Trivia question, Mended:
Hearkening back to the sequence of events just before we met Kerrdremak -- if Kairon had the martial flexibility ability, would he be able to use a move action to emulate Improved Initiative before opening the door? Basically using the ability as a precombat buff?
|
Martial flexibility is a move action initially, and goes to smaller actions later. You can take a move action out of combat, so yes, you should be able to activate Improved Initiative through martial flexibility if you do so before the action that triggers rolling of initiative. A 12th level brawler can even use it as an immediate action, so he should be able to say "I'm going to use a use of martial flexibility to get a +4 on this roll" AFTER the GM says "roll initiative".
Got another flurry of questions for you, Mended --
1) The close wounds spell: we've discussed it twice (once with the conclusion of using the Spell Compendium version, the second time with the Miniatures Handbook), and I would like confirmation of which way you want it to be. SC's version uses a 2nd-level slot and scales from 5.5 average healing to 7.5; MH's uses a 3rd-level slot and remains at a constant average of 5 points of healing. Which one? Last time I'll ask -- honest! :)
2) Concerning the Healing domain's healer's blessing power: The rules text of the entry indicates that "cure" spells get the +50% benefit, but it does not say that "cure" spells get that benefit. So, do spells like close wounds and breath of life get the boost as well? Or is it limited to just cure-named spells?
3) And, finally -- If Kairon multiclassed into brawler, would he be able to gain the benefits of the Snakebite Striker and Wild Child archetypes simultaneously?
Thanks, Mended!!
This is the last discussion we had about close wounds and I stick by that. So the level three version is the one I'll allow. For healer's blessing I have no problem with it applying to any spell that cures, even if it doesn't have Cure in the spell name. About the two Brawler archetypes... O.o ... ? You'd have to do some serious narrative convincing to coax me into allowing such different archetypes to apply simultaneously. Those two things don't seem to be very congruous with each other. I certainly think a narrative case could be made for allowing both, but I'd need to see the narrative case before I said yes.
Chillel, full breaks given, I cannot imagine trying to participate in this online distraction while being fully RL distracted like that. Kudos to you for even attempting it. :) Hope your caregivers find something to help you get the sleep every human needs. :D
Well, one has to do something. And apart from being distracted, it is unpleasant but not the end of the world.
Actually I consulted a sleep expert doctor who told me to stop drinking so much caffeine and that made a lot of difference all by itself. I am making progress but trying to break a bunch of longstanding bad habits. I will get there.
Chillel/Boudacia. My apologies. I forgot to consider you were undergoing those studies at the time. I applaud you for the effort made of posting under such circumstances. Forgive me please? :D
There isn't much to forgive. No offence was taken [well, not any that lasted more than a minute].
And looking at online RPGs did give me something to do. Albeit not very well. :(
Okay all, paizo.com was down all morning for me, and just now came back up. Unfortunately for you all, I'm off of work in about ten minutes, and have a very busy afternoon at home. Not to mention my home internet was down this morning, and might still be. It's entirely likely that I won't be able to post anything in gameplay (including robot-posting for Goruck) until tomorrow morning! Sorry! See you soon.
MW
Rassumfrassum boards ate my post!!!! EDIT: Three frackin' times!!!!
But -- Yay!! The boards are back!!!!
Things I wanted out of multiclassing: 1) no loss of BAB progression, 2) access to Acrobatics and Perception (and maybe even Stealth) as class skills (and the higher number of skill ranks granted, the better), 3) a degree of narrative consistency with Kairon's backstory and that weird feat I took at level 1, and 4) negligible impact on my cleric/healing abilities. And there's no real way to get it all. And I'm fine with that.
1) Let's start with the inquisitor. The biggest draws to this class were the ranged weapon proficiencies, 6 skill ranks per level, stern glare, and the continued progression toward healer's blessing. I don't think we really need *more* low-level divine spells per day, even if comprehend languages would probably be my first pick for the two that Kairon would learn. The BAB hit is a very big deal, and makes the longbow proficiency look that much less appealing. While it grants Perception as a class skill, it *doesn't* put Acrobatics on the list, which is, frankly, a higher priority than Stealth (at least at this point). Stern glare matches up quite well with the way I've been playing Kairon, but it plays directly against the Provincial drawback -- acquiring an ability to counteract a defining characteristic is reasonable, but somewhat unappealing. Getting to empowered cures is a pretty big deal for me -- I ran the numbers yesterday, and I'm impressed.
THE BOTTOM LINE: The loss of 1 BAB is too big a deal. So that automatically rules out a long, long list of other options.
2) I knew the ranger had an archetype or two that could get an animal companion at level one, and the 6 skill ranks per level made it a balanced consideration with the bloodrager ('cause the flavor/storyline options with the bloodrager are still the most appealing, and it's been on my mind the longest). But, of course, the favored enemy ability stuck in my craw. And I couldn't find an archetype that allowed for a level one animal companion and replaced FE in a way that I found appropriate. So, naturally, I took it the next step to . . .
3) . . . the slayer. Full BAB, 6 skill ranks per level (and gives all three targets as class skills!), and add studied target on top of that?! What's not to like? Well, nothing -- except for the fact that it just doesn't match up to Kairon's character. *sad face*
But it's got an outside chance of making the cut -- BOTTOM LINE: 1%.
4) And so on to the bloodrager. Let's be frank about it -- the destined bloodline is the best, with the arcane bloodline as a close second. Either one of those could match Kairon's story well. Sorta. But to 'crunch' well with the fiendish blood trait and the Accursed feat, I felt that I should examine the abyssal and infernal bloodlines most. I readily dismissed abyssal (and that, out of hand, really) because the aesthetics of growing demonic claws while bloodraging didn't appeal -- even though it's more consistent than the other option, really, even if we ignore the metagame considerations. The infernal bloodline granted three instances of the flaming weapon ability, in effect: this appealed to my choice of Fire as a domain, it increased our damage output a little bit, and certainly could serve to evoke some Sarenite side-eyes ("Ummmm . . . Brother? You stabbed that foul being, and burned him with magic flame, but . . . is that brimstone I smell??").
To which we could add Acrobatics and Perception as class skills (Score!!), 6 rounds of more damage and more HP (woot!), and fast movement. I love being able to move quickly in this game. Have I ever told y'all that? Ever since I saw the 3.x scout class, I've been in love with mobility of all kinds in d20 RPGs.
But the infernal bloodline (which was my intended option, had I taken bloodrager -- though I haven't *totally* ruled it out yet) gave us even more fire than we already have, and I think we've got more than enough between Kairon and Dolok already.
And then it hit me: if Kairon chooses to rage, he won't be able to cast. And being fatigued after willingly dropping the rage mid-combat to be able to field whatever corner case/emergency comes up may be more crippling than we can bear. Which would relegate the ability to either a 'first day's fight' or 'last day's fight' kind of thing, in a way. Which would beg the question: 'why bother with it?'
BOTTOM LINE HERE: I think we're down to about a 29% likelihood that the bloodrager will get the nod. I'm sorry, fast movement! :(
5) The snakebite striker brawler archetype keeps things simple -- get some sneak attack damage, the ability to qualify for additional combat feats (which, admittedly, is a draw, considering Kairon's status as the team dunce), and the option to punch something and mean it.
Explaining how Kairon developed a knack for sneak attack would be pretty easy, considering his ability with Heal -- if you know how to fix something, you also know how to break it. No big deal there.
Even as much as I feel we need to get Kairon in the thick of things in combat (more out of necessity than my natural impulses to mix it up on the battle grid), I can honestly say that the brawler's cunning would almost certainly never be used.
Gaining Improved Unarmed Strike is perfect for Kairon. We won't always be able to count on the bad guys to cooperate and stay 10 feet away or more. Even if we find a way to get the cleric into some mithral (It's mithril, dangit!!!) breastplate, upgrading that melee damage by two die sizes and adding his full Strength mod is HUGE.
But -- that martial flexibility . . . .
6) And so we come to the wild child archetype. It's got the skills I want (If not as many ranks. :( ), full BAB, all the advantages of the snakebite striker, and an animal companion. I get what I want for Kairon, and at the same time open up some new territory, mechanically and narratively, by going from "Oh, hey, we've got a fox follower!" to "What's Gloria gonna do next?". A firefoot has an Intelligence score of 2, which means she could learn 6 tricks already, and we'd get to add one right away (animal companion table). Granted, that would entail weeks of gametime effort on Kairon's part, RAW, but being a dog owner, I get it. We'd get a 16 HP Tiny tracker (definitely the bonus trick!) that has some significant bonuses to Perception and Acrobatics right at level 4. Cool deal.
BUT:
Let's just say that I took full advantage of that, getting my fourth level of cleric at fifth character level and then took the feat Boon Companion. Almost "overnight", Gloria goes from a 16 HP one-trick fox-y to a 45+ HP combat support platform. She'd never be as viable an attacker as Kanga, but she could set flanks, scout for the group, keep watch at night, and function as a "Kanga Lite".
And Kairon would be martially flexible, have the ability to punch things readily, and get another level of spellcasting.
Brawler 1/Cleric 4//Half-druid 5??!! It seems like too much, even to me.
There are a couple of mitigating factors here, though:
* -- Gloria wouldn't get any stronger on her own. Her contributions would peak then and there. No mas.
* -- Having her as an animal companion would serve as a 'weak link' in the party: resource consumption in terms of spells, daily abilities, and coinage would apply, and Kairon would be permanently inclined to keep her out of a sense of responsibility and companionship (not begrudgingly, but perhaps so for others). Good for story, though. :)
Furthermore, I would feel somewhat obligated to take the second level of brawler, in order to "fully pay" the associated cost. I could certainly be talked out of that, though.
But that's where the real rub comes in: pushing back my spellcasting and cleric abilities two levels may be more than we want to bear as a team, while at the same time I could understand Mended wanting me to do just that . . . .
BOTTOM LINE: This is our 70% option.
What say you, crew?
Mostly for Mended
No matter which way this goes (whether one level or two), I'm going to start trying to incorporate some "more-BAB-1-ish" actions in the future. Gonna throw some punches after stepping into melee, maybe try some Acrobatics moves here and there. 'Cause one of three things is happening -- some brawler, some bloodrager, or some slayer. I'll gameplay according to the responses I get here, as I try to build/find consensus.
Another item: We've talked about close wounds. Would you be receptive to being asked about some other 3.x spells? I've had an excess of free time (how odd!), and there are some spells I'd like to kick up to you for consideration, but I'd like to know a good time to get that particular ball rolling, if at all.
In terms of the narrative for Kairon: I could totally see him deciding to "cleanse" this old monastery and setting up a hospital in its place. That being said, I'll spoiler the next bit, even for you:
EDIT: Oh, yeah -- One more thing!
You'll all be pleased to know that I hashed through the Sacred Summons thing. I had forgotten that it has no prerequisites a 1st-level cleric can't get just from class features. I can take the feat and never worry with the rest of the summoning stuff. Yay! I found what I was missing/had forgotten! So I'm pretty sure that I'll be taking it at level 7, regardless.
|
|
I won't bother to reiterate how great I think Brawler is. I will say that I think that martial flexibility is definitely better than 1d6 sneak attack, IF you are willing to scour the combat feats list for good ways to use it in any given situation. Unless you're trying to qualify for arcane trickster (which is how I discovered the archetype), the main draw of the archetype is that it requires less thought than making effective use of Martial Flexibility.
As for Wild Child, I hadn't even considered Boon Companion, but it does make sense, if you have the feat to spare. One problem is that I believe Gloria is tiny? That means she doesn't threaten adjacent squares, so she won't make a good flanking buddy. A utility companion could still be useful though, just note that you're going to have to sink some skill points into Handle Animal (though depending on GM interpretation, you may be able to mitigate that need by taking boon companion, which gets her past her first ability bump, and putting that ability bump into INT, which makes her smart enough to learn, but not speak, a language). Tiny size does mean a +8 size bonus to stealth, but if you want a combat-capable animal companion (who, I'll point out, won't stay combat capable for terribly long unless you take more levels in a class that advances it), I think you'd want a different one.
I definitely don't think you should take exactly two levels of Wild Child. You would get Brawler's Flurry (which can be used to make two unarmed strikes even if you have both hands full), but if you want to continue taking levels of Brawler, you should probably aim for at least 4. You're basically giving up on advancing your divine casting at that point, but I think we can make up most of the difference with wands if that's the way you want to go.
Getting tired of my posts being eaten. *gripegrumblecuss*
1) If the pattern holds true, there'd be a size increase for Gloria at 4th level, I think. That would get her to Small size, and allow for more combat options.
Though finding animal companion rules for foxes *has* been a bother . . . .
2) Are you recommending 4 levels' worth just to push for the fourth iterative? 'Cause that's the only real draw I see for that heavy an investment -- the two additional levels of animal companion advancement notwithstanding.
Uuummm ... read about half maybe? got tired of it honestly. Too many choices. That's why personally I don't multiclass, except on the very rare occasion. Like taking a rogue at first level and then Psion, Int based class, so skills out the wazoo And a lot of class skills because of rogue class!
Anyways, one thing is absolutely for certain. Whatever you decide, no one can accuse you of not thinking it through! ;)
And yes, the boards being down was horrible! And right now so far, I have to log back in every time I re-load the page?!?!? Getting kinda irritated.
|
|
Getting tired of my posts being eaten. *gripegrumblecuss*
1) If the pattern holds true, there'd be a size increase for Gloria at 4th level, I think. That would get her to Small size, and allow for more combat options.
Though finding animal companion rules for foxes *has* been a bother . . . .
2) Are you recommending 4 levels' worth just to push for the fourth iterative? 'Cause that's the only real draw I see for that heavy an investment -- the two additional levels of animal companion advancement notwithstanding.
Just looking at what you get. Especially if you plan to stick with the longspear primarily and use unarmed strike as a backup for when people get in range (and thus not making full use of Brawler's Flurry) and are not getting the bonus feats because of the Wild Child archetype, I don't think levels 2-3 have all that much to offer. Not nearly as much as level 4. So, IF you take brawler with the Wild Child archetype, and IF it's more than just a one-level dip, I think it's worth going to level 4, which gives you an increased damage die for your unarmed strike, an AC bonus, and the knockout ability.
Edit: Oh, and yes, there probably would be a size increase for a fox animal companion, either at the 4th level or at the 7th.
Syrus, the fact that you are so open about sharing your mental process for leveling Kairon, I think, is awesome. Not many people are willing to share their entire mental process when it comes to leveling up. Add into that the fact that you so strongly consider not only the narrative assets, but what has taken place in the narrative already (i.e. Gloria). All of which points to an impressed and admiring GM. That, of course, means that even though the rules might not dictate it, I'd be willing to make allowances for things that make narrative sense. For example. I might be willing to increase Gloria's size, magically, even before the class rules options make that possible. If that were desired. Point being: thank you for sharing all of that mental process, for a long-time gamer that has NEVER thought that much about leveling up, it was humbling. As you move forward, I like the choice of brawler for all the same reasons you pointed out. I also am very intrigued by the idea of Kairon establishing a hospital at the site of this old monastery. Very cool idea that creates a plethora of narrative hooks, some of which work with things I already had clunking around somewhere near my medulla.
As to 3.x spells, I'm always willing to listen. You point out some of the things you've been looking at. I'll make a call, whenever.
As to the leadership feat, did I ever say I wouldn't allow that? I don't think so. I actually like the leadership feat, especially in a game that has now dropped down to four PCs. Henchman/hirelings might have become a thing even without the leadership feat at higher levels, so, have at it. :D
Here's hoping the boards don't eat this post... They've been absolute crap for the past few days.
Not sure anybody but me is keeping track, but Monday (Oct. 30th) will mark one calendar year that we've been playing this campaign. Thank you all for continuing to provide me one of the most challenging and rewarding gaming experiences I've ever had.
Happy (almost) anniversary everybody!
Your friend,
MW
I had been keeping it eyeballed. :)
Strange incongruence -- this is easily the longest-running game I have ever played, insofar as regular participation goes (everybody being there, keeping the story going, etc.), but it's also the "slowest". Nearly a calendar year to gain two levels (and a fair chunk of a third, considering the current combat -- >.> Mended)*??! My frenetic friends of the tabletop would have quit *long ago*.
But it'd be lying, for me to say that this was anything other than my favorite campaign (as a player), or that this format was anything other than the tops.
Keep at it, Mended! You are appreciated!!
And to my teammates: it continues to be wild, wild fun. Thanks for your time, effort, feedback, and fun-ness!
* - Totally not serious.
As to the leadership feat, did I ever say I wouldn't allow that? I don't think so. I actually like the leadership feat, especially in a game that has now dropped down to four PCs. Henchman/hirelings might have become a thing even without the leadership feat at higher levels, so, have at it. :D
Uh, don't we still have 5 PCs.
And leadership does not become available until level 7, so I am not giving it much thought as yet.
On mental processes on levelling up, I am following a build. Not one I have 100% worked out, but the basic idea is to get very very deadly with ice magic. Things are determined in advance, at least in outline, so there isn't a huge amount to think about.
And we should seriously have started one day later. What could be more auspicious than starting a campaign in which you play a witch than starting on Halloween.
Five PCs, right. I keep forgetting about Goruck... I blame his posting infrequency...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Keep forgetting G... who?
1) RE: brawler levels -- My R&D work continues to pay off!! Hosteling armor. I could stick with one level of brawler, get Boon Companion at 5th, and eventually keep Gloria "safe-ish" for 7500 gp. Considering the implications of a "forever 5th" animal companion, I think that path is solid. I feel no guilt at all in saying that I'm much more likely to not bother with 'brawler 2' now that I've kept processing the data.
2) Handle Animal -- Oh, are y'all gonna get a surprise . . . . Kairon's skipping a rank in Heal!! But absolutely must put a rank/some ranks in HA, if only to get to 5th level.
3) Gloria's size -- I'm not gonna push for a size increase for her without paying for it with Boon Companion. 'Cause I'm nearly certain that she'd get it once treated as a 4th+ level animal companion -- most all the other critters do. And as for doing it magically? Totally your call, Mended -- having raised 10 dogs from birth (or 3 months, which is close enough, in one of those cases), I'm cool with it being an organic thing ("Ummmm . . . I like you and all, but I need to eat, too.") or another Sign from Sarenrae ("Holy Flamin' Fox Ears, Halfman!! Didja see that??!").
4) Brawler's cunning and narrative paths -- I did find a feat (and chain?) I *might* take, with a li'l help from my GM. Hypothetical, Mended: Gloria dies at some point in the story -- could I do some retraining and buy out of the animal companion feature, and go for the Fox Style feat to replace Boon Companion? In tribute to my friend, of course.
More later.
And so it begins (again)!!
5) 3.5 spells for consideration:
1st-level Spells
E.g., Kairon could cast this spell to provide light for up to three minutes. At any point during the duration, he could use his round's actions to make the ranged attack, like so: next round -- 1d8, 2nd round -- 1d8+1, 3rd -- 1d8+2, and so on.
2nd-level Spells
I'll stop there, since the 3rd-level spells aren't relevant. Yet. :)
NOTE: The source for all these spells is Spell Compendium, if that helps.
... As to the exploding of the bombardier kobolds by setting their combustible gear on fire, I'm afraid that's a no-go. Fire magic that is listed as instantaneous, unless otherwise stated in the spell's description, does not have a chance to start persons or attended objects on fire. Sorry!
I agree with this statement of course. BUT I have a question Mended?
Burning Hands Spell description states: "Flammable materials burn if the flames touch them. A character can extinguish burning items as a full-round action." So if I am not mistaken that would seem to indicate it does have a chance of starting persons or attended objects on fire does it not?
Action's to you in gameplay, Dolok!!
*poke*
:D
Yes I was aware that it is my turn, but I was hoping to get an answer to the question about Burning Hands first. But now that I think about it since I am entangled and that cuts my movement down AND calls for a concentration check to cast a spell, I guess I'll go ahead and try to drench myself to get rid of it. If I'm not mistaken Mended did say my Drench spell would wash it off/dissolve it enough right?
He did say it was effective against it *in the context of it (the snot) being difficult terrain*. I'm not sure that holds for one being entangled. Mended?
And as for that -- you're still looking at a DC 15 concentration check to pull it off. At least it's just a 0th, though!
I'd go for the drench, regardless, and get a half-move completed. That way you're 15 feet closer to most of the action, even if you fail the concentration check *and* Mended rules against "washing yourself off".
Best-case: You pass the concentration check, move wherever you want to be, and get your AC back up to max!
Just gonna throw this in here. Dare ya to look!
Yes, I have way too much free time, these days. :D
Just ran the numbers on Acrobatics, and they don't look too good, honestly. Know any good sources of boosts for it?
Elven boots
Elixir of tumbling
Boots of striding and springing
Those are the easy ones. Gonna have to dig deep to make it worthy.
|
|
Which use(s) of acrobatics are you most interested in, avoiding AoOs? You should be able to come up with a masterwork tool that would give you a +2 for 50gp, but it might be tricky to think of a valid one that wouldn't take up your feet slot. Otherwise, it would stack with a magic item, since all the ones I can find for acrobatics provide competence bonuses, and a masterwork tool is a circumstance bonus.
A couple more:
Belt of Tumbling (800gp, +4 competence for moving through threatened squares)
Cat Burglar's Boots (2000gp, +2 competence to Acrobatics, Climb and Stealth, plus 1/day reroll of any one of those skills, and a secret pocket for theives' tools)
Vermilion Rhomboid Ioun Stone (10000gp, +5 competence to Acrobatics and Swim, and the cracked version gives you a +1 for 400gp)
The belt is a good deal if that's what you're after, but it does preclude wearing any of the belts that grant ability bonuses at the same time (though it's cheap enough that by the time you can afford those, it might be worth getting it as a belt-slot tattoo).
Don't forget that Illiam has Craft Wondrous now. I'm assuming we'll get some downtime once we get back to town, so he can make these items for half price. If I'm honestly roleplaying the character though, I don't see him charging you less than 60% of market price. That, or maybe a trade of some kind where he felt like he was getting the better end of the bargain...
Too right on the cash value angle!! :)
But, yes, the AoO avoidance was the objective in taking the skill at all. That said, though, even having dropped 15% (or less) advancement with my past skill selections, going against anything of a CR 5 pushes me down to a 25-ish% chance to beat average CMD (and that's if a TON of good and awesome things happen with that mithril fullplate upon returning to town -- which may or may not be supported by our resident tank, and/or requisite die rolls) over the next few levels. But then it gets much worse -- to the point that I would need to roll natural 20s all day to get the desired result, and even that might not be good enough!
Though, of course -- it's not about avoiding AoOs *all* the time . . . . But I may be better served going in another direction . . . .
Heh. I wonder if I'll ever shut up about this.
... As to the exploding of the bombardier kobolds by setting their combustible gear on fire, I'm afraid that's a no-go. Fire magic that is listed as instantaneous, unless otherwise stated in the spell's description, does not have a chance to start persons or attended objects on fire. Sorry!I agree with this statement of course. BUT I have a question Mended?
Burning Hands Spell description states: "Flammable materials burn if the flames touch them. A character can extinguish burning items as a full-round action." So if I am not mistaken that would seem to indicate it does have a chance of starting persons or attended objects on fire does it not?
I am going to weigh in on this. The general rule, used in the law and also in normal language, is that specific provisions take precedence over general provisions.
Here, I believe that means the general provision is that fire damge is instantaneous and doesn't set fire to anything. The specific provision is the quoted part of the description of burning hands, saying the opposite for that particular spell.
Therefore imho burning hands will set fire to stuff.
It is up to the GM of course.
Dolok -- which version of drench do you use? I've only found one, so far, but I wanted to learn if there were others.
And boy, oh boy, but is Paizo having some technical difficulties!!
Just gonna throw this in here. Dare ya to look!
Yes, I have way too much free time, these days. :D
I did have a look at this Syrus, but it didn't register it was you.
I like Star Wars. But I don't want to learn the Spheres of Power system to play in it. My tabletop role playing group keep starting games in new systems and then stopping them shortly after, so I have had my fill of learning new RPGs. And I am in enough online campaigns already.
Three things:
1) That line in burning hands, as I understand it, was written to explain that if the spell was directed at unattended flammable objects, they would ignite. The actual spacing of the paragraphs becomes important in understanding that it doesn't apply.
In the printed original there was like a character return between the two lines of description, physically separating one from the other.
In the end the second descriptive line was meant to clarify that if you wanted to use burning hands to, like, start the thatch of a roof on fire, you could. Ergo, a rather "expensive" way to start a fire. So, no, burning hands does not set any attended flammable objects on fire.
2) I did say drench would wash off the goo. Regardless of whether the goo was on a PC or the floor, so Dolok's goo is fully cleaned off, Dolok is no longer entangled, good for you!!!
3) Paizo.com has been for the better part of a darned week now. My ability not only to just log in successfully, let alone read new posts, and heaven help me if I can actually post something that doesn't get eaten, has been tragic to say the least. That said, I'll be trying to get caught up with things right now, as things seem to be working correctly at the moment. I hope the internet fairies cooperate!!!
|
|
1) That line in burning hands, as I understand it, was written to explain that if the spell was directed at unattended flammable objects, they would ignite. The actual spacing of the paragraphs becomes important in understanding that it doesn't apply.
In the printed original there was like a character return between the two lines of description, physically separating one from the other.
In the end the second descriptive line was meant to clarify that if you wanted to use burning hands to, like, start the thatch of a roof on fire, you could. Ergo, a rather "expensive" way to start a fire. So, no, burning hands does not set any attended flammable objects on fire.
Not to argue with the GM (I didn't start it!), and of course you get the final say, but I have to point out that this argument makes no sense. If we were talking about a ray or another spell that targets a creature or object, I could totally see this reasoning, but Burning Hands is an AoE, which means that it the condition of "if the spell was directed at unattended flammable objects" is satisfied any time there are flammable objects within the area of its effect, not just when there are no creatures where.
Now, we don't want to get into the situation where every AoE does damage to every item carried by a character hit by it (though I've heard that Gary Gygax made you roll saves for each of your items if you failed yours), and I think pathfinder has a rule somewhere that says this doesn't happen, but I would think that combustible substances that are held out in the open, ready to be used in the next round, should be vulnerable (especially if Burning Hands is used as a readied action, triggered when the materials are most vulnerable). Certainly, someone with a fire ray should be able to target those items (rather than the character holding them) for a chance to set them off prematurely, possibly causing a chain reaction in the process...
|
|
Btw, I'll also point out that putting someone to sleep (like with slumber hex) just as they're about to throw a bomb should cause them to drop it, making it explode in their own square. Doing so would require a readied action. If it worked, it would wake them right back up, but with splash damage at play, it might be worth it.
|
|
Other readied actions that might work on these guys (assuming the GM approves):
* Readied action to catch a bomb that is about to hit you (you would not have an action to throw it back in the same round, and it would go inert by the next round, but might allow you to prevent it from detonating).
* Readied action to sunder the bomb once it's ready to throw, thereby making it explode in the thrower's hand. Trip might do the trick as well. Disarm should allow you to take it, but not to throw it, though letting it fall to the ground in their square should work (though it would require you to be in the splash area, unlike Sunder, which can be done with a reach weapon). These might even work as an AoO, which is provoked by making and attempting to throw the bomb.
* Readied action to swat a bomb out of the air with Mage Hand. Once it leaves the thrower's grip, it is unattended, but whether an alchemist's bomb counts as "nonmagical" for this purpose is up to the GM (should work with alchemist's fire, at least).
* Likewise, a readied action to hit the bomb with a ray when it's in flight and in position to do splash damage to the most enemies might work.
|
|
Meanwhile, I'll try to get eagles over all of them. They can't use their bombs on the eagles, lest they take the splash damage on themselves and their buddies, and it will mean they won't be able to throw at anyone without taking AoOs. Hopefully, with a name like "bombardiers", they're not well equipped for melee. If nothing else, they should buy a round for us to get into position.
I wonder how many HD the bombardiers have. Probably 2. Doesn't make sense to try the Sleep wand with eagles in the AoE.
I'm also considering summoning an actual level 2 creature next round. A small elemental or a hellhound might be really handy about now. We'll have to see how the round goes, first. If I can usefully cast sleep (and not mostly hit eagles with it), that's probably a better option, since we hopefully only have another couple of rounds of combat.
|
|
Btw, I think this was the last round for my original eagles (the two of them that are left) IF Summoner's Charm doesn't apply because I used a wand.
Whenever you cast a conjuration (summoning) spell, increase the duration by a number of rounds equal to 1/2 your wizard level (minimum 1). This increase is not doubled by Extend Spell. At 20th level, you can change the duration of all summon monster spells to permanent. You can have no more than one summon monster spell made permanent in this way at one time. If you designate another summon monster spell as permanent, the previous spell immediately ends.
If it does apply, they have one more round. If not, they're still able to AoO and provide flanking bonuses until my next turn.
I'm also considering summoning an actual level 2 creature next round. A small elemental or a hellhound might be really handy about now. We'll have to see how the round goes, first. If I can usefully cast sleep (and not mostly hit eagles with it), that's probably a better option, since we hopefully only have another couple of rounds of combat.
A Hellhoud is an alternate summoning and they are usually only avaiable in a particular circumstance eg to the followers of a certain god. I don't know who can summon a hellhoud.
On if you get your summoner's charm on the wand, I think not. The description starts "Whenever you cast a conjuration (summoning) spell". The wand casts the spell and the caster level of the spell in determined by the wand. It is otherwise with a staff.
I know all about summonings having played 3 master summoners.
Not to argue with the GM (I didn't start it!), and of course you get the final say, but I have to point out that this argument makes no sense. If we were talking about a ray or another spell that targets a creature or object, I could totally see this reasoning, but Burning Hands is an AoE, which means that it the condition of "if the spell was directed at unattended flammable objects" is satisfied any time there are flammable objects within the area of its effect, not just when there are no creatures where.
First, you are putting forth an argument that the GMs argument is flawed. Therefore, by definition you are arguing with the GM. Politely and respectfully perhaps, but still arguing with the GM.
Second, I would normally agree with you, a AoE attack is directed against everything in it's area.
But here we are trying to be consistent with a rule that an AoE fire attack does enough damage by heat to kill people and other living creatures but not set fire to anything. It takes a lot of heat to kill a person outright instantly, smoke inhalation is often more dangerous than the fire itself. And it is very easy to set fire to things like paper, tinder or, most of all, accelerants.
To be consistent with the rule it would not be possible to set fire to paper or petrol with a match. And obviously you could not set fire to a match with a matchbox.
So saying an argument makes no sense means that it should be accepted. AoE fire spells should affect those outside their area of effect but not within, should do extra damage to creatures immune to fire and so on.
Not to argue with the GM (I didn't start it!), and of course you get the final say, but I have to point out that this argument makes no sense. If we were talking about a ray or another spell that targets a creature or object, I could totally see this reasoning, but Burning Hands is an AoE, which means that it the condition of "if the spell was directed at unattended flammable objects" is satisfied any time there are flammable objects within the area of its effect, not just when there are no creatures where.
First, you are putting forth an argument that the GMs argument is flawed. Therefore, by definition you are arguing with the GM. Politely and respectfully perhaps, but still arguing with the GM.
Second, I would normally agree with you, a AoE attack is directed against everything in it's area.
But here we are trying to be consistent with a rule that an AoE fire attack does enough damage by heat to kill people and other living creatures but not set fire to anything. It takes a lot of heat to kill a person outright instantly, smoke inhalation is often more dangerous than the fire itself. And it is very easy to set fire to things like paper, tinder or, most of all, accelerants.
To be consistent with the rule it would not be possible to set fire to paper or petrol with a match. And obviously you could not set fire to a match with a matchbox.
So saying an argument makes no sense means that it should be accepted. AoE fire spells should affect those outside their area of effect but not within, should do extra damage to creatures immune to fire and so on.
Two things:
1st, after doing some research into burning hands, I've seen that nobody agrees on it. Which puts it squarely in that GM fiat closet. So, moving forward, for ease of use (and I mean that for the PCs, because if every evil caster casting Burning Hands at you guys set every remotely combustible object you're carrying on fire, it would be a darned nightmare for all of us), and since that is how I have always ruled it, Burning Hands does NOT set attended objects on fire. Unattended flammable objects in the area of the spells effect, however, (like lamp oil spilled on the floor) WILL ignite. Interestingly, in my research I saw people who said the original language was there as some sort of warning to PCs that if they cast the spell in, say, a forest with thick undergrowth, they might start a forest fire... O.o Almost like the original writer of the spell wanted some sort of caution language along the lines of "use at your own risk..."
2nd, Illiam, I agree with Chillel that your Summoner's Charm does not affect spells from a wand. The wand is CL 3, so the eagles will last for three rounds. Which means the two from the original casting will disappear as soon as your round in the initiative comes up again.
Oh! One more thing, so I guess three things: Paizo.com continues to be COMPLETE AND ABSOLUTE GARBAGE!!!!!
Paizo very consistently give priority to making the game work well as a game over making the game logical.
For instance it makes no sense that you can normally sell things for half what it costs you to buy them.
So despite my [perfectly correct] raving about how illogical it is having all items potentially destroyed by AoE spells does make the game more enjoyable.
|
|
Since we've decided than unconscious things don't get a reflex save, we can force a fall if we can put a slurk to sleep then use Goruck's ability to drop it. Might be too late to make much use of the tactic, but I just thought I'd throw it out there. I haven't been keeping track, but we're probably running low on slurk riders that Chillel hasn't attempted to hex, so that's one way to make the hex useful against slurks (who would otherwise just get kicked awake by their riders, so it wouldn't do any good). This tactic, of course, relies on Goruck delaying/readying his action, since Chillel technically comes before him in initiative.
|
|
Their AC could be below 20 if they're not wearing chain shirts. Leather or Studded Leather is probably more likely, which would put them at an 18 or 19, respectively. Of the two, I'd guess studded leather (or Hide Shirts, which would leave them with the same bonuses as studded leather), which would put them at a 19AC. Since I also rolled a 15, a 16 and a 17, we'll know if it's below 18 once those attacks are resolved, but it looks like my gut feeling that the eagles got one hit each might turn out to have been overly optimistic. Hopefully the 19 hit at least...
Looks like they have an INT bonus of +2 based on their damage rolls, which is low for an alchemist, but they're not going to need anything higher than that for this encounter. If this combat lasts long enough for them to run out of bombs for the day, we'll be in trouble.
Upshot: if I'm right, I think we will want another summons.
|
|
Btw, are any of the icons on the grid unnecessary? It's pretty cluttered. What's the orange circle below the elevator supposed to represent? The Basket? I don't think we need that anymore. Is Dolok still planning to use that Burning Hands template? I moved it to the bottom layer (just above the map) so that we could at least get access to the others in that area...
I agree about that. The whole battlefield is littered with dead or unconscious bodies and pools of snot, some with PCs trapped within.
Syrus, I forgot you had asked about which version of Drench I'm using.
Drench - Ultimate Magic
School conjuration (creation) [water]; Level sorcerer/wizard 0
CASTING
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S
EFFECT
Range close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Target one creature or object of size Large or smaller
Duration 1 round
Saving Throw Reflex negates (object); Spell Resistance yes (object)
A sudden downpour soaks the target creature or object. The rain follows the subject up to the range of the spell, soaking the target with water. If the target is on fire, the flames are automatically extinguished. Fires smaller than campfires (such as lanterns and torches) are automatically extinguished by this spell.
Sweet! Nicer than the version I found.
And thanks! I'll have my post finished here shortly.