OOTS #1205 - The Discussion Thread

[Doug Lampert]

What does scry-and-die mean?

D&D scrying spell is explicitly stated to be good enough to allow you to teleport to a location if you can scry it.

Scry-and-die means you scry someone to see where they are, cast all your buff spells on your entire team, and teleport in for a fully buffed surprise round followed by a fully buffed normal combat against an isolated foe who's buff spells aren't yet cast.

It's an astonishingly effective and powerful tactic in D&D campaigns where the GM doesn't do something specific to stop it or simply not allow it to work for arbitrary and made up reasons.

[Rogar Demonblud]

And even if the enemy has some buffs up, that surprise round goes a long way towards ending the fight, especially given the number of mid/high level Save or Die spells.

[Peelee]

D&D scrying spell is explicitly stated to be good enough to allow you to teleport to a location if you can scry it.

Scry-and-die means you scry someone to see where they are, cast all your buff spells on your entire team, and teleport in for a fully buffed surprise round followed by a fully buffed normal combat against an isolated foe who's buff spells aren't yet cast.

It's an astonishingly effective and powerful tactic in D&D campaigns where the GM doesn't do something specific to stop it or simply not allow it to work for arbitrary and made up reasons.

Speaking of arbitrary and made up reasons...

We were playing Star Wars Saga Edition one time. I can't remember the specifics, but I ended up doing something that I shouldn't have been able to do by any reasonable standard, but I kept nat-20-ing and kept going. The DM crumpled up one of his notes, threw it at me, and said, "No. You get hit with the plot rock." Everyone got a good laugh out of it, and while totally going against the gameplay of what I did, was absolutely the right call.

[Doug Lampert]

Speaking of arbitrary and made up reasons...

We were playing Star Wars Saga Edition one time. I can't remember the specifics, but I ended up doing something that I shouldn't have been able to do by any reasonable standard, but I kept nat-20-ing and kept going. The DM crumpled up one of his notes, threw it at me, and said, "No. You get hit with the plot rock." Everyone got a good laugh out of it, and while totally going against the gameplay of what I did, was absolutely the right call.

There are times "just say no" is the best way for a GM to respond.

But for systematic problems in the game system, such as Rules as Written Diplomacy or Scry and Die's extreme effectiveness, IMAO, the correct GM solution is to implement an actual houserule and tell the players what the houserule is so that they will know what the rules of the game are.

I'll note that there is a very good diplomacy fix for D&D on this site, and that Scry and Die is dealt with by a simple houserule that a scrying sensor letting you see a few feet of someone's surroundings with no idea where they are is blatantly and over the top NOT good enough for a teleport! I mean, what were they smoking when they said that it is?

[Edited to add] Another part of of the Scry and Die fix is to declare that teleporting is disorienting, I mean, you're traveling through the astral plane to a completely new location, and that therefore you not only don't get a surprise round, the locals all become aware of you due to the pop of displaced air, and THEY get a surprise round as they recover from their surprise faster than you recover from the teleport disorientation. There are plenty of other possible fixes, but at level 13+ the core D&D rules are broken by Scry and Die. [Still better than diplomacy which breaks the game at about level 3 if anyone wants to play a "face" character.]

[Schroeswald]

Damn, I want to sig this too, lmao.

My previous permission extends to you (how many people liked this quote is giving me the warm fuzzier too).

Speaking of arbitrary and made up reasons...

We were playing Star Wars Saga Edition one time. I can't remember the specifics, but I ended up doing something that I shouldn't have been able to do by any reasonable standard, but I kept nat-20-ing and kept going. The DM crumpled up one of his notes, threw it at me, and said, "No. You get hit with the plot rock." Everyone got a good laugh out of it, and while totally going against the gameplay of what I did, was absolutely the right call.

I think I want to get that bolded bit in my signature, I'm pretty sure you have permanent permission for that, right? (If thats true I guess I'm making an extended sig)

[Peelee]

I'm pretty sure you have permanent permission for that, right? (If thats true I guess I'm making an extended sig)

Yes; I believe that if I don't want something recorded, I probably shouldn't say it. Everyone is free to quote anything I say, whether uncharacteristically intelligent or profoundly stupid.

ETA: As to the quote, that's become a running gag among us. A character wants to do something unorthodox that would derail the campaign? Sorry, there's a plot rock in the way. DM doesn't want scry-and-die skipping but forgot to mention it in his notes and has to wing it? The dungeon walls are made of plot rock. The boulder blocking off Romani's Ranch in Majora's Mask? You guessed it, that's a plot rock. Generally, so long as it's not unreasonable and doesn't feel super railroady, plot rock is perfectly fine to use.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Yes; I believe that if I don't want something recorded, I probably shouldn't say it. Everyone is free to quote anything I say, whether uncharacteristically intelligent or profoundly stupid.

Takes me back to this little gem of an interaction.

[Schroeswald]

Takes me back to this little gem of an interaction.

Thats why I remembered him saying it, someone did sig it and I've seen that signature.

[Thrair]

So. I apologize if this has been brought up before.

But does Redcloak remember this is the dwarf he scried on having sex?

...Gonna make the conversation a little awkward.

[RatElemental]

I just have to throw this two cents into the "Did Durkon die 2 times or 3 times" thing.

If Durkon died 3 times, he lost 3 levels. Also, he'd been dead a while now when the vampire was staked.

I content that Durkon only died twice.

[dancrilis]

If Durkon died 3 times, he lost 3 levels.

Level loss is not impacted by how many times you die it depends on how you are brought back from the dead.

Also Durkon seems to retain the experience he gained during the period where he was(within) a vampire.

[understatement]

So. I apologize if this has been brought up before.

But does Redcloak remember this is the dwarf he scried on having sex?

...Gonna make the conversation a little awkward.

For both of their sakes, hopefully not.

Level loss is not impacted by how many times you die it depends on how you are brought back from the dead.

Also Durkon seems to retain the experience he gained during the period where he was(within) a vampire.

I won't be surprised if Durkon tosses out an eighth-level spell, considering how close he was to level 15 before. How much XP does one get from saving the entire world?

[dancrilis]

How much XP does one get from saving the entire world?

I believe that a single character (beyond level 3) going against a character effectively 8 levels higher then them (i.e a character defeating a vampire version of the themselves) nets 0 XP (unless the DM decides to reward some for for the unusual activity).
But someone more familiar with XP by encounter might be able to better answer.

[Peelee]

I won't be surprised if Durkon tosses out an eighth-level spell, considering how close he was to level 15 before. How much XP does one get from saving the entire world?

At least 10.

[Kantaki]

How much XP does one get from saving the entire world?

Depends how much of a challenge it is I'd say.
So Durkon talking Redcloak out of "the Plan"?
Enough to level up.

[Squire Doodad]

Depends how much of a challenge it is I'd say.
So Durkon talking Redcloak out of "the Plan"?
Enough to level up.

Enough to get him to cast level 8 spells?
I think there was someone expecting that...

[Jasdoif]

I believe that a single character (beyond level 3) going against a character effectively 8 levels higher then them (i.e a character defeating a vampire version of the themselves) nets 0 XP (unless the DM decides to reward some for for the unusual activity).
But someone more familiar with XP by encounter might be able to better answer.

Close!

Experience points are awarded are based on your effective character level, and the challenge you overcame by its challenge rating. If that challenge rating was eight higher than your ECL, it would be in the "pfft, ask your DM if you get anything" area; but a vampire's challenge rating is only two higher than the base creature's. (ECL and CR are measured from different perspectives; e.g. a vampire's at-will domination would amount to five-ish potential takeovers during a typical encounter, while out of combat could be the entire population of a small city in less than a day)

In any event, you get experience specifically for overcoming challenges; and you can't receive enough experience at once to gain multiple levels (you're capped at one experience point short of gaining a second level).

[Fyraltari]

Close!

Experience points are awarded are based on your effective character level, and the challenge you overcame by its challenge rating. If that challenge rating was eight higher than your ECL, it would be in the "pfft, ask your DM if you get anything" area; but a vampire's challenge rating is only two higher than the base creature's. (ECL and CR are measured from different perspectives; e.g. a vampire's at-will domination would amount to five-ish potential takeovers during a typical encounter, while out of combat could be the entire population of a small city in less than a day)

In any event, you get experience specifically for overcoming challenges; and you can't receive enough experience at once to gain multiple levels (you're capped at one experience point short of gaining a second level).

So, would defeating Durkon* and, later, Gontor* be enough to for Durkon to get at least one level back?

[Jasdoif]

So, would defeating Durkon* and, later, Gontor* be enough to for Durkon to get at least one level back?

Overlooking the oddities involved in the scenario....Probably exactly one. Defeating HPoH by himself is over half of the experience he'd need to get to the next level; so if he was close enough to the next level before he died, or if a level reduction was applied before and thus he was exactly halfway to the experience needed to gain the level back, he'd have gained a level.

Experience points are divided by the number of participants, of which there were a bunch, so the Exarch is supremely unlikely to contribute to Durkon's level in any notable way.

[Fyraltari]

Overlooking the oddities involved in the scenario....Probably exactly one. Defeating HPoH by himself is over half of the experience he'd need to get to the next level; so if he was close enough to the next level before he died, or if a level reduction was applied before and thus he was exactly halfway to the experience needed to gain the level back, he'd have gained a level.

Experience points are divided by the number of participants, of which there were a bunch, so the Exarch is supremely unlikely to contribute to Durkon's level in any notable way.

But most of those participants were low-level so might not have gotten anything from the encounter, if I'm following correctly.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Depends on if the nonexistent rules use individual level or average group level for the calculation base..

[Jasdoif]

Experience points are divided by the number of participants, of which there were a bunch, so the Exarch is supremely unlikely to contribute to Durkon's level in any notable way.

But most of those participants were low-level so might not have gotten anything from the encounter, if I'm following correctly.

Correct; the participants may not have gotten experience themselves despite their impact on how much experience Durkon would have gotten.

Also, if the Exarch was more than one level below HPoH, Durkon wouldn't get enough experience for defeating him to recover from losing a level to Hilgya's flame strike even if he did somehow get it all for himself.

[dancrilis]

Correct; the participants may not have gotten experience themselves despite their impact on how much experience Durkon would have gotten.

Also, if the Exarch was more than one level below HPoH, Durkon wouldn't get enough experience for defeating him to recover from losing a level to Hilgya's flame strike even if he did somehow get it all for himself.

Of course he did tell a well told tale of about a life of unnecessary poverty so he might have gotten experience for that, and if he got some for every flashback well sky's the limit.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

a life of unnecessary poverty

I'm not sure I'd describe the decission to spend money on the life of five people instead of on my own life of comfort as an unnecessary choice.

Grey Wolf

[Peelee]

I'm not sure I'd describe the decission to spend money on the life of five people instead of on my own life of comfort as an unnecessary choice.

Grey Wolf

While I agree with that, she was also quite insistent about others not helping her.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

While I agree with that, she was also quite insistent about others not helping her.

That's more Don't You Dare Pity Me. Had she been less poor, she'd still would've refused help that in any way reminded her she was missing an arm. Did she take pride a tad too far? Maybe. But then, she's not just a dwarf, she's The Dwarf.

Grey Wolf

[Peelee]

That's more Don't You Dare Pity Me. Had she been less poor, she'd still would've refused help that in any way reminded her she was missing an arm. Did she take pride a tad too far? Maybe. But then, she's not just a dwarf, she's The Dwarf.

Grey Wolf

Yeah, I know, but a rising tide should raise all boats. I realize that some people would rather keep their metaphorical anchor where it is, but I'm not a fan of that mentality.

[dancrilis]

I'm not sure I'd describe the decission to spend money on the life of five people instead of on my own life of comfort as an unnecessary choice.

Grey Wolf

It was an unexpected gesture that even Durkon with his lifetime of experience still occassionally has mixed feelings about it (panel 24), I would say it was a choice that no one would have faulted her for not making - it was not necessary for her to do so except in that it was necessary for her to do so (although a part of me is almost more impressed with the guy who gave her the money).

In contrast Durkon is now a powerful adventurer with occassional access to significant resources, and we have not seen him spending it on raising dishonoured dwarves.
For that matter if Dwarves in general felt it was necessary to save souls from Hel they could setup a charity to raise the dishonoured dead - without knowing the ration of honoured to dishonoured dead it is difficult to know if just a charity would be able to save all of them but it should be able to save a few (assuming 1% of Dwarves die dishonourable - which would seem a lot based on Durkon's apathy here (panel 11), 5450gp for a Raise Dead would mean that they would need 100 Dwarves to chip in 54.50gp over the course of there lives to prevent Hel getting any of them (baring mass extinction events), and that is steep for a Human but fairly doable for a Dwarves lifespan.

[Peelee]

In contrast Durkon is now a powerful adventurer with occassional access to significant resources, and we have not seen him spending it on raising dishonoured dwarves.

How often has Durkon had access to dishonored dwarven corpses?

[dancrilis]

How often has Durkon had access to dishonored dwarven corpses?

He was just back home a few days ago and I didn't see him handing over a massive amount of savings to raise some lost over the last few decades - now maybe he did - but I don't believe that we saw it (nor did he seem to send back money when Miko went to deliver a letter for him).