OOTS #859 - The Discussion Thread

[deworde]

Am I the only one who thinks that a charged Darkness scroll fired on the same arrow might have been a better choice? Simple fog is, while on a smokestick and rather useful, incredibly mundane and brushed away with any casting of a Gust of Wind on a wand or caster spell list. At least one person in the group-save his deafening-can see straight through it due to True Sight moving past all visual obstruction. Not to mention that a full-on Darkness would have better protected Durkon after he shouted the word, leading him into either going back into the wall, or calling a Dispel for the others to charge in.

We've already been through this (top of the page)...

True sight won't get through the fog, as it's a real obstruction. Ironically, magical darkness would be overridden by true sight.

Also, the Order will probably want something that will clear quickly, so they can go on the offensive without running into each other.

But I agree that if they had a charged darkness scroll, then it might work better. But it would be far less inventive and clever, and thus wouldn't get rule of awesome bonus.

[Kish]

Well, putting aside the fact that it's pretty unlikely that anyone in the party was actually carrying such a thing, Tarquin's Ring of True Seeing actually doesn't allow him to see through the smoke. True Seeing fails to bypass mundane disguises or other mundane visual impediments. Not that there's any way for the Order to know this, since they aren't presently aware it is Tarquin they're fighting, and even if they did, they have no way of knowing he has a Ring of True Seeing. However, serendipitously, they ended up choosing the superior option, probably due to the lack of availability of the inferior option.

I don't think they need to know specifically "This enemy has a Ring of True Seeing" to realize that "not a magical illusion" is a big advantage in combat against adventurers of their own level in an area known for magical illusions.

[theNater]

Simple fog is, while on a smokestick and rather useful, incredibly mundane and brushed away with any casting of a Gust of Wind on a wand or caster spell list.

Darkness would be wiped out by any spell with the light descriptor of 2nd level or higher. How is that better?

[Aurabolt]

Darkness would be wiped out by any spell with the light descriptor of 2nd level or higher. How is that better?

Fine then, Deeper Darkness. Point is, there are many ways to prevent a mundane adventuring item from effecting your group when you have magic to assist or could simply snap the stick in two.

[B. Dandelion]

About that sliding door....

Do you think there's a divide-and-conquer theme to some of the traps? The Order lost their wizard and now the Linear Guild is absent a cleric (also a mummy). When Team Evil shows up are they gonna lose the Monster in the Darkness? I think it would be kind of cool if the teams all wound up getting scattered, running about and encountering each other randomly. With three teams this was probably never going to be an entirely straightforward conflict anyway, and you could do some things with that setup that it'd be harder to do or justify elsewhere.

Oh and fridge logic hit me about how Roy was so insistent they all be united as a team before the assault, and Elan said his plan to reunite them wouldn't work because they'd discussed it on panel, and now they're absent V anyway so Elan was ultimately right. In your face Roy! Ambush is still awesome though.

[Kish]

Fine then, Deeper Darkness. Point is, there are many ways to prevent a mundane adventuring item from effecting your group when you have magic to assist or could simply snap the stick in two.

That...would do nothing to a smokestick.

Given that you asserted [exactly backwards] that True Seeing will cut through mundane smoke and wouldn't cut through Darkness as well as your waving off theNater with "Point is," you appear to be making an argument more based on ideology than reality. A magical method is not inherently superior to a nonmagical one.

[Yendor]

From the SRD:

If darkness is cast on a small object that is then placed inside or under a lightproof covering, the spell’s effect is blocked until the covering is removed.

If they'd used Darkness, the cunning ambush could be foiled by sticking the arrow in a bag.

A magical method is not inherently superior to a nonmagical one.

Non-magic 1, Magic 0.

[Aurabolt]

When magic is a finite resource and shown to be as powerful as it is, superiority is generally considered in such a case. Spells per day outside 0-level can do things beyond simple adventuring gear. The smokestick was in Tarquin's hand; if he had destroyed it quickly enough, there may not have been a fog to begin with. In the story, you'd expect him to do that when he snatched the arrow.

Hell, in the rules, isn't the arrow supposed to be destroyed when they do that?

[Kish]

When magic is a finite resource and shown to be as powerful as it is, superiority is generally considered in such a case.

You're using passive voice to assert an authority you don't have. If you wish to claim that magic is inherently superior to nonmagic, you need to argue the case, not just assert it, and not back it up with claims that are exactly wrong ("True Seeing will cut through the smokestick's smoke and wouldn't cut through a Darkness spell").

Hell, in the rules, isn't the arrow supposed to be destroyed when they do that?

...Yes. The ability Snatch Arrows is properly described as Destroy Arrows, isn't really superior to its prerequisite ability Deflect Arrows unless the presence of the arrow on the floor is a problem to the snatcher--I mean destroyer--and is never used to grab arrows and shoot them back. Also, Tarquin has a means of causing alchemically treated wood to cease to exist, such that it will not produce smoke which it produces instantly when ignited, and which is in no way dependent on its being shaped like a stick.

Really. The more you broadcast that you don't actually know the rules you're arguing about, the less compelling your case looks.

[Aurabolt]

You're using passive voice to assert an authority you don't have. If you wish to claim that magic is inherently superior to nonmagic, you need to argue the case, not just assert it, and not back it up with claims that are exactly wrong.

...Yes. The ability Snatch Arrows is properly described as Destroy Arrows, isn't really superior to its prerequisite ability Deflect Arrows unless the presence of the arrow on the floor is a problem to the snatcher--I mean destroyer--and is never used to grab arrows and shoot them back. Also, Tarquin has a means of causing alchemically treated wood to cease to exist, such that it will not produce smoke which it produces instantly when ignited.

Really. The more you broadcast that you don't actually know the rules you're arguing about, the less compelling your case looks.

One, I'm not doing anything with my voice-unless I don't understand what you mean since I'm not getting it because of 'issues' and for that I apologize- except argue a point I thought was there. Darkness is the spell I would have considered for the situation instead of a Fog caused by a alchemical item. If there isn't one, I'll back off, but don't insult me or my logic just because I'm coming from the rules stating that a damn fog caused by a arrow in a warrior's hand somehow managed to not be prevented. Especially when Magic could have been used more effectively, from the rules that I know. Darkness or DD is magical, which would prevent Sabine, Nale and Z from seeing. Also, it seems a little harder to get rid of because it requires another spell to do so. A smokestick is a bit less effective in that regard from my understanding of the rules and experience.

Secondly, I did check the feat description now that you said that. My mistake there, and my apologies. By that same token Shouldn't he have thrown it back at the attacker? I figured Tarquin would have noticed the Smokestick and thrown it back.

Thirdly, I don't see what's wrong with the assertion that magic is more powerful than mundane alchemical or normal items. Especially since I would expect an adventuring party on the level of the OOtS to not carry mundane items anymore in favor of magical items.

On a resource standpoint, spells are harder to gain back than items are since one requires rest in hostile or dangerous areas and the other requires gold. Magic also provides a number of effects that alchemy cannot perform or emulate because they're so limited. Utility for an ambush which leads to an advantage through a smokestick, certainly, but can't Invisibility do the same thing? Or a well placed Slient Image? Not to mention that alchemy and mundane direct damage like Scorching Ray or improving one's chances in combat through bonuses through Bless or Prayer or a Shield of Faith. Magic is rather effective in these cases. Not to say that basic stuff isn't, but magic items appear to be a lot of this game for a reason. Don't put me down simply because that point happens to be true.

[Kish]

One, I'm not doing anything with my voice-unless I don't understand what you mean since I'm not getting it because of 'issues' and for that I apologize- except argue a point I thought was there.

"Superiority is generally considered" is passive voice. Who or what considers?

The correct answer here seems to be "Aurabolt." If you wish to argue that magic is inherently superior to nonmagic such that when a character uses a nonmagical item which appears to accomplish everything the character wanted, it makes sense to go, "Huh, why didn't they use a spell instead?" you need to make a case. You are not doing so.

Darkness is the spell I would have considered for the situation instead of a Fog caused by a alchemical item.

And it would not have worked on Tarquin, due to his Ring of True Seeing. Would have been as easily dispelled by a Daylight spell as the smokestick could be dispelled by a Gust of Wind spell. Would not, in any way you have yet indicated, have been superior to the smokestick. You would have used a spell rather than a 20-gp item. Okay. The Order didn't. So far this looks like a point to the Order; anything could happen next, of course.

If there isn't one, I'll back off, but don't insult me or my logic just because I'm coming from the rules stating that a damn fog caused by a arrow in a warrior's hand somehow managed to not be prevented.

I did not insult you. I did state that your argument is lacking, because it is. And that sentence seems to break down after the word "hand."

Especially when Magic could have been used more effectively, from the rules that I know.

What rules? Explain how.

Darkness or DD is magical, which would prevent Sabine, Nale and Z from seeing.

And they are unable to see in the smokestick's fog, so...not a point in favor of Darkness or Deeper Darkness's superiority.

Also, it seems a little harder to get rid of because it requires another spell to do so.

Whereas getting rid of the smokestick requires? What Nale said to use was a spell. What you appear to be arguing, is that it could have been gotten rid of by Tarquin wishing really hard.

Secondly, I did check the feat description now that you said that. My mistake there, and my apologies. By that same token Shouldn't he have thrown it back at the attacker? I figured Tarquin would have noticed the Smokestick and thrown it back.

Evidently he did not. Going out on a limb here, perhaps he's not perfect and infallible. Not a point in favor of magic in any case, since if there was somehow a triggered Darkness spell on the arrow that would be on the arrow when Tarquin threw it back, too.

Thirdly, I don't see what's wrong with the assertion that magic is more powerful than mundane alchemical items.

The same thing that is wrong with the assertion that a fighter with a broken sword could never defeat Xykon. For any assertion, you need to provide support. You are not providing support for your assertion. You are merely providing willingness to keep reasserting it.

Utility for an ambush which leads to an advantage through a smokestick, certainly, but can't Invisibility do the same thing? Or a well placed Slient Image? Not to mention that alchemy and mundane direct damage like Scorching Ray or improving one's chances in combat through bonuses through Bless or Prayer or what have you. Magic is rather effective in these cases.

Explain how any of those spells would have done what the smokestick did here.

Understand, I am not saying magic is useless or that there exists a nonmagical item which can supersede magic in every situation; that would be the other extreme from your position. I am saying that, "Why did they use a nonmagical item when they have access to magic?" is not a legitimate question, and I am saying that each time you post, your position appears to be even more about ideology rather than logic.

[Aurabolt]

"Superiority is generally considered" is passive voice. Who or what considers?

Ah, I see what you mean, outside all the pressure on me for some reason. To answer the question, every person I've played the game with finds magic more powerful. I don't recall ever using alchemical items in my games save for a Sunrod over a Torch once. We tended to rely on magical items, magic and class abilities as well as weapons and armor.

And it would not have worked on Tarquin, due to his Ring of True Seeing. Would have been as easily dispelled by a Daylight spell as the smokestick could be dispelled by a Gust of Wind spell. Would not, in any way you have yet indicated, have been superior to the smokestick. You would have used a spell rather than a 25-gp item. Okay. The Order didn't. So far this looks like a point to the Order; anything could happen next, of course.

Yeah, I get that now. The smokestick, in this situation, is the more superior item. My argument is stating that a mundane item wouldn't normally be as powerful as magic since there appear to be multiple ways to circumvent the Smokestick since its a) a physical object that can be destroyed and b) a nonmagical fog that could be brushed away with a breeze. I could imagine Obscuring Mist or Fog Cloud to be a problem for a high-level party, but not a smokestick. By the rules, I could see them getting screwed over but doing something clever to be rid of it. By the narrative, I expected more from Tarquin.

I did not insult you. I did state that your argument is lacking, because it is. And that sentence seems to break down after the word "hand."

Right, so the tone of your words don't come across as a bit hostile to you? Snark aside on your Snatch Arrows feat thing-which I deserved since I hadn't checked the rules yet- Its not hard to think I'm being attacked here.

And they are unable to see in the smokestick's fog, so...not a point in favor of Darkness or Deeper Darkness's superiority.

Yes, because I was operating that Darkness was a complete inability to see when you could see in Fog Cloud. I see that is not the case...though I guess that might require some tweaking; I was of the understanding that a single smokestick wasn't that powerful, and you'd need more than one to achieve that effect.

Whereas getting rid of the smokestick requires? What Nale said to use was a spell. What you appear to be arguing, is that it could have been gotten rid of by Tarquin wishing really hard.

Evidently he did not. Going out on a limb here, perhaps he's not perfect and infallible..

Throw it down the hallway? He has that ability by the feat description. One would expect someone of his experience to recognize the trick and counter.

Also, I was of the understanding that Darkness was more powerful in this case because you could see through the fog and not five-feet in front of you. I thought Darkness was pretty much total. Its a far weaker spell than I expected...why don't more people use Fog Cloud, I wonder.

The same thing that is wrong with the assertion that a fighter with a broken sword could never defeat Xykon. For any assertion, you need to provide support. You are not providing support for your assertion. You are merely providing willingness to keep reasserting it.

Other than the fact that managing to defeat them with a broken sword was, by the game rules and the numbers, pretty much an impossibility..

Yeah, I can't in this case. You win.

Explain how any of those spells would have done what the smokestick did here.

Understand, I am not saying magic is useless; that would be the other extreme from your position. I am saying that, "Why did they use a nonmagical item when they have access to magic?" is not a legitimate question, and I am saying that each time you post, your position appears to be even more about ideology rather than logic.

Well, I can't. Not with those spells. At that point, I was saying that magic is more varied than mundane equipment and has more effectiveness by its use. An mundane item-not counting weapons and armor-can't give you improved attack bonuses like magic can or protect you better like magic can. Masterwork can provide a +1 bonus, but not cause your weapon to combust into fire or do extra damage. Or protect you with more AC or Resistances. Can't deal direct damage like a spell can, or more than a spell can. Alchemists Fire is powerful, but not like a Scorching Ray.

Right, how is a question on its own merits not legitimate? A question cannot be legitimate if the question is meant to garner information. They had the means to cast the Darkness spell or the Fog Cloud spell with their current setup, so I was wondering why they went with the option which-at the time-seemed tactically inferior.

[Ghosty]

The thing about magical Darkness is that True Seeing cuts through it. Now, the Order doesn't know about T's Ring, but c'mon: they're expecting the LG to be roughly of equivalent level to the Order, heading to the lair of a master (Epic?) Illusionist. Pretty easy to imagine that at least Z, whatever cleric they scrounged up, (even Nale isn't silly enough to try this without a healer) and maybe Nale too, have True Seeing up. And so, Darkness, or any visual illusions, wouldn't work. But an ordinary fog bank/smoke cloud will.

[Before the deafening from the Holy Word, I'd have thought Elan could whip up an interesting auditory illusion: to do what, I'm not sure, but I am sure the Giant's creative enough to surprise me with something effective. True Seeing won't touch an auditory (or olfactory too, I guess) illusion.]

The question for me is why Malack didn't instantly tell everyone to freeze (and thereby not set off traps); he was going to use his active Control Winds spell to blow the smoke away. Of course, since he cast Control Winds from a scroll (Panel 3), perhaps the duration had expired while he was mummy-making? In any event, maybe he didn't get initiative before the door slammed in his face. (And Durkon came out of the wall. Anyone else wishing for an Aliens reference in the next comic? "They're coming out of the walls! That's it, man. Game over, man. Game over!")

[Aside, Aliens is over 25 year old?! Damn, I'm old.]

So, do we think that Durkon has a shot at tanking Tarquin before the rest of the Order shows up? At least the smoke stick'll be gone after this round, so the Order can charge up to Durkon/T without setting off the traps themselves.

[Bulldog Psion]

Maybe they didn't have Darkness or Fog Cloud available. Or had a better use for them later in the plan -- after all, we haven't seen the full plan yet.

Just throwing out random thoughts.

[Aurabolt]

e was going to use his active Control Winds spell to blow the smoke away. Of course, since he cast Control Winds from a scroll (Panel 3), perhaps the duration had expired while he was mummy-making?

That's a really good point, and another reason why removing Malack from the battle was so important. I'm not sure the OoTS planned that, but that scroll might still have duration if he made it. If he wasn't behind that wall, the smokestick may never have come into play in the first place.

[Doug Lampert]

Fine then, Deeper Darkness. Point is, there are many ways to prevent a mundane adventuring item from effecting your group when you have magic to assist or could simply snap the stick in two.

1) Darkness and Deeper darkness explicitely generate shadow, you can see through both non-magically. It gives concealment and a 20% miss chance, not total concealment and a 50% miss chance you get from being blinded.

The smoke stick gives the SAME EFFECT at 5', and is better at anything more than 5' as it gives total concealment past that point.

2) The spells are both easily countered by putting the arrow in a bag. Both spells can be countered by a dispell magic. Both spells can be countered by an appropriate light spell. Using magic doesn't make it less counterable.

The darkness spells SUCK. Magic in D&D is typically vastly superior to mundane methods, but that doesn't mean that every spell is superior to every mundane method. A smoke stick is simply better than the spells.

3) True seeing works against the spell, but not the stick.

[Emperordaniel]

(And Durkon came out of the wall. Anyone else wishing for an Aliens reference in the next comic? "They're coming out of the walls! That's it, man. Game over, man. Game over!")

Belkar already referenced that exact line way back in 2004, near the end of Dungeon Crawlin' Fools..

[Jay R]

My argument is stating that a mundane item wouldn't normally be as powerful as magic ...

Exactly. That's why finding a specific case in which the mundane item is more useful is a subtle and clever trick.

Tarquin evidently agreed with you, and expected something magical. So he looked at it after the smoke started and said, "Heh. Pretty clever."

He then seemed to sneer at Nale's inability to cope with, "Well, Nale? Orders? Are you going to let a 20 gp novelty throw your Linear Guild into disarray."

So it seems clear that Tarquin wasn't going to respond until Nale gave the orders. Why? We don't know. But he is not on Nale's side, any more than he is on the side of the Empress of Blood, or was on the side of Lord Tyrinar the Bloody.

Right, so the tone of your words don't come across as a bit hostile to you? Snark aside on your Snatch Arrows feat thing-which I deserved since I hadn't checked the rules yet- Its not hard to think I'm being attacked here.

Speaking as a neutral observer (I just joined this discussion), it seems to me that the initial response was straightforward, but that your inability to see their point made them more frustrated. There's no attack here; there is certainly frustration with the continued argument.

And even that's over now. Let's look forward and move on.

[Smolder]

The darkness spells SUCK. Magic in D&D is typically vastly superior to mundane methods, but that doesn't mean that every spell is superior to every mundane method. A smoke stick is simply better than the spells.

This is what most impresses me about this comic. Despite D&D being decades old, and a forum of voracious fact-checkers and self-proclaimed experts, the Giant still manages to school us all in how D&D was meant to be played.

Both Meld Into Stone and smokesticks were known but overlooked, and smokesticks were probably overlooked primary because of the common player bias against non-magical devices and strategies.

[rewinn]

In related news, Trading Guilds across the Multiverse report a shortage of Smoke Sticks, as parties stock up.

"I raised the price to 50gp, and they still sold out," one merchant reported, shaking his head. "And they keep bugging me about Meld Into Stone scrolls. I'm getting a lot of referral fees from the local temple!"

[Boogastreehouse]

...why don't more people use Fog Cloud, I wonder.

I do. All the time. In the right situation it's awesome.

That's the key here: The right situation. Sometimes a smokestick or other "mundane" item is way more handy than a spell, and a more economic resource to "waste." There are tons of ways to see through/dispel darkness, but a smokestick can really surprise a party.

I can't count the number of times my 10th-level character has been saved because she happened to have a tanglefoot bag or alchemist fire on hand.

Sometimes paying attention to your surroundings is better than a piece of mundane equipment or a spell. Killing the monster that was too tough for us because we noticed that we could easily start a rock slide was incredibly rewarding and wasted very few resources. We mopped it up pretty handily after the avalanche.

PS: A wand of Gust of Wind is also amazingly handy. Always keep one around.

[Nightpenguin]

With regards to the whole Darkness/smokestick thing, I would like to point out again that though it is possible with various means (via the Delay Spell metamagic feat from Complete Arcane, off the top of my head) for a Darkness spell to work as a mobile trap, there is still as of yet no explanation of how they managed to get the smokestick to trigger - smokesticks must be ignited, and you can't have a fire burning inside a sealed container.

[rewinn]

With regards to the whole Darkness/smokestick thing, I would like to point out again that though it is possible with various means (via the Delay Spell metamagic feat from Complete Arcane, off the top of my head) for a Darkness spell to work as a mobile trap, there is still as of yet no explanation of how they managed to get the smokestick to trigger - smokesticks must be ignited, and you can't have a fire burning inside a sealed container.

I assumed, when reading the comic, that the smokestick was fused somehow. This strikes me as only a very minor modification to the basic smokestick. A smokeless fuse might add 10%-50% to the cost of the thing.

[Boogastreehouse]

With regards to the whole Darkness/smokestick thing, I would like to point out again that though it is possible with various means (via the Delay Spell metamagic feat from Complete Arcane, off the top of my head) for a Darkness spell to work as a mobile trap, there is still as of yet no explanation of how they managed to get the smokestick to trigger - smokesticks must be ignited, and you can't have a fire burning inside a sealed container.

Haley, an expert on traps, used her skills to rig an effect. Maybe the sudden stop of the arrow caused something inside to spark. I really don't think it needs to be any more complicated than that.

[Throknor]

I assumed, when reading the comic, that the smokestick was fused somehow. This strikes me as only a very minor modification to the basic smokestick. A smokeless fuse might add 10%-50% to the cost of the thing.

That would be hard to time, as she'd need to start it before shooting. But stick a piece of flint in it and it's like a fluorescent glo-stick: crack it to light it. I'd think a grab strong enough to snatch a flying arrow could squeeze the tube enough to strike a concealed flint.

[Marlowe]

Did somebody mention pages back that there's a slightly more expense smokestick that can be set to go off?

[onigame]

I like how Malack's tail sticks out of the third panel.

[RecklessFable]

Durkon: A Dwarf of one word!

[Nightpenguin]

Did somebody mention pages back that there's a slightly more expense smokestick that can be set to go off?

I believe that it was a joke.

[Zubrowka74]

The problem is you can't have more than 100% alcohol content in something, and human beings can consume grain alcohol and not die.

All it means is that humans could consume way less dwarven beer than dwarves could, not that it would kill them outright.

Not to nitpick but by modern chemistry, abv above 96 % is toxic to humans not because of the alcohol but because of the solvent (benzene, for example) needed to get rid of the last 4 % of water.