Gelatinous Cube Goodness

Gruns

Explorer
Hey all.
So my group had a run in with a gelatinous cube today, and many a rules questions sprung into light! Where to start... I guess it's just best to describe the scenario, and you rules expert types can tell me where I screwed up!

We had a (W)arlord, (P)aladin and a (R)ogue in a corridor with the [CC]ube. The corridor was actually 10' wide, as was the cube, but for the sake of ASCII art, we'll pretend it was 5'.

So here's the tunnel setup: ____(W)____(P)[CC](R)

The (P) Divine Challenges the [CC] and attacks. Result irrelevant.
The [CC] attacks the (P) and hits, (P) is Immobilized. [CC] decides now is a good time to use its Action Point, and Engulfs said (P). Now we have this setup:
_____(W)_____[PC](R)

Now for the stupid questions: Is the [CC] still Divine Challenged? i.e., does "occupying the same square" count as "adjacent" as far as the (P) engaging the [CC] to keep the Divine Challenge going? I ruled No, simply because it seemed absurd. "Bahamut will smite thee, foul ooze! Just as soon as I get out of your plasmatic grasp...!" However, it really depends on whether or not he is considered adjacent, since he was adjacent to at least 3/4 of the [CC].

And if "occupying 1 of 4 squares of a Large creature" counts as "adjacent", is the [CC] still Flanked by the (P) and the (R)?!? After looking through every book I had for rules on Engulfed, occupying the same space, etc etc, I couldn't find any RAW that said the (P) COULDN'T help with flanking. I however ruled that no, he wasn't, since the [CC] wasn't trying to dodge him or show him any concern, other than to slowly digest him in acid. *This turned out to be a moot point as the (P) was also Dazed while engulfed, and Dazed people can't flank anyway. Also, PHB 285 suggests that you need to draw a line across oppoisite sides, and technically, you only cross one side, so again, "No".

Anyway, the (W) thought it looked like fun, so she ran up and hit the [CC]:
_________(W)[PC](R)

Some (Z)ombies joined the fight, and were throwing gobs of guts at the (W)arlord from behind.
(Z)(Z)_______(W)[PC](R)

Before too long, the [CC] proceeded to Engulf the (W)arlord, too...
(Z)(Z)__________[WP](R)

Now the (Z)'s had to target the (R)ogue. Since they're pals, the [CC] doesn't act as Cover for the (R), but what about the (W) and/or the (P) who are still "in the way", but just happen to be inside an ooze at the moment?? I ruled that, ok, this mess of (W),(P) and [CC] were enough to provide Cover for the (R). It just so happens that this +2 AC then negated what would have been a hit on the already badly injured (R)ogue.

All in all, a fun time was had by all as we enjoyed the visuals of what was going on, and mucked our way through it.

I have a feeling this post is going to format horribly, and be too hard to follow, so I'm not even going to bother Previewing and trying to fix it. For those that like a challenge, have fun.

Later!
Gruns
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Rashak Mani

First Post
Formatting is fine... I understood what happened... but answering will be much more complicated. Anyone ? :p

I think you were correct as regards the paladin challenge.

As for the cover I'd rule that the bodies don't give cover... but since the Gel Cube actually covers the area that the rogue does get some protection while next to the cube. By the rules as written (RAW) he wouldn't though.
 

Saeviomagy

Adventurer
The paladin's challenge has the extra "must remain adjacent/attack foe" line purely to stop the tactic of marking a monster and then making oneself unattackable (running away, hiding etc).

Also I believe that people inside the ooze are dazed purely to avoid the "do they flank" question.
 

Gruns

Explorer
The paladin's challenge has the extra "must remain adjacent/attack foe" line purely to stop the tactic of marking a monster and then making oneself unattackable (running away, hiding etc)

True, but getting yourself sucked into a gelatinous cube is another way to make oneself unattackable...

Later!
Gruns
 

ShinRyuuBR

First Post
I consider a requirement to be adjacent to include occupying the same space, unless the nature of the power in all good sense requires otherwise. Since the idea of DC is for the paladin not run away, I think it stands. BTW, you CAN attack in your own space, and wierd as the cube is, I wouldn't discard the possibility it could attack an engulfed target, though it would probably be its nature to just sit and wait digestion to do it's thing.

About flanking, I'd tentatively rule it works, as long as there is at least 1 square of the cube's space between its two foes.

Cover I find to be straightforward: the cube occupies its whole space, so it grants total cover to anyone at the other side. This was certainly stated in 3e, not sure about 4e but there's no reason why it should be taken back.

Out of curiosity, is this the encounter in the southwest area of the 2nd level of the Keep on the Shadowfell? If so, did you notice the cubes and zombies are NOT actually allies?
 

hvg3akaek

First Post
I would suggest that "attacking within itself" would be *how* the Cube digests :) So, no real problem doing such.

But the whole cube-thing does make for strange reading. For instance, no suffocation when one is fully engulfed!
 


HighTemplar

First Post
Lol great thread and very well presented ! (unlike yousaid, I thought this was plenty)

Even tho I always go RaI without a seconds notice, I think you did make most of the calls right.

If the paladin is still actively fighting the cube from inside it, I don't see why it wouldn't keep the challenge(grabbed only prevents moving away). From a RaW PoV you would need to find the specific line in the PH that states "standing in the same square as you opponent counts as being adjacent to it for related powers" which i don't think you will find, since they trying every ridiculous way to make sure noone could share squares.

Just to discuss the flanking issue, again if they would have been stunned or dazed inside the cube (not being so much a threath to the cube, they couldnt possibly flank) but lets assume someone removed his dazed condition with a specific power of magical object. Someone attacking you from your own square, if directly opposed by another foe on his team should be flanking you. Some monsters have 0 reach, I can't remember which but i'm pretty sure flies dont have reach, never read that they couldnt flank, after all is you had a fly that could nail you for 1d10 dmg per attack i'm pretty sure you would care about it even tho its in one of your squares (hence possible flanking). (just my opinion here)

To add some more into it, in my previous 3-3.5e game, I had troubles with flanking and too much sneak attack so I ruled that someone can decide not to care about one of his flankers in order to defend fully against the other one. Of course turning your back on someone should come with a price and so the flankee lost his dex bonus and granted surprise advantadge to the one he turned his back on (which seems legitimate... who would you rather turn your back on, a rogue, a fighter or try to settle facing the 2 at once and be flanked ? face the rogue, hes now powerless, while the fighter hacks your back to pieces,finish the rogue then face the fighter alone) Anyways just pointing out that the gelatinous cube has 14 dex, which is certainly factored in his AC, and thus ruling that the cube does not give about the caracters inside it implies that he shouldnt get this bonus against them.

As for cover does the book says that if the cube and zombies are allies they shouldn't give each other cover ? Thats ridiculous I mean it's a large CUBE I fail to see how someone could throw something thru him on the account of being friends "hey cube open a tiny hole just the time i throw something ok ...please... NOW!(in zombie speech)"

Basically what ShinRyuuBR said.

One last detail, it is nowhere stated that being engulfed in the cube means you are completely immersed inside it, nothing infirms part of your body could still be sticking out of it and the cube dosent have to be exactly 10ft by 10 by 10. it could be 8by8by12 and kind of adjust, retract or expans himself slightly(or w/e) what was my point again ? oh ya suffocation and saying that you cannot be attacked while engulfed so I think those are a false assumption.

My first point even tho i've contradicted it, was that your decisions all seemed to be coherent, you look like a very competent DM and I don't think you need our advice, just some more confidence that you're as smart as the ones who invented all those rules, if not more so.
 


An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top