GameBanshee Forums

Dice are a fun gamboling and gaming tool. They tend to be rooted in mathematics. In the short-term of one single roll, or 3 or 4 rolls they can produce hugely luck based results ranging from the dreaded Snake Eyes 1,1 to the grin enducing Double Six.

However, by the laws of arithmatic, over the course of 20 or 30+ rolls, the average will always be 7 or as close as makes no difference - or at least this will be the case barring one in a hundred examples of extreme good or bad lack.

Most gamers know this. D&D players most definately know this.

So, how did the developers manage to create a game based entirely and 100% on dicing theory and practice that does not obey the rules of any dice known to man (aside from the ol' loaded dice scenario, rather ironically practiced by a patron of the Welcome Wench).

Sometimes you just know things aren't right, even without looking at the stat details.

Well, my Elf Ranger (20 dex, Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, classed in Archery, level 3 using a short-bow and normal arrows) was lucky enough to be able to take on a Bugbear one-on-one, and the stats were... astonishing.

The Bugbear was stating at an AC of just 13 to hit. That meant my ranger only needed to roll a 9 or better on a 20 sided dice to hit. That's a 60% chance to hit, ladies and gentleman. During the encounter he stunningly managed to miss 60% of the time - as if in a plane of reversal, through the looking glass.

Bad luck you might think? Maybe if the encounter was short, yes, but over 20 to 30 rounds? I think not.

Now, one can cope with one single encounter where this occurs, but I can absolutely guarentee that this has been the story of the entire adventure so far.

But the story and the problem does not end here, oh no, not by a long shot!

The Bugbear it turned out required approximately 24 HP to take it out the game. So, logically, that's going to be about 7 successful hits of a 1-6hd weapon (the average score of a 6 sided dice being 3.5 - not 3 as some might think, as the average falls between the lower and higher 3 numbers and is not simply one half of the highest number).

However, my ranger failed to EVER score more than a hit of 4 and only scored a hit of 4 ONCE. The VAST majority of rolls were for a hit of 1 point of damage. It ran something like this:

1, 2, 1, 1, 3, 1, 4, 1, 2, 1, 1, 3, 1, 2

As you can see, double the amount of hits it should have been taking.

Now, add that to the 40% hit rate instead of a 60% hit rate and you have my archer plugging away for 35 rounds at one single opponent of no great stature which, by correct D&D rules should only take 10-12 rounds.

Oh, and no, he never once got a critical.

Now expand this to the entire campaign and every character and you can see quite clearly where most of the negative feedback comes from, even from people who really like the attempt at strict adherence to the D&D ruleset combined with easily visible turn-based action (such as you see in the first Fallout game).

The problem is not that it *looks* slow - the problem is that it's *unjustifiably* slow.

And where this very definite problem ruins the game is at the point where you realise your character's life actually depends on you being able to *quickly* dispatch the oppositions superior numbers to get an even playing field before the HP gets to half-way down.

Because this game, like so many, uses the 'swarm' method of fighting - the bad guy's might be easy to beat, but with 3 or 4 of them getting a free swipe every round until you get the numbers down it doesn't matter how well built your guy is, he's still taking 4/20 chances of recieving a critical hit instead of just 1/20 (And the bad guys do seem to get the criticals a lot more regularly than our joes) then the main priority of any campaigner must be to find a way to reduce numbers *fast*. When even having ALL your team attacking ONE enemy fails to take a weakling down, even in TWO rounds, then something is most definitely *wrong*.


To conclude:

I find it hugely ironic that people praise this game because of it's 'hardcore' adherence to the ruleset, when, in reality, it's combat system is no more accurate or meaningful than any other RPG out there, and could even be considered one of the *least* D&D accurate RPG games ever made.

I can cope with slow, and the game still has the 'new stuff to look at' factor but, like Beyond Divinity, if I get any kind of glitch that hinders my progress permanently, I shant be rushing to find a resolution...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Ranty tag-line

The looking glass continues...

5 capable level 5 adventurers versus one *static* Behemoth Frog

Behemoth Frog:
AC 22 (melee) AC 26 (missile) 98 HP

(whoever made this game really hates ranged weapon users)

5 hearty adventurers:
Sweetness, Fighter, Longsword, +12 attack, hits on a roll of 10-20 for 9-16 damage
Shortstack, Fighter, Warhammer, +9 attack, hits on a roll of 13-20 for 7-14 damage
Splinter, Ranger, Longbow, +9 attack, hits on a roll of 17-20 for 2-9 damage
Snuggles, Cleric, Light Mace, +5 attack, hits on a roll of 17-20 for 4-9 damage
Rhubarb, Rogue, Crossbow, +5 attack, cannot hit without critical as suffering a -4 to attack as firing into melee (even though the ranger does not suffer this penalty in this particular encounter)
+
Searing Light, cannot hit without critical as treated as a ranged weapon.
Spiritual Hammer, cannot hit without critical as treated as a ranged weapon.


First off, before we get down to the fight, why does fighting a creature the size of 2 large vans stacked on top of each other produce a 'firing into melee penalty'?

Secondly, under what circumstances will adventuring bow users NOT be firing into melee?

Thirdly, why does a giant frog (and most evil characters in the game) have a better missile AC than melee AC? Excuse me, but as far as I'm aware, don't MOST (read 'all') D&D entities have weaker missile AC than melee AC - hence the need to aquire buffs and special equipment to assist this stat?


Right, onto the fight, seconds out...

Round 1:
Roll 15 - Shortstack hits for damage of 14
5 - Splinter misses
2 - Sweetness misses
4 - Rhubarb misses
16 - Searing Light failes a ranged attack hit for Snuggles
ouch - Behemoth Frog's tongue grapples Shortstack.

End of round feelings: ok, so my ranged weapons AND spells are not going to help, OMG how crap is this, and now one of my 2 dedicated melee characters is effectively paralyzed. Uh-oh, I forsee long boring reloads ahead

Round 2:
Shortstack succeeds in a 'break free' attempt - huraah!
Roll 6 - Splinter misses
2 - Sweetness misses
8 - Rhubarb misses
4 - Spiritual hammer fails a ranged attack hit for Snuggles
nice - Behemoth Frog does nothing

End of round feelings: I'm getting nowhere here, but oh well, at least Shortstack is back he seems to like hitting it. And since when was a spiritual hammer a ranged attack? It's a morning star and it floats next to the target in melee for 4 rounds. There's no range involved in it's combat at all. The bad guys even attack it... in melee. What weird world of reversal is this game playing at?

Round 3:
Roll 18 - Shortstack hits for 14 damage
11 - splinter misses
17 - Sweetness hits for 10 damage
18 - Rubarb misses
18 - Snuggles gives up spellcasting and joins the melee and hits for 7 damage
18 - Spiritual hammer misses
Frog does nothing

End of round feelings: Wahey, looks like the frog is glitched after the shock of Shortstack breaking free - This shouldn't take long at all!

Round 4:
Roll 15 - Shortstack hits for 9 damage
6 - Splinter misses
2 - Sweetness misses
15 - Rhubarb misses
17 - Snuggles hits for 7 damage
11 - spiritual hammer misses
Frog just sits there

End of round feelings: OMG Snuggles is on fire! Must really hate frogs... low-end hit from Shortstack, not an overly progressive round.

Round 5:
Roll 11 - shortstack misses
10 - Splinter misses
3 - Sweetness misses
12 - Rhubarb misses
18 - Snuggles hits for 9 damage
18 - Spiritual Hammer misses
Frog just sits there looking dumb

End of round feelings: So... out of all my team of mixed adventurers, the only character who can hit a prostrate giant frog is... the cleric. The one who only carries a weapon because it would look silly not to.

Round 6:
Roll 12 - shortstack misses
9 - Splinter misses
9 - Sweetness misses
1 - Rhubarb misses
1 - Snuggles misses
Spiritual hammer evaporates
Frog does nothing

End of round feelings: Yawn.

Round 7:
Roll 3 - Shortstack misses
15 - Splinter misses
12 - Sweetness hits for 10 damage
19 - Rubarb misses
11 - Snuggles misses
Frog silently prepares for death

End of round feelings: What a lot of swash for so little buckle. Is it dead yet?

Round 8:
11 - Shortstack misses
19 - OMG Splinter hits for 7 damage
16 - OMG Sweetness hits for 16 damage (it would have been dead with a lot less)
Frog dies. Dead.

End of round feelings: Sure glad it couldn't fight back with 3 attacks per round like so many other creatures in this game.


To conclude:
Sweetness - 55% chance to hit for 9-16 damage (36-64)
miss, miss, hit (10), miss, miss, miss, hit (10), hit (16) = 37.5% hit for 27-48 damage (36)
My best character only just scraping in a last minute reaching of the minimum of expectation.

Shortstack - 40% chance to hit for 7-14 damage (21-42)
hit (14), N/A, hit (14), hit (9), miss, miss, miss, miss = 40% hit for 21-42 damage (37)
My tank fighter hitting expectations, but in a very bizarre and frushtrating manner.

Splinter - 20% chance to hit for 2-9 damage (4-18)
miss, miss, miss, miss, miss, miss, miss, hit (7) = 12.5% hit for 3-14 damage (7)
Again, just scraping in at the last minute to 'normalise' otherwise terrible stats.

Rhubarb - 5% chance to hit for critical
miss, miss, miss, miss, miss, miss, miss - 0% hit for 0 damage

Snuggles - 20% chance to hit for 4-9 damage (4-9)
N/A, N/A, hit (7), hit (7), hit (9), miss, miss = 60% hit for 4-9 damage (23)
Well above average stats, dramatically so.

Spells - various
miss, miss, miss, miss, miss = 0% hit for 0 damage.
Utterly depressing.


You see... everything is just all wrong. It's D&D but in reverse.

This was my first reload of this encounter. The first encounter failed because the AI dumped my rouge in the first hit position, so I moved him 4cm to the left so he could fire ranged weaponry (being a low HP character). Unfortunately this triggered an onslaught of 6 additional lizard creatures of varying types who surrounded my entire back-line - causing me incapable of either firing, spellcasting or even moving without incuring at least 3 attacks of opportunity. This left my two fighters up front fighting a small big frog and a big big frog by themselves. Needless to say, one was quickly despatched by the behemoth Frog, and since I was going to reload anyway I didn't bother using any HP potions.

For the reload I just moved my rogue 3cm instead of 4cm and everything was fine. Even the first small big frog died nice and quick, leaving me with the sceario I described above.

So I've just spent about an hour of gaming time killing one big frog who, even when non-glitched, is not that big a menace.



And just what is it with all these 'attacks of opportunity'?

I move during melee - generates an attack of opportunity
I use a potion - generates an attack of opportunity
I use a ranged weapon - generates an attack of opportunity
I cast a spell - generates an attack of opportunity
I simply approach a Hill Giant to deliver my first blow - generates an attack of opportunity (and I'm not even joking)

Example:
Approach Hill Giant.
Hill Giant gets 2 attacks of opportunity, hits Once.
I attack Hill Giant once and miss.
Hill Giant attacks 3 times, hitting twice.
Fighter uses round to swill a HP potion.
Hill Giant gets 2 free attacks of opportunity and hits once.
Hill Giant attacks 3 times and I'm dead.

(I ended up killing it without even using fighters, but used Spiritual hammers as my fighters and got lucky with ranged weapons and spells - on my 10th/15th encounter).

Now... excuse me if I'm wrong, but aren't the regular attacks a creature gets during their round their 'attacks of opportunity'? Being as the whole attack by round system and gradual HP loss simply metaphores the whole battle - and that any 'realism' added to this approach simply muddles rather than 'improves' an established dueling structure?

For example, we all know that one arrow is normally enough to take any living soul out of action, but for these games we accept that we can take 40 because the battle is merely representing your characters general hardiness, not assuming you have actually taken 40 arrow hits.

Once you get into the anality of these 'attacks of opportunity' you enter the road to RPG insanity. Take my above example as an example. How long would it take 5 people to chop up a frog? Would any of them ever 'miss'? How can an archer miss a barn door at 5 paces? Wouldn't a hit to the face be worse than a hit to the leg? OMG, it's endless and all beside the POINT.

Also, in reality even, if you decide to run from battle the opportunity is with YOU, not the person attacking, as it is a 'surprise' move! And what about simply backing away with your sheild raised?

I mean, OMG, what has this game got against bows, potions and spells? Why not just field us with 5 fighters and have a function which denies the use of potions during combat? But then... OMG, fighters are useless against Giants... LOL.


It's D&D but for grandads who don't like anything which involves 'ass-kicking' and prefer spending an hour infront of the computer killing one creature in gradual small lumps thinking they are doing it 'properly'.

The game might have been released with glitches, but, really, there's a lot more wrong with this game than simply 'glitches'.

Still, I'm relatively old now, so on I plod. Bring on the big fish. yay.

And just what is it with all these 'attacks of opportunity'?

I move during melee - generates an attack of opportunity

Moving through someones sphere generates attacks of opportunity. For humanoid characters it's a 1,5 meter sphere around them. Reading manual helps. Playing tutorial helps even more.

I use a potion - generates an attack of opportunity

You're reaching to your backpack and taking out a potion, then drinking it. Try doing that with absolutely no focus loss, not lowering your guard, not slowing your moves, not stopping to look at your foe..

I use a ranged weapon - generates an attack of opportunity

Try firing a bow when someone beats you in the face with a mace... I mean honestly, what did you expect?

I cast a spell - generates an attack of opportunity

Defensive spellcasting + successful concentration roll allow you to cast without being attacked. Instant spells generate no AOO.

I simply approach a Hill Giant to deliver my first blow - generates an attack of opportunity (and I'm not even joking)

Giants have a 3m or even 4,5m spheres that allow them attacks of opportunity. To approach them without being attacked you would have to do 1,5m steps, the ONLY moving method that allows full concentration on defense and triggers no AOO. There are exceptions from that rule. Read the manual.

Example:
Approach Hill Giant.
Hill Giant gets 2 attacks of opportunity, hits Once.
I attack Hill Giant once and miss.
Hill Giant attacks 3 times, hitting twice.
Fighter uses round to swill a HP potion.
Hill Giant gets 2 free attacks of opportunity and hits once.
Hill Giant attacks 3 times and I'm dead.

That is how the game works. This is how this edition of D&D works. Except for Hill Giant gets 2 free attacks of opportunity which is not likely to be true.

What about simply backing away with your sheild raised?

It's called Full defense mode + 1,5 meter step. No attacks of opportunity, higher defense.

Also, in reality even, if you decide to run from battle the opportunity is with YOU, not the person attacking, as it is a 'surprise' move!

In this game you face warriors, animals, demons.. Creatures that had their share of battles. Most are driven by instinct. Running away is a LIKELY scenario, experienced before or at least expected by everyone that is not lvl 1. Basic logic.

Now to adress the OTHER part of your rant. One about missing, bad rolls etc..

In Battle for Wesnoth game, my fire mage character has a 70% chance to hit targets with his fireball spell. Thus i should hit 7 out of 10 attacks average.
Yet he managed to miss 63 times in a row.
That's a stunning 1,144561273430837e-33 % chance.

Some people pick the right lottery numbers, others do that twice or even three times in a row. Some people get his by lightning. Some miss ranged attacks in ToEE.

The Bugbear it turned out required approximately 24 HP to take it out the game. So, logically, that's going to be about 7 successful hits of a 1-6hd weapon (the average score of a 6 sided dice being 3.5 - not 3 as some might think, as the average falls between the lower and higher 3 numbers and is not simply one half of the highest number).

However, my ranger failed to EVER score more than a hit of 4 and only scored a hit of 4 ONCE. The VAST majority of rolls were for a hit of 1 point of damage. It ran something like this:

1, 2, 1, 1, 3, 1, 4, 1, 2, 1, 1, 3, 1, 2

And what is your rangers strength? You are aware that it counts, right? No? Read the manual.

First off, before we get down to the fight, why does fighting a creature the size of 2 large vans stacked on top of each other produce a 'firing into melee penalty'?

It's a TURN BASED game. If there was an actual giant frog fighting a group of adventurers it would NOT stand in place and just attack while being otherwise static. I hope you understand what i'm saying here. This particular frog is static, because there is not much room where it could go with its size.
Even if its fully static even RP wise, it would be the devs forgetting to make SINGLE EXCEPTION from combat rules. But as long as its capable of attacking in hand to hand combat, its capable of moving its body, and trying to hit something that moves from point-blank range is differend from firing from 3m or 10. That's not only D&D.

Excuse me, but as far as I'm aware, don't MOST (read 'all') D&D entities have weaker missile AC than melee AC

No D&D entities have weaker missile AC than melee AC.
It is more likely that the frog has 26 ranged AC instead of 22, because creatures engaged in melee combat with someone are tougher to hit. Even more so when you're firing from behind someone.
There was a +4 AC modifier, but i cannot recall the exact rules.

There are many more penalties and modifiers that apply in this game. Make sure the enable viewing them ALL before rants such as this one. It's not just dice rolling.

This was my first reload of this encounter. The first encounter failed because the AI dumped my rouge in the first hit position, so I moved him 4cm to the left so he could fire ranged weaponry (being a low HP character). Unfortunately this triggered an onslaught of 6 additional lizard creatures of varying types who surrounded my entire back-line - causing me incapable of either firing, spellcasting or even moving without incuring at least 3 attacks of opportunity.

This is how the encounter normally looks like. You're supposed to fight them all at once.

Rhubarb, Rogue, Crossbow, +5 attack, cannot hit without critical as suffering a -4 to attack as firing into melee (even though the ranger does not suffer this penalty in this particular encounter)

The answer to this was given by You

Well, my Elf Ranger (20 dex, Point Blank Shot

Now expand this to the entire campaign and every character

Yes. Let's assume that just because you had bad luck fighting a bugbear, the game acts like that all the time

I could make a longer post, even a second and a third one.. but what would be the point.
I'm sorry if anything i wrote offended you, but you went ahead and ranted about the game for quite a while, using math to back up your claims.. Not knowing how the system actually works. Your arguments are invalid.

I agree on Spiritual Weapons having "ranged attack" being a messed up idea, probably a bug.
I also agree that the game can bug out. Hell, its a wonder you didnt mention CTD's which are a plague. It bugs out constantly, and crashes more often than not.. But as for the rest of your two post fiesta?

Let me sum it up with short, blunt answers :

I mean, OMG, what has this game got against bows, potions and spells?

They're fine.

OMG, fighters are useless against Giants.

They're not.

Luck

Yes.

Now... excuse me if I'm wrong

You're excused.

This game works (almost) exactly how D&D does. It requires you to actually imagine the "ass kicking", since it specialises in displaying the numbers and how to get there.

I'd like to repeat Stworca's most important point: Read the Manual.

Wow, you guys really don't get it do you :laugh:

Stworca - I did not say say that 'attacks of opportunity' were not part of the rules - I was explaining how CRAP the system is.

And it's also the part I HATED most about Dragon Age Origins.

Are you seriously telling me that if someone is surrounded by 6 ememies, and one runs away, that you are going to find the time to give them an individual 'free' shot?

Poppycock.

Why do you need to go into your backpack to get a healing potion? Why cany the experienced adveturer have one in his sheil hand open and ready?

Poppycock.

Why does casting a spell require anything other than the muttering of words? Which can be done while keeping your guard up.

Poppycock.

When advancing on a target with a long reach? OMG, so with pikemen, once you've breached their extra 3 feet of weaponry, how come their weapon doesn't become useless? How come you don't get endless attacks of opportunity for them having the wrong weapon?

Poppycock.

loading a bow does indeed require 'movement', but with high dexterity (the whole point of dexterity) you can flick one up and out and fire it in the time it takes for someone to swing a heavy two handed sword. And once fired - IF you're claiming realism, would kill them outright.

Poppycock.

It might be how 3.5 works, but it's crap.

Re: Luck - this point is clearly discussed in my first post, I notice you don't quote this section, only the sections you can get an 'angle' with.

Your dude who failed 63 times in a row - once in a lifetime occassion was it?

You seriously telling me you 'enjoy' having to micro-manage and use feats just so you can perform simple and basic D&D actions like spellcasting and retreating from battle? You think that's what D&D is all about? Seriously?

My ranger has a +2 bonus for stregth. Plenty enough for 'normal' gameplay. But oh well, looks like I'll have to waste a few more feats just to counter the -4 bullcrap. Weapon finese longbows - lmao.

Point Blank Shot - enables the archer to fire at close range without penalty. Doesn't mention firing into melee, and the archer has been having this penulty long after he gained the feat.

And as for feats that enable avoidance of 'attack of opportunity', why does a fighter have to waste a feat on 'unarmed combat' in order to progress in that tree?

Mr BS - Reading the manual has nothing to do with making the BS contained in the manual a 'better' experience.

And I'm quite capable of imagining an ass-kicking - it happens when they fight pirates and the battle is over in 2 rounds no matter how many of them there is.

Or during the battle against the leutenant, sargeant and a room full of goons - over in about 4 or five rounds. In the time it took my archer and crossbow weilders to kill one YES ONE bandit archer (who wasn't in melee and neither were mine), the two fighters and cleric's collection of spiritual hammers managed to kill 8 bandits. In fact, the one they did manage to kill, was at the cust of being finished off as the last man standing by my cleric when he finally dropped.

It feels like an ass-kicking when it IS an ass-kicking, and it's a lame drag when it IS a lame drag.

Both my Archer and Rogue have been like sacks of crap the ENTIRE game except agains the weakest human opposition - pirates and bandits - when they are not even needed.

To invent an RPG which renders ranged attack redundant is... pathetic.

To invent a combat system which 'requires' characters to take OPTIONAL feats to make a character playable in the most basic way is shocking - why doesn't the character start out with the feat? You wouldn't start a fighter on level 1 with zero feats in armour... would you...? Oh, that's right, YOU probably would...


And, yes, obviously, it's easier to kill an elephant with spears than it is with arrows (sarcasm). Say, why don't we get some guys to 'hem in' the elephant with spears while the other guys shoot it with arrows - that sounds like a plan - oh, sorry guys, we can't hit the elephant because theres a couple of people 'standing in the way' and the elephant keeps moving...

Poppycock.


"No D&D entities have weaker missile AC than melee AC."

That is EXACTLY what I said.

You don't seem to get it. Attacks of Opportunity (AoO) are a serious and realistic threat.

• Turning your back in a fight is a big no-no, it doesn't take much to seize upon that, even if surrounded. You can select the action "Redraw from melee" to do so without provoking an AoO, which represents leaving with your guard up.
• Even drawing a potion from a bandoleer is difficult in combat. Imagine grabbing your cellphone and answering a call while fighting. You have to sheath your weapon, or take on hand away from your weapon, or use your shield hand to grab hold of it, and pop the cork, and then drink it, all in less than 6 seconds.
• Spells: explicitly described in D&D as requiring gestures. The required concentration check for defensive casting isn't that high, either. 5 ft steps do wonders as well.
• Firing bows in melee, well... It just doesn't work that way. Aiming, even in the slightest, opens you up. You have to pick the arrow from the quiver, knock it, draw and still aim more or less. You have to be VERY quick to do that without getting a punch in the face. Once again: 5ft step.
• Your gripe with pikemen: the game errs here, because in Pen & Paper, there is a "deadzone" in which they can't attack with a reach weapon. Besides, polearms are some of the deadliest weapons every designed, as an aside. Note straight pikes, but things like Glaives, Ranseurs, etc.
• Point Blank Shot: read the manual. It's +1 to hit and damage if target within 30 ft. Precise Shot negates the melee penalty. Both are mandatory for Archers.
• Low damage archery: Keep in mind that many enemies have Damage Reduction for Piercing/Non Magic.
• In the end, I never had problems with an archer in ToEE. A lvl 4 Fighter is quite the force to be reckoned with.
• Requiring Improved Unarmed Strike to avoid AoO? Really? Just the AoO if attacking unarmed yourself, yes, but why would you ever do that? It's an option, yes, but doing so would, logically, require optional feats.
• The one feat that helps with AoO when moving is Mobility, which requires Dodge. Not the greatest of feats, but ToEE hasn't got that many (useful) feats to begin with.
• Play smart to avoid AoO's: take 5ft steps, plan your movement, fight with reach weapons, use the Tumble skill (I believe it's in the game) to avoid AoO, let the high-AC character absord AoO's for the others, since most opponents can only make one AoO/round.
• Last point: Yes, if you want to do certain things, certain feats are mandatory for that.
• Second last point: the early combat encounters in the game tend to be on the hard side of things, since opponents are more powerful than your flimsy lvl 1 adventurers. Smart stat allocation helps, as does doing all possible sidequests in the villages, so you have a few extra lvls.

Stworca made a good effort to explain you where you misunderstood the rules, but you still seem to confuse them.
Having seen lots of RPG systems over the years, 3.5's the one that offers the best combination between playability, "realism" and options. It is, however, far from the easiest to learn.

Also, could you please post your party with stats, classes, skills and feats? We could probably help you out, so you can enjoy the game more.

LastDanceSaloon wrote:Are you seriously telling me that if someone is surrounded by 6 ememies, and one runs away, that you are going to find the time to give them an individual 'free' shot?

No matter how strange it may sound : Yes. One who runs away is the easiest one to hit. Warriors who miss such opportunities die.
Sure, five attacking foes should make such things impossible, but that's how it works.

Why do you need to go into your backpack to get a healing potion? Why cany the experienced adveturer have one in his sheil hand open and ready?

Why can't the experienced adventurer have five of them open and ready, with two wands, three backup weapons and a backup shield.
All this while fighting with two weapons / two handed weapon / sword + shield...

Why does casting a spell require anything other than the muttering of words? Which can be done while keeping your guard up.

Correct me if im wrong, but most systems use gestyculation.

When advancing on a target with a long reach? OMG, so with pikemen, once you've breached their extra 3 feet of weaponry, how come their weapon doesn't become useless? How come you don't get endless attacks of opportunity for them having the wrong weapon?

It's possible to fight with pikes and spears in close range. These are not hoplite-like pikes. Much shorter.

loading a bow does indeed require 'movement', but with high dexterity (the whole point of dexterity) you can flick one up and out and fire it in the time it takes for someone to swing a heavy two handed sword.

While someone with two daggers would stab you eleven time while you're doing that.

And once fired - IF you're claiming realism, would kill them outright.

As would every other "damage taken" in this game.
Surely the games you play have instant kill arrows when fired from point blank range.

It might be how 3.5 works, but it's crap.

Perhaps. Some like it, others do not.

Re: Luck - this point is clearly discussed in my first post, I notice you don't quote this section, only the sections you can get an 'angle' with.
Your dude who failed 63 times in a row - once in a lifetime occassion was it?

I sure hope so. But your rant about how in one fight you had 40% hits when you should have 60% average, and how it's NOT luck but the game HATING archers..? Come on.

You seriously telling me you 'enjoy' having to micro-manage and use feats just so you can perform simple and basic D&D actions like spellcasting and retreating from battle? You think that's what D&D is all about? Seriously?

Pen and paper is not. PC D&D is. The system is complex, and i for one like complex systems. I tend to play Aurora you know.

And as for feats that enable avoidance of 'attack of opportunity', why does a fighter have to waste a feat on 'unarmed combat' in order to progress in that tree?

You have a point here, but this is how they built the system.

Or during the battle against the leutenant, sargeant and a room full of goons - over in about 4 or five rounds. In the time it took my archer and crossbow weilders to kill one YES ONE bandit archer (who wasn't in melee and neither were mine), the two fighters and cleric's collection of spiritual hammers managed to kill 8 bandits. In fact, the one they did manage to kill, was at the cust of being finished off as the last man standing by my cleric when he finally dropped.

A few feats, base attack above 6 (when you get another attack per round) and things will change. Initially archers and mages can be unimpressive, but they're far from useless. Needless to say it's less risky to play them, so the rewards are lower.

To invent a combat system which 'requires' characters to take OPTIONAL feats to make a character playable in the most basic way is shocking - why doesn't the character start out with the feat?

They're not optional. You don't start with the feats so that you can choose which path to take. It's freedom of choice.

And, yes, obviously, it's easier to kill an elephant with spears than it is with arrows (sarcasm).

From 1,5m range? It is.

Say, why don't we get some guys to 'hem in' the elephant with spears while the other guys shoot it with arrows - that sounds like a plan - oh, sorry guys, we can't hit the elephant because theres a couple of people 'standing in the way' and the elephant keeps moving...

Go on a shooting range and try to hit something that moves (NOT in a pattern) from point blank range. No, you dont want to just hit it. You aim for vital parts of the body to damage it. In very close range there is no aiming.

"No D&D entities have weaker missile AC than melee AC."

That is EXACTLY what I said.

Nope.
"Excuse me, but as far as I'm aware, don't MOST (read 'all') D&D entities have weaker missile AC than melee AC "
That is EXACTLY what you've said.

Surely the games you play have instant kill arrows when fired from point blank range.

Maybe he plays a Ranger in Wizardry VIII?

loading a bow does indeed require 'movement', but with high dexterity (the whole point of dexterity) you can flick one up and out and fire it in the time it takes for someone to swing a heavy two handed sword.

Why did medieval archers - people who often fired bows for a decade - change weapons from bow to knives when enemies were close? THEY WERE DOING IT WRONG! They should've went all Legolas on them.

"Turning your back in a fight is a big no-no, it doesn't take much to seize upon that, even if surrounded. You can select the action "Redraw from melee" to do so without provoking an AoO, which represents leaving with your guard up."

OMG. What experienced adventurer wouldn't do that anyway! PASSIVELY. Why do you need to micro-manage a BASIC action of an EXPERIENCED fighter? Why isn't it ASSUMED that's what your character is going to do anyway? As a player all I am doing is MOVING the pieces, NOT dictating their every flinch!

And I'm sorry, but yes it does take a lot to sieze upon that! On the one hand you're claiming 'how can you perform XYZ action with someone poking a spear in your face' while at the same time saying 'but it's ok for them to do XYZ while having a spear poking you in the face'. It's hypocrytical NONSENSE.



"Even drawing a potion from a bandoleer is difficult in combat. Imagine grabbing your cellphone and answering a call while fighting. You have to sheath your weapon, or take on hand away from your weapon, or use your shield hand to grab hold of it, and pop the cork, and then drink it, all in less than 6 seconds."

OMG, consuming a SMALL potion is NOTHING like answering a cell phone, are you completely out of your mind? Where does it EVER state how big a potion bottle is? As far as my imagination is concerned they are no more than a mouthfull. Any EXPERIENCED adventurer could quite easily have them about their person in a position of 6 second intake - SIMPLY snap one off your utility belt and gulp. Who says they have corks? Why not just 'flick-off' lids? Why are we having to micro-manage BASIC functions just to compensate for YOUR lack of IMAGINATION?


"Spells: explicitly described in D&D as requiring gestures. The required concentration check for defensive casting isn't that high, either. 5 ft steps do wonders as well."

Again, why wouldn't the EXPERIENCED mage do this PASSIVELY and AUTOMATICALLY without you having to micro-manage this? Why don't you just ASSUME this is what the guy will do and save all us RPG'ers the un-necessary WAR-GAMERY.


"Firing bows in melee, well... It just doesn't work that way. Aiming, even in the slightest, opens you up. You have to pick the arrow from the quiver, knock it, draw and still aim more or less. You have to be VERY quick to do that without getting a punch in the face. Once again: 5ft step."

What do you mean it doesn't work that way? Total and utter... OMG. So when the archer is really good and they get two attacks per round, suddenly they have the time to reload really quick. And yes, again, I repeat, isn't the whole POINT of DEXTERITY that, YES, THEY ARE VERY QUICK!

Ogre slow, rogue quick - OMG, just when did you get off the D&D bus?

5ft step - again, why don't they do this PASSIVELY and AUTOMATICALLY?


"Your gripe with pikemen: the game errs here, because in Pen & Paper, there is a "deadzone" in which they can't attack with a reach weapon. Besides, polearms are some of the deadliest weapons every designed, as an aside. Note straight pikes, but things like Glaives, Ranseurs, etc."

Pikes are one of the deadliest weapon ever made - when used by HUGE numbers of men standing in deep rows - NOT by two or three goons 'poking' people in the middle of a room full of adventurers. Their primary benefit was taking down HORSES.

They were a reaction to the mainly equine invasions from the European Steppes, namely Attila the Hun and Ghengis Khan, the latter winning battles by the use of ARCHERS who could QUICKLY load and fire off arrows while riding horse-back. They were a return the Roman concept of sheild cover and tight formation battling. They have NOTHING to do with adventurers stumbling accross rooms full of GOONS.


"Point Blank Shot: read the manual. It's +1 to hit and damage if target within 30 ft. Precise Shot negates the melee penalty. Both are mandatory for Archers."

I know this, it was Stworca who did not. You'll notice my archer 'chose' these feats as his first two feats as noted by the Opening Post. And the game must be glitched beyond belief because my archer still encounters this penalty. Similarly, I tried to two-hand one of my fighters, but even after taking the Two-Handed feat they were still getting -10 and -6 instead od -4 and -4.


"Low damage archery: Keep in mind that many enemies have Damage Reduction for Piercing/Non Magic."

Off course I'm keeping it in mind - that's exactly why I'm ranting about it here - because it's ON MY MIND. Shame the game NEVER tells you about 5/piercing. I haven't come accross one yet that states this. Some have 5/blugeoning, some have 5/slashing, but none mention 5/piercing, but yes, for some reason ALMOST everyone seems to be totally immune to the useless things - except humanoids.


"In the end, I never had problems with an archer in ToEE. A lvl 4 Fighter is quite the force to be reckoned with."

Since I have no idea what patches or mods you're using and the extent to which your version does or does not glitch, whether you're soloing or using 8 characters this statement is meaningless to the game I'm having, and without statistical evidence as as meaningless as me claiming I scored the winning touchdown in the Superbowl.


"Requiring Improved Unarmed Strike to avoid AoO? Really? Just the AoO if attacking unarmed yourself, yes, but why would you ever do that? It's an option, yes, but doing so would, logically, require optional feats."

Yes, really, dig out the game again and look at the advanced feats in the dodge tree and one has a pre-requisite that you have taken an improved unarmed attack feat. And, yes, my thoughts exactly, why would you do that? And there's no 'logically' about it, it's all illogical from the outset as illustrated by ALL my posts on the subject.


End of part 1

Part 2


"The one feat that helps with AoO when moving is Mobility, which requires Dodge. Not the greatest of feats, but ToEE hasn't got that many (useful) feats to begin with."

Oh really? So instead of using feats to improve my saving throws, add attack to my weapons or increase their damage I have to crap about in a dodge tree or concentration tree just so my characters can perform BASIC battle manouvers that they should be doing PASSIVELY from level 1 anyway? Or at the very least given as free automatic feats similar to the Armour Feats? Utter game destroying balderdash.


"Play smart to avoid AoO's: take 5ft steps, plan your movement, fight with reach weapons, use the Tumble skill (I believe it's in the game) to avoid AoO, let the high-AC character absord AoO's for the others, since most opponents can only make one AoO/round."

Plan my movement? The whole point of my second post was an encounter where you are automatically dumped in the middle of a lake and swarmed before you've moved anywhere. And I repeat, micro-managing the anally retentive wishes of faux realism is NOT something I should have to do, it should all be PASSIVE.

And now you're telling me I have to fight with reach weapons? Exacly how many heroes in both real history and in fantasy history are notable for thier beautifully crafted spear? I can think of... one.

D&D = Swords and Sorcery - again, when did you get off the D&D bus?


"Last point: Yes, if you want to do certain things, certain feats are mandatory for that."

What, you mean, like, Armour Proficiency for Fighters? You know, that feat you get AUTOMATICALLY from the get go because your character is fairly REDUNDANT without it therefore making feats OPTIONAL is rendered POINTLESS if for the first 5 levels your fighter has to aquire 3 armour feats and 3 weapon feats JUST TO PERFORM THIER BASIC FUNCTIONS.

It is a BASIC FUNCTION of an archer to fire into melee. It is a BASIC FUNCTION to know how to move around a combat area. OMG.


"Second last point: the early combat encounters in the game tend to be on the hard side of things, since opponents are more powerful than your flimsy lvl 1 adventurers. Smart stat allocation helps, as does doing all possible sidequests in the villages, so you have a few extra lvls."

Wow, how patronising is this? And how wrong!

All of my early encounters were a piece of cake. I had no reloads until I encountered some skeleton gnolls walking inbetween areas and I was long past level 1. My stat allocation has been perfect thank-you very much and I only took one roll per character and I didn't even choose Ironman, I just play 'properly'

And, yes, thank-you for that, yes I did all the quests first, how nice of you to start implanting tripe like this into the posts.

Are you going to advise me that selling gold chains is a better option than wearing them next? Because I'm obviously such a n00b that that I really can't figure that out for myself...

"Stworca made a good effort to explain you where you misunderstood the rules, but you still seem to confuse them."

No, Stworca did nothing of the kind, as has been stated several times. I can assure you I have no confusion about how crap these rules are.


"Having seen lots of RPG systems over the years, 3.5's the one that offers the best combination between playability, "realism" and options. It is, however, far from the easiest to learn."

Utter crap. As far as I'm aware 3.0 and then 3.5 has rendered conversion to computer games 10 times more complicated and 10 times less playable, reduces options, and as for realism... PLEASE ADDRESS THIS FOLLOWING POINT:

For the third time: Under what circumstances is having 30 arrows sticking in you in any way shape or form 'REALISM' and why are you even TRYING to implement realism in the shape of FAUX REALISM to something which is entirely FANTASY based?

This isn't Command and Conquor, this isn't Call of Duty, this isn't a Waterloo re-enactment society - this is FANTASY.

Dragons breathe fire but dragons can die from being attacked with fire, this is called 'fantasy' not anally retentive 'realism' - exactly where did you get off the D&D bus?


"Also, could you please post your party with stats, classes, skills and feats? We could probably help you out, so you can enjoy the game more."

You patronising little...

Wow, you really do adhere to your forum name don't you...

"The system is complex, and i for one like complex systems."


Says it all really.

"Why did medieval archers - people who often fired bows for a decade - change weapons from bow to knives when enemies were close?"


Yes sweetheart, they saw the bad guy APPROACHING and changed to a dagger or short sword WHILE THE ENEMY WAS APPROACHING.

THEY DID NOT WAIT FOR THE BAD GUY TO BE UPON THEM AND THEN DECIDE THIS WOULD BE A GOOD TIME TO CHANGE TO A MELEE WEAPON.

omfg.

You do not put additional attacks and activities inbetween normal round based actions - when did you get off the D&D bus?

Since you're convinced fighters need basic armour and weapon feats (which they get automatically), I'm really having trouble trying to get on your train of thought.

Really not finding a feat in the Dodge tree that also requires Improved Unarmed Strike. Please tell me which one it is.

Pikes: as I said, and Stworca pointed out: these aren't hoplite pikes, or anything of the kind, but weapons made to grant reach, tripping opportunities and grant various ways of inflicting damage. Turn in on your history, and you'll find plenty examples of why polearms are so great.

The retreating in combat... If you turn your back, you get hit. Simple as that. Noticed that myself during trainings.
D&D offers the full-retreat option as a full round action. You have to make a choice between retreating quickly with a move action, getting an AoO (or avoiding it with Tumble), and have a standard action left, or be safe and spend a fullround retreating. It's part of gameplay, to make that decision.

Spellcasting: deal with it, it's the way it works. Gestures and words, unless the spell dictates otherwise. There are feats to circumvent this, but I know, let's no go there, in the area of choice... (Honestly, those feats aren't worth it.) It certainly isn't the first kind of game that allows spells to be interrupted. In older D&D editions, there wasn't any kind of defense against, even. (At least, not in the PC adaptions.)

Archery in close combat: the problem with that two handed sword that takes as much time to swing as you to draw an arrow, knock it, pull back and release, is that, at the end of your shot, there's still 5 ft of sharp steel with lots of momentum coming your way.

"Warriors going two-handed", I assume you're talking about two weapon fighting. It requires one feat, yes. Quite right, since it's hard to do properly. The feat is even called "Two Weapon Fighting" and the manual explains the penalties you entail. (-2 to hit if offhand weapon is light, -4 if not.)

The potion bottle: be serious: pressing a button on a cellphone is about the same effort and coordination as using a flick-cap on a bottle and quaffing it. It takes time, and you have to expose yourself.

If you have problems with deciding the actions of characters "in detail", I suggest you play Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring: Extended Edition. It's from Peter Jackson. The game even comes with voice-command: you start it up, command your guys to "Save Middle-Earth!" and lo and behold! You don't have to decide upon their weapon attacks, movement modes, or spells. The AI is good enough to decide when to use which kind of action.
I did find it a that on the easy side, though, because I never had to reload. Except the Balrog battle. My mage kept dieing. Stupid AoO granted by the reach of that whip...

Also, your latest post in reply to Stworca's excellent point left me in the dark. I don't get your point there. Real life is simultaneous, so you can swap before they get to you. D&D is turn based. You have to predict. Once again: 5 ft step works wonders.

You are absolutely right Mr BS, you don't get anything I'm writing in the slightest.

I'm very sorry, I don't know what I can do to help, maybe you could go to reading courses at your local college?

I'm waiting for factual refutals, not for ad hominem attacks.

"I'm waiting for factual refutals, not for ad hominem attacks."

I'm very sorry dude, but if you just ignore everything I write and just regugitate ignorant bile mixed with patronising rhetoric, you's tend to get what you deserve.

Sorry mate, but this thread isn't about 'not knowing the rules' it's about 'how much these rules stink' - once you've grasped this basic concept I feel sure you will find the simple words I use very easy to grasp.

We've been trying to explain how the rules are actually a viable representation of combat. You seem to have trouble applying them in game, as is apparent from your random claims.

No, you've been patronising, offering un-evidenced claims, ignoring my points and making up your own.

And, no, you've been trying to justify the stupidity of the rules like children who have been caught with their hand in the cookie jar throwing out preposterous excuse after preposterous excuse.

I have never once stated any problem with in-game application of the spasticated rules, this, like so many of your posts, is something you've completely made up in order to belittle your 'opposition'.

ok sweety, answer me this one simple question, name me a single superior RPG computer game which has been released since the advent of 3.5 rules that accurately uses 3.5 rules.

Then, when you've answered that little ponderer, tell me why I can enjoy and play umpteen RPG games without ever refering to a manual, but for some reason, this game is 'better' because you have to read the manual in order to perform actions that don't even require a second thought in many SUPERIOR RPG games.

There you go, 2 little 'conversation starters'.

(oh, and please be aware that I have not stated whether or not I have read any manuals, so infering that I read the manuals might not really be your best bet as an opener to any answer).