Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Please, Ravingdork. I have a title about how horrible of a troll and liar I am, and I haven't even had to get close to such a claim.
It's all about if someone hates you for some reason.
Actually, all charge-abusers do have at least a small cause for hating me, since I inadvertently helped change the rules on charging in 3.5.
In 3.0, you see, you did have to charge to the first square from which you could reach your opponent; however, you didn't have to charge TOWARD your opponent. Perhaps it's a corner case, but in a game with a number of Wizards employees years ago at the time 3.5 was in development, one of whom was married to the lead designer for 3.5. My character was enlarged when we encountered a beholder, whose antimagic ray shrank me to regular size. On my turn, I charged the beholder... sideways, to get out of the antimagic cone, returning to embiggened size outside the cone. In embiggened size, I now had reach to the beholder; the fact that it was BEHIND me was irrelevant since 3.0 had no facing. It was, in fact, the first square from which I could attack it, I had reach to it... technically, it was legit as a charge. SPLAT go beholder. Same character later stacked a bunch of psionic feats and things to do 200+ with a charge attack (may seem like small potatoes compared to the DPR exploits people developed later, but it seemed like a lot to this crew, prompting a "How can you be doing that much?" question from the lead's wife... while we were playing at their house no less). Not long after, 3.5 came out, and wouldn't you know a few loopholes had been changed. I can't claim total credit, but I did my part... :)
If AM BARBARIAN was running around a campaign world in which I played a Wizard who wanted to kill him I would expect the worst and have the following contingency setup;
1. Contingency - Teleport straight upwards max range of best long range spells. Trigger - When AM BABARIAN attacks me....
2. Be wearing a Ring of Feather Falling (at the very least....)
3. Fast cast a Maze Spell on him (no save)
4. Park my Sphere of Annihilation on the spot he dissapeared
5. Laugh maniacally when he reappears IN the same spot as the SphereSeriously, when playing a caster, or when dealing with a specific threat, there is always a way round it - no point restricting yourself to one method.
How about 1-2 above and then Waves of Exhaustion - no scary raging monster anymore and you can blast away to your hearts content.
1) Contingency cannot sense AM Barbarian. Divination is not part of the spell. Nor can it sense 'an attack.' It is NOT a readied action. It can sense when YOU GET HIT or MISSED.
2) Max range on teleport at L20 is what, 2000 miles? And can you even teleport to an open area of space you cannot see? Teleport is all ground to ground if beyond line of sight. You might mean Dimension Door, but that ends your actions for the round.
3) You cast the Maze spell, it gets spell turned, and you are now Mazed. Congrats. He knows just where to find you when you pop back out.
4) You always get the save to avoid the Sphere, which, being a magic item, he'll basically auto-save.
5) He's 1/day immune to exhaustion. You need at least 2, hence why people are talking about QUickened to get them on him before he reaches them. By round 2, it's too late.
In short, Fail all the way around. DO try again.
==Aelryinth
Allow me to point out the yawning holes in this arguement without being as rude as the respondent.
1) Nothing in Contingency states it cannot 'detect' the stated conditions for the trigger. It is the complexity of the specified trigger that is the issue - being attacked by AM BARBARIAN is NOT a complex issue! Also - I haven't used ANY of my actions yet (also see point 2).... have you even read the Contingency spell? - it is so general as to allow practically anything which could be witnessed by a person. I can't witness an attack by a barbarian? please....
2) Teleporting to somewhere I 'cannot see'? I said straight upwards - I don't know about you - but I am fairly familiar with what the sky looks like above my head, I look up from time to time.... Dimension Door has the limitation of not allowing further action (regardless of how triggered, as written - so OF COURSE I didn't state use of it....)
3) Spell Turning? - great, now I am several hundred feet in the air in another dimension with time to contemplate the my next move, OR I allow my Ring of Spell Turning to activate, or absorb the incoming spell and prepare my response, either way it just changes the game plan, and I have learned something useful about my adversary without harm to myself. I might even stay there as long as possible to let his Rage tick away and/or to make him think I escaped.
4) If the Maze does go off he re-appears WITHIN the Sphere of Annihilation. Perhaps you are the kind of GM to allow a save in such circumstances, but I am not, nor do I know any - there is no save to 'resist' or 'avoid' a Sphere, again - READ before posting.
5) Waves of Exhaustion - great again! I learn another ability of my enemy and am STILL out of range of any problemmatic attacks he can do on me with time to think and act.
In short - this tactic has never FAILED to get my characters ass out of hot water against melee characters and always given me time to adapt and overcome.
If the pouncer halts his charge to avoid your tactic, you have still won the most important advantage the build is attempting to obtain by attacking you from a distance in the hope of killing you instantly. So you still win even if AM BARBARIAN has to halt his charge or take the attack at a point away from you. You go first next round, exit the combat, and plan your strategy in the privacy of your home.
The main thing you need to do to defeat the AM BARBARIAN or BATTY BAT build is to take the advantage of being able to charge you outside your sight. After that it's all about proper strategy once you take the surprise advantage away. The entire build is built upon the idea of catching a wizard flying around and attacking him at a distance.
I counteracted that in several ways including:
1. Henchmen with +49 Perception, +54 with magic item which I didn't even include. AM BARBARIAN is spotted and known as the enemy. Now it comes to down to initiative. Surprise round elminated.
2. Wall of Suppression to completely negate all magic. Or you can use a wall of force to simply elminate the charge.
3. Leave the combat either via contingency after first hit where you take more than 50 points of damage or teleport out next round.
4. None of the divinations permanencied on AM barbarian detect anything on you because you have your 24 hour duration mind blank active.
5. His blindsight/blindsense ability on his mount is only active to 30 feet. Outside of that he is unaware of your location when invisible unless he pinpoints using Perception which is quite possible given the mount's high perception.
6. Your main focus should be on the elimination of the mount. The mount is the only thing giving AM BARBARIAN any kind of advantage. Without the mount, he's nothing more than a nuisance. The Synthesist mount is more important than AM BARBARIAN and should be the first target of your attack.
7. You don't need to kill him the same day. You are a wizard. You can kill him over a number of weeks. That is the advantage of being a wizard is not having to stand toe to toe with an enemy.
You could even do stuff like travel around the negative energy plane occasionally opening gates where AM BARBARIAN is after making a deal with the local negative energy plane creaures to feed on him and taunt AM BARBARIAN until he charges you using your readied action to close the gate once he is through. Then tell the negative energy creatures once they feed on his mount, he's done.
AM BARBARIAN has one strategy: charge and sticky pointy lance in you.
Wizard has a multitude of strategies. None of which require you kill AM BARBARIAN the same day.
Why think like a barbarian and stand there trying to kill one in toe to toe battle? That's playing into his mentality and showing yourself to be an arrogant, impatient wizard that is angry he can't crush the ant right in front of him. While the patient wizard sees AM BARBARIAN as a problem that may take more than one immediate battle to solve. So your sole strategy should be taking the foolish advantage you've given him by flying around opening yourself up to the charge attack away from him. Once you've done that, then you hunt him making him flying around at 97 m.p.h. all the time.
AM BARBARIAN is living a lot less comfortable a life than you by sleeping, eating, crapping, pissing, and having no women or feasting while being forced to live on his eidolon. You can even send him mental images of you partying, whoring, and living it up while he's trapped on his eidolon in the sky paranoid because he knows if ever takes time off, you're going to stick it to him.
So really, who wins in that circumstance? I say the wizard soundly wins. I'd be sending old AM BARBARIAN and his henchmen images of me partying all the time. Even tell him where I was. See if he shows up. Then leave him a programmed illusion to give him a message. Good times for the wizard.
Doesn't the Superstitious Rage Feat required as a pre-requisite for Witch Hunter which is a pre-requisite for Spell Sunder PREVENT AM BARBARIAN from having ANY spells deliberately cast on himself?
BROKEN!
|
Doesn't the Superstitious Rage Feat required as a pre-requisite for Witch Hunter which is a pre-requisite for Spell Sunder PREVENT AM BARBARIAN from having ANY spells deliberately cast on himself?
BROKEN!
...hey, you're right. I'm sure Trinam will argue that he activates the ring of spell turning while he's not raging, or that it isn't casting a spell on him specifically, or some such...but we already knew AM is broken and can't ever exist, right?
...whereas 20th-level wizards, of course, really exist. My uncle knows a guy who works with someone whose brother's girlfriend met one at a party one time. :D
Doesn't the Superstitious Rage Feat required as a pre-requisite for Witch Hunter which is a pre-requisite for Spell Sunder PREVENT AM BARBARIAN from having ANY spells deliberately cast on himself?
BROKEN!
Only why he is raging. So while he is raging, neither him nor his mount can accept spells beneficial or harmful willingly. Only spells that don't allow a save can be given to either the mount or the barbarian while raging. No scrolls, no using magic items while raging, no using skills but those allowed while raging.
It all depends on the DM if they allow him to drop rage, use a standard action to reactive, and then rage again past level 17. Which is the usual method for a high level barbarian to use use activated magic items at high level, which leaves openings for a DM (or wizard)to hammer the barbarian if an enemy readies an action to hit him while he drops rage. I use it quite often and my barbarian player is very careful as to when he drops rage.
|
|
Doesn't the Superstitious Rage Feat required as a pre-requisite for Witch Hunter which is a pre-requisite for Spell Sunder PREVENT AM BARBARIAN from having ANY spells deliberately cast on himself?
BROKEN!
Only why he is raging. So while he is raging, neither him nor his mount can accept spells beneficial or harmful willingly. Only spells that don't allow a save can be given to either the mount or the barbarian while raging. No scrolls, no using magic items while raging, no using skills but those allowed while raging.
It all depends on the DM if they allow him to drop rage, use a standard action to reactive, and then rage again past level 17. Which is the usual method for a high level barbarian to use use activated magic items at high level, which leaves openings for a DM (or wizard)to hammer the barbarian if an enemy readies an action to hit him while he drops rage. I use it quite often and my barbarian player is very careful as to when he drops rage.
Except that AM has this crazy scheme whereby he never drops out of rage because he thinks he can sunder an item with a merciful weapon and not break it and still get another round of rage...or something. It doesn't make any sense to me when I type it, but it does to him. Anyway, AM thinks he's perma-raging.
Except that AM has this crazy scheme whereby he never drops out of rage because he thinks he can sunder an item with a merciful weapon and not break it and still get another round of rage...or something. It doesn't make any sense to me when I type it, but it does to him. Anyway, AM thinks he's perma-raging.Doesn't the Superstitious Rage Feat required as a pre-requisite for Witch Hunter which is a pre-requisite for Spell Sunder PREVENT AM BARBARIAN from having ANY spells deliberately cast on himself?
BROKEN!
Only why he is raging. So while he is raging, neither him nor his mount can accept spells beneficial or harmful willingly. Only spells that don't allow a save can be given to either the mount or the barbarian while raging. No scrolls, no using magic items while raging, no using skills but those allowed while raging.
It all depends on the DM if they allow him to drop rage, use a standard action to reactive, and then rage again past level 17. Which is the usual method for a high level barbarian to use use activated magic items at high level, which leaves openings for a DM (or wizard)to hammer the barbarian if an enemy readies an action to hit him while he drops rage. I use it quite often and my barbarian player is very careful as to when he drops rage.
More like 'he has infinity rage rounds per day due to sundering things and having an orc great-grandmother or something.' Which, yes, the best way to deal with activating it is dropping rage during your turn, reactivating it, and reraging during the same turn.
Per your interpretation, you could therefore get a charge attack against someone (Bad Guy A) just around a corner out of sight if he had a buddy (Bad Guy B) a bit past him but in sight. Declare your charge against BGB, make your movement, and take a swing at BGA once you get there. This violates the rule that you cannot charge if you don't have line of sight, which makes me think your interpretation of the charge rule is wrong.Note that a charge action states, in RAW, that you MAY move up to twice your speed, which must be toward the designated target's nearest square, nobody in the way, no difficult terrain, etc. It does not anywhere state that, once you declare a charge, you MUST move twice your speed toward that creature. That is your interpretation. It is not RAW.
The charge rules state: "After moving, you may make a single melee attack." Not "a single melee attack against the target of your charge." Just "a single melee attack."...
You *do* have line of sight to the target of your charge.
You aren't charging Bad Guy B. You are charging Bad Guy A, to whom you have LOS. You charge toward Bad Guy A, you move at least 10 feet in a straight, unobstructed line toward Bad Guy A. You continue charging Bad Guy A. During your charge you see Bad Guy B and decide to end your movement, resolving your attack against him.
The target of your charge is the target toward which you must MOVE. "Charging, however, carries tight restrictions on how you can move." Not "on how you move and attack." Just "on how you can move."
"Attacking on a Charge: After moving, you may make a single melee attack." Not "make a single melee attack against the designated target toward whom you are moving." Just "make a single melee attack." Period. That's it. THERE ARE NO SPECIAL RESTRICTIONS ON WHOM YOU CAN ATTACK DURING A CHARGE. They do not exist in the RAW.
Check it, bro:
"Charge is a special...
You moved in a straight line towards the target and attacked it with a +2 bonus. You just charged it. But you can#t charge it because you couldn't see it
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Alienfreak, you're ignoring the point. The attack portion of the charge rules dont require you specify a target when you choose to charge; only the movement portion of charging does. So you have to choose an opponent and move towards them, but nowhere in the rules does it require you to attack that opponent.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
The issue is not your ridiculous RAI interpretation of the charge rules, the issue is that you are re-writing the ready action rules.You *do* have line of sight to the target of your charge.
You aren't charging Bad Guy B. You are charging Bad Guy A, to whom you have LOS. You charge toward Bad Guy A, you move at least 10 feet in a straight, unobstructed line toward Bad Guy A. You continue charging Bad Guy A. During your charge you see Bad Guy B and decide to end your movement, resolving your attack against him.
The target of your charge is the target toward which you must MOVE. "Charging, however, carries tight restrictions on how you can move." Not "on how you move and attack." Just "on how you can move."
"Attacking on a Charge: After moving, you may make a single melee attack." Not "make a single melee attack against the designated target toward whom you are moving." Just "make a single melee attack." Period. That's it. THERE ARE NO SPECIAL RESTRICTIONS ON WHOM YOU CAN ATTACK DURING A CHARGE. They do not exist in the RAW.
Check it, bro:
"Charge is a special...
I'm not using RAI. Would you care to please cite the RAW that says otherwise.
I'm also not doing anything to the ready action rules. Readying an action works exactly as it says in the book.
It is the "unitary, indivisible, unstoppable action" folks that are attempting a curious eisigesis on the rules and calling it RAW.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
...Per your interpretation, you could therefore get a charge attack against someone (Bad Guy A) just around a corner out of sight if he had a buddy (Bad Guy B) a bit past him but in sight. Declare your charge against BGB, make your movement, and take a swing at BGA once you get there. This violates the rule that you cannot charge if you don't have line of sight, which makes me think your interpretation of the charge rule is wrong.Note that a charge action states, in RAW, that you MAY move up to twice your speed, which must be toward the designated target's nearest square, nobody in the way, no difficult terrain, etc. It does not anywhere state that, once you declare a charge, you MUST move twice your speed toward that creature. That is your interpretation. It is not RAW.
The charge rules state: "After moving, you may make a single melee attack." Not "a single melee attack against the target of your charge." Just "a single melee attack."...
You *do* have line of sight to the target of your charge.
You aren't charging Bad Guy B. You are charging Bad Guy A, to whom you have LOS. You charge toward Bad Guy A, you move at least 10 feet in a straight, unobstructed line toward Bad Guy A. You continue charging Bad Guy A. During your charge you see Bad Guy B and decide to end your movement, resolving your attack against him.
The target of your charge is the target toward which you must MOVE. "Charging, however, carries tight restrictions on how you can move." Not "on how you move and attack." Just "on how you can move."
"Attacking on a Charge: After moving, you may make a single melee attack." Not "make a single melee attack against the designated target toward whom you are moving." Just "make a single melee attack." Period. That's it. THERE ARE NO SPECIAL RESTRICTIONS ON WHOM YOU CAN ATTACK DURING A CHARGE. They do not exist in the RAW.
Check it, bro:
"Charge
RAW been quoted to you repeatedly. RAW says you must move towards your designated target, and that is the target to which you must have LOS. RAW places no conditions on whom you attack during your charge. At this point, you either get it or you don't (or won't). Happy gaming!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
THIS AM WHERE BARBARIAN POINT OUT ALIENFREAK AM PROBABLY BEING PURPOSELY OBTUSE IN ORDER TO CONTINUE TO ROUSE RABBLE.
BARBARIAN RECOMMEND SUNDERING ARGUMENT AND MOVING ON WITH ARGUMENT AFTER AM DESTROYED.
CRAZY NON-LOGIC AM DESTROYED, BARBARIAN GAINS 1 HP.
DESTROYER BLESSING AM BEST FEET EVER.
AM CLEARED TO CONTINUE.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Alienfreak, you're ignoring the point. The attack portion of the charge rules dont require you specify a target when you choose to charge; only the movement portion of charging does. So you have to choose an opponent and move towards them, but nowhere in the rules does it require you to attack that opponent.
You said it a lot more succinctly than I did. :)
Fine. No Maze then.
I go first (Divination Wizard)
I have Contingency -> Put up a wall of force when an attacker comes within melee his/her range. Angled slightly tilted towards attacker.
Round 1
Quickened/Heightened Reduce Person
(Purpose, less damage, possibly gets rid of spellturning and buffs my AC at the same time if thrown back at me)
Ready an action against him coming within his melee range.
He charges: Contingency Goes off when near me.
Readied action: Place wall of Force aLong Left Diagonal, Tilted towards attacker.
His round ends, fruitlessly.
Next Round.
Quickened Wall of Force on Right Diagonal, tilted inwards, creating a pyramid around the Barbarian.
Timstop and then Summon 2 or more monsters inside of the pyramid with the barbarian.
Each time he tries to destroy a wall, I creat a new one where the old one was.
Fine. No Maze then.
I go first (Divination Wizard)
I have Contingency -> Put up a wall of force when an attacker comes within melee his/her range. Angled slightly tilted towards attacker.Round 1
Quickened/Heightened Reduce Person
(Purpose, less damage, possibly gets rid of spellturning and buffs my AC at the same time if thrown back at me)Ready an action against him coming within his melee range.
He charges: Contingency Goes off when near me.
Readied action: Place wall of Force aLong Left Diagonal, Tilted towards attacker.His round ends, fruitlessly.
Next Round.
Quickened Wall of Force on Right Diagonal, tilted inwards, creating a pyramid around the Barbarian.
Timstop and then Summon 2 or more monsters inside of the pyramid with the barbarian.Each time he tries to destroy a wall, I creat a new one where the old one was.
Even assuming Contingency works that way, you lose due failing to understand charge mechanics.
It goes off when AM is within melee range to you. The wall of force pops up, he spell sunders it, and then has 4 attacks left with your name on them.
YASD.
Would you like your possessions identified (Y/N)?
P.S. And how the heck is a wall of force able to affect your person? You need to reread Contingency bro, you're confusing it with programmed image.
...Per your interpretation, you could therefore get a charge attack against someone (Bad Guy A) just around a corner out of sight if he had a buddy (Bad Guy B) a bit past him but in sight. Declare your charge against BGB, make your movement, and take a swing at BGA once you get there. This violates the rule that you cannot charge if you don't have line of sight, which makes me think your interpretation of the charge rule is wrong.Note that a charge action states, in RAW, that you MAY move up to twice your speed, which must be toward the designated target's nearest square, nobody in the way, no difficult terrain, etc. It does not anywhere state that, once you declare a charge, you MUST move twice your speed toward that creature. That is your interpretation. It is not RAW.
The charge rules state: "After moving, you may make a single melee attack." Not "a single melee attack against the target of your charge." Just "a single melee attack."...
You *do* have line of sight to the target of your charge.
You aren't charging Bad Guy B. You are charging Bad Guy A, to whom you have LOS. You charge toward Bad Guy A, you move at least 10 feet in a straight, unobstructed line toward Bad Guy A. You continue charging Bad Guy A. During your charge you see Bad Guy B and decide to end your movement, resolving your attack against him.
The target of your charge is the target toward which you must MOVE. "Charging, however, carries tight restrictions on how you can move." Not "on how you move and attack." Just "on how you can move."
"Attacking on a Charge: After moving, you may make a single melee attack." Not "make a single melee attack against the designated target toward whom you are moving." Just "make a single melee attack." Period. That's it. THERE ARE NO SPECIAL RESTRICTIONS ON WHOM YOU CAN ATTACK DURING A CHARGE. They do not exist in the RAW.
Okay... just so you get the semantics (I don't think you will, but its always worth a try).
1. You cannot charge a target you cannot see. This defines "charge" as some kind of action that seems to include things.
It doesn't say "you cannot use the move component of a charge against a target you cannot see" (as you always wrongly state). It simply says you cannot take a CHARGE (so all of it) against a target you cannot see.
If you don't have line of sight to the opponent at the start of your turn, you can't charge that opponent.
2. Charge is movement and an attack.
Charging is a special full-round action that allows you to move up to twice your speed and attack during the action. Charging, however, carries tight restrictions on how you can move.
.
..
So AGAIN. You move towards BGA and then notice (as you stand next to him) that there is a BGB standing next to him around the corner. You decide to attack him.
So you a) moved towards him and b) directly attacked him with a +2 bonus.
THIS IS A CHARGE! What else is a charge?
You are cherry picking meanings of words as you want them while destroying the whole cohesion of sentences and semantics of sentences while ignoring common text comprehension and call it Rules as WRITTEN just because you abuse the meaning of the words so they fit your scheme.
Fine. No Maze then.
I go first (Divination Wizard)
I have Contingency -> Put up a wall of force when an attacker comes within melee his/her range. Angled slightly tilted towards attacker.Round 1
Quickened/Heightened Reduce Person
(Purpose, less damage, possibly gets rid of spellturning and buffs my AC at the same time if thrown back at me)Ready an action against him coming within his melee range.
He charges: Contingency Goes off when near me.
Readied action: Place wall of Force aLong Left Diagonal, Tilted towards attacker.His round ends, fruitlessly.
Next Round.
Quickened Wall of Force on Right Diagonal, tilted inwards, creating a pyramid around the Barbarian.
Timstop and then Summon 2 or more monsters inside of the pyramid with the barbarian.Each time he tries to destroy a wall, I creat a new one where the old one was.
Even assuming Contingency works that way, you lose due failing to understand charge mechanics.
It goes off when AM is within melee range to you. The wall of force pops up, he spell sunders it, and then has 4 attacks left with your name on them.
YASD.
Would you like your possessions identified (Y/N)?
P.S. And how the heck is a wall of force able to affect your person? You need to reread Contingency bro, you're confusing it with programmed image.
Spell Sunder is a standard action. He can't even Spell Sunder the round he charged... not to mention that he has no Iterative attacks in that round he Spell Sunders. He actually has no attacks at all in such a round.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
stuff
Sorry bro, I've neither changed nor cherry-picked meanings, nor taken anything out of context. I've read the text precisely as it stands, neither adding to it nor taking away from it.
A charge requires choosing a target, moving toward that target, and making an attack, but there is no requirement in the RAW that the attack be against the same creature. It doesn't exist, which is why when repeatedly asked, you cannot produce a citation in the rules to support your contention that the attack must be against the same creature. You say that it must. The rules do not. They've been quoted to you repeatedly.
Your counter-example is perfectly legal. The player has fulfilled all the requirements of a charge. Designate target creature within LOS (BGA), move toward that creature (BGA), make attack (BGB).
You refuse to accept that the rules as written actually say what they mean and mean what they say. You insist there is an additional requirement that the rules do not stipulate. If that works for you, then great! Problem is, that means you have invented an inferred rule that is not there in the RAW to fit your interpretation of what the designers intended (that the move part of the charge and the attack part of the charge must be against the same target), even though there is no text to support that interpretation. Again, that's fine. No problem at all.
It's just not RAW. You insisted on RAW, not RAI, but your argument is based on RAI (attack and movement must be vs. same creature in a charge) when the RAW (movement is required to be vs. target of charge, attack is not required to be against that target) does not support your position. When you try to be the RAW police, sometimes you get busted.
When you can find and cite RAW text to actually support your position that the RAW requires your attack during your charge must be against the creature you designate and move towards during your charge, then get back to me. Until then, happy gaming to you and peace out.
The issue is not your ridiculous RAI interpretation of the charge rules, the issue is that you are re-writing the ready action rules.You *do* have line of sight to the target of your charge.
You aren't charging Bad Guy B. You are charging Bad Guy A, to whom you have LOS. You charge toward Bad Guy A, you move at least 10 feet in a straight, unobstructed line toward Bad Guy A. You continue charging Bad Guy A. During your charge you see Bad Guy B and decide to end your movement, resolving your attack against him.
The target of your charge is the target toward which you must MOVE. "Charging, however, carries tight restrictions on how you can move." Not "on how you move and attack." Just "on how you can move."
"Attacking on a Charge: After moving, you may make a single melee attack." Not "make a single melee attack against the designated target toward whom you are moving." Just "make a single melee attack." Period. That's it. THERE ARE NO SPECIAL RESTRICTIONS ON WHOM YOU CAN ATTACK DURING A CHARGE. They do not exist in the RAW.
Check it, bro:
"Charge is a special...
I'm not using RAI. Would you care to please cite the RAW that says otherwise.
I'm also not doing anything to the ready action rules. Readying an action works exactly as it says in the book.
It is the "unitary, indivisible, unstoppable action" folks that are attempting a curious eisigesis on the rules and calling it RAW.
Mr. Nelson, you scored on the Internet by making me look up a word, but I think you meant "exegesis". I couldn't find eisigesis.
==Aelryinth
More stuff with a heap of rudeness.
Kindly state anywhere in Contingency where it allows the spell to identify an attacker.
Kindly state the RANGE at which it may make this identification.Kindly state how it differentiates a charging orc from a charging mosquito (for the guy with the wall of force idea, although he can't tie it to a wall of force).
The spell is not operating off YOUR INTELLECT. It is NOT a readied action! Quit treating it like one! It responds to something that happens to you AFTER the effect!
2) Teleport to an open area you CANNOT SEE. Sure, straight up in an open field, you're good. But you can't 'port in a thousand feet over magnimar...and so you can't do it to Batty Bat in motion.
3) Oh, you now Shrodinger'd your own spell turning, ignoring the fact that two Spell Turnings set up a resonance field to, um, nasty effect. Good show there. And he can be sitting right next to where you pop out of the Maze, which is not a good place for you to be. If he's 10' away, he can charge, and you've got a standard action to take while inside his reach to try and get away.
4) Exactly how big do you think a Sphere of Annihilation is? There are no 'auto-kills' in Pathfinder. If he saves, he pops up next to it. You still have to touch him with it. And he can have a ready action to charge or move when he gets out as you attempt to control the sphere.
Plus, it's a minor artifact, and not eligible for this competition as outside the purchase limits. If you can fiat a Sphere, he can fiat a Rod of Absorption to counter it and mess you up at the same time.
5) Waves of Exhaustion - you now know it won't work, but not why, how, or the limits thereof, unless you are metagaming. He could be a horizon walker with a level in Desert.
And sure, it's gotten your mage out of all sorts of trouble, but that 'trouble' wasn't AM BARBARIAN. Trite tactics won't work on him.
==Aelryinth
the entire premise is ridiculous. a 20th level caster standing in an open field with no buffs? not likely. really its the perfect environment for the barb, and the worst possible situation for the caster. i hate to say it again, but really? a fully buffed barbarian, mounted, actively hunting high level casters, vs an oblivious, 20th level, super intelligent, wizard standing in a field, completely unprepared, is a "duel?" no, its an implausible scenario. the bear will kill the shark every time, just so long as the shark is in a field, and isn't allowed to bite.
the only fair thing top do is to assume they are hunting each other, and thus equipped/buffed for the job. that changes the match-up considerably. the counter argument is that its impractical for the caster in other situations. i, however, believe a repertoire that allowed the caster to take down AMB would be pretty damn effective against most things.
beyond the fact that the wizard is being restricted from doing anything a wizard would do (if you were a super-powerful-plane-traveling wizard would you be standing around like a dip in a field, or flying around undetectable with loads of minions? hmmmmmm. i think id pick the second one), and is assumed to be an idiot unaware of an impending attack despite god like intelligence that would in all likelihood allow him to predict the exact moment and method of attack, there are other MAJOR double standards in effect here.
every time anyone suggests that the caster could have the same bat, the retort is "what are the chances?" damn good id say. if its the best companion in the multiverse, why wouldn't every 20th level character have one as a slave? in fact, it could easily be argued that a highly mobile, super perceptive mount is just as ideal for a ranged caster as a mele character.
assuming the wiz is allowed to buff, i still haven't seen an explanation as to how the barbarian is able to detect/perceive/identify the caster at a range of greater than 120ft. i read the thread looking for that explanation, and i never came across one. the counter argument has been "why would he already be undetectable?" well, why WOULDNT he/she? if i could turn invisible whenever i wanted, in conjunction with simulacrums & illusions and stuff, i certainly would, and i dont live in a super dangerous fantasy would where others certainly have that power, and far scarier ones to boot. besides, as a super brain, he would KNOW it was coming.
on a more rules related issue, im still not convinced that a mounted char can make more than a single attack after moving more than 5 feet. a full attack action, sure, that consists of a single mele attack. ive seen vague hand-waving about what is "more specific", but in my opinion that is not relevant, as the rules do not conflict in any way. sure, he may use pounce RAW and make a full attack action, but that full attack action will consist of a single attack because of a situational restriction.
re: contingency. cant you have it activate when you say "oh, poop!" (a free action) and use the chars ability to perceive the barb swooping in?
now, to my am-barbie vs anti-barbie-casty:
im no min maxer (quite the opposite, really),so im not very good at this type of "build-off", but has anyone considered using a range pumped "Terrible Remorse" on the the barb or mount? the target will make the save, and be able to "take NO actions" for 20 rounds while the caster hammers him with the arsenal. a flying follower (casters "batty bat") can shoot a spell first to take down reflection etc. cant sunder it with no actions.....
Spell turning?
==Aelryinth
ah, of course, how about ....
Mage's Disjunction vs ring of ST, then swift terrible remorse? getting the range to work out shouldn't be too tough, lure him in with an illusion (persistent image) of a caster while still being undetectable with invisibility + mind blank. by the time he's close enough to interact with it and determine that its an illusion, it'll be too late.
man, i suck at this type of thing.
Spell Sunder is a standard action. He can't even Spell Sunder the round he charged... not to mention that he has no Iterative attacks in that round he Spell Sunders. He actually has no attacks at all in such a round.
Spell sunder actually replaces a Sunder check, and thus can be used in place of an iterative attack the same as sunder.
...Wait why am I still paying attention to you anyways? Didn't AM sunder your logic like two steps back? I guess that might be why you forgot.
ah, of course, how about ....
Mage's Disjunction vs ring of ST, then swift terrible remorse? getting the range to work out shouldn't be too tough, lure him in with an illusion (persistent image) of a caster while still being undetectable with invisibility + mind blank. by the time he's close enough to interact with it and determine that its an illusion, it'll be too late.
man, i suck at this type of thing.
Ride by-attack, he's suddenly 400 ft in the other direction, still out of your TR range and now aware that some mind-blanked invisible casty is on him. Pick a random target square, charge it, see if you find an enemy, and murder under charge rules. If no enemies within blindsense/god perception range, keep going and end on the other side. Sweep until bored or murder has occurred.
Trust me, it's been tried. Also, TR only lasts 1 round should he make his save (which is likely), and BATTY BAT would still be more than capable of moving.
Not saying you suck per se, but it's a good idea to start somewhere we haven't been already.
...Wait why am I still paying attention to you anyways? Didn't AM sunder your logic like two steps back? I guess that might be why you forgot.
You make me go all "awwww" now :)
Also, luring with an illusion also grants a will save, and Batty-Bat's blindsense will tell him there's nothing there when he gets close enough.
==Aelryinth
Ride by-attack, he's suddenly 400 ft in the other direction, still out of your TR range
Why does that matter? wiz is on the same mount (or better) and has a better starting position, making him more than capable of overtaking the barb wherever he might go.
and now aware that some mind-blanked invisible casty is on him. Pick a random target square, charge it, see if you find an enemy, and murder under charge rules. If no enemies within blindsense/god perception range, keep going and end on the other side. Sweep until bored or murder has occurred.
can't catch a guy who moves just as fast as you. Even if AMB was faster wiz has a 3d space of undefined size to hide in (open field) - never happen. Also, you can't charge something without LOS, so randomly charging doesn't work. Even if you saw him you would have to change direction = no charge. Plus, who knows, maybe it's the same trap again ;). If you do get close, he just says " oh poop" and triggers a contingency spell to save his ass. Rinse and repeat. How long can the barb rage before he has to spend time to sunder something? Not forever.
TR only lasts 1 round should he make his save (which is likely), and BATTY BAT would still be more than capable of moving.
really? I'm new to PF, but I don't see that the effect ends one turn after a successful save anywhere in the spell description - the save doesn't end the effect, and he must do it every turn for the duration, as far as I can tell. Further, the wiz batty bat is just as fast so no amount of running will work. Interesting, though, that a 4th level spell would have him on the run.....
Also, luring with an illusion also grants a will save, and Batty-Bat's blindsense will tell him there's nothing there when he gets close enough.
==Aelryinth
You only get the save if you interact with it - not observe it. he has to attack it.
It's a major image so it fools blindsense too. its a moot point anyhow - arcane sight will detect it long before that. the wiz, however, has god level int and knows that barb will charge from very far away (farther than '120), since that is how his tactic has been repeatedly described to be effective. this ensures that he is within striking range no matter where AMB attempts to go after that point.
Also, luring with an illusion also grants a will save, and Batty-Bat's blindsense will tell him there's nothing there when he gets close enough.
==Aelryinth
You only get the save if you interact with it - not observe it. he has to attack it.
It's a major image so it fools blindsense too. its a moot point anyhow - arcane sight will detect it long before that. the wiz, however, has god level int and knows that barb will charge from very far away (farther than '120), since that is how his tactic has been repeatedly described to be effective. this ensures that he is within striking range no matter where AMB attempts to go after that point.
actually, scratch that. unless he uses a standard action arcane sight wont work, and even then he cant be sure - he will have to attack it to discover it isn't real.
also, changing tactics from pounce to ride by is meta-gaming. up until this point the outlined tactic was to charge from the max distance for a pounce. given that approach barb would leave himself wide open for a surprise round ambush with no response, and then an init roll. if you went with the hyped diviner, thats two rounds of spell bombardment before a possible response = dead AMB.EDIT: found the errata on TR; my bad. still works though. cast it quick and it shuts him down for a turn, then cast a spell to put on the hurt. repeat. still not bad....
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
The issue is not your ridiculous RAI interpretation of the charge rules, the issue is that you are re-writing the ready action rules.You *do* have line of sight to the target of your charge.
You aren't charging Bad Guy B. You are charging Bad Guy A, to whom you have LOS. You charge toward Bad Guy A, you move at least 10 feet in a straight, unobstructed line toward Bad Guy A. You continue charging Bad Guy A. During your charge you see Bad Guy B and decide to end your movement, resolving your attack against him.
The target of your charge is the target toward which you must MOVE. "Charging, however, carries tight restrictions on how you can move." Not "on how you move and attack." Just "on how you can move."
"Attacking on a Charge: After moving, you may make a single melee attack." Not "make a single melee attack against the designated target toward whom you are moving." Just "make a single melee attack." Period. That's it. THERE ARE NO SPECIAL RESTRICTIONS ON WHOM YOU CAN ATTACK DURING A CHARGE. They do not exist in the RAW.
Check it, bro:
"Charge is a special...
I'm not using RAI. Would you care to please cite the RAW that says otherwise.
I'm also not doing anything to the ready action rules. Readying an action works exactly as it says in the book.
It is the "unitary, indivisible, unstoppable action" folks that are attempting a curious eisigesis on the rules and calling it RAW.
Mr. Nelson, you scored on the Internet by making me look up a word, but I think you meant "exegesis". I couldn't find eisigesis.
==Aelryinth
I'm actually not sure how eisigesis is spelled, but it was a term I picked up from my ex-wife when she was in seminary. Eisigesis is the opposite of exegesis.
Exegesis = extracting meaning from a text. It's a method seminarians use to study Bible passages and understand their meaning through cross-reference, linguistic word study, and historical contextual study.
Eisigesis (or however it's spelled; obviously that isn't the right spelling. I should ask my ex next time we talk.) = reading meaning into a text, typically based on personal biases or preconceived notions about what a passage means, and something seminarians are taught to avoid doing.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Once you have decided upon an action, it is resolved. You cannot go midway through resolving an action and say "I changed my mind" just because the outcome is looking like it will be detrimental to your character.I'm not using RAI. Would you care to please cite the RAW that says otherwise.
I'm also not doing anything to the ready action rules. Readying an action works exactly as it says in the book.
It is the "unitary, indivisible, unstoppable action" folks that are attempting a curious eisigesis on the rules and calling it RAW.
You cannot change your action and start a different one.
You can stop what you are doing *AFTER* resolving any occurrence that has already been triggered. Take my earlier example about Player and Bad Guy. Player attacked Bad Guy and triggered a CaGM AoO. He couldn't change his mind and avoid the AoO; once he made the attack, the AoO was triggered and resolved, then Player's attack was resolved. Then he attacked Bad Guy again and triggered another CaGM AoO. Again, he couldn't change his mind and avoid the AoO.
However, having made his second iterative attack, Player is now committed to the full attack action full-round action, and he has two iterative attacks remaining. The full attack rules state that you may change targets in between each attack, but the only creatures present are Player and Bad Guy. There are no other targets available to choose.
What must Player do with his 2 remaining attacks?
If I am understanding your position, you would contend that he must take his 2 remaining attacks, and must use them either on Bad Guy (provoking additional AoOs) or himself, and that he may not choose to simply stop attacking. Is that a fair representation of your position on that scenario?
Maybe a simpler example is this:
Bad Cleric starts casting unhallow in his temple, with a 24-hour casting time. Good Guy sneaks into his castle and challenges him to a duel. Bad Cleric says "Sorry bro, I'm casting this spell for the next 24 hours. Can't change my action to fight with you." Good Guy goes over and murderizes him because Bad Cleric can't fight back, because he is literally incapable of changing his action once declared.
That may sound silly, but it's very serious: What are the limits on the unalterability of declarations of action?
I.e. you cannot go midway through a jump over a chasm and say "no scratch that, I choose to not jump" because your jump roll came out badly.
I never said you could. In fact, I've said the opposite. You resolve any rolls and actions that occur, including readied actions, AoOs, etc.
What I have said is that you can choose to stop your action BEFORE making rolls; to use your example, you could run up to the edge of the chasm, say to yourself "this is crazy!" and simply stop, choosing not to jump BEFORE making your die roll for the jump check.
Once you make the check, then it's like Julius Caesar said, "the die is cast," and you live with the result. I've been quite consistent on that point.
If you provoke a readied action, the readied action GOES OFF. You don't avoid it. You don't prevent it. It happens. There is no retroactive avoidance of the readied action. This is why I'm so puzzled at your repeated statements that I am rewriting the ready action rules and/or making them useless or ineffectual. The readied action person gets their readied action.
It is your contention that the PC in question, once having started moving but before reaching the edge of the chasm, is literally physically incapable of stopping himself prior to jumping.
Am I correct in my understanding of your point? Not that he could decide in midair, "ooh, bad roll, do over!," but before he got to the edge, before making any jump check, the PC cannot decide not to jump.
That is what you're trying to do with your re-write of the Ready Action rules.
I haven't rewritten a thing about the ready action rules.
It my be a silly question, however after refreshing my memory by reading Contingency description, there seems to be a limit on the triggering of the condition - that of quality of "personal" range.
Nothing seems to prohibit caster from stating a condition similar like "Activate the spell at the very moment I am to take an injury in excess of a scratch, but before I take enough damage to impair my health more than a scratch" (i.e. whenever I am taking more than one hp of damage, but before I take more than one hp of damage).
The precast spell's effect occurs, quote the PRD, "immediately".
So, teleport away.
Regards,
Ruemere
So... You want the spell to wait for you to take damage, confirm the damage is more than 1, then go back in time and teleport you prior to the damage?
You do know there are no delorians in Golarion, right?
It my be a silly question, however after refreshing my memory by reading Contingency description, there seems to be a limit on the triggering of the condition - that of quality of "personal" range.
Nothing seems to prohibit caster from stating a condition similar like "Activate the spell at the very moment I am to take an injury in excess of a scratch, but before I take enough damage to impair my health more than a scratch" (i.e. whenever I am taking more than one hp of damage, but before I take more than one hp of damage).
The precast spell's effect occurs, quote the PRD, "immediately".
So, teleport away.
Regards,
RuemereSo... You want the spell to wait for you to take damage, confirm the damage is more than 1, then go back in time and teleport you prior to the damage?
You do know there are no delorians in Golarion, right?
The conditions needed to bring the spell into effect must be clear, although they can be general. In all cases, the contingency immediately brings into effect the companion spell, the latter being "cast" instantaneously when the prescribed circumstances occur. If complicated or convoluted conditions are prescribed, the whole spell combination (contingency and the companion magic) may fail when triggered. The companion spell occurs based solely on the stated conditions, regardless of whether you want it to.
Taking damage is general, taking more than x damage is "clear".
Immediate actions are always resolved immediately before the result of the action that triggered them comes into effect.
So the spell "detects" (or however it does it) an dangerous attack (more than x damage) and teleports you to safety before the attack actually hits you.
No problems here.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There's a problem with that last statement, Gavin. Bear in mind the way damage works in pathfinder. There is no way for the spell to predict how much damage is going to be dealt until it is dealt. That guy could be holding back and opting to purposely deal 1 damage, or he could be going all out.
The only way for the spell to know how much damage would be dealt is for the damage to be rolled and dealt. Once the damage is rolled and resistances are included, it has already been dealt. Until that point, it's impossible to know.
Once the point at which you know how much damage you've taken has occurred, the damage has been dealt. Thus, your contingency would try to activate.
But, consider your wording.... 'Just before I take the damage.' By the time the spell knows that you've taken enough damage to activate it, it's
*Slams hand on desk and points. Dramatically.*
Your wording is therefore creating a paradox! The spell has to know the amount of damage you would take, which it can't know until after you take it! The only way this would be possible is if the spell can time travel!
Do you expect us to believe a fifth level spell can time travel, Gavin?
contingency: apparently comment about contingency must have been overlooked. simply make the condition for activation a word ("oh poop!" as suggested earlier, has a nice ring to it), then say that word as a free action(speaking is a free action that can be done at any time) to activate, whenever. since the barb isnt stealthy, its no problem at all to activate contingency whenever you'd like, even on his turn.
stopping a full round action: consider a charge on the ground - at any point the charging character can, at the very least, drop prone as a free action to stop the charge. seems like a realistic way to stop charging. unfortunately dropping prone while flying is not possible (no ground). im inclined to believe that because it it a full round action which has specific movement rules, that voluntarily violating those rules is not possible. unless a condition which prevents completion of that action occurs,(e.g dropping prone, a free action which is in itself not explicitly movement; or terrain appearing/being revealed), then the action resolves as stated. a full round action is INDIVISIBLE, you can not do half of a full round action, then take a standard action. this is clear when you note that the only exception - choosing between a full attack and a standard attack - is specifically outlined. the moment a player says "i charge" the full round action following the necessary moment rules is guaranteed, barring intervention. i dont believe a charge can be declared retroactively, either; a move satisfying a charges requirements + an attack does not become a charge since it was taken as a move + standard. a full round charge action must be taken at the onset of the turn for it to be a charge, and the action is indivisible and can thus not be altered once initiated.
consider an attacker performing a coup de grace vs a readied action to sunder the attackers weapon. coup de gras starts, sunderer destroys the weapon. the full round action cannot be completed, but the attacker cannot choose to do anything else, such as move.
EDIT: i do believe, however, that you can stop at any time so long as you have satisfied the requirements of the charge. thus, if you have moved 10' or more towards the target, you can stop at any time after that point because you have effectively completed a charge. you MUST move that initial 10 feet, however.
contingency: apparently comment about contingency must have been overlooked. simply make the condition for activation a word ("oh poop!" as suggested earlier, has a nice ring to it), then say that word as a free action(speaking is a free action that can be done at any time) to activate, whenever. since the barb isnt stealthy, its no problem at all to activate contingency whenever you'd like, even on his turn.
No. While you can speak as a free action when it is not your turn, the rules don't say that you can interrupt an action to do this. The rules for readying actions clearly state that you interrupt another character, the rules for immediate actions and speaking do not.
contingency: apparently comment about contingency must have been overlooked. simply make the condition for activation a word ("oh poop!" as suggested earlier, has a nice ring to it), then say that word as a free action(speaking is a free action that can be done at any time) to activate, whenever. since the barb isnt stealthy, its no problem at all to activate contingency whenever you'd like, even on his turn.No. While you can speak as a free action when it is not your turn, the rules don't say that you can interrupt an action to do this. The rules for readying actions clearly state that you interrupt another character, the rules for immediate actions and speaking do not.
ah! very true. hmmmm.
what if the condition was "when i become aware of an impending attack." since being aware of someone is an instantaneous and continuous effect (perception checks are made instantaneously , the moment conditions arise that would make it possible to detect something, e.g. stealth vs perception), and the barbarian is not stealthy. the moment he enters the visual range of the wizard "pop," right?if that doesnt work, you could definitely make it "when i cast feather fall," which IS an immediate action that allows you to interrupt.
what if the condition was "when i become aware of an impending attack."
That could work AFAIK, but you'd still need to put a lot of exceptions in for what constitutes an attack and not (mosquito syndrome). Still, it only allows you to escape - you've not beaten AM yet.
There's a problem with that last statement, Gavin. Bear in mind the way damage works in pathfinder. There is no way for the spell to predict how much damage is going to be dealt until it is dealt. That guy could be holding back and opting to purposely deal 1 damage, or he could be going all out.
The only way for the spell to know how much damage would be dealt is for the damage to be rolled and dealt. Once the damage is rolled and resistances are included, it has already been dealt. Until that point, it's impossible to know.
Once the point at which you know how much damage you've taken has occurred, the damage has been dealt. Thus, your contingency would try to activate.
But, consider your wording.... 'Just before I take the damage.' By the time the spell knows that you've taken enough damage to activate it, it's
*Slams hand on desk and points. Dramatically.*
Your wording is therefore creating a paradox! The spell has to know the amount of damage you would take, which it can't know until after you take it! The only way this would be possible is if the spell can time travel!
Do you expect us to believe a fifth level spell can time travel, Gavin?
Wait... what?
So its like no difference if the bullet is just heading to barely strafing your arm or directly going for your head.
By looking at where it is going to hit (the vector of the movement) plus the kinetic energy (movement speed plus mass) [this is emulated by a to hit roll and a dmg roll] you can pretty much analyze the damage something is going to deal (in case you know your own position, which you do).
And since its happening IMMEDIATLY (this is unrealistic, but well its D&D) it can wait until the tip of that spear is like 10^-09 meters in front of you and then teleport you to safety if it looks like its going to deal as much damage as predicted(so the spell sees that lance coming moving at an incredible speed at some "vital" parts of the caster and decides to teleport him to safety)..
By the wording of contingency a simple "deals damage x" is not going to be a too complex issue. Its not layered "if then and also if then then then" and pretty straight forward. Plus you are aware of the thing happening and thus the spell is, too.
I always set the awareness of the person the spell is on as the "measurement" whether the spell detects it or not. Per RAW it does have no limits on what it can detect and that is b+~~+!#s... (as saying as soon as somebody invisible is within 200 foot which I don't detect... yet *cast see invisibility)