If you finish the troll before the start of his next turn(he's unconscious), he's gone for good. Regeneration has been temporarily disabled by the Snapdragon fireworks. That was the reason for the emergency colourspray :P
You know us wizards...we always have contingency plans...but no, it'll be unfair to the PCs if I really layer multiples...;)
Done. Waiting for Ziva to update hp, she should be down unless her stat sheet isn't updated...
Yeah I'm negative -2 at the moment.
Be consistent :p Yeah, I know its uncharitable of me, but what were you expecting from a law student? (They do enjoy a good debate).
I expect you to be courteous rather than snipe at a player, especially one who has stated that they know they don't have all the information.
There is disagreement on the DC20 perception to notice an invisible creature. Is that just a static value, or can you use Stealth to further improve it? Since I wasn't planning to use Stealth on this character I hadn't inquired about that. Seems that the module is using tricks I've been avoiding.
Mort, how does the Monk in your example locate the square that the invisible creature is in? I am going to want to understand this since Invisible Summoning is something I can be capable of later.
To be honest, I would think stealth would help, but I'm two minds about this. Feel free to put your arguments yes and no about it. I'll read them next time I has internets. I probably won't be able to reply much.
How I would locate an invisible creature on the ground as a monk would be this: Do it like minesweeper, move through every square on the ground. Monks have the movespeed for it.
Even if he's invisible, he still occupies a space, so you would provoke an AOO moving through, and your movement would be blocked. That is how you know something invisible is there. Then get your bag of flour and throw it.
Invisibility is a resource spent by a caster. There should be some benefit on it...
Generally you need to wait for the invisible creature to attack, then you try to bag it. Or someone to have see invisibility and glitterdust. If an invisible creature next to you attacks you on a 5ft reach, you automatically know which square the attack came from. However, the creature can move away...
That sounds enormously impractical for a monk. Look at this encounter for a moment. Difficult Terrain so movement restricted. Multiple combatants. Therefore the strategy we would have to rely on is have our monk slowly walk through every squaare on the map, crossing his fingers that the caster is not moving or flying, while hoping it can tank the damage from mooks or summonered creatures.
Of course, if its flying and invisible, you are realistically screwed. Waiting for an invisible creature to attack is a terrible strategy as emphasized by this very encounter, where the creature hasn't bothered attacking and has spammed summoning - it could have probably killed me if it didn't switch targets.
Yes, there should be advantages for the caster using it - but it shouldn't be an end all "gg" button against any non arcane caster (which is what it is if you don't allow Perception rules).
In light of how non casters are expected to find invisible enemies - currently wondering if I should retrain out of Hunter into something like Inquisitor or Alchemist where I can cast it myself.
I'm reading stuff while on car...
Invisibility is a GG for non casters. There are reasons why my magus has a bat familiar. Eat 20 ft radar, s*cker.
Speak with animals and bats are the druid's arsenal against invisible creatures. Not to mention faerie fire IS on the druid spell list.
The good news is low level casters run out of spells so easily.
Mr Whiskers can cast see invisibility and glitterdust.
I've given information for general direction. Pinppont is DC 40, so good luck.
Yeah, the main problem is that at level 2, our access to anti-invisibility spells is pretty limited.
From level 4, though (when Mr Whiskers gets access to level 2 spells), we should be more able to deal with it.
See Invis loses to dust of disappearance if you want to get technical. Glitterdust works but its just within 10 foot radius, so we would still need to narrow it down, and its not that great in wide open spaces.
Anyway, anyone got rope?
We know invisible critter is within 30 feet, so imo just spin in a circle and swing a rope around. If it hits something, we know where it is. If it then moves, easier Perception DC to spot
GG?
Mort,
The way you are suggesting Invisibility be run is much more powerful than what I allow. It is already a very powerful spell given it has a reasonable duration, gives a bonus to stealth, prevents AoO by anyone that can't see the invisible creature, and the 50% miss chance for full concealment.
This is even worse for the situation we have where it is a weather effect blocking sight, so See Invisibility (even if we had it) wouldn't help. Made even worse since evidently the creature doing it is flying.
I have some other stuff to do tonight, so I expect it will be tomorrow before I can organize a reply. Suffice it to say I don't require a DC 40 perception just to pinpoint a stationary caster. As a player, I I generally have my casters move after casting so that they aren't still in the square where everyone heard them cast from.
The internet here is worst then I thought. I think I'm down to 1 post/day until 3rd of jan ><
The tactics of the creature states he sits there and spams summons, so I sat there and spammed summons!
Spinning rope also you'll need to state altitude, realistically you can make one circle in 6 seconds.
Note the following:
A creature can grope about to find an invisible creature. A character can make a touch attack with his hands or a weapon into two adjacent 5-foot squares using a standard action. If an invisible target is in the designated area, there is a 50% miss chance on the touch attack.
There will still be a miss chance even should you be using rope. Not that it really matters since the creatures are out of there now...
Should you decide to invis and spam summons, I honestly wouldn't care - that's one less augmented summoned small earth elemental/one less glitterdust/create pit/burst of radiance I have to deal with. And honestly, if the party is doing their job properly, I'll have bigger matters to deal with then 1 mage summoning monsters. An optimized PC still does more damage then summons do, at the end of the day.
I actually care more that my monsters have a clear course of action each round. If it means whacking on summoned monsters, so be it.
Again GM, no-one is irritated about the creatures tactics, whats irritating is that you added two things that affected the encounter as written.
Firstly, there is the whole sight abuse thing. I don't want to go into it again, the points been made that it was a double standard, and again, no problems with how a baseline encounter was run. I am utterly fine with how the book runs it - but when you ban PC's from using the tactic with the full knowledge that you intend to then use the tactic against PC's - it gets irritating.
Second thing was adding even more advantages to the critter using invisibility spells - making the spell far stronger. For instance, if it starts moving, then its mod is 20 + Stealth Check. This means you have a 47. You then take a -20 penalty for effectively still being "in combat" (which it still is - its summoned creature is still attacking), and a further -5 penalty for moving half speed for a DC check of 22. If critter is moving faster than that then its a -5 penalty to stealth and a -10 penalty to invis check instead of -5. We also take a -4 Perception check penalty due to snow effects (I'm assuming). Considering that 2 of us can make perception checks up to DC 27, and one to 29 (assuming max rolls), I'd like to have a shot at trying to pinpoint it even if the chances are low. Furthermore, Ziva can actually outfly / chase it because she can move at her full flight speed (ie Flight Speed 40), while this creature has to move at half speed due to relying on stealth + invis - or it can move at full speed in which case it takes penalties. The rest of the party can also run after it - trying to close the distance. For instance if its got a flight speed of 30 - then it can only move 15 feet at a time.
The sight abuse was written in the mod:
"***** flies upward to hide in the falling snow... *rest of stated tactics*"
Stealth:
When moving at a speed greater than half but less than your normal speed, you take a –5 penalty.
We're looking at 50 fly speed, 60 fly speed here, respectively.
Grick's post in earlier link more or less stated that the DC in combat for the mage is 40 to pinpoint.
Combat ensues:DC 40+X Perception check: pinpoint an invisible creature's location
Base DC 20, +20 from invisible, -20 due to in combat, +20 due to not moving, +X (+1 per 10 feet away)
The sight abuse was written in the mod:
I don't think you get it, so just in case you missed it
Again GM, no-one is irritated about the creatures tactics.
I am utterly fine with how the book runs it
I have no issues with the mod.
All I am asking for is some consistency in your house-rule - why would you ban the tactic from PC's because its "tough to adjudicate" but then run an AP, encounter, or mod that actually uses that very tactic - except its arguably even more of an abuse case - and not see an issue. Why is it not O.K for PC's to use a similar tactic while our enemies can?
Like if Deeper Darkness / Solid Fog / Obscuring Mist are all ok and fine and you run the encounter - that's fine, there's 0 cause for complaint, because both sides are using / have the option of sight based tactics. What your house-rule has done is create a situation where you are perfectly O.K with enemies optimized around using the tactic - but not PC's - and its frustrating. This is a problem because the mod does not assume your house rule is in place. Its written under standard pathfinder ruleset, which assumes that enemies AND PC's can use sight based tactics - that it goes both ways.
I'm going to largely ignore your post on invisibility checks, because you told us that the creature is moving. Which means that if you look at that calculation you posted, its included a +20 modifier if you are stationary. You can look at the last page, I made a post giving you the exact same calculation - arriving at a DC 40 check, so long as it is stationary. The calculation chances again, if you use Invisibility + Stealth, where it becomes Stealth + 20. Your "some distance away" check activates beyond 30 feet, so yes, if it is 40 feet away, then yes, its +1 to your Perception check DC.
If it moves @ 30 feet+ then it takes a -5 penalty on its stealth check, provided it is using stealth + invisibility. Technically, you also take a -5 penalty to your invis modifier as well RAW but its unclear.
Either its moving full speed and taking appropriate penalties to its stealth mod - or its moving at a slower speed, having higher stealth, but allowing us to catch up to it. You cannot have it both ways.
I'd like to make a gameplay post, but I cannot progress it any further until I know if we can track or make perception checks. If we are not allowed to roll perception against it, then you effectively treat Invisible, as Ethereal for the purposes of detection.
About vision blocking - I can do it only a few times at best, and as I said earlier if the party chooses to do so, I get a nightmare to adjudicate for the rest of the next 5 books?
Either I get accused of metagaming, or I get to take no actions at all.
Also, at the start, the party did have the choice of mods, and everyone agreed on ROW.
I'll tell you for the purposes of this fight, there's no use trying to find them, short of blindsense. They can outrun Vernai if they choose, so there's really no point in you trying to get them down.
Family is waiting for me, so I'll catch up tonight.
Re: Sight abuse. It is a matter of trust. Do you want us searching for loopholes in everything you say? We now clearly know there is a double-standard here for sight abuse.
Re: Grick's analysis.
First of all, I'm trying to figure out if there is a difference here between invisibility and full concealment.
I believe the creature only had full concealment (from the weather effects), not invisibility. One apparent difference between full concealment and invisibility is that Total Concealment does not deny opponents their Dex to AC. Blindness or Invisibility would grant that.
Secondly, Grick's modifiers are almost all from the Invisibility section in CRB, pg. 563-564. If there is a difference, that table may not apply.
Thirdly, the mage was in combat and speaking, so -40 to perception DC.
Going to other rules:
I'm still digging, focusing mostly on total concealment.
If we start from the Perception skill instead, the DC to hear the details of a conversation is DC 0 plus range modifiers. Pinpointing the square someone is in appears to be +20 DC to that.
CRB, pg. 102 gives the DC to hear conversation.
CRB, pg. 442 talks about pinpointing a creatures location, but assumes the creature is blind. My understanding is that even in the heavy snow we could still see 5'.
I have used the DC0 +20 for people to locate someone casting a spell with verbal components. The trick is doing it while they are speaking, so normally you would have to ready an action. Them speaking is a stimulus so they get the automatic perception roll.
It may be that I've been doing that wrong.
Re: Chasing them down. I'm not looking to do that at the moment. I'm fine with it being declared that they have successfully fled from us.
Re: Family
Go, spend time with them! Hope you have a good time.
@ Mr Whiskers
I'm 99% sure its full invis (with the possibility its in the black area of the map which still makes it near impossible to find).
I'm also 90% sure that penalties for speaking and being in combat don't stack - I think its just a flat -20 for either situation :/
The GM has it correct when its a DC 40 Perception check for a stationary target to pinpoint (still DC 20 for general awareness though).
RE Chasing: Still don't understand how they can outrun Vernai unless they are taking penalties to Stealth (which is fine but specify that since it lowers the DC to locate them).
RE Sight Blocking
About vision blocking - I can do it only a few times at best
Err what? When we walked into that previous area, I got the feeling it was a flat, permanent environmental hazard. Does it fade? It certainly didn't feel like it. Unless of course, you meant invisibility on the critter, (which might make more since since I doubt its a constant ability) in which case its even more concerning. Do you include invisibility in your house-rule against vision blocking effects? Are we also banned from casting invisibility for anything other than "evasion".
With noting that your "I can only do it a few times at best", also applies to PC's as well. Wanna know how many times a level 6 Shadow-Walker Rogue can cast Deeper Darkness that ONLY (so no-one else) it can see through? Twice. Before level 6? Zero. Level 17? Three Times. I..really don't see how thats going to be more of an issue than the environmental conditions we appear to be facing as early as level 2.
Re: Family
What Mr. Whiskers said!
I'm 99% sure its full invis (with the possibility its in the black area of the map which still makes it near impossible to find).
I'm not sure either way. Our characters probably have no way of knowing.
Given some of the statements about the creature being able to see through the weather effects, I thought it was likely just total concealment.
I'm also 90% sure that penalties for speaking and being in combat don't stack - I think its just a flat -20 for either situation :/
Untyped stacks unless from the same source.
Speaking and being in combat are not the same source.
I will freely admit it could be read either way. To me it makes more sense that the "or" is that either condition can cause the penalty. If you have both, they should stack.
---
Switching to a different topic:
Best wishes to everyone in the new year!
Please look at this. Call it standard practice of mine, but for every game I've run(other then my first Gestalt game - because the character in question was not of the level to use deeper darkness), I've always banned vision blocking effects for ease of adjudication. You may check other 1-shots I've run - all do not allow players to use vision blocking effects.
Whether there are bad guys using those tactics or not, I still ban them anyway.
Stealth at half speed, but less then full imposes a -5 penalty. I took it for 2 of them , that's why it was a +15, instead of a +20 stealth check. 45ft as a move action still beats Vernai's 40 ft.
When moving at a speed greater than half but less than your normal speed, you take a –5 penalty.
Oracles can choose deeper darkness as a spell known as a 3rd level spell. Extended, it can last an entire dungeon(5 or more encounters).
If you get an eversmoking bottle and goz masks for everyone - the rest of the AP everyone gets total concealment at >5 feet, and 20% concealment chance at 5ft away. that cannot be dispelled. Even if gust of wind is used, it only clears the smoke for 1 round before its back.
Invisibility has never been considered as a vision blocking effect. Should my words have given the impression so, I apologise.
I already said earlier, if you want to go invisible and spam summons, by all means, go ahead. My monsters will just wail on anyone else they can see.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Einar, I know your balls are blue!
Anyway, the beach was wonderful. I saw 3 sea sponges, 4 sea cucumbers, a tiny rock crab, oysters growing on rocks, a red coloured brain like looking coral and my brother found a scallop shell eith an octopus hiding inside it.
There were schools of anchovies that where you startled them, they'd jump into the sky, and it'd seem the sky was filled with shimmering diamonds. And no dead fish on the beach.
Why don't you get that in Singapore? :(
I might consider asking a Venture Captain friend of mine how heavily sight abuse comes up in this and future books (seeing as you don't know). Hopefully this is like the only abuse case we have to deal with which means it doesn't have to be an issue moving forward. Its still extremely frustrating having to handle the tactic being used against you, while being unable to do it yourself.
Quote:
About vision blocking - I can do it only a few times at best
This is the only fight thus far with this kind of effect. The rest are all clear. I've already mentioned this is the one and only time, for this book. Several times as as matter of fact. Whether it reoccurs in other books or not, I'm not in a position to say. Nevertheless, you can always take up crafting etc, to make appropriate items that let you see through it.
Can you (with your knowledge of the book), specify what items you would rule as avoiding the effect? Just so what we know we should consider crafting.
Since you can even use it for underwater slit and smoke(which isn't a vapour), snow is fine...
I've already mentioned...
Some repetition is good. Expect us to miss things.
This is a game. I am not gong to do a heavy analysis of every word you write. I have at times gone back to reread a section of gameplay or discussion when I thought there was something relevant there. Still, I will miss things.
This is very normal.
Alchemical power components - since wands are spell trigger items, you just say the command word, so there is no spellcasting, so you cannot use alchemical power components. If you make your own wand, you can factor the alchemical components into every charge. Then you can get the bonus.
Also, a little backstory about Shui, here
Group,
Alright, we now have an opportunity to buy magic not limited by what is in Haldren.
Is it the approximately 790 gp each and still buy the Wand of Scorching Ray, or do we want to reconsider?
Mort,
How do you intend to run spell lattice? Does it allow you to change what spell is in the lattice? The item description is not clear about what happens after copying the spell. Can you put a new spell in there? If so, it effectively gives an additional spell prepared to an Arcanist. If not, it is a page of spell knowledge with an additional requirement of using a hand to hold it.
I'm trying to decide between a Spell Lattice and a Cloak of Resistance +1.
Spell latttice is fine. Select whatever spell you want, cast away! Put in a new spell, cast away too!
Hmm I have around 2.6K. Wondering if I should be saving up since I want to outfit Ziva and Vernai or buy something now.
Shui won't always be around. She will appear at specific points . And she will never appear in the middle of a city/town. You'll only run into her in the wild.
You can also tell her to stock up on scrolls you would like to purchase more off, and there's a chance she will see to it.
Hmm I have around 2.6K. Wondering if I should be saving up since I want to outfit Ziva and Vernai or buy something now.
What you buy now may allow you to survive to better equip yourself later.
Hmm yeah but there are some expensive items I might need to save up for. I think I'll just save my cash - I'm fairly confident my survival wont depend on whether I got a +1 AC or save boosting item at this point in the game (and picking the right option) and if it does - not much I can do about it.
I want to check before updating my character.
As I understand it increasing my Int should add another starting language, 2 skill ranks (one per level), another starting spell, plus all the other things that depend on Int.
Yep.
Draconic, Kn: Local, UMD, Detect Undead.
Will update my profile shortly.
I picked up a strength bonus for both - I'll have it updated on profile when I finish work.
Well, she can always put a rank in Linguistics at level 3... After all, she will definitely be getting 'cultural immersion' ;-)
I can move plot, but I rather that more then 1 PC gets to interact with Nadya and ask her questions.
Well, we previously agreed that spoilered flash-backs were an option, but I am happy to wait for someone else to pipe-up if they want to :-)