Matheus' spell restoration time is midnight, but I think Sayid's is dawn.
Aye, but don't forget that we basically spend 2-3 hours cleaning the shrine.
Plus the time we advanced beforehand(half an hour), plus whatever time we spent breaking camp after Sayid was done(we had breakfast and stuff together, Isa was painting etc.).
Basically it could be around Mid-Day currently. Meaning ~16-20 hours should be doable with Dawn, and still leave us ample time of being blessed.
(or, as said, we could depart early and have Sayid re-charge during the first break we take and hope his magic is not needed beforehand.)
Finja is correct in her assumption of the time. To wait for Sayid to recover his spells would leave you with about 4-5 hours of bless.
About Aravashnial, he indeed can't recover his spells, both because he doesn't have his grimoire with him and due to his blindness. This is way he is only casting his spells when he believes is extremely necessary.
GM, adjusted the transparency on your circle of darkness so we can still see the grid-lines for the purposes of movement.
wouldn't the darkmantle fail to maintain the grapple on Jiao? (13 vs 18-3 (15)?)
Yay. Both our guys with Darkvision are unable to participate (I know it was random, but just our luck).
That begs a question: If that thing grapples Jiao, who I know was next to me, can I attack it? More specifically: Do I risk attacking Jiao accidentaly or on a miss?
Should Jiao Feng survive this, it would be really nice to get healed^^
I feel the need to point out that if healed before, Jiao Feng wouldn't be down. And she is a frontliner who can dish out good damage.
@Sayid: Thanks very much! Could you tell me how you did it? I was sure it was possible to be done, but I could not find the way to do it...
@Darrien: Jiao Feng was still flat-footed. Her Flat-footed CMD is 15, so it dropped to 12 for being critical.
@Finja: You are free to attack the darkmantle grappling Jiao Feng with no chance of hitting her. Pathfinder wasn't thought to be a 3d combat for sure... being 10 ft. high with a sphere effect, it could be said that Jiao Feng and the Darkmantle are at least partially visible.
Sorry Jiao Feng, I was hoping to let Matheus be more than just spamming CLW. Like if we weren't surprised and put in darkness he could also have used liberating command to help someone out of grapple. Plus he has more combat utility than he has been able to show. Hindsight...
ah, I always forget the flat-footed thing.
Also, sorry if its a bit meta-gamey but another question, but does the stone with the flame still produce light?
I'm unsure of how the creature created the darkness, but if its via a darkness spell or SLA the darkness spell only lowers light level by 1. A torch gives off normal light to 20 feet, and dim further out. So the 20ft of normal light from a torch would still cast dim light (allowing people to see, but with possible issues, and limited) unless I suppose you cast the darkness spell on the torch itself? If its just for dramatic purposes or the like feel free to say so and I'm fine with it just pondering.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Darkness turns off any spell of 2nd level or lower and also stops any sources of non-magical light from entering (by FAQ).
ah, does it turn it off or just counter it? I was assuming the stone as a torch, my apologies but I did not know about the FAQ. Its certainly more potent now.
Matheus is correct. About the stone with the flame, the last time it was mentioned in the gameplay was Sayid storing it in a backpack. Being a 3rd level spell, produce flame would indeed be able to pierce this darkness... but none of you attempted to identify the spell cast on the stone.
Since you have other ways to generate normal light (Finja's lantern and light spells from three of you), I did not overrule that action by saying you were carrying it, so it is still stored.
They could invoke it separately to dispel the light or continual flame spells, yes. But with our multiple sources running it made the most sense to use it normally and suppress them all locally.
@Sayid: Thanks very much! Could you tell me how you did it? I was sure it was possible to be done, but I could not find the way to do it...
When you go to fill the color on the shape if you tell google that you want to make a custom color it will pull up a windowlet with two sliders, one for shade and one for transparency. Just play with the sliders until you get what you want.
@Sayid: A 5 ft. step is an action in the RAE, so you do not get attack#3.
Also, added colors for easy targeting/posting. Will also do so for future combats.
Guys, is everything ok? I believe we are losing pace here...
I get that weekends are slow, but the last post was Thursday. I've made a quick research and all of you (aside from Matheus, who already posted) posted on other games or on these boards more than once between this time.
This worries me, because when I do this myself, it is an indication that I'm losing interest in the game. If this is the case, please let me know, for I wish not to continue a game if you guys have lost interest.
I'm here. My posting in other games was sporadic in the last week, since i just moved house and get a new job soon there's plenty of stuff to do.
Will check hp status later and post if conscious^^
Since I am bottom of the initiative order I was holding off on posting until others came along.
Thanks for the healing!
Weekends are slow, indeed. I did get some posting in but mostly did it in games that were waiting on me to resolve turns(or where I knew games kept moving swiftly on weekends and they would have to wait on me).
Only Mattheus had posted on Friday, so I admittedly prioritized differently - Apologies.
The second reason was that I felt a bit lost as to what to do. It seemed my only option was to ready an attack, but I figured I'll sleep over it and see if dream-brain comes up with something else useful to do.
Not having ranged options and not being able to see in the dark does somewhat limit possibilities, though.
But I am still very interested, please do not let weekends be the factor that gives that impression, weekday posting is strong - weekends prioritize family - I still try to get posting done, but everything else is secondary when compared to my girls. I hope for your understanding on that front.
Darrien's vote is to just let them be and get moving.
Might be an issue if we come back, possibly in a hurry.
Maybe if we are down here for a couple days, but at that point we likely have bigger issues than these things.
Just let them be is certainly mercyful. But they could be food. We can make water, but not food.
I was already thinking about it on the Rats, but didn't want to risk diseases. Just saying, if we eat Darkmantle, that's that many more full rations for Isa. Think of the kid before you decide to spare them. ;)
Just trying to be pragmatic there - self-sufficient wilderness dwellers can't be choosers.
Well it sounds like Jiao Feng has decided to pry them off the ceiling. So I think our decision is made.
I think it's great. In too many games, there is never any rationing of resources needed, except for an urgency to push forward. We got by the water shortage thanks to having a cleric...I suspect there's another option given for groups without access to the cantrip, but other things, like arrows or food, may well be scarce. We have no idea how far we fell. Just because there are some statues and an abandoned Dwarven Temple is no guarantee we are even close to the surface.
Horgus may ask for a bite of stuff we run into down here before long... :)
I'll update later today.
@Sayid: The words, in this case, are indeed just mystical nonsense. The way I run my games, arcane spells need special intonations to complete them, but not words with meaning. In this case, the words sound like abyssal, but have to actual meaning. The sound like abyssal part is important, because it will affect Spellcraft checks (if you do not know abyssal, you'll have a penalty).
Divine spells are different. They do not require intonations, but actual prayers instead, which the caster can choose upon casting. In this case, since the words are important and not the intonation, it will be impossible to use Spellcraft to identify a spell if you do know the language... on the other hand, anyone who knows the language will have a good idea about the general effect of the spell even without a Spellcraft check.
In this particular case, you all know the spells being cast are of Arcane nature.
That caster is high enough level to put the 2nd spider out where it had a clear charge line into Matheus without the first getting in the way?
Note that with total defense Matheus is on 18 AC. The entanglement from the web drops it to 16. The charge only just hit and the second attack missed. If the charge lane was blocked and it was a move and attack then both attacks miss.
That caster is high enough level to put the 2nd spider out where it had a clear charge line into Matheus without the first getting in the way?
Note that with total defense Matheus is on 18 AC. The entanglement from the web drops it to 16. The charge only just hit and the second attack missed. If the charge lane was blocked and it was a move and attack then both attacks miss.
Sorry, I did not understand your question. Summon monster is a close range spell, so even without the increase from level it has a range 25ft., so he can put both spiders close to the northeast exit, allowing both spiders ample ways to charge.
You are correct about the second attack though, even if your AC is 14 due to -2 from wounded and -2 from entangled.
I mean that the first spider charges in and then is in the way of the second spider's charge.
"You must have a clear path toward the opponent, and nothing can hinder your movement (such as difficult terrain or obstacles). You must move to the closest space from which you can attack the opponent. If this space is occupied or otherwise blocked, you can’t charge. If any line from your starting space to the ending space passes through a square that blocks movement, slows movement, or contains a creature (even an ally), you can’t charge. "
If you summon two creatures next to each other then they will usually have the same destination space. Thus a caster would normally split his summons locations apart so that they can potential charge without clipping into each other.
I mean that the first spider charges in and then is in the way of the second spider's charge.
"You must have a clear path toward the opponent, and nothing can hinder your movement (such as difficult terrain or obstacles). You must move to the closest space from which you can attack the opponent. If this space is occupied or otherwise blocked, you can’t charge. If any line from your starting space to the ending space passes through a square that blocks movement, slows movement, or contains a creature (even an ally), you can’t charge. "
If you summon two creatures next to each other then they will usually have the same destination space. Thus a caster would normally split his summons locations apart so that they can potential charge without clipping into each other.
Well, as far as I know (and I could not find anything against it), a caster can put the creatures he summon wherever he wants as long as they are within his range. He decided to put them close to the west exit in a way that both had a clear line for charge and those spots where the closest place to charge.
I have a super fun story about this encounter. Once we finish it.
Still working to understand unchained action economy, so if this is a self-evident question I apologize.
The way I read it it looks like you can take 2 move actions and a single attack action in a single round right?
Move and attack are both simple actions...so from where I am starting it looks like I can travel 30' north along the edge of the pit, ending just outside the slanted area. I then should be able to make another move action to get up next to our dwarven friend and then use my final action to attack him?
Yes/No/Maybe?
That is all assuming that I make the DC 10 Acrobatics check to move across the slanted area.
Yes, that seems correct to me.
Having gotten an affirmative from somebody, I am going to roll with that. GM, if this is incorrect let me know and we can retcon something.
Who knows, I might fall in the pit and then all of this is moot.
if we fail the acrobatics check, do we have to make a reflex check, or is it just an instant "down the rabbit hole" ?
Also, Finja, just in case you might not know. You can "stow" the shield away as a move/part of a move to negate the tower shields -10 ACP. (you lose the AC obv. but... yeah.)
if we fail the acrobatics check, do we have to make a reflex check, or is it just an instant "down the rabbit hole" ?
Also, Finja, just in case you might not know. You can "stow" the shield away as a move/part of a move to negate the tower shields -10 ACP. (you lose the AC obv. but... yeah.)
The rules are silent about this. I'll go with if you fail the acrobatics check by 4 or less, you wasted your act to move. You can use another act to try again and so on. If you failed your check by 5 or more or end your turn on the edge, then you make the Reflex save.
I believe most rules regarding acrobatics or climb are generally like this.
@Sayid: As Jiao mentioned, you are correct.
Two nat 20s in a row. The dice roller really does not like my character.
Two nat 20s in a row. The dice roller really does not like my character.
Apparently not, but then it gave you a nat 20 to not get poisoned, just to smooth things a bit.
FYI, I'm playing a F2F game where the GM has a house rule that if you roll a nat 20 on an attack, then rolls another nat 20 on the confirmation, you need to roll yet another confirmation and if you hit, instant death!
That is a scary house rule if monsters get to play by it as well...sure, it is only a .0125% chance of happening (in different terms, it is a 1 in 10,000), but that is very non-zero.
next time we come across a room prepared this way, lets fall back and wait a bit. lol
@Acrobatics: I did not know how you houseruled this.
The original pit line only states that the edges are sloped, calling out the reflex save to avoid falling in on ending turn - it does not call for acrobatics, consider them difficult terrain or anything of the sort.
Acrobatics states that a check is only needed if the DC to traverse a area becomes 10 or higher. Moving at full speed at a slope 45° or less is only DC 7(which explains why the spell does not call out a check) - even with an additional modifier 'gravel' or being 'wet' it would only be DC 9.
You probably applied the "Cavern/severely obstructed" +5 modifier which places the DC at over 10. But only if it includes the +5 for moving at full speed - otherwise it would be back down at DC 7 and not require a check at all - so without moving at full speed, it seemed there should be no check necessary at all, so I believed making the check meant we would move at full speed.
(In other words: If it was heavily sloped, 45° or more, the spell would call out a acrobatics check to move across with full speed, since the DC would be 10 or higher - so the slope should only contribute a +2, so a single +5 should not be enough to push DC high enough to require the check.)
It seems I missed something, but it was not my intent to 'cheat' by moving too far.
PS: I'll post in a few hours.
@Acrobatics: I did not know how you houseruled this.
The original pit line only states that the edges are sloped, calling out the reflex save to avoid falling in on ending turn - it does not call for acrobatics, consider them difficult terrain or anything of the sort.Acrobatics states that a check is only needed if the DC to traverse a area becomes 10 or higher. Moving at full speed at a slope 45° or less is only DC 7(which explains why the spell does not call out a check) - even with an additional modifier 'gravel' or being 'wet' it would only be DC 9.
You probably applied the "Cavern/severely obstructed" +5 modifier which places the DC at over 10. But only if it includes the +5 for moving at full speed - otherwise it would be back down at DC 7 and not require a check at all - so without moving at full speed, it seemed there should be no check necessary at all, so I believed making the check meant we would move at full speed.
(In other words: If it was heavily sloped, 45° or more, the spell would call out a acrobatics check to move across with full speed, since the DC would be 10 or higher - so the slope should only contribute a +2, so a single +5 should not be enough to push DC high enough to require the check.)It seems I missed something, but it was not my intent to 'cheat' by moving too far.
PS: I'll post in a few hours.
Here is the thought process: The spellcaster intended to create a pit as closer to the entrance of the cave as he could, to make it difficult for you to come to him. Where it was placed, it created a couple really narrow spots for you to cross (all the squares left of the pit, and one square south of the pit).
The DC to cross narrow surfaces of 1-3 feet wide is 5. The pit makes it severely sloped, giving it +5 for a total of DC 10, which thus requires a check. From the "Cross Narrow Surfaces" entry, you can only move at half-speed, lose your Dex to AC and needs only one check for the whole round.
All good. It's table variance.
As said, my interpretation would be that severely sloped would always force a check to move at full speed(DC 10) and thus be indicated in the spell effect, especially because it synergizes very well with the "reflex save to avoid falling in" if you can only move at half speed by default.
But then, there's also little definition on how the sloping works for placement on non-open spaces. Is it dependent on how much space it has to work with with a fixed depth and a variable angle? Is it a fixed angle with variable depth? What about obstacles? If there is a single pillar in the 'slope' area, how does the effect interact with it?
I just wanted to explain why I believed full movement was correct, based on the spell not calling out it's effectively halving movement speed.
For the future: Would that stack with effects creating difficult terrain or effects like grease?
By the way just double checking we aren’t waiting on me again? I had my third round actions early in the order after being booted on round two...?
Guys, I'm tinkering with the idea of letting you casters to create new spells if you wish so and have the time to research. It will not come into play now for obvious reasons, but eventually you'll have plenty of time to pursue such things if you so choose. The idea behind it is not to unbalance things or let you go crazy, but instead add some uniqueness and give you greater flexibility.
My initial plan is to use the following rules:
-You need to pick an existing spell as the base spell.
-You then can add any metamagic feat to it by increasing the level of the spell as the feat dictates. You need not to know the feat in question. As an example, you could take the fireball spell and add the Elemental Spell (acid) to it, making it a 4th level.
-You can change a spell's school by increasing its level by 1. As an example, you could take the fly spell and change it to necromancy (thus, lets say, making skeletal wings sprout from your back), making it a 4th level spell.
-You can change a spell's class by increasing its level by 1 if the new class isn't one that already gains access to the given spell at higher levels. As an example, you could take the fly spell and give a cleric access to it (perhaps by making angelic/demonic wings appear in your back), making it a 4th level spell.
-Working together, we could lower the level of a spell by 1 or more by giving it some drawback. Perhaps giving it a costly material component, or increasing casting time, decreasing duration, making it a concentration spell, and so on...
What are your thoughts?
I like the concept, I would recommend having some options that are lateral rather than having an increase or decrease in level. Changing school might be a good option for that since a lot of the time that is just flavor.
I would also recommend a mechanic for changing the size or number of damage dice. For example, increase fireball to d8s or change cap by level to 15 by increasing spell level by 1.
I would also caution against allowing low level spells to be dropped by more than one level. I would say cannot drop the level by more than (initial level minus 2)/2 minimum 1. Round down of course. This means level 6 spells could be dropped to level 4, but 5 and below could only drop 1 level. Other wise you might end up seeing very powerful spells at lower levels. Or just make a rule that you can only use the level decrease to bring it down to the initial level but not below it.
I like the idea. Good to have some base guidelines, but each change should be taken as a whole of the game with explicit GM approval.
If you make a level 4 fireball conjuration the normal thing is that is would also get around SR - something that is huge.
Sounds nice. Some of the suggested things(e.g. increasing dice cap) can already be done via Metamagic.
But as Mattheus pointed out, it's worth noting that some changes may have unplanned-for consequences.
E.g. allowing the spells to be switched to one school makes Spell Focus/Improved Spell Focus extra tasty(if it is a safe-or-suck, the higher spell level simply adds to the DC so is not always a drawback) - and some metamagic feats work on spells with specific schools or descriptors.
How those interact with each other and what options they enable should also be considered.
I know you will be final arbitrator, but if one of our casters is going for a tasty combo, they should probably check first if it's going to work the way they want.
Also, you probably don't want to include cantrips on this, due to all-day-casting.
All that said, in opposition to the last sentence, I am all for a Magic Missile Cantrip variant that takes a full round action to cast and only counts half caster level(minimum 1) for all day fire-support even at low levels. (the splash and ray spells will often be fired into melee and fail with soft cover and abysmal to-hit - an auto-hit would be preferable even if it comes with the drawback of not moving.)