Dear, you're making my point for me. You just snipped the one sentence which made it seem like you didn't.
Despite your quote from the gods, there are FAR more examples of the comic following the rules of a 3.5 D&D setting then there are of it breaking the rules of a 3.5 D&D setting. The author may not care about the rules in the interests of story and plot, but he sure seems to care about them in the interests of background and setting.
Repeat of my position: The D&D 3.5 rules will be followed unless they need to be ditched in the interests of humor or plot. In this case, having Tarquin catch an arrow means that it would have hit him otherwise, because that is how the feat works. The comic title and everything we've seen in the comic supports this, so there is no need to speculate that the arrow missed or that the feat is being applied outside of the core rule set. In fact, having Tarquin catch an arrow facilitates the story within the rules of a 3.5 D&D setting. Bonus!
Arguments that Haley shouldn't have aimed at Tarquin are missing the point entirely. Re-read the title of the comic.
__________________
I'm a goddamn baby-making, life-taking MACHINE!
Dear, you're making my point for me. You just snipped the one sentence which made it seem like you didn't.
Just to be clear, you're saying this quote from the author supports your position that the comic follows moment-to-moment rules accuracy: "If you are looking for moment-to-moment rules accuracy from this comic ... I don't care about that at all."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stella
Arguments that Haley shouldn't have aimed at Tarquin are missing the point entirely. Re-read the title of the comic.
My assertion is that Haley was counting on Tarquin catching the arrow, whether it was going to hit him or not. Can you explain how the title, "Actually, she did [learn he was going to catch the arrow]," contradicts that? It's evident from the title that Haley expected Tarquin to catch the arrow. What's in dispute is whether the arrow would necessarily have hit him otherwise, following moment-to-moment rules accuracy, or whether it might have whizzed past or bounced off his armor.
Your argument is, and has always been, that rules accuracy demands that the arrow would have hit him if he hadn't caught it, and therefore it definitely would have hit him if he hadn't caught it — but since Rich says that he doesn't care at all about moment-to-moment rules accuracy, that argument holds no water. Find a better argument.
If Rich wanted to have Tarquin reach out and catch an arrow as it was clearly whizzing past him, he could do so without thinking twice about it, regardless of whether it violates the rules or not. Likewise, if he wanted to have Tarquin catch an arrow that would have bounced off his armor, he could do so. Did he do that in this case? We have no way of knowing! We simply do not know if the arrow he caught would have done damage or bounced off his armor, because Rich doesn't let fine rules details dictate the story.
Rule One of GitP forums: You do not talk about the speed at which comics are uploaded. Rule Two: YOU DO NOT TALK ABOUT THE SPEED AT WHICH COMICS ARE UPLOADED. Rule Three: If you join the GitP forums, you have to fight... textually, that is. Usually over some plot minutia that nobody really cares about. It passes the time.
The creator is busy with other things, like the $1.2 million dollar order for his products. Updating his webcomic is way down on the priority list these days.
He's also actively drawing the Belkar donor comic, as noted in the Kickstarter updates. So there are pages being done, they're just not for the main OOTS site.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Giant
Sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar. Sometimes, characters that have a similar hairstyle just have a similar hairstyle. How many hairstyles do you think there are that can be drawn in stick figure style, anyway?
But don't think that you can enforce your preference upon the remainder of the forums.
I haven't seen anything being forced on anyone. but at least a few of us think that the actual version of the Snatch Arrows feat, the one that gets used in practice most often during evenings and nights around tables full of dice and character sheets presided upon by smart DMs, works like jere7my says it does. In other words, this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by FujinAkari
Additionally, I have to agree with Jeremy (sorry, I know that isn't technically how you spell your name :P) It makes absolutely no sense to presume that higher quality armor makes people less able to catch arrows. No DM worth their salt is going to deny a character the ability to catch an arrow just because their armor would have stopped it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finagle
The creator is busy with other things, like the $1.2 million dollar order for his products. Updating his webcomic is way down on the priority list these days.
I think you said you were running a business. (FWIW, so do I.)
I don't know for you, but paying customers are higher on my priority list than "freebie" customers.
Just to be clear, you're saying this quote from the author supports your position that the comic follows moment-to-moment rules accuracy: "If you are looking for moment-to-moment rules accuracy from this comic ... I don't care about that at all."
Indeed I do. You read this to support your position, but you're wrong.
In the most recent strip the amount of seconds in a melee round are used as part of a joke. This is, as much as it may shock you, a citation of the core rules of the 3.5 D&D game upon which this comic is based. Do you protest this citation of the game rules? No (or at least, I hope not). But it proves my point, which is, as much as I hate to repeat myself again and again, that the setting will follow the rules. It just won't be a slave to them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jere7my
Your argument is, and has always been, that rules accuracy demands that the arrow would have hit him if he hadn't caught it, and therefore it definitely would have hit him if he hadn't caught it — but since Rich says that he doesn't care at all about moment-to-moment rules accuracy, that argument holds no water. Find a better argument.
No, you. My argument is that the strip will follow the rules of the game unless it becomes inconvenient. It has to, because this is the setting in which the story is being told. You prove that the arrow missed Tarquin and that the rules of the game were broken. You prove that the "moment-to-moment rules accuracy" weren't followed. I've made my case, and supported it with the game rules. You can assume any hypothetical case you like, but I don't see any evidence on your side. If you'd like to provide proof, well, I'm all ears.
__________________
I'm a goddamn baby-making, life-taking MACHINE!
In the most recent strip the amount of seconds in a melee round are used as part of a joke. This is, as much as it may shock you, a citation of the core rules of the 3.5 D&D game upon which this comic is based. Do you protest this citation of the game rules? No (or at least, I hope not). But it proves my point, which is, as much as I hate to repeat myself again and again, that the setting will follow the rules. It just won't be a slave to them.
Then we agree. This is exactly what I've been saying right along. Quoting myself: "I think the comic generally follows the outlines of the D&D ruleset, but in cases where there's a choice between following the rules exactly and making the story more interesting Rich chooses the latter."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stella
No, you. My argument is that the strip will follow the rules of the game unless it becomes inconvenient. It has to, because this is the setting in which the story is being told. You prove that the arrow missed Tarquin and that the rules of the game were broken. You prove that the "moment-to-moment rules accuracy" weren't followed. I've made my case, and supported it with the game rules. You can assume any hypothetical case you like, but I don't see any evidence on your side. If you'd like to provide proof, well, I'm all ears.
As I said before, if you want perfect rules accuracy, it's still possible for the arrow to neither hit Tarquin nor be caught: Deflect Arrows is a prerequisite for Snatch Arrows, so he could have deflected it instead of catching it. But that's not the point.
The point is, we agree that Rich generally follows the rules unless he needs to break them for the story (or forgets them, or wants to make a joke, or whatever). If that's the case, then when I say, "I think he changed the rules slightly for this reason," you can't just say "No, because the strip follows the rules." That's not a sufficient argument — you have to address the reason I gave for the exception (in this case, that the story works better if Haley was depending on Tarquin catching the arrow, rather than just not minding if he did).
If the rule is "Cats don't go in the water unless they have a reason to," and I say "I think that cat is going to go into the water because there's a fish right there," you can't then say "No, cats don't go into the water." You have to say, "No, I don't think that little fish is sufficient incentive to overcome the general rule," or something like that.
The rules of D&D are not the final word in the argument, as you suggested in your initial post, because, as we both agree, Rich breaks them whenever he has a reason to. Because he's said he doesn't care about rules accuracy at all, I don't think that's a high bar to clear — even a minor reason would be sufficient. The question is: Did Rich have a reason in this case?
If you don't think so, that's fine. But "The strip follows the rules" is not an answer to that question.
Rule One of GitP forums: You do not talk about the speed at which comics are uploaded. Rule Two: YOU DO NOT TALK ABOUT THE SPEED AT WHICH COMICS ARE UPLOADED. Rule Three: If you join the GitP forums, you have to fight... textually, that is. Usually over some plot minutia that nobody really cares about. It passes the time.
Tarquin charged forward, pushing Sabine out of the way, to catch the arrow. He went out of his way to get into its path.
Wrong. Tarquin charged ahead of his party because years of experience as a genre-aware villain suggested to him that they were walking into a trap, and fighters belong in the front lines when battle begins. Then AFTER he was finished pushing his way to the front, Haley took careful aim and fired.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jere7my
Tarquin could just as easily have told everyone to retreat or flatten themselves against the wall.
Tarquin is defensive-minded for a high level fighter, but he isn't a sniveling coward. Also, I don't think he actually respects Sabine enough to push her out of the way "because she was in terrible danger": more like he pushed her out of the way because she was inconveniently blocking his path to the fun stuff.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jere7my
Regardless of the rules — which I don't think Rich follows so slavishly — I don't think Haley was even aiming for Tarquin, who was in the middle of the pack, so much as getting the arrow past the mummies and into a place where she knew he would catch it.
Haley shot Tarquin with an arrow before, and he caught it. Haley does not know any more than we do exactly what rule Tarquin used to catch the arrow, but it is pretty obvious that she learned he can catch arrows SOMEHOW, and I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that the ruse with the smokestick was deliberately designed to hoist him on his own petard. That means that Tarquin was the target, not JUST because he was in the front of the pack by the time Haley shot the smokestick at him, but because he was the guy who needed a big smoking handful of cumuppance.
That is the only interperetation that makes the scene awesome, and that's something Rich is willing to bend rules for. However, the only rules I can think of that were most OBVIOUSLY bent was how the smokestick was set to go off after it was shot, not how Tarquin was able to catch it.
Yes, I think Haley was shooting directly FOR Tarquin. I even believe she was waiting for him to be in just the right spot too, so they might activate the huge iron door trap.
However, I also believed some rules bending was always possible. If Tarquin is a rich, magnificent bastard, his AC is probably significantly higher than Haley's attack bonus due to all sorts of magic equipment he might have. She probably has a 50/50 chance of hitting him at best... This is why the rules could be fudged, and he might decide to snatch the arrow regardless of whether or not it may have actually hit him. Realistically it make no sense to deny that possibility.
It seems like the point of the OOTSverse is not slavish adherence to the D&D rule book, but to highlight the many unintended consequences that such adherence would have, both in individuals (like Z's attempts to min-max vs. V) and in societies (alignments and their effects on various races and how races perceive eachother). So we should expect both adherence with D&D rules as well as some surprising outcomes that result naturally from human(oid) behavior (like Roy using intellect in battle). Just a thought.
Yay!
How about Tarquin catching the arrow, in accordance with the game rules and the Snatch Arrows feat, and in accordance with "the plan". Which is to say, Tarquin catching the arrow because he can.
__________________
I'm a goddamn baby-making, life-taking MACHINE!
It seems like the point of the OOTSverse is not slavish adherence to the D&D rule book, but to highlight the many unintended consequences that such adherence would have, both in individuals (like Z's attempts to min-max vs. V) and in societies (alignments and their effects on various races and how races perceive eachother). So we should expect both adherence with D&D rules as well as some surprising outcomes that result naturally from human(oid) behavior (like Roy using intellect in battle). Just a thought.
Look, the D&D 3.5 ruleset forms the baseline of the laws of physics in the OOTSworld. This is the case because it allows Rich to make jokes he might not otherwise be able to make, and to tell a story that he might not otherwise be able to tell, but it is nonetheless the case. It's been well-established that Rich does not stick to that ruleset in all cases. Sometimes he forgets that a given rule applies in a given situation, and sometimes he outright makes a mistake. Sometimes, and more rarely than you seem to think, he outright chooses to disregard a rule. You're right that story trumps rules. What you don't seem as willing to accept is that the rules are there not because Rich likes writing around a bunch of self-imposed impediments, but because they actually serve the story. It is more likely, given the Rich-imposed status of the 3.5 ruleset as the laws of physics of OOTSworld, given Rich's mastery (superb, but still humanly fallible) of that ruleset, and given the frequency at which deviations from those laws of physics occur (that is, often enough to be noticeable, but really pretty rarely), that when there is a rules-plausible explanation for a given phenomenon, that that phenomenon occurred as the rules say it should than that it did not.
__________________
Milk Chocolate Justiciar of the Haley fanclub
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anarion
And remember, whoever captures the fox and brings it under their control first gains ownership and accompanying property rights over the wild beast.
Yay!
How about Tarquin catching the arrow, in accordance with the game rules and the Snatch Arrows feat, and in accordance with "the plan". Which is to say, Tarquin catching the arrow because he can.
Obviously Tarquin caught the arrow because he could — I'm not sure what you're saying.
As I've said ad nauseam, one possibility is that Tarquin caught an arrow that was going to hit him, as the Snatch Arrows rules technically say. Another is that Rich used (or didn't care enough to care about) the common house-ruled version of Snatch Arrows that says you can catch an arrow even if it is going to miss you because of your armor. I'm open to either possibility; you're only open to the former, it seems.
I think we've both said everything we have to say several times. Since you've shown no interest in engaging with the bulk of my posts I'm going to call this discussion, or at least my part of it, over.
To the folks who corrected my earlier point about Haley possibly not aiming for Tarquin: Yes, going back and looking at the comic, it was clear that she did indeed aim for Tarquin specifically. My later posts incorporated that correction, but I never explicitly acknowledged the error.
Obviously Tarquin caught the arrow because he could.
Yay!
Quote:
Originally Posted by jere7my
As I've said ad nauseam, one possibility is that Tarquin caught an arrow that was going to hit him, as the Snatch Arrows rules technically say.
Yay!
Quote:
Originally Posted by jere7my
Another is that Rich used (or didn't care enough to care about) the common house-ruled version of Snatch Arrows that says you can catch an arrow even if it is going to miss you because of your armor. I'm open to either possibility; you're only open to the former, it seems.
Boo! Your interpretation requires that A) I accept that your insistence of "common house-ruled version of Snatch Arrows" applies. I've played D&D for many years and have never seen this "common" house rule of yours applied anywhere. And B) I agree with your application of house rules to the comic as a standard upon which to base the interpretation of the comic itself. Madness, I say! You might as well expect that the comic follow the rules of GURPS or Runequest.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jere7my
I'm going to call this discussion, or at least my part of it, over.
Yay!
Quote:
Originally Posted by jere7my
To the folks who corrected my earlier point about Haley possibly not aiming for Tarquin: Yes, going back and looking at the comic, it was clear that she did indeed aim for Tarquin specifically. My later posts incorporated that correction, but I never explicitly acknowledged the error.
Yay!
__________________
I'm a goddamn baby-making, life-taking MACHINE!
Look, the D&D 3.5 ruleset forms the baseline of the laws of physics in the OOTSworld. This is the case because it allows Rich to make jokes he might not otherwise be able to make, and to tell a story that he might not otherwise be able to tell, but it is nonetheless the case. It's been well-established that Rich does not stick to that ruleset in all cases. Sometimes he forgets that a given rule applies in a given situation, and sometimes he outright makes a mistake. Sometimes, and more rarely than you seem to think, he outright chooses to disregard a rule. You're right that story trumps rules. What you don't seem as willing to accept is that the rules are there not because Rich likes writing around a bunch of self-imposed impediments, but because they actually serve the story. It is more likely, given the Rich-imposed status of the 3.5 ruleset as the laws of physics of OOTSworld, given Rich's mastery (superb, but still humanly fallible) of that ruleset, and given the frequency at which deviations from those laws of physics occur (that is, often enough to be noticeable, but really pretty rarely), that when there is a rules-plausible explanation for a given phenomenon, that that phenomenon occurred as the rules say it should than that it did not.
As usual, you are violently agreeing with me. I never said "story trumps rules" and I don't even see how you got that from what I said. What I said was that the more character and plot driven events of the story grow organically within the rules in ways that are often surprising, emotional and thought provoking, even to people who are very familiar with that ruleset.
The simplest example would be love. There is no rule for love. There are Charisma checks to influence people, but no broad mechanism for governing long term interpersonal relationships and their outcomes, usually leaving that for extraneous roleplaying. Would you argue there should be no love in the Giant's world because it has no "law of physics" to guide it? Or that it does belong there, because the story is about people, but that it should be influenced by the rules of alignment, race and history that govern their world?
Ugh... that's got to be the gayest thing I've ever typed.
s/love/sex/g
There, fixed.
Boo! Your interpretation requires that A) I accept that your insistence of "common house-ruled version of Snatch Arrows" applies. I've played D&D for many years and have never seen this "common" house rule of yours applied anywhere.
I have yet to play a game where getting my armor enchanted caused my character to become worse at grabbing an arrow out of the air. I would be curious about why the games you play adhere to such a pointless and counter-intuitive rule.
It IS a rule, but every game I have run, played, encountered, or heard about - without fail - would have enforced the spirit rather than the letter fo the rule, and the spirit of the rule is that arrows can only be caught if they entered your proximity.
__________________ Official Incense Aroma Specialist for the Vaarsuvius Fan Club!
English isn't my primary language, so please let me know if something I'm saying doesn't make sense!
I have yet to play a game where getting my armor enchanted caused my character to become worse at grabbing an arrow out of the air.
Do you play D&D? Because getting your armor enchanted will cause your character to become less likely to be hit, which conveys into a smaller likelihood to Snatch Arrow. Illogical? Sure. But this is the system within which we play. Armor class isn't a pure hit/miss system, just as hit points isn't a pure health system.
__________________
I'm a goddamn baby-making, life-taking MACHINE!
Do you play D&D? Because getting your armor enchanted will cause your character to become less likely to be hit, which conveys into a smaller likelihood to Snatch Arrow. Illogical? Sure. But this is the system within which we play. Armor class isn't a pure hit/miss system, just as hit points isn't a pure health system.
You're beginning to sound REALLY dogmatic now...
But at least you admit the whole concept is illogical. Great, now that's the first step to recovery. Now perhaps you should next be asking yourself what it is the D&D ruleset tries to emulate (outside of magic).
It IS a rule, but every game I have run, played, encountered, or heard about - without fail - would have enforced the spirit rather than the letter fo the rule, and the spirit of the rule is that arrows can only be caught if they entered your proximity.
Yup. And Rich has shown no qualms about using house rules in OotS — his homebrew Fly spell, e.g.
If you yourself admit that the rule is illogical, then I don't see why you are as shocked as your acting that Rich may not be following the rule. Although I do believe he grounds the rules within the rules of 3.5, I also know he willfully and regularly ignores extremely minute or specific rulings, particularly when the mechanical implications of which are confusing to the casual reader.
As Jeremy continues to say, you are free to disagree. What you are not free to do is insist that your interpretation is right and anyone else's interpretation is wrong. There simply is not sufficient information to say what Rich intended, and if I think that Tarquin was showboating and snatched the arrow rather than dodging it, my read of the scene is every bit as valid as yours.
__________________ Official Incense Aroma Specialist for the Vaarsuvius Fan Club!
English isn't my primary language, so please let me know if something I'm saying doesn't make sense!
RSS Feeds: 
Re: OOTS #862 - The Discussion Thread
My argument is that the strip will follow the rules of the game unless it becomes inconvenient. It has to, because this is the setting in which the story is being told. You prove that the arrow missed Tarquin and that the rules of the game were broken. You prove that the "moment-to-moment rules accuracy" weren't followed. I've made my case, and supported it with the game rules. You can assume any hypothetical case you like, but I don't see any evidence on your side. If you'd like to provide proof, well, I'm all ears.
Milk Chocolate Justiciar of the Haley fanclub 
Official Incense Aroma Specialist for the Vaarsuvius Fan Club! 
