Class and Level Geekery VIII (spoilers ahoy!)

[douglas]

Originally Posted by Lvl45DM!

Yeah but dude he's not carrying durkon like a heavy load. He THREW him 10-15 feet!

The only thing I can think of for rules to handle that is some of the Setting Sun maneuvers from Tome of Battle.

[Gift Jeraff]

Originally Posted by ghoul-n

Any evidence on Zz'dtri being a male, btw?

6 different characters (V, Sabine, Nale, Qarr, Roy, and Tarquin) have called him male on multiple occasions, and so has the Giant. Since no one has referred to him as female or ambiguous, it seems he's a he.

[Winter]

This is proof that Tarquin has the Feat: "Improved Toss Dwarf".

[Winter]

Originally Posted by FujinAkari

This is not the way debate works. Burden of proof requires the person making the assertion to provide evidence...

Yes, exactly. This is what we are examining here. You make a claim based on something said in comic and claim that was a proof.
I say it's no proof as your source is unreliable and precisision was not necessary all for what Eugene wanted to tell Roy in that scene. Instead of bringing proof myself, I argue that your proof has not been one in the first place.

Again, we are at Xykon saying "I love you, Redcloak" and you claiming that was 100%-proof for Xykon loving Redcloak only based on the fact that Xykon should know what he really feels (and of course would say so in all circumstances, no matter what he intends to cause with his say).
Eugene saying "Roy, you were the highest level character on the field, it was your responsibility" when he really wants to scold Roy, make him feel bad, etc is the very same thing.

[moonbiter]

Originally Posted by Frog Dragon

Can we estimate Tarquin's strength from this?

I'd say no, if only because we don't know what magic bling he is wearing. He is rather obviously wearing a belt/girdle, which may or may not be a you-know-what.

[RMS Oceanic]

Originally Posted by Winter

This is proof that Tarquin has the Feat: "Improved Toss Dwarf".

I dunno, he could just have "Toss Humanoid" and a level in the Prestige Class "Fastball Special".

Originally Posted by moonbiter

I'd say no, if only because we don't know what magic bling he is wearing. He is rather obviously wearing a belt/girdle, which may or may not be a you-know-what.

I actually don't-know-what. A belt of Giant's Strength? We note Roy's modified Strength, so I wouldn't see a problem in noting what strength Tarquin demonstrates, regardless of where his strength came from. We just need to decide what factors to take into account.

[Oscredwin]

Originally Posted by douglas

The only thing I can think of for rules to handle that is some of the Setting Sun maneuvers from Tome of Battle.

My guess has always been that Tarquin had Martial Adept levels. My guess is he's heavily multiclassed. He tripped Roy with an AoO when Roy entered his threatened space (a few builds to do that), he caught the arrow, likely with magic gloves (an extra <20k on magic items or 3 feats, which do you think he uses), and some way to get the setting sun maneuver he used.

[Forikroder]

Originally Posted by Winter

Yes, exactly. This is what we are examining here. You make a claim based on something said in comic and claim that was a proof.
I say it's no proof as your source is unreliable and precisision was not necessary all for what Eugene wanted to tell Roy in that scene. Instead of bringing proof myself, I argue that your proof has not been one in the first place.

Again, we are at Xykon saying "I love you, Redcloak" and you claiming that was 100%-proof for Xykon loving Redcloak only based on the fact that Xykon should know what he really feels (and of course would say so in all circumstances, no matter what he intends to cause with his say).
Eugene saying "Roy, you were the highest level character on the field, it was your responsibility" when he really wants to scold Roy, make him feel bad, etc is the very same thing.

theres no reason to assume Eugene was lying, there was nothing in comic that would point to him lieing and no evidence that Roy thought he was wrong nor was there good reason to assume Eugene knew about Soon

if Xykon said he loved redcloak, there would be evidence wether hes lying but its not something you could straight ignore youd have to look at the comic and the surrounding scenario before making a decision, maybe Xykon legit swings that way

the point is you cant just say "whatever this person saids is obviously wrong because theyve been shown to lie before" its like saying Tarquin really isnt a fighter or that Malack doesnt actually have a weak consititution or Ian isnt really Haleys father

[FujinAkari]

Originally Posted by Winter

Yes, exactly. This is what we are examining here. You make a claim based on something said in comic and claim that was a proof.
I say it's no proof as your source is unreliable and precisision was not necessary all for what Eugene wanted to tell Roy in that scene. Instead of bringing proof myself, I argue that your proof has not been one in the first place.

And here is the crux of our disagreement. Yes, Eugene is somewhat unreliable, but he is also very much in a position to know the information he is claiming. I just don't see any sense in him goading Roy with information which both know to be untrue. It would be like someone claiming I had squandered my lottery winnings when I knew I had never even bought a ticket. That isn't effective, it is only confusing.

An effective goad is to pick at someone over information which -is- true. Since Eugene and Roy can both be assumed to have a good measure as to the fighting capabilities of the OOTS, what reason is there to think Eugene was lying, yet, Roy still apparently accepts the lie as blameworthy?

[tiercel]

If we could estimate how far Tarquin throws Durkon, it would give more insight into which Setting Sun maneuver he has (assuming that's what he's using for the throw, which seems like one obvious option).

If it's only a 10-foot throw, it could be the lowly Mighty Throw, which could be just a Martial Study feat or even a magic item granting a single maneuver.

The throw looks more impressive than 10 feet -- I'd guess that in the "spin and throw" panel Durkon is already 10 feet away from Tarquin and we don't have a "clang" or other sound effect to indicate that he strikes the ground there (i.e. he's still in motion).

The action economy is interesting here too, though Rule of Cool may certainly be in play -- it seems like all of #851 (until the last panel) is a single round, which makes it slightly tricky for Tarquin to pull off everything he does:

• Trip Roy
• Both use snatched arrow to attack Belkar and toss Belkar
• Dwarf-toss

Of these, the dwarf-tossing seems the most likely to be Tarquin's standard action (would have to be if a Setting Sun maneuver is how he's doing it). Tripping Roy could be the result of the Counter Charge maneuver; if it is, it makes his reaction to Belkar problematic. (Stance of Alacrity is a possibility, but means that Tarquin would have to be mostly martial adept.)

Also it is drawn very explicitly as a trip attack, implying that Tarquin got off an AoO rather than an immediate-action counter. Since charging doesn't normally provoke an AoO, it's very likely we are looking at Robilar's Gambit (which gives AoO even on a miss, and seems like a perfect fit for an overconfident showoff, much less one packing Improved Trip and Improved Disarm).

Then the action economy could break down to something like:

• Robilar's -> AoO -> trip attack vs Roy (Improved Trip or just a regular trip since Tarquin must have Improved Unarmed Strike to qualify for Snatch Arrows and we don't see Tarquin take Improved Trip's follow-up attack, though this could be a consequence of Roy falling down the stairs out of reach)
• Counter Charge -> interrupts Belkar's attack and moves him 2 squares behind Tarquin (doesn't account for arrow melee attack though)
• X Throw maneuver -> dwarf tossing
• ready to use another counter maneuver when poised facing Elan (since Tarquin's immediate action is now refreshed after his turn tossing Durkon)

[Enlong]

Going down the list of Tarquin's actions:

First, Roy misses an attack, and Tarquin seems to immediately Trip him and semd him down the stairs. This seems to be a use of Defensive Throw from Complete Warrior, which means he also has Dodge, Improved Unarmed Strike, Combat Reflexes, and Improved Trip.

Then, he grabs Haley's arrow out of the air. That is a textbook Snatch Arrows, which means he also has Deflect Arrows (Improved Unarmed Strike is already spoken for)

What he did with Durkon is a bit harder to find. I thought it was Fling Enemy, from Races of Stone, but Tarquin would have to be of Large size. Anyone know another feat for throwing a guy across the room?

[douglas]

Here's my guess for what happened this comic:
Tarquin took a turn last comic when he arrived and attacked Roy, so the entire Order got to go before his next turn.
Roy's turn: Roy charges and misses, Tarquin uses Defensive Throw to trip him. Artistic license sends Roy tumbling down the nearby stairs due to momentum, unless someone has a better explanation.
Haley's turn: She shoots, Tarquin catches the arrow with Snatch Arrows (possibly from a magic item). Haley wastes the rest of her turn staring in shocked surprise.
Belkar's turn: Belkar charges, Tarquin uses Hold the Line to stab him with the arrow, then Counter Charge maneuver from Tome of Battle as an immediate action. This negated Belkar's attack and allowed Tarquin to move him 10 feet away, illustrated as tossing him. Tarquin likely saved CC for this instead of using it against Roy because he'd have a much higher chance of success against Belkar due to the size difference and Belkar having less strength than Roy.
Durkon's turn: Cast Hold Person, Tarquin makes his save.
Elan's turn: Could be inserted somewhere above, starts using bardic music.
Tarquin's turn: Tarquin uses one of the various throw maneuvers from the Setting Sun discipline in Tome of Battle to pick up Durkon and throw him.
Roy's turn: charge again, and hit.
Haley's turn: Full attack. For some reason Tarquin doesn't catch any, perhaps because he's using the gloves Neoseanster suggested and is saving the second use.
Belkar's turn: Charge, this time Counter Charge is already expended.

It should now be Elan or Durkon's turn again, unless another member of the Linear Guild gets in range.

Tarquin's action costs:
1 AoO vs Roy
non-action vs Haley
1 AoO and 1 immediate action vs Belkar
Standard or full round action (I'd have to look it up) vs Durkon

That's low enough to be squeezed into one round.

Edit: Defensive Throw after a normal miss makes sense for Roy, and also frees up Counter Charge for use against Belkar - which would incidentally explain both why Belkar didn't even get to attack at all and how Tarquin threw him aside. I'll edit my suggested sequence to account for this in a moment.

Edit2: Changes finished.

[Oscredwin]

By my math, adding infinite arrow snatching onto otherwise magical gloves is 15k, half that if it's considered associated. It's well within his budget (he was willing to give away a 90k ring to Elan) and we know he has a(n evil) crafter. I think that's more likely than IUS, deflect arrows, snatch arrows. Tarquin seems more optimized than that.

It looks like he threw Durkon about 10 feet, more if he's still moving. I'm assuming that the radius of the spin is a little over a five foot square.

Also worth noting for characterization, He didn't throw Durkon into a wall, and seemed to take pains to avoid doing so.

[sgtpimenta]

Originally Posted by Math_Mage

See, I can ask you to do that, because my assumptions are the BASE assumptions. If you want to force a special exception, you have to DISPROVE THOSE ASSUMPTIONS. I am not obligated to disprove yours, or to exert ANY special effort to uphold mine--even though that's what I've been doing all along.

YOUR TURN.

Now, here is where you are wrong.

In The Giant's quote you mention (1/12/2012), Rich explicitly says that he's not willing to let others to decide what happens in his world. Even if you are to claim being an expert in the D&D rules, you have no right to decide that yours are the base assumptions in the OotS-verse. Not without solid evidence. To use an analogy that you may find familiar, when you make such a bold assumption like that and uses the lack of information as a proof, you are the one claiming the existence of Russel's teapot.

Originally Posted by Winter

Again, we are at Xykon saying "I love you, Redcloak" and you claiming that was 100%-proof for Xykon loving Redcloak only based on the fact that Xykon should know what he really feels (and of course would say so in all circumstances, no matter what he intends to cause with his say).
Eugene saying "Roy, you were the highest level character on the field, it was your responsibility" when he really wants to scold Roy, make him feel bad, etc is the very same thing.

As FujinAkari has repeatedly pointed out, the fact that Eugene wants to scold Roy does not mean that he's lying.
But the fact that Roy does not deny it seems to imply that he knows it and agrees.

[FujinAkari]

Originally Posted by sgtpimenta

Now, here is where you are wrong.

In The Giant's quote you mention (1/12/2012), Rich explicitly says that he's not willing to let others to decide what happens in his world. Even if you are to claim being an expert in the D&D rules, you have no right to decide that yours are the base assumptions in the OotS-verse.

This is flatly incorrect. Rich repeatedly and consistently describes the comic as operating according to the D&D 3.5 ruleset. While he can, will, and has modified or ignored rules as the story requires, it is absolutely correct to state that the default assumption is that the story follows D&D rules.

Any deviation for the ruleset is a deviation from the default and requires evidence. Evidence does not need to be provided that V has to rest to recharge spells, that Durkon has a constitution bonus, or that Xykon does not need to sleep. These are part of the source material and an assertion that they do not apply requires evidence, not the assertion that the source material is being followed.

[Snurk]

I think it's been dsaid before but aint Tarquin monk gone fighter...makes a lot of sense tripping roy with a non trip weapon while armed... Also helps with snatch arrow and stuff...

[Kish]

Tarquin's class has never been stated in the comic.

[zimmerwald1915]

Originally Posted by Kish

Tarquin's class has never been stated in the comic.

This is correct. It would be quite funny if Tarquin was part, or even all, Monk. If only because it would mess with Belkar's head. Heavy armor makes it unlikely, though.

[toapat]

Originally Posted by FujinAkari

There is no evidence Roy did any of that. If leveling in the afterlife WERE possible, why were the IFCC's three most powerful souls all people who went epic while they were still alive? Shouldn't it just be whoever had been dead the longest?

That is because in the Evil Afterlives, there would be a Dungeon of Easily Conquered Nations, where instead of kicking the crap out of a few Celestial trolls, you ruthlessly grind the opposition beneath your Iron heel. The mooks are so low level, that you dont gain experience. Everything in Celestial has an evil mirror in the Abyss. The blessAteria is mirrored by the Cursed Famine, a bar where you feast like a king, while starving slaves watch.

Asto party level, The actual debate is moot. The OotS abuses a loophole in the Law of Narative Casualty. If Roy lost a level, he had gained enough XP in Celestia to level up enough to compensate for the 4ish months he was dead, plus the negative level from Resurection. Belkar made the save on that Wight because he was underleveled, and it would mean he would have to roll even more 20s to keep up. V gains more XP then the other characters to burn it on item crafting.

[gallagher]

so according to this topic, something on comic 748 makes Belkar level 16. the only proof toward his level that i can see is teh seven hits on roy, meaning that in one full attack he had 7 hits, and thus likely got combat style mastery from his 11th level of ranger

where else in that strip would it give a clue to Belkars level?

[Fitzclowningham]

Originally Posted by sgtpimenta

Are you saying that levels are not relevant to determine the general competence level of characters, but abilities scores – even those which don’t have any direct application in a given character build – are? Do you mind to elaborate?

I can't speak for Math Mage, but for myself, YES. Gaining a level doesn't make you more intelligent or more importantly, more wise. Even though IRL experience is perhaps the most important component of IRL wisdom, it doesn't work that way in 3.5; the concepts are related, but 3.5 "experience" is immediately turned at levelups into specific feats, skills, spells, and hit points. It has nothing to do with a character's common sense or competence. That is governed by Int, Wis, and, if Elan is a reliable example, Cha. None of these change when a character levels unless he or she adds a point to one of them, and it is exceedingly rare for a Fighter to add points to any of these from levelling; they almost always put their points into Str, Dex, or Con.

Roy is competent because he is smart, wise, (somewhat) charismatic, and has the personality and temperament for leadership. It doesn't work the same way as IRL, and it isn't supposed to.

Originally Posted by sgtpimenta

Let's try to use the fancy words properly, shall we? The assertion "Roy is low level" needs as many proofs as "Roy is high level". If that was not the case, all this discussion would be over, before it even have begun, and the OP of C&LG thread would show Roy's exact level. Yet, since you have no solid evidence of your position, you try to disproof my position by demanding evidence that you can't show yourself. And you know what? Even if I can't prove my position, it still doesn't mean that yours are right. As you keep trying to reinforce your position using nothing but lack of evidence to the contrary, you are the one using the argument from ignorance.

MM isn't arguing that Roy is low level. He is arguing that your "gut feeling" that Roy is high level is based on nothing in the comic, and nothing in the rules. There's a difference. In all the voluminous typing you've done on the subject, in both the #850 thread and here, you have asserted nothing more substantive on the subject than some variant of "he had to be, because he is more competent."

Originally Posted by sgtpimenta

Your analogy does not apply. Do you even want to compare Roy and Frodo? We are talking of two very different archetypes. Frodo is a humble, small man of modest origin, walking among kings, and elves and wizards. Frodo is no warrior. His own insignificance is his most useful tool - he needs to be inconspicuous to succeed.

Also, I never have heard of Frodo jumping onto the back of a Nazgul.

You don't see the connection? Frodo <<<<< Sauron. Roy <<<<< Xykon. I'm going out on a limb here, but my bet is on Roy to win in the end against a vastly more powerful enemy, just like Frodo did.

Originally Posted by sgtpimenta

That's not true. Roy haven't spent a feat at that time, I'll give you that, but he managed to perfect the art required for the movement. The fact that he does not explicitly mention the feat does not mean anything.

No, he mentions that he has "an awesome idea for a cool sword move..." He didn't "perfect the art" because, as Horace said, "...it don't mean a thing if you ain't paid for that swing." That means he didn't "perfect the art required for the movement." That requires spending a feat, which he was incapable of doing in the afterworld, because he was incapable of gaining experience there, and therefore, levels.

[sgtpimenta]

Originally Posted by Fitzclowningham

Roy is competent because he is smart, wise, (somewhat) charismatic, and has the personality and temperament for leadership. It doesn't work the same way as IRL, and it isn't supposed to.

I don't know what you mean by "competent", by as I explained in my post, I mean ability to overcome challenges. Then I proceed to explain why it is related with levels - which I won't repeat here.

Originally Posted by Fitzclowningham

MM isn't arguing that Roy is low level. He is arguing that your "gut feeling" that Roy is high level is based on nothing in the comic, and nothing in the rules. There's a difference. In all the voluminous typing you've done on the subject, in both the #850 thread and here, you have asserted nothing more substantive on the subject than some variant of "he had to be, because he is more competent."

Four attack per round = 16+ levels. It's based in the rules and the comics. I wrote some voluminous typing about it.

Originally Posted by Fitzclowningham

No, he mentions that he has "an awesome idea for a cool sword move..." He didn't "perfect the art" because, as Horace said, "...it don't mean a thing if you ain't paid for that swing." That means he didn't "perfect the art required for the movement." That requires spending a feat, which he was incapable of doing in the afterworld, because he was incapable of gaining experience there, and therefore, levels.

Let's read what the little ball of light has to say:

Originally Posted by Roy's Archon

All these weeks of training since you returned from the Oracle and you've managed to finally master the art of disrupting the spellcasting of a dummy

Originally Posted by FujinAkari

This is flatly incorrect. Rich repeatedly and consistently describes the comic as operating according to the D&D 3.5 ruleset. While he can, will, and has modified or ignored rules as the story requires, it is absolutely correct to state that the default assumption is that the story follows D&D rules.

But that is the thing, isn't it? No one argues that OotS is still a universe loosely based in D&D. But which are the rules that The Giant are using and which are the ones that he ignoring? The default for ootsverse is whatever Rich decides to use. If a forumer are to assume which rules are used and which are not, he's better have evidence to prove his claims.

[Math_Mage]

I need to apologize for much of my previous stridence, since the rules actually don't make it clear that characters' actions in the afterlife don't translate into XP when resurrected until you get down into extremely detailed RAW analysis. Instead, the spell descriptions simply take for granted that characters don't do anything that would gain XP in the afterlife. It's only when it discusses corner cases, like raising level 1 characters, that the SRD explicitly says the new reduced level keys off the level at time of death, implying that hypothetical afterlife XP doesn't count:

Originally Posted by SRD

Level Loss
Any creature brought back to life usually loses one level of experience. The character’s new XP total is midway between the minimum needed for his or her new (reduced) level and the minimum needed for the next one. If the character was 1st level at the time of death, he or she loses 2 points of Constitution instead of losing a level.

Without reading to that level of detail, it's not at all clear that the rules preclude afterlife XP. While this does not negate the fact that the rules DO support my position, it certainly increases the chance that Rich might have simply bypassed the extreme nitty-gritty technicalities in favor of story.

I do maintain that Horace's statement, and Roy's, show that this technicality was followed. But I thought I was harping on a point that should be obvious to everyone, when that's not the case at all. So for that, I apologize.

Having already stated that I'm tired of this argument, I'm doubly reluctant to continue it now that it has been properly merged into the C&LG thread. So I'll be brief:
-3.5 ruleset IS the default. This cannot be questioned. Rich HAS demonstrated his willingness to DEPART from the rules on occasion, but by and large this comic is marked by its consistency in that regard, even in details most would overlook (and this is hardly a detail as far as the story is concerned).
-Levels do not imply competence in OotSworld. Levels give characters power and options (some more than others; the difference between 14th and 16th level matters far more to a Wizard than a Fighter). Competence is the measure of how well a character uses that power. That is the manner in which Roy has demonstrated his competence.
-The problem with the assertion "Roy is higher level than the rest of the party" is that it conflicts with the rest of the comic if you follow the rules. Roy was the same level as the rest of the party at the start, he was at most one level above when he died, and he came out at least one level below the next lowest-leveled member of the Order. The differing burden of proof comes in when we start arguing about whether or not we should ignore the rules; I do not have any obligation to prove that the rules were followed, since that is the default.
-I do not think Roy will defeat Xykon by force of arms, so it does not matter that he is more martial than Frodo. The narrative point stands.
-I've already stated my opinion on Eugene's scolding: it places Roy at 13th or 14th level, depending on how you think Roy would respond if he was 13th level. Myself, I don't think Roy would bother snapping back just because V is also 13th, because he's unambiguously V's leader and therefore assumes responsibility anyway.
-The first attack of the claimed four in #795 is ambiguous.

[Flame of Anor]

I think it's "Glamered" armor, not "Glamoured".

[FujinAkari]

Originally Posted by sgtpimenta

But that is the thing, isn't it? No one argues that OotS is still a universe loosely based in D&D. But which are the rules that The Giant are using and which are the ones that he ignoring?

Well, Rich would certainly argue that the rules are always being followed

While it is true that sometimes he does make mistakes and allows an inconsistency to slip into the strip. But these are, overwhelmingly, mistakes. It is almost never Rich's intention to openly violate the rules.

So, we are left with an author who is willing to break the rules when the narritive or plot requires it, but not an author who simply doesn't care what the rules say. The default assumption is and must be that Rich is following the rule unless something can be shown which indicates he's not. You don't just get to randomly ignore a rule because it would be really convenient for your argument if that rule wasn't being followed.

If you wish to argue that a rule doesn't apply, you need in-comic evidence, or a statement from Rich that he is interpreting the situation differently. You can't sit there and say "Well I'm right unless Rich specifically says I'm wrong! Prove Rich is following this specific rule!" No, Rich is following all rules until something demonstrates he is ignoring a specific D&D caveat. OOTS is based on D&D 3.5, (not loosely-based, mind you) and Rich has shown a high level of fidelity to the ruleset over the years, with only a handful of exceptions and (nearly?) all of them documented.


With all of that said, I would actually agree with you that Roy may have gained XP in the afterlife if Horice hadn't made it a point to say that he -hadn't- learned the feat yet. Roy should, at this point, be level 13. If he had gained a level, Warriors gain a bonus feat at 14, so there is no reason to presume he would have been unable to gain the feat in the afterlife unless he also can't gain a level in the afterlife.

The presence of the whole training sequence does argue that Roy is learning, but Horice's statement is a direct acknowledgement that Roy isn't leveling, therefore clearly I can't see him as having gained experience.

[FujinAkari]

Originally Posted by Math_Mage

-I've already stated my opinion on Eugene's scolding: it places Roy at 13th or 14th level, depending on how you think Roy would respond if he was 13th level. Myself, I don't think Roy would bother snapping back just because V is also 13th, because he's unambiguously V's leader and therefore assumes responsibility anyway.

Well of course he wouldn't... V isn't a good character.

[Flame of Anor]

Originally Posted by FujinAkari

Well of course he wouldn't... V isn't a good character.

Well, not now.

[ti'esar]

Originally Posted by Flame of Anor

Well, not now.

Although it's possible that at some point Rich conceived of V as Good, as far as I know, within the comic itself V has been True Neutral for the duration.

[Winter]

Originally Posted by Flame of Anor

Well, not now.

Not ever since the comic ran. Vaarsuvius always has shown to be very self centered with evil tendencies once in a while and showing some care for his/her friends or for the well-being of all of existence.

That's fairly neutral. The question always has been (especially since Darth Vaarsuvius) how far the evil tendencies go and how they are to be weighted.

[factotum]

That does raise the whole bit where he was affected as badly as the others by Unholy Blight, mind you, which shouldn't have happened if he's Neutral...