how does evard's black tentacles work, and/or why is it good?

[evilbob]

While I cannot argue the logic, and I think those ideas are fine, to me that seems a bit overcomplicated for what could be a simple problem: two choices, two chances. 50% for either one. If it's a dragon grappling a cat then the chances should probably be weighted, but otherwise it's just faster and simpler to divide the total number of creatures in the grapple into 100 and call that the % chance. Still, though, to each his own.


All the same, let's review:

- The tentacles spell is purported to work great against medium or smaller creatures, especially if it can block up a choke point (but large or bigger creatures probably won't have a very hard time against the spell).
- Trapped creatures are likely to remain trapped (since being grappled is a major impediment), while non-trapped creatures are likely to just move through without much hindrance.
- Some folks believe it should re-attempt to grapple each round, a la the "spirit" of the spell.
- The spell gives no cover bonuses.
- Grappled creatures lose their dex bonus, which is great for ranged sneak attacks, but also sad because the same creatures have a reduced chance to get hit due to the grapple.
- The spell is basically a "save or be delayed (and take tiny amounts of damage)" except that it works against a grapple check instead of a save.

I wonder if anyone has just run the spell as a flat grapple DC of 18+caster level instead of rolling an opposed grapple check each time?

 

[Will]

GM in tabletop game ran it as repeatedly trying to grapple each round.

The spell was cast in a 40' diameter stone room at which point the doors in locked.

Yeah. Hard to escape at that point, eh?

 

[mvincent]

I wonder if anyone has just run the spell as a flat grapple DC of 18+caster level instead of rolling an opposed grapple check each time?

Yup, but that can make the spell more powerful. By reducing the standard deviation, someone that has a significantly lower grapple bonus than the spell (which should be the majority of opponents the spell is used on), will have a harder time escaping over the course of several rounds (or it might even become impossible for some).

 

[akbearfoot]

There is another major discrepency with this spell.


It is more effective for NPCs as opposed to PCs....Especially given that the typical BBEG type spellcaster has at least a few more HD than the PCs. That makes the grapple checks involved hard to beat even for the Raging half-orc barbarian with a +4 strength girdle, using an action point. On that note, the spell actually grapples STRONGER than the 7th level strength optimized raging half-orc at the minimum level to cast it....and it just gets stronger after that. Compare a troll's or hill giant's grapple checks(among the strongest critters for their CRs)...Basically, nobody but a strength optimized beast has a reasonable chance to escape this spell. Worst case scenario is that everyone makes the initial grapple, and then they all lose a turn while they try and scramble to the nearest edge of the spell. That scenario is VERY unlikely to happen assuming you can catch 3 people in the area which is entirely likely since otherwise you wouldn't bother using an AE spell.

It's like it was designed with TPKs in mind.


I also disagree with peoples assertions that 1d6+4 damage is 'a small amount' of damage. That's enough damage to kill an average wizard in a few rounds. A 1d8 hit dice class only lasts another round or 2.

The way I read the spell is once you break free you get to spend the rest of your turn trying to escape. After that you get grappled again on the caster's next turn. Doesen't make sense in a 'how would I design this spell to function' sorta way if it ignored people in the area but somehow still detected creatures that later enter the area.

 

[evilbob]

Yup, but that can make the spell more powerful.

Would it really, though? It is my thought that statistically, it should be exactly the same (although for someone with a really low grapple check, it would be a 100% certainty - but then again, someone with a really high grapple check would have a 100% chance to beat it, too). But I could be wrong.

The main advantage of this would just be less rolling. If you caught 5 things in this spell and ruled that it worked each round, that's a lot of dice that can slow things down. At least setting a DC cuts the work in half.

Doesen't make sense in a 'how would I design this spell to function' sorta way if it ignored people in the area but somehow still detected creatures that later enter the area.

I agree.

 

[mvincent]

It is my thought that statistically, it should be exactly the same (although for someone with a really low grapple check, it would be a 100% certainty - but then again, someone with a really high grapple check would have a 100% chance to beat it, too).

Well, casters are almost certainly going to use this on targets that have a grapple bonus 10 points lower than the tentacles more often than on targets with a grapple bonus 10 points higher, making your method more of a certainty in the favor of caster overall.

But if we also look at say a grapple bonus that is 8 points lower than the tentacles:
They would have 10% chance to break free using you method (i.e. 2 wins out of 20 combos), but they would normally have a 16.5% chance if both parties rolled (i.e. 66 wins out of 400 combos). Over the course of several rounds, that can multiply into a significant difference (indeed: average of 6 rounds in the tentacles as opposed to 10 rounds is probably a breaking point on survivability).

Would it really, though?

It appears so. Did you have some other numbers to run, or was it a gut feeling?

 

[Doug McCrae]

It's good for killing drow.

 

[evilbob]

It appears so. Did you have some other numbers to run, or was it a gut feeling?

Gut feeling. The thing is, I suspect those numbers would basically be in reverse for the higher end (when the creature has a grapple check 8 higher than the spell). And just because the "bar" is set high is no reason to discount whether or not something is fair.

Just a thought, though. No real grounding.

 

[Jhaelen]

GM in tabletop game ran it as repeatedly trying to grapple each round.

The spell was cast in a 40' diameter stone room at which point the doors in locked.

Yeah. Hard to escape at that point, eh?

I've used it recently against my players' party.
It served it's purpose: prolonging the boss fight and putting at least one of them in danger of dying, because the BBEG kept stacking continous area damage effects on it.

First thing the psion did was to dimension door out of the area and dispel it (with his second attempt).

It's a powerful spell, but at the level at which it's typically encountered, the pcs will have adequate counter-measures.

 

[eamon]

I don't see how the spirit of the spell implies that the tentacles should re-attempt to grapple each round.

Creatures within the area of effect at the time of the casting, or those entering at a later moment are grappled by the tentacles - sure. That's it. Nowhere does the spell say the tentacles are constantly trying to reacquire freed targets. Once they are grappled (which only happens if they fail the initial and singular grapple check) the tentacles squeeze and thus deal damage each round.

The only way for a creature to be grappled multiple times is for it to leave and reenter the area of effect.

I can imagine a spell in which the tentacles were constantly seeking to grapple everything in reach, but that's not this spell; this spell just makes tentacles that grasp everything and then contract. They don't seek new targets except those that are entering. That's fine, and there's no "spirit" I can find that requires more complex readings.

I think the FAQ is right here. The alternative doesn't make much more sense, and it's definitely less supported by the rules text, and it's possibly too powerful.

Where do you find the spirit of spell? I'm a big believer in the importance of rules as intended, but I just don't see it here.