| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| Mind Rogue11-02-05, 01:39 PM | Hello people, This is the thread for this weeks fights. As usual, play nice (or at least attempt some manner of civility). The rules of Gladius can be found here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=448520). That said, unless I am mistaken, you have about 2 hours and 15 minutes to finish updating your characters, unless Caterane decides to collect early so he can go to bed at a reasonable hour. I hope you all remembered to set your clocks for Daylight Savings Time, where applicable. It should now be about 6:45 GMT. Good luck to all and lets have a good, clean fight. -Mind Rogue |
| Pitlords11-02-05, 01:43 PM | Confirmed. You have a little bit more than 2 hours to edit. We have Pitlords for 18 arena fights, and for 9 monster fights. As far as I can see, this is a problem. If anyone can pitlord another fight, please write me a PM. Every bit helps. |
| TelinArtho11-02-05, 01:47 PM | Go ahead and assign max to me if you need to Pitlords (even assign my own fights to me, I won't mind...). This week is looking to be fairly light for me in the real world anyway. PM Sent. I was going to deactivate one of my characters, but I've only got five that are in the arena right now anyway (Only? Hah!). I'll set Tanglewood to Ready if there's enough Pitlords. |
| Tellish_of_Ket11-02-05, 02:08 PM | Confirmed. You have a little bit more than 2 hours to edit. We have Pitlords for 18 arena fights, and for 9 monster fights. As far as I can see, this is a problem. If anyone can pitlord another fight, please write me a PM. Every bit helps. I'll take up to 10 fights. Yup....10! fights. -ToK |
| TelinArtho11-02-05, 02:08 PM | Just an idea to present about held over fights. If the fight is a monster fight - why not just cancel it? Also, you might not want to bother holding over Talari's MQ - as Luni's been gone since 10/29 and has not poked head nor tail since then. |
| Tellish_of_Ket11-02-05, 02:10 PM | Just an idea to present about held over fights. If the fight is a monster fight - why not just cancel it? Also, you might not want to bother holding over Talari's MQ - as Luni's been gone since 10/29 and has not poked head nor tail since then. I agree with re-rolling monster fights, but not the MQ. That would have been something that was requested. Maybe Luni will make a guest appearance this week. -ToK |
| Sindorin11-02-05, 02:10 PM | How the heck do you find the time for 10 fights? I have trouble juggling 1 fight! |
| NiQil11-02-05, 02:13 PM | I'll take up to 10 fights. Yup....10! fights. -ToK What I want to know...is whether this is monster fights like the Active Pitlord post says, or whether these would be actual fights LOL. |
| Tellish_of_Ket11-02-05, 02:14 PM | What I want to know...is whether this is monster fights like the Active Pitlord post says, or whether these would be actual fights LOL. Anything...monster, MQ, regular etc... -ToK |
| TelinArtho11-02-05, 02:20 PM | I was assigned 6 fights last week - and if it wasn't for being sick over the weekend and Monday - I likely would've had them all done by Saturday night (well, except that this is the second week in a row that I've had a 70+ round fight - but those are exceptions...). Once you get into a rhythm and have a solid block of time - I have no problem churning out fights rather quickly. Obviously, complicated tactics or complicated dice rolls not withstanding... Of course, even before I was assigned the fights, I was doing 2-4 late fights each week - so I figured by upping the number I could just get the fights done earlier. I can't say I'm all that impressed that no one stepped up to take the other fights - but that's not required either (so its not like I'm upset - I was just hoping to see other people take my lead on picking up late fights). |
| waywreth11-02-05, 02:41 PM | First off - thanks to the Pitlords that do so many fights/admin. I'd like to try one in the near future (although alas this week won't work). Just an FYI to whomever gets my fights - I'm on vacation next week and have no net access. I WILL send tactics by Friday so fear not. Please don't pair me for Nov 7th though, and I will update my PCs when I return. |
| Snommelp11-02-05, 02:49 PM | If there aren't enough pitlords to go around, I can always take another fight or two. I know ToK's looking forward to doing ten fights, but I personally think he'd go crazy with the workload. |
| Mind Rogue11-02-05, 02:52 PM | I'll gladly take a 2 vs 2 fight, but I'd prefer to stay away from hunter matches. |
| NiQil11-02-05, 03:01 PM | If there aren't enough pitlords to go around, I can always take another fight or two. I know ToK's looking forward to doing ten fights, but I personally think he'd go crazy with the workload. Guess that depends on whether he gets 10 ECL 3 duels/monster fights or if he gets a 4 team vs 4 team match along with 2 4 person FFA's, 3 3 person FFA's and 4 2 vs 2 team battles LOL |
| TelinArtho11-02-05, 03:09 PM | @NiQil - actually with a 10-fight workload: a 4 vs 4 fight counts as 4 fights a 4 person Hunter match counts as 2 fights a 2 vs 2 fight counts as 2 fights and a 3 person Hunter match counts as 2 fights. (For each 2 people in a fight, it counts as a fight) So theoretically - he'd get the 10 credits for the above. |
| Macbrea11-02-05, 03:11 PM | As I sent, I can take a few fights also. |
| Snommelp11-02-05, 03:17 PM | How much time do we have? I've decided that Hypnotism was a poor spell choice for Hennan and would like to replace it with Cure Light Wounds. |
| TelinArtho11-02-05, 03:20 PM | about a 1/2 hour or so. |
| waywreth11-02-05, 03:20 PM | How much time do we have? I've decided that Hypnotism was a poor spell choice for Hennan and would like to replace it with Cure Light Wounds. 37 minutes by my clock. |
| TelinArtho11-02-05, 03:21 PM | 97 minutes by my clock. then your clock is off by an hour. Check the times of the first 2 posts and the time that they list as being the end time. |
| waywreth11-02-05, 03:23 PM | then your clock is off by an hour. Check the times of the first 2 posts and the time that they list as being the end time. No idea what you're talking about. gogo ninjaedit! |
| Snommelp11-02-05, 03:25 PM | Thanks, guys. Hennan's spell list has been edited. |
| TelinArtho11-02-05, 03:26 PM | ah but you see I had already thought of that counter strategy and edited mine to include a quote of yours! Ha-HA! |
| NiQil11-02-05, 03:27 PM | @NiQil - actually with a 10-fight workload: a 4 vs 4 fight counts as 4 fights a 4 person Hunter match counts as 2 fights a 2 vs 2 fight counts as 2 fights and a 3 person Hunter match counts as 2 fights. (For each 2 people in a fight, it counts as a fight) So theoretically - he'd get the 10 credits for the above. I knew that you got a credit for every 2 participants, but I wasn't aware that it also counted as a fight for each 2 participants...learn something new every day... |
| Pitlords11-02-05, 03:52 PM | Time is up. Stop editing please. |
| Pitlords11-02-05, 05:31 PM | PAIRINGS DONE! Credit Changes: +10: Tellish of Ket +6: Huan, KingUther +3: TelinArtho, Iced +2: Begferdeth, Cerebus, Usurpator, Caterane +1: Book5, Maraxus, Mcbrea, Mindrogue, Pittbull, SauroGrenom, Sindorin, Soullord, Snommelp, LLMadCow, Enterik +0: Gonbow, Onewingedangel -1: Nightbanegod -2: NiQil Credits for Pitlords: +6: TelinArtho +5: Tellish of Ket +2: Cerebus, KingUther, Snommelp, Usurpator +1: Begferdeth, Book5, Gonbow, Iced, Maraxus, Mcbrea, Mindrogue, Onewingedangel, Pittbull, SauroGrenom, Sindorin, Soullord Credits for Campaignlords: +6: Huan +3: Iced, KingUther, Tellish of Ket Credits for Active PCs: -1: Gonbow, Iced, Onewingedangel, Snommelp, Nightbanegod -2: Tellish of Ket, NiQil -3: TelinArtho Special Credits: +4: Tellish of Ket (4 maps) +2: Caterane (GM) +1: LLMadCow (Prisonlord), Enterik (map), Begferdeth (map) Thanks to everyone who has sent me a PM to increase his fights. That helped a lot. Good luck! Cat |
| King Uther11-02-05, 05:44 PM | I would like Virgo to be paired with Hagrid. We spoke of fighting each other via PM, and while some people feel there are minor violations(There really aren't), I don't see any reason to prevent him from engaging Hagrid. But I stand by whatever you say Cat. If Virgo cannot be paired, then so be it. @ToK I will have to re-write my tactics for our fight. Although I don't feel I'll be doing anything different, except them to be drafted in the morning. |
| Pitlords11-02-05, 05:51 PM | Slight Change: Jessie (Oldmangray) vs Kracknol (SauroGrenom): Nightbanegod Donak (Mal-2) vs Delaria (TelinArtho): Nightbanegod Nightbanegod +2°, Telin and Tellish-1° @King: I get a PM from Prisonlords every week and Virgo was in there. Please talk to LLMadCow. He has the say in the prison. If he says it's ok, I will pair you and Hagrid. @Iced: Thanks for running the monster fight but you need to include positions, hitpoints, buffs, etc etc |
| Ravashack11-02-05, 05:52 PM | Ugh, this has not been a good week for me... I forgot to add HP for Perius reflecting the fact that he gained a level (CORRECTLY this time). :P Other than that, I can't think of anything I forgot to change in my feverish haze. Nope! I was wrong. I forgot his PP. -_- It won't matter in the upcoming fight though... |
| Tellish_of_Ket11-02-05, 06:08 PM | I would like Virgo to be paired with Hagrid. We spoke of fighting each other via PM, and while some people feel there are minor violations(There really aren't), I don't see any reason to prevent him from engaging Hagrid. But I stand by whatever you say Cat. If Virgo cannot be paired, then so be it. @ToK I will have to re-write my tactics for our fight. Although I don't feel I'll be doing anything different, except them to be drafted in the morning. As long as neither of us edit our characters, there's no reason why you couldn't submit different tactics. I will be reviewing mine as well, but i still have a copy, so most likely they will just be forwarded. -ToK |
| NiQil11-02-05, 06:25 PM | Hmmm....I wonder how much I can pay Waywreth to surrender Dargain's fight vs Silas so that I can get all of my character's to level 4 this week LOL |
| Snommelp11-02-05, 06:36 PM | All tactics sent/forwarded. Have fun, pitlords. |
| Maraxus11-02-05, 06:52 PM | Tactics for Zassl send to Gonbow. Whoo, I'm fast (not as fast as Snommelp but I like myself anyway ;)) |
| Macbrea11-02-05, 06:52 PM | Wow, two fomorian works against one melee.. this should be close. Ok, sent Gorak's tactics. |
| Snommelp11-02-05, 06:56 PM | Tactics for Zassl send to Gonbow. Whoo, I'm fast (not as fast as Snommelp but I like myself anyway ;)) That's right. I've got the fastest tactics in the West! ...maybe if I slowed down, I'd lose even less matches. Grik could be undefeated right now instead of 6-3 going on 7-3. |
| Ravashack11-02-05, 07:09 PM | Tactics sent to Book5. I predict a very short fight, but my predictions have been way off lately. (sorry TelinArtho!) |
| SoulLord11-02-05, 07:14 PM | Vandelar looks around the ecl 7 league. I thought someone was complaining that there was no one on the league and it sure was not me. oh well let's see what we have Salamanders .... inmune to fire! .... and there's 4 of them! yikes! I hope they roll really lousy on their equipment. |
| Macbrea11-02-05, 07:18 PM | Ch'ch'ili (Begferdeth) vs Anya Starfire (Mind Rogue): Mcbrea Oh, PM tactics to Macbrea. Just wanted to make sure I got them and not some strange guy who was very confused. :P |
| Mind Rogue11-02-05, 08:08 PM | @ Macbrea Tactics for Anya sent via PM. |
| NiQil11-02-05, 08:37 PM | Would normally get tactics done tonight, but have a date with Episode III....will get em out tomorrow. |
| One_Winged_Angel11-02-05, 09:12 PM | @Dr. Funk: Tactics for Vivi Sr. Recieved via PM. |
| TelinArtho11-02-05, 09:16 PM | @All my gladiators. I do try to keep my PM box relatively empty - but with a large number of fights, sometimes it will fill up - if it does - you can either email your tactics or just post here and let me know that I'm full - and resend them after I've replied. Okay tactics received: Vivi Jr (Dr. Funk) Anderson (Dming) Yari. Still waiting on a few. I will start on fights where I have both sets of tactics in the morning. |
| TelinArtho11-02-05, 09:26 PM | @ToK - tactics for Aquin's bloodbath have been sent - may Grik's life be extinguished as a beet in a blender... Rest of my tactics will come as I write them. I'm still putting my kids down for the night - so I'll be on and off for a while. |
| Luni11-02-05, 09:31 PM | Sorry, for disappearing on you guys. I had a relative pass away, and inbetween travelling to the funeral and such, I forgot about the COre COliseum. Sorry to everyone whose fight I didn't run. @ToK: I'll make a post in the campaign tomorrow. |
| Tellish_of_Ket11-02-05, 09:33 PM | Sorry, for disappearing on you guys. I had a relative pass away, and inbetween travelling to the funeral and such, I forgot about the COre COliseum. Sorry to everyone whose fight I didn't run. @ToK: I'll make a post in the campaign tomorrow. SHE'S BACK!!! :bounce: :cheer: :bounce: -ToK |
| TelinArtho11-02-05, 09:33 PM | Well, that's all understandable - you just had a few of us worried is all. Glad to see you back. Too bad you didn't get to enjoy the bloodbath of Aquin vs Grik... Anyway - take it easy if you need to - Life is much more important than CoCo. |
| TelinArtho11-02-05, 09:34 PM | @Usurpator - tactics for Sir Valkin vs Hennan the Bard have been sent via PM. |
| One_Winged_Angel11-02-05, 09:41 PM | @Usurpator: Tactics sent Via E-mail. Please conferm. |
| TelinArtho11-02-05, 09:45 PM | @ToK - tactics for Tanglewood Breeze vs The Bounty Hunter have been sent via PM. |
| Poe The Great11-02-05, 09:54 PM | @Telin Artho: Tactics for Idolyn vs Zeno sent. |
| TelinArtho11-02-05, 10:09 PM | @poe - clarification requested (you are not going to be happy...). @nightbanegod - tactics for delaria sent. |
| Poe The Great11-02-05, 10:26 PM | @Telinartho- Unless I am able to somehow change my character and fix the errors before the fight, I am afraid I will have to forfeit the fight. My horse is a vital part of my strategy, and without him I am afraid the battle's not even worth fighting. |
| Macbrea11-02-05, 11:03 PM | Funny, when I first read my fight for Gorak vs 2 Formorian Workers, I set the strategy for him vs 2 Formorian Warriors. Silly Gorak isn't able to identify one Formorian from another. |
| Book511-02-05, 11:14 PM | "Perius (Ravashack) Ready for 11/2/05" ... is not. HP is not calculated ( 3HD? ), PP is mis-calculated, Skill Points are off... second level power is not even chosen... I have a feeling there is more. I fail to see how the massive edits required to make this character "ready" would be reasonably allowed. These are not minor oversights - nor is there some sort of slight error. The saves and bab are correct. The gladiator has been progressed - simply incorrectly, incompletely, and is most certainly not "ready." Unless someone says otherwise Im for "Rebreg wins by default, Perius goes up in the prison on violation, and Telin tosses me one off the top of the pile." @saurogenome - Tactics recieved. @Cerebus 13 - Tactics sent. @anyone.. oh I wish I had had a chance to put my character change request in before pairings.... switchin up to the spiked chain.. did you know it deals 1d6 (small) lethal damage, reach and adjacent square (full threat), deals damage to characters with armor +1 or better (like .. every .. weapon.. except the whip ?? ) and can be finessed for a two-weapon attack? I dont know what I was thinking not going with it in the first place! |
| TelinArtho11-02-05, 11:38 PM | @Telinartho- Unless I am able to somehow change my character and fix the errors before the fight, I am afraid I will have to forfeit the fight. My horse is a vital part of my strategy, and without him I am afraid the battle's not even worth fighting. Well, given the situation (I assume it was a misunderstanding of the ally rules) - I would be inclined to suggest to ask your opponent to switch your Hvy. Warhorse for a light Warhorse. Given the intent - it shouldn't be difficult, and I am inclined to run it that way. However, if you don't want to ask your opponent for that leeway - I will take the forfeiture. Honestly - I think you are giving up for no reason - but hey - its your character I guess. |
| TelinArtho11-02-05, 11:44 PM | "Perius (Ravashack) Ready for 11/2/05" ... is not. HP is not calculated ( 3HD? ), PP is mis-calculated, Skill Points are off... second level power is not even chosen... I have a feeling there is more. I fail to see how the massive edits required to make this character "ready" would be reasonably allowed. These are not minor oversights - nor is there some sort of slight error. The saves and bab are correct. The gladiator has been progressed - simply incorrectly, incompletely, and is most certainly not "ready." Unless someone says otherwise Im for "Rebreg wins by default, Perius goes up in the prison on violation, and Telin tosses me one off the top of the pile." @saurogenome - Tactics recieved. @Cerebus 13 - Tactics sent. @anyone.. oh I wish I had had a chance to put my character change request in before pairings.... switchin up to the spiked chain.. did you know it deals 1d6 (small) lethal damage, reach and adjacent square (full threat), deals damage to characters with armor +1 or better (like .. every .. weapon.. except the whip ?? ) and can be finessed for a two-weapon attack? I dont know what I was thinking not going with it in the first place! I'll say otherwise. Just because he isn't completely updated does not grant you leave to forfeit his match. His HP and PP are easily calculated. Missing skill points have never broken a fight. And his missing power just means he can't use it this fight. |
| Sunwolf11-02-05, 11:47 PM | @Pittbull tactics for Brilf sent by PM |
| Snommelp11-02-05, 11:48 PM | @ Telin: tactics received. Strange that I'm fighting against two of your characters and running a third... let's keep the trash-talk down, or I might "forget" some of your tactics :P Just kidding. The trash-talking just makes it that much more fun when my characters win. Good luck. Aquin will need it. Valkin might, too. Bards is tricksy. |
| Book511-03-05, 12:14 AM | I'll say otherwise. Just because he isn't completely updated does not grant you leave to forfeit his match. His HP and PP are easily calculated. Missing skill points have never broken a fight. And his missing power just means he can't use it this fight. You make a good point - it is his loss. Does make me wanna audit his item expeditures.. Thatah stillah violational though? no? or simply auditworty? Seems a rather .. bit of extra work - guess thats what streamline (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=523687&page=3) is for :shrug: not trying to shovel just sayin. Not like Tans streamlined but Kals a mess. Thats what Im sayin. His attacks are still listed at level 3... :grumble: |
| Ravashack11-03-05, 12:51 AM | You make a good point - it is his loss. Does make me wanna audit his item expeditures.. Thatah stillah violational though? no? or simply auditworty? Seems a rather .. bit of extra work - guess thats what streamline (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=523687&page=3) is for :shrug: not trying to shovel just sayin. Not like Tans streamlined but Kals a mess. Thats what Im sayin. His attacks are still listed at level 3... :grumble: He is a wilder. He ONLY gets 3 powers at level 4. He simply chose to pick a level 1 power over a level 2 one. That is why the Level 2 power slot is there but blank. Skill points: The skill points are correct, the skill point total is not. HP: I already mentioned what was wrong in the tactics message. Power points: Same deal. To clarify, I had incorrectly done a level up on a previous fight, had to undo it, and had to redo it again after a very delayed match while I had a fever. Needless to say, I forgot a few things because it felt like I had did it already. If you wish to audit, go right ahead. I do, however, ask that you audit AFTER I had a chance to actually be able to edit again (i.e. after the match). The mistakes you listed already I have already caught, and auditing to point them out to me when I already know about them is, if you'll excuse me, a waste. |
| Gonbow11-03-05, 01:24 AM | *crawls out of his insanely long day* Santos vrs Pirotess eh? Well, I didn't expect Santos to ever get a good matchup again after that FFA fight he started off with ^_^ I'll send tactics tomorrow, when I'm sane. @Maraxus Tactics recieved. |
| Cerebus1311-03-05, 07:44 AM | *crawls out of his insanely long day* Santos vrs Pirotess eh? Well, I didn't expect Santos to ever get a good matchup again after that FFA fight he started off with ^_^ I'll send tactics tomorrow, when I'm sane. @Maraxus Tactics recieved.Um, slight problem... I had Pirotess crafting this week because she had recently leveled up and was going to make some armor for her familiar and make a Headband for herself. Is there anything we can do about this? Because she has been updated to reflect a week of crafting already. |
| waywreth11-03-05, 08:59 AM | @Gonbow - Tactics for Casgish sent. @SauroGrennom - Tactics for Dargain sent. |
| Cerebus1311-03-05, 09:01 AM | Just a small bump... I've sent a PM to Pitlords to hopefully assign another opponent for Gonbow this week. Pirotess is updated incorrectly right now if she doesn't get a chance to craft this week...so I don't want to mess around with trying to do an arena fight instead. |
| Tellish_of_Ket11-03-05, 09:17 AM | read Upset of the Century: Grik vs Aquin -ToK |
| TelinArtho11-03-05, 09:34 AM | In the Aquin vs Grik fight, since Grik does not have natural weapons or improved unarmed strike, he provokes an AoO when starting a grapple. Also - I have seen in Merman's case the use of rakes in a grapple. I am going to look this up further - because I think Aquin gets a few more attacks here. |
| Cerebus1311-03-05, 09:40 AM | In the Aquin vs Grik fight, since Grik does not have natural weapons or improved unarmed strike, he provokes an AoO when starting a grapple. Also - I have seen in Merman's case the use of rakes in a grapple. I am going to look this up further - because I think Aquin gets a few more attacks here.From the Sahugin description is says that they get two Rake attacks while swimming. However Caterane has used these Rake attacks with Mer-man before this as long he was grappling...so I guess they can be used out of the water. |
| TelinArtho11-03-05, 09:51 AM | Having checked a bunch of Mer-man's fights - I see that in the 3 cases that I specifically saw the grapple - Merman was granted the rake attacks in two of them. The two where these happened are also the 2 most recent fights - so obviously this is current. I feel that Aquin should get these rake attacks as long as Merman is allowed them. |
| waywreth11-03-05, 09:52 AM | The description around raking is quite clear - only in water. I don't think Merman or Aquan should get them. However TelinArtho's point around the provoking when Grik tries to grapple is quite important - if he hits on the AoO, the grapple never happens and the fight could end quite differently. At the least, he'll get another round or 2 of attacking. |
| Snommelp11-03-05, 09:53 AM | read Upset of the Century: Grik vs Aquin -ToK Not that it really matters, but Grik should have raged when he started the grapple. That means those extra rake attacks are more likely to hit, but Grik's got a lot more HP to take it. Concerning the AoO that didn't happen: Aquin was armed with a crossbow when Grik started the grapple. You can't AoO with a ranged weapon. He could still bite, I suppose, but that's at a lower attack bonus. EDIT: Looking at the damage, how did Grik manage 14 in the first grapple? He deals 1d6+6 when raging, which is a max of 12, and a total roll of 24 means it wasn't a crit... |
| Macbrea11-03-05, 09:53 AM | Sahuagin's Rake ability: Rake (Ex) Attack bonus +2 melee, damage 1d4+1. A sahuagin also gains two rake attacks when it attacks while swimming. Definition of rake: Rake A creature with this special attack gains extra natural attacks when it grapples its foe. Normally, a monster can attack with only one of its natural weapons while grappling, but a monster with the rake ability usually gains two additional claw attacks that it can use only against a grappled foe. Rake attacks are not subject to the usual -4 penalty for attacking with a natural weapon in a grapple. A monster with the rake ability must begin its turn grappling to use its rake—it can’t begin a grapple and rake in the same turn. Definition of (Ex): Extraordinary Abilities (Ex) Extraordinary abilities are nonmagical, though they may break the laws of physics. They are not something that just anyone can do or even learn to do without extensive training. These abilities cannot be disrupted in combat, as spells can, and they generally do not provoke attacks of opportunity. Effects or areas that negate or disrupt magic have no effect on extraordinary abilities. They are not subject to dispelling, and they function normally in an antimagic field. Using an extraordinary ability is usually not an action because most extraordinary abilities automatically happen in a reactive fashion. Those extraordinary abilities that are actions are standard actions unless otherwise noted. I would assume by the reading of these the sahugin should get the rake ability only while swimming and should get two of them when doing that. It should be noted by description of rake itself it isn't an action to use it. It suddenly goes off everytime the Sahuagin gets involved in a grapple in water. |
| TelinArtho11-03-05, 09:59 AM | Actually, I think the text is a little fuzzy on this issue - and since the current ruling is that the rakes work - they should be added to the fight regardless. However, as it stands, now that I've read the full complement on rake attacks - I'm willing to let it stand - AS LONG AS Merman can no longer do the rakes either. |
| Tellish_of_Ket11-03-05, 10:00 AM | From the Sahugin description is says that they get two Rake attacks while swimming. However Caterane has used these Rake attacks with Mer-man before this as long he was grappling...so I guess they can be used out of the water. Just because Cat used them outside of a swimming environement doesn't make it right. I gave you the AoO's as I didn't equip you with your trident as specified in your tactics. It make it a heck of a lot closer, but you still eventually missed an AoO. @Snommelp, you critted going into the grapple. And your reduced raging AC is taken into account. -ToK |
| TelinArtho11-03-05, 10:01 AM | Not that it really matters, but Grik should have raged when he started the grapple. That means those extra rake attacks are more likely to hit, but Grik's got a lot more HP to take it. Concerning the AoO that didn't happen: Aquin was armed with a crossbow when Grik started the grapple. You can't AoO with a ranged weapon. He could still bite, I suppose, but that's at a lower attack bonus. EDIT: Looking at the damage, how did Grik manage 14 in the first grapple? He deals 1d6+6 when raging, which is a max of 12, and a total roll of 24 means it wasn't a crit... If you look at my tactics you'll see that I wanted the trident quickdrawn after drinking the potion - which I did in round 1 - so I was supposed to have the trident in hand according to my tactics. |
| Cerebus1311-03-05, 10:05 AM | Just because Cat used them outside of a swimming environement doesn't make it right. I gave you the AoO's as I didn't equip you with your trident as specified in your tactics. It make it a heck of a lot closer, but you still eventually missed an AoO. @Snommelp, you critted going into the grapple. And your reduced raging AC is taken into account. -ToKSo Sahugin Rake does not work outside of water? I'll add it to the FAQ if this is the case. |
| Snommelp11-03-05, 10:07 AM | Just because Cat used them outside of a swimming environement doesn't make it right. I gave you the AoO's as I didn't equip you with your trident as specified in your tactics. It make it a heck of a lot closer, but you still eventually missed an AoO. @Snommelp, you critted going into the grapple. And your reduced raging AC is taken into account. -ToK Oh, all right. It just didn't look like Grik was raging because the extra rage HP wasn't there (it is now). With the edits, it looks good to me. That AoO nearly did Grik in... fishy man hits fast! |
| TelinArtho11-03-05, 10:13 AM | Close fight - Aquin's arrogance gets the better of him again... Good match sir (at least Aquin got in a bit of damage...) |
| Tellish_of_Ket11-03-05, 10:15 AM | Close fight - Aquin's arrogance gets the better of him again... Not to keep beating a dead horse, but ya. With just a little more planning, you could have and should have easily won this fight. But on the flip side, not meaning that as an insult to Grik either. Aquin is definately a walking blender. -ToK |
| TelinArtho11-03-05, 10:22 AM | Paging Saffron Brass - Anthon is looking for your help again... Episode 2: The Golden Golem (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=529972) |
| Snommelp11-03-05, 10:28 AM | Not to keep beating a dead horse, but ya. With just a little more planning, you could have and should have easily won this fight. But on the flip side, not meaning that as an insult to Grik either. Aquin is definately a walking blender. -ToK No offense taken. Confidentially, Grik's a great fighter, but he's an idiot. Luck has saved him in instances where his stupidity has gotten him in over his head. I'm sure whomever finally beats that luck will be considered a hero in Gladius. @ Telin: well fought, fishy man. Maybe some day Grik and Aquin will meet again. Grik will be more cautious next time. |
| King Uther11-03-05, 11:14 AM | The reason Mer-Man was granted those rakes was because the arena was supposed to be an special environment that allows those things. Also: Rake (Ex): A creature with this special attack gains extra natural attacks when it grapples its foe. Normally, a monster can attack with only one of its natural weapons while grappling, but a monster with the rake ability usually gains two additional claw attacks that it can use only against a grappled foe. Rake attacks are not subject to the usual –4 penalty for attacking with a natural weapon in a grapple. A monster with the rake ability must begin its turn grappling to use its rake—it can’t begin a grapple and rake in the same turn. So Aquin should be allowed rakes in all the rounds he started in the grapple. |
| Tellish_of_Ket11-03-05, 11:18 AM | The reason Mer-Man was granted those rakes was because the arena was supposed to be an special environment that allows those things. Also: Rake (Ex): A creature with this special attack gains extra natural attacks when it grapples its foe. Normally, a monster can attack with only one of its natural weapons while grappling, but a monster with the rake ability usually gains two additional claw attacks that it can use only against a grappled foe. Rake attacks are not subject to the usual –4 penalty for attacking with a natural weapon in a grapple. A monster with the rake ability must begin its turn grappling to use its rake—it can’t begin a grapple and rake in the same turn. So Aquin should be allowed rakes in all the rounds he started in the grapple. Absolutely NOT!!! To think that the arena is flooded with water to benefit Aquin or Merman is preposterous. Rake (Ex): Attack bonus +2 melee, damage 1d4+1. A sahuagin also gains two rake attacks when it attacks while swimming. The arena cannot adjust to that type of environment. -ToK |
| NiQil11-03-05, 11:19 AM | The reason Mer-Man was granted those rakes was because the arena was supposed to be an special environment that allows those things. Also: Rake (Ex): A creature with this special attack gains extra natural attacks when it grapples its foe. Normally, a monster can attack with only one of its natural weapons while grappling, but a monster with the rake ability usually gains two additional claw attacks that it can use only against a grappled foe. Rake attacks are not subject to the usual –4 penalty for attacking with a natural weapon in a grapple. A monster with the rake ability must begin its turn grappling to use its rake—it can’t begin a grapple and rake in the same turn. So Aquin should be allowed rakes in all the rounds he started in the grapple. In rebuttal, I offer a quote from our own Rules thread....along with the example it provides. The environmental specifics of the Arena can change to fit the gladiators fighting in it; it always does its best to be as beneficial to both gladiatos as possible. If one gladiator wants to burrow, then the earth is loose enough to allow burrowing. If, on the other hand, a gladiator wants to Meld into Stone, then he can assume any part of the Arena to be made of stone. If a light breeze would be helpful to either party, then there is a light breeze. Naturally, common sense should always be used: just because one character is a Merfolk, the Arena will not be flooded with water. These environmental bonuses should always be minor, and never actively hostile to the other gladiator. In short, no to the rake attacks. And Merman should not get them either. |
| TelinArtho11-03-05, 11:21 AM | @Cerebus13 - tactics for Daeren sent via PM. |
| Macbrea11-03-05, 11:22 AM | Now, it would be reasonable if there ever was a fight between Merman and Aquin to flood the arena with water. |
| Tellish_of_Ket11-03-05, 11:27 AM | Now, it would be reasonable if there ever was a fight between Merman and Aquin to flood the arena with water. I agree 100%. If they both agree to fight in a watery environment, that's all fair and good. -ToK |
| Tellish_of_Ket11-03-05, 11:39 AM | @Cerebus13 - tactics for Daeren sent via PM. Yeah, mine too. Forgot to post that i sent them via PM as well. Good luck to my opponent. -ToK |
| Mind Rogue11-03-05, 11:45 AM | Tellish, you're emphasising the wrong word. Rake (Ex): Attack bonus +2 melee, damage 1d4+1. A sahuagin also gains two rake attacks when it attacks while swimming. Since this doesn't say what it is in addition too, it can be asumed to be in addition to the normal case when a creature would get a rake attack, which is when grappling. Thus, whenever a sahuagin is in a grapple or when swimming, he can rake. |
| Tellish_of_Ket11-03-05, 11:49 AM | Tellish, you're emphasising the wrong word. Since this doesn't say what it is in addition too, it can be asumed to be in addition to the normal case when a creature would get a rake attack, which is when grappling. Thus, whenever a sahuagin is in a grapple or when swimming, he can rake. WHAT! No way. It's not in addition to anything. It very specifically says, "while swimming", not in addition it can make them EVEN while swimming. -ToK |
| Myrridin11-03-05, 12:02 PM | Since *someone* left the "13" off of Cerebus13's name (again). :rolleyes: I have resent my tactics for the Kalarthus vs Tan fight, this time to the correct person. |
| Sindorin11-03-05, 12:04 PM | Sindorin considers creating account named "Cerebus" to see who sends me tactics if Cerebus ever pitlords my fights... wahahaha |
| Cerebus1311-03-05, 12:05 PM | Since *someone* left the "13" off of Cerebus13's name (again). :rolleyes: I have resent my tactics for the Kalarthus vs Tan fight, this time to the correct person.If someone hadn't taken the Cerebus account already this wouldn't be a problem :P. |
| NiQil11-03-05, 12:18 PM | Tellish, you're emphasising the wrong word. Since this doesn't say what it is in addition too, it can be asumed to be in addition to the normal case when a creature would get a rake attack, which is when grappling. Thus, whenever a sahuagin is in a grapple or when swimming, he can rake. No...the way it is written, it is saying that, in addition to any normal grapple attacks, it can also rake in a grapple while under water. If not underwater, it grapples as normal....minus the rakes. |
| One_Winged_Angel11-03-05, 12:31 PM | @NiQil: Tactics recieved for Methos. I'll likely run the fight on Friday and post at some point on Saturday unless it goes for a long time. |
| Pittbull11-03-05, 12:42 PM | @Mind Rogue: Tactic for Barthleby are sent via E-Mail @Sunwolf: Brilf's tacic received. @My Gladiators: Sorry, don't expect the fight to be up before monday, I'll spend me weekend at the lake of Contance. It'll be posted on Monday for sure, no delay! |
| TelinArtho11-03-05, 12:47 PM | @Sindorin - tactics sent for Kraegin via PM. Any questions - please let me know. |
| NiQil11-03-05, 12:50 PM | @ Snommelp: Tactics for Kronos sent via PM @ One_Winged_Angel: Tactics for Methos sent via PM (and I see that you received them) @ SauroGrenom: Tactics for Silas sent via PM.....and again let me apologize for them. |
| NiQil11-03-05, 12:51 PM | @NiQil: Tactics recieved for Methos. I'll likely run the fight on Friday and post at some point on Saturday unless it goes for a long time. Given the MO's of the two characters, I would be shocked it if goes past 10 rounds...one of us is going to die quickly. |
| Sindorin11-03-05, 12:56 PM | Tactics for Kraegin have been received, and I don't know if I spelled that right... anyway, I could really use the other set of tactics as this is going to be a very very interesting weekend... I may or may not be able to find time to sit down and run a fight with room for corrections. |
| Ravashack11-03-05, 01:15 PM | WHAT! No way. It's not in addition to anything. It very specifically says, "while swimming", not in addition it can make them EVEN while swimming. -ToK You're doing exactly what Mind Rogue is talking about ToK--emphasizing the wrong words. "While swimming" is talking about when it normally attacks while swimming. The second line you are focusing on reads "IF (this) THEN ALSO (that)." Meaning IF it is attacking while swimming, THEN it ALSO gets two rake attacks added to the attacks. Just like how the Pounce ability also lets you rake on top of full attacking. This is emphasized by this line in the descriptor: Sahuagin are savage fighters, asking for and giving no quarter. When swimming, a sahuagin tears with its feet as it strikes with its talons or a weapon. About half of any group of sahuagin are also armed with nets. |
| One_Winged_Angel11-03-05, 01:15 PM | Given the MO's of the two characters, I would be shocked it if goes past 10 rounds...one of us is going to die quickly. :D You'd be surprised how often I get a streak of rolls less than 5. Most of the time it's with one of my characters. Gladiators seem to be spared this. @MindRogue: Pittbull's character is driving me nuts. I think my tactics may be sent tommorrow. |
| Mal-211-03-05, 02:08 PM | @Tellish_of_Ket: Tactics for Donak sent. |
| Tellish_of_Ket11-03-05, 02:11 PM | You're doing exactly what Mind Rogue is talking about ToK--emphasizing the wrong words. "While swimming" is talking about when it normally attacks while swimming. The second line you are focusing on reads "IF (this) THEN ALSO (that)." Meaning IF it is attacking while swimming, THEN it ALSO gets two rake attacks added to the attacks. Just like how the Pounce ability also lets you rake on top of full attacking. This is emphasized by this line in the descriptor: Very interesting. Lemme ponder this for a bit. So basically you're telling me it rakes with it front claws regarldess, and if it's swimming it gets an additional set of rakes because of it's feet? Hmm...gimme a moment. -ToK |
| Cerebus1311-03-05, 02:19 PM | Very interesting. Lemme ponder this for a bit. So basically you're telling me it rakes with it front claws regarldess, and if it's swimming it gets an additional set of rakes because of it's feet? Hmm...gimme a moment. -ToKI guess it would be reasonable to imagine a Sahuagin flipping and twisting to use all of their claws while under water. On dry land this would be impossible to accomplish because they are not agile enough. |
| Tellish_of_Ket11-03-05, 02:20 PM | OK, i allowed the rake. I've looked at other examples and find them all the be worded the same way. The Sahuagin gets EXTRA rake attacks if it's swimming...but still gets it base rake attacks. I rolled them both, and they both missed as well, and i edited the fight to reflect the fact that he makes the rakes. So the outcome wasn't changed by it, and Grik can rest well, knowing that after the video replay he is still the winner. Aquin, well...sleeps with the fishes. (lol) -ToK |
| NiQil11-03-05, 02:29 PM | Let's put these together in one post so that we can make sure we are all on the same page. Rake (Ex): A creature with this special attack gains extra natural attacks when it grapples its foe. Normally, a monster can attack with only one of its natural weapons while grappling, but a monster with the rake ability usually gains two additional claw attacks that it can use only against a grappled foe. Rake attacks are not subject to the usual –4 penalty for attacking with a natural weapon in a grapple. A monster with the rake ability must begin its turn grappling to use its rake—it can’t begin a grapple and rake in the same turn. Rake (Ex): Attack bonus +2 melee, damage 1d4+1. A sahuagin also gains two rake attacks when it attacks while swimming. From the first quote, we see that, once in a grapple (but not in the round that the grapple is initiated), any creature with the Rake ability can gain two additional claw attacks without the usual -4 penalty. From the second quote, we see that it lists the attack modifier for the sahuagin's rakes. The reason? In water, any time it attacks, whether that be with a weapon, unarmed, or whatever, it also gets two rake attacks. Putting the two together, we get that a sahuagin in a grapple gets it's normal natural attacks in the grapple, and also gets two rake attacks, since any creature with the rake ability gets those extra attacks in a grapple. If the sahuagin were to be grappling underwater, it would get a total of 4 rake attacks. Two because any creature with the rake ability gets them in a grapple, and two more because a sahuagin gets 2 additional rake attacks to go along with any attack made when swimming. That is how I read it. |
| Tellish_of_Ket11-03-05, 02:35 PM | ...and because Aquin is a mutant, he gets two rake attacks normally, 3 underwater...gotch'ya. I rolled all four rake attacks for Aquin...sadly Fate gave him a swift kick in the nads and denied him even a single hit. -ToK |
| NiQil11-03-05, 02:43 PM | ...and because Aquin is a mutant, he gets two rake attacks normally, 3 underwater...gotch'ya. I rolled all four rake attacks for Aquin...sadly Fate gave him a swift kick in the nads and denied him even a single hit. -ToK Reminds me of a cheesy horror movie from when I was a kid...."Kick him in the nards!" "Wolfman doesn't have any nards!" "Kick him anyway!" <kick> <painful howl> "Wolfman's got nards!!!!" |
| Tellish_of_Ket11-03-05, 02:51 PM | @Tellish_of_Ket: Tactics for Donak sent. Your pitlord is NBG...i took the liberty to forward them for ya. -ToK |
| TelinArtho11-03-05, 03:26 PM | Just who can get lucky quicker? See in: Alexander Anderson vs Vivi Ornatier Jr. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7663427&postcount=583) |
| Mal-211-03-05, 03:29 PM | Your pitlord is NBG...i took the liberty to forward them for ya. Thank you, I missed the update to my fight. |
| NiQil11-03-05, 03:37 PM | Just who can get lucky quicker? See in: Alexander Anderson vs Vivi Ornatier Jr. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7663427&postcount=583) One thing I noticed there at the end, Telin.....not fight affect but figured I would mention it....Alxander can't draw both short swords while moving because he does not have the quick draw feat. As a part of a move action, you can only draw a single weapon, to my knowledge. |
| TelinArtho11-03-05, 03:38 PM | Yes - but he double moves that round since after he fires his crossbow - he wants to draw both short swords and close... |
| NiQil11-03-05, 03:40 PM | Yes - but he double moves that round since after he fires his crossbow - he wants to draw both short swords and close... But in that circumstance, one of those moves is considered to take the place of a standard action, since a move action has already occurred (and the first sword was drawn), and drawing a second weapon would be considered a second standard action in the round. That's how I see it, anyway. |
| TelinArtho11-03-05, 03:44 PM | You can take a move action in place of a standard action. Since a move action can take the place of a standard action and drawing a weapon can be done as a free action while moving - he can draw 2 weapons during a double-move. |
| Usurpator11-03-05, 03:51 PM | That is how I read it. I don't agree: 1. A Sahuagin gets two extra attacks with its feet while grappling (which is what raking is about) bringing the total for a normal full attack in a grapple to 5. 2. A Sahuagin can also use the same two attacks while he is swimming as part of his normal full attack routine, giving him 5 attacks at his regular attack bonus. If he would gain four rake attackswhile grappling and swimming, it would have said 'additional', not 'also'. |
| NiQil11-03-05, 03:57 PM | I don't agree: 1. A Sahuagin gets two extra attacks with its feet while grappling (which is what raking is about) bringing the total for a normal full attack in a grapple to 5. 2. A Sahuagin can also use the same two attacks while he is swimming as part of his normal full attack routine, giving him 5 attacks at his regular attack bonus. If he would gain four rake attackswhile grappling and swimming, it would have said 'additional', not 'also'. You are probably right.....I was taking 'also' to mean 'additional'....but putting it as you did, it makes more sense your way. It *did seem a little overpowered to me...now I know why LOL. |
| Tellish_of_Ket11-03-05, 03:58 PM | I don't agree: 1. A Sahuagin gets two extra attacks with its feet while grappling (which is what raking is about) bringing the total for a normal full attack in a grapple to 5. 2. A Sahuagin can also use the same two attacks while he is swimming as part of his normal full attack routine, giving him 5 attacks at his regular attack bonus. If he would gain four rake attackswhile grappling and swimming, it would have said 'additional', not 'also'. That's a very good point and duly noted for future references. -ToK |
| SoulLord11-03-05, 04:00 PM | @King Uther: If you can pm or e-mail me the equipment for the salamanders in the fight against Vandelar I would be grateful. as that way I can send tactics sooner. |
| One_Winged_Angel11-03-05, 05:01 PM | @Mind Rogue: Tactics for Kailia sent. Here's to hoping. :) |
| Snommelp11-03-05, 05:04 PM | @ Snommelp: Tactics for Kronos sent via PM Got 'em |
| Poe The Great11-03-05, 05:21 PM | So...should I PM the changes to my horse? What about me not qualifying for spirited charge? |
| TelinArtho11-03-05, 05:31 PM | Do PM the changes to the horse (both to myself and your opponent). Unfortunately, you cannot switch feats before the fight - but you won't be able to use the currently invalid one. |
| Usurpator11-03-05, 05:34 PM | @TelinArtho: Shazzelin predicts a lovely crop of Vakkor's this week. Excellent for populating his rack and keeping away weak-hearted neighbours. ;) |
| TelinArtho11-03-05, 05:46 PM | Yeah well, Vakkor wasn't even supposed to be paired - so its not like he's actually fully prepared... so if you win - don't think it is any fault of your own... :) :P |
| Snommelp11-03-05, 05:47 PM | Tactics received for 1.5 fights; I need tactics from Oldmangray for Tak the Hungry to have a complete set. |
| Mind Rogue11-03-05, 06:05 PM | @ Pittbull and Angel I've got both of your tactics, but I don't know when I'll be able to run it. If homework and everything is light, I might be able to do it tomorrow, otherwise it'll probably be done sunday. Oh, for future reference, I also prefer to be PMed the tactics rather than email. |
| NiQil11-03-05, 06:14 PM | Tactics received for 1.5 fights; I need tactics from Oldmangray for Tak the Hungry to have a complete set. LOL you sound like a Mini's collector |
| TelinArtho11-03-05, 06:22 PM | I'm still waiting for tactics for the following: Fjörd Thjünderbjürd (Begferdeth) Zeno (Dracazar) and Balbanes, Avatar of Life (King Uther) vs Krunch (Tellish of Ket) |
| One_Winged_Angel11-03-05, 06:26 PM | @ Pittbull and Angel I've got both of your tactics, but I don't know when I'll be able to run it. If homework and everything is light, I might be able to do it tomorrow, otherwise it'll probably be done sunday. Oh, for future reference, I also prefer to be PMed the tactics rather than email. :confused: :confused: :confused: I thought I did PM them... Anyway, the bare bones of Vivi vs. Methos (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7665020&postcount=584) are up. I'll write a story later. Right now I'm fairly uninspired. Ideas from NiQil or Dr. Funk are welcome. This is my first Pitlording job in quite a while. Any fixer-uppers or error reports are not only good, but welcome as I need to start honing the old 5|<11z. EDIT: Judging by the fact that I edited on 3 clerical errors, getting used to using the sblock command might be a start... |
| NiQil11-03-05, 06:33 PM | :confused: :confused: :confused: I thought I did PM them... Anyway, the bare bones of Vivi vs. Methos (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7665020&postcount=584) are up. I'll write a story later. Right now I'm fairly uninspired. Ideas from NiQil or Dr. Funk are welcome. This is my first Pitlording job in quite a while. Any fixer-uppers or error reports are not only good, but welcome as I need to start honing the old 5|<11z. EDIT: Judging by the fact that I edited on 3 clerical errors, getting used to using the sblock command might be a start... I knew that wasn't going to last past 10 rounds.... Can you please edit in the 60 gp Methos made from profession (bartending)? |
| One_Winged_Angel11-03-05, 06:44 PM | I knew that wasn't going to last past 10 rounds.... Can you please edit in the 60 gp Methos made from profession (bartending)? The way your luck was going, I wasn't too sure... Added your 60 gp. That gives me an idea for a story. |
| Mind Rogue11-03-05, 06:49 PM | :confused: :confused: :confused: I thought I did PM them... Anyway, the bare bones of Vivi vs. Methos (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7665020&postcount=584) are up. I'll write a story later. Right now I'm fairly uninspired. Ideas from NiQil or Dr. Funk are welcome. This is my first Pitlording job in quite a while. Any fixer-uppers or error reports are not only good, but welcome as I need to start honing the old 5|<11z. EDIT: Judging by the fact that I edited on 3 clerical errors, getting used to using the sblock command might be a start... You did PM them. Your opponent sent them via Email. I was just being lazy and didn't want to say @ Pittbull and Angel and then @ Pittbull, or else give you both the "tactics recieved" memo. |
| One_Winged_Angel11-03-05, 06:57 PM | You did PM them. Your opponent sent them via Email. I was just being lazy and didn't want to say @ Pittbull and Angel and then @ Pittbull, or else give you both the "tactics recieved" memo. Ah. Laziness. Perfectly viable excuse in my opinion. :D |
| Book511-03-05, 07:32 PM | If you wish to audit, go right ahead. I do, however, ask that you audit AFTER I had a chance to actually be able to edit again (i.e. after the match). The mistakes you listed already I have already caught, and auditing to point them out to me when I already know about them is, if you'll excuse me, a waste. eh, "want" might have been a strong adverb. I'll go read your tactics now. |
| King Uther11-03-05, 07:34 PM | @Luni Could you please forward my tactics to Telin for Balbanes? I don't have them. |
| Ravashack11-03-05, 07:54 PM | eh, "want" might have been a strong adverb. I'll go read your tactics now. It was. It turned an already sour mood from the week into a very ****** off mood. Not your fault though. |
| Begferdeth11-03-05, 08:04 PM | @ TelinArtho and Macbrea: My tactics for Chili and Fjord are off. Fjord looks like he has a chance... Chili not so much. But hey, its Chili... Why ruin a perfectly good losing streak? :D Still waiting for tactics from Iced and Ribking. |
| Luni11-03-05, 08:19 PM | @Luni Could you please forward my tactics to Telin for Balbanes? I don't have them. Done. |
| Snommelp11-03-05, 09:04 PM | I've got all tactics now. Fights will begin tomorrow, probably. |
| nightbanegod11-03-05, 09:39 PM | tactics for .... Tanglewood (TelinArtho) vs Bounty Hunter (Nightbanegod): Tellish of Ket Auburn (Vathelokai) vs The First Horseman (Nightbanegod): Tellish of Ket ... wow... i just noticed that ToK is running both of my fights this week.... be nice with the horseman so he can challenge Krunch in the near future... .. uhh yeah... so tactics will be sent tomarrow mourning... busy tonight... |
| nightbanegod11-03-05, 09:43 PM | Your pitlord is NBG...i took the liberty to forward them for ya. -ToK received...have both sets of tactics for Donak (Mal-2) vs Delaria (TelinArtho): Nightbanegod will run in the MORNING ... sleepy karaoke ... and im not even the one singing... |
| Macbrea11-04-05, 01:27 AM | Fights for Anya vs Ch'ch'ili (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7667791&postcount=585) is complete. |
| Pitlords11-04-05, 04:29 AM | Usurpator +1° for Arena Weekly |
| Pittbull11-04-05, 07:01 AM | @ Pittbull and Angel I've got both of your tactics, but I don't know when I'll be able to run it. If homework and everything is light, I might be able to do it tomorrow, otherwise it'll probably be done sunday. Oh, for future reference, I also prefer to be PMed the tactics rather than email. Your link on the gladiators-thread is E-Mail, just let it change by the pitlord. |
| SoulLord11-04-05, 07:57 AM | @King Uther: Tactics for Vandelar e-mailed. *crosses fingers as he needs some luck on this one |
| TelinArtho11-04-05, 08:30 AM | Tactics received for Jessie (I think your pitlord is NBG - I'll forward them accordingly), Balbanes (2 PMs from Luni and one from Uther), Fjord (Begferdeth) - all received. Haven't checked my email this morning - but I think I'm still missing Krunch and Zeno. If anyone tried to send me a PM and found my box full - I've got 2 slots open - so it should be open enough for now. /d |
| Cerebus1311-04-05, 08:34 AM | Pale-Rider vs. Daeren (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7669021&postcount=587) is up. Please let me know if there are any problems...this fight ran really long. |
| TelinArtho11-04-05, 08:52 AM | In round 12 - Daeren's Fortitude save should have another +2 because it is against poison - this means that Daeren makes his save. Because of this - one of the hippogriff attacks in round 14 misses (5 damage less), Pale's touch in round 17 misses. Its still clear that I lose - so just edit in those and add in one more round of attacks by pale and it should be good. @ToK - nice job on the misdirection... it won't happen again. |
| Cerebus1311-04-05, 09:46 AM | In round 12 - Daeren's Fortitude save should have another +2 because it is against poison - this means that Daeren makes his save. Because of this - one of the hippogriff attacks in round 14 misses (5 damage less), Pale's touch in round 17 misses. Its still clear that I lose - so just edit in those and add in one more round of attacks by pale and it should be good. @ToK - nice job on the misdirection... it won't happen again.I adjusted the fight to include the extra poison save. Some of the damage rolls got shifted downwards because of a miss here or there, so the fight took one additional round because Pale could not kill Daeren with his first Coup de Grace. |
| Mind Rogue11-04-05, 10:08 AM | Fights for Anya vs Ch'ch'ili (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7667791&postcount=585) is complete. That was fast and flaming... quite unlike some of her recent fights. I'll make sure I fix the number in the near future. Not like the damage on the spear is going to matter ever. |
| Begferdeth11-04-05, 10:58 AM | Well, Im quite unsurprised that Chili lost again. Way too much damage aimed at him this time. Ill have to start picking up bigger Vigor stones. Cmon Fjord, get me a win this week! :) |
| TelinArtho11-04-05, 11:43 AM | Yari vs Fjord (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7670059) Will a bard out-grapple a Monk? Check the fight out and see! |
| SoulLord11-04-05, 01:11 PM | Tactics for pirotess received Tactics for Santos Fi'Corma not received yet. |
| TelinArtho11-04-05, 01:14 PM | I've received all of the tactics for the remaining 2 fights on my list. I'll be running one tonight most likely and then the other tomorrow - barring surprises (like my kids refusing to go to bed or something similar... :) ) |
| Sindorin11-04-05, 02:36 PM | For those of you whom I am pitlording for this week, I am going to be out of town for the next two days. I will be returning Sunday night, so I will be able to run the fight Monday. I am still waiting on tactics for one of the gladiators (I have the tactics for Kraegin). Please make sure they are in my inbox in either my email or PMs. For my two campaignlords (Huan and King Uther) I will be able to post sporadically albeit without books. Please NPC my characters, as both camapaigns are in combat at the moment - Ceres' tactics have been stated, and Sokai's tactics are fairly straightforward. Thank you, Sindorin |
| Snommelp11-04-05, 03:11 PM | DMing: you need to link the result of your fight to the fight itself. Right now you have no link at all. Just copy THIS link onto your character sheet, and remember to do the same for future fights. |
| Tellish_of_Ket11-04-05, 03:35 PM | @ToK - nice job on the misdirection... it won't happen again. Thanks. Always go with your gut...never listen to your opponent. And even if still, add a little extra tactically to cover the rarities. -ToK |
| Ribking11-04-05, 07:45 PM | Still waiting for tactics from Iced and Ribking.@Begferdeth - Tactics for Greefe sent. |
| Iced11-05-05, 12:19 AM | @Begferdeth+Sindorin - Tactics sent for Anixx and Validi's future victories... :D |
| Snommelp11-05-05, 02:10 AM | Kronos vs. Tak is up. I used to dislike long tactics... not so much any more... |
| NiQil11-05-05, 03:59 AM | Kronos vs. Tak is up. I used to dislike long tactics... not so much any more... That totally did not go like I expected....kinda shocked. @Snommelp: Can you edit in the 60 gp Kronos earned from crafting? |
| One_Winged_Angel11-05-05, 04:44 AM | I decided to add a little flavor to Methos vs. Vivi. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7665020&postcount=584) Enjoy! |
| MysticMonk200511-05-05, 04:52 AM | tactics sent via PM |
| Usurpator11-05-05, 06:50 AM | Sir Valkin vs. Hennan (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7676120&postcount=590) is up. Let me just say that one of the gladiators was able to charge the other in round 1. |
| Snommelp11-05-05, 10:51 AM | That totally did not go like I expected....kinda shocked. @Snommelp: Can you edit in the 60 gp Kronos earned from crafting? Right, sorry. I would say that it would be helpful to send that in a PM, but I tend to forget that with my own gladiators. Practice what you preach, right? @ Usurpator: ouch. Sorry I didn't have a better tactic for sleep failing, but I really didn't expect him to be in LoS round 1. That, and I didn't expect to win this one period. |
| TelinArtho11-05-05, 11:45 AM | Zeno vs Idolyn (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7677335) Tough fight to work with - but I think I got the spirit right regardles... |
| Gonbow11-05-05, 01:15 PM | Tactics for pirotess received Tactics for Santos Fi'Corma not received yet. Eh; it was requested that the fight be changed to a monster fight... I guess the request was denied; sending tactics now. |
| Vathelokai11-05-05, 04:59 PM | I decided to add a little flavor to Methos vs. Vivi. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7665020&postcount=584) Enjoy! It's not my fight or anything, but why didn't Vivi cast shocking grasp in round 3? That's how I would have interpreted the tactics. |
| One_Winged_Angel11-05-05, 05:30 PM | It's not my fight or anything, but why didn't Vivi cast shocking grasp in round 3? That's how I would have interpreted the tactics. Yah, I wasn't too sure. However, he did specify that he wished to do so only if he could get it off in the same round. He was technically in range. After rolling a Touch attack (http://invisiblecastle.com/find.py?id=181023), you can see he missed. It would not have changed the outcome. |
| Usurpator11-05-05, 06:56 PM | It took me a couple of hours to run, but Azriel vs. Goran (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7680201&postcount=594) is up. Enjoy. |
| Dracazar11-05-05, 07:22 PM | Hi, I have some words to say about this fight: Zeno (Dracazar) vs Idolyn Mirzanth (Poe The Great): TelinArtho I think I lost the fight because the pitlord made some mistakes. I'm calm and hope to be polite while explaining the matter. 1. Reach weapon Rounds 9 to 17 (9 rounds) I'm in (-17,20), he is in (-20,21). My reach if 15ft. and 20ft. (large size with ranseur). His reach is only 10ft. (medium size with lance). He can't attack me. 2. Moving To attack me, he need to move. It is clearly obvious that I'll keep the distance between us to 20ft so he must move two squares in my threatened area. That will have granted me some AoO (he dropped the bow). I'll take the best effort for my new size and reach, I think. 3. Potions I wrote to drink a potion if I fall below 14hp. On round 12 I went to 13hp, no potion drinked. Perhaps a successfull hit would have ended the fight, so ok. On round 16 I went to -1hp (diehard), still no potion drinked. 4. Attack modifier On Round 16 I read: 8! (automiss). I think this means that I roll 1 on d20, but with 1 my attack modifier would be 9 I have +3 BAB, +6 Str (rage), -1 size = +8, so 1 on d20 would be 9! (automiss) no 8! (automiss). This is remarkable because on Round 15 I miss for 1 point, so would be fair to know what was my total modifier. I'm unable to calculate the modifier because the link to the roll didn't work. I searched using ZenIdo as Id with no success. I ask, kindly, to rerun the fight. TY |
| Begferdeth11-05-05, 07:52 PM | Vivaldi vs Greefe (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7680475&postcount=595) is up! Chew me out guys. You know you want to. Theres no way I ran a fight with no mistakes :rolleyes: |
| TelinArtho11-05-05, 07:52 PM | I answered some of these points in my PM, but I'll address them for public eye here again: 1. Reach weapon Rounds 9 to 17 (9 rounds) I'm in (-17,20), he is in (-20,21). My reach if 15ft. and 20ft. (large size with ranseur). His reach is only 10ft. (medium size with lance). He can't attack me. Essentially, when you got to melee - you tried to stay at a range of 15ft - this way he could not withdraw without an AoO and he could not close to 5ft without drawing an AoO (which 5ft would've allowed his horse to attack). I didn't keep track of the exact locations during those rounds because it is a much slower process - however at the end round summary, it would always look like a range of 15ft because he would act first (take a five foot step to a 10ft range) and then you would act (take a five foot step to be at 15ft range). 2. Moving To attack me, he need to move. It is clearly obvious that I'll keep the distance between us to 20ft so he must move two squares in my threatened area. That will have granted me some AoO (he dropped the bow). I'll take the best effort for my new size and reach, I think. I kept you at a range of 15ft when possible - as explained above. At 20ft he would never have tried to stay at melee with you because he could withdraw without provoking attacks. As to getting an AoO for the dropped bow - you don't get one. If he had put it away (sheathed the weapon) - you would've. But as it stands - dropping a weapon does not provoke. 3. Potions I wrote to drink a potion if I fall below 14hp. On round 12 I went to 13hp, no potion drinked. Perhaps a successfull hit would have ended the fight, so ok. On round 16 I went to -1hp (diehard), still no potion drinked. Well yes and no. There's another portion of your tactic that you are neglecting here - let's quote the whole thing: If I fall below 14hp, and it is reasonable that the combat will not ends within next round, I'll drink a CLW potion. Note the "and it is reasonable that the combat will not end within next round" portion. In your first hit, you reduced him to under half his hitpoints and a second hit could very well drop him without incident. On the other hand, by taking a round to drink a potion - you would be that much closer to your rage ending - so I decided that it was more reasonable to be able to end the fight now - rather than in hopes that you'll be able to survive after your rage ends (where you'll almost certainly need 2 hits). You only needed a 13 to hit - so the fact that you missed for 7 rounds in a row has nothing to do with a bad tactic - just bad luck. 4. Attack modifier On Round 16 I read: 8! (automiss). I think this means that I roll 1 on d20, but with 1 my attack modifier would be 9 I have +3 BAB, +6 Str (rage), -1 size = +8, so 1 on d20 would be 9! (automiss) no 8! (automiss). This is remarkable because on Round 15 I miss for 1 point, so would be fair to know what was my total modifier. I'm unable to calculate the modifier because the link to the roll didn't work. I searched using ZenIdo as Id with no success. If you are having trouble finding it, did you use the "Roll ID" or the character name? - you should look up under the character name. Anyway, in round 16 in particular, your rage had just ended. So instead of +9 (+3BAB, +7Str (rage+enlarge), -1sz) you had +6 (+3 BAB, +4Str(fatigued+enlarged), -1sz) - and now that I'm looking at it - it looks like it should've only been a +6 instead of a +7 from the fatigue. I apparently got the number right on the round after that though. /d |
| Book511-05-05, 08:02 PM | http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?p=7680545&posted=1#post7680545 Up and Imaged already! 10 rnds. |
| Ravashack11-05-05, 08:33 PM | Bah, double checked my numbers after editing character today and was off on PP by 1. :P Not that it mattered. ^_^ |
| One_Winged_Angel11-05-05, 09:12 PM | It took me a couple of hours to run, but Azriel vs. Goran (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7680201&postcount=594) is up. Enjoy. I have a couple issues with this fight. 1) Azriel has Damage reduction 5/Magic. Later in the fight (when it would have mattered) this is not even considered. 2) If you truely felt that I needed to melee as opposed to fight with range, why is it that you didn't follow my tactics for what happened if my scythe was dropped? The damage reduction is what is most pressing, however. The oil of magic weapon ended round 13. Since a great amount of damage was sustained after this, it is a concern. The issue with why not following my supplement tactics is somewhat irrelevent, but I think that if I can't hit him that you would at least fall back on my other tactics. Sigh. I would like to request a re-run if possible. Sorry to drag it out. Luck just wasn't on my side for this battle. |
| Book511-05-05, 09:14 PM | Bah, double checked my numbers after editing character today and was off on PP by 1. :P Not that it mattered. ^_^ Ya know I look at Rebreg's record and... Im like "how can this have been so one sided?" But, deflect arrows... if you had rapid shot... |
| Ribking11-05-05, 09:56 PM | Vivaldi vs Greefe (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7680475&postcount=595) is up! Chew me out guys. You know you want to. Theres no way I ran a fight with no mistakes :rolleyes:Sheesh...another loss to the almighty Grapple+Natural Weapons. The very first roll....the one where i lost Initiative. That hurt worse than the Bite attacks, I think. :weep: Anyhoo....yeah I see a few mistakes, though not result-affecting. In Round 9, after he finally attacks me (was that close to the 10 round delay limit? Or do his actions count as combat?), his AC should have been 16 not 20. A -2 from Rage and an additional -2 from Charging. This brought my first attack on him within 1. Once I saw how close I was to actually hitting him taking this into consideration, I was determined to find an extra -1 to his AC somewhere. Instead, I found just a simple math error....in his favor.Round 9: Greefe whirls as he hears the giant roar, and the next thing he sees is 6'10" of snarling death chewing on his chest. His readied action goes off, and he rages as he chops down at the thing: 7+9+1-4=15 vs AC 14+4+2=20. Miss.*sigh* |
| KerlanRayne11-06-05, 12:18 AM | I have a couple issues with this fight. 1) Azriel has Damage reduction 5/Magic. Later in the fight (when it would have mattered) this is not even considered. 2) If you truely felt that I needed to melee as opposed to fight with range, why is it that you didn't follow my tactics for what happened if my scythe was dropped? The damage reduction is what is most pressing, however. The oil of magic weapon ended round 13. Since a great amount of damage was sustained after this, it is a concern. The issue with why not following my supplement tactics is somewhat irrelevent, but I think that if I can't hit him that you would at least fall back on my other tactics. Sigh. I would like to request a re-run if possible. Sorry to drag it out. Luck just wasn't on my side for this battle.As to your question. 1) I have seen the fight and your DR was most definitely taken into account. It might say I did 11, 12, etc damage, but if you look at your HP total you'll see that you actually took 5 less each time. So that is not a problem. If changes are made due to #2, I think I should stow that Greatsword, not drop it. KerlanRayne |
| One_Winged_Angel11-06-05, 12:26 AM | As to your question. 1) I have seen the fight and your DR was most definitely taken into account. It might say I did 11, 12, etc damage, but if you look at your HP total you'll see that you actually took 5 less each time. So that is not a problem. If changes are made due to #2, I think I should stow that Greatsword, not drop it. KerlanRayne Meh. Not even worth it then. Good fight. You just had 2 natural 20s where I got a lot of sub 10s. Not issues with tactics or builds, just a matter of luck. I withdraw my request for a re-run. Good fight, Kerlan. Wish I had been a bit luckier, but I still got one shot at winning. 'Cept it's even slimmer than this one... :( |
| Oldmangray11-06-05, 01:02 AM | soz guys /rant i was just looking over the battle tak lost and the comment about providing move than 3 lines of tactics. im sorry if i count correctly i have 8 lines of tactics that could be used. and a whole lot of gear that never seems to be used. now in the rules of gladius and reading previous battles i got the impression that the tactics we send to our pitlords were in ADDITION to our defualt tactics and that pitlords wouldn't blindly follow your sent tactics like some sort of indoctrinated cult member. ID like to know why i have had 2 pitlords go "you need more than 2 lines of tactics" do you not go over people char sheets when you pit lord there fight? there default tactics are right there posibbly one or two clicks away are you that stubborn and or lazy that you wont click and read an alternate method? maybe our tactics are short because we have stupidly long hours that completely root us over and stop us forming cohesive sentances let alone complex tactics for battles when we get home?! show some sense if there tactics aren't very long look at there default tactics and try and get some sense of what they are trying to achive. now i was led to belive that the pitlords would exercise some felxability in following player submitted tactics, i mean if someone was shooting you with a bow and arrow you would most likely drink a potion that would protect you from them wouldn't you?. i diddnt have that down in my tactics but then i thought it would be obvious to anyone "hey i have this protection from arrows potion, and im being shot by an archer wow im just going to stand here and take it, arrows tickle!" if i am wrong in thinking that the pitlords need to exercise some imagination and innovation on player tactics when they are brief or are nullified by the situation or just in general please tell me now and ill make sure to write out tactics that cover EVERY single possible eventuality. and on that note if the pitlords follow player sent tactics blindly to the letter why in my battle here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7675571&postcount=589) did i suddnely on round three draw my mind blade? End Round 2: Tak 23/23 (0, 20) [Bull’s Strength ends round 31 SoF ends round 12] Kronos 28/28 (-18, 4) [Force Screen ends round 11, SoF ends round 12] Tak moves towards Kronos while manifesting a mindblade. when my tactics clearly state k i start with my mind blade out shield strapped to me. QTF!? so please tell me am i to write 32 pages of tactics to cover every eventuality in the sure knowledge that that is the only way to cover myself against obvious threats? or do i trust in pitlords who have stated to me that "you sent me tactics so i never looked at your default tactics" please help. /rant sigh i felt this had to be said |
| Snommelp11-06-05, 01:13 AM | *sigh* First and foremost, you cannot hold three things in two hands. Well, you could, but only if that shield of yours was a small shield. It's not; it's large. You can't hold a large shield, a mindblade, and a potion at the same time. That takes care of the "WTF!?"... Secondly: I don't use expendables unless I am expressly told to do so. I have seen fights where a pitlord used an expendable that could have won the fight, but luck ruined it. The pitlord was chewed out for "wasting money." Thus, you've gotta tell me if you want to use your potion of Pro Arrows. I'm pretty sure every other pitlord is the same. Third: written tactics take precedence over default tactics, but if the written tactics fall apart then the defaults can and should be used. However, your default tactics also have no mention of what to do in the case of a ranged fight. I'm sorry Tak lost, but really, you had absolutely no plan in either set of tactics for if a ranged fight should happen. So please stop blaming me and use this as a learning experience. |
| One_Winged_Angel11-06-05, 01:40 AM | @Oldmangrey: Default tactics are supposed to be fallback plans, not supplements thrown in there. It's important to know that you need to analyze the fight carefully. Write contingancy plans. If you feel like you just don't want to do this, tell the pitlord to do what he thinks is best. As pitlords, we are not supposed to use expendable items unless told to. It's not written anywhere, but I've seen people get fairly ticked when a rather pricy scroll was used. Heck, I've seen people ticked over the loss of a couple arrows. Pitlords actually ARE supposed to follow player's tactics as though they were the Ten Commandments until the tactics become impossible or just plain stupid to follow. We have to. Otherwise, the players can use the "you didn't follow my tactics to the line" argument and we have to re-run. If you want your fighter run on default tactics, SAY SO! It's simple. Just "in addition to my default tactics..." then fill in. Otherwise, it's fair game to not have to glance at them. As Tellish of Ket once stated, assume your giant eagle ally has better judgement than your pitlord. |
| Dracazar11-06-05, 04:36 AM | Essentially, when you got to melee - you tried to stay at a range of 15ft - this way he could not withdraw without an AoO and he could not close to 5ft without drawing an AoO (which 5ft would've allowed his horse to attack). I didn't keep track of the exact locations during those rounds because it is a much slower process - however at the end round summary, it would always look like a range of 15ft because he would act first (take a five foot step to a 10ft range) and then you would act (take a five foot step to be at 15ft range). I didn't agree. I'll try to explain the reasons. My reach is 15ft and 20ft, his reach is 10ft and he don't have bow. The best effort for my new size and reach is to keep him at 20ft distance, not 15ft. With 20ft distance there are two possibility: a) Enemy move toward me: This surely grant me an AoO, he has to move 10 ft to attack. The first 5ft step is ok, the second 5ft step grante me the AoO. b) Enemy withdraws: This is good because he lose his attack for the round. Remember he has no bow, withdrawing would be not useful. On next round I'll go again at 20ft distance and make my attack. The situation can be looped. Every round I have an attack and a AoO and he has his attack, or I have an attack and he has nothing. Ok for the other things. |
| Usurpator11-06-05, 04:37 AM | I have a couple issues with this fight. 1) Azriel has Damage reduction 5/Magic. Later in the fight (when it would have mattered) this is not even considered. Add up all the damage and compare Azriel's hit points, you'll see that it was considered perfectly. I even wrote something about you 'celestial constitution' stopping the damage in the flavor text. Check first, yell later please. 2) If you truely felt that I needed to melee as opposed to fight with range, why is it that you didn't follow my tactics for what happened if my scythe was dropped? I guess I got confused by the multiple addendums, sorry. This is what I read: "Since it seems slightly more likely that she will fail in her attempt, go ahead a drop the scythe if need be. I'm hoping to finish him with arrows now." I got that to mean you wanted to finish him with arrows after you dropped the scythe. I see now you intended that sentence to mean that you hoped you would finish him with your arrows before you wanted to resort to using your scythe. But I got a sense you are also disagreeing with me choosing to have you fight with the scythe instead of continuing the ranged duel. Is this true? You could have easily seen a ranged duel wouldn't work when writing tactics. I feel I was gracious by letting you character realize that and deviate from your tactics which said to continue firing arrows until you had nothing left, and only then switch to your secondary tactics. Sigh. I would like to request a re-run if possible. Sorry to drag it out. Luck just wasn't on my side for this battle. Your base tactics were simply ineffective, and I tried to do the best I could with them and improvised to your advantage after only a few shots. Your had bad luck with the trip rolls, sure, but that was at least a situation where you had reasonable odds to begin with. And I created that situation by going against your specified tactics. What would you have liked me to do? |
| Begferdeth11-06-05, 10:37 AM | Well, I fixed that up anyways. Somehow, when yousaid you went hunting for that extra +1, I just got this (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=34) stuck in my head :D Oh, and its hard to break the 10 round delay limit by round 9 :P Sheesh...another loss to the almighty Grapple+Natural Weapons. The very first roll....the one where i lost Initiative. That hurt worse than the Bite attacks, I think. :weep: Anyhoo....yeah I see a few mistakes, though not result-affecting. In Round 9, after he finally attacks me (was that close to the 10 round delay limit? Or do his actions count as combat?), his AC should have been 16 not 20. A -2 from Rage and an additional -2 from Charging. This brought my first attack on him within 1. Once I saw how close I was to actually hitting him taking this into consideration, I was determined to find an extra -1 to his AC somewhere. Instead, I found just a simple math error....in his favor.*sigh* |
| One_Winged_Angel11-06-05, 12:10 PM | @Usurpator: I withdraw my request for a re-run. Good fight, Kerlan. Wish I had been a bit luckier, but I still got one shot at winning. 'Cept it's even slimmer than this one... :( Check first, indeed, yell later indeed :D No worries about it. It was mostly an issue of not really seeing a way to win. No, nothing against you. I had no real chance to win at all, especially when it came to tripping after the loss of my feat. No, no re-run. I'll leave things as they stand, no complaints. I don't like it when people quibble about things after it's realized they had nothing to complain about, so I won't do the same. Well run, good story, and I look foreward to next time! What I would like you to do? Do something fun for gladius weekly! -OWA |
| Cerebus1311-06-05, 02:21 PM | Tan vs. Kalarthus (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7685394&postcount=597) is up. Let me know if you have any problems with it. |
| SauroGrenom11-06-05, 03:51 PM | Silas (NiQil) vs Dargain Dar'ath (Waywreth) is finally finished. Took me way longer than I thought it would. I hope to get a map of the fight up soon. |
| NiQil11-06-05, 04:51 PM | Silas (NiQil) vs Dargain Dar'ath (Waywreth) is finally finished. Took me way longer than I thought it would. I hope to get a map of the fight up soon. @ SauroGrenom: Can you please add in the 60 gp in skill earnings that Silas made into the fight summary when you get a chance? |
| One_Winged_Angel11-06-05, 05:01 PM | @ SauroGrenom: Can you please add in the 60 gp in skill earnings that Silas made into the fight summary when you get a chance? :rolleyes: Seems like you have to do this with every fight you're in. |
| Usurpator11-06-05, 05:29 PM | :rolleyes: Seems like you have to do this with every fight you're in. I have stopped asking Pitlords to correct this. It just happens too often. I'll just ask the offending Pitlord to correct it if one of my characters ever gets thrown in jail for this. There is usually no reason not to use Craft or Profession skills to make money, so I think we should just assume those who have appropriate skill ranks do so, no mention required. It's like read magic with scrolls or psicraft when adressing powerstones. There is just no reason for a character not to do it, so I will automatically assume it, even if it is not written as prefbuff. |
| NiQil11-06-05, 07:58 PM | I have stopped asking Pitlords to correct this. It just happens too often. I'll just ask the offending Pitlord to correct it if one of my characters ever gets thrown in jail for this. There is usually no reason not to use Craft or Profession skills to make money, so I think we should just assume those who have appropriate skill ranks do so, no mention required. It's like read magic with scrolls or psicraft when adressing powerstones. There is just no reason for a character not to do it, so I will automatically assume it, even if it is not written as prefbuff. This is exactly the reason it *should be done. Anytime a character is audited, if the fight does not reflect what he has recorded as earned from that fight, then either he is wrong or the fight is wrong. I'd rather take a little time now and make sure the pitlords get it right, rather than have to fix it later...and maybe have a pitlord that didn't do it not around anymore and me just lose out on the gold. And this isn't something that can be assumed, because not every character does it. The rules are explicit in that it must be stated in your fight rewards to get the gold from skill earnings of this nature. |
| NiQil11-06-05, 08:00 PM | :rolleyes: Seems like you have to do this with every fight you're in. Only because pitlords don't seem to be able to remember to do it on their own on a consistant basis. Sometimes it's there...sometimes it's not. When it's not, I bring it up so it can be corrected, because it's my job to make sure my characters are kept up accurately. But it still falls to the pitlord to make sure this is in the fight...that is part of the pitlord responsibility. |
| Mind Rogue11-06-05, 08:24 PM | Hey question. If one of the players tries to use a scroll or powerstone that is beyond them and fails the CL check, but passes the Wis check to avoid a mishap, is the spell or power still imbued into the item, or is it safely but ineffectively discharged? |
| One_Winged_Angel11-06-05, 09:23 PM | Hey question. If one of the players tries to use a scroll or powerstone that is beyond them and fails the CL check, but passes the Wis check to avoid a mishap, is the spell or power still imbued into the item, or is it safely but ineffectively discharged? ...Please don't tell me this is my fight :( Anyway, the Wis check will simply allow them to avoid the mishap, but the power/spell fails. |
| TelinArtho11-06-05, 09:40 PM | I didn't agree. I'll try to explain the reasons. My reach is 15ft and 20ft, his reach is 10ft and he don't have bow. The best effort for my new size and reach is to keep him at 20ft distance, not 15ft. With 20ft distance there are two possibility: a) Enemy move toward me: This surely grant me an AoO, he has to move 10 ft to attack. The first 5ft step is ok, the second 5ft step grante me the AoO. b) Enemy withdraws: This is good because he lose his attack for the round. Remember he has no bow, withdrawing would be not useful. On next round I'll go again at 20ft distance and make my attack. The situation can be looped. Every round I have an attack and a AoO and he has his attack, or I have an attack and he has nothing. Ok for the other things. There's two things at work here and I'll explain why I chose this course of action over another. 1. First of all, your opponent has greater speed than you. If you allow him to withdraw without provoking - not only will you not be able to fully close on the future attempts, you will not get an AoO from him. 15ft is ideal because you still threaten, he can't take a 5ft step and attack with his bow and can only attack with his lance without provoking. Once you get him to this range and his reach is 10ft, from dropping the bow, then comes in point #2. 2. Once you have gotten him to drop his bow, you take a 5ft step to get back to 15ft range, and he takes 5ft steps to get to 10ft and attack you. In order for you to get to 20ft, you could attack and move away (drawing an AoO) - then he could charge (giving you an AoO to use). Since charging is much worse for you than it is for him (because while you might hit more frequently because of his dropped AC, when he hits he will kill you MUCH quicker because of the lance's double damage on the charge), I opted to forego that route and just do 5ft steps. So either - you start at 20ft range from the beginning, in which case he is easily able to outmaneuver you and fall back upon a third or fourth tactic or you give yourself a fighting chance at melee while being enlarged and deal with AoO and charging attacks from your opponent. Since I had to make a judgement call - I went with the route that seemed most reasonable. Also note that if I had pursued the actions that you wish (that is moving away after attacking so he can charge you - the attack in round 11 would have hit for a minimum of 10 damage (2d8+8 dmg) and the attack in round 12 would have an additional minimum of 5 damage (2d8+8 vs 1d8+4). Would have ended the fight - MUCH - quicker and more definitively in his favor... |
| Mind Rogue11-06-05, 10:01 PM | ...Please don't tell me this is my fight :( Anyway, the Wis check will simply allow them to avoid the mishap, but the power/spell fails. Okay, I won't tell you. Anyway, Kailia vs Barthleby is done. I'll put in the expenses after I've had a chance to rest a while, but they will definitely be in before I retire for the evening. However, the question apparently does greatly influence the fight. If the spell fails, but the energy is not released from the spell completion item, the battle goes one way. If the power drains away the, battle goes the other. |
| One_Winged_Angel11-06-05, 10:18 PM | Okay, I won't tell you. ...That's not funny. ... Ok, fine, maybe a little. :D :D :D Anyway, Kailia vs Barthleby is done. I'll put in the expenses after I've had a chance to rest a while, but they will definitely be in before I retire for the evening. However, the question apparently does greatly influence the fight. If the spell fails, but the energy is not released from the spell completion item, the battle goes one way. If the power drains away the, battle goes the other. I'm afraid I don't quite understand the idea here. If the user meets these requirements and has a manifester level at least equal to the power’s manifester level, she can automatically manifest the stored power without a check. If she meets both requirements but her own level is lower than the power stone’s manifester level, she has to make a manifester level check (1d20 + user’s level), against a DC equal to the power stone’s manifester level +1, to manifest the power successfully. On a failure, the user must succeed on a DC 5 Wisdom check to avoid brainburn (see below). A natural roll of 1 on this check is always a failure. Brainburn: When something goes awry, the user of a power stone improperly manifests the stored power. The resultant psionic surge persists for 1d4 rounds, unless the power stone is flung farther than 100 feet away or is destroyed. This surge deals 1d6 points of damage per power stored per round and arcs across multiple targets, similar to energy current, except the damage type isn’t specified. The user is the primary target, and one nearby ally is the secondary target (chosen at random). The manifester level for a standard power stone is the minimum manifester level needed to manifest the power (unless otherwise specified). Dunno, but it seems to me like when you fail to manifest the power but pass the wisdom check, all that happens is the stone is gone and I lose the GP and get nothing in return. |
| Snommelp11-06-05, 10:45 PM | @ Maraxus: I just noticed that Sam's bracers of Armor are still listed in his equipment section as +1. However, they're priced for +2 and listed under his AC bonuses as +2, because they are indeed +2. Sorry if that caused any confusion. |
| Mind Rogue11-06-05, 10:55 PM | ...That's not funny. ... Ok, fine, maybe a little. :D :D :D I'm afraid I don't quite understand the idea here. Dunno, but it seems to me like when you fail to manifest the power but pass the wisdom check, all that happens is the stone is gone and I lose the GP and get nothing in return. I think I've seen it both ways where failing the first check but passing the wisdom check either still leaves the power in the stone, unactivated, and where it drains away without effect. If the power remains in the stone, the match runs as I've run it. However, if it drains away, you'll lose the fight because you won't have the +25 hp from vigor. |
| TelinArtho11-06-05, 10:56 PM | @King Uther and ToK - I'll be running the Balbanes vs Krunch fight tomorrow - as I'm in the middle of a poker tournament and it will likely run very late for me. Expect it tomorrow. /d |
| One_Winged_Angel11-06-05, 10:58 PM | I think I've seen it both ways where failing the first check but passing the wisdom check either still leaves the power in the stone, unactivated, and where it drains away without effect. If the power remains in the stone, the match runs as I've run it. However, if it drains away, you'll lose the fight because you won't have the +25 hp from vigor. Ah. Hmm...it's a point. To the almighty FAQ! Unless you already checked there, in which case I will immerse myself in the rules of the game in Wizards. EDIT: The almighty FAQ sides with me! It says that in the event of a scroll, anyway. Since powerstone is basically equivilant to scroll, it says this. If you do not succeed in activating a scroll spell, the spell is not used up. If you suffer a mishap when you fail to cast the spell, however, you activate the scroll after a fashion and the scroll is wasted. You likewise lose the spell on the scroll if you fail any Concentration check you might have to make while using the scroll. You also lose the spell from the scroll or if you fail any arcane spell failure roll you might have to make when using the scroll. |
| Sindorin11-07-05, 12:12 AM | I'm sorry to do this, and that I didn't think to do this sooner, but sooner is better than later in this case... I got stuck out of town for an extra day and thus I will not have the time to comfortably run Anixx vs. Kraegin. If someone could take this fight I would greatly appreciate it, and I apologize. I might not be able to forward tactics in time... ~Sindorin |
| Snommelp11-07-05, 02:27 AM | I'm done with Vakkor vs. Shazzelin, but I need to know what the XP/GP adjustment is for an ECL 4 character bringing one medium centipede before I post it. |
| Tellish_of_Ket11-07-05, 03:31 AM | I'm done with Vakkor vs. Shazzelin, but I need to know what the XP/GP adjustment is for an ECL 4 character bringing one medium centipede before I post it. That depends. Did he win? or lose? Non-pet owner wins...[1275xp, 1275 gp], pet owner lost gets [562xp, 562gp] pet owner wins...[1125gp, 1125xp], non-pet owner lost, [637xp, 637gp] |
| Usurpator11-07-05, 03:40 AM | I have taken THE TEST and I am a Lawful Good Halfling Ranger with the stats Str:16 Dex:17 Con:16 Int:15 Wis:15 Cha:13 Dang! That's 53 pts using the point-buy method. WOW! I guess all those years in the forces paid off. Actually, since halflings have -2 Str, +2 Dex your base scores would be Str 18, Dex 15, Con 16, Int 15, Wis 15, Cha 13. Or 55 pts using the point-buy method. Or should I have posted this in prison? :P |
| Dracazar11-07-05, 07:44 AM | 1. First of all, your opponent has greater speed than you. If you allow him to withdraw without provoking - not only will you not be able to fully close on the future attempts, you will not get an AoO from him. 15ft is ideal because you still threaten, he can't take a 5ft step and attack with his bow and can only attack with his lance without provoking. Once you get him to this range and his reach is 10ft, from dropping the bow, then comes in point #2. I try to clarify some issues, because I agree to a large extent of your post. When my enemy has the bow I agree absolutely that the best distance is 15ft. 2. Once you have gotten him to drop his bow, you take a 5ft step to get back to 15ft range, and he takes 5ft steps to get to 10ft and attack you. In order for you to get to 20ft, you could attack and move away (drawing an AoO) - then he could charge (giving you an AoO to use). Since charging is much worse for you than it is for him (because while you might hit more frequently because of his dropped AC, when he hits he will kill you MUCH quicker because of the lance's double damage on the charge), I opted to forego that route and just do 5ft steps. Perhaps here is the matter, you say: "In order for you to get to 20ft, you could attack and move away (drawing an AoO)". I don't understand this, he is 10ft distance from me, I would take 10ft back and attack with my 20ft reach, why should I draw an AoO? Leaving a threatened area does not provoke AoO (Am I wrong? Really). On the next round he will charge me, ok! I have 2 attack (my normal attack + AoO) and he has 1 attack (charge). I repeat, ok for the 15ft while he has bow, it is optimal tactic, but when he is without ranged attack, more attacks I'll do and better it is. I don't care for double damage from his lance, I would like more hit change and less AC for him. With only one more successful hit I would win the fight. Thanks for you reply. |
| Poe The Great11-07-05, 08:47 AM | Even though I won (barely), there were some pretty major tactical errors in Idolyn's fight, mainly being that when Idolyn withdrew those several rounds where he kept provoking attack of opportunities, he could've fired an arrow. You can even fire an arrow when your mount is running...at a -8 penalty, none the less (well, -4 with mounted archery, which I have.) But anyway, it's not that big of a deal- I won anyway. I'll just have to remember to remind my next pitlord. |
| Tellish_of_Ket11-07-05, 09:19 AM | Actually, since halflings have -2 Str, +2 Dex your base scores would be Str 18, Dex 15, Con 16, Int 15, Wis 15, Cha 13. Or 55 pts using the point-buy method. Or should I have posted this in prison? :P Nah, i was just trying to be modest. I actually took it twice. Second time around i was a Lawful Neutral Human Monk. Which makes for an interesting combo, ranger/monk. Flurry+twf+imptwo+grtwf. -ToK |
| Macbrea11-07-05, 09:26 AM | Round 1: Wolf, [atk: 23, hits. 28, hits. Dmg: 13, 9] Round 2: two more arrows, [atk: 15, hits. 21, hits. Dmg: 8, 7] Isn't that 36 damage and enough to put him to -3 hps? |
| Tellish_of_Ket11-07-05, 09:37 AM | Round 1: Wolf, [atk: 23, hits. 28, hits. Dmg: 13, 9] Round 2: two more arrows, [atk: 15, hits. 21, hits. Dmg: 8, 7] Isn't that 36 damage and enough to put him to -3 hps? hehe....Oops! <slinks away to fix> -ToK **EDIT - Done. Man, how emberassing is that? lol |
| Macbrea11-07-05, 09:46 AM | Technically, she is forced to defeat the ape. As it is a animal companion and wolfcaller bleeds out, while this is happening. As by the grappling fight it appears she managed to actually do this without expending any resources it means she is fine. I figured I would mention it as it cost Wolfcaller alot less resources for the loss. |
| TelinArtho11-07-05, 10:03 AM | I try to clarify some issues, because I agree to a large extent of your post. When my enemy has the bow I agree absolutely that the best distance is 15ft. Perhaps here is the matter, you say: "In order for you to get to 20ft, you could attack and move away (drawing an AoO)". I don't understand this, he is 10ft distance from me, I would take 10ft back and attack with my 20ft reach, why should I draw an AoO? Leaving a threatened area does not provoke AoO (Am I wrong? Really). On the next round he will charge me, ok! I have 2 attack (my normal attack + AoO) and he has 1 attack (charge). I repeat, ok for the 15ft while he has bow, it is optimal tactic, but when he is without ranged attack, more attacks I'll do and better it is. I don't care for double damage from his lance, I would like more hit change and less AC for him. With only one more successful hit I would win the fight. Thanks for you reply. When leaving a threatened area, you draw an AoO - unless you are just taking a 5ft step. Perhaps this is where you were confused. You can check the SRD on movement in combat if you like. |
| Snommelp11-07-05, 10:10 AM | That depends. Did he win? or lose? Non-pet owner wins...[1275xp, 1275 gp], pet owner lost gets [562xp, 562gp] pet owner wins...[1125gp, 1125xp], non-pet owner lost, [637xp, 637gp] Thanks. I'll get that edited in and have the fight up in two shakes of a dragon's tail. ...wait... isn't it 400 unadjusted for the loser? Those look like they're based around 600 for the loser. |
| TelinArtho11-07-05, 10:33 AM | Yeah - ToK screwed up. +/- 6.25% of the regular rewards. 1125/375 for me if I win/lose; 1275/425 for my opponent if he wins/loses. |
| Snommelp11-07-05, 10:40 AM | Vakkor vs. Shazzelin is up. Sorry it wasn't up sooner; parents came up for Homecoming weekend. |
| Usurpator11-07-05, 10:52 AM | Vakkor vs. Shazzelin is up. Sorry it wasn't up sooner; parents came up for Homecoming weekend. Thanks Snommelp, was waiting anxiously all day! @TelinArtho: Good try even though the odds were stacked against you. Did you do know/realize the following: Duergar Immunities (Ex): Immunity to paralysis, phantasms and poison I think this should make Shazzelin immune to hold person (and Centipede poison too). I guess I should mention this in my tactics next time to help the PitLord. |
| Mind Rogue11-07-05, 11:07 AM | Ah. Hmm...it's a point. To the almighty FAQ! Unless you already checked there, in which case I will immerse myself in the rules of the game in Wizards. EDIT: The almighty FAQ sides with me! It says that in the event of a scroll, anyway. Since powerstone is basically equivilant to scroll, it says this. Then the match stands as written and I declare the android Kailia the winner, barring anything that Pittbull can find drastically wrong with the match. |
| TelinArtho11-07-05, 11:40 AM | Thanks Snommelp, was waiting anxiously all day! @TelinArtho: Good try even though the odds were stacked against you. Did you do know/realize the following: Duergar Immunities (Ex): Immunity to paralysis, phantasms and poison I think this should make Shazzelin immune to hold person (and Centipede poison too). I guess I should mention this in my tactics next time to help the PitLord. I did know about the poison - but had missed the paralysis part. Man that sucks. Oh well, I wasn't too inspired anyway since I wasn't expecting him to be paired in the first place... Oh and Snommelp - for future reference it is a standard action to recall a spell with a pearl of power - not a move-equivalent action - so Vakkor couldn't have recalled spells at the rate he did in actuality (in one case at least). |
| Usurpator11-07-05, 12:03 PM | @Snommelp It does'n matter for the outcome, but: Shazzelin lets fly with an arrow and psionic power (18+12=30, damage 4+5+5+5+3+3=25) and Vakkor takes it deep in his chest. Is this 1d8+4d6+3 damage? In any case, the first shot should have been 1d8+8d6+3 damage (1d8+3 base, +2d6 psionic shot, +2d6 deep crystal charge, +4d6 dissolving weapon). I see that I didn't mention the additional damage dice from dissolving weapon in my tactics, which might have caused the mix-up. |
| Pittbull11-07-05, 12:15 PM | Then the match stands as written and I declare the android Kailia the winner, barring anything that Pittbull can find drastically wrong with the match. No, no, it's OK! Kalia is the winner. Congrats OWA!! I guess you're right, if you fail the manifester-check for a higher level powerstone, you don't use up the stone's charge. @My Gladiators: I'll start to run the fight this evening, so it'll be posted in time, no worries. |
| TelinArtho11-07-05, 12:18 PM | Balbanes vs Krunch (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7692275) Interesting fight with both gladiators overly confident that they will win. But who will? Click to see! |
| TelinArtho11-07-05, 01:18 PM | I'm sorry to do this, and that I didn't think to do this sooner, but sooner is better than later in this case... I got stuck out of town for an extra day and thus I will not have the time to comfortably run Anixx vs. Kraegin. If someone could take this fight I would greatly appreciate it, and I apologize. I might not be able to forward tactics in time... ~Sindorin Anyone want to take the fight? I would appreciate it more than Sindorin would (since its my character after all...). /d |
| Macbrea11-07-05, 01:26 PM | Pass it to me, Assuming I can get the tactics I can do it tonight when i get home. |
| TelinArtho11-07-05, 01:43 PM | Tactics for Kraegin have been forwarded. Hopefully Iced/Sindorin will come on and forward Anixx's tactics. |
| Macbrea11-07-05, 01:53 PM | PMed Iced to get tactics. Hopefully, I will recieve them today. |
| Pittbull11-07-05, 02:31 PM | Brilf vs Zubair (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7692911&postcount=606) is up! One has been very lucky! |
| TelinArtho11-07-05, 02:40 PM | @Pittbull - I don't think that Zubair can ride out and then make a full round of actions. He could take a standard action, but not a full round one. /d |
| Vathelokai11-07-05, 02:44 PM | I didn't see a notice, so I'll make one. Auburn [Vathelokai] vs The First Horseman: War [Nightbanegod] is up. The only thing I notice is in round 6; the familiar attacks with no mention of the Horseman's AOO. I tried to look up rolls, but couldn't successfuly guess the name they were under. I assume the familiar made a tumble check. I'll wait for Nightbanegod's response before editing my sheet. |
| Snommelp11-07-05, 02:49 PM | Is this 1d8+4d6+3 damage? In any case, the first shot should have been 1d8+8d6+3 damage (1d8+3 base, +2d6 psionic shot, +2d6 deep crystal charge, +4d6 dissolving weapon). I see that I didn't mention the additional damage dice from dissolving weapon in my tactics, which might have caused the mix-up. Yeah, it's 4d6. Okay, now the match isn't nearly as close as it was. But since this doesn't even change the expendables used, I'll go ahead and leave it be. @ Telin: I looked for that info about Pearls of Power, but couldn't find it anywhere. Consider it noted for the next fight. Now, has anyone seen Maraxus? He's supposed to run my one remaining fight: Sam vs. Yoriko. EDIT: wait a second, this does change the expendables used... let me check the dice real quick... okay, that extra 4d6 totals 14 damage (4+4+1+5), so that changes the number of arrows used from 5 to 1. I'll edit the fight to let you have those 4 extra arrows; you may need them later. |
| Pittbull11-07-05, 02:59 PM | @Pittbull - I don't think that Zubair can ride out and then make a full round of actions. He could take a standard action, but not a full round one. /d A riding five-foot step would have been enough, too for a line of effect, so a full-round attack is still possible. Are you sure, that it's not possible to make a full round attack when riding? We got so many rapid-shooting riding gladiators in the past and it was never a concern. I thought it's possible to rapid-shoot, even if your mount is doulbe-moving, the attacks happen only in the middle of the move. |
| Macbrea11-07-05, 02:59 PM | @ Telin: I looked for that info about Pearls of Power, but couldn't find it anywhere. Consider it noted for the next fight. Under command word activation in the beginning of the magic item section you will see: Activating a command word magic item is a standard action and does not provoke attacks of opportunity. |
| TelinArtho11-07-05, 03:02 PM | A riding five-foot step would have been enough, too for a line of effect, so a full-round attack is still possible. Are you sure, that it's not possible to make a full round attack when riding? We got so many rapid-shooting riding gladiators in the past and it was never a concern. I thought it's possible to rapid-shoot, even if your mount is doulbe-moving, the attacks happen only in the middle of the move. You can fire while it is moving - but that suffers penalties on the attack rolls. |
| Mind Rogue11-07-05, 03:03 PM | A riding five-foot step would have been enough, too for a line of effect, so a full-round attack is still possible. Are you sure, that it's not possible to make a full round attack when riding? We got so many rapid-shooting riding gladiators in the past and it was never a concern. I thought it's possible to rapid-shoot, even if your mount is doulbe-moving, the attacks happen only in the middle of the move. Maraxus is online at this point in time (or at least he was few minutes ago). His profile says he was writing a PM. I'm getting kind of anxious about the fight too. |
| Pittbull11-07-05, 03:05 PM | You suffer only penalties, when you're double-moving (-4) or running (-8). Zubair did only a singlemove. You can use ranged weapons while your mount is taking a double move, but at a -4 penalty on the attack roll. You can use ranged weapons while your mount is running (quadruple speed), at a -8 penalty. In either case, you make the attack roll when your mount has completed half its movement. You can make a full attack with a ranged weapon while your mount is moving. Likewise, you can take move actions normally. |
| One_Winged_Angel11-07-05, 03:06 PM | No, no, it's OK! Kalia is the winner. Congrats OWA!! Thanks! That was easily her hardest fight so far. You have one powerful build there. Keep with it! |
| Pittbull11-07-05, 03:07 PM | @Mindrogue: What do you want to tell me? :confused: ;) Might be the wrong quote. |
| Macbrea11-07-05, 03:10 PM | You can use ranged weapons while your mount is taking a double move, but at a -4 penalty on the attack roll. You can use ranged weapons while your mount is running (quadruple speed), at a -8 penalty. In either case, you make the attack roll when your mount has completed half its movement. You can make a full attack with a ranged weapon while your mount is moving. Likewise, you can take move actions normally That is from the mounted combat section. So, apparently it doesn't matter how fast your mount is moving. You can make full attacks with ranged weapons. |
| Snommelp11-07-05, 03:15 PM | Maraxus is online at this point in time (or at least he was few minutes ago). His profile says he was writing a PM. I'm getting kind of anxious about the fight too. That eager to lose? Or do you have some unforseen trick up your sleeve? |
| Tellish_of_Ket11-07-05, 03:27 PM | The only thing I notice is in round 6; the familiar attacks with no mention of the Horseman's AOO. I tried to look up rolls, but couldn't successfuly guess the name they were under. I assume the familiar made a tumble check. I'll wait for Nightbanegod's response before editing my sheet. Uhm...he's blind. He doesn't get an AoO. Hmm...i didn't realize i forgot to post the tag for the rolls. Try something like auburn vs horseman or something like that. I'm gonna try to find them as well. -ToK |
| King Uther11-07-05, 04:01 PM | Perhaps my tactics were a little confusing, but there are a few things about the Krunch fight I do not like. 1. Obscuring Mist was a defensive spell, mostly to be used to escape and reset some defenses. 2. He tripped me with a Falchion. C'mon. Tell me that's a joke. 3. He raged, and as a result I would have tried to withdraw and escape until his rage ended. It's contingency #8. With my double move on withdraw behind cover, it's easy for me to escape over time and buff. 4. I still have a problem with the Cleave feat and magical images. I believe that is not an intended use for cleave. 5. In round 1 Balbanes could stow the wand, therefore casting spells a round earlier. 6. What does the 3 mean at the end of Krunch's position when he attacks the horse? 7. Was I in range for Hold Person at the start? I would have made my concentration, and he would have failed the save. Why didn't that happen? 8. I was trying to stand toe-to-toe with a superior melee combatant. My tactics suggest to not do that unless I am at an advantageous position. |
| Maraxus11-07-05, 05:05 PM | Maraxus is online at this point in time (or at least he was few minutes ago). His profile says he was writing a PM. I'm getting kind of anxious about the fight too. That's not writing PM, that's reading the tactics you sent. :) Yoriko Obato vs Sam is up. Come and see the monks battling. PS: Hopefully next week I will find the time to run the fight at the weekend, again. |
| NiQil11-07-05, 05:09 PM | That's not writing PM, that's reading the tactics you sent. :) Yoriko Obato vs Sam is up. Come and see the monks battling. PS: Hopefully next week I will find the time to run the fight at the weekend, again. I looked at the fight, Maraxus, and I see an error in Sam's favor that will cause the fight to not be over. In round 10, Sam stands up and takes his AoO and then attacks. Yoriko follows up with trip attacks. The trip attacks from Yoriko both total to 16 vs touch AC 17....both misses. But then in round 11, you have Sam standing up again and taking an AoO for 10 damage. But he was already standing. So that 10 damage shouldn't be there...that's gonna change yer fight. Edit: I also see an error in Yoriko's favor. In round 7, the Strength checks for the trip attack tied. In the case of a tie, the win goes to the person with the highest modifier, which would be Yoriko. So Sam would be prone there, and then incur an AoO standing up in round 8. |
| Maraxus11-07-05, 05:19 PM | *checks this* Oh, the problem is more complicated. *checks the rolls* Looks like I rolled round 10 twice. If you look at the hit points, There are also some damage missing. I allso wrote the second 10th turn, but then, when adding new blank rounds, looks like I also overwrote it. Let me correct that quickly. Edit: About the think with the tie: Yes, I checkt the rules section line for line - twice. Finally, I ruled it that way, because in the grapple section it explicitly states what happens in case of a tie (hight mod, then roll again). Since this does not stand in the trip section, too, I say that in case of a trip this does not count and nothing happens. PS: But one think could really make me edit that again (and definitly give Sam a nother good chance) - Is the follow-up attack from Improved trip against the standing or the prone AC?? PPS: Now, where is Gonbow? |
| Vathelokai11-07-05, 05:21 PM | Uhm...he's blind. -ToK Ummm....so am I. :D |
| TelinArtho11-07-05, 05:38 PM | Perhaps my tactics were a little confusing, but there are a few things about the Krunch fight I do not like. 1. Obscuring Mist was a defensive spell, mostly to be used to escape and reset some defenses. Yes, and that's what you were using it for. If you notice from your tactics, 2. If tripped, cast defensively Obscuring Mist. He can't even see me at 10 ft. Then stand up. You were tripped - so you cast it defensively and stood up. After that, you started to buff. 2. He tripped me with a Falchion. C'mon. Tell me that's a joke. Well, he's got improved trip - so he could do it with a foot, hand whatever. It doesn't really matter - you still wouldn't have provoked and he would have still succeeded. Consider the falchion flavor text. 3. He raged, and as a result I would have tried to withdraw and escape until his rage ended. It's contingency #8. With my double move on withdraw behind cover, it's easy for me to escape over time and buff. It is definitely not "easy" to escape over time. First of all, the withdraw action is a full round action - so you won't be able to buff during a withdraw. While you are mounted, he is flying - so he matches your speed. I will adjust the moves until he is able to get an attack against you, because this is in your tactics - but there will be a point when withdrawing is going to provoke - in which case, the horse still dies and you still get tripped. The only question is will this happen before his rage wears off (and even if it does wear off if it will make a difference). 4. I still have a problem with the Cleave feat and magical images. I believe that is not an intended use for cleave. Well, I have always seen the cleave/great cleave feat used in this way. If you can find me in the SRD, FAQ, errata where it has been clarified - I will happily adjust. You'll have to find something that specifically addresses the mirror image though. 5. In round 1 Balbanes could stow the wand, therefore casting spells a round earlier. No - because he doesn't find his opponent until the move action is already completed. He then takes a standard action to use the wand. 6. What does the 3 mean at the end of Krunch's position when he attacks the horse? Sorry - that's just the z dimension of his flight indicating the number of five foot squares up he is. In the case of the 3 - it means he is 15ft above the ground. 7. Was I in range for Hold Person at the start? I would have made my concentration, and he would have failed the save. Why didn't that happen? If you were in range, I would've had you use it. However, after the original move ended at a distance of 170ft or so (check the coordinates if you'd like to know the exact distance). 8. I was trying to stand toe-to-toe with a superior melee combatant. My tactics suggest to not do that unless I am at an advantageous position. Actually, you weren't trying to stand toe-to-toe - you were trying to piece together tactics that were already pretty broken because Krunch broke out of the entangle very quickly. |
| Snommelp11-07-05, 06:10 PM | PS: But one think could really make me edit that again (and definitly give Sam a nother good chance) - Is the follow-up attack from Improved trip against the standing or the prone AC??Unfortunately for me, it's against prone AC, because you hit them before they finish standing up. I'm guessing that with that information, the fight results stand? |
| Maraxus11-07-05, 06:22 PM | I meant the follow-up attack from the feat, not the AoO in the next round. As a pitlord I have the problem, that in P&P I dm very ... randomly, not stricktly after the rules, so here, I do only after the rules. For AoOs, "The attack happens before the action that triggers it." stands (though sometimes this has to bow to causality like in "ready to attack once he is in reach") Just with the attack from the feat I have found nothing, so I took logic (even if the opponent is still falling, this should be no better situation for him than lying on the ground). I also wasn't sure if Yoriko could make follow-up attacks after weapon trips with unarmed strike. I made them with the Kama, like cleave attacks. Thinking about this again, I would allow a greatswort fighter to use his weapon on follow-up attacks after (unarmed) trips, too, so this was probably bad pitlording. But I think the result stands. And since it is half past midnight, I say "Good fight, good night!" and am off. :) |
| TelinArtho11-07-05, 06:25 PM | 3. He raged, and as a result I would have tried to withdraw and escape until his rage ended. It's contingency #8. With my double move on withdraw behind cover, it's easy for me to escape over time and buff. Okay - in round 5, Balbanes withdraws from (-17,10) to (-4,23). Krunch follows him from (-19,9,3) to (-4,23,3). From here, Balbanes cannot withdraw without drawing an AoO. This means you either withdraw (and don't cast from the scroll - and therefore die from the attacks that ensue after the horse is downed and you are tripped or you try to cast from the scroll and eventually die for the same result. |
| Mind Rogue11-07-05, 06:28 PM | *checks this* Oh, the problem is more complicated. *checks the rolls* Looks like I rolled round 10 twice. If you look at the hit points, There are also some damage missing. I allso wrote the second 10th turn, but then, when adding new blank rounds, looks like I also overwrote it. Let me correct that quickly. Edit: About the think with the tie: Yes, I checkt the rules section line for line - twice. Finally, I ruled it that way, because in the grapple section it explicitly states what happens in case of a tie (hight mod, then roll again). Since this does not stand in the trip section, too, I say that in case of a trip this does not count and nothing happens. PS: But one think could really make me edit that again (and definitly give Sam a nother good chance) - Is the follow-up attack from Improved trip against the standing or the prone AC?? PPS: Now, where is Gonbow? Yep, on a tie, whoever has the higher modifier wins. If it is a tie still, you reroll. In this case, it does't really matter, since Yoriko won anyway, so no real need for a fix. |
| Sindorin11-07-05, 06:49 PM | Can someone take my fight? Anixx vs. Kraegin |
| NiQil11-07-05, 06:55 PM | Can someone take my fight? Anixx vs. Kraegin Macbrea volunteered to take it, and already got tactics from Iced and Telin...he has a post in the fight thread with their sheets and tactics and a note stating he would run it when he got home tonight. So yer covered. |
| Gonbow11-07-05, 07:12 PM | PPS: Now, where is Gonbow? My apologizes; I'm here, but I've got a problem. Namely, the computers at my college got infected with some spyware, the cleaning of which involved deleting profiles; like the default student account, underwhich I had saved the half-way finished fight I had this week. Given the fact that I still have a three-hour class to go to, I don't believe I am capable of restarting this fight over again (Casgish vrs Zassl), so I'd like to request that someone else pick up the fight. @Maraxus & Waywreth Again, my apologizes, if you could forward your tactics to whoever picks it up, I'd appreciate it; I'll be online for a little bit further myself and will also do so if I see someone pick it up. |
| SoulLord11-07-05, 08:45 PM | Quick question what was the latest ruling on using a readied action to break LOS by moving away and thus ruin a spell? the rules on gladius say You cannot ready to dodge an incomming attack |
| Cerebus1311-07-05, 10:06 PM | Quick question what was the latest ruling on using a readied action to break LOS by moving away and thus ruin a spell? the rules on gladius sayI imagine this may pertain to my fight so my opinion may be biased but...by definition a spell is considered an attack for the sake of cancelling spells such as Invisiblity, so I assume it would apply to this rule as well. |
| Sindorin11-07-05, 10:15 PM | Macbrea volunteered to take it, and already got tactics from Iced and Telin...he has a post in the fight thread with their sheets and tactics and a note stating he would run it when he got home tonight. So yer covered. Ah, thank you all for covering my arse. |
| SoulLord11-07-05, 10:32 PM | Santos (1079) vs Pirotess (1533) is ready fight (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7696838&postcount=609) |
| nightbanegod11-07-05, 11:03 PM | to parties concerned, running fights right now however i MUST go to bed. fights will be finished and posted around 3pm central (US) time... dunno its GST equivalent... tuesday |
| Gonbow11-08-05, 12:10 AM | Quick question what was the latest ruling on using a readied action to break LOS by moving away and thus ruin a spell? the rules on gladius say I'm not dodging an attack; Moving away happens before he attacks. By the time the attack is going on its too late to dodge/move away... Other pitlords have allowed me to do this, which is why I selected it as a tactic this time. It's a bit late in the week to have a discussion about it though, so unless an Elder would like to chime in, I'll let the modification to my tactics stand. |
| Iced11-08-05, 12:14 AM | Crafting a Forge of Armorsmithing +10 would cost me 5,000gp/1,000xp and 10o right? |
| Cerebus1311-08-05, 12:53 AM | I'm not dodging an attack; Moving away happens before he attacks. By the time the attack is going on its too late to dodge/move away... Other pitlords have allowed me to do this, which is why I selected it as a tactic this time. It's a bit late in the week to have a discussion about it though, so unless an Elder would like to chime in, I'll let the modification to my tactics stand.If that is the way other Pitlords have interpreted it then it needs to be clarified within the rules so that future confusion can be avoided. To me the phrase, "You cannot ready to dodge an incomming attack", applies pretty easily here because a spell is considered an attack. |
| Macbrea11-08-05, 01:31 AM | Anixx vs Kaergin epic battle (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7694112&postcount=607) Hey, would you believe i had to use two posts to post the silly fight. It was 68k characters long. This fight took awhile. If someone would be so kind as to look it over. |
| King Uther11-08-05, 01:44 AM | @Telin Eh, it happens. Honestly, Balbanes wasn't prepared for a speedy melee combatant. A weakness I intended to work on but didn't have time. @ToK Good job, my friend. Good job. @Dice Gods You suck. |
| King Uther11-08-05, 01:57 AM | @Macbrea Anixx vs Kraegin There is one thing in particular you may want to consider. Shatter, the spell, only affects nonmagical things. Anixx's greatsword is a +1 shocking greatsword, meaning it is immune. So, in light of this, the fight will go differently, and not be as long. I will take you through it quickly. In round 3, Anixx would have hit with his diving charge, dealing 5d6+10 damage(All damage doubled except shock). In round 4, Anixx would have crit'd, ending the match. |
| Luni11-08-05, 02:22 AM | I'm not dodging an attack; Moving away happens before he attacks. By the time the attack is going on its too late to dodge/move away... Other pitlords have allowed me to do this, which is why I selected it as a tactic this time. It's a bit late in the week to have a discussion about it though, so unless an Elder would like to chime in, I'll let the modification to my tactics stand. Must be nice. I remember a Pitlord who siad I couldn't ready a tower shield as total cover against an attack. While I don't know the tactics as they are written, I think it is primarily pitlords discretion. |
| King Uther11-08-05, 03:06 AM | @Macbrea and SoulLord Fights will be up tomorrow on my lunch break. Sorry for the delay. Athough, I have to admit, pitting Gorak vs two monsters with 5 hp and no possible ranged attack seems a little funny. And Vandelar will probably crush the salamanders, barring any unluckiness. |
| Tellish_of_Ket11-08-05, 04:23 AM | @King: I have to admit, both times i faced you, both times the dice seem to just give up on ya. I hate winning by dice, but sometimes it happens. @Soullord: I noticed something right at the end of the fight. I didn't read the whole thing, just skimmed to see who won. A confirmation to crit uses ALL the previous rolls bonuses, including true strike. So anything but a 1! would have confirmed the crit. just fyi. @Ready to dodge an Attack/spell: We have house ruled, this isn't possible. Otherwise we return to the days of tactics that include nothing but readies, making like for the pitlord immensly painful. About the only exception to this i know is riding out of reach of a sleep spell, but only because you can do it on your standard action before the spell is cast, not through an actual ready. * You cannot take a free 5ft step as part of your ready action. * A ready action must be specifically defined. There must be a concrete trigger and a concrete action. * A ready action must be a basic non-exotic action. * You cannot ready to dodge an incomming attack. -ToK |
| Macbrea11-08-05, 09:03 AM | @Macbrea and SoulLord Fights will be up tomorrow on my lunch break. Sorry for the delay. Athough, I have to admit, pitting Gorak vs two monsters with 5 hp and no possible ranged attack seems a little funny. And Vandelar will probably crush the salamanders, barring any unluckiness. Yeah, that is what I was thinking. They are also cr 1/2s. My minimum damage is 5. This means I will kill them on a 12+ on the die. My guess will be Expended 4 arrows 1 recovered, +300xp/+300gp. Can I vote for them to be warriors? :P |
| TelinArtho11-08-05, 10:16 AM | @Macbrea Anixx vs Kraegin There is one thing in particular you may want to consider. Shatter, the spell, only affects nonmagical things. Anixx's greatsword is a +1 shocking greatsword, meaning it is immune. So, in light of this, the fight will go differently, and not be as long. I will take you through it quickly. In round 3, Anixx would have hit with his diving charge, dealing 5d6+10 damage(All damage doubled except shock). In round 4, Anixx would have crit'd, ending the match. Wish I had noticed that about shatter. Oh well - that's what I get for not checking it thoroughly... /d |
| SoulLord11-08-05, 10:29 AM | @Soullord: I noticed something right at the end of the fight. I didn't read the whole thing, just skimmed to see who won. A confirmation to crit uses ALL the previous rolls bonuses, including true strike. So anything but a 1! would have confirmed the crit. just fyi. -ToK Ouch I thought that the confirm roll didn't carry over things like true strike and charge bonus. I'll update it to add the +20 for true strike then. |
| Maraxus11-08-05, 10:37 AM | My apologizes; I'm here, but I've got a problem. Namely, the computers at my college got infected with some spyware, the cleaning of which involved deleting profiles; like the default student account, underwhich I had saved the half-way finished fight I had this week. Given the fact that I still have a three-hour class to go to, I don't believe I am capable of restarting this fight over again (Casgish vrs Zassl), so I'd like to request that someone else pick up the fight. @Maraxus & Waywreth Again, my apologizes, if you could forward your tactics to whoever picks it up, I'd appreciate it; I'll be online for a little bit further myself and will also do so if I see someone pick it up. I second this. :) Btw, do we at least get a loses's XP/GP, if the fight does not happen at all? |
| Iced11-08-05, 10:49 AM | Sweet another victory for both the Dire Flame and the East Wind of Death! :evillaugh Soon my minions will rule Gladius and topple the harvester off of his shadowy seat! :plotting: |
| Tellish_of_Ket11-08-05, 11:11 AM | :evillaugh Soon my minions will rule Gladius and topple the harvester off of his shadowy seat! :plotting: Until you run into Krunch!! lol -ToK |
| Guildmaster (EHTC)11-08-05, 11:14 AM | Why does the Harvester sit on a shadowy seat? Can't he afford a gold one with the hundreds of thousands of gold pieces he should have? |
| TelinArtho11-08-05, 12:03 PM | These are the remaining fights. Both Nightbanegod and King Uther have said that they they will have their fights posted and Gonbow already said that he would not be able to complete the fight. Level 3 Jessie (Oldmangray) vs Kracknol (SauroGrenom): Nightbanegod Donak (Mal-2) vs Delaria (TelinArtho): Nightbanegod Gorak Razorfang (Macbrea) vs 2 Formian Workers [Monster]: King Uther Level 4 Zassl (Maraxus) vs Casgish Darath (Waywreth): Gonbow TelinArtho Level 7 Vandelar the Red (SoulLord) vs 4 Flamebrother Salamander [Monster]: King Uther So if Maraxus and Waywreth or Gonbow can send me the tactics - I'll get the remaining fight finished up. |
| TelinArtho11-08-05, 12:31 PM | @MacBrea - you know - I was just looking over the fight for Kraegin vs Anixx and there is a problem and I would like it resolved. Here's the lines of tactics that I'm looking at: If at any point, he gets within range of shatter (40ft), cast Shatter on his greatsword. If shatter doesn't work - follow it up with a sanctuary and start summoning creatures (centipedes if he is not flying - appropriate flying creatures if he is). If he breaks through the sanctuary, start bringing in spiritual weapons. Once the spiritual weapons are out, spontaneously cast inflict spells of the highest levels that I can. Shatter didn't work and you followed it up with a Spiritual Weapon. However, if you notice the above, you'll see that I wanted Sanctuary up so that I could summon some creatures. I would appreciate it if the fight was modified to take this into account. |
| King Uther11-08-05, 03:12 PM | Gorak vs the Formians (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7702074&postcount=611) is up. A 3 round shocker. It's funny that a 5hp enemy has Cure Serious Wounds. |
| Mal-211-08-05, 03:22 PM | It's funny that a 5hp enemy has Cure Serious Wounds. It's because the formians are designed to come in mixed groups: a bunch of workers, some warriors and a taskmaster, for instance. IIRC, it takes eight workers in concert to use Cure Serious Wounds. |
| King Uther11-08-05, 03:29 PM | Yeah, but think about it. Cannon Fodder healers. |
| King Uther11-08-05, 03:37 PM | Vandelar the Red vs 4 Flamebrother Salamanders (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7702318&postcount=612) is up. Sonic Fireballs? Nice. |
| Macbrea11-08-05, 03:43 PM | Anixx vs Kraegin was edited to take in account of tactics I failed to follow. I followed them to the letter this time taking numbers as they came up. Because this fight was edited two times it amounted to far more time then nessessary on any fight. Anyways, all numbers such as d20, d8 and d6 were taken in order of how they were rolled and modifiers applied then. There is one case in which I held off using the number until it came up. That was the 2d8 roll. I waited until an item that did 1d8 critted and at that point I took those die rols. If anyone has a disagreement with this fight, I will ask another Pitlord to please rerun the whole fight. |
| TelinArtho11-08-05, 03:56 PM | @Macbrea - unfortunately, despite my recorded win in this instance, the fight still has errors. Also, rolls that are made are supposed to be kept thematically (so a successful attack roll should have been applied to an attack, etc). It appears to me that the saving throw for the sanctuary was the crit that was originally rolled - but beyond that I think the fight is a little confusing. Also, an opponent only gets one saving throw vs sanctuary. If he succeeds - that casting of the spell is ineffective; if he fails, it prevents him for the duration. It is not a saving throw made each round. @Iced - I'd be willing to have the fight extended a week in order to correct these errors - as I'm sure you are not going to be happy with the result as is, and apparently Macbrea doesn't have the time to rerun it. Is this acceptable to you? |
| Iced11-08-05, 04:31 PM | @TelinArtho - yes it is acceptable to me. Let's re-run next week. |
| Macbrea11-08-05, 04:34 PM | In truth, I think at this point if I edit the fight for round 3 and 4 differently I would get a mess. I would suggest a different pitlord rerun the fight as obviously I screwed that one up. I won't have time to run it tonight. And either result screws the player. The only result that is useful to the players is a complete rerun of the whole fight. |
| Iced11-08-05, 04:35 PM | I updated Anixx's sheet after the second version of the fight and purchased a potion of invisibility. The only other changes were in my gp and xp totals and should not affect the fight. I'll keep it as is and not use the potion of invisibility next week. (So it's less work when I beat you of course...;)) |
| TelinArtho11-08-05, 04:35 PM | Okay then, I had already edited Kraegin for the loss originally - so it will be easy to restore him to his previous state. Once there, the new pitlord will receive new tactics from us. See you next week then. I'll PM Pitlords and let him know that we are re-running the fight next week. |
| TelinArtho11-08-05, 04:37 PM | I updated Anixx's sheet after the second version of the fight and purchased a potion of invisibility. The only other changes were in my gp and xp totals and should not affect the fight. I'll keep it as is and not use the potion of invisibility next week. (So it's less work when I beat you of course...;)) That's all good - the only thing I had added from the fight was a newly crafted PoP (1st) - so there's nothing there. I will still restore my character to his pre-fight values though, since they were recorded before the fight anyway. |
| Usurpator11-08-05, 04:38 PM | Okay then, I had already edited Kraegin for the loss originally - so it will be easy to restore him to his previous state. Once there, the new pitlord will receive new tactics from us. See you next week then. I'll PM Pitlords and let him know that we are re-running the fight next week. Too bad about all the editing. I already had half a Gladius Weekly article made up. Something about Kragein's deadly crossbow. It had like an average of 8 damage (on 1d10) over 20 shots or so. :) |
| TelinArtho11-08-05, 04:53 PM | My character has been reset to his prefight status. I have also sent the PM to Pitlords to have the fight rerun and reassigned next week. @Usurpator - well, sometimes these things happen. You can always pick up coverage on one of my 70+ round fights - they always are fun... or if you want to talk about average rolls - take a look at Aquin's fight. His average d20 roll is in the order of 8. |
| TelinArtho11-08-05, 05:39 PM | Zassl (Maraxus) vs Casgish Darath (Waywreth): Gonbow TelinArtho Okay - Gonbow has sent me the tactics for the fight. I'll get it done before pairings - probably tonight or tomorrow morning. |
| nightbanegod11-08-05, 05:42 PM | ARG.... kracknol vs jesse is getting surprise plot twists (and really bad rolls) and is lasting longer than anticipated... could someone take up Donak (Mal-2) vs Delaria (TelinArtho): ??? last post of page 20 in the battles thread... tactics and character sheets |
| Iced11-08-05, 05:48 PM | @NBG - I'll take Donak (Mal-2) vs Delaria (TelinArtho) ~Iced |
| Maraxus11-08-05, 06:08 PM | Zassl (Maraxus) vs Casgish Darath (Waywreth): Gonbow TelinArtho Okay - Gonbow has sent me the tactics for the fight. I'll get it done before pairings - probably tonight or tomorrow morning. A big, dwarven :cheer:. ;) Go, TelinArtho, go. :D |
| Iced11-08-05, 06:53 PM | Donak vs Delaria (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7704057&postcount=613) is up in the fights thread |
| nightbanegod11-08-05, 09:15 PM | i apologize about its tardyness but kracknol vs Jesse is semi finished... please message me any errors and i will try and fix them ASAP THE FIGHT (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7688094&postcount=601) |
| TelinArtho11-08-05, 09:41 PM | Donak vs Delaria (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7704057&postcount=613) is up in the fights thread Thanks for running it. Eventually I'll learn to start buffing myself and hoping that my allies get in more than one attack... /d |
| TelinArtho11-09-05, 12:15 AM | Casgish vs Zassl (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7706717) Both tactics could use a little work - though Casgish was the more difficult one to work with. First of all, he gives his familiar some things to hold and never mentions him again. Second of all, he mentions nothing about moving at all. Anyway - the fight would have been a simple win I think - if Zassl had made his save... |
| Maraxus11-09-05, 03:38 AM | ...or Casgish had not made his concentration check for casting while suffering continious damage. ;) ...Hm, if you have time, you could change this, if not, I have no problem with another loose because I Level up anyway, and that's only DC13 with a +10 modifier - he probably get's it anyway. Hey, more chance to turn this fight comes from the fact, that the blinding of the color spray lasts only 1 round, so until just before his next action - round 13, when he shoots me, I do no longer get the -2AC for invisible attacker, making my AC 19 (attack 17 means no hit then). And likewise, in round 14, I'm still stunned in my action but not in his, so I get back my dex and that stunned -2 goes away, too, so my AC is my "sky-high" 25 and his 22 would not have hit. |
| Vathelokai11-09-05, 03:51 AM | @ Tellish_of_Ket: Auburn [Vathelokai] vs The First Horseman: War [Nightbanegod] I was looking at it again... Auburn WINS [+1200xp][+1200gp] USED: Scorching ray (x2), Magic missile (CL 1), mage armour, expeditious retreat Horseman LOST [+600xp][+600gp] USED: Nothing. Horseman had a mount, so I should be getting higher rewards, and I'm pretty sure Horseman's rewards are off. |
| Tellish_of_Ket11-09-05, 04:06 AM | @ Tellish_of_Ket: I was looking at it again... Horseman had a mount, so I should be getting higher rewards, and I'm pretty sure Horseman's rewards are off. Auburn WINS [+1350xp][+1350gp] USED: Scorching ray (x2), Magic missile (CL 1), mage armour, expeditious retreat Horseman LOST [+350xp][+350gp] USED: Nothing. Oops. Proper amounts adjusted in. -ToK |
| TelinArtho11-09-05, 09:45 AM | ...or Casgish had not made his concentration check for casting while suffering continious damage. ;) ...Hm, if you have time, you could change this, if not, I have no problem with another loose because I Level up anyway, and that's only DC13 with a +10 modifier - he probably get's it anyway. Hey, more chance to turn this fight comes from the fact, that the blinding of the color spray lasts only 1 round, so until just before his next action - round 13, when he shoots me, I do no longer get the -2AC for invisible attacker, making my AC 19 (attack 17 means no hit then). And likewise, in round 14, I'm still stunned in my action but not in his, so I get back my dex and that stunned -2 goes away, too, so my AC is my "sky-high" 25 and his 22 would not have hit. I forgot to roll the concentration, 28 (http://invisiblecastle.com/find.py?id=184486) - so that's ok. Now on the blindness and stunning - I think you might be right. It lasts for one round, ending just before his action in round 13 - so yes - that's right, his AC should be 19. Likewise in round 14. Alright - I will try to adjust the fight today - we'll just have to see how my time goes today. |
| TelinArtho11-09-05, 10:18 AM | Okay - the fight's been edited and the result changed for Zassl and Casgish. |