Class and Level Geekery XII - Even Nerds Call Us Nerds

[Kurald Galain]

Welcome to the latest incarnation of the Class and Level Geekery thread! Here, we are discussing what the possible stats are for each of the six OOTS members. Below is an estimate of the characters' stats; this was first kept by Runolfr, Wrecan, and Chrismith. I will update this post as the discussion continues and as subsequent strips reveal more information about OOTS; RMS Oceanic will update the post with the other characters.

The aim of this thread is that we give D&D statistics for the characters in the comic based on the events and statements made in the comic, plus statements by The Giant in the forum and his books. For this purpose, we assume that the comic strictly follows the 3.5E D&D rules. We are aware that The Giant has stated that he doesn't always follow the rules, because his goal is to write a story and not to write session reports from a D&D campaign. Nevertheless, in this thread we assume the rules are being followed anyway, and see what stats, feats, and skills could explain what happens. Essentially, that means we're taking the rules side of the comic more seriously than its author does; if you like, you can assume a little footnote on every factoid of this thread that says "* or The Giant used a houserule". Why? Well, because it's Geekery. If Star Trek fans can do it, then so can we :smallwink:

Please read the thread rules (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=229756) by Mark Hall.

[Kurald Galain]

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: Which source books are used in the comic?

Player's Handbook 1 and Dungeon Master's Guide 1
Book of Vile Darkness (certain monsters; Boost Spell Resistance feat)
Complete Adventurer (ninjas)
Complete Arcane (warlocks; Tsukiko's and Zz'dtri's spells)
Complete Warrior (hexblade)
Dungeonscape (Thog; the acid-breathing shark; note that The Giant co-wrote this book)
Expanded Psionics Handbook (blue; mindblade)
Fiend Folio (certain monsters)
Magic of Incarnum (mentioned by Redcloak's lackey)
Monster Manual (mentioned by Celia and Vaarsuvius)
Monster Manual 2 (certain monsters)
Oriental Adventures (other samurai class, and mentioned by Xykon)
Spell Compendium (numerous spells that aren't from the PHB1)
uncertain: Epic Level Handbook (a feat and spell from this book are mentioned, but most epic characters or spells in the comic don't follow the rules from this book)


Q: In which comic do the characters demonstrate having leveled?


Level
:roy:
:belkar:
http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g68/Cats_Are_Aliens/Banners/DurkonVampire_zps6711c6b8.png
:elan:
:haley:
:vaarsuvius:


9
12
12
12
12
12
12


10
124
125
124
124
124
124


11
251
???
201
???
???
186


12
???, 665
249
???
???
477
???


13
485, 862
???
556
393
511
397


14
886
???
859
647
???
627


15
936
860
-
860
615
716


16
-
936
-
936
936
935



Q: Which characters are included in this thread?
(1) All named members of the Order, Team Evil, the Linear Guild, the Order of the Scribble, and the Vector Legion.
(2) Any frequently occurring character, as noted in the Character Appearances thread. Note that this includes Samantha: it was easier to be a common character back when the comic was shorter. We don't unlist characters just because they've died.
(3) Family members of the main characters, as long as we have something to write about them.
This means that Daigo and Ian Starshine would be next in line, but we don't have a lot of material on either character.

Q: Which material is covered by this thread?
All comics on the web and in print (including SSDT, Gygax magazine, and the Kickstarter bonus stories), as well as anything written about the comic by The Giant. However, not included are any one-panel joke comics, such as used for incentives, t-shirts, or the fundraiser.
Note that even though the characters have stated they aren't sure whether this is the same continuity, certain items and abilities have been shown to carry over. We're listing all of it here for the sake of convenience, but any material from (e.g.) SSDT is clearly marked as such so that people can distinguish it from the main online comics.

Q: I've heard there was a fight over some topic years ago, and now we're not allowed to discuss it any more. Is that the case?
No; this thread does not have a banned topic list (of course, the forum as a whole has one; please see the board rules for details).

Q: Is a character's statement about another character considered evidence?
Yes. We assume that when a character says something about another character's (or his own) ability scores, build, feats, and so forth, they are speaking the truth, except where this contradicts with other evidence or is clearly not possible within the rules.

Q: If a character makes a special attack like grappling, and his victim does not make an attack of opportunity, can that be evidence of a feat like Improved Grapple?
Yes, assuming the victim is armed, and otherwise capable of making AOOs. It is clear that the rules for attacks of opportunity are used in the comic, and there is no reason to assume that grappling/tripping/sundering is an exception.

Q: If somebody doesn't say the name of a spell while casting it, does that mean he has the Silent Spell feat?
Not necessarily. We know that Vaarsuvius doesn't have that feat, and yet V still occasionally casts spells while talking about something else.

Q: What does "Core" mean?
The three "Core" books in 3E D&D are the Player's Handbook 1 (PHB), Dungeon Master's Guide 1 (DMG), and Monster Manual 1 (MM). This is an official term defined by WOTC, who put the word "Core" in big letters on the cover of these three books. No other books are Core, and there is no such thing as "partially Core", "almost Core", or "semi-Core" - every book is either Core or non-Core. Note that both the OOTS comic and this thread contain numerous non-Core elements.

Q: Does The Giant use house rules?
Probably. But for the purpose of this thread, we assume that the comic doesn't, except where The Giant has explicitly said so, or where some event is clearly not possible by the rules. That is, we try to explain events in the comic within the rules as much as possible, and that means not leaving factoids out of this thread just because The Giant might not have followed the rules there.

Q: A character undertook this heinous/awesome/dutiful/impulsive/meh action. Does that mean they are now evil/good/lawful/chaotic/neutral?
No. As seen in a thousand forum threads, people have different ideas about alignment, and what defines and changes them. The alignments posted here are taken from the character's own mouth, someone else in a position to know their alignment, or their use of a spell/feat/whatever which has an alignment restriction. Kindly refrain from speculating from how a character's action changes their alignment, since it's not really something you can reason out with facts and numbers.

Q: A character undertook this brilliant/moronic/insightful/ignorant/inspiring/repulsive action. Does that mean they now have a high/low intelligence/wisdom/charisma score?
No. Similar to the previous question, people have different ideas about what the mental ability scores represent and how much they influence a character's personality. The ability scores posted here are taken from the character's own mouth, someone else in a position to know their scores, or their use of a spell/feat/whatever which requires a minimum ability score. Kindly refrain from speculating from how a character's personality changes their ability scores, since it's not really something you can reason out with facts and numbers either.

Q: How does Xykon cast Maximized Energy Drain in comic 652?
We don't know for sure. The most popular theories involve the feat Improved Spell Capacity, the feat Sudden Maximize, or a Rod of Metamagic. Each theory has its pros and cons.

Q: What magic item makes Xykon immune to fire damage in comic 653?
We don't know for sure; there are multiple items within RAW that make their user immune to fire, available from level 14. Note that Xykon doesn't specify whether it's an amulet, ring, belt, or other kind of item.

[Kurald Galain]

:roy: Roy Greenhilt
Lawful Good (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0490.html), Human male Fighter (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0285.html) 15 (forum (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=18180388&postcount=1118)).
Str 24+ (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0687.html) (Unmodified strength 20+ (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0004.html)) *)
Dex 13+ (required for Improved Grapple)
Int 14-17 (“very good"*, but V's Int is "higher"*)
Wis 14+ (“very good"*)
Cha 12+ (“decent*), modifier less than Elan's (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0101.html).
Age: 29 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0500.html).
Feats (13): Cleave, Great Cleave, Power Attack (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0102.html), Horace Greenhilt's Mage Slayer (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0886.html), Improved Grapple (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0730.html), Improved Sunder (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0795.html), Improved Unarmed Strike (prerequisite for Improved Grapple), Weapon Focus (greatsword), Weapon Specialization (greatsword) (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0064.html), Endurance (sleeps in armor (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0162.html) without getting fatigued).
Skills (60+): Intimidate (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0001.html), Ride 1 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0141.html), Knowledge (Arcana) (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0326.html), Knowledge (Architecture and Engineering) 2+ (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0808.html), Knowledge (Geography) (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0690.html), Profession (Goatherd) (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0141.html), Spellcraft (OOPC), Bluff 0 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0139.html), Sense Motive 0 (OOPC), Spellcraft (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0183.html).
Items: Magical armor (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0693.html), Bag of Tricks (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0130.html), club (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0151.html), newspaper (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0277.html), heirloom +5 Starmetal Greatsword (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0297.html), formal suit (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0310.html), shillelagh oil (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0443.html), potion of delay poison (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0443.html), boots (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0666.html), bedroll (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0669.html), list of Xykon's spells, feats and magic items (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0670.html), Belt of Giant Strength (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0687.html), book, sextant (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0690.html).
*

:belkar: Belkar Bitterleaf aka Ali S. Fakenamington (KS:US), aka the Belkster, aka Death's Li'l Helper (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0488.html)
Chaotic (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0230.html) Evil (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0489.html), Halfling (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0021.html) male Ranger 11+ / Barbarian (forum), total level 16 (forum (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=18180388&postcount=1118)).
Str 14-17 (jump exceeds movement, forum, and carrying capacity in SSDT).
Dex 13+ (prerequisite for Spring Attack).
Int <10 (OOPC).
Wis <10 (ability score penalty (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0475.html)).
Cha <10 (without any charisma (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0312.html)).
Age: 28+ (ranger for three years, over a year ago (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0001.html)).
Feats (11): Endurance, Greater Two-Weapon Fighting, Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, Track, Two-Weapon Fighting (all ranger bonus feats); Bounding Attack, Craft Disturbing Mental Image (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0249.html), Dodge (prerequisite for Spring Attack), Mobility (prerequisite for Spring Attack), Spring Attack (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0928.html), Two-Weapon Pounce (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0613.html); no feats related to special attacks (SSDT).
Skills (89): Balance 5+ (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0279.html), Climb (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0230.html), Craft: Trapmaking (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0270.html), Handle Animal 0 (NCPB), Hide (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0468.html), Jump (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0019.html), Move Silently 2+ (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0270.html), Profession: gourmet chef 4 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0475.html), Sense Motive 0 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0171.html), Speak language: halfling (racial), Spellcraft (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0221.html), Spot 0 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0119.html), Survival 0 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0213.html), Use Magic Device (SSDT).
Abilities: Halfling racial abilities, ranger and barbarian class abilities, animal companion: Mr. Scruffy (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0682.html), favored enemy: human (forum) (http://www.sequentialtart.com/article.php?id=467) and undead (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0957.html), scent (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0383.html).
Items: Unholy symbol (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0011.html), red chalk (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0038.html), cloak (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0107.html), Ring of Jumping +20 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0130.html), stilts, Sapphire guard disguise (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0294.html), quill (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0357.html), string (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0379.html), chef hat, Mama Bitterleaf's secret ingredient (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0476.html), clothespin (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0526.html), bedroll (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0573.html), 3 small magical daggers (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0611.html) (+4 and +2 (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=16461748&postcount=668), forum), mimic (SSDT), wand of dispel clothing (SSDT), book: Dune (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0690.html), bucket and spade (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0695.html), bag of holding full of money (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0807.html), +5 Dagger of Collision (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0960.html), +3 Vest of Resistance, Clasp of Protection from Evil (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0969.html). Either has dex 15+ or wears light or no armor (to use two-weapon pounce).

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g68/Cats_Are_Aliens/Banners/MrScruffy.png Mr. Scruffy
True Neutral (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=15667889#post15667889) (forum), Cat male, animal companion (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0682.html).
Str 6 (animal companion).
Dex 18 (animal companion).
Con 10 (racial).
Int 2 (racial).
Wis 12 (racial).
Cha 7 (racial).
Age: 7 (WXP).
Feats: Stealthy, Weapon Finesse (racial bonus feats).
Skills: Balance +10, Climb +6, Hide +16, Jump +10, Listen +3, Move Silently +8, Spot +3 (all racial skills).
Abilities: Low-light vision, scent (both racial abilities); natural armor +4, link, share spells, evasion, devotion (all animal companion abilities); 3 tricks, including attack (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0520.html) and come (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0522.html).
Items: String (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0673.html).

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g68/Cats_Are_Aliens/Banners/DurkonVampire_zps6711c6b8.png Durkon Allotrope Thundershield, pseudonym (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0946.html)
Lawful Evil (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0883.html), Dwarf (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0076.html) vampire (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0878.html) male Cleric of Hel (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0946.html) 14 (based on spells cast in a day (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0875.html)).
Str 20-25 (can carry Vaarsuvius (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0507.html), can't carry Roy (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0038.html); +6 as vampire).
Dex <14 (dex penalty, SSDT; +4 as vampire).
Con n/a (undead).
Int ~12 (no evidence; +2 as vampire).
Wis 19-25 (required for 7th-level spells (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0859.html), and to lose his best 7th-level spell to Enervation (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0810.html); +2 as vampire).
Cha <14 (low modifier (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0200.html), see also DCF; +4 as vampire).
Age: 55+ (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0732.html).
Feats (5): Extend Spell (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0839.html), Extra Turning (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0016.html); Alertness, Combat Reflexes, Dodge, Improved Initiative, and Lightning Reflexes (all vampire bonus feats).
Skills (31+): Knowledge: Religion not maxed (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0052.html), Listen 0 (OOPC), Ride 0 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0141.html), Speak language: dwarf (racial) and giant (SSDT), Spellcraft (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0910.html), Spot 0 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0318.html).
Abilities: Dwarf racial abilities, vampire abilities.
Items: Candles (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0007.html), bedroll (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0016.html), full plate armor (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0025.html), deck of cards (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0050.html), holy symbol (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0073.html), Amulet of Natural Armor (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0130.html), heirloom shield and warhammer (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0237.html), parcheesi board (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0380.html), spyglass (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0444.html), religious vestments (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0501.html), scroll of Sending (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0634.html), belt pouch (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0673.html), Bleedingham papers (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0732.html), flask of liquor (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0737.html), 10,000+ gp of diamond dust (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0845.html), Staff of Obscure Spells (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0906.html), healing potions (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0908.html).
Spells: Standard cleric list, plus domain spells as listed above, plus Bless Beer (WXP), Call Lightning (DCF), Cat's Grace (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0027.html), Control Winds (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0837.html), Cure Itchy Wounds (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0335.html), Heat Blisters of Eternal Pain (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0007.html), Heathen Smiting (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0007.html), Mass Death Ward with backdoor (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0876.html), Mass Resist Energy (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0848.html), and Tumor (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0007.html).
Before becoming a vampire, Durkon was Lawful Good (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0844.html), had Con ~12 (racial), the ability Turn Undead (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0016.html), the Good domain (required to cast Holy Smite (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0806.html)), and the spells Thor's Lightning (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0473.html) and Might of Thor (which is assumed to be the standard cleric spell Righteous Might).

:elan: Elan
Chaotic Good (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0445.html), Human male Bard (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0050.html) 14+ (required to retrain to cure critical wounds (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0949.html)) / Dashing Swordsman (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0390.html) 1+, total level 16 (forum (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=18180388&postcount=1118)).
Str <20 (can't carry Roy (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0038.html), and the same as Nale (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=821955&postcount=47), forum).
Dex 13-17 (required for Dodge, and to get a four on Move Silently (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0766.html)).
Con same as Nale.
Int 4-10 (too low to cast cantrips (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0127.html), but higher than Thog (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0388.html).
Wis <10 (not even a smidgen (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0080.html)).
Cha 22+ (required for 5th level spells at level 13 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0647.html), +2 from belt (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0675.html)).
Age: 22+ (WXP).
Feats (6): Dodge, Mobility (both prerequisites for Spring Attack), Spring Attack (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0761.html), Still Spell (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0156.html).
Skills (85+): Diplomacy (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0387.html), Hide (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0468.html), Listen (higher than Sir Francois, OOPC), Move Silently <3 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0766.html), Perform: sing 12+ (required for Inspire Greatness (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0593.html)), Perform: string instruments 15+ (required for Song of Freedom (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0890.html)), Perform: kazoo (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0198.html), Ride 2+ (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0141.html), Spot 0 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0318.html), Spellcraft 2+ (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0324.html), Tumble (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0026.html).
Abilities: Bard class abilities, charismatic strike (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0390.html), dramatic instincts (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0392.html), glass damage immunity (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0471.html).
Items:Banjo (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0073.html), ceremonial meat costume (OOPC), dice (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0121.html), Boots of Elvenkind (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0130.html), kazoo (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0198.html), jam, lantern, pingpong bat, roller skate, squirrel (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0206.html), yoyo (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0277.html), dashing outfit (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0388.html), toothbrush (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0391.html), lute (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0471.html), Belt of Charisma +2 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0675.html), treasure chest (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0691.html), drawing (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0693.html), The Stick the Order was named after (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0696.html), letter, Chaos Sabre (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0943.html), evil sword (SSDT), castanets and sombrero (SSDT), no armor (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0594.html). Elan still has his old equipment (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8484548&postcount=12) (forum).
Spells: Animate Rope (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0156.html), Cure Critical Wounds (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0949.html), Disguise Self (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0387.html), Greater Dispel Magic (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0647.html), Lesser Confusion (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0721.html), Major Image (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0455.html), Mass Cure Light Wounds (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0647.html), Mending (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0400.html), Neutralize Poison (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0647.html), Prestidigitation (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0085.html), Silent Image (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0674.html), Summon Plot Exposition (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0013.html), not Identify (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0766.html), or Break Enchantment (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0790.html).

:haley: Haley Starshine aka Mistress Nightingale, aka The Red Blur (OOPC), aka Dark Mistress Shadowgale (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0093.html)
Chaotic Good (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0393.html), Human female Rogue (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0008.html) 16 (forum (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=18180388&postcount=1118)).
Str 13-19 (high enough to drag the cart (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0522.html), but can't carry Roy (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0038.html)).
Dex 20-21 (modifier of +5, forum).
Con 9+ (higher than Vaarsuvius (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0843.html)).
Int 12+ (received bonus languages (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0247.html)).
Cha 12-19 (with any charisma (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0312.html); and with maxed out Bluff (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0412.html), for Hide to be her best skill (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0311.html), her cha mod has to be less than her dex mod).
Age: About 25 (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12254291&postcount=24) (forum; was 24 here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0168.html), and that was (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0198.html) over a (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0260.html) year ago (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0702.html)).
Feats (9+): Dodge (SSDT), Improved Precise Shot (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0615.html), Manyshot (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0062.html), Martial Weapon Proficiency (longbow) (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0454.html), Point Blank Shot (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0062.html), Precise Shot (prerequisite for IPS), Ranged Pin (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0477.html), Ranged Sunder (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0511.html), Rapid Shot (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0062.html).
Skills (180+): Appraise (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0129.html), Bluff 18+ (maxed out) (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0412.html), Disable Device (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0841.html), Forgery (OOPC), Hide 18+ (best skill) (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0311.html), Knowledge: Arcana (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0578.html), Knowledge: Religion low (forum) (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15175785&postcount=48), Open Lock 15, Ride 0 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0141.html), Search (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0036.html) not maxed (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0840.html), Sense Motive 2+ (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0171.html), Spellcraft 9+ (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0867.html), Spot 0 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0318.html), Tumble (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0108.html), Use Magic Device 7+ (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0834.html), Use Rope 8 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0069.html).
Abilities: Rogue class abilities; two special rogue abilities, both spent on a feat.
Items: Two gemstones (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0123.html), 8 Bags of Holding (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0130.html), towel (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0277.html), hair dryer (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0278.html), rope (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0477.html), +5 Air Freshener of Pineness (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0526.html), a lot of clothes (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0570.html), bedroll (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0573.html), +5 Longbow of Icy Burst (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0615.html), Crystal's +4 blade (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0648.html), magic leather armor (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0675.html), dyed Boots (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0675.html) of Speed (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11095086&postcount=2) (forum), at least 200,000 gp in cash (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0680.html), trowel, metal detector (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0692.html), Bleedingham papers (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0726.html), 4+ quivers of green arrows (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0799.html) including silver and cold iron (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0062.html), three potions (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0799.html) (since Belkar took one (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0807.html)), thief's tools (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0841.html), wands (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0910.html), bag of copper pieces (SSDT).

:vaarsuvius: Vaarsuvius
True Neutral (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=11664984#post11664984) (forum), Elf (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0030.html) ambiguously gendered (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0107.html) Wizard (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0009.html): Evoker (DCF) 16 (forum (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=16647248&postcount=982)).
Str 5-9 (can carry Yukyuk (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0800.html), and strength penalty (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0245.html)).
Dex <12 (no real attack bonus on rays, forum).
Con 8-12 (required to have enough HP to survive the fight against Xykon (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0652.html); also, lacks a decent con, forum; and lower than Haley (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0843.html)).
Int 24 (forum (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=16647248&postcount=982)).
Wis 10-11 (moderate, forum).
Cha 6-9 (can return as a ghost (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0163.html), and without any charisma (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0312.html)).
Age: 131+ (WXP).
Feats (11+): Alertness (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0003.html), Empower Spell (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0588.html), Extend Spell (SSDT), Maximize Spell (SSDT), Quicken Spell (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0588.html), Scribe Scroll (wizard bonus feat), not Silent Spell (forum), not Still Spell (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0161.html).
Skills (108+): Appraise +3 (from familiar), Concentrate (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0041.html), Craft: Alchemy (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0098.html), Decipher Script (SSDT), Knowledge: Arcana (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0188.html), Knowledge: Religion (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0016.html) not high (forum) (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=15175785), Ride 0 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0141.html), Spot 0 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0318.html), Search 0 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0030.html), Speak Language: elf (racial), raven (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0271.html), not draconic (SSDT), Spellcraft (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0181.html), , Use Magic Device 2+ (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0750.html).
Abilities: Elf racial abilities, familiar: Blackwing (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0003.html), share spells with familiar (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0691.html), scry on familiar, barred schools: Conjuration (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0340.html) and Necromancy (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11686399&postcount=36) (forum; also by elimination).
Items: Headband of Intellect +4 (required to cast four 6th-level spells (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0627.html) with a base int of 18 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0031.html) at level 11), doily (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0033.html), Ring of Wizardry III or IV (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0182.html), two small gemstones (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0123.html), many scrolls and spellbooks (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0173.html), Finding Plot Holes for Dummies (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0623.html), twelve more books (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0623.html), jar of diamond dust (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0679.html), Bleedingham papers (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0726.html), defensive potions (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0923.html), Tarquin's whip (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0932.html), two potions (SSDT), apricot-scented face gel (SSDT), chalice (SSDT).
Spells: Arcane Eye (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0693.html), Banishment (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0585.html), Bull's Strength (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0104.html), Bugsby's Cat-Retrieving Hand (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0781.html), Bugsby's Clenched Fist (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0896.html), Bugsby's Expressive Single Digit, Bugsby's Flicking Finger (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0624.html), Bugsby's Grasping Hand (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0397.html), Chain Lightning (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0106.html), Charm Monster (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0335.html), Cone of Cold (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0041.html), Crushing Despair (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0127.html), Detect Magic (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0116.html), Dimensional Anchor (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0624.html), Dimensional Lock (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0946.html), Disintegrate (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0186.html), Dispel Magic (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0049.html), Distant Inferno (OOPC), Dominate Person (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0800.html), Evan's Spiked Tentacles of Forced Intrusion (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0020.html), Expeditious Retreat (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0005.html), Explosive Runes (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0092.html), Feather Fall (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0240.html), Fireball (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0020.html), Fire Trap (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0323.html), Flamefinger (OOPC), Forcecage (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0627.html), Fly (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0507.html), Greater Dispel Magic (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0839.html), Greater Invisibility (SSDT), Gust of Wind (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0595.html), Haste (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0684.html), Heroism (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0684.html), Hold Monster (SSDT), Hold Person (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0200.html), Hold Portal (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0178.html), Identify (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0009.html), Invisibility (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0157.html), discount Invisibility Sphere (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0088.html), Lightning Bolt (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0020.html), Magic Missile (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0065.html), Mass Bear's Endurance (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0427.html). Mass Bull's Strength (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0427.html), Mass Enlarge Person (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0427.html), Overland Flight usable on others (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0835.html), Owl's Wisdom (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0058.html), Passwall (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0857.html), Polymorph (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0697.html), Power Word Blind (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0306.html), Power Word Stun (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0716.html), Prestidigitation (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0323.html), Prismatic Spray (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0591.html), Protection from Arrows (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0240.html), Ray of Frost (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0950.html), Resilient Sphere (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0935.html), Scorching Ray (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0065.html), See Invisibility (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0624.html), Sending (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0630.html), Silent Image (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0750.html), Sleep (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0065.html), Stinking Cloud (DCF), Stoneskin (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0790.html), Stone to Flesh (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0790.html), Suggestion (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0178.html), Summon Plot Hole (SWMU), True Seeing (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0691.html), Vaarsuvius' Enhanced Scrying (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0504.html), Vaarsuvius' Greater Animal Messenger (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0563.html), Vampiric Touch (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0049.html), Veil (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0584.html), Wall of Fire (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0919.html), Wall of Force (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0955.html), unspecified polymorph spell (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0955.html), at least one sonic spell (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0345.html).

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g68/Cats_Are_Aliens/Banners/Blackwing.png Blackwing (Common name (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0674.html))
Raven (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0003.html) male, familiar.
Str 1 (racial).
Dex 15 (racial).
Con 10 (racial).
Int 13 (familiar).
Wis 14 (racial).
Cha 6 (racial).
Feats: Alertness, Weapon Finesse (racial bonus feats).
Skills: Listen +5, Spot +7 (racial skills), can use Vaarsuvius's skill ranks (familiar).
Abilities: Flight (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0003.html), low-light vision (both racial abilities); natural armor +8, improved evasion (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0797.html), empathic link, deliver touch spells, speak with birds, spell resistance 18 (all familiar abilities).
Items: Bauble (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0679.html), sombrero, fake beard and mustache (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0679.html), wand (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0750.html), bracelet with Orange Prism Ioun Stone (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0967.html).

[Kurald Galain]

Probably unnecessary placeholder. Next posts are for Oceanic.

[RMS Oceanic]

Team Evil

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/trytoguess/PimpedXykon.png Xykon, pseudonym (SOD)
Chaotic (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=13027771&postcount=5) (forum) Evil (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0446.html), Human male lich (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0013.html), Sorcerer 21+ (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0532.html)
Con n/a (undead).
Int ~15 (no evidence, age and lichdom).
Wis ~15 (no evidence, age and lichdom).
Cha 28+ (casts seven 9th-level spells in one combat, SOD).
Age: 111+ (WXP).
Feats (13+): Maximize Spell (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0459.html), Still Spell (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0653.html), Epic Spellcasting (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0532.html), at least one craft feat (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0543.html).
Skills (46+): Bluff (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0106.html), Concentration (required to cast while grappled (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0653.html)), Spellcraft 24+, Knowledge: Arcana 24+ (required for Epic Spellcasting), Reverse Psychology 2+ (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0106.html), Speak Language: Draconic (NCPB); +8 racial bonus on Hide, Listen, Move Silently, Search, Sense Motive, and Spot checks.
Abilities: Fear aura, paralyzing touch (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0448.html), turn resistance, damage reduction (SOD), immunity to cold, electricity (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0652.html), polymorph, and mind-affecting attacks (all lich abilities).
Items: Soul gem (SOD), Serini's diary (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0195.html), Widescreen crystal ball (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0376.html), Teevo (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0415.html), crown (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0434.html) that radiates evil (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0202.html), Dorukan's (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0196.html) headband (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0484.html), unspecified item that gives fire immunity (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0653.html), Ring of Protection that gives deflection bonus (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0653.html).
Spells: Animate Dead (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0037.html), Animate Dead Animal (SOD), Cloister (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0532.html), Cloudkill (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0670.html), Contingency (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0670.html), Energy Drain (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0652.html), Epic Mage Armor (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0670.html), Finger of Death (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0430.html), Ghostform (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0370.html), Greater Invisibility (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0429.html), Greater Teleport (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0670.html), Invisibility (SOD), Lightning Bolt (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0037.html), Magic Missile (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0112.html), Mass Hold Person (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0670.html), Meteor Swarm (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0442.html), Otiluke's Resilient Sphere (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0670.html), Overland Flight (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0442.html), Ray of Frost (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0542.html), Shatter (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0112.html), Soul Bind (SOD), Stoneskin (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0670.html), Superb Dispelling (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0653.html), Symbol of Insanity (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0448.html), Symbol of Pain (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0110.html), Teleport (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0192.html), Xykon's Moderately Escapable Forcecage (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0376.html), unspecified summoning spell (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0431.html), unspecified fire spell (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0459.html), unspecified spell that enables travel to the Astral Plane (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0833.html).

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g68/Cats_Are_Aliens/Banners/Redcloak.png Redcloak, pseudonym (SOD)
Lawful (required for Law domain) Evil (SOD), Goblin (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0148.html) male, Cleric (SOD) 17 (can cast 9th spells (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0826.html)).
Str ~8 (no evidence, racial).
Dex ~12 (no evidence, racial).
Wis 20+ (based on saving throw difficulty class (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0456.html)).
Cha 12+ (required to use Rebuke Undead (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0459.html) four times (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0461.html) per day (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0462.html)).
Age: 55+ (WXP), does not age physically (SOD).
Feats (5+): Craft Wondrous Item (Xykon's phylactery in SOD), Extend Spell (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0451.html).
Skills (36+): Diplomacy (SOD), Knowledge: Chemistry (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0423.html), Speak Language (Goblin) Does not speak Draconic (NCPB).
Abilities: Goblin racial abilities, Rebuke Undead (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0113.html), Command Undead (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0830.html), Destruction domain (required to cast Disintegrate (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0480.html)) and Law domain (required to cast Hold Monster, SOD).
Items: The Crimson Mantle (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0369.html), backup unholy symbol (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0662.html), Book of Vile Darkness, Fiend Folio, Monster Manual II (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0431.html), eye patch (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0701.html), spyglass (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0423.html), Xykon's Phylactery (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0827.html), Arcane half of the Snarl Ritual (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0830.html), Ring of protection from level drain (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0830.html)
Spells: standard cleric list, plus domain spells as listed above, plus Unseal, Greater Obscure Object, Superior Resistance, Hardening (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0831.html)

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/trytoguess/Tsukiko.png Tsukiko (deceased (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0830.html))
Neutral Evil (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15667889&postcount=57), Human female, Wizard (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0420.html): Necromancer (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=11637535) (forum) 3+ / Cleric (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0516.html) 3+ (required for Mystic Theurge) / Mystic Theurge (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0446.html) 6+, and two more levels of either Wizard or Mystic Theurge (required to cast 6th-level wizard spells).
Int 16+ (required to cast Create Undead (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0708.html) as a wizard).
Wis 15+ (required to cast Flame Strike (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0516.html) as a cleric).
Feats (6+): Scribe Scroll (wizard bonus feat), Quicken Spell (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0519.html).
Skills (42+): Knowledge: Arcana 6+, Knowledge: Religion 6+ (required for Mystic Theurge (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0446.html)).
Abilities: Rebuke Undead (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0516.html), two unknown domains, barred school (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=11637535) (forum): Abjuration (by elimination).
Items: Spellbook (wizard feature), unholy symbol (required to cast Flame Strike (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0516.html)), Xykon plushie (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0653.html), Xykon portrait, various books and scrolls, quill (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0700.html).
Spells: standard cleric list, plus wizard spells Cold Orb (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0522.html), Create Undead (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0708.html), Dominate Person (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0516.html), Electric Orb (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0518.html), Fire Orb (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0519.html), Fireball (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0518.html), Fly (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0458.html), Invisibility (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0518.html), Lesser Acid Orb (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0519.html), Lightning Bolt (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0458.html), Mind Fog (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0653.html), Shout (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0458.html), Teleport (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0513.html), Tsukiko's Amazing Wight-Making Spell (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0516.html) (forum (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11664910)).

:mitd: Monster In The Darkness
Please see this thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=293047) for details.


The Linear Guild

:nale: Nale (Deceased (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0913.html))
Lawful Evil (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0057.html), Human male, Fighter / Rogue 2+ (required for Evasion (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0050.html)) / Sorcerer 8+ (required to cast Dimension Door (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0811.html)); total level 15 (Hit by Holy Word (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0860.html)).
Str <19 (same as Elan (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=821955), forum).
Dex 13-17 (same as Elan).
Con ?? (same as Elan).
Int 13+ (For Combat Expertise).
Cha 15+ (required to cast Sending (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0337.html)).
Age: 22+ (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0258.html) (same as Elan (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0050.html)).
Skills: Bluff (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0393.html).
Feats: Combat Expertise, Improved Disarm (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0361.html).
Abilities: Rogue class abilities.
Items: Longsword (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0458.html), Linear Guild Business Cards (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0804.html), wand of Enervation (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0806.html), Elixirs of Negative Energy protection (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0906.html).
Spells: Charm Person (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0383.html), Dimension Door (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0811.html), Expeditious Retreat (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0067.html), Invisibility (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0819.html), Prestidigitation (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0142.html), Suggestion (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0393.html).

:sabine: Sabine
Evil (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0394.html), Succubus (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0637.html) female, Racial hit dice 6 / Level adjustment 6 / Rogue (NCPB) 3+ (at least as high as her personal rival (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0581.html) Haley (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0616.html)).
Dex ~13 (no evidence, racial).
Con ~13 (no evidence, racial).
Int 9+ (higher than Thog (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0458.html), lower than Nale (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11883778&postcount=198), forum).
Wis ~14 (no evidence, racial).
Cha ~26 (no evidence, racial).
Age: 2000+ (NCPB).
Abilities: Flight (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0377.html), change shape (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0142.html), energy drain (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0057.html), charm monster, detect good, detect thoughts, ethereal jaunt, suggestion, greater teleport: self plus 50 pounds of objects (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0804.html), summon demon, damage reduction 10 / cold iron or good (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0062.html), darkvision, electricity and poison immunity, acid cold and fire resistance, spell resistance 18, telepathy, tongues; plane shift 1/day (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0380.html) (all racial abilities), rogue class abilities, doesn't grow tired (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0365.html).
Items: Cellphone (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0903.html)

:thog: Thog
Non-lawful (required for rage (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0387.html)) Evil (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0387.html), Half-Orc male, Fighter 2 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0064.html) / Barbarian 9+ (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0396.html) (required to have 3 attacks a round).
Str 14+ (his highest ability score (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0791.html)).
Int <8 (racial, dump stat (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0044.html)).
Wis <10 (abysmal will save (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0066.html)).
Cha ~8 (no evidence, racial).
Age: 17+ (WXP).
Feats (3+): Power Attack (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0788.html).
Skills (6+): Jump (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0808.html).
Abilities: Dungeoncrasher alternative class feature (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0808.html) (forum (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=11982830)), half-orc racial abilities, barbarian class abilities.

http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h87/osiris32/drizzle.png Zz'dtri (Deceased (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0908.html))
Neutral Evil (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15667889&postcount=57) Drow (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0044.html) male, Wizard: Transmuter (DCF) 15 (deafened by Holy Word (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0862.html)).
Dex ~12 (no evidence, racial).
Con ~8 (no evidence, racial).
Int 17+ (required to cast Plane Shift (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0802.html)).
Cha ~12 (no evidence, racial).
Feats (9+): Lightning Reflexes (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0799.html), Scribe Scroll (wizard bonus feat), Silent Spell (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0065.html) (forum (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=822237)), Boost Spell Resistance, unspecified feat that increases Spell Resistance (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0795.html), Empower Spell (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0847.html).
Skills: Speak Language: Drow Sign Language (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0862.html)
Abilities: Spell Resistance 28+ (racial, at least +4 from feats and an item (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0790.html)); drow racial abilities; barred schools: Enchantment, Necromancy (by elimination).
Items: Spellbook (wizard feature), unspecified item that boosts Spell Resistance (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0795.html).
Spells: Baleful Polymorph (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0792.html), Break Enchantment (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0800.html), Dimension Door (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0795.html), Disguise Self (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0789.html), Flesh to Stone (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0053.html), Fly (3.0 version) (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0049.html), Greater Dispel Magic (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0906.html), Gust of Wind (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0860.html), Locate Object (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0894.html), Magic Circle Against Evil (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0883.html), Phantasmal Killer (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0800.html), Planar Binding (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0883.html), Plane Shift (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0802.html), Protection from Energy (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0799.html), Scrying (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0698.html), Shield (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0065.html), Teleport (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0862.html), Vitriolic Sphere (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0847.html), Wall of Ice (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0057.html), unspecified lightning spell (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0065.html).

http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/7486/hilgya.png Hilgya Firehelm
Non-lawful (worships the god of chaos (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0052.html)) Evil (DCF), Dwarf female, Cleric of Loki (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0052.html) 7+ (required to cast Restoration (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0074.html)).
Wis 14+ (required to cast Restoration (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0074.html)).
Skills: Speak Language (Dwarven)
Abilities: Dwarf racial abilities (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0076.html), Fire domain (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0052.html), one unknown domain.
Items: Horned helmet, armor, shield (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0043.html), holy symbol (required to use rebuke ability (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0052.html)).

http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/9580/yikyikpy8.jpg Yikyik (deceased (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0063.html))
Chaotic Evil (same as Belkar, DCF), Kobold male, Ranger (DCF).
Str ~6 (no evidence, racial).
Dex 12+ (gets additional attack from Combat Reflexes (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0048.html)).
Con ~8 (no evidence, racial).
Feats: Combat Reflexes (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0048.html), Track (ranger bonus feat).
Skills: Speak Language (Draconic)
Abilities: Ranger class abilities.
Items: Dagger (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0048.html).

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/trytoguess/Leeky.png Leeky Windstaff
Neutral Evil (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0344.html), Gnome male, Druid (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0344.html) 13+ (required to cast Fire Storm (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0359.html)).
Str ~8 (no evidence, racial).
Con ~12 (no evidence, racial).
Wis 17+ (required to cast Fire Storm (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0359.html)).
Feats (5+): Leadership (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0399.html).
Abilities: Gnome racial abilities, druid class abilities, animal companion (hawk "Kitty" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0346.html), deceased (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0359.html)).

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g68/Cats_Are_Aliens/Banners/Pompey.png Pompey
Neutral Evil (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15667889&postcount=57), Half-Elf male, Wizard: Conjurer (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0254.html) 5+ (required to cast Still Silent Animate Rope (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0342.html)).
Int 14+ (required to cast four 2nd-level (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0350.html) spells per day (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0354.html)).
Age: 44+ (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0258.html).
Feats (3+): Scribe scroll (wizard bonus feat), Silent Spell, Still Spell (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0342.html).
Skills (35+): Knowledge: Arcana (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0258.html).
Abilities: Half-elf racial abilities, barred schools: evocation and enchantment (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0254.html).
Items: Spellbook (wizard feature).
Spells: Animate Rope (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0342.html), Summon Monster I (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0354.html), Summon Monster II, at least 5 touch-range buff spells (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0350.html) -- lowest-level possibilities are Mage Armor, Protection from Good, Protection from Law, Bull's Strength, Bear's Endurance.

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g68/Cats_Are_Aliens/Banners/Yokyok.png Yokyok (deceased (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0357.html))
Kobold male.
Str ~6 (no evidence, racial).
Dex ~12 (no evidence, racial).
Con ~8 (no evidence, racial).
Skills: Speak Language (Draconic)
Items: Rapier (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0348.html).

http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/9580/yikyikpy8.jpg Yukyuk (Deceased (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0848.html))
Kobold male, Ranger (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0792.html) 4+ (required for an animal companion (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0790.html)) / Rogue (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0790.html).
Str ~6 (no evidence, racial).
Dex ~12 (no evidence, racial).
Con ~8 (no evidence, racial).
Abilities: Ranger and rogue class abilities, animal companion (riding dog "Sir Scraggly" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0790.html)).
Feats (4+): Endurance, Track (ranger bonus feats).
Skills: Speak Language (Draconic)
Items: Two Crossbows of Quick Loading (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0800.html).

[RMS Oceanic]

The Sapphire Guard

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a311/estelindis/hinjo.gif Hinjo
Lawful Good, Human male, Paladin (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0409.html) 11-12 (three attacks per round (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0453.html), but was lower level than Roy during the battle at Azure City (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0485.html), and hasn't leveled up since (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0671.html)).
Cha 12+ (required for Lay On Hands (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0409.html)).
Age: 26+ (WXP).
Abilities: Paladin class abilities, Summon Conscience (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0410.html), paladin mount: dire wolf "Argent" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0432.html).
Items: Cold-iron katana, silvered katana (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0588.html); magic boots, cloak and armor (WXP).

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/trytoguess/lien.png Lien
Lawful Good, Human female, Paladin (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0479.html) 12+ (higher level than Hinjo (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0671.html)).
Str 13+ (required for Cleave).
Int 10+ (good, not dumb (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0584.html)).
Cha 12+ (required for Lay On Hands (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0591.html)).
Age: 29+ (three years older than Hinjo, DSTP).
Feats (6+): Cleave (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0473.html), Power Attack (prerequisite for Cleave), Weapon Focus: Longspear (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0591.html).
Abilities: Paladin class abilities, paladin mount: large shark "Razor" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0479.html).
Items: Longspear (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0591.html); magic boots, cloak and armor (WXP); ring of waterbreathing (DSTP).

:miko: Miko Miyazaki (deceased (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0464.html))
Lawful Good, Human female, Monk 2+ (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0209.html) / Fallen Paladin (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0407.html) 10+ (three main-hand attacks per round (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0200.html), and higher level than Hinjo (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0409.html)).
Str 13+ (required for Exotic Weapon Proficiency: Katana (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0200.html); the DMG states that a katana is a masterwork bastard sword; wielding it in one hand requires a feat, wielding it in two hands does not).
Dex 17+ (required for Improved Two-Weapon Fighting (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0200.html)).
Wis 11+ (required to cast Cure Light Wounds in the Miko fight (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=291639)).
Cha 12+ (required for Lay On Hands (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0219.html)).
Age: 28+ (WXP).
Feats (6+): Cleave (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0461.html), Exotic Weapon Proficiency: Katana (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0200.html), Improved Two-Weapon Fighting (two off-hand attacks per round (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0200.html)), Improved Unarmed Strike (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0461.html), Power Attack (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0374.html), Quick Draw (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0215.html), Stunning Fist (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0200.html), Track (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0213.html), Two-Weapon Fighting (prerequisite for ITWF).
Skills (30+): Knowledge: the Planes (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0373.html), Spellcraft 0 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0221.html), Survival +1 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0213.html).
Abilities: Monk class abilities, unavailable paladin mount: horse "Windstriker" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0200.html).
Items: Magic boots, cloak and armor (WXP); katana, wakizashi (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0200.html).

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/trytoguess/O-Chul.png O-Chul
Lawful Good, Human male, Fighter / Paladin (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0545.html) 3+ (has Aura of Courage (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0546.html)), total level 12+ (higher than Hinjo (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0671.html)).
Str 11+ (can carry Vaarsuvius (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0661.html)).
Con ~25 (WXP).
Cha <10 (dump stat (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0545.html)).
Age: 29+ (fighter for twelve years (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0545.html), and minimum age for a fighter is 16).
Skills (45+): Bluff 0 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0545.html), Spellcraft (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0670.html), Swim (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0542.html).
Abilities: Paladin class abilities.

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/trytoguess/Shojo.png Shojo (deceased (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0407.html))
Chaotic Good (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0410.html), Human male, Aristocrat 14 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0289.html).
Str / Dex / Con ~4 (no evidence, age).
Int / Wis / Cha ~13 (no evidence, age).
Age: 72+ (WXP).
Feats (6): Improved Paranoia (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0405.html).
Skills (68+): Bluff (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0289.html), Perform (puppetry) (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0379.html).

The Vector Legion (Team Tarquin)

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g68/Cats_Are_Aliens/Banners/Tarquin.png Tarquin
Lawful Evil (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0050.html), Human male, level 21+ (for Infinite Deflection (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0925.html)).
Str 16+ (can carry Nale (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0862.html)).
Con ~9 (no evidence, age).
Dex 25+ (required for Infinite Deflection (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0925.html)).
Int, Wis, Cha ~11 (no evidence, age).
Age: 51+ (adventuring for 35 years (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0854.html)).
Feats: Quick draw (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0761.html), [Dodge and Sidestep Charge or Robilar's Gambit] (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0851.html), Improved Unarmed Strike, Deflect Arrows, Snatch Arrows, Combat Reflexes, Infinite Deflection (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0925.html), Improved Grapple, Power Attack, Improved Sunder (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0934.html)
Skills: Speak Language: Drow Sign Language (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0862.html), Ride (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0851.html), Spellcraft (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0860.html), Spot (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0858.html)
Abilities: Evasion (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0853.html)
Items: Dagger (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0820.html), helmet (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0722.html), two Rings of Regeneration (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0762.html), Ring of True Seeing (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0819.html), Glamoured Armor (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0849.html), mask that says "Nope" on it (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0852.html), whip, Extra Strength Keoghtum Ointment (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0863.html).

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g68/Cats_Are_Aliens/Banners/Malack.png Malack (Deceased (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0906.html)), pseudonym (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0874.html)
Lawful (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?339912-Vampire-question-settled&p=17331234&viewfull=1#post17331234) Evil (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15715754&postcount=56), Lizardfolk (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0737.html) male vampire (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0870.html), Cleric of Nergal (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0737.html) 12 (required for Craft Staff (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0878.html), but no higher spells (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15715754&postcount=56)).
Age: 200+ (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0874.html).
Str ~18 (no evidence, racial).
Con n/a (undead).
Dex ~14 (no evidence, racial).
Int ~10 (no evidence, racial).
Wis 20+ (from spells per day (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15716359&postcount=751)).
Cha ~14 (no evidence, racial).
Skills: Speak Language (Draconic)
Feats (5+): Craft Staff (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0878.html), Quicken Spell (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0811.html); Alertness, Combat Reflexes, Dodge, Improved Initiative, Lightning Reflexes (all vampire bonus feats).
Abilities: Vampire abilities, Cleric Domains (Death and Destruction (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15715919&postcount=61)).
Items: Holy Symbol.
Spells: Standard cleric list, plus Death and Destruction domain spells, Protection from Daylight (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0871.html).

http://imageshack.us/a/img4/8008/978c.png Laurin Shattersmith
Evil Human Female, Psion (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0911.html) 13+ (To be level drained (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0931.html) but still manifest Disintegrate (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0934.html))
Str, Dex, Con ~7 (No evidence, age)
Int 16+ (To manifest Disintegrate)
Wis, Cha ~12 (No evidence, age)
Age: 58+
Items: Headband, Red Ioun Stone, Green Ioun Stone, Orange Ioun Stone (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0758.html)
Powers Known: Body Adjustment (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0928.html), Clairvoyant Sense (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0945.html), Control Body (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0927.html), Dimension Door (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0931.html), Disintegrate (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0914.html), Dispel Psionics (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0929.html), Specified Energy Adaptation (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0935.html), Mental Disruption (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0928.html), Mind Probe (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0913.html), Telekinetic Force (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0929.html), Unspecified Attack Power (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0925.html), Wormhole (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0910.html)

http://imageshack.us/a/img199/803/f5bb.png Miron Shewdanker
Evil Human Male, [Wizard 15+ or Sorcerer 16+] (To cast Horrid Wilting (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0928.html))
Str, Dex ~9 (No evidence, age)
Con 6+
Int [18+ or ~11]
Wis ~11 (No evidence, age)
Cha [~11 or 18+]
(Intelligence or Charisma depends on which class he is)
Age: 38+ (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=16361374&postcount=218)
Spells Known: Baleful Polymorph (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0926.html), Contingency (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0928.html), Greater Dispel Magic (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0925.html), Horrid Wilting (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0928.html), Teleport (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0928.html), Unspecified Defensive Spell (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0925.html)

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g68/Cats_Are_Aliens/Banners/Kilkil.png Kilkil
Lawful Neutral (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15667889&postcount=57) Winged Kobold male, level 5-10 (paralyzed by Holy Word (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0861.html)).
Str ~6 (no evidence, racial).
Dex ~12 (no evidence, racial).
Con ~8 (no evidence, racial).
Items: Glasses (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0718.html).
Skills: Speak Language (Draconic)
Abilities: Flight (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0847.html).

[RMS Oceanic]

The Order of the Scribble

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g68/Cats_Are_Aliens/Banners/SoonKim.png Soon Kim (Deceased (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0277.html))
Lawful Good, Human Sacred Watcher (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0459.html) Male, Paladin (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0276.html) 21+ (Low Epic (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15415463&postcount=331)).
Str 13+ (For EWP (Katana))
Con n/a (Deathless)
Cha ~14 (No Evidence, Sacred Watcher)
Abilities: Flight (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0449.html), Paladin Abilities, Sacred Watcher Abilities, Deathless Abilities
Feats: Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Katana) (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0276.html)
Skills:
Items: Enchanted Armor, Katana (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0449.html).
Spells: Standard Paladin Spells.

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g68/Cats_Are_Aliens/Banners/Lirian.png Lirian (deceased, SoD)
Neutral Good, Female elf Druid (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0276.html) 21+ (Low Epic).
Dex ~12 (no evidence, elf).
Con ~8 (no evidence, elf).
Wis 19+ (required to cast Shapechange, SoD)
Skills: Speak Language (Elven, Druidic)
Feats:
Items:
Spells: Standard Druid, plus Divine Half of the Rift Sealing Ritual, Divine Half of the Gate Building Ritual (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0276.html), Guardian Virus and Guardian Virus Innoculation

http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd40/rtg0922/OotSSmilies/Dorukan.png Dorukan (Deceased, SoD)
Neutral Good (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15667889&postcount=57), Human Wizard 21+ (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0532.html).
Str/Dex/Con ~4 (No evidence, age)
Int 19+ (required to cast Gate)
Age: 71+
Skills: Spellcraft 24+, Knowledge (Arcana) 24+ (For Epic Spellcasting)
Feats: Scribe Scroll (wizard bonus feat), Craft Wonderous Item (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0055.html), Epic Spellcasting (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0532.html)
Spells: Anti-Second Edition Ward (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0055.html), Arcane Half of the Rift Sealing Ritual, Arcane Half of the Gate Building Ritual (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0276.html), Cloister, Unspecified Conjuration (Calling) spell (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0532.html), "Pure Heart" Ward (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0057.html), Sending, Teleport, Prismatic Spray, Meteor Swarm, Gate, Scrying, Unspecified Fire Spell

http://i166.photobucket.com/albums/u93/Reed_Copperstrand/Girard_new.png Girard Draketooth (deceased (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0846.html))
Black Dragon-blooded (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0842.html) Human male, Ranger 2 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0694.html)/Sorcerer 19+ (Low Epic (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15415463&postcount=331)).
Cha 19+ (required to cast Microcosm)
Feats: Track, Two-Weapon Fighting (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0276.html), not Epic Spellcasting (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15415463&postcount=331).
Spells: Microcosm (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0886.html), Recorded Message/Booby Trap (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0695.html), Invisibility Spell (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0277.html), Other Illusions

http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h87/osiris32/serini-1.png Serini Toormuck
Halfling female, Rogue 21+ (Low Epic (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15415463&postcount=331)).
Str ~5 (no evidence, halfling, age)
Dex ~9 (no evidence, halfling, age)
Con ~7 (no evidence, age)
Int/Wis/Cha ~12 (No evidence, age)
Abilities: Halfling abilities, Rogue abilities
Skills:
Feats:
Items: Shortbow (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0276.html)

http://img78.imageshack.us/img78/1264/kraagorhc8.gif Kraagor (Deceased (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0276.html))
Non-lawful, Dwarf Male, Barbarian (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0276.html)
Con ~12 (no evidence, dwarf)
Int 8+ (Doesn't use Thog-speak (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0276.html))
Cha ~8 (no evidence, dwarf)
Abilities: Dwarf abilities, Barbarian abilities
Skills: Speak Language (Dwarven)
Feats:
Items: Axe (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0276.html)


Family and other characters

http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h87/osiris32/celiasmiley.png Celia
Lawful Good (DSTP), Sylph (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0053.html) female, 6+ HD (required to cast Lightning Bolt (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0070.html)).
Cha 16+ (required to cast four 3rd-level spells (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0578.html) in a day).
Age: 22+ (WXP).
Abilities: Flight (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0053.html), cast sorcerer spells as a caster of a level equal to her HD (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0530.html), shoot lightning out of her fingers (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0529.html) (all racial abilities).
Skills (36+): Spellcraft (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0532.html).
Items: Black eyeliner pencil (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0537.html), cell phone (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0053.html), 'feeblemind causing' blue dress (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0310.html).
Spells: Alter Self (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0538.html), Lightning Bolt (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0070.html), either Fog Cloud or Obscuring Mist (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0604.html), no necromancy spells (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0538.html).

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g68/Cats_Are_Aliens/Banners/Eugene.png Eugene Greenhilt (deceased, OOPC)
Lawful Good (SOD), Human male ghost (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0015.html), Wizard: Illusionist (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0291.html) 11+ (required to cast Permanent Image (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0295.html)).
Str/Dex ~4 (no evidence, age).
Con n/a (undead).
Int 16+ (required to cast Permanent Image (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0295.html)).
Wis ~13 (no evidence, age).
Cha 6+ (required to become a ghost (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0015.html)).
Age: 81+ (WXP).
Feats (8+): Scribe Scroll (wizard bonus feat).
Items: Spellbook (wizard feature).
Spells: Detect Scrying (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0292.html), Fly (SOD), Invisibility Sphere (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0088.html), Minor Image (OOPC), Permanent Image (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0295.html), Summon Boot (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0525.html), Teleport (SOD), unspecified chair conjuration (OOPC), unspecified fire spell (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0664.html).

http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h87/osiris32/julia.png Julia Greenhilt
True Neutral (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0343.html), Human female, Wizard 3 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0485.html).
Int 15+ (required to cast Sending (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0337.html) from a scroll).
Age: 17+ (five years younger than Nale (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0258.html)).
Feats (4): Scribe Scroll (wizard bonus feat).
Spells: Feather Fall (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0485.html), Magic Missile (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0354.html).

http://img110.imageshack.us/img110/9168/samrg8.png Samantha (deceased (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0189.html))
Evil (NCPB), Human female, Sorcerer (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0166.html) 12 (required to cast exactly three 6th level spells in a day (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0168.html)).
Cha 16-21 (required to cast Chain Lightning (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0166.html), but has no bonus spells (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0168.html) at level 6). Also, her charisma is higher than Haley's (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0161.html).
Age: 18 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0159.html).
Feats (5): Maximize Spell (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0168.html), not Silent Spell, not Still Spell (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0169.html).
Spells: Chain Lightning (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0166.html), Fireball (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0166.html), Fly (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0160.html), Hold Person (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0166.html), Lightning Bolt (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0168.html), Magic Missile (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0168.html), Protection From Arrows (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0168.html).

http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/8754/qarrnn2.png Qarr
Lawful (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0634.html) Evil (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0668.html), Imp (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0555.html) male, Sorcerer (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0625.html) 8-10 (required to cast Charm Monster (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0559.html), and to get only two Scorching Rays (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0797.html)).
Dex ~17 (no evidence, racial).
Wis ~12 (no evidence, racial).
Cha 14+ (required to cast Charm Monster (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0559.html)).
Feats (5+): Dodge, Weapon Finesse (racial bonus feats).
Abilities: Flight (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0792.html), poison, detect good, detect magic, invisibility: self (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0624.html), suggestion 1/day, commune 1/week, alternate form, damage reduction 5/good or silver (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0555.html), darkvision, fast healing (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0627.html), poison immunity, fire resistance; greater teleport: self plus 50 pounds of objects (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0630.html), plane shift (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0637.html), summon devil (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0584.html) (all racial abilities);
Spells: Charm Monster (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0559.html), Lesser Telepathic Bond or Telepathic Bond (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0503.html), Lightning Bolt (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0797.html), Scorching Ray (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0792.html), Extraplanar Phone Connection (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0903.html).

[With a box]

Q: In which comic do the characters demonstrate having leveled?
Level
9 12 12 12 12 12 12
10 124 125 124 124 124 124
11 251 ??? 201 ??? ??? 186
12 ???, 665 249 ??? ??? 477 ???
13 485, 862 ??? 556 393 511 397
14 886 ??? 859 647 ??? 627
15 936 860 - 904 615 716
16 - 936 - 936 936 935

How could 936 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0936.html) be proof of they reached that level?
Elan dose nothing except talking with Tarquin and Roy or Belkar are not even appear in that comic.

[Loreweaver15]

I think the rationale was that they just finished an encounter that would at minimum have put them over the EXP requirement for leveling, but I am unsure.

[zimmerwald1915]

I think the rationale was that they just finished an encounter that would at minimum have put them over the EXP requirement for leveling, but I am unsure.
Aye, scroll down to each individual character (except for Durkon, who did not gain enough XP to level after the fight with Tarqin, Laurin, and Miron and likely will never level again) and you'll see a link marked "forum" next to their names that links to the post containing the evidence.

Since we're discussing the table, I still have to question how strip 904 demonstrates Elan having 15 levels. As I recall, the rationale for listing him with 15 levels was the comparison with Nale as a personal nemesis. As such, I would think that strip 860, which shows Nale getting deafened, but not blinded, by Durkon's holy word, would make a better cite.

EDIT: alternatively, if that's no longer considered a good rationale, is there any reason to list Elan as having reached level 15 before 936 at all?

[Kurald Galain]

Since we're discussing the table, I still have to question how strip 904 demonstrates Elan having 15 levels. As I recall, the rationale for listing him with 15 levels was the comparison with Nale as a personal nemesis. As such, I would think that strip 860, which shows Nale getting deafened, but not blinded, by Durkon's holy word, would make a better cite.
Fixed.

Also added the 13 dex required for Roy's feats.


I think the rationale was that they just finished an encounter that would at minimum have put them over the EXP requirement for leveling, but I am unsure.
Indeed.

[ChristianSt]

@Orange Prism Ioun Stone:

It is currently listed under V's item, but all the in-comic evidence imo points toward that it is Blackwing's item:

935, last panel (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0935.html): Blackwing says: "I totally snagged a bauble."
This is also the last time we see the Ioun Stone: In Blackwing's claw.
937, second panel (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0937.html): Blackwing says: "bury me with my shiny!"

We haven't seen V since then, but unless he/she shows up with it or otherwise they discuss that V has it, I think it should be moved to Blackwing.

[Emanick]

Minor nitpick: Elan is currently listed as Bard 13/Dashing Swordsman (total level 16), which is fairly confusing, as it implies that we know for sure that he's a level 13 bard and has a total level of 16, but don't know his Dashing Swordsman level.

Wouldn't it be better to list him as Bard 13+/Dashing Swordsman 1-3 (total level 16)? Since he seems to have leveled since strip 647, we no longer have any reason to assume that he's a precisely level 13 bard, and he could plausibly have anywhere between 1 and 3 Dashing Swordsman levels.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Minor nitpick: Elan is currently listed as Bard 13/Dashing Swordsman (total level 16), which is fairly confusing, as it implies that we know for sure that he's a level 13 bard and has a total level of 16, but don't know his Dashing Swordsman level.

Wouldn't it be better to list him as Bard 13+/Dashing Swordsman 1-3 (total level 16)? Since he seems to have leveled since strip 647, we no longer have any reason to assume that he's a precisely level 13 bard, and he could plausibly have anywhere between 1 and 3 Dashing Swordsman levels.

Good point, but a tad redundant. I would prefer:

Bard 13+/Dashing Swordsman 1+ (total level 16)

or

Bard 13+/Dashing Swordsman 1-3


With a preference for the first.

Grey Wolf

[Kornaki]

Good point, but a tad redundant. I would prefer:

Bard 13+/Dashing Swordsman 1+ (total level 16)

or

Bard 13+/Dashing Swordsman 1-3


With a preference for the first.

Grey Wolf

The first one is dramatically better. The second one says nothing about what Elan's level is, certainly he could be level 14 given that description.

[Bird]

The first one is dramatically better. The second one says nothing about what Elan's level is, certainly he could be level 14 given that description.
Agreed. The first is clear and precise.

[rbetieh]

I dont usually post here, but doesn't Blackwing have a "Shiny" now as well?

[RMS Oceanic]

I dont usually post here, but doesn't Blackwing have a "Shiny" now as well?

The "Shiny" is the Orange Ioun Stone we've been discussing.

Should Elan be deprived of his +3 Keen Rapier? I don't believe we kept Haley's +3 Bow after Crystal snapped it.

[orrion]

The "Shiny" is the Orange Ioun Stone we've been discussing.

Should Elan be deprived of his +3 Keen Rapier? I don't believe we kept Haley's +3 Bow after Crystal snapped it.

Is there a way to be sure that's what Tarquin Sundered?

Elan has his first rapier sundered by Belkar. Haley found him another, and he used that until Nale stole his identity. Then Julio gave him the +3 Keen rapier and he reacquired his other (Word of Giant). Tarquin sundered one, but he should still have another and there's no definitive way to tell which is which.


Regarding the stone: I think it's a nitpick to want to give it to Blackwing. V is the only one of them that can make use of it anyway.

[Steven]

It's not a nitpick: It's what we've observed in the comic.

[ChristianSt]

Regarding the stone: I think it's a nitpick to want to give it to Blackwing. V is the only one of them that can make use of it anyway.

Since when does "is best usage" trump over "in-comic evidence"?

[rodneyAnonymous]

The word deceased is capitalized inconsistently. I, for one, prefer the lower-case d.

[zimmerwald1915]

Since when does "is best usage" trump over "in-comic evidence"?
Since this thread began distributing items according to each character's needs, irrespective of property rights :smalltongue:

Seriously, if you want "in-comic evidence," the ioun stone is nowhere to be seen in strip 943. Blackwing might have stored it in that mysterious hammerspace where he keeps his sombrero, fake beard, and other bauble, but why would he do that? An ioun stone orbits the user's head and doesn't need to be stored anywhere, and keeping it out of sight means that Blackwing can't look at it.

Devil's advocacy aside, I agree it should be listed as Blackwing's item until further notice. But it's really not that big a deal. One thing I will say: if Kurald wants to make that edit, he should be quick about it. 944 will come out fairly soon, and might necessitate another edit.

[Sniffnoy]

The link explaining why Belkar's daggers are at least +4 and +2 is broken.

[Caex]

Nitpick: Tarquin is listed as having "Glamoured Armor"; in comic it is called "glamered armor," which is the same spelling as is used in the SRD.

[Kurald Galain]

Ok, moved the Ioun Shiny to Blackwing with the expectation that I'll move it back soon :smallwink:

Also fixed Elan's level, fixed Belkar's link, and removed the rapier.

See, Elan loses one rapier (and Haley's moisturizer) in 714. The Giant said that what he used in 722 is his other rapier. Then in 729, Roy and Belkar have recovered the gear, they have Haley's dagger and bow, plus the warrant, but no sign of the rapier (or the moisturizer, which we've unlisted from Haley ages ago). Same thing in 732. Then in 934, Tarquin sunders his other rapier, so Elan has no rapiers left.

[Matt620]

Hey, I noticed the ages on the Azure City-ites were marked with indefinite answers, but the War and XPs book (as well as the "Don't Split the Party" bonus section) gives us some proper ages.

Miko is 28 and Hinjo is 23 as of the beginning of War and XPs. Lien also mentions during Don't Split the Party that Hinjo is five years younger than her, so she'd be 28.

[CaDzilla]

The Order of the Scribble

http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/8754/qarrnn2.png Qarr
Lawful (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0634.html) Evil (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0668.html), Imp (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0555.html) male, Sorcerer (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0625.html) 8-10 (required to cast Charm Monster (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0559.html), and to get only two Scorching Rays (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0797.html)).
Dex ~17 (no evidence, racial).
Wis ~12 (no evidence, racial).
Cha 14+ (required to cast Charm Monster (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0559.html)).
Feats (5+): Dodge, Weapon Finesse (racial bonus feats).
Abilities: Flight (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0792.html), poison, detect good, detect magic, invisibility: self (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0624.html), suggestion 1/day, commune 1/week, alternate form, damage reduction 5/good or silver (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0555.html), darkvision, fast healing (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0627.html), poison immunity, fire resistance; greater teleport: self plus 50 pounds of objects (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0630.html), plane shift (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0637.html), summon devil (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0584.html) (all racial abilities);
Spells: Charm Monster (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0559.html), Lesser Telepathic Bond or Telepathic Bond (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0503.html), Lightning Bolt (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0797.html), Scorching Ray (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0792.html), Extraplanar Phone Connection (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0903.html).

As a Devil, Qarr has telepathy as a trait.

[Kurald Galain]

As a Devil, Qarr has telepathy as a trait.

Most, but not all, devils have telepathy; in particular, imps do not. Furthermore, devil telepathy has a range of 100 feet, and Qarr has been shown to use telepathy at a substantially longer range than that. And we already know he has sorcerer levels; hence, the spell.

[Ceaon]

http://img78.imageshack.us/img78/1264/kraagorhc8.gif Kraagor (Deceased (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0276.html))
Non-lawful, Dwarf Male, Barbarian (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0276.html)
Dex ~8 (no evidence, dwarf)
Con ~12 (no evidence, dwarf)
Int 8+ (Doesn't use Thog-speak (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0276.html))

Can someone explain the 8 dexterity to me? Dwarves don't have a dexterity penalty, do they?

[ChristianSt]

Can someone explain the 8 dexterity to me? Dwarves don't have a dexterity penalty, do they?

I think that is an error of some sort: The SRD (www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/dwarf.htm) lists dwarf ability traits as "+2 Constitution, -2 Charisma." So I think that it should be Charisma ~8.

[CaDzilla]

Most, but not all, devils have telepathy; in particular, imps do not. Furthermore, devil telepathy has a range of 100 feet, and Qarr has been shown to use telepathy at a substantially longer range than that. And we already know he has sorcerer levels; hence, the spell.

Nowhere does it state in the 3.5e Monster Manual that imps are an exception to the Telepathy powers. The special ability that imps do not have at will is greater teleport. I personally handwave that as a power he got from his boss(es?) due to his PC levels.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

I thought that since only Baatezu have telepathy, and Imps are not Baatezu, Qarr wouldn't have Telepathy as a trait.

[137beth]

Nowhere does it state in the 3.5e Monster Manual that imps are an exception to the Telepathy powers. The special ability that imps do not have at will is greater teleport. I personally handwave that as a power he got from his boss(es?) due to his PC levels.

Other devils that have telepathy have it listed in their stat-block. Imps do not, so they do not have telepathy.

[Porthos]

From the SRD:


Devil Traits
Most devils possesses the following traits (unless otherwise noted in a creature’s entry).

Immunity to fire and poison.
Resistance to acid 10 and cold 10.
See in Darkness (Su): Some devils can see perfectly in darkness of any kind, even that created by a deeper darkness spell.
Summon (Sp): Some devils share the ability to summon others of their kind (the success chance and type of devils summoned are noted in each monster description).
Telepathy.

My emphasis.

Imp
Special Qualities: Alternate form, damage reduction 5/good or silver, darkvision 60 ft., fast healing 2, immunity to poison, resistance to fire 5

Telepathy is not listed on the SQ block.

Furthermore, of all the creatures listed on the Devil (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/devil.htm) page, Imps and Lemures are the only ones without Telepathy listed in their SQ blocks.

I think it is logical conclude that they don't have it since the SRD went out of the way to list it on all of the others.

[Crusher]

From the SRD:



My emphasis.


Telepathy is not listed on the SQ block.

Furthermore, of all the creatures listed on the Devil (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/devil.htm) page, Imps and Lemures are the only ones without Telepathy listed in their SQ blocks.

I think it is logical conclude that they don't have it since the SRD went out of the way to list it on all of the others.

Looking at it the other way, are there any devils that say they *do not* have telepathy or whatever else? Because if none of them say they're lacking any abilities, and I think that's the case, then I think there's a misinterpretation of how that block of common devil abilities is meant to be applied.

I don't think it means "these are the abilities all devils have unless they specifically say otherwise". I think it actually means "If you're DM and don't have time to look up an entry, the odds are good that any given devil will be able to do these things. But if you want to get all detail-y you'll have to look up each monster's actual stat block. Most will have these abilities, but a few of them won't."

So the initial block doesn't supersede each stat block, its more like a Cliff's Notes for what the stat blocks are each likely, but not certain, to have. To be sure, you'd have to check each stat block.

[Porthos]

Looking at it the other way, are there any devils that say they *do not* have telepathy or whatever else? Because if none of them say they're lacking any abilities, and I think that's the case, then I think there's a misinterpretation of how that block of common devil abilities is meant to be applied.

Lemures, as I said, don't have telepathy and they're a type of devil.

There's also not many devils listed in the SRD (11 in total). But the two weakest, lemures and imps, have less abilities than the more powerfuls ones.

Makes sense to me.

ETA::: Deciding to check:

Imps only have Resitance 5 to fire, not immunity
No Resistance to Acid or Cold
No ability to see in darkness
and, as noted, no telepathy.

Really, Imps are at the bottom of the totem pole here (outside of lemures). It makes sense that they don't get everything.

If the SRD meant to say all instead of most it would have said all instead of most.

[Crusher]

Lemures, as I said, don't have telepathy and they're a type of devil.

There's also not many devils listed in the SRD (11 in total). But the two weakest, lemures and imps, have less abilities than the more powerfuls ones.

Makes sense to me.

ETA::: Deciding to check:

Imps only have Resitance 5 to fire, not immunity
No Resistance to Acid or Cold
No ability to see in darkness
and, as noted, no telepathy.

Really, Imps are at the bottom of the totem pole here (outside of lemures). It makes sense that they don't get everything.

If the SRD meant to say all instead of most it would have said all instead of most.

Right. It doesn't say Lemures have telepathy but it also doesn't say that *they don't* have telepathy either, right? No explicit denial of the ability.

[Shale]

But many other devils' stat blocks do explicitly say that they have telepathy. Why note it in some entries but not others if they all have it?

[CaDzilla]

Right. It doesn't say Lemures have telepathy but it also doesn't say that *they don't* have telepathy either, right? No explicit denial of the ability.

Sorry, forgot that imps aren't Baatezu, so he doesn't telepathy as a trait. However, this also means that him summoning that pit fiend was a spell of his rather than a trait. Though this could be handwaved as his rank being augmented by his class levels.

[Porthos]

Right. It doesn't say Lemures have telepathy but it also doesn't say that *they don't* have telepathy either, right? No explicit denial of the ability.

But that's not how statblocks work. There isn't a presumption of having to deny something unless it is explicitly noted that it isn't there for some reason.

I will also note the the Lemure is specifically noted as being mindless, so it'd be pretty silly for it to be telepathic.


But many other devils' stat blocks do explicitly say that they have telepathy. Why note it in some entries but not others if they all have it?

To jump off point this for a second, if something is supposed to have all of the traits of a subtype, the SRD says so (as far as I know). Take undead. Statblocks will say 'undead traits' in the Special Qualities section, unless they are tailoring it for a specific monster.

The Imp DOES NOT have 'devil traits' listed in its statblock, so I don't think you can presume that they have all of them. Especially since there are already differences between it and the 'standard' devil package.

Other Examples:

The Chain Devil doesn't have the immunity to fire and poison that most devils have. Instead it is immune to cold. Are people going to tell me it is also immune to fire and poison, and the creators of 3x just forgot to include it?

...

OK, that's possible, I admit. :smalltongue: But other devils have different abilities as well. It seems to me that the generic block at the beginning is for the DMs who create their own devils, so they know what most have.

As an aside, it turns out that the Chain Devil is the other devil listed on that page besides Imps and Lemures that doesn't have telepathy. Making it 8 out of 11. Whoops. Missed that on my quick search. :smallredface::smallbiggrin:

Given that the devils have differences in the Special Qualities listing and the Devil Trait said 'most' not 'all', I can't see how we can presume that Imps have telepathy.

If someone wants to run their game that way, kewl beans. But it looks to me that RAW doesn't say that Imps have it standard.

[CaDzilla]

But that's not how statblocks work. There isn't a presumption of having to deny something unless it is explicitly noted that it isn't there for some reason.

I will also note the the Lemure is specifically noted as being mindless, so it'd be pretty silly for it to be telepathic.



To jump off point this for a second, if something is supposed to have all of the traits of a subtype, the SRD says so. Take undead. Statblocks will say 'undead traits' in the Special Qualities section, unless they are tailoring it for a specific monster.

The Imp DOES NOT have 'devil traits' listed in its statblock, so I don't think you can presume that they have all of them. Especially since there are already differences between it and the 'standard' devil package.

Other Examples:

The Chain Devil doesn't have the immunity to fire and poison that most devils have. Instead it is immune to cold. Are people going to tell me it is also immune to fire and poison, and the creators of 3x just forgot to include it?

...

OK, that's possible, I admit. :smalltongue: But other devils have different abilities as well. It seems to me that the generic block at the beginning is for the DMs who create their own devils, so they know what most have.

As an aside, it turns out that the Chain Devil is the other devil listed on that page besides Imps and Lemures that doesn't have telepathy. Making it 8 out of 11. Whoops. Missed that on my quick search. :smallredface::smallbiggrin:

Given that the devils have differences in the Special Qualities listing and the Devil Trait said 'most' not 'all', I can't see how we can presume that Imps have telepathy.

If someone wants to run their game that way, kewl beans. But it looks to me that RAW doesn't say that Imps have it standard.

According to the 3.5 MM, the devils with Baatezu in their sub-headings are the ones with the normal traits. Kytons, erinyes', hellcats, and imps are not Baatezu. I should also note that none of Qarr's abilities follow his statistics block. He shouldn't be able to teleport at will or summon anything, especially a devil that is second in authority only to archdevils.

[Porthos]

According to the 3.5 MM, the devils with Baatezu in their sub-headings are the ones with the normal traits. Kytons, erinyes', hellcats, and imps are not Baatezu.

Fair enuf. :smallsmile:

[Taelas]

Erinyes are Baatezu, actually.

So are Lemures, and they are the only baatezu in the book that do not have Telepathy listed (presumably because they specifically cannot communicate). They instead have the Mindless trait listed (twice). It is also not the only baatezu trait they are lacking. (They cannot summon baatezu, for instance.)

It seems to me that Qarr is simply an Imp that for some reason has the baatezu subtype. Maybe he has a template. That would be one way of explaining his telepathy and teleportation, as well as his ability to summon Pit Fiends.

[ReaderAt2046]

Note that according to strip 943, Elan now has a Chaos Sabre, whatever that is.

[CaDzilla]

Erinyes are Baatezu, actually.

So are Lemures, and they are the only baatezu in the book that do not have Telepathy listed (presumably because they specifically cannot communicate). They instead have the Mindless trait listed (twice). It is also not the only baatezu trait they are lacking. (They cannot summon baatezu, for instance.)

It seems to me that Qarr is simply an Imp that for some reason has the baatezu subtype. Maybe he has a template. That would be one way of explaining his telepathy and teleportation, as well as his ability to summon Pit Fiends.

While they can't communicate, they are sensitive to other devils' commands

[Vinyadan]

I am just wondering if the thread title is a reference to Shamus Young's commentary to this page (http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=653)of DM of the Rings. :smallbiggrin:

[Taelas]

I am just wondering if the thread title is a reference to Shamus Young's commentary to this page (http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=653)of DM of the Rings. :smallbiggrin:

Bit more local (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=16859290&postcount=651).

[Quartz]

Is it worth noting that Dorukan and Lirian aren't exactly dead? They're soulbound in a gem that Xykon carries.

[Porthos]

Is it worth noting that Dorukan and Lirian aren't exactly dead? They're soulbound in a gem that Xykon carries.

No, they're still dead (though unresurrectable thanks to being soulbound). They just haven't moved on to whatever plane they would go to upon death.

[137beth]

No, they're still dead (though unresurrectable thanks to being soulbound). They just haven't moved on to whatever plane they would go to upon death.

Quartz is the Oracle in disguise, and has chosen to define "death" as a soul being trapped in the afterlife, in a hopeless attempt to justify Xykon not having "caused the death" of Dorukan or Lirian. His comment is absolute proof he is secretly a kobold oracle!

More seriously, though, Dorukan and Lirian are dead--sould bind (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/soulBind.htm) can only be cast on a dead creature. Even if we hadn't seen the die, the fact that Xykon was able to bind their souls would prove that they are dead.

[CaDzilla]

Regarding Dorukan, don't we have an upper limit for his level? Assuming that all of those energy drains got him at max damage, that puts his maximum level at 40

[Loreweaver15]

Regarding Dorukan, don't we have an upper limit for his level? Assuming that all of those energy drains got him at max damage, that puts his maximum level at 40

Out of curiosity, isn't level 40 above the "I am functionally God" threshold?

[SaintRidley]

Right. It doesn't say Lemures have telepathy but it also doesn't say that *they don't* have telepathy either, right? No explicit denial of the ability.

Not being listed in the statblock is an explicit denial of the ability.

Just like Qaar doesn't have Gate 5/day - it's not in the statblock.

[SavageWombat]

Tarquin still listed as having Infinite Deflection, I see.

[Loreweaver15]

Tarquin still listed as having Infinite Deflection, I see.

Oh, oh oh! Wait a minute, I haven't got my popcorn!

[zimmerwald1915]

Oh, oh oh! Wait a minute, I haven't got my popcorn!
Here, have some of mine.

[Sylthia]

Can someone explain the 8 dexterity to me? Dwarves don't have a dexterity penalty, do they?

In 2nd ed, they did, but they haven't since then, unless it's some dwarf sub-race.

[vergil]

Okay, perhaps stupid question here, but what was the result of the Wight draining Belkar's level in 515? The Wight's level drain gives Belkar a DC 14 Fortitude save after 24 hours to remove the negative level with no ill effects.

Belkar is listed as having reached 12th level in 249, and both Rangers and Barbarians have good Fortitude saves, so that's a +8 to his save, halflings get a +1 racial bonus, so assuming no bonus to Constitution and no magical items that boost saves he should have had a 75% chance of making his saving throw.

Is it assumed that his level there was drained permanently, or that he made his saving throw offscreen? Or is there some other factor that I'm missing?

[Steven]

Tarquin still listed as having Infinite Deflection, I see.

Since people are eating popcorn....

Is this not simply because it's the only way to explain what he has done by RAW. Since it's the only way to explain it by RAW, we default to that because if we don't then every other possible combination of home-brew is equally as likely.

He could catch them with some gloves, he could catch them with a feat. He catch them with a ring, he could catch them with his teeth.

He could catch them on the ground, he could catch them upside down.

But he couldn't catch them Sam-I-Am, by RAW, without the epic feat.

....

I'll see myself out.

[Loreweaver15]

All in favor of a slow clap?

[SavageWombat]

Since people are eating popcorn....

Is this not simply because it's the only way to explain what he has done by RAW. Since it's the only way to explain it by RAW, we default to that because if we don't then every other possible combination of home-brew is equally as likely.

He could catch them with some gloves, he could catch them with a feat. He catch them with a ring, he could catch them with his teeth.

He could catch them on the ground, he could catch them upside down.

But he couldn't catch them Sam-I-Am, by RAW, without the epic feat.

....

I'll see myself out.

The point is that Infinite Deflection is contra-indicated by his behavior on the side of the airship. The feat in question was a poor fit before (as he only EVER caught two arrows) and now even poorer. I personally think that the supporters of putting the feat on the list like to be able to "prove" that Tarquin is epic-level.

Tarquin has an undefined ability two catch two, and only two, arrows at one time. Not Infinite Deflection.

But since you asked, that's my stance. Hope the popcorn was tasty.

[Steven]

I was going to cancel my post because I vaguely remembered you posting something like that before, which make sense to me btw, but then I had this whole Dr. Seuss thing going on and decided to post anyway :P

[Emanick]

The point is that Infinite Deflection is contra-indicated by his behavior on the side of the airship. The feat in question was a poor fit before (as he only EVER caught two arrows) and now even poorer. I personally think that the supporters of putting the feat on the list like to be able to "prove" that Tarquin is epic-level.

Tarquin has an undefined ability two catch two, and only two, arrows at one time. Not Infinite Deflection.

But since you asked, that's my stance. Hope the popcorn was tasty.

Alternate theory: Rich hasn't shown Tarquin catching more than one arrow in each hand at a time because him doing so would make less intuitive sense to someone less hyper-familiar with the rules than the people in this thread, not because he cares about the game mechanics. It's also possible that Tarquin made a tactical mistake in the 0.2 seconds he had to react to the arrows zooming straight towards his eyes - a mistake I, frankly, would make too.

Maybe you're right. Maybe Rich has definitively decided that Tarquin isn't epic and doesn't have Infinite Deflection. But since it's possible that he does have the feat, we have to list it, because it's the only RAW explanation. Remember, there is no public definitive list of Tarquin's stats. We are literally making them up.

[zimmerwald1915]

Is it assumed that his level there was drained permanently, or that he made his saving throw offscreen? Or is there some other factor that I'm missing?
We don't know either way.


I'll see myself out.
Will you be here all week? Should we tip our waitresses?

[SavageWombat]

Maybe you're right. Maybe Rich has definitively decided that Tarquin isn't epic and doesn't have Infinite Deflection. But since it's possible that he does have the feat, we have to list it, because it's the only RAW explanation. Remember, there is no public definitive list of Tarquin's stats. We are literally making them up.

It's possible that Roy's grandfather's feat is Mage Slayer, since that fits the description of the ability. But it doesn't actually appear to work the same way, so the list hedges on that. It's possible that Tarquin has Infinite Deflection, but the feat doesn't match what's in the strip. So the only reason to definitively list it is for the excuse to say "and he's therefore 21+ level". RAW doesn't apply because Tarquin's ability doesn't match RAW regardless.

[RMS Oceanic]

It's possible that Roy's grandfather's feat is Mage Slayer, since that fits the description of the ability. But it doesn't actually appear to work the same way, so the list hedges on that. It's possible that Tarquin has Infinite Deflection, but the feat doesn't match what's in the strip. So the only reason to definitively list it is for the excuse to say "and he's therefore 21+ level". RAW doesn't apply because Tarquin's ability doesn't match RAW regardless.

Tarquin intercepts more than one arrow in a single round. What's not RAW about that?

[Kurald Galain]

We don't assume that every character is optimized nor that every character uses optimal tactics at all times. Indeed, The Giant has repeatedly stated that they don't. So I'm afraid it's not a very useful argument to claim that "character X could have done something tactically better with feat Y, and therefore he doesn't have that feat".


Note that according to strip 943, Elan now has a Chaos Sabre, whatever that is.
A popular theory is that it's an anarchic weapon (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicWeapons.htm#anarchic), meaning it deals extra damage to lawful creatures such as Tarquin. That said, I'm sure we'll see what its special effects are the next time Elan gets into combat.

[Ceaon]

This is the corrected stat block for Kraagor, then.

http://img78.imageshack.us/img78/1264/kraagorhc8.gif Kraagor (Deceased (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0276.html))
Non-lawful, Dwarf Male, Barbarian (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0276.html)
Con ~12 (no evidence, dwarf)
Int 8+ (Doesn't use Thog-speak (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0276.html))
Cha ~8 (no evidence, dwarf)
Abilities: Dwarf abilities, Barbarian abilities
Skills: Speak Language (Dwarven)
Feats:
Items: Axe (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0276.html)

[hamishspence]

Kraagor uses Thog-speak in crayon strips in SoD though.

Maybe he uses it when he chooses to, rather than all the time?

[Loreweaver15]

Kraagor uses Thog-speak in crayon strips in SoD though.

Maybe he uses it when he chooses to, rather than all the time?

There's several different levels of 'dumb', indicated by degraded grammar, missing capitalization, and bolded text, in various forms. Somebody cataloged them a while back.

[RMS Oceanic]

I've corrected Kraagor's statblock.

[Kurald Galain]

So is there general agreement that anyone who doesn't use Thog-speak has intelligence 8 or more, including Belkar, Elan, Yikyik, and Crystal? Should we make further inferences on intelligence based on the fact that certain characters (e.g. Haley) can consistently fit a proper Sending message in 25 words, and other characters (e.g. Nale) cannot?

[SavageWombat]

We don't assume that every character is optimized nor that every character uses optimal tactics at all times. Indeed, The Giant has repeatedly stated that they don't. So I'm afraid it's not a very useful argument to claim that "character X could have done something tactically better with feat Y, and therefore he doesn't have that feat".

A character being forced into a tactical dilemma by another character's knowledge of their limitations is not the same as your quoted argument. Haley knew that Tarquin had to use both hands to catch both arrows. This isn't a "she got lucky" moment.

This is not a case where the more powerful ability fits the circumstance - it does not describe what is seen in the strip. We don't put "limited wish, level 15+" on someone's character sheet every time they cast a spell we don't recognize.

[RMS Oceanic]

A character being forced into a tactical dilemma by another character's knowledge of their limitations is not the same as your quoted argument. Haley knew that Tarquin had to use both hands to catch both arrows. This isn't a "she got lucky" moment.

This is not a case where the more powerful ability fits the circumstance - it does not describe what is seen in the strip. We don't put "limited wish, level 15+" on someone's character sheet every time they cast a spell we don't recognize.

And how does "intercepts more than one arrow in a single round" not tally up with infinite deflection?

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Kraagor uses Thog-speak in crayon strips in SoD though.

Maybe he uses it when he chooses to, rather than all the time?

Maybe talking with proper grammar is an Intelligence-based skill, and thus he can't use it while raging? Was he even raging at the time he used Thog-speech?

(Yeah, I'm grasping at straws)

Grey Wolf

[Kalmegil]

So is there general agreement that anyone who doesn't use Thog-speak has intelligence 8 or more, including Belkar, Elan, Yikyik, and Crystal? Should we make further inferences on intelligence based on the fact that certain characters (e.g. Haley) can consistently fit a proper Sending message in 25 words, and other characters (e.g. Nale) cannot?

I don't think so. Crystal is the best example. I doubt she has Int 8+, yet she doesn't use Thog-speak. If low Int has a mechanical effect that's present in the comic, by all means use that. But we shouldn't assume that the Giant represents particular stat levels in only one way.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

I don't think so. Crystal is the best example. I doubt she has Int 8+, yet she doesn't use Thog-speak. If low Int has a mechanical effect that's present in the comic, by all means use that. But we shouldn't assume that the Giant represents particular stat levels in only one way.

Do we have an example of any pure-blooded orc that doesn't used Thog-speech? Therkla is the only one I can think of off the top of my head, but she was half-orc.

GW

[ChristianSt]

A character being forced into a tactical dilemma by another character's knowledge of their limitations is not the same as your quoted argument. Haley knew that Tarquin had to use both hands to catch both arrows. This isn't a "she got lucky" moment.

This is not a case where the more powerful ability fits the circumstance - it does not describe what is seen in the strip. We don't put "limited wish, level 15+" on someone's character sheet every time they cast a spell we don't recognize.
From the discussion I have read here (and SRD excerpts), Infinite Deflection is a possible RAW answer to what Tarquin did.

1) You either need to say how Infinite Deflection doesn't work for what was seen. Saying he could do better with it, doesn't force him to actually do better.
2) Or at least propse another RAW explanation how Tarquin did it. Because I think enough forumites would prefer a non-epic solution. But I haven't seen any other working RAW explanation.

I see neither.

Also Haley didn't need to know whether he would use one or both hands: even only needing one hand would make it harder for him to hold to the ship.

[SavageWombat]

You either need to say how Infinite Deflection doesn't work for what was seen. Saying he could do better with it, doesn't force him to actually do better.

People keep trying to push this point - and it doesn't apply in this case. Infinite Deflection covers the ability to deflect more than one arrow, yes, in the same way that Fireball covers the ability to fill a 5' hex with flame.

Rich showed us multiple times how Tarquin's ability works - he can catch one arrow in each free hand. No more. Haley was counting on this being the case, and she was proven correct. It was a big dramatic moment in a climactic fight.

People have stretched the "well, he could have used that feat in that fashion" to cover this instance because they really want to put that feat on his listing.

If Belkar suddenly displayed another combat stunt that requires a feat chain three items long (again!) I don't think we'd see people demanding that Belkar's level be upgraded to 21+. They'd accept that there's another factor involved.

Demanding that Tarquin be listed with an Epic feat that doesn't match the observed reality of the strip is not in keeping with the rest of the decisions made by this forum.

[Chronos]

Tarquin's use of his ability on the ship in no way changes the evidence for it being Infinite Deflection. Yes, if he has Infinite Deflection, then he made a tactical error. But that's irrelevant, because if he doesn't have Infinite Deflection, he also made a tactical error. No matter how his ability works, it was a mistake for him to let go of the railing with both hands, since the falling damage was certainly greater than the damage from one of the arrows. So, what we can conclude from that incident is that Tarquin made a mistake. That's all we can conclude.

Yes, this implies that Tarquin is epic, and we should be especially careful about conclusions that imply something unexpected. But Tarquin being epic isn't actually unexpected. We already have multiple lines of evidence that Tarquin is either epic or very close to it. Admittedly, some of those lines of evidence are circumstantial, but it's still no surprise to see them confirmed.

[ChristianSt]

Demanding that Tarquin be listed with an Epic feat that doesn't match the observed reality of the strip is not in keeping with the rest of the decisions made by this forum.

Please where does Infinite Deflection doesn't match the strip?

I don't think Tarquin is epic. But Infinite Deflection is a RAW explanation.

Your alternative is that he has the "Tarquin's houseruled Arrow Catching" feat.

If there is a RAW solution and there is no in-comic evidence suggesting there is a houserule in effect, the RAW solution is the one that should be used here.

[Shale]

I think what this comes down to is where we're going to draw the line between homebrew and RAW.

Everything in OOTS is homebrewed to some degree or another. Rich has been very up-front about that, including in this very topic. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=15179104#post15179104) So do we declare homebrew when the story breaks with the SRD's "fluff" in some notable way, or only when we see something that's mechanically impossible under the rules as written?

Here, we have Tarquin doing nothing that would be impossible with Infinite Deflection and Snatch Arrows. There are two arrows flying toward him, he catches them. If you're just looking at the list of actions and matching them up with SRD entries, it couldn't be simpler. But the incredibly clear implication of the scene is that he has only two options - catch the arrows or let at least one of them hit. That's incompatible with Infinite Deflection, since the simplest possible application of that feat - not even a rules-lawyering, overstrategized version, just "apply the explicit terms of the feat as written" - would let him block both with one hand, while keeping his grip on the Mechane with the other.

[SavageWombat]

Yes, this implies that Tarquin is epic, and we should be especially careful about conclusions that imply something unexpected. But Tarquin being epic isn't actually unexpected. We already have multiple lines of evidence that Tarquin is either epic or very close to it. Admittedly, some of those lines of evidence are circumstantial, but it's still no surprise to see them confirmed.

I feel that the difference between "higher level than the PCs" and "epic" is an important line to discuss before crossing. Tarquin can easily be 20th level and still meet all other circumstantial evidence. And if the only "strong" evidence is the presence of one problematic feat, I think we should refrain from using it as the basis of fact.


Here, we have Tarquin doing nothing that would be impossible with Infinite Deflection and Snatch Arrows. There are two arrows flying toward him, he catches them. If you're just looking at the list of actions and matching them up with SRD entries, it couldn't be simpler. But the incredibly clear implication of the scene is that he has only two options - catch the arrows or let at least one of them hit. That's incompatible with Infinite Deflection, since the simplest possible application of that feat - not even a rules-lawyering, overstrategized version, just "apply the explicit terms of the feat as written" - would let him block both with one hand, while keeping his grip on the Mechane with the other.

Thank you!

[hamishspence]

Maybe talking with proper grammar is an Intelligence-based skill, and thus he can't use it while raging? Was he even raging at the time he used Thog-speech?

(Yeah, I'm grasping at straws)

"raging make kraagor a thirsty boy."

Could be that he's just began his rage, rather than is about to begin it.

[ChristianSt]

I agree that he could have used Infinite Deflection RAW to just use one hand to deflect both.

But this doesn't change the fact he could RAW do what he did in comic with it.

Saying he can't have that feat because he would used it better sounds like some kind of optimization argument that this thread doesn't relay on.

So unless you propose another RAW explanation, I don't think there really is something to argue about.

[Shale]

That's like saying that if there are three zombies clustered around Roy and he cuts through two of them, downing both, but doesn't attack the third at all, allowing it to get past him and kill V, well, that could still be Great Cleave, since he doesn't have to take the third attack.

(This is assuming the "Great Cleavage" scene hadn't happened, of course. It's a hypothetical!)

IMO, there's a gap between "tactical decisions" and "active self-sabotage." I don't feel comfortable assuming that a character would choose to fail at his primary combat goal, which is what Tarquin did if he has Infinite Deflection.

And again, if we're judging just on basis of what can mechanically explain the actions a character takes in combat, none of that matters. If we're not, then it does.

[ChristianSt]

That's like saying that if there are three zombies clustered around Roy and he cuts through two of them, downing both, but doesn't attack the third at all, allowing it to get past him and kill V, well, that could still be Great Cleave, since he doesn't have to take the third attack.

(This is assuming the "Great Cleavage" scene hadn't happened, of course. It's a hypothetical!)

It depends:

Is there another RAW explanation how he cuts through two zombies? If so, then this scene doesn't imply he has Great Cleavage.

If Great Cleavage is the only RAW explanation, then yes imo it would proof that he has Great Cleavage (at least in the context of this thread), unless there is a contradiction.

[Kurald Galain]

I feel that the difference between "higher level than the PCs" and "epic" is an important line to discuss before crossing.
Actually, within the 3E rules, the difference between a 20th and a 21st level character is pretty small. Sure, the latter gets the stamp "epic", but that's just a word; in practice he'll just have +1 to hit and a few more hit points compared to one level earlier, and one additional feat out of a list that's frankly pretty bad (except for Epic Spellcasting).

So whether a character level is 20 or 21 is about the same leap as whether it's 17 or 18; that is, not a particular big deal unless you gain a new spell level out of it.

[SavageWombat]

It depends:

Is there another RAW explanation how he cuts through two zombies? If so, then this scene doesn't imply he has Great Cleavage.

If Great Cleavage is the only RAW explanation, then yes imo it would proof that he has Great Cleavage (at least in the context of this thread), unless there is a contradiction.

Your interpretation of the RAW rule is exactly the problem that Shale is describing. The fact that the ability as demonstrated in the comic doesn't match the rule is in fact the "contradiction" you're seemingly ignoring.

[Techwarrior]

On a completely unrelated subject...

Sabine needs a Strength of at least 20 in order to carry Elan (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0805.html) and his gear (2 rapiers, a lute, the belt, and the boots) while flying.

If she is ignoring the 'light load to fly' rule, her Strength must still be at least 13 to do that, as she quite clearly isn't restricted to a 5 ft. step as a full-round action.

Also, I think that scene also qualifies her for Improved Bull Rush.

[ChristianSt]

Your interpretation of the RAW rule is exactly the problem that Shale is describing. The fact that the ability as demonstrated in the comic doesn't match the rule is in fact the "contradiction" you're seemingly ignoring.

Can you post me a single panel where there is something shown that contradicts Infinite Deflection, without arguing "he could have made a smarter/better decision"?

Doing a suboptimal move != rules mismatch.

[Shale]

"I desperately want to keep clinging to the ship, but I am going to let go even though nothing about the ability I am using requires me to do that" goes beyond "suboptimal," is my point. If you can't get that, then we're just talking in circles.

[ChristianSt]

"I desperately want to keep clinging to the ship, but I am going to let go even though nothing about the ability I am using requires me to do that" goes beyond "suboptimal," is my point. If you can't get that, then we're just talking in circles.

So what? It would most likely be much better to catch only 1 arrow with 1 hand and take one to the face instead of doing like he did?

Maybe he wanted to look desperate so that Elan will capture him?

Nothing forced the Ogre in 216 to jump of the cliff. Yet he did. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0216.html) Which was clearly very suicidal, even more so than what Tarquin did.

[Shale]

If his only choices were to take the arrow to the face or catch it, he doesn't have Infinite Deflection.

That's the last thing I'm going to say on this. I've made my point ad nauseam, and it's not going to help anyone to keep going around and around on it.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

"I desperately want to keep clinging to the ship, but I am going to let go even though nothing about the ability I am using requires me to do that" goes beyond "suboptimal," is my point. If you can't get that, then we're just talking in circles.

Shale,

I get what you are saying, and I agree with you that all the evidence in the comic points to the fact that Tarquin only has regular grab arrows, with a houserule that he can use it twice per turn, but needs to have both hands free, and must use each hand once.

But for this thread, that opens a can of worms that they might prefer to keep closed. This is similar to how I agree that Zodar fits MitD, if we allow a houserule to say he looks insectoid rather than the guy in black armour from the official drawings, but for the purposes of the thread we stick with RAW.

Now, I'm not sure if this thread operates under strict "no houserules when RAW" or if you could find a past ruling where RAW existed but was so ludicrous it was rejected. This case is a gray area, where it bugs some that it propels Tarquin to level 21 (it bugs me) and fazes others not at all (Kurald). But while I disagree with the conclusion, I can appreciate that the "no houserules when RAW" is a necessity for the thread, otherwise, everyone will be doing arguments in less-gray areas using this case as their precedent.

Yours,

Grey Wolf

[SavageWombat]

So what? It would most likely be much better to catch only 1 arrow with 1 hand and take one to the face instead of doing like he did?


No, he would have batted both arrows away with one hand and remained clinging to the ship. Face it, RAW does not explain this scene with that feat.

The comic clearly depicts a highly specific ability - the ability to catch up to two arrows, one per free hand. This is the power Rich wants Tarquin to have, to set up the scene with Haley. Saying he could deflect any number of arrows, but chose to (a) fall of an airship and (b) let Miron be shot behind him is more of a stretch then you seem willing to admit.

[Shale]

Grey Wolf, that's the discussion I think we should be having. Not "what's happening in the scene" but "what standard of evidence should we be using." And I think you have a good point, really. It is a grey area, no pun intended.

[zimmerwald1915]

"I desperately want to keep clinging to the ship, but I am going to let go even though nothing about the ability I am using requires me to do that" goes beyond "suboptimal," is my point. If you can't get that, then we're just talking in circles.
Well, if we're going down thhe "nothing requires" route, then nothing requires that Tarquin let go of the airship for the scene to play out as it did. Stripped of all dramatic framing and reduced to spare mechanical actions, here's my reading of how the scene played out.

Bandana sets the ship moving violently, forcing Tarquin to have to make a Reflex save each turn to hang on.
Haley shoots two arrows at Tarquin.
Tarquin catches both arrows.
Tarquin makes a Reflex save to hang on to the side of the airship, albeit not as securely as before.

From Tarquin's point of view, Haley's arrows didn't actually change the actions he needed to take. Deflected or not, caught or not, sooner or later he'd need too make that Reflex save. Being left hanging less securely than before is a reasonable interpretation of having barely succeeded on that save, and would be reasonable no matter if the genesis of the bare success was an additional penalty or a naturally low roll. Catching both of Haley's arrows might or might not have imposed a circumstance penalty to that save, but even if they did such circumstance penalties are normally -2. I don't think "accepting a -2 penalty on a save I'll need to make anyway, and am likely to make given that I've made every saving throw put to me so far" is such a "beyond suboptimal" trade-off for "avoiding potentially 2d8+20d6 of damage." Of course, from Haley's point of view, giving Tarquin a circumstance penalty costs her nothing and shooting at him is extremely satisfying.

[SavageWombat]

Now, I'm not sure if this thread operates under strict "no houserules when RAW" or if you could find a past ruling where RAW existed but was so ludicrous it was rejected. This case is a gray area, where it bugs some that it propels Tarquin to level 21 (it bugs me) and fazes others not at all (Kurald). But while I disagree with the conclusion, I can appreciate that the "no houserules when RAW" is a necessity for the thread, otherwise, everyone will be doing arguments in less-gray areas using this case as their precedent.

The closest example that comes to my mind is the debate over Xykon exact level needed to cast Maximized Energy Drain. Since there was a clear dispute on the point, the forum used the lower bound even though it assumed an unseen magic item or feat not in SRD (iirc). In this case, Tarquin's level is being set at the higher bound solely on the interpretation of one feat that some of us dispute.

[Kalmegil]

Do we have an example of any pure-blooded orc that doesn't used Thog-speech? Therkla is the only one I can think of off the top of my head, but she was half-orc.

GW

Exactly. Which suggests to me that the Giant uses Thog-speech to indicate something other than Int, such as lack of fluency with a second language. Which might suggest that Thog, though also a half-orc, learned orcish first. This, of course, is mere speculation, but I think it's also mere speculation to think that Thog-speech's absence is a sign of a certain minimum Int.

The only in-comic reason we have to think Thog-speech is Int-related is that Thog is dumb, which we know for other reasons, and that he uses Thog-speech. The out-of-comic reason to think it's related requires importing a pretty pernicious attitude, specifically that lack of idiom fluency in a language is a sign of low intelligence.

If you compare what Thog says in Thog speech to what the Orcs on the island say, it's clear most or all of them are smarter than Thog, despite their speech being largely the same. (This is the flip side of Crystal, who is dumber than those orcs, but speaks common better).

[ChristianSt]

No, he would have batted both arrows away with one hand and remained clinging to the ship. Face it, RAW does not explain this scene with that feat.

The comic clearly depicts a highly specific ability - the ability to catch up to two arrows, one per free hand. This is the power Rich wants Tarquin to have, to set up the scene with Haley. Saying he could deflect any number of arrows, but chose to (a) fall of an airship and (b) let Miron be shot behind him is more of a stretch then you seem willing to admit.

And again: while it might certainly be plausible that he has an houseruled feat, nothing you said really matters:

first of all I'm not sure why you boldfaced deflect. I'm not sure if you have a problem with him catching the arrows or not. But that is no problem since with the Snatch Arrow (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#snatchArrows) feat he can catch an arrow when deflecting it via Deflect Arrow (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#deflectArrows). With Infinite Deflection (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/feats.htm#infiniteDeflection) he can do this as many times as he wants per round. Without it only once.

to (a): He didn't chose to fall. He did chose to catch the arrows and make it harder to hold onto the ship. Maybe he is just used to catch arrows and doesn't really like to deflect them. As I said maybe he wanted to look a bit more desperate to get captured (which didn't work out). But with those three feats he can clearly choose to catch both arrows.

to (b): Deflect Arrow lists "when you would normally be hit with a ranged weapon, you may deflect". So clearly Tarquin could not deflect any arrow hitting other peoples. Because those arrows didn't hit Tarquin.

If there would actually see a strip where he gets hit by a third arrow, then it would be a far better indication that he doesn't have Infinite Deflection. But since we don't have that, your argumentation is "I find it more likelier that he has some houseruled feat instead of playing RAW and making a suboptimal/bad decision."


Q: Does The Giant use house rules?
Probably. But for the purpose of this thread, we assume that the comic doesn't, except where The Giant has explicitly said so, or where some event is clearly not possible by the rules. That is, we try to explain events in the comic within the rules as much as possible, and that means not leaving factoids out of this thread just because The Giant might not have followed the rules there.

So playing by the thread rules I think it is pretty clear what should be listed, unless you have another RAW explanation OR say how the scenes doesn't work with RAW.

Sure, you can say you don't like those rule and want them to be changed, but then you should say that and not argue about stuff that results from those rules without saying that the rules are the problem.

[Socksy]

http://imageshack.us/a/img4/8008/978c.png Laurin Shattersmith
Evil Human Female, Psion (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0911.html) 13+ (To be level drained (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0931.html) but still manifest Disintegrate (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0934.html))
Str, Dex, Con ~7 (No evidence, age)
Int 16+ (To manifest Disintegrate)
Wis, Cha ~12 (No evidence, age)
Age: 58+
Items: Headband, Red Ioun Stone, Green Ioun Stone, Orange Ioun Stone (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0758.html)
Powers Known: Body Adjustment (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0928.html),
Control Body (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0927.html), Dimension Door (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0931.html), Disintegrate (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0914.html), Dispel Psionics (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0929.html), Specified Energy Adaptation (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0935.html), Mental Disruption (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0928.html), Mind Probe (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0913.html), Telekinetic Force (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0929.html), Unspecified Attack Power (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0925.html), Wormhole (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0910.html)


Has Ultrablast been mentioned yet?
And I will eat my hat if a Wormhole big enough to let an entire army through isn't augmented above seventh level.
I still think she's an Elan, if simply for Rule of Funny when someone shouts Elan, trying to get the bard's attention, and she hears, and confusion ensues.

[Shale]

It's not Ultrablast, it's an unnamed homebrew power that Rich eyeballed at sixth level. (https://twitter.com/RichBurlew/status/400740323233505280)

[Socksy]

It's not Ultrablast, it's an unnamed homebrew power that Rich eyeballed at sixth level. (https://twitter.com/RichBurlew/status/400740323233505280)

Thank you c::smallsmile:
Also, someone needs to dig out the first edition thief rules for Haley's dad for the "Family" section.:smallwink:

[zimmerwald1915]

Thank you c::smallsmile:
Also, someone needs to dig out the first edition thief rules for Haley's dad for the "Family" section.:smallwink:
Why? Even in the comic where Haley mentions it, she uses the verb "was," not "is," implying that Ian is no longer a First-Edition Thief and was upgraded to Third Edition along with [almost] everything else.

[Bird]

Exactly. Which suggests to me that the Giant uses Thog-speech to indicate something other than Int, such as lack of fluency with a second language. Which might suggest that Thog, though also a half-orc, learned orcish first. This, of course, is mere speculation, but I think it's also mere speculation to think that Thog-speech's absence is a sign of a certain minimum Int.

The only in-comic reason we have to think Thog-speech is Int-related is that Thog is dumb, which we know for other reasons, and that he uses Thog-speech. The out-of-comic reason to think it's related requires importing a pretty pernicious attitude, specifically that lack of idiom fluency in a language is a sign of low intelligence.

If you compare what Thog says in Thog speech to what the Orcs on the island say, it's clear most or all of them are smarter than Thog, despite their speech being largely the same. (This is the flip side of Crystal, who is dumber than those orcs, but speaks common better).
Interestingly, there is a mechanical link in D&D between multilingualism and intelligence, because INT bonus = bonus languages. However, there is no objective mechanical link between INT and facility with Common.

I agree that it's reductionist to peg intelligence based on whether someone uses Thog-speak or not. Enor is probably smarter than Thog, and Crystal might be, but we have no firm basis with which to say so.

This is further complicated by the fact that much of the humor of Thog comes from the juxtaposition of his grammar with oddly eloquent, poetic, or modern diction. ("Thog grateful for update on talky-man's relationship status.") He is sort of an idiot genius.

We also seem to set the lower bounds of Elan and Sabine's intelligences based purely on Thog calling them "smart," which I don't understand either.


On a completely unrelated subject...

Sabine needs a Strength of at least 20 in order to carry Elan (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0805.html) and his gear (2 rapiers, a lute, the belt, and the boots) while flying.

If she is ignoring the 'light load to fly' rule, her Strength must still be at least 13 to do that, as she quite clearly isn't restricted to a 5 ft. step as a full-round action.

Also, I think that scene also qualifies her for Improved Bull Rush.
She did even better than that when she carried Nale and Thog at the same, when they were escaping from Azure City.

Sabine's strength came up in the last thread, but the issue sputtered out because of the old disagreement about whether to use flight loads as evidence or not.

I will say this: whether you use that evidence or not, there can be no doubt that Sabine is supposed to be extremely strong. A big part of her shtick is lifting/throwing heavy things.

Sticks her arm through a heavily armored soldier, then lifts him one-handed with no evident exertion. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0120.html)

Lifts Roy one-handed, then casually tosses him across the room. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0343.html)

Smashes the TV by swinging or tossing the couch at it. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0914.html)

She is strong.

[Loreweaver15]

Your interpretation of the RAW rule is exactly the problem that Shale is describing. The fact that the ability as demonstrated in the comic doesn't match the rule is in fact the "contradiction" you're seemingly ignoring.

The argument here is that there is nothing else in RAW that will allow Tarquin to do what he does by RAW, which you have been challenged to present an alternative explanation for. Until someone does, the simplest, least-homebrewed explanation is Snatch Arrows plus Infinite Deflection.

People have been up front with you that it doesn't match perfectly, and are perfectly open to alternatives, which they have asked you to provide. Instead of providing alternatives, you just keep saying "can't be that can't be that why aren't you listening to me".

[Shale]

But...the claim is that there isn't a RAW explanation at all. How can you back that up with a RAW explanation?

[zimmerwald1915]

But...the claim is that there isn't a RAW explanation at all.
Then the claim is a bad one. Infinite Deflection + Snatch Arrows can explain Tarquin's actions by RAW, as ChristianSt explained. That Infinite Deflection could have been used alone to deflect the arrows1 doesn't enter into whether the combination of the two feats can explain what happened or not.

1If we want to go into houserules territory, there might be something going on where if you have Snatch Arrows you must snatch rather than deflect the arrows you would have deflected. Interestingly, assuming you can only snatch one arrow per hand, this would considerably weaken Infinite Deflection.

[Shale]

Then the claim is a bad one. Infinite Deflection + Snatch Arrows can explain Tarquin's actions by RAW, as ChristianSt explained. That Infinite Deflection could have been used alone to deflect the arrows doesn't enter into whether the combination of the two feats can explain what happened or not.

Yes, I know. That is more or less exactly what I said a page ago. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=16965694&postcount=83) We apparently disagree over whether that scene remains coherent if Tarquin could have blocked both arrows with one hand if he felt like it, but chose not to, and then for some reason suddenly changed his mind again about whether he wanted to hold on to the ship. (And, more to the point, whether that lack of coherence should factor into what's listed in a stat block.)

[SavageWombat]

And Wish spells can be used to explain any magical effect we don't immediately understand (Zz'dtri's green lightning?) but you don't see us rushing to put it on the list.

Infinite Deflection can just barely explain how he performed the trick, if you overlook the incredibly obvious flaws in it's execution. The "but he could if he wants to" argument is weak and specious at best.

Personally, I think the obvious answer is "he has Gloves of Missile Snaring and Rich didn't realize that having two doesn't let you use them twice". But I understand perfectly about not assuming magic items unnecessarily.

No matter how much people keep yammering about RAW, the point is that a sketchy feat suggestion has been used to justify a further level minimum. And that, when the Haley scene demonstrated just how sketchy the suggestion was, forumites refused to revisit the question.

Tarquin should have "undefined ability to snatch two arrows/round", not a feat that does not fit the observed behavior.

And yes, clearly I need to keep returning to this point, because people keep saying "but technically"... at me and refusing to actually discuss the issue.

[hamishspence]

Personally, I think the obvious answer is "he has Gloves of Missile Snaring and Rich didn't realize that having two doesn't let you use them twice". But I understand perfectly about not assuming magic items unnecessarily.

I could see Gloves, like Gauntlets, being the sort of thing that one might expect to be visible- even if it's a bit less obvious- only coloring the hands and wrists differently.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/Incentives.html

[ChristianSt]

Infinite Deflection can just barely explain how he performed the trick, if you overlook the incredibly obvious flaws in it's execution. The "but he could if he wants to" argument is weak and specious at best.

Personally, I think the obvious answer is "he has Gloves of Missile Snaring and Rich didn't realize that having two doesn't let you use them twice". But I understand perfectly about not assuming magic items unnecessarily.

No matter how much people keep yammering about RAW, the point is that a sketchy feat suggestion has been used to justify a further level minimum. And that, when the Haley scene demonstrated just how sketchy the suggestion was, forumites refused to revisit the question.

Tarquin should have "undefined ability to snatch two arrows/round", not a feat that does not fit the observed behavior.

Maybe it is an option which needs a really bad tactical choice from Tarquin, but it still is RAW.

Your proposed alternatives are both houseruled (either ignoring limitations of abilities or requiring a non-existing feat).

So while it certainly isn't the best explanation, it is so far the only RAW explanation we have.

[SavageWombat]

So while it certainly isn't the best explanation, it is so far the only RAW explanation we have.

It is so far from being the best explanation it is in fact a BAD explanation. Like using Wish to explain random spell effects.

In other words, it is better that the listing have no explanation then a bad one that doesn't explain the evidence - and certainly better not to use that bad explanation as "proof" of character level. It should not be on the list.

[Shale]

Can we please take it as read that the choice is between Infinite Deflection and some form of homebrew? Pretty please?

[Taelas]

It is so far from being the best explanation it is in fact a BAD explanation. Like using Wish to explain random spell effects.
Except we don't need to go that far to explain random spell effects.


In other words, it is better that the listing have no explanation then a bad one that doesn't explain the evidence - and certainly better not to use that bad explanation as "proof" of character level. It should not be on the list.
I have never liked Tarquin getting Infinite Deflection, but I have to disagree with you. It's a RAW explanation that satisfies the requirement for the scene.

I don't think it's in any way accurate, and it bugs me that Tarquin is pegged as Epic due to something so utterly ridiculous as him catching two arrows. But the logic is sound.

[CaDzilla]

Theory on Tarquin's arrow catching: Tarquin's father/mentor was a monk who specialized in catching arrows. Tarquin cut off his father's hands and made the into an artifact that allowed the wearer to catch as many arrows per round as long as their hands were free.
Incidentally, for some reason I think that Tarquin's family name is Arrowcatcher.

[zimmerwald1915]

I don't think it's in any way accurate, and it bugs me that Tarquin is pegged as Epic due to something so utterly ridiculous as him catching two arrows. But the logic is sound.
Most Epic feats, excepting Epic Spellcasting and the Epic Crafting feats, aren't actually that great. The "martials don't get nice things" trope is alive and well beyond level 20.

[SavageWombat]

I don't think it's in any way accurate, and it bugs me that Tarquin is pegged as Epic due to something so utterly ridiculous as him catching two arrows. But the logic is sound.

If you agree it's not accurate, and it causes the Epic problem I describe, then I think you'd support my suggestion that it not be listed.

There is nothing in the thread guidelines that says a suggested explanation MUST be listed unless hard evidence against it is discovered. It's a bad fit - just leave it out.

[zimmerwald1915]

If you agree it's not accurate, and it causes the Epic problem I describe, then I think you'd support my suggestion that it not be listed.
Why do you think it's problematic to have Epic characters in the story besides Xykon and the Order of the Scribble, which by itself is already a pretty big stable of Epic characters? Please provide reasons other than a visceral negative reaction to the word "Epic."

[CaDzilla]

Shouldn't Lirian have Epic Spellcasting? She made the divine half of the gate.
Also, if Tarquin was actually epic level, wouldn`t he showboat it a lot, especially when he's trying to instill a sense of despair into his son?

Haley:Want some?(fires arrows)
Tarquin:MUDAMUDAMUDAMUDAMUDA, your arrows will not pass by me, lowborn trash.

[Shale]

Can't block an arrow that's not going to hit you (at least, not without even more homebrew than I'm already assuming). The arrows Tarquin didn't snag went past him, ergo he could not block them.

[SavageWombat]

Why do you think it's problematic to have Epic characters in the story besides Xykon and the Order of the Scribble, which by itself is already a pretty big stable of Epic characters? Please provide reasons other than a visceral negative reaction to the word "Epic."

1. Restricting the Epic status to just Xykon and the Order of the Scribble puts them in a different league. A special status. Tarquin being in that group makes him - a seemingly one-arc villain - appear to be in that same league. I disagree with this interpretation.

2. I further feel that Rich has deliberately made this distinction with those characters, and that if he wanted us to think Tarquin was in their league, he would indicate so more directly than by giving him an obscure feat.

3. If I'm alone on this forum in having a visceral negative reaction to the ELH (as opposed to the word itself), it surprises me. It perpetuates the idea that characters are ridiculously high-level just because of their importance in the story or world - the people who claim Aragorn must be a 16th level ranger, for example. It leads to people talking about "when V reaches epic level" and the like.

[CaDzilla]

Being Epic level in a story means being able to do something that awes spectators without even trying. Kicking a mountain in half is epic. Destroying a moon is epic. Most things from Toriko are epic. Catching two arrows at a time is just something that you would expect from a guy who can catch arrows. If Arrowcatcher was epic level, he would probably be able to kill all of the armies on the Western continent.

[zimmerwald1915]

1. Restricting the Epic status to just Xykon and the Order of the Scribble puts them in a different league. A special status. Tarquin being in that group makes him - a seemingly one-arc villain - appear to be in that same league. I disagree with this interpretation.
Please distinguish this from the statement "I think Epic should be used as sparingly as possible." Also please explain the discrepency between this feeling of yours and the Giant's statement that there isn't that big a difference in power between characters of the Order's level and low-Epic characters like Girard.


2. I further feel that Rich has deliberately made this distinction with those characters, and that if he wanted us to think Tarquin was in their league, he would indicate so more directly than by giving him an obscure feat.
Please distinguish this statement from your first statement.

Also, please explain away the following story: from the time when Tarquin was first introduced to the fight at the top of the pyramid, everything Tarquin did could have been done equally well by a 1st-level Commoner with a ridiculously outsized wealth. Since that fight, the Giant progressively introduced indications that Tarquin was much higher level. For example, he took three iterative attacks at the top of the pyramid, pegging him as at least level 11 in a full-BAB class, higher if his BAB progression was slower. The Giant then gave Malack an Epic ECL (which Durkon also has now, by the way), providing circumstantial evidence that the rest of the New Western Order are very strong. He then had Miron cast an 8th-level spell, providing even more such circumstantial evidence. He then had Tarquin survive, after having taken a backstab from Haley, a fall comparable to the one Roy didn't survive. He then demonstrated his multiple-arrow catching ability on multiple occasions, more than even two pairs of gloves of arrow snaring would allow. Finally, consider that we have no Epic warrior characters to which to compare Tarquin. He and Roy are pretty much it as far as "warriors at the high end of the level curve" go. To me, this story shows that as time goes on we get shown more and more indications of Tarquin's being very high level. You, apparently, prefer to cherry-pick one indication simply because it appears the most definitive to the thread curators.

Finally, if there is no already-established Epic warrior around against which a non-Epic Tarquin must compare unfavorably (no, Kraagor doesn't count), why should he not be our standard by which Epic warriors are judged?


3. If I'm alone on this forum in having a visceral negative reaction to the ELH (as opposed to the word itself), it surprises me. It perpetuates the idea that characters are ridiculously high-level just because of their importance in the story or world - the people who claim Aragorn must be a 16th level ranger, for example. It leads to people talking about "when V reaches epic level" and the like.
No one has seriously argued for purposes of this thread that Tarquin must be Epic because he is a prominent character, or that world-political leaders must be Epic. Shojo, the 14th-level Aristocrat, stands as a stark counter-example to both. If people want to misinterpret what level means in their own arguments, or even want to misinterpret this thread's first post, that's on them and they can be corrected.


Being Epic level in a story means being able to do something that awes spectators without even trying. Kicking a mountain in half is epic. Destroying a moon is epic. Most things from Toriko are epic. Catching two arrows at a time is just something that you would expect from a guy who can catch arrows. If Arrowcatcher was epic level, he would probably be able to kill all of the armies on the Western continent.
Roy was doing a bang-up job of killing an army without Infinite Deflection or Epic levels. Again, to paraphrase the Giant and to paraphrase Kurald Galain paraphrasing the Giant, being low-Epic does not by itself imply all that much more power than the Order currently possesses. If you think otherwise, take it up with the Giant.

[CaDzilla]

Please distinguish this from the statement "I think Epic should be used as sparingly as possible." Also please explain the discrepency between this feeling of yours and the Giant's statement that there isn't that big a difference in power between characters of the Order's level and low-Epic characters like Girard.


Please distinguish this statement from your first statement.

Also, please explain away the following story: from the time when Tarquin was first introduced to the fight at the top of the pyramid, everything Tarquin did could have been done equally well by a 1st-level Commoner with a ridiculously outsized wealth. Since that fight, the Giant progressively introduced indications that Tarquin was much higher level. For example, he took three iterative attacks at the top of the pyramid, pegging him as at least level 11 in a full-BAB class, higher if his BAB progression was slower. The Giant then gave Malack an Epic ECL (which Durkon also has now, by the way), providing circumstantial evidence that the rest of the New Western Order are very strong. He then had Miron cast an 8th-level spell, providing even more such circumstantial evidence. He then had Tarquin survive, after having taken a backstab from Haley, a fall comparable to the one Roy didn't survive. He then demonstrated his multiple-arrow catching ability on multiple occasions, more than even two pairs of gloves of arrow snaring would allow. Finally, consider that we have no Epic warrior characters to which to compare Tarquin. He and Roy are pretty much it as far as "warriors at the high end of the level curve" go. To me, this story shows that as time goes on we get shown more and more indications of Tarquin's being very high level. You, apparently, prefer to cherry-pick one indication simply because it appears the most definitive to the thread curators.

Finally, if there is no already-established Epic warrior around against which a non-Epic Tarquin must compare unfavorably (no, Kraagor doesn't count), why should he not be our standard by which Epic warriors are judged?


No one has seriously argued for purposes of this thread that Tarquin must be Epic because he is a prominent character, or that world-political leaders must be Epic. Shojo, the 14th-level Aristocrat, stands as a stark counter-example to both. If people want to misinterpret what level means in their own arguments, or even want to misinterpret this thread's first post, that's on them and they can be corrected.

Malack has an ECL of exactly 20, which is close, but not epic. The Giant is saying that these characters on Arrowcatcher's team are just high level. Arrowcatcher also isn't the leader, so he is relatively the same level as these guys. He can survive damage by virtue of fast healing and being a class designed to tank hits.
Shojo got all of his XP by roleplaying a senile, old man and escaping many assassination attempts (probably). He only has experience being a smart guy.

[SavageWombat]

Please distinguish this from the statement "I think Epic should be used as sparingly as possible." Also please explain the discrepency between this feeling of yours and the Giant's statement that there isn't that big a difference in power between characters of the Order's level and low-Epic characters like Girard.

Why should I? Your statement "sparingly as possible" is fine. I don't consider giving Tarquin the status on the basis of one feat is "sparingly". And the fact that the math for ELH doesn't hold up is on the book, not me - they are the ones using a special term for the category.


Please distinguish this statement from your first statement.

Again, why do I need to? Would you rather I make it 1a?


Also, please explain away the following story: from the time when Tarquin was first introduced to the fight at the top of the pyramid, everything Tarquin did could have been done equally well by a 1st-level Commoner with a ridiculously outsized wealth. Since that fight, the Giant progressively introduced indications that Tarquin was much higher level. For example, he took three iterative attacks at the top of the pyramid, pegging him as at least level 11 in a full-BAB class, higher if his BAB progression was slower. The Giant then gave Malack an Epic ECL (which Durkon also has now, by the way), providing circumstantial evidence that the rest of the New Western Order are very strong. He then had Miron cast an 8th-level spell, providing even more such circumstantial evidence. He then had Tarquin survive, after having taken a backstab from Haley, a fall comparable to the one Roy didn't survive. He then demonstrated his multiple-arrow catching ability on multiple occasions, more than even two pairs of gloves of arrow snaring would allow. Finally, consider that we have no Epic warrior characters to which to compare Tarquin. He and Roy are pretty much it as far as "warriors at the high end of the level curve" go. To me, this story shows that as time goes on we get shown more and more indications of Tarquin's being very high level. You, apparently, prefer to cherry-pick one indication simply because it appears the most definitive to the thread curators.

You, apparently, feel that the definition of a high-level character somehow precludes him being in the 18-20th level range - or at least you're arguing strongly with me about it.

I'm not cherry-picking anything. I'm specifically saying that no evidence of anything Tarquin has done yet precludes him being in the 18-20th level range, and that the mistake is in assigning him 21+ on the basis of one feat, and the gut feeling of forumites that he "must be" epic level.


Finally, if there is no already-established Epic warrior around against which a non-Epic Tarquin must compare unfavorably (no, Kraagor doesn't count), why should he not be our standard by which Epic warriors are judged?

Why should he be? If there's no evidence to assume so, why leap to the point?


No one has seriously argued for purposes of this thread that Tarquin must be Epic because he is a prominent character, or that world-political leaders must be Epic. Shojo, the 14th-level Aristocrat, stands as a stark counter-example to both. If people want to misinterpret what level means in their own arguments, or even want to misinterpret this thread's first post, that's on them and they can be corrected.

"Seriously argued" sounds like a no True Scotsman argument. I feel like the point has been made repeatedly. Just because you don't support that particular belief doesn't mean it hasn't been expressed. And I'm not talking about political power - just the perception that Tarquin is "so kewl" that he MUST be Epic.

tl:dr - This post seems to argue that there's no reason Tarquin can't be epic level. I am not arguing that he can't - I'm arguing that there is no good evidence that he is, by the normal standards of the forum thread. And since I am admittedly biased on the issue, I don't like seeing a poor argument handwaved through without discussion.

[zimmerwald1915]

Malack has an ECL of exactly 20, which is close, but not epic.
You might want to recount that. Malack gets 2 humanoid hit dice and 1 level adjustment from being a lizardfolk (this assumes he is a lizardfolk, but it shouldn't matter; any of the other plausible options give him more total RHD and LA). He gets 12 cleric hit dice from, well, being a 12th-level cleric. Finally, he gets 8 level adjustment from being a vampire. 2 racial hit dice + 12 class hit dice + 9 level adjustment = ECL 23. That's a firmly Epic ECL.


The Giant is saying that these characters on Arrowcatcher's team are just high level. Arrowcatcher also isn't the leader, so he is relatively the same level as these guys. He can survive damage by virtue of fast healing and being a class designed to tank hits.
I did say this was circumstantial evidence, yes? How does rephrasing that statement using more, less clear, words constitute a response to my statement?


Shojo got all of his XP by roleplaying a senile, old man and escaping many assassination attempts (probably). He only has experience being a smart guy.
What bearing does this have on anything? First, you have no reason to claim you know where Shojo got his levels. Second, the point I was making against SavageWombat was that any claim that Tarquin is Epic based on his political or story status is, as Shojo shows, specious on its face and doesn't deserve even passing consideration.

[SavageWombat]

You might want to recount that. Malack gets 2 humanoid hit dice and 1 level adjustment from being a lizardfolk (this assumes he is a lizardfolk, but it shouldn't matter; any of the other plausible options give him more total RHD and LA). He gets 12 cleric hit dice from, well, being a 12th-level cleric. Finally, he gets 8 level adjustment from being a vampire. 2 racial hit dice + 12 class hit dice + 9 level adjustment = ECL 23. That's a firmly Epic ECL.


And I think the rest of the arguments have decided, again and again, that one party member's level does not provide evidence for other party member's level. Malack can have all the ECL he wants, it doesn't prove Tarquin's.

You're asking people to provide evidence against Tarquin being Epic, when the question is actually if there is any evidence for it. Other than, "Wow, he sure kicked Roy's butt".

[zimmerwald1915]

Why should I? Your statement "sparingly as possible" is fine. I don't consider giving Tarquin the status on the basis of one feat is "sparingly". And the fact that the math for ELH doesn't hold up is on the book, not me - they are the ones using a special term for the category.
Because it's not distinguishable from "I don't like Epic." You're putting forward your personal aesthetic preferences (whether there's a silent majority backing you or not is irrelevant) and demanding that not only should the curators run the thread by them, but ultimately that the Giant cater to them in his story. I see no reason to credit this demand.


Again, why do I need to? Would you rather I make it 1a?
Kinda, yeah. Repeating the same point twice and pretending they're different doesn't add anything to the discussion.


You, apparently, feel that the definition of a high-level character somehow precludes him being in the 18-20th level range - or at least you're arguing strongly with me about it.
Can I take that strawman with me to Oz? The story I told was of an ever-growing accumulation of evidence of various kinds and strengths pointing towards an Epic Tarquin, of which the one listed in the first post is only the most applicable to the standards of this thread. Dismissing in-comic evidence that doesn't meet the incredibly strict standards of this thread (which all but amount at this point to "a character must look at the camera and say 'I have x feat or y class ability'") as irrelevant or a gut feeling among forumites is cherry-picking.


Why should he be? If there's no evidence to assume so, why leap to the point?
What about "there was mounting evidence released in comic over the course of years" screams "leap" to you?


"Seriously argued" sounds like a no True Scotsman argument. I feel like the point has been made repeatedly. Just because you don't support that particular belief doesn't mean it hasn't been expressed. And I'm not talking about political power - just the perception that Tarquin is "so kewl" that he MUST be Epic.
A serious argument is distinguishable by its tone, the gravity with which it treats evidence over personal bias or aesthetic preference, and its germane-ness to the topic being discussed. An argument that "Tarquin must be Epic because he is kewl" is not serious on its face and deserves address only to the extent that it must be debunked. So is an argument that "Tarquin must not be Epic because he isn't kewl enough."

[zimmerwald1915]

And I think the rest of the arguments have decided, again and again, that one party member's level does not provide evidence for other party member's level. Malack can have all the ECL he wants, it doesn't prove Tarquin's.
What about "it's circumstantial evidence" don't you understand? I shouldn't need to point out that circumstantial evidence isn't dispositive every time I say the phrase. That is built into the definition.

[Crusher]

I'm loath to step in here, but I think GreyWolf's point is worth reiterating:

The way this thread works is that it finds explanations by RAW for things that happen in the strip. Where there are multiple potential explanations, a RAW interpretation is going to always trump a home-brewed explanation or other undefined explanation.

- Infinite Deflection is an explanation by RAW.

Unless we have another explanation by RAW, and afaik we do not, this answer has to stand. Its really that simple.

[SavageWombat]

Because it's not distinguishable from "I don't like Epic." You're putting forward your personal aesthetic preferences (whether there's a silent majority backing you or not is irrelevant) and demanding that not only should the curators run the thread by them, but ultimately that the Giant cater to them in his story. I see no reason to credit this demand.

So you also see no reason to support an aesthetic preference FOR him being epic? That the only reason to make a ruling is based on evidence? That's what I'm for. My feelings on Epic are an explanation of my passion, not the case I am arguing.


Kinda, yeah. Repeating the same point twice and pretending they're different doesn't add anything to the discussion.

Pot, this is Kettle. Kettle, Pot.


Can I take that strawman with me to Oz? The story I told was of an ever-growing accumulation of evidence of various kinds and strengths pointing towards an Epic Tarquin, of which the one listed in the first post is only the most applicable to the standards of this thread. Dismissing in-comic evidence that doesn't meet the incredibly strict standards of this thread (which all but amount at this point to "a character must look at the camera and say 'I have x feat or y class ability'") as irrelevant or a gut feeling among forumites is cherry-picking.

The story you told was an accumulation of evidence of a high-level Tarquin. Higher level than Roy. Possibly the highest level fighter we've met. Nothing about that requires him to be epic - and as you like to refer to the Giant as saying, there's not a lot of difference between Roy and Tarquin's power level.


What about "there was mounting evidence released in comic over the course of years" screams "leap" to you?


Again, what evidence? Especially by the standards of this thread? Has he even been proven to have a number of feats outside the norm, or a Wealth-by-Level excess? The only proof of his actual level ever discussed was this one erroneous feat.


What about "it's circumstantial evidence" don't you understand? I shouldn't need to point out that circumstantial evidence isn't dispositive every time I say the phrase. That is built into the definition.

Circumstantial evidence is any evidence that is not direct testimony. That's all it means. It certainly doesn't support or rebut your argument.

I think you mean "a large pile of small clues" which you think adds up to an Epic conclusion. But from all the other arguments I read on this thread, that's not relevant here. The assigned stats for characters, for example, would look a lot different if the readership's "overall impression" of someone's stats had any weight.

To reiterate position:

I don't believe Tarquin has demonstrated the feat "Infinite Deflection". I think it should be removed from the list. Since his level of 21+ is justified solely by his possession of the feat, it should be removed as well.

What point are you arguing, apart from "I think Tarquin IS TOO Epic level?"

[CaDzilla]

Soon is the best example I can think of for an epic level warrior. He was formally introduced in a move that surprised Xykon. He was pretty much what you would expect from an epic level paladin. Arrowcatcher, a man obsessed with the dramatic, was supposedly introduced as epic by catching two arrows and not saying anything.

[RMS Oceanic]

Soon is the best example I can think of for an epic level warrior. He was formally introduced in a move that surprised Xykon. He was pretty much what you would expect from an epic level paladin. Arrowcatcher, a man obsessed with the dramatic, was supposedly introduced as epic by catching two arrows and not saying anything.

The single most impressive toy I can think for an epic non-magical character is that feat that extends your lifespan. Soon was impressive, but as seen by the Army of Ghosts that's not bound to being Epic, otherwise they wouldn't have manifested. Unfortunately the extra-ordinary benefits of being epic are mostly the magic stuff. I can think of epic Fighter feats that grant abilities that newer classes can obtain before level five. The effect of Infinite Deflection isn't one.

[SavageWombat]

Spoilered out because now I'm just nitpicking.


For example, he took three iterative attacks at the top of the pyramid, pegging him as at least level 11 in a full-BAB class, higher if his BAB progression was slower.

Which proves that he's at least 11th level. What's your point?


The Giant then gave Malack an Epic ECL (which Durkon also has now, by the way), providing circumstantial evidence that the rest of the New Western Order are very strong.

Which proves that he's high level. What's your point?


He then had Miron cast an 8th-level spell, providing even more such circumstantial evidence.

Which proves that he has a friend who's at least 17th level. Again, what's your point?


He then had Tarquin survive, after having taken a backstab from Haley, a fall comparable to the one Roy didn't survive.

Roy had taken a Meteor Swarm to the face before taking the fall. High level fighters surviving 20d6 falling damage surprises no one.


He then demonstrated his multiple-arrow catching ability on multiple occasions, more than even two pairs of gloves of arrow snaring would allow.

Two arrows ever, only. It's an important plot point. Haley's "Tarquin - Catch" line is a payoff to that sequence - that she knows that he has to use two hands to catch two of her arrows. She's deliberately using her brain and triumphing over his limitations. Implying otherwise reduces Haley's agency in this scene to having gotten lucky because Tarquin screwed up.

Nothing you are proposing says anything other than that Tarquin is higher level than a 16th level fighter (Roy).

[CaDzilla]

The single most impressive toy I can think for an epic non-magical character is that feat that extends your lifespan. Soon was impressive, but as seen by the Army of Ghosts that's not bound to being Epic, otherwise they wouldn't have manifested. Unfortunately the extra-ordinary benefits of being epic are mostly the magic stuff. I can think of epic Fighter feats that grant abilities that newer classes can obtain before level five. The effect of Infinite Deflection isn't one.

Feats are not the only benefit to being epic. Skills of Martial characters at epic level are almost indistinguishable from magic (i.e-become effectively intangible, disassemble a person's weapon as a free action, etc.)

[ChristianSt]

So should we add th rule: "If someone feels like a specific level isn't justified, then it cannot be listed?"

Then from what I read here you have not really a problem with him having a certain feat, but that that feat is tied to specific prerequisite (i.e. epic), that you think is "too special" for Tarquin?

Because that is kinda the main argument I can locate in your posts.


Unless you present a RAW alternative or say the thread rules need to be changed (I don't think so - because without hard boundaries this thread would probably just end in people arguing about what feels better), I think there is nothing left to discuss.

[Techwarrior]

She did even better than that when she carried Nale and Thog at the same, when they were escaping from Azure City.

Sabine's strength came up in the last thread, but the issue sputtered out because of the old disagreement about whether to use flight loads as evidence or not.

I will say this: whether you use that evidence or not, there can be no doubt that Sabine is supposed to be extremely strong. A big part of her shtick is lifting/throwing heavy things.

Sticks her arm through a heavily armored soldier, then lifts him one-handed with no evident exertion. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0120.html)

Lifts Roy one-handed, then casually tosses him across the room. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0343.html)

Smashes the TV by swinging or tossing the couch at it. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0914.html)

She is strong.

Right. But currently we have no info listed for her. (I was the one who brought it up, though it might have been thread before last) I'm willing to accept listing it without the fly in light load rule, so long as we list something.

Thog and Nale do make a better example though. Base weight of the two totaled is 278 lbs. For her to carry them, she needs
18 as a heavy load
26 as a light load
21 as a medium

[Crusher]

Let's set aside the flying encumbrance one just for a moment. It is where we'll get the highest numbers but it also has some contention so let start with the standing stuff first and work our way up. If the standing stuff says 16 min or whatever, that's at least an improvement over nothing. We can set higher sights after that.

The arm through the chest and lift seems like the most impressive. But is there an argument that he's bouncing away in shock or something so it's not really a clean lift?

[JustWantedToSay]

Right. But currently we have no info listed for her. (I was the one who brought it up, though it might have been thread before last) I'm willing to accept listing it without the fly in light load rule, so long as we list something.

Thog and Nale do make a better example though. Base weight of the two totaled is 278 lbs. For her to carry them, she needs
18 as a heavy load
26 as a light load
21 as a medium


Nale is ~180 pounds (wanted poster (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0715.html)), + 154 for base-orc = 334. So 19 str mimimum.

ETA:

4./ Again in Races of Faerun, there is a feat called Outsider Wings, which states that they "allow you to fly at your land speed (average maneuverabilty). A medium or heavy load that would reduce your land speed reduces your flying speed by a proportionate amount."

Read more: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?88084-Flying-vs-Armour-vs-Encumbrance#ixzz2sy4RduZF

[SavageWombat]

So should we add th rule: "If someone feels like a specific level isn't justified, then it cannot be listed?"

Then from what I read here you have not really a problem with him having a certain feat, but that that feat is tied to specific prerequisite (i.e. epic), that you think is "too special" for Tarquin?

Because that is kinda the main argument I can locate in your posts.


Unless you present a RAW alternative or say the thread rules need to be changed (I don't think so - because without hard boundaries this thread would probably just end in people arguing about what feels better), I think there is nothing left to discuss.

Nice try, but no.

I object to the feat because I don't think he legitimately has it - and that the feat is the ONLY REASON the thread has for setting his level at 21+.

And stop harping on "RAW alternative" - I don't have to suggest another way he could have done it. My position is that the feat you support does not adequately describe what is shown in the comic.

It is better to not list something at all than to list something that cannot be supported. This rule is followed in every other instance. It's fairly obvious that Roy's armor should be a breastplate, for example, but we don't put that down because we don't know for sure.

Tarquin has a feat or magical item that lets him catch two, and only two, projectiles. That is not how Infinite Deflection works - therefore the feat is not Infinite Deflection. And therefore shouldn't be listed.

[ChristianSt]

Tarquin has a feat or magical item that lets him catch two, and only two, projectiles. That is not how Infinite Deflection works - therefore the feat is not Infinite Deflection. And therefore shouldn't be listed.

So because Tarquin only deflects two out of two arrows (he never even gets hit with more than two!), that is proof that it can't be Infinite Deflection, because that can only be used to deflect a non-finite amount of arrows? :confused:

[Loreweaver15]

I present to you the situation:

1. Tarquin did a thing.

2. He did this thing on-panel multiple times.

3. We know of exactly one possible method he could have used to do the thing without homebrewing.

4. It is literally impossible for him to have done the thing without either that method or homebrewing.

Number 4 there is the operative bit in this argument. Tarquin did a thing, and to do that thing he must have some prerequisite, of which there is exactly one possibility without breaking the rules of the thread. Therefore, until confirmed otherwise, Tarquin must have the prerequisite.

Therefore, the burden of proof has shifted to the opposition, i.e. you.

[SavageWombat]

So because Tarquin only deflects two out of two arrows (he never even gets hit with more than two!), that is proof that it can't be Infinite Deflection, because that can only be used to deflect a non-finite amount of arrows? :confused:

This strikes me as deliberately obtuse. Let me clarify for you.

Rich has deliberately chosen to portray Tarquin as, when attacked with arrows, catching (not deflecting) two arrows. One in each hand. Every time.

Rich then gave us a scene where Haley deliberately exploits this behavior by shooting two arrows at him, forcing him to release his grip with both hands in order to catch them.

The feat (or magic item) is demonstrably the ability to catch one arrow in each hand. I refuse to believe that Rich is even implying that Tarquin had the option to deflect the arrows with one hand, but chose not to or screwed up. Haley forced the issue on him, which is one more reason Haley is awesome.

Ergo: Tarquin does not have Infinite Deflection, he has the ability to catch one arrow in each hand.

Ergo: Infinite Deflection does not describe the behavior shown in the strip, even from a "he could have if he'd wanted to" standpoint. It's not a best fit by RAW, it's no fit at all.

Ergo: It should not be listed.

Regardless of your opinion of my opinion, I am presenting a logical argument, not an emotional one.

[SavageWombat]

I present to you the situation:

1. Tarquin did a thing.

2. He did this thing on-panel multiple times.

3. We know of exactly one possible method he could have used to do the thing without homebrewing.

4. It is literally impossible for him to have done the thing without either that method or homebrewing.

Number 4 there is the operative bit in this argument. Tarquin did a thing, and to do that thing he must have some prerequisite, of which there is exactly one possibility without breaking the rules of the thread. Therefore, until confirmed otherwise, Tarquin must have the prerequisite.

Therefore, the burden of proof has shifted to the opposition, i.e. you.

3 is where your argument falls down. I am claiming that the "one possible method" is not actually a possible method because it does not describe what we saw.

I do not need to propose a RAW alternative - I'm saying I don't think there is one. I am saying that Tarquin having that feat is undermined or contraindicated, and therefore should not be included in the official listing without actual support.

It's like the bit with Occam's Razor - just because something is "the simplest explanation remaining" doesn't mean it's the correct one if it doesn't explain all the facts.

[137beth]

It's not Ultrablast, it's an unnamed homebrew power that Rich eyeballed at sixth level. (https://twitter.com/RichBurlew/status/400740323233505280)

I hope this doesn't get lost amid arguments over Tarquin.

[orrion]

It's not Ultrablast, it's an unnamed homebrew power that Rich eyeballed at sixth level. (https://twitter.com/RichBurlew/status/400740323233505280)
I hope this doesn't get lost amid arguments over Tarquin.

I read that as Rich saying his own ability to "Make It Up and Call It a Day" is 6th level.

[Bird]

Right. But currently we have no info listed for her. (I was the one who brought it up, though it might have been thread before last) I'm willing to accept listing it without the fly in light load rule, so long as we list something.

Thog and Nale do make a better example though. Base weight of the two totaled is 278 lbs. For her to carry them, she needs
18 as a heavy load
26 as a light load
21 as a medium

My mistake -- I forgot who said what. I agree with you that I'd be willing to ignore flight loads for the moment as long as we list something.

As JustWantedToSay points out above, we have a weight for Nale, so the figures can be bumped up from that.


Let's set aside the flying encumbrance one just for a moment. It is where we'll get the highest numbers but it also has some contention so let start with the standing stuff first and work our way up. If the standing stuff says 16 min or whatever, that's at least an improvement over nothing. We can set higher sights after that.

The arm through the chest and lift seems like the most impressive. But is there an argument that he's bouncing away in shock or something so it's not really a clean lift?
I'd tend to reject that interpretation, because
(1) Bouncing several vertical feet seems like an odd reaction to a hand through your chest, to me.
(2)Even if he did "help" her with the lift, she's rearing back and clearly supporting him on her own.
(3)The fact that she lifts Roy above her head one-handed with no help and no evident strain suggests that she is capable of doing likewise with the guard.

You can lift up to your max load (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/carryingCapacity.htm) above your head. Assuming minimum weight for an adult human for the guard (124) and the lightest heavy armor (35), that's 159, which gives her a minimum of 14 STR.

Note: I realize that he isn't 100% above her head, but is there any disagreement that if you can lift something that high one-handed, you can get it all the way over your head with two? (Realistically, lifting something at that angle one-handed is much more difficult than a two handed above-the-head lift.)

*

Another thing -- if we prefer to calculate based on Roy's weight, can we do better? We know that he is "big" because Ian refers to him as such (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0772.html). Is that enough to peg him as being of at least average weight for a male human? If so, average weight of 175 + 30 lb breastplate = 205 lbs = 16 STR min for Sabine.

[137beth]

I read that as Rich saying his own ability to "Make It Up and Call It a Day" is 6th level.

So what, he's a psionic Giant?


Anyways, per the standards of this thread, Tarquin must have infinite deflection. His displayed abilities are perfectly consistent with him having infinite deflection under RAW, and they are not consistent with him not having infinite deflection.

[SavageWombat]

His displayed abilities are perfectly consistent with him having infinite deflection under RAW,

This is one of the points I am disputing. Your definition of "perfectly consistent" is flawed.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Wait, can Snatch Arrows be used with Infinite Deflection?
To clarify: does Infinite Deflection allow you to snatch the arrows, or just deflect them?

[Douglas]

I'm loath to step in here, but I think GreyWolf's point is worth reiterating:

The way this thread works is that it finds explanations by RAW for things that happen in the strip. Where there are multiple potential explanations, a RAW interpretation is going to always trump a home-brewed explanation or other undefined explanation.

- Infinite Deflection is an explanation by RAW.

Unless we have another explanation by RAW, and afaik we do not, this answer has to stand. Its really that simple.
If that is officially the way this thread works, then I officially think that the thread's standards need to be revised. Homebrew is well known to be in use, and several examples of it are already listed here. It should not take Rich Burlew himself making an explicit statement for the possibility of an additional piece of homebrew to be admitted. Yes, homebrew should not be proposed lightly with no evidence, but the combined number and persistence of people arguing about it in this case should be plenty to demonstrate that there is evidence and the evidence is strong.


I present to you the situation:

1. Tarquin did a thing.

2. He did this thing on-panel multiple times.

3. We know of exactly one possible method he could have used to do the thing without homebrewing.

4. It is literally impossible for him to have done the thing without either that method or homebrewing.

Number 4 there is the operative bit in this argument. Tarquin did a thing, and to do that thing he must have some prerequisite, of which there is exactly one possibility without breaking the rules of the thread. Therefore, until confirmed otherwise, Tarquin must have the prerequisite.

Therefore, the burden of proof has shifted to the opposition, i.e. you.
I admit that Infinite Deflection is indeed the only RAW way for Tarquin's action to be possible. I and the various other people on this side are arguing that there is sufficient evidence against it that homebrew should be considered despite the lack of Word of Giant, and if necessary the thread rules should be revised to allow it.

[With a box]

Wait, can Snatch Arrows be used with Infinite Deflection?
I think Tarquin reflectively snatch the first one, so the hand is not empty anymore, so he had to use his hand to catch the other.

[Crusher]

Rich showed us multiple times how Tarquin's ability works - he can catch one arrow in each free hand. No more.

This seems to be the crux of your point. Speaking as someone who has no particular opinion on Tarquin's level (To me, if he has Infinite Deflection he's Epic. If an alternative explanation exists then he's probably 18-20), I'm trying to understand how you're so convinced of this point.

You are certain of two points: that Tarquin cannot deflect arrows without snatching them, and that he cannot... lets go with "impede" more than 2 arrows at a time.

Looking at the strips where Tarquin grabs arrows to get the context for those two points.

851 - Snatches one arrow, uses it to stab Belkar. Only one arrow is shot. Snatching instead of deflecting is sub-optimal tactically because he could have just used his axe on Belkar instead. However, Malak later is angry that Tarquin wasn't taking the fight seriously and Tarquin admits to it. Hard to consider it evidence for either point.

858 - Snatches one arrow, it blows up on him. Only one arrow shot. Snatching instead of deflecting turns out to be a bad idea in hindsight but it would have been a stretch for Tarquin to know that at the time. Plus, the plot needed him to catch the arrow. Like before, hard to consider it as evidence either way.

925 - Snatches two arrows. I remember a lot of rules back and forth over who the arrows were actually aimed at, but from a RAW standpoint it doesn't really matter because you can only snatch or deflect arrows that would have hit you. The other 3 arrows all either hit Miron or bounced off his defenses, meaning Tarquin could not have snatched or deflected them.

On the one hand, I don't see this particularly as evidence that Tarquin can only impede 2 arrows at once, because he only had 2 arrows to work with. None of the other 3 hit him, so he couldn't have done anything with them. On the other hand, it does seem slightly funny that Tarquin snatched the arrows. Sure, its actually the first time he's used the ability that it didn't turn out to be sub-optimal to snatch instead of deflect. But the last time Tarquin grabbed an arrow Haley shot at him it ended up being a significant problem and that seems like the kind of thing Tarquin would remember.

Against that, unlike last time Tarquin has a clear view of Haley and it certainly doesn't look like she's doing anything funny with the arrows. Plus, is it possible a deflected arrow could hit Laurin or Miron? I sort of doubt it, but its worth mentioning.

Anyway, its not directly evidence that Tarquin can only snatch arrows rather than deflect them, but based on his own recent history snatching those arrows would have seemed like a risky move.

936 - Snatches two arrows, falls off the airship. Two arrows were shot at him. Its unfortunate Haley never does a full barrage of 4 or even 5 arrows at Tarquin just to see what would happen. Because without that, there's just no evidence Tarquin is limited to 2 arrows per round. Sure, he never impedes more than 2, but he never has more than 2 shot at him at a time.

As for snatch vs deflect, as has been deeply discussed, snatching the arrows instead of deflecting them wasn't a good idea. On the one hand (pun intended), even deflecting them at all was arguably a bad idea. Had he done it with one hand, he would still have been holding onto the (still swerving?) airship with one hand while hundreds of feet in the air. The real issue with falling isn't the damage (though that's obviously considerable), its that Tarquin has no way of getting back up. If he falls, he *LOSES*. The optimal move in that situation was to simply let the arrows hit him.

On the other hand, this is the second time today that catching Haley's arrows resulted in something very bad happening to him. So I do kinda see what you're saying on the whole snatch vs deflect thing. Even after it seems like maybe its a bad idea he keeps on doing it.

The problem I have, after thinking about it, is two-fold. First, there really isn't any evidence he can't handle more than two arrows at once. Sure, he never does more than two at once, but then he never has more than 2 shot at him. If Haley had hit him with 4 arrows for all we know he might have snatched the first one and then deflected the next 3.

Second, Infinite Deflection remains the only option we know of by which he could impeded more than 1 arrow per round. Yes, Tarquin's decisions to keep snatching instead of deflecting are increasingly suspicious, but they can still be explained away as poor decision making, especially since deflecting them at all (in any fashion) would probably have been a poor choice.

If further evidence appears later which casts doubt on Tarquin having Infinite Deflection then its certainly worth revisiting. But as it stands now, its the best option and fits the evidence albeit shakily.

[SavageWombat]

Remember that I'm arguing from the point that what Rich chooses to show us is relevant. And that Rich always showed Tarquin snatching the arrows. And when Haley chose to use a full barrage, Rich chose to show us two arrows snatched and the rest going past. Whether this is a rules issue is not relevant to my point.

The assumption that Tarquin HAD to snatch the arrows is vital to the later scene with Haley.

Main point is this - even those such as yourself, who are actually trying to defend the point, admit that the grounds for Infinite Deflection are "shaky". You say that it's the only thing that covers the bases, but it simultaneously does so too well (why only two?) and not enough (why snatch when he shouldn't?)

If even the feat's defenders admit that the evidence is poorly fitting at best, I continue to submit that it DOES NOT DESERVE LISTING. Arguing that "it's the only explanation" is a weak argument. There are plenty of other points on this list that remain unresolved due to issues such as these. Why is a bad option better than no option? Why is "this is quite possibly wrong" better than "we don't know"?

[ti'esar]

As much as I hate to see the evidence for Tarquin's level lost (because I do think the "common-sense" interpretation is that he is level 21) I'm inclined to agree with SavageWombat. Tarquin's arrow-snatching ability has enough conflicts with Infinite Deflection that the latter can't really be called a best-fit.

[Emanick]

Remember that I'm arguing from the point that what Rich chooses to show us is relevant. And that Rich always showed Tarquin snatching the arrows. And when Haley chose to use a full barrage, Rich chose to show us two arrows snatched and the rest going past. Whether this is a rules issue is not relevant to my point.

I don't think Rich cares what we think Tarquin's feats are, so I don't think authorial decisions about what's relevant to show the reader are in play here. He's probably been using the arrow-catching thing as nothing more or less than something between a running joke and a microcosm of Tarquin's character: the great fighter is able to do this really cool thing, but he's so confident that he does the cool thing no matter what, and it doesn't always work out well for him. It's the physical manifestation of his fatal flaw - his overconfidence in his own abilities and worldview.

What Rich consciously chooses to show us, in this case, should have very little impact on what we decide here. I am 99.9% certain that Rich neither knows nor cares whether Tarquin has Infinite Deflection, so there are no clues to the author to look for. Since Rich never shows Tarquin facing the opportunity to catch three arrows, we have literally no data on that score.


The assumption that Tarquin HAD to snatch the arrows is vital to the later scene with Haley.

No, it isn't. The scene works just as well - or indeed, even better, because we know The Giant likes to show how characters' fall as a direct result of their own actions - if we assume Tarquin acted out of his customary overconfidence and reflexively caught the arrows.

Most of your argument rests on these rather strongly held, but weakly evidenced, assumptions about authorial intent and gut instinct. It's getting rather irritating how you not only insist that you're right, but that everyone else is being unreasonable for disagreeing with you. And besides, gut instinct has no part in this thread.

[137beth]

Next thing ya know people will be arguing that Tarquin obviously has a homebrew feat that REQUIRED him to teleport himself and Laurin onto the airship, since if he had a choice (i.e., could simply not ask Laurin to wormhole him), he would obviously have been smart enough to give up.

Clearly, the only explanation is that Tarquin was acting in the perfectly optimal way, given his build consisting of nebulous feats which require him to act the way he did. \end{sarcasm}

[Crusher]

Remember that I'm arguing from the point that what Rich chooses to show us is relevant. And that Rich always showed Tarquin snatching the arrows. And when Haley chose to use a full barrage, Rich chose to show us two arrows snatched and the rest going past. Whether this is a rules issue is not relevant to my point.

The assumption that Tarquin HAD to snatch the arrows is vital to the later scene with Haley.

Main point is this - even those such as yourself, who are actually trying to defend the point, admit that the grounds for Infinite Deflection are "shaky". You say that it's the only thing that covers the bases, but it simultaneously does so too well (why only two?) and not enough (why snatch when he shouldn't?)

If even the feat's defenders admit that the evidence is poorly fitting at best, I continue to submit that it DOES NOT DESERVE LISTING. Arguing that "it's the only explanation" is a weak argument. There are plenty of other points on this list that remain unresolved due to issues such as these. Why is a bad option better than no option? Why is "this is quite possibly wrong" better than "we don't know"?

You're a bit frustrating to talk to, because you take a correct point:

"...admit that the grounds for Infinite Deflection are 'shaky'."

and then stretch it into

"If even the feat's defenders admit that the evidence is poorly fitting at best...".

and finally you end up with

"this is quite possibly wrong".

You can see that those statements aren't equivalent, can't you? It feels like we start off with a reasonable grasp of each other's points, but by the end you've gone off the rails. What's going on?

[SavageWombat]

I don't think Rich cares what we think Tarquin's feats are, so I don't think authorial decisions about what's relevant to show the reader are in play here. He's probably been using the arrow-catching thing as nothing more or less than something between a running joke and a microcosm of Tarquin's character: the great fighter is able to do this really cool thing, but he's so confident that he does the cool thing no matter what, and it doesn't always work out well for him. It's the physical manifestation of his fatal flaw - his overconfidence in his own abilities and worldview.

What Rich consciously chooses to show us, in this case, should have very little impact on what we decide here. I am 99.9% certain that Rich neither knows nor cares whether Tarquin has Infinite Deflection, so there are no clues to the author to look for.

If you are presuming that we are not to draw on the actual content of the strip to determine what abilities the characters have, you have no basis for a discussion. I am basing my opinion on what Tarquin actually does, which is what Rich chose to show him doing. I have never claimed that Rich has an opinion on Infinite Deflection as per this thread - I simply feel that Rich knows quite well what ability he intended Tarquin to demonstrate. That he can catch one arrow in each hand, as he does four times in the strip.


Since Rich never shows Tarquin facing the opportunity to catch three arrows, we have literally no data on that score.

And in the absence of that data, people continue to insist that the feat should be listed anyway.


No, it isn't. The scene works just as well - or indeed, even better, because we know The Giant likes to show how characters' fall as a direct result of their own actions - if we assume Tarquin acted out of his customary overconfidence and reflexively caught the arrows.

This paragraph demonstrates to me how much you are arguing from your own character assumptions. Which would violate your statement below.


Most of your argument rests on these rather strongly held, but weakly evidenced, assumptions about authorial intent and gut instinct. It's getting rather irritating how you not only insist that you're right, but that everyone else is being unreasonable for disagreeing with you.

1. This feels like a personal attack to me.
2. I have never said anything about people being unreasonable - but I am disagreeing with them. And any tone I might be displaying is a frustration at being regularly misinterpreted by people who want to argue with what they think I'm saying instead of what I'm actually saying.


And besides, gut instinct has no part in this thread.

Gut instinct seems to be the basis of your argument here. I've been basing my argument on a reasoned interpretation of the strip itself. Several people have been able to argue with me on the same level, which I appreciate - and some of them have agreed with my minimum premise that the argument for Infinite Deflection is "shaky".

I don't mind people disagreeing with me. But I tend to respond with answers when people ask me questions or directly challenge me instead of the topic.

[SavageWombat]

You're a bit frustrating to talk to, because you take a correct point:

"...admit that the grounds for Infinite Deflection are 'shaky'."

and then stretch it into

"If even the feat's defenders admit that the evidence is poorly fitting at best...".

and finally you end up with

"this is quite possibly wrong".

You can see that those statements aren't equivalent, can't you? It feels like we start off with a reasonable grasp of each other's points, but by the end you've gone off the rails. What's going on?

I read your post, and I assumed that you meant that the argument was "shaky" in that it was poorly supported. "Poorly fitting at best" and "quite possibly wrong" are intended as equivalent statements in my response. I'm sorry if you feel I misrepresented your opinion.

My statement to you, and others who posted similarly was simply that: if you agree that the feat does not sufficiently match what we seen in the strip (and words like "shaky" are a reference to sufficiently) then I would think you would support my argument that the feat should not be listed.

I have made my case, and clearly been heard. But people do continue to demand that I respond to their personal arguments, even when the point has already been asked and answered.

[Savannah]

You may perform any number of deflections each round, as the Deflect Arrows feat.


You must have at least one hand free (holding nothing) to use this feat.

Tarquin had neither hand free when holding the reins of the tyrannosaurus. Tarquin had neither hand free when clinging to the side of the airship. By RAW he cannot have used Infinite Deflection.

[Techwarrior]

Let's set aside the flying encumbrance one just for a moment. It is where we'll get the highest numbers but it also has some contention so let start with the standing stuff first and work our way up. If the standing stuff says 16 min or whatever, that's at least an improvement over nothing. We can set higher sights after that.

The arm through the chest and lift seems like the most impressive. But is there an argument that he's bouncing away in shock or something so it's not really a clean lift?

The arm-through-chest scene doesn't give us anything more than carrying Thog and Nale long-distance will (whether flying or no). 2 people are heavier than 1 in full-plate in D&D 3.5, and hole-in-chest-guy might only have been lifted by the "Max Lift" rule, and so gives a lower, and therefore less useful minimum Strength.


Nale is ~180 pounds (wanted poster (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0715.html)), + 154 for base-orc = 334. So 19 str mimimum.

ETA:

4./ Again in Races of Faerun, there is a feat called Outsider Wings, which states that they "allow you to fly at your land speed (average maneuverabilty). A medium or heavy load that would reduce your land speed reduces your flying speed by a proportionate amount."

Read more: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?88084-Flying-vs-Armour-vs-Encumbrance#ixzz2sy4RduZF

While the feat would be completely RAW if that's how the feat works, it's also non-core. Coupled with the contention of whether or not the "light load to fly" rule is even in use... It's a possibility though.


My mistake -- I forgot who said what. I agree with you that I'd be willing to ignore flight loads for the moment as long as we list something.

As JustWantedToSay points out above, we have a weight for Nale, so the figures can be bumped up from that.


I'll refigure the calculations with 180. :smallsmile:


I'd tend to reject that interpretation, because
(1) Bouncing several vertical feet seems like an odd reaction to a hand through your chest, to me.
(2)Even if he did "help" her with the lift, she's rearing back and clearly supporting him on her own.
(3)The fact that she lifts Roy above her head one-handed with no help and no evident strain suggests that she is capable of doing likewise with the guard.

You can lift up to your max load (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/carryingCapacity.htm) above your head. Assuming minimum weight for an adult human for the guard (124) and the lightest heavy armor (35), that's 159, which gives her a minimum of 14 STR.

Note: I realize that he isn't 100% above her head, but is there any disagreement that if you can lift something that high one-handed, you can get it all the way over your head with two? (Realistically, lifting something at that angle one-handed is much more difficult than a two handed above-the-head lift.)

Another thing -- if we prefer to calculate based on Roy's weight, can we do better? We know that he is "big" because Ian refers to him as such (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0772.html). Is that enough to peg him as being of at least average weight for a male human? If so, average weight of 175 + 30 lb breastplate = 205 lbs = 16 STR min for Sabine.

All of these things are still lighter than Thog + (new and improved) Nale, so we don't need to worry about it. We don't actually have rules for max lift of one hand, or anything like that sadly. (That I'm aware of)
______

Based on Nale weighing ~180 and assuming Thog to be as light as possible (154 lbs of Half-Orc) for Sabine to carry them both while moving overland she has to have a minimum of 19 Strength (22 if medium, 27 if light). Link (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0458.html)

Sabine also seems to have Improved Bull Rush (and thus Power Attack) Link (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0805.html), and Improved Grapple (and thus 13+ Dexterity) Link (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0810.html)

[Emanick]

If you are presuming that we are not to draw on the actual content of the strip to determine what abilities the characters have, you have no basis for a discussion. I am basing my opinion on what Tarquin actually does, which is what Rich chose to show him doing. I have never claimed that Rich has an opinion on Infinite Deflection as per this thread - I simply feel that Rich knows quite well what ability he intended Tarquin to demonstrate. That he can catch one arrow in each hand, as he does four times in the strip.

It sounded to me as if you were claiming that Rich was specifically implying that Tarquin can only catch two arrows at a time, which he is almost certainly not going out of his way to do. As I've already said, I think the most likely reason why he hasn't shown more than two arrows being caught is because of aesthetic reasons, not game mechanics ones. It's possible that he has gameplay in mind, too, but very unlikely, IMO. I very much doubt that Rich has made the conscious decision in his head that "Tarquin can only catch two arrows at once."


And in the absence of that data, people continue to insist that the feat should be listed anyway.

Data on whether or not Tarquin can catch three arrows is unavailable - but data on whether or not he can catch two isn't, and that's what the Infinite Deflection argument is going off of.


This paragraph demonstrates to me how much you are arguing from your own character assumptions. Which would violate your statement below.

My assumptions aren't necessarily correct, either. I was simply pointing out that your opinion - that the scene doesn't make any sense, story-wise, unless Tarquin had no choice but to let go of the side of the ship - is not the only valid one, so using it as an argument against Infinite Deflection being in play here is highly subjective.


1. This feels like a personal attack to me.
2. I have never said anything about people being unreasonable - but I am disagreeing with them. And any tone I might be displaying is a frustration at being regularly misinterpreted by people who want to argue with what they think I'm saying instead of what I'm actually saying.

I'm sorry if that sounded like a personal attack on you. I certainly didn't mean it as such. All I meant to imply was that I felt like you were calling out other people for being unreasonable simply because of how they were disagreeing with you. I assume that was just another example of tone getting distorted and frustrations running high over the Internet (on my part, yours, both of ours, whatever).


Gut instinct seems to be the basis of your argument here. I've been basing my argument on a reasoned interpretation of the strip itself. Several people have been able to argue with me on the same level, which I appreciate - and some of them have agreed with my minimum premise that the argument for Infinite Deflection is "shaky".

I don't mind people disagreeing with me. But I tend to respond with answers when people ask me questions or directly challenge me instead of the topic.

I'm not arguing from gut instinct myself, I'm arguing from the established rules of this thread. It looks to me like many of your points rely on a very subjective (albeit reasoned) interpretation of the strip, which is why I've been countering with my own completely different interpretation in order to show how subjective I feel your case is - that's the "gut instinct" you've probably been picking up.


Tarquin had neither hand free when holding the reins of the tyrannosaurus. Tarquin had neither hand free when clinging to the side of the airship. By RAW he cannot have used Infinite Deflection.

He let go of the side of the airship and the reins when grabbing the arrows. Therefore, his hands were free.

[ChristianSt]

@SavageWombat:

I have heard two valid arguments why Infinite Deflection might not be fitting RAW.


It could be kinda unclear whether Snatch Arrows + Infinite Deflection allows to snatch multiple arrows in one round. [I think the rules read as "he can".]
He didn't have free hands to perform such. [I'm not sure about the rules, but it should be rather easy to drop stuff to get your hands free. In fact both times he has lost grip on was he holds before.]


Your argumentation is, "It can't be RAW, because:"


"I think Rich pictured the stuff to show X" - If we change something on that ground, what do we have to stop people claiming "Thog should have more CHA, because clearly he is fan favorite and has therefore clearly more Charisma" (and what stops me from saying "I think Rich pictured the stuff to show not X"?)
"I don't like character X being level Y" - What if I would say I like Tarquin being epic? Rich said that "We're getting to the point where the difference between the high-level OOTS and the low-epic Order of the Scribble is mostly one of degrees anyway. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=15415463#post15415463)". What better way is there to show that as by the Order surviving an encounter with one (or even more!) epic character(s)?
"I think character wouldn't do that" - Rich said that he doesn't write characters that make optimal decisions. Yet you claim that Tarquin would make something else if he had the options we give him!
"I think a scene wouldn't worked with it" - Maybe Rich showed it that way because he thought it was funnier this way? Even with using Infinite Deflection in the optimal way (using one hand to deflect both), Rich could easily have written the scene exact the same way! Because it should be pretty clear that even letting one hand go makes your grip worse.
Haley shot at Tarquin. But we don't know what she wanted to achieve with it and we even less know how she wanted to achieve it. If her goal was to make him plummet, than it didn't really worked directly - because Tarquin hold grip for a small amount after it. But it is possible that he would have fallen off anyway, because of Bandana's maneuvers.


In fact all arguments I read from, I could simply copy & paste slap in some "not"'s and could argue that way. E.g. "I feel that Infinite Reflection match pretty nicely with what Rich wanted to show" or "I feel that Tarquin is special enough to be epic, so it is good we have proof he is epic". Yet I'm not doing it, because I care about RAW - and the thread rules say that this thread also cares about RAW (and if only to prevent such discussions). And right now we have one (and only one!) working RAW solution vs. a bunch of homebrew/houseruled alternatives.


To make it clear: I'm not saying your arguments/views are wrong. I only say that this is simple your subjective opinion on it. There is no objective reason (RAW!) why any of it should work as you claimed. And the thread rules make it clear that we try to stay as objective as possible (so if RAW is possible - as it is in this case - then this thread stays RAW)

[Coat]

Can I propose a thought-experiment?

Let's say that we regularly (4 times in the current book for example) see Roy fighting groups of low-level mooks that are in close combat. Each time this happens, Roy swings, and cuts down exactly 3 mooks in a single swing, with no damage to or contact with the 4th mook. The number of mooks per engagement vary, but is typically more than 3 within reach.

This is perfectly explicable by RAW with Great Cleave, though suboptimal.

The question is, after the Nth time that Roy kills exactly 3 mooks out of the X available to him Great Cleave (where X>3), is there a point where we should question whether this is in fact Great Cleave, or whether it could be a house-ruled power with a different effect?

And if that is not a thread rule we currently use, would it increase the value of the thread if it was?

What if there was an additional effect (let's say that each time this happened he also Sunders any weapons the affected Mooks are holding) that could be explained by RAW (for the purposes of arguing, lets assume that a Sword Of Sundering is a thing that exists) but that we otherwise have no evidence for.

Is there a point at which it makes more sense to theorise a houserule feat that combines (in this case) Sundering with a Great Cleave limited to 2 extra kills, than to hold to the RAW interpretation that we have a bizarre use of a RAW feat coupled with a RAW but unsupported power.


We have not seen Tarquin deflect an arrow (unless I'm mistaken?)
We have seen Tarquin catch arrows that according to the narrative would make more sense if they were targeting someone other than T.
We have never seen Tarquin intercept more arrows than he has free hands
We have seen Tarquin catch more than one arrow.

A feat that allows Tarquin to catch any arrow that passes through his square or those to either side of him, provided that he has a hand free, regardless of who the arrow is targeted at, would be consistent with what we have seen, and with Tarquin's character and role within his team*.

Is there a point at which we should consider this as a possible interpretation, rather than a strained RAW interpretation?
Is this substantially different to writing down 'unknown green lightning spell' for a mage?

* This doesn't seem like a completely mad feat to exist, but I can't comment on it's likely power level.

[Chronos]

SavageWombat, suppose, hypothetically and for the sake of argument, that there were somewhere in the core books a non-epic feat that had Snatch Arrows as a prerequisite, and which had as its benefit "You may use your Snatch Arrows feat as many times in a round as you have free hands". If such a feat existed, I expect you would be arguing that we should list Tarquin as having it, correct? But by your own arguments, we should not: If Tarquin had that feat, it would not explain why he let go of the airship rail with both hands, because it was better to hold on and take damage from one arrow than it was to let go.

Tarquin letting go of the airship is a problem. But it's not a problem with the Infinite Deflection feat: It's a problem no matter what abilities Tarquin has. It's a problem with Tarquin himself, and his ability to make rapid decisions under pressure, not with his feats.


On to the topic of flying, carrying loads, and Sabine's strength:
1: I agree that Roy being described as "big" is enough to say that his weight is at least the average for a human male.
2: I agree that there is hard evidence for Sabine having at least 19 Str. She might have more, or might have something that increases the load she can fly with. I prefer the latter option, because succubi only have a +2 Str modifier (enough that an individual succubus could, by luck of the dice, have a 19 or 20, but anything more than that would still require special effort on her part to raise it).
3: IIRC, one option for increasing her load while flying is the feats Reinforced Wings and Heavyweight Wings, from Races of the Dragon, which I believe have come up before in this thread.
4: If we're using loads while flying to determine strength, then we also have to contend with Celia carrying Roy. Sylphs don't have a Str bonus (even if we adjust for them being inexplicably medium-sized), and her wings are described as "diaphanous", which does not sound consistent with them being "reinforced" or "heavyweight". With Roy, we might account for this by her casting a spell on him beforehand (a Levitate would do the trick), but then she later whisked away Haley (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0613.html) without any preparation needed.

[SavageWombat]

SavageWombat, suppose, hypothetically and for the sake of argument, that there were somewhere in the core books a non-epic feat that had Snatch Arrows as a prerequisite, and which had as its benefit "You may use your Snatch Arrows feat as many times in a round as you have free hands". If such a feat existed, I expect you would be arguing that we should list Tarquin as having it, correct? But by your own arguments, we should not: If Tarquin had that feat, it would not explain why he let go of the airship rail with both hands, because it was better to hold on and take damage from one arrow than it was to let go.

Tarquin letting go of the airship is a problem. But it's not a problem with the Infinite Deflection feat: It's a problem no matter what abilities Tarquin has. It's a problem with Tarquin himself, and his ability to make rapid decisions under pressure, not with his feats.

And if we're going to discuss hypotheticals, I would like to see comments on Coat's proposed thought-experiment, because I feel it to be most relevant.



First let me say that I appreciate the more "look at this logically" posts that have come recently.

I will agree that yours is a strong argument. My opinion, however, is that from the point of the needs of the story (of this particular sub-sub-subplot) is that we are supposed to assume, D&D rules notwithstanding, that Tarquin could not afford to risk the hit from even one arrow (sneak damage and all).

I don't expect people to agree with this, but here's my following on the particular plot point.

Haley vs. Tarquin:

Setup: Haley shoots Tarquin. Tarquin snatches the arrow. Haley learns that Tarquin can catch her arrows.
Continuance: Haley shoots - let's say towards Tarquin - with a barrage of arrows. Tarquin demonstrates that he can catch two arrows.
Payoff: Haley, having been recently trounced by Tarquin, yells "Hey Tarquin! Catch!" - please note that she says that, it's important - and shoots two arrows at his face. She wants him to catch the arrows. That's her plan.

The payoff comes not from some theme about Tarquin's overconfidence, but from Haley's deliberate use of his tactics against him. It is my contention that the depiction of Tarquin's ability was always written with this payoff in mind. That's how Rich writes these things.

So maybe the rules don't entirely support it, between respective HP and falling damage issues and Reflex saves and all. But I still maintain that the Giant wrote this scene to be interpreted that Tarquin had to catch the arrows or else. And that does not work well with Infinite Deflection. It would work with your hypothetical feat, because the "had to or else" argument would still apply.

P.S. How was that popcorn anyway?

[Bird]

All of these things are still lighter than Thog + (new and improved) Nale, so we don't need to worry about it. We don't actually have rules for max lift of one hand, or anything like that sadly. (That I'm aware of)
______

Based on Nale weighing ~180 and assuming Thog to be as light as possible (154 lbs of Half-Orc) for Sabine to carry them both while moving overland she has to have a minimum of 19 Strength (22 if medium, 27 if light). Link (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0458.html)

Sabine also seems to have Improved Bull Rush (and thus Power Attack) Link (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0805.html), and Improved Grapple (and thus 13+ Dexterity) Link (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0810.html)
Aye, it's a lower strength, and therefore is irrelevant if we consider flight loads. I was figuring it anyway so that even if we can't reach a consensus on flight load evidence (since some folks don't approve of it), we can still give her a minimum STR of 16. As Crusher suggested, it's a place to start.

I agree that there's no one-handed lift rule; I was merely thinking through my decision to apply to above-the-head lift rule to the scene with Sabine & Roy.

I don't think I agree with her having Improved Bull Rush. While she does enjoy that flying tackle maneuver (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0343.html), there's no evidence of of IBR except the failure of Roy/Elan to take an AoO. In Roy's case, she caught him flat-footed, and in Elan's, he was unarmed, explaining why each character could not make an AoO. (This is if you accept that an untaken AoO is evidence of a feat in the first instance, which I understand that some do not.)

Durkon is likewise unarmed in 810 when she grapples him; I don't think we have evidence of Improved Grapple either.

[ChristianSt]

Setup: Haley shoots Tarquin. Tarquin snatches the arrow. Haley learns that Tarquin can catch her arrows.
Continuance: Haley shoots - let's say towards Tarquin - with a barrage of arrows. Tarquin demonstrates that he can catch two arrows.
Payoff: Haley, having been recently trounced by Tarquin, yells "Hey Tarquin! Catch!" - please note that she says that, it's important - and shoots two arrows at his face. She wants him to catch the arrows. That's her plan.

So her plan is to goad Tarquin to make a dumb move. Which she did. Regardless of what feats Tarquin has or has not (or how he could use them or did use them).
Unless you want to start to argue that his move was even dumber if he has Infinite Deflection. (Which it is, but where is the threshold that something is being "too dumb to be used in the comic"?)

And even if it would require that Tarquin has or has not certain feats, it is still your personal interpretation of what Rich intended to show. You might be right that he intended him to not have Infinite Deflection. He might have said "Tarquin has Infinite Deflection, but he uses it only to snatch arrows because it looks cooler". Or maybe he even said "Screw the rules anyway". By the way, I think the last one is the likeliest.

I personally can't see anything of "Obviously Rich wanted to show that Tarquin hasn't Infinite Deflection". And even if I did think that, that would be irrelevant for this thread.

But that doesn't change the rules how this thread operates. So unless you want to change the thread rules, there is nothing left to argue about. And if you want this thread to change its rules, you should be pretty clear what rules you want to change (to what degree/what you want as a new result), and make good arguments why you think the rules are bogus.


To the hypothetical 3/X Cleavage Scenario: If there is no other RAW-explanation other than Great Cleavage, then imo yes this thread would list Great Cleavage as a feat for Roy, even if he does use it pretty badly. [Maybe he just had really trouble with Cleavage 101, like with his C- on Attacks of Opportunity (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0216.html) and doesn't know how to cleave more than 3 enemies? :smalltongue:]
And I personally would be in favor of listing Great Cleavage instead of changing how the thread operates. Or this is a slippery slope into the dangerous territory of "inventing random stuff that fits the comic best". The scope of the thread is not to homebrew a OotS setting & rules, but to explain how OotS works best with RAW.


I can't really say anything about the "unknown green lightning spell", since I'm not into D&D-rules, but here some (random) thoughts on the comparison:


If there is no RAW-spell/effect/whatever that would allow to manifest said green lightning, than we need to dip into homebrew to explain that effect. And "unknown green lightning spell" sounds like a reasonable explanation to me.
As I said I'm not really familiar with D&D-rules, but I know there are rules to research epic spells. Maybe there are also rules to research non-epic spells? But I haven't read about researching (epic) feats. [Certainly that is no fit comparison, but DSA (a German RPG) has rules to research spells in-time, but not to research feats. So I wouldn't be shocked if D&D would do the same thing.]

[zimmerwald1915]

As I said I'm not really familiar with D&D-rules, but I know there are rules to research epic spells. Maybe there are also rules to research non-epic spells? But I haven't read about researching (epic) feats. [Certainly that is no fit comparison, but DSA (a German RPG) has rules to research spells in-time, but not to research feats. So I wouldn't be shocked if D&D would do the same thing.]
There (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/arcaneSpells.htm#addingSpellstoaWizardsSpellbook) are (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/divineSpells.htm#divineIndependentResearch), but they amount to "you can create new spells" and don't give much guidance as to how.

[Savannah]

He let go of the side of the airship and the reins when grabbing the arrows. Therefore, his hands were free.

I disagree. It is a free action to drop an item, not an immediate action, therefore dropping an item by RAW must occur during your turn. By RAW, he was stuck holding on to those reins and ship until his turn, and so he could not have a free hand to use Infinite Deflection.

[SavageWombat]

But that doesn't change the rules how this thread operates. So unless you want to change the thread rules, there is nothing left to argue about. And if you want this thread to change its rules, you should be pretty clear what rules you want to change (to what degree/what you want as a new result), and make good arguments why you think the rules are bogus.

I am not claiming that the thread should make new rules - I am arguing that the thread should consider this particular feat outside the limits of the existing rules. I have never said that the thread should post my explanation of the power - I want it to post no explanation, or a "we don't know" explanation.


To the hypothetical 3/X Cleavage Scenario: If there is no other RAW-explanation other than Great Cleavage, then imo yes this thread would list Great Cleavage as a feat for Roy, even if he does use it pretty badly.

And I personally would be in favor of listing Great Cleavage instead of changing how the thread operates. Or this is a slippery slope into the dangerous territory of "inventing random stuff that fits the comic best". The scope of the thread is not to homebrew a OotS setting & rules, but to explain how OotS works best with RAW.

See, this is the actual point on which we are disagreeing. I, and at least a few others, think we should not list a feat that has unexplained flaws as far as it's portrayal of the comic events. And as you say,


If there is no RAW-spell/effect/whatever that would allow to manifest said green lightning, than we need to dip into homebrew to explain that effect. And "unknown green lightning spell" sounds like a reasonable explanation to me.

"Unknown missile catching ability" is what I'm arguing for.

New Hypothetical:

We've just read strip 409 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0409.html). Roy has hit Miko with his greatsword so hard she flies across the room.

I come on the thread and post that since according to RAW, normal weapon attacks do not knock people back like that, clearly Roy has the Awesome Blow feat, as that allows you to attack at -5 and knock the target back 10' while inflicting damage.

You're "not into D&D rules" so your first inclination is to say "that seems reasonable".

I go on to say "and therefore, Roy has a 25+ Str and is a size Large creature."

Did your opinion of the feat suddenly change? Are you really going to look through the books for an official RAW alternative to how the feat was accomplished? Are you going to accept the feat proposal if you can't find one, because you have no other RAW option? Or are you going to argue that it's clearly not the case because of other factors?

In other words, we do not have to list a RAW explanation for something if that RAW explanation does not fit the evidence. And that the standard for how well the explanation fits the evidence is not a hard-and-fast rule.

[Kalmegil]

I disagree. It is a free action to drop an item, not an immediate action, therefore dropping an item by RAW must occur during your turn. By RAW, he was stuck holding on to those reins and ship until his turn, and so he could not have a free hand to use Infinite Deflection.

That's a good point. Of the free actions listed in the SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#freeActions), speaking is expressly called out as being a free action that can be performed "even when it isn’t your turn." None of the other actions, including drop an item, have this caveat.

Further, under the list of action types (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm), immediate actions are expressly called out as actions that "can be performed at any time — even if it's not your turn." Note that the other actions in that list don't specify that they have to occur on your turn. This is a general rule established at the top of the list: "When a character’s turn comes up in the initiative sequence, that character performs his entire round’s worth of actions. (For exceptions, see Attacks of Opportunity and Special Initiative Actions.)"

Since the ability to take an action outside your turn is called out when it's allowed, it makes sense to interpret RAW as not allowing free actions outside your turn when the rules don't expressly grant that option.

[Doug Lampert]

I disagree. It is a free action to drop an item, not an immediate action, therefore dropping an item by RAW must occur during your turn. By RAW, he was stuck holding on to those reins and ship until his turn, and so he could not have a free hand to use Infinite Deflection.

Agreed. Nothing in the rules says you can voluntarily drop an item off turn.

And the ONLY argument in favor of infinite deflection is the strict RAW argument that "this is the only way to do this by strict RAW".

But it doesn't even work on those grounds.

You can argue that dropping an item off turn is a reasonable and common houserule, but if we're allowing houserules in then just what's the reason for infinite deflection which T could easily have used WITHOUT letting go of the airship rather than assuming a houserule that he can use snatch arrows once per free hand?

[SavageWombat]

You can argue that dropping an item off turn is a reasonable and common houserule, but if we're allowing houserules in then just what's the reason for infinite deflection which T could easily have used WITHOUT letting go of the airship rather than assuming a houserule that he can use snatch arrows once per free hand?

She's not saying to assume a houserule that does that - she's saying that even with such a houserule it still fails.

I think she might be making a point about RAW nitpicking.

[Savannah]

I think she might be making a point about RAW nitpicking.

Nah, RAW nitpicking has a place and I have great respect for those that can do it well. I'm just trying to respond to the calls for a RAW counterargument from the pro-Infinite Deflection crowd.

[Kalmegil]

Good. It seems that infinite deflection is NOT a RAW-compliant way to explain Tarquin's catching two arrows in a single round. It requires a house rule, and therefore is no more RAW than a two-per-turn feet or item.

So now can we remove it (and the stats that rely on it, such as his level)?

[Crusher]

Hmm, the whole "free action" point is an interesting one.

I don't have any books with me so I can't argue this very well, but there's a split between the two cases of multi-arrow snatching. When Tarquin's on the side of the airship, he's very clearly hanging onto the side with both hands.

However, can anyone actually see what Tarquin's hands are doing in the 3rd panel of 925? Because I cannot. In panel 1 he's clearly holding the reins, and in panel 6 he's snatching the arrows, but other than 3 his hands are off-screen the entire time so, barring someone being able to zoom in on 3, we don't actually know if he's holding the reins when Haley shoots her arrows or not.

It sounds like dropping the reins would be a problem (if he's holding them), but is letting go of the side of the airship considered in the same category? I don't know if they'd be considered the same sort of action or not.

[ChristianSt]

New Hypothetical:

We've just read strip 409 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0409.html). Roy has hit Miko with his greatsword so hard she flies across the room.

I come on the thread and post that since according to RAW, normal weapon attacks do not knock people back like that, clearly Roy has the Awesome Blow feat, as that allows you to attack at -5 and knock the target back 10' while inflicting damage.

You're "not into D&D rules" so your first inclination is to say "that seems reasonable".

I go on to say "and therefore, Roy has a 25+ Str and is a size Large creature."

Did your opinion of the feat suddenly change? Are you really going to look through the books for an official RAW alternative to how the feat was accomplished? Are you going to accept the feat proposal if you can't find one, because you have no other RAW option? Or are you going to argue that it's clearly not the case because of other factors?

In other words, we do not have to list a RAW explanation for something if that RAW explanation does not fit the evidence. And that the standard for how well the explanation fits the evidence is not a hard-and-fast rule.

That is a hypothesis that is not comparable to the current discussion. There is no problem with Tarquin having Infinite Deflection (other than basically "you don't like it").

In your example Roy doesn't fit fulfill one prerequisite (being Large, since Roy is a Human and therefore a Medium-sized creature [and I'm not even sure if PCs have access to Monster traits, but that is irrelevant since he doesn't fulfill being Large]). So RAW he cant have Awesome Blow, so Roy having Awesome Blow cannot be a RAW explanation for that scene.

I can't tell what that scene can tell us about Roy (since I'm not familiar with the D&D possibilities and don't want to dig what the SRD has for option that might work), but I can tell that it is not "Roy has Awesome Blow". Unless you can also argue why a Medium-sized creature has gotten access to a feat requiring a Large size.

Why do you think it is RAW impossible for Tarquin to have Infinite Deflection? And don't start "Rich wanted to show him snatch arrows, so it can't be Infinite Deflection." or "If Rich wanted to show him have Infinite Deflection he would used it against more than two arrows.". Both these arguments (and all others I have seen from you) have nothing to do with RAW. None of the prerequisites are problematic from a RAW standpoint (other than that you believe "Tarquin isn't epic because epic is way to special for Tarquin").


I can understand the points Savannah make, and as others said it might be indeed impossible to drop his grip instantaneously before snatching the arrows, which I can't really comment on due to my lack of D&D knowledge. I assumed that it is possible to do so.

With that argument I can understand to remove Infinite Deflection/Snatch Arrows/Deflects Arrows and come up with another alternative. And from the options "houserule instantaneously drop something" vs. "Tarquin's Arrow Snatching special feat" I cannot really say which option should be preferred. I would lean a bit more on the second, unless there are more things that can be explained with the other an we can sort of apply Occam's razor.


To make it clear: I'm not married with the "Tarquin has Infinite Deflection" idea. But from the information I have/had(?) it seems to be a RAW explanation. Discarding RAW for homebrew is just bad - and your argumentation was just "I don't like this RAW explanation, so therefore it is homebrew".

[SavageWombat]

That is a hypothesis that is not comparable to the current discussion. There is no problem with Tarquin having Infinite Deflection (other than basically "you don't like it").

It's comparable because it demonstrates that there exists a line for where a feat is not an acceptable explanation just because it is RAW. The issue is not RAW, but what standard of proof we use.


In your example Roy doesn't fit fulfill one prerequisite (being Large, since Roy is a Human and therefore a Medium-sized creature [and I'm not even sure if PCs have access to Monster traits, but that is irrelevant since he doesn't fulfill being Large]). So RAW he cant have Awesome Blow, so Roy having Awesome Blow cannot be a RAW explanation for that scene.

Nitpicking the analogy does not address the point.


I can't tell what that scene can tell us about Roy (since I'm not familiar with the D&D possibilities and don't want to dig what the SRD has for option that might work), but I can tell that it is not "Roy has Awesome Blow". Unless you can also argue why a Medium-sized creature has gotten access to a feat requiring a Large size.

There exists at least one race - the Goliath - and I vaguely remember a feat, that allows a Medium character to act as a Large character for combat purposes. But again, I'm not going to nitpick the analogy.


Why do you think it is RAW impossible for Tarquin to have Infinite Deflection? And don't start "Rich wanted to show him snatch arrows, so it can't be Infinite Deflection." or "If Rich wanted to show him have Infinite Deflection he would used it against more than two arrows.". Both these arguments (and all others I have seen from you) have nothing to do with RAW. None of the prerequisites are problematic from a RAW standpoint (other than that you believe "Tarquin isn't epic because epic is way to special for Tarquin").

One more time - I do not need to prove it is "RAW impossible". I want to convince people that the description of the feat Infinite Deflection does not match what is shown in the strip. So I can use those arguments, because you are the only one insisting on an RAW alternative.


With that argument I can understand to remove Infinite Deflection/Snatch Arrows/Deflects Arrows and come up with another alternative. And from the options "houserule instantaneously drop something" vs. "Tarquin's Arrow Snatching special feat" I cannot really say which option should be preferred. I would lean a bit more on the second, unless there are more things that can be explained with the other an we can sort of apply Occam's razor.

Since everyone else keeps arguing points they don't actually support - you don't need your hands to Ride (control mount with your knees) or to Climb (hold on with one hand as long as you're not moving) according to the RAW. Since we're ignoring what the strip actually depicts and all.

I find it wryly amusing how easily you and others admit that there are problems with the fit between feat and comic, but are loath to consider simply removing it.


To make it clear: I'm not married with the "Tarquin has Infinite Deflection" idea. But from the information I have/had(?) it seems to be a RAW explanation. Discarding RAW for homebrew is just bad - and your argumentation was just "I don't like this RAW explanation, so therefore it is homebrew".

No, my argument has always been "I don't think this feat fits what we've been shown, so therefore it should not be listed." Between the two extremes of "RAW" and "homebrew" there is simply "we don't know". "No entry" is a better fit for "we don't know" than a bad fit feat.

[ChristianSt]

I want to convince people that the description of the feat Infinite Deflection does not match what is shown in the strip.

Why doesn't it match with what is shown?
I have (I think two or three pages ago) clearly stated how Infinite Deflection + Snatch Arrows can be used exactly as Tarquin used it in the comic. (Minus perhaps this free hand thing - which is an argument you never have presented.)

[SavageWombat]

Why doesn't it match with what is shown?
I have (I think two or three pages ago) clearly stated how Infinite Deflection + Snatch Arrows can be used exactly as Tarquin used it in the comic. (Minus perhaps this free hand thing - which is an argument you never have presented.)

Because every reason I've already stated above, which you keep discounting because you are overly-focused on RAW. Rules Lawyering, as it is sometimes called.

I didn't think the free hand requirement was unknown by anyone. It's kind of at the heart of "why shooting Tarquin would cause him to fall". What Savannah pointed out was a timing issue about when his hands are considered "free" for use.

[ChristianSt]

Because every reason I've already stated above, which you keep discounting because you are overly-focused on RAW. Rules Lawyering, as it is sometimes called.

... :smallsigh:

You posted this earlier:

The comic clearly depicts a highly specific ability - the ability to catch up to two arrows, one per free hand.

I responded with how it is possible to do that with Infinite Deflection + Snatch Arrows.

Yes you can also do other things on top of that with it, but why isn't a combination of feats that allow "A" or "B" (and maybe "C") a valid explanation of how a character did "A"?


[Also I did now about the free hand clause, but I assumed it is no problem to instantaneously drop something.]

[Shale]

You know what answer you're going to get. You've gotten it easily a dozen times just in this go-round. You don't agree with it. We get that. Why keep asking?

[SavageWombat]

You know what answer you're going to get. You've gotten it easily a dozen times just in this go-round. You don't agree with it. We get that. Why keep asking?

I'm going with Shale on this one. I've made my point, and some people even agree with it.

I originally posted because I felt the discussion should have been revisited after the Tarquin-on-the-rail scene, and it wasn't. Now it has been. Just because I feel strongly that I'm right doesn't mean it looks like I'm going to get my way.

And we've seen what happens when we call for a vote in the "Rich's Quotes" thread.:smalltongue:

[Kalmegil]

Well, the free-action drop thing still needs to be resolved. So you might get your way.

[SavageWombat]

Well, the free-action drop thing still needs to be resolved. So you might get your way.

True. Points to be debated then:

1) The dinosaur. Tarquin does not technically need to be holding the reins to control the dinosaur, as long as he made a Ride check at the beginning of last round. He is not holding a weapon; there are no other rules for reins. So are his hands full or not?

2) Tarquin must keep one hand on the wall to avoid falling, as per Climb. Dropping an object, as Savannah pointed out, happens on your action. But he's not dropping an object, technically - he's freeing up a hand, an action not covered. He could be interpreted as having one hand free all along, because he wasn't attempting to take a move action - but that doesn't match what we are shown.

[ChristianSt]

Maybe the problem is that I just want to understand what the problem is you see here. Because I can't see any problems. [Since he did things he could do* with the feats he has in the OP while not doing anything that contradicts** having those feats.]

But since you don't want to provide any valid reasons from a perspective of the threads rules, I just gonna say "I agree to disagree with you", and walk away from this discussions, since it just doesn't make any sense to spend more posts on it. Though it probably would have been a better decision from me to do that 3 pages ago :smallsigh: - but that is not your fault :smallwink:


* Baring the free hand thing (which I'm not sure how it gets resolved). Which is interestingly a point where your proposed feat is as invalid as the ones currently listed in the OP. So maybe you get what you want (removing Infinite Deflection), but certainly not because of the reasons you posted.


** Since making suboptimal/bad decisions is no reason in itself. Even though Roy can clearly choose to Cleave through mummies, nothing would have stopped him from attacking them one by one if he wants.

[Loreweaver15]

As far as dropping his grip on the airship:

I'm not sure that at that point he was gripping the airship.

We see in panel 3 that Tarquin has at least one of his feet hooked into the space between boards in the side of the ship, and he continually adjusts his position for the following panels until he reaches a vertical standing position (complete with exasperated body language towards Elan--), at which point he is leaning against the railing with, it always appeared to me, his hands loosely on the inward side of that railing. If that's the case, then what happens is: Haley fires and Tarquin zips his hands up reflexively, the momentum of which topples him backwards and he flails an arm out and gets a poor grip on the side of the ship again.

This is, I admit, a shaky argument, because it's based on the body language of a stick figure, but I would like to examine the actual physicality of the scene from you guys' perspective.

[SavageWombat]

As far as dropping his grip on the airship:

I'm not sure that at that point he was gripping the airship.

We see in panel 3 that Tarquin has at least one of his feet hooked into the space between boards in the side of the ship, and he continually adjusts his position for the following panels until he reaches a vertical standing position (complete with exasperated body language towards Elan--), at which point he is leaning against the railing with, it always appeared to me, his hands loosely on the inward side of that railing. If that's the case, then what happens is: Haley fires and Tarquin zips his hands up reflexively, the momentum of which topples him backwards and he flails an arm out and gets a poor grip on the side of the ship again.

This is, I admit, a shaky argument, because it's based on the body language of a stick figure, but I would like to examine the actual physicality of the scene from you guys' perspective.

Well, yes, but that's from looking at the artwork.

The actual RAW says: "You need both hands free to climb, but you may cling to a wall with one hand while you cast a spell or take some other action that requires only one hand. "

So since I'm told that rules trump mere observation, Tarquin must be holding on with one hand regardless.

Should I be posting this in blue?

[ChristianSt]

Mh I'm actually not sure, but I would interpret the body language that he surely has the railing more or less "in hand". At least I wouldn't exactly say he has free hands right there. So from a rules standpoint I would say he somehow needed to "drop the railing" before snatching arrows. And from what I read it is implied you can do Free Actions (other than to speak) only during your turn.




So since I'm told that rules trump mere observation, Tarquin must be holding on with one hand regardless.

Should I be posting this in blue?

I'm not sure if you want to say that others shouldn't take your second to last sentence (or your complete post?) serious, but I just wanted to say that I never implied that rules trump observation, neither can't I remember someone else implying that.

[Douglas]

** Since making suboptimal/bad decisions is no reason in itself. Even though Roy can clearly choose to Cleave through mummies, nothing would have stopped him from attacking them one by one if he wants.
This reminds me of an example from statistics class in high school: over and over again, we were told "correlation does not imply causation" - to infer causation, you need a controlled experiment. And yet, even professional statisticians and scientists readily accept now that cigarette smoking causes cancer in humans despite no such controlled experiment having ever been performed. This came about because of an extended discussion that concluded the preponderance of evidence met such a high standard that the experiment was not, in this particular case, necessary.

It is true that suboptimal or bad decision making is not normally evidence for this thread. This is not a normal suboptimal or bad decision, however.

Tarquin's decision is bad in an extremely obvious way to even the most casual reader, even one with no D&D knowledge whatsoever - it risks falling from the airship, simultaneously taking a large amount of falling damage and losing all remaining hope of favorably resolving the Elan situation.

Tarquin's decision, assuming he has the feat proposed, has a better alternative that is both extremely simple and extremely obvious to even the most casual reader of the feat's rules text - just deflect both arrows with one hand, it's the most basic use the feat has.

The consequences of Tarquin's decision relative to the supposed alternative are extremely spectacular - a huge amount of damage and the total loss of his entire goal.

I submit that the combination of the extreme nature of all three of these factors at once should be considered sufficient to admit homebrew as an alternative explanation without needing absolute proof or a quote from The Giant, especially when the proposed homebrew - that, however he does it, Tarquin can only snatch and only once per hand - simultaneously is so simple and fits the evidence so well.

[ryuplaneswalker]

Tarquin's decision is bad in an extremely obvious way to even the most casual reader, even one with no D&D knowledge whatsoever - it risks falling from the airship, simultaneously taking a large amount of falling damage and losing all remaining hope of favorably resolving the Elan situation.

Except you are only giving half the situation there.

It is not just the risk of arrow to the face vs falling, Tarquin has a chance to talk Elan into helping him, he is not going to do that with an arrow.

[Techwarrior]

Aye, it's a lower strength, and therefore is irrelevant if we consider flight loads. I was figuring it anyway so that even if we can't reach a consensus on flight load evidence (since some folks don't approve of it), we can still give her a minimum STR of 16. As Crusher suggested, it's a place to start.

I agree that there's no one-handed lift rule; I was merely thinking through my decision to apply to above-the-head lift rule to the scene with Sabine & Roy.

I don't think I agree with her having Improved Bull Rush. While she does enjoy that flying tackle maneuver (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0343.html), there's no evidence of of IBR except the failure of Roy/Elan to take an AoO. In Roy's case, she caught him flat-footed, and in Elan's, he was unarmed, explaining why each character could not make an AoO. (This is if you accept that an untaken AoO is evidence of a feat in the first instance, which I understand that some do not.)

Durkon is likewise unarmed in 810 when she grapples him; I don't think we have evidence of Improved Grapple either.

The point isn't about the rules concerning the difference in how much she can carry while flying versus how much she can carry without flying. I'm saying that to carry Nale and Thog with an Overland Speed she has to be able to carry their combined weight with her Heavy Load. That pegs her minimum Str to 19, ignoring the additional rules for how much you can carry and fly effectively.

In regards to both of the Improved X feats, that makes sense and I'm willing to drop those as suggestions, although I think I've seen her grapple someone while they were armed and not flat-footed, so I might bring that back up.



On to the topic of flying, carrying loads, and Sabine's strength:
1: I agree that Roy being described as "big" is enough to say that his weight is at least the average for a human male.
2: I agree that there is hard evidence for Sabine having at least 19 Str. She might have more, or might have something that increases the load she can fly with. I prefer the latter option, because succubi only have a +2 Str modifier (enough that an individual succubus could, by luck of the dice, have a 19 or 20, but anything more than that would still require special effort on her part to raise it).
3: IIRC, one option for increasing her load while flying is the feats Reinforced Wings and Heavyweight Wings, from Races of the Dragon, which I believe have come up before in this thread.
4: If we're using loads while flying to determine strength, then we also have to contend with Celia carrying Roy. Sylphs don't have a Str bonus (even if we adjust for them being inexplicably medium-sized), and her wings are described as "diaphanous", which does not sound consistent with them being "reinforced" or "heavyweight". With Roy, we might account for this by her casting a spell on him beforehand (a Levitate would do the trick), but then she later whisked away Haley (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0613.html) without any preparation needed.

1) As I've said, Nale and Thog are still heavier, and she lifted them in such a way as to require her Strength to put doing that underneath the maximum for her Heavy Load.
2) I prefer the latter option as well, but I'm unsure how this being non-core and unstated versus the possibility of her using an Enhancement item of Strength and her level up increases to boost Strength.
3) That sounds right.
4) Alright, I'll take that on. Those feats don't actually require her to have heavier wings than normal, so the fluff is irrelevant. If she has Reinforced Wings (can fly with a medium load), she only needs a Strength of 15 to be able to pull of both of the listed accomplishments (Haley should be lighter than Roy, even including gear). The same feat on Sabine allows her to get away with a total Strength (including Enhancement items) of 22.

[Flame of Anor]

If you look carefully at 936, (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0936.html) especially panels 1, 2, and 4, you can see that Tarquin is supporting his weight on his forearms or elbows, not his hands. Note the characteristic sharp bend of the elbow as seen best in panel 2. If you were resting your weight on something with your hands, you would not have bent arms. That would put your weight on the arm muscles--like holding yourself halfway through a push-up or chin-up indefinitely. Extremely fatiguing for no good reason.

Rather, if you were resting on your hands, you would have your arms straight, so as to rest the weight on the arm bones. Conveniently enough, the Giant gives us an example of this! Look at Elan's position in panels 1, 4, and 6 of the second page. He is clearly resting on his hands on the railing, unlike Tarquin.

[ChristianSt]

It is true that suboptimal or bad decision making is not normally evidence for this thread. This is not a normal suboptimal or bad decision, however.

Tarquin's decision is bad in an extremely obvious way to even the most casual reader, even one with no D&D knowledge whatsoever - it risks falling from the airship, simultaneously taking a large amount of falling damage and losing all remaining hope of favorably resolving the Elan situation.

Tarquin's decision, assuming he has the feat proposed, has a better alternative that is both extremely simple and extremely obvious to even the most casual reader of the feat's rules text - just deflect both arrows with one hand, it's the most basic use the feat has.

The consequences of Tarquin's decision relative to the supposed alternative are extremely spectacular - a huge amount of damage and the total loss of his entire goal.

I submit that the combination of the extreme nature of all three of these factors at once should be considered sufficient to admit homebrew as an alternative explanation without needing absolute proof or a quote from The Giant, especially when the proposed homebrew - that, however he does it, Tarquin can only snatch and only once per hand - simultaneously is so simple and fits the evidence so well.


Maybe (but only maybe) you are correct with your analysis.

But it relies sole on interpreting that what happened in a certain way. There are other interpretations that could also be valid, yet don't make Tarquin's decision suicidal (or whatever you call it).


First of all, by following your argumentation, I could even argue further that Tarquin's decision in itself doesn't make any sense at all, whether he has Infinite Deflection or not: It should have been no problem for him to take one (or even both) arrows to the face! (as other posters have said)
It assumes that Tarquin realizes what the consequences of his actions are. This was more or less a decision of split seconds. I think it wouldn't be hard to find real life examples of decisions that seem much worse than this.
We don't know what Tarquin wanted to achieve in this situation. Maybe he realized that he needed to abort the fight, and wanted to look more desperate. And that tactic he employed successful. I can't think right now of a scenario where Tarquin would look more desperate than the events shown. (It wasn't enough that Elan decided to save him, but Tarquin couldn't know that.)
Maybe it was to highlight how skillful/tactical Haley applied her actions in this scenario? She successfully convinced Tarquin to catch the arrows. If he could do even better things, than this highlights how good Haley tempted him to do a bad thing.


We simple don't know which of this (or your) alternatives is likelier or how it was intended.
Claiming "it is obvious" is just a way to hide that it is your personal interpretation.
Dragging in the mysterious "casual reader" doesn't help either. [Heck what is this "casual reader"? Because from all images I have it is not someone who visits the forum and certainly not someone who ponders about D&D-rules.]

[Taelas]

To be honest, I think it was simply set up such that Tarquin reacted on instinct, and his normal instinct is to catch arrows shot at him.

[Coat]

Why doesn't it match with what is shown?
I have (I think two or three pages ago) clearly stated how Infinite Deflection + Snatch Arrows can be used exactly as Tarquin used it in the comic. (Minus perhaps this free hand thing - which is an argument you never have presented.)

Tarquin's behaviour is inconsistent with Snatch Arrows + Infinite Deflection, because

He is never shown deflecting an arrow
He is never shown intercepting more than two arrows
He intercepts arrows that narratively should not have been aimed at him


All of this can be explained by Snatch Arrows + Infinite Deflection but is not consistent with them.

If we knew that the Giant operates strictly by RAW and has RAW character sheets for each character that their actions are strictly in accordance with, then Snatch Arrows + Infinite Defection is the only possible interpretation.

However, we know that the Giant does not.

What is the purpose of this thread: to translate the comic into the world of RAW? Or to record the capabilities of the characters as shown?

Personally, I find the latter more interesting and useful than the former, but whatever.

[Emanick]

Yeah, I think we're all overthinking the "why did Tarquin make this suboptimal decision, even when he had about a fifth of a second to react" thing. No human being can think through things logically during the time it takes an arrow to fly 20 feet. Tarquin is reacting on pure instinct there, and so I think it's unreasonable to put too much thought into whether his actions were wise enough to be "in character." Literally anybody can make a poor choice when they have about 0.2 seconds to think about it.

[Myou]

....

I normally just lurk in this thread since the long, in-depth arguments that go on are not something I want to get drawn into, but I do want to voice my support, since this has gone on far too long now. I absolutely agree with douglas and his side, and want to add my 'vote', whatever that may be worth, towards amending Tarquin's stats - for the reasons that have already been explained in excellent detail.

[With a box]

maybe the ship is so long, Haley's arrows need a full round to reach Tarquin
It could be a hint of the size of the Machina
:smallmad:

[Loreweaver15]

Tarquin's behaviour is inconsistent with Snatch Arrows + Infinite Deflection, because

He is never shown deflecting an arrow
He is never shown intercepting more than two arrows
He intercepts arrows that narratively should not have been aimed at him


All of this can be explained by Snatch Arrows + Infinite Deflection but is not consistent with them.

If we knew that the Giant operates strictly by RAW and has RAW character sheets for each character that their actions are strictly in accordance with, then Snatch Arrows + Infinite Defection is the only possible interpretation.

However, we know that the Giant does not.

What is the purpose of this thread: to translate the comic into the world of RAW? Or to record the capabilities of the characters as shown?

Personally, I find the latter more interesting and useful than the former, but whatever.

We can all do the latter on our own, though. Everybody who's read the comic knows that Tarquin has some skill that lets him snatch arrows out of the air consistently; the more difficult task is to, as you say, translate the comic into the world of RAW, finding the closest fit by the basic rules of the game without going into the muddled mechanics that the Giant tweaks in order to make the situation more dramatic and interesting. There is literally only one combination of abilities that would allow Tarquin to do his arrow trick at any level of optimization or good decision-making, and so by RAW he must have that ability.

Speaking of which!


Yeah, I think we're all overthinking the "why did Tarquin make this suboptimal decision, even when he had about a fifth of a second to react" thing. No human being can think through things logically during the time it takes an arrow to fly 20 feet. Tarquin is reacting on pure instinct there, and so I think it's unreasonable to put too much thought into whether his actions were wise enough to be "in character." Literally anybody can make a poor choice when they have about 0.2 seconds to think about it.

[ChristianSt]

Tarquin's behaviour is inconsistent with Snatch Arrows + Infinite Deflection, because

He is never shown deflecting an arrow
He is never shown intercepting more than two arrows
He intercepts arrows that narratively should not have been aimed at him


All of this can be explained by Snatch Arrows + Infinite Deflection but is not consistent with them.

If we knew that the Giant operates strictly by RAW and has RAW character sheets for each character that their actions are strictly in accordance with, then Snatch Arrows + Infinite Defection is the only possible interpretation.

However, we know that the Giant does not.

What is the purpose of this thread: to translate the comic into the world of RAW? Or to record the capabilities of the characters as shown?

Personally, I find the latter more interesting and useful than the former, but whatever.

I'm not sure what definition of "consistent" you are using. But if Infinite Deflection + Snatch Arrows can explain that was it seen, I would say it is consistent with what is being seen. (And to point 3: I think there is nothing that can say whether the arrow would have hit Tarquin or not. So that argument is pure speculation.).

The thread rules (the relevant section I copied a couple of pages ago) are working under the assumption that we use RAW whenever possible (unless where it is not possible or the Giant explicitly said he houseruled this).
So while you say the latter is more interesting and more useful for you, it is not the goal of this thread.


Edit: in fact is pretty hard to show inconstancy in "X having active ability Y". It can pretty much only happen if someone says "really (un)fortunate that X doesn't have the ability to do Y". Because even if X never does Y, we don't know if he didn't do Y because he can't do it, or if he preferred (for whatever reason) not to do Y.

But before you start saying: "So clearly Tarquin should have all feats listed in the SRD!". No, we don't have any scene that requires him to have these feats. But we have scenes (snatching multiple arrows) that requires him to have Infinite Deflection + Snatch Arrows RAW. [Unless you present another RAW solution how he did it.]

[Coat]

We can all do the latter on our own, though.


You might be able to. I can't.

I don't have an exhaustive knowledge of all DnD spells. I've never read the Epic source books. I've never played a ranger, and have only a hazy understanding of their class abilities.


Everybody who's read the comic knows that Tarquin has some skill that lets him snatch arrows out of the air consistently

I certainly remember that now. Whether I'll still remember it in 18 months time, when Tarquin re-appears half way through book seven is another question: I don't have a perfect recall of every item any character has ever picked up, and every power they've ever used.

As situations arise within the comic, I like to guess at what might happen next. What could Roy do in this situation? Is Varsuvius tapped out of spells, what does s/he have left in the bank? Just how powerful is Tarquin anyway?

Because OotS is based on DnD this kind of speculation is a lot more grounded than, for example, trying to work out whether Aragorn is Moar Awesome than Faramir.

Translating what the characters do into RAW terms is a very useful part of this speculation - but not if we lose too much information in the process.

So I find the information in this thread very useful for this kind of speculation, but for me, a record that Tarquin can consistently catch 2 arrows but has never deflected any is more useful than a theory that he can deflect infinite arrows, but doesn't want to.

Of course, this thread isn't obliged to provide what I want - all I can do is present the case for why it might be worth doing, which I have done.

So I'll shut up now.


Tarquin is reacting on pure instinct there, and so I think it's unreasonable to put too much thought into whether his actions were wise enough to be "in character." Literally anybody can make a poor choice when they have about 0.2 seconds to think about it.

This, I completely agree with.

[Kalmegil]

However, can anyone actually see what Tarquin's hands are doing in the 3rd panel of 925? Because I cannot. In panel 1 he's clearly holding the reins, and in panel 6 he's snatching the arrows, but other than 3 his hands are off-screen the entire time so, barring someone being able to zoom in on 3, we don't actually know if he's holding the reins when Haley shoots her arrows or not.

If you look really closely, you can see his hand at the edge of the panel, and it's on the edge of the reins, in the same position it was in when he was holding the reins two panels earlier:

http://i.imgur.com/DmYLHP4.png (http://imgur.com/DmYLHP4)

So we don't need to determine whether he has to "drop" the rail in order to verify that the empty hands requirement of infinite deflection is not part of whatever skill or item Tarquin is using. He's holding the reins; he can't drop them as a free action; he makes a catch. Ergo, there's some houseruling going on here: either out-of-turn free drops, or something other than infinite deflection.

(For the record, the rules the Giant seems (we don't have enough samples to be sure) to have imposed here--one catch with each hand, free drops allowed--seem better to me than the RAW rules. Not that that's relevant to this thread specifically. Just don't want to seem like I'm criticizing the Giant's choice here. The arrow-snatching showing Tarquin's competence, then biting him when he can't adapt is one of the touches that make this arc so wonderful.)

[Coat]

I'm not sure what definition of "consistent" you are using. But if Infinite Deflection + Snatch Arrows can explain that was it seen, I would say it is consistent with what is being seen. (And to point 3: I think there is nothing that can say whether the arrow would have hit Tarquin or not. So that argument is pure speculation.).

(regarding arrows at other targets, I am referring to 925 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0925.html), where Haley announces that she's shooting at Miron, and Tarquin catches two arrows. Though I think it's also debatable whether the smokestick arrow Haley shoots inside the pyramid was going to connect with him).

If I see a man in dirty overcoat sitting by the side of a road, with a board in front of him asking for spare change, that is consistent with the interpretation that he is a beggar. It fits the facts, and what we know about beggars.

He might be a banker who accidentally feel into a muddy puddle after a going out for a drink, lost his wallet in a puddle, and is asking for some change so he can call home while he has a little rest. What we see is explained by that interpretation, but not really consistent with it, because we know bankers are typically unlikely to feel like a little rest by the side of the road and much more likely to explain their situation to someone.

That's the distinction that I'm drawing between 'consistent' and 'explained by'.


The thread rules (the relevant section I copied a couple of pages ago) are working under the assumption that we use RAW whenever possible (unless where it is not possible or the Giant explicitly said he houseruled this).
So while you say the latter is more interesting and more useful for you, it is not the goal of this thread.

Yep. I'm questioning whether those are the best thread rules we could have, or whether it's possible to improve them.


I am suggesting that to change the rules such that we have a thread interpreting the comic in the light of RAW, rather than translating the comic into the world of RAW in the most minimalist way possible, would be more useful and interesting.

And having made that suggestion, I withdraw.

[Chronos]

Quoth Savage Wombat:

The actual RAW says: "You need both hands free to climb, but you may cling to a wall with one hand while you cast a spell or take some other action that requires only one hand. "
There we go, then, that clears that up: He's climbing, ergo he has both hands free, ergo he meets the requirement to use Snatch Arrows (and Infinite Deflection).

And Savage Wombat, a question: If you don't like rules lawyering (and that's no criticism; plenty of people don't), then why are you even in this thread? Rules lawyering is the entire purpose of this thread.

[SavageWombat]

There we go, then, that clears that up: He's climbing, ergo he has both hands free, ergo he meets the requirement to use Snatch Arrows (and Infinite Deflection).

No, that's the opposite of clearing it up. he's climbing, ergo he has one hand on the wall, ergo he doesn't.


And Savage Wombat, a question: If you don't like rules lawyering (and that's no criticism; plenty of people don't), then why are you even in this thread? Rules lawyering is the entire purpose of this thread.

There's a difference between discussing rules technicalities and rules-lawyering. I started to explain better, but it might get overly hostile-sounding.

[illyahr]

There we go, then, that clears that up: He's climbing, ergo he has both hands free, ergo he meets the requirement to use Snatch Arrows (and Infinite Deflection).

Actually, to catch two arrows he'd need two hands free, which he doesn't.

Also, Deflect Arrows (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#deflectArrows), and Snatch Arrows as a result, requires you to not be flat-footed. Climbing treats you as Flat-Footed (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/climb.htm) so it would be impossible for Tarquin to use Snatch Arrows, by RAW, in this instance.

[sr123]

Why can't the words "possibly" and "probably" be used in the descriptions, with appropriate comic links?

As in, Tarquin: "Gloves of Arrow Snatching or the Snatch Arrows feat; possibly Infinite Deflection."

Not everything in the front page has to be written with absolute certainty. In fact, much of the stats (particularly those based on the later comics, in which Rich has explicitly gone off-rules) should not.

[SavageWombat]

Also, Deflect Arrows (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#deflectArrows), and Snatch Arrows as a result, requires you to not be flat-footed. Climbing treats you as Flat-Footed (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/climb.htm) so it would be impossible for Tarquin to use Snatch Arrows, by RAW, in this instance.

Good point. Clearly Tarquin has levels in Thief-Acrobat. That lets you climb without being flat-footed, right?

[ChristianSt]

Actually, to catch two arrows he'd need two hands free, which he doesn't.

Also, Deflect Arrows (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#deflectArrows), and Snatch Arrows as a result, requires you to not be flat-footed. Climbing treats you as Flat-Footed (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/climb.htm) so it would be impossible for Tarquin to use Snatch Arrows, by RAW, in this instance.

Hm, I can't see it anywhere (under Climb and under Flat-Footed), that Climbing causes someone to be Flat-Fooded. The only thing that is related that you loose "Dexterity bonus to AC (if any)" on both.


Why can't the words "possibly" and "probably" be used in the descriptions, with appropriate comic links?

As in, Tarquin: "Gloves of Arrow Snatching or the Snatch Arrows feat; possibly Infinite Deflection."

Not everything in the front page has to be written with absolute certainty. In fact, much of the stats (particularly those based on the later comics, in which Rich has explicitly gone off-rules) should not.

First of all you probably could put a "possibly" and "probably" to nearly anything here, since I think the stuff we actually can say for certain here are pretty few. But feel free to imagine that this thread title is "Possibly Class and Probably Level Geekery" if it feels better for you :smallwink:. [Also that leaves the problem that Snatch Arrows alone doesn't allow Tarquin to do what he did.]



(regarding arrows at other targets, I am referring to 925 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0925.html), where Haley announces that she's shooting at Miron, and Tarquin catches two arrows. Though I think it's also debatable whether the smokestick arrow Haley shoots inside the pyramid was going to connect with him).


I assumed you talk about these, but as I said it is pretty much impossible to say whom they would have hit if Tarquin didn't catch them. I think it is likelier that they would have hit Tarquin.



If I see a man in dirty overcoat sitting by the side of a road, with a board in front of him asking for spare change, that is consistent with the interpretation that he is a beggar. It fits the facts, and what we know about beggars.

He might be a banker who accidentally feel into a muddy puddle after a going out for a drink, lost his wallet in a puddle, and is asking for some change so he can call home while he has a little rest. What we see is explained by that interpretation, but not really consistent with it, because we know bankers are typically unlikely to feel like a little rest by the side of the road and much more likely to explain their situation to someone.

That's the distinction that I'm drawing between 'consistent' and 'explained by'.

I think you are mixing "consistent" as in "(of an argument or set of ideas) not containing any logical contradictions." [e.g. "a consistent explanation"] op with "unlikely". [At least that is what Google tells consistent should mean (which is luckily that what I have thought it should mean).]

Even in the example you provided, there is no logical contradictions with the hypothesis "the man in dirty overcoat is a banker". Certainly it is likely wrong and you could do a measurement of some sort (e.g. asking him) to add new information to falsify that hypothesis, but without further information it isn't inconsistent.

It would be inconsistent if I would say "he never leaves his cubicle in the bank from 2pm to 4pm" while he sits there at 3pm.



Yep. I'm questioning whether those are the best thread rules we could have, or whether it's possible to improve them.


I am suggesting that to change the rules such that we have a thread interpreting the comic in the light of RAW, rather than translating the comic into the world of RAW in the most minimalist way possible, would be more useful and interesting.

And having made that suggestion, I withdraw.

And how would that work? What exactly means "interpreting the comic in the light of RAW"? It just sounds like endless argumentation which homebrew fits better.

[Yes, I know there are some nearly endless argumentations ongoing right now - but I think we would have far more with such a fuzzy guideline]

[Kalmegil]

Hm, I can't see it anywhere (under Climb and under Flat-Footed), that Climbing causes someone to be Flat-Fooded. The only thing that is related that you loose "Dexterity bonus to AC (if any)" on both.

Elsewhere (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/combatModifiers.htm) the Armor Class Modifiers table makes it clear that the loss of dexterity bonus to AC while climbing is due to being flat-footed: "Flat-footed (such as surprised, balancing, climbing)."

OK, so now we can show that catching two arrows while holding reins with at least one hand* and catching two arrows while climbing or clinging to a wall require some house-ruling if done under infinite deflection.

*Tarquin could be holding the reins with only his left hand, and clinging is allowed with one hand. But he catches two arrows, and once he catches one arrow, he has no empty hand and he can't drop the first arrow (and we know he in fact did not drop the arrow).

To sum up where we are now on this particular angle, we have two instances of non-RAW infinite deflection. Therefore there's no reason to prefer infinite deflection plus free-drop houserule over some other houserule.

[ChristianSt]

Elsewhere (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/combatModifiers.htm) the Armor Class Modifiers table makes it clear that the loss of dexterity bonus to AC while climbing is due to being flat-footed: "Flat-footed (such as surprised, balancing, climbing)."

OK, so now we can show that catching two arrows while holding reins with at least one hand* and catching two arrows while climbing or clinging to a wall require some house-ruling if done under infinite deflection.

*Tarquin could be holding the reins with only his left hand, and clinging is allowed with one hand. But he catches two arrows, and once he catches one arrow, he has no empty hand and he can't drop the first arrow (and we know he in fact did not drop the arrow).

To sum up where we are now on this particular angle, we have two instances of non-RAW infinite deflection. Therefore there's no reason to prefer infinite deflection plus free-drop houserule over some other houserule.

Mh the free hand/climbing/clinging is a though one to deal with. Right now I would say it doesn't work RAW.

To 925: It could be that he dropped the rains while being off-panel (i.e. the Panel where Haley shoots - I'm not sure if it is possible to say that it was impossible to him for having an action in between).


Since the free hand/climbing/clinging sounds like it needs a rather complicated workaround (unless someone wants to start arguing that clinging != climbing, and so Tarquin isn't Flat-Footed. In that case a "Instantaneous dropping" is enough), I would say "Taruin's Arrow Snatching feat" is the best explanation [With something like "Once per hand you may at any time snatch an arrow targeting you/that would hit you while letting any object free you hold with that hand."]

[Crusher]

Elsewhere (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/combatModifiers.htm) the Armor Class Modifiers table makes it clear that the loss of dexterity bonus to AC while climbing is due to being flat-footed: "Flat-footed (such as surprised, balancing, climbing)."

OK, so now we can show that catching two arrows while holding reins with at least one hand* and catching two arrows while climbing or clinging to a wall require some house-ruling if done under infinite deflection.

*Tarquin could be holding the reins with only his left hand, and clinging is allowed with one hand. But he catches two arrows, and once he catches one arrow, he has no empty hand and he can't drop the first arrow (and we know he in fact did not drop the arrow).

To sum up where we are now on this particular angle, we have two instances of non-RAW infinite deflection. Therefore there's no reason to prefer infinite deflection plus free-drop houserule over some other houserule.

Argument aside, this is the third time in the last few pages you've made an assertion, announced it to be fact, and declared the discussion to be over. Whatever the intent, its coming across as pushy and un-collegial, particularly since the whole rein discussion is certainly not established as fact.

The climbing/flatfooted point, however, may be another story. I'm curious to see how it plays out.

[Coat]

I think you are mixing "consistent" as in "(of an argument or set of ideas) not containing any logical contradictions." [e.g. "a consistent explanation"] op with "unlikely". [At least that is what Google tells consistent should mean (which is luckily that what I have thought it should mean).]

I am using consistent to mean "an argument or set of ideas that does not contain significant contradictions". Rather than logical.

A banker sitting in muddy clothes begging for coins is inconsistent because it ignores significant facts about bankers. The idea of a banker includes a concept of a person with a certain sense of their importance and status in society, with a certain amount of drive and ambition.

We do not (or, at least I don't - but I think this is fairly common narrative currency) expect a person of status, drive and ambition to give up and beg for coins just because they lose their wallet and their coat gets muddy. We expect someone of that background to take a more active role in solving the problem, to demand of the world a solution.

As an interpretation it is sufficient to explain the facts but it is not consistent with them because it ignores things that we believe we know about bankers that do not fit the observed facts.

Infinite deflections explains the facts, but it is not consistent with them because it allows ignores things we know about infinite deflection (that you can intercept more than two arrows) and that we believe we know about Tarquin (he is a capable combatant, not an actual clown)



And how would that work? What exactly means "interpreting the comic in the light of RAW"? It just sounds like endless argumentation which homebrew fits better.

[Yes, I know there are some nearly endless argumentations ongoing right now - but I think we would have far more with such a fuzzy guideline]

We will have nearly endless arguments whatever the rules, because that is the nature of rules and people.

Science is probably the best example of a clearly defined rules rigidly followed (i.e. the methodology of science), and it still descends into bickering and argumentation.

The question is *do the rules, when followed according to the intent, generate useful and interesting discussion*. I point you to the thread title, and ask whether this thread is really as useful as it could be.

TL;DR: there is a desire to have rules that are sufficiently prescriptive that there is no room for discussion and all statements are either true or false. This is precisely the desire you're applying to the story with the banker. In my opinion, it is a mistake, because there are simply never enough facts to work with. The only statement you end up able make is that there is a man asleep in a muddy raincoat - all else is interpretation; in my opinion, it is better to accept a certain amount of uncertainty, and try to have a constructive discussion about what's likely.

[Kalmegil]

Argument aside, this is the third time in the last few pages you've made an assertion, announced it to be fact, and declared the discussion to be over. Its coming across as pushy and un-collegial.

I have NOT declared the discussion to be over. I have summed up the full breadth of this aspect of the discussion each time I've addressed it, mainly because it's happening intertwined with a different discussion on the same topic, after responding to new information that has been presented by posters. I have also stated my belief that I've addressed all the outstanding (as in raised within the discussion) objections to the position I'm advocating.

One of those was in response to your specific question (my post with the blown up screenshot). If you have anything specific to object to in my conclusions in that post, I'll address them further.

And, yes, I have stated things as facts: specific thing about what the rules say as written, with links to support those facts. If you take a quick gander through the thread, there's a lot of that going on.

Further, several of my posts have ended in questions or in express acknowledgement that the issue is not yet resolved ("Well, the free-action drop thing still needs to be resolved", for example

This is the very opposite of me declaring the discussion over: it's me having the discussion.

[ChristianSt]

I am using consistent to mean "an argument or set of ideas that does not contain significant contradictions". Rather than logical.

A banker sitting in muddy clothes begging for coins is inconsistent because it ignores significant facts about bankers. The idea of a banker includes a concept of a person with a certain sense of their importance and status in society, with a certain amount of drive and ambition.

We do not (or, at least I don't - but I think this is fairly common narrative currency) expect a person of status, drive and ambition to give up and beg for coins just because they lose their wallet and their coat gets muddy. We expect someone of that background to take a more active role in solving the problem, to demand of the world a solution.

As an interpretation it is sufficient to explain the facts but it is not consistent with them because it ignores things that we believe we know about bankers that do not fit the observed facts.

Infinite deflections explains the facts, but it is not consistent with them because it allows ignores things we know about infinite deflection (that you can intercept more than two arrows) and that we believe we know about Tarquin (he is a capable combatant, not an actual clown)

Unlikely is not a contradiction. I even have the perfect example that basically is exactly the same as your scenario:

Take an professional award-winning violinist vs. a street musician. Surely from your argumentation you presented from the banker/beggar scenario a street musician being an professional award-winning violinist would be contradiction.


Yet that actually happened (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joshua_Bell#Washington_Post_experiment)! So does things that actually happen contradict itself nowadays?

[Toper]

I agree entirely with SavageWombat and Coat. The Giant's intention for Tarquin's power seems perfectly clear from 925 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0925.html), where Tarquin catches exactly two of the five arrows that Haley aimed at Miron. If the thread engages in the kind of active denial of the obvious that's necessary to posit that Haley aimed two arrows at Tarquin instead, well, it probably belongs in Silly Message Board Games instead of OOTS Discussion.

Part of me is glad that there's such a resistance to the silliness here, but another part of me would rather just abandon it to the people who think that nerds call them nerds.


TL;DR: there is a desire to have rules that are sufficiently prescriptive that there is no room for discussion and all statements are either true or false. This is precisely the desire you're applying to the story with the banker. In my opinion, it is a mistake, because there are simply never enough facts to work with. The only statement you end up able make is that there is a man asleep in a muddy raincoat - all else is interpretation; in my opinion, it is better to accept a certain amount of uncertainty, and try to have a constructive discussion about what's likely.
Yes, this exactly.

[Crusher]

This is the very opposite of me declaring the discussion over: it's me having the discussion.

- "So now can we remove it (and the stats that rely on it, such as his level)?"

- "Therefore there's no reason to prefer infinite deflection plus free-drop houserule over some other houserule."

Statements like these are attempts to call an end to the discussion, not further it.

[Loreweaver15]

Part of me is glad that there's such a resistance to the silliness here, but another part of me would rather just abandon it to the people who think that nerds call them nerds.

Bit more of a direct reference, actually (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=16859290&postcount=651) :P

[Kalmegil]

- "So now can we remove it (and the stats that rely on it, such as his level)?"

- "Therefore there's no reason to prefer infinite deflection plus free-drop houserule over some other houserule."

Statements like these are attempts to call an end to the discussion, not further it.

No, the first one is an attempt to solicit an opinion from others about the post I made. The second is a statement of my conclusion based on the evidence.

Both of these have been done by dozens of other people in this thread and its predecessors. And properly so.

Do you want to address the content of my post, or just your perception of the tone? Because I'm not particularly interested in discussing the latter, and if you're not going to do the former, it'll save me some time to know that up front.

[warrl]

The closest example that comes to my mind is the debate over Xykon exact level needed to cast Maximized Energy Drain. Since there was a clear dispute on the point, the forum used the lower bound even though it assumed an unseen magic item or feat not in SRD (iirc). In this case, Tarquin's level is being set at the higher bound solely on the interpretation of one feat that some of us dispute.

You're correct that the level is being set on the basis of one feat. However, levels are a scale - someone can be described as having 14+ levels meaning they are at least level 14 and may be higher. Feats are on/off - a character either does or doesn't have the feat, no in-between.


As much as I hate to see the evidence for Tarquin's level lost (because I do think the "common-sense" interpretation is that he is level 21) I'm inclined to agree with SavageWombat. Tarquin's arrow-snatching ability has enough conflicts with Infinite Deflection that the latter can't really be called a best-fit.

IF the Infinite Deflection explanation can be made to fit without house-ruling anything, then it fits. If there is no other non-houseruled explanation that fits, then Infinite Deflection is best-fit by virtue of being only-fit.

Is catching two arrows rather than deflecting them, when deflecting would be the better choice, consistent with Infinite Deflection plus Snatch Arrows? Yes, it is. (I'm ignoring the free-hand issue for the moment.) Choosing a sub-optimal tactic does not violate RAW.

And it's quite in-character for Tarquin to be catching arrows rather than deflecting them. It's more showy and badass, and usually not significantly supoptimal. So by now it isn't really a choice, it's a reflex action.

Now as for the free-hand issue... that looks like a real problem unless there's another feat to drop things out-of-turn. I would think it's an incredibly common house-rule to allow such things, but still, in this thread we would rather list something as unexplained than accept house-rules.
If it can't be dealt with, then we can't explain his actions by RAW.

[SavageWombat]

This is the point where I would normally be posting, except it's just reiterating my earlier points. DC al Coda or whatever.

[Savannah]

The thread rules (the relevant section I copied a couple of pages ago) are working under the assumption that we use RAW whenever possible (unless where it is not possible or the Giant explicitly said he houseruled this).

Respectfully, I'd like to point out that the thread rules also state:


Their sole responsibility is to maintain lists of information as represents the threads community's conclusions.

(emphasis mine)

Now, there have been several RAW arguments for why Infinite Deflection would not work (free hand, flat-footed). Those need to be hashed out, and may result in Infinite Deflection being removed on its own merits. If loopholes are found, however, I would suggest that this protracted argument shows that Infinite Deflection is not the community's conclusion given the amount of opposition it has been facing lately, and perhaps deserves the same treatment as other highly debated issues, such as Xykon's casting of Maximized Energy Drain and immunity to fire damage.

[Crusher]

No, the first one is an attempt to solicit an opinion from others about the post I made. The second is a statement of my conclusion based on the evidence.

Both of these have been done by dozens of other people in this thread and its predecessors. And properly so.

Do you want to address the content of my post, or just your perception of the tone? Because I'm not particularly interested in discussing the latter, and if you're not going to do the former, it'll save me some time to know that up front.

Just the latter. Since ChristianSt has already addressed the former me replowing that ground would accomplish little.

Edit - Plus, I think, mercifully, both sides have just about exhausted their arguments, and the only points worth discussing now are the free action and flat-footed points which really hinge more on rule interpretation than the comic.

I agree with Warrl's later points. Its not an entirely straightforward question, but if a way out from the hands-free and flat-footed questions cannot be found, then Infinite Deflection cannot be the answer by RAW.

[Kalmegil]

Since the free hand/climbing/clinging sounds like it needs a rather complicated workaround (unless someone wants to start arguing that clinging != climbing, and so Tarquin isn't Flat-Footed. In that case a "Instantaneous dropping" is enough), I would say "Taruin's Arrow Snatching feat" is the best explanation [With something like "Once per hand you may at any time snatch an arrow targeting you/that would hit you while letting any object free you hold with that hand."]

I actually don't think that clinging is climbing, after looking at it again, so I would say he's not flat-footed. But according to RAW only one hand is free when you cling, so the second catch is still problematic (though, as you say, instantaneous dropping would be enough).

[Crusher]

I actually don't think that clinging is climbing, after looking at it again, so I would say he's not flat-footed. But according to RAW only one hand is free when you cling, so the second catch is still problematic (though, as you say, instantaneous dropping would be enough).

The only problem here is that in the comic he catches both arrows with different hands simultaneously. So even if an instant drop is adequate from a rules standpoint, it would mean take rules over what we see in the strip.

[Kalmegil]

The only problem here is that in the comic he catches both arrows with different hands simultaneously. So even if an instant drop is adequate from a rules standpoint, it would mean take rules over what we see in the strip.

True. He clearly does not drop one arrow then catch the other in his one free hand, so instant drop doesn't suffice for that scene.* For that scene to work, there has to be an exception to the "you can perform actions that require one hand while clinging" rule. I think this does take flat-footedness out of the equation, though.

*I got caught up in trying to find a way to mechanically let him catch two arrows while clinging, without matching it to the visuals.

[Crusher]

True. He clearly does not drop one arrow then catch the other in his one free hand, so instant drop doesn't suffice for that scene.* For that scene to work, there has to be an exception to the "you can perform actions that require one hand while clinging" rule. I think this does take flat-footedness out of the equation, though.

*I got caught up in trying to find a way to mechanically let him catch two arrows while clinging, without matching it to the visuals.

Hmm, has anyone looked through past fights looking for examples of people dropping things when it wasn't their round, effectively house-ruling in "instantaneous dropping"?

Edit - Oh, wait. Did you mean the "instantaneous drop" in reference to clinging onto the side of the airship? If that's what you meant (and not dropping the first arrow), then that would actually work fine with what we saw in the strip. My mistake.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Hmm, has anyone looked through past fights looking for examples of people dropping things when it wasn't their round, effectively house-ruling in "instantaneous dropping"?

Didn't Elan drop his Bloodingham papers when grappled by Sabine?

BTW, I find the argument that Infinite deflection is not usable while dangling because dangling is a flat-footed state identical to climbing by far the most persuasive indication that Tarquin is operating outside RAW. I would place the onus of demonstrating that dangling is not a flat-footed, "loose your dex bonus" state on those arguing in favour of Infinite Deflection.

Grey Wolf

[Kalmegil]

Oh, wait. Did you mean the "instantaneous drop" in reference to clinging onto the side of the airship? If that's what you meant (and not dropping the first arrow), then that would actually work fine with what we saw in the strip. My mistake.

Nope, I meant dropping the first arrow, and you're right, it simply didn't work with what we saw in the strip. So the free-hand requirement still prevents him catching the second arrow, and an house-rule modifying the clinging/one-hand rule would let him do so, but a house-rule allowing free-action off-turn dropping wouldn't cut it for the scene as pictured.


BTW, I find the argument that Infinite deflection is not usable while dangling because dangling is a flat-footed state identical to climbing by far the most persuasive indication that Tarquin is operating outside RAW. I would place the onus of demonstrating that dangling is not a flat-footed, "loose your dex bonus" state on those arguing in favour of Infinite Deflection.

I couldn't find anything definitive in the SRD, so I moved onto the free-hand requirement. But it certainly seems that the "you can’t move to avoid a blow" condition is just as much in play when you're clinging as when you're climbing. I just didn't want to venture too far into the murky "how much interpreting to RAW can we do here" waters when an alternative reason for rejection was present.


Didn't Elan drop his Bloodingham papers when grappled by Sabine?

I interpreted that as a drop caused by the grapple (if I'm remembering the same scene you are), not a choice. Which would also be a house-rule, I think.

[dps]

Unlikely is not a contradiction. I even have the perfect example that basically is exactly the same as your scenario:

Take a professional violinist vs. a street musician. Surely from your argumentation you presented from the banker/beggar scenario a street musician being a professional violinist would be contradiction.


Yet that actually happened (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joshua_Bell#Washington_Post_experiment)! So does things that actually happen contradict itself nowadays?

:smalleek: How on earth would it be a contradiction? How is a street musician not a professional musician? He takes money for his playing, therefore he's a professional. Granted, he may not be a violinist, but rather play some other instrument, but he's clearly a professional.

[SavageWombat]

:smalleek: How on earth would it be a contradiction? How is a street musician not a professional musician? He takes money for his playing, therefore he's a professional. Granted, he may not be a violinist, but rather play some other instrument, but he's clearly a professional.

While your interpretation is valid, I think many people would assume that a professional musician has a job playing for contract, not for tips. If he's a street musician he's just busking. If the hot dog stand hears him playing and hires him to play for the diners, then he's professional.

[ChristianSt]

:smalleek: How on earth would it be a contradiction? How is a street musician not a professional musician? He takes money for his playing, therefore he's a professional. Granted, he may not be a violinist, but rather play some other instrument, but he's clearly a professional.

Yeah ok. On a certain level a street musician is professional. Probably a better word would have been famous or fillinig concert halls or award winning or whatever.

So I used a wrong word, but that doesn't change anything to the comparisons here.

[Loreweaver15]

I still favor the resting-his-elbows interpretation of Tarquin's body language, but I agree that the flat-footed question IS a relevant objection. I'm going to withdraw from the discussion for the moment, as that's really all I can say on THAT subject.

[glissle]

The text for climbing doesn't say flat-footed, and the text for flat-footed doesn't include climbing. The only place flat-footed and climbing are put together is a table entry whose purpose is to describe the loss of dexterity to AC. I'd say that is a case where the text should be taken over the table.

Also, climbing says your hands have to be free, suggesting that - as we see in the comic - Snatch Arrows messes up climbing (hence the fall), but that climbing doesn't prevent using your hands (if you don't mind falling as a result). Tarquin does apparently drop the arrows off-turn in order to catch himself, so there's still some kind of house rule in effect, but it's probably not specific to snatched arrows.


Why does everything need to be boiled down to just a conclusion? Tarquin's level is important enough to be worth having a footnote explaining how little evidence there is.

[Taelas]

There is no contradiction, here. :smallconfused:

If there's an entry linking flat-footed and climbing (and we know that there is), the only reason to dismiss that entry would be if the text and table were in conflict. They are not. Thus the entry in question simply clarifies the situation: climbing makes you flat-footed.

[Flame of Anor]

There is no contradiction, here. :smallconfused:

If there's an entry linking flat-footed and climbing (and we know that there is), the only reason to dismiss that entry would be if the text and table were in conflict. They are not. Thus the entry in question simply clarifies the situation: climbing makes you flat-footed.

I don't think we are certain that Tarquin is climbing, though. He's just kind of...there.

[JustWantedToSay]

If he's not climbing, then he's balancing on the rail, or a lip beyond it. Balancing also leaves him flat-footed.

[Kalmegil]

Yeah, when he lets go to catch the arrows, he falls, then catches himself. He was doing something that he had to keep doing to avoid falling that required at least 1 hand. All the possibilities I'm aware of would stop him from catching two arrows using RAW infinite deflection: clinging leaves only one hand free; climbing and balancing (and possibly clinging as a subset of climbing) leave you flat-footed.

[Crusher]

Yeah. As far as I can see, the only answer would be if he was allowed to instantaneously "drop" the side of the ship, grab both arrows, instantaneously drop *the arrows* and then make a (probably fairly difficult) reflex save to regrab the ship before plummeting.

Its not impossible that this is somehow doable. I mean, he *did* drop the arrows after snatching them and regrab the side of the ship, so its really only the instant drop of the side of the ship that needs to be explained.

But I don't see people lining up to provide explanations for how it would work.

[illyahr]

By RAW, dropping something is a Free Action, not an Immediate Action, so it can't be done on someone else's turn. However we slice it, we enter the realm of Homebrew.

[SavageWombat]

Well, the Gloves of Arrow Snaring say "even if he doesn't meet the prerequisites for it." So if we say that "not being flat-footed" is a prerequisite...

/I know, I know

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Well, the Gloves of Arrow Snaring say "even if he doesn't meet the prerequisites for it." So if we say that "not being flat-footed" is a prerequisite...

/I know, I know

Aren't they "once daily" use, though? We'd need a homebrewed version that can be used at-will.

GW

[The_Final_Stand]

What if he has the feat and the gloves? That way, X times per day he can ignore prerequisites, and other times he can follow the rules! :smalltongue:

I do not actually support this interpretation.

[Kornaki]

Aren't they "once daily" use, though? We'd need a homebrewed version that can be used at-will.

GW

It's twice per day. Can he just switch out the gloves he is wearing for new ones and refresh his uses?