| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| Sindorin04-27-05, 12:28 PM | Please remember to BE NICE!!! Tactics are due FRIDAY!!! Fights are due MONDAY!!! DON'T FORGET!!! Everyone, have a nice week/weekend. |
| Sindorin04-27-05, 03:01 PM | Do you hear that? That is the sound of the editing deadline, for it is upon us. STOP EDITING YOUR SHEETS!!! |
| Jindl04-27-05, 03:03 PM | Do you hear that? That is the sound of the editing deadline, for it is upon us. STOP EDITING YOUR SHEETS!!! Um, I thought it was at 4 pm EST ... which is an hour away? |
| Sindorin04-27-05, 03:08 PM | Is it? last week it was now... DST really messes things up... |
| Pitlords04-27-05, 03:28 PM | Last week it was 23 hours later. You still have half an hour. |
| Sindorin04-27-05, 03:47 PM | That makes sense... this is what happens when i try to pay too much attention :) |
| Pitlords04-27-05, 05:29 PM | PAIRINGS DONE Send your tactics early to your pitlord Pitlords should run their fights as soon as they have the tactics Pitlords may begin running fights without tactics on saturday Fights due Tuesday 8 AM GMT. Late penalties after that, plus you lose your gained credit Another negative credit if you don't post the fight at all If you cannot run your fight, tell us so that it can be reassigned. No penalties in that case. Have fun Credit Changes: +3: Kaigan, Jindl +2: Xanadu, Cerebus, Zyme, Salrantol +1: Tagg, Mutilate, Jstorrie, KingsideBishop +0: Huan, Cat, Spash Credits for running fights: +3: Kaigan +2: Spash, Xanadu, Cerebus, Zyme, Salrantol +1: Jindl, Huan, Tagg, Mutilate, Jstorrie, KingsideBishop Credits for quests: +2: Jindl -1: Huan, Spash Credits for active PCs: -1: Cat, Spash Special credits: +1: Cat (GM) The Vacuum Elemental Online Roller is down so I used another one: Nadaka's Dice Box (http://www14.brinkster.com/nadaka/DiceBoxDB.asp?Page=Find&By=Name&Value=LivingGladius), probably from Russia :D Search for "Living Gladius" There's not much to say this week except welcome back Cellardweller and GOOD LUCK to everyone! Cat |
| Jindl04-27-05, 05:52 PM | @spash - Would you roll init for both fights? @Sindorin - Um, I'll tell you if JotHF will bring his mount, if you'll tell me if Ceres is bringing his mount... -Jindl |
| spasheridan04-27-05, 05:58 PM | @Cat: Finael's fight is extended from last week so I only have 2 active PCs this week, not 3. I should gain a Cr instead of breaking even. @Jindl: Lemme get home, I don't have die rolling links here at work. About 4 more hours. |
| Snommelp04-27-05, 06:20 PM | Daka is still in violation, and now he's my opponent, so forgive me if I proceed to raise Hell. Since this violation takes away all of Daka's weapons but his spears, I think I should probably be nice and let him use normal versions of the weapons instead. Does that seem fair? |
| Huan04-27-05, 06:28 PM | @Jindl Tactics for Nell have been PMed. |
| Jindl04-27-05, 06:32 PM | @Jindl Tactics for Nell have been PMed. Got 'em. |
| Zyme8604-27-05, 06:54 PM | Just like your character's helm, the violating item was lost and will be recovered in the black market |
| Pitlords04-27-05, 07:11 PM | @Cat: Finael's fight is extended from last week so I only have 2 active PCs this week, not 3. I should gain a Cr instead of breaking even. Ok sorry |
| Megrim_Lord04-27-05, 08:49 PM | ok... I stayed up until 1 am on monday to ensure Trokk would be ready for this week, only to find out that he isn't fighting... i feel kind of cheated... |
| Salrantol04-27-05, 09:45 PM | I see a lot of characters with "psionic focus" as a prebuff--it was my understanding that psionic focus was obtained by a DC20 concentration check, and many of these characters lack the capacity for such via the "take 10 on all skills" rule, not having +10 to Concentration. Is there (a) another way to obtaion psionic focus or (b) an arena houserule that overrides that limitation? |
| Jindl04-27-05, 09:48 PM | I see a lot of characters with "psionic focus" as a prebuff--it was my understanding that psionic focus was obtained by a DC20 concentration check, and many of these characters lack the capacity for such via the "take 10 on all skills" rule, not having +10 to Concentration. Is there (a) another way to obtaion psionic focus or (b) an arena houserule that overrides that limitation? Nah, they are taking 20, which is allowed because there is no penalty for failure. |
| Salrantol04-27-05, 09:58 PM | Daka is still in violation, and now he's my opponent, so forgive me if I proceed to raise Hell. Since this violation takes away all of Daka's weapons but his spears, I think I should probably be nice and let him use normal versions of the weapons instead. Does that seem fair? Just like your character's helm, the violating item was lost and will be recovered in the black market I don't think the problem is so much with the item itself, but the fact that without the "Hammer of +3 craft wepons", you don't have the requisite skill to create many of your items--specifically, "MW H.Flail" & "MW Adamantine Greatsword". Since you can't afford to have the adamantine greatsword without crafting it yourself [and you can't craft it yourself without the magic hammer], it is reasonable to conclude that you would not then have it for the fight. She is offering to allow you to use a non-adamantine version of that same weapon (since, without making the adamantine sword, you could afford a masterwork heavy flail and masterwork greatsword easily) just for now until you have paid the requisite credits in the Blackmarket. By the way, to both of you: Getting me tactics early is good, I'll have time to run it tomorrow if I have your tactics :) |
| Salrantol04-27-05, 10:02 PM | Thank you, Jindl, for the clarification. @bgt & @Malither76: Getting me tactics early is good. I'll have plenty of time tomorrow to run your fight, so it'll get posted nice and early, letting you update before the deadline for updating characters. @King Uther: My fight results were posted this morning (and I contested them for a while), so I did not get a chance to update my character sheet. Are you OK with me presuming to have replaced my expended items to the status listed on the sheet (excepting the 2 arrows, since they're purchased in 20s) and deducting that same amount from my compensation for my last fight? |
| Salrantol04-27-05, 10:17 PM | ok... I stayed up until 1 am on monday to ensure Trokk would be ready for this week, only to find out that he isn't fighting... i feel kind of cheated... Trokk The Eviscerator, Ready For 04/20/05 ECL 4-5 I think the mystery is solved. |
| Sindorin04-27-05, 10:24 PM | @spash - Would you roll init for both fights? @Sindorin - Um, I'll tell you if JotHF will bring his mount, if you'll tell me if Ceres is bringing his mount... -Jindl Yes, Ceres is likely bringing his mount, depending on what you say of JotHF bringing his ;). |
| spasheridan04-27-05, 11:00 PM | @spash - Would you roll init for both fights?l Eniolissaryn the Elder (Jindl) vs Sokai Calanis (Sindorin): Spasheridan Enio Init: 13+ Sokai Init: 19+ Jindl of the High Forest (Jindl) vs Ceres Solus (Sindorin): Spasheridan Jindl Init: 5+ Ceres Init: 4+ You can find the plusses yerself, I'm watchin my next DVD of Bab 5. Netflix roxors |
| Sunwolf04-28-05, 12:16 AM | @Capt Mutilate -- tactics for Telveran sent by email and PM |
| King Uther04-28-05, 01:05 AM | That's cool, Salrantol. I don't mind if you do that. You can replace the items you used as long as no one else minds. I think that's totally fair. @Cerebus13 tactics for Virgo sent via PM @KingsideBishop tactics for Cyalin sent via PM |
| Zyme8604-28-05, 01:08 AM | You can find the plusses yerself, I'm watchin my next DVD of Bab 5. Netflix roxors OH ya, I'm going through stargate right now, plan to start on Bab 5 or Startreck NG next (right after Beserk) |
| Snommelp04-28-05, 03:19 AM | <SNIP> Precisely. I'm a "he," by the way, not a "she." I know the long hair is confusing, and I'm trying to find a new picture for the World thread. Tactics are going to be sent within the next five minutes. |
| Salrantol04-28-05, 07:36 AM | Precisely. I'm a "he," by the way, not a "she." I know the long hair is confusing, and I'm trying to find a new picture for the World thread. Tactics are going to be sent within the next five minutes. Well, that explains the moustache... tactics received |
| Pittbull04-28-05, 07:58 AM | Hagird II's and Laph's tactic has been sent to their pitlords via E-Mail. |
| Salrantol04-28-05, 08:06 AM | @Malither76: Tactics received |
| Megrim_Lord04-28-05, 08:30 AM | I think the mystery is solved. ... DAMMIT!!! :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: I don't suppose I could still get a fight providing I could find an opponent |
| Jindl04-28-05, 09:04 AM | Yes, Ceres is likely bringing his mount, depending on what you say of JotHF bringing his ;). JotHF wasn't planning on bringing his mount. Is is safe to assume that Ceres will not be bringing his either? |
| Caterane04-28-05, 10:00 AM | @Megrim Lord: Trokk was not set ready for the 27th but for the 20th and that was last week. I don't cheat anyone; in the worst case I overlook something but that can always be corrected. I know I give a different impression but even I am only human :D You're lucky though. Bael'ryl Mythus (Kaigan) has been rolled out so if you want to fight him, send a PM to Pitlords. |
| Huan04-28-05, 10:05 AM | ... I are only human ... "I are only human", eh? Indeed... I dunno, it's early in the morning for me, I'm not in my right mind atm, and I found that humorous, heh heh. :P Anyway... @Cellardweller Tactics for Janelle received, thank you. |
| Cerebus1304-28-05, 10:43 AM | @Captain Mutilate - Deedlit's tactics have been sent via email, 2 of them because I amended the first :P @Zyme86 - Guts' tactics have been sent via email @Caterane - Mer-Man's tactics received @King Uther - Virgo Arkazzan's tactics received @Salrantol - Horthek Bolgimzak's tactics received @Kaigan - Still need Aeluath Dryearraheal's tactics, and then I'll have everything for this week. |
| Sindorin04-28-05, 12:21 PM | JotHF wasn't planning on bringing his mount. Is is safe to assume that Ceres will not be bringing his either? Ceres will be bringing the mount - he needs every chance he can get against you ;). |
| xanadu04-28-05, 12:44 PM | Still waiting on tactics for The Gatekeeper and Damon Tharkis. |
| Caterane04-28-05, 01:06 PM | "I are only human", eh? Indeed... I dunno, it's early in the morning for me, I'm not in my right mind atm, and I found that humorous, heh heh. :P Huan: -50 credits. I had something else there first and forgot to change "are". Hey! I make less mistakes than some of you native speakers!! :P |
| Sindorin04-28-05, 01:21 PM | Well, that really depends on if we speak English, or if we speak American. Two very ranting sets of tactics for Ceres vs. JotHF and Sokai vs. The Elder have been sent by PM to Spasheridan. Good luck Jindl! :) |
| Caterane04-28-05, 01:31 PM | That sounds like an austrian saying he speaks austrian :P |
| Sindorin04-28-05, 01:35 PM | That sounds like an austrian saying he speaks austrian :P :rofl: Even then, there are some Americans that I just cannot understand... it's funny. I'm told my German accent is very southern. I had two teachers over three years - the first one taught us southern, and the second, who I disliked, tried to change everything around and make us learn Hoch Deutsch. I sometimes speak a mixture of both by accident, but I feel that it is easier to speak southern - it just rolls off of the tongue better. |
| Megrim_Lord04-28-05, 01:54 PM | @Megrim Lord: Trokk was not set ready for the 27th but for the 20th and that was last week. I don't cheat anyone; in the worst case I overlook something but that can always be corrected. I know I give a different impression but even I are only human :D You're lucky though. Bael'ryl Mythus (Kaigan) has been rolled out so if you want to fight him, send a PM to Pitlords. I know, it was my fault, stupid me If Kaigan wants Bael and trokk to have a rematch that's fine with me |
| Caterane04-28-05, 01:56 PM | I speak High German; Pittbull probably too (he's from Hannover) Tactics for Indri sent. |
| Pitlords04-28-05, 02:02 PM | Trokk (Megrim Lord) vs Bael'ryl Mythus (Kaigan): Zyme86 has been added to the Roster. Kaigan-1, Zyme+1 |
| Huan04-28-05, 02:13 PM | Huan: -50 credits. I had something else there first and forgot to change "are". Hey! I make less mistakes than some of you native speakers!! :P Aww... how harsh; you wound me... but it was all in good fun, you know. I was actually not poking fun at the grammatical error, so much as HOW you said it. ;) I take it the subtle humor was not recieved, meh. :rolleyes: (Trust me, you DO speak better English than most Americans, though) And tactics for Indri recieved, thank you. |
| TaggIIV04-28-05, 04:49 PM | Tactics for Gatekeeper PMd to xanadu. Also, tactics for Nyphanalith were PMd to Kaigan yesterday |
| Salrantol04-28-05, 05:36 PM | Brogan Galanodel vs. Gareth Irontower (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?p=6053579#post6053579) is up. @Zyme86: When I get your tactics for Daka, I can run your fight. |
| Zyme8604-28-05, 06:20 PM | @Salrantol tatics sent |
| Zyme8604-28-05, 06:29 PM | waiting for tatics: Trokk (Megrim Lord) Bael'ryl Mythus (Kaigan) Hisoka the Clown (Salzorin) Brilf Zephyr (Sunwolf) Please send by friday night(not early saterday morn) |
| Pittbull04-28-05, 07:19 PM | I speak High German; Pittbull probably too (he's from Hannover) OH, no! I was born in Freiburg and live in Bavaria. I'm able to speak Bavarian (Southern Dialect), High German and some other dialects which are pretty secret, but I would be happy to speak English as good as CAT! |
| Megrim_Lord04-28-05, 07:58 PM | Trokk's tactics sent via pm |
| Salzorin04-28-05, 08:11 PM | sorry about the delay on hisoka's tactics zyme.... been vexing over them for a while now. I should have them done and sent within a few hours. |
| Kingside_Bishop04-28-05, 09:03 PM | @King Uther: Cyalin's tactics recieved, still waiting for Inquisitor Valorum's. |
| Salrantol04-28-05, 10:27 PM | Ack! A problem (not like it changed the turnout of the match or anything, just an immunity to the match-winning spell) in the Brogan/Gareth fight--I'll fix it after I get done with my other fight, where the tactics are basically "I only want to fight on my terms" and I have to try to avoid penalizing either of them because they're both doing it. :surrender |
| Salrantol04-28-05, 10:43 PM | Question: DMG says a Quaal's Feather Token (whip) "wields itself against any opponent desired just like a dancing weapon (see page 224)". SRD says a dancing weapon "fights for 4 rounds using the base attack bonus of the one who loosed it and then drops." So does the whip stop fighting after 4 rounds? A dancing weapon also "takes up the same space as the activating character", so what happens if, while grappling, the whip is moved away from its owner (via successful grapple check, etc.)? Thanks. |
| Zyme8604-28-05, 10:57 PM | When you loose a wip token, It fights using it's bonuses for 4 rounds then drops useless. If someone moves, it brings everything with it or the grapple ends. The grappeling wip has a 10ft reach so the person would have to move at least ten feet away from the grappled opponent of the grapple ends |
| Sunwolf04-28-05, 11:11 PM | @Zyme tactics for Brilf sent by PM |
| Salzorin04-29-05, 12:06 AM | @Zyme: Tactics for Hisoka the Clown have been sent |
| Snommelp04-29-05, 01:24 AM | Ack! A problem (not like it changed the turnout of the match or anything, just an immunity to the match-winning spell) in the Brogan/Gareth fight--I'll fix it after I get done with my other fight, where the tactics are basically "I only want to fight on my terms" and I have to try to avoid penalizing either of them because they're both doing it. :surrender Yeah... I completely forgot about the central obstacle when writing my tactics, and Daka wants to embed himself there. I would send an add-on to my tactics, but seeing as I've seen Daka's tactics that would definitely be cheating on my part. I should start adding a line to the end of my tactics: "If the above tactics fall apart, improvise while trying to follow the spirit of the tactics." |
| Salrantol04-29-05, 07:40 AM | "If the above tactics fall apart, improvise while trying to follow the spirit of the tactics." That's pretty much what I'm doing, since there's essentially no way for you to force Daka out to where you can charge him (and the line "avoid charges at all costs" is easily followed). Basically, I'm gonna put the two of you in melee combat (a situation disadvantageous to you) via means that are disadvantageous to him. Hopefully, things will balance out. :gah: Although, a question with regards to that--I asked part of it already, but there are complications. Let's say, hypothetically speaking of course ;) , that a mounted combatant is grappled by a whip token, and guides his horse to move with his knees (Ride DC5). Does he need to succeed on an opposed grapple check to move the whip with him? Can the whip even stop him? Is it Ride vs. whip's grapple? And who's the crackhound at Wizards that decided that 500gp is fair for an item that grapples with a +15 modifier? (equivalent of 18STR+Improved Grapple+7BAB!!) By the way, Snommelp, I hadn't actually seen your picture when I used the word "she", I was going by your avatar, which I looked at more closely after you said something and saw was, in fact, male (thus the "moustache" crack). Your picture didn't look overly feminine (to me anyway). |
| Cerebus1304-29-05, 09:32 AM | ECL 3 - Virgo Arkazzan vs Horthek Bolgimzak (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6060017&postcount=1508) is up. I did what I could with the given tactics but Salrantol didn't anticipate him using invisibility so I had to improvise... The choice came down to moving randomly or spending move actions to spot/listen. I tried the spot/listen tactic and unbelievably Virgo was able to creep up close without making any noise. Lemme know if there are any mistakes or if you have any questions. |
| Sunwolf04-29-05, 11:14 AM | @bgt Brogan Galanodel can't have the Undetectable Alignment spell because it is a Bard, Cleric or Paladin spell and not on the Wiz/Sor list. |
| Snommelp04-29-05, 12:45 PM | Although, a question with regards to that--I asked part of it already, but there are complications. Let's say, hypothetically speaking of course ;) , that a mounted combatant is grappled by a whip token, and guides his horse to move with his knees (Ride DC5). Does he need to succeed on an opposed grapple check to move the whip with him? Can the whip even stop him? Is it Ride vs. whip's grapple? And who's the crackhound at Wizards that decided that 500gp is fair for an item that grapples with a +15 modifier? (equivalent of 18STR+Improved Grapple+7BAB!!) You may not want to listen to me, seeing as I am one of the people involved, but I would say that it would be opposed aided strength checks. Quixote (aided by Rozinante) pulling against the whip (aided by Daka). This only comes into play if Quixote is trying to move outside of the reach of the weapon (10 feet? 15?), but if he manages to pull the weapon away from Daka, it stops dancing, I think. Or maybe it would be an aided disarm attempt... Anyways, seeing as it's only a 4 round item, I suppose 500 gp is acceptable. |
| spasheridan04-29-05, 01:12 PM | Although, a question with regards to that--I asked part of it already, but there are complications. Let's say, hypothetically speaking of course ;) , that a mounted combatant is grappled by a whip token, and guides his horse to move with his knees (Ride DC5). Does he need to succeed on an opposed grapple check to move the whip with him? Can the whip even stop him? Is it Ride vs. whip's grapple? And who's the crackhound at Wizards that decided that 500gp is fair for an item that grapples with a +15 modifier? (equivalent of 18STR+Improved Grapple+7BAB!!)I would imagine that: A) A person who is grappled may ONLY take actions detailed under "actions while grappled" b) Ride checsk are NOT listed under "actions whiled grapples" c) If I was a super generous DM I would require the grappled person to beat the grapple check of the whip to attempt to make a ride check, but since you would have to beat the grapple check to escpae it's the same thing. SO, by the rules, I see no way for a grappled person to make a ride check. |
| Salrantol04-29-05, 02:58 PM | I did what I could with the given tactics but Salrantol didn't anticipate him using invisibility so I had to improvise... The choice came down to moving randomly or spending move actions to spot/listen. I tried the spot/listen tactic and unbelievably Virgo was able to creep up close without making any noise. Not entirely accurate. I did anticipate him using invisibility. It wasn't in the tactics because there was basically nothing I could do about it with what I have on the character. This week I'll have time to update (read: buy potions of see invisible), so next time might be different. |
| Salrantol04-29-05, 03:04 PM | Corrected version of Brogan vs. Gareth is up (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?p=6053579#post6053579) by the way. |
| Cerebus1304-29-05, 03:06 PM | Not entirely accurate. I did anticipate him using invisibility. It wasn't in the tactics because there was basically nothing I could do about it with what I have on the character. This week I'll have time to update (read: buy potions of see invisible), so next time might be different. Unfortunately Potions of See Invisible don't exist in the DMG and the CoCo doesn't allow custom Potions/Oils of Spells that have a range of "Personal" :(. |
| King Uther04-29-05, 04:43 PM | I actually have a potion of see invisibility on my character sheet, something I feel that should be allowed, otherwise greater invisibilty would be kill every character who doesn't have access to the spell or scroll. If I am told to exchange that out by someone with authority, I will. But then every arcane caster needs to pick up both greater invisibility and silence, rendering listen checks worthless. |
| Cerebus1304-29-05, 04:49 PM | I actually have a potion of see invisibility on my character sheet, something I feel that should be allowed, otherwise greater invisibilty would be kill every character who doesn't have access to the spell or scroll. If I am told to exchange that out by someone with authority, I will. But then every arcane caster needs to pick up both greater invisibility and silence, rendering listen checks worthless. Greater Invisibility is balanced because it only lasts 1 rnd/level. The means it only lasts 7 rounds at the min CL to cast it (CL of 7). Silence isn't the best thing in the world for casters because a ton of spells rely on verbal components. The Silent Spell feat can get around this, but it's still a feat spent and it increases spell level by 1. |
| spasheridan04-29-05, 04:50 PM | I actually have a potion of see invisibility on my character sheet, something I feel that should be allowed, otherwise greater invisibilty would be kill every character who doesn't have access to the spell or scroll. If I am told to exchange that out by someone with authority, I will. But then every arcane caster needs to pick up both greater invisibility and silence, rendering listen checks worthless.On this topic, once improved invis rears it's ugly head.. if we require LOS for any ranged attack the improved invis protected mage can now levitate / spider climb invisibly and fire arrows, and no one can do anything to stop it unless they are also a spell caster. Maybe invisibility should be banned from the arena... The term my group uses is NND, or No Natural Defense. In other words, if there is a power out there that REQUIRES another power out there to overcome, then that power is NND because some players will be playing normals (fighters, monks, rogues). Sure, there are the save or dies, but at least the normal can purchase a save booster or a potion to increase their saves. Well, maybe banning invis is a poor idea, but my point remains. In a 4 PC vs monster scenario all that the 4 PC's require is that 1 of them can overcome the NND ability of the opponent. In the 1 PC v 1 PC scenario the NND power and the NND counter are usually tied up in the same PC, so the wizard can cast invisibility and see invisibility. Just a thought. |
| Cerebus1304-29-05, 04:54 PM | On this topic, once improved invis rears it's ugly head.. if we require LOS for any ranged attack the improved invis protected mage can now levitate / spider climb invisibly and fire arrows, and no one can do anything to stop it unless they are also a spell caster. Maybe invisibility should be banned from the arena...Didn't we already agree that it would be more balanced to not require LOS for ranged attacks? :P |
| Jindl04-29-05, 04:56 PM | On this topic, once improved invis rears it's ugly head.. if we require LOS for any ranged attack the improved invis protected mage can now levitate / spider climb invisibly and fire arrows, and no one can do anything to stop it unless they are also a spell caster. Maybe invisibility should be banned from the arena... As the main person who was argueing the LOS rule, I have already agreed that it is reasonable to allow archers to fire a ranged weapon at the square they believe the target to be in, as long as they have LOS to the square. -Jindl |
| Zyme8604-29-05, 08:00 PM | She sa' be up (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6057618&postcount=1507) |
| Jindl04-29-05, 09:24 PM | @Spash - Tactics for JotHF have been PM'd. Tactics for the Elder have been PM'd. -Jindl |
| Salrantol04-29-05, 11:58 PM | Completed Don Quixote de la Mancha vs. Daka (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?p=6054756#post6054756) is up! |
| xanadu04-30-05, 02:26 AM | Hagrid vs. The Gatekeeper is up (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6066203) Three round kill. Poster-child for current psionic debate. |
| Snommelp04-30-05, 03:44 AM | Completed Don Quixote de la Mancha vs. Daka (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?p=6054756#post6054756) is up! I'm assuming a whip token acts like a normal whip. That means that, although it can grapple, it won't deal damage to an armored opponent. Quixote still has a fair shot! EDIT: Nevermind. Just saw the critical at the end. EDIT 2: In the round when Quixote drew his sword, he could have attacked, but did not. Why? I would guess it was because he drew his shield, but seeing as lances can be held one handed while mounted, his shield should have already been out. That sword strike could be the extra 5 damage Don Quixote needed to win. |
| Zyme8604-30-05, 04:09 AM | the wip deals damage to any opponent if it grapples, armoured or not. be mindful that it represents painful contorting, not just crushing. Drawing or stowing in a move-equlivent action, you sheathed and drew, 2 move actions, but no attack is possible. |
| Snommelp04-30-05, 04:13 AM | the wip deals damage to any opponent if it grapples, armoured or not. be mindful that it represents painful contorting, not just crushing. Drawing or stowing in a move-equlivent action, you sheathed and drew, 2 move actions, but no attack is possible. I'll take your word on the whip damage, but the attack is still possible. Quick Draw is a wonderful feat. EDIT: And now, since you have changed your feats, we add a new dimension. If the Quick Draw attack hits and deals enough damage to put Daka into negative HP, you will have to choose between winning the fight and keeping the adamantine sword. |
| Pittbull04-30-05, 07:05 AM | Hagrid vs. The Gatekeeper is up (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6066203) Three round kill. Poster-child for current psionic debate. Fight was OK, but Hagrid should get more XP and cash, because Gaty brought his horse into the arena. |
| xanadu04-30-05, 01:28 PM | Fight was OK, but Hagrid should get more XP and cash, because Gaty brought his horse into the arena. I think you might be right here but I think I read there is some sort of cap for losses. Should he get 400? I originally had that please let me know. |
| Kaigan04-30-05, 01:48 PM | I believe the bonus is applied after the cap, but no sure |
| Salrantol04-30-05, 04:09 PM | EDIT 2: In the round when Quixote drew his sword, he could have attacked, but did not. Why? I would guess it was because he drew his shield, but seeing as lances can be held one handed while mounted, his shield should have already been out. That sword strike could be the extra 5 damage Don Quixote needed to win. Of the bolded text, I was unaware, I'll adjust that and see how it comes out. |
| Salrantol04-30-05, 04:22 PM | EDIT: And now, since you have changed your feats, we add a new dimension. If the Quick Draw attack hits and deals enough damage to put Daka into negative HP, you will have to choose between winning the fight and keeping the adamantine sword. Since the fight was run with him having Diehard/Endurance but no adamantine greatsword, I finished the fight with the same. Character changes after the submission of the completed fight have no bearing on the fight in question. I know you want to win, and it sucks to lose when you deal your opponent more damage than he has HP (stupid Vigor (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6060017&postcount=1508)), but I think allowing character changes to affect fights ex post facto would be a dangerous precedent. Speaking of which, though, rebuilding characters is permitted once a character has begun, without restarting from 3200XP? (i.e. I'd like to modify the Salrantol build substantially [from rog1/ftr1/brd1 to brd3] and was wondering if that's kosher) By the way, the updated fight (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6054756&postcount=1506) is up now. -2 HP is a tough HP for your opponent to be at when you die, but such is life with the Diehard feat. |
| Zyme8604-30-05, 04:27 PM | in round5, it is apparent that Rozinante set against the charge, but that doesn't stop the charge, only rearranges the init. I would still get a chance to hit |
| Salrantol04-30-05, 04:37 PM | The charge is blocked by the pillar next to which you are hiding. And it's not really Rozinante attacking you. "Rozinante's long fang" was an expression I used for the Don's lance. It wasn't a set attack, either, but rather the attack of opportunity provoked by movement through threatened space. |
| Snommelp04-30-05, 04:43 PM | By the way, the updated fight (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6054756&postcount=1506) is up now. -2 HP is a tough HP for your opponent to be at when you die, but such is life with the Diehard feat. Meh. At least I brought him into negatives, which means he hurt himself when he killed me. The only sad part is that I only earned 225 XP :weep: At this rate, Sancho's going to be lost for a very long time! BTW, I still don't believe the dancing whip should deal damage (I see nothing in the RAW to suggest that it does), but since the final critical is more than enough to destroy Quixote anyway, it's a bit of a moot point. |
| Cerebus1304-30-05, 04:43 PM | @Salrantol Feat/skill/etc changes are usually only allowed if they are illegal and must be changed, or if those particular abilities haven't affected any of your fights. I haven't seen anyone change a class before so I guess that is up to the discretion of the council folks. I'm in the same boat because I want to change some feats on one of my toons (again! :P), but I'll likely just reset and redo my equipment. Oh well, it's all a learning experience. |
| Snommelp04-30-05, 05:04 PM | @ Zyme86: Since Quixote's sword strike was enough to force Daka to use the Diehard feat, you are now unable to switch it out without resetting the character. Sorry. I tried to give you an out, but Salrantol doesn't dig the Ex Post Facto jive, man. |
| Dagda Mor04-30-05, 06:12 PM | with the attack damage for the charge, the diehard feat should not have been used |
| Snommelp04-30-05, 06:20 PM | with the attack damage for the charge, the diehard feat should not have been used What charge? Daka's charge? The charge that Salrantol has already explained did not happen, and for good reason? |
| Zyme8604-30-05, 07:06 PM | you cant set against a charge and move |
| Pittbull04-30-05, 07:08 PM | I think you might be right here but I think I read there is some sort of cap for losses. Should he get 400? I originally had that please let me know. Yes, I think, 400 is right. |
| Snommelp04-30-05, 07:14 PM | you cant set against a charge and move True, although since setting against a charge counts as readying, it would be more correct to say "you can move and then set against a charge." However, Dagda Mor was saying that Daka dealt damage in a charge that never happened. If the charge didn't happen, how could the charge have created damage? |
| Zyme8604-30-05, 08:50 PM | sorry Dagda. I fergot to sign him out, befor I used a public computer, that was me talking, |
| Snommelp05-01-05, 03:22 AM | Well, in that case, would you care to explain yourself? I fail to see how the fact that you can move and set a weapon against a charge in the same round has any relevence concerning the charge that did not happen because of cover. |
| Kingside_Bishop05-01-05, 12:24 PM | Still waiting for tactics from Captain Mutilate to run Inquisitor Valorum vs. Cyalin Orndrill. If I don't get them by tommorow morning, I'll run the fight tommorow, using extrapolated tactics according to the Inquisitor's previous fights. |
| xanadu05-01-05, 03:10 PM | Damon vs. Legion (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6075718) is up. |
| Cerebus1305-01-05, 03:35 PM | Mer-Man vs Aeluath (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6075899&postcount=1511) is up. Let me know if there are any mistakes or anything. Fight kinda ended when I rolled a 20 to crit and 20 to confirm it :P. |
| spasheridan05-01-05, 04:24 PM | Damon vs. Legion (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6075718) is up. SPiritual weapons do not threaten AoO. SPiritual weapons are magic missiles that make attack rolls every round. XP is capped before the mount bonus, and then the mount bonus is applied so Legio would gain +33% I'm unsure of Damons positions towards the end of the match, how he moved and where, but since he must stay within 130 feet of me... hrm. Spiritual weapon has a duration of 3 rounds from the scrolls. SP 1 would only get 3 attacks on me during it's 3 rounds, so it's final attack on rnd 25 wouldn't be made. I don't see any manifester level checks being made for Legion when he used his ML 7 powerstones. Anywho, looks like some few small errors. At best Legion would get maybe one or 2 more shots at Damon, but since that might do the trick... |
| xanadu05-01-05, 05:04 PM | SPiritual weapons do not threaten AoO. SPiritual weapons are magic missiles that make attack rolls every round. XP is capped before the mount bonus, and then the mount bonus is applied so Legio would gain +33% I'm unsure of Damons positions towards the end of the match, how he moved and where, but since he must stay within 130 feet of me... hrm. Spiritual weapon has a duration of 3 rounds from the scrolls. SP 1 would only get 3 attacks on me during it's 3 rounds, so it's final attack on rnd 25 wouldn't be made. I don't see any manifester level checks being made for Legion when he used his ML 7 powerstones. Anywho, looks like some few small errors. At best Legion would get maybe one or 2 more shots at Damon, but since that might do the trick... The positions I have listed are correct; yes he had to stay in range which is why Legion was able to get a shard attack in. If you want a photoshop arena map of the merry-go-round both of you had, I can email it to you. You might be right about the weapons not getting AOOs. I know it doesn't get flanking but I didn't see anything in the spell description. I will remove the AOO Legion suffered until someone tells me otherwise. Legion did pass his manifester checks, my bad not including them. About Spititual Weapon #1. If it blinks out after its last attack, Damon would just conjure another. I guess I confused myself saying ends round [25] thinking it end after the round when it ends on Damon's initiative [is this correct?]. It's been 2nd edition since I have done spiritual weapons, are my answers to your questions here correct? Edit: Ok I had Legion ignore the spiritual weapons but Relfections is just too fast. Added a few cosmetic changes and an error I made of one of Damon's attacks in which I forgot his owl's wisdom. Also corrected Legion's share of XP & GP. Fight result did not change. |
| Kingside_Bishop05-01-05, 05:44 PM | Inquisitor Valorum vs. Cyalin Orndrill (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6076832&postcount=1512) is up. That fight went on a considerable deal longer than it should have. |
| Zyme8605-01-05, 07:30 PM | tbc |
| Salzorin05-01-05, 08:18 PM | Ok, this has me very confused and a little upset zyme. What plane system are you using for movement in the arena? Are you using the basic map with opponents starting on the East and West sides of the arena? My tactics specifically say that I'm supposed to 4x run straight to the pillar, so that I'm not even viewable (that would put me at [16,11]) ... but you had me move to some spot right out in the open. Had you followed my tactics, I would've been 10 feet up the column already in round 2. By Guts' tactics, he would've 4x ran until he was directly north of me basically. So on his round 3, he could've based the pillar, but he wouldn't according to his tactics, cause I would be out of reach. This SIGNIFICANTLY changes the fight, because it would've been a ranged standoff between he and I... according to our tactics. |
| Cerebus1305-01-05, 08:21 PM | Yeah um, this fight should have taken a LOT longer. He would have been up the column by 3rd round so i should have moved to cover and buffed then started in with the bow. |
| Zyme8605-01-05, 08:27 PM | you can only run in a straight line, PG144PHB, You can run as a full round action...When you run, you can move up to four time your speed in a straight line. |
| Cerebus1305-01-05, 08:31 PM | Straight lines don't mean you have to run only along diagonals or east/west/north/south. From his starting position (20,0) to behind the column he specified (at 16,11ish) if you take a ruler there are no obstructions or other stuff in his way, so he should have ran there immediately. |
| Zyme8605-01-05, 08:38 PM | yes there is, the rock at (20-,8) prevents a straight run down and there are no pillars on a diagonal run route south, and straight line means straight line, not multiple straight lines, it specifys A straight line in the PHB, he simply cant make it to the pillar in one move |
| Cerebus1305-01-05, 08:44 PM | There is a pillar though, at (15,11). Hisoka started off on the east side at position B at (20,0), so according to his tactics he should have ran towards the pillar closest to him and south...which is at (15,11). A ruler running between (20,0) and (15,11) shows no obstructions in the way. If you need a better map try this link: http://www.sebastian-sutor.de/coco/start.html and follow the instructions to get it to display. |
| Zyme8605-01-05, 08:47 PM | for the last time, he cant change direction during a run |
| Salzorin05-01-05, 08:51 PM | Zyme, I don't know what map you're looking at, but if you draw a straight line from (20,0) to (15,11)... the spot (20,8) is NOWHERE in the path... http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=4867971&postcount=7 |
| Zyme8605-01-05, 08:58 PM | o ****, I see wht you mean. many appoiges, I will rerun after I finish my next fithe. I thought it rules ment you could only move along diagonals or straight, not cutting, sorry Thousand appoligies |
| Cerebus1305-01-05, 09:01 PM | I'm pretty sure it's meant to be done that way, otherwise 4xruns and charges would be pretty limited :P. |
| Salzorin05-01-05, 09:03 PM | Awesome. Thanks Zyme. |
| Zyme8605-01-05, 10:47 PM | Bael vs Trokk is up............................now (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6078821&postcount=1514) |
| Kaigan05-01-05, 10:57 PM | Umm.. Zyme How did you add up the damage for the last rounds of the fight. In Round 14 Trokk was at 1 HP, and I did 2 damage, he should be at -1. Then I hit him again in round 15 for 4 more, so that would be -5. Besides, if you do an action at 0 HP, you go to -1 and start dying. |
| Zyme8605-02-05, 12:22 AM | I list the extra hp to the right, it was feeding off the rage bonus hp |
| King Uther05-02-05, 12:25 AM | while he was in a rage, that round after his action it would've ended, making him at -5 hp and fatigued. |
| Snommelp05-02-05, 12:50 AM | while he was in a rage, that round after his action it would've ended, making him at -5 hp and fatigued. This is true. Note that fights don't technically end until death, and since Trokk would have been always 1 hp below Bael'ryl, unless one stabilized, Bael'ryl would have won. |
| Zyme8605-02-05, 02:20 AM | Updated Histoka vs Gutes is up … (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6077629&postcount=1513) |
| Kaigan05-02-05, 10:09 AM | So the rage runs out, putting Trokk at -5 hp, I am at -4 hp, so it's whoever dies first, or stabilizes. |
| Salzorin05-02-05, 10:28 AM | A few more things zyme... round 3 G:Seing he is already too late to stop the annoying wall walker,retreats behind the pillar to the northe, giving a terrible angle to HC and draws biofeedback stone. and manifests HC: Climbs further up the wall, drawing and drinking potion of mage armour G- 19/19(15,12) skate(3/10) bio(1/10) HC- 27/27(14,-10,4) wall(2/30) round 4 G:draws bow and stows g.sword HC:manifests tatoo of force screen G- 19/19(15,12) skate(4/10) bio(2/10) HC- 27/27(14,-10,4) wall(3/30) screen(1/10) You had me use mage armor and the tat of force screen... but you only gave me the bonus from force screen. I would've had an AC of 24 instead of 20 with both... making all of guts' hits into misses. Also, you've got guts' getting a cover bonus to AC and then a 50% concealment roll as well. He should have the cover bonus to AC, but there is no concealment roll... he doesn't have concealment. (Just as you don't get concealment when you use your horse for cover) |
| Zyme8605-02-05, 10:45 AM | right again, time for rerun #3, thx, I overlooked that |
| Cerebus1305-02-05, 10:47 AM | Don't really need to rerun it again Zyme, with the rolls you have posted just drop the concealment checks from his attacks and he should have reduced Guts to at least -1. |
| Zyme8605-02-05, 11:05 AM | Don't really need to rerun it again Zyme, with the rolls you have posted just drop the concealment checks from his attacks and he should have reduced Guts to at least -1. please elaborate.. |
| Cerebus1305-02-05, 11:15 AM | Oh nevermind, you were calculating the rolls so that I had a 15 AC instead of 19 AC from cover. So.....R5 he would still miss, R7 he would hit now, R8 would be a miss now, R11 would have been a hit but not a crit. As for Guts, he misses a lot cuz he sucks :P Pretty much need a crit to get him until Force Screen wears off. |
| Sindorin05-02-05, 02:57 PM | I hope everyone is doing okay with their fights... there are still quite a few out. I imagine more will be posted, but it's Monday, so yeah. :) |
| Caterane05-02-05, 03:18 PM | First of all, another figth where my opponoment rolls only insane attacks. :raincloud I request that all my opponoments are +1 CR because of the rolls. Round 1: Aeiou moved (move action), drank a potion (standard action), and readied (standard action). That is not possible. Round 2: Aeiou single moved on horse (move action), ordered the horse to attack (move action) and attacked (standard action). Again, too many actions. Merman didn't activate his force screen on round 2. Please do this. Round 4: I don't understand why I cannot savely activate the tattoo. If I 5ft step back I am out of his reach. If I 5ft step forward, I am also out of his 10ft lance reach. So no AoO. Anyway, the force screen should be long up. Round 5: A 5ft step to the right (behind cover) would have been much better so I would have had cover against Aeious next attack which would cause it to miss. Instead I 5ft stepped in the open. I mentioned cover in my tactic. Please correct that. Round 6: I explicitely mentioned not to heal but rage and frenzy to get +6 str/con. Instead I drew and drank cure potions for several rounds while he damaged me on. Please execute my attack maneuver that I mentioned in my tactic. Round 7: Again, Merman heals instead of attacking Round 8: My sunder check is +15, not 14 (+3bab, +5str, +3rage/frenzy, +4twohanded) while Aeious check is +10 only because he uses his lance one-handed, not twohanded. With rage+frenzy I would deal 1d10+12 damage, not +9. Also, I cannot see my tactic being followed. I just stand within the central obstacle and hack at him, something I could have done anywhere. After all, I used some time to get into the central pillar. Round 9: With the new sunder modifiers, I would actually destroy his lance with this swing. Round 11: 20! 20! :rolleyes: Cerebus, I never saw him suffering -4 AC/attack because of squeezing. He moved freely within the central obstacle as if it wouldn't hamper him but every second square would force him to squeeze. You didn't use frenzy until later, and didn't use rage at all. I also want to note that drawing my glaive can be done as part of my movement so no need to spend a move action on it. I know my tactics were a bit more complicated that Kaigan's (who assumed me to go invisible, or wanted to focus on ready actions which I countered in my tactics) but there's still enough time to correct all that. Thanks |
| Megrim_Lord05-02-05, 03:41 PM | So the rage runs out, putting Trokk at -5 hp, I am at -4 hp, so it's whoever dies first, or stabilizes. Well, I still won :D besides if you are going to argue for a rerun I'll just point out the fact that Trokk was denied a knockdown attempt he was entitled to after his 1st hit, which means you burned some of my resources instead of me murdering you senselessly after tripping you :D but overall it was a good fight |
| Megrim_Lord05-02-05, 03:45 PM | oh, and not to mention another aspect in my favor; the mist only lasts 1 rnd / cl and should have dissipated in like round 7 or 8 |
| spasheridan05-02-05, 03:49 PM | First of all, another figth where my opponoment rolls only insane attacks. :raincloud I request that all my opponoments are +1 CR because of the rolls. THe dice gods can be cruel. I'm not sure whats worse, loosing because your PC rolls a string of 1's or loosing because your opponent rolls a string of 20's.. Round 2: Aeiou single moved on horse (move action), ordered the horse to attack (move action) and attacked (standard action). Again, too many actions. I've seen this before. Let's check with the SRD: Fight with Warhorse: If you direct your war-trained mount to attack in battle, you can still make your own attack or attacks normally. This usage is a free action. Guide with Knees: You can react instantly to guide your mount with your knees so that you can use both hands in combat. Make your Ride check at the start of your turn. If you fail, you can use only one hand this round because you need to use the other to control your mount.Aeou's riding a warhorse, right? OK, so: Guide with knees to free both hands: Free action FIght with warhorse: Free action Leaving a full round of actions for the rider. Now, knowing that a rider may full attack with a bow from the back of a galloping horse we know that the rider doesn't actually SPEND his move action while the horse moves, but rather the rider is restriced to standard actions at the end of the horse's move. The rider is free to take a move action while the horse is moving, driving the horse was a free action for the turn (guide with knees). Or do I have mounted combat completely wrong and is it impoosible to full attack with a bow from the back of a galloping horse? |
| Jindl05-02-05, 03:57 PM | My take on the mounted combat rules is that guiding your mount is a free action that must be combined with at least a move action. Therefore, if your only action in the round was to make an attack as a standard action, you must spend your move action guiding your mount. However, you could also guide your mount as a free action combined with the move action of drawing a weapon, then take your standard action to attack. Or you could combine your free action with the full round action of firing your bow, since a full round action is at least a move action. So, free action that must be combined with at least a move action. -Jindl |
| Cerebus1305-02-05, 03:59 PM | Round 1: Aeiou moved (move action), drank a potion (standard action), and readied (standard action). That is not possible.Yeah I screwed that up, forgot that a mounts movement IS your movement for all intents and purposes...but you can do stuff at the same time. Round 2: Aeiou single moved on horse (move action), ordered the horse to attack (move action) and attacked (standard action). Again, too many actions.I forgot to cross off some of the text related to his horse attacking here. I had already crossed out the roll so it didn't influence anything. Merman didn't activate his force screen on round 2. Please do this. Round 4: I don't understand why I cannot savely activate the tattoo. If I 5ft step back I am out of his reach. If I 5ft step forward, I am also out of his 10ft lance reach. So no AoO. Anyway, the force screen should be long up.Okay, going to take a bit longer to get to the central obstacle. Round 5: A 5ft step to the right (behind cover) would have been much better so I would have had cover against Aeious next attack which would cause it to miss. Instead I 5ft stepped in the open. I mentioned cover in my tactic. Please correct that.Okay. Round 6: I explicitely mentioned not to heal but rage and frenzy to get +6 str/con. Instead I drew and drank cure potions for several rounds while he damaged me on. Please execute my attack maneuver that I mentioned in my tactic. Round 7: Again, Merman heals instead of attackingOkay, may still have to heal in order to jump up over the 15 HP mark at some point however...we'll have to see. Round 8: My sunder check is +15, not 14 (+3bab, +5str, +3rage/frenzy, +4twohanded) while Aeious check is +10 only because he uses his lance one-handed, not twohanded. With rage+frenzy I would deal 1d10+12 damage, not +9. Also, I cannot see my tactic being followed. I just stand within the central obstacle and hack at him, something I could have done anywhere. After all, I used some time to get into the central pillar. Round 9: With the new sunder modifiers, I would actually destroy his lance with this swing.I'll adjust for this stuff. Cerebus, I never saw him suffering -4 AC/attack because of squeezing. He moved freely within the central obstacle as if it wouldn't hamper him but every second square would force him to squeeze. I looked at the rules in the SRD for this: Squeezing In some cases, you may have to squeeze into or through an area that isn’t as wide as the space you take up. You can squeeze through or into a space that is at least half as wide as your normal space. Each move into or through a narrow space counts as if it were 2 squares, and while squeezed in a narrow space you take a -4 penalty on attack rolls and a -4 penalty to AC.Looking at the CoCo map there are 8 places within the central obstacle that are only 1 square wide: (-1,-2),(-2,-1),(-2,1),(-1,2) and four additonal ones where the first coordinate is positive instead of negative. Now all of these squares are on the diagonal unfortunately so it makes it really hard to visualize where a 10' square creature would be when moving into them as per this part of squeezing:When a Large creature (which normally takes up four squares) squeezes into a space that’s one square wide, the creature’s miniature figure occupies two squares, centered on the line between the two squares. For a bigger creature, center the creature likewise in the area it squeezes into.How do you split two squares over the diagonal space like that? I envisioned him and the horse passing through the "squeeze" spot and popping out into one of the four 4x4 squares created on the corners of the central obstacle. He is not squeezing here so in order for anyone to catch you during a squeeze in the central obstacle it would have something to do with what space you take up while travelling through the "squeeze" spot. If I am wrong with this interpretation please let me know and explain how I should handle it, because the rules are not making sense to me for this. I also want to note that drawing my glaive can be done as part of my movement so no need to spend a move action on it.Yeah messed that up too, will fix it. ----- I'll work on incorporating the above changes, and if someone could explain how to handle a creature's placement if they have 10' space and are squeezing through one of the 8 spots on the central obstacle that are too skinny for them I'll change that as well if needed. |
| spasheridan05-02-05, 04:56 PM | @Jindl: By your interpertation, there is no way to full attack with a bow from the back of a moving mount. I thought this was explicitly allowed... @Cerebus: The important rule when squeezing in the center you need to know. Creatures may NEVER move diagonaly around a corner. SO, imagin a large creature is on the (20, 0) side of the obstacle. He must take 3teps, one north and then west, and then north again.. all the time squeezing but ending his move in a space he does not have to squeze in. to get out he squeezes 3 more steps west and north. (or east and south to where he came from). Remember that each space costs double move so if he doesn't have the move to make the entire double move stay where you are. I also doubt that a gladiator would move so they are STUCK squeezing between moves and allow their opponent a swing at them while squuezing, so I wouldn't move a gladiator in such a way that leaves him stuck in the squeeze for a round. Incurring an AoO is OK I guess if it's the only option. |
| Jindl05-02-05, 05:10 PM | @Jindl: By your interpertation, there is no way to full attack with a bow from the back of a moving mount. I thought this was explicitly allowed... Sorry, I should have said "free action combined with at least a move action". When full attacking with a bow, you are combining the free action with the full round action. |
| Captain Mutilate05-02-05, 06:53 PM | GAaaaaaaaaa........ again I have no time to pitlord a fight. Please give me no more fights for a while. I will PM the tactics to the Pitlord account. |
| Salrantol05-02-05, 07:09 PM | I can take Mutilate's fight if Pitlords gets me the tactics tonight. |
| Cerebus1305-02-05, 08:34 PM | Revised run of Merman vs Aeluath (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6075899&postcount=1511) is done. I tried to pair rolls so that Attack roll goes to Attack roll, AoO goes to AoO, Spot to Spot, Heal to Heal....etc. Merman sunders the lance successfully and begins his ready/move tactic against Aeluath and reduces him to 1 HP (the die roller is fickle). He then switched to ranged in favor of actually having a chance at hitting Merman. The double 20 critical still ends the fight the same later in the match, it just takes longer to get to it now. If there are still problems let me know immediately so I can revise before Wednesday. |
| Kaigan05-02-05, 09:11 PM | Hey Zyme One more issue. When Trokk dies, he floats to the ground. My mount, which I'm not on can still attack him, and kill him before I bleed to death. I can win. Edit: Can someone take the Zubair vs. Necavi Fight off of me, I don't have time to do it. I can forward you tactics. |
| Megrim_Lord05-02-05, 09:35 PM | Hey Zyme One more issue. When Trokk dies, he floats to the ground. My mount, which I'm not on can still attack him, and kill him before I bleed to death. I can win. Edit: Can someone take the Zubair vs. Necavi Fight off of me, I don't have time to do it. I can forward you tactics. dying and dies are two different things, plus your mount is too dumb to attack me if you can't command it to. besides, I've already pointed out my reasons for not bothering to argue with me :D |
| Jindl05-02-05, 09:38 PM | dying and dies are two different things, plus your mount is too dumb to attack me if you can't command it to. besides, I've already pointed out my reasons for not bothering to argue with me :D I've got to agree here. An unconscious character under the effect of a fly spell does not start featherfalling. They hover in place. A dead character becomes an object, ending the fly spell and starting the feather fall. Also, the defend trick ends when the threat has been nullified, so your mount should not defend you against an unconscious opponent (something which has likely been run incorrectly in the past). -Jindl |
| Jindl05-03-05, 01:10 PM | So, um, with the boards being down since yesterday, I'm guessing we'll extend the fight deadline until Wed, then do pairings on Thurs? |
| spasheridan05-03-05, 01:26 PM | Phew, back up! Sokai v Elder is finished but at home, I'll get my next battle up tonight. Before I post Sokai v Elder, can anyone help me determine the exact effects of brainbrun? Say you were holding a powerstone with 2 enlarged ML8 crystal shards in it. My understanding is that you immediatly take 16d6 pts of damage from the brainburn. THen the nasty DM rolls a d4 and get's a 3, so the stone is burning for 3 rounds. Next round you get burned then you move or can you move before it burns again? |
| Sunwolf05-03-05, 01:46 PM | Phew, back up! Sokai v Elder is finished but at home, I'll get my next battle up tonight. Before I post Sokai v Elder, can anyone help me determine the exact effects of brainbrun? Say you were holding a powerstone with 2 enlarged ML8 crystal shards in it. My understanding is that you immediatly take 16d6 pts of damage from the brainburn. THen the nasty DM rolls a d4 and get's a 3, so the stone is burning for 3 rounds. Next round you get burned then you move or can you move before it burns again? From my reading of the SRD: Brainburn is 1d6 * # powers in stone for 1d4 rounds. So for your example 2d6 on round 1 and 2d6 for 2 more rounds. It does mention that the ways to stop the brainburn are to destroy the stone or get it more than 100ft away. As to what happens after the brainburn starts as a result of your standard action to manifest (on your init) -- if you have a move action left in the round you should still be able to use it. Drop stone and move away or drop and try to crush the stone next round. Either way unless you can move really fast, I would rule that you will suffer the second round of brainburn if it happens (while you are crushing stone or moving away). I would rule that the damage of the brainburn occurs on your init in subsequent rounds so you can act but you will get the brainburn affects *while* you do so. |
| Huan05-03-05, 01:53 PM | FYI: Indri vs Janelle is not up yet, my apologies, and won't be up until tonight. :( |
| spasheridan05-03-05, 01:56 PM | Wow, d6 per power is much less than the d6 per power POINT I read. Maybe I have a bit more to do than I thought. |
| Sindorin05-03-05, 04:46 PM | Phew, back up! Sokai v Elder is finished but at home, I'll get my next battle up tonight. Before I post Sokai v Elder, can anyone help me determine the exact effects of brainbrun? Say you were holding a powerstone with 2 enlarged ML8 crystal shards in it. My understanding is that you immediatly take 16d6 pts of damage from the brainburn. THen the nasty DM rolls a d4 and get's a 3, so the stone is burning for 3 rounds. Next round you get burned then you move or can you move before it burns again? Curses. Throw the stone. Far. In fact, throw it at the Elder. |
| Pitlords05-03-05, 06:00 PM | Have the boards been down? When? How long? Deedlit vs Telveran reassigned to Salrantol! |
| TaggIIV05-03-05, 06:03 PM | They were down last night (Monday 5/2/05), about 10ish PM EST. For at least a couple hours - I didnt check again until this morning whereupon they were functioning normally. |
| Caterane05-03-05, 06:10 PM | Okay, deadline and pairings extended by one day; mainly because many fights are unfinished. That's why I always write "run your fight early". @Cerebus: I don't know why I readied in round 10? He was at 1 hp and a single hit would have ended the fight. Instead, readying vs an attack (which obviously wasn't going to happen if he is at 1 hp) was very stupid from Merman because it wasted an attack plus gave him the free option to withdraw without another attack. As for the 20! 20! ...you cannot transfer this double 20 to another round and another weapon. We keep thematic* rolls only and the double 20 was made with his lance which now has been sundered long before so this roll is gone. *thematic means, if I roll a 1! vs hold person, then I also fail this save against the same spell in the rerun. If he cannot cast hold person in the rerun (for whatever reason), then the 1! never happened. |
| Jindl05-03-05, 06:13 PM | As for the 20! 20! ...you cannot transfer this double 20 to another round and another weapon. We keep thematic* rolls only and the double 20 was made with his lance which now has been sundered long before so this roll is gone. *thematic means, if I roll a 1! vs hold person, then I also fail this save against the same spell in the rerun. If he cannot cast hold person in the rerun (for whatever reason), then the 1! never happened. I don't think I agree with this. Thematic has always meant that attack rolls stay attack rolls, saving throws stay saving throws, and skill checks stay skill checks. It has never been confined to attack rolls to the same weapon. Especially since many reruns result in the gladiator switching from melee to ranged, etc. You don't throw away the roll just because the gladiator switched weapons in the rerun. -Jindl |
| xanadu05-03-05, 06:25 PM | Just out of curiosity, what are the COCO rules (if any) regarding the status of our opponents. I am mostly thinking hit points, armor class, and how many pp/spells they have left. I know I am guilty of writing in my tactics of asking the pitlord to metagame regarding my gladiators actions. I do it only because it seems as if this knowledge of our opponents is freely available and most everyone else does it to. |
| cellardweller05-03-05, 07:51 PM | I'm with Jindl on this one (20/20). |
| Kaigan05-03-05, 08:28 PM | Emergency!!! I have no time tonight to run these two fights: Finael Owlguide (Spasheridan) vs The Ripper (Xanadu): Kaigan Zubair Suhaim (KerlanRayne) vs Necavi Omnes (Xanadu): Kaigan I can forward tactics to whoever takes over. I'll have Azer vs. Nyph up in a bit. Thanks, and sorry. |
| Zyme8605-03-05, 09:15 PM | I could run one of them no prob. Zyme |
| Kaigan05-03-05, 09:24 PM | I'll send you the tactics for this fight. Zubair Suhaim (KerlanRayne) vs Necavi Omnes (Xanadu): Kaigan |
| Huan05-03-05, 11:12 PM | Bare-bones of Indri'ynar Per-El'ereth vs Janelle Werabrook (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6092501&postcount=1517) is up. Short version: Two hit fight... person 1 hit person 2, and person 2 hit the ground (bit of a lucky hit, though)... and it won't be bare-bones for long! ;) |
| Jindl05-04-05, 12:29 AM | @Pitlords / Arstimis - I never recieved tactics for Arthemus Arctus. I'm assuming that Arti sent the tactics a couple of weeks ago to the original pitlord, but they were never forwarded to me. I'm holding off on doing the fight in the hopes that I'll get some tactics soon. If I don't receive any tactics, I'd suggest simply dissolving the pairing, instead of extending the fight for a 3rd week (heh, this is the only week it was assigned to me :D) -Jindl |
| Kaigan05-04-05, 01:10 AM | Alright, managed to finish Ripper vs. Fineal. Please check for errors |
| xanadu05-04-05, 01:55 AM | Alright, managed to finish Ripper vs. Fineal. Please check for errors Didn't see any looking real quick except Ripper used a potion of mage armor and not cure light wounds. |
| Salrantol05-04-05, 02:36 AM | Deedlit vs. Telveran Trueblade (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6093772&postcount=1519) is up. I am a little sleep-deprived, so if there are any errors let me know. |
| spasheridan05-04-05, 03:00 AM | Alright, managed to finish Ripper vs. Fineal. Please check for errorsGrrr. Frickin entangle spell! And then sitting there while the bat pecked at him, not fighting back?? Next time I'll have to put the "DOn't be an idiot" caveat in my tactics just in case I act like one again. Sokai v Elder is up. Jindl managed to graze the boundary of every rule in his tactics. If anyone can show me why Bubbo cannot be polymorphed into a troll with a shared polymorph spell I would be grateful, because that's just nasty and I never want to see it again! I think that Bubo would have a hard time being a troll but there's no rule that says an Owl doesn't know how to operate a fly spell (instead of wings) or fight like a troll.... |
| spasheridan05-04-05, 03:03 AM | JIndl v Ceres will be delayed, sorry folks! 20th fight pitlorded, first one late. |
| Sindorin05-04-05, 08:15 AM | Erm... I'm not sure why or where Sokai ever used a stone of Ego Whip in that fight, but whatever works. It doesn't look like Bubo went too far away from the Elder to lose the shared spell benefit. Nice tactics, Jindl. Also, bad luck for Sokai. |
| Cerebus1305-04-05, 08:18 AM | @Cerebus: I don't know why I readied in round 10? He was at 1 hp and a single hit would have ended the fight. Instead, readying vs an attack (which obviously wasn't going to happen if he is at 1 hp) was very stupid from Merman because it wasted an attack plus gave him the free option to withdraw without another attack. As for the 20! 20! ...you cannot transfer this double 20 to another round and another weapon. We keep thematic* rolls only and the double 20 was made with his lance which now has been sundered long before so this roll is gone. *thematic means, if I roll a 1! vs hold person, then I also fail this save against the same spell in the rerun. If he cannot cast hold person in the rerun (for whatever reason), then the 1! never happened. I don't think I agree with this. Thematic has always meant that attack rolls stay attack rolls, saving throws stay saving throws, and skill checks stay skill checks. It has never been confined to attack rolls to the same weapon. Especially since many reruns result in the gladiator switching from melee to ranged, etc. You don't throw away the roll just because the gladiator switched weapons in the rerun. -Jindl@Jindl & Caterane What should I do concerning the rolls then? Please be specific so I can try to wrap up this fight asap...because I don't think I'll have time later. Also, (as Xanadu asked later in this thread) how accurately can a player tell their opponent is wounded? I've read in various D&D articles that the first level of hitpoints you get, which is a maxed hitdie, represent actual physical soaking of damage whereas any other hitpoints you get from levels is experience you gain in dodging and parrying blows and thus represents endurance/tiredness. So when a person is reduced to within their 1st hitdie they would be visibly bleeding/wounded and whatnot....possibly. However this stance makes spells such as Deathwatch pointless. So to cut this story short...how should I handle this? Mer-Man reduced Aeiou to 1 hitpoint (well within his first hitdie), so should he have known that Aeiou was seriously wounded? Or can players not tell this accurately enough to estimate their opponents life? If I could get these questions answered I'll try to rerun the fight a third time...but I've got a family emergency at home right now so please do not enter my characters in any fights and set my Pitlorded fights to zero for a while. I've PM'd the Pitlords account about this as well. |
| Jindl05-04-05, 09:44 AM | @Jindl & Caterane What should I do concerning the rolls then? Please be specific so I can try to wrap up this fight asap...because I don't think I'll have time later. I think you handled the thematic rolls correctly (and Cellardwellar agreed). While two elders don't outrank a GM, when discussing a fight involving that GM's character I think we probably should just to eliminate any appearance of bias :D. Also, (as Xanadu asked later in this thread) how accurately can a player tell their opponent is wounded? I've read in various D&D articles that the first level of hitpoints you get, which is a maxed hitdie, represent actual physical soaking of damage whereas any other hitpoints you get from levels is experience you gain in dodging and parrying blows and thus represents endurance/tiredness. So when a person is reduced to within their 1st hitdie they would be visibly bleeding/wounded and whatnot....possibly. However this stance makes spells such as Deathwatch pointless. So to cut this story short...how should I handle this? Mer-Man reduced Aeiou to 1 hitpoint (well within his first hitdie), so should he have known that Aeiou was seriously wounded? Or can players not tell this accurately enough to estimate their opponents life? I've not seen that interpretation before, but if that was the case, then wouldn't you heal up everything beyond your first HD overnight? I mean really, when healing Hps = your level each day, it takes a fighter 5 days longer than the mage to heal up from 1 hp. Does that mean the mage can recover from fatigue much better than a fighter can? I don't think I agree with that interpretation. Unlike GURPS, when it comes to hp's DnD is all or nothing. There is no difference in the capabilities of a 20th level mage with full hps and one with only 1 hp. I'm not saying you shouldn't be able to tell that your attacks hit and dealt damage. I'm just saying that you shouldn't know how much more damage your opponent can take. -Jindl |
| Cerebus1305-04-05, 09:54 AM | @All One more question... Caterane is having Mer-Man employ a ready action to 5' step away and attack Aeulath with his reach weapon triggered by Aeulath attacking Mer-Man. This is a perfectly legitimate tactic, however Kaigan did not speak of anything in his own tactics to counter something like this. Should I as a Pitlord continue to follow what tactics he does have (get into melee, charge if able) and basically allow Mer-Man to beat him to death and never get an attack in, or are Pitlords allowed to improvise against a tactic not covered? Kaigan mentioned using ranged against Mer-Man if Mer-Man also used ranged against him...I took this a step further and had Aeulath switch to ranged once he realized that Mer-Man could negate any melee attack he makes by readying and stepping away. I realize this is a rather sticky situation with how much a Pitlord is allowed to improvise, but Aeulath is no fool (10 Int makes him average) so would he allow himself to be killed like this with no hope of retaliation?I think you handled the thematic rolls correctly (and Cellardwellar agreed). While two elders don't outrank a GM, when discussing a fight involving that GM's character I think we probably should just to eliminate any appearance of bias :D.With both of your permissions I will continue to handle my rolls as I have. Once I have posted the 3rd rerun please go over it again and be sure everything is in order.Unlike GURPS, when it comes to hp's DnD is all or nothing. There is no difference in the capabilities of a 20th level mage with full hps and one with only 1 hp. I'm not saying you shouldn't be able to tell that your attacks hit and dealt damage. I'm just saying that you shouldn't know how much more damage your opponent can take. -JindlAlright, without Deathwatch then a PC has no idea what their opponent's HPs are unless they become staggered (at 0 HPs) or dying (at <0). I'll continue to rerun the fight with this in mind. ---- After this final question is answered I should be able to do another rerun. It is an important one to consider however because Caterane pointed out to me that Aeulath's tactics do not mention switching attacks modes to ranged unless Mer-Man goes to ranged...so I do not want to overstep my bounds as a Pitlord by improvising too much. |
| Pittbull05-04-05, 10:57 AM | After this final question is answered I should be able to do another rerun. It is an important one to consider however because Caterane pointed out to me that Aeulath's tactics do not mention switching attacks modes to ranged unless Mer-Man goes to ranged...so I do not want to overstep my bounds as a Pitlord by improvising too much. You can't overstep your bounds as a Pitlord, you do not have any. You just need to be fair and run the characters not foolish, expect they are fools. ;) I think an expierenced fighter like Aeulath should be able to adjust his tactic. Nobody likes his charaters to be played like robots. Beside this, the right to improvise prevents us gladiators to write pages of tactics which cover everthing for a single fight. I think, this is a good common use. |
| spasheridan05-04-05, 11:06 AM | Caterane is having Mer-Man employ a ready action to 5' step away and attack Aeulath with his reach weapon triggered by Aeulath attacking Mer-Man. This is a perfectly legitimate tactic, however Kaigan did not speak of anything in his own tactics to counter something like this. Should I as a Pitlord continue to follow what tactics he does have (get into melee, charge if able) and basically allow Mer-Man to beat him to death and never get an attack in, or are Pitlords allowed to improvise against a tactic not covered? Kaigan mentioned using ranged against Mer-Man if Mer-Man also used ranged against him...I took this a step further and had Aeulath switch to ranged once he realized that Mer-Man could negate any melee attack he makes by readying and stepping away.PLaying a PC like a fool is always a poor choice. If Aeulath's tactic says "Attack Mer-Man" then Aeulath will attempt to attack. If the attack fails because of Mer-Man's tricky readied actions then the trick will work once or twice and the you MUST adapt Aeulath's attack. Continuing to use a attack tactic that has no chance of hitting is not "attacking", it's giving up. When deciding how to change Aeulath's tactics remember that readied actions are visible so Aeulath knows what Mer-Man is up to. Tricky tactics are fun and cute, but creating a logic trap that denies actions to your opponent is not the intention of the arena. PC's would not sit there and not attack round after round, so the pitlord must adapt a bit. @sindorin: You were out of crystal shard stones and that troll form elder looked beefy so I had you switch to ego whips for your last attack. |
| Sindorin05-04-05, 11:48 AM | @sindorin: You were out of crystal shard stones and that troll form elder looked beefy so I had you switch to ego whips for your last attack. Oh, okay. I really wish you would have considered using pp instead of a stone though. I didn't mention Ego Whip anywhere in my tactics specifically because I figured it wouldn't have much effectiveness against an awesome will save like Elder's, and I have to fix the stone anyway because of the new price scaling rule. I probably should have put what I should have done after the Crystal Shard stone ran out (or blew itself up, whatever works :rolleyes: ). Thanks for running our fights! |
| Jindl05-04-05, 01:20 PM | @Spash - You forgot to include the scroll: fly in the items used for the Elder. I'll be happy to keep it ... :D |
| Malither7605-04-05, 01:52 PM | @cerebus, this may be a little late, but a ready action just resets inititive, like in this fight mer man may step back and deliver an attack on the other gladiator but that doesn't take that gladiators turn away so mer man would step back attack but then he would be attacked as the other gladiator now finishes his turn and now they are engaged face to face and its mer mans turn since initiitive reset. |
| Salzorin05-04-05, 02:07 PM | Yes Malither, the other gladiator does get his turn, but if he's already used his movement and then was interupted before his standard action, then he is only left with a standard action. Which leaves him unable to step forward to be in range to attack.... |
| Cerebus1305-04-05, 02:11 PM | I'm still working on the rerun of the fight, but my job is dogging me a lot today so I can never find a minute to concentrate on it. If it's not finished by the afternoon expect it tomorrow...too much stuff going on at home right now to work on it. |
| xanadu05-04-05, 05:22 PM | Grrr. Frickin entangle spell! And then sitting there while the bat pecked at him, not fighting back?? Next time I'll have to put the "DOn't be an idiot" caveat in my tactics just in case I act like one again. Only an idiot because you didn't break out. If you got that strength roll on the second try, The Ripper would have been in trouble. All ideas look bad when the dice dont fall your way. Trust me, I would much rather have Ripper's opponents shooting bows than tryung to break free of my entanglements |
| Cerebus1305-04-05, 05:25 PM | 3rd rerun of Mer-Man vs Aeluath is here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6075899&postcount=1511). Mer-Man was the victor this time due to his rage being activated later...he had enough time left on it to step out and melee Aeluath when he switched to ranged. The rolls are not the prettiest but I tried to maintain the following (for everyone involved...so Mer-Man's rolls where his own and Aeluath's didn't overlap with them): Attack rolls = Attack Rolls (this includes AoOs) Sunder rolls = Sunder Rolls Spot = Spot Listen = Listen Ride = Ride Hide = Hide Heal = Heal and some odds and ends stuff that was mostly unique like stay mounted checks and stabilizing. I hope this makes the deadline and stands up to scrutiny...because I don't have anymore time this week to participate as a Pitlord or even writing up my own tactics. |
| Arstimis05-04-05, 05:34 PM | So Arthemus is going on his 4th week of the same extended fight? Thats cool, no problem |
| Malither7605-04-05, 05:40 PM | @Salzorin, that is true if he is out of movement, as you said his turn is interupted just like it says in the description, then you get to finish your turn if you still havent moved more than your normal move you can advance and engage |
| Salzorin05-04-05, 05:58 PM | Wish it worked like that, but... He ends his move action to start a standard action attack. That's when the readied action interrupts. When it goes back to his turn, he's already ended his move action, so he can not resume his move action to use up whatever movement he may have left. The only action he has left is a standard action. I'd be all for houseruling in the ability to continue a move action after a readied action interuption (cause it seems logical that a person be able to do that, as long as they haven't actually attacked yet)... but for now the tactic is perfectly legit, annoying as it may be. |
| Jindl05-04-05, 07:26 PM | So Arthemus is going on his 4th week of the same extended fight? Thats cool, no problem If you want to send me some tactics, I can run the fight tonight. -Jindl |
| Jindl05-04-05, 07:36 PM | Wish it worked like that, but... He ends his move action to start a standard action attack. That's when the readied action interrupts. When it goes back to his turn, he's already ended his move action, so he can not resume his move action to use up whatever movement he may have left. The only action he has left is a standard action. I'd be all for houseruling in the ability to continue a move action after a readied action interuption (cause it seems logical that a person be able to do that, as long as they haven't actually attacked yet)... but for now the tactic is perfectly legit, annoying as it may be. It's can be countered. Switching to ranged attacks was one option for Aeluath. But he's a melee-ist, so its probably not the best option. What he could have done is stood still and readied to attack when Mer-man attacks from 10 ft away. Basically, here's how that would go: 1. Mer-man readies to 5 ft step away and attack. Aeluath closes to try and melee, triggering Mer-man's readied action. Mer-man attacks and Aeluath ends his action unable to attack. 2. Repeat #1. 3. Aeluath has figured out Mer-man's strategy. He comes up with a counter. Mer-man readies to 5 ft step away and attack (like normal). Instead of moving in to attack, Aeluath then readies to 5 ft step towards Mer-man and attack, triggered when Mer-man attacks from 10 ft away. 4. Both gladiators continue to ready for 9 more rounds, neither attacking the other (because neither readied action is triggered). 5. After 10 rounds, Mer-man has to act first because he is higher in the initiative. So he attacks, triggering Aeluath's readied action, who steps 5 ft in and attacks Mer-man. It's easily countered, although it does hurt your buff durations. Personally, I'm getting to the point where I think we need to restrict readied actions to allow only interrupting spellcasting/manifesting. The strategy Cat used here, while within the Core rules makes no actual sense in battle, and violates the entire combat concept of DnD. Combatants are supposed to dance back and forth trading blows. It's built into their armor class (as a dex bonus or dodge bonus), and into their reach. Using a readied action this way shouldn't be allowed, because it breaks the system of combat. That's my 2 cps. -Jindl |
| Arstimis05-04-05, 07:49 PM | If you want to send me some tactics, I can run the fight tonight. -Jindl I sent you tactics last firday via email.... but i guess i'll foward them..again |
| Snommelp05-04-05, 07:56 PM | @ Jindl: it's not too big of a deal, seeing as it would only work for one round anyway. From the PHB, page 160: "You can take a 5-foot step as part of a readied action, but only of you don't otherwise move any distance during the round." If Mer-man moves on his turn and readies again, he can't take the five foot step. If Mer-man doesn't move, but rather readies to duck back five feet, then Aeluath can turn his five-foot step to close into a larger move action and still get an attack in. Unless I've misinterpreted a rule somewhere. |
| Kaigan05-04-05, 08:15 PM | great! Now i have to re update Aeuluath. Thanks. |
| Jindl05-04-05, 08:18 PM | I sent you tactics last firday via email.... but i guess i'll foward them..again Got 'em (this time). |
| Cerebus1305-04-05, 08:20 PM | That's the way the battle turned out...if there are still issues with how I handled it please say so and I can attempt to fix it again. I don't have a huge amount of time but I would rather people be satisfied that the result was fair. |
| Kaigan05-04-05, 08:21 PM | There is one issue Cerebus. In round 14 I was at 23 HP, then in round 15, he didn't even hit me, and I'm down to 17 for no reason. Edit: And I'm wondering how you figured his damage? his glaive only does 1d10+7. In round 4 he did 2+8 damage, it should only be 2+7, Then In round 10, when he rages, he gains +4 to str, which means a +2 to the modifier, so his damage would be 1d10+9, not 1d10+12, so he does less damage there. So that also means, that his attack rolls are wrong as well and should only be +11 instead of +12. And in round 16, why did I shoot my bow, instead of dropping it, drawing my longsword or flail, and continue with melee? |
| Cerebus1305-04-05, 08:45 PM | I'll look into it. The hitpoints changing thing is probably because of my having redone the fight several times, the values get messed up when copying and then editting. His normal glaive damage is +7, but when he is raged/frenzied his strength increases to 26...which is a +8 base. However he is wielding the glaive with two hands, because he has to, thus it becomes +12. His attack rolls are +12 because of +2 from rage and +1 from blood frenzy. |
| Kaigan05-04-05, 08:46 PM | Okay thanks, but with the hit points, I should have 5 more, and the bow, should not be used, I would go melee. |
| Cerebus1305-04-05, 08:48 PM | K gimme some time, I will try to finish it tonight so it makes pairings tomorrow. |
| Jindl05-04-05, 10:20 PM | Arthemus Arctus (Arstimis) vs Nell Leonne (Huan): Jindl is finished, and now you both can move on to other opponents. Let me know if there are questions/comments. -Jindl |
| Arstimis05-04-05, 10:51 PM | Arthemus Arctus (Arstimis) vs Nell Leonne (Huan): Jindl is finished, and now you both can move on to other opponents. Let me know if there are questions/comments. -Jindl The only thing I didnt understand was how he sundered my other bow that wasnt equipped...I never knew you could do that |
| xanadu05-04-05, 10:55 PM | Zyme86 - Normally I dont make a stink over the decisions pitlords make regarding my characters, but there are a number of problems with the fight. Because Necavi and his mount missed their reflex saves, they do not get additionally reflex saves in later rounds with entanglement. Also, Necavi Omnes should not try to break free, I never said to do this (because it is pointless) and I thought I made his priorities explicitly clear: 1)Vigor first. Don’t put this away unless I have more than 50 HPs. and Necavi should use Dorje if less than 30 HPs (take an AOO – especially if Cannon Fodder can attack) By saying that my character should use the Dorje even if that means taking an attack to do so makes it pretty clear the importance I attached to such a manuever. I understand my opponent keeps his amazing rolls in a re-run scenario, but I really think there are fundamental mistakes in the fight which need to be fixed and ask that Necavi should follow my tactics as laid out as much as Zubair followed KerlanRayne's. Also, this is a moot point because the construct wont appear since Necavi doesn't have 50 HP, but I recall a discussion earlier about a mounts withdraw does *not* prevent an AOO against the rider, just the mount. Speaking in mounts, Necavi should also use his ride check to react against Zubair's arrows. |
| Jindl05-04-05, 10:58 PM | The only thing I didnt understand was how he sundered my other bow that wasnt equipped...I never knew you could do that Yep, you can attack a held/worn object. It's actually easier than sundering a weapon that is being wielded. |
| Arstimis05-04-05, 11:02 PM | Yep, you can attack a held/worn object. It's actually easier than sundering a weapon that is being wielded. Ya..just doesnt make so much since to me..how a weapon that is on my back can be sundered easier than one in front of me...but DND doesnt always make sense oh, and this could be my final statement for a while (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?p=6101254#post6101254) |
| Salzorin05-04-05, 11:17 PM | Personally, I'm getting to the point where I think we need to restrict readied actions to allow only interrupting spellcasting/manifesting. The strategy Cat used here, while within the Core rules makes no actual sense in battle, and violates the entire combat concept of DnD. Combatants are supposed to dance back and forth trading blows. It's built into their armor class (as a dex bonus or dodge bonus), and into their reach. Using a readied action this way shouldn't be allowed, because it breaks the system of combat. That's my 2 cps. -Jindl I have to agree that the use of readied actions in this fashion is rather illogical and very much outside the intention of the rule... I'm all for restricting readied actions to a more feasible set of actions that are within the true nature of the combat system, but we can't just restrict it to spellcasting/manifesting. Readying a pike weapon against a charge, for instance, is something that makes perfect sense and something specifically outlined within the books... so the question is, where do you draw the line? Is readying a move action against a bow so you can duck behind a pillar acceptable? What about readying an action against a power in the same fashion so they lose LOS? Are Jindl and I alone on this one, or are there more people that support the idea and think that readied actions need some more clearly defined uses? |
| Sindorin05-04-05, 11:22 PM | A lot of my fights have gotten locked down and frustrated pitlords recently because I have been trying to adapt to tactics seen used here in CoCo. I usually say "Always attack with a readied action" in hopes that it won't trigger the enemy's. I would love to see restrictions applied to readied actions in combat, they just don't make sense sometimes. |
| Cerebus1305-04-05, 11:27 PM | 4th rerun is up...here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6075899&postcount=1511). Mer-Man is still the winner, but the fight is VERY much down to the wire at the end. Both opponents have studied each other long enough that Aeluath anticipates the readied action now, and Mer-Man realizes this (after one wasted ready) so switches to trading blows with him. A 20 and then an 18 to confirm a crit against Aeluath ends it however. As always...please let me know immediately if you find something wrong with the way I ran the fight. I apologize for all of the reruns, I've been a bit distracted lately so my work suffers. |
| cellardweller05-04-05, 11:31 PM | Are Jindl and I alone on this one, or are there more people that support the idea and think that readied actions need some more clearly defined uses? I disagree completely. I think Cat's use of readied actions was both within the letter and the intent of the rule. These are the sort of applications that I see regularly at tabletop games. |
| xanadu05-04-05, 11:59 PM | I disagree completely. I think Cat's use of readied actions was both within the letter and the intent of the rule. These are the sort of applications that I see regularly at tabletop games. Agree in the letter of the rule, but not its intent. Combat is fluid. Nobody runs away fast enough to avoid the swing of a sword; I dont care how long the are readying. Whatever reactive capabilities characters have are reflected in dexterity bonuses. I'm sorry but the whole: "I ready a move when A attacks so A hits air" is ultimately cheese aside from unrealistic. How does A's attack hit air anyway? If you ain't there, he doesn't attack. What it boils down to are experienced gladiators are seeking to exploit the rules to waste their opponents standard actions. I agree that it is a valid tactic, but what if a person doesn't write tactics vs such a contigency? Some pitlords have them continually executing flawed routines. In a tabletop setting, a opponent can adjust his tactics. This is not variable here and thus very much exagerrates their effectivness. |
| Malither7605-05-05, 12:02 AM | I think to ready and action is fine, but the trigger is what matters the book uses and example of someone entering through a door will trigger the action mean it could be friend or enemey, the action happens quick b/c it is an interupt. That is why I believe you can not ready to such a specific action as an attack, if he is swinging on you its too late, now it is leagal to say when he closes to threat I want to retreat back 5 feet and poke with spear, again this will interupt him but he will then be able to continue his move and attack, same with archery, you could ready to duck behind cover when they load weapon or make a move. and so on, the ready action has to be vague and quick because again its an interupt at least thats my interpetation, I will see if I can get the question answered by emailing wizards of the coast. |
| cellardweller05-05-05, 12:49 AM | Agree in the letter of the rule, but not its intent. Combat is fluid. Nobody runs away fast enough to avoid the swing of a sword; I dont care how long the are readying. Whatever reactive capabilities characters have are reflected in dexterity bonuses. I'm sorry but the whole: "I ready a move when A attacks so A hits air" is ultimately cheese aside from unrealistic. How does A's attack hit air anyway? If you ain't there, he doesn't attack. What it boils down to are experienced gladiators are seeking to exploit the rules to waste their opponents standard actions. I agree that it is a valid tactic, but what if a person doesn't write tactics vs such a contigency? Some pitlords have them continually executing flawed routines. In a tabletop setting, a opponent can adjust his tactics. This is not variable here and thus very much exagerrates their effectivness. But you're ok with interrupting spells? I think you are letting preconceptions interferre, remember it takes exactly the same amount of time to swing a sword as it does to cast a spell. It sounds like your problem is not with the readied actions but with some pitlording you receive. A character should never be robotted, and an opponent should have his tactics adjusted after 1 or 2 "spoofs". |
| Kaigan05-05-05, 01:10 AM | Haha, alright, I give in, Cat's readied actions are too powerful yes. And I really hope he doesn't lose sleep over thinking them up. I always thought the arena was to test a build, and I really don't know where, pillar hoping with readied actions and a glaive comes into real D&D, but that's just me. I mean, it's an intelligent concept and all, but when it boils down to it, hey, whatever. I guess if I ever fight merman again, my tactics will be, buff until Merman is buffed all the way, stay away as I watch him go to the central pillars to start his dance, then just wait, and buff occaisionally as Merman waits out the 10 round limit, and force him out, and then attack where and when I can. It's a frustrating cycle to deal with, and not worth my time in tactics. So yeah, Cat, I applaude your intelligent tactics, but your build at the moment says nothing to me. |
| KerlanRayne05-05-05, 01:50 AM | By saying that my character should use the Dorje even if that means taking an attack to do so makes it pretty clear the importance I attached to such a manuever.You know you did use Vigor three times. Also, on a related note, to repeat my earlier statement about the change in Psionic Pricing Rules: But his Dorje had nothing to do with the change in the rules. The power level has always scaled with the manifester level. All you did was change the other items to match it. It was wrong when he got it in the quest and more than doubles his net worth. At the very least I think it should be lowered to manifester level 3 or 4. (Sorry, xanadu, but doubling your net worth is a big thing.)Any response to my suggestion? I know that any chage made won't go into effect untill after this fight anyway. At ML 6 it's worth 13,500 gp!! At ML 4 it would drop by more than half to 6,000 gp. At ML 3 it would go down to 4,500 gp. KerlanRayne |
| cellardweller05-05-05, 01:55 AM | I agree, the Dojre should be replaced with either a lower ML version or a partially charged version at Xanadu's discretion. |
| spasheridan05-05-05, 02:05 AM | Logic traps in tactics are a royal pain in the rear. I hate it when pitlord bias wins or looses a fight, but I hate it even more when gladiators exploit rules loopholes to throw a surprise tactic. Because of the blindness that tactics are written in an extremely unusual tactic will always be unanticipated. Here's a good example: Polymorph / Wildshape: Tactcs vs a grappler differ from tactics vs a reach weapon wielder differ from tactics vs a 5 attack a rnd opponent differ from tactics vs a hider differ from tactics vs a mobile opponet. If an opponent has access to polymorph or wildshape then you must write tactics for each of those instances, yet the the polymorpher must only write tactics for the form they will choose. As a pitlord I do not want my decisions to be what make or break the fight. But when one gladiator writes tactics that bring the battle into an unexpected situation I am forced to decide how to alter the other gladiator's tactics. I find readied actions to be the first tactic to be abused in this manner, forcing the pitlord to choose winners and loosers. The flip side of this, of course, is imblance between casters and non-casters. Readied actions tend to be the only defense a non-caster has vs spells. Since so many spells have save or die power, the only defense vs them is to not be the target... and so readied actions are a necesarry evil. I'm still waiting for an honest readied action marathon, where 2 characters stare each other down for 10 rounds... each with a readied action waiting to be triggered by their opponent. The silliness will be amusing. |
| KerlanRayne05-05-05, 02:23 AM | As for the readied move actions, this is how I see it. Fighter A swings at Fighter B and Fighter B dodges to the left just far enough to miss and then swings back. That would be normal combat. Now what if Fighter B dodged to the left and kept going left until he was 30 ft away? That would be a readied move action. KerlanRayne |
| Jindl05-05-05, 02:44 AM | As for the readied move actions, this is how I see it. Fighter A swings at Fighter B and Fighter B dodges to the left just far enough to miss and then swings back. That would be normal combat. Now what if Fighter B dodged to the left and kept going left until he was 30 ft away? That would be a readied move action. KerlanRayne And I don't have such a problem with that (although per the rules, Fighter B would draw an AoO for leaving a threatened area). What we are seeing is that Fighter B dodges to the left (making Fighter A automatically miss), and then attacks as part of the same action. Why should that be any different than normal combat (where Fighter A makes his normal attack roll to hit)? -Jindl |
| Jindl05-05-05, 02:48 AM | The flip side of this, of course, is imblance between casters and non-casters. Readied actions tend to be the only defense a non-caster has vs spells. Since so many spells have save or die power, the only defense vs them is to not be the target... and so readied actions are a necesarry evil. That's part of the reason that I suggest we restrict readied actions to include interrupting spells, single moves, and readied attacks. Actually, come to think of it, I think the fairest thing to do is eliminate the ability to take a 5 ft step with your readied action. That would help with the cheese factor immensely. BTW: Almost all save or die spells have Fort saves, which just happens to be the best saves for the majority of non-casters. Save or die spells actually work much better against casters than they do against non-casters (due to the low Fort of many casters). -Jindl |
| xanadu05-05-05, 02:50 AM | But you're ok with interrupting spells? I think you are letting preconceptions interferre, remember it takes exactly the same amount of time to swing a sword as it does to cast a spell. It sounds like your problem is not with the readied actions but with some pitlording you receive. A character should never be robotted, and an opponent should have his tactics adjusted after 1 or 2 "spoofs". In a manner of speaking, yes. It takes a standard action to swing a sword and cast a spell yes, but I'd really think casting a spell takes more time if D & D were real (retrieve spell components, wave your hands in the air, speak nonsensical phrase - even in one motion, my sword is already swong by the time you are pulling your hand out of component pouch...also in Advanced D & D spells were cast in terms of segments, a more realistic if cumbersome scenario that reflected the reality they took longer). It's not just a problem with pitlording. Is the "I ready against an attack against an attack" routine explained clearly in the rules? Without extrapolating, can I see a reference stating I lose my attack because I was unable to attack an opponent not there? Do you enjoy pitlording a match where A says, "ready a move upon B's spellcasting" and B says, "Ready a spell upon A's movement"? In a tabletop non 1 VS 1 confrontation, A is attacked by C and B is grappled by D for idling. In real campaigns, the sophisitcated tactics we use are often, even if desirable, not really practical. If Gladius is about derterming the playability of real life characters, I'd prefer the winner to be the better build, not the one who spends the most time writing tactics. I understand my view is just an opinion and might even be a minority. Amd I'm not saying there is not a place for creative tactics. Look at some of the first fights in COCO; they seemed more fluid, enjoyable, and more in line what happens in a table top setting (at least from my experience). |
| xanadu05-05-05, 03:09 AM | You know you did use Vigor three times. Yes. But I don't see what your getting at here. Until the item if no longer useable, the tactics should not change. There is a reason why I emphasized using it because I knew Necavi would take a lot of arrows this fight. Also, on a related note, to repeat my earlier statement about the change in Psionic Pricing Rules: Any response to my suggestion? I know that any chage made won't go into effect untill after this fight anyway. At ML 6 it's worth 13,500 gp!! At ML 4 it would drop by more than half to 6,000 gp. At ML 3 it would go down to 4,500 gp. KerlanRayne Yeah, The pitlord administrator said because I aquired it as a quest under the old rules system on a quest, the item would stay as is (though if I ever wanted to sell it, it would be priced under the new rules). Now, when every other gladiator gives up their 175 gp manifester level 7 energy ray stones and 150 gp 30 hit point vigor stones, I am willing to price my item in accordance to every other gladiators' equipment so Necavi is not an anomaly - which I have to say I am doing so voluntarily and something not everyone would do. It certainly does seem as if you are trying to make it sound as if my objections are unreasonable. Why? Necavi fought under the same pricing system as every other gladiator this week - he had no unfair advantage. Also I do not think you would be happy if Zubair broke away from your most important tactic (say going into melee) and then have me reply to your objections, "You know Zubair hit me three times with his sword." |
| cellardweller05-05-05, 03:27 AM | <snip>but I'd really think casting a spell takes more time if D & D were real <snip> This is what I mean about preconceptions. Without extrapolating, can I see a reference stating I lose my attack because I was unable to attack an opponent not there? CombatII.rtf The action occurs just before the action that triggers it. If the triggered action is part of another character’s activities, you interrupt the other character. Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action. Look at some of the first fights in COCO; they seemed more fluid, enjoyable, and more in line what happens in a table top setting (at least from my experience). I see rule *accuracy* as much more important. Any change from the core rules takes the CoCo further away from the "average"* dnd game *I am assuming that for every group whose house rule is "double done by the fireball spell" there is a group that house rules "fireball does half damage" etc. |
| Snommelp05-05-05, 03:58 AM | @ Jindl: it's not too big of a deal, seeing as it would only work for one round anyway. From the PHB, page 160: "You can take a 5-foot step as part of a readied action, but only of you don't otherwise move any distance during the round." If Mer-man moves on his turn and readies again, he can't take the five foot step. If Mer-man doesn't move, but rather readies to duck back five feet, then Aeluath can turn his five-foot step to close into a larger move action and still get an attack in. Unless I've misinterpreted a rule somewhere. This seems to have gone unnoticed, and is still relevent, so forgive me, but I shall quote myself. |
| xanadu05-05-05, 05:19 AM | The action occurs just before the action that triggers it. If the triggered action is part of another character’s activities, you interrupt the other character. Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action. I believe this would support my interpretation not yours. B readies a move actions vs A's attack. A declares his action to attack B. B's ready action triggers and moves 30 feet away. A is no longer capable of continuing his stated action of attacking B because B is no longer a valid target. I see rule *accuracy* as much more important. Any change from the core rules takes the CoCo further away from the "average"* dnd game Are you saying the older COCO fights were based on incorrect interpretations of the rules? I wasn't here so maybe I'm wrong abbout this, but the fights I saw were not replete with irregularities, oddities, or other assorted house rules. What rule do I consult when I have this scenario: A says, "ready a move upon B's spellcasting" and B says, "Ready a spell upon A's movement"? The 10 round rule, a very big change from the core rules. This hypothetical fight probably will not be derermined by strength of build or even tactics but by who falls on the wrong side of a ready loop. |
| cellardweller05-05-05, 06:26 AM | B readies a move actions vs A's attack. A declares his action to attack B. B's ready action triggers and moves 30 feet away. A is no longer capable of continuing his stated action of attacking B because B is no longer a valid target. We agree so far, A is no longer capable of continuing his action. Where we diverge is that you think this entitles A to a second standard action, but the passage does not say this, it only says that he can continue his action. A cannot complete his attack and he now only has a MEA left. Are you saying the older COCO fights were based on incorrect interpretations of the rules? I wasn't here so maybe I'm wrong abbout this, but the fights I saw were not replete with irregularities, oddities, or other assorted house rules. Not house rules, but collective misinterpretations (allowing sundering with adamantine arrows for example). Every once in a while someone says "hey, thats not right" and the community as a whole becomes more adherent to the rules. Currently CoCo has only 3 house rules (PoA, Gate and Psionic Items), and none of these were introduced lightly. What rule do I consult when I have this scenario: A says, "ready a move upon B's spellcasting" and B says, "Ready a spell upon A's movement"? You'd consult exactly the same ones that you'd consult in a table top game - the rules on readying CombatII.rtf - In both environments an infinite loop results. The 10 round limit is the equivilent of an adventure module saying something like "If the party take more than 3 hours to reach Agathoths chamber he will teleport back to his stronghold" or "Unless Agathoth can drive the party out of his chamber within 4 minutes his ritual will be ruined" - it forces one party to break the loop first. |
| Jindl05-05-05, 09:42 AM | I think Snommelp has made a good point, namely that Mer-man could not use his ready strategy 2 rounds in a row. |
| Salzorin05-05-05, 10:16 AM | I don't see how that prohibits him from using a 5' step and an attack every round jindl.... On something you mentioned last page as a possible resolution to readied actions... the removal of 5' steps. The only problem with removing the use of 5' steps is that you could then never successfully ready an action to attack and interupt a spell... since any spell caster could just 5' step away and cast. So you'd have to add a little extra wording to perhaps only disallow 5' step retreats? That the 5' step can only be used in the pursuit of making the standard action successful. |
| Caterane05-05-05, 10:22 AM | Here's how it goes: (1) MerMan readies to attack+5ft step which causes Kaigan's attack to miss, then ini resets and he moves silently around the pillar and readies again. Aeulath cannot see where I am nor what I am doing. He cannot ride around the pillar because that way he loses his attack (besides: he wanted to go into melee anyway). So Aeulath moves within the central obstacle and keeps looking for me. Since he has no lance he needs to come within 5ft of me -> AoO plus my ready action goes off, and if he didn't pass a spot check he is flatfooted. Then Aeulthat attacks. That way I got off 3 attacks vs 1 from Auelath. (2) Next round: A and M are basing each other. MerMan readies to 5ft step and attack when Auelelath attacks which again causes his attack to miss (because the attack is already underway) and Merman attacks from cover. Ini resets and Merman moves away (no AoO because of cover) to the other side of the pillar and readies again. See (1). This is a highly sophisticated maneuver that I developed (which still hasn't been executed properly, not even in the 4th rerun but since I won I won't bother Cerebus anymore). Now Kaigan - who basically wrote nothing else but "Charge or Attack" should find a perfect counter strategy after only 1 round. Sorry guys but that's just not fair. @Spash/Jindl: You suggest that the pitlord should adept after one or two rounds but I also remember MerMan's fight vs Azriel where MerMan switched weapons back and forth for 4 rounds, which was backed up by both of you because I didn't explicitely describe a counter in my tactics (I mentioned something even but that was not enough in your opinion). This week, Aeulath (Int 10 opposed to MerMan's 16 for last week) quickly adepts his tactic after one (or two rounds at the latest). And that even though he didn't mention a single word about that but just wrote attack. Additionally, he not only quickly adjusts, he also finds a perfect counter tactic with ready actions and whatnot. When I asked for a proper adaption last week, you only said "it's not in the tactic so we go with the very basic adaption". I don't want to think that this is Anti-Caterane thinking so I assume you have changed your mind about the level and nature of pitlord adaptions during the last 7 days. |
| Jindl05-05-05, 10:54 AM | @Spash/Jindl: You suggest that the pitlord should adept after one or two rounds but I also remember MerMan's fight vs Azriel where MerMan switched weapons back and forth for 4 rounds, which was backed up by both of you because I didn't explicitely describe a counter in my tactics (I mentioned something even but that was not enough in your opinion). This week, Aeulath (Int 10 opposed to MerMan's 16 for last week) quickly adepts his tactic after one (or two rounds at the latest). And that even though he didn't mention a single word about that but just wrote attack. Additionally, he not only quickly adjusts, he also finds a perfect counter tactic with ready actions and whatnot. When I asked for a proper adaption last week, you only said "it's not in the tactic so we go with the very basic adaption". I don't want to think that this is Anti-Caterane thinking so I assume you have changed your mind about the level and nature of pitlord adaptions during the last 7 days. In both cases, I think the gladiator would adapt after seeing the manuever twice (not 4 times as was done with Mer-man). Although the counter I suggested for Aeluath is much simpler than the one that Mer-man needed against Azriel. However, I want to draw your attention back to my earlier point: The fights are becoming more an issue of who writes better "readied action tactics" than the builds themselves. And the pitlords are having to resolve these readied actions with improvised counters, which leads to many reruns. Just the two fights mentioned in this post had to be run a total of 8 times. That's ridiculous, and its a direct result of "readied action tactics". Now I agree with cellardweller that using readied actions is common and good in a tabletop game. But in a game where players have to mail in tactics to a pitlord, it causes havoc in the whole system. Anytime a fight has to be rerun multiple times, nobody ends up happy. So I think we need to be working on a solution. Some suggestions are: 1. Eliminate the ability to take a free 5' step with the ready action. 2. Restrict readied actions to a specific list to choose from (such as "set against charge", "attack to interrupt spellcasting/manifesting", "attack when located", "move when he moves", etc.) 3. Disallow the use of a "readied dodge" (ie. "move when he attacks".) 4. I'm sure there are other possibilities as well. While I'm not sure yet which of these changes I think is the best, I do think that any one of these changes to our system would ensure that this place runs smoothly and for the enjoyment of everyone. While this may be a more strict interpretation of the standard Core "ready action", I think it is a necessary change due to the way we run fights. -Jindl |
| Caterane05-05-05, 11:03 AM | I'd even say we should use suggestion 1-3. In my group, we reduced ready actions likewise when everyone ran around with ready actions all day lol |
| spasheridan05-05-05, 01:31 PM | With perfect omniscience the tactical counter to Mermans offense: Rnd 1) Approach to 10 feet of Merman. Merman continues to ready. Rnd 2) 5 foot adjust to base Merman. Merman continues to ready. Rnd 3) Attack merman, after merman adjusts back and attacks, you can make a 5 foot adjust and continue with your attack action. OR 1) Always carry a reach weapon. When you see your opponent readying throw a dagger at him then ready yourself so he breaks the 10 round limit 1st. BTW: Almost all save or die spells have Fort saves, which just happens to be the best saves for the majority of non-casters. Save or die spells actually work much better against castSave or Die doesn't mean die, it also means helpless, so toss in those Wil saves for hold person, brainlock, sleep... @Spash/Jindl: You suggest that the pitlord should adept after one or two rounds but I also remember MerMan's fight vs Azriel where MerMan switched weapons back and forth for 4 rounds, which was backed up by both of you because I didn't explicitely describe a counter in my tactics (I mentioned something even but that was not enough in your opinion). This week, Aeulath (Int 10 opposed to MerMan's 16 for last week) quickly adepts his tactic after one (or two rounds at the latest). And that even though he didn't mention a single word about that but just wrote attack.I'm trying to remember specifics of last week.. it all seems to blur together. My general feeling is that logic trap tactics (or denial tactics) break the spirit of the rules, and are not so much a clever tactical invention but rather an abuse of the mail-in tactics system we use. SO, spring attacks with a glaive wielder that force the opponent to incur an AoO every round are fair and even. Readied actions around corners vs attacks that deny opponents attacks and force them to incur multiple AoO are not fair and even. Is there a rules reason why? Of course not, but the way that battles are run here (mail-in tactics) are not based on core rules and the issue at hand is not the legality of the manuver but the fairness of it in a mail-in tactics world. The main reason I don't like these kinds of actions is the need for the pitlord to improvise. It's unfair to run a gladiator like a robot and have his attack actions be denied round after round.. no one would play like that. It's also unfair to create new tactics after reading the opponents tactics, but that's what is required. And so the pitlord is forced into picking a winner and a looser... and thus re-runs occur. As far as a specific fix, I think Jindl has a good grasp on it. Let me ponder it for a while... |
| KerlanRayne05-05-05, 03:10 PM | Yes. But I don't see what your getting at here. Until the item if no longer useable, the tactics should not change. There is a reason why I emphasized using it because I knew Necavi would take a lot of arrows this fight. ... Also I do not think you would be happy if Zubair broke away from your most important tactic (say going into melee) and then have me reply to your objections, "You know Zubair hit me three times with his sword."I was just saying that in the first six rounds you used it three times, after that it was either at 30 or you were unconscious. I wasn't trying to attack you, just making sure you understood the fight. I know some of it was hard to read for me. Yeah, The pitlord administrator said because I aquired it as a quest under the old rules system on a quest, the item would stay as is (though if I ever wanted to sell it, it would be priced under the new rules). Now, when every other gladiator gives up their 175 gp manifester level 7 energy ray stones and 150 gp 30 hit point vigor stones, I am willing to price my item in accordance to every other gladiators' equipment so Necavi is not an anomaly - which I have to say I am doing so voluntarily and something not everyone would do. It certainly does seem as if you are trying to make it sound as if my objections are unreasonable. Why? Necavi fought under the same pricing system as every other gladiator this week - he had no unfair advantage.See this is where we disagree. The new pricing rules had no effect on your Vigor item. I has always been priced wrong, even before the changes. Me pointing out this error in the Character Violations thread is what sparked the whole Psionic Pricing debate. They were basically saying "He's right, and we should make the other items be priced like that too." KerlanRayne PS - The GP and XP values for our fight were wrong. I should get 1,500 XP and 1,600 GP. xanadu should get 500 XP and 533 GP. |
| xanadu05-05-05, 05:44 PM | ... |
| xanadu05-05-05, 06:17 PM | I was just saying that in the first six rounds you used it three times, after that it was either at 30 or you were unconscious. I wasn't trying to attack you, just making sure you understood the fight. I know some of it was hard to read for me. Only because my tactics were not followed. I knew I'd get hit with your super arrow that is why I said "first" and "dont put away until more than 50 HPs". How come everyone else has the right to complain and get re-runs when pitlords dont follow small minor tactical nuances but when my #1 tactic which I made explicitly clear is ignored, my objections are equally ignored. If you ask me, I think that rather sucks. See this is where we disagree. The new pricing rules had no effect on your Vigor item. I has always been priced wrong, even before the changes. Me pointing out this error in the Character Violations thread is what sparked the whole Psionic Pricing debate. They were basically saying "He's right, and we should make the other items be priced like that too." Has nothing to do with the fight. Though I think your synopsis does not reflect the issue? @Xanadu: Necavi may keep the vigor dorje from the quest; after all, it was your quest reward. However, in case you want to sell it you will only get the old price, half of it even. Add a * behind the item which links to this post. Kerlan is right but so is Xanadu. I have noticed that problem some time ago. The pricing of the dorje is not the issue here and I don't know why it keeps coming up. The first time I fought Zubair, the pitlord did not allow me to make ride checks because he felt I needed mounted combat. I lost but didn't complain because it probably wouldn't have made a differenece (though it certainly would have given me a chance). Now the very first thing I mention in my tactics just gets ignored and noone has a problems with that?!?!? Why do "Comments and Concerns" threads exists if it is clearly obvious that a gladiator's #1 priority was not followed and when said gladiator makes the point - the first time that particular gladiator has ever made a point despite getting screwed in the past - he is basically told his item, legally aquired under the existing rules and further sanctioned by the Pitlord adminstrator is a problem? KerlanRayne, please dont take this personally I am not blaming you; you did not run the fight and you have an equal right to address your comments and concerns. Comment: Round one - Vigor Dorje. Vigor Dorje not stowed away until HP total is over 50. Vigor Dorje re-manifested once under 30 HPs. Follow tactics please. Concern: Pitlord didn't follow obviously very important tactic and nobody seems to care except gladiator who lost. Proposed solution. See comment. Gladiators and allies keep existing rolls of course. |
| Salrantol05-05-05, 06:36 PM | @Snommelp& @Sunwolf: Please send tactics soon, I'd like to run the fight tonight if I can. You guys did well last week in getting them early so I hope I can count on you both again. @xanadu: You are correct. If tactics are not followed, it is the responsibility of the pitlord to correct the error. |