attacks deal the indicated damage plus the dragon’s Strength bonus. A dragon also can use its bite to snatch opponents if it has the Snatch feat. Claw: (2/rnd) Claw attacks deal the indicated damage plus 1/2 the dragon’s Strength bonus (round down). The dragon also can use its claws to snatch opponents if it has the Snatch feat. Claw attacks are secondary attacks, requiring a –5 penalty on the attack roll. (Many dragons choose the Multiattack feat to lessen this penalty to –2). Wing: (medium size)(2/rnd) The dragon can slam opponents with its wings, even when flying. Wing attacks deal the indicated damage plus 1/2 the dragon’s Strength bonus (round down) and are treated as secondary attacks. Tail Slap: (large size) The dragon can slap one opponent each round with its tail. A tail slap deals the indicated damage plus 1-1/2 times the dragon’s Strength bonus (round down) and is treated as a secondary attack. Crush (Ex): (huge size) This special attack allows a flying or jumping dragon of at least Huge size to land on opponents as a standard action, using its whole body to crush them. Crush attacks are effective only against opponents three or more size categories smaller than the dragon (though it can attempt normal overrun or grapple attacks against larger opponents). A crush attack affects as many creatures as can fit under the dragon’s body. Creatures in the affected area must succeed on a Reflex save (DC equal to that of the dragon’s breath weapon) or be pinned, automatically taking bludgeoning damage during the next round unless the dragon moves off them. If the dragon chooses to maintain the pin, treat it as a normal grapple attack. Pinned opponents take damage from the crush each round if they don’t escape. A crush attack deals the indicated damage plus 1-1/2 times the dragon’s Strength bonus (round down). Tail Sweep (Ex): (gargantuan size) This special attack allows a dragon of at least Gargantuan size to sweep with its tail as a standard action. The sweep affects a half-circle with a radius of 30 feet (or 40 feet for a Colossal dragon), extending from an intersection on the edge of the dragon’s space in any direction. Creatures within the swept area are affected if they are four or more size categories smaller than the dragon. A tail sweep automatically deals the indicated damage plus 1-1/2 times the dragon’s Strength bonus (round down). Affected creatures can attempt Reflex saves to take half damage (DC equal to that of the dragon’s breath weapon). A dragon knows and casts arcane spells as a sorcerer of the level indicated in its variety description, gaining bonus spells for a high Charisma score. Some dragons can also cast spells from the cleric list or cleric domain lists as arcane spells. Brass dragons cast all cleric spells and those from the Chaos and Knowledge domains as arcane spells Dragons can pinpoint creatures within a distance of 60 feet. Opponents the dragon can’t actually see still have total concealment against the dragon. A dragon sees four times as well a human in shadowy illumination and twice as well in normal light. It also has darkvision out to 120 feet. All dragons have skill points equal to (6 + Int modifier, minimum 1) x (Hit Dice + 3). Most dragons purchase the following skills at the maximum ranks possible: Listen, Search, and Spot. The remaining skill points are generally spent on Concentration, Diplomacy, Escape Artist, Intimidate, Knowledge (any), Sense Motive, and Use Magic Device at a cost of 1 skill point per rank. All these skills are considered class skills for dragons. (Each dragon has other class skills as well, as noted in the variety descriptions.) Bluff, Gather Information, and Survival are considered class skills for brass dragons. All dragons have one feat, plus additional feats based on Hit Dice just like any other creature. Dragons favor Alertness, Blind-Fight, Cleave, Flyby Attack, Hover, Improved Initiative, Improved Sunder, Power Attack, Snatch, Weapon Focus (claw or bite), Wingover, and any metamagic feat that is available and useful to sorcerers. [b]Lv. adjust and stat. modifiers are cumulative. All other are total ammounts. Age Size HitDice LvAdj Str Dex Con Int Wis Cha BAB Saves Fright FlySpeed CL SR SpecialAbilities Wyrmling T 4 +2 - - +2 - - - +4 +4 - 150avg - - Fire type, speak w/ animals at will Very young S 7 +1 +2 - - - - - +7 +5 - 150avg - - - Young M 10 +1 +2 - +2 +2 +2 +2 +10 +7 - 200poor 1 - - Juvenile M 13 +2 - - - - - +13 +8 - 200poor 3 - Endure elem. 3/day Young adult L 16 +2 - +2 +2 +2 +2 +16 +10 20 200poor 5 18 DR 5/magic Adult L 19 +4 - +2 - - - +19 +11 21 200poor 7 20 Suggestion 1/day Mature adult H 22 +4 - +2 +2 +2 +2 +22 +13 24 200poor 9 22 DR 10/magic Old H 25 +2 - - - - - +25 +14 25 200poor 11 24 Control winds 1/day Very old H 28 +2 - +2 +2 +2 +2 +28 +16 28 200poor 13 25 DR 15/magic Ancient H 31 +2 - - - - - +31 +17 29 200poor 15 27 Control weather 1/day Wyrm G 34 +2 - +2 +2 +2 +2 +34 +19 32 250clum 17 28 DR 20/magic Great wyrm G 37 +2 - +2 - - - +37 +20 33 250clum 19 30 Summon Djinni Originally Posted by Saffron's Tactic Well... immune to sleep, rembered his see invis scroll after that Janni fight, resist elements, every type of elemental damage... Black tentacles of course. Unless he gets some lucky damage rolls, he'll have to get me with tentacles... I'm guessing black tentacles, dispel, sonic fireball, sonic ray, mirror image, acid arrow, and sonic grasp. WHAT! He dosn't have shield?!? dispel magic 180 ft. black tentacles 180 ft.; 20 ft. radius spread fear 30 ft. First a rules questions: The wording of Black tentacles was debated a few weeks ago because of Vandalar and Va'ria's use of it. The wording of the spell says the tentacles "appear underfoot". So does that mean they cannot be summoned on the ceiling? Twenty feet up on a pillar? For these tactics I'm assuming that the spell can be targeted on any surface and spreads out 20 ft. from the point of origin. If you rule that tentacles can only be summoned from the ground, then Saffron will fly anywhere in the arena that seems reasonable, and at an elevation of 40 ft. If you rule that they can be summoned from the ground or ceiling, but not pillars, than Saffron will stay at 30 ft and fly all over the arena. Summary of Strategy Stay in an area where black tentacles cannot get me. Get him to waste his dispel. Buff, then cure with CLW wand and harm with MM wand. Tactics A little subterfuge, and then a long ranged battle. This assumes the south starting box; if I get another, use equivilents. Start off hovering at an elevation of 30 ft. [You must start at the ground.] (just in case he thinks to target the tentacles on top of a rock; avoiding tentacles is top priority) at (0,-26; default square) holding wand of MM and a potion of hide from animals. The box with corners (-6,-11)(6,-11)(-6,-16)(6,-16) is the only safe space from tentacles, so I'm going to stay in that box if at all possible. I have hover, so it should be easy. Fly out into that 'box' and ready to drink the potion on LOS. I'm guessing that will trigger his "cast dispel if I think she's well buffed" reflex. If I hear him casting spells out of sight in another starting area, then move from one 'safe box' to another to get close to his position. If he ignores me and continues buffing, then attack with MM until Vandalar responds. After Vandalar attacks (either with dispel or sonic something-or-other) then drink potions of sonic resist and mage armor. If I can move to get cover without leaving my 'box' then do so. After buffing draw wands of magic missle (cl3) and CLW - one wand in each hand. Priority list: cure self above 40 hp, shoot spectral hands, shoot Ganon(familiar), shoot Vandalar. This order is not absolute; killing a charged up spectral hand may be more important at a given moment than healing from 15 hp to 20. Once Vandalar draws cure potions, offer terms of surrender; I have 45 CLW and he has 6. If Vandalar will not see reason, then I'm willing to use all of my wand. Contingincies If Ganon gets within range (i.e. he's trying to touch me), then hit him with the sleep breathweapon. If Vandalar gets closer than 100 ft. throw thunderstones at his space. If Vand casts tentacles, and somehow I live through it, then Saffron will fly anywhere in the arena that makes sense. If he uses greater invis or blacklight so I can't target him, then wait it out. If in fear of the 10 round rule, cast detect magic from wand and concentrate; try to determine what his buffs are. If I can determine his space, and he's close, then throw things at him (thunderstones, acid, bags of flour, holy symbols, etc.) If he hits me with fear, remember that panicked brass dragons burrrow. If, for some insane reason, we both end up out of spells and ammo, and have to fight, then Saffron will drink potion of bulls strength. Then she'll draw wand of enfeeblement, and grapple Vandalar; alternate attacking with wand and fire breath. Once Vand has str 1, then alternate natural attacks and fire breath. As Always Thanks for pitlording. If I missed something, PM me.
Kaigan 01-10-06, 05:01 AM	Here is my FFA: Drac vs. Darius vs. Cid vs. Speedy Please look it over. I tried my best to stick to all the tactics, and I think I did fairly well. I have one more to do. Vivi's Miniquest will be up tomorrow. I'm tired, so bed time for me.
Usurpator 01-10-06, 05:07 AM	Except, by your own logic, it still works. Monk gets ready to fire against opponent with readied action to fire upon the monk firing. Ready action triggers, and opponent fires. Monk drops arrow (free), deflects, draws new arrow (free), and fires. Still works. Not true. You cannot take an action in response to another action unless you ready it (or it is an immediate action). If an archer readies to shoot a spellcaster upon spellcasting, the spellcaster in question cannot quickly blast the archer with a quickened hold person in response, and possibly stop the shot, even though a quickened hold person is a free action. Nor can an unarmed character quickdraw an weapon in response to an opponent running by and get an AoO, unless he readies the quickdraw. Same with dropping ammunition or taking your hand of the bow.
Usurpator 01-10-06, 05:42 AM	Thelgar vs. Sir Valkin is up. Sir Valkin Height 5 ft. 0 inches, Weight 120lbs, Str 16 Maybe a bit metagamy to have a 5 ft. 120 lbs. human with Str 16, bit allowable I guess. Will change the role-playing aspect a bit, though. Sir Valkin, aka the human dwarf... ;) (that's not entirely true, a Dwarf his size would weigh a lot more) Sir Valkin weight: 120 lbs Sir Valkin equipment weight: 94.4 lbs. Foreman equimpent weight: 26 lbs. (riding saddle: 25 lbs., bit and bridle 1 lbs., not counting horseshoes) Total: 240.4 lbs., thus Foreman is at medium encumbrance and speed 40(60 with horseshoes). But I see you have many encumbrance types and variants 94,85,67 etc. and you are adding your outfit to you total, which you don't need to. And I think horseshoes also don't need to be added to his carried weight (counts as clothing). So I guess as long as Foreman doesn't wear barding, and Sir Valkin doesn't get a lot of weapons and heavy armor, it would be do-able. It would help if you made your encumbrance a bit clearer, since now I have to add everything by hand. That is also why I proposed a rule about no equipment switching. The way you write up your sheet is the way you enter the arena. You can of course drop equipment once in the arena, but cannot start with equipment on the ground, nor take something from home or leave something at home. That would solve all the ugly adding and cross-referencing I have to do now to calculate Sir Valkin's and Foreman's encumbrance. @TelinArtho: I have lots of characters with horses, and know it can be difficult to properly balance carried weight with a horse's light load limit. I suggest to ditch Foreman and get a new (Elite) Light Warhorse with higher Str. Would solve your problem entirely (and take Fleet of Foot instead of Endurance while you're at it)
MitzaVolchenko 01-10-06, 05:59 AM	Kailia (One-Winged-Angel) vs Gundir Malakas (Kaigan) is up. If anyone wants to peruse it and tell me what needs fixing if anything, I will be up for another hor or three and can do a quick edit. The Set Up (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8194797&postcount=983) The Fight (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8196060&postcount=989)
Vathelokai 01-10-06, 05:59 AM	@TelinArtho: I have lots of characters with horses, and know it can be difficult to properly balance carried weight with a horse's light load limit. I suggest to ditch Foreman and... BLASPHEMY!!! :D
Usurpator 01-10-06, 07:26 AM	@NiQil: Greefe vs. Silas I don't think casting grease on someone's armor would have it fall off. - Common sense says greasy armor won't fall off your body. - The spell text says the object will be 'dropped'. You cannot drop your armor. Dropping implies held items. Armor is worn, not held. - The spell text specifically says that greased armor or clothing provides a +10 circumstance bonus to Escape Artist. If casting grease on armor would cause it to 'drop/fall off', how would it be able to give such a bonus? Original idea :) , but no go I'm afraid.
waywreth 01-10-06, 08:39 AM	@TelinArtho: I have lots of characters with horses, and know it can be difficult to properly balance carried weight with a horse's light load limit. I suggest to ditch Foreman and get a new (Elite) Light Warhorse with higher Str. Would solve your problem entirely (and take Fleet of Foot instead of Endurance while you're at it) I believe at level 5 Paladin he's just waiting to quest for his Heavy Warhorse anyway (paladin special mount). And besides, Foreman is cool.
Altaris13 01-10-06, 08:55 AM	Thelgar vs. Sir Valkin is up. Please look over it for errors and such. I hope there aren't too many, but if there are any significant fight changing ones, I will look over and rerun tomorrow sometime before evening. Now to run the FFA and the MQ. Well, I only found one error, but I do have an issue with your choice of actions during the course of the fight. The error: Thelgar is not actually dying in Round 52 like you say. He raged, and gains 8hp which you did not account for. Also, why did you not play the avoidance tactic on Thelgar's behalf? Thelgar can easily avoid a charge by moving around the center stack, or even one of the "L" pillars of a starting box. I may not have explicitly said to do so, but Thelgar is not stupid, and this /is/ Sir Valkin he's up against. I am insulted that you'd play Thelgar in the "me crush, me smash" mentality. Your decisions on Thelgar's behalf handed Valkin this win, far more so than the rolls. As well, is there a reason that Thelgar did not take cover during the 40-something rounds of exchanging fire? I was very clear in my tactics to /not/ chase him around. Thelgar is not going to play to Valkin's superior speed. I used the Potion of Fly to avoid Valkin. I think that is quite clear in the presentation of my tactics. Why would Thelgar sit there and allow Valkin to take the occasional pop-shots at his leisure? Please consider these things and adjust appropriately.
TelinArtho 01-10-06, 09:53 AM	@Altaris - I told Dr. Funk to post here - but apparently he didn't listen... I'll have to go smack him upside his head... Anyway, I'll be taking your monster fight (I already have your tactics). It should be up soon.
TelinArtho 01-10-06, 10:12 AM	Well, I only found one error, but I do have an issue with your choice of actions during the course of the fight. The error: Thelgar is not actually dying in Round 52 like you say. He raged, and gains 8hp which you did not account for. Also, why did you not play the avoidance tactic on Thelgar's behalf? Thelgar can easily avoid a charge by moving around the center stack, or even one of the "L" pillars of a starting box. I may not have explicitly said to do so, but Thelgar is not stupid, and this /is/ Sir Valkin he's up against. I am insulted that you'd play Thelgar in the "me crush, me smash" mentality. Your decisions on Thelgar's behalf handed Valkin this win, far more so than the rolls. As well, is there a reason that Thelgar did not take cover during the 40-something rounds of exchanging fire? I was very clear in my tactics to /not/ chase him around. Thelgar is not going to play to Valkin's superior speed. I used the Potion of Fly to avoid Valkin. I think that is quite clear in the presentation of my tactics. Why would Thelgar sit there and allow Valkin to take the occasional pop-shots at his leisure? Please consider these things and adjust appropriately. First of all, I said to smite on Valkin's first melee attack - so although you would have had 8 more hp, I would have done 12 more damage from the charge. As to the rest, I want to point out that very little was actually in the tactics. You ask why you didn't seek out cover while we were exchanging shots? Well, in your tactics, it says only to negate my cover while shooting - which usually means putting yourself out in the open. As to avoiding the charge - again there's nothing in your tactics to avoid it - all it really said was that you wanted to "try to attack on a charge when possible" - if you want to do this - again, you are going to set yourself up in the open somewhere. It should be noted that if you charged me- your attack still would have missed, and I could have charged from that distance (20ft from you) - with a ride-by-attack and still have the same result. So either - you set yourself up for a charge - still miss and let me charge in and deal 25+12=37 damage - which would be reasonable in your tactics. Or you avoid until I can charge and get the result with a readied attack against my charge. ------------------------ @Usurpator - the height and weight are within the rules and since we're allowed to pick within the realms of the description, I'm not breaking any rules. As to him being a short human - I have always described him as such in any roleplaying I've done. I also have it clearly explained which items he carries on Foreman and which items are left in the starting area. The extra weapons are just to make him more viable against non-standard opponents (not that it has come up yet). I have calculated the weight correctly as far as I can tell. As to the horseshoes - it would be real nice to be able to exclude them - but it is no longer of importance. Why? Because Sir Valkin just became Pal 5 - and gets his special mount! Won't be moving at 90ft anymore (have to drop down to 80ft...)
Dracazar 01-10-06, 10:39 AM	Here is my FFA: Drac vs. Darius vs. Cid vs. Speedy Please look it over. I tried my best to stick to all the tactics, and I think I did fairly well. I have one more to do. Vivi's Miniquest will be up tomorrow. I'm tired, so bed time for me. Thank you for the great fight with nice maps :D Please add to Drac's used items a scroll of Protection from Arrows.
Dracazar 01-10-06, 10:47 AM	any news about: Uilo (Dracazar) vs Feradeth (Kaigan) vs Ural (TelinArtho) vs Sven (TroubleWolf): Luni [All vs All] ? I'm away from home, so I'm just asking if I missed something. Thank you Luni.
Altaris13 01-10-06, 10:49 AM	@Altaris - I told Dr. Funk to post here - but apparently he didn't listen... I'll have to go smack him upside his head... Anyway, I'll be taking your monster fight (I already have your tactics). It should be up soon. Um, wrong person? :confused: I don't have any monster fights that I know of. As for Thel vs Valk, good point about the Smite. But your points about negating cover? What cover? The cover from Foreman? I can't negate that. Poor choice of words in my tactics. There's no movement or otherwise support of a map to show where we were located in the arnea. And it was not in my tactics to ready vs a charge, good idea, but not in my tactics. If a Pitlord is going to adjust my tactics, I'd at least expect him/her to do so to my character's benefit and intelligence, rather than the benefit of my opponent. Thelgar can ready to attack you coming into range and still negate your charge line. But whatever. I don't believe I've won a fight yet that Kaigan pitlorded. Kaigan, I'd appreciate your response to my concerns. It could be just me, but I really feel that you handled this in Valkin's favor from the start. We three are all experienced Pitlords and Gladiators, and I think I can safely say that the choices made on behalf of my character were not consistent with my tactics, with our experience, or with my character's Intelligence. I won't ask for a rerun, and will chalk this up to a lesson learned. When Kaigan pitlords, type out three PMs worth of contingencies. I'm not mad, but I do feel slighted. If anyone feels insulted by this, imagine how I feel.
SoulLord 01-10-06, 10:56 AM	Well, this is highly disappointing. @Caterane: Could you add Vandalar's tactics? I'm curious as to what might have happened if I won initiative. See next post. Considering both set of Tactics It would have been closer no doubt about it. I take it you dont object the fight Vath so we can edit our characters accordingly? There is a Shield spell and some scrolls that vandelar needs to get ;)
Snommelp 01-10-06, 11:39 AM	Any word on Kronos MacLeod vs. Hennan: Gonbow? Maybe I missed it...
Kaigan 01-10-06, 11:40 AM	Um, wrong person? :confused: I don't have any monster fights that I know of. As for Thel vs Valk, good point about the Smite. But your points about negating cover? What cover? The cover from Foreman? I can't negate that. Poor choice of words in my tactics. There's no movement or otherwise support of a map to show where we were located in the arnea. And it was not in my tactics to ready vs a charge, good idea, but not in my tactics. If a Pitlord is going to adjust my tactics, I'd at least expect him/her to do so to my character's benefit and intelligence, rather than the benefit of my opponent. Thelgar can ready to attack you coming into range and still negate your charge line. But whatever. I don't believe I've won a fight yet that Kaigan pitlorded. Kaigan, I'd appreciate your response to my concerns. It could be just me, but I really feel that you handled this in Valkin's favor from the start. We three are all experienced Pitlords and Gladiators, and I think I can safely say that the choices made on behalf of my character were not consistent with my tactics, with our experience, or with my character's Intelligence. I won't ask for a rerun, and will chalk this up to a lesson learned. When Kaigan pitlords, type out three PMs worth of contingencies. I'm not mad, but I do feel slighted. If anyone feels insulted by this, imagine how I feel. Good morning everyone. Now to address issues. The main problem I had with your guys, both of you, tactics are these parts. If he tries to stay ranged and out my charge distance/line, then go to his starting square and steal his bolts. Then proceed to exchanging arrows using readied actions to attack him when he comes into LOS. Do NOT chase him if he plays a ranged contest, instead, make him come to me and take advantage of my bow's longer range and better damage. and If he is flying - I am going to avoid him - taking full defense for myself and using Foreman for cover (and if he fires at Foreman - don't forget to use mounted combat to negate hits if possible). During the avoidance, use the Hand of Glory for Daylight to dazzle him if he comes within 60ft of me. If he is flying, enlarged and has his glaive out - all moves should block LOS and leave at least 120ft from him in order to reduce his number of attacks against me and to block charges. Once Valkin saw you flying, he immediately wanted to stay away from you, out of melee reach. You were still buffing, so Thelgar didn't know what was going one, until the round where he popped up, the ran away, to maintain distance. This is where I had you go back and pick up his bolts. Now for the archery shooting, you said to ready a shot when he moves. I had no problem with that, except Valkin wanted to also take full defensive actions, and using Foreman for cover. Thus AC could have been 27 I believe. I thought I put a note about my decision there, and why the positions were only relative and that I wan't going to keep them because it would be too much of a hastle to mark Valkin moving around in full defense, while you shoot when he breaks LOS. Also Altaris, you didn't have any contingencies for when fly ran out. But I should have kept you in cover. But what I also should have done, was to ride Valkin in and use daylight to dazzle you and then stay far and shoot you with the bolts that he had, as per this tactic. If he is expanded and has his glaive out and I can't charge him, activate daylight, put away the lance, draw my crossbow and start firing at him from any distance greater than 100ft. If he tries closing with me, just keep withdrawing - unless he sets himself up so that I can charge him. If this is the case, drop the crossbow, quickdraw the lance and charge with a smite on a ride by attack. Unless he has readied to attack me (which is pretty likely) - he won't be able to attack me. Now you on the other hand had these tactics. Try to attack on a charge when possible. Fly high enough to always be out of his melee reach. Always move to negate cover, but not at the expense of incurring AoO or getting in his melee reach. I wasn't sure if you still wanted to do that on the ground or not, but that's how I played it, and sorry if that wasn't they way to do so. Now I have some time, so I think I will properly edit the fight, but after fly is expired. I don't see anything that Thelgar can do to Valkin in that time, unless you have idea of what you could do based on the tactics you gave me. But this is what would happen: Valkin will rid ein after you're done flying, use daylight on you, then shoot bolts at you from distance, while you stay behind cover. Oh, incidently, I should have had Valkin smite, dealing +4 to attack and damage, so that would negate any cover that you had. I'm sorry if this didn't turn out the well, but if you would like me to rerun, then I will, however, I believe the results will stay the same, the only difference is that it will be longer, and more items will be consumed. Oh, and the reason why I had you ready vs. the charge was becuase if you had hit, you would have killed him with 2d8+8+4d6disolving+2d6psiweapon+2d6deepc rystl, and the poison. So I decided to take the chance, thinking that's what you would have done. If you guys want me to clear it up some more, just ask me to and I will rerun, adding in those things that I missed. Again, sorry for any confusion.
DTFarstar 01-10-06, 11:41 AM	Here is my FFA: Drac vs. Darius vs. Cid vs. Speedy Please look it over. I tried my best to stick to all the tactics, and I think I did fairly well. I have one more to do. Vivi's Miniquest will be up tomorrow. I'm tired, so bed time for me. Hey, I ended up alot better off than I was afraid I would. I can't believe I forgot my scroll of mage armor. Since no one has objected my character sheet has been updated and Darius has graduated to the ECL 4 league! Now he's really going to lose =-P
TelinArtho 01-10-06, 11:59 AM	@Altaris, Kaigan Incidentally, Altaris - Kaigan actually gave you the best situation given that you wanted to charge in. Here's why: 1. If you charge on me, you get a +2 to attack, a -2 to damage and will attack me from 20ft away. I will get a Ride check to gain cover from my mount. The following round I charge you, I get a +2 to attack, triple my damage and kill you. 2. If I charge you and you are readied to receive me, I get a +2 to attack if I get to you and I can't take a ride check to gain cover from my mount. I also get a -2 penalty to my AC on the charge. I can't see any point in changing the fight since there's no way that Kaigan can follow your tactics and avoid a charge at the same time.
Caterane 01-10-06, 12:06 PM	Hmmm, trying to find the wrong tag place so I can tell Cat and have this fixed.... There we go, was one missing /sblock, one too many /sblocks, and one missing set of sblock and /sblock. If you want to Cat you can just Quote this and then copy and paste it over the sheets and tactics in the Battles thread so make it neater. Vandelar the red Optional: Slender Elf (Male+elf grey) (Neutral) (Wizard necromancer 8, ECL 8) (height 5 feet, weight 100 pounds) xp 28,479 /28,000 Member of the Arcane Order Arcane Order (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=500767) STR...06 [-2]...(0 pts) [06, -2racial] DEX...18 [+4]...(10 pts) [18, +2racial] CON...14 [+2]...(10 pts)[16, -2racial] INT...24 [+7]...(16 pts)[18, +2racial][+1 lvl 4][+1 lvl8][+2 headband] WIS...08 [-1]...(0 pts) CHA...08 [-1]...(0 pts) Hit Points: 37 [3 HD] (4 +2.5 +2.5+2.5+2.5+2.5+2.5+2.5+16) AC 15 [+4dex][+1 ring], Touch 15, Flat 11 Initiative: +4 [4dex, 0feat] BAB/Grap: +4/+2 [+3 bab, -2str] Speed 30 Saves: Fort +6 [2 class +2con +2 cloak] Refl +7 [2 class +3 ref +2 cloak] Will +7 [6 class -1 wis +2 cloak] +2 save vs enchantment, inmune to sleep Attacks: MW crossbow +9 (4 base +4 ranged +1 mw) dmg 1d8 19-20 x2 range 80 Ranged Touch +8 (4 base +4 Ranged) Touch +2 (4 base -2 Str) Feats: (scribe scroll) [1st wizard] (summon Familiar) [1st wizard] (spell focus necromancy) [1st character] [+1 dc necromancy spells] (tatoo focus necromancy) [3rd character] [+1 dc necromancy spells][+1 caster level check to overcome spell resistance] (empower spell) [5th wizard] (energy substitution)(Sonic) [6th character] Racial and Class Abilities: Immunity to magic sleep effects, and a +2 racial saving throw bonus against enchantment spells or effects. low light vision Weapon Proficiency: Elves receive the Martial Weapon Proficiency feats for the longsword, rapier, longbow (including composite longbow), and shortbow (including composite shortbow) as bonus feats. +2 racial bonus on Listen, Search, and Spot checks. An elf who merely passes within 5 feet of a secret or concealed door is entitled to a Search check to notice it as if she were actively looking for it. Skills (56 Points Class Wizard, 28+7+7+8+8+8+8+9): +19 Spellcraft [10 rnks, +7(int) ] [Wiz 8] +2 knowledage arcana synergy +13 Concentration [11 rnks, +2(con)] [wiz 11] +6 Spot [5 CCrnks, -1 (wis)]+2 race [wiz 10]+3 when in bright light and familiar is within 1 mile / +2 when familiar is within 5 ft +6 Listen [5 CCrnks, -1 (wis)]+2 race [wiz 10]+2 when familiar is within 5 ft +9 Move silently [5 CC rnks, +4(dex)][wiz 10] +9 Tumble [5 CCrnks, +4(dex)][wiz 10] +9 hide[5 CCrnks +4(dex)][wiz 10] +12 Knowledage Arcana [5 rnks, +7(int) ] [Wiz 5] +14 Craft Clocks [5 rnks, +7(int) ] [Wiz 5] +2 mw toolschanged (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7556235&postcount=7) Speaks (common), (elven) Gnoll, Gnome, Goblin, Orc, Sylvan, celestial(2). opposite schools enchantment/charm,transmutation Memorized: 0.-ghost sound,detect magic, resistance, touch of fatigue. 1.-Shocking Grasp, Shocking Grasp, Obscuring mist,magic missile, ray of enfeeblement, protection from evil, Grease 2.-Ghoul Touch ,Acid Arrow, Spectral Hand, Mirror Image, [Sonic] Scorching ray,Scorching ray 3.-Fear,Dispel Magic x 2, [sonic] fireball, Fireball 4.- Fear, Greater Invisibility, Evards black tentacles, dimension door Spells (7*1+6*2+5*3+4*4) (7+12+15+16=43) (50/3 = 16.6 = 17) wizard 8th 4,4,3,3,2 | specialist +1 1st , +1 2nd, +1 3rd, +1 4th = 4,5,4,4,3 | 24 int +2 1st +2 2nd, +2 3rd, +1 4th = 4,7,6,5,4 0- resistance,acid splash, detect poison, detect magic, read magic, dancing lights,flare,light,ray of frost, ghost sound, disrupt undead, touch of fatigue, arcane mark, prestidigitation. 1st 1- Obscuring Mist,2-shocking grasp, 3.-magic missile, 4.-true strike, 5.-mage armor, 6.-grease (dc 18),7.-summon monster 1, 8.-protection from good, 9.-protection from evil 10-color spray (dc 18) 11-protection from law 12-protection from chaos 13- ray of enfeeblement 2nd 1- Ghoul touch (dc 21), 2-invisibility, 3-web (dc 19), 4-summon swarm, 5-Blindness/deafness (dc 21), 6-scorching ray, 7-shatter (dc 19), 8-False Life, 9-see invisibility, 10-protection from arrows, 11-resist energy, 12-scare(dc 21), 13-spectral hand, 14- mirror image, 15- Acid Arrow, 16-Minor Image(dc 19) 3rd 1.-Ray of exhaustion (dc 22) 2.-stinking cloud (dc 20) 3.- dispel magic 4.- summon monster III 5.- vampiric touch 6.-blacklight 7.-fireball (dc 20) 8.-Major Image(dc 20) 4th 1.-Fear (dc 23) 2.-Evard's black tentacles 3.-Greater Invisibility 4.- Solid Fog 5.-Dimension Door 6.-Phantasmal Killer(dc 21) 7.-Globe of invulnerability lesser Evard's black tentacles Bab +8/+3 Grapple check +15 Hawk Familiar Ganon Hawk Familiar Ganon hp 18 init +3 fly 60 BaB +4 AC 24/15 (touch)/21 (flat footed) (4 natural base,+4 natural (familiar), 3 dex , 2 size, 3 MW studded leather) attack +9 (1d4-2) +4 bab, +3 dex, +2 size , low light vision saves +2 Fortitude /+5 Reflex /+6 will abilities Str 6, Dex 17, Con 10, Int 9, Wis 14, Cha 6 skills +9 Listen [5 CCrnks, +2(wis), +2 alertness ] [Wiz 10] +17 Spot [5 CCrnks, +2(wis),+8 racial, +2 alertness ] [Wiz 10] +7 Spellcraft [8 rnks, -1(int) ] [Wiz 8] +11 Concentration [11 rnks, +0(con)] [wiz 11] +8 Move silently [5 CCrnks, +3(dex)][wiz 10] +8 Tumble [5 CCrnks, +3(dex)][wiz 10] +16 hide [5 CCrnks +3(dex)][wiz 10] +8 size modifier +4 Knowledage Arcana [5 rnks, -1(int) ] [Wiz 5] feats Alertness, Weapon Finesse Alertness, improved evasion, share spells, empathic link Deliver touch spells speak with master speak with animals of it's kind Equipment MW studded leather armor 175gp 2lb Miscellaneous Statistics: Encumberance: 0-20 (light), 21-40 (medium), 41-60 (heavy) Weight carried: 7 lb Buffs and Prefight actions: start with loaded crossbow. Equipment: (Free weightless outfit) (Armor)spell component pouch x2 (Weapon)dagger [1 lbs][ 2 gp] Pearl of power 1,000 gp (1st level) headband of intellect +2 4,000 gp Blackmarket (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6796322&postcount=74) Cloack of resistance +2 4,000 gp light crossbow MW 330 gp 4lb crossbow bolts 19 2 gp 2lb ring of protection +1 2000 gp lesser metamagic rod of silence 3000gp slippers of spider climbing 4800gp 1/2 lb Expendable Items: [CL] Scribed Scroll of Obscuring Mist x2 [(wiz 1)] [- lbs][25 gp]C Scroll of Shocking Grasp x1 [(wiz 1)] [- lbs][25 gp]C Scroll of Shocking Grasp x2 [(wiz 5)] [- lbs][125 gp]C Scroll of Sonic Shocking Grasp x3 [(wiz 5)] [- lbs][125 gp]C Scroll of True Strike x2 [(wiz 1)] [- lbs][25 gp]C Scroll of Mage Armor x3 [(wiz 1)] [- lbs][12.5 gp]C Scroll of Invisibility x2 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75 gp]C Scroll of Summon Swarm x1 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75 gp]C Scroll of scorching ray x0 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75 gp]C Scroll of sonic scorching ray x1 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75 gp]C Scroll of spectral hand x0 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75 gp]C Scroll of Minor Image x1 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75 gp]C Scroll of see Invisibility x1 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75 gp]C Scroll of protection from arrows x1 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75 gp]C Scroll of resist energy x2 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75 gp]C Scroll of protection from chaos x0 [(wiz 1)] [- lbs][25 gp]C Scroll of protection from evil x3 [(wiz 1)] [- lbs][25 gp]C Scroll of Dispel Magic x0 [(wiz 6)] [- lbs][225 gp]C Scroll if BlackLight x1 [(wiz 5)][- lbs][187.5 gp]C Scroll if Major Image x1 [(wiz 5)][- lbs][187.5 gp]C Other universal solvent x1 [50gp] Tatto of Synesthete x3 [ML1] [-- lbs][100/300 gp] Tatto of Skate x1 [ML1] [-- lbs][100/600 gp] potion of cure light wounds x6 [8][50/350 gp] potion of hide from undead [50/50 gp] Tatto of Chameleon x1 [ML1] [-- lbs][100/500 gp] tangle foot bag x1 [100gp] potion of invisibility [300gp] potion of pass without trace [50gp] Crawling Tatoo of Entangling Ectoplasm [50gp]¨Ganon Elixir of hiding x0 [250gp] spell failure 0% Equipment at home: [Cold Iron] crossbow bolts 15 4 gp 2lb Bolts of Asmeroviel slaying [CAlchemical Silver] crossbow bolts 20 3 gp 2lb Bolts of Devil slaying Gold: 7148.5 Candy central poster of the collectors' edition SpellBook (Other item) Miscellaneous Statistics: Encumberance: 0-20 (light), 20 (medium), 60 (heavy) Weight carried: 7 1/2 lb Mount weight carried: 0 lb Character Background: The elven training in the magical arts was not good enough so he ventured far and wide until he reached Gladius in there a stranded wizard made him his apprentice, at the beginning extracting much of his magical power for his benefit which tired him quickly. and so he left in search of more mystical knowledage Default Tactics familiar holds charge of ghoul touch send familiar to attack cast scorching ray from scrolls on target Fights results: 1: (N'rik Hathindar), (Deadly assasain): (Win (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6557771&postcount=63) ) [+900XP] [+900 gold] Attack of the Rat Swarm I 2: (Xaseus Soulrendir), (Sindorin):Win (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6609371&postcount=78) [+1125XP] [+1125 gold] Burning Paladin! 3: (Terminus Est), (gonbow): Win (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6659823&postcount=93) [+900XP] [+900 gold] Attack of the Bat Swarm II 4: (Zerone), (Saya): Loss (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6743584&postcount=127)[+450GP][+450xp] The Dagger of doom! 5: (mUGEN): loss (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6793220) [+450gp][+450 xp] Who Took My walls away! 6: ( Talari -> Vandelar -> Xyanthraxia -> Inihe) loss (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6833816&postcount=166)[+400 gp][+400 xp] Entangle! 7: (Talari leafwhisper) Loss (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6899859&postcount=203) [+400 gp][+400 xp] Entangle! 8: (Czernobog) Win (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6977501&postcount=243) [+1200 gp][+1200 xp] Inmune to Hold person .....whew.... 9: (Maylee) win (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7042857&postcount=276) [+1200 gp][+1200 xp] A paralizing shocking Touch part I 10: (grakk mighty fist) Win (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7116518&postcount=310) [+1500 gp][+1500 xp] Attack of the Bat swarm III 11: (quest a Real necromancer)Sucess! (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=496063) [+6400 gp][+6000 xp] 12: (2 locust swarms)win (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7327853&postcount=414) [+1200xp][+1600gp] [+147gp engineering] 13: (Talari, Va'ria and Vandelar vs 7 shocker lizards and 1 babau demon) Victory (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7423556&postcount=64)[+1519 xp][+2066gp] 14: Aquin Win (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7453763&postcount=479)[+1800xp][+2000gp] Repeat after me monstuous humanoids not the same as humanoids 15: (quest Foundations of the order) sucess (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7495957&postcount=1) [+933xp][+1600gp] [+133 gp clockmaking] 16: Against 4 Salamander Flamebrothers Victory (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7702318&postcount=612) [+2100xp][+2600gp] [+133 gp clockmaking] 17: Vs Vampire Fighter 5 victory (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7734746&postcount=626) [+2100xp][+2600gp] [+133 gp clockmaking] 18: vs Krunch Victory (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7915614&postcount=746) [+2100xp][+2600gp] [+133 gp clockmaking] Impressive fortitude Save 19: vs Va'ria Loss (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7978420&postcount=786) [+700xp][+866gp] [+147 gp clockmaking] 20: vs Dameon Victory (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8027591&postcount=827) [+2100xp][+2600gp] [+147 gp clockmaking] Overcome Hubris prepare better Vandelar! 21: vs 2 Jann Victory (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8087615&postcount=883) [+1400xp][+2400 gp][147 gp] Never forget see invisibility Again! [B]Past Expenditures. Bolts 4 cold iron bolts 5 tatoo of skate 4 tatoo of chameleon 4 tanglefoot bag 1 potion of clw 1 elixir of hiding 1 Summon Familiar 100 spellbook 15 Copied Spells vampiric touch scribe 300 = 300 Solid Fog copy 200 scribe 400 = 600 Dimension Door copy 200 scribe 400 = 600 Invisibility greater copy 200 scribe 400 = 600 Summon Monster III copy 150 scribe 300 = 450 Major Image copy 150 scribe 300 = 450 Dispel Magic copy 150 scribe 300 = 450 Spectral Hand copy 100 scribe 200 = 300 Mirror Image copy 100 scribe 200 = 300 summon swarm copy 100 scribe 200 = 300 Blindness/deafness copy 100 scribe 200 = 300 Minor Image copy 100 scribe 200 = 300 Acid Arrow copy 100 scribe 200 = 300 scorching ray copy 100 scribe 200 = 300 shatter copy 100 scribe 200 = 300 False Life copy 100 scribe 200 = 300 see invisibility copy 100 scribe 200 = 300 protection from arrows copy 100 scribe 200 = 300 resist energy copy 100 scribe 200 = 300 Protection from good scroll 25 scribe 100 = 125 Protection from good scroll 25 scribe 100 = 125 protection from Chaos scroll 25 scribe 100 = 125 ray of enfeeblement scroll 25 scribe 100 = 125 Scribed Scrolls Scroll of Obscuring Mist x2 [(wiz 1)] [- lbs][12.5/25 gp][1/2 xp]C Scroll of Shocking Grasp x2 [(wiz 1)] [- lbs][12.5/25 gp][1/2 xp]C Scroll of Shocking Grasp x3 [(wiz 5)] [- lbs][62.5/187.5 gp][5/15 xp]C Scroll of sonic Shocking Grasp x3 [(wiz 5)] [- lbs][62.5/187.5 gp][5/15 xp]C Scroll of True Strike x2 [(wiz 1)] [- lbs][12.5/25 gp][1/2 xp]C Scroll of Mage Armor x6 [(wiz 1)] [- lbs][12.5/75 gp][1/6 xp]C Scroll of Protection from evil x3 [(wiz 1)] [- lbs][12.5/37.5 gp][1/3 xp]C Scroll of Invisibility x10 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75/750gp][6/60 xp]C Scroll of Summon Swarm x5 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75/375 gp][6/30 xp]C Scroll of scorching ray x6 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75/450 gp][6/36 xp]C Scroll of sonic scorching ray x1 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75/75 gp][6/6 xp]C Scroll of Spectral Hand x1 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75/75 gp][6/6 xp]C Scroll of see Invisibility x7 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75/525 gp][6/42 xp]C Scroll of Minor Image x1 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75/75 gp][6/6 xp]C scroll of protection from arrows x3 [(wiz 1)] [- lbs][75/225 gp][6/24 xp]C scroll of resist energy x2 [(wiz 3)] [- lbs][75/150 gp][6/12 xp]C Scroll of protection from chaos x1 [(wiz 1)] [- lbs][12.5/12.5 gp][1/1 xp]C Scroll of Dispel Magic x1 [(wiz 6)] [- lbs][225/225gp gp][18/18 xp]C Scroll of BlackLight x1[(Wiz 5)][- lbs][187.5/187.5 gp][15/15 xp]C Scroll of Major Image x1[(Wiz 5)][- lbs][187.5/187.5 gp][15/15 xp]C Hi Caterane thanks for pitlording and have fun. I'm going to take a Gamble that If sucessful can end this fight quickly. Start at (0,22) or equivalent with Gannon on Shoulder Have Gannon fly(run action) from my location to (19,-13) or equivalent and tell Vandelar where Saffron is(free) and if he is flying above evard's black tentacles range 10ft. (delay vandelar 1 step in iniatiative so gannon can go first if you feel it's nessesary fot this to work) If Saffron is In evard's black tentacles range Then Vandelar will move closer to the location of Saffron and following the indications of Gannon he will cast Evards black tentacles on the area Saffron is. Offer Saffron to surrender and if he desists cast ray of enfeeblement on him (to make his grapple check even worse) and then Kill him with my damage spells except. fire spells and magic missiles. The Plan Fails! *Gannon & vandelar will tumble when nessesary to Avoid AoO *Vandelar is inmune to sleep 1.-Oh well it was worth the try Cast Invisibility and ask Gannon to return. 2.-cast see invisibility from scroll Share with Gannon 3.-Once Saffron is located move silently close to him (use slippers of spider climbing if nessesary) then give gannon a shocking grasp spell and ready an action to cast sonic scorching ray on saffron as soon as gannon is away from saffron as to avoid the shooting into melee penalty. 4.-chase saffron and cast either acid arrow or sonic fireball if unable to see him *acid arrow will force concentration checks 5.-from here on chase saffron giving gannon Sonic shocking grasp,recalling and giving away shocking grasp. Feel free to use any resources at my disposal. Contingencies reduced to 8< hp Cast obscuring mist, Hide and heal back as much as possible Can't Find Saffron for a long while. Cast ghost sound & minor Image to encourage him to show up. Getting hammered by spells cast greater invisibility Saffron Brass http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/Vathelokai/CoCo%20Maps/Saffron1.jpg Female Brass Dragon Wyrmling Age 5 Chaotic Good ECL 8 [4HD +2LA +1Rogue +1 Horizon Walker] XP 29,800 Next lv.: ??,000 Stats STR...10 [+0]...(2 pts) DEX...10 [+0]...(2 pts) CON...18 [+4]...(10 pts)[+2 race] INT....17 [+3]...(10 pts)[+1 4th HD] WIS...10 [+0]...(2 pts) CHA...16 [+3]...(10 pts) Combat Stats Hit Points: 63.5 [6 HD]12 +(6.5race x3) +(3.5rogue)+(4.5 Horizon) +(4con x HD) AC 15 Touch 12, Flat 15 +2size, +3 natural armor Initiative: +0 [+0 dex] BAB/Grap: +5/-3 [+5bab, +0str, -8size] Speed 60 ft., burrow 30 ft., fly 150 ft. (average) Saves: Fort +10 [+4race +4 con +2 Horizon] Refl +6 [+4race +2rogue +0 dex] Will +4 [+4race +0 wis] Immune to sleep, paralysis, fire Vulnerable to cold +4 vs. environmental hazards [endurance feat] Attacks: Bite threatens 5 ft., Claws do not threaten Bite +7 melee, 1d4(+str mod)[20/x2][+5 BAB, +2 size, +0 str] Claw +7 melee, 1d3(+1/2str mod)[20/x2][+5 BAB, +2 size, +0 str] Tiny Greataxe +3 1d8 [20/x3] +5 BAB, +2 size, +0 str, -4 non proficient BW: Line of fire 1d6 [30x5x5 ft.][DC16 reflex for 1/2 dmg.][1d4 rnd. recharge] BW: Cone of sleep [sleep for 1d6+1 rnds.][15 ft. length and diamater] [DC16 will negates][1d4 rnd. recharge] Full attack: bite +7, claw +2, claw +2 Sneak Attack +1d6 Feats: Hover (Monster) (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/monsterFeats.html) [1st race]:Start hover is a move action. Once started it is a free action. A hovering creature can change direction regardless of manuverability. Track (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/featsAll.html#track) [3rd HD]: Use the survival skill to track in any terrain. Endurance [6th HD]: +4 on numerous environmental checks and saves Special Abilities: Eat anything Tire at 1/2 speed during overland travel Breath Weapon (fire, sleep) Speak w/ animals (at will) Immunities (sleep, paralysis, fire) Vulnerability (cold) Blindsense 60 ft. Darkvision 120 ft. Low-light vision (quadruple human range) Keen senses (double human range) Trapfinding Sneak attack +1d6 Terrain mastery: Desert Immune to fatigue, and anything that would cause exhaustion causes fatigue instead. Also +1 insight to hit/damge creatures with "environment: desert" in their statblock. Size Modifiers:Tiny +2 Att +2 AC +8 Hide checks -8 Grapple checks Uses smaller equipment Carries 1/2 the weight of medium creatures Class Skills (63 Racial Pts., 11 Rogue, 7 Horizon Walker): +12 spot 6 rnks, +1 rogue rnks., +0 wis, +5(eyes of eagle) +5 listen 5 rnks, +0 wis +8 hide +0 dex, +8 size +1 move silent +1 rogue rnks., +0 dex +9 concentration 5 rnks, +4 con +1 tumble +1 rogue rnks., +0 dex +16 diplomacy 6 rnks, +1 rogue rnks.,+2 horizon rnks., +3 chr, +2 syn(bluff), +2 syn(sense motive) +11 gather information 5 rnks, +1 rogue rnks., +3 chr, +2 syn(know:local) +10 knowledge: nature 5 rnks, +3 int, +2 syn(survival) +10 search 6 rnks, +1 rogue rnks., +3 int +11 knowledge: geography 5 rnks, +12-cc rogue.,+2 rnks. horizon, +3 int +8 knowledge: local 5 rnks, +3 int +8 bluff 5 rnks, +3 chr +5 sense motive 5 rnks, +0 wis +7/9/11 survival 5 rnks, +2 horizon rnks., +0 wis +2 syn(search), +2 syn(know: geog), +2 syn(know: nature) +4/6 disable device +1 rogue rnks., +3 int+2 tool +3 sleight of hand +1 rogue rnks., +0 dex +2 syn(bluff) +1/3 open lock +1 rogue rnks., +0 dex+2 tool +X speak language 2 race, +1 horizon rank, +3 int Speaks Draconic, Common, Sylvan, Ignan, Animal, Celestial Base - draconic; int bonus - common, sylvan, ignan; spell like ability - Animals; skills - celestial +5 intimidate +3 chr, +2 syn(bluff) +5 disguise +3 chr +2 syn(bluff) +3/5/7 appraise +3 int+2/4 tools +3 craft +3 int +3 forgery +3 int +3 perform +3 chr +0 escape artist +0 dex +0/2 use rope +0 dex+2 tool +0 balance +0 dex] +0 climb +0 str +0 jump +0 str +3 knowledge(any) +3 int +3 use magic device +3 chr +3 use psionic device +3 chr +3 decipher script +3 int +0 profession +0 wis +3 handle animal +3 chr +0 heal +0 wis +0 ride +0 dex +0 swim +0 str +3 spellcraft +3int +3 psicraft +3 int +2 autohypnosis +0 wis +2 syn(concentration) Buffs and Prefight actions: None at present Equipment Worn: Broach of Shielding [1500gp] [absorbs 101/101 magic missile damage] Goggles Eyes of the Eagle (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7146656&postcount=95) [2500gp] [+5 comptence, spot] Handy Haversack [2000gp] [holds 120 lbs., 10 cu. ft.] [filled with 52lbs, 3(?) cu. ft.] Gloves of Object Reading [3000gp] [as the psi-power object reading with 30 minute durration. Learn race, gender, age, alignment, and loss/aqusition of an item for up to 6 previous owners] Tiny Greataxe [20 gp][3 lbs.] 5 bags of flour [.1 gp][5 lbs.] 20 wooden holy symbols (20 different dieties) [20gp] Thieves tools, masterwork [100 gp][2 lbs.] mirror [10gp] [.5lbs] Ma Manacles [50 gp][2 lbs.] Lock, amazing [150 gp][1 lb.] Bag of holding type 1 (15 lbs) [holds 250 lbs, 30 cu. ft.] [holding 86.5 lbs, 10 cu. ft.] [2375gp] [2500 - 125gp: skill discount] (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7811475&postcount=679) [sblock=items in bag of holding] block and tackle 5 (5lbs) crowbar (+2 circumstance to str) [2gp] [5lbs] 100 chalk [1gp] fishing net [4gp] [5lbs] black ink [8gp] 3 colored ink (red, yellow, blue) [48gp] 10 empty vials (5 stained with mixed colored ink)[1gp] [1lbs] 5 ink pen [.5gp] 10ft. pole [.2gp] [8lbs] hammer [.5gp] [2lbs] grappling hook [1gp] [4lbs] 50 silk rope (+2 use rope checks) [10gp] [5lbs] whistle [.8gp] wax [1gp] [1lbs] sewing needle [.5gp] sledge [1gp] [10lbs] shovel [2gp] [8lbs] tent [10gp] [20lbs] blank spell book (diary/notebook) [15gp] [3lbs] spell component pouch [5gp] [2lbs] scale [2gp] [1lbs] hourglass [25gp] [1lbs] magnify glass [100gp] 3423 gp in gems 26 gp (50 coins=1lb) 4 silver Expendable Items: Items on this list are in Haversack except tatoos 5 acid [50gp] [5lbs] 2 antitoxin [100gp] 5 smokestick [100gp] [2.5lbs] 2 thunderstone [60gp] [2lbs] 10 tindertwig [10gp] 5 full waterskins [5gp] [20lbs] wand det.magic [375gp] [50/50 charges] wand CLW [750gp] [45/50 charges] wand magic missile (CL 3) [2250gp] [50/50 charges] wand det. secret doors [750gp] [49/50 charges] wand invisibility [4500gp] [46/50 charges] wand ray of enfeeblement (CL 2) [5 credits][49/50 charges] 4 feathertoken anchors [200gp] universal solvent [50gp] Incense of obsession (w/ casting spells) [200gp] psionic shard: disable device +6 [360gp] potion resist elements: cold (10) [300gp] potion resist elements: sonic (10) [300gp] potion bull's strength [300gp] potion lesser restoration [300gp] potion prot. good [50gp] potion prot. evil [50gp] potion mage armor [50gp] 3 potion hide (animals) [150gp] potion hide (undead) [50gp] potion magic fang [50gp] potion pass w/o trace [50gp] potion remove fear [50gp] elixer of love [150gp] tatoo synesthete [100gp] Equipment at home: No home; just wanders around Gladius. Keeps everything in Handy Haversack. Load:Total Carried: 5 lbs. Light 0-16.5 Medium 16.6-33 Heavy 34-50 Default Tactics Talk them to death Quest to reach Gladius [Tellish of Ket] Win! (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=501551) [+7200 xp] [+8000 gp] Mini-Quest: Episode 1 - The silver soldier [TelinArtho] Win! (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=521601&page=1&pp=30) [+1500 xp] [+1600 gp] Mini-Quest: Episode 2 - The Golden Golem [TelinArtho] Win! (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=529972) [+1500 xp] [+1600 gp] vs. Orc Vampire, fighter lv. 5 [Monster Fight] Loss - [+600 xp][+666 gp] vs. Krunch [Tellish_of_Ket] Loss ??? [+700 xp] [+ 866 gp] vs. Pale Rider [Tellish_of_Ket] Loss (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7934041) [+700 xp] [+ 833 gp] vs. Daeren Stronghammer [TelinArtho] - Win - [+2100 xp] [+2600 gp] 4 potions mage armor [50gp each] [200gp] potion invisibility [300gp] 5 acids [10gp each] [50gp] [s]tatoo clairvoyant sense [300gp] cannot be made into tatoo wand magic.miss [44/50 charges][value 660gp][330 gp] Monsters as Player Races (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/monstersAsRaces.html) [sblock=Dragon Type:]A dragon is a reptile-like creature, usually winged, with magical or unusual abilities. Features: 12-sided Hit Dice. Base attack bonus equal to total Hit Dice (as fighter). Good Fortitude, Reflex, and Will saves. Skill points equal to (6 + Int modifier, minimum 1) per Hit Die, with quadruple skill points for the first Hit Die. Traits: A dragon possesses the following traits (unless otherwise noted in the description of a particular kind). Darkvision out to 60 feet and low-light vision. Immunity to magic sleep effects and paralysis effects. Proficient with its natural weapons only unless humanoid in form (or capable of assuming humanoid form), in which case it is proficient with all simple weapons and any weapons mentioned in its entry. Proficient with no armor. Dragons eat, sleep, and breathe. A dragon can always use its breath weapon while grappling, as well as its spells and spell-like or supernatural abilities, provided it succeeds on concentration checks. Dragons do not tire as quickly as other creatures when moving overland on the ground. If a dragon attempts a hustle or a forced march, check for nonlethal damage once every 2 hours instead of every hour. A dragon’s metabolism operates like a highly efficient furnace and can metabolize even inorganic material. Some dragons have developed a taste for such fare. Using a breath weapon is a standard action. Once a dragon breathes, it can’t breathe again until 1d4 rounds later. If a dragon has more than one type of breath weapon, it still can breathe only once every 1d4 rounds. A blast from a breath weapon always starts at any intersection adjacent to the dragon and extends in a direction of the dragon’s choice, with an area as noted on the table below. If the breath weapon deals damage, creatures caught in the area can attempt Reflex saves to take half damage; the DC depends on the dragon’s age and variety, and is given in each individual entry. Saves against nondamaging breath weapons use the same DC; the kind of saving throw is noted in the variety descriptions. The save DC against a breath weapon is 10 + 1/2 dragon’s HD + dragon’s Con modifier. A tiny brass dragon has two types of breath weapon, a line of fire (30 ft) and a cone of sleep (15 ft). Creatures within the cone must succeed on a Will save or fall asleep, regardless of HD, for 1d6 rounds plus 1 round per age category of the dragon. The fire damage for the brass dragon's breath weapon is 1d6 x the age catagory of the dragon. A dragon’s spell-like abilities depend on its age and variety. It gains the abilities indicated for its age plus all previous ones. Its age category or its sorcerer caster level, whichever is higher, is the caster level for these abilities. The save DC is 10 + dragon’s Cha modifier + spell level. All spell-like abilities are usable once per day unless otherwise noted. Speak with Animals: Divination CL 1 Components: V, S Casting Time: 1 standard action Duration: at will You can comprehend and communicate with animals. You are able to ask questions of and receive answers from animals, although the spell doesn’t make them any more friendly or cooperative than normal. Furthermore, wary and cunning animals are likely to be terse and evasive, while the more stupid ones make inane comments. If an animal is friendly toward you, it may do some favor or service for you. All dragons have immunity to sleep and paralysis effects. Each variety of dragon has immunity to one or two additional forms of attack no matter what its age, as given in its description. Brass dragons are immune to fire and vulerablility to cold(+50% dmg). Bite: Bite attacks deal the indicated damage plus the dragon’s Strength bonus. A dragon also can use its bite to snatch opponents if it has the Snatch feat. Claw: (2/rnd) Claw attacks deal the indicated damage plus 1/2 the dragon’s Strength bonus (round down). The dragon also can use its claws to snatch opponents if it has the Snatch feat. Claw attacks are secondary attacks, requiring a –5 penalty on the attack roll. (Many dragons choose the Multiattack feat to lessen this penalty to –2). Wing: (medium size)(2/rnd) The dragon can slam opponents with its wings, even when flying. Wing attacks deal the indicated damage plus 1/2 the dragon’s Strength bonus (round down) and are treated as secondary attacks. Tail Slap: (large size) The dragon can slap one opponent each round with its tail. A tail slap deals the indicated damage plus 1-1/2 times the dragon’s Strength bonus (round down) and is treated as a secondary attack. Crush (Ex): (huge size) This special attack allows a flying or jumping dragon of at least Huge size to land on opponents as a standard action, using its whole body to crush them. Crush attacks are effective only against opponents three or more size categories smaller than the dragon (though it can attempt normal overrun or grapple attacks against larger opponents). A crush attack affects as many creatures as can fit under the dragon’s body. Creatures in the affected area must succeed on a Reflex save (DC equal to that of the dragon’s breath weapon) or be pinned, automatically taking bludgeoning damage during the next round unless the dragon moves off them. If the dragon chooses to maintain the pin, treat it as a normal grapple attack. Pinned opponents take damage from the crush each round if they don’t escape. A crush attack deals the indicated damage plus 1-1/2 times the dragon’s Strength bonus (round down). Tail Sweep (Ex): (gargantuan size) This special attack allows a dragon of at least Gargantuan size to sweep with its tail as a standard action. The sweep affects a half-circle with a radius of 30 feet (or 40 feet for a Colossal dragon), extending from an intersection on the edge of the dragon’s space in any direction. Creatures within the swept area are affected if they are four or more size categories smaller than the dragon. A tail sweep automatically deals the indicated damage plus 1-1/2 times the dragon’s Strength bonus (round down). Affected creatures can attempt Reflex saves to take half damage (DC equal to that of the dragon’s breath weapon). A dragon knows and casts arcane spells as a sorcerer of the level indicated in its variety description, gaining bonus spells for a high Charisma score. Some dragons can also cast spells from the cleric list or cleric domain lists as arcane spells. Brass dragons cast all cleric spells and those from the Chaos and Knowledge domains as arcane spells Dragons can pinpoint creatures within a distance of 60 feet. Opponents the dragon can’t actually see still have total concealment against the dragon. A dragon sees four times as well a human in shadowy illumination and twice as well in normal light. It also has darkvision out to 120 feet. All dragons have skill points equal to (6 + Int modifier, minimum 1) x (Hit Dice + 3). Most dragons purchase the following skills at the maximum ranks possible: Listen, Search, and Spot. The remaining skill points are generally spent on Concentration, Diplomacy, Escape Artist, Intimidate, Knowledge (any), Sense Motive, and Use Magic Device at a cost of 1 skill point per rank. All these skills are considered class skills for dragons. (Each dragon has other class skills as well, as noted in the variety descriptions.) Bluff, Gather Information, and Survival are considered class skills for brass dragons. All dragons have one feat, plus additional feats based on Hit Dice just like any other creature. Dragons favor Alertness, Blind-Fight, Cleave, Flyby Attack, Hover, Improved Initiative, Improved Sunder, Power Attack, Snatch, Weapon Focus (claw or bite), Wingover, and any metamagic feat that is available and useful to sorcerers. [b]Lv. adjust and stat. modifiers are cumulative. All other are total ammounts. Age Size HitDice LvAdj Str Dex Con Int Wis Cha BAB Saves Fright FlySpeed CL SR SpecialAbilities Wyrmling T 4 +2 - - +2 - - - +4 +4 - 150avg - - Fire type, speak w/ animals at will Very young S 7 +1 +2 - - - - - +7 +5 - 150avg - - - Young M 10 +1 +2 - +2 +2 +2 +2 +10 +7 - 200poor 1 - - Juvenile M 13 +2 - - - - - +13 +8 - 200poor 3 - Endure elem. 3/day Young adult L 16 +2 - +2 +2 +2 +2 +16 +10 20 200poor 5 18 DR 5/magic Adult L 19 +4 - +2 - - - +19 +11 21 200poor 7 20 Suggestion 1/day Mature adult H 22 +4 - +2 +2 +2 +2 +22 +13 24 200poor 9 22 DR 10/magic Old H 25 +2 - - - - - +25 +14 25 200poor 11 24 Control winds 1/day Very old H 28 +2 - +2 +2 +2 +2 +28 +16 28 200poor 13 25 DR 15/magic Ancient H 31 +2 - - - - - +31 +17 29 200poor 15 27 Control weather 1/day Wyrm G 34 +2 - +2 +2 +2 +2 +34 +19 32 250clum 17 28 DR 20/magic Great wyrm G 37 +2 - +2 - - - +37 +20 33 250clum 19 30 Summon Djinni Originally Posted by Saffron's Tactic Well... immune to sleep, rembered his see invis scroll after that Janni fight, resist elements, every type of elemental damage... Black tentacles of course. Unless he gets some lucky damage rolls, he'll have to get me with tentacles... I'm guessing black tentacles, dispel, sonic fireball, sonic ray, mirror image, acid arrow, and sonic grasp. WHAT! He dosn't have shield?!? dispel magic 180 ft. black tentacles 180 ft.; 20 ft. radius spread fear 30 ft. First a rules questions: The wording of Black tentacles was debated a few weeks ago because of Vandalar and Va'ria's use of it. The wording of the spell says the tentacles "appear underfoot". So does that mean they cannot be summoned on the ceiling? Twenty feet up on a pillar? For these tactics I'm assuming that the spell can be targeted on any surface and spreads out 20 ft. from the point of origin. If you rule that tentacles can only be summoned from the ground, then Saffron will fly anywhere in the arena that seems reasonable, and at an elevation of 40 ft. If you rule that they can be summoned from the ground or ceiling, but not pillars, than Saffron will stay at 30 ft and fly all over the arena. Summary of Strategy Stay in an area where black tentacles cannot get me. Get him to waste his dispel. Buff, then cure with CLW wand and harm with MM wand. Tactics A little subterfuge, and then a long ranged battle. This assumes the south starting box; if I get another, use equivilents. Start off hovering at an elevation of 30 ft. [You must start at the ground.] (just in case he thinks to target the tentacles on top of a rock; avoiding tentacles is top priority) at (0,-26; default square) holding wand of MM and a potion of hide from animals. The box with corners (-6,-11)(6,-11)(-6,-16)(6,-16) is the only safe space from tentacles, so I'm going to stay in that box if at all possible. I have hover, so it should be easy. Fly out into that 'box' and ready to drink the potion on LOS. I'm guessing that will trigger his "cast dispel if I think she's well buffed" reflex. If I hear him casting spells out of sight in another starting area, then move from one 'safe box' to another to get close to his position. If he ignores me and continues buffing, then attack with MM until Vandalar responds. After Vandalar attacks (either with dispel or sonic something-or-other) then drink potions of sonic resist and mage armor. If I can move to get cover without leaving my 'box' then do so. After buffing draw wands of magic missle (cl3) and CLW - one wand in each hand. Priority list: cure self above 40 hp, shoot spectral hands, shoot Ganon(familiar), shoot Vandalar. This order is not absolute; killing a charged up spectral hand may be more important at a given moment than healing from 15 hp to 20. Once Vandalar draws cure potions, offer terms of surrender; I have 45 CLW and he has 6. If Vandalar will not see reason, then I'm willing to use all of my wand. Contingincies If Ganon gets within range (i.e. he's trying to touch me), then hit him with the sleep breathweapon. If Vandalar gets closer than 100 ft. throw thunderstones at his space. If Vand casts tentacles, and somehow I live through it, then Saffron will fly anywhere in the arena that makes sense. If he uses greater invis or blacklight so I can't target him, then wait it out. If in fear of the 10 round rule, cast detect magic from wand and concentrate; try to determine what his buffs are. If I can determine his space, and he's close, then throw things at him (thunderstones, acid, bags of flour, holy symbols, etc.) If he hits me with fear, remember that panicked brass dragons burrrow. If, for some insane reason, we both end up out of spells and ammo, and have to fight, then Saffron will drink potion of bulls strength. Then she'll draw wand of enfeeblement, and grapple Vandalar; alternate attacking with wand and fire breath. Once Vand has str 1, then alternate natural attacks and fire breath. As Always Thanks for pitlording. If I missed something, PM me. Thanks a lot!
TelinArtho 01-10-06, 12:07 PM	Yeah - I screwed up - I meant NiQil when I said I had taken Dr. Funk's monster fight...
One_Winged_Angel 01-10-06, 12:08 PM	Kailia (One-Winged-Angel) vs Gundir Malakas (Kaigan) is up. If anyone wants to peruse it and tell me what needs fixing if anything, I will be up for another hor or three and can do a quick edit. The Set Up (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8194797&postcount=983) The Fight (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8196060&postcount=989) I honestly don't see why readying a move action to move when I'm still going to be trapped is unallowed. Still, opinions? I'm curious about entangle and burning sphere. Since it's there with me as you so delicatly stated, would it not have burned away the effect on my square? Any reason, when he is right there, I can't just shoot rays at him? Sorry, but it just seems stupid when he is sitting well within range. Ok, why why why did you have me attack the dog? -Ignore it. It's not worth worrying about. Granted, magic fang might hurt...hmmm... -OK, if he is invisible and his dog is nearby, slam it with my staff or shoot with bow. No offense, but it just seems rather dumb when I can very likely find him in the next round. No spot or listen checks to attempt to locate... Meh. I give. This is going to go down as another loss because Iced didn't get the fight done. Mitza, thanks for taking it. If you want to re-run go for it. I'm not going to be a :censored: when you volunteered to run the fight.
Kaigan 01-10-06, 12:39 PM	Vivi's Miniquest is posted here Pretty straight forward.
Luni 01-10-06, 12:40 PM	Quick Question, what do we do if both gladiators are bleeding to death from the same action?
Altaris13 01-10-06, 12:44 PM	@Kaigan/Telin: I said I won't ask for a rerun, and I won't. You both have good points, thanks for discussing. I've already edited Thelgar with the loss. Like I said, need more contingencies, lesson learned.
MitzaVolchenko 01-10-06, 12:51 PM	Quick Question, what do we do if both gladiators are bleeding to death from the same action? Roll stabilization checks for each of them each round until they stabilize or bleed to death ontheir initiative. If both stabilize, they check @ once per hour for continuing to bleed out. One will eventually die ;)
Begferdeth 01-10-06, 01:00 PM	The White Hand vs Pirotess V2 (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8189077) is up. Surprisingly little changed. My dice were not on a hot streak there. Both may want to check it out though, as the rewards were altered slightly in The White Hands favor.
SoulLord 01-10-06, 01:02 PM	Quick Question, what do we do if both gladiators are bleeding to death from the same action? 1.-run stabilization checks each round 2.-reduce hp based on the initiative order or did you mean something else?
Gonbow 01-10-06, 01:09 PM	Any word on Kronos MacLeod vs. Hennan: Gonbow? Maybe I missed it... You didn't miss it; the fight will be up tonight, it should be fairly straight forward once you run into eachother (Very high stealthing abilities on both characters, wee), but I had to restart the fight due to the IT department of my college absconding with the computer I was using, thus the delay, my apologizes.
TelinArtho 01-10-06, 01:19 PM	Caspian vs Bill the Xill (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8198047) Very close fight - too bad one side didn't get a few more rolls his way...
MitzaVolchenko 01-10-06, 01:22 PM	I honestly don't see why readying a move action to move when I'm still going to be trapped is unallowed. Still, opinions? I will grant that it is not quite the same thing as a mechanically termed Dodge, but it falls intot he same category. It also presumes you can see or hear him casting. In this case you could either move out and go hunting as your tactics suggest or you can attempt to delay. I moved Kailia toward cover at ever opportunity. The contingency never occurred as he had a readied action to cast when he sighted oyu and you were moving having already acted that turn. I'm curious about entangle and burning sphere. Since it's there with me as you so delicatly stated, would it not have burned away the effect on my square? Any reason, when he is right there, I can't just shoot rays at him? Sorry, but it just seems stupid when he is sitting well within range. As I stated in my sum up, I am not sure on this one. It seems logical, in which case, I can move you the 5' and apply your escape attempts as your reflex save for re-entangling (have to check but I am pretty sure you are at the same number or close to it). As for attacking from entangle, you are at a hefty penalty to do so. Furthermore your only hope of escaping the Flaming Sphere is full movement and then some as it moves at 30' and counts as a move action for Gundir. I will review it again now that I have had my nap, and see what is what. Ok, why why why did you have me attack the dog? No offense, but it just seems rather dumb when I can very likely find him in the next round. You attacked the dog because you said if he (presumably Gundir) was not around or visible to go ahead and wail on the dog. Please note what I said about writing tactics on things that you cannot in any possible stretch of the imagination confirm or know. I spent more than an hour deciding what to do with your tactics. You used contingencies like if he summons, if he is invisible. Well at that point you had not seen him chugging along in the wake of the dog so you would have presumed him to be invisible, or so I estimated. Considering that hte dog was biting you, I felt you would be upset if Kailia simply wandered around being bitten and never responded. No spot or listen checks to attempt to locate... I will take another look at the distances and the respective skill stats, but by the time it would have made a difference for you, you were LOS. He had you pinpointed from round one when Idrai spotted you. Meh. I give. This is going to go down as another loss because Iced didn't get the fight done. Mitza, thanks for taking it. If you want to re-run go for it. I'm not going to be a :censored: when you volunteered to run the fight. Gee, thanks. I will look things over again and see if there are any factors that make a drastic change to the fight. I will edit accordingly. I would ask that you look at the last, last minute fight from Iced and then make a statement like that one. Check last week's Comments and Concerns thread...the last few posts are commiseration about that particular Hunter fight.
Cerebus13 01-10-06, 01:30 PM	The White Hand vs Pirotess V2 (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8189077) is up. Surprisingly little changed. My dice were not on a hot streak there. Both may want to check it out though, as the rewards were altered slightly in The White Hands favor.I forgot to include tactics for using Spellcraft to identify his spells, otherwise I would have seen the Resist Energy and not wasted the time to cast Scorching Ray. In the future remember that characters get reactive listen checks and against actions that are very easy to detect (DC 0 to hear someone casting) it is not hard to hear them.
TelinArtho 01-10-06, 01:35 PM	Just got a response from Pitlords about the tie and it is a no-go - so I'll be off editing that fight for a little while. The changes will only affect Trixie and Challack
Usurpator 01-10-06, 01:45 PM	@Usurpator - the height and weight are within the rules and since we're allowed to pick within the realms of the description, I'm not breaking any rules. I am sorry, I did not mean to imply in any form or matter that you were breaking any rules. I was just amazed that many gladiators here seem to be short anorexic types. When I read the info it just jarred the image I had of Sir Valkin. I also have it clearly explained which items he carries on Foreman and which items are left in the starting area. In any case, I can tell you that I got confused by your notation. Also, I just wanted to take this particular case to reiterate that I would really like to see 'non-switchable' gladiators, who enter the arena as they are, and do not switch out any equipment, let alone leave equipment on the arena floor before the fight starts. Has nothing to do with Sir Valkin. Congratulations on making next level!
DTFarstar 01-10-06, 02:14 PM	Hehe, kind of glad with the tie no go, I think I get more experience for a clear second place than I do tieing anyway. Heh, especially if she wins the opposed CHA check and gets me to surrender and take money. Of course, making the check or whatever and actually winning would be awesome, but I don't see that happening. Curse my pitiable will save.
Guildmaster (TLT) 01-10-06, 02:15 PM	My 4 way FFA is up here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8198206&postcount=992) I'm also having a very hard time with these boards today. :( It took me half an hour just to post the silly fight. Luni
TelinArtho 01-10-06, 02:15 PM	Trixie vs Challack vs Aerryl vs Mistique (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8184343) has been edited according to the ruling from pitlords that Trixie and Challack can't agree to tie. The winner may surprise you...
TelinArtho 01-10-06, 02:26 PM	@Luni - not sure why you didn't have Esmelda attack Sven - including the AoO that he generated. It would only have killed him off faster - so I guess it doesn't matter though. I realized the error on the long sword over the course of the week - my sheet will be updated accordingly when it is updated for the fight.
MitzaVolchenko 01-10-06, 02:53 PM	@ One_Winged_Angel I checked for the effect of Listen checks for you. You *might* have heard him in rounds 4-5 though it would be a hail mary roll as you have distraction from Idrai and rock walls between you plus distance. You could not have pinpointed him in any case. Since you seemed to wish to close to melee, I chose to keep you moving toward where you already knew he had to be more or less from where the dog came from so quickly in round one. On the matter of entangle vs. flaming sphere, Entangle does not mention fire as a counter. Additionally the plants continue to grow. So while the sphere would burn some (potentially adding flaming plant damage), new would continue to grow. The sphere does not mention any broadcasting effect, and as a sphere, does not touch the full ground area of the square. You could have cast rather than attempt to escape the plants and fire, but you would have needed to make the concentration check(s) taking into account entangle and damage taken. You could have hit the dog and ignored the flames and plants. However, you specify escape artist to get out of entangle, and honestly getting away from the fire, the dog, and the plants seemed higher priority than rolling to attempt to damage your opponent or a low chance to hit attack on the dog while entangled. On the matter of the ready to move action, you can ready to move *after* taking the effect of the spell to gain cover, but readying to move *before* taking the effect of the spell is readying to dodge. In either case, the failure against the entanglement makes it a non issue here. If anyone sees anything that is either a direct violation of tactics or a numerical fubar, please let me know.
Ribking 01-10-06, 03:17 PM	@DTFarstar I haven't updated my sheet yet....I'm waiting to here what Niqil has to say about our match. But, it says in the Character of Gladius thread that free activities are now supposed to be posted with fight summaries... Could you add the 3 [Ma]Light Hammers that Greefe crafted over the week, please?
DTFarstar 01-10-06, 04:32 PM	@Ribking : I'll get right on that. @Kaigan : That's about what I expected. I'm pleased with it because I got 900 for second place instead of 750 for tieing.
TelinArtho 01-10-06, 04:34 PM	LEVEL 5 FIGHTS Kronos MacLeod (NiQil) vs Hennan (Snommelp): Gonbow [Posted that it will be up late tonight] LEVEL 7 FIGHTS Noko (Maraxus) vs Kraegin (TelinArtho): Iced [Still has open issues - but regardless - Iced still needs to include the fight summary and rewards] LEVEL 8 FIGHTS Talari (Luni) => Daeren (TelinArtho) => Rayos (Kaigan): Huan [Hunter] [Week 2] I'm later than usual in this posting - but for the most part - the week looks pretty good. I know Huan usually runs a little on the late side... but Daeren REALLY wants to go on his quest this week... so in other words - for him I am very impatient. Also - Iced - even if you aren't going to edit in the changes that have been noted - you need to include the summary and rewards for the Kraegin vs Noko match.
Guildmaster (TLT) 01-10-06, 04:56 PM	I'm later than usual in this posting - but for the most part - the week looks pretty good. I know Huan usually runs a little on the late side... but Daeren REALLY wants to go on his quest this week... so in other words - for him I am very impatient. Also - Iced - even if you aren't going to edit in the changes that have been noted - you need to include the summary and rewards for the Kraegin vs Noko match. Patience! Though, I'd like Talari to kill the silly dwarf off again. @About Esmelda: I believe, could be wrong, that the defend trick only kicks in if he attacks you. You had him on his heels for a while, so he never took a swing. Luni
Begferdeth 01-10-06, 06:33 PM	Well, you didnt see him cast it. So you wouldnt know that he had resist energy up until you actually hit him with something that he was resisting. Also, if you want a reactive listen check, put a few points in listen! Its DC 0, but there was 180' or so between you at the time, and you were double-moving. Thats a -18 on the check, and probably a penalty on your listen too. No point rolling things that cant happen. I forgot to include tactics for using Spellcraft to identify his spells, otherwise I would have seen the Resist Energy and not wasted the time to cast Scorching Ray. In the future remember that characters get reactive listen checks and against actions that are very easy to detect (DC 0 to hear someone casting) it is not hard to hear them.
TheMagister 01-10-06, 06:59 PM	I forgot to include tactics for using Spellcraft to identify his spells, otherwise I would have seen the Resist Energy and not wasted the time to cast Scorching Ray. In the future remember that characters get reactive listen checks and against actions that are very easy to detect (DC 0 to hear someone casting) it is not hard to hear them. In order to use Spellcraft to ID a spell in place, don't you have to have Detect Magic up and...detecting? It's not a fast process, if I remember correctly... TM
TheMagister 01-10-06, 07:01 PM	Thanks for the edit, Begferdeth! I only had a slim chance of pulling out the win, but those extra D6s on the arrow crits did the job. Also, I feel silly about the "4 missiles" thing. Sorry bout that. TM
Iced 01-10-06, 07:44 PM	Noko vs Kraegin fight is resolved and up.
NiQil 01-10-06, 08:15 PM	@DTFarstar I haven't updated my sheet yet....I'm waiting to here what Niqil has to say about our match. But, it says in the Character of Gladius thread that free activities are now supposed to be posted with fight summaries... Could you add the 3 [Ma]Light Hammers that Greefe crafted over the week, please? No complaints from me...I didn't account for the net in my tactics...but more importantly I forgot to mention that I hate online dice rollers. I didn't really lose due to anything other than *extremely hideous rolls. Maybe next time the grease trick will be aimed at yer net LOL. @ Telin: Thanks for picking up the monster fight...here again...I forgot to mention I hate online dice rollers. All those trips that I made, and I couldn't follow through on any of them with hits it seemed like. I knew going in I would probably lose, but that doesn't mean the dice need to assure it LOL BTW, have I mentioned how much I hate online dice rollers? This should bode well for Hennan.
DTFarstar 01-10-06, 08:15 PM	20 + spell level Identify a spell that’s already in place and in effect. You must be able to see or detect the effects of the spell. No action required. No retry. So, depends on the DM, I guess. Does Resist Energy hang about one like an aura or do you need Detect Magic to see it? I personally think the latter, but I guess an argument could be made for most spells having constant visible effects. @Niqil - Hey, anytime you have a fight run by me, feel free to request that I use my own dice. I personally prefer it when I pitlord, but it was my impression that most people prefer it if an online roller is used. So, this goes for anyone, if you would rather I use my own dice, I would not be adverse. Unless your opponent threw a hissy fit, then I would definately be willing to do it that way. Online rollers irritate me sometimes. Anyway, just throwing that out there.
Gonbow 01-10-06, 10:14 PM	Kronos vrs Hennan is up here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8201558&postcount=994). Well, it took long for them to beat the **** out of each other than I expected from looking at the sheet, but some clever tactics will do that. Anyways, my apologizes for the time it took... @Pitlords I see Tatyana is still listed as active... An elder said that her fight was changed... I'm guessing they didn't PM you? Ah well. EDIT: Hmm, I made a mistake with the fight; a ending-changing one, I'm editing it now. Second EDIT: Didn't change the result of the fight, surprisingly enough, but made it alot closer.
NiQil 01-10-06, 10:19 PM	Kronos vrs Hennan is up here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8201558&postcount=994). Well, it took long for them to beat the **** out of each other than I expected from looking at the sheet, but some clever tactics will do that. Anyways, my apologizes for the time it took... @Pitlords I see Tatyana is still listed as active... An elder said that her fight was changed... I'm guessing they didn't PM you? Ah well. EDIT: Hmm, I made a mistake with the fight; a ending-changing one, I'm editing it now. I don't know if the error you made is the same one I was about to mention....using a wand does not provoke AoO. So all of those AoO go away, and the attacks will roll downward for Hennan. Activation: Wands use the spell trigger activation method, so casting a spell from a wand is usually a standard action that doesn’t provoke attacks of opportunity. Also, my encumbrance is listed near the top of my sheet underneath my speed, in case you missed it.
Gonbow 01-10-06, 10:22 PM	I don't know if the error you made is the same one I was about to mention....using a wand does not provoke AoO. So all of those AoO go away, and the attacks will roll downward for Hennan. No, that wasn't what I was thinking of; I was thinking of the fact that I never had the Ray of Enfeeblement wear off... Combined with no AoOs, I think Kronos will win, editing /again/ wee. Gracias, NiQil.
Snommelp 01-10-06, 10:36 PM	No, that wasn't what I was thinking of; I was thinking of the fact that I never had the Ray of Enfeeblement wear off... Combined with no AoOs, I think Kronos will win, editing /again/ wee. Gracias, NiQil. Curses... regarding your Alter Self comment, Hennan's been using that trick for a while. I had just picked up Invisibility and wanted to try it out. Honestly, my mistake was not thinking about his Shield of Faith... that was probably the deciding factor, more than anything else.
NiQil 01-10-06, 10:44 PM	Curses... regarding your Alter Self comment, Hennan's been using that trick for a while. I had just picked up Invisibility and wanted to try it out. Honestly, my mistake was not thinking about his Shield of Faith... that was probably the deciding factor, more than anything else. I had written my tactics with the thought that you would be using both the Alter Self and the Invisibility...hence the reason I said I would probably have to crit to even it you...the trog you favor would have shot your AC through the roof. And I thought the Ray might happen, but there wasn't really any way to defense against that so I didn't worry about it.
Snommelp 01-10-06, 10:54 PM	I had written my tactics with the thought that you would be using both the Alter Self and the Invisibility...hence the reason I said I would probably have to crit to even it you...the trog you favor would have shot your AC through the roof. And I thought the Ray might happen, but there wasn't really any way to defense against that so I didn't worry about it. Unfortunately, I couldn't use both because of my limit on spells. If I could have, I would have. Maybe I should start buying potions again...
Iced 01-11-06, 01:53 AM	How is the archmage prestige class' spell like ability feature run in the CoCo? Does the ability count towards total spell levels usable, or is it seperate. Example: A wizard takes a level of archmage and decides to take the spell like ability for his level. He selects meteor swarm as the spell he wants to be able to use as a spell-like ability twice per day. Does he gain four spell levels (-5 for taking ability, +9 for having an extra 9th level spell) or does he lose 14 levels (-5 for taking ability, -9 for losing a ninth level spell slot)
Dracazar 01-11-06, 06:46 AM	My 4 way FFA is up here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8198206&postcount=992) Thank you for the run, some comments: About Husk (the animal companion): I asked to share all the buffs with Husk (so the dog should stay near me, also Uilo commands him to "guard") so: - in rounds 7-10 Husk shares PfEvil against the summoned Swarm - in round 9 the swarm attacked 2 times the dog (instead of 1), first attack 3 hp, second attack 6 hp, and you moved the dog from 13 to 2 hp, instead of 9 hp - in round 10 husk should suffers go to 2 hp instead of -4 hp - When the swarm fades the dog should be alive, Uilo may heal him for a major help (flanking) for next melee attacks About Ural - in round 14 Ural AC is 9 [11(touch)-2(charge), ride cover faila] and not 15 so she suffer 5 more damages! (as for your rolls) - in round 15 Uilo did 8 damages and not 7 (as for you rolls) (only this 1 hp would change the fight!) Also for SRD the swarm attacks or pursues the nearest creature as best it can so I think that the swarm should pursue his first target (Feradeth) and not go against my animal companion, also Uilo is a druid and know how the swarm works so she could move her dog towards a foe instead of letting him suffers damage for 4 rounds. I admit that I'm a bit disappointed about yuor ruling in this situation. As you can see there are major issues that could change the winner of the fight, I'm sure that you will fix them, thanks.
Cerebus13 01-11-06, 08:10 AM	Well, you didnt see him cast it. So you wouldnt know that he had resist energy up until you actually hit him with something that he was resisting. Also, if you want a reactive listen check, put a few points in listen! Its DC 0, but there was 180' or so between you at the time, and you were double-moving. Thats a -18 on the check, and probably a penalty on your listen too. No point rolling things that cant happen.Spellcraft entry: 15 + spell level Identify a spell being cast. (You must see or hear the spell’s verbal or somatic components.) No action required. No retry. Resist Energy has verbal and somatic components so if I had heard or seen the casting of the spell, I would have had a chance to identify it. My Listen check is +5 with Alertness/Familiar/1 Rank, which means I would have only had needed a 13 or higher to hear the casting with the DC of 0 and -18 from distance. Whether or not you are moving has no effect on listening, except that it may increase or decrease the modifier for distance. Please do not dismiss tactics that you do not feel are valid.
TelinArtho 01-11-06, 10:04 AM	Thank you for the run, some comments: About Husk (the animal companion): I asked to share all the buffs with Husk (so the dog should stay near me, also Uilo commands him to "guard") so: - in rounds 7-10 Husk shares PfEvil against the summoned Swarm - in round 9 the swarm attacked 2 times the dog (instead of 1), first attack 3 hp, second attack 6 hp, and you moved the dog from 13 to 2 hp, instead of 9 hp - in round 10 husk should suffers go to 2 hp instead of -4 hp - When the swarm fades the dog should be alive, Uilo may heal him for a major help (flanking) for next melee attacks About Ural - in round 14 Ural AC is 9 [11(touch)-2(charge), ride cover faila] and not 15 so she suffer 5 more damages! (as for your rolls) - in round 15 Uilo did 8 damages and not 7 (as for you rolls) (only this 1 hp would change the fight!) Also for SRD the swarm attacks or pursues the nearest creature as best it can so I think that the swarm should pursue his first target (Feradeth) and not go against my animal companion, also Uilo is a druid and know how the swarm works so she could move her dog towards a foe instead of letting him suffers damage for 4 rounds. I admit that I'm a bit disappointed about yuor ruling in this situation. As you can see there are major issues that could change the winner of the fight, I'm sure that you will fix them, thanks. You can't share spells unless you cast them from memory - so your potion of Protection from evil is a no-go to be shared. In round 14, Ural's AC would have been 13, not 15 - because she did make her ride check for cover. The damage for your flame blade should have only been 1d8+1 not 1d8+2 - so that's why the online roll for damage and the damage reported in the fight does not match up. Here's Luni's comment to that effect in the pitlord comments: @Dracazar: Flame Blade at CL 3 only hits for 1d8+1, not 1d8+2. It is +1 for every 2 levels. Also, summon swarm doesn't help if your opponents run away from it and leave your animal companion as the closest target
Dracazar 01-11-06, 10:43 AM	You can't share spells unless you cast them from memory - so your potion of Protection from evil is a no-go to be shared. In round 14, Ural's AC would have been 13, not 15 - because she did make her ride check for cover. The damage for your flame blade should have only been 1d8+1 not 1d8+2 - so that's why the online roll for damage and the damage reported in the fight does not match up. Here's Luni's comment to that effect in the pitlord comments: Ok for the Protection from Evil issue. But: Husk should be alive after the swarm fades, Luni subtracted the damage 2 times Uilo has enough intelligence to move her dog towards the foe instead of letting him suffer dumages from the swarm doing nothing for 4 rounds In round 14 Ural's AC is 9 as for the first (http://invisiblecastle.com/find.py?id=331851) dice rolled. Uilo should hit! +1 for every 2 levels works as for magic missile (For every two caster levels beyond 1st, you gain an additional missile—two at 3rd level, three at 5th, four at 7th, and the maximum of five missiles at 9th level or higher), no?
TelinArtho 01-11-06, 10:52 AM	Ok for the Protection from Evil issue. But: Husk should be alive after the swarm fades, Luni subtracted the damage 2 times Uilo has enough intelligence to move her dog towards the foe instead of letting him suffer dumages from the swarm doing nothing for 4 rounds In round 14 Ural's AC is 9 as for the first (http://invisiblecastle.com/find.py?id=331851) dice rolled. Uilo should hit! +1 for every 2 levels works as for magic missile (For every two caster levels beyond 1st, you gain an additional missile—two at 3rd level, three at 5th, four at 7th, and the maximum of five missiles at 9th level or higher), no? Whether Uilo has enough intelligence or not is not the question. If the dog has been given orders to attack/defend (auto if you were attacked) - it will continue with that until you change its command. While you have some control over the dog - if you wanted him to disengage while the swarm was in effect - you definitely need to include that in your tactics. If a change is going to be implemented in the fight - I only ask that Ural be given the chance to trample as I stated in my tactics. I hadn't brought it up since I had won - but that likely means that you are knocked prone anyway... As to the flame blade, it deals +1 dmg for levels 1-3, +2 for 4-5, +3 for 6-7, etc. If it worked as MM - then it would say +1 plus an additional +1 per x levels. Note the difference in wording: The blade deals 1d8 points of fire damage +1 point per two caster levels (maximum +10) For every two caster levels beyond 1st, you gain an additional missile—two at 3rd level, three at 5th, four at 7th, and the maximum of five missiles at 9th level or higher.
Dracazar 01-11-06, 11:03 AM	While we wait Luni's answer I would like to comment the: +1 point per two caster levels just to undestand. You use this method: level/2 rounded down I use +1 per two caster level (as rules says) and it is this way: level 1: +1 level 3: +2 (because level 3 is two level above level 1) level 5: +3 (because level 5 is two level above level 3) and so on... Perhaps I'm wrong but please point me a source for yuor ruling
TelinArtho 01-11-06, 11:24 AM	ROUNDING FRACTIONS In general, if you wind up with a fraction, round down, even if the fraction is one-half or larger. Exception: Certain rolls, such as damage and hit points, have a minimum of 1. That's the rule you need to look at.
Altaris13 01-11-06, 11:36 AM	To all, and especially Kaigan: Pleaese accept this as a formal apology. Earlier this week I insinuated that Kaigan had taken favorites against my characters, and that was completely unfounded and unnecessary. I am extremely sorry. ~Altaris
Dracazar 01-11-06, 11:43 AM	That's the rule you need to look at. The ROUNDING FRACTIONS rule is the rule that I need if the spell would say "+1 point * caster level / 2 (maximum +10)". But the spell says another thing and it seems that my progression in much more near to the RAW "+1 point per two caster levels".
TelinArtho 01-11-06, 11:52 AM	Flame Blade: Touch attack deals 1d8 +1/two levels damage I'm not sure why you would think that it is +1/two levels above 1st - the only spell that I have found and that I can think of that works that way is Magic Missile. In cases where this is the exception (like Magic Missile) - the progression is spelled out - which indicates to me that it is the exception - not the rule. The bulk of spells that get better on a progression according to caster level are divided by the caster level: Acid Arrow - 2d4 damage +1 round/3 levels (so +1 round at 3rd, +2 rounds at 6th, etc) Shield of Faith +2 deflection +1 per 6 levels (+2 total at 1st-5th, +3 total at 6th-11th, etc) GMW +1 enh to weapon per 4 levels Magic Vestment +1 AC to armor per 4 levels
Maraxus 01-11-06, 11:57 AM	Noko vs Kraegin fight is resolved and up. Thanks for running that long fight. But could you add the profession-money? (133gp)
Huan 01-11-06, 12:12 PM	The belated Hunter Fight Talari->Daeren->Rayos (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8205154) is up. My sincere apologies to Luni, TelinArtho, and Kaigan for the late arrival. Short version: When there are more than 3 times as many animals and magical beasts than there are characters running around, it slows things down, but presents an overwhelming force.
NiQil 01-11-06, 12:32 PM	The ROUNDING FRACTIONS rule is the rule that I need if the spell would say "+1 point * caster level / 2 (maximum +10)". But the spell says another thing and it seems that my progression in much more near to the RAW "+1 point per two caster levels". Telin is correct about his progression of Flame Blade. The reason? An example: Flame Blade does +1/2 caster levels, minimum 1. Magic Missile does +1 missile/2 caster levels above 1st, minimum 1. So Flame Blade does +1 at 1st, 2nd, and 3rd because the minimum is 1. Your caster level doesn't become divisible by 2 until 4th level, which is when you receive the +2 version. Magic Missile, on the other hand, because you disregard the 1st level when counting missiles, gets 1 at 1st and 2nd, but as soon as it hits 3rd, because 3-1 = 2 and because you add to the first missile you got at 1st, allows you to divide that 2 by 2 to get an additional missile. At 5th level, you now have 5-1 = 4 divided by 2 = 2 + the missile you already had at 1st. Basically what this boils down to is that Magic Missile progresses on every odd numbered caster level, while Flame Blade advances on every even numbered caster level. The difference is the addition in the Magic Missile spell that states after first level.
Dracazar 01-11-06, 12:44 PM	Flame Blade does +1/2 caster levels, minimum 1. Magic Missile does +1 missile/2 caster levels above 1st, minimum 1 This is your typing, but the text in SRD is different. What I'm sayng is +1 point per two caster levels = +1 * caster levels / 2 ? If those two things are the same then there is no problem, I'm able to do some fractions and round them down.
Snommelp 01-11-06, 12:58 PM	Warclone: sorry to post this so late, but I just noticed that the rewards for the free-for-all are wrong. Winthrop is a class ally, which doesn't affect rewards.
TelinArtho 01-11-06, 01:07 PM	The belated Hunter Fight Talari->Daeren->Rayos (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8205154) is up. My sincere apologies to Luni, TelinArtho, and Kaigan for the late arrival. Short version: When there are more than 3 times as many animals and magical beasts than there are characters running around, it slows things down, but presents an overwhelming force. Thanks Huan. The only thing that I'll request is the adjustment for Talari's allies: Max CA is 6 (ECL-2): Talari brings in Ripper (CR4) and Bat Swarm (CR2) = 4+2=6. So Rayos and I should get +25%/2 bonus to our rewards and Talari should get a 25% penalty to hers. The adjusted rewards then are: Talari 3200xp/3533gp -25% = 2400xp/2650gp Daeren 1600xp/2266gp +25%/2 = 1800xp/2549gp Rayos 800xp/1133gp +25%/2 = 900xp/1275gp.
DTFarstar 01-11-06, 01:14 PM	@Dracazar - Yeah, formula for Flame Sword is (CL/2 rounded down)* +1, minimum +1.
Luni 01-11-06, 01:38 PM	The belated Hunter Fight Talari->Daeren->Rayos (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8205154) is up. My sincere apologies to Luni, TelinArtho, and Kaigan for the late arrival. Short version: When there are more than 3 times as many animals and magical beasts than there are characters running around, it slows things down, but presents an overwhelming force. Thanks, Huan. It isn't easy Pitlording for Talari lately. Could you add "Talari teaches Tiger to Air Walk" as a free activity.
Luni 01-11-06, 02:11 PM	@TelinARtho & Dracazar: Taking a look at the fight, noting not to use yellow again. I see problems with Ural's hp. Round 13: Ural 14/27 Round 14: Ural 9/27 [Blade hit, I just recorded it wrong] Round 15: Ural 12/27 [After getting hit for 7] Let me fix that, add Ural's Trample in as well.
Luni 01-11-06, 02:32 PM	Ok. I edited in the hp mistake and Ural's trample attack. Short story: Uilo actualy knocks the horse prone from the overrun. :( So the winners change.
Luni 01-11-06, 02:41 PM	Thanks Huan. The only thing that I'll request is the adjustment for Talari's allies: Max CA is 6 (ECL-2): Talari brings in Ripper (CR4) and Bat Swarm (CR2) = 4+2=6. So Rayos and I should get +25%/2 bonus to our rewards and Talari should get a 25% penalty to hers. The adjusted rewards then are: Talari 3200xp/3533gp -25% = 2400xp/2650gp Daeren 1600xp/2266gp +25%/2 = 1800xp/2549gp Rayos 800xp/1133gp +25%/2 = 900xp/1275gp. It's wrong actually. Receives [2400 + 800 gp] 3200xp and [3400 + 1133] 3533 gp. Huan's math is wrong. Talari should be 2400 xp/3400 gp. The other two are right though.
TelinArtho 01-11-06, 02:45 PM	Yeah - I didn't see that 3400+1133=3533 in his math... When you were saying that the "other two are right though" you meant my other two were right...right? /d
Huan 01-11-06, 02:46 PM	@Luni, TelinArtho Thank you both for your adjustments... I have edited them in.
TelinArtho 01-11-06, 03:01 PM	Ok. I edited in the hp mistake and Ural's trample attack. Short story: Uilo actualy knocks the horse prone from the overrun. :( So the winners change. That's just sad... Luckily 2nd was still enough to advance and purchase the cloak she purchased, so it wasn't a huge edit. Also - it doesn't change anything but to resist the reverse, the horse gets +4 to her roll because she's a quadruped.
King Uther 01-11-06, 03:34 PM	Vivi attempts to Diplomacy himself some air elementals. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8206849&postcount=2) Wasn't listed on the list of character actions so its late.
TelinArtho 01-11-06, 03:55 PM	actually - it was assigned to iced this week and he completed it a few days ago...
Pittbull 01-12-06, 07:40 AM	Nexa used her free activity to train her Dire Bat 'guard'!
MindWandererB 01-14-06, 04:45 PM	Bolrak vs Shazzelin (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8183893&postcount=964) is up. My first attempt at PitLording. It's more effort than I expected. I know it's way late to comment, but I do have one minor correction and one question. Correction: +80 gp from Craft (scupting) on Bolrak. Question: There were a couple of times when Bolrak was successfully spotting his opponent, but was failing to Deflect Arrows. I can't think of any reason why this should be. Am I not understanding how Deflect Arrows works? The loss was a foregone conclusion, since I missed seeing Wall Walker. Even if I had seen it, Bolrak simply can't compete with that tactic. Ah, well.