How a DM can counter cheesy PC tactics w/o using cheesy DM tactics.

[dkilgo]

I didn't think of how you would go about targeting the item. Maybe situation would have to dictate.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

One more thing, and we may have played this part wrong... The Wyvern did a Fly-By Attack. It swooped down, and did an attack, then swooped away. However, since it swooped away, it went through a threat range and the person it attacked (I think it was the Rogue) got an AoO on it. Was this right? I don't think it mentioned about Fly-By Attack negating AoO. Which I found as strange. It's like Spring Attack, but you still get an AoO against the critter. The whole point of Fly-By Attack is to swoop in, hit, and swoop out. Seems like you shouldn't get an AoO on this, otherwise what is the point?

Your DM was right--unlike Spring attack, Fly by attack doesn't negate the AoO. (If the creature has reach though, that's unnecessary)

We caught about half of them in darkness. They were lower level Rogues, so they may not have had Uncanny Dodge. Even so, our Rogue was higher level then them and I believe if you are like 4 levels higher (I forget the exact number) then you can sneak attack even if they have uncanny dodge.

Rogues 4 levels higher than the character with uncanny dodge may sneak attack uncanny dodge foes if they flank them. That has no bearing on whether or not they lose their dex bonus and are sneak attackable by invisible opponents however.

Then again, you're a party of four sixth level characters right. 10 first or second level rogues (around EL 8 but a very weak EL 8)wouldn't be a major threat even without cheesy tactics. A pair of fireballs should have finished them off.

The point is, darkness + blindsight helped in each circumstance. It might not have been the only way we could have one, but it did play a major role. Either allowing for sneak attacks or hindering movement and escape.

Well there's nothing necessarily cheesy about a tactic helping in most fights. Haste helps in most fights after all. So does fireball. This is somewhat different because it has the capability to make difficult fights easy but if the DM provides a reasonable pallette of enemies (including some with blindsight and immune to crits/sneak attacks) and also lets intelligent NPCs prepare to deal with the tactic that's been killing the area's villains, it shouldn't be a problem.

 

[Brown Jenkin]

Your DM was right--unlike Spring attack, Fly by attack doesn't negate the AoO. (If the creature has reach though, that's unnecessary)

In this case Wyverns are Huge and have a 10' reach so no AoO should have applied unless its opponet had a weapon with 10' Reach. So things were done slightly wrong. Additionaly, tacticaly the Wyvern should not have been entering the darkness but only focusing on those outside the darkness. With the Rogue unable to see where the Wyvern is (See note below) it would be hard for the Rogue to take appropriate action. Also the Wyvern has a speed 60 flying so 1 double move up would have gotten it out of the darkness should it somehow have been centered in the effect.

Well there's nothing necessarily cheesy about a tactic helping in most fights. Haste helps in most fights after all. So does fireball. This is somewhat different because it has the capability to make difficult fights easy but if the DM provides a reasonable pallette of enemies (including some with blindsight and immune to crits/sneak attacks) and also lets intelligent NPCs prepare to deal with the tactic that's been killing the area's villains, it shouldn't be a problem.

Thank you Elder-Basilisk for that summary

One other thing of note. Deeper Darkness has a 60' foot radius while Blindsight has a 30' radius so that Rogue is himself blind to anything beyond 30' So unless his opponent is within 30' the Rogue will also have no idea where anyone is, making this tactic somewhat less usefull.

 

[dkilgo]

Good point Elder-Basilisk.

 

[James McMurray]

From reading the Wyvern account, it sounds as if they cast darkness directly upon the wyvern. Of course, that isn't exactly kosher, considering that darkness can only target objects.

If they didn't cast it on the wyvern, then it definitely should have kept away from the darkness.

 

[dkilgo]

I just believe that the whole encounter with the wyvern was executed wrong. The DM did not prepare the encounter, or just did not understand the abilities of the wyvern.

 

[AuraSeer]

The rule about half movement in darkness is not absolute, IMO. It mostly makes sense if you're on the ground, because you lose the ability to see where you're putting your feet. Flying creatures should be allowed to keep their full movement speed, if in an open area; they know they're not going to crash into anything, so they can keep on in a straight line (and probably climb) to get out of the area of effect.

 

[melkoriii]

See I would have a spell caster cast two spells. Not being Dispell.

1)Casts Fly on self and flies up out of reach.
2)Casts Evard’s Black Tentacles. Wait till the darkness fades.

 

[FlimFlam]

The Wyvern may have been a younger one, thus the size could have been reduced for that.

The Darkness spell was on a coin, held in the Rogues hand. When the Wyvern came in at him, he opened his hand and the Wyvern was engulfed in darkness.

The reason movement was hampered was because we were fighting in a forest area. If the Wyvern tried to fly out without watching where he was going, he would have smacked into several tree branches. Hence, the movement reduction.

 

[dkilgo]

I understand the movement reduction, but I still think that the DM should have better prepared for the wyvern encounter.