So if I charge, I can also do stealth. That would be awesome for rogues.You can't use the standard action to cast and at the same time use stealth just as you can't use the standard action to attack and use stealth.According to the rules, if teleporting is moving then yes I can.
You can't Stealth if you attack, run, or charge. Arcane Knowledge may have missed this in the Stealth skill description.
|
But what you are glossing over is that being invisible doesn't preclude you from being detected by rule. In fact the rule says if you are within 30 feet of a player and "active" it is just a DC 20 perception check.
You seem to be trying to argue that teleporting into a space isn't being "active". I don't even need to reach the threshold of movement, just activity.
Exact quote is "A creature can generally notice the presence of an active invisible creature within 30 feet with a DC 20 Perception check."
If you are entering a space, you are active. If you active and a creature can "generally notice" your presence why would you not get a check?
Concealment isn't the issue. I don't need to see you as the rule states what is occurring is that "The observer gains a hunch that “something's there” but can't see it or target it accurately with an attack."
So if you are active in an area within 30 feet, they get a check. I don't think you can reasonably argue that teleporting into an area isn't being active in the area.
|
|
You can't Stealth if you attack, run, or charge. Arcane Knowledge may have missed this in the Stealth skill description.So if I charge, I can also do stealth. That would be awesome for rogues.You can't use the standard action to cast and at the same time use stealth just as you can't use the standard action to attack and use stealth.According to the rules, if teleporting is moving then yes I can.
Are you arguing you can do it as part of casting a spell?
Most likely moving through space, as opposed to removing yourself from space and then replacing you in space. It's an instantaneous spell. There is no delay in time. You are simply there and not elsewhere. It's not that you're moving very fast, you are just there. It's magic.
You are moving very fast, through the Astral Plane, not the Prime Material Plane. Your point still stands, "it's magic" is good enough for me. Personally, I think this whole thing has not really moved the conversation forward at all.You displace air, but unless someone can see or feel the air move it's irrelevant. 30 feet away, I would be surprised if someone without special senses can do that. If anyone challenges the notion, have your friend stand 30 feet away and wave his arms really fast. See if you can see or feel the air move. Someone popping into the Prime Material Plane and standing still is probably not going to move the air nearly as much. It's just gas. So again, I agree with you: "it's magic."
Can we move the discussion past this?
I am late to this thread. Can somebody explain (or point out) what teleportation and stealth have to do with monks and the hate some peole have fot them?
Probably not. Sorry.
But what you are glossing over is that being invisible doesn't preclude you from being detected by rule. In fact the rule says if you are within 30 feet of a player and "active" it is just a DC 20 perception check.
You seem to be trying to argue that teleporting into a space isn't being "active". I don't even need to reach the threshold of movement, just activity.
Exact quote is "A creature can generally notice the presence of an active invisible creature within 30 feet with a DC 20 Perception check."
If you are entering a space, you are active. If you active and a creature can "generally notice" your presence why would you not get a check?
Concealment isn't the issue. I don't need to see you as the rule states what is occurring is that "The observer gains a hunch that “something's there” but can't see it or target it accurately with an attack."
So if you are active in an area within 30 feet, they get a check. I don't think you can reasonably argue that teleporting into an area isn't being active in the area.
So what's the definition of active? It's not a game term. So we default to the definition of the word, which leads us to action. Now by the rules of the game, the action of casting teleport was completed prior to the spell occuring. The Ghaele is no longer acting. The ghaele is then transported by the spell. The ghaele is now in a new space taking and making no actions. She still has a move action left to take, but is currently by definition inactive.
Are you arguing you can do it as part of casting a spell?
Doesn't have to. If teleportation is considered movement, then she does so without an action and as part of that movement.
Although using this line of logic makes the monk much better, since I can now apparently abundant step directly in front of the BBEG and then duck stealth behind a bush.
Correct?
Do you have concealment as part of the teleport, or after the teleport? If you're invisible, sure. Your monk can DD-Stealth all day long. Same if you're monk is in a pitch dark room with folks that can only see in light. I have no problem with either scenario. Not having cover/concealment while teleporting creates a problem.
EDIT: If you use a cloak of the mountebank to DD-somewhere as say a rogue, that would work too. Might be kind of useful for getting into the killzone of a big monster (something rogues have a rough time doing sometimes).
I wouldn't suggest this, the Cloak creates a big poof of smoke when he vanishes and re-appears. Kinda defeats the purpose of an inconspicuous infiltration. :P
|
|
Most likely moving through space, as opposed to removing yourself from space and then replacing you in space. It's an instantaneous spell. There is no delay in time. You are simply there and not elsewhere. It's not that you're moving very fast, you are just there. It's magic.
You are moving very fast, through the Astral Plane, not the Prime Material Plane. Your point still stands, "it's magic" is good enough for me. Personally, I think this whole thing has not really moved the conversation forward at all.You displace air, but unless someone can see or feel the air move it's irrelevant. 30 feet away, I would be surprised if someone without special senses can do that. If anyone challenges the notion, have your friend stand 30 feet away and wave his arms really fast. See if you can see or feel the air move. Someone popping into the Prime Material Plane and standing still is probably not going to move the air nearly as much. It's just gas. So again, I agree with you: "it's magic."
Can we move the discussion past this?
The question is if that makes you active. A 5 foot step 30 feet away isn't that detectable, but it would make you detectable for the purpose of the rule.
As to moving this along, this was not the scenario I proposed, but if it is on the table, it is on the table until something else is put up.
I wouldn't suggest this, the Cloak creates a big poof of smoke when he vanishes and re-appears. Kinda defeats the purpose of an inconspicuous infiltration. :PAlthough using this line of logic makes the monk much better, since I can now apparently abundant step directly in front of the BBEG and then duck stealth behind a bush.
Correct?
Do you have concealment as part of the teleport, or after the teleport? If you're invisible, sure. Your monk can DD-Stealth all day long. Same if you're monk is in a pitch dark room with folks that can only see in light. I have no problem with either scenario. Not having cover/concealment while teleporting creates a problem.
EDIT: If you use a cloak of the mountebank to DD-somewhere as say a rogue, that would work too. Might be kind of useful for getting into the killzone of a big monster (something rogues have a rough time doing sometimes).
Oh yeah. I forgot about the poofiness of that cloak. Good catch. Sucks for the rogue again. XD
Most likely moving through space, as opposed to removing yourself from space and then replacing you in space. It's an instantaneous spell. There is no delay in time. You are simply there and not elsewhere. It's not that you're moving very fast, you are just there. It's magic.You are moving very fast, through the Astral Plane, not the Prime Material Plane. Your point still stands, "it's magic" is good enough for me. Personally, I think this whole thing has not really moved the conversation forward at all.
You displace air, but unless someone can see or feel the air move it's irrelevant. 30 feet away, I would be surprised if someone without special senses can do that. If anyone challenges the notion, have your friend stand 30 feet away and wave his arms really fast. See if you can see or feel the air move. Someone popping into the Prime Material Plane and standing still is probably not going to move the air nearly as much. It's just gas. So again, I agree with you: "it's magic."
Can we move the discussion past this?
I would be willing to do so, yes. Sorry I didn't notice your post sooner, Bob. Welcome to the party. ^-^
|
|
So what's the definition of active? It's not a game term. So we default to the definition of the word, which leads us to action. Now by the rules of the game, the action of casting teleport was completed prior to the spell occuring. The Ghaele is no longer acting. The ghaele is then transported by the spell. The ghaele is now in a new space taking and making no actions. She still has a move action left to take, but is currently by definition inactive.
Are you arguing you can do it as part of casting a spell?Doesn't have to. If teleportation is considered movement, then she does so without an action and as part of that movement.
You are arguing that while doing the standard action of a spell you can also be attempting stealth.
Are you seriously making this argument?
As to active, you are arguing, to use your words that "moving the ghaele" is not "active".
Is that correct? Are those your positions?
The question is if that makes you active. A 5 foot step 30 feet away isn't that detectable, but it would make you detectable for the purpose of the rule.
As to moving this along, this was not the scenario I proposed, but if it is on the table, it is on the table until something else is put up.
Standing there doesn't make you any more active than if you were casting a stilled and silent spell while invisible. If you aren't moving, then you get a +20 on your check. So if you teleport to within 30 feet, but don't move, then the DC is 40 to notice you are there. If you teleport to within 30 feet but either take a 5-foot step or use your movement to move, then the DC is 20 (5-foot step), 15 (half speed), or 10 (full speed). You get +20 if you are also making a Stealth check.
|
|
:(I am late to this thread. Can somebody explain (or point out) what teleportation and stealth have to do with monks and the hate some peole have fot them?Probably not. Sorry.
Wraithstrike and I made a Barbarian and a Monk build a couple hundred posts back, as I wanted to refute the claim that the monk was clearly inferior.
The proposed format was to have people look at the builds (as well as any other builds people would like to create) and then answer the question of which one you would want to add to a party of the Iconics at the same level.
Then for some reason an Azata appeared for solo combat. Tels tried valiantly to bring it back to the combat with the iconics, but now we seem to be learning that you can attempt stealth while casting and that teleporting into an area isn't something that makes that player "active".
Yeah...
You are arguing that while doing the standard action of a spell you can also be attempting stealth.
Nope, I'm telling you that Stealth is not an action and is done as part of movement. The standard action completes. It ends. Then the teleportation occurs (as well as your Stealth).
Are you seriously making this argument?
As to active, you are arguing, to use your words that "moving the ghaele" is not "active".
Is that correct? Are those your positions?
The rule says "active creature". The creature is not active. By definition it is not taking actions and isn't actually doing anything. So yeah, that's the position I suppose. I'll break it down to you.
1: Begins casting a spell (standard action).
2: Complete casting a spell (standard action resolves).
3: Ghaele is transported to the area (not an action, but movement, so Stealth check).
4: Ghaele is now within 30 ft. of the folks but is inactive. Not taking any actions. There are no active creatures around.
|
|
Standing there doesn't make you any more active than if you were casting a stilled and silent spell while invisible. If you aren't moving, then you get a +20 on your check. So if you teleport to within 30 feet, but don't move, then the DC is 40 to notice you are there. If you teleport to within 30 feet but either take a 5-foot step or use your movement to move, then the DC is 20 (5-foot step), 15 (half speed), or 10 (full speed).The question is if that makes you active. A 5 foot step 30 feet away isn't that detectable, but it would make you detectable for the purpose of the rule.
As to moving this along, this was not the scenario I proposed, but if it is on the table, it is on the table until something else is put up.
The next round maybe you are standing there. The round you teleport into a space you moved into the space, so you aren't just standing there.
|
|
You are arguing that while doing the standard action of a spell you can also be attempting stealth.Nope, I'm telling you that Stealth is not an action and is done as part of movement. The standard action completes. It ends. Then the teleportation occurs (as well as your Stealth).
Are you seriously making this argument?
As to active, you are arguing, to use your words that "moving the ghaele" is not "active".
Is that correct? Are those your positions?
The rule says "active creature". The creature is not active. By definition it is not taking actions and isn't actually doing anything. So yeah, that's the position I suppose. I'll break it down to you.
1: Begins casting a spell (standard action).
2: Complete casting a spell (standard action resolves).
3: Ghaele is transported to the area (not an action, but movement, so Stealth check).
4: Ghaele is now within 30 ft. of the folks but is inactive. Not taking any actions. There are no active creatures around.
You just made a stealth check as a free action then?
I'm not really sure why I'm posting. I don't really have a dog in this fight. I like monks and I think they work fine even though they can probably use a little bit of a boost. They aren't unplayable but they do take some work to play well. They can't be played simply going toe to toe with the enemy like a barbarian.
You just made a stealth check as a free action then?You are arguing that while doing the standard action of a spell you can also be attempting stealth.Nope, I'm telling you that Stealth is not an action and is done as part of movement. The standard action completes. It ends. Then the teleportation occurs (as well as your Stealth).
Are you seriously making this argument?
As to active, you are arguing, to use your words that "moving the ghaele" is not "active".
Is that correct? Are those your positions?
The rule says "active creature". The creature is not active. By definition it is not taking actions and isn't actually doing anything. So yeah, that's the position I suppose. I'll break it down to you.
1: Begins casting a spell (standard action).
2: Complete casting a spell (standard action resolves).
3: Ghaele is transported to the area (not an action, but movement, so Stealth check).
4: Ghaele is now within 30 ft. of the folks but is inactive. Not taking any actions. There are no active creatures around.
As no action, in fact.
|
|
I'm not really sure why I'm posting. I don't really have a dog in this fight. I like monks and I think they work fine even though they can probably use a little bit of a boost. They aren't unplayable but they do take some work to play well. They can't be played simply going toe to toe with the enemy like a barbarian.
I may have been unclear. It isn't a PvP situation. It is "Hey, we are the 4 iconics and we are recruiting, which one would be the best addition to our motley crew for adventures going forward!"
The intention was specifically not to have this be PvP or PvBBEG.
Then a wild Azata appeared...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
:(I am late to this thread. Can somebody explain (or point out) what teleportation and stealth have to do with monks and the hate some peole have fot them?Probably not. Sorry.
Well, as for what this has to do with the thread. Largely nothing.
It's widely regarded by most of the Pathfinder players and developers, that the Monk is a brokenly-weak class. It is, at best, survivable.
Ciretose is wishing to challenge this claiming saying the Monk can be just as useful, if not more so, than any of the other more martial classes in Pathfinder.
Ashiel tossed up the Ghaele as an example of a monster after Ciretose asked for a more specific example of an outsider.
Ciretose claimed that the example that Ashiel posted was invalid as he was purposefully putting the Ghaele in the least optimal method of attacking, and that the method he used favored the Barbarian.
I then began arguing a lot with him on the subject of Ashiel. A lot.
Then I pointed out some of the more obvious tactics one could used based solely on the 'standard' Ghaele as presented in the bestairy.
In my opinion, since I pointed out all the tactics possible for an APL 13 party against a CR 13 Ghaele, I concluded that, unless properly prepared, or unless played stupidly, a Ghaele is likely to force a party to retreat. Largely due to the fact the Ghaele has infinite healing, infinite dispel, at-will Greater Teleport and at-will Greater Invisibility.
In essence, the Ghaele can hit hard, hit fast, and get away to patch her wounds, before returning, and there is little the party can actually do. If they Dimensionall Anchor her, she can turn incoporeal and sink into the ground to dispel the Anchor, before resuming her Teleport fighting.
Ciretose, as far as I can tell, is trying to salvage the fight against the Ghaele, even as a party, to make his Monk look good. We've already pointed out that neither the Barbarian nor the Monk fare well against the Ghaele, but that the Barbarian lasted longer and did more damage. Even a full party would find the Ghaele a tough encounter unless they could consistently prevent it from escaping, which is neigh impossible to do.
Funnily enough, the Ghaele would be easier to kill if we pulled advice from Ashiel's Guide to Adventure Preparation and someone had purchased a +1 Ghost Touch Net to stop the Ghaele from going incorporeal and sinking into the ground.
At least, that's my interpretation of events so far.
Then a wild Azata appeared...
Specifically because Ciretose asked, I might add. :P
Funnily enough, the Ghaele would be easier to kill if we pulled advice from Ashiel's Guide to Adventure Preparation and someone had purchased a +1 Ghost Touch Net to stop the Ghaele from going incorporeal and sinking into the ground.
There's a reason we keep those around. This is a good example. :3
EDIT: Actually, and this might be a b$%$@ move at this point, but a +1 ghost touch mancatcher would be epic for screwing up the ghaele's day. A barbarian has a goofy high CMB and CMD, and that can prevent the Ghaele from getting off a teleport and prevent him from moving around; and it's a reach weapon; and it stacks with his rage power that gives him +13 to CMB.
|
|
Tels, why do you keep doing that? Every time I start to like you, you go off on the "People are saying" thing...
You are better than that. As I said before, if it is so obvious link to a build or two.
So on the off topic, somewhere back there are builds, everyone is welcome to make more, I have no idea what was concluded about the Azata other than apparently you can move and be inactive and cast spells while also attempting stealth.
Good times, I need sleep.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Tels, why do you keep doing that? Every time I start to like you, you go off on the "People are saying" thing...
You are better than that. As I said before, if it is so obvious link to a build or two.
So on the off topic, somewhere back there are builds, everyone is welcome to make more, I have no idea what was concluded about the Azata other than apparently you can move and be inactive and cast spells while also attempting stealth.
Good times, I need sleep.
Really? Do you not pay attention to the threads at all? Every week we average at least 5 threads decrying the Monk as being weak. We even have a Developer publicly posting that the Monk is a 'weak class' and needs to be fixed to be brought up into the realm of the other classes. There is so much proof floating around it's ridiculous for you to keep telling me I have to prove the Monk is weak, when it's already been proven. Do I have to prove Gravity exists just because everyone says so? No, gravity exists, it's already been proven, I don't have to prove it again.
Here we go, I went and go this just for you, Ciretose.
You are mistaken as to who is responsible for "every negative change" to the monks since they came out.
I am not functioning alone. The design team works together on these things. And before it goes to print, Jason reads all the rules content as a last-minute check.
How brass knuckles interact with monk attacks was a decision the design team reached after discussing it.
Monk vows were a decision the design team reached after discussing it. (Mind you, in the design turnover for the vow, the benefit was you got +1 ki for every 5 monk levels. So it's not like I took what was presented and nerfed it, I felt it needed more of a boost than as it was originally written. Clearly most people think it deserved more, but don't paint this situation like I did this to punish anyone or that I hate monks or vows.)
The wording for flurry of blows in the Core Rulebook was written by Jason (and as that TWF reference isn't in the Beta, it was probably added very late in the design process for the Core Rulebook). At the time, Jason felt his intent was clear. The blog preview for PFRPG monks shows flurry-as-TWF was his intent. "Sean's ruling" on how flurry works isn't my personal belief (derived independently with no input from Jason) of how the rule should work, it's the result of me checking and re-checking with Jason about it over the course of the boards discussion to make sure I understand what he meant by the text in the Core Rulebook.
As it turns out, the rules for the monk flurry aren't clear. I got it wrong when answering an earlier FAQ (perhaps I didn't explain myself well enough to Jason when addressing that FAQ issue, perhaps Jason misrembered that he changed how flurry works in PF). Other people on staff got it wrong when they built or developed stat blocks. Freelancers got it wrong when they wrote archetypes for the monk. Like much of the rules text in the Core Rulebook, the flurry text could really benefit from being rewritten and reworded. The design team hasn't decided what to do about that yet, but that doesn't change that Jason intended it to work like TWF. This isn't "Sean's ruling," this is "how Jason the designer wanted it to work."
It's really easy to make me the point man for your outrage and rude comments because I'm the guy who's always answering FAQ questions. And it's easy to want to "go ask mom" if you don't like the rule answer from "dad." But that's not how it works. If you don't like my answer, you can't ask Jason to override me... because what we say in the FAQ is the result of a discussion and consensus with the other designers, regardless of whose name (mine, Jason's, Stephen's) is attached to that specific FAQ. It's fine to disagree with a FAQ, or say you won't do it that way in your campaign, or ask for the design team to reconsider a FAQ decision, but you can't single out me or Stephen or Jason and say "that guy is wrong, I want another designer to correct them." That just makes you look foolish.
Yes, ProfessorCirno, your information is wrong about me designing the gunslinger. I have no idea where you got the idea that I had anything to do with the design of that class. Maybe you should think about what other information you think is true is actually wrong. And that goes for everyone in this flurry meta-topic. I've been reading all of this, and I can't help but laugh at some of the ridiculous and provably false things some people are quoting as the truth. One really good example is "Jason couldn't have meant flurry to work like TWF, that would make the sohei invalid, and Jason designed the sohei, and he wouldn't have designed the sohei that way if he meant flurry to work like TWF." Except that Jason didn't design the sohei (at least, Jason Bulmahn didn't... it was designed by freelancer Jason Nelson). You guys don't know who designed which parts, or who developed which parts, or what discussion led to a particular choice of wording. Talking as if you do know really puts you on shaky ground.
Does the brass knuckles ruling hurt the monk? Only in the sense that the monk is a weak class and needs to be fixed at its root, not patched with a weapon choice that would become the default weapon for monks if you don't want your monk PC to suck.
Does the vow of poverty hurt the monk? Only in the sense that the monk is a weak class and needs to be fixed at its root, not patched with a two-paragraph option for gearless monks that doesn't address the greater campaign issues of wealth by level, wealth in a party, and so on.
Does the flurry-as-TWF rule hurt the monk? Well, it certainly doesn't help that it breaks or forces weird interpretations of certain archetypes, and is written in a confusing way that led to unclear interpretations by most people who read it.
I don't want the monk merely patched, I want it fixed. I agree that it's hard to play an effective monk, the monk rules are convoluted, and it's expensive in terms of magic item and ability score needs. But I don't know that the monk can be sufficiently fixed without requiring significantly more explanatory text in the Core Rulebook--which we can't add without messing up the layout for pages and pages, which we can't do because we have that book and other books referring to things in the Core Rulebook by specific page number. I--and the other designers--don't want to just slap a bandage on it and call it good; this is a significant concern, just like the stealth rules, and deserves careful consideration.
My much-earlier point from the other thread still stands: I go out of my way to engage with people on the boards, discuss rules, and figure out what people want in the FAQ. When Jason and I discuss something in the rules, if I disagree with his ruling (for example, I think the trip weapon property is really weak), I'm not afraid to (1) explain the official ruling, and (2) admit that I disagree with that ruling. Yet too many people here think that I'm some kind of FAQ-lackey, making rulings without talking it over with other members of the staff, and think it's okay to be rude to me or go "over my head" when they disagree with the official ruling from the design team. I got tired of that attitude. And I stopped posting answers to rules, and stopped posting FAQs, because I didn't want to deal with it any more (which is sad, because I actually like answering rules questions). Because I'm not required to deal with rudeness and personal attacks, I won't do it.
And since I stopped posting rules clarifications and FAQs, there have been zero new FAQs posted.
Take that as you will.
I also decided to bold some relevant parts for you to read at your leisure.
Why is the creature getting within 30 feet with a teleport anyway? It has a movement rate of 50 or 150. Why teleport closer than you need to?
Why is the creature getting within 30 feet with a teleport anyway? It has a movement rate of 50 or 150. Why teleport closer than you need to?
It has a movement of 50 ft in Humanoid form, or 150 ft in Light Form.
The idea was to neutralize whichever character is, physically, the weakest. I chose the wizard as the most likely in a party of Cleric, Rogue, Fighter, Wizard and either Barbarian or Monk. The Ghaele would Teleport in close to the Wizard, make a full attack on the next round, which likely drops or kills the Wizard. If the Wizard isn't dead, the Cleric will have to spend some actions getting the Wizard back up on it's feat. In the mean time, the Ghaele could Teleport away, and transform into a Light Cloud and start shooting her Light Rays (lazers) at whomever is range. Without fear of the Wizard of Cleric interfering.
The Chaotic Creature is trying to make as much Chaos as possible in the Party dynamic to skew the odds in her favor. If they worked together as a well organized team, the fight becomes significantly harder, if they can't formulate a proper method of counter-attack, then the Ghaele is all but assured of victory.
[Edit] This is dependent on the Ghaele staying invisible and largely undetected. If the Wizard has See Invisibility, then the Ghaele has to first dispel it, in order to move freely. I made this big long post on the Ghaele's tactics a while back, and referenced it on a number of occasions since then.
And how the azata full atack teh wizard from 30 ft away?Why is the creature getting within 30 feet with a teleport anyway? It has a movement rate of 50 or 150. Why teleport closer than you need to?It has a movement of 50 ft in Humanoid form, or 150 ft in Light Form.
The idea was to neutralize whichever character is, physically, the weakest. I chose the wizard as the most likely in a party of Cleric, Rogue, Fighter, Wizard and either Barbarian or Monk. The Ghaele would Teleport in close to the Wizard, make a full attack on the next round, which likely drops or kills the Wizard. If the Wizard isn't dead, the Cleric will have to spend some actions getting the Wizard back up on it's feat. In the mean time, the Ghaele could Teleport away, and transform into a Light Cloud and start shooting her Light Rays (lazers) at whomever is range. Without fear of the Wizard of Cleric interfering.
The Chaotic Creature is trying to make as much Chaos as possible in the Party dynamic to skew the odds in her favor. If they worked together as a well organized team, the fight becomes significantly harder, if they can't formulate a proper method of counter-attack, then the Ghaele is all but assured of victory.
I didn't say that. I said the Ghaele Teleports close to the Wizard and full attacks next round. I.E. the Ghaele is physically standing next to the Wizar, Invisible mind you, at the end of the Teleportation and on her next turn, the Ghaele unleashes a full attack to drop the Wizard.
Why is the creature getting within 30 feet with a teleport anyway? It has a movement rate of 50 or 150. Why teleport closer than you need to?It has a movement of 50 ft in Humanoid form, or 150 ft in Light Form.
The idea was to neutralize whichever character is, physically, the weakest. I chose the wizard as the most likely in a party of Cleric, Rogue, Fighter, Wizard and either Barbarian or Monk. The Ghaele would Teleport in close to the Wizard, make a full attack on the next round, which likely drops or kills the Wizard. If the Wizard isn't dead, the Cleric will have to spend some actions getting the Wizard back up on it's feat. In the mean time, the Ghaele could Teleport away, and transform into a Light Cloud and start shooting her Light Rays (lazers) at whomever is range. Without fear of the Wizard of Cleric interfering.
The Chaotic Creature is trying to make as much Chaos as possible in the Party dynamic to skew the odds in her favor. If they worked together as a well organized team, the fight becomes significantly harder, if they can't formulate a proper method of counter-attack, then the Ghaele is all but assured of victory.
[Edit] This is dependent on the Ghaele staying invisible and largely undetected. If the Wizard has See Invisibility, then the Ghaele has to first dispel it, in order to move freely. I made this big long post on the Ghaele's tactics a while back, and referenced it on a number of occasions since then.
I had forgotten about the tactics you wrote. I was stuck on the ghaele teleporting and fighting the monk. Teleporting next to the wizard or cleric to prevent them from casting is a good idea.
I had forgotten about the tactics you wrote. I was stuck on the ghaele teleporting and fighting the monk. Teleporting next to the wizard or cleric to prevent them from casting is a good idea.Why is the creature getting within 30 feet with a teleport anyway? It has a movement rate of 50 or 150. Why teleport closer than you need to?It has a movement of 50 ft in Humanoid form, or 150 ft in Light Form.
The idea was to neutralize whichever character is, physically, the weakest. I chose the wizard as the most likely in a party of Cleric, Rogue, Fighter, Wizard and either Barbarian or Monk. The Ghaele would Teleport in close to the Wizard, make a full attack on the next round, which likely drops or kills the Wizard. If the Wizard isn't dead, the Cleric will have to spend some actions getting the Wizard back up on it's feat. In the mean time, the Ghaele could Teleport away, and transform into a Light Cloud and start shooting her Light Rays (lazers) at whomever is range. Without fear of the Wizard of Cleric interfering.
The Chaotic Creature is trying to make as much Chaos as possible in the Party dynamic to skew the odds in her favor. If they worked together as a well organized team, the fight becomes significantly harder, if they can't formulate a proper method of counter-attack, then the Ghaele is all but assured of victory.
[Edit] This is dependent on the Ghaele staying invisible and largely undetected. If the Wizard has See Invisibility, then the Ghaele has to first dispel it, in order to move freely. I made this big long post on the Ghaele's tactics a while back, and referenced it on a number of occasions since then.
Yeah, I tried showing how a Party could fare against the Ghaele, but after awhile, I started thinking, "Holy crap! Unless the party is expecting encounters with extraplanar creatures, and prepares for it, the Ghaele is going to murder them. Murder them, take their loot, raise them and murder them again while taking their candy. Why is this a CR 13 creature?"
I had forgotten about the tactics you wrote. I was stuck on the ghaele teleporting and fighting the monk. Teleporting next to the wizard or cleric to prevent them from casting is a good idea.Why is the creature getting within 30 feet with a teleport anyway? It has a movement rate of 50 or 150. Why teleport closer than you need to?It has a movement of 50 ft in Humanoid form, or 150 ft in Light Form.
The idea was to neutralize whichever character is, physically, the weakest. I chose the wizard as the most likely in a party of Cleric, Rogue, Fighter, Wizard and either Barbarian or Monk. The Ghaele would Teleport in close to the Wizard, make a full attack on the next round, which likely drops or kills the Wizard. If the Wizard isn't dead, the Cleric will have to spend some actions getting the Wizard back up on it's feat. In the mean time, the Ghaele could Teleport away, and transform into a Light Cloud and start shooting her Light Rays (lazers) at whomever is range. Without fear of the Wizard of Cleric interfering.
The Chaotic Creature is trying to make as much Chaos as possible in the Party dynamic to skew the odds in her favor. If they worked together as a well organized team, the fight becomes significantly harder, if they can't formulate a proper method of counter-attack, then the Ghaele is all but assured of victory.
[Edit] This is dependent on the Ghaele staying invisible and largely undetected. If the Wizard has See Invisibility, then the Ghaele has to first dispel it, in order to move freely. I made this big long post on the Ghaele's tactics a while back, and referenced it on a number of occasions since then.
Yeah. The breakdown I did of the Ghaele vs Monk and Barbarian was just a quick example of an outsider-gish against both of them. Ironically, he asked for one that gave the barbarian difficulty, and I gave him one that was CR appropriate and the Barbarian still does better. Both loose against it pretty easily in a strait battle. The barbarian is more useful for dealing damage and/or grappling the Ghaele. Sadly, neither of the contenders (monk or barbarian) are particularly prepared for such naughty tactics (Tels pointed out that you can be though).
I will say, that if anything positive came out of this, I have a nuclear deterrent for anyone that wants to run Evil characters.
I'd simply sit them all down, tell them to level their characters up to 14th level, and we're going to run a 'training run'. I will of course, bring a Ghaele and get to play "Avatar of Divine Wrath" for roughly 20 rounds. Then I will point out they lost, or nearly lost, to an encounter that is labeled as 'easy' according to the APL chart.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You are right,I did not read your post well.
As a Dm i would say
If the ghaele is invisible before teleporting, then afther teleporting nobody would notice that unless blindsense and the like or some other special circunstance,like teleporting in the middle of a lake (you know, for the waves). When the ghaele move then I would roll (secretely) perception for every Pcs with the apropiate penalty because the ghaele is invisible.It seems pretty clear to me i still do not understand that discussion. But i do not want to become a nuisance, so there is no need of further explanaition.
You're not a Nuisance at all, I really don't mind explaining things so you understand them. It's what we're here for after all.
Also, I'm kinda hoping we can get this thread to surpass the Flurry of Changes to Flurry of Blows thread. I think it'd be kinda fun.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Good catches on the see invisibility.
Glitterdust still goes out to 230 ft, and so is still viable. If the Ghaele closes and is within 30 ft he is detectable by a DC 20 perception check (which is anything but a 1 for both the monk and the barbarian) meaning anyone who has invisibility purge or glitterdust is using it and suddenly Ghaele with an entire party getting a round of attacks.
Closing on the wizard means coming into range of invisibility purge, and anything within 230 feet is in range of glitter dust.
I think you are being completely on the up and up Tels. Anything with invisibility is a challenge for the monk and barbarian we built because we both failed to adapt for it. Totally a mistake on my part in planning, and I bet wraith would say the same.
It particularly is bad for the monk in this case, as if he could see him he could actually be very useful.
In most games I run the caster has permanent see invisability by this level and always glitterdust. I can't remember the last time we had a well lit open space that large that involved an greater invisible creature with long range attacks.
I did not know see invis was a personal only spell until it pointed out upthread by Tels. I left that much gold left so I could adapt to any encounters that I had to retreat from. I am somewhat at a loss of how to deal with it outside of UMD. I know that in a game I will have casters, but I try to be more independent so they are free to do what they have to do.
Why aren't we using dragons? Let's not avoid something that comes up frequently because of the potential derail. In fact, why aren't we using examples from modules or AP's.
I'm fine with anything published, because I am quite certain that it wasn't made with this in mind.
When I run dragons they own parties. I am sure that a buffed dragon is hard to deal with until the casters debuff it. We then have to decide which spells the casters might have, and I am too lazy to stat out a caster. :)
And then I cited DD and he realized there was no such restriction.Didn't Wraithstrike already point out that you cannot DD into the air? Or are we talking when it's land bound with the sword?In the discussed encounter if the Ghaele can be made visible, only one of the melee classes can get to the Ghaele.
The monk.
Actually I realised that if the monk has a method of flight then it might be possible.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I did not know see invis was a personal only spell until it pointed out upthread by Tels. I left that much gold left so I could adapt to any encounters that I had to retreat from. I am somewhat at a loss of how to deal with it outside of UMD. I know that in a game I will have casters, but I try to be more independent so they are free to do what they have to do.Good catches on the see invisibility.
Glitterdust still goes out to 230 ft, and so is still viable. If the Ghaele closes and is within 30 ft he is detectable by a DC 20 perception check (which is anything but a 1 for both the monk and the barbarian) meaning anyone who has invisibility purge or glitterdust is using it and suddenly Ghaele with an entire party getting a round of attacks.
Closing on the wizard means coming into range of invisibility purge, and anything within 230 feet is in range of glitter dust.
I think you are being completely on the up and up Tels. Anything with invisibility is a challenge for the monk and barbarian we built because we both failed to adapt for it. Totally a mistake on my part in planning, and I bet wraith would say the same.
It particularly is bad for the monk in this case, as if he could see him he could actually be very useful.
In most games I run the caster has permanent see invisability by this level and always glitterdust. I can't remember the last time we had a well lit open space that large that involved an greater invisible creature with long range attacks.
Best bet? +1 Ghost Touch Net + Dimensional Anchor.
If it goes Incorporeal, it can't go through the ground while tangled with the net, nor can it remove the Net without returning to Humanoid form. It can't teleport away while under the effects of Dimensional Anchor. Go full on Nerd Rage and beat the piss out of it while it's trying to escape. This delays the Ghaele from escaping for a couple rounds, which gives time foe the Fighter and Rogue to get in position to beat on the Ghaele while the Wizard casts spells and the Cleric possibly buffs (party or self) debuffs or does other Clerical things.
The key is to restrict it's movement. If you can do that, you win, but if you can't you lose.
You are right,I did not read your post well.
As a Dm i would say
If the ghaele is invisible before teleporting, then afther teleporting nobody would notice that unless blindsense and the like or some other special circunstance,like teleporting in the middle of a lake (you know, for the waves). When the ghaele move then I would roll (secretely) perception for every Pcs with the apropiate penalty because the ghaele is invisible.It seems pretty clear to me i still do not understand that discussion. But i do not want to become a nuisance, so there is no need of further explanaition.
You're not a Nuisance at all, I really don't mind explaining things so you understand them. It's what we're here for after all.
well then, what was the problem? what stealth have to do with all that?
Not really certain what point Ciretose was making, but I'll give it a shot. He was trying to invalidate my posted tactics by saying that the Ghaele can be detected anytime it enters within 30 ft of a player by making a DC 20 Perception check to notice Invisible creatures. If this is true, then the Ghaele becomes a bit easier to deal with, as it will be harder for the Ghaele to teleport in, wait until next round, then full attack the Wizard, as they will notice the Ghaele's presence.
Myself (and others) were arguing that Teleporting while Invisible does not produce any noticeable effect that the PCs can use to detect the Invisible Ghaele. Therefor, they can't stop the Ghaele from full attacking without meta-gaming.
He was also trying to show the Monk is better than the Barbarian against the Ghaele, because he has higher AC, higher saves (debatable), and higher mobility (via Abundant Step).
[Edit] Btw, Ciretose, if you feel I am wrong in guessing at your intentions, feel free to correct me. I can't read your mind, but this is the best guess I had as to what you were attempting with the whole Teleporting + Stealth thing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I tried showing how a Party could fare against the Ghaele, but after awhile, I started thinking, "Holy crap! Unless the party is expecting encounters with extraplanar creatures, and prepares for it, the Ghaele is going to murder them. Murder them, take their loot, raise them and murder them again while taking their candy. Why is this a CR 13 creature?"
Haha, yeah. Honestly the more I think about it the nastier it seems too. Up until this thread, I had mostly just discussed it as a martial creature with Wraithstrike in another thread, where I pointed out that its equipment (it wields a +4 sword afterall) is rather irrelevant (I replaced all instances of its weapon with "masterwork sword" and still rocked faces).
This thread has caused me to learn more about them than I knew initially. Yay for me. :D
I can think of a few good tactics, including protection from chaos and good, and circle spells thereof. Dealing with the invisibility is problematic but do-able if the party prepares for invisible foes (but it can really choose its battles so easily). It can even ambush the party in the darnedest of places (it even has disguise self so it could even be invisible and just seem like something else, or just appear as a random passerby up until it smacks the piss out of you). Dealing with it means needing to deal with sight issues, incorporeality, teleportation, flight, melee power, and spellcasting. It could literally change its entire fighting style round to round. Like switched stances or something. :P
Ghaele: "Prepare to taste the dance of steel!" *whips the snot out of the cleric*
Barbarian: "Grr, I'm Grokkok and I'm going to smash you!"
Ghaele: *parries and dodges* "You can't kill an idea..." *turns incorporeal and drifts into the ground*
Barbarian: "Where'd she go!?"
Ghaele: *rises up out of the ground and blasts the barbarian with laser beams* "Giggle...over here big guy."
Barbarian: *leaps through the air and tries to grapple the Ghaele but passes through her* "Ooph...I prefer things with meat..."
Ranger: "Don't worry, I've got her!" *moves for his bow*
Ghaele: "Oh, you're not the brightest crayon are ya? Just like a little doggy. Sit boy."
Ranger: *fails save vs hold monster* "Ulp..."
Cleric: "It hurts...so much..." *lies at -2*
Ghaele: "Oh you big baby..." *floats into the ground*
Barbarian: "Grrr, where'd she go!?"
Ghaele: *stablizes the cleric from beneath the ground, 'cause she's a good sport.*
Ranger: *sweatdrops and fails another will save, thinking to himself: I should have invested in Iron Will.*
Barbarian: "Pfft, well that invisible little wench isn't going to take me by surprise!!" *picks up axe and readies an action to whack her when she appears, and activates come & get me*
Ghaele: *greater teleports about 275 feet away* "Over here BSB!" *blasts with light rays*
Barbarian: "Ouch, oh, my tender bits! I take it back, I take it back, don't come and get me!"
Ranger: *sweatdrops* C'mon ol' boy, shake yourself out of it. Where's a 12+ when you need it!?
Ghaele: *teleports next to Ranger.* Ho-ho, he'll never see this coming.
Ranger: *An 11!? Dice gods you spite me so!*
Ghaele: *coup de graces with the flat of her blade to deal nonlethal damage since the -4 to hit matters not in this case* "LIGHTS OUT, BIATCH!" *smashes him in the back of the head like she was playing cricket and clobbers him*
Ranger: "Oh save me Jeebus!" *falls down*
Barbarian: "AM MAD!" *ragelancepounce*
Ghaele: "AM DODGEY!" *50% evasion + AC Buffs* Swish goes the miss.
Ghaele: "Come and getcha!" *SMASH FACE*
....
Ghaele: "Now where's the wizard!?"
Wizard: *appears out of no where with a group of 12 6th level copies of himself.* "Alright me! FIRE!!!"
Wizard Simulacrum Swat Team: "Acid Arrow!"
Ghaele: *sizzles from 24d4 acid damage* "Ow, my hair!!" *turns incorporeal and sinks into the ground*
Wizard: "Pfft, that wasn't so hard! Hey guys, wake up! Man, what would you guys do without me?"
Wizard: *falls down* "Urk..."
Ghaele: *appears from behind the wizard, wiping her sword off.* "Didn't think it was over that easily did you? Now how about you fellas? Want some?"
Wizard Simulacrum Swat Team: "Umm...he did it!" *point at each other*
Ghaele: "That's what I thought."
Other tactic, and i hate myself for pointing out that but antagoniza could do the trick.
Don't worry, everyone else hates you for pointing it out too. :P *joking*
i have two doubts if you allow me to continue this interrogation :P
1) how the ghaele full attack if it have to move 30 ft? it sees to me that it needs two rounds two full attack. teleporting and wait + move and wait + full attack.
2) i would say the Pc have the right to notice the ghaele afther it start to move, why not?
Not 30 ft. away, within 30 ft. The ghaele is actually appearing next to the *insert target here* and is going to full-attack on the next round. As for trying to sense her once she begins moving, that's totally fine, but pinpointing her is going to be a pain in the butt (stealth +37 minimum).
Best bet? +1 Ghost Touch Net + Dimensional Anchor.
If it goes Incorporeal, it can't go through the ground while tangled with the net, nor can it remove the Net without returning to Humanoid form. It can't teleport away while under the effects of Dimensional Anchor. Go full on Nerd Rage and beat the piss out of it while it's trying to escape. This delays the Ghaele from escaping for a couple rounds, which gives time foe the Fighter and Rogue to get in position to beat on the Ghaele while the Wizard casts spells and the Cleric possibly buffs (party or self) debuffs or does other Clerical things.
The key is to restrict it's movement. If you can do that, you win, but if you can't you lose.
I'm so glad people are getting usage out of this. ^.^