|
|
Post by achinca on Apr 2, 2009 14:04:42 GMT 1
Puff, if people are like me and easily confused, we could go back to right after the surprise attack and start the repost from here. Cal or She-elf can clean up the posting if needed.
Just a thought.
You are the DM, you are ALWAYS right and I agree with whatever decision you make.
|
|
|
|
Post by nodaisho on Apr 4, 2009 4:27:20 GMT 1
So, I noticed something when reading the improved trip feat. If you successfully trip someone, you get a free attack as if you hadn't just made that trip attack. Not as a free action, it doesn't list the action needed, it sounds most like an immediate action. This seems like it could get a bit abusive with Barrend. Attack them, do more than 10 damage, trip them, attack them again, while they are down. Not as abusive as a wizard or cleric will get as they level up, but for now, pretty powerful (hypothetically 9 attacks per round, including AoOs). I'm figuring that I just won't make the additional attacks when I am using the knock-down trip attempt, at least for now. Any input on this? This does seem to make knock-down less valuable, as it is now only really useful for enemies that I am not likely to knock down, but probably can't knock me over either.
Alternately, I could just take improved bull rush and make the first giant dwarven golfer. Hit 'em, knock 'em down, send 'em flying with a bull rush. FORE!
|
|
|
|
Post by Caledonian Achilles on Apr 4, 2009 12:18:00 GMT 1
in 4th edition, when you get a bonus attack, quite often you have to do a "melee basic attack" only and not something exotic such as a class power.
i've always assumed that improved trip allows you to try and trip someone up THEN make an attack on them with the advantage that they are now prone when you make the damaging attack.
i'm not sure as DM if i'd allow this extra attack to be a disarm, trip or bull's rush, ect
|
|
|
|
Post by She-Elf on Apr 4, 2009 12:44:19 GMT 1
Hi,
Just so you all know, Wildfox and myself are going on holiday for about 2 weeks from tomorrow. We should have internet access but posting will most probably be somewhat sporadic, so don't feel you have to wait for me to keep things moving. You have my permission to roleplay Taliea if you want to speed the game up.
I'll be back in the country on the 17th April.
Bye!! o/
She-Elf
|
|
|
|
Post by Caledonian Achilles on Apr 4, 2009 13:04:49 GMT 1
on that note, Puff if you are going to be away, maybe you would like to make an OOC post of your absence?
|
|
|
|
Post by nodaisho on Apr 4, 2009 22:14:44 GMT 1
Oh, the bull rush idea wasn't really serious, it was a mostly SRD version of a suggestion someone else had, of using the knock-back feat, which is like knock-down, but bull rush instead of trip. I just liked the image of a giant dwarf using a guisarme as a golf club and sending orcs flying.
What do you think of the thing I brought up with standard attack triggering a trip triggering another attack? It wouldn't be reliable, as it requires a successful trip, but given that I am currently doing 2d6+14 damage pretty regularly, I don't want to use it if it means I'll be outdoing everyone else. The damage outdoes the damage a wizard does on a single target at this level, but doesn't have the range a wizard does, or the area effect. I think it might be a lot more powerful than the average non-magical character, but not more powerful than a magical character gets at high levels, when they get "greater screw with reality".
And Cal, is that praise for 4th ed? I thought you didn't like it?
|
|
|
|
Post by Caledonian Achilles on Apr 5, 2009 14:55:09 GMT 1
I'm not sure i'm up to speed on this debate but i'd be happy to ponder it as a fellow player  i think 4th ed provides a gaming quick fix, but as a 4th ed DM i find i can't give my players as many non-combat choices as i used to without spending a week devising a fiendishly complicated skill challenge. "filler material" is crudely hacked away from all adventures and it plays from encounter to encounter. even non-combat encounters are dealt with by a succession of skill rolls. however it does pander to people who like to roll damage dice (which is almost everybody) 4th ed also makes PbP easier and fairer so that rules junkies like myself dont have an advantage from learning all the idiosyncracies of unusual combat manoeuvres. |
|
|
|
Post by achinca on Apr 6, 2009 14:51:06 GMT 1
Cal, move away from the dark light and slowly move back to the light side. We are here for you my friend. Don't go to that scary place called 4.0,
|
|
|
|
Post by nodaisho on Apr 6, 2009 16:19:21 GMT 1
Cal, with regards to your edit of my post, it specifies here: www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/combatModifiers.htm (search for spread) that spread effects negate the reflex bonus to cover. Is there some other rule you are thinking of that adds a bonus? |
|
|
|
Post by Caledonian Achilles on Apr 6, 2009 18:59:01 GMT 1
The rules here mean that if you are around a room or corridor corner and someone casts a fireball then the flames sweep past the corner. However, an aperture provides much more cover than this. There'll be something in the FAQ but corners means corners and not an apeture like a window or door. There are pictures in the DMG that explains all this somewhere near the front of the book. i'll dig it out if i can find it
|
|
|
|
Post by nodaisho on Apr 16, 2009 6:31:17 GMT 1
Puff, I really don't understand your logic behind my action. I say that Barrend charges him, in the OOC section I say charge attack, and why on earth would I suddenly charge into a fight only to stop and stare at the daisies?
Also, I'm only seeing one AoO there, despite having three. I should have been able to trip every single one of them. Unless they have some 10-foot step ability. I didn't specifically say that I had three, but like you said, I have seven rolls there, am I going to have to save a template as a word file for each of my posts, so I don't forget any details of what Barrend can do?
|
|
|
|
Post by puffthemagicdragon on Apr 16, 2009 14:36:57 GMT 1
Yeah, I'm sorry I suck as a DM!!
Don't worry all, this game will be over very soon, and I'll be done DMing
Noda, next round I'll have each guy stand and wait til you make a trip attempt and then I suspect an attack, then come around to the next guy and make a trip attempt and probably yet another attack and then a third trip attempt and yet another attack.
I'm sorry, but I have a problem when three guys attack you and you make a trip attempt and then an attack on the first , you think the other two guys are just gonna stand there and wait for you to finish, thus giving you a chance to trip them. These guys are experienced warriors also, maybe I should think of Bruce Lee's old movies and have one or two guys attack and the other thirty just stand there, so that way only one or two attack at a time.
|
|
|
|
Post by achinca on Apr 16, 2009 17:47:12 GMT 1
Puff, you do not suck as a DM. And when all 6 of us have DM it will be your turn again~
|
|
|
|
Post by nodaisho on Apr 17, 2009 6:07:54 GMT 1
I think I may have overreacted a bit, I felt like you had intentionally screwed with my post, possibly to make the fight harder. I didn't take enough time to cool down before posting. Puff, you don't suck as a DM, but there are problems when you play too loose with the rules, especially if you don't bother to tell anyone about it beforehand. In a tabletop game, it might work, because then the person gets to do something different (even though they might be angry if their plan or entire character is based around it), but we have seen how slowed down PbP games can get.
Barrend has combat reflexes, which allows him to make more than one AoO a round. In this case, his dexterity while enlarged allows three per round, which just happens to match the amount of attackers perfectly. It means he is that good, he is that fast, he can do what Bruce Lee would actually be doing if the cameras and the other stuntmen didn't have trouble keeping up. I note you have no problem suspending your disbelief about people being able to produce fire from nowhere. By arbitrarily enforcing realism on some situations and not others, you are robbing those people that don't use "magic" of their abilities.
|
|
|
|
Post by Caledonian Achilles on Apr 22, 2009 13:58:47 GMT 1
I dont think you are over-reacting noda
I do think it was over-ambitious to ask Puff to DM a mid-level game for his first time behind the virtual DM screen.
It's not easy being a referee in what can be complex combat situations without the wealth of experience and knowledge some of us have.
The stress is getting to everyone and seems to be spilling in to other games too.
Therefore i think i am going to STOP puff's game now while he is ahead.
Things that went well;
I enjoyed Puff's enthusiasm and zeal
I liked his incredible way of setting a scene and helping the players immerse themselves in the story
The NPCs had very strong characterisation allowing us all to relate to them in our own ways
Things that could be better;
The plot became a little hazy, it started out as an adventure of exploration. We found evil critters to slay but then for some reason we are trying to slay humans who haven't done anything to us other than outsmart us to the treasure. it made it hard for good-aligned characters to find a motive for the fight.
the DM role is referee and not as adversary to the players. there were situations that blatantly looked like the DM was squarely against the players and the players had to argue to be allowed a fair judgement.
some of the house rules were unusual. house rules are great if they enhance instead of hinder game play.
I hope Puff will DM again but i would advise keeping your sights set on attainable goals. a level 1 evil campaign would be great - we all have to start small and work our way up.
|
|
