Page 19 of 22 FirstFirst ... 910111213141516171819202122 LastLast
Results 541 to 570 of 638
  1. - Top - End - #541
    Halfling in the Playground
     
    SwashbucklerGuy

    Join Date
    Jun 2008

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by lio45 View Post
    it's not a good idea to run PC vs PC combat.

    So, we all agree on this...
    For certain values of "all", where "all" does not equal "all".


    One of the most entertaining sessions I've ever had at a gaming convention was a high level PC vs PC free for all arena battle. There were six players, each with a 20th level character of various classes. Every man for himself. The only rule was that everybody must remain within a given radius of the arena and nobody could shift to another plane for more than a total of five rounds. All six enter the arena on round one, roll initiative, and start blasting.

    It lasted about two hours, and was amazingly fun.

    w

  2. - Top - End - #542
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2008

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by lio45 View Post
    So, we all agree on this...
    Quote Originally Posted by wzeller View Post
    For certain values of "all", where "all" does not equal "all".


    One of the most entertaining sessions I've ever had at a gaming convention was a high level PC vs PC free for all arena battle. There were six players, each with a 20th level character of various classes. Every man for himself. The only rule was that everybody must remain within a given radius of the arena and nobody could shift to another plane for more than a total of five rounds. All six enter the arena on round one, roll initiative, and start blasting.

    It lasted about two hours, and was amazingly fun.

    w
    I feel the same way.

    Facing a challenge in which one player, the Game Master, is running all the opponents is challenging because he can run them as a well-coordinated machine, if that's what is called for.

    Facing a challenge in which each opponent is run by a different player, presents a whole new set of challenges. Each player may tend to drift from the most optimal teamwork decisions, but as they only have to concentrate on one character instead of juggling a whole team, they can really utilize that character to it's full potential.

    Yeah, players fighting players can be a lot of fun.
    2012 Kickstart Pledge Drive Backer# 12,851

    Their: a possessive pronoun like “her” or “our”
    There: refers to a place ("the Kobold is over THERE"), or to indicate the existence of something, or to mention something for the first time. ("THERE is a Halfling sneaking up on him")
    They're: a contraction of “they are.”

    Also: Your/You're, Its/It's, Then/Than.


    And... I believe in you.
    —click!
    C fl epefggj cd gpyb hcex jpz.

  3. - Top - End - #543
    Halfling in the Playground
     
    PaladinGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2009

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    I think the LG is tending to only loose more and more after this attack. They were the first to really loose a member (Sabine wont come back for this fight).

    Nale is already in bad shape with no priest nearby to recover him.

    The mage may be 2 more round without spells and are probably the next target.

    Tarquin is fighting Durkon. If the Order really prepared for this fight, as they are showing, we are talking about a high level warrior trying to hit a fully prepared (and by prepared I mean buffed) high-level warrior-priest....unless Tarquin is like 3 or more levels over Durkon, that will be really hard specially if Durkon keeps on defensive.

    The kobold is unable to fight and were already considered the least prepared for the game (thought he is probably the big surprise)

    I think the order has everything to defeat the LG in the next 3 rounds. But Oots is never that easy to predict =P

  4. - Top - End - #544
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    FujinAkari's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by torugo View Post
    The mage may be 2 more round without spells and are probably the next target.

    Tarquin is fighting Durkon. If the Order really prepared for this fight, as they are showing, we are talking about a high level warrior trying to hit a fully prepared (and by prepared I mean buffed) high-level warrior-priest....unless Tarquin is like 3 or more levels over Durkon, that will be really hard specially if Durkon keeps on defensive.
    While I agree, do remember that Zz'tiri only has a 20% chance to mess up his spells, so even if he is deafened for four rounds, he is statistically unlikely to fail again.

    Additionally, despite any theoretic difficulty Tarquin may have hitting Durkon, also recall he has promised Malack that Durkon be spared (and left up to Malack to deal with) so he also has to ensure he doesn't kill the dwarf. Rough spot!
    Last edited by FujinAkari; 2012-08-22 at 12:46 AM.
    Official Incense Aroma Specialist for the Vaarsuvius Fan Club!

    English isn't my primary language, so please let me know if something I'm saying doesn't make sense!
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    Thank you, FujinAkari.
    ThePhantasm's awesometacular post

  5. - Top - End - #545
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Fish's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by FujinAkari View Post
    While I agree, do remember that Zz'tiri only has a 20% chance to mess up his spells, so even if he is deafened for four rounds, he is statistically unlikely to fail again.
    Next round his odds are the same as always: 20% chance to fail. He is no more unlikely to fail next time as he was this time.
    The Giant says: Yes, I am aware TV Tropes exists as a website. ... No, I have never decided to do something in the comic because it was listed on TV Tropes. I don't use it as a checklist for ideas ... and I have never intentionally referenced it in any way.

  6. - Top - End - #546
    Banned
     
    willpell's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Fish View Post
    Next round his odds are the same as always: 20% chance to fail. He is no more unlikely to fail next time as he was this time.
    Thank you! I was suppressing my usual condemnation of statistics, but it is good to know that I am not entirely alone in my convictions with regard to this matter.

  7. - Top - End - #547
    Titan in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Manchester, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Fish View Post
    Next round his odds are the same as always: 20% chance to fail.
    Which is no doubt why FujinAkari said "*statistically* unlikely"--in other words, we all know that the chances of rolling another 6 after you've rolled 10 in a row is still 1 in 6, but the statistical chances of rolling 11 sixes in a row are not great! (A little over 360 million to 1 against, in fact... ).

    EDIT: In fact, at a 20% failure rate and assuming he tries casting one spell a round for four rounds, the odds of Zz'dtri failing every single time is 625 to 1 against. Possible, but not likely.
    Last edited by factotum; 2012-08-22 at 05:40 AM.

  8. - Top - End - #548
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    WolfInSheepsClothing

    Join Date
    Sep 2009

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by FujinAkari View Post
    While I agree, do remember that Zz'tiri only has a 20% chance to mess up his spells, so even if he is deafened for four rounds, he is statistically unlikely to fail again.
    If he tries to cast spells in each of the other three rounds, odds are about 50% that at least one of those spells will fail.

  9. - Top - End - #549
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    2323mike's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Central Europe
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    It's not like probablility, statistics and odds are such a big deal in OotS-verse.

  10. - Top - End - #550
    Halfling in the Playground
     
    PaladinGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2009

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    On the other side...

    I have a distinct feeling Tarquin has been playing this far...same thing wont happen after Nale falls. We can expect full use of all his magic items and his abilities.

    Were I Roy, I would have planned to concentrate attacks to disable the mage as soon as possible. After sucessfully disabling Nale, Zz and Sabine, it will be Tarquin's team to fight and that will be challenge enough

  11. - Top - End - #551
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Fish's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by factotum View Post
    Which is no doubt why FujinAkari said "*statistically* unlikely"...
    I know why he said "statistically." His statement was still wrong.

    "Even if he is deafened for four more rounds, he is statistically unlikely to fail again." This is wrong. There are 16 arrangements of win-lose over the next 4 rounds (or 2^4). In only one of those configurations does Z succeed all four times at p = 0.8. The chances of that are (0.8)^4, or about 51.2%. That's not "statistically unlikely," that's a coin flip

    Our ability to make statements about statistical groupings depends upon random independent events. If we say, "Because he failed once, therefore he is more likely to succeed now," the events are no longer independent. See also: the Gambler's Fallacy.
    The Giant says: Yes, I am aware TV Tropes exists as a website. ... No, I have never decided to do something in the comic because it was listed on TV Tropes. I don't use it as a checklist for ideas ... and I have never intentionally referenced it in any way.

  12. - Top - End - #552
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    EvilClericGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2010

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Water_Bear View Post
    No such rule in D&D 3.5. You can Wish for a Candle of Invocation, use it to call up a Noble Djinn, and demand it give you three Wishes. Then make the third one for another Candle of Invocation. And that's just the most well known Wish Loop.

    That said, as a DM I wouldn't let the Suggestion "Follow my orders" to fly, even if it was rules legal. Still, ultimately it's Rich's comic and there's no reason to think it wouldn't be rules legal even in a real game.
    I'll take your word for the rules - I haven't played D&D since 1987, and am firmly in the camp that reads the comic for the writing and humor, not for its compliance with the minutiae of applicable rules. I was invoking the generic three wishes trope, and cite Robin Williams as the Djinn as my authority.

  13. - Top - End - #553
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    MindFlayer

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Fish View Post
    I know why he said "statistically." His statement was still wrong.
    She.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fish View Post
    "Even if he is deafened for four more rounds, he is statistically unlikely to fail again." This is wrong. There are 16 arrangements of win-lose over the next 4 rounds (or 2^4). In only one of those configurations does Z succeed all four times at p = 0.8. The chances of that are (0.8)^4, or about 51.2%. That's not "statistically unlikely," that's a coin flip
    Less than 50% is statistically unlikely. That is, at least, a perfectly reasonable use of the term. (You also inserted a "more" into her quote — since holy word only deafens for 1d4 rounds, she meant four rounds in total — but your math is correct for the next three rounds. .8^3 = 51.2%.)

    Anyway, she was responding to someone who was talking about the next two rounds, in which case, story needs aside, the chance of a failure is even less likely.
    Last edited by jere7my; 2012-08-22 at 11:16 AM.

  14. - Top - End - #554
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Fish's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    The odds that Z succeeds in both of the next 2 rounds: 64%
    The odds that Z fails in at least 1: 36%

    In other words, the odds are greater that Z will fail at least once, than the odds that Z will fail the very next roll. Aggregate probability is funny like that and, contrary to the original post, is not dependent upon what came before.
    The Giant says: Yes, I am aware TV Tropes exists as a website. ... No, I have never decided to do something in the comic because it was listed on TV Tropes. I don't use it as a checklist for ideas ... and I have never intentionally referenced it in any way.

  15. - Top - End - #555
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    DwarfClericGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2011

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Fish View Post
    The odds that Z succeeds in both of the next 2 rounds: 64%
    The odds that Z fails in at least 1: 36%

    In other words, the odds are greater that Z will fail at least once, than the odds that Z will fail the very next roll. Aggregate probability is funny like that and, contrary to the original post, is not dependent upon what came before.
    The chance that Zz'dtri succeeds in all 3 of the next 3 rounds: 51.2%
    The chance that Zz'dtri fails in at least 1: 48.8%

    Zz'dtri is unlikely to fail again before the deafness wears off, even if the deafness lasts the full 4 rounds. It's not very unlikely, and if there were four more rounds then failing at least once would be likely, but FujinAkari's original statement is correct.

  16. - Top - End - #556
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    MindFlayer

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Fish View Post
    In other words, the odds are greater that Z will fail at least once, than the odds that Z will fail the very next roll.
    Absolutely. If I roll a die ten times, it is more likely that I will get a 1 one of those times than that I will get a 1 on the first roll. I think this is probably something everyone here agrees on.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fish View Post
    Aggregate probability is funny like that and, contrary to the original post, is not dependent upon what came before.
    You might want to read FujinAkari's post again. She didn't say anything about correlation: "While I agree, do remember that Zz'tiri only has a 20% chance to mess up his spells, so even if he is deafened for four rounds, he is statistically unlikely to fail again." If Zz'd'tri is indeed deafened for all four rounds by Holy Word, there is a 48.8% chance of spell failure at least once during the next three rounds. That is below 50%, therefore statistically unlikely.

    I have a 5-sided die. I roll a 1. Someone bets me a dollar I'll roll a 1 again in the next three rolls. Should I take the bet? Well, what are my chances of successfully avoiding a 1? 51.2%. I have the statistical edge, so yes, I should take the bet. Likewise, it's a fair bet that Zz'd'tri will get at least one spell off (made more likely by the fact that there's only a 25% chance of four rounds of deafness).

    I believe we're all on the same page here. Nobody, unless I've forgotten someone, is saying that the fact that Zz'd'tri already failed in the first round makes it less likely that he'll fail in rounds 2 through 4. (In reality, his success or failure depends on the story; for all we know, Rich's homebrew Holy Word gives a 75% chance of spell failure — or, like Han Solo, he just doesn't care about the odds. But we're talking math here.)
    Last edited by jere7my; 2012-08-22 at 01:23 PM.

  17. - Top - End - #557
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    FujinAkari's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    Wow... I've never had so many people insist that I said something which I didn't say. Thanks for defending my words Jere7my and factotum, and Nater.

    I am quite aware of the Gambler's Fallacy and was most assuredly not committing it. The chance of Z succeeding is greater than 50%, therefore it is the statistical favorite.
    Official Incense Aroma Specialist for the Vaarsuvius Fan Club!

    English isn't my primary language, so please let me know if something I'm saying doesn't make sense!
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    Thank you, FujinAkari.
    ThePhantasm's awesometacular post

  18. - Top - End - #558
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    DwarfClericGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2011

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    And upon review, I think the actual point of contention here was based around the use of the word "unlikely", and whether it is appropriate to apply it to a 49%/51% probability situation. Reasonable people can reasonably disagree on that.

    However, the point of figuring the odds was originally to determine whether Zz'dtri is pretty much out of the fight, and I think it's safe to say that no, Zz'dtri is still a force to be reckoned with.

  19. - Top - End - #559
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    BardGuy

    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by theNater View Post
    And upon review, I think the actual point of contention here was based around the use of the word "unlikely", and whether it is appropriate to apply it to a 49%/51% probability situation. Reasonable people can reasonably disagree on that.

    However, the point of figuring the odds was originally to determine whether Zz'dtri is pretty much out of the fight, and I think it's safe to say that no, Zz'dtri is still a force to be reckoned with.
    I just read through the posts all in a row and that's what was sticking out to me. "Unlikely" is more of a colloquial or idiomatic description than a scientific one, and not one I'd associate with a 48/52 split. If I have a 48 black socks and 52 white socks mixed in a drawer I wouldn't call it "unlikely" to blindly grab a black sock.

    Though I'd guess since the smoke is still hanging around the first spell Z would cast is still Gust of Wind, so the Order will know when Z is again a threat.

  20. - Top - End - #560
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    FujinAkari's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Throknor View Post
    I just read through the posts all in a row and that's what was sticking out to me. "Unlikely" is more of a colloquial or idiomatic description than a scientific one, and not one I'd associate with a 48/52 split. If I have a 48 black socks and 52 white socks mixed in a drawer I wouldn't call it "unlikely" to blindly grab a black sock.
    Just to be argumentative, would you call it "statistically unlikely" to blindly grab a black sock? :)
    Official Incense Aroma Specialist for the Vaarsuvius Fan Club!

    English isn't my primary language, so please let me know if something I'm saying doesn't make sense!
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    Thank you, FujinAkari.
    ThePhantasm's awesometacular post

  21. - Top - End - #561
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2008

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Throknor View Post
    Though I'd guess since the smoke is still hanging around the first spell Z would cast is still Gust of Wind, so the Order will know when Z is again a threat.
    Z just tried to cast Gust of Wind and failed his casting check due to being deafened. He wasted it and unless he memorized it twice, he can't cast it again.

    This is why I love having a Wand of Gust of Wind. You just never know when you're going to need it.
    2012 Kickstart Pledge Drive Backer# 12,851

    Their: a possessive pronoun like “her” or “our”
    There: refers to a place ("the Kobold is over THERE"), or to indicate the existence of something, or to mention something for the first time. ("THERE is a Halfling sneaking up on him")
    They're: a contraction of “they are.”

    Also: Your/You're, Its/It's, Then/Than.


    And... I believe in you.
    —click!
    C fl epefggj cd gpyb hcex jpz.

  22. - Top - End - #562
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    Zombie

    Join Date
    Jun 2012

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    This whole discussion is a brilliant illustration of why dropping vocalize for the silent spell feat was a silly decision. I believe we all agree that Z doesn't have the silent spell feat, and may not have an appropriate contingency spell prepared in case of massage damage rec'd

  23. - Top - End - #563
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Gnoman's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Toledo, Ohio

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    Of course, being deafened could still screw Z over. If he only prepared Gust once, then he can't execute the last tactical decision, and the combination of blindness (from the smoke) and being deaf makes it very hard to decide what to do.

  24. - Top - End - #564
    Banned
     
    willpell's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaxxkang8182 View Post
    and may not have an appropriate contingency spell prepared in case of massage damage rec'd
    Weapon Focus: Shiatsu?
    Last edited by willpell; 2012-08-22 at 10:08 PM.

  25. - Top - End - #565
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    rewinn's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Seattle
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by FujinAkari View Post
    ...[Z] is statistically unlikely to fail again.

    Additionally, despite any theoretic difficulty Tarquin may have hitting Durkon, also recall he has promised Malack that Durkon be spared (and left up to Malack to deal with) so he also has to ensure he doesn't kill the dwarf. Rough spot!
    Z has an additional problem: he's optimized for fighting V, and V's not there. We have not seen evidence that Z is well-suited for close-quarters combat; the meat shields are supposed to keep the guys with sharp stabby things AWAY from Z, but now they are being swarmed in what has become a dead-end corridor. What useful spells does Z have?

    It may soon be time for Tarquin to place his ace
    Spoiler
    Show
    ... telling his employee Roy, "Good job, you showed you can take care of my son. Now back to work, let's find that gate!"

  26. - Top - End - #566
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    rewinn's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Seattle
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    Can't the imp teleport to the other side of the door, then back to Malack to report what's going on?
    Last edited by rewinn; 2012-08-22 at 11:20 PM.

  27. - Top - End - #567
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    FujinAkari's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by rewinn View Post
    Z has an additional problem: he's optimized for fighting V, and V's not there. We have not seen evidence that Z is well-suited for close-quarters combat; the meat shields are supposed to keep the guys with sharp stabby things AWAY from Z, but now they are being swarmed in what has become a dead-end corridor. What useful spells does Z have?
    People keep saying this, but -why- would Z be preparing spells to fight someone he sent to the plane of deadly torture or whatever it was, Z likely -expects- V not to be there...
    Official Incense Aroma Specialist for the Vaarsuvius Fan Club!

    English isn't my primary language, so please let me know if something I'm saying doesn't make sense!
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    Thank you, FujinAkari.
    ThePhantasm's awesometacular post

  28. - Top - End - #568
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Jan 2012

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    I am starting to think the idea that Tarquin is going to throw Nale under the bus and try to strike a deal with the Order might be possible.

  29. - Top - End - #569
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2008

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by FujinAkari View Post
    People keep saying this, but -why- would Z be preparing spells to fight someone he sent to the plane of deadly torture or whatever it was, Z likely -expects- V not to be there...
    I suspect the logic here is that, because Z is so heavily optimized to fight V, he simply lacks the options to truly prepare for anything else. His feat selection has been tailored to defeat V, and, assuming he doesn't have every spell in the world in his spellbook (which seems like a decent assumption in OOTSverse), his spell catalogue is also tailored to face V. Sure, he may have some general use spells that he can prepare, but the fact that his spellbook is so V-centric means that he may be missing some valuable options. In short, he can make the best hand out of cards he has, but what he's been dealt may not be as good as it might have been.

    ...at least, that's what I think the argument is supposed to be. I really don't buy it, myself.

  30. - Top - End - #570
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    EvilClericGuy

    Join Date
    Aug 2012

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    I miss Thog.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •