-THE SUMMONING 2007 -
PRE-REGISTRATION SITE: http://www.warhorn.net/summoning2007/
Pre-registration WeekEnd CON PASS * Fri/Sat/Sun -$35
Homewood Suites by Hilton(r) Miami-Airport/Blue Lagoon
5500 Blue Lagoon Drive
Miami, Florida 33126
Reservations:(800) CALL-HOME (800-225-5466) Phone: (305) 261-3335 * Fax:
(305) 261-1223
The Summoning is a collective gathering of the best RPG Game Systems that we
can offer. Located in Miami, Florida this convention is home to several
premiere events such as Dave Arneson's BLACKMOOR !!, Living Arcanis,
WitchHunter as well as Living Greyhawk's Principality of Ulek(Florida/Puerto
Rico region)
WALK-IN'S ARE WELCOME AND APPRECIATED!- Please come & enjoy and spend a
fantastic Time of the year with us!!!!
MIDNITE MADNESS is openly available for any BlackMoor / POU- year 6 & 7 !!!
If it is not on the slot schedule- Just gather a group together and see the
Convention staff for Scenario- DON'T FORGET! ask convention staff with time.
******* BLACKMOOR MARKETPLACE
Episode 59: Shadow in the Dark
Episode 60: Riddles and Crossroads
Episode 61: The Siege**Battle Interactive- Each time a different ATL must be
played, and each time it is played it must be played with a different
character.
Episode 62: Where Angels Fear to Tread
Episode 63: Bug Hunt
Episode 64: Of Greed and Rainbows
Episode 65: Small Problems
Episode 67: Into the Lightless Depths (Round 1 + 2)
Episode 68: Big Trouble
* Episode 72: Cutty Black Sow (Round 1 + 2)***Premiere!!
* Episode 71: Retrieval (Round 1 +2)***Premiere!!
* Episode 69: The Hellward Annex ***Premiere!!
* Episode 70: The Dawn of Goss ***Premiere!!
* COR7-16: Divided We Stand
* COR7-18 :Into the Mist
* COR7-19 :Wrath of the Slave Lords
* SHE7-IN02 Rangers Lead the Way--Two-round Sheldomar Battle Interactive
An Interactive so BIG that NOT even 1 Convention can finish it ALL, BUT YOU
CAN DAMN WELL TRY!!!!!
Possible Core/Sheldomar Premiere!!!!(more to come).
Introductory Adventures
* Dark Providence 01 - Storm Tide
* Dark Providence 02 - Swans
* Dark Providence 03 - Loss of Innocence
* Dark Providence 04 - It Came from the Woods
Full-Length Convention Adventures:
* Dark Providence 05 - Age of Innocence
* Dark Providence 06 - Beasts of the Forest
* Dark Providence 07 - Spurning Death's Touch
Special L.A. MARKETPLACE
* LA-IK-HAI-01-01 Behind Enemy Lines
* LA-IK-HAI-01-03 Enemy at the Gate
* LA-IK-PAL-01-02 Death
* LA-SP5-07 Dedication - Two-Round d20 Living Arcanis Dungeon Crawl
(Special focus given to Sarishan Binders and Beltinian Exorcists)
* LA-IK-PAL-01-03 Fortunes
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
“Taskmaster of the Sundered City”
by Jose Ortiz
Tokall Deathbringer’s red eyes watch the warriors in the battle arena
with morbid amusement. The arena is a modest pit made of shaped stone
and adorned only with stains of dried blood. The weary dwarf in the
pit wears little more than rags and is armed with a rusty hammer. His
opponent is a human Hextorite, armored in a blood-red breastplate and
wielding a bastard sword. The combat is lasting longer than it should,
but that is only due to Tokall’s orders to prolong the suffering as
much as possible. Ever since the incursion by the Three-Hold Thane’s
forces into the heart of the Sundered City, the duergar high cleric
has ordered triple shifts in the mines for the Deepholm slaves. Any
dwarves who slack, even for an instant, find themselves in ‘the pit’,
a fate from which none of the slaves has ever returned.
Tokall’s communion with Laduguer has revealed that the dwarves and
their hired hands stole a precious artifact of battle from the
duergar’s battle treasury. Since that time, the duergar and their
allies have been in a constant state of battle-preparedness. Under the
leadership of their returned Thane, the dwarven clans have retaken the
Underfoot clanhold earlier in the year, and Tokall knows that victory
has emboldened them. It is only a matter of time before the three
clans and their Gyri allies return to the conquered clanhold of
Deepholm en force. What’s more, their newly freed ‘Three-Hold Thane’
will be coming with them, so The Gray Protector has told him. The
whole story is still unclear to Tokall, but somehow Greltan’s gem had
imprisoned the Thane’s spirit and the Crown of Thanes for nearly
fifteen years, only to be freed by hired adventurers. No matter, his
return will be short-lived.
The thought brings a smile to the High Taskmaster’s lips, revealing a
row of unnaturally pointed fangs.
The dwarf cries out in pain as the Hextorite swipes his blade in a
calculated cut across the forehead. The end is almost near. The blood
runs into the dwarf’s eyes, and the swings of his hammer become wild
as he loses sight of his opponent in a wash of crimson. His Deepholm
fellows are made to watch his punishment; it is the only respite they
get from their toil in the mines.
“Master,” says the voice of a duergar perceptible only to the leader
of the Deathbringer’s ears, “The giant mercenaries bring word, the
dwarven army approaches as you had foreseen.
The Taskmaster’s eyes flare, and suddenly his interest in the match
comes to an end. A wave of his hand and there is a cracking sound as
the struggling dwarf lets out an anguished cry, and crumples like a
rag doll upon the floor of the pit. The whips of the slave drivers
hush what muffled cries come from the onlooking Deepholm captives. The
Hextorite combatant looks up, his face a curious mix of surprise and
disappointment.
“It is time,” says the malevolent duergar leader, “the dwarven Thane
approaches. Captains, ready your men. Keepers, prepare your charges.”
The Hextorite’s look changes to one of resolve, and with a disdainful
look, he spits on the dwarven body and exits the arena. There is
movement all around as duergar commanders and the Hextorite
lieutenants leave the Temple of Laduguer for their respective
assignments throughout the city. There is not a doubt in any of their
minds of where they need to go, or what they will be facing, as it has
been drilled into them a hundred times over. One spectator, a large
minotaur mercenary with twisted horns, grins at the announcement as
his tongue licks his upper lip.
“You will have your fill Azterrox, as promised. Go now, prepare your
brood.”
The minotaur grunts approvingly and sinks into the earth.
Like the Hextorite mercenaries, and the giant refugees, Azterrox is
one of many minions that has joined the duergar in the past few years.
Tokall has turned none away, and indeed has built his forces
anticipating this very moment. Thane or not, the dwarves and their
allies will be crushed and any who survive will swell the ranks of the
Deathbringer slave pens...or feed his sellswords.
*********************
CONfalon 2007
November 30 - December 2, 2007
The Carousel Hotel and Resort
Ocean City, MD
http://www.gyruff.org/cons/confalon.php
I am extremely pleased to announce the rebirth of a New Orleans RPGA
Convention.
February 22 - 24, 2008 will mark the first annual NOLAcon RPGA event!
This event will take place in the New Orleans area and will feature
Living Greyhawk, Dungeons and Dragons adventures. Since Katrina New
Orleans has been without a convention of this type, but the city and
people are now ready for you to come and get your game on!
Go to http://www.NOLAcon.com <http://www.nolacon.com/> right now for
all the details.
We anticipate this year's event to be very exciting as the Living
Greyhawk campaign is drawing to a close. Now that time units are no
longer a factor everyone is playing hard to retire their characters.
We plan on having all year 7 and year 8 (out so far) Sheldomar and
Yeomanry mods, a core special, and perhaps more... Check the NOLAcon
Blog (http://www.NOLAcon.com/blog <http://www.nolacon.com/blog> ) for
developments as they happen! We are also open to the hosting of other
RPGA gaming systems provided organizers are available.
Come one, come all, to the first annual NOLAcon so you can boast to your
friends down the road that you were here when it started.
Laissez Les Bons Temps Rouler!
Brad Ellis
Co-Organizer
nolacon@... <mailto:nolacon@...>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
"Collateral Damage"
by Jamie Hyssong, Stephen Adams and Kenny Watkins
The ivory-bearded Thane of the Three-Holds stands looking over the
sheets of architectural maps spread out over the tables in front of
him. To a normal observer, it would look like masses of chambers and
connecting tunnels, but the Thane was intimately familiar with the
design of his dwarven home. His mind plots as he goes over the battle
plans for the coming assault on the original clan-hold of Deepholm,
now known as the Sundered City. Standing quietly well behind him,
bracketing the only entrance to the room like two silent columns, a
pair of younger dwarves dressed in fine grey cloaks watch him work.
A firm knock echoes through the room; without any visible
reaction, without even looking up from the sheaf of maps spread out
before him, the Thane speaks.
"Enter."
The chamber’s double doors quietly open and Shieldlord Torm
Rockbender steps through. Standing before the open doors, he makes
momentary eye contact with the Thane’s guards. The two dwarves
acknowledge the look from their captain and gracefully step away,
closing the doors behind them. Torm stands silently and formally,
waiting for several long moments as his Thane continues to stare at
the complex layout before him.
“We’ve got quite a task ahead of us, my friend,” the Thane finally
says, running a hand through his thick beard before turning and
smiling at Torm. “It gladdens me to know you’ll be leading this
operation.”
“Thank you, my Thane,” Torm replies with a reverent bow to his
lord. “You honor me by placing this operation in my care. But I’m
still uncomfortable with your presence on the battlefield. I would
like you to reconsider my offer of watching from…” he starts but the
Thane gives a deep chuckle shaking his head.
“We’ve been over this ground before,” the Thane smiles. “I've been
'kept safe' for too long. This battle I lead from the front; by
Moradin’s hand we shall either carry the day or return to His halls to
stand with our forefathers. My mind is adamant on this point. But
there’s something else that’s bothering you…”
Stepping forward he looks intently at Torm’s stern face. “What is it?”
“Recent intelligence reports from the strike teams that last
entered the Sundered City...” Torm says, not breaking from his formal
stance. “We know that the filth are using slaves to work the mines in
the hold. Most of those slaves are clansmen of ours. Brothers and
sisters left behind when we were forced to flee.”
The Thane nods grimly as a pained look crosses his face. “Go on.”
Finally breaking with formality Torm walks over to the maps to
review them himself, shuffling through the papers as he continues to
speak.
“With utmost respect, my Thane, we can’t just give up our clansmen
for dead,” Torm continues. “The duegar certainly know we are planning
something. When we launch our attack, they will execute those
prisoners we can reach… They won’t risk our clansmen rising up to join
us.” Torm pounds the table for emphasis and turns to face his lord.
“We must try to free our kin before the coming battle!..." the
emotion ebbs and Torm's voice calms, "...my Thane.”
The Three-Hold Thane nods as he picks up a mug of ale off the
table and takes a deep swallow. “Torm, I would like nothing more than
to help those still in the duegars’ hands, but we have to think of the
whole clan's future. You know we simply cannot afford to spare any of
our forces to launch a rescue mission. And even if we could, the grim
reality is that they would stand little chance of making it to the
lower levels.”
“There are other ways in…” Torm starts, but the Thane shakes his head.
“All of those are critical to our battle plans. We cannot risk
giving away their existence before the battle.”
“I’m thinking of the monastery entrance we used before” Torm
explains. “We could get a small rescue mission in through there.”
“That entrance has served us well, but certainly the duegar know
of it by now. We’ve struck through it twice now, striking as deep as
the throne room the last time. It will be well guarded.”
“Yes, of course” Torm agrees. “But a hand-selected team of skilled
dwarves may be able to use stealth and guile...and the All Father's
guidance to make their entrance. If they make it inside, reaching the
slave-pens should not be difficult, and if timed correctly we would
have out kin amongst us before the battle begins. It’s a risk we must
take. I’ve prayed this through with Moradin and with the right team
of dwur, it can work.”
The Thane scowls for a moment in deep thought before nodding.
“Very well Torm. I shall allow it. Warriors from the other holds will
be arriving soon. Assemble the best suited from any who volunteer,
brief them, and send them as soon as possible. ”
“Thank you my Thane” Torm says with a bow. Taking a mug of ale
for himself, he flips though the sheaf of maps, exposing the main
gates of the Sundered City,
“Now, for the initial attack my Thane...”
*******************
A Call to Arms!
Dwarves are being sought out to participate in a Special Mission
to assist the BI at Confalon. If you will be using a dwarf PC in the
BI and want to volunteer, contact Jamie at jameshyssong (at)
hotmail.com. Please include character level, class and what APL you
would be willing to play. You will be notified via email if you are
selected to participate.
The Special Mission will be being played during slot 4 on Saturday
afternoon. It will roll directly into the BI. Those selected will be
using the same character at both the Special Mission and the BI and
playing at the same table. The APL for the Special Mission has not
been determined and will dependent on who volunteers.
FINAL NOTE: This is a storyline Special Mission only. Do not volunteer
expecting some fancy access. It's for the honor of the dwur.
******************
CONfalon 2007
November 30 - December 2, 2007
The Carousel Hotel and Resort
Ocean City, MD
http://www.gyruff.org/cons/confalon.php
ANNOUNCING WUkon 2008 (Pronounced woo-con)! Winthrop
University's 2nd annual Gaming Convention!
The convention will take place at Winthrop University
at The Inn at Winthrop on January 11th-13th, 2008.
*Location has been changed to a more suitable location*
Winthrop University is located in Rock Hill, SC.,
Aprox. 20 miles south of Charlotte, NC.
Cost of Admittance
PREREGISTER ONLINE AND PAY BY DECEMBER 20th AND GET
THE ENTIRE CON FOR $28!
$35 for General Admittance at the door
$30 with a Student ID/Military ID/Senior ID
$13 for Friday only
$18 for Saturday only
$13 for Sunday only
For more Information, please visit
www.warhorn.net/wukon2008
Need PCI book for Living Arcanis and Witch Hunter? Order them while you
register for the Con and They are guaranteed to be at the Check in table when
you get there!
Living Arcanis
LA Market Place (Running throughout the Con!)
LA - IK-MID 1-02 Square Peg in a Round Hole
LA - IK-MID 1-03 Tree of Shadows
LA - SP 5-07 Dedication
LA Grab Bags!
NEW: *POSSIBLE PREMIER WITH HIGH LEVEL PLAY* (Keep an eye out on the Warhorn
and For future Con Announcement updates on this subject.)
Living Greyhawk
LG - COR7-18 - Into the Mist
LG - COR7-19 - Wrath of the Slave Lords
LG - COR7-20 - Murder in the River Quarter
LG - GRM 7-9 - The Lost and the Found
*LG - GRM 7-IN5 - Hammerstrike
LG - GRM 7-IS2 - Surrounded
*LG - SHE 7-IN2 - Rangers Lead the Way
(LG - GRM 7-IN6 - Hammerfall was canceled due to author constraints.
Hammerstrike has been converted into a two round BI!)
Witch Hunter: Dark Providence
*WH:DP A Child's Game
WH:DP 1-08 Dedication
WH:DP 1-09 Consecration
WH:DP 1-10 Revelation
WH:DP 1-11 - *Premier* TBA
*Note: WH:DP 1-08, 1-09, 1-10 must be played in
order!
Dave Arnesons Blackmoor
DAB Castle Blackmoor (Tiers 1, 2, and 3!)
4ed Preview
Delve Into the Dark, Away from the Light!
Hotel Information
All Hotels listed are within 5 miles of Winthrop
University
-The Inn at Winthrop 800.505.2226 or 803.323.2300
-Days Inn 803.329.2171
-Hilton Garden Inn - 803.325.2800
-Best Western Motel 803.329.1330
*Note: Some of the mods above are two round mods,
please register for both parts of the mods. Those mods
have (*) beside their name.
Hurry and Register today! Mods with no interest will
be dropped at the End of December!
See you there!
CG Nobles
WUkon Senior GM
liveitdies(@)yahoo.com
www.warhorn.net/wukon2008
________________________________________________________________________________\
____
Be a better pen pal.
Text or chat with friends inside Yahoo! Mail. See how.
http://overview.mail.yahoo.com/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
-THE SUMMONING 2007 -
PRE-REGISTRATION SITE: http://www.warhorn.net/summoning2007/
Pre-registration WeekEnd CON PASS * Fri/Sat/Sun -$35
Homewood Suites by Hilton(r) Miami-Airport/Blue Lagoon
5500 Blue Lagoon Drive
Miami, Florida 33126
Reservations:(800) CALL-HOME (800-225-5466) Phone: (305) 261-3335 * Fax:
(305) 261-1223
The Summoning is a collective gathering of the best RPG Game Systems that we
can offer. Located in Miami, Florida this convention is home to several
premiere events such as Dave Arneson's BLACKMOOR !!, Living Arcanis,
WitchHunter as well as Living Greyhawk's Principality of Ulek(Florida/Puerto
Rico region)
WALK-IN'S ARE WELCOME AND APPRECIATED!- Please come & enjoy and spend a
fantastic Time of the year with us!!!!
MIDNITE MADNESS is openly available for any BlackMoor / POU- year 6 & 7 !!!
If it is not on the slot schedule- Just gather a group together and see the
Convention staff for Scenario- DON'T FORGET! ask convention staff with time.
*******Special BLACKMOOR MARKETPLACE
Episode 59: Shadow in the Dark
Episode 60: Riddles and Crossroads
Episode 61: The Siege**Battle Interactive- Each time a different ATL must be
played, and each time it is played it must be played with a different
character.
Episode 62: Where Angels Fear to Tread
Episode 63: Bug Hunt
Episode 64: Of Greed and Rainbows
Episode 65: Small Problems
Episode 67: Into the Lightless Depths (Round 1 + 2)
Episode 68: Big Trouble
* Episode 72: Cutty Black Sow (Round 1 + 2)***Premiere!!
* Episode 71: Retrieval (Round 1 +2)***Premiere!!
* Episode 69: The Hellward Annex ***Premiere!!
* Episode 70: The Dawn of Goss ***Premiere!!
* COR7-16: Divided We Stand
* COR7-18 :Into the Mist
* COR7-19 :Wrath of the Slave Lords
* SHE7-IN02 Rangers Lead the Way--Two-round Sheldomar Battle Interactive
An Interactive so BIG that NOT even 1 Convention can finish it ALL, BUT YOU
CAN DAMN WELL TRY!!!!!
Possible Core/Sheldomar Premiere!!!!(more to come).
Introductory Adventures
* Dark Providence 01 - Storm Tide
* Dark Providence 02 - Swans
* Dark Providence 03 - Loss of Innocence
* Dark Providence 04 - It Came from the Woods
Full-Length Convention Adventures:
* Dark Providence 05 - Age of Innocence
* Dark Providence 06 - Beasts of the Forest
* Dark Providence 07 - Spurning Death's Touch
Special L.A. MARKETPLACE
* LA-IK-HAI-01-01 Behind Enemy Lines
* LA-IK-HAI-01-03 Enemy at the Gate
* LA-IK-PAL-01-02 Death
* LA-SP5-07 Dedication - Two-Round d20 Living Arcanis Dungeon Crawl
(Special focus given to Sarishan Binders and Beltinian Exorcists)
* LA-IK-PAL-01-03 Fortunes
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Make-up Con 2007 needs players!!
Located SE of Charlotte NC in Indian Trail NC
Date: DEC 7-9 2007
Cost: $20 for 3 days of gaming
Playing retiring Sheldarmar Metaregionals, Grand March, Cores and
Adaptables Mods.
If you are wanting to to get those mods you missed last year and can
make it to Make-UP Con, Please Go to the yahoo group listed below and
sign up in the databases ASAP.
The con needs more players to sign up by this Friday midnight to go on.
http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/make-up_con/
Darlene Weepie
Make-Up Con 2007
I tend to agree with Brooks, Michael, Dennis, and Joe/Brett during
the BI.
1. When there are multiple Cloudkills in a particular area, they
overlap not stack. You only have to make one saving throw.
2. Taking the ability damage is an instantaneous effect of the
cloudkill. You can take the damage more than once for various
reasons.
If the cloudkill only provided for a penalty (such as Ray of
Enfeeblement) than the penalties would overlap and not stack. Only
the "best" penalty would apply to the PC/NPC.
Ability damage/drain is what makes Shadows/Wraiths so feared. It's
also why high level parties fear a cloudkill. And the fact that
Heroe's Feast was not available made the cloudkills that much more
fearsome to a high level party. I know my cleric is more likely to
carry 1 or 2 Heroe's Feasts, specifically so she doesn't have to rack
6 neutralize poisons.
GH
--- In GranMarch@yahoogroups.com, "Brooks G. Banks"
<brooks.banks@...> wrote:
>
> Just to clarify, I don't personally think that stacking ability
damage
> is the same as stacking hp damage. The RAW view it all the same,
but
> since abilities are rarely above 18 until high levels, and hps get
above
> 18 rather quickly, ability points are a much more limited resource.
>
> I don't believe that the intent of the author was to have the
effects of
> multiple spells stack, and often it's the intent that a Senior GM
has to
> determine.
>
> My main point was to point out that you really shouldn't post
snarky or
> insulting comments on a listserv, unless you have done *ALL* of
your
> homework. Putting a couple of half phrases in quotes is likely to
get
> your argument ripped a new one, so it's always best to have all
your
> information in line.
>
> Brooks (duly appointed champion of sanity and clear-headed thought
by
> none other than the PotGML himself, Ed Podsiad)
>
> Michael Hicks wrote:
> >
> > I have to agree with the statement of well done Brooks. You have
presented
> > a very effective and well researched answer.
> > I did want to post an opinion, but one which may not really be
relevant
> > since this appears to
> > concern a ruling at an RPGA sanctioned event. (I have not read
the entire
> > post).
> >
> > While the rules do seem to indicate that the effect of multiple
cloud kill
> > spells could/should stack, I would
> > submit this "logical" explanation for the spells effects not
stacking. The
> > spell description seems to indicate
> > that a physical cloud of poisonous gas is formed by the
spell "creatures
> > immune to poison are not affected".
> > Thus if I were the DM in this case, I would rule (in spite of the
rules)
> > that there is only so much body
> > surface area which can be exposed, only so much can be inhaled
(although
> > inhalation is not required for damage to
> > take place exposure is), and therefore the spell effects would
not stack.
> > The overall size of the cloud could be increased by
> > placing the clouds strategically or I might would allow for the
higher of
> > the rolls to count as damage as you stated
> > in option 2 for the ruling. To compare it to two fireball effects
is like
> > comparing apples to oranges (hp damage as opposed to
> > ability damage). While both of these are damage they are a
different
> > "kind"
> > of damage. If a pc gets hit by two different
> > fireball spells one hits then the other and the damage would of
course
> > stack. The effect of a fireball is not from the
> > pc remaining in the area, but from the fiery explosion the spell
produces.
> > In this case the cloud kill produces a physical
> > cloud which is poisonous and the pc must remain in the area to
continue to
> > take damage.
> >
> > I can't argue with your assessment of the game rules. However,
the rules
> > must sometimes be "bent" to accommodate
> > a game situation in a logical manner, and in my opinion that is
one of the
> > reasons we have a senior judge.
> >
> > As a player I would accept any of the rulings and move on and
have fun.
> > After all the game about having fun, and
> > not arguing over the rules.
> >
> > Just mho.
> >
> > Michael
> >
> >
> > _____
> >
> > From: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com <mailto:GranMarch%
40yahoogroups.com>
> > [mailto:GranMarch@yahoogroups.com
> > <mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf
> > Of allen
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 9:28 AM
> > To: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com <mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: [SPAM] Re: [U] RE: [GranMarch] Re: MACE thanks
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Palladino SSgt T J (GCE RCT 2 S-6 Techcon)"
> > <palladinotj@ <mailto:palladinotj%40gcemnf-wiraq.usmc.mil>
> > gcemnf-wiraq.usmc.mil>
> >
> > > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
> > >
> > > Ouch! That's going to leave a mark.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: GranMarch@yahoogrou <mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com>
ps.com
> > [mailto:GranMarch@yahoogrou <mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com>
> > ps.com] On
> > > Behalf Of Brooks G. Banks
> > > Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 4:03 PM
> > > To: GranMarch@yahoogrou <mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com>
ps.com
> > > Subject: Re: [GranMarch] Re: MACE thanks
> > >
> > > It might actually help if you quoted the whole text of your
supporting
> > > facts, instead of just paraphrasing (and doing a poor job of
it).
> > >
> > > /stack: Combine for a cumulative effect. In most cases,
modifiers to a
> > > given check or roll stack if they come from different sources
and have
> > > different descriptors (or no descriptors at all), but do not
stack if
> > > they have the same descriptors or come from the same source
(such as the
> > > same spell cast twice in succession). If the modifiers to a
particular
> > > roll do not stack, only the best bonus or worst penalty
applies. Dodge
> > > bonuses and circumstance bonus however, do stack with one
another unless
> > > otherwise specified. Spell effected that do not stack may
overlap,
> > > coexist independently, or render one another irrelevant,
depending on
> > > their exact effects./
> > >
> > > You will note that the words used are "In most cases", leaving
it open
> > > that there are some cases where effects stack. We then go down
to the
> > > mention of spells, where it states "Spell effects that do not
stack..."
> > > which does not state, either clearly or categorically or even
partially,
> > > that *ALL* spell effects of the same spell do not stack.
Consequently,
> > > we need to look in the magic section of the PHB itself (you did
want to
> > > quote the PHB after all):
> > >
> > > /COMBINING MAGICAL EFFECTS
> > > Spells or magical effects usually work as described, no matter
how many
> > > other spells or magical effects happen to be operating in the
same area
> > > or on the same recipient. Except in special cases, a spell does
not
> > > affect the way another spell operates. Whenever a spell has a
specific
> > > effect on other spells, the spell description explains that
effect.
> > > Several other general rules apply when spells or magical
effects operate
> > > in the same place:
> > >
> > > /Now, looking specifically at cloudkill, to see which of the
paragraphs
> > > that follow apply, we find the following:
> > >
> > > /Cloudkill
> > > Conjuration (Creation)
> > > Level: Sor/Wiz 5
> > > Components: V, S
> > > Casting Time: 1 standard action
> > > Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
> > > Effect: Cloud spreads in 20-ft. radius, 20 ft.high
> > > Duration: 1 min./level
> > > Saving Throw: Fortitude partial; see text Spell Resistance: No
This
> > > spell generates a bank of fog, similar to a fog cloud, except
that its
> > > vapors are yellowish green and poisonous. These vapors
automatically
> > > kill any living creature with
> > > 3 or fewer HD (no save). A living creature with 4 to 6 HD is
slain
> > > unless it succeeds on a Fortitude save (in which case it takes
1d4
> > > points of Constitution damage on your turn each round while in
the
> > > cloud). A living creature with 6 or more HD takes
> > > 1d4 points of Constitution damage on your turn each round while
in the
> > > cloud (a successful Fortitude save halves this damage). Holding
one's
> > > breath doesn't help, but creatures immune to poison are
unaffected by
> > > the spell.
> > > Unlike a fog cloud, the cloudkill moves away from you at 10
feet per
> > > round, rolling along the surface of the ground. Figure out the
cloud's
> > > new spread each round based on its new point of origin, which
is 10 feet
> > > farther away from the point of origin where you cast the spell.
Because
> > > the vapors are heavier than air, they sink to the lowest level
of the
> > > land, even pouring down den or sinkhole openings; thus, the
spell is
> > > ideal for slaying hives of giant ants, for example.
> > > It cannot
> > > penetrate liquids, nor can it be cast underwater.
> > >
> > > /Based on the above, the results of the spell are not bonuses or
> > > penalties (for an example of a penalty, see Ray of
Enfeeblement, which
> > > will *not* stack with multiple castings), but, instead are
damage. As
> > > *damage* does not go away when the spell effect ends, this
becomes an
> > > *Instantaneous* effect. For an example of a spell that deals
*damage*
> > > but has a duration, see Wall of Fire. Consequently, we find the
> > > following paragraph under "Combining Magical Effects":
> > >
> > > I/nstantaneous Effects: Two or more spells with instantaneous
durations
> > > work cumulatively when they affect the same target. For
example, when
> > > two fireballs strike a same creature, the target must attempt a
saving
> > > throw against each fireball and takes damage from each
according to the
> > > saving throws' results. If a creature receives two cure light
wounds
> > > spells in a single round, both work normally.
> > >
> > > /Even if you were hesitant to apply the above paragraph to the
situation
> > > at hand (multiple castings of Cloudkill), the following would
be the
> > > next most likely to apply:
> > >
> > > /Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths: In cases
when two or
> > > more identical spells are operating in the same area or on the
same
> > > target, but at different strengths, only the best one applies.
For
> > > example, if a character takes a --4 penalty to Strength from a
ray of
> > > enfeeblement spell and then receives a second ray of
enfeeblement spell
> > > that applies a --6 penalty, he or she takes only the --6
penalty. Both
> > > spells are still operating on the character, however. If one
ray of
> > > enfeeblement spell is dispelled or its duration runs out, the
other
> > > spell remains in effect, assuming that its duration has not yet
> > > expired./
> > >
> > > However, in this paragraph, the example deals with a spell that
applies
> > > a *PENALTY* that ends when the spell effect ends, which is not
even
> > > remotely the same thing as what happens with Cloudkill (who's
effects
> > > last in the same way as hitpoint damage lasts, until healed
normally or
> > > magically).
> > >
> > > So, one of two possible rulings may be had from this. 1- You
suffer the
> > > effects of all cloudkill spells who's area your PC is in (based
on the
> > > *Instantaneous* ruling, which applies to all other damage).
This, in my
> > > opinion, is the more correct of the two. 2- You take the
highest damage
> > > total from the 3 effects in question (rolling appropriate
damage for all
> > > 3 spells then applying the highest total). This is the more
generous,
> > > yet probably less correct interpretation, in my opinion.
> > >
> > > It seems to me that the Senior GM ruled more favorably than
either of
> > > those two interpretations, and as such, I fail to see what you
are
> > > actually complaining about. And, it seems, that Wizards
Customer Service
> > > (a more complete waste of money and a more completely useless
group of
> > > rules interpretation people I have yet to see) can't even read
their own
> > > rules and apply them.
> > >
> > > As for your last quoted text, perhaps you should really pay
attention to
> > > what you're reading. That entire paragraph speaks specifically
of
> > > "modifiers to a given check or roll". Damage is not a modifier
to
> > > anything.
> > >
> > > Now, casting aspersions on the list is pretty childish, and
insulting
> > > everyone who doesn't agree with you is just plain sad and
pathetic.
> > > Perhaps, next time you wish to vent, you should do what you
accuse
> > > everyone else of not doing, and *READ* all the relevant text,
and not
> > > just the piece of the text that, when taken out of context from
the rest
> > > of the paragraph, seems to support your argument.
> > >
> > > Brooks
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
> >
> > very well said brooks!
> > to add to the statement about WOTC consumer staff.
> > these people only read the rules AS they are, and
> > then try to give THEIR futile best answer to what
> > they think the rule says even though most of them
> > don't even play the game at all.
> > furthermore, any rules interpretations from the
> > wizards web site is practically ignored by the triad
> > in most cases, and leaves it up to the senior judge
> > at the convention to make the final decision
> > no matter how poorly it may be.
> > thus, there will ALWAYS be some disagreement
> > about any rule that's unclear to begin with from
> > someone at any point during a scenario at any convention.
> > so, when at a convention, we just have to live with
> > what the "final" decision was made, and move on!
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Just to clarify, I don't personally think that stacking ability damage
is the same as stacking hp damage. The RAW view it all the same, but
since abilities are rarely above 18 until high levels, and hps get above
18 rather quickly, ability points are a much more limited resource.
I don't believe that the intent of the author was to have the effects of
multiple spells stack, and often it's the intent that a Senior GM has to
determine.
My main point was to point out that you really shouldn't post snarky or
insulting comments on a listserv, unless you have done *ALL* of your
homework. Putting a couple of half phrases in quotes is likely to get
your argument ripped a new one, so it's always best to have all your
information in line.
Brooks (duly appointed champion of sanity and clear-headed thought by
none other than the PotGML himself, Ed Podsiad)
Michael Hicks wrote:
>
> I have to agree with the statement of well done Brooks. You have presented
> a very effective and well researched answer.
> I did want to post an opinion, but one which may not really be relevant
> since this appears to
> concern a ruling at an RPGA sanctioned event. (I have not read the entire
> post).
>
> While the rules do seem to indicate that the effect of multiple cloud kill
> spells could/should stack, I would
> submit this "logical" explanation for the spells effects not stacking. The
> spell description seems to indicate
> that a physical cloud of poisonous gas is formed by the spell "creatures
> immune to poison are not affected".
> Thus if I were the DM in this case, I would rule (in spite of the rules)
> that there is only so much body
> surface area which can be exposed, only so much can be inhaled (although
> inhalation is not required for damage to
> take place exposure is), and therefore the spell effects would not stack.
> The overall size of the cloud could be increased by
> placing the clouds strategically or I might would allow for the higher of
> the rolls to count as damage as you stated
> in option 2 for the ruling. To compare it to two fireball effects is like
> comparing apples to oranges (hp damage as opposed to
> ability damage). While both of these are damage they are a different
> "kind"
> of damage. If a pc gets hit by two different
> fireball spells one hits then the other and the damage would of course
> stack. The effect of a fireball is not from the
> pc remaining in the area, but from the fiery explosion the spell produces.
> In this case the cloud kill produces a physical
> cloud which is poisonous and the pc must remain in the area to continue to
> take damage.
>
> I can't argue with your assessment of the game rules. However, the rules
> must sometimes be "bent" to accommodate
> a game situation in a logical manner, and in my opinion that is one of the
> reasons we have a senior judge.
>
> As a player I would accept any of the rulings and move on and have fun.
> After all the game about having fun, and
> not arguing over the rules.
>
> Just mho.
>
> Michael
>
>
> _____
>
> From: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com <mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com>
> [mailto:GranMarch@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf
> Of allen
> Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 9:28 AM
> To: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com <mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [SPAM] Re: [U] RE: [GranMarch] Re: MACE thanks
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Palladino SSgt T J (GCE RCT 2 S-6 Techcon)"
> <palladinotj@ <mailto:palladinotj%40gcemnf-wiraq.usmc.mil>
> gcemnf-wiraq.usmc.mil>
>
> > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
> >
> > Ouch! That's going to leave a mark.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: GranMarch@yahoogrou <mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com> ps.com
> [mailto:GranMarch@yahoogrou <mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com>
> ps.com] On
> > Behalf Of Brooks G. Banks
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 4:03 PM
> > To: GranMarch@yahoogrou <mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com> ps.com
> > Subject: Re: [GranMarch] Re: MACE thanks
> >
> > It might actually help if you quoted the whole text of your supporting
> > facts, instead of just paraphrasing (and doing a poor job of it).
> >
> > /stack: Combine for a cumulative effect. In most cases, modifiers to a
> > given check or roll stack if they come from different sources and have
> > different descriptors (or no descriptors at all), but do not stack if
> > they have the same descriptors or come from the same source (such as the
> > same spell cast twice in succession). If the modifiers to a particular
> > roll do not stack, only the best bonus or worst penalty applies. Dodge
> > bonuses and circumstance bonus however, do stack with one another unless
> > otherwise specified. Spell effected that do not stack may overlap,
> > coexist independently, or render one another irrelevant, depending on
> > their exact effects./
> >
> > You will note that the words used are "In most cases", leaving it open
> > that there are some cases where effects stack. We then go down to the
> > mention of spells, where it states "Spell effects that do not stack..."
> > which does not state, either clearly or categorically or even partially,
> > that *ALL* spell effects of the same spell do not stack. Consequently,
> > we need to look in the magic section of the PHB itself (you did want to
> > quote the PHB after all):
> >
> > /COMBINING MAGICAL EFFECTS
> > Spells or magical effects usually work as described, no matter how many
> > other spells or magical effects happen to be operating in the same area
> > or on the same recipient. Except in special cases, a spell does not
> > affect the way another spell operates. Whenever a spell has a specific
> > effect on other spells, the spell description explains that effect.
> > Several other general rules apply when spells or magical effects operate
> > in the same place:
> >
> > /Now, looking specifically at cloudkill, to see which of the paragraphs
> > that follow apply, we find the following:
> >
> > /Cloudkill
> > Conjuration (Creation)
> > Level: Sor/Wiz 5
> > Components: V, S
> > Casting Time: 1 standard action
> > Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
> > Effect: Cloud spreads in 20-ft. radius, 20 ft.high
> > Duration: 1 min./level
> > Saving Throw: Fortitude partial; see text Spell Resistance: No This
> > spell generates a bank of fog, similar to a fog cloud, except that its
> > vapors are yellowish green and poisonous. These vapors automatically
> > kill any living creature with
> > 3 or fewer HD (no save). A living creature with 4 to 6 HD is slain
> > unless it succeeds on a Fortitude save (in which case it takes 1d4
> > points of Constitution damage on your turn each round while in the
> > cloud). A living creature with 6 or more HD takes
> > 1d4 points of Constitution damage on your turn each round while in the
> > cloud (a successful Fortitude save halves this damage). Holding one's
> > breath doesn't help, but creatures immune to poison are unaffected by
> > the spell.
> > Unlike a fog cloud, the cloudkill moves away from you at 10 feet per
> > round, rolling along the surface of the ground. Figure out the cloud's
> > new spread each round based on its new point of origin, which is 10 feet
> > farther away from the point of origin where you cast the spell. Because
> > the vapors are heavier than air, they sink to the lowest level of the
> > land, even pouring down den or sinkhole openings; thus, the spell is
> > ideal for slaying hives of giant ants, for example.
> > It cannot
> > penetrate liquids, nor can it be cast underwater.
> >
> > /Based on the above, the results of the spell are not bonuses or
> > penalties (for an example of a penalty, see Ray of Enfeeblement, which
> > will *not* stack with multiple castings), but, instead are damage. As
> > *damage* does not go away when the spell effect ends, this becomes an
> > *Instantaneous* effect. For an example of a spell that deals *damage*
> > but has a duration, see Wall of Fire. Consequently, we find the
> > following paragraph under "Combining Magical Effects":
> >
> > I/nstantaneous Effects: Two or more spells with instantaneous durations
> > work cumulatively when they affect the same target. For example, when
> > two fireballs strike a same creature, the target must attempt a saving
> > throw against each fireball and takes damage from each according to the
> > saving throws' results. If a creature receives two cure light wounds
> > spells in a single round, both work normally.
> >
> > /Even if you were hesitant to apply the above paragraph to the situation
> > at hand (multiple castings of Cloudkill), the following would be the
> > next most likely to apply:
> >
> > /Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths: In cases when two or
> > more identical spells are operating in the same area or on the same
> > target, but at different strengths, only the best one applies. For
> > example, if a character takes a --4 penalty to Strength from a ray of
> > enfeeblement spell and then receives a second ray of enfeeblement spell
> > that applies a --6 penalty, he or she takes only the --6 penalty. Both
> > spells are still operating on the character, however. If one ray of
> > enfeeblement spell is dispelled or its duration runs out, the other
> > spell remains in effect, assuming that its duration has not yet
> > expired./
> >
> > However, in this paragraph, the example deals with a spell that applies
> > a *PENALTY* that ends when the spell effect ends, which is not even
> > remotely the same thing as what happens with Cloudkill (who's effects
> > last in the same way as hitpoint damage lasts, until healed normally or
> > magically).
> >
> > So, one of two possible rulings may be had from this. 1- You suffer the
> > effects of all cloudkill spells who's area your PC is in (based on the
> > *Instantaneous* ruling, which applies to all other damage). This, in my
> > opinion, is the more correct of the two. 2- You take the highest damage
> > total from the 3 effects in question (rolling appropriate damage for all
> > 3 spells then applying the highest total). This is the more generous,
> > yet probably less correct interpretation, in my opinion.
> >
> > It seems to me that the Senior GM ruled more favorably than either of
> > those two interpretations, and as such, I fail to see what you are
> > actually complaining about. And, it seems, that Wizards Customer Service
> > (a more complete waste of money and a more completely useless group of
> > rules interpretation people I have yet to see) can't even read their own
> > rules and apply them.
> >
> > As for your last quoted text, perhaps you should really pay attention to
> > what you're reading. That entire paragraph speaks specifically of
> > "modifiers to a given check or roll". Damage is not a modifier to
> > anything.
> >
> > Now, casting aspersions on the list is pretty childish, and insulting
> > everyone who doesn't agree with you is just plain sad and pathetic.
> > Perhaps, next time you wish to vent, you should do what you accuse
> > everyone else of not doing, and *READ* all the relevant text, and not
> > just the piece of the text that, when taken out of context from the rest
> > of the paragraph, seems to support your argument.
> >
> > Brooks
> >
> >
> >
> > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>
> very well said brooks!
> to add to the statement about WOTC consumer staff.
> these people only read the rules AS they are, and
> then try to give THEIR futile best answer to what
> they think the rule says even though most of them
> don't even play the game at all.
> furthermore, any rules interpretations from the
> wizards web site is practically ignored by the triad
> in most cases, and leaves it up to the senior judge
> at the convention to make the final decision
> no matter how poorly it may be.
> thus, there will ALWAYS be some disagreement
> about any rule that's unclear to begin with from
> someone at any point during a scenario at any convention.
> so, when at a convention, we just have to live with
> what the "final" decision was made, and move on!
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I have to agree with the statement of well done Brooks. You have presented
a very effective and well researched answer.
I did want to post an opinion, but one which may not really be relevant
since this appears to
concern a ruling at an RPGA sanctioned event. (I have not read the entire
post).
While the rules do seem to indicate that the effect of multiple cloud kill
spells could/should stack, I would
submit this "logical" explanation for the spells effects not stacking. The
spell description seems to indicate
that a physical cloud of poisonous gas is formed by the spell "creatures
immune to poison are not affected".
Thus if I were the DM in this case, I would rule (in spite of the rules)
that there is only so much body
surface area which can be exposed, only so much can be inhaled (although
inhalation is not required for damage to
take place exposure is), and therefore the spell effects would not stack.
The overall size of the cloud could be increased by
placing the clouds strategically or I might would allow for the higher of
the rolls to count as damage as you stated
in option 2 for the ruling. To compare it to two fireball effects is like
comparing apples to oranges (hp damage as opposed to
ability damage). While both of these are damage they are a different "kind"
of damage. If a pc gets hit by two different
fireball spells one hits then the other and the damage would of course
stack. The effect of a fireball is not from the
pc remaining in the area, but from the fiery explosion the spell produces.
In this case the cloud kill produces a physical
cloud which is poisonous and the pc must remain in the area to continue to
take damage.
I can't argue with your assessment of the game rules. However, the rules
must sometimes be "bent" to accommodate
a game situation in a logical manner, and in my opinion that is one of the
reasons we have a senior judge.
As a player I would accept any of the rulings and move on and have fun.
After all the game about having fun, and
not arguing over the rules.
Just mho.
Michael
_____
From: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com [mailto:GranMarch@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of allen
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 9:28 AM
To: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [SPAM] Re: [U] RE: [GranMarch] Re: MACE thanks
----- Original Message -----
From: "Palladino SSgt T J (GCE RCT 2 S-6 Techcon)"
<palladinotj@ <mailto:palladinotj%40gcemnf-wiraq.usmc.mil>
gcemnf-wiraq.usmc.mil>
> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>
> Ouch! That's going to leave a mark.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: GranMarch@yahoogrou <mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com> ps.com
[mailto:GranMarch@yahoogrou <mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com> ps.com] On
> Behalf Of Brooks G. Banks
> Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 4:03 PM
> To: GranMarch@yahoogrou <mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com> ps.com
> Subject: Re: [GranMarch] Re: MACE thanks
>
> It might actually help if you quoted the whole text of your supporting
> facts, instead of just paraphrasing (and doing a poor job of it).
>
> /stack: Combine for a cumulative effect. In most cases, modifiers to a
> given check or roll stack if they come from different sources and have
> different descriptors (or no descriptors at all), but do not stack if
> they have the same descriptors or come from the same source (such as the
> same spell cast twice in succession). If the modifiers to a particular
> roll do not stack, only the best bonus or worst penalty applies. Dodge
> bonuses and circumstance bonus however, do stack with one another unless
> otherwise specified. Spell effected that do not stack may overlap,
> coexist independently, or render one another irrelevant, depending on
> their exact effects./
>
> You will note that the words used are "In most cases", leaving it open
> that there are some cases where effects stack. We then go down to the
> mention of spells, where it states "Spell effects that do not stack..."
> which does not state, either clearly or categorically or even partially,
> that *ALL* spell effects of the same spell do not stack. Consequently,
> we need to look in the magic section of the PHB itself (you did want to
> quote the PHB after all):
>
> /COMBINING MAGICAL EFFECTS
> Spells or magical effects usually work as described, no matter how many
> other spells or magical effects happen to be operating in the same area
> or on the same recipient. Except in special cases, a spell does not
> affect the way another spell operates. Whenever a spell has a specific
> effect on other spells, the spell description explains that effect.
> Several other general rules apply when spells or magical effects operate
> in the same place:
>
> /Now, looking specifically at cloudkill, to see which of the paragraphs
> that follow apply, we find the following:
>
> /Cloudkill
> Conjuration (Creation)
> Level: Sor/Wiz 5
> Components: V, S
> Casting Time: 1 standard action
> Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
> Effect: Cloud spreads in 20-ft. radius, 20 ft.high
> Duration: 1 min./level
> Saving Throw: Fortitude partial; see text Spell Resistance: No This
> spell generates a bank of fog, similar to a fog cloud, except that its
> vapors are yellowish green and poisonous. These vapors automatically
> kill any living creature with
> 3 or fewer HD (no save). A living creature with 4 to 6 HD is slain
> unless it succeeds on a Fortitude save (in which case it takes 1d4
> points of Constitution damage on your turn each round while in the
> cloud). A living creature with 6 or more HD takes
> 1d4 points of Constitution damage on your turn each round while in the
> cloud (a successful Fortitude save halves this damage). Holding one's
> breath doesn't help, but creatures immune to poison are unaffected by
> the spell.
> Unlike a fog cloud, the cloudkill moves away from you at 10 feet per
> round, rolling along the surface of the ground. Figure out the cloud's
> new spread each round based on its new point of origin, which is 10 feet
> farther away from the point of origin where you cast the spell. Because
> the vapors are heavier than air, they sink to the lowest level of the
> land, even pouring down den or sinkhole openings; thus, the spell is
> ideal for slaying hives of giant ants, for example.
> It cannot
> penetrate liquids, nor can it be cast underwater.
>
> /Based on the above, the results of the spell are not bonuses or
> penalties (for an example of a penalty, see Ray of Enfeeblement, which
> will *not* stack with multiple castings), but, instead are damage. As
> *damage* does not go away when the spell effect ends, this becomes an
> *Instantaneous* effect. For an example of a spell that deals *damage*
> but has a duration, see Wall of Fire. Consequently, we find the
> following paragraph under "Combining Magical Effects":
>
> I/nstantaneous Effects: Two or more spells with instantaneous durations
> work cumulatively when they affect the same target. For example, when
> two fireballs strike a same creature, the target must attempt a saving
> throw against each fireball and takes damage from each according to the
> saving throws' results. If a creature receives two cure light wounds
> spells in a single round, both work normally.
>
> /Even if you were hesitant to apply the above paragraph to the situation
> at hand (multiple castings of Cloudkill), the following would be the
> next most likely to apply:
>
> /Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths: In cases when two or
> more identical spells are operating in the same area or on the same
> target, but at different strengths, only the best one applies. For
> example, if a character takes a --4 penalty to Strength from a ray of
> enfeeblement spell and then receives a second ray of enfeeblement spell
> that applies a --6 penalty, he or she takes only the --6 penalty. Both
> spells are still operating on the character, however. If one ray of
> enfeeblement spell is dispelled or its duration runs out, the other
> spell remains in effect, assuming that its duration has not yet
> expired./
>
> However, in this paragraph, the example deals with a spell that applies
> a *PENALTY* that ends when the spell effect ends, which is not even
> remotely the same thing as what happens with Cloudkill (who's effects
> last in the same way as hitpoint damage lasts, until healed normally or
> magically).
>
> So, one of two possible rulings may be had from this. 1- You suffer the
> effects of all cloudkill spells who's area your PC is in (based on the
> *Instantaneous* ruling, which applies to all other damage). This, in my
> opinion, is the more correct of the two. 2- You take the highest damage
> total from the 3 effects in question (rolling appropriate damage for all
> 3 spells then applying the highest total). This is the more generous,
> yet probably less correct interpretation, in my opinion.
>
> It seems to me that the Senior GM ruled more favorably than either of
> those two interpretations, and as such, I fail to see what you are
> actually complaining about. And, it seems, that Wizards Customer Service
> (a more complete waste of money and a more completely useless group of
> rules interpretation people I have yet to see) can't even read their own
> rules and apply them.
>
> As for your last quoted text, perhaps you should really pay attention to
> what you're reading. That entire paragraph speaks specifically of
> "modifiers to a given check or roll". Damage is not a modifier to
> anything.
>
> Now, casting aspersions on the list is pretty childish, and insulting
> everyone who doesn't agree with you is just plain sad and pathetic.
> Perhaps, next time you wish to vent, you should do what you accuse
> everyone else of not doing, and *READ* all the relevant text, and not
> just the piece of the text that, when taken out of context from the rest
> of the paragraph, seems to support your argument.
>
> Brooks
>
>
>
> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
very well said brooks!
to add to the statement about WOTC consumer staff.
these people only read the rules AS they are, and
then try to give THEIR futile best answer to what
they think the rule says even though most of them
don't even play the game at all.
furthermore, any rules interpretations from the
wizards web site is practically ignored by the triad
in most cases, and leaves it up to the senior judge
at the convention to make the final decision
no matter how poorly it may be.
thus, there will ALWAYS be some disagreement
about any rule that's unclear to begin with from
someone at any point during a scenario at any convention.
so, when at a convention, we just have to live with
what the "final" decision was made, and move on!
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Yeah, but I noticed how the BI effectively prevented the normal way
that High Level parties deal with poison.
No Pancakes of [name your god here] for you!
GH
--- In GranMarch@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Waltman" <pdwaltman@...>
wrote:
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com [mailto:GranMarch@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf
> Of allen
> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 3:32 PM
> To: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [SPAM] Re: [GranMarch] Re: MACE thanks
>
> .
> so, a delay poison would delay the effective the
> damage taken until either the duration expires,
> or it's dispelled in which the accumulated damage is
> taken all at once if not neutralized beforehand.
>
> =========================================================
> For all but the lowest APL tables, a 300 GP core purchase Delay
Poison
> Potion is something that could be expected of characters. Certainly
> previous events in this series have had such casting creatures, so
an
> expectation of a chance of such in the future events in the series
should
> have been contemplated. Arcane casters (wizards, sorcerers, war
mages at
> least, I don't know about beguilers, hexblades and bards) and druids
> probably should have had gust of wind scrolls for the same reason
(except
> those who can't cast evocation spells), which are even cheaper and
get rid
> of cloudkill spells in their line of effect (in one round). I have
> non-casting characters with such scrolls, for the just in case, and
I can't
> play in Gran March events (the spell also gets rid of Obscuring
Mist, Fog
> Cloud, Solid Fog and Acid Fog spells; [the next time the Mimic sets
off the
> acid fog trap my wizard will be ready]).
>
> A problem with the delay poison defense is that if there is no
neutralize
> poison within the duration of the spell (a potion being 3 hours,
unless the
> person purchased the extended delay poison potion that appeared on
some past
> AR (that one was 10 hours)), then all the potion does is delay
death. And
> area dispel magic spells are a real danger.
>
> Of course, people could have used their potion in the game earlier
and faced
> this again (the policy of two comes in here). On the other hand, I
know of
> quite a few people who refuse to "waste" their money buying scrolls
and
> potions; there are some one shot items that almost approach
necessity.
> Certainly there are a few rare occasions that having the one potion
or
> scroll can save your life (or soul). Having a few on hand (keep
them out of
> the haversack) is a good investment.
>
> Dennis Waltman
>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Palladino SSgt T J (GCE RCT 2 S-6 Techcon)"
<palladinotj@...>
> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>
> Ouch! That's going to leave a mark.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com [mailto:GranMarch@yahoogroups.com] On
> Behalf Of Brooks G. Banks
> Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 4:03 PM
> To: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [GranMarch] Re: MACE thanks
>
> It might actually help if you quoted the whole text of your supporting
> facts, instead of just paraphrasing (and doing a poor job of it).
>
> /stack: Combine for a cumulative effect. In most cases, modifiers to a
> given check or roll stack if they come from different sources and have
> different descriptors (or no descriptors at all), but do not stack if
> they have the same descriptors or come from the same source (such as the
> same spell cast twice in succession). If the modifiers to a particular
> roll do not stack, only the best bonus or worst penalty applies. Dodge
> bonuses and circumstance bonus however, do stack with one another unless
> otherwise specified. Spell effected that do not stack may overlap,
> coexist independently, or render one another irrelevant, depending on
> their exact effects./
>
> You will note that the words used are "In most cases", leaving it open
> that there are some cases where effects stack. We then go down to the
> mention of spells, where it states "Spell effects that do not stack..."
> which does not state, either clearly or categorically or even partially,
> that *ALL* spell effects of the same spell do not stack. Consequently,
> we need to look in the magic section of the PHB itself (you did want to
> quote the PHB after all):
>
> /COMBINING MAGICAL EFFECTS
> Spells or magical effects usually work as described, no matter how many
> other spells or magical effects happen to be operating in the same area
> or on the same recipient. Except in special cases, a spell does not
> affect the way another spell operates. Whenever a spell has a specific
> effect on other spells, the spell description explains that effect.
> Several other general rules apply when spells or magical effects operate
> in the same place:
>
> /Now, looking specifically at cloudkill, to see which of the paragraphs
> that follow apply, we find the following:
>
> /Cloudkill
> Conjuration (Creation)
> Level: Sor/Wiz 5
> Components: V, S
> Casting Time: 1 standard action
> Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
> Effect: Cloud spreads in 20-ft. radius, 20 ft.high
> Duration: 1 min./level
> Saving Throw: Fortitude partial; see text Spell Resistance: No This
> spell generates a bank of fog, similar to a fog cloud, except that its
> vapors are yellowish green and poisonous. These vapors automatically
> kill any living creature with
> 3 or fewer HD (no save). A living creature with 4 to 6 HD is slain
> unless it succeeds on a Fortitude save (in which case it takes 1d4
> points of Constitution damage on your turn each round while in the
> cloud). A living creature with 6 or more HD takes
> 1d4 points of Constitution damage on your turn each round while in the
> cloud (a successful Fortitude save halves this damage). Holding one's
> breath doesn't help, but creatures immune to poison are unaffected by
> the spell.
> Unlike a fog cloud, the cloudkill moves away from you at 10 feet per
> round, rolling along the surface of the ground. Figure out the cloud's
> new spread each round based on its new point of origin, which is 10 feet
> farther away from the point of origin where you cast the spell. Because
> the vapors are heavier than air, they sink to the lowest level of the
> land, even pouring down den or sinkhole openings; thus, the spell is
> ideal for slaying hives of giant ants, for example.
> It cannot
> penetrate liquids, nor can it be cast underwater.
>
> /Based on the above, the results of the spell are not bonuses or
> penalties (for an example of a penalty, see Ray of Enfeeblement, which
> will *not* stack with multiple castings), but, instead are damage. As
> *damage* does not go away when the spell effect ends, this becomes an
> *Instantaneous* effect. For an example of a spell that deals *damage*
> but has a duration, see Wall of Fire. Consequently, we find the
> following paragraph under "Combining Magical Effects":
>
> I/nstantaneous Effects: Two or more spells with instantaneous durations
> work cumulatively when they affect the same target. For example, when
> two fireballs strike a same creature, the target must attempt a saving
> throw against each fireball and takes damage from each according to the
> saving throws' results. If a creature receives two cure light wounds
> spells in a single round, both work normally.
>
> /Even if you were hesitant to apply the above paragraph to the situation
> at hand (multiple castings of Cloudkill), the following would be the
> next most likely to apply:
>
> /Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths: In cases when two or
> more identical spells are operating in the same area or on the same
> target, but at different strengths, only the best one applies. For
> example, if a character takes a --4 penalty to Strength from a ray of
> enfeeblement spell and then receives a second ray of enfeeblement spell
> that applies a --6 penalty, he or she takes only the --6 penalty. Both
> spells are still operating on the character, however. If one ray of
> enfeeblement spell is dispelled or its duration runs out, the other
> spell remains in effect, assuming that its duration has not yet
> expired./
>
> However, in this paragraph, the example deals with a spell that applies
> a *PENALTY* that ends when the spell effect ends, which is not even
> remotely the same thing as what happens with Cloudkill (who's effects
> last in the same way as hitpoint damage lasts, until healed normally or
> magically).
>
> So, one of two possible rulings may be had from this. 1- You suffer the
> effects of all cloudkill spells who's area your PC is in (based on the
> *Instantaneous* ruling, which applies to all other damage). This, in my
> opinion, is the more correct of the two. 2- You take the highest damage
> total from the 3 effects in question (rolling appropriate damage for all
> 3 spells then applying the highest total). This is the more generous,
> yet probably less correct interpretation, in my opinion.
>
> It seems to me that the Senior GM ruled more favorably than either of
> those two interpretations, and as such, I fail to see what you are
> actually complaining about. And, it seems, that Wizards Customer Service
> (a more complete waste of money and a more completely useless group of
> rules interpretation people I have yet to see) can't even read their own
> rules and apply them.
>
> As for your last quoted text, perhaps you should really pay attention to
> what you're reading. That entire paragraph speaks specifically of
> "modifiers to a given check or roll". Damage is not a modifier to
> anything.
>
> Now, casting aspersions on the list is pretty childish, and insulting
> everyone who doesn't agree with you is just plain sad and pathetic.
> Perhaps, next time you wish to vent, you should do what you accuse
> everyone else of not doing, and *READ* all the relevant text, and not
> just the piece of the text that, when taken out of context from the rest
> of the paragraph, seems to support your argument.
>
> Brooks
>
>
>
> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
very well said brooks!
to add to the statement about WOTC consumer staff.
these people only read the rules AS they are, and
then try to give THEIR futile best answer to what
they think the rule says even though most of them
don't even play the game at all.
furthermore, any rules interpretations from the
wizards web site is practically ignored by the triad
in most cases, and leaves it up to the senior judge
at the convention to make the final decision
no matter how poorly it may be.
thus, there will ALWAYS be some disagreement
about any rule that's unclear to begin with from
someone at any point during a scenario at any convention.
so, when at a convention, we just have to live with
what the "final" decision was made, and move on!
Thank you, Brooks. As always, you are a bastion of sanity and
clear-headed thought when it comes to the game rules (and putting people
in their place).
(also, I wasn't really in the mood to type all of that out)...
Ed P.
________________________________
From: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:GranMarch@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Brooks G. Banks
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 8:03 AM
To: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [GranMarch] Re: MACE thanks
It might actually help if you quoted the whole text of your
supporting
facts, instead of just paraphrasing (and doing a poor job of
it).
/stack: Combine for a cumulative effect. In most cases,
modifiers
to a given check or roll stack if they come from different
sources and
have different descriptors (or no descriptors at all), but do
not stack
if they have the same descriptors or come from the same source
(such as the same spell cast twice in succession). If the
modifiers to a
particular roll do not stack, only the best bonus or worst
penalty
applies. Dodge bonuses and circumstance bonus however, do stack
with one another unless otherwise specified. Spell effected that
do
not stack may overlap, coexist independently, or render one
another
irrelevant, depending on their exact effects./
You will note that the words used are "In most cases", leaving
it open
that there are some cases where effects stack. We then go down
to the
mention of spells, where it states "Spell effects that do not
stack..."
which does not state, either clearly or categorically or even
partially,
that *ALL* spell effects of the same spell do not stack.
Consequently,
we need to look in the magic section of the PHB itself (you did
want to
quote the PHB after all):
/COMBINING MAGICAL EFFECTS
Spells or magical effects usually work as described, no matter
how
many other spells or magical effects happen to be operating in
the
same area or on the same recipient. Except in special cases, a
spell
does not affect the way another spell operates. Whenever a spell
has
a specific effect on other spells, the spell description
explains that
effect. Several other general rules apply when spells or magical
effects operate in the same place:
/Now, looking specifically at cloudkill, to see which of the
paragraphs
that follow apply, we find the following:
/Cloudkill
Conjuration (Creation)
Level: Sor/Wiz 5
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Effect: Cloud spreads in 20-ft. radius, 20 ft.high
Duration: 1 min./level
Saving Throw: Fortitude partial; see text
Spell Resistance: No
This spell generates a bank of fog, similar to a fog cloud,
except that
its vapors are yellowish
green and poisonous. These vapors automatically kill any living
creature
with
3 or fewer HD (no save). A living creature with 4 to 6 HD is
slain
unless it succeeds
on a Fortitude save (in which case it takes 1d4 points of
Constitution
damage on your
turn each round while in the cloud). A living creature with 6 or
more HD
takes
1d4 points of Constitution damage on your turn each round while
in the
cloud (a
successful Fortitude save halves this damage). Holding one's
breath doesn't
help, but creatures immune to poison are unaffected by the
spell.
Unlike a fog cloud, the cloudkill moves away from you at 10 feet
per
round, rolling
along the surface of the ground. Figure out the cloud's new
spread each
round based
on its new point of origin, which is 10 feet farther away from
the point
of origin
where you cast the spell. Because the vapors are heavier than
air,
they sink to the lowest level of the land, even pouring down den
or
sinkhole openings;
thus, the spell is ideal for slaying hives of giant ants, for
example.
It cannot
penetrate liquids, nor can it be cast underwater.
/Based on the above, the results of the spell are not bonuses or
penalties (for an example of a penalty, see Ray of Enfeeblement,
which
will *not* stack with multiple castings), but, instead are
damage. As
*damage* does not go away when the spell effect ends, this
becomes an
*Instantaneous* effect. For an example of a spell that deals
*damage*
but has a duration, see Wall of Fire. Consequently, we find the
following paragraph under "Combining Magical Effects":
I/nstantaneous Effects: Two or more spells with instantaneous
durations work cumulatively when they affect the same target.
For
example, when two fireballs strike a same creature, the target
must
attempt a saving throw against each fireball and takes damage
from
each according to the saving throws' results. If a creature
receives
two cure light wounds spells in a single round, both work
normally.
/Even if you were hesitant to apply the above paragraph to the
situation
at hand (multiple castings of Cloudkill), the following would be
the
next most likely to apply:
/Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths: In cases
when two
or more identical spells are operating in the same area or on
the
same target, but at different strengths, only the best one
applies. For
example, if a character takes a --4 penalty to Strength from a
ray of
enfeeblement spell and then receives a second ray of
enfeeblement spell
that applies a --6 penalty, he or she takes only the --6
penalty. Both
spells are still operating on the character, however. If one ray
of
enfeeblement spell is dispelled or its duration runs out, the
other spell
remains in effect, assuming that its duration has not yet
expired./
However, in this paragraph, the example deals with a spell that
applies
a *PENALTY* that ends when the spell effect ends, which is not
even
remotely the same thing as what happens with Cloudkill (who's
effects
last in the same way as hitpoint damage lasts, until healed
normally or
magically).
So, one of two possible rulings may be had from this. 1- You
suffer the
effects of all cloudkill spells who's area your PC is in (based
on the
*Instantaneous* ruling, which applies to all other damage).
This, in my
opinion, is the more correct of the two. 2- You take the highest
damage
total from the 3 effects in question (rolling appropriate damage
for all
3 spells then applying the highest total). This is the more
generous,
yet probably less correct interpretation, in my opinion.
It seems to me that the Senior GM ruled more favorably than
either of
those two interpretations, and as such, I fail to see what you
are
actually complaining about. And, it seems, that Wizards Customer
Service (a more complete waste of money and a more completely
useless
group of rules interpretation people I have yet to see) can't
even read
their own rules and apply them.
As for your last quoted text, perhaps you should really pay
attention to
what you're reading. That entire paragraph speaks specifically
of
"modifiers to a given check or roll". Damage is not a modifier
to anything.
Now, casting aspersions on the list is pretty childish, and
insulting
everyone who doesn't agree with you is just plain sad and
pathetic.
Perhaps, next time you wish to vent, you should do what you
accuse
everyone else of not doing, and *READ* all the relevant text,
and not
just the piece of the text that, when taken out of context from
the rest
of the paragraph, seems to support your argument.
Brooks
emailman wrote:
>
> Any spell (whether it affects a creature, object, or area)
does not
> stack with itself per PHB page 313, prgr #4, lines 4-5. `Just
to
> confirm, I asked wizards. Their official reply is:
>
> "Spells do not normally stack so the creature is going to take
> damage from 1 spell though all will be active in that area."
-Quote
>
> It often amazes me to see folks look at text and completely
dismiss it
> as not meaning what seems perfectly clear to me. Though I was
once a
> tech writer, but still, when it says: "...do not stack if they
have the
> same descriptor or come from the same source such as the same
spell
> cast twice in succession." Come on. How does anyone with an
Int of 4
> not understand this?!
>
> -A
>
> --- In GranMarch@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com>,
> "Paul Waltman" <pdwaltman@...> wrote:
> >
> > Your interpretation and mine on overlap are in sync.
> >
> > However as you can see on this list there are those that
believe
> > differently.
> >
> > Certainly, I'll have to make sure it is clear in future,
what ones there
> > are, Gran March games.
> >
> > Dennis
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com>
> [mailto:GranMarch@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com>]
> On Behalf
> > Of Michael Eshleman
> > Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 3:33 PM
> > To: granmarch@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:granmarch%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:granmarch%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: RE: [GranMarch] Re: MACE thanks
> >
> >
> > > So you seem to be saying that if three cloudkill spells
are cast
> in the
> > same
> > > space (complete overlap), that your interpretation would
have the
> player
> > > characters make three saving throws each round likely at
best
> losing 3d4/2
> > > damage each round?
> > >
> > > Dennis
> >
> > I didn't see anything in the original e-mail about
overlapping areas of
> > effect, just effect stacking. IMO if multiple cloudkill
spells (or
> another
> > continuous area spell like blistering radiance, acid fog or
solid fog)
> > overlap you are only affected by one.
> >
> > Which was (according to my information) the ruling given by
the
> senior GM at
> > the convention and followed by the table judge. Where
multiple
> cloudkill
> > spells overlap, you are only affected by one.
> >
> > -Michael Eshleman
> > __________________________________________________________
> > Put your friends on the big screen with Windows VistaR +
Windows LiveT.
> >
>
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/shop/specialoffers.mspx?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_
CPC_
<http://www.microsoft.com/windows/shop/specialoffers.mspx?ocid=TXT_TAGLM
_CPC_>
>
<http://www.microsoft.com/windows/shop/specialoffers.mspx?ocid=TXT_TAGLM
_CPC_
<http://www.microsoft.com/windows/shop/specialoffers.mspx?ocid=TXT_TAGLM
_CPC_> >
> > MediaCtr_bigscreen_102007
> >
> > Main Website: http://granmarch.sheldomar-valley.org
<http://granmarch.sheldomar-valley.org>
> <http://granmarch.sheldomar-valley.org
<http://granmarch.sheldomar-valley.org> >
> > Mirror Site: http://members.aol.com/aeontrin02/
<http://members.aol.com/aeontrin02/>
> <http://members.aol.com/aeontrin02/
<http://members.aol.com/aeontrin02/> >
> >
> > Community email addresses:
> > Post message: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com>
> <mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Subscribe: GranMarch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:GranMarch-subscribe%40yahoogroups.com>
> <mailto:GranMarch-subscribe%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Unsubscribe: GranMarch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:GranMarch-unsubscribe%40yahoogroups.com>
> <mailto:GranMarch-unsubscribe%40yahoogroups.com>
> > List owner: GranMarch-owner@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:GranMarch-owner%40yahoogroups.com>
> <mailto:GranMarch-owner%40yahoogroups.com>
> >
> > Shortcut URL to this page:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GranMarch
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GranMarch>
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GranMarch
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GranMarch> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Ouch! That's going to leave a mark.
-----Original Message-----
From: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com [mailto:GranMarch@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Brooks G. Banks
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 4:03 PM
To: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [GranMarch] Re: MACE thanks
It might actually help if you quoted the whole text of your supporting
facts, instead of just paraphrasing (and doing a poor job of it).
/stack: Combine for a cumulative effect. In most cases, modifiers to a
given check or roll stack if they come from different sources and have
different descriptors (or no descriptors at all), but do not stack if
they have the same descriptors or come from the same source (such as the
same spell cast twice in succession). If the modifiers to a particular
roll do not stack, only the best bonus or worst penalty applies. Dodge
bonuses and circumstance bonus however, do stack with one another unless
otherwise specified. Spell effected that do not stack may overlap,
coexist independently, or render one another irrelevant, depending on
their exact effects./
You will note that the words used are "In most cases", leaving it open
that there are some cases where effects stack. We then go down to the
mention of spells, where it states "Spell effects that do not stack..."
which does not state, either clearly or categorically or even partially,
that *ALL* spell effects of the same spell do not stack. Consequently,
we need to look in the magic section of the PHB itself (you did want to
quote the PHB after all):
/COMBINING MAGICAL EFFECTS
Spells or magical effects usually work as described, no matter how many
other spells or magical effects happen to be operating in the same area
or on the same recipient. Except in special cases, a spell does not
affect the way another spell operates. Whenever a spell has a specific
effect on other spells, the spell description explains that effect.
Several other general rules apply when spells or magical effects operate
in the same place:
/Now, looking specifically at cloudkill, to see which of the paragraphs
that follow apply, we find the following:
/Cloudkill
Conjuration (Creation)
Level: Sor/Wiz 5
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Effect: Cloud spreads in 20-ft. radius, 20 ft.high
Duration: 1 min./level
Saving Throw: Fortitude partial; see text Spell Resistance: No This
spell generates a bank of fog, similar to a fog cloud, except that its
vapors are yellowish green and poisonous. These vapors automatically
kill any living creature with
3 or fewer HD (no save). A living creature with 4 to 6 HD is slain
unless it succeeds on a Fortitude save (in which case it takes 1d4
points of Constitution damage on your turn each round while in the
cloud). A living creature with 6 or more HD takes
1d4 points of Constitution damage on your turn each round while in the
cloud (a successful Fortitude save halves this damage). Holding one's
breath doesn't help, but creatures immune to poison are unaffected by
the spell.
Unlike a fog cloud, the cloudkill moves away from you at 10 feet per
round, rolling along the surface of the ground. Figure out the cloud's
new spread each round based on its new point of origin, which is 10 feet
farther away from the point of origin where you cast the spell. Because
the vapors are heavier than air, they sink to the lowest level of the
land, even pouring down den or sinkhole openings; thus, the spell is
ideal for slaying hives of giant ants, for example.
It cannot
penetrate liquids, nor can it be cast underwater.
/Based on the above, the results of the spell are not bonuses or
penalties (for an example of a penalty, see Ray of Enfeeblement, which
will *not* stack with multiple castings), but, instead are damage. As
*damage* does not go away when the spell effect ends, this becomes an
*Instantaneous* effect. For an example of a spell that deals *damage*
but has a duration, see Wall of Fire. Consequently, we find the
following paragraph under "Combining Magical Effects":
I/nstantaneous Effects: Two or more spells with instantaneous durations
work cumulatively when they affect the same target. For example, when
two fireballs strike a same creature, the target must attempt a saving
throw against each fireball and takes damage from each according to the
saving throws' results. If a creature receives two cure light wounds
spells in a single round, both work normally.
/Even if you were hesitant to apply the above paragraph to the situation
at hand (multiple castings of Cloudkill), the following would be the
next most likely to apply:
/Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths: In cases when two or
more identical spells are operating in the same area or on the same
target, but at different strengths, only the best one applies. For
example, if a character takes a --4 penalty to Strength from a ray of
enfeeblement spell and then receives a second ray of enfeeblement spell
that applies a --6 penalty, he or she takes only the --6 penalty. Both
spells are still operating on the character, however. If one ray of
enfeeblement spell is dispelled or its duration runs out, the other
spell remains in effect, assuming that its duration has not yet
expired./
However, in this paragraph, the example deals with a spell that applies
a *PENALTY* that ends when the spell effect ends, which is not even
remotely the same thing as what happens with Cloudkill (who's effects
last in the same way as hitpoint damage lasts, until healed normally or
magically).
So, one of two possible rulings may be had from this. 1- You suffer the
effects of all cloudkill spells who's area your PC is in (based on the
*Instantaneous* ruling, which applies to all other damage). This, in my
opinion, is the more correct of the two. 2- You take the highest damage
total from the 3 effects in question (rolling appropriate damage for all
3 spells then applying the highest total). This is the more generous,
yet probably less correct interpretation, in my opinion.
It seems to me that the Senior GM ruled more favorably than either of
those two interpretations, and as such, I fail to see what you are
actually complaining about. And, it seems, that Wizards Customer Service
(a more complete waste of money and a more completely useless group of
rules interpretation people I have yet to see) can't even read their own
rules and apply them.
As for your last quoted text, perhaps you should really pay attention to
what you're reading. That entire paragraph speaks specifically of
"modifiers to a given check or roll". Damage is not a modifier to
anything.
Now, casting aspersions on the list is pretty childish, and insulting
everyone who doesn't agree with you is just plain sad and pathetic.
Perhaps, next time you wish to vent, you should do what you accuse
everyone else of not doing, and *READ* all the relevant text, and not
just the piece of the text that, when taken out of context from the rest
of the paragraph, seems to support your argument.
Brooks
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
It might actually help if you quoted the whole text of your supporting
facts, instead of just paraphrasing (and doing a poor job of it).
/stack: Combine for a cumulative effect. In most cases, modifiers
to a given check or roll stack if they come from different sources and
have different descriptors (or no descriptors at all), but do not stack
if they have the same descriptors or come from the same source
(such as the same spell cast twice in succession). If the modifiers to a
particular roll do not stack, only the best bonus or worst penalty
applies. Dodge bonuses and circumstance bonus however, do stack
with one another unless otherwise specified. Spell effected that do
not stack may overlap, coexist independently, or render one another
irrelevant, depending on their exact effects./
You will note that the words used are "In most cases", leaving it open
that there are some cases where effects stack. We then go down to the
mention of spells, where it states "Spell effects that do not stack..."
which does not state, either clearly or categorically or even partially,
that *ALL* spell effects of the same spell do not stack. Consequently,
we need to look in the magic section of the PHB itself (you did want to
quote the PHB after all):
/COMBINING MAGICAL EFFECTS
Spells or magical effects usually work as described, no matter how
many other spells or magical effects happen to be operating in the
same area or on the same recipient. Except in special cases, a spell
does not affect the way another spell operates. Whenever a spell has
a specific effect on other spells, the spell description explains that
effect. Several other general rules apply when spells or magical
effects operate in the same place:
/Now, looking specifically at cloudkill, to see which of the paragraphs
that follow apply, we find the following:
/Cloudkill
Conjuration (Creation)
Level: Sor/Wiz 5
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Effect: Cloud spreads in 20-ft. radius, 20 ft.high
Duration: 1 min./level
Saving Throw: Fortitude partial; see text
Spell Resistance: No
This spell generates a bank of fog, similar to a fog cloud, except that
its vapors are yellowish
green and poisonous. These vapors automatically kill any living creature
with
3 or fewer HD (no save). A living creature with 4 to 6 HD is slain
unless it succeeds
on a Fortitude save (in which case it takes 1d4 points of Constitution
damage on your
turn each round while in the cloud). A living creature with 6 or more HD
takes
1d4 points of Constitution damage on your turn each round while in the
cloud (a
successful Fortitude save halves this damage). Holding one's breath doesn't
help, but creatures immune to poison are unaffected by the spell.
Unlike a fog cloud, the cloudkill moves away from you at 10 feet per
round, rolling
along the surface of the ground. Figure out the cloud's new spread each
round based
on its new point of origin, which is 10 feet farther away from the point
of origin
where you cast the spell. Because the vapors are heavier than air,
they sink to the lowest level of the land, even pouring down den or
sinkhole openings;
thus, the spell is ideal for slaying hives of giant ants, for example.
It cannot
penetrate liquids, nor can it be cast underwater.
/Based on the above, the results of the spell are not bonuses or
penalties (for an example of a penalty, see Ray of Enfeeblement, which
will *not* stack with multiple castings), but, instead are damage. As
*damage* does not go away when the spell effect ends, this becomes an
*Instantaneous* effect. For an example of a spell that deals *damage*
but has a duration, see Wall of Fire. Consequently, we find the
following paragraph under "Combining Magical Effects":
I/nstantaneous Effects: Two or more spells with instantaneous
durations work cumulatively when they affect the same target. For
example, when two fireballs strike a same creature, the target must
attempt a saving throw against each fireball and takes damage from
each according to the saving throws' results. If a creature receives
two cure light wounds spells in a single round, both work normally.
/Even if you were hesitant to apply the above paragraph to the situation
at hand (multiple castings of Cloudkill), the following would be the
next most likely to apply:
/Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths: In cases when two
or more identical spells are operating in the same area or on the
same target, but at different strengths, only the best one applies. For
example, if a character takes a --4 penalty to Strength from a ray of
enfeeblement spell and then receives a second ray of enfeeblement spell
that applies a --6 penalty, he or she takes only the --6 penalty. Both
spells are still operating on the character, however. If one ray of
enfeeblement spell is dispelled or its duration runs out, the other spell
remains in effect, assuming that its duration has not yet expired./
However, in this paragraph, the example deals with a spell that applies
a *PENALTY* that ends when the spell effect ends, which is not even
remotely the same thing as what happens with Cloudkill (who's effects
last in the same way as hitpoint damage lasts, until healed normally or
magically).
So, one of two possible rulings may be had from this. 1- You suffer the
effects of all cloudkill spells who's area your PC is in (based on the
*Instantaneous* ruling, which applies to all other damage). This, in my
opinion, is the more correct of the two. 2- You take the highest damage
total from the 3 effects in question (rolling appropriate damage for all
3 spells then applying the highest total). This is the more generous,
yet probably less correct interpretation, in my opinion.
It seems to me that the Senior GM ruled more favorably than either of
those two interpretations, and as such, I fail to see what you are
actually complaining about. And, it seems, that Wizards Customer
Service (a more complete waste of money and a more completely useless
group of rules interpretation people I have yet to see) can't even read
their own rules and apply them.
As for your last quoted text, perhaps you should really pay attention to
what you're reading. That entire paragraph speaks specifically of
"modifiers to a given check or roll". Damage is not a modifier to anything.
Now, casting aspersions on the list is pretty childish, and insulting
everyone who doesn't agree with you is just plain sad and pathetic.
Perhaps, next time you wish to vent, you should do what you accuse
everyone else of not doing, and *READ* all the relevant text, and not
just the piece of the text that, when taken out of context from the rest
of the paragraph, seems to support your argument.
Brooks
emailman wrote:
>
> Any spell (whether it affects a creature, object, or area) does not
> stack with itself per PHB page 313, prgr #4, lines 4-5. `Just to
> confirm, I asked wizards. Their official reply is:
>
> "Spells do not normally stack so the creature is going to take
> damage from 1 spell though all will be active in that area." -Quote
>
> It often amazes me to see folks look at text and completely dismiss it
> as not meaning what seems perfectly clear to me. Though I was once a
> tech writer, but still, when it says: "...do not stack if they have the
> same descriptor or come from the same source such as the same spell
> cast twice in succession." Come on. How does anyone with an Int of 4
> not understand this?!
>
> -A
>
> --- In GranMarch@yahoogroups.com <mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com>,
> "Paul Waltman" <pdwaltman@...> wrote:
> >
> > Your interpretation and mine on overlap are in sync.
> >
> > However as you can see on this list there are those that believe
> > differently.
> >
> > Certainly, I'll have to make sure it is clear in future, what ones there
> > are, Gran March games.
> >
> > Dennis
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com <mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com>
> [mailto:GranMarch@yahoogroups.com <mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com>]
> On Behalf
> > Of Michael Eshleman
> > Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 3:33 PM
> > To: granmarch@yahoogroups.com <mailto:granmarch%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: RE: [GranMarch] Re: MACE thanks
> >
> >
> > > So you seem to be saying that if three cloudkill spells are cast
> in the
> > same
> > > space (complete overlap), that your interpretation would have the
> player
> > > characters make three saving throws each round likely at best
> losing 3d4/2
> > > damage each round?
> > >
> > > Dennis
> >
> > I didn't see anything in the original e-mail about overlapping areas of
> > effect, just effect stacking. IMO if multiple cloudkill spells (or
> another
> > continuous area spell like blistering radiance, acid fog or solid fog)
> > overlap you are only affected by one.
> >
> > Which was (according to my information) the ruling given by the
> senior GM at
> > the convention and followed by the table judge. Where multiple
> cloudkill
> > spells overlap, you are only affected by one.
> >
> > -Michael Eshleman
> > __________________________________________________________
> > Put your friends on the big screen with Windows VistaR + Windows LiveT.
> >
> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/shop/specialoffers.mspx?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_CPC_
> <http://www.microsoft.com/windows/shop/specialoffers.mspx?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_CPC_>
> > MediaCtr_bigscreen_102007
> >
> > Main Website: http://granmarch.sheldomar-valley.org
> <http://granmarch.sheldomar-valley.org>
> > Mirror Site: http://members.aol.com/aeontrin02/
> <http://members.aol.com/aeontrin02/>
> >
> > Community email addresses:
> > Post message: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Subscribe: GranMarch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:GranMarch-subscribe%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Unsubscribe: GranMarch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:GranMarch-unsubscribe%40yahoogroups.com>
> > List owner: GranMarch-owner@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:GranMarch-owner%40yahoogroups.com>
> >
> > Shortcut URL to this page:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GranMarch
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GranMarch>
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Why?
Getting caught in multiple fireballs means full effect from each.
Multiple incendiary clouds would still do full damage from each. Damage
from getting stung by multiple scorpions stacks, including poison
damage. We are talking about damage, not effects here. Cloudkill does
stat damage, but it is still damage. Any effects, such as reduced
visibility, would not stack. Multi-round exposure from the same spell
and overlapping spells should all be at full effect.
-----Original Message-----
From: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com [mailto:GranMarch@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Michael Eshleman
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 11:33 PM
To: granmarch@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [GranMarch] Re: MACE thanks
> So you seem to be saying that if three cloudkill spells are cast in
> the same space (complete overlap), that your interpretation would have
> the player characters make three saving throws each round likely at
> best losing 3d4/2 damage each round?
>
> Dennis
I didn't see anything in the original e-mail about overlapping areas of
effect, just effect stacking. IMO if multiple cloudkill spells (or
another continuous area spell like blistering radiance, acid fog or
solid fog) overlap you are only affected by one.
Which was (according to my information) the ruling given by the senior
GM at the convention and followed by the table judge. Where multiple
cloudkill spells overlap, you are only affected by one.
-Michael Eshleman
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Sorry, I probably needed the next line too, depending on APL:
"A living creature with 6 or more HD takes 1d4 points of Constitution
damage on your turn each round while in the cloud (a successful
Fortitude save halves this damage)."
-Eric
On Nov 26, 2007 10:04 PM, Eric Pelkey <alakhai.vaynard@...> wrote:
> Which point are you arguing? That two distinct cloudkills in the same
> area do not require two saves in the same round, or that cloudkill
> can't do more damage with a single casting over multiple rounds?
>
> It seems like you are arguing the latter, since it was already
> mentioned that as far as we are aware the ruling from the senior judge
> was that the multiple castings did not stack.
>
> If that is the case, try reading Cloudkill itself:
>
> "A living creature with 4 to 6 HD is slain unless it succeeds on a
> Fortitude save (in which case it takes 1d4 points of Constitution
> damage on your turn each round while in the cloud)."
>
> How can anyone with an Int of 4 not understand this?
>
> -Eric
>
>
> On Nov 26, 2007 9:46 PM, emailman <platinumgray@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Any spell (whether it affects a creature, object, or area) does not
> > stack with itself per PHB page 313, prgr #4, lines 4-5. `Just to
> > confirm, I asked wizards. Their official reply is:
> >
> > "Spells do not normally stack so the creature is going to take
> > damage from 1 spell though all will be active in that area." -Quote
> >
> > It often amazes me to see folks look at text and completely dismiss it
> > as not meaning what seems perfectly clear to me. Though I was once a
> > tech writer, but still, when it says: "do not stack if they have the
> > same descriptor or come from the same source such as the same spell
> > cast twice in succession." Come on. How does anyone with an Int of 4
> > not understand this?!
> >
> > -A
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In GranMarch@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Waltman" <pdwaltman@...> wrote:
> > >
> > > Your interpretation and mine on overlap are in sync.
> > >
> > > However as you can see on this list there are those that believe
> > > differently.
> > >
> > > Certainly, I'll have to make sure it is clear in future, what ones there
> > > are, Gran March games.
> > >
> > > Dennis
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com [mailto:GranMarch@yahoogroups.com]
> > On Behalf
> > > Of Michael Eshleman
> > > Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 3:33 PM
> > > To: granmarch@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: RE: [GranMarch] Re: MACE thanks
> > >
> > >
> > > > So you seem to be saying that if three cloudkill spells are cast
> > in the
> > > same
> > > > space (complete overlap), that your interpretation would have the
> > player
> > > > characters make three saving throws each round likely at best
> > losing 3d4/2
> > > > damage each round?
> > > >
> > > > Dennis
> > >
> > > I didn't see anything in the original e-mail about overlapping areas of
> > > effect, just effect stacking. IMO if multiple cloudkill spells (or
> > another
> > > continuous area spell like blistering radiance, acid fog or solid fog)
> > > overlap you are only affected by one.
> > >
> > > Which was (according to my information) the ruling given by the
> > senior GM at
> > > the convention and followed by the table judge. Where multiple
> > cloudkill
> > > spells overlap, you are only affected by one.
> > >
> > > -Michael Eshleman
> > > __________________________________________________________
> > > Put your friends on the big screen with Windows VistaR + Windows LiveT.
> > >
> >
> > http://www.microsoft.com/windows/shop/specialoffers.mspx?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_CPC_
> > > MediaCtr_bigscreen_102007
> > >
> > > Main Website: http://granmarch.sheldomar-valley.org
> > > Mirror Site: http://members.aol.com/aeontrin02/
> > >
> > > Community email addresses:
> > > Post message: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subscribe: GranMarch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > > Unsubscribe: GranMarch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > > List owner: GranMarch-owner@yahoogroups.com
> > >
> > > Shortcut URL to this page:
> > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GranMarch
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
Which point are you arguing? That two distinct cloudkills in the same
area do not require two saves in the same round, or that cloudkill
can't do more damage with a single casting over multiple rounds?
It seems like you are arguing the latter, since it was already
mentioned that as far as we are aware the ruling from the senior judge
was that the multiple castings did not stack.
If that is the case, try reading Cloudkill itself:
"A living creature with 4 to 6 HD is slain unless it succeeds on a
Fortitude save (in which case it takes 1d4 points of Constitution
damage on your turn each round while in the cloud)."
How can anyone with an Int of 4 not understand this?
-Eric
On Nov 26, 2007 9:46 PM, emailman <platinumgray@...> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Any spell (whether it affects a creature, object, or area) does not
> stack with itself per PHB page 313, prgr #4, lines 4-5. `Just to
> confirm, I asked wizards. Their official reply is:
>
> "Spells do not normally stack so the creature is going to take
> damage from 1 spell though all will be active in that area." -Quote
>
> It often amazes me to see folks look at text and completely dismiss it
> as not meaning what seems perfectly clear to me. Though I was once a
> tech writer, but still, when it says: "do not stack if they have the
> same descriptor or come from the same source such as the same spell
> cast twice in succession." Come on. How does anyone with an Int of 4
> not understand this?!
>
> -A
>
>
>
> --- In GranMarch@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Waltman" <pdwaltman@...> wrote:
> >
> > Your interpretation and mine on overlap are in sync.
> >
> > However as you can see on this list there are those that believe
> > differently.
> >
> > Certainly, I'll have to make sure it is clear in future, what ones there
> > are, Gran March games.
> >
> > Dennis
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com [mailto:GranMarch@yahoogroups.com]
> On Behalf
> > Of Michael Eshleman
> > Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 3:33 PM
> > To: granmarch@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: RE: [GranMarch] Re: MACE thanks
> >
> >
> > > So you seem to be saying that if three cloudkill spells are cast
> in the
> > same
> > > space (complete overlap), that your interpretation would have the
> player
> > > characters make three saving throws each round likely at best
> losing 3d4/2
> > > damage each round?
> > >
> > > Dennis
> >
> > I didn't see anything in the original e-mail about overlapping areas of
> > effect, just effect stacking. IMO if multiple cloudkill spells (or
> another
> > continuous area spell like blistering radiance, acid fog or solid fog)
> > overlap you are only affected by one.
> >
> > Which was (according to my information) the ruling given by the
> senior GM at
> > the convention and followed by the table judge. Where multiple
> cloudkill
> > spells overlap, you are only affected by one.
> >
> > -Michael Eshleman
> > __________________________________________________________
> > Put your friends on the big screen with Windows VistaR + Windows LiveT.
> >
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/shop/specialoffers.mspx?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_CPC_
> > MediaCtr_bigscreen_102007
> >
> > Main Website: http://granmarch.sheldomar-valley.org
> > Mirror Site: http://members.aol.com/aeontrin02/
> >
> > Community email addresses:
> > Post message: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com
> > Subscribe: GranMarch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > Unsubscribe: GranMarch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > List owner: GranMarch-owner@yahoogroups.com
> >
> > Shortcut URL to this page:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GranMarch
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
>
>
>
>
Why do you keep arguing with people who are agreeing with you? And why this
pathetic appeal to a very, very marginal authority? (WotC customer service
is widely known and held in contempt for their lack of understanding of the
rules of the games they publish - though they happened to get this one right.)
This was asked and answered at the convention - characters in the area of
multiple cloudkill spells only take damage from one. On the other hand, it's
damage (not a penalty), so the effects of multiple exposures do stack, just
like the damage from multiple fireballs stack.
Nick Perch
In a message dated 11/26/2007 9:47:34 PM Eastern Standard Time,
platinumgray@... writes:
>Any spell (whether it affects a creature, object, or area) does not
>stack with itself per PHB page 313, prgr #4, lines 4-5. `Just to
>confirm, I asked wizards. Their official reply is:
>
>"Spells do not normally stack so the creature is going to take
>damage from 1 spell though all will be active in that area." -Quote
**************************************Check out AOL's list of 2007's hottest
products.
(http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop00030000000001)
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
-----Original Message-----
From: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com [mailto:GranMarch@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of allen
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 3:32 PM
To: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [SPAM] Re: [GranMarch] Re: MACE thanks
.
so, a delay poison would delay the effective the
damage taken until either the duration expires,
or it's dispelled in which the accumulated damage is
taken all at once if not neutralized beforehand.
=========================================================
For all but the lowest APL tables, a 300 GP core purchase Delay Poison
Potion is something that could be expected of characters. Certainly
previous events in this series have had such casting creatures, so an
expectation of a chance of such in the future events in the series should
have been contemplated. Arcane casters (wizards, sorcerers, war mages at
least, I don't know about beguilers, hexblades and bards) and druids
probably should have had gust of wind scrolls for the same reason (except
those who can't cast evocation spells), which are even cheaper and get rid
of cloudkill spells in their line of effect (in one round). I have
non-casting characters with such scrolls, for the just in case, and I can't
play in Gran March events (the spell also gets rid of Obscuring Mist, Fog
Cloud, Solid Fog and Acid Fog spells; [the next time the Mimic sets off the
acid fog trap my wizard will be ready]).
A problem with the delay poison defense is that if there is no neutralize
poison within the duration of the spell (a potion being 3 hours, unless the
person purchased the extended delay poison potion that appeared on some past
AR (that one was 10 hours)), then all the potion does is delay death. And
area dispel magic spells are a real danger.
Of course, people could have used their potion in the game earlier and faced
this again (the policy of two comes in here). On the other hand, I know of
quite a few people who refuse to "waste" their money buying scrolls and
potions; there are some one shot items that almost approach necessity.
Certainly there are a few rare occasions that having the one potion or
scroll can save your life (or soul). Having a few on hand (keep them out of
the haversack) is a good investment.
Dennis Waltman
Your interpretation and mine on overlap are in sync.
However as you can see on this list there are those that believe
differently.
Certainly, I'll have to make sure it is clear in future, what ones there
are, Gran March games.
Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com [mailto:GranMarch@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Michael Eshleman
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 3:33 PM
To: granmarch@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [GranMarch] Re: MACE thanks
> So you seem to be saying that if three cloudkill spells are cast in the
same
> space (complete overlap), that your interpretation would have the player
> characters make three saving throws each round likely at best losing 3d4/2
> damage each round?
>
> Dennis
I didn't see anything in the original e-mail about overlapping areas of
effect, just effect stacking. IMO if multiple cloudkill spells (or another
continuous area spell like blistering radiance, acid fog or solid fog)
overlap you are only affected by one.
Which was (according to my information) the ruling given by the senior GM at
the convention and followed by the table judge. Where multiple cloudkill
spells overlap, you are only affected by one.
-Michael Eshleman
_________________________________________________________________
Put your friends on the big screen with Windows VistaR + Windows LiveT.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/shop/specialoffers.mspx?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_CPC_
MediaCtr_bigscreen_102007
Main Website: http://granmarch.sheldomar-valley.org
Mirror Site: http://members.aol.com/aeontrin02/
Community email addresses:
Post message: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com
Subscribe: GranMarch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Unsubscribe: GranMarch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
List owner: GranMarch-owner@yahoogroups.com
Shortcut URL to this page:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GranMarch
Yahoo! Groups Links
i agree with this effect.
damage is accumulative from any source, even if
it's duplicated from the same spell.
thus, even a twinned spell of cloud kill would be nasty.
however, the effects are ppoison based, thus any
spell or ability that negates poison would stop the effect.
so, a delay poison would delay the effective the
damage taken until either the duration expires,
or it's dispelled in which the accumulated damage is
taken all at once if not neutralized beforehand.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Waltman" <pdwaltman@...>
To: <GranMarch@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 12:21 PM
Subject: RE: [GranMarch] Re: MACE thanks
> So you seem to be saying that if three cloudkill spells are cast in the
> same
> space (complete overlap), that your interpretation would have the player
> characters make three saving throws each round likely at best losing 3d4/2
> damage each round?
>
> Dennis
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com [mailto:GranMarch@yahoogroups.com] On
> Behalf
> Of Michael Eshleman
> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 8:54 AM
> To: granmarch@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [GranMarch] Re: MACE thanks
>
>
>> The GM &
>> senior judge also let the effects of the same spell stack with itself
>> resulting in PC constitution scores approaching 0. FYI folks, multiple
>> castings of the same spell do not stack with itself (Wizards verified
>> this)!
>
> I assume you are talking about cloudkill, which does Constitution damage.
> The spell stacking rules are for spells with continuous effects that
> expire
> after an amount of time. Spells that deal damage deal that damage
> instantaneously, there is no ongoing effect. For example, if you are in
> the
> area of a blistering radiance spell you take hit point damage each round
> from the spell. If you are in a cloudkill you take Constitution damage
> each
> round (getting saving throws where appropriate for the spell of course).
>
> -Michael Eshleman
> _________________________________________________________________
> You keep typing, we keep giving. Download Messenger and join the i'm
> Initiative now.
> http://im.live.com/messenger/im/home/?source=TAGLM
>
> Main Website: http://granmarch.sheldomar-valley.org
> Mirror Site: http://members.aol.com/aeontrin02/
>
> Community email addresses:
> Post message: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com
> Subscribe: GranMarch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> Unsubscribe: GranMarch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> List owner: GranMarch-owner@yahoogroups.com
>
> Shortcut URL to this page:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GranMarch
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Main Website: http://granmarch.sheldomar-valley.org
> Mirror Site: http://members.aol.com/aeontrin02/
>
> Community email addresses:
> Post message: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com
> Subscribe: GranMarch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> Unsubscribe: GranMarch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> List owner: GranMarch-owner@yahoogroups.com
>
> Shortcut URL to this page:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GranMarch
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
> So you seem to be saying that if three cloudkill spells are cast in the same
> space (complete overlap), that your interpretation would have the player
> characters make three saving throws each round likely at best losing 3d4/2
> damage each round?
>
> Dennis
I didn't see anything in the original e-mail about overlapping areas of effect,
just effect stacking. IMO if multiple cloudkill spells (or another continuous
area spell like blistering radiance, acid fog or solid fog) overlap you are only
affected by one.
Which was (according to my information) the ruling given by the senior GM at the
convention and followed by the table judge. Where multiple cloudkill spells
overlap, you are only affected by one.
-Michael Eshleman
_________________________________________________________________
Put your friends on the big screen with Windows Vista + Windows Live.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/shop/specialoffers.mspx?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_CPC_Medi\
aCtr_bigscreen_102007
Why would they not?
Ed P.
________________________________
From: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com [mailto:GranMarch@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Paul Waltman
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 3:22 PM
To: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [GranMarch] Re: MACE thanks
So you seem to be saying that if three cloudkill spells are cast in the same
space (complete overlap), that your interpretation would have the player
characters make three saving throws each round likely at best losing 3d4/2
damage each round?
Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com <mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:GranMarch@yahoogroups.com <mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf
Of Michael Eshleman
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 8:54 AM
To: granmarch@yahoogroups.com <mailto:granmarch%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [GranMarch] Re: MACE thanks
> The GM &
> senior judge also let the effects of the same spell stack with itself
> resulting in PC constitution scores approaching 0. FYI folks, multiple
> castings of the same spell do not stack with itself (Wizards verified
> this)!
I assume you are talking about cloudkill, which does Constitution damage.
The spell stacking rules are for spells with continuous effects that expire
after an amount of time. Spells that deal damage deal that damage
instantaneously, there is no ongoing effect. For example, if you are in the
area of a blistering radiance spell you take hit point damage each round
from the spell. If you are in a cloudkill you take Constitution damage each
round (getting saving throws where appropriate for the spell of course).
-Michael Eshleman
__________________________________________________________
You keep typing, we keep giving. Download Messenger and join the i'm
Initiative now.
http://im.live.com/messenger/im/home/?source=TAGLM
<http://im.live.com/messenger/im/home/?source=TAGLM>
Main Website: http://granmarch.sheldomar-valley.org
<http://granmarch.sheldomar-valley.org>
Mirror Site: http://members.aol.com/aeontrin02/
<http://members.aol.com/aeontrin02/>
Community email addresses:
Post message: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com <mailto:GranMarch%40yahoogroups.com>
Subscribe: GranMarch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:GranMarch-subscribe%40yahoogroups.com>
Unsubscribe: GranMarch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:GranMarch-unsubscribe%40yahoogroups.com>
List owner: GranMarch-owner@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:GranMarch-owner%40yahoogroups.com>
Shortcut URL to this page:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GranMarch
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GranMarch>
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
So you seem to be saying that if three cloudkill spells are cast in the same
space (complete overlap), that your interpretation would have the player
characters make three saving throws each round likely at best losing 3d4/2
damage each round?
Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com [mailto:GranMarch@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Michael Eshleman
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 8:54 AM
To: granmarch@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [GranMarch] Re: MACE thanks
> The GM &
> senior judge also let the effects of the same spell stack with itself
> resulting in PC constitution scores approaching 0. FYI folks, multiple
> castings of the same spell do not stack with itself (Wizards verified
> this)!
I assume you are talking about cloudkill, which does Constitution damage.
The spell stacking rules are for spells with continuous effects that expire
after an amount of time. Spells that deal damage deal that damage
instantaneously, there is no ongoing effect. For example, if you are in the
area of a blistering radiance spell you take hit point damage each round
from the spell. If you are in a cloudkill you take Constitution damage each
round (getting saving throws where appropriate for the spell of course).
-Michael Eshleman
_________________________________________________________________
You keep typing, we keep giving. Download Messenger and join the i'm
Initiative now.
http://im.live.com/messenger/im/home/?source=TAGLM
Main Website: http://granmarch.sheldomar-valley.org
Mirror Site: http://members.aol.com/aeontrin02/
Community email addresses:
Post message: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com
Subscribe: GranMarch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Unsubscribe: GranMarch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
List owner: GranMarch-owner@yahoogroups.com
Shortcut URL to this page:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GranMarch
Yahoo! Groups Links
http://www.coolhunting.com/archives/2007/11/doris_salcedo_s.phphttp://www.tate.org.uk/modern/exhibitions/dorissalcedo/default.shtm
"Doris Salcedo's Shibboleth is the first work to intervene directly in
the fabric of the Turbine Hall. Rather than fill this iconic space
with a conventional sculpture or installation, Salcedo has created a
subterranean chasm that stretches the length of the Turbine Hall. The
concrete walls of the crevice are ruptured by a steel mesh fence,
creating a tension between these elements that resist yet depend on
one another. By making the floor the principal focus of her project,
Salcedo dramatically shifts our perception of the Turbine Hall's
architecture, subtly subverting its claims to monumentality and
grandeur. Shibboleth asks questions about the interaction of sculpture
and space, about architecture and the values it enshrines, and about
the shaky ideological foundations on which Western notions of
modernity are built."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7112960.stm
Colombian artist Salcedo said the work symbolised racial hatred and
division in society.
------------------------------------------------------------------
So, despite the merits (or lack thereof) of calling a big crack in the
museum floor "art", the idea that this piece is called Shibboleth, and
looks like the remains of an earthquake, an invasion of giants, and
whateverloth intrusions and is supposed to represent racial hatred and
division in society is just too much parallelism for me...
Weirded out,
Paige
--
Scorpienne
scorpienne at gmail dot com
www dot scorpienne dot freeservers dot com
> The GM &
> senior judge also let the effects of the same spell stack with itself
> resulting in PC constitution scores approaching 0. FYI folks, multiple
> castings of the same spell do not stack with itself (Wizards verified
> this)!
I assume you are talking about cloudkill, which does Constitution damage. The
spell stacking rules are for spells with continuous effects that expire after an
amount of time. Spells that deal damage deal that damage instantaneously, there
is no ongoing effect. For example, if you are in the area of a blistering
radiance spell you take hit point damage each round from the spell. If you are
in a cloudkill you take Constitution damage each round (getting saving throws
where appropriate for the spell of course).
-Michael Eshleman
_________________________________________________________________
You keep typing, we keep giving. Download Messenger and join the im Initiative
now.
http://im.live.com/messenger/im/home/?source=TAGLM
I've been catching up on some groups I haven't been watching, and I
noticed this post. That would be my name below. To fill out
the "Unknown", the location is Clemson, SC. Bill Baldwin is from
Pensecola, FL.
Nothing is really started yet (and probably won't be until at least
March), but we three admins have set up a temporary Yahoo group for the
region. The address is http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/lfrseusa/.
No rules discussions or even story yet...we're pretty much just
saying "Hey, here we are".
> Southeast US
>
> This region includes the US states of Alabama, Florida, Georgia,
Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and
Virginia.
> Location: Unknown
> Name: Scott Horn
> Position: Writing director
> Favorite Movie: Gettysburg
> Favorite Book: Animal Farm
> Favorite Food: Pizza (covered in meat products)
> Bio: Political science/history major at Clemson University. Mail
order manager for college store. roleplayer on Horde-side Twisting
Nether World of Warcraft server.
Thanks to all who made Mace happen. It was good
However, I would like to offer my 2cp worth of feedback on the BI. The
BI had a good concept, but the monsters for the APL were well beyond
what we (my table) could handle. We would start a fight, but never get
anywhere before the DM would move us to the next battle. The GM &
senior judge also let the effects of the same spell stack with itself
resulting in PC constitution scores approaching 0. FYI folks, multiple
castings of the same spell do not stack with itself (Wizards verified
this)!
The worst part of the BI is it ran over several hours making it worse.
Some folks need more sleep than others (I'm one of those) and the
Friday BI left me (and others) tired for the rest of the Con.
I'm not trying to slam anyone, just offering my feedback in hopes the
next one can take advantage of the opportunities created here.
-A
--- In GranMarch@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Meunier" <dagent145@...> wrote:
>
> Well, I must say for my first con outside of my region I picked an
> awesome one to go to. I had a blast at every table I played and ran. I
> can't find enough good things about the players, GMs, con staff, the
> mod writers, and even the friendly local fiends :D. Expect to see me
> back in the March sometime.
>
>
> > Yeah, course it was nothing compared to me running from table to
> > table, screaming for my life. Malcom needs to pick up Iron Will...
>
> Yeah dude, that was classic :).
>
> For Gyruff!
>
> Michael Meunier
> aka Idrin Karn
>
>
> --- In GranMarch@yahoogroups.com, "churchtwinblades" <twinblades@>
> wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, course it was nothing compared to me running from table to
> > table, screaming for my life. Malcom needs to pick up Iron Will...
> > Again, my thanks to everyone who ran and defended Shibolith against
> > the fiendish enemies of the Gran March.
> >
> > For Commandant and Country!
> >
> > --- In GranMarch@yahoogroups.com, robert green <rayous@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I also would like to express my thanks. I will never forget the
> > day my comrads life were spared by the mercy of the great Master
> > Vigilant Lord Marax.
> > >
> > > ----------------------------------------
> > > > To: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com
> > > > From: houseothud@
> > > > Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 15:48:00 +0000
> > > > Subject: [GranMarch] MACE thanks
> > > >
> > > > I want to express my appreciation to the folks who ran the
> > battle
> > > > interactive this past weekend at MACE. They did a great job
> > with
> > > > the material they were given.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks!
> > > >
> > > > Valerie Fricault
> > > > Michael Eshleman
> > > > Pete Winz
> > > > Jason Swanson
> > > > Nick Perch
> > > > Tim Murphy
> > > > Brett King
> > > > Andrew Phillips
> > > > John Brice
> > > > Brayden Glad
> > > > Eric Morris
> > > > Terry Morris
> > > > George Harris
> > > >
> > > > And thanks to Greg Gershowitz for working to get us all together
> > and
> > > > finding DMs to cover games so we could all play - not an easy
> > task
> > > > this year.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Joe Masdon
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Main Website: http://granmarch.sheldomar-valley.org
> > > > Mirror Site: http://members.aol.com/aeontrin02/
> > > >
> > > > Community email addresses:
> > > > Post message: GranMarch@yahoogroups.com
> > > > Subscribe: GranMarch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > > > Unsubscribe: GranMarch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > > > List owner: GranMarch-owner@yahoogroups.com
> > > >
> > > > Shortcut URL to this page:
> > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GranMarch
> > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > Your smile counts. The more smiles you share, the more we
donate.�
> > Join in.
> > > www.windowslive.com/smile?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_Wave2_oprsmilewlhmtagline
> > >
> >
>
Come One Come All,
We have the following RPGA Living Greyhawk games scheduled for play
at The Lost Goblin in Raleigh, NC. Please come out and play. And
remember, all GRM6-x and SHE6-x modules DO still retire on Dec. 31,
2007!
Sun. 2pm, Nov. 25, GRM6-06 War of the Undying
Wed. 6pm, Nov. 28, GRM6-08 Coming Home
Sun. 2pm, Dec. 2, INT7-03 A Dead Man's Job
Wed. 6pm, Dec. 5, INT7-03 A Dead Man's Job
Please go to http://lostgoblingames.com to check out the store
and/or go to www.warhorn.net/lostgoblin to signup for games. We
look forward to seeing you there!
- Eric Morris
Senior GM
Offline 
Send Email
Online Now 
