Some more rules questions

[Sir Robilar]

Here are some questions that arose during our regular campaign. As always, thanks for your insights!

1. Can the Halfling burn his Luck on the Wizard’s spell check? Seems like it to me, but wouldn’t that be much too powerful?

2. How is the Cleric supposed to reach the higher spell results?

3. If multiple characters try to break down a door together, how do you handle it? Examples, some from Goodman’s modules, would be:
- Everyone rolls his own Str-check, ignoring all others.
- +2 to the check for each character helping on one rolled check, with a set maximum of characters that can help.
- Only characters with a positive strength modifier can help and simply add their modifier to one roll made by the strongest.
- The characters need a combined Strength score (not modifier) to automatically succeed. I think this one is from Sailors and I'm quite fond of it.

3.5 If there is a set Strength DC to break down a door in the adventure and one character wants to break the door down alone without any time pressure. Would you have him roll until he makes the roll or just decide that he manages to do so after some time has passed?

4. How would you handle surprise in this situation: The characters know that multiple invisible foes are in a room. They walk into the room, weapons ready. The invisible creatures silently take position wherever they want and then attack, instantly ending their invisibility. Would they get surprise attacks before Initiative is rolled or would Initiative be rolled normally?

[beermotor]

1. Yes.
2. Luck, most obviously. Then, other circumstance bonuses, maybe group rituals? Raven_Crowking and I disagree about whether a Cleric ought to be able to spellburn divine aid, although the rules don't forbid it they do specifically say Clerics can't spellburn spell checks under normal circumstances. Also, Bless can provide longer lasting bonuses to spell checks; other spells or items may do the same.
3. The best way to do it is, IMHO, the second one. I like a little randomness in it, otherwise the last one would be the best.
3.5. Noise could be a factor. The more/longer you have to roll, the more noise you're making, right?
4. I'd roll for surprise. Generally monsters either surprise the party or they don't, but if both sides have a chance, then I'd roll... for example, some monsters surprise on a 1-4 in d6, so I'd roll that if the party was being cautious / looking out / preparing. If they were just blundering along, forget it, they're just surprised.

[Raven_Crowking]

Here are some questions that arose during our regular campaign. As always, thanks for your insights!

1. Can the Halfling burn his Luck on the Wizard’s spell check? Seems like it to me, but wouldn’t that be much too powerful?

In my games, the Lucky Charm certainly can.

2. How is the Cleric supposed to reach the higher spell results?

Luck.

3. If multiple characters try to break down a door together, how do you handle it? Examples, some from Goodman’s modules, would be:
- Everyone rolls his own Str-check, ignoring all others.
- +2 to the check for each character helping on one rolled check, with a set maximum of characters that can help.
- Only characters with a positive strength modifier can help and simply add their modifier to one roll made by the strongest.
- The characters need a combined Strength score (not modifier) to automatically succeed. I think this one is from Sailors and I'm quite fond of it.

Whatever you feel works best for the situation at hand. Different doors might have different circumstances/rules. I am actually a big fan of this.

3.5 If there is a set Strength DC to break down a door in the adventure and one character wants to break the door down alone without any time pressure. Would you have him roll until he makes the roll or just decide that he manages to do so after some time has passed?

General rule: Three Strikes and You're Out. If DC 20 is a superhuman feat, there is no "Take 10" or "Take 20" in my game. I would let you roll on a higher die in the dice chain, though, the represent the extra care taken.

4. How would you handle surprise in this situation: The characters know that multiple invisible foes are in a room. They walk into the room, weapons ready. The invisible creatures silently take position wherever they want and then attack, instantly ending their invisibility. Would they get surprise attacks before Initiative is rolled or would Initiative be rolled normally?

I would roll initiative normally, but if the creatures are also silent, there is very little chance that a PC will be able to take effective action. What I would say happens is that PCs who beat the invisible creature's Init gain a Luck check (Roll Luck or under on 1d20) to hear the creatures just before they attack (possibly as a result of that attack), thus allowing a pre-emptive strike attempt with a 50% miss chance.

[Raven_Crowking]

Raven_Crowking and I disagree about whether a Cleric ought to be able to spellburn divine aid, although the rules don't forbid it they do specifically say Clerics can't spellburn spell checks under normal circumstances. Also, Bless can provide longer lasting bonuses to spell checks; other spells or items may do the same.

The correct interpretation is mine. In my game.

The correct interpretation is beermotor's. In his game.

One of the core strengths of this game is embodied in the words, "Fear No Rule".

[beermotor]

Raven_Crowking and I disagree about whether a Cleric ought to be able to spellburn divine aid, although the rules don't forbid it they do specifically say Clerics can't spellburn spell checks under normal circumstances. Also, Bless can provide longer lasting bonuses to spell checks; other spells or items may do the same.

The correct interpretation is mine. In my game.

The correct interpretation is beermotor's. In his game.

One of the core strengths of this game is embodied in the words, "Fear No Rule".

Absolutely. I think it's helpful to discuss where disagreements are and provide reasoning, so people can choose for their own games.

[smathis]

3. If multiple characters try to break down a door together, how do you handle it? Examples, some from Goodman’s modules, would be:
- Everyone rolls his own Str-check, ignoring all others.
- +2 to the check for each character helping on one rolled check, with a set maximum of characters that can help.
- Only characters with a positive strength modifier can help and simply add their modifier to one roll made by the strongest.
- The characters need a combined Strength score (not modifier) to automatically succeed. I think this one is from Sailors and I'm quite fond of it.

Whatever you feel works best for the situation at hand. Different doors might have different circumstances/rules. I am actually a big fan of this.

Historically, I've used all four options. It varies on the circumstance. I have these sort of "group checks" baked into rules that appear in Transylvanian Adventures. That now works for about 90% of all these sorts of issues, regardless of the d20-based game used.

3.5 If there is a set Strength DC to break down a door in the adventure and one character wants to break the door down alone without any time pressure. Would you have him roll until he makes the roll or just decide that he manages to do so after some time has passed?

General rule: Three Strikes and You're Out. If DC 20 is a superhuman feat, there is no "Take 10" or "Take 20" in my game. I would let you roll on a higher die in the dice chain, though, the represent the extra care taken.

Generally, I've ruled that if a character fails then they must try some other means to overcome the obstacle (i.e. pick a lock, try to pop off the hinges, cut their way through, use magic or find another entry). Transylvanian Adventures also introduces variants that handle the "this is the only way in and I really have to get through this door" situations. Common wisdom is to not design an adventure or dungeon around that kind of logjam. But, in a way, that's also a bit like handing out a trophy for just showing up. There's nothing accomplished, just a list of gimmes that the players can't possibly find challenging. The "skill" variants in Transylvanian Adventures solves this problem too. It allows for logjams to be bypassed at a cost. Which I think is preferable to just forcing a clue or entrypoint upon a group of players.

I'd much rather have more complications and more story than just hand out clues and "successes" like Hansel and Gretel on the path to a candy house.

I very likely am the only person who feels this way.

There's also the question of what constitutes the need for a skill check roll. I mean, I rarely have players roll to Search something -- unless it's really, really well hidden. And most of the time a player can avoid a skill roll if they just describe what they're doing in a way that it makes sense. I prefer the dice to give randomization -- as opposed to binary pass/fail.

I digress and am talking like a crazy person right now. So I'll stop. but you get the drift...

[Sir Robilar]

Thanks a lot for all of your insights! Great help yet again.

Smathis, I really like your idea that when the characters fail they have to try to overcome the obstacle with other means! I will give this a try, let's hope my players won't rebel against it.

I'm ok with ruling some things like the breaking down doors example from occurrence to occurrence. Unfortunately I have experienced players that hate it when one thing is ruled in this way once and in another way later. These kinds of players would nail me down on ruling something in one way forever. Probably I should try harder to convey the philosophy.

[Vanguard]

One could conceivably allow spellburn for Cleric's as a Divine Aid request. Essentially, "I sacrifice my life force for a power boost." Maybe make it burn at two stat points for for +1?

[ragboy]

Certain sects of religions in my world give the cleric a "spellburn" like ability. As raven said -- Fear no Rule (even some other Judge's interpretation). Hell, I think I would allow a "spellburn" type of function to a character trying to open a door -- might work as a "you try so hard you hurt yourself, but with the extra reserve of Strength..."

Dunno. I'll have to think on it.

[GnomeBoy]

...might work as a "you try so hard you hurt yourself, but with the extra reserve of Strength..."

I'm pretty sure there was talk of this during the playtesting or the beta phase (or both).

"Skillburn" -- didn't quite make that jump? Wanna burn some Agility in order to not fall to your death...?

[cthulhudarren]

Raven_Crowking and I disagree about whether a Cleric ought to be able to spellburn divine aid, although the rules don't forbid it they do specifically say Clerics can't spellburn spell checks under normal circumstances. Also, Bless can provide longer lasting bonuses to spell checks; other spells or items may do the same.

The correct interpretation is mine. In my game.

The correct interpretation is beermotor's. In his game.

One of the core strengths of this game is embodied in the words, "Fear No Rule".

Absolutely. I think it's helpful to discuss where disagreements are and provide reasoning, so people can choose for their own games.

A bloodthirsty chaotic deity could allow a blood sacrifice spellburn while a lawful deity may require 100gp per point worth of exotic incense. Time necessary for each would also vary.

[Sir Robilar]

When reading through the book again today, I came up with some more questions that I remembered came up during our sessions. Again I'd be very interested how you would rule in these cases.

5. Concerning Grappling - When a creature is pinned, do you rule that it can do nothing besides trying to free itself from the pin? I believe the rules text is „it can’t take any significant actions“. Also, would you rule that freeing oneself from a grapple is a use of one's action die? Or does it take, for lack of a better turn, a "full-round action"?

6. Ulfeonar’s Wolf Spear (from Doom of the Savage Kings, p.12) - I don’t quite understand how this is to be used. First of all: „On a successful hit…“ - does this mean that this pinning effect triggers after any successful hit, after the regular weapon damage has been applied? Or is it some kind of special attack, activated when the wielder succesfully ‚hits‘ the foe but not inflicting any damage?

6.5 Then concerning the pinning effect of the spear: Is this the same pin as described in the Grapple rules? Or would you rule that the spear’s pin only reduces the pinned creature’s AC by the spear wielder’s Strength modifier plus rendering the creature unable to move in any mundane or magical way?

7. Falling damage: „For each broken bone, the character permanently loses 1 point of Strength or Agility (player’s choice).“ - I assume that this broken bone, including the ability loss, can be healed by a cleric sacrificing a die use with Healing Hands? Or would you rule that it is not possible to ever heal permanent ability loss?

8. Standing up from Prone - does it take one of your action die to do this or all of your action dice? For example, could a level 6 fighter stand up with his first action die and then make an attack with his other action die in the same round?

9. „A wizard who sacrifices a full 20 points of ability scores in one fell swoop automatically treats his next spell check as a roll of natural 20.“ - pretty sure I saw this discussed somewhere already, but I couldn’t find it just now. The question that came up for us was, wouldn’t it be worse to spellburn 20 points than to spend merely 19? When spending 19, you would roll the d20 and add 19 points for the final spell result, with 20, you would not roll the die and merely add your regular Int + twice your caster level to a fixed result of 20.


Thanks!

[TheNobleDrake]

9. „A wizard who sacrifices a full 20 points of ability scores in one fell swoop automatically treats his next spell check as a roll of natural 20.“ - pretty sure I saw this discussed somewhere already, but I couldn’t find it just now. The question that came up for us was, wouldn’t it be worse to spellburn 20 points than to spend merely 19? When spending 19, you would roll the d20 and add 19 points for the final spell result, with 20, you would not roll the die and merely add your regular Int + twice your caster level to a fixed result of 20.

Burning 20 does not result in a 5% chance to roll a natural 1 and have something unplanned happen despite your spellburn, whereas burning 19 does.

[Sir Robilar]

Burning 20 does not result in a 5% chance to roll a natural 1 and have something unplanned happen despite your spellburn, whereas burning 19 does.

Ah, that does make sense. So it's more of a security measure against the permanent ability loss and possible corruption.

[beermotor]

I don't rule it that way. I'd give the player the option to roll anyway, that way they could get a potentially much higher spell check result.

Or fail miserably and suffer hilarious corruption.

[phg]

I don't rule it that way. I'd give the player the option to roll anyway, that way they could get a potentially much higher spell check result.

Or fail miserably and suffer hilarious corruption.

I don't understand. How is giving them an option to roll the d20 going to get a higher potential roll result than 20?

[TheNobleDrake]

I don't understand. How is giving them an option to roll the d20 going to get a higher potential roll result than 20?

Because instead of taking a result of 20 and all the usual critical stuff to the roll, you instead roll with a +20 bonus on top of the rest of your typical stuff which could result in something like a 40+ check result.

[cthulhudarren]

I don't understand. How is giving them an option to roll the d20 going to get a higher potential roll result than 20?

Because instead of taking a result of 20 and all the usual critical stuff to the roll, you instead roll with a +20 bonus on top of the rest of your typical stuff which could result in something like a 40+ check result.

Yeah, and even if they do roll a one, they could just burn a luck point to avoid the corruption, yes?

[beermotor]

I don't understand. How is giving them an option to roll the d20 going to get a higher potential roll result than 20?

Because instead of taking a result of 20 and all the usual critical stuff to the roll, you instead roll with a +20 bonus on top of the rest of your typical stuff which could result in something like a 40+ check result.

Yeah, and even if they do roll a one, they could just burn a luck point to avoid the corruption, yes?

BUT WHERE'S THE FUN IN THAT?!?!?!

[cthulhudarren]

Because instead of taking a result of 20 and all the usual critical stuff to the roll, you instead roll with a +20 bonus on top of the rest of your typical stuff which could result in something like a 40+ check result.

Yeah, and even if they do roll a one, they could just burn a luck point to avoid the corruption, yes?

BUT WHERE'S THE FUN IN THAT?!?!?!

0% fun in that.

[reverenddak]

Yeah, and even if they do roll a one, they could just burn a luck point to avoid the corruption, yes?

Actually, no. A natural 1 is always a failure. As it is with attacks and saving throws. And natural 20s are always successes with attacks & saving throws (and obviously with spell checks).

[Sir Robilar]

Yeah, and even if they do roll a one, they could just burn a luck point to avoid the corruption, yes?

Actually, no. A natural 1 is always a failure. As it is with attacks and saving throws. And natural 20s are always successes with attacks & saving throws (and obviously with spell checks).

I think cthulhudarren was referring to the rule that wizards that suffer corruption can burn a point of Luck to avoid it (page 116: Luck to avoid corruption). I'm not a fan of that rule.

[reverenddak]

I think cthulhudarren was referring to the rule that wizards that suffer corruption can burn a point of Luck to avoid it (page 116: Luck to avoid corruption). I'm not a fan of that rule.

Oh, right. I pretend it doesn't exist.

[Raven_Crowking]

I think cthulhudarren was referring to the rule that wizards that suffer corruption can burn a point of Luck to avoid it (page 116: Luck to avoid corruption). I'm not a fan of that rule.

I am fine with that rule. Wizards do not automatically regain Luck, and when Luck gets low enough, strange things can happen.

[Skyscraper]

I am fine with that rule. Wizards do not automatically regain Luck, and when Luck gets low enough, Strange Things can happen by.

Fixed that for you.