The Reason This Game Is So Sloooooooow

[Kipi]

"The potion drinking with weapons in hand in the middle of combat and using a bow in melee come to mind."

Ok, I'll repeat them again.

At the start of the game and for quite a long time into it you are started with a fighter who weilds a sword in one hand and a buckler in the other. A buckler does not require the use of a hand. The hand is free to hold anything the fighter chooses. Why no a ready potion, or two.

Why is this so hard to visualise?

In theory that would work, but that would require the shield hand (or buckler hand in this case) to actually be free and the buckler being strapped to arm. This would cause the shield to move, making it more or less unreliable protection. This is why hand is used to steady the shield. Now, you mention buckler. Bucklers are in fact small shields hold in fist, as you can see from [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buckler"]this[/url] Wikipedia article. So, as the hand is reserved to steady the shield, there is no room for potion.

Another point is that, even if the hand was free to hold potion, any blow would more or less certainly make the warrior to drop the potion. This is just how the human body works, even in real life.

With reguards to bows, the archer takes one round to fire a shot, and at an advanced stage can fire two shots in one round. Ergo, there is no difference in time between his actions and the actions of anyone else on the battlefield. The very fact that it is possible to fire two shots in one round (even excluding haste) suggests that it is more than possible to perform this action without incuring an attack of opportunity.

It doesn't matter what specific actions the archer is doing, it still all happens in one round, exactly the same as for someone swinging a longsword. Swinging a longsword is a slow process, this is an established 'reality' in D&D and yet the longsword weilder suffers no attack of opportunity, but a quick archer does?

And dexterity implies deftness and quickness of bodily movement. would and archer with high dexterity standing next to an ogre with virtually zero dexterity really incur the archer sacrifice an attack of opportunity? I think not. The ToEE description of an ogre: Slow and stupid.

You are right in there that the archer should be able to shoot as often in melee combat as when the enemies are far away. But what, as far as I can see, you are missing is that when enemy has engage melee combat with archer, it doesn't matter if the archer is shooting towards the enemy standing in melee range or somebody else, archer can't defend and shoot the arrows at the same time. The AoO presents those situations when the characters chooses to perform an action which would make them unable to defend themselves. Archer who is shooting just can't defend himself.

I have to admit, I agree with you that in some cases the AoO doesn't make sense, like every move action causing AoO if the movement happens in melee range of enemy. But that's a flaw in D&D in general, not specifically in ToEE.



EDIT: Sorry, the site picked up one of my earlier Multi+ -button clicks to this post, the first quote was never intended to this post.

[GawainBS]

Not every movement in combat provokes AoO. Just leaving a threatened area. Also, last time I checked my PHB, AoO weren't really "optional" rules.

Archers can shoot into melee as much as they want, but the act of drawing the arrow, nocking it and pulling the string, leaves you open for a melee strike. Just look at all the various martial arts that have ways to disarm gunwielders. Bringing a gun to bear and shooting requires much less effort and space then a bow, yet here it happens too. Without the Combat Reflexes feat on the attacker, however, only the first shot would provoke an AoO.

[LastDanceSaloon]

"In theory that would work, but that would require the shield hand (or buckler hand in this case) to actually be free and the buckler being strapped to arm. This would cause the shield to move, making it more or less unreliable protection. This is why hand is used to steady the shield. Now, you mention buckler. Bucklers are in fact small shields hold in fist, as you can see from this Wikipedia article. So, as the hand is reserved to steady the shield, there is no room for potion.

Another point is that, even if the hand was free to hold potion, any blow would more or less certainly make the warrior to drop the potion. This is just how the human body works, even in real life."

Ok, so how about the fighter choose not to wear a shield, have one less AC and choose to hold a potion instead?

Now he has zero protection let alone weakened protection but does not incur an attack of opportunity (if it were possible to hold a potion).

Why is it not possible to hold a potion? Wizards always have hands free for example. Yes they need to 'gesticulate' for the harder spells, but they are not spell casting when using a round to use a potion.


"Archer who is shooting just can't defend himself."

The well worn argument here is that the penalty already exists because a high dexterity character will have weaker armour and invariable have weaker AC and less HP than a tank (aside from magical armour), making him easier to hit and quicker to kill. Applying an attack of opportunity on top simply piles misery on top of misery. Like-wise when a mage is attacked.

I have no beef with spell interuption, this has been stadard for years and rarely and only occassionly gets questioned, but, again, adding an attack of opportunity is simply piling misery upon misery to the already prone character.


"But that's a flaw in D&D in general, not specifically in ToEE."

Interestingly, the buckler idea occured to me because ToEE permitted my duel weilding swordsman to also wear a buckler. Though it didn't raise his AC. Just another glitch I guess.?.

[LastDanceSaloon]

"Archers can shoot into melee as much as they want, but the act of drawing the arrow, notching and pulling the string, leaves you open for a melee strike."

I'm very sorry gawain, but you just ignored what I wrote and regurgetated rules without discussing them. They might be the rules, but I don't understand why you're asking for a discussion on my supposedly irrational thoughts when you do not wish to discuss them but rather just regurgetate the rule book. An activity which was covered way back in post 5 or 6.

[GawainBS]

"Archers can shoot into melee as much as they want, but the act of drawing the arrow, notching and pulling the string, leaves you open for a melee strike."

I'm very sorry gawain, but you just ignored what I wrote and regurgetated rules without discussing them. They might be the rules, but I don't understand why you're asking for a discussion on my supposedly irrational thoughts when you do not wish to discuss them but rather just regurgetate the rule book. An activity which was covered way back in post 5 or 6.

I explained there where the "realistic" part is, and how you're leaving yourself open. In my quoted text, there is exactly zero mentioning of the rule.

Fighting with a potion in one hand wouldn't provoke an AoO, but you're now suffering other drawbacks: only able to use one hand in combat. Still, quaffing it back would have to happen VERY quickly.

Also, high DEX characters use lighter armour, which limits the DEX less, and they probably end up with an AC that is just as high as melee-fighters. Not to mention that they have less trouble with Tumbling to avoid drawback AoO's. So unless you're fighting in an extremely confined space (or a very large creature), the advantage is actually with the Archer.

[LastDanceSaloon]

"I explained there where the "realistic" part is, and how you're leaving yourself open. In my quoted text, there is exactly zero mentioning of the rule."

How exactly are you 'closed' when you do not perform any action whatsoever? If the archer just stands there doing nothing but 'imagining' him dodging around like Muhammed Ali, this doesn't provoke an attack of opportunity, but if he's dodging around while doing an action he can perform blindfolded as a matter of instinct then somehow he is 'more' prone to an additional attack than a two-weilding swordsman who's swing is at full retreat?

You really don't like discussing the slowness and openess of the two handed swordsman do you?

And in 'reality' as I mentioned previously, the archer would probably already be moving away from the attacker prior to his arrival, it's only the turn based nature of the game which denies him this 'reality' action. So why not also suspend the 'reality' that, yes, an archer hasn't got a lot to defend with at all really regardless of specific actions.

"Fighting with a potion in one hand wouldn't provoke an AoO, but you're now suffering other drawbacks: only able to use one hand in combat. Still, quaffing it back would have to happen VERY quickly."

Yes. But what would you rather carry? +1 AC enhancement or a heal potion? I guess it depends on the battle, but I'd probably go for the heal potion when faced with a Hill Giant or a character with high hit power.

"Also, high DEX characters use lighter armour, which limits the DEX less, and they probably end up with an AC that is just as high as melee-fighters. Not to mention that they have less trouble with Tumbling to avoid drawback AoO's. So unless you're fighting in an extremely confined space (or a very large creature), the advantage is actually with the Archer. "

Well, at level 5 of ToEE my ranger has 3 AC less than the main tank and approximately two thirds the HP. There has been no way as yet to improve this. I am pretty sure most D&D games involve extremely confined spaces and very large monsters on quite a regular basis. And if a game chooses swarm tactics in a confined space (and most do) then you're really struggling to ever find the right time and place to use a dex archer to good effect.

Here's another point about ToEE. A 100HP Lonesome Hill Giant is a nightmare to face, but a 100HP archer who can fire two shots per round and is a very experienced adventurer (the Blacksmith in the Pirate village/town/thing) dies without barely a whimper.

On a level of reality it's making a big dumb giant (who may never have lifted a club in anger before, we have no idea) a more superior warrior than a high level fully rounded and advanced adventurer.

What kind of encouragement is that (in an RPG sense) to my wanna-be Ranger?

[GawainBS]

Eh, twohanded swordsmen aren't the lumbering behemoths you make them out to be. They can be quite fast.
Also, I do assume the archer is dodging, but, once again, nocking an arrow and shooting is EXTREMELY hard to manage while dodging. That is the point: you have to expose yourself to take aim, even from that close.

In D&D, I'd prefer to wield my weapon in two hands and don't care about healing potions, as those are traps. General consensus is that you take down the enemies as soon as possible, and heal after combat. Clerics can do emergency healing. There's still the point that drinking a potion while fighting isn't so easy.

I can't speak for your party, of course, but 16 DEX (18 quite possible) on an Archer at lvl 1 is "standard", and 14 for a meleewarrior too. (A bit high, maybe, but never mind.) Archer either has a Chain Shirt/Studded Leather, which gives him 16 AC at the least. Tank has probably Scale Mail or Chainmail, which gives him 16 or 17 AC. I'm not assuming a shield, because twohanded weapons in D&D are superior. But with a Shield, yes, the difference can be 3. Even with a shield, a higher Armour Check Penalty rears its head. The Archer has a higher DEX & less armour check and a higher speed, so he can Tumble more easily and get out of reach. The difference in HP is minimal. I'd never give any character less than 14 CON, and they have either a d10 or d8 HD.
The number of confined spaces I've played in in D&D is actually quite limited. You can even look at most maps of adventures: more often than not, there's quite some space.

The Giant is probably the biggest threat, due to reach. Reach is an extremely important advantage in combat. Then again, this is about an encounter specific to ToEE, which has some balance problems, as we've established earlier.

[Stworca]

With all due respect, and no patronizing intended :

Ok, so how about the fighter choose not to wear a shield, have one less AC and choose to hold a potion instead?

... bla bla...
REALISM!!!

He'll have to open the bottle too you know, and while fighting with an open bottle in his hand - watch out not to spill it. Enough realism yet, or should we also add that his hands will get sweaty after a while, thus he'll have to make dexterity rolls or drop the bottle...? If the bottle was rugged then we wouldn;t have to do the slippery roll, instead a skin graze roll would be needed.
Another roll would be in order to determine whether or not the fragile bottle would bend or break in his hand when held too tightly.
For total realism we could also add "expires at :" date on the potion, and measure the temperature and air humidity each round, because magical potions tend to loose their healing properties in certain conditions.
Now what if the warrior was stressed cause of combat, and his throat would tighten during consumption of the healing beverage? How thick is the potion? Does it taste well, or do we need more rolls to see if he doesn't gag on it or throw it up?

So many variables!

Holding an open potion bottle is possible in pen and paper D&D and i'd say it wouldn't provoke an AoO (DM decision), but would be too much fuzz to implement in ToEE.

With reguards to bows, the archer takes one round to fire a shot, and at an advanced stage can fire two shots in one round. Ergo, there is no difference in time between his actions and the actions of anyone else on the battlefield. The very fact that it is possible to fire two shots in one round (even excluding haste) suggests that it is more than possible to perform this action without incuring an attack of opportunity.

It doesn't matter what specific actions the archer is doing, it still all happens in one round, exactly the same as for someone swinging a longsword. Swinging a longsword is a slow process, this is an established 'reality' in D&D and yet the longsword weilder suffers no attack of opportunity, but a quick archer does?

You're focusing on this one potential unreal thing. Melee weapons being slow to swing, and thus archer having enough time to fire a shot in point blank with no AoO.

I'll skip the fact that one handed weapons are not slow ones, and one could easily score a hit every second.

I'll skip the fact that even two handed ones can be swung very swiftly, and each swing, even the least powerful can be deadly. [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCVt9rRE0bk"]Not that even these two douche bags seem to be swinging them quite fast, and they are not warriors by ANY standards.[/url]
Hell,[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hfLZozBVpM"]this fat guy swings fast AND cuts stuff open effortlessly[/url] Dodge that, and load an arrow before he takes another swing.. Wait, but the two guys in the video dared to MOVE while swinging?!? OUTRAGE!

I'll skip the fact that sword is only one of the weapons that a two handed swordsman has. Even if he just swung his sword, his elbow can still smash your face, knee hit the groin, kick break your ankle, headbut throw of balance.. D&D doesn't include such attacks, but REALISM does.. Hell, the swordsman can just push you, grab your arrow, grab the bow, grab your sleeve, get too close to take a shot... Use the POMMEL to break your jaw.

I'll also skip the fact that it's not an easy job to shot an arrow, and much strength and balance is required, which is unachievable when you're dodging swords, kicks, headbuts, grappling and spit.

Instead, let's imagine a real situation where an archer tries firing a bow in point-blank range, and a footman fighting him. The archer would get instantly raped 99 out of 100 cases. Archers didn't win melee duels with their bows. Why 99 out of 100? Because the 100th is your favorite hero Legolas.
AoO is a mechanic that simulates exactly this.
AoO is a balancing roll. It applies when you're doing something that is unwise during a wild melee brawl.

A mage may not always have to wave his hands, but he sure has to concentrate to control the magic energy. Doing so AND avoiding mace swings is tricky.. but as you pointed out - possible.
But it's also possible in D&D and ToEE itself. It;s "defensive casting."

Now, before you say "You're clueless, that's not what i said, i want to know why it's not PASSIVE?!?!?!One"

You're free to NOT use defensive casting, because you have the option to focus FULLY on the spell, and thus make sure that you succeed with it. You provoke an AoO but you're sure that the spell hits.. OR you don't provoke AoO and focus on defense just as much as on the casting, but you can fail at multitasking.

The next example is "OMG, OMG, WHY CANT I PASSIVELY NOT PROVOKE AOO WHILE MOVING!?"
Because you have the option to move at full speed (defending yourself while sprinting? HA), instead of moving slower but being more careful at the same time. What would be the point of the first one?
Example 1 : Delayed blast fireball is about to blow up and annihilate everything. Running as fast as you can is the only sane option. Better to provoke an AoO than die in a fiery inferno.
Example 2 : Your fragile mage friend on the other end of the room is about to get killed by an enemy. Charge to save him. Your armor has a chance of deflecting the blow, his robes provide no protection at all.
Example 3...

Are you seeing where i'm going here?

NO game is fully realistic, for one that IS would be a pain to play.
I for one like ToEE because it offers some freedom. I can solve a quest in three ways, i can choose my own feats, i can run provoke AoO's or not.. It implemented D&D system very well, and the system itself offers even more freedom.
I understand however that such freedom may not fit people who are used to play games where you left click to attack and right click to move.
ToEE (and the entire d&d system) is a middle ground. Diablo being the "What is realism? Can i eat it?" and Dwarf Fortress Adventure Mode being "Better play with calculator and wikipedia open"

[LastDanceSaloon]

So on the one hand you're lampooning 'reality' concepts and on the other hand you're defending the 'reality' concepts.

And you say my posts are confusing...

Also, re: sell-by dates on potions - that isn't actually that far off that OLD concept of having weapons deteriate from use.

Oh boy, aren't we all glad that rubbish vanished from our screens...

[LastDanceSaloon]

"Eh, twohanded swordsmen aren't the lumbering behemoths you make them out to be."

If you start your argument from this premise then, again, your basing your entire post on a point that I never raised and is one that you have invented in order to find an 'angle'.

I never said two handed swordsmen were lumbering behemoths, it's the rules which state this. My point being, if it takes one full turn to swing a two-handed weapon then there will be 2.5 seconds the sword/axe etc is at full back-swing, 1 second of impact and 2.5 seconds of follow through.

An archer also takes one complete round to finish their attack, only with the archer there is 5 secods of preparation and 1 second of impact at the end of his 6 seconds.

And even no matter the fine details of at what particular second each is performing their preparation, execution and follow through, both still take one complete round to finish their manouver.

It's not what I think the 'reality' is, and Sworca seems to think a dagger user could be allowed 6 attacks per round in 'reality', it's about how the rules are applied.

in any given turn a character has 6 seconds to perform one move (more if a higher level or using haste/speed), it shouldn't matter what they are doing in that 6 seconds. To penalise certain classes or specific actions with additional hits for no other reason than one person's imagination of what a character is possibly or possibly not doing with their 6 seconds is, quite frankly, a bit bonkers.

In ToEE my Elf Ranger Archer has the following drawbacks to start the game:

-2 constitution (Elf varient but +2 Dexterity) but creating low HP
-4 attack firing into melee
Attacks of Opportunity for performing his basic function or even changing his weapon or pulling back in a tight squeeze.
A need to put stats in 4 categories, strength, dexterity, wisdom and constitution in order to function correctly
All monsters have far higher AC verses missiles than melee
Some monsters are belived to have 5/piercing though this is never mentioned so this is debateable wether this is actually the case or not.
Relatively low AC

Now compare this to the starting out drawbacks of a human fighter:

Cannot consume a potion during combat without incurring an attack of opportunity
May have to change weapon in combat if the enemy shows 5/slashing or 5/bludgeoning causing an attack of opportunity
May have to run up to a big monster to engage it, causing an attack of opportunity

Therefore an Elf Ranger archer already has plenty enough drawbacks and doesn't really warrent any more. In Icewind Dale, for example, the archer would be one of the people protecting the spellcasters until the spellcasters are up-to-speed, but still tries to avoid melee. Whereas in ToEE the archer has become another party member that needs to be protected by fighters until the archer is up-to-speed. It's put the archer in the spellcaster category rather than the fighter category - something that has been expanded on recently in Dragon Age with the mage-like sniper archers.

The need to give fighters some hinderance is certainly a debated aspect as to why strict adherence of attacks of opportunity were introduced, but the archer in particular really gets the short straw from 3.0/3.5 trends.

And the reason 3.5 was created was in the name of balance. To prevent our heroes being too powerful too quickly - it had nothing really to do with debating what they were or were not doing with their 6 seconds.

And for a system which was introduced in order to give balance, of which ToEE is the closest PC representative, the game has proven to be one of the most imbalanced ever created - you yourself have noted this aswell.

I am stating, with my posts, why my Elf Archer is also imbalanced and that this has nothing to do with the glitches.

[GawainBS]

This is LDS:

You really don't like discussing the slowness and openess of the two handed swordsman do you?

See? That's where I was going in. My "angle" appears covered.

Where do you get that break down of a round, how long each action takes? You are making things up. Quit doing so, it's not constructive.

Stworca mentioned actual number of swings in reality, which might be possible. It is stated in the rules that an attack consists of a number of swings, misses and parries. Not every "to hit roll" represents an actual attack.

in any given turn a character has 6 seconds to perform one move (more if a higher level or using haste/speed), it shouldn't matter what they are doing in that 6 seconds. To penalise certain classes or specific actions with additional hits for no other reason than one person's imagination of what a character is possibly or possibly not doing with their 6 seconds is, quite frankly, a bit bonkers.

They are penalised for doing things when threatened, yes. Firing a bow in melee is quite silly, as proven repeatedly. 5ft step is your friend, once more. Just repeating it, so that you are once more confronted with the fact that these "stupid" rules are actually allowing you to circumvent this drawback.

True, the Elven Ranger has different drawbacks than the Human Fighter. They also have different benefits. (Reflex Saves, Range, Initiative, Speed, Skills, Favoured Enemy (which is marginal), Low-Light Vision, not having to enter reach to be effective, all in favour of the Elven Ranger, for example. He also gets spells, later on, and an Animal Companion.)
The race factor is also quite large at 1st lvl. For example, a Human Ranger would be able to take Point Blank Shot and Precise Shot, avoiding the -4 penalty.
If you would have a Fighter as an Archer, he wouldn't really need to have a high WIS, too.

Later on, a tremendous advantage of archers is that they can Full Attack almost always, where as meleedudes need to spend a move action (or two, given their lower speed inflicted by armour) to get in position. Next round, the enemy could easily ruin the meleefighters next round as well, by moving away.
In Pen & Paper, you can make this even more outspoken, by giving the Archer a mount, which allows him to move at the mount's speed (40-50 ft, probably) and still Full Attack. A Mounted Melee still needs to spend a move action to get to the opponent.

Just to point out that Archers aren't getting the short stick, really.

P.S.: Pen & Paper D&D 3.5 isn't balanced at all, that is to say: casters are tremendously, god-like powerful compared to non-casters.

[LastDanceSaloon]

Ok, my characters are now at level 6 and I can now report that my two fighters are at last kick-ass - both having up to 2 successful attacks per turn and starting to do exciting acrobatics when they kill things and have AC over 25 and HP at or over 50. This is now starting to feel 'awesome'! Lol.

However, the next major encounter, again, re-itterates my point about the burdens that archers and spellcasters face in this game.

I've just started the Temple itself, but I didn't try the front door yet, I went into the Guardhouse to have a nosey around there first.

The encounter in the Guardhouse is, on first impressions, insane. In the guardhouse you are met by the following:

1 leader
1 Wizard
2 Witches
2 Leuitennants
4 or 5 Footman
and 8-10 archers of varying types.

This is all in a tightly packed room.

It is a forced encounter and I therefore could not 'prepare' for it by altering my team formation, what weapons they carry and I could not buff in advance.

Since the sqaures are not visible I had no idea what parts of the room I could run to without being blocked off. It turned out that I had 2 squares in front of me and 1 square to the left and 1 square to the right. This meant that the bad guys could keep me blocked in for a very long time, denying me access to the wizard and any flanking maneveurs.

Basically, I was hemmed in and at the mercy of their archers and spellcasters until I had cleard a very large number of goons. And the AI was intelligent, chess-like, in that the bad guys were targeting the weakest and the spellcaster first. The AI dumped my Ranger and Rogue on the front-line 2 squares to the front, my Cleric on the 1 route to the right and my damage rather than defence fighter on the route to the left. My tank started at the back of the field. (there that looking glass again).

Needless to say, the first attempt failed terribly as I immediately sent my fighters en-route to the mage and concentrated all ranged and spells in that direction (as per RPG standard). My archers and spellcaster were very quickly fully surrounded and the fighters just kept getting blocked off by goons, the AI even converting it's archers to melee as soon as a space became available. All my players, apart from the tank, died relatively quickly.

First re-load and I played a bit 'smarter' and didn't even use my archers unless they were clear of goons, left the wizard alone and concentrated my fighters on clearing the the goons around my archers. By not evoking attacks of opportunity my archers survived longer as did my cleric, but the bad guys still won-out.

Second re-load I prepared for the battle in advance. I changed my two archers to melee weapons. I won the battle like it was a walk in the park, with only the cleric taking significant damage.

And the only reason my cleric took significant damage was because she evoked approximately 24 attacks of opportunity by casting 3 spells for a spiritual hammer, one of which failed.

Now, this was the really bizzare thing. Spellcasting evoked attacks of opportunity from all the archers in the room. Is this a glitch? Or should I start ranting about how impossible it is for archers, on the one hand, to be so slow at acting that they invoke attacks of opportunity when they act, but on the other hand are quick enough to fire on someone else as an attack of opportunity?

And further more, regardless of that issue, I think this quite starkly proves my point that this game, by trying to create 'real challenges' simply denegrates everything to melee weapons and completely destroys both the fun and the point of 'varied' team members.

I creamed this encounter not by buffing in advance, not by altering my formation, but simply by reloading once I understood the terrain and by converting my 2 archers to melee in advance.

Yes, such mechanics have appeal, but isn't this more like the Waterloo re-enactment society then RPG fantasy?

[Stworca]

Your spellcasters will win encounters on their own once they get fireball. Lvl 7 i believe?

IIRC Otis is a well made archer NPC, give him a shot to see how they can work.

Naturally the biggest damage dealing class is a chaotic good warrior wielding an overpowered 1,5 handed sword artifact that should never exist in D&D, let alone ToEE, but after that it's all mages.

[GawainBS]

Wizards get Fireball at lvl 5, when they also get Haste.

Archers shouldn't get an AoO (barring very, very specific builds), but it *might* be possible they have an action readied to attack someone who starts casting. (This mechanic entails that you sacrifice your standard action, and you take it when a pre-set condition is triggered.)
If they got an AoO, it's a glitch.

I agree, the random placing of partymembers is annoying, but that's a failing of ToEE, obviously. I don't recall having big troubles because of it, though. Maybe I was lucky.

About this:

Yes, such mechanics have appeal, but isn't this more like the Waterloo re-enactment society then RPG fantasy?

Good Fantasy, for me (emphasis, for me), is as realistic as possible in the "real world" field. Archery, Swordplay, Acrobatics,... with mundane means should obey "real world" rules, unless it is backed up otherwise, such as a race with incredible hand-eye coordination, a specific training regimen (although this borders on the supernatural), etc. As soon as Magic is involved, everything changes. Still, I really like Magic to be applied consequently and consistenly.
Just to make the point that "RPG Fantasy" is a pretty wild and loose term. I do agree that D&D is far from everybody's cup of tea.

[LastDanceSaloon]

Ah well, I think it's time to wrap this game up. Just time to share one more ludicrous encounter which I think pretty neatly sums up the game.

Hmmm, which one shall I pick?

Shall it be the big bad boss and her array of fruit and vegetables? Nah.

Shall it be the entire earth level of the temple which looks like it was cut and pasted from Beyond Divinity's XP farms that contains around 100 totally random and out of place one-hit-wonder bad guys? Nah.

Shall it be the appaearance of Lulz at the end of the big battle with the high priest, just for 3 or 4 rounds (as it get's persuaded to leave by Cuthbert, awfully nice of him), just to try and kill one of your characters after an epic fight because that's so awfully fun? Nah.

Shall it be the unending array of doors leading to yet more monsters even long after you've figured out where the boss fight is? Nah.


I'm going to go for the Glabrezu encounter.

What good RPG is ever without a Glabrezu?

Well, this Glabrezu came in giant size with five, yes five, big snappy beaks pecking at anything that came close - plenty enough to kill one character per round, maybe two rounds if they have massive AC.

I'm not even sure why this Glabrezu was there, nor whether it was plot significant or whether it was just another of the hundreds of random big monster encounters the game stuffs in your face if you chose to go into one of the elemental doorways. I must admit, I do give the game huge credit of variety of monsters, I just take it away again by saying, yes, but why are they there? Is the High Priest some kind of Noah figure preparing for the flood?

Anyway, it wouldn't be D&D without killing a Glabrezu and since there are no dragons, I thought I'd take this as my 'one for the record books' scalp.

So... after the 20/30th reload I finally got the situation, timing and luck to fell this 200HP beast of a beast... but I had to do it in a very specific manner - or rather, the only way possible for my team.


Firstly, do not engage it in conversation. It's one of those hilarious encounters where you get suddenly cut-scened into a conversation and it tells you it's going to attack you. Whoop de do.

*reload*

get in range, but at a safe distance, and force an attack with an archer (well they have to have some use). Two big 50HP earth elementls pop out the ground - because one 200HP monster with 5 big attacks per round just isn't enough - and game-on.

Ooops, no, it's not game-on, it's *reload* time because it's dumped your priest at the back-end of the round order meaning you have no summons' to prevent the bad guys having first crunch.

*reload* *reload* *reload* *reload* *reload*

Ah, at last, my cleric gets to go first. Cast Spiritual Hammer. Glabrezu and one Earth Elemental attack Spiritual Hammer. Glabrezu casts Magic Mirror. Use Searing Light to quickly despatch the 2 Elementals (*reload* if the spell fails to hit) with additional help from my 2 fighters just to hurry it up (*reload* if the Elementals do a couple of criticals on a fighter). Use archers to take out the Magic Mirror spell as quickly as possible.

After about 3 or four rounds you should be back to where you started with you versus the Glabrezu. And this is where you find out the Glabrezu is immune to... pretty much everything except critical hits from melee weapons. Longbow +1 - fail. Crossbow - fail. Flame Strike - fail. Searing Light - fail. Longsword +3 - fail (well it did 3 damage, which is basically a fail considering the Glab killed him in one turn) Hmmm, so what am I left with... ah, a fighter with a big pointy holy stick and some summoned Spiritual Hammers.

*reload* *reload* *reload*

Battle becomes a ticking bomb encounter - can my one fighter with a big pointy holy stick sit behind the Spiritual Hammers and get the 15 criticals before the 5 Spiritual Hammers (cast at long intervals, replacing one as one is about to exipre) run out and I get pecked to death in seconds.

*reload*

Ah damn, this time it's switched to attacking my fighter instead of a Spiritual Hammer when I got in range, darn, just realised it switches it's attack to whichever character arrives last. Hmmm, next time I will have to be able to cast a Spiritual Hammer right after my fighter gets in range, but before the Glabrezu acts. So I need the order to be my fighter, then the cleric, then the Glabrezu.

*Reload*

This time I shall try and time my Siritual Hammers to get the maximum. Each one should have about 8 rounds of life (as I took the increase spell duration feat). Hmmm, that makes about 40 rounds with me having 3 chances of a critical every round. Hmmm, 120 chances at 10% equals 12 - OMG, it's gonna be a close one!

*reload*

Oh yes! Down he goes!

Of all the fights I've had in D&D, watching a Dwarf slowly poke a Glabrezu to death really is one out there on it's own.

And then it drops a magical gem. Oooo, that's nice. But what do I do with it? And why do I even care any more? I was fighting the end-boss battle ages ago... but I decided to have a breather and take a quick look in that strange door in the middle of the room, just to see where it leads... Oh great... it was a one-way door and I saved before I realised...

[Stworca]

I've decided to go with one liners : You can actually kill "Lulz"

[GawainBS]

IIRC, The Glabrezu has DR/Good & Cold Iron, so a Holy Cold Iron weapon would do full damage. I also think he has spell resistance. A basic Glabrezu.

[LastDanceSaloon]

"You can actually kill "Lulz""

More than likely, you can kill pretty much everything in the game, but why and so what?

"IIRC, The Glabrezu has DR/Good & Cold Iron, so a Holy Cold Iron weapon would do full damage. I also think he has spell resistance. A basic Glabrezu."

Interesting point. But what's your point? What should or should not happen in real D&D is irrelevent when actually facing what is on your screen and is likely glitched to high heaven.

[GawainBS]

My point is that that Glabrezu isn't necessarily that highly glitched at all. It requires specific resources, which the party is able to acquire.

[LastDanceSaloon]

The game doesn't tell you what any weapon is made of.