Thanks guys! Yeah, on the second round I did use escape artist and was succsessful. After much reading last night I came to the same conclusion as you guys too. I can imagine flailing at the thing as it gets on me, then ripping it off and it trying to re-attach again. What confuses me is this. Ok, it succeeds in attaching. When I get my turn I roll vs its CMD (9) and win thus removing it. On it's turn it just uses its initial numbers to attach again and we repeat the process? Also it looks as if the grappler must make a roll each round to keep the grapple going? This is where the racial +11 comes in if it hasn't been removed on my turn? What I should've done is ready an action to remove it (act directly after it does) so it can't end it's turn on me thus failing to drain me. Thanks alot guys.
So, I was grappled by two stirges. My rogue had a crappy CMB of 1 and CMD of 13. Firstly, we ruled that I couldn't attack the stirges with a dagger one-handed without first making an opposed grapple check. To me, the rules suggest that you can unless you are actively trying to get out of the grapple in which case you then make an opposed roll. I didn't want to oppose the grapple, I just wanted to stab it. Secondly, the stirge was using its considerable CMB of +11 (a racial bonus given in subsequent rounds once the grapple had been established) and a further +5 from the normal rules on grappling (pg 200 Core Rulebook), again, given if the victim couldn't break the initial grapple. So, +16. But, it goes on to say on pg 201 that the victim can attempt to break a grapple as a standard action by making a combat maneuver check, DC equal to attackers CMD (in this case, 9). Is it just me or does this sound totally contradictory? Can the stirge keep opposing me at +16 since it managed to grapple me in the first instance which would mean it uses its CMB vs my CMB or do I just beat its CMD of 9 and then stab at it? Ideas please. I really feel this rule should be clearer.
Sheesh, some ppl are hard to please........ At least you've tempered your criticism of this excellent aide with some token positivity. Monster Advancer Overlord, I bow down to your awesomeness and would like to suggest that even with its few flaws, the generator is about as good as it gets for speeding up prep time. Thankyou.
Some time ago there was discussion about some very helpful ppl who were constructing websites that automate things like NPC's, treasure and advance monsters. Would any of you guys happen to remember or have the links to any of those sites. I have since changed jobs so don't have them shortcutted anymore - not very orgabnisd of me! Thanks all.
I think Lynora has it here. If a disagreement ensues, I would use the other interaction checks (diplomacy etc) to see who was more convincing. For example, of the three PC's the first rolls 18, the second 11 and the last 8. Use those numbers to impose a bonus or penalty to the diplomacy rolls. Whoever gets the highest gets his/her way by convincing the others of their superior knowledge.
Ok, so, we're playing AD&D years ago. The party walks into a room with no other exit. The stone statues at the door attack, blocking the only way out. The rogue madly searches the room while the others fight and finds a trapdoor at the centre of the room. The elf fighter is first down the hole, climbing down the ladder within. The rogue (for some reason), after getting into the combat for a couple of rounds, wants to execute a retreating backflip down the escape hatch. He rolls a 1 on his dexterity check and I rule that while he does the backflip perfectly, he fails to grab hold of the ladder, thereby free-falling down the chute, knocking the elf off the ladder on his way down and both of them dying after stopping 140' later. They all whined so I had to show them my notes. There it was in pencil and white; "ladder, 140' drop".
For those who wanted an update on what happened in our game here it is. Just to summarize, we were investigating a goblin market where the murder of one particular goblin was carried out by our trusty paladin. What happened next was...... We basically all left town. Except the paladin. The market mobilised to see what the commotion was all about. I guess if you're gonne kill someone you gotta do it quietly. Mal, the paladin, made a run for the horses. That's as far as he got before he was swamped by gobbies trying to grapple, trip, bite and generally behave in an anti-social manner. The next part was way cool. Mal continued to cut the horses free whereby they all ran away. Then he simply thwarted most attempts to grapple and trip, and continued to drag the wailing mini-horde through the viallge while any green-skin within earshot attempted to climb on wagons, each other etc to have a go. It was like WWF (or whatever) with gobbies jumping all over Mal, bashing him with pots, pans and anything else they could find. Eventually they got him down with subdual damage and hung him. Still, it was fun seeing how far Mal got with approx 15 midgets trying to hold him down. The funniest bit was Mal continually warning them that if they continued they would be in real trouble. Defiance is beatiful. Anyhoo, now we're surveying the sewers for the city. It was a very productive session.
Abraham spalding wrote:
Well, making the assumption that people are animals, you'd have to be right as animals as previously stated are neutral in the DnD game. However, I think there's many ppl out there who'd disagree that people are animals - but that's another debate........:)
Nuetral is the most abused alignment. It's the interpretation that one can do whatever one wants based upon nuetrality that causes the problem - i.e. "I'll pick the alignment that gives me the most freedom". Sounds like the PC needs a shift to either NE or CN. Doing whatever one wants at any given time would suggest chaos IMO. Perhaps the DM could enforce an Good/Evil to get some. It helps me to consider that most animal types are Nuetral. They kill to eat but do not otherwise do anything malicious. Imagine a Druid who defends the forest no matter who the opponent or threat is.
FilmGuy wrote:
They might affect only a single character but the party is still in support. Imagine a scenario where the party encounters 5 goblins (in a market - Kidding) and the fighter pretty much cleans them up in two rounds without the wizard doing anything. The wizard still gets a share of XP. Similarly, the traps may only be for flavour and not all that dangerous but they would be at a lower CR so only small amounts of XP would come from them. Probably wouldn't upset the apple cart all that much in the larger scheme of things. Just my ideas. In the end, do what suits your game. Also, check out Traps and Treachery by Fantasy Flight Games. Awesome books for traps. They even give working diagrams for how they work.
Moorluck wrote:
...I think he's alluding to the fact that in the party there was a half vampire - that caused a whole different set of moral dilemmas for the paladin. The vampire being unnatural etc.
Stereofm wrote:
I'd love to see your maps - maybe I can help. Were you using sheets/effects on your maps. Until you do, you won't realise what the prog is capable of.
Yes there is a slight learning curve but that's necessary when you're using a tool that allows that level of detail. As pointed out above, use the tutorials. I wouldn't think that it'd take more than a couple of hours to get familiar enough to do some really nice maps. Once I got into the program, I was totally addicted as I had a level of control and speed not previously experienced. I also have a great add-on which lets me do maps in the same style as those at the back of The Lord of the rings - awesome black and white, almost hand-drawn looking.
carmachu wrote:
Agreed, but his opinion counts for something no matter what you think his agenda is. Obviously Goodman's bias lay in the fact that he is trying to produce a product. The argument that everyone elses ideas have as much weight are, IMO, wrong. What he says about knowing more is true - he has to. HOWEVER, the spin from that is something else entirely. Ultimately it doesn't matter. Lastly, I'd ask everyone, why spend so much energy thinking about this stuff. We are all just part of a market - if there's enough of us buying, the product will continue. No amount of speculation will change it. You want to look at the data? Why? You can't change it except by supporting/not supporting said product. It truly amazes me that ppl would even bother debating sales btwn editions. I feel that there is still many of us 3.5 heads (myself not included) that begrudge their edition finishing and another group who support 4E (or both) that feel a need to justify/defend their interest in a new edition by pointing out it's validity using sales strength. This is just a big pi*&ing contest that continues to breed negativity between gamers. I'm in support of anyone playing anything and having fun, regardless of economics I can't influence. The only data I care about is right there on my character sheet.
Zambayoshi wrote:
I'm not precarious - I'm back at town!
ghettowedge wrote:
While I accept your point I disagree. Yes, some ideas could be used in other RPG's but that's true of nearly every thread on the 3.5/OGL etc. When we get to the crunch, however, the rules are 3.5 so the 4E types etc aren't going to get much out of them. Why not start another thread on Gamer Life that's more generalized? The 4E guys have something similar to this too. I'm picking up some really good ideas here, ppl. Keep it coming.
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
.....hmmmmm......ok..... Isn't it funny in an ironic way that you spelt "inaccurate" incorrectly. :) Sorry, been a long day.
FabesMinis wrote: Again, isn't this more of a Gamer Life topic? Come on, Man. Honestly, who are you - the thread police? It's obviously a thread for anyone who wants to improve their 3.5 game. Awesome idea Pax. 3.5 can be hard off the bat. New GM's should get some great ideas here. My tip; Get familiar with the basics of the ruleset first, like combat and magic. these are usually the things that slow the game down most so get as good a grasp as possible. When you're writing up the encounter, get a page reference for anything you're iffy on, like monsters etc. As a player, my GM has post-it's on everything. In the end, rest assured your game will develop it's own flavour. If your group (including you) don't like something CHANGE IT. Consistency is the key.
Gamer Girrl wrote:
Agreed, but his actions as a player/PC don't have to support your views or those of the majority. He's been very honest about his reasons so there's really no reason to feel frustrated because his views are contrary to the majority. After all, he is accommodating us by taking part in the conversation. We're not here to convince him of anything, we're really just exploring some things that happened in the game so all points of view are valid. Having said all that, I basically agree with where you stand on things regarding the topic.
raoul wrote: ... That's some funny s*!t man. Chimp Slayer! I agree that the vibe here is at times getting unneccessarily hostile. Let's keep it nice people. Raoul is good enough to open up on his game to get a debate happening so let's respect his ideas like he's respecting ours.
Lord Fyre wrote:
How would that be done - tell me and I shall do it. Very nice to see you, Watchman. :)
Hang on - you hadn't proved anything. Why not attack anyone who may be capable of committing evil. If the gobbie was good (alas, we'll never know) your suspicion was wrong. ...then you would argue that it was a lower life form therefore it doesn't matter? It makes the word "investigation" redundant because we should've just destroyed them for being sus (as all goblins are). :)
That last comment is pure awesome. I don't think the search was fruitless, yeah it took a while but it's a thourough group. I really enjoy these situations because you get to see the player play the character. Althought there are disagreements they are always communicated in an adult manner. ...except the name calling and general verbal abuse....;)
MWAHAHA! I think you're right. We definitely get bogged down in the minutae at times. It's probably more of a role play group than a combat group I think. Not to say that combat is minimal or anything. I agree that I should've asked the gobbie to accompany us - still, my thoughts were that the gobbie was/ or had a very good chance of doing something bad. The copper doens't just ask you to come with him when he sees at the murder crime scene. He cuffs you and takes you away for further questioning. I wasn't gonna give him the chance to get away - and I didn't use spells thst would physically hurt him, I was just passifying him. Imagine coppers that could do that! No more guns.
When was it proven that the potions etc were the previous belongings of the dead travellers? Sounds to me like a circular argument of self justification. Secondly, is trying to attain the 7 virtues counter to the class itself if, as you point out, you're going to explore the positive and negative aspects. surely a willingness to do this points to chaotic immediately and also a reluctance to bother with the things that make a paladin a paladin. we were only sent there to investigate. It would have been, in my opinion, up to the city to decide guilt and punishment unless we actually witnessed crime. What do ppl think about the monk stopping the wizard in the apprehension of the other gobbie selling body parts?
Wow. great response by all. Glad you took the time to read the thread, Raoul. Just to add an extra piece of information in regards to a comment made by Kevin Mack; the Paladin had agreed on a price to pay the the Gobbie for his potions then, when the goblin turned his back, the paladin executed him. Would this go against the paladin's code re. cheating, lying? After all, they had agreed on a trade. Secondly, why kill just one Goblin when he could slay them all. Seems as if the paladin chose to kill the one he could most benefit from, meaning it had nothing to do with defeating evil. It took two attacks to kill the gobbie mind you, seeing as his surprise attack missed - pretty funny.
thanks for your ideas Gamer Girrl. The other part of the story is that we found one Goblin selling magical items made of human body parts. Now, this Gobbie I tried to arrest and take back to town for questioning but the monk in the party stopped me because he didn't think the gobbie was doing anything wrong! So many moral dilemmas.
You're in a Goblin market. Tents and stalls line the streets, filled with everything from leatherwork to pots and pans. Sure, the goblin traders here drive a hard bargain, but they haven't tried to mislead, attack, or do anything ubtoward to you or your party. Question; Is it ok for the Lawful Good paladin to put his axe through one Goblin's head (selling potions etc) and take its' stuff on the basis that they are vermin? Background; Our party was sent to investigate a goblin market on the King's road that had sprung up near a ruined bridge. Some human travellers had gone missing nearby. The goblins built a new bridge, allegedly charging a toll. We weren't charged a toll by them and two of us left the market without harrassment. Although the bridge looks like it was destroyed by tools, there is no proof that the gobbies did it......yet. So, to the question.
|