Class and Level Geekery XII - Even Nerds Call Us Nerds

[Kornaki]

You're underestimating the power of the D20. If Durkon had a -4 to Bluff, then he could roll a 20 and Roy could get a net 15 and still lose. If Roy rolled a 1, he could have a net 14 - for example a +4 to wisdom and 10 ranks in Sense Motive. Since he actually is capped at 9.5 since it's a cross class skill, we probably know less about his Sense Motive skill than we did when we started

[Bird]

We can add Durkon's middle name "Allotrope" to his entry. I guess he's the only Order member with a confirmed middle name.

[b_jonas]

Hi! This might be a stupid question. Is it possible to derive a lower bound for Haley's wisdom from how she's made her will save in #10 when none of the goblins other than the one with class levels did? At least a very low one like at least 4? We know she's not sleep resistant, unlike Vaarsuvius.

[Bird]

Hi! This might be a stupid question. Is it possible to derive a lower bound for Haley's wisdom from how she's made her will save in #10 when none of the goblins other than the one with class levels did? At least a very low one like at least 4? We know she's not sleep resistant, unlike Vaarsuvius.

Heh, I like the idea, but I don't think it pans out. We don't know anything about the save DC for that check vs boredom. But assuming 12th level Haley with a Wisdom of 1 and no other modifiers, she'd have a total Will Save of -1, and could hit a DC 19 with a natural 20. The goblin cleric that saved should have a reasonable Will Save given a minimum wisdom score for casting a 4th level spell plus his base class bonus, but that information doesn't get us anywhere. And the other goblins all rolled natural 1s for all we know.

[Douglas]

Pass vs fail on a save rarely tells us anything because there's always the possibility of natural 1 (autofail) or 20 (autopass). We can look at what's statistically likely, but it doesn't give us certainties.

[Quartz]

From 963 can we discern that Roy's sword has some sort of size-changing property? When you're swallowed you can generally only use light weapons to cut your way out. Note that the sword comes directly out of the frog-monster's head, and not in an arc.

[Emanick]

From 963 can we discern that Roy's sword has some sort of size-changing property? When you're swallowed you can generally only use light weapons to cut your way out. Note that the sword comes directly out of the frog-monster's head, and not in an arc.

Is there a feat that allows you to ignore that requirement? Close Fighter, or something like that? I'm no expert on fighter feats, but I'd imagine that that's a more likely solution than one that allows Roy's sword to change its size.

[durron597]

In other news, counting combat and trap XP alone, as of 936, Roy should have enough XP to level to 15, and Belkar, Elan, and Haley should have enough XP to level to 16.

For a more thorough summary of the encounters defeated and XP gained from them, please consult the following table. All CR values given are minimums:

Strip	Challenges Defeated	CR	Roy XP	Belkar XP	Durkon XP	Elan XP	Haley XP	Vaarsuvius XP
8551	-	-	91,000	105,000	91,000	105,000	105,000	120,000
862	Kilkil, Nale, Tarquin, Sabine, Zz'dtri, 5 mummies	6 CR 5 creatures + 2 CR 15 creatures + 1 CR 21 creature + 1 CR 10 creature	104,230	114,600	104,230	114,600	114,600	120,000
880	1 planar binding trap, 1 stoneskin trap, 1 haste trap, 1 meteor swarm trap	1 CR 10 trap + 1 CR 7 trap + 1 CR 5 trap + 1 CR 4 trap	104,510	114,750	104,510	114,750	114,750	120,000
891	1 microcosm trap	1 CR 10 trap	104,773	114,938	104,2602	114,938	114,938	120,000
900	1 exploding pyramid	1 CR 10 trap	105,036	115,126	104,260	115,126	115,126	120,000
908	Nale, Zz'dtri	2 CR 15 creatures	105,036	115,126	105,635	115,126	115,126	120,000
909	Spiky, 1 elder silicon elemental, 1 piscoloth	2 CR 11 creatures + 1 CR 9 creature	105,999	115,599	105,635	115,689	115,689	120,000
921	6 quetzalcoatlus3, 6 riders	6 CR 8 creatures + 6 CR 1/2 creatures	105,999	115,599	105,635	116,439	116,439	120,000
922	Bloodfeast, 1 rider	1 CR 7 creature + 1 CR 1/2 creature	105,999	115,599	105,635	116,439	116,439	120,000
923	1 allosaurus, 1 megaraptor, 2 riders	1 CR 7 creature + 1 CR 6 creature + 2 CR 1/2 creature	105,999	115,599	105,635	116,439	116,439	120,000
936	Laurin, Miron, Tarquin, 1 triceratops	1 CR 21 creature + 1 CR 15 creature + 1 CR 13 creature + 1 CR 9 creature	112,818	122,908	106,460	123,658	123,658	125,667

¹This is fairly arbitrary, but I chose to start counting at the strip where the Order descended into the pyramid.
²-250 for casting planar ally.
³This is the only pterosaur for which I could find stats, not that it matters. The correct monster is likely to be weaker, and none of the Order involved in that encounter needed the XP they got from it to level.

The otherwise very helpful post by zimmerwald1915 has formatting issues. I've fixed the formatting of the table, if we want to make the links to discussions of their level more legible.

[ChristianSt]

From 963 can we discern that Roy's sword has some sort of size-changing property? When you're swallowed you can generally only use light weapons to cut your way out. Note that the sword comes directly out of the frog-monster's head, and not in an arc.

Is there a feat that allows you to ignore that requirement? Close Fighter, or something like that? I'm no expert on fighter feats, but I'd imagine that that's a more likely solution than one that allows Roy's sword to change its size.

Yeah, seems more likelier. If it would have some sort of size-changing property, than shouldn't we see it grow and shrink? At most I could see some sort of "this can be used as a light weapon"-enchantment on it (if that is possible).


Also I'm not sure on the rules: Could it just be possible for the swallowed Roy to just kill the frog first and then just escape the grapple afterwards (which should be rather easy against a dead frog)? We don't really see how Roy escaped: we only see him swallowed and cutting into the frog in one panel, and in the next panel he is free. We don't really know what happened exactly between those panels (unless that Durkon did nothing ).

[Vinyadan]

Unless there's a feat for that, I see it as much more reasonable to just assume the Giant didn't take the rule into account while writing the script, at least until there is proof of a size-changing weapon having been in Roy's hands for many, many strips, without ever being referred to as such, although it is a plot-relevant item.

On a second note, I don't think the rule should have applied at all. Roy simply stabbed the beast before he could be swallowed. There's no proof he didn't get out through the mouth. Roy wasn't swallowed yet, although he could have been in the following round, hadn't the monster been dead.

[Timy]

On a second note, I don't think the rule should have applied at all. Roy simply stabbed the beast before he could be swallowed. There's no proof he didn't get out through the mouth. Roy wasn't swallowed yet, although he could have been in the following round, hadn't the monster been dead.

He may not be swallowed yet but he is at the very least grappling (in the mouth of the frog) and the rules states that while grappling you can only use light weapon for attacking.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

He may not be swallowed yet but he is at the very least grappling (in the mouth of the frog) and the rules states that while grappling you can only use light weapon for attacking.

I don't remember that rule applying when you are being swallowed by a giant creature. In general, those creatures allow you to try to hack your way out with any weapon before it digests you.

GW

[Timy]

I don't remember that rule applying when you are being swallowed by a giant creature. In general, those creatures allow you to try to hack your way out with any weapon before it digests you.

GW

I am not at all a rule specialist but I looked in these 4 links ans I don't see why it should be special (at least I found nothing making it possible for an attack with a longsword).

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Grapple
http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Tyrannosaurus
http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Improved_Grab
http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Swallow_Whole

[Chantelune]

Personally, that scene kind of struck me as "let's not get the rule in the way of the storytelling".

[Flame of Anor]

Would it matter if Roy had had an active freedom of movement spell?

[Timy]

Would it matter if Roy had had an active freedom of movement spell?

It would not because he would not have been grappled in the first place.

[Flame of Anor]

It would not because he would not have been grappled in the first place.

What if some cleric had crafted a contingent freedom of movement on Roy, trigger "being swallowed"?

[zimmerwald1915]

The otherwise very helpful post by zimmerwald1915 has formatting issues.

It didn't before the table bbcode changes

Thanks for your help, though. Maybe the links should be changed to your post?

[Vinyadan]

What if some cleric had crafted a contingent freedom of movement on Roy, trigger "being swallowed"?

Still less far-fetched than the amazing size-changing sword, I suppose. But what if it were a weight-changing weapon?

I couldn't find the rule about not being able to use other than light weapons when grappled, could someone tell me how it's phrased or under which paragraph it can be found? I found a lot of things about using light weapons while grappling, but not about when being grappled.

[Quartz]

It's not when being grappled but when being swallowed. If you look in the Monster Manual about being swallowed whole, the description for each monster says that you can only use small or tiny slashing weapons - the Tarrasque is the only exception I've spotted.

[JustWantedToSay]

Are there any rules about swallowing hazardous objects?

Could it be that Roy did not stab the frog, but the frog's act of swallowing impaled itself with the sword?

ETA:

In the previous two strips, we see characters reaching high, but their arms do not reach above the head.
I played with some lines in paint. I found that roy's chin to belt, and roy's chin to head, has about 3:7 ratio. I extended the sword and drew a circle for the head, and found that the sword seems well beyond roy's head: out of reach.

[Vinyadan]

It's not when being grappled but when being swallowed. If you look in the Monster Manual about being swallowed whole, the description for each monster says that you can only use small or tiny slashing weapons - the Tarrasque is the only exception I've spotted.

OK.
What I am not getting is why he should be incapacitated to use the sword, if he has not yet been swallowed, but only held in the frog's mouth with improved grab.

[Kornaki]

OK.
What I am not getting is why he should be incapacitated to use the sword, if he has not yet been swallowed, but only held in the frog's mouth with improved grab.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/spe...ks.htm#grapple

"Attack Your Opponent
You can make an attack with an unarmed strike, natural weapon, or light weapon against another character you are grappling. You take a -4 penalty on such attacks."

[LuisDantas]

I don't remember that rule applying when you are being swallowed by a giant creature. In general, those creatures allow you to try to hack your way out with any weapon before it digests you.

Lucky Roy that this wasn't an unusually anti-social frog. :)

Seriously now, this brings back memories of D&D fans claiming that GURPS was "too complicated" because they were used to relying on the letter of the law for everything, and GURPS expects you not to.

I think this situation falls squarely within the qualificator of "artistic privilege". The Giant has long clearly stated that he won't make a point of following the D&D rules at the expense of plot convenience, so I don't think we can really infer anything about Roy's sword from that scene, except that it is capable of piercing that frog's hide. Game mechanics considerations have not been explicitly raised and do not seem likely to.

[Timy]

I think this situation falls squarely within the qualificator of "artistic privilege". The Giant has long clearly stated that he won't make a point of following the D&D rules at the expense of plot convenience, so I don't think we can really infer anything about Roy's sword from that scene, except that it is capable of piercing that frog's hide. Game mechanics considerations have not been explicitly raised and do not seem likely to.

Of course. But it is (correct me if I am wrong) the very subject of this topic to look for RAW explanations of what is written in comic.

And it seems that we have a monster grappling Roy and then, him being "held in mouth" (so grappled) or "swallowed whole" and using his longsword (which is not a light weapon) which in both cases seems to be impossible in the RAW without some additional things (like a freedom of movement spell or a size-changing enhancement).

[LuisDantas]

Of course. But it is (correct me if I am wrong) the very subject of this topic to look for RAW explanations of what is written in comic.

And it seems that we have a monster grappling Roy and then, him being "held in mouth" (so grappled) or "swallowed whole" and using his longsword (which is not a light weapon) which in both cases seems to be impossible in the RAW without some additional things (like a freedom of movement spell or a size-changing enhancement).

Fair enough. I just file this one under "rule of plot", I suppose. I feel that even in a game situation this would probably be acceptable.

In any case, Greenhilt is a greatsword, not a longsword. Which of course further distances it from a light weapon.

[Hecuba]

If we must try to give a RAW explanation, it would seem that the most conservative option would be that (like Big T) the frog creature shown has an unusually large gullet and is not subject to the light-weapon only clause that usually comes with swallow whole.

[Kornaki]

If we must try to give a RAW explanation, it would seem that the most conservative option would be that (like Big T) the frog creature shown has an unusually large gullet and is not subject to the light-weapon only clause that usually comes with swallow whole.

Except you can clearly see from the size of the frog that this isn't true. He's not exactly a colossal creature.

[Flame of Anor]

Except you can clearly see from the size of the frog that this isn't true. He's not exactly a colossal creature.

And saying "This creature has an exception to RAW" is not very RAW.

[Hecuba]

And saying "This creature has an exception to RAW" is not very RAW.

RAW has specific exceptions to itself all the time, and we have a specific example of it using this exact exception.

A highly questionable attribution of a specific rule to a specific non-colossal creature seems (at minimum) no worse than a highly questionable attribution of a specific ability to a specific weapon.