Class and Level Geekery XIII - Comic As Written, not Comic As Intended

[zimmerwald1915]

Does Profession: Gourmet Chef run off Wisdom or Int?
All Profession skills run off Wisdom in the same way all Perform skills run off Charisma and all Knowledge skills run off Intelligence.

[ghoul-n]

But a greatsword is not among the "some weapons" that can be used to make trip attacks without provoking. That's reserved for weapons like the guisarme, halberd, and sickle, the descriptions of which say they can be used to make trip attacks.

This is indeed a fair point.

However looking now at Improved Trip description I can't see anything about Attacks of Opportunity while being armed.


Improved Trip [General]

Prerequisites
Int 13, Combat Expertise.

Benefit
You do not provoke an attack of opportunity when you attempt to trip an opponent while you are unarmed. You also gain a +4 bonus on your Strength check to trip your opponent.

If you trip an opponent in melee combat, you immediately get a melee attack against that opponent as if you hadn’t used your attack for the trip attempt.

Normal
Without this feat, you provoke an attack of opportunity when you attempt to trip an opponent while you are unarmed.

Special
At 6th level, a monk may select Improved Trip as a bonus feat, even if she does not have the prerequisites.

A fighter may select Improved Trip as one of his fighter bonus feats.

So, Roy PROBABLY could've had it, but imo it wouldn't be that relevant right now.

Now, let's look at flat-footed description:


Flat-Footed
A character who has not yet acted during a combat is flat-footed, not yet reacting normally to the situation. A flat-footed character loses his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any) and cannot make attacks of opportunity.[/B]

It fits if Durkon's glowing hand in #1000 counts as scary special effect and not as combat action. Does it?

[littlebum2002]

So, maybe I missed this conversation, but is V not casting Foreceful Hand in 934 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0934.html)?

[zimmerwald1915]

So, maybe I missed this conversation, but is V not casting Foreceful Hand in 934 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0934.html)?
Yes. Interestingly, this is acknowledged in her level analysis (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=16647248&postcount=982), but not in the spell list in her statblock.

[Jasdoif]

So, maybe I missed this conversation, but is V not casting Foreceful Hand in 934 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0934.html)?It's certainly possible, but grasping hand (which Vaarsuvius is already listed as having (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0397.html)) can perform the same function as forceful hand with a larger bonus (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/graspingHand.htm).

[littlebum2002]

Huh. Yeah, having so many Hand spells that all basically do the same thing is a nightmare when trying to pin down the stats of a wizard who constantly uses said spells.

[Peelee]

Huh. Yeah, having so many Hand spells that all basically do the same thing is a nightmare when trying to pin down the stats of a wizard who constantly uses said spells.

Logically, we could reason out that since V likes the Hand line, he would very likely take the new one at each new spell level, and thus has them all. By the way this thread works, though, yeah; it's a a logistical quagmire at times.

[Quartz]

All Profession skills run off Wisdom

That pretty much nails it. SRD cite (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/profession.htm).

[Quild]

I'm wondering, just out of curiosity, if Roy was unlucky not to hit HPoH on his second attack.

I assume that Roy easily overcomes the 10 DR (7 from STR modifier, 5 from weapon modifier, 2 from weapon specialization and at least 2 damage from dice rolls), so if he hits, he damages. Where was that strip where a barbarian hits at 1d12+3xx again? :D


HPoH has at least for AC:
10 base natural armor
+6 from vampire template
+8 from his full plate armor
+1-5 from his amulet (which stacks with vampire template, right?)
That's 25-29
I suppose the amulet grants +3, but I don't really care here.

Roy's bonus to hit is:
14 bab
+7 from STR modifier
+5 from weapon modifier
+1 from weapon focus

So if that calculation is correct, on anything else than a fumble, Roy hits on his first strike.
Which would mean that either Roy fumbled, either he used Power Attack (and rolled 6 at the very most if he used full power attack on a HPoH with 29 AC).

Has Roy been unlucky on this hit (that have to happen sometimes) or am I forgetting some things that boost HPoH's AC?

Edit: Ah, he missed again while I was typing!

[Crusher]

I'm wondering, just out of curiosity, if Roy was unlucky not to hit HPoH on his second attack.

I assume that Roy easily overcomes the 10 DR (7 from STR modifier, 5 from weapon modifier, 2 from weapon specialization and at least 2 damage from dice rolls), so if he hits, he damages. Where was that strip where a barbarian hits at 1d12+3xx again? :D


HPoH has at least for AC:
10 base natural armor
+6 from vampire template
+8 from his full plate armor
+1-5 from his amulet (which stacks with vampire template, right?)
That's 25-29
I suppose the amulet grants +3, but I don't really care here.

Roy's bonus to hit is:
14 bab
+7 from STR modifier
+5 from weapon modifier
+1 from weapon focus

So if that calculation is correct, on anything else than a fumble, Roy hits on his first strike.
Which would mean that either Roy fumbled, either he used Power Attack (and rolled 6 at the very most if he used full power attack on a HPoH with 29 AC).

Has Roy been unlucky on this hit (that have to happen sometimes) or am I forgetting some things that boost HPoH's AC?

Edit: Ah, he missed again while I was typing!

Plus shield, and given Durkon's level it would be pretty shocking if it and the full plate weren't magical.

[Quild]

Plus shield, and given Durkon's level it would be pretty shocking if it and the full plate weren't magical.

That's another +1 or +2 then. Durkon's armor wasn't mentionned to be magical some time ago (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0025.html) and he hasn't change since. Sooo, not sure about this one.

[b_jonas]

HPoH has at least for AC:
10 base natural armor
+6 from vampire template
+8 from his full plate armor
+1-5 from his amulet (which stacks with vampire template, right?)
That's 25-29
I suppose the amulet grants +3, but I don't really care here.

Has Roy been unlucky on this hit (that have to happen sometimes) or am I forgetting some things that boost HPoH's AC?

Durkon also has a heritage shield, which may even be magical, and should boost his AC. His shoes may also help.

[zimmerwald1915]

Even if Durkon's armor isn't magical, he might have cast magic vestment before the meeting, which at his level would grant an additional +3 enhancement bonus.

[Codyage]

I think this comment may have been glossed over when I proposed it. But I am sure Durkon's shield might be a light steel shield.

It appears to be steel, can be used to shield bash (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0359.html), while also being able to hold an item in the same hand as the shield. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0237.html) We can see that the shield straps around his arm, leaving his hand open.

A heavy shield cannot be used to hold any other items, and a buckler cannot be used to shield bash. Can we update Durkon to have Heirloom light steel shield, and warhammer? That way for all future stat purposes, we know its a light steel shield.

[LightPhoenix]

I'm don't believe his amulet stacks with the bonus from being a vampire.

Per the SRD on Natural Armor (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/theBasics.htm#naturalArmorBonus):


Natural armor bonuses stack with all other bonuses to Armor Class (even with armor bonuses) except other natural armor bonuses.

And per the SRD on Vampires (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/vampire.htm):


The base creature’s natural armor bonus improves by +6.

And of course on the Amulet of Natural Armor (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/wondrousItems.htm#amuletofNaturalArmor):


This amulet, usually crafted from bone or beast scales, toughens the wearer’s body and flesh, giving him an enhancement bonus to his natural armor bonus of from +1 to +5, depending on the kind of amulet.

Since natural armor bonuses don't stack, and both bonuses are to natural armor, he does not get a bonus from the amulet.

[EDIT] Also, given the last two comics, either Roy has gotten hideously unlucky, or Durkon has some other bonus to AC if Quild's analysis is otherwise correct (Roy's AB of +27 vs. Durk's AC of 24-26 with a shield).

[zimmerwald1915]

Since natural armor bonuses don't stack, and both bonuses are to natural armor, he does not get a bonus from the amulet.
While yours is probably the best reading, it's complicated by the fact that the template grants an unspecified bonus to the "base creature's" natural armor, while the amulet grants an "enhancement bonus" to natural armor. The enhancement bonus, at least when talking about AC, applies to another bonus type. For example, the enhancement bonus carried by a suit of armor affects the armor bonus to AC. It is not listed separately. The natural armor bonus to AC is listed separately from other bonuses. Does that mean enhancement bonuses applied to it affect it the same way enhancement bonuses affect armor or shield bonuses to AC?

[LightPhoenix]

Does that mean enhancement bonuses applied to it affect it the same way enhancement bonuses affect armor or shield bonuses to AC?

I would argue no. It's a bonus to natural armor, and the entry for natural armor does not stipulate any exceptions based on where the bonus comes from. Therefore, no bonuses to natural armor stack, no matter what the source or type is. Since both the vampire template and the amulet are bonuses, they don't stack.

[Jasdoif]

While yours is probably the best reading, it's complicated by the fact that the template grants an unspecified bonus to the "base creature's" natural armor, while the amulet grants an "enhancement bonus" to natural armor.I disagree that the template grants a bonus, actually.


The base creature’s natural armor bonus improves by +6.No modifier is added, the base natural armor bonus is altered directly. It's the same as ability score adjustments; A vampire doesn't have the same base Strength score with an untyped +6 bonus; it has a Strength score 6 points higher than the base score.

[Seward]

I'm wondering, just out of curiosity, if Roy was unlucky not to hit HPoH on his second attack.

I assume that Roy easily overcomes the 10 DR (7 from STR modifier, 5 from weapon modifier, 2 from weapon specialization and at least 2 damage from dice rolls), so if he hits, he damages. Where was that strip where a barbarian hits at 1d12+3xx again? :D


HPoH has at least for AC:
10 base natural armor
+6 from vampire template
+8 from his full plate armor
+1-5 from his amulet (which stacks with vampire template, right?)
That's 25-29
I suppose the amulet grants +3, but I don't really care here.


We really need to add +3 to armor and shield for Mantle of Faith. It's only a 3rd level spell, lasts all day and gives +3 at 12th level, +4 at 16th level. Every cleric uses it routinely at those levels rather than enchanting their armor/shield...it's as common as natural spell on a druid. So Durkula is likely rocking about 35 armor class. Roy doesn't have haste running so each attack after the first is at -5, his second and third iteratives aren't that likely to hit (thus him hitting about 1/3 times...sometimes the first attack will get unlucky but his later attacks will get lucky, it's a very normal outcome at his level)

[Seward]

I would argue no. It's a bonus to natural armor, and the entry for natural armor does not stipulate any exceptions based on where the bonus comes from. Therefore, no bonuses to natural armor stack, no matter what the source or type is. Since both the vampire template and the amulet are bonuses, they don't stack.

The natural armor bonus from an amulet (or the druid spell Barkskin) is an "enhancement" bonus. It stacks on whatever natural armor a critter has already, which includes that added by the template. Likewise Durkon's wisdom bonus will still get added to if he has an amulet of wisdom - which he almost certainly does.

The reason to not give Durkula an amulet of natural armor is that in 3.5, it takes the same slot as his wisdom item. (ditto con, but that's not a problem for an undead. Clerics have a hard time getting permanent enh bonuses to con in 3.5).

Even without the amulet though, mantle of faith means he's at least in the low 30s and Roy might be power attacking some to get through the DR, which means he'll have a lower attack bonus than you guys estimated.

[Quild]

In the same way than Jasfoif, I believe that there's a difference between "natural armor bonus" and "bonus to natural armor" :D

If Roy was turned into a vampire, his belt wouldn't be suddenly useless.


So HPoH has:
16 Natural Armor
+8 from Full Plate Armor
+1 from shield
+1-5 from amulet

Now, about enhancement bonus...
Am I right to believe that an enhancement bonus on either the shield or the armor (or, say, a ring) would not stack with another one?
It makes an at least +3 bonus from magic vestment likely, but we can't expect very much unless the shield is +4 or +5, right?
Then, a +4 deflection bonus to AC from Shield of Faith could also apply and be one of the spells that we've seen HPoH cast in #1000 (last panel) or #1001 (fourth panel).

That would make HPoH AC something like 33-37?

In that case, not really surprising that Roy has some trouble damaging him if he uses power attack. And due to that 10 to DR, he needs that if he does not want his damage range to be 6-20 each hit (especially when HPoH has 5 to fast Healing). Up to 10 (or 15) additive damage to each hit seems better than higher chance to hit.

[Seward]

s...
Am I right to believe that an enhancement bonus on either the shield or the armor (or, say, a ring) would not stack with another one?[

You would not be correct. Each enhancement bonus to a different thing stacks.

In Durkon's case, Magic Vestment adds an enhancement bonus to his Armor bonus. The spell can also be used to add an enhancement bonus to his Shield bonus. An amulet of natural armor would add an enhancement bonus to his natural armor. Gloves of dexterity would add an enhancement bonus to his dexterity which might help his AC if he wasn't already a vampire in heavy armor.

Realistically he isn't going to have some of those bonuses, but he might have some others. Here's the stack he's likely to have, based on how I saw a lot of level 15ish clerics play in Living Greyhawk.

10 Base
6 Vampire natural armor
1 Dodge bonus from dexterity (fulllplate allows +1 dex bonus, and vampire temlplate gives dex, so Durkula has almost got to have a 12 dexterity by now)
8 Armor bonus from fullplate
3 Enhancement to Armor from Magic Vestment 14-15th level cast on armor
2 Armor bonus from heavy shield
3 Enhancement bonus to Armor from Magic Vestment 14-15th level cast on armor
1 (at least) Deflection bonus from ring of protection
(Belkar "I throw ring+1 in the trash" at Azure City time - they've all got one)
==
34
Durkon might have circle of protection from good running, anticipating fighting Roy, Haley or Elan, that would bump him to 35 against him, and it lasts 2.5 hours for a L3 spell. If he cast Shield of Faith before entering the Moot (15 minute duration) he'd bump to 37 AC (+4 deflection)

What Durkon will not have, barring homebrew magic items are:
1. Amulet of Natural Armor - he can only wear this if he doesn't have an Amulet of Wisdom - given that he only gets high level bonus spells if he has a permanent wisdom bonus, that's simply insane. No cleric ever uses his amulet slot for anything but Amulet of Wisdom once one is found/bought. It's a big enough problem (because Amulet of Con is also blocked) that clerics do value highly any wisdom item that goes on another slot and can be enhanced beyond what an Ioun stone can do (only +2). Also some players who really want high AC contort the character concept just to take plant domain because barkskin is a domain spell.

Other things are possible but AC wasn't Durkon's main thing (so no ioun stones that add +1, no feat spent on "Dodge", etc). Being a cleric, it didn't need to be, as you can see he gets quite respectable AC just because of his basic cleric spells and wearing heavy armor/shield. (what I listed above costs him only a about 4000gp, half of that for the ring +1 and 2-3 level 3 spell slots, possibly a level 1 spell slot as well. This is pocket change at level 15) The vampire template just took a good AC and bumped it to "front line fighter" levels. Getting it any better is quite pricey - spending cash on armor shield is pointless (in 1-2 more levels he gets +4 for free from magic vestment, vs paying 16k per item), bumping the ring to +2 is 6k, but he has a spell he can cast or even quicken that does +4 already (+28k) so why bother? There are no easy natural armor items beyond buying scrolls of Barkskin and seeing if Haley can UMD them, something Durkon likely wouldn't think of and HPOH wouldn't dream of. The ioun stone is only 5k, but it would whiz about his head quite visibly, so he doesn't have one etc.

I am assuming about 34 AC, with 35 vs good very likely and 37 quite possible. You got the target range right in your last post, but more or less by having errors cancel out. Given that Rich tends to do this sort of thing by feel, he might have guestimated the numbers slightly differently but also likely arrived at mid-30s AC, which tends to get hit by a L15 fighter mostly on the top iterative attack and other things that get full bonus (such as AOOs)

[zimmerwald1915]

You would not be correct. Each enhancement bonus to a different thing stacks.
This is correct.

[Quild]

Ah. But the +4 or +6 STR enhancement from Roy's belt can not be stacked with Bull's Strength, right?
Because this enhancements applies on Roy I guess. It's not the belt itself that's super strong.

[Lvl45DM!]

Its because they are both enhancement bonuses as opposed to a racial bonus like being a vampire. An orc has a +4 strength and benefits from a +2 belt of strength. Different kinds of bonuses always stack

[MesiDoomstalker]

Completely unrelated to the Durkula AC debate, shouldn't 896 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0896.html)prove that V has at least 1 point in Knolwedge (Architecture and Engineering)?

[Lvl45DM!]

Why? V didnt realize the acoustics thing based on Knowledge he deduced it. The room changed shape and he could suddenly hear things.

[zimmerwald1915]

Why? V didnt realize the acoustics thing based on Knowledge he deduced it. The room changed shape and he could suddenly hear things.
Knowledge skills model that kind of deduction.

[b_jonas]

About calculating Durkon's AC, I still think there are too many uncertainities. I agree that the shield he heirloom shield is a small one that likely gives only 1 point of AC by its base, but given that it's a heirloom, it may be magically enchanted, which can add up to 5 additional points. Besides the shield, you didn't seem to count Durkon's boots, which likely protect at least 1 point, but could also add more if it's magical.

It's also possible for Durkon to have sources of AC form divine magic (or other divine powers, such as abilities gained from a domain) that we have no way to know about. I believe such protection spells are easily accessible, though many of them can be excluded because would have obvious visible effects or because they don't stack with the Vampire natural armor or armor enchantment.

Update:

Why? V didnt realize the acoustics thing based on Knowledge he deduced it. The room changed shape and he could suddenly hear things.
Agreed. Her “keen elven senses” (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0246.html) and the Alertness granted by Blackwing have actually worked this time. But the question is whether she needs a Knowledge skill to deduce that the changes of acoustics means the dungeon was designed for eavesdropping. I'd think she doesn't, need a skill, she can do that deduction without training the skill.

[Douglas]

Besides the shield, you didn't seem to count Durkon's boots, which likely protect at least 1 point, but could also add more if it's magical.
The boots are just part of his armor, and their protection is included in the armor's bonus. Boots in D&D are not a separate protective item. They can be magical items, but the properties that go on them are not typically protective in nature.

[rodneyAnonymous]

The boots are just part of his armor, and their protection is included in the armor's bonus. Boots in D&D are not a separate protective item. They can be magical items, but the properties that go on them are not typically protective in nature.

To clarify that, possibly, in D&D magic boots tend to give bonuses other than +AC, like a speed boost or sneaking buff. It's not impossible for boots to add to AC separately from the rest of a suit of armor, but it would be unusual. The DM can make almost any magic item they want, but I don't think there are any canonical items that do that.

[falsedot]

I think that there was a discussion about how many times Roy hit Xykon in the dragon fight (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0442.html) but I cannot find it, does anyone remember the conclusion?

I'm trying to calculate the proc rate of the green glow here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=19772420&postcount=29)and 5 procs in a row seem really unlikely

[bookguy]

The boots aren't magical. (http://http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0693.html)

[zimmerwald1915]

The boots aren't magical. (http://http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0693.html)
What Roy's boots say about Durkon's is beyond me.

[Aeliren]

To add to Ian Starshine, his age is listed as 60+ on his wanted poster (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0915.html).

[Emanick]

To add to Ian Starshine, his age is listed as 60+ on his wanted poster (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0915.html).

Great catch! That means we should also change his assumed Strength and Constituton to "~7 (no evidence, age)" and his assumed Intelligence, Wisdom and Charisma to "~12 (no evidence, age)."

Also, we can at least list Shoulder Pad Guy in the Vector Legion as an Evil human male, so we should probably do that.

[Quartz]

In post #4 Tarquin is listed as having Spellcraft twice.

[Gift Jeraff]

Shouldn't Durkon and Malack be listed as having unholy symbols, not holy symbols?

[zimmerwald1915]

Shouldn't Durkon and Malack be listed as having unholy symbols, not holy symbols?
Yes, but it's pretty much a semantic difference. Holy and unholy symbols function, and are priced, exactly the same way.

[Molan]

Also, do we not believe that Tarquin has improved Snatch arrows? This is a long thread so I may have missed something but that one seems pretty obvious, and would have an impact on his minimum Dex.

Also I think Kil Kil is a Cohort, there's lots of evidence that Tarquin would have taken Leadership

[rodneyAnonymous]

Also, do we not believe that Tarquin has improved Snatch arrows?

No. I will try to find you a link to that discussion. In short, there are several possible explanations for his behavior, but none of them fit RAW exactly. (For example, maybe ISA. Or he might be wearing Gloves of Arrow Snaring. Another possibility is the epic feat Infinite Deflection, but it's odd that he can catch two arrows per round, but didn't use one hand to deflect both arrows on the airship. And his hands were not free, and he can't free them during Haley's turn. And so on.) It was probably a minor house rule, but we don't know.

I think he should be listed as having Tarquin's Amazing Arrow-Catching Ability (to go with Tsukiko's Amazing Wight-Making Spell), but that didn't get any support.

[Molan]

Gotcha. I would lean towards "ISA, but he used both hands because the Book was ending" lol. Or, more accurately, "ISA, but he used both hands because Story". But anyway yea I'd appreciate it.

Seems like he's just a high level fighter who relies heavily on his ability to get other people to help him (Cha) and a suite of magical items and feats which, while leaving him not-optimized, seem to fit his more "whollistic" approach to Villainy. He doesn't need to be a perfect fighter to do what he needs to do because he chums around with Wizards and Psions and OTHER people who are better add it, but the huge number of fighter feats let him build himself into a pretty-hard-to-assassinate dictator.

Incidentally are we counting his ability to persuade a red dragon into his Cha? Or his military genius to his Int? Or his ability to survive a (potentially) 20d6 fall into his Con?

[rodneyAnonymous]

No. Those facts do not meet this thread's standard of evidence, except the fall proves that he has at least 21 hit points. We don't even know for sure that he is a Fighter.

[Quartz]

No. Those facts do not meet this thread's standard of evidence, except the fall proves that he has at least 21 hit points. We don't even know for sure that he is a Fighter.

Indeed. Based on the willingness of his mooks to keep fighting for him, he could be a Knight of at least 8th level for the Call to Battle class feature, but that's a little thin, and not enough for a positive determination.

I'd tentatively put him a Ftr 4 (for Weapon Specialisation) / Kt 8+ / Mk 13+ (for Diamond Soul, passing off SR as a very good save), but he could easily be Ftr 4 / Mk 17 or Kt 8 / Mk 17 (for Timeless Body to avoid physical stat decreases). I'm using the Monk here to represent a disciplined warrior rather than a martial artist monk.

[Myou]

Indeed. Based on the willingness of his mooks to keep fighting for him, he could be a Knight of at least 8th level for the Call to Battle class feature, but that's a little thin, and not enough for a positive determination.

I'd tentatively put him a Ftr 4 (for Weapon Specialisation) / Kt 8+ / Mk 13+ (for Diamond Soul, passing off SR as a very good save), but he could easily be Ftr 4 / Mk 17 or Kt 8 / Mk 17 (for Timeless Body to avoid physical stat decreases). I'm using the Monk here to represent a disciplined warrior rather than a martial artist monk.

Why monk? Especially so much of it.

[Steven]

The answer is in the post you quoted: "Mk 17 (for Timeless Body to avoid physical stat decreases)"

[Myou]

The answer is in the post you quoted: "Mk 17 (for Timeless Body to avoid physical stat decreases)"

That's not really the answer - why does he need timeless body so badly? I don't remember him saying he didn't suffer aging penalties.

Assuming there is a reason to think that's the case then clearly he's a 15th level druid, not a 17th level monk. :smallamused:

[Vendanna]

Assuming there is a reason to think that's the case then clearly he's a 15th level druid, not a 17th level monk. :smallamused:

I think he is just bard 2/fighter 18.

He started as bard (that's why he has proficiency with the whip) and why Elan's mother fall for him, and that's where he saw how powerful the stories and the control of them are.

You can say that "but you cannot be lawful if you are a bard", but notice that he later switched to fighter (and I don't think you loose the bard abilities if you turn lawful, you just cannot get new levels on bard)

Why I peg him as Epic? because otherwise he cannot have an EPIC fight with elan. and obviously he is way higher level than the rest of the order (incidentally he is probably the same level as julio scoundrel since its his nemesis) :smalltongue:

about the arrow snatching, I'm more inclined to having an item with that property than having the feat himself, since he brags about the ring of regeneration and other stuff that elan could have, yet it seems he cannot control the arrow snatching (he must grab both missiles with the hands)

[Quartz]

Why monk? Especially so much of it.

Good saves and good defensive abilities - Diamond Soul, Timeless Body, Evasion, and much more - for minimal BAB loss. Few of the monk's defensive abilities are limited by wearing armour. At level 20 a Kt 8 / Mk 12 loses only 3 BAB (BAB = 17/12/7/2) and a Ftr 4 / Mk 16 loses only 4 BAB (BAB=16/11/6/1), and EAB applies thereafter. Tarquin's weapon isn't a Monk weapon so I haven't included Flurry etc.

[Emanick]

I think he is just bard 2/fighter 18.

He started as bard (that's why he has proficiency with the whip) and why Elan's mother fall for him, and that's where he saw how powerful the stories and the control of them are.

You can say that "but you cannot be lawful if you are a bard", but notice that he later switched to fighter (and I don't think you loose the bard abilities if you turn lawful, you just cannot get new levels on bard)

Why I peg him as Epic? because otherwise he cannot have an EPIC fight with elan. and obviously he is way higher level than the rest of the order (incidentally he is probably the same level as julio scoundrel since its his nemesis) :smalltongue:

about the arrow snatching, I'm more inclined to having an item with that property than having the feat himself, since he brags about the ring of regeneration and other stuff that elan could have, yet it seems he cannot control the arrow snatching (he must grab both missiles with the hands)

I don't know that there's any reason to assume Tarquin can't control the arrow-snatching. Yes, he did so when hanging off the side of the airship, which was clearly a bad idea, but he had a fraction of a second to think, so it was probably a reflexive instinct rather than a consciously considered decision. I mean, the arrows were headed towards his face. It was a pretty natural reaction (for someone who is used to catching arrows).

[Myou]

Good saves and good defensive abilities - Diamond Soul, Timeless Body, Evasion, and much more - for minimal BAB loss. Few of the monk's defensive abilities are limited by wearing armour. At level 20 a Kt 8 / Mk 12 loses only 3 BAB (BAB = 17/12/7/2) and a Ftr 4 / Mk 16 loses only 4 BAB (BAB=16/11/6/1), and EAB applies thereafter. Tarquin's weapon isn't a Monk weapon so I haven't included Flurry etc.

There's nothing about him that suggests monk - or that has any of the class features you listed other than evasion - which is incredibly easy to get.


Astral Dancer 2 (4), ecl 7 (9), Planar Handbook - first value in zero-G, bracket value in normal circumstances
Chameleon 3, ecl 8, Races of Destiny, see text
Cipher Adept 2, ecl 9, Planar Handbook
Combat Medic 4, ecl 9, Heroes of Battle
Dungeon Delver 4, ecl 11, Complete Adventurer
Loredelver 3, ecl 10, Races of Destiny
Monk 2
Ninja 12
Ranger 9
Rogue 2
Scout 5
Shadow Scout, OA
Shadowdancer 2
Survivor 2, ecl 3, Savage Species
Extreme Explorer 2, ecl 6, Eberron Campaign Setting
Initiate of the Draconic Mysteries 1, ecl 6, Draconomicon
Master Thrower 2, ecl 7 (CW)
Great Raptor Mask, soulmeld, Magic of Incarnum
Impulse Boots, soulmeld, Magic of Incarnum
Riding Bracers, soulmeld, Magic of Incarnum, for your mount
Combat Medic 4, ecl 9, Heroes of Battle
Swordsage 9, Tome of Battle
Master Specialist (abjuration) 7, ecl 10, Complete Mage - works for all saves, see text
Lurk 9, Complete Psionic
Aglarondan Griffonrider 2, ecl 9, FR: Unapproachable East - only while mounted

Ring of Evasion, ring, DMG, works in armour

special mention
Divine Oracle 2, ecl 7, Complete Divine, works in any type of armour
Shadow Creature, template, Lords of Madness
Riding Bracers, soulmeld, Magic of Incarnum - grants evasion to your mount
Spell Reflection, Complete Mage variant - reflects spells that missed, see text
Rogue 10, 13, 16, or 19/20, class variant, Complete Champion, "Friend's Evasion", evasion for all adjacent allies
Sanctified One (Olidammara) 1 or 3 or 5/5, ecl 6, Complete Champion, allies within 30', see text

[b_jonas]

Or his ability to survive a (potentially) 20d6 fall into his Con?
I think the sand in the desert behaves the same as soft water, so the fall damage capped out at much lower than 20d6 when Tarquin fell on it. Strip #686 panel 11 to 12 proves that the sand in the desert is soft. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0686.html) Update: ok, apparently sand doesn't work that way in D&D RAW. Sorry.

[rodneyAnonymous]

If you are moving fast enough (in most cases, falling far enough), it doesn't matter whether you're stopped by sand, water, or concrete. It's not the landing that hurts, exactly, it's the sudden change in acceleration caused by landing.

[Steven]

That's not really the answer - why does he need timeless body so badly? I don't remember him saying he didn't suffer aging penalties.

Assuming there is a reason to think that's the case then clearly he's a 15th level druid, not a 17th level monk. :smallamused:

It is the answer. The Fact that you think it's a poor choice doesn't change the "why" of the origional post in which he gave two different reasons.

I should also point out that there is no way this discussion can actually provide enough evidence to get anything included in this thread as there is no way to prove that T is or is not a monk. Can a Monk build do the things that T does? Yes. Can prove it one way or the other with the info we have? No.

[zimmerwald1915]

About the only thing we can be reasonably certain of regarding Tarquin's class is that he is not a bard, and that's only because he talks about them as if he was not himself one.

[ti'esar]

Well, that and he's pretty clearly not a primary caster.

(Though I've wondered in the past if it's possible he used to be a bard, but wound up violating the "bards cannot be lawful" clause. It would certainly be more appropriate for the Darth Vader jokes then being an ex-paladin blackguard or the like).

[Kurald Galain]

Can a Monk build do the things that T does?

Well, actually, no. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0851.html)

Any prospective build of Tarquin should take into account his ability to throw people into other people (both by the aforementioned whirlwind against Durkon, and by this whip maneuver (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0929.html)), as well as the disabling strike he pulls on Haley (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0934.html). I'm reasonably sure that monks can't do any of that.

[Steven]

Well, actually, no. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0851.html)

Any prospective build of Tarquin should take into account his ability to throw people into other people (both by the aforementioned whirlwind against Durkon, and by this whip maneuver (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0929.html)), as well as the disabling strike he pulls on Haley (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0934.html). I'm reasonably sure that monks can't do any of that.

True. Although with multi-classing it might be doable, my TO skills aren't that great tbh.

[Kurald Galain]

Added armor to Redcloak. Noted that Durkon's shield is light and steel, and that Roy's boots aren't magic. Added age 60 to Ian and updated stats to match. Removed double spellcraft from Tarky.

Considering they look identical in-comic and we don't necessarily know the alignment of all gods, I'm not sure if there's a point in distinguishing between holy and unholy symbols.

[Myou]

It is the answer. The Fact that you think it's a poor choice doesn't change the "why" of the origional post in which he gave two different reasons.

I should also point out that there is no way this discussion can actually provide enough evidence to get anything included in this thread as there is no way to prove that T is or is not a monk. Can a Monk build do the things that T does? Yes. Can prove it one way or the other with the info we have? No.

I meant to say 'an', not 'the', sorry.
As in, the reasons given are not a good argument for him having 17 levels of monk.

[Douglas]

Replace "Horace Greenhilt's Mage Slayer" with "Spellsplinter Maneuver", referenced by name in 1003 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1003.html).

[137beth]

The fact that it's called a maneuver might suggest that it is actually a homebrew maneuver in the game sense and the feat he took was Martial Study. I suspect, however, that the Giant just used the word maneuver in it's common English meaning. Unless other evidence shows up, I support keeping it listed as its own feat (but changing the name to Spellsplinter Maneuver, as stated in the comic.)

[Chronos]

Suboptimal or not, it's known that Durkon really does have an amulet of natural armor. It's possible that he got it improved to also be an amulet of wisdom, or that he has an equivalent wisdom bonus from some other item, but regardless, he has a natural armor amulet.

[Quild]

I'm trying to figure out when Roy did spend a feat on the Spellsplinter Maneuver. Solutions I see are:
- Spellsplinter Maneuver is a Fighter Bonus Feat, he took it when he reached level 14 again, deal with it.
- It's not and Roy had to retrain a feat somewhere between #666 and #682 (assuming this must be done in "town", I'm not sure at all how retraining works).
- It's not, but Roy kept an unused feat just in case (I have no clue if this can be done).
- Roy took the feat when he reached level 15 (but he would have reached level 15 before or during the pyramid... Not an easy one.)

We only know 10 feats that Roy has, while he must have 8 Fighter Bonus Feat and 6 regular feats. 8 of his known feats can be picked as Fighter Feats. Endurance can't.



Edit : The total levels of the party still redirects here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=18180388&postcount=1118) but Zimmerwald updated his calculation and what result of it.

[unbeliever536]

The fact that it's called a maneuver might suggest that it is actually a homebrew maneuver in the game sense and the feat he took was Martial Study. I suspect, however, that the Giant just used the word maneuver in it's common English meaning. Unless other evidence shows up, I support keeping it listed as its own feat (but changing the name to Spellsplinter Maneuver, as stated in the comic.)

Horace explicitly calls it out as a feat (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0498.html)

[ghoul-n]

Guys, can we list this "WHUMP!" thingy in panel#8 of strip 1003 as Improved Disarm? Seems like Durkula is disarmed now, and it didn't provoke any AoO.

It also goes along with Roy's 14+ Int pretty well.

[rodneyAnonymous]

Disarm is a special attack and knocking an opponent's weapon out of its hands is the primary effect. If Durkula lost his grip on his staff as a result of that attack, it was a secondary effect. It was not clearly a disarm attack.

[Quild]

Disarm is a special attack and knocking an opponent's weapon out of its hands is the primary effect. If Durkula lost his grip on his staff as a result of that attack, it was a secondary effect. It was not clearly a disarm attack.

I don't really understand. HPoH would have lost his grip because of what attack? A regular one?

It seems that Roy did not inflict any damage, doesn't it really looks like a succesful disarm? HPoH would have had an AoO if it's a disarm, except if Roy has a feat (or HPoH did not thought about the AoO but I doubt this, he seems to have a better head for maths than Durkon).

[ArkenBrony]

Guys, can we list this "WHUMP!" thingy in panel#8 of strip 1003 as Improved Disarm? Seems like Durkula is disarmed now, and it didn't provoke any AoO.

It also goes along with Roy's 14+ Int pretty well.


Disarm is a special attack and knocking an opponent's weapon out of its hands is the primary effect. If Durkula lost his grip on his staff as a result of that attack, it was a secondary effect. It was not clearly a disarm attack.

there is no shown connection with the HPOH itself, and no injury marks are added to it either. i think it's a pretty good bet roy has improved disarm

[illyahr]

there is no shown connection with the HPOH itself, and no injury marks are added to it either. i think it's a pretty good bet roy has improved disarm

Especially since 'whump' is an impact sound, not the usual slashing sound you would connect with an attack from a bladed weapon.

Also, what was the verdict on Roy having Improved Trip?

[rodneyAnonymous]

The vampire goes flying. The attack was against it, not its weapon. "That was a disarm attack" seems like a stretch to me.

[zimmerwald1915]

The vampire goes flying. The attack was against it, not its weapon. "That was a disarm attack" seems like a stretch to me.
Well what else ought a disarm attack to look like? As far as the rules go, the disarm attempt is made against the character holding the weapon, not the weapon itself.

Also, it is well-established that characters in this strip go flying even when the rules are silent about whether they should. For example, Xykon's meteor swarm knocks O-Chul off his feet, despite the spell description saying it does nothing of the kind.

[rodneyAnonymous]

If that's a dead end (disagree, but I concede the point), then what's the evidence for Roy having the Improved Disarm feat, and not just that he made a normal disarm attempt? That the vampire didn't make an attack of opportunity?


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.

I don't think the vampire would be capable of making an AoO in the depicted situation. That's an important piece of the AoO rules: for them to apply, it's not just that Person A does something that provokes a "free" attack, but also that Person B could take advantage of the opportunity. Holding a staff one-handed is fine, but using it to attack would take two hands. Maybe Roy did provoke an AoO, but the vampire couldn't take it.

[Jasdoif]

I am not sure the vampire would be able to make an AoO in the depicted situation. That's an important piece of the AoO rules: not just Person A provokes a "free" attack, but that Person B could take advantage of the opportunity. Holding a staff one-handed is fine, but using it to attack would take two hands.A vampire's slam attack would be valid for making an attack of opportunity.

[rodneyAnonymous]

It's unclear to me whether D&D vampires can attempt a slam attack while holding a staff in one hand and a shield in the other. As far as I can remember, all drain/slam vampire attacks in OOTS have been done bare-handed.

[Jasdoif]

It's unclear to me whether D&D vampires can attempt a slam attack while holding a staff in one hand and a shield in the other. As far as I can remember, all drain/slam vampire attacks in OOTS have been done bare-handed.If I'm parsing the comic correctly, HPoH switched the staff to his shield hand (to manipulate his divine focus to cast destruction); he would've had an empty hand at the time he could have made an attack of opportunity (assuming one was provoked, of course).

[rodneyAnonymous]

Okay. 666666

[ghoul-n]

So, if it was Impoved Disarm, Roy must also have Combat Expertise (as prerequisite).

By the way, it's also a prerequisite for Improved Trip.

[Kornaki]

It's unclear to me whether D&D vampires can attempt a slam attack while holding a staff in one hand and a shield in the other. As far as I can remember, all drain/slam vampire attacks in OOTS have been done bare-handed.

It's not clear to me that the vampire needs to have a hand free to slam, despite the description as bludgeoning with an appendage in the SRD.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/vampire.htm


A vampire armed with a weapon uses its slam or a weapon, as it desires.

[SavageWombat]

There was a thread somewhere - it may have been Pathfinder instead of 3.5 - where they mentioned deliberately leaving the exact definition of slam attacks vague so that the DM could describe it as they wanted.

[Seward]

Slam is nearly always humanoids with fists and you get either 1 slam or 2 slams, so it's normally done as a fist, but some monsters may not fit that, so the GM has some leeway. I'd assume (and at my own table would enforce) Durkon couldn't slam with stuff in both hands, but in that situation his spellcasting hand was free to slam so it doesn't really matter what the definition of Slam was. Durkon gets an AOO if Roy provokes it.

Also seriously. Roy's a high intelligence fighter. What are the odds he would NOT take the one feat chain that has intelligence as a requisite? We've never seen him fight defensively that I can remember (so also no combat expertise, since those tend to go together) but we have seen him knock people down a lot and I find the disarm-as-explanation pretty convincing.

Since both the trip and disarm seem to also knock the enemy back like Bull Rush does I suppose he could have some feat chain that does both and involves power attack or pa/bull rush as a requisite but since he never gets any useful mechanical effect from that "knockback" I'd guess it's just artistic license and flavor, while the crunch is the disarm feat.

[Quartz]

Also seriously. Roy's a high intelligence fighter. What are the odds he would NOT take the one feat chain that has intelligence as a requisite? We've never seen him fight defensively that I can remember

How about the fight with the spiked-chain-wielding half-ogre? The one who fell off the cliff?

[zimmerwald1915]

How about the fight with the spiked-chain-wielding half-ogre? The one who fell off the cliff?
In that fight, Roy was taking the charge action, not the fight defensively action.

[bronnt]

Is it possible that Roy used the Disarm maneuver without Improved Disarm, and the slam attack that Durkon uses at the end of #1003 IS an AoO?

[rodneyAnonymous]

Is it possible that Roy used the Disarm maneuver without Improved Disarm, and the slam attack that Durkon uses at the end of #1003 IS an AoO?

No, if it were an AoO, it would have been resolved before the disarm attack. (Or at about the same time, visually.)

[Fey]

I would like to discuss Roy's Jump skill.

Roy, Elan, and Haley are generally depicted as being about the same height. Roy tends to look just the slightest bit taller in some scenes, but it's negligible. So say for the sake of argument that Roy is "average height." Middle-range on the PHB height chart is 5'10", or 70 inches.

On my screen (resolution might make sizes different on different screens), in Panel 9 of #1004, Roy is 10/16th of an inch tall (measured from his heel to the top of his head (not from his toes since they're pointed downward)). That means 1/16th of an inch (on the scale of Panel 9 only, since it's zoomed out more than normal) is about 7 scale inches. The distance Roy jumps (measured from the lowest point of his "motion line" where it touches the floor to the height of the spear in the wall) is an inch and a half, or 24/16th inches. That means Roy leaps up 24 * 7 inches = about 168 inches, or 14 ft.

Medium-sized creatures are treated as having an "8-foot vertical reach." Meaning Roy only has to jump 6 ft in order for his hand to reach the spear at 14 ft high. The DC for a 6-foot vertical jump is DC 24.

Roy has a listed Str score of 24+, giving him +7 from Str. But he's wearing a breastplate, which has an armor check penalty of -4, giving Roy a Jump score of +3 if he has no ranks in it. Even if he rolled a Nat 20, that would only give him a 23, one point shy of the DC he needs. Therefore, he has to have at least one rank in Jump. (Realistically, he probably has a lot more ranks in Jump, since he probably rolled lower than a Nat 20. But depending on his roll he could need anywhere from 1 to 20 ranks in it.)

[Steven]

Did Belkar ever take back the ring of jumping after Roy borrowed it to attack X?

[Fey]

Did Belkar ever take back the ring of jumping after Roy borrowed it to attack X?

Fascinating. I have no idea. If Roy still has the ring then the entire point is moot.

[Emanick]

Did Belkar ever take back the ring of jumping after Roy borrowed it to attack X?

Yeah, he almost certainly did. We see him attacking a flying vulture from above shortly after he reaches Roy's corpse. There's probably other instances of him using the ring that I've forgotten.

[Kornaki]

Durkon becomes gaseous, which is a standard action, and then he takes a move action to go into the center of the room. Meanwhile, Roy gets two attacks (of opportunity?). Combat reflexes maybe?

[Chronos]

Why did Durkon going gaseous have any relevant effect on the fight? All it gives him, defense-wise, is DR/magic, which Roy's sword should overcome. All of those attacks against the vapor cloud should have worked just fine.

[Quartz]

If we assume that as of the end of 1006 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1006.html)Roy is now at 1 HP, per Harm (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/harm.htm), having made his save against Harm, does that help us pin down Roy's stats?

[Atomburster]

On a (mostly) unrelated topic, (with regard to V surviving hir fight with Xykon), here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0658.html), the first 2 panels show V with the low-hp eye thing that we see at the end of strip 1006, while in the 4th panel, just after being hit by another Meteor Swarm, V is shown with normal eyes.

Would it be reasonable to consider that O-Chul may have done a Lay on Hands on V in the interim between panels 2 and 4?

EDIT: Also, note that here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0663.html), immediately after escaping, O-Chul does not LoH himself. Granted, there are circumstances and such, but.. it might be something to consider?

[zimmerwald1915]

On a (mostly) unrelated topic, (with regard to V surviving hir fight with Xykon), here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0658.html), the first 2 panels show V with the low-hp eye thing that we see at the end of strip 1006, while in the 4th panel, just after being hit by another Meteor Swarm, V is shown with normal eyes.

Would it be reasonable to consider that O-Chul may have done a Lay on Hands on V in the interim between panels 2 and 4?
No, because V does in fact have a black eye (that is, a bruised eye, not the black eyes most humanoid characters in the comic have) in panel 4 of that strip, and all panels thereafter until the panel 2 of strip #667 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0667.html), when Durkon heals her. The only reason her black eye is a little bit difficult to see in panel 4 of strip #658 is that it's obscured by the heat haze around Xykon's meteor swarm.

[zimmerwald1915]

Why did Durkon going gaseous have any relevant effect on the fight? All it gives him, defense-wise, is DR/magic, which Roy's sword should overcome. All of those attacks against the vapor cloud should have worked just fine.
It helped him get un-impaled, for one thing.


If we assume that as of the end of 1006 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1006.html)Roy is now at 1 HP, per Harm (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/harm.htm), having made his save against Harm, does that help us pin down Roy's stats?
No. Passed or failed saves are entirely useless when it comes to deriving the underlying stats, as are hit or missed attacks, because a character can always roll a natural 1 or natural 20.

[Atomburster]

No, because V does in fact have a black eye (that is, a bruised eye, not the black eyes most humanoid characters in the comic have) in panel 4 of that strip, and all panels thereafter until the panel 2 of strip #667 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0667.html), when Durkon heals her. The only reason her black eye is a little bit difficult to see in panel 4 of strip #658 is that it's obscured by the heat haze around Xykon's meteor swarm.

I'm referring to the 'line between eyes' thing, not the bruised eye. V had that line on panels 1 and 2, but not on panel 4 or any panel thereafter.

Also, in the preceding strip (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0657.html), V has a red line injury from hir mouth to the chin in the last panel, while this injury is not present from panels 4 and onward from strip 0658. (It is present on panels 1 and 2.)

However, given that O-Chul has CHA as a dump stat, perhaps he casted a Cure Moderate Wounds spell instead.

[zimmerwald1915]

I'm referring to the 'line between eyes' thing, not the bruised eye. V had that line on panels 1 and 2, but not on panel 4 or any panel thereafter.
That? That's an expression V made with her eyebrows, not a wound. Expressions come and go without denoting anything about the character's hit points or mechanical condition. Did Belkar become less sick or cursed after the first panel of strip 579 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0579.html)?


Also, in the preceding strip (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0657.html), V has a red line injury from hir mouth to the chin in the last panel, while this injury is not present from panels 4 and onward from strip 0658. (It is present on panels 1 and 2.)
There are three marks on V's chin in the final panel of 657, from the stage right to left: a single red line, a single black line, and a branching red line. If you look closely at the branching red line, you will see that it is not an external wound. It looks much more like a trickle of blood from V's mouth (it starts above V's lower lip, and branches as it flows, like a river delta). That it disappears by panel 5 of 658 indicates nothing other than V being able to swallow again, and having wiped her face.

By the final panel of 658 the external wounds - the black line and the red line - are still there.

[Quild]

If we assume that as of the end of 1006 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1006.html)Roy is now at 1 HP, per Harm (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/harm.htm), having made his save against Harm, does that help us pin down Roy's stats?

What we could make from here is:
- Assume HPoH did MAXIMUM damages and that Roy is at 1 HP. It would mean that Roy doesn't have more HP than HPoH's maximum damage+2 because he would not be at 1HP otherwise (including the 20HP lost from Energy Drain in the damages).
- Assume HPOH did MINIMUM damages and that Roy is at 1 HP (and was at 2 HP before Harm :smallwink:) and therefore assume that Roy can't have less HP than those minimum damage +1.

Roy took:
- Unknown spell in 1002
- Slam attack + Energy Drain in 1003
- Flame Strike + Slam attack + Energy drain in 1004
- Harm

The unknown spell is quite certainly an inflict severe wounds (Destruction needs a Divine Focus as shown in next page, Harm has a black aura, I don't see what else it could be here).

Don't have the time to do the maths, but I don't think we're likely to learn very much from such HP range. Especially when the range for damages from Harm is 1-150.

Minimum damage would be:
- Inflict Serious Wounds: 3d8+14 (Will halves) = 8 (or 9?)
- Slam Attack*2: (1d6+5)*2 = 12
- Energy Drain*2: 10*2 = 20
- Flame Strike: 14d6 (reflex halves) = 7
- Harm: 1-140 = 1

Sooo, Roy has more than 49 HP? Not going far with it, I'd say.
And maximum damage would be something close of 321 HP. Not going to help much either.


EDIT: Also, note that here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0663.html), immediately after escaping, O-Chul does not LoH himself. Granted, there are circumstances and such, but.. it might be something to consider?
Charisma is O-Chul's dump's stat (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0545.html). He would need at least 12 CHA for LoH, he very likely can't use it at all. At least without magic items.
Also characters seems not to feel the urge some of us feel of healing themselves.

[GMantis]

I think the description of the harm spell makes it clear that it can't reduce HP below 1 only in case the subject makes the save. If not, there is no such limit. Which means that Roy likely did make his save (he would need to have at least 188 HP to survuve otherwise, which seems quite improbable), so he only received a maximum of 70 damage.

[Quild]

I think the description of the harm spell makes it clear that it can't reduce HP below 1 only in case the subject makes the save. If not, there is no such limit. Which means that Roy likely did make his save (he would need to have at least 188 HP to survuve otherwise, which seems quite improbable), so he only received a maximum of 70 damage.

Description of the spell is poorly written. Damages from Harm can't kill someone.

[Jasdoif]

Hmm....So Roy hit HPoH while he was casting harm, but the spell didn't fizzle....That'd be a successful Concentration check, wouldn't it?


Roy's using a +5 greatsword, damage of 2d6+5, minimum damage of 7....
First post has him with Strength 24, that's a +7 mod; wielding a two-handed weapon requires two hands, so times-and-a-half damage, or +10.5; rounded down that'd be +10....
So minimum 17 damage.

Assuming starmetal doesn't bypass silver DR, HPoH's DR reduces by the damage taken by 10, so that's 7.

The DC for a concentration check while casting a spell is 10+damageTaken+spellLevel, and harm is a level 6 spell, so 10+7+6, or 23....

If HPoH rolled a 20, that'd take a +3 modifier.

Undead use Charisma instead of Constitution for Concentration checks, and first post has HPoH with less than 14, so +1 is highest possible ability modifier.


So HPoH would have to have at least +2 worth of Concentration modifier from another source. Whether that's skill points, Skill Focus (concentration) or something external; I'm not sure.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Hmm....So Roy hit HPoH while he was casting harm, but the spell didn't fizzle....That'd be a successful Concentration check, wouldn't it?

We don't know enough about the spellsplinter to know what heppened there. It might be that it grants an OA when enemy casts even if they are casting defensively, and therefore forces a regular concentration check, or it might be something else completely.

GW

[Jasdoif]

We don't know enough about the spellsplinter to know what heppened there. It might be that it grants an OA when enemy casts even if they are casting defensively, and therefore forces a regular concentration check, or it might be something else completely.Given that we're seeing sword cut into vampire mid-cast, I'm pretty confident a Concentration check is called for; regardless of what allowed sword to cut into vampire mid-cast.

[Peelee]

Given that we're seeing sword cut into vampire mid-cast, I'm pretty confident a Concentration check is called for; regardless of what allowed sword to cut into vampire mid-cast.

More often than not, I don't even bother commenting because Grey Wolf sums up what I would say before I can, but I'd agree with this.

[Phoniex]

so I know roy's Spell fizzle feat can stop casting.. but does it do that by simply jacking up the concentration check or some other way? How do you think it works specifically?

[zimmerwald1915]

so I know roy's Spell fizzle feat can stop casting.. but does it do that by simply jacking up the concentration check or some other way? How do you think it works specifically?
Absent the feat, a spellcaster adjacent to Roy would either make a concentration check to cast defensively, or provoke an attack of opportunity and make a concentration check to keep the spell. The DC of the check to cast defensively is 15 + spell level. The DC of the check to cast despite being injured in the middle of casting is 10 + damage + spell level. Because a fighter can usually do more than 5 damage per attack, a spellcaster forced to cast adjacent to one would typically opt to cast defensively. Significantly, if they do, they don't provoke an attack of opportunity, even if they don't beat the DC.

Spellsplinter can work in one of two ways. It can allow a fighter to attack a spellcaster even if they cast defensively, or it can allow a fighter to prevent a spellcaster from casting defensively. Allowing a fighter to attack a spellcaster even if they're casting defensively is the more complicated option. The spellcaster would check against the cast defensively DC, then check again against the fighter's damage, and if they succeeded on both checks would be able to cast. This could lead to a situation where the fighter does not hit the spellcaster, but the spellcaster loses the spell anyway for failing to beat the cast defensively DC. This is obviously harder on the spellcaster Preventing the spellcaster from casting defensively is simpler. They only make one check, against the fighter's damage. If they beat it, they can cast, despite taking damage. This is easier on the spellcaster.

Every time Roy has been shown disrupting a spell (vs. Miron, vs. Durkon) he was also shown doing damage. That is not definitive one way or another; what would be definitive is him missing, but the spell fizzling anyway. In either case, the spellcaster can keep casting if they succeed at some number of concentration checks. For what it's worth, Mage Slayer, 3.5 feat similar to Spellsplinter, allows the fighter to prevent the spellcaster from casting defensively.

TL;DR Durkon likely made a concentration check here. Spellsplinter needn't jack up the DC of the concentration checks at all, at least, not by itself. What would jack up the concentration DC is Roy's damage, and he has other ways of boosting that.

[Psyren]

so I know roy's Spell fizzle feat can stop casting.. but does it do that by simply jacking up the concentration check or some other way? How do you think it works specifically?

Whatever it does, it is apparently not auto-success as once thought. Which does not bode well for Roy - if Durkula, with his low-ish Cha could make that check, Xykon with his much higher Cha will have much higher odds of beating it.

[Quartz]

Description of the spell is poorly written. Damages from Harm can't kill someone.

Per the SRD, Harm cannot kill a target who makes their save. Targets who fail their save are fair game.


If the creature successfully saves, harm deals half this amount, but it cannot reduce the target’s hit points to less than 1.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Given that we're seeing sword cut into vampire mid-cast, I'm pretty confident a Concentration check is called for; regardless of what allowed sword to cut into vampire mid-cast.

I agree a concentration check is probably called for, one that Hippo passed. But I don't think we can confidently base the DC on anything - for all we know, Roy's feat means that the concentration check is an opposed check (against, say, Roy's agility, to indicate his ability to hit the spell at its apex). Or as a compensation for allowing an OA against defensive cast, have a DC higher than defensive casting but not quite as high as that of a regular hit (e.g. only half or Roy's damage goes towards the DC). Or anything else, really, as needed for the plot. Or heck, maybe we are wrong and Roy is the one that makes the check to disrupt the spell and he didn't pass it this time.

As Psyren points out, if this feat is to work against Xykon, it can't simply be a regular check that an epic charismatic character won't pass on a 2 (I mean, sure, it could be, and then Xykon proceeds to botch every roll against it when needed, but hopefully you get my drift).

Grey Wolf

[Jasdoif]

I agree a concentration check is probably called for, one that Hippo passed. But I don't think we can confidently base the DC on anything - for all we know, Roy's feat means that the concentration check is an opposed check (against, say, Roy's agility, to indicate his ability to hit the spell at its apex). Or as a compensation for allowing an OA against defensive cast, have a DC higher than defensive casting but not quite as high as that of a regular hit (e.g. only half or Roy's damage goes towards the DC). Or anything else, really, as needed for the plot. Or heck, maybe we are wrong and Roy is the one that makes the check to disrupt the spell and he didn't pass it this time.I'm fairly sure a minimum standard DC is tolerable for a minimum skill modifier. Though admittedly, a feat that made it easier for its target to pass the Concentration checks to cast the spells it's supposed to prevent would be likely to fall out of general use, explaining Wrecan's comment that no fighter alive knew the feat anymore: They died when the feat betrayed them :smalltongue:

In any case, it seems too early to assume all the feat can do is force Concentration checks, or increase (or alter, I guess) the difficulty of Concentration checks.


As Psyren points out, if this feat is to work against Xykon, it can't simply be a regular check that an epic charismatic character won't pass on a 2 (I mean, sure, it could be, and then Xykon proceeds to botch every roll against it when needed, but hopefully you get my drift).It could be a coincidence that the first time we see Roy's maneuver fail to stop a spell is also the first time we've seen it used against a "hold the charge"-valid spell. But then, just about any pattern would look a coincidence at this point.

[Hecuba]

On concentration: however esoteric the Spellsplinter Maneuver might be in terms of other effects, Roy did get an attack and should have triggered a concentration check. Unless someone thinks there is any remotely reasonable (note: reasonable, not likely) case where Spellsplinter would make a Concentration check easier, it would seem that we can make calculations for the passed check like we would for any other Concentration check. It may be overly conservative, but I don't see it being overly generous.. Edit: grey_wolf's suggestion of an opposed check would certainly seem like a reasonable case where the check could be made easier.

Re Harm: The range is too large to be meaningful. The only way we would get meaningful information would be if we somehow know Roy failed the save (in which case his HP total would evidence for either a higher level or higher con mod).

[SavageWombat]

Per the SRD, Harm cannot kill a target who makes their save. Targets who fail their save are fair game.

This point has long been argued and stated by the 3.5 designers as incorrect. Regardless of saving throw, Harm can't kill anyone.

Yes, it's badly phrased.

[Kornaki]

Durkon becomes gaseous, which is a standard action, and then he takes a move action to go into the center of the room. Meanwhile, Roy gets two attacks (of opportunity?). Combat reflexes maybe?

So nobody has any opinions on this? Roy has combat reflexes, and since Durkon moves across Roy he should draw three attack of opportunities. Since Roy only takes two and we know that his dex is 13+ then we get that Roy's dexterity is exactly 13.

[Quild]

Roy's using a +5 greatsword, damage of 2d6+5, minimum damage of 7....
First post has him with Strength 24, that's a +7 mod; wielding a two-handed weapon requires two hands, so times-and-a-half damage, or +10.5; rounded down that'd be +10....
So minimum 17 damage.

How could I have totally forgotten how STR modifier worked with 2H weapons? :(

Anyway, Roy has Weapon Specialization, that's another +2.

[Douglas]

So nobody has any opinions on this? Roy has combat reflexes, and since Durkon moves across Roy he should draw three attack of opportunities. Since Roy only takes two and we know that his dex is 13+ then we get that Roy's dexterity is exactly 13.
Movement only provokes once each round, no matter how much movement it is.

[Myou]

I think that Roy probably failed his will save there. This is because Roy collapses - a character at 1hp shouldn't collapse, and when Nale was left at 1hp fighting Malack we indeed saw that he did not.

Harm, as written, cannot leave you with less than 1hp unless you fail our save, in which case it can, regardless of designer intent.

HPoH casts harm as he appears, so he cannot have been holding the charge, so the only way I know of that a vampire would be able to deal extra damage while delivering a touch spell - energy drain inflicting two negative levels that reduce hit point total by 5 each - cannot be applied, as that requires him to make a slam attack - which would also itself deal damage of course - and so cannot be applied when delivering a touch spell unless you are holding the charge from a previous casting.

So, with all that in mind, harm should only have caused him to collapse but still be awake if he failed his save and was left with 0hp - as happened to Crystal. That would mean he took the full damage from the spell of course.

However there is a black aura around him after the harm spell - this could be part of the visual effects, but another possibility is that either I or Rich made a mistake about a vampire's energy drain ability - and HPoH atually hit Roy with both harm and energy drain at once, in which case Roy would have to have made his save, leaving him with exactly -9 hit points.

There is one other remote possibility - that the unidentified spell his took earlier does damage over time - but it doesn't seem likely at all to me.

[Quild]

Harm, as written, cannot leave you with less than 1hp unless you fail our save, in which case it can, regardless of designer intent.

Is that a running gag? Harm does not put you with less than 1 HP even if you fail your save. I know how it is written, but still.


The collapse thing, well... May be homebrewed. Roy took big damages here, Giant maybe does not like to have a character having the same reaction when he lose 1HP or when he lose all but 1HP, even if they still have positive HP.
That kind of things doesn't seem really new to me.

[Quartz]

This point has long been argued and stated by the 3.5 designers as incorrect.

The rules as written in the SRD say otherwise. There's been ample time to correct it, so do you have a cite for the view of the designers?

[Quild]

The rules as written in the SRD say otherwise. There's been ample time to correct it, so do you have a cite for the view of the designers?

Try the 3.5 FAQ, page 83, end of first column.

[Peelee]

Try the 3.5 FAQ, page 83, end of first column.

I believe the correct word here is, "Booyakasha!"

[SavageWombat]

Try the 3.5 FAQ, page 83, end of first column.

Thank you Quild.

[Myou]

Is that a running gag? Harm does not put you with less than 1 HP even if you fail your save. I know how it is written, but still.


The collapse thing, well... May be homebrewed. Roy took big damages here, Giant maybe does not like to have a character having the same reaction when he lose 1HP or when he lose all but 1HP, even if they still have positive HP.
That kind of things doesn't seem really new to me.

Running gag? No? :smallconfused:
The FAQ isn't RAW, it's just personal rulings made by whoever fielded the particular question - it may very well be that harm was always meant to work as you say, but the spell as printed doesn't, and it doesn't matter what the designers meant it to do - because intent is not rules as written. The intent behind the rules of the game is often staggeringly different to the results - no-one meant for polymorph and shapechange to make all non-casters obsolete but they do regardless, and correcting that requires deviating from the rules as written. There's nothing wrong with doing so, but we cannot assume that others will choose the same deviations we might! I personally see nothing wrong with harm being able to deal leathal damage on a failed save, for example - and according to the actual rules of the game it can.

As for the collapse, your argument doesn't really make sense as we have seen harm being used successfully in the past to leave someone on the verge of death from high HP. Even ignoring that, I don't recall ever seeing Rich show a character collapse like that without reason before.

For the purposes of this thread we have to assume that Rich follows the rules except where it is otherwise stated by him or where it is not possible to explain the events seen - you cannot argue that the game should work differently or that Rich probably just ignored the rules, because that argument applies to everything in the comic and makes this thread impossible to continue.

[b_jonas]

Roy took:
- Unknown spell in 1002
- Slam attack + Energy Drain in 1003
- Flame Strike + Slam attack + Energy drain in 1004
- Harm

The unknown spell is quite certainly an inflict severe wounds (Destruction needs a Divine Focus as shown in next page, Harm has a black aura, I don't see what else it could be here).

Do you mean Inflict Serious Wounds or Inflict Critical Wounds? Both are not too high level cleric spells that Durkon can cast spontanously several times a day, and he probably gets the latter as a domain spell too. However, they have touch range, and in #1002 Durkon doesn't seem to be touching Roy. Compare with #1006 where Durkon clearly makes the touch attack (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1006.html) requried for the Harm spell. Roy doesn't seem to take much damage from it, so it's probably irrelevant.

[Quild]

Do you mean Inflict Serious Wounds or Inflict Critical Wounds? Both are not too high level cleric spells that Durkon can cast spontanously several times a day, and he probably gets the latter as a domain spell too. However, they have touch range, and in #1002 Durkon doesn't seem to be touching Roy. Compare with #1006 where Durkon clearly makes the touch attack (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1006.html) requried for the Harm spell. Roy doesn't seem to take much damage from it, so it's probably irrelevant.

Right and right. Critical is more likely and it would be a touch spell. Wonder what it is then.
I checked Malack's uses and he was indeed touching his targets (except when he failed on Nale). HPoH touched Roy as well when "trying" to channel a cure moderate wounds.
So I dont know what the spell is.

@Myou: I'm not going to answer about intent vs rules because it doesn't matter in the end. Also because I'm on smartphone right now.
However, Nale was shown quite stunned after Malack's Harm. Still was able to act on his next round.
And I'm not sure what happened to Roy when impaled by the triceratops.

[SavageWombat]

Just for hypothetical - if we agree that the spell in 1002

a) was ranged
b) was successfully saved against by Roy and
c) didn't particularly do anything as a result

... what spell(s) could it likely have been? Durkula went with Hold Person, so he would seem to be trying Save or Die/Suck spells before trying to chew through Roy's HP.

Bestow Curse comes to mind as a tactic, to reduce Roy's saving throws.

[Kornaki]

This argument about whether Roy is incapacitated seems like it would be better resolved by just waiting for the next comic strip.

[Crusher]

This argument about whether Roy is incapacitated seems like it would be better resolved by just waiting for the next comic strip.



Where's the fun in that?

[Kornaki]

Movement only provokes once each round, no matter how much movement it is.

So I found this thread

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?248756-Full-Attack-on-an-Attack-of-Opportunity


There are two Improved Combat Reflexes. One is in the Epic Level Handbook, and it allows you to make more Attacks of Opportunity than your Dexterity would normally allow. The other Improved Combat Reflexes was published in Dragon Magazine (I think it was issue number 100). This one is not an epic feat. It allows you to make one additional attack at a -5 penalty when making an Attack of Opportunity.


This alleged dragon magazine feat is the only way I can find that would allow Roy to make two attack of opportunities on Durkon moving.

[Quild]

Just for hypothetical - if we agree that the spell in 1002

a) was ranged
b) was successfully saved against by Roy and
c) didn't particularly do anything as a result

... what spell(s) could it likely have been? Durkula went with Hold Person, so he would seem to be trying Save or Die/Suck spells before trying to chew through Roy's HP.

Bestow Curse comes to mind as a tactic, to reduce Roy's saving throws.

Didn't it definitely inflict damages?

Slay living (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0149.html) was once showed as ranged, once not (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0906.html).

However ranged spells are shown with a finger pointed, while touch spells are shown with an open hand. HPoH could have touched Roy off panel and we only see the effect afterwards. Like for the Harm spell in #1006 where HPoH touched Roy, but isn't touching him when the effect occurs.


Edit: I missed something when I said that it doesn't matter who's right about Harm being able to kill or not. If Giant reads the rule as the first option and Harm can kill and Roy's collapse result of him being in negative HP, then, Roy did not make his save against Harm which dealt 140HP.
Meaning Roy took as minimum damages:
- Inflict Critical Wounds: 4d8+14 (Will halves) = 9
- Slam Attack*2: (1d6+5)*2 = 12
- Energy Drain*2: 10*2 = 20
- Flame Strike: 14d6 (reflex halves) = 7
- Harm: 140 = 140

That's a total of 188. If Roy is currently at -9HP, he has a maximum of 179HP.
Assuming Roy is a level 15 Fighter (which still isn't the main agreement and would mean that Roy is higher level than Durkon even after his death and was same level than Haley before she fought the Golem), that's a maximum of 150HP+15*CON.
If Roy has 12 CON, it requires him to have taken Toughness 5 times. Roy has enough feats left for that, but I think we would be able to put him at a minimum of 14 CON.


That's minimum though. Assuming average and failed saves (Roy is in the middle of the Flame Strike), average damage are:
- ICW : 32
- Slam Attacks : 17 (still assuming min STR for HPoH)
- Energy Drains : 20
- Flame Stike : 49
- Harm : 140
Total of 128+140 HP = 268 HP.

While Roy would have an average of 87+CON HP, so would require 34 CON to be above -10 :D

If Roy REALLY is in negative HP, HPoH sure rolled very low and Roy sure has high CON and/or rolled his HP dice very high.

[Quartz]

Try the 3.5 FAQ, page 83, end of first column.

Link to FAQ (http://www.adnd3egame.com/documents/mainfaq.pdf).

Here's the text:


The harm spell deals 10 points of damage per caster
level (to a maximum of 150 points at 15th level) and cannot
take a target’s hit points to less than 1...

I wonder why they didn't update the SRD?

[b_jonas]

I found a counter-example. #466 shows the Inflict Critical Wounds spell without apparently touching. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0446.html) This is even more strange if you realize that Tsukiko casts it on Xykon, after Xykon specifically asks her to cast her strongest negative energy spell. Incidentally, how can Inflict Critical Wounds be her strongest negative energy spell? Shouldn't she be able to cast Harm at that point? (Update: I mean strongest against a willing undead, not strongest in general.)


However ranged spells are shown with a finger pointed, while touch spells are shown with an open hand. HPoH could have touched Roy off panel and we only see the effect afterwards. Like for the Harm spell in #1006 where HPoH touched Roy, but isn't touching him when the effect occurs.
Xykon used a finger for his non-spell paralyzing touch attack (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0448.html). The touch attack we see the most often is the paladin ability called "lay on hands", which would sure look strange with just a finger.

[Quild]

I found a counter-example. #466 shows the Inflict Critical Wounds spell without apparently touching. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0446.html) This is even more strange if you realize that Tsukiko casts it on Xykon, after Xykon specifically asks her to cast her strongest negative energy spell. Incidentally, how can Inflict Critical Wounds be her strongest negative energy spell? Shouldn't she be able to cast Harm at that point? (Update: I mean strongest against a willing undead, not strongest in general.)

She has at least 3 levels of Cleric and 3 levels of Wizard and 1 level of Mystic Theurge.
She has shown 4th level cleric spells but not higher. Her "Create Undead" seems to be from Wizard spell list, because Giant said she was a Necromancer.

So maybe she's Wizard 3/Cleric 3/Mystic Theurge 8 and have access to Harm and did not prepare it, but maybe she's Wizard 3+/Cleric 3/Mystic Theurge 7- and does not have access to Harm.

[Myou]

Link to FAQ (http://www.adnd3egame.com/documents/mainfaq.pdf).
I wonder why they didn't update the SRD?

Because the FAQ is not part of the rules of the game. :smallsigh:


The FAQ isn't RAW, it's just personal rulings made by whoever fielded the particular question - it may very well be that harm was always meant to work as you say, but the spell as printed doesn't, and it doesn't matter what the designers meant it to do - because intent is not rules as written. The intent behind the rules of the game is often staggeringly different to the results - no-one meant for polymorph and shapechange to make all non-casters obsolete but they do regardless, and correcting that requires deviating from the rules as written. There's nothing wrong with doing so, but we cannot assume that others will choose the same deviations we might! I personally see nothing wrong with harm being able to deal leathal damage on a failed save, for example - and according to the actual rules of the game it can.

[Chronos]

We've also seen a single-finger touch used for an inflict spell (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0611.html). Not that it particularly matters; a touch is a touch.

[Peelee]

Because the FAQ is not part of the rules of the game. :smallsigh:


” If you have a question that isn’t answered here, please contact us
via the following URL and ask away: <http://wizards.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/wizards.cfg/php/enduser/std_alp.php>. Or you can send an email to
[email protected] instead!

Yeah, it seems like this is less a "reddit AMA from the authors of the book" and more an "official WOTC FAQ to fix errors or address potential inconsistencies."

You may not like it, but that's why rule 0 exists. Don't use it in your games, but don't be surprised if anyone else you game with does.

[Quild]

Because the FAQ is not part of the rules of the game. :smallsigh:As you said before in your quote, the FAQ is not RAW. Agreed. This is quite self-explanatory.
But RAW has it's limits, and this is why the FAQ exists. And why the SRD has sometimes been corrected (and the answer to "why isn't it updated" may be that there are newer versions of D&D than 3.5 and that 3.5 even isn't reprinted since years (heard about reprints some years ago but I believe they did not occur).
"Not part of the rules of the game", however, is subject to discussion.

FAQ is an official document (and Quartz specifically asked for the "view of the designers", so it was a perfectly legitimate answer to his question). It does contains surprising things that doesn't fit together. But FAQ exists because RAW contains mistakes or inaccuracies. I would even dare to say that there is a strong correlation between inaccuracies in Rules As Written and Frequently Asked Questions.

The guys of "Days of Wonder" makes fantastic rules for their games. I'm devious when playing "Smallwords" but never found a place for interpretation outside of RAW, whatever combo I try to make. And I heard that most if not each of their games have such perfect rules.

Creators of "Munchkin" on another hand, made it clear that some rules may be subject to interpretation. There's still an official FAQ.


Now, this is the last time I say anything on this subject, because:
- Giant is clearly not an adept of RAW, so I don't see your point about it.
- I'm in no gaming session with you.
- If it is Giant's understanding of 3.5 rules that Harm can reduces HP to 0 or less, next page may be clear about it. But maybe Roy made his save or has HP left because he has a lot of these, or maybe there will be off-panel stuff, or maybe he will be healed before we can figure out if he was in negative HP.

[Myou]

Yeah, it seems like this is less a "reddit AMA from the authors of the book" and more an "official WOTC FAQ to fix errors or address potential inconsistencies."

You may not like it, but that's why rule 0 exists. Don't use it in your games, but don't be surprised if anyone else you game with does.

I have no strong opinion about the FAQ actually, but RAW means rules as written, not rules as someone says they should have been written. The actual printed books and their associated errata are RAW, anything else, including the sage or the FAQ, are not. Monte Cook himself could descend from on high with his Holy Book of Designer Intent +5, but that still doesn't onerride the contents of the actual rulebooks. The purpose of the FAQ is to try to explain the rules, not re-write them, that was explicitly the purpose of errata. If you don't accept this then I suggest you take it up with the 3.5 board - where I suspect you will find everyone tells you the same thing. The FAQ is best described as a list of ways in which whoever was answering the particular questions would rule 0 the issue.


As you said before in your quote, the FAQ is not RAW. Agreed. This is quite self-explanatory.
But RAW has it's limits, and this is why the FAQ exists. And why the SRD has sometimes been corrected (and the answer to "why isn't it updated" may be that there are newer versions of D&D than 3.5 and that 3.5 even isn't reprinted since years (heard about reprints some years ago but I believe they did not occur).
"Not part of the rules of the game", however, is subject to discussion.

FAQ is an official document (and Quartz specifically asked for the "view of the designers", so it was a perfectly legitimate answer to his question). It does contains surprising things that doesn't fit together. But FAQ exists because RAW contains mistakes or inaccuracies. I would even dare to say that there is a strong correlation between inaccuracies in Rules As Written and Frequently Asked Questions.

I do not believe that the FAQ was written by the designers actually, although I could be wrong on that. However the FAQ is generally percieved as being unhelpful and even contradictory in its answers - and if I recall correctly there are even cases where it contradicted itself or the sage.


- Giant is clearly not an adept of RAW, so I don't see your point about it.
- I'm in no gaming session with you.
- If it is Giant's understanding of 3.5 rules that Harm can reduces HP to 0 or less, next page may be clear about it. But maybe Roy made his save or has HP left because he has a lot of these, or maybe there will be off-panel stuff, or maybe he will be healed before we can figure out if he was in negative HP.

The point is made in the opening post of this thread, that this is a thread for RAW only explanations!


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:

Emphasis mine.

I completely agree that there is nothing wrong with using the FAQ, sage or other statements WotC have made as rules in your game, however they are not the default ruleset and cannot be assumed to be in use.

Edit: On the subject of the FAQ's reliability, stackexchange puts it very nicely:


The common problem with the Q&A articles, both “Sage Advice” and the FAQ, is that they were written by second parties with no better judgment than a good DM or StackExchange contributor. Yes, Williams and his successors were employees of the game publisher, and hypothetically had inside knowledge, but in practice they mostly worked from the rules and first principles like the rest of us do. Overall, their rulings were decent, but they also published quite a few screamers. As a result, online forums and Usenet groups like rec.games.frp.dnd regarded the Q&A folks as no more reliable than a smart player, and rejected arguments that used “Sage Advice” or the FAQ as authorities on the game.

Thus, there’s a bit of confusion between folks who reasonably expect an official rules document to be authoritative, and folks who’ve been in enough online rules debates to realize that you need to take the FAQ with a lot of salt — mostly because it wasn’t written by anyone with any kind of special authority or oversight or quality control.

http://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/60044/what-is-wrong-with-the-dd-3-5-faq The thread in question has pages worth of explanation for anyone still unconvinced.

[Hecuba]

Yeah, it seems like this is less a "reddit AMA from the authors of the book" and more an "official WOTC FAQ to fix errors or address potential inconsistencies."

You may not like it, but that's why rule 0 exists. Don't use it in your games, but don't be surprised if anyone else you game with does.

I, for one, would not be opposed to including FAQ where they are clear and consistent. They are not RAW (because they are rulings not rules), but they are at least something more official than ad-hoc house rules as adjudicated by the thread.

[Quild]

*sigh* I can't help myself but answering.


The point is made in the opening post of this thread, that this is a thread for RAW only explanations!


we assume that the comic strictly follows the 3.5E D&D rules.


Emphasis mine.
You realize that if you're going to go "As Written", it's not written that the comic follows RAW rules? But written that it strictly follows rules.

I still defend the idea that intent of the rules matters more than being stuck on the literal reading. In part because literal reading has its limits and just can't be always sufficent. Hencefoth the FAQ which isn't here only for things as poorly written than Harm.

I had lot of troubles as a child for strictly obeying the rules as they were told/written.
Example: When I was in my last year of kindergarten, we did some painting. Once finished, we were asked to put in the trash the paper sheets we were using as palettes, some other stuff and everything that was lying on the floor. Turns out, a girl's sweater had felt from her chair to the floor. Not a girl I was fond of. At all. That sweater ended in the trash and had paint on it.
Can you imagine that I got grounded for this? (well, grounded may not be the right term at all since I was actually hanged to a coat rack by the teacher. I'm glad she took that poor decision because my parents decided to be mad at her rather than at me).

So you see, that's a lesson I was told early.

[Myou]

*sigh* I can't help myself but answering.


You realize that if you're going to go "As Written", it's not written that the comic follows RAW rules? But written that it strictly follows rules.

I still defend the idea that intent of the rules matters more than being stuck on the literal reading. In part because literal reading has its limits and just can't be always sufficent. Hencefoth the FAQ which isn't here only for things as poorly written than Harm.

I had lot of troubles as a child for strictly obeying the rules as they were told/written.
Example: When I was in my last year of kindergarten, we did some painting. Once finished, we were asked to put in the trash the paper sheets we were using as palettes, some other stuff and everything that was lying on the floor. Turns out, a girl's sweater had felt from her chair to the floor. Not a girl I was fond of. At all. That sweater ended in the trash and had paint on it.
Can you imagine that I got grounded for this? (well, grounded may not be the right term at all since I was actually hanged to a coat rack by the teacher. I'm glad she took that poor decision because my parents decided to be mad at her rather than at me).

So you see, that's a lesson I was told early.

But the FAQ is not part of the actual rules - this is my point.
In actual games the intent is of course something to consider - but different people have different ideas on what the rules should be, so for theoretical exercises like this the only possible basis is RAW, as it's all but impossible to find a universal house rule. Even in this case, I would allow harm to kill where as you would not - the intent probably was that it couldn't kill but what got printed was a version that could - and not everyone agree on how it should work so the only practical option is to go with how it does work, which is what this thread does.

[Sky_Schemer]

But the FAQ is not part of the actual rules - this is my point.

While we do understand your point, I think it's more pedantic than is necessary. Strictly speaking, WotC owned the license to D&D 3.5 and published a set of books around it, and released an SRD under an OGL. They are the license holder and authoritative source for RAW.

If the authoritative source later publishes clarifications on those rules, and does so using their official channels (such as some form of "email us at our WotC address and we'll publish answers on our web site", for example) then that is also an authoritative source. They are the license holders, they wrote the rules and their word on the rules is the word of the rulemakers.

If one of the individuals that wrote the rules goes and publishes stuff independently on their personal web site, or some other non-WotC web site, then that is not authoritative. No matter who they are or what role they had in creating the rules. Why? Because the owner of the license is WotC, not one of the individual rule writers.

So, that FAQ is as good as RAW. It is a WotC publication, on WotC servers, via a WotC formal process. That it wasn't turned into errata or an updated printing is likely due to the fact that they were moving on with D&D 4.0, but the reasoning is irrelevant: it is still the official word from the owners.

[Myou]

While we do understand your point, I think it's more pedantic than is necessary. Strictly speaking, WotC owned the license to D&D 3.5 and published a set of books around it, and released an SRD under an OGL. They are the license holder and authoritative source for RAW.

If the authoritative source later publishes clarifications on those rules, and does so using their official channels (such as some form of "email us at our WotC address and we'll publish answers on our web site", for example) then that is also an authoritative source. They are the license holders, they wrote the rules and their word on the rules is the word of the rulemakers.

If one of the individuals that wrote the rules goes and publishes stuff independently on their personal web site, or some other non-WotC web site, then that is not authoritative. No matter who they are or what role they had in creating the rules. Why? Because the owner of the license is WotC, not one of the individual rule writers.

So, that FAQ is as good as RAW. It is a WotC publication, on WotC servers, via a WotC formal process. That it wasn't turned into errata or an updated printing is likely due to the fact that they were moving on with D&D 4.0, but the reasoning is irrelevant: it is still the official word from the owners.

The FAQ is not authoratative because it is not stated to be a set of rules corrections - where as errata is - the FAQ is merely a set of suggested interpretations - a compendium of proposed rule 0 changes. The FAQ is not RAW, and due to the shoddy quality it is also widely ignored because it isn't good at all.

If an author's publishing house makes an official announcement that his book ended with everyone dying, while the text clearly shows they lived happily ever after, then their statement not override the written ending.

You could choose to include the FAQ and treat it as RAW, but it is not RAW and any contraditions it makes with RAW are houserules - and most people do not use it - so any thread basing itself on RAW does not use it. This is not just my opinion, it is the de-facto state of things in discussions of D&D 3.5.

Anyway, if there's anyone who still wants to argue about this then I suggest making a thread about it over on the 3.5 subforum, as it is unlikely to even be pertinent to this thread once the next comic comes out.

[Kornaki]

I never could have imagined this thread title would be represented so perfectly.

[Hecuba]

If one of the individuals that wrote the rules goes and publishes stuff independently on their personal web site, or some other non-WotC web site, then that is not authoritative. No matter who they are or what role they had in creating the rules. Why? Because the owner of the license is WotC, not one of the individual rule writers.

Setting aside issues of differing quality control levels (though the published books still are not always stellar in that regard), there is the matter FAQ and RAW representing different mechanisms of game design. It is quite likely, even if 3.5 had been the last version of D&D, that the majority of the FAQ would never have entered errata.

The FAQ follows the long tradition of Sage Advice and other similar features in Dragon and (to a lesser extent) Dungeon. These, like the FAQ, are intended to provide guidance on Rulings rather than Rules: they are, effectively, narrow guidance on potential application of Rule 0.

Rulings sometimes become rules, but not always or even often. It's worth remembering as we discuss RAW that the system was designed under the presumption that what came to be RAW need not cover everything.

[Inevitability]

I don't know if this has been discussed, but has anyone else noticed Tsukiko must have been much higher level then we thought?

To be specific, in comic 513 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0513.html), she is seen casting Teleport, taking at least six wights along with her.

Now what is the big deal here? For someone to take six medium-sized creatures along with a Teleport spell, (s)he must have a caster level of at least 18! The lowest level Tsukiko would be able to do this at would be if she took three levels of wizard, three of cleric, ten of mystic theurge and then five more of wizard, which would put her total caster level at barely enough to reach the required amount.

The catch is, this would give her a minimum level of twenty-one. Or to put it differently; Tsukiko would already have reached Epic levels around comic 500 and lived for 300 more. She might have been no more than a few levels below Xykon by the time she died.

Of course, the above is pretty hard to believe. The comic implies redcloak, who wasn't that high-level still was more powerful than she was, not to mention that she didn't actually do any of the things a high-level wizard can accomplish. In addition, she most likely didn't have Teleport back when she was imprisoned (and making an eight-level leap in under half a year would be quite extraordinary), as she could just have used it to escape the besieged city to somewhere safe (and don't tell me the captives weren't allowed to choose what spells to prepare).


So how to explain this, then?

1. Rich Burlew doesn't care Tsukiko was too low level to teleport so many wights. He wanted an even number (buddy system!) and two or four just didn't seem impressive enough. By far the most plausible option, in my opinion.

2. Tsukiko used some kind of caster-level-increasing spell or item.

3. Tsukiko cast the spell from a scroll Xykon wrote. I doubt this, both because I don't think Xykon cares enough to take Scribe Scroll and because he probably wouldn't give any away (not once, but many times) to strengthen a random ally he doesn't care too much about.

Does anyone else have an explanation?

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Anyone else have an explanation?

There is a class or feat that increases the number of teleport targets (wayfarer?). It was used to explain the Azure city teleporting mage that ferried the OotS, then got drunk and et by a bird.

(I know this ain't exactly an A-level answer, but I'm hoping this will clue someone into providing the real details)

Grey Wolf

[zimmerwald1915]

There is a class or feat that increases the number of teleport targets (wayfarer?). It was used to explain the Azure city teleporting mage that ferried the OotS, then got drunk and et by a bird.
Maybe this is a common feat in the South?

[EmperorSarda]

Question, what are the odds that the SpellSplinter Maneuver requires the spell use a focal component in order to disrupt it? Destruction requires a focal component, but harm does not.

[zimmerwald1915]

Question, what are the odds that the SpellSplinter Maneuver requires the spell use a focal component in order to disrupt it? Destruction requires a focal component, but harm does not.
Practically nil. Miron's horrid wilting, like any spell cast by an arcane caster, did not require a divine focus.

[Sky_Schemer]

Practically nil. Miron's horrid wilting, like any spell cast by an arcane caster, did not require a divine focus.

It's not been established that Roy used Spellsplinter in that instance, has it?

Going just from the art, that appears to have been a simple sword strike/slash. The Spellsplinter looks like an S-curve the two times we know for sure he has tried it. I don't know what to make of the dream sequence, where it looks like a regular strike. In theory that's Roy's idealization of how it works, but that doesn't mean it's accurately represented.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

It's not been established that Roy used Spellsplinter in that instance, has it?

Since Roy doesn't shout out the attacks, no, it has not been established - but since the slash happens mid-spell, it is very likely it was it, and it failed. Since the slash didn't intersect the spell itself, and the description of the attack is "hit the spell at its apex", that is what makes me think that the feat requires both to hit with the attack AND pass some kind of reflex check for it to cancel the spell.

Grey Wolf

[EmperorSarda]

Practically nil. Miron's horrid wilting, like any spell cast by an arcane caster, did not require a divine focus.

With how spells have failed before, that looked like Miron failed his concentration check there, like any normal damage done when casting a spell. At least that's how I looked at it.

[Sky_Schemer]

Since Roy doesn't shout out the attacks, no, it has not been established - but since the slash happens mid-spell, it is very likely it was it, and it failed. Since the slash didn't intersect the spell itself, and the description of the attack is "hit the spell at its apex", that is what makes me think that the feat requires both to hit with the attack AND pass some kind of reflex check for it to cancel the spell.

I meant Miron's Horrid Wilting spell, which looked like a missed Concentration check. I agree that in 1006, Roy tried Spellsplinter against Durkula and failed.

[b_jonas]

I don't know if this has been discussed, but has anyone else noticed Tsukiko must have been much higher level then we thought?

To be specific, in comic 513 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0513.html), she is seen casting Teleport, taking at least six wights along with her.

[...]

2. Tsukiko used some kind of caster-level-increasing spell or item.

3. Tsukiko cast the spell from a scroll Xykon wrote. I doubt this, both because I don't think Xykon cares enough to take Scribe Scroll and because he probably wouldn't give any away (not once, but many times) to strengthen a random ally he doesn't care too much about.
This is an interesting observation, thanks for bringing it up.

I wonder if she somehow gets to target one wight for free with any of his spells, just like how wizards can often target their familiar for free. Is there a known feat or item that has such an effect? Alternately, could she have previously used some obscure magic spell to tie some pairs of wights so they can be teleported together? Either of these would be generally useful for a necromancer who often wants to give buffs to multiple undead minions at the same time. Tsukiko was expelled from the most prestigous academies of magic of the continent, so she would have had opportunity to learn about obscure magic.

[Inevitability]

I wonder if she somehow gets to target one wight for free with any of his spells, just like how wizards can often target their familiar for free.

The Improved Familiar feat does grant the ability to take an Ice Mephit (a CR3 creature), so it might be considered acceptable to allow a Wight too. In that case, she could cast Teleport and move herself, five wights (so she'd still have a caster level of 15) and Boots.

You know what? Boot-wearing-wight is Tsukiko's familiar now. HEADCANON ACCEPTED.

[Quartz]

Does anyone else have an explanation?

Teleport (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/teleport.htm) is a 5th level spell, 6 creatures requires CL 18, which is easily achievable for an 18th level Mystic Theurge (Wiz 3 / Cl 3 / MT 10 / Wiz +2) using the Practiced Spellcaster feat which allows up to +4 caster levels (up to actual level or HD). If Tsukiko were a specialist Conjurer (unlikely but possible) she'd cast Teleport at +1 CL so would only need to be 17th level.

Tsukiko is shown as not casting the spell from a scroll, though she might have cast it from a Ring of Spell Storing. She's not shown as having a helmet, so it's not a Helm of Teleportation.

Storywise, it foreshadows how badass Redcloack is when he casually kills her, shows Haley's wisdom in running, and we missed it!

[Hecuba]

Teleport (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/teleport.htm) is a 5th level spell, 6 creatures requires CL 18, which is easily achievable for an 18th level Mystic Theurge (Wiz 3 / Cl 3 / MT 10 / Wiz +2) using the Practiced Spellcaster feat which allows up to +4 caster levels (up to actual level or HD). If Tsukiko were a specialist Conjurer (unlikely but possible) she'd cast Teleport at +1 CL so would only need to be 17th level.

Spell Enhancer would be a good spell known to pick up if this was going to be used as an ongoing tactic. +2 CL for a swift action. There's also Boots of Big Stepping for another +2. Create Magic Tattoo can net another +1. Assuming she's rocking practiced spellcaster, she should be able to manage the rest of the required CL boost with just spells and items by 13.

[Quartz]

Hmm... another possibility is that Teleport is one of her Domain spells, and that the granted power is to cast such spells at +1 CL.

I'm not familiar with any of the items you list, but are the CL adjustments they give all cumulative?

[Gift Jeraff]

If Tsukiko were a specialist Conjurer (unlikely but possible)

Impossible because she's a specialist Necromancer.

[Hecuba]

Hmm... another possibility is that Teleport is one of her Domain spells, and that the granted power is to cast such spells at +1 CL.

I'm not familiar with any of the items you list, but are the CL adjustments they give all cumulative?

Yes: they are all un-typed.

[Quartz]

Impossible because she's a specialist Necromancer.

We know that she's a necromancer in story terms, but do we know that she is a specialist Necromancer in game terms?

[zimmerwald1915]

We know that she's a necromancer in story terms, but do we know that she is a specialist Necromancer in game terms?
Yeswe do. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?211438-Tsukiko-s-Prohibited-Schools/page2&p=11637535#post11637535) There's a helpful link in the first post.

[Quartz]

Yeswe do. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?211438-Tsukiko-s-Prohibited-Schools/page2&p=11637535#post11637535) There's a helpful link in the first post.

Well, that excludes that possibility.

[Kornaki]

It looks like Roy is indeed incapacitated.

[Quild]

It looks like Roy is indeed incapacitated.

How do you figure? He reached his weapon and used it to block something out of his turn.
Or provoked an AoO while reaching his weapon.

I like the first one better because it would mean Roy never lost his weapon in D&D terms, but it makes HPoH attacking twice in a row.
And I don't see why Roy would have lost his weapon from the damages from Harm if not incapacited.

[Myou]

It looks like Roy is indeed incapacitated.


How do you figure? He reached his weapon and used it to block something out of his turn.
Or provoked an AoO while reaching his weapon.

I like the first one better because it would mean Roy never lost his weapon in D&D terms, but it makes HPoH attacking twice in a row.
And I don't see why Roy would have lost his weapon from the damages from Harm if not incapacited.

This whole scene looks a bit hard to explain. If Harm left Roy at 1hp he shouldn't actually have fallen over (the alternative being that he failed his save, ate the full damage and was just very lucky to be at 0hp and not less), unless HPoH was mechanically speaking combining a touch attack with an unarmed trip attempt.

If HPoH did use a trip action then the sword block is simply the normal process of a character using his dexterity bonus to dodge an attack, and this new attack leaves Roy at -9.
If Roy failed the save against Harm and was lucky enough to be at 0hp then this latter expalnation is still valid, except that Roy would now be dead. :smalltongue:

The failed save is a much neater explanation for falling prone, but seems very unlikely given that we can be all but certain that Roy will not be dying here.

So my guess is HPoH held the charge on that Harm, possibly after missing his initial, free touch attack, and combined the delivery of the Harm spell with a trip attempt in order to make it easier to finish Roy off afterwards. Roy made the save but failed to resist falling prone.

[:-)]

Roy most likely has the Die Hard feat.

[Quild]

...
In pointed out to the fight with Laurin, Tarquin and Miron earlier. Going more into detail this time:

in #927 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0927.html) Roy had just fell (on soft ground) from Bloodfeast because of Miron's baleful polymorph. Roy seems dazed, for no reason.
It's probably just a representation of the fall while Roy isn't dazed in D&D terms and was capable to act. It was however the Triceratops turn (or Tarquin's while controlling it) and Roy couldn't avoid this attack.

Then Roy is affected by Control Body, then falls again, and... Is dazed again! Or still? There is again no reason for this.

He still manages in next comic to attack Miron before any other member of the OOTS (but not before Laurin started to heal VL or Tarquin to... attack? Miss an AoO?)

Then comes Mental Disruption which get Roy Dazed for real in D&d terms. But why does he lose his sword? And for that matter, how many actions does Tarquin take here?


So my point is that Roy losing actions/rounds and losing his sword free aren't very specific here and works better with "rule of plot" than any other rule.

[Sky_Schemer]

Roy most likely has the Die Hard feat.

I concur.

One explanation for this scene is that Rich has taken a strict RAW interpretation of how Harm is written in the SRD, and that Harm reduced Roy to 0 hp. He has Die Hard and is disabled instead of unconcious.

On the first page of 1007...is he using a standard action to block the attack? That would make sense. This could be a Total Defense maneuver. How did he get his sword, though? HPoH is moving in slowly so that may be a full round there. He uses a move action ot ready his sword while HPoH uses a move action to close in.

On the second page of 1007, I am guessing he has made his saving throw against the energy drain.

[Quild]

On the second page of 1007, I am guessing he has made his saving throw against the energy drain.

Made his what, now?

[Sky_Schemer]

Made his what, now?

Ah, right. I forgot 3.5 doesn't allow a save on a vampire's slam attack. Gah.

[Jasdoif]

Ah, right. I forgot 3.5 doesn't allow a save on a vampire's slam attack.Not until 24 hours have passed, anyway.

[Sky_Schemer]

Not until 24 hours have passed, anyway.

Right. In which case, Roy just lost 10 hp. So...he either was at 0 hp and is now at -10 and dead, or he was at 1 hp (using the traditional behavior of Harm) and is now at -9. I don't think the former is likely based on the artwork and his reaction. But if the latter then there doesn't appear to be a RAW explanation for Roy having gone prone as others have pointed out.

[Myou]

Right. In which case, Roy just lost 10 hp. So...he either was at 0 hp and is now at -10 and dead, or he was at 1 hp (using the traditional behavior of Harm) and is now at -9. I don't think the former is likely based on the artwork and his reaction. But if the latter then there doesn't appear to be a RAW explanation for Roy having gone prone as others have pointed out.

I rather like my trip idea.

[Quild]

Right. In which case, Roy just lost 10 hp. So...he either was at 0 hp and is now at -10 and dead, or he was at 1 hp (using the traditional behavior of Harm) and is now at -9. I don't think the former is likely based on the artwork and his reaction. But if the latter then there doesn't appear to be a RAW explanation for Roy having gone prone as others have pointed out.

There's also the possibility that he was at more than 1HP after the Harm.
If he was at 0 (or lower), we may see Eugene very soon.

I miss his taunts. We still need to know why he did not haunted Roy when Xykon went on his way. As he was supposed to do. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0664.html)
Eugene sure is an ass and Lawful doesn't mean he can't lie (his line sounds very sarcastic), but there is something weird here. It's in his own interest to tell Roy.
So if we have an Eugene/Roy talk very soon, I expect Eugene to taunt about the vampire. Quite sure he already knew how these things work.

[Gift Jeraff]

There's also the possibility that he was at more than 1HP after the Harm.
If he was at 0 (or lower), we may see Eugene very soon.

I miss his taunts. We still need to know why he did not haunted Roy when Xykon went on his way. As he was supposed to do. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0664.html)
Eugene sure is an ass and Lawful doesn't mean he can't lie (his line sounds very sarcastic), but there is something weird here. It's in his own interest to tell Roy.
So if we have an Eugene/Roy talk very soon, I expect Eugene to taunt about the vampire. Quite sure he already knew how these things work.

In a bonus strip, Eugene haunted Roy while he was still in the illusion.

[Kornaki]

Durkon has to have cast harm because Roy attempted to use Spellsplinter (unless it works against touch attack charges for spells that have been cast previously). Roy then gets knocked down, and Durkon gets to make more attacks immediately before Roy gets to go. I don't see anything above that actually explains the sequence.

[Sky_Schemer]

I rather like my trip idea.

It's a great idea, it's just not supported by the artwork.

Maybe the next page will offer something that helps. So far, this one is looking like "plot trumps rules".

[b_jonas]

On these discussions about Roy's HP, I wonder if Roy may have some sort of defense that caused him to take less damage from the Harm spell or the level drains than you think. (I mean even apart from making the will save.)

At first I thought the ancestral sword reforged with starmetal that could have some extra effect. Roy has interrupted the blacksmith in #298, so maybe he didn't tell about all the effects. Durkon was touching the sword both of the last two times he tried to level drain Roy, so maybe the sword has absorbed some of the negative energy, or was at least harmful to Durkon in a way that he can't just drain Roy again. But the problem is, the sword didn't seem to glow green, nor did I see any visual effect indicating this.

So I wonder, maybe Roy did some preparations off-screen that we don't know about. Roy knew for a while that he'd fight the lich Xykon, so maybe he has some other defense specifically against undead. Roy also knew that he'd probably have to fight the high level cleric Redcloak, so maybe he prepared something against evil clerics that protects him from a Harm spell. Or perhaps he's specifically prepared against energy drain or level drain, given that he's already lost a level from resurrection and can't afford to lose more. Energy drain seems to come up a lot in this universe: Sabine, Tsukiko's wights, and Malack all drained energy from the protagonists. Also, Xykon has used the Energy Drain spell on Vaarsuvius (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0652.html), and now that Redcloak can cast level 9 spells, he can prepare that spell as well. The idea of such protection has occurred to at least four people in the comic: Malack has researched a Mass Death Ward spell, Nale was buying elixirs of negative energy protection, Tsukiko had a ring of level drain protection, and Belkar has bought a clasp of protection from Evil. Any of these would be useful for Roy against Xykon and Redcloak. If protection from level drain is so abundant in the stickverse, maybe Roy is prepared somehow too.

Incidentally, shouldn't Malack's entry in the OP list the Mass Death Ward spell? He could probably cast it, given that he's researched it and put it in his staff and taught it to Durkon.

[Quild]

Malack has researched a Mass Death Ward spell
Nope, Malack helped Durkon to research that spell. And that spell probably is Roy's preparation against negative energy.

[unbeliever536]

Also, Durkon and Malack's Slightly Vulnerable Mass Death Ward isn't in the staff. As far as we know, Malack's staff contains Protection from Daylight and Malack's Kwik-E-Vamp (though of course it might have a number of other spells, probably mostly necromancy).

[Gift Jeraff]

Also, Durkon and Malack's Slightly Vulnerable Mass Death Ward isn't in the staff. As far as we know, Malack's staff contains Protection from Daylight and Malack's Kwik-E-Vamp (though of course it might have a number of other spells, probably mostly necromancy).

And Create Undead.

[unbeliever536]

Oh yeah, I forgot about that one.

[Sky_Schemer]

I have an idea here on how Roy could still be alive at the end of strip #1007, using RAW, yet be knocked to the ground from the Harm spell at the end of #1006.

What if HPoH was using his slam attacks to deal non-lethal (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/injuryandDeath.htm#nonlethalDamage) damage? There'd still be the energy drain with negative levels and HP loss, but the effect of the Harm spell would be to put his non-lethal damage equal to his current HP. The end result would be Roy with >0 HP but the staggered (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#staggered) condition.

Then it doesn't matter if Rich is using the "traditional" or poorly-written 3.5 definition of Harm, because in this scenario Roy does not have to go to 0 HP. He just has to end up at HP = non-lethal damage.

This proposal also fits with the artwork. At least two of the level drains we have seen from HPoH were simple touches instead of actual blows.

[RickDaily12]

Based on the fight with HPOH, now that Roy is whipping out his potions, I want to quickly discuss calculations of Roy's minimum Constitution score up until this point.

Roy is able to attack without suffering pain, so even if Roy has Diehard as a chosen feat, it doesn't appear to be needed as of now as he would not be able to do two move actions (getting up from prone + drawing a potion) if he were staggered or disabled.

Based on that alone, Roy's current hitpoint total as of the newest comic (1008) must be 1+.


We can then look at the damage he's suffered in the past comics, assuming Durkon is Cleric 14:

1002: A spell that opens three wounds (Head: Left and right, torso right) (3)
1003: Two Negative levels (10)
1004: 14th level Flame Strike [ref. ha.] and Two Negative Levels (7+10 = 17)
1006: 14th level Harm [will ha.] (70)
1007: Two Negative Levels (10)

Interesting to note: Whether Roy has taken any lethal or nonlethal damage shouldn't be relevant, as staggered should still prevent you from performing multiple move actions in the same round, so we should be able to consider all of Durkon's damage on Roy, whether it's lethal or not; the fact that Roy was able to get up and draw a potion should be an indicator that his total damage does not yet exceed his maximum hitpoints.

Anyway, adding all those damage markers together, we get (3+10+17+70+10+1 = 111+ HP)

Assuming Roy is at least 15th level, with only 10s for his HD, he must at least have a Con Score of 6 to have enough HP to survive the fight against HPOH.

(EDIT: Since the OP currently marks Roy at 14th, his Con must be no less than 8 if this is the case.)

[Sky_Schemer]

it doesn't appear to be needed as of now as he would not be able to do two move actions (getting up from prone + drawing a potion) if he were staggered or disabled.


I think you are assuming that he took both of those actions in the same round. That may not be the case. Wrecan helping him up would technically be "aid another" which is a standard action, and he needed a move action to reach Roy. So that could be one round there, with Roy pulling out the potion during the next round.

[AMoonWalker]

Based on the fight with HPOH, now that Roy is whipping out his potions, I want to quickly discuss calculations of Roy's minimum Constitution score up until this point.

Roy is able to attack without suffering pain, so even if Roy has Diehard as a chosen feat, it doesn't appear to be needed as of now as he would not be able to do two move actions (getting up from prone + drawing a potion) if he were staggered or disabled.

Based on that alone, Roy's current hitpoint total as of the newest comic (1008) must be 1+.


We can then look at the damage he's suffered in the past comics, assuming Durkon is Cleric 14:

1002: A spell that opens three wounds (Head: Left and right, torso right) (3)
1003: Two Negative levels (10)
1004: 14th level Flame Strike [ref. ha.] and Two Negative Levels (7+10 = 17)
1006: 14th level Harm [will ha.] (70)
1007: Two Negative Levels (10)

Interesting to note: Whether Roy has taken any lethal or nonlethal damage shouldn't be relevant, as staggered should still prevent you from performing multiple move actions in the same round, so we should be able to consider all of Durkon's damage on Roy, whether it's lethal or not; the fact that Roy was able to get up and draw a potion should be an indicator that his total damage does not yet exceed his maximum hitpoints.

Anyway, adding all those damage markers together, we get (3+10+17+70+10+1 = 111+ HP)

Assuming Roy is at least 15th level, with only 10s for his HD, he must at least have a Con Score of 6 to have enough HP to survive the fight against HPOH.

(EDIT: Since the OP currently marks Roy at 14th, his Con must be no less than 8 if this is the case.)
Hmm, too bad we can't be sure of what D cast in 1002. Inflict Critical Wounds (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/inflictCriticalWounds.htm) seems likely, given the damage he did, but it doesn't have the negative energy look of harm... Can anyone think of any low (ish) damage Cleric spells that doesn't use negative energy?
If it was Inflict Critical Wounds, that would put the minimum damage dealt for 1002 at 9 ((14+4)/2).

[Quild]

We can then look at the damage he's suffered in the past comics, assuming Durkon is Cleric 14:

1002: A spell that opens three wounds (Head: Left and right, torso right) (3)
1003: Two Negative levels (10)
1004: 14th level Flame Strike [ref. ha.] and Two Negative Levels (7+10 = 17)
1006: 14th level Harm [will ha.] (70)
1007: Two Negative Levels (10)

Clerics just don't have much spells that inflict damages. Considering it's not Flame Strike or Destruction (requires divine focus).
Could be slay living, but it inflicts more damage (on a successful save) than ICW on a successful save.

There's no reason for an inflict spell to be lower than "Critical" wounds (lower save, HPoH has plenty of level 4 spells without much use (he used a Restoration spell already this day)), so this is probably the best guess.
We discussed already 2 pages ago the "Touch" problem of ICW, but there's no real consistence about Cure or Inflict spells in the past.

So, the 3 damages may be replaced by 9 (4d8+14, will halves).
You missed the slam attacks that goes with the negative levels.
Assuming base STR of 20, it's 1d6+5 each. That's 18 damage.

Adding those 24 damage, it makes a total of 134, which means 135 HP at least.
At level 14, Roy needs 10 CON for that.


Hmm, too bad we can't be sure of what D cast in 1002. Inflict Critical Wounds (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/inflictCriticalWounds.htm) seems likely, given the damage he did, but it doesn't have the negative energy look of harm... Can anyone think of any low (ish) damage Cleric spells that doesn't use negative energy?
If it was Inflict Critical Wounds, that would put the minimum damage dealt for 1002 at 9 ((14+4)/2).
Inflict spells have the same color than usual spells.
Tsukiko did use an Inflict spell on Xykon (without touching him (surprisingly)). (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0446.html)

[Phoniex]

Hel's Might? So I think its based off Righous Might.. which increases your size by 1. That's what thor's might seem to do to Durkon in the past.. but this spell looks like it increases size category twice? Maybe in exchange for the con buff? I mean Durkula is still a medium base creature and going to large should not make him twice as tall as the distance he can wall climb up right? I mean everyone else can see he is larger than "large" size correct?

[Quild]

Hel's Might? So I think its based off Righous Might.. which increases your size by 1. That's what thor's might seem to do to Durkon in the past.. but this spell looks like it increases size category twice? Maybe in exchange for the con buff? I mean Durkula is still a medium base creature and going to large should not make him twice as tall as the distance he can wall climb up right? I mean everyone else can see he is larger than "large" size correct?

Durkon looked 15 feet tall to Hinjo while using Thor's Might. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0453.html)

Durkon had indeed been something like 3 times bigger than Julia in a previous strip. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0354.html)

I know there's at least a third occurrence of Thor's Might (Durkon used it to throw someone in the air), but can't remember when it was.


Also note that Durkon's feet are probably not on the ground right now.

[unbeliever536]

It's #588 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0588.html), the fight against the giant unspecified devil.

[Flame of Anor]

but this spell looks like it increases size category twice? Maybe in exchange for the con buff? I mean Durkula is still a medium base creature and going to large should not make him twice as tall as the distance he can wall climb up right? I mean everyone else can see he is larger than "large" size correct?

The strip's literal title is "Not to Scale." We can't deduce anything from relative sizes in it.

[littlebum2002]

I mean, in every instance he does get extremely large, but I think this is a weird rule think Rich is ignoring.

A Dwarf is a Medium creature, yet is only about a foot taller than a halfling or a gnome, who are both Small creatures. So, yes, Righteous Might should double your height, but that would just make Durkon a little taller than most humans, which wouldn't be very impressive. So, instead, he's given an average height for a Large creature, which would be about 10-14', which seems about right.

If he was instead a Huge creature then, assuming he's about 4'6, that would make him 18' tall which seems way too tall for what we've seen.

EDIT: Actually, I think it could easily go either way, but I'd go with "it's Righteous Might". It works, and it's a much simpler explanation.

[Sky_Schemer]

I mean, in every instance he does get extremely large, but I think this is a weird rule think Rich is ignoring.

I think this is a case where the art exaggerates in order to have the right impact. We're looking at 2D figures here, but the thing about 2D is that humans aren't very good at judging changes in area, and we tend to underestimate areas overall. It's one of the reason why area-based charts (bubble charts, and to a lesser extent pie charts) are frowned upong by data visualization experts.

[dps]

1002: A spell that opens three wounds (Head: Left and right, torso right) (3)


I don't think we can make the assumption that 3 wounds mean at least 3 hit points lost, given the way DnD hit points abstract damage.

To be clear, I'm NOT saying that the 3 wounds might represent more than a hit point of damage each--from the fact that you're discussing Roy's minimum CON score, it's clear that you realize that each could represent more, perhaps much more, than 1 HP apiece. I'm suggesting that it's possible that the 3 wounds together still just represent 1 HP in total. Not likely, I'll grant, but possible.

[rodneyAnonymous]

I don't think we can make the assumption that 3 wounds mean at least 3 hit points lost, given the way DnD hit points abstract damage.

I think the assumption was that 3 wounds means the attack did 3dx (minimum 3) damage, which seems fair to me. It's not like the conclusion is bold.

[RickDaily12]

I don't think we can make the assumption that 3 wounds mean at least 3 hit points lost, given the way DnD hit points abstract damage.

To be clear, I'm NOT saying that the 3 wounds might represent more than a hit point of damage each--from the fact that you're discussing Roy's minimum CON score, it's clear that you realize that each could represent more, perhaps much more, than 1 HP apiece. I'm suggesting that it's possible that the 3 wounds together still just represent 1 HP in total. Not likely, I'll grant, but possible.
However bizarre damage rules may apply to DnD, I still think one open wound on its own can be considered as at least 1 hitpoint lost. They're meant to be used as an indication of how hurt a character is in the comic. Given how many hitpoints we've already established Roy having, don't you think the whole (3 obvious wounds possibly being 1 HP lost) a bit stretchy, seeing as how if Roy only lost 1 HP, drawing three wounds to indicate this implies he got hurt more than he really did?

But fine, I'll still humor it:

1002: Inflict Minor Wounds (1) (Required, or more damage suffered)
1003: Flame Strike, Slam Attack, Two negative levels (7+6+10)
1004: Slam Attack, Two negative levels (6+10)
1006: Harm (70)
1007: Slam Attack, Two negative levels (6+10)
1008: [Roy is able to take standard actions without suffering and/or make two move actions in the same round] (+1 required)

(1+23+16+70+16+1 = 127+ HP Required)

Roy still needs at least 10 CON at level 14, or 8 CON at level 15. Roy's CON cannot be lower than 8 to survive this fight. QED.

[Quild]

Technically (https://xkcd.com/1475/), Roy has some feats that we don't know. He could have taken thoughness 3 or more times. And then, 6 CON becomes an option if he's level 15.

[Crusher]

Technically (https://xkcd.com/1475/), Roy has some feats that we don't know. He could have taken thoughness 3 or more times. And then, 6 CON becomes an option if he's level 15.

Indeed. My personal theory before deciding Roy was simply a 40+ pt buy build was that he'd gone with two dump stats: Dex and Con. Then to make up for it he'd taken Toughness 4-5 times.

[Atomburster]

Or Improved toughness.

I doubt that the spell Durkula used in #1002 is Inflict Minor Wounds, though. Seriously, what spellcaster would cast Cantrips with he/it had 6th or 7th level spells at it's disposal?

[Quild]

Indeed. My personal theory before deciding Roy was simply a 40+ pt buy build was that he'd gone with two dump stats: Dex and Con. Then to make up for it he'd taken Toughness 4-5 times.

We "know" that Roy has:
- 18 STR (+1 at level 4 and 1 at level 8)
- 13+ DEX
- 14-17 INT
- 14+ WIS
- 12+ CHA

DEX isn't really a dump stat here (his 13 DEX was shown in #730 with improved grapple so maybe he got that last point with is twelth level).
I don't see why CON would be Roy's dump stat. Even if he rolled his stats in order, if his CON was unsatisfying, wouldn't he have put here his bonus points from level 4 and 8 rather than improving STR and spending feats in thoughness? Or found an amulet of CON?

Roy just have very high stats.


I doubt that the spell Durkula used in #1002 is Inflict Minor Wounds, though. Seriously, what spellcaster would cast Cantrips with he/it had 6th or 7th level spells at it's disposal?

The idea that 3 wounds match with 3dice is not that bad. In this case, Inflict Serious Wounds is still an option.

Why would HPoH use "Inflict Serious Wounds" rather than "Inflict Critical Wounds"? There's only 1d8 difference in damage so maybe he prefers to use lower slots first in case the higher ones becomes useful later. Yet, Roy is more likely to resist this.

[Vinyadan]

The idea that 3 wounds match with 3dice is not that bad.


It could be worth a cross-check with these pages:
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0627.html
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0442.html (too many d6)
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0656.html

But Xykon's meteor swarm is special, because all spheres can strike a single target (it could simply be a way to avoid the spell taking up too much room in the panel with 4 spheres, each with 40 foot explosions).

And this http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0657.html could be a chance for an estimation of the damage inflicted by Xykon's MSwarm.

[Douglas]

But Xykon's meteor swarm is special, because all spheres can strike a single target (it could simply be a way to avoid the spell taking up too much room in the panel with 4 spheres, each with 40 foot explosions).
No, that's how Meteor Swarm normally works.

[Vinyadan]

No, that's how Meteor Swarm normally works.

You are right, I read "you may not" instead of "you may" in the spell description.

[Acora]

I'm honestly kinda surprised that this isn't in the main post, since it seems like it's such a small thing, but with such a huge project as this, obviously stuff gets missed.

Tarquin has at least 15 Dex, Deflect Arrows, and improved unarmed strike, because those are all prerequisites for Snatch Arrow (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0858.html). I can't think of any feat that would let Tarquin snatch multiple arrows in one round (I'm more of a Pathfinder guy than a 3.5 guy), but admittedly this might just be the result of Haley using Manyshot.

[Rakoa]

I'm honestly kinda surprised that this isn't in the main post, since it seems like it's such a small thing, but with such a huge project as this, obviously stuff gets missed.

Tarquin has at least 15 Dex, Deflect Arrows, and improved unarmed strike, because those are all prerequisites for Snatch Arrow (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0858.html). I can't think of any feat that would let Tarquin snatch multiple arrows in one round (I'm more of a Pathfinder guy than a 3.5 guy), but admittedly this might just be the result of Haley using Manyshot.

Snatch Arrows doesn't let you negate two arrows in the same round, as he did with Haley's on the Mechane.

[Acora]

Snatch Arrows doesn't let you negate two arrows in the same round, as he did with Haley's on the Mechane.Technically, since the wording of Snatch Arrows indicates that "Once per round when you would normally be hit with a ranged weapon, you may deflect it so that you take no damage from it", it could easily be argued that, against a feat like Manyshot (which uses a single attack roll), using snatch arrows would negate both arrows, as negating the attack roll for one of them negates the other by default.

Given that, as far as I'm aware, nothing else gives the ability to snatch two arrows at once, and given that Tarquin is clearly snatching two arrows at once, it seems that this is the best explanation, especially since Haley is seen firing two arrows at the same time, as indicated by Manyshot. Besides, we know she has manyshot, so it isn't a stretch for her to be using it here.

Even if we don't assume that Snatch Arrows is responsible for his reaction on the Mechane (though, again, I feel this fully explains it), he's still seen snatching singular arrows earlier on, which means he either has Snatch Arrows in addition to whatever else might explain his ability to catch two arrows at once (meaning everything in my first post was true), or he has some other obscure feat that no one has really been able to pin down which allows him to do exactly what Snatch Arrows allows, which seems a bit silly and roundabout to me.

[Rakoa]

It has been suggested that he has the Epic feat Infinite Deflection, and that is where a very long debate spawned, because Infinite Deflection allows (you guessed it) the deflection of as many arrows per round as you want. However, many people disagreed with this, because it also doesn't require a free hand to do (which is to say, they don't have to be caught individually in a hand). Some thought that Tarquin would just have karate-chopped the arrows out of the air with one hand while maintaining his grip on the Mechane, as would be possible with the feat. Others argued that Tarquin prefers catching arrows as a way to show off, and so did it is a reflex even though he didn't have to. Others didn't agree.

Still others suggested that he had Gloves of Arrow Snatching (or something like that) equipped. I think those were from an older edition, though, which people argued was fine because Laurin's Wormhole power was too. I can't remember the finer details of that argument, though.

I personally believe he does have Infinite Deflection, but no consensus was ever reached, and so here we are today.

[rodneyAnonymous]

(The item, by the way, is Gloves of Arrow Snaring, which is not from an earlier edition... but the use frequency limitation--only twice per day--would have to be explained. And the fluff doesn't fit, nowhere close.)

The Deflect Arrows feat says "You must have at least one hand free (holding nothing) to use this feat. Once per round when you would normally be hit with a ranged weapon, you may deflect it so that you take no damage from it." (Note that neither of Tarquin's hands were free on the airship, and he couldn't free them during Haley's turn. This is fatal to any strictly-rules-as-written interpretation.)

The Snatch Arrows feat says "When using the Deflect Arrows feat you may catch the weapon instead of just deflecting it."

The Infinite Deflection epic feat says "You may perform any number of deflections each round, as the Deflect Arrows feat."

The rules don't actually say you can use Infinite Deflection to catch arrows. Even if your DM lets you use SA and ID together (and I'd argue that's illegal: SA says it applies when you use the DA feat, but you'd be using the ID feat, and even if it acts like DA, it's not), using ID to stop two arrows by catching one in each hand, instead of swatting both away with one hand, would be ignoring the main reason the feat exists. It's not just sub-optimal usage, it's bizarre, going-out-of-your-way-to-handicap-yourself usage. It's also an epic feat, so we'd have to assume level 21 minimum, which is dulling Ockham's Razor. Nevermind that ID requires a free hand, so catching an arrow makes it unusable. This is supposed to get you from one->many, using it just for one->two is weird. Assumptions of ineptitude should be off-limits for similar reasons as assumptions of optimization.

It was much simpler when Tarquin had only caught one arrow at a time (once on top of (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0851.html) and again inside (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0858.html) the pyramid), obviously it was the Snatch Arrows feat... but then he caught two that seemed to be aimed at Miron (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0925.html)! You can't do that... unless two-fifths of those shots were aimed at Tarquin, or maybe were partial-cover misses that would have hit him. So we were already bending over backwards to accommodate a strict reading, and then the airship scene (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0936.html) is too much, it is something like the Snatch Arrows feat, but clearly it is the author doing what he wants and not following the D&D 3.5 rules to the letter. Also that this is happening around the same time Rich stated his intention to do exactly that, which is telling I think.

Finally, I don't even have to convince you that this argument is correct, only that it exists. Obviously there is not consensus to list Tarquin as having Infinite Deflection. (Come to think of it, why not list at least Snatch Arrows? It couldn't be the magic gloves.)

The most probable explanation for Tarquin's behavior is that he has the Snatch Arrows feat, with a minor houserule that he can use it "once per round per free hand" instead of just "once per round". (And "ability to intercept attacks directed at other targets", or whatever, would have to be a separate issue. And the hands-not-free thing... maybe he readied an action to fail at his goal of staying aboard, to be triggered by an event he wasn't expecting?)

[Emanick]

I'm very much in favor of listing Snatch Arrows. I certainly can't recall any plausible arguments against including it.

[rodneyAnonymous]

IIRC, the statblock went from listing nothing to Snatch Arrows, then from Snatch Arrows to Infinite Deflection, then from Infinite Deflection to nothing (and perhaps it should only have been reduced to SA, instead of nothing).

[Acora]

Well, whether he has Infinite Deflection or not, he clearly has Snatch Arrows, since, you know, the whole snatching thing, and unless he's got some way to get around the prerequisites for it, it helps us pin down his stats, too.

[Crusher]

(The item, by the way, is Gloves of Arrow Snaring, which is not from an earlier edition... but the use frequency limitation--only twice per day--would have to be explained. And the fluff doesn't fit, nowhere close.)

The Deflect Arrows feat says "You must have at least one hand free (holding nothing) to use this feat. Once per round when you would normally be hit with a ranged weapon, you may deflect it so that you take no damage from it." (Note that neither of Tarquin's hands were free on the airship, and he couldn't free them during Haley's turn. This is fatal to any strictly-rules-as-written interpretation.)

The Snatch Arrows feat says "When using the Deflect Arrows feat you may catch the weapon instead of just deflecting it."

The Infinite Deflection epic feat says "You may perform any number of deflections each round, as the Deflect Arrows feat."

The rules don't actually say you can use Infinite Deflection to catch arrows. Even if your DM lets you use SA and ID together (and I'd argue that's illegal: SA says it applies when you use the DA feat, but you'd be using the ID feat, and even if it acts like DA, it's not), using ID to stop two arrows by catching one in each hand, instead of swatting both away with one hand, would be ignoring the main reason the feat exists. It's not just sub-optimal usage, it's bizarre, going-out-of-your-way-to-handicap-yourself usage. It's also an epic feat, so we'd have to assume level 21 minimum, which is dulling Ockham's Razor. Nevermind that ID requires a free hand, so catching an arrow makes it unusable. This is supposed to get you from one->many, using it just for one->two is weird. Assumptions of ineptitude should be off-limits for similar reasons as assumptions of optimization.

It was much simpler when Tarquin had only caught one arrow at a time (once on top of (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0851.html) and again inside (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0858.html) the pyramid), obviously it was the Snatch Arrows feat... but then he caught two that seemed to be aimed at Miron (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0925.html)! You can't do that... unless two-fifths of those shots were aimed at Tarquin, or maybe were partial-cover misses that would have hit him. So we were already bending over backwards to accommodate a strict reading, and then the airship scene (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0936.html) is too much, it is something like the Snatch Arrows feat, but clearly it is the author doing what he wants and not following the D&D 3.5 rules to the letter. Also that this is happening around the same time Rich stated his intention to do exactly that, which is telling I think.

Finally, I don't even have to convince you that this argument is correct, only that it exists. Obviously there is not consensus to list Tarquin as having Infinite Deflection. (Come to think of it, why not list at least Snatch Arrows? It couldn't be the magic gloves.)

The most probable explanation for Tarquin's behavior is that he has the Snatch Arrows feat, with a minor houserule that he can use it "once per round per free hand" instead of just "once per round". (And "ability to intercept attacks directed at other targets", or whatever, would have to be a separate issue. And the hands-not-free thing... maybe he readied an action to fail at his goal of staying aboard, to be triggered by an event he wasn't expecting?)

IIRC, the basic problem with the Gloves of Arrow Snaring was simply that he needed to have two pairs of them on him in the pyramid and that he swapped the first pair for the second pair sometime between the fight in the pyramid and the fight on the airship. Other than the improbability of Tarquin bringing two pairs with him to the pyramid, it works pretty well... except for the whole "letting go of the rail during someone else's turn" thing.

[b_jonas]

I still think the basic problem with the Gloves of Arrow Snaring is that we've seen Tarquin's hands a lot of times and it's drawn without gloves. We know what gloves look like in OoTS, because Thor is drawn in gauntlets of power (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0353.html) all the time.

[rodneyAnonymous]

Unfortunately, the fluff for Gloves of Arrow Snaring says "Once snugly worn, these gloves seem to meld with the hands, becoming almost invisible." But carrying a second pair and putting them on in the pyramid, even if it got around the usage limitation, strikes me as needlessly complicated. And invoking them doesn't actually solve any problems, it just adds more.

[Quild]

Tarquin is listed to have Evasion because of #853 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0853.html) but Belkar seems to think that he rather has an item that protects against fire.

Also, Tarquin stunned (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0861.html) Durkon, or something.
How does he do that?

[Crusher]

Unfortunately, the fluff for Gloves of Arrow Snaring says "Once snugly worn, these gloves seem to meld with the hands, becoming almost invisible." But carrying a second pair and putting them on in the pyramid, even if it got around the usage limitation, strikes me as needlessly complicated. And invoking them doesn't actually solve any problems, it just adds more.

Well, needlessly complicated in and of itself isn't really a problem, other than to make an answer less likely to be the correct solution. I mean, something's RAW or its not. And it does sort of bring something to the table. Its at least arguable that someone wearing the gloves can only snare, instead of deflect, incoming arrows explaining why Tarquin did what he did on the airship.

[Emanick]

Well, needlessly complicated in and of itself isn't really a problem, other than to make an answer less likely to be the correct solution. I mean, something's RAW or its not. And it does sort of bring something to the table. Its at least arguable that someone wearing the gloves can only snare, instead of deflect, incoming arrows explaining why Tarquin did what he did on the airship.

I think the real problem with the gloves is that they don't actually solve any problems. It's been stated before (by me and by others) that Tarquin did not have time to think rationally while the arrows were speeding towards his face; he had about a tenth of a second to react and was acting purely on instinct. If he normally catches arrows, then his instinctive reaction in that situation would have been to catch them. QED.

More importantly, for the RAW gloves to explain Tarquin's arrow-catching ability, he would have to be carrying around several different pairs of arrow-snatching gloves and switching pairs off-panel after he catches any given pair of arrows. This strikes me as sufficiently implausible that it shouldn't be seriously considered, certainly not before something simpler, such as Infinite Deflection.

I think we should just go with Snatch Arrows.


Tarquin is listed to have Evasion because of #853 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0853.html) but Belkar seems to think that he rather has an item that protects against fire.

Also, Tarquin stunned (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0861.html) Durkon, or something.
How does he do that?

Tarquin takes no damage from Flame Strike in the first strip you linked, even though half the damage that spell does is "divine" damage of no particular type, and thus can't be blocked by anything that protects against specific types of damage, such as fire. Hence the Evasion assumption.

No clue how Tarquin stuns Durkon in that other strip.

[zimmerwald1915]

In lieu of going over the futile discussion about Tarquin again, I wonder about Wrecan. Is "crusader" a social role a la Miko's samurai, or is it a literal call-out of the Tome of Battle class?

[Emanick]

In lieu of going over the futile discussion about Tarquin again, I wonder about Wrecan. Is "crusader" a social role a la Miko's samurai, or is it a literal call-out of the Tome of Battle class?

I don't think it's necessarily futile. My recollection of our last discussion is that we argued a lot about Infinite Deflection but then never really addressed whether Snatch Arrows should be included afterwards. I could be wrong, although I obviously don't think so.

[ti'esar]

In lieu of going over the futile discussion about Tarquin again, I wonder about Wrecan. Is "crusader" a social role a la Miko's samurai, or is it a literal call-out of the Tome of Battle class?

Good question. Though even if it is his class, I don't think we have enough information to list him (or Veldrina for that matter).

[Sylthia]

Good question. Though even if it is his class, I don't think we have enough information to list him (or Veldrina for that matter).

For Wrecan and Veldrina, do the authors of the characters know, since thy are kickstarter cameos? For Class, at least.

[zimmerwald1915]

For Wrecan and Veldrina, do the authors of the characters know, since thy are kickstarter cameos? For Class, at least.
Wrecan isn't a Kickstarter cameo. He's a tribute to a deceased board member, whose wife proposed to the Giant that a character be named after him. (http://www.giantitp.com/index.html#6eam4vhlOtdyflgooaB)

And we do know Veldrina's class for sure, creator revelation or not. She's a favored soul.

[shockeroo]

"Is Wrecan's class Crusader?"


Good question. Though even if it is his class, I don't think we have enough information to list him (or Veldrina for that matter).

1009 seems like a pretty obvious call-out to his class to me. It's a very odd choice of word to call him otherwise, Rich tends not to do these things for no reason.

We also have Veldrina's class confirmed as Favoured Soul.

Back on Wrecan, is 1008 is sufficient evidence that he has ranks in Bluff?

[b_jonas]

Unfortunately, the fluff for Gloves of Arrow Snaring says "Once snugly worn, these gloves seem to meld with the hands, becoming almost invisible." Oh! I didn't know this fluff, I must have missed it last time it came up. Thanks for mentioning this.

[Lolo]

Between Roy's comment of being ten at the time, and his brother being in Celestia for the last 18 years mentioned in comic 496, can we peg Roy's age in the 28-29 range, or is that too trivial for this topic?

[zimmerwald1915]

Back on Wrecan, is 1008 is sufficient evidence that he has ranks in Bluff?
No. Even if the vampire believed him (as opposed to just being distracted, which can be achieved without a skill check), Bluff can be used untrained.

[SavageWombat]

I'm pretty convinced Durkon is size Huge in this strip, now.

[Crusher]

I don't think it's necessarily futile. My recollection of our last discussion is that we argued a lot about Infinite Deflection but then never really addressed whether Snatch Arrows should be included afterwards. I could be wrong, although I obviously don't think so.

I find it hard to imagine there were topics that *weren't* covered, although ID was certainly the centerpoint. There was so much discussion someone could have typed War and Peace into a series of posts and its possible I could have missed it.

[unbeliever536]

Between Roy's comment of being ten at the time, and his brother being in Celestia for the last 18 years mentioned in comic 496, can we peg Roy's age in the 28-29 range, or is that too trivial for this topic?

It's listed already, in fact. He's 29 as of strip #500 (a few weeks had passed since #496).

[Emanick]

I find it hard to imagine there were topics that *weren't* covered, although ID was certainly the centerpoint. There was so much discussion someone could have typed War and Peace into a series of posts and its possible I could have missed it.

If memory serves, we talked about Snatch Arrows, then Infinite Deflection, and I think the ridiculously long discussion of Infinite Deflection ended with us more or less saying "Ugh, forget this, I guess we're just not going to agree" and moving on to a new thing that had come up. We never actually circled back to Snatch Arrows again, unless I'm forgetting something, which, again, is a possibility.

Does anyone have an argument against including Snatch Arrows? I haven't seen one raised since the suggestion was first raised a page or two back.

[Tobtor]

I dont normally answer this thread, but find it very interesting as a non hard-core DnD player.


Does anyone have an argument against including Snatch Arrows? I haven't seen one raised since the suggestion was first raised a page or two back.

Multiple arguments were raised against it, all can be explained, but only through houseruling etc.

1. He catches two arrows. Not only in the airship, but also shots against Miron earlier. Does this mean he doesn't have snatch arrows? No, it could either a) be a houserule allowing for catching two arrows, or b) be a combination of Snatch arrows and some other feat (like ID, or homebrewed improce snatch arrow feat), or c) have some other explanation, like the gloves (or other hhouserule). As the last option could also explain the incident were he catshes one arrow, the explanations needs to cover all incidents.
This means: all explanations require some level of houseruling, I cannot see how one set of houseruling is better/worse than another.

2 Snatch arrows does not allow you to snach arrows at others, thus making the first example of him catching two arrows difficult to explain.

3. Some people were not comfortable by the "he didn't have time to think, regading the letting go of the railing" argument in a RAW thread. Since the rules does not stipulate any fast action clause in what line of defence you use. Is it a story feature? Perhaps (I am not convinced), but that is difficult to prove or disprove by RAW, and thus rely on opinions.

4. Do snatch arrow adequately explain the letting go of the rails or is a free hand necessary? If not, then another houserule, making it 2 or 3 hosuerules to the snatch arrow explanation (no free hands, snatch two arrows, and snatching arrows shot against others).

I would say, 2-3houserules in addition to the need for a non-RAW explanation (but psychological explanation) to why he lets go of the rail makes a good argument against including it. Is it possible? Sure, but not more than a completely homebrew feat, or item, or houseruling regarding the gloves.

[Seward]

Re: Tarquin. The dude has a couple levels of monk.

He's got really good saves and evasion. 2 monk levels gives you +3 to all save, 2 feats (helps with fitting in obscure feats like pun-dueling by getting in some basics), and stunning fist. Maybe his axe was ki-focus.

[Hecuba]

Re: Tarquin. The dude has a couple levels of monk.

He's got really good saves and evasion. 2 monk levels gives you +3 to all save, 2 feats (helps with fitting in obscure feats like pun-dueling by getting in some basics), and stunning fist. Maybe his axe was ki-focus.

If I wanted to replicate Tarquin's displayed abilities, I would probably strongly consider a short Monk dip: in addition to the items you mention, it also adds Snatch Arrows in particular (which is at least a starting point for that issue). It is not, however, the only way to accomplish those goals. A dip in survivor could cover much of it. A ring of evasion could help (though we already know of 1 of his 2 ring slots).

In short, you have a good hypothesis, but there isn't any direct evidence that supports it over other possibilities.

[Steven]

Don't we know T has a ring of true seeing and a ring of regen?
(Sorry, don't have time to go archive diving atm)

[El Dorado]

My favorite Tarquin theory is that he's using 2nd edition Gloves of Missile Snaring. We've seen other references to earlier editions (e.g. Wormhole power, Keoghtom's ointment).

Gloves of Missile Snaring: These gloves radiate slightly of enchantment and alteration if magic is detected for. Once snugly worn, they seem to meld with the hands, becoming almost invisible (undetectable unless within five feet of the wearer). Either or both hands so clad, if not already holding something, can be used to pick many sorts of missiles out of the air, thus preventing possible harm, and enabling the wearer to return a hand-thrown missile to its sender as an attack in a subsequent round.

All forms of small, hand-hurled or weapon-propelled missiles (arrows, bolts, darts, bullets, javelins, axes, hammers, spears, and the like) can be caught. If the weapon magically returns to the attacker, then catching it simply prevents damage, and returning the weapon does not result in an attack.

[Crusher]

I dont normally answer this thread, but find it very interesting as a non hard-core DnD player.



Multiple arguments were raised against it, all can be explained, but only through houseruling etc.

1. He catches two arrows. Not only in the airship, but also shots against Miron earlier. Does this mean he doesn't have snatch arrows? No, it could either a) be a houserule allowing for catching two arrows, or b) be a combination of Snatch arrows and some other feat (like ID, or homebrewed improce snatch arrow feat), or c) have some other explanation, like the gloves (or other hhouserule). As the last option could also explain the incident were he catshes one arrow, the explanations needs to cover all incidents.
This means: all explanations require some level of houseruling, I cannot see how one set of houseruling is better/worse than another.

2 Snatch arrows does not allow you to snach arrows at others, thus making the first example of him catching two arrows difficult to explain.

3. Some people were not comfortable by the "he didn't have time to think, regading the letting go of the railing" argument in a RAW thread. Since the rules does not stipulate any fast action clause in what line of defence you use. Is it a story feature? Perhaps (I am not convinced), but that is difficult to prove or disprove by RAW, and thus rely on opinions.

4. Do snatch arrow adequately explain the letting go of the rails or is a free hand necessary? If not, then another houserule, making it 2 or 3 hosuerules to the snatch arrow explanation (no free hands, snatch two arrows, and snatching arrows shot against others).

I would say, 2-3houserules in addition to the need for a non-RAW explanation (but psychological explanation) to why he lets go of the rail makes a good argument against including it. Is it possible? Sure, but not more than a completely homebrew feat, or item, or houseruling regarding the gloves.

Afaik, letting go of the rail on Haley's turn simply isn't doable by RAW which invalidates all of the above options, barring a houserule. If we allow a houserule, then it could happen in one of two ways, either the releasing of the rail was houseruled into being acceptable OR Tarquin has a feat or magic item that's houseruled in such a way that it allows him to drop whatever is in his hands before doing his arrow snatching. We don't know which.

However, once we're past that issue, Tarquin *must* have arrow snatching in some form otherwise he couldn't grab the arrows like he does. He either has to have the feat itself, a houseruled version of a feat that does something similar, or a magic item that can do it.

Beyond that, he needs a way to interact with more than one arrow per round. We don't know what his limit is. It might be two, it might be infinite. The three options he has here are Infinite Deflection, Gloves of Arrow Snaring, or some kind of houseruled item or feat.

I don't feel strongly enough about the Gloves of Snaring to say it should be listed in his statblock, but the reason I like them overall is because they're the single option that requires the fewest steps to get to.

Gloves of Snaring - Houserule to let go of railing + 8k gp in magic items (which is trivial for Tarquin. He casually offered Elan a ring of Regeneration and those go for 90k) + Tarquin needs to make a small error in judgment in grabbing the second arrow instead of just letting it hit him

Snatching - Houserule to either let go of railing or to adjust a feat + 2 regular feats (Deflect Arrows and Snatch Arrows) + 1 epic feat (Infinite Deflection) + Tarquin needs to make a colossal error in judgement in grabbing the second arrow instead of deflecting it

Or it could be solved by some combination of houseruled feat changes (like allowing an arrow Snatch per open hand rather than just once/round would eliminate the need for ID).

Looking at it that way, the Gloves seem like the much easier choice. Yes, it would require a fair degree of paranoia for Tarquin to pack more than one pair of gloves of arrow snaring. On the other hand, this is Tarquin we're talking about. This is a man who loves to plan things out.

Plus, why not? For someone in Tarquin's position they're trivially cheap and very light to pack and carry around. A 6-pack of them would only be about 1/4 the cost of his Ring of Regeneration (to say nothing of his Ring of True Seeing, which I'm not even sure is doable with 3.5 rules).

[Hecuba]

Don't we know T has a ring of true seeing and a ring of regen?
(Sorry, don't have time to go archive diving atm)

Actually, we know he has a ring of true seeing and at least 2 rings of regeneration, but I don't think we've ever gotten indication that he's actually wearing the ring of regeneration (though we do know he keeps at least on on his person when adventuring).

This makes a Ring of Evasion somewhat less likely, but still easily possible. There are multiple options for using more than 2 rings, or he could just swap one out - a ring of regeneration is reasonably useful (if inefficient) for healing that doesn't need to be rushed, but the limb regeneration benefit of keeping it on at all times is fairly minor unless you introduce something like called shots.

[Sky_Schemer]

Actually, we know he has a ring of true seeing and at least 2 rings of regeneration, but I don't think we've ever gotten indication that he's actually wearing the ring of regeneration (though we do know he keeps at least on on his person when adventuring).

We have seen the effects of it being worn here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0852.html).

[Hecuba]

We have seen the effects of it being worn here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0852.html).

Huh. I stand corrected. If it is demonstrably worn, that makes a ring a weak option for a evasion. We still, however, have many options other than Monk to explain it.

[Kornaki]

Afaik, letting go of the rail on Haley's turn simply isn't doable by RAW which invalidates all of the above options, barring a houserule. If we allow a houserule, then it could happen in one of two ways, either the releasing of the rail was houseruled into being acceptable OR Tarquin has a feat or magic item that's houseruled in such a way that it allows him to drop whatever is in his hands before doing his arrow snatching. We don't know which.


This is actually false, and is commonly misstated. Dropping an item (similar to letting go of a railing) is a free action, which can be taken at any time that you are taking other actions. If he is making an immediate action to catch the arrows, he can take free actions as well.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

This is actually false, and is commonly misstated. Dropping an item (similar to letting go of a railing) is a free action, which can be taken at any time that you are taking other actions. If he is making an immediate action to catch the arrows, he can take free actions as well.

Having hands free is a pre-requisite to being able to take that immediate action to catch the arrows, so he can't let go of the railing.

GW

[rodneyAnonymous]

Dropping an item you're holding is a free action, and letting go of the railing on an airship is functionally the same. But "free action" doesn't mean you can do it any time, that means it doesn't cost you a move or attack action during your turn. Talking is specifically called out by the rules as an exception: it's a free action and you can do it out of turn.

To use Snatch Arrows or the magic gloves, Tarquin would have had to have a hand free before Haley starts attacking. Or, he could ready an action to let go if he gets attacked, but that's preposterous. I would buy that he made a split-second decision that resulted in failing at his goal, but not that he thought about it and made a considered choice to fail, never mind that he wasn't expecting to be attacked. (And readied actions don't act like the contingency spell, where you can set up a given action to happen automatically in response to a trigger event at some point in the possibly-distant future; you have to tell the DM--when it's your turn--that's what you're doing with your action this round. The event can only "trigger" the readied action until it's your turn again, so if that event doesn't happen before then, you wasted your turn. Next round on your turn, you can choose to ready the action again, or to do something else.)

PS: Using the Deflect Arrows feat (or whatever) is not an action in a D&D combat sense. That would be true even if the rulebook didn't specifically say so, but it does.

[Kurald Galain]

Dropping an item you're holding is a free action, and letting go of the railing on an airship is functionally the same.

Why is that the same? Do you have any RAW citations that say so?

[b_jonas]

There are multiple options for using more than 2 rings, or he could just swap one out
Wait, what options? The only one I know of is an epic feat: Additional Magic Item Space (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/feats.htm#additionalMagicItemSpace). Are you thinking of a gnome tinker changing the ring to take some other slot instead (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0967.html)?


Dropping an item you're holding is a free action, and letting go of the railing on an airship is functionally the same. But "free action" doesn't mean you can do it any time, that means it doesn't cost you a move or attack action during your turn. [...]

[...] Or, he could ready an action to let go if he gets attacked, but that's preposterous. [...] (And readied actions [...]; you have to tell the DM--when it's your turn--that's what you're doing with your action this round. The event can only "trigger" the readied action until it's your turn again, so if that event doesn't happen before then, you wasted your turn. [...])
Wait, why would you have wasted your turn? I thought that if you ready a move action or attack action, that wastes the move action or attack action of your turn. But here, Tarquin would be readying a free action. That doesn't waste his turn, because he could take a high number of free actions on his turn anyway. This is a point of technicality of course, I also don't think that Tarquin had readied dropping the railing in this scene.

[d20familiar]

Wait, why would you have wasted your turn?
It takes your standard action to ready an action no matter what kind of action you are readying: move, standard or swift.

[rodneyAnonymous]

Why is that the same? Do you have any RAW citations that say so?
Those aren't serious questions, are they? It is literally, exactly the same thing... whether you fall because of letting go, or the object does.

[Crusher]

It takes your standard action to ready an action no matter what kind of action you are readying: move, standard or swift.

Yeah, being able to ready Free Actions freely would be pretty powerful.

[Kornaki]

Having hands free is a pre-requisite to being able to take that immediate action to catch the arrows, so he can't let go of the railing.

GW

To clarify, he can take an immediate action to do anything, and then let go of the railing. If he has "When you get shot at, as an immediate action get +3 AC", he can use that, let go of the railing, then if he happens to have the ability to snatch arrows after that's all said and done, he can.

[Aeliren]

"Horace Greenhilt's Mage Slayer" should probably be changed to "Spellsplinter Maneuver" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1003.html), since that seems to be its name.