|
And i think that a +2 arrow (or even a +1) has enough hardness and hit points to survive the damage of passing through two walls of fire.
At best a arrow count as a light hafted weapon. hardness 5 hp 2.
You get a +2 to hardness and +10 hp for each +1 of the weapon.
So:
- a +1 arrow get 7 hardness and 12 hp.
- a +2 arrow get 9 hardness and 22 hp.
It is mainly wood so it should take normal damage from fire (and the fletching is very susceptible to fire).
Wall of fire minimal damage: 7+2d6
The +1 arrows would be destroyed before doing any damage.
The +2 would survive with a good chance of getting the broken condition. The broken condition would be almost granted if the caster of the wall of fire was level 8+.
The general impression from your posts is that your master was way too lenient, treating his monsters like video games creatures: "the script say they do a and then b and then c, so they do that, independently by what happen" and allowing your lot to do thing that aren't normally allowed.
I was tempted to make comments similar to those DoomCrow did, even if without the accusing tone.
Your description of your round of action include a large number of free actions and several of those were questionable.
Quick draw of a metamagic rod: "Quick Draw (Combat) Benefit: You can draw a weapon as a free action instead of as a move action. You can draw a hidden weapon (see the Sleight of Hand skill) as a move action. ... Alchemical items, potions, scrolls, and wands cannot be drawn quickly using this feat."
A rod is even less of a weapon than a wand.
The jabberwock was aware of your group presence, so no surprise round.
"When a combat starts, if you are not aware of your opponents and they are aware of you, you're surprised."
and so on and on.
At that point the problem isn't the module or the monster.
It is that your group is playing in a way very different from what is intended and how the module is balanced.
Every one of those error is a small advantage, always in the group favour. They pile up and the effect get multiplied by the next error.
Then the "waste of space cleric" comment.
No one in the group has needed a restoration in all the modules?
No cure spells or healing by channelling?
You have always used wands, staves and other healing magic items?
It can even be what happened, but it sound hardly credible.
It again raise the doubt. Your group was so awesome that never encountered a problem or the GM was forgetting the rules that would have made your life a bit more difficult?
|
Thanks for posting. I'm DMing and we are just into Book 2. I'm looking forward to this encounter and I want to make sure it's not a let down for my players. The lessons here are range and prep time.
Regardless of this, you got away with murder.
4 free actions! I assume you had to drop your rod to fire your bow? The Free Action rule says there are reasonable limits to how many you can do for free as decided by the GM. Also, as Diego points out, Quick Draw gives you <b>a</b> weapon. I also wouldn't count a Rod as a weapon.
The real killer though, 2 swift actions.
Not good and no fun as it turned out. It shouldn't be entirely up to the GM to sort this out either. My players regularly check each others turns to make sure they are within the rules. Help your GM out, don't get caught up in the 'awesomeness' of our character, think reasonably and check yourself to ensure you are playing within the rules. I guarantee it will be more fun for everyone.
Oh, I would rule that Smite Evil outcomes the DR/Vorpal.
@Diego Rossi
What surprise round?
When did i say anything about us having surprise round?
I know very well that not anyone agrees that rods count as weapon but i don't want to get in that rule arguemement again (been there done that, didn't lead anywhere) but the exact same situation can happen with a glove of storing, and i can't say that 10000gps are a problem at 16th level.
Yes the DM was going very easy at us for the most part of the AP (for 4 and a half books to be precise), you can't imagine how many times the enemies could full attack either me or the rogue but chose to either spread their attacks or just full attacked my animal companion.
I don't even want to remember how at 12th level the magus (alone) defeated 4 adult black dragons in a swamp in the span of 1-2 minutes.
And no he wasn't forgetting rules (on the most part, hey anyone can forget a rule here or there) but instead going too easy one us at the beggining of the game and later by refusing to make encounters more difficult than it was written on the AP, and a few time at higher levels going way too easy on us or making grave mistakes on his tactics.
No we didn't really needed restoration until we could afford scrolls and/or spellcasting service in our capital.
No we didn't need healing via cure spells (and it took him too LONG to get heal because of PrCing to HV and for one level forgetting that he had access to heal) because after 2nd level we could afford wands of CLW, after that even if we played without him it would only cost us more for wands of CLW but you know what? when you split the treasure in 3 ways instead of 4 ways you get more money.
His most usual "tactics" was: a) Buff two rounds, move and buff at the third and attack on the fourth, b) Turn on healbot mode for the entire fight, it doesn't matter that the enemy hasn't even gotten to half our hitpoints no we always have to be at full hitpoints and it doesn't matter that my actions can be used for anything else, no, and c) Casting nothing and jump into the fray with my skyrocket AC and swing my longsword for 1d8+1(up to +3).
In fact when we re-did our characters (at 10th level) because of the problem caused by crafting feats, this player decided to re-make his character, fortunately this time asked for another guy's help and together him and me make his character a good build (S&B) and told him what to take at the next levels i have to admit it wasn't as much of dead weight because his character wasn't so bad built, unfortunately he didn't know how to utilize such a character and switched his tactics to a lesser form of the a) and became :cast at least one self buff spell, then move and cast and then go into battle.
Believe me when i say that he was just a punchbag during most of the game, and all of his cheating couldn't help him do anything really meaningfull.
@RizzotheRat
Which two swift actions?
I am really trying not to get into a rods are light maces arguement here on this thread.
If he wanted to pose a limit to the free actions taken each turn it should have said so at the beggining of the game, i don't know why you think that 4 free actions are bad, i don't think that any number of free actions are bad but YMMV.
The Jabberwock could only have been caught flat-footed at range by the rogue during a suprise round or - as he did - by winning initiative at the beginning of combat and lighting it up within that range.
Mechanically, he could not have dealt sneak attack damage by the simple virtue of having had a full 10 rounds pass before the encounter was engaged with both sides of the encounter aware of each other. Mutual awareness denies flat-footedness once the combat timers are in progress.
As has already been acknowledged, the GM botched the execution of the encounter from the get-go and bluntly tooled what should have been an awesome encounter with a critter of real world legend into what was a guaranteed win for your group.
Which was a real shame, since it's clear you were looking forward to it once you heard about it.
Which was a real shame, since it's clear you were looking forward to it once you heard about it.
I have tried. REALLY tried, to keep this encounter a secret from my players. Some of them may know about it, I'm not sure, but it should come as a surprise to at least half of 'em! Ack! Two books to go...
Oh, and I'm SOO going by the Bestiary's call-out on DR. My group's paladin be damned! There's plenty in this AP for him to get his Smite on, and I want at least ONE baby of my own, dangit. (Well, I've a couple, as I'm also tossing in an anti-paly just for him. Shhh!:)
Which was a real shame, since it's clear you were looking forward to it once you heard about it.I have tried. REALLY tried, to keep this encounter a secret from my players. Some of them may know about it, I'm not sure, but it should come as a surprise to at least half of 'em! Ack! Two books to go...
Oh, and I'm SOO going by the Bestiary's call-out on DR. My group's paladin be damned! There's plenty in this AP for him to get his Smite on, and I want at least ONE baby of my own, dangit. (Well, I've a couple, as I'm also tossing in an anti-paly just for him. Shhh!:)
A quick and dirty fix is to combine DR and fast healing into regeneration 15/vorpal. Smite doesn't bypass regeneration (as I understand it), so at the very least they have to beat it down before decapitating it with a vorpal weapon.
|
I ran this for my group.. and needless to say it was an AWESOME and memorable encounter. Many thanks and props to Richard Pett, and other folks who helped write the creature/module/setting.
I have spoilered portions in case of spoilering.. although if you know about the jabberwock.. then you are either a GM... know whats coming.. or are here by accident! And I apologize for the terrible grammar.
Also, while I realize that it may have been intended for a 15minute adventure day encounter.. I decided to spread it out with a few mini/warmup encounters to not only drain a few party resources, but to give them a chance to get some of those long buffs going before dropping a CR20 into their laps.
it started off the day with the cleric of Torag casting commune with his deity and asking 'Is there going to be a blight today?' Answer: Yes. After there was a lot of party grumbling/mumbling (to be expected dealing with the other blights) Then came the time questions, "the next hour.. etc etc". It was at that point the screams of the populace could be heard, alarm bells were ringing and general combat had begun. Almost sarcastically the cleric asked (commune still going!) "Its happening right now isnt it?", Answer: Yes!
The last blight had started with Evil Ash teleporting on top of a building in the market district and unleashing the first wave of minions on the populace in an effort to distract the party while he searched for Briar. It was a wave of.. 1d4+1 (got 3 total) Purple worms, one as a ghost (which was fun for the players to see this ectoplasmic worm flying through buildings, carrying people only to slam them against a wall), One was a skeletal, and the other was a plant. The party quickly gathered (the cleric was in the bar communing, rogue + oracle + ranger, were shopping in the market district at the time, sorcerer (ruler) was enjoying a nice morning with Lady Melisandre). Needless to say 15th level party of five made relatively quick work of the worms in a few rounds. At which point our evil villain Ash made his presence known and started the back and forth banter between himself and the party (while the rogue was steathily climbing the building to murder him).
As negotiations broke down (and the assassination attempt thwarted by the trusty floating PokeDex/Skeets Amalmagation), our villainous Ash decided to up his game by summoning the Thrasfyr (one of the Tane), to terrorize/subdue the party. After a few rounds of tangling with the foe (and the sorcerer landing a nice knowledge planes check) decided to go for the banishment (with only 18HD and a CL 14 banish giving him 28 HD to work with.. it was up to Thrasfyrs will save to keep him in the fight!) At +15 he was standing a good chance of staying in the plane.. until he rolled that nat 1.. and only existing for a mere two rounds was sent home packing. (And a channel+heal bringing up the party meat soaks).
Highly irate at the party of removing one of his most powerful minions with a few gestures and a terrible roll: (Not to mention his assistant rubbing it in. "Sir! They banished your minion! This leaves you in a perilious position!!" Our villain decides to go for broke, with the pomp awarded him by being a named bad guy, the skies go dark as the Jabberwock makes its entry onto the scene!! Starting off the round with a confirmed crit on his eye beam(142 Dmg!) the party's outlook changed drastically! (And since he did a full attack of two beams, the whiffling took effect!) The party returned the favor with a volley of ranged attacks (which thanks to range and whiffling only the ranged touch attacks made it through.) Unfortunately the sorcerer/ranger failed their knowledge planes check and had no clue on the weaknesses (although the failure of the skorching rays was made apparent by our trusty assistant!).
Full of itself (having taken no damage and almost burnt the rogue to a crisp!) Our intrepid Jabberwock descends upon the party to take Briar personally (the DC28 fear save is rough!! Sending the rogue/Ranger running.) The cleric takes out Briar and tries to go toe/toe with the beast (once it gets fully charged when the jabberwock appears) while the oracle starts casting buffs/chasing after party members for remove fear. And the sorcerer is cycling through every debuff spell he has to try and buy the cleric more time. (Slow fails, Whiffling + Poor dice rolls are causing problems with those touch attacks!) Managing a lucky natural 20 it looks to be over for the Jabberwock, but a 2 on the confirm roll saves him from an early exit, and he proceeds to chomp on the cleric, forcing him to spend his round healing himself while the others try to rally their fleeing members. The staggered effect really hurting the Jabberwock's damage output, it decides to take to the air again and try this one more time, the lazer eye rolls horrendous, and fails to break the clerics fire resistance. With the oracle having tracked down the rogue/ranger and bolstered their spirits, the sorcerer lends the cleric a fly spell to try and bring the fight back to the jabberwock, while the others support from down below.
Unfortunately for the cleric, the stagger only lasts for one round, and the Jabberwock brings the pain in air/air combat, making the cleric start to think about an exit strategy, while the ground team's efforts begin to bear fruit as their dice lend them to start peppering the beast (DR15/vorpal+FH20 aside). The Cleric makes a break for it but fails his defensive cast of heal and gets a crit as he moves out, dropping him to the ground, Briar still stuck in his grubby paws. The oracle rushes over to Breath of life (Cure Deadly Wounds!) his fallen comrade and brings him back to the realm of the living, only to be greeted by the Jabberwock wanting some more face time with its new buddy. At this point it turns into a knock-out, party on dragon fight, as the rogue/ranger pull out the dual wields and the party dog piles on the dragon and start trading Full attack actions. (And a limited wish from the sorcerer to lower its AC by 6)! With the rogue getting some nasty sneak attacks in, the jabberwock repays him in kind by turning all his attacks (+Haste from summoner!!) and triple critting him, and turning him into fine rogue giblets. Despite now inhaling bits of rogue mist, the party refuses to give up, and stays the course, bringing the beast down below 50hp, (disintigrate save of nat 1! and another threat from Briar) the beast is going no where soon. Deciding to give a final gift to the party, he point blanks a Vital Strike Eye Beam Crit (45 d6 PROTON CANNON!) And char broils the ranger into a smoking/smouldering husk. Before it finally succumbs to the battle oracle's Halbred (Irovetti's Awesome weapon).
It was a very awesome fight, and we enjoyed every bit of it. (also brought home the importance of knowledge checks, that vulnerable to cold would have been a HUGE benefit)
|
|
@Diego Rossi
What surprise round?
When did i say anything about us having surprise round?
This surprise round:
O
The jubberwock was flat footed because we defeated it in initiative.
Flat-Footed: At the start of a battle, before you have had a chance to act (specifically, before your first regular turn in the initiative order), you are flat-footed.
You can't be flat footed without a surprise round. Simply losing initiative without a surprise round don't make you flat footed.
Rods
Physical Description: ...(Many, as noted in their descriptions, can function as light maces or clubs due to their hardy construction.)Metamagic, Reach
Description
The wielder can cast up to three spells per day with a one-step increase in their range category (such as from close to medium, or medium to long) as though using the Reach Spell feat.
Nothing in the description of the metamagic rod of reach say that it can be used like a light mace or a club, ergo it is not a light mace or club.
If a rod can be used as a weapon is explicitly stated its description.
Examples: Rod of Alertness, Rod of Flailing, Rod of Lordly Might
@RizzotheRat
Which two swift actions?
Activating the paladin Smite Evil power and casting Instant Enemy.
I am really trying not to get into a rods are light maces arguement here on this thread.
If he wanted to pose a limit to the free actions taken each turn it should have said so at the beggining of the game, i don't know why you think that 4 free actions are bad, i don't think that any number of free actions are bad but YMMV.
Apparently you want to cling to your broken rules.
Free Action: Free actions consume a very small amount of time and effort. You can perform one or more free actions while taking another action normally. However, there are reasonable limits on what you can really do for free, as decided by the GM.
There is no hard limit to the free actions, but you were performing, to be precise, at least 10 free actions.
Quick drawing 2 "weapons", dropping 1 of the quick draw items, activating your boot of speed and taking 6 arrows from your quiver (even that one it is is a free action).
A large number of identical free actions (like taking the arrow from the quiver) isn't a problem, mixing 4 different kind of free actions (and that is considering the drawing of two very different weapons like the same kind of quick action) is.
Um, Diego, it says right there in the PRD excerpt you posted that you're flat-footed if you haven't had the chance to act in combat yet.
If a rogue gets the drop on someone in a surprise round, they can make a single sneak attack as their standard action for the surprise round, and then, if they beat the target's initiative on the first regular round, the target remains flat-footed until his turn, permitting the rogue to make a full sneak attack.
I ran this for my group.. and needless to say it was an AWESOME and memorable encounter. Many thanks and props to Richard Pett, and other folks who helped write the creature/module/setting.
I have spoilered portions in case of spoilering.. although if you know about the jabberwock.. then you are either a GM... know whats coming.. or are here by accident! And I apologize for the terrible grammar.
Also, while I realize that it may have been intended for a 15minute adventure day encounter.. I decided to spread it out with a few mini/warmup encounters to not only drain a few party resources, but to give them a chance to get some of those long buffs going before dropping a CR20 into their laps.
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **...
Awesome. :)
Flat-Footed: At the start of a battle, before you have had a chance to act (specifically, before your first regular turn in the initiative order), you are flat-footed.You can't be flat footed without a surprise round. Simply losing initiative without a surprise round don't make you flat footed.
Huh? Rule you have quoted contradicts your statement.
I'd like to offer a cookie to the guy who left small pieces of the jabberwock poem. I'll blatantly steal that, and leave small pieces of the poem on any First World-related treasures.
|
|
Um, Diego, it says right there in the PRD excerpt you posted that you're flat-footed if you haven't had the chance to act in combat yet.
If a rogue gets the drop on someone in a surprise round, they can make a single sneak attack as their standard action for the surprise round, and then, if they beat the target's initiative on the first regular round, the target remains flat-footed until his turn, permitting the rogue to make a full sneak attack.
You have missed a little point in the whole discussion: there was no surprise round. If there is no surprise round there is no chance to be flat footed.
The piece i cite say: (specifically, before your first regular turn in the initiative order), .
The first regular turn had gone and be done at least 10 turn before the moment the rogue fired.
The jabberwock was aware of the PC, the PC were aware of the jabberwock. No surprise round, no flat footed target.
The jabberwock was already in combat, attacking the city and doing its stuff.
The rogue could have denied the jabby dexterity and get his sneak attacks if he had successfully hidden himself and then fired. And that would have worked only for the first arrow.
Giving him a free flat footed target was a bad mistake on the top of a pile of other mistakes.
InitiativeAt the start of a battle, each combatant makes an initiative check.
...Flat-Footed: At the start of a battle, before you have had a chance to act (specifically, before your first regular turn in the initiative order), you are flat-footed.
...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.
The Surprise Round: If some but not all of the combatants are aware of their opponents, a surprise round happens before regular rounds begin. In initiative order (highest to lowest), combatants who started the battle aware of their opponents each take a standard or move action during the surprise round. You can also take free actions during the surprise round. If no one or everyone is surprised, no surprise round occurs.
Unaware Combatants: Combatants who are unaware at the start of battle don't get to act in the surprise round. Unaware combatants are flat-footed because they have not acted yet, so they lose any Dexterity bonus to AC.
Notice all those "When a combat start". if the combat has already started, and the jabberwock attacking the city count as combat, there is no surprise round, no one act before the other side had a change to act and so on.
in that situation someone successfully hiding in shadow or being invisible can negate the target dexterity bonus to AC for one attack (or more if he has improved invisibility) but don't get him flat footed.
The two thins aren't interchangeable.
Your party runs into a band of orcs. Neither side is surprised. Initiative is rolled. Everyone involved is flat-footed until their initiative comes up. Being flat-footed does not require a surprise round in any way. The Jabberwock had not had a turn in combat yet; ergo, it was flat-footed.
Now, combat should have started far earlier to prevent this, but since he didn't, the Jabberwock being flat-footed was exactly what the rules called for.
...of an AWESOME encounter...
Now *that's* what I'm talking about. A right proper fight. Cookies and kudos to all involved. And thanks for sharing! Gave me some ideas of my own... :)
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Your party runs into a band of orcs. Neither side is surprised. Initiative is rolled. Everyone involved is flat-footed until their initiative comes up. Being flat-footed does not require a surprise round in any way.
I agree.
The Jabberwock had not had a turn in combat yet; ergo, it was flat-footed. Now, combat should have started far earlier to prevent this, but since he didn't, the Jabberwock being flat-footed was exactly what the rules called for.
I disagree. Combat began the round both sides noticed one another and prepared to engage. The party was casting spells. The Jabberwock was moving in to close. Neither side was flat-footed.
Unless you would like to claim that, if you see a band of orcs 150' away and take a double-move to close to 90', you remain flat-footed until you roll an attack.
You rode towards the thing in open field, and then the encounter starts at 60 feet distance? And the guy is flatfooted?
You should have rolled Ini as soon as you were able to see each other, which would have been more like 1000 feet (or more). Then go round by round (movement, spells, ranged attacks). Yes, the JW is flat footed if you beat it in Ini, but at 1000 or so feet distance, not at 60ft. This is ridiculous.
Um, Diego, it says right there in the PRD excerpt you posted that you're flat-footed if you haven't had the chance to act in combat yet.
If a rogue gets the drop on someone in a surprise round, they can make a single sneak attack as their standard action for the surprise round, and then, if they beat the target's initiative on the first regular round, the target remains flat-footed until his turn, permitting the rogue to make a full sneak attack.
You have missed a little point in the whole discussion: there was no surprise round. If there is no surprise round there is no chance to be flat footed.
The piece i cite say: (specifically, before your first regular turn in the initiative order), .
The first regular turn had gone and be done at least 10 turn before the moment the rogue fired.
You're conflating two things here. It is entirely possible in general to be flat footed without a surprise round. Simply roll poorly on your initiative. However, in this case, 10 rounds passed since that point, so that wasn't applicable to anyone any more.
If it's flying, Whiffling is always up. It's not activated. Arrows being shot at it have to pass through the effect, thus +4 to its AC.@Drogon
First of all as i have said the jabberwock can't use vital strike with it's rays.
You forget that i had bestow grace of the champion on me, so no DR against my attacks.
In order to activate Wiffling it had to come close so it can full attack.
I don't know what the DM was thinking but how do you run it for your players? At what distance you put it?
Whiffling says "whenever it makes a full attack action." So it wouldn't have been up unless it actually took a full attack.
It's damage reduction "can only be bypassed by weapons with the vorpal quality." The fact that the creature's rules write-up calls this out specifically, to me, means that it overrides anything else that may be going on.
Agreed. Specific trumps general.
It *can* use vital strike with its eye rays. Again, that is specifically called out in its stat block.
I'm kindof inclined to disagree here. If the eye rays weren't specifically called out as "shoot two as a standard action", I'd totally agree, but since they are (and they're Sp), I'm inclined to think that by RAW it doesn't. It takes an action to activate the eye rays, which therefore means it doesn't have an action to use vital strike. The same way a Two-Weapon Warrior fighter can't vital strike when using his Doublestrike ability.
Turin the Mad's post.
Indeed it sounds (ok reads) like an awesome and rememberable battle, by the way good thinking to not make this encounter a 15 minute work day, i am glad to see someone enjoying their fight with jabberwock.
Normally i would say something about the rules and the wiffling activating after a standart action to shoot two eye beams, the vital strike on a eye ray and another ray beam to the same round, BUT screw that the encounter was a good and awesome one regardless.
P.S. Kudos on adding some comic relief moments in the encounter.
|
|
It *can* use vital strike with its eye rays. Again, that is specifically called out in its stat block.I'm kindof inclined to disagree here. If the eye rays weren't specifically called out as "shoot two as a standard action", I'd totally agree, but since they are (and they're Sp), I'm inclined to think that by RAW it doesn't. It takes an action to activate the eye rays, which therefore means it doesn't have an action to use vital strike. The same way a Two-Weapon Warrior fighter can't vital strike when using his Doublestrike ability.
The jabberwock tactics say that he vital strike with one eye ray wile fling in circle to regenerate back to full health.
As he can't hoover (no feat and poor air manoeuvrability) he can't do a full attack while flying, so no whiffling while flying.
The stat block is a bit strange as it seem to imply that the jabby can fire both ray as a standard action, but all the text and descriptions use the term rays so I think it is fairly clrear that they are 2 rays.
@leo1925 the point I am trying to get across is that your GM has been too lenient on enforcing some of the rules and limitations in the game (for example the thing about the wall of fires and the magic arrows).
The result is that the PC are way stronger than intended.
If he allow that and at the same time he don't adjust the NPC power the result is a extremely uneven fight with the PC constantly getting easy victories.
After a time the game lose all its flavour.
@leo1925 the point I am trying to get across is that your GM has been too lenient on enforcing some of the rules and limitations in the game (for example the thing about the wall of fires and the magic arrows).
The result is that the PC are way stronger than intended.If he allow that and at the same time he don't adjust the NPC power the result is a extremely uneven fight with the PC constantly getting easy victories.
After a time the game lose all its flavour.
On that i agree with you.
|
|
Which two swift actions?
I am really trying not to get into a rods are light maces arguement here on this thread.
If he wanted to pose a limit to the free actions taken each turn it should have said so at the beggining of the game, i don't know why you think that 4 free actions are bad, i don't think that any number of free actions are bad but YMMV.
I thought you acknowledged you forgot about Smite Evil being a swift action earlier in this thread?
The point about Quick Draw is that it is for a weapon. Singular, and not for a magical item that isn't a weapon. Even if your GM allows you to quick draw the rod (I wouldn't), you shouldn't be quick drawing the rod AND the bow.
Your point about the GM limiting the free actions is revealing. Sounds like to you trying to get in as many actions as possible and not playing with any reasonableness. A gaming buddy of mine (both a player and GM) would call this cheating. I think that's too strong a term but I do believe you have a Player V GM mindset. In my view, you have only cheated yourself and fellow players out of a cool encounter.
To the flat-footed argument, the confusion here is that you said you had 10 rounds of buffing before any engagement. Rounds are only used in a combat situation, ie: AFTER initiative has been rolled. While your casters are buffing your ranged guys like crazy, what is the Jaberwocky doing? If it's aware of the party and moving towards you, hasn't it acted? The encounter never should have started at 60 feet.
Your GM let you down here, but it doesn't sound like the players are helping too much.
I thought you acknowledged you forgot about Smite Evil being a swift action earlier in this thread?
Yes but i said that i didn't intented to do that, i was mistaken in thinking that activating smite evil is a free action, i noticed my mistake while this thread was going.
The point about Quick Draw is that it is for a weapon. Singular, and not for a magical item that isn't a weapon. Even if your GM allows you to quick draw the rod (I wouldn't), you shouldn't be quick drawing the rod AND the bow.
First of all as i said before i was wrong about all rods also being weapons and the same thing could happen with a glove of storing. Now why wouldn't you let a player draw two weapons in the same round?
Why wouldn't you let a player (with the quickdraw feat) draw his sword, then drop it (let's say someone was readying a disarm), and then draw another sword?
Your point about the GM limiting the free actions is revealing. Sounds like to you trying to get in as many actions as possible and not playing with any reasonableness. A gaming buddy of mine (both a player and GM) would call this cheating. I think that's too strong a term but I do believe you have a Player V GM mindset. In my view, you have only cheated yourself and fellow players out of a cool encounter.
Yes i am trying to get as many actions as possible, action economy is the alpha and the omega in this game, just like a wizard tries to get as much money for his buck from his spells and feats.
No i don't have a Player V GM mindset, if i did i would have dominated the game long before the jabberwock but instead both me and one other player were gimping our characters in order to make the game more interesting.Just for the record i didn't want to shoot (because i knew what would happen with bow+smite evil but i didn't know the extent of it) the jabberwock with my bow when we were at 60 ft., i wanted to charge it with the briar but the other players wanted to me to shoot my bow first because, they said, "why wouldn't you fire your bow first?, your character is equally good at using his bow as it is at using a sword so wouldn't you fire from a safety first?", and listened.
To the flat-footed argument, the confusion here is that you said you had 10 rounds of buffing before any engagement. Rounds are only used in a combat situation, ie: AFTER initiative has been rolled. While your casters are buffing your ranged guys like crazy, what is the Jaberwocky doing? If it's aware of the party and moving towards you, hasn't it acted? The encounter never should have started at 60 feet.
For some reason, the DM wanted the jabberwock to do absolutely nothing but fly to our position until it was at 60 ft. and those 10 rounds were pre-battle rounds, and we rolled initiative when the jabberwock was at 60 ft.
Your GM let you down here, but it doesn't sound like the players are helping too much.
How were we not helping? By using the rules at our disposal? By taking advantage of the situation the DM set?
TL;DR: GM borked the set up, Jabberwock (lesser) was smoked like a cheap cigar, players felt the victory was hollow and quit playing the campaign before it was done to move on to something else.
|
|
Yes i am trying to get as many actions as possible, action economy is the alpha and the omega in this game, just like a wizard tries to get as much money for his buck from his spells and feats.
No i don't have a Player V GM mindset, if i did i would have dominated the game long before the jabberwock but instead both me and one other player were gimping our characters in order to make the game more interesting.
Just for the record i didn't want to shoot (because i knew what would happen with bow+smite evil but i didn't know the extent of it) the jabberwock with my bow when we were at 60 ft., i wanted to charge it with the briar but the other players wanted to me to shoot my bow first because, they said, "why wouldn't you fire your bow first?, your character is equally good at using his bow as it is at using a sword so wouldn't you fire from a safety first?", and listened.
The question was directed at RizzotheRat but I will reply.
As I said before it is not only the number of free action that matter, but the number of different free actions.
No one has problems with a archer drawing 6 arrows as 6 free actions and firing them.
No one should have problem with a TWF that draw two meele weapon and use them.
Repeated identical or almost identical actions are easy.
The problem start when someone draw a item with a free action, use it, drop it, draw another item with another free action and use it, then do a different free action, al the above possibly speaking complex phrases giving instructions to the group.
At that point the gain from action economy become excessive.
I hadn't ever felt the necessity to specify, but my personal feeling is that about 3-4 different kinds of free actions is the limit.
It is in the rules that free actions are not completely free--that the GM has the power to pronounce that the amount of action a player is fitting in with free actions at any given time is excessive. A good GM should be prepared to make that pronouncement.
It is in the rules that free actions are not completely free--that the GM has the power to pronounce that the amount of action a player is fitting in with free actions at any given time is excessive. A good GM should be prepared to make that pronouncement.
...and good players should be ready to accept.
It is in the rules that free actions are not completely free--that the GM has the power to pronounce that the amount of action a player is fitting in with free actions at any given time is excessive. A good GM should be prepared to make that pronouncement.
And i (as a player) am prepared to accept such a pronouncement if one ever is made.
|
|
If a character wielded two swords I'd let them draw both as free actions. I wouldn't let them draw one, use a swift action, drop and draw another and get a full round action in. Too much. You also activated your boots or speed and activated smite evil. That's way too much.
Really, your Ranger had so much prep time he could have had the rod out ready to use before the Jaberwocky "appeared" 60 feet away.
The problem is, you didn't use the rules at your disposal, you broke them. Two swift actions is against the rules. The GM didn't pick it up but it shouldn't be entirely up to he/she do to make sure your turn is legal.
As I said earlier, the GM dropped the ball, but you also got away with murder.
As I said earlier, the GM dropped the ball, but you also got away with murder.
Are you serious?
Is that big a deal because i made one rules mistake (the smite not being a free action) a mistake that the whole table made, and not stop to think that the DM might be thinking of putting a hard cap on the number of free actions i can take?Am i at fault for not trying to figure out what a DM might have in his mind? The rule say that the DM can put a limit to the number, it doesn't even give a guideline, so how can i predict what another person is thinking? especially if he has never said anything about that?
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
leo1925, it isn't as simple as that.
Let's say you're playing with a Game Master who makes a mistake in favor of the monsters. (Let's say she, oh, forgets to check whether a critical hit confirms.) Would you remind her of the rules?
Let's say a Game Master interprets the rules in a way that goes strongly in favor of the monsters, to the extent that the verisimilitude of the game breaks down. (Let's say that every time you get hit by an area effect spell, all your items have to make saving throws; as a results, most of your gear is usually broken.) Would you ask your GM to think twice about that?
If you answered yes to those questions, but don't also point out weird rules interpretations in your character's favor, then you're part of the problem.
When the GM announced that the Jabberwock is flat-footed, did you consider "If I spend several rounds advancing towards an enemy, I would certain want my full armor class when I arrived. Just because I wasn't attacking the entire time, I have certainly been in combat, and I wouldn't be flat-footed." and protest, "No, dude. We should be attacking its full AC" ?
Was there a problem? It sounds like it: people thought the encounter was lame.
Could you have done anything about it? Yes; you could have urged the GM to play the encounter less to your advantage.
Does that make you "at fault"? I wouldn't say there's fault involved, but it does give you a share of the responsibility.
|
|
As Chris says, you are all responsible for the game. GMing does take a lot of work. I know I've forgotten a bunch of BBEG special attacks, defences and like in the heat of battle, only to read back after and slap my forehead. Help a brother out!
Squeezing as much advantage out of your turn to the point of breaking the rules is short changing everybody at the table. As does looking the other way when the GM unwittingly disadvantages your opposition.
If this was a one off, then only this encounter suffered, but If you have more fizzle and than fun then I'd suggest have a chat around the table about your groups style of running combat and your shared understanding of how encounters start. Run some PFS mods and swap up who GMs for a few sessions. Swapping roles will make you a better all round gamers. Just some thoughts. Take it or leave it.
Also, coming to the community, complaining "The encounter was lame and too easy" and then getting upset when they point out the errors made during the encounter ( be it now on the side of the GM or your group ) is positively Ravingdorkian.
Also, coming to the community, complaining "The encounter was lame and too easy" and then getting upset when they point out the errors made during the encounter ( be it now on the side of the GM or your group ) is positively Ravingdorkian.
I don't think i protested on the pointing of errors, i protested on the placing of blame and guilt, and in the calling someone a cheater.
I also argued the rules on a few occasions (vital strike, smite's ignore DR and rods as weapons) and actully admited being wrong when i was proven wrong (on the rods as weapons).
leo1925, it isn't as simple as that.
Let's say you're playing with a Game Master who makes a mistake in favor of the monsters. (Let's say she, oh, forgets to check whether a critical hit confirms.) Would you remind her of the rules?
Let's say a Game Master interprets the rules in a way that goes strongly in favor of the monsters, to the extent that the verisimilitude of the game breaks down. (Let's say that every time you get hit by an area effect spell, all your items have to make saving throws; as a results, most of your gear is usually broken.) Would you ask your GM to think twice about that?
If you answered yes to those questions, but don't also point out weird rules interpretations in your character's favor, then you're part of the problem.
When the GM announced that the Jabberwock is flat-footed, did you consider "If I spend several rounds advancing towards an enemy, I would certain want my full armor class when I arrived. Just because I wasn't attacking the entire time, I have certainly been in combat, and I wouldn't be flat-footed." and protest, "No, dude. We should be attacking its full AC" ?
Was there a problem? It sounds like it: people thought the encounter was lame.
Could you have done anything about it? Yes; you could have urged the GM to play the encounter less to your advantage.
Does that make you "at fault"? I wouldn't say there's fault involved, but it does give you a share of the responsibility.
On the first example if the DM was rolling behid a screen i wouldn't have known if it confirmed or not, if it wasn't rolling behind a screen yes i would remind him the rule.
I would have told that this not how the rules work and re-think about it, but if he insisted on it i would have shown him the rules after the session (or at least the encounter) and ask him if he wants to make a house rule of them and then tell him my opinion on the house rule.Now to answer your question, no i didn't tell him that the jabberwock shouldn't be flat footed and that close to us because i was tired from trying to tell him that 10 rounds of buff were TOO much and would screw the encounter all together.
And yes i accept the part of the responsibility that is mine, that is not remembering that the paladin's smite evil isn't a free action but also don't think that this counts as getting away with murder.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, coming to the community, complaining "The encounter was lame and too easy" and then getting upset when they point out the errors made during the encounter ( be it now on the side of the GM or your group ) is positively Ravingdorkian.
Some players just like to argue, and in my experience most of them cannot fathom the concept of them being in the wrong, to the point of constant denial.
Leo, we are trying to give you advice so that your group doesn't encounter these lame encounters again, but it's a moot point when players don't listen. This game is a symbiotic relationship in that it requires both sides contributing to the game and looking out for the other. The GM runs the game and helps the Players with character development, party cohesion and provides a little push now and then when they need it. The players in turn, help the GM sometimes when he misses something so the game moves along in a fair and smooth fashion. This is just a small part of what GMs and players do but it's one of the most important. This kind of symbiosis is needed to keep the game fun for everyone (including the GM) and keep it running without any major problems.As a player, you need to help your GM if he's not pulling his own weight. The GM needs to clarify rules like these so it's out in the open. It's not a player's call to guess how many free actions he can take in a round. If you don't know, then ask. By not asking and just doing whatever until the GM says something is just irresponsible and taking advantage of the GM.
By the way, was this your GM's first campaign that he ran? How long has he been a GM?
Am i at fault for not trying to figure out what a DM might have in his mind? The rule say that the DM can put a limit to the number, it doesn't even give a guideline, so how can i predict what another person is thinking? especially if he has never said anything about that?
It's not a question of fault, really. But saying that an encounter was a huge disappointment and you wiped the floor of what otherwise should be an epic, legendary bad guy, while simultaneously saying what rules were violated/altered, and how things were handled "poorly", has led to this discussion. Yes, it sounds like the situation was unfortunate, and should not have occurred in the way it did. A group error, if you will.
Sad, more than anything. I've been looking forward to this encounter more than any other in the entire AP. Or any AP that I've yet read, actually. (So major props to Pett!)
I'll not speak for others, but IMO the fault was not in the design (even one against four), but in the execution.
And I will admit I've had my own failings. I've found I must make special note of spell resistance. I've a tendency to forget about that one! Fortunately I've got some good players who know the rules well, and will keep me honest. Both in their favor and in my own... :)
Also, coming to the community, complaining "The encounter was lame and too easy" and then getting upset when they point out the errors made during the encounter ( be it now on the side of the GM or your group ) is positively Ravingdorkian.Some players just like to argue, and in my experience most of them cannot fathom the concept of them being in the wrong, to the point of constant denial.
Leo, we are trying to give you advice so that your group doesn't encounter these lame encounters again, but it's a moot point when players don't listen. This game is a symbiotic relationship in that it requires both sides contributing to the game and looking out for the other. The GM runs the game and helps the Players with character development, party cohesion and provides a little push now and then when they need it. The players in turn, help the GM sometimes when he misses something so the game moves along in a fair and smooth fashion. This is just a small part of what GMs and players do but it's one of the most important. This kind of symbiosis is needed to keep the game fun for everyone (including the GM) and keep it running without any major problems.As a player, you need to help your GM if he's not pulling his own weight. The GM needs to clarify rules like these so it's out in the open. It's not a player's call to guess how many free actions he can take in a round. If you don't know, then ask. By not asking and just doing whatever until the GM says something is just irresponsible and taking advantage of the GM.
By the way, was this your GM's first campaign that he ran? How long has he been a GM?
Do you actually have players that ask you how many free actions they are allowed to make everytime their turn comes up? Or do they ask you and you set a limit at the begging of each session?
How do you help someone who doesn't listen?
I have been telling him to be carefull from day one where he had us roll for stats (2d6+6, roll three sets keep the best) and we all ended up with some crazy stats.
I am not sure if this was his first DnD campaing as a DM or not, i think that it was but i am not 100% sure, i do know that he had DMed other games though (VtM, WtF and MtAw to be precise).
I don't know how much games he has DMed but i know that the number of games he had DMed isn't a double digit. He is not the regular DM of our group.
Also, coming to the community, complaining "The encounter was lame and too easy" and then getting upset when they point out the errors made during the encounter ( be it now on the side of the GM or your group ) is positively Ravingdorkian.Some players just like to argue, and in my experience most of them cannot fathom the concept of them being in the wrong, to the point of constant denial.
Leo, we are trying to give you advice so that your group doesn't encounter these lame encounters again, but it's a moot point when players don't listen. This game is a symbiotic relationship in that it requires both sides contributing to the game and looking out for the other. The GM runs the game and helps the Players with character development, party cohesion and provides a little push now and then when they need it. The players in turn, help the GM sometimes when he misses something so the game moves along in a fair and smooth fashion. This is just a small part of what GMs and players do but it's one of the most important. This kind of symbiosis is needed to keep the game fun for everyone (including the GM) and keep it running without any major problems.As a player, you need to help your GM if he's not pulling his own weight. The GM needs to clarify rules like these so it's out in the open. It's not a player's call to guess how many free actions he can take in a round. If you don't know, then ask. By not asking and just doing whatever until the GM says something is just irresponsible and taking advantage of the GM.
By the way, was this your GM's first campaign that he ran? How long has he been a GM?
Do you actually have players that ask you how many free actions they are allowed to make everytime their turn comes up? Or do they ask you and you set a limit at the begging of each session?
How do you help someone who doesn't listen?
I have been telling him to be carefull from day one where he had us roll for stats (2d6+6, roll three sets keep the...
Honestly, you run the game.
Try gming according to how the rules ate intended to be played. Your GM will come around when he sees how fun the game can be when played right.When challenges are trivialized the fun factor of the game goes out the window
@BornofHate
I might do, as i have said before there is a chance i will run the RotR in October.
We have to disagree here. Like I said, I would start by making the interpretations that I listed above. Jabberwocky, even lesser ones, are epic, legendary, incredibly powerful, and exceedingly rare. Paladins are a dime a dozen. Immovable object versus unstoppable force arguments get to be adjudicated by the GM. This GM says the Jabberwock's DR wins out. I just can't reconcile a 1st level paladin being able to scratch a beast like this just because he's smiting.
More than that, I don't see a mere seventh level spell that every divine caster (except a druid) has access to being able to beat out one of the most powerful defenses of one of the most storied creatures in fantasy gaming and literature.
Like I said, however, this is my interpretation.
Funny interpretation.
As I see it Paladin's are quite rare. The type of person that would actually qualify to become a paladin would be extremely unique.
And I don't view Smite Evil as some common ability anymore than spell casting or extraordinary swordplay.
And though a Jabberwock is a legendary powerful creature, a paladin's Smite Evil would penetrate it's DR just as it penetrates any creatures DR. A paladin is channeling the power of a god. A being that could snuff a Jabberwock from existence in a fight. A being whose power is so vast that it can grant spells to thousands or millions of followers and manipulate entire portions of a world. That rules portions of other entire planes of existence.
I wouldn't confuse what Smite Evil is. It isn't the paladin's personal power against the Jabberwock. It is the power of a good god channeled through his servant to destroy evil. I would say it would be capable of penetrating a Jabberwock's DR. I would in fact consider Smite Evil to be specifically built for fighting creatures like the Jabberwock or other powerful legendary creatures like Demon Lords or ancient named dragons.
Smite Evil is the bane of such creatures. It should penetrate their DR. Paladins are the holy warriors that hunt such powerful and legendary evil creatures. Why wouldn't their Smite Evil work against them?
|
We have to disagree here. Like I said, I would start by making the interpretations that I listed above. Jabberwocky, even lesser ones, are epic, legendary, incredibly powerful, and exceedingly rare. Paladins are a dime a dozen. Immovable object versus unstoppable force arguments get to be adjudicated by the GM. This GM says the Jabberwock's DR wins out. I just can't reconcile a 1st level paladin being able to scratch a beast like this just because he's smiting.
More than that, I don't see a mere seventh level spell that every divine caster (except a druid) has access to being able to beat out one of the most powerful defenses of one of the most storied creatures in fantasy gaming and literature.
Like I said, however, this is my interpretation.
Funny interpretation.
As I see it Paladin's are quite rare. The type of person that would actually qualify to become a paladin would be extremely unique.
And I don't view Smite Evil as some common ability anymore than spell casting or extraordinary swordplay.
And though a Jabberwock is a legendary powerful creature, a paladin's Smite Evil would penetrate it's DR just as it penetrates any creatures DR. A paladin is channeling the power of a god. A being that could snuff a Jabberwock from existence in a fight. A being whose power is so vast that it can grant spells to thousands or millions of followers and manipulate entire portions of a world. That rules portions of other entire planes of existence.
I wouldn't confuse what Smite Evil is. It isn't the paladin's personal power against the Jabberwock. It is the power of a good god channeled through his servant to destroy evil. I would say it would be capable of penetrating a Jabberwock's DR. I would in fact consider Smite Evil to be specifically built for fighting creatures like the Jabberwock or other powerful legendary creatures like Demon Lords or ancient named dragons.
Smite Evil is the bane of such creatures. It should penetrate their DR. Paladins are the holy warriors...
I love your take on Smite Evil -- very poignant.
If paladins are "quite rare" in your campaign, that will work fine. RAW, they are not.
Thank you Maddigan.
I am totally with you on everything but one thing.
Yes IC the paladins are quite rare individuals and yes i agree that statistically speaking the paladins would be less only by virtue of having alingment restrictions.
But as we all know IC our science doesn't hold much, i still believe that there are less paladins in the world than fighters but their number isn't small.
PS. just for the record. In Golarion only 6 gods have paladins (Erastil, Torag, Serenrae, Iomidae, Shelyn and Abadar).
Every single character class in the game is fairly rare except perhaps the fighter and cleric, though high level, skilled fighters and powerful priests are still rare. You figure every small village has at least one priest and fighter type about.
Even when you read modules, there aren't a ton of PC classed characters around. Most our commoners with a dispersment of other NPC classes with only a few PC classes. And paladin is amongst the rarer PC classes in a module or game world.
Paladins most assuredly are rare, whether you want to count them in modules or in game world books or simply go by what kind of traits are necessary to be a paladin.
The alignment restriction makes them extremely rare since not many people are going to be inclined towards Lawful Good. Then the requirement of strong str, con, and cha would further cull the pack. Then add in strong dedication to your deity. Couple that with a requirement to go forth and fight evil. And you have an extremely rare class.
By RAW they are rare. It's pretty to work out why.
Admittedly, I have only the Bestiary 2 and not the AP. But I see no reason from what I have, why the eye rays cannot take advantage of Vital Strike. The feat merely requires a weapon (the eye rays are listed as the creature's natural range weapon), and a BAB +6. The feat would limit the creature to a single attack, but it can be used. Unless somebody can explain to me what I'm missing.
Also, the creature's listing in B2 mentions specifically that only a vorpal can overcome its DR. With most creatures with DR, it merely lists the DR in the stat block. In the Jabberwock's case, it actually gives further instructions in the description. To my mind, there is no doubt that indicates those special instructions override any normal DR rules.
Admittedly, I have only the Bestiary 2 and not the AP. But I see no reason from what I have, why the eye rays cannot take advantage of Vital Strike. The feat merely requires a weapon (the eye rays are listed as the creature's natural range weapon), and a BAB +6. The feat would limit the creature to a single attack, but it can be used. Unless somebody can explain to me what I'm missing.
Also, the creature's listing in B2 mentions specifically that only a vorpal can overcome its DR. With most creatures with DR, it merely lists the DR in the stat block. In the Jabberwock's case, it actually gives further instructions in the description. To my mind, there is no doubt that indicates those special instructions override any normal DR rules.
To answer your question about vital strike i ask you to answer me a question first:
Can you use vital strike when you use the pinpoint targeting feat or when a magus uses his spellstrike?On the DR issue:
And the paladin's smite ovveride any normal DR rules, also as i have said in the core book says very specifically that DR X/magic can only be overcomed by magic weapons, by the logic you present the paladin's smite doesn't work on that either, also DR X/slashing specifically says that only slashing weapons can overcome this DR, by the logic you prestnt the paladin's smite doesn't work on that either, you see where i am going right?
|
|
Admittedly, I have only the Bestiary 2 and not the AP. But I see no reason from what I have, why the eye rays cannot take advantage of Vital Strike. The feat merely requires a weapon (the eye rays are listed as the creature's natural range weapon), and a BAB +6. The feat would limit the creature to a single attack, but it can be used. Unless somebody can explain to me what I'm missing.
To answer your question about vital strike i ask you to answer me a question first:
Can you use vital strike when you use the pinpoint targeting feat or when a magus uses his spellstrike?
It is unclear to me what is the meaning of your reply, but this:
Ray: Do rays count as weapons for the purpose of spells and effects that affect weapons?
Yes. (See also this FAQ item for a similar question about rays and weapon feats.)
For example, a bard's inspire courage says it affects "weapon damage rolls," which is worded that way so don't try to add the bonus to a spell like fireball. However, rays are treated as weapons, whether they're from spells, a monster ability, a class ability, or some other source, so the inspire courage bonus applies to ray attack rolls and ray damage rolls.
The same rule applies to weapon-like spells such as flame blade, mage's sword, and spiritual weapon--effects that affect weapons work on these spells.
—Sean K Reynolds, 07/29/11
t me seem to say that there is no problem applying a effect (from a feat) to a ray attack.
On the DR issue:
And the paladin's smite ovveride any normal DR rules, also as i have said in the core book says very specifically that DR X/magic can only be overcomed by magic weapons, by the logic you present the paladin's smite doesn't work on that either, also DR X/slashing specifically says that only slashing weapons can overcome this DR, by the logic you prestnt the paladin's smite doesn't work on that either, you see where i am going right?
The difference is that the Jabberwock not only has DR/Vorpal listed in its stat block, but then also has an entry to explain it in alongside its other abilities like Burble and the like.
So either Paizo dropped the ball for the Jabberwock and lesser Jabberwock in both books and added in an extra, unnecessary explaination, or the explaination means what it says and absolutely nothing, not even smite evil, can get through a Jabberwock's DR if it isn't Vorpal.
Considering Paizo isn't going to forget that they don't need to explain DR while editing two different books, that indicates that Jabberwock DR acts differently from normal DR.
Look, here are the stat blocks for the Jabberwock and it's lesser brothers.
Jabberwock
Lesser Jabberwock
The PFSRD lists out all the creatures that have been released for Pathfinder, even by third parties. If the DR explanation doesn't mean anything special then you should be able to find more examples from Paizo beyond the Jabberwocks. I can tell you now that no other big monster (Pitfiend, Balor, Planetar or even the Tarrasque) has a similar stat block explaination.