|
I would like some opinions / clarifications. The following happened in my last game.
An Oracle of Bone using Command Undead and controlling 3 JuJu-Zombies (aquired via Command Undead in an earlier fight against them) walks into a anti magic field in the mana wastes.
As GM I rule that the feat Command Undead (p120) works similar to the spell Control Undead. As Oracle it is powered by channeling - a supernatural ability. As SU it is effected by an anti magic field as command undead is a non-instantaneous spell.
The Oracle therefore loses control.
To make it worse for the player he is walking as the last member of the party. All three JuJu-zombies directly behind him.
The zombies - regaining there own wits and upset about the Oracle which controlled them (as far as I can tell they seem intelligent undead) are pretty upset. Walking 5 feet behind the unaware Oracle they attack him from behind.
Surprise round: three attacks in the back with low Armour class resulting in three hits and the loss of most HP of the character.
The player feels I nerfed his character and was overly harsh.
Complaint 1:
I should have rolled for perception as he should have noticed to lose control.
Reason not to roll perception (apart of having GMed for 10 hours and it was around Midnight) - you don't need concentration to control them. They are out of sight, out of mind. He knew he was walking in the Mana Waste and the easiest way to prevent surprise would have been to just have them walk ahead of him.
Probably a better handling:
I should have allowed perception check to the whole group entering the anti magic zone. In case they would have walked on like before - no additional perception. You can't be much more surprised as that.
Complaint 2:
The control of the Undead shouldnt have stopped. The Undead had a command and being controlled is not an ongoing SU effect but an unspecified condition. As such it is not effected. After all a channel energy (healing) isn't dispelled.
Was I too harsh?
The player did survive and I didn't intend to kill him. I assumed (right or wrong) he could withstand the three attacks and the the three zombies were no match for the group anyhow.
In the end he got badly wounded but he probably felt I killed his dignity.
Opinions?
Any rules I have overlooked and why I'm wrong.
Thod
You handled things well and the fact you're considering what you could have done will improve future decisions. However, events like this, among other things, are why I refuse to allow antimagic field in any games I run. Some spells are just designed to cause problems.
|
|
I don't think removing (disallowing) dead magic zones from the Mana Wastes is an option.
They are a hazard there and dealing with it was part of the adventure. The actions of the Oracle came unexpected (it did end the encounter ahead of that immediately) but by having the undead following the Oracle this had to happen in my view.
I don't think just having ruled at some stage that the undead had 'disappeared' (advice from my wife) would have ended better. I tried to follow the rules as well as possible. And I'm not a fan to restrict actions / railroad player to prevent them harming themselves.
Thod
I don't think removing (disallowing) dead magic zones from the Mana Wastes is an option.
Well, for me it is. I'll turn a whole campaign setting topsy-turvy if a few parts of it doesn't make sense to me. I never suggested that you kill all antimagic field effects, I just said that I do.
They are a hazard there and dealing with it was part of the adventure. The actions of the Oracle came unexpected (it did end the encounter ahead of that immediately) but by having the undead following the Oracle this had to happen in my view.
I don't think just having ruled at some stage that the undead had 'disappeared' (advice from my wife) would have ended better. I tried to follow the rules as well as possible. And I'm not a fan to restrict actions / railroad player to prevent them harming themselves.
Thod
I don't see anything wrong with how the encounter/event was handled. It's the oracle's fault for wandering through the Mana Wastes with all of his undead behind him. You weren't too harsh at all. The player just needs to be more aware of his in-game surroundings.
Aren't Juju just inhabited by spirits, rather than animated by negative energy?
Wouldn't the Juju Zombies' controlling spirits just be banished, so the zombies revert to inert corpses?
Aren't Juju just inhabited by spirits, rather than animated by negative energy?
Wouldn't the Juju Zombies' controlling spirits just be banished, so the zombies revert to inert corpses?
Antimagic field only suppresses -- it doesn't dispel. The spirits would remain in the corpse and act however their specific alignment dictated, but once they leave the area the oracle's control is reestablished and the undead will follow orders again.
|
I think it was right that he should have lost control, but I don't think an immediate attack without a perception check was right at all.
First of all, there is no facing in Pathfinder. Therefore he was looking right at his zombies when he lost control and should have been afforded a perception check.
Second, if he's a Juju oracle then his zombies are not necessarily evil, and I don't feel should operate on the basis of instantly committing violence as their first free action. A more appropriate reaction could have been one of the zombies asking a question, or just standing there and refusing further orders. It could have escalated to violence, but I don't think it should have started that way.
|
|
First of all, there is no facing in Pathfinder. Therefore he was looking right at his zombies when he lost control and should have been afforded a perception check.
.
This wouldn't agree on that. There are several instances in which therecis a facing direction which has an impact on what you can do.
Fly - you can't just do a 180 degree turn in the air.
Driving a wagon - see Ultimate Combat.
As such I also ruled that when you walk for 2 hours on a road you face in the direction you walk and don't see what is behind you. We can argue that this is a much weaker form of facing in a direction and can be changed as a free (?) action. But it can have an effect if you want to preserve verisimilitude.
Also this was never debated. The question was rather would you get a perception check to notice you lost control or not.
Don't confuse this with a combat situation where you try to watch out and defend in all directions if possible. And even there do you have a facing condition in the form of flanking where opponents face you from two directions.
But it's a red herring for the original post as I admitted I could have done this part better.
Thod
|
|
In regard to JuJu zombies. He is an oracle of bones - not a JuJu Oracle and he took the zombies over against their will. As far as I can tell they have an intelligence and are unhappy when taken over.
And in this adventure they where assigned evil alignment. The paladin happily s'mores them.
I will have to look up the bit about spirits. I don't have the adventure path where they originally showed up but assume some googling will give me more information.
Thod
In regard to JuJu zombies. He is an oracle of bones - not a JuJu Oracle and he took the zombies over against their will. As far as I can tell they have an intelligence and are unhappy when taken over.
And in this adventure they where assigned evil alignment. The paladin happily s'mores them.
I will have to look up the bit about spirits. I don't have the adventure path where they originally showed up but assume some googling will give me more information.
Thod
Juju zombies aren't intelligent, IIRC. The ability that animates them specifically differentiates between intelligent and non-intelligent undead, so it clearly can't make anything intelligent.
|
|
They did have a stats block and an Int of 4. This is an 3.5 adventure played under Pathfinder rules. But a check at my 3.0 monster manual shows ordinary zombies as Int ---
Looking at Human JuJu Zombie in PFSRD shows even an INt score of 8.
Not highly intelligent but enough for - urgh, urgh, you enslave us - we hit you (no not as speech but as thoughts). I did not use 5 foot steps to add flanking for them as was possible but below the Int of the creatures.
They did have a stats block and an Int of 4. This is an 3.5 adventure played under Pathfinder rules. But a check at my 3.0 monster manual shows ordinary zombies as Int ---
Looking at Human JuJu Zombie in PFSRD shows even an INt score of 8.Not highly intelligent but enough for - urgh, urgh, you enslave us - we hit you (no not as speech but as thoughts). I did not use 5 foot steps to add flanking for them as was possible but below the Int of the creatures.
Int 8 is pretty darn high for a zombie. 3 Intelligence is sentient, capable of understanding and speaking languages, understanding morality and being able to have an alignment of your choice, etc. 8 isn't even that far beneath normal humans in terms of ability (it's a -5% to general intellectual things). Juju zombies are far, faaaaaaaar more cunning that the robots that are normal zombies.
As for the antimagic deal, I think you were overly harsh. While it seems that the antimagic field would indeed suppress the control since it functions as a Control Undead spell, they moment they undead moved out of the field they would be controlled again. This may not be a big deal, but it's worth noting.
As for the zombies surprising them, that is a definite no-no. The zombies were not hidden in any way, so if they began to make any hostile actions, everyone would just roll initiative normally. If the guy didn't get to act before the zombies and bail, then that would be an issue, but giving them a free surprise round is a bit lame IMO.
Finally, I think the cleric would become aware that their supernatural ability just shut down. There's nothing in the rules to say either way, but I think that if you have some sort of supernatural control over someone, then you'd probably be able to tell when that was severed, just like you can tell when you make a saving throw from a source you're not aware of. However, this is merely an interpretation of what would have happened since it's not covered and is by no means RAW. It also doesn't matter because, as noted previously, either way you'd just roll Initiative and go from there.
So yeah, the surprise round was harsh and against the rules.
Probably a better handling:
I should have allowed perception check to the whole group entering the anti magic zone. In case they would have walked on like before - no additional perception. You can't be much more surprised as that.
-If your strength suddenly drops from 20 to 18 because of the belt or something you're wearing suddenly shuts off it should be almost impossible not to feel it. A party at that level should have a fair number of magic items who's sudden depowerment should be noticable.
this should be followed by a knowledge arcana check for the oracle or someone to say "Park the zombies" because they'll know what will happen. A big use for Knowledge arcana is to let players know some of the finer points of how magic works under the DM's rules.
Complaint 2:
The control of the Undead shouldnt have stopped. The Undead had a command and being controlled is not an ongoing SU effect but an unspecified condition. As such it is not effected. After all a channel energy (healing) isn't dispelled.
-Its a supernatural effect, the zone eats it. Unfortunately for the oracle am fields only work against incorporeal undead, so they don't just drop
s for the zombies surprising them, that is a definite no-no. The zombies were not hidden in any way, so if they began to make any hostile actions, everyone would just roll initiative normally. If the guy didn't get to act before the zombies and bail, then that would be an issue, but giving them a free surprise round is a bit lame IMO.
I have to disagree here. If something you think is under your control and suddenly turns on you thats as big a surprise as something popping out of nowhere. If you're in a crowded market and random peasant number 84 quickdraws a knife and goes for your throat that's definitely a surprise even if you can plainly see random peasant number 84. In this case i would allo a perception vs disguise or perhaps sense motive vs bluff for the hero to realize something was up.
s for the zombies surprising them, that is a definite no-no. The zombies were not hidden in any way, so if they began to make any hostile actions, everyone would just roll initiative normally. If the guy didn't get to act before the zombies and bail, then that would be an issue, but giving them a free surprise round is a bit lame IMO.
I have to disagree here. If something you think is under your control and suddenly turns on you thats as big a surprise as something popping out of nowhere. If you're in a crowded market and random peasant number 84 quickdraws a knife and goes for your throat that's definitely a surprise even if you can plainly see random peasant number 84. In this case i would allo a perception vs disguise or perhaps sense motive vs bluff for the hero to realize something was up.
No bigger a surprise than any nonhostile suddenly becoming hostile. It's still just an initiative. Just as if someone in the group suddenly decides to attack another player (not recommending it, just saying PC 1 wouldn't get a surprise action vs PC 2 just 'cause he's the first to declare combat).
No bigger a surprise than any nonhostile suddenly becoming hostile. It's still just an initiative.
no, its still a surprise. You're aware they exist but you're not aware they're hostile.
Just as if someone in the group suddenly decides to attack another player (not recommending it, just saying PC 1 wouldn't get a surprise action vs PC 2 just 'cause he's the first to declare combat).
If PC 2 doesn't see it comming then PC one SHOULD get a surprise round.
|
|
No bigger a surprise than any nonhostile suddenly becoming hostile. It's still just an initiative.no, its still a surprise. You're aware they exist but you're not aware they're hostile.
Just as if someone in the group suddenly decides to attack another player (not recommending it, just saying PC 1 wouldn't get a surprise action vs PC 2 just 'cause he's the first to declare combat).If PC 2 doesn't see it comming then PC one SHOULD get a surprise round.
That's not how surprise rounds work. That mechanic is covered by initiative.
|
That's not how surprise rounds work. That mechanic is covered by initiative.
Initiative is only required after both parties are aware of the threat. If one character isn't aware that another has become a threat, then the threatening character is entitled to a surprise round. That IS how surprise rounds work.
A sense motive should have been allowed to notice the change in attitude. If the zombies were allowed a bluff check to hide their actions that should have been done, and the GM should roll secretly for the PC's for their sense motive check if he did not trust them to not metagame. The other issue is that when you control undead you know you have established a connection. As soon as the connection broke you would have known. There is also the issue of all your other magic items turning off. Magic turning off alone would let him know something was up.
|
|
Initiative is only required after both parties are aware of the threat. If one character isn't aware that another has become a threat, then the threatening character is entitled to a surprise round. That IS how surprise rounds work.
That's not how surprise rounds work. That mechanic is covered by initiative.
Well, either the PCs should have been allowed a Perception/Sense Motive check, or there should have been no surprise round.
To have a surprise round without a chance to prevent the surprise round is idiotic.
To have a surprise round without a chance to prevent the surprise round is idiotic.
-Definitely, but there should be more mechanisms to achieving surprise than stealth, ie disguise or bluff vs perception or perhaps sense motive to deal with threats that are visible but that are not visible as threats.
|
|
To have a surprise round without a chance to prevent the surprise round is idiotic.
-Definitely, but there should be more mechanisms to achieving surprise than stealth, ie disguise or bluff vs perception or perhaps sense motive to deal with threats that are visible but that are not visible as threats.
Alright, then we're agreed that there should have been some form of check to either anticipate or prevent battle.
Ok, so everyone makes a DC 0 Perception check since the dudes are in plain sight, aren't hiding, aren't concealing their motives (which would fall under Sense Motive), and then just roll Initiative and do things as normal. They are already aware of the zombies, they just don't know they're a threat yet. Using that argument, you could argue that the PCs never get a surprise round because unless the badguys are coming at them with weapons drawn, then they don't know they're hostile, and should let them have a surprise round.
Sorry, but Initiative exists specifically for this sort of thing. You cannot ready actions outside of combat either. You roll initiative. If some guy points a crossbow and some dude and Initiative isn't rolled, and says he's shooting them, they don't get a "surprise round" because they had something pointed at them. They roll initiative and if the guy who's the target wins then he could try to dive for cover or attack the shooter, or whatever.
There is nothing here that suggests the zombies should have gotten a surprise round. Just an initiative. If the dude in front of the zombies fails initiative, good job, he noticed the zombies too late and got clobbered. If the initiative is higher, he realized and acted before the zombies turned his face into mush.
|
Finally, I think the cleric would become aware that their supernatural ability just shut down. There's nothing in the rules to say either way, but I think that if you have some sort of supernatural control over someone, then you'd probably be able to tell when that was severed, just like you can tell when you make a saving throw from a source you're not aware of. However, this is merely an interpretation of what would have happened since it's not covered and is by no means RAW. It also doesn't matter because, as noted previously, either way you'd just roll Initiative and go from there.
Generally if a control powers "notify" you when the target is freed it is specified in the spell/power description. If it is not specified you don't get any warning.
Noticing the anti magic area would have been fairly easy if anyone had any physical characteristic enhancement going on, especially strength.
In the 3.x versions of D&D magical armours don't give increased mobility like previous versions but losing several points of strength (and so carrying capacity) or constitution (and so endurance) while doing a march should be easy to notice.
The "surprise attack" is one of the weakness of the current version. There is no mechanic to be surprised by unexpected events.
The ju-ju zombie is a completely unexpected event with no warning so it has a fair chance to surprise even a perceptive character, on the other hand making it a automatic surprise attack is a bit excessive.
A Perception against guys in the open, so an automatic success would be too lenient.
Maybe a Sense Motive to notice the changed attitude (with some modifier in favour of the zombies as they are "trusted" by the players)?
A simple initiative roll with a malus? (where the guys rolling higher than the zombies had the time to react, the others didn't?
It is one of those situations where the GM decision is the rule.
yours, Thod, was reasonable. I see little room for complaining by the player.
Seeing as the GM added something to the game and ignored existing precedents just to get a surprise round on the players, I think the player has plenty of reason to complain; and I say this as a GM (practically everything that I'm involved in I'm involved as a or the GM).
If a guy on the street walking past you suddenly decides to attack you, you roll initiative and go from there. Drawing a weapon is pointless, as he could just as easy try to take a swipe at you unarmed since you would be flat-footed if you didn't realize it was coming (as in you didn't beat his initiative check). You roll initiative and deal with it like that. There is entirely nothing that was gained by not just rolling initiative as is normal, since the threat of ambush was just as real in both situations.
|
|
I did agree in my original post I should have added perception checks when they entered the anti-magic zone. That would have allowed them to change behaviour and given them a chance to be on extra alert.
I can't go back here. Even GMs make mistakes. I'm not free of them.
In regard to be in plain sight: this is where I disagree. They were walking behind him, scimitars in their hands. The situation is more akin to a trap or ambush. Once you walk into an anti-magic zone you lose control. What do you do to prepare for that.
It didn't help that the player set up the ambush himself by placing the zombies in the order they where. We had figures, a grid map and a road they followed.
Walk as last member of the party with all three zombies behind you in striking distance was bad judgement if there is a possibility to lose control - which off course the player/character thought would never happen.
I would agree with automatic perception if they had placed the zombies anywhere in sight of the group. But they where not in plain sight assuming you don't walk backwards or check once every round what is behind you.
The same goes for sense motive. You can't do sense motive without seeing someone. As a GM I disallow someone a sense motive if he can't see him. At least no automatic sense motive. It needs an action by the player - which I denied by not telling them they entered a dead magic zone.
Noise? They did have the scimitars drawn as they had nothing to store them or any other equipment. Also to 'follow and protect' the oracle they had to be ready to attack at a moments notice.
I know someone said there is no facing in Pathfinder. Well - that is a different discussion.
Anyhow - the main complaint was that he lost control - not the surprise. Off course that made the whole situation a double whammy.
Thod
There is no facing in D&D. They might have been walking behind them, but for all intents and purposes you are just making stuff up to screw with your players. I don't agree with that, and I probably never will. There are so many things in this game that GMs can do besides making up stuff and not following rules to screw with their players, that I could GM this game for a hundred more years and not exhaust my options for bringing heck down on them.
Heck, having the zombies attack them (which I think was fine given the loss of control) is already a kick in the pants. Here you literally have party resources turning against them. You got their minions attacking them. Even if they defeat their minions, then they don't have any minions now, so it's already a lose/lose situation.
|
|
I hope you feel better about the kick in the pants / loss of resources if I tell you the player got it wrong when he controlled them assuming control undead = twice his level of HD instead of Command Undead as Feat = once his level.
His 'resource' shouldn't have been more as one Zombie in the first place. I did ask as GM during play - how many levels - and I did follow the advice of the player at the time. I'm not blaming him - he had played ten hours and mistakes are made.
I only found out next day when I read in more detail to figure out if I was wrong with the loss of control or not. To keep a game going you sometimes make decisions without half an hour looking up a rule.
I didn't complain - it happened as an honest mistake in the heat of the game.
The reason I posted here is that even a day later he challenged my handling of losing control trying to convince me I was wrong.
As I said - I do admit I was wrong in regard to give them no chance of noticing surprise in one or another way.
I hope you feel better about the kick in the pants / loss of resources if I tell you the player got it wrong when he controlled them assuming control undead = twice his level of HD instead of Command Undead as Feat = once his level.
Your player should admit his mistakes as well then, and then we should all learn from it. You, he, and we who are reading about it. So next time he shouldn't make such major mistakes with his own class features, and you shouldn't spring surprise rounds where they are not warranted, and everyone can be happy and fairness pervades throughout the land.
There is no facing in D&D. They might have been walking behind them, but for all intents and purposes you are just making stuff up to screw with your players.
Just to point out a thing, there are no facing rules in combat in D&D/Pathfinder. This is quite different from saying that a character sitting on bench in a park and reading his spellbook is completely aware of all his surrounding, including people passing behind him, and could easily recognize a former enemy walking by on the park directly behind him.
As for the OP, I would have handled the situation exactly in the same way; this is the exact situation of a 'surprise round' for me (others obviously would disagree), like when speaking to a trusted ally and the he suddenly pops out a knife and stabs you between the ribs.
Just my 2c.
|
|
To answer to the character on the bench.
The better analogy would have been the character on the bench with a guard behind the bench protecting him and look out for him - but suddenly strike him instead.
There should have been some warning - like a perception about magical energies crackling through the air and leading to the guard attacking him. As I said - I should have made it obvious they enter a dead magic zone.
But in case no actions follow on that (aka the character returns toeards reading assuming the guard takes care of his safety) I would do the same again.
The three zombies got likely placed there to take a hit for any ambush from behind / protecting the group from behind. Unfortunately they became the thread themselves.
On a different note - everyone enjoyed himself and I thanked everyone for a memorable day of gaming and got great feedback back. I don't want to give people the impression there was a fall-out or otherwise issues. Just two people with a stubborn opinion in regard to losing control over Undead or not when entering a dead magic zone. And off course both regular GMs who GM more often as play. And nothing worse as two GMs not agreeing on a rule call ;)
But I wanted to ensure the call to end the control over the Undead was correct according to the rules. I exaggerated the issue by the way I didn't tell them entering a dead magic zone. Of course they had to expect that walking into the Mana Wastes anyhow.
Thod
If a guy on the street walking past you suddenly decides to attack you, you roll initiative and go from there. Drawing a weapon is pointless, as he could just as easy try to take a swipe at you unarmed since you would be flat-footed if you didn't realize it was coming (as in you didn't beat his initiative check). You roll initiative and deal with it like that. There is entirely nothing that was gained by not just rolling initiative as is normal, since the threat of ambush was just as real in both situations.
Ok, so how does this work? You're standing at a street corner, counting out coins to the merchant, someone decides to knife you (they have quick draw). You roll initiative, you go first, and punch them... before they've done anything. Their knife is still in its sheath and to all apparent witnesses you've just given someone a bloody nose for standing there. What precisely are you reacting to before it happens?
Antimagic Shell is as cheesy as it gets so if I rolled a random event in the mana wastes and got an antimagic effect, I would make it gradually increasing instead of "one step and magic is no no".
This would have given you something that no perception check can emulate - the chance to roleplay this (although after 10 hours this might get hard :-) and then let the player come to his own conclusions (or fail to do so).
So saying "your Zombie is tailing more and more behind as it sometimes stops to glare at you only to move after you a second later as if nothing happened" would have left the choice to advance or not with the player and thus if he pressed on he could hardly fault you.
This is the price of such modern things as "skills" when back in the "good ole times" narration was more important than how high a modifier you had on your perception and wether you get to use it in any given situation.
That said you have to decide what perception is for you in your game. It is already by far most the useful and important skill, adding some sort of precognition by allowing a player to roll perception for totally unexpected lightning fast threats is giving this skill more credit than it should be worth.
If a guy on the street walking past you suddenly decides to attack you, you roll initiative and go from there. Drawing a weapon is pointless, as he could just as easy try to take a swipe at you unarmed since you would be flat-footed if you didn't realize it was coming (as in you didn't beat his initiative check). You roll initiative and deal with it like that. There is entirely nothing that was gained by not just rolling initiative as is normal, since the threat of ambush was just as real in both situations.
Out of curiosity, what do you suppose the surprise round rules are for, then?
|
|
Edit: this was in reply to BigNorse Wolf
Edit 2: just realise this should be in reply to Ashiel. Didn't realise the first part of BigNorse Wolf was a quote.
This is not just a table top combat system but also a role-play game.
But lets look up Surprise in the rulebook: p178
Surprise
When a combat starts, if you are not aware of your opponents and they are aware of you, you're surprised. Sometimes all the combatants on a side are aware of their opponents, sometimes none are, and sometimes only some of them are. Sometimes a few combatants on each side are aware and the other combatants on each side are unaware. Determining awareness may call for Perception checks or other checks.
Part 1 of surprise deals with awareness.
Is the Oracle aware of the zombies - yes.
Is the Oracle aware there is any opponent around - no. She doesn't treat the zombies as opponents but as minions.
Are the Zombies aware of the Oracle - yes.
Are the Zombies aware of the Oracle being an opponent - yes once they enter the anti magic zone and they get back their free will.
Determining awareness may call for perception and in the circumstances I should have allowed at least to become aware that they enter a Anti magic zone.
Just think about a different example to illustrate why it is important to know more as the fact someone is aroound.
You enter a room with an invisible opponent. You are 'aware' he is there but can't locate him. In this case I would always give the invisible attacker a surprise attack ahead of initiative unless the player has a readied action which would negate surprise but ensure he loses initiative.
Now change the 'room' to a large mansion and the character is told his enemy is in there but just doesn't know where or even that he is impossible. According to your definition surprise is even then not possible because he is aware someone hostile is there.
Surely you could interpret RAW that way and I'm not saying you will. But 'Awareness' is not a defined game term - it is rather left to the discretion of the GM.
|
|
In reply to MicMan
Great ideas how to role-play.
The AntiMagic zone wasn't a random event. The group was on the way towards an AntiMagic zone and an possible ambush in that zone by allies of the zombies.
Deciding they walk through another anti magic zone not specified (they did walk several hours) was an off-the cuff decision. The alternative would have been to get a double whammy later with possible ambush from the front and rebelling zombies from behind.
This was uncharted territory and I didn't feel that it would make sense that the ambush side is directly conveniently where the anti magic of the mana waste starts.
Roleplaying it - yes - a lost opportunity but we already role played a lot and two 4 hour scenarios had turned into 10 hours of play with 2 more that night and the final encounter next day.
And no - after that event I took care the next attack happened with initiative and not surprise despite having been fully in the right to have an ambush directly afterwards.
So in a way I did the ambush earlier and with different monsters but off course in a way that hit a single character much harder as anyone else. But yes - role-play wise actions have consequences and taking the zombies with him instead of killing or releasing them was what caused it.
A simple command - walk into the desert and don't come back would have avoided this completely. But they were regarded as 'resource'. Curse of the greedy player ...
This is not just a table top combat system but also a role-play game.
And the purpose of this backhanded and pointless insult is...?
Determining awareness may call for perception and in the circumstances I should have allowed at least to become aware that they enter a Anti magic zone.
Surprising the party with absolutely no warning, chance, or recourse should require some pretty extraordinary circumstances, like ghosts popping out of the walls at them. The zombies are there, there is no facing, so the oracle should have had a chance to note their change in behavior.
1) If the oracle had been first there's no real warning for an anti magic field, but the rest of the party went in first. Presumably they have some magic gear, they should have been told that it was no longer working.
2) Once the party realizes something is up someone should get a roll to realize that there is an AM field. If that works they might know that the supernatural ability to control zombies won't work in there.
3) Once the zombies go all free willy again, the oracle should have gotten a roll (probably sense motive) to notice her zombies change from "yes master" to "i will rip your lungs out"
You enter a room with an invisible opponent. You are 'aware' he is there but can't locate him. In this case I would always give the invisible attacker a surprise attack ahead of initiative unless the player has a readied action which would negate surprise but ensure he loses initiative.
I can't follow your reasoning here. If i know he's in the room what's preventing me from casting see invisibility or farie fire?
Now change the 'room' to a large mansion and the character is told his enemy is in there but just doesn't know where or even that he is impossible. According to your definition surprise is even then not possible because he is aware someone hostile is there.
Are you sure you're not confusing me with someone else?
Surely you could interpret RAW that way and I'm not saying you will. But 'Awareness' is not a defined game term - it is rather left to the discretion of the GM.
Discretion is one thing, abuse is another. There should be a roll to avoid surprise.
|
For future reference the DC/modifier for the perception check would have been about 8, not 0 as some have stated.
Distracted, +5 (a long walk in the desert gets boring real fast, most people get lost in their thoughts while doing boring, monotonous things),
Unfavorable conditions, +2 (a windy desert, sand is soft and doesn't make much noise when walked on),
Distance from target, +1 or more for some party members (+1/10 ft from target).
I'd imagine the zombies probably used stealth rather than just charge like maniacs(although maybe they did!) so add or subtract to the difficulty as behavior (and dice rolls) dictate.
Otherwise I'd say you handled the situation well.
|
|
And the purpose of this backhanded and pointless insult is...?
Sorry - this was unwarrented and I think I indeed mixed your post up.
You enter a room with an invisible opponent. You are 'aware' he is there but can't locate him. In this case I would always give the invisible attacker a surprise attack ahead of initiative unless the player has a readied action which would negate surprise but ensure he loses initiative.I can't follow your reasoning here. If i know he's in the room what's preventing me from casting see invisibility or farie fire?
the way I understood an earlier poster was that even without any action I'm not allowed to just declare a surprise round. Nothing prevents you From doing exactly that but why bother if I'm not allowed to declare surprise as GM anyhow, this got me riled up the wrong way.
Are you sure you're not confusing me with someone else?
see edit 2 in my post. I think I did.
Thod
|
|
This adventure is in some published module? I would be curious to get it as it seem interesting.
It is a season zero Pathfinder Society Scenario - level 8-9 ot 10-11. Lost at Bitter End. You should find it on the Pathfinder Society pages - in the right window. Follow PFS scenarios - season zero. I think it is scenario 26. It got some pretty good ratings and seemed straightforward to GM.
I had friends around for a special game and we had decided to do a second one but couldn't find a valid one that nobody had played. When my son dropped out we were able to go for a higher level one for both games - originally only one high level was slated for the evening slot. I volunteered to run this and prepared during the break for food in the evening.
Pitfalls: as you see from this thread - prepare for effects of anti magic fields. Also the monsters have D&D stats. If you play outside the Society you will have a lot more freedom to adapt to your group.
|
|
For future reference the DC/modifier for the perception check would have been about 8, not 0 as some have stated.
Distracted, +5 (a long walk in the desert gets boring real fast, most people get lost in their thoughts while doing boring, monotonous things),
Unfavorable conditions, +2 (a windy desert, sand is soft and doesn't make much noise when walked on),
Distance from target, +1 or more for some party members (+1/10 ft from target).I'd imagine the zombies probably used stealth rather than just charge like maniacs(although maybe they did!) so add or subtract to the difficulty as behavior (and dice rolls) dictate.
Otherwise I'd say you handled the situation well.
Should I add a +20 modifier for invisible. After all they walk behind him and as such are 'non visible' to the oracle. A modifier easily avoided but applicable in the current situation.
Off course that brings us back to the facing issue that receives split opinions.
And charging needs 10 feet movement. They walk in squares directly behind. No charge but Full attack possible.
the way I understood an earlier poster was that even without any action I'm not allowed to just declare a surprise round. Nothing prevents you From doing exactly that but why bother if I'm not allowed to declare surprise as GM anyhow, this got me riled up the wrong way.
-Not allowed, sort of allowed. Breaking gaming etiquette yes. Its sort of like throwing a cr +6 encounter at the party. You CAN do it... you just really should have a reason, shouldn't do it that often, and there probably should be a way out of it.
Basically, by declaring de facto surprise, what you're saying is that there is NO possible way an experienced expert could possibly have avoided or reacted to the encounter. As a player that makes the character, and by extension me, feel like an idiot.
The DM is the ONLY portal players have into the world. The DM describes the sights, sounds, smells and actions of everything in the world. Not telling the player about the change in stance, the sudden look of murder in the zombies eyes, a change in the shuffling of their steps leaves them flying blind in your world, which can be incredibly frustrating.
Off course that brings us back to the facing issue that receives split opinions.
Pathfinder doesn't have facing, which is why you can't do that (sneak up on someone from behind without cover) in the game. If an NPC was specifically only looking in one direction, the GM could rule that sneaking up behind them is technically concealment, thus you can use Stealth. But the game assumes that people at risk of being killed at any moment tend to look in ALL directions instead of just focusing on one. -SKR
http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/rules/canYouTake20ToHideAnObject&page=2
|
|
Should I add a +20 modifier for invisible. After all they walk behind him and as such are 'non visible' to the oracle. A modifier easily avoided but applicable in the current situation.
Off course that brings us back to the facing issue that receives split opinions.
That would depend on weather they made a stealth check or note I suppose.
If the juju zombies weren't actively attempting to hide their presence, but instead just doing something unexpected the lack of visibility was why the roll was required in the first place, so doubly penalizing them for it seems a bit unfair. Ultimately it would be your call, but I'd consider it more of a 'listen' rather than a 'spot' in 3.5 terms so visibility wouldn't make a difference to me.
And charging needs 10 feet movement. They walk in squares directly behind. No charge but Full attack possible.
For some reason I thought they were 10 ft behind. In that case reduce the perception DC to 7 instead of 8.
There is no facing in D&D. They might have been walking behind them, but for all intents and purposes you are just making stuff up to screw with your players.
Just to point out a thing, there are no facing rules in combat in D&D/Pathfinder. This is quite different from saying that a character sitting on bench in a park and reading his spellbook is completely aware of all his surrounding, including people passing behind him, and could easily recognize a former enemy walking by on the park directly behind him.
As for the OP, I would have handled the situation exactly in the same way; this is the exact situation of a 'surprise round' for me (others obviously would disagree), like when speaking to a trusted ally and the he suddenly pops out a knife and stabs you between the ribs.
Just my 2c.
There are no facing rules in Pathfinder. If a GM wants to use facing for an NPC as a plot or story point he can, but it is not in the rules.
As an example I might say the PC's can sneak past an NPC who is reading a book because he is not looking up, but by the rules he can see anything that is trying to get past that door. Your combat notification has nothing to do with it since you still need the cover and concealment rules to sneak past someone before combat even begins, simply because there is no facing.
|
|
Thanks for all the input and discussion
In the end it was an ill defined (rules wise) situation.
You can use no facing rules but it isn't combat yet and breaks verisimilitude.
Sense motive was mentioned but I think posters forget that RAW it takes 1 minute to do a sense motive check.
Bluff by the zombies also doesn't apply as they don't tell lies.
Stealth - the oracle knows where the zombies are. He just doesn't know there changed motive and the intend to attack.
Did I leave them no option? I made up my mind when they got controlled. If you take them with you, they will revert back to hostility as soon as they enter a anti magic zone. It was impossible to avoid them because the aim was to go to one of them.
Nobody here said the Oracle should have retained control.
And yes - I should have given the group notification that they entered a anti magic zone.
Thod