4/13... same caveats as before.
We'll have my kids screaming in the background, but I'm game :D
Sure :D
Its cool - we can work something out - you will still hear them though :D
I can't commit, but I'll make an attempt to make it work. I might have some baby education going on during that day.
|
Blue Light Speical
25% off any magic scroll or magic item that emulates magic spells on a non-continuous basis. For example, a belt of strength would not be eligible, but Winged Boots (which let you fly per the spell three times/day) are discounted. When in doubt, ask here. You have 48 hours. (10am EST Thursday)
Zeriax will buy 20*alchemically silver tipped arrows for 1gp + 40gp = total 41gp
|
|
To help provide clarity to the ‘playing up’ rule, let me explain how encounters are balanced in Pathfinder. Generally, the GM determines the Average Party Level, rounding to the nearest number. If it’s a larger party (6-7), he adds on to that number. He then determines the “CR” or Challenge Rating. For an “average difficulty” encounter, CR usually equals the APL. An easy one is CR=APL -1 (essentially one monster of your APL). The hardest encounter advised to GM’s is CR +3 (four monsters of your level). These are epic encounters that most parties will need to use consumables and great tactics to overcome.
I've recently updated the houserules, including a new 'playing up' table. The Table in the updated house rules shows you how “Playing up” changes the game. Essentially, “Playing up” at the lower levels (+1 or +2, for example) changes the easy/normal encounters into challenging ones, but has little or no effect on the ones already scripted to be Challenging or Epic.
Note that loot increases affect even those battles that would not be changed per the last line. That’s to reflect the fact that the players often spend more spells/resources in getting TO those end battle. So, a final, epic boss battle would be “Epic” difficulty no matter what, however, expect the fact you have less spells and resources to make it just a tad harder when you make it there.
Everyone has gone mad?
|
JC, I think I could help more by upping the party's damage output and I think a controlling wizard would be far more effective at the table where tactical movement and positioning are more important.
Reading your house rules on power points, its 12pp to change a character archetype. Does this include my wizard school specialisation? Eventually I'd like to become a straightforward evoker/blaster with a little bit of control and swap SF conjuration for SF evocation.
Would this be;
School=12pp
Feat=1pp
|
|
Moving the copycat discussion over here. :)
Yeah, d20 isn't authoritative...but Paizo.com/prd is...and it shows it as a spell like ability. When you click on the SP deal, it says it provokes. It's essentially a weaker, 1st level version of mirror image which, of course, provokes when you cast. It can also be done as a move action, allowing you to cast a spell at the same time. As a back line caster who is worried about the occasional arrow or something, it's a great ability. As a front line defender, it's certainly got a weakness. Of course, you can cast defensively as you can any spell, I imagine, to avoid the AoO. I would rule it's a 1st level ability with a DC of 17 to cast defensively. And, you still get your standard.
I would be open to allowing you to upgrade the ability to a non provoking deal for four power points.
What level does the wand of Shocking Grasp cast at?
|
|
You can 5 foot step into an enemy line without taking AoO? And also one thing I don't understand, how do you step into the line - which space are you occupying then? I can understand stepping through but not stepping into
Well, if you cannot five foot step into it, I'm not sure how you can move through since you cannot move through an enemy square without a really great acrobatics check or CMB (overrun, for example).
Given that any square is open, a five foot step does not provoke unless its difficult terrain. Hypothetically, there could be spaces between the party members on the front line" so to speak. Obviously, we're doing a lot of abstracting here.
But there's two ways to run this. If I ruled that Front lines were more like front walls, it would make it impossible for fighters and the such to ever get to the wizards in the back line.
The other way is to treat them like open shares with party members adjacent to them. This is how I've been running this for a while now. Again, remember the final fight in CoT. It would have taken the party another round to finish off the skeleton in the front line. (And given the wizards one more round to cast and finish off more of the party). Instead, Tessai and Black Devil rushed through and got in the wizards' faces. In fact, I can point to several example in CoT where you all or the baddies five foot stepped into each others' "Front Line"... so I guess I'm a bit stumped where all the surprise is coming from.
When I get a chance, I'll write all this out and insert into the house rules so everyone is clear on how this works. Again, you can walk into or through any 'line' ... but if you move more than 5' in the process, you may take AoO's.
I have always thought that the only ways to go around a EFL is:
- Around, if you have enough move to do it - depending on the move, you may take AoO or not (this is probably complicated without a map - a shame for my monk and his move :/)
- Above, if you have the ability to jump that high or you are flying - depending on how close you pass to the enemy you may take an AoO or not;
- Through - I'm not even going into rules here, but for me, if you want to move through an enemy occupied space you have two options, either you "wiggle" through, or "feint" through, or something like that = Acrobatics; Or you force your way through - you "push" him out of the way, you "barrel" over him, or something similar so... Strength or Bull Rush or Overrun...
But there's two ways to run this. If I ruled that Front lines were more like front walls, it would make it impossible for fighters and the such to ever get to the wizards in the back line.
I am not saying that Front Lines are like walls, they can be passed through in one of the ways I described above, but from my perspective there is no free space for you to just stay there, inbetween someone, unless you push someone out of their spot - I know we are abstracting, but if you have a bunch of people lined up side by side in a fight, you cannot simply step in besides them UNLESS you take the place of someone else. This is my perspective of course.
The other way is to treat them like open shares with party members adjacent to them. This is how I've been running this for a while now. Again, remember the final fight in CoT. It would have taken the party another round to finish off the skeleton in the front line. (And given the wizards one more round to cast and finish off more of the party). Instead, Tessai and Black Devil rushed through and got in the wizards' faces. In fact, I can point to several example in CoT where you all or the baddies five foot stepped into each others' "Front Line"... so I guess I'm a bit stumped where all the surprise is coming from.When I get a chance, I'll write all this out and insert into the house rules so everyone is clear on how this works. Again, you can walk into or through any 'line' ... but if you move more than 5' in the process, you may take AoO's.
My interpretation on the above is different from yours - you can move through - if you take an AoO or not will depend on your ability at getting through (in this case Acrobatics) - if you are not that good at it, or if you don't succeed, you risk being stopped dead in your tracks, but this is when you are trying to avoid being hit by moving acrobatically so to speak.
Now... you can just rush through, without trying to have finesse at it, and not trying to avoid the AoOs (this is what Tessai did) - the AoOs can be attacks, trips, etc, and again, you risk NOT being able to get through.
This is how I picture going through an enemy line, with its chances of success or insuccess - I'm really not sold on allowing someone to occupy the same line as your allies are occupying. Also, I don't really see the point of picturing a "space" inbetween front liners.
But hey, I am not really making an issue out of this - I am just here to play, and play I will. Just two things are important then: being something else than a frontliner capable combatant is getting suckier and suckier ;), and also a heads up on this one (we would have had this debate already) would have been important, since Zeriax would never stand immediately behind the PFL again ;)
Still, and I am usually a peaceful guy when it comes to rules, I would like to see this one reviewed cause I am not picturing why this one is needed, so please don't write it in the house rules yet :D
|
|
The challenge I see interpreting it your way (that you have to force your way to the other side of a Front Line) is that you basically force every bad guy (or good guy) who wants to get back at the guy with reach or whatever to take an AoO' from everybody on the other front line every time. Personally, I don't have an issue with a guy taking five foot steps to get to the other side. After all, the defenders can always take five foot steps as well...as long as the squishies are far enough back, they're safe. Ultimately, the baddie WILL have to take AoO's from the front line if he wants the squishies in the back!
Another challenge is that it would also presume that party members are constantly shoulder to shoulder in a perfect fireball formation. As you've seen, I randomly determine who (outside the primary target) is hit by AoE's, presuming that party members are always somewhat spread out.
In my experience in grid base combat, while there are times a 'front line' is formed that doesn't allow baddies to stop in between (mostly in hallways), most of the time, even in rooms, the front and back liners end up getting spread out a bit (as they move for sneak attacks, better positioning, staying out of Fireball formation, etc).
I don't really see this as making the front liner 'suckier' par se. I've played enough grid based to know that few parties ever have enough 'front liners' to from solid lines that are actually difficult to get around. Only in constricted areas like hallways, and against monsters with low intellect (who don't use tactics, but go straight for the person in front) does your generic, high AC guy really shine in that protection role. In Pathfinder, if you really want to be a "tank" who does the best job possible really holding a front line, and protecting others from getting those squishes behind you, you need not only high defense, but feats that control the spaces around you (Improved trip, lunge, step up & strike, etc.) Just my 2cp :P
The house rule mention I made wasn't to change existing rules (as I have them in my head) but rather get them documented properly. While its all well and good for me to point to previous examples where I've run things this way, the best way to insure that players both current and future understand how I will run things is to get them in the house rules. That way, there's minimal reason for any player to be surprised when a baddie does something like this (And the player will also know that THEY have it as an option, as well!)
I didn't mean it is suckier to be a frontliner - it is getting suckier not to be one is what I was saying.
Again, it is supposed to be a challenge to get through the frontline, is it not?
I cannot go on with the debate for the time being, my kids are waiting for dinner - but I still don't see the point of this rule - what improvement is it bringing to the game? ;)
Would be cool to have the input of the rest of the gang on this one ;)
|
|
I think you misunderstand...or maybe I misunderstand you. I'm not creating a new rule here. I'm simply clarifying and documenting the way I've been running the Pbp (See previous CoT battles for confirmation) so that people aren't surprised in the future.
I didn't mean it is suckier to be a frontliner - it is getting suckier not to be one is what I was saying. Ah, I see that now. Well, if you're a backliner, you may want to stay further behind the front line. :) Outside of gunslinger and alchemists I don't know of too many ranged attackers who want to be too close to the baddies.
Again, it is supposed to be a challenge to get through the frontline, is it not?
Simply put, you either need to take a number of AoOs, make a great acrobatics check or five foot step a number of times without the other Front liners taking five foot steps with you. In fact, that's probably a little harder to get through then normal play since in my Pbp you provoke from the entire front line *and* you don't have a great option for running AROUND the PFL (whereas in grid play, you can run around in open areas easily enough).
Well, a lot of things apply:
Yes, stand more than 5' behind the PFL. Then EFL enemy cannot 5' into PFL-rank and attack. They have to 10', and get AoO. Problem with this fix: Any P2L? Because any P2L will give you more minus to hit. Not a ton, but still more minus. Digest: Stand a bit more back.
Yes, we aren't CoT, with a PFL of 5 heavy hitters. Our PFL is Meg and Brenton, and honestly, we're not much of a threat. I could totally see any reasonably brave enemy just risking the AoOs. But we're all we've got, unless we've got Ameiko, now. And we need that bow in action.
We COULD get doors involved, we have before. We could fight in a slow retrograde, 5' back every turn, so the PFL casters can put up spells, lay down runes, etc, while you archers and magi types rain damage. We could concentrate all fire on one enemy. We could communicate better, like "Mirror goddess protects you, demons cannot touch you, but do not touch them. Attack the Goblin." (I suspect he's dead now, though) We could flat-out kite, with a scout (Meg would volunteer) finding and running away from enemies, to bring them into open ground.
We could get more tactical overall, but the mapless method slows the flanking deployment (flank happens on the next turn), and makes it all feel uphill.
Its not a question of being able to cross a line with 5' steps, heck, we could even teleport through - my question is simpler - why these rules?
Why is it being decided to make it easy to cross an enemy line? Not to be dramatic but I feel backliners are being stomped here - as follows:
- One cannot be immediately behind the first line because he/she will always be in danger of an easy attack from any massive melee damage dealer - 5 feet plus full attacks - BAM! Dead!;
- The argument of having to use multiple 5 feet adjustment only works if they are single opponents - imagine in the situation above Zeriax does not die and retreats - then his own first line has enemies on both sides, REALLY easy - too easy in my opinion;
- If by any mortal chance, one EVER gets a setup where there are 2 ppl in the front and 2 in the back with reach weapons, the ranged in the back... well... Its gonna hurt. and plese keep in mind I already have precise shot. We are basiclly removing any race that does not have point blank as a bonus feat, from playing a ranged character in level 1 (looking at a constant -6 or -7 if his friends are in combat;
Last and again, we can do a lot of things Megekki - we can use doors, pits, and a large number of tactics, I agree - but I ask again - why this rule? What purpose does it serve - it seems to be to make it easier to cross a front line - i can see a number of wrong things with that (vulnerability of the back line, it is going to force a frontliner either to fully and only commit to battlefield control (trip, etc.) - and still he will not be able to contain the enemies advancing through their ranks. But I won't even go there, I just ask why the decision to make it so?
Bottom line, it is my opinion that you should not be able to 5' step through, because after you end your first step there is simply no spot for you to occupy - again, I don't think assuming a "space" between combatants is a good solution - of course the line is not compact but even so, a line is built so as not to accept enemies standing there next to you...
"Simply put, you either need to take a number of AoOs, make a great acrobatics check" - I would stop here, I don't feel the need for additional ruling tbh. What this causes is making it impossible to hold a line, since the only possible reaction to an enemy standing next to you, is... retreating until you are backed into a wall, squeezing your casters and archers, or you are out of the dungeon? Sorry man, I can't digest that one :D
|
|
Last and again, we can do a lot of things Megekki - we can use doors, pits, and a large number of tactics, I agree - but I ask again - why this rule?
Short answer, because I believe (IMHO) it is the abstraction that most closely resembles normal Pathfinder, especially if you go with the assumption that the front line is rarely shoulder to shoulder and/or there's usually room to maneuver/five foot step around them (to their side) if they are.
Long Answer... Those people right behind the tanks in regular pathfinder are rarely that protected from baddies doing a five foot step and strike. Because melee defenders are rarely in great control of the battlefield, most casters and the such I know of stay as far back as they can without taking additional penalties.
This happens all the time in grid play. It's how flanking situations are generally set up. You get in front of the enemy in one round, and if you have him outnumbered, you take five foot steps the next round to surround him.
This happens a lot especially when there are only 4-5 ppl in the team. You can't form a 'line' of any sort in normal sized rooms (or outdoor situations) with 2 ppl in the front. Monsters/baddies can easily five foot step diagonally (or run around) to quickly flank or, in the next round, be behind the front line if the players don't fall back. Works the same for the other team though. It's not like those skeleton mages were really THAT protected once BD and Tessai decided it was party time.
Actually, that's a great example of how the five foot rule can definitely come into play. You guys had the skeleton beast prone. While prone, it cannot move. It either has to get up and eat AoO's, or stay still. If you guys five foot stepped a few rounds in a row, and it doesn't take the AoO's to get up, then yes, you could get at the mages without provoking in both normal play and my Pbp. (If we ruled as you suggest, then it would be very possible in grid, but not my Pbp). And that makes sense both in how it works with grid play, and how it works logically (A "front Line" that refuses to move, either because of prone condition or just not wanting to fall back, eventually becomes something you can work around as you parry).
And it's the way I've been running it for some time. I'm not convinced that it's really broken, par se. I tend not to change things until I believe it is. On the other hand...
We are basically removing any race that does not have point blank as a bonus feat, from playing a ranged character in level 1 (looking at a constant -6 or -7 if his friends are in combat; ... I agree this may need fixing, which is why I addressed it in a rule change earlier, and I'm watching carefully to see how it plays out before making more change. Again, though, from my experience, this happens in regular play all the time.
Keep in mind, when it comes to ranged attackers, all of them pick up Precise shot by level 3 at the latest (Fighters and humans can pick it up at level 1, Non human Rangers at level 2. Non-human alchemist and the such by level 3). Until then, it's actually easier to hit the bad casters/ranged attackers in the back than it is to hit front line with ranged attacks until then because of the way my Pbp works (And it happens at the table that way many times as well). Again, I agree its a concern, and I've made a change to the rules there...I'll watch it a while, listen to feedback, and move from there. (Also, keep in mind that ranged focus classes such as Ranger and Zen Archer usually eliminate the cover penalty deal by level 6. It's designed that way...they are supposed to be the masters of the bow).
It is an abstraction. A lot gets lost in any abstraction. But this abstract ranks system isn't really worse, just different.
Even in a full grid treatment, the front line of two guys, in an open field, can't protect the back line of two guys. People just run past, out of reach.
In a 10' corridor, two guys still can't prevent passage, they can only make it costly. If Enemy1 is at EFL, he cannot move into PFL without some kind of check, Acrobatice, or overrun, or something. If P2L is 10' behind, E1 has to get past PFL, moving 10', to attack P2L. So he either takes AoO moving 10', from PFL, or he takes AoO moving 5', from one guy(the guy he's trying to 'crowd'), and then he has to move again to get to attack P2L.
That's all my understanding.
If I may venture an opinion, I think a lot of the problem is understanding the situation. Phil has, by definition, the clearest possible mental image of the situation. This HAS to be true, since any image we might have, if it doesn't match his, is wrong. And if Phil hasn't formed any image, we're still wrong. IF we think the doorway is 10' wide, or the pits are covered, or the walkway bridge is swinging back and forth... and Phil doesn't, we're going to have problems.
Meanwhile, the enemies have no such potential for misunderstanding. They won't ever 'wait for Meiko' and wind up doing essentially nothing. They won't derp through the post deadline and return to find the party taken out.
For myself, when ire rises at this sort of nonsense, I tell myself it's the chaos of battle, it's the loss of cool at being in real fighting for the first time. I'm not sure what I'll tell myself when we're 4th level.
Maybe we'll get Emrys to cast Floating Disk, and Zeriax can stand on it for a clear field of fire. (And Primary Target status)
|
|
If I may venture an opinion, I think a lot of the problem is understanding the situation. Phil has, by definition, the clearest possible mental image of the situation. This HAS to be true, since any image we might have, if it doesn't match his, is wrong. And if Phil hasn't formed any image, we're still wrong. IF we think the doorway is 10' wide, or the pits are covered, or the walkway bridge is swinging back and forth... and Phil doesn't, we're going to have problems.
Truedat.... though I do feel it's a failure on my part when basic rules (and pbp abstractions) aren't properly communicated. When these things happen, I edit the houserules (it's a living document) so that it IS clear moving forward. While there may always be some misunderstanding in not describing a scene or something (and it even happens in grid play where I didn't explain a situation clearly enough), it really shouldn't happen in the area of 'rules.'
They won't derp through the post deadline and return to find the party taken out. Now, I do want to say in my defense, I am trying to 'make up a turn' deal, and I *did* pause the game for Emrys a couple of rounds ago because I felt it was a make or break moment. The main reason I have this one rule (which admittedly can be frustrating) is that it allows me to keep things moving when people miss a post rather than putting 4+ on hold waiting every time someone get behind.
For myself, when ire rises at this sort of nonsense, I tell myself it's the chaos of battle, it's the loss of cool at being in real fighting for the first time. I'm not sure what I'll tell myself when we're 4th level. Hahahaah. I like this. And, yeah, you know, it makes sense.
I will tell you, though, you guys have an advantage that guys at my tables don't have. In my table game, I give each player 10 seconds to tell me what they are going to do, or I delay them. I use the same logic. "Combat is fast. Make a decision and live with it!" This forces them to oftentimes make less-than-optimal decisions. Hopefully, they use the same reasoning in the back of their head. (And my bad guys...they also make poor decisions because I force myself to move fast...AND I'm not as familiar with them as players are with their characters). In Pbp, it's the fact that sometimes you miss a turn. (And I still make bad decisions because I only give myself so much time to post every round of combat).
Maybe we'll get Emrys to cast Floating Disk, and Zeriax can stand on it for a clear field of fire. (And Primary Target status) LOL. Good one! That paints a great mental image. Don't worry. At level six, he won't even know what a penalty is.
The table guys have a map. They get to ponder between turns all the fields of fire and such. And they don't have to waste a post cycle to get a clarification. But anyway...
I saw I had a PM from Z, and I figured I'd reply here. Told him I would. This is what I said:
Sorry, I just saw this now.
It'll be alright. I see how it's a huge shock to have the guy step through the open space to hit you, when you can't shoot through the open space to hit him. I think I'll say that. Yes, I'll definitely say that.
Zeriax cannot find a clear path to shoot arrows through, and is taking heavy minuses. And a 6th-level fix is useless to him NOW. But he's doing it, he's taking the minuses, because there's no clear path for arrows.
And then a guy steps into the open space. What open space? What space, when there was no room for arrows?
I think you can see the disconnect. And when the disconnect takes your character out of the fight, you have nothing left to do but argue.
---
That's what I replied to Z.
And now, an anecdote about GM-vision versus player-vision. To lighten the mood.
"Suddenly, Carnivorous Apes jump from the trees! Roll Inititative!"
"What? Wait, what trees? We were in a desert."
"You didn't see the trees?! Then you're surprised!"
<hail of cheetos>
See, that's what we need, an internet cheetos-gun.
|
|
That's because there are many more situations where you can five foot to characters, but it's not easy to get a clear shot. Remember, the rule states that for choosing cover, you pick one corner of your square and connect it to all four corners of your target's square. If any of those corners clip through another person, it's partial cover.
On the other hand, in any given combat situation where two or three front line people are fighting bad guys, it's REAL easy for them to five foot step close to the back line unless they are in a hallway.
I can't do a done of examples, but I can give you one, Z, so you can see HOW this happens in Pathfinder.
_E_E_
_H_H_
12345<---Archer's row
(E=Enemy, H=Hero, A=Archer, Underscore = Open Space)
Assuming a 25 wide room, there's no position that the archer can shoot from that has a clear shot without cover AC bonus to an enemy according to RAW, even from spot #1, 3 or 5. It looks clear, but a line drawn to all four corners of the enemy will clip a friend and incur cover (from the archers' row...or any position behind it). However, assuming the archer is in that row which is five feet behind the party, you can see that the "E"s can five foot step and be in his face for a full round attack.
And a 6th-level fix is useless to him NOW. I wouldn't call this a fix. I'll remind y'all that Pathfinder is built on the concept of letting players do pretty hard stuff that they want regardless of class and the such, but applying penalties which feats can remove or reduce. Wanna wear full plate mail as a cleric? Sure...but until you get Heavy armor proficiency, there are penalties. Wanna wield two weapons at once? Lots of big penalties until you get those two weapon fighting feats (then they turn into small penalties). Wanna shoot an arrow through an guys face despite the face there are party members and maybe even other baddies between you and your target? You can do that! It's just going to be some penalties until you can get the proper feats. That's just the way PF works.
I could draw more diagrams and stuff...but it comes down to this//. I've played Pathfinder twice / week for over two years. I cannot tell you what the exact percentage is, but well over 1/2 of the shots any archer/gunslinger/etc does in my games hits into that cover issue until they get the improved precise shot feat. There's a reason why its so popular (along with regular precise shot).
I totally understand that if you just take my two pbp rules at face value, they seem contradictory...but trust me, it happens this way so often in grid play. I do agree, though, that shots are not blocked 100% of the time, especially if there aren't that many ppl on the front lines to begin with. That's why I am visiting the notion of softening up those rules. I wouldn't even consider it if I didn't agree it's something that warrants consideration.
From my part, the argument is over - With brutal honesty, I feel penalized by a rule that is different from "the rules" without me knowing about it until it hits me in the face for 20+ points of damage, mainly because it is one I do not understand, and one that made my character bite the dust.
Continuing with the brutal honesty, it REALLY doesn't matter because I am only willing to draw an argument such far, and GM-JC I will repeat it again - I admire the work that you have put into our two PbP together and I hope for many more - I am talking not only about the efforts to keep them alive and flowing, but also your knowledge of the game, hence my "brutal honesty".
That being said, play ball!! :D
Edit: Tessai is gonna make you regret this rule ;)
|
|
The table guys have a map. They get to ponder between turns all the fields of fire and such. And they don't have to waste a post cycle to get a clarification. But anyway...
I will point out, that I post plenty of times in between most posting periods to insure that you guys do NOT have to waste a post cycle to get clarification. I'm very dedicated to these Pbp groups, and do my absolute best to insure that you guys have as smooth as an experience as the medium, and my free time, allow. I won't harbor any implication, even a slight one, to the contrary. :P
Look. Guys. Seriously, this is getting just a little crazy. Z, I'm sorry you're upset. Shame on me for not doing a better job clarifying these Pbp rules a little better and shocking you with the baddies' move. However, I'm really not out to make any one feel bad by my rules. Keep in mind, the vast majority of them work both ways for both players and baddies. You guys can do the same to them if you wish.
I'll continue to evaluate the cover bonus house rule to ranged attacks and make adjustments accordingly.
As far as the 5' stepping rule...we've had it for six or so months...I've used it several times on the party in CoT, and I almost wanna bet y'all have done the same. This is the first time that I'm getting a serious complaint on it. Based on that, I have reviewed it carefully, but I'm not convinced its broken and/or that it violates the spirit of traditional gameplay. It's not perfect as is typical of most of my abstractions, but I feel at the moment that it would be a greater error to create the abstract rule that no one can ever five foot step into the same 'row' as an enemy character...with the obvious exception of a 5-15' wide hallway style fight. I will make sure that both this rule and new exception are properly posted in the house rules to insure that this particular misunderstand does not happen again.
Play ball!!
Edit: It is not a complaint ;)
Edit 2: And please GM-JC, keep in mind I never even realized you were using such rule in CoT.
|
|
From my part, the argument is over - With brutal honesty, I feel penalized by a rule that is different from "the rules" without me knowing about it until it hits me in the face for 20+ points of damage, mainly because it is one I do not understand, and one that made my character bite the dust.
Ok...and again, I apologize for not spelling it out earlier. I see the debate as being over, but I want to make sure you understand my reasoning. See my example above. Do you understand how in normal grid play that the cover bonus to AC from ranged attacks comes into play often because of the 'clipping' rule? And that at the same time, while it's hard to get a clear shot in these types of situations without moving to the front line, it's still very easy for the baddies to take a 5' forward into that same 'front line'? (The awesome thing for you here, is that if they ARE in the PFL like that, they no longer get Cover AC bonus).
And please GM-JC, keep in mind I never even realized you were using such rule in CoT.
Well, let me help ya out. You actually saved BD earlier when a rogue had five foot stopped into the PFL to be able to reach him and try to CdG him . At the time, BD was in the 5' back line, behind the PFL. It was at
http://paizo.com/campaigns/JCServantsCouncilOfThieves/gameplay&page=55 where I said, " The tiefling rogue 5 foots into the party front line for the kill, provoking an attack of opportunity from the front line AND those behind it as he performs the CdG. Normally, I would have you guys roll AoO after resolving the combat, or maybe just roll it myself so I can get the round resolved and moved onto the next one...but this is REALLY important. Edmond, Tessai, Brandon (if melee weapon is equipped) and Beppo...AoO! And make it count!".
-E-E-
-H-H-
_-_-_
12345
Agreed.
Shift right-hand "H" 5' to the East, and 3 and 4 have clear shot to right-hand E. (F below)
-E-F-
-G--H
-----
12345
None of the EFL/PFL people gain or lose anything, but the archer in 3 or 4 gains big to hit. Sure, F will 5' East. But only after the archer shoots him on the archer's turn.
This sort of model is denied to us, however. And the pain is being felt disproportionately by Zeriax.
Edit: Zeriax, who has said 'play ball'. So now I hush.
|
|
Shift right-hand "H" 5' to the East, and 3 and 4 have clear shot to right-hand E. (F below)
True...but, again, in my experience, it rarely works out that way. Usually E's just move with H's to keep cover unless the archer delays his turn to right after the player who moved. Or the H's FORGET to move because I got them on a time limit (again, combat is FAST, and I don't let players tell other players how to play, though I do allow them a free action to yell out one line such as "Get out of the way of my shot!). It's a lot of coordination that just doesn't happen much at my tables.
I feel that reducing the penalty to -2 to -4 helps to meet the above reality in the regular table play. Keep in mind, there are only two H's in that example which would be -2 in my Pbp. In reality, you guys have had more ppl on the front line, or he's trying to shoot through other enemies as well, making a clear shot in grid play all but impossible. I'll continue to look at it, though.
From my part, the argument is over - With brutal honesty, I feel penalized by a rule that is different from "the rules" without me knowing about it until it hits me in the face for 20+ points of damage, mainly because it is one I do not understand, and one that made my character bite the dust.Ok...and again, I apologize for not spelling it out earlier. I see the debate as being over, but I want to make sure you understand my reasoning. See my example above. Do you understand how in normal grid play that the cover bonus to AC from ranged attacks comes into play often because of the 'clipping' rule? And that at the same time, while it's hard to get a clear shot in these types of situations without moving to the front line, it's still very easy for the baddies to take a 5' forward into that same 'front line'? (The awesome thing for you here, is that if they ARE in the PFL like that, they no longer get Cover AC bonus).
And please GM-JC, keep in mind I never even realized you were using such rule in CoT.Well, let me help ya out. You actually saved BD earlier when a rogue had five foot stopped into the PFL to be able to reach him and try to CdG him . At the time, BD was in the 5' back line, behind the PFL. It was at
http://paizo.com/campaigns/JCServantsCouncilOfThieves/gameplay&page=55 where I said, " The tiefling rogue 5 foots into the party front line for the kill, provoking an attack of opportunity from the front line AND those behind it as he performs the CdG. Normally, I would have you guys roll AoO after resolving the combat, or maybe just roll it myself so I can get the round resolved and moved onto the next one...but this is REALLY important. Edmond, Tessai, Brandon (if melee weapon is equipped) and Beppo...AoO! And make it count!".
Sorry GM-JC, I cannot really agree with you on this one - in grid play, unless we were in a restricted environment (granted that can happen a lot), Zeriax would take advantage of his increased move as a monk to deal with EFL coming around PFL - I unfortunately cannot do that in this abstraction, as was clearly seen.
Also, I would have "seen it coming" as the EFL would begin the slow process of stepping around PFL, instead of BAM in my face.
Yes, I remember very well the instance when BD was threatened - but again it feels contradictory - " The tiefling rogue 5 foots into the party front line for the kill, provoking an attack of opportunity from the front line" - I now understand that the AoO was probably due to the CdG but it was unclear then, and in the heat of combat and no exact positioning, I cannot even remember if someone was down and he had stepped through that opening - actually, I was under the impression that, since Tessai had fled, he had stepped through the space she was occupying before.
I second Megekki's diagram and assessment for the reason that even though at the table one may get ahead of oneself, those things can be corrected, because they are not made rule, and when the group coordinates itself enough, this can be surpassed.
I will agree to disagree on this one.
Shall we move along? :D
|
|
I second Megekki's diagram and assessment for the reason that even though at the table one may get ahead of oneself, those things can be corrected, because they are not made rule, and when the group coordinates itself enough, this can be surpassed.
Well, and this goes into the archer conversation we had a week or so ago, and not the five foot rule. Regardless, I agree that the shots can be clear sometimes, especially with party coordination of sorts, and that's why I'm working on that rule. The only thing we seem to disagree on his just how frequently such coordination takes place at the table.
However, given that we don't have an exact way to replicate that experience on the Pbp without slowing down the game substantially, I'm still open to other suggestions on how to better abstract those gameplay elements.
I stated that I feel that more than 50% of the shots I see archers take involve cover because of lack of coordination, not enough room to move around, etc. I've change the rule to a -2 to -4 penalty based on how many people are between. If you and others honestly feel it is significantly less, then perhaps I reduce it further. Or come up with a different method if you can think of a good one. At the end of the day, it works for the bad guys too, so I'm cool with tweaking it without being concerned about upsetting gameplay balanced too badly.
Wizards in my game such as Emrys and the baddies, go through similar concerns with the way I abstract who is in the AoE given that we don't have exact positioning.
Speaking of, I was waiting on Emrys before moving the game forward. (or the next posting period). I don't see him and it's 6pm soooooo...