I don't think I'll be using that feat in this game, but that's good to know.
What the heck are the developers thinking with that errata?
So north or east? Time to get moving!
I think we're walking into an ambush either way.
Someone call it, and I'll go.
What the heck are the developers thinking with that errata?
That martials can't have nice things.
I think we're walking into an ambush either way.
An ambush? Do you really think I would do that to you guys?
Don't worry, I'll toss a bomb in first.
Good call. We'll do it like a fire team door breech.
So you know, for a "dual surprise round" type situation, such as what's likely to happen with the door breach, I'm going to have readied actions trigger based on initiative modifiers first and foremost. So, in the event of something triggering "when the door opens," to use an example that was pretty well implied in Kel's post, whoever has the higher initiative mod will be the one to take their action. So, if Tina readies a bomb toss and an enemy readies an arrow shot, whoever has the higher initiative mod will be first to act.
It's going to be effectively no different than if you were in regular combat rounds and had tied on initiative. I just felt that I should make that known, since I've seen some GMs rule that the players actions go first at all times.
makes sense.
In the interest of safety, Max, you may not want to do that from your current position. You don't have a possible cone into the room from that square.
Swap with Rex. That will put the first square of the blast right in front of the door, and the rest into the room on the left side.
If the templates I'm looking at are any indication, you and Deia would be caught in the blast from Rex's position too, Kel. The only way I see to get a Color Spray to hit only the door and those on the other side would be if he was in the spot I've marked with the tiny Aravashnial icon.
EDIT: Well, you only now, since Deia moved herself.
Ready to go
From the space that Rex is currently in, he can put the first square of the burst directly in front of the door. The rest of it would spill into the doorway and into the other room.
A cone is only one square wide at the beginning.
The cone would look like this-
CCC
..CC
….C
……A
The issue is that the standard grid shapes in pathfinder don't take into account diagonal firing very well.
The also don't have any functional rules for firing from behind cover (pop out, fire, duck back), which is really the only way any sane person fights with any kind of ranged weapon.
I'm going by the cone diagrams over at d20PFSRD. They have a general shape to the scribble that I just put on the map. I put it where it would end up should Max fire diagonally from Rex's current position.
They're also the same size and shape as the diagrams in the regular PRD's magic section.
Take that exact shape and flip it 180*. That's what I'm talking about. It's the same shape and area, originates from the same place, and travels in almost exactly the same path. It just doesn't put allies in the blast radius.
Think of it like this-
Stand 5 feet diagonally away from your door, and imagine the situation. He's trying to fire through the door when it opens. He's right next to it and has a 5 foot wide margin of error. There really shouldn't be any danger to the rest of us.
The issue is that the blast templates on the PFSRD are incomplete. There are 3 more viable shapes. My example is one of them.
It's up to you though. If there's no way of doing it, then he'll have to come up with another plan. At least we'll know that the enemy can't fire cones through doors either.
I'm going to go with the templates in the PRD. If it's a corner shot, it follows the stair-stepped pattern. If it's a center shot, it follows the more rectangular pattern.
It keeps things simpler in my opinion.
Fair enough.
Max, other ideas?
Wait, does Max not have line of sight into the room from his position? I was planning on color-spraying only the left side of the room, using the top left corner of Max's square as the point of origin. Added a ridiculous yellow shape to the map to convey the idea.
The other alternative is to cast Grease. Assuming he can see into the room, he should be able to drop that on some foes.
Based on how the two AoE templates work, you can't use color spray in this situation without catching allies in the blast.
Grease cast just inside the room would be awesome though.
Let's go with grease then. It is probably the better choice anyway as it has better range into this mystery room.
-Posted with Wayfinder
Bacon grease hopefully!
Which squares is the grease on?
The greased squares have been marked.
I also just realized as I was doing this update that I positioned the cultist of Baphomet badly. I forgot that the glaive was a reach weapon. Oh well, you guys really knocked it out of the park with your breach and clear.
I wasn't clear on this before, but the Cultist of Baphomet is the one in the grease and is wielding a Glaive? Is that correct?
Is this game using the Reach weapon Soft Cover rules? I'm fine either way, but it's important to know now.
If we are, that attack on Kel missed.
If not, that's awesome for me, because I'm using a reach weapon and have Combat Reflexes so I'll be able to Threaten through occupied squares. (I'd definitely be willing to take the hit for that!)
I don't want to hold things up, so I'll state my actions here, based on either ruling.
If we are using the usual cover rules, Kel is not currently being threatened (you can't take AoOs against creatures with Cover), so he just stands up and swings at the Deskari priestess.
If we are not using the usual cover rules, then Kel provokes if he stands up, so he will go full defensive and stand.
I wasn't aware that reach weapons suffered from soft cover. It just says ranged weapons in the PRD.
EDIT: Nevermind, I see it. At the top it says to treat reach weapons as ranged for determining cover. Well, since I treated it one way already, I'll just continue treating it that way, at least for this fight.
We can change it later if the party wants to.
It's a subject of some debate. If you check the section on Cover it says
To determine whether your target has cover from your ranged attack, choose a corner of your square. If any line from this corner to any corner of the target's square passes through a square or border that blocks line of effect or provides cover, or through a square occupied by a creature, the target has cover (+4 to AC).
When making a melee attack against an adjacent target, your target has cover if any line from any corner of your square to the target's square goes through a wall (including a low wall). When making a melee attack against a target that isn't adjacent to you (such as with a reach weapon), use the rules for determining cover from ranged attacks.
Of course, RAW also says that Reach weapons don't threaten at all on a diagonal, unless you happen to be Large size or bigger.
The reach weapon rules are little silly.
So, however you want to rule it is fine with me. Both options are beneficial to me at the moment.
Yea, I just saw that and was making the edit to my post as you typed that.
EDIT: Nevermind, I see it. At the top it says to treat reach weapons as ranged for determining cover. Well, since I treated it one way already, I'll just continue treating it that way, at least for this fight.
We can change it later if the party wants to.
Anything that gets Kel more AoOs is fine with me.
Anything that gets Kel closer to dead is fine with me.
I see you just updated your HP as well. You should be at 12. My tracking isn't for your remaining HP, it's how much damage you've taken.
Ok, fixed.
Since the topic has just come up, why don't we start the discussion on reach weapons, cover, and the 3.5 diagonal exception.
Personally, I don't know why Paizo removed the diagonal exception. But either way works for me and I'll leave it up to you to decide as players.
For reach and cover, I'd say call this fight a fluke because of a bad GM call. But, again, I'll leave it up to you guys how you want it to go after this fight onward.
I definitely prefer the diagonal exception. I also prefer that reach weapons not be subject to the soft cover rules.
Those two house rules make reach weapons viable and interesting in combat. The standard rules render them practically useless.
|
My input, mostly as somebody who will be the target of a reach weapon, not a user:
- The diagonal rules as written are dumb, and seem to be trying to get around the in-game system of using squares for maps more than anything else. Having reach weapons threaten the diagonal square seems reasonable to me.
- I could go either way on cover. There is no obvious mechanical issue or problem that solves; it feels like a balancing issue to me. I'll go along with the group here.
- I could go either way on cover. There is no obvious mechanical issue or problem that solves; it feels like a balancing issue to me. I'll go along with the group here.
I agree with this. I think it's balanced either way, because what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
If the enemies get soft cover against our reach weapons, then I provide soft cover for my allies against theirs. I would be fine with that.
That sounds good to me
-Posted with Wayfinder
And bad tactical decisions on my part made this fight much easier than it could have been. Oh well. You guys rocked it on that fight opener and it really set the tone in your favor. Good jorb.
I'm okay either way on the reach thing. They should just drop grids altogether and and measure movement. But I suppose using a grid is for ease of play and you don't have to bring a tape measure.
^ this.
I completely agree. In my home games I've pretty much done away with the grid. We just eyeball most movement. A foot long piece of string is pretty much all we ever need in the rare cases that movement is questionable.
While the grid does act weird at times, I'm not going to get rid of it for a PbP. It's hard to do when the scale of maps change fairly frequently, while it's easy to do it with a tabletop where an inch is always the exact same distance. I will say that I like hex grids better than square grids, since they handle diagonals and circular AoEs better in my opinion, but they also introduce their own problems.
Anyway, since it seems that everyone either doesn't care or agrees with Kel on the reach weapons, we'll go with the 3.5 diagonal exception and no soft cover for reach weapons.
Edit: Fun fact - since D&D started out being based on tabletop wargames, movement was originally handled with a measuring tape.
I'd like one of the MW chain shirts.
You are correct sir. I believe it was Arneson, that first brought forth idea of making characters and going into a dungeon, fighting monsters and taking their stuff. And thus it began and here we are 40 years later.
Can't believe I've been playing for almost 30 years myself. But I remember reading Dragons of Autumn Twilight and getting the Red Box back in the summer of 85. Never looked back, I was hooked.
My mistake, pass.
It is. They were also both women, where the earlier ones were men.
Sorry about the lack of any real updates last night and today. Work was busy last night, and then I got stranded away from home in the 10 inches of snow that dropped today.
Working on getting an update in now.
Not much of an update, but it's something. These more dungeon-crawly bits seem to take a while to move from one area to another.
I also revealed part of the area at the bottom of the ladder to represent what's visible by looking down the shaft.