Pairings are done. Guess it's a bad time for everyone.
Regarding the playtest fights: I'd like Tira Duskmeadow and Erais the Sunlord (Salrantol) vs. Kage and Shahai (Hirumajoe) : whitebaron to be run in the traditional, tactics-based manner, and Maravanna Sheharath and Arkemna (MindWandererB) vs. Corrin Reedson and Riardon Brightvale (whitebaron) : Callix to be run in play-by-post, using spoiler blocks the same way Telin did Samuel vs. Longshot recently.
Credits:
Callix F4
CrazyArtificer F1
dulsi F1
Hirumajoe F1
Huan Q2
lonewolf F1
TelinArtho F2 A1 A-1
templer10 F1
Turanson F2
MindWandererB A2
whitebaron F1
The D&L band is new this week- and I totally forgot to allocate my level 0 spell slots. Can I treat those as half dancing lights and half light spells? I was meaning for this to be the case- and there is a high liklihood that we will have to surrender without these utility spells.
2: i believe callix would actually like it to be exactly the other way round - if i understood him correctly, he did not want to make a play-by-post fight due to limited time/ressources...
1: how many pitlords short are we?
2: i believe callix would actually like it to be exactly the other way round - if i understood him correctly, he did not want to make a play-by-post fight due to limited time/ressources...
1) Four, I think.
2) That's fine by me.
1) Four, I think.
2) That's fine by me.
If needed I can take one more fight
2 Huge Quadrupeds
Useless trivia:
This is the 7th monster fight I am running for Elrick.
That must be some kind of record, right?
@telin:
The D&L band is new this week- and I totally forgot to allocate my level 0 spell slots. Can I treat those as half dancing lights and half light spells? I was meaning for this to be the case- and there is a high liklihood that we will have to surrender without these utility spells.
Haven't looked at what you are talking about - but that's fine with me - am I your opponent or the pitlord? :P
Yes, that's the piece I posted but I was told the decision has already been taken.
Sorry if I'm sounding nagg, but I'm confused. Maybe I'm just reading it wrong.
To me, all the previous rulings seem to be based on the assumption that the rider is doing something while the mount withdraws. Trying to sit in the saddle, move with the mount, attack, that sort of stuff.
What I'm questioning now is whether or not a rider provokes attacks of oppertunity when the mount withdraws if said rider is just a load?
If a character carries someone in battle while the character being carried is unconcious, and the carrying charcter withdraws in a coordinated manner as opposed to just running, does the charcter being carried provoke an AoO?
The ruling may very well be the same, but it looks like an entirely different case here. To me, anyway.
That piece just re-inforces what I stated. If your horse withdraws- you withdraw.
Only reason I remember this is I was the pitlord the last time this came up. It's impossible for a mount to withdraw and you take a different action.
I read that wrong earlier. I actually read it as you telling that the rider should have taken an AoO, don't ask me why.
So we agree. I think the rider should withdraw as well without provoking AoOs.
I'd like to have another couple of opinions so we can take a decision on this issue.
Thanks for sending the tactics.
@the D&L band - still need your tactics.
Note to self: Remember to heal.
Thanks for dealing with all that, lonewolf.
Yeah, I was wondering why you didn't use it. All the more fortune to me, I guess.
The Dark One vs 4 4th level Dromite Wilders is up [post=15905071]here[/post]. And no, they didn't use Ego-whip...
just one thing - the DC vs blindness is 23 since it's a necromancy spell - so that is 1 less wilder to worry about - for 1 round anyway - but since they have synasthete i don't think it will change much - talk about crappy rolls...
ToK got me a couple of times in the "metagame" - asking one thing about such and such character and then going the complete opposite direction...
I think that was probably just his AD/HD personality at work. ;)
just one thing - the DC vs blindness is 23 since it's a necromancy spell - so that is 1 less wilder to worry about - for 1 round anyway - but since they have synasthete i don't think it will change much - talk about crappy rolls...
Fight has been edited. The Dark got to last 1 more round, and got a successful laughter off, but propagating the rolls through to the next round still brought the Dark one down.
Edits to Salvador and Sunstroke vs Max Ribbleton are up [post=15855737]here[/post].
thanks for running.
Max should probably continue to create new Astral Constructs in rounds 118+, but no need to edit that in(he is in fight 3 anyway, so this really makes no difference)
Edits to Salvador and Sunstroke vs Max Ribbleton are up [post=15855737]here[/post].
Two things: The delay timer applies to Max. If he has offensive actions he can take, he has to take one every tenth round. This means he has to spend those pp on constructs well before Salvador has to descend and confront him. Secondly, as per our tactics, the attacks would be dealing nonlethal damage, so after round 11, when he has 57 damage dealt to him, and 41+15 HP, he should be KO'd.
Notes:
...
With the exception of the coup de grace, every attack will be made with the -4 penalty to deal nonlethal damage.
The physical stature of half-giants lets them function in many ways as if they were one size category larger.
i believe the sentence you quoted is just a misworded explanation, as is the madness sentence, as are so many things...
it certainly makes no sense if you can wield large items without penalty and huge items with double penalty....
i believe an elder vote would go down exactly that road... it just makes no sense otherwise.
i believe an elder vote would go down exactly that road... it just makes no sense otherwise.
This is a creature that is large in many respects, but medium in many others. I don't see how this doesn't make sense. (at least, it doesn't make any more sense than a 3ft dwarf being a medium creature, and thus having the exact same reach as a half-giant- an incredibly large medium creature.)
The nature of the rules is you'll have some nonsensical stuff in between size categories. Half-giants are "kind of" large, but they are not really- so it makes sense to me that they can "kind of" weild large weapons, but not all large weapons.
they can wield large weapons as a human can wield medium weapons or a halfling can wield small weapons.
the question is: why shouldn't they wield huge weapons as a human wields large weapons (at -2)? i can't see any explanation for a thing like that.
i don't want to dwell on the dwarf issue... i never believed they were truly medium sized anyway... (except around the belly) - there are just to many exceptions to their medium-sizedness.
I don't understand why what has come before would matter for the purposes of this fight. The rules are what they are- just because nobody noticed until now(I certainly haven't fought a half-giant psiwarrior lately, if at all) doesn't mean the rules don't exist. Unless there's been a court decision or something- the rules should stand as they are written, shouldn't they?
Perhaps I'd concede this point if we were facing another gladiator- but this is just a monster. There are no feelings to be hurt by forcing it to adhere to the rules- and they are pretty darn clear. The half-giant ignores the penatly associated with weilding a weapon designed for creatures one size larger than him. This axe is not designed for creatures one size larger than him: so he doesn't ignore the penalty.
The problem is I happen to read the rules as I have ruled in the fight - ie - so as far as I am concerned - I am running the character as the rules are written. You are making the assumption that I disagree with how it has been run in the past - this assumption is incorrect.
I don't care about "hurting someone's feelings" but I do care that things are consistent unless revoked by an elder vote. I also care that things are not changed after a fight's been posted because of a change in rules interpretation.