In a recent game, we assaulted a wooden palisade/fort at night. My archer ranger, crept up to the edge of the fort's torch light (65 feet away in total darkness), used his boots of levitation to float ~100 feet up in the air, and then began raining down arrows upon the poor men within.
Between my allies on the ground, my favored enemy bonuses, them being flat-footed against my attacks, and their being almost wholly unable to retaliate effectively against an unseen archer, the fort was soon cleared of enemies.
I kept careful track of range increment penalties (even using Pythagorean theorem) as well as penalties for levitation's unbalance effect.
Was this handled right? Should the defenders have been flat-footed pretty much the entire time? Or would they, by the rules, somehow have figured things out after the first shot?
|
While it's true that they shouldn't have been flat-footed after acting in combat, it would be very reasonable for the defenders to be denied their Dex bonus to AC against attacks that they couldn't perceive.
The one thing that I would question, in terms of how it was handled, is that the defenders didn't simply duck behind hard cover (or run into a building) after a round or two of seeing their fellows dropped by unseen attacks. If the guy next to me caught an arrow in the eye socket, the last thing I'd want to be doing is squint uselessly into the darkness.
Also, if you were relying on their own torchlight to target them, you'd expect someone would be bright enough to extinguish those torches that weren't helping them, but were obviously helping to target them.
When you have a large group of defenders in a fort, you'd expect them to respond intelligently to most threats, especially in a fantasy environment, where magic and supernatural abilities aren't really that uncommon. Otherwise, they never would have survived long enough to be killed by you. After all, parties of PCs aren't the only threats that populate a dangerous world.
As soon as they have taken an action, ANY action, they are no longer flat footed. You maybe unseen against them, but that is not flat footed.
Sorry, our group is accustomed to using the term flat-footed and "lose Dex bonus" synonymously, even though we all know that they really aren't the same.
actually you played it better off for them...
going off the PRD it states that anyone you cannot see you due to darkness is deemed 'blind' it then states that "A blinded creature loses its Dexterity modifier to AC (if positive) and takes a –2 penalty to AC."
So I would say that you played the combat as per rules...
The fort defenders weren't blind, they just couldn't see me as I was far enough in the dark that not even darkvision could find me. I could see them clear enough as they were standing in a well lit fort.
I don't know that the -2 would have applied in this instance.
If it does, than I will have to remember that should I use this tactic later.
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/environment.html))
The devil is in the details here. Someone that can't see you isn't blind. I can't see what part of the page you referenced is supposed to provide your intended meaning.
In many cases, some characters or monsters might be able to see while others are blinded. For purposes of the following points, a blinded creature is one who simply can't see through the surrounding darkness.
-Now it doesn't say surrounding what, but i think its pretty clear that it means the creature in question. The creature in question is surrounded by light.
Blind creatures must make a DC 10 Acrobatics skill check to move faster than half speed. Creatures that fail this check fall prone. Blinded creatures can't run or charge.
Its pretty clear that this is not a limitation on the guards.
A creature blinded by darkness can make a Perception check as a free action each round in order to locate foes (DC equal to opponents' Stealth checks). A successful check lets a blinded character hear an unseen creature “over there somewhere.” It's almost impossible to pinpoint the location of an unseen creature. A Perception check that beats the DC by 20 reveals the unseen creature's square (but the unseen creature still has total concealment from the blinded creature).
When you're fighting the DC to hear you is 0 with distance as the only penalty.
Cold Napalm wrote:
As soon as they have taken an action, ANY action, they are no longer flat footed. You maybe unseen against them, but that is not flat footed.
Sorry, our group is accustomed to using the term flat-footed and "lose Dex bonus" synonymously, even though we all know that they really aren't the same.
After they act they are no longer flat footed and after you shot you are no longer concealed (that is what sniping is for) so unless you dropped them all in the surprise round/1st round if you won initiative they would not lose their dex after the first round
Technically, unless its a moonless , clouded night they can see the ranger just fine. He's under low light conditions, and the torches don't (as they do in the real world) ruin your night vision for things further out. Low light doesn't give you a spot penalty (oddly enough) all it gives is a 20% miss chance and the possibility of hiding.. but since you're in combat and not sniping you can't do that (especially since the ranger is being observed after that point)
After they act they are no longer flat footed and after you shot you are no longer concealed (that is what sniping is for) so unless you dropped them all in the surprise round/1st round if you won initiative they would not lose their dex after the first round
If they are fighting an invisible attacker, as they were, they would still lose Dex to AC.
Though I agree, if there was any moon out, he would still be visible.
Seeing as we weren't in any hurry, we waited for an opportune time to make our assault (we scouted the fort for a week while scribing scrolls of invisibility prior to the assault). Though it was never stated, specifically, it's probably safe to say there was no moon (or at least lots of cloud cover). The entire fight lasted less than four minutes.
While my invisible friends scaled the walls and attacked on the ground, I provided cover fire from on high, in the dark, and without invisibility.
I would have to concur with questioning the targets remaining in the open to be killed and Boots of Levitation at level 3 (4 max) since I'm assuming this is your Kingmaker game....
Please edit your post. I was attempting to avoid such connections in order to keep this thread spoiler free.
Those who survived to get to cover were either hacked apart by my comrades or flushed out into the open for my arrows to pierce.
Our party suffered a tragic TPK at the fort, and we were all forced to make a whole new group of characters. The new characters came into the game where our old ones had left off (that is, at 4th level) and had appropriate starting gear for 4th-level characters. They were little more than mercenaries and bounty hunters who had been hired to find our old characters. When the party wizard was later killed (been a rough run for us), I inherited the boots he had crafted with his starting funds.
By the time our new characters found there way to the fort (after several unrelated encounters and mini-adventures), the occupants therein had learned how best to utilize the magical gear from our old characters. Made the assault that much harder on us.
1) Why didn't they attempt to find cover behind something? Walls, battlements, dead bodies, tower shields, enclosed areas, or beneath the walways around the top? or Towers?
2) None of them had low light vision?
3) Didn't they have people in the woods acting as point men for attacks? What was keeping an entire battallion of orcs from surprise attacking!? Would they not have patrols go around the base of the fort every 2-5 minutes?
4)Bullseye Lanterns... anyone?
5) None of them had spells or flying animal companions that could help them carry sunrods around the sky? No Moon or Stars or arrows with sunrods or fire on them illuminating the sky temporarily telling them where the enemy was?
6)Well.... the fort was useless..... so they might as well have run outside and attack the group on the ground...
All in all.... this was the most useless fort ever with the stupidest warriors ever. The DM should have just had them hand over their land, gold, women and children; then commit suicide :-).
Overall the plan was well handled and implemented by the players. As a DM I think it would be fair to give the players a few rounds of fire and then the fort does "Something" to dig in. Send up a flare, find a caster, send out a flying trained own, bullseye lantern, or just break out the tower shield and dinner tables for cover. Heck, after a night of this I would set up many extra large bon fires that could be set alight to give 300' of visibility.
The players could have then used this same hit and run tactic over a week or three to whittle them down for a final confrontation.
Short answer is the players did well and were rewarded by a good victory, while a DM with 20/20 hind sight could come up with many counter options I know myself and many other DM's who could have run the encounter the same way. It is not the first or last time the players outsmart a DM with a good idea.
Any energy effects on the bow or ammunition?
How did you get to see them ? What is your vision type? Did you have lowlight or some thing. Cause if you can see them and the low light then they can see you as well. What light sorce give off 65 ft of light?
1) Why didn't they attempt to find cover behind something? Walls, battlements, dead bodies, tower shields, enclosed areas, or beneath the walways around the top? or Towers?
Nearly half of them ran behind walls or into buildings. Those who hid behind walls didn't benefit much as I would just levitate high enough to get an angle on them. Those who ran into the buildings were flushed out by my allies. The second half were either shot dead before they could respond, or were too preoccupied with fighting my invisible allies on the ground to spend time getting to cover.
2) None of them had low light vision?
Didn't seem that way. At least two of them seemed to have darkvision from magic items, however.
3) Didn't they have people in the woods acting as point men for attacks? What was keeping an entire battallion of orcs from surprise attacking!? Would they not have patrols go around the base of the fort every 2-5 minutes?
Their scouts had actually noticed us poking around a few days before the attack and they had tightened their defenses. Though we were aware of this out of game, we all failed our checks to notice the scout and the only in-game indication that we had been spotted was the very fact that they had tightened security.
When we attacked, I kept my animal companion horse directly beneath me should I need to drop back to the ground to make a quick escape. As luck would have it, a powerful scout (I suspect it was the fort's second in command), found my mount and quickly figured out where I was. I got an arrow in my arm before I was able to levitate out of his darkvision range and my moutn was able to drive him off for a time.
He spent a lot of time firing blindly into the air trying to hit me, but I was simply too high to be easily seen. All in all he shot me twice during the encounter and all but murdered my horse.
4)Bullseye Lanterns... anyone?
None were mentioned, but I doubt it would have mattered. I would simply have scooted a little further off and a little higher up in order to stay out of range. After all, we had spied on them long enough to know what light sources they had access to.
5) None of them had spells or flying animal companions that could help them carry sunrods around the sky? No Moon or Stars or arrows with sunrods or fire on them illuminating the sky temporarily telling them where the enemy was?
Honestly, I too was very surprised they didn't return fire with flaming arrows in an attempt to locate me. It would have been a simple matter for one guy to shoot a flaming arrow with several others using prepared actions to turn me into a pincushion.
That is precisely why we attacked from two directions. My allies on the ground were supposed to prevent the enemy from getting that organized.
6)Well.... the fort was useless..... so they might as well have run outside and attack the group on the ground...
Not useless at all. They wiped out our first party of adventurers entirely.
All in all.... this was the most useless fort ever with the stupidest warriors ever. The DM should have just had them hand over their land, gold, women and children; then commit suicide :-).
I hear this kind of attitude on the forums a lot. I'll post my most optimized character ever, only to have people tell me it is extremely weak. I'll post about an interesting and difficult encounter only to have people say the GM went way too easy on us. Why do people do that?
Any energy effects on the bow or ammunition?
No.
Nope.
|
|
How did you get to see them ? What is your vision type? Did you have lowlight or some thing. Cause if you can see them and the low light then they can see you as well. What light sorce give off 65 ft of light?
I think the point of the strategy is based on the fact that this isn't the case, Tom.
A light source sheds light to given distance and in given amount. Something outside of that light source's maximum distance can see in to the illumintated area, but is himself not illuminated. Thus, 'dork's ranger could see in, but no one could see out, since he was at 65 feet, or 5 feet beyond the low light illumination of the light source.
***********************************
The tactic works per the rules. If such magic is commonplace, counter-measures should be commonplace. That's the nature of warfare and technology/magic. If it isn't common, it should work until word gets out, and then countermeasures start to come into play.
|
I don't know about one point Ravingdork, your companions aside if an enemy hugged the wall closest to you no matter how high you went they'd still have cover if you're 65 feet out or so. You'd at least suffer the prone target penalty if you got to such an extreme angle (not to mention the range penalties).
That being said it's a good tactic that worked on a group of foes who really wouldn't expect it (if this is from Kingmaker). Bandits aren't trained soldiers and a haphazard response fits that.
--Vrocket propelled grenades
I don't know about one point Ravingdork, your companions aside if an enemy hugged the wall closest to you no matter how high you went they'd still have cover if you're 65 feet out or so. You'd at least suffer the prone target penalty if you got to such an extreme angle (not to mention the range penalties).
That being said it's a good tactic that worked on a group of foes who really wouldn't expect it (if this is from Kingmaker). Bandits aren't trained soldiers and a haphazard response fits that.
--Vrocket propelled grenades
The prone penalties from on high is kind of a GM ruling type thing and not necessarily part of the rules.
I did have to deal with cover and partial cover for 1 or 2 rounds due to those walls (and the 1 or 2 rounds before that they had total cover relative to me).
Also, I kept careful rack of range penalties via Pythagorean Theorem. I even went so far as to calculate the angles of my attacks at various heights to better determine how much cover they had relative to me. :)
|
|
Our party suffered a tragic TPK at the fort, and we were all forced to make a whole new group of characters. The new characters came into the game where our old ones had left off (that is, at 4th level) and had appropriate starting gear for 4th-level characters. They were little more than mercenaries and bounty hunters who had been hired to find our old characters. When the party wizard was later killed (been a rough run for us), I inherited the boots he had crafted with his starting funds.
For levitation to be available at this level shouldn't be a problem via spell, scroll, or potion. It shouldn't be a problem from a gaming perspective. But, as I said in my last post, if it is commonly available, countermeasures should be commonly available.
While I appreciate your description of why it worked out that the party has the equipment it has, when push comes to shove, in a standardly equipped game, Boots of Levitation are overpowered for 4th level. Appropriate equipment for 4th level characters per the WbL chart is 6k gold. In addition, per p.400, no more than 50% should be spent on one item. Another way of looking at it are that the boots are appropriate for a 6th level character per the 50% single item idea.
How magical crafting fits into this is undefined by the rules, but the intent of the wealth by level chart, in my eyes, is to appropriately equip characters. 4th level characters should have gear valued at no more than 6k; no one item should be more than 3k, regardless of whether the crafter made it or not. Doing otherwise is gaming the system in order to obtain an advantage. Per my thinking, WbL and crafting should work together to provide flexibility, not Wealth Beyond Level.
Inheritance of dead party member's equipment, by definition, creates wealth by level issues. This goes back to the early days of RPGs and most groups that seek to insure a quality game put measures in place to limit the effects. To any objection along the lines of "Joe would have wanted me to have it," or "It's unreasonable that I wouldn't use it," can be found the rebuttal, "Come up with an explanation that creatively explains why the stuff isn't inherited and also supports the matter of game balance." An example is, "Adventurers traditionally inter into contracts to return all materials to the next-of-kin."
*******************************
Congrats on the creative approach to the solution.
For levitation to be available at this level shouldn't be a problem via spell, scroll, or potion. It shouldn't be a problem from a gaming perspective. But, as I said in my last post, if it is commonly available, countermeasures should be commonly available.
While I appreciate your description of why it worked out that the party has the equipment it has, when push comes to shove, in a standardly equipped game, Boots of Levitation are overpowered for 4th level. Appropriate equipment for 4th level characters per the WbL chart is 6k gold. In addition, per p.400, no more than 50% should be spent on one item. Another way of looking at it are that the boots are appropriate for a 6th level character per the 50% single item idea.
Note the emphasis. The text on page 400 is a guideline/recommendation rather than a hard rule. In fact, the entire WBL guidelines are just that, guidelines. Our group doesn't typically adhere to the guideines saying we should only have so much of any given ind of item for a number of reasons:
1) We are accustomed to the v3.5 way of doing it.
2) It's too complicated for our tastes. Spend until you can't spend anymore is far easier.
3) Those who think it may unbalance the system are usually over thinking it.
4) It breaks our suspension of disbelief. It is totally possible for an adventurer in literature to come across only a single magical item of any real significance. What is far less likely is that they end up being a Christmas tree of "just the right kind" of items.
What's more, our characters DO typically send a deceased character's treasure off to their loved ones, or else bury them with it if they have no loved ones. Only in times of great stress do we consider taking the treasure, and even then, only in order to survive the immediate situation.
My character is the exception, however. He was raised by spriggans and has no qualms whatsoever about stealing from the dead, much to my allies' continued dismay.
|
|
I also have to agree with Howie that your boots are too powerful for your WBL. You can't use starting funds to make magic items for half their price. Item creation and selling goods for half balance each other out in game.
If you found the Sword of Coolness but want a Belt of Whiz-Bang and know how to make one you can sell of the sword for half and then craft it. In the end however the Sword and Belt are the same price.
--Vrock'em Sock'em Robots
|
|
Note the emphasis. The text on page 400 is a guideline/recommendation rather than a hard rule. In fact, the entire WBL guidelines are just that, guidelines.
All waffle words are guidelines. All campaigns vary. This is like saying everyone has opinions and they vary. The guidelines are a standard that serves as benchmark for common discussions between players from different campaigns. If the guidelines are ignored, then there should be cause related to the overall power structure of the campaign. If the guidelines are ignored, but the critters that reasonably should see such magic regularly are unprepared for it, the balance between threat and reward is out of whack.
Your campaign chooses to ignore this guideline, have a combat that has little challenge (as a result of that, in part) which then generates a thread that is partially "is this really how it works" and partially "look how we stomped this through our creativity." (Latter quotes are mine as a literary device and are not intended to be seen as 'dork's words.)
Again, congrats on the the solution. If the game is progressing how you like, then enjoy. If not, seek to see why.
You can't use starting funds to make magic items for half their price.
If you ever find that rule, feel free to show it to us. We might just change our ways. :P
All waffle words are guidelines. All campaigns vary. This is like saying everyone has opinions and they vary. The guidelines are a standard that serves as benchmark for common discussions between players from different campaigns.
I agree.
At least I stated some valid reasons why we don't adhere to those particular passages.
|
If you ever find that rule, feel free to show it to us. We might just change our ways. :P
Hey Ravingdork, I just wanted to say (as a GM who has run that same encounter) that what you did was quite clever and I think you taking the fort as you did was just fine. Your ease with the battle might have had to do with two things: 1. your possession of the boots (covered below) and 2. being 4th level (as far as I remember, that adventure was meant to end at 4th level, and the PCs were meant to be around 3rd when they went to that fort).
On the note of crafting stuff for starting gear, I would like to toss in a thought. When you get your starting gear, it's not as if you're going out and 'buying' everything outright. Characters start with a certain 'value' of gear and crafting something doesn't change how much it's worth. It's the same reason why a 1st level character doesn't get a discount on a longsword if his dad happened to make it. Just because his dad only spent 1/3rd the price doesn't change how valuable the longsword *is*.
In any case, it's really up to the individual GM, but I've always argued that 'starting wealth' should be the total *value* of everything that character has, not necessarily how much it costs. This keeps everyone on equal footing at the start, and prevents people going further with the 'craft' thing. For example, if you make a party of 5th level characters (that all have backgrounds of adventuring together) and one of them has Craft Wondrous, do they all get discounts on the wondrous items (as if the wizard crafted them for them)? If not, why? If only the wizard gets the discount, why?
Frankly, it's just much simpler to say that the starting wealth each player gets is the total value of everything, and not the cost. It also seems to be the RAI, but I can't give you any hard evidence to that.
Hey Ravingdork, I just wanted to say (as a GM who has run that same encounter) that what you did was quite clever and I think you taking the fort as you did was just fine. Your ease with the battle might have had to do with two things: 1. your possession of the boots (covered below) and 2. being 4th level (as far as I remember, that adventure was meant to end at 4th level, and the PCs were meant to be around 3rd when they went to that fort).
Easy? If it weren't for my covering my allies from afar, and the party oracle staying invisible the ENTIRE fight to offer healing where needed, my allies on the ground would have died 3 times over.
On the note of crafting stuff for starting gear, I would like to toss in a thought. When you get your starting gear, it's not as if you're going out and 'buying' everything outright. Characters start with a certain 'value' of gear and crafting something doesn't change how much it's worth. It's the same reason why a 1st level character doesn't get a discount on a longsword if his dad happened to make it. Just because his dad only spent 1/3rd the price doesn't change how valuable the longsword *is*.
In any case, it's really up to the individual GM, but I've always argued that 'starting wealth' should be the total *value* of everything that character has, not necessarily how much it costs. This keeps everyone on equal footing at the start, and prevents people going further with the 'craft' thing. For example, if you make a party of 5th level characters (that all have backgrounds of adventuring together) and one of them has Craft Wondrous, do they all get discounts on the wondrous items (as if the wizard crafted them for them)? If not, why? If only the wizard gets the discount, why?
Frankly, it's just much simpler to say that the starting wealth each player gets is the total value of everything, and not the cost. It also seems to be the RAI, but I can't give you any hard evidence to that.
Oh I agree completely, and I believe this myself. However, my friends are accustomed to powerful characters, so we let it slide in our games. As a GM, I would rule similarly as you if it didn't make me into a total hypocrite to my friends.
This keeps everyone on equal footing at the start, and prevents people going further with the 'craft' thing.
The following comment is not, repeat, NOT, snark.
If you can never get any discount for crafting items, especially at the start of the campaign when the characters have had years to make the items that they want to begin adventuring with, then why would anyone, ever, spend skill points on craft?
I hear this kind of attitude on the forums a lot. I'll post my most optimized character ever, only to have people tell me it is extremely weak. I'll post about an interesting and difficult encounter only to have people say the GM went way too easy on us. Why do people do that?
I think some people like to believe they're the only ones who ever have original ideas. They also like to think they're the only ones playing the game "right". These people exist in real life all over the place, the anonymity of the Internet just magnifies it somewhat.
I gotta say that fight was one of the tougher ones. Our party was almost TPKed as well, only a HUGE amount of luck saved us. Kudos on the good tactics.
@Tom S 820, actually this is a good case for a Bullseye lantern which has a 60' normal, 120' dim. Also spells like Dancing Lights can be useful for blanketing an area. Hopefully a guard in that situation will be able to make the listen check to at least point the sweep lights in the right direction.
@james maissen, wow that is really sticking to battlemat measurements, counting the every other diagonal as 10 feet. Nice handy formula. I don't think anyone in any group I've played in has measured ranged weapons that way even since 2nd edition, or even blue box when it comes to that.
I was using this site to determine the diagonals (as I'm no good at math). Supposedly it takes things like the grid into account.
I think in the interest of keeping the post spoiler free many aspects of the situation in the fortress were left out by the OP. That's why you can't just say the people in the fort were stupid or should have been doing some set of actions, it was a (mostly) scripted encounter. I think a couple other people on this thread recognize where this particular situation occurred and are also trying to be cautious of putting too much information in their replies.
|
|
Also, I kept careful rack of range penalties via Pythagorean Theorem. I even went so far as to calculate the angles of my attacks at various heights to better determine how much cover they had relative to me. :)
'Dork, we may disagree about other aspects of this, but using Pythagorean Theorom in 3 dimensions should be fine. The entire point of 3.5 grid math is that that diagonal math is an approximation of PT. It should be accuarate to within 5' for most encounters. I'll leave it to the calculator nuts to work out when that barrier is broken.
Neither flat footed, nor denied their Dex.
Not 'blind' either.
The only advantage is they'd have a hard time firing back.
I think BNW has covered it all pretty well to be honest.
How did you get to see them ? What is your vision type? Did you have lowlight or some thing. Cause if you can see them and the low light then they can see you as well. What light sorce give off 65 ft of light?
Well if they are standing in light then he can see them, thats fair enough. His light source doesn't have to illuminate them, they are illuminating themselves. Hes limited to the maximum distance of his unobscured range if they choose to stand in a well lit area.
|
|
Neither flat footed, nor denied their Dex.
Not 'blind' either.
The only advantage is they'd have a hard time firing back.
I think BNW has covered it all pretty well to be honest.
Yeah. A hard time. 'Cause they can't see the archer. In game terms, this is the same as blind.
Your 2nd post contradicts your first, or you don't understand the described terrain and/or rules.
some things to take into consideration:
just because a sniper has made an attack does not mean he is, by any means, no loner concealed.
Eye sight adjustment from brighter light, looking out into darkness is often spoiled if not rendered useless.
If one were to douse the torches, and then wait until night vision adjusted, then yes the ranger would have been noticeable in the moonlight.
the "sound" of an archer in combat is how much different than an archer who is hiding?
answer: not alot
hes not grunting, clanking, shouting, or in this case barely moving, what would they be listening for. the "twang" of his bowstring? the hiss of the arrow? would they hear that over the gurgling cries of the guy net to him with an arrow in his throat?
in modern day sniping there is muzzle flash and report (the sound the bullet makes as it breaks the sound barrier)
usually a rifleman gets off a single shot before needing to relocate.
In the times of the colonial armies fighting the indian wars, this was not an issue for camouflaged heron, mohawk, pequot or iriquois warriors.
they just plucked away as their bow strings went unheard over the cries and clamor of their targets screaming and running about.
if you have noise, even nominal noise around you (say a fire crackling loudly) you are unlikely to hear anything at range that is not distinct (like a wolf howl) but if you have more noise than that near you (clamoring of soldiers) it would be nearly impossible for you to hear something like a bow string from far enough away to receive range penalties.
Yeah. A hard time. 'Cause they can't see the archer. In game terms, this is the same as blind.
No, this is not blind... they can see the terrain around them, they can see other attackers, and unless it was a pitch black moonless night with no stars or anything else, they could possibly see him as well.
In an area of dim light, a character can see somewhat. Creatures within this area have concealment (20% miss chance in combat) from those without darkvision or the ability to see in darkness. A creature within an area of dim light can make a Stealth check to conceal itself. Areas of dim light include outside at night with a moon in the sky, bright starlight, and the area between 20 and 40 feet from a torch.
Thats the rules; They are not 'blind', they are not 'unable to defend', HE simply has concealment, hence hard to hit.
He doesn't even get the benefit of +1 for higher ground, as he's using a missile weapon.
Thats all.
Your 2nd post contradicts your first, or you don't understand the described terrain and/or rules.
Sorry how is this the case?
some things to take into consideration:
Whilst I agree with you, the RAW kinda handwaves a lot of this stuff away.
Neither flat footed, nor denied their Dex.
Not 'blind' either.
The only advantage is they'd have a hard time firing back.
I think BNW has covered it all pretty well to be honest.
How are they not denied their Dex? They are being attacked by a concealed attacker they can't find, after all.
How are they not denied their Dex? They are being attacked by a concealed attacker they can't find, after all.
Wanna show me where it says that in RAW?
Because if being attacked by someone with partial concealment denies your dex, then it would apply to an archer in broad daylight firing down on attackers from a battlement, which it doesn't.
The attacker gets no bonus, except cover. Not even the +1 for height (which I part disagree with)
In actuality RD, seems you got thrown a HUGE bone, because the targets would ALSO have had concealment per RAW, unless they were parked on top of a toch each... which is VERY unlikely.
|
|
This keeps everyone on equal footing at the start, and prevents people going further with the 'craft' thing.
The following comment is not, repeat, NOT, snark.
If you can never get any discount for crafting items, especially at the start of the campaign when the characters have had years to make the items that they want to begin adventuring with, then why would anyone, ever, spend skill points on craft?
I think you misunderstand. I am not against Craft feats giving you discounts *during* a campaign, just against those discounts being applied to items you purchase with your 'starting cash'.
You had concealment (perhaps full, most likely partial) that is all.
By RAW, he would have had partial concealment, and ironically, so would they.