Class and Level Geekery XII - Even Nerds Call Us Nerds

[Taelas]

There is no contradiction, here.

If there's an entry linking flat-footed and climbing (and we know that there is), the only reason to dismiss that entry would be if the text and table were in conflict. They are not. Thus the entry in question simply clarifies the situation: climbing makes you flat-footed.

[Flame of Anor]

There is no contradiction, here.

If there's an entry linking flat-footed and climbing (and we know that there is), the only reason to dismiss that entry would be if the text and table were in conflict. They are not. Thus the entry in question simply clarifies the situation: climbing makes you flat-footed.

I don't think we are certain that Tarquin is climbing, though. He's just kind of...there.

[JustWantedToSay]

If he's not climbing, then he's balancing on the rail, or a lip beyond it. Balancing also leaves him flat-footed.

[Kalmegil]

Yeah, when he lets go to catch the arrows, he falls, then catches himself. He was doing something that he had to keep doing to avoid falling that required at least 1 hand. All the possibilities I'm aware of would stop him from catching two arrows using RAW infinite deflection: clinging leaves only one hand free; climbing and balancing (and possibly clinging as a subset of climbing) leave you flat-footed.

[Crusher]

Yeah. As far as I can see, the only answer would be if he was allowed to instantaneously "drop" the side of the ship, grab both arrows, instantaneously drop *the arrows* and then make a (probably fairly difficult) reflex save to regrab the ship before plummeting.

Its not impossible that this is somehow doable. I mean, he *did* drop the arrows after snatching them and regrab the side of the ship, so its really only the instant drop of the side of the ship that needs to be explained.

But I don't see people lining up to provide explanations for how it would work.

[illyahr]

By RAW, dropping something is a Free Action, not an Immediate Action, so it can't be done on someone else's turn. However we slice it, we enter the realm of Homebrew.

[SavageWombat]

Well, the Gloves of Arrow Snaring say "even if he doesn't meet the prerequisites for it." So if we say that "not being flat-footed" is a prerequisite...

/I know, I know

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Well, the Gloves of Arrow Snaring say "even if he doesn't meet the prerequisites for it." So if we say that "not being flat-footed" is a prerequisite...

/I know, I know

Aren't they "once daily" use, though? We'd need a homebrewed version that can be used at-will.

GW

[The_Final_Stand]

What if he has the feat and the gloves? That way, X times per day he can ignore prerequisites, and other times he can follow the rules!

I do not actually support this interpretation.

[Kornaki]

Aren't they "once daily" use, though? We'd need a homebrewed version that can be used at-will.

GW

It's twice per day. Can he just switch out the gloves he is wearing for new ones and refresh his uses?

[SavageWombat]

It's twice per day. Can he just switch out the gloves he is wearing for new ones and refresh his uses?

I think the problem was that the gloves say twice per day, but as the feat - and the feat says "once per round".

That's the reason for my preference for the gloves - because "twice per day" is in the description. But that clearly doesn't pass the RAW test, and some pointed out that magic gloves might be something that would be drawn.

[JustWantedToSay]

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/po...oyantSense.htm

Laurin calls it clairvoyance, but I'll assume she means the above?

[Crusher]

Plus she created two more portals. One to send Tarquin (plus his army) back, and a second to summon in what I presume are soldiers of the Empire of Sweat. They certainly aren't Tarquin's flunkies. Have we seen those uniforms before?

[Shale]

They're presumably from the Empire of Sweat (Sweaters? But they're wearing armor...), since Laurin owns the valley now.

[CaDzilla]

Laurin doesn't have the orange stone anymore

[zql]

Tarquin didn't use the snatching feat while climbing, the hole point is that he had to "stop climbing" to catch those arrows.


We've seen the sweat soldiers here.

[Kalmegil]

Tarquin didn't use the snatching feat while climbing, the hole point is that he had to "stop climbing" to catch those arrows.

This is basically a recap, but if he wasn't climbing, he was clinging, which only leaves one hand free. Once he caught one arrow, he had no hands free. But he still caught the second arrow.

[hamishspence]

Wile-E-Coyote's Law of Cartoon Inertia - you can always let go of what's supporting you - and fall the moment you notice there's nothing to support you.

[Kalmegil]

Which would be a house rule.

[Kornaki]

Which would be a house rule.

This rule of comedy has actually been stated in the comic as being in effect though.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0437.html

[warrl]

Wile-E-Coyote's Law of Cartoon Inertia - you can always let go of what's supporting you - and fall the moment you notice there's nothing to support you.

I'm pretty sure that when falling is caused only by gravity, you do it only during your turn.

And something that causes you to lose your grip doesn't cause you to fall, it merely removes what's preventing gravity from causing you to fall.

[Steven]

None of which explains how Tarquin would release his hold while the arrows are mid flight. Letting go might be a free action but I don't think it's an immediate action.

[SavageWombat]

None of which explains how Tarquin would release his hold while the arrows are mid flight. Letting go might be a free action but I don't think it's an immediate action.

What if he habitually readies his action (while clinging to precarious objects) with the trigger "if someone shoots a projectile at me, release my handholds and catch the missiles?" That would interrupt Haley's action, wouldn't it?

It's probably written on his character notes somewhere.

[Steven]

It probably is. Remember how, when he first set that up and his team all started throwing things at him just to watch him fall down cliffs? What larks.

[Toper]

If you believe that you must give Tarquin Infinite Deflection + Snatch Arrows in order to explain this, why take it away just because it's not quite enough to explain that? Doesn't this discussion seem rather tangential to the original one?

[Steven]

The idea is that in the first instance it the combo explained it by RAW. The second instance is not explainable by RAW which means that there is something homebrewish going on.
We can assume that T doesn't have two different ways of catching arrows so we can drop the infinite deflection since we know there must be something else at work.

That's the logic as I understand it and I think the assumption in my second paragraph is a fair one.

[Toper]

We can assume that T doesn't have two different ways of catching arrows

What if giving him two ways of catching arrows is the only way to explain 925 by RAW? Wouldn't the thread feel compelled to do so?

(I'm not saying it is, but I am saying you could certainly come up with house rules to explain 936 alone.)

[Steven]

I can't speak to that. My understanding of the rules of the thread is that if something is shown not to be RAW then it's listed as such so I can't see two separate rules being listed but that's not my call to make.

[Kalmegil]

What if giving him two ways of catching arrows is the only way to explain 925 by RAW? Wouldn't the thread feel compelled to do so?

(I'm not saying it is, but I am saying you could certainly come up with house rules to explain 936 alone.)

Are there two different RAW ways of catching arrows that, if he had them both, would explain either 925 or 936? I'm not aware of any.

The only way 925 happens with infinite deflection/snatch arrows is if he dropped the reins during the panel where Haley shoots. So far, I don't think anyone has proposed a RAW mechanism that explains what happens in 936, even one that requires him possessing two different abilities.

Also, I don't see any real house-rule that allows 936 that doesn't also allow 925 (assuming he doesn't drop the reins), because the house rule pretty much has to allow two-hand snatching while one hand is not free. I suppose the rule could be "while clinging," but I doubt anyone would seriously propose that.

Basically, if we determine we must house rule one incident of a particular power, I don't think we need to assume all the other incidents of that power were done via RAW. We can safely assume that the house rule covers all instances of that power.

Here, we seem to have a power that states "character can catch two arrows* even when his hands are not free" (*where two is the lower limit; I suppose it could be more). The other possibility is infinite deflection plus snatch arrows plus house rule lifting hands-free restriction or allowing immediate action drops.

I'm NOT saying we should add the rule I listed first to the character sheet, but I think at this point it's enough to take down infinite deflection/snatch arrows, because we have no in-comic means to actually determine which house rule is more likely.

[Gift Jeraff]

Official name for Tarquin's party: Vector Legion

I was so close.