Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Caterane 02-12-07, 01:54 PM	IRON MAN TOURNAMENT - Gossip and Rumors - http://www.caterane.de/CoCo/Struktur/Gladius-Coliseum.jpg The time has come that we will see the first Iron Man Tournament. As announced, the start date will be March 14 so it's time to flesh out the final rules and find any problems now before they arise. This is one of the functions of this thread. In addition to that, it will serve as a Tavern to all things related to the Iron Man Tournament. The Winner of the Iron Man Tournament gains a Custom Avatar and a Custom Title! This thread also serves as a Subscription thread. I will maintain a list of characters here that subscribed to the Iron Man. Since it's important that there are as few auto-wins as possible due to player absence, all subscribed characters will have to confirm their participation the week before the tournament begins but I'll remind you about again that when the time comes. The following characters have subscribed to the Iron Man. To subscribe, write me a PM (http://boards1.wizards.com/private.php?do=newpm&u=154373) and check back later to see if I didn't miss your subscription. Your character must be ECL 9 or ECL 10, or start as a team of ECL 7s or ECL 8s, in any combination. Characters marked red are handicapped and gain a bonus (see next post). IRON MAN PARTICIPANTS [Last Update: MAR 14] [ECL10] Archangel Ixenthor (Caterane) [Power: 17673 (1564); 6 won, 1 lost] [Q:6][C:1] [Great Renown] [Special Power] [ECL10] Uhmentarymster the Old (Caterane) [Power: 24351 (2155); 20 won, 3 lost] [Q:1] [Great Renown] [ECL10] Indri'ynar Per'Elereth (Caterane) [Power: 21594 (1911); 16 won, 5 lost] [Q:5] [Great Renown] [ECL10] Mer-Man (Caterane) [Power: 27583 (2441); 19 won, 2 lost] [Q:1] [Great Renown] [ECL10] Loddick Saffrion (Erithmu) [Power: 12418 (1099); 14 won, 10 lost] [Q:4] [ECL10] Lord Frost (Macbrea) [Power: 7695 (681); 3 won, 6 lost] [Q:2] [Special Power] [Failure] [ECL10] Zassl (Maraxus) [Power: 14769 (1307); 17 won, 16 lost] [Q:1] [Special Power] [ECL10] Noko (Maraxus) [Power: 17017 (1506); 14 won, 5 lost] [Great Renown] [Special Power] [ECL10] Besthirah Lafali (MindWandererB) [Power: 13819 (1223); 5 won, 2 lost] [Q:1] [Special Power] [ECL10] Aerryl Nalladar (MindWandererB) [Power: 13853 (1226); 17 won, 9 lost] [Q:4] [ECL10] Lady Indivara (MitzaVolchenko) [Power: 11300 (1000); 0 won, 0 lost] [Q:1] [Special Power] [ECL09] Lissa Longfellow (MysticMonk2005) [Power: 7528 (941); 16 won, 15 lost] [Q:1] [ECL10] Perius (Ravashack) [Power: 10791 (955); 14 won, 33 lost] [ECL10] Raskos the Jade Father (SauroGrenom) [Power: 12904 (1142); 6 won, 5 lost] [Q:5] [ECL10] Kracknol (SauroGrenom) [Power: 16644 (1473); 20 won, 10 lost] [ECL10] Retikos, The Padparadasha Sage (SauroGrenom) [Power: 11300 (1000); 0 won, 0 lost] [Q:1] [ECL10] Va'ria Theladrais (Sindorin) [Power: 16938 (1499); 10 won, 6 lost] [Q:3] [ECL10] Vandelar the Red (SoulLord) [Power: 14656 (1297); 17 won, 9 lost] [Q:3] [ECL10] Brilf Zephyr (Sunwolf) [Power: 11831 (1047); 16 won, 18 lost] [ECL10] Leif Goldeneye (Sunwolf) [Power:22080 (1954); 21 won, 4 lost] [Q:1] [Great Renown] [ECL10] Telveran Trueblade (Sunwolf) [Power: 13006 (1151); 12 won, 9 lost] [ECL10] Kraegin (TelinArtho) [Power: 13017 (1152); 9 won, 14 lost] [Q:3] [ECL10] Jur, The Mad Magician (Tellish_of_Ket) [Power: 11300 (1000); 0 won, 0 lost] [Q:1] [ECL09] Monsieur Hood (TheMagister) [Power: 13672 (1709); 14 won, 5 lost] [Q:2] [Great Renown] [ECL10] Saffron Brass (Vathelokai) [Power: 11446 (1013); 4 won, 7 lost] [Q:6] [Special Power] [ECL10] Auburn (Vathelokai) [Power: 11187 (990); 12 won, 12 lost] [Q:5] [ECL10] Gaston Dar'ath (waywreth) [Power: 19311 (1709); 20 won, 7 lost] [Q:1] [Great Renown] [ECL10] Archdevil Asran (Zevox) [Power: 12949 (1146); 7 won, 6 lost] [Q:5] [ECL10] Eraca Moralta (Zevox) [Power: 15345 (1358); 14 won, 4 lost] [Q:2][M:2] [Special Power] The Arcane Hand [ECL08] Owen Ir'Tolden (Erithmu) [Power: 5700 (1000); 0 won, 0 lost] [Q:1] [ECL08] Silis Lueria (MindWandererB) [Power: 5700 (1000); 0 won, 0 lost] [Q:3][C:1] The Two Storms [ECL08] Istima Telarc (Zevox) [Power: 9262 (1625); 13 won, 4 lost] [Q:3] [Great Renown] [ECL08] Ihdald Seaslash (Milov) [Power: 6486 (1138); 11 won, 13 lost] [Q:4] The Wailing Fugue [ECL08] The Harvester (Caterane) [Power: 12705 (2229); 18 won, 0 lost] [Q:4] [Great Renown] [ECL07] The Pale-Rider (Tellish of Ket) [Power: 6104 (1526); 7 won, 1 lost] [Q:3] [Great Reknown] The Iron Man can only work if there are 16, 32, or 64 characters participating. If there are 1-3 missing slots we can fill them with Monster Groups but that should be kept at a minimum. If the starting number of characters is slightly above the last increment, the players with the most subscribed characters have to withdraw one of theirs until it fits. The next post will list all rules we have fleshed out so check back once in a while.
Caterane 02-12-07, 01:55 PM	Elligable Participants Any character of ECL 9 or ECL 10 can participate as well as any ECL 7 and ECL 8 character in teams. Handicapped Characters ECL 9 characters, and ECL 7 characters in teams gain one free prebuff round and one surprise round before initiative is being rolled. That is to compensate for their handicap of being of lower level. If two such handicapped PCs fight each other, the effect is evened out. If, however, two teams with ECL 7s but also ECL 8s meet, the handicapped characters are not evened out but ressolved normally according to the handicap rules (the ECL 7s roll initiatives before their surprise round). Frozen Tournament As discussed, the tournament will be run frozen. You get your expendables back after the 3FC is complete. The finals will thus be held in week 2. No XP or GP, no powerrating change, no win/loss record change, and once the tournament started you cannot buy or craft anything until it's over or you're out. Character Reset All characters participating will be reset to Week 1, no matter in which week they're now. Equal chances to everyone. Once the tournament is over, all characters will continue normally in which week they were in when the higher leagues unfreeze. Free Crafting To grant equal chances to those who had to be reset, everyone gets to buy stuff before the tournament starts, and gains one free week of crafting. Please send a PM to my account (not to Pitlords! The Pitlords account can only hold 30 PMs and will flood) with your craft petition. Two-week Pairings Iron Man Pairings will be rolled on wednesday along with regular pairings. All Iron Man fights will be 2 week fights. However, I want to remind any pitlord to finish his fight in week 1!!!! The additional week is NOT for you to lay back in week 1 but to discuss fight issues and to make sure that there are definately no late fights or reruns. Again: for the pitlord, nothing changes! Split Brackets Since the IMT uses 16 fights in round 1, we will split this round into two groups (or maybe 4 if we don't have enough pitlords, see below). So this effectively means round 1 will be finished after one month (two months if quartered). Fortunately, time is not an issue. Pitlord Rewards Since these fights require you to spend more time on details, any IMT pitlord will get 2° for his fight. However, the penalties for not finishing such a fight are quadrupled! This includes (!) any necessary reruns and mistakes to be fixed so make sure everything is settled at the end of the 2-week period. If there are two different opinions, the Elders and I will decide by vote; majority wins. Request to Players I want to ask any IMT participant to NOT activate any character not in the tournament; we need every pitlord for that time. I also want to ask for additional pitlord volunteers. If that doesn't work, we will have to split the IMT again, ie four 2-week pairings groups instead of two which would extend round 1 of the tournament to 2 months. I don't want the regular pairings to suffer but the IMT will get pitlords assigned first. If you have any additional questions, now's the time to ask.
Caterane 02-12-07, 02:03 PM	First Question: Should we hold the Iron Man frozen or unfrozen? The problem is that some characters level up right after their first match.
hogarth 02-12-07, 02:04 PM	Are the Iron Man matches going to preempt normal arena pairings on any of the weeks in question?
TheMagister 02-12-07, 02:15 PM	First Question: Should we hold the Iron Man frozen or unfrozen? The problem is that some characters level up right after their first match. If everyone is reset to fight 1 and allowed to spend their cash beforehand, then we should hold it frozen.
TelinArtho 02-12-07, 02:21 PM	Just a quick note that due to the timing, I will be unavailable as a pitlord for the iron man tournament. My baby boy is going to be born on March 14th (scheduled c-section), so I am virtually certain I will be unavaible. If, by chance, he does come early, I may alter my status at that time - but we'll see. I would suggest suspending regular fights during the first two weeks of the tournament to reduce pitlord load (fewer people have to run multiple difficult fights). After the first two weeks - I think it should be pretty simple to maintain the regular load. As to being frozen or not - I would suggest making it unfrozen, but make sure that everyone is given the opportunity to craft/etc beforehand (in the case of individuals who are mid-3FC or who just reach eligibility by the deadline. I would also not allow individuals to advance during the tournament so that it is an even keel throughout. In other words - accumulate exp during the tournament, but only advance (if possible) at the end.
Zevox 02-12-07, 02:35 PM	I definitely vote for Frozen. Having some of the ECL 10s leveling up in mid-tournament could really throw off the balance (could wind up with an ECL 9 vs an ECL 11 one-on-one). I suppose you could go with what Telin said and let them gain xp/gp but only level up/buy stuff after the tournament, but it'd be simpler for everyone just to treat it as Frozen I'd think. Zevox
Macbrea 02-12-07, 02:45 PM	My suggestion is unfrozen with a 2 week free craft timer set up before the tourneyment starts. This means at the start. All people are reset to week 1 and count as if they had 2 weeks to craft. That would be posted in a quick Non-Pairings Pairing right before the real pairings. Then the matches would start. Exp/gold wise they should recieve it atfer they have been eliminated from the tourneyment.
MindWandererB 02-12-07, 02:47 PM	I'm of the opinion that it should be frozen. If it isn't frozen, then mid-tourney levelups need to be prohibited. For mid-cycle characters, they definitely need to be able to buy or craft things ahead of time. Perhaps they could have some "probationary items" that they don't get to keep after the tournament. Regarding not having enough characters to fill a roster: we can always set it up so you have to "fight the bye." For instance, if there are two slots unfilled, they can be filled with another "copy" of a PC. The "real" PC will be determined in advance, but only the tourney administrator* will know which is which. That way, all participants have to take all the fights seriously (and expend spells, etc.), even though one of the copies is incapable of winning. An alternative would be to just auto-advance one PC that has no per-day abilities anyway. I don't want to use monsters. For one, the fairness of them is deeply in question, and a fight that's too easy or too hard would both be problematic. For another, what happens if the monster wins? It advances to the next round? I do not want this to be won by the troll weretyrannosaurus. We may have to suspend regular fights, depending on how many PCs are involved. Of course, each one would count as an activation regardless. BTW, if anyone wants to parner up with Silis, just for the heck of it, I'm game. Especially a fellow TAO-er or Achos campaigner. *The tourney administrator should be someone with no PCs involved, if at all possible. That leaves me out, and probably Cat. Telin can't commit at that point. NiQil, perhaps, since you don't have any characters at that level anyway?
Caterane 02-12-07, 03:21 PM	Well, I have nothing against a few monster groups. I see no reason why there shouldn't be NPC opposition or even a winner in the end. As for the administration, I'll do it but I want to participate too. Don't worry, all rolls will be publically rolled and visible to anyone. The cycle of the Iron Man will be 2 weeks per round. That extends it a bit and we have time to run hold-overs (which I believe will happen more often due to player complaints).
MindWandererB 02-12-07, 03:31 PM	Well, I have nothing against a few monster groups. I see no reason why there shouldn't be NPC opposition or even a winner in the end. The cycle of the Iron Man will be 2 weeks per round. That extends it a bit and we have time to run hold-overs (which I believe will happen more often due to player complaints).Again, I don't think monsters would be fair. Someone who draws 3 phrenic spider eaters is at an unfair advantage; someone who draws the half dragon treant or 6 fiendish manticores is at an unfair disadvantage. If we spend 2 weeks per set, we should definitely not suspend normal operations. We may need a State of Emergency, but 12 weeks without normal fights would be ridiculous.
Caterane 02-12-07, 04:10 PM	Of course we'll not suspend the arena but in case of a pitlord shortage the Iron Man has pre-eminence. In such a case we can come up with rules, like those in the Iron Man may not have any other characters active or have to pitlord for every PC beyond the first. Such things. We should maybe streamline the monster numbers. I've followed the discussion and I think it'd be better to have fixed numbers. What's the conversion on the rolls to fixed numbers?
MindWandererB 02-12-07, 04:17 PM	We should maybe streamline the monster numbers. I've followed the discussion and I think it'd be better to have fixed numbers. What's the conversion on the rolls to fixed numbers?1d3 or 1d4 = 2 2d2 or 1d6 = 3 Then just add any +'s or -'s and you're good.
Iced 02-12-07, 07:01 PM	I vote for unfrozen but without leveling/receiving awards until elimination from the tournament.
Caterane 02-12-07, 07:22 PM	Just thought about it again and figured out that unfrozen doesn't work. We cannot assign XP right away because else PCs level up mid-tournament. But even if we assign XP after the tournament retroactively, it's not working. The winner of the tournament might jump to ECL 12. If Ixenthor or Merman win, they're even almost ECL 13. However, for the 2 levels they got (ECL 11+12) they would still receive only gold rewards for ECL 10 fights. Remember the multiplier for ECL 10 is 1.93 while at ECL 11 it's 2.27 and at ECL 12 it's 2.72!! If we assign Virtual XP for the tournament then it's unfair too because you'd gain ECL 11 and ECL 12 multipliers while fighting ECL 10 opponents and gaining ECL 10 XP. Not to forget that if we do that, we'll have our ECL 10s spreach over 3-4 leagues. So to keep it KISS - we'll run the tournament frozen for all participants.
Abyssal Stalker 02-13-07, 02:11 AM	How about creating a couple of EL10 mercenaries and fill the gaps with them?
MindWandererB 02-13-07, 02:17 AM	How about creating a couple of EL10 mercenaries and fill the gaps with them? Mercs are undeniably weaker than PCs. That would be an unfair advantage. On the other hand... now that I think of it, perhaps they should be biased in favor of the PC. Perhaps the PCs with the very lowest powerratings could be paired against a merc. They need all the help they can get anyway, especially since the seeding system will put them up against the highest-rated PCs in the next round.
Iced 02-13-07, 03:25 AM	i'm not sure about that... i think i could make a pretty mean mercenary if i had EL10 flexability. With the right idea in mind i think that a mercenary doesn't need to be a pushover and i'll create a couple if we're going to use them.
Rauul 02-13-07, 04:19 AM	i'm not sure about that... i think i could make a pretty mean mercenary if i had EL10 flexability. With the right idea in mind i think that a mercenary doesn't need to be a pushover and i'll create a couple if we're going to use them. Wouldn't mind trying that myself... Since i don't have credits to make a ECL 10 for it.. Not that i haven't been thinking about how many fights to run a week to get there :) That reminds me..
Vathelokai 02-14-07, 12:34 AM	Mercs are undeniably weaker than PCs. That would be an unfair advantage. On the other hand... now that I think of it, perhaps they should be biased in favor of the PC. Perhaps the PCs with the very lowest powerratings could be paired against a merc. They need all the help they can get anyway, especially since the seeding system will put them up against the highest-rated PCs in the next round. Caliandra of TAO would be interested... ;) Maybe paired with Bobo the brute I could whip up a merc or two real quick.
SauroGrenom 02-16-07, 04:19 PM	Cat, What about the 3FC? This ironman tournament is an ironman thing, so is there going to be a 3FC or no? Is this a 4FC or 5FC (depending on # of participants) instead of a 3FC? We should hash that out soon. I'm going to be editing my characters for the ironman, and requesting some black market items. I need to know what the conditions of the battle will be so I can decide what's good to buy. Also what map are we using?
Zevox 02-17-07, 11:48 PM	Maps: King Uther had a pretty good idea for that last time the Iron Man was under serious discussion. Lemme' see if I can dig it up.... Yup, there it is, last page of the 2nd Council thread (yeesh, hadn't realized it had been so long...). Iron Man - I currently count 22 players within striking distance of EL10. 24 would be ideal, and it is doable should either someone make an EL10 character outright or quest higher-up from EL7. With 24 competitors, we could end up with something like this: Round 1, 3 player FFA: Fight 1: Sewer Fight 2: Forest Fight 3: City Fight 4: Arena Fight 5: Cavern Fight 6: Temple Fight 7: Plains Fight 8: Arena Survivors move on to the next round, autopopulating tournament seeds based on what fight they were put in originally. Round 2: Seed 1 vs Seed 8 - City Seed 4 vs Seed 5 - Forest Seed 3 vs Seed 6 - Cavern Seed 2 vs Seed 7 - Sewer Arenas are chosen to make competitors fight in a different arean every single combat. The true winner should be able to win in every battleground. Round 3: Seed 1/8 vs Seed 4/5 - Temple Seed 3/6 vs Seed 2/7 - Arena Arena chosen because it is not possible for any of the fighters to have fought in that particular arena. Although random arenas could be used out of the ones not fought in yet. Like Seed 1 vs Seed 4 in the Cavern, since neither have fought there yet. Final Round: Seed 1/8/4/5 vs Seed 3/6/2/7 - Either fight in a battleground neither have fought in or perhaps have someone create a new one just for this fight. Alterations will obviously be needed if we don't get the number of participants he anticipated, but it sounds like a pretty good, workable idea to me. Zevox
NiQil 02-18-07, 02:28 AM	In light of some industrious reporting on behalf of Zevox, as Prisonlord I feel it incumbant to add a stipulation to the IT that I feel that in order to participate, you should not have any outstanding violations in the prison of any kind. Not just red, but yellow or green as well. The IT is a big deal for us, and should be treated as such. So if someone can't take the time to fix errors that others have pointed out to them, then I don't feel that they deserve to be in the IT. Of course, that's just my 2 electrums.
Tellish_of_Ket 02-18-07, 02:32 AM	In light of some industrious reporting on behalf of Zevox, as Prisonlord I feel it incumbant to add a stipulation to the IT that I feel that in order to participate, you should not have any outstanding violations in the prison of any kind. Not just red, but yellow or green as well. The IT is a big deal for us, and should be treated as such. So if someone can't take the time to fix errors that others have pointed out to them, then I don't feel that they deserve to be in the IT. Of course, that's just my 2 electrums. I'll toss my 2 electrums in the kitty as well and second that. Tellish
MindWandererB 02-19-07, 02:27 AM	Maps: King Uther had a pretty good idea for that last time the Iron Man was under serious discussion. Lemme' see if I can dig it up.... Alterations will obviously be needed if we don't get the number of participants he anticipated, but it sounds like a pretty good, workable idea to me.For the sake of fairness, I'd like the finals to be held in the Arena, since it's the most egalitarian of all the maps. I would also like to set it up so that to make it to the finals, each competitor must have one battle in the cavern, temple, or sewers, one in the city or forest, and one in the arena or plains.
Caterane 02-20-07, 07:01 PM	Sorry that I haven't replied in the last 3 days but I was busy with ...tactics :cool: Sauro informed me that some of you have the impression that we ignore the 3FC for the tournament. Don't be misled by the name. The 3FC will be executed normally although all characters start in Fight 1 with their spells and abilities reset. The name IronMan was an invention of SnarkHunter (an Elder in the days of yore). He started to use this term from one day on before we had a concept so the name is not program. Maybe we should find a better name that doesn't mislead like that. Core Coliseum Tournament?
SauroGrenom 02-20-07, 07:48 PM	What Cat's trying to say here is that week 4 of the tournament will be like week 1 of the 3FC, so spells are regained and x/day abilities reset.
MindWandererB 02-21-07, 04:34 PM	Just to clarify: if participants are "reset" to Fight 1 of their cycle, it's treated just as if they had just finished Fight 3, right? So they can shop and so on? (I'm mad at myself, because I wanted to buy something for Besthirah, but had to set her ready so quickly that I forgot. I want to make sure I get a chance to do that.)
Tellish_of_Ket 02-21-07, 04:36 PM	Just to clarify: if participants are "reset" to Fight 1 of their cycle, it's treated just as if they had just finished Fight 3, right? So they can shop and so on? (I'm mad at myself, because I wanted to buy something for Besthirah, but had to set her ready so quickly that I forgot. I want to make sure I get a chance to do that.) I like that character concept, jfyi. A few of us pounded out some kind of similiar thoughts on a build back in the day, but never followed up on it. I like what you've done with urs. Tellish
MindWandererB 02-21-07, 04:56 PM	I like that character concept, jfyi. A few of us pounded out some kind of similiar thoughts on a build back in the day, but never followed up on it. I like what you've done with urs. Wish I'd seen that discussion... you folks probably thought of things I missed. She'll go with Psionic Fist at ECL 11, if you couldn't guess. Not 100% decided on the feats, but I'll probably focus on the archery (and maybe INA). That's the biggest downside of lycanthropes--you don't get very many feats of your choosing. She only gets 3 more by ECL 15, one of which has to be psionic, but the psionic archery feats are long chains. I still have a lot of thinking to do on that one. But your vote of confidence helps.
Caterane 02-21-07, 07:30 PM	Yes, everyone will be reset at the beginning of the tournament and is allowed to buy stuff, or craft for up to 7000 gp. Once the tournament started, there's no additional buying until it ends. After 3 fights your sheet will be reset to how it has been on week 1. I still hope we get 32 participants together...
MindWandererB 02-21-07, 07:46 PM	I reterate my willingness to pair Silis up with another ECL 8 character. He's not exactly the best out there, but he can fill up a slot. Well, half a slot. Looking at this week's roster, I see one active ECL 8 and four active ECL 7's that aren't signed up yet--surely someone would want to team up with Silis. However, also looking at the roster--I don't see it happening. We'd need 13 more participants or teams to hit 32. I see potentially three or four teams, and maybe 8 or so ECL 9-10 characters whose players are active these days. We'd have to get pretty much every eleigible character signed up to even come close, and even then we'd need a merc, monster, or bye to fill it up.
Erithmu 02-21-07, 07:52 PM	I reterate my willingness to pair Silis up with another ECL 8 character. He's not exactly the best out there, but he can fill up a slot. Well, half a slot. Looking at this week's roster, I see one active ECL 8 and four active ECL 7's that aren't signed up yet--surely someone would want to team up with Silis.Torel will be ECL 7 by the end of his cycle, If you will have him, he will get a buff round (which is really nice)
Zevox 02-21-07, 07:58 PM	With me and my brother you can definitely add 3 to our current list after this week - I'm waiting to send a PM for all of them at once, but after Istima levels from this week's fight, I'll be entering Asran, Eraca, and teaming Istima with my brother's Ihdald. Maybe if Featylec's mission is a success and we need the boost to our numbers I'll enter him, but only maybe (I'm hesitant to enter him without the Shadow Companion he'd get when he levels up, which is ironically the one and only class ally that requires questing around here). Zevox
Caterane 02-21-07, 08:02 PM	Hood and Harvester just broke up. I prefer to have Harvey at ECL 9 (access to 4th lvl spells) although I would have loved to fight with Hood. So, if anyone is interested in teaming up with our powerarcher, contact TheMagister.
Iced 02-25-07, 07:03 PM	Solan and Anixx will both be participating after they complete their guild missions. Will Solan have some time to train his Hippogriff?
Zevox 02-25-07, 07:13 PM	Solan and Anixx will both be participating after they complete their guild missions. Will Solan have some time to train his Hippogriff? Given the time frame you're looking at (he started his quest this week, it will end the week before the Iron Man), not enough, no. Though you may want to note that you could get him a special mount that flies based on the 3.5 DMG's rules on page 204-205, which presumably would come pre-trained. At his level he could get a Pegasus, and if he levels up from the mission he could get a Griffon. They'd just gain benefits from being his special mount slower due to the required level for them being higher. Zevox
Erithmu 02-25-07, 07:32 PM	Solan and Anixx will both be participating after they complete their guild missions. Will Solan have some time to train his Hippogriff? Depends on if I kill you or not :devil:
Milov 02-25-07, 07:32 PM	I'm under the assumption that Iron Man is an elimination tourney, which I just got Zevox to confirm, yet I didn't see that in the thread, so if we're wrong, feel free to correct me. Anyway, I'm curious. Assuming it is indeed elimination based, what would occur if someone had two characters of thier own fight each other? I understand that it would be avoided fairly easily during the early rounds, but if multiple characters of one person made it to, for example, the semi finals, or the finals even, what would then occur? Would the person who uses both characters write both tactics, and probably lean toward one of the characters winning, or would a "Ghost"** person be set to write the tactics for one instead? Or something else entirely? **=Ghost person meaning someone who is not involved in the tournament.
Iced 02-25-07, 07:33 PM	I don't have the 3.5 DMG, could someone outline how that would work? He'd go for the griffon special mount at EL10.
Iced 02-25-07, 07:35 PM	Depends on if I kill you or not :devil: :gah: - always a possibility i guess...
Zevox 02-25-07, 07:38 PM	I don't have the 3.5 DMG, could someone outline how that would work? He'd go for the griffon special mount at EL10. Essentially, its much like the Druid alternate animal companion. The minimum Paladin level for a Griffon special mount is 8, so you'd treat level 8 for that mount like level 5 for a normal one when determining what the bonuses it gets for being your special mount are (the extra HD, natural armor, and so on). Thats it. Zevox
MindWandererB 02-25-07, 07:52 PM	I'm under the assumption that Iron Man is an elimination tourney, which I just got Zevox to confirm, yet I didn't see that in the thread, so if we're wrong, feel free to correct me. Anyway, I'm curious. Assuming it is indeed elimination based, what would occur if someone had two characters of thier own fight each other? I understand that it would be avoided fairly easily during the early rounds, but if multiple characters of one person made it to, for example, the semi finals, or the finals even, what would then occur? Would the person who uses both characters write both tactics, and probably lean toward one of the characters winning, or would a "Ghost"** person be set to write the tactics for one instead? Or something else entirely? **=Ghost person meaning someone who is not involved in the tournament. In this event, the player chooses which one will surrender.
Iced 02-25-07, 07:52 PM	So it's my level -3 for accumulated mount bonuses. Got it. By level 10 i've got a +2HD griffon fully trained. I like it :D
Erithmu 02-25-07, 08:02 PM	In this event, the player chooses which one will surrender. Is there any penalty associated with the surrender, or do they get a full week of free spells to unload on the next fight? I don't have a problem if it is at the end of the cycle, but if it is after the second fight ... I'm a little worried.
Zevox 02-25-07, 08:07 PM	Aye, that'd be a problem. Perhaps, presuming a 5-round event, we should treat both the semifinals and finals as week 1 for the characters? That'd be the most fair in that regard I think, since even with Cat's characters we should be able to avoid characters from the same player fighting each other until at least week 3. Zevox
SauroGrenom 02-25-07, 09:09 PM	Unless we get lots more characters being involved in the Ironman, it looks like we are going to have to prune the list down to only 16 characters. We're alot farther from 36 than 16. It looks like we'll probably be required to limit everyone to a max of 2 characters in the tournament. Even if we do that, there are 11 people fielding characters on the list so far. Of the 11, 5 have only one character. That leaves 6 with two characters. And 6x2+5=17. Even that rather strict limit will result in too many characters and someone with 2 or more characters will be required to cut back to one. If we can get another 5 characters, then 27 we'll be closer to 32 than 16. We'll have a lot of monster fights in the first round and possibly the second as well, but then all the entered characters can play. So if anyone with an ECL9 or 10 character is "on the bubble" we should encourage them to sign up. There are 8 ECL10 characters on the roster not yet signed up for the tournament. That's: Asran Jur Sir Valkin Va'Ria Perius Barthleby Lady Indavria Ignatius Some of the players are not active in CoCo right now, but others are active. If one of you has a character that's in ECL9 or 10, please sign up soon.
Tellish_of_Ket 02-25-07, 09:12 PM	Jur will be signing up...guaranteed. I'm just not done building him yet is all. Still got a few weeks to go. Tellish
TheMagister 02-25-07, 09:16 PM	Hood is reviewing applications. :ton: Actually, only Silas and Manzarf have spoken up. I'm thinkin' about it.
Zevox 02-25-07, 09:19 PM	I just sent my characters' applications to Cat a few hours ago (after Istima's fight was posted). Archdevil Asran, Eraca Moralta, and the team of Istima Telarc & Ihdald Seaslash will be added to that list when Cat next edits it. Zevox
MindWandererB 02-26-07, 02:05 PM	@TM: It's going to have to be Manzarf, unless someone else pipes up. See the roster. I agree about the "free" surrender problem. We never came up with a better idea, though.
TelinArtho 02-26-07, 02:26 PM	Unless we get lots more characters being involved in the Ironman, it looks like we are going to have to prune the list down to only 16 characters. We're alot farther from 36 than 16. It looks like we'll probably be required to limit everyone to a max of 2 characters in the tournament. Even if we do that, there are 11 people fielding characters on the list so far. Of the 11, 5 have only one character. That leaves 6 with two characters. And 6x2+5=17. Even that rather strict limit will result in too many characters and someone with 2 or more characters will be required to cut back to one. If we can get another 5 characters, then 27 we'll be closer to 32 than 16. We'll have a lot of monster fights in the first round and possibly the second as well, but then all the entered characters can play. So if anyone with an ECL9 or 10 character is "on the bubble" we should encourage them to sign up. There are 8 ECL10 characters on the roster not yet signed up for the tournament. That's: Asran Jur Sir Valkin Va'Ria Perius Barthleby Lady Indavria Ignatius Some of the players are not active in CoCo right now, but others are active. If one of you has a character that's in ECL9 or 10, please sign up soon. Sir Valkin will not be in the ironman - in fact having Kraegin in it is questionable to begin with. If the need comes down to trim some characters off in order to fit the brackets better - I am perfectly fine with Kraegin being one of them.
SauroGrenom 02-26-07, 02:47 PM	I agree about the "free" surrender problem. We never came up with a better idea, though.We can make sure that these events only take place in week 3 (thus no carry over). So in week 4 and onward everyone has only one character in the tournament. That means there will be 4 different people at that point (assuming a 5 round tourney). It would be kind of pointless if the last two rounds of the tourney are just Cat deciding which of his characters will surrender.
Macbrea 02-27-07, 09:03 AM	Hmmm, Izumi and Relanex... that might be an odd pairing..
MitzaVolchenko 02-27-07, 04:28 PM	In light of some industrious reporting on behalf of Zevox, as Prisonlord I feel it incumbant to add a stipulation to the IT that I feel that in order to participate, you should not have any outstanding violations in the prison of any kind. Not just red, but yellow or green as well. The IT is a big deal for us, and should be treated as such. So if someone can't take the time to fix errors that others have pointed out to them, then I don't feel that they deserve to be in the IT. Of course, that's just my 2 electrums. I'm sorry, but someone can nitpick up violation and eliminate the competition? Bad idea, brother. Additionally, I say again, if violations are so much more important than mapping fights for clarity, maps need ot be mandatory and violations need to be PM'd to the player every time they are reported. Failure to PM to the player needs to result in the violation being suspended until that little issue is rectified, or alternately Prisonlords can send PM's to the violated players when he updates the Prison each week. You can add Indivara to tourney, and I will withdraw her if I either get my new build done in time to EL10 ro I find it a partner. Unfortunately anythin without thumbs is going to need either her Leadership cohort and followers available or a buddy.
MindWandererB 02-27-07, 05:43 PM	I'm sorry, but someone can nitpick up violation and eliminate the competition? Bad idea, brother. Additionally, I say again, if violations are so much more important than mapping fights for clarity, maps need ot be mandatory and violations need to be PM'd to the player every time they are reported. Failure to PM to the player needs to result in the violation being suspended until that little issue is rectified, or alternately Prisonlords can send PM's to the violated players when he updates the Prison each week. You can add Indivara to tourney, and I will withdraw her if I either get my new build done in time to EL10 ro I find it a partner. Unfortunately anythin without thumbs is going to need either her Leadership cohort and followers available or a buddy. It's not that easy. To get a Violation tag, the prison post has to be made before Sunday, which gives the player some time to correct it. I do think that the Violation tags need to be checked for current validity before tossing anyone out, though. We've always made it a player's responsibility to keep tabs on the Prison roll call. It's not a heavy burden. And this is not the right venue for your crusade.
MitzaVolchenko 02-27-07, 05:53 PM	Violation tag goes up on Sunday. I don't see it until Tuesday. Violation tags do not come off until the following Sunday assuming that the informant fixes the violation post. If I read the suggestion correctly, the green violation still results in elimination. Looking at the current violations for characters signed up for IT, I would hate to see eliminations based on them.
Abyssal Stalker 02-28-07, 01:48 AM	I think this kind of situations should be seen case-by-case, and the player in question the chance to fix it. IT is big, everyone has been waiting it for ages, and I can see hurt feelings if someone gets dropped out because of a violation. Just give him a chance to fix it before the fight. It needs only a simple system: -the one who makes the pairings also checks the violations, if there is one, he sends a PM to the people -the player who has the violation doesn't edit his sheet, but instead sends a PM to his pitlord and opponent, telling how he fixes the violation. -the pitlord adds the fix to the post in the battles thread and uses the fixed stats. This is a bit more work to do than normally, but it's the Iron Man Tournament, for gods sake! If someone is dropped out because of a violation, it will lead to something like what ended the world event.
McJarvis 03-01-07, 10:27 PM	I haven't really been following this thread(honestly-> the entire idea of the Iron Man really doesn't appeal to me, which is why I'm not doing a credit dump to make an ecl 10 char....all that aside.... Is the Iron Man going to be disrupting normal pairings? Would be nice to know if I'm getting a CoCo vacation in a week or two. edit-> while we're at it, will guild activity be suspended? If one is suspended, I would like both to be suspended so I could just disappear.for two weeks
MindWandererB 03-01-07, 10:52 PM	Is the Iron Man going to be disrupting normal pairings? Would be nice to know if I'm getting a CoCo vacation in a week or two. edit-> while we're at it, will guild activity be suspended? If one is suspended, I would like both to be suspended so I could just disappear.for two weeksSomewhere eariler in this thread is the answer to the first question; we answered the second a very long time ago. For the first: No, the normal pairings will go on as usual. Hopefully we'll have enough pitlords for all that. We may have to restrict players to 1 non-Iron Man character, or some such. For the second: guild activity also continues; however, offensive operations at the ECL 8+ range will not be allowed for the duration. On the other hand, since the Iron Man is frozen, we may not have to stick to this, but this was the decision before we decided to hold the competition frozen.
McJarvis 03-02-07, 12:38 PM	For the first: No, the normal pairings will go on as usual. Hopefully we'll have enough pitlords for all that. We may have to restrict players to 1 non-Iron Man character, or some such. Just count the Iron-man participants as having activations. Thus either participants are shelling out credits(which I suppose they could do, if they want to see kittens die) or they don't run their normal chars in the normal pairings. All that aside, I could probably take on extra regular fights during the Iron Man compy.
SauroGrenom 03-02-07, 07:10 PM	I was under the impression that when the Ironman begins, the rest of pairings will be delayed for a few weeks. It looks like we're headed for 32 participants. We're going to need at least 16 pitlords for the 1st round. That'll eat up most of our pitlording resources. After the 1st round we can probably resume the rest of coco fights, but that first round will really squeeze us. Remember these will be hotly argued fights and it will be at a high ECL where fights are more complicated.
MindWandererB 03-02-07, 07:47 PM	Of course we'll not suspend the arena but in case of a pitlord shortage the Iron Man has pre-eminence. In such a case we can come up with rules, like those in the Iron Man may not have any other characters active or have to pitlord for every PC beyond the first. Such things.Here's the "impression" you should have.
MitzaVolchenko 03-03-07, 12:53 PM	I will withdraw from Iron Man and decline to pitlord for it if we can't cover the non-IT fights. It seems likely that the IT folks will not be activating their stables of other characters during the IT. If you replace 2-5 lower ECL characters with 1-2 IT entries, we should be fine, but the board needs its new blood. Telling the new blood that their game is on hiatus for the old blood to play its game, is not particularly kosher. I don't think we are going to run as short as it looks at first blush.
Vathelokai 03-03-07, 01:09 PM	I completely agree. I won't have anyone else active (except maybe crafting), and will be pitlording what I can durring the tourney.
MindWandererB 03-03-07, 05:09 PM	I will withdraw from Iron Man and decline to pitlord for it if we can't cover the non-IT fights. At the very least, keep your characters in the contest. If you drop out, it will only be like a surrender, which gives your opponents an advantage in the next round. Speaking of which, let me mention seeds. The original plan, after some discussion, was to match up the highest-ranked gladiator with the lowest-ranked, the second-highest to the second-lowest, and so on. But it just occurred to me that because of the 3FC, this gives the higher-ranked competitiors an even greater advantage than they already have, because they can conserve resources when fighting weaker foes. In my opinion, that's not cool. My alternative proposal (and of course, I'd love to hear others) is that each of the top 16 gladiators be paired with someone exactly 16 ranks below them. That maintains the same "feel," but makes it so that the top 16 are at a more equitable advantage/disadvantage. The next round would be arranged so that assuming the top 16 each win their fights, each of the top 8 is paired with a gladiator exactly 8 ranks below them, and so on. 1 17 1 9 9 25 1 5 5 21 5 13 13 29 1 3 3 19 3 11 11 27 3 7 7 23 7 15 15 31 1 2 2 18 2 10 10 26 2 6 6 22 6 14 14 30 2 4 4 20 4 12 12 28 4 8 8 24 8 16 16 32
TheMagister 03-03-07, 05:13 PM	As long as the blanks are filled at random and not according to Power Level, I'm good with it.
MindWandererB 03-03-07, 05:31 PM	Okay, then we have at least three opinions that I know of. Mine: Use seeds, rank to make equal distances between characters. NiQil's: Use seeds, rank to maximize distances between extreme characters, minimize between moderate characters. TM's: Make the whole thing random.
SauroGrenom 03-03-07, 07:27 PM	We also need to construct the tournament so that all the remaining characters of player X fight one another in the 3rd round. This prevents the surrender advantage when those characters meet one another, because they meet one another at the end of the 3FC and reset for the next fight. So all 4 or 5 of Cat's characters and all 3 of mine need to be reduced to just one character left at the most by the end of the 3rd week. Starting into the 4th week we should have 4 remaining characters who are all payed by 4 different players. Anything else will be utterly boring as the semi-finals and finals have people surrendering.
MindWandererB 03-03-07, 07:52 PM	We also need to construct the tournament so that all the remaining characters of player X fight one another in the 3rd round. This prevents the surrender advantage when those characters meet one another, because they meet one another at the end of the 3FC and reset for the next fight. So all 4 or 5 of Cat's characters and all 3 of mine need to be reduced to just one character left at the most by the end of the 3rd week. Starting into the 4th week we should have 4 remaining characters who are all payed by 4 different players. Anything else will be utterly boring as the semi-finals and finals have people surrendering. Hmm... that's a good point. We can use that as a modifying condition on top of the general rule, maintaining the rule as much as possible. It also needs to be the third round exactly, because that marks the end of a 3FC, so they'll have no advantage going into later rounds. It can't be perfect--for instance, with 3 characters, if two end up paired together in round 2 and one surrenders, but the third one loses in round 1 or 2, then the one that didn't surrender will have extra resources against the one that beat his third character. That sounded more complicated than it is. Let me give an example, using just 8 characters. Round 1: Raskos beats Noko and Kracknol beats Indivara, but Retikos loses to the Harvester. Also, Gaston beats Saffron. Round 2: Raskos and Kracknol are paired together, so that in case Retikos also won, he'd be paired against one of them in round 3. Raskos surrenders. The Harvester beats Gaston. Round 3: Kracknol gets to fight the Harvester having used only 1 fight's worth of resources. Edit: It would also mean that one player can have at most 4 gladiators in the tournament at all, because if you have 5, then two of them would be paired off in round 1.
Zevox 03-03-07, 09:19 PM	I'm with TM in general - random pairings rather than powerrating based, please. I'd rather not be intentionally paired with someone stronger or weaker than myself, and I definitely don't want to give Cat's characters the benefit of being paired with the weakest foes in the first few rounds so they can win with even less effort than usual. However, Sauro's certainly right about needing to make sure characters from the same player are set up so as not to fight each other before round 3. How that works with random pairings though I'm not sure... Zevox
MindWandererB 03-03-07, 09:34 PM	I'm with TM in general - random pairings rather than powerrating based, please. I'd rather not be intentionally paired with someone stronger or weaker than myself, and I definitely don't want to give Cat's characters the benefit of being paired with the weakest foes in the first few rounds so they can win with even less effort than usual. However, Sauro's certainly right about needing to make sure characters from the same player are set up so as not to fight each other before round 3. How that works with random pairings though I'm not sure... Zevox I can handle that. Quasirandom assignment is something I do for a living. But we still have the problem of making it impossible to have more than 4 characters per player.
Caterane 03-03-07, 09:37 PM	We're in no hurry to finish the Iron Man. Infact I think it should be an event that we should savour for some time. First of all, it should be 2-week pairings for the Iron Mans only (to avoid problems with late fights); the rest of the arena will continue normally. Secondly, we'll split the IT pairings into two groups on round 1, maybe on round 2 even. That means the IT might take 2-3 months to finish but so what.
Rauul 03-04-07, 12:53 AM	Since i am not member of the Ironman and hopefully won't have the headaches of running an Ironman match, may i suggest this.. Forget Pairings... pairs 2 time at most.. then brackets.. easier, and would give people a guess as to who they are fighting next... Equal footing for everyone.. 2 brackets, bracket (1) consisting of 1-2 charaters belonging to a player, since you have 32 players thats a bracket of 16 players or 8 teams, Bracket (2) Consists of the others that didn't make it in the top Bracket (this can be from power level or because they are teams or because they rolled the lowest on a d100 dice) After glancing at the tactics submitted for level 10 charaters... i do suggest the battles run 2 weeks, instead of the normal 1 week, (1 week to draw up tactics, 1 week to run the fight) Week 1 bracket 1. Week 2 bracket 2 (battles week 1) Week 3 Bracket 1 (battles week 2) Week 4 Bracket 2 (battles week 3) ect.. when it gets down to 6 on each bracket (should be after the First 3 fc of each), combine the brackets into 1 with a fresh draw of names. No Breaks to refresh expendables, just spells, nimbus resses of allys and pps ect..if a charater is dependant on expendables then ironman should break his back.. this would allow for the Pitlords to run thier normal fights and for the players to have thier normal 2 charaters in the arena.. Another Suggestion is that each week, the ironmen fight on a different map.. to be a true ironman you should be able to defeat your enemys anywhere on any map.. Just the 2.5 coppers from a Spectator.. BTW, can us lower level players make bets with our charaters from week 1- finals... i am sure there is an odds make that would set odds 1 day after pairs are up :thumbsup: Ironman1 - -winner1f Ironman2- -Winner2f Ironman3 - -winner1f Ironman4- -winner3f Ironman5- -winner1f Ironman6- -Winner2f Ironman7- -winner1f Ironman8- -winner3f Ironman9 - -winner1f Ironman10- -Winner2f Ironman11 - -winner1f Ironman12- -winner3f Ironman13- -winner1f Ironman14- -Winner2f Ironman15- -winner1f Ironman16-
SauroGrenom 03-04-07, 01:43 PM	I've mentioned this before, but I think I should bring it up again. In my opinion, we should try to group the characters into "styles" that are paired against one another in the early stages. It would be sad if none of the full casters were paired against one another in round 1, so by the time we get to round 3 only casters are left. I think we should try to pair wizards with wizards and psions with psions and sneaky types with sneaky types and pet builds with other pet builds and so on... This means that by the time we reach the semi-finals and finals we at least have multiple styles of characters (instead of all wizards). That helps make for a more interesting end stage of the tourney. Instead of creating the entire bracket, we should probably make each stage of the bracket after the results of the last stage are completed. This allows us to make "corrections" as needed. For example Say Cat begins with 5 characters... We can have those 5 characters fight against characters by other players in round 1. In round 2 Cat (or anyone else) is only allowed to have 4 characters remaining. So If he wins all 5 fights, he must choose 1 who isn't participating in the 2nd round. We'll subsititute in a monster encounter in his place. At the end of round 2, Cat is only allowed to have 2 characters going into round 3. So he'll have to pick among those who've won all their fights so far. In the 4th round we continue our pattern, but only 1 character per player is allowed. Having a bracket that is created every round as needed does offer a different tourney strategy. If the bracket is made in complete, we can strategize about our future opponents and anticipate things for the 3FC. If the bracket is created one round at a time, we cannot do this.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-04-07, 01:56 PM	I've mentioned this before, but I think I should bring it up again. In my opinion, we should try to group the characters into "styles" that are paired against one another in the early stages. It would be sad if none of the full casters were paired against one another in round 1, so by the time we get to round 3 only casters are left. I think we should try to pair wizards with wizards and psions with psions and sneaky types with sneaky types and pet builds with other pet builds and so on... This means that by the time we reach the semi-finals and finals we at least have multiple styles of characters (instead of all wizards). That helps make for a more interesting end stage of the tourney. Instead of creating the entire bracket, we should probably make each stage of the bracket after the results of the last stage are completed. This allows us to make "corrections" as needed. This is a VERY interesting idea. I'm actually really warming up to it. After looking at the IT builds though, there are LOTS of casters. Some are hybrid between caster/melee, and sneaky/melee, sneaky/caster. We'd have to come up with a concensus on the pairings for the first round, then "re-seed" them after each round...sorta like what they do in tennis. I like it. ToK
Zevox 03-04-07, 02:03 PM	Eh, that'd be kinda tough to do, don't you think Sauro? We have a ton of casters signed, and plenty of gishes, but not much in the way of other characters. For sneaks, for instance, only Noko, Besthira, Eraca, Silis, and Ihdald really qualify, and of them only Noko is actually focused on that, not to mention that Silis and Ihdald are each just half of a team with a straight caster each. While the idea of preventing casters from being all that lasts past the first couple of rounds is nice, it might not be an easily doable thing. Zevox
NiQil 03-04-07, 02:10 PM	As an add-on to that....isn't this supposed to be a tournament to see who the Iron Man of Gladius is? Shouldn't you be able to prove that against any type of build that steps your way? If your build is only viable against certain opponents, and against others it crumbles, then I don't think it deserves to win. I mean...just looking at the entries so far...how hard would it be for someone who wants to pony up the credits to sit down and create a caster-killer? He'd be all prepared to take on all of the casters and gishes, but if he gets paired against a melee monster, he's probably screwed. That is not an Iron Man, in my opinion...that's just playing the odds. Maybe it's the cynic in me, but what's the point of even having the tournament if the winner can't take on all comers?
TheMagister 03-04-07, 05:31 PM	Agreed. Let the Dice (notice the capital letter? :)) choose who's paired with who, and "interesting" be damned. This is about who's the toughest hombre in Gladius at or around ECL 10. It's not about Fighter/Wizard balance (to be very general). TM
Tellish_of_Ket 03-04-07, 07:27 PM	Yeah, i'll retract earlier my opinion after giving it more thought. May the best Tellish of Ket win. :P ToK
MysticMonk2005 03-07-07, 08:06 PM	I think we should try to pair wizards with wizards and psions with psions and sneaky types with sneaky types and pet builds with other pet builds and so on... Aww no fair protecting your vulnerable wizards like that. I want a piece of them!(Needless to say I'm overjoyed there are alot of them) Also do you reset your 3FC for this?
MitzaVolchenko 03-08-07, 05:02 AM	At the very least, keep your characters in the contest. If you drop out, it will only be like a surrender, which gives your opponents an advantage in the next round. If I withdraw it will be before the tourney opens. Surrender is not an option. So far I am not seeing that brackets can be established and fights set up in such a way as to cover the normal arena and the tourney. I am sort of waiting on the outcome of this discussion thread to make a decision. Can we expect that sometime soon? We are almost to open date and it doesn't look like that much has been finalized.
waywreth 03-08-07, 01:57 PM	I think we should try to pair wizards with wizards and psions with psions and sneaky types with sneaky types and pet builds with other pet builds and so on... This means that by the time we reach the semi-finals and finals we at least have multiple styles of characters (instead of all wizards). That helps make for a more interesting end stage of the tourney. I totally disagree. I prefer random pairings - you get whomever you get, the whole point is and Ironman, the best gladiator to get through the random pairings.
Caterane 03-08-07, 02:29 PM	Sorry for not replying but all that moving to another city takes a hell of time. I bought everything anew. The Iron Man begins next week and we should now reach some conclusion. I don't think Seeds based on powerrating would be fair nor should the tournament be anticipatable, ie you do not know who you will face in the next round. Note that Niqil and I have the same opinion; it might happen that the universe explodes tomorow or so. We will roll it randomly with the Online Roller after the deadline so that no one knows his opponent beforehand. Still, we have to prevent same characters from being paired against each other. Players with multiple characters: 5 - Caterane 3 - Mindwanderer 3 - SauroGrenom 3 - Sunwolf 3 - Zevox 2 - Tellish of Ket 2 - Erithmu 2 - Maraxus 2 - Vathelokai I'd say we just roll each round anew and reroll matches. That way you can only face your own character if only your characters are left in the tournament. No seeds, no brackets, just the online roller. And it's totally random and unpredictable :)
Caterane 03-08-07, 02:50 PM	Frozen Tournament As discussed, the tournament will be run frozen. You get your expendables back after the 3FC is complete. The finals will thus be held in week 2. No XP or GP, no powerrating change, no win/loss record change, and once the tournament started you cannot buy or craft anything until it's over or you're out. Character Reset All characters participating will be reset to Week 1, no matter in which week they're now. Equal chances to everyone. Once the tournament is over, all characters will continue normally in which week they were in when the higher leagues unfreeze. Free Crafting To grant equal chances to those who had to be reset, everyone gets to buy stuff before the tournament starts, and gains one free week of crafting. Please send a PM to my account (not to Pitlords! The Pitlords account can only hold 30 PMs and will flood) with your craft petition. Two-week Pairings Iron Man Pairings will be rolled on wednesday along with regular pairings. All Iron Man fights will be 2 week fights. However, I want to remind any pitlord to finish his fight in week 1!!!! The additional week is NOT for you to lay back in week 1 but to discuss fight issues and to make sure that there are definately no late fights or reruns. Again: for the pitlord, nothing changes! Split Brackets Since the IMT uses 16 fights in round 1, we will split this round into two groups (or maybe 4 if we don't have enough pitlords, see below). So this effectively means round 1 will be finished after one month (two months if quartered). Fortunately, time is not an issue. Pitlord Rewards Since these fights require you to spend more time on details, any IMT pitlord will get 2° for his fight. However, the penalties for not finishing such a fight are quadrupled! This includes (!) any necessary reruns and mistakes to be fixed. If there are two different opinions, the Elders and I will decide by vote; majority wins. Request to Players I want to ask any IMT participant to NOT activate any character not in the tournament; we need every pitlord for that time. I also want to ask for additional pitlord volunteers. If that doesn't work, we will have to split the IMT again, ie four 2-week pairings groups instead of two which would extend round 1 of the tournament to 2 months. I don't want the regular pairings to suffer but the IMT will get pitlords assigned first. If you have any additional questions, now's the time to ask.
waywreth 03-08-07, 03:35 PM	I want to ask any IMT participant to NOT activate any character not in the tournament... In this case, I'd like to ask that Gaston be removed from the list. I'd rather activate a character that can advance, vs. one that wasn't going to win the tourney (but would've been a nasty roadblock for someone).
Macbrea 03-08-07, 03:45 PM	I think if we count particlpation as one activation per character it should be fine. Lets be honest here. It goes: 1st week: 8 fights 2nd week: 8 fights 3rd week: 4 fights 4th week: 4 fights 5th week: 2 fights 6th week: 2 fights 7th week: off 8th week: 2 fights (1 championship and third place fight) 8 Fights are going to be pretty light on the taxation if the pitlords know they have two weeks to get it done.
Caterane 03-08-07, 03:56 PM	In this case, I'd like to ask that Gaston be removed from the list. I'd rather activate a character that can advance, vs. one that wasn't going to win the tourney (but would've been a nasty roadblock for someone). Nah, he stays in. I meant it as a petition not a rule. It's definately more desirable to have you participate.
McJarvis 03-08-07, 03:59 PM	Can I formally request not to be assigned Iron Man tourny fights as a pitlord?
Macbrea 03-08-07, 04:02 PM	At 2 credits per fight and two weeks to do them. With a bunch of the first fights going to be near surrenders?
TelinArtho 03-08-07, 04:02 PM	My question about LPA in the council needs to be answered before Kraegin can be set to ready for the IMT.
McJarvis 03-08-07, 04:17 PM	At 2 credits per fight and two weeks to do them. With a bunch of the first fights going to be near surrenders? yes. I don't need credits.
Erithmu 03-08-07, 04:19 PM	Are characters allowed to craft (doesn't deplete the pitlord pool)
Caterane 03-08-07, 04:21 PM	Only one week free crafting before the tournament begins; once it started there's no more crafting or buying.
Erithmu 03-08-07, 04:23 PM	Only one week free crafting before the tournament begins; once it started there's no more crafting or buying. Sorry ... Non-IMT chars of players who have chars in the IMT
Caterane 03-08-07, 04:24 PM	As said it's not a written rule. You can basically do anything you want. Things that do not use up pitlords are totally ok anyway.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-08-07, 04:49 PM	Split Brackets Since the IMT uses 16 fights in round 1, we will split this round into two groups (or maybe 4 if we don't have enough pitlords, see below). So this effectively means round 1 will be finished after one month (two months if quartered). Fortunately, time is not an issue. I would like to formally request that we do all initial seedings and pairings in week 1 (one 2-week allotment) instead of breaking it up into two seperate two-week allotments. Reason for this? I feel i can easily Pitlord up to 10 fights. So if there are 16 fights, that should be pretty easy for the other pitlords to handle. I'm at home with absolutely nothing to do. It takes me about 30 minutes on average to run a single fight. So i can't see this taking me more than just a couple of days to run 10 fights. Also, another small suggestion is that if there are extrenuous errors in a fight that needs to be debated (calmly of course), but intensely, that they create a thread similar to FoTW thread, except relate it specifically for that fight. Discussion: Lief (Sunwolf) vs Ixenthor (Caterane) [IMT] Something like that. Because with that many fights, and using a single thread (like FoTW can become), it clogs it up quite fast and it can be difficult to scan back 5 or 6 pages to figure out a conversation within. ToK
MindWandererB 03-08-07, 05:03 PM	Nah, he stays in. I meant it as a petition not a rule. It's definately more desirable to have you participate. I would also pull out if this was a requirement. I have no illusions about winning; it would be much more important for me to try to get some levels for Kervan, Maya, and Gakhnalak. @ToK: We definitely do not want you speed-pitlording on this. It's better to take more time and make sure every fight is a work of art. We also can't rely 100% on one pitlord.
SauroGrenom 03-08-07, 05:07 PM	I'll pick up two Tourney fights instead of just one normal arena fight. Honestly I can run fights in 2 or 3 hours unless one of the participants is a evasive character. Evasive tactics eat up my time, because I've got to run more skill checks every round and measure distances for skill check modifiers on spot and listen. If that can be avoided, I'd be happy to run an extra fight or even two.
SauroGrenom 03-08-07, 05:12 PM	Cat, I can sympathize with people who want to have their characters develop a bit. I'd like to see the Tourney run as pseudo-frozen. Allow characters to gain xp and gp to the next level, but they are "frozen" while the tourney lasts. When they are out of the tourney, grant them the xp and gp they would have won in the fights they participated in.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-08-07, 05:55 PM	I would also pull out if this was a requirement. I have no illusions about winning; it would be much more important for me to try to get some levels for Kervan, Maya, and Gakhnalak. @ToK: We definitely do not want you speed-pitlording on this. It's better to take more time and make sure every fight is a work of art. We also can't rely 100% on one pitlord. I never speed-pitlord. I always strive for 100% accuracy. I would give each and every fight, all the time and detail that it would need, that i would give to any other fight i pitlord. In fact, i've done it before. We had a serious shortage of pitlords one week and i was caring for the boards. I ran 8 fights and had them all done by Saturday and pretty much error free. One or two extremely minor issues. But i can do it. ToK
waywreth 03-08-07, 05:55 PM	Nah, he stays in. I meant it as a petition not a rule. It's definately more desirable to have you participate. If that's the case, Gaston will give it a shot then. Thanks.
MitzaVolchenko 03-08-07, 05:57 PM	Frozen Tournament As discussed, the tournament will be run frozen. You get your expendables back after the 3FC is complete. The finals will thus be held in week 2. No XP or GP, no powerrating change, no win/loss record change, and once the tournament started you cannot buy or craft anything until it's over or you're out. So is the expendable cap raised to accomodate for the possibility of exceeding a single 3FC? Character Reset All characters participating will be reset to Week 1, no matter in which week they're now. Equal chances to everyone. Once the tournament is over, all characters will continue normally in which week they were in when the higher leagues unfreeze. Holy confusion for blondes with paperwork to do, Batman! Beyond my own inability to manage my paperwork, no objection from me. I have never seen the point in tracking 3FC for frozen characters at all. I would say just hard reset all of them and do away with the double tracking. Free Crafting To grant equal chances to those who had to be reset, everyone gets to buy stuff before the tournament starts, and gains one free week of crafting. Please send a PM to my account (not to Pitlords! The Pitlords account can only hold 30 PMs and will flood) with your craft petition. Two-week Pairings Iron Man Pairings will be rolled on wednesday along with regular pairings. All Iron Man fights will be 2 week fights. However, I want to remind any pitlord to finish his fight in week 1!!!! The additional week is NOT for you to lay back in week 1 but to discuss fight issues and to make sure that there are definately no late fights or reruns. Again: for the pitlord, nothing changes! So we don't really get two weeks to run the fights, just a week to run the fight and a week to be griped at? Speed of molasses running uphill in a Canadian winter. That alone is enough to make me consider seriously whether I want to run IMT fights. Split Brackets Since the IMT uses 16 fights in round 1, we will split this round into two groups (or maybe 4 if we don't have enough pitlords, see below). So this effectively means round 1 will be finished after one month (two months if quartered). Fortunately, time is not an issue. Time is an issue if the folks in IMT can't activate other characters and the IMT gets priority over other fights. Pitlord Rewards Since these fights require you to spend more time on details, any IMT pitlord will get 2° for his fight. However, the penalties for not finishing such a fight are quadrupled! This includes (!) any necessary reruns and mistakes to be fixed. If there are two different opinions, the Elders and I will decide by vote; majority wins. I assume that elders or yourself who have a fighter in a contested fight are forced to abstain? Request to Players I want to ask any IMT participant to NOT activate any character not in the tournament; we need every pitlord for that time. I also want to ask for additional pitlord volunteers. If that doesn't work, we will have to split the IMT again, ie four 2-week pairings groups instead of two which would extend round 1 of the tournament to 2 months. I don't want the regular pairings to suffer but the IMT will get pitlords assigned first. If you have any additional questions, now's the time to ask. As I said before, if the regular board suffers for a specialty event that of necessity excudes a lot of folks, withdraw Indi and take me off of the IMT pitlord list. I think the IMT is a great idea, but I do not want to see CoCo turn into a good old boys club for months on end. I will happily help out up to the point where it lessens the game for those that cannot particiapte in it. I am not sure that I am interested in having my non-frozen characters stand around for 2-4 months doing nothing while Indivara who is likely to win a grand total of one of her IMT fights takes up my activation. Nor do I in any way agree with a frozen league event ever taking priority over the main board's needs.
MindWandererB 03-08-07, 06:07 PM	Cat, I can sympathize with people who want to have their characters develop a bit. I'd like to see the Tourney run as pseudo-frozen. Allow characters to gain xp and gp to the next level, but they are "frozen" while the tourney lasts. When they are out of the tourney, grant them the xp and gp they would have won in the fights they participated in. We discussed this option before; it's a mess with xp/gp ratios.
SauroGrenom 03-09-07, 04:27 PM	We discussed this option before; it's a mess with xp/gp ratios. I don't think it's too bad. Really all you do is just keep track of the xp earned, and award the gp at the ratio for each encounter the character would have had. So I think that Mer-Man is closest to the ECL11 range. He'd earn xp/gp as an ECL10 character in an ECL10 fight for his 1st combat. Then give him xp/gp as an ECL11 character in an ECL10 fight for his 2nd combat (assuming he makes it to the 2nd round). Obviously Cat cannot actually level the character or buy equipment until the tourney is over, but he can keep track of the rewards and level the character when the tourney is done. This removes the valid protest by waywreth that you'd rather activate characters that can actually increase in levels instead of the tournament characters.
Caterane 03-09-07, 06:46 PM	That means checking every character (of 32!). The ECL 10 league has been frozen for how long? 2 years? It doesn't matter if you don't level up for another 3 months. I also want the ECL 10s to start equally, not having some start ECL 10, others 11 or 12 even. It's now a race to ECL 15 where we will hold another Iron Man Tournament. Or maybe ECL 20 but we'll see.
MindWandererB 03-09-07, 06:55 PM	That means checking every character (of 32!). The ECL 10 league has been frozen for how long? 2 years? It doesn't matter if you don't level up for another 3 months. I also want the ECL 10s to start equally, not having some start ECL 10, others 11 or 12 even. It's now a race to ECL 15 where we will hold another Iron Man Tournament. Or maybe ECL 20 but we'll see. Speaking of checking characters, Cat, you still have four in prison, three with red violations and one with a yellow. Might want to take care of that sooner rather than later.
Zevox 03-09-07, 07:02 PM	Hm, looks like we're just one character short of the ideal 32. If Featylec's mission succeeds this week, maybe he'll join as a last-minute entry after all. Zevox
Zevox 03-09-07, 07:18 PM	Say, I just thought of something we may want to do for the final rounds here. With 32 participants, we're looking at 5 rounds of matches, 1 short of 2 3FCs. Which means going by straight 3FC rules, the final round is in fight 2 for the finalists. However, given that, it would be possible for a magic or psionics using finalist who has an easier semifinal fight to have a possibly significant edge over the other finalist. So may I suggest that we treat both the semifinals and finals as being fight 1 of a cycle for the participants to avoid such a thing? Zevox
TheMagister 03-10-07, 07:56 AM	Can I enter Hood solo at ECL 8? He can fill up that final slot, and with the right map and first-alpha-strike capability he's got a little bit of a shot. If not, then oh well. Oh, and official petition entered to BAN the forest map in its current incarnation for these high level combats. TM
Zevox 03-10-07, 08:04 AM	For an ECL 8, you need a teammate to enter TM. You could still try to track down another ECL 8 or 7 interested in entering though. Edit: Hm, actually, now that I think of it - interested in pairing him with Ceilia? With the free crafting she can finish her current armor and pearl project early for it. She'll be quite a bit below most of our foes in level, but she can provide Hood with good melee and decent magic support. Zevox
TheMagister 03-10-07, 09:11 AM	I'd go for that. Another team WAR! Whoohoo! TM
Rauul 03-10-07, 10:09 AM	Acually as this is the IRONMAN competition... i would suggest that they start in the arena.. then go to the Plains, then the forest. (thats round 1 3fc) then 2nd 3fc use the Sewers, temple city.. and for the semis and finals... Pure arena.. Or maybe a Modified arena map if Someone wants to make one just for Ironman... Ironman is About overcoming all obsticals to be the Top Dog.. Including the different maps, and different Opponents.. Gawd i am glad i don't have a Anyone in Ironman :P :P :P
TheMagister 03-10-07, 04:13 PM	Ceilia Durrol [ECL7] and Monsieur Hood [ECL8] will team up to enter the Iron Man Tournament as: "The Red Knight Gambit". The name is modeled after a popular opening move in Hood and Ceilia's game of choice, lanceboard which is similar in setup and strategy to chess. TM
MindWandererB 03-10-07, 04:16 PM	Ceilia Durrol [ECL7] and Monsieur Hood [ECL8] will team up to enter the Iron Man Tournament as: "The Red Knight Gambit". The name is modeled after a popular opening move in Hood and Ceilia's game of choice, lanceboard which is similar in setup and strategy to chess. TM You'd better PM Cat with that.
Zevox 03-10-07, 04:18 PM	You'd better PM Cat with that. Taken care of. Zevox
Zevox 03-10-07, 06:55 PM	Say, I just thought of something we may want to do for the final rounds here. With 32 participants, we're looking at 5 rounds of matches, 1 short of 2 3FCs. Which means going by straight 3FC rules, the final round is in fight 2 for the finalists. However, given that, it would be possible for a magic or psionics using finalist who has an easier semifinal fight to have a possibly significant edge over the other finalist. So may I suggest that we treat both the semifinals and finals as being fight 1 of a cycle for the participants to avoid such a thing? Zevox So, in addition to drawing some attention back to this, I have a query: is there any way to know which characters will participate in which half of round 1 of the tournament? I have 4 characters now entered in it, and if only one or two (or even none) activate in week 1, I'll want to know so I can decide how many of my other characters to activate (for instance, if none of mine fight in the first part, I'll activate Arden and Mithos, but if three or all four fight then, I'll want no one else active that week). Zevox
Tellish_of_Ket 03-11-07, 04:15 AM	Can ten 3rd level gladiators participate in IMT? It's an EL 10, it might make it quite interesting. ToK
Zevox 03-11-07, 11:20 AM	Can ten 3rd level gladiators participate in IMT? It's an EL 10, it might make it quite interesting. ToK Considering the goal of the Iron Man isn't to drive pitlords totally insane, I'm going to say thats an emphatic "NO"! ;) Zevox
Rauul 03-11-07, 12:32 PM	Considering the goal of the Iron Man isn't to drive pitlords totally insane, I'm going to say thats an emphatic "NO"! ;) Zevox hmmm acually i was thinking about 2 4th levels joining.. a human cleric and a half-orc... would be easy to right the tactics and make them work as a team :)
Erithmu 03-11-07, 12:34 PM	hmmm acually i was thinking about 2 4th levels joining.. a human cleric and a half-orc... would be easy to right the tactics and make them work as a team :)Except teams have to have characters from different players.
Rauul 03-11-07, 12:36 PM	Except teams have to have characters from different players. Now i didn't read that in any rules!!!!
Erithmu 03-11-07, 12:42 PM	Now i didn't read that in any rules!!!! I'm 90% sure that the IMT team rules follow the same set of rules as parties found at the bottom of this page. I would have teamed Owen and Torel up if that were not the case.
Zevox 03-11-07, 12:57 PM	In any event, two ECL 4 characters isn't among the combinations allowed in the Iron Man (its only EL 6 team, after all). What is allowed is spelled out in the second post in this thread - 1 ECL 10 or 9, or teams of ECL 8s and/or 7s. Zevox
Tellish_of_Ket 03-11-07, 02:36 PM	Considering the goal of the Iron Man isn't to drive pitlords totally insane, I'm going to say thats an emphatic "NO"! ;) Zevox I was teasing. :P That would be funny though. I actually think that, that 10-man team would win...quite easily actually. lol ToK
Caterane 03-11-07, 04:57 PM	Hey guys, I thought that it might be easier for me and everyone to roll Iron Man pairings on thursday. We have 2 weeks time anyway and wednesday is already crowded with all the regular pairings stuff.
MindWandererB 03-11-07, 05:17 PM	Hey guys, I thought that it might be easier for me and everyone to roll Iron Man pairings on thursday. We have 2 weeks time anyway and wednesday is already crowded with all the regular pairings stuff. That seems reasonable. Gives an extra day to prep from a late fight, too.
Zevox 03-11-07, 05:19 PM	Say, I just thought of something we may want to do for the final rounds here. With 32 participants, we're looking at 5 rounds of matches, 1 short of 2 3FCs. Which means going by straight 3FC rules, the final round is in fight 2 for the finalists. However, given that, it would be possible for a magic or psionics using finalist who has an easier semifinal fight to have a possibly significant edge over the other finalist. So may I suggest that we treat both the semifinals and finals as being fight 1 of a cycle for the participants to avoid such a thing? ZevoxSo, in addition to drawing some attention back to this, I have a query: is there any way to know which characters will participate in which half of round 1 of the tournament? I have 4 characters now entered in it, and if only one or two (or even none) activate in week 1, I'll want to know so I can decide how many of my other characters to activate (for instance, if none of mine fight in the first part, I'll activate Arden and Mithos, but if three or all four fight then, I'll want no one else active that week). Zevox Still waiting for some feedback on these. Especially that second - I'd rather not accidentally get stuck with either 5 or 6 activated characters or none at all next week... Zevox
Pitlords 03-11-07, 05:22 PM	You won't. We'll roll up all 16 pairings for round 1 then I pick 8 (or 4 if pitlord shortage) for this week. I'll make sure no one has more than 2 PCs active in any one week.
MindWandererB 03-11-07, 05:28 PM	You won't. We'll roll up all 16 pairings for round 1 then I pick 8 (or 4 if pitlord shortage) for this week. I'll make sure no one has more than 2 PCs active in any one week. Except yourself, of course, with 5 participating characters. I look forward to the semifinals, which will consist mostly of Cat's characters surrendering to each other. Fun stuff.
Erithmu 03-11-07, 05:29 PM	You won't. We'll roll up all 16 pairings for round 1 then I pick 8 (or 4 if pitlord shortage) for this week. I'll make sure no one has more than 2 PCs active in any one week.That might be tricky for you having characters in 5 fights ... (I make the suggestion that you have your team fight be in the same week you have only one other fight.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-11-07, 05:33 PM	Except yourself, of course, with 5 participating characters. I look forward to the semifinals, which will consist mostly of Cat's characters surrendering to each other. Fun stuff. I prefer the semifinals where cat's characters get trounced by Jur. That would be more fun, lol. ToK
Erithmu 03-11-07, 05:39 PM	I will find it funny if Prisonlords beats all five of them down and leaves the Pale Rider wondering where his partner is.
Zevox 03-11-07, 05:41 PM	I will find it funny if Prisonlords beats all five of them down and leaves the Pale Rider wondering where his partner is. If Cat doesn't get them fixed like, now, thats exactly what'll happen. Which would be a terrible pity, even if it does give the rest of a us some hope for winning we wouldn't otherwise have. Well, unless Cat overrules NiQil's insistence on Iron Men not having violations after today, which is possible. Zevox
TheMagister 03-11-07, 05:44 PM	Boy, would that be bad form... Even editing them after knowing who he's paired with would be bad form, come to think of it.
Erithmu 03-11-07, 05:49 PM	I think characters should still be due on Wednesday at the normal deadline, but the pairings wont be made to Thursday. That would be 'fair'
Zevox 03-11-07, 08:45 PM	Well, theres the Roll Call. Who wants to break the news to Cat? *eyes NiQil* Zevox
MitzaVolchenko 03-11-07, 11:13 PM	Who actually thinks that Caterane is out of the IMT, even though the rules say that any red vioaltion makes all characters from the offending player unpairable?
Zevox 03-11-07, 11:17 PM	Not many I expect. I know I don't. I'm just waiting to see the inevitable reaction when someone steps up and tries to tell him they are. :P Zevox
MitzaVolchenko 03-11-07, 11:58 PM	Not many I expect. I know I don't. I'm just waiting to see the inevitable reaction when someone steps up and tries to tell him they are. :P Zevox I nominate Prisonlords :P
Zevox 03-12-07, 12:35 AM	I nominate Prisonlords :P Well, theres the Roll Call. Who wants to break the news to Cat? *eyes NiQil* Zevox Hey, what a coincidence ;) . Zevox
NiQil 03-12-07, 01:15 AM	IRON MAN PARTICIPANTS [Last Update: MAR 01] [ECL10] Archangel Ixenthor (Caterane) [Power: 17673 (1564); 6 won, 1 lost] [Q:6][C:1] [Great Renown] [Special Power] [ECL10] Uhmentarymster the Old (Caterane) [Power: 24351 (2155); 20 won, 3 lost] [Q:1] [Great Renown] [ECL10] Indri'ynar Per'Elereth (Caterane) [Power: 21594 (1911); 16 won, 5 lost] [Q:5] [Great Renown] [ECL10] Mer-Man (Caterane) [Power: 27583 (2441); 19 won, 2 lost] [Q:1] [Great Renown] [ECL09] Loddick Saffrion (Erithmu) [Power: 7992 (999); 13 won, 10 lost] [Q:3] [ECL10] Lord Frost (Macbrea) [Power: 7695 (681); 3 won, 6 lost] [Q:2] [Special Power] [Failure] [ECL09] Zassl (Maraxus) [Power: 10456 (1307); 17 won, 16 lost] [Q:1] [Special Power] [ECL10] Noko (Maraxus) [Power: 17017 (1506); 14 won, 5 lost] [Great Renown] [Special Power] [ECL09] Besthirah Lafali (MindWandererB) [Power: 10464 (1308); 3 won, 0 lost] [Q:1] [Special Power] [ECL10] Aerryl Nalladar (MindWandererB) [Power: 13853 (1226); 17 won, 9 lost] [Q:4] [ECL10] Lady Indivara (MitzaVolchenko) [Power: 11300 (1000); 0 won, 0 lost] [Q:1] [Special Power] [ECL09] Lissa Longfellow (MysticMonk2005) [Power: 8256 (1032); 16 won, 14 lost] [Q:1] [ECL10] Perius (Ravashack) [Power: 10791 (955); 14 won, 33 lost] [ECL10] Raskos the Jade Father (SauroGrenom) [Power: 12904 (1142); 6 won, 5 lost] [Q:5] [ECL10] Kracknol (SauroGrenom) [Power: 16644 (1473); 20 won, 10 lost] [ECL10] Retikos, The Padparadasha Sage (SauroGrenom) [Power: 11300 (1000); 0 won, 0 lost] [ECL10] Va'ria Theladrais (Sindorin) [Power: 16938 (1499); 10 won, 6 lost] [Q:3] [ECL10] Vandelar the Red (SoulLord) [Power: 14656 (1297); 17 won, 9 lost] [Q:3] [ECL10] Brilf Zephyr (Sunwolf) [Power: 11831 (1047); 16 won, 18 lost] [ECL10] Leif Goldeneye (Sunwolf) [Power:22080 (1954); 21 won, 4 lost] [Q:1] [Great Renown] [ECL10] Telveran Trueblade (Sunwolf) [Power: 13006 (1151); 12 won, 9 lost] [ECL10] Kraegin (TelinArtho) [Power: 13017 (1152); 9 won, 14 lost] [Q:3] [ECL10] Jur, The Mad Magician (Tellish_of_Ket) [Power: 11300 (1000); 0 won, 0 lost] [ECL10] Saffron Brass (Vathelokai) [Power: 11446 (1013); 4 won, 7 lost] [Q:6] [Special Power] [ECL10] Auburn (Vathelokai) [Power: 11187 (990); 12 won, 12 lost] [Q:5] [ECL10] Gaston Dar'ath (waywreth) [Power: 19311 (1709); 20 won, 7 lost] [Q:1] [Great Renown] [ECL10] Archdevil Asran (Zevox) [Power: 12949 (1146); 7 won, 6 lost] [Q:5] [ECL10] Eraca Moralta (Zevox) [Power: 15345 (1358); 14 won, 4 lost] [Q:2][M:2] [Special Power] The Arcane Hand [ECL08] Owen Ir'Tolden (Erithmu) [Power: 5700 (1000); 0 won, 0 lost] [ECL08] Silis Lueria (MindWandererB) [Power: 5700 (1000); 0 won, 0 lost] [Q:2][C:1] The Two Storms [ECL08] Istima Telarc (Zevox) [Power: 5776 (1444); 11 won, 4 lost] [Q:3] [ECL08] Ihdald Seaslash (Milov) [Power: 7273 (1276); 11 won, 11 lost] [Q:3] The Wailing Fugue [ECL08] The Harvester (Caterane) [Power: 12705 (2229); 18 won, 0 lost] [Q:4] [Great Renown] [ECL07] The Pale-Rider (Tellish of Ket) [Power: 6104 (1526); 7 won, 1 lost] [Q:3] [Great Reknown] The Red Knight Gambit [ECL08] Monsieur Hood (TheMagister) [Power: 9399 (1649); 13 won, 5 lost] [Q:2] [Great Renown] [ECL07] Ceilia Durrol (Zevox) [Power: 8036 (2009); 12 won, 0 lost] [Q:3] [Great Renown] The Iron Man can only work if there are 16, 32, or 64 characters participating. If there are 1-3 missing slots we can fill them with Monster Groups but that should be kept at a minimum. If the starting number of characters is slightly above the last increment, the players with the most subscribed characters have to withdraw one of theirs until it fits. The next post will list all rules we have fleshed out so check back once in a while. The characters listed in red above are ineligible to participate due to their prison status. As I posted here almost a month ago, all characters must not have any violations in order to participate in the IMT. This was stated again here, just a mere two days ago. The above characters in red have not fulfilled this requirement (and in point of fact, are in a state of violation that would not allow participation in a normal arena match), and are therefore disqualified from the IMT.
TheMagister 03-12-07, 07:19 AM	:hides:
hogarth 03-12-07, 08:24 AM	<yeah, like that's going to happen>
waywreth 03-12-07, 09:12 AM	Should I have anything in particular in the subject line for Gaston for participation in the Iron Man? And has anyone PM'd Cat yet?
Caterane 03-12-07, 09:13 AM	Another thing that occured to me was that we cannot allow NPC Services to prebuff with spells nor can we allow mercenaries in the Iron Man. It's frozen which means there's no reason not to use any buff in the PHB or the best mercenary. So: If you make use of the NPC Service or hire a mercenary, your spent gold is not refunded. This should also apply to frozen characters in general. I "bought" all Symbols for free with Ixenthor once which is surely not in the spirit of the rules. @Niqil: I'll PM the owners of these characters
MitzaVolchenko 03-12-07, 09:15 AM	@Niqil: I'll PM the owners of these characters *looks confused then stops pretending to be awake and goes back to bed*
Zevox 03-12-07, 12:09 PM	@Niqil: I'll PM the owners of these characters :heehee Ah, sorry about that Cat, but I had to do it. Not sure if that was intentional or not, but its still funny. You're the owner of all those characters. Zevox
TheMagister 03-12-07, 01:09 PM	Seems appropriate: Nuklear Power Comic (http://www.nuklearpower.com/daily.php?date=070308) :looloo:
MitzaVolchenko 03-12-07, 06:42 PM	Questions: Are we waiting a week to start so that Cat's characters are legal, or are we starting without Cat? Or is Cat getting a unique exception that would have been denied to anyone else?
Caterane 03-12-07, 07:08 PM	I've already fixed my violations and sent out PMs to all NARCs and Prisonlords so I'm good to go.
NiQil 03-12-07, 09:29 PM	I've already fixed my violations and sent out PMs to all NARCs and Prisonlords so I'm good to go. Ummm....no. This is incorrect. As I stated in my previous posts, the characters mentioned are not eligible for the IMT. They were not fixed by the most recent roll call, so are all currently in prison. I'm sorry if this throws things off for the IMT, but I have never made expections for anyone regarding unfixed violations, and I'm not about to start now. I treat everyone equally. The violations in questions were outstanding for 4 weeks. They were not fixed in the time alloted, so the characters must be withheld from pairings, as per normal prison policy. There is no reason to issue another special prison update before pairings to show these characters fixed as you requested. If you want to overrule me and enter your characters into the IMT against the rules of the Prison, that is your right as the DM of this forum. But I will not make exceptions in this case that I would not make in any other case. If this makes me a hardass and a troublemaker, so be it. But we have these rules for a reason, and if we don't follow them, then what is the point of having them?
Macbrea 03-12-07, 10:02 PM	Ok, this is alittle silly. Erithmu didn't post fixed until 7pm sunday night. Exactly, what are you going to do prison wise if I violate someone. I won't be home til 8pm-10pm on any sunday night. Therefore your just going to next week if your trying to get them fixed on that day. :P
NiQil 03-12-07, 10:08 PM	Ok, this is alittle silly. Erithmu didn't post fixed until 7pm sunday night. Exactly, what are you going to do prison wise if I violate someone. I won't be home til 8pm-10pm on any sunday night. Therefore your just going to next week if your trying to get them fixed on that day. :P Think what you want and call me what you want, but I stand by my decision. I laid these rules out a month ago, and not only were the IMT rules that I stated not followed, but the normal prison rules were not followed as they pertain to getting someone out of prison. Cat has the power to override me, and that is his prerogative. But in doing so, that effectively makes a mockery of everything I do as Prisonlord. If the IMT is really that important, there's nothing stopping Cat from doing exactly that. But if we are going to uphold the guidelines we all operate under, then my ruling should be accepted and held up, as it has always been held by Cat that my word is law with regard to anything prison-related. Either way, that's all I have to say on the matter.
Macbrea 03-12-07, 10:11 PM	Aren't we resetting for a week with nothing but crafting the first week? This could be the most boring IMT I have ever seen!
MitzaVolchenko 03-13-07, 01:49 AM	Ok, this is alittle silly. Erithmu didn't post fixed until 7pm sunday night. Exactly, what are you going to do prison wise if I violate someone. I won't be home til 8pm-10pm on any sunday night. Therefore your just going to next week if your trying to get them fixed on that day. :P I think I brought that up and it was discussed that the statement regarding even green violations counting would not be carried through. In the case of red violations that weren't actually fixed until credit expenditures well after Prison deadline, it comes down to are we running by rules or not? If the answer is "not," that is very telling in and of itself. Of course there is a simple and legitimate means of delaying tourney start which is trying to fill out the brackets with empty spots due to the loss of Caterane's stable.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-13-07, 03:50 AM	Aren't we resetting for a week with nothing but crafting the first week? This could be the most boring IMT I have ever seen! No, IMT starts this Wednesday. The crafting thing is only that you are allowed to do a one-time crafting of supplies equivalent to a full week. ToK
Caterane 03-13-07, 04:18 AM	Ummm....no. This is incorrect. As I stated in my previous posts, the characters mentioned are not eligible for the IMT. They were not fixed by the most recent roll call, so are all currently in prison. I'm sorry if this throws things off for the IMT, but I have never made expections for anyone regarding unfixed violations, and I'm not about to start now. I treat everyone equally. The violations in questions were outstanding for 4 weeks. They were not fixed in the time alloted, so the characters must be withheld from pairings, as per normal prison policy. There is no reason to issue another special prison update before pairings to show these characters fixed as you requested. If you want to overrule me and enter your characters into the IMT against the rules of the Prison, that is your right as the DM of this forum. But I will not make exceptions in this case that I would not make in any other case. If this makes me a hardass and a troublemaker, so be it. But we have these rules for a reason, and if we don't follow them, then what is the point of having them? Niqil, this Iron Man tournament is a special thing that we are waiting for 2 years and just because you don't want to give out another "roll call" (ie just removing 5 fixed violations) does not mean clean characters will not be paired in IMT. I know they're all mine but if someone else character was fixed before the thursday deadline I would have let him in too. Besides, I wanted to fix them three times already but everytime someone wrote me a PM with important board stuff that I had to deal with first. So my characters will participate; you can leave the outdated prison tag on them for another week if you like but that's not going to affect the Iron Man. I am sure you see that this special one-time event is reason for an extra "roll call". EDIT: Just want to add that you're doing a wonderful job in the prison but you have to be a bit more flexible. Such decisions oblivious of the context will only create hard feelings. Were it someone else who got ruled out like that I could understand if he would leave the board because of that.
MitzaVolchenko 03-13-07, 07:36 AM	Color me not surprised.
Erithmu 03-13-07, 12:47 PM	Question: How are we 'linking' the week of crafting? (since I plan on keeping that equipment after the IMT and it would have been crafted anyways) or do we just put it in our first fight and let it be?
Caterane 03-13-07, 12:59 PM	Color me not surprised. Mitza, your continuous sarcastic comments begin to get on my nerves, and considering that I'm steadily getting PMs with requests that the senders don't want to get involved with you (three alone in the last two weeks!) I'm not the only one. For your information: I would have let ANYONE into the tournament with clean characters, no matter if the violation was fixed one minute before the deadline. This is a game after all. And not that it matters but with 5 characters suddenly missing the tournament couldn't start anyway.
waywreth 03-13-07, 01:26 PM	To use a baseball analogy, I see Cat's characters as the New York Yankees of a few years ago... you know they're going to be at the top of their division (with staves of anti-magic *cough*), but beating them would be glorious! You know they're going to outspend you, but the dice are fickle, and you only have to win one fight. I look forward to facing them on the floor of the arena. Oh and I believe the answer is yes, but I haven't seen it actually mentioned anywhere... is the Iron Man single elimination?
hogarth 03-13-07, 01:28 PM	To use a baseball analogy, I see Cat's characters as the New York Yankees of a few years ago... you know they're going to be at the top of their division (with staves of anti-magic *cough*), but beating them would be glorious! I see Caterane's characters more as the Harlem Globetrotters of the Core Coliseum; the rules are just a teensy bit more malleable whenever they're playing. :D
Tellish_of_Ket 03-13-07, 01:33 PM	Oh and I believe the answer is yes, but I haven't seen it actually mentioned anywhere... is the Iron Man single elimination? Yes.
TheMagister 03-13-07, 02:57 PM	Okay, since I was under a misconception about Hood's interception, I accidentally earned enough xp to level him up to level 9. I don't want to break up Hood's team with Ceilia, but I kinda need the money in order to buy a few choice expendables. What can I do?
Tellish_of_Ket 03-13-07, 02:59 PM	Okay, since I was under a misconception about Hood's interception, I accidentally earned enough xp to level him up to level 9. I don't want to break up Hood's team with Ceilia, but I kinda need the money in order to buy a few choice expendables. What can I do? Well, Celia is only Level 7, so you're still good to go as a team. (i think) ToK
TelinArtho 03-13-07, 03:02 PM	This is just an update because I'm not sure the next time I'll be online from now until the pairings. Kraegin is set to ready. To whomever receives him as an opponent and as his pitlord, I expect I will be writing tactics on Friday. I might be running late, but I will do my best to get them in on time. At worst, I will send them on Saturday morning EDT.
Zevox 03-13-07, 03:23 PM	Okay, since I was under a misconception about Hood's interception, I accidentally earned enough xp to level him up to level 9. I don't want to break up Hood's team with Ceilia, but I kinda need the money in order to buy a few choice expendables. What can I do? As Tellish said, we can still be a team I believe. A level 9 and a level 7 = an EL 10 group. If we get told otherwise though, I guess Ceilia just won't be in the tournament. Which is fine with me - she can finish her crafting and continue onward with nabbing her Animate Dead ally and leveling up, so maybe by the time the tournament is over she'll be approaching level 10 and be in a better position to help WAR while their enemies are still waiting for the thaw ;). Zevox
Caterane 03-13-07, 03:36 PM	ECL 9 + 7 is not a viable option. Not even under guild rules.
TheMagister 03-13-07, 03:36 PM	Read the second post in this thread and make sure. To me it says that you're either ECL 10 (singular), ECL 9 (singular) or ECL 8 (teamed with another 8 or another 7 as a team). If we can do the 9+7=EL 10 mixed pair thing, I'm all for it. Hood gets manyshot at Level 9. {pleasurable shiver} Edit: there ya go. I'll leave Hood unmodified to participate, or I'll just withdraw his and Ceilia's team.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-13-07, 03:38 PM	I guess i'm wrong. I must have missed that part at the beginning of the thread. phew! I can breathe a sigh of relief now. ToK
TheMagister 03-13-07, 03:39 PM	I can feel your sarcasm all the over here in Corpus Christi, Tellish. :)
Abyssal Stalker 03-13-07, 03:40 PM	Well, if Hood can't participate and Ceilia still wants in, Manzarf is willing to join. He isn't as fancy as Hood, but available. Actually, he is scum and he knows it :)
TheMagister 03-13-07, 03:44 PM	I've made up my mind. I withdraw, and I'm pretty sure that Zevox isn't too broken up about it. Truthfully, it's the combination of Blacklight, Antimagic Field, and Deflect Arrows on the Harvester that really made my decision for me. The sooner I'm out of the ECL 8 bracket, the better. :) TM
Zevox 03-13-07, 03:45 PM	Well, if Hood can't participate and Ceilia still wants in, Manzarf is willing to join. He isn't as fancy as Hood, but available. Actually, he is scum and he knows it :) Nah. My chief reason for offering with Hood was because we were 1 short of the full 32 participants we needed, and I didn't want to enter Featylec. Ceilia will just go on as normal - shes about to get her first undead ally anyway, and I'm quite looking forward to it :plotting: . Zevox
Tellish_of_Ket 03-13-07, 03:46 PM	Oh, Hood could participate, but he hasn't been specifically preparing for other characters like some people. TM :incog:
TheMagister 03-13-07, 04:17 PM	Hey, if I've got people looking out for me specifically, I take that as a total compliment. Life's all about how you look at things, right?
McJarvis 03-13-07, 04:18 PM	Hey, if I've got people looking out for me specifically, I take that as a total compliment. Life's all about how you look at things, right? Only if you choose to look at it that way.
TelinArtho 03-13-07, 04:19 PM	Just remember: Even if you're paranoid it doesn't mean that everyone's not out to get you...
TheMagister 03-13-07, 04:21 PM	Just remember: Even if you're paranoid it doesn't mean that everyone's not out to get you... :twitch:
Zevox 03-13-07, 04:29 PM	I've made up my mind. I withdraw, and I'm pretty sure that Zevox isn't too broken up about it. Truthfully, it's the combination of Blacklight, Antimagic Field, and Deflect Arrows on the Harvester that really made my decision for me. The sooner I'm out of the ECL 8 bracket, the better. :) TM Wait, you're not entering Hood after all? So, uh, is anybody else going to fill up that 32nd slot for us, or do I have to enter Featylec to make sure we don't get any bys or monsters? Zevox
TheMagister 03-13-07, 04:36 PM	Nah. I'll have more fun with him active and gaining xp. @Cat: don't worry. No surprise attacks on CEF structures or anything. I'm not low like that.
TelinArtho 03-13-07, 04:37 PM	@Zevox - I wouldn't worry about it. I could always add Sir Valkin (who would have no chance...) or I could always add Jar-red to pair up with someone... I'm trying to stay away from activating a second character - but in the interests of keeping away from the situation you describe, I would be willing to do it.
Zevox 03-13-07, 04:41 PM	@Zevox - I wouldn't worry about it. I could always add Sir Valkin (who would have no chance...) or I could always add Jar-red to pair up with someone... I'm trying to stay away from activating a second character - but in the interests of keeping away from the situation you describe, I would be willing to do it. Well, thats kind of the situation I'm in too. I don't want to enter Featylec because he'd be hopeless with all the anti-hiding things folks have access to at this level, and since I have 3 characters in already. I'm willing to enter him to avoid the situation, though. And its probably better if I do that than if you add Valkin, since you have more serious RL issues to deal with than I do. So if nobody else steps up by the day's end, I'll enter Featylec. Zevox
SauroGrenom 03-13-07, 04:49 PM	I don't know about you, but I'm really looking forward to this tournament. My characters may get booted in the 1st week, but I think the whole thing is kind of exciting.
Zevox 03-13-07, 04:52 PM	I don't know about you, but I'm really looking forward to this tournament. My characters may get booted in the 1st week, but I think the whole thing is kind of exciting. Oh, I certainly am. I do expect Asran at least, perhaps also the Istima/Ihdald team, to fall in round 1, but I think this'll be fun as a whole. My misgiving about Featylec is mainly all the Touchsight users that abound in here - that power basically auto-wins against Featylec unless the psion using it has no will save powers, which with Ego Whip out there that isn't likely. Its no fun when hes paired with one of those, and in this thats all too likely. Zevox
TheMagister 03-13-07, 04:52 PM	Man, I'm not used to being so wishy-washy. Are ya'll saying you NEED Hood to participate so that you can have an even amount of characters?
Zevox 03-13-07, 04:56 PM	Man, I'm not used to being so wishy-washy. Are ya'll saying you NEED Hood to participate so that you can have an even amount of characters? No, just that we need one more entrant for the even 32 characters the tournament requires. The alternative is that either someone gets a by, or we enter a monster; and neither of those appeals to me. Zevox
TheMagister 03-13-07, 04:58 PM	Oh, so you want somebody easier to kill than an EL 10 monster. Gotcha.
hogarth 03-13-07, 04:59 PM	No, just that we need one more entrant for the even 32 characters the tournament requires. The alternative is that either someone gets a by, or we enter a monster; and neither of those appeals to me. Zevox I want to see three young red dragons win the tournament! :ayyyy!:
Zevox 03-13-07, 04:59 PM	Oh, so you want somebody easier to kill than an EL 10 monster. Gotcha. Sort of. I just hate the idea of entering a monster in general, since they're so often much tougher than PCs, and I don't want to see a monster win this thing or knock out gladiators that might otherwise have advanced. Edit: Yeah, what hogarth said is exactly the type of thing I want to avoid. Ugh. Zevox
Rauul 03-13-07, 05:24 PM	Sort of. I just hate the idea of entering a monster in general, since they're so often much tougher than PCs, and I don't want to see a monster win this thing or knock out gladiators that might otherwise have advanced. Edit: Yeah, what hogarth said is exactly the type of thing I want to avoid. Ugh. Zevox Acually if that happened... then maybe someone would believe us when we say that the werehalf-dragont-rex is a tad to powerful for 1 on 1 combat... Acually... could a person enter the drug crazed mule of MWB's
TheMagister 03-13-07, 05:40 PM	Okay. I'll enter him. PM is off. TM
MitzaVolchenko 03-13-07, 05:41 PM	I can enter Willowmoon, but I am actually considering withdrawing Indivara.
Caterane 03-14-07, 04:31 AM	Ok, we now have 32 participants and if possible last minute changes should be avoided. I'll log the characters now. Again: the deadline for IMT PCs is thursday 9 PM CET, not wednesday. Pairings will be rolled on wednesday normally.
Caterane 03-14-07, 08:47 AM	Hey I had an idea... what about enabling Bets for the Iron Man? Players can bet credits on individual pairings, and on the Iron Man Winner in general! We just have to come up with a good way to rate each character; powerrating would be perfect although I have no idea how to create a formula that works. Fortunately we have some mathematicians here??? :lightbulb
hogarth 03-14-07, 08:53 AM	Hey I had an idea... what about enabling Bets for the Iron Man? Players can bet credits on individual pairings, and on the Iron Man Winner in general! We just have to come up with a good way to rate each character; powerrating would be perfect although I have no idea how to create a formula that works. Fortunately we have some mathematicians here??? :lightbulb According to my understanding, the professional way to give odds is to find a payout that equalizes the amount bet on each side of the wager. Handicapping based on the power rating alone may not work very well. I would recommend allowing side bets, and letting the two wagerers determine whatever odds they're comfortable with.
Macbrea 03-14-07, 08:59 AM	I am willing to bet my 1o that Lord Frost makes it to round 2. Based off his power rating I should get good odds. :P
TheMagister 03-14-07, 09:07 AM	May I make a suggestion? [quote=Maps are also determined randomly (1-Arena, 2-Cavern, 3-City, 4-Forest, 5-Plains, 6-Sewer, 7-Temple).[/quote] This is something that (if it has been discussed at all) I've looked for and missed in the discussion of the IMT (and the regular pairings as well!). I would like to statisitically see more fights in the Gladius Arena. There are a couple ways to do this. Roll 1d8: 1 and 2 - Arena, 3-Cavern, etc. or Roll 1d10: 1,2,3,4 - Arena, 4-Cavern, etc. I'm just noticing that (as I get into higher leagues and have more movement and attack options) that Hood is more often than not heavily handicapped by the map. Point in fact, since his inception: Arena - Cavern - || City - ||| Sewer - ||| Forest - ||| Plains - ||||| Temple - || Hood has never fought in the arena. The City and the Plains are his best maps, it is true, and he's fought on those maps 8 of 18 times. The Cavern, the Sewer, the Forest, and the Temple are all his problem maps: 10 of 18 times. What happened to the regular old arena?
Zevox 03-14-07, 09:16 AM	Personally, with regard to maps, I still wish we could go with KU's idea of intentionally making sure no one fights on the same map twice. The winner of the IMT should be able to prove himself in any terrain. The arena I'd say should be reserved for the finals, since its the closest thing we have to a "neutral" map that doesn't favor one type of character. Zevox
Vathelokai 03-14-07, 09:18 AM	I am willing to bet my 1o that Lord Frost makes it to round 2. Based off his power rating I should get good odds. :P If they go through with the 'pair casters to casters, etc.' philosophy, he might have to fight Saffron in round 1. That would be interesting.:)
Erithmu 03-14-07, 09:20 AM	Personally, with regard to maps, I still wish we could go with KU's idea of intentionally making sure no one fights on the same map twice. The winner of the IMT should be able to prove himself in any terrain. The arena I'd say should be reserved for the finals, since its the closest thing we have to a "neutral" map that doesn't favor one type of character. ZevoxI would agree, problem is we only have 5 rounds and 7 maps. From a pitlord perspective, I would drop the forest map and then either the cavern or the temple map, but that is my opinion. Can we do something like that?
Macbrea 03-14-07, 09:21 AM	I really hope they don't do that. It unbalances the final results, as it doesn't really represent what the rest of the fights in the arena mean. Example: on an average week you have to be able to deal with everything in your bracket. The fighters need to survive a wizard same as another fighter. Handcaping them by making it non-spellcaster fights isn't a very good representation.
Zevox 03-14-07, 09:27 AM	I would agree, problem is we only have 5 rounds and 7 maps. From a pitlord perspective, I would drop the forest map and then either the cavern or the temple map, but that is my opinion. Can we do something like that? Eh, I didn't mean different maps each round. KU's idea was more like seeding maps across the brackets. For instance, one fourth of round 1s battles being on the temple, another fourth being on the plains, another in the forest, and another in the sewer. Then half of the second round in another map and half in another, making sure its not a repeat for anyone. And so on. Zevox
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 11:28 AM	I have a slight problem with Level 9's getting a free pre-buff, free surprise round, then initiative. That's potentially 3 rounds of your opponent being flat-footed. I think that is TOO much of an advantage for a 9th level PC. The power difference between a 9th and a 10th doesn't warrant that significant of an advantage. I can see pre-buff, then initiative, but not up to 3 free rounds. I don't know any 10th level character than can weather 3 rounds against a 9th. NONE. And i was looking for one too. Anyone else have the same reservations? I suggest that the 7th guy gets the prebuff, surprise, and then init, but not 9th. I suggest 9's, just get the prebuff. ToK
Zevox 03-14-07, 11:58 AM	I'm not sure why we have it as both a pre-buff round and a surprise round when the normal rules for mismatched characters with just 1 level difference is just a surprise round, but I would like to point out Tellish that the opponent being flat-footed in the prebuff round is moot, since all you can use that for is buffing. Zevox
SauroGrenom 03-14-07, 12:05 PM	I have a slight problem with Level 9's getting a free pre-buff, free surprise round, then initiative. That's potentially 3 rounds of your opponent being flat-footed. I think that is TOO much of an advantage for a 9th level PC. The power difference between a 9th and a 10th doesn't warrant that significant of an advantage. I can see pre-buff, then initiative, but not up to 3 free rounds. I don't know any 10th level character than can weather 3 rounds against a 9th. NONE. And i was looking for one too. Anyone else have the same reservations? I suggest that the 7th guy gets the prebuff, surprise, and then init, but not 9th. I suggest 9's, just get the prebuff. ToKPerhaps you don't understand the rule here. The prebuff round cannot be used to move on the battlefield, or to target your opponent, or to interact with the arena itself. Really all the prebuff round can do is to give you the option to use a short duration buff spell on yourself before the combat begins. It's a significant, but not overwhelming advantage. And it does not allow you to do anything to a flatfooted opponent.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 12:41 PM	I know you can't do anything to your opponent on the pre-buff. It's still a HUGE advantage for 1 level of seperation. "biggest baddest buff" "speedy mount, sees opponent, fire (or big spell bomb)" "win init, fire (or big spell bomb)" = dead 10th level pc. I have no problems with one or the other, but not both. A 9th level pc gets either a surprise round, or a prebuff, but not both. Man, that's just overkill. ToK
SauroGrenom 03-14-07, 12:44 PM	A surprise round is only a standard action. You cannot move and fire on a surprise round. There's only one map with a 1/3 chance of starting with LOS to the opponent (at incredible range). You'll never get a chance to use a surprise "round" to hurt your opponent. Best case scenario is the surprise round allows you to get into position. Then you need to be lucky enough to also win initiative.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 12:45 PM	A surprise round is only a standard action. You cannot move and fire on a surprise round. You can if you're mounted
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 12:47 PM	AND lets not forget his/her allies. That's two ppl buffing, two ppl striking for the kill, and two ppl who may go before you in initiative striking you dead as dead can ever be. ToK
SauroGrenom 03-14-07, 12:48 PM	You can if you're mounted There's only one map where there's any possibility of being able to target a foe with this. Even there it's a huge range penalty. You'd probably have to roll a natural 20 to have any chance of hitting.
SauroGrenom 03-14-07, 12:49 PM	AND lets not forget his/her allies. That's two ppl buffing, two ppl striking for the kill, and two ppl who may go before you in initiative striking you dead as dead can ever be. ToK Only the main character gets to prebuff and take advantage of surprise, (I think).
SauroGrenom 03-14-07, 12:51 PM	My point is that I've never seen the surprise round or prebuff round be fight changing. Never. As far as I know no one has ever been able to hit an opponent during a surprise round.
hogarth 03-14-07, 12:52 PM	There's only one map where there's any possibility of being able to target a foe with this. Even there it's a huge range penalty. You'd probably have to roll a natural 20 to have any chance of hitting. I would be much more concerned if this were a really high level fight where you can prebuff with Find the Path and then cast a quickened teleport during the surprise round (say). At level 10, your options are more limited in the first round or two considering that there's only 1 map where you start with line-of-sight.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 12:59 PM	There's only one map where there's any possibility of being able to target a foe with this. Even there it's a huge range penalty. You'd probably have to roll a natural 20 to have any chance of hitting. You're wrong. There's only one map where it CAN'T be done - Forest. All other maps, you have the ability to see and strike your opponent on that surprise round. You're right about one part....either a prebuff, or a surprise round doesn't necessarily make it fight-altering, but add both into the equation and you're cooked. ToK
MitzaVolchenko 03-14-07, 01:05 PM	I'm not sure why we are mismatching in IMT at all. Iron Man implies one. Not Championship of Gladius.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 01:14 PM	Let me just use Mr. Hood and Uhme as my examples. Probably what i think are the two strongest competitors...just my opinion though. [On Plains] Hood buffs with offensive precog. (he prolly has better, dunno psionics), moves out 120' (single move) on pegasus, and launches a hail of arrows. -8 for range modifiers, still leaves him with +7/+7/+2 when rapid shooting (or he could use manyshot). +7/+7/+2 vs Uhms touch/flat-footed AC 10. Goodbye Uhme. Goodbye any gladiator really. Now, here's the kick in the crotch. IF he somehow fails to kill Uhme, they still roll off for initiative. Hood +5, Uhm +0. I'm looking at all the gladiators and noone can survive that much of a pounding before even having a chance to act. NOONE! ToK
hogarth 03-14-07, 01:20 PM	[On Plains] Hood buffs with offensive precog. (he prolly has better, dunno psionics), moves out 120' (single move) on pegasus, and launches a hail of arrows. -8 for range modifiers, still leaves him with +7/+7/+2 when rapid shooting (or he could use manyshot). +7/+7/+2 vs Uhms touch/flat-footed AC 10. Goodbye Uhme. You can't use a full attack action on the surprise round. He could use Manyshot, though. Also, spellcasters often start prone on the Plains map, and an extended Mage Armor would not be unheard of either so AC 10 is overly pessimistic, IMO. Really, it's only an issue if you know where your foe is right off the bat, and that generally only occurs on the Plains map (or maybe if you have the Ambush package and you're defending). That's the downside of playing an unarmored spellcaster, though. You pays your money and you takes your chances.
TheMagister 03-14-07, 01:20 PM	I'm looking at all the gladiators and noone can survive that much of a pounding before even having a chance to act. NOONE! ToK Here's hopin'. :D
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 01:27 PM	You can't use a full attack action on the surprise round. He could use Manyshot, though. Also, spellcasters often start prone on the Plains map, and an extended Mage Armor would not be unheard of either so AC 10 is overly pessimistic, IMO. Really, it's only an issue if you know where your foe is right off the bat, and that generally only occurs on the Plains map (or maybe if you have the Ambush package and you're defending). That's the downside of playing an unarmored spellcaster, though. You pays your money and you takes your chances. Not true. Any mounted character can find the other gladiator in any map on round 1 except Forest.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 01:29 PM	Here's hopin'. :D Wasn't meaning to pick on Mr. Hood, i just looked at the 9th level guys after reading that they get both prebuff and surprise, then init, and yours just happen to be there. Our only saving grace will be if you fight someone in the forest, or fight a 8-8 team to negate the ungodly advantage. Otherwise, i am 100% confident in predicting a Mr. Hood IMT Champion. ToK *EDIT You can't use a full attack action on the surprise round. He could use Manyshot, though. Also, spellcasters often start prone on the Plains map, and an extended Mage Armor would not be unheard of either so AC 10 is overly pessimistic, IMO. Really, it's only an issue if you know where your foe is right off the bat, and that generally only occurs on the Plains map (or maybe if you have the Ambush package and you're defending). That's the downside of playing an unarmored spellcaster, though. You pays your money and you takes your chances. Maybe you missed the flat-footed touch part. lol
hogarth 03-14-07, 01:36 PM	Not true. Any mounted character can find the other gladiator in any map on round 1 except Forest. I don't know how you can guarantee that without having a lucky guess. Example 1 - Sewer: http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=sewer;a=Name,L,2,3;b=Na me,M,32,32 How does A find B? Example 2 - Arena: http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=arena;a=Name,L,6,32;b=N ame,M,61,28 How does A find B? Example 3 - City: http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=city;a=Name,L,3,4;b=Nam e,M,64,61 How does A find B?
McJarvis 03-14-07, 01:43 PM	As an official spokesperson of the Msr. Hood fanclub, I must humbly suggest that we recognize that French people are not that great at fighting(Horseback gunman vs Tanks? psh) & thus we should give Msr. Hood three full rounds with which to hunt down/shoot at enemies while they are still flat footed. And we should probably start him off in the same starting square as them too. =]]] ~McJ~
TheMagister 03-14-07, 01:44 PM	He's only saying it's possible. And it is. Not the 100% death sentence that he's exaggerating, but the chance is there.
TheMagister 03-14-07, 01:45 PM	As an official spokesperson of the Msr. Hood fanclub, I must humbly suggest that we recognize that French people are not that great at fighting(Horseback gunman vs Tanks? psh) & thus we should give Msr. Hood three full rounds with which to hunt down/shoot at enemies while they are still flat footed. And we should probably start him off in the same starting square as them too. =]]] ~McJ~ Oh, you flatterer. You wanna get on my good side, do something with Cupid! Tessero's gettin' flabby around the middle.
McJarvis 03-14-07, 01:46 PM	Oh, you flatterer. You wanna get on my good side, do something with Cupid! Tessero's gettin' flabby around the middle. I'll put Cupid at the top of my priority list for CoCo(you just watch-> I'll work on her BEFORE I activate Artificer or TIM again. Just to show I'm serious-> No artificer active this week!)
TheMagister 03-14-07, 01:48 PM	Don't do that. I can't activate any characters while Hood is paired in the Iron Man. <I'm assuming that if Hood fights in week 1 but not week 2 (even if he wins) that I can activate another character, right?>
McJarvis 03-14-07, 01:50 PM	Don't do that. I can't activate any characters while Hood is paired in the Iron Man. <I'm assuming that if Hood fights in week 1 but not week 2 (even if he wins) that I can activate another character, right?> You could still activate Tessero along with me during IMT. Technically if I activate cupid in leu of another of my characters, you'll be using up the exact same # of pitlords as otherwise.(Cat said before that the # of pitlords used is all he cares about)
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 01:53 PM	I don't know how you can guarantee that without having a lucky guess. Example 1 - Sewer: http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=sewer;a=Name,L,2,3;b=Na me,M,32,32 How does A find B? Example 2 - Arena: http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=arena;a=Name,L,6,32;b=N ame,M,61,28 How does A find B? Example 3 - City: http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=city;a=Name,L,3,4;b=Nam e,M,64,61 How does A find B? Example 1 - Sewer:With pipes leading to squares 1 and 2, a reactive listen check might tell you he's not there. It would then seem reasonable to head off to entry #2. A simple double move of your mount reveals all starting positions. If your mount is Hoods (120') you could see/do a lot more. http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=arena;a=Name,L,8,31,27, 14;b=Name,M,61,28;los=27,14,61,28,1 Example 3 - City: A character with a "flying mount" can reach the ceiling of the city and see all starting positions. ToK
McJarvis 03-14-07, 01:59 PM	@TM: Remember, the main reason I have to be a huge fan of Msr. Hood is he's the only person to have defeated any of my characters since my return to Gladius all those months ago. [excluding The Rouge Saint, but he's not technically mine anyway] Oh yeah, I'm that full of it. :-) /me goes to work starting the 'roid-donkey fan club...
TheMagister 03-14-07, 02:01 PM	And even I'll admit that that defeat was 60% luck. Hood was too young to own seeking arrows and I was too green with psionics to know about the 40' sighted psicrystal that kills hiding in concealment thing.
hogarth 03-14-07, 02:02 PM	Example 1 - Sewer:With pipes leading to squares 1 and 2, a reactive listen check might tell you he's not there. It would then seem reasonable to head off to entry #2. A simple double move of your mount reveals all starting positions. If your mount is Hoods (120') you could see/do a lot more. http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=arena;a=Name,L,8,31,27, 14;b=Name,M,61,28;los=27,14,61,28,1 Example 3 - City: A character with a "flying mount" can reach the ceiling of the city and see all starting positions. 1 - I don't think you make much noise while flat-footed. 2 - You can't do a double move on the surprise round. 3 - There's no position on the City map where you can see everything -- buildings obstruct the view. I agree that if you're prepared and you get lucky you might be able to hose someone on the surprise round. But that's no more unfair than "paper beats rock" is unfair for the person playing rock. ;)
SauroGrenom 03-14-07, 02:03 PM	Let me just use Mr. Hood and Uhme as my examples. Probably what i think are the two strongest competitors...just my opinion though. [On Plains] Hood buffs with offensive precog. (he prolly has better, dunno psionics), moves out 120' (single move) on pegasus, and launches a hail of arrows. -8 for range modifiers, still leaves him with +7/+7/+2 when rapid shooting (or he could use manyshot). +7/+7/+2 vs Uhms touch/flat-footed AC 10. Goodbye Uhme. Goodbye any gladiator really. Now, here's the kick in the crotch. IF he somehow fails to kill Uhme, they still roll off for initiative. Hood +5, Uhm +0. I'm looking at all the gladiators and noone can survive that much of a pounding before even having a chance to act. NOONE! ToKYou cannot shoot in the same surprise round where your mount uses a move action. Also you cannot take a full round action in a surprise round. Even if mounted, you either move or attack in a surprise round. Since there's only one map with a slim chance of starting with LOS, this isn't a concern. The very best that Hood can do is get lucky and be on the plains with the 1/3 chance of Uhm being in the starting square where they spot one another. Then Hood makes a single attack with a -10 range penalty against Umh's flatfooted AC. Uhm's will survive that single arrow unless it's a crit with nearly max damage. There's only 1/3 x 1/7 ~ 5% chance of this starting situation happening. After that, if Uhm dies because he fails initiative, then so be it. Hood's ability to cause damage drasticially drops after the 1st round of attacks. He looses his two psionic focus in that first arrow and it takes a move action to regain each one. So his damage output is way lower or he cannot hit touch AC. Also he's totally up a crick if he has to deal with miss chances, or cannot locate his opponent easily (invisibility anyone). In any case this is precisely the weakness of a character like Uhm. It's not like a one hit kill has never happened to that character.
TheMagister 03-14-07, 02:06 PM	Beg pardon. If there's a surprise round, then the mount and the character get a move or standard action each. That would seem the way it would work...
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 02:07 PM	I was just using them as examples. Not trying to single anyone out. If his mount moves, he can still use Manyshot in a surprise round. The mount is allowed an action as is the rider. ToK
Erithmu 03-14-07, 02:07 PM	Not to mention that Uhme will start invisible. Thyle or the Phantom steed on the other hand ....
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 02:09 PM	1 - I don't think you make much noise while flat-footed. 2 - You can't do a double move on the surprise round. 3 - There's no position on the City map where you can see everything -- buildings obstruct the view. I agree that if you're prepared and you get lucky you might be able to hose someone on the surprise round. But that's no more unfair than "paper beats rock" is unfair for the person playing rock. ;) My bad. K, i'll drop it, since it seems i'm the only one against a 9th vs 10th having both a prebuff and a surprise. ToK **EDIT <runs off to buy a tower shield>
SauroGrenom 03-14-07, 02:09 PM	I was just using them as examples. Not trying to single anyone out. If his mount moves, he can still use Manyshot in a surprise round. The mount is allowed an action as is the rider. ToKThey share initiative, so their actions must take place at the same time. If the mount moves, hood just waits around and wasts his standard action waiting for the mount to finish moving. You can attack while a mount runs, or while a mount double moves, but there is no option to attack in the middle of a mounts single move. So in a surprise round you can either move or attack.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 02:13 PM	They share initiative, so their actions must take place at the same time. If the mount moves, hood just waits around and wasts his standard action waiting for the mount to finish moving. You can attack while a mount runs, or while a mount double moves, but there is no option to attack in the middle of a mounts single move. So in a surprise round you can either move or attack. They do share initiative, but they each get their own actions. Your mount acts on your initiative count as you direct it. You move at it's speed, but the mount uses its action to move. Which means, Hood can single move and Manyshot. ToK
SauroGrenom 03-14-07, 02:18 PM	They do share initiative, but they each get their own actions. Which means, Hood can single move and Manyshot. ToK No. The presence of your mount doesn't give you extra actions in a round. The logical extension of your suggestion is that any rider can just sit on the mount as it takes a run action, and then take the rider's own normal compliment of actions after the mount is done. That's just not the case. For the mount/rider team, everyone's actions happen at the same time in combat. While the mount is moving, hood is using a move action, or while Hood is attacking, the mount is using a standard action. However, there's no option for Hood to be attacking in the middle of a mounts move action or after the mounts move action if everyone only gets a standard action. If the mount were running, or double moving then he could attack in the middle of that (with associated penalties). But those kinds of movement are not options for a surprise round.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 02:31 PM	Wow...i did some hard research on what you were saying Sauro, because i would have went "All In" betting that it was allowed during a surprise round. I would have lost the farm that's for sure. After some fastiduous reading of many sources, i have come to the same conclusion as you. During the surprise round, a mounted combatant cannot move and fire. That's an eye-opener for me, certainly. :bow: ToK
MindWandererB 03-14-07, 02:40 PM	<sigh> The rules are silent on mounted combat during the surprise round. However, when a character takes an action when the mount double-moves, the action is at the mid-point of the move. It would be reasonable to assume the same happens when a single move is all you get. With a pegasus, that could be pretty far. Doesn't work in the sewers, though. Pegasus can't fly, and the water slows it down. I agree with the consensus--I have never seen those extra actions make any difference. Oh, except for the time someone accidentally poisoned themselves in the prebuff round. Not sure that counts.
SauroGrenom 03-14-07, 02:46 PM	<sigh> The rules are silent on mounted combat during the surprise round. However, when a character takes an action when the mount double-moves, the action is at the mid-point of the move. It would be reasonable to assume the same happens when a single move is all you get. With a pegasus, that could be pretty far.Woah there... We aren't making up new options to attack in the middle of a move action are we? That's totally not kosher. If you want to attack in the middle of a move action on your mount, that's called using the ride bye attack feat. We shouldn't be making us new kinds of shot on the move actions to be used in surprise rounds. That's totally none core and not OK by the rules, and not a good idea at all if you ask me.
hogarth 03-14-07, 02:50 PM	<sigh> The rules are silent on mounted combat during the surprise round. I don't understand this argument. Here's what it says in the "Rules of the Game" article on Mounts (pt. 3) (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20050208a). "Ranged Attack: You can make a ranged attack from your moving mount. If your mount makes a single move, you make your attack either before or after the movement, and the rules assume your mount is stationary when you shoot." Why is this different on the surprise round?
MindWandererB 03-14-07, 02:52 PM	Woah there... We aren't making up new options to attack in the middle of a move action are we? That's totally not kosher. If you want to attack in the middle of a move action on your mount, that's called using the ride bye attack feat. We shouldn't be making us new kinds of shot on the move actions to be used in surprise rounds. That's totally none core and not OK by the rules, and not a good idea at all if you ask me. Okay. Then Tellish is completely correct. If neither the mount nor the rider counts as surprised, then each get a single action. If the mount takes a single move, the rider can take his action either before or after that move, as per Hogarth's quote. @Hogarth: My suggestion was because of timing. In a normal round, you can assume that you're acting while your mount is still, and the mount is moving while you do nothing--essentially, you each forfeit one of your two actions. In a surprise round, you only get one action, so if your mount moves and then you act, it's like you're creating time.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 02:56 PM	Woah there... We aren't making up new options to attack in the middle of a move action are we? That's totally not kosher. If you want to attack in the middle of a move action on your mount, that's called using the ride bye attack feat. We shouldn't be making us new kinds of shot on the move actions to be used in surprise rounds. That's totally none core and not OK by the rules, and not a good idea at all if you ask me. Melee maybe, but not archery. Rules are crystal clear on that one. I don't understand this argument. Here's what it says in the "Rules of the Game" article on Mounts (pt. 3) (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20050208a). "Ranged Attack: You can make a ranged attack from your moving mount. If your mount makes a single move, you make your attack either before or after the movement, and the rules assume your mount is stationary when you shoot." Why is this different on the surprise round? Here is why it's different in a surprise round...believe me, i was actually surprised myself. (pun intended) Moving While Mounted When you and your mount move, the two of you use your mount's speed rating, adjusted for the mount's encumbrance and the terrain. Because your mount takes you along with it when it moves, a move for your mount also counts as a move for you. (See Rules of the Game, All About Movement for notes on what constitutes movement.) Even though you're not propelling yourself, you still spend time moving. That would imply to me what Sauro is saying. Since during a surprise round, you get either a move or a standard, if your mount moves, you cannot attack as well, even via archery. ToK
SauroGrenom 03-14-07, 03:00 PM	Okay. Then Tellish is completely correct. If neither the mount nor the rider counts as surprised, then each get a single action. If the mount takes a single move, the rider can take his action either before or after that move. NO! For crying out loud. How can people who are usually so well versed in the rules ignore the fundamental facts of mounted combat? How may times do I have to say it. The actions take place at the same time. The mount and rider share initiative and act at the same time in the round. A surprise round has only a standard action in it. They either both use move actions at the same time, or both standard actions at the same time. You cannot have one of each in a surprise round. The rider/mount combo does not create additional actions in a round. We have special rules that allow a mount and rider combo to take different actions at the same time. This includes the stuff you see in the mounted archery feat. It only allows a character to take a full action while his mount is taking a different full action. All of those are only usable during a normal full round, none of them can be used in a surprise round.
MitzaVolchenko 03-14-07, 03:17 PM	RotG say that the attack takes place either before or after the move, not during.
MindWandererB 03-14-07, 03:24 PM	NO! For crying out loud. How can people who are usually so well versed in the rules ignore the fundamental facts of mounted combat? How may times do I have to say it. The actions take place at the same time. The mount and rider share initiative and act at the same time in the round. A surprise round has only a standard action in it. They either both use move actions at the same time, or both standard actions at the same time. You cannot have one of each in a surprise round. The rider/mount combo does not create additional actions in a round. We have special rules that allow a mount and rider combo to take different actions at the same time. This includes the stuff you see in the mounted archery feat. It only allows a character to take a full action while his mount is taking a different full action. All of those are only usable during a normal full round, none of them can be used in a surprise round.Yes, you can have a mount take a move action (e.g. a double move) while the rider takes a standard action, or even a full-round action. You don't need ride-by attack to shoot while your mount is moving, you just take a penalty to hit. So then riddle me this: in a surprise round, the mount takes a single move. The rider takes a standard action. At what location does the standard action take place?
TheMagister 03-14-07, 03:36 PM	Read Tellish's post a few posts up. ... I think I agree with Sauro on this one. {pauses for the end of the world} Yeah.
Maraxus 03-14-07, 03:39 PM	Btw, WHEN will the Iron Man Tournament happen? :) Somehow it does not say anywhere.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 03:42 PM	Yes, you can have a mount take a move action (e.g. a double move) while the rider takes a standard action, or even a full-round action. You don't need ride-by attack to shoot while your mount is moving, you just take a penalty to hit. So then riddle me this: in a surprise round, the mount takes a single move. The rider takes a standard action. At what location does the standard action take place? @MWB: For the first part, he's not saying anything about that...he's just talking about the surprise round. @Bolded: I'm cut/pasting from my above post. Here is why it's different in a surprise round...believe me, i was actually surprised myself. (pun intended) Moving While Mounted When you and your mount move, the two of you use your mount's speed rating, adjusted for the mount's encumbrance and the terrain. Because your mount takes you along with it when it moves, a move for your mount also counts as a move for you. (See Rules of the Game, All About Movement for notes on what constitutes movement.) Even though you're not propelling yourself, you still spend time moving. That would imply to me what Sauro is saying. Since during a surprise round, you get either a move or a standard, if your mount moves, you cannot attack as well, even via archery. It works differently during a surprise round.
McJarvis 03-14-07, 03:44 PM	Read Tellish's post a few posts up. ... I think I agree with Sauro on this one. {pauses for the end of the world} Yeah. Agreeing with Sauro is kind of like a solar eclipse. It's incredibly rare and looks neat from space-> but otherwise life goes on. ;)
MindWandererB 03-14-07, 03:50 PM	Melee maybe, but not archery. Rules are crystal clear on that one. Here is why it's different in a surprise round...believe me, i was actually surprised myself. (pun intended) That would imply to me what Sauro is saying. Since during a surprise round, you get either a move or a standard, if your mount moves, you cannot attack as well, even via archery. ToK This doesn't make any sense, though. It's explicit in the rules that you can take a standard action while you mount moves. Why can you shoot (even take a full attack) while your mount double-moves in a normal round, but you can't shoot while your mount single-moves in a surprise round?
waywreth 03-14-07, 03:51 PM	Btw, WHEN will the Iron Man Tournament happen? :) Somehow it does not say anywhere. It starts today. See the sticky post (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=809000) at the top of the CoCO.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 03:54 PM	This doesn't make any sense, though. It's explicit in the rules that you can take a standard action while you mount moves. Why can you shoot (even take a full attack) while your mount double-moves in a normal round, but you can't shoot while your mount single-moves in a surprise round? Doesn't make much sense to me either, and i didn't know until today. I was like you. I was in fact working my case aginst Sauro to argue the opposite. Then i came upon two sources from RoTG that would contradict it. The surprise round is VERY limited in what you can do. You get one action...either a move or a standard. If you mount moves, and it actually does count as your movement, despite seperate actions, you've just used an action during the surprise round. Trust me....i didn't know it until today either. But my research, in trying to prove Sauro wrong, showed otherwise. ToK
Maraxus 03-14-07, 03:54 PM	It starts today. See the sticky post at the top of the CoCO. Yes, I expected as much. It does not say there, too, however.
SauroGrenom 03-14-07, 03:59 PM	This doesn't make any sense, though. It's explicit in the rules that you can take a standard action while you mount moves. Why can you shoot (even take a full attack) while your mount double-moves in a normal round, but you can't shoot while your mount single-moves in a surprise round? The SRD doesn't say you can take a standard action while your mount takes a move action. I cannot find that anywhere. I find this: Casting Spells while Mounted: You can cast a spell normally if your mount moves up to a normal move (its speed) either before or after you cast. If you have your mount move both before and after you cast a spell, then you’re casting the spell while the mount is moving, and you have to make a Concentration check due to the vigorous motion (DC 10 + spell level) or lose the spell. If the mount is running (quadruple speed), you can cast a spell when your mount has moved up to twice its speed, but your Concentration check is more difficult due to the violent motion (DC 15 + spell level). And this: You can use ranged weapons while your mount is taking a double move, but at a –4 penalty on the attack roll. You can use ranged weapons while your mount is running (quadruple speed), at a –8 penalty. In either case, you make the attack roll when your mount has completed half its movement. You can make a full attack with a ranged weapon while your mount is moving. Likewise, you can take move actions normally There's nothing else I can find. We have only two specific cases where you can do something other than what your mount does. All other times, you do the same thing as the mount. A mount does not create more time in a surprise round.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 04:07 PM	The SRD doesn't say you can take a standard action while your mount takes a move action. I cannot find that anywhere. I find this: Casting Spells while Mounted: You can cast a spell normally if your mount moves up to a normal move (its speed) either before or after you cast. If you have your mount move both before and after you cast a spell, then you’re casting the spell while the mount is moving, and you have to make a Concentration check due to the vigorous motion (DC 10 + spell level) or lose the spell. If the mount is running (quadruple speed), you can cast a spell when your mount has moved up to twice its speed, but your Concentration check is more difficult due to the violent motion (DC 15 + spell level). And this: You can use ranged weapons while your mount is taking a double move, but at a –4 penalty on the attack roll. You can use ranged weapons while your mount is running (quadruple speed), at a –8 penalty. In either case, you make the attack roll when your mount has completed half its movement. You can make a full attack with a ranged weapon while your mount is moving. Likewise, you can take move actions normally There's nothing else I can find. We have only two specific cases where you can do something other than what your mount does. All other times, you do the same thing as the mount. A mount does not create more time in a surprise round. I would hope that argument above is limited to the surprise round...cuz if your generalizing it and applying it to a regular round, you are so far off base, you may as well be batting from the moon. ToK
SauroGrenom 03-14-07, 04:32 PM	All I'm saying is that if the mount takes a move action, the rider must also take a move action. If a mount takes a standard action, the rider must be using a move or standard action at the same time. The only exception being those specific cases where the rules allow the rider to take an action in the middle of a mounts actions (casting a spell or ranged attacks). A mount cannot attack (standard action) and move (move action) while the rider uses a move action and then attacks. When the mount is moving, the rider must be using a move action. You mount can be using a move action, while the rider draws a weapon. Or the mount can attack while the rider draws a weapon, and so on with all the various combinations of move actions and standard actions and so on. But whenever the mount takes a move action, the rider also takes a move action unless the rider is using one of the special options to cast or fire a ranged weapon while his mount moves (then there are special rules for this case only and none of those rules apply in a surprise round). No matter what, the members of the mount/rider combo never get extra actions because of being mounted or ridden (with the exception of ranged attacks and casting mentioned specifically in the rules).
TheMagister 03-14-07, 04:46 PM	We should move the rules discussion into a different forum.
MitzaVolchenko 03-14-07, 04:50 PM	The rider and mount in this example are not gaining extra actions. They are taking one action each. The RotG are clear on this. The attack from the rider takes place before or after the move and the mount is considered sationary at the time of attack. When your mount moves, you move along with it, which means that you're using your mount's speed rating. Your mount, however, is actually doing the moving, and that leaves you free to do something else while your mount moves, such as making a ranged attack. Ranged Attack: You can make a ranged attack from your moving mount. If your mount makes a single move, you make your attack either before or after the movement, and the rules assume your mount is stationary when you shoot. If your mount makes a double move, you can still make a ranged attack, but you're shooting while the mount is moving and you take a -4 penalty on your attack roll. If your mount runs, you take a -8 penalty on ranged attacks. In either case, you make your attack roll when your mount has completed half its movement for the turn.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 04:57 PM	And you're missing another VERY important PHB quote... "Even if your mount runs, you may make a single attack at the end." ToK
SauroGrenom 03-14-07, 05:08 PM	And you're missing another VERY important PHB quote... "Even if your mount runs, you may make a single attack at the end." ToK That is definitely not in the SRD. And I have trouble believing it's in the PHB. Are you sure that it's not referencing a charge? Doesn't it say something like, If your mount charges...
Zevox 03-14-07, 05:15 PM	That is definitely not in the SRD. And I have trouble believing it's in the PHB. Are you sure that it's not referencing a charge? Doesn't it say something like, If your mount charges... I can't find a reference to making melee attacks with a running mount either (though it is clearly allowed with ranged). It does, however say this: Your mount acts on your initiative count as you direct it. You move at its speed, but the mount uses its action to move. Which blows a hole in the "you use your move action when your mount moves" statements someone made. Zevox
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 05:16 PM	Phb even goes to say, "Likewise, you can take move actions normally, so that, for instance, you can load and fire a xbow in a round while your mount is moving." "If your mount moves more than 5 feet, you can only make a single melee attack. Essentially, you have to wait until the mount gets to your enemy before attacking, so you can't make a full atack. Even at your moutns full speed, you odn't take a penalty on melee attacks while mounted." I think i read the running part from RoTG, i'll go back and look. I was just reading it a few moments ago. ToK
hogarth 03-14-07, 05:17 PM	That is definitely not in the SRD. And I have trouble believing it's in the PHB. Are you sure that it's not referencing a charge? Doesn't it say something like, If your mount charges... Here's what it does say in the SRD: "If your mount moves more than 5 feet, you can only make a single melee attack. Essentially, you have to wait until the mount gets to your enemy before attacking, so you can't make a full attack. Even at your mount's full speed, you don't take any penalty on melee attacks while mounted." It's a bit ambiguous what that means. EDIT: ninja'd
SauroGrenom 03-14-07, 05:22 PM	Which blows a hole in the "you use your move action when your mount moves" statements someone made.I need to split a hair here. You are using a move action at the same time as the mount is moving. You are not using your move action to move. But your move action is happening at the same time in the sequence of events as when the mount is moving. You don't get to have the mount drag you around and take a full attack at the end of the mounts movement. You cannot do this because your actions are happening at the same time as the mounts actions. So for part of the time, you are not in position to make a full attack (unless you are using a ranged attack and there are special rules about that).
Zevox 03-14-07, 05:27 PM	You don't get to have the mount drag you around and take a full attack at the end of the mounts movement. Actually, with ranged attacks, you're quite explicitly allowed to do just that. You can make a full attack with a ranged weapon while your mount is moving. Plus, right after that sentence, you get this one, which also expressly contradicts you: Likewise, you can take move actions normally Note the plural "actions" there. And as for melee attacks being limited to 1 when the mount moves more than 5 feet, thats a special case given a separate explanation: If your mount moves more than 5 feet, you can only make a single melee attack. Essentially, you have to wait until the mount gets to your enemy before attacking, so you can’t make a full attack. So yeah, its quite obvious that you do not use a move action when your mount moves based on the rules right in the SRD/PHB. Zevox
MindWandererB 03-14-07, 05:27 PM	You cannot do this because your actions are happening at the same time as the mounts actions.There's the key point. Your actions are happening simultaneously, but they don't have to be the same action. If you can cast a spell or fire an arrow (or fire multiple arrows) while your mount is taking a double-move or even a run, then you can take any standard action during your mount's move action.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 05:28 PM	Oh i agree, you are using up a move action when your mount moves, no question there about that one at all. With the obvious exceptions of full attacking archery, charging, etc..that are clearly laid out. AND, that's why, during the surprise round you only get ONE action...if your mount moves, by default, that action is subsumed in the mounts movement. But in a regular round, a mount can easily double move (even hustled), and at the end of the movement, if you are within reach of an opponent, you may make one single melee attack. Even on a run. It just says more than 5'. That's pretty specific to me. ToK
TheMagister 03-14-07, 05:33 PM	It is confusing, I'll be the first to say it. Sauro's saying that if the mount moves, the rider can take any move action he wants during the surprise round (like drawing a potion or something). However, since there's no precedent for attacking or taking a standard action in the middle of your mount's single move, you can't attack. The reason is because you don't have time to attack either before or after your mount's move on a surprise round. The way I thought of it is: A round is six seconds. If your mount moves a single move, it takes 3 seconds, leaving you 3 seconds to attack. If your mount moves a double move, it's moving the same speed as a single move, so the double move takes six seconds. The rider cannot make a melee attack after his mount double moves because he's out of time (the end of the mount's movement is the end of his round). He could take two move actions, OR he could make a ranged attack (full or single) after the first part of the double move and before the second part of the double move, because he still has 3 seconds to complete the act. On a surprise round, there is only 1/2 a round of actions available to be taken (3 seconds). I'm not going to ask what happens when the rider manifests Hustle and actually does create more time... Edit: Wow...it DOES seem to imply that you can attack after a mounted double move. I never would have thought that they'd condone that. I stand corrected.
MindWandererB 03-14-07, 05:37 PM	In those terms, then here's my reasoning: A normal round is 6 seconds. If your mount takes a double-move (6 sec.) and you take a full ranged attack (6 sec.), then you're acting at the same time, and you take a penalty to your attack rolls. The point of origin of the attack is considered to be the midpoint of the horse's move. A surprise round is 3 seconds. In 3 seconds, your mount can take a single move, and you can take a single attack. Again, you're acting at the same time, so it should be treated the same way.
TheMagister 03-14-07, 05:39 PM	Sure makes sense. If you can make a single melee attack at the end of a mounted double move (that's not a charge), then you should be able to fire a manyshot at any point of a mounted double move (before, middle, or end).
SauroGrenom 03-14-07, 05:49 PM	Rules of the game article about mounts #3 (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20050208a) Melee Attack: You can make a melee attack from your moving mount. If your mount makes a single move, you make your attack either before or after the movement. If your mount makes a double move, you can't make a melee attack unless you're charging. If your mount runs, you can't make a melee attack at all.OK, so that settles it. Telish you must be confusing charging with running in your thing from the PHB. Ranged Attack: You can make a ranged attack from your moving mount. If your mount makes a single move, you make your attack either before or after the movement, and the rules assume your mount is stationary when you shoot. If your mount makes a double move, you can still make a ranged attack, but you're shooting while the mount is moving and you take a -4 penalty on your attack roll. If your mount runs, you take a -8 penalty on ranged attacks. In either case, you make your attack roll when your mount has completed half its movement for the turn.So if the mount makes a single move, you can only make ranged attacks before or after the move. If there is no before or after the move in the round worth of actions, then you cannot make a ranged attack in the same round as the mount moves. I think that's clear enough. There's the key point. Your actions are happening simultaneously, but they don't have to be the same action. If you can cast a spell or fire an arrow (or fire multiple arrows) while your mount is taking a double-move or even a run, then you can take any standard action during your mount's move action.Well, no. You can do what the rules say you can do. You can make a ranged attack before or after a mount's move action, or you can make a ranged attack during a mount's double move or run action. That's all the options you have. If you do anything else, you're creating new options not listed in the SRD for the mounted archer.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 05:54 PM	Yeah, i did find it again, and i simply mis-read it. Reading too fast. But either way. I can melee attack at the end of the double move (clearly), and as i agreed with Sauro, during a surprise round (a very specific rule, and specific overrides general), you cannot attack if your mount moves because your action is subsumed in the mounts movement. Otherwise i have no disagreements. It just seems that Sauro thinks you can't make a melee attack after a double move. I've quote it twice now that you can. ToK
SauroGrenom 03-14-07, 05:56 PM	Otherwise i have no disagreements. It just seems that Sauro thinks you can't make a melee attack after a double move. I've quote it twice now that you can.Look at my post above, and the first quote from the article. You cannot make a melee attack after a double move unless it's a charge.
MindWandererB 03-14-07, 06:14 PM	Well, no. You can do what the rules say you can do. You can make a ranged attack before or after a mount's move action, or you can make a ranged attack during a mount's double move or run action. That's all the options you have. If you do anything else, you're creating new options not listed in the SRD for the mounted archer.Look, let's break this down. The mount takes a single move. You're saying that the rider can't do anything at all, because 1) he can't take an action before or after the move, because his one action is simultaneous with the mount's, but 2) he can't take an action during the move because the rules say that you take the action either before or after the move? That's just silly. Point 2 is an advantage, not a restriction--it's in the rider's best interests to be stationary during the shot, because he takes penalties otherwise. If he wanted to shoot during the move and take a penalty for it, there's no reason why he couldn't. @Tellish: No, you can't make a melee attack with a double move. You can move up to your mount's full speed--that's a single move--and still make a melee attack.
SauroGrenom 03-14-07, 06:30 PM	Look, let's break this down. The mount takes a single move. You're saying that the rider can't do anything at all, because 1) he can't take an action before or after the move, because his one action is simultaneous with the mount's, but 2) he can't take an action during the move because the rules say that you take the action either before or after the move? That's just silly. Point 2 is an advantage, not a restriction--it's in the rider's best interests to be stationary during the shot, because he takes penalties otherwise. If he wanted to shoot during the move and take a penalty for it, there's no reason why he couldn't.That's RAW. Let's do a mental exercise to see what you are suggesting implies. So let's assume that we write a new rule: A rider can use a standard action ranged attack or spell in the middle of his mounts move action. So this opens up some new options for the archer. Let's say that we have the following situation on this map with Blue guy on a light warhorse and Red guy is the target. http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=city;a=Targ,M,33,63;b=M oun,L,51,33 If we use core rules, then blue guy cannot use a bow to attack Red guy very easily. He needs to move 90' to get into position. If he uses a move action, that's not enough. If he uses a double move and full attack, then that's not enough either, because attacks are resolved at the middle of the movement. The only core rules option is to use a run action (with higher penalties) and move 180' and attack from the middle of that as shown here: http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=city;a=Targ,M,33,63;b=M oun,L,51,33,33,33,15,33 Now if we use the MWB house rule, we allow blue guy to make a move action then also make a ranged attack in the middle of the next move action (ranged attacks in the middle of a move action are the new option). So blue guy gets to attack with lower attack penalties and we get something that looks like this: http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=city;a=Targ,M,33,63;b=M oun,L,51,33,39,33,33,33,27,33 You see? You're inventing new combat options for the mounted ranged attacker. That's just not in the rules. The rules give a number of useful options, but not that one. Edited for clarity
MindWandererB 03-14-07, 06:43 PM	You see? You're inventing new combat options for the mounted ranged attacker. That's just not in the rules. The rules give a number of useful options, but not that one. Edited for clarityNo, I'm not. First of all, I don't think I'm suggesting a house rule. But that's not something I'm going to convince you of. Second, you're putting words in my mouth. I never suggested that "A rider can use a standard action ranged attack or spell in the middle of his mounts move action." I suggested that "A rider can take any standard or full-round action other than a melee attack in the middle of his mount's move, even if the mount is restricted to taking only a single move action that round." By that phrasing, you create no additional options. Here's an equally ludicrous situation: the mount is Slowed. By your reading, the mounted character can do nothing at all, period, unless he dismounts. Tell me that makes sense.
SauroGrenom 03-14-07, 06:58 PM	No, I'm not. First of all, I don't think I'm suggesting a house rule. But that's not something I'm going to convince you of. Second, you're putting words in my mouth. I never suggested that "A rider can use a standard action ranged attack or spell in the middle of his mounts move action." I suggested that "A rider can take any standard or full-round action other than a melee attack in the middle of his mount's move, even if the mount is restricted to taking only a single move action that round." By that phrasing, you create no additional options. Here's an equally ludicrous situation: the mount is Slowed. By your reading, the mounted character can do nothing at all, period, unless he dismounts. Tell me that makes sense. By your very own reasoning, if you can attack in the middle of a mount's move action, why does it apply only during a surprise round not all the time? What's so special about a surprise round that makes the way a mount and rider interact different from all other rounds? If the mount is slowed, he can either attack or move but not both. I would't allow the shoot and move option. Yep it looks like he would be better off dismounting in most cases. Yea. That makes sense. Similarly I wouldn't allow someone to shoot and move if they were riding a zombie mount. Nor would I allow a shoot and move on a readied action. If we create a new rule as you suggest, then we'll have to allow this kind of shoot on the move in all these cases where only a single action is an option in the round. If any of these cases isn't OK, then we shouldn't allow it in any of the others cases. Cumon, let's be consistent.
McJarvis 03-14-07, 06:59 PM	Sauro's interpretation is the simplest and most elegant: so I side with him.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 07:03 PM	@Tellish: No, you can't make a melee attack with a double move. You can move up to your mount's full speed--that's a single move--and still make a melee attack. Where is that defined? Not trying to be a smart aleck, just curious. Those terms are very loosely used. There are many contradictory statements that say use speed, and then makes a reference (much later) to Full Speed, etc... I always worked on the knowledge that "speed" = single move, "full speed" = double move. ToK
SauroGrenom 03-14-07, 07:08 PM	I suggested that "A rider can take any standard or full-round action other than a melee attack in the middle of his mount's move, even if the mount is restricted to taking only a single move action that round."Besides, if we use this, we are still creating more combat options for the mounted archer. Take the following example: Say Blue guy is our archer and he wants to shoot Red guy and end the move w/o LOS on Red guy. Also he want his mount to attack Green guy. http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=city;a=Name,M,12,40;b=N ame,L,21,46;c=Name,M,21,33 So according to your rule above, he can move and shoot on the move (at least standard attack perhaps even full attack). Then his mount can take a standard action against Green guy. http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=city;a=Name,M,12,40;b=N ame,L,21,46,21,40,21,34;c=Name,M,21,32 Don't tell me that's not making new options for the mounted character.
McJarvis 03-14-07, 07:10 PM	Don't tell me that's not making new options for the mounted character. If it wasn't making more options then he wouldn't have a reason to argue it. The most useful thing, however, is using wands/dorjes on horseback(edit-> on phantom steed-back) without having to make concentration checks...regardless of how fast your horse is going.
MindWandererB 03-14-07, 07:32 PM	If the mount is slowed, he can either attack or move but not both. I would't allow the shoot and move option. Yep it looks like he would be better off dismounting in most cases. Yea. That makes sense. Similarly I wouldn't allow someone to shoot and move if they were riding a zombie mount. Nor would I allow a shoot and move on a readied action.:confused: If that makes sense to you--that a zombie rider is physically incapable of shooting a bow while the mount moves--then whatever. Seems you have the majority opinion, but I will privately believe that you are all insane. I'd love to see any of you explain to a non-CoCo player why they can't drink a potion or reload a crossbow while the mount moves during a surprise round, though.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 07:36 PM	:confused: If that makes sense to you--that a zombie rider is physically incapable of shooting a bow while the mount moves--then whatever. Seems you have the majority opinion, but I will privately believe that you are all insane. I'd love to see any of you explain to a non-CoCo player why they can't drink a potion or reload a crossbow while the mount moves during a surprise round, though. Uh...not me. I'm in total disagreement with Sauro (except the surprise round part). It's probably a loop-hole of rules quotes, but it's there. However, i totally disagree on use of a mount otherwise other than the black/white quotes which Sauro seems to imply that's the be-all, end-all of things you can do on a mount. Not-So-Insanely-Yours, ToK
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 07:47 PM	........moved down.
McJarvis 03-14-07, 07:47 PM	If this were a "RotG" issue it would start, "The rules don't say you can use any standard action while your mount moves, but that's what they mean..."
Zevox 03-14-07, 07:49 PM	By your very own reasoning, if you can attack in the middle of a mount's move action, why does it apply only during a surprise round not all the time? What's so special about a surprise round that makes the way a mount and rider interact different from all other rounds? What MWB was suggesting, near as I can tell, is that a rider should be able to fire mid-move during a single move action any time. Not in the middle of the second half of a double move as you suggested, just in the middle of a single move. I agree with him in that, personally. If the mount is slowed, he can either attack or move but not both. I would't allow the shoot and move option. Yep it looks like he would be better off dismounting in most cases. Yea. That makes sense. Similarly I wouldn't allow someone to shoot and move if they were riding a zombie mount. Nor would I allow a shoot and move on a readied action. Say what? Why? Its the mount thats slow(ed), not the rider. Why in all nine hells shouldn't he be able to shoot while the mount moves?? Thats basic mounted combat - the mount single-moves, the rider shoots. Whether that movement is all the mount can do or not shouldn't matter in the least. Say Blue guy is our archer and he wants to shoot Red guy and end the move w/o LOS on Red guy. Also he want his mount to attack Green guy. So according to your rule above, he can move and shoot on the move (at least standard attack perhaps even full attack). Then his mount can take a standard action against Green guy. Don't tell me that's not making new options for the mounted character. I will. Thats an option they already have, near as I can tell, by anything other than the most strict, literal (I'd like to add some more derogatory-sounding ones there, but those I can think of are stronger than what I'd like to convey) reading of the rules, where anything not outright stated in the rules is impossible (please don't make me bring up what that would mean, its been done enough I'd tend to think). As I recall someone saying shortly after I joined here, neither the interpretation "if it isn't specifically allowed by the RAW, it can't be done" nor the interpretation "if it isn't specifically prohibited by the RAW, it can be done" is right, and I think here you're using the former too much personally. Zevox
Horatius 03-14-07, 07:49 PM	Where is that defined? Not trying to be a smart aleck, just curious. Those terms are very loosely used. There are many contradictory statements that say use speed, and then makes a reference (much later) to Full Speed, etc... I always worked on the knowledge that "speed" = single move, "full speed" = double move. ToK Good question - I was about to post what I thought was the answer, and I looked it up: From SRD: Combat while Mounted: With a DC 5 Ride check, you can guide your mount with your knees so as to use both hands to attack or defend yourself. This is a free action. When you attack a creature smaller than your mount that is on foot, you get the +1 bonus on melee attacks for being on higher ground. If your mount moves more than 5 feet, you can only make a single melee attack. Essentially, you have to wait until the mount gets to your enemy before attacking, so you can’t make a full attack. Even at your mount’s full speed, you don’t take any penalty on melee attacks while mounted. If your mount charges, you also take the AC penalty associated with a charge. If you make an attack at the end of the charge, you receive the bonus gained from the charge. When charging on horseback, you deal double damage with a lance (see Charge). You can use ranged weapons while your mount is taking a double move, but at a –4 penalty on the attack roll. You can use ranged weapons while your mount is running (quadruple speed), at a –8 penalty. In either case, you make the attack roll when your mount has completed half its movement. You can make a full attack with a ranged weapon while your mount is moving. Likewise, you can take move actions normally It's a bit ambiguous. Typically, though, you cannot attack and move at the same time, so one could argue that you have to move to the point where you make the attack as a move action, then attack (while stationary). From this perspective, the use of the term 'full speed' is probably to make it clear that you can move from 5' to full speed (50' for a heavy warhorse, say) and still suffer no attck penalties. Of course, making ranged attacks can be done while the mount is moving - with this in mind I think what MWB is saying WRT the surprise round makes sense - it's almost like 'starting' a full round action and never completing it.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-14-07, 07:51 PM	@Tellish: No, you can't make a melee attack with a double move. You can move up to your mount's full speed--that's a single move--and still make a melee attack. ...and may move up to double your speed Bonuses to Speed: A barbarian has a +10 foot bonus to his speed When you withdraw, you can move up to double your speed If your mount moves more than 5 feet, you can only make a single melee attack. Essentially, you have to wait until the mount gets to your enemy before attacking, so you can’t make a full attack. Even at your mount’s full speed,... Nothing here indicates that you cannot attack after make a double move with your mount. In fact, it would indicate that you can. The specific rule is MORE THAN 5' FEET...not "in a single move", or "more than 5' but less than double, up to a single" I don't read any such clause. You can make a single attack from your mount, even at the end of the double move. To me, it's clearly written. What they are inferring with "Even at your mount's full speed, ..." part is that you don't suffer any attack penalties. If you happen to charge, good for you, you also get the +2 charging bonus, and AC penalty. The word speed is being used to imply single move....FULL SPEED would imply double. By my research anyhow. ToK
McJarvis 03-14-07, 08:02 PM	The word speed is being used to imply single move....FULL SPEED would imply double. By my research anyhow. ToK Full speed implies going your full speed in any given action. This is important for hiding purposes-> If a character that has a 40 ft movement moves 40 feet in a move action & then drinks a potion, they went "full speed", even though they only moved at half their full potential during the round. If they moved 40 ft as a double-move action, then they moved "at half or less" speed... That's my understanding of the term "Full Speed" and how it relates to hide//ms checks. (and that's how CoCo has treated the term ever since I started doing stealth builds)
MindWandererB 03-14-07, 08:08 PM	The word speed is being used to imply single move....FULL SPEED would imply double. By my research anyhow.Here's my research, then.Accelerated Movement: You can try to walk across a precarious surface more quickly than normal. If you accept a –5 penalty, you can move your full speed as a move action. (Moving twice your speed in a round requires two Balance checks, one for each move action used.) That's the clearest example I can find.
SauroGrenom 03-14-07, 11:44 PM	MWB is right on the movement speed thing. Full speed applies to a single move action where you move the full distance allowable by your movement speed.
SauroGrenom 03-14-07, 11:56 PM	I'd love to see any of you explain to a non-CoCo player why they can't drink a potion or reload a crossbow while the mount moves during a surprise round, though.I'm not even saying this. If you look at the rules of the game article that I linked above (here again for your convenience (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20050208a)) you can see that there's a complete list of standard actions you could potentially use while the mount is moving. It includes drinking a potion and since reloading a crossbow is a move action, you can obviously use it while your mount is using a move action. The list is complete as far as I can tell. If it's not listed, then you cannot do it.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-15-07, 12:53 AM	deleted...ugh. i give up. RoTG contradict black and white RAW phb. I hate skip williams. Imho, the biggest idiot in this game and shouldn't give advice of any kind regarding rules. ToK
Tellish_of_Ket 03-15-07, 12:57 AM	MWB is right on the movement speed thing. Full speed applies to a single move action where you move the full distance allowable by your movement speed. Despite that i give up arguing, MWB's quote in fact shows that full speed is double move...but either way. i give up. Skip is an idiot. That RoTG link you have clearly contradicts the black and white RAW of phb. ToK
Zevox 03-15-07, 12:58 AM	I hate skip williams. Imho, the biggest idiot in this game and shouldn't give advice of any kind regarding rules. Trust me, you're not alone in that belief. Way back when I had just joined one of his articles gave us the rule that you couldn't share spells from scrolls with your familiar. Then not too long ago an FAQ update comes out specifically saying you could. Ugh. Zevox
MitzaVolchenko 03-15-07, 12:58 AM	deleted...ugh. i give up. RoTG contradict black and white RAW phb. I hate skip williams. Imho, the biggest idiot in this game and shouldn't give advice of any kind regarding rules. ToK Careful, this is not the place for anti-Skip rhetoric. Believe me if you had IM we would have plenty to talk about. The RotG are always an interesting source to deal with.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-15-07, 01:00 AM	Careful, this is not the place for anti-Skip rhetoric. Believe me if you had IM we would have plenty to talk about. The RotG are always an interesting source to deal with. Oh i know skip personally (at one time anyways). Trust me, he's a doofus. ToK
McJarvis 03-15-07, 07:15 AM	I'm not even saying this. If you look at the rules of the game article that I linked above (here again for your convenience (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20050208a)) you can see that there's a complete list of standard actions you could potentially use while the mount is moving. It includes drinking a potion and since reloading a crossbow is a move action, you can obviously use it while your mount is using a move action. The list is complete as far as I can tell. If it's not listed, then you cannot do it. I don't understand...wasn't this what "we"(not me, but you all) were arguing about? You can make a ranged attack from your moving mount. If your mount makes a single move, you make your attack either before or after the movement, and the rules assume your mount is stationary when you shoot.
TheMagister 03-15-07, 10:29 AM	Can I be the first to say that I have a LARGE problem with Uhme's Improved Familiar? Not that it's an Imp. That's fine. But that Cat has the alternate forms listed as: 1) Willowisp, and; 2) Erinyes?! Common forms include monstrous spider, raven, rat, and boar. Doesn't seem to hint at assuming the form of a major devil... To be completely fair, the Imp's alternate form description does say that it functions as the polymorph spell cast at 12th caster level, but somehow, I doubt that it's meant to allow an Imp (CR2) to assume the form of an Erinyes. TM
hogarth 03-15-07, 10:36 AM	Can I be the first to say that I have a LARGE problem with Uhme's Improved Familiar? Not that it's an Imp. That's fine. But that Cat has the alternate forms listed as: 1) Willowisp, and; 2) Erinyes?! To be completely fair, the Imp's alternate form description does say that it functions as the polymorph spell cast at 12th caster level, but somehow, I doubt that it's meant to allow an Imp (CR2) to assume the form of an Erinyes. Yeah, I call "shenanigans" on that one, too. Before Uhme meets this imp, it only has 3 HD and thus those forms would be impossible. It says nothing about changing the permissible forms. I would highly recommend limiting the list of forms to what is stated in the description. EDIT: In fact, I call "shenanigans" on the whole idea of adding new rules (familiars with alternate alignments? doesn't say anything about that in the Rules of Gladius) on the eve of his big fight. Anyone for a game of Calvinball?
Erithmu 03-15-07, 10:57 AM	Can I be the first to say that I have a LARGE problem with Uhme's Improved Familiar? Not that it's an Imp. That's fine. But that Cat has the alternate forms listed as: 1) Willowisp, and; 2) Erinyes?! Doesn't seem to hint at assuming the form of a major devil... To be completely fair, the Imp's alternate form description does say that it functions as the polymorph spell cast at 12th caster level, but somehow, I doubt that it's meant to allow an Imp (CR2) to assume the form of an Erinyes. TMI invoke the rule of Knowledge ranks: Eule doesn't have the appropriate knowledge skills to change into anything but 3HD outsiders.
hogarth 03-15-07, 11:01 AM	I invoke the rule of Knowledge ranks: Eule doesn't have the appropriate knowledge skills to change into anything but 3HD outsiders. Not to mention the rule of "only 1 size larger" (unless we're talking about the Billy Barty of the erinyes world).
Zevox 03-15-07, 11:03 AM	An Imp with those forms? Oh, no no no. Take a look at the SRD my friends: Each imp can assume one or two forms from the following list: Small or Medium monstrous spider, raven, rat, and boar. Its different from the MM, and as you can see specifically limits them to that list only. No Will-o'-wisp for him, and by all Nine Hells definitely no Erinyes cheese (that one couldn't even be done by our house rules anyway - its more than 1 size category different from the Imp). Zevox
TheMagister 03-15-07, 11:05 AM	{Polite Question} How much did Mer-Man pay for his new Huge 9HD hippogriff, and where is the link to the post the black market, and who approved that? Also, is the CR correct (normal Hippo CR 2)? Normal Hippo HD (3) adv. to 9: Net increase +2 CR. Elite Array: +1 CR. Size Increase x 1: +1 CR. Customized: +1 CR (And I'm not sure about this one. It might fall under the category of "monster possesses certain special abilities or skills that significantly increase combat effectiveness (+2 CR). TM
hogarth 03-15-07, 11:05 AM	An Imp with those forms? Oh, no no no. Take a look at the SRD my friends: Its different from the MM, and as you can see specifically limits them to that list only. No Will-o'-wisp for him, and by all Nine Hells definitely no Erinyes cheese (that one couldn't even be done by our house rules anyway - its more than 1 size category different from the Imp). I forgot -- it got changed with the Polymorph errata. It's not even based on Polymorph any longer.
Erithmu 03-15-07, 11:06 AM	An Imp with those forms? Oh, no no no. Take a look at the SRD my friends: Its different from the MM, and as you can see specifically limits them to that list only. No Will-o'-wisp for him, and by all Nine Hells definitely no Erinyes cheese (that one couldn't even be done by our house rules anyway - its more than 1 size category different from the Imp). ZevoxWow ... The two commonly used SRD's have a discrepancy. Interesting. Either way ... @Cat: I don't think so, ... Also I feel somewhat inclined to mention that Indri can't bring Blightlord and the Animal Companion ... (Ally of my Ally rule)
hogarth 03-15-07, 11:10 AM	Wow ... The two commonly used SRD's have a discrepancy. Interesting. Jans has incorporated DMG/MM/PHB errata into d20srd.org.
Zevox 03-15-07, 11:10 AM	{Polite Question} How much did Mer-Man pay for his new Huge 9HD hippogriff, and where is the link to the post the black market, and who approved that? Uh, thats right on his sheet. 12,300 gp, with the 5 credits and confirmation from Pitlords (yes, himself, I know) linked. Though why he paid credits for it I don't know, since thats not required for purchased allies. Also, is the CR correct (normal Hippo CR 2)? Normal Hippo HD (3) adv. to 9: Net increase +2 CR. Elite Array: +1 CR. Size Increase x 1: +1 CR. Customized: +1 CR (And I'm not sure about this one. It might fall under the category of "monster possesses certain special abilities or skills that significantly increase combat effectiveness (+2 CR). TM Edit: No, CR 6 is right (2 + 2HD +1elite +1size). We've never modified allies' CR for customization. Zevox
Zevox 03-15-07, 11:12 AM	... Also I feel somewhat inclined to mention that Indri can't bring Blightlord and the Animal Companion ... (Ally of my Ally rule) Yes, he can. The "ally of my ally rule" says it applies to leadership-like allies (e.g. a Thrallherd's Thrall or a Thaumaturge's Planar Cohort), not other, non-ECL class allies. Zevox
Erithmu 03-15-07, 11:17 AM	Yes, he can. The "ally of my ally rule" says it applies to leadership-like allies (e.g. a Thrallherd's Thrall or a Thaumaturge's Planar Cohort), not other, non-ECL class allies. ZevoxRead that wrong ... sorry Cat
Macbrea 03-15-07, 11:18 AM	it's the main reason I use the www.d20srd.org for my SRD. Is because the errata have all been added into it. Therefore, I don't have to open two documents to see that something has been seriously altered with an errata. Such as the fact the polymorph errata changed about 50 things.
Sunwolf 03-15-07, 11:21 AM	Doesn't permanency cost exp and 5gp/1xp used for permanent effects even if cast by your self on yourself?
Zevox 03-15-07, 11:21 AM	Actually, I pulled that quote of mine right off the Sovelior_Sage SRD. 'Tis the only one I use, since I find its set up much easier to use than the others I've seen. So yeah, whats the SRD with the discrepancy then? Zevox
Zevox 03-15-07, 11:23 AM	Doesn't permanency cost exp and 5gp/1xp used for permanent effects even if cast by your self on yourself? Yup. Thats right in our meta rules post. Zevox
Erithmu 03-15-07, 11:24 AM	I'm starting to think that we should have had characters due a week before the tournament started, so that reviews could take place.
hogarth 03-15-07, 11:30 AM	I'm still looking for that rule that allows you to change the alignment of your improved familiar... :P
MitzaVolchenko 03-15-07, 01:18 PM	Oh i know skip personally (at one time anyways). Trust me, he's a doofus. ToK I don't argue that...so is Dave A. (snuggly and logical in a warped fashion also apply to Dave). However, that comes close to the sort of thing folks get kicked from WotC boards for :P
TelinArtho 03-15-07, 04:49 PM	I'm still looking for that rule that allows you to change the alignment of your improved familiar... :P Also, since when did you get to customize the feats of your familiar... (Eule has Deflect Arrows somehow...)
MitzaVolchenko 03-16-07, 01:11 PM	Gladius Royale Casino is Now Open for Business! (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=810427)