-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
One also has to consider the source. If Roy or V say something, there's a good chance they've at least thought about it a little and, in the absence of countervailing evidence, its probably right. On the other hand, if Elan (and perhaps to a lesser extent Belkar) say something, there's a good chance they haven't thought about it even a little and, in the absence of countervailing evidence, its probably wrong.
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Crusher
One also has to consider the source. If Roy or V say something, there's a good chance they've at least thought about it a little and, in the absence of countervailing evidence, its probably right. On the other hand, if Elan (and perhaps to a lesser extent Belkar) say something, there's a good chance they haven't thought about it even a little and, in the absence of countervailing evidence, its probably wrong.
As a general rule, I agree with that.
For the specific case in question--Roy trash-talking Miko--I remain mystified that someone would think he was being precise. (As I said, actually more mystified that someone would think he knew Shojo's age to a decade than I would be that someone would think he knew Shojo's age to the year, because it is at least possible to imagine him asking Shojo's age, whereas I can't imagine how he'd find out what decade Shojo was born but not what year.)
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kish
As a general rule, I agree with that.
For the specific case in question--Roy trash-talking Miko--I remain mystified that someone would think he was being precise. (As I said, actually more mystified that someone would think he knew Shojo's age to a decade than I would be that someone would think he knew Shojo's age to the year, because it is at least possible to imagine him asking Shojo's age, whereas I can't imagine how he'd find out what decade Shojo was born but not what year.)
Because you can typically peg how old someone is within a decade or so by their looks? At any rate, I didn't take Roy literally but it wouldn't be unreasonable for someone to assume that Roy estimated Shojo to be in his eighties. This wouldn't mean Shojo has to be that old, sure, but it is worth discussion. Just like whether or not Belkar took Craft Disturbing Mental Image as a feat was worth discussion. Personally, I think it was just a joke and not literal. But it is definitely worthy of bringing up.
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kish
As a general rule, I agree with that.
For the specific case in question--Roy trash-talking Miko--I remain mystified that someone would think he was being precise. (As I said, actually more mystified that someone would think he knew Shojo's age to a decade than I would be that someone would think he knew Shojo's age to the year, because it is at least possible to imagine him asking Shojo's age, whereas I can't imagine how he'd find out what decade Shojo was born but not what year.)
I believe he is at one point referred to as an octogenarian.
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SowZ
This wouldn't mean Shojo has to be that old, sure, but it is worth discussion. Just like whether or not Belkar took Craft Disturbing Mental Image as a feat was worth discussion. Personally, I think it was just a joke and not literal. But it is definitely worthy of bringing up.
No, I think it is not. Imagine I call you "Oh, don't be so old and grumpy and stuck in your ways" in a silly internet debate to express I think you focus too much on unimportant and informationless detail (Note I'm not doing it, this is just for the sake of the argument here).
Now someone comes along and claims you are "old", based on that statement. My line was a worthless statement in regard to carrying actual information very similar to Belkar making jokes or Roy trash-talking to Miko.
Yes, it is worth bringing up but not worth talking more for three posts about it and then dismissing it as "joke" or "trash talk". Roy's comment does not carry more information than "Roy thinks Shojo is old" for which we need no evidence at all (and it surely does not tell us how old Shojo is).
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Winter
No, I think it is not. Imagine I call you "Oh, don't be so old and grumpy and stuck in your ways" in a silly internet debate to express I think you focus too much on unimportant and informationless detail (Note I'm not doing it, this is just for the sake of the argument here).
Now someone comes along and claims you are "old", based on that statement. My line was a worthless statement in regard to carrying actual information very similar to Belkar making jokes or Roy trash-talking to Miko.
Yes, it is worth bringing up but not worth talking more for three posts about it and then dismissing it as "joke" or "trash talk". Roy's comment does not carry more information than "Roy thinks Shojo is old" for which we need no evidence at all (and it surely does not tell us how old Shojo is).
Why are you saying it is not worth bringing up and also saying it is worth bringing up? A discussion can be, "Here is a reference to someones age." "Well, I think it is sarcasm." "Regardless, guys, we have a better source for his age. *Insert evidence*" "Oh, okay." Worth bringing up and talking about when a claim about a character is made.
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SowZ
Why are you saying it is not worth bringing up and also saying it is worth bringing up? A discussion can be, "Here is a reference to someones age." "Well, I think it is sarcasm." "Regardless, guys, we have a better source for his age. *Insert evidence*" "Oh, okay." Worth bringing up and talking about when a claim about a character is made.
Yes, that is what a discussion can and should be in these cases. In this case it is not that, in this case it is much, much longer based on some throw-away remarks by people who simply can and should not know more than us.
I'm sorry if the previous post was too fuzzy. Basically everything is worth to get brought up, but some things should die with a "no, because ..."-post.
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Winter
Yes, that is what a discussion can and should be in these cases. In this case it is not that, in this case it is much, much longer based on some throw-away remarks by people who simply can and should not know more than us.
I'm sorry if the previous post was too fuzzy. Basically everything is worth to get brought up, but some things should die with a "no, because ..."-post.
That happened. Gitman00 asked, hamishspence replied. Two posts, done.
Then we got a rather long discussion on the decidedly different topic of what sorts of posts people want to see in the thread, and what sorts of attitudes. That discussion may have been precipitated by Gitman00's post, but it was not about his question.
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Flame of Anor
Just a reminder:
as I argued here, I believe convincingly, Vaarsuvius should be listed with the Knowledge: Religion skill.
I'll just pop in and remind people of this, because it still hasn't been listed.
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Flame of Anor
I'll just pop in and remind people of this, because it still hasn't been listed.
I'll second that, it seems better established than certain things already listed.
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Techwarrior
I agree with Flame here. Vaarsuvius undoubtedly has the skill trained, he doesn't neccasarily have it maxed, but he does have it.
Moi aussi.
Quote:
Also, Two Weapon Pounce has a Special exception for Rangers with the Two Weapon Fighting Combat Style. Belkar doesn't need any Dexterity, much less 15, to get the feat or to use it, so long as he is wearing light or no armor.
I would like to see Belkar's Dexterity score changed, as Two Weapon Pounce doesn't affect it for him. Do we have any other hard information on the subject?
I would like to to point out though, the OP hasn't been updated at all since October of last year so this might take a while. :smallwink:
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
While we're on the subject, I still see no justification for the assumption that "I'm summoning the employee exit" was casting a "Summon Employee Exit" spell.
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
Doesn't Malack creating mummies prove that he's of a non-Good alignment? Or is there an exception when the spell comes from an item?
Or is it because we're not sure if it was specifically Create Undead? Even then, is there any spell that directly creates intelligent undead yet does not have the [Evil] descriptor?
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Techwarrior
I would like to to point out though, the OP hasn't been updated at all since October of last year so this might take a while. :smallwink:
Oh, I'm still here, there just hasn't been a lot of new material lately (which, after all, tends to correspond to Rich's health). Okay, so yeah, V has the knowledge skill; added now. Looks like I overlooked the last time this was mentioned because of the subsequent (unrelated) flamewar.
Speaking of which, do we have a decent link for V's knowledge: Arcana skill?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Techwarrior
I would like to see Belkar's Dexterity score changed, as Two Weapon Pounce doesn't affect it for him.
And also that. I don't think we know anything else about Belkar's dexterity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gift Jeraff
Doesn't Malack creating mummies prove that he's of a non-Good alignment? Or is there an exception when the spell comes from an item?
That's a good question. We don't really know how he created the mummies, though; what he did doesn't match the Create Undead spell (which takes one hour to cast and produces one mummy which is not under the caster's control). Earlier discussion suggested that he used Malack's Magnificent Mummy-Manufacturing Magick, similar to Tsukiko's Amazing Wight-Making Spell, and we don't know what descriptors that spell might have.
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kurald Galain
That's a good question. We don't really know how he created the mummies, though;
"A few charges from your staff each," Tarquin said. But...is anyone seriously under the impression there's even a tiny, minute chance that Malack is Good-aligned?
(Question about Summon Employee Exit not withdrawn.)
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kurald Galain
Speaking of which, do we have a decent link for V's knowledge: Arcana skill?
Well, she manages to identify the young adult black dragon as such, a DC 26 Knowledge (arcana) check. The dirty magazines would have given a circumstance bonus, but since Knowledge is trained only, V wouldn't have been able to make the check at all without at least one rank in the skill.
Quote:
That's a good question. We don't really know how he created the mummies, though; what he did doesn't match the Create Undead spell (which takes one hour to cast and produces one mummy which is not under the caster's control). Earlier discussion suggested that he used Malack's Magnificent Mummy-Manufacturing Magick, similar to Tsukiko's Amazing Wight-Making Spell, and we don't know what descriptors that spell might have.
I believe casting a spell from a staff is a standard action, regardless of the listed casting time. And if Malack is not Good-aligned, then controlling the newly created undead via rebuking would be no problem for him.
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
Kubota has levels in both Aristocrat and a Aristocrat friendly prestige class that grants the extraordinary ability to fool magical lie detection.
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurald Galain
That's a good question. We don't really know how he created the mummies, though; what he did doesn't match the Create Undead spell (which takes one hour to cast and produces one mummy which is not under the caster's control). Earlier discussion suggested that he used Malack's Magnificent Mummy-Manufacturing Magick, similar to Tsukiko's Amazing Wight-Making Spell, and we don't know what descriptors that spell might have.
Technically possible, but until we see more evidence, we should assume he's using Create Undead. Also, the justification for why undead-making spells are Evil is because they're powered by negative energy, so undead increase entropy by their very existence. Any custom Create Undead-style spell should also have the Evil descriptor.
That said, casting an Evil spell is an evil act, but doesn't by itself mean you have an evil alignment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kish
"A few charges from your staff each," Tarquin said. But...is anyone seriously under the impression there's even a tiny, minute chance that Malack is Good-aligned?
There is evidence that he may be Neutral, but not Good, no.
Quote:
(Question about Summon Employee Exit not withdrawn.)
Agreed. No solid evidence that it's a spell, its utility seems far too limited for a Sorcerer to waste a spell slot on it, and in context it's much more likely to be some kind of custom feature that Dorukan built into his dungeon. It also has a white aura, while Celia's spellcasting aura is blue.
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gitman00
negative energy, so undead increase entropy by their very existence.
If increasing entropy is evil, then eating food, moving, and living in general should also be evil. :smalltongue:
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Winter
If increasing entropy is evil, then eating food, moving, and living in general should also be evil. :smalltongue:
Hey, I'm just repeating the WOTC reasoning. :smalltongue: Though I can't remember the exact source.
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gitman00
Hey, I'm just repeating the WOTC reasoning. :smalltongue: Though I can't remember the exact source.
I think you should focus on the "negative energy" thing and the D&D moral, not some fantasy-concept which RL-meaning isn't understood by most people. :smalltongue:
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gitman00
Any custom Create Undead-style spell should also have the Evil descriptor.
That is a good point; I've looked around, and any undead-creating spell I can find does in fact have the evil descriptor. Unless we can find an exception to that, I find it plausible that whatever spell Malack used was indeed evil, which proves that he himself is of non-good alignment (since clerics cannot use spells of an alignment opposite to their own).
And yeah, "entropy" within the context of D&D religion has a different meaning than "entropy" within the context of real-world physics :P
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
None of this gets us anywhere, since he used the staff.
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ti'esar
None of this gets us anywhere, since he used the staff.
Actually, the rules on staffs say that you cast spells from a staff, and the rules on clerics say that they cannot cast spells with an alignment descriptor opposite to their own. So this would still show that Malack is non-good; Durkon wouldn't be able to use that same staff.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
zimmerwald1915
I believe
casting a spell from a staff is a standard action, regardless of the listed casting time. And if Malack is not Good-aligned, then controlling the newly created undead via rebuking would be no problem for him.
I'm afraid this is incorrect. Third paragraph here, casting from a staff takes as long as the spell would take normally.
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
We've seen Create Undead and Create Greater Undead cast in much less than an hour, so I don't think it really matters.
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ti'esar
None of this gets us anywhere, since he used the staff.
I agree. Even if we could exclude Malack from being good that would not help a lot. The probability of his alignment being good is so low anyway that it deserves not much attention: the big question is if he is neutral or evil.
Using a staff to cast an evil spell as cleric that your god is not giving you for a good reason (not evil) might be allowed by the rules but I find it unlikely a cleric should/would ignore the explicit wishes of his or her god (no [Evil] spells).
From the (D&D) morals point of view, Malack *has* to be evil, no matter the source of the spells.
From the rules' perspective, nothing new is learned here.
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gitman00
Agreed. No solid evidence that it's a spell, its utility seems far too limited for a Sorcerer to waste a spell slot on it, and in context it's much more likely to be some kind of custom feature that Dorukan built into his dungeon. It also has a white aura, while Celia's spellcasting aura is
blue.
RMS Oceanic, are you still curating this thread? The last time you posted in it will be exactly four months ago as of tomorrow.
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
The description of the spell completion items (scroll) says explicitly that the actual spellcasting of the stored spell is being finished the reader of the scroll, although the effort is minimal.
The description of spell trigger item (wands, staves) says "Spell trigger activation is similar to spell completion, but it’s even simpler." Note that "simpler" implies being of the same basic nature.
IMNSHO the best reading of the RAW would be that casting Create Undead from a staff would be forbidden for Good aligned clerics or clerics who worship Good aligned gods.
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
For what it's worth, I agree that "Summon Employee Exit" was probably a feature of the dungeon, not a feature of Celia.
On Shojo's age, I seem to recall that there was some other inconsistency in the timeline that could be resolved by assuming Shojo to be 72 instead of 80+, though I can't remember what. Something about the age at which Soon turned over command of the Guard to him, and the time span of the Scribble's adventures?
For some new grist for the mill: What Belkar does in the current strip to avoid the arrow-trap looks a lot like "use a mount for cover". Should we assume that this was a use of the Ride skill (DC 15)? Though I'm not sure how much this gets us, since Ride can be used untrained.
-
Re: Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!
It's a Ride check with a DC low enough that almost anyone, trained or not, could in theory make. So it tells us nothing.