Sorry for Iorskan being useless this fight.
He can’t see what is in the fog
The fog smells bad
It’s sticky in there
Put together and he won’t go in. OOC I know he should, but IC it feels wrong to do so. Hence the apology
Well, dretches only cast at CL 2, so the stinking cloud won't last much longer.
Do you want those of us acting at the top of the round to wait to post our round 3 actions until all of the round 2 actions are posted, or can we consider the post-NPC part of round 2 and the pre-NPC part of round 3 to be one big PC initiative block? The latter is kinda what I had in mind. That way, anyone we're waiting for a post from is just considered to be delaying action until before the next NPC turn comes up.
You might also want to reexamine the commas and semicolons in the initiative list.
Kinda beats the whole point of rolling seperate initiative, doesn't it, if everyone winds up in one block anyway? ',:\
I don't know what you people want from the initiative.
I'm cool with it though, just make sure to post what round you're acting on at the top of the post so's we can keep things straight.
I don't think so. The point of having a high initiative is to get your first turn before the enemy gets theirs. Basically, if you win initiative, you get an extra turn at the beginning of combat, and after that we proceed to alternate between "the PC turn" and "the NPC turn". That way, you don't have to worry about keeping track of which round a turn occurs in.
Step 1: The PCs that win initiative get a turn (if any).
Step 2: The NPCs get a turn.
Step 3: All PCs get a turn.
Step 4: Repeat steps 2 and 3 until the combat is over.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yep. I'm lost in the whole initiative discussion. Which is fine.
Yep. I'm lost in the whole initiative discussion. Which is fine.
My thoughts exactly
Yep. I'm lost in the whole initiative discussion. Which is fine.
The idea is to basically break initiative down to a binary question: Did you beat the NPCs in initiative, yes or no? If you did, you get a turn before their first-round turn. Otherwise, you don't. After that, the players that go at the end of the first round and those that go at the beginning of the second round become one initiative block, and you just alternate between PCs and NPCs.
Ok, so I think the GM is trying to kill us.
Auger Kytons aren't on the normal summon monster list. They can be summoned with a Ring of Summoning Affinity (Kyton), or as a standard action with the Summon Evil Monster feat. Since he said it was a standard action, that suggests the latter, but a summoner with the ring would probably explain it too. In either case, it requires casting Summon Monster III to summon ONE augur kyton. Summoning 4 at once requires a Summon Monster V spell. This means we're dealing with an invisible 9th-level wizard (or summoner, which would also explain the standard action summons, but would mean those kytons are going to stick around a lot longer) at level 3. Clearly, the AP has gone out the window.
This just became a "run away" encounter. I wish we had just procured some explosives to collapse the basement in on these guys...
Shall we send the signal to start the above ground attack and flee upstairs? With a 9th level wizard in the mix, we might not be able to win, but we can certainly do some damage on the way out. Have our guys grab some torches and set fire to the walls, and keep the troops busy long enough to allow the fire to spread enough that they won't be able to put it out before the whole place burns down?
There is some metamagic that might have increased the number of summons to allow 4 from a Summon Monster IV, but those would probably increase the spell level anyway. Superior Summoning could allow 4 (with a maximum roll on the 1d3) to be summoned with a Summon Monster IV spell, though that would also mean that the summons are augmented, as that feat is a prerequisite. Even so, that would mean a level 7+ wizard AND a level 5+ wizard (one high voice and one deep voice tells us there are two) who will probably continue to spam summons.
And of course, Ozzy wouldn't know all this numerical stuff, but she would know that summoning 4 augur kytons requires much stronger magic than they expected to encounter.
All over my head. But don’t worry...anything that comes at us will be eaten and/or murdered
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What Iorskan said. Awn knows naught of wizardry or summonsing, but he knows, through the power of dreams, that perhapsmaybeoneday a great dragon could potentially be a great wreaker of havoc.
|
Auger Kytons aren't on the normal summon monster list. They can be summoned with a Ring of Summoning Affinity (Kyton), or as a standard action with the Summon Evil Monster feat. Since he said it was a standard action, that suggests the latter, but a summoner with the ring would probably explain it too. In either case, it requires casting Summon Monster III to summon ONE augur kyton. Summoning 4 at once requires a Summon Monster V spell. This means we're dealing with an invisible 9th-level wizard (or summoner, which would also explain the standard action summons, but would mean those kytons are going to stick around a lot longer) at level 3. Clearly, the AP has gone out the window.
Ozzy, if you could, please do me a favor- this, at least IMO, comes dangerously close to metagaming. You're actively planning decisions based on things your character shouldn't know- seeing as Ozzy has likely never played Pathfinder. Either way, I trust the DM to give us appropriate encounters, not kill us encounters, so just chill out!
If we need to run, we will, but this is certainly not the time to start thinking about it. We've got how many bandit PC's with us, and 2 kobolds, who haven't even joined the fray yet. We'll be fine.
Speaking of which, what are our lovely NPC friends doing?
On a completely separate note, GM, How is the DR system working out for you? We’ve had a few combats now. Is there anything that needs tweaking or is it too soon to tell?
Re: Armor as DR
It’s working out fine! We’ll get a bit more stress testing of the system in the minionfest upstairs, but so far I’ve no complaints.
Re: Falgrim Sneeg
Not to confirm or deny anything, but if Sneeg had fifth level spells I think he would have opened with them. Sneeg was built with PC rules, and was actually really fun to design. Last high level caster you guys fought was locked down and slaughterafied, so I wanted to make Sneeg a more interesting fight. But he’s well within the 3 CR range that marks “fair” encounters, when the NPCs are spoken for. (Speaking of them, they’ll be moving into the room now that they have room to do so. They shoulda by all rights done so this turn, so I’ll give them two turns next round.)
Though, I didn’t know that Sneeg would be fought right here (or at level three, rather than four) until you made the plan to ambush the casters through the tunnel. I built him around the same time I rebuilt Auchs and the Stag Lord, his spells are better suited for flying about the sky and controlling the battlefield then fighting a small army in an enclosed space. He also had some nice synergy with the manticore, their tactics complemented each other. But that’s the way the cookie crumbles, neh?
If you guys give me half a chance, I’ll talk your ears off about all my nefarious plans. Which isn’t a great trait in a DM! So tell ya what, I’ll bottle it all in for now and I’ll post character builds and the strategies I had planned after the bandits‘ expectations been toasted.
Clearly, the AP has gone out the window.
In the AP, Sneeg was a level one warrior without a developed personality. So, no arguments there. :-)
Ozzy, if you could, please do me a favor- this, at least IMO, comes dangerously close to metagaming. You're actively planning decisions based on things your character shouldn't know- seeing as Ozzy has likely never played Pathfinder. Either way, I trust the DM to give us appropriate encounters, not kill us encounters, so just chill out!
I'm trying to work out how that last action was possible without the character we're fighting being 3x our level. My character wouldn't know those specifics, but what Ozzy's knowledge of these creatures was specifically pointed out in a spoiler, and she knows enough about summoning to be worried by it. I think that's plenty of in-character motivation to make the suggestions I did (which I made out of character, because barking out orders in-character wouldn't work without explaining them to the other players, sorry if that's metagaming).
Oh, and WRT our NPCs, the GM's tactics so far have made it clear that their only use in this fight (the downstairs one, at least) will be getting in our way until they get killed en masse. I say leave them where they are. The survivors will just turn against us for getting them killed otherwise.
|
|
Wow! So much going on since I went to work! This is awesome, but now I feel bad, because I think I ruined Ozzy's plan....
@Ozzy: I just know that I personally don't want to know the stats/CR of the creatures we are fighting until AFTER we've defeated them. This way, I know my decisions are based on what my character would do in the moment, not necessarily what Artemis P would do. I don't know, maybe I'm just being a stick in the mud; but this is the second time it's occurred, so I figured I should say something. Carry on!
Some people have more trouble separating in-character and out-of-character motivations than others, and it wouldn't be the first time other players have asked me to tone down my out-of-character analysis (or keep it to myself). When combats run as long (in real-world time) as PBP ones often do, I find the out-of-character detective work is often more than half the fun.
Honestly, part of the reason I brought it up was that I was a little concerned that our GM had woefully miscalculated something, resulting in a much more difficult encounter than he had intended (or perhaps just a number of creatures from one summons that is not actually possible with the character's stats?). He's at least (all but) confirmed that we're not fighting someone with 5th-level spell slots, though I'm still a little concerned that our large number of (so far, effectively useless) NPCs were part of his calculation for encounter level.
After we finish the assault on the fort, I suggest we try to refrain from leading an army of low-level minions around, so as to avoid having encounters thrown at us that have been modified based on calculations that are broken by their presence, lest we end up without any subjects to rule.
Some people have more trouble separating in-character and out-of-character motivations than others, and it wouldn't be the first time other players have asked me to tone down my out-of-character analysis (or keep it to myself). When combats run as long (in real-world time) as PBP ones often do, I find the out-of-character detective work is often more than half the fun.
I’m much the same, so I get where you’re coming from! I’m also, to tell the truth, pretty happy when you do it, I put a bit of effort into designing these things and it’s fun to see other people thinking about them, too.
I'm still a little concerned that our large number of (so far, effectively useless) NPCs were part of his calculation for encounter level.
Nope. They didn’t factor into it at all and weren’t, in fact, the NPCs I was thinking of when I spoke of CR.
Though, I thought you’d have to start losing before someone was desperate enough to open Nugrah’s cell.
It bears mentioning, though, that Sneeg was built in advance of your plan to ambush him through a tunnel. The way I initially envisioned it, he was going to be one of the last of the lieutenants to bite it, and the party was likely to be level four at the time. But then you guys came up with a plan I (and by extension, the NPCs) hadn’t anticipated, and it changed the order you encountered everyone, as well as invalidating much of their tactics. Which is the glory of the game!
Nope. They didn’t factor into it at all and weren’t, in fact, the NPCs I was thinking of when I spoke of CR.
For the sake of the other players, I'll refrain from listing the conclusions I'm drawing from this statement.
|
|
Though, I thought you’d have to start losing before someone was desperate enough to open Nugrah’s cell.
Remember- Abaos is great at making plans. He's terrible at sorting good plans from bad!
For the sake of the other players, I'll refrain from listing the conclusions I'm drawing from this statement.
At least until after we've defeated Sneeg. Once we've beaten him, I'm curious! But thank you!
Wow! So much going on since I went to work! This is awesome, but now I feel bad, because I think I ruined Ozzy's plan....
Btw, the "cover up the gate" comment was because I realized that as long as the caster that summoned the augur kytons (the deep-voiced one, we don't know who this is, but we're pretty sure it's not Nugrah, but he seems to be in Nugrah's cell for some reason) was stuck behind the portcullis, we could effectively prevent him from casting at us by blocking his line of effect, giving us time to deal with the first one (the one with the high-pitched voice, who I think is falgrim sneeg?).
Does scent's 30ft range go through walls, or does it have to move around them?
|
|
Btw, the "cover up the gate" comment was because I realized that as long as the caster that summoned the augur kytons (the deep-voiced one, we don't know who this is, but we're pretty sure it's not Nugrah, but he seems to be in Nugrah's cell for some reason) was stuck behind the portcullis, we could effectively prevent him from casting at us by blocking his line of effect,
Yeah- only problem is, now all he has to do is walk out the door. Which I had already said I was going to do, twice, so it felt like cheating to change that action despite your plan. Though, Abaos is definetly going to try and prevent him from leaving!
(the one with the high-pitched voice, who I think is falgrim sneeg?)
Call it a hunch, but I'm betting the high- pitched one is Ralmog Who Weeps. Remember, Ralmog had three turns to act before we could, while Falgrim Sneeg failed his check to hear us talking to Jen. IDK, we'll find out!
So, apparently, I'm not very good at paying attention.
I was under the impression that there was only ONE wizard who managed to turn invisible and then teleport into Nugrah's cell, because I didn't notice the high/low voice thing.
Bleh. >_<
Wait.... falrim sneeg spoke before he went invisible. Unless he's trying to alter his voice, we should know which one is his.
EDIT:
Call it a hunch, but I'm betting the high- pitched one is Ralmog Who Weeps. Remember, Ralmog had three turns to act before we could, while Falgrim Sneeg failed his check to hear us talking to Jen. IDK, we'll find out!
Are we supposed to know this information as non-gm players?
Sneeg is the low pitched voice.
The high pitched voice is very high pitched. It's even squeakier than Nakpik.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Unrelatedly, this is a thing that I drew.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ok, well, I guess we can know this, then. Interesting.
On a side note, I absolutely forgot to roll bleed damage last turn, so rather than make a whole new post just for that, I'll do it here instead.
Unrelatedly, this is a thing that I drew.
Dm, that's fantastic! Great job!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Unrelatedly, this is a thing that I drew.
I agree with abaos here! It's funny how out of place abaos looks with the party of monsters and demihumans
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Moved to Discussion because my reply got too long.
Ozzy, I do have a waterskin so I agree with that, and the grease-to-reveal-invis stuff, but I actually disagree with the invisible scroll thing. I had a discussion with the DM a few months ago about whether or not an invisible person would be able to see with their eyes shut, and we came to the conclusion that invisibility has to be an illusion that alters how someone is perceived, not an actual change in how they interact with light.
If light were bent around you or passed right through you, you wouldn't be able to see, and thus invisibility would make you blind. However, such is not the case in the land of Pathfinding.
Seeing as you can cast grease past allies, at odd angles, and through windows too small to fit your hand through, I should imagine it comes into existence where it is conjured, rather than spraying from the caster’s hands or mouth.
The ground is made of dirt, so I’d say it’s pretty dirty. If you want to sling mud, you can target two adjacent squares as a standard action. If there’s an invisible target in one of those squares, I’ll roll in secret to see if you find them.
If invisible creatures couldn’t see themselves and their stuff they’d be able to see fine with their eyes closed, right through their eyelids, or see with a bag over their head. Which would be fun. Except, it can’t work that way, because if light actually passes through an invisible creature than it’d pass through their retinas and they’d be blind. I think that invisibility, the illusion spell, just makes it look to others like you aren’t there. If it fooled the caster too, it’d be a spell of sharply limited utility.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I gotta disagree on that one. The thing about not being able to see might be true of "invisibility" in any sense that it might exist in the real world, but I don't think that logic applies here.
The Invisibility spell is an illusion, but more specifically it is a glamer. "A glamer spell changes a subject’s sensory qualities, making it look, feel, taste, smell, or sound like something else, or even seem to disappear." Something glamerred to be invisible appears, to some subset of the senses, to not be there. It doesn't allow light to pass through or bend around something, it just makes it imperceptible to certain senses. When you're invisible, light still hits your eye normally, but someone standing on the other side of you will also see that light (btw, they don't just think they're seeing it, because glamers are not mind-affecting). There is also no save that allows you to see an invisible thing (only one to resist being unwillingly turned invisible), so unless the invisible character is also under the effect of a spell like See Invisibility, he should not be able to see himself or his gear.
Now, the implications for an invisible person's vision are interesting. I think it's clear that the eye would still focus light onto the retina, and the retina would still sense it (though there would be no way to observe this from outside the eye, because either the eye and its interactions with light are invisible, or (if you use See Invisibility), they aren't. Eyeglasses would also function for the wearer. They would not be able to see the glasses, but they would be able to see through the glasses, just as if they were visible (though another creature would not see this distortion of light, even if that creature was also under the effects of an invisibility spell). One can, of course, imagine alternate fictional physics under which this might be the case (like if there was an "invisibility dimension" in which creatures can see one another, but non-invisible creatures can't), but that's not how the spell works.
Now, what about eyelids, blindfolds, hands held in front of the eyes, etc? These are more grey areas, but I will point out that being able to see your eyelids and being able to see what's on the other side of your eyelids aren't necessarily the same thing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Love the picture you drew! Wish I was a better word-smith so I could express that more eloquently, but it is awesome
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Solution: quantum physics. The light both bends around the person AND interacts with them. To an outside observer. When the system is observed, it collapses upon the light bending around them. To the one the magic affects, the system collapses into that the light interacts normally to them. Both realities exist side-by-side, existing together, but simultaneously separate.
When this is over, you'll have to tell me how to you got an imp/quasit improved familiar to a (7th level?) wizard to be able to reliably use scrolls and wands. They don't have a spell list of their own, so you'd have to really pump UMD (something that interests me, obviously). I have ideas (and MOST of the sources of MOST of the bonuses seem obvious), but hopefully your implementation involves some magic items to get him over the top that I can claim for Mr. Winky...
Of course, I'm also hoping to claim some unused scrolls/wands to use similarly.
When this is over, you'll have to tell me how to you got an imp/quasit improved familiar to a (7th level?) wizard to be able to reliably use scrolls and wands.
DM_Schollar, I hope you aren't using any of my familiar stacking tactics; Cuz that's just flat-out broken...
Broken familiar stacking tactics? I would be interested in reading about those...
Re: Invisibility
It's fun to think about these sorts of things!
The Invisibility spell is an illusion, but more specifically it is a glamer. "A glamer spell changes a subject’s sensory qualities, making it look, feel, taste, smell, or sound like something else, or even seem to disappear." Something glamerred to be invisible appears, to some subset of the senses, to not be there. It doesn't allow light to pass through or bend around something, it just makes it imperceptible to certain senses.
We're in agreement! Invisibility can't possibly actually manipulate light. (Same as silent image, for that matter, since figments become transparent if you disbelieve in them.) But I see no reason for a glamer to effect everyone equally, any more than I see a reason for figments to effect everyone equally. They aren't dealing with light. They aren't dealing with real things. They're illusion spells from the illusion school, which cause people to perceive things other than what exists.
If you couldn't see yourself and your gear, even if you for some reason aren't blind, invisibility would still hurt the caster in a number of ways not mentioned in the spell description.
You wouldn't be able to retrieve items from storage without spending what would most probably be several full round actions, I'd probably inflict some penalty for moving through difficult terrain (since you wouldn't be able to see where you're putting your feet), I'd probably inflict some kind of a penalty to hit (since you can't see your own hands) and AC (since you're relying solely on kinosthetic sense to tell where your weapons and shields are) rather than the bonuses to those statistics wrapped into the spell. And you wouldn't be able to avoid gaze attacks, and if your weapon has a haft (such as a spear) I'd adjudicate major penalties to hit with it seeing as you have no idea how far you're choked up on the weapon.
I think it's a whole lot simpler to just assume that invisibility doesn't effect the caster.
DM_Schollar, I hope you aren't using any of my familiar stacking tactics; Cuz that's just flat-out broken...
I wouldn't dream of it. -_-
I must not have been in my right mind when I read this yesterday. You have Quick Study, why not swap mirror image for something more useful?
People, if and when I miss your questions or forget to answer them, call me out on it in the discussion thread!
I’ll say that over the past while that you’ve been prisoner of the bandits, you’ve conducted many daring missions to collect and hide your belongings, and are thus equipped with everything on your character sheet.
Glitterdust could really turn this around, especially since there's no save against the part that negates invisibility. Web would probably hurt us more than help us while we're down here, but it could be REALLY useful upstairs.
Edit: The Quick Study exploit is actually REALLY good, because although you can only have one second-level spell prepared at a time at your level, you can use one, and then use the exploit to prepare a different one in its place to use later. Without it, there doesn't appear to be any way that you could use two different second-level spells in the same day.
I must not have been in my right mind when I read this yesterday. You have Quick Study, why not swap mirror image for something more useful?
You're not the only one misreading things; I somehow managed to look right over Quick Study when I was reading over my own character sheet, even though I specifically remembering making it (along with improved init.) a priority during character creation. -_-
Probably because I wrote it down as "Arcane Exploits/Quick Study", so when I skimmed over it my eyes just saw "Arcane Exploits". Gah!
Edit: Did something come up with Awn, or is he just generally busy?
Edit: Did something come up with Awn, or is he just generally busy?
That's one of the problems with PBP. Sometime people get really busy, or go camping without an internet connection, or just forget about the game and don't check in for a while, usually without any warning or explanation, sometimes for several weeks. Sometimes people will even ghost you and start ignoring your game while continuing to post in others.
It's a bigger problem when it happens while you're in initiative, of course, or if you're in the middle of an interaction that that character is essential to (your party face in a diplomatic situation) than the rest of the time. Otherwise, everyone tends to just assume that the character is following along and being unusually quiet.
If it holds the game up too much, the GM will usually bot the character to allow the game to continue. If you KNOW you're going to be unavailable, it's good form to give the GM explicit permission to bot your character, ideally with some guidance about your general plan so that he/she doesn't do something you wouldn't do.
Awn's last post was only a couple of days ago, and it's not uncommon for people to not post at all over the weekend, so we're not at the point where his absence is odd, yet.
Awn’s in a different time zone (Australia, I think) so he usually posts during what we’d consider the middle of the night.
I've been thinking more about the crafter cohort I want to build. Arcanist might actually be a better (or at least more fun) way to play that character than Wizard. I also stumbled across the Artisan third-party class that would make a good base for this type of character (though it would require changing some other things I had planned). Before I put too much thought into this class, would the GM allow that class?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If only being in another timezone were my reason for lacklustre posting!
Awesome picture DM!!!! Awn looks cool, and I love Guthruc's face! Jen looks suitably wistful/mystified (wistified? mystful?), Ozzy right at home with her family and Abaos has just the right amount of "whelp!?!?" Fantastic. Except Iorskan. Iorskan needs to be much bigger. And covering most of us with his majesty. Which is bigger. And better. Than all of us. Much bigger. And better. Let's make the Broken Stolen Kingdom Lands Great Again.