Sacrificial Bunnies (Warlock curse question)

[TheShedim]

Credible Threat was exactly the rule that I expected and dreaded to see, from a DM perspective. This means the ability is defined by the characters current level.

Removing the context of bunnies, and lets say the party used intimidate to get a bloodied foe to surrender, and then force that foe to escort them through the bad guys lair. If given the opportunity this surrendered murderous villain will do anything and everything in his power to ensure the untimely demise of the PC's aside from needlessly ending his own life.

So at what point does he become no longer a credible threat, is it once he is in chains when his directions could lead them into an inescapable battle or a deadly trap, or is it when the PC's level up does a power that would have worked five minutes before no longer work because a level difference is now too great?

The "bunny" example was just to get (and did so successfully) responses. I thank you for the directions, I must have missed that in the DMG, I guess I am a bit hesitant to have to make rulings defined by the character's current intangibles such as level.

 

[hong]

The DMG encourages you to say yes to the players, and in general, you should. However, sometimes, just sometimes, you also shouldn't be afraid to say no.

 

[Cadfan]

Good point.

Plus, the book only says "sack of rats". If they really wanted to close the loophole, they'd have *listed* every sack of things that isn't considered a credible threat.

Sure, the extra 50 page list of bugs, vermin, squirrels, and voles and the like would have driven up the cost of the book, but I for one DEMAND THOROUGHNESS.

You forgot buckets of rats. Rules don't say nuthin' 'bout mah buckit a' rats.

 

[VannATLC]

a level is not an intangible.

If its a level appropriate enemy in chains, he's still a threat, as far as I am concerned. I believe the spirit of the suggestion/rule is based around creatures of approximate power. If you'd put it in an encounter against the NPCs, then its a credible threat.

If you're putting things more than 5 levels less, I'd generally claim they are not credible threats. It might be higher than that, and its always going to be eyeballing.

Notice there is no entry in the MM for a rat? Or most non-dire vermin? Swarms, yes.. but have fun with that one.

 

[Cadfan]

The "bunny" example was just to get (and did so successfully) responses. I thank you for the directions, I must have missed that in the DMG, I guess I am a bit hesitant to have to make rulings defined by the character's current intangibles such as level.

Its not "defined" by intangibles like level. Its "defined" by the DM's discretion. Intangibles such as level are just one of the many, many factors that go into the DM's decision making. Fortunately, Dungeon Masters run on the Human Brain 1.0 OS, which, while really crappy at complex math, is really good at what we colloquially refer to as "judgment calls." This is why we haven't replaced Human Brain 1.0 with the otherwise superior Linux for our DMing needs.

While I recognize that some people are nervous about trusting an approximation rather than a determinate algorithm, the "judgment call" decision tree is so integrated into the D&D rule system that extracting it is likely impossible. A system designed from the ground up without resort to the "judgment call" is probably a superior choice. There are a number of such game systems available from the retailer "Electronic Arts."

 

[JPL]

I think that anything that makes your warlock look like an idiot instead of a master of strange infernal/fey/cosmic powers is probably pretty dicey.

But whatever you can pester your DM into, I guess.

While the idea of sacrificing a "worthy" but helpless foe to trigger powers makes a certain degree of sense thematically for some varieties of warlock, it's also murder. Rather than give evil warlocks this added option, I think that only allowing a homicide in the heat of actual combat to trigger the ability is the better option.

 

[Stormtalon]

Alright, alright -- I confess! I did used to carry around a large number of small live rodents on one of my characters!

However:

1) he was a thri-kreen
2) they were mice
3) he also carried around a jar of honey
4) mmmm, squeeky, wriggling chips & dip....

 

[Vayden]

Two things:

1) It's been a while since I stumbled into a good Derren thread. You, sir, are a master of your craft, and I respect your unparalleled ability to destroy rationality.

2) For any non-Derren people out there who are confused by the "credible threat" rule, here's how it works. It is only a "rule" if your players are stupid enough or don't respect you enough that you have to pull out a "rule". Otherwise, it works like this - any time a player attempts to bring extra targets into a fight for the purpose of triggering a cookie through something approximating the bag of rats strategy, you either a) tell him that it's not going to work and to quit being a jack-ass or b) without telling him, turn his bag of rats into vile demon rat swarms (you're creative, come up with a good in-game reason) and make sure that he's terrified of ever trying that again.

 

[Nifft]

So at what point does he become no longer a credible threat, is it once he is in chains when his directions could lead them into an inescapable battle or a deadly trap, or is it when the PC's level up does a power that would have worked five minutes before no longer work because a level difference is now too great?

He's no longer a credible threat when the DM decides he isn't going to attempt to kill the PCs with any chance of success.

This is the exact difference between a bag of rats and a swarm of rats.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Regicide]

Its not "defined" by intangibles like level. Its "defined" by the DM's discretion.

My discretion is that since PCs are intended to go through 6 fights in a day, killing maybe 60 creatures in a day, and the adventure is made for them to win, the majority of what they face is not a meaningful threat. Certainly not 1HP minions which die if you trip and stumble into them. By RAW, effects generally shouldn't go off.

The sack rule is so odious that you get some really stupid effects. The Light at-will for instance can only be used on objects which pose a "meaningful threat" to the caster, you can't cast light on a stone for instance. If you use Cloud of Daggers on a crowd of people, only the ones that are a threat will get hit by it, civilians, bunnies or other things in the area won't be hurt. I guess thats one way to get passed illusion spells and find dopplegangers, just cloud of daggers the person and if they aren't a threat it won't hurt them. Brilliant. Love rules that if you use them you get nonsense.