"I hate math"

[woodelf]

Not quite. This depends on the rogue's level, and whether or not he's tumbling to eliminate attacks of opportunity by movement (probably not).

Wraith: 20, as the Bracers of Armor +3 are effective against incorporeal touch.
Invisible: 22, assuming the PC has four levels of rogue, since he has Uncanny Dodge and doesn't lose his Dex bonus due to invisible opponents.
Cleric: 18...22-3 (Armor) - 2 (Natural Armor) +1 (Dodge).

I'm also unsure if he would be fighting defensively vs. the wraith and invisible fighter, since he's just moving when he triggers AoOs.

Brad

That's sort of my point: eh, who cares? So my rulings were all wrong except for the cleric. So what? If the player brought it up, i'd go with the actual rule. If i were the player, and misremembered the rules, and no one else corrected me, so what? The spirit of things (pardon the pun) was preserved: i don't get armor vs. incorporeal or touch attacks, i don't get to dodge someone i can't see (unless i've got the feat/class ability that says otherwise). Yes, there's a correct ruling. And, yes, i was wrong (as i sorta suspected i might be). My point is that it doesn't matter--the game doesn't break if you screw up the rules, even if you screw them up on a regular basis. Oh, and my ruling on fighting defensively, based on my hazy recollection of the rules, is that it applies for the entire round, 'cause the penalty applies to any AoOs you make, so the bonus should apply to your AC the whole time, too. Which, again, might not match what the book says, but so what? So long as the players know how we're running things, and it's consistent, and they know beforehand how things are going (i.e., they know that the fighting defensively modifiers either apply to their attack sequence only, or the whole round, and can thus plan accordingly), who cares whether it matches the books?

 

[Ourph]

You're just trying to be obtuse.

For those not keeping score:

Saeviomagy says: Wraith 24, Fighter 16(20 w/uncanny dodge), Cleric 17
Woodelf says: Wraith 17, Fighter 18, Cleric 19
cignus says: Wraith 20, Fighter 18(22 w/uncanny dodge), Cleric 18

Considering the fact that three people answered my example and each gave different answers for each situation, I rest my case.

BTW the real answer to:

A Rogue with bracers of armor +3, Dex 18, ring of protection +1, amulet of natural armor +2, the Dodge and Mobility feats and fighting defensively. The Rogue moves through the threatened squares of a wraith and an invisible fighter wielding a longsword; ends his movement next to a Cleric holding an inflict light wounds spell in his hand and tries to initiate a grapple. The rogue has declared his Dodge vs. the Cleric.

What is his AC vs. each opponent for the AoOs he provokes?

is....

Wraith 26 [10+3(bracers)+4(dex)+1(ring)+4(mobility)+2(fighting defensively)=26]
The Wraith ignores natural armor, but nothing else (force armor counts).

Fighter 16 (20 w/uncanny dodge) [10+3(bracers)+1(ring)+2(amulet)=16] +4(dex) w/uncanny dodge = 20
The Fighter ignores all dodge bonuses, but uncanny dodge gives the rogue his Dex bonus if he has the ability.

Cleric 18 [10+4(dex)+1(ring)+2(fighting defensively)+1(dodge)=18]
The Cleric ignores armor bonuses and natural armor bonuses, plus the rogue doesn't get his mobility AC bonus because he's provoking for grappling, not for moving.

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

For those not keeping score:

Saeviomagy says: Wraith 24, Fighter 16(20 w/uncanny dodge), Cleric 17
Woodelf says: Wraith 17, Fighter 18, Cleric 19
cignus says: Wraith 20, Fighter 18(22 w/uncanny dodge), Cleric 18

Considering the fact that three people answered my example and each gave different answers for each situation, I rest my case.

Oops, forgot Mobility, so that'd be Wraith: 24 and Fighter: 18 (26 w/uncanny dodge).

Also, note that Woodelf used Fighting Defensively (and provided a reasonable explanation thereof, too!), which raises the AC by 2 in general. However, that's not mentioned in the example, but it's reasonable to assume a rogue would do such.

Of course, *my* rogue always Tumbled, and 10-foot-adjusted when he got enough Tumble, so I can count the number of AoOs he suffered during a three-year campaign on two hands and have fingers remaining.

Brad

 

[Ourph]

Oops, forgot Mobility, so that'd be Wraith: 24 and Fighter: 18 (26 w/uncanny dodge).

Also, note that Woodelf used Fighting Defensively (and provided a reasonable explanation thereof, too!), which raises the AC by 2 in general. However, that's not mentioned in the example, but it's reasonable to assume a rogue would do such.

1st - Wrong again (see my edit above).

2nd - The example does explicitly include fighting defensively.

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

Fighter 16 (20 w/uncanny dodge) [10+3(bracers)+1(ring)+2(amulet)=16] +4(dex) w/uncanny dodge = 20

Remember, if he has uncanny dodge, he doesn't lose the +4 Dodge bonus from Mobility, since he still has his Dex bonus. And, I believe fighting defensively would still apply, as well.

Brad

 

[Ourph]

Remember, if he has uncanny dodge, he doesn't lose the +4 Dodge bonus from Mobility, since he still has his Dex bonus. And, I believe fighting defensively would still apply, as well.

Brad

Uncanny dodge only returns your Dex bonus to you, it does not allow you to keep all of your dodge bonuses. The condition that made you lose your dodge bonuses still exists, Uncanny Dodge just allows you to avoid losing ONE of those bonuses.

BTW - The fact that we're debating this, TOTALLY proves my point.

 

[Doctor Bomb]

That's nothing man. 2 friends of mine made a spreadsheet for character CREATION for Rolemaster. Took it from a 4 hour process (w/all the classes and such to look thru as well as Talent Law, gods forbid ya make a mage) to an hour and a half one.

Secret Squirrel,
On a totally unrelated note, WHERE CAN I GET THAT SPREADSHEET!!


H/Orc Monk (old skool RM) - Deaf as a post, but strong as a troll!

 

[Ace]

RPGs are not a storytelling medium. They're about mission-oriented dynamic problem-solving scenarios. It shouldn't be a surprise that a competant GM is one that focuses more about constructing the scenario than anything else.

Uh No.

D&D 3x as written is as you put it "mission-oriented dynamic problem-solving scenarios" but it isn't always played that way

other RPG's are about different things -- FREX Sorcerer is about "how far would you go to get what you want played in a narrative enviroment" -- Malestrom (by the late lamented Huburis games) is about telling stories in a universe of wonder -- Universalis is a game about creating stories --- and there are others that are harder for me to describe like Trollbabe, Donjon and Rune

Buffy interestingly is a "mission-oriented dynamic problem-solving scenarios" type of game but it uses 1d10 -- and the GM never need roll anything during a typical game -- ever

The math in Buffy is limited to a simple chart --- Ok 2 charts with maybe ten entries. I once ran a climactic battle scene with 10 vampires and a machine gun nest against 4 high powered PCs -- the battle took about 10 minutes real time and was quite satisfactory

prep time for me is about ten to twenty minutes for an evening of Buffy or Angel -- all I need to pencil and paper (and sometimes cut and paste for a stat block)

3x OTOH is a lot more complex-- preping the game in accordance with the rules takes at least an hour and requires at least half that to set up tactical choice charts and so on. Actually playing a combat especially at high levels quite often takes several hours


The number of options is staggering and maintaining challenge and balance is difficult

I am of the dislikes math cowd to-- don't get me wrong I can use it -- heck I can use GURPS Vehicles without a spreadsheet but thats not why I am there --

 

[Enkhidu]

Uncanny dodge only returns your Dex bonus to you, it does not allow you to keep all of your dodge bonuses. The condition that made you lose your dodge bonuses still exists, Uncanny Dodge just allows you to avoid losing ONE of those bonuses.

Allright, this confused the heck out of me. But rather than hijack the thread I started one over in the rules forum: here.

 

[argo]

You're right, no calculus for me. Bleh! In college, that is, because I tested out in high school. I'd had enough of that crap!

Please show me a formula that calculates the probability of doing 140 hit points of damage a round to a Fire Giant with a 21 AC, when you're playing the following character:

It's done all the time, just hang out on the rules forum or dig up an old smackdown thread. But the point is that you don't need any of that nonsense to actually play the character. Just add and subtract and keep a running total of two or three numbers in your head. Most of the work can be done ahead of time (as levels go up certain magic becomes an expected part of a battleplan and should be pre-calculated as well).

THANK YOU to everyone who's given me advice on how to improve my home campaign. My home campaign is fine, however, and I've run two campaigns to 20th, and another to 32nd. Not the issue. The amount of time and complexity to do that IS the issue. I'm challenging you to get out of the box and THINK! Can't we have as good a game, without it being too complex?

Don't want to, no need to. Once again, my advice to you is the same I give to people who complain about dnd being too "high magic". Play low levels. Seriously, low level dnd is about as simple a game as you can get without switching to a narriative system. (which is a fine choice too, if thats what works for you).

But (if I am understanding you corectly) you say you aren't looking for house rules. You think that this is a flaw in the system that prevents some people from having fun and should be adressed with a system change. In that case I my answer is an even stonger no! The game is designed to ramp up in dificulty, to challenge the players as well as their characters, as you hit higher and higher levels. That was an intentional decision so new players could be introduced to the game but experienced players could still be entertained without leaving the system for something more complex. Wanting to change the fundamental framework of the system is as much a disservice to those players as asking a newbie to play at 35th level. People should play the game to have fun, that means playing at a level, and with a style, that suits you.

This is NOT a systemic problem.