Post/Author/DateTime	Post
waywreth 05-23-07, 11:09 AM	Fights of the Week: May 23rd 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 MindwandererB will pair the active Characters of Gladius after the deadline. Link to pairings. Make sure that your character is not in prison. 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 The Iron Man tournament continues this week - good luck to all involved. 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!
Abyssal Stalker 05-23-07, 02:23 PM	I took a headstart and posted Rauul's and SoulLord's miniquests. Please tell me if you edit your characters between about one hour ago and the deadline.
Macbrea 05-23-07, 02:28 PM	Hmm, three active in the ECL 8 league. Duet, Kervan and Izumi... :P
TelinArtho 05-23-07, 02:30 PM	Hmm - good point Macbrea... maybe I'll go activate Jar-red...
McJarvis 05-23-07, 02:31 PM	Hmm - good point Macbrea... maybe I'll go activate Jar-red... Jar-red vs Duet could be an interesting battle!
Zevox 05-23-07, 02:31 PM	Heh, think thats bad, theres only two active at ECL 7. Looks like Arden gets to torture Rubicanti a little bit more :plotting: . Zevox
Macbrea 05-23-07, 02:32 PM	Yeah.. bring it.. only 33% you get Izumi.. :P You know.. her 597 power rating is gonna hurt when she beats someone again!
TelinArtho 05-23-07, 02:34 PM	Well - unfortunately he has a lot of work to be done to finish leveling to ECL8 - not the least of which is spending some of his 14kgp nest egg on his new animal companion... I don't think I could be ready in 24 minutes...
McJarvis 05-23-07, 02:35 PM	Well - unfortunately he has a lot of work to be done to finish leveling to ECL8 - not the least of which is spending some of his 14kgp nest egg on his new animal companion... I don't think I could be ready in 24 minutes... just set to ready & set to ready go with the flow :) edit-> did I really just say that? B-O
Rauul 05-23-07, 02:42 PM	I took a headstart and posted Rauul's and SoulLord's miniquests. Please tell me if you edit your characters between about one hour ago and the deadline. No edit from me since he leveled.. and this is his last fight this cycle.. thanks for the head start thou :)
TelinArtho 05-23-07, 02:51 PM	Well, certainly Jar-red has no need to spend his money but I do want to give him some thought - because otherwise it just sits there... Hmm - this actually got me thinking - can a lycanthrope in hybrid form activate a wand? In hybrid form you are not allowed to cast spells with verbal components - but I don't know if this excludes activating items with command words or not...
Usurpator 05-23-07, 02:57 PM	Three gladiators active in the ECL5 League, two of which mine.... :weep: I personally hate monster fights, especially mandatory ones. What are my options, should I pull back a gladiator? But then again, it becomes a bit unfair, since then I can practically choose which gladiator faces my lone opponent. What to do?
waywreth 05-23-07, 02:59 PM	Three gladiators active in the ECL5 League, two of which mine.... :weep: I personally hate monster fights, especially mandatory ones. What are my options, should I pull back a gladiator? But then again, it becomes a bit unfair, since then I can practically choose which gladiator faces my lone opponent. What to do? Sorry, I pulled my ECL5 wizard since I realized that elves can't become Red Wizards (and yes it took me to ECL5 to notice that).
TelinArtho 05-23-07, 03:00 PM	Well - its not a guaranteed monster fight - but it certainly appears that it is a possibility - since a hunter or FFA is out of the range of possibility. You could have then paired up to face an ECL7 character - but that seems unlikely. And then there's the possibility of two ECL3 characters being paired with one of your ECL5 characters - but I think the restrictions on ECL3 prevent that... You could ask MWB to pair one of them and leave the other one out on this one occasion. I'm not sure if he wants the hassle of it - but it doesn't hurt to ask...
McJarvis 05-23-07, 03:06 PM	I noticed there's a holdover fight this week[because one of my chars is in it]. Is this going to endanger our pitlord population? [1 extra fight + 1 probable less pitlord]
Usurpator 05-23-07, 03:07 PM	You could ask MWB to pair one of them and leave the other one out on this one occasion. I'm not sure if he wants the hassle of it - but it doesn't hurt to ask... Crap, now it's two garantueed monster fights, or a fight in the an ECL 7 league. I think I'll pull my gladiators then. Monster fights are way boring to me.
Usurpator 05-23-07, 03:14 PM	I have activated my two ECL3 characters (only ones I know are completely edited and ready for fighting). I'll PM MWB to have them fight instead of the ECL5's then if no one shows up in that league. I'm within the deadline, am I not?
waywreth 05-23-07, 03:17 PM	I'm within the deadline, am I not? Actually... no. It was 15 minutes or so ago. The most important deadline for a player is Wednesday 12 PM PST/3 PM EST on Wednesday because this is the deadline for editing your sheet. If you edit your sheet after this time, you auto-lose your assigned fight.
McJarvis 05-23-07, 03:18 PM	I have activated my two ECL3 characters (only ones I know are completely edited and ready for fighting). I'll PM MWB to have them fight instead of the ECL5's then if no one shows up in that league. I'm within the deadline, am I not? I'm pretty sure MWB will let it slide if he hasn't started pairing yet, though. Cat always did, at least.. [[not to imply that MWB is bound by Cat's decisions, of course...]]
Macbrea 05-23-07, 03:21 PM	got to love those twittle your thumb type weeks for a character... Relanex Thines (Macbrea) crafts a wand of fireball (CL 8, 18000 gp) [Week 2/3]
MindWandererB 05-23-07, 03:23 PM	No problems anyway--I missed Lightwolf's levelup. So there are enough opponents to face there.
Usurpator 05-23-07, 03:24 PM	So, it's two monster fights and two auto-losses this week for me going strictly by the rules. That's not particularly heartening... Well, if MindWandererB started the pairing already, then my ECL3 simply won't be paired, hence no auto-loss. I think the idea behind the rule is not to edit your characters *after* the pairings right? So that it should be covered looking at the spirit of the rules.
Rauul 05-23-07, 03:29 PM	got to love those twittle your thumb type weeks for a character... Relanex Thines (Macbrea) crafts a wand of fireball (CL 8, 18000 gp) [Week 2/3] Am shocked the people in your league aren't making protection from fire wands LOL
TelinArtho 05-23-07, 03:32 PM	In general I'd send a quick pm to your pitlord and opponent(s) about the late editing. Since it is before the actual pairings - it is usually not a problem. If I am your opponent - I certainly have no issue with it.
waywreth 05-23-07, 03:32 PM	So, it's two monster fights and two auto-losses this week for me going strictly by the rules. That's not particularly heartening... Well, if MindWandererB started the pairing already, then my ECL3 simply won't be paired, hence no auto-loss. I think the idea behind the rule is not to edit your characters *after* the pairings right? So that it should be covered looking at the spirit of the rules. I wouldn't worry about an autoloss (I certainly wouldn't hold you to it if you were fighting my characters) but the issue was MWB might have already paired the ECL3 characters.
Macbrea 05-23-07, 03:33 PM	Am shocked the people in your league aren't making protection from fire wands LOL Some already have wands of resist energy.
TelinArtho 05-23-07, 03:35 PM	Am shocked the people in your league aren't making protection from fire wands LOL And hence the reason I didn't want to activate Jar-red prematurely... *Purchases Wand of Resist Energy (CL2)...
Macbrea 05-23-07, 03:36 PM	The wand of fireballs was originally started because I needed to get rid of summons and allies. I am more likely to use my personal spells vs an actual gladiator.
waywreth 05-23-07, 03:37 PM	Of course that's only resistance 10 (unless they're 7th level or higher wands).
Macbrea 05-23-07, 03:39 PM	8d6 ~ 3.5 x 8 ~ 28 at DC 14 = average 14 damage - 10 = 4... not much worry.
waywreth 05-23-07, 03:45 PM	8d6 ~ 3.5 x 8 ~ 28 at DC 14 = average 14 damage - 10 = 4... not much worry. Math like that is why I rethought my wizards career as an evoker. It's all about the save or die spells. But, I do like your idea of using the fireballs to clear out allies/summons.
TelinArtho 05-23-07, 03:46 PM	Of course that's only resistance 10 (unless they're 7th level or higher wands). 8d6 ~ 3.5 x 8 ~ 28 at DC 14 = average 14 damage - 10 = 4... not much worry. Well - that's for certain. Jar-red has a reflex save of +9 and he's also got enough hit points to be able to last while closing the distance... The resistance just helps make sure I can close the distance in time...
Macbrea 05-23-07, 03:48 PM	Well, I do everything on averages. Relanex will have enough at the end of his next 3FC win or lose to make a wand of MM CL 9. If your opponent doesn't have shield the average damage is (2.5 x 5) + 5 = 17.5 damage per charge. You will note that is actually higher then the fireball wand. My opponents that can put up shield probably will have difficulty with other spells in his inventory. Those that cannot, have to kill him quickly or die.
MindWandererB 05-23-07, 04:00 PM	And, pairings are done.
TelinArtho 05-23-07, 04:02 PM	Darrgon and Kai Engal already faced each other in the current ECL3 league (just 2 weeks ago). Any possibility of switching someone out?
McJarvis 05-23-07, 04:05 PM	And, pairings are done. Taren Rune (NiQil) vs. General Zaroff (McJarvis) : Zevox [Arena] General Zaroff is doing an intercept for PSI this week.
MindWandererB 05-23-07, 04:09 PM	Darrgon and Kai Engal already faced each other in the current ECL3 league (just 2 weeks ago). Any possibility of switching someone out?Taren Rune (NiQil) vs. General Zaroff (McJarvis) : Zevox [Arena] General Zaroff is doing an intercept for PSI this week. Taren Rune (NiQil) vs. Kai Engel (Hirumajoe) : TelinArtho [Arena] Darrgon the Summoner (TelinArtho) vs. Kathren Durrol (Zevox) : Sjiggie [Arena]
TelinArtho 05-23-07, 04:12 PM	Heh - except Darrgon and Kathren faced off this last week... How about Taren vs Darrgon and Kai vs Kathren?
MindWandererB 05-23-07, 04:15 PM	Heh - except Darrgon and Kathren faced off this last week... How about Taren vs Darrgon and Kai vs Kathren? Done.
MindWandererB 05-23-07, 04:19 PM	Credits: +5: SauroGrenom +4: Rauul, TelinArtho, Vathelokai, Zevox +3: MindWandererB, templer10, TheMagister +1: Abyssal Stalker, Macbrea, MitzaVolchenko, Sjiggie, Yitzi -1: Erithmu, NiQil
waywreth 05-23-07, 04:22 PM	You know... if I had the chance to pick the worst two matchups possible on the ECL3 listing... the ones I got would've been my choices.
Rauul 05-23-07, 04:22 PM	Good lord... 2 elves in the all vs all and you wonder why Graashnak hates Elves!!!
Rauul 05-23-07, 04:28 PM	Miniquest for Enoch the Prophet (Salrantol) is up and ready.. Corpse of the Damned ECL 6 (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?p=12478673#post12478673)
Usurpator 05-23-07, 04:33 PM	And, pairings are done. Thanks MWB! Q: Can you intimidate familiars? If so, what CR are they?
McJarvis 05-23-07, 04:34 PM	Thanks MWB! Q: Can you intimidate familiars? If so, what CR are they? 1) Yes. 2) Proper CR for an animal advanced that many HD.
TelinArtho 05-23-07, 04:40 PM	Except standard familiars are magical beasts...
templer10 05-23-07, 04:42 PM	MWB - dunerunner is ECL 4 so tha means he should be getting a monster fight - another possibility is sending Lord lorian or another of my ECL 6's into inter league fight vs 2 ECL 4's - lord lorian at the moment has monster fight at ECL 6 (althrough in all fairness it really should be longshot since the undertaker has no chance in hell to win against Him since he can dispell whatever debuffs he throw and he cant do enough dmg to knock down his 100+ hp.) and on another note- elrick VS maya again? to the members of the 4 way FFA (ecl 4) in the forest - please try to do tactics ASAP - that 1 will take me a hell of a lot of time i expect.
McJarvis 05-23-07, 04:48 PM	Except standard familiars are magical beasts... I just assumed animal since they're treated as an animal for other purposes as well[Familiars->Alterself, RotG] In the end, whichever we choose would be a made-up figure. They technically have *no* CR, but that clearly isn't acceptable.
Usurpator 05-23-07, 04:55 PM	1) Yes. 2) Proper CR for an animal advanced that many HD. Im talking about Lightwolf Phoenixstar's rat familiar. A normal rat has CR 1/8, it has been advanced by 4.75 HD, magical beast CR increases by 1 for each 3 HD added. So it has CR 1+ 1/8 (rounded down to 1)? It's wisdom is 12, so it has a courage value of 2? Aramur has Intimidate +7, that is 5 points higher, so the Rat familiar is frightened for the first 4 rounds, shaken for the rest of combat, right? EDIT: obviously, this isn't 'by-the-book' advancement. Nobody ever intimidate a familiar in CoCo?
TelinArtho 05-23-07, 04:57 PM	Shame on you for intimidating a rat...
Macbrea 05-23-07, 04:57 PM	@Rauul: Tactics for Izumi have been sent.
McJarvis 05-23-07, 04:58 PM	Im talking about Lightwolf Phoenixstar's rat familiar. A normal rat has CR 1/8, it has been advanced by 4.75 HD, magical beast CR increases by 1 for each 3 HD added. So it has CR 1+ 1/8 (rounded down to 1)? It's wisdom is 12, so it has a courage value of 2? Aramur has Intimidate +7, that is 5 points higher, so the Rat familiar is frightened for the first 4 rounds, shaken for the rest of combat, right? EDIT: obviously, this isn't 'by-the-book' advancement. Nobody ever intimidate a familiar in CoCo? That's my understanding of it. TIM did it a few times, but we never got an official ruling on the correct way to do it. (He used stats similar to what you just used)
Usurpator 05-23-07, 05:01 PM	And Usurpator's rule clarification questions strike again! Frightened: A frightened creature flees from the source of its fear as best it can. If unable to flee, it may fight. A frightened creature takes a –2 penalty on all attack rolls, saving throws, skill checks, and ability checks. A frightened creature can use special abilities, including spells, to flee; indeed, the creature must use such means if they are the only way to escape. Frightened is like shaken, except that the creature must flee if possible. Panicked is a more extreme state of fear. So, this sort of assumes that the source of the fear can be seen/determined. In arena fights in many situations the source of the fear cannot be seen initially. What happens? What happens if you can hear the source of the fear, but not see it?
Macbrea 05-23-07, 05:05 PM	Well panicked if you cannot find your target is a random direction.
Rauul 05-23-07, 05:13 PM	to the members of the 4 way FFA (ecl 4) in the forest - please try to do tactics ASAP - that 1 will take me a hell of a lot of time i expect. Graashnak Tactics sent for the Battle of the Jungle... 2 new sets of elf ears for his necklace of ears...
TelinArtho 05-23-07, 05:24 PM	Tactics for Darrgon and Vallgar have been sent to Sjiggie and Rauul respectively.
MindWandererB 05-23-07, 05:58 PM	MWB - dunerunner is ECL 4 so tha means he should be getting a monster fight - another possibility is sending Lord lorian or another of my ECL 6's into inter league fight vs 2 ECL 4's - lord lorian at the moment has monster fight at ECL 6 (althrough in all fairness it really should be longshot since the undertaker has no chance in hell to win against Him since he can dispell whatever debuffs he throw and he cant do enough dmg to knock down his 100+ hp.) and on another note- elrick VS maya again? to the members of the 4 way FFA (ecl 4) in the forest - please try to do tactics ASAP - that 1 will take me a hell of a lot of time i expect. All right: Kazero Zenigame (Aura_Blade) vs. Unknown Monster : templer10 [Arena] Balthazar Picsou (hogarth) vs. Dunerunner (Yitzi) : Zevox [Forest] Mohmat Iptomor (Eluria) vs. Graashnak Vruuurk (Rauul) vs. Tyden Rayn (NiQil) : templer10 [Forest] [All-vs-All] As for Elrick/Maya: Different map, could be a very different fight.
templer10 05-23-07, 06:08 PM	As for Elrick/Maya: Different map, could be a very different fight. oh - i know - it's juat a pain in the ass to write tactics lol. good thing you didnt have time to get energy adaptation stones since last time or i would be in a world of hurt.
templer10 05-23-07, 06:15 PM	Aura_Blade - monster for kazero rolled - 1 large construct.
Rauul 05-23-07, 06:22 PM	All right: Kazero Zenigame (Aura_Blade) vs. Unknown Monster : templer10 [Arena] Balthazar Picsou (hogarth) vs. Dunerunner (Yitzi) : Zevox [Forest] Mohmat Iptomor (Eluria) vs. Graashnak Vruuurk (Rauul) vs. Tyden Rayn (NiQil) : templer10 [Forest] [All-vs-All] As for Elrick/Maya: Different map, could be a very different fight. O-well same tactics... nothing changes... rather have the 2 elves but 1 will work.. :)
MindWandererB 05-23-07, 06:46 PM	oh - i know - it's juat a pain in the ass to write tactics lol. good thing you didnt have time to get energy adaptation stones since last time or i would be in a world of hurt. And I'd be in a world of poverty. Is there any energy type Elrick isn't packing? Normal flame, acid flame, sonic flame, call lightning... aha! no cold. So only 600 gp to protect myself from everything.... Yeah, let's try that again at ECL 8, when I can get unspecified Energy Adaptation (and a flying mount).
Rauul 05-23-07, 07:15 PM	Sybil ap Kalten Quest is up.. Quest: Draconic Homecoming ECL 6 (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=852218)
Sjiggie 05-23-07, 07:31 PM	Zevox: Featylec Miniquest good luck!
TheMagister 05-23-07, 08:24 PM	Rubicanti (TheMagister) vs. Arden Tarmik (Zevox) : Macbrea [Cavern] @!%%&*#!! No love in the pairings roller. Same type of map and everything. No running room and the potential of plenty of buffing time, and Rubi without many of his AC increasing buffs. Crud. Edit: Can I flurry touch attacks now? I've got an Elder majority but no hard and fast decision...
Eluria 05-23-07, 08:53 PM	@T10 - tactics sent for Mohmat vs. Graaaash vs. Tyden in Forest FFA; good luck pitlording it!
Rauul 05-23-07, 10:19 PM	Someday someone is gonna quest to kill the fire mephit... I feel it coming.. he is an annoying little dude..
hogarth 05-23-07, 10:24 PM	@Zevox: tactics sent for Balthazar Picsou.
TheMagister 05-23-07, 10:37 PM	@templer10 - Monster Info for Lord Lorian is up here. TM
TheMagister 05-23-07, 11:35 PM	Aight, McJ. I just need tactics for General Zaroff vs. a by-the-book lizardfolk with standard equipment. TM
waywreth 05-23-07, 11:46 PM	@Zevox - Tactics sent for Vantis in Vantis Dar'ath (waywreth) vs. Psellus the Frail (Khaim) : Zevox [Arena] @Templar10 - Tactics sent for Inzin in Apocalypse (NiQil) vs. Inzin Dar'ath (waywreth) : templer10 [Arena] And if I win either of those, I will be surprised.
templer10 05-23-07, 11:51 PM	And I'd be in a world of poverty. Is there any energy type Elrick isn't packing? Normal flame, acid flame, sonic flame, call lightning... aha! no cold. So only 600 gp to protect myself from everything.... Yeah, let's try that again at ECL 8, when I can get unspecified Energy Adaptation (and a flying mount). iam not carring produce flame (subdual).... (which i will in ECL 8) But you did get a much more favorable map this time.
Zevox 05-23-07, 11:56 PM	@ MWB - Monster info is up. Probably a little too obvious on at least one, but I couldn't think of a way not to make it so... Zevox
MindWandererB 05-23-07, 11:58 PM	Aight, McJ. I just need tactics for General Zaroff vs. a by-the-book lizardfolk with standard equipment. TMIt's not a by-the-book lizardfolk. It's an NPC, which means elite stats and gear. Just because he has no class levels doesn't mean he doesn't enjoy the other benefits.
TheMagister 05-24-07, 12:03 AM	Oh! That changes things a little. Not much, but a little.
Vathelokai 05-24-07, 12:04 AM	Another intimidate question: Can you use the 'intimidate animal' part of the intimidate package if you have no ranks in handle animal? Meaning if your chr mod is higher than the allies CR? As a Free Activity, you can use your Intimidate skill to scare one or more allies of your opponent that have an intelligence of 3 or more. Your Intimidate value must be at least as high as (Ally CR + Ally Wisdom + Resistance to fear) to affect him or her (called Courage Value). There are three different effects depending on your Intimidate value relative to the Courage Value: * Scared: Your intimidate skill is at least equal to the ally's Courage Value. Your opponent's ally is Shaken for the entire combat. * Frightened: Your intimidate value is higher than the Courage Value by 5 or more. Your opponent's ally is Frightened for the first 4 rounds, then is Shaken for the entire combat. * Panicked: Your intimidate value is higher than the Courage Value by 10 or more. Your opponent's ally is Panicked and does not appear to the fight. Multiple Allies: If the opponent has more than one ally, you can decide which ally you want to intimidate. After having intimidated the first ally, deduct the the Courage Value from your Intimidate Value. If you have points left, you can intimidate another ally (and so on) but your Intimidate value is decreased after each intimidation. Handle Animal: If you also have a Handle Animal value equal to the CR of an opponent's ally, you may also intimidate animals. If you have a Handle Animal value of CR+5 you can intimidate magical beasts and vermin. Note: If the ally is immune to fear, he is also not subject to Intimidate. If the master has the Aura of Courage (Paladin 3), the ally gains an additional +4 bonus to resist the level check. Side note: this intimidate thing may need some tweaking...
Zevox 05-24-07, 12:05 AM	Another intimidate question: Can you use the 'intimidate animal' part of the intimidate package if you have no ranks in handle animal? Meaning if your chr mod is higher than the allies CR? HANDLE ANIMAL (CHA; TRAINED ONLY) I think that says it all. Zevox
MindWandererB 05-24-07, 12:08 AM	I think that says it all.It doesn't, really. HA is trained only for some applications, but not for others.@ MWB - Monster info is up. Probably a little too obvious on at least one, but I couldn't think of a way not to make it so...You're right; it was a little obvious. And I think it calls for a reroll; a CR 7 and a CR 4 monster isn't EL 8. It should be a CR 7 and a CR 5. If I'm wrong about what it is, I'll go with what you have, but if I'm right, you should correct it.
Zevox 05-24-07, 12:11 AM	You're right; it was a little obvious. And I think it calls for a reroll; a CR 7 and a CR 4 monster isn't EL 8. It should be a CR 7 and a CR 5. If I'm wrong about what it is, I'll go with what you have, but if I'm right, you should correct it. According to this thing (http://www.d20srd.org/encounterCalculator.htm), 1 CR 4 + 1 CR 7 = EL 8. If you want it with a tougher cohort though, I'm game for rerolling on the EL 5 table ;) . Zevox
NiQil 05-24-07, 12:33 AM	@ templer10: Tactics for Apocalypse sent via PM @ Yitzi: Tactics for Blitzkrieg sent via PM @ Sjiggie: Tactics for Taren Rune sent via PM @ templer10: Tactics for Tyden Rayn sent via PM If I win any fights this week, I will be surprised.
Rauul 05-24-07, 12:47 AM	@ templer10: Tactics for Apocalypse sent via PM @ Yitzi: Tactics for Blitzkrieg sent via PM @ Sjiggie: Tactics for Taren Rune sent via PM @ templer10: Tactics for Tyden Rayn sent via PM If I win any fights this week, I will be surprised. I will chear for you... just not in the all for all.. but in the rest i will :)
Vathelokai 05-24-07, 12:48 AM	@Yitzi: tactics for both of my fights sent (Zodiac and Unholy Ninja).
Abyssal Stalker 05-24-07, 01:02 AM	@MWB: There has been a mistake from SoulLord. Vandelar should be active, but I see that he had the title wrong. I alredy have started his MQ, so if you could add that to the pairings and also add me +1 credit.
templer10 05-24-07, 04:16 AM	mitza- tactics for longshot against the udertaker sent- shouldnt be 2 hard to run.
MindWandererB 05-24-07, 04:18 AM	According to this thing (http://www.d20srd.org/encounterCalculator.htm), 1 CR 4 + 1 CR 7 = EL 8. If you want it with a tougher cohort though, I'm game for rerolling on the EL 5 table ;) . Zevox That calculator rounds in some odd ways. By the book, it should be 7+5 (it's even on the chart here). Not that I really want it to be harder, but I have to live with the same rules that apply to everyone else. @Abyssal: Done, but let's not make a habit of this, hm?
Abyssal Stalker 05-24-07, 04:50 AM	That calculator rounds in some odd ways. By the book, it should be 7+5 (it's even on the chart here). Not that I really want it to be harder, but I have to live with the same rules that apply to everyone else. @Abyssal: Done, but let's not make a habit of this, hm? Hey, I wasn't the one who had his title line wrong... ;)
templer10 05-24-07, 05:16 AM	telin - tactics for Elrick VS maya (defending the crown) are sent - got it in 1 PM (barely) this time. i hope MWB dont do that vigor until infinity thing again sigh.
templer10 05-24-07, 05:56 AM	themagister - tactics for Lord lorian vs monster sent - i would appriciate if you could update the monster name in the description so i can see if i have a chance - that is assuming you have no questions about the tactics - and let me just say - I HATE MONSTER FIGHTS.
hogarth 05-24-07, 06:37 AM	and let me just say - I HATE MONSTER FIGHTS. I share your feelings...
templer10 05-24-07, 06:46 AM	I share your feelings... that will teach me not to be skimpy on the knowladge skills i guess sigh.
Sjiggie 05-24-07, 06:51 AM	Just spend 1 skill point in each knowledge skill that you have on you class skills list and you know most of the time more than without :p
McJarvis 05-24-07, 08:59 AM	Oh! That changes things a little. Not much, but a little. Tactics for the "Cleric of Denth: Part 2" fight are sent! :)
Rauul 05-24-07, 09:19 AM	Tactics for the "Cleric of Denth: Part 2" fight are sent! :) well where is the duet's tactics?
McJarvis 05-24-07, 09:20 AM	well where is the duet's tactics? We're working on them :P Izumi is a bit more complicated of an opponent than an ECL 3 lizardfolk NPC. ;)
Rauul 05-24-07, 09:21 AM	We're working on them :P Izumi is a bit more complicated of an opponent than an ECL 3 lizardfolk NPC. ;) Izumi is just big.. and smashes things.. hard!.. LOL acually Mac is the complicated one
McJarvis 05-24-07, 09:31 AM	Izumi is just big.. and smashes things.. hard!.. LOL acually Mac is the complicated one See? The Lizard folk is small, and doesn't do much of anything. MUCH less complicated ;)
Macbrea 05-24-07, 10:11 AM	Izumi isn't tough.. She has 9pp coming into the match with 3pp pre-buffed into a disolving weapon. In a closet, she will head toward her enemy and hit them really hard. You can assume her AC is 28. If that helps. :P Go ahead and use the wand of resistance for acid. Because, that is what she can put down range. If not the first time she hits it will be 7d6+9 + 4d6 acid ~ 33 slashing + 14 acid.
TelinArtho 05-24-07, 10:18 AM	Looks like the roller and mapper are inaccessible to me at the moment... Spoke too soon - seems to be back up.
Rauul 05-24-07, 11:07 AM	hmm reading the tactics for the 3 way fight... it's gonna be a tough fight.. Good luck to all of us..
templer10 05-24-07, 11:26 AM	rauul - which week is it for graashak- week 1?
Rauul 05-24-07, 11:30 AM	rauul - which week is it for graashak- week 1? yes.. did i forget to clear his 3fc? yea.. mission lasted 2 weeks instead of the normal 3 (we died week 2) and then he did his crafting and selling.. and 3fc started
Khaim 05-24-07, 11:33 AM	@Zevox - Tactics sent for Vantis in Vantis Dar'ath (waywreth) vs. Psellus the Frail (Khaim) : Zevox [Arena] @Templar10 - Tactics sent for Inzin in Apocalypse (NiQil) vs. Inzin Dar'ath (waywreth) : templer10 [Arena] And if I win either of those, I will be surprised. @Zevox - Tactics for Psellus are in. @waywreth: I think you underestimate yourself. You have scary damage, especially given our low hp totals. If you get within Scorching Ray range, I'm dead. So basically it's a question of whether I can pull a Sleep off before you close and burn me to death in one spell. Edit: Also, check the Prison. Your spellcasting is a bit off.
templer10 05-24-07, 11:38 AM	yes.. did i forget to clear his 3fc? yea.. mission lasted 2 weeks instead of the normal 3 (we died week 2) and then he did his crafting and selling.. and 3fc started not exacly your PPS confused me - why does it list you only have 6 pps in total? it should be 8 - 1(class), 2(bonus), 2 (first psionic talent), 3 (second psionic talent).
Rauul 05-24-07, 12:06 PM	not exacly your PPS confused me - why does it list you only have 6 pps in total? it should be 8 - 1(class), 2(bonus), 2 (first psionic talent), 3 (second psionic talent). go back through the 4 times he has been put in prison for his pps.. yes i believe it should be 8.. but i will use 6 (2 per fight) and not complain.. Level 3 (1 bonus from wis, 2 bonus from feat) Level 4 (1 bonus from wis, 1 from pw, 1 from feat) for a total of 6 Now i thought... Special You can take this feat multiple times. Each time you take the feat after the first time, the number of power points you gain increases by 1. that that ment i get 3 instead of 1 since the first one gave me 2 pps.. but after being in prison so much i guess i was wrong..
templer10 05-24-07, 12:10 PM	go back through the 4 times he has been put in prison for his pps.. yes i believe it should be 8.. but i will use 6 (2 per fight) and not complain.. Level 3 (1 bonus from wis, 2 bonus from feat) Level 4 (1 bonus from wis, 1 from pw, 1 from feat) for a total of 6 Now i thought... that that ment i get 3 instead of 1 since the first one gave me 2 pps.. but after being in prison so much i guess i was wrong.. i think you should ask in the tavern/courtroom since i see niqil use it as 2,3,4 etc and not to mention the fact that doing 2,1 doesnt make sens since it essentielly means you cant take the feat more then twice (first time 2 pps, second time 1 pps, third time 0 pps?)
NiQil 05-24-07, 12:11 PM	go back through the 4 times he has been put in prison for his pps.. yes i believe it should be 8.. but i will use 6 (2 per fight) and not complain.. Level 3 (1 bonus from wis, 2 bonus from feat) Level 4 (1 bonus from wis, 1 from pw, 1 from feat) for a total of 6 Now i thought... that that ment i get 3 instead of 1 since the first one gave me 2 pps.. but after being in prison so much i guess i was wrong.. No, you are not wrong. Everytime you take the feat, you gain that many more pp. Look at Taren Rune or Apocalypse and their respective feat progressions for examples. The total is cumulative each time you take the feat. Otherwise, the feat would just get more and more worthless each time you took it.
templer10 05-24-07, 12:19 PM	No, you are not wrong. Everytime you take the feat, you gain that many more pp. Look at Taren Rune or Apocalypse and their respective feat progressions for examples. The total is cumulative each time you take the feat. Otherwise, the feat would just get more and more worthless each time you took it. hope rauul doesnt mind iam getting free credits off his back just now then. :D p.s. niqil- you have 10 PPS for that fight not 9 - 2 from last fight +8.
NiQil 05-24-07, 12:24 PM	hope rauul doesnt mind iam getting free credits off his back just now then. :D p.s. niqil- you have 10 PPS for that fight not 9 - 2 from last fight +8. How do you figure? I leveled after Fight 1, and I used 6 in my first fight. I have 23 pp available for 3 fights, which breaks down to 7/8/8. Take 6 from the first fight, leaving me with 8 +1 carryover.
templer10 05-24-07, 12:35 PM	How do you figure? I leveled after Fight 1, and I used 6 in my first fight. I have 23 pp available for 3 fights, which breaks down to 7/8/8. Take 6 from the first fight, leaving me with 8 +1 carryover. no actually - 23= 8 per fight since you round upwards- doesnt matter if you leveled after that fight. (since it only matter how much you used in fact, not what you COULD have uesd).
NiQil 05-24-07, 12:38 PM	no actually - 23= 8 per fight since you round upwards- doesnt matter if you leveled after that fight. (since it only matter how much you used in fact, not what you COULD have uesd). I see what you mean...naw...I run my pp a little differently. Doing it your way leaves me nerfed for fight 3. My way still gives me equal distribution over all 3 matches. But technically you are correct.
templer10 05-24-07, 12:41 PM	I see what you mean...naw...I run my pp a little differently. Doing it your way leaves me nerfed for fight 3. My way still gives me equal distribution over all 3 matches. But technically you are correct. well ill use 9 for you since that's what you spesified - i just write 10 since that is the correct listing. p.s - eluria is going to kick himself when he realize that his compression wont give him bonus to hit becuase his Bow has a str rating for his normal size....
NiQil 05-24-07, 12:46 PM	well ill use 9 for you since that's what you spesified - i just write 10 since that is the correct listing. p.s - eluria is going to kick himself when he realize that his compression wont give him bonus to hit becuase his Bow has a str rating for his normal size.... I think he'll kick himself more for that opening round enervation....
templer10 05-24-07, 12:50 PM	I think he'll kick himself more for that opening round enervation.... true lol
Rauul 05-24-07, 12:51 PM	hope rauul doesnt mind iam getting free credits off his back just now then. :D p.s. niqil- you have 10 PPS for that fight not 9 - 2 from last fight +8. Acually i am more ****** at being in prison for the 4th time do to pps when he hasn't taken a damn level in a psionc class since i started him... means the other 3 should LOOSE thier credits
waywreth 05-24-07, 01:28 PM	@Zevox - Tactics for Psellus are in. @waywreth: I think you underestimate yourself. You have scary damage, especially given our low hp totals. If you get within Scorching Ray range, I'm dead. So basically it's a question of whether I can pull a Sleep off before you close and burn me to death in one spell. Edit: Also, check the Prison. Your spellcasting is a bit off. My characters have a traditional history of being unlucky. Just wait until the "2" is rolled on the sleep save. Anyway thanks for the spellcasting, I changed my mind so many times I didn't get it right. I'll fix him after our fight is posted.
Khaim 05-24-07, 01:46 PM	My characters have a traditional history of being unlucky. Just wait until the "2" is rolled on the sleep save. Anyway thanks for the spellcasting, I changed my mind so many times I didn't get it right. I'll fix him after our fight is posted. To be fair, you need a 12+, so you have a 45% of making the save- odds I like. And the spellcasting isn't a big deal; you're out a few spell levels, but with your Pearls it probably won't come up anyways. I'm certainly not complaining in any case.
templer10 05-24-07, 01:53 PM	errm - does dissolving weapon get double dmg if the weapon it's on gets a crit (double 20's)? and on another note- mohamat is haveing a REALLY bad day.
Zevox 05-24-07, 01:56 PM	errm - does dissolving weapon get double dmg if the weapon it's on gets a crit (double 20's)? and on another note- mohamat is haveing a REALLY bad day. No - additional dice of damage never do. Not Sneak Attack, not Psionic Weapon, not Dissolving Weapon, etc etc. Zevox
Macbrea 05-24-07, 01:57 PM	No... Example: Izumi's Kusuri-gama 4d6 slashing +10 slashing + 4d6 slashing with focus + 4d6 acid. If you crit you only double the base weapon plus modifiers. And you roll the damage. Not multiply the roll. So.. a crit for her would be: 4d6 + 10 + (4d6 + 10) + 4d6 greater weapon focus + 4d6 acid
templer10 05-24-07, 01:57 PM	No - additional dice of damage never do. Not Sneak Attack, not Psionic Weapon, not Dissolving Weapon, etc etc. Zevox are you sure about this? becuase spells that cause dmg ARE doubled on a crit (scorching ray etc).
McJarvis 05-24-07, 01:59 PM	are you sure about this? becuase spells that cause dmg ARE doubled on a crit (scorching ray etc). He's right. Spells are not extra damage dice when they are the sole source of damage. On the other hand, dissolving weapon/touch are adding extra damage.
Zevox 05-24-07, 01:59 PM	are you sure about this? becuase spells that cause dmg ARE doubled on a crit (scorching ray etc). Because they're not additional dice of damage to an attack's base damage - they are the attack's base damage. Things that add damage dice to an existing attack are different, and never double/triple/quadruple on a critical. Zevox
Macbrea 05-24-07, 02:00 PM	are you sure about this? becuase spells that cause dmg ARE doubled on a crit (scorching ray etc). Sometimes you multiply damage by some factor, such as on a critical hit. Roll the damage (with all modifiers) multiple times and total the results. Note: When you multiply damage more than once, each multiplier works off the original, unmultiplied damage. Exception: Extra damage dice over and above a weapon’s normal damage are never multiplied. Yup, am pretty sure.
templer10 05-24-07, 02:01 PM	Because they're not additional dice of damage to an attack's base damage - they are the attack's base damage. Things that add damage dice to an existing attack are different, and never double/triple/quadruple on a critical. Zevox Ok- but that was 1 impressive hit non theless- 2 heads of a double axe hit, both with dissolving weapon - 1 as a crit in total - 4d8+10+8d6 (from both hits) for 50 dmg.
Macbrea 05-24-07, 02:03 PM	Not that is matters but it is a good habit to break damage by types when posting it. :P
templer10 05-24-07, 02:06 PM	Not that is matters but it is a good habit to break damage by types when posting it. :P doesnt matter in this case- i may yet get a short FFA.
Hirumajoe 05-24-07, 02:30 PM	@Telin: Tactics sent. And please, try to roll a save higher than 1. :)
Zevox 05-24-07, 02:31 PM	@ Telin - Tactics for Kathren Durrol (vs Kai Engel) PMed. I expect that, one way or another, that'll be a short fight. @ hogarth, Khaim, & Waywreth - Tactics recieved. I'll run Psellus vs Vantis first, either tonight or tomorrow. Zevox
Rauul 05-24-07, 02:34 PM	Ok- but that was 1 impressive hit non theless- 2 heads of a double axe hit, both with dissolving weapon - 1 as a crit in total - 4d8+10+8d6 (from both hits) for 50 dmg. and it wasn't even against the elf...
templer10 05-24-07, 02:42 PM	and it wasn't even against the elf... the elf was being a chicken - and as we speak trying to shoot against protection from arrows....
templer10 05-24-07, 02:49 PM	3 questions - 1)if dissipitating touch is used on a held object is it the fighter's regular AC? if not what. 2)deep crystal double axe has 30 HP? 3)does dissipitating touch ignore objects hardness since it's untyped damage?
Hirumajoe 05-24-07, 02:51 PM	3 questions - 1)if dissipitating touch is used on a held object is it the fighter's regular AC? if not what. 2)deep crystal double axe has 30 HP? 3)does dissipitating touch ignore objects hardness since it's untyped damage? You can't sunder with a touch spell since its neither a slashing or bludgeoning melee weapon.
Macbrea 05-24-07, 02:59 PM	You can sunder with a fist that has dissipating touch on the hand if you swing it to do actual damage.
Hirumajoe 05-24-07, 03:04 PM	Hmm... Good point. In that case, normal sunder rules apply. Since Dissipating Touch in not any form of energy damage (for which hardness has special rules), hardness should apply against the dissipating touch damage. Also, the object would only damaged by lethal damage. Non-lethal damage is ignored. Hardness Each object has hardness—a number that represents how well it resists damage. Whenever an object takes damage, subtract its hardness from the damage. Only damage in excess of its hardness is deducted from the object’s hit points (see Table: Common Armor, Weapon, and Shield Hardness and Hit Points; Table: Substance Hardness and Hit Points; and Table: Object Hardness and Hit Points).
templer10 05-24-07, 03:16 PM	Hmm... Good point. In that case, normal sunder rules apply. Since Dissipating Touch in not any form of energy damage (for which hardness has special rules), hardness should apply against the dissipating touch damage. Also, the object would only damaged by lethal damage. Non-lethal damage is ignored. disipitating touch has in it's "target" creature or object touched so i assume it can be used against object, but if hardness apply to it and considering deep crystal double axe has 30 HP niqil better get damn lucky on the rolls. Can someone confirm if i need to do sunder rolls or not for disipitating touch used on a held object or not?
Macbrea 05-24-07, 03:21 PM	held objects are not considered unattended. As a result you would have to be able to touch the object. This would require a opposed sunder roll between the touch spell and the weapon. Against a worn object you would do same as sundering a worn object.
Zevox 05-24-07, 03:22 PM	@ Macbrea - Tactics for Arden Tarmik (vs Rubicanti) have been PMed. Smaller map than I'd prefer, but even so, I think Arden has the upper hand. Zevox
NiQil 05-24-07, 03:30 PM	Sunder rolls do not apply. The power specifically lists objects as a viable target. It's simply a matter of dealing enough damage vs the object's hp. Kind of like chopping at a door with an axe. You don't sunder the door...you simply apply hp damage. A touch attack vs the weapon is still needed, as normal. As for hardness, to my knowledge, hardness does not apply vs spells or powers. Though I have not been able to find anything in the rules one way or the other so far.
Macbrea 05-24-07, 03:32 PM	Hardness does to apply to spells and powers. Energy attacks have special rules that are reduced by anything with hardness. And a Door is an unattended object. And therefore, gets no save against being hit.
MindWandererB 05-24-07, 03:32 PM	@Zevox: Can I get that monster reroll, please?
Rauul 05-24-07, 03:35 PM	Sunder rolls do not apply. The power specifically lists objects as a viable target. It's simply a matter of dealing enough damage vs the object's hp. Kind of like chopping at a door with an axe. You don't sunder the door...you simply apply hp damage. A touch attack vs the weapon is still needed, as normal. As for hardness, to my knowledge, hardness does not apply vs spells or powers. Though I have not been able to find anything in the rules one way or the other so far. from what i understand.. hardness is subtracted from the damage whats left goes to hps... the only thing i have ever seen is Adamantine that ignore the first 20 points of hardness..
NiQil 05-24-07, 03:36 PM	Hardness does to apply to spells and powers. Energy attacks have special rules that are reduced by anything with hardness. And a Door is an unattended object. And therefore, gets no save against being hit. So can you kindly point me in the direction of the rules that state that opposed sunder rolls are required when using a spell to break an object? Would you require opposed sunder rolls if the item in question was a wand instead of a weapon? Or a holy symbol? How do you make opposed sunder rolls if we were talking about destroying a holy symbol? And if you can point me to the rules regarding hardness and spells, that would be super. I looked, and I couldn't find anything one way or the other...maybe I was looking in the wrong place.
templer10 05-24-07, 03:37 PM	Sunder rolls do not apply. The power specifically lists objects as a viable target. It's simply a matter of dealing enough damage vs the object's hp. Kind of like chopping at a door with an axe. You don't sunder the door...you simply apply hp damage. A touch attack vs the weapon is still needed, as normal. As for hardness, to my knowledge, hardness does not apply vs spells or powers. Though I have not been able to find anything in the rules one way or the other so far. can some other elder confirm niqil's opinion on this? and if he's right - what's the object AC? and about hardness - it does apply - spells/powersARE subjecto to hardness - since hardness simply say it apply to damage not just weapon damage, some energy types (sonic, acid) ignore this.
templer10 05-24-07, 03:40 PM	So can you kindly point me in the direction of the rules that state that opposed sunder rolls are required when using a spell to break an object? Would you require opposed sunder rolls if the item in question was a wand instead of a weapon? Or a holy symbol? How do you make opposed sunder rolls if we were talking about destroying a holy symbol? And if you can point me to the rules regarding hardness and spells, that would be super. I looked, and I couldn't find anything one way or the other...maybe I was looking in the wrong place. from the SRD - "Hardness Each object has hardness—a number that represents how well it resists damage. Whenever an object takes damage, subtract its hardness from the damage. Only damage in excess of its hardness is deducted from the object’s hit points (see Table: Common Armor, Weapon, and Shield Hardness and Hit Points; Table: Substance Hardness and Hit Points; and Table: Object Hardness and Hit Points). ..... Energy Attacks Acid and sonic attacks deal damage to most objects just as they do to creatures; roll damage and apply it normally after a successful hit. Electricity and fire attacks deal half damage to most objects; divide the damage dealt by 2 before applying the hardness. Cold attacks deal one-quarter damage to most objects; divide the damage dealt by 4 before applying the hardness" the SRD mention that "damage" caused to objects is reduced by the hardness, it then goes to give exeption in the form of energy attacks - (some of them) ergo - if it's damage and NOT energy based, it's subject to hardness.
Zevox 05-24-07, 03:42 PM	@Zevox: Can I get that monster reroll, please? Actually, no need to reroll. I'll just move the previous cohort roll up to the EL 5 list. Edited into the monster post. Good luck. Zevox
Macbrea 05-24-07, 03:48 PM	If you read the rules to sunder you will notice there is a second for breaking objects that are not weapons or shields. Those are the rules you use for wands or holy symbols. The item that you apply the damage with is a spell. Now for damaging objects: Smashing objects: common hardness (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/exploration.htm#tableCommonArmorWeaponAn dShieldHardnessAndHitPoints)
Macbrea 05-24-07, 03:53 PM	The requirement of a slashing or bludgeoning weapon isn't a full requirement according to that description. It just says, 'Generally, you can smash an object only with a bludgeoning or slashing weapon.' There of course are exceptions such as with a touch energy spell or dissipating touch.
NiQil 05-24-07, 03:57 PM	If you read the rules to sunder you will notice there is a second for breaking objects that are not weapons or shields. Those are the rules you use for wands or holy symbols. The item that you apply the damage with is a spell. Now for damaging objects: Smashing objects: common hardness (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/exploration.htm#tableCommonArmorWeaponAn dShieldHardnessAndHitPoints) Let me point to the quote right at the beginning of the section: Smashing a weapon or shield with a slashing or bludgeoning weapon is accomplished by the sunder special attack. Smashing an object is a lot like sundering a weapon or shield, except that your attack roll is opposed by the object’s AC. Generally, you can smash an object only with a bludgeoning or slashing weapon. The condition you are talking about only applies if I am trying to smash a weapon or shield with a slashing or bludgeoning weapon. I am not. Therefore, sunder rolls do not apply. It is an attack vs an object, with the AC and so forth calculated using the tables given. Edit: Ninja'd So we have established that sunder rolls do not apply. So it's a touch attack vs the items touch AC, with hardness subtracting out of the damage dealt.
Macbrea 05-24-07, 04:00 PM	What is the AC of a carried weapon?
templer10 05-24-07, 04:01 PM	So we have established that sunder rolls do not apply. So it's a touch attack vs the items touch AC, with hardness subtracting out of the damage dealt.[/QUOTE] what IS the item's touch AC? and you do realize your chance of actualy dealing enough dmg to matter are 0 right? it's a deep crystal weapon after all. edit- Actually- i ask again - how many HP does a weapon from deep crystal has? an OBJECT has 30 per inch but a weapon isnt mentioned.
McJarvis 05-24-07, 04:03 PM	I thought you couldn't target attended weapons/items unless the spell in question specifically allowed you to target an attended weapon/item? This was the logic behind stoping things like Rays and Energy missiles targeting weapons. (More specifically: stopping people from targeting readied tower shields with scorching rays//dorjes of energy ray)
NiQil 05-24-07, 04:03 PM	What is the AC of a carried weapon? An object’s Armor Class is equal to 10 + its size modifier + its Dexterity modifier. An inanimate object has not only a Dexterity of 0 (–5 penalty to AC), but also an additional –2 penalty to its AC. Furthermore, if you take a full-round action to line up a shot, you get an automatic hit with a melee weapon and a +5 bonus on attack rolls with a ranged weapon. So in this case it would be 10 + 0 size - 5 Dex - 2 inanimate = AC 3 to hit the double axe. It has hardness 10. @ McJarvis: Look again Q: Can psionic energy powers (such as Energy Missile, Energy Ball, etc) be used to sunder attended objects/equipment on a character? A: No, it can only target unattended objects such as a dropped sword or a chair. Only the energy powers carry this restriction, because of the Energy Missile abuse.
TelinArtho 05-24-07, 04:04 PM	The AC of an object is described in the Sunder rules Sundering a Carried or Worn Object: You don’t use an opposed attack roll to damage a carried or worn object. Instead, just make an attack roll against the object’s AC. A carried or worn object’s AC is equal to 10 + its size modifier + the Dexterity modifier of the carrying or wearing character. Attacking a carried or worn object provokes an attack of opportunity just as attacking a held object does. To attempt to snatch away an item worn by a defender rather than damage it, see Disarm. You can’t sunder armor worn by another character. @NiQil - your quote is for an unattended inanimate object. When the object is attended - it uses the dex modifier of the holder.
Macbrea 05-24-07, 04:06 PM	So. let me get this straight. To hit an object in a book carried in a persons hand with an axe you need: Sundering a Carried or Worn Object You don’t use an opposed attack roll to damage a carried or worn object. Instead, just make an attack roll against the object’s AC. A carried or worn object’s AC is equal to 10 + its size modifier + the Dexterity modifier of the carrying or wearing character. Attacking a carried or worn object provokes an attack of opportunity just as attacking a held object does. To attempt to snatch away an item worn by a defender rather than damage it, see Disarm. You can’t sunder armor worn by another character. but to hit an carried axe you need AC 3? The weapon isn't an inanimate object.
templer10 05-24-07, 04:08 PM	the 10+dex etc makes a lot more sense- it's not an object on the ground - it's something the other guy is holding and fighting with.
NiQil 05-24-07, 04:08 PM	So in this case it would be 10 + 0 size - 5 Dex - 2 inanimate = AC 3 to hit the double axe. It has hardness 10. @ McJarvis: Look again Only the energy powers carry this restriction, because of the Energy Missile abuse. @ templer: Go by this table: Table: Common Armor, Weapon, and Shield Hardness and Hit Points Weapon or Shield Hardness HP1 Light blade 10 2 One-handed blade 10 5 Two-handed blade 10 10 Light metal-hafted weapon 10 10 One-handed metal-hafted weapon 10 20 Light hafted weapon 5 2 One-handed hafted weapon 5 5 Two-handed hafted weapon 5 10 Projectile weapon 5 5 Armor special2 armor bonus x5 Buckler 10 5 Light wooden shield 5 7 Heavy wooden shield 5 15 Light steel shield 10 10 Heavy steel shield 10 20 Tower shield 5 20 1 The hp value given is for Medium armor, weapons, and shields. Divide by 2 for each size category of the item smaller than Medium, or multiply it by 2 for each size category larger than Medium. 2 Varies by material; see Table: Substance Hardness and Hit Points.
McJarvis 05-24-07, 04:09 PM	@ McJarvis: Look again Only the energy powers carry this restriction, because of the Energy Missile abuse. So crystal shard can still be used to target tower shields? Scorching Ray can? Any other # of energy rays that are non-psionic can?
NiQil 05-24-07, 04:10 PM	The AC of an object is described in the Sunder rules @NiQil - your quote is for an unattended inanimate object. When the object is attended - it uses the dex modifier of the holder. Good point...I quoted the wrong formula. So the double axe has an AC of 10 + the orc's Dex mod.
Rauul 05-24-07, 04:10 PM	Deep crystal has 30 hit points per inch of thickness and a hardness of 10.
NiQil 05-24-07, 04:11 PM	So crystal shard can still be used to target tower shields? Scorching Ray can? Any other # of energy rays that are non-psionic can? Only if the description of the spell/power states that it can target objects like Dissipating Touch does.
Hirumajoe 05-24-07, 04:12 PM	Only the energy powers carry this restriction, because of the Energy Missile abuse. So wait a second. Does this mean you can use ray spells to destroy attended objects? Since a ray could target unattended object, can you target an attended object, say with Melf's acid arrow? Edit: I'm apparently too slow. But what if it says you can't target anything. I mean, rays don't exactly specify you can use them on people either...
NiQil 05-24-07, 04:13 PM	So wait a second. Does this mean you can use ray spells to destroy attended objects? Since a ray could target unattended object, can you target an attended object, say with Melf's acid arrow? See above
NiQil 05-24-07, 04:14 PM	This is probably all moot anyway, since I made a mistake on the hardness issue....I'm just gonna burn up pp flailing ineffectually at the weapon while I get carved up....
Hirumajoe 05-24-07, 04:19 PM	Well, this has far reaching consequences... I mean dispel magic + acid arrow means someone's magic bow just went up in a sizzle of acid. Given that acid arrow has no target section what so ever...
Macbrea 05-24-07, 04:20 PM	Well, in truth.. the first time you tap it and get no noticable effect the pitlord should determine the tactic is void and move to another strategy. We aren't playing characters with a 1 or 2 Int and Wis.
NiQil 05-24-07, 04:28 PM	Well, this has far reaching consequences... I mean dispel magic + acid arrow means someone's magic bow just went up in a sizzle of acid. Given that acid arrow has no target section what so ever... Then that would mean you cannot target objects with it. As I said...the spell/power must state that it can target objects.
NiQil 05-24-07, 04:28 PM	Well, in truth.. the first time you tap it and get no noticable effect the pitlord should determine the tactic is void and move to another strategy. We aren't playing characters with a 1 or 2 Int and Wis. One would hope, but that's not what's being rolled out in the roller right now.... @ templer10: If you see this before you finish, you might want to give this some thought, since it is quite obvious that the tactic as written will not work due to my mistake about the hardness rules.
templer10 05-24-07, 04:29 PM	Well, in truth.. the first time you tap it and get no noticable effect the pitlord should determine the tactic is void and move to another strategy. We aren't playing characters with a 1 or 2 Int and Wis. in this case the disipitating touch is more or less his main tactics so i dont agree- also in real fights people make mistakes - se la vi. p.s. ask rauul AND niqil- if i spot some obvios rule violation by the time i post tactics (i go over it once) i point it out to the fighter but once i post it i Almost never improvise becuase of other peeps mistakes and i usually dont improvise in general and any improvisation here will end the fight pretty shortly in niqils favor (since he can kill graashak with 1-2 crystal shard/disipitating touch attacks if they werent done on the weapon) - so it really wouldnt be fair to rauul.
NiQil 05-24-07, 04:34 PM	in this case the disipitating touch is more or less his main tactics so i dont agree- also in real fights people make mistakes - se la vi. p.s. ask rauul AND niqil- if i spot some obvios rule violation by the time i post tactics (i go over it once) i point it out to the fighter but once i post it i Almost never improvise becuase of other peeps mistakes and i usually dont improvise in general and any improvisation here will end the fight pretty shortly in niqils favor (since he can kill graashak with 1-2 crystal shard/disipitating touch attacks if they werent done on the weapon) - so it really wouldnt be fair to rauul. That's what Int/Wis checks are for...set a DC and make some rolls. Let the dice decide.
Rauul 05-24-07, 04:35 PM	That's what Int/Wis checks are for...set a DC and make some rolls. Let the dice decide. As much as i wanna disagree... i can't... because I sooo agree it's not funny
templer10 05-24-07, 04:37 PM	That's what Int/Wis checks are for...set a DC and make some rolls. Let the dice decide. hmm - if rauul agrees, i suppose-but how much backwards you want it? start high DC and make it easier per round?
McJarvis 05-24-07, 04:39 PM	Then that would mean you cannot target objects with it. As I said...the spell/power must state that it can target objects. Where is this in the rules, anyway? I've never come across it...just taken ya'll at yer word. edit-> Specifically, I'm looking for language that makes the "target" of a ranged attack have to be a creature or unattended object. This is the only language that would prevent things like, say, acid arrow from targeting attended objects. Of course, it would also stop certain thematic things like the heros bursting in & shooting the rope a man is hanging from, or shooting a glass of water in someones hand.
NiQil 05-24-07, 04:40 PM	hmm - if rauul agrees, i suppose-but how much backwards you want it? start high DC and make it easier per round? My recommendation would be to decide whether Int or Wis would be more appropriate, set a DC and start the rolls in the round after the first successful hit to the axe. Decrease the DC by 1 each time a successful attack occurs. D20 + the stat mod to determine it isn't working and make a change.
NiQil 05-24-07, 04:41 PM	Where is this in the rules, anyway? I've never come across it...just taken ya'll at yer word. The rules are written about what you can do, not what you can't. If the spell or power says it can target objects, then it can. Otherwise, it cannot (unless some other rule says otherwise).
templer10 05-24-07, 04:41 PM	My recommendation would be to decide whether Int or Wis would be more appropriate, set a DC and start the rolls in the round after the first successful hit to the axe. Decrease the DC by 1 each time a successful attack occurs. D20 + the stat mod to determine it isn't working and make a change. i can live with this. DC 15 int sound okay? EDIT - niqil you lucky basterd.... 16 on the first roll. anyway iam continuing with disipitating touch attacks on graashak himself - not as ideal for you as crystal shards but you cant exepct to improvised to the BEST option. (and i dont have to bother with rerolling dice and deleting stuff).
McJarvis 05-24-07, 04:44 PM	The rules are written about what you can do, not what you can't. If the spell or power says it can target objects, then it can. Otherwise, it cannot (unless some other rule says otherwise). Nothing in the rules says that ray spells can target creatures, only that they can target things. How do you draw a distinction on what targets are valid?
MindWandererB 05-24-07, 04:51 PM	WotC has said on numerous occasions that targeting attended objects with spells, even rays, is not allowed. I don't know the source, but they used to have a lot of problems with disintegrate being used on equipment. Even if a source on that can't be found, we should have a house rule about it.
NiQil 05-24-07, 04:52 PM	Nothing in the rules says that ray spells can target creatures, only that they can target things. How do you draw a distinction on what targets are valid? I see references to creatures, not things. Ray: Some effects are rays. You aim a ray as if using a ranged weapon, though typically you make a ranged touch attack rather than a normal ranged attack. As with a ranged weapon, you can fire into the dark or at an invisible creature and hope you hit something. You don’t have to see the creature you’re trying to hit, as you do with a targeted spell. Intervening creatures and obstacles, however, can block your line of sight or provide cover for the creature you’re aiming at. If a ray spell has a duration, it’s the duration of the effect that the ray causes, not the length of time the ray itself persists. If a ray spell deals damage, you can score a critical hit just as if it were a weapon. A ray spell threatens a critical hit on a natural roll of 20 and deals double damage on a successful critical hit.
NiQil 05-24-07, 04:53 PM	WotC has said on numerous occasions that targeting attended objects with spells, even rays, is not allowed. I don't know the source, but they used to have a lot of problems with disintegrate being used on equipment. Even if a source on that can't be found, we should have a house rule about it. Except there is no rule in the SRD about restrictions on targeting attended objects. So any such rule would be a houserule. We already have one such rule in place for the psionic Energy powers.
Hirumajoe 05-24-07, 04:55 PM	I see references to creatures, not things. Acid Arrow Conjuration (Creation) [Acid] Level: Sor/Wiz 2 Components: V, S, M, F Casting Time: 1 standard action Range: Long (400 ft. + 40 ft./level) Effect: One arrow of acid Duration: 1 round + 1 round per three levels Saving Throw: None Spell Resistance: No A magical arrow of acid springs from your hand and speeds to its target. You must succeed on a ranged touch attack to hit your target. The arrow deals 2d4 points of acid damage with no splash damage. For every three caster levels (to a maximum of 18th), the acid, unless somehow neutralized, lasts for another round, dealing another 2d4 points of damage in that round. Material Component Powdered rhubarb leaf and an adder’s stomach. Focus A dart. I see no reference to rays, or even a target section. And all the effect texts is mentions a "target". Thus, the ray rules do not apply to acid arrow. So are you allowed to even target creatures, since they're not explicitly mentioned?
hogarth 05-24-07, 04:57 PM	Nothing in the rules says that ray spells can target creatures, only that they can target things. How do you draw a distinction on what targets are valid? The explanation that I heard (that was somewhat convincing) was that you can't sunder an object with a ray for the same reason you can't sunder an object with a hurled club. A sunder is a melee attack roll, not a ranged attack roll. There's a non-core feat that allows ranged sunders, I believe. Of course, if a spell/power specifically mentions targeting attended objects (like if it has Save: Will (object), for instance), then it is certainly allowed to do so.
Hirumajoe 05-24-07, 05:00 PM	So would it be okay for an acid arrow to deal damage to an unattended object? Since there are rules for ranged damage to objects. Ranged Weapon Damage Objects take half damage from ranged weapons (unless the weapon is a siege engine or something similar). Divide the damage dealt by 2 before applying the object’s hardness.
NiQil 05-24-07, 05:00 PM	I see no reference to rays, or even a target section. And all the effect texts is mentions a "target". Thus, the ray rules do not apply to acid arrow. So are you allowed to even target creatures, since they're not explicitly mentioned? Ummm...no one said the ray rules applied to Acid Arrow. I was specifically answering McJ's question about rays.
Hirumajoe 05-24-07, 05:01 PM	Ummm...no one said the ray rules applied to Acid Arrow. I was specifically answering McJ's question about rays. Oh, sorry. My bad.
McJarvis 05-24-07, 05:03 PM	:: You aim a ray as if using a ranged weapon Ranged Attacks: With a ranged weapon, you can shoot or throw at any target ... Target or Targets: Some spells have a target or targets. You cast these spells on creatures or objects, as defined by the spell itself. The spell does not define the nature of the targets themselves: thus Creatures _or_ Objects can be targeted. If you want to be even more technical: Acid Arrow isn't even a ray spell, so only the target quotation above _really_ applies to it.
NiQil 05-24-07, 05:04 PM	So would it be okay for an acid arrow to deal damage to an unattended object? Since there are rules for ranged damage to objects. Does the description state that the spell applies to objects? No, so no. Also, the quote you list specifically mentions ranged weapons, not ranged attacks. Big difference.
NiQil 05-24-07, 05:05 PM	:: The spell does not define the nature of the targets themselves: thus Creatures _or_ Objects can be targeted. If you want to be even more technical: Acid Arrow isn't even a ray spell, so only the target quotation above _really_ applies to it. See above. The ranged rules state damage from a ranged weapon. Last time I checked, a ray wasn't a weapon listed on the weapons tables or in the weapons section. Same with acid arrow.
McJarvis 05-24-07, 05:06 PM	The explanation that I heard (that was somewhat convincing) was that you can't sunder an object with a ray for the same reason you can't sunder an object with a hurled club. A sunder is a melee attack roll, not a ranged attack roll. There's a non-core feat that allows ranged sunders, I believe. Of course, if a spell/power specifically mentions targeting attended objects (like if it has Save: Will (object), for instance), then it is certainly allowed to do so. ... Sunder is a specific type of attack with melee weapons, yes: but this doesn't mean we should turn to it as a guiding light every time the idea of "breaking" an object comes up. It seems to me that this is akin to saying you have to use trip rules to knock someone over with a wind spell of some sort: I'm just plain not trying to trip them in combat. Why would you go there for rules on it?
McJarvis 05-24-07, 05:08 PM	Honestly: I'm going to have to insist that all gladiators die horrid very painful deaths every other 3FC because the rules give no way of going to the bathroom. ::rolleyes::
templer10 05-24-07, 05:12 PM	and the ECL 4 madness is done and here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=12490485&postcount=890).
NiQil 05-24-07, 05:14 PM	Honestly: I'm going to have to insist that all gladiators die horrid very painful deaths every other 3FC because the rules give no way of going to the bathroom. ::rolleyes:: If you would like, I can add that to my default tactics LOL
Rauul 05-24-07, 05:22 PM	and the ECL 4 madness is done and here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=12490485&postcount=890). only comment... you didn't have Graak use vigor when he spotted the human? extra 10 hps would of been nice :) edit> don't worry about it.. thanks for the run and Elf.. you got lucky.. pointy ears
Eluria 05-24-07, 05:47 PM	and the ECL 4 madness is done and here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=12490485&postcount=890). thanks for running the fight; you're obviously right about the range for entangling ectoplasm. two quick questions: can I just ask why ectoplasm wasn't manifested followed by horse moving back? or at least attack, if it's just going to stand there doing nothing. Also, when Graash hits mohmat, why doesn't he try to ride for cover? please let me know if there's something i'm overlooking here t10. thanks! -e
McJarvis 05-24-07, 05:52 PM	If you would like, I can add that to my default tactics LOL We should probably throw all the Clerics in prison too, because all Melee Attacks only have opponents as legal targets. Healing is a no-no by the book, apparently. [Touching is a sub-set of Melee attacks] My point is-> If we want to institute a house-rule that spells/powers can not target attended objects unless otherwise specified, I'm 100% behind that. To dance around it and only house-rule certain spells/powers but not others is just ignorant. There is no "right way" to read the rules(nor is there a 100% logical way in which you are trying to describe): Technically speaking it doesn't say anywhere whether outsiders have skeletons or not, so they are not a valid target for Animate Dead(Requires skeletal sctructure). We allow it anyway. Why? Because of the Rule 0 DM clause. Technically the rules have no listen DC listed for 99% of the actions we take. Gladiators still get a listen check for them, though. Because common sense applies. I think it was Usurp who said in the last few weeks: Just because the rules don't say you can doesn't mean you can't, and just because the rules don't say you can't doesn't mean you can. [try saying THAT five times fast...]
templer10 05-24-07, 06:22 PM	thanks for running the fight; you're obviously right about the range for entangling ectoplasm. two quick questions: can I just ask why ectoplasm wasn't manifested followed by horse moving back? or at least attack, if it's just going to stand there doing nothing. Also, when Graash hits mohmat, why doesn't he try to ride for cover? please let me know if there's something i'm overlooking here t10. thanks! -e horse cant move backwards becuase you 5 foot moved to be able to manifest the entangle without AoA, you didnt move longer then that becuase it would cause AoA also unless you did whitdraw which is a full round action which will also put you well beyond range for entangling ectoplasem, which would be counter to tactics which said to advance and use entangling ectoplasem. the ride for cover for the non crit i forgot before - i just did it - natural 1 - sucks to be you i guess.
hogarth 05-24-07, 08:01 PM	Sunder is a specific type of attack with melee weapons, yes: but this doesn't mean we should turn to it as a guiding light every time the idea of "breaking" an object comes up. It seems to me that this is akin to saying you have to use trip rules to knock someone over with a wind spell of some sort: I'm just plain not trying to trip them in combat. Why would you go there for rules on it? Well, it's hard to argue that the designers intended for characters to attack attended objects with a sling (say) when there's a feat called Ranged Sunder in Complete Warrior that makes it possible! I'm on your side, mostly -- I thought I could use Reginald Molehusband's "Ring of the Yrthak" to destroy scrolls, potions, wands, etc. but I was told "no; that's a ranged sunder". I may not agree with that ruling, but at least it's sort of self-consistent. At any rate, it doesn't even make my "Top 10 CoCo Ruling Pet Peeves" (like the idea that an octopus and a half-giant have the same vertical reach -- :uh-huh:).
TelinArtho 05-25-07, 12:02 PM	Maya Redwine (MindWandererB) vs Elrick Flamebrother (templer10) is up.
templer10 05-25-07, 12:09 PM	Maya Redwine (MindWandererB) vs Elrick Flamebrother (templer10) is up. thanks for the run- looks like someone forgot to look at grimlock's tricks... on another note - i seriosly pity whoever i get next week at ECL 7 - 24 SL's to throw at some poor fellow...
templer10 05-25-07, 12:14 PM	also- am i wrong in thinking that creatures with natural weapons do thier primary weapon damage in grapple? (maybe it's just hourse rule for my P&P game)
TelinArtho 05-25-07, 12:15 PM	also- am i wrong in thinking that creatures with natural weapons do thier primary weapon damage in grapple? (maybe it's just hourse rule for my P&P game) They do if they have the improved grapple feat or the improved grab special ability. Otherwise - nonlethal attack based on their size.
templer10 05-25-07, 12:19 PM	They do if they have the improved grapple feat or the improved grab special ability. Otherwise - nonlethal attack based on their size. good to know - But even with just non lethal dmg- against caster types it's a killer. btw- there's some broken sblocks tags in the fight.
TelinArtho 05-25-07, 12:20 PM	I believe those are from your character sheet...
Khaim 05-25-07, 12:22 PM	They do if they have the improved grapple feat or the improved grab special ability. Otherwise - nonlethal attack based on their size. I don't think Improved Grapple gives that. Improved Grab does, though.
Zevox 05-25-07, 02:30 PM	Khaim is correct. Improved Grab only. Zevox
TelinArtho 05-25-07, 02:36 PM	Ah - my mistake.
MindWandererB 05-25-07, 03:10 PM	thanks for the run- looks like someone forgot to look at grimlock's tricks... on another note - i seriosly pity whoever i get next week at ECL 7 - 24 SL's to throw at some poor fellow... I did know that, I just forgot to do anything about it. Grease would have been about all--and my luck was not with me in that fight anyhow, so I'm not sure how much it would have helped. Stupid druids. :)
TelinArtho 05-25-07, 04:12 PM	Kathren Durrol (Zevox) vs Kai Engel (Hirumajoe) is up. Revenge is a dish best served cold...
Zevox 05-25-07, 04:24 PM	Kathren Durrol (Zevox) vs Kai Engel (Hirumajoe) is up. Revenge is a dish best served cold... :eek: ...I just have one question. You sure that the TS applies to the confirmation roll? I know I've run one fight in the past where I didn't allow it to do so. Relevant rules: You gain temporary, intuitive insight into the immediate future during your next attack. Your next single attack roll (if it is made before the end of the next round) gains a +20 insight bonus. Additionally, you are not affected by the miss chance that applies to attackers trying to strike a concealed target. If it applies, well, can't beat dice like that. If it doesn't, Kathren is still alive, and we've got a sleep save to roll. Zevox
TelinArtho 05-25-07, 04:27 PM	I'll certainly do some searching, but I'm fairly certain it does.
TelinArtho 05-25-07, 04:34 PM	Nice - this question is answered precisely on page 68 of the FAQ (12/20/06): If you threaten a critical hit while under the effect of a true strike spell, does the +20 insight bonus also apply to the critical hit confirmation roll? Yes. The confirmation roll uses the exact same attack modifiers as the original (and may even have additional modifiers, if the character has special abilities that affect the confirmation roll).
Rauul 05-25-07, 05:45 PM	Looking for a Questlord for Graashnak, who just leveled to ECL 5 and wants to kill an Elf.. it's for fun and for RP (and to get him into Slayer next level) Drop me a PM if you wanna do a MiniQuest
Zevox 05-25-07, 06:26 PM	Nice - this question is answered precisely on page 68 of the FAQ (12/20/06): *nods* So be it then. Guess it was too much to hope that Kathren would do as well as her sister for a level or two. Zevox
Hirumajoe 05-25-07, 06:33 PM	Kathren Durrol (Zevox) vs Kai Engel (Hirumajoe) is up. Revenge is a dish best served cold... Thanks for the run. And um, wow, lucky shot. Not much more to say about it. Edit: Woot! Just realized Kai actually levels... +10 hp, Knock-down feat, +1 BAB and +1 Caster level. Its a pretty sweet level...
Zevox 05-25-07, 07:48 PM	Balthazar vs Dunerunner is done. Guess who won - the hiding Bard or the grappling Half-Giant? Hint: in the forest map. Zevox
templer10 05-25-07, 09:18 PM	I did know that, I just forgot to do anything about it. Grease would have been about all--and my luck was not with me in that fight anyhow, so I'm not sure how much it would have helped. Stupid druids. :) well - look at the bright side- Elrick is a problem for the peeps in the ECL 7 league now.
TheMagister 05-26-07, 10:37 AM	Lord Lorian's monster info is posted here. I chose everything (equipment and such) before I read tactics. I don't like your chances, bro. This particular monster is pretty much made to defeat this particular character type. :( I'll do what I can. TM
TheMagister 05-26-07, 10:38 AM	well - look at the bright side- Elrick is a problem for the peeps in the ECL 7 league now. YAY! Someone Rubicanti is equipped to actually compete with! :w00t:
templer10 05-26-07, 10:50 AM	YAY! Someone Rubicanti is equipped to actually compete with! :w00t: annoyingly high reflex save (and evasion) you got there. i hope i get a nice and open arena againt him - make my life a lot easier.
hogarth 05-26-07, 11:53 AM	Balthazar vs Dunerunner is done. Guess who won - the hiding Bard or the grappling Half-Giant? Hint: in the forest map. That's about as good a set-up as Picsou's going to get -- a good map for hiding, a non-elf foe, and no allies. And he still could've easily lost to one good bowshot! Maybe I'll buy a Bronze Griffon to help him out.
TheMagister 05-26-07, 01:57 PM	Some of Lord Lorian vs. a Babau Demon is up. Do you wanna surrender before I waste some more of your stuff? This fight's a pretty bad pain in the arse to run... I'm not ashamed to say that you'd be doing me a favor. TM
templer10 05-26-07, 02:21 PM	Some of Lord Lorian vs. a Babau Demon is up. Do you wanna surrender before I waste some more of your stuff? This fight's a pretty bad pain in the arse to run... I'm not ashamed to say that you'd be doing me a favor. TM shouldnt my psionic shot be doing dmg even if the e-ray doesnt? (it's untyped after all and can be regained with move action) and i still have a decent chance to hit it and do decent dmg (after offensive precog and offensive prescience it's +9/10 to hit for 1d8+3/4+2d6) with Bow and 20 cold iron arrows you know that i did mention to use - if E-ray and e-missile dont work.
TheMagister 05-26-07, 02:31 PM	I'll take that as a "no, don't surrender -- I still think I've got a shot". ;) Of course your psionic shot'll do damage, but it'll deal the same type of damage that the base attack deals. So the "immune to electricity" kills that energy type totally. The second ray that you did do got sucked up by SR. I'll keep going. {shrug} It's your load of gp down the drain... edit: oh, and you're down to 7 pp left in your reservoir. I'm not sure when to stop applying defensive buffs like vigor and share pain - your tactics kind've imply that they should be refreshed whenever possible.
templer10 05-26-07, 02:38 PM	I'll take that as a "no, don't surrender -- I still think I've got a shot". ;) Of course your psionic shot'll do damage, but it'll deal the same type of damage that the base attack deals. So the "immune to electricity" kills that energy type totally. The second ray that you did do got sucked up by SR. I'll keep going. {shrug} It's your load of gp down the drain... edit: oh, and you're down to 7 pp left in your reservoir. I'm not sure when to stop applying defensive buffs like vigor and share pain - your tactics kind've imply that they should be refreshed whenever possible. well if you are asking me - dont bother with vigor since that just seem to be dispelled, if i was there i would go with offensive buffs, keep reentangling and redoing force shield and hope i get lucky on the attack rolls on the bow. EDIT - that will teach me to manetion hide manifesting next time sigh.
NiQil 05-26-07, 03:19 PM	Hey...it could be worse...you could have made the same rules mistake when writing two different sets of tactics this week... Stupid hardness...
templer10 05-26-07, 04:28 PM	apocalypse VS inzin is done and here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=12508909&postcount=895)- result is fairly predictable even through the dice was really wierd there.
NiQil 05-26-07, 04:36 PM	apocalypse VS inzin is done and here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=12508909&postcount=895)- result is fairly predictable even through the dice was really wierd there. You need to modify the results for Grawl..... Forgot that was an animal companion.... I don't think I had any luck with the dice that whole match...was pretty pathetic. The damage on those energy missiles was stupidly low. And people wonder why I am constantly bashing mounts....even class ones.
templer10 05-26-07, 04:41 PM	You need to modify the results for Grawl..... Forgot that was an animal companion.... I don't think I had any luck with the dice that whole match...was pretty pathetic. The damage on those energy missiles was stupidly low. And people wonder why I am constantly bashing mounts....even class ones. if you had a 2d6 dorja you would have won i think but the - e- missiles did have rotten luck on the dmg.
Rauul 05-26-07, 04:44 PM	You need to modify the results for Grawl..... Forgot that was an animal companion.... I don't think I had any luck with the dice that whole match...was pretty pathetic. The damage on those energy missiles was stupidly low. And people wonder why I am constantly bashing mounts....even class ones. oh oh wait till i bring in My forest Gnome druid and his Dire Weasle.. :)
templer10 05-27-07, 09:47 AM	kazero VS unknown monster is done (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=12515702&postcount=896) - Monk Vs hardness - predictable if unfortunate result.
MitzaVolchenko 05-27-07, 10:22 AM	Arbin Softfoot (Yitzi) vs. Davian (McJarvis) : MitzaVolchenko [Arena] I have no tactics and there is no post up for this fight.
TheMagister 05-27-07, 10:40 AM	Fight Part 1 Fight Part 2 Lord Lorian vs. a Babau is (hopefully) finished.
templer10 05-27-07, 10:58 AM	Fight Part 1 Fight Part 2 Lord Lorian vs. a Babau is (hopefully) finished. thanks for the run - sorry i couldnt save you some time but it's not in my nature to give up :).
TheMagister 05-27-07, 11:31 AM	It's not a by-the-book lizardfolk. It's an NPC, which means elite stats and gear. Just because he has no class levels doesn't mean he doesn't enjoy the other benefits. I have a question here: this Elite Lizardfolk has a CR of 2 (normal 1 plus Elite Array) and an ECL of 3 (2 HD plus LA +1). I thought we were supposed to go by CR on all fights (unless I'm missing something)? Nevermind. Reading the rules does wonders for you, you know. :)
TheMagister 05-27-07, 11:32 AM	thanks for the run - sorry i couldnt save you some time but it's not in my nature to give up :). You're welcome! I'm just glad you're taking it at face value and not nit-picking it to death. I'm certain there are errors hiding all over the place in something that long.
templer10 05-27-07, 11:38 AM	You're welcome! I'm just glad you're taking it at face value and not nit-picking it to death. I'm certain there are errors hiding all over the place in something that long. i could nit pick it but the fact is i didnt have enough info to plan it right and he has 2 much HP for small changs to matter - if i had more info before the fight i might have been able to plan something better. (just strait up entangle + cold iron shots might have worked over those 40 rounds). at the end its that damn dispell at will that got me - stupid monster....
Yitzi 05-27-07, 12:25 PM	Blitzkrieg vs Unholy ninja is up.
Vathelokai 05-27-07, 12:56 PM	Blitzkrieg vs Unholy ninja is up. Link to fight No complaints here.
Yitzi 05-27-07, 01:00 PM	I just realized that I forgot to post rewards, but that's fixed now.
TheMagister 05-27-07, 02:40 PM	dbl post. Nothing to see here.
TheMagister 05-27-07, 02:41 PM	Statistics: Zaroff d20: 11 rolls, 7.5 average d4: 1 rolls, 4 average d2: 1 rolls, 2 average d8: 7 rolls, 4.6 average d6: 6 rolls, 4.5 average Sthiss d20: 5 rolls, 4.8 average d3: 1 rolls, 3 average "Holy cursed dice, Batman! The Joker stole everything above a 13!" {GASP} "Holy unlucky number, Batman!" Good grief! Somebody HIT SOMETHING!! TM
hogarth 05-27-07, 02:48 PM	Just a comment, TM -- note that a club is a one-handed weapon (not a light weapon) so using one in an off-hand gives a -4 penalty on attacks (not a -2 penalty).
TheMagister 05-27-07, 03:39 PM	Oh, you're right (and I should've realized that, but I was searching like mad to find a way to make him dangerous and let my hope get away from me). Not that it would've mattered in this fight with those dice. General Zaroff vs. Sthiss Tor the Souless is up here. {Yawn} Edit: And in case anyone cares: Statistics: Zaroff d20: 21 rolls, 9.3 average d4: 2 rolls, 4 average d2: 1 rolls, 2 average d8: 14 rolls, 4.9 average d6: 6 rolls, 4.5 average Sthiss d20: 8 rolls, 6.1 average d3: 1 rolls, 3 average d4: 2 rolls, 4 average Just WOW, those d20s were flat.
Khaim 05-27-07, 11:31 PM	@ hogarth, Khaim, & Waywreth - Tactics recieved. I'll run Psellus vs Vantis first, either tonight or tomorrow. Zevox Poke.
Zevox 05-28-07, 02:18 AM	Poke. Now now, don't ye be worrying. I mixed up which fight I said I'd run first, so Dunerunner vs Balthazar got done instead, and I had to work all weekend. The rest of my fights are getting done Monday and Tuesday. Zevox
McJarvis 05-28-07, 10:41 AM	@TM: Nice run, but geez man-> your dice are never good to my characters :( Ironically, my "evasion" tactics were intended to just have Zaroff move+standard action instead of double-move attacking. I'm glad you decided to improv as the fight went on to cover all the bases of what I possibly could have meant :)
Abyssal Stalker 05-28-07, 12:33 PM	Blitzkrieg vs Unholy ninja is up. Pitlord hint: list the round when a certain effect ends, not the time remaining. A little less bookkeeping.
Yitzi 05-28-07, 12:56 PM	Thanks, but I find it ok this way.
Khaim 05-28-07, 01:14 PM	Waywreth, Hideous Laughter and Scorching Ray both have a range of close, i.e. 30 ft. Good luck disrupting me with those. Edit: Oh, and I forgot that Sleep has a 1 round casting time, so we both are utterly incompetent mages. Edit2: Oh, and with two magic missiles probably smacking me every time I attempt a Sleep, I think you win this one.
Zevox 05-28-07, 02:16 PM	Psellus the Frail vs Vantis Dar'ath is up. Next on my list: Kervan vs Monsters. Should be done tonight. Tomorrow: Aramur vs Lightwolf. Zevox
waywreth 05-28-07, 02:55 PM	Waywreth, Hideous Laughter and Scorching Ray both have a range of close, i.e. 30 ft. Good luck disrupting me with those. Edit: Oh, and I forgot that Sleep has a 1 round casting time, so we both are utterly incompetent mages. Edit2: Oh, and with two magic missiles probably smacking me every time I attempt a Sleep, I think you win this one. @Khaim - I think any wizard I make is cursed to have bad rolls. And thanks Zevox for the feedback. As an enchanter, my main goal is to use spells like sleep or hideous laughter and scorching ray to CDG, but at low levels you just do what you can...
Khaim 05-28-07, 03:05 PM	@Khaim - I think any wizard I make is cursed to have bad rolls. Well, we both had terrible tactics that time. I should have just used my higher AC/attack to shoot you to death, instead of wasting time with spells.
Khaim 05-28-07, 03:07 PM	Psellus the Frail vs Vantis Dar'ath is up. Next on my list: Kervan vs Monsters. Should be done tonight. Tomorrow: Aramur vs Lightwolf. Zevox Yeah, sorry about the AC thing. Thanks for sticking to our (admittedly horrible) tactics.
Yitzi 05-28-07, 03:31 PM	Zodiac vs. Flamehair is up.
Sjiggie 05-28-07, 04:01 PM	When you have 2 claw attack you have to make an attack roll for both claws but do you apply 2 weapon fighting penalties?
NiQil 05-28-07, 04:07 PM	When you have 2 claw attack you have to make an attack roll for both claws but do you apply 2 weapon fighting penalties? If you are referring to Taren's fight, as I suspect you are, no. This is outlined in the description of Claws of the Beast.
Khaim 05-28-07, 04:09 PM	When you have 2 claw attack you have to make an attack roll for both claws but do you apply 2 weapon fighting penalties? No. Natural weapons have a different system for penalties with multiple attacks. Your "main" natural weapon is made at no penalty; any other natural weapon is secondary has a -5 penalty. If you attack with both weapons and natural weapons, your weapons attack as normal for your BAB and TWF, if you have it, and your natural weapons are all secondary and have a -5 penalty. Note that the -5 penalty is flat; that is, you take the same penalty for attacking with two natural weapons as you do for attacking with five (0/-5 and 0/-5/-5/-5/-5). Also, you can't attack with both a claw and a weapon in that hand. Finally, the Multiattack feat allows you to attack with secondary natural weapons at -2.
Usurpator 05-28-07, 04:11 PM	Zodiac vs. Flamehair is up. Hey Yitzi, thanks for running it! The buffs were indeed a bit unnecessary, but Vath could have written nastier tactics with those 20 spell levels available. Biofeedback to counter summoned monsters and CdG attempts, force screen for countering summons and attacks while suffering from Hideous Laughter. Skate was purely as backup in case I could not count on my horse Broca for whatever reason. Besides, the buffs cost only 65 gp. and a few pp. Still got 6 pp (half my pool) for last fight, so I'm quite content with the result. Sorry about beating Zodiac to a pulp Vath, is he going to 'nova' in his third fight now with 25 out of 30 spell levels available?
Vathelokai 05-28-07, 04:12 PM	Zodiac vs. Flamehair is up. Looks good to me. About the comments; yeah, glass cannon. The build should be filling out a bit in the next couple levels. Never expected him to do well below 5th or so.
Vathelokai 05-28-07, 04:14 PM	Sorry about beating Zodiac to a pulp Vath, is he going to 'nova' in his third fight now with 25 out of 30 spell levels available? His third fight is a MQ for the guild; so basicly, yes. Nova time. I do that sort of thing for quests (especially since I lost 2 of the three previous fights against these damn rioters), but not if I'm spending all three fights in the arena. That also explains his lacking spell selection right now.
Sjiggie 05-28-07, 07:22 PM	Darrgon vs Taren is up please check for errors. It was a close fight in the end but I thought that Darrgon had it in the pocket when Taren failed his save vs the color spray
Zevox 05-28-07, 07:43 PM	@ TM - Saw your tactics for Rubi. Grappling if you dorje is sundered? Against a foe with better bab and strength than you and the ability to expand?? May I guess that you're more or less resigned to defeat without that dorje? Zevox
NiQil 05-28-07, 08:54 PM	Darrgon vs Taren is up please check for errors. It was a close fight in the end but I thought that Darrgon had it in the pocket when Taren failed his save vs the color spray I see some possibly fight affecting errors in rounds 16, 17, and 19. In each of those rounds, you have Taren full attacking with claws. Each claw gets its own attack. So there should be two attacks in each of those rounds (round 18 does not, because I couldn't full attack, unless the previous rounds change enough to allow that). You also seem to be applying the damage for both claws with a single attack roll, which is incorrect. Each claws gets it's own attack roll for 1d4+Str damage, not one attack roll for both claws. Also, in round 15, Taren is dealt ability damage to his Dex from one of the centipedes. Since he is a finesse character, this is going to affect his attack rolls, and will also bring down his AC as well. It does not appear that either of those changes were accounted for in the roller. These errors appear to help Darrgon more than Taren at first glance, but there is enough there that things could get altered, so I would appreciate it if you could make those corrections.
Zevox 05-28-07, 09:42 PM	Kervan Sheharath vs Zeke the Formian Taskmaster & Grog the Half-Gold Dragon Ogre (man thats a mouth full!) is up. Ouch, the pain. Zevox
templer10 05-29-07, 12:13 PM	Zevox - i just read the tactics for that lightwolf VS Aramur and Men - i feel for you - i predicts this going into the 50+ round range unless you get REALLY lucky. p.s. - this is the reason every pitlord hates the forest....
TelinArtho 05-29-07, 12:21 PM	Darrgon vs Taren is up please check for errors. It was a close fight in the end but I thought that Darrgon had it in the pocket when Taren failed his save vs the color spray In the fight result - you should probably mention that Darrgon used his Acid Splashes as well (it is his 3rd fight - so it doesn't actually matter - but always good to be consistent). NiQil is right about his attacks though. There should be two attacks per full attack and each successful hit is 1d4+1 damage. Once the poison takes into effect, his attack bonus is reduced by 2 because of the lowered dex. If it does extend the fight to a longer duration - do note that poison has a secondary effect at 1 minute (round 23 for the first one).
Usurpator 05-29-07, 12:25 PM	Zevox - i just read the tactics for that lightwolf VS Aramur and Men - i feel for you - i predicts this going into the 50+ round range unless you get REALLY lucky. p.s. - this is the reason every pitlord hates the forest.... The forest is just too big, too many redundant squares. I feel for Zevox too.
Usurpator 05-29-07, 12:35 PM	Okay, if the delay penalty forces me to go looking, then I will climb down the tree, and try to climb up the next one to continue my search (if I see him on the way, climb up the nearest tree if on the ground, or climb back up if on a tree). The idea is that I want to be off the ground as little as possible. If after I find him he goes for cover from me, he is avoiding combat as much as I am, so there should be no delay penalty. After reading this contingency: Reclimbing a tree upon seeking Aramur is not an offensive action, it is delaying. If you got out to seek someone but do not take offensive action upon finding someone, but simply restart evasion, you were not actually looking to actively engage someone, but simple appearing to do so for the sake of the delay timer. Delaying also counts for buffing for example. You cannot buff for 9 rounds, then look for someone for 5 rounds, and when you find him continue another few rounds of buffing. You need to actively engage. I'm waiting for a snipe shot, he's waiting for a climb shot. We cannot both get what we want, we cannot force the other to get what we want, so neither of us should get what we want, that seems the only fair thing to me. I could of course have written for Aramur to rehide as soon as I saw him, but I didn't since I consider it delaying.
MindWandererB 05-29-07, 12:52 PM	Kervan Sheharath vs Zeke the Formian Taskmaster & Grog the Half-Gold Dragon Ogre (man thats a mouth full!) is up. Ouch, the pain. Zevox <sigh> Okay, I did underestimate their AC, but there wasn't a whole lot I could have done in any event. Cursing the ogre's Str modifier might have helped, but mainly they were just plain too much for me to handle.
Rauul 05-29-07, 01:22 PM	Anyone wanna help me out with some math... ecl 6 with 1.5 CA of undead minions.. for Awards. (begs shamelessly)
TelinArtho 05-29-07, 01:32 PM	MaxCA at ECL6 is 4, so 1.5/4*25% = 9.375%
Abyssal Stalker 05-29-07, 01:34 PM	@Mitza: I don't necessary agree the way you handled delay penalty in the fight Undertaker vs Longshot. I'm not even sure why you left me standing around in the beginning. There isn't really a reason why Nail would refuse to move. And AFAIK the delay penalty hits only when you reach a cumulative time of 10 rounds of delaying, which it doesn't seem to be. Mainly I'm just bored in losing every time I compete in the arena...hence the complaining :(
templer10 05-29-07, 01:39 PM	@Mitza: I don't necessary agree the way you handled delay penalty in the fight Undertaker vs Longshot. I'm not even sure why you left me standing around in the beginning. There isn't really a reason why Nail would refuse to move. And AFAIK the delay penalty hits only when you reach a cumulative time of 10 rounds of delaying, which it doesn't seem to be. Mainly I'm just bored in losing every time I compete in the arena...hence the complaining :( Frightened means just that - that he wont move towards the scary guy. and you can complain how much you like lol - cant argue with those reflex saves... mitza - i actually used 6 more pps then noted (for that e-missile at the start) the undertaker's familiar died, and my share pain is still working for 2+ hours - please edit.
Rauul 05-29-07, 01:40 PM	MaxCA at ECL6 is 4, so 1.5/4*25% = 9.375% yea forgot his horse.. but i think i got it.. thanks
Zevox 05-29-07, 01:53 PM	Aramur vs Lightwolf done. Thank Tymora for the delay penalty. And yes, I noticed that Yitzi's response to my point about the delay penalty was quite flawed, and pointed this out in my comments about the fight. Fortunately, it never came up. Zevox
McJarvis 05-29-07, 01:58 PM	@Mitza: Pitlords is prone to changing assigned pitlords on fights without notice. Apparently both of us looked on Wednesday when pairings were rolled & both saw that the fight was still assigned to Mal & was in week 2. You must have been edited in later. Really-> You can't expect the gladiators to check 3->4 times on Wednesday. As far as I knew Mal was just 1 week behind, especially given that he posted elswhere in the forum that he messed up his hand. (seemed like a temporary setback)
Yitzi 05-29-07, 01:58 PM	After reading this contingency: Reclimbing a tree upon seeking Aramur is not an offensive action, it is delaying. If you got out to seek someone but do not take offensive action upon finding someone, but simply restart evasion, you were not actually looking to actively engage someone, but simple appearing to do so for the sake of the delay timer. Delaying also counts for buffing for example. You cannot buff for 9 rounds, then look for someone for 5 rounds, and when you find him continue another few rounds of buffing. You need to actively engage. I'm waiting for a snipe shot, he's waiting for a climb shot. We cannot both get what we want, we cannot force the other to get what we want, so neither of us should get what we want, that seems the only fair thing to me. I could of course have written for Aramur to rehide as soon as I saw him, but I didn't since I consider it delaying. Actually, the official rule is that if neither person is actively seeking to attack the other, the delay penalty does not apply. And while Lightwolf is climbing, you can attack with the sling-if you don't, you're as much in violation of the delay penalty as Lightwolf is. The delay penalty is if one person hides, or keeps a chase going without attacking. Not if they choose to maneuver for position. Still, if even that counts as delay penalty, then I'll shoot on sight and then climb the tree. Of course, by the same token if you find Lightwolf while not in the bog, you can't retreat to the bog and then attack. McJarvis, a few minor mistakes in assertions made by your tactics: -you only get +4 AC from alter self: +1 size, +4 natural, but -1 from a DEX reduction. -I don't actually need to snipe to beat deflect arrows, attacking from hiding without making a check to rehide will work too.
McJarvis 05-29-07, 02:01 PM	McJarvis, a few minor mistakes in assertions made by your tactics: -you only get +4 AC from alter self: +1 size, +4 natural, but -1 from a DEX reduction. -I don't actually need to snipe to beat deflect arrows, attacking from hiding without making a check to rehide will work too. 1) Dex doesn't change with alterself-> no reduction. 2) Once I auto-spot you my speed will allow me to follow & negate your cover. Your only chance was either to snipe to hit me or kill me on the first shot. This kind of tactic(fast speed+following hider) makes sniping all but impossible in the arena. [Even Mort had to use a deeper darkness spell to create her own concealment.] ~McJ~
Yitzi 05-29-07, 02:04 PM	1) Dex doesn't change with alterself-> no reduction. Whoops, my mistake. 2) Once I auto-spot you my speed will allow me to follow & negate your cover. Your only chance was either to snipe to hit me or kill me on the first shot. ~McJ~ Or to move away and rehide somewhere else (if you're 70' away, you might have trouble etting there before I rehide)
McJarvis 05-29-07, 02:07 PM	else (if you're 70' away, you might have trouble etting there before I rehide) If I'm 70' away you're probably going to be dealing with firing multiple range incriments away, and could have successfully sniped(since that'd be a +7 to the DC of my spot check anyway) All the same, my double move is 100'. All I need to do is move to where I saw you fire & then duck around the corner, and I have a pretty good chance of auto-spotting you. ~McJ~ EDIT-> though, granted, my hp are so low you might just hit me with that first shot :-O
Abyssal Stalker 05-29-07, 02:10 PM	Frightened means just that - that he wont move towards the scary guy. and you can complain how much you like lol - cant argue with those reflex saves... I can still argue the fact that I shouldn't be hitting delay penalty. I have no clue if Nail should be shaken or frightened. What the hell is the CR of a familiar? Edit: Nevermind. Whatever, I'll just suck the loss. I'm too tired to start arguing this...
MitzaVolchenko 05-29-07, 02:16 PM	@Mitza: Pitlords is prone to changing assigned pitlords on fights without notice. Apparently both of us looked on Wednesday when pairings were rolled & both saw that the fight was still assigned to Mal & was in week 2. You must have been edited in later. Really-> You can't expect the gladiators to check 3->4 times on Wednesday. As far as I knew Mal was just 1 week behind, especially given that he posted elswhere in the forum that he messed up his hand. (seemed like a temporary setback) I looked on Wednesday and noted that I had two fights. I can and do expect it to be checked. I sent PM's for tactics and got what amounts to attitude for asking for them. I was within my rights to just run from the one line defaults on both characters...how not fun would that have been for ya'll? Please see the prison for Davian :) Fight will be up by deadline, but I really would have liked to have had the sniper battle with more time to mess with it.
McJarvis 05-29-07, 02:18 PM	I looked on Wednesday and noted that I had two fights. I can and do expect it to be checked. I sent PM's for tactics and got what amounts to attitude for asking for them. I was within my rights to just run from the one line defaults on both characters...how not fun would that have been for ya'll? Apparently you check later than we do. All the same-> you were giving us attitude for not giving tactics over when really Pitlords is the one who changed the assignment without making special note of it(at least no where either of us could see...) Please see the prison for Davian :) Already addressed. It's a non-violation.
MitzaVolchenko 05-29-07, 02:21 PM	@Mitza: I don't necessary agree the way you handled delay penalty in the fight Undertaker vs Longshot. I'm not even sure why you left me standing around in the beginning. There isn't really a reason why Nail would refuse to move. And AFAIK the delay penalty hits only when you reach a cumulative time of 10 rounds of delaying, which it doesn't seem to be. Mainly I'm just bored in losing every time I compete in the arena...hence the complaining :( I had to make the call on whether to stand around cajoling your familiar ( he could do nothing but cower for the first four rounds) or advance without him and hope for the best. Looking over it now, I could have had Undertaker advancing and let the bat catch up, but it really wouldn't have made much difference. Also note that without a successful listen, he won't turn toward you but rather will continue on toward the next corner listening. I could edit in the reversal and check the dispel, which if I have time, I will. It won't likely change the outcome as the reflex saves will still obliterate you. even dispelling the vigor, the fireball damage won't kill him before the energy missiles kill Undertaker. Believe me, I know the feeling on the losing strings.
McJarvis 05-29-07, 02:23 PM	@Mitza: If you feel strongly about the Prison thing than either delay the fight another week or just have Davian auto-lose. I'd rather either of these to fighting without the extra 3hp & have to argue with you about it.
MitzaVolchenko 05-29-07, 02:24 PM	Apparently you check later than we do. All the same-> you were giving us attitude for not giving tactics over when really Pitlords is the one who changed the assignment without making special note of it(at least no where either of us could see...) Already addressed. It's a non-violation. I disagree on the violation..take it to the council. You have an ally with no stats that gives you a bonus. I won't allow it in the fight. I sent a message stating that I had no tactics and that there was no post for the fight. That isn't attitude, that is a request for tactics. I even lurkedon IM looking for you when I received the other tactics and not yours :)
McJarvis 05-29-07, 02:26 PM	Alright-> just have Davian forfeit the fight then. I don't have the time to enforce rules around here or argue with Pitlords who hijack characters.
Zevox 05-29-07, 02:28 PM	Actually, the official rule is that if neither person is actively seeking to attack the other, the delay penalty does not apply. And while Lightwolf is climbing, you can attack with the sling-if you don't, you're as much in violation of the delay penalty as Lightwolf is. The delay penalty is if one person hides, or keeps a chase going without attacking. Not if they choose to maneuver for position. Wrong on all counts save for Aramur being delaying if he didn't attack back (presuming, of course, he took cover so you couldn't attack either). See my comments in the fight's wrap-up. Zevox
TelinArtho 05-29-07, 02:33 PM	Since he's not listing any of the benefits for the familiar, but still lists the type and paid for it - I don't see any reason to blindside him of his 3hp - especially if it isn't his opponent calling it foul play. Note that the benefit of the familiar is there as long as the familiar is within a mile of the caster. He doesn't list alertness (which would require within reach), so I don't think this is an issue.
MindWandererB 05-29-07, 02:39 PM	@Mitza: Pitlords is prone to changing assigned pitlords on fights without notice. Apparently both of us looked on Wednesday when pairings were rolled & both saw that the fight was still assigned to Mal & was in week 2. You must have been edited in later. Really-> You can't expect the gladiators to check 3->4 times on Wednesday. As far as I knew Mal was just 1 week behind, especially given that he posted elswhere in the forum that he messed up his hand. (seemed like a temporary setback) I only change things without notice before I post the "Pairings done" announcement. Until then, nothing is set in stone. After that, I announce any and all changes. As for missing fights, I check the Battles thread to see if the fight is underway, and by how much. If there's no record of it at all, and there's nothing recent about it in the FotW, I assign a new pitlord.
McJarvis 05-29-07, 02:41 PM	I only change things without notice before I post the "Pairings done" announcement. Until then, nothing is set in stone. After that, I announce any and all changes. Hum...I didn't know that. Perhaps some size-7 "Warning: Not Official Pairings" at the top of the post is in order so newcomers don't get confused on this? :-)
Usurpator 05-29-07, 02:43 PM	Actually, the official rule is that if neither person is actively seeking to attack the other, the delay penalty does not apply. The delay rule, as written, is quite flawed. I have harassed Caterane many times to rewrite it. If what you say were true, the match between Aramur and Lightwolf would have lasted for eternity, with both waiting for the other to act. And while Lightwolf is climbing, you can attack with the sling-if you don't, you're as much in violation of the delay penalty as Lightwolf is. Very true, but if you are allowed to climb, Aramur is allowed to rehide. You see where that gets us, a standoff like before, which is one of the purposes of the delay penalty to break. So no rehiding for Aramur and no reclimbing for Lightwolf. The delay penalty is if one person hides, or keeps a chase going without attacking. Not if they choose to maneuver for position. That is your interpretation, but I don't believe that is the purpose of the rule. Regardless of the maneuvering, if the 'ideal position to attack' doesn't occur within 10 rounds, you will be forced to attack from a less than ideal position by the delay rule. Still, if even that counts as delay penalty, then I'll shoot on sight and then climb the tree. That is perfectly fine. Shoot once and the return to evading. 10-round delay counter is reset at the time of your first shot. That was why the comment was made '50+ round match' was there I think, because it seemed it would be 'one shot and climb/rehide, wait 10 rounds, then another one-shot, climb/rehide type of match' Of course, by the same token if you find Lightwolf while not in the bog, you can't retreat to the bog and then attack. Of course, that was why I didn't include that in my tactics, it would have been illegal, and would bring is right back to the stand-off that the delay penalty is supposed to break. We both had main tactics that required the cooperation of our opponent to succeed. Neither had the ability to force the other to fight on their terms. I had a contingency for such a situation, you didn't. You're a smart player. Obviously you would try to have Lightwolf engage me in a situation in which he has the upper hand. The Climbing tactic was the most obvious and dangerous tactic I could think of, so I chose to counter it.
Usurpator 05-29-07, 03:02 PM	Zevox, thanks for running the fight! I spotted one minor error. Aramur should get another attack when Lightwolf is standing up after having tripped him, since Aramur has Combat Reflexes.
Rauul 05-29-07, 03:16 PM	doubleed
Rauul 05-29-07, 03:16 PM	Ok i Started.. Daren Legrad vs. Vallgar the Unhinged (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=12537334&postcount=907) ECL 3, running to the Post office and will finish it when i get back... 1 Question thou... Does mage armor and Shield each add +4 vs Spectral hand? if so this fight is gonna be over fast..
TelinArtho 05-29-07, 03:21 PM	Spectral hand allows a caster to make ranged touch attacks with touch spells channeled through the hand. They are still touch attacks, so armor and shield boni need not apply.
Zevox 05-29-07, 03:21 PM	Zevox, thanks for running the fight! I spotted one minor error. Aramur should get another attack when Lightwolf is standing up after having tripped him, since Aramur has Combat Reflexes. Really? Thats a rare feat. Completely missed it. Oh well, makes no difference to the fight anyway. Zevox
Yitzi 05-29-07, 03:24 PM	No, mage armor and shield don't help vs, spectral hand, as that is a touch attack. They'll give the skeleton a tough time though. Also, is chill touch limited to 3 touches or 3 attacks? You can use this melee touch attack up to one time per level.
TelinArtho 05-29-07, 03:25 PM	Ok i Started.. Daren Legrad vs. Vallgar the Unhinged (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=12537334&postcount=907) ECL 3, running to the Post office and will finish it when i get back... 1 Question thou... Does mage armor and Shield each add +4 vs Spectral hand? if so this fight is gonna be over fast.. For some reason - a few of the rounds are appearing in duplicate. Just figured I'd mention it since it looks odd...
Yitzi 05-29-07, 03:42 PM	Aramur vs Lightwolf done. You messed up the rewards. It's ECL 5, so ally effects are 16.6666...% and base rewards are 1500 xp, 1600 gp, so Aramur gets 1250 xp, 1333 gp 3 sp 3 cp, and Lightwolf gets 583 xp, 622gp 2 sp 2 cp. So that needs to be fixed. About the delay penalty, 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. I assumed this meant that if neither wants to enage the other, there is no penalty, perhaps I misread it.
MitzaVolchenko 05-29-07, 04:59 PM	Davian vs. Arbin is done and in reward editing stage. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=12538195&postcount=909)
MitzaVolchenko 05-29-07, 05:08 PM	I have no interest in having a fight run if the Pitlord is obviously biased in the first place. Winning and losing doesn't matter to me-> but I'd rather not spend resources on a fight where I'm not being given a fair chance. Considering that my opponent hasn't voiced any angst towards the toad-tactic, the tactic is not some new thing I made up-> this has been used many times in CoCo, and that there are no rules forbidding(only rules allowing) what I did: I have no choice but to assume that you want Davian to lose for some reason. [Or are just having a power trip in the prison-> whatever] Basically-> It doesn't matter that I think Davian would win the fight regardless of the 3hp. I just object to how you're handling things & would rather just forfeit in protest of all of this foolishness. I agreed to allow the HP's pending the court decision on the missing stat toad and the idea of a free asset that is not harmable by your opponent giving an edge. This is not bias of any kind, and considering the amount of time we spend chattering on IM, I would expect a charge like that sooner from your opponent than from you. That is not worthy, hon. Not in the least. Davian is the first character I have seen that does not include their familiar's stats on their character sheet.
MitzaVolchenko 05-29-07, 05:10 PM	Frightened means just that - that he wont move towards the scary guy. and you can complain how much you like lol - cant argue with those reflex saves... mitza - i actually used 6 more pps then noted (for that e-missile at the start) the undertaker's familiar died, and my share pain is still working for 2+ hours - please edit. Done.
Usurpator 05-29-07, 05:14 PM	About the delay penalty, I assumed this meant that if neither wants to enage the other, there is no penalty, perhaps I misread it. You read it correctly, as I said, it is badly written and should have been amended a long time ago. If it was as you suggested, the fight would have been stalled infinitely with both of us waiting for the other.
TelinArtho 05-29-07, 05:34 PM	@Rauul - couple of issues with the fight. In the interest of fairness, I need you to edit them in. 1. My tactics called for casting Blindness before Chill Touch. Yes, this means he gets his first fortitude save versus the Blindness instead (and succeeds at it). 2. You need to include the saving throws versus Chill Touch on the ones that hit (a new one for the first hit and then another one for the one that hit in round 10. Although this wouldn't make any hits into misses - this does have the potential to reduce his damage output enough to extend the fight another round or two.
Rauul 05-29-07, 05:36 PM	Ok Daren Legrad vs. Vallgar the Unhinged (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=12537334&postcount=907) ECL 3, is done.. Some of the DC on the dice roller are messed up as are some rounds (alot) but you can see everything Someone ****** of the Dice god... *eyes Vallgar*
Rauul 05-29-07, 05:58 PM	@Rauul - couple of issues with the fight. In the interest of fairness, I need you to edit them in. 1. My tactics called for casting Blindness before Chill Touch. Yes, this means he gets his first fortitude save versus the Blindness instead (and succeeds at it). 2. You need to include the saving throws versus Chill Touch on the ones that hit (a new one for the first hit and then another one for the one that hit in round 10. Although this wouldn't make any hits into misses - this does have the potential to reduce his damage output enough to extend the fight another round or two. Fixed Sorry... you made it last a little longer.. but same result..
TelinArtho 05-29-07, 06:07 PM	thanks for the run and the edit.
Sjiggie 05-29-07, 06:14 PM	I see some possibly fight affecting errors in rounds 16, 17, and 19. In each of those rounds, you have Taren full attacking with claws. Each claw gets its own attack. So there should be two attacks in each of those rounds (round 18 does not, because I couldn't full attack, unless the previous rounds change enough to allow that). You also seem to be applying the damage for both claws with a single attack roll, which is incorrect. Each claws gets it's own attack roll for 1d4+Str damage, not one attack roll for both claws. Also, in round 15, Taren is dealt ability damage to his Dex from one of the centipedes. Since he is a finesse character, this is going to affect his attack rolls, and will also bring down his AC as well. It does not appear that either of those changes were accounted for in the roller. These errors appear to help Darrgon more than Taren at first glance, but there is enough there that things could get altered, so I would appreciate it if you could make those corrections. I've editted the fight but didn't matter at all in the end only you did less damage to Darrgon than originally. Your attack still hit Darrgon but you deal less damage because the second claw misses. On round 16 your claw deals not enough damage to kill the Medium Centipede and on the next round the crits kills it so I didn't make the second roll but had you move up one round earlier but the second attack in round 18 misses Darrgon so no effective change in the end. Also added Darrgon acid splashes in the fight summary
Usurpator 05-29-07, 06:27 PM	Now, a little tip, if you want to beat someone like Aramur in the future, I'd suggest playing to that magic of yours. His chief weakness is will saves, so consider picking up a spell or two with that in the future, but even with just your spells you could've done something with Grease, like tripping him up or making his weapon slick. Oh, and consider grabbing Ray of Enfeeblement too - that is the bane of folks like Aramur, no question about it. In any event, better luck next time. Actually, I think Aramur hasn't rolled a single Will save yet, in all of his 10 fights! How's that for luck? :D I'm quite amazed that he received only one real loss, luck in getting the right opponents all the way!
McJarvis 05-29-07, 07:09 PM	@Mitza: Several problems with the fight in relation to you ignoring tactics & rules, but most of all: I edited my character sheet before the fight was run, and thus you had to default it to Yitzi. I also conceded the fight several times in the forums, and I'd rather not argue over all of this. Just do your job.
McJarvis 05-29-07, 07:19 PM	I agreed to allow the HP's pending the court decision on the missing stat toad and the idea of a free asset that is not harmable by your opponent giving an edge. This is not bias of any kind, and considering the amount of time we spend chattering on IM, I would expect a charge like that sooner from your opponent than from you. That is not worthy, hon. Not in the least. Davian is the first character I have seen that does not include their familiar's stats on their character sheet. Sorry, just saw this: The court decision has no outcome on this fight, but that's not important anymore. You're being very mean whether you know it or not, and I will have no part of it. You forced my hand, and I made the fight a default. It's not a pitlords job to make policy, just uphold the current rules. By the rules Davian lost by default, and you must abide by this. There has been more than enough "proof" in public regarding my intentions on this fight.
SauroGrenom 05-29-07, 07:29 PM	Just do your job.Woahw. Chill. Remember here where is say to Have Fun! It's alright to get peeved. But it's not alright to get personal about it. Many of us, self included, have gotten peeved at Mitza at one point or another. Consider it a right of passage. Calm down go have a beer, and try not to be inflammatory, especially when it won't have any possible positive contribution to the issue at hand. Cheers, :pint:
MitzaVolchenko 05-29-07, 07:33 PM	Sorry, just saw this: The court decision has no outcome on this fight, but that's not important anymore. You're being very mean whether you know it or not, and I will have no part of it. You forced my hand, and I made the fight a default. It's not a pitlords job to make policy, just uphold the current rules. By the rules Davian lost by default, and you must abide by this. There has been more than enough "proof" in public regarding my intentions on this fight. I will not re-write this fight to a zero resources used forfeit. That is not fair to your potential opponents. I was already in the process of running the fight (with the extra HP's allowed) when you posted to just forfeit it. If you have any issues with anything in the fight as run, I will be happy to address them. I am sorry that you think that I am being mean. That is not the intent. My questions and rules clarification requests are properly posted in the Court Room. Please add your toad's statistics to the character sheet and add its location (either with you or if we continue to allow it wherever the toad stays during fights) to your pre-buffs.
MindWandererB 05-29-07, 07:47 PM	@Mitza: Several problems with the fight in relation to you ignoring tactics & rules, but most of all: I edited my character sheet before the fight was run, and thus you had to default it to Yitzi. I also conceded the fight several times in the forums, and I'd rather not argue over all of this. Just do your job.And just for reference, if the pitlord already has the "snapshot" of your character sheet, an edit isn't necessarily a forfeit. And when the rules are not 100% clear, as they were not in this case (we don't have a formal rule about whether allies can be absent from the fight, but still count as nearby), the pitlord is not only allowed but obligated to try to determine a policy. In this case, Mitza even gave you the benefit of the doubt and effectively gave you the extra 3 HP.
MitzaVolchenko 05-29-07, 07:59 PM	Woahw. Chill. Remember here where is say to Have Fun! It's alright to get peeved. But it's not alright to get personal about it. Many of us, self included, have gotten peeved at Mitza at one point or another. Consider it a right of passage. Calm down go have a beer, and try not to be inflammatory, especially when it won't have any possible positive contribution to the issue at hand. Cheers, :pint: LOL I am a CoCo right of passage, now? Well I guess infamy is as good as fame, right?
Macbrea 05-29-07, 08:02 PM	Arden vs Rubicanti is finished. Was kind of abrupt.
TheMagister 05-29-07, 08:10 PM	Arden vs Rubicanti is finished. Was kind of abrupt. Not gonna argue about the result, but I'm curious: How did Arden sunder the dorje after already tripping Rubi in the round? Round 9, I mean. ;)
Erithmu 05-29-07, 08:13 PM	Not gonna argue about the result, but I'm curious: How did Arden sunder the dorje after already tripping Rubi in the round? Round 9, I mean. ;) I think he took it on the AoO on stand.
Zevox 05-29-07, 08:16 PM	Not gonna argue about the result, but I'm curious: How did Arden sunder the dorje after already tripping Rubi in the round? Round 9, I mean. ;) AoO for standing, looks like. Only issue I would have with the fight is that Arden's expansion should have only cost him 1 pp. He can't spend more than that on a War Mind power yet anyway. The other 2 were provided by his surge. Obviously, doesn't matter a lick to the fight as it went anyway. Thanks for the run. Zevox
Macbrea 05-29-07, 08:17 PM	Sorry, if it wasn't clear. Round 9 Arden makes hampered move [move action] and swings to trip [standard action]. Trips Rubicanti and takes [free action] free swing after trip. Rubicanti prone and going to take a shot standing up might as well pull out dorje [free], activate it [standard], and then stand [move]. Draws attack of oppurtunity, which was a sunder [free].
Macbrea 05-29-07, 08:18 PM	AoO for standing, looks like. Only issue I would have with the fight is that Arden's expansion should have only cost him 1 pp. He can't spend more than that on a War Mind power yet anyway. The other 2 were provided by his surge. Obviously, doesn't matter a lick to the fight as it went anyway. Thanks for the run. Zevox Oops, sorry. will charge to 2 less and roll for surge.
Macbrea 05-29-07, 08:20 PM	No enerveration.. So, still stands.
TheMagister 05-29-07, 08:24 PM	{carefully} I need to check my tactics, but don't I always take total defense before rising? When tripped, take total defense while rising. Don't worry about it. I was weirded out about it is all. Fight was a no-contest anyhow. Whoa, whoa, whoa. {checks roller more carefully} You've got some serious problems, Mac. When Arden enlarges, his Dex drops. When Arden is entangled, his Dex drops. Arden's Ref save vs. being stuck to the floor is NOT +7. It's 7-1-2 = +4. Arden is glued to the floor. Enlarged and Entangled, his Dex is effectively 10. So is his Touch AC (if that ever matters). In round 8, Rubi should be fighting defensively. The -4 to hit wouldn't matter to the tanglefoot throw (still beats an AC 10), but the +3 dodge to his AC might help later. Arden gets glued. In round 9, Arden can't 5' step even if he WASN'T glued to the floor: he's entangled. The followup attack might miss with the extra dodge bonus -- lemme check -- nope, I it still hits. Arden's 13+10 hits AC 23, and Rubi's AC is 17+4+1+2+3-4 = 23. Drat. He might not be able to trip if he can't 5' step though. And regardless, the dorje doesn't come out that round. It'll get sundered soon enough, though by a greatsword instead of a guisarme. :) In round 10, Rubi still gets touched and tripped (darned high rolls), but Arden's followup completely misses (21 ain't anywhere close). I'd appreciate another look, just for the sake of completeness. Sorry to go back on my "I don't care" attitude, but those are some interesting twists.
Macbrea 05-29-07, 08:27 PM	Don't think total defensive helps against a sunder attack to hit an object.
Zevox 05-29-07, 08:34 PM	Oops, sorry. will charge to 2 less and roll for surge. Its Arden's third fight anyway, so how much he spent doesn't matter ultimately. Don't think total defensive helps against a sunder attack to hit an object. You are correct. Zevox
TheMagister 05-29-07, 08:42 PM	The dorje was only out because Rubi didn't take total defense as requested. It should be drawn later when it has potential to be useful. ;) Oh, and it shouldn't be too much of a stretch to request that Rubi 5' steps closer after taking total defense and rising. Just making sure. :)
Zevox 05-29-07, 08:46 PM	Oh, and it shouldn't be too much of a stretch to request that Rubi 5' steps closer after taking total defense and rising. Just making sure. :) Considering Arden was expanded and wielding a reach weapon at the time, it wouldn't exactly matter. Zevox
TheMagister 05-29-07, 08:47 PM	After two trips to the ground, that's 10' of movement closer to Arden in which Arden cannot move back. OH! And Arden needs DC 15 concentration checks to refocus, on top of the DC 20 to successfully refocus! Yay entangle!
Macbrea 05-29-07, 08:52 PM	Concentration check rolled a 27. And the movement 5ft toward after standing doesn't effect a thing. The next trip occurs at the 15ft range then? Damage from first trip was 26 and second trip was 16. You only stood once.
Macbrea 05-29-07, 08:55 PM	And the to hits both times were 27 and 29.. Exactly from prone AC 20 + 6 = 26. You were hit even if you went full defensive.
Zevox 05-29-07, 08:58 PM	After two trips to the ground, that's 10' of movement closer to Arden in which Arden cannot move back. Um, yes he can, unless hes backed up against a wall, in which case its easy to just readjust around Rubi. OH! And Arden needs DC 15 concentration checks to refocus, on top of the DC 20 to successfully refocus! Yay entangle! Regaining focus != casting/manifesting, so no, that wouldn't happen. But in any event, Arden almost auto-succeeds on such an easy check, with +12 concentration. Zevox
TheMagister 05-29-07, 08:58 PM	Look, if you don't want to edit, don't. Chances are 80/20 (or worse) that Rubi wins. I know that. But he's still got 16 hp left because Arden's followup on the second trip MISSES. That means that Rubi can stand (taking an AoO for rising) while under total defense (still) and move 5' closer. Now Rubi is 10' away. Now the guisarme goes away. Now Arden trips unarmed (which doesn't change anything). But if Arden misses with one more followup swing or one more touch attack, all of a sudden Rubi can deal damage. Rubi can fight defensively, draw/manifest hammer and touch, and then flurry/flurry/repeat. At least there's the POTENTIAL for fight changing crits. We've all seen it happen.
TheMagister 05-29-07, 09:01 PM	And the to hits both times were 27 and 29.. Exactly from prone AC 20 + 6 = 26. You were hit even if you went full defensive. Arden's followup attacks are vs. touch AC? No they're not (he's using psionic weapon, at least). Arden's touch attacks to hit are all fantastic: no argument on whether or not those hit. His followups aren't so picture perfect, though. Rubi's while-rising AC is 23 if fighting defensively, or 26 if total defense.
Macbrea 05-29-07, 09:05 PM	Those follow-ups aren't made against your rising AC. They are Free attacks against a prone target. And you cannot fight defensively without making an attack.
Zevox 05-29-07, 09:08 PM	At least there's the POTENTIAL for fight changing crits. We've all seen it happen. ...Fight changing crits? Against 84 hp? With your damage output? Zevox
Macbrea 05-29-07, 09:12 PM	There is no point except when I used the dorje in which you could have gone full defensive by your tactics. Round 8 - you throw a tanglefoot bag per your tactics Round 9 - Arden swings first trips and hits you 26 damage Round 9 - I can go full defensive and stand changes AoO to 29 hit if I move the swing up. Damage output same 16 damage. Only difference comes in you don't use the dorje.
TheMagister 05-29-07, 09:16 PM	There is no point except when I used the dorje in which you could have gone full defensive by your tactics. Round 8 - you throw a tanglefoot bag per your tactics Round 9 - Arden swings first trips and hits you 26 damage Round 9 - I can go full defensive and stand changes AoO to 29 hit if I move the swing up. Damage output same 16 damage. Only difference comes in you don't use the dorje. You don't keep thematic rolls in their places? You'd move the sunder roll into the AoO's place? edit: PM sent.
Macbrea 05-29-07, 09:18 PM	The Item I missed is the -4 dex for entangle effecting the DC 15 Reflex save. And no I don't have a problem with you. I simply missed the save adjustment.
Zevox 05-29-07, 09:19 PM	You don't keep thematic rolls in their places? You'd move the sunder roll into the AoO's place? edit: PM sent. Um, if you no longer draw your dorje that round, Arden doesn't know which one to sunder, so keeping thematic rolls, wouldn't the sunder roll become an AoO roll instead? Zevox
Macbrea 05-29-07, 09:22 PM	Actually, I have to go back to the point I missed the -4 dex for the reflex save in which a 16 was rolled vs a DC 15 and stick you to the floor. This will probably result in some changing of the effects because you would be unable to step closer.
TheMagister 05-29-07, 09:22 PM	And the other stuff? The followup hits that miss?
Zevox 05-29-07, 09:22 PM	The Item I missed is the -4 dex for entangle effecting the DC 15 Reflex save. And no I don't have a problem with you. I simply missed the save adjustment. Um, the -4 dex wouldn't change the reflex save. He has +2 to his saves from Defensive Precognition you didn't include in the initial roll. And its debatable whether the dex loss from the bag should effect its save anyway. Edit: Wow, we all posted at the same minute. Thats gotta be a new record or something. :) Zevox
TheMagister 05-29-07, 09:26 PM	Um, if you no longer draw your dorje that round, Arden doesn't know which one to sunder, so keeping thematic rolls, wouldn't the sunder roll become an AoO roll instead? Zevox I thought that "thematic" means that a sunder roll goes to the next sunder, and an AoO roll goes to the next AoO. "Keeping rolls in order" is what you're talking about. It's not worth arguing about. If Mac keeps 'em in order, then that's what he does and I can just shut up. :)
Macbrea 05-29-07, 09:27 PM	Hmm, following tactics exactly. I should go defensive and stand. Resulting in the sunder attack to hit with a 31. It doing 15 damage. Then the trip attack on the next round will hit with a 29. Bringing Rubicanti to the floor again. It will keep with the tactics and save the charge. And I always try to keep dice of the same modifiers of the same to player the same.
TheMagister 05-29-07, 09:29 PM	Um, the -4 dex wouldn't change the reflex save. He has +2 to his saves from Defensive Precognition you didn't include in the initial roll. And its debatable whether the dex loss from the bag should effect its save anyway. Edit: Wow, we all posted at the same minute. Thats gotta be a new record or something. :) Zevox Oop. You're right. I totally forgot about that. 9+7+2-1-2 = 15 exactly. That eliminates the 5' step approach. I'd still like to see if Arden can finally miss a touch to trip and let Rubi tumble in to start actually fighting. Edit: and you can't sunder with armor spikes, so if Arden doesn't have his greatsword in hand, then no sunder on AoO.
TheMagister 05-29-07, 09:33 PM	Okie. If you keep the rolls as they occur in order, then forget it all. Thanks for the run.
Macbrea 05-29-07, 09:36 PM	I always try to keep rolls in order of rolling them. Though, with going full defensive you are still alive at end and I have to do more rounds.
Zevox 05-29-07, 09:38 PM	Oop. You're right. I totally forgot about that. 9+7+2-1-2 = 15 exactly. Most do, for some reason. I even mention in my tactics right next to the manifesting request that it gives +2 AC and saves, yet I don't think anyone has remembered it on their own yet. Which is a pity, since its the major reason I took the power (Arden gets a chain ability next level that gives him the same +2 insight to AC as a free action anyway, so he'll be using it much less starting then). It makes his saves quite good (at level 7, +11/+9/+9 is even better than my 20 CHA Paladin/Sorcerer Mithos will have). Zevox
Macbrea 05-29-07, 09:48 PM	Ok, edited based off always going total defensive when standing. It resulted in not using the charge of the dorje of hammer.
TheMagister 05-29-07, 09:49 PM	Thanks a lot, man.
Macbrea 05-29-07, 09:53 PM	I generally don't have it out for a character. I try to run the fight as close as possible to what I see the rules and what the tactics say. Generally, when I improvise players complain that I am using too much to help one character or the other. So, I try to avoid it. And with 6 rounds of buffs, I miss modifiers :P
TheMagister 05-29-07, 10:03 PM	I just hate to be a badgering player. We work hard as pitlords -- it makes me feel like I'm being mean to a person who's there to help me. Still, when what I say seems to just get shortly ignored or dismissed by obviously erroneous statements, it gets my dander up. All I ever want is a fair shake, you know? "The Impression I Got" I never felt like you were "out to get me". I felt like you were tired of pitlording, and wanted to get finished with the whole distasteful business as fast as possible. When I requested that you go back to the chore to work on it some more, I felt like you tried to find every reason not to. I felt like I had to verbally drag you back into it. I also felt (due to some other previous comments on other fights of mine) that you initially dismissed my comments as pointless because you feel that I (as a player) "argue a lot" and that I'm "picky". {end of "feelings moment"}
Macbrea 05-29-07, 10:06 PM	I couldn't figure out where you were getting the ability to approach so easily. The problem was the save and it's modifiers not all getting applied.