Since the old one filled up, check for latest posts and move here once done!

I think only labeling the corner square and letting us count is a great solution actually- the grid frequently doesn't quite line up with the labels

I will do so going forward!
Added a few to hint. BAirwin is thus in B3. Simple.
https://docs.google.com/drawin...Y6wdaYoFbJU6VCQ/edit
This message was last edited by the GM at 12:44, Mon 28 Aug 2017.

I wonder what would've happened if those attacks had hit Ignatz :P

Hope then that this time everyone's clear.
Again, someone kindly move my token and create the burst zone.
No one enter this one, though, it applies to any creature.

Question:
Do I need to roll damage separatly? I assumed so, but Saskan only rolled once?
Question:
Forced movement does not trigger a zone's effect, right? I.e. pushing the Servants into the chasm will not make them prone, right?Found it, mixed it up with AoO.
This message was last edited by the player at 16:08, Mon 28 Aug 2017.

I moved your token but I don't know how or where to place the burst.  I assume from your targets you are placing it on E4?

Thanks.
Yes, cast e4... forgot the word 'on' ;)

Sorry but why are all three servants at so many HP after two being hit for 8 damage from Saskan and one for 10damage by Malph?
No rewind, just so I understand.
I also missed Reaper 3 taking so much damare?

Umm. I think I messed up what is what.
The ones closer to Bairwin... are these Reapers or Servants?
This message was last edited by the player at 16:32, Mon 28 Aug 2017.

I've been wondering myself

Bairwin's not granting CA from any effect, right? Been a while since Ignatz missed without an AP to spend to try again haha.

The skeletons are the Servants and and the roped ones behind em, are reapers, seems the colors are messed up! My bad!

Actually Bairwin was prone. Since he also was immobilized he could not try to stand up.
Being prone does grant CA
This message was last edited by the player at 10:40, Tue 29 Aug 2017.

In 4e you can stand from prone while being immobilized

Aha?
Funny.
Since I forgot to apply -2 for my attacks due to them being prone I guess Karma has worked its way :)

In 4e the -2 to hit prone characters only applies to ranged attacks, not area attacks, which are distinct even though they have a range ;)

Correct - http://dnd4.wikia.com/wiki/Prone
The stand up action is a move action a creature can take to end the prone condition - so yeah, they can rise and attack. But if slower grant CA to melee attacks.

So in terms of initiative order I technically should have had CA on my first attack, which hit anyway

Bingo - normally we skim on initiative, but it matters here.

Hmmm, I should be more careful about not posting the first round if I lose Initiative to the monsters, but in this case since Saskan got my Initiative to a tie and I have a higher Initiative modifier than the monster roll I went before the enemies anyway I think

Nice pace, and yes Saskan will inevitably be within 10 squares of you all, so +2 to your initiative.

Also, missing his post, as you all went quick!

Did Malph disappear? I don't see him on the map. I was planning on giving him another Commander's strike.

Readded. The revision history shows the last editor of the map removed him - likely by accident

Since he moved to H4 I assumed he was hidden beneath the servant token...
This message was last edited by the player at 08:52, Thu 31 Aug 2017.

Regardless, we should be good to proceed!

I will add your post, assuming you give Malph the extra option.
Further, you can post then if you need to use a minor or move...ok?

Just to keep things moving.

The Phantom Chasm lasts until the end of the whole encounter.
You just deleted it I think.
The Gasping Shadows lasts until EMNT, it is still there but has not been placed.

This does not match neither with IC nor map.
What is H3? Servant or Reaper?
What are B3, B5 and D5? Servant or Reaper?

H3 reaper
Rest are servants with the orange border.

I have no idea if the magic orb's +1 damage applies to fixed damage, in this case INT.
Again, no manipulation of the map possible. Sorry

There may be exceptions that I'm not thinking of right now, but in 4e if you don't roll damage you don't add any bonuses to the amount, generally.

Also, if I save against that ongoing damage with an immediate reaction before my turn comes up, do I still take damage from it?
This message was last edited by the player at 10:49, Thu 31 Aug 2017.

I would spend AP to cast against the now nicely arranged servants+Bairwin but I think it would be far too confusing without being able to manipulate all those tokens myself.
...
Oh cool.
Someone just did :)
Thanks

You're welcome- go for it!

Much obliged.
My Action finished.
No further slides as B6 was missed.

13 damage to Bairwin.
Unless he has resistances he ought to be dead

In this case Vyn it shouldn't matter but for future reference, when you roll damage with an area attack you just do one damage roll that applies to all targets

In reply to Ignatz (msg # 33):

Aha.
I asked this above in #5 but got no answer and did not search myself.
Again thanks

No problem! Also, Saskan grants some bonuses to AP attacks- I think +1 to hit? If it's +2 then you hit the Servant at B6 with your second attack.

Tactical Presence - When an ally you can see spends an action point to make an                     extra attack, the ally gains a bonus to the attack roll equal to one half of your Int Mod (1)

Storyteller, which square was the servant with 21 hp in at the start of the turn? Also, did Vyn kill Bairwin? It affects my turn if he did.

This message was deleted by the player at 11:39, Thu 31 Aug 2017.

The reaper who Malph this turn should have been at -5 to his attack due to Warfryn's Witchfire.  Was that included?

Argh, no. That means it misses! So no damage to Malph.

Clutch debuffing Warf! Stahl, how is it that you're Attack hit 24 and still missed? Did you misread your roll or did I miss an enemy buff?

In reply to Ignatz (msg # 41):

Oh, well. Moving on.

Don't feel bad, he was also Dragonfeared, so he was at net -7 this turn :)


Roll damage?  It's just a basic 1d8.  I can roll that for you.  Also, Twin Strike > Careful Attack?  I think 2 rolls is better than a flat +2 and still can be used in both melee and range.  Unless you're going for a non-meta build.

That was a whole lot of posting while I was sleeping. I worked too...

So did my turn get skipped. I only care if someone needed a healing word but I think we are all pretty healthy

Warf why not Curse that reaver first?

Coz I cursed him last turn.  But thanx - I forgot to roll the curse damage.

I believe that's unnecessary and would cause confusion at this point, but feel free. The details of the roll are displayed under my character details.


I wouldn't dispute any of that.


I'm not sure what you mean by a "non-meta build."

It sounds as though you're offering to discuss and help me modify my character. If so, we should probably do that elsewhere, like over private messages, and we should make sure we each understand the other's approach to the game.

Stahl, do what you please here, I am not penalization anyone for what they do.
That said, you do hit, and to avoid making it tricky, heck - I will add it as part of my post. Easy peasy - won't impact anything.
As for Non-meta, the terminology is ill fitting for anything but PM. It does mean something aside recommended or advised by a predefined standard, but that also means killing any chance of individual characterization which to me is more important.
The too long, did not ready version - Play what you want, I will adapt and allow you to have fun if I can.

Hahaha I wondered when Malph and Stahl would get into optimization stuff.

Storyteller, you're right that optimal builds can be cookie cutter, but you should let me tell you about some of my favorite builds sometime- my tenure with 4e was all about coming up with optimal builds that were mechanically novel. Ignatz is not one of them, he's pretty much standard for a Barbarian mechanically, but his personality is pretty unique. Stahl has seen my Seeker|Ranged hybrid Controller build in action though, that one is my crown jewel as far as non-cookiecutter builds go.

As someone quoted in a game I am part off.
"The GM should allow for any character to shine, without penalizing how they build themselves. Obvious bad choices in game is one thing, but selecting one ability over another is not the same".

And I agree with this sentiment. There should be room for all - and I know Malph asked since I am certain he wants to help and nothing else.

I'm not worried about being penalized in some way. If I was forced to take certain options or randomly roll my abilities, I'd expect some leeway from the GM. But except for having to take an expertise feat (at least I think that's why I have that listed), I made all my own choices. Please don't adjust anything for me. If I feel I'd like something to change, I'll retrain my character when I level up. Or, if the character is bad enough, it will die and I'll make another one, and make different choices.

Edit:

I believe that, and I was sincere in my offer of a PM discussion.
This message was last edited by the player at 15:00, Fri 01 Sept 2017.

Sorry all for being in and out of late. I got lost and couldn't figure out what was going on even with the summaries... I also was having a hard time with Saskan as a character. He's far more strategic than I am but I think I'm going to make one minor adjustment and remember that I can do things other than give out Commanders Strike and then I should have a lot more fun!

In reply to Saskan (msg # 52):

One thing I dig about the warlord is that they have an inherent degree of strategic ability even if they player is a poor strategist. A huge amount of strategic ability is contained in their initiative bonus and action point benefits. The most strategic player couldn't bring those about no matter how hard they tried.

It does help that I innately throw bonuses around, but that was part of the problem for me actually. I didn't really feel like I was doing anything... Something I'll have to work on as we enter combat and when someone uses an AP.

Ignatz offered a great piece of advice a while back regarding coming up with a few ways to describe the actions of giving another an action. It's a strange thing. Perhaps I should start rolling for others when I grant them an attack, I would just need to know their to hit bonuses and damage...

Rolling for people is exactly what I did when I played a taclord. I recommend it!

In another game, sadly long deceased, there was a permathread in which people could put there MBA/RBA stats so that the Taclord could do exactly that.  Maybe something we should consider.

Also perhaps in our posts er should include an OOC line detailing Immediate etc actions and, in particular, interrupts?

We could also add it into the table our GM has created for our enemies (assuming we wanted to add ourselves into that mix :)

In reply to Saskan (msg # 57):

I'm all for you rolling on the Commanders Strikes.  Though I feel like I hit more with yours thank my own attack;)

Anyway, been home like 8 of he past 48 hours, of which 7.5 has been sleeping.  Another long day ahead.  I hope to at least read threads today and maybe get posts up Monday.

oh man, sounds like a very long weekend :(.

If anyone wants to PM me their To Hit and Damage bonuses, I'll be happy to make that work.

Question, here's the wording for Commander's Strike, could I potentially initiate a charge from Ignatz with this?

In reply to Saskan (msg # 59):

Longsword+4 (1d8 damage)

lol

Much as Warfryn would like to partake...he doesn't actually have a melee weapon!!

He can shoot raw arcane energy out of his hand!

Oh and no, unfortunately that doesn't work Saskan haha
This message was last edited by the player at 17:10, Sun 03 Sept 2017.

It would be awesome if it did, especially coupled with Inevitable Wave :)

If there is a power that acts as an MBA, it can be replaced.  I'm pretty sure as long as you target within range, you could have Ignatz charge in with his MBA at-will power to send hm running back.  It says an ally of your choice.  As long at that ally targets your target with an MBA, it works.

That was what I was thinking. Ignatz, do you have an at will charge?

Hahaha if that were possible, I would have been begging Saskan to do that for a long time now. The problem is that I can only use Howling Strike in place of a MBA if it's at the end of a charge, and the power doesn't say I can charge when I use it. If Saskan has a power that lets me charge (which he can get as encounter and daily powers at higher levels), then I could use it.

"Special: When charging, you can use this power in place of a melee basic attack. If you are raging, you can move 2 extra squares as part of the charge."

Oh shit I actually forgot about the extra movement when raging. That might come in handy, that pushes my charge from 8 squares to 10.
This message was last edited by the player at 01:48, Tue 05 Sept 2017.

Where can this be found ?

A variety of sources. I don't believe Rangers get any. Paladins have Virtuous Strike, Warlocks get Eldritch Strike, Druids get a couple that only work in wildshape.

In reply to Ignatz (msg # 68):

These look like complete lists to me.

http://dnd4.wikia.com/wiki/Melee_basic_attack
http://dnd4.wikia.com/wiki/Charge
http://dnd4.wikia.com/wiki/Ranged_basic_attack

Besides these, many monsters have melee or ranged basic attacks that do a bit more than just damage.

Speaking of:

Stahl:
Melee basic attack:
Battleaxe
+7 (+3 Strength, +2 proficiency, + 1 level, + 1 expertise) vs. AC
Hit: 1d10+3 damage. May reroll 1 die resulting in a 1.

Ranged basic attack:
Magic longbow +1
+7 (+3 Dexterity, +2 proficiency, +1 level, +1 enhancement) vs. AC
Hit: 1d10+4 damage.

Prinz:
Melee basic attack:
Bite
+6 vs. AC
Hit: 1d8+2 damage, (1d8+4 with combat advantage)

If Stahl's hunter's quarry damage hasn't been dealt yet in a turn, either he or Prinz can add it to their damage against Stahl's quarry.

Thanks guys.

Hey GM, do I need to keep the book around to evade costs forever or is Stahl's suggestion possible ? Naturally, after intense study during some down-time :D

I wasn't quite clear on what the deal is with the book. Is it that the book lets a ritual caster perform comprehend languages for zero component cost?

If the book amounts to an endless font of information for the party (by effectively translating everything they might come across), Stahl doesn't care if the townsfolk ever receive it.
This message was last edited by the player at 15:11, Tue 05 Sept 2017.

Ignatz's MBA with his +1 Carnage Gouge is +9 to hit (4 STR+2 prof+1 expertise+1 enhancement+1 level) and 2d6(brutal 1)+6. The brutal 1 means that if I get a 1 rolling damage, that single d6 gets rerolled until it's not a 1. The Carnage enchantment means that if any of my weapon damage dice show a 6, the damage roll gets an extra 2 damage- that does not stack if I get multiple 6s. Also if you're rolling my Attack and it's a potentially lethal turn against a key target, you can have me add another +1[W] as a free action if my racial Furious Assault power hasn't been used yet. That can be added after you see if you hit, and the extra 2d6 brutal 1 can also trigger the Carnage property if the original damage roll didn't.

He has to keep it for it to be free. So that is the twist I guess. But once done, yeah, he can return it.

In reply to Storyteller (msg # 74):

The idea, I take it, is that it's like how scrolls worked in previous editions, except that it doesn't go away after it's used. Is that right?

Bingo!

Also, please drive the scene, if you wish to proceed.

Perhaps something more like this ?
With the confusion we had about which servant is which etc. an indication of its Location (naturally at the time of the GM post), a row for each foe might be a good way to prevent this, also as regards which effect affects who etc.
Of course, handling tables is sometimes a bit of a mess, but I always do those in EXCEL anyway, then it's just prep to get the nice table as below.
As before, only GM would post the table, so as not to clutter the IC endlessly with tables.

Just my 50 pence

As I can steal this from you via your post, no hassle. It would be great actually, as I can indicate a new placement if pushed(hi MALPH/vynt!) or similar. So yeah...YOINK!

Just need the lot of you to confirm the stats or well, I should check I guess. But if you have added them as Vynt has, they should be on point.
One thing I might add is a space or column that states usage of AP(which aids Saskan).

This message was last edited by the player at 06:07, Fri 08 Sept 2017.

I doesn't have Eldritch Strike, opting as I did for the Blast rather than the strike.  SO no MBA for Warfryn till he buys himself a dagger.

Nice!

Sorry for my lack of relatively activity.  Hellishly busy at work, coupled with a lot of good events ongoing on personally.  Next week, I'm traveling for work, so I should actually have more time than of late.

I'm assuming the Orcus reference is actually supposed to be Shar.

Also, my MBA is +9 to hit, 1d8+5 damage.

Actually I thought it was intention to suggest some sort of alliance between cultists of Shar and Orcus...
Clarification would be nice, I guess :-)

Do we have some sort of Group Equipment list anywhere ?
Or what do we do with those 200 sp and 100 gp ?

@Ignatz
With that weapons would it not be wise to tick the "record each die" option ?
Either way, added it above, not sure about the damage though, I've added +4 for your STR...


^^, it might be nice to add your values to the table :D
This message was last edited by the player at 06:09, Fri 08 Sept 2017.

Whops..misstype! Yes, remove orcus, place Shar. That one is on me for being sloppy.

As for a shared thread, if you want one, let me know.

In reply to Storyteller (msg # 84):

Ahh, so no Undead in the Keep... or so we hope :-)

:-(
I somehow messed up with the link to Magic Items.
Can someone provide it again please ?
Much obliged.
Seems there is none and one must leave through the books
(I was only trying to find healing potion ^^)
This message was last edited by the player at 09:34, Fri 08 Sept 2017.

Potion of Healing Level 5
This simple potion draws on the body’s natural healing ability to
cure your wounds.
Potion 50 gp
Power (Consumable ✦ Healing): Minor Action. Drink this
potion and spend a healing surge. Instead of the hit points
you would normally regain, you regain 10 hit points.

So, yeah, kindly do set up a "Group Equipment" thread.

If everyone's okay I'd say we purchase 2 potions, leaving us with 200ss in the Group cash.

Other than that I think we can set out to the Keep ?

The potions from the supply storage are free if you take them. The thread is up shortly.

In reply to Storyteller (msg # 89):

The thread is closed... cannot write

Sorted.

QUestion.
Has the fight vs Bairwin been a 'milestone' ?
Am asking because of potential recovery of AP(s) :D

Milestoning is two encounters in a row without long rest, so yes, given that there has not been a long rest since you took on both ninaran and now Bairwin.

So yes, Milestone.
This message was last edited by the GM at 08:20, Mon 11 Sept 2017.

In reply to Storyteller (msg # 93):

Wasn't aware there's a n actual definition of milestone other than those implied by more or less common sense...^^

Okay, so we go to the Keep ?
Or do we check on the graveyard as my character suggested sometime earlier ?

In reply to Vynthear Klayde (msg # 94):

DMs can also decide that a given encounter counts double toward a milestone (such as if the encounter is two or more levels above the party) or doesn't count toward a milestone at all (such as if the encounter is two or more levels below a party).

Ding! That said, It is very likely that you will have to take a long rest before entering a keep voiding all this. That said, yes, I gave you the dull and boring core version of a milestone, and Stahls definition is on point.
In the end, it is just mechanics, and how it is applied is more key. In a string of encounters, getting a second AP during a long trek in a tunnel to get that awesome relic of kickbuttery, it is huge. So what Stahl said mostly.

Arcane checks for any signals and locations you wish to check, any roll over 15 can tell you more.

As for the game now, we do not need to stall if you wish to proceed, as I sense you do, you can include the above as part of a two way post if you wish, and I will look into making a new thread soon, splitting the locations.
Agreeable?

Stahl takes 10 on Athletics to get himself, Prinz and then Vynthear over the barricade. He'll help anyone else who needs it.

:)
Completely forgot about "Take 10"

Saskan can roll a 1 and still make his Athletics check :)

Tbh, its a silly check. You got the time to take 10, so if you can, go ahead.
Also while I offer some options, you are out in the open and thus have freedom on choices and paths etc.
Feel free to think broad and investigate if you desire.

In reply to Storyteller (msg # 101):

Cannot speak for the others.
But I assumed the barrier was exactly that and thus some sort of halting point, maybe a fight even.
Now that we recklessly climbed over it... what is there ? Where are the guards ?
If there are none, maybe just a description would have sufficed ?
As is, I currently have no idea what to do as I lack further input.
Especially since not everybody has yet replied to the challenge of overcoming the wall.
Okay, so now that has turned out to be a nice feature of the landscape but indeed not a real stopping point.
Since there are no guards, we might reasonably assume that we may approach further without much danger to be detected.
I'm fairly sure our ranger is proficient enough to Show and lead the right way to approach without too much danger, that's the thing I expect rangers to be there for ^^.
Well then, can't we just continue on the path ?
I mean, we are heading for the Keep, right ? It looks pretty large. Some of those walls and towers look crumbled ?
Can't we just proceed to the Keep itself and have some description ? What about gates or general access possibilities ?
What is this ? Another barrier ? If so, can we have some descrption ? So we can come up with a plan to overcome it ?

I saw your point and have done just that.

So... the Keep itself is in ruins ? All those buildings can no longer be used as a Keep ? And there's only the staircase leading down into the mountain ?
Right ?

The description I read indicated that we saw no guards, so I wrote Stahl's actions based on that.

I figured we could also have walked around it, but I didn't want to get into a back-and-forth with questions. It's apparently meant as an obstacle to wagon traffic, not to people who can go over or around.


Then go with what's given.


No need to be only fairly sure. You've been travelling with him for a little while and you'll have as sense of how he moves and how aware he is. His character sheet is in his description. Not all rangers are the same.


Seems like we could have, and I would have if nothing had been posted today.


It was similar, so it wouldn't have needed any more plan than this one did.

The GM can and should roll any checks Stahl and Prinz trigger. I don't particularly care if they're rolled openly or not. My interest is just in keeping things moving.

Sorry I've been AWOL lately, things are super busy on my end, but I'll be in the mix here soon :)

Can I just check a couple of things before I post?

I thought Warfryn and Stahl were going on ahead of the others to recce the place?  According to the map we are all there - that does not bode well for stealthiness.

Also who is Vynthear talking to and what about?  Surely he cannot see what is going on in the room and does his talking not break our stealth?

OK.  Stahl has acted so Warfryn will follow suit.
This message was last edited by the player at 16:57, Mon 18 Sept 2017.

I haven't been able to check the map, but I gathered that you and I were supposed to move our markers to indicate that we were ahead.

The GM only rolled stealth for us (high-five on our untrained rolls being enough to gain surprise).


We were lucky to get stealth in the first place, so it's probably not a huge concern whether it's broken or not.


Cool. The goblin should know Stahl and Prinz are there now.

I wasn't trying to intimidate the goblin into silence, but I'll go with that. Stahl gave a whistle, so he has broken stealth. I generally don't like messing with stealth, which is why I didn't train Stahl in it.

I have not gone doen the staircase and am talking to Saskan, Ignatz, Malphurious about not having cast Comprehend Languages.
You both went down to check out the siutation.
Imo, just ignore the tokens of the rest of us

I re-read my post and saw that I didn't specify that Stahl had whistled to Prinz. Apologies for not being clear.

Let's just go with rhat has been posted.  I hate ret-conning.

In reply to Warfryn (msg # 113):

Agreed. Same here. I will refrain from making any adjustments to past posts.

I'm back but it's going to get worse before it gets better.  I'll be following along and will post for combat as best I can.  Aiming for once a day, but it will likely be around 8-9 PM CST.

Please do ignore. Only two are present.
Stahl and warfryn. The rest should imagine they are at the top of the stairs.

That was an amazing intimidate check!

I'll roll initiative shortly. Then he plans to have Prinz guard the goblin and he'll move up.

Oops!  I didn't notice the little goblin figure.  I thought the 'D9' was the goblin.

I shall continue anyway.

I figured out how to move counters on my phone and have moved Stahl, circling him around the room.

I want everyone else to join in, so Tahlequah directs Prinz to return to the others and get them to follow, Lassie style. I could still use a counter for Prinz, or perhaps I just didn't see it.

How ? You absolutely MUST tell me how to do that...

In reply to Vynthear Klayde (msg # 120):

My keyboard has arrow keys. I found I can reposition a selected icon with those. I'm using a SwiftKey keyboard on an Android phone, but I think it's also available for iDevices.

I don't want stealth to outvalue everyone else participating. The game generally doesn't assume anything more than not making a lot of deliberate noise. Come on into the chamber so we can move along.

Right, should we pick up the pace? What is the hold up here?
You have all the options now, is that the issue? *smirk*

Well.
I did imagine that the two go down to investigate/scout.
Then come back and report, so we can 'plan'
Not quite sure about that staircase, but I envisioned it to go down at least some 30 yards or so.
Then again, if that is the sole reason for the stalling, then indeed let's get down there :D

You have all the cards, so really, no need for it to stall here. None at all.

In reply to Vynthear Klayde (msg # 124):

If we make forward progress, I'd prefer to hold onto it, rather than back up.

"Caution" and "planning" are realistic, but far less necessary in this game (as far as I've ever seen) than in real life.

We know nothing really about the keep and its denizens.  But now, as far as I can see, we have a (potential) prisoner that we can question - preferably outside and not in the actual dungeon. So what is the problem?

Or do we just kill him out of hand?  Warfryn would not like that; he is a paladin as well as a warlock!

In reply to Warfryn (msg # 127):

The only concern is that no one is actually taking any actions. If you have a preference, state it and let's do it so we can move on. I'll back you up.

Secondary to that is that getting more information, while realistic, probably isn't necessary. I doubt the game assumes that we'll do that.

Tertiary to that is that interrogation scenes are interminable and not very adventuresome. But I'll concede that that's just my personal preference.

It's not necessary to kill the goblin, just send it running. For future reference, and clarity, what kind of killing is Warfryn cool with?

He is an adventurer so generally killing of 'baddies' or 'monster' is OK but in combat.  Killing in cold blood leaves him a little cold.

Well.
It is us who determine the game and not the other was round.
I cannot say I particularly care whether the game - or the adventure - expects something or not. Or whether something specific is required or not.
Of course, one can play this like a chain of combat encounters. But must one? More specifically, do we want to?
The game is just the means. I prefer to play a role... and I am not talking Abort Controller ^^. I am talking about Vynthear Klayde, an eladrin wizard fighting an evil cult.

To a degree, yes.


Depends on the alternatives


What I want is to keep moving forward, doing interesting things that do a lot to hook everyone in. Combat tends to be one thing that does that, interrogation tends not to be. Other things also do that.


Cool. My character is under my control, so he decides to do thing that I want him to do that are also plausible for him to be doing. That's a valid approach too.

I have had a chance to take interesting actions, and I wanted to give others that chance. As I said, I'll back up anything anyone does now. If there's nothing to back up tomorrow, I'll take some further actions for Stahl and Prinz that move things forward.

Edit: backing up the interrogation.
This message was last edited by the player at 20:51, Tue 26 Sept 2017.

Huh ? This discussion is going down the drain, it seems.

1. I'm 100% with you on the matter of trying to avoid situations that exclude some (or even the majority) of the PCs.
   Like this current scene where two went down to scout.
   Admittedly, I did not expect the scene would turn out to be long (it feels that way at least), i.e. more like a brief report "Just a single guard, a goblin, many corridors leading off", i.e. a fluff description of the map.
   Notice that I put the word plan inside these '' in my post above.
   
2. I totally agree that we should try to play scenes/situations which keep action high. Not limited to 'action' as in combat, but implying that everyone gets involved and has somethign to contribute rather than sit it out and wait.
   E.g. the discussion with the scholar was done while everyone else was occupied with something else, there was no need to wait on the resolution of this scene.
   
3. I'm absolutely with you concerning the 'nudge' for everyone to participate and not refrain from contributing/sharing/enjoying.
   
4. I'm also completely with you to keep the initiative and move along rather than stop and stall.
   Remember that barricade which stalled the flow since we (well, I at least ^^) expected something to happen there

That being said, I do, however, object to argument with 'the game' or 'the adventure' expecting (or not) this or that.
It's like saying 'hey, this is DnD, let's just rush from one combat to the next, reap gold and magic items' or 'hey, this is SoIF, we must intrigue, plot, betray' or 'hey, this is AM, we must oppose the church, research and invent new spells, craft items' or 'hey, this WFRP, everyone is corrupted by Chaos, mutants are everywhere, we must bodily search everyone to see mutations' or 'hey, this is WH40K, let's pump that bolter fire into everything we see' or... know what I mean ?
If you would argue that this single goblin is just a tired dumb guard who cannot tell us anything, because goblins generally cannot because they are stupid, cannot remember any names anyway, have no interest beyond the next drink/food/card game etc then I would be all with you INgame, too.
That's really all #130 was all about.

I'm actually not that sure that the current lull has been triggered by the Scene.
Whatever.
I agree that playing out an interrogation is again excluding the majority from contributing.
Since we already have a whole section of the map revealed, can we not just get some brief/incomplete description 'west corridor leads to...., east corridor leads to the stores, south is sleeping room, about a dozen guards nearby, Pimple is the boss, he's an orc with a massive axe' and call that our interrogation ?
And then continue ?

Wait, the goblin does not flee outside as instructed ?
Well (blush) as meant anyway, lol.
'Region' was supposed to mean the whole Thunderpeaks area, not just this room ^^

Do you want initiatives now or after the surprise round?

I finally got some time to catch up and post haha. Now hopefully Malph will be able to get clear of whatever weeds he's in and we can get this ball rolling again.

If in doubt, for anything, skill or anything - roll anyways, and I will include it going forward. But yes, go ahead, if you intend to use it.

Not sure if D7 will still be visible to Warfryn when his initiative comes round so please adjust as required.

Vynthear.  Could you do me a great favour and not use 'small' in your posts.  I am having eye problems (and as of today am now awaiting surgery) and your posts are almost completely unreadable to me.

Cheers for the table Vynt.
Will use this.
Also, lacking Malph? Otherwise he will hang back and advance to the room and we will start combat later today.

Saksn ought to fill in his details on of these days.
Also: I did not edit for damage done already

Nah, but that is also my job mate :) Worry not!

As was foretold~

Gosh darnit. I missed that, cheers. So tonight, in 5 to 6 hours. Means an update tomorrow morning hopefully.

CST = UTC -6.0
So, yeah, 8h difference.

Need bonuses and damage so Saskan can actually roll :D

Eldritch Blast +5 to hit and 1d10+4 to damage

In reply to Warfryn (msg # 145):

And the Dagger ?

@Saskan
One number is missing...
AC = 17
F = 15
R = 15
W = ???
Found it

This message was last edited by the player at 05:22, Fri 06 Oct 2017.

Dagger 1d20+1/1d4+1

I presume the red square is/was Grasping shadows but what is the bigger yellow square?

In reply to Warfryn (msg # 148):

Beguiling Strands.
Can be deleted as soon as GM has acknowledged my post, imo

Someone please act, even if it's not strictly your turn.

Right now, we actually lack two players showing no sign of activity. I can promise an update tomorrow morning, regardless but had hoped people would participate when they see a round start.
This is a general issue of the game, and guess enforcing 48 hour rule of combat turns might be needed but given I have been waylaid by illness in the family I have not been up to the task myself. That said, Please try and get a post out, given it is 4e, and not that complicated.
I know Malph warned of inactivity, but also lack Warfryn.

I was waiting to find out about the Beguiling Strands square on the map.  I have assumed because there is an actual limit drawn that it affects those in it or who enter it and I do not want Warfryn to be affected.

I did ask and Vynthear only said that he was waiting for the GM to remove it.  So I waited.

In reply to Warfryn (msg # 152):

Unless I'm misunderstanding something, there's no ongoing effect from beguiling strands.
http://dnd4.wikia.com/wiki/Beguiling_strands

So, that spell shouldn't affect you. If you're still concerned, maybe you can take some other action or delay.

In reply to Stahl Tropfstein (msg # 153):

Yeah, it has no lasting effect, I just put it there, so GM can follow my post.
Might have been wiser just to rush along and describe the area covered and then just go through with the rolls.
Sorry for the misunderstanding

It is my own fault.  I don't know that spell and because there was a zone marked on the map I thought better not go in.  I should have looked it up myself and I would have known.

I have to go out now for an hour or so but I will post for Warfryn when I get back.

In reply to Warfryn (msg # 155):

There was no need to go in. You could have used eldritch blast from the doorway.

http://dnd4.wikia.com/wiki/Eldritch_blast

Range 10, should be fine. With the recent updates, you could also go:
Warlocks may instead choose Eldritch strike instead of this power, which is a melee at-will attack.

Same same - anyways, I will update for Malph within an hour or so.

Actually noticed that both Ignatz and Malph are away...
Hmm..will have to NPC two characters to the best of my abilities.

Anyone heard from either? I am not a fan of NPCing for a lengthy amount of time, since that is no fun for me in particular. Would rather have active players tbh, which I know they both are.

I'm okay with waiting some more... say, until Friday ?

I'm here! Post incoming :)

Oh whoops, too late for that round

How come Warfryn's damage on sniper 3 was not recorded on the latest report (msg 44)?

I did post 14 hours before that message.

In reply to Warfryn (msg # 162):

You can record it yourself and repost what you think is correct. You'll get no argument from me.

Ah!  So we amend this ourselves?

In reply to Warfryn (msg # 164):

I amended it when I posted, and I didn't hear a fuss.

Yeah, I updated the statblock when I posted with the results of my post. I would have rolled the Torturer's OA against me myself, but I don't know the damage.

No, and I won't either. I may be the GM but preventing you from contributing seems counter-intuitive. And I will make mistakes, so go ahead, and amend, and I will use the latest and up to date table for round summary. So please, add and adjust. It helps us all!

In reply to Storyteller (msg # 167):

Makes those posts awefully huge though ^^

Some of Ignatz's results didn't flow down, so I added those and made it clear in the text who (I think) is dead.

I was able to move Prinz on my phone, but I couldn't put an X over the goblin warrior, so please note that he's dead.

Vynth, highlighting changes is a really good idea

Alot of good improvements over this fight. The table is golden, marking enemies on the map makes it more easy to see where they are, and all in all suits 4e and what it's strengths are.

That said, the game is facing a common issue on RPOL - player post attrition.
Basically it seems a few post, wait and nothing happens.
I am going on a short holiday tomorrow and will be back Monday, although I might be able to post, but I am in a spot where I need to look at activity and possibility of replacement, as right now the game will slowly dwindle. This is based on activity and as stated, I am not keen on NPC'ing as it derives from my fun.

Hence, I will do this and I insist that by no later than the 21st(this Saturday), you have stated interest in the game and if you are able to provide continual updates and posts to this game. If I do not see it by then, I will take it as a no or at best a "maybe" which still is too uncertain for me.
If you have issues, or troubles preventing posts, I would love to see it to, and have a rough estimate. It can be hard to exact it, but hence why I ask it to be roughly only.

I do this as right now, you are in a situation which could be driven forward with player interaction, but nothing is really happening, and no one is pushing this. I must admit I expect more interaction and drive from the players if this game is to succeed, and the book/adventure path relies on it as well.

Pending the above, I will react and adjust accordingly.

Still interested.
But indeed also guilty of lack of truly pushing this.
Admittedly I was in two games in the last two years where I had to do this a lot. And it kind of drained me. Both times died, btw. Solo Play ain't my thing, you know.
You know that I am rather active, so if the group dynamic is there you can most definitely expect my contribtuion.

I am interested in continuing. My issues have been playing catch-up a lot and mostly from my phone where I can’t easily go back and remember what’s what.

I will be better about checking on my laptop and posting regularly. Speaking of which I will see if I can help push us forward now.

In combat, there's only so much anyone can do, in-character. A timer on actions which then allows the next player to go, or allowing all players with initiatives between monsters to act in any order, followed by a timer for whomever hasn't gone, might help.

Out of combat, I'd gladly post more, but I tend to get asked not to when I do, in other games. If we could agree, for instance, that people who wanted to chime in either would have or need to go along with what the active players are doing. That's just a for instance.




Please don't think of NPCing as the only option. There are others. For example, another player could take up the character, or the character could be considered to be "background" with a balanced amount of the current and future enemies also "backgrounded," i.e. the monsters and the missing PCs are sort of fighting each other in the corner, "winning" (or "losing") when the active PCs do.


It was hard to see that, and some additional GM prompting would not have gone amiss. The enemy going under the table made it seem a bit like we couldn't just move forward.


I'll be honest: I have no interest in exploring rooms, making knowledge checks, or talking to NPCs. I'll happily move from room to room, but if a monster (such as these current ones) aren't going to fight, then they're free to go, as far as I'm concerned. Talking to them isn't interesting to me or significantly helpful to the game. If we could avoid those kinds of situations, or keep them very short, I could be more engaged.

I know that probably sounds like I just want constant fighting. That's not the case. Fighting is a good thing, because 4th Edition made sure that everyone could participate in in equally, as with almost no other kind of activity. It also has a very clear indication or progress by one side or the other unlike, say, discussion or negotiation, and a clear indication of success, unlike searching a room.

I'm not suggesting that we only fight, but clear challenges are nice. General looting isn't fun for me, but trying to find a particular object before a deadline, or before someone else finds it, would be. Talking generally isn't fun for me, but something like giving and taking specific instructions might. Sort of like a specific search: not just asking for general information or "tell us everything you know," but trying to find someone who knows a specific fact or can perform a specific deed for us. "What's going on" discussions tire me.

I know this adventure isn't written for any of that, really. I just want to make clear that I'm not just in this for the fighting, but for the excitement. Fighting just happens to be the easiest form of excitement.

I will gracefully bow out, if the GM deems me to be the wrong kind of player for this particular adventure.

Thank you Stahl - your post is very insightful and beneficial for me.
I guess my post should be seen as a cry for help as much as anything else.
I want this game to succeed but found no one posting anything, as even criticisms was desired for me.
You posts makes it clear to me, at least in parts where there are improvements to be had and these can be taken into account and rectified with some ease.
Yes, recently my RL has caused some things to become a tad to easily bought, and that is just not going to work long term.
In short, thank you, it actually is quite helpful and please stay for I value your participation.

In reply to Storyteller (msg # 175):

Okay, thanks. Glad to help.

I meant to add "Have a good holiday!" above.

Just looking back at the current IC page (back to msg 32 on 29th Sept) it looks like no one posts on a weekend.  That does often slow things down but it is my experience that many games suffer a weekend slowdown/shutdown.

I agree with Stahl that having to wait for the person before you in the initiative order also slows thigs down - a bit; but I admit to a preference for that system rather than the 'all pst at once and let the GM sort it out' system.  That does work quite a lot quicker but it does put a lot more work on the GM.  It an also be quite confusing - 'did that goblin die before I hit it or not?'

I am happy with the way this game is going, despite the apparent slowness, although it will be a shame if we have lost Malph.

Agreed. A Monday prompt might help stoke things.


The beauty of the table is that it takes care of a lot of that. Work off the most recent one, write your move, post, and if someone else has posted already, back up and sort out your move based on their text and their version of the table.

I'm fine with the normal initiative format, as long as we have a clear policy on when an absent person either delays or is moved to the background.

I've been wildly busy lately, but I'm still here and don't plan on going anywhere :)

Total Agreement there.
In each and every game I play in I always strive to relieve the GM workload, to lessen a GM's effort. I am thankful for all those GMs, it's the least I can do.
I guess, this might be confused with 'meddling' sometimes.
[Shrug]
I expect GMs to notify me if they object ^^

In reply to Vynthear Klayde (msg # 180):

I am honestly failing to see how that approach puts more work on the GM. Even if it does put slightly more work on the GM, if the approach helps keep the game going, then it's likely to be work the GM is willing to do.

We all understand the rules and we're all fair-minded. We could relieve far more work from the GM in other ways. The table itself is one good example.

No one is likely to contradict Saskan, so Saskan's post could have included Saskan doing what Saskan suggested. Stahl went ahead and did it, so that there's no question that things are moving forward and changing.

I don't prefer to dictate other's actions, even when it is likely what they would do. It just breaks one of those unwritten rules about assuming too much (for me at least).

That said, I will try to make sure my posts include more direct action in the future to keep things moving.

Though it wouldn't be dictating anyone else's actions, just yours, wouldn't it?


Why does that rule exist? I think I know the historical reason: because someone might drag someone else into a dangerous situation that they wanted to avoid (and could have avoided, if given a chance). But is that still a real concern? The GM doesn't seem like the kind of person who is going to punish anyone, let alone someone who was pulled along unwittingly. It's a safeguard on top of a safeguard.


Thanks! At some point someone has to decide something, and everyone has to go along, as long as we're planning to stay as a party. The decision can always be added to ("I go down the hall with Saskan, but I stick to the shadows.") so people feel like the situation is more what they can handle. But blocking an action someone is taking, or not taking action so as not to be blocked, leaves us stuck discussing and taking votes, rather than taking risks (which we're all more than capable of handling).

Maybe that's already clear to you. In any case, thanks! And thanks for proposing a course of action for Stahl to champion.

I reflected on this:


Fundamentally you are actually in this situation but are not pressed on it.
- You know that a ritual based upon what you discovered in town and at the burial site(the note left behind) is in progress, and you know that with enough blood, it can be commenced. You do not know what however it will do, but it seems like an ill omen directly linked to SHAR.
- Karelel and his subordinates are behind a large harvest of both goods and people in the region and are using it to further their agenda.
- Finding him and stalling whatever he is upto right now is the key for you, and you do not know how long you have? Where are those you have not found? Are they even alive.
- I will provide a post today aiding you onwards in this, but know that this line of thought does require a different approach from me, but one I am willing to commit to. I am if nothing else flexible and willing to adjust always, and yes, I do not punish without reason. What they dice do is one thing, but being prickly and causing a fuss over minor things is silly to me. So indeed, I do not punish for what to me is a slip, rather I will give opportunity for you to learn or do something with it.

This is a rather gruesome thought, but would it be mercy to kill the Goblin? I could give him a healing surge technically :)

You could ask the goblin how he'd feel about it.

Thank you for the recap.

I'd be open to being pressed on it, though I don't think that's necessary at the moment, unless we'd be tying it to real-world time (which is something I've long thought about but have never seen a way to do).


A cool post that helps point us on. Thanks.

I don't think I was clear on what your usual approach is. It can probably work, though it's to be expected that one would have to adjust to a given group of strangers, even ones in the same hobby. But we can adjust too, so I'm open to hearing more about the approach you prefer to take.


I checked back but I wasn't sure what this was referring to. But I'm glad to hear that you don't feel generally punitive.

I don't feel that things going badly in a game is a "punishment," as long as the game moves on and everyone is able to participate. We could completely fail this quest, but that should merely give us (or our successors, if none of us survives) new things to contend with. I'd really dig playing an adventure predicated on Kalarel having succeeded.

I'm not wedded to my character. I have always wanted to try a beastmaster, so that's what I made. I don't even usually like playing strikers. So, if Stahl has to die from dice rolls or because it just seems appropriate, I'm fine with that. The only thing important to me is that I am able to keep participating with some PC or another.

I ain't letting you go Stahl, trust me - you are in for a penny in for a copper ;)

My post was merely to state the simple term: "I want the game to flourish for all us. If you have fun, so do. If you post, I get to post as well, it's the circle of life for the game basically."

In reply to Saskan (msg # 186):

By the way, if you had just said that Saskan kills the goblin out of mercy, I would have backed you up. That can still happen if you want, even with what Stahl has done. I would not question it.


Hear, hear!

Acting on Vynthear's preference doesn't mean not acting as a group. Everyone can fit themselves how they like into that plan (with the option of sneaking with Stahl or not), and build off it how they like.

Vynthear's stated preference was to sneak. Stahl's backing him up on that and adding on to it. If someone states another preference and Vynthear acts on that instead, Stahl will too.

Edit: I really do think sneaking is a fine idea, based on what we know. It should have just as much chance of working as anything else.
This message was last edited by the player at 14:23, Tue 24 Oct 2017.

Warfryn is always up for a bit of sneaking.  His Stealth is actually not that good but when he moves he almost always gains concealment which is pretty much as good.

In reply to Warfryn (msg # 192):

Exactly, and if they spot you and initiative is rolled, at least you get another Stealth check to hide. If you're joining Stahl, he'll switch to his bow and let you open the door. Ooh, I just had another idea.

Nous attendons pour l'idee avec le bated breath...

Lost my token somewhere... ?

Storyteller, did the goblin answer my question about surviving townspeople?

He will in now! I forgot to add it, so check for an update!

I personally think Vynthear should get to move as many extra squares as he wants, at any time, but I'm not sure why a natural 20 would matter to a skill roll. There are no criticals for skills.

In reply to Stahl Tropfstein (msg # 198):

Didn't know that, thanks for the reminder

@Stahl, we're all good, but Saskan may have momentarily had his pride wounded by your words :)

In reply to Vynthear Klayde (msg # 199):

The upside is that there are no critical failures. If all a person needs is a 1 to succeed, they can't fail.

In reply to Saskan (msg # 200):

It wasn't my intent to offend, in character or out.

I am always happy to go ahead if anyone wants me to. That said, It's hard for me to go along with any direction or assumption that my character will scout ahead and report back. There are a bunch of reasons for that, which I can go into if it matters to anyone. Basically: scouting isn't adventurous for me, as it's about avoiding or mitigating risk, rather than facing it.

By the way, there seems to be an assumption that Stahl is stealthy, I guess because rangers often are. Stahl is not. He has a good Dexterity, but he's not trained in Stealth, primarily because I hate using Stealth. Based on the rolls I'm seeing, Stahl is no better at Stealth checks than Vynthear is, which Vynthear would plausibly be able to tell.

In saying all this, I'm afraid I've condemned myself to having to sit back while others scout ahead and report back. I hope not.

There really wasn't offense personally, but Saskan is an Int-Warlord so in his mind he recommended an approach that would allow for sneaky people (that weren't Stahl) to sneak ahead and report back. Now knowing you aren't so sneaky, it's even funnier, but not a big deal.

I almost just had Saskan charge ahead out of frustration, but I figured I'd go along with it because part of being a Warlord/Leader is working with the team you had. He reminded himself that Stahl is a dwarf and dwarves are stereotypically grumpy so it was all fine!

In reply to Saskan (msg # 203):

I just realized that Warfryn isn't any better at Stealth than Vynthear. Is anyone actually trained in it? Fine by me if not.

Stahl is trained in:
Acrobatics
Athletics
Dungeoneering
Endurance
Heal

I feel that an in-game version of this information would have come out during conversations on the road. No one is required to tell me this, but it would be interesting to know what others are trained in.

As a player, I never pick Insight, Perception or Stealth, if I don't have to. Acrobatics seems like an odd one for a dwarf, but it's useful for more than just acrobatic stunts. I might retrain it for Nature later, but Nature also strikes me as strange for a dwarf.

Prinz is actually trained as well, in Endurance and Perception. He came with those, so I was stuck with Perception.

I don't say this or ask for information in order to pigeonhole myself or others. I will never frown on anyone rolling any skill they want, trained or not. I will in fact encourage people to roll, even when they stand a decent chance of failure. The d20 roll almost always provides for a significant swing in capability, such that trained, able characters won't always be better than the untrained, less-able character. It's the old D&D joke about the wizard being able to lift a gate that the fighter just failed to lift.

(Which was why taking 10 was introduced; when there's no pressure, the better person will be more consistently better - though not always.)

I mention all this because I've seen D&D generate a lot of assumptions about skills and success or failure with them. I'm sort of laying out where I'm coming from, in hopes that my in-game decisions are less likely to come across as deliberately disruptive.

Saskan is trained in:
History
Intimidate
Athletics
Diplomacy

History and Intimidate being his highest bonuses thanks to his Dragonborn-ness...

Warfryn is trained in;

Arcana
Bluff
Diplomacy
Intimidate
Streetwise.

His Dex is only 10 so Stealth is not good but when he moves at least 3 squares he gets Concealment (as long as there are some shadows) which helps a bit.

Good stuff.


From shadow walk? I didn't know that required any shadows to obtain the concealment. I thought it was automatic, in any light, due to the warlock's inherent spookiness.

Moving more than 2 squares brings down a -5 penalty to Stealth checks, so the partial concealment will let you try to remain hidden, but not as easily.

I had forgotten about the -5 to stealth for the movement

In reply to Warfryn (msg # 208):

Yeah, it's harsh, but in a pinch at least you're better off than someone without built-in concealment.

Almost all strikers have a built-in defensive schtick, and I assumed that's what shadow walk was really meant for, to bolster the warlock's fairly low AC.

So in terms of current roles we have:
Saskan - Leader
Stahl - Controller/Striker?
Warfryn - Striker/Defender?
Vynth - Controller
Ignatz - Striker
Malph - Defender (if we haven't lost him but we likely have)...

Does that sound right?

Just curious.

Guess we are detected based on Warfryn's Stealth roll, so I guess we might as well start combat, heh ?

EDIT:
Of course, I'm only assuming these are Warriors...
This message was last edited by the player at 06:13, Thu 26 Oct 2017.

They are goblins..do you need anything more :P

So far we had Goblin Torturer, Goblin Warrior and Goblin Sniper
No idea what these are, perhaps a fourth ‘type’

I am updating the table as we speak, so hang on a tad :)

That one ought to be correct...
There was a mistake on that A9 which is A10 instead.
I also edited the locations of the PCs


This message was last edited by the player at 05:27, Fri 27 Oct 2017.

Are we supposed to copy and update the table in each post?

In reply to Saskan (msg # 216):

That's what I plan to do. It will thin out quickly, given all those minions.

I properly forgot to add, just do both actions for round 1 and initiative!

I do assume that Saskan, Warfryn and myself have acted already.
Waiting for the other 3, then you...

Am I wrong?

Are we moving on without other's actions? I'm good either way I just want to know :)

To me it seemed all have acted. New round is up, so go ahead.

I'm sorry for not posting my move along with the updated table. I wanted to get the update out before more errors propagated, but I wasn't ready to post my own turn. I'll post later to a new post with a new update to the table (hopefully remembering to post all of my own changes).

Warfryn, it's very likely that there are errors. If you see any, please fix them on the map, or repost the table with corrections.

I have moved and incorporated what Warfryn pointed out. I didn't change the map, except to move Prinz and the goblin cutter he killed.

Stahl has his axe out now. Due to his Beast Protector feat, if an enemy makes a melee attack Prinz while Stahl is adjacent to Prinz, Stahl gets to make an opportunity attack on them, even if he can't normally reach them. This is not meant to trick any enemy into attacking Prinz; I assume any enemy will be aware of the threat.

If Malph(whom I wrote) is not back after this combat, I will open for applications to hit spot.

In reply to Storyteller (msg # 225):

Ok. We can get by with 5 for a while.

Saskan, cool turn! A couple questions- do remember if either of the 2d6 you rolled for my MBA turned up a 6? Also, which goblin did you target? There's only non-minion adjacent to me I think, so I'm assuming that one?

Two 5’s.

I attacked Goblin Warrior 2. Sorry, I should have indicated my target. I did put the damage in though. You almost killed him!

Cool! Also I noticed my MBA info in the statblock is a little off. My damage bonus should be +6, not +4; 18 STR+magic weapon+weapon focus. Probably won't matter for this particular goblin, but it may be relevant later.

I agree - that said, long term it is not viable and I have to at least consider it.

I updated my post and the table to add in that 2 damage, you never know what will help...

In reply to Storyteller (msg # 230):

Why is five not viable?

Stahl you're gonna finish off that goblin with 2 hp left riiiiight? :P

Warfryn if you curse K12 that attack would probably kill your target!

That's what I get for posting when I am tired and busy.  I shall amend.

In reply to Stahl Tropfstein (msg # 232):

Maybe the encounters are built for a party of 6?

In reply to Saskan (msg # 236):

Supposing that's true:

A) They've seemed pretty easy for six, so going to 5 would just make them somewhat challenging.
B) It's very easy to modify encounters in 4th edition.

Like I said, Maybe... it’s all supposition :)

It’s also very early in the game so it’s hard to gauge the level of difficulty of encounters and I feel like I’ve come closer to death here than in many games but that’s hard to recall precisely.

I would also add that I would miss my Uncle Malph both in and out of character so I am hoping he returns

In reply to Saskan (msg # 238):

Whether or not we get another player, it would be good to clarify what happens if a character dies, or if that's even something the DM would allow to happen under normal circumstances.

I agree.
Going by logic the 4e system is build around a leader, a defender, a controller and strikers for the rest. Do you need this thought? Not necessarily but certain things yes, do get harder.
Marking for instance is very strong if used well, as he did, but this simple also means a difference in scaling the encounters, in amount and content, and also on the players behalf approach an encounter differently. All is possible and doable.
Right now, for that reason, I move along with the party and as I still hope to hear from him, his character remains.

Lots of ooc posts since GM's last ic round.
Will you please submit your actions Stahl?

In reply to Vynthear Klayde (msg # 242):

Sure!

Vynth I'm guessing it's a case of frequent internet access on a mobile device and infrequent access on a desktop

I never considered the 5th and on slots to be striker slots.


Exactly. A group can play without all the roles covered, but if they play the same way they would if those were covered they're likely to make things harder for themselves.

(The only group I think might be a drag would be an all-defender party. Even that would still work, just without the characters getting full effect from their main shtick. An adventure made for such a group, with NPCs or similar objectives to protect, could be a lot of fun.)

I recommend against scaling the encounters just because of missing roles. It would be a good idea though if we could clarify how PC deaths will be handled. Can we bring in a new character immediately, or are we ejected from play until the party reaches some point where that would be more convenient.

I neglected to move Prinz on the map before the Storyteller acted, but I'm fine with the map as is. Whomever posts next should edit the table to put Prinz at J11.

If possible, I'd like clear access to my hunter's quarry at J8 for either Stahl or Prinz before I act, but I can hack a minion if necessary.

Does the Dragonfear only apply to enemies or to everyone?

In reply to Warfryn (msg # 247):

Probably just enemies, but if it's both will that change your move or will you just take a penalty to what you were going to do anyway?

Dragonfear targets enemies only

Posted, Ignatz, I don't know your surge value, so I didn't update your HP, but you get your second wind +2 HP. I also did a bit of minion clearing and burned through the rest of my healing. I hope I don't regret that...

Yup, my guess, too.
Hmm.
Kindly do note it was not meant offensive in any way. On reading again it was a bit rough I guess.
Oh well: Apologies.

I'll update it when I get a chance, forgot to last time. Thanks!

Found the answer.
Need to have loe to any square I want to push an enemy into.
Which is not the case with those tapestries.
I take it only the northern one has been pulled down?
This message was last edited by the player at 20:19, Fri 03 Nov 2017.

I'm in the process of acting. Just a shift and a miss. I've been doing some map updating. I'll work from Warfyn's table.

Would anyone mind if dead creatures were deleted from the table?

Missed to correct that.
Maybe Stahl should. He has the latest

In reply to Vynthear Klayde (msg # 256):

Anyone can repost, and if everyone uses the latest block, issues should be minimized. If I revised what I posted, someone might quote and post it before I submit the correction.

Storyteller is generally inactive over the weekend, if memory serves me correctly. So now's the time to make whatever updates we need to.

Saskan is getting to be more and more fun to play the more I figure things out.

Saskan, don't you also give a damage buff to allies you use your breath on?

EDIT: Oh no this is what I was thinking of-
Inspiring Breath - when you hit an enemy using your dragon breath racial powers
your alliees gain a +5 bonus to damage rolls against that enemy until the end
of your next turn.

Bummer that you missed Balgron!
This message was last edited by the player at 05:04, Sat 04 Nov 2017.

Hah!
Well done!
AP well spent, too, imo as Balgron may have shifted away otherwise.

In reply to Ignatz (msg # 259):

Yep. Thats why no damage buff. I killed everyone I hit. :)

I love barbarians

Alrighty then. I'd like to suggest that the other goblins would give up or run after that move. But I'd also be okay just playing it out.

I could roll intimidation?

In reply to Ignatz (msg # 264):

Okay by me, but it would be an anticlimax to what you just did, especially if you rolled low.

I agree - rolling makes no sense here.
Should we create a "morale" rule of sorts. You kill a majority including the "leader" types and I roll/consider morale/breakaway? Could work and to me seem realistic(albeit this is fantasy so a silly statement!).

@Ignatz. Can I ask you as a favor, to roll for any OA you decide to force when charging about. It will happen, and aids me greatly, as I know you are a knowledgeable player and thus can make that judgment easily.

In reply to Storyteller (msg # 266):

That gets my vote. I tend not to enjoy playing out battles to the very last orc that we're all standing around and pounding on.

Allowing the "Ender's Game" type victory (where you take out the commander and everyone else just gives up. See also: Sauron, the Chitauri, the ID4 aliens, the Trade Federation, etc.) might have to mean that it's harder for us to reach the head, in order to cut it off. The troops would want to protect the head, too. Fortunately, most leader have some nifty powers to keep themselves alive. Imagine a leader who could have taken Ignatz's smackdown and redirected it to a nearby minion. Some of them can do that (though ideally we'd know when that could happen, so we could avoid wasting major powers).

And given that our method of play is so very slow, there's a clear advantage for all of us if we cut out some parts that might not be terribly interesting. But different people find different things interesting, and I don't mean to speak for everyone.

I am good with that as well unless the battle is meant to be one of attrition and energy wasting. But I am guessing it isn’t given the Storyteller’s agreement.

Also, something in me is so reluctant to provoke OA’s and I don’t know why. Not an issue in this game but in others where I am playing a defender or a tank (other game systems). I really should start doing that!

There's something to that: if the game assumes that we'll take the time to whittle every last HP away, during which the enemy could be whittling ours away, then if the enemy cuts and runs we'd wind up with more resources than the game expects. One could offset that by adding to later encounters a supply of enemies that reflect the ones that ran or surrendered before, but then players would wonder why they didn't kill them earlier.

Overall, it probably doesn't make a different if these enemies don't do all the damage they can before they run, but I'd be open to seeing what difference it is likely to be, if anyone wants to simulate it.


You're not alone. I feel like most people feel that if they suffer an OA, then they have done something foolish or wrong. And yeah, it can be a sign of poor planning, or of someone not realizing the rules. But it can also be a very reasonable trade-off, as we saw here. OAs are also a way for the GM to run a battle down more quickly, while putting more pressure on softer PCs, as long as there's a rational reason for them to take that risk.

That reluctance is not a terrible instinct! Winning fights in 4e often comes down to optimizing action efficiency, and giving the enemy free actions runs counter to that, though of course there are times when it's worth it. I definitely think you should avoid provoking OAs from things that other people don't have marked, but don't forget that it's an option :)

So far Storyteller the only OA I can recall provoking was in the last fight, and I was trying to roll it myself but I couldn't find the but I couldn't find the relevant numbers. Ignatz is built to be able to reach the targets he wants to reach without taking too much heat. For the record, Ignatz didn't provoke this turn.

Wait did I provoke earlier in this fight and forget

Okay no haha, I haven't even taken a move action since the beginning of the fight!
This message was last edited by the player at 23:09, Sat 04 Nov 2017.

This

In reply to Vynthear Klayde (msg # 272):

Arguably, we could do better than to engage in encounters intended primarly or even partly to wear us down.

In reply to Stahl Tropfstein (msg # 273):

How would you go about identifying those before engagement?

In reply to Vynthear Klayde (msg # 274):

I'd look at the goals of the monsters. If their only goal is to kill the PCs, and they'll keep at that no matter what, then it might just be about wearing us down.

I'd look at the goals of the players. If they can only win by killing all the monsters (as opposed to killing only some, as here, or killing/stopping enough to achieve an objective) then they are often going to end up in a situation where they're beating a dead horse, where the enemy really can't do anything back and victory is assured (if it wasn't already).

Okay, looks like a plan.
So reasonably we may probably assume that the goal of all those goblins is to guard the complex. To repel any intruders. When they realize they cannot achieve that their goal probably shifts to flee outright or - if they are loyal - to call in more forces or at the least inform those higher up.
Well, we have heard that the staircase to the lower levels is behind a door beyond which none of them have ever gone before. Well, Balgron probably did go there. With cowardly creatures like goblins it is a matter of what/who they fear more, methinks.

Hmm.
To make that assessment/evaluation you detail above don't we need scouting? To evade any engagements we do not want. If we fail at that: what are our options when we do realize it's 'only' attrition? If we disengage we only leave our foes with time to organize themselves... if they are intelligent.

In reply to Vynthear Klayde (msg # 276):

Good questions.

Unless there's a way for everyone to have active involvement and active responsibility for scouting (as opposed to hanging back and being quiet, waiting for a report), then even if we "need" scouting, it's not a viable approach in terms of the game itself. We could be very smart about how we go about this, but ultimately the smartest and safest approach would not be adventurous, it would be a bureaucracy, some of us engaging in a systematic gathering of information to try to piece something together for the party to figure out in advance to "solve" the dungeon. Even pointless combat is better than that.

I think there are ways to have that active involvement for everyone. Or it could be glossed over: What if we just knew what was to be found in a given area, so we knew the point of engaging in it? It's the digging out of that information that quickly makes it seem as though it would be more fun for everyone just to fight, because at least that's something every character is good at.

I don't think we have to assume that the goal of the goblins is to guard the complex. They don't need a torture chamber, if they're just guarding. The enemies stand between us and things that would be useful to us: an item, a piece of information, a way forward, an in-character need like a beloved NPC. Keeping those things from us (intentionally or not) does not need to involve attrition. And if we engage and we find that we're using more resources than we like, and we disengage, then we simply fail. That thing that would be useful to us is now lost. The enemy leaves with it, or destroys it, or reinforces it beyond what we can handle right now. We have to go on without it.

(In the case of a way forward, there would need to be another, less desirable way forward, so that we don't grind to a complete halt.)

Right now, we need a way down. We can, as a party, investigate whether or not a particular route leads us down, and get past enemies keeping us from heading down, avoiding enemies that aren't. If we can't tell, we could, engage any enemies and then if we see there's no way down, we could disengage. Maybe we'll see something else they have that we could use.

I would have thought that the minions at least would have instantly thrown up their hands when Balgron died, especially in such a sudden and gory manner.  The warriors might have continued to fight but I reckon they would have given in as well.  Note that I suggest this only because of how their boss died!

So you strip them of armour and weapons, damage or break these things and send the goblins out of the dungeon.  They would probably be very pleased to escape with their skins.

Alternatively just kill them and get on with it (that is probably not Warfryn speaking!).

As to the torture chamber; probably a makeshift affair so they could keep themselves occupied while they guard the area.

As to sending out scouts and waiting for their reports before continuing, I think this is probably not a good ideas.  All it needs is one bad roll (encounter) like Warfryn had a few moments ago and all is lost.  We then have the scouting party running back to their supports who may not be particularly well prepared.  Scouts should be quite close in front so they can be quickly reinforced or so they can easily and quickly get back to an already prepared main group.

So. To evade unnecessary fights we require information that in most cases could only be aquired by scouting or questioning. We have all agreed that both scouting and questioning is not wanted because it decreases (maybe even delete) involvement of everyone and thus risks posting frequency loss and -in a long run - game death.
We all agreed on this, right?
So in effect we cannot truly pick our fights. We can only aim to find the quickest route downstairs. I.e. no dungeon level cleansing, no complete exploration of each level but a focused search to reach Kalarel asap.
Identifying and not engaging in attrition fights is moot as we do not have an alternative.

BTW, we are in between enaggements so I can use any Healing Surge, right ?

By the team you question and investigate the latter room, you could easily spend 5 minutes, which is a short rest.
Hence, you can do everything you would during such a one. Heal and spend surges, regain encounter powers etc.

It's not necessary to evade them entirely. If we head someplace and it doesn't appear to be a place we need to be, we pull back. For instance.

Really it's not necessary to evade them at all, if we can agree that once the main threat has been dealt with, the battle is effectively over, as with our last fight. Just because something is intended as an "attrition" fight, doesn't mean it has to be played that way, with the enemy fighting to their very last minion and hit point. I like the idea of a "morale" check, in either a mechanical or roleplaying sense, or both.


When it's painstakingly roleplayed out, with tentative, uncertain moves that take a day or more to resolve, and with the majority of players hanging back doing nothing, then I don't want it. But there are ways we could "scout" that don't require all that. There's no set way that scouting has to work, or what failing to scout well means. It's often assumed that a failed Stealth check means that the enemies instantly attack, but maybe instead they themselves hide, or leave the area, or lock their doors, or hastily complete their goal so we can't hope to stop them. Or, maybe we just don't learn anything and need to go in as a group if we want to.


I think that overstates it. It's gone from me not wanting to play out our slaughter of a leaderless group of mooks, and not wanting us to scout in the traditional way, to something else. I think there's a middle ground.