Old Test of Spite flawed

[Elves]

Not really worth a thread but threads are cheap I guess. This was the match that got Lightning Maces banned from Test of Spite: Olo vs PhoenixRivers (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?125698-Test-of-Spite-Olo-vs-PhoenixRivers).

TLDR - guy with Lightning Maces got hit with Death Urge (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/deathUrge.htm). They interpreted this as creating an infinite damage loop because his attacks against himself automatically hit.

No clue how they got that idea though. Death Urge says:


the subject attacks itself as a full-round action. The attack automatically succeeds and deals damage as a critical hit.

As a full-round action the target makes a single attack against themselves. Only that attack is a crit. If it triggered a Lightning Maces attack, that attack wouldn't be a guaranteed crit, nor would any further LM attacks.

More to the point, the death urge attack doesn't even trigger Lightning Maces, because LM requires that "you roll a threat on an attack roll". The death urge attack doesn't include any attack roll; the attack just "automatically succeeds", and deals damage as a critical hit. The guy would do 1 instance of crit damage to himself, no lightning maces, over.

---

My point here is that a lot of old charop cheese wasn't scrutinized with any rigor so look at it with fresh eyes. Another example IIRC is that "Jack B. Quick" doesn't work.

[Nifft]

My point here is that a lot of old charop cheese wasn't scrutinized with any rigor so look at it with fresh eyes.

New cheese isn't much better.

[PoeticallyPsyco]

Another example IIRC is that "Jack B. Quick" doesn't work.

IIRC, it doesn't have any elements that outright don't work, it's just that going from 4 attacks to 6 requires a ruling that you can still trip someone who's prone, which is questionable.

[Darg]

IIRC, it doesn't have any elements that outright don't work, it's just that going from 4 attacks to 6 requires a ruling that you can still trip someone who's prone, which is questionable.

Use of the word prone is questionable too. We got what we got though.

[Elves]

IIRC, it doesn't have any elements that outright don't work, it's just that going from 4 attacks to 6 requires a ruling that you can still trip someone who's prone, which is questionable.

Then more debatably there's whether Karmic and Robilar's stack. RC says you can only make 1 AOO for "each provoking act". Some people argue that an attack is only a single act (that the rule doesn't say action being justified by the fact that you can make multiple attacks as part of the same action). I don't personally buy it but it's probably better for the game. FAQ agrees but who cares what they say.

[Bronk]

IIRC, it doesn't have any elements that outright don't work, it's just that going from 4 attacks to 6 requires a ruling that you can still trip someone who's prone, which is questionable.

Seems like you'd only be able to trip someone if they were trying to stand up... otherwise you'd have to do your tripping with a giant pancake spatula.

[Psyren]

My point here is that a lot of old charop cheese wasn't scrutinized with any rigor so look at it with fresh eyes.

But I already banned it :smalltongue:

[PoeticallyPsyco]

Then more debatably there's whether Karmic and Robilar's stack. RC says you can only make 1 AOO for "each provoking act". Some people argue that an attack is only a single act (that the rule doesn't say action being justified by the fact that you can make multiple attacks as part of the same action). I don't personally buy it but it's probably better for the game. FAQ agrees but who cares what they say.

Hmm, now that's more interesting. Robilar's Gambit triggers on an attack, while Karmic Strike triggers on getting hit... but arguably that's still the same act by your opponent.

[Xervous]

Hmm, now that's more interesting. Robilar's Gambit triggers on an attack, while Karmic Strike triggers on getting hit... but arguably that's still the same act by your opponent.

Where’s the MTG stack when you need it?

[Elves]

Makes me wonder what a modern Jack B Quick would look like, dishing the fighter 20 gimmick. With flaws, human feat, and Gloves of the Balanced Hand, all its feats can be polished off in 3 levels, leaving 17 levels of the build wide open for whatever.

Monk 1: Improved Unarmed Strike, Combat Expertise; Decisive Strike (replacing Overpowering Attack)
Monk 2: Improved Trip
Swordsage 1: weapon focus (White Raven weapons - battleaxe & longsword)
Golden Dancing Pegleg: Mobility, Spring Attack
Gloves: ITWF
H: Power Attack
F: Dodge
F: Combat Reflexes
1: Karmic Strike
3: TWF
6: High Sword Low Axe
9: Double Hit
12: Elusive Target
15: Robilar's Gambit
18: Defensive Throw

Becomes more open yet if Karmic and Robilar's don't stack.

[PoeticallyPsyco]

Makes me wonder what a modern Jack B Quick would look like, dishing the fighter 20 gimmick. With flaws, human feat, and Gloves of the Balanced Hand, all its feats can be polished off in 3 levels, leaving 17 levels of the build wide open for whatever.

Monk 1: Improved Unarmed Strike, Combat Expertise; Decisive Strike (replacing Overpowering Attack)
Monk 2: Improved Trip
Swordsage 1: weapon focus (White Raven weapons - battleaxe & longsword)
Golden Dancing Pegleg: Mobility, Spring Attack
Gloves: ITWF
H: Power Attack
F: Dodge
F: Combat Reflexes
1: Karmic Strike
3: TWF
6: High Sword Low Axe
9: Double Hit
12: Elusive Target
15: Robilar's Gambit
18: Defensive Throw

Becomes more open yet if Karmic and Robilar's don't stack.


Hmm, probably another level of Swordsage for 2nd level maneuvers and then into Crusader. The fatal flaw of the build is that there's no incentive to target you over your allies or way to otherwise force opponents to provoke opportunity attacks; Crusader and later Devoted Defender can fix that while also making you likely to just shrug off the enemy attacks you're courting. Plus, switching to a healing stance means a lot of healing when you're landing 4-6 attacks per turn.

Actually, though, Swordsages don't get White Raven as an available school (unless you're implementing Age of Warriors). Even if they did, they only get the "benefit" of Weapon Focus, and as far as I know it's still rather contentious whether "benefit" includes qualifying for prerequisites.

So maybe Monk 2/ Fighter 2/ Crusader 2/ Devoted Defender 3/ Crusader X?

[Elves]

Actually, though, Swordsages don't get White Raven as an available school (unless you're implementing Age of Warriors).
Even in Age of Warriors (which I do need to finish although check this out (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nAfzLOlzeKtJOjuQiO-9PuIZihVASYlL/view)) they don't. Thought you choose any disc you have a mv known from but I guess not. 16 free levels then.


and as far as I know it's still rather contentious whether "benefit" includes qualifying for prerequisites.
Sword and Fist p5, Virtual Feats says yes.


The fatal flaw of the build is that there's no incentive to target you over your allies or way to otherwise force opponents to provoke opportunity attacks; Crusader and later Devoted Defender can fix that while also making you likely to just shrug off the enemy attacks you're courting.
Agreed, making the build truly effective is about forcing the punishment. Devoted defender helps, glare helps, but IDK if 3e has any true mark-like abilities.

Leaping Flame maneuver seems important because it allows you to make Robilar's attacks against ranged attacks (including ranged touch spells). That suggests keeping a swordsage level for one of the WF feats. Or JPM for an "out there" option.

It's tempting to take it down the standard lockdown tripper route or down the 1d2 crusader WRT route (skeezy as that latter is), but I think elegance in character building is about focusing on the build concept, in this case the retaliation.