OotS 448

[Celebrim]

So if anything the rules were not broken (depending on if you allow the ball to be considerd a trap which allows it to be used in the manor that it was) BUT if anything hey were sure in hell were abused.

That's the problem I have with the current Symbol write up. It's easily abused, and to avoid that abuse it includes some very broad, very vague, rules lawyerish restrictions. Only these anti-loopholes are designed for a rules lawyerish DM to be able to squash any usage of the spell that the DM feels is inappropriate. The problem of course is that while any decent DM ought to be able to exploit those loopholes, no decent DM wants to be rules lawyering his players.

In the Xykon case, since Xykon is an NPC, Rich as the DM can simply rule the restrictions that limit Symbol power are as narrow as he likes. I don't really have a problem with Rich breaking the rules, because he's the DM and the usage Xykon employs is within the letter if not the spirit of the wording of the spell. My problems with the scene are completely unrelated to the rules issues.

 

[Professor Phobos]

Man, the Bhaalspawn didn't take down Sarevok just as Gorion got wasted, did he?

No!

Did they win against Irenicus in that first battle in the streets of Athkatla? Nope!

They had to go and do sidequests for a while before they had the mojo to challenge their recurring villains. Xykon might win this battle, but the war, the war is not lost until the Order of the Stick is TPKed.

 

[Slife]

Wow...that sounds an awful lot like a more condescending version of my original point. The last part anyway. The first part is just more asserting that you have more right to cherry-pick definitions than anyone else does. Unless you can specifically point to a reference where a D&D book specifically says " When the writers of the D&D rules talk about offensive spells, they're not talking about irritating spells. They're talking about attack spells."

But under EITHER interpretation (even your incredibly st^Hilly one), it doesn't work.

 

[Klaus]

Just to distract people from the "offensive or not" use of a Symbol, there's an archer paladin who's attacking a flying paladin. Shouldn't she be attacking the nearest creature (even if that means attacking with a ranged weapon an opponent that threatens her, thereby provoking an AoO)?

Discuss.

 

[Delta]

Again, I think the comic was highly successful as a work of horror. It's not a comedy beat -- and Rich routinely has such comics that are touching or dramatic and not comedy beats.

I'll admit that rules-wise the biggest gray spot was the use of symbol in this manner that I'd certainly call offensive. But I've seen that in lots of D&D games, and immediately recognized the style of adjudication that was taking place. I've heard of clerics carrying a voice-activated symbol around on their shield. I've had a fellow player allowed to carry around explosive runes papers and wave them at the bad guys, very much in this manner.

Even Rich set the precedent for liberalness with the early explosive runes usage that was even more keenly not "upon a book, map, scroll, or similar object bearing written information". There wasn't a big outcry over that, as I recall. I wouldn't allow these usages, but I know that other DMs do, and Rich clearly has the precedent set for this world.

Explosive runes in OOTS: http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0092.html
Explosive runes in SRD: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/explosiveRunes.htm

 

[Celebrim]

Just to distract people from the "offensive or not" use of a Symbol, there's an archer paladin who's attacking a flying paladin. Shouldn't she be attacking the nearest creature (even if that means attacking with a ranged weapon an opponent that threatens her, thereby provoking an AoO)?

Discuss.

Like I said, the whole battle felt hand-waved to me.

 

[Storm Raven]

I don't know how. Xykon has been portrayed as vastly superior to them, vastly in the sense of "Brazillian national soccer team, but with bionic enhancements and armed with missile launchers VS school team of retarded 8 year old children" vastly superior. Xykon can only lose now by a catastrophic act of incompetence or a blatant Deus Ex Machina; in any case, I'm afraid Rich has written himself into a corner with this one.

That's not that big a deal, because, you know, the OotS, being PCs and all, can gain levels.

 

[Nail]

We all know the battle for Azure City is lost.

TOotS has to retreat (i.e. leave town) and regroup...not to mention raise Roy.

The hobgoblins take the town in the next 3 strips. Quote me.

 

[Grog]

Wow...that sounds an awful lot like a more condescending version of my original point. The last part anyway. The first part is just more asserting that you have more right to cherry-pick definitions than anyone else does. Unless you can specifically point to a reference where a D&D book specifically says " When the writers of the D&D rules talk about offensive spells, they're not talking about irritating spells. They're talking about attack spells."

You can't be serious. Can you?

 

[Joker]

Man, the Bhaalspawn didn't take down Sarevok just as Gorion got wasted, did he?

No!

Did they win against Irenicus in that first battle in the streets of Athkatla? Nope!

They had to go and do sidequests for a while before they had the mojo to challenge their recurring villains. Xykon might win this battle, but the war, the war is not lost until the Order of the Stick is TPKed.

So many good memories.