Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Pitlords 01-22-05, 05:41 AM	This thread is for Council Elders only! Please take up one and only one post which you edit. Perhaps even take on your own color. Then save this thread under 'favorites' because it will vanish over time due to no new posts coming up. The Council of Elders •Cellardweller •Jindl •LLMadCow •Magagumo •SnarkHunter Council Rules •The polls: The next post contains all polls. A poll will be opened as long as there is one Council Elder's voice missing (exception: if a poll has already 4 voices in favor of one side then it may be considered 'closed' and the rule enacted but will stay open until everyone has voted). Polls are opened by the GMs. Any citizen of the Core Coliseum (Elder or not) may suggest a new poll; the GMs will add it to the list if there seems to be significant support for the idea. •Voices: Every Council Elder has one voice which he assigns to one of the options. If there is still no decision once every Elder has voted, the highest votes will be voted on again. •Attitude: Most of the times polls will be voted as 'Yes', 'No', or 'Abstain'. Please put one of these words at the beginning of your vote. You may explain the reason behind this in a short description (optional). In some cases the voices is required to be more specific (example: "Do you want a green, red or blue background") in which case the various voice options will by included in the poll question (e.g. "Green", "Red", "Blue") •Discussion: This board is for the votes and discussions. Post only once and edit your thread. •Decision: A poll is enacted as soon as a simple majority is reached. As soon as 4 Council Elders vote in favor of one side (absolute majority) the poll is enacted, no matter if there are still votes missing. In case of a split vote, the opinions of the two GM’s (Caterane, Ashenai) may be consulted. •Deadline: Each topic will be debated for a period not to exceed two weeks. Topics may be closed early if an early heavy majority is shown. Any Elder's voice not put to vote within two weeks is considered to have abstained. The default poll time is two weeks, but it may be prolonged if difficult and/or decisions with severe consequences are to be made. •Overview: Please post your votes so that they are easily recognizable; a list would be best. •Decision Reached: Once a decision has been reached, you will make a public announcement in the tavern of such and a pm to the Pitlords account for the two GM’s to review and respond. http://www.caterane.de/CoCo/Struktur/Portal-red.gif (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?p=5425014#post5425014) Portals to the old senate thread and the previous Elders Forum and the Discussion Forum are included for your perusal. Previous Elders Forum (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=299338) Old Senate Thread (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=236361) http://www.caterane.de/CoCo/Struktur/Pfeil2.gif Portal to Elder Diskussion Forum
Pitlords 01-22-05, 05:42 AM	Current Issues: (1) Maze Spell [0] Caster loses for 10-round Invulnerability [1] Target loses for 10-round Leaving unless he returns [2] Target gets 10 rounds doing whatever he wants and then returns. [0] Target gets 5 rounds doing whatever he wants and 5 attempting checks (auto-return still) [0] Target gets 10 rounds attempting checks, no actions allowed. [2] Leave as it is (up to 100 rounds) (2) Grappling While Mounted [1] Grapple normally, both are "mounted" [0] Can't grapple at all, you need to get him out of the mount [2] Grapple with special rules. Suggest! (Aiding another) [2] You have to beat both the target mounts in grapple (3) Autospot Sneakers [2] Sneaker is auto-spotted if he moves in a square without concealment or cover [0] Like (a) but the sneaker can make a bluff check to prevent being autospotted [2] As long as he begins and ends movement behind cover/concealment he is not autospotted Resolved Issues 3) Caster Level Prerequisites for Item Crafting (Discussion (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=351279)) 4 Nay Caster Level is not a prerequisite for crafting most magic items (there are exceptions, like magical weapons and armor, where a caster level prerequisite is explicitly given). Old Resolved Issues: The following results have not been Vetoed and are Official: I Removal of Central obstacles: 5 Nay Unanimous, Central obstacle to remain II Random arenas (and which ones): 3 Abstain, 2 Nay This idea still has to be further developed in order to make a consensus III Banning the gate spell in all of its forms 5 Aye Unanimous, This spell is Toast. IV The take 10 rule: 5 Aye Unanimous, no longer taking 10 in combat. V Addition of the Divine section in the SRD: 4 Aye, 1 Nay The divine section of the SRD will be included within the rules of the CoCo VI Snark's Moderator Statistics: 3 Aye, 1 Undecided Snark's Idea seems to be going official as of now. We trust you can handle the first run Snark :) VII 10 Round rule: 1 Abstain 3 Cumulative Rounds spent invulnerable are cumulative VIII False Life Stacking 4 No Unanimous, No stacking, all are drained at the same time.
Pitlords 01-22-05, 05:45 AM	Old Voided Issues: The following decisions have been rendered null because the massive changes of Living Gladius have made the original considerations moot. Please feel free to revisit any of these issues; if you feel they should still be in effect, you are welcome to vote on them again, but at the very least, they merit renewed discussion/voting. IX Capping/increasing cost of undead allies: 4 For Cap No cost, 1 No cost/cap All Undead allies will be capped and no additional cost will be required. NULL: There is a completely new ally system. X Reduction of credit cost for monster fights: 5 Aye Unanimous, All monster fights cost 1 credit. NULL: Monster fights no longer exist as such; they have been replaced by the quest system. XI Mo's Proposal 2 Undecided, 1 Abstains, 2 Against This proposal needs more working on before a decision could be made. NULL: Parts of Mo's proposal have been included in the Living Gladius rules. XII Moh's Idea, Revisited (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=317010) 2 KerlanRayne's Suggestion, 1 Druid Roxor's Suggestion We will be working on seeing how we can implement it in the next couple of days. NULL: Parts of Mo's proposal have been included in the Living Gladius rules. XIII Bought allies resurrected for free: 4 Aye Unanimous, Bought allies resurrected for free. NULL: Bought allies are resurrected for free inside the Nimbus (in Arena fights), but are not resurrected in quests. XIV Max Scroll/Powerstone CL/ML 2 Unlimited, 1 ECL + 2 All scrolls are allowed. (See XV) NULL: See XV. XV Item cost increase 2 Increase to all consumables, 1 None 2, 5x increase and 10 charges. All consumables (Scrolls, Potions, Unguents, Tonics, Tanglebags, Thunderstones, etc) suffer a 5x price increase. Wands/Staves suffer no price change but their charges are reduced to 10 NULL: With Living Gladius' more "campaign-like" advancement, the original reason behind this decision no longer applies. XVI Fights per Level (Cat's Suggestion) 3, 2 fights per level at level 17+ (pre-epic) Unanimous, gladiators require 2 fights to level-up at level 17 and beyond. NULL: Living Gladius has an all-new advancement system. XVII Ceiling Reduction 2 To 50ft, 1 To 100ft The official ceiling is now 50ft high. Special maps and arrangements can still make for exceptions. NULL: At Elder request, and because the balance issues that prompted this change in the first place are now drastically altered, this decision is also rendered null. The ceiling is at 155' (150' of elevation for a Medium creature). XVIII Scribing Costs 4 50 gp/level, 4 have to buy scrolls Wizards cannot use the 50 gp/spell level cost to look at another wizard's spellbook (PHB, page 179). They have to buy the appropriate scrolls instead. NULL: This issue split the Elders 4-4, and went to CoCo-wide vote. Since the decision was based partly (and probably in greater part) on a wish to balance wizards, this issue should be revisited in Living Gladius, where spellcasters have been significantly weakened. Until and unless the Elders revisit this issue, wizards can once again scribe new spells into their spellbooks for a total cost of 150 gp/spell level (except for level 1 spells, which only cost 125 gp).
LLMadCow 01-22-05, 06:27 AM	Voice 1, the Madness Is this seat taken? <Looks around> Well, I call dibs on this seat. <Sits down and gets comfortable> Voice 2, the Cow Hey! Scoot over and make some room for me! Voice 3, the mysterious LL Don't forget me! Why can't I sit all by myself? Why don't you two get your own chairs? Grrrrr. 1) Maze Spell Voice 1 - f. Leave it as it is (up to 100 rounds). Voice 2 - c. Target gets 10 rounds doing whatever he wants and then returns. Voice 3 - b. Target loses for 10-round leaving unless he returns. 2) Grappling While Mounted Voice 1 - c. Grapple with Special rules. Voice 2 - a. Grapple normally, both are "mounted" Voice 3 - b. Can't grapple at all, you need to get him out of the mount. 3) Autospot Sneakers Voice 1 - c. As long as he begins and ends movement behind cover/concealment he is not autospotted. Voice 2 - b. Like (a) but the sneaker can make a bluff check to prevent being autospotted. Voice 3 - a. Sneaker is auto-spotted if he moves in a square without concealment or cover.
cellardweller 01-22-05, 07:00 AM	1) Maze spell c. Target gets 10 rounds doing whatever he wants and then returns. Reasoning - The spell has a very different use in the collesium than in a typical campaign. The spell that Maze most closely resebles in effect is Etherealness. With Maze (L8) you and your allies are able to ignore 1 enemy while you buff, with Etherealness, you and your allies are able to ignore all enemies (more or less) while you buff. This is in line with the difference between a L8 and L9 spell, therefore limiting the targets actions during this period is not required to strengthen the spell further. (I could probably be talked/bribed around to f. though) @Jindl - the whole point of the 10 round rule was to prevent a gladiator from placing themselves into a position where thier opponent is unable to affect them. The 10 round rule is an artificial construct of the collesium to even fights out. Viewing the spell in this light, I would be more inclined to choose a than b however that would just make the spell useless which is why I settled on c. @Jindl II - the thing is that the 10 round rule changes the effects of these spells radically. The diffence between this spell these spells and gate is that they are easily modified to bring them back into line (just like we did with PAO). 2) Mounted Grapple (No longer an issue) RoG have given guidelines (stating 'a' mostly d. You have to beat both the target and the target's mounts grapple check to grapple. Reasoning - The SRD clearly states the grapple process, without ever mentioning "except if the target is mounted". It should follow then that being mounted does not prevent you from being grappled. @Jindl - note that mounted is in quotes all the "unsuitable mount" conditions would apply normally. In the case of a large monk (or a psionic pegasi ;)) the net result would be that the mount, the grapplee and the grappler would all be sharing the same square(s). @jindl II - I think you and I are reading the word "mounted" differently. In your example Aku would have the halfing and his dog pinned beneath his right paw - they are all sharing the same space, hence Aku is "mounted". Allow me to flip this example on you, can you honestly say that a huge behir would mysterously be unable to grab a halfing because there is a puny dog under him? @all - The condition where the mount does the grappling has not been addressed, both Shiaan and the Harvester have used this tactic in the past. As I see it, all the normal grapple rules should be applied. This could lead to a large number of creatures all sharing the same space (eg a wizard being grappled, his familiar, his mount, the mount doing the grappling and the rider - sheesh!), but I can't see any rules that would prevent this. If you are riding a mount that is grappling, should mounted combat apply? My feeling is that you cannot negate a "damage your opponent" grapple attack, but you can negate an "attack your oppoent" attack. @jindl III - That is a good compromise between the two positions. My vote has been changed. 3) Autospot Sneakers a) Sneaker is auto-spotted if he moves in a square without concealment or cover The rules are quite clear in this instance. @all - I can see that maybe some leeway needs to be made to enable sneakers in the collesium, but c is going way too far. The complete adventurer has an optional rule that is much more reasonable (5' for every 5 ranks) and would make a nice compromise position.
Jindl 01-22-05, 12:14 PM	Maze Spell B. Target loses for 10-round Leaving unless he returns. @Snark/Cellar/LL - Why should the maze spell give its target an exemption to the 10 round for leaving the arena rule? In DnD, if you cast maze at a target, that target is removed from the fight, and you just won the fight. Why should it be different in the Arena? I recognize that the 10 round rule began to prevent teleporters from exiting, buffing at the leisure, and returning (I wrote the rule, remember? :D) But spells like Imprisonment, Maze, and Temporal Stasis (because the target is outside of time - thus outside of the arena) would also depend on this rule to keep their usefulness in the Arena. All three spells effectively win the fight for the caster in DnD, so they should remain that way in the arena. If that effect is too powerful in your opinions, then we should talk about banning the spell (like Gate) instead of coming up with an artificially watered down version of it. Grappling While Mounted D. You have to beat both the target's and the mount's grapple check to maintain the grapple. Since you can't enter the mount's square, you can't maintain the grapple without beating the mount in a grappling check (and creating a multiple grapplers situation). You can still initiate the grapple and deal damage by only defeating the target in a grapple check, but the grapple will end at the end of your turn. @Snark/Cellar - I didn't choose A, because the mount may not be a suitable mount for the grappler (like a enlarged monk grappling someone mounted on a warhorse. There is no way the Large monk is considered mounted on the Large warhorse.) I think my explanation above best fits the rules as written. @Cellar - If a creature is an "unsuitable mount" then you can't share space with it without grappling, or it being 3 sizes smaller than you. Saying that a horse is an "unsuitable mount" for an ogre means the ogre can't mount it at all. Plus, the ogre's weight may be more than the horse can carry, which further demonstrates that the ogre cannot be considered "mounted". Let's put another example out there. Suppose Aku polymorphs himself into a Behir (a huge creature weighing several thousand pounds) and then grapples a halfling on a riding dog. Please tell me that Aku is not going to be considered "mounted". Isn't it much more reasonable to suggest that Aku must remove the halfling from the dog in order to maintain the grapple? And we haven't discussed how to remove the halfling from the dog. Perhaps with a trip check, or a grapple check to "move the grapple" into Aku's space (leaving the dog out of Aku's space) or something to that effect? @Cellar (2) - Okay, I think I see where you are coming from. Your use of "mounted" is indeed different from mine. I think we have to be careful with that term, because it does have many rules implications regarding skills and feats, etc. Perhaps we should look at another option for handling grapple attempts against mounted characters: The main issue seems to be whether the grappler can enter the space shared by the mount+rider in order to continue the grapple. I think not, because the mount isn't part of the grapple it can't be in the grappling space, and the grappler can't move into its space. You think that the grappler should be considered "mounted" and thus allowed to enter the mount's space. But perhaps there is another alternative. Perhaps the grappler should have to win a grapple check against both the mount and the rider (as if it was grappling them both simultaneously). If the grappler wins, it could move into the space shared by the rider+mount, becuase they are all now grappling. This makes sense to me, because it should be more difficult to grapple someone who is mounted. It also makes sense with the Aku scenario above, because Behir-Aku would be grappling both the dog and the halfling. What do you think? ON A SEPARATE NOTE: In regards to situations where the mount initiates the grapple, I think that the rider must either join the grapple or dismount (thus exiting the grappling space). Should the rider have no actions left, he must do one of the above at his earliest opportunity. This is similar to a ruling in the Official FAQ, where a PC is standing over an unconscious creature, that suddenly regenerates and becomes conscious. Since the rules allow a PC to share a space with an unconscious creature, but not a conscious one, the ruling was that the newly conscious creature must either initiate a grapple (making it okay to share the space with the PC) or leave the space at his earliest opportunity. I think this would be an adequate ruling for how to deal with the rider of a mount that starts a grapple. Perhaps we could add this as a separate issue to be voted on? Autospot Sneakers Thinking ...
SnarkHunter 01-22-05, 09:48 PM	1) f 2) a 3) c These seem to be the most parsimonious and logical decisions, though others are free to disagree. Note for the record though, that, they are dumb. ;)
Pittbull 02-16-05, 03:16 AM	(1) Maze Spell: 3 votes for c, no other votes (2) Grappling While Mounted: 3 votes for LL's aiding another, two votes for a, 1 vote abstain (3) Autospot Sneakers: My votes: 3 for you can move for 1' per skill rank, 2 for you can move 5' per skill-check/5, 1 for c [if the first two votes aren't valid, give 3 votes to "c"] Another issue we might add, is the familiar-topic (permanent XP-loss if it dies)!
Sindorin 05-23-05, 09:20 AM	Sindorin, Seraph of Luck, takes his seat at the table. It seems that the majority of issues have been solved at this time. If I feel the need to address something, it will be done so in the Discussion Forum and edited here. Issues that require resolution: 1) Blacklight - total concealment as per 3.0 darkness or 20% concealment as per 3.5 darkness 2) Ranged weapons without LoS 3) Targeting center of area effect 4) Eversmoking bottle 1) -It grants Total Concealment 2) -If LOS: attack character If no LOS: attack square that you think he is in. 50% miss chance applies. 3) -Requires Spellcraft/Psicraft 4) -Pyrotechnics makes choking smoke, so the bottle should as well. And it should affect the wielder as well since it originates from the bottle, whereas Pyrotechnics is a long range spell...
Pittbull 06-01-05, 11:26 AM	Regarding Cellar's proposal to change Lance: From the first day when Lance entered the arena I hated him, then he has beaten Angosh and I hated him even more. SO no change on this character!! Hey, wait, I'm just kidding!! I think, we should allow Cellar the change and charge some credits for that. 5° is a good idea, but let's see what Cellar wants to change.
Caterane 06-01-05, 12:04 PM	Right, Cellardweller, please tell us what you want to change
cellardweller 06-05-05, 03:57 AM	Sorry just noticed the question. I'll get you the full details tonight (I'm in a bit of a rush now). I need a quick elders vote by the time I run the fight in 18hrs or so. Jindl has expressed concerns about giving equipment to a figurine of wonderous power. It is based on animate object and as such does not the two categories for which there are rules (summoned vs called). Should a Figurine be able to keep equipment between activations? I am abstaining, because I see validity in both sides.
Caterane 06-05-05, 04:40 AM	Hm, this is the Council thread but I was misguided by the name "Forum" too. I blame it on Ash who opened it :D I'll open a new one. Re: I don't see why not. I can call it anytime during the week, twice a day even so I have more than enough chances to equip it. Why shouldn't that be possible?
Sindorin 06-07-05, 02:24 PM	Sorry just noticed the question. I'll get you the full details tonight (I'm in a bit of a rush now). I need a quick elders vote by the time I run the fight in 18hrs or so. Jindl has expressed concerns about giving equipment to a figurine of wonderous power. It is based on animate object and as such does not the two categories for which there are rules (summoned vs called). Should a Figurine be able to keep equipment between activations? I am abstaining, because I see validity in both sides. I'd prefer editing this into my post, but it doesn't appear that anyone else is doing so. I will instead explain why you should not be able to give items to an inanimate object: Bronze Griffon: When animated, a bronze griffon acts in all ways like a normal griffon under the command of its possessor. The item can be used twice per week for up to 6 hours per use. When 6 hours have passed or when the command word is spoken, the bronze griffon once again becomes a tiny statuette. Moderate transmutation; CL 11th; Craft Wondrous Item, animate objects; Price 10,000 gp. I don't see how it would be possible since the griffon figurine is animated itself... I vote no. I could sound really stupid and say that it says the bronze griffon turns into the tiny statuette, but it does not say anything about equipment that it carries... but then again, that's why we're having this one.
LLMadCow 06-08-05, 03:27 AM	Sorry just noticed the question. I'll get you the full details tonight (I'm in a bit of a rush now). I need a quick elders vote by the time I run the fight in 18hrs or so. Jindl has expressed concerns about giving equipment to a figurine of wonderous power. It is based on animate object and as such does not the two categories for which there are rules (summoned vs called). Should a Figurine be able to keep equipment between activations? I am abstaining, because I see validity in both sides. (Sorry for the late reply, but I am going to offer my input nonetheless!) My ruling is as follows: A Figurine of Wonderous Power would be able to use items while activated, but upon returning to an unactivated state the items would fall to the ground. The reason behind my ruling is as follows: Whenever a figurine is done being used, it is going to return to it's original state, and that would be the form it was created in - only the whatever equipment it starts with. All of the figurines have their own special abilities and powers, to include one of the goats having some weapons for the owner to employ in battle. IF a player would like to pay credits for a specially crafted FoWP, they could own one that had some extra features that the book did not mention.
Caterane 06-09-05, 07:24 AM	This thread is closed! Please use the new Council of Elders (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?p=6399349#post6399349) thread for votes, and the Discussion thread (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?p=5425014) for discussions! Please make sure that you use the Council for votes only and keep it clean of discussions and explanations. I don't want to open a fifth Council :/ Thanks.