Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Maesto 07-21-07, 01:51 PM	Hi guys, My table just finished RHoD. We were significantly understrength, but managed to pull through relatively unscathed. Alright, the 63 on 8d10 killed two characters, but other than that, we got through basically alright. One of the combinations we significantly abused was Binding Winds + Silence, then picking off critters with enlarged reach weapons and reserve feats. In fact, this was the tactic which picked off every difficult encounter from part four onwards. Essentially, critters couldn't move, couldn't cast spells or use command trigger items, nothing could be done. It goes without saying that this really made some of the combats anticlimatical. I'd really suggest closing Binding Winds; it's applications are vast and stupid, and once caught, there is nothing at all that a critter can do, unless they have a teleportation ability or freedom of movement. If they've also been silenced, they need teleport as a spell-like ability. I heard an uproar about this spell when it was initially introduced, although most people said it was fine, as "what melee fighter would stay at range, even though it meant not getting damaged?", so I'm proposing another uproar. Combined with the stupidity of silence, this is a truly horrendous (and low level) combination. Has anybody else experienced these difficulties? Cheers, Jolyon
CdrcJsn 07-21-07, 04:38 PM	It's no more broken than a grappler + silence. Heck, a Tasha's will render the target unable to cast spells, which means you don't even need silence. This spell takes out one of your casters out for the entire fight(duration = concentration) which is the real cost of the spell.
CdrcJsn 07-21-07, 04:39 PM	oops, double post
Maesto 07-22-07, 01:59 AM	Tasha's has language dependent stuff in it, this one doesn't. Tashas also has a duration, while this one doesn't. Once mooks are dealt with, or if there are none to start with, taking one of your casters out for the entire combat is relatively painless. Also, when you're grappling, you can be hit with natural attacks. For example, take a dragon being grappled by somebody with silence cast on them. The dragon won't be worried for long.
Jay_Ibero_911 07-22-07, 02:47 AM	Tasha's has language dependent stuff in it, this one doesn't. Tashas also has a duration, while this one doesn't. Once mooks are dealt with, or if there are none to start with, taking one of your casters out for the entire combat is relatively painless. Also, when you're grappling, you can be hit with natural attacks. For example, take a dragon being grappled by somebody with silence cast on them. The dragon won't be worried for long. They can attack with natural attacks, but with a -4 attack penalty, which is pretty significant usually. And the grappled target is denied his dex against the rest of the party...
ShinAkuma2 07-22-07, 02:51 AM	The dragon won't be worried for long. Doing its single natural attack a round instead of any number of other options it has is fine by me.
copper_wyrmling 07-22-07, 03:57 AM	Doing its single natural attack a round instead of any number of other options it has is fine by me. Against most PCs, the dragon won't stay grappled if it doesn't want to stay grappled (once you start encountering the Large ones, at least). Even a medium one often has a decent chance of rolling high and escaping. There's no way for it to break out of binding winds, that I can see. I agree it tends to lead to anticlimactic combats, but I'm not sure if it's unbalancing - it does allow a save and it doesn't stop ranged attacks (iirc). (Also, Maesto, you forgot the PC death in Part 3. Having half your party die is not really "relatively unscathed", although it's better than the TPK which might have happened without the Binding Winds trick in Part IV. I hate my dice sometimes.)
CdrcJsn 07-22-07, 04:09 PM	Tasha's has language dependent stuff in it, this one doesn't. Tashas also has a duration, while this one doesn't. Once mooks are dealt with, or if there are none to start with, taking one of your casters out for the entire combat is relatively painless. Tasha's is better when it does work. I'm not saying it's better overall. I'm saying it's comparable in strength so in comparison, Binding Winds is hardly broken. As for duration...if your fights typically take longer than the duration of a Tasha's, then your group doesn't have enough damage dealers or you're fighting a group of enemies. Against groups, grease, web, glitterdust, entangle or briar web might be better for screwing up the opposition than taking out a single target. Binding Winds is a good spell. But I wouldn't call it broken.
JJeff 07-22-07, 09:24 PM	But Binding Winds has a Ref neg and SR:Yes. It's still pretty hard to pull off...
jstorrie 07-22-07, 10:48 PM	Eh, dragons don't often have the best Ref saves.
Dr.Cornelius 07-23-07, 02:36 AM	Binding Winds has a key advantage - it is a Reflex save - Tasha's and Glitterdust are both Will saves. In general caster types have better Will than Reflex, and don't forget that non-humanoids get +4 against Tasha's. The most comparable spell to Binding Winds is Bands of Steel (SC p.24) On a failed save, Binding Winds prevents the target from moving but Bands immobilizes. Bands of Steel entangles even if the save is made. Bands allows a strength or escape artist check to break free. Both are Reflex saves. Both are Medium range. Binding Winds is concentration duration while Bands of Steel is 1 round/level. Binding is 2nd level, Bands is 3rd. Up to this point Binding Winds and Bands of Steel are relatively well balanced against each other. The big difference is that Binding Winds affects all creatures while Bands of Steel only affects Medium or smaller creatures.
Maesto 07-23-07, 03:01 AM	The other difference is that there is a way out of bands of steel. There is no way out of binding winds.
CdrcJsn 07-23-07, 03:11 AM	The big difference is that Binding Winds affects all creatures while Bands of Steel only affects Medium or smaller creatures. I think this is the biggest argument against it being unbalanced, and only from the view point that it should probably be a level higher because a similar spell has a much stricter limitation and is a higher level. Of course one can also argue that Band of Steel shouldn't have the size limitation. After all, larger creatures will typically have higher strength, making it easier to break out.
CdrcJsn 07-23-07, 03:27 AM	The other difference is that there is a way out of bands of steel. There is no way out of binding winds. Other than interrupting the caster of course... Sure, it screws single targets...but there are plenty of spells that will basically take away all the threat from an encounter.
Mommy was an Orc 07-23-07, 10:06 AM	Other than interrupting the caster of course... Sure, it screws single targets...but there are plenty of spells that will basically take away all the threat from an encounter. The problem is that infinite duration and the reflex save. That offers a lot of tactical manuevers that a spell such as Tasha's simply doesn't give you. Such as: Retreat to 210 feet(at low APL, this is almost certainly past Medium range) and have your archer open fire. Unless the target has long-range options or some kind of fast healing, that's basically it for them. It is only a -4 and the archer can fire one shot a round. Outwait buffs - a lot of combats have round per level or minute per level buffs factored into them. Shield, Protection from Good, Shield of Faith, Divine Power, Bull's Strength, Displacement, etc...the party retreats out of range and waits for the buffs to wear off.
Mattastrophic 07-23-07, 12:17 PM	Hmm... Limited Wish->Chained Binding Winds... It's the Concentration part that balances Binding Winds. It drops the caster down to move actions, and if he takes damage, he's gotta start making Concentration checks. I've begun to like Refusal for this sort of caster lockdown, though. Or Bands of Steel + Empowered Ray of Enfeeblement. -Matt
solbergb 07-23-07, 12:36 PM	Limited wish doesn't allow metamagicked versions of the spells. There was a circle ruling on this. Which means that would take a greater rod of chaining and there might even be table variation on that. A lesser rod of chaining in the hands of a druid though....still the additional saves are at +5.
Mattastrophic 07-23-07, 12:45 PM	Limited wish doesn't allow metamagicked versions of the spells. There was a circle ruling on this. That sounds like a West Coast thing. Back when I lived on the East Coast, we did it all the time. Plus, it's a core rules issue, not an LG issue, so table variation rules the day once more. -Matt
bitznarf 07-23-07, 12:48 PM	Nope, there is an actual circle ruling on this. And I think there may be a FAQ as well. Table variation should be next to nil.
solbergb 07-23-07, 12:53 PM	I don't know if it is a west coast thing or not. I've seen limited wish used a fair bit at home and when I travel, but nobody's attempted to mix metamagic in, so I don't know for sure how anyone but me would rule. Well - from LGCS "Limited wish: You must have access to a spell in order to duplicate its effects." and of course the core rules talk about duplicating a spell, not duplicating a spell plus any possible metamagic combination. I did poke around looking for a circle ruling or dispel confusion or FAQ entry but didn't find it. If someone could find the reference I'd appreciate it. This may be one of those things WOTC didn't feel a need to spell out, as metamagic isn't on the list of allowed things the spell can do. Out of curiosity, are you guys who allow this even requiring the PC to have the feat in some form?
Mattastrophic 07-23-07, 01:01 PM	Personally, I cut it off at "you have to have access to the metamagic feat you're duplicating." So no Limited Wishing for Sudden Quickened spells. A seventh-level spell to cast Chained Greater Magic Weapon? That's reasonable enough, don't you think? -Matt
Mommy was an Orc 07-23-07, 01:20 PM	Out of curiosity, are you guys who allow this even requiring the PC to have the feat in some form? I'd allow it if they had the feat and the result wasn't weird - as an example, you couldn't use Limited Wish to cast Quickened Binding Winds as the Limited Wish itself wasn't Quickened.
bitznarf 07-23-07, 01:39 PM	Anyone know where to find the ruling on only getting normal spells, not metamagic versions, from the Mage of the Arcane Order's spellpool ability? As I understand it, the mechanism is much the same as that of limited wish.
solbergb 07-23-07, 01:41 PM	See...I dislike rulings that spawn more rulings. As in "I let metamagic feats apply to limited wish spells except for any "Swift action" metamagic feats. I don't allow heighten either because that's weird" It's more honest to allow sudden quicken, sudden empower, sudden maximize...they're all metamagic. Oh and energy substitution too, why not? Turns limited wish into "you lose" but it's a natural extension of the concept. Easier just to do what the spell says - and let it simulate an actual *spell* effect. Especially as while it might be reasonable to research a new spell that does the same thing chain greater magic weapon does and make it a level 7 spell (or actually level 6, as LW doesn't let you simulate L7 spells), no such spell actually exists on any spell list you have access to in LG.
solbergb 07-23-07, 01:42 PM	Anyone know where to find the ruling on only getting normal spells, not metamagic versions, from the Mage of the Arcane Order's spellpool ability? As I understand it, the mechanism is much the same as that of limited wish. The Pale website has captured a circle ruling on this one. Although like Limited Wish in the LGCS, it only talks about what spells you can spellpool (PHB only), doesn't touch on metamagic.
Mattastrophic 07-23-07, 02:04 PM	It's more honest to allow sudden quicken, sudden empower, sudden maximize...they're all metamagic. Oh and energy substitution too, why not? Turns limited wish into "you lose" but it's a natural extension of the concept. Sudden feats work a little differently, so Sudden anything won't work with Limited Wish. I'll double-check then post the text after lunch. Also, you have to have access to a feat in order to utilize it, just like how you can't cast Limited Wish->Heroics unless you have access to Heroics. -Matt
Mommy was an Orc 07-23-07, 02:31 PM	See...I dislike rulings that spawn more rulings. As in "I let metamagic feats apply to limited wish spells except for any "Swift action" metamagic feats. I don't allow heighten either because that's weird" It really isn't another ruling. It is a natural consequence of Limited Wish taking a standard action to cast. You could Quicken something, but as you're spending a standard action to cast a swift action spell... It's more honest to allow sudden quicken, sudden empower, sudden maximize...they're all metamagic. Oh and energy substitution too, why not? Turns limited wish into "you lose" but it's a natural extension of the concept. Easier just to do what the spell says - and let it simulate an actual *spell* effect. Especially as while it might be reasonable to research a new spell that does the same thing chain greater magic weapon does and make it a level 7 spell (or actually level 6, as LW doesn't let you simulate L7 spells), no such spell actually exists on any spell list you have access to in LG. I'm not entirely sure how that's easier or more honest. If a Wizard can cast an Empowered Fireball with a 5th level slot, I'm not sure why he can't use Limited Wish to do just that. He can use the feat as often as he has slots that can use it. And Empowered Fireball is a spell. On the other hand, if he wants to use his Sudden Empower feat on the result of the Limited Wish spell, he can make that his one use.
Mattastrophic 07-23-07, 03:22 PM	Sudden feats work a little differently, so Sudden anything won't work with Limited Wish. I'll double-check then post the text after lunch. Here we go... Once per day, you can apply the effect of the Maximize Spell feat to any spell you cast without increasing the level of the spell or specially preparing it ahead of time. You can still use Maximize Spell normally if you have it. Thus, Sudden Maximize is applied AFTER you decide what spell you're duplicating with Limited Wish. For example, Sudden Maximized Fireball is NOT a 3rd-level spell. It's a third-level spell (Fireball), then when cast has a feat applied to it. -Matt
solbergb 07-23-07, 05:06 PM	I'm not entirely sure how that's easier or more honest. If a Wizard can cast an Empowered Fireball with a 5th level slot, I'm not sure why he can't use Limited Wish to do just that. He can use the feat as often as he has slots that can use it. And Empowered Fireball is a spell. Ok fair enough on the quicken/sudden stuff. I see the disnction you're making. I still see nothing in the limited wish description that allows metamagic. Last I saw there were no spells on any spell list that had metamagic applied, and what Lim Wish (and similar spells) allow is spells from various spell lists. Show me the spell list that has "empowered fireball" on it - and I'll allow it.
Mattastrophic 07-23-07, 05:17 PM	Table variation rules the day. -Matt
Mommy was an Orc 07-23-07, 05:29 PM	Last I saw there were no spells on any spell list that had metamagic applied, and what Lim Wish (and similar spells) allow is spells from various spell lists. Show me the spell list that has "empowered fireball" on it - and I'll allow it. I don't think that's actually relevant - Limited Wish can produce effects that are in line with the power of the above effects(the last option - "Produce any other effect whose power level is in line with the above effects, such as a single creature automatically hitting on its next attack or taking a -7 penalty on its next saving throw."). An Empowered Fireball is pretty clearly in line with the power of a 5th level Wizard spell, or you wouldn't be allowed to take it with a 5th level slot. In any case, it says nothing about being a spell from a spell list, it says wizard/sorcerer spell of 6th level or lower. A metamagic'd spell is still a spell and referred to as such.
JamesMaissen 07-23-07, 06:11 PM	Ok fair enough on the quicken/sudden stuff. I see the disnction you're making. I still see nothing in the limited wish description that allows metamagic. Last I saw there were no spells on any spell list that had metamagic applied, and what Lim Wish (and similar spells) allow is spells from various spell lists. Show me the spell list that has "empowered fireball" on it - and I'll allow it. I think Spirit Shaman might be the closest thing there. They pick 'spells known' each day, and if they want 'empowered fireball' they would need to pick that as one of the known ones. -James
garyjohnson 07-23-07, 06:28 PM	Also, when you're grappling, you can be hit with natural attacks. For example, take a dragon being grappled by somebody with silence cast on them. The dragon won't be worried for long. The dragons in my RHoD home game have been - being reduced to one attack a round, being unable to fly, and struggling to out-grapple the flying enlarged raging half-orc monk has made the dragon combats play out rather differently at my table. By part four, all the major bad guys (including the dragons) were getting their minions to cast freedom of movement on them if they thought the PCs were nearby, so that they had a fighting chance against the grapple-monster PC. :) Cheers, Gary Johnson
solbergb 07-23-07, 10:12 PM	In any case, it says nothing about being a spell from a spell list, it says wizard/sorcerer spell of 6th level or lower. A metamagic'd spell is still a spell and referred to as such. It's a spell but it isn't a wiz/sor spell. That's the distinction. Limited wish doesn't give unlimited metamagic effects at my table. But we've hijacked this thread long enough. The topic is binding winds. I agree, infinite duration with no way to escape makes it too effective compared to any other spell of its type. It's forcecage with a concentration check, SR and saving throw and no size limit or material component cost. I'm not sure adding SR, save and concentration is worth 5 spell levels. So far I've refrained from adding it to my pouncekitty's L2 spell list but I don't know if I'll remain strong forever :)
copper_wyrmling 07-23-07, 10:23 PM	I don't think that's actually relevant - Limited Wish can produce effects that are in line with the power of the above effects(the last option - "Produce any other effect whose power level is in line with the above effects, such as a single creature automatically hitting on its next attack or taking a -7 penalty on its next saving throw."). An Empowered Fireball is pretty clearly in line with the power of a 5th level Wizard spell, or you wouldn't be allowed to take it with a 5th level slot. In any case, it says nothing about being a spell from a spell list, it says wizard/sorcerer spell of 6th level or lower. A metamagic'd spell is still a spell and referred to as such. EDIT: I did have a longer post on this, but that's not helping the thread get back on topic - suffice it to say that I agree with solbergb on this, the "any effect whose power level is in line with the other effects" might work on my table, but it would depend on the power of the effect you were producing and I imagine it'd be subject to heavy table variation. Back to binding winds ;)
Puggle Halfwine 07-24-07, 02:21 AM	Of course, this particular spell might see the introduction of more Spellwarp Sniper Druids... making this spell into a ranged touch attack (with no save).
Jay_Ibero_911 07-24-07, 02:33 AM	Of course, this particular spell might see the introduction of more Spellwarp Sniper Druids... making this spell into a ranged touch attack (with no save). Binding Winds won't work with Spellwarp...it has a duration other than Instantaneous and therefore cannon be spellwarped...Sandblast on the other hand is the spellwarp druid's spell of choice...
Dr.Cornelius 07-24-07, 02:47 AM	...so that they (Dragons) had a fighting chance against the grapple-monster PC.Congratulations - you have successfully discovered that the 3rd edition Grapple mechanic is deeply flawed. Here's hoping that Grapple, Trip, et al are modeled better in 4th...
Jay_Ibero_911 07-24-07, 02:53 AM	Congratulations - you have successfully discovered that the 3rd edition Grapple mechanic is deeply flawed. Here's hoping that Grapple, Trip, et al are modeled better in 4th... What's so flawed about it? Grappling is based on size, strength, and base attack bonus. And you can't start a grapple with a target more than one size larger than you. If the dragon is small and weak enough to be successfully grappled...well Kudo's then...I have a character who enlarged himself and successfully grappled a blood golem, nerfing the encounter (though it helped he had a golembane scarab too).
CdrcJsn 07-24-07, 03:56 AM	I'm not sure adding SR, save and concentration is worth 5 spell levels. Hmm... Blindness is 2nd level and has a save. Power Word Blind is 7th level with no save. Compared to Forcecage, maybe 5 levels is the appropriate difference in power levels. Binding Winds is a very useful spell...but it's only an encounter stopper against single target encounters. There are several spells that fall under that category. I certainly wouldn't be overly worried if Binding Winds is used against my character, even if I fail a save. I know the rest of the team has a good chance of breaking me out by disrupting the caster's concentration. Even if they don't, I'm tying up one of the enemy casters by virtue of being the subject of the spell (which is usefull all by itself), and I still have a ton of options even if I can't move (drink a potion, go full defensive, cast a spell, use a missile weapon, etc).
Dr.Cornelius 07-24-07, 03:57 AM	IMHO the Grapple and Trip mechanics are too strong - i.e. it is too easy for a character that spent a few feats specializing in a "trick" fighting style to dominate a more conventional opponent. Consider a one-on-one gladiator style combat between an optimized Grapple or Trip specialist and an optimized melee character that invested in other efficient feat trees. In my experience the trick fighter has a significant, if not dominant, advantage. Now there are a couple of counter arguments: 1) D&D encounters are considerably more complex and varied than simple gladiator style encounters. True, but the example applies in many encounters. 2) Close Quarters Fighting (feat, CW p.97) is an effective counter* to Grapple. Likewise Prone Attack (feat, CW p.103) counters Trip. In a world where characters predominantly fought other PCs, many characters would invest in CQF. Likewise, as authors see their carefully crafted encounters defeated time and again by this kind of tactic I expect that the mod metagame will evolve counters. To some extent silenced enlarged grapplers, lance-wielding spirited-charging dire bat-riders, enlarged invisible pouncing dire tigers, and other combos are corner cases that exploit unexpected synergies or poorly modeled situations. These present authors a fundamental problem: Encounters tough enough to challenge these highly optimized tactics may overwhelm even well designed iconic characters with conventional tactics. I don't know of a good answer - its basically a Nash Equilibrium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nash_Equilibrium) - once a significant proportion of players adopt these kinds of exploits then all players must adapt or be defeated by encounters that evolved to beat the exploits. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- *Expect table variation on whether or not Close Quarters Fighting has any benefit against opponents with a reach advantage.
solbergb 07-24-07, 01:00 PM	I certainly wouldn't be overly worried if Binding Winds is used against my character, even if I fail a save. Of course not. By definition, there are at least 3 other guys around to disrupt the druid. It is a rare case where something is more broken in the hands of NPC's than PC's. Also keep in mind that PC's parties are scaled to win, which means if you were an enemy, there would only be maybe 2 of you, instead of 4-6. Binding winds is only over the top on single or maybe 2-3 enemy encounters, and only when the extras can't get at the druid.
solbergb 07-24-07, 01:03 PM	IMHO the Grapple and Trip mechanics are too strong - i.e. it is too easy for a character that spent a few feats specializing in a "trick" fighting style to dominate a more conventional opponent. People who don't play these characters tend to have an inflated view of how effective the tactics are. Having played one for 14 levels... For every encounter where Burke dominated with his tactical feats, there are three where they're irrelevant and one where he's the one being dominated "tricked out" or not and one where he should have done well with them but the dice made the approach backfire. The d20 looms very large compared to the grapple and trip checks a PC can actually achieve. I quite often refrain from grappling or tripping because my odds of sticking it is considerably less than my odds of just killing the enemy by hitting them (after level 8ish, melees hit on "2s" on their primary attacks a lot) Grappling also takes away your threatened area and makes you vulnerable. Tripping has a good chance of leaving you disarmed or dumped on your rear, just by die roll swings. When these tactics work, they work well. When they don't, they're a wasted round, or sometimes worse than that. They're a lot like weak save/die spells that sometimes backfire on the "caster". They SHOULD do something pretty serious, or they wouldn't be worth doing at all, because the failure rate is too high. Given that all high BAB fighters are decent grapplers, that there are many grapple spell effects etc, it isn't surprising that there are already many grapple defenses and counters in the game (free movement, the teleport line of spells, feats, etc). Tripping is defeated by any "fly=good" creature, and also by teleport and a few feats...or just killing the guy while prone. -4 isn't that big a deal if you can actually reach the enemy. The most important trip counter my melees carry is a reach weapon.
CdrcJsn 07-24-07, 04:42 PM	For every encounter where Burke dominated with his tactical feats, there are three where they're irrelevant and one where he's the one being dominated "tricked out" or not and one where he should have done well with them but the dice made the approach backfire. My exact feeling about this Binding Winds + Silence tactic. For every lone dragon or spell caster encounter you can catch with this trick, you face 3 or 4 encounters where you're fighting a small horde of hobgoblins where the tactic would be inferior or dangerous to use.
garyjohnson 07-24-07, 09:53 PM	IMHO the Grapple and Trip mechanics are too strong - i.e. it is too easy for a character that spent a few feats specializing in a "trick" fighting style to dominate a more conventional opponent. IME, it's actually more important whether or not the character is using feats/abilities from a wider range of sources than their opponent - and this applies regardless of the fighting style. Published WOTC scenarios tend to use only the PHB/DMG/MM, with content from other books kept to a minimum. LG PCs who use feats/abilities/equipment from other books tend to be able to do more and be more effective at what they do than a PHB-only character, and thus have a notable advantage when going through ADP scenarios. That goes for defensive abilities as well - your example of Close-Quarters Fighting as the counter to grappling PCs seems to me a good instance of this principle in operation. I agree that combat versatility (by which I mean the ability to do a range of things that change the dynamics of a combat) is powerful, and that standard D&D tropes like "the PCs fight as a group, not as individuals" make it safer to do high-risk high-reward manoeuvres like grappling. However, for me that models real fighting situations reasonably well - if I'm fighting someone with a baseball bat and I want to wrestle them so they don't hit me with the bat while my friends stop their friends hitting me while my hands are full, why not use that tactic? Cheers, Gary Johnson
clannagh 07-24-07, 10:16 PM	Part of the issue with RHOD is the restrictions placed on it as an LG adaptable. RHOD clearly states that over the 3 months of the campaign the bad guys have seen the PCs in action often enough to get word on their particular tactics and develop counters to them. In a home game that means you would take different spells from the listed ones, possibly even alter magic items (give them some SR for example) or hand out extra ones that the bad guys carry or change the level of the participants (it is suggested in several places that if the party is doing too well take the dragons up a size or two for example). None of this is permitted (nor should it be) in the adaptable version. In an LG adaptable the GM is limited to trying to improve the bad guys chances with better tactics alone. In some cases, where the PCs have found a really good tactic, this means the later encounters simply get plastered over and over again despite the fact the mod clearly states the Red Hand learn from previous encounters. Unfortunately thats just the way it is.