Post/Author/DateTime	Post
waywreth 03-07-07, 02:26 PM	Fights of the Week: March 7th Please don't edit the sheet after the deadline or you will lose the match. Rules of Gladius All that you need to know is written in the Rules of Gladius. It could be useful also to give a look to the Court Decisions Part 1 and Part 2. Please do not make fake accounts or insult the Elders. Pairings GM Caterane will pair the active Characters of Gladius after the deadline. Make sure that your character is not in prison (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=571107&goto=lastpost). Pitlording You should use the CoCo Dice Roller (http://www.hwx.it/wizards.com) for the fight. If you need it, there is a nice template ready to use that will help. You could find the Battle Map Tag Generator (http://www.hwx.it/coco) for dynamic Maps very useful. You must post a link to your fight in this thread when it is complete. If you need a quick and dirty tool to calculate distances between two points (in 2-D or 3-D), this tool (http://wormhole.ath.cx/coco/coco_dist.php) should suffice. Another useful link is the Quick Access tables for XP and Gold. If a fight needs to be rerun, the Pitlord has to inform the Pitlords account. He cannot react to requests from Players because the other player and the pitlord might disagree. He has no time to read the fight and the discussion. Please keep that in mind. PMs from players with rerun requests won't have an impact. Recent News and Developments Also if you're interested in the guild system please vote in the "Discussion: What should the guild system be like?" The Iron Man (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=790318) tournament is scheduled to start on March 14th. Get your characters active now to advance those last few levels as soon as possible! More details forthcoming. Comments & Concerns Post any comments or concerns for this weeks fights in this thread. Be kind and courteous to your fellow posters, and don't feed the pitlords. Please remember that they do hard work and consume a lot of time to let you play. Above all, have FUN! If you have questions or comments on any of the changes, please make your posts be heard in the Council of Gladius!
McJarvis 03-07-07, 03:00 PM	All of the links in the battles thread from last week seem broken....?
MitzaVolchenko 03-07-07, 03:02 PM	Dunno...deadline has come and gone. A new week in Gladius has arrived!
MindWandererB 03-07-07, 03:02 PM	All of the links in the battles thread from last week seem broken....? It's a typo. Cat used [thread] instead of [post] links. I'll fix it. Edit: Done.
Rauul 03-07-07, 03:18 PM	*Waits very impatiently.. waiting*
sonofzeal 03-07-07, 03:20 PM	*Waits very impatiently.. waiting* You and me both. ^^
Hirumajoe 03-07-07, 03:27 PM	I personally wait patiently. Because otherwise, someone is going to hand you the pairing maker some week and say "You do it faster!". :D
sonofzeal 03-07-07, 03:36 PM	I personally wait patiently. Because otherwise, someone is going to hand you the pairing maker some week and say "You do it faster!". :D And on that day I'll toss myself a sea cat to run circles around. ^^ ...naw, I wouldn't tamper with it. Some day they may trust me enough to run it myself, but until then I'll have to play the waiting game. That doesn't mean I have to ENJOY waiting though. :P
Rauul 03-07-07, 03:44 PM	I personally wait patiently. Because otherwise, someone is going to hand you the pairing maker some week and say "You do it faster!". :D oh thats easy... just make telin's charaters all fight telins other charaters in ECL 3 and make Telin the pitlord... there goes 3/4 of the ecl 3 fights :P But honestly... i really don't want that headache ever....
TelinArtho 03-07-07, 03:46 PM	Personally, I don't sit around and wait for it myself. Its very rare that I have nothing better to do. That said, good luck in the next few weeks while I'm "away" to everyone. I'm sure I'll still be around to a greater or lesser extent (especially for the next few days), so if you are looking for my help for something (for what I'm frankly not sure...), I'll still be around for that. I just won't be in any quests or running any characters (except possibly Kraegin for the IMT).
Rauul 03-07-07, 03:53 PM	Personally, I don't sit around and wait for it myself. Its very rare that I have nothing better to do. That said, good luck in the next few weeks while I'm "away" to everyone. I'm sure I'll still be around to a greater or lesser extent (especially for the next few days), so if you are looking for my help for something (for what I'm frankly not sure...), I'll still be around for that. I just won't be in any quests or running any characters (except possibly Kraegin for the IMT). Congrats on the Mini-telin and i hope you like to change diapers :)
TelinArtho 03-07-07, 03:55 PM	Well, since this is my 3rd kid... yeah - I think I've established whether I like to change diapers...
sonofzeal 03-07-07, 03:57 PM	Congrats on the Mini-telin and i hope you like to change diapers :) Somehow I can't think the thought "Mini-telin" without picturing a reeeeally small dude in full plate on a tiiiiny blue dragon type thing... Gratz though. :)
Guildmaster_LOY 03-07-07, 04:10 PM	Congrats on the Mini-telin and i hope you like to change diapers :) When I first read this I thought you meant someone had made an ECL 3 version of Jar-Red somehow... LoL
TelinArtho 03-07-07, 04:12 PM	Just wait until I get back and I activate my were-baboon... not quite the same type of build, but very nasty in his own right (nothing like changing shape and still having your full-plate on...)
MindWandererB 03-07-07, 04:13 PM	@McJarvis: Your miniquest is up, as you have no doubt noticed. You may post when you are ready. @Telin: Actually, much to my disappointment, the Rules of the Game recently declared that nonhuman primates cannot wear humanoid-shaped armor.
McJarvis 03-07-07, 04:17 PM	@McJarvis: Your miniquest is up, as you have no doubt noticed. You may post when you are ready. I actually always forget to look for my MQ's. Thanks for the heads up...I'll post after work.
TelinArtho 03-07-07, 04:17 PM	@McJarvis: Your miniquest is up, as you have no doubt noticed. You may post when you are ready. @Telin: Actually, much to my disappointment, the Rules of the Game recently declared that nonhuman primates cannot wear humanoid-shaped armor. Well isn't that a kick in the pants... It happens to go along with my whole "if you're not a humanoid, then you need to pay for armor as a non-humanoid" no matter what your shape is... Still, he's not hurting too much without the armor. +8 total bonus to strength if I pair him up with an orc base race... (which I haven't decided yet).
MindWandererB 03-07-07, 04:21 PM	It happens to go along with my whole "if you're not a humanoid, then you need to pay for armor as a non-humanoid" no matter what your shape is...Umm, planetouched? Elans? Half-giants? Undead? No, I don't think so. Besides, a were-baboon is a humanoid....
TelinArtho 03-07-07, 04:33 PM	Umm, planetouched? Elans? Half-giants? Undead? No, I don't think so. Besides, a were-baboon is a humanoid.... In my campaign - yes - those things would need "special" armor. That's just the way it goes. Now - since no one in my campaigns typically would have an odd combination (I tend to run from level 1, so most non-humanoid races are out from the start), it admitedly has only come up rarely. I'm looking over the RotG articles, and came across something like what you describe in Polymorphing Revisited (Part Three): When a creature changes form, any equipment it has either remains worn or held by the new form (if that form is capable of wearing or holding the item), or melds into the new form and becomes nonfunctional. The DM must decide if the new form can handle the equipment. This is best decided on a case by case basis; however, Rules of the Game has previously suggested that one can divide creatures into types that have basically humanoid shapes and those that do not, as follows: Humanoid: Fey, Giant, Humanoid, Monstrous Humanoid, Outsider, Vermin Non-humanoid: Aberration, Animal, Dragon, Elemental, Ooze []bIn this case, "humanoid" refers to a creature that walks upright on two legs, and has two arms, a head, and a torso. A humanoid might have a few extra limbs, such as an extra pair of arms, a pair of wings or a tail (or perhaps wings and a tail). The suggestions presented here are intended as general guidelines only. For example, most outsiders have generally humanoid bodies, but not all of them do. Likewise, some animals have bodies that fit the humanoid plan.[/b] As a rule of thumb, a change from a form that has a humanoid shape to another form that also has a humanoid shape leaves all equipment in place and functioning. The creature's equipment changes to match the assumed form. It becomes the appropriate size for the assumed form and it fits the assumed form at least as well as it fit the original form. The being can change minor details in its equipment, such as color, surface texture, and decoration. When a subject changes from a form with a humanoid shape to a form with a nonhumanoid shape (or vice versa) any equipment that can't be worn by the new form falls off at the subject's feet. (The druid's wildshape ability provides an exception: all equipment is subsumed into the new form and becomes nonfunctional while the druid remains in the assumed form.) Items the subject could conceivably wear in an assumed form remain functional. For example, most items worn on the body, such as armor, cloaks, boots, and most other items of clothing made for a humanoid body won't fit on a nonhumanoid body. Some items can fit on just about any kind of body. For example, a ring fits nearly any form that has digits of some kind (the limit of two rings applies no matter how many hands or similar appendages a creature has). Likewise, a necklace fits on just about any form that has a neck. I do find it funny that "vermin" is accidentally listed under the humanoid shapes (oops!), but I don't think the above really agrees with your statement MWB, and in fact points back to the previous ruling we had. Note the bolded paragraph - it is indicating that while for the most part creature type x would qualify, there are exceptions; by the same token while creature type y doesn't usually qualify, there are exceptions. Now, if this isn't to what you were pointing, please do show me the article and reference, because I am curious.
MindWandererB 03-07-07, 04:52 PM	God damn. I know I recently read an explicit comment somewhere that said "animals can't wear armor designed for humanoids. No, not even an ape," or something to that effect. But I can't find it. Again.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-07-07, 04:53 PM	The Undertaker (Abyssal Stalker) vs. Balrog (Maraxus) If you hand in your tactics tonight, the fight will be done tonight. Good luck. ToK
Zevox 03-07-07, 04:54 PM	Well well, Arden's fight this week is going to be straightforward. I wish he'd stop getting paired with guys with bonuses vs tripping though... @ Ettiquette_Gnome - I have to work in about in an hour, but when I get back tonight I'll write tactics and PM them to you. Zevox
Macbrea 03-07-07, 04:55 PM	@Etiquette_Gnome: Razorfang's Tactics sent for the Arden vs Razorfang fight.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-07-07, 04:56 PM	If anyone knows they will be late and/or unable to run their fight, i'm open to take it off their hands. ToK
TelinArtho 03-07-07, 04:56 PM	God damn. I know I recently read an explicit comment somewhere that said "animals can't wear armor designed for humanoids. No, not even an ape," or something to that effect. But I can't find it. Again. Well, until you do, expect to face a were-baboon in celestial chain with a +6 dex bonus, +3 natural armor... (I'm just kidding of course, he won't have the celestial chain to start with...)
sonofzeal 03-07-07, 04:57 PM	.......shoot, did I fail to request to pitlord only ECL3 fights? Apologies to TaggIIV, Etiquette_Gnome, and False_Keraptis in advance over my near-inevitable guffaw in the course of the fight. ;) Seriously though, just make sure to spell things out explicitely in your tactics (with pretty pictures if necessary) and we should be good. Also, the earlier you get me your tactics the more time I'll have to look everything over, and that's always a good thing. *goes off to dig through the rules and figure out how monster fights work, seeing as how he'll be on both sides of one this week*
Erithmu 03-07-07, 05:03 PM	Minor note: Retikos' miniquest was finished and is in the questlog, it should be removed from the fight list
False_Keraptis 03-07-07, 05:09 PM	@ Pitlords: Sabra Marana has advanced to ECL 5 and is no longer an appropriate match for Gundmir Guldesdep (ECL 4). Thanks.
Macbrea 03-07-07, 05:15 PM	@Sauro: Izumi's tactics sent. That should be a silly fight to run.
Maraxus 03-07-07, 05:17 PM	Monsieur Hood (TheMagister) vs. Ihdald (Milov) vs. Istima (Zevox) ...was not finished last week. It's finished now. Again, I'm sorry, I did not get it done earlier. PS: That way, however, we have more time to address problems, that will obviously be there.
Erithmu 03-07-07, 05:24 PM	@Sauro: Izumi's tactics sent. That should be a silly fight to run. You seeing something that I am missing? I know I'm in finals and my brain is kinda on the fritz, but ... and I mean this with no disrespect ... how are you going to hurt me?
TelinArtho 03-07-07, 05:28 PM	I think that's why its silly...
Zevox 03-07-07, 05:29 PM	Monsieur Hood (TheMagister) vs. Ihdald (Milov) vs. Istima (Zevox) ...was not finished last week. It's finished now. Again, I'm sorry, I did not get it done earlier. PS: That way, however, we have more time to address problems, that will obviously be there. No serious problems I can see on a quick scan. I'm curious how Ihdald was hiding, given the lack of maps or position notes in those rounds, but I assume he moved behind a tree to break LoS. Little thing that needs to be changed in the wrap-up though: Istima's powerstone was vigor, not force screen. Zevox
Erithmu 03-07-07, 05:30 PM	Perhaps I should slightly rephrase: Macbrea: did you send real tactics? If you didn't then I won't write any as I could really use the extra time to study and write papers. If you did send real tactics then I'll have to prepare something.
Milov 03-07-07, 05:31 PM	Eh, all the first glance issues I saw weren't really issues, since it was just me missing something. Looks good from what I can see. Good fight everyone! (Says the person who had his elf hiding in the trees the whole time, I know :P) Oh... I am curious to something.... Ihdald is also on a guild mission this week... I can't edit his sheet to let him shop and whatnot now since it was late.... can I?
Zevox 03-07-07, 05:53 PM	@ Etiquette_Gnome - Tactics took less time than I thought, so they've been PMed. Man thats a straightforward fight. Zevox
Maraxus 03-07-07, 06:08 PM	No serious problems I can see on a quick scan. I'm curious how Ihdald was hiding, given the lack of maps or position notes in those rounds, but I assume he moved behind a tree to break LoS. Little thing that needs to be changed in the wrap-up though: Istima's powerstone was vigor, not force screen. Zevox No, concealment ... wait ... *checks the rules* Whoops, looks like this course of action needs a bluff check to "create a diversion to hide". Well, in the beginning, this should be no problem, since he can in fact just run behind the next tree, after the entanglement, this could create a problem... If anyone wants I can try to correct this, but not today. :) (Stone-thing corrected)
Sutro 03-07-07, 06:32 PM	Bah. For some reason, my title line didn't update, I could've sworn that I edited it. The body was updated for this week including the top availability line though. Is there any way to get Weapon in for ECL 4 this week? -Sutro
Macbrea 03-07-07, 06:35 PM	Perhaps I should slightly rephrase: Macbrea: did you send real tactics? If you didn't then I won't write any as I could really use the extra time to study and write papers. If you did send real tactics then I'll have to prepare something. I would send real tactics. If you cannot kill me with your spell slots then your going to have a problem.
sonofzeal 03-07-07, 06:39 PM	Bah. For some reason, my title line didn't update, I could've sworn that I edited it. The body was updated for this week including the top availability line though. Is there any way to get Weapon in for ECL 4 this week? -Sutro Sabra Marana just levelled but wasn't placed in the ECL 5 bracket. I'm supposed to run a fight with Sabra vs Gundmir in ECL 4. May I humbly suggest to the powers that be that Weapon be swapped for Sabra in that fight?
MindWandererB 03-07-07, 06:43 PM	@Macbrea and templer10: Tactics have been sent.
Milov 03-07-07, 06:56 PM	No, concealment ... wait ... *checks the rules* Whoops, looks like this course of action needs a bluff check to "create a diversion to hide". Well, in the beginning, this should be no problem, since he can in fact just run behind the next tree, after the entanglement, this could create a problem... If anyone wants I can try to correct this, but not today. :) (Stone-thing corrected) On the half-hope that it'll cause new attack rolls and such, I'm kinda opting for it.... ;)
Tellish_of_Ket 03-07-07, 07:21 PM	Sabra Marana just levelled but wasn't placed in the ECL 5 bracket. I'm supposed to run a fight with Sabra vs Gundmir in ECL 4. May I humbly suggest to the powers that be that Weapon be swapped for Sabra in that fight? Send a PM to Pitlords and if it flies, i will offer to run the fight. Also mention that in your pm as well. ToK
Rauul 03-07-07, 07:32 PM	@templer10: Graashnak vs Gakhnalak tactics sent... (MWB makes nasty orcs..) @TheMagister : Tactics for Rauul vs Qwogi Sent... this should be interesting... to say the least
sonofzeal 03-07-07, 07:38 PM	Send a PM to Pitlords and if it flies, i will offer to run the fight. Also mention that in your pm as well. ToK I sent it. I'm willing to keep the fight, but I mentioned you were willing as well.
Rauul 03-07-07, 07:39 PM	did anyone notice that hood is in 2 battles this week?? Both ECL 8... now i know Hoodie is a great archer... but i didn't know he could be in 2 fights at the same time!!!
MindWandererB 03-07-07, 07:47 PM	did anyone notice that hood is in 2 battles this week?? Both ECL 8... now i know Hoodie is a great archer... but i didn't know he could be in 2 fights at the same time!!! You're allowed to double book a guild fight with a hold-over.
Rauul 03-07-07, 08:06 PM	You're allowed to double book a guild fight with a hold-over. oh ok... BTW MWB... i really hate your Orc.. anyone taking bets.. cause i will honestly bet against my own charater this week..
TheMagister 03-07-07, 08:10 PM	Well, I feel like Hood made a damned fine showing for himself against that heavy-armored psicannon Istima. I have no problem letting the fight stand as-is, but I would like to point out ONE thing. @Maraxus - remember this? Another Alteration to Istima's Tactics Before firing Ego Whips at Hood, please pop him with a Dispel Psionics (7 pp, so I roll 1d20+12 vs his powers' DC 11+ML). That'll hopefully douse any Animal Affinity (Cha) and/or Defensive Precognition he may have put up. Zevox You skipped that step. Hood might just survive for another round, or he might not. If Istima's first manifested power is dispel magic, then Hood interrupts it, and he keeps all his buffs. THEN it's a matter of whether or not Istima tries Dispel Magic again. If he does, then Hood has another two rounds (one for the insertion of the Dispel Magic, and one for the insertion of the Dispel retry). Hood'll still fumble that one Will save, but he'll get several shots off in the process. It could change the fight completely, and not just for Hood. If Istima spends 14 pp on dispel magic, he might run out of pp for Ihdald later. I'd appreciate it if you'd make some rolls to see what'll happen, since the movement doesn't seem to really matter at all. Thanks for the run! TM Edit: something else to consider. When Ihdald hides and is not spotted, his first attack of his full attack action denies Istima his Dex to AC, and also negates any dodge boni to AC (such as from full defense).
MindWandererB 03-07-07, 08:30 PM	oh ok... BTW MWB... i really hate your Orc.. anyone taking bets.. cause i will honestly bet against my own charater this week.. If it makes you feel any better, there was one potential scenario with which I was sufficiently unhappy with my odds that I wanted to avoid it. I still had an edge, mind you, but it would have been close.
Milov 03-07-07, 08:43 PM	Curse my lesser knowledge of the intricacies of this game... I didn't know Istima would lose AC bonuses like that... That could alter quite a few shots, I think!
templer10 03-07-07, 08:54 PM	mindwandererB- tactics for harbinger VS Ghashara sent - sorry they are long but druids has lots of options to counter.
MindWandererB 03-07-07, 08:58 PM	mindwandererB- tactics for harbinger VS Ghashara sent - sorry they are long but druids has lots of options to counter. Got 'em. I don't spot any problems with a cursory look.
Eluria 03-07-07, 08:58 PM	@Mitza - Tactics sent for Mohmat vs. Ahab @TM - Tactics sent for Qwogi vs. Rauul, "the betrayal." A gripping tale of one small goblin seeking vengeance on his former partner, whom said goblin believes never, in fact, showed up in the woods to fight Torel last week, contrary to whispers in Gladius suggesting that Rauul, too, fell to the crafty druid.
MitzaVolchenko 03-07-07, 09:02 PM	@sonofzeal Your monster fight will be here. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11699774&postcount=649) Unfotunately 2 small monsters is all you get for description. @Eluria tactics received. @Vath Should have Zwei's tactics to you in the next hour or two.
McJarvis 03-07-07, 09:03 PM	@TM: I don't believe I'm slotted for a "MQ" as stated in the battles thread. Please send tactics, since I'll be running it like a monster fight.
TheMagister 03-07-07, 09:05 PM	I have all tactics for the Rauul vs. Qwogi fight. Expect it to be up tonight in the small hours of the morning. I sincerely hope this does not devolve into a mass-rolling-I-hope-I-can-roll-a-20 contest. I hate those. :( TM Edited in a more realistic timeframe!
templer10 03-07-07, 09:27 PM	rauul - tactics for lord lorian VS Lightwolf Phoenixstar - Archer Vs Archer fight have fun.
Rauul 03-07-07, 09:38 PM	If it makes you feel any better, there was one potential scenario with which I was sufficiently unhappy with my odds that I wanted to avoid it. I still had an edge, mind you, but it would have been close. lets hope i found the weak link :)
TaggIIV 03-07-07, 10:03 PM	Is anyone else having a problem viewing Battles thread? Whenever I click on it or on "last page" or even on the page numbers it keeps showing up blank. And tactics sent to sonofzeal (a few hours ago)
hogarth 03-07-07, 10:09 PM	Is anyone else having a problem viewing Battles thread? Whenever I click on it or on "last page" or even on the page numbers it keeps showing up blank. And tactics sent to sonofzeal (a few hours ago) You'll have to go to your Options and set the number of posts per page to something lower (like 20 per page instead of 50).
Zevox 03-07-07, 10:32 PM	You skipped that step. Hood might just survive for another round, or he might not. If Istima's first manifested power is dispel magic, then Hood interrupts it, and he keeps all his buffs. THEN it's a matter of whether or not Istima tries Dispel Magic again. If he does, then Hood has another two rounds (one for the insertion of the Dispel Magic, and one for the insertion of the Dispel retry). Hood'll still fumble that one Will save, but he'll get several shots off in the process. It could change the fight completely, and not just for Hood. If Istima spends 14 pp on dispel magic, he might run out of pp for Ihdald later. Actually, you'll get dropped faster like this, and Istima has more pp vs Ihdald. He'd manifest the dispel as the first power you interrupt, which the big damage prevents Istima from manifesting. The second attempt would work, and auto-succeed on dispelling Defensive Precognition (+12 vs DC 11+2=13), which means with thematic rolls kept your second save (after the natural 1) fails, since you rolled 19 exactly, and that will total 9 charisma damage (before you got the chance to manifest animal affinity). As you're dazed that round, you fall with less damage to Istima and less pp used on you. Edit: something else to consider. When Ihdald hides and is not spotted, his first attack of his full attack action denies Istima his Dex to AC, and also negates any dodge boni to AC (such as from full defense). Istima's FF AC with force screen is 21, 25 if he happens to have cover from a tree at the time. None of Ihdald's first attacks that didn't hit would hit either of those. No change there. Edit: Oh, and Ihdald doesn't seem to have been penalized for the entangling ectoplasm on him. Thats -2 attack and -4 dex, for a total -4 attack on all his shots. That'll cause some hits to miss. Zevox
MitzaVolchenko 03-07-07, 10:37 PM	@Vathelokai Tectics for Zwei sent. If you have questions, don't hesitate to ask.
NiQil 03-07-07, 10:41 PM	@ Rauul: Tactics for Tamis Ruhl sent via PM @ TheMagister: Tactics for Truls Rohk sent via PM @ templer10: Tactics for Tyden Rayn sent via PM
Zevox 03-07-07, 11:10 PM	@ Cat - Little pairings problem: we need a time roll. I know I at least have a character who needs it - Asran's cohort Senorda has an Extended Mage Armor that wears off if the roll is 4+, but stays with 3 or less. Zevox
TheMagister 03-07-07, 11:18 PM	Actually, you'll get dropped faster like this, and Istima has more pp vs Ihdald. He'd manifest the dispel as the first power you interrupt, which the big damage prevents Istima from manifesting. The second attempt would work, and auto-succeed on dispelling Defensive Precognition (+12 vs DC 11+2=13), which means with thematic rolls kept your second save (after the natural 1) fails, since you rolled 19 exactly, and that will total 9 charisma damage (before you got the chance to manifest animal affinity). As you're dazed that round, you fall with less damage to Istima and less pp used on you. Zevox That was my question, kinda. Would Istima try to dispel again? It wasn't really figured into your tactics whether or not to try twice.
Zevox 03-07-07, 11:22 PM	That was my question, kinda. Would Istima try to dispel again? It wasn't really figured into your tactics whether or not to try twice. *shrugs* You're right, it isn't. I wasn't expecting him to do enough damage to interrupt the first. It'd be up to Maraxus I suppose. Either way though, the results stay the same. If he tries it again, what I said happens. If he doesn't, the fight goes as it is now. So it seems a moot point to me. Zevox
TheMagister 03-07-07, 11:30 PM	Yeah, you're probably right. Hood made a helluva showing, though. 84 damage in three attacks. You just can't really complain about that. I add another instance of shaking my fist at Ego Whip. :banghead: That power should really be a Will save for no damage. Hasn't that been errata'd yet? :tantrum:
Zevox 03-07-07, 11:40 PM	Yeah, you're probably right. Hood made a helluva showing, though. I add another instance of shaking my fist at Ego Whip. :banghead: That power should really be a Will save for no damage. Hasn't that been errata'd yet? :tantrum: Oh trust me, I'm not a fan of it either. It was simply the only way he was dealing with you quickly enough to not have to worry about getting pasted by his fell shots and attacks from Ihdald. And yeah, Hood made a great showing. It'd be nice for them to have another 1-on-1 later on. Istima needs a little revenge for last time ;) . Zevox
TheMagister 03-07-07, 11:56 PM	Deal. Let's agree to an EL 10 challenge match, after Hood gets Manyshot. That'll add a little punch to those ready actions. :) I'm still on the fence about taking Greater Psionic Shot or Greater Manyshot. +2d6 damage, or the chance to add "extra" additional modifiers more than once per standard action? Mmmm.... Greater Psionic Shot: Expend Focus for Fell Shot and focus for GPS. Entire Manyshot is a touch attack (two arrows for the price of one!). Attack deals 2d8+6+2d4+4d6[4ppDeepcrystal]+4d6[GPS]. Add other stuff if opponent has no energy resistance (Weapon of Energy, oil of Flame Arrow, Dissolving Weapon), or use Bane arrows for additional punch. Offensive Prescience is a cheap +4 damage, or +6 if augmented. For funsies against melee monsters or low-strength full casters, use Strength of my Enemy on the bow. Vampiric Blade on the Bow is a keen idea as well. That's about all I can think of as far as boosts to damage. If such an amount of money were possible to accumulate, a +1 deepcrystal longbow of suppression [around 19K] would be SICK. Yeah, I can only command the dispel three times a day. But it confers it on the ammo...TWO targeted dispels on a manyshot! OUCH! {pant...pant} I need a cigarette. :) TM
Etiquette_Gnome 03-07-07, 11:59 PM	So, what happens to Sabra?
Tellish_of_Ket 03-08-07, 12:22 AM	Deal. Let's agree to an EL 10 challenge match, after Hood gets Manyshot. That'll add a little punch to those ready actions. :) I'm still on the fence about taking Greater Psionic Shot or Greater Manyshot. +2d6 damage, or the chance to add "extra" additional modifiers more than once per standard action? Mmmm.... Greater Psionic Shot: Expend Focus for Fell Shot and focus for GPS. Entire Manyshot is a touch attack (two arrows for the price of one!). Attack deals 2d8+6+2d4+4d6[4ppDeepcrystal]+4d6[GPS]. Add other stuff if opponent has no energy resistance (Weapon of Energy, oil of Flame Arrow, Dissolving Weapon), or use Bane arrows for additional punch. Offensive Prescience is a cheap +4 damage, or +6 if augmented. For funsies against melee monsters or low-strength full casters, use Strength of my Enemy on the bow. Vampiric Blade on the Bow is a keen idea as well. That's about all I can think of as far as boosts to damage. If such an amount of money were possible to accumulate, a +1 deepcrystal longbow of suppression [around 19K] would be SICK. Yeah, I can only command the dispel three times a day. But it confers it on the ammo...TWO targeted dispels on a manyshot! OUCH! {pant...pant} I need a cigarette. :) TM And then we watch you scream in horror and agony as your arrow hits a windwall and bounces harmlessly off the arena ceiling. TM in slow motion...."NOooooooOOOOoooooOOOoooooooo!" lol ToK
Erithmu 03-08-07, 12:25 AM	@Sauro: Tactics for Torel sent ... I had to worry that I was getting angry and might do something ... rash @ToK: Tactics for Owen sent for his MQ/Monster fight
Tellish_of_Ket 03-08-07, 01:08 AM	@ToK: Tactics for Owen sent for his MQ/Monster fight Completed ToK
Erithmu 03-08-07, 01:27 AM	Completed ToKIts a beautiful thing when someone else writes your tactics for you ...
Tellish_of_Ket 03-08-07, 01:33 AM	Its a beautiful thing when someone else writes your tactics for you ... Wow...what a coincedence. I'd hate to be the odds maker and try to figure out the odds of that happening. lol Either way, bravo for your "special" insight, lol. ToK
TheMagister 03-08-07, 01:48 AM	Rauul vs. Qwogi is completed. A rather... sudden ... ending. TM
Rauul 03-08-07, 03:13 AM	Rauul vs. Qwogi is completed. A rather... sudden ... ending. TM Good lord... Ok i can see where i lost... fight cost me more in gold that I won I am sorry to say... Shrugs.. Can you add the 1 charge from the wand of cure light wounds to what was used.. :P
templer10 03-08-07, 03:15 AM	iam a bit new and it's bound to come up for me when pitlording (maybe even for this week)so i would appriciate if someone will direct me to where it's written how exacly hide Vs spot works (and by that i mean house rules or court decesions- i know the SRD) and listen Vs move silently becuase as far as i understand it now if you are in the open no matter how far away you are autospotted if you are in line of sight and if you are near (as in 5 feet) from cover/concealment you are automaticly hiding and if you are further then that you are autospotted unless you have 5 ranks of hide for each 5 feet away from cover? and and i saw some references to DC 0 regarding to listen checks to hear attacks coming?
Zevox 03-08-07, 03:28 AM	iam a bit new and it's bound to come up for me when pitlording (maybe even for this week)so i would appriciate if someone will direct me to where it's written how exacly hide Vs spot works (and by that i mean house rules or court decesions- i know the SRD) and listen Vs move silently becuase as far as i understand it now if you are in the open no matter how far away you are autospotted if you are in line of sight and if you are near (as in 5 feet) from cover/concealment you are automaticly hiding and if you are further then that you are autospotted unless you have 5 ranks of hide for each 5 feet away from cover? and and i saw some references to DC 0 regarding to listen checks to hear attacks coming? Well, for starters, the 1' per rank to hide rule only works when moving from cover to cover. No hiding in plain sight just by being close to cover. Yes, you are autospotted if out in the open with no cover or concealment. You need one of those and not yet having been spotted to hide. The exception is characters with hide-in-plain-sight, but we only have one of those in the arena now anyway. By our odd conventions, you are assumed to be trying to hide anytime you can, so if you have cover and an enemy walks into LoS, even if it wasn't in your tactics to be sneaky, you get a hide check. Don't ask me why, because that one has never quite made sense to me. For listen, our house rules define how well you locate an enemy with your check - you need to beat the DC by 20 to pinpoint, and for every 5 you miss the DC by you could be 5' more off. See the skills post in the rules thread for details. And yes, another of those I shake my head at, but we've defined the listen DC to hear an attack as 0. For reasons I'll never understand, this applies even to things like spells and wands, even if they're silenced. Zevox
TheMagister 03-08-07, 03:40 AM	Good lord... Ok i can see where i lost... fight cost me more in gold that I won I am sorry to say... Shrugs.. Can you add the 1 charge from the wand of cure light wounds to what was used.. :P Done!
Rauul 03-08-07, 04:29 AM	if anyone wants to watch Valen Sky on his mission quest.. it's started.. Mission: [LoY] "To Teach an Old Dog a New Trick" [EL 7] (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?p=11703268#post11703268) please send me comments or complaints via PM's ty in advance
MitzaVolchenko 03-08-07, 04:52 AM	Idhald's mission starts here. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=805322)
TheMagister 03-08-07, 05:01 AM	Idhald's mission starts here. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=805322) Makin' sure you realize that Ihdald's in a miniquest-style one-shot thing. I know you're still new with all the guild stuff (join the club!). Missions are three-week things, like quests. Operations (which is what Ihdald's on) are a one week affair, like a mini. TM
MitzaVolchenko 03-08-07, 05:04 AM	Makin' sure you realize that Ihdald's in a miniquest-style one-shot thing. I know you're still new with all the guild stuff (join the club!). Missions are three-week things, like quests. Operations (which is what Ihdald's on) are a one week affair, like a mini. TM So what do I title it? Operation? I looked in the guild rules, got frustrated, quit reading the guild rules, and am now faking it ;)
Pitlords 03-08-07, 06:49 AM	Gundmir Guldesdep (False_Keraptis) vs. Unknown Monster : sonofzeal [Sewer] Nyphanalith (TaggIIV) vs. Sabra Marana (Etiquette_Gnome) : sonofzeal [Arena] Jur, The Mad Magician (Tellish_of_Ket) miniquests to join TAO : Vathelokai [Miniquest] [Guild] [LOG] ML Rauul : Sybil (MitzaVolchenko) befriends Kelartus for WAR [Week 4/3] I don't understand where all these wrong league pairings come from. I always use the sheet posted on the battles thread and add the rewards from there. I might happen that I miscalculate once in a while but not that often so I have to assume that the rewards are sometimes being changed or even the outcome. If that happens after the roster is updated, write me a PM please. @Rauul: I've reset the quest time to week 2
waywreth 03-08-07, 08:49 AM	@TheMagister - Tactics for Matthis in Matthis Dar'ath III (waywreth) vs. Truls Rohk (NiQil) : TheMagister [Arena] PM'd.
Macbrea 03-08-07, 09:00 AM	@Sauro: Tactics for Torel sent ... I had to worry that I was getting angry and might do something ... rash Here is the deal Erithmu. I wrote tactics in such a manner to make you expend some spell slots. If I don't do that then when another character activates in League 7. You have almost complete spell slots to go into the fight. If for some reason Izumi can survive 8 SL + 3 swarms then you have a problem. This is very unlikely. Since, I have another character in League 7 that I am likely to activate then I am not going to give you a full spell slot allotment to fight him with. Izumi most likely has lost that fight unless your luck is horrendous. If it is so, you will have to come to melee and that will end the fight quickly. Now, I very much doubt this will happen. Surrenders in CoCo are extremely unfair to the next person that has to fight your character in the arena if your not at the end of your cycle.
McJarvis 03-08-07, 09:16 AM	Gotta love the Metagame, eh? :)
Macbrea 03-08-07, 09:29 AM	It's not just a case of metagame. I have to try and survive 8SL + 3 swarms + 8 SL from pearls in order to be able to kill the character. All of this on 39 Hps. Writing tactics that would allow me to do that results in me doing alot of wait for spell to be cast on me take the effect of the first blast and run to next start block. If the swarms are bats they then go back to the druid and nibble on him because he is the closest target. If they are anything else then the druid has to stay within 40ft of the swarm to maintain concentration on it. This is alittle difficult on a bat that flies at 40ft per round. Since, initiative isn't simaltanuous except in the case of a mount and rider. Those swarms move then the bat moves. It is very hard to stay in the air, close to the ground and out of reach of the swarm. Now, I do have energy resistance to a picked type of energy. Torel has sonic and electrical attacks. He has to choose the one that I didn't otherwise the average attack will result in 0 damage. Now, this leave him with throwing fire and throwing sonic damage with produce flame. It is a matter of hitting at that point while riding on a moving mount. I am fine with the dice deciding what is going to happen. So, my tactics are written in a fashion that I try to stay alive as long as possible. Yes, this means I am purposely making the character spend his spell slots to kill Izumi. Assuming the Sauro runs the fight rather then stating flatly that because Izumi cannot damage the flying Druid she surrenders, then Torel is required to spend slots and resources. If we allow character to just have surrenders then they go to the next fight with full resources and spell slots. It puts the records of spell casters out of wack. It is a pretty easy fight to run from a pitlord standpoint. As one of the characters is basicly moving.
McJarvis 03-08-07, 09:33 AM	I didn't mean for it to sound like a "bad" metagame. Harvey switching extend spell for deflect arrows is another example of the metagame of gladius-> you adapt to what you know is in the field. It's important not to let draws go by, because it just leaves casters with lots of spell slots in the field to succeede even more. Thus, it's the metagame....((or outside your current fight, at least...looking at the larger picture))
Erithmu 03-08-07, 09:37 AM	It's not just a case of metagame. I have to try and survive 8SL + 3 swarms + 8 SL from pearls in order to be able to kill the character. All of this on 39 Hps. Writing tactics that would allow me to do that results in me doing alot of wait for spell to be cast on me take the effect of the first blast and run to next start block. If the swarms are bats they then go back to the druid and nibble on him because he is the closest target. If they are anything else then the druid has to stay within 40ft of the swarm to maintain concentration on it. This is alittle difficult on a bat that flies at 40ft per round. Since, initiative isn't simaltanuous except in the case of a mount and rider. Those swarms move then the bat moves. It is very hard to stay in the air, close to the ground and out of reach of the swarm. Now, I do have energy resistance to a picked type of energy. Torel has sonic and electrical attacks. He has to choose the one that I didn't otherwise the average attack will result in 0 damage. Now, this leave him with throwing fire and throwing sonic damage with produce flame. It is a matter of hitting at that point while riding on a moving mount. I am fine with the dice deciding what is going to happen. So, my tactics are written in a fashion that I try to stay alive as long as possible. Yes, this means I am purposely making the character spend his spell slots to kill Izumi. Assuming the Sauro runs the fight rather then stating flatly that because Izumi cannot damage the flying Druid she surrenders, then Torel is required to spend slots and resources. If we allow character to just have surrenders then they go to the next fight with full resources and spell slots. It puts the records of spell casters out of wack. It is a pretty easy fight to run from a pitlord standpoint. As one of the characters is basicly moving.Torel is at the end of his cycle .... I reset no matter what ... that is more of why I am irked ... It isn't 8 SL it is 17 SL and 3 SL in pearls. I agree with the principle of the matter, and appreciate the honesty and energy in making sure that future encounters are balanced. (That and my summon swarms got uber nerfed a week ago, so I'm not planning on seeing those again anytime soon.) EDIT: Also this is not intended to be offensive, or aggreesive in anyway. Master's level finals week tends to add unneeded and unwanted stress on a person, that then manifests itself in areas unexpected.
Maraxus 03-08-07, 09:39 AM	About that dispel magic thing: Yes, I noticed that too, but at that point, the Hood was allready dead and I though "Hey, maybe he won't complain." :( 3 Players, all writing ton's of tactics and then there are also 3 Addendums! Show me the Pitlord who get's this right and I'll bow before him. ;) Since in fact, Monsieur Hood suprisingly succeded on the will saves with 19 vs DC 19 three times in a row (not that the last mattered anymore), I don't think it will change anything in either direction. It is just hard to change anything in any way, while keeping rolls, since such an integral part as "which power to use first" will chance the whole outcome of the battle and then there are questions like: "Which will saves to take, keep the order, or keep the rounds, they were made in," etc. etc. (But I'll give it a try and hope, it will satisfy everybody. - It won't but nobody shall say I have not tried) Two other things: The penalties for entanglement (-2 -2 atrtack through -4 dex) were included - but so was +2 for being invisible (or should this be an AC modifier?) - if I understand this right, a hidden attacker get's his "invisible"-bonusses for all attacks of a full attack, correct me, if I'm wrong (with quote preferably :D). Hm, I will definitly start to write tactics with a self-imposed limit of 1000 characters, anding with: "In other situations, act at the best of my abilities." ... but then again, sometimes pitlords do the most stupid, useless, or self-destructing thinks, when there is a situation not exactly covered by the rules.
McJarvis 03-08-07, 09:41 AM	Master's level finals week tends to add unneeded and unwanted stress on a person, that then manifests itself in areas unexpected. I appreciate the struggle you must be going through(and even moreso appreciate the field of study in which you participate), but perhaps you should take finals week off when running characters....? Show me the Pitlord who get's this right and I'll bow before him. I appreciate your praise. Furthermore, I'm so confident in my abilities that I don't feel any particular need to prove them. ;)
Macbrea 03-08-07, 09:42 AM	Torel is at the end of his cycle .... I reset no matter what ... that is more of why I am irked ... It isn't 8 SL it is 17 SL and 3 SL in pearls. I also, misread your 3FC to read that you had only fought in week 1. This also effected how I wrote my tactics. Heck, it's likely that dice will beat me purely on call lightning hits with an average of 10.5 damage per hit times 18 hits.
hogarth 03-08-07, 09:43 AM	(That and my summon swarms got uber nerfed a week ago, so I'm not planning on seeing those again anytime soon.) What was the uber-nerfing for Summon Swarm?
Erithmu 03-08-07, 09:47 AM	I appreciate the struggle you must be going through(and even moreso appreciate the field of study in which you participate), but perhaps you should take finals week off when running characters....? Normally do ... However one is slightly competitive I actually only have 1 char in the arena (Starting to enjoy that character), and 2 on quests: 1 who had a quick miniquest (Guild join RP aspect), and the other is finishing a quest to be ECL10 for the Ironman (Competative). I normally take the week off from running fights, to some extent this place is a nice stress relief and allows my brain to rest some. It is a toss up, but I think I would rather be sane slightly frustrated, rather than insane and really frustrated. Normally I do ok with a cut back in my involvement, I haven't really cut back this time around (Quest/Missionlording)
Erithmu 03-08-07, 09:48 AM	What was the uber-nerfing for Summon Swarm?The range at which you can concentrate on the swarm (basically 25ft + 5/2levels). So no casting and then moving far far away and letting the swarm do it's job.
Macbrea 03-08-07, 09:50 AM	What was the uber-nerfing for Summon Swarm? Summons swarm lasts for Concentration +2 rounds. It has a range of close (25ft + 5/2 levels]. Once brought in to being you have to stay within close range of the swarm to maintain concentration. The swarm itself is uncontrolled to it's location except that it goes toward the closest target. This means if a 6th level druid casts a summons swarm 35ft sway it moves towards it's target and munches on them. That target cannot be more then 45ft away else the druid isn't in range to concentrate on the swarm. As a result the swarm only lasts another two rounds. If the druid casts a swarm on someone 15ft away and that person then runs 40ft away. After the swarm landed on the person. The person takes one round of damage then the swarm comes back and eats the druid. The druid then has to run from his own swarm and is likely to have to give up concentration. The rules to conjuration state that creatures summoned in can leave the range of the spell. The problem comes in that concentration has been ruled to only last out to the range of the spell.
McJarvis 03-08-07, 09:52 AM	The range at which you can concentrate on the swarm (basically 25ft + 5/2levels). So no casting and then moving far far away and letting the swarm do it's job. Which, while I agree with the ruling, does make summon swarm more or less useless....(since the swarm will attack you the moment your opponent moves away)
Abyssal Stalker 03-08-07, 09:58 AM	Summons swarm lasts for Concentration +2 rounds. It has a range of close (25ft + 5/2 levels]. Once brought in to being you have to stay within close range of the swarm to maintain concentration. The swarm itself is uncontrolled to it's location except that it goes toward the closest target. This means if a 6th level druid casts a summons swarm 35ft sway it moves towards it's target and munches on them. That target cannot be more then 45ft away else the druid isn't in range to concentrate on the swarm. As a result the swarm only lasts another two rounds. If the druid casts a swarm on someone 15ft away and that person then runs 40ft away. After the swarm landed on the person. The person takes one round of damage then the swarm comes back and eats the druid. The druid then has to run from his own swarm and is likely to have to give up concentration. The rules to conjuration state that creatures summoned in can leave the range of the spell. The problem comes in that concentration has been ruled to only last out to the range of the spell. This is absolutely the rightful thing to do! :) I'm really tired of seeing ECL4 fights end up with an invisible caster concentrating on a swarm that could be on the other side of the world... And a fighter running from it, because he forgot his flaming greatsword to the other pants' pocket...
hogarth 03-08-07, 10:01 AM	The range at which you can concentrate on the swarm (basically 25ft + 5/2levels). So no casting and then moving far far away and letting the swarm do it's job. I think that was just one Elder's misreading of the rules. It's clear that Conjuration spells are an exception to the range requirements: Conjuration Each conjuration spell belongs to one of five subschools. Conjurations bring manifestations of objects, creatures, or some form of energy to you (the summoning subschool), actually transport creatures from another plane of existence to your plane (calling), heal (healing), transport creatures or objects over great distances (teleportation), or create objects or effects on the spot (creation). Creatures you conjure usually, but not always, obey your commands. A creature or object brought into being or transported to your location by a conjuration spell cannot appear inside another creature or object, nor can it appear floating in an empty space. It must arrive in an open location on a surface capable of supporting it. The creature or object must appear within the spell’s range, but it does not have to remain within the range. There was some discussion in the Courtroom thread, but I don't believe there was a consensus reached. There is a line in the psionics rules that states: If a target moves out of range, the power reacts as if your concentration had been broken. ...but a swarm is not the target of a Summon Swarm spell, it's the effect.
Erithmu 03-08-07, 10:05 AM	I think that was just one Elder's misreading of the rules. It's clear that Conjuration spells are an exception to the range requirements: There was some discussion in the Courtroom thread, but I don't believe there was a consensus reached.It was ... the ruling is from the Psi section on concentration, that if a target leaves the range then concentration ends. While I argued for the fact that the spell doesn't have a target, they called the swarm itself the target. Probably only going to see me swarming in the cavern map, and maybe the temple and sewer
Abyssal Stalker 03-08-07, 10:12 AM	It was ... the ruling is from the Psi section on concentration, that if a target leaves the range then concentration ends. While I argued for the fact that the spell doesn't have a target, they called the swarm itself the target. Probably only going to see me swarming in the cavern map, and maybe the temple and sewer It's quite obvious that the spellcaster is concentrating on the swarm, otherwise he wouldn't have anything that he is concentrating on.
McJarvis 03-08-07, 10:14 AM	If the target of the spell was the swarm itself, then you could only summon swarms that happened to be within the range of the spell.
hogarth 03-08-07, 10:19 AM	It was ... the ruling is from the Psi section on concentration, that if a target leaves the range then concentration ends. While I argued for the fact that the spell doesn't have a target, they called the swarm itself the target. Probably only going to see me swarming in the cavern map, and maybe the temple and sewer I can only find MWB's opinion on the issue in the Courtroom thread. Are you sure that Telin/NiQil/Sauro voted on it as well? As far as being overpowered goes, I'd agree that it's a powerful spell, but there's a trivial defense (a potion of Protection from Evil).
Erithmu 03-08-07, 10:23 AM	I can only find MWB's opinion on the issue in the Courtroom thread. Are you sure that Telin/NiQil/Sauro voted on it as well? As far as being overpowered goes, I'd agree that it's a powerful spell, but there's a trivial defense (a potion of Protection from Evil).I don't remember ... I'll let you take up that fight if you are so inclined. I only have a 12th grade level of ability in rules lawyering ... Working on my PhD in having fun in DnD so you can see where my interests lie.
TelinArtho 03-08-07, 10:50 AM	I had a strong opinion on the concentration matter until I realized it was just something in the psionics section that it spawned from. From that point on - I rescinded my opinion. To be clear - if you are looking for votes - I would say that Summon Swarm can be concentrated on as long as you have LOE, but you don't necessarily need to be in range.
templer10 03-08-07, 11:49 AM	want to see a fairly predictable outcome? come see Graashnak vruuk VS gakhnalak strongjawin the plaines here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11700811&postcount=651) comments welcome- on another note - iam still waiting for tactics from Agtarn Listay (Papapeperoni) so i can run his fight.
Erithmu 03-08-07, 11:55 AM	want to see a fairly predictable outcome? come see Graashnak vruuk VS gakhnalak strongjawin the plaines here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11700811&postcount=651) comments welcome- on another note - iam still waiting for tactics from Agtarn Listay (Papapeperoni) so i can run his fight. My only complain is not to the pitlord but the players ... why do the names have to look so darn close to each other ...
templer10 03-08-07, 11:58 AM	My only complain is not to the pitlord but the players ... why do the names have to look so darn close to each other ... OH MY GOD- tell me about it- i started the fight really late at night and was dead tired and had to check myself around 5 times to make sure i go the positions and initiative right becuase of the damn name
Abyssal Stalker 03-08-07, 12:12 PM	Well, they are both orcs, and orcs tend to have names that resemble each other. You know, like Gakhnalak and Graashnak. Or Orc#1, Orc#2 and Orc#3...
MindWandererB 03-08-07, 12:28 PM	Well, they are both orcs, and orcs tend to have names that resemble each other. You know, like Gakhnalak and Graashnak. Or Orc#1, Orc#2 and Orc#3... Oh, I should so do that next time. "Hi, I'm Orc #42!" Been done before... but not as a PC, methinks. If this ever happens again, you can call mine Strongjaw. I was highly amused by those bow attack rolls... I was thinking to just soften Graashnak up with one little True Strike, I wasn't counting on a crit! But then, I wasn't expecting to get shot from 5 range increments away, either. And to finish it with a max damage trip follow-up... I was thinking that fight could have been a little closer, but I guess not. Can't complain!
Zevox 03-08-07, 12:35 PM	Two other things: The penalties for entanglement (-2 -2 atrtack through -4 dex) were included - but so was +2 for being invisible (or should this be an AC modifier?) - if I understand this right, a hidden attacker get's his "invisible"-bonusses for all attacks of a full attack, correct me, if I'm wrong (with quote preferably :D). Yes, you are indeed wrong. Hiding =! invisible. Hiding just lets you hit an enemy without thier dex/dodge bonuses to AC. Invisibility is a special ability that specifically gives you +2 to attacks and negates those AC bonuses. And near as I can tell, it looks like you overlooked one of the entangle penalties, because it gives both -4 dex and -2 attack (for a total -4 on dex-based attacks), but Ihdald was getting attacks at his normal bonus. Zevox
Tellish_of_Ket 03-08-07, 12:53 PM	Still waiting for tactics from Abyssal. You still have time, no biggy there. Just sending a reminder is all. I can run the fight as soon as i recieve them. ToK
Abyssal Stalker 03-08-07, 01:20 PM	Still waiting for tactics from Abyssal. You still have time, no biggy there. Just sending a reminder is all. I can run the fight as soon as i recieve them. ToK Well, they have been sent. Here's hoping.
Sutro 03-08-07, 02:05 PM	Bah. I was hoping Gundmir was going to taste the joy of the e-ray again, but looks like Weapon's inactive. :( -Sutro
SauroGrenom 03-08-07, 05:50 PM	Are there any fights that need a pitlord? My fight was a surrender, and I can probably run another in place of it. Oh, and FYI to Erithmu and Macbrea, I posted the surrender in the battle thread.
Horatius 03-08-07, 05:52 PM	@Rauul: Tactics for Le Petit Guepe PM'd. Thanks for pitlording.
sonofzeal 03-08-07, 06:01 PM	@Mitza - tactics for monster battle PM'd. ...are Monster Battles generally harder or easier than gladiator battles at this level? I was looking through some of the options, and some of them are seriously scary. I wouldn't give good odds for pretty much anyone vs two Shocker Lizards, especially with that +11 Hide....
MitzaVolchenko 03-08-07, 06:07 PM	@Mitza - tactics for monster battle PM'd. ...are Monster Battles generally harder or easier than gladiator battles at this level? I was looking through some of the options, and some of them are seriously scary. I wouldn't give good odds for pretty much anyone vs two Shocker Lizards, especially with that +11 Hide.... Tacitcs received and fight will be running nowunless I get distracted. Welcome to my ongoing issue with EL=CR=ECL=LA and the falsehood that lies therein. Consider white dragon wyrmlings then try making a character of one and it will all become clear :)
MindWandererB 03-08-07, 06:08 PM	@Mitza - tactics for monster battle PM'd. ...are Monster Battles generally harder or easier than gladiator battles at this level? I was looking through some of the options, and some of them are seriously scary. I wouldn't give good odds for pretty much anyone vs two Shocker Lizards, especially with that +11 Hide.... It's about 50/50. And +11 hide only gets you so far in an open area. Speaking of reminders, I still need tactics from orsono. Welcome to my ongoing issue with EL=CR=ECL=LA and the falsehood that lies therein. Consider white dragon wyrmlings then try making a character of one and it will all become clear :) I wish you wouldn't say that. We don't treat those as the same, and we never have. A white wyrmling NPC is a lot easier to beat than a PC, which is why it has a CR of 2, an LA of +2, and an ECL of 5. I'd give even odds for 1 PC white wyrmling vs. 3 NPC ones any day.
False_Keraptis 03-08-07, 06:09 PM	Bah. I was hoping Gundmir was going to taste the joy of the e-ray again, but looks like Weapon's inactive. :( -Sutro Hah! Gundmir specializes in cutting down insolent kobolds! Look at his record vs. R'y: 2 and 1. Add in Weapon and he's batting 500 lifetime, which isn't half bad. Or maybe it's exactly half bad...
Tellish_of_Ket 03-08-07, 07:58 PM	Balrog Vs Undertaker Sadly, even at the extreme range penalties, a pair of arrows found their mark. ToK
sonofzeal 03-08-07, 08:13 PM	Gundmir vs Random Monster is here. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11710427&postcount=656) Two words - "total", "slaughter".
McJarvis 03-08-07, 08:23 PM	If anyone wants to see the most drug-crazed mule ever, check out how the Artificer of Gladius died to a EL 3 encounter here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=804918)
MitzaVolchenko 03-08-07, 08:33 PM	If anyone wants to see the most drug-crazed mule ever, check out how the Artificer of Gladius died to a EL 3 encounter here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=804918) Wow! Awesome...I want one for a pet...my Blackmoor barbarian is laughing her head off...ride the steppes charger?! never! I'll stick with my mule! BTW Hajj fried the Vargouilles here. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11699774&postcount=649)
sonofzeal 03-08-07, 08:43 PM	Wow! Awesome...I want one for a pet...my Blackmoor barbarian is laughing her head off...ride the steppes charger?! never! I'll stick with my mule! BTW Hajj fried the Vargouilles here. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11699774&postcount=649) Woot! I have a hard time imagining anyone who wouldn't auto-win vs the Vargouilles. In theory it's a save-or-die, but they lack any means of delivering an effective Coup de Grace, and that kiss won't take effect until after the fight. I guess that d% likes me. ^^
TheMagister 03-08-07, 08:46 PM	Oh, MAN. {laughs weakly} Donkeys on CRACK!
Tellish_of_Ket 03-08-07, 09:01 PM	Oh, MAN. {laughs weakly} Donkeys on CRACK! I guess i'm the only one who's gonna say, that the CR 3 mule is'nt that big of a deal. It's tough, sure, but by no means obtuse. Krunch killed a hound archon on his EL3 monster fight mock up, to which i've seen almost ALL other gladiators auto-surrender. It really depends on the build that's facing the templated creature. In this case, TAG probably wasn't the best suited against it and i'm sure that made it all the harder. Either way, gratz to MWB, on a unique and interesting monster build. ToK
McJarvis 03-08-07, 09:08 PM	I guess i'm the only one who's gonna say, that the CR 3 mule is'nt that big of a deal. It's tough, sure, but by no means obtuse. Krunch killed a hound archon on his EL3 monster fight mock up, to which i've seen almost ALL other gladiators auto-surrender. It really depends on the build that's facing the templated creature. In this case, TAG probably wasn't the best suited against it and i'm sure that made it all the harder. Either way, gratz to MWB, on a unique and interesting monster build. ToK Not best suited? He had no way to out maneuver it, & it was very resistant to all of his attacks. At least the hound archon doesn't have resistance to both the energy types that I deal damage via when magic missile isn't fast enough. Not to mention the mind-thrash that might as well have been a save-or-die spell ;) edit-> Though I can't complain too much-> it would have taken a +8 Will save to fend off the mind thrash, so TAG's inability to even damage the thing was a non-issue. The poor die roll vs the Mind thrash(phrenic) is the reason TAG died...not the other templates.
MitzaVolchenko 03-08-07, 09:10 PM	Woot! I have a hard time imagining anyone who wouldn't auto-win vs the Vargouilles. In theory it's a save-or-die, but they lack any means of delivering an effective Coup de Grace, and that kiss won't take effect until after the fight. I guess that d% likes me. ^^ Remove your dogs, paralyze you, both deliver CDG bites in the same round on the same initiative. Then it becomes three save or die rolls. Not bad odds for them. I am also not of the school that monsters should be horribly more powerful compared to the build. We don't re-roll pairings for normal gladiators just because one combatant has no way to affect the other. In this case they had a shot (not a great one, but not *that* horrible). Had one of the dogs failed, you would have been likely to at least lose allies out of it (wouldn't matter on 3rd fight, but I don't really pay attention to that either). Your tactics would have had yourunning for thie hills and summoning while they ate Fluffy :)
sonofzeal 03-08-07, 10:58 PM	Can someone doublecheck the rewards on both of my fights (the one Hajj was in and the one I pitlorded for Gundmir)? I know I messed up Gundmir's, and Hajj's look a little high - if that's what they're supposed to be I'm not going to complain, but I'd rather know now than have to change it later.
TheMagister 03-09-07, 12:18 AM	I began Matthis vs. Truls, and then decided I didn't wanna deal with the CoCo anymore tonight. I'll finish it over the weekend, most likely on Saturday. I'll see you guys then. I'm takin' a break for a couple days. Have fun! TM
MitzaVolchenko 03-09-07, 12:28 AM	I wish you wouldn't say that. We don't treat those as the same, and we never have. A white wyrmling NPC is a lot easier to beat than a PC, which is why it has a CR of 2, an LA of +2, and an ECL of 5. I'd give even odds for 1 PC white wyrmling vs. 3 NPC ones any day. We just have to agree to disagree on this one. Lots of people have put up the numbers. You just put how much LA (the answer is +6LA) on that mule while keeping it a CR3 monster? And it did what to the ECL4 character? I don't think CoCo handles the equations in anything like a fair manner. That is my opinion, I am entitled to it.
MindWandererB 03-09-07, 12:31 AM	Can someone doublecheck the rewards on both of my fights (the one Hajj was in and the one I pitlorded for Gundmir)? I know I messed up Gundmir's, and Hajj's look a little high - if that's what they're supposed to be I'm not going to complain, but I'd rather know now than have to change it later. Actually, Hajj's rewards are low. ECL 3 vs. CR 2 = 600 xp * 2 vargouilles * .75 ally penalty = 900 xp/gp.
MindWandererB 03-09-07, 12:39 AM	We just have to agree to disagree on this one. Lots of people have put up the numbers. You just put how much LA (the answer is +6LA) on that mule while keeping it a CR3 monster? And it did what to the ECL4 character? I don't think CoCo handles the equations in anything like a fair manner. That is my opinion, I am entitled to it.You are indeed. However, let me mention that when dealing with monsters/NPCs, ECL is always higher than CR, with the sole exception of most base CR 1-1/2, base 1 HD, character-classed, template-free NPCs. There's a reason why CR and ECL aren't the same thing; I am positive that if we balanced monster fights by ECL rather than CR, they would be a cakewalk nearly all the time.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-09-07, 01:16 AM	You are indeed. However, let me mention that when dealing with monsters/NPCs, ECL is always higher than CR, with the sole exception of most base CR 1-1/2, base 1 HD, character-classed, template-free NPCs. There's a reason why CR and ECL aren't the same thing; I am positive that if we balanced monster fights by ECL rather than CR, they would be a cakewalk nearly all the time. I'm just waiting for the tauric paragon awakened(realized) Iron Golems of a major titan bloodline with a ring of major spell storing (anit-magic field) at the ECL 20 monster fights. Then i'll consider things abusive. As it stands, i believe there isn't anything abusive in core. Not templates not anything. My personal opinion is if someone says "sour grapes", or calls something abusive or overpowerred, my response would be "well, u just didn't think hard enough to optimize your CoCo build." Keep in mind that this thread was once part of the Character Optimization thread. It was all about "optimizing" to the max. Min/max...min/max. Not, "oh, that's too strong, cuz i'm too stupid to think up anything better and can't deal with it, so we need to ban it". There are a lot of house-rules that i don't agree with, but were pushed through because we had some very good optimizers and the sub-optimizers couldn't deal with it. I've always been in the camp of the "epitome of the optimizer" and if something is really strong and powerful, then come up with tactics/concept to deal with it, rather than complain about it. I know VERY few ppl share that same point of few...which is too bad. It really helps open up the mind to think outside the box and come up with some original concepts. For me, it's more optimizing, and less nerfing, so long as everything is core and within both the raw and the spirit of the rules. I absolutely do not bend the rules even the slightest. I don't try to twist and interpret rules to suit my own needs. I always play fair and within the bounds of the game...but i do optimize. So, the next time something is encountered that you have to step back and say, "it's too powerful for me", i would hope it would encourage an individual to create a more optimal build rather than nerf. I know i'll get the "it's just fun for me" camp tearing a strip into me, then i say, don't complain when an optimize-friendly pitlord puts your rp-er through the ringer with a killer monster. Just chalk it up and keep having fun. I'm not single out anyone individually, or anyone in particular, it's just the tone i've been reading the last week or two that's all. My rant for the night is done....:) ToK
sonofzeal 03-09-07, 01:34 AM	Tellish, I'm sorta with you and sorta not. I agree in the purity of optimization, but I think once a build has been proven "broken", that it should be retired. In my gaming session, once I discovered how to use Handle Animal for ungodly power, I stopped putting it on my characters. Otherwise I, as a player, become a one-trick pony, and I have little motivation to find new powerful combinations. By retiring proven techniques, you force the serious optimizers to investigate new paths to true power. Handle Animal was proven, and nerfed. Mavening was proven, and nerfed. Gate was proven, and nerfed. Harvy has proven Blacklight, and is on the verge of getting it nerfed. Are these nerfs to give n00bs a chance, or to get the serious optimizers to find new approaches?
Abyssal Stalker 03-09-07, 01:36 AM	Balrog Vs Undertaker Sadly, even at the extreme range penalties, a pair of arrows found their mark. ToK Thanks for the run. It's not like this would be the first time he loses this way on the plains. At least I didn't spend too much expendables.
MindWandererB 03-09-07, 01:46 AM	There are a lot of house-rules that i don't agree with, but were pushed through because we had some very good optimizers and the sub-optimizers couldn't deal with it. I've always been in the camp of the "epitome of the optimizer" and if something is really strong and powerful, then come up with tactics/concept to deal with it, rather than complain about it.I don't think you're giving due credit here. It's not that "sub-optimizers" complained; it's because when one or two options are much better than anything else, you have a game where either you are a clone, or you lose. When you could get a Roc as an ally by ECL 8 or whatever, if that wasn't nerfed, then you either had a Roc or something equivalent (which meant you had Handle Animal as a class skill), or you lost. When you could be Reincarnated multiple times, and get racial modifiers over and over, then either you did that, or you lost. When spellcasters could dump their entire repertiore on a single fight, then either you were a straight or near-straight caster, or you lost. And so on. If the goal is to find what works the best, then congratulations. You win. Your completely legal Handle Animal ally, or your army of 20 HD undead, or whatever, is better than anyone else. Now we all go home and do something else, because there's no point playing this game anymore. Or we could play minor variations--can my character's Roc beat your character's Triceratops? Would it be better to be reincarnated over and over in this combination, or that one? We could play that game, but would it be fun? Not for me. Just look at the diversity in our character lists. Every single class is represented. Nearly every LA+0 race is represented. Characters with every base class except bard and soulknife are currently represented among the Greatly Renowned. Would that be possible without our house rules? I'll take this game over the open-optimizing one, thank you.
MitzaVolchenko 03-09-07, 01:58 AM	We could play that game, but would it be fun? Not for me. Just look at the diversity in our character lists. Every single class is represented. Nearly every LA+0 race is represented. Characters with every base class except bard and soulknife are currently represented among the Greatly Renowned. Would that be possible without our house rules? I'll take this game over the open-optimizing one, thank you. Heh...bard...great renown...that is a laugh...I scanned for other living bards...sadly it appears Sybil is doomed to failure tags and singing solos :P Actually I probably would abuse the credit free wands as it would mean that I had the ability to wand some of the few truly useful spells bards get. The house rules do serve the purpose you suggest, and we do have to have some. However, I don't think we are equal opportunity nerfing things...which bugs me. This discussion does not belong in this thread, however, so I'll drop it and have another chuckle at the thought of a great renown bard...hmmm...great renown bard...grrr...now I am thinking again (incidentally, I probably could have pulled it off with Sliver as a bard pre 3FC).
Tellish_of_Ket 03-09-07, 02:05 AM	Nope. There were still TONS of options open. And i think there still are. As for the Roc guy, he was beaten by just a plain old druid. And the roc only ever won 1 fight. It was the str-domain/dest-domain, improved crit falchion with other dmg bonuses that usually did it. When spellcasters could dump their entire repertiore on a single fight, then either you were a straight or near-straight caster, or you lost.Straight casters spell dumping for auto-wins? Nope, they were beaten by tactically sound straight non-caster builds consitently. And it was proven. But we were seeing just WAY too many caster builds, something had to be done. The reincarnation was never used, or ever intended to be used. Ppl just laughed when i suggested to ban it from CoCo. A legit reincarnation build would never happen in TT. Maven was my mock at the new gp earning system that i said it was broken(breakable) from inception and needed work. Trust me, i'm not complaining....far from it. I'm just seeing other posts go on "it's too powerful" rants and i just feel i need to chime in with....it could be worse. It's not about playing minor variations MWB, it really isn't. What we use now is so full of possibilities, i still haven't explored or used all my ideas of core-optimized builds let alone digging through UA. I'm a psionic retard, so i don't anticipate i'll ever convert or go that route. Fact is, some are more suited for this environment, and some aren't. I'll take this game over the open-optimizing one, thank you.Trust me, fun is my first priority and for everyone to enjoy it as well. I just like to encourage free spirit and free thinking. Fairness should rule above all. ToK {le sigh} sometimes i think i'm misunderstood. lol ;)
Zevox 03-09-07, 02:05 AM	Heh...bard...great renown...that is a laugh...I scanned for other living bards...sadly it appears Sybil is doomed to failure tags and singing solos :P Theres at least two other Bards in the arena right now, actually. McJarvis' Cupid de Locke is a straight Bard, and my Annalina Vale is a multiclasser. Pittbull also had a Pixie with a Pixie Bard cohort way back when, and I'm sure if he returns he'll see some action once the upper leagues thaw. Zevox
sonofzeal 03-09-07, 02:08 AM	Heh...bard...great renown...that is a laugh...I scanned for other living bards...sadly it appears Sybil is doomed to failure tags and singing solos :P Actually I probably would abuse the credit free wands as it would mean that I had the ability to wand some of the few truly useful spells bards get. The house rules do serve the purpose you suggest, and we do have to have some. However, I don't think we are equal opportunity nerfing things...which bugs me. This discussion does not belong in this thread, however, so I'll drop it and have another chuckle at the thought of a great renown bard...hmmm...great renown bard...grrr...now I am thinking again (incidentally, I probably could have pulled it off with Sliver as a bard pre 3FC). Actually, I have an idea on how to totally break the Bard class... it'll require lvl6 or so and a few custom items though, so I'll sit on it until I have more credits. :cool:
Tellish_of_Ket 03-09-07, 02:09 AM	Actually, I have an idea on how to totally break the Bard class... it'll require lvl6 or so and a few custom items though, so I'll sit on it until I have more credits. :cool: But here is the CoCo (optimizing) challenge. Make it viable and playable right from the get go. That's the tough one. ToK
MitzaVolchenko 03-09-07, 02:10 AM	But here is the CoCo (optimizing) challenge. Make it viable and playable right from the get go. That's the tough one. ToK So consider yourself challenged...get abard to great renown starting at ECL3 and going up without spending oodles of credits to do it :P
Yitzi 03-09-07, 02:13 AM	rauul - tactics for lord lorian VS Lightwolf Phoenixstar - Archer Vs Archer fight have fun. I also sent mine, so as soon as you're ready to run it you can. However, there is one addendum I would like to make to what I sent, if you have not begun yet, I'm sending it now.
MysticMonk2005 03-09-07, 02:16 AM	Yeah, you're probably right. Hood made a helluva showing, though. 84 damage in three attacks. You just can't really complain about that. I add another instance of shaking my fist at Ego Whip. :banghead: That power should really be a Will save for no damage. Hasn't that been errata'd yet? :tantrum: And now u know what stopped most of Pard's winning sprees.(That and I was fighting the person who pitlorded a lot of Pard's winning fights.) But yea Ego Whip is IMO slightly overpowered.(This coming from the guy that thinks wizards are weak)
sonofzeal 03-09-07, 03:03 AM	So consider yourself challenged...get abard to great renown starting at ECL3 and going up without spending oodles of credits to do it :P *crunches numbers* The problem with my build is the Expendables limit, and the price of higher level Bard spell scrolls. Without that, I could do it at lvl3, although there'd be a chance of failure. Unless I get houseruled, I'm confident that I can pretty much guarantee wins by lvl5, but it'd only become economically viable around lvl7, when he can start suplimenting the scrolls with his own spells. And, looking over the various options, I suddenly have a massive desire to make this an Ironman character. There's a few counters, but I think those can be worked around. Hmmm.....
Zevox 03-09-07, 03:07 AM	And, looking over the various options, I suddenly have a massive desire to make this an Ironman character. There's a few counters, but I think those can be worked around. Hmmm..... Eh, I think you're a bit late for that, unless you want to cough up 35 credits plus whatever you need in custom items this week. The Iron Man starts next week. Zevox
sonofzeal 03-09-07, 03:10 AM	Eh, I think you're a bit late for that, unless you want to cough up 35 credits plus whatever you need in custom items this week. The Iron Man starts next week. Zevox I know.... :weep:
MysticMonk2005 03-09-07, 03:11 AM	Theres at least two other Bards in the arena right now, actually. McJarvis' Cupid de Locke is a straight Bard, and my Annalina Vale is a multiclasser. Pittbull also had a Pixie with a Pixie Bard cohort way back when, and I'm sure if he returns he'll see some action once the upper leagues thaw. Zevox Don't forget the most famous CoCo bard of all. CANDY For the longest time free posters of her were given out to all starting characters!(Wish I still had mine >.<)
Zevox 03-09-07, 03:25 AM	Don't forget the most famous CoCo bard of all. CANDY For the longest time free posters of her were given out to all starting characters!(Wish I still had mine >.<) Eh, I was talking about current characters, actually. Zevox
MysticMonk2005 03-09-07, 03:36 AM	well u mentioned Pittbull, so I figured Candy deserves alittle spot light too.
False_Keraptis 03-09-07, 03:38 AM	Nice mule, MWB. Remind me to get the villagers together and pass out the pitchforks and torches. Seriously, though it's pretty scary for an EL 3, I wouldn't say it's too unreasonable. Just compare it to some of the meaner CR 3 critters in the SRD, like the dire wolf, or the howler.
McJarvis 03-09-07, 07:17 AM	Characters with every base class except bard and soulknife are currently represented among the Greatly Renowned. I think I could make a solo-er bard with great renown. Not sure about soul knife. edit-> Though I didn't mention it, I do agree with MWB's sentiment...though I note that expendibles are still so important that almost every non-NiQil character requires a caster level of some sort
waywreth 03-09-07, 08:36 AM	I began Matthis vs. Truls, and then decided I didn't wanna deal with the CoCo anymore tonight. I'll finish it over the weekend, most likely on Saturday. I'll see you guys then. I'm takin' a break for a couple days. Have fun! TM Thanks for the update! Enjoy the weekend.
Yitzi 03-09-07, 08:37 AM	*crunches numbers* The problem with my build is the Expendables limit, and the price of higher level Bard spell scrolls. Most bard spells are wizard spells as well (and a few are cleric spells), you can cast those from the normal cost scrolls.
McJarvis 03-09-07, 08:42 AM	Most bard spells are wizard spells as well (and a few are cleric spells), you can cast those from the normal cost scrolls. Nod...in fact, one of the advantages to being a bard is that some of the scrolls are cheaper than the wizard version(ex-> scroll of heroism)
Yitzi 03-09-07, 08:45 AM	And now u know what stopped most of Pard's winning sprees.(That and I was fighting the person who pitlorded a lot of Pard's winning fights.) But yea Ego Whip is IMO slightly overpowered.(This coming from the guy that thinks wizards are weak) What's so powerful about it? And how did it do any straight damage? From what I see, it does CHA damage only.
hogarth 03-09-07, 08:48 AM	What's so powerful about it? And how did it do any straight damage? From what I see, it does CHA damage only. The point is that a character with 6 charisma is only 6 points of damage away from losing vs. Ego Whip. If your Cha goes to zero, you're unconscious until further notice.
McJarvis 03-09-07, 08:50 AM	The point is that a character with 6 charisma is only 6 points of damage away from losing vs. Ego Whip. If your Cha goes to zero, you're unconscious until further notice. indeed-> and cha doesn't go up with level, but ego whip damage does.
Abyssal Stalker 03-09-07, 09:10 AM	indeed-> and cha doesn't go up with level, but ego whip damage does. And every Ego Whip does charisma damage, no matter what your Will save is. The save is only for half damage. And that is probably the biggest reason why people think it's overpowered.
Maraxus 03-09-07, 09:32 AM	And every Ego Whip does charisma damage, no matter what your Will save is. The save is only for half damage. And that is probably the biggest reason why people think it's overpowered. I think the "free" dazing for 1 round does it's part, too. A character usually either has low charisma, or the charisma is quite essential for the characters power (Wilder, Sorcerer, Bard, somewhat Paladin). ... Okay, unless you are a beautyful pixie named Noko... But anyway, in most cases, the first 7pp ego whip probably is quite save-or-die-esque. You fail, then you take roughly 5 cha-damage. next turn another 2 or 3, even is you make your save. At this point, 50% of the characters are allready dead or doomed. And even, if your opponent is a psion/wider, it's not likely, you killhim in 1 round.
TelinArtho 03-09-07, 10:46 AM	And as has been mentioned before - just don't make Cha a dump stat... In just about all of my characters, I make an effort to supply at least 2 points to Cha to bring him or her up to 10, more if I can spare it. And if your will save is poor - Ego Whip is just one of many spells that can spell your end...
Hirumajoe 03-09-07, 10:50 AM	Lets consider the possible counters to Ego Whip: Immunity: Either to mind affecting powers or ability damage. Mindblank (not available at low level) 9th level Slayer (not possible at low level) Be a Construct, Plant, Undead, etc Globe of invulnerability (available to wizards/sorcs) Untargetable: Have Total Concealment or cover On the right maps, tactics and a good hide check Sniping (High Hide) Blacklight (3rd level) Invisibility (2nd level) Greater Invisibility (4th level) Stay beyond range or out of LOS, depends on map and manueverability. Healing: Body Purification (1 round cast, 3rd level, heals 2+augmentation) Lesser Restoration (3 round cast, 1st-2nd level, heals 1d4) Restoration (3 round cast, 4th level, heals all) Looks like the best bet is have some form of Minblank. After that total concealment. Although that can be countered with touchsight. Still, potions of blacklight might be worth it. Sniping would be viable, except that he's most likely know where you are due to the DC 0 listen check and run up with a touchsight. Other option is an alpha strike build. Hit him even harder before. Like Hood (except when the Psion doesn't have a spare 30 pp to drop on Vigor...). But yeah, you need a method of dealing with Ego whip by the time ECL 11 rolls around, since psions with 35 pp (not including int bonuses) per fight and 3d4 cha damage ego whips aren't pretty...
SauroGrenom 03-09-07, 11:44 AM	There's a spell called Spell Immunity that would also work. That's a cleric spell. Also there are a couple powers or feats that offer decreased ability damage. I cannot recall what they are. I'm thinking Instant Fortress. There are several sources of spell resistance that can also help against this kind of power. Edit: Also don't forget that Mirror Image defeats targeted powers like this.
hogarth 03-09-07, 12:04 PM	There's a spell called Spell Immunity that would also work. That's a cleric spell. Also there are a couple powers or feats that offer decreased ability damage. I cannot recall what they are. I'm thinking Instant Fortress. There are several sources of spell resistance that can also help against this kind of power. Not everyone has the same interpretation of psionic/magic transparency (cat SRD.txt | sed 's/spell/power/g' > PsionicSRD.txt). Personally, I don't think Spell Immunity would work. Intellect Fortress or the feat Mental Resistance would work fine, though.
SauroGrenom 03-09-07, 12:07 PM	Spell Immunity would clearly work. This is obviously part of the magic/psionics transparency. There's nothing gray about that at all.
TelinArtho 03-09-07, 12:26 PM	So consider yourself challenged...get abard to great renown starting at ECL3 and going up without spending oodles of credits to do it :P I've actually been working on a bard in my spare time... though I haven't yet had a character with great reknown... if I manage it with the bard, I will be very impressed with myself... I make no claims about not spending oodles of credits though (not that I tend to spend a lot to begin with...), but I figured I'd mention the approach of another bard sooner or later...
MitzaVolchenko 03-09-07, 01:00 PM	I've actually been working on a bard in my spare time... though I haven't yet had a character with great reknown... if I manage it with the bard, I will be very impressed with myself... I make no claims about not spending oodles of credits though (not that I tend to spend a lot to begin with...), but I figured I'd mention the approach of another bard sooner or later... About darned time! Though by the thime your new arrival is settled, Sybil will either be retired or no longer pure bard.
hogarth 03-09-07, 01:06 PM	About darned time! Though by the thime your new arrival is settled, Sybil will either be retired or no longer pure bard. This probably doesn't count (since he's more of an experiment than an actual character), but Balthazar Picsou (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11297743&postcount=1059) is another currently active pure bard who's (profitably) failing in the arena.
MitzaVolchenko 03-09-07, 01:09 PM	This probably doesn't count (since he's more of an experiment than an actual character), but Balthazar Picsou (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11297743&postcount=1059) is another currently active pure bard who's (profitably) failing in the arena. I sit corrected...can't imagine how I missed the duck err...elf. :P
Hirumajoe 03-09-07, 01:24 PM	Good point on the mental resistance and Intellect Fortress. Thats quite possibly enough of a reduction. Although in the case of IF you're spending just as much power points as he is on Ego Whips . Fortunately its an immediate action so you're not losing actions. As far as Spell Immunity goes, I think I agree with Sauro. It says to treat it as an unbeatable spell resistance (which we know there is transparency for). And it also will work on spell-like abilities explicitly, which psionics are all a subset of. You know a 3/day item of Spell Immunity at CL 8 might be worth the 34560 gp and 15 credit cost at around ECL 11 or 12. Heck, even a 1/day item for 11520 gp might be worth it. Hmm... I'm up against the Harvester. I choose Magic Missiles. I'm up against a Psion? I choose Ego Whip and Energy Missile. I'm up against Wizard on the 3rd fight of his 3FC, I choose his two low level save or die spells he has left...
Erithmu 03-09-07, 01:26 PM	At that point ... you run into dispel magic/psionics ... Those don't allow SR.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-09-07, 02:19 PM	@Hirumjoe: You are missing a lot of counters to ego whip. Otilukes sphere...buff in virtual safety a save-or-die spell of your own (magic jar, and you can have him ego-whip himself just for fun and spend his max pp so he has only status-quo pp for his next FC) greater mobility than the ego whipper ready to disrupt tactics counterspell (using dispel magic or greater dispel) Just a few extra's to keep in mind. I have a few others, but those are trade secrets. heheh ToK
Zevox 03-09-07, 02:20 PM	counterspell (using dispel magic or greater dispel) That doesn't work on Psionics. Theres no "counter-manifesting" mechanic for it to work like via transparency. Zevox
MindWandererB 03-09-07, 03:33 PM	Nod...in fact, one of the advantages to being a bard is that some of the scrolls are cheaper than the wizard version(ex-> scroll of heroism)Um, a wizard can use a bard's scroll of heriosm just fine. If it's an arcane scroll, it's on the wizard's spell list, and it's not from a prohibited school, no problem. Just like all those clerics running around with CL2 ranger-scribed Resist Energy scrolls. I think I could make a solo-er bard with great renown. Not sure about soul knife.Also note that the way I added up the classes, even one level of a class would count. No one has more then 2 levels of Fighter, for instance, and I don't think any GR claracters have more than that of barbarian, ranger, or paladin levels, either. If I'd made Gakhnalak a bard instead of a battle sorcerer (which was my next choice), he'd still be a fight away from GR right now.
McJarvis 03-09-07, 03:40 PM	Um, a wizard can use a bard's scroll of heriosm just fine. If it's an arcane scroll, it's on the wizard's spell list, and it's not from a prohibited school, no problem. Just like all those clerics running around with CL2 ranger-scribed Resist Energy scrolls. Also note that the way I added up the classes, even one level of a class would count. No one has more then 2 levels of Fighter, for instance, and I don't think any GR claracters have more than that of barbarian, ranger, or paladin levels, either. If I'd made Gakhnalak a bard instead of a battle sorcerer (which was my next choice), he'd still be a fight away from GR right now. If I ever decide to retire a character with great renown I'll make sure to give him a level of Soul knife & then retire him ;)
TelinArtho 03-09-07, 03:51 PM	@MWB - with regard to your quest, I do have a suggestion for Kervan: Sanctuary. If you need a few rounds of buffing, that one spell can be very useful in attaining it.
MindWandererB 03-09-07, 04:33 PM	@MWB - with regard to your quest, I do have a suggestion for Kervan: Sanctuary. If you need a few rounds of buffing, that one spell can be very useful in attaining it. That's a very good suggestion. I ignored it before because of the short duration, but it might well be worth it now. Thanks.
MindWandererB 03-09-07, 04:52 PM	Harbinger (templer10) vs. Ghashara (orsono) [ECL4, Cavern]
MitzaVolchenko 03-09-07, 04:59 PM	Harbinger (templer10) vs. Ghashara (orsono) [ECL4, Cavern] How can we have a surrender before tactics deadline?
TelinArtho 03-09-07, 05:00 PM	Deadline is 9pm GMT - which is 3 hours ago...
MitzaVolchenko 03-09-07, 05:02 PM	Deadline is 9pm GMT - which is 3 hours ago... Interesting...in that case this is the first time I have been on time with tactics in ages...the rules say the Pitlord can start runinng them on Saturday or post surrenders...that was probably my boggle...Saturday won't happen in my timezone for many hours to come :)
McJarvis 03-09-07, 05:04 PM	Deadline is 9pm GMT - which is 3 hours ago... Really? I always thought it was 5pm EST(which is what time it is now) Guess I'm lucky I always send them in on Thurs night!
MindWandererB 03-09-07, 05:06 PM	Deadline is 9pm GMT - which is 3 hours ago... Actually, it's only 1 hour ago. I don't wait that long--my time to run fights is on Thursdays and Fridays, and I mention in my pitlord profile that I have no time to wait. People know the rules--mostly, anyway. I admit that line about Saturday is misleading, but the precise deadline is mentioned in the prior sentence.
MitzaVolchenko 03-09-07, 05:07 PM	Actually, it's only 1 hour ago. I don't wait that long--my time to run fights is on Thursdays and Fridays, and I mention in my pitlord profile that I have no time to wait. People know the rules--mostly, anyway. I admit that line about Saturday is misleading, but the precise deadline is mentioned in the prior sentence. You have edit access...remove the misleading line.
MindWandererB 03-09-07, 05:11 PM	You have edit access...remove the misleading line. True. I'll do that. OH, CRAP! Just out of curiosity, I checked orsono's last active date--it was Feb. 20? I wondered how that was possible--and Ghashara was set active for FEBRUARY 7, not March. So never mind--it's a non-fight. Sorry, templer10.
templer10 03-09-07, 06:34 PM	True. I'll do that. OH, CRAP! Just out of curiosity, I checked orsono's last active date--it was Feb. 20? I wondered how that was possible--and Ghashara was set active for FEBRUARY 7, not March. So never mind--it's a non-fight. Sorry, templer10. any chance ill get some kind of action then? maybe monster fight? i can write tactics fast for it - i dont want to miss an active week especially since i have only 2 active charcters, not to mention it's annoying as hell to write 3 pages of tactics then end up with nothing
templer10 03-09-07, 06:49 PM	can i run a fight now with defult tactics or do i have to wait until saturday morning since if i dont do it today iam not sure when ill have time?
MindWandererB 03-09-07, 06:53 PM	any chance ill get some kind of action then? maybe monster fight? i can write tactics fast for it - i dont want to miss an active week especially since i have only 2 active charcters, not to mention it's annoying as hell to write 3 pages of tactics then end up with nothingI can't do it, but maybe someone else can. Tellish, maybe? You up for a monster fight? can i run a fight now with defult tactics or do i have to wait until saturday morning since if i dont do it today iam not sure when ill have time?The deadline is up, so you're entitled to run any fights with default tactics if you haven't gotten any others.
McJarvis 03-09-07, 07:11 PM	I have no idea how to make this monk vs hood. Do I use full hp for the first hd, or do I treat it like a NPC? What kind of abilities do I use? A 36 pt buy, a 25 pt buy, or just the abilities listed in the SRD?
Zevox 03-09-07, 07:23 PM	I have no idea how to make this monk vs hood. Do I use full hp for the first hd, or do I treat it like a NPC? What kind of abilities do I use? A 36 pt buy, a 25 pt buy, or just the abilities listed in the SRD? I would presume NPC rules apply - no full hp for 1st HD. Abilities... no clue. 36 pt or 25 pt buy would be CR+1 at least, given that the elite array is just a preset form of 25 pt buy, so neither of those. Nonelite array? Book stats? An Elder want to toss of an opinion here? Zevox
sonofzeal 03-09-07, 08:29 PM	Nyphanalith vs Sabra Marana is here. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11720995&postcount=662) Note - I'd origionally made Sabra attempt a strength check to escape the Entanglement even though it was pointless, before I realised that nothing in his tactics really depended on the ability to move, and with an Int of 23 I'm fairly sure Sabra could make the smart choice.
templer10 03-09-07, 08:45 PM	want to see a really predictable result? come see tyden rayn playing shoot the monk here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11720541&postcount=661)
MindWandererB 03-09-07, 08:59 PM	I would presume NPC rules apply - no full hp for 1st HD. Abilities... no clue. 36 pt or 25 pt buy would be CR+1 at least, given that the elite array is just a preset form of 25 pt buy, so neither of those. Nonelite array? Book stats? An Elder want to toss of an opinion here? Zevox Actually, monsters with PC levels are always assumed to use the elite array.
NiQil 03-09-07, 09:12 PM	want to see a really predictable result? come see tyden rayn playing shoot the monk here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11720541&postcount=661) Thanks for the run... And yes, my tactics will change, as I will get another power next level and can start pumping out Wild-Surged Crystal Shards for 3d6 damage before adding psionic shot before ever tapping the dorjes.
McJarvis 03-09-07, 09:25 PM	I don't think I'm gonna be able to generate that monk//run the hood fight with the sharpness of mind that I would like to tonight. I'll run it tomorrow night if I get the chance(I should be able to..nothing planned that can't be moved) ~McJ
Sutro 03-09-07, 10:51 PM	Scallas was a bard/barbarian with a losing record that I actually liked pretty well; I'll probably recraft him to be a bit more successful. He didn't do too badly for my first effort but he needs an overhaul.
MindWandererB 03-10-07, 03:13 AM	I was just reading Rubicanti's tactics vs. Maya, and spotted that TM wants him to "flurry touch." As near as I can figure, that's not an option, since touch attacks are not unarmed strikes. He could use normal unarmed strikes, but then the touch would be expended if he missed, and he'd have to hit Maya's normal AC. Otherwise, he only gets one touch per round.
Abyssal Stalker 03-10-07, 03:17 AM	I would presume NPC rules apply - no full hp for 1st HD. Abilities... no clue. 36 pt or 25 pt buy would be CR+1 at least, given that the elite array is just a preset form of 25 pt buy, so neither of those. Nonelite array? Book stats? An Elder want to toss of an opinion here? Zevox I've done all my NPCs with PC classes using the array 15,14,13,12,10,8 because someone told me to use that in the tavern. And according to my understanding, that doesn't increase their CR. An NPC human fighter 9 is a CR9 encounter.
False_Keraptis 03-10-07, 03:55 AM	@Rauul: Tactics for Fnorri sent by PM. Sorry to take so long.
Horatius 03-10-07, 04:18 AM	@Rauul: I see that you've posted only my tactics ammendments on the fight LPG vs Tamis; I meant those only as ammendments - please use the buff routine and contingencies in my original tactics.
TheMagister 03-10-07, 07:02 AM	I was just reading Rubicanti's tactics vs. Maya, and spotted that TM wants him to "flurry touch." As near as I can figure, that's not an option, since touch attacks are not unarmed strikes. He could use normal unarmed strikes, but then the touch would be expended if he missed, and he'd have to hit Maya's normal AC. Otherwise, he only gets one touch per round. Oh, come on now. That's slicing the baloney a little thin, don't you think? "So, what do you hit your opponent with when you punch him?" "Uh...my hand?" "GREAT! And what about when you deliver a touch spell?" "Uh...my...my...hand?" "WOW!" This comes down to the method of delivery, MWB. What weapon is Rubicanti using to deliver his Hammer touch attack? His natural weapon. What is his natural weapon? An unarmed strike. [Ref: pg. 41 PHB, unarmed strike: A monk's unarmed strike is treated both as a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells or effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons (such as the magic fang or magic weapon spells).] When using flurry of blows, what can a monk flurry with? Unarmed strikes, and special monk weapons. AH! And if what you propose is the case: Why have we advocated and allowed a flurry touch attack to start a grapple, eh? [Ref: pg. 156 PHB, Step 2: Grab: You make a melee touch attack to grab the target.] Why're you scurred of a 1d8 touch attack? :) TM
templer10 03-10-07, 07:36 AM	True. I'll do that. OH, CRAP! Just out of curiosity, I checked orsono's last active date--it was Feb. 20? I wondered how that was possible--and Ghashara was set active for FEBRUARY 7, not March. So never mind--it's a non-fight. Sorry, templer10. any chance ill get some kind of action then? maybe monster fight? i can write tactics fast for it - i dont want to miss an active week especially since i have only 2 active charcters, not to mention it's annoying as hell to write 3 pages of tactics then end up with nothing I can't do it, but maybe someone else can. Tellish, maybe? You up for a monster fight? so any chance some elder or someone will step up and give me some monster fight?
Horatius 03-10-07, 08:43 AM	I'd be willing to run it. I was planning on helping out for the IM anyway, and this would be a good warm-up. If you send me tactics today I'll run it by tomorrow (I'm on GMT).
templer10 03-10-07, 09:10 AM	I'd be willing to run it. I was planning on helping out for the IM anyway, and this would be a good warm-up. If you send me tactics today I'll run it by tomorrow (I'm on GMT). i will - later today (going out just now) but you need to roll on the monster table and tell me what my knowladge tells me about it - and do we need to get approved by an elder or something?
Macbrea 03-10-07, 10:22 AM	I was just reading Rubicanti's tactics vs. Maya, and spotted that TM wants him to "flurry touch." As near as I can figure, that's not an option, since touch attacks are not unarmed strikes. He could use normal unarmed strikes, but then the touch would be expended if he missed, and he'd have to hit Maya's normal AC. Otherwise, he only gets one touch per round. Actually, rule changed in 3.5. Holding the Charge If you don’t discharge the spell in the round when you cast the spell, you can hold the discharge of the spell (hold the charge) indefinitely. You can continue to make touch attacks round after round. You can touch one friend as a standard action or up to six friends as a full-round action. If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges. If you cast another spell, the touch spell dissipates. Alternatively, you may make a normal unarmed attack (or an attack with a natural weapon) while holding a charge. In this case, you aren’t considered armed and you provoke attacks of opportunity as normal for the attack. (If your unarmed attack or natural weapon attack doesn’t provoke attacks of opportunity, neither does this attack.) If the attack hits, you deal normal damage for your unarmed attack or natural weapon and the spell discharges. If the attack misses, you are still holding the charge. But you are partially, right, it does have to be delivered as a melee attack in order to use flurry. You may not flurry touch attacks as it's not part of the description of the flurry ability.
TheMagister 03-10-07, 10:48 AM	Truls vs. Matthis is up. Congrats to the winner! TM
TheMagister 03-10-07, 10:49 AM	But you are partially, right, it does have to be delivered as a melee attack in order to use flurry. You may not flurry touch attacks as it's not part of the description of the flurry ability. Then how is it that we flurry to start a grapple? Starting a grapple requires a melee touch attack.
Macbrea 03-10-07, 11:03 AM	It appears faq answer to that one is: Can a monk make disarm, sunder, and trip attacks during her flurry of blows? What about grapple checks? What about bull rushes, overruns, or other special combat Maneuvers? As long as every attack is made with one of the monk’s special weapons (that is, weapons allowed as part of a flurry), the monk can perform any special attack that takes the place of a normal attack. She’s free to disarm, sunder, trip, and grapple to her heart’s content. She couldn’t bull rush or overrun (since those don’t use special monk weapons), nor could she aid another (which requires a standard action) or feint (which requires a move action). Which seems to indicate since you are using a monk weapon you may deliver touch attacks. So, I am going to run it as touch attacks may be made.
Horatius 03-10-07, 11:59 AM	i will - later today (going out just now) but you need to roll on the monster table and tell me what my knowladge tells me about it - and do we need to get approved by an elder or something? @ templer10: Knowledge roll (Harbinger has no relevant knowledge skills): two large monsters. @anyone: Any problem with me running a monster fight for Harbinger, as MWB suggested?
TheMagister 03-10-07, 12:15 PM	I don't know the specifics of the situation, but if MWB suggested it, it's better than even odds that it's okay. {No, I'm not sucking up.}
MitzaVolchenko 03-10-07, 01:15 PM	I don't know the specifics of the situation, but if MWB suggested it, it's better than even odds that it's okay. {No, I'm not sucking up.} LOL...he is often right but not always :P
TheMagister 03-10-07, 01:23 PM	LOL...he is often right but not always :P Hence the "better than even odds" choice of words.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-10-07, 02:09 PM	It appears faq answer to that one is: Can a monk make disarm, sunder, and trip attacks during her flurry of blows? What about grapple checks? What about bull rushes, overruns, or other special combat Maneuvers? As long as every attack is made with one of the monk’s special weapons (that is, weapons allowed as part of a flurry), the monk can perform any special attack that takes the place of a normal attack. She’s free to disarm, sunder, trip, and grapple to her heart’s content. She couldn’t bull rush or overrun (since those don’t use special monk weapons), nor could she aid another (which requires a standard action) or feint (which requires a move action). Which seems to indicate since you are using a monk weapon you may deliver touch attacks. So, I am going to run it as touch attacks may be made. Actually that's incorrect. Nothing of what you quoted indicates touch attacks. He can flurry while holding a charge, but they must be regular attacks, not touch attacks. ToK
TheMagister 03-10-07, 03:01 PM	It appears faq answer to that one is: Can a monk make disarm, sunder, and trip attacks during her flurry of blows? What about grapple checks? What about bull rushes, overruns, or other special combat Maneuvers? As long as every attack is made with one of the monk’s special weapons (that is, weapons allowed as part of a flurry), the monk can perform any special attack that takes the place of a normal attack. She’s free to disarm, sunder, trip, and grapple to her heart’s content. She couldn’t bull rush or overrun (since those don’t use special monk weapons), nor could she aid another (which requires a standard action) or feint (which requires a move action). Which seems to indicate since you are using a monk weapon you may deliver touch attacks. So, I am going to run it as touch attacks may be made. @Tellish What part of "As long as every attack is made with one of the monk's special weapons (that is, weapons allowed as part of a flurry) the monk can perform any special attack that takes the place of a normal attack" doesn't cover the special attack "melee touch attack"? I mean, if a monk can flurry to start a grapple (which requires melee touch attacks) why (to your mind) couldn't she flurry to touch an enemy with a touch spell? They're both touch attacks, and use the exact same mechanic and method of delivery (which is the monk's unarmed strike). Also, there's that section under touch attacks that states that the caster can hold the charge indefinitely, but if the caster touches anything, even unintentionally, the touch spell/power discharges. So, what's the difference between saying, "I flurry touch," and "I flurry to touch to start a grapple, and intentionally fail my grapple check to start a grapple, thus 'unintentionally' discharging the touch spell that I've been holding." ?
Tellish_of_Ket 03-10-07, 03:06 PM	@Tellish What part of "As long as every attack is made with one of the monk's special weapons (that is, weapons allowed as part of a flurry) the monk can perform any special attack that takes the place of a normal attack" doesn't cover the special attack "melee touch attack"? I mean, if a monk can flurry to start a grapple (which requires melee touch attacks) why (to your mind) couldn't she flurry to touch an enemy with a touch spell? They're both touch attacks, and use the exact same mechanic and method of delivery (which is the monk's unarmed strike). Also, there's that section under touch attacks that states that the caster can hold the charge indefinitely, but if the caster touches anything, even unintentionally, the touch spell/power discharges. So, what's the difference between saying, "I flurry touch," and "I flurry to touch to start a grapple, and intentionally fail my grapple check to start a grapple, thus 'unintentionally' discharging the touch spell that I've been holding." ? I can't find the evidence to support my claim at this moment. I do remember reading it somewhere in something or other. It was clear that if a monk/wiz wanted to use chill touch with flurry it would need to make regular damaging unarmed flurry attacks as part of it. Obviously since i can't find it right now, ur quote will have to stand, but it's still missing that key info of discharging touch-based spells. Flurry to grapple isn't the same. The touch attack is what's required to get a hold and start the grapple. It's part of the mechanic required to grapple. But i'll keep looking. ToK **EDIT...don't get me wrong. I'm not saying it doesn't make sense, it does. But i just didn't think it was in the game mechanics is all.
TheMagister 03-10-07, 03:10 PM	{friendly sarcasm} YES! Let us fly into the face of all logic and seek to disprove something that makes total sense! Such is the heart and soul of DnD! :rolleyes:
NiQil 03-10-07, 03:15 PM	Truls vs. Matthis is up. Congrats to the winner! TM About what I expected...too many spells to overcome. Ah well. Thanks for the run. One thing to correct...you have the rewards listed as if it was an ECL 4 fight....it is only ECL 3. So if you could fix that, that would be super.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-10-07, 03:23 PM	{friendly sarcasm} YES! Let us fly into the face of all logic and seek to disprove something that makes total sense! Such is the heart and soul of DnD! :rolleyes: I agree, it makes sense. I also remember reading it somewhere...but since i cannot find WHERE that is anymore, looks like i'm out to lunch. ToK
MindWandererB 03-10-07, 03:25 PM	@Tellish What part of "As long as every attack is made with one of the monk's special weapons (that is, weapons allowed as part of a flurry) the monk can perform any special attack that takes the place of a normal attack" doesn't cover the special attack "melee touch attack"? I mean, if a monk can flurry to start a grapple (which requires melee touch attacks) why (to your mind) couldn't she flurry to touch an enemy with a touch spell? They're both touch attacks, and use the exact same mechanic and method of delivery (which is the monk's unarmed strike). Also, there's that section under touch attacks that states that the caster can hold the charge indefinitely, but if the caster touches anything, even unintentionally, the touch spell/power discharges. So, what's the difference between saying, "I flurry touch," and "I flurry to touch to start a grapple, and intentionally fail my grapple check to start a grapple, thus 'unintentionally' discharging the touch spell that I've been holding." ?The difference is that a grapple uses your unarmed strike for all purposes. It deals unarmed strike damage, your base attack bonus for iterative attacks, and monks explicitly get to use their flurry with it. A trip can be performed with a weapon (like a flail), so a monk can use an unarmed strike with it. Same goes for sunders and disarms. However, unless you deliver the touch attack with an unarmed strike, you don't get to flurry. And to deliver it with an unarmed strike, you follow the rule Macbrea quoted (you have to hit normal AC, but you also do unarmed strike damage as a bonus). It has nothing to do with flying in the face of logic. Striking someone with a martial art move is a different animal than delivering a touch spell. And for the record, if you tried to deliver a touch spell with a grapple, I seem to recall reading somewhere that if you tried this, it would work only if the grapple check succeeded. Otherwise the spell was discharged to no effect. However, I'm pretty sure that was under the 3.0 rules (when a failed attempt at delivery by unarmed strike also wasted the spell).
TheMagister 03-10-07, 03:26 PM	About what I expected...too many spells to overcome. Ah well. Thanks for the run. One thing to correct...you have the rewards listed as if it was an ECL 4 fight....it is only ECL 3. So if you could fix that, that would be super. Whoops! I'll get right on it and edit here when I'm done. Back in a jiff.. Edit: Done!
templer10 03-10-07, 04:47 PM	@ templer10: Knowledge roll (Harbinger has no relevant knowledge skills): two large monsters. @anyone: Any problem with me running a monster fight for Harbinger, as MWB suggested? tactics for harbinger VS 2 large monsters sent - god i hope those arent swarms.
Horatius 03-10-07, 08:18 PM	Harbinger vs 2 large monsters is done! As a matter of interest, can monsters suffer delay penalties? These monsters definitely would have been better to try to ambush Harbinger. Wait and ambush would be consistent with their 'normal' tactics as well.
templer10 03-10-07, 08:24 PM	Harbinger vs 2 large monsters is done! As a matter of interest, can monsters suffer delay penalties? These monsters definitely would have been better to try to ambush Harbinger. Wait and ambush would be consistent with their 'normal' tactics as well. thanks for the run- and ill fix what need fixing
McJarvis 03-10-07, 10:47 PM	Yet another delay on the Hood fight. Darn those friends who call last-minute offering an African banquet! ;)
Macbrea 03-10-07, 11:56 PM	Ok, Rubicanti vs Maya in the city.
NiQil 03-11-07, 12:27 AM	Ok, Rubicanti vs Maya in the city. You need to add in the summary that Maya's horse died and will not be available for the rest of the cycle
Erithmu 03-11-07, 12:49 AM	Completed ToKHey ToK: just something that I thought of ... could you put somewhere that this was out of cycle. Maybe just a title line of something like "Miniquest/monster fight to join TAO, Out of Cycle"
Macbrea 03-11-07, 01:10 AM	You need to add in the summary that Maya's horse died and will not be available for the rest of the cycle It didn't die. it stabilized at -2 hps.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-11-07, 01:11 AM	Hey ToK: just something that I thought of ... could you put somewhere that this was out of cycle. Maybe just a title line of something like "Miniquest/monster fight to join TAO, Out of Cycle" Result of the Fight Owen wins! Owen gains 1800 xp and 1980 gp and entry in TAO. This is an Out-Of-Cycle Quest Owen Time Between Fights: 4 Prebuffs/Ongoing Effects: None Items Used: None Spells or Powerpoints Used: SL8 x/day Abilities Used: None Free Activity: None How's that?
Macbrea 03-11-07, 01:15 AM	I still to this date cannot figure out how people take out of cycle quests. Is that like.. Darn. I am 50gp short of my spiffy new armor of squeeginess. You mind I just add the gold? Oh. sorry. I need to take an out of cycle quest. So, as to not mess up my schedule.
Erithmu 03-11-07, 01:32 AM	@ToK: that works @MacBrea: That character is brand new and I would have been reset for the IMT anyways, so I just did the joining that way. Torel has been running fight cycles for quite some time now, and he is a heavy heavy crafter (I think maybe 600gp of his total gear has been bought). I don't like frozen Out of Cycle MQ ... but that is just personal caveat.
NiQil 03-11-07, 01:59 AM	I still to this date cannot figure out how people take out of cycle quests. Is that like.. Darn. I am 50gp short of my spiffy new armor of squeeginess. You mind I just add the gold? Oh. sorry. I need to take an out of cycle quest. So, as to not mess up my schedule. I'll give you a perfect example. Wildfire is about 300 gp short of the gold I need to be able to craft mithral full plate and a couple of other things. He just completed his cycle. Rather than start another cycle to get the funds for those items and have to wait three weeks, I can do an out of cycle miniquest to earn the money I need and then be able to craft the very next week.
MindWandererB 03-11-07, 03:13 AM	Ok, Rubicanti vs Maya in the city. I have several comments. 1) Rubicanti had no tactics to kill my horse, only to stun it, and then only on an AoO. He should be continuing to use Hammer instead. 2) There was no re-application of Vigor on Maya's part. 3) Manifesting Hammer provokes an AoO. All three are very possibly fight-affecting, especially in combination. Please correct.
Macbrea 03-11-07, 03:21 AM	I have several comments. 1) Rubicanti had no tactics to kill my horse, only to stun it, and then only on an AoO. He should be continuing to use Hammer instead. 2) There was no re-application of Vigor on Maya's part. 3) Manifesting Hammer provokes an AoO. All three are very possibly fight-affecting, especially in combination. Please correct. On 1, He has no ranged weapon and statement that says, "B) the Ground Attack – Meaning Maya on foot and Horse using defend trick. Move to prevent flanking situations (Tumble!). Manifest metaphysical weapon on Rubi's unarmed strike. Manifest Hammer from the dorje and touch the horse, then flurry the light warhorse first (+9/+9 for 1d6+1+1d8 dmg vs. normal AC) and repeat until it dies. Turn to Maya and begin to light her up with touch attacks until she dies.' I took that to mean. Am in hand to hand with no way to deal ranged damage as stun horse and beat til dead. On 2, your tactic said if fight is close reapply vigor. It wasn't. On 3, 'Dorjes use the power trigger activation method, so manifesting a power from a dorje is usually a standard action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity.' So, no AoO.
Rauul 03-11-07, 03:23 AM	Fnorri the Miser (False_Keraptis) vs. Charles Ponzi (UserNamer) the Archer battle (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11723540&postcount=665)... one sided thanks to my cursed dice..
MindWandererB 03-11-07, 03:24 AM	On 1, He has no ranged weapon and statement that says, "B) the Ground Attack – Meaning Maya on foot and Horse using defend trick. Move to prevent flanking situations (Tumble!). Manifest metaphysical weapon on Rubi's unarmed strike. Manifest Hammer from the dorje and touch the horse, then flurry the light warhorse first (+9/+9 for 1d6+1+1d8 dmg vs. normal AC) and repeat until it dies. Turn to Maya and begin to light her up with touch attacks until she dies.' I took that to mean. Am in hand to hand with no way to deal ranged damage as stun horse and beat til dead. On 2, your tactic said if fight is close reapply vigor. It wasn't. On 3, 'Dorjes use the power trigger activation method, so manifesting a power from a dorje is usually a standard action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity.' So, no AoO. Okay, 3 I'll give you. As for 2, I said this: "If the fight is close (i.e. we're not in a situation where one of us can't hurt the other), renew Vigor from dorje" We were not in such a situation, so I should have done so. And as for 1, Maya was never on foot, so that tactic does not apply.
False_Keraptis 03-11-07, 03:31 AM	Fnorri the Miser (False_Keraptis) vs. Charles Ponzi (UserNamer) Hmm... It's not showing up for me; are you sure it was posted right? Yes, I have been sitting here refreshing every half hour or so as I work through another bleak Minnesota night.
Macbrea 03-11-07, 03:35 AM	Okay, 3 I'll give you. As for 2, I said this: "If the fight is close (i.e. we're not in a situation where one of us can't hurt the other), renew Vigor from dorje" We were not in such a situation, so I should have done so. And as for 1, Maya was never on foot, so that tactic does not apply. Sorry, he has no tactic for if he has all weapons sundered. So, I am forced to improvise to the flavor of is tactics. I did brought him back to his tactical wants.
MindWandererB 03-11-07, 03:37 AM	Sorry, he has no tactic for if he has all weapons sundered. So, I am forced to improvise to the flavor of is tactics. I did brought him back to his tactical wants. Actually, he did have a tactic for if I played keep-away--it turns out I didn't need to sunder anything. He wanted to use Skate and try to keep up. That was his tactical want.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-11-07, 03:37 AM	And as for 1, Maya was never on foot, so that tactic does not apply. Not trying to stick my nose where it doesn't belong, but that was quite a shock to me as well from reading. I had to quickly scroll back and triple read the tactics. lol. ouch! ToK
Tellish_of_Ket 03-11-07, 03:38 AM	Hmm... It's not showing up for me; are you sure it was posted right? Yes, I have been sitting here refreshing every half hour or so as I work through another bleak Minnesota night. Edit your settings and reduce your posts/page number. I have it set to 40 and never experience any bugs. Some ppl need to tune it down to like 20 or so before the battles thread opens up. ToK
Rauul 03-11-07, 04:02 AM	Hmm... It's not showing up for me; are you sure it was posted right? Yes, I have been sitting here refreshing every half hour or so as I work through another bleak Minnesota night. thats cause i tried to post it 2/3 asleep... sorry.. Le Petit Guepe (Horatius) vs. Tamis Ruhl (NiQil) : ECL 3 Arena Archer battle here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11723489&postcount=664) and with that... good night...
Rauul 03-11-07, 04:03 AM	Edit your settings and reduce your posts/page number. I have it set to 40 and never experience any bugs. Some ppl need to tune it down to like 20 or so before the battles thread opens up. ToK acually i posted the wrong one... sorry
MitzaVolchenko 03-11-07, 04:34 AM	Not trying to stick my nose where it doesn't belong, but that was quite a shock to me as well from reading. I had to quickly scroll back and triple read the tactics. lol. ouch! ToK Actually, he did have a tactic for if I played keep-away--it turns out I didn't need to sunder anything. He wanted to use Skate and try to keep up. That was his tactical want. So I read through the tactics and the fight. In the latter part of TM's tactics there is a statement regarding the crystal shard attacks and using the sling which has clearly been destroyed. Rubi has decent INT and WIS scores, does have tactics to atack the horse to keep Maya close. I see nothing wrong with the improv as run since it was an extension of the tactics that TM submitted. Additionally, the horse had full attacked him. His AC is pretty darned good, but which should a charcter with a grain of intelligence and no ranged option left do? Let his opponent ride away out of reach and be decimated? No. What if Maya stays in melee? Let the horse take 3 chances for 20's each round? No. That was a reasonable extension of tactics without adding anything not already in tactics somewhere. Unreasonable would be adding a flying grapple of Maya followed by an attempt to pin and choke to death. Vigor might be a reasonable argument, though I don't see it making a ton of difference as by the time it would have been applicable, the figh would not be what I would consider close.
MindWandererB 03-11-07, 04:55 AM	So I read through the tactics and the fight. In the latter part of TM's tactics there is a statement regarding the crystal shard attacks and using the sling which has clearly been destroyed. Rubi has decent INT and WIS scores, does have tactics to atack the horse to keep Maya close. I see nothing wrong with the improv as run since it was an extension of the tactics that TM submitted.The one reference TM made to using the sling was if Maya was levitating. That's it. More importantly, I see no need to improvise at all. There is no part of Rubicati's tactics that were rendered invalid by the circumstances. In melee against a mounted Maya, he wanted to use Hammer on her. If Maya was trying to avoid melee, he wanted to use Skate and try to keep up. I see nothing in the circumstances that would merit improvisation. Heck, he never should have drawn the sling in the first place--he didn't want to use it, he wanted to race. I don't mind losing, but I'd like to lose to the tactics that my opponent actually wrote. Nothing is preventing them from being followed, so I'm asking Macbrea to please do so.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-11-07, 05:04 AM	That was a reasonable extension of tactics without adding anything not already in tactics somewhere. Unreasonable would be adding a flying grapple of Maya followed by an attempt to pin and choke to death. I think the issue MWB is pointing out is that there wasn't anything going wrong with TM's tactics at the time to warrant any kind of improvisation. ToK
Zevox 03-11-07, 11:30 AM	I still to this date cannot figure out how people take out of cycle quests. Is that like.. Darn. I am 50gp short of my spiffy new armor of squeeginess. You mind I just add the gold? Oh. sorry. I need to take an out of cycle quest. So, as to not mess up my schedule. Hows this for a reason to take out-of-cycle MQs? You want to obtain a handle animal ally, which requires a miniquest. However, said ally is useless unless you train it afterwards. So if you did the quest in-cycle, unless it just so happened to be your third fight of the cycle, you'd have at least one fight where the ally was useless. Take the quest out-of-cycle and you can spend a full activity or three teaching it the tricks necessary. Thats what I did with Ceilia when she got her Hipogriff mount. Zevox
Horatius 03-11-07, 12:02 PM	Le Petit Guepe (Horatius) vs. Tamis Ruhl (NiQil) : ECL 3 Arena Archer battle here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11723489&postcount=664) and with that... good night... @Rauul: Some problems: You haven't linked rolls, so I can't check the effects of these mistakes. 1. Magic Weapon does give me +1 to damage with my weapon. 2. Shield of Faith does stack with Shield - one is a shield bonus, the other is a deflection bonus. 3. You didn't heal me! My tactics said to heal if my hp drops below 15 - what happened there?
Rauul 03-11-07, 12:26 PM	@Rauul: Some problems: You haven't linked rolls, so I can't check the effects of these mistakes. 1. Magic Weapon does give me +1 to damage with my weapon. 2. Shield of Faith does stack with Shield - one is a shield bonus, the other is a deflection bonus. 3. You didn't heal me! My tactics said to heal if my hp drops below 15 - what happened there? 1) ok + damage not +hit.. 2) i miss read.. 3) they were lost in the 2 sets of tactics... will do the heals 4) will also roll the 3 crits i just noticed in the dice roller for tamis.. the rolls are linked now.. will fix when i get back..
TheMagister 03-11-07, 12:28 PM	The one reference TM made to using the sling was if Maya was levitating. That's it. More importantly, I see no need to improvise at all. There is no part of Rubicati's tactics that were rendered invalid by the circumstances. In melee against a mounted Maya, he wanted to use Hammer on her. If Maya was trying to avoid melee, he wanted to use Skate and try to keep up. I see nothing in the circumstances that would merit improvisation. Heck, he never should have drawn the sling in the first place--he didn't want to use it, he wanted to race. I don't mind losing, but I'd like to lose to the tactics that my opponent actually wrote. Nothing is preventing them from being followed, so I'm asking Macbrea to please do so. Just for the record, I actually asked for Macbrea to make decisions like this: Some tactics can fit multiple situations. Please don't take their separate groupings as three different and self-contained sets of tactics. If a certain tactic fits in better in a certain situation (for instance, if Maya starts levitating off of her horse after a charge), do the no-brainer and move to the most applicable set of tactics. Improvisation is certainly appreciated. Just try to be smart (within Rubi's capabilities, of course). Mac knew that Rubi knew that if he let Maya get away here, then there'd be a very real possibility of not being able to fire up the most desired form of offense (because there'd be no way to even harry Maya from a distance). Stunning and killing the horse was a much better tactical choice, especially after seeing Maya's tactic first-hand (sunder the bow and ride away, draw another ranged weapon, and it gets sundered...gee, I wonder what comes next?). He made a pretty standard decision, which happens when unforeseen situations come up: he fell back on another part of my tactics that fit the situation better. If it hadn't worked out and Maya had gotten away, then he could've switched to the "race" tactics (he'd've had to!). Anyway, thanks for the run, Mac. TM
templer10 03-11-07, 12:31 PM	@Rauul: Some problems: You haven't linked rolls, so I can't check the effects of these mistakes. 1. Magic Weapon does give me +1 to damage with my weapon. 2. Shield of Faith does stack with Shield - one is a shield bonus, the other is a deflection bonus. 3. You didn't heal me! My tactics said to heal if my hp drops below 15 - what happened there? i think the rolls are here (http://www.hwx.it/wizards.com/dice.php?sid=1212)
MitzaVolchenko 03-11-07, 02:22 PM	You haven't linked rolls, so I can't check the effects of these mistakes. Just as an aside, online rollers are not required for anything but quests and the determination of monster type in monster fights. Haven't even read to see if this hasany bearing on this, but it is something that you should know. If I am pressed for time and the roller is taking too long to refresh, I skip it and go to the dice bag of doom. Even when I am using an online roller, it is the CoCo roller and I may or may not rememberto link them. You can always go the roller and click sessions. That will let you browse for your fight assuming it is in the CoCo roller.
MindWandererB 03-11-07, 03:18 PM	Just for the record, I actually asked for Macbrea to make decisions like this: Mac knew that Rubi knew that if he let Maya get away here, then there'd be a very real possibility of not being able to fire up the most desired form of offense (because there'd be no way to even harry Maya from a distance). Stunning and killing the horse was a much better tactical choice, especially after seeing Maya's tactic first-hand (sunder the bow and ride away, draw another ranged weapon, and it gets sundered...gee, I wonder what comes next?). He made a pretty standard decision, which happens when unforeseen situations come up: he fell back on another part of my tactics that fit the situation better. If it hadn't worked out and Maya had gotten away, then he could've switched to the "race" tactics (he'd've had to!). Anyway, thanks for the run, Mac. TMWell, for what it's worth, I think this is bogus. Why write tactics at all? Just tell the pitlord, "Improvise to the best if your ability. Do the optimal thing in any given situation." This is what we have tactics for. There was no part of your tactics that failed or required improvisation. Yes, killing the horse was a much better choice, but it wasn't your choice. You had explicit tactics for preventing Maya from getting away (stunning the horse with an AoO), and explicit tactics for what to do if she did (use Skate to give chase). Neither tactic was followed. There was nothing unforeseen that required improvisation. So his bow was sundered--the bow he didn't want to use anyway. Why would the elimination of an option he wasn't planning to use force him to change tactics? I feel very much like I was up against two tacticians instead of one, one of which had the benefit of knowing how the fight was going and could invent new tactics on the fly. That's more than a little unfair.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-11-07, 03:37 PM	Just for the record, I actually asked for Macbrea to make decisions like this: Mac knew that Rubi knew that if he let Maya get away here, then there'd be a very real possibility of not being able to fire up the most desired form of offense (because there'd be no way to even harry Maya from a distance). Stunning and killing the horse was a much better tactical choice, especially after seeing Maya's tactic first-hand (sunder the bow and ride away, draw another ranged weapon, and it gets sundered...gee, I wonder what comes next?). He made a pretty standard decision, which happens when unforeseen situations come up: he fell back on another part of my tactics that fit the situation better. If it hadn't worked out and Maya had gotten away, then he could've switched to the "race" tactics (he'd've had to!). Anyway, thanks for the run, Mac. TM But RUBI didn't now....that's MWB's point. It's up to rubi to play rubi, not the pitlord. I strongly and wholeheartedly disagree with such improvisations. Especially in the face of a tactic that is still continuing to work for the gladiator. This is no reason to change it. ToK
TheMagister 03-11-07, 03:58 PM	Some tactics can fit multiple situations. Please don't take their separate groupings as three different and self-contained sets of tactics. If a certain tactic fits in better in a certain situation (for instance, if Maya starts levitating off of her horse after a charge), do the no-brainer and move to the most applicable set of tactics. Improvisation is certainly appreciated. Just try to be smart (within Rubi's capabilities, of course). Why did you both ignore this? I put it in there for a reason. I could rewrite that particular sentence like this: "If a certain tactic fits in better in a certain situation (for instance, if Maya sunders both my ranged weapons and shows that she's gonna try to outrun me on Calabash), do the no-brainer and move to the most applicable set of tactics." ...and so he did. I did include tactics for how I wanted to deal with Calabash if he became a problem. However, since I can't personally be there to say "Oh, ok. Impliment them now!", I asked Mac to "do the no-brainer" for me. As he said, Rubi's a pretty smart cupcake all on his own. Reduced to no ranged weapons, taking out the horse was the next logical thing to do. TM
Tellish_of_Ket 03-11-07, 04:51 PM	It's not up to the pitlord to make the decision of "what's working better" or not. It's up to Rubi. Rubi's plan was still working effectively. ToK
TheMagister 03-11-07, 04:54 PM	It's not up to the pitlord to make the decision of "what's working better" or not. It's up to Rubi. Rubi's plan was still working effectively. ToK While I understand where you're coming from, I just don't agree. My plan was getting my ranged weapons systematically destroyed and leaving me with no options in that area. Rubi would cease to be "effective" in about six seconds. :) TM
Tellish_of_Ket 03-11-07, 04:58 PM	While I understand where you're coming from, I just don't agree. My plan was getting my ranged weapons systematically destroyed and leaving me with no options in that area. Rubi would cease to be "effective" in about six seconds. :) TM Not really. You had viable tactics to chase him down in that event. I'm just saying that the pitlord adaptation was nowhere to be seen in your tactics, and completely turned the fight to a one-sided event. That's all i'm saying. I'm saying that, that is a dangerous area for pitlords to enter when adapting tactics. I've always felt that adapting tactics were to be made in a neutral fashion. This wasn't the case this time, or at least i don't think so. Others may disagree. I mean, it's just a philosophy, but either way, i feel the greater issue here is that rubi's tactics were working quite fine. Just because Mac can see the future and the eventual demise of rubi because of Maya's tactics, doesn't give him the authority to change rubi's tactics to a winning situation. Just my opinion. ToK
MindWandererB 03-11-07, 05:16 PM	While I understand where you're coming from, I just don't agree. My plan was getting my ranged weapons systematically destroyed and leaving me with no options in that area. Rubi would cease to be "effective" in about six seconds. :) TMYeah, this is the main point where I disagree, too. Having your ranged weapons be destroyed is a moot point if you had no intention to use them, anyway. If Maya had sundered his ranged weapons and then levitated, then by all means, I agree with an improvisation, because your tactic would be impossible. But since nothing prevented him from doing exactly what you said to do, I just don't see it.
sonofzeal 03-11-07, 05:28 PM	Isn't there a guideline out there somewhere that says that Pitlord improvisation shouldn't be to the benifit of the person who's tactics were breaking down?
Zevox 03-11-07, 05:29 PM	Isn't there a guideline out there somewhere that says that Pitlord improvisation shouldn't be to the benifit of the person who's tactics were breaking down? No - in fact, thats the point of it. MWB and Tellish's argument though is that TM's tactics didn't break down, so there was no need to improv. Zevox
Horatius 03-11-07, 07:44 PM	Just as an aside, online rollers are not required for anything but quests and the determination of monster type in monster fights. Haven't even read to see if this hasany bearing on this, but it is something that you should know. If I am pressed for time and the roller is taking too long to refresh, I skip it and go to the dice bag of doom. Even when I am using an online roller, it is the CoCo roller and I may or may not rememberto link them. You can always go the roller and click sessions. That will let you browse for your fight assuming it is in the CoCo roller. Thanks, I did know this. It's just that I would have immediately double checked to see if the mistakes had any impact before posting if the rolls had been linked originally. Still, thanks for the heads-up.
SauroGrenom 03-12-07, 12:21 AM	I forget. Do competence bonuses stack? Or is that circumstance bonuses?
MindWandererB 03-12-07, 12:36 AM	I forget. Do competence bonuses stack? Or is that circumstance bonuses? It's circumstance, as long as the circumstances are different. Two magics that make you blend into the background better won't stack toward your Hide bonus, for instance, but one such might stack with another circumstance, like the light shining in your opponent's eyes.
Zevox 03-12-07, 12:37 AM	I forget. Do competence bonuses stack? Or is that circumstance bonuses? Circumstance do I'm certain (else Druid/Ranger bonuses with their animal companions wouldn't stack with MW whistles, and I know they do). Competence I'm not sure - I'll see if I can find that. Edit: Bleh, I seem to be unable to find anything about what bonuses stack with themselves. Sorry. Zevox
templer10 03-12-07, 07:06 AM	anyone 2 busy to run his fight? iam bored and got time to run 1 more.
Zevox 03-12-07, 07:16 PM	Anyone heard from Etiquette_Gnome lately? His profile says hes been on within the last day, but I've not seen hide nor hair of him around here since before pairings, and the roller (which, correct me if I'm wrong, I believe he uses) indicates he hasn't started his fight yet. I know theres another day yet, but I get a little worried when Pitlords I don't know for certain always get fights done just a little late appear to have disappeared come Monday, especially when the fight is as simple as the one he has this week... Zevox
Sjiggie 03-12-07, 07:28 PM	If I can get the tactics of both players before tommorow 3pm (GMT) I can run the fight if Etiquette_Gnome doesn't show up by then. Sjiggie
Rauul 03-12-07, 07:38 PM	Le Petit Guepe (Horatius) vs. Tamis Ruhl (NiQil) : ECL 3 Arena Archer battle here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11723489&postcount=664) and with that... good night... 24 rounds of your viewing pleasure... Nothing changed.. much
Horatius 03-12-07, 07:52 PM	Le Petit Guepe (Horatius) vs. Tamis Ruhl (NiQil) : ECL 3 Arena Archer battle here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11723489&postcount=664) and with that... good night... 24 rounds of your viewing pleasure... Nothing changed.. much @Rauul: quick read shows you're still only healing me once each time: my tactics say to heal me up over 20 hp.
Rauul 03-12-07, 10:14 PM	Lord Lorian (templer10) vs. Lightwolf Phoenixstar (Yitzi) ECL 3 Arena View it here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11723422&postcount=663)
McJarvis 03-12-07, 10:24 PM	I've posted the stats on the half-giant monk vs Hood. I'll do the setup of the battle now & complete it tomorrow when I have time. Sorry for the close-to-deadline nature of all of this..I'm dead tired.
templer10 03-12-07, 10:28 PM	Lord Lorian (templer10) vs. Lightwolf Phoenixstar (Yitzi) ECL 3 Arena View it here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11723422&postcount=663) ALthrough i won in the end I am sorry to say I found some mistakes in the fight. First, My dorja of enlarge energy ray is augmented to manifester level 2 so it does 2d6 DMG each hit NOT 1d6 dmg like you did. so you need to roll additional dmg for rounds – 4, 5, 8, 11 Second- you mention every time lighwolf has partial cover and by the map i really cant see it. third – I specified that I am using energy ray (electricity) from the dorja, it has +3 to hit against targets wearing metal armor which lightwolf has (mithral chain shirt) - while i saw at your comments you noticed that - you didnt add it to the calculations of hit/miss- so it means that I also hit at round 6 with a roll of 8 + 9 against touch AC 15. so you need to roll dmg for that round as well. Fourth- you disregarded I get +1 to dmg each time iam in point blank range since it also add dmg to shots from dorja, so you need to add 1 point of dmg for rounds 4,5,6,8,11 He is probably dead after all that added dmg but if he isn’t – then Fifth- Why didn’t I chase him at rounds 7 and 9? I only said to attempt to refocus if I am doing nothing productive- my first priority per the tactics is to shoot him, preferably at base range. Sixth- why didn’t I attack at round 10 since I was in range? (if I was in range or could get to it) Seventh- iam not a 100% on this (At least not on core only( but I remember seeing that spells that use attack rolls to hit and do dmg can get a critical so you need to roll a critical confirmation for round 11. (if it got to round 11 which it shouldn’t have). eigth- didnt notice i can only do court connections with 5 ranks in the craft skills but i still get teh free activity gold without the court connctions which is 57G. would appricate the fixes and modification of number of charges used if necesery. ty
Zevox 03-12-07, 10:31 PM	Well, still no sign of EG as yet... much as I hate bailing on someone like this, I've forwarded my tactics to Sjiggie. If EG shows back up with a completed, we'll take his, but I'd like to make sure the thing gets run, especially since Arden is on an errand for the EHTC this week, so I need to know if hes successful for sending action info to Guildlords. @ Macbrea - If you don't mind, please forward Razorfang's tactics to Sjiggie as well, and we can be certain the fight will be run, one way or another. Zevox
Rauul 03-12-07, 11:00 PM	@Rauul: quick read shows you're still only healing me once each time: my tactics say to heal me up over 20 hp. Ok added the rounds.. and the clw charges.. Please note.. next time send one set of tactics.. cause to be 100% honest.. when i have 2+ for 1 charater it messes me up.. (23 hps when the other guy is doing 4-11 and your can drop below 15 to one arrow... really adds up) Still a good showing..
Rauul 03-12-07, 11:17 PM	ALthrough i won in the end I am sorry to say I found some mistakes in the fight. First, My dorja of enlarge energy ray is augmented to manifester level 2 so it does 2d6 DMG each hit NOT 1d6 dmg like you did. so you need to roll additional dmg for rounds – 4, 5, 8, 11 Second- you mention every time lighwolf has partial cover and by the map i really cant see it. third – I specified that I am using energy ray (electricity) from the dorja, it has +3 to hit against targets wearing metal armor which lightwolf has (mithral chain shirt) - while i saw at your comments you noticed that - you didnt add it to the calculations of hit/miss- so it means that I also hit at round 6 with a roll of 8 + 9 against touch AC 15. so you need to roll dmg for that round as well. Fourth- you disregarded I get +1 to dmg each time iam in point blank range since it also add dmg to shots from dorja, so you need to add 1 point of dmg for rounds 4,5,6,8,11 He is probably dead after all that added dmg but if he isn’t – then Fifth- Why didn’t I chase him at rounds 7 and 9? I only said to attempt to refocus if I am doing nothing productive- my first priority per the tactics is to shoot him, preferably at base range. Sixth- why didn’t I attack at round 10 since I was in range? (if I was in range or could get to it) Seventh- iam not a 100% on this (At least not on core only( but I remember seeing that spells that use attack rolls to hit and do dmg can get a critical so you need to roll a critical confirmation for round 11. (if it got to round 11 which it shouldn’t have). eigth- didnt notice i can only do court connections with 5 ranks in the craft skills but i still get teh free activity gold without the court connctions which is 57G. would appricate the fixes and modification of number of charges used if necesery. ty your Dorja is Illegal as you payed 1500 for a augmented ML 2 that should cost you 3000 (see prison thread for details) hence why i dropped it to an ML 1 augmented As for the rest i will go through and adjust as needed.. you missed 1 time with the ray i believe.. (rolls are posted) Enjoy your win and get your charater legal..
MitzaVolchenko 03-13-07, 01:44 AM	Yeah, this is the main point where I disagree, too. Having your ranged weapons be destroyed is a moot point if you had no intention to use them, anyway. If Maya had sundered his ranged weapons and then levitated, then by all means, I agree with an improvisation, because your tactic would be impossible. But since nothing prevented him from doing exactly what you said to do, I just don't see it. @MWB, ToK His later tactics did mention use of his sling. The character is not a stupid automaton. The last time I objected to someone improvising for my opponent though their tactics said nothing about laying an ambush, my character got walked into an ambush in spite of being fully intelligent enough to not do so. I was told that superior movement meant that I would be in delay and to lump it. I appreciate the heck out of a pitlord that doesn't treat an intelligent character like they are STUPID. Macbrea did not go out on any great long limbs to treat the character like it wasn't an idiot. He went a lot less far out than my pitlord who was praised for it while I was told to stop whinging. So, end result, Macbrea did what pitlords are supposed to which is run the fight by the spirit of the tactics, not the absolute spelled out letter. Read my signature. I will be very disappointed if that fight gets a re-run that it surely does not deserve.
Rauul 03-13-07, 02:10 AM	Fnorri the Miser (False_Keraptis) vs. Charles Ponzi (UserNamer) ECL 4 Temple View it here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11723540&postcount=665).. Poor dwarf got ganged up on
Vathelokai 03-13-07, 03:23 AM	@Mitza @Maraxus Sorry to be that guy again, but I won't be able to finish my fight in time. If It goes into week two, I can run it tomorrow. If someone else who can run the fight to Mitza's exacting standards (i.e. correctly) wants to pick it up and finish it, go right ahead. Just send me a pm. Here's where it is so far... Durin (Maraxus) vs. Zwei und'Vierzig (MitzaVolchenko) : Vathelokai [City] Ready for Mar 7 [Fight 2] Levelup Durin Gender and Race: Male Deep Dwarf Size and Type: Medium-sized humanoid Height and Weight: 4'5", 170 lbs. Age: 45 years Alignment: Neutral good (changed) ECL: Barbarien 2 / Psi-Warrior 3 / Warmind 1 (ECL6) Experience: 15.802/21.000 Attributes STR 17 (+3) [10 pts] [16 Base, +1 lvlup] [+4 in rage, +2 Expansion, +2 personal super.] DEX 12 (+1) [04 pts] [12 Base] [-2 Expansion] CON 16 (+3) [06 pts] [14 Base, +2 Racial] [+4 in rage, +2 personal super.] INT 14 (+2) [06 pts] [14 Base] WIS 16 (+3) [10 pts] [16 Base] CHA 06 (-2) [00 pts] [08 Base, -2 Racial] Miscellaneous Statistics Hit Points: 55 [+12 in rage, +6 perso. super.] [6 HD] [12 (Barbarien) + (4.5 (Psi-Warrior) x 3) + (6.5 (Barbarien)) + (5.5 (Warmind)) + (6 HD x +3 Con)] Armor Class (Normal): 21 [+2 when using heavy shield, or +4 when using Force screen, -2 in rage, +4 vs giant, -2 Expansion, -4 Reckless Offence] [10 Base, +1 Dex, +9 Armor, +1 Deflection] Armor Class (Touch): 12 [-2 in rage, +4 vs giant, -2 Expansion, -4 Reckless Offence] [10 Base, +1 Dex, +1 Deflection] Armor Class (Flat-Footed): 21 [+2 when using heavy shield, or +4 when using Force screen, -2 in rage, +4 vs giant, -2 Expansion, -4 Reckless Offence] [10 Base, +1 Dex, +9 Armor, +1 Deflection Initiative: +1 [+1 Dex] Base Attack Bonus: +5 [+2 (Barbarien), +2 (Psi-Warrior), +1 (Warmind)] Grapple: +8 [+2 in rage, +1 perso super, +5 Expansion] [+5 BAB, +3 Str] Speed (Land): 20 ft [20 Base, +10 Barbarien, but not in heavy armor] Weight Carried: 125.00 lbs, medium encumbrance [0-76 (Light), 77-153 (Medium), 154-230 (Heavy)] Saves Fortitude: +12 [+2 in rage, +1 perso. super, +3 against poison, +3 against spells and spell-likes] [+3 Con, +3 (Barbarien), +3 (Psi-Warrior), +2 (War-Mind), +1 Enhancement] Reflex: +5 [+3 against spells and spell-likes] [+1 Dex, +1 Psi-Warrior, +2 Warmind, +1 Enhancement] Will: +5 [+2 in rage, +3 against spells and spell-likes] [+3 Wis, +1 Psi-Warrior, +1 Enhancement] Melee Attacks Greataxe +9, 1d12+4, (20/x3), Slashing [+3 damage in rage, +1.5 perso super, Expansion 3d6+6] [+3 Str, +5 BAB, +1 Enhancement] Flail +8, 1d8+3, (20/x2), Bludgeoning,1, 2 [+2 damage in rage, +1 perso super, Expansion 2d6+4] [+3 Str, +5 BAB] Guisame +9, 2d4+4, (20/x3), Reach 10 ft, Slashing,1 [+3 damage in rage, +1.5 perso super, Expansion 2d6+6] [+3 Str, +5 BAB, +1 MW] Armor Spikes +8, 1d6+3, (20/x2), Piercing [+2 damage in rage, +1 perso super, Expansion 1d8+4] [+3 Str, +5 BAB] [+1 higher ground vs. medium sized or smaller, when mounted, +2 Attack Reckless Offence +2 attack in rage, +1 attack perso super, +1 attack vs. Orcs and Goblinoids] Ranged Attacks Mighty Composite Longbow +7, 1d8+3, (20/x3), Range 110 ft, Piercing [2d6+3 Expansion] [+1 Dex, +5 BAB, +1 Enhancement] Net +2, none, Range 10 ft (max),3 [+1 Dex, +5 BAB, -4 unproficient] [-2 Expansion, +1 attack vs. Orcs and Goblinoids] 1: May be used to make trip attempts. 2: +2 on check to disarm opponent 3: Entangles Opponent Special Attacks & Abilities -See feats! -Dwarven Stability: +4 vs. trip attempts. -Darkvision 90ft. -Light Sensitivity: Dazzled in bright sunlight or daylight spell. -Rage 1/day -Chain of personal Superiority: +2 insight to Str & Con, 3 times per day -Uncanny Dodge: Dex to AC, even when flat-footed or attacker invisible. Powers Readied Psi-Warrior (ML 3) Level 1: Vigor, Force Screen, Expansion Warmind (ML 1) Level 1: Empty Mind Power Points Available Per Fight: 4 This fight: 7 pp [10 Total Power Points / 3, rounded up] Total Power Points: 10 [(3 Psi-Warrior, +4 Wis, +2 Warmind, +1 Wis] Manifester Level: 3 / 1 Feats Combat Expertise,Lvl 1: Attack to AC Improved Trip,Psi-Warrior 1: +4 on trip, Free follow up attack Knock Down,Lvl 3: free trip after 10 damage hits. (Trip modifier +7, with Expansion +12, +2 more in rage) Psionic Weapon,Psi-Warrior 2: +2d6 when expending Psi. Focus Reckless Offense,Level 6: +2 Attack for -4 AC Skills Total Skill Points: 42 [30 Barbarien, 12 Psi-Warrior, 4 Warmind] Languages: Common, Dwarf, Giant, Undercommon [2 Racial, 2 Int] Armor Check Penalty: -5 (-7) [-5 Armor, (-2 Shield)] Appraise: +2 [+2 on stone/metal] [+2 Int] Concentration: +9 [+3 Con, 6 Ranks (2 Psi-Warrior, 4 War-Mind)] Handle Animal: +0 [-2 Cha, 2 Ranks (Barbarien)] Hide: -4 [+1 Dex, 0 Ranks, -5 ACP] Knowledge (Arcana): +3 [+2 Int, 1 Ranks (BarbarienCC)] Knowledge (History): +4 [+2 Int, 2 Ranks (BarbarienCC)] Knowledge (Nature): +3 [+2 Int, 1 Ranks (BarbarienCC)] Knowledge (Psionics): +10 [+2 Int, 8 Ranks (Psi-Warrior)] Knowledge (Religion): +3 [+2 Int, 1 Ranks (BarbarienCC)] Knowledge (The Planes): +3 [+2 Int, 1 Ranks (BarbarienCC)] Listen: +7 [+3 Wis, 4 Ranks (Barbarien)] Move Silently: -4 [+1 Dex, 0 Ranks, -5 ACP] Ride: +9 [+1 Dex, 6 Ranks (Barbarien), 2 ranks (Psi-Warrior)] Spot: +6 [+3 Wis, 3 Ranks (BarbarienCC)] Prefight Actions -Bring Sleipnir, the horse -Get Psionic Focus Equipment Worn and Carried Basic Outfit [0 lbs] [0 gp] +1 Full Plate with armor spikes [60 lbs][2700 gp] Heavy wooden shield [10 lbs][7 gp] Flail [5 lbs][8 gp] MW Guisarme [12 lbs][309 gp] MW Greataxe [12 lbs][320 gp] MW Composite Mighty+3 Bow [3 lbs][700 gp] 60 Arrows [0.15 lb each = 9 lbs] [0.05 gp each = 3 gp] 2 Nets [6 lb each = 12 lbs] [20 gp each = 40 gp] Cloak of Resistance +1 [1 lb] [1000 gp] Ring of Protection +1 [0 lb] [2000 gp] Cold Iron Dwarven Waraxe [8 lb] [60 gp] Silver Dwarven Waraxe [8 lb] [120 gp] Expendable Items Powerstones: (Same number = same stone) 1: Biofeedback [ML 2] [50 gp] 1: Precognition, Defensive [ML 2] [50 gp] 2: Prescience, Offensive [ML 1] [25 gp] 3: Metaphysical Weapon [ML 2] [50 gp] Potions: Prot. from good [CL 1] [50 gp] Prot. from evil [CL 1] [50 gp] Bless weapon [CL 2] [100 gp] Total: 400 Max total (ECL2 x 50): 1250 gp Equipment on horse Mil. Sattle [30 lbs][20 gp] Banded mail Barding [70 lbs][1000 gp] Equipment at Home Leather Barding [30 lbs][40 gp] 10 torches [10 lb] [0.1 gp] 4 pint oil [4 lb] [0.4 gp] Flint and steel [8 lb] [1 gp] Tindertwig [- lb] [1 gp] Backpack [2 lb] [2 gp] ... coins of gold (see acounting) Allies Maximum CR per ally: CR 1 Maximum ECL per ally: ECL 3 Maximum CA of allies per fight: CA 3 Naglhuf: Just as Sleipnir (but unequiped, while Sleipnir is active) [Formerly known as "Horse 1"] - Stonecunning: +2 racial bonus on Search checks to notice unusual stonework. A dwarf who merely comes within 10 feet of unusual stonework can make a Search check as if he were actively searching, and a dwarf can use the Search skill to find stonework traps as a rogue can. A dwarf can also intuit depth, sensing his approximate depth underground as naturally as a human can sense which way is up. - Weapon Familiarity: Dwarves may treat dwarven waraxes and dwarven urgroshes as martial weapons, rather than exotic weapons. -Cast force screen vs. martial enemies, else vigor. -Circle the arena counter-clockwise, charce on sight. Use greataxe. Durin was a young dwarf in an underground village, and was decided to become a sage, despide his good physical condition. Then, one day, the village was threatened by a group of tribe giants. The first attack almost compleatly wiped out the village's defence. The dwarves were waiting for the second attack to surely wipe them out, but the rescuers came in time. A group of dwarven adventurers with great psychic poweres and the ability to activate great pysical power in combat. They awaited the giant's at the gates and killed them all. Durin was impressed and decided to ignore the way, that was choosen for him and went of to learn their way of mental power and war. 1: with Kon (Ned) vs Carandol (EG) + Zax (Telin): defeat [ +337 XP] [ +337 gp] 2: Tweak (Vathelokai): defeat [ +225 XP] [ +225 gp] 3: Kelsat (NiQil): victory [ +675 XP] [ +675 gp] 4: Atalan (NiQil): victory [ +675 XP] [ +675 gp] 5: Vaden Wick (NiQil): victory [ +675 XP] [ +675 gp] 6: Matthis (waywreth): victory [ +675 XP] [ +675 gp] 7: A Dwarf (Pitlord Erithmu): defeat [ +400 XP] [ +400 gp] 8: Ynotar Mihm Eer (Etiquette_Gnome): victory [ +1050 XP] [ +1050 gp] 9: Rubicanti (The Magister): undecided [ +400 XP] [ +400 gp] 10: Sybil ap Kalten (MitzaVolchenko): victory [ +1050 XP] [ +1050 gp] 11: with Zax vs Maelosh & Sybil: victory [ +1050 XP] [ +1050 gp] 12: with Treetall vs Rubicanti and Wisp: victory [ +1375 XP] [ +1467 gp] 13: Hunter: Zodiac, Rubicanti, Reginald: okay [ +972 XP] [ +1050 gp] 14: A Human werebear (TelinArtho)lost [ +458 XP] [ +485 gp] MQ1: 3 Dire Bats (Tellish_of_Ket)victory [ +1250 XP] [ +1333 gp] 15: Arden Tarmik (Zevox)victory [ +1375 XP] [ +1466.72 gp] Starting: 3000 gp Earned: 12041.72 gp Spent: 9336 gp Remaining: 5605.72 gp Equipment: 7267 Expendables: 375 on Horses/Home: 1791.5 Allies: 300 Past: 329.5 Guisarme 4.5 gp received [9 gp originally spent] [font=courier new]0 Arrows [0.05 gp each = 0 gp] Stone of Animal Affinity [ML 3] [150 gp] (MQ1) Stone of Dissolving Weapon [ML 3] [150 gp] (MQ1) Stone of Precognition, Offensive [ML 1] [25 gp] (15) Durin used 1pp and powerstone of offensive precognition Time Between Fights: - Prebuffs/Ongoing Effects: - Items Used: - Spells or Powerpoints Used: - x/day Abilities Used: - Free Activity: - Time Between Fights: - Prebuffs/Ongoing Effects: - Items Used: - Spells or Powerpoints Used: - x/day Abilities Used: - Free Activity: - Gender and Race: Male horse Size and Type: Large animal Height and Weight: 6'6", 800 lbs. Age: (adult) Alignment: true neutral ECL: - CR: 1 Attributes Str 16, Dex 13, Con 17, Int 2, Wis 13, Cha 6 Miscellaneous Statistics Hit Points: 22 [3 HD] Armor Class (Normal): 20 [10 Base, +1 Dex, +6 Armor, -1 Size, +4 Natural] Armor Class (Touch): 10 [10 Base, +1 Dex, -1 Size] Armor Class (Flat-Footed): 19 [10 Base, +6 Armor, -1 Size, +4 Natural] Initiative: +1 [+1 Dex] Base Attack Bonus: +2 [Horse 3HD] Grapple: +9 [2 BAB, +3 Str, +4 Size] Speed (Land): 40 ft [60 Base, encumbrance and armor 40] Weight Carried: 393 lbs, medium encumbrance [0-230 (Light), 231-460 (Medium), 461-690 (Heavy)] Saves Fort +6, Ref +4, Will +2 Melee Attacks 2 hooves +4 melee (1d4+3) and bite -1 melee (1d3+1) Special Attacks and Abilities -Low-light vision -Scent Feats EnduranceLvl 1 RunLvl 3 Skills Languages: none Hide: -9 [+1 Dex, -4 size, -6 ACP] Listen: +4 [+1 Wis, 3 Ranks] Move Silently: -5 [+1 Dex, -6 ACP] Spot: +4 [+1 Wis, 3 Ranks] Start mounted, Shield readied Move around in the city, taking full defence. Once I'm shot at: If for whatever reason I see Zwei and she is reachable, feel free to charge at her. In melee use the chain of personal superiority and make Trip attacks. But probably it won't be so easy. If I can't get her (for example because she sniped at me), take cover (Sleipnir full cover), drop prone and take full defence, untill she runs out of arrows. Manifest Vigor for 2 pp and do so twice again, as soon as the temporary hit points are worked down. Put off the shield, take out the greataxe and mount Sleipnir. Before she comes for melee, manifest force screen. Use chain of personal superiority but attack for damage. If I can knock-down her do so, but don't try trip attacks. Also, once I'm below 10 HP (and in melee), rage. Once raging use Reckless offence and Psi-Weapon on the first attack. Note that I have Uncanny Dodge! Thanks for Pitlording. Maraxus Ready for Arena Mar 7th (Fight 1)[ECL6]; Free Activity Earn 78gp (dance) Zwei und'Vierzig Time Between Fights: Prebuffs/Ongoing Effects: N/A Items Used: Spells or Powerpoints Used: N/A x/day Abilities Used: Free Activity: +78gp perform Time Between Fights: Prebuffs/Ongoing Effects: Items Used: Spells or Powerpoints Used: N/A x/day Abilities Used: Free Activity: +78gp perform http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v694/uninvitedtruth/Zweipic.jpg Free Action=earn 78gp dancing Zwei stands right at five feet and masses less than an elf. She has dusky skin and a shaved head with single long braid of coarse black hair stemming from the crown. She sports two very sharp horns from her brow and displays prominent sharp canines when she smiles. Her dark eyes glow slightly red when in shadows. Female Tiefling 5'0" 99lbs Medium Outsider (Native) LN Monk 5 (ECL 6) 17,307/21,000 Guild:EHTC STR...14 [+2]...(6pts) DEX...21 [+5]...(16pts+1 (4th lvl) Racial +2 CON...12 [+1]...(4pts) INT....14 [+2]...(4pts) Racial +2 WIS...14 [+2]...(6pts) CHA...6 [-2]...(0pts) Racial-2 Hit Points: 31.0 [5d8 HD] 8+18.0+5con AC 18 [+5dex, +0size, +2wis, +1Monk5], Touch 18, Flat 13 [+4 Armor (Tattoo Inertial Armor), +4 shield (Tattoo Force Shield), +1 Dodge] AC Modifiers: +3 on defensive, +6 full defensive (Tumble), +4 vs. AoO's for mvmnt (Mobility) Initiative: +5 [+5dex,] BAB/Grap: +3/+5 +3bab, +2str] Speed 40 Saves: Fort +5 [+4 Monk +1con ] Refl +9 [+4 Monk +5dex ] [Evasion] Will +6 [+4 Monk +2wis] [u]Attacks: Unarmed Strike +5 melee, 1d8+2, 20/x2 +1 Composite longbow (STR +2), of Frost +9 ranged, 1d8+3 (+1d6 cold), 20/x3 Range 110' Flurry of Blows Unarmed Strike +4/+4 melee, 1d8+2, 20/x2 Combat Modifiers: Flurry of Blows -1/-1 Attack Feats: Improved Unarmed Strike [Monk 1] Stunning Fist [Monk 1] (DC 14, 4/day) [10+2(1/2 HD) + 2(wis)] Evasion [Monk 2] Deflect Arrow [Monk 2] Dodge [1st Level] Mobility [3rd level] Racial and Class Abilities: Darkness Once per day (caster level equal to class levels) Skill Bonuses: +2 Bluff, +2 Hide Resistances: +5 Cold, electricity, fire Flurry of Blows Still Mind +2 vs. enchanment spells and effects Ki Strike treat unarmed as magical Slow Fall 20' negates first 20' of falling damage when in reach of wall Purity of Body Immune to all natural diseases. Proficient with all martial weapons Outsider Skills (48 Points Monk): +15 Hide [+8Monk +5(DEX) +2 Racial][8 Ranks] +13 Move Silently [+8Monk +5 (DEX) ][8 Ranks] +13 Tumble [+8Monk +5(DEX) ][8 Ranks] +03 Perform (dance) [+5Monk -2(CHA)][5 Ranks](78gp earn) +10 Spot [+8Monk+2(WIS)][8 Ranks] +10 Listen [+8Monk +2(WIS)][8 Ranks] +08 Escape Artist +3Monk, +5(DEX)[3 Rank] +07 Balance [0rnk, +5 Dex, +2 Tumble] +02 Climb [0rnk, +2 Str] +04 Jump [0rnk, +2 Str, +2 Tumble] Speaks: Common, Infernal, Elven, and Draconic Buffs and Prefight Actions: None Equipment: Red Monk's Outfit [0 lbs][free] +1 Composite longbow (STR +2), of Frost[3lbs][8,600gp] Quiver with 88 arrows (normal) [13.2lbs][5gp] 20 silvered arrows [3lbs][41gp] 20 cold iron arrows [3lbs][2gp] [B]Expendable Items: 3 Tattoo of Force Screen (ML1) [0 lbs][300 gp] 3 Tattoo of Inertial Armor (ML1)] [0 lbs][300 gp] 1 Potions of Cure Light Wounds [(CL1)] [.2 lbs][100 gp] 3 Tanglefoot Bags [12lbs][150gp] 1 Alchemist's Fire [1lbs][20gp] Miscellaneous Statistics: Encumberance: 0-58 (light), 59-116 (medium), 117-175 (heavy) Weight carried:36.4 lb Character Background: Zwei is a disciplined predator. Her past is shrouded in pain and her focus is a defense against that pain. She cares nothing for right and wrong, only for keeping herself ordered and apart from the hurts that no potion can cure. Fights results: ECL3-Hunter (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8140671&postcount=927) Fight Part II (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8140671&postcount=927) Aryleia (NightBreeze) => Samuel (Lonewolf) => Gaston (waywreth) => Zwei und'Vierzig (MitzaVolchenko):Luni Loss (2nd place) - +649 Exp, +649gp+39gp for performing=688gp ECL 3 FFA (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8168118&postcount=952) Fight Part II (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8168154&postcount=953) Zwei vs Featylec vs. Jonathon vs. Marco: Macbrea Loss (3rd place) - +750xp, +750gp+39gp for performing=789gp Miniquest to Join EHTC: Altaris13 (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=567548) win - +300xp, +300gp, +39gp for performing=339gp ECL3 (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8270794&postcount=55) Zwei vs. Selene (Erithmu): shadowmaster Win - +900xp, +900gp+39 gp (perform)=939gp ECL3 (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8348550&postcount=118) Zwei vs. Finrod (lonewolf): TelinArtho Win - +900xp, +900gp+39gp (perform)=939gp Level up ECL4 FFA (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8414876&postcount=188) Zwei (MitzaVolchenko) vs. Maeril (Usurpator) vs. Manzarf (Abyssal Stalker) vs. Tsiuzues (Skojar) : Warclone Loss - +833xp, +833gp+52gp (perform)=885gp ECL4 (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8470157&postcount=221) Zwei vs. Rethun (Kaigan): Gonbow (Win) - +1200xp, +1200gp+52gp (perform)=1252gp ECL4 (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8497890&postcount=245) Zwei vs. Histal Da'arth: Turin (Loss) - +400xp, +400gp+52gp (perform)=452gp ECL4 (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8570992) Zwei vs. Fjord (Begferdeth): MysticMonk2005 (Win)+1200xp, +1200gp+52gp (perform)=1252gp ECL5 (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=8996258&postcount=555) Zwei vs. Hassan Sabbah (Vathelokai): Abyssal Stalker (Win)+1500xp, +1600gp+65gp(perform)=1665gp ECL5 (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=9217460&postcount=603) Zwei vs. Tueor Amplexus (MysticMonk2005): DSugui(Loss)+500xp, +533gp+65gp(perform)=598gp ECL5 (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=9238589#post9238589) Zwei vs. Kendal(Papapeperoni) :Traevanon(Loss)+500xp, +533gp+65gp(perform)=598gp ECL5, Team vs. ECL7 (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11007161#post11007161) Zwei & Fyhir (Spasheridan) vs. Ja-red (TelinArtho): Hirumajoe(Loss)+500xp, +533gp+65gp (perform)=589gp ECL5 MQ (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=773523) Zwei rejoins the ranks of EHTC: McJarvis (Success)+1500xp, +1600gp+65gp (perform)=1665gp ECL5 (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11300868&postcount=509) Zwei vs. Treetall Oakleg (Hogarth): Erithmu (Loss)+500xp, +533gp+65gp (perform)=589gp ECL6 (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11484801#post11484801)Zwe i vs. Ceilia (Zevox): TelinArtho (Loss)+675xp, +750gp+78gp (perform)=828gp ECL6 (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11513994&postcount=581) Zwei vs. Anakala (TelinArtho): MindWandererB (Loss)+675xp, +749gp+78gp(perform)=827gp ECL6 (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11679351&postcount=642) Zwei & Balrog (Maraxus) vs. The Harvester (Caterane): SauroGrenom (Loss)+625xp, +639gp+78gp(perform)=717gp Experience Breakdown +3,200 Starting Experience +14,107 Experience Won -0Experience Spent +17,307Total Experience Past Expenditures: Gold Tracking +315gp remaining from start +649 gp second place hunter +39gp performing -100 replacing Tattoo of Inertial Armor +750 gp +39gp perform -200 replacing tattoos of Inert Arm,Force Screen -5gp 50 bolts -100gp Alch Fire*5 -150gp Tanglefoot*3 +300gp MQ success +39gp perform +900gp win vs. Selene +39gp perform -200gp replacing tattoos of inert arm, force screen +900gp win vs. Finrod +39gp perform +833gp +52gp perform -100gp replace inert arm tatt -50gp replace tanglefoot +1200gp win vs. Rethun -200gp replace tatts +52gp perform +400gp loss to Histal +52gp perform -200 replace tattoos -60gp replace alch fire +1200gp win vs. Fjord +52gp performing -100gp replace tattoo of inert armor -60gp replace alch fires +1600gp win vs. Hassan +65gp performing -200gp replacing tattoos +533gp Loss vs. Tueor +65gp dance -200gp replacing tattoos +533gp loss vs. Kendal +65gp perform -200gp replace tattoos -400gp 2 tatts force screen, 2 tatts inertial armor +533gp loss vs. Ja-red +65gp perform +1600gp victory of EHTC's watchcat(MQ) +65gp perform +533gp loss vs. Treetall +65gp perform +1167gp 5sp sold +1 Light Crossbow[4 lbs][2335 gp] +3gp, 5cp sold 61 bolts [7.9 lbs][5 gp] -8600gp comp lngbw,str+2, frost -5gp 100 arrows -2gp 20 cold iron arrows -41gp 20 silvered arrows -300gp Replace Force Screen tatts (3) -300gp Replace Inertial Armor tatts (3) -150gp Replace Tanglefoot bags (3) +750gp loss vs Ceilia +78gp perform +749gp loss vs Anakala +78gp perform +639gp loss vs. Harvey +78gp perform -100gp Replace Force Screen tatt (1) -200gp Replace Inertial Armor tatts (2) ______________ 4,891gp 5sp 5cpTotal Thanks for pitlording! Double move toward balcony sticking near cover. Double move toward balcony sticking near cover. Climb to balcony. Feel free to try this a couple of times as Zwei is not a stellar climber, note that soft fall means no damage for failing any climb check unless for some reason she wanted to climb onto a tower. If she is detected before making it up to the balcony or detects her foe nearby, skip climbing and just take cover behind the hedges using hide and fire tactics. If she successfully gets onto a balcony, Durin is target. Tap Inertial armor, tap force screen when he is in sight. If she is stuck playing a run and hide game on the ground, get into areas that have the hedges at 5' to force the horse to squeeze and outmaneuver him. If stuck on the ground, kill Sleipnir. No help for it, but once the horse is out of the way, on the ground, she has full advantages. I played with the mapping tool a bit and even double moving, she should have a round or two to try climbing before he is possibly in LOS. When in doubt, get distance and cover. All expendables are fair game as needed. Note that Zwei never needs to put her bow away to threaten adjacent squares and can deflect or flurry with things in her hands. Escape artist to get out of grapple. If grappled on the balcony escape and jump for it. Soft fall negates damage. Draw and pitch a tanglefoot bag on him if/when he approaches the balcony to climb. Remember high ground advantage to attack. Durin is dodge buddy. Use the CLW as needed (been trying to get rid of that forever). If you have questions catch me on IM or send a PM. Rolls (http://www.hwx.it/wizards.com/dice.php?sid=1215) Setup Zwei is in the northwest and goes first. Durin is in the northeast, mounted on Sleipnir, wearing his shield. round 1 Zwei double moves east. Durin hears nothing single moves (choosing randomly to go south) and goes on defense. round 2 Zwei moves, jumps over a 5 ft hedge, and begins climbing up to a balcony. She dosn't get off the ground. Durin still hears nothing and keeps moving on the defensive. round 3 Zwei climbs up onto the balcony and gets her bow out. Durin hears nothing and keeps going. http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=city;a=Z,M,4,61,18,57,2 5,58,26,59,Zwei;b=D,L,61,62,60,54,56,49, 52,44,Slepnir;los=26,59,52,44,1 round 4 Zwei taps her tattoo of intertial armor. Durin moves to the center area of the map while defending. round 5 Zwei readies to tap tatto of force screen. Durin moves some more. Zwei spots Durin's helmet just over the edge of a rooftop. She taps her tattoo. Durin finishes moving, but sees nothing. http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=city;a=Z,M,26,59,Zwei;b =D,L,52,44,44,44,36,44,Slepnir;los=26,59 ,36,44,1 round 6 Zwei fires an arrow, but it bounces off armor. Durin dismounts, drops prone and manifests vigor for 2 pp. round 7+ [color=gray]Since both of your tactics include waiting out the arrow storm, I'm using pitlord perogative to ignore the '10 round rule'. Zwei fires all 88 of her regular arrows. She hits once in round 12. Durin responds to the hit by manifesting another 2 pp vigor. round 43+ Zwei fires all 20 of her cold iron arrows. She hits on round 54, doing some damage. Durin responds to the hit by manifesting another 2 pp vigor. round 63+ Zwei fire all 20 of her silver arrows. She hits on round 68 with a crit. Durin has 41 hp remaining. He has 1 pp remaining. He gets up, tells Sleipnir to heel and moves toward Zwei's balcony. round 83 Zwei gets out a tanglefoot bag and readies to tap another tattoo of force screen. Durin double moves while removing his shield. round 84 Zwei readies. Durin climbs over the hedge dispite his armor. Zwei taps her tatto of force screen. Durin finishes climbing over. http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=city;a=Z,M,29,59,Zwei;b =S,L,35,44,32,58,Slepnir;c=D,M,34,44,33, 51,31,57,31,58,Durin round 85 Zwei throws the tanglefoot bag, barely hitting him. Durin is stuck to the ground, and entangled for 5 rounds. Durin attacks the goo, doing 9 damage round 86 Notes Zwei does not have her bonus to jump from speed abover 30 listed (+4 per 10 ft.). Durin is missing the required skills on his sheet: climb, jump, and swim.
MitzaVolchenko 03-13-07, 03:44 AM	I haven't reviewed it in its entirety but it looks a lot like the towershield rule vs. an archer. Not sure why I didn't eliminate the horse at any point when it became clear that I was going to be forced to melee, but I'll look through it again when I am done with what I am working on right now.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-13-07, 04:06 AM	@MWB, ToK His later tactics did mention use of his sling. The character is not a stupid automaton. The last time I objected to someone improvising for my opponent though their tactics said nothing about laying an ambush, my character got walked into an ambush in spite of being fully intelligent enough to not do so. I was told that superior movement meant that I would be in delay and to lump it. I appreciate the heck out of a pitlord that doesn't treat an intelligent character like they are STUPID. Macbrea did not go out on any great long limbs to treat the character like it wasn't an idiot. He went a lot less far out than my pitlord who was praised for it while I was told to stop whinging. So, end result, Macbrea did what pitlords are supposed to which is run the fight by the spirit of the tactics, not the absolute spelled out letter. Read my signature. I will be very disappointed if that fight gets a re-run that it surely does not deserve. So what you're basically saying is because you were done wrong, that hey, suck it up, it's ok for it to happen to someone else? Not sure i buy that philosophy, but we are all entitled to opinions. I don't think anybody is saying to use supidity when improvising. I think the majority just agrees that there was no need at the time to improvise, that's all. In your case, if you were gonna be taking a delay penalty, then something obviously had to be done correct? Dunno though, i didn't read the fight. ToK
False_Keraptis 03-13-07, 06:26 AM	Poor dwarf got ganged up on Drat! The dice never seem to like my save-or-dies. Fnorri has yet to see a blindness spell work.
TheMagister 03-13-07, 07:22 AM	Okay...wow. A monk with deflect arrows (feat) and a buckler of arrow deflecting. Hmm. Right then. Let's see how Hood does.
MitzaVolchenko 03-13-07, 07:30 AM	So what you're basically saying is because you were done wrong, that hey, suck it up, it's ok for it to happen to someone else? Not sure i buy that philosophy, but we are all entitled to opinions. I don't think anybody is saying to use supidity when improvising. I think the majority just agrees that there was no need at the time to improvise, that's all. In your case, if you were gonna be taking a delay penalty, then something obviously had to be done correct? Dunno though, i didn't read the fight. ToK To take a page from Telin's book...illustrate your majority. His tactics did use his ranged weapon...the character had no way to know that Maya would not levitate, but he did know that if she did, he had no weapon. Since it is supposedly perfectly viable that he could keep up with the horse, then she certainly could have levitated to negate it. the improv prevented her from escpaing per the spriit and intention stated in TM's tactics. Either way of course, the pitlord inthis case makes the clal on re-run unless Cat overrules it. In my case, I had actually made the last attack, had I not been walked into an improv'd ambush, my opponent should have taken delay and been forced to come around the corner into my ambush. My solution has been to write volumes of tactics for certain pitlords and know which ones will take the statement "all expendables are fair game, if you run into a stumbling block, improvise at will" and actually look at the mental stats to determine what degree of improv is appropriate.
Abyssal Stalker 03-13-07, 07:34 AM	Okay...wow. A monk with deflect arrows (feat) and a buckler of arrow deflecting. Hmm. Right then. Let's see how Hood does. How come Mr Gummy Bear has so much equipment? Shouldn't he have standard monster treasure?
McJarvis 03-13-07, 08:10 AM	Okay...wow. A monk with deflect arrows (feat) and a buckler of arrow deflecting. Hmm. Right then. Let's see how Hood does. I took a page from my own book. I'm hoping to get that mithril buckler on The Artificer of Gladius eventually. (perhaps a non-mithral one for when he wants to just blast with his wand? Hmmm) Regardless-> it was important to spend all of his gold and I didn't want to go through the items & spend it on 50 different things(like a real gladiator would). I haven't really read through Hood's tactics, but I think it'll be a good fight. How come Mr Gummy Bear has so much equipment? Shouldn't he have standard monster treasure? I'm fairly certain "standard" means standard character wealth for his level(which is 28,000gp according to rules of gladius), though I could be wrong.
templer10 03-13-07, 08:11 AM	your Dorja is Illegal as you payed 1500 for a augmented ML 2 that should cost you 3000 (see prison thread for details) hence why i dropped it to an ML 1 augmented As for the rest i will go through and adjust as needed.. you missed 1 time with the ray i believe.. (rolls are posted) Enjoy your win and get your charater legal.. My dorja isnt illegal as far as i know and i referense you to my post in the prison from just now (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11751334&postcount=1003)- ill welcome any elder to come there to take a look
MitzaVolchenko 03-13-07, 08:12 AM	Evil dice for post 666 of the Battles thread. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11726398&postcount=666) Mohmat vs. Ahab is up.
Abyssal Stalker 03-13-07, 08:32 AM	I took a page from my own book. I'm hoping to get that mithril buckler on The Artificer of Gladius eventually. (perhaps a non-mithral one for when he wants to just blast with his wand? Hmmm) Regardless-> it was important to spend all of his gold and I didn't want to go through the items & spend it on 50 different things(like a real gladiator would). I haven't really read through Hood's tactics, but I think he can still have a shot at it. I'm fairly certain "standard" means standard character wealth for his level(which is 28,000gp according to rules of gladius), though I could be wrong. That's just it. I don't know which should be used, and nor does the Rules of Gladius say. There's the monster tables and monster wealth. Monster charts have clearly creatures with PC classes. Do they use the monster wealth chart or not? Starting gold is for PCs, that's for sure. Mercenaries are created using the same starting gold as monsters. I've created all my monsters with PC classes using the monster wealth chart and abilities 15,14,13,12,10,8. On the other hand this makes those fights "ridiculously easy". If we pair a dwarf fighter with 8000gp equipment and abilities 15,14,13,12,10,8 against a 36-pt buy dwarf fighter with 24000gp equipment, it's not hard to figure who has the upper hand...
hogarth 03-13-07, 08:38 AM	I've created all my monsters with PC classes using the monster wealth chart and abilities 15,14,13,12,10,8. On the other hand this makes those fights "ridiculously easy". If we pair a dwarf fighter with 8000gp equipment and abilities 15,14,13,12,10,8 against a 36-pt buy dwarf fighter with 24000gp equipment, it's not hard to figure who has the upper hand... For a fighter, yes. For a spellcaster, it can be tough -- the NPC can use every single spell level at his disposal (plus every expendable he has), but a PC only gets to use 1/3 of his spell levels and his expendables are more precious. FWIW, I think you should use the monster wealth.
McJarvis 03-13-07, 08:39 AM	If someone could respond on this, I'm likely not going to be starting the fight until around noon EST. Would be nice to know what kind of equipment Mr. Gummi should have.
Maraxus 03-13-07, 08:42 AM	(...) I've created all my monsters with PC classes using the monster wealth chart and abilities 15,14,13,12,10,8. On the other hand this makes those fights "ridiculously easy". If we pair a dwarf fighter with 8000gp equipment and abilities 15,14,13,12,10,8 against a 36-pt buy dwarf fighter with 24000gp equipment, it's not hard to figure who has the upper hand... I know!! I know!!! It's the one that can fire and forget his expendables, because he does not have to worry about falling behind the wealth per level thing. No wait, it's the one, that is not effected by the 1/3 rule. ... Nonono, it's the one that does not need to have any knowledge skills, to know his opponent. (and yes, fights vs. NPCs are a cakewalk compared to monsters) PS: About Durin's fight: I really, realyy was lucky with that regular arrows. Not so with the 20-20 critical with the silver arrow. And since it's a bow, the damage should be x3, so I got another 1d8+2 damage. I thing that's it. Oh, higher ground is a melee modifier only, but it did not matter, of course. And "Since both of your tactics include waiting out the arrow storm, I'm using pitlord perogative to ignore the '10 round rule'.": I definitly think, one player shooting at the other is "meaningful interaction", so no need for that rule anyway
Macbrea 03-13-07, 08:43 AM	In Rules of Gladius Battles 1 thread about half way down is an sblock. It has exactly how much equipment a standard CR treasured monster should have.
Macbrea 03-13-07, 08:44 AM	NPCs are just monsters with loot.
McJarvis 03-13-07, 08:44 AM	In Rules of Gladius Battles 1 thread about half way down is an sblock. It has exactly how much equipment a standard CR treasured monster should have. Ahha! I will adjust Mr. Gummy accordingly when running him, then. (this fight just got way easier for Hood :) )
Abyssal Stalker 03-13-07, 08:45 AM	I moved the discussion to the Council, because there is obviously a need for a summary. Remember that quests and monster fights can't be compared, because in the other the PC gains healing and in the other he has to rely on his own resources.
McJarvis 03-13-07, 09:17 AM	Until this issue is resolved I will assume Mr Gummy only gets equipment according to the table that Macbrea volunteered. Happy Birthday TM :)
TheMagister 03-13-07, 09:23 AM	Until this issue is resolved I will assume Mr Gummy only gets equipment according to the table that Macbrea volunteered. Happy Birthday TM :) I wasn't complaining either way. If Hood can't beat a CR = to his ECL-2, then he's got other problems, ya know? TM
McJarvis 03-13-07, 09:26 AM	I wasn't complaining either way. If Hood can't beat a CR = to his ECL-2, then he's got other problems, ya know? TM CR should be Hood's level. It's a half-giant Monk 7(by the battles thread)
TheMagister 03-13-07, 10:27 AM	{surprise} It was my understanding that it was "an operative with a CR equal to the PMG's ECL." {Shrug} I don't really care. More money for the Iron Man! Edit: Each PMG has a race and class associated with it, and the attacking agent will be an NPC of that race and class, of an ECL matched to the interceptors. And I misread it. :) I could've intercepted with an ECL 3 member of WAR, and it'd have been fine. {sigh} TM
McJarvis 03-13-07, 11:45 AM	The fight of Gummi vs Hood is about complete. I'll see about posting rewards before 3, and then run the rest of the "fight" after I get home from work tonight. However, I don't see Gummi having many options. (stupid dice >=O ) ~McJ~ edit-> I don't suppose anyone wants Gummi to be a merc? :-)
TheMagister 03-13-07, 12:08 PM	Yuck! Wow...I'd almost wish he'd landed that grapple; that was awesome! Who needs to fly when you can...almost fly? :)
McJarvis 03-13-07, 01:16 PM	Yuck! Wow...I'd almost wish he'd landed that grapple; that was awesome! Who needs to fly when you can...almost fly? :) Actually, I just realized that there's a chance he succeeded. Can you critically fail an opposed grapple check? He should have: +16(normal) +2(bears strength) +2(heroism) =+20 Which means his natural 1 is a +21 vs your 20. :-O
Erithmu 03-13-07, 01:19 PM	Actually, I just realized that there's a chance he succeeded. Can you critically fail an opposed grapple check? He should have: +16(normal) +2(bears strength) +2(heroism) =+20 Which means his natural 1 is a +21 vs your 20. :-O Nope: opposed checks never auto fail or auto succeed
hogarth 03-13-07, 01:19 PM	Actually, I just realized that there's a chance he succeeded. Can you critically fail an opposed grapple check? He should have: +16(normal) +2(bears strength) +2(heroism) =+20 Which means his natural 1 is a +21 vs your 20. :-O I don't think opposed checks fail on a 1 since they're essentially untrained skill rolls. Only attack rolls and saves fail on a 1, I thought. By the way, Mr. Gummi couldn't be a mercenary as-is -- mercenaries are limited to 10% of wealth in expendables. Also note: Boots of Striding and Springing and a monk's speed bonus do not stack (they're both enhancement bonuses).
McJarvis 03-13-07, 01:28 PM	I don't think opposed checks fail on a 1 since they're essentially untrained skill rolls. Only attack rolls and saves fail on a 1, I thought. Hm. Does Heroism affect grapple checks then? By the way, Mr. Gummi couldn't be a gladiator as-is -- gladiators are limited to 10% of wealth in expendables. I used the formula ECL2*50. I've never seen 10% as a rule anywhere...? Also note: Boots of Striding and Springing and a monk's speed bonus do not stack (they're both enhancement bonuses). Must have overlooked that....I'll check into it.
hogarth 03-13-07, 01:30 PM	I used the formula ECL2*50. I've never seen 10% as a rule anywhere...? I meant "mercenary", not "gladiator". Starting Gold: Use Table 4-23 from DMG, p127. No item worth more than 50% of the Starting Gold, and no more Expendables than 10% of the Starting Gold.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-13-07, 01:35 PM	Actually, I just realized that there's a chance he succeeded. Can you critically fail an opposed grapple check? He should have: +16(normal) +2(bears strength) +2(heroism) =+20 Which means his natural 1 is a +21 vs your 20. :-O Heroism does not affect grapple checks. Grapple check is an opposed roll with a definative formula. Heorism is +2 attack bonus. ToK
Sjiggie 03-13-07, 01:36 PM	@Zevox and Macbrea I'm running your fight atm I don't know if I can finish it before the deadline but I will finish it tonight well before the next pairings.
TheMagister 03-13-07, 01:41 PM	@Zevox and Macbrea I'm running your fight atm I don't know if I can finish it before the deadline but I will finish it tonight well before the next pairings. It looks like Etiquette_Gnome just opened a fight session in the CoCo roller, Sjiggie. Dunno if one of you guys wants to check in to that or not...
Hirumajoe 03-13-07, 01:46 PM	Heroism does not affect grapple checks. Grapple check is an opposed roll with a definative formula. Heorism is +2 attack bonus. ToK I respectfully disagree. A grapple check is just like a melee attack roll except you use a special size modifier. There are no other changes to the roll from a melee attack roll. I quote from the RotG, all about grappling part 1. A grapple check is just like a melee attack roll, except that a special size modifier replaces your normal size modifier. In regular melee combat, smaller creatures get both an attack bonus and an Armor Class bonus. When grappling, the advantage goes to the bigger opponent. Table 7-1 in the Monster Manual shows size modifiers for regular and grappling combat. Page 156 in the Player's Handbook also shows special size modifiers for grappling. Because a grapple check is an opposed check, the combatant with the higher total wins the check. If the check is a tie, the combatant with the highest total grapple modifier (base attack bonus + Strength modifier + special size modifier + any miscellaneous that might apply). If there is a tie and both combatants have the same grapple modifier, roll again to break the tie.
Horatius 03-13-07, 01:49 PM	I respectfully disagree. A grapple check is just like a melee attack roll except you use a special size modifier. There are no other changes to the roll from a melee attack roll. I quote from the RotG, all about grappling part 1. A grapple check is just like a melee attack roll, except that a special size modifier replaces your normal size modifier. In regular melee combat, smaller creatures get both an attack bonus and an Armor Class bonus. When grappling, the advantage goes to the bigger opponent. Table 7-1 in the Monster Manual shows size modifiers for regular and grappling combat. Page 156 in the Player's Handbook also shows special size modifiers for grappling. Because a grapple check is an opposed check, the combatant with the higher total wins the check. If the check is a tie, the combatant with the highest total grapple modifier (base attack bonus + Strength modifier + special size modifier + any miscellaneous that might apply). If there is a tie and both combatants have the same grapple modifier, roll again to break the tie. That would imply that natural 1s and 20s are also relevant.
Sjiggie 03-13-07, 01:50 PM	It looks like Etiquette_Gnome just opened a fight session in the CoCo roller, Sjiggie. Dunno if one of you guys wants to check in to that or not... I'll let Etiquette_Gnome finish the fight then since it is his fight.
Macbrea 03-13-07, 01:54 PM	That fight should be over soon. It appears that Razorfang managed to get Arden into a grapple.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-13-07, 02:06 PM	I respectfully disagree. A grapple check is just like a melee attack roll except you use a special size modifier. There are no other changes to the roll from a melee attack roll. I quote from the RotG, all about grappling part 1. A grapple check is just like a melee attack roll, except that a special size modifier replaces your normal size modifier. In regular melee combat, smaller creatures get both an attack bonus and an Armor Class bonus. When grappling, the advantage goes to the bigger opponent. Table 7-1 in the Monster Manual shows size modifiers for regular and grappling combat. Page 156 in the Player's Handbook also shows special size modifiers for grappling. Because a grapple check is an opposed check, the combatant with the higher total wins the check. If the check is a tie, the combatant with the highest total grapple modifier (base attack bonus + Strength modifier + special size modifier + any miscellaneous that might apply). If there is a tie and both combatants have the same grapple modifier, roll again to break the tie. Nope....you are reading too much into misc modifiers. Heroism is NOT a misc modifier, it's a +2 to attack, not opposed checks, hardly misc. A misc modifiers could be feats, special grappling abilities possessed by creatures etc... By your definition you could also use heroism against opposed trip just because you make an unarmed touch attack roll? You get it for the unarmed touch attack, but not the opposed trip. Likewise, u'd benefit from Heroism to make the touch attack to "start" a grapple, but not the opposed roll itself. It would apply to sundering, as this is clearly "opposed attack rolls". Like an attack, is nothing close to "an attack".
McJarvis 03-13-07, 02:09 PM	Like an attack, is nothing close to "an attack". ...that you can flurry with. :-)
hogarth 03-13-07, 02:10 PM	Nope....you are reading too much into misc modifiers. Heroism is NOT a misc modifier, it's a +2 to attack, not opposed checks, hardly misc. A misc modifiers could be feats, special grappling abilities possessed by creatures etc... I believe the spell Good Hope would add a +2 bonus, though, since it specifically adds a bonus to "ability checks".
Hirumajoe 03-13-07, 02:15 PM	Nope....you are reading too much into misc modifiers. Heroism is NOT a misc modifier, it's a +2 to attack, not opposed checks, hardly misc. A misc modifiers could be feats, special grappling abilities possessed by creatures etc... By your definition you could also use heroism against opposed trip just because you make an unarmed touch attack roll? You get it for the unarmed touch attack, but not the opposed trip. Likewise, u'd benefit from Heroism to make the touch attack to "start" a grapple, but not the opposed roll itself. It would apply to sundering, as this is clearly "opposed attack rolls". Like an attack, is nothing close to "an attack". Ok, I see where you're coming from. But the opposed trip roll is a strength (or dex) check, where your bab never factors in. That's the difference in my mind. Whenever I read BAB, I want to include the generic attack roll bonuses and penalties that would apply to that roll. Perhaps thats wrong. But at least consider the reverse, an attack penalty. Are you suggesting that being entangled (say from a tanglefoot bag) doesn't affect the grapple check, since that -2 is an attack roll penalty? Or how about being shaken? Since a grapple check is neither a ability check, skill check, attack roll or saving throw (since its apparently a self defined, unreferenced anywhere else check) being shaken shouldn't affect grapple checks.
Hirumajoe 03-13-07, 02:16 PM	I believe the spell Good Hope would add a +2 bonus, though, since it specifically adds a bonus to "ability checks". Alas, the grapple check is specifically not an ability check. Its some wierdly, uniquely defined roll in the grapple section. Edit: On re-reading the SRD, I note something interesting: Your attack bonus on a grapple check is: Base attack bonus + Strength modifier + special size modifier If its not an attack, why the heck does it have an attack bonus?
Tellish_of_Ket 03-13-07, 02:22 PM	Ok, I see where you're coming from. But the opposed trip roll is a strength (or dex) check, where your bab never factors in. That's the difference in my mind. Whenever I read BAB, I want to include the generic attack roll bonuses and penalties that would apply to that roll. Perhaps thats wrong. But at least consider the reverse, an attack penalty. Are you suggesting that being entangled (say from a tanglefoot bag) doesn't affect the grapple check, since that -2 is an attack roll penalty? Or how about being shaken? Since a grapple check is neither a ability check, skill check, attack roll or saving throw (since its apparently a self defined, unreferenced anywhere else check) being shaken shouldn't affect grapple checks. Only to the touch attack to start one. Once you are in it, all else follows the formula. It's weird i know, and i'm not a big fan that grapple checks don't benefit from Good Hope and similar "ability" checks. In a TT game, at home, i would allow it for sure. I agree, the grapple check is too self-defining and unreferenced, making it difficult to adjudicate when tricky situations come up. ToK
Hirumajoe 03-13-07, 02:30 PM	Only to the touch attack to start one. Once you are in it, all else follows the formula. It's weird i know, and i'm not a big fan that grapple checks don't benefit from Good Hope and similar "ability" checks. In a TT game, at home, i would allow it for sure. I agree, the grapple check is too self-defining and unreferenced, making it difficult to adjudicate when tricky situations come up. ToK Hmm... But thats the thing, if you'd allow in a TT game, then its purely an interpretation of the RAW issue. So, basically, I'm going to quote a bunch of stuff, and I want you to tell me why you interpret it the way you do. Grapple Checks Repeatedly in a grapple, you need to make opposed grapple checks against an opponent. A grapple check is like a melee attack roll. Your attack bonus on a grapple check is: Base attack bonus + Strength modifier + special size modifier Special Size Modifier The special size modifier for a grapple check is as follows: Colossal +16, Gargantuan +12, Huge +8, Large +4, Medium +0, Small -4, Tiny -8, Diminutive -12, Fine -16. Use this number in place of the normal size modifier you use when making an attack roll. Why go through all the trouble of calling it "like" an attack roll, calling it an "attack bonus", and "when making an attack roll" if they didn't want it to be an attack roll with an odd size modifier. Why not just call it an grapple check and leave out all that referencing to attack rolls completely? Its totally superflous in the interpretation you present. Where does it say the normal attack roll modifiers don't apply? The only reason they can't call it an attack roll is because of the size switch. They essentially do everything but that statement. It certainly seems within the spirit of the rules and reasonable interpretation of the words as written (which admittedly can be read in different ways by different people).
Tellish_of_Ket 03-13-07, 02:53 PM	Hmm... But thats the thing, if you'd allow in a TT game, then its purely an interpretation of the RAW issue. So, basically, I'm going to quote a bunch of stuff, and I want you to tell me why you interpret it the way you do. Why go through all the trouble of calling it "like" an attack roll, calling it an "attack bonus", and "when making an attack roll" if they didn't want it to be an attack roll with an odd size modifier. Why not just call it an grapple check and leave out all that referencing to attack rolls completely? Its totally superflous in the interpretation you present. Where does it say the normal attack roll modifiers don't apply? The only reason they can't call it an attack roll is because of the size switch. They essentially do everything but that statement. It certainly seems within the spirit of the rules and reasonable interpretation of the words as written (which admittedly can be read in different ways by different people). I'd allow it in a TT game because i think the wording of the RAW is dumb (and i mean i'd only allow good hope like stuff). It's not allowed in CoCo because of RAW. They call it "like an attack roll" for a few reasons. 1 - they are idiots and want to confuse us. 2 - they need to call it "something". 3 - because it's close to an attack roll, but with a unique specific formula to observe and just not quite enough like an attack roll to apply all the regular attack-roll bonuses. My theories? * Quicken true strike would make you "DA BOMB" grappler. * PLUS there are more than Core sources to consider. Some creatures have quicken spell-like abilities to give such bonuses. * DnD isn't build around CoCo...it's the other way around. * While holding you in a grapple and flying, i could techinically use one action to "move" you in a grapple, decelerate 10' gain the DIVING bonuses against you and do double nat weapon dmg. I hope you can see, that despite it NOT making sense in some ways, it actually DOES make sense in many many other ways. ToK
TelinArtho 03-13-07, 02:59 PM	* While holding you in a grapple and flying, i could techinically use one action to "move" you in a grapple, decelerate 10' gain the DIVING bonuses against you and do double nat weapon dmg. That's just wrong in so many ways... Grappling is definitely a hindrance in moving and with someone in your space to begin with means that there's automatically movement that restricts you... so no diving...
Macbrea 03-13-07, 02:59 PM	* While holding you in a grapple and flying, i could techinically use one action to "move" you in a grapple, decelerate 10' gain the DIVING bonuses against you and do double nat weapon dmg. This isn't quite possible. Because your limited to the actions you can do in a grapple. You don't get a standard and a move action in a grapple. To be specific it says: When you are grappling (regardless of who started the grapple), you can perform any of the following actions. Some of these actions take the place of an attack (rather than being a standard action or a move action). So, doing a 'Move in a Grapple' Maneuver is a complete turns worth of activity.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-13-07, 03:05 PM	That's just wrong in so many ways... Grappling is definitely a hindrance in moving and with someone in your space to begin with means that there's automatically movement that restricts you... so no diving... Uh...i believe i said i know it's wrong. ;) Just using it as a stupdity example. ToK
TheMagister 03-13-07, 03:09 PM	Idea!:lightbulb Rope 'em or net 'em. Grapple 'em. Fly up. Drop 'em and let 'em dangle. Dive 'em. {smack!} It'd be like the upside down version of one of those rubber-ball-paddle toys we all had as kids (could be revealing my "ancientness").
Macbrea 03-13-07, 03:11 PM	Tetherball.......
Hirumajoe 03-13-07, 03:24 PM	I'd allow it in a TT game because i think the wording of the RAW is dumb (and i mean i'd only allow good hope like stuff). It's not allowed in CoCo because of RAW. They call it "like an attack roll" for a few reasons. 1 - they are idiots and want to confuse us. 2 - they need to call it "something". 3 - because it's close to an attack roll, but with a unique specific formula to observe and just not quite enough like an attack roll to apply all the regular attack-roll bonuses. My theories? * Quicken true strike would make you "DA BOMB" grappler. * PLUS there are more than Core sources to consider. Some creatures have quicken spell-like abilities to give such bonuses. * DnD isn't build around CoCo...it's the other way around. * While holding you in a grapple and flying, i could techinically use one action to "move" you in a grapple, decelerate 10' gain the DIVING bonuses against you and do double nat weapon dmg. I hope you can see, that despite it NOT making sense in some ways, it actually DOES make sense in many many other ways. ToK Ok, I can't argue with "they're stupid". :) But as for they "needed to call it something", they didn't need to do that for defining all the other rolls in the game. Just this one. There literally is no reason to refer to an attack roll in it at all. They could have simply said "Your grapple bonus on a grapple check is BAB + Strenth + Grapple Size modifier (see text)." No need to say "like an attack roll", or your "attack bonus". They defined opposed skill check without refering to it. They defined saving throw and skill rolls without refering to attack rolls. Heck, they defined sense motive checks for feinting without refering to attack rolls, why in this case? (And in the case of sense motive checks, I'd agree with you that generic attack bonuses don't apply, since no where does it remotely hint that its like an attack roll... Just that it adds their BAB). I submit that in the spirit of the rules, they intended for generic attack bonuses to apply. 1) Quick True Strike also makes you the "Da Bomb" in melee attacks, ranged attacks, sunder attempts, rays, etc. Why not here? I mean, it gets you one guaranteed grapple check. Kinda like one guaranteed melee attack. Yeah, you did grapple damage. Once. Now he gets to escape versus your normal modifier, once for each attack he's entitled to due to BAB. I mean, anything affecting your BAB obviously makes you the "DA Bomb" in melee combat, ranged combat, and any attack roll in general, so why is this a problem? 2)I admit I'm not familiar with these sources that have quicked grapple bonuses. Could you give a few examples or at least point me to which books so I can browse them at some point? 3) I'm not saying ignore the rules. I'm saying that the rules are poorly written and have multiple ways of being interpreted, and I'm going with the interpretation which I think is most in the spirit that they were written. I don't think my reading is completely out there. I mean, I've been quoting the SRD and the RotG with statements which seem supportive and certainly not flat out contradictory. And also with the spirit of the rules. And you're right, D&D doesn't revolve around the CoCo. But to say that the CoCo literally follows every rule in D&D is false. Otherwise we wouldn't have house rules. Besides, I think this is more of an "interpretation" debate, of which I'm positive isn't CoCo's first. :D 4) Others have already commented on the Dive. Btw, do any elders want to chime in and tell me I'm crazy so I can drop the subject? (Telin you've obviously been reading...) I'm going to go check the FAQs to see if I can't find anything, one way or the other...
Zevox 03-13-07, 03:29 PM	@ Etiquette_Gnome - I see the match is up. Looks good, though there is the two issues. The first is irrelevant since Arden won - that Razorfang's initial grapple attempt should have failed, since he only rolled a 12 against Arden's touch AC of 15. The second though is very relevant - Arden's enervation should never have happened. He only has a 5% per level of the surge chance of enervating, so 10% with +2 surge, but you rolled it as though he had a 20% chance, and the roll wouldn't enervate with only a 10% chance. No need to change the fight since he won, but please remove the pp loss from enervation in the wrap-up. Oh, and also, the gp rewards are slightly off. ECL 6 is 1600 for the winner and 533 for the loser. You don't use the ratio for same level fights, since it results in rounding errors, but the table in the rules thread itself. Zevox
TelinArtho 03-13-07, 03:30 PM	In general, unless it is specifically a grapple bonus, then no it wouldn't apply to grapples (and likewise for trips, disarms, etc). This issue has been brought up before in other circumstances, and I disagreed with it at the time. Now that I have had more time to read into it though - I am in general agreement with it. So - heroism's bonus would not apply to a grapple.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-13-07, 03:31 PM	Idea!:lightbulb Rope 'em or net 'em. Grapple 'em. Fly up. Drop 'em and let 'em dangle. Dive 'em. {smack!} It'd be like the upside down version of one of those rubber-ball-paddle toys we all had as kids (could be revealing my "ancientness"). Use sovereign glue to glue them to rope and glue rope to ceiling. LOL ToK
Hirumajoe 03-13-07, 03:41 PM	And I just found relevant portions of the FAQ too... Anyways, I'll just post this for reference and drop the subject. Although I'd really if other people would read them and respond. This comes from the 3.0 FAQ When rolling opposed attack rolls (such as in a grapple or a disarm attempt), does a natural 1 mean automatic failure as it does for a normal attack roll? For the attacker (that is, the character trying to disarm a foe or accomplish something with a grapple check) a natural 1 fails and a natural 20 succeeds, no matter what the defender rolls. Although the defender’s roll is called an “opposed attack roll,” the defender is really just setting the DC for the attacker: 1s and 20s aren’t special for the defender. Just apply the defender’s modifiers to set the DC for the attacker. If both the attacker and the defender roll a 1, the attacker fails. If both the attacker and the defender roll a 20, the attacker succeeds. Note that you cannot get a hold on a foe two or more sizes larger than you (see page 137 in the Player’s Handbook). All of the foregoing assumes that you are indeed making an opposed attack roll, which is subject to automatic success or failure. Checks are not subject to automatic success or failure. For example, if you are making an opposed check (as you would when making a Hide check opposed by a foe’s Spot check), a roll of 1 or 20 has no special significance. As far as I can tell, the grapple section didn't really change from 3.0 to 3.5 so the above should apply... Edit: Not to mention it answers the original question that was asked that sparked this whole mess, i.e. whether natural 1's automatically fail...
TheMagister 03-13-07, 03:41 PM	HA! Have you ever seen "9 to 5"?
Macbrea 03-13-07, 03:43 PM	Why do people reference the 3.0 stuff. It doesn't really apply to 3.5. The game system has moved forward!
McJarvis 03-13-07, 03:45 PM	Why do people reference the 3.0 stuff. It doesn't really apply to 3.5. The game system has moved forward! Because, as the name suggests, 3.5 is ultimately built on 3.0 & 3.0 rules are 3.5 rules, unless other 3.5 sources say otherwise. :P
Macbrea 03-13-07, 03:46 PM	Yes, but referencing how things worked in 3.0 doesn't always do much in 3.5. What it causes is confusion alot of the time.
Hirumajoe 03-13-07, 03:47 PM	Why do people reference the 3.0 stuff. It doesn't really apply to 3.5. The game system has moved forward! Because if it hasn't changed, it still applies. Look at the 3.0 edition grapple rules. They're virtually identical to the 3.5 rules. Besides, the disclaimer at the beginning of the 3.5 faq says: About the FAQ If you have a question about the D&D game rules, you might find them within this FAQ. Any new additions or major corrections in a version are provided in red text for your convenience. Red text changes to black text in the next version. This version of the D&D FAQ uses the 3.5 revision of the core rules and also contains questions covering material from a variety of books (such as Savage Species and Epic Level Handbook). If you haven’t yet adopted the revision, don’t worry—in the rare instance that the answer is different between 3rd edition and the 3.5 revision, we’ll bring it to your attention with a call out that says “Revision Alert.” Given that they don't counter it or show a "Revision Alert", the 3.0 rulings must still apply.
MitzaVolchenko 03-13-07, 03:50 PM	*grins* I wouldn't count on them actually alerting anyone on anything. Keep in mind that statement is based on them noticing a discrepency or change.
Yitzi 03-13-07, 03:59 PM	Rauul, looked over the fight, and there were a number of things that seem wrong: -In round 1, I should have run 4 spaces further-I am able to, as light armor means run is 4X. However, you also gave me more movement than appropriate in round 2, so it balances out. -I cannot use rapid shot in a ready action-rapid shot is an FRA, only standard and below can be readied -You said I lost due to his +3 to hit, I think it might be better attributed to the dice letting me down in those first few critical rounds. There were no major effects, and what there was would give Lorian a higher chance. I need to prepare for next week, so I'm adjusting my char sheet, there is probably no need to rerun the battle (if you do, please PM me and Lorian, letting us know what changed, it will probably just be one arrow less used by me).
Rauul 03-13-07, 04:09 PM	Rauul, looked over the fight, and there were a number of things that seem wrong: -In round 1, I should have run 4 spaces further-I am able to, as light armor means run is 4X. However, you also gave me more movement than appropriate in round 2, so it balances out. yea i noticed it and corrected it on second round -Throughout the fight, you had Lorian's dorja do 1d6 damage, it should be 2d6 due to augmenting See prison thread.. -I cannot use rapid shot in a ready action-rapid shot is an FRA, only standard and below can be readied opps my bad on that... forgot that will give you your 4 arrows back! -You said I lost due to his +3 to hit, I think it might be better attributed to the dice letting me down in those first few critical rounds. Just blame my cursed Dice.. everyone else does.. All the significant mistakes, if corrected, would give Lorian a better chance to win, so all that it affects is expendables used. I need to prepare for next week, so there is probably no need to rerun the battle (if you do, please PM me and Lorian, letting us know what changed). go prepare.. fixing the 4 arrows now..
MindWandererB 03-13-07, 05:14 PM	In general, unless it is specifically a grapple bonus, then no it wouldn't apply to grapples (and likewise for trips, disarms, etc). This issue has been brought up before in other circumstances, and I disagreed with it at the time. Now that I have had more time to read into it though - I am in general agreement with it. So - heroism's bonus would not apply to a grapple. This is the way we were ruling it before the RotG article, but that seems to contradict this.
Maraxus 03-13-07, 07:16 PM	This isn't quite possible. Because your limited to the actions you can do in a grapple. You don't get a standard and a move action in a grapple. ... You do get a move action and a standard action, you just can't use it for everything. ;)
MitzaVolchenko 03-14-07, 05:03 AM	@Vathelokai I am going to have to request a re-run. Only after 96 rounds and most of her ammo she decides to kill the horse he was using for cover because only then it seemed inevitable that it would be a ground fight? Durin had ranged options and hits the delay rule many times in that fight. He also had the option to approach and climb. He is certainly a better climber than Zwei. Durin doesn't even return fire allowing the option to ready and fire when he does negating a portion of his defense, nor does he try to approach or engage. It is hard to say how many times he hit delay because of the sheer volume of rolls. If I can't get her (for example because she sniped at me), take cover (Sleipnir full cover), drop prone and take full defence, untill she runs out of arrows. Manifest Vigor for 2 pp and do so twice again, as soon as the temporary hit points are worked down. There was never a point where he could not get to her. She wasn't hiding her whereabouts, merely taking advantage of the cover provided by the balcony. I'll grant that her option to jump off the balcony and run makes that problematic, but he did have the ability to close with her. Point of fact, I included tactics to delay his closing with her and give her a possible escape window that was by no means sure, but certainly more meaningful than 128 arrows and only choosing to kill the horse he used for cover (without ride checks...who knew horses' legs provided that much cover?) after 96 rounds. He could have sent a shot her way and then retreated from sight to try to force her into delay, but ignoring the delay rule is not really acceptable when it only serves to completely nerf one fighter. This isn't a case of both fighters seeking to engage. I'd appreciate an edit or re-run observing the delay rule.
Maraxus 03-14-07, 08:09 AM	As I said, as far as I read the rules, getting shot counts as "meaningful interaction", therefor no delay penalty. Climbing a balcony while getting shot is definitly no option. Returning fire (from save distance, so it's still a 20-fight) would have definitly been an option, definitly even a better option, however with all the possibilities (sniping, shooting from roofs, shot and run), I took this (legal, as I see it) tactic. Hm, I think you allready got a fair deal when Vath allowed your character to save some arrows to fire at Sleipnir. Oh and then: Zwei taps her lats force screen and resumes the pattern of readying a flurry, then retreating with a punch, figuing 3 attacks to Durin's one is the best option. Sure, it's a good deal, however, you can't ready a flurry (full attack action) and you can't withdraw in the same turn you attack, so a tumble check is needed. Also note, that Zwei does not get out of Durin's charge range, so this will likely not work everywhere on the map (but that is secondary). So, especially without the readied flurry, you don't get better then 2 attacks for one, either meleeing it out flurry vs. Axe-swing, or by reading attack, then striking and retreating with a tumble DC 15 check (where this is possible: given that most streets in the city are longer then 35ft (first 5ft of tumbling cost double), this map is a good example, where it likely works only every 2nd round or something). And Geez... you both need 20s to hit. No, Durin hits on a 17, later 18 ... (well, does not matter, that attack rolls round 140-171 were really bad. ;) ) So: Delaying: No. There is interaction (you can add some meaningful insults, Durin sometimes does that in such situations, where he can't reach an opponent) Reading a flurry: Does not work (but of course since it's to the advantage of the winner, at this state, no need to fix it, just mentioning it in case the fight will be altered)
Vathelokai 03-14-07, 09:01 AM	@Vathelokai I am going to have to request a re-run. Only after 96 rounds and most of her ammo she decides to kill the horse he was using for cover because only then it seemed inevitable that it would be a ground fight?He was using buildings for cover, not the horse. Durin had ranged options and hits the delay rule many times in that fight.As I said, I took pitlord perogative to ignore the delay rule. He may have had ranged options, but they were moot since Zwei has deflect arrows. He also had the option to approach and climb. He is certainly a better climber than Zwei.Zwei has a +2, Durin has a -2 after the armor check penalty. It is entirely possible for him to 5 ft step forward the entire time he is taking arrow fire, they try to climb quickly, but to what effect? Durin doesn't even return fire allowing the option to ready and fire when he does negating a portion of his defense, nor does he try to approach or engage. It is hard to say how many times he hit delay because of the sheer volume of rolls. 12 times. There was never a point where he could not get to her. She wasn't hiding her whereabouts, merely taking advantage of the cover provided by the balcony. I'll grant that her option to jump off the balcony and run makes that problematic, but he did have the ability to close with her. Point of fact, I included tactics to delay his closing with her and give her a possible escape window that was by no means sure, but certainly more meaningful than 128 arrows and only choosing to kill the horse he used for cover (without ride checks...who knew horses' legs provided that much cover?) after 96 rounds.Again, cover from buildings, not horse. He dismounted, then dropped prone, so no ride checks. He could have sent a shot her way and then retreated from sight to try to force her into delay, but ignoring the delay rule is not really acceptable when it only serves to completely nerf one fighter. This isn't a case of both fighters seeking to engage.One of my opinions is that firing arrows at an opponent that is immune to arrows does not count as meaningfull interaction. It serves only to lower ac, which is also a nerf to only one fighter. So the only reasonable counter to the delay penalty for Durin is to inch forward under fire, then try to climb. Zwei, being no fool, will respond by hitting Durin with a tanglefootbag, then using the bought time to flee and find another balcony to repeat the strategy. Once the tanglefoot bags are gone, she can simply flee when Durin gets close. I'd appreciate an edit or re-run observing the delay rule.I can do that; just want to make sure of all things that need fixed before starrting. As I said, as far as I read the rules, getting shot counts as "meaningful interaction", therefor no delay penalty.I'm really not sure how it works. Climbing a balcony while getting shot is definitly no option. Returning fire (from save distance, so it's still a 20-fight) would have definitly been an option, definitly even a better option, however with all the possibilities (sniping, shooting from roofs, shot and run), I took this (legal, as I see it) tactic.Trying to snipe every now and then is an option I suppose, though Zwei's deflect arrows counters most other things. Hm, I think you allready got a fair deal when Vath allowed your character to save some arrows to fire at Sleipnir. Oh and then: Sure, it's a good deal, however, you can't ready a flurry (full attack action) and you can't withdraw in the same turn you attack, so a tumble check is needed. Also note, that Zwei does not get out of Durin's charge range, so this will likely not work everywhere on the map (but that is secondary).Durin got an AoO every time Zwei punched and retreated, but Zwei has the mobility feat, so Durin never hit. As for charge range, Zwei made an effort to go around corners or into yards to avoid a charge line, basicly forcing a double move (thus the 1 round pause between attacks). However, I didn't use the mapper since I was hurrying, and there is a possibilty that every now and then it wouldn't have worked like that. However, Zwei wouldn't have stopped to ready in a location she couldn't retreat from. So, especially without the readied flurry, you don't get better then 2 attacks for one, either meleeing it out flurry vs. Axe-swing, or by reading attack, then striking and retreating with a tumble DC 15 check (where this is possible: given that most streets in the city are longer then 35ft (first 5ft of tumbling cost double), this map is a good example, where it likely works only every 2nd round or something). She just took the attacks of opportunity. Since her speed is double Durins, she can basicly pick where she stops to ready at. There could have been 1 to 9 rounds of delay between each of those ready actions; I just choose to have them every other round to save time running the fight. No, Durin hits on a 17, later 18 ... (well, does not matter, that attack rolls round 140-171 were really bad. )True, but Zwei has +4 mobility ac against attacks of opportunity, so those need a 20. So: Delaying: No. There is interaction (you can add some meaningful insults, Durin sometimes does that in such situations, where he can't reach an opponent) Reading a flurry: Does not work (but of course since it's to the advantage of the winner, at this state, no need to fix it, just mentioning it in case the fight will be altered)We may need an elder to chime in on 'meaningful interaction' deffinition for this fight. I think I explained the flurry thing well enough above.
TheMagister 03-14-07, 09:12 AM	In my ever-so-humble opinion, trusting in a class feature (heavy armor in this instance which contributes to a high AC and a big hit die size contributes to high hp) to see you through a storm of arrows is not delaying. If he's vulnerable to 20s, he's allowing interaction. Just my opinion.
Macbrea 03-14-07, 09:15 AM	We have always played that being a target or pell has always been meaningful interaction.
Zevox 03-14-07, 09:23 AM	I've got to disagree TM. If you're not doing anything yourself, its not meaningful interaction on your part. In my mind, delay tactics such as this "sit and weather the storm arrow" idea has always been one of the things the delay penalty has been meant to prevent. Now, in this particular case, I can see why its difficult to adjudicate, since Durin's ranged options are rendered useless by Zwei's Deflect Arrows and his climb skill is so low he needs to roll a 17+ several times to climb the building. He really doesn't have any truly viable options for striking back. However, he could at least be forced by the delay rule to try the climbing a few times before giving up and sitting back to wait. Thats just my opinion though. Zevox
hogarth 03-14-07, 09:27 AM	Now, in this particular case, I can see why its difficult to adjudicate, since Durin's ranged options are rendered useless by Zwei's Deflect Arrows[.] I thought you were allowed to ready an action to attack when she has both hands on her bow and thus avoid Deflect Arrows. Just a personal note -- fights like this (the inaccessible force vs. the unhittable object, with the inevitable bickering afterwards) are why I gave up on pitlording random arena fights.
Zevox 03-14-07, 09:28 AM	I thought you were allowed to ready an action to attack when she has both hands on her bow and thus avoid Deflect Arrows. Ah, very good point! That is a viable option for him. I'd say that'd be the way to go to avoid this delay penalty issue personally. Zevox
Maraxus 03-14-07, 09:32 AM	Wait, my attacks were AoOs, how is this possible?? Round X: ... starts, Zwei and Durin are -say- 20 ft apart and Zwei goes first. Zwei readies and action to attack. Durin moves in, Zwei attacks, Durin attacks. Round X+1: Zwei punches and get's away more then 20 ft and around a corner to prevent charging. (I'm expecting tumble here) Durin moves into 20 ft Distance again. Round X+2: Zwei readies, Durin moves in, repeat untill somebody is down.
Vathelokai 03-14-07, 09:38 AM	Wait, my attacks were AoOs, how is this possible?? [/u]Round X:[/u] ... starts, Zwei and Durin are -say- 20 ft apart and Zwei goes first. Zwei readies and action to attack. Durin moves in, Zwei attacks, Durin attacks. Round X+1: Zwei punches and get's away more then 20 ft and around a corner to prevent charging. (I'm expecting tumble here) Durin moves into 20 ft Distance again. Round X+2: Zwei readies, Durin moves in, repeat untill somebody is down. Round x+1 Zwei punches and then does a normal move. Durin takes an AoO for Zwei leaving a threatened space. Zwei finishes moving 30-40 ft away around a corner (since she isn't slowed down) Durin closes half the distance to Zwei. Round x+2 Zwei readies to flurry again. Durin moves the rest of the distance to attack. Zwei flurries. Durin attacks. round x+3 Zwei puches and retreats. Durin takes an AoO Zwei moves 40 ft.
Erithmu 03-14-07, 09:39 AM	Wait, my attacks were AoOs, how is this possible?? [/u]Round X:[/u] ... starts, Zwei and Durin are -say- 20 ft apart and Zwei goes first. Zwei readies and action to attack. Durin moves in, Zwei attacks, Durin attacks. Round X+1: Zwei punches and get's away more then 20 ft and around a corner to prevent charging. (I'm expecting tumble here) Durin moves into 20 ft Distance again. Round X+2: Zwei readies, Durin moves in, repeat untill somebody is down. Your forgetting the "Zewi moves, then readies"
Vathelokai 03-14-07, 09:40 AM	I thought you were allowed to ready an action to attack when she has both hands on her bow and thus avoid Deflect Arrows.Never heard of that one. Has this been done before? Anyone have a source? Just a personal note -- fights like this (the inaccessible force vs. the unhittable object, with the inevitable bickering afterwards) are why I gave up on pitlording random arena fights.Dosn't really bother me; heck, I wouldn't even call this bickering; still at the reasonable stages (and going to stay that way, damn it :) ). I just have time constraint issues.
TheMagister 03-14-07, 09:45 AM	Round x+1 Zwei punches and then does a normal move. Durin takes an AoO for Zwei leaving a threatened space. Zwei finishes moving 30-40 ft away around a corner (since she isn't slowed down) Durin closes half the distance to Zwei. Round x+2 Zwei readies delays to flurry. [Initiative change due to delay] Durin moves the rest of the distance to attack and attacks. Zwei flurries. Durin attacks. round x+3 Zwei puches and retreats. Durin takes an AoO Zwei moves 40 ft. Durin attacks. Zwei punches and retreats. Durin takes an AoO. Zwei moves 40 ft. Following this progression, the number of attacks puts Zwei slightly ahead. Zwei: punch + flurry + punch = 4. Durin: AoO + strike + strike = 3. Zwei would do better if she stood still and got a 2-to-1 ratio. I can't think of any situation in which it's better to risk AoOs (when talking about solo play).
Maraxus 03-14-07, 10:07 AM	Round x+1 Zwei punches and then does a normal move. Durin takes an AoO for Zwei leaving a threatened space. Zwei finishes moving 30-40 ft away around a corner (since she isn't slowed down) Durin closes half the distance to Zwei. Round x+2 Zwei readies to flurry again. Durin moves the rest of the distance to attack. Zwei flurries. Durin attacks. round x+3 Zwei puches and retreats. Durin takes an AoO Zwei moves 40 ft. Whoo, you all are posting fast. ;) I like this one, it would be a 3:2 ratio of Zwei's attacks vs. Durin's attacks, and if you also considder, that you can not ready a flurry of blows, because it only works with a full attack, it would even be 2:2. And one of those attacks (x+2 here) would even be against the AC without mobility. The other one could be prevended with a tumble check (reasonable improvisation, that anyone this +13 tumble will want to tumble through threatened squares - but then again, I see no "hit, run, ready" tactics on Zwei's tactics at all.) In no case it would be a 3:1 ratio, like you said (and rolled round 144 to 158). About returning fire: Yes, I first had this in mind, too. Ready to shoot on her shooting, and shoot from hiding over great distance to make the spot check very hard. A good returning fire clause - Including 'choosing the appropriate range' and 'working down her Tatoos of force screen should she use them' in the case she is visible but up somewhere - would have been even better, likely saving me some pp (Durin's HP are 55, his damage average 7.5, while Zwei may deal 11 damage average on a hit, but has only 31 HP, making a better ratio for Durin allready. If I had also said: Wait 9 rounds in full cover, shoot, if she taps a Tatoo, wait behind full cover for another 9 round, then engage again. Then I could have gone over to hiding and suprise-shooting from 220 ft distance, even dwarfs can do such. Voillą, my hit-chances even surpass her's. I even allready wrote "wait 9 rounds between every since arrow" That way, in round 600, when Zwei's Innitial armor goes down (and I did not expect her to renew this, since she only has as many as she has fights this 3FC), only <60 arrows had been shot, increasing my chances again. I thought of equally big thinks against a hiding Zwei, but then, this was all totally, unnecessary complicated. And since - up to my understanding of words - this was not needed, I swiched to this easier to manage tactic. Sure, the chances are worse then a perfectly executed counter tactic to every possible tactic from Zwei's side, but I thought: Hey, let's keep it simple and calculateable. Plus the "9 rounds waiting, 1 round shooting" tactic is not very nice anyway. PS: Btw, about that delaying-penalty for "getting fired at but not returing fire": I also don't think a character should be penaltilised because he has brought a bow. I mean, you would not penatilise me if I did not have it and better equipment should be no disadvantage, I think.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 11:17 AM	PS: Btw, about that delaying-penalty for "getting fired at but not returing fire": I also don't think a character should be penaltilised because he has brought a bow. I mean, you would not penatilise me if I did not have it and better equipment should be no disadvantage, I think. Well delay penalties can and should apply for "weathering the storm". I've done it to the point of waiting out an alter self and shield spell and some other buff to wear off so i could hit the individual. That's part of where the delay penalty rule comes from. From ppl "weathering storms". It's not meaningful interaction. That's what the delay penalty rule is for. No offense, but i'd have delayed you out. You can thank the universe above for a forgiving and thoughful pitlord that allowed you guys to "fight it out until the end". ToK
Maraxus 03-14-07, 11:44 AM	Well delay penalties can and should apply for "weathering the storm". I've done it to the point of waiting out an alter self and shield spell and some other buff to wear off so i could hit the individual. That's part of where the delay penalty rule comes from. From ppl "weathering storms". It's not meaningful interaction. That's what the delay penalty rule is for. No offense, but i'd have delayed you out. You can thank the universe above for a forgiving and thoughful pitlord that allowed you guys to "fight it out until the end". ToK Okay, I'm no Elder, I can't say, what the delay rule is intended to do, but as it is written, you seam wrong. If this is what the rule is supposed to do, than it neds to be re-written. The delay rule prevents consequent hiding, running away. Or to quote it: Note that this limit only applies if one of the characters wants to engage the other, but the other one is hiding, invisible, or out of reach. Was I hiding? No. Invisible? No. Out of reach? Again, no. Penalizing me for lieing there and taking the shoots is just as ridiculus like penalizing my opponent for not coming down from her balcony and attacking me in melee! She was out of reach of my primary and secondary attacks, while I was so nice to place myself in the line of her fire! If anyone should be penalized, start there (no, I'm not demanding that. I think it would be wrong, through less wrong then saying I was "delaying" the fight) I mean, I could have also written: "Wait in this small ally between the red house and the grey house and ready an action to move towards Zwei, once she comes within reach." That would call for delaying. And with my opponents tactics in mind, that would call for a delay penalty for the both of us, somewhat (Because instead of actively searching for me, she climbs on her balcony and waits for me to come). The delay rule does a good job when preventing people to stay invisible/hidden/flying/running and wait for the opponents buffs to end and it does a good job in preventing both players to sneak to a favorable position and then wait for the enemy (if both would and could do that, there would obviously be no fight).
Zevox 03-14-07, 12:03 PM	Never heard of that one. Has this been done before? Anyone have a source? I don't know a specific fight where its been done, but I know it has. An arrow deflector needs a hand free to deflect arrows, so if both hands are occupied firing a bow, then a readied shot will get through at that point in time. Zevox
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 12:45 PM	Okay, I'm no Elder, I can't say, what the delay rule is intended to do, but as it is written, you seam wrong. If this is what the rule is supposed to do, than it neds to be re-written. The delay rule prevents consequent hiding, running away. Or to quote it: Was I hiding? No. Invisible? No. Out of reach? Again, no. Penalizing me for lieing there and taking the shoots is just as ridiculus like penalizing my opponent for not coming down from her balcony and attacking me in melee! She was out of reach of my primary and secondary attacks, while I was so nice to place myself in the line of her fire! If anyone should be penalized, start there (no, I'm not demanding that. I think it would be wrong, through less wrong then saying I was "delaying" the fight) I mean, I could have also written: "Wait in this small ally between the red house and the grey house and ready an action to move towards Zwei, once she comes within reach." That would call for delaying. And with my opponents tactics in mind, that would call for a delay penalty for the both of us, somewhat (Because instead of actively searching for me, she climbs on her balcony and waits for me to come). The delay rule does a good job when preventing people to stay invisible/hidden/flying/running and wait for the opponents buffs to end and it does a good job in preventing both players to sneak to a favorable position and then wait for the enemy (if both would and could do that, there would obviously be no fight). Let me requote you the most relevant part which applies to you in that particular fight.. Note that this limit only applies if one of the characters wants to engage the other, but the other one is hiding, invisible, or out of reach. You clearly had no intentions of engaging. Just my two copper. ToK
MitzaVolchenko 03-14-07, 01:00 PM	Yes, he can ready to fire during the attack. He doesn't specify that tactic, and it is one that I would never employ without it being specified as it is one of the only things that negates ride checks for cover and deflect arrows. Either you know to use it, or you don't. (Thank you TM, for pointing that out to me...didn'thelp Zwei last time and may kill her this time, but still a happy bit of knowledge.) Yes, we consider being shot by a flying mage which the character has absolutely no way to reach as meaningful, but that is not the case here. He has the aiblity to move to her. She also has the ability to hide up there when he refuses to do anything but turtle forcing him to try to reconfirm her location or be in delay. Why after the first say 30 arrows did Zwei not move? not kill the horse? With no round summaries, I presumed that he was using the only thing I could tell that he was near for cover, the horse. I can't tell if Zwei even moved to the end of the balcony to try to negate cover. The final kicker is that I can't spot him over the rooftop. The balcony is below roof level. I would have included that in my first set of arguments, but the board went down while I was looking things over, so I went to bed and am only just now getting back to this. I am still looking, but the things already mentioned are enough to warrant a hold over. Edit Re-run/edit request sent via PM to Vath, Pitlords, Maraxus
Maraxus 03-14-07, 01:15 PM	Let me requote you the most relevant part which applies to you in that particular fight.. You clearly had no intentions of engaging. Just my two copper. ToK So, the rulas say that "A and B" must be given, I say: B is not given and you answer: A is given, that's all what matters. - Sorry it does not work that way. Apart from that, I would have been totally glad, if I had been able to engage. To quote my tactics: If for whatever reason I see Zwei and she is reachable, feel free to charge at her. In melee use the chain of personal superiority and make Trip attacks. Look at it that way: Durin wants to swing his axe at Zwei. Zwei wants to fire her arrows at Durin. Furthermore, Durin had no problem, to swing, while Zwei fires, but Zwei decides to climb a balcony to fire at Durin without him slashing back. To me, this allready sounds like he only needs to sit behind full cover declaring: "She is obviously out of reach, I can't engage, it's her fault, in 10 rounds she should get a delay penalty." I want to engage and so I'm engaging, the plan is to have her run out of arrows, what will force her into melee. But that does not matter at all, because the Rule does not say: "Both characters have to attack another as fast as possible." The rule sais: "Both characters should be doing thier best to fight the other." And getting shot at is fighting. Or to quote the rules again: ... If you do not, the pitlord is free to introduce some unfortunate circumstance (...) that makes you vulnerable and negates the method used to avoid combat. I think no other quote describes the (supposed by me) intention of the rule better then this one. The delay rule is against characters trying to avoid combat. While I get shot, there is combat! Okay, if you are still not convinced, i don't know.
MitzaVolchenko 03-14-07, 01:21 PM	Durin's tactics specify hiding/invisible as the conditions under which Durin can't reach Zwei. Not wanting to climb the balcony is not the same thing as not able to fly. Using the terrain to make you work for it (and frankly I wasn't sure that Zwei would make the climb DC to get onto the balcony...she is abysmal at climbing), should not mean that you get nerfed by pitlords. Durin refused to take the steps to engage.
TheMagister 03-14-07, 01:23 PM	I agree with Maraxus. Getting shot at with arrows is one of the more dangerous ways to play with odds in DnD. If he's willing to roll the dice, he's participating.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 01:24 PM	Ok, you think i'm not on your side on this, i actually am. I don't believe the pitlord did anything wrong in the adjudication concerning the delay rule. I didn't read your tactics, so my apolagies if i jumped the gun. I just would have erred on the side of caution and had you more engaging is all. I'm a little more strict with delay interpretations than most, but i do know it's up to the individual pitlord to enforce it. It's not a hard fast mandatory rule where his/her hands are tied. A Pitlord has a lot of freedom with that area. So Vath was perfectly in his rights to run the delay rule the way he did. That being said, i still think the Pitlord did a great job in the adjudication. I don't think he was out of bounds in his ruling. I didn't read the tactics or fight, i'm just going by message board. ToK *EDIT I agree with Maraxus. Getting shot at with arrows is one of the more dangerous ways to play with odds in DnD. If he's willing to roll the dice, he's participating. Yes, i have seen the light.
Maraxus 03-14-07, 01:27 PM	To say something good (one should not forget this on all this complaining), a 186 rounds fight is allways a very good job. :D Thanks for that, btw.
MitzaVolchenko 03-14-07, 01:33 PM	To say something good (one should not forget this on all this complaining), a 186 rounds fight is allways a very good job. :D Thanks for that, btw. Um, I don't agree that running 186 rounds is always a very good job. I do appreciate any pitlord's efforts, but quantity of rounds does not equal quality of rounds. Vath's efforts are appreciated. *gives Vath big hugs* An example of playing your odds that is not delaying would be Varsh. Let them fire all arrows and just keep advancing. At least he is actively trying to come to melee. Sure, he may not be able to until they run out of arrows, but he is actively advancing. Either way, the fight, in this case is not properly done. Zwei cannot fire through the building. She is not an arcane archer with a seeking arrow or a death arrow going out to find Durin on its own. Edit @ ToK, read it again, please.
Rauul 03-14-07, 01:41 PM	Ok, you think i'm not on your side on this, i actually am. I don't believe the pitlord did anything wrong in the adjudication concerning the delay rule. I didn't read your tactics, so my apolagies if i jumped the gun. I just would have erred on the side of caution and had you more engaging is all. I'm a little more strict with delay interpretations than most, but i do know it's up to the individual pitlord to enforce it. It's not a hard fast mandatory rule where his/her hands are tied. A Pitlord has a lot of freedom with that area. So Vath was perfectly in his rights to run the delay rule the way he did. That being said, i still think the Pitlord did a great job in the adjudication. I don't think he was out of bounds in his ruling. I didn't read the tactics or fight, i'm just going by message board. ToK *EDIT Yes, i have seen the light. i almost would... except for the almost 200 arrows when down range when the guy is prone behind a house (balcony 10 ft, house 20 ft, Dwarf laying on the ground taking a nap behind the 20ft house) Delayed... yes he did.. the Archer would of in all common sence 1) noticed he isn't moving so he may be dead... and desided to wait herself for 9 rds.. (opps can't see through the building) 2) sees the horse and kills it since she don't know if he is behind it or not..(oops can't see through the building) My Questions as a Player.. why would an experianced archer let off 200 arrows and leave herself completely out of arrows... Would Hood? would any archer? Charging the building is meaningful interaction, fireing off an arrow every 9 rds is meaningful interaction... laying on the ground behind a building is not meaningful interaction IMHO
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 01:45 PM	Grr...read my post. I said, if it were me, i'd penalize for delaying. But also at the same time, i'm agreeing there are grey areas and that taking a pounding with arrows is meaningful interaction. As i said, and will say again, I WOULD PENALIZE FOR DELAY, but it's not up to me, it's up to Vath and what Vath did, concerning the delay is perfectly legit. I can't fault him on it, despite that it's not what i would do. There, that should be the end. ToK (from me at least)
MitzaVolchenko 03-14-07, 01:50 PM	Grr...read my post. I said, if it were me, i'd penalize for delaying. But also at the same time, i'm agreeing there are grey areas and that taking a pounding with arrows is meaningful interaction. As i said, and will say again, I WOULD PENALIZE FOR DELAY, but it's not up to me, it's up to Vath and what Vath did, concerning the delay is perfectly legit. I can't fault him on it, despite that it's not what i would do. There, that should be the end. ToK (from me at least) Actually a Pitlord is required to enforce rules, not ignore them. Most of the time when a Pitlord notes and ignore of delay it is because both opponents are actually looking for the other and can't find them ie. the forest map. Vath was pressed for time, which happens to us all. My policy as a pitlord is that if I am pressed for time and there is even one solid objection, I go for hold over and edit or re-run as needed.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 02:00 PM	Actually a Pitlord is required to enforce rules, not ignore them. No rules were ignored, sorry you feel that way. ToK
TheMagister 03-14-07, 02:03 PM	Quit posting about already, both of you (or "all three of you" if you count Maraxus). The PMs have been sent, and the machinery set in motion. Talking about it here with people who have nothing to do with it accomplishes nothing but hard feelings. Let's stop it before it gets outta hand. {Look! I'm a mediator!} :dancin:
MitzaVolchenko 03-14-07, 02:12 PM	No, you're a magister :P I'm not debating any further. My grounds for appeal have been PM'd. Now I have to rely on Vath reappearing to confirm re-run/edit or Pitlords granting it on his own. For clarification, I don't think anyone is too emotionally involved in this one. Though maybe they are, hard to say. I'm not. *big hugs for Maraxus and ToK* (in case they were feeling left out of the Vath hugs)
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 02:17 PM	I never get upset....anymore. LOL. I've learned a long long time ago, that taking things personal or even getting emotional is a one-way track to the dumpster. I just present my opinion (and yes, i am opinionated). "Hugs to all. I just love everyone here, and i want to thank all those that made this opportunity possible. I wanna thank..." ToK
Erithmu 03-14-07, 02:31 PM	I never get upset....anymore. LOL. I've learned a long long time ago, that taking things personal or even getting emotional is a one-way track to the dumpster. I just present my opinion (and yes, i am opinionated). "Hugs to all. I just love everyone here, and i want to thank all those that made this opportunity possible. I wanna thank..." ToK... Me, Myself and I and my opinions without which this moment would not be possible... Man, the finals are starting to get to me ... I promise I'll be sane tomorrow. Where is the smiley in a straight jacket?:twitch:
Vathelokai 03-14-07, 02:31 PM	No, you're a magister :P I'm not debating any further. My grounds for appeal have been PM'd. Now I have to rely on Vath reappearing to confirm re-run/edit or Pitlords granting it on his own. For clarification, I don't think anyone is too emotionally involved in this one. Though maybe they are, hard to say. I'm not. *big hugs for Maraxus and ToK* (in case they were feeling left out of the Vath hugs) I will be re-running it, as I said earlier (though it was burried). At work now; no time to chat. *HUGS*
MitzaVolchenko 03-14-07, 02:36 PM	@Vath Thank you. I appreciate it.
MindWandererB 03-14-07, 02:46 PM	Just wondering why no one quoted this:Similarly, if a wizard is flying over the head of a melee fighter and peppering him with Magic Missiles while he is unable to do anything, no penalty should be given, since there is meaningful interaction between the gladiators.
Horatius 03-14-07, 02:52 PM	Just a comment/question: In the current itteration of the fight, Zwei (as the loser) is gaining over 600xp - shouldn't the xp gain be limited to 600 (ECL*100), regardless of the enemy's ally?
Zevox 03-14-07, 02:54 PM	Just a comment/question: In the current itteration of the fight, Zwei (as the loser) is gaining over 600xp - shouldn't the xp gain be limited to 600 (ECL*100), regardless of the enemy's ally? No. That cap does not apply to bonuses from allies/skill packages (else those would be meaningless if the one gaining them lost), only to the base rewards from the win (for beating a monster battle or higher-level foe, for instance). Zevox
Maraxus 03-14-07, 03:10 PM	No, you're a magister :P I'm not debating any further. My grounds for appeal have been PM'd. Now I have to rely on Vath reappearing to confirm re-run/edit or Pitlords granting it on his own. For clarification, I don't think anyone is too emotionally involved in this one. Though maybe they are, hard to say. I'm not. *big hugs for Maraxus and ToK* (in case they were feeling left out of the Vath hugs) *grummel* Now I get emotionall. I did not delay. The rules on delaying clearly say, that all you have to do is search combat, not, that a melee fighter has to stupidly charge at a house he will never be able to climb while the opponent is attacking him. The rules are clear, you are ignoring them and want to talk the pitlord into the same (and it does not matter to me that you actually believe your "interpretation" is correct). And because I now looked in here and read that vath is rerunning it, not only a fight I won fair will get rolled out again, I also have to set back from active for a week. :ahem: Okay, skip that, since Durin is inactive during the IMT, no problem if the fight get's hold over.
MitzaVolchenko 03-14-07, 03:15 PM	I am truly sorry that you are stuck sitting out a week. It has happened to me more times than I care to think. The delay rule aside, Zwei could not possibly have targetted Durin from the location he was in. With no round summaries (which are required) I can't tell how many other things are not quite right with the fight, but it does warrant edit or re-run. Again, I am sorry for the inconvenience, but look at it from my POV...Zwei wasted a ton of resources doing something that was not even possible. If Durin was going to refuse to engage on the balcony, Zwei did include ground tactics that should take effect...and before she burns 128 arrows firing into the side of a building.
Abyssal Stalker 03-14-07, 03:21 PM	@hogarth: Your assault mission still hangs on the pairings page. Cat hasn't probably noticed that it is finished (Asran assaulting Stygian Strikers).
Maraxus 03-14-07, 03:26 PM	Then Durin just moved another turn to 32,52 and jumped to 34,53 when you shot and everything happens just as described with +1 round. Is this really enough mistake to justify a hold-over? Edit: Ah, the Iron man tournament starts today? Okay, in that case, it does not really matter, because I won't have Durin active anyway.