Arena Tournament, Round 32: Chile II vs. Roberts

[ArenaManager]

Arena Tournament, Round 32: Chile II vs. Roberts

Map:
http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b30/Kyeudo/GlassArena.jpg


XP Award: 300 XP
GP Award: 300 GP

chilepepper - Chile II (http://www.thetangledweb.net/addon.php?addon=Profiler&page=view_char&cid=8505)
Mavian - Roberts (http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheets/view.php?id=41436)

All Combatants, please roll initiative.

[chilepepper]

Checking in, deciding on purchases. Should be ready to roll tonite.

[Mavian]

As of this round of purchasing, I really don't have anything I wish to buy. That of course could change due to something you pickup.

[chilepepper]

Purchases:
Sundark goggles
Scroll Protection from Arrows
Studded Leather Barding

I reserve the right to purchase more based on your purchablah blah blah...

But I'll go ahead and roll initiative now.
[roll0]

[Mavian]

Purchases:
A resist energy potion and some sleep-smoke.

Initiative [roll0]

[chilepepper]

You'll have to be more specific on that potion, and if you would be so kind as to provide the source for the sleep-smoke, I'm having trouble finding it.

[Talic]

Initiate Ref Talic

Correct on the potion.



When you create a potion, you make any choices that you would normally make when casting the spell. Whoever drinks the potion is the target of the spell.

[Mavian]

It's acid resistance, what else would it be, and sleep-smoke is in Waterdeep

[chilepepper]

Holy crap, that sleep-smoke is wicked.

I'll start in A13, mounted. I'll twiddle my fingers and be done.

refs
Cast mage armor using two 0 level spell slots.

HP: 5
AC: 19 T:14 F:16
Spells: 3,4
Buffs: Mage Armor 1/600
Position: A13, mounted

[Mavian]

Roberts - Start in Y13 with A crossbow in one hand and vial in the other.

Move Action: Twiddle my Thumbs :smallbiggrin:
Standard Action: Drink Potion

End of Turn

Stats for Refs:

I'm not actually going to drink the potion, as its actually a vial of sleep-smoke. My attempt here is to bluff him into believing I've actually drank my Resist Energy Potion. Asking him for a sense motive will blow the ruse though, and he should be far enough away not to notice what I actually do.
Bluff Check: [roll0]
Hp: 10
Position: Y13
AC: 18. 15. 13
Speed: 30
Bolts: 49

[chilepepper]

Round 2

I guess I'll list my actions by value as well. (twiddling my fingers last round was a standard action (but you knew that))

Standard: Twiddle the fingers again
Move: Pull out a scroll while moving to A7

refs
Again using two 0 level slots to cast Shield

HP: 5
AC: 23 T:14 F:19
Spells: 1,4
Buffs: Mage Armor 2/600, Shield 1/10
Position: A7, mounted

[Mavian]

I like to post my actions the way I do so that they're concise, and easy for the refs to follow if there's a need to go over them.

Roberts - Round 2

Ref Question:

I want to delay my move until the next turn. So this isn't really a question, more of a statement of fact. Also note my previous statblock for my potion fake out. If either of these are illegal, or should be known to my opponent, feel free to let him know.


Move Action: Y13 -> Z18
Standard Action: Twiddle my thumbs and stick out my tongue at you. :smalltongue:

End of Turn:

Stats for Refs

Hp: 10
Position: Y13
AC: 18. 15. 13
Speed: 30
Bolts: 49



S

[chilepepper]

Round 3
Standard: Read from my piece of paper
Move: to M1

refs
DC3 caster level check [roll0] for 2nd level scroll

HP: 5
AC: 23 T:14 F:19
DR 10/magic (vs ranged)
Spells: 1,4
Buffs: Mage Armor 3/600, Shield 2/10, Protection from Arrows 1/1200 (0 dmg)
Position: M1, mounted

edit1:fix code
edit2: Done

[Mavian]

Roberts

Move Action: Z18 to Z22

Standard Action: Ready an Action


Ready an action to take a shot with my crossbow and then a 5 foot step behind cover if Chile gains LoE


End of Turn:

Stats for Refs:

Hp: 10
Position: Y13
AC: 18. 15. 13
Speed: 30
Bolts: 49

[chilepepper]

Round 4

Move: to Z5

Let me know if that triggers your held action.

Not done...

refs
HP: 5
AC: 23 T:14 F:19
DR 10/magic (vs ranged)
Spells: 1,4
Buffs: Mage Armor 4/600, Shield 3/10, Protection from Arrows 2/1200 (0/20 dmg)
Position: Z5, mounted

[Mavian]

It does indeed.

I snap off a shot at you from my crossbow, before stepping back to Y20

Attack Roll: [roll0] Range not included.
Damage: [roll1]

[chilepepper]

The shot sails just wide.
Done.

refs
Ready an action to Breathe if Roberts gets within range and LoE.

HP: 5
AC: 23 T:14 F:19
DR 10/magic (vs ranged)
Spells: 1,4
Buffs: Mage Armor 4/600, Shield 3/10, Protection from Arrows 2/1200 (0/20 dmg)
Position: Z5, mounted

[Mavian]

Actually, I'm still in Z22. I have no idea what I was thinking with that 5 foot step. So if that changes your turn, feel free to change your standard.

[Talic]

Initiate ref Talic

Chile, I'll need you to roll me a D20. You'll receive the results of it afterwards.

[chilepepper]

@talic[roll0]
the lack of the 5' step doesn't change anything, go ahead

[Talic]

@Chile

Ok, nothing to report


@Mavian

The d20 was for a sense motive. Now he won't know what it was for, unless he passed.


@refs

Applied a penalty, per the spot skill, due to the fact that this bluff is being carried out at 115 feet distance.


Continue.

[Mavian]

Roberts

Move Action: Z22 to U23

Standard Action: Ready an Action

Ready an action to move if Chiles gains LoE


End of Turn:

Stats for Refs:

Hp: 10
Position: U23
AC: 18. 15. 13
Speed: 30
Bolts: 49

[chilepepper]

Round 5

Move to O15. Again, lemme know if that triggers your readied action, I'll finish based on that.

Not done.


HP: 5
AC: 23 T:14 F:19
DR 10/magic (vs ranged)
Spells: 1,4
Buffs: Mage Armor 5/600, Shield 4/10, Protection from Arrows 3/1200 (0/20 dmg)
Position: O15, mounted

[Mavian]

Yep, It triggers it and I move from U23 to P23

Still Chile's turn.

[chilepepper]

Breath weapon.
Entangling Acid Breath
[roll0] Acid (Ref DC15 for half damage)
You are Entangled for [roll1] rounds and take 1d6 acid damage at the beginning of each of my turns during the duration.

Entangle
The character is ensnared. Being entangled impedes movement, but does not entirely prevent it unless the bonds are anchored to an immobile object or tethered by an opposing force. An entangled creature moves at half speed, cannot run or charge, and takes a -2 penalty on all attack rolls and a -4 penalty to Dexterity. An entangled character who attempts to cast a spell must make a Concentration check (DC 15 + the spell’s level) or lose the spell.

Done

refs
HP: 5
AC: 23 T:14 F:19
DR 10/magic (vs ranged)
Spells: 1,3
Buffs: Mage Armor 5/600, Shield 4/10, Protection from Arrows 3/1200 (0/20 dmg)
Position: O15, mounted

[Mavian]

Reflex Save [roll0] +5 dex, +2 from cover.

[Mavian]

Roberts

Move Action: P23 to O20

Standard Action: Toss the vial in my hand in your general direction, aiming at the O14/15 P14/15
Attack Roll: [roll0] -4 for Range, -4 from Entanglement
That'll hit AC 5.
Splash if needed: [roll1]

You and your mount need to hit a DC 15 fort save, or go unconscious for awhile.

Sleep Smoke

One dose affects a globe 10 feet in diameter on the fi rst round, expanding
outward to a globe 20 feet in diameter on the second round, and being harmless thereafter. A strong wind can move the globe of sleep-smoke.
Type: Inhaled DC 15; Initial damage unconsciousness for 1
minute; Secondary damage unconsciousness for 1d3 minute



End of Turn

Stats for Refs:

Hp: 7/10
Position: O20
AC: 18. 15. 13, 16/13/11
Speed: 30/15 due to entanglement
Bolts: 48

[chilepepper]

Acknowledged, 2 damage and entangled to you.

edit: you ninjaed me.

[Mavian]

Yep, hence the atrocious range penalties on another wise sure attack ::smallyuk:

[chilepepper]

Also, your attack gets another -4 for soft cover, but it still hits.

Fort for me [roll0]
Fort for my pony [roll1]

edit: of course my stupid pony rolls the 20

[chilepepper]

Stay in saddle [roll0]
Damage if I fall from saddle [roll1]

I'm in the saddle still.

I'll need a ref to rule on how the mount is going to avoid combat. I obviously want it to stay in the arena, which it could safely do, being able to move further than you.

[Mavian]

You forgot to say which one was you falling :p

[chilepepper]

In d20, higher is always better. 1 is fail, 2 is success.


refs
I am unconscious, in the saddle. My war pony now avoids combat, can it do that while staying in the arena?

[chilepepper]

and here's the sleep-smoke:

One dose affects a globe 10' in diameter on the first round, expanding outward to a globe 20' in diameter on the second round, and being harmless thereafter. A strong wind can move the globe of sleep-smoke.

Inhaled DC15 Initial damage unconsciousness for 1 minute, Secondary damage unconsciousness for 1d3 minutes

[Mavian]

Yeah, I dug it up and threw it in the post I hit you with it. One thought crosses my mind. Does your mount need to make another save on its turn, as its still in the poisons area? I haven't actually looked at the poison rules in forever.

Also, I do believe that I take the remaining acid damage from your breath weapon.

[Talic]

Initiate Ref Talic

By the rules, yes, it does, but only if it is still in the poison cloud at the start of YOUR turn, not its. In addition, it will need to make 2 saves in 1 minute. Inhaled poisons also state that holding your breath is no good, as it enters nasal cavities, tear ducts, etc.

Further, as it's a war pony, it's trained for combat. As chile isn't conscious, he's not controlling it. Does he still choose its actions? Does it go aggressive, or avoid combat? Who controls the mount?

[Mavian]

Um, I'm pretty sure this situation hasn't come up before, so I don't think there is a precedent that's been established, so we're gonna need Kyeudo, Bigmac, or another High ref to make a ruling on it.

[Kyeudo]

GM Kyeudo

The pony will simply act to get as far away from attackers as possible until it either falls asleep or his rider wakes up. It's actualy called out in the rules that if you become unconcious, your mount avoids combat. Since your mount can't open doors, it can't leave the arena, and so you won't end up DQed by a ring out.

As long as Chilepepper follows the simple guideline of "as far away from any attackers as possible" I see no need for a ref to control the pony.

[chilepepper]

Round 6
Alright so on your turn in round 15, I'll wake up or fail a second save.

Here's the rest of your damage from my breath weapon. [roll0]

Double move to J2

[Mavian]

Roberts - Round 6

Free Action: Reload Crossbow
Double Move to K13 in a non threatening manner, putting my crossbow away as a free action during the move.

End of Turn:

Stats for Refs:

Hp: 6/10
Position: O20
AC: 18. 15. 13,
Speed: 30
Bolts: 48

[chilepepper]

Round 7

Double move to Z1

refs

HP: 5
AC: 23 T:14 F:19 (not including unconsciousness)
DR 10/magic (vs ranged)
Spells: 1,3
Buffs: Mage Armor 7/600, Shield 6/10, Protection from Arrows 3/1200 (0/20 dmg)
Position: Z1, mounted, unconscious

[Mavian]

Roberts

Run from K13 to Y2

Questions For Refs:

I still want to know how an unconscious rider manages to stay on a horse thats double moving. Also, I want to appear less threatening, [roll0] so a random charisma roll to do so.


End of turn: Although I would like my questions answered at some point.

Stats for Refs:

Hp: 6/10
Position: O20
AC: 18. 15. 13,: 13/10/13 due to running.
Speed: 30
Bolts: 48

[chilepepper]

Run from K13 to Y2

That's an illegal move.

[Mavian]

A straight line from the center of K13 to the center of Y2 passes through nothing that would prevent movement, so how is it an illegal move?

[chilepepper]

You mean nothing except the hard corner at the intersection of M/N 11/12. You can't move diagonally past a hard corner, which means you have to be in M11 during your move. A straight line from K13 thru M11 ends at O9.

[Bronz]

High Ref Bronz

Wow, this is a mess. I didn't have time to read it all. BUT!

1. The Dread Pirate's move was legal. Broke out paint for it and the corner is not in the way. Movement is not restricted square by square but by lines (it's counted square by square however).

2. I didn't check where the pony was the round after the poison, but if it was still in the cloud of smoke it would need to make another save. It is another exposure, and would have to save again in another minute. Multiple exposures, even of the same poison, stack.

3. I'm not even sure where that 50/50 chance to stay in the saddle came from. If it is precedent in this arena I don't know about it and if it is official RAW I can't find it. Also, Chile, in the d20 system rolls on a d20 are always better higher. Percentage chances are dictated by the roller (high/low, over/under etc.). Please post your chance next time.

@Mavian

As you can see I don't know about the rule either. I checked the ride skill and nothing says anything about staying in the saddle while unconscious.

Also, as you don't have wild empathy you can't affect the animal's attitude in one way or another.


@Mavian
[spoiler]

[Mavian]

The 50/50 thing is listed in the ride skill for not falling off. I was the one who proposed the unconscious people have a chance to fall off horses addendum to it because I have a feeling I'm going to be stuck chasing around a bloody horse for the next 30 rounds.

The horse/poison thing was resolved earlier.

And I just have a straightedge I put on the monitor to draw lines. Don't need no fancy paint program that way.

[chilepepper]

It's not listed in the ride skill, at least not in the SRD. However, it is listed in the mounted combat section. The relevant text is:

If You Are Dropped

If you are knocked unconscious, you have a 50% chance to stay in the saddle (or 75% if you’re in a military saddle). Otherwise you fall and take 1d6 points of damage.

Without you to guide it, your mount avoids combat.
The rules clearly say that you get a 50% chance to stay in the saddle at the point you are knocked unconscious. It goes on to say the mount avoids combat, so the mount moving after the rider falls unconscious is dealt with and it never mentions a need for another check to stay in the saddle.

The horse poison thing: the poison was thrown on my opponents turn, so a second exposure and save would have been necessary, but not until her following turn. The horse was already out of the poison by then. The secondary damage save is happening on the bottom of the 15th round.

BTW, sorry about not stating prior to rolling the d2, I assume it's just the nature of d20 since that was a specific point in the change from 2nd edition. One of the designers said, '...higher is always better in d20.'

[Talic]

Initiate Ref Talic
Also located in the equipment section, under Saddles:



Military
A military saddle braces the rider, providing a +2 circumstance bonus on Ride checks related to staying in the saddle. If you’re knocked unconscious while in a military saddle, you have a 75% chance to stay in the saddle (compared to 50% for a riding saddle).

[chilepepper]

RAW would seem to indicate a need to check when knocked unconscious, not while unconscious.

[chilepepper]

I guess I'll go ahead with the next round.

Round 8
Run to Z26

refs
HP: 5
AC: 23 T:14 F:19 (not including unconsciousness)
DR 10/magic (vs ranged)
Spells: 1,3
Buffs: Mage Armor 8/600, Shield 7/10, Protection from Arrows 6/1200 (0/20 dmg)
Position: Z26, mounted, unconscious

[Mavian]

When you move out of Z2, I'm going to attempt to reach out and grab Chile and trip him off his mount.

Touch Attack: [roll0] - This provokes an AoO from Chile.
If it hits, we have opposed Trip Checks [roll1]

[chilepepper]

What let's you attack when it's not your turn?

[Mavian]

Moving through a threatened square provokes an attack of opportunity. Any attack of opportunity can be any form of attack including trips, sunders, disarms and grapples.

[chilepepper]

Except you don't threaten. (and it's actually leaving a threatened square provokes)

[Mavian]

Yes I do. Armor spikes for the win.

[chilepepper]

AAAhhhhrrrgggghh. I totally forgot about the armor spikes. Alright, lemme figure my math.

[chilepepper]

Okay, the touch attack hits.

So I can use Dex at -5, Str at -4, or Ride at -3.
C'mon, big money, big money, no whammies!
Opposed Trip Check (using ride) [roll0]

edit: Alright, I'm prone in Z2 and the pony is in Z26, I'm willing to call this match a draw

[Mavian]

And a frog-splash for the win.

Coup de gras with Armor Spikes.
[roll0]

[chilepepper]

I'm dead, but I want a rematch. Talic had me roll a sense motive check and applied penalties based on range. Sense motive has no penalties for range and Talic is an initiate judge, he can't invent new rules. I actually passed the sense motive check.

[Bronz]

High Ref Bronz

If I am reading this right, Chile got knocked out of the mount to the ground correct? If that's the case, the ground causes [roll0] points of damage and Chile wakes up (though prone)

[Talic]

I'm dead, but I want a rematch. Talic had me roll a sense motive check and applied penalties based on range. Sense motive has no penalties for range and Talic is an initiate judge, he can't invent new rules. I actually passed the sense motive check.

Spot does have penalties for range however. Potions are diminutive objects. Spot modifier at 100+ feet, plus DC for spotting the potion (+12 size) puts the DC for even seeing the potion at 31. With your spot modifier of +10 at the start of the match, there was no possible way you could have seen the potion via spot. The error was mine in even granting the sense motive check in the first place, based on objects you couldn't observe. Still, as there was no information given to you based on the distance, there is luckily no mechanical impact to that mistake.

Further, it is against rules and policy in the arena as a participant in a match to read spoiler messages that are not directed at you before the match is called.

[chilepepper]

The size modifier for the potion doesn't matter. I'm not trying to see a potion that's hidden. My opponent tried to mislead me into believing she drank a potion. She bluffs by making it look as convincing as possible. My sense motive success means there was something about the way she pretended to drink the potion that I didn't buy. If spot comes into play, then we're talking about me seeing that the liquid is still in the vial, or the stopper was never removed, or something to that effect. That would then grant a +20 modifier to my sense motive because the bluff is basically impossible to believe. So if you're going to penalize me based on range penalties for spot to see the vial, then I get a spot check. You don't just carry those penalties to any other check you want. If I fail the spot, then I can't see the details of the vial, but I can still see my opponent who isn't hiding. I can still see her trying to bluff me into believing she's drinking something. And I still get a sense motive check, which I passed.

As for reading the spoiler.

Any actions done without LoS are posted in spoilers. Also, if one character is hiding and the other fails his Spot check, the hiding character gets to post in spoiler blocks, but gets to peek in the spotting character's actions as well. This is an honor system, so integrity is very important. Any accusations of cheating will be investigated by the High Referees.

That's the rule. I understand the intention of posting in spoilers, and I'm not arguing that participants can look in spoilers when they shouldn't. The match was over, even if it wasn't officially called. If the match is over, there's no reason I can't look in spoilers.

[Talic]

Potion had relative concealment (in a hand). Being out in the open only goes so far, Chile. The termite on the wide open plains of Agave isn't visible at 300 yards. A caster flying at a quarter mile up isn't going to see the copper piece lying on the ground by the well. At 1/3 the distance of a football field, even the best vision won't pick up the clues you're trying to pick up. In the instance of trying to determine whether the potion that your opponent pretended to drink was actually drank relies on visual details of the potion or of the opponent. These details range from a lack of swallowing, lack of liquid movement, or presence of a cork, but all rely on precise vision of a diminutive object with at least partial concealment... At 105 feet.

Further, on review, your opponent was attempting to perform actions which are ruled by Sleight of Hand moreso than Bluff. Sleight of hand, under close observation, is opposed by spot.

As for the match being over...

No, it wasn't. Matches are not over until a high ref calls them. That's the REASON that matches are called by high refs. If you'll look above, at Bronz's post, then you'll see that there was a factor you hadn't taken into account. A mistake was made, that wasn't caught until after your illegal viewing of the text. That also, has potential game impact, in that you were quite possibly conscious when the coup de grace was listed. Regardless of whether or not you were correct in the above call, you were wrong in this. The spoiler system is listed as an on your honor system. Please follow it.

[Kyeudo]

GM Kyeudo

Talic, could you please calm down?

It has previously been established that we are not playing by regular physics. We are playing by D&D's RAW. Common sense only factors in when A) the RAW contradict themselves, B) the RAW are broken and need fixing to be used, or C) the RAW don't cover it.

As such, Talic should not have applied a penalty to the Sense Motive check. However, I don't see where succeeding that Sense Motive check would have changed the outcome of the match, as Chile II did not act in any way as though his Acid Breath Weapon was useless.

While Talic is technicaly right that spoilers shouldn't be read until the match is officialy called, Chile II was dead, so this can be overlooked. Also, it looks like the damage that Bronz rolled drops Chile II to the negatives, so even though that coup de grace couldn't have happened, Chile is still out for the count.

Unless Chilepepper and/or Mavian has some argument that the course of the match would have differed based on the information from the Sense Motive check, I don't see a reason to grant a rematch.

[Paladin Latham]

High Ref Paladin Latham

Um... O.K. Kyeudo says he won sooo..

Roberts is declared the winner and recieves 300xp and a dashing picture of himself standing atop a pile of gold (he even steals the 300gp after the picture is taken! Yaharr!)

Edit: ... this rematch doesn't sit well with me. I don't see how something so small affected the outcome. There have been dozens of matches that had mistakes like that.

[chilepepper]

How could it have not made a difference?

[chilepepper]

High Ref Paladin Latham

Um... O.K. Kyeudo says he won sooo..

Roberts is declared the winner and recieves 300xp and a dashing picture of himself standing atop a pile of gold (he even steals the 300gp after the picture is taken! Yaharr!)

No, Kyeudo said unless I have an arguement. I'd be nice if you waited to see what I had to say.

[chilepepper]

Knowing that my opponent might have had the sleep poison in hand makes a huge difference. If it didn't make a difference, there would have been no need for the bluff.

[Talic]

The success of the sense motive would not have given you information that he had a sleep item. Only that he was holding a potion that he did not actually drink. Had I deemed the success of your action, the response that would have been listed would have been "your opponent didn't drink from the vial in his hand." Terminology would have been identical to your opponent's usage at the start of the match.

Let me ask you this. Why did you use the breath weapon on your opponent just before you were knocked out? I'm trying to get an idea of the thought process that clued you in on the possibility that he wasn't warded.

[chilepepper]

I didn't say anything about knowing the sleep poison was in hand. I said 'knowing the poison might have been in hand.'

If the contents of the vial were not consumed, that means my opponent is walking around with either poison ready to throw or potion ready to drink. Either could be a readied action. Having an empty vial in hand means a move action to draw the poison.

[Talic]

Whether or not I used my breath weapon and when doesn't have any bearing to this discussion.

Yes, it does. It was the last action you performed prior to being knocked out. It was also the only action you made after the bluff check. Knowing your thought process for the action gives people the rationale, and what logical reasoning there would be for a change. For example, if you thought the potion was drank, then you would have known that 1d6 had no chance of damaging him, and thus, no chance of entangling him. The only reasoning I can see, is that for some reason you thought that he might not have drank the potion.

And if that is the case, then you had no reason to believe it was a potion, and not a sleep toxin. If you thought the potion drink might not have been done, then you allowed yourself the possibility that whatever vial was in his hand was full. You had to have allowed the possibility, for whatever reason, or you wouldn't have performed an attack that deals 1d6 against a resistance of 10.

By this logic, if you made that breath attack (which you did) based on some clue, believing his vial wasn't drank, then you should have known the vial in hand wasn't drank; I.E. it was full.

From there, you would have made the false assumption that it was a potion, and not sleep smoke. And that would attribute the loss of the match to player error. If you had not done the breath, then yeah, you have a pretty good case for "I didn't know". But the breath itself is a bet that the potion wasn't drank. If the potion wasn't drank, then that bet is also that the vial in his hand is full. Your bet was right on both counts, and you just misidentified the item, by the best interpretation I've got, without your input.

[chilepepper]

It was also the only action you made after the bluff check.


The bluff was in round 1, the breath was in round 5. Care to recheck your math.


Knowing your thought process for the action gives people the rationale, and what logical reasoning there would be for a change.

I just gave the logical reasoning for wanting a change. Not having a full vial in hand not only means an additional move action to use it, and the ability to use is as a readied action. That would drastically change my tactics.


For example, if you thought the potion was drank, then you would have known that 1d6 had no chance of damaging him, and thus, no chance of entangling him. The only reasoning I can see, is that for some reason you thought that he might not have drank the potion.

Knowing that the vial was empty is different from thinking the vial might possibly be empty. Taking a risk based on an assumption is completely different from making a calculated move based on fact.


And if that is the case, then you had no reason to believe it was a potion, and not a sleep toxin. If you thought the potion drink might not have been done, then you allowed yourself the possibility that whatever vial was in his hand was full. You had to have allowed the possibility, for whatever reason, or you wouldn't have performed an attack that deals 1d6 against a resistance of 10.

By this logic, if you made that breath attack (which you did) based on some clue, believing his vial wasn't drank, then you should have known the vial in hand wasn't drank; I.E. it was full.

From there, you would have made the false assumption that it was a potion, and not sleep smoke. And that would attribute the loss of the match to player error. If you had not done the breath, then yeah, you have a pretty good case for "I didn't know". But the breath itself is a bet that the potion wasn't drank. If the potion wasn't drank, then that bet is also that the vial in his hand is full. Your bet was right on both counts, and you just misidentified the item, by the best interpretation I've got, without your input.
And if you were the one playing this match, then you following your logic is a safe bet. There's no reason to explain my logic in what I did. The simple fact is, you not only overstepped you authority as an initiate judge, you also made a mistake. That led to knowledge being withheld from me that I should have had. What I did without that knowledge is not nearly as important as what I could have done with the knowledge. The simple fact that my opponent could use whatever was in hand as a readied action is more than enough to warrent a possible change in my tactics. Since it is highly likely that my tactics would have been different, the outcome could be different. Therefor, I think a rematch, or backing up to the end of round one is in order.

[Talic]

The bluff was in round 1, the breath was in round 5. Care to recheck your math.

Getting snippy won't resolve the problem any better or more completely. Since I'm the only one still here, it makes sense that I'm trying to actually verify your claim for a rematch one way or the other, hmm? Working against that does what for you, exactly? That said, the check was actually made sometime in round 4, after at least one other judge declined to give you the check at all.


I just gave the logical reasoning for wanting a change. Not having a full vial in hand not only means an additional move action to use it, and the ability to use is as a readied action. That would drastically change my tactics.

How?


Knowing that the vial was empty is different from thinking the vial might possibly be empty. Taking a risk based on an assumption is completely different from making a calculated move based on fact.

True, but putting yourself in range of the sleep attack to do that breath. on the risk, that showed a willingness to risk the entire match for it. If you had any indication that the vial was in fact full, and was possibly filled with a save or lose item, which you've just verified here, then you willingly took a risk. That risk didn't pay off.


And if you were the one playing this match, then you following your logic is a safe bet. There's no reason to explain my logic in what I did.

Which hinders anyone's ability to understand your point of view, if you're not willing to explain it.


The simple fact is, you not only overstepped you authority as an initiate judge, you also made a mistake.

I accept that criticism, as it was upheld by a senior judge. Bear in mind, also, that as a high ref has called this match, the only one who can overrule that is a higher one. If you'd like a good reason to bring him, then I'd suggest having one where the misplay which happened would definately have changed your plan in a specific manner which is incongruous with what happened. Again, snippy doesn't solve this. I'm here because I want to explore your request fully. Why else would I still be here?


That led to knowledge being withheld from me that I should have had. What I did without that knowledge is not nearly as important as what I could have done with the knowledge.

True, for the first point. However, what you could have done with the knowledge is immaterial to what you would have done with the knowledge. You need a concrete reason on what happened, how it affected your tactics, and how you would have acted differently with that information, and WHY. If you want a rematch, you'll at the very least, need that, and it needs to make sense. Otherwise, you were outplayed, and the mistake can't be shown to have definately caused the outcome. That's what's needed to take a win away from someone. Strong evidence that the loss was a direct result of the misplay.


The simple fact that my opponent could use whatever was in hand as a readied action is more than enough to warrent a possible change in my tactics. Since it is highly likely that my tactics would have been different, the outcome could be different. Therefor, I think a rematch, or backing up to the end of round one is in order.
Again, "possible", and "highly likely" aren't enough to take the win from another player... ESPECIALLY when you've provided no reasoning or insight to your overall strategy or goal that would support this.

Mistakes happen, Chile. You've certainly made them, some in my matches. I've made them as well. High refs have made them. Heck, even Kyeudo's made a couple here and there. The fact that there was a play error isn't in question. That's been ruled. I've accepted that. What you need is evidence that that play error directly caused the loss. Not that "it could possibly have maybe caused a change that might have effected the next several rounds of my theorems and strategies, which I cannot be bothered to explain, and thus verify."

That's not a solid position to make your point from. I want you to have the opportunity to make that point, but you're not making it easy.

[Kyeudo]

GM Kyeudo

Talic, you're getting a little overzealous. Please tone it down.

Still, he brings up an important point. For us to believe that the course of the match would be altered, you need to show us that because you were told that he drank a potion of acid resistance you decided to use an acid based breath weapon, but if you had known that he hadn't drank the potion, you would have taken a different course of action.

Talic assumed that you would need to prove a different outcome, but you merely need to prove different circumstances sufficient to grant a reroll of any one action in this match to be granted at least a rewind.

Given the circumstances and your own statements, you already believed that the vial was not what he said it was, even with a falsely failed Sense Motive check, and so Acid Breathed him. How does that differ from being told "He did not actualy drink the potion"?

BTW, in the future, Talic, when the rules don't call out the interpretation of a situation, call a high ref of some sort. Let us screw the rules up. It's kind of our job.

[chilepepper]

The first solid difference I can point out is that if I had known my opponent hadn't drank the potion of acid resistance, I wouldn't have used the scroll of protection from arrows.
The reason I used my breath weapon was because my opponents tactics didn't make sense. If she was immune to the breath weapon, why did she avoid combat? In order to determine if she was immune, I had to use my breath weapon. The use of the breath weapon wouldn't have changed, since if I knew she wasn't immune, I'd use it, as opposed to thinking she might not be immune and using it to find out.
But the second big difference is in my tactics. Being mounted, I can move, breath, move. If my sense motive had been accurately reported, I would know that there was still something usable in my opponents hand. On the chance that it was the poison, I would have waited until I could move breath move. That would have, at the least, meant an even greater range penalty, at most, the lack of a possible shot at all.
It's not really the possibility of her being immune I'm calling out here, it's whether or not her hand held an empty vial or a full one. That makes a tangible difference to my tactics, and to the resulting rolls.

[Mavian]

His actually. Both me and my character are male.

[Kyeudo]

GM Kyeudo

I'm glad there was an explanation for that breath weapon use. I couldn't figure out what you were thinking.

As it seems that your tactics would have undergone a reasonable and logical change, and because simply rewinding this match would be pointless, as the divergant point was in the very 1st round and the reveal that has taken place since would invalidate Roberts's tactics, I declare you two eligible for a full rematch.

You may keep your purchases for the match or get a full refund if you wish.

Do you want a new thread for the rematch, or will you simply reuse this one?

[Mavian]

You know, one thing that wasn't taken into consideration during this entire exchange was the modifiers to sense motive checks. A bluff that your opponent wants to believe gets a +5 modifier, yet no-one has asked Chile if he wanted to believe that my character drank the potion in the first place. Although its probably too late due to the fact that the match has already ended.

[chilepepper]

A) Sorry about the 'she' assumption. For some reason, Mavian seems like a feminine name to me and I assume Roberts is a last name. In my experience, players usually stick to same sex characters. If I have offended, I apologize. The character sheet didn't have a sex listed, I checked.

B) As far as the sense motive modifier...

The target wants to believe you. -5
The bluff is believable and doesn’t affect the target much. +0
The bluff is a little hard to believe or puts the target at some risk. +5
The bluff is hard to believe or puts the target at significant risk. +10
The bluff is way out there, almost too incredible to consider. +20

I wouldn't say Chile II wanted to believe you. If it were 10 minutes later and something happened to trigger a sense motive, then Chile II would want to believe you because that would mean the protection had expired. Chile II would expect you to use it, so it's "believable". Although Chile II would prefer if you didn't use it, I wouldn't argue that it necessarily "puts me at risk" because not using it doesn't mean you can't just use it later. I would assume a zero modifier.

However, that is a very valid point and I would like Kyeudo to rule on that. A -5 modifier would indeed mean failure, and I can't claim I'm unbiased. If the penalty applies, then I will take my loss. If it doesn't then I am fine playing the rematch right here, no need to start a new thread.

[Kyeudo]

GM Kyeudo

I think I would need a more convincing bluff before I'd go giving out that -5 penalty on the Sense Motive check. Here in the Arena, gladiators have probably seen it all. I've seen matches where people were blinded using illusions of pumpkins, so belivability is a little more stringent here.

[Mavian]

I'm just not too keen on the whole rematch thing, mainly due to the fact that my strategy has already been blown out of the water and revealed to my opponent.

[Kyeudo]

GM Kyeudo

Which is why I said you can get a refund on the gear you bought for this match if you want. A simple rewind would leave you in a much worse position, as you'd be stuck with him knowing your strategy and no option to change anything.

So, new thread or not?

[chilepepper]

This thread is fine with me.

[Mavian]

Lets do this.

[chilepepper]

I'll keep my purchases listed in the beginning.

[roll0]

[Mavian]

Initiative = [roll0]

[chilepepper]

Did you take a refund?

[Mavian]

Nope, my items are as listed.

[chilepepper]

I'll start in A13, mounted, move to A7. I'll twiddle my fingers, do a little mumbling, and be done.

refs
Cast mage armor using two 0 level spell slots.

HP: 5
AC: 19 T:14 F:16
Spells: 3,4
Buffs: Mage Armor 1/600
Position: A7, mounted

Done.

[Mavian]

Roberts: Round 1 Redux Starting in Z13 with my crossbow and a potion

Move Action: Z13 to Z8
Standard Action: Drink Potion

End of Turn:

Stats for Refs:

Ha, I'm going to do exactly the same thing as last time. Pretend to drink the vial. Bluff: [roll0]. The thing is, could one of the refs roll the check for him, because if you ask him to do it, he'll instantly know something is up.
Actually, there's no way in hell he can beat the roll, so nobody even needs to roll for him.
Hp: 10
AC: 18, 15, 13
Speed: 30
Position: Z8

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b30/Kyeudo/GlassArena.jpg

[chilepepper]

Rematch Round 2

Move to D2 while drawing my scroll and reading from it, then I discard the sheet of parchment.

Sense Motive [roll0]
Just in case you're ballsy enough to try the same trick.

refs
I don't really care about the sense motive roll. If I did, I'd argue for a +20 modifier since I just saw the same trick. It'll be obvious in the next couple rounds whether or not he drank it. If he is trying to bluff me again, I just don't want any tip-off that I don't buy it.

DC3 caster level check [roll1] for 2nd level scroll

HP: 5
AC: 19 T:14 F:15
DR 10/magic (vs ranged)
Spells: 3,4
Buffs: Mage Armor 2/600, Protection from Arrows 0/10dmg
Position: D2, mounted

edit: Done

[Talic]

Ref Talic

@Mavian

Here for theatric effect


@Chile
Results of sense motive:
Mavian's char seems to have actually drank it this time.

[Mavian]

Roberts - Round 2 Redux

For Refs:

I'm going to delay my move until the next round.


Move Action: Z8 -> W5
Standard Action: No Visible Action

End of Turn

Stats for Refs

Hp: 10
AC: 18, 15, 13
Speed: 30
Position: W5

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b30/Kyeudo/GlassArena.jpg

[chilepepper]

Rematch round 3

Move to G8. Done.

refs
I ready an action to breath if I get LoE in range, my mount readies an action to move if we're attacked.

HP: 5
AC: 19 T:14 F:15
DR 10/magic (vs ranged)
Spells: 3,4
Buffs: Mage Armor 3/600, Protection from Arrows 0/10dmg
Position: G8, mounted

[Mavian]

Roberts - Round 4 part deux

Move Action: W5->V10
Standard Action: Ready an Action

Ready an action to take a shot at Chile's mount if LoE is established, and then 5 foot step.


End of Turn:

Stats for Refs


Hp: 10
AC: 18, 15, 13
Speed: 30
Position: V10

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b30/Kyeudo/GlassArena.jpg

[chilepepper]

Now we're in round 4

Move to B2, done.

refs
I ready an action to breath if I get LoE in range, my mount readies an action to move if we're attacked.

HP: 5
AC: 19 T:14 F:15
DR 10/magic (vs ranged)
Spells: 3,4
Buffs: Mage Armor 4/600, Protection from Arrows 0/10dmg
Position: B2, mounted

[Mavian]

Roberts - Round 5 redux

Move Action: V10->Q11
Standard Action: Ready an Action

Ready an action to move if LoS is established


End of Turn:

Stats for Refs


Hp: 10
AC: 18, 15, 13
Speed: 30
Position: V10

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b30/Kyeudo/GlassArena.jpg

[chilepepper]

Why are you a round off?

[Kyeudo]

GM Kyeudo

I think he is counting each turn as one round. Don't worry about it. Round count only matters for short term spells and effects.

[chilepepper]

Rematch Round 5

Move to H7. Done (now it's your turn in the 5th round).

refs
I ready an action to breath if I get LoE in range, my mount readies an action to move if he attacks.

HP: 5
AC: 19 T:14 F:15
DR 10/magic (vs ranged)
Spells: 3,4
Buffs: Mage Armor (ends in R601), Protection from Arrows 0/10dmg (R3602)
Position: H7, mounted

BTW, I know it was a bluff in round 1. If a high ref wants to know how I know, I can explain.

[Mavian]

Round 6 - And yes, I know how to count.

Move Action: Q11->P13
Standard Action: Fire at your Mount
Attack: [roll0]
Damage: [roll1]

[chilepepper]

If your count is correct, could you please explain how you did nothing in round three without posting it, and then denied me my turn in round 4?

[Kyeudo]

GM Kyeudo

Why are you fighting over round count? It doesn't matter unless you have actualy had a turn skipped. Take your turn, Chilepepper.

[chilepepper]

I'm confused, if Roberts count is correct, then he did nothing in round 3, my count is off, and one of my turns got skipped.

[Mavian]

Your right, I didn't do anything in round 3. But that doesn't mean any of your rounds got skipped.

[chilepepper]

...I'll continue the match under the assumption that all is well, but I still need an answer.

Roberts, your movement triggers my readied action. When LoE is established at P13, I breathe,

Entangling Acid Breath
[roll0] Acid (Ref DC15 for half damage)
You are Entangled for [roll1] rounds and take 1d6 acid damage at the beginning of each of my turns during the duration.

If you wish to change your standard action, you may.

[chilepepper]

Your right, I didn't do anything in round 3. But that doesn't mean any of your rounds got skipped.

So the whole rolling initiative thing doesn't matter?

[Mavian]

Why would you think rolling initiative doesn't matter? If we didn't roll initiative, we wouldn't know who goes first in a round.

Reflex Save [roll0]

[chilepepper]

Well, since I won initiative, I should be going first in the round. If you did nothing in round 3, then I would go first in round 4, not the other way around.

Also, are you still taking the shot at Hoofy?

[Talic]

Ref Talic

Rounds are correct, no actions have been skipped. An initiative modifying action seems to have caused the confusion. Currently, Mavian is the first player in each round, Chile is the second.

[Mavian]

Yes, I am still shooting your pony in the face.

[chilepepper]

Ref Talic

Rounds are correct, no actions have been skipped. An initiative modifying action seems to have caused the confusion. Currently, Mavian is the first player in each round, Chile is the second.

That would mean you delayed in round three, and ended delay in round 4 before my action. I want to say that delaying should've been posted, but since initiative counts that don't have anything on them don't actually exist, no actual time passed, therefor it wasn't really a visible action. It also would have no effect on the game other than if you had some continuing effect that ended at the end of your turn. Since effects endings and changes trigger at the beginning of your turn and not the end, the only difference is that you get to say you're first in the round. There might be something I'm missing, and since you tried to keep the delay secret, I wouldn't expect you to explain it to me. I guess you could have some weird round fetish, but my assumption is that you just wanted to mess with my head. Sooo... mission accomplished.


Yes, I am still shooting your pony in the face.

Attacking triggers my ponies readied action and it moves us to P7, blocking your shot.

and now that I understand (at least a little) That makes it my turn in the bottom of the 6th.

You take [roll0] acid damage from the entanglement effect.

I'll move to I4 and breath a normal acid breath.
[roll1] acid (reflex DC15 for half)
And I'm done.

refs

The pony readies another move if Roberts attacks anything.

HP: 5
AC: 19 T:14 F:15
DR 10/magic (vs ranged)
Spells: 3,2
Buffs: Mage Armor (ends in R601), Protection from Arrows 0/10dmg (R3602)
Position: I4, mounted

[Mavian]

You were right, there was a reason that I changed my Initiative around. It was because I figured this would become around of readied actions. And in the case of readied actions, going first has palpable consequences.



If you take your readied action in the next round, before your regular turn comes up, your initiative count rises to that new point in the order of battle, and you do not get your regular action that round.


Which means your turn as written is currently illegal.

[chilepepper]

Well, if delaying as you did causes an actual difference in the game, I would have to argue that delaying from the bottom of the round to the next round is a discernible action and should've been posted outside of spoilers. Even if it's ruled okay to post it in spoilers, I should've seen a post from you saying
Round 3 spoilered text
Round 4 as written

That would've at least made it clear that you meant round 4 and that it wasn't just a typo. Then when I said "Now we're in round 4" you should've clarified that it was actually the middle of round 4 not the beginning. As I pressed for clarification, Kyeudo said round count has no effect except short term spells and effects. I could argue I'm justified in asking for a rewind all the way back to my round 4 posting since that's when the difference would kick in. However, in the interest of time, I'm asking for a rewind to my post at 5:10pm where I say "I'll continue under the assumption..." Since that's arguably where my strategy would differ had I known that your round postings were correct and Kyeudo's statement could be debated being inconsistent with RAW.

[Kyeudo]

GM Kyeudo

He had me confused with the round counting as well. Delay is noticable and should have been announced, as it makes bookkeeping the inititive consequences easier.

As I said earlier, round count only matters for duration buffs. Inititive order is what realy changed, and that does matter.

Here's how things are now:
Roberts was acting first in the turn.
Chile readies an action at the end of one turn.
Roberts, at the begining of the next, triggers it by shooting the horse.
The ready action interrupts Roberts turn and the horse moves. Chile is now top of the round.
The rest of Roberts turn happens.
Chile's turn for the rest of the round is skipped. He is out roughly one move action in the grand scheme of things.
Next round starts. Chile has the highest inititive, so he goes first in this round.
Chile acid breaths Roberts.
It is now Roberts turn.

This is all, of course, dependant upon me understanding the ready action rules well enough.

[Mavian]

If delaying is a noticeable action, then readying has to be a noticeable action as well.

And if that's the case, then I want to rewind back to the beginning of my turn in round 6, because Chile didn't post anywhere that he had readied an action.

[Kyeudo]

GM Kyeudo

Yes, readying an action is noticable, as it takes up a standard action.

If you realy want, we can rewind this. It technicaly is within your rights, as both Chile and his horse readied an action without declaring it.

This thread is quickly devolving into a rules nightmare the like of which I haven't seen since we fired Damionte.

[Talic]

Ref Talic

There's nothing in the SRD to indicate that delaying (i.e. not doing anything) is noticable, other than posting when you act. Mavian did so, for the most part, correctly listing the round he was acting in for each action. The only update that should be noted is that the movement that Mavian noted in his "Round 2 redux" (post 94) actually took place at the beginning of round 3. It produces no effect that would be noticable, other than the round acted in, which was reported.

For the actions, as I see it:

Bottom of round 5, Chile readies an action.
Top of round 6, Mavian moves, triggering Chile's readied action. Chile takes readied action, breathing, and his initiative count changes to immediately before Mavian (next action, round 7).
Mavian continues turn, attacking animal.
triggers readied action of animal (is this allowed? Does it require training, or a specific trick?), resulting in movement. Horse moves in initiative count to the same as Chile's character.
Mavian finishes turn in round 6, and next action is Chile, top of round 7.


One question. Is readying an action for your mount an allowed action without training? Or to be more precise, how complete is a player's control over his mount?

Match on pause, for high ref ruling on issue.

[chilepepper]

IMO, delaying, because you are actually not doing anything, would be noticable. Some readying, like readying a polearm against a charge, would be noticable. Other readies, like ready to move, is not noticeable. I haven't seen anyone, other than Mavian, posting a ready outside of spoilers. As he said in post 12 of this thread
I like to post my actions the way I do so that they're concise, and easy for the refs to follow if there's a need to go over them. I haven't seen anything that would indicate the act of readying is non-spoilerable. Most of the time, you are simply delaying your action to a later time, which is as obvious as not taking the action at all. I haven't seen consistent examples of people saying: move action to here, standard action not taken, free actions not taken, done. But if we are to post readied actions and delay as if it's a noticeable thing, than that's fine, but I haven't seen that rule yet (save the proposed post format from today). If that's the ruling than I guess we should decide how far back we go. As I said, my current vote is going back to between my first breath and the crossbow shot. Mavian, would you like to go back further?

About the mount. Mounts use their own actions, so there's no reason they can't ready an action. RAW says guiding a mount with your knees is a free action. It does not list an action value for guiding a mount normally. Since it's not a free, move, or standard action; there's nothing limiting me to guiding it as part of the mounts move action, like it would normally be if it weren't readied. (Not to mention the fact that Kyeudo already acknowledged the mounts readied action.)

[chilepepper]

Sorry, just reread Talic's recollection of the events so far.

5B Chile readies, pony readies

6A Roberts moves, triggering chile's ready, moving chile from 6B to 6A and using chile's turn, roberts completes move

6Acont Roberts shoots, triggering ponies ready, moving pony to 6A and using pony's turn, roberts finishes shot (or not, but standard is spent)

Roberts turn in 6 is done, chile's turn in 6 is done

Round 7 chile is back on top of the round, moves, spits, moves again

So my move posted was actually legal. That means, as far as I'm concerned, my strategy wouldn't have changed even if I knew about the delay in round 3. As far as I'm concerned, barring the okay from Kyeudo and Mavian, we can continue the match. However, there is the issue of my spoilered ready (I'd call it even-steven cause of the hidden delay) and the question of the pony's ready.

[Kyeudo]

GM Kyeudo

I honestly haven't a clue what to rule on the pony's ready action. As far as I can recall there is nothing in the rules as to the extent of a rider's control of his mount. If I had to rule, I'd probably rule against it, but I'd like to get a few second opinions on the matter from the other refs.

[Talic]

Ref Talic


IMO, delaying, because you are actually not doing anything, would be noticable. Some readying, like readying a polearm against a charge, would be noticable. Other readies, like ready to move, is not noticeable.

While I personally agree on the readied actions, Kyeudo has recently ruled that readied actions are noticable, since they use standard actions. However, since delaying is actually not doing anything, then "No action" is an accurate description of visible effects. Later, you can perform whatever you like, but bear in mind, you cannot interrupt a player's action, as you can with readied actions.



About the mount. Mounts use their own actions, so there's no reason they can't ready an action. RAW says guiding a mount with your knees is a free action. It does not list an action value for guiding a mount normally. Since it's not a free, move, or standard action; there's nothing limiting me to guiding it as part of the mounts move action, like it would normally be if it weren't readied. (Not to mention the fact that Kyeudo already acknowledged the mounts readied action.)

Yes, but as he said, this thread has a lot of rulings issues. I'm merely bringing something to attention, and asking for a ruling by a higher ref. I'm not trying to make any rulings on it. Per SRD, for handle animal:


Combat Riding (DC 20): An animal trained to bear a rider into combat knows the tricks attack, come, defend, down, guard, and heel. Training an animal for combat riding takes six weeks. You may also “upgrade” an animal trained for riding to one trained for combat riding by spending three weeks and making a successful DC 20 Handle Animal check. The new general purpose and tricks completely replace the animal’s previous purpose and any tricks it once knew. Warhorses and riding dogs are already trained to bear riders into combat, and they don’t require any additional training for this purpose.

Attack (DC 20): The animal attacks apparent enemies. You may point to a particular creature that you wish the animal to attack, and it will comply if able. Normally, an animal will attack only humanoids, monstrous humanoids, giants, or other animals. Teaching an animal to attack all creatures (including such unnatural creatures as undead and aberrations) counts as two tricks.

Come (DC 15): The animal comes to you, even if it normally would not do so.

Defend (DC 20): The animal defends you (or is ready to defend you if no threat is present), even without any command being given. Alternatively, you can command the animal to defend a specific other character.

Down (DC 15): The animal breaks off from combat or otherwise backs down. An animal that doesn’t know this trick continues to fight until it must flee (due to injury, a fear effect, or the like) or its opponent is defeated.

Guard (DC 20): The animal stays in place and prevents others from approaching.

Heel (DC 15): The animal follows you closely, even to places where it normally wouldn’t go.

Action
Varies. Handling an animal is a move action, while pushing an animal is a full-round action. (A druid or ranger can handle her animal companion as a free action or push it as a move action.) For tasks with specific time frames noted above, you must spend half this time (at the rate of 3 hours per day per animal being handled) working toward completion of the task before you attempt the Handle Animal check. If the check fails, your attempt to teach, rear, or train the animal fails and you need not complete the teaching, rearing, or training time. If the check succeeds, you must invest the remainder of the time to complete the teaching, rearing, or training. If the time is interrupted or the task is not followed through to completion, the attempt to teach, rear, or train the animal automatically fails.


Handle animal gives specific guidelines for what animals trained for combat riding know. Now, it could be argued that commands to defend, guard, and heel could be reliably set to readied actions. But there's no listing anywhere that suggests that the control over the animal would be any greater than listed above.

Ride checks concerning guiding with knees doesn't appear to allow greater control, only allowing you to have the same level of control without requiring a hand (skill use contrasts number of hands required).

That's the only reason I brought it up. There's no guideline or rule that I can find allowing you to control another creature's actions to that extent.

[chilepepper]

Okay, how about this. We'll nix the ponies readied action for right now. The pony doesn't have a readied action, so it takes the hit from the crossbow while in H7. That puts us at the top of the seventh, Chile's turn. We can finish up the debate about pony readied actions either spoilered in here, or out in the waiting area. The pony won't ready anymore actions in this match. Mavian, if you're okay with that, we can get rolling again.

Here's the SRD section on mounted combat, which is what I was referring to
Mounted Combat
Horses in Combat

Heavy warhorses, light warhorses and warponies can serve readily as combat steeds. Light horses, ponies, and heavy horses, however, are frightened by combat. If you don’t dismount, you must make a DC 20 Ride check each round as a move action to control such a horse. If you succeed, you can perform a standard action after the move action. If you fail, the move action becomes a full round action and you can’t do anything else until your next turn.

Your mount acts on your initiative count as you direct it. You move at its speed, but the mount uses its action to move.

A horse (not a pony) is a Large creature and thus takes up a space 10 feet (2 squares) across. For simplicity, assume that you share your mount’s space during combat.
Combat while Mounted

With a DC 5 Ride check, you can guide your mount with your knees so as to use both hands to attack or defend yourself. This is a free action.

When you attack a creature smaller than your mount that is on foot, you get the +1 bonus on melee attacks for being on higher ground. If your mount moves more than 5 feet, you can only make a single melee attack. Essentially, you have to wait until the mount gets to your enemy before attacking, so you can’t make a full attack. Even at your mount’s full speed, you don’t take any penalty on melee attacks while mounted.

If your mount charges, you also take the AC penalty associated with a charge. If you make an attack at the end of the charge, you receive the bonus gained from the charge. When charging on horseback, you deal double damage with a lance.

You can use ranged weapons while your mount is taking a double move, but at a -4 penalty on the attack roll. You can use ranged weapons while your mount is running (quadruple speed), at a -8 penalty. In either case, you make the attack roll when your mount has completed half its movement. You can make a full attack with a ranged weapon while your mount is moving. Likewise, you can take move actions normally
Casting Spells while Mounted

You can cast a spell normally if your mount moves up to a normal move (its speed) either before or after you cast. If you have your mount move both before and after you cast a spell, then you’re casting the spell while the mount is moving, and you have to make a Concentration check due to the vigorous motion (DC 10 + spell level) or lose the spell. If the mount is running (quadruple speed), you can cast a spell when your mount has moved up to twice its speed, but your Concentration check is more difficult due to the violent motion (DC 15 + spell level).
If Your Mount Falls in Battle

If your mount falls, you have to succeed on a DC 15 Ride check to make a soft fall and take no damage. If the check fails, you take 1d6 points of damage.
If You Are Dropped

If you are knocked unconscious, you have a 50% chance to stay in the saddle (or 75% if you’re in a military saddle). Otherwise you fall and take 1d6 points of damage.

Without you to guide it, your mount avoids combat.

[Mavian]

Actually, I'm more interested on the question of whether readying an action is visible or not.

[chilepepper]

I don't think I've seen any other instance of someone other than you posting anything about readied actions outside of a ref spoiler. I'm going to go check some archives from this arena (with los being perma-extablished). Maybe I'm wrong.

edit: Just looking over Round 26, I found 4 examples of readies in spoilers and 1 example of a ready outside of a spoiler, except for Mavian's posts.

Inside
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3762975
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3763000
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3848660
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3756395

Outside
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3811756%22

[Bronz]

High Ref Bronz

I would just like to interject and say that I have done the same as Mavian as well as BigMac. And I am not privvy to where Kyeudo ruled that they are visible (I can't see how as nothing is happening).

[Kyeudo]

GM Kyeudo

The internet ate my last post, so I'll make this concise.

Taking a standard action should be a visible action, thus readying an action is visible. You can't see what action was readied, but you can see when it is readied.

Riding animals cannot ready actions at the direction of their rider unless the riding animal can communicate with the rider and has an intelligence score of 3 or more.

[chilepepper]

I was going to quote the RAW about "Not an Action" action types, but since the ruling is because of the animals intelligence, I can't disagree. So as far as that goes, the pony couldn't ready an action. I'm fine with the pony not moving and getting shot in the face in H7. We can take it from there.

Since the ruling about readied actions being visible is a new ruling, can I assume it takes effect from this point on?

[Kyeudo]

GM Kyeudo

Yes.

[chilepepper]

Okay to recap.

Top of the 6th

Roberts moved Q11-P13, triggering Chile's readied action (post 102)

Chile breathed an Entangling Acid Breath dealing 1 damage and entangling for 4 rounds (107) since the reflex save failed (109).

Roberts confirmed (112) that the attack on Hoofy still happens (102). Even after the penalties for being entangled, it hits Hoofy for 2 damage.

That puts us at the top of 7th, Chile is now first in initiative again.

Round 7
You take [roll0] acid damage from the entanglement at the start of it's second of four rounds of effect.

Pony's Move Action 1: Move to L11.
Standard Action: Cast a spell
DC10 Concentration check [roll1]
If that succeeds roll a DC14 Will save. (drow +2 applies)

Not done, pending your will save.

Pony's move action 2: Move to H9

Done

edit: stat block for refs

HP: 5/5
Hoofy's HP: 11/13
AC: 19 T:14 F:15
Hoofy's AC: 16 T:11 F:15
DR 10/magic (vs ranged)
Spells: 2,3
Buffs: Mage Armor (ends in R601), Protection from Arrows 0/10dmg (R3602)
Position: H9, mounted

[Mavian]

Roberts -

Free Action: Drop Crossbow
Move Action: Draw Potion
Standard Action: Drink Potion

End of Turn:

Stats for Refs:

Hp: 4/10
Position: O20
AC: 18. 15. 13,:Not including entanglement
Speed: 30 not including entanglement
Bolts: 48v
Resist Acid 10 for 30 rounds

[chilepepper]

Round 8
Well, I'm not gonna try and run away for 30 rounds. Sooo...

Pony move: Move to N11
Standard Action: Cast a spell
I need you to fail a DC 14 Will save please(drow +2 applies)

I'm sure you can figure out what I'm casting. So in the interest of speeding things up, if you make the save, go ahead with your turn.

stat block
The spell is daze, just to be official.

HP: 5/5
Hoofy's HP: 11/13
AC: 19 T:14 F:15
Hoofy's AC: 16 T:11 F:15
DR 10/magic (vs ranged)
Spells: 1,3
Buffs: Mage Armor (ends in R601), Protection from Arrows 0/10dmg (R3602)
Position: N11, mounted

[Mavian]

Will Save - [roll0]

[chilepepper]

You are dazed in round 8.

Round 9
Move action: Draw Spear
Standard action:
Ranged attack [roll0]
Damage [roll1]
Confirm if Crit [roll2]
Crit Damage [roll3]
Pony's move action: Move to H9

Done.

edit: so 1 damage from the spear

[Mavian]

Standard Action: Pick up Your Spear
Move Action: Yawn and put it through my belt

End of turn

Stats for refs:

Hp: 4/10
Position: P13
AC: 18. 15. 13,:Not including entanglement
Speed: 30 not including entanglement
Bolts: 48v
Resist Acid 10 for 29 rounds

[chilepepper]

Round 9

Full round action: Run to B26.

Done.

stats
HP: 5/5
Hoofy's HP: 11/13
AC: 19 T:14 F:15
Hoofy's AC: 16 T:11 F:15
DR 10/magic (vs ranged)
Spells: 1,3
Buffs: Mage Armor (ends in R601), Protection from Arrows 0/10dmg (R3602)
Position: B26, mounted

[Mavian]

Standard Action: Pick up crossbow
Move Action: P13 to P14
End of turn

Stats for refs:

Hp: 4/10
Position: P13
AC: 18. 15. 13,
Speed: 30
Bolts: 48
Resist Acid 10 for 28 rounds

[chilepepper]

Round 10

Double move A10

Done.

stats

HP: 5/5
Hoofy's HP: 11/13
AC: 19 T:14 F:15
Hoofy's AC: 16 T:11 F:15
DR 10/magic (vs ranged)
Spells: 1,3
Buffs: Mage Armor (ends in R601), Protection from Arrows 0/10dmg (R3602)
Position: A10, mounted

[Mavian]

Move Action: P14 to N15
Standard Action: Take a pot shot at your pony.

Attack Roll: [roll0]
Damage: [roll1]

[chilepepper]

That's a miss, especially considering you crossbow is not loaded. No?

[Mavian]

Hmm, that's a good point. Oh well

[chilepepper]

Move to C1.

Done.

[Kyeudo]

GM Kyeudo

Chile II is the Winner!