Archers vs outsiders split from unfairly powerful monsters

[emeraldstreak]

Also, why wouldn't the Pit Fiend have started the Wish loop long ago?


I repeat, why would the Pit Fiend wait to start the Wish loop?

OK, now you are utterly confused.


It's not for a PC to answer why Pit Fiends in a setting have not started abusing their Wishes "long ago". It's not for a first level PC to fix a setting where Pit Fiends have abused their wishes long ago.

[ColorBlindNinja]

It's not for a PC to answer why Pit Fiends in a setting have not started abusing their Wishes "long ago". It's not for a first level PC to fix a setting where Pit Fiends have abused their wishes long ago.

If we're optimizing Pit Fiends, they would have already begun a Wish loop. Just like an optimized Fighter would have purchased all his gear long ago, or in this case, started a Wish loop.

I'm not going to take your claims about Fighter VS Pitfiend seriously unless you can tell me exactly how the Fighter is supposed to win.

[emeraldstreak]

If we're optimizing Pit Fiends, they would have already begun a Wish loop. Just like an optimized Fighter would have purchased all his gear long ago, or in this case, started a Wish loop.

Shockingly, whomever started first finished first? That's setting history, not a RAW challenge.

A challenge would be the CR 20 monster (as described in its entry by RAW) and the level 20 character (as built by its player by RAW) going for the loop at one and the same time. A challenge, as explained above, the PC wins overwhelmingly.

[ColorBlindNinja]

Shockingly, whomever started first finished first? That's setting history, not a RAW challenge.

It's assumed that characters have a history when building them. Otherwise, they just sprung out of the ground at level 20 with their WBLs worth of gear.

A challenge would be the CR 20 monster (as described in its entry by RAW) and the level 20 character (as built by its player by RAW) going for the loop at one and the same time.

Why? Why couldn't both characters have already benefited from free Wishes and walk into combat with the buffs and gear obtained from said Wishes?

A challenge, as explained above, the PC wins overwhelmingly.

Until you can show me how the Fighter is built, I don't believe you.

[Florian]

If we're optimizing Pit Fiends, they would have already begun a Wish loop. Just like an optimized Fighter would have purchased all his gear long ago, or in this case, started a Wish loop.

I'm not going to take your claims about Fighter VS Pitfiend seriously unless you can tell me exactly how the Fighter is supposed to win.

You might have noticed that the fighter we discuss here didn't start the "wish loop" using WBL but instead used that to act like we suppose a Fighter acts, by beating the target by force of arms and skill.

So maybe such simple concepts are a bit above your pay grade?

[ColorBlindNinja]

You might have noticed that the fighter we discuss here didn't start the "wish loop" using WBL but instead used that to act like we suppose a Fighter acts, by beating the target by force of arms and skill.

Irrelevant; we were discussing Wish loop tactics.

So maybe such simple concepts are a bit above your pay grade?

Would it kill you to be polite?

[emeraldstreak]

Otherwise, they just sprung out of the ground at level 20 with their WBLs worth of gear.

Exactly, that's why it's called a challenge, a gauntlet, an arena - not a roleplaying campaign in setting with history.

Or if you prefer, they have their logical prehistory and setting - but it just so happens that they begin their rivalry exactly in that moment, under these exact conditions.

Why? Why couldn't both characters have already benefited from free Wishes and walk into combat with the buffs and gear obtained from said Wishes?

Because the PC would be Pun Pun. As in swat Greater Deities by the dozen final optimization Pun Pun. That's the end of the loop, Ninja.

[ColorBlindNinja]

Exactly, that's why it's called a challenge, a gauntlet, an arena - not a roleplaying campaign in setting with history.

Or if you prefer, they have their logical prehistory and setting - but it just so happens that they begin their rivalry exactly in that moment, under these exact conditions.

That still doesn't explain why that prehistory can't include Wish loops...

Because the PC would be Pun Pun. As in swat Greater Deities by the dozen final optimization Pun Pun. That's the end of the loop, Ninja.

I did say that Wish loops would leave them both unable to fight each other.

[Menzath]

That still doesn't explain why that prehistory can't include Wish loops...

Because that would void the premise of the challenge and /thread?

Work within the constraints of the challenge, or not at all is part of the point I think.

[ColorBlindNinja]

Because that would void the premise of the challenge and /thread?

Work within the constraints of the challenge, or not at all is part of the point I think.

Fine, it was a hypothetical discussion anyway.

[emeraldstreak]

That still doesn't explain why that prehistory can't include Wish loops...

The answer is either: whoever started first (possible while the other wasn't even born) - outcome is obvious and hardly worth a discussion,

or they begin at the same time, each being what he is by RAW - at which point I already described the ways the PC is ahead.

[Florian]

Fine, it was a hypothetical discussion anyway.

Look, stupid, I don´t let you get off the hook so easily. The premise of this whole challenge was quite clear and met easily. The last pages are people chiming in, disagreeing with the outcome and coming up with weirder and weirder constraints or simply moving goal posts to negate the result.

[ColorBlindNinja]

Look, stupid, I don´t let you get off the hook so easily. The premise of this whole challenge was quite clear and met easily. The last pages are people chiming in, disagreeing with the outcome and coming up with weirder and weirder constraints or simply moving goal posts to negate the result.

No, Emeraldstreak and I were discussing a Fighter and Pit Fiend abusing Wish loops.

[emeraldstreak]

No, Emeraldstreak and I were discussing a Fighter and Pit Fiend abusing Wish loops.

And hopefully we are done.

Referring again to this post as the one that ends the discussion as far as RAW is concerned.


Finally - and importantly - I have to caution against trying to "optimize" the Pit Fiend away from what is presented in the MM. If you do that long enough, it will stop being a monster, but will become a Player Character of sorts that unfairly uses a race that doesn't have +LA, and if it did it would be +40 or something, against a character of +0 LA or so.

[Beheld]

The premise of this whole challenge was quite clear and met easily. . . disagreeing with the outcome

I don't think asserting you can with a bunch of extremely limited understandings of the rules and declarations that Pit Fiends aren't allowed to use half their SLAs is quite the same as "clearly met" if people are still disagreeing with the outcome, doesn't seem so clear.

[Florian]

I don't think asserting you can with a bunch of extremely limited understandings of the rules and declarations that Pit Fiends aren't allowed to use half their SLAs is quite the same as "clearly met" if people are still disagreeing with the outcome, doesn't seem so clear.

Guy, who cares? The premise was: Fighter vs. Pit Fiend, now fight!

You drone on and on about what could have happened before, what could have been used... all pure blah-blah that was never part of the original question. So, pure moving goal posts.

Yes, high-CR monsters have abilities and they could come into play when they have the time to prep, but that was never the question here.

[Beheld]

Guy, who cares? The premise was: Fighter vs. Pit Fiend, now fight!

You drone on and on about what could have happened before, what could have been used... all pure blah-blah that was never part of the original question. So, pure moving goal posts.

Yes, high-CR monsters have abilities and they could come into play when they have the time to prep, but that was never the question here.

The premise was never that an exterior force automatically teleported both parties adjacent to each other in a featureless death plane.

The question was how fighters deal with Pit Fiends (or don't) in actual game enviroments. In fact, Jormugand specifically talked about the Pit Fiend attacking in a surprise round in their original statement about the issue, which means that invisibility, or the Pit Fiends superior detection abilities already came into play in the very first explanation.

[ColorBlindNinja]

So, how exactly is this Core only UMD Fighter supposed to take out the Pit Fiend?

Is he allowed to dip into Rogue so he can at least have more ranks in UMD?

What spells should he be using?

[Anthrowhale]

I'm finding myself losing track of the wrong claims that have been made so I decided to make a FAQ.

Spoiler: Fighter 20 is immune to Pit Fiend Blasphemy

Show

Beheld claimed that the Pit Fiend's Blasphemy power can daze the fighter.

...the Pit Fiend can move over to within 40ft of you ... and then Blasphemy you, Dazing you for one round, and repeat infinitely while the Morghs/Mummies fish for crits to kill you.

However, Blasphemy has no listed effect for a 20 HD creature (the halfling sniper) when cast at caster level 18.

Spoiler: Sniping does not break hide

Show

Beheld claimed that sniping requires losing hide.

While we are talking about sniping rules, you get that no matter what you roll on a hide check they all see you right?

This is wrong, because the 4th sentence of hide says:

It’s practically impossible (-20 penalty) to hide while attacking, running or charging.

implying that it is possible as long as you hide with a -20 penalty. Beheld further claimed this was not a rule.

Or you know, you could quote the actual rules..

referring to the sniping section. However the sniping section does not say you are revealed when sniping---it just says that:

...you can make one ranged attack, then immediately hide again...

which does not contradict the first rule---it just clarifies that an additional hide check at -20 is required. In particular it never states that you are revealed if the hide check is made. As a general principle nothing changes according to RAW unless it is stated as changing.

Spoiler: Permanency Detect Magic does not require concentration forever

Show

Beheld claimed that:

...unless you use your standard action to detect magic every round of your life, you don't get "pinged" by illusions ...

This is incorrect because Permanency changes the duration from concentration to permanent.

This spell makes certain other spells permanent.

Since detect magic is permanent, it no longer requires concentration. Detect Magic does require "study".

The amount of information revealed depends on how long you study a particular area or subject.

The RAW interpretation is that since no action cost is given there is no action cost as Menzath points out. The text of persistent spell suggests that automatic detection with concentration for further information is closer to RAI. Either way, the fighter need not concentrate every round for life.

Spoiler: Cover from a boulder applies to a half-plane

Show

Beheld implies that cover from a boulder only applies if a large number of enemies line up.

...if the mummies don't line up in a nice long line, and the Pit Fiend is in the air, then you probably don't have cover with respect to all of them from many locations.

However the Cover rules state:

If any line from this corner to any corner of the target’s square passes through a square or border that blocks line of effect or provides cover, or through a square occupied by a creature, the target has cover...

. Hence a small boulder can provide cover against all opponents on the other side (not just ones in a carefully arranged line) of a boulder since one corner of the square has LOE blocked for all opponents on the other side.

Spoiler: Cover works more than 10 feet away

Show

Beheld apparently claims that cover and concealment only works within 10' of someone you hide from. After I point out that cover and concealment are common in natural settings he says:

Your contention that there is cover or concealment within 10ft of every enemy ever is silly.

. This is simply an incorrect understanding of the cover rules---they apply at any range.

Spoiler: A Fighter can Permanency Detect Magic

Show

Beheld claims

But while we are on the subject, you actually can't Permanency Detect Magic on your fighter at all. It's literally against the rules.

A fighter with Permanency Detect Magic is unusual since detect magic can only be made permanent on yourself. But it is allowed using a Ring of spell storing which states

A ... ring of spell storing contains ... spells that the wearer can cast

. This use of a ring of spell storing was stated in the original description.

[Psyren]

A 300gp potion beats Blasphemy as well.

[Beheld]

I'm finding myself losing track of the wrong claims that have been made so I decided to make a FAQ.

Spoiler: Fighter 20 is immune to Pit Fiend Blasphemy

Show

Beheld claimed that the Pit Fiend's Blasphemy power can daze the fighter.
However, Blasphemy has no listed effect for a 20 HD creature (the halfling sniper) when cast at caster level 18.

Spoiler: Sniping does not break hide

Show

Beheld claimed that sniping requires losing hide.
This is wrong, because the 4th sentence of hide says: implying that it is possible as long as you hide with a -20 penalty. Beheld further claimed this was not a rule. referring to the sniping section. However the sniping section does not say you are revealed when sniping---it just says that: which does not contradict the first rule---it just clarifies that an additional hide check at -20 is required. In particular it never states that you are revealed if the hide check is made. As a general principle nothing changes according to RAW unless it is stated as changing.

Spoiler: Permanency Detect Magic does not require concentration forever

Show

Beheld claimed that: This is incorrect because Permanency changes the duration from concentration to permanent. Since detect magic is permanent, it no longer requires concentration. Detect Magic does require "study". The RAW interpretation is that since no action cost is given there is no action cost as Menzath points out. The text of persistent spell suggests that automatic detection with concentration for further information is closer to RAI. Either way, the fighter need not concentrate every round for life.

Spoiler: Cover from a boulder applies to a half-plane

Show

Beheld implies that cover from a boulder only applies if a large number of enemies line up. However the Cover rules state: . Hence a small boulder can provide cover against all opponents on the other side (not just ones in a carefully arranged line) of a boulder since one corner of the square has LOE blocked for all opponents on the other side.

Spoiler: Cover works more than 10 feet away

Show

Beheld apparently claims that cover and concealment only works within 10' of someone you hide from. After I point out that cover and concealment are common in natural settings he says: . This is simply an incorrect understanding of the cover rules---they apply at any range.

Spoiler: A Fighter can Permanency Detect Magic

Show

Beheld claims A fighter with Permanency Detect Magic is unusual since detect magic can only be made permanent on yourself. But it is allowed using a Ring of spell storing which states . This use of a ring of spell storing was stated in the original description.

Oh, I'm sorry, so close, you only lied in five out of six of those. You were so close to lying about every single thing. Well it was a good try. It is weird how you decided to just make a new post where you repeated a bunch of lies I have already corrected while ignoring the corrections. Presumably every time this thread goes to a new page you will repeat the same lies, ignoring the same corrections.

But in reverse order:

1) You are lying about what I said about detect magic permanency, because you claimed he was using a ring that you didn't budget into WBL. He can't use a ring he doesn't have.

2) You are lying about what I said about Cover, because my point was your halfling with a 10ft movement speed has to move 10ft every round after sniping, so needs cover within 10ft, and illusions block off far away cover.

3) You are lying about what I said about Cover, because I specifically quoted the cover rules to correct your false claim that you can have cover against everything just by standing near a boulder, even though you don't, because Pit Fiends fly, and morgs and mummies aren't going to be standing in the same place.

4) You lie about what I said about detect magic, because I very specifically always said that detect magic doesn't ping when you come within 60ft of illusions UNLESS YOU CONCENTRATE, and you then decided it would be convenient to repeatedly lie about what I said, over and over, no matter how many times I correct you.

5) I notice you omit part of the sniping description, because it doesn't help your argument. The same part that I've already pointed out. "then immediately hide again. You take a -20 penalty on your Hide check to conceal yourself after the shot." If you are still hidden during the shot, why on earth would you need to hide again after the shot?

Your claim that you roll once during the attack, and then again after the shot is nonsense. You are relying entirely on a summary statement about penalties, in the middle of an entire paragraph that summarizes penalties, and then saying "that's not a sentence that summarizes the penalties for sniping, it's a rule on it's own." Even though if it was a rule on it's own, there would be no reason to ever use the sniping rules ever.

But hey, while we are bringing up stuff from the past, why did your fighter spend 1,582,000gp when WBL is only 760,000gp?

[Anthrowhale]

... you repeated a bunch of lies I have already corrected while ignoring the corrections....

That's a pretty strong admission you are making there. Thank you. If you want to point out the corrections, I'm happy to add them to the FAQ.

I quoted you and you have pointed out no incorrect quotes so all claims along the lines of "You are lying about what I said" are clearly false. You may have meant to say something other than what you said (we all make mistakes) so please make some corrections where necessary.

... you claimed he was using a ring that you didn't budget into WBL. He can't use a ring he doesn't have.

A spell storing ring is a common item that the build does not need on a routine basis. If it matters, I'm happy to add 10gp of cost for the 10 rounds of use in the back story.

... my point was your halfling with a 10ft movement speed has to move 10ft every round after sniping, so needs cover within 10ft, and illusions block off far away cover.

The halfling has a movement speed of 20' not 10'. I'll add that to the FAQ. I'm also unclear on what you are saying about illusions.

...I specifically quoted the cover rules to correct your false claim that you can have cover against everything just by standing near a boulder, even though you don't, because Pit Fiends fly, and morgs and mummies aren't going to be standing in the same place.

Citation needed. I never claimed that you can have cover against everything.

... I very specifically always said that detect magic doesn't ping when you come within 60ft of illusions UNLESS YOU CONCENTRATE, and you then decided it would be convenient to repeatedly lie about what I said, over and over, no matter how many times I correct you.

So, you were wrong two ways. Once by claiming that every standard action for life was needed and once by claiming that concentration is needed. If you want to dispute the RAW, then find a citation that says otherwise.

5) I notice you omit part of the sniping description, because it doesn't help your argument. The same part that I've already pointed out. "then immediately hide again. You take a -20 penalty on your Hide check to conceal yourself after the shot." If you are still hidden during the shot, why on earth would you need to hide again after the shot?

If you want to come up with an alternate claim for what RAW is, then please reconcile all rules, not just the ones that favor your position.

...Even though if it was a rule on it's own, there would be no reason to ever use the sniping rules ever.

I have no idea what you are talking about here, but it sounds quite wrong.

But hey, while we are bringing up stuff from the past, why did your fighter spend 1,582,000gp when WBL is only 760,000gp?

I have no idea what you are talking about here, but the conclusion is wrong. I carefully accounted for all spending.

[DEMON]

5) I notice you omit part of the sniping description, because it doesn't help your argument. The same part that I've already pointed out. "then immediately hide again. You take a -20 penalty on your Hide check to conceal yourself after the shot." If you are still hidden during the shot, why on earth would you need to hide again after the shot?

Moving Sniper: To use this maneuver, you must succeed on a sniping attack (see the Hide skill description, page 76 of the Player's Handbook), both hitting your intended target and successfully hiding thereafter. If no one sees you, you can make a sniping attack again in the following round, taking a single move after your attack and before you hide (characters without this feat can only shoot and hide, not move as well). As long as you continue to hit the target and avoid detection from an enemy, you can make a sniping attack on the move each round.

Emphasis mine. Take from it what you will, but I'd say this suggests you can avoid detection by a successful hide check after a hit, as part of the sniping.

[Beheld]

Emphasis mine. Take from it what you will, but I'd say this suggests you can avoid detection by a successful hide check after a hit, as part of the sniping.

That ability... doesn't even do anything? You can already use sniping to shoot as a standard action and then move and hide as a move action. That's already how the rules work. I don't think "some random thing written in a completely different book by a different person who clearly doesn't understand the hiding rules" is a very good argument.

@anthrowhale, can you just stop repeating the same lies over and over and over again? Is that like, a contractual obligation you have to lie about what I said? Like, I already went out of the way to explain why you were lying about each thing, and aside from your lie about how I didn't do that, you just repeated the same lies.

No matter how much you edit out of my quotes and lie about what I said, it is still factually true that you don't get updated whenever you walk within 60ft of an illusion like you claimed, unless you concentrate every round. Your claim that you can just "hide" during an attack action is flatly contradicted by the existence of the sniping rules, since if you could hide during an attack action, you would just do that instead of sniping. Difficult terrain costs two squares to move through, so your claim that you constantly have cover and/.or concealment at all times in all squares would require terrain with half movement speed. Or are you now contending that all terrain is perfectly flat and you would have no trouble moving until you next need to schroedinger's terrain it to give you cover against all enemies again?

For ****s sake, you even lied about why I corrected you by quoting it out of context and pretending my corrections of your lies were admissions of fault, are you paid per lie?

I have no idea what you are talking about here, but the conclusion is wrong. I carefully accounted for all spending.

Well, except when you declared you have an 18,000gp item for free.

And also when you bought 800kgp worth of stuff for 80kGP.

I mean, anyone can write incorrect prices next to items and say they accounted for things, it doesn't mean you didn't give yourself 1.5million gp worth of goods. Also I guess I will point out since we are talking about wealth, that you invented an item that doesn't exist and made up your own pricing.

[DEMON]

That ability... doesn't even do anything? You can already use sniping to shoot as a standard action and then move and hide as a move action. That's already how the rules work.

I believe that is incorrect, going by a quote from SRD:

Normally, you make a Hide check as part of movement, so it doesn’t take a separate action. However, hiding immediately after a ranged attack (see Sniping, above) is a move action.

I don't think "some random thing written in a completely different book by a different person who clearly doesn't understand the hiding rules" is a very good argument.

Fair enough. Though it's still a 1st party rulebook from the same edition, expanding upon the topic in question, that suggest you can avoid detection when sniping by succeeding on hide checks, so I wouldn't completely disregard it. Also, as shown above, I don't think the author does not understand the sniping rules.

[Lans]

A spell storing ring is a common item that the build does not need on a routine basis. If it matters, I'm happy to add 10gp of cost for the 10 rounds of use in the back story.

I have no idea what you are talking about here, but the conclusion is wrong. I carefully accounted for all spending.

I think half cost for the ring would be more in line of what is reasonable, as your essentially buying if then selling it back. As for you not accounting for wealth

Slotless: Pale Green Ioun Stone: 30K

Expendables
Arrows: 160 Cold Iron
Arrows: 160 Silver
Arrows: 20 Adamantium: 1.2K

You don't seem to have accounted for 90% of of your arrows, granted that doesn't cover the number you were stated to be off by.

A DM also adjusts encounters to match PC capability -- so say several posters in this thread. Or is that just adjusting down because otherwise we make Fighters sad?

I would use the word adjust instead of match, and adjusting up is a lot easier than adjusting down by raw. By the rules you can basically make the pit fiend an EL21 encounter, select worse feats, and maybe say he didn't have a mountain of corpses to mummify, and make the fight on neutral, or even the pcs turf. On the making things harder you can do the opposite, then give the Fiend equipment.

[Dagroth]

It should be noted that WBL assumes certain things.

It assumes that a character will have bought and used consumables (that don't have permanent effects) at lower levels.

It assumes that a character will have bought (or looted) lower level items and lower levels and then sold (or given away) those items when they got better ones.

Edit:
Additionally, if we're assuming high levels of "Magic Mart"-itis, finding "Wizard who will cast Permanency for hire" & finding "Wizard with a Ring of Spell Storing who will cast Permanency for hire" are equally trivial tasks.

[emeraldstreak]

It should be noted that WBL assumes certain things.

It assumes that a character will have bought and used consumables (that don't have permanent effects) at lower levels.

It assumes that a character will have bought (or looted) lower level items and lower levels and then sold (or given away) those items when they got better ones.

Edit:
Additionally, if we're assuming high levels of "Magic Mart"-itis, finding "Wizard who will cast Permanency for hire" & finding "Wizard with a Ring of Spell Storing who will cast Permanency for hire" are equally trivial tasks.

No assumptions.

The Fighter must be a RAW level 20 character.

[Anthrowhale]

Emphasis mine. Take from it what you will, but I'd say this suggests you can avoid detection by a successful hide check after a hit, as part of the sniping.

It does seem impossible to reconcile these statements with a view that hide is automatically lost during sniping. But again, it's impossible to reconcile the statements in hide with a view that hide is automatically lost during sniping.

Like, I already went out of the way to explain why you were lying about each thing, and aside from your lie about how I didn't do that, you just repeated the same lies.

I find many of your statements incomprehensible and unsupported. On the other hand, I have provided many references, shared the logic, and sometimes updated my beliefs as others have commented thoughtfully. Maybe try making a real argument?

I find everything else you are saying here incomprehensible. Items that don't exist? 1.5Mgp? Your unwillingness to provide any explanation or references despite requests implies you have none.

I think half cost for the ring would be more in line of what is reasonable, as your essentially buying if then selling it back. As for you not accounting for wealth

That seems like very high price for a brief rental... But I'll work with it. I decided to ditch the fire resistance on the bracers and pay the full price, adding in a spellcasting services True Seeing in case I ever need it.

You don't seem to have accounted for 90% of of your arrows, granted that doesn't cover the number you were stated to be off by.

It actually is accounted in my spreadsheet, but the price is very low. Anyways, I added it.

[Anthrowhale]

I tried to understand two more of Beheld's wrong claims and largely failed---there just isn't enough detail provided. Anyways, here they are (and I've added them to the original post.)

Spoiler: Yes, it's really all just 760K gp

Show

Beheld claims that all expendables are 10 times more expensive than what is listed and hence that the build is far over allowed wealth.

Well I mean, for one shots, consumables are supposed to cost 10 times as much.

I have no idea where this is coming from and no rule has been cited---maybe it's some house rule for tournaments that Beheld once played with.

Spoiler: The halfling's move is 20 or more

Show

Beheld claims the the halfling's movement speed is 10.

...my point was your halfling with a 10ft movement speed...

. This is simply false as a halfling has a movement speed of 20 which can be enhanced to 50 with haste, 60 with a fly potion, or 90 with both. My best guess is that Beheld took Hide as a constraint and read the second sentence while missing the third and fourth sentences.