Arena Tournament, Round 49: Chile IV and Glunk vs Greenscales and Dusker

[ArenaManager]

Arena Tournament, Round 49: Chile IV and Glunk vs. Greenscales and Dusker

Map:
http://i190.photobucket.com/albums/z83/Bitzeralisis/Arena%20Tournament%20Maps/Arena-Base-Map.gif
The Arena walls for this map are 30 ft high, with a Climb DC of 30. The pillars are 10 feet tall with a Climb DC of 20.


XP and GP Awards:
1st: 1200XP and 1100GP
2nd: 400XP and 500GP
3rd: 200xp and 200GP

Chilepepper - Chile IV (http://www.thetangledweb.net/forums/profiler/view_char.php?cid=10467)
Mavian - Todd (http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheets/view.php?id=31584)
Talic - Greenscales (http://www.coyotecode.net/profiler/view.php?id=3565)
theterran - Dusker (http://www.coyotecode.net/profiler/view.php?id=3947)

SoD - Glunk (http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheets/view.php?id=49518)

All Combatants, please roll initiative.

edit: Glunk has been substituted for Todd. Relevant posts and links are in this thread.

[Talic]

Init to win it: [roll0]

No current purchases planned, though that could change, with ally/opponent purchases.

[chilepepper]

HEY! That's my line. [roll0]

[theterran]

Hehe...same here :smallamused:

[roll0]

[chilepepper]

Near as I can tell, Mavian hasn't been on since 6/25. I've PMed, but things are not looking good. If my partner doesn't show, I'll still have a go at the two of you. My right to fight is set by precedent I believe.

[Talic]

I see his last post as 6-25, and his last logon as 8-02. Still, I've no problem with double-teaming you. Heh. That said, I do believe there's another level 2 in the queue. We may be able to petition a replacement, if he's checked, corrected, and it's approved by Kyeudo.

Edit: Oh, and yes, that was your line. If I'm to be taking your life, I might as well start with your rhetoric. Heh.

[chilepepper]

We may be able to petition a replacement, if he's checked, corrected, and it's approved by Kyeudo.

I would be fine with that. But we'll wait and give Mavian a chance.

[Talic]

I would be fine with that. But we'll wait and give Mavian a chance.

Of course. That was offered as a last resort solution.

On a side note, purchases/etc are still being discussed with my teammate. It'll be more final once we determine whether or not replacement for Mavian will be done, and after we get all settled in on strategy. I must say, I'm interested in seeing how the awesomesauce that was chile IV translates into level 2 competition.

[chilepepper]

awesomesauce

You keep stealing my words. Although, admittedly, I don't know if I've used that word here. In a Maptools campaign I'm in, it's my OOC catch phrase. I pull some tactical trick I learned or came up with here and the other players ask "what was that?!?" Awesomesauce.

edit: but I wouldn't classify Chile IV as awesomesauce. His level 1 career was rather doldrum. If I remember correctly, I won 1 match and the rest were handed to me.

[Talic]

Oh? I might have been thinking of Chile II, whose swathe of destruction across his tournament was pretty much unopposed. Grr me and my work website proxy blocks. I'll have a solid look at your character in the AM, on a non-work PC, and we'll see what I can formulate. Greenscales is one of my better chars, I believe, unless you consider Bobo's ability to use aerial bombardment and Summon Dire Hawk. I liked TEMBWBAM, but that was an idea before its time. Next time, I'll shoot for a character that can make a 6d6 alchemist's fire flat footed touch attack at level 2.

[chilepepper]

theterran, are you okay with switching SoD's character with Mavian's?

[Talic]

In the event that mavian times to three days, which, I think is about to happen. happened.

[theterran]

I have no issues with switching out Mavian's character since he's apparently no longer participating...

[chilepepper]

Alright, the okay from Kyeudo is here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4953926&postcount=1038).

Sending SoD a PM.

[SoD]

Glunk

"Gragh! Lets do this! Me will water orc orc you to death!"

I'm in. [roll0]

Purchasing: 1 potion of bull's strength.

[Talic]

I'll edit in your character information shortly. I don't have any purchases in response to SoD's. Scratch that. I have a purchase. Gimme a minute.

Buying a Feather Token - Whip.

Edit: Willing to Solo this if partner is officially DQ'd by a ref.

[chilepepper]

I have no purchases, waiting on theterran and SoD for further purchases, or the okay to start.

edit: The ArenaManager has edited in the new roster info.

[SoD]

No more purchases. I'm chargin' in with only me weapons, armour an' a drink fer half time!

[Talic]

I would appreciate giving Terran until the end of monday, even though the technical time expires before then. I do recall in earlier matches against him, he stated that he's typically offline during weekends. I know that we're under no obligation to honor that, but frankly, I think it'd be a bit iffy on me taking out both of you. One or the other I'm relatively confident I've got enough tricks for... Both is a tall order.

[theterran]

No purchases here...

Who ever is up...go ahead.

[Talic]

Current initiative order is:

Chile IV
Glunk
Dusker
Greenscales

As LOS does not exist, place starting locations in spoilers, as well as items in hand. Game on!

My Stats:Location: Y13
In hand: gauntlet (equipped), guisarme (1 hand grip), potion invisibility
HP: 24/24
AC: 15 (+3 armor, +2 Dex)
Saves: +7/+2/-2
Abilities: Rage (unused)
Effects on self: None

[chilepepper]

Sent a PM to SoD, waiting for a reply before I take my turn. In the meantime, I'll get my stats ready.

Starting info for those with LoS

I'll start in B13 with the Scroll and wand in one hand, and the other hand free. My tent is left out of the Arena.

and my stats
HP 6/6
AC: 17 T15 F12 (Armor 2, Dex 5)
Spells: W5/S5 // W4/S4 // Ice Knife
Effects:
In Hand: Scroll (TS, Sh, Inv, ER) and wand // nothing
Location: B13

[SoD]

Glunk, pre-rounds

Starting Info: Start B14, with potion in hand, wearing light armour (whichever one I've got...)

Battle State: HP 25/25
AC: 15 (Touch 12, FF 13)
In Hand: Potion (Bull's Strength)
Location: B14

[chilepepper]

Round 1 - Chile

refs, GlunkCast from the scroll. Move to E20.

Listen DC ? (higher than 13) to hear that I'm casting a spell from the starting location. If you beat the check by 10, then you can attempt a spellcraft check.

stats
HP 6/6
AC: 21 T15 F16 (Armor 2, Dex 5, Shield 4)
Spells: W5/S5 // W4/S4 // Ice Knife
Effects: Shield 1/10
In Hand: Scroll (TS, Sh, Inv, ER) and wand // nothing
Location: E20


Done. Glunk's turn.

[Talic]

@Refs:Reactive listen: [roll0]
Reactive Spot: [roll1]

[SoD]

Glunk, round I

Move Action: Move to D21.
Standard Action: Ready Action. If someone targets Chilie with a ranged weapon or spell, move in between the two.

Battle State: HP 25/25
AC: 15 (Touch 12, FF 13)
In Hand: Potion (Bull's Strength)
Location: D21

Done, Duskers move.

[theterran]

Dusker - Round 1

Actions (viewable to Talic):
Starting in Y14 with a spiked chain in one hand and a potion of SoF in the other, I will Drink the Potion, drop the vial and move to S14.

Free Action, place other hand on spiked chain.

[roll0]
[roll1]


End my Turn.

Stats:
Location: S14
HP: 17/17
AC: 20 Touch: 16 FF: 16
In Hand: Spiked Chain
SoF (1/10)
Boots (0/3)

Spell Slots:
Level 0 - 3/3
Level 1 - 3/3

Maneuvers:
Sapphire Nightmare Blade, Shadow Blade Technique, Clinging Shadow Strike, Stone Bones

[Talic]

My actions, Round 1 (viewable to theterran):
Starting in Y13, gauntlet and potion in hand. Move to S15. Drink potion, disappear. Hide: [roll0]
MS:[roll1]

End Turn. LOS and Chile's up.

Location: S15 invis. DC 31 to notice presence of invis (+1 per 10 feet), DC 51 to pinpoint square)
In hand: gauntlet (equipped), guisarme (1 hand grip), empty vial in off hand.
HP: 24/24
AC: 15 (+3 armor, +2 Dex)
Saves: +7/+2/-2
Abilities: Rage (unused)
Effects on self: Invisibility 1/30

[Morbius]

High Ref Morbius


LOS

Chile IV
You only see Glunk

Glunk
You only see Chile

Greenscales
You see only Dusker on S14

Dusker
No LOS

[chilepepper]

Round 2 - Chile

GlunkFree action to point, indicating I'm moving southeast

refsSwift Action - Activate Law Devotion- +3 attack
Move to I26.
If LoS is established during move I'll adjust course and finish turn differently.
If not, I'll ready an action to use the Bag of Boulders on LoS.

stats
Spot+5 / Listen+4
HP 6/6
AC: 21 T15 F16 (Armor 2, Dex 5, Shield 4)
Spells: W5/S5 // W4/S4 // Ice Knife
Effects: Shield 2/10
...Law Devotion: 1/10 (attack)
In Hand: Scroll (TS, Sh, Inv, ER) and wand // nothing
Location: Moving from E20 to I26

Need a ref to adjudicate my actions and pass the turn to Glunk.

[Maurkov]

High Ref Maurkov

Not a LoS check.

@chile, refsI was going to pitch in on this match, but I had no idea what you're up to.

I don't have access to the text of Launch Item. Can you post it?

As for manipulating two items in one hand (scroll, wand), Is that allowed? It's not a big deal since your other hand is free and switching items back and forth is free, but it ought to be answered, since you can't take additional free actions during your readied action.

If you could spend the extra few keystrokes to type out the spell names, I wouldn't have just spent 5 minutes figuring out what you meant by a scroll of Sh. Shocking Grasp? Shield? And that's just in core.

Looking at your character sheet, you're carrying a "bag of boulders" that weighs nothing. Which lead me to examine the rest of your gear. You've got

tanglefoot bags 8 lbs
acid 2
alchemist's fire 2
MW artisan's tools 5
spell pouch 2
leather armor 15
and... boulders ???
(you left your tent at home)

So, how many boulders do you have, and how much do they weigh? Even if that's zero boulders, you're carrying a medium load, and your speed is 30'. E20 is 35' from the closest corner of your starting position.

In going from E20 to I26, are you going around or over the ziggurat? I'll hazard that that's another move beyond your speed, but withhold judgment until you plot it out for me.

[Morbius]

High Ref Maurkov

Not a LoS check.

@chile, refsI was going to pitch in on this match, but I had no idea what you're up to.

I don't have access to the text of Launch Item. Can you post it?

As for manipulating two items in one hand (scroll, wand), Is that allowed? It's not a big deal since your other hand is free and switching items back and forth is free, but it ought to be answered, since you can't take additional free actions during your readied action.

If you could spend the extra few keystrokes to type out the spell names, I wouldn't have just spent 5 minutes figuring out what you meant by a scroll of Sh. Shocking Grasp? Shield? And that's just in core.

Looking at your character sheet, you're carrying a "bag of boulders" that weighs nothing. Which lead me to examine the rest of your gear. You've got

tanglefoot bags 8 lbs
acid 2
alchemist's fire 2
MW artisan's tools 5
spell pouch 2
leather armor 15
and... boulders ???
(you left your tent at home)

So, how many boulders do you have, and how much do they weigh? Even if that's zero boulders, you're carrying a medium load, and your speed is 30'. E20 is 35' from the closest corner of your starting position.

In going from E20 to I26, are you going around or over the ziggurat? I'll hazard that that's another move beyond your speed, but withhold judgment until you plot it out for me.

High ref Morbius

@ Maurkov, chile refs
Basically launch item allows him to throw an item like alchemist's fire at the range of 100 ft without range penalties, bag of boulders is an item from Magic Item Compendium, I don't remember how much it weights but I don't think it's much.

I agree with Maurkov on the guess what spell I just cast situation.
And the hold several items on one hand topic was discussed before but I don't remember where or the result.
EDIT: Chile has 40 ft move, he has enought move to go there

[chilepepper]

@refs
Wow, why do I make so many mistakes with my characters. I'm sorry, as I have erred. First, let me answer everything.

Launch ItemLaunch Item
Transmutation
Level: Sorcerer/Wizard 0
Components: S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Touch
Target: One Fine item in your possession, weighing up to 10
lb.
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: None
Spell Resistance: No
You hold the itemand windmill your armin an underhanded toss.
When it leaves your hand, it is bathed in an orange glow and flies far-
ther than you could throw any item.
You cause a Fine itemin your possession to fly at great speed
to a target or location you specify, out tomediumrange (100 ft.
+ 10 ft./level).
This spell is normally used to launch dangerous items
(flasks of acid, thunderstones, and so on) farther than you
could normally throw them. You can use this spell to make an
attack with a splash weapon. If you choose to do so, you must
make an attack roll as normal, but you suffer no penalties for
range.
Source: Spell Compendium 3.5 (SpC)

Bag of Boulders weighs 1#.

Holding multiple items: As previously ruled by Kyeudo (in one of my previous matches) there is a difference between Holding and Wielding. You cannot wield more than one thing in your hand. By RAW, you can hold as much as you want, up to maximum carrying capacity, and there's no restriction on how you hold it. I could be holding everything in one hand. While the feasibility may be argued in the extreme, holding a stick and a piece of paper in one hand is feasible, so there's no reason to challenge RAW. If an invisible person can drop a scroll and read it from the ground, then I assume it needs no manipulation, I just have to be able to read it.

Sorry about the spells, I'll have that corrected in my next stat block. It was in fact Shield. I didn't mean to make more work for you, as I know how much effort it takes to ref things. For immediate reference, the scroll has True Strike, Shield, Invisibility, and Expeditious Retreat.

Encumberance: I am under medium encumberance, and therefore my speed is reduced to 30'. In round one, I took a standard actoin, then moved. Being a high ref, I assume the best thing to do is shorten the distance traveled. If that doesn't change LoS between round 1 and round 2, then nothing needs to be rewound (double check with SoD of course). In the second round, I tried to move further with a move action than is possible. Precedent would indicate a rewind to that point, I will simply follow the same path, going around the corner, getting as far as possible. The rest of my turn as stated can stand.

Start > D18 > F23

I hope I've given enough information to rectify the situation. Sorry for the hassle.

[Talic]

So, is Glunk up?

[Maurkov]

Somebody still needs to do a LoS. I'll get to it late tonight tomorrow morning if nobody gets there first.

Edit: Sorry, I'm wiped.

[Talic]

@Dusker:Free Action: Speak(quietly):

If you want, I can scout ahead, get an advantage. They can't see me. If that sounds good, just wait for me to move first.

[Maurkov]

High Ref Maurkov

LoS:

@GlunkYou see Chile in F23. He had to redo his moves because he is encumbered. Start > D18 > F23@DuskerYou see no one.@GreenscalesYou see Dusker at S14. You see Chile stop in F23. You don't think Dusker has the angle to see him, though.@ChileI am mollified.
If an invisible person can drop a scroll and read it from the ground, then I assume it needs no manipulation, I just have to be able to read it.One could argue that a scroll with multiple spells must be manipulated, but I won't. Your new moves look fine, and I've updated those that can or have seen you.

You see Glunk in D21
Glunk's turn.

[Bayar]

If an invisible person can drop a scroll and read it from the ground, then I assume it needs no manipulation, I just have to be able to read it.



I hate you guys

And no one told me that option :mad:

[chilepepper]

And no one told me that option :mad:

bayar
That's because refs can't suggest tactics to a match participant.

Nothing important, just some banter.

[Talic]

@Dusker:Free Action (speak quietly): I see one. Southwest. Both probably there. If you wait, I'll get by him, counter anything he does. Will drop vial when I move as signal.

Edited to comply with ref ruling, and an error correction.

[SoD]

Glunk, round II

Chile can see.
Move to E22

Need LoS.

[Morbius]

High Ref Morbius

I smell, something wrong...
LoS:


@GlunkYou see Chile in F23.

@DuskerYou see no one. Ignore Talic's message, Maurkov made a mistake about positioning there is not LOS

@GreenscalesYou see Dusker at S14. I am afraid Maurkouv was mistaken there is no LOS to any opponent, you did not see chile anywhere so far

@Chile
You can see what Glunk posted above

@refs
This is a side view from the arena to make things more simple

http://img144.imageshack.us/img144/2379/templesidehl6.png (http://imageshack.us)
PS: It ignores the squared corners

[Talic]

@morbius, refs:I actually pegged LOS to chile when I verified it. Distance between myself and chile: 85 feet (factoring in diagonals for south and west, and diagonals for south and lowering elevation).

Assume my point of vision is at S15 (elevation 15). I.E. My eyes are on the top of my body (which is standing on ground at elevation 10). From S15 to M19 is 40 feet. Anything after M19 is past the covering obstacle (the elevated plateau). So, for every 5 feet of visibility I gain going down, I must look out 40 feet. Thus, at M19, I can see Elevation (10). At G23 (80 feet out), I can see to elevation (5). That means at F23 (85 feet out), I can barely see into the Elevation (0) square. Not denying the guy gets cover, but I should just barely have LOS.

[Morbius]

@morbius, refs:I actually pegged LOS to chile when I verified it. Distance between myself and chile: 85 feet (factoring in diagonals for south and west, and diagonals for south and lowering elevation).

Assume my point of vision is at S15 (elevation 15). I.E. My eyes are on the top of my body (which is standing on ground at elevation 10). From S15 to M19 is 40 feet. Anything after M19 is past the covering obstacle (the elevated plateau). So, for every 5 feet of visibility I gain going down, I must look out 40 feet. Thus, at M19, I can see Elevation (10). At G23 (80 feet out), I can see to elevation (5). That means at F23 (85 feet out), I can barely see into the Elevation (0) square. Not denying the guy gets cover, but I should just barely have LOS.

High Ref Morbius

refs, talic
Hum... that is a very complicated formula... before I fry my brain trying to understand that, is it still valid when you realize that S15 is elevation 10 only?(or are you enlarged?)
EDIT: also for some reason I fail to see LOS here (I believe there are about 4 squares or more between you and the position Maurkov said Chile was if he was there anyway...
http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/4286/templeside2mm1.png (http://imageshack.us)

[Talic]

High Ref Morbius

refs, talic
Hum... that is a very complicated formula... before I fry my brain trying to understand that, is it still valid when you realize that S15 is elevation 10 only?(or are you enlarged?)

@morbius/refs:
S15 is elevation 10. That means that the surface my feet are on is 10 feet up. My eyes are roughly 5 feet above that, unless I'm prone.

[Morbius]

High Ref Morbius

refs, talic
Also for some reason I fail to see LOS here (I believe there are about 4 squares or more between you and the position Maurkov said Chile was if he was there anyway...
http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/4286/templeside2mm1.png (http://imageshack.us)

[Talic]

@Refs/Morbius:
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w85/maharai23/templeside2mm1.png

Your blue line's a bit thick, and whereas it starts using its center to show my LOS, at the point where the blockage is, it uses the bottom. I overlaid a thinner line to illustrate. By narrowing the line to 1 pixel wide, it eliminates the center vs. top/bottom of the line issue.

EDIT: Granted, this is a bit oversimplified, as it doesn't factor in the 3rd dimension (which adds distance to both the top and bottom, with the whole 2nd-diagonal-is-10-feet thing).

The exact square measurements should be 8 squares at elevation 10, and 9 squares at elevation less than 10.

[SoD]

Glunk

Move to I22. Total distance moved: 35 feet.

Ready Action: If Attacked attack back. If this isn't possible (due to actions readied), five-foot step five feet to H22


If I see either of them, I inform Chile. Done.

Duskers turn.

Battle State: HP 25/25
AC: 15 (Touch 12, FF 13)
In Hand: Potion (Bull's Strength)
Location: I22

[Maurkov]

High Ref Maurkov


I smell, something wrong...@refsI was going to defend my LoS, but after rechecking it, the line from the south east top edge of F23 to the south east top edge of S15 does touch the edge of the ziggurat at the top of the stairs. :smallyuk: Not sure how the side view makes this one easier.

I'm not certain of the remedy, though. It's impossible to ignore revealed information. Greenscales will establish LoS as soon as he steps west(up) or south, but I wonder if we should allow Chile to redo his last move.Mea culpa.

[Talic]

@Refs:Mea Culpa? There's no cause for Maurkov to be admitting error here.

As best I can determine, there WAS LOS. I've checked the overhead and the side maps. Here's everything I've got, including an overhead pic to show distances and horizontal obstructions, and a side pic to plot the elevation obstruction.

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w85/maharai23/Arena-Base-Map-2.gif

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w85/maharai23/Arena-Base-Map-3.jpg

[theterran]

If everything is a go, I'll post my turn tomorrow (Monday)

Just need someone to give the go ahead.

[Maurkov]

High Ref Maurkov

@Talic, RefsThe problem is the 10' high point at the edge of 19-20. Since Greenscales nearest point is 5' above and 20' away, he can't see anything 5' below and closer than 20' away. Chile's furthest point is 20' away and therefore out of sight. Just.

Any east-west displacement is a distraction.

.........G.
..../......
.C./.......
22222111111
43210987654
Not sure if that's adding to the discussion. My question is about the remedy.

[Talic]

@Maurkov/refs:Due to the way that diagonal distance works in D&D, the east/west is not a distraction. If chile were in S23, your point would have merit. As is, the east/west increases both the distance from me to the obstacle and the distance from the obstacle to chile. Due to this, the line isn't pure vertical and north/south. It's angled, with 40 feet of distance pre-obstruction, 45 feet of distance post obstruction. Plotting the line, as I did, shows the direct path you have to look to see the opposing player. That line travels for 40 feet, encounters the top of the stairs, travels 45 more, and encounters Chile. The secondary picture following it plots the angle of descent for a line with those characteristics.

You can be 5 feet back from a wall, on the top. Look far enough down it to the left and the right, and you'll see inches away from it, even if you can't see closer than 5 feet away right next to you. The east and west cannot thus be a distraction.

I think your basic error here is that you are correlating as if the stairs at S19 are the obstacle, when the stairs at M19 are actually the problem.

However, even if you were right, I don't see that any remedy needs to be made. The only remedies I can think of that could possibly apply would be rewinding and restarting the match. My previous intent for movement was to travel Southwest to the top of the stairs, then Northwest to view the opponent starting area, then northeast, making a full circuit of the arena to find my opponents. If I encountered them, I'd move adjacent if possible. I believe the Southern movement on my previous turn correlates this. Based on that, whether I find him now, or 10 feet into my movement makes no difference. I still have plenty of movement to make it to my goal (adjacent). Thus, there is no major difference between the end results of my next turn.

The possible consequences of a further rewind could be used to garner information about the nature of the error (based on where the rewind was made to), and thus provide information about our position. A full restart would be possible, I suppose, but seems a bit extreme in this instance.

[Maurkov]

High Ref Maurkov


Just need someone to give the go ahead.Go ahead.

[theterran]

Dusker - Round 2


Actions (Greenscales/refs):
Move to O18.

Need LoS Check, Turn not Over.

Stats:
Location: O18
HP: 17/17
AC: 20 Touch: 16 FF: 16
In Hand: Spiked Chain
SoF (2/10)
Boots (0/3)

Spell Slots:
Level 0 - 3/3
Level 1 - 3/3

Maneuvers:


Sapphire Nightmare Blade, Shadow Blade Technique, Clinging Shadow Strike, Stone Bones

[Maurkov]

High Ref Maurkov

Is this another thread that nobody wants to LoS because I showed up earlier? I screwed it up last time, remember?

Edit: ...and this time too. Superceded by the LoS in post 59.

@DuskerWhen you step in Q16 you can see Chile in F23. 15' of your first move action has been completed.
@GreenscalesNo additional LoS.
@ChileNo additional LoS.
@GlunkNo additional LoS.
Still Dusker's turn.

[Talic]

Nah, I think it was my half dozen spoiler blocks that muddled it.

[theterran]

Dusker - Round 2 (cont)

Actions:
Finish my Move to P16. There I will use a move action to put away my spiked chain.

End my Turn.

Stats:
Location: P16
HP: 17/17
AC: 20 Touch: 16 FF: 16 (+2 Pillar not included)
In Hand:
SoF (3/10)
Boots (0/3)

Spell Slots:
Level 0 - 3/3
Level 1 - 3/3

Maneuvers:



Sapphire Nightmare Blade, Shadow Blade Technique, Clinging Shadow Strike, Stone Bones

[Maurkov]

High Ref Maurkov

Dang it. That's another reffing error by yours truly. I blame emotional distress brought on by Talic's cruel and heartless ref calls, here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5060754). Rewind Dusker's last post.

Amended LoS:

@ChileYou see Dusker enter Q16 from the NE, triggering your readied action. He has cover.
@DuskerWhen you enter Q16 and see Chile in F23, he sees you, too.
@GreenscalesYou see Dusker enter Q16.
@GlunkYou see Chile in F23
Chile's readied action is triggered.

[chilepepper]

What was that, like 40 posts ago? *scanning, scanning, scanning* AHA, found it. Wait, where am I again? *scanning, scanning* got it.

For those with LoS to Chile
Chile pulls a small pebble out of a bag and throws it in a line approx. toward Z11 from his location
(big money, biiiig money, no whammies)
[roll0] (-2 range, -2 cover)
[roll1] bludgeoning

For those with LoS to Dusker
A pebble flies at Dusker, possibly hitting

This concludes the hooligan portion of our show, please stay tuned for blood, guts, and gore.

[Maurkov]

High Ref Maurkov

I think you missed anyway, cover (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/combatModifiers.htm#cover) is good for -4.

I believe Dusker now completes his action.

[Talic]

Assuming Dusker's actions stand, I'll make a movement in the morning. I hope they do, though I'm not entirely sure, with what I can only assume was a readied action.

[Talic]

Greenscales actions: (Round 2)

(These will stand as my actions regardless of whether Dusker changes his.)
My actions, Dusker can read:
Just kidding Dusker, but I don't want them to know I'm invisible.

Well, I know something's down there. I just saw the pebble fly. So, without further delay...


Move: S15 to O19. From there I should have clear LOS to Chile in F23 (as was originally 'mistakenly' given to me). That's 30 feet of my 50 movement.

(Free action: At this point, I will drop vial in square P18, in mid movement.)

Continue move to M21 (10 feet for diagonally across and diagonally down.

Apply Move silently and hide to that move:
Hide: [roll0]
Move Silent: [roll1]

Move: From M21 to F24, Following M21 > J24 > F24.
If Chile has some way to see invisible creatures, he may take an AoO when I leave G24. Otherwise, with my total concealment, he may not.

Apply move silently and hide to that move, also:
Hide: [roll2]
Move Silently: [roll3]

All rolls above were made factoring the following:
Hide +20 (invisible) -5 (move above 1/2)
Move Silent -5 (move above 1/2)

Free: Shift weapon grip to two handed. That way, if he provokes from 5 feet away, I can unarmed strike (kick) him, if he 5 foot step and provokes, I can whack him there too.

Free: Activate Rage.

Done, pending ref LOS and dusker's updates, if any.

My Stats:Location: F24 invis. DC 21 to notice presence of invis (+1 per 10 feet), DC 41 to pinpoint square) DC 6 to hear me (+1 per 10 feet distance), DC 46 to pinpoint square through listen.

In hand: gauntlet (equipped), guisarme (2 handed grip)

HP: 28/28

AC: 13 (+3 armor, +2 Dex, -2 Rage)

Saves: +7/+2/+0

Abilities: Rage (used)

Effects on self: Invisibility 2/30, Rage 1/9

[theterran]

I'll keep my actions the same.

[chilepepper]

So we're waiting on LoS to end Greenscales' turn, then Glunk is up (my initiative dropped to between Glunk and Dusker).

[Maurkov]

High Ref Maurkov

LoS. I'm also posting your positions inside your spoiler block. If I get something wrong, correct me. It's been a while since I followed this game.

@GreenscalesYou are invisible.
You began your move in S15 and are now in Q17.

Dusker continued his move to P16. When you reach R16 you first spot Chile in F23. Continuing to Q17, you see Glunk in I22. You have used 15' of move.

@GlunkYou are in I22. You see Chile in F23. He threw something NE up onto the ziggurat.

@ChileYou are in F23. Dusker continued his move to P16. Glunk is in I22.

@DuskerYou finished your move in P16. You can see Chile in F23.

It is still Greenscales's turn.

[Talic]

@Maurkov/Refs:The remainder of my move will stand as posted (post 63), leaving me in final position F24. If I can get LOS from that position, I'd appreciate it.

Done, pending LOS for updated turn info.

[Maurkov]

High Ref Maurkov

LoS update

@refsDoing passive sense checks to see who notices Greenscales.
[roll0][roll1]
[roll2][roll3]

@GreenscalesYou are invisible.
You are in F24.

You still see Dusker at P16, Chile at F23, and Glunk in I22. I realized It's not clear whether your bottle drop is from attempting to be stealthy or attempting to misdirect. I assumed the former (you released it below the LoS of your opponents).
@GlunkYou are in I22. You see Chile in F23.

You hear someone descend the steps to the east, and move southeast to south to southwest of you.
@Chile
You are in F23.
You see Dusker at P16 and Glunk is in I22.

You hear someone descent the steps to the east, and move southeast and then south of you.
@Dusker
You are in P16.
You see Chile in F23.

You see a empty potion flask appear in P18.

Glunk's turn.

[Talic]

@Refs/Maurkov:Stealthy. It's meant to be a signal to Dusker, as my allies can't see me either.

EDIT: Not a holdup in any way, merely a verification of a minor point. Still on Glunk.

[SoD]

Glunk, round..II? III? III, I think.

Move to I18.

Not done, LoS please.

[Talic]

(Yes, it is the top of round 3).

@Refs:Please note, I am invisible. What with my abysmal move silent rolls, it's pretty much a sure thing that chile heard me.... If Glunk was made invisible by chile, and is nearby, he may have too.

[chilepepper]

last stat block reposted for LoS, refs only

Spot+5 / Listen+4
HP 6/6
AC: 21 T15 F16 (Armor 2, Dex 5, Shield 4)
Spells: W5/S5 // W4/S4 // Ice Knife
Effects: Shield 2/10
...Law Devotion: 1/10 (attack)
In Hand: Scroll (TS, Sh, Inv, ER) and wand // nothing
Location: F23

[Mephit]

LoS:

Boy, this took me a long time. Sorry if I messed up, it's a bit of a chaos, so I just made up LoS out of the info on this page. (And the map, of course)

Greenscales
As Maurkov said, you see Glunk in I22, so he's not invisible right now. However, he does move out of your LoS as he walks into I21

Chile
Glunk moves out of your LoS as he walks into I21

Glunk
You spot Dusker in P16 when you walk into I20. You may redo your actions from there.

Dusker
You see Glunk entering I20. He will continue his actions from there.

It's still Glunk's turn.

[SoD]

Glunk

"Grah! I will Water Orc Orc you to de-thuh!"

For those with LoS:
Move to M19.
Standard Action: Drink Potion.
Free Action: Rage.


Battle Stats: HP 27/27
AC: 15 (Touch 12, FF 13)
In Hand: Nothing
Location: M19
Buffs: Bull's Strength 0/30
Rage: 0/9
STR: 30 (+4 potions, +4 rage).
CON: 20.
Will: +0

Done.

[Mephit]

LoS:

Dusker
Glunk refers to his parentage and then moves to M19. He seems to be prepared to attack anyone who nears him.

[chilepepper]

Chile - round 3 - 2nd to act

To help alleviate some of the ref burden, I will openly declare you hear me casting a spell during my turn. (calculating listen modifiers can be a pain)

refs only

I'm adding notes since there's a good chance our new ref may be adjudicating. Please take no offense.

Swift action, reallocate Law Devotion to AC

5' step to F24 if possible
(If Greenscales is in that square, you tell me my move is illegal. I just need to know what square I am in, f23 or f24. Either way I'll still use the scroll.)

Read from my scroll (they have to beat the Listen DC by 20 to get a spellcraft check. If I were reffing, I'd roll the checks to see if anyone is close enough before I figure out the penalties for range, it may be easier for you)
Invisibility
CL DC4 [roll0]
Wis [roll1] (if necessary)
edit: Spell not cast, no mishap
edit: If no one does anything (like Greenscales taking an AoO) then I am done. The ref that tells me what square I'm in and resolves LoS checks can pass the turn.


I'm going to stop there because I may or may not have triggered reactive checks or attacks of opportunity.

Not done. Getting ref.
stats block, refs only

Spot+5 / Listen+4
HP 6/6
AC: 24 T18 F19 (Armor 2, Dex 5, Shield 4, Sacred 3)
Spells: W5/S5 // W4/S4 // Ice Knife
Effects: Shield 4/10
...Law Devotion: 2/10 (ac)
In Hand: Scroll (TS, Inv, ER) and wand // nothing
Location: F23 -> F24 maybe

[Mephit]

LoS:

Everyone hears (and for those with LoS to him, sees) Chile casting a spell.

Refs

Listen Checks:
Dusker: [roll0]
Greenscales: [roll1]]
Glunk: [roll2]
Coyotecode isn't working at this time, I'll add modifiers later. But I doubt it'll matter much.
Edit: The only coming even close is Greenscales. I'll check his modifiers later, but it won't be relevant to the match.


Chile


I'm adding notes since there's a good chance our new ref may be adjudicating. Please take no offense.
No offense taken. But suddenly, you hear rocks falling...

:smallwink:
[/banter]
It is an illegal move to move into F24. Conclude whatever you want from that.

Greenscales

You see Chile (in F23) read something of a scroll (this is the spell everyone hears), lowering his guard.
You're entitled to an attack of opportunity.
Post wether you want to take it or not and if you do, attack roll and such.

Glunk

Nothing else happens.

Dusker

Nothing else happens.

Match is on hold until the participant I specifically adressed in his spoiler replies.

[Talic]

Reply@Me, Refs, Chile, and anyone with LOS to Chile
Wolf Fang Strike!

Just kidding, I'm not an initiator. I do have an AoO to take, though. And I think I'll go with a melee touch attack to grapple (provided it's legal, of course). I will be using unarmed strike, but will not be using gauntlets, as both hands are full. As unarmed strikes aren't limited to hands and arms, and the only requirement is that the grappling character be able to grab, I submit that there are many grappling and wrestling maneuvers which are entirely leg based.

Melee touch attack vs flat footed touch ac: [roll0] (+8 base, +2 rage, +2 invisible)
If hit, opposed grapple check: [roll1] (+12 base, +2 rage)
If grapple succeeds, I move into Chile's square and deal:
[roll2]
I opt to make this damage lethal (Improved Unarmed strike), if damage goes through.

EDIT: I do believe that a 23 will hit flat footed touch AC, and I don't think that you can top the grapple check. Pending any inquiries/disputes, that should put Chile out.

[Mephit]

Refs, Talic, Chile
[quote$I do have an AoO to take, though. And I think I'll go with a melee touch attack to grapple (provided it's legal, of course).[/QUOTE]

I'm not sure about this. An AoO is a single melee attack, and the srd lists a grapple check as a 'Special Attack'. You do need to make a melee touch attack to start a grapple, but initiating a grapple is IMHO not a 'single melee touch attack.

If this is a legal move, however, then Chile is out. He has a mere 6 HP, and there is no way he can beat that grapple check.

This is just my opinion, and I could be forgetting another paragraph in the rules or a line in the FAQ. Feel free to discuss or get another ref involved. :smallsmile:

[Talic]

Refs, Talic, Chile
I'm not sure about this. An AoO is a single melee attack, and the srd lists a grapple check as a 'Special Attack'. You do need to make a melee touch attack to start a grapple, but initiating a grapple is IMHO not a 'single melee touch attack.

If this is a legal move, however, then Chile is out. He has a mere 6 HP, and there is no way he can beat that grapple check.

This is just my opinion, and I could be forgetting another paragraph in the rules or a line in the FAQ. Feel free to discuss or get another ref involved. :smallsmile:


@Refs, Chile:Anything that can be used in the place of a melee attack can be done with an AoO. That includes grapple attempts, trip attempts, and the like. Bull Rush is, I think, the only special attack that you can't use in place of an attack, as it's always a standard action (have to move).

My only issue is the grapple with legs, as I am holding a guisarme 2 handed. Hence why I have the question.

[chilepepper]

@refs, Talic
While unarmed strikes are described as being punches and kicks (paraphrased); you still have to BE unarmed to make an unarmed strike. I feel pretty confident in assuming your hands are full with your reach weapon, therefore you are not in fact threatening me. Is this a correct assessment?

[Talic]

@Refs, Chile:Incorrect. Unarmed strikes need not be made with hands. I know of no rule stating your hands have to be empty to use an unarmed strike.


You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your action. Generally, that means everything in all squares adjacent to your space (including diagonally). An enemy that takes certain actions while in a threatened square provokes an attack of opportunity from you. If you’re unarmed, you don’t normally threaten any squares and thus can’t make attacks of opportunity.

Improved unarmed strike makes me considered armed when making unarmed strikes, so I threaten.


Unarmed Strike

A Medium character deals 1d3 points of nonlethal damage with an unarmed strike. A Small character deals 1d2 points of nonlethal damage. A monk or any character with the Improved Unarmed Strike feat can deal lethal or nonlethal damage with unarmed strikes, at her option. The damage from an unarmed strike is considered weapon damage for the purposes of effects that give you a bonus on weapon damage rolls.

An unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon. Therefore, you can use the Weapon Finesse feat to apply your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier to attack rolls with an unarmed strike.
I see no rule showing that I must have no weapons in hand to make an unarmed strike.

Can you cite the source showing that I must have my hands free to make an unarmed strike, when I am declaring that I'm not using my hands to make the attack (and denying myself the masterwork bonus for my gauntlet)?

As I see it, I'm threatening 5 feet away with unarmed attacks, and 10 feet away with the guisarme.

More Unarmed strike information:

Unarmed Attacks

Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon, except for the following:

Attacks of Opportunity

Attacking unarmed provokes an attack of opportunity from the character you attack, provided she is armed. The attack of opportunity comes before your attack. An unarmed attack does not provoke attacks of opportunity from other foes nor does it provoke an attack of opportunity from an unarmed foe.

An unarmed character can’t take attacks of opportunity (but see "Armed" Unarmed Attacks, below).

"Armed" Unarmed Attacks

Sometimes a character’s or creature’s unarmed attack counts as an armed attack. A monk, a character with the Improved Unarmed Strike feat, a spellcaster delivering a touch attack spell, and a creature with natural physical weapons all count as being armed.

Note that being armed counts for both offense and defense (the character can make attacks of opportunity)

Unarmed Strike Damage

An unarmed strike from a Medium character deals 1d3 points of damage (plus your Strength modifier, as normal). A Small character’s unarmed strike deals 1d2 points of damage, while a Large character’s unarmed strike deals 1d4 points of damage. All damage from unarmed strikes is nonlethal damage. Unarmed strikes count as light weapons (for purposes of two-weapon attack penalties and so on).

Dealing Lethal Damage

You can specify that your unarmed strike will deal lethal damage before you make your attack roll, but you take a -4 penalty on your attack roll. If you have the Improved Unarmed Strike feat, you can deal lethal damage with an unarmed strike without taking a penalty on the attack roll.

Again, I see no rule between items in hand and unarmed strikes. I'm not using my gauntlet weapon, so as best I can tell, that's legit.

[chilepepper]

@ref, talicArmed and unarmed are diametrically opposite. You cannot be armed and unarmed at the same time, you are either one or the other. If you are not unarmed, you cannot make an unarmed attack. Similarly, if you don't have a sword in hand, you can't make an attack with a sword. All the rules for how to handle unarmed attack, improved unarmed strike, etc. are completely moot because you are not unarmed. If you are not unarmed, you cannot make an unarmed strike.

[Talic]

@ref, talicArmed and unarmed are diametrically opposite. You cannot be armed and unarmed at the same time, you are either one or the other. If you are not unarmed, you cannot make an unarmed attack. Similarly, if you don't have a sword in hand, you can't make an attack with a sword. All the rules for how to handle unarmed attack, improved unarmed strike, etc. are completely moot because you are not unarmed. If you are not unarmed, you cannot make an unarmed strike.


@Chile, Refs:Actually, according to the text I gave above, I am making an "Armed" unarmed attack.

Now, you are trying to state that because I have a two handed weapon in my hands, that I cannot kick, or headbutt someone (both listed forms of unarmed attack). Not only does this not make any real world sense, it doesn't have any RAW support.

Unarmed Strike does not equal punch. Arms may be the common method for holding weapons, and you may be limited in the number of weapons you may hold by the number of arms you have, but there is no support, common sense or RAW, that you may only make an unarmed strike while unarmed. If that were the case, then the following would be true.

*Person holding a longsword only cannot use two weapon fighting to attack with an unarmed strike for the off hand attack (note: Off hand is misleading, as you do not need to use a hand to make an off hand attack. Notable RAW support is attacking with a 2 handed weapon and armor spikes). As you are armed with a longsword, you can't be unarmed, right?

In other words, making an unarmed strike is not certifying you are unarmed. It is a game term for a specific type of attack. One that may be delivered via an arm, a leg, a head, an elbow, a knee, or virtually any relatively solid part of your body. It is a reserved game term for a specific attack, and thus, trying to use the dictionary definition of unarmed is cluttering the issue with out of context and irrelevant information.

Yes, you are right. You may not make a longsword attack without a longsword readied. Granted, with prehensile tail or a mouthpick longsword, that longsword could be readied on a tail or mouth. Would you then not threaten with that weapon, if you had a 2 handed weapon in hand?

Similarly, you may not make an unarmed strike unless you have the weapon readied. Luckily, as the weapon is conceivably nearly any part of your body (per SRD), it's hard not to have something readied.

Now, unless you have concrete RAW stating that Unarmed Strikes (with improved unarmed strike feat) do not threaten when a character's hands are full, please concede the point. I've shown you specific RAW stating that an unarmed strike may be made with legs. My legs are free to make that attack.

Thus, I've shown RAW supporting why I can. Could you show RAW stating why I can't?

If you prefer, I'd be happy to request a high ref. Not sure how long we'd have to wait, but if you need a ruling, I'd be happy to fetch one.

In conclusion, RAW states I may make an unarmed strike with a kick. There is no RAW support that I cannot make that attack with a kick if I am holding objects in each hand.

If, by RAW, I am capable of making an attack into that square, then I threaten it.

If I threaten it, and there is no specific text forbidding it, then I may make an attack of opportunity when provoked.

All RAW support is in my previous message.

[Bayar]

@refs, Chile, Talic:

See, the fact that you have a reach weapon in both your hands makes you not threaten adjactent squares. So tehnically, you cant.

Unless that reach weapon can also hit adjactent opponents, like a Spiked chain.

[Talic]

@Bayar, Chile, refs:The reach weapon doesn't threaten adjacent.

The unarmed strike does.

I'm not making an attack with the reach weapon.

As I've said, several times now... Follow with me, PLEASE.

1) Unarmed strikes can be made with kicks. Source: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsincombat.htm

Unarmed Attacks

Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon, except for the following:

Attacks of Opportunity

Attacking unarmed provokes an attack of opportunity from the character you attack, provided she is armed. The attack of opportunity comes before your attack. An unarmed attack does not provoke attacks of opportunity from other foes nor does it provoke an attack of opportunity from an unarmed foe.

2) The weapon in my hands has no relevance on whether or not I can kick (if you'd care to disagree with this, PROVIDE RAW SUPPORT. Start with the location that says unarmed strikes must be made with hands.). This is because I am not using my arms or hands.

3) Characters with Improved Unarmed Strike may make attacks of opportunity with unarmed strikes. Source: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsincombat.htm

A monk, a character with the Improved Unarmed Strike feat, a spellcaster delivering a touch attack spell, and a creature with natural physical weapons all count as being armed.

Note that being armed counts for both offense and defense (the character can make attacks of opportunity)

4) I threaten any square I can make an attack into. Source: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/attacksOfOpportunity.htm

Threatened Squares

You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your action.

5) I can make a melee attack with my guisarme at enemies 10 feet away, therefore, I threaten 10 feet away. The guisarme does not allow me to attack adjacent foes. Source: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm

Glaives, guisarmes, lances, longspears, ranseurs, spiked chains, and whips are reach weapons. A reach weapon is a melee weapon that allows its wielder to strike at targets that aren’t adjacent to him or her. Most reach weapons double the wielder’s natural reach, meaning that a typical Small or Medium wielder of such a weapon can attack a creature 10 feet away, but not a creature in an adjacent square.

6) I can also choose to make a melee attack with unarmed strike, via a kick or headbutt, even if my hands are full. If you wish to dispute this, and state that an attack that doesn't use my hands cannot be made when my hands have something in them, PLEASE CITE SOURCE. Unarmed strike has a reach of 5 feet. Thus, I can attack adjacent foes.

7) My guisarme can attack 10 feet away, and my unarmed strike can attack 5 feet away. Thus, I threaten all squares that are 5 or 10 feet away, albeit with different attacks.

8) Chile provoked an attack of opportunity from 5 feet away. My unarmed strike threatens that area.

9) A character I threaten provoked an attack of opportunity. Thus, I AM ENTITLED TO TAKE AN AOO.

[chilepepper]

@refs, talic

Perhaps you should follow along. You want RAW, here it is.


Originally Posted by SRD, Actions in combat
Unarmed Attacks

You aren't unarmed. Done. Stop reading. Nothing below that applies because YOU AREN'T UNARMED.

[Talic]

@refs, talic

Perhaps you should follow along. You want RAW, here it is.



You aren't unarmed. Done. Stop reading. Nothing below that applies because YOU AREN'T UNARMED.

@Chile, refs:
I have already told you. Unarmed strike cannot be taken from the dictionary, any more than any other RESERVED GAME TERM can be. Unarmed strikes follow specific rules in D&D. Nowhere in the rules ANYWHERE does it state that opponents that are armed may not make unarmed attacks.

Now, would you care to point out text stating that armed opponents are not allowed to make unarmed strikes?

Because I'd be happy to point out an official Wizards published article on unarmed attacks.

Here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20070327a).

Note about halfway down, where it goes into this:

The unarmed attack entry in Chapter 8 of the Player's Handbook contains most of the rules for fighting without weaponry. Here's an overview, along with a few additions and comments:

* You usually make an unarmed attack with a free hand.

As far as the rules are concerned, you can use just about any part of your body in an unarmed attack: a head butt, kick, elbow, knee, or forearm. This means you don't need a free hand to make an unarmed attack.

If you're making any unarmed attacks in addition to an attack with your primary hand (for instance, a sword slash and a kick or head butt), consider the unarmed attacks as off-hand attacks even if you aren't making them with a hand. See Part Two for notes about using unarmed strikes as primary and secondary weapons.
First bold states you don't need a free hand. Second bold section specifically references making unarmed strikes while armed.

And in case you want to question the credentials, the author of that Wizard's article was a co-designer of D&D, and the chief designer of the Monster Manual. I'd say that puts it about as close to 'design intent' as you can get. And, since it doesn't contradict anything in the SRD, that sounds pretty much cut. and. dry.

Now that that's settled, are there any other concerns you have?

[Bayar]

@refs, Chile, Talic:
While I agree with you that you can make unarmed attack rolls with your legs feet, head, ****, ass and any other body part, the Grapple rules specifically says you have to GRAB someone. That's what grapple means. Hand-to-hand combat. How do you grab someone with your legs when you are standing up ? Do you jump at him with your legs ?

Anyway, I am waiting for Kyeudo to make a definitive ruling. Personally I say that it doesnt work.

[Talic]

@Bayar, Refs, Chile:RAW doesn't outline specifically how to qualify what is enough "grabbing ability" to grapple. Only that you have to be able to grapple. Now, we've all seen the grapple mod listed for horses, which have no hands, have only ungainly legs, and are perfectly fine grappling. So there's at least SOME raw support for it, though, admittedly, by RAW alone, it can go both ways.

Further, IRL, there are many grabs and holds that rely on legs only, including the figure 4, and a variety of others. Legs are capable of manipulation, and are capable of wrapping around someone firmly. If that's the standard that's used for whether or not grappling is allowed with an extremity, then it should be kosher.

[Bayar]

@Bayar, Refs, Chile:RAW doesn't outline specifically how to qualify what is enough "grabbing ability" to grapple. Only that you have to be able to grapple. Now, we've all seen the grapple mod listed for horses, which have no hands, have only ungainly legs, and are perfectly fine grappling. So there's at least SOME raw support for it, though, admittedly, by RAW alone, it can go both ways.

Further, IRL, there are many grabs and holds that rely on legs only, including the figure 4, and a variety of others. Legs are capable of manipulation, and are capable of wrapping around someone firmly. If that's the standard that's used for whether or not grappling is allowed with an extremity, then it should be kosher.


http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0200.html

Think that explains it...

[chilepepper]

@Chile, refs:And in case you want to question the credentials, the author of that Wizard's article was a co-designer of D&D, and the chief designer of the Monster Manual.

refs, talicMonte Cook was a DnD game designer too, but Malhavoc Press products aren't RAW anymore than that reference you pulled up. Unless you can point to RAW that says you can make an unarmed attack while armed, you can no more do that than make a sword attack without a sword. Just because RAW doesn't expressly forbid it, doesn't mean you can do it. Yes, you can kick as an unarmed strike; but if you aren't unarmed, you can't make an unarmed strike to begin with. Hands, feet, etc. are options for how to deliver an unarmed attack. When you attack with a Morning Star, you can do piercing damage or bludgeoning damage. You still have to have a Morning Star in your hand before you ever get to that option.

and concerning bayar's last post
refs, talicNice! Got both the horse grapple and the kick while armed. It's not RAW either, but still funny!

[Kyeudo]

GM Kyeudo

Wow. We've got some serious rules lawyering going on here and Mavian isn't even involved.

Chilepepper, you are wrong. There is no simpler way to put it. D&D is a game with contradictions built into the rules. The only reason you stop moving when you die is your hitpoints are less than the amount of nonlethal damage you've sustained.

Talic has clearly shown that, despite the name, he has all the limbs and training required by RAW to make an unarmed strike AoO despite wielding a two handed guisarme. Checking into the grapple rules yielded no requirement that that attack be made by hands, nor did it define a grab as more than an unarmed melee touch attack. If you need to know how a grapple without hands could be possible, watch this video from 8:11 to 8:18.

[chilepepper]

Thank you Kyeudo. I assume that means I'm out.

[Bayar]

GM Kyeudo

Wow. We've got some serious rules lawyering going on here and Mavian isn't even involved.

Chilepepper, you are wrong. There is no simpler way to put it. D&D is a game with contradictions built into the rules. The only reason you stop moving when you die is your hitpoints are less than the amount of nonlethal damage you've sustained.

Talic has clearly shown that, despite the name, he has all the limbs and training required by RAW to make an unarmed strike AoO despite wielding a two handed guisarme. Checking into the grapple rules yielded no requirement that that attack be made by hands, nor did it define a grab as more than an unarmed melee touch attack. If you need to know how a grapple without hands could be possible, watch this video from 8:11 to 8:18.

What video ? :confused:

[Talic]

That means my Invisibility is gone, and I am now where chile was.

Next up is me, then dusker, then Glunk.

My Actions: Any with LOS to where chile stood can read.Well, time to try to 2 on 1 this thing.

Move: from F24 to J19 (50').
Standard: Ready an action. Attack any enemy that enters my threat range.

End turn. LOS needed. Turn will stand so long as there are no illegal moves. If I gain LOS to opponent, please give any noticable information that would assist me in threat determination, such as items in hand, any noticeable size changes, and the like.

Stats:Location: J19

In hand: gauntlet (equipped), guisarme (2 handed grip)

HP: 28/28

AC: 13 (+3 armor, +2 Dex, -2 Rage)

Saves: +7/+2/+0

Abilities: Rage (used)

Effects on self: Rage 2/9

[Mephit]

LoS:

Greenscales
No LoS except for Chile's unconscious body, of course.

Dusker
No change in LoS. (See 1 or 2 LoS's back)

Glunk
No change in LoS. (See 1 or 2 LoS's back)

It's Dusker's turn.

[theterran]

Dusker - Round 3

Assuming Glunk is still in M19, I will move to O19, drawing my Spiked Chain as I move.

As a Swift Action, I will cast Blade of Blood and take 5 damage.
As a Standard Action I will use Shadow Blade Technique and Attack Glunk.

[roll0]
[roll1]

[roll2] + [roll3]
If Both attacks hit...add this cold damage as well: [roll4]

End my Turn. (If he's not in M19, I'll have to change my move...)
(edit)
If both of those hit, I take the lower roll as my normal attack so there isn't a crit, if only the 26 hits, I'll need to roll a crit.

Stats:
Location: O19
HP: 12/17
AC: 20 Touch: 16 FF: 16
In Hand:
SoF (3/10)
Boots (0/3)

Spell Slots:
Level 0 - 3/3
Level 1 - 2/3
Maneuvers:

Sapphire Nightmare Blade, Shadow Blade Technique, Clinging Shadow Strike, Stone Bones

[SoD]

Yup, M19. And no, the 14 doesn't hit. Roll your crit.

[Talic]

I think there was an LOS error.

As I'm in J19.

[theterran]

Crit Roll
[roll0]
[roll1]

(edit) That's 20 Damage all together...I believe...since the 5 Cold damage doesn't count.

[Talic]

Information for Glunk's turn, as the LOS was in error.

I am in J19. I readied an action when I reached J19.

[SoD]

Glunk, round IV

5 foot step to N18, drawing my great falchion, and attack Greenscale with a two-point power attack ("Grah! I WILL Water Orc Orc you until you die to death!")

[roll1]

And, in case of crit (18-20 range), open spoiler.
[spoiler]1d20+10
[roll2]

Battle State:
HP 7/27
AC 15 (Touch 12, FF 13)
In Hand: Great Falchion
Location: N18
Buffs: Bull's Strength 1/30
Rage: 1/9
STR: 30 (+4 potions, +4 rage).
CON: 20.
Will: +0

Done.

[theterran]

Dusker - Round 4

5ft Step to P18.
Swift Action: Cast Blade of Blood (non painful type)
Standard Action: Initiate the Sapphire Nightmare Blade Maneuver.

[roll0] VS your AC

[roll1] (-2 if the Concentrate roll fails)
[roll2] + [roll3] + [roll4] (if con check passes)

End my Turn

(edit) Wow...epic fail...

Stats:
Location: P18
HP: 12/17
AC: 20 Touch: 16 FF: 16
In Hand:
SoF (4/10)
Boots (0/3)

Spell Slots:
Level 0 - 3/3
Level 1 - 1/3
Maneuvers:


Sapphire Nightmare Blade-x, Shadow Blade Technique-x, Clinging Shadow Strike, Stone Bones

[SoD]

...damn it, why do I not type the right thing;


Glunk, round IV

5 foot step to N18, drawing my great falchion, and attack Greenscale with a two-point power attack ("Grah! I WILL Water Orc Orc you until you die to death!")

I mixed up the characters with who was playing them, I meant to attack Dusker. I belive it's actually physically impossible for me to reach Greenscales from N18. We may need a rewind, as it should've been Greenscales turn before yours, and, if allowed, I might edit my post so I actually attack someone within reach...

[Talic]

Wait a sec, terran. Glunk tripped my ready action when he got to 5 feet from me.

Unarmed strike!

[roll0]
If hit: [roll1]
If threat: [roll2]
If Crit: [roll3]

If hit, I use scorpion's grasp.

Opposed Grapple check: [roll4]
If Successful, Enter your square and deal: [roll5]

Read SOD's above post. If the move you announced is illegal, it's gonna have to be rewound. However, it needs a high ref to do so. Technically, the attack was illegal, and the 5 foot step was legal. However, I have no problem with agreeing to a rewind to the beginning of Glunk's turn, as long as my partner agrees. Either way, he'll need to charge, and either way, he'll need to reroll.

And both me and my partner have gold stars this match. Me for getting rid of Chile, and my partner for knocking you into 1-hit-kill territory. Only reason I went for Chile first is the invisibility option... Though the fact that he had a whopping 6 hp helped. With your 27, you're dang near impossible to 1 shot.

[chilepepper]

Umm, when I died, how was it Greenscales turn? He took a readied action moving his initiative to right before mine which means everyone else goes before him. -my bad

[theterran]

I thought he took an AoO...but I could be mistaken

[Kyeudo]

GM Kyeudo

I haven't looked over the match, but it seems both sides agree that Glunk couldn't have done what he did, so a rewind is in order.

Since SoD caught it and reported it himself, we'll give him a full rewind to the start of his turn instead of making him keep the five foot step.

[Talic]

Chile, my attack on you was an Attack of Opportunity, triggered by the reading of the scroll.

Those don't change initiative count. Thus, my turn was right after I hit you. That said, it's currently Glunk's turn, and, per Kyeudo, he has his entire turn to play with.

I'm in J19. Glunk is in M19. Dusker is in O19.

I have a readied action.

I believe that covers game state. You're up.

[SoD]

Glunk

5 foot step to N18, drawing great falchion. Attack Dusker (got it right this time!) with a 2 point power attack.

[roll0]
[roll1]


HP 7/27 (owch...)
AC 15 (Touch 12, FF 13)
In Hand: Great Falchion
Location: N18
Buffs: Bull's Strength 1/30
Rage: 1/9
STR: 30 (+4 potions, +4 rage).
CON: 20.
Will: +0
Done.

[Talic]

Assuming that drops my ally, it's my turn.

If for some reason, that's not the case, disregard this (and I'll strike through it).

Free action: Drop Guisarme.
Full Round action: CHARGE! (to M19)

Melee PUNCH attack GO!

Attack: [roll0] (+9 base, +2 rage, +2 Charge)
If Hit: [roll1]
If threat: [roll2]
If Crit: [roll3]

Scorpion's Grasp (if hit)

Opposed Grapple check: [roll4]
If won: [roll5]

All damage is lethal.

EDIT: That should be 19 damage. No need to make the roll, in order to win the opposed check, you'd need to roll a 23 on a D20.

[Bayar]

How do you get a +20 on damage rolls, SOD ? I can only count 19.

[Talic]

I count 19 as well. 1.5 Str mod (str mod +10 right now, assuming you're potioned up and raging) is +15

Power attack for 2 = +4

That's +19. I mean, either way, you've got well over what's needed to render Dusker unconscious, but still.

[theterran]

Regardless...I'm down...and I think Talic dropped Glunk?

[Talic]

Unless glunk has some special ability, or an AC higher than 26 while raging, it looks that way.

[SoD]

Yeah, I'm down. And for the final point, did you count the +1 damage from the reckless trait? (-1 atk, +1 dmg).

[Bayar]

Yeah, I'm down. And for the final point, did you count the +1 damage from the reckless trait? (-1 atk, +1 dmg).

Oh...wow, you are reckless...

[Talic]

It works on so many levels, lol.

[Mephit]

Greenscales and Dusker are the victors!

Dusker gets a -5% res reduction for winning! Which is to say, he still has to pay nothing! Huzzah!

[Talic]

Are you a high ref, Mephit?

[Bayar]

Are you a high ref, Mephit?

Nop. But high refs are becoming an endangered species, so we let anyone call matches nowadays.

[Talic]

Nop. But high refs are becoming an endangered species, so we let anyone call matches nowadays.

Fair enough, lol.

[Kyeudo]

GM Kyeudo


Greenscales and Dusker are the victors!

Dusker gets a -5% res reduction for winning! Which is to say, he still has to pay nothing! Huzzah!

The enthusiasm is appreciated, but that's our job.


Nop. But high refs are becoming an endangered species, so we let anyone call matches nowadays.

We arn't dead yet.

Greenscales and Dusker are the Winners!