Change font size
It is currently Fri Aug 18, 2017 1:26 pm



Post a new topicPost a reply Page 2 of 5   [ 72 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 1:30 pm 
Noise Maker
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 12:52 pm
Posts: 1616
Location: 52°15'24.99"N 1°09'48.62"W, Sol III
Real Name: Set to Private
Harroguk wrote:
A3:
this reffing thing turns out to be a whole lort more complex than i thought. maybe i should just keep my head out of it.

It's simple enough if I summarise:
  • Roll to hit the vehicle with autofire
  • If vehicle is hit, passengers must make REF saves to avoid damage
  • If vehicle is hit but provides full cover, passengers are only at risk if any damage beats the vehicle's hardness

Does this make sense and work? Does it follow the rules?

_________________
Running the Game - the loneliness of the long distance blogger
Tengwio, hinoin! U eo swaillir, aneo?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 1:40 pm 
Motor Mouth
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2008 2:00 am
Posts: 3719
Location: Singapore
Medals: 1
Dungeonbowl Champion (1)
Real Name: Lee
A3.
makes sense to me now. seems fair. as to whether it follows the rules, thats your call.

from last weeks question i think everyone should be warey of getting into vehicles in this weeks rpg sessions.

_________________
Use a MediaCenter? Use Trakt.
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 5:59 pm 
A3:
As I read it,

1. The only attack roll is made to hit the area (Def 10), which forces a reflex save from all creatures. (p148)
2. Attacks against characters in vehicles are made like any other attack, but characters get a def bonus from the vehicle's speed and cover from the vehicle.(p163)
3. No allowance is made for the hardness of cover.(p144-5) You could, by the RAW, get cover from a sufficiently large tissue.
(incidentally, Concealment requires that "nothing physically blocks a blow or shot", so the tissue technically gives cover and not concealment, by virtue of its physical presence.)

So: by the RAW (I'm a monster! RAWr! :evil: )

# Roll to hit the area containing the vehicle with autofire
# If area is hit, passengers must make REF saves to avoid damage.
The hardness of the vehicle doesn't matter, and it's quite possible for the vehicle in question to be completely unscathed while the passengers are turned into Chinese takeaway.

Your way makes far more sense though.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 9:49 am 
Noise Maker
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 12:52 pm
Posts: 1616
Location: 52°15'24.99"N 1°09'48.62"W, Sol III
Real Name: Set to Private
Q:4 (D&D 3.5)From the Sorcerer class description:
SRD wrote:
A sorcerer’s selection of spells is extremely limited. ...snip... At each new sorcerer level, he gains one or more new spells, as indicated on Table: Sorcerer Spells Known. ... These new spells can be common spells chosen from the sorcerer/wizard spell list, or they can be unusual spells that the sorcerer has gained some understanding of by study.

These spells gained through "study" - could they be from other classes' spell lists?

_________________
Running the Game - the loneliness of the long distance blogger
Tengwio, hinoin! U eo swaillir, aneo?


Last edited by Altair-the-Vexed on Thu Aug 07, 2008 12:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: A4
PostPosted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 10:15 am 
Motor Mouth

Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 9:44 am
Posts: 3870
Location: Kenilworth
Real Name: Beardy Pete
I would say that depended on the GM, and they should call it based on the situation. I suppose it might be possible for a sorcerer to study a divine scroll to figure out how to replicate the effect as an arcane spell but if that was the case then why wouldn't arcane spellcasters have been doing the same for years and codifying them as arcane spells for future generations of spellcasters?

_________________
This signature intentionally left blank.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 12:02 pm 
A4: There's no reason (beyond considerations of balance) that a sorceror couldn't pick up divine spells as arcane - the bard already does this to a degree with the various Cure spells. Besides, a sorceror with a bunch of divine spells on their list is still far squishier than a cleric anyway.

Q5: is there any way in D&D 3.5 to reduce the ASF of leather armour? I know that a chain shirt can be reduced from 20% to 10% by means of mithral (and by another 10% with the twilight enhancement), but is there any way to do this with leather/studded armour?


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 12:12 pm 
Noise Maker
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 12:52 pm
Posts: 1616
Location: 52°15'24.99"N 1°09'48.62"W, Sol III
Real Name: Set to Private
Daremonai wrote:
Q5: is there any way in D&D 3.5 to reduce the ASF of leather armour? I know that a chain shirt can be reduced from 20% to 10% by means of mithral (and by another 10% with the twilight enhancement), but is there any way to do this with leather/studded armour?

A5 - can't find anything in the core RAW. I'll look in my Magic Item Compendium tonight.

_________________
Running the Game - the loneliness of the long distance blogger
Tengwio, hinoin! U eo swaillir, aneo?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 12:22 pm 
Noise Maker
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 12:52 pm
Posts: 1616
Location: 52°15'24.99"N 1°09'48.62"W, Sol III
Real Name: Set to Private
A5 Quick google result:
WotC forums wrote:
I recently came up with a way to reduce full plate's 35% spell failure to 0%. You can also apply the same idea to a chain shirt or breastplate, as detailed below.

First, this is what I've come up with for Full plate, (which has a base cost of 1500G).

Mithral (-10%) [DMG]: Make it from mithral. For heavy armor, it costs 9000G, which is the bulk of the cost.

Githcraft (-5%) [DMG2]: Armor made by the Githyanki costs 600G, which includes price of Master Work. Also gives a +1 bonus to concentration checks.

Thistledown padding (-5%) [RotW]: Costs 500G, but raises the armor check penalty by 1.

Spellcaster armor (-5%) [Dr358]: From the article "Master's Forge" in Dragon magazine. Having your armor made as spellcaster armor reduces spell failure and only costs 400G.

Now to add a magical quality, requiring the armor to have a +1 enchantment bonus, which I included in the price of the magic quality below.

Twilight (-10%) [BoED] It has a +1 cost, so +2 in all (4000G)


So, that’s -3 armor check, +3 max dex, 0% arcane spell failure, and +9 to AC for a total of 16,000G.

Similarly, you could make other armor this way. For example:


Chain shirt: Mithral, SpellCrafter's, and Githcraft for 2100G

Breastplate: Mithral, SpellCrafter's, Githcraft, and Thistledown for 5700G

Click here for a link to the thread.

BTW: none of the above are available in my game ... as yet.

_________________
Running the Game - the loneliness of the long distance blogger
Tengwio, hinoin! U eo swaillir, aneo?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 1:25 pm 
WotC forums wrote:
Githcraft (-5%) [DMG2]: Armor made by the Githyanki costs 600G, which includes price of Master Work. Also gives a +1 bonus to concentration checks.


Given that mere posession of a Githyanki sword is punishable by death, it's a bit odd that they'd be running around selling their armour so cheaply. But who am I to judge?


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 08, 2008 10:22 am 
Noise Maker
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 12:52 pm
Posts: 1616
Location: 52°15'24.99"N 1°09'48.62"W, Sol III
Real Name: Set to Private
Q6 (D&D 3.5) Opinions / definitive ruling wanted1
The rules on potions state the following:
SRD wrote:
The character taking the potion doesn’t get to make any decisions about the effect —the caster who brewed the potion has already done so. The drinker of a potion is both the effective target and the caster of the effect (though the potion indicates the caster level, the drinker still controls the effect).

Does this mean that potions which duplicate spells that have multiple targets only ever effect the character taking the potion?
For example: You drink a Potion of Feather Fall (good luck getting it out of your pack and drinking it before you hit the ground - but just for the argument...), and the spell only works on you, even if the potion maker was 4th level (thus his spell of Feather Fall would effect 4 creatures).
Is that right?

_________________
Running the Game - the loneliness of the long distance blogger
Tengwio, hinoin! U eo swaillir, aneo?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: A6
PostPosted: Fri Aug 08, 2008 10:26 am 
Motor Mouth

Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 9:44 am
Posts: 3870
Location: Kenilworth
Real Name: Beardy Pete
I think that you are right. There is no logical way that a potion could affect a group of characters, unless the potion created an area effect centered on the drinker, but in this example the drinker has no control over who else might be affected and feather fall does specify a limited number of targets rather than all in an area.

In other news, I'm quite glad my char can cast feather fall himself - these question inevitably lead to something upsetting happening to our D&D party. Anybody else got any useful spells against falling off an airship?

_________________
This signature intentionally left blank.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 08, 2008 10:31 am 
Motor Mouth
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2008 2:00 am
Posts: 3719
Location: Singapore
Medals: 1
Dungeonbowl Champion (1)
Real Name: Lee
A6:

Im with drongo on this one, potions should only affect the person drinking them unless they have a non-targeted (As in affects all members in the area rather than specific members) AoE ability where the subject drinking the potion becomes the target for the AoE.

This means you really should stay away from the potion of fireball. :twisted:

_________________
Use a MediaCenter? Use Trakt.
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: RPG Rules Questions and Answers
PostPosted: Wed Sep 17, 2008 4:25 pm 
Noise Maker
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 12:52 pm
Posts: 1616
Location: 52°15'24.99"N 1°09'48.62"W, Sol III
Real Name: Set to Private
Q7
SRD wrote:
WHIRLWIND ATTACK [GENERAL]
Prerequisites: Dex 13, Int 13, Combat Expertise, Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack, base attack bonus +4.
Benefit: When you use the full attack action, you can give up your regular attacks and instead make one melee attack at your full base attack bonus against each opponent within reach.
When you use the Whirlwind Attack feat, you also forfeit any bonus or extra attacks granted by other feats, spells, or abilities.

Does that last sentence mean that Whirlwind Attack denies you any attacks of oportunity for the round in which you use it?

_________________
Running the Game - the loneliness of the long distance blogger
Tengwio, hinoin! U eo swaillir, aneo?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: A7
PostPosted: Wed Sep 17, 2008 4:31 pm 
Motor Mouth

Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 9:44 am
Posts: 3870
Location: Kenilworth
Real Name: Beardy Pete
Altair-the-Vexed wrote:
Q7
SRD wrote:
WHIRLWIND ATTACK [GENERAL]
Prerequisites: Dex 13, Int 13, Combat Expertise, Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack, base attack bonus +4.
Benefit: When you use the full attack action, you can give up your regular attacks and instead make one melee attack at your full base attack bonus against each opponent within reach.
When you use the Whirlwind Attack feat, you also forfeit any bonus or extra attacks granted by other feats, spells, or abilities.

Does that last sentence mean that Whirlwind Attack denies you any attacks of oportunity for the round in which you use it?


I would say no as attacks of opportunity are available to everybody rather than as a result of any special abilities, aren't they?. I would suggest however that the extra AoOs granted by Combat Reflexes would be forfeit

_________________
This signature intentionally left blank.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: RPG Rules Questions and Answers
PostPosted: Wed Sep 17, 2008 4:32 pm 
A 7:

I agree with the drongo.

It says extra attacks granted by spells, feats or abilities.

I would take that to mean stuff like combat reflexes, haste, rapid shot etc.

Attacks of Opportunity are just part of the normal combat rules, and everyone gets them by default, should the situation arise - they don't strike me as being granted by spells, feats or abilities, so shouldn't count in the above rule.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post a new topicPost a reply Page 2 of 5   [ 72 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
610nm Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net