This is the Tavern of the Core Coliseum. Here, all Characters of Gladius meet to chat, drink, and sometimes even brawl. You can ask questions, talk to others, or write whatever you want as long as it does not violate the Code of Conduct. You can't really go wrong here.
Newcomers who want to make a character should use the [post=5179911]Quickstart Guide[/post] or read the [post=6463399]Rules of Gladius[/post]. If you have a question, the Tavern is definitely the right place to go.
Links to the old Taverns:
- [thread=192697]Core Coliseum Tavern I[/thread]
- [thread=348562]Core Coliseum Tavern II[/thread]
- [thread=444341]Core Coliseum Tavern III[/thread]
- [thread=525782]Core Coliseum Tavern IV[/thread]
- [thread=571121]Core Coliseum Tavern V[/thread]
- [thread=636662]Core Coliseum Tavern VI[/thread]
- [thread=724116]Core Coliseum Tavern VII[/thread]
- [thread=780187]Core Coliseum Tavern VIII[/thread]
- [thread=826502]Core Coliseum Tavern IX[/thread]
- [thread=872360]Core Coliseum Tavern X[/thread]
On another note, can I get some opinions on removing the Fly portion from the Celestial armor?
Celestial Armor: +3 chainmail (+8 max dex, -2 ACP, 15% ASF), 1/day fly @CL5
+3 armor (9000gp)
Fly 1/day @CL5 (5400gp) [1800gp x 3 (SL) x 5 (CL) x (1/5) (charges per day)]
Base armor (8000gp)
The character I'm considering it for already has Fly 100ft (perfect) so it would be a complete waste of 5400gp.
Edit: What probably needs to happen is a few self-consistent set of clarifications needs to be made and the elders vote on which one seems the closest to the intent of the rules.
I'm a little confused about calculating "Spell Levels Available Per Fight". What do you put for "Cantrips"? Specifically I'm making a Barbarian 1, Sorcerer 2. So he's got 4 first level and 6 cantrips plus 1 first for charisma. Spell levels available per fight is 5/3 which rounds up to 2. Should Cantrips be 6? Or is there some limit per fight that I'm not seeing somewhere.
There is no limit on cantrips in any given fight - they're 0 level spells, thus cost no spell levels to use. So yes, you would put 6 in that slot. Though why it was even put on that default character sheet is still beyond me, and I imagine no one would mind if you just cut that line entirely.
Zevox
i'll finish "the triwizards" today, but are the penalizing deadlines for quests as strict as for fights? (read: do i need to update it today at work, or can i wait till i come home late in the night after the deadline?)
i'd rather not lose 2° because of that. ;)
First, and foremost, I agree with hirumajoe that the ruling should be in a way that makes it easy to apply during a fight. It has to stay true to the rules, and if possible should also make sense, though the latter is the least important imho. If it is formulated clearly then I do not need to understand it. (Example: Why does invis only break on offensive actions ? it does not really make any sense, but is easy to apply and very clear)
Second, I think it is unreasonable that hiding would require a movement. Example: I am standing in a dark room. Noone has darkvision. Then I do not need to do anything to hide. Just standing completely immobile should be enough.
That does not mean that hiding never needs a movement. In the case of sniping it clearly does (its in the rules), and it makes some kind of sense: After being hit by something, the target will probably focus his attention on the square the attack came from, so you better not be there. I understand that sniping was written without taking HIPS into account. However, if HIPS allows me to melee attack and rehide without movement, then I think it should allow sniping without movement for consistency (and clearly its easier to hide when at range than at melee).
Personally i am as of yet undecided between the following two options:
a) After an attack you must move at least 5' to get another hide roll, independent of HIPS, or similar things. If you do not move after an attack you are autospotted.
b) If (and only if) you have HIPS then you can attempt hide checks as a non-action after attacks. This even applies for sniping. This allows full-attacks while staying hidden. If you do not have HIPS, then the normal hiding rules apply.
Regardless of these two questions, I think we are agreed that it takes a hide check at -20 to get the hide bonus during the attack, and an additional hide check at -20 (possibly after a move) to not be autospotted after the attack.
Third, my idea about what automatically breaks hiding status (and therefore requires additional hide checks or results in being autospotted):
- Any offensive action (as invisibility, but before the action happens)
- Anything that requires a standard action to do (Not if you do a move-equivalent action during your standard action).
- Any action that results in you occupying different squares after the action than before (ie: actual movement)
- Anything that would require a Concentration check to uphold a spell. (getting damage, ...)
- Nothing else
Uranedal just ended a quest. One of his multiple spells scrolls has just 1 spell used out of four. Can I write that spell back in the scroll, spending the correct amount of money, obviously?
Is it possible to add spells to a multiple spell scroll?
Uranedal just ended a quest. One of his multiple spells scrolls has just 1 spell used out of four. Can I write that spell back in the scroll, spending the correct amount of money, obviously?
No. Crafting scrolls requires "new" materials.
All writing implements and materials used to scribe a scroll must be fresh and unused. A character must pay the full cost for scribing each spell scroll no matter how many times she previously has scribed the same spell.
No. Crafting scrolls requires "new" materials.
Hmm.. I can sell the scroll and craft one identical one. The net result is the same, but it would take out much more space on the char sheet.
#2 you spend actions if you do that tht could be used to craft other stuff.
The good news is: with the right skill packages you could make some money by selling for more than half-price i think
Some of you may remember me from way back when, some of you notsomuch. Anyway, just letting all of you know I am available as a Questlord for a long or mini- quest.
-Huan
While I wasn't around to remember you, at least let me say "Welcome back". :D
My personal opinion: I have a lot of faith in WotC's Development team. The mechanical reviews have been quite good, all the rationales seem to be in place, and Andy Collins is very competent at what he does. So in that respect--which is the most critical for CoCo--I have high hopes.
On the other hand, I have a lot more trepidation for the work of the Design team. It's commonly said that crunch serves fluff--that the main reason for the mechanics to exist at all is to allow us to roleplay in a fantasy world we love. 4e seems to be turning that on its head, with fluff serving crunch. The new races, the new world-building philosophy, the changes to FR, the monster design, etc. all are designed in such a way as to give the PCs things to kill and to quest for. The good news is that fluff is a lot easier for DMs to change--but the bad news is, it's a betrayal of much of what the long-term fans are attached to.
The other thing that worries me is the production schedule. Only days ago, it was announced that the social encounter rules aren't done yet, and wouldn't be revealed until the DMG was published. Considering the DMG is now in press, and the rules need to be good to go by D&D XP in two weeks, I'm significantly worried that the end product will be rushed and we'll need a 4.5 to sort it all out.
I'm significantly worried that the end product will be rushed and we'll need a 4.5 to sort it all out.
i'm quite sure you're right about that. about the srd: the current srd does not contain everything you need to play - neither will the future one. i believe they will publish it in a way that you can play without the manual, if you had access to a manual every once in a while. you could not possibly play dnd 3.5 only with the srd - crucial points are missing like how CL relates to EL, how much xp does an encounter give, when do you level...
Essentially- it is far easier to create balanced & fun mechanics, then apply names to them, then it is to do it the other way around.
i'm quite sure you're right about that. about the srd: the current srd does not contain everything you need to play - neither will the future one. i believe they will publish it in a way that you can play without the manual, if you had access to a manual every once in a while. you could not possibly play dnd 3.5 only with the srd - crucial points are missing like how CL relates to EL, how much xp does an encounter give, when do you level...
That's still what I meant. With the 3.5 SRD, I almost never have to crack open one of my books. The XP formulas are fairly straightforward, as do the various CR/EL/APL/ECL/LA relationships. It was announced in a couple of places that the new SRD won't allow you to do that at all--that you'll need either a print copy of the books or an unlocked online copy to accomplish almost anything. Nothing will be "Open" (OGL is being renamed, something like GSL, I forget exactly). WotC has announced that the current SRD gives too much away for free, and the new one will be very different.
that you'll need either a print copy of the books or an unlocked online copy to accomplish almost anything. Nothing will be "Open"
sounds like an innovative and new way to lose customers.
while i never bought a rulebook for dnd, i own lots of other dnd stuff. (mostly novels, campaign-settings, both dnd games)
basically, if they take me free access to the rules, they lose me as a customer.
sounds like an innovative and new way to lose customers.
while i never bought a rulebook for dnd, i own lots of other dnd stuff. (mostly novels, campaign-settings, both dnd games)
basically, if they take me free access to the rules, they lose me as a customer.
Only time will tell. They've been making lots of moves away from the "base" D&D players and into mainstream. Let's face it- Blizzard gets so much per month to for peeps to play WoW. Asking D&D players to throw up some cash for a PhB, or for the core-set if they want to start games themselves, isn't that much. D&D is probably the cheapest form of fantasy entertainment out there. [I mean geez- think of CCG's, Mini's, MMORPG's, console single-player games, etc, etc]
Only time will tell. They've been making lots of moves away from the "base" D&D players and into mainstream. Let's face it- Blizzard gets so much per month to for peeps to play WoW. Asking D&D players to throw up some cash for a PhB, or for the core-set if they want to start games themselves, isn't that much. D&D is probably the cheapest form of fantasy entertainment out there. [I mean geez- think of CCG's, Mini's, MMORPG's, console single-player games, etc, etc]
I totally agree. Asking someone to pay 90 bucks for all the D&D Core Books isnt too much to ask for a game that you are going to play for years to come. And as a player, the Players Guide should probably be enough most of the time with an occasional peek into the DM-guide for magical Items.
If you compare that to the money you would spend if you´d go to the movies instead every time you would otherwise play D&D, you come out way ahead.
I totally agree. Asking someone to pay 90 bucks for all the D&D Core Books isnt too much to ask for a game that you are going to play for years to come. And as a player, the Players Guide should probably be enough most of the time with an occasional peek into the DM-guide for magical Items.
If you compare that to the money you would spend if you´d go to the movies instead every time you would otherwise play D&D, you come out way ahead.
You can pre-order the core rulebook gift set on Amazon for $62.82 right now (after 5% preorder discount), with free shipping. That's less than five months of a WoW subscription, or something like 10% of a Warhammer army. Heck, even board games are running about half of that these days, and a newly-released video game comes close to all of it.
I knew that there were discussions to do that, but I hadnt noticed that there was a final decision on that one. Now it looks like Theradors tactic for the FFA is kinda nerfed.
i'll be running this when i come home this evening... any opinions from his opponents whether i should use the old or the new city rules for this?
@callix: pitlords is still fine. it's linked to mwb's account, after all.
soe was mostly due to the fact that i still don't have much time, telin got a virus(sick), t10 got a virus(computer), so us three are already -8 fights held - and some of the newer pitlords also made a pause.
Is the protection against summoned creatures applied also to neutral ones?
Third, the spell prevents bodily contact by summoned creatures. This causes the natural weapon attacks of such creatures to fail and the creatures to recoil if such attacks require touching the warded creature. Good summoned creatures are immune to this effect. The protection against contact by summoned creatures ends if the warded creature makes an attack against or tries to force the barrier against the blocked creature. Spell resistance can allow a creature to overcome this protection and touch the warded creature.
There's no specific mention of alignment with protection from summoned creatures, except for the line which says Good creatures are immune to the effect.
Are neutral creatures prevented to touch the subject as well?
When you read PoG spell it says that Good creatures cannot touch you, to add more confusion.
Its strange, but its the way it works.
[post=8764322]Xander[/post] does not qualify for the Improved Unarmed Strike and Improved Grapple feats, due to insufficient dex. This is compounded by the fact that when expanded he loses dexterity as well.
First off, IUS doesn't have a dex requirement as far as I can see in the SRD. Improved Grapple does though, and since he's really build to be a grappler, I'm curious on what should be done about it:
1. Get his dex up to 15. This means spending 10 of his 25 pnt buy and putting his +1 @4th into dex. Since he apparently never spent that +1 @4th point - that is only 4 points to come up with. I could drop 3 out of Con and 1 out of Cha or just 4 out of Con or some other combination.
2. Drop the grapple feat (and IUS as an option) and rebuild him as some other melee powerhouse. I'm not a great creator of psionic characters - so I would appreciate some help on his redesign if this option is selected.
Normally I would just go back to the original creator - but of course Iced hasn't been around in a while.
As an aside, I noticed the damage on the spiked gauntlets is incorrect - should be 1d6 not 1d8. If anyone else notices an error (other than the INT 8 (base 10) line...), let me know.
A question about the old shared accounts: is the Pitlords account currently in used (ie: can i send PM's there ?) or should I PM someone else instead ?
Pitlords account is still in use (at least it was about 17 hours ago)...
Is there a maximum height in the swamp-sections of the forest? Should there be?
As far as the height within the forest goes ...
The Canopy: The canopy is at 30ft height. Medium and smaller creatures can walk through the thick canopy just like other creatures walk on the ground (the branches will not bear the weight of Large creatures, and the foliage prevents the use of wings). The canopy covers any square that is not swamp on the ground. You have to pass a DC 15 Balance check in order to walk through the canopy that way at half movement (DC 25 for full movement). Failure means that you make no progress while failure by 5 or more means that you drop 30ft to the ground. Only one check is necessary per round of movement. Anyone within the canopy gains cover and concealment against those outside the canopy. Above the canopy (at 35 feet), the branches are so tightly interwoven as to be completely impenetrable (even by druids).
and
The Swamp: The swamp (light green squares in the center) is 4 feet deep and counts as Deep Bog (medium and larger PCs need 4 squares of movement per square; small PCs must swim; Move silently DC+2; provides cover; see DMG p88; huge and larger creatures treat it as difficult terrain only).
Thus, my understanding of the swamp area of the forest would imply that there is no canopy over the swamp, and the current wording of the rules implies that the forest ceiling (at 35ft) does not apply over the swamp. Therefore, the swamp area of the forest currently has no ceiling ...
I am of two minds as to whether it is necessary or not, i.e. if there 'should' be a ceiling over the swamp area of the forest.
The thing that would concern me is the fact that for a character with a high fly speed, it would become effectively identical to a plains battle.
Perhaps one solution would be to have no ceiling, but if only one character is beyond a height of 35ft in the swamp area, then that character (and only that character) suffers a delay penalty (even if the other character is simply delaying on the ground).
The idea of this would be that if one character flies into that area, then they suffer normal penalties as if delaying, however if two characters both fly into that area, then they have the option of an aerial dogfight.
Perhaps the simplest and cleanest solution would be just to say that the forest ceiling (at 35ft) continues over the swamp.
We should probably move this discussion over to the council, since that is where these things get decided.
edit- I just looked at the forest map again, and I find it strange that there are little holes in the canopy. Not all of the swamp squares are touching each other- so there are effectively little nooks and crannies to hide in.
[thread=993748]Master DM Competition #41: Create a Traitor[/thread]
Good luck to anyone who might decide to participate.
Would an Elixer of Minute Seeing be possible?(+10 competance to spot for 1 hour, CL5, 250 gp cost, base spell - clairaudience/clairvoyance) There are a hoarde of elixers that give +10 competence for 1 hour to a skill @ 250gp.
RE: Credits- Are all charged items constrained by those rules, or just the single-charged ones? Because it can be purchased with multiple charges. Just curious =]
edit- for that matter, is a wizard not allowed to use an elixer of hiding he crafted at ECL3? It's entirely possible- and I find it suspect to charge credits for a wondrous item someone crafted themselves out of the SRD. [unless our rules on ignoring CL doesn't work for 1-time use wondrous items]
If you craft [an elixir of hiding|sovereign glue] with a lower caster level, you can bring it in without spending credits.
The caster level cap is on "Expendables and Charged Items".
If you craft [an elixir of hiding|sovereign glue] with a lower caster level, you can bring it in without spending credits.
Well, if this is possible Uranedal is an happy gnome.
If a monster has resistance and vulnerability to the same kind of damage (such as fire), which effect is applied first? And when does the saving throw come in?
Always roll a saving throw before applying any effects that would increase or reduce the damage dealt. For example, if a frost giant is struck by a fireball that would deal 35 points of damage, it would roll its Reflex save, then apply its vulnerability to fire after determining how much damage the fireball would normally deal. If the save failed, the frost giant would take 52 points of damage: 35 + one-half of 35 (17.5, rounded down to 17). A successful save would mean the frost giant suffered only 25 points of damage: one-half of 35
rounded down (17), plus one-half of 17 rounded down (8).
If the creature has both resistance and vulnerability to the same kind of damage, apply the resistance (which reduces the damage dealt by the effect) before applying the vulnerability (which increases the damage taken by the creature). For example, imagine our frost giant wore a ring of minor fire resistance (granting resistance to fire 10). If the save failed, the frost giant would take 37 points of fire damage: 35 (fireball) –10 (resistance to fire 10) = 25, plus one-half of 25 (12.5, rounded down to 12). If the save succeeded, the frost giant would take only 10 points of damage: 17 (half damage from the fireball, rounded down) – 10 (resistance to fire 10) = 7, plus one-half of 7 (3.5, rounded down to 3).
As a general guideline, whenever the rules don’t stipulate an order of operations for special effects (such as spells or special abilities), you should apply them in the order that’s most beneficial to the creature. In the case of damage, this typically means applying any damage-reducing effects first, before applying any effects that would increase damage.
That's half your answer.
Does the favored soul’s resistance to energy class feature stack with resistance to energy gained as a racial trait?
No. Resistance to energy from multiple sources doesn’t stack—it’s simply a set value. A 5th-level aasimar favored soul who chooses resistance to acid would have resistance to acid 10 from his class levels and resistance to acid 5 from his race, so he’d use the higher value.
And there's the other half, albeit a bit indirectly.
And on an unrelated note, I ran across this while searching:
Do spell resistance, damage reduction, or caster level for spell-like abilities increase as a monster advances by Hit Dice?
Unless a monster’s description states otherwise, most monster special abilities aren’t Hit Dice-based, and thus are unaffected by advancement either by HD or by class level. (An exception is the save DC for any monster special ability, which is specifically described as using HD in its calculation).
Again, a DM can create exceptions to this rule; for example, increasing spell resistance by +1 per point of Challenge Rating increase (not per HD) is a good way of keeping a monster’s SR relevant.
Also, a warning: I may be getting a new job soon, and that will definitely have a negative impact on the amount of time I have available here. If I get it, it's unlikely that the current timing for pairings will work for me.
Might as well remind y'all now: D&D Experience is next week, and I'm going to be there. So pairings will be on Telin again, though I'll be back in time to update afterwards.
Also, a warning: I may be getting a new job soon, and that will definitely have a negative impact on the amount of time I have available here. If I get it, it's unlikely that the current timing for pairings will work for me.
Good Luck on the new Job, and thats cool with 4e arround the corner.. Changing pairing day is fine with me
Anyone care to look at my [post=15164520]Character[/post]?
I've done this maybe...twice?...so I'm not too sure of myself. :P
Anyone see problems with it?
I was thinking to take classes in Sorcerer until it unlocks the rank 3 spells, then take the Dragon Disciple PrC.
New-ish player here. Hi.
Anyone care to look at my [post=15164520]Character[/post]?
I've done this maybe...twice?...so I'm not too sure of myself. :P
Anyone see problems with it?
I was thinking to take classes in Sorcerer until it unlocks the rank 3 spells, then take the Dragon Disciple PrC.
Very nice for a first try. I see lots of depth in the build...
I notice a few typo's in the color tags for equipment. You also have a broken tag in the skills section.
Your cantrips don't count toward spell levels. So you have only 5 total spell levels (4 first level spells as 2nd level sorcerer + 1 bonus for 14 Cha), and 2/fight.
Other things that come in handy for the future are:
Silversheen for lycanthropes and outsiders with DR.
Cold Iron backup weapon for the pixie rogues...
Small weapon for use if you get grappled.
Scroll of Shield for wizards and wands of Magic Missile.
Belt pouch of spell components.
Oil of magic weapon for beating protection from arrows and DR/magic.
Your potions of protection from alignment can be had as scrolls @ half the price you now have. Generally if you're spending actions in combat healing, then you're loosing anyway. So CLW potions average 5hp/round. Most opponents deal more than 5hp/round, so you'll be burning money trying to heal and not getting anywhere.
Spell Focus(evocation) needs to be indicated as your level 3 feat. I should also mention that Evo is generally considered to be a weak choice, especially here where you typically face only one opponent.
"(Conditional Modifier)" under Fort Save should say "(+2 when raging)".
You need either Read Magic or Spellcraft in order to use scrolls.
You don't have Craft (bowmaking), so you can't have a self-crafted masterwork bow.
CLW potions are of limited use. They're pricey, take a round to consume (and often provoke an AoO), and aren't very potent. I typically pack no more than one to stop bleeding effects.
Re: Sauro's suggestions: you can't actually get silversheen yet, and you won't be fighting any pixies until at least ECL 5. Of course, silver and cold iron are cheap anyway. Also, you need a spell component pouch, not a belt pouch--it's different.
Welcome! Why do you say new-ish? I don't see any record of you ever having made a character here before.
Probably because he's a power-user of the WotC forums. He's got more posts than you, me, and probably a few more elders combined. I suspect he's been watching for a while.
New-ish player here. Hi.
Anyone care to look at my [post=15164520]Character[/post]?
I've done this maybe...twice?...so I'm not too sure of myself. :P
Anyone see problems with it?
I was thinking to take classes in Sorcerer until it unlocks the rank 3 spells, then take the Dragon Disciple PrC.
Welcome aboard MagicChoco.
I had a look at your character and there's nothing more to add to what Sauro and MWB already told. Looks like a solid build, even though I'm not a Dragon Disciple fan. I always found that an Half-Dragon template gives the same flavour, at much less cost ;)
if so - what kind of action (if any) does the TK user do in order to do that?
Anyone care to look at my [post=15164520]Character[/post]?
I was thinking to take classes in Sorcerer until it unlocks the rank 3 spells, then take the Dragon Disciple PrC.
I thought it was kinda funny that my latest character Orgauth (just above yours) is also a Barbarian/Sorcerer and planned to take Dragon Disciple after getting level 3 spells. Very different designs for the characters of course.
can you sunder a psionic tattoo?
NO!
When using Telekinesis with the Combat manuver option - can the the TK user make multiple grapple checks in the round (of instance one to Pin and the second to grapple for damage) if he has high enough Caster level?
if so - what kind of action (if any) does the TK user do in order to do that?
I think the relevant part of the grapple rules is:
If You’re Pinning an Opponent
You can attempt to damage your opponent with an opposed grapple check, you can attempt to use your opponent’s weapon against him, or you can attempt to move the grapple (all described above). At your option, you can prevent a pinned opponent from speaking.
You can use a disarm action to remove or grab away a well secured object worn by a pinned opponent, but he gets a +4 bonus on his roll to resist your attempt (see Disarm).
You may voluntarily release a pinned character as a free action; if you do so, you are no longer considered to be grappling that character (and vice versa).
You can’t draw or use a weapon (against the pinned character or any other character), escape another’s grapple, retrieve a spell component, pin another character, or break another’s pin while you are pinning an opponent.
Since a Pin only lasts for 1 round, and since these are described as actions whilst pinning an opponent, I believe the second grapple check (to damage opponent) is only relevant if the first grapple check (to pin an opponent) succeeds. I don't believe this requires multiple attacks/grapple checks per round.
Out of curiosity....
can you sunder a psionic tattoo?
The rules seem to allow it. I would probably allow it. Presumably a tattoo is not on a bodypart protected by armor (how would you activate it), so it should be possible to hit. And cutting the skin would change the tattoo, destroying it. To make it balanced, the attack should not deal any actual damage to the wearer though.
Otoh, one could argue that a tattoo worn on the skin is similar enough to armor and or clothing to make the "You cannot sunder armor worn by a character" go into effect.
I think the relevant part of the grapple rules is:
Since a Pin only lasts for 1 round, and since these are described as actions whilst pinning an opponent, I believe the second grapple check (to damage opponent) is only relevant if the first grapple check (to pin an opponent) succeeds. I don't believe this requires multiple attacks/grapple checks per round.
i think you are wrong - When you are grappling - There are a couple of actions you can take, one is attempting to damage the other guy, a second one is attempting to Pin. If you manage to Pin And you still have more grapple attempts in that round Due to high BAB (or you are a monk which can flurry it) - you can attempt to damage the guy with the second/third/forth grapple attempt with progressive minuses to the roll.
Bote that the actions you can take while pinning refer to the actions you can do while grappling so you dont get a grapple attempt for damage "free" if you manage to pin.
If your intrepirtation was correct there would be nothing to lose from attempting to pin every round and if you make it attempt to damage also.
there is a reason people don't usually don't try to Pin unless they have high BAB and/or friends to do the damage.
btw - note the telekenisis description at the start say: "Alternatively, once per round, you can use telekinesis to perform a bull rush, disarm, grapple (including pin), or trip".
so iam not sure he even CAN make more then 1 grapple attempt per round - if he does make more then 1 - it is clear he get's -5/-10 on the second and third check.
Stuff's been noted and changed.
I know it's already been said that there's nothing else...but anything else? :P
Probably because he's a power-user of the WotC forums. He's got more posts than you, me, and probably a few more elders combined.
And the vast majority of those posts were in threads of no real consequence.
Don't let my post count fool you...I'm probably one of the laziest people you'll ever meet. :P
But I digress.
I always found that an Half-Dragon template gives the same flavour, at much less cost ;)
But medium size half-dragons don't get wings with the template!
It's a crime, I tell you...
I know it's already been said that there's nothing else...but anything else?
But I digress.But medium size half-dragons don't get wings with the template!
It's a crime, I tell you...
You'll be needing flight long before the DD prestige class gives it to you. Melee warriors will need flight by about ECL6 or 7. You can cope with a good ranged attack to rely upon when you cannot get into melee.
Generally the character looks solid because you have good melee ability, backup buffing support and a good movement speed (70 with expeditious retreat). Those are all the basics you need for a decent melee build at early levels.
At higher levels a melee character needs flight, Haste and either reach or the feat that lets you charge around a corner.
Anyway the point is that if you're taking DD for flight, then it's probably going to be too late when you get it. Instead take eldritch knight so your spell casting increases.
Anyway the point is that if you're taking DD for flight, then it's probably going to be too late when you get it. Instead take eldritch knight so your spell casting increases.
I agree with the former, but not necessarily the latter. I have a DD character, who's pretty successful, and flight (via my cohort) has been extremely valuable, and will only become moreso; he has six levels to go before sprouting wings. Far too late.
I went with DD over half-dragon because 3 12-sided HD (25 HP before a Con item or Rage) weren't worth the price for what I wanted. But strictly speaking, a Half-Dragon Eldritch Knight is probably a more potent character. Or an Arcane Archer... hmm. If I didn't already have far more character concepts than I'll ever use, a half-dragon arcane archer could be an interesting build (mimicing the success of Thwap McSmash, with any luck). And of course, you could take an entirely unrelated route with levels of fighter, psychic warrior, etc.
Hence why I wouldn't take the template for this. I'm wierd like that. :P
I'll still take fly as one of the sorcerer's third level spells, though. That'll be a given.
I'd love to play a gestalt game someday as a SorcererX || Paladin 5/Dragon Disciple X
I don't think many DMs would allow that. There's an unwritten code that most gestaltists seem to follow that builds like Wizard X || Cleric 3/Mystic Theurge X violate the spirit of gestalt by allowing one "side" to advance the abilities of the other "side." Gestalt is to allow you to do two things at once at full effectiveness, not one thing even better than a normal character.
I don't think many DMs would allow that. There's an unwritten code that most gestaltists seem to follow that builds like Wizard X || Cleric 3/Mystic Theurge X violate the spirit of gestalt by allowing one "side" to advance the abilities of the other "side." Gestalt is to allow you to do two things at once at full effectiveness, not one thing even better than a normal character.
If the DM brought that up I would suggest to get rid of the bonus spells granted by the DD(which is the only part of the class that augments a spellcaster, really). The mechanics I'm looking for is the dragon-paladin.
if you have your familiar deliver a touch spell, can you manifest without losing the spell?
can you use the psionic feats overchannel or enlarge with spells?
Long answer:
Q: Can a gladiator with levels in both a casting and a manifesting class hold the charge for a touch spell and still be free to manifest psionic powers? (or vice versa with a touch psionic power?)
A: Any attempt to cast a spell or manifest a power when already holding a charge of either type would cause the initial charge to dissipate.
Though not explicitly called out in the spell descriptions or magic item descriptions, spells, spell-like abilities, and magic items that could potentially affect psionics do affect psionics.
When the rule about psionics-magic transparency is in effect, it has the following ramifications.
Spell resistance is effective against powers, using the same mechanics. Likewise, power resistance is effective against spells, using the same mechanics as spell resistance. If a creature has one kind of resistance, it is assumed to have the other. (The effects have similar ends despite having been brought about by different means.)
All spells that dispel magic have equal effect against powers of the same level using the same mechanics, and vice versa.
The spell detect magic detects powers, their number, and their strength and location within 3 rounds (though a Psicraft check is necessary to identify the discipline of the psionic aura).
Dead magic areas are also dead psionics areas.
From this, nowhere is manifest level treated as usable as caster level. So I do not believe overchannel would work with spells.
Lastly, in regards to feats that say "powers" affecting "spells", well you really don't want that. Otherwise the following feat would negate all wizard/sorcerer/cleric/druid/etc magic (unless they also happen to have some pp laying around...)
Benefit
When a foe strikes you in melee combat, the foe immediately loses its psionic focus, if any. Also, if you are the target of a power, the manifester of the power must spend an additional number of power points equal to your Wisdom bonus, or the power fails (all the power points spent on the power are still lost). This extra cost does not count toward the maximum power points a manifester can spend on a single power.
Special
You cannot take or use this feat if you have the ability to use powers (if you have a power point reserve or psi-like abilities).
Out of curiosity....
can you sunder a psionic tattoo?
While there are no rules preventing this, I have only one thing to say:
NO!
I'm with lonewolf. This is one area on which I'd definitely have to go with common sense over game rules technicalities. You don't sunder tattoos - period. Thats worse than sundering headbands, rings, and belts, by a long shot.
Yeah ... which got me to the question: can you sell a tattoo ? I think you can, though I have no idea how that is supposed to work. Especially: how/where does the merchant store it after you sold it ?
You can. The fact that you can transfer tattoos to another person allows that*. As for that last, I think thats one aspect of the matter best left unsaid, eh? ;)
*Quoth the SRD:
A psionic tattoo inscribed on a wearer is potentially more mobile than a mundane tattoo. As a standard action, the wearer can will the tattoo to move to a different part of his body or onto the skin of any willing (or unconscious) living creature he touches. If the wearer of a psionic tattoo is rendered unconscious or is slain, another sentient creature can touch the tattoo while willing it to leave the previous wearer and apply itself to the new creature as a standard action.
Zevox
When using Telekinesis with the Combat manuver option - can the the TK user make multiple grapple checks in the round (of instance one to Pin and the second to grapple for damage) if he has high enough Caster level?
I asked a while ago (when I was planning a ghost character). I was told "no" because of the "Once per round..." wording.
last fight of gortek was against mineau, though. you can go through the battles-threads, actions for the week are linked on page 1. i did a quick search dec-jan-feb, but there's not other fights than vs. mineau
but: stats say: 3-7
fights total on your sheet: 10
you sure you're missing something?
question concerning wizards+leveling midcycle
had 5* lvl 1 spells => 2/fight
gained 4* lvl 2 spells => 5/fight
fight 1: 0 used + level up
fight 2: how many are available?
i can cheer for either 2(left over)+5=7
or 5(none used in fight 1)+5=10
i could not find this under 3FC in the rules - maybe it should be added? i'm sure i have seen the answer to this already once, but i'm unable to find it - maybe because it was not in the rules, but in tavern/fotw posts...
the idia here is to throw a CMW potion at the shadow - but here the bottle wont break upon hitting the shadow won't it?
question regarding aquin vs varjo iam now running - Can you throw a splash weapon (and have it work) vs an incorporeal creature? - splash weapons say: "A splash weapon is a ranged weapon that breaks on impact, splashing or scattering its contents over its target and nearby creatures or objects."
the idia here is to throw a CMW potion at the shadow - but here the bottle wont break upon hitting the shadow won't it?
A creature must be able to swallow a potion or smear on an oil. Because of this, incorporeal creatures cannot use potions or oils.
Any corporeal creature can imbibe a potion. The potion must be swallowed. Any corporeal creature can use an oil.
So, no.
about touchsight: since it is an invisible window, and touchsight defeats invisibility, i'd say: most likely yes.
Well, the "window" is actually an interplanar hole. I am not sure if a hole is something that you can pick up with Touchsight, since you cannot, by definition, touch it. However, See Invisibility works, so for balancing reasons I probably would allow Touchsight to work aswell.
mucki: he means, he did forget to record it and does not know when or where.
last fight of gortek was against mineau, though. you can go through the battles-threads, actions for the week are linked on page 1. i did a quick search dec-jan-feb, but there's not other fights than vs. mineau
but: stats say: 3-7
fights total on your sheet: 10
you sure you're missing something?
My own logs of powerrating changes show the fight with Mineau as Gortek's last one, too.
Can touchsight detect a rope-trick hole?
The intent is clearly that Touchsight basically extends your sense of touch out, but that's not what it says. It says you ignore invisibility. While I'd house-rule it differently, the power works as written.
Since you specifically use Holy Water against incorporeal creatures, I think it should work.
Actually, holy water is specifically an exception to the rule: unlike other nonmagical attacks, including grenadelike weapons, holy water can affect incorporeal undead.
question regarding aquin vs varjo iam now running - Can you throw a splash weapon (and have it work) vs an incorporeal creature? - splash weapons say: "A splash weapon is a ranged weapon that breaks on impact, splashing or scattering its contents over its target and nearby creatures or objects."
the idia here is to throw a CMW potion at the shadow - but here the bottle wont break upon hitting the shadow won't it?
I would say no. If you take a look at the holy water description you know why.
Holy water damages undead creatures and evil outsiders almost as if it were acid. A flask of holy water can be thrown as a splash weapon.
Treat this attack as a ranged touch attack with a range increment of 10 feet. A flask breaks if thrown against the body of a corporeal creature, but to use it against an incorporeal creature, you must open the flask and pour the holy water out onto the target. Thus, you can douse an incorporeal creature with holy water only if you are adjacent to it. Doing so is a ranged touch attack that does not provoke attacks of opportunity.
A direct hit by a flask of holy water deals 2d4 points of damage to an undead creature or an evil outsider. Each such creature within 5 feet of the point where the flask hits takes 1 point of damage from the splash.
If a Wilder with manifester level 3 uses Mind Thrust using Wild Surge +2, can that wilder activate the Maximize Power feat, since the Wilder's manifester level is then 5 and the Wilder would only end up paying 5?
Right then. A question while I think through different ideas that appeal to me somehow.
If a Wilder with manifester level 3 uses Mind Thrust using Wild Surge +2, can that wilder activate the Maximize Power feat, since the Wilder's manifester level is then 5 and the Wilder would only end up paying 5?
No, it's only good for giving you free augmentation; a metapsionic feat isn't the same as augmentation. Note, however, that other people disagree (I think Zevox thought it should be possible).
mucki: he means, he did forget to record it and does not know when or where.
last fight of gortek was against mineau, though. you can go through the battles-threads, actions for the week are linked on page 1. i did a quick search dec-jan-feb, but there's not other fights than vs. mineau
but: stats say: 3-7
fights total on your sheet: 10
you sure you're missing something?
Thanks, guess i wasn't missing any fights... New meds messing with me i guess... Well ECL 4 will have a Dwarf Active next week
No, it's only good for giving you free augmentation; a metapsionic feat isn't the same as augmentation. Note, however, that other people disagree (I think Zevox thought it should be possible).
well, in this case, it's also pretty useless. the average of 5d10 (30) is far above the maximized 10 you'd get, and the cost in pp would be the same(3).
aside from higher levels, pretty much every power thar can be augmented ends up better than a maximized version.
examples:
3d6 maximized energy missile = 18
7d6 energy missile = average 28, dc +2 higher
6d6 maximized energy missile = 36
10d6 energy missile = average 35, dc +2 higher
so that's about when it evens out. above, the maximize is clearly better, if the augmentation gained is unimportant.
anyone, please?
question concerning wizards+leveling midcycle
had 5* lvl 1 spells => 2/fight
gained 4* lvl 2 spells => 5/fight
fight 1: 0 used + level up
fight 2: how many are available?
i can cheer for either 2(left over)+5=7
or 5(none used in fight 1)+5=10
i could not find this under 3FC in the rules - maybe it should be added? i'm sure i have seen the answer to this already once, but i'm unable to find it - maybe because it was not in the rules, but in tavern/fotw posts...
well, in this case, it's also pretty useless. the average of 5d10 (30) is far above the maximized 10 you'd get, and the cost in pp would be the same(3)
Ah, but, assuming for a bit that this actually worked, you are using wild surge+2, to get 2 of the manifester levels and are adding 2d10 at no extra pp cost. Then the damage becomes a definate 30, which is somewhat better in some situations where you want to be sure to deal that 30 damage and not curse your god for your damage rolls. I mean, with 5d10 of damage, you could get enough, but still...
Then, using wild surge +2+X, it would get progressively better...but it's all a rather moot point as it doesn't actually work. :P
question concerning wizards+leveling midcycle
had 5* lvl 1 spells => 2/fight
gained 4* lvl 2 spells => 5/fight
fight 1: 0 used + level up
fight 2: how many are available?
i can cheer for either 2(left over)+5=7
or 5(none used in fight 1)+5=10
i could not find this under 3FC in the rules - maybe it should be added? i'm sure i have seen the answer to this already once, but i'm unable to find it - maybe because it was not in the rules, but in tavern/fotw posts...
In your example, it's 7. You don't get unused spell levels retroactively.
You end up with extra pp/spell levels at the end of your cycle.
Consider a character flying high (either plains/forest/arena maps).
- If an item that they are carrying or wielding is dropped then, does the item suffer falling damage?
- Does an items hardness apply against falling damage?
I've come up with a few interesting ideas that I would like to turn into new tactics, but it raises a few questions which I want to bring to the tavern for dissection first.
Consider a character flying high (either plains/forest/arena maps).
- If an item that they are carrying or wielding is dropped then, does the item suffer falling damage?
- Does an items hardness apply against falling damage?
Yes and yes. (In my opinion, of course.)
I've considered using Telekinetic Thrust to throw an opponent's items straight up in the air, too.
Since you're already talking 'bout stuff like that: What damage would a 3000 lbs stone do, thrown at an enemy from... 100' for example?
RAW?
The stone would get falling damage and the person would be unharmed.
:P
In the Playtest fight:
Elementals are immune to criticals
@Stormwind, MWB & Mucki:
In the Playtest fight:
Elementals are immune to criticals
Doh ... you're right - boy do I feel silly
Ah, but, assuming for a bit that this actually worked, you are using wild surge+2, to get 2 of the manifester levels and are adding 2d10 at no extra pp cost. Then the damage becomes a definate 30, which is somewhat better in some situations where you want to be sure to deal that 30 damage and not curse your god for your damage rolls. I mean, with 5d10 of damage, you could get enough, but still...
Then, using wild surge +2+X, it would get progressively better...but it's all a rather moot point as it doesn't actually work. :P
well, if maximize power would cost you an additional 2 pp, i'd agree with you. but it is 4pp. so you can't use ml3+2surge to cast for 3d10+maximize it. you'd be 2pp short.
it's possible to augment, use a psionic feat(with psicrystal: 2 feats) and use surge at the same time, but the amount gained via surge can only be used for augmentation. so you could do extend or empower at lvl 3, but not maximize.
maximize is pretty powerful, that's why it costs that much. it still is cheaper than maximize spell (which would be +8pp), and quicken power is much cheaper than quicken spell, too.
this is why in my example above, i said that it evens out at ML 10 (wilder:7). after that, the metapsionic feat is damage-wise better than augmentation, and you can still augment for the extra damage (unless using higher level powers than PL 2)
wilder lvl 3 possible:
energy ray 3pp-empowered +2pp surge augmented
=> deals 1.5*(3d6) ~ 15.75 as opposed to 17.5
mind thrust 3pp-empowered +2pp surge augmented
=> deals 1.5*(3d10) ~ 24.75 as opposed to 27.5
so you can see, on average its better to wait with the metapsionics for later..
wilder cl 7:
mind thrust 7pp-empowered +3pp surge augmented
=> deals 1.5*(8d10) ~ 66 as opposed to 55
but the amount gained via surge can only be used for augmentation.
"Assuming for a bit that this actually worked" basiclly meant "assume is false" or "a metapsionic feat is an augmentation" since the thought fell flat when "it didnt work."
Oooo, I'm horrible at being clear. I can just feel how bad my first tactics will be. :P
[random tangent]Run my paper stacks, run![/random tagent]
But yeah, there are better options.
I agree: yes to both, BUT magical weapons are still immune to that damage since they can only be harmed by other magical weapons with at least the same enhancement bonus.
I thought that was no longer true in 3.5 edition. I could be misremembering and/or making something up, though.
Anyways, the real goodies to destroy are fragile things like wands, headbands, periapts, etc.
I thought that was no longer true in 3.5 edition. I could be misremembering and/or making something up, though.
Anyways, the real goodies to destroy are fragile things like wands, headbands, periapts, etc.
Your not ... it was removed in Errata somewhere along the way.
Your not ... it was removed in Errata somewhere along the way.
So even magical weapons would take falling damage, right?
If I recall correctly, each point of enhancement bonus adds 2 to a weapon’s or shield’s hardness and +10 to its hit points .... so magical weapons would be harder to destroy simply by virtue of having a higher hardness and more hp.
@Stormwind, MWB & Mucki:
In the Playtest fight:
Elementals are immune to criticals
Doh ... you're right - boy do I feel silly
Oh, didn't know that. thanks.
@Stormwind, MWB & Mucki:
In the Playtest fight:
Elementals are immune to criticals
Which is funny, because I "crit" Ilma twice eariler in the fight, and we all remembered not to roll the crit confirm/damage then....
Your not ... it was removed in Errata somewhere along the way.
Not so much errata; it's mentioned by accident in some areas where they failed to update the rules completely, but the "real" rules on the matter have it correct.
The rules on characters and objects being damaged by falling or being hit by a falling object are in the Wilderness, Weather, and Environment section of the SRD. Search for "FALLING" (case sensitive). And yes, both the faller and the fall-ee, so to speak, would be damaged.
what kind of action does it take to stand up from kneeling, or to kneel?
this is not covered in the srd, but i'd say it either costs you something from your movement, is a move-action, or... ?
question concerning kneeling:
what kind of action does it take to stand up from kneeling, or to kneel?
this is not covered in the srd, but i'd say it either costs you something from your movement, is a move-action, or... ?
Standing from prone is a move action that provokes. As far as I know - this is the item that is used anytime someone stands from a kneeling position.
Likewise, dropping prone is a free action. As far as I know - this is the item that is used anytime someone kneels from a standing position.
I wanted to make sure I could enhance a Swarm creature with a template or two (Celestial or Phrenic or whatever). I am pretty sure you can given:
For game purposes a swarm is defined as a single creature with a space of 10 feet—gigantic hordes are actually composed of dozens of swarms in close proximity. A swarm has a single pool of Hit Dice and hit points, a single initiative modifier, a single speed, and a single Armor Class. It makes saving throws as a single creature
After all, the template is to the swarm creature itself, regardless of it being composed of multiple creatures.
In regards to size, according to the Combat Section: Creature Sizes table, only Large
size creatures have space 10ft. Therefore, swarms, being a creature of 10ft are also Large-sized creatures, despite being composed of smaller creatures.
Any problems with this logic?
-Huan
Certainly some creatures will be "ill-suited" and give you a -5 penalty on Ride checks.
The rules state that some creatures are impossible to Ride, but it doesn't specify which. I recall at least one discussion about which creatures are ill-suited and which are impossible, but the result was inconclusive.
Hmm, Snaga was thinking of using Enlarge person on his raven and Reduce person on himself effectively swapping their sizes and then riding his new "mount." Do you think this could work? Would Snaga have to pay for training?
The raven familiar isn't an animal - so it gets into that questionable area on how much training is. It would probably be the same as an animal though.
Ok Someone explain to me... why is it that out of all my characters.. the only one NOT a Failure is Shadow... the one Character that should be... Comeon.. everyone told me Bards In Coco Suck... So why is it he is not a failure... and my Half-orc melee monster is...
Not sure about your bard. But I just glanced at your melee guy, and I can tell you he's not winning because he's too slow. Your moving at 55' on the ground when fully buffed. The other thing is that it looks to me that your buff cycle is too long. And for being a character with so much multiclassing, your saves are low. DC's in level 6 are about 18 or so for an optimized caster. Your will saves (where save or die effects are at) will fail that most of the time.
Kracknol is my melee smasher, and he's not doing super well either... but against players in a 1v1 fight (rather than monsters or free for all's) he has a decent record. If he cannot end the battle in 6 rounds, then his chances of loosing increases terribly. For melee characters, you need to be ready to go quickly. And then you need to control the battle by forcing melee when your opponents are avoiding you.
Not sure about your bard. But I just glanced at your melee guy, and I can tell you he's not winning because he's too slow. Your moving at 55' on the ground when fully buffed. The other thing is that it looks to me that your buff cycle is too long. And for being a character with so much multiclassing, your saves are low. DC's in level 6 are about 18 or so for an optimized caster. Your will saves (where save or die effects are at) will fail that most of the time.
Kracknol is my melee smasher, and he's not doing super well either... but against players in a 1v1 fight (rather than monsters or free for all's) he has a decent record. If he cannot end the battle in 6 rounds, then his chances of loosing increases terribly. For melee characters, you need to be ready to go quickly. And then you need to control the battle by forcing melee when your opponents are avoiding you.
Indeed. See my comments above about my gish build- for melee builds, speed is king in CoCo.
Also Rauul- you might be depending on tactics more with shadow than you do with your orc. Sometimes confidence can be the downfall of a gladiator.
Indeed. See my comments above about my gish build- for melee builds, speed is king in CoCo.
Also Rauul- you might be depending on tactics more with shadow than you do with your orc. Sometimes confidence can be the downfall of a gladiator.
I can certinly confirm That - the one time i did a melee char he was Good on paper but failed miserably - probably Because my style of play is to overthink and over plan stuff which Works For casters but not so much for melee smashers.
I don't want to open up the floodgate on the ones that have no adjustment on level, but some of the other metamagic would seem reasonable.
Since Cailix is running this off the PW power set and making a custom item (which still kinda irks me) the pricing works out. At a TT game I would throw this item out the window ... at the CoCo ... it is pretty much clean.
You have the ultimate say, but note that SauroGrenom didn't hesitate to reject "legal" custom items during his term in office.
I don't have any objection to taking an existing item (the skin) and removing the continuous part (1.5x modifier) and adding the 2/day limitation (0.4x modifier). That reduces the price to 4800 gp. But reducing the CL from 3 to 1 shouldn't divide the price by 3, IMO. That's about as limiting as adding "can only be used by neutral characters" for -20% and "can only be used by bards or rogues" for another -20%.
I guess I spent too much time GM'ing Champions where "a limitation that doesn't limit is worth nothing".
While I agree with your opinion I disagree with your pricing on the skin
The skin is done by an egoist not a PW (2nd lvl power for Ego) so the pricing is continuous effect
2000 *2PL *3ML *1.5(10 min duration) = 18000
Since Cailix is running this off the PW power set and making a custom item (which still kinda irks me) the pricing works out. At a TT game I would throw this item out the window ... at the CoCo ... it is pretty much clean.
Although looking at it now ... It should probably be based off the 2k and not the 1800gp build option, being use activated more than just a command word. (an 80gp difference)
I was acually thinking of having the same thing as Cailix's cloak added to Shadows Elven Cloak.. but i am having a problem with figureing out the cost..
Cloak of Disappearing, Lesser:
Use-activated Chameleon (CL 1) 2/day (PsyWar crafted).
Weight: 1lb. Cost: 800 gp (1*1*2000*2/5).
Cost figures out to be 2700 (6 Squared*100*.75)+ 400(800*500)-2500(Initial cost of Cloak)=600 gp
I am probably wrong on this math.. Can someone help me with this..
I read your blog posts... coo.
I'm excited about it. Not sure how CoCo constructs like 3FC and solo combat such will work. Traps and terrain are integral aspects of the game, so we'll need to change things... All that can be figured out when there's a complete rules set in front of us.
I have some very solid ideas for those things now. The default assumption is somewhat longer adventuring days, plus you get an extra action point after every 2 encounters, so I think we'll bump it up to a 4FC. Solo combat may be a bit odd: I think strikers will be at a huge advantage, followed by defenders, with leaders and controllers being pretty craptastic. Because running fights is considerably simpler now, I think we may start seeing a lot more parties, which will even that discrepancy up a bit (and we can also raise the maximum on 4 PCs per fight). We'll definitely need new maps; we can start with the Arena, as usual, but we'll need new ones with interesting terrain features, scalable traps, and the like ASAP.
I'm hoping you are feeling up to doing pairings. My wife had an emergency over the weekend and it will certainly make me unavailable on Wednesday.
I think so, yes. I feel considerably better today; by tomorrow morning I should be up to doing the updates and be ready for pairings.
@MWB: Wait...that thing was in arlington, VA? That's where I live :-O
Hope you enjoyed your visit. Did you stay at the hyatt? That's the same place my current employer put me up when I was interviewing here
I announced that I was going to be there weeks ago... I figured you would have showed up if you'd had any free time at all. Cheapest con I've ever heard of--you could play 4e for the whopping total of a buck. I stayed at a cheapo hotel up a few blocks behind the White House, took the Blue Line to the con. No way I would have had time for anything more than what I did--given the choice between playing Rock Band and getting some sleep, I would have chosen sleep. Probably why I got sick. Though it would have been cool to meet you.
Gary Gygax, one of the co-creators of the Dungeons & Dragons role-playing game, died Tuesday morning at his home in Lake Geneva, Wisconsin, according to Stephen Chenault, CEO of Troll Lord Games.
Gygax designed the original D&D game with Dave Arneson in 1974
I announced that I was going to be there weeks ago... I figured you would have showed up if you'd had any free time at all. Cheapest con I've ever heard of--you could play 4e for the whopping total of a buck. I stayed at a cheapo hotel up a few blocks behind the White House, took the Blue Line to the con. No way I would have had time for anything more than what I did--given the choice between playing Rock Band and getting some sleep, I would have chosen sleep. Probably why I got sick. Though it would have been cool to meet you.
Honestly- I guess I don't read the tavarn and whatnot as closely as I think sometimes. I wasn't even aware there was a convention. Though I guess I have been pretty busy with work lately...among other distractions.
Gary Gygax, one of the co-creators of the Dungeons & Dragons role-playing game, died Tuesday morning at his home in Lake Geneva, Wisconsin, according to Stephen Chenault, CEO of Troll Lord Games.
Gygax designed the original D&D game with Dave Arneson in 1974
It might be silly, but:
As my own, little tribute to "the man" I've just rolled a line of 69 d20 rolls. There where 4 20s alltogether, one of 'em being tha last die rolled. I think that's a fitting end!
69 d20s
4, 15, 18, 10, 16, 3, 10, 18, 16, 4, 10, 11, 6, 12, 3, 10, 14, 15, 17, 10, 2, 1, 18, 6, 9, 16, 9, 20, 17, 11, 13, 11, 13, 19, 9, 12, 17, 11, 16, 16, 18, 15, 8, 20, 20, 5, 5, 16, 2, 17, 12, 9, 4, 8, 8, 5, 18, 8, 12, 1, 1, 4, 7, 15, 3, 17, 3, 6, 20
4, 15, 18, 10, 16, 3, 10, 18, 16, 4, 10, 11, 6, 12, 3, 10, 14, 15, 17, 10, 2, 1, 18, 6, 9, 16, 9, 20, 17, 11, 13, 11, 13, 19, 9, 12, 17, 11, 16, 16, 18, 15, 8, 20, 20, 5, 5, 16, 2, 17, 12, 9, 4, 8, 8, 5, 18, 8, 12, 1, 1, 4, 7, 15, 3, 17, 3, 6, 20
I have some very solid ideas for those things now. The default assumption is somewhat longer adventuring days, plus you get an extra action point after every 2 encounters, so I think we'll bump it up to a 4FC. Solo combat may be a bit odd: I think strikers will be at a huge advantage, followed by defenders, with leaders and controllers being pretty craptastic. Because running fights is considerably simpler now, I think we may start seeing a lot more parties, which will even that discrepancy up a bit (and we can also raise the maximum on 4 PCs per fight). We'll definitely need new maps; we can start with the Arena, as usual, but we'll need new ones with interesting terrain features, scalable traps, and the like ASAP.
I'm in the midst of exam week right now, so I tried to go to bed early last night and ended lying there thinking about 4E for about an hour and a half. The major thing floating around in my head was that battle appears to be vastly more tactical. Many abilities depend on where precisely your foe is located, and many of your abilities involve "moving" you foe. I know that as a player there have been many times that I was very disappointed by the way tactical movement was handled in one or another battle. It will be challenging to overcome that problem for CoCo battles where tactics are submitted way in advance.
I was thinking that a way to deal with that would be to make all fights play out in threads, action by action. Each player will simply post their own actions and make the necessary rolls. To a large extent fights can play out with minimal pitlord involvement. The pitlord will determine starting positions, start the thread, and handle things till the players can see one another. If anything sneaky happens where only one player knows what's going on like invisibility, then that gets handled by the pitlord through PM's. For the most part, this way the pirlord is the ref, and the players can play the game at their own pace.
There can be rules to penalize people who're stalling, ie take too long to post their actions. And players can decide on a time that they can get online on the same day, and play out a battle rapidly posting alternatively.
Anyway it could be a workable way of doing things. Any thoughts on that?
I rather enjoyed PA's tribute.
(Suggestion for using threads for fights cut.)
Anyway it could be a workable way of doing things. Any thoughts on that?
I probably wouldn't play much in a scenario like that. Although I could probably handle it most of the time, work has to take priority during the week and weekends are variable. I don't think I could devote that much time to the CoCo. The current setup allows one to participate without too much time commitment especially if you don't pit lord. I'm not sure how easy that will be to do in 4e but I think it is a desirable trait to keep.
I'm in the midst of exam week right now, so I tried to go to bed early last night and ended lying there thinking about 4E for about an hour and a half. The major thing floating around in my head was that battle appears to be vastly more tactical. Many abilities depend on where precisely your foe is located, and many of your abilities involve "moving" you foe. I know that as a player there have been many times that I was very disappointed by the way tactical movement was handled in one or another battle. It will be challenging to overcome that problem for CoCo battles where tactics are submitted way in advance.
I was thinking that a way to deal with that would be to make all fights play out in threads, action by action. Each player will simply post their own actions and make the necessary rolls. To a large extent fights can play out with minimal pitlord involvement. The pitlord will determine starting positions, start the thread, and handle things till the players can see one another. If anything sneaky happens where only one player knows what's going on like invisibility, then that gets handled by the pitlord through PM's. For the most part, this way the pirlord is the ref, and the players can play the game at their own pace.
There can be rules to penalize people who're stalling, ie take too long to post their actions. And players can decide on a time that they can get online on the same day, and play out a battle rapidly posting alternatively.
Anyway it could be a workable way of doing things. Any thoughts on that?
That's a good point, but it's also true that play-by-post is too slow a format for our purposes. dulsi's stance will be common as well. I think we'll have to go with three options: the default (if no one can agree) being our usual tactics-based system, alternative 1 being play-by-post, and alternative 2 being the D&D game table (for subscribers) or OpenRPG (for non-subscribers). In a play-by-post game, late penalties would be given to all participants, no matter whose fault it is, so that option shouldn't be taken lightly.
I don't think pre-written tactics will necessarily be that bad in 4e. Tactical positioning is a bit more important, but it's largely a function of interesting monster mechanics (damn those "shifty" kobolds!), traps and terrain features, and party/monster cooperation (or lack thereof). With foreknowledge of what's on your opponent's sheet and what's on the map, and either no allies to work with or jointly-written tactics, I think it'll work just fine.
Can you buy NPC spellcasting services between fights in a 3FC?
No, you can't buy anything in mid-cycle (as far as I know). The exception is the Discount free activity (but you still can't use the item you get via Discount anyways).
My experience with D&D versions has been that they alternate between simplicity and complexity.
- 1981 - My dad buys the Basic and Expert D&D sets. You can play a fighter, cleric, magic-user, thief, halfling, elf or dwarf. What fun!
- 1982 - My brother buys the AD&D Player's Handbook. Holy smoke! Not only can you pick whatever race you want (including gnome, half-orc or half-elf), but you can pick your class too! In fact, you can pick two or three classes, and you can pick all kinds of crazy classes like monk, druid (2nd level spells at level 2!!) or assassin, not to mention what you might find in Unearthed Arcana, Dragon magazine, etc. And, if you're lucky, your 1st level wizard can be psionic and mind blast the crap out of everything.
- 1991 - I get the 2nd Edition D&D Player's Handbook. Druids are now just a type of priest and assassins are just a type of rogue. I guess that makes sense. I always thought monks were kind of wimps, so I don't really miss them. (Eventually different "kits" got published to give you some more things to choose from, but I was too cheap to buy any splatbooks.)
- 2001 - I buy the 3rd Edition D&D Player's Handbook. Druids are back! And so are monks and assassins! And get this -- I can pick any combination of classes I want, like a barbarian/wizard/druid/monk/rogue. And there are prestige classes, too (which I liked better than kits, frankly). And every time I blink, more new clases are being published, including psionic ones.
- 20?? - I get (or will I?) the 4th Edition D&D...whatever it's called. So long, druids and monks (for a little while, at least).
Personally I liked the "anything goes" complexity of 3.0/3.5 the best so far, but there's something to be said for simplicity, too. If the pattern keeps holding, I can't wait for 5th Edition!
While I like the ability to multi-class like mad(pun intended!), I find myself enjoying straight-ticket builds much more as of late. I think the reason is that the emphasis turns from crunch to RP, but I am unsure. Maybe it's even the fun of finding optimized ways of working with different boxes, rather than making the box big and assuming the tactics can reside within.
Personally I find one base class and one prestige class is about the "sweet spot" for me. But I like having options. For instance, I like playing spellcasters more than melee fighters so the 3rd edition characters I've played include a half-orc cleric, a human spirit shaman, a warforged psion, a spellscale sorcerer/war weaver, a human psychic warrior, an elven beguiler, a dwarven wizard, a maenad cloistered cleric and a dromite psionic artificer/ghostbreaker. It's no accident that there's no repeated classes in there (except for cleric -- the cloistered cleric was going to go into war mind, so that doesn't count in my mind); I generally like to try something new every time.
On the one hand, it looks like every 4th edition class will be sort of like a spellcaster so I'll probably like that part. But on the other hand, that means that you start off with only 9 classes, all of which feel vaguely similar; I could easily be wrong on how similar they actually "feel" in practice, though.
especially "everyone can heal" and second wind seem to me like bad ideas, as are per-encounter based stuff. and what i absolutely dislike is the merging of some skills into one, like listen and spot.
The whole 4e ruleset has one direction to one sentence, that seems to be pretty much the core of it: "how can we make dnd more like minis?"
streamlining is good, but i don't like some of the simplifications that went also along the rp-lines. it simply has the wrong feel to have dnd + dnd minis get closer to each other instead of diversification.
Defenders: A cross between the Warblade and Fighter. They lose the recharge mechanic but have at-will powers instead, but at 1st level they have almost all attacks, no counters or boosts. Many powers feel more like 3e feats than spells--Tide of Iron, for instance, is a basic melee attack that pushes your opponent back a square if you hit; Cleave is a basic melee attack that deals your Str damage to a secondary target if you hit the first one. It's basically like a straight warrior in 3e, but with some nice bonuses thrown in to make things interesting.
Strikers and Controllers: these two actually felt quite similar. Both need to stay in the back and shoot ranged attacks, the only difference being that controllers are better at hitting multiple targets for light to moderate damage and strikers are better at hitting a single target for heavy damage. I think that if I had to go with a 3-PC party, a striker with Class Training in a controller class, or vice-versa, would be the way to go. Heck, a half-elf Warlock could take Scorching Burst (a wizard at-will area attack) and probably be perfectly adequate, just to clear out minions. Note: the rogue is supposed to be a melee striker, but we didn't see it at the con. Not sure how that will work. All we saw were ranged strikers.
Leaders: We saw the cleric but not the warlord. The cleric really felt like a spellcaster, with healing prayers, ranged attacks which grant allies bonuses if you hit, Turn Undead, Cause Fear (which works on undead now!), etc. The playtest cleric had one melee power as well, but I never saw it in use.
I guess the main distinction between spellcasters and non-spellcasters is mathematic. Weapon powers start with your basic weapon attack and add stuff to it, like bonuses to hit or damage, double or triple damage, or special effect riders. Spell powers start from "scratch." All this really means is that your choice of weapon impacts all your weapon powers directly, but there isn't as much selection of implements and the choice isn't as important.
What is it you like about spellcasters, or dislike about nonspellcasters? That would help me answer your concern.
i dislike most of the things i saw thus far from 4e.
especially "everyone can heal" and second wind seem to me like bad ideas, as are per-encounter based stuff. and what i absolutely dislike is the merging of some skills into one, like listen and spot.
The whole 4e ruleset has one direction to one sentence, that seems to be pretty much the core of it: "how can we make dnd more like minis?"
streamlining is good, but i don't like some of the simplifications that went also along the rp-lines. it simply has the wrong feel to have dnd + dnd minis get closer to each other instead of diversification.
What is it about everyone healing, encounter powers, and merged skills that you dislike?
The goal wasn't to make D&D more like DDM, but rather it was to take some of the strengths of DDM and apply them to D&D to make it a more streamlined game. I think the result was worth it, and I think that if you give it a try you'll have a hard time finding anything concrete to complain about.
The RP aspect was definitely not simplified. There were no rules for RP before, except for the broken, static DCs for Diplomacy and whatnot. It's much easier now to do anything you like; the DM can straight role-play like in previous editions, or he can have the PCs roll various types of opposed checks. I haven't had much experience with this sort of thing, as the previews were combat-heavy, but from talking with others and reading blogs, I've been impressed with how creative the players can be, and the DM can instantly decide how to adjudicate it reasonably.
What is it you like about spellcasters, or dislike about nonspellcasters? That would help me answer your concern.
Well, I know what I like about spellcaster is the creativity involved. Like using spells like "shape wood" and figuring out how to use that best in combat, or using spells like "dancing lights" as safety flares to attract city guards. Basically, thinking outside the box and really RPing that intelligence/or/wisdom.
Well, I know what I like about spellcaster is the creativity involved. Like using spells like "shape wood" and figuring out how to use that best in combat, or using spells like "dancing lights" as safety flares to attract city guards. Basically, thinking outside the box and really RPing that intelligence/or/wisdom.
Again, the previews were combat-heavy, so we didn't get to see too many utility spells. I know they exist, 'cause they were on one of the preview pages on display (see sblock), but I don't know how easily creative players will be able to make use of those in the way you're accustomed.
What is it you like about spellcasters, or dislike about nonspellcasters? That would help me answer your concern.
Well, pre-"Tome of Battle" melee/ranged fighters mostly just do one thing -- "I try to hit the monster" -- maybe in a few different flavours (trip, grapple, etc.). Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Casters just have a wider range of options to choose from (especially if the DM allows various splatbooks with new spells).So now melee/ranged fighters have more flavours of "hit the monster" (which is good) but casters will no doubt have fewer spells to choose from (which is maybe good from a balance point of view, but is less exciting from a variety point of view).
I guess I'm just wondering if every class is going to end up with a "1/day super-blast" and a "per encounter de-buff" and an "at-will blast", etc., making them vaguely similar.
about everyone getting healing surges feels like invalidating some of the core concepts of the "healer" - someone to stay back and focus on that.
about skills: originally coming from DSA, i enjoy skill-rich environments. even though dnd always had far lesser skills, figuring out things took a lot longer than for e.g. in DSA. the reason for this is not the amount of skills: but how to use it, is the important factor. DND overregulated those checks, giving rules for any and all skills in places where a simple "dm decides the dc" would have been much better than most of the pages in the phb. what i specially dislike is "perception" and "stealthy" - it feels like everything is going to generics...
about roles: most of the time, roles rather limit options than encourage them. we'll see how it works out in 4e, but i still have that gnawing feeling that i'll see wow - the rp game. some trees, some options, some flavor.
about encounter powers: well, it basically limits creativity (since you've got it anyway every time you start a fight) and resourcefulness. no need to watch out for that last damage spell, if you have it all over again. no need to come up with a different solution once you've depleted those.
can you share something about spell selection and such things of a wizard in 4e? or was everything at the previews restricted to completely selected characters?
@mcj: i'm totally with you. just ask durz about usages for the spells grease, mount or prestidigitation...
about skills: originally coming from DSA, i enjoy skill-rich environments. even though dnd always had far lesser skills, figuring out things took a lot longer than for e.g. in DSA. the reason for this is not the amount of skills: but how to use it, is the important factor. DND overregulated those checks, giving rules for any and all skills in places where a simple "dm decides the dc" would have been much better than most of the pages in the phb. what i specially dislike is "perception" and "stealthy" - it feels like everything is going to generics...
Hey, a generic skill system is better than AD&D where no one had any skills except for thieves, assassins and barbarians. :D
What is DSA?
It is a german Fantasy Roleplaying System that is also quite old(started 1984).
@lonewolf. on the same age issue, you're quite off. ;)
a-ha! cheater. ;)
@mwb: i've already preordered 4e. everything is worth giving a shot.
about everyone getting healing surges feels like invalidating some of the core concepts of the "healer" - someone to stay back and focus on that.
Oh, you definitely still need that. Dwarves can use their second wind as a minor action, so they get one "get out of jail free," so to speak, and paladins use Lay on Hands as a minor action 3 times per day, so they can do the same plus use it on others, but in each case you only get 1/4 of your max HP back, which isn't much except for the defenders. Using Second Wind as a Ranger is like drinking a CLW potion at ECL 6--it's just kind of pointless.
about skills: originally coming from DSA, i enjoy skill-rich environments. even though dnd always had far lesser skills, figuring out things took a lot longer than for e.g. in DSA. the reason for this is not the amount of skills: but how to use it, is the important factor. DND overregulated those checks, giving rules for any and all skills in places where a simple "dm decides the dc" would have been much better than most of the pages in the phb. what i specially dislike is "perception" and "stealthy" - it feels like everything is going to generics...
4e is much more deregulated. DMs and PCs decide the DC jointly now--if the PC tries something mundane but screws up, they suffer for it badly, but if they try something fancy and succeed, they can get some hefty benefits from it. The generics support this a lot--a skill like "Athletics" covers not only all the Str-based skills in the PHB, but a lot of things that would have been generic Str checks because there was no skill for them. Same for Acrobatics and Thievery. The confusion between Search and Spot (which throws even experienced players occasionally) is gone, although I really dislike that being asleep gives you a -5 to Perception and being deafened gives you a -10!
about roles: most of the time, roles rather limit options than encourage them. we'll see how it works out in 4e, but i still have that gnawing feeling that i'll see wow - the rp game. some trees, some options, some flavor.
Yes and no. What roles do is eliminate options that make a character a "5th party member," and also CoDzillas that make other members irrelevant. You can still have a tremendous number of options, but it's all but guaranteed that each member will 1) be useful and 2) not step on each others' toes.
about encounter powers: well, it basically limits creativity (since you've got it anyway every time you start a fight) and resourcefulness. no need to watch out for that last damage spell, if you have it all over again. no need to come up with a different solution once you've depleted those.
Each power is conditionally useful, and I've seen players who assumed this mentality was correct and screwed it up. Several monsters clustered together? Good time for the Force Orb--whoops, they were only minions, I should have stuck with Scorching Burst. Undead? Turn 'em... except that turning has a range of only 2 squares, so I need to save it for the optimal time. Clerics and paladins also have "use one of the following 2-3 powers" abilities, which makes you choose. And I can't tell you the number of times I saw someone go after a BBEG with just the wrong power--you don't use your 1/day big blast on the enemy spellcaster if it targets Will defense.
can you share something about spell selection and such things of a wizard in 4e? or was everything at the previews restricted to completely selected characters?
Pregens only, but several inferences can be made. Looks like the baseline is two at-will powers (which never change through level 30; they can be retrained, but only level 1 at-wills exist), one encounter power, and one daily. Many races get a bonus power, which is in some cases a specific power (like the tiefling's Infernal Wrath) and in some cases an option (like the half-elf, who gets to pick one at-will power from another class's list). Wizards also get 3 cantrips (at-wills), and while they only get one daily power per day, they can choose which power that is from their spellbook (which starts with two powers). I have no idea how any of this improves with level, but I'm sure that the baseline progression is unified.
I guess I'm just wondering if every class is going to end up with a "1/day super-blast" and a "per encounter de-buff" and an "at-will blast", etc., making them vaguely similar.
You can see from the character sheets (you can see them here, among other places) that there's quite a bit of variability in what the powers do, even at 1st level.
Pregens only, but several inferences can be made. Looks like the baseline is two at-will powers (which never change through level 30; they can be retrained, but only level 1 at-wills exist), one encounter power, and one daily. Many races get a bonus power, which is in some cases a specific power (like the tiefling's Infernal Wrath) and in some cases an option (like the half-elf, who gets to pick one at-will power from another class's list). Wizards also get 3 cantrips (at-wills), and while they only get one daily power per day, they can choose which power that is from their spellbook (which starts with two powers). I have no idea how any of this improves with level, but I'm sure that the baseline progression is unified.You can see from the character sheets (you can see them here, among other places) that there's quite a bit of variability in what the powers do, even at 1st level.
From reading the stuff on the website, I get the impression that as you increase in levels, powers get more powerful not drastically more plentiful. One of the comments I recall was a lamentation that at high levels of play, the game slows down due to having way too many powers at the disposal of each player.
So I suspect that as levels go up the at will powers will have more umph, instead of having 15 powers to choose from. Same goes for the per encounter and per day powers. You get options to replace lesser powers with greater ones as you go up. Or perhaps you get to use them a bit more often than you did before.
You can see from the character sheets (you can see them here, among other places) that there's quite a bit of variability in what the powers do, even at 1st level.
I looked at the sheets already. It seemed to me that 80+% of the powers fell under one or more of these three categories:
- Do X damage.
- Move someone Y squares.
- Heal Z damage.
By way of contrast, my level 2 beguiler (the PbEM Reginald Molehusband) has 21 spells at his disposal, only two of which fit those categories (Whelm and Expeditious Retreat).
I looked at the sheets already. It seemed to me that 80+% of the powers fell under one or more of these three categories:
- Do X damage.
- Move someone Y squares.
- Heal Z damage.
By way of contrast, my level 2 beguiler (the PbEM Reginald Molehusband) has 21 spells at his disposal, only two of which fit those categories (Whelm and Expeditious Retreat).
Beguilers are an extreme example--I play one myself, and in combat it's pretty much just Sleep, Color Spray, and Daze. Everything else is either noncombat or crap (except ER, which has uses I just haven't encountered yet with that character).
Nearly all the 4e at-will powers are damage-dealing because they replace basic attacks, so you never have to just say "I attack." Some classes (fighter, wizard--I think of the 4e preview wizard as being an evoker) are more focused on dealing damage, others (paladin, cleric) mainly do other things.
Beguilers are an extreme example--I play one myself, and in combat it's pretty much just Sleep, Color Spray, and Daze. Everything else is either noncombat or crap (except ER, which has uses I just haven't encountered yet with that character).
I haven't used Daze, but I have used Charm Person; otherwise your list is right on the money. :D I suspect I'll get the chance to use Silent Image soon (since I think we're going to be fighting some undead).
Nearly all the 4e at-will powers are damage-dealing because they replace basic attacks, so you never have to just say "I attack." Some classes (fighter, wizard--I think of the 4e preview wizard as being an evoker) are more focused on dealing damage, others (paladin, cleric) mainly do other things.
Well, from what I remember the paladin had a smite (damage), a challenge (damage) and lay on hands (healing). The cleric had some kind of blast (damage), healing (healing), assisting others with saves (healing), turn undead (move opponent). Of course there could be a ton of non-combat spells/powers that they didn't include on the pregen characters since those were only going to be used for combat.
Paladin: At-will: A smite that deals damage and grants temp HP (damage and healing), a plain ol' smite (damage), a challenge (makes the paladin "sticky"), and lay on hands (healing). Encounter: a smite that deals damage and grants an AC bonus to an ally (damage and buff), and a choice between giving an ally a bonus to a saving throw (healing, by your nomenclature) or giving himself +2 damage for one attack (buff). Daily: Damage.
Cleric: At-will: Deals damage and grants an ally an attack bonus (damage and buff), deals damage and grants an ally an AC bonus (damage and buff), deals damage and grants temp HP or an extra saving throw (damage and heal). Encounter: Moves opponent, heals an ally, and a choice between a bonus to an attack roll or saving throw (healing/buff), a bonus to damage on certain powers (damage), or turn undead (damage and moves opponent). Daily is damage and bestows vulnerability 5 all (damage and debuff).
So yes, it's sort on interesting terrain effects, compulsions that do things other than move opponents, and the like. This is also level 1 at a demo game. I doubt they put Grease on the first 3e demo wizard, either. The wizard does get Ghost Sound (which doubles as Message), Light, Mage Hand (a minor action--really useful!), and Sleep.
Split (Ex): Slashing and piercing weapons deal no damage to a black pudding. Instead the creature splits into two identical puddings, each with half of the original’s current hit points (round down). A pudding with 10 hit points or less cannot be further split and dies if reduced to 0 hit points.
If a part of the pudding cannot be further split, can you kill it with slashing and piercing weapons?
I would say yes.
If a part of the pudding cannot be further split, can you kill it with slashing and piercing weapons?
I would say yes.
I think that's the intent, yes. Otherwise the "dies if reduced to 0 hit points" is a pointless comment.
edit-
Erm, no..I dunno why they said that 0 hp thing. Maybe teh weapons do do damage after they are reduced to 10 or fewer hp.
how is a half-dragon ooze even possible?
i know it's allowed by the rules, but some assumptions:
half dragons have wings.
oozes have no form. how are their wings supposed to do anything if they aren't solid?
half dragons have a breath weapon.
oozes have no mouth. how is it supposed to exhale?
---
yet another example of an impossible monster on the list...
- Is it still mindless?
- Is it still Blind?
- is it still immune to critical hits?
(all from Ooze features. The answer should be the same to all of these questions.)
- How do the natural weapon attacks of this thing look like? Can it use slam and claws at the same full attack?
- Can this thing hear?
and a few addtional questions about this Halfdragon pudding:
- Is it still mindless?
- Is it still Blind?
- is it still immune to critical hits?
(all from Ooze features. The answer should be the same to all of these questions.)
- How do the natural weapon attacks of this thing look like? Can it use slam and claws at the same full attack?
- Can this thing hear?
By strict reading of the rules: yes, no, and yes. The half-dragon template specifically grants low-light vision and darkvision.
All that aside- if I can get two elders approval[or GM approval], I would like to re-roll this monster. There are too many rules questions associated, including how many times he can use his breath weapon. [what if he gets split 4 x first? By the rules each pudding can use it (!!!!) ]
I know this is an unorthodox request- but this is a seriously messed up monster.
By strict reading of the rules: yes, no, and yes. The half-dragon template specifically grants low-light vision and darkvision.
only because it has lowlightvision it doesnt mean that it is not also blind. Otherwise the Blindness spell couldnt work on anyone with lowlightvision. I know its silly, but RAW those things dont cancel each other out. And with such a strange monster, you cannot even work with common sense either, because by common sense, this thing wouldnt exist.
All that aside- if I can get two elders approval[or GM approval], I would like to re-roll this monster. There are too many rules questions associated, including how many times he can use his breath weapon. [what if he gets split 4 x first? By the rules each pudding can use it (!!!!) ]
Amen
) and we'll get something more definite later. There's no need to delay running the fight on account of something like this.3000 (base) + 6*200 (6 tricks)
...or...
3000 (base) + 1000 (special training) + 6*200 (6 tricks)
...or something else?
As much as I'd like to turn 31 this Saturday, it's a little late for that.
2008 - 1974 = :P
Wait? It's not 2005????
Does that apply to dorjes too? I mean: Durzulgor I has a dorje of dissolving weapon at CL4, since that's the level you need(as a psi-warri) to gain acces to the power. Reduced to CL3 (enough pps to manifest a 2nd level power), his dorje would be way cheaper!
I see no reason you would be required to have a ML4 on a dorje of dissolving weapon. It's not a bad idea. The ML4 dorje doesn't cost nearly as much as the ML5 one, and it has 4d6 damage instead of 3d6 for the ML3 dorje.
Generally the point is that you don't have to have ML4 on the dorje, but the ML4 one is a resonably good price for what you get.
You don't have to have a psion craft the item. It could just as easily be craft by a psiwarrior... and a psiwarrior can choose to craft the item at any ML that's sufficient to provide the pp to manifest the power.
As my wizard who's 7th level can craft a scroll of fireball with a CL of 5th level, my psiwarrior who's 17th level can craft a powerstone with a ML of 11th level. This is all that's necessary for a ML 11 powerstone of personal psionic mindblank.
I'm pretty sure that this isn't the case, Sauro. I do believe items need to have a minimum caster level equal to the minimum the class creating it needs to cast it - hence Bards can't make their spell level 2 Heroism scrolls below CL 4, for instance, even though wizards can learn 2nd level spells at CL 3. I don't see why this wouldn't apply likewise to psionics. Minimum power points to use a power does not automatically equate to the minimum ML that power can be.
Zevox
I'm pretty sure that this isn't the case, Sauro. I do believe items need to have a minimum caster level equal to the minimum the class creating it needs to cast it - hence Bards can't make their spell level 2 Heroism scrolls below CL 4, for instance, even though wizards can learn 2nd level spells at CL 3. I don't see why this wouldn't apply likewise to psionics. Minimum power points to use a power does not automatically equate to the minimum ML that power can be.
Zevox
i totally agree(but see below), though bards also have ways around that... (they simply buy wizard crafted scrolls and use them, as the only distinction is arcane/divine on scrolls)
about the powers: there's a little problem though, as there's the little feat called expanded knowledge. basically, any psion could craft ANY power. so it seems perfectly fine to have a ML 3 dorje of dissolving weapon. (psion crafted). the only thing you can not do, is craft a PW-crafted dissolving weapon dorje at ML 4.
Dorjes are normally created at the minimum manifester level required to manifest the power
Minimum Manifester Level for Psychic Warrior to manifest a PL2 Power is 4. DOT. So basically, if you buy dorjes, powerstones and other items you can always take psion-crafted stuff. If you want to do it yourself, you need to take you minimum ML.
How much does a fully trained hippogriff with Combat Riding cost? Is it:
3000 (base) + 6*200 (6 tricks)
...or...
3000 (base) + 1000 (special training) + 6*200 (6 tricks)
...or something else?
It's the 1000.
I'm pretty sure that this isn't the case, Sauro. I do believe items need to have a minimum caster level equal to the minimum the class creating it needs to cast it - hence Bards can't make their spell level 2 Heroism scrolls below CL 4, for instance, even though wizards can learn 2nd level spells at CL 3. I don't see why this wouldn't apply likewise to psionics. Minimum power points to use a power does not automatically equate to the minimum ML that power can be.
Zevox
It's different with psionics, though. If you look at the tables of prices for power stones, dorjes and psionic tattoos, there are no separate columns for psychic warrior powers; in fact the power stone table mentions that it applies to psychic warrior powers (by saying you need to roll again if you get a power greater than level 6).
In any case, a psion/wilder can always use Expanded Knowledge to learn Dissolving Weapon (say) and then manifest it as ML 3 (just like any other level 2 power) and then make a dorje out of it.
It's the 1000.
So the total cost is 5,200 for a hippogriff with Combat Riding?
Is there any way to buy high-end flying mounts for ecl's 10-20 with gold, or do you just have to have winged boots by then? [or leadership, handle animal, diplomacy, etc to gain a mount another way]
You mean something better than a griffon/pegasus?
I dont think so.
That said - have fun flying it in 2 maps (maybe 3 if you can maneuver it to the center of the city...)
Is the volume of the object for Shrink Item comprehensive of empty parts or not?
A cube of 4910 lbs of iron and a cave semisphere of Iron of the same weight have the same volume of iron, but much different total volume.
Still, a 5 tons box of material falling on your head is much more cheesy then a semisphere blocking you (with no damage)
Yeah- but with the second one you're forcing the pitlord to have to figure out how to calculate the hp of the material(since everyone and their brother has an adamantine weapon), wall thickness, etc, etc. On top of it all, you're actually delaying combat instead of making moves to approach the enemy...
Easier on pitlord= better strategy
I played around with telekinetic thrust and using shrink item to get maximum weight- it really didn't pan out on paper.
Yeah- but with the second one you're forcing the pitlord to have to figure out how to calculate the hp of the material(since everyone and their brother has an adamantine weapon), wall thickness, etc, etc. On top of it all, you're actually delaying combat instead of making moves to approach the enemy...
HMM.. i planned to use that linked with animals / allies / fog spells, so it shouldn't be delaying.
If it's legit I may do the calculations myself. Just need an afternoon to waste for that
EDIT: I plan to use a similar tactic in my TT game as well, in that case with a cave sphere filled with lantern oil and with a few mechanisms which prevents that from dropping out too fast. Scatter the holes on the sphere and then shrink it.
Lit (prestidigitation will be fine when shrunk) and drop it to have a massively damaging burning sphere do siege cities.
http://www.identicalsoftware.com/coco/
That item won't be approved. An item that provides unlimited healing for both living and undead creatures has a value much greater than the price you attribute for it. With charges per day it would be a little more manageable - but unlimited uses per day is a little crazy.
In a word: yes.
The CoCo will continue to exist after 4e's release and as far as I know will still need monster lists.
Aside from that - the lists are useful to me for other things too - so I get benefit aside from helping fix some of the current issues on the current lists.
Well i hope it exists after 4e... i mean i have Plans to make my Teifling Warlock who embraced his heritage of the Demonic Forces... and well I Must have a Halfling who can steal your coins and make you like it
I was just wondering... I for one will keep Shadow going in 3.5 till i get bored with it or have to fight monsters every week...
I can't find anywhere in the rules where it mentions available deities...so does that mean all deities are allowed from anywhere I can find?
...yeah, I don't really know which deities are from which book or anything...if it's easier, I'm looking for a deity whose favored weapon is the bow(longbow) and is a step away from Lawful Good.
Kanchelsis, the Vampire God. Domains: Darkness, Magic. Alignment: LE(?) [Jonathon Raven Gravebound]
About Yaristis [Berri the Friendly]
Yaristis is a Neutral Good god followed by many of the civilized races the world over. Yaristis is the emblem of charity and good will and the defender of the meek, weak and poor.
Followers of Yaristis bear the emblem of one hand depositing either a coin or a piece of food in the palm of another hand in an expression of giving. Although many of the followers are pacifistic by nature, a sect of the faith specifically aims to defend the weak and to help out those who suffer from lack of food, water or other needs.
Yaristis's favored weapon is the warhammer - a symbol of strength and structure in many societies. Followers of Yaristis may choose from the following domains: Charm, Luck, Travel, or Community.
[Greyhawk] Pelor [Sir Valkin]
About Denth the Summoner [Kraegin]
Denth is a lesser god in the pantheon who is not well recognized among the populace of most civilized lands - probably because his wars with summoned armies laid waste to vast areas, leaving plenty of death and misery around. His own armies suffered many losses, but since they made use of summoning magics, were easily replenished. Denth is an underling to the God of Magic, a bastard child in a way, because no one wishes to think of him and his deeds.
Denth's holy symbol is that of a palm with a man coming through a portal. In some cases, the man is replaced with the figure of a particular followers favorite summoned creature.
Denth is a neutral god with evil tendencies. Although he does have a small number of good followers, the majority fall under Neutral and Evil alignments. A follower of Denth can choose from the following domains: Evil, War, Strength. Denth's favored weapon is a Flail.
About Grantis, Dwarven god of Justice and Retribution [Bulgar Stronghammer]
Grantis is a Lawful Neutral god among the dwarves for the most part, although in recent ages, some humans have come to follow his guidelines quite closely. The clerics of Grantis preside over judgements no matter how small or big within the dwarven community, including handing out decisions and executions.
Followers of Grantis are allowed to express themselves in their dress, with their holy symbol emblazoned very prominently. Grantis's holy symbol is that of a hammer on both sides of a scale.
Followers of Grantis are rarely seen outside of the Dwarven communities. The rare few who become travelers, mostly do so for a temporary pilgrimage or to communicate with other temples to Grantis throughout the world. The vast majority however, tend to stay in their homeland.
Grantis's favored weapon is a warhammer. Clerics of Grantis may choose from the following domains: Protection, Strength, Law, Earth
[Greyhawk/FR] Emmantiensien, the Treant King and sage of the Seelie Court. Domains: Magic and Plant. Favored Weapon: Club. [Kervan Sheharath]
[Greyhawk/FR] Aasterinian; Domains: Madness and Travel; Favored weapon: Scimitar [Gakhnalak Strongjaw]
About the Followers of the Elemental Influences: [Dentik Earthmolder]
Followers of the Elemental Influences are not really centered around a single god, but are more focused on the influences and balance of the four elements. Clerics of the disposition tend to focus on two particular elements and sometimes focus on opposing elements because of their inherent balance.
Ethos of the followers can sometimes be misconstrued as chaotic in nature, mostly due to the preconceived notion that elemental forces are chaotic at their roots (for instance the destructive and sudden nature of powerful winds (air), forest fires (fire), earthquakes (earth) and water dangers (waves, tsunamis and such) (water). The reality however is that followers are very focused on balance and are not all that afar from druids in their beliefs.
Followers of the Elemental Influences tend to don garb that is fashioned after their favored elements - forging together colors of air, water, earth and fire in tune with their beliefs. The holy symbols of such followers are also iconic images of the four elements - usually a combination of the two chosen by the follower.
Followers of the Elemental Influences can choose two of the four elemental domains. Rare followers sometimes pick from among the following: Destruction, Weather, Strength or Sun - but always have at least one Elemental domain.
The favored weapon of a follower of the elemental influences varies by the elements chosen. Air: Rapier, Fire: Battleaxe, Earth: Warhammer, Water: Trident. Once a particular follower has chosen one type of favored weapon, that weapon will always appear for conditions that call for it (spiritual weapon)
Ukko, the High God of the people of the north. [Lemminkäinen]
Ukko, or Perkele as he is also called rules the skies and controls the weather. He brings the replenishing rain if he is pleased, but strikes with thunder and lightning if he is angry. When the northmen go to war, they must pray for Ukko to give them strength over their enemies. Ukko is usually described in the form of an aged warrior who wields a flaming greatsword.
Domains: Destruction and War. Favored Weapon: Greatsword. Alignment: LN?
[FR] The Red Knight, Goddess of Strategy, Planning, and Tactics. Domains: Protection and War. Favored Weapon: Longsword. [Ceilia Durrol]
[FR] Siamorphe, Goddess of Nobles, Royalty, and the Rightful Rule of Nobility. [Mithos Durrol]
[FR] Gargauth, God of Corrupt Politicians, Sorcerers, and Traitors. [Mithos Durrol]
Mephistopheles, Lord of Cania. Alignment: LE(?) [Archdevil Asran]
[FR] Oghma [Istima Telarc]
Lis, Goddess of Beauty. Domains: Charm and Magic. Alignment: LG [Kilor Mintolo]
Ossyilth, a Far Realm diety, manifests as a floating cloud of writhing tentacles and unblinking eyes. He offers the domains Darkness and Madness amoung others. His favored weapon is the Scythe. His Holy Symbol is a disk formed of interlocking tentacles with three eyes. [Shugho-zact]
And yes, Lis is Lawful Good.
[FR] The Red Knight, Goddess of Strategy, Planning, and Tactics. Domains: Protection and War. Favored Weapon: Longsword. [Ceilia Durrol]
Actually, the Red Knight's domains are Law, Nobility, Planning (non-core), and War. I just fudged Protection in because Law and Nobility suck for Ceilia's build and Protection is thematic enough.
Mephistopheles, Lord of Cania. Alignment: LE(?) [Archdevil Asran]
Lawful Evil, yes. Hes actually an Archdevil, not a God, though.
Other gods my characters have followed include:
- Fenmarel Mestarine (FR God of Feral Elves, Outcasts, Scapegoats, and Isolation) Alignment: CN. Domains: Animal, Chaos, Elf (non-core), Plant, Travel. [Eraca Moralta]
- Azuth (FR God of Wizards and Spells) Alignment: LN. Domains: Illusion (non-core), Knowledge, Magic, Law, Spell (non-core). [Kathren Durrol & Aldyrr Starras]
- Tamara (Dragon Goddess of Life, Light, and Mercy - from 3e Draconomicron) Alignment: LG. [Nimbus]
- Beshaba (FR Goddess of Bad Luck, Misfortune, Random Mischief, and Accidents) Alignment: CE. Domains: Chaos, Evil, Fate (non-core), Luck, Trickery. [Annalina Vale]
- Talos (FR God of Destruction, Earthquakes, Storms, Conflagrations, and Vortices) Alignment: CE. Domains: Chaos, Destruction, Fire, Evil, Storm (non-core). [Destra Stormwind]
- Shar (FR Goddess of Darkness, Night, Secrets, Forgetfulness, and Loss) Alignment: NE. Domains: Cavern (non-core), Darkness, Evil, Knowledge. [Indrithia Celeth]
- Ilmater (FR God of Suffering, Martyrdom, Perseverance, and Endurance) Alignment: LG. Domains: Good, Healing, Law, Strength, Suffering (non-core). [Sir Alboreth]
- Dispater (Multi-setting, Archdevil patron of War and Intrigue, Lord of Dis, second layer of hell.) Alignment: Lawful Evil. [Arden Tarmik]
Zevox
El Adelantamiento is a Deity that is not often found outside of his own demiplane, as his sole purpose is to learn and progress.
His ultimate purpose is to unite all schools of magic, divine arcane or whatsoever, under his divine rule.
When he manifests outside of his plane, he is often seen as an old scholar, or priest. One cornerstone of his rulings is:
Whenever you got the chance to learn something new, do it, no matter the costs. This is quite a problem inside the church of El Adelantamiento,
since pacts with demons and other deities are quite common even within the clergy.
Domains: Knowledge, Magic, Madness, Rune
Favored Weapon: Pencils, Crayons and Wax. (Or, if it cannot be helped with books, a Rapier)
he is mad after all, did i mention that? *G*
When the lighting is "dark" as is this week - if 2 opponents tart with LOS to one another (which is what usually happens in the plains) - do they start autospotting each other? iam asking since from the time that they can act - since of the great distance involved - if they want to hide, they can, just not sure what happen until their first action.
I'm pretty sure they need to break LOS before they can start hiding.
There was a discussion about this some time ago but I dont remember the result:
If an attack deals 1d1-3 physical damage and 4d6 acid damage because of dissolving touch, does the "min 1 damage" - rule kick in for the whole damage together, or is there 1 physical damage +4d6 acid?
EDIT: And another question:
How long does the Blindness caused by the Sunbeam spell last? I would guess until either the spell is expended or runs out, correct?
Well with Dissolving touch... it's a touch attack.. and you don't need to do any damage to do 4d6..
Your touch, claw, or bite is corrosive, and sizzling moisture visibly oozes from your natural weapon or hand. You deal 4d6 points of acid damage to any creature or object you touch with your successful melee touch attack.
There was a discussion about this some time ago but I dont remember the result:
If an attack deals 1d1-3 physical damage and 4d6 acid damage because of dissolving touch, does the "min 1 damage" - rule kick in for the whole damage together, or is there 1 physical damage +4d6 acid?
EDIT: And another question:
How long does the Blindness caused by the Sunbeam spell last? I would guess until either the spell is expended or runs out, correct?
I guess the blindness lasts as long as the spell does, as there's no other duration indicated.
re: damage minimums: I think we decided that if a source added an unspecified damage type, thus adding to the base damage of the weapon (e.g. Psionic Weapon or sneak attack), the minimum is applied after adding the bonus damage. If the bonus damage is of a different type (as in this case), the minimum is applied first. So to answer your question, damage would be 1 physical +4d6 acid.
I guess the blindness lasts as long as the spell does, as there's no other duration indicated.
Hmm. I thought it was permanent until cured, but it's not clear from the spell description.
I guess the blindness lasts as long as the spell does, as there's no other duration indicated.
re: damage minimums: I think we decided that if a source added an unspecified damage type, thus adding to the base damage of the weapon (e.g. Psionic Weapon or sneak attack), the minimum is applied after adding the bonus damage. If the bonus damage is of a different type (as in this case), the minimum is applied first. So to answer your question, damage would be 1 physical +4d6 acid.
about the blindness - i think you are wrong about this - or at least the intent wasnt to have a duration of how long the spell lasts.
this spell is fairly powerfull (7th level), but it's duration is also very short (1 round/level or until all beams are xhusted - so can be 4 rounds) - a blindness for 4 rounds is almost useless to me when a 2nd/3rd level spell cause blindness for a permemnent duration, the added 4d6 dmg per hit doesnt seem to give an excuse to lower the duration to a few rounds.
in addition - For example - take the "sunburst" spell - Which is druid 8 and is a slightly stronger/diffrent version of the sunbeam spell also cause some damage and it makes the target blinded. The duration there is "instantanous" and the spell description also doesnt say that how long the blindness lasts. I think it's safe to assume no one thinks the blinded duration here ISNT until cured or the whole blindness thing is meaningless.
i think it's the same for sunbeam - it's obvios (to me) the intent is for it to be permemnet (until cured).
Page 272-273 & 268 – Resurrection and Raise Dead [Addition]
These spell do not work on elves.
It's about time. There's no freaking way anybody in Arvandor is coming back to the Material Plane. For any reason. It's due to be made explicit.
Page 203-204 - Bigby [Substitution]
All reference to Bigby become “Stephen Colbert.” All spells with “Stephen Colbert” in the name have “Doritos” as a material spell component.
They're just fishing for a shout-out on this one.
I remember a few years ago when they did an "april fools" joke on potion mixing. I couldn't for the life of me figure out why it was a joke though, and I used the article in my main games...
@Salratol: Its at 120ft...
btw: this is one of those fights were both tactics dont work that well. Flutterthought is shooting energy pushs into the spell immunity and Enoch failed the concentration check for the invisibility purge while double moving(natural 1). Plus the ogre mage is still stuck in the entangle...
I´ll continue now.
Ah, nuts. I hadn't anticipated that. Well played. But I agree with Salrantol--there's no reason why you can't ride a grappling mount and not be in the grapple yourself.
the problem is, it is illegal to be in a square with someone else who a) is not your mount or b) is not grappling with you.
so either you're IN the grapple, or you are IN an illegal square. since the grapple takes up the whole place your mount is in, you're automatically hedged out if you aren't in the grapple on the end of your turn.
suceeding to join the grapple would be automatic, though, as you can decide to grapple your own mount (and deal subdual damage to it, since it would be your favored target as it allows you to join the grapple automatically - in all other cases you'd need to win an opposed grapple roll)
Alright thats good enough for me now.
btw: this is one of those fights were both tactics dont work that well. Flutterthought is shooting energy pushs into the spell immunity and Enoch failed the concentration check for the invisibility purge while double moving(natural 1). Plus the ogre mage is still stuck in the entangle...
I´ll continue now.
I did have backup plans for if the energy push didn't seem to have an effect--one electric, one fire, then Crystal Shards on the nightmare. I just hope I had time to draw my dorje before getting grappled.
Ah, nuts. I hadn't anticipated that. Well played. But I agree with Salrantol--there's no reason why you can't ride a grappling mount and not be in the grapple yourself.
Well there's that whole thing that says you cannot occupy an opponent's square unless you have one of the exceptions going on... I don't see how a rider would qualify as one of those exceptions.
That would tell me that if a mount is grappling, then the rider must also grapple or otherwise get kicked off the mount.
Q: How does grappling a mounted opponent work?
A: If you grapple someone who is mounted, you join him on the mount. If the mount cannot carry both of you, you are then considered to be grappling your opponoment adjacent to the mount, with the mount having the opportunity to take an AoO unless the attacker has the Improved Grapple feat. If the mount decides to move, the rider falls off unless he wins an opposed grapple check against the attacker, in which case the attacker is moved along with the rider as the mount moves.
The mount is also your enemy and using your arguments the attacker cannot move into the same square with the mount.
If that is true, one of our Courtroom rulings is also invalid:
The mount is also your enemy and using your arguments the attacker cannot move into the same square with the mount.
That ruling was taken directly from RotG articles.
If that is true, one of our Courtroom rulings is also invalid:
The mount is also your enemy and using your arguments the attacker cannot move into the same square with the mount.
that courtroom ruling is invalid anyway - if you start a grapple, you incur an AoO only from the one you are starting to grapple. - no AoOs provoked here, BUT: if you succeed the opposed grapple roll, you incur an AoO from EVERYONE that's standing next to you and threatening your square, since you move out of it in a matter that is neither a 5ft step, nor a withdraw.
so the horse would get an AoO all the time, but it would not be able to foil the grapple.
about joining on the horse in the grapple: i believe this to be a result of the "you move into the attackers square"-rule, which in itself always poses questions like "if a large character grapples a medium character, where do they stand afterwards?" or "if a creature with reach grapple someone, does it get movement for free?"
i really do not appreciate using ROTG articles for coco rules - they seem somewhat random in their decisions...
i specially like that part:
if you grapple in the air, you can end the grapple with a grapple check. if your opponent relies on natural flight and has a minimum forward speed, he immediately free-falls. he can do a CLIMB (!) check to oppose your grapple check in order to stay aboard, and cling onto you.
so why are we suddenly using climb instead of grapple? the author just thought it would make sense. but this is far away from the RAW.
and @lonewolf: i believe that the mount issue is another of those anomalies that cannot be helped. dnd is very good at creating such issues, since it gives lots and lots of options in combat. i hope they did things like grapple way better in 4e. not modifiers or buff/debuffs are what i hate most about 35e - it's the way they always create loopholes in the rules even when they first write them.
i hope they did things like grapple way better in 4e.
This, I can answer: at DDXP, I deliberately attempted a grapple even though it wasn't a very good idea, just so I'd learn how it worked. It's called "grab" instead of "grapple" in 4e. You make a Strength attack against your opponent's Reflex defense; if you succeed, they're immobilized (unable to relocate). They're not restricted in their actions any other way, and neither are you. You stay adjacent to them, not in their square. They can break free with an Athletics check against your Fortitude defense, or with an Acrobatics check against your Reflex defense (or, of course, by killing you, teleporting, etc.).
This, I can answer: at DDXP, I deliberately attempted a grapple even though it wasn't a very good idea, just so I'd learn how it worked. It's called "grab" instead of "grapple" in 4e. You make a Strength attack against your opponent's Reflex defense; if you succeed, they're immobilized (unable to relocate). They're not restricted in their actions any other way, and neither are you. You stay adjacent to them, not in their square. They can break free with an Athletics check against your Fortitude defense, or with an Acrobatics check against your Reflex defense (or, of course, by killing you, teleporting, etc.).
Ah, but can you have your flying mount grapple your opponent? :P
Ah, but can you have your flying mount grapple your opponent? :P
well, obviously - yes. since the new grappling described by mwb does not include moving anywhere. while i would not call that "grappling" like we know it, the mechanics seem much simpler.
well, obviously - yes. since the new grappling described by mwb does not include moving anywhere. while i would not call that "grappling" like we know it, the mechanics seem much simpler.
True--I don't know if there's any mechanism for pinning or otherwise prevent an opponent from moving their arms freely. There may be. Overall, it's much more a judgment call-based game, which is good for TT but bad for us.
Overall, it's much more a judgment call-based game, which is good for TT but bad for us.
i hoped so. nothin worse than sitting at tabletop with half of the players looking over some rules, and the others arguing whether a dragon can do a full attack in a grapple or not. ;)
Any input is most appreciated.
Should I perhaps switch out Augment Summoning for Craft Wondrous Item to load her down with some phat lewt? Edit to add (or how about psionic hole?)
Any Ideas on how she could get a Pisbane weapon sooner? (she really hates Psionics).
Check her out:
http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=13339809&postcount=1200
Anyway - CWI is an obvious choice and will probably give you more usefulness than Augmented Summoning will - even at the early levels. Augmented Summoning is useful though - especially when combined with summon swarm (tougher swarms with higher distraction DCs...) - but the short duration of summons can be annoying. Kraegin compensated for this with the Evil domain (+1 CL) and a rod of Lesser Extend spell that he used up to ~ECL7.
As for the psibane weapon - it looks to me that Bend Reality will be out of your reach - so you'll just have to buy it. This means a +1 weapon with Psibane - +3 total bonus = 18000gp. If you spend most of your cash - you can get it at ECL6-7 - but likely won't be able to afford it until ~ECL8-9.
It might be better to go with a "flavor" psibane weapon as just a bane weapon versus a common psionic enemy (giants (half-giants), aberrations (elans), etc). Since this is only 8000gp as a +1 weapon - that's not too bad - and you could craft it if you pick up CMA&A at 5th.
I can't give more specific info without the rest of the sheet filled out - but looks like a standard conjurer build from what I can tell.
BTW I should of mentioned I don't think breaking LOS and readying an attack is sufficient to catch someone flat footed. I think you would need to be hidden. Any older players know how this is handled typically.
On the readied action sneak attacks: They've worked as long as Shaela's been running. Since LOS has been broken, you're automatically considered hidden until you break/are denied cover or they spot you. They have no chance to spot you on their turn unless they get full LOS. Thus, if they move around a corner, you get to hit them flat-footed. Life's hard enough for a rogue without gimping this. Otherwise, you get what that fight had: Deflect Arrows = Dead Rogue. Also, Touchsight = Dead Rogue, Uncanny Dodge = Dead Rogue, but they don't affect this.
Does this actually work as Callix makes it ? It sounds like an awfully easy method to make someone flat-footed.
@yitzi: hello unknown & welcome back.
hmm.
- in my opinion inspire courage and hide/move silently don't go well together. i don't get why you are taking bard levels, though -
if it is for skill points and perform skill to enter shadowdancer, i'd go rogue instead. - it's not like you can use that many spells with your charisma from the bard, anyway.
It's not for shadowdancer entry, it's for arcane archer entry (2 levels bard will give lvl1 arcane spells) without sacrificing hide/move.
-weapon selection: get a backup greatsword. you're a barbarian, so use something that really makes damage, not like the quarterstaff... basically, with that kind of weapon, if you get based to melee the fight's over. with a bigger weapon you still got a good shot.
Thanks. I suppose a greatsword won't cost too much, I plan to get it later today (before pairings). But I hope not to get based to melee with 50 speed
Thanks. I suppose a greatsword won't cost too much, I plan to get it later today (before pairings). But I hope not to get based to melee with 50 speed
Don't bet on that :D
I've seen guys with 60 ft speed being based :P
I'm considering to have Nordens going on a quest next week april 16 and He would love to have some company.
I don't have a questlord so one of those would be nice
as for goal Nordens could be looking for information on where an artifact of his village is, but anything is in the air.
Nobody?
Don't bet on that :D
I've seen guys with 60 ft speed being based :P
Wlecome back Yitzi - and ill second that comment.
on another note - anyone planning on activating on ECL 13-14 (or 2 peeps in 12) if so ill update My guys there, i think longshot is one win away from being the First ECL 15 char in the CoCo (this incarnation of it anyway).
It's not for shadowdancer entry, it's for arcane archer entry (2 levels bard will give lvl1 arcane spells) without sacrificing hide/move.
Thanks. I suppose a greatsword won't cost too much, I plan to get it later today (before pairings). But I hope not to get based to melee with 50 speed
1) ok, arcane archer - rogue/sorcerer? gives a lot more spells, more skills, even more useful spells (true strike?), and access to a lot more wands and scrolls. ;)
downside: - inspire, asf
upside: +spells
note that i don't believe hide on ecl3 to work at all.
2) well. you only got speed 50. any meleer barbarian could have 40. shoot+single move 50 vs run 160 = based immediately.
shoot+single move 50 vs double 80 = based soon.
with sorcerer you could also take expeditious retreat for such cases...
@dulsi & mucki & callix:
the way i see it, shaela can pull it off like that, IF:
a) she makes her hide check good enough (-4 full speed hiding) and lucifer does not spot her
b) she spots lucifer (since he does not try to hide, i'd auto-grant this though)
=> lucifer only auto-spots if he has complete LoS.
there could be situations like these:
it is clear, that one side has free LoS, the other has cover. you could sneak here, without ever having to apply coco auto-LoS rule.
For now I'm looking for a questlord for [post=12072066]Valanthe[/post] he wants to establish his base of operations again and gain followers. Anybody up for it?
Thanks Sjiggie
@Sjiggie: since there is only one level between Gradak and Nordens they should be able to quest together, if you are interested Nordens will wait a week
the problem here is not that you can't quest together, but which ecl you want to go for.
ecl6 or 7 is both possible - and the difficulties are also like that - easier than normal @ecl6, harder than that @ecl7.
in some weeks i might have time again for questing, but now- sorry, no.
1) ok, arcane archer - rogue/sorcerer? gives a lot more spells, more skills, even more useful spells (true strike?), and access to a lot more wands and scrolls. ;)
downside: - inspire, asf
upside: +spells
The other downsides are BaB (and hence later progression into AA) and multiclass penalties (2 sorc isn't really worth all that much in spells after a while, and any more is way too hard to avoid multiclass penalties.) While the loss of true strike and shield (and mage armor) is inconvenient, I figure this way is better.
note that i don't believe hide on ecl3 to work at all.
It doesn't work so well, but it might be worth something, especially with chameleon. And even if not, it will definitely be valuable later, so I should put in the points now.
2) well. you only got speed 50. any meleer barbarian could have 40. shoot+single move 50 vs run 160 = based immediately.
shoot+single move 50 vs double 80 = based soon.
with sorcerer you could also take expeditious retreat for such cases...
But exp. retreat runs out. And if he does do as you suggest, he won't have an attack left that round, so I can just withdraw to get away. If he keeps running, I can just keep withdrawing (with maybe a 5'+shoot to avoid the 10-round penalty) until he gets tired. And if he doubles...so can I, and just shoot+single once every few rounds.
@Sjiggie: since there is only one level between Gradak and Nordens they should be able to quest together, if you are interested Nordens will wait a week
I do say I'm interested but maybe Gradak will wait till you get to ECL 5 if you want it. You can even go on a quest and reach ECL 5 and then go on another quest with Gradak.
Let me know when you get there and we will see
Sjiggie
PS. Anybody up to be the questlord for Valanthe. For the record I don't want to start with the quest this pairings but maybe the next one if possible.
I do say I'm interested but maybe Gradak will wait till you get to ECL 5 if you want it. You can even go on a quest and reach ECL 5 and then go on another quest with Gradak.
Let me know when you get there and we will see
Sjiggie
fair enough I'll let you know
So I need a questlord for Nordens atarting april 16 if possible, so is there anybody interested?
fair enough I'll let you know
So I need a questlord for Nordens atarting april 16 if possible, so is there anybody interested?
I volunteer. Just let me know the reason for your quest and desired ECL
Boots of Athletics +1
These snug boots have minor enchantments that grant improved traction, assisting in all manner of athletic activities. When worn, they grant a +1 Competence bonus to Balance, Climb, and Jump checks.
CL 1
I was wondering if these could be treated as related abilities, making the cost 300 gp (and therefore affordable) rather than 400 gp (and out of one free activity's worth of gathering)?
1. I've developed a new [post=15606217]character[/post], and would like people's thoughts.
2. I have a couple of questions:
a. I assume that level 20 isn't going to stay frozen forever (unless everybody moves to 4e first, but it sounds like 4e will be less amenable to the min/maxing and pitlord system that charicterize the CoCo, so assuming it doesn't), meaning that eventually we'll have epic characters. I have an idea for a character,and would like to plan for it to work at that point too, but there's one thing that's unclear and can affect things: The epic rules have details for prestige classes and for psionic classes, but not psionic prestige classes. So does that mean those classes won't able to go above level 10 even in epic? Or will they be available, but not grant any feats (so the slayer class, for example, would get another +2 vs. favored enemy every 3 levels and +1 to manifesting class every level, but nothing else)? Or will feat lists and progressions be provided when we reach that point?
b. If someone has, say, a 25% ally penalty, 20% multiclass penalty, and 15% bonus from the political career package, do they have a total of 25+20-15=30% penalty, or is it calculated as .75X.8X1.15=.69 for a 31% penalty, or a mix of the two methods (such as (1-.25-.2)X1.15=.6325 for a 36.75% penalty)?
3. There's an issue I'd like to raise: The rules for acquiring ethereal equipment, as currently written, are broken at higher levels, especially for casters. Let's try an example:
Say we have an ECL 17 ghost sorceror. He has a 3FC, and wins 1 fight and loses 2. He earns 5/3X36,000=60k gold (assume ally penalties and bonuses cancel out). Say he spends 20% on his ally (which is a very high amount) and 10% on his ghost touch weapon (which for a caster is insanely high). He still has 42k gold that can only be spent on ethereal items. Assuming he uses a free activity with each fight to spend some, he still needs about 5 and a half full activities to spend it (he can't use a quest to spend it, as anything aquired there must be covered by the rewards of the quest), meaning that for that 3FC and associated full activities, he was in the arena for 37.5% of the time, not what the CoCo is supposed to be. By crafting (the case the current rules are based on), this isn't an issue, as nobody crafts 70% of their stuff. But here he has no other option. The natural change would be to link the amount bought with actions to the amount of gold gained with each fight, that way it will scale properly. (On a related note, can multiple ethereal buying activities be combined like they can for crafting?)
All penalties/bonuses to rewards are summed together and then applied to the rewards. In your example - 30% penalty is the correct answer.
For your last question - I think lonewolf was touching on this issue in the council - I don't know what became of that issue though. Also - just a minor nitpick:
By crafting (the case the current rules are based on), this isn't an issue, as nobody crafts 70% of their stuff.
Take a look at Kraegin. He has spent ~10kgp on stuff he hasn't crafted; ~95kgp on crafted items.
Ok perfect.. I thought it needed a miniquest anyway ;)
Nordens will find his wolf then
:D
"Donovan the Grey desires able sword handler to partner with for profit in arena. Competence required, will be rewarded with crafting services and monsters.
~D~"
I'm looking for a warrior-type partner. Would be nice if you are capable of using scrolls that I craft for the team- but certainly not required. Donovan is a summoner, so you will likely be able to flank often. [and my love for expandables will ensure you will be buffed thrice over before most combats]
I'm thinking a psi-warrior touch-feat chain[ala kracknol] would be best, though I'm not entirely certain.
I would be financing all quick-crafting black market activities, so we'd be activating every week. Starting level is negotiable, given that I have the credits to start my guy off pretty much anywhere I want.
I left him in the freezer for a while
Check out Gimrel, if you want.. Psi-Warrior touch feats chain
I left him in the freezer for a while
I believe conceptually a melee character would be more suited to donovan. He has the capabilities to slow down opponents, make his partner faster/a flier(eventually), and then provide flanking support. With an archer two of these are less important- and the third is a flat out detriment unless you pick up precise shot.
We'll meet on the battlefield
Actually - I do have an Orc Ranger/Orc Paragon build that I've been fleshing out in my spare time. His focus is on archery - but he'd likely pick up precise shot sooner than later anyways.
Of course - neither of these would use psionics (indeed the first one is an "anti-psionic" character) - and neither would use touch attacks...
EDIT: And for posterity:
I have an ogre designed for ECL6 that would be fine (another anti-psionic character), and a yuan-ti pureblood that I've got most of the way done (also ECL6).
If you go a little higher, I have my hound archon and bralani designed pretty much. And one more beyond that - I even have a barbazu...
Heh, so Ceilia is the only non-Cat character ever to reach that level of PR eh? Cool. Maybe one of these days I'll get around to reactivating her. I should even be able to get a character active again next week, now that I think of it. Hm...
Zevox
Actually both Elrick and longshot had over 2100 at some point, not sure about lorian.
If anyone sends me a message and my PM box is full - blame someone else...
Clearing some messages now.
I thought so too- but there is an elder who suggested that I do it, and I've noticed several other blessed book users doing it. The key here is that wizards get "free pages" on creation. I thought it sounded wonky, but "when in rome..", right?
Yes, but if that is how it works, then I have to criticize you for poor strategic planning for not buying a new spellbook (after selling your old one to craft a blessed book) to put your new free spells in, then copy them into your blessed book and sell the regular spellbook for free money.
Yes, but if that is how it works, then I have to criticize you for poor strategic planning for not buying a new spellbook (after selling your old one to craft a blessed book) to put your new free spells in, then copy them into your blessed book and sell the regular spellbook for free money.
Heh. I thought about that, but decided I was willing to lose out on a few hundred gp if it meant not adding long sections of accounting to my already exhaustive accounting section.
(I am afraid my character sheets might be very telling that two of my majors in college were accounting and systems engineering....documentation, documentation, documentation!
)About this--> Mstwk Cold Iron Guisarme [154.5gp][12 lbs]
My calculation for the cost was as such:
Normal Masterwork Guisarme: 309
Cold-Iron costs double "normal" counterpart
Crafting halfs cost
End result: Cold-Iron Masterwork Guisarme: 309 gp.
So the price should be (9gpx2(cold Iron) + 300gp(Masterwork))/2(crafted)=159gp
I hope my notation made things easy on you. I broke the expendables used by ECL with auditors in mind specifically.
Q: Can a Dragonfire Adept (Dragon Magic p24) use their breath weapon while in a grapple?
A: Page 60 of the Rules Compendium outlines a series of maneuvers that can be used while you are in a grapple. Unfortunately, using a supernatural attack it not one of them. Some Dungeon Masters may allow you to use your breath weapon in the same way you would cast a spell while in a grapple, but you will need to check with your DM to see how they want to handle it.
We will not be observing this ruling. The Rules Compendium is not considered a core source by our standards, and it contradicts the Monster Manual (which does permit the use of a breath weapon in a grapple).
okie. Thank you sal for the audit. I have this theory that if I get an audit now, when I need an audit at ECL12 there won't be as much work for the auditor
I hope my notation made things easy on you. I broke the expendables used by ECL with auditors in mind specifically.
Your record-keeping methods are t3h 0wnz0rz, as it were. It made the audit really easy, and I'm sure it made things easier for you to fix things as well.
Seriously, though, why so many blank lines?
Seriously, though, why so many blank lines?
I honestly don't see much of a difference with or without them. I will continue to try and root them out, though...as soon as this week's fight gets settled. Thorell is currently investigating reports in the inner city about some crazy arsonist terrorizing poor gladius-ans.
I honestly don't see much of a difference with or without them. I will continue to try and root them out, though...as soon as this week's fight gets settled. Thorell is currently investigating reports in the inner city about some crazy arsonist terrorizing poor gladius-ans.
i was thinking about taking other approaches than fire but... well, fire works fine.
i was thinking about taking other approaches than fire but... well, fire works fine.
I know thematically it might be inappropriate, but would you be willing to do a full 3-week quest with thorell once this fight is over? I'd rather avoid monster fights without a storyline backdrop- and ECL7 looks pretty dry right now.
I know thematically it might be inappropriate, but would you be willing to do a full 3-week quest with thorell once this fight is over? I'd rather avoid monster fights without a storyline backdrop- and ECL7 looks pretty dry right now.
sure, but you'd have to come up with a (far-fetched is enough) storyline for that. ;)
grey elf pyromaniac and dwarven melee gish... looks pretty hmm ... strange
sure, but you'd have to come up with a (far-fetched is enough) storyline for that. ;)
grey elf pyromaniac and dwarven melee gish... looks pretty hmm ... strange
Not to mention Thorell's true-good alignment. Perhaps a society of fighter-types that are trying to erradicate all magic/psionic types from existance? [minor cult]
Not to mention Thorell's true-good alignment. Perhaps a society of fighter-types that are trying to erradicate all magic/psionic types from existance? [minor cult]
yeah, that would be cool. we should send darian or lorian to do the job, though.
what about a contest? whoever makes more damage wins.
Show
*verrenpreparestobackstabformorepoints*
yeah, that would be cool. we should send darian or lorian to do the job, though.
what about a contest? whoever makes more damage wins.Show*verrenpreparestobackstabformorepoints*
There's some sort of strange black blot on this post. Weird.
So I guess this is an open request for a Questlord now. Any takers?
Max just leveld to ECL7. Wanna make this a three character quest? It looks like you two guys need a neutral middleman. ;)
Max just leveld to ECL7. Wanna make this a three character quest? It looks like you two guys need a neutral middleman. ;)
max is on fight 2 - thats a bit of a problem, but i could wait those 2 weeks.
Is there any "out of game" reason why why he shouldnt be able to finish his 3FC in the first two encounters of the quest and start a new 3FC with the last encounter?
I see.
Is there any "out of game" reason why why he shouldnt be able to finish his 3FC in the first two encounters of the quest and start a new 3FC with the last encounter?
i believe you can only start quests on F1, since you can use all your powers freely within. if there's any way to get an exception for this, i'd be for it -
but if i remember the rules correctly, you can only quest for a full cycle...
I know I have started a 3-week quest mid-cycle before, and I'd imagine it wouldn't be a problem.
ok - if one does a thing like that - can the one character shop in between? he definitely is limited in his last week by the 3fc... what else to do then?
*curious*
On another note Valanthe (Also ECL7) is still looking for a questlord. He wanted to create his group of followers. But adventuring with Verren and Thorell also sounds amusing. Idea?
Sorry lonewofl- maybe max won't work out....this time.
Valanthe would work out well too.
edit- on the other hand, I'm willing to sit out 1 week if a questlord doesn't appear right away, so maybe Max can just finish out his cycle and then we'll have a nice even group to adventure with. If we're out of cycle we can pick any EL, right? What do you guys think? We have a pretty solid group here, I think - just about the only thing we're missing is healing, but only Thorell lacks the capacity to do that on his own. [though I could through vampric touches & false lifes into the build for questing purposes.]
Plus waiting out a week would save me a credit it would take me to quick-craft scrolls up to full, as well as whatever wondrous item I decide on.
but you dont have to calculate it like that - in coco its actually a lot easier for pcs -
EL = ECL + number of chars
so 4*ECL7 = EL 11
Hmm. Still need to develop a personality for this specific incarnation too.
Given the difficulties of questlording for a 4-player team and some alignment difficulties (Verran is evil, Valanthe is a LG paladin), perhaps it would be better to form two different quests.
Hm..
Given the difficulties of questlording for a 4-player team and some alignment difficulties (Verran is evil, Valanthe is a LG paladin), perhaps it would be better to form two different quests.
i don't think that would be too much of a problem for verren - he'd gladly help valanthe to capture his new slaves...
i don't think that would be too much of a problem for verren - he'd gladly help valanthe to capture his new slaves...
I believe you are thinking of a thrallherd ;)
For those with the white screen problem when trying to open threads try to change your skin to something different then the Wizards Community Default skin. This is helping me as I don't encouter any more white screens for the moment.
Brilliant ...
In other news I think BM and TH are all caught up.
Third, if you want to upgrade a custom item, do you have to pay the full credit cost again, or can you apply the already paid credits (e.g. does upgrading an amulet of natural armor +1 and constitution +2 to an amulet of natural armor +1 and constitution +3 cost 5 credits (for different numerical bonus) or a full 15 (also paying again the cost to combine different items in one slot). Similarly, would it cost credits to upgrade gloves of dexterity +3 to +5?
I'm also wondering if the white screen problem has to do with thread size. It seems to happen most in our Battles thread, which is pushing 2000 (usually) large posts.
Third, if you want to upgrade a custom item, do you have to pay the full credit cost again, or can you apply the already paid credits (e.g. does upgrading an amulet of natural armor +1 and constitution +2 to an amulet of natural armor +1 and constitution +3 cost 5 credits (for different numerical bonus) or a full 15 (also paying again the cost to combine different items in one slot). Similarly, would it cost credits to upgrade gloves of dexterity +3 to +5?
about post size: the way i can see it, it works like this:
- you request a thread
- gleemax looks in its cache and if it does not find something new enough, it requests the page from the used vbb-forum
- vbb processes the request and replies to gleemax
- gleemax puts it into its cache and returns it.
so what can the problems be?
a) you get no updates - caching did not work properly (this was sometimes to be seen when the index page did not update correctly or you could not quote, seems to be fixed nowaday)
b) you get no page - this is most likely to some fixed timeout - when the post size is large(has nothing to do with the actual number of threads, just the characters in the displayed threads), the procedure from above does not return in a timely fashion, and thus gleemax will stall. instead of giving an error message though, they just give you a blank page.
c) huge threads take long to load
- well, this is just because it is a lot of data, after all. 20 battles at once, is like 20*50k characters = 1MB of data to transfer.
about credit costs: +3 to +5 is 5°. that's the way it's handled and i believe it is ok like this.
i believe it would be the same for your custom item, though - as it does not increase it's power any more, i believe it's the same 5°. but rith will have to chime in on that.
Third, if you want to upgrade a custom item, do you have to pay the full credit cost again, or can you apply the already paid credits (e.g. does upgrading an amulet of natural armor +1 and constitution +2 to an amulet of natural armor +1 and constitution +3 cost 5 credits (for different numerical bonus) or a full 15 (also paying again the cost to combine different items in one slot). Similarly, would it cost credits to upgrade gloves of dexterity +3 to +5?
Certainly the +3 -> +5 bonus costs 5 credits (it's been done before). I think it should cost 5 credits for the other example as well, but there's no precedent that I know of.
Also, if you cast a spell from a scroll, can you share it with your familiar?
So upgrading a custom item to another item with the same custom feature requires you to pay full credits again, but upgrading a combined item does not require you to repay the cost for combining items?
Also, if you cast a spell from a scroll, can you share it with your familiar?
@1: the logic behind it is, that you pay for each custom bonus you get. combining it once costs credits. advancing it to another custom bonus costs credits. adding another custom bonus costs credits. but if you upgrade something, it does not really change something of the item's basic properties...
@2: scroll yes, potion no. as long as you are really casting the spell (spell trigger or spell completion items count both) yourself and therefor choosing targets, you can target your familiar as well as share the spell.
@1: the logic behind it is, that you pay for each custom bonus you get. combining it once costs credits. advancing it to another custom bonus costs credits. adding another custom bonus costs credits. but if you upgrade something, it does not really change something of the item's basic properties...
So if you upgraded instead to an amulet of natural armor +1 and constitution and wisdom +2 you would pay 10 credits? And if you upgraded it to natural armor +2 and consitiution +4 it would cost no extra credits?
So if you upgraded instead to an amulet of natural armor +1 and constitution and wisdom +2 you would pay 10 credits? And if you upgraded it to natural armor +2 and consitiution +4 it would cost no extra credits?
all i can further say: ask rith...
ps: your questions sound to me like accusations...
p.s - IMO he can continue it since drawing the weapon isa free action but not 100% sure.
err- nevermind... Natural 1 on the attack roll to disarm (DOH...).
Question - someone charges with a lance (10 reach), someone else readies to disarm while enlarged with spiked chain (20 reach), if he makes the disarm, can the one disarmed quickdraw (he has the feat) a longsword to continue the charge?
p.s - IMO he can continue it since drawing the weapon isa free action but not 100% sure.
err- nevermind... Natural 1 on the attack roll to disarm (DOH...).
Telin is going to hate me ... but same w/ T10 ... since Disarm is an opposed roll ... you can't auto fail on a nat 1.
Telin is going to hate me ... but same w/ T10 ... since Disarm is an opposed roll ... you can't auto fail on a nat 1.
Actually - i think it should autofail - it's still classified as an attack, and in any case i still think he can quickdraw the longsword and continue the attack.
Sometimes the last page can be loaded, and usally I can get the first page to work, but the with the rest, the explorer claims that the loading is done before anyting realy hapons.
Can anyone help?
@ Tunagolem, if you're using the wizzards community default skin try changing it to another skin or reduce the number of post per page to 10 or 20
Apologies for the extended break, but work and TT gaming has been keeping me sufficiently busy (and burned out). But I'm going to try to be putting some time back into the CoCo. I'll try to be catching up on the Elder discussions tomorrow and see if there's any pressing decisions.
So... Anyone in the ECL 13 bracket up for a fight this week?
So I suppose I should check back up on this place.
Apologies for the extended break, but work and TT gaming has been keeping me sufficiently busy (and burned out). But I'm going to try to be putting some time back into the CoCo. I'll try to be catching up on the Elder discussions tomorrow and see if there's any pressing decisions.
So... Anyone in the ECL 13 bracket up for a fight this week?
a 50-50 chance to lose before we even roll init? sure - why not... Ill try to get elrick ready.
TM
Hiya people! Good to see the CoCo still going strong. See you around.
TM
I wouldn't say we're going strong... we're struggling to stick around at this point.
This is something I wanted to bring up anyway: I once again want to urge people to volunteer for some playtest fights. It's become quite possible to create your own characters at this point, even if you don't have a whole lot of options. Or you can take a preview character or two and run with them.
We need to be able to launch our 4e game as soon as is feasible--I'd like to open it up with an Iron Man Tournament starting on July 9. By then, we need to decide how many characters per entry (1, 2, more? or an option?) at the very least. The nice thing about an Iron Man is that we don't need to decide how long a cycle will be ahead of time... it'll be last man (or woman) standing. It would also be nice if we could determine what our needs are in the way of maps.
We had only 25 characters in the arena this week--it wasn't long ago that we had 25 players active weekly, and at its peak the CoCo has had more than 25 characters active at ECL 3 alone and over 100 in total! If we're going to stick around in the face of an edition change and the general atrophy of the WotC forums, we need to get our act in gear. Our big chances this year are the tournaments: Iron Man in July, UnCon this fall sometime. After that we need to start building ourselves back up again with subgames, campaigns, and special events.
I wouldn't say we're going strong... we're struggling to stick around at this point.
This is something I wanted to bring up anyway: I once again want to urge people to volunteer for some playtest fights. It's become quite possible to create your own characters at this point, even if you don't have a whole lot of options. Or you can take a preview character or two and run with them.
We need to be able to launch our 4e game as soon as is feasible--I'd like to open it up with an Iron Man Tournament starting on July 9. By then, we need to decide how many characters per entry (1, 2, more? or an option?) at the very least. The nice thing about an Iron Man is that we don't need to decide how long a cycle will be ahead of time... it'll be last man (or woman) standing. It would also be nice if we could determine what our needs are in the way of maps.
We had only 25 characters in the arena this week--it wasn't long ago that we had 25 players active weekly, and at its peak the CoCo has had more than 25 characters active at ECL 3 alone and over 100 in total! If we're going to stick around in the face of an edition change and the general atrophy of the WotC forums, we need to get our act in gear. Our big chances this year are the tournaments: Iron Man in July, UnCon this fall sometime. After that we need to start building ourselves back up again with subgames, campaigns, and special events.
on that note - i would like to offer again that since we are saying more or less goodbye to 3.5 to do a special tournament, that has the potential to intrest old players and new that was previosly dubbed "the cheese man tournement" - in which each player can make any type of charcter currently allowed under the rules in the ECL decideded (i suggest in the 10-15 range but note that 8th level spells might be an overkill) and we give each charcter a given allowence in credits to use for special options for the charcter (i would say 15-30 that can be used on everything that would be approved today), last man standing wins.
this should give a proper send off for 3.5 and can potentialyl draw new players since when everyone start exacly even it is truly a test of how good someone is at designing and running the charcter.
on that note - i would like to offer again that since we are saying more or less goodbye to 3.5 to do a special tournament, that has the potential to intrest old players and new that was previosly dubbed "the cheese man tournement" - in which each player can make any type of charcter currently allowed under the rules in the ECL decideded (i suggest in the 10-15 range but note that 8th level spells might be an overkill) and we give each charcter a given allowence in credits to use for special options for the charcter (i would say 15-30 that can be used on everything that would be approved today), last man standing wins.
Seconded!
(On a personal note, I haven't been as active here because I've been haunting the paizo.com message boards. Also, I tend to lose interest in characters above level 7 or so because the tactics take so long to write.)
(On a personal note, I haven't been as active here because I've been haunting the paizo.com message boards. Also, I tend to lose interest in characters above level 7 or so because the tactics take so long to write.)
A solution may be to have more separate thread fights. you must find a willing pitlord, though.
Also, I tend to lose interest in characters above level 7 or so because the tactics take so long to write.)
well, i currently have decision problems in equipping lelenia (has around 12-14k to spare in her next discount) and gwerdan (has around 15k to spend), and verren's waiting for quests...
but i'll be back in action soon. nevertheless, two juggling conventions kinda take me out of the picture for 2 weeks each... (one: last weekend, second: 21/5-24/5)
@seperate thread fights: i believe this might be an integral part of how 4e fights should be run - since they have much more tactical options, and less strategic decisions to make. at least at the currently tested levels, there's not much you can do in terms of writing tactics - this far that's what i realised when copy/pasting corrins tactics for the second playtest.
I was going to have 2 playtests this week, both with teams but one with tactics and one with play-by-post, but with Callix out we're short volunteers. Unless someone else wants to pitlord, I guess we'll be doing two play-by-posts this week.
Re: Cheese Man tournament: Meh... I never liked the idea much, but I suppose there are ways of doing it. As long as there's a credit cap and only blackmarket stuff that would be unquestionably allowed is used, it might be manageable. Is anyone other than templer and hogarth interested?
@hogarth: You should get involved in the 4e playtests, then! Tactics clearly don't take long to write.
@hogarth: You should get involved in the 4e playtests, then! Tactics clearly don't take long to write.
I haven't been following 4E stuff very carefully; is there anything other than very bare-bones 1st-level characters available? If not, I might as well stick to making another 3rd-level character for the Core Coliseum (since I know 3.5 rules already).
I'm not a 4E "hater", but I always have a healthy skepticism of anything "new".
Re: Cheese Man tournament: Meh... I never liked the idea much, but I suppose there are ways of doing it. As long as there's a credit cap and only blackmarket stuff that would be unquestionably allowed is used, it might be manageable. Is anyone other than templer and hogarth interested?
I do have some builds I'd like to test out.. most are relics of a few years ago and I'll need some work on those though.
Is anyone other than templer and hogarth interested?
I would be, but it is summer time & I really don't want to give up more time to CoCo right now.
I haven't been following 4E stuff very carefully; is there anything other than very bare-bones 1st-level characters available? If not, I might as well stick to making another 3rd-level character for the Core Coliseum (since I know 3.5 rules already).
I'm not a 4E "hater", but I always have a healthy skepticism of anything "new".
There are some basic rules for character creation, so it's possible to come up with something different from the pregens if you want (I did, you can see them in the playtest thread). As for "bare bones," 1st-level characters are kind of bare-bones by definition.
The best way to challenge skepticism is to give it a try. The way things are going now, I think we either have to adopt 4e in a hurry and make it attractive, or close our doors. Since 4e is an especially cooperative game compared with 3e, we may end up having to do that anyway, but I'd like to at least give surviving a shot. 4e CoCo will have some strengths over 3e, like better balance and simpler tactics (especially at high levels); it may have some weaknesses as well but we'll have to wait and see about those.
Basically, it's do-or-die time for us. If we can't draw in new members by switching to 4e, we're done. That's why I'm asking anyone who cares to contribute to helping with the transition process. The first few months will be the critical ones, when we can draw people in to test out and master the 4e rules. If we're not ready to go in a prompt fashion--at worst, by UnCon--then I'll probably have to tell CM to close the CoCo before the end of the year.
Will GR tag offset the -2 penalty for the familiar?
Can I create a cohort using UA rules?
You can create a cohort with UA rules - but you still need to pay for the customizations (I think there is one example - without looking I would guess it is Owen's cohort - but that's just a guess...)
The "no reach" means that each square of the entangle effect is restricted to the contents of that 5' cube (only).
i have a question about entangle - does it affect a horse (and it's riders) if the horse is just slightly above the ground since the horse has horseshoes of the zephyr?
the ruling about entangle in the courtroom states:
"Q: How does the spell Entangle interact with flying creatures?
A: Entangle is considered to not have any reach, therefore it may only affect those subjects that share it's space. Entangle can therefore affect anything in a 5 ft cube that it has been cast upon. Any flying creature that is hovering above these spaces is going to be affected depending upon their maneuverability rating. Good and Perfect flyers can hover at a height of 5 ft above the ground (or whatever surface the entangle spell has been applied to), and therefore would be outside of the area of affect of the spell (unless they intentionally chose to go closer than 5 ft). Creatures with Average or below maneuverability would be considered to have entered the area of affect if they do not have the ability to hover at 5 ft of height, and therefore would be affected."
the ruling is self contridoctory since it once say that entagle has no reach and in a second place say it affects anything in a 5 foot cube.
as far as i read it - entangle should affect said horse since it only hovering 4 inches above the ground - but i might be wrong - if so - someone correct me please - soon - since it's round 1 of the fight and i don't feel like going back to fix things later.
what happens?
I would guess that if the horse moves and the rider fails his strength/escape artist check, he falls off the horse.
right?
Entangle on a horse + rider. Rider fails the Reflex save, the horse succeeds.
what happens?
I would guess that if the horse moves and the rider fails his strength/escape artist check, he falls off the horse.
right?
Defensive Precognition makes him suceed on the save(+1 is just enough), but it is an interesting question nonetheless. [looking at the roller, (6)+6(ref)+1(defensive precog) = 13, the save DC. Of course- I could be missing something...]
I would probably rule that he needs to do a strength check in order to move- but the horse wouldn't move without him.
edit- of course, if this were tabletop I would say it's nonesense that entangle could affect the rider of a large animal.
edit- of course, if this were tabletop I would say it's nonesense that entangle could affect the rider of a large animal.
on every other map I´d agree, but in the forest IMHO even flyers should be affected by entangle.
Eland would like to see Bedina Cassan approved
Audited - check
Approved - check.
You can't hire her until she appears on the merc roster. I'm sending the PM to pitlords presently.
Question on spelltouched feats. are they legal in CoCo?
Question on spelltouched feats. are they legal in CoCo?
Nope. Only the stuff that's listed in the rules thread is legal in CoCo.
Question on spelltouched feats. are they legal in CoCo?
no, they are not. they are not listed in the allowed UA variants you can buy for credits. I believe that they could be incorporated for the usual 10° as well, but that would have to be elder-decided.
about questing: offer accepted, i'll send you my ideas 'till next weekend.
@Nabuchadnezzer
Seriously, dude. Put audits in sblocks.
@NabuchadnezzerSeriously, dude. Put audits in sblocks.
-Iced
Last Activity: 02-28-08 01:23 AM
Is there a chance that my photo will be added to the gallery? :D
EDIT: I need to make an ECL 5 and an ECL 4 audit in order to get those 10 credits I need, and by next fight I'll pitlord my 1st (I hope easy) fight since I see that pitlords are needed.
Is there anyone ECL 4 or 5 who needs an audit? Tomorrow I'll do at least one of those audits (maybe both)
I sent my photo to scribelords for the gallery, but on scribelords' profile I see:
Last Activity: 02-28-08 01:23 AM
Is there a chance that my photo will be added to the gallery? :D
EDIT: I need to make an ECL 5 and an ECL 4 audit in order to get those 10 credits I need, and by next fight I'll pitlord my 1st (I hope easy) fight since I see that pitlords are needed.
Is there anyone ECL 4 or 5 who needs an audit? Tomorrow I'll do at least one of those audits (maybe both)
Once Ralein (green link in sig, D&D sblock) gets updated for this week, he could use a look-over. He's ECL 6.
I sent my photo to scribelords for the gallery, but on scribelords' profile I see:
Last Activity: 02-28-08 01:23 AM
Is there a chance that my photo will be added to the gallery? :D
EDIT: I need to make an ECL 5 and an ECL 4 audit in order to get those 10 credits I need, and by next fight I'll pitlord my 1st (I hope easy) fight since I see that pitlords are needed.
Is there anyone ECL 4 or 5 who needs an audit? Tomorrow I'll do at least one of those audits (maybe both)
scribelords is gone since gleemax - send it to the current scribelord saurogrenom.
about the credits: i believe you could have some negative credits, especially if you are active like you currently are. if you have 7 or 8 out of the 10, that might be enough already - so if you are a bit short, get your variant nevertheless.
Lelenia (see sig) has not been audited yet - feel free to do so, should be easy credits.
about audits: i found one mistake in your audits - we don't reduce wand pricing due to lowered charges, since it would be an unneccessary pain for the player. you only need to calculate it if you want to sell it.
Just got back home from a pretty extended stay. Looking to maybe get back into CoCo. I'd like to put Emorick Brightstar on the roster. Let me know if there's any significant rules change that would keep him benched. Thanks.
-Iced
Seems fine to me. Welcome back ;)
Just got back home from a pretty extended stay. Looking to maybe get back into CoCo. I'd like to put Emorick Brightstar on the roster. Let me know if there's any significant rules change that would keep him benched. Thanks.
-Iced
looks to me like you paid for your tricks for each of your dogs, but did not list it on your sheet.
second, get some spare arrows between the cycles for your at-home-section, as you can switch it out between fights, there should be no problem with some storekeeping and it saves you the problem if you take part in the shootout and then run out of arrows for your next fight...
scribelords is gone since gleemax - send it to the current scribelord saurogrenom.
about the credits: i believe you could have some negative credits, especially if you are active like you currently are. if you have 7 or 8 out of the 10, that might be enough already - so if you are a bit short, get your variant nevertheless.
Lelenia (see sig) has not been audited yet - feel free to do so, should be easy credits.
about audits: i found one mistake in your audits - we don't reduce wand pricing due to lowered charges, since it would be an unneccessary pain for the player. you only need to calculate it if you want to sell it.
Yep, Crazyartificer did say that to me before fixing his sheet for the others miskates. Now that I know how to deal with wands (never actually sold any), I'll treat them correctly. ;)
I don't know anything about these negative credits... How do they work?
Only now I went back here and be active... I had 0.3 credits left from Christmas or so and made audits yesterday for 5.5 credits...
Thank you for letting me audit your PC's, I'll audit Lelenia first.
Yep, Crazyartificer did say that to me before fixing his sheet for the others miskates. Now that I know how to deal with wands (never actually sold any), I'll treat them correctly. ;)
I don't know anything about these negative credits... How do they work?
Only now I went back here and be active... I had 0.3 credits left from Christmas or so and made audits yesterday for 5.5 credits...
Thank you for letting me audit your PC's, I'll audit Lelenia first.
actually, gwerdan and verren where audited not that long ago. so those two are out of the picture. - well, how do negatives work?
you pay a cost, pitlords sees you are some credits (but not yet in the negatives) short, and you are still allowed to do something that would cost you credits - as long as you don't fall to many credits below zero, it is just assumed you'll work them in sometime later. you don't have any tax or interest to pay - just note that this option is not unlimited if you don't earn credits. this is something not really written down in the rules, but i have seen mwb handle it like this ever since. and it is good like that - not everyone has the time every week to earn all his necessary credits.
Starting May 21st(maybe 28th), [post=15495848]Max[/post] and [post=13597028]Verren[/post] would like to go on a 3-week quest (ECL 9):
RP-Goal: "To defeat a sect of Psion-Haters."
We need a questlord for that one, too.
*bump*
actually, gwerdan and verren where audited not that long ago. so those two are out of the picture. - well, how do negatives work?
you pay a cost, pitlords sees you are some credits (but not yet in the negatives) short, and you are still allowed to do something that would cost you credits - as long as you don't fall to many credits below zero, it is just assumed you'll work them in sometime later. you don't have any tax or interest to pay - just note that this option is not unlimited if you don't earn credits. this is something not really written down in the rules, but i have seen mwb handle it like this ever since. and it is good like that - not everyone has the time every week to earn all his necessary credits.
Thank you for explaining!
Lelenia's audit is up.
You was right, it was really easy (nice and neat sheet!)
With these 3 audits I should have 9.5 credits, plus that 0.3 :D
I'll make another audit while I ask for the UA thing for my red wizard...
If you want to, you could do an audit of Korwald. I think it should also be pretty straightforward.
Thank you too :D
I'll do the audit in the next hour(s). It seems that audits are well welcomed here!
Question: how does the "copy new spells in wizard's spellbook" work with respect to time? Can I copy new spells for free timewise? Or do I have a temporal limit on how many spells I can copy during (or after) the 3FC?
Question: how does the "copy new spells in wizard's spellbook" work with respect to time? Can I copy new spells for free timewise? Or do I have a temporal limit on how many spells I can copy during (or after) the 3FC?
There are no temporal limits on acquired spells.
There are no temporal limits on acquired spells.
actually - there is - sort of - you can't sepnd any cash (other then for crafting stuff) between 3FC's - and learning spells cost cash so you can only do it after ending a 3FC - but then you can learn how many you want.
Thank you for explaining!
Lelenia's audit is up.
You was right, it was really easy (nice and neat sheet!)
With these 3 audits I should have 9.5 credits, plus that 0.3 :D
I'll make another audit while I ask for the UA thing for my red wizard...
about some things on my sheet: i don't deduct price and value from arrows or similar things unless they are completely gone. i also don't put them into my used items list for the same reason - makes accounting easier.
i bought 60+60 arrows before fight 1, 60 of them are gone for good - you'd need to check some fights more thoroughly, though, to find them used arrows - some pitlords really neglect this part of the summary. (i just took all the arrows and deducted them, since i don't like that arrow counting anyway)
about glitterdust and see invis, though: it is illegal to delete items you used in your 3FC - she's between fight 2 and 3. you are required to use strikethroughs between fights. Also i had 2 tanglefoot bags, the one listed in the summary is not the one listed with strikthrough on the sheet above.
well, you can learn spells anytime between your 3FCs, not in cycle. else you'Re good to go 200 spells between fight 3 and 4 if you like to, but i'd rather advise you not to. ;)
about some things on my sheet: i don't deduct price and value from arrows or similar things unless they are completely gone. i also don't put them into my used items list for the same reason - makes accounting easier.
i bought 60+60 arrows before fight 1, 60 of them are gone for good - you'd need to check some fights more thoroughly, though, to find them used arrows - some pitlords really neglect this part of the summary. (i just took all the arrows and deducted them, since i don't like that arrow counting anyway)
about glitterdust and see invis, though: it is illegal to delete items you used in your 3FC - she's between fight 2 and 3. you are required to use strikethroughs between fights. Also i had 2 tanglefoot bags, the one listed in the summary is not the one listed with strikthrough on the sheet above.
I checked twice the text of the fights in which arrows used weren't listed to make up the total and I actually counted less than 60 and wrote that... about striked items, I read the audit sample on 1st page and there it's suggested to move used items out from expendables... maybe I read bad, but if it's not legal I won't complain about striked things anymore ;)
maybe I read bad, but if it's not legal I won't complain about striked things anymore ;)
well, you should actually remove those in between fights entirely - but to be honest, i don't see the reason with arrows. basically, i don't even see the reason behind arrows even needing accounting.
well, you should actually remove those in between fights entirely - but to be honest, i don't see the reason with arrows. basically, i don't even see the reason behind arrows even needing accounting.
I think that arrows should be counted for load though... but I see the point :D
I should have my 10 credits now, thanks to all who let me make the audit (and learn how to do them well - I hope).
Tomorrow I'll try to learn how to pitlord for my 1st fight, I hope that it will be not too difficult
If anyone else wants to run an audit, Flutterthought is due, especially considering she just got a cohort.
when i read this, i really thought you'd take another pixie...
when i read this, i really thought you'd take another pixie...
It was tempting, but no. One pixie is madness enough. I opted for a cheese-meister meat shield.
I'm PMing pitlords, please let me know if you like my wizard or you have any advice for him
cheers :D
It was tempting, but no. One pixie is madness enough. I opted for a cheese-meister meat shield.
Half-Dragon Grig eh? I knew somebody would copy my idea eventually - those things are just NASTY!
Starting May 28th, [post=14446062]
Starting May 21st(maybe 28th), [post=15495848]Max[/post] and [post=13597028]Verren[/post] would like to go on a 3-week quest (ECL 9):
RP-Goal: "To defeat a sect of Psion-Haters."
We need a questlord for that one, too.
*bumpedagain*
And now the questions:
1) Am I understanding right that you can't get an elite animal until Level 4 since an elite animal's CR is 1 higher than a standard animal?
2) Can a gun (musket specifically) be made of darkwood or mithril to decrease its weight?
If the ally has an ECL, the maximum ECL is ECL-2 or 1 (whichever is greater). At ECL4, you could have an ECL2 ally (theoretically - technically you can't because you can't hire mercs until ECL5...)
I would allow either darkwood or mithril to reduce the weight of the musket (not both obviously).
EDIT:
RAW I think that he can, but maybe there is a houserule here that states otherwise.
From the SRD:
Creating Magic Items
To create magic items, spellcasters use special feats. They invest time, money, and their own personal energy (in the form of experience points) in an item’s creation.
Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created. Most of the time, they take the form of spells that must be known by the item’s creator (although access through another magic item or spellcaster is allowed).
If we (Vitellio and I) make a party of 2, can his PC use my PC's craft feats to make his scrolls/whatever?
EDIT:
RAW I think that he can, but maybe there is a houserule here that states otherwise.
From the SRD:
You can use your craft feats to make any item you can make, at his expense, for his character. You can't use your wizard's Scribe Scroll feat to make his cleric a scroll of spiritual weapon, though, for example.
I have another question...
If we make a party by next week, my character will have a net loss of his expendables he'll use this fight, with no gain in XP and gp since vitellio's PC starts at 3200 xp and I will lose xp's and gp's gained in my first fight.
Can I just use my charactar as he was at creation to make the party?
Thanks for the answer!
I have another question...
If we make a party by next week, my character will have a net loss of his expendables he'll use this fight, with no gain in XP and gp since vitellio's PC starts at 3200 xp and I will lose xp's and gp's gained in my first fight.
Can I just use my charactar as he was at creation to make the party?
just write up a post in the training hall that you want to reset your character - should be fine.
also, i believe it would be very problematic bookkeeping for a team to be on different parts of their 3fcs... (as the one can craft while the other can't, and for the next fight, you could not even use the newly crafted items...)
Good day fellow travelers.
My name is Vitellio, and I come from the distant lands of Italy.
I was thinking about entering the Core Coliseum, counseled by Nabuchadnezzar. I had a character concept in mind, but I stumbled upon an unclear ruling.
Before proceeding, I was advised by my compatriot to seek your opinion on the matter.
I wanted to introduce a Druid, with a Camel companion. When going into grapple, he(my camel is sensitive about being addressed with a it) must proceed with a touch attack. I say that the malus on his bite attack, given that the grapple check is made with an unarmed attack, is not taken in consideration. My friend argues the contrary. Which one of us is right?
Thank you for your attention.
Benvenuto sul Core Coliseum ;)
just write up a post in the training hall that you want to reset your character - should be fine.
also, i believe it would be very problematic bookkeeping for a team to be on different parts of their 3fcs... (as the one can craft while the other can't, and for the next fight, you could not even use the newly crafted items...)
Thank you, I'll ask there, but first I'll wait that Vitellio readies his character ;)
I didn't expect him to subscribe here, else I would have waited him :D
EDIT:
@CrazyArtificer: Italian warriors are descending on CoCo :D
Thanks for the answer!
I have another question...
If we make a party by next week, my character will have a net loss of his expendables he'll use this fight, with no gain in XP and gp since vitellio's PC starts at 3200 xp and I will lose xp's and gp's gained in my first fight.
Can I just use my charactar as he was at creation to make the party?
What I would probably do is to just make a copy of the character to be part of the party and keep the current copy as a solo character.
Otherwise, yeah, just post a request in the Training Hall to reset him to initial conditions to join a team.
@sal: his problem are the credits, since he wants to keep that variant he purchased without having to pay them again -> copy would not be possible.
generally, i would not try out a team as first characters in the current environment - but we'll see how it goes.
@sal: his problem are the credits, since he wants to keep that variant he purchased without having to pay them again -> copy would not be possible.
Exactly, credits are the issue...
But if we are in State of Emergency, we can have only 1 PC active, so the 1st character may be the only one active and I wish that Abazilar will always be active... :D
Besides, I invited Vitellio to join here months ago when I first played here and I talked him this way "why not build a 2-PC's party if we both go there?"
Well, he declined that time, but now he surprised me and both of us will be glad to make a group.
He wants to play a druid (even solo) and I want to play a specialist wizard (even solo, that's why Abazilar was born), but I don't like to make duplicates and Abazilar seems indeed the right wizard to couple with him. I tried to think about a non-red wizard specialist, or a psion... but really want to play with Abazilar, so I'll try out the team with my conjurer.
I.e. could you polymorph into a 7 HD Sahaugin assuming 7th caster level, and thus be a large sahaugin (with the associated increases in strength, con, natural armor, reach, etc?).
Since I believe people do that with dragons, I think its fine, but just wanted to confirm it was true for any creature. Thanks.
Here's a really dumb question: Can you polymorph into a creature with extra HD?
I.e. could you polymorph into a 7 HD Sahaugin assuming 7th caster level, and thus be a large sahaugin (with the associated increases in strength, con, natural armor, reach, etc?).
Since I believe people do that with dragons, I think its fine, but just wanted to confirm it was true for any creature. Thanks.
No; the spell description says you turn into a typical representative of that creature type and the FAQ (I believe) clarifies you cannot polymorph into an advanced (or templated) version of a creature. If there's a creature with two different MM entries (like barghest + greater barghest, or various dragon age categories, or umber hulk + truly horrid umber hulk), then you can polymorph into any one of those.
Also, why not starting as bard? (Much) more skill points at the expense of 1-2 hp's
Did think about starting as a bard, but her will loos 2 hp (I know not much) and some skill in Ride and Handle animals, to gain alot of skills that I don't know where to put and that I don't think I will be able to work on because of lack of skill points (irony), if however you have an idea as to where to put the skills to good us I'm all ears
put bard cross-class into ride and handle animal, if you need to. you'll still end up with more skills. especially tumble is always useful...
also, you need to have cha 11 to be able to cast level 1 bard spells, and you need cha 12 to have them available at bard 2 already. if you don't want to have more bad levels, you should maybe go sorcerer instead - 2 cantrips and inspire courage make all those extra spells you gain seem pretty worthless...
put bard cross-class into ride and handle animal, if you need to. you'll still end up with more skills. especially tumble is always useful...
also, you need to have cha 11 to be able to cast level 1 bard spells, and you need cha 12 to have them available at bard 2 already. if you don't want to have more bad levels, you should maybe go sorcerer instead - 2 cantrips and inspire courage make all those extra spells you gain seem pretty worthless...
hhmm good idea yes I think I'll go with sorcerer
I'm thinking about a gnome illusionist with shadow shaper special ability to play as single character (or maybe to couple with vitellio's PC instead of Abazilar, if I am pleased with the gnome)
Can I use ventriloquism to make verbal components of spells seem to come from another place?
Yes and no.
Ventriloquism allows you to create the illusion (figment) of speech coming from elsewhere. So you could certainly create an auditory figment that sounds like someone casting a spell; it'd probably require a Bluff check to sound convincing. But note that Ventriloquism doesn't have any effect on the noises you actually make in reality (as far as I can tell), so if you cast a spell the verbal component still issues from your location.
I think the best you could do is make it sound like verbal components are coming from two different places at once.
Yes and no.
Ventriloquism allows you to create the illusion (figment) of speech coming from elsewhere. So you could certainly create an auditory figment that sounds like someone casting a spell; it'd probably require a Bluff check to sound convincing. But note that Ventriloquism doesn't have any effect on the noises you actually make in reality (as far as I can tell), so if you cast a spell the verbal component still issues from your location.
I think the best you could do is make it sound like verbal components are coming from two different places at once.
Uhm, real ventriloquism works differently ;)
But I slept on it and I won't play another wizard. Instead, a roguish-assassin-ranged character.
I am undecided though, shall I make a (variant fighter feat) rogue 4 - psychic warrior 1 - assassin 2 - shadowdancer 1 - assassin +N or shall I make a (variant fighter feat) rogue 4 - psychic warrior 1 - assassin N?
Or maybe a a (variant fighter feat) rogue 4 - psychic warrior 2 - assassin 1 - shadowdancer 1 - assassin +N to take one of said useless feat?
The 1st would take HiPS at 8th but requires 3 more "useless" feats, while the 2nd would take HiPS at 13th and has the most feat freedom.
In case you can't tell, I'm considering another rogue, and UMD looked like a good way to get a range of useful effects until I found those rules. Personally, I think the expendables cap, 3FC and the high DCs of UMD make it hard enough to pull off. I'm not expecting the rules to change now. I'm just having a whinge.
@Callix: Isn't scroll limits based on ECL rather than CL?
Is it just me, or do the scroll cap rules completely wreck UMD? If you need UMD to use the scroll, then you can't use one above CL 2, as your CL for the spell is 0.
In case you can't tell, I'm considering another rogue, and UMD looked like a good way to get a range of useful effects until I found those rules. Personally, I think the expendables cap, 3FC and the high DCs of UMD make it hard enough to pull off. I'm not expecting the rules to change now. I'm just having a whinge.
Actually, there is a rule to let you get around this. Your effective CL if you have UMD is your total modifier -10. So, if you have 5 ranks, a CHA of 16, Magical Affinity, and Skill Focus (Use Magic Device), you can get up to CL 3 items.
Actually, there is a rule to let you get around this. Your effective CL if you have UMD is your total modifier -10. So, if you have 5 ranks, a CHA of 16, Magical Affinity, and Skill Focus (Use Magic Device), you can get up to CL 3 items.
Thank you. I'll get to work on it right away.
EDIT: What about synergy bonuses? There's up to +4 in synergies for scrolls; can I count them?
@callix: may i point you to the rules:
In case of Use Magic Device, you use your total skill value-10 to determine the CL (eg UMD+13 = CL 3).
Since it is not ranks, but total value, you could have
6 ranks + 2 synergy (4 later as your cc spellcraft hits 5 ranks @ecl7) + 4 cha + 2 feat + 1/2 item (blackmarket) = up to CL 6 scrolls @ecl3. i believe maxing out like that is not necessary, though.
6 ranks, 2 synergy, 3 cha, 2 item would be enough to fit into your cap anyway. And since your caster level is 0, you could get cl 2 scrolls anytime, so you might not even need the item from the start.
-edit: ninja'd again. why do i even take the time to elaborate on such topics?
Someone needs an Audit? I need 6° so I can do 2-3 audits ;)
@Callix: Isn't scroll limits based on ECL rather than CL?
It's based on both. You are limited to expendables with a CL no greater than your ECL. You are limited to scrolls/powerstones with a CL no greater than your CL + 2. This is to stop characters with 1-level dips in classes from gaining access to higher-level spells from those classes, basically, because those would really skew the power level of such a character out of proportion to the level of investment in the class.
EDIT: What about synergy bonuses? There's up to +4 in synergies for scrolls; can I count them?
Yes.
-edit: ninja'd again. why do i even take the time to elaborate on such topics?
Don't feel too bad, you simul-ninja'd me on answering Nabuchadnezzar.
When using the Rob Store free activity, can you take an expendable that would cause you to exceed your cap?
Also, @WB: while maxing out your UMD for gaining high-CL scrolls is a little redundant, it is very useful if your scrolls are ever used for more than just buffing.
Whoops. One more question: Assassins and bards ingore ASF for light armor. Do Assassin/Bard scrolls do the same?
Whoops. One more question: Assassins and bards ingore ASF for light armor. Do Assassin/Bard scrolls do the same?
No, since it is a feature of the class, and not the spells.
If I ignite them in round 1 (for instance using a tindertwig), do I gain concealment in that same round?
How long does the smoke last?
No, since it is a feature of the class, and not the spells.
so: if a bard uses scrolls, he ignores it. if a rogue uses bard scrolls, he has asf. ;)
so: if a bard uses scrolls, he ignores it. if a rogue uses bard scrolls, he has asf. ;)
Absolutely. Otherwise, you could buy sorcerer/wizard spell scrolls, and, as long as they had a CL high enough, claim that they were scribed by battle sorcerers, so you don't get ASF from light armor. Which gets a little bit silly.
The old map I scanned in has been added to the quest maps. Not sure if anyone would want to use it. It is called the Silent Tower. (Telin probably remembers it.)
If anyone has any features they want on the mapper let me know.
If I have a masterwork armor, can it be enchanted by NPC's? For what price / time?
It takes no time, and the price is the difference in market value (so 1000 gp to upgrade armor to +1). Same goes for upgrading the armor from, say, +1 to +2.
It takes no time, and the price is the difference in market value (so 1000 gp to upgrade armor to +1). Same goes for upgrading the armor from, say, +1 to +2.
Thank you :D I feared that it would've taken 1 week per 1000 gp of difference in value
Given that the monster entry does have scent listed - it seems to me an error in the "as characters" section (and tables overrule text don't they - I can never remember that)... That and scent is remarkably difficult to use - so I would have little issue with it...
Someone needs an Audit? I need 6° so I can do 2-3 audits ;)
@Callix: Isn't scroll limits based on ECL rather than CL?
If you're still looking for Audits, feel free to hit up [post=9998566]Valen Sky[/post]. He could probably use one, although be warned it'll probably be alot of effort. He's seen 44 fights.
I'm going to have to ask again: Can the Rob Store action get you a temporery expendable in excess of your expendables cap?
My guess would be that it can exceed your cap, but looking through the rules of gladius, its not clear one way or the other. As I'm not one of the people who designed the free action, I'm not sure of the intent. But that interpretation would make the most sense to me.
I'm going to have to ask again: Can the Rob Store action get you a temporery expendable in excess of your expendables cap?
speaking of money, it should be possible to do so (else, the activity would not make that much sense)
speaking of CL or blackmarket items - i believe this is impossible - you are still only allowed legal items for your character.
speaking of money, it should be possible to do so (else, the activity would not make that much sense)
speaking of CL or blackmarket items - i believe this is impossible - you are still only allowed legal items for your character.
The legality is fine; it's just a money issue. Another 75gp scroll per fight can be very useful, especially when it's Shield of Faith (+3, 30 mins).
The legality is fine; it's just a money issue. Another 75gp scroll per fight can be very useful, especially when it's Shield of Faith (+3, 30 mins).
Cheesy :D
Cheesy :D
I'm making UMD DC 23, Open Lock +11 and Sleight of Hand +9 to do it. I consider that "jumping through enough hoops"
Oh, and my bad. It's every six CLs, so I only get a free +2 Defelction to AC. Still half an hour, though.
I'm going to have to ask again: Can the Rob Store action get you a temporery expendable in excess of your expendables cap?
Sure; it's a freebie.
I'm making UMD DC 23, Open Lock +11 and Sleight of Hand +9 to do it. I consider that "jumping through enough hoops"
Oh, and my bad. It's every six CLs, so I only get a free +2 Defelction to AC. Still half an hour, though.
I didn't mean to sound offensive. I actually like so much the cheesiness of the idea that I'm building a character around that as well.
A question: for Rob Store purposes do you include ACP in the Sleight of Hand check?
I didn't mean to sound offensive. I actually like so much the cheesiness of the idea that I'm building a character around that as well.
A question: for Rob Store purposes do you include ACP in the Sleight of Hand check?
i'd say so. since you rob your store in the equipment you'll come to the arena with, there'll be no time for you to equip your armor else. (you might get caught if you take to much time...)
else you could have all kind of packages that rely on skill booster items which are not actually worn - Lelenia would be one of the first to utilize such a constellation. ;)
i'd say so. since you rob your store in the equipment you'll come to the arena with, there'll be no time for you to equip your armor else. (you might get caught if you take to much time...)
else you could have all kind of packages that rely on skill booster items which are not actually worn - Lelenia would be one of the first to utilize such a constellation. ;)
Makes sense. Guess that robbing in Full Plate is not a good idea.
I'm making UMD DC 23, Open Lock +11 and Sleight of Hand +9 to do it. I consider that "jumping through enough hoops"
Oh, and my bad. It's every six CLs, so I only get a free +2 Defelction to AC. Still half an hour, though.
Shield of faith is 1 min / level only, is it extended and cast at 15th caster level?
I've finally readied my pc, and it's [post=15938433]here[/post]
What do you think about him? any errors/mistakes? Anything to correct?
Vitellio, the newbie^_^
Ok people.
I've finally readied my pc, and it's here
What do you think about him? any errors/mistakes? Anything to correct?
Vitellio, the newbie^_^
You can remove the skills which you aren't using, except for the ones required from the standard sheet. It's actually better to do that, as shorter sheets are better.
Beside that, your character isn't handsome for sure :D
EDIT: it would be better also to include CL along each spell in a scroll. I know they are all the same CL, but it's easier to check that way.
Is it better to switch the fighter level to complete the human paragon progression? Any tip?
She should be a tactical warrior, so focused mainly on tripping/disarming/bull rushing.
If you're still looking for Audits, feel free to hit up [post=9998566]Valen Sky[/post]. He could probably use one, although be warned it'll probably be alot of effort. He's seen 44 fights.
Only half day :D
[post=15953889]Here[/post] it is.
Nice sheet! ;)
Do you have any advice for him?
I ended up not planning for a dip in Shadowdancer... Assassins get HiPS at level 8 anyway and I would lose a feat and 5 skill points in the short run and a whole level in the long run.
Toying with the idea of a new character as well.
Is it better to switch the fighter level to complete the human paragon progression? Any tip?
She should be a tactical warrior, so focused mainly on tripping/disarming/bull rushing.
Kinda nice. I'm going pure rogue with my version, and getting some stealth/nova spells. Also avoiding ACP. But this works; Bull's Strength is at least a 2-of.
If you want to avoid ASF, you're going to need to use Divine scrolls. Since you can't routinely emulate Wis 12+, you're probably going to lose some actions to another 25% fail chance. Hell, I'm planning to invest in Wisdom for low levels, and I'm using Mithril Chain!
Only half day :D
[post=15953889]Here[/post] it is.
Nice sheet! ;)
Sweet, thanks!
Although I disagree with one point. Rangers are only proficient in Light armor and shields according to the 3.5 SRD.
Also, I don't suppose you saw an additional 8 xp floating around somewhere...
After Valen's current fight he's going to be short of level 14 by 8 xp. If he wins his next fight, I think he loses more than the value of the consumables he's used for his entire career. About 2,785.77. (Because he'd be getting xp for 14th level at the 13th level gp rate.)
Sweet, thanks!
Although I disagree with one point. Rangers are only proficient in Light armor and shields according to the 3.5 SRD.
Also, I don't suppose you saw an additional 8 xp floating around somewhere...
After Valen's current fight he's going to be short of level 14 by 8 xp. If he wins his next fight, I think he loses more than the value of the consumables he's used for his entire career. About 2,785.77. (Because he'd be getting xp for 14th level at the 13th level gp rate.)
You can always check for rounding errors. We have a couple of pitlords who erroneously use the XP/GP ratios when they should just use the base values, and I bet there are some who round ally modifiers as well. Of course, that could send your XP either up or down, but it might be worth a look.
Valen brought Lightning, his light warhorse (CR 1) to the 1st and 3rd fights (the middle fight he had to decend into the temple and was horse-less). I believe that should be a 5% modifier for the 1st and last fights on a CR 7 reward (or technically 6 and 4) of 2100. 2100*0.95 = 1995, not 1,969 as listed.
This would be an extra 26*2 = 52 xp Valen is owed?
Also, the gold also seems off. It should be 2,600 * 0.95 = 2470 for the 1st and last fights, and should be a straight 2,300 for the middle fight (2,600 - 300). That should be an extra 113 gp? (48+48+17).
@Hirm: yea those rewards look off.
Can anyone find the line where it says if you fall and take falling damage you end up prone? I've looked ...
Kinda nice. I'm going pure rogue with my version, and getting some stealth/nova spells. Also avoiding ACP. But this works; Bull's Strength is at least a 2-of.
Yes, I had the impression you were going rogue so I wanted something different. Stealing you an idea is ok, stealing the whole concept is too dirty :P
If you want to avoid ASF, you're going to need to use Divine scrolls. Since you can't routinely emulate Wis 12+, you're probably going to lose some actions to another 25% fail chance. Hell, I'm planning to invest in Wisdom for low levels, and I'm using Mithril Chain!
I admit I didn't consider this aspect. Unfortunately I cannot really increase Wisdom without losing hp or weakening other aspects of the build.. I guess Owl's wisdom would be a no-brainer at higher levels.
It would be probably better to switch to Use Psionic Devices :P
Sweet, thanks!
Although I disagree with one point. Rangers are only proficient in Light armor and shields according to the 3.5 SRD.
Also, I don't suppose you saw an additional 8 xp floating around somewhere...
After Valen's current fight he's going to be short of level 14 by 8 xp. If he wins his next fight, I think he loses more than the value of the consumables he's used for his entire career. About 2,785.77. (Because he'd be getting xp for 14th level at the 13th level gp rate.)
Uhm, true, rangers are proficient with light armor only... for a reason I am not able to specify, I was looking at old 3.0 rangers :D
never mind since a slayer is already proficient with heavy armor...
I recalculted the xp total... I found a two more mistakes in your rewards copied from the wrap-ups (I listed them)... that's an even bigger increase in xp (and gp) earned in fights, if you win, you'll surely level-up...
@Hiru/Neb: Also Deep Crystal is masterwork, DC is an extension of Mundane Crystal, which is treated as Masterwork.
@Hirm: yea those rewards look off.
Can anyone find the line where it says if you fall and take falling damage you end up prone? I've looked ...
Uhm.. yes, I read DC but not mundane crystal. I thought that mundane crystal was mundane indeed.
What's to do when 2 players want to make a party? We need both to send a pm to pitlords to advise "hey, there is a new party of two!"? Two different tactics for fights or one whole tactic for both?
I'm waiting for two approvals in the training hall for my two characters in order to play tomorrow, I hope that the approvals will come soon
What's to do when 2 players want to make a party? We need both to send a pm to pitlords to advise "hey, there is a new party of two!"? Two different tactics for fights or one whole tactic for both?
you're free to do with tactics as you please. i'd advise you to send only one tactics, makes misunderstandings (both between the players and for the pitlord) less likely.
about putting the team on the roster: yeah, just send a pm (one is enough) to pitlords with the links to the characters forming the team. as they are both fresh characters, this should really be not an issue.
@training hall etc: was a long weekend for americans, looked it up after rith told me so: memorial day.
you're free to do with tactics as you please. i'd advise you to send only one tactics, makes misunderstandings (both between the players and for the pitlord) less likely.
about putting the team on the roster: yeah, just send a pm (one is enough) to pitlords with the links to the characters forming the team. as they are both fresh characters, this should really be not an issue.
@training hall etc: was a long weekend for americans, looked it up after rith told me so: memorial day.
Abazilar isn't really fresh since he has done his first fight [post=15955011]yesterday[/post] and I'm unsure on how to deal with spells and expendables I used in that fight.
I think that since we start a new 3FC from 3000 xp I should restart from scratch, with no xp gained, no gold gained, no expendables and no spells used. That's why I'm waiting for approval
@memorial day: sure, now I realize... that's ok then.
question - i know that having an animal taught combat riding makes it proficient with armor - i just can't find where it's written - can anyone point me in the right direction please?
Under "Types & Subtypes" -> "Animal":
Proficient with no armor unless trained for war.
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#animalType
Q: What is "trained for war?" With regard to animal's that have this wording within their stats.
A: Trained for war is synonymous with the Combat Riding package.
She's a bit poorer, and I got a doubt on Weapon Finesse as a bonus feat for a PC pixie.. beside that, nice sheet and quick audit.
Flutterthought audit is up
She's a bit poorer, and I got a doubt on Weapon Finesse as a bonus feat for a PC pixie.. beside that, nice sheet and quick audit.
It is in the MM Errata ... there is a general 'Weapon Finesse' errata on one of the first pages.
It is in the MM Errata ... there is a general 'Weapon Finesse' errata on one of the first pages.
Yes, it's there.
so the only issue is about ~200 gp and craft skills (others) which should be increased to +8..
Hi guys! Just popped in to see if things are still going on around here. Haven't had much time for..well, for anything.
:D
About 90% of the CoCo is in the same situation.. things are still going and I'm sure MWB or someone else will explain anything better than me, but basically we are going to test 4th editon and if we can't get enough new players the CoCo will close down
Owen is casting a spell that costs him 1000xp. According to two different places I spend
a) 5gp per 1 xp (Misc: Meta rules -> House rules)
b) ECL ratio per 1xp (Rules of Gladius: Races and Classes -> XP Loss Houserules)
c) both?
d) The greater of the two?
When Telin did his summoning w/ Kraegin he just used option B
Question regarding house rules and xp usage from spells
Owen is casting a spell that costs him 1000xp. According to two different places I spend
a) 5gp per 1 xp (Misc: Meta rules -> House rules)
b) ECL ratio per 1xp (Rules of Gladius: Races and Classes -> XP Loss Houserules)
c) both?
d) The greater of the two?
When Telin did his summoning w/ Kraegin he just used option B
Option B should be correct. I'll change it in the meta rules section.
I don't use psionics much, so I'm constantly surprised by some of the stuff I find there
Can a wizard cast a spell from a scroll and share the spell with his animal companion? or cast the scroll spell on his animal companion even if it has range: personal?
Yes and yes.
I had a look at your character and it seems ok for a game rule perspective.
The only isse I've seen is with pp. It's ok to break down PP/fight the way you do, but as you can spend 2 at most in each fight, if you avoid spending them both you could have 2 pp also in the third fight.
For other tips one should at least give a general idea of the kind of character you want to play.
As for the kind of character, well, this one's just a concept I thought up while looking at some of the threads. He probably won't do well against casters, but if he can get to within melee range of anything using a weapon, anything they're holding is in danger.
Why you have such a low strength? Dropping Cha a bit could bring you to Str 16, unless you need it for some reason.
I assume you're going to take Focused Sunder soon, but why not switch it with Reckless offense?
Also, given how Sundering works, Expansion could be a good power later. You can already buy Expansion powerstones augmented to 3 pp (which will then last 3 minutes, enough for most fights) giving you an additional +5 on Sunder attempts (size bonus and strength increase). One costs 150 gp though, so you may only afford one in your expendables cap.
also, the archmage has another nifty power making more than up for reaining hit points and surges... arcane spirit form is really more powerful (for a wizard, that is)
well, for one, you get it 5 levels earlier, which is quite some time. (50 fights)
also, the archmage has another nifty power making more than up for reaining hit points and surges... arcane spirit form is really more powerful (for a wizard, that is)
1. Only one of them is lvl 21.
2. I don't know the rest of the Trickster's Features. Aren't they worth anything?
1. Only one of them is lvl 21.
2. I don't know the rest of the Trickster's Features. Aren't they worth anything?
sure they are - 3/day reroll, and at level 30 you can force the DM to declare one rolled d20 roll as a natural 1.
still, i believe a wizard should not go for that.
sure they are - 3/day reroll, and at level 30 you can force the DM to declare one rolled d20 roll as a natural 1.
still, i believe a wizard should not go for that.
i agree.. trickster is more along the lines of a Rouge or warlock thing to me..
What's the point of Archmage's Features: Spell Recall, Archspell and Shape Magic, if one can simply be a Deadly Trickster and get Epic Trick at lvl 26?
The other part of epic trick ... is that it is an 'or' statement, not an 'and' statement.
In that case the epic trick's option of restoring all spell would've been stronger.
BTW, will I get the birthday credits eventhough the week didn't count?
2nd BTW, what haponed to Gleemax today?
BTW, will I get the birthday credits eventhough the week didn't count?
2nd BTW, what haponed to Gleemax today?
Speaking of Birthdays.. Mine is on the 22nd.. i could use some credit to get a little out of the hole i got into... LOL
1. Click on the link for the thread you want to see. Don't click on "Page X" or "goto last post". Just click on the main thread name.
2. In the URL, replace "showthread" with "newreply". Press Enter, or whatever is appropriate for your OS/browser.
3. You are now in the "Reply to Topic" page. Scroll down to review the last 30 posts in the thread. Unfortunately, this doesn't let you see any more posts, but it's better than nothing.
What does "marking" an opponent do?
It makes not attacking you unfavourable to them. If a marked opponent makes an attack that does not include the person that marked them, they take a -2 to the attack roll/s. Also, the effect that marked them will usually specify another detrimental effect. Fighters get a free basic melee attack, while Paladins just deal 1d8 radiant damage.
Paladins just deal 1d8 radiant damage.
[3*Tier]+Cha damage, actually.
[3*Tier]+Cha damage, actually.
Whoops.
In other news, has anyone seen CrazyArtificer lately? Our playtest is at a bit of a standstill...
Whoops.
In other news, has anyone seen CrazyArtificer lately? Our playtest is at a bit of a standstill...
nope, missing out at shadowfell, too. if there were bets on that, i'd say: all my money on girlfriend.
nope, missing out at shadowfell, too. if there were bets on that, i'd say: all my money on girlfriend.
Half right, wb
Most of the time polishing my thesis, the rest with her :D
I just don't see the point of updating her sheet every week if nothing is changing.
I'll hold off until you reply.
when you recreate a map via link, i believe the editlink-checkbox should be set to true already. usually, if you do that kind of stuff, you'd like to continue editing all over. it makes handling easier for newtime pbp players as they don't need to remember it before posting the map of the next round.
thnx in advance
The gold issue doesn't have to delay everything.
BTW: Will I get my birthday credits?
The mapper now restores Sizes, effects, style and opacity when clicking on edit links. Los is stil not restored. All the pages have been changed to send utf-8 encoding. (Noticed someone tried to a username with characters beyond the standard Latin characterset. That should now work. If there are more problems I may just restrict it to the Latin characterset.)
Guess we'll read next week
Good Luck with uni Crazy Artificer, what are you studying?
Welcome back, although I didn't join until late 2006.
The current GM, MindwandererB is in the process of getting the rules written up and making final decisions. The start of those rules posts can be seen in the Rules of Sagaris thread. I should probably bug him about starting a character thread so we can start posting 1st level characters.
Yeah, I hope it's okay for me to assume They start at lvl 3 with 32 point buy. But even the point buy system is different in 4th. So I may have to wait.
We've decided to start at 1st, since level 1 isn't so squishy and powerless in 4e. And we'll probably take the standard point buy system.
I've decided I'm going to have a team of Warlock and Fighter. I read it right that we create a team of 2 characters right?
For the 1st level characters, it should be default from the PHB or DMG, which I believe is 100 gp.
correct. though i'm not sure whether mwb will keep it at that, or up it by a lvl 1 item maybe, as he said he wanted to round the other leagues a bit as well. (the dmg method as well as the cumulated wealth methods all have the same problem - they just don't give you rounded gold values, more like 17891952 gp)
I should probably bug him about starting a character thread so we can start posting 1st level characters.
Done. Post away.
Done. Post away.
since this seems to be working - BUG HIM ABOUT THE RULES
At the moment the GM, MindwandererB is updating the rules for the new edition, but there's sufficient up in the rules of Sagaris thread that you can start posting teams of 2 characters in the Characters of Sagaris thread.
Also I noticed an error on Lonewolf's Character sheet in Characters of Sagaris.
He didn't give a name to one of his at will powers he just left it as.
Name
dagger....+8 vs. AC
Hit: 1d6+4 damage
Special: You can move 2 squares before the attack
Just thought I would post that here since the courtroom for Sagaris isn't open yet, or do we still use the Gladius one?
For now, either a PM or the tavern is probably fine, but eventually the prison will be the right place for it.
Is there a 4th Edition SRD I should use, or is the equipment/classes pretty much the same?
Unfortunately, there is no 4th Edition SRD like the 3rd edition one. And the equipment/classes while sharing similar names, really aren't like in 3rd edition. It is a completely new system. A copy of the PHB is rather necessary these days (although you don't need the DMG for magic items anymore, so just 1 book).
However, for the time being you can kinda of use the the D&D compendium for a similar purpose. It can be found here.
Just try typing in "class" or "skill" or "feat" or more specific terms as you need them. That should bring up a fair bit of information.
Re: Story contests: My CoCo time is extremely limited right now; what I have is going into getting the basics set up (like the rules
). We don't have any elders with very much free time right now, either. But if one of them does want to handle such an event, I'll award the credits for it.Re: Prison and other threads: Those all fall under the auspices of various elders. Because shared accounts are now verboten, any Elder who's in charge of one of those threads is responsible for creating and updating them as necessary. So the Prison will go up whenever TelinArtho puts it up. But seeing as how we're not even doing pairings yet, a Prison isn't really necessary.
Sagaris is the name of the city the new 4th edition core colosium is set in. It's main threads have already been posted such as 'The Rules of Sagaris' and 'Characters of Sagaris'.
Also I noticed an error on Lonewolf's Character sheet in Characters of Sagaris.
He didn't give a name to one of his at will powers he just left it as.
Name
dagger....+8 vs. AC
Hit: 1d6+4 damage
Special: You can move 2 squares before the attack
Just thought I would post that here since the courtroom for Sagaris isn't open yet, or do we still use the Gladius one?
fixed
;)
@MWB: do you plan to keep the date for the first pairings on July 23?
the default sheet needs some adjustments.
while i'm flattered you just took mine from the shadowfells, there are things that should be kept track of:
a) how ability scores come into being. 10 18 10 16 9 15 for a half-elf might take a while to figure out if it's not written somewhere.
b) you've got item powers, but not utility powers.
c) for easier checking, players should be required to write the level of the powers into their sheets, and if they acquired them multiclass or racially, a comment would be nice as well.
d) there should be some indicator on skills, which is trained and which is not.
One disadvantage to using the Courier font, despite the advantages of it being a fixed-width font, is that I can't put instructions in quote tags without adding a mess of extraneous font tags.
I'm a new member to this board, I tried to enter the coliseum fun last year, but overload of information and lack of time kept me from joining your burgeoning community. I lurked sometimes and have enjoyed reading up on the miniquests, but RL kept me from being dragged in. So here we are with a new edition and some time on my hands so I'm eager to give it a try.
I do have some questions though, As I understand the fight cycle of four fights was created for balance purpose. What I didn't catch is this.
1. Do the 4 fights occur against the same opponent?
2. Are they run by the same pitlord?
3. Are they run in the same week?
OR
Each week you enter a different cycle, with a different pitlord against a new opponent?
I hope we will enjoy our time together,
Prodigal Orc
as i'm tired, i'll skip to the essentials:
Each week you enter a different cycle, with a different pitlord against a new opponent?
4 weeks in which you play = 1 cycle. you get paired each week to a different opponent and pitlord, and those weeks need not be adjacent to each other in the real world. so you can really have like 2 teams, activate a and b every other week instead of one team every week, still both would have 4 fights, then end of cycle.
Anyone mind checking it over.
Also I have a question about the rules that is relevant to my characters. Does a character that uses a two-handed weapon do any extra damage? I looked thoroughly through the PH and all I found was that if a character chooses to wield a versatile weapon with two hands he does 1 extra damage. But it doesn't say anything about this applying to two-handed weapons as well.
New "updates" (read: errata) are up. A lot of them are actually really significant. Feat retraining, energy resistance, Blade Cascade, and the surprised condition got some changes that will affect people a lot. For those of you who are DMing at home, skill DCs and skill challenges got massive, massive overhauls--for the better, IMO, but really, the versions they printed were inexcusable.
skill DCs and skill challenges got massive, massive overhauls--for the better, IMO, but really, the versions they printed were inexcusable.
the math of skill challenges still is broken, even with their update. still, it got better for less complex (should be called: shorter) challenges. since we are combat focussed here, we gladly won't mind any of those changes. ;)
welcome!
4 weeks in which you play = 1 cycle. you get paired each week to a different opponent and pitlord, and those weeks need not be adjacent to each other in the real world. so you can really have like 2 teams, activate a and b every other week instead of one team every week, still both would have 4 fights, then end of cycle.
Thank you
I'll try to post characters by tonight.
I have another question tough, what is the general opinion of this board about races. Are the PHB races superior due to racial feats? I mean Dwarven durability is awesome, most of the racial feats are or do you think MM races are better.
Thank you
I'll try to post characters by tonight.
I have another question tough, what is the general opinion of this board about races. Are the PHB races superior due to racial feats? I mean Dwarven durability is awesome, most of the racial feats are or do you think MM races are better.
It really depends on what you're trying to do. There are things in the MM racial powers that no PHB character can do, and there are things in racial feats that the MM races can't duplicate. It can be annoying when making a character of a MM race to gloss over a quarter of the feats because they're racial feats, but that's about the extent of it.
Im quite sure that we will see all of the PHB races and a good deal of the MM races in play here.
Elven Accuracy/Precision is pretty nice too.
OTOH, Bugbear, Drow and Kobold are the best rogue races. Hands down.
Unfortunately that hurts a halfling wizard. A halfling wizard can use a staff implement but can't use it as a weapon. (Granted this is just an observation. I don't intend to make a staff using halfling wizard and would just scale down the damage in a TT game.)
EDIT: Looking over the skill challenge changes and I must say wizard's errata methodology is awful. Normally I wouldn't care but with the skill challenge you really need to change it so the errata needs to be more usable. I'm also disappointed by the changes. Looks like 1st skill challenges become very easy. I suppose the decreased number of failures makes it a little harder but without the +5 DC when it is a skill makes the moderate DC 10 pretty close to an autosuccess for trained skills.
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pRawkYWWe-saM8_idYwVBUw
i did some maths for the new, the old, and two other related methods which you can find there.
you can see more of this discussion over at dm advice - [thread=1061332]skill challenges broken?[/thread]
There are a few cases where a weapon is usable as an implement. There the wizards staff, the holy avenger and the pact blade.
In these cases, do feats or class abilities that modify weapon damage also apply if the weapon is used as an implement.
For example does the weapon focus feat apply to a righteous inferno cast by a paladin who's wielding a holy avenger?
Basically, if it refers to a weapon group or uses the term weapon, no. When something is being used as an implement its not being used as a weapon.
If it refers to a specific object, without referring to it as a weapon, yes.
For example, if you're a warlock/rogue with the Daggermaster paragon class, you score criticals while using a dagger pact blade on an 18-20, irregardless if you're using it as an implement or a weapon. Because it only refers to the object, dagger. On the other hand, weapon focus refers to the light blade weapon group. Weapon groups only apply to weapons, and thus you wouldn't get the weapon focus feat while using an implement (even if you *could* use it as a weapon).
the math of skill challenges still is broken, even with their update. still, it got better for less complex (should be called: shorter) challenges.
Granted, "easy" challenges are now brokenly easy; they're clearly meant to only have a small chance of failure for an untrained, low-stat character. But at least high-complexity challenges are possible now. Comparing the four methods you have listed, the new DMG method looks the best by far; it works great as being challenging for low-complexity, high-DC and for high-complexity, moderate DC, and hit-or-miss for moderate-complexity, moderate-DC. It could still use some work, but it looks like it does at least work now.
In regards to the prison and courtroom - I already have the threads complete - I just need to post them.
By the by - I'm looking for some good images for the header post (since Cat always used a different one per prison block, tavern, etc). If someone has something appropriate - either post the link here or send me a PM.
and i found another mistake: you have three entries +2 racial in your rogue.
and i'm not sure if you need that extra +1 speed, but we'll see once 4e is finally going live.
things to remember about 4e sneak attack: recharges at the start of your turn, and can be only used 1/turn. so commanders would only be a backup if the rogue does not hit and the warlord is out of other, more useful powers.
Anyways, I think it's good enough now to start fighting. It may not work as intended, but if that's the case I'll deactivate them and try something else out.
The thing I like about this is is the +10 Initiative at the start. And hopefully, they'll have smaller maps so Rogues can make good use of First Strike.
I'm off to work.
@rauul / reapers of doom:
ritual caster is one of the most useless feats for coco - ritual casting is currently banned. also i would not buy 18 dex for a warlock, you need some int for powers, and your defenses are really unbalanced with 11 fortitude. this might not be a problem at low levels, but once good fortitude attacks come around, wilbur will be a dead piece of halfling.
for gortek:
-a handaxe is heavy thrown, thus your ranged attack would be much better.
-cleave should do your strength modifier to adjacent enemies -> 4.
- your damage is off on most of the powers - it should be +6 (4str, 2 feat)
but he has even 2 weak defenses... not that optimal for a defender. also, cleaves primary attack and secondary effect do not work on the same target - you might reconsider taking another power, like tide of iron or sure strike.
---
Well i took your advice on gortek and replaced him.. with another Striker class.. Best Defense is a Great Offense.. So take another Look at the Reapers of Doom and let me know where i screwed up please.. I changed out the Feat on Alburr.. thanks for pointing that out (as for the weak foritude save.. is something i will work with since i really like him as is.. )
@sal / underdark yakuza
as for the name: bugbears in the underdark? ;)
Well...
1. The drow are known for having goblinoid slaves.
2. He's a (part-time) cleric of Torog, god of the Underdark.
3. Sagaris is very near the Underdark's largest Bugbear settlement, Vekkimakkilat. dc:
bugbear money: there's no decision on how much large weapons cost, this should be adressed, but i can guarantee it will not be the same as medium ones, once this issue is touched. so you'll likely run out of money. else the bugbear is solid.
Well, I can hardly be faulted for not accomodating house rules that haven't been written yet, can I?
healing word will likely help him a bit in taking hits, and though i see no real useful paragon cleric path later this is a good choice. (but you could go multiclass warlord as well)
I looked into that, and since the feat was just to be a sort of substitute healer, I looked at the relative healing abilities, and in comparable situations, *every* warlord power I'd consider power-swapping to use, had Charisma as a
Question: what happened to Gladius? I was under the impression it would continue even after the release of the 4th edition, but there apparently haven't been any new fights for over a month.
It got killed by the lack of interest. Rather than to let it die slowly and painfully, we put it to rest.
It got killed by the lack of interest. Rather than to let it die slowly and painfully, we put it to rest.
Alternatively, you stopped all leagues above 5th, and found that no-one was interested in a two-level-long arena. Most of my low-level characters were experiments, Ralein and Petyr were the ones I cared about.
Are we allowed to make EVIL paladins... I ask this only cause i have always wanted to play a Drow Paladin of Lolth, Teamed with a Drow Warlock
there is no restriction anymore. In the DMG there is a section describing evil clerics and Paladins and the only change(which is sad imho) is that everything that deals radiant damage should deal necrotic damage instead.
. Speaking of pairings, do you know when they'll go up? Next week?Anyway, The Brothers Whitworth are up. Very one-dimensional, I know. We'll see how they do
.Of course, there's no reason y'all can't have some fights in the meantime just for kicks.
So, I'm going to unmark my team as ready and put up the new team tomorrow after I wake up.As far as I can tell, customer service does have a unified answer to whether wintertouched and lasting frost work with a frost weapon, since its been put into the player's handbook faq. Now whether the FAQ is official is another question... But anyways, it says fire weapons, but the same logic applies to frost:
[b]15. When do a Magic Item's keywords apply?[b]
If you use a magic item's power in conjunction with a power granted to you by your race or class, that item's keywords are added to the regular keywords of the power you are using. For example, if you are have a Flaming Weapon, and you use an at-will power to attack an enemy along with the at-will power of the Flaming Weapon, your attack will have the Fire keyword in addition to the normal keywords of your attack. You have to be using the powers of the weapon for those keywords to be added; simply using the magic item does not necessarily mean every keyword attached to a power of that item will be added.
1) In the damage calculations I applied quarry once, to a single armor splinter. That was the 9 damage listed first.
2) I noted the damage if you were just a straight ranger with 22 strength, with weapon focus, the feat which increases quarry damage, lasting frost and wintertouched. Although I did mis-calculate the first time, I think the new value of 149.5. If you drop the frost weapon and the two cold feats it drops to 124.5, although its then not so sure you'll hit with all 5 (missing on 1,2,3,4). But I'm hard pressed to find leader and defender abilities which can do the amount of 1 or 2 target damage attacks that strikers can pull off.
In regards to the potions: The allocate resource to a multiple of the potion price is an interesting option, although it might take awhile to figure out the right multiplier. I guess I'm biased because I pitlord and generally dislike healing. It makes fights last longer.
maybe it should work. maybe it shouldn't. CS answers are RAI (by the CS person answering) and thus not at all better than any house ruled decision anywhere else.
examples why it cannot work, RAW, the way it is currently written (and worded by CS as well):
1) it takes a free action to activate or deactivate the frost property of the weapon. a free action cannot be taken whilst you take another action (or even as a part of it), since it nowhere in the rules says you CAN actually do that. every argument taken to prove that, would also prove that you can take your move, standard and minor actions all at once. (e.g. attack while shifting with your movement power)
so, since the power is not used in conjunction, you won't get the cold keyword.
2) keyword = damage type?
this is most often used when talking about why the combo should work. while the phb uses those two as a synonym sometimes, there are distinctions in other places.
talking about cold, you could have: a cold power, and cold damage. while the phb says that the keyword should apply to the resulting damage, it does not explicitly say that the power before it actually hits gains the keyword (ability questioned: CA from wintertouched) - this could be used as argument also against the daily power from the frost weapon - as you'd need to have already hit for the effect to be there.
as for numbers crunching: now that we look at the l16 ranger having about 150 pts of damage output in one round, what do you believe a rogue could do?
18 str+dex/bugbear lvl 1.
2d6+4 (easy target) + 2d6+4+4 (tortorous strike) + 2d8+4 (sneak attack) +1d6 (predatory eye) = 5d6+2d8+16 = 42.5 average, maximum hp you can have at level 1 is 40.
i'm not into rogues yet - but this feels a bit more broken and you also need "only one" daily.
as for numbers crunching: now that we look at the l16 ranger having about 150 pts of damage output in one round, what do you believe a rogue could do?
18 str+dex/bugbear lvl 1.
2d6+4 (easy target) + 2d6+4+4 (tortorous strike) + 2d8+4 (sneak attack) +1d6 (predatory eye) = 5d6+2d8+16 = 42.5 average, maximum hp you can have at level 1 is 40.
i'm not into rogues yet - but this feels a bit more broken and you also need "only one" daily.
Oh come on, just about anyone can deal that much damage with an action point, a daily, and an encounter power. I know a Fighter can, a Ranger can, a Paladin can, etc. Due to the scaling of HP vs. the scaling of damage, it's much harder to 1-shot someone at high levels.
the faq is just a collection of customer service answers. it's imo a very bad place to look for answers to rules questions, and i'd rather not use those answers at all. the keyword stuff / property is quite obviously in contradiction to the rulebook.
maybe it should work. maybe it shouldn't. CS answers are RAI (by the CS person answering) and thus not at all better than any house ruled decision anywhere else.
I admit there are several possible interpretations, and that cust serv has been wrong before. Unfortunately, without an errata or developer clarification, we're probably going to have to rule on it fairly quickly in the courtroom because of Tieflings, hellfire blood, and flaming weapons in heroic tier.
examples why it cannot work, RAW, the way it is currently written (and worded by CS as well):
1) it takes a free action to activate or deactivate the frost property of the weapon. a free action cannot be taken whilst you take another action (or even as a part of it), since it nowhere in the rules says you CAN actually do that. every argument taken to prove that, would also prove that you can take your move, standard and minor actions all at once. (e.g. attack while shifting with your movement power)
If thats the case, how does Elven Accuracy work? Its a free action, not an interrupt (since you can't take interrupts on your turn). It rerolls an attack roll in the middle of a power going off, changing whether you apply the hit or miss condition.
so, since the power is not used in conjunction, you won't get the cold keyword.
2) keyword = damage type?
this is most often used when talking about why the combo should work. while the phb uses those two as a synonym sometimes, there are distinctions in other places.
talking about cold, you could have: a cold power, and cold damage. while the phb says that the keyword should apply to the resulting damage, it does not explicitly say that the power before it actually hits gains the keyword (ability questioned: CA from wintertouched) - this could be used as argument also against the daily power from the frost weapon - as you'd need to have already hit for the effect to be there.
However, if you've already resolved the attack, how can the "extra" damage be extra? Does damage resistance (say stone skin) apply twice when you use a flaming or frost weapon's daily on a hit? The fact that its "extra" tends to imply to me that its added directly to the damage rolled in the hit section of the power, effectively modifying the power as its going off, rather than occuring after the triggering hit has fully resolved.
as for numbers crunching: now that we look at the l16 ranger having about 150 pts of damage output in one round, what do you believe a rogue could do?
18 str+dex/bugbear lvl 1.
2d6+4 (easy target) + 2d6+4+4 (tortorous strike) + 2d8+4 (sneak attack) +1d6 (predatory eye) = 5d6+2d8+16 = 42.5 average, maximum hp you can have at level 1 is 40.
i'm not into rogues yet - but this feels a bit more broken and you also need "only one" daily.
At level 15... Would probably be a Bugbear Brutal Scoundrel Daggermaster + Divine Oracle cleric. I admit its a two man combo, but guaranteed crit on Imperiling Strike with 50/50 odds of hitting initially (-6 to AC/Ref) + Critical Opportunity + Action point ->Slaying Strike. Imperiling strike would do 6+24+6+6+3+2+10.5 = 56.5 damage. The Critical Opportunity would likely add 10.5+6+3+2 = 21.5, which then does a total of 78, pushing even that Dwarven defender into Bloodied. Slaying Strike adds another 17.5+6+6+3+2 = 34.5. Total damage is about 112.5 damage. Costs an encounter from the Cleric, and uses 2 encounters, a daily, and an action point from the Rogue.
This is with just weapon focus and the backstabber feats.
The ranger version is just better though since you've got a 75% chance of starting the sequence (higher if you're an Elf). On the other hand, you've got a much higher chance of a secondary crit occuring with the rogue's dagger master build.
Anyways, my new Team is up and I deleted the old team. Hopefully this won't cause problems. Since everything is getting delayed, I'm thinking it shouldn't be an issue that I completely revamped my group.
[post=16404961]Unionized Workers[/post]
Basically, this group's point is to knock people over. Then hit them harder... or something.
trigger should likely be you roll an attack roll ... or it should state that you can do it when you roll a roll you dislike, like they stated in some PP features i believe.
they tried to resolve some issues with their new actions, but already now they are running into problems. (like pact boons - according to their dndi database, they would be immediate reactions... )
with the keyword and damage, we're falling into a loop here.
consider a non-active frost weapon. you miss due to no cold property active. you'd have hit with a cold power, which is only part of "if you hit", though.
with tieflings, we've got a bit of leeway here - i don't see them anywhere near a melee character, and with powers and implements this is a lot clearer since there is no adding other types of damage to a power that represents something different. (like you'd do with frost weapons)
ps: thnx for the math on the rogue.
about elven accuracy: i believe this to be a wrongly done trigger-action.
trigger should likely be you roll an attack roll ... or it should state that you can do it when you roll a roll you dislike, like they stated in some PP features i believe.
Unfortunately, having a "trigger" doesn't actually change the nature of the power, other than restricting when you can use it. You're still taking a "free" action at the same time as some other action you're performing, so the precedent is set. I'd probably interpret them differently if they were all consistently written that way, but from a RAW perspective I don't think it matters.
with the keyword and damage, we're falling into a loop here.
consider a non-active frost weapon. you miss due to no cold property active. you'd have hit with a cold power, which is only part of "if you hit", though.
Well, there's still a sequence of things that happen with the power, so by the time you've reached the applying hit or miss effect stage, it to late to actually change the status of the hit or miss. In any case, since you can't apply the daily, there's no contradiction, you simply miss.
As for the free action, until Elven accuracy and its ilk get their badly needed errata, the frost weapon free action at-will could probably be used after you roll, but before the DM has declared hit or miss, with the same timing.
with tieflings, we've got a bit of leeway here - i don't see them anywhere near a melee character, and with powers and implements this is a lot clearer since there is no adding other types of damage to a power that represents something different. (like you'd do with frost weapons)
Actually, I see them as solid Warlords, especially if magic weapons add their keyword. A flaming weapon brings their to-hit and damage up to a +2 Str equivalent race, along with both an Int and Cha bonus. If not, then they're merely ok warlords.
ps: thnx for the math on the rogue.
No problem.
btw, what i don't get with your reasoning: if nothing prevents you from activating/using a free action before you end your standard action, what prevents you from activating/using a standard action before you end your move action? elven accuracy is the exception to this rule here, not the precedence.
so even if elven accuracy is a free action, it does not allow you to take another action while you are doing any one action.
rules reference:
phb p. 269, top left. you can take actions in any order. it says nothing about cross-using them. so, while it can be any order, it has to be IN ORDER.
the action types are defined directly above, or on page 267 - and they include free actions as a "main action type".
http://ww2.wizards.com/Company/Press/?doc=20080728
That message was lost in translation to me anyway...
once a sustained power is manifested and initial dice rolled, initial damage done, your action is ended. no houserule needed.
the powers and effects you are quoting can happen on your round, and since immediate actions are the only things that can not happen on your round, wotc used for the phrasing an action that can happen in any round, yours or your opponents or your allies.
i reread on the targeting rules - yeah, you really need to give all targets at once.
--
the shifting issue: i only told you what you can do to avoid AoO with your new 4e innate spring attack interpretation.
--
up until the last post, i believe we were discussing the rules - but since you seem to only want to push your cause and not discuss the rules any more, this will be my last answer for a while.
--
the shifting issue: i only told you what you can do to avoid AoO with your new 4e innate spring attack interpretation.
--
Oh, I see your point now. I misunderstood the initial comment, and I do agree, a shift action (or a multi-shift action) would let you avoid the OA.
You're correct, we've probably argued this too much, and upon re-reading realize I let some of my frustration out in my last post. You're right to call me on it and I apologize, for what its worth.
At this point we should be asking for other people's opinions other than our own, and then asking for a vote in the council on how frost weapons and wintertouched/lasting frost feats should be handled. And whether that involves other rulings/clarifications such as can free actions be taken at any time, including your other actions. (I'm guessing standards in the middle of moves is an entirely different question).
On an unrelated note, is anyone here disappointed that Gleemax.com is going the way of the dodo (aside from the message boards, of course)? I never used any of the "social networking" stuff myself.
http://ww2.wizards.com/Company/Press/?doc=20080728
Actually, I heard about that and decided to stop by to say hi.
So, erm, hi. Things are going well for me (except for the whole 50 hours a week on a salary bit, but I like my job). Sorry about dropping the ball there at the end. I bow my head in shame to 'Rith and Telin, but it could not be helped.
So the forums (like this one) are moving back to wizards.com?
Does anyone have as much history as my characters do?
By the way, here is my proposed trap:
Rotten Board Trap
Reflex save (DC 24) or you fall 5' and take 1d3 damage. If you take 3 damage, the rotten boards beneath you break and you fall an additional 70' and take 7d6 damage.
CR 1, avg damage 10.133, manual reset
For what it's worth, I wouldn't approve that. It's a nice idea from an optimization perspective, but swingy all-or-nothing traps like that are exactly the kind of things that are hard to get behind. CoCo is (theoretically) about optimizing character builds and tactics, not getting improbably lucky with dice rolls. (Admittedly there's a lot of that by necessity, but it's to be avoided where possible.)
But it's not illegal, according to the current rules. So under what grounds would it be disapproved?
(Note that there already is a save-or-die CR 1 trap -- the carrion crawler brain juice on the doorknob -- but it's too expensive to be worthwhile.)
But it's not illegal, according to the current rules. So under what grounds would it be disapproved?
(Note that there already is a save-or-die CR 1 trap -- the carrion crawler brain juice on the doorknob -- but it's too expensive to be worthwhile.)
I don't own the 3.5 DMG, so I dunno about that one, but similar traps have been disallowed in the past (I think it was after the revision, but I'm not 100% sure about that). There's a reason why, even though there are rules, traps still require a judgment call about whether they should be allowed.
I don't own the 3.5 DMG, so I dunno about that one, but similar traps have been disallowed in the past (I think it was after the revision, but I'm not 100% sure about that). There's a reason why, even though there are rules, traps still require a judgment call about whether they should be allowed.
I understand, but I don't see where in the rules that anyone can disallow a legal trap. I guess I'd like to see a rules clarification (and maybe some better guidelines on what kind of traps are "unfair") before I use the trap rules again.
I think it's the more complicated damage probability function (and the fact that it seems "tailor-made" to take advantage of the CR calculations) that make it objectionable.
...in which case we should change the rules instead of saying "it fits the rules, but I wouldn't allow it anyways".
Personally, I'd like to turf the trap rules altogether (along with the ally rules, but that's another story...).
.@hogarth - I remember a similar discussion coming up before about the traps - I'll have to search my archives though - so give me a bit to find it.
I'm more than happy to fight any and all (although perhaps not all at the same time :D)
A combat between the two shadowdancers might be, as you said, particulary amusing ;)
I definitely agree on having this one as a separate thread fight though ... we wouldn't want to inflict something like this on some poor pitlord - not even on Telin
Does the canopy extend such that a character can stand at 37,30 or the like and still be in the canopy ?
From the rules I would think yes but just to be sure
The canopy covers any square that is not swamp on the ground.
That square is a water square - so it is covered by the canopy.
can monsters with equipment use npc spellcasting services e.g. to cast a counterspell in their ring of counterspells?
Checking the monster equipment rules, the only absolute restriction is:
Monsters cannot have any items which are unavailable to PCs without credits.
Thus as far as the rules are concerned, I would say that it is allowable to use NPC spellcasting services.
Could someone please tell me what happened here? I would be glad to participate again
Hey, I was away for a long time and I came here by accident, and it seems that CoCo has started anew, didn't it?
Could someone please tell me what happened here? I would be glad to participate again
It didn't exactly start "anew"; the (3.5) CoCo just resumed after an extended nap.
I also saw that in the current fight, she cast from a scroll, implying that psuedodragons can cast spells. Is this correct?
No, it implies that clerics with the Magic domain can cast spells.
The two creatures I'm contemplating are the Blink Dog (they have a language of their own - but it mostly consists of barks (ie animal sounds)) and the dretch (cannot speak but has telepathy).
All fixed now.
@wb - Not sure about updating the battles thread - but I assume I can send updates to MWB to make. I just don't want to do it too often - as I'm sure it will get annoying to him. Maybe once a month isn't so bad though.
[post=17716830]Obligatory, "what'd I mess up on?"[/post]
I've decided to think through my characters a little more carefully...this one probably won't be all that decent till later levels, though. >.>
Looks like a cool concept. I noticed you have your flat-footed AC listed as 14, when it should be 11. The Monk Wis-to-AC bonus counts like a regular Dex bonus, and you lose it for the same reasons.
Also why are you ex-monk? Didn't you take the rogue level first?
Really Old And Really Gross Heroes?
:P
Rolling
Over
And
Retreating (from)
Grandmaster
Hogarth
:P
Looks like a cool concept. I noticed you have your flat-footed AC listed as 14, when it should be 11. The Monk Wis-to-AC bonus counts like a regular Dex bonus, and you lose it for the same reasons.
Also why are you ex-monk? Didn't you take the rogue level first?
the first part is wrong.
These bonuses to AC apply even against touch attacks or when the monk is flat-footed. She loses these bonuses when she is immobilized or helpless, when she wears any armor, when she carries a shield, or when she carries a medium or heavy load.
the second part however is true - why would anyone with rogue levels not take the free skill points granted by taking rogue first? it's wort the 1 or 2 HP less.
AC Bonus (Ex)
When unarmored and unencumbered, the monk adds her Wisdom bonus (if any) to her AC. In addition, a monk gains a +1 bonus to AC at 5th level. This bonus increases by 1 for every five monk levels thereafter (+2 at 10th, +3 at 15th, and +4 at 20th level).
These bonuses to AC apply even against touch attacks or when the monk is flat-footed. She loses these bonuses when she is immobilized or helpless, when she wears any armor, when she carries a shield, or when she carries a medium or heavy load.
So it's okay to add monk's wis to both touch and flat-footed AC.
ROARGH team members have all sent their pm to Telin, the last of us will entroduce himself tomorrow after our good-earned sleep: in Italy it's 1:00 AM and we were a bit in a hurry in the last few days to complete our sheets and hope that it's all okay.
We are proud to present the Really Owning And Really Great Heroes (R.O.A.R.G.H.TM) party:
- [post=17656494]Ruby[/post], the Redhead Transmutress Chick
- [post=17709009]Azel T'hrond[/post], the Battle-Hardened Close-Quarter Fighter
- [post=17709445]Maurendal[/post], the Eagle-Eyed Sniper
- [post=17711222]Edhel[/post], the Sturdy Divine Wall
:D
(okay, maybe our titles will change in the early future, but posting only the names would have been a bit sad, and that's what I came up with just before I go to sleep...
)why are you ex-monk? Didn't you take the rogue level first?
Yeah, but I won't be taking any more monk levels and he's no longer lawful for story reasons(which I may or may not ever get around to putting in words. Stupid words. >.>).
Yeah, but I won't be taking any more monk levels and he's no longer lawful for story reasons(which I may or may not ever get around to putting in words. Stupid words. >.>).
still, you'd be getting lots of skill points with rogue first, and could still be an ex-monk, at the cost of 8-6 +4.5-3.5 = 1 HP
My progression was rogue -> monk -> monk, but I have everything listed as ex-monk for the above reasons.
Can someone casting Dispel Magic actively choose to fail to dispel an effect? Specifically, if you're using the targeted version, and have a spell of your own active on your target, can you choose not to dispel it (normally a targeted dispel on your own spell auto-succeeds, which most people wouldn't like at all in this situation)? What about on others' spells - for someone, say, with an ally who had a spell effect active on an enemy? For most other forms of magic you can actively choose to fail at something - such as an undead auto-failing their will save vs an Inflict spell, or most characters auto-failing will saves vs a Cure spell - but I'm not sure about this one.
Zevox
A curious thought I had while considering potential future fights recently:
Can someone casting Dispel Magic actively choose to fail to dispel an effect? Specifically, if you're using the targeted version, and have a spell of your own active on your target, can you choose not to dispel it (normally a targeted dispel on your own spell auto-succeeds, which most people wouldn't like at all in this situation)? What about on others' spells - for someone, say, with an ally who had a spell effect active on an enemy? For most other forms of magic you can actively choose to fail at something - such as an undead auto-failing their will save vs an Inflict spell, or most characters auto-failing will saves vs a Cure spell - but I'm not sure about this one.
The only case I know of where you can choose to fail is with saving throws. A dispel check is not a saving throw. Additionally, you don't know which spells are affecting your target, so picking which dispel checks to succeed and which ones to fail doesn't make much sense; you don't even know how many dispel checks you're making a priori.
So, no.
The only case I know of where you can choose to fail is with saving throws. A dispel check is not a saving throw. Additionally, you don't know which spells are affecting your target, so picking which dispel checks to succeed and which ones to fail doesn't make much sense; you don't even know how many dispel checks you're making a priori.
So, no.
But you can choose to automatically succeed in dispelling your own spells, if I'm not mistaken. And that should be the only auto-thing in dispel checks, I think
Hypothetical situation: A Medium PC drinks a potion of enlarge person, then throws a bola (which shrinks after it leaves the thrower's hand). Does the PC get a bonus for being size Large on his trip attempt? I presume the answer is "yes", but it's not totally clear to me.
yes
The size of the weapon doesnt affect the trip check. Only the size of the wielder does.
But you can choose to automatically succeed in dispelling your own spells, if I'm not mistaken. And that should be the only auto-thing in dispel checks, I think
Actually, if you're using the targeted version, according to the way the spell is worded, it's not a choice. You simply automatically succeed at dispelling your own spells. No two ways about it. Which was in part why I was asking. But oh well.
Zevox
ROARGH team members have all sent their pm to Telin, the last of us will entroduce himself tomorrow
Oh yeah :P
Hi all, nice to meet the community
[post=17709009]Azel[/post] is ready to get his *** kicked :D R.O.A.R.G.H. Rules
Okay, so I have a couple of questions about burglary. First, who deals with the theft, is it the stealing player or the Pitlord? Secondly, if I crafted scrolls at 37.5 gp, they're stolen as if they cost the full 75, right?
For your first question, it says in the rules: "The burglar writes a PM to both the Pitlord and the affected Player which items he wants to steal. If he hasn't sent this PM (to both) until Thursday 9 PM GMT (24 hours after pairings) his Burglary attempt fails."
For the second question, it says "up to a marketprice [sic] value" of xxx. I believe the market price for those scrolls would be 75 gp, in your example.
1. Excellent SR (enough to make a caster at your ECL have a 40% chance of getting through, 50% versus someone with Spell Penetration and Greater Spell Penetration).
2. Mediocre saves (lowest is +7, highest is +13)
3. Excellent DR that will be tough for most opponents to beat
4. Decent Natural AC/Dex bonus to AC
5. Ability to cast arcane spells (though only up to SL3 - opponents may be using spells of much higher power)
The character design I have right now has about 100kgp to spare - so plenty of options to consider...
Can someone please tell me where I can find this feat? In fact, all I need to know is the prerequisites, assuming that the benifit of the feat is +1 to DC of the chosen school.
Hi, I was looking at some higher level characters and saw that this one has the feat tattoo focus[necromancy].
Can someone please tell me where I can find this feat? In fact, all I need to know is the prerequisites, assuming that the benifit of the feat is +1 to DC of the chosen school.
it's in the 3.5 dmg. i don't know exactly, but i think you must be a specialist of that school to use it, (and maybe be from thay?)
Tatoo Focus is one of them. You can find it in the DMG page 194.
It gives you +1 DC and a +1 bonus vs SR in your specialized school.
Since the second part is fluff only, you can ignore it here in CoCo.
Also, you need to be a Human
incorrect
only the Red Wizard PrC has that requirement
incorrect
only the Red Wizard PrC has that requirement
Right, I misread that. Just because the feat is most useful for Red Wizards ;)
incorrect
only the Red Wizard PrC has that requirement
Well, if you're playing in the Forgotten Realms, it may as well have that prerequisite, since the feat can only be acquired by getting a tattoo from a Red Wizard, who are universally human and highly xenophobic.
But yeah, for our purposes, Tattoo Focus is available to any specialist wizard.
Zevox
Do they provide cover or total cover if a medium creature, taller than 5 ft, stands behind them?
Do they work like the rocks in the arena, since both are 5x5x5 ft?
In the following example, if o's are the statues, if a guy stays in 5, does another guy in 2 have total or normal cover from him?
123
ooo
456
The central statue is treated as a 15' tall, 10' square obstacle, surrounded by a 5' safe "path;" the medium statues next to the boxes are 5'x5'x5'. They block Line of Sight just as a normal pillar would.
The statues block LOS for Medium (or smaller) vs Medium (or smaller).
In general, the height of a person should be ignored in a fight, and only work with the person's size category. This way we avoid 7ft tall half giants with a halberd able to hit someone who is more than a 5ft square away. Yes - it makes people into blocks - but it makes it less of a judgement call in edge-case scenarios (like needing to jump for instance).
Hi everyone - glad to see this little section of the web/dnd world has been resurrected. I doubt any of you remember me, I played a little like 1-2years ago. But this is a really fun, welcoming environment, and it was a great opportunity for old folks like me who lack a RL gaming outlet to keep exploring the wonderful world of DnD (3.5, not the debacle that is 4e... <>)
I have a few random questions, about potential chars, which I'm not sure whether they've been answered in the past.
Is anything special required to activate old characters who've fallen away, besides PMing Telin?
Yup - PM me with anyone you want to activate who is not already on the roster.
Also - I remember you - though not your characters specifically.
In any case - welcome back - hope the CoCo still provides what it did for you back then.
Question: can the mounted combat be used even if you would lose your DEX bonus against the attacker?
Generally, no. Mounted Combat requires that you be aware of the attack and able to react to it. Off the top of my head I can think of no circumstance where you lose your dex to AC yet also meet those qualifications. (Maybe vs a Blinking opponent... but I'm not sure there.)
Zevox
HA skill description:
12 hrs of activation time in a week ... so ... 14 weeks?
Good point... I forgot that it took that long. (Although then, why do we allow players to train an animal one trick with a free activity, two with a full activity?)
So I guess you do need to be, well, Ceilia to get a Bronze Griffon trained for combat riding. Or take forever training it...
Zevox
or speed train it ... Celia could do it ... I'm guessing she can make the checks on take 10 ...
but there's no coco rule on that. 2 tricks it is. or buy it.
however, that interpretation seems pretty strange to me. it stands to reason that an animated item has the same mind as an animal that was domesticated, and trained tricks on creation.
Of course, I'm not sure it wouldn't be better to just buy a real Griffon rather than the statue. Self-crafting the statue is cheaper, and you do get to reuse it if its killed once, but you have the 6 hour time limit per use to worry about, and the statue is more expensive if not self-crafted. And either way ally restrictions apply.
Zevox
And either way ally restrictions apply.
Zevox
not true. if you don't prebuff your items, you get as many allies as you want. in that regard, it's the same as summoning.
also, according to the [post=6466576]rules[/post] there's no such thing as quick-train.
Good point... I forgot that it took that long. (Although then, why do we allow players to train an animal one trick with a free activity, two with a full activity?)
A 3FC is 3 weeks long, therefore you can train three tricks per 3FC.
The issue with a Bronze Griffon is that it can only be active for 12 hours per 3FC. That's not an issue with regular animals.
Question: what are the current rules on monster equipment?
they are unchanged. still most money has to go into the big six + up to 10% expendables. it's in the quick reference monsters 1-10 part of the rules
Q: Does using a magical item, such as a Bag of Tricks, require ranks in any specific skill to operate it?
A: Unless SPECIFICALLY mentioned in the description of a magical item, no specific skills are required to be able to use it.
The Bronze griffon does not need to be trained in combat riding guys.
7 should be all set though.