PDA

View Full Version : Question on Swift Hunter.



Ixahinon
2008-12-10, 09:22 PM
"Your skirmish damage applies against any creature you have selected as a favored enemy, even if it is normally immune to extra damage from critical hits"

Skirmish works just like Swift Attack, Sneak Attack,and Critical hits right. Being Immune to Critical Hits is stated in the monsters stat block..just natural immunity.

But Heavy Fortification still stopps this extra damage, does it not?

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-10, 09:31 PM
I'd say no. The phrasing is "even if it is immune". Heavy fort grants immunity. Seems to work.

Ixahinon
2008-12-10, 09:34 PM
You got to be kidding me. What's the point of having Oozes, Constructs, and Undead in the game, then? There is no disernable anatomy to a Stone Golem..it's all F*cking stone! A skeleton is nothing but Bone..Ooze is a pile of glop...Rogues/Scouts/Rangers basically a "Get out of Jail free" card...

RebelRogue
2008-12-10, 09:41 PM
You got to be kidding me. What's the point of having Oozes, Constructs, and Undead in the game, then? There is no disernable anatomy to a Stone Golem..it's all F*cking stone! A skeleton is nothing but Bone..Ooze is a pile of glop...Rogues/Scouts/Rangers basically a "Get out of Jail free" card...
Have you ever played a precision-damage based build in a Undead/Construct/Ooze-heavy story arc without acces to something like this? I guess not...

Kizara
2008-12-10, 09:42 PM
Have you ever played a precision-damage based build in a Undead/Construct/Ooze-heavy story arc without acces to something like this? I guess not...

Realism should trump your character's convience. People who disagree with this should go play 4e and be happy.

Starbuck_II
2008-12-10, 09:44 PM
Realism should trump your character's convience. People who disagree with this should go play 4e and be happy.

Is that Sarcasm or are you just bitter?
Really hard to tell sometimes. :smallconfused:

Kizara
2008-12-10, 09:45 PM
Is that Sarcasm or are you just bitter?
Really hard to tell sometimes. :smallconfused:

Bitter. Simulation should trumpt gamist issues unless it makes things unmanagable (such as tracking your encumbrance constantly or the like).

A good way to tell with my posts: If it seems to slam 4e; that's the correct reading.


Further on this thread's topic:

I'm frankly sick of seeing things that amount to "I know this doesn't make sense, but wouldn't it be cool for my character to be able to?"

And don't pull the "Wizard Fallacy" on me, thanks.

RebelRogue
2008-12-10, 09:47 PM
Realism should trump your character's convience. People who disagree with this should go play 4e and be happy.
No reason to turn this into an edition argument!

But I've been through the above-mentioned scenario and it was horrible to the point of unplayability! Realism - Schrealism! This is a game, not scheduled time of "sucks to be you"!

Kizara
2008-12-10, 09:54 PM
No reason to turn this into an edition argument!

But I've been through the above-mentioned scenario and it was horrible to the point of unplayability! Realism - Schrealism! This is a game, not scheduled time of "sucks to be you"!


As far as the gamist concerns: Your DM should be aware of your character's abilities and limitations, and play to both.

If you play a cleric (that isn't Czilla) and you never run into any undead, you miss out on a main ability.

If you play a rogue, and you always run into undead, you miss out on alot of your abilities (Undead often have special forms of movement and preception too, so it undermines your sneakyness).

If you play a wizard and you always run into things with high SR/golems, fast grappling monsters, or the like, you can't use your abilities and are marginalized.

If you play a lancer and never have adventures outside in openish terrain, you miss out on most of your abilities.

If you play a beserker and always fight enemies with Reflex save effects, high DR, special forms of movement and the like, you are marginalized.

If you play a paladin and never run into overtly evil foes, you miss out on a main ability.


The list goes on. The solution isn't to fudge the game so it doesn't make sense but your shtick works, its to design adventures (and play your character) more intelligently.

Ryuuk
2008-12-10, 09:56 PM
You got to be kidding me. What's the point of having Oozes, Constructs, and Undead in the game, then? There is no disernable anatomy to a Stone Golem..it's all F*cking stone! A skeleton is nothing but Bone..Ooze is a pile of glop...Rogues/Scouts/Rangers basically a "Get out of Jail free" card....

Question though, at least with regards to Swift Hunter, how is the bonus to damage from skirmish any different from the bonus to damage the ranger gets from favored enemy? So he studied constructs and now knows how to fight them a bit more effectively, is it that much of a stretch that he would apply this knowledge to the way he skirmishes them as well?

RTGoodman
2008-12-10, 09:59 PM
You got to be kidding me. What's the point of having Oozes, Constructs, and Undead in the game, then? There is no disernable anatomy to a Stone Golem..it's all F*cking stone! A skeleton is nothing but Bone..Ooze is a pile of glop...Rogues/Scouts/Rangers basically a "Get out of Jail free" card...

Three justifications:

First, you've spent your life learning to kill these beasts quickly. Surely after some time you'd be able to figure out the right way to hit 'em with a sword to deal more damage than normal, especially if you already know how to do it to other things. I mean, skeletons still have bones to break, and golems still have bits that they need to keep running. (I've got nothing for oozes, though. :smalltongue:)

Second, listen to RebelRogue - he's hit the nail on the head on BOTH comments.

Third, welcome to late-3.x power creep, homeslice. There's a lot worse out there than making a precision-damage-guy useful against certain creature types.


The list goes on. The solution isn't to fudge the game so it doesn't make sense but your shtick works, its to design adventures (and play your character) more intelligently.

And yet for almost all the things you mention, there are actually feats/PrCs/spells/whatever that do change your "schtick" instead of changing adventure design. Divine feats, no-SR spells, non-evil Smites with other classes, etc.

Stormageddon
2008-12-10, 10:00 PM
You got to be kidding me. What's the point of having Oozes, Constructs, and Undead in the game, then? There is no disernable anatomy to a Stone Golem..it's all F*cking stone! A skeleton is nothing but Bone..Ooze is a pile of glop...Rogues/Scouts/Rangers basically a "Get out of Jail free" card...

Keep in mind Rogues don't get a get out of jail card. Swift hunter does not apply to sneak attack.

But your right it doesn't make sense but than neither does shooting fireballs out of your hands. and speaking as a scout/ranger playing in a game that super heavy undead based. I like it.

UserClone
2008-12-10, 10:00 PM
ok, four level 1 rogues against ghouls, Kizara. Go.

And Ryuuk, the difference is, you *don't get* bonus damage from FE with any of those types.

Also, what he said. v

RebelRogue
2008-12-10, 10:00 PM
Rest assured that there's a bit of personal bitterness in the statement above.

On a more objective level, I fail to see wha should be wrong with the Feat's effect with regards to verisimilitude: the Feat implies that you're highly trained for dealing with very specific situations. You know how to hurt these creatures, even if others fail to see how because of limited knowledge! How is that so different from other class features/Feats?

Edit: well, rtg pretty much ninja'ed me there...

Grynning
2008-12-10, 10:06 PM
Bitter. Simulation should trumpt gamist issues unless it makes things unmanagable (such as tracking your encumbrance constantly or the like).

*stuff*

And don't pull the "Wizard Fallacy" on me, thanks.

You know, I used to be like that - obsessed with details and everything making sense. My best friend and long time DM came up with a strategy. He would just look at me, and say, "Zombies." It came from a day when I started ranting about firearms in a zombie movie.
Zombies.
Animated corpses. Things with no life, no vital processes, able to get up and move around.
Decidely NOT REAL.
It was a good "unreality" check for me. I learned to just sit back and enjoy it. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MST3KMantra)

Similarly, D&D is not a simulation of anything remotely real. It has so many completely ludicrous elements that stuff like this should be the least of your worries. I mean, seriously, you couldn't hurt a walking stone or an animate slime with any hand weapon, period, except maybe a pickaxe or hammer on the golem. Worrying about questions like this is rather a moot point.

In a fantasy game, there are many, many ways to explain precision damage against creatures without anatomies. Well placed blows that weaken the joints on a stone golem. Shooting an ooze at an angle so some it's liquid mass flies off. Just remember, it's heroic fantasy, not historical reenactment. Unless you're reenacting historical periods where people fought oozes, golems and zombies, which I do not believe are recorded anywhere.

Ixahinon
2008-12-10, 10:07 PM
It is wrong, because it breaks the game. Having said feat, with his current stuff, would allow 8d6 damage per swing, for four swings (He duel wields). He's 15th level...he is throwing an 8th level fire ball with a sword... a +2 Greater Undead Bane Sword. I'm not even counting his sword damage, and strength.

My point is...these monsters were created with a specific intent in mind. You can't critical them. A man doing that much damage on his own..can solo an Iron Golem with no problems at all...

There is also the problem of jumping light years ahead of his companions in damage. Why are they even playing now?

I understand spells such as Grave Strike, and Spark of Life that allow for criticaling undead FOR A TIME DURATION...but allowing it 24/7 is game breaking...completely.

Arbitrarity
2008-12-10, 10:07 PM
Keep in mind Rogues don't get a get out of jail card. Swift hunter does not apply to sneak attack.

But your right it doesn't make sense but than neither does shooting fireballs out of your hands. and speaking as a scout/ranger playing in a game that super heavy undead based. I like it.

Penetrating Strike. Go Dungeonscape. Also, MIC, since we're already out of core. Crystal of Truedeath and Greater Demolition crystals are your friends. Really, I don't understand why undead, constructs, plants, are immune to critical hits. You take out a limb, strike more critical body parts, pretty easily (well, not easily, but possibly), even on such things. Oozes, not so much, but plausibly.



At 1st level, a ranger may select a type of creature from among those given on Table: Ranger Favored Enemies. The ranger gains a +2 bonus on Bluff, Listen, Sense Motive, Spot, and Survival checks when using these skills against creatures of this type. Likewise, he gets a +2 bonus on weapon damage rolls against such creatures.

I see NO limitations on the bonus damage against any creature type in that description.

Animefunkmaster
2008-12-10, 10:08 PM
Now its hard to make a realism claim with things such as oozes/constructs/undead as they aren't real. However, I feel that it is fairly realistic that a person who specializes in killing these types of creatures would know how to hit them in areas that would maximize there damage. That's my line of thinking for undead and constructs... Oozes don't make much sense to me, but it seems reasonable that someone who knew a lot about them would be able to harm them better. I think the best way to represent that in dnd is with precision based damage.

If it were me I would say some fraction of sneak attack for favored enemies instead of skirmish damage... but hey, I never really liked skirmish from a realism perspective to begin with, and the feat is clearly designed for them.

As for what good is having oozes/constructs/undead; not every skirmisher or ranger will take this feat (much less favored enemy construct or Ooze) and a wizard still deals with these creatures better (and has the knowledge checks to pick apart there weaknesses). Also a DM shouldn't be out just to screw a player. In a typical campaign with more than one type of monster, favored enemy is far less desirable.


He's 15th level...he is throwing an 8th level fire ball with a sword... a +2 Greater Undead Bane Sword. I'm not even counting his sword damage, and strength.

So... delayed blast fireball from a 15th level wizard is...? Not to mention the spell Control Undead (no save for mindless).

Sinfire Titan
2008-12-10, 10:08 PM
Bitter. Simulation should trumpt gamist issues unless it makes things unmanagable (such as tracking your encumbrance constantly or the like).

A good way to tell with my posts: If it seems to slam 4e; that's the correct reading.


Further on this thread's topic:

I'm frankly sick of seeing things that amount to "I know this doesn't make sense, but wouldn't it be cool for my character to be able to?"

And don't pull the "Wizard Fallacy" on me, thanks.

There are worse things than Skirmish Damage always being on. Much worse. Like Echoing Shadow Miracle worse.

This feat is nothing compared to the real brain-busters, like the Self-Replicating Warforged Army. Or the Infinite Gold Commoner. (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=2950.msg91570#new)

Kizara
2008-12-10, 10:19 PM
There are worse things than Skirmish Damage always being on. Much worse. Like Echoing Shadow Miracle worse.

This feat is nothing compared to the real brain-busters, like the Self-Replicating Warforged Army. Or the Infinite Gold Commoner. (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=2950.msg91570#new)

Believe it or not, its possible to object to this while also not allowing such shennegins/nonsense as well.

While not exactly Wizard Fallacy, you did something similar.

The "you know how to fight them better so your damage works now" claim:

I can proscribe to this... to a point. As long as its not outright fudgery of "well I have this ability, so my character somehow figures out a way".

Thing is, golems, animated objects, doors, walls, weapons, etc are not clockwork constructions, they don't have vulnerable parts. If are more skilled at smashing things (Destructive Rage), that's one thing, but "I attack them more sneakily" doesn't work, sorry.

Undead generally do not have vulnerable parts, organs or other places that even someone skilled at fighting them could exploit. Even skeletons don't have bones that are more especially breakable or somesuch, and things like "target the spine" falls into the called shot territory of "I shoot it in the face", and that's not how combat works.

Oozes are just a gelatinous blob. How can you strike it in a more deadly fashion that doesn't amount to "harder"? And that's PA, not SA.


Now SKIRMISH is not quite the same, as skirmish is finding advantage through positioning and accuracy, as opposed to enemy vulnerable spots. If you allow that shifting 10ft to the side can make your arrow do more damage, I don't see the difference if its a vampire really.

RebelRogue
2008-12-10, 10:20 PM
It is wrong, because it breaks the game. Having said feat, with his current stuff, would allow 8d6 damage per swing, for four swings (He duel wields). He's 15th level...he is throwing an 8th level fire ball with a sword... a +2 Greater Undead Bane Sword. I'm not even counting his sword damage, and strength.
Swift Hunter allows skirmish damage to apply. You can't do a full melee attack and skirmish at the same time that I know of.

Edit: ah yeah, Travel Devotion and pounce. Forget about that!

Sinfire Titan
2008-12-10, 10:25 PM
Swift Hunter allows skirmish damage to apply. You can't do a full melee attack and skirmish at the same time that I know of.

Pounce, Travel Devotion, numerous magic items, it's easier than you think.


Believe it or not, its possible to object to this while also not allowing such shennegins/nonsense as well.

Did you even read where the hell that link lead to? Theoretical Optimization. This assumes no DM Fiat, no interference from personal interpretations of the rules. That means that everything in that forum is completely legal by RAW, just like Pun-Pun (and are about as powerful as said Kobold).

In other words, that's the /b/ of Optimization, the place where broken things come from to rape your horses and ride off on your women. Nothing short of DM Fiat or flavor-text is capable of preventing this from happening. Nothing.

RebelRogue
2008-12-10, 10:25 PM
Undead generally do not have vulnerable parts, organs or other places that even someone skilled at fighting them could exploit. Even skeletons don't have bones that are more especially breakable or somesuch, and things like "target the spine" falls into the called shot territory of "I shoot it in the face", and that's not how combat works.
You seem to have pretty detailed knowledge of how completely fictitious creatures from a game work and don't work!

RTGoodman
2008-12-10, 10:25 PM
It is wrong, because it breaks the game. Having said feat, with his current stuff, would allow 8d6 damage per swing, for four swings (He duel wields). He's 15th level...he is throwing an 8th level fire ball with a sword... a +2 Greater Undead Bane Sword. I'm not even counting his sword damage, and strength.

My point is...these monsters were created with a specific intent in mind. You can't critical them. A man doing that much damage on his own..can solo an Iron Golem with no problems at all...

There is also the problem of jumping light years ahead of his companions in damage. Why are they even playing now?

I understand spells such as Grave Strike, and Spark of Life that allow for criticaling undead FOR A TIME DURATION...but allowing it 24/7 is game breaking...completely.

In that case, it's just wrong because it's considerably more powerful than you're willing to allow in your game. Assuming you're the DM, just sit down and talk to the player and tell him it's just too much in the current game. Ask him if he's willing to chance his feat to something less game-breaking, or if he'll consider a change to the ability (for instance, he can only do half damage to normally immune creatures). Remember, a DM should say "Yes" as much as possible, but once it causes a problem it's fully within his rights to say "No."

Also, note that he has to have Favored Enemy (Undead, Oozes, AND Constructs) to be able to effect all of those, and you could be using those for something much more effective depending on the game (like Humans or something). If all you're throwing are Undead/Constructs/Oozes, though, there's no reason he SHOULDN'T want to take the feat, since you're shutting down a LOT of his power.


@RebelRogue: There are actually a TON of ways to get a Skirmish full attack. One level in the Spirit Lion Totem barbarian variant from Complete Champion gives you Pounce (full attack on a charge, which means you HAVE to move 10 feet), the Belt of Battle from MIC gives you an extra action (use it for extra move action, then normal full attack), and the Travel Devotion feat from Complete Champion gives extra move actions in general.


EDIT: So many dice of sudden strike damage!

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-10, 10:37 PM
What are the other characters? A Scout dealing 32d6 bonus if all attacks hit doesn't seem unreasonable to me, since his entire build probably was aimed at that. There's a lot of ways to deal a lot more damage a round than that by 15th level, and since an undead-heavy campaign nerfs most skillmonkeys, it's not surprising he found a way around it. Heck, even banning that aspect of the feat would just mean he buys a Greater Truedeath Crystal which only costs him a few thousand and does the same thing.

Ixahinon
2008-12-10, 10:44 PM
I have no problems with the idea of sneak attack/skirmish/sudden strike/critical hit/whatever else on things that shouldn't be able to..but what I have a problem with is him being able to do it 24/7. If this feat had a Uses Per Day on it..Nothing would be said of it...but it doesn't. 36d6 is incredable, coupled with an Aporter weapon, or Spring Attack...he'd do it all the time. Even a mage can't keep up with that..eventually they'd run out of spells to keep up.

Spells that allow a 'window' to do the things said above is fine...feats should be done in the same way...

Thinker
2008-12-10, 10:45 PM
It is wrong, because it breaks the game. Having said feat, with his current stuff, would allow 8d6 damage per swing, for four swings (He duel wields). He's 15th level...he is throwing an 8th level fire ball with a sword... a +2 Greater Undead Bane Sword. I'm not even counting his sword damage, and strength.

My point is...these monsters were created with a specific intent in mind. You can't critical them. A man doing that much damage on his own..can solo an Iron Golem with no problems at all...

There is also the problem of jumping light years ahead of his companions in damage. Why are they even playing now?

I understand spells such as Grave Strike, and Spark of Life that allow for criticaling undead FOR A TIME DURATION...but allowing it 24/7 is game breaking...completely.

So on a full attack he deals an average of 112 damage plus bane damage plus his weapon damage at a reasonably high level. I'm not sure how that is a big deal. He still won't often one-shot things, but at the same time he is still fairly squishy. How does he deal with flying creatures (with flyby attack), ranged opponents, or opponents using terrain to their advantage? Instead of trying to take away his class abilities, why not try a more strategic approach? How much damage do other people in the party do that makes 112 a lot at level 15?

Edit: Also consider creatures with DR. That damage is taken off of every attack (another weakness of two-weapon fighters). If it's that much of a problem throw something with DR 15/(whatever you want) at him (reducing his damage to only 15 damage on average, assuming all attacks hit).

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-10, 10:52 PM
I have no problems with the idea of sneak attack/skirmish/sudden strike/critical hit/whatever else on things that shouldn't be able to..but what I have a problem with is him being able to do it 24/7. If this feat had a Uses Per Day on it..Nothing would be said of it...but it doesn't. 36d6 is incredable, coupled with an Aporter weapon, or Spring Attack...he'd do it all the time. Even a mage can't keep up with that..eventually they'd run out of spells to keep up.

Spells that allow a 'window' to do the things said above is fine...feats should be done in the same way...At level 15 the Wizard has 8th level spells, the Druid is able to turn into a Tendriculos or a Triceratops and has a pet Dire Bear(1 level away from a Dire Tiger), and an Ubercharger can be dealing damage in the ~300 range. Let the Scout break kneecaps if he wants. It's nothing a Rogue couldn't be doing 24/7 with a magic item or an ACF.

Ixahinon
2008-12-10, 10:55 PM
How is that not a big deal? An Angel of Decay straight from the text has 198 hp of damage. he does 112 hp on average, and it's half dead already. Angels of Decay are CR 15 as well..

The next person in the group that does more damage would be the mage...and he has to struggle to hit that high consistantly in damage. With metamagics and all. Next melee can do maybe 50hp on average.

There's my problem.

And he's not squishy. Skirmish gives him +4 AC more. +3 Energy Immunity Mithral Breastplate, +3 Buckler with Improved Buckler Defense, ring of Protection +3, Bracers of Barkskin (+2), +5 Dex Mod

32 AC

RTGoodman
2008-12-10, 10:59 PM
How is that not a big deal? An Angel of Decay straight from the text has 198 hp of damage. he does 112 hp on average, and it's half dead already. Angels of Decay are CR 15 as well..

The next person in the group that does more damage would be the mage...and he has to struggle to hit that high consistantly in damage. With metamagics and all. Next melee can do maybe 50hp on average.

There's my problem.

Well, then read what I wrote in my last post about talking to the player. If that doesn't work, STOP THROWING THE SAME CREATURE TYPES AT HIM.

Also, you're the DM - you can change things! That's what you're there for!

For any other suggestions on how to deal with the player, you're gonna need to post the build.


And he's not squishy. Skirmish gives him +4 AC more. +3 Energy Immunity Mithral Breastplate, +3 Buckler with Improved Buckler Defense, ring of Protection +3, Bracers of Barkskin (+2), +5 Dex Mod

32 AC

The Marut (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/inevitable.htm#marut) (CR 15) has an attack of +22 - that means it only needs a 10 to hit and deals (effectively) 5d6+12 damage. That's twice a round with a full attack. A Mature Adult Brass Dragon (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/dragonTrue.htm#brassDragon) (CR 15) has a +28 to it's attack, has a LOT of attacks, and can FLY. An Old White Dragon (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/dragonTrue.htm#whiteDragon) (CR 15) has a +31 to hit, meaning it hits on EVERYTHING BUT A NATURAL ONE.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-10, 11:01 PM
How is that not a big deal? An Angel of Decay straight from the text has 198 hp of damage. he does 112 hp on average, and it's half dead already. Angels of Decay are CR 15 as well..

The next person in the group that does more damage would be the mage...and he has to struggle to hit that high consistantly in damage. With metamagics and all. Next melee can do maybe 50hp on average.

There's my problem.Ah. One mans well-built character is another's campaign smasher. Can't really help you there, as it's probably possible to boost a Monk's damage that high.

Grynning
2008-12-10, 11:03 PM
How is that not a big deal? An Angel of Decay straight from the text has 198 hp of damage. he does 112 hp on average, and it's half dead already. Angels of Decay are CR 15 as well..

The next person in the group that does more damage would be the mage...and he has to struggle to hit that high consistantly in damage. With metamagics and all. Next melee can do maybe 50hp on average.

There's my problem.

And he's not squishy. Skirmish gives him +4 AC more. +3 Energy Immunity Mithral Breastplate, +3 Buckler with Improved Buckler Defense, ring of Protection +3, Bracers of Barkskin (+2), +5 Dex Mod

32 AC

I am going to say this - that is nothing very impressive in terms of character optimization. Go read through one, just one, of the very long character power level threads on this forum, you'll see that 32 AC and 100 or so points of damage is not that unreasonable. And even with 32 AC, the monsters will very likely hit anyways. At this level of play, as Stoopidtallkid has already mentioned, other classes are doing things that are WAY more broken with much less effort. Save or dies and wildshaping to say the least. And the wizard can't even be hit in melee because he's flying and surrounded by other spells all the time, and the cleric will probably have a higher AC than 32 just standing still.

The point is, melee classes like the scout and ranger are sub-par by default. Anything that brings their damage up is a good thing, especially since damage is the only thing they're really any good for.

SurlySeraph
2008-12-10, 11:10 PM
It is wrong, because it breaks the game. Having said feat, with his current stuff, would allow 8d6 damage per swing, for four swings (He duel wields). He's 15th level...he is throwing an 8th level fire ball with a sword... a +2 Greater Undead Bane Sword. I'm not even counting his sword damage, and strength.
...
I understand spells such as Grave Strike, and Spark of Life that allow for criticaling undead FOR A TIME DURATION...but allowing it 24/7 is game breaking...completely.

Optimized high-level characters do a lot of damage? My God, the game is broken!


Thing is, golems, animated objects, doors, walls, weapons, etc are not clockwork constructions, they don't have vulnerable parts. If are more skilled at smashing things (Destructive Rage), that's one thing, but "I attack them more sneakily" doesn't work, sorry.

Golem: joints
Animated objects: depends
Doors: hinges
Weapons: break it by hitting as close to the middle as possible


Undead generally do not have vulnerable parts, organs or other places that even someone skilled at fighting them could exploit. Even skeletons don't have bones that are more especially breakable or somesuch, and things like "target the spine" falls into the called shot territory of "I shoot it in the face", and that's not how combat works.

As with golems, hit them in the joints to snap their limbs off. Or, yes, break their backs.


Oozes are just a gelatinous blob. How can you strike it in a more deadly fashion that doesn't amount to "harder"? And that's PA, not SA.

Got me there. Cut a chunk off of it, maybe.


I have no problems with the idea of sneak attack/skirmish/sudden strike/critical hit/whatever else on things that shouldn't be able to..but what I have a problem with is him being able to do it 24/7. If this feat had a Uses Per Day on it..Nothing would be said of it...but it doesn't. 36d6 is incredable, coupled with an Aporter weapon, or Spring Attack...he'd do it all the time. Even a mage can't keep up with that..eventually they'd run out of spells to keep up.

Hellfire Warlock with that Vestige that negates CON damage bound.

Alternately, I'm sure Tippy has a Wizard somewhere that can do that.

Ixahinon
2008-12-10, 11:11 PM
Well, then read what I wrote in my last post about talking to the player. If that doesn't work, STOP THROWING THE SAME CREATURE TYPES AT HIM.

Also, you're the DM - you can change things! That's what you're there for!

For any other suggestions on how to deal with the player, you're gonna need to post the build.

I thought of that too..but this campaign is kind of built around the undead/demon/cult scenrio. Maybe I can post character...

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-10, 11:15 PM
I thought of that too..but this campaign is kind of built around the undead/demon/cult scenario. Maybe I can post character...Like I said, this guy sounds well-built, not broken. I'd recommend talking to him about it. I'm guessing he has Improved Skirmish and, say, Travel Devotion or something to let him move 20 and full-attack, as well as some other boosting feat. Not really huge.

Animefunkmaster
2008-12-10, 11:24 PM
"I attack them more sneakily"

I generally don't feel precision based damage is like this, its more like "I know where to hit you to deal more damage". The difference between kicking someone in the balls or trying to cut there arm (not a good example, I know). The point is: while precision based damage can be obtained by sneaking up on someone but doesn't have to.

Constructs and undead are a little different because they are magic and not biological, since we can't think of them in a realistic sense lets compare them to robots (without the circuitry). Attacking at a joint seems more likely to cause damage than right on there chest (or other large/well supported/armored area), given the blows are equal in force, this can be defined as precision based damage. Now jumping back to dnd, someone who is very familiar with magical constructs could feasibly get precision based damage on constructs/undead by hitting them in weaker areas of there design (either magical/circuitry design or just physical)... so at the very least, the fluff of the feat sounds reasonable (or perhaps we will have to agree to disagree on this one). The DM always reserves the right to not like the mechanics of something and to substitute his own.

My analogy is flawed with oozes, which are so far beyond my logical understanding that I just accept them as a part of a fantasy world. Maybe the character learns a special way to hit the ooze that simultaneously hurts it and swirls it around dealing more damage? Little weird. I don't have an explanation for you there,

For a character who focuses on killing one thing often leave themselves open in another area. Ever thought of things with reach? Disarm/Sunder/Trip/Grapple much? How about a non favored enemy with heavy fort armor. Maybe something with a few levels in warshaper. Just because a non-caster is competent at killing a few types of creatures doesn't mean the character is broken. Stick the player in question in a situation that would be a new kind of challenge (like a race to catch something, or a social situation). Finding ways so the player doesn't just turn on Auto-Attack and watch reactions is what makes dnd fun.

Fax Celestis
2008-12-10, 11:36 PM
It is wrong, because it breaks the game. Having said feat, with his current stuff, would allow 8d6 damage per swing, for four swings (He duel wields). He's 15th level...he is throwing an 8th level fire ball with a sword... a +2 Greater Undead Bane Sword. I'm not even counting his sword damage, and strength.

Uh, he has pounce? If not, he doesn't get Skirmish unless he moves 10'. Which means, guess what? No TWF.

Eldariel
2008-12-10, 11:40 PM
How about the rest of the characters? Are they about equal to the Swift Hunter in power? If they are, you could safely just optimize your monsters a bit more, resulting in higher AC, some constant spell effects (Undead are often created through Magic; their creators could easily place some contingent enchantments on the stronger individuals - Demons, on the other hand, have a wide variety of spell effects available through their natural spell-likes and items), protective items, Wands/spell effect items, etc. I mean, monsters have treasure so they better use them.

You can also give them superior stat arrays (the ones in the books present average specimen; that is, 11/10/11/10/11/10 mostly for non-Humanoids; give some Elite Array or rolled stats), pick their feats better (trust me, the normal picks are horrible), etc. Note that Skirmish requires you to be within 30' to work. It's fairly easy for monsters to get to the Skirmisher and trip/grab (if they can't find Freedom of Movement)/similar him. Basically, he's supposed to be good against his Favored Enemies (that's why they are called favored enemies), let him. Just, don't forget that most opposition should have already acquired some protective gear. Also, if the party has been making a ruckus, the opposition could be prepared specifically for their tactics at least partially thanks to Divinations and spy reports and what-have-yous.


As for how to crit things:

Undead: Depends on Undead. Talking about Skeleton, hitting the key bone that maintains the structural integrity. Alternatively, since they're animated by magic, hit a section where the magical energies converge, disrupting the spell animating it. A key idea in most magical animation is that attacking the object weakens the spell and there's usually a magical core in an animated object that's needed for the creature to keep walking. Vampires and such have obvious weak points.

Elementals: They aren't immune to damage. Therefore, they have some kind of an anatomy. It's just fluid an alien. A trained Skirmisher can still locate the weak points in their structure. Also, magically animated, see skeleton.

Oozes: Oozes are living, so there's more to them than a blob of stuff. Therefore, there must be a part they are vulnerable at. Alternatively, hitting them with precision damage just means covering as large part of their body with one hit as possible to lower their integrity.

Constructs: Obviously, they're magically animated. Further, they have humanoid-like bodies, and they're machines so they obviously have the thing that makes them tick, in addition to parts you could hit to hinder their functionality. For example, breaking their torso pretty much brings down the whole thing.

Ixahinon
2008-12-10, 11:41 PM
He has Lion's Charge...which is Pounce.

I guess my problem with all this is: Why do these type of creature have Immunity to something that can be bypassed so easily? There isn't even something that softens the blow, either..like... only 3/4 sneak attack damage or something..it's full blown. Just like attacking any other flesh and blood character...only without flesh and blood.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-10, 11:42 PM
Uh, he has pounce? If not, he doesn't get Skirmish unless he moves 10'. Which means, guess what? No TWF.And getting 8d6 with Skirmish is hard with only 4d6 base. Imp Skirmish requires 20' move, not 10, Acrobatic Skirmisher is Dragon and would take 2 feats to get an additional 2d6, as well as requiring moving through an opponent's square(meaning doesn't work with Pounce). The only other options for boosting SA mostly don't mention Skirmish.

Edit:As to why they have immunity, it's just as valid to ask why some classes have bonus damage that is ignored so easily. They really aren't the best damagers, and 5 types are immune to them out of 12.

Fax Celestis
2008-12-10, 11:44 PM
He has Lion's Charge...which is Pounce.

I guess my problem with all this is: Why do these type of creature have Immunity to something that can be bypassed so easily? There isn't even something that softens the blow, either..like... only 3/4 sneak attack damage or something..it's full blown. Just like attacking any other flesh and blood character...only without flesh and blood.

Because the initial designers of the game looked at Sneak Attack's damage output potential and went OMGWTFSPQR WE NEED TO MAKE THIS DIFFICULT TO GET KTHX

Later, the designers went, "Okay, Sneak Attack is too hard to get, we were wrong in our assumption. Let's see what we can do to fix it." Hence Razing Strike, golem strike, gravestrike, and vine strike's creation. But these were too hard to use, requiring multiclassing.

So then they came up with other replacements.

Eldariel
2008-12-10, 11:46 PM
I guess my problem with all this is: Why do these type of creature have Immunity to something that can be bypassed so easily? There isn't even something that softens the blow, either..like... only 3/4 sneak attack damage or something..it's full blown. Just like attacking any other flesh and blood character...only without flesh and blood.

The immunity is easily bypassed, since the immunity ruins characters. A focused character who cannot do that one thing he's good at is useless. Imagine a Scout without Skirmish. Maybe 10 damage per turn if he's lucky, 20 with enough enchantments. He's not going to pose a serious threat to any opponent of equal CR, let alone one with DR.

Really though, I don't think anything should be immune to critical hits. Precision damage, maybe. But anything can be hit in an especially vulnerable spot. And since inability to deal precision damage pretty much kills some characters, it's better to have resistance to it rather than total immunity, so it's still something you could overcome, but requiring some work.

Philistine
2008-12-10, 11:47 PM
Let me guess: you told the players beforehand that this was going to be a very undead-heavy campaign? Because it sounds like the Scout/Ranger's player has put some effort into optimizing for exactly that very specific situation. It's driven his class, feat, and FE selections; and he's also dumped a huge chunk of his character's wealth on a pair of swords that would be much less useful in any other type of setting.

It sounds, in other words, like he's worked very hard to build a character that can kill undead very effectively, but is utterly marginal against virtually any other type of opponent. So why shouldn't he reap the benefits of that much specialization?

MeklorIlavator
2008-12-10, 11:48 PM
Plus, what's his Attack Bonus? Sure, if every attack hits he does massive damage, but that's assuming every attack hits. Perhaps some enemies with displacement or something similar?

Ixahinon
2008-12-11, 12:01 AM
I'm not trying to demean his build. At first, maybe..but not now. No, he was not told this was an undead specific campeign...just a lot of it. There are other things in the game...he chose to go this route. As a player, I applaud him for such a creation.

It's the word 'immunity' that botheres me...it isn't immune at all, thanks to feats...It's just hard to grasp for me..

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-11, 12:05 AM
It's the word 'immunity' that botheres me...it isn't immune at all, thanks to feats...It's just hard to grasp for me..It's immune to all normally targeted precision damage. He's specially trained to hit undead in their weakest point.

Ixahinon
2008-12-11, 12:12 AM
In theory, a DM allowing a mage to make Protection from Energy (Any type) perminent is immune to fire. Immune... Have it cast by high level casters, and it's also very hard to dispel...thus the word Immune. *shrug* One of D&Ds little quirks that I need to get past, I guess...

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-11, 12:17 AM
In theory, a DM allowing a mage to make Protection from Energy (Any type) perminent is immune to fire. Immune... Have it cast by high level casters, and it's also very hard to dispel...thus the word Immune. *shrug* One of D&Ds little quirks that I need to get past, I guess...Searing Spell, Sandstorm. +1 metamagic that allows your fire spells to ignore fire resistance and deal 50% damage to immune creatures, x2 damage to Cold-subtype creatures. And that's just the first way I could think of.

Ixahinon
2008-12-11, 12:21 AM
Exactly...your not immune...so why use the word immune?

Eldariel
2008-12-11, 12:22 AM
I guess the point here is that designers wanted for D&D to be kind to one-trick ponies. That is, the game is built to give you tools to get through things that would hose your entire character who's only good at one thing. Wizards decided that it should be ok for someone to want to be a pyromancer without being punished by totally immune opponents. Same with Scouts, Wizards decided that it should be ok for someone to be a precision damage wielder even in an Undead-focused campaign (where they'd normally be completely useless).

Really, there's very little in terms of real, unpiercable immunity in D&D ("spell immunity" only protects you against spells with SR: Yes description, and abilities exist that allow you to ignore any amount of SR, theorethically allowing you to cast through Spell Immunity's SR: Infinite when going by that interpretion), especially before Epic (once you enter Epic though, due to the lack of published material, defenses tend to take over making standard damage pretty much the only means of beating people as everyone is immune to everything...and hitting someone with normal damage between all the contingent effects, defensive spells and so on is not trivial at all).


Immunity means that you're immune to normal effects of one kind. Someone capable of piercing immunity is not "normal".

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-11, 12:23 AM
Exactly...your not immune...so why use the word immune?You're immune to all normal versions of it. This is something special specifically designed to get around the immunity. It's not really precision damage anymore, it's "anti-undead skirmishing".

MeklorIlavator
2008-12-11, 12:26 AM
Exactly...your not immune...so why use the word immune?

Because 9 times out of 10, you are. Its only once people start spending resources that this might be broken, and even then, only those who spend the resources can break this. I mean, do you complain about PC's being able to fly if the wizard canst fly even though Humans explicitly can't? Or how about taking actions after you get knocked to -5 hp if you have the Diehard feat?

Heck, even in real life, do you complain that people shouldn't say that man can't fly, as we do have airplanes? Or how about surviving in Space? Its the same idea: spend resources and you can get around limitations.

Ixahinon
2008-12-11, 12:26 AM
You're immune to all normal versions of it. This is something special specifically designed to get around the immunity. It's not really precision damage anymore, it's "anti-undead skirmishing".

So to retaliate..would necomantic liches discover ways to make themselves high protected (possibly Immune?) to those 'special attacks' too? After all, we are talking about adapting, adopting, and improving.

I have a funny feeling that if I invented a feat to counteract against special attacks allowing sneak attack to work on undead..I'm suddenly being an *******...but why can't enemies find new defenses just as PCs find new attacks?

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-11, 12:29 AM
So to retaliate..would necomantic liches discover ways to make themselves high protected (possibly Immune?) to those 'special attacks' too? After all, we are talking about adapting, adopting, and improving.Yep. D&D is essentially an arms race. Especially at high levels, it quickly becomes a question of figuring out what the enemy isn't immune to, then hitting that. Mindblank/Deathward/FoM FTW.

Grynning
2008-12-11, 12:30 AM
So to retaliate..would necomantic liches discover ways to make themselves high protected (possibly Immune?) to those 'special attacks' too? After all, we are talking about adapting, adopting, and improving.

Liches are spellcasters. They have a dozen or more ways to be "immune" to melee damage, period, let alone sneak attacks or skirmish.

Arbitrarity
2008-12-11, 12:32 AM
I.e. Blur. You can't get precision damage when your enemy has concealment based miss chance.

Between flight, Greater Mirror Image, Abrupt Jaunt, and a host of other buffs, I can safely say that wizards can avoid your average melee attack.

Eldariel
2008-12-11, 12:37 AM
And uhh, Ironguard, Etherealness, Ghostform, Image-line, Astral Projection, etc... Oh yeah, and Simulacri, Contingencies, shaped Anti-Magic Fields, etc. I mean, it's a caster. It has means.

Ixahinon
2008-12-11, 12:39 AM
I.e. Blur. You can't get precision damage when your enemy has concealment based miss chance.

Between flight, Greater Mirror Image, Abrupt Jaunt, and a host of other buffs, I can safely say that wizards can avoid your average melee attack.

Mages can withstand anything..I'm talking about melee types...they aren't really proficient in casting blur...

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-11, 12:40 AM
Mages can withstand anything..I'm talking about melee types...they aren't really proficient in casting blur...But they are proficient in fighting in dark areas(though if your Scout doesn't have Darkvision or an Everburning Iwin stone by now, there's a problem).

Grynning
2008-12-11, 12:41 AM
Mages can withstand anything..I'm talking about melee types...they aren't really proficient in casting blur...

Then you're not talking about liches. What are you arguing at this point, exactly?

Swift Hunter is NOT overpowered. I think that's all we're trying to get across here. If you think otherwise, you should think of a better reason than "you might be able to possibly cream an undead with it if you build very specifically towards it."

Ixahinon
2008-12-11, 12:44 AM
Then you're not talking about liches. What are you arguing at this point, exactly?

Swift Hunter is NOT overpowered. I think that's all we're trying to get across here. If you think otherwise, you should think of a better reason than "you might be able to possibly cream an undead with it if you build very specifically towards it."

Yea..that arguement is gone. I've already coneaded. However, when people were starting to suggest ways to counter this stuff...everyone came up with magical solutions. Maybe the problem was when I used lich as an example...

Grynning
2008-12-11, 12:47 AM
Yea..that arguement is gone. I've already coneaded. However, when people were starting to suggest ways to counter this stuff...everyone came up with magical solutions. Maybe the problem was when I used lich as an example...

Everything in 3.5 has a magical solution. That's one of the major balance problems of the edition. Actually its the major balance problem of the edition.

Which why most people don't fret over melee builds too much. They're all easily countered by magic.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-11, 12:49 AM
Yea..that arguement is gone. I've already coneaded. However, when people were starting to suggest ways to counter this stuff...everyone came up with magical solutions. Maybe the problem was when I used lich as an example...Liches have to be casters. Most undead are created by casters(the others are generally made by other undead and just more powerful as casters). The other prime non-magical ways of stopping precision damage include: Not getting hit
Fighting with concealment(darkness, fog)
avoiding the Scout
not letting the Scout move
killing the Scout
Heavy Fortification Armor(maybe)
Warshaper levels(again, maybe)

Jasdoif
2008-12-11, 12:51 AM
Exactly...your not immune...so why use the word immune?I'm going to guess it's because when "immune" was first used it actually was immunity, and republishing everything that said "fire immunity" as soon as an ability bypassed it wasn't feasible. Besides which, this is a case of "special effect specifically negates other special effect", and since you know which one is which it should be fairly easy to remember.


Anyway, back to the original topic....Assuming you allow Fortification to apply to skirmish damage, I disagree that Swift Hunter bypasses Fortification. Heavy Fortification doesn't make you immune to critical hits or the like, it turns 100% of them into ordinary hits. At that point, you have no skirmish damage to apply Swift Hunter to.

FMArthur
2008-12-11, 01:00 AM
I think it's worth reminding yourself that he would be able to pull off that damage (and only if he hits!) on any foe, and that he's gone to great lengths to make sure he can still be useful even when facing certain enemies that would normally make him totally useless in combat. If you just DM-fiat around his character build and hand-wave some 'super-immunity' just to specifically smite his character and make his extra work redundant (leaving him in the situation of uselessness he worked to avoid) you're going to wind up with a very unhappy player.

If this is really broken for a 15th level character to you, you may in fact be reading some combat rules wrong. You know that you can only attack as a standard action, and can only full attack when you move 5-ft or less, right? (it's possible that he does have one of a few obscure things that lets full-attack after moving though, but it involves spending more feats/levels in other classes that can reduce his power). You should know that Scouts only get Skirmish damage when moving 10+ feet, you should know all the Two-Weapon-Fighting rules and penalties that apply, etc, etc. I'm not saying that these specific things are things you got wrong or anything, but most often when someone says something is broken and 99% of other players don't agree, that someone is usually misunderstanding the rules in some small but situationally disastrous way.

What sort of things are the rest of the party doing in combat, by the way?

Grynning
2008-12-11, 01:06 AM
What sort of things are the rest of the party doing in combat, by the way?

There is no party. The whole argument is about a hypothetical Swift Hunter scout in a hypothetical party, with hypothetical Favored Enemy Undead fighting a hypothetical undead non-spellcasting opponent. Or something like that. Hypothetically.

I have no idea anymore :smallconfused:

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-11, 01:08 AM
Yeah, I have to ask what other characters are played with if ~100 damage is an issue.

RTGoodman
2008-12-11, 01:09 AM
There is no party. The whole argument is about a hypothetical Swift Hunter scout in a hypothetical party, with hypothetical Favored Enemy Undead fighting a hypothetical undead non-spellcasting opponent. Or something like that. Hypothetically.

I have no idea anymore :smallconfused:

God, I would HOPE there's a party:


The next person in the group that does more damage would be the mage...and he has to struggle to hit that high consistantly in damage. With metamagics and all. Next melee can do maybe 50hp on average.

There's my problem.

And he's not squishy. Skirmish gives him +4 AC more. +3 Energy Immunity Mithral Breastplate, +3 Buckler with Improved Buckler Defense, ring of Protection +3, Bracers of Barkskin (+2), +5 Dex Mod

32 AC

...Or else the OP has some crazy multiple personalities that are all D&D characters with stats and stuff.

Grynning
2008-12-11, 01:14 AM
See, I got the impression that he was just giving examples to support his point (or trying to anyways :smalltongue:). Nothing about those posts strikes me as recounting actual game play.

Edit: We all make up stats for hypothetical characters on board discussions, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that. I'm just saying that the argument here has gotten way out of hand over a relatively minor thing (Swift Hunter, which I believe is widely regarded as a well-balanced feat).

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-11, 01:18 AM
And if they do, then he needs to figure out that you can't use a Buckler with TWF.

Grynning
2008-12-11, 01:20 AM
And if they do, then he needs to figure out that you can't use a Buckler with TWF.

You can with Improved Buckler Defense, that's what the feat does. Remember, D&D bucklers are apparently little things strapped to your forearm, not real bucklers that you hold in your hand.

Animefunkmaster
2008-12-11, 01:30 AM
In theory, a DM allowing a mage to make Protection from Energy (Any type) perminent is immune to fire. Immune... Have it cast by high level casters, and it's also very hard to dispel...thus the word Immune. *shrug* One of D&Ds little quirks that I need to get past, I guess...

I could be mistaken but I believe there are other immunities that can be bypassed. IIRC (afb) Frost Mage eventually has her magic pierce cold immunity. Spending a feat is not easy, not by a long shot, you usually have precious few and they are an integral part for customizing your character (not including multiclassing or PrCs). A 1 level dip, that's easy, a magic item, easy, a Feat... not so much. And in this case feat + class ability (Also check multiclassing on this guy, if he has a dip in barbarian, he may have missed something).

Some things to do: He has to move 20 ft right? first option is to close in, he moves out of threatened square he provokes you can attempt a trip or grapple or just a regular attack. Difficult terrain, move hindering spells/move enhancing spells on self, reasonably intelligent foes (Stay out of charging range, ready actions), trip/disarm/sunder/grapple (the best things in 3.5 do not revolve around hp). Next: Demons and Cultist (This brings down his weapon). Finally: Hordes. It might get hectic keeping track but lots of little opponents is more fun for players than one big one (makes even the weakest melee character feel powerful downing foe after foe, while the mages are tiny gods). Keep in mind that CR and undead is a little wonky. Finally, this doesn't seem like a problem with your skirmisher and more with the rest of the party, post what they are and we can give you advice on how to help them.

Work smarter not harder, don't try to beat him at what he does, help the other players get stronger and focus on making there experience just as enjoyable (in addition to not singling out the skirmish player). If the player in question is being a douche, then you need to talk to him.

They are level 15 with a mountain of gold, they should all be really good at what they do.

Fax Celestis
2008-12-11, 11:34 AM
He has Lion's Charge...which is Pounce.

And he gets that, what, four times a day? Seriously. This Is Not As Big An Issue As You're Making It.

RukiTanuki
2008-12-11, 04:17 PM
In an exceptions-based game such as D&D, this is an odd point to be upset about an exception.

To actually answer the original question, though, I think Swift Hunter only circumvents the creature's immunity to precision damage, and that any item granting protection from critical hits/precision damage would function normally.

Sinfire Titan
2008-12-11, 10:41 PM
I'm not trying to demean his build. At first, maybe..but not now. No, he was not told this was an undead specific campeign...just a lot of it. There are other things in the game...he chose to go this route. As a player, I applaud him for such a creation.

It's the word 'immunity' that botheres me...it isn't immune at all, thanks to feats...It's just hard to grasp for me..

The feat changes the way the world works. A character who takes the feat isn't just training, he's telling the Physics of the game what's going to happen when a certain siutation occurs. Not that hard to understand, it just works differently from RL.