Zherog's page

Zherog wrote:

Talion09 wrote:

I have one awaiting its meeting with the Gatekeeper:

"Tsochari & Fallen Heroes" (Eberron/Low-Level) Sent in March 27th.

*Sighs and goes back to the drawing board*

Sorry ;-)

Although after I sent mine in, GGG said he had a Tsochari adventure query that was rejected recently...

I'll probably send the query anyway (unless an editor posts and tells me not to bother ;) ). I like the idea, and mine is higher level than yours, and generic world. And I can always use the writing practice. :)

I have one awaiting its meeting with the Gatekeeper:

"Tsochari & Fallen Heroes" (Eberron/Low-Level) Sent in March 27th.

*Sighs and goes back to the drawing board*

I'm still around, but having had some success here am branching out to other endevors for a little while at least. I'm sitting on the three or four things that I actually wrote manuscripts for. Hopefully you'll get to see the epic collaboration project that Dryder, I, and many others was a proud part of - I know I'm dying to - sometime soon though I only inferred that from a fortune cookie I read a few weeks back so don't quote me.

GGG

Sorry. I failed my Will save and couldn't help myself. ;)

Alright, so we're starting the encounter at 100 feet? Against Goblins, right?

A goblin has a speed of 30 feet. So yes, a goblin can use the "run" action to close the full distance and engage you in melee combat. Here's the rules running:

Run

You can run as a full-round action. (If you do, you do not also get a 5-foot step.) When you run, you can move up to four times your speed in a straight line (or three times your speed if you’re in heavy armor). You lose any Dexterity bonus to AC unless you have the Run feat

You can run for a number of rounds equal to your Constitution score, but after that you must make a DC 10 Constitution check to continue running. You must check again each round in which you continue to run, and the DC of this check increases by 1 for each check you have made. When you fail this check, you must stop running. A character who has run to his limit must rest for 1 minute (10 rounds) before running again. During a rest period, a character can move no faster than a normal move action.

You can’t run across difficult terrain or if you can’t see where you’re going.

A run represents a speed of about 12 miles per hour for an unencumbered human.

So there's some important tidbits to pull out of that.

1) Moving in this way requires a full-round action. That means they can get next to you, but they can't do anything else.
2) All movement while running must be in a straight line. No turns.
3) A creature who is running loses their Dex bonus to AC. This makes them sneak attackable while running. Which is important when combined with...
4) Because running is movement, it'll provoke attacks of opportunity from anybody the goblins run past.
5) You can't run across difficult terrain.
6) You can't run if you can't see.

So let's continue on. Let's assume our goblins are indeed allowed to run, and they are lucky enough to not get killed by any of the attacks of opportunity they provoke. Now they reach you, the archer, and stop. They can't do anything else this turn.

Now it's your turn. You can take a 5' step without provoking an attack of opportunity. If that allows you to move to a square where you aren't threatened, you can do anything you want without repercussion in that square - including firing your bow at the goblin who just sprinted up to get close to you.

So now let's assume you can't take a 5' step. Maybe your back was against the wall to start, and the goblins were smart enough to surround you. Well, guess what? As long as you're willing to provoke an Attack of Opportunity from each creature that threatens you, you can still use your bow. If your AC is high enough, or if you have enough hit points you just don't care too much about a goblin poking you once with a sword, this isn't the worst thing in the world.

Hope that helps. :)

-- John

Got a rule quote from somewhere, Ghetto? Like I said, I'm anal retentive; I like having a rule I can point to. ;) I guess it's more or less implied in the rules... I think that should be good enough to go on.

Yep, but that still only allows you to make one a round. My point was that a rogue who gets five attacks a round (between iterative attacks, TWF, and so on) might be better off making those five attacks - and dealing massive amounts of sneak attack each hit - than making one attack, and hoping the creature fails the Fort save.

It probably wouldn't occur often, because the save DC for the CdG should be really darn high. It's just one of those things to keep in mind.

In many cases, a rogue is better off not making a coup de grace. A CdG is a full-round action; if the rogue gets a significant number of attacks in a full-attack, there are times he'll be better off making that full attack than making one attack and forcing a a Fortitude save. Not often, of course, but it's something to keep in mind. ;)

So my players are wandering through a forest as they travel between adventures. After reading the Ecology of the Ettercap, I decided they'd make a really cool "random" encounter. They're different, and the authors did a nice job making the ettercap seem like a fun encounter (kudos, gents).

So this morning, I popped open the SRD and looked up the Ettercap. And I noticed their "advancement" line only advances them by hit dice. I distinctly recall, though, the authors had an advanced critter in their article that included class levels. So is this one of those "designers can get away with bending some rules when it makes something cool" things, or is there an explicit rule somewhere that discusses this sort of thing?

I'm pretty anal retentive, and I like to follow the rules as much as possible. ;)

the only thing left is feinting in combat, which as the rules state, you make an opposed Bluff check, and your opponent is denied his DEX for your next attack.

This is ususally only a one attack a round option (Bluff and Attack), unless you have something like Feint Mastery from the Invisible Blade Prestige class which allows you to feint in combat as a FREE ACTION.

However, the errata for the Invisible Blade PrC states that you can still only feint once per round. So while you get to make a full attack, your feint only applies to the first one.

That pretty much covers all of the sneak attack permutations.

Not really. ;) We haven't gone into all the permutations of losing your Dex mod to AC. Flat-footed is only one way for that to happen. Some of the ways to lose your Dex mod to AC include:

Being stunned
Climbing
making a Balance check while you have fewer than 5 ranks
being the subject of a hold person (or similar) spell

There's probably more. :)

There's also a quiver posted in a Forgotten Realms article on the WotC site that basically creates arrows as you reach into it. Unfortunately, I don't recall the name of the item, nor the article it's in; and the WotC site is blocked here at work, so I can't go and search for it.

I'll try to remember to search for the name tonight at home.

Ninja's use this ability either to guarantee a sneak attack on their initial strike (and we all know that a good ninja only needs one, anyways...right?)...

Trick question - there's no such thing as a good ninja. :D

Rule: The Two Weapon Fighting feat allows a character to wield two weapons, period. It does not allow these weapons to be used simultaneously in one strike. That requires a different feat (see below).

This point isn't quite true. You can opt to wield two weapons without the feat. The feat just reduces the penalties from it.

Otherwise, I agree with the rest of the info, and the conclusion.

--John

Actually, don't add in Point Blank Shot, as every attack doesn't qualify for it. PBS would get listed on the "Combat Options" line for the character. Otherwise, Timault is correct.

--John

I was thinking recently this would be good too. I see Gary's point, certainly - I've spent (more than) enough time on message boards to have seen what he's talking about plenty of times.

Would it be possible, instead, to change things slightly so that when you're posting a reply (quoted or otherwise) you see the last half dozen or so posts below the "Enter post" window? It would certainly make copy/pasting easier. My work-around right now is to open two browser windows.

So let's see how I do here... This'll actually make a fun little "test." ;)

SRD wrote:

Multiattack

An animal companion gains Multiattack as a bonus feat if it has three or more natural attacks and does not already have that feat. If it does not have the requisite three or more natural attacks, the animal companion instead gains a second attack with its primary natural weapon, albeit at a -5 penalty.

Now the boar has 2 attacks thanks to it's HD, but the only natural attack it has is gore. It has no claw, bite, tail, etc. Just gore. So what do I do here?

Note that creatures that use natural attacks do not gain more attacks from a high BAB. For example, a "standard" dire boar has a gore attack and a +5 BAB. When it advances enough hit dice to gain a +6 BAB, it still only receives a single gore attack.

So, that said, your boar doesn't qualify for Multiattack; it only has one natural attack (a gore). Since it doesn't qualify for Multiattack, it gains a second gore attack; the second attack is at a total attack bonus of 5 less than the primary. So if your 13 HD dire boar had the same Strength as the standard, it's primary attack would be at +17 (+9 BAB, +8 Strength). It would now gain a second gore attack at +12.

Also, I put all the other animal companion bonuses it recieves (Link, share spells, evasion & devotion) on the SQ line in the stat block. Is that correct?

Link goes on the same line as languages; Evasion goes on the same line as the saves. I believe the others do indeed go in the SQ section. Note that some items (such as Link and Share Spells) should also be on the master's stat block.

And where do I list any bonus tricks, or trained tricks for that matter?

SQ is probably the right section for them. The SQ area seems to be the "catch all" area for when stuff doesn't fit elsewhere.

So hopefully my answers don't send you off in the wrong direction. ;)

-- John

If they want to produce material for D&D, their options are use the OGL and/or d20 licenses, or don't publish it. ;)

:ROFL:

At Thanksgiving last year, we asked my daughter (4 at the time) what she was thankful for. She pondered for a moment, then answered, "Pink!"

We took her and her brother out shopping last weekend for summer clothes. Everything she picked was pink! We had to talk her into other colors. Things like, "You know, Sweetie, if you buy this pair of black shorts you can wear it with any of your pink shirts."

We're in the process of re-doing her room; right now, it's still "baby" themed. You guessed it; everything she picks - paint, curtains, bed stuff, and so on - is pink.

PS: What an amazing thing it is to see design studs like James (I firmly believe the guys at Dungeon right now are in the stratosphere in terms of experience with adventure design) in here in the forums asking all of us for our input! That is awesome! And he listens too!

I agree Clark. I think it's really awesome the way the staff (of both magzines!) interacts with the readership on these message boards.

So I guess I'll actually attempt to make a useful post on this thread now. Amazing, I know. ;)

It's probably easier to list the things I don't like. A lot of this stuff assumes a campaign rather than a "one off" adventure.

I don't like a static environment. When the adventurers kick in the front door, the inhabitants should all react accordingly; instead, lots of "dungeon crawls" have the denizens just hang out in their room, waiting for the PCs to come kick their ass. Intelligent foes are going to either prepare (cast spells, use potions, etc) or flee. Animal-intelligent type foes are going to defend their home. If you don't believe me, wander into the woods and go into a bear's den. :D They're not going to lounge around waiting for the PCs to get there.

I don't like unused useful treasure. Some things in treasure piles of intelligent creatures always bug me. Why does that necromancer have a ring of protection +4 in his chest instead of on his finger? Sure, if he's wearing two other really cool rings it might make sense - but that's not always the case.

I don't like nonsensical ecologies. A dungeon is somebody's (or something's) home. It needs to take into account movement, eating, sleeping, going to the bathroom, oxygen circulation, and so on. In addition, somebody mentioned earlier the example of a rust monster in one room with an iron golem in the next. That's something else in this category.

I don't like traps that serve no purpose. A trap is going to be there for one of two reasons. Either it's in place to keep something out, or it's in place to keep something in. If the trap is there to keep the adventurers out, the denizens need a way to bypass it. That might mean another (more hidden) way in; that might mean a "key" to get around the trap. Whatever. If the trap exists to keep something in, it should be designed that way. If the purpose of your trap is to keep the mummy from escaping the tomb, don't use a death effect.

I don't like adventures without a goal. A half-baked goal is better than no goal. If the best hook my character has for going into the Dungeon of Doom is a chance to get some loot, then I'm not sure he's going in. This one, though, isn't always the dungeon writer's fault; the DM really needs to figure this one out. I'm generally OK with, "My friend Bob the Wizard needs something in that dungeon; I'm a big strong fighter and Bob needs protection. And he's always helped me in the past, so I guess I'll help him with this." That's an OK "hook" for my PC - as long as Bob really does have a good reason to want to go in.

I don't (generally) like dungeons that are of the "kill, loot, repeat" design. It goes back to the first point, I suppose. But it's more than that. I want interaction. Have a monster/NPC surender; or have somebody attempt to get away. Have somebody bargain with the PCs - "If I give you X, will you leave?" Give my PC something to do other than bringing stabbity death upon some monsters.

So there's things I don't like. Most adventures seem to have one of those - and that's OK. It's really only a problem when an adventure has all those elements. That's when it's seems to go from "cool adventure" to "dungeon crawl" (in the negative context) for me.

Er... that's a long post. I hope it made sense...

Zherog wrote:

Welcome to my world...

... a magical place filled with Disney Princesses, Dora the Explorer and enough Barbie to make a toy chest look like a Pepto Bismol explosion, I imagine.

At least that's what my daughter's room looks like.

You forgot Polly Pockets and My Little Pony. ;) And she has all the attitude of a teenager in a handy 5 year old size container. *twitch*

Let me just throw in my own humble request for stats to all be gathered into one place like in Red Hand and RttToEE. That makes it SO MUCH EASIER on me as a DM to prepare an adventure!

That's interesting. I guess this is another thing I'm in a minority group for. When I ran RttToEE, I found it a big pain in the ass to have the stat blocks in the back of the book. Now, I will say that was the old format, which I loathe. I could never find information I needed in the old stat block. It was so bad with RttToEE that I put all the NPCs into PCGen and printed out character sheets for them.

I just find it interesting that so many people dislike Maure Castle. I thought I was the only one.

*sniff* I'm not alone! We should form a support group. ;D

Congrats to both of you!

Welcome to my world...

Welcome to the Black Hole. :D

Zherog wrote:

James - I assume you don't mind if I put a quote of your post over there?

Sure; go right ahead!

Thanks.

One of my pet peeves is knee-jerk reactions to partial information. It's best to check something out for yourself, or read an informed review, before jumping to conclusions.

I generally agree, and it's one of the reasons I came here to discuss it, because I know the Paizo folks are used to the stat blocks by now, and I know you guys sometimes get a look at a WotC book before the rest of us.

Personally, I think that the new stat block works wonderfully for both adventrue stat blocks and monster book stat blocks. Having the same format between both is just common sense, as this way one needs only know how to navigate one User Interface to get the info.

I like the new stat block. I find it far easier to find information when I'm running a game. And it makes complete sense to have the same format for NPCs and monsters rather than two formats.

I'm guessing WotC is going to have to release the missing information in an errata file for Complete Psionic. Some of the missing informtion - such as LA and advancement - just seems too important. From what I've been reading, the info isn't in the text, either.

Hopefully, these kinks in the system are worked out before they publish a book I'm interested in. :D

Yeah, based on further comments on the thread over on WotC's boards, it sounds like the treasure information has certainly migrated to the text section. Those with the book haven't said yet - one way or another - whether the other sections (organization, terrain, advancement, and LA) have also migrated there.

James - I assume you don't mind if I put a quote of your post over there?

Funny how? Funny like a clown?

:D

* drools on the thread *

I haven't seen the book in question, but perhaps the treasure entry was obmitted because they all granted "standard" treasure, much like the space/reach line is often obmitted. As for the advancement line... I don't know. But it's not one I have really referenced all that often, and many times I completely ignore it (giving class levels before HD have maxed out, or giving more than max HD. I suppose it would be nice to know at which point a particular monster moves from Large to Huge, but perhaps WotC has decided that it really isn't an issue. If you want your monster to be Gargantuan with 5 HD... go for it. (Although the MM does list minimums I believe, but I'm feeling too lazy to go over and look)

Sure. I don't think I've ever used the random treasure stuff in 3.x; the advancement line is nice to know whether a critter advances by hit die, or if it can take class levels. It's also nice to know when it changes size. The AC breakdown is nice to have, but it usually isn't difficult to reverse engineer it.

All that said, those things appear in the stat blocks in Dungeon; so that's why I was asking - to see if any of the good folks here have an idea why those things aren't in the stat blocks for Complete Psionic.

Check out how we're presenting new monsters in Dungeon starting with issue #130 if you want a sort-of sneak peak as to where the new MM4 stat blocks are headed.

Making adventure stat blocks and New Monster stat blocks work the same way is not only an immense time saver, but it seems to me to just make more sense. Why learn 2 stat blocks when 1 will do?

I'm gonna give this baby a bump...

I've heard grumblings (over on the WotC boards) that Complete Psionic uses the new stat block format - except it doesn't include lines for Advancement or Treasure, nor does it include an AC break down. I haven't seen the book; I was wondering if anybody who has seen it has a comment.

I like the new stat block format - but how can you have a monster stat block without an "advancement" entry? How can you not mention what sort of treasure the critter normally has? I don't normally care about the AC breakdown - I can typically reverse engineer them fairly quick - but I know plenty of other folks who like to have that information right at their finger tips.

Was it an oversight from WotC, or can we expect this in MM4 too?

-- John

Damn - I should've asked for a beer instead. :D

Anyway... The good news, ericthecleric, is I just got a reply from Mike for the submission I sent back in early February. So he's not kidding. ;) The bad news is it was a rejection. :(

Do I get a cookie? :)

Depends. Currently he seems to be taking a little longer. I've heard back from him for some queries both before and after recent submissions (with "recent" meaning the past quarter). Prior to this, though, Mike was fairly quick at acknowledging receipt of a submission.

I know, for example, that I have a submission from early February that's currently unacknowledged. I fret over submissions a lot less now than I did a year or so ago, though. I'll probably send Mike an e-mail at the end of April/early May to check in on some things. I used to send those sorts of e-mails more frequently. ;)

My advice at this point would be that if you reach 6 weeks without hearing back from Mike one way or another, you should consider a follow up e-mail asking him to verify receipt. Don't resend the article, though, unless Mike asks you to. No sense cluttering up his inbox. :)

--John

You and me both, Ashavan.

-- John

I'd be interested, too. I might have some revision work I need to do now...

Delericho wrote:

Phil. L wrote:

I'm just wandering whether WotC will ever make the new stat blocks available to the OGL companies.

Do they need to? I was under the impression that a stat block was just a way of presenting information, and that the license only covered the information itself, rather than presentation. Of course, I might be wrong.

That should be true, but I've heard that WotC says it's not possible for other companies to use it. That makes no sense to me, but it's what I heard.

That's really interesting... Can you recall where you heard it?

Aw, man! I saw Jeremy's name and was hoping to get a new, super-cool tip. ;)

Not having the exact HD hasn't been an issue during game so far, and all I need is the amount of HD when it comes to turning undead. Never needed it for any other reason.

Some spell effects (such as sleep) are dependent upon hit dice as well.

Dungeon 134 and 135 have no Forgotten Realms or Eberron content

So what?

ROFL!

That's awesome, Hal! That Sutter guy has no sense of humor! :P :P

If you don't mind more of a hack n slash type mentality, I mostly enjoed DMing Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil, and thoroughly enjoyed playing City of the Spider Queen.

Here's the list.

If you scroll back through the thread, you'll find some other good stuff from Wes.

Right here in this thread...

I'd rather play the well-planned, thought out scenario, even if my character's reason for doing so is a bit shaky, rather than spending an afternoon on the wandering damage table.

Sometimes, the best reason for your character is, "Gee, my friend Bob the Fighter really wants to do this. He's saved my ass more than once; guess I'll help him out this time. Besides, I'm likely to make money doing this."

I've never really accepted, "but my character wouldn't do that" as a very good excuse from a player. It's really not difficult to find a viable reason - my friends wanna do this, I'll get paid some phat loot, it'll help make me famous, whatever.

I agree with you, Brent. We also play every other week - and only for about 4 1/2 hours. I try really hard to offer up plot hooks that appeal to at least two players; sometimes, though, other players need to suck it up and use a generic excuse to go on an adventure.

So here's a crazy question for the editors. Is there any chance of beefing up BotB by one page? That's what - another 500-700 words, give or take? By adding one more page to the format, it'll allow writers to get more than 3 or 4 items in with the current format.

Anyway - just a crazy thought late on April Fool's Day. ;)

personally, I would have sent a detailed outline of the article (of course, I dont know the rules and such); or a polished rough draft.

They want a query when you have an idea for an article. What that query looks like is generally up to you as the writer; certainly, you want to include some of the cool elements your article will cover. A rough draft, though, isn't a good idea. An outline may not be a good idea, either. One of the things your query needs to do is excite the editor - and things don't get much more boring than an outline. ;0

Everyone here is reading them and remembering them and thats what the PBM company wants.

Everyone except me. ;) I really mean I don't notice 'em. I barely notice the artwork that's part of the articles. ;)

The old format was atrocious.

I wouldn't go that far. ;) The old format was great - at first. But most of the problems it presented have been hit on here already:

I've had class acts take longer than 8 months from submission to print. ;) Though I guess 8 is about average.

I do think it'll be harder than ever to get a class act article printed now. Instead of running 11 articles a month, they're now running only three. So there's just about 1/3rd as many slots, and still just as many ideas and submissions (or so I assume). This is good for the readers, because it raises the overall quality of the articles, since now only the best of the best get in. It's not as good for the writers, who could sometimes get an article slipped in simply because Mike had nothing else to put in that slot that month. :D

Keeping within the set word count is one of the hardest tasks of writing adventures, especially when you have to take an axe to your work and have to decide which bit you like most, and which bit you must lose for another day.

It's not just a problem with just adventures. ;) I tend to be over my word count a lot more than under, so I've had to take an axe to my work on more than one instance. I can still hear the cries of pain and anguish for my work. :P

Rich - thanks for sharing that! It's really neat to see the query for it, and compare the differences - something as simple as a name changing (Refrum) to the whole sauhagin thing being replaced.

One other thing that's really interesting - the length of the query! I count it at just over 1700 words! And the only way I get it to fit on two pages is to reduce the font size to 10 - a size that strains my eyes. *shrug* I guess when something is such top-notch quality, you can bend the rules, eh? ;)