Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

DMs: How do you tone down your players?

Tags:
  • Video Games
Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
August 24, 2005 3:01:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

One of my players is a quintessential munchkin. He's a level 11 ranger,
and he's taken Combat Specialization (Archery). He's got Improved
Multi-Shot, Multi-Shot, Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Rapid Shot,
Weapon Focus (Longbow), and Weapon Specialization (Longbow). Obviously,
he has a high Dex score, and improves it whenever he can. So, needless
to say, this guy is fairly uber and, compared to the damage the other
characters do, he's a nuclear warhead. And we're not even talking about
the bonuses on his weapons.

I am getting the distinct impression that this guy is TOO powerful for
his own good. I'd like to tone him down a bit, but I *know* that if I
do, he'll be VERY unhappy. Unhappy players tend to leave empty seats at
my gaming table. Not an idea I cherish.

So I'm trolling for ideas on how to reduce his potency a bit, and do it
tactfully. I managed to blind him in the last encounter, and that was a
serious blow to his pride; but healing is so readily available that
it's hardly a long-term solution.

So what would you guys do if you were in my shoes?

Any help you all can provide would be greatly appreciated

More about : dms tone players

August 24, 2005 3:33:43 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

<michael.hofer@civigenics.com> wrote in message
news:1124906498.700914.115220@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> One of my players is a quintessential munchkin. He's a level 11 ranger,
> and he's taken Combat Specialization (Archery). He's got Improved
> Multi-Shot, Multi-Shot, Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Rapid Shot,
> Weapon Focus (Longbow), and Weapon Specialization (Longbow). Obviously,
> he has a high Dex score, and improves it whenever he can. So, needless
> to say, this guy is fairly uber and, compared to the damage the other
> characters do, he's a nuclear warhead. And we're not even talking about
> the bonuses on his weapons.

The PC is an archer, with the feats expected for an archer. How is that
being a munchkin? BTW, if he's Rgr11, he also has Improved Precise Shot
(Rgr11 bonus feat), and cannot have Weapon Spec., which requires four levels
of Fighter. Improved Multi-Shot..never heard of it..which book?

The weakness of archery at high level is the lack of damage per attack.
Strength oriented poison or necromancy vs. strength is a problem (penalties
to strength bow). That becomes a big deal when trying to punch through DR.
To be at their best, archers need a good position and then stay there. They
have light armor, and hit points tend to be low compared to tanks. They
don't get AoO, and they provoke. Don't pick on him, but challenge him a bit.
Wind, rain, underwater, darkness, terrain, etc.

David
--
CaissaWas__SPAMHater__INTP@adelphia__ANTIV__.net without the block
Anonymous
August 24, 2005 3:40:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Yeah, he seems to be doing an AWFUL lot of damage, and he hits pretty
much all the time. Perhaps we should review how he's doing the math.

In which case he doesn't need toning down so much as he needs to be
watched carefully.
Related resources
Anonymous
August 24, 2005 3:46:15 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

I didn't necessarily want to take anything away from him, or cripple
him, but I do want to make it much harder for him to be a damage
powerhouse.

He's always attacking from a distance. I should definitely have some of
the combatants close to melee range with him, but he always seems to be
able to stay out of range. That makes it hard to take him down. I'll
have to work harder on it.
Anonymous
August 24, 2005 6:48:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Werebat wrote:
> Telendil Silverleaf wrote:
>
> > I didn't necessarily want to take anything away from him, or cripple
> > him, but I do want to make it much harder for him to be a damage
> > powerhouse.
> >
> > He's always attacking from a distance. I should definitely have some of
> > the combatants close to melee range with him, but he always seems to be
> > able to stay out of range. That makes it hard to take him down. I'll
> > have to work harder on it.
>
> An invisible ogre mage with a coupla levels in fighter, a spiked chain,
> and improved trip.
>

He didn't say he wanted to kill him!

- Justisaur
Anonymous
August 24, 2005 7:12:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

michael.hofer@civigenics.com wrote:

> One of my players is a quintessential munchkin. He's a level 11 ranger,
> and he's taken Combat Specialization (Archery). He's got Improved
> Multi-Shot, Multi-Shot, Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Rapid Shot,
> Weapon Focus (Longbow), and Weapon Specialization (Longbow). Obviously,
> he has a high Dex score, and improves it whenever he can. So, needless
> to say, this guy is fairly uber and, compared to the damage the other
> characters do, he's a nuclear warhead. And we're not even talking about
> the bonuses on his weapons.
>
> I am getting the distinct impression that this guy is TOO powerful for
> his own good. I'd like to tone him down a bit, but I *know* that if I
> do, he'll be VERY unhappy. Unhappy players tend to leave empty seats at
> my gaming table. Not an idea I cherish.
>
> So I'm trolling for ideas on how to reduce his potency a bit, and do it
> tactfully. I managed to blind him in the last encounter, and that was a
> serious blow to his pride; but healing is so readily available that
> it's hardly a long-term solution.
>
> So what would you guys do if you were in my shoes?
>
> Any help you all can provide would be greatly appreciated
>

How is this different from an 11th level barbarian being a nuclear
weapon? How is this different from an 11th level mage being a powerhouse?

It seems to me that he has only done what is sensical. Even a novice who
wants a great archer could make this build. He has no prestige classes.
All his feats look like core feats. He knows exactly what he needs to
improve. I would call this optimized, but not munchkin.

The #1 way to limit an optimized character is to set up a wide and
varied set of encounters. (In essence, there is no single way to "best"
optimize the character.) When you are outside, is there ever difficult
weather? Have you ever fought in a windstorm? Inside, do your
intelligent critters go for the archer? Do doors and walls give
appropriate cover? Darkness? Webs? Are your encounters more than just
"fight"? How about locked doors and magical traps? What about social
interaction? What about plants, or creatures that take half damage from
piercing? The wider the challenges become, the more likely his character
will be deficient in some necessary skill.

CH
Anonymous
August 24, 2005 7:41:56 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Telendil Silverleaf wrote:

> Yeah, he seems to be doing an AWFUL lot of damage, and he hits pretty
> much all the time. Perhaps we should review how he's doing the math.
>
> In which case he doesn't need toning down so much as he needs to be
> watched carefully.

That is very often the case. Note that he *might* not be using bad math
intentionally... And even if he is, it's best to give him the "out" of
publicly assuming (tacitly or otherwise) that his mistakes are innocent.

- Ron ^*^
Anonymous
August 24, 2005 7:43:58 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Telendil Silverleaf wrote:

> I didn't necessarily want to take anything away from him, or cripple
> him, but I do want to make it much harder for him to be a damage
> powerhouse.
>
> He's always attacking from a distance. I should definitely have some of
> the combatants close to melee range with him, but he always seems to be
> able to stay out of range. That makes it hard to take him down. I'll
> have to work harder on it.

An invisible ogre mage with a coupla levels in fighter, a spiked chain,
and improved trip.

- Ron ^*^
Anonymous
August 24, 2005 8:35:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Telendil Silverleaf wrote:
> I didn't necessarily want to take anything away from him, or cripple
> him, but I do want to make it much harder for him to be a damage
> powerhouse.
>
> He's always attacking from a distance. I should definitely have some of
> the combatants close to melee range with him, but he always seems to be
> able to stay out of range. That makes it hard to take him down. I'll
> have to work harder on it.
>

Perhaps some flying foes with high movement rates can bypass the
ground-bound fighter-types and play with the ranger. At level 11, a
balanced encounter of 10-12 CR 4 creatures is appropriate.

I suggest a group of half-dragon dire bats, some of which might attack
the party while the others go overhead and take on the back ranks.
Anonymous
August 24, 2005 10:03:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Justisaur wrote:

> Werebat wrote:
>
>>Telendil Silverleaf wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I didn't necessarily want to take anything away from him, or cripple
>>>him, but I do want to make it much harder for him to be a damage
>>>powerhouse.
>>>
>>>He's always attacking from a distance. I should definitely have some of
>>>the combatants close to melee range with him, but he always seems to be
>>>able to stay out of range. That makes it hard to take him down. I'll
>>>have to work harder on it.
>>
>>An invisible ogre mage with a coupla levels in fighter, a spiked chain,
>>and improved trip.
>>
>
>
> He didn't say he wanted to kill him!

Umm... A skeletal dragon?

- Ron ^*^
Anonymous
August 24, 2005 10:16:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

<michael.hofer@civigenics.com> wrote:
>One of my players is a quintessential munchkin. He's a level 11 ranger,
>and he's taken Combat Specialization (Archery). He's got Improved
>Multi-Shot, Multi-Shot, Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Rapid Shot,
>Weapon Focus (Longbow), and Weapon Specialization (Longbow). Obviously,
>he has a high Dex score, and improves it whenever he can. So, needless
>to say, this guy is fairly uber and, compared to the damage the other
>characters do, he's a nuclear warhead. And we're not even talking about
>the bonuses on his weapons.

I'm confused. He gets 4 attacks a round when full-attacking. And if
someone gets within melee range, he's provoking AOOs like nobody's business.

Remember that Manyshot has a bunch of limitations:

(a) it's a standard action, not an attack action, so you can only perform
it once a round.
(b) only one shot gains the benefits of precision (including Specialization
and Critical Hits) for the "first" arrow.

I suspect he's been pulling some fast ones...

How did he get Weapon Specialization as a single-classed Ranger, btw?

Donald
Anonymous
August 24, 2005 10:51:37 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Telendil Silverleaf" <michael.hofer@civigenics.com> wrote in message
news:1124909175.010015.304790@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> I didn't necessarily want to take anything away from him, or cripple
> him, but I do want to make it much harder for him to be a damage
> powerhouse.
>
> He's always attacking from a distance. I should definitely have some of
> the combatants close to melee range with him, but he always seems to be
> able to stay out of range. That makes it hard to take him down. I'll
> have to work harder on it.

Here's one thing that I did. I set the party against some hags and their
cronies(some giants). The hags had been transformed to appear as villagers
the party knew to be missing(the hags had captured and eaten them). When
the fight started, the "villagers"(hags) came rushing past the front line,
appearing to be hapless villagers running for cover. They took cover behind
the two characters that routinely stayed out of melee combat(the wizard and
the bow-specialist fighter). It was pretty deadly when they revealed
themselves. Not only did they have rear attacks on unaware opponents, but
hags do some pretty hefty damage. They cut those two down in record
time(actually, the fighter managed to survive, barely, but the wizard...
yikes... he was at about -30 before the round was out).

There's not much that you can do in a "stand up" fight to prevent a
character from staying out of it, if that's his wish, so unfortunately,
you're going to have to get sneaky if you want to attack a character that is
actively avoiding melee combat, by use of trickery, deceit, ambush and so
on, on the part of the bad guys.

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 1:01:28 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Your player decided he wants to play an archer specialist and has made
his character to be the best archer he can be. He even has the nerve
to want his character to be quite competent at something, taking all
the appropriate Feats and maximizing the ability score most apropropos
for archery.

How dare he. What are players coming to these days. Really.

:/ 

Gerald Katz
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 1:02:43 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Your player decided he wants to play an archer specialist and has made
his character to be the best archer he can be. He even has the nerve
to want his character to be quite competent at something, taking all
the appropriate Feats and maximizing the ability score most apropropos
for archery.

How dare he. What are players coming to these days. Really.

:/ 

Gerald Katz
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 1:50:37 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

michael.hofer@civigenics.com wrote in news:1124906498.700914.115220
@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

> So I'm trolling for ideas on how to reduce his potency a bit,

He's pretty poor in close combat, right? So let him get swarmed by a
horde of demented kobolds (or whatever). He'll kill loads but the
rest will get to him - unless he runs - and he'll be in serious
trouble despite the beasties being very low HD.
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 2:31:17 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Quentin Stephens <stq@stq.gro.ku.invalid> wrote:
> He's pretty poor in close combat, right? So let him get swarmed by a
> horde of demented kobolds (or whatever). He'll kill loads but the
> rest will get to him - unless he runs - and he'll be in serious
> trouble despite the beasties being very low HD.

Also, as the sunder/disarm thread mentions, it's pretty easy for archers
to get screwed in melee (i.e., losing the bow).
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 6:03:54 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Hadsil wrote:
> Your player decided he wants to play an archer specialist and has made
> his character to be the best archer he can be. He even has the nerve
> to want his character to be quite competent at something, taking all
> the appropriate Feats and maximizing the ability score most apropropos
> for archery.
>
> How dare he. What are players coming to these days. Really.
>
> :/ 

Precisely.

This player dfidn't do _anything wrong_. He engaged in no rules abuse.
His character-building choices are completely logical, and obvious.

This character is in no way overpowered. There could be three reasons
he's overshadowing the other characters:

1) The player is cheating (deliberately or not) on his die rolls, or
adding more bonuses than he's entitled to, etc. The fix is obvious, in
this case.

2) The encounters are geared to be advantageous to an archer ranger.
Again, the fix should be a no-brainer.

3) The other characters are underpowered. This is a lot tougher to fix,
and shows a difference in skill or gaming attitude between your
players. What are the other characters like, exactly?

Laszlo
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 9:51:39 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

chaoslight@gmail.com wrote:
> What, he should have told the player he can't take those feats?

Well, he certainly should have told the player his Ranger 11 couldn't
take Weapon Specialization! :-)

BTW, it strikes me that a good Shadowdancer build of equivalent level
would be tough, but fair 1 on 1 opponent/BBG.
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 9:54:47 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

alordofch...@yahoo.com wrote:
> chaoslight@gmail.com wrote:
> > What, he should have told the player he can't take those feats?
>
> Well, he certainly should have told the player his Ranger 11 couldn't
> take Weapon Specialization! :-)

Well, obviously. :) 

That was already addressed by Donald Tsang, though.

> BTW, it strikes me that a good Shadowdancer build of equivalent level
> would be tough, but fair 1 on 1 opponent/BBG.

How does a DM make a fight one-on-one, without resorting to very
heavy-handed and cheesy storyline manipulation?

Laszlo
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 1:30:21 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

I believe it's a mighty composite longbow; not sure how strong he is.
(I'm at work, and his sheet's at the house.)
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 1:36:41 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Oh, now that's just evil. I like it!!!
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 1:42:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Holy freakin' moley. You should write horror novels. Will you DM for my
group? I'd gladly play just for the chance to die in such an awesome
scene. Playing that would be scary, frustrating, and exciting at the
same time!
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 1:49:32 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

One thing that I probably failed to point out is that this particular
build isn't the main thing that makes him a munchkin in my eyes. In
point of fact, the guy lives for leveling. He actually begged me to do
away with XP and just let us level at the start of each session. He's
only interested in fighting and leveling. In *THAT* regard, he's a
munchkin. :) 

This particular build seemed problematic to me, due to the amount of
damage that he's doing, and the number of shots he's pulling off. (I
seem to recall him rolling 6 attack dice per round, which seems off.)
Again, as others have pointed out, that's probably my fault. The
probelm is likely not the build, per se, but the way he's interpreting
it, and my trusting his interpretation of it. (By the way, Improved
Precise Shot is in Complete Warrior, I believe.)

I certainly don't want to disillusion him or make him unhappy by
smacking him around with the DM's nerfbat. Rather, I'd like to
challenge him, and put his life at serious risk. Unfortunately, doing
that without annihilating the other players is a problem (since they
aren't optimized like he is).

That's why I'm fishing for ideas. And let me tell you, you guys have
some fantastic ideas. Despite sounding like a dick DM in my original
post, I'm glad I wrote it (though I admit it could have been more
accurately worded).
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 2:07:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

chaoslight@gmail.com wrote:
> alordofch...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>>chaoslight@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>What, he should have told the player he can't take those feats?
>>
>>Well, he certainly should have told the player his Ranger 11 couldn't
>>take Weapon Specialization! :-)
>
>
> Well, obviously. :) 
>
> That was already addressed by Donald Tsang, though.
>
>
>>BTW, it strikes me that a good Shadowdancer build of equivalent level
>>would be tough, but fair 1 on 1 opponent/BBG.
>
>
> How does a DM make a fight one-on-one, without resorting to very
> heavy-handed and cheesy storyline manipulation?

What, the PCs never EVER split up?

DM: "OK, you guys have a few months of down time in Greyhawk... I'd
like to know roughly what you spend your time on and who you spend it with."

Players: "We rent one room at the inn that's big enough for ALL of us to
sleep in. We barricade ourselves in the room and sleep in shifts.
Whenever we are awake we have our armor on and weapons drawn and ready,
spaced evenly around the room in case of area effect spells. If there
is a knock at the door, we wake the sleeping and cast buff spells before
we even acknowledge that we are present. The cleric casts Create Food
and Water to feed everyone and we hire a commoner to change our chamber
pots."

- Ron ^*^
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 2:10:32 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Justisaur wrote:
> Werebat wrote:
> > chaoslight@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > Werebat wrote:

> > >>DM: "OK, you guys have a few months of down time in Greyhawk... I'd
> > >>like to know roughly what you spend your time on and who you spend it with."
> > >>
> > >>Players: "We rent one room at the inn that's big enough for ALL of us to
> > >>sleep in. We barricade ourselves in the room and sleep in shifts.
> > >>Whenever we are awake we have our armor on and weapons drawn and ready,
> > >>spaced evenly around the room in case of area effect spells. If there
> > >>is a knock at the door, we wake the sleeping and cast buff spells before
> > >>we even acknowledge that we are present. The cleric casts Create Food
> > >>and Water to feed everyone and we hire a commoner to change our chamber
> > >>pots."

Back in highschool (1979 or so) I had a party INSIST that of course
they had taken all these silly precausions in town and at the inn.

I agreed and played the planned encounter out accordingly.

IIRC the next town the guard arrested them (their "routine", "we
always do this" precausions would make any official paranoid, and
the officials had no reason to coddle wander thugs who made them
paranoid), the next town they got into a fight with half the town,
the next town a REALLY skilled thief decided to steal whatever it
was that they were guarding that was so important.

The next town they anounced that they were acting like normal
people, and we had no further problems.

Talking it out would have been much better (I was young and
foolish), but this worked and the players agreed it was a likely
set of consequences to their described actions.

> > This sort of thing happens all the time, though. I learned my lesson
> > when I tried to have a bronze dragon "discretely" observe the party in
> > seagull form, and made the mistake of mentioning that there was a
> > seagull on the beach. That seagull became the target of two or three
> > divinatory spells as soon as I mentioned it.
> >
> > Useful tool for making the PCs blow resources, though. "You see a crow
> > in a nearby tree..."

I have a rule that if you are investigating EVERYTHING you encounter
animals/civilians/whatever at least once an hour or so. They don't
fuss about such things being abstracted away, there is no need to
mention the bird unless someone makes a high enough spot/sense motive
to notice it is not acting normally.

But it also works surprisingly well to just give the players the out
of character information that they are being spied on by a familiar,
tell them that their characters don't know, and expect them to react
as their characters should. I find that most players are perfectly
capable of firewalling backstory their characters don't know and
that many appreciate having the full story. And if you have forgotten
the obscure "spot enemy familiar" special power you let into the game
the players may remember it.

Ask your players, then trust your players. Most of them want to have
a good game and don't want to act like jerks.

DougL
August 25, 2005 3:26:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On 24 Aug 2005 11:01:38 -0700, michael.hofer@civigenics.com
wrote:

>One of my players is a quintessential munchkin. He's a level 11 ranger,
>and he's taken Combat Specialization (Archery). He's got Improved
>Multi-Shot, Multi-Shot, Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Rapid Shot,
>Weapon Focus (Longbow), and Weapon Specialization (Longbow). Obviously,
>he has a high Dex score, and improves it whenever he can. So, needless
>to say, this guy is fairly uber and, compared to the damage the other
>characters do, he's a nuclear warhead. And we're not even talking about
>the bonuses on his weapons.
>
>I am getting the distinct impression that this guy is TOO powerful for
>his own good. I'd like to tone him down a bit, but I *know* that if I
>do, he'll be VERY unhappy. Unhappy players tend to leave empty seats at
>my gaming table. Not an idea I cherish.
>
>So I'm trolling for ideas on how to reduce his potency a bit, and do it
>tactfully. I managed to blind him in the last encounter, and that was a
>serious blow to his pride; but healing is so readily available that
>it's hardly a long-term solution.
>
>So what would you guys do if you were in my shoes?
>
>Any help you all can provide would be greatly appreciated

You can't take his character back from him - you should never
have allowed things to get so bad in the first place.

If you start introducing rule modifications now it will just
piss everyone off - even the non-optimizers. Nor can you make
the other characters more powerful - that is not a satisfactory
solution.

Start a new campaign with 1st level characters. Reduce the rate
of character level advancement by 50%. Force the players to rely
on their wits not their brawn.
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 3:38:03 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Rubert Boleyn said:
> What's this Improved Multishot? I don't recognise it. Or did you mean
> Improved Rapid Shot, from _Complete Warrior_?

You're right. I always get those confused, especially since I'm at work
and don't have the materials to refer to.

:D 
August 25, 2005 3:40:08 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Telendil Silverleaf" <michael.hofer@civigenics.com> wrote in message
news:1124988572.204806.174720@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...

> This particular build seemed problematic to me, due to the amount of
> damage that he's doing, and the number of shots he's pulling off. (I
> seem to recall him rolling 6 attack dice per round, which seems off.)
> Again, as others have pointed out, that's probably my fault. The
> probelm is likely not the build, per se, but the way he's interpreting
> it, and my trusting his interpretation of it. (By the way, Improved
> Precise Shot is in Complete Warrior, I believe.)

Most likely situation is that he is mistakenly using rapid shot and
multishot. It takes looking at the types of action to see that it isn't
possible, and is therefore easy to overlook.

David


--
CaissaWas__SPAMHater__INTP@adelphia__ANTIV__.net without the block
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 3:55:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Telendil Silverleaf wrote:
> One thing that I probably failed to point out is that this particular
> build isn't the main thing that makes him a munchkin in my eyes. In
> point of fact, the guy lives for leveling. He actually begged me to do
> away with XP and just let us level at the start of each session. He's
> only interested in fighting and leveling. In *THAT* regard, he's a
> munchkin. :) 
>
> This particular build seemed problematic to me, due to the amount of
> damage that he's doing, and the number of shots he's pulling off. (I
> seem to recall him rolling 6 attack dice per round, which seems off.)
> Again, as others have pointed out, that's probably my fault. The
> probelm is likely not the build, per se, but the way he's interpreting
> it, and my trusting his interpretation of it. (By the way, Improved
> Precise Shot is in Complete Warrior, I believe.)
>
> I certainly don't want to disillusion him or make him unhappy by
> smacking him around with the DM's nerfbat. Rather, I'd like to
> challenge him, and put his life at serious risk. Unfortunately, doing
> that without annihilating the other players is a problem (since they
> aren't optimized like he is).
>
> That's why I'm fishing for ideas. And let me tell you, you guys have
> some fantastic ideas. Despite sounding like a dick DM in my original
> post, I'm glad I wrote it (though I admit it could have been more
> accurately worded).
>

Dude, you have to be in control of your game. First thing is, you
already know he's got something wrong since he got Weapon Specialization
somehow, so that has to got. THen you got to sit down with his
character sheet and look up all the feats to see what they do and figure
out for yourself how many attacks he should have anf what damage he
does. That is not bad DMing or you out to get the player, that's you
(as referree) enforcing the rules. "Six attackas a round" sounds to me
like he's trying to stack Manyshot and RapidShot, which he can't do.
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 5:42:48 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Telendil Silverleaf" <michael.hofer@civigenics.com> wrote in message
news:1124988572.204806.174720@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> I certainly don't want to disillusion him or make him unhappy by
> smacking him around with the DM's nerfbat. Rather, I'd like to
> challenge him, and put his life at serious risk. Unfortunately, doing
> that without annihilating the other players is a problem (since they
> aren't optimized like he is).

Why not make the problem more "morally" problematic? It sounds like this
guy is a pretty trigger happy kind of guy, willing to blow away anything
that enters his sight line. So, use that against him.

Let him plug full o arrows someone he really SHOULDN'T have killed, and then
get the GOOD guys mad at him, and have THEM go after him. All of a sudden,
the big problem isn't that he can't kill things, it's that he's killing the
wrong things. Of course, such a plot would depend on your players being
somewhat decent role players who might actually be interested in NOT killing
the good guys.

Or, for that matter, make the target of their investigations something very
impermanent. Some commoner has information they need, and plugging him with
even one arrow will surely kill him dead. Then he can't attack the
guy(theoretically, at least). Hell, let the bad guys use this critical guy
as a human shield. Any attack on the bad guys will result in the death of
the guy they need.

The way I see it, if one PC is optimized for combat, and you make combats
tough enough to be a challenge for that one PC, the combats will surely kill
every other PC as a matter of course. So, don't make the encounters about
combat. And if they DO resort to combat, make the results VERY bad for the
PC's in ways that don't involve combat. Sure, they can kill whomever they
run into, but if they do that, it will mean bad things for the plot.

The key thing about going that way is sticking to your guns. If they bitch
and complain that they can't advance the plot for some reason, and you give
in, they KNOW they can kill anything they want, and just complain afterwards
that they don't know what to do, and they know that you'll bail em out.
However, it's likewise critical to this path to make clear BEFORE the combat
starts that combat would be a very bad idea, otherwise they can legitimately
bitch that they didn't know it was bad to kill everything. The key phrase
for this way of doing things is "I told you so". Tell them combat is bad
before it starts, then when combat finishes, and they ask about some key
plot point, you can inform them it's no longer viable, and when they
complain, simply "I told you so".

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 5:46:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Waldo wrote:

> Bonus evil: give the sorceror a metamagic feat -- Silent Spell makes a
> lot of sense in this context -- so he can also use his sixth level
> slots if need be. Bam, now he's got it 8x/day.

You can ALWAYS downcast a low level spell in a higher level slot.
You don't need metamagic, it doesn't take longer, there is no
extra cost except the slot.

DougL
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 8:03:44 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On 24 Aug 2005 11:01:38 -0700, michael.hofer@civigenics.com carved
upon a tablet of ether:

> One of my players is a quintessential munchkin. He's a level 11 ranger,
> and he's taken Combat Specialization (Archery). He's got Improved
> Multi-Shot, Multi-Shot, Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Rapid Shot,
> Weapon Focus (Longbow), and Weapon Specialization (Longbow). Obviously,
> he has a high Dex score, and improves it whenever he can. So, needless
> to say, this guy is fairly uber and, compared to the damage the other
> characters do, he's a nuclear warhead. And we're not even talking about
> the bonuses on his weapons.

What's this Improved Multishot? I don't recognise it. Or did you mean
Improved Rapid Shot, from _Complete Warrior_?

> I am getting the distinct impression that this guy is TOO powerful for
> his own good. I'd like to tone him down a bit, but I *know* that if I
> do, he'll be VERY unhappy. Unhappy players tend to leave empty seats at
> my gaming table. Not an idea I cherish.
>
> So I'm trolling for ideas on how to reduce his potency a bit, and do it
> tactfully. I managed to blind him in the last encounter, and that was a
> serious blow to his pride; but healing is so readily available that
> it's hardly a long-term solution.
>
> So what would you guys do if you were in my shoes?

Start using the odd opponent with Stoneskin up. Or just foes with DR
vs whatever sort fo arrows he has. DR is a serious damper on any
character that relies on massive numbers of attacks, rather than
massive damage per attack.

--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 8:04:06 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On 24 Aug 2005 11:40:33 -0700, "Telendil Silverleaf"
<michael.hofer@civigenics.com> carved upon a tablet of ether:

> Yeah, he seems to be doing an AWFUL lot of damage, and he hits pretty
> much all the time. Perhaps we should review how he's doing the math.
>
> In which case he doesn't need toning down so much as he needs to be
> watched carefully.

What's his bow, and how strong is he?

--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 8:12:08 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On 24 Aug 2005 11:46:15 -0700, "Telendil Silverleaf"
<michael.hofer@civigenics.com> carved upon a tablet of ether:

> He's always attacking from a distance. I should definitely have some of
> the combatants close to melee range with him, but he always seems to be
> able to stay out of range. That makes it hard to take him down. I'll
> have to work harder on it.

A monk should be unpleasant, then. Or an arcanist with Stoneskin with
a dislike for archers. Or how about an invisible rogue with a
scroll/wand of Dimension Door?

--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 9:05:34 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"DougL" <lampert.doug@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1124989832.703359.8290@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Ask your players, then trust your players. Most of them want to have
> a good game and don't want to act like jerks.
>
> DougL
>


Exactly....................

Regards, John Waters

--
---------
Notice: Spelling mistakes left in for people who need to correct others to
make their life fulfilled.
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 9:46:13 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

chaoslight@gmail.com <chaoslight@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hadsil wrote:
>> Your player decided he wants to play an archer specialist and has made
>> his character to be the best archer he can be. He even has the nerve
>> to want his character to be quite competent at something, taking all
>> the appropriate Feats and maximizing the ability score most apropropos
>> for archery.
>>
>> How dare he. What are players coming to these days. Really.
>>
>> :/ 
>
> Precisely.
>
> This player dfidn't do _anything wrong_. He engaged in no rules abuse.

*ahem* Weapon Specialization is a fighter feat, not allowed to rangers.


Keith
--
Keith Davies "Trying to sway him from his current kook-
keith.davies@kjdavies.org rant with facts is like trying to create
keith.davies@gmail.com a vacuum in a room by pushing the air
http://www.kjdavies.org/ out with your hands." -- Matt Frisch
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 9:52:34 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Telendil Silverleaf wrote:
> One thing that I probably failed to point out is that this particular
> build isn't the main thing that makes him a munchkin in my eyes. In
> point of fact, the guy lives for leveling. He actually begged me to do
> away with XP and just let us level at the start of each session. He's
> only interested in fighting and leveling. In *THAT* regard, he's a
> munchkin. :) 

Eh, that's not particularly munchkin. Some players just like fast
advancement, either for the power or the novelty. Likewise, some players
just don't care for the bookkeeping involved in tracking XP. Now, there
other signs that your player may be a bit over-eager for powerups, like
the questionable Weapon Specialization feat and the number of attacks:

> This particular build seemed problematic to me, due to the amount of
> damage that he's doing, and the number of shots he's pulling off. (I
> seem to recall him rolling 6 attack dice per round, which seems off.)

An 11th-level character shouldn't have more than five attacks per round:
Three for BAB, one from a feat (Rapid Shot, TWF, etc), and one from the
/haste/ spell. If he's making 6 attacks, he's almost certainly cheating,
and if nobody's casting /haste,/ he's cheating a lot.

> Again, as others have pointed out, that's probably my fault. The
> probelm is likely not the build, per se, but the way he's interpreting
> it, and my trusting his interpretation of it. (By the way, Improved
> Precise Shot is in Complete Warrior, I believe.)

No, Improved Precise shot is a core feat, and one that rangers get for
free at 11th level. Maybe you mean Improved Rapid Shot, which removes
the attack penalty from Rapid Shot?

> I certainly don't want to disillusion him or make him unhappy by
> smacking him around with the DM's nerfbat.

While I'm personally tolerant of player cheating, I don't consider it a
"nerf" to rein in a cheating player, and it sounds like that's what's
going on here.

> Rather, I'd like to challenge him, and put his life at serious risk.

That's hard to do if the player is cheating egregiously.

> Unfortunately, doing that without annihilating the other players is a
> problem (since they aren't optimized like he is).

He's not particularly optimized; except for the apparent mistakes, it's
a reasonable build.
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 10:00:35 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Werebat <ranpoirier@cox.net> wrote:
>
>
> Justisaur wrote:
>> Waldo wrote:
>>
>>>Perhaps a bit baroque, but point is: there are ways.
>>
>> I give you my vote for Evil DM of the Year award. That's way beyond
>> anything I've ever done or even thought of.
>
> Eh. In a round or two, the ranger makes his Will save (he gets one
> whenever he's ordered to do something against his nature, like attack
> the party), and now the main bad guy has a buffed ranger on his ass.

Way up in the air, where the bad guy can dispel his /fly/ spell at will?

"Hey, what?! No, I *won't*... free!"
"Free *falling*."
"Aaaaaaah!"

Also, remember the BBG is invisible. The archer will have a terribly
difficult time targetting him.


Keith
--
Keith Davies "Trying to sway him from his current kook-
keith.davies@kjdavies.org rant with facts is like trying to create
keith.davies@gmail.com a vacuum in a room by pushing the air
http://www.kjdavies.org/ out with your hands." -- Matt Frisch
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 10:00:36 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Keith Davies wrote:
> Werebat <ranpoirier@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>Justisaur wrote:
>>
>>>Waldo wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Perhaps a bit baroque, but point is: there are ways.
>>>
>>>I give you my vote for Evil DM of the Year award. That's way beyond
>>>anything I've ever done or even thought of.
>>
>>Eh. In a round or two, the ranger makes his Will save (he gets one
>>whenever he's ordered to do something against his nature, like attack
>>the party), and now the main bad guy has a buffed ranger on his ass.
>
>
> Way up in the air, where the bad guy can dispel his /fly/ spell at will?
>
> "Hey, what?! No, I *won't*... free!"
> "Free *falling*."
> "Aaaaaaah!"

Fly doesn't dispel that way anymore.

Be careful -- here there be MSBs.


> Also, remember the BBG is invisible. The archer will have a terribly
> difficult time targetting him.

True enough, but he'll still be buffed to the gills.

A better plan is for the BBG to hit him with Touch of Idiocy and/or
maybe Mind Fog (though that one will get noticed) before telling him to
open fire on the PCs. He'll tend to stay Dominated for longer.

- Ron ^*^
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 10:00:36 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 18:00:35 GMT, Keith Davies <keith.davies@kjdavies.org>
wrote:
>Way up in the air, where the bad guy can dispel his /fly/ spell at will?
>"Hey, what?! No, I *won't*... free!"
>"Free *falling*."
>"Aaaaaaah!"

Dispelling a Fly spell doesn't result in a person falling. Or, at least,
not in a particularly dangerous way. Read the description of Fly again.
Or, heck, let me just quote the relevant section from page 232 of the PHB.

"Should the spell duration expire while the subject is still aloft, the
magic fails slowly. The subject floats downwards 60 feet per round for 1d6
rounds. If it reaches the ground in that amount of time, it lands safely.
If not, it falls the rest of the distance, taking 1d6 points of damage per
10 feet of fall. Since dispelling a spell effectively ends it, the subject
also descends in this way if the fly spell is dispelled, but not if it is
negated by an antimagic field."

One range increment for a Composite Longbow is 110 feet (165 feet with Far
Shot). The average on a d6 is 3.5, so so long as the archer is within a
single increment, it's *very* unlikely that dispelling the fly spell will
cause any damage. If the archer is more than 110 feet up, he's not going
to be doing serious damage in the first place (since True Strike only
applies to his first attack roll) and I might even remove precision
bonuses, as a DM, because he can't *see* the parts to hit where it would
hurt the most.


Joel
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 10:03:21 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Keith Davies <keith.davies@kjdavies.org> wrote:
> *ahem* Weapon Specialization is a fighter feat, not allowed to rangers.

I'm wondering if he's actually a rgr7/ftr4 or something similar -- that
would explain the Weapon Specialization but no Improved Precise Shot.
(Other likely explanations include player cheating and DM misremembering.)
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 10:03:22 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

We dont even know if he has WS. The DM could be saying it off the top of his
head as he said, he didnt have the chara sheet with him when he wrote the
post.

Also looking at the build their is nothing wrong with it. The player seems
to have he aproriate feats for his chosen class (asside from the alleged
WS), & know what he wants out of that chara build.

Also why is the DM trying to punish him for his style of play? the more i
read it the more it seems the DM has a personal problem with the player, &
wants to use the game to settle it.

So what if he wants to level etc, alota players are like that, many think
D&D is straight H&S. IMHO its the DMs job to try & show them theirs more to
D&D then H&S & leveling.

Also I saw comments here from ppl on how to punish him, that also involved
the party being in danger to teach this guy a lesson, why is the party to
suffer for what looks like a tit tat, between the DM & the Ranger ?, has
the DM taken the player aside & discussed his play style etc, and what irks
him?.

What do the other players think of their companion ? are they jealous or
upset over the players domination of damage? or do they rely on him to do
just what he is doing as part of their stategy?.

Regards, John Waters
--
---------
Notice: Spelling mistakes left in for people who need to correct others to
make their life fulfilled.
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 10:10:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Bradd W. Szonye" <bradd+news@szonye.com> wrote in
news:slrndgpt9l.3mj.bradd+news@szonye.com:

> Quentin Stephens <stq@stq.gro.ku.invalid> wrote:
>> He's pretty poor in close combat, right? So let him get swarmed
>> by a horde of demented kobolds (or whatever). He'll kill loads
>> but the rest will get to him - unless he runs - and he'll be in
>> serious trouble despite the beasties being very low HD.
>
> Also, as the sunder/disarm thread mentions, it's pretty easy for
> archers to get screwed in melee (i.e., losing the bow).

True, but the way I suggest allows him an out with his skin intact
and a lesson learned. Trying to explicitly screw over a player is bad
form IMO - though a campaign enemy would certainly know the
character's weaknesses.
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 11:33:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 18:00:35 GMT, Keith Davies
<keith.davies@kjdavies.org> wrote:

>Werebat <ranpoirier@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Justisaur wrote:
>>> Waldo wrote:
>>>
>>>>Perhaps a bit baroque, but point is: there are ways.
>>>
>>> I give you my vote for Evil DM of the Year award. That's way beyond
>>> anything I've ever done or even thought of.
>>
>> Eh. In a round or two, the ranger makes his Will save (he gets one
>> whenever he's ordered to do something against his nature, like attack
>> the party), and now the main bad guy has a buffed ranger on his ass.
>
>Way up in the air, where the bad guy can dispel his /fly/ spell at will?
>
>"Hey, what?! No, I *won't*... free!"
>"Free *falling*."
>"Aaaaaaah!"
>
>Also, remember the BBG is invisible. The archer will have a terribly
>difficult time targetting him.
>
>
>Keith

dont you gently float down now (3.5) when fly is dispelled?
Anonymous
August 26, 2005 12:11:19 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Werebat <ranpoirier@cox.net> wrote:
>
>
> Keith Davies wrote:
>> Werebat <ranpoirier@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Justisaur wrote:
>>>
>>>>Waldo wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Perhaps a bit baroque, but point is: there are ways.
>>>>
>>>>I give you my vote for Evil DM of the Year award. That's way beyond
>>>>anything I've ever done or even thought of.
>>>
>>>Eh. In a round or two, the ranger makes his Will save (he gets one
>>>whenever he's ordered to do something against his nature, like attack
>>>the party), and now the main bad guy has a buffed ranger on his ass.
>>
>>
>> Way up in the air, where the bad guy can dispel his /fly/ spell at will?
>>
>> "Hey, what?! No, I *won't*... free!"
>> "Free *falling*."
>> "Aaaaaaah!"
>
> Fly doesn't dispel that way anymore.

That's *lame*. It *should* dispel like that.

Maybe not wear off -- I can see it being designed to let you down gently
as part of the spell -- but if it gets taken away it should.

Ah well.

> Be careful -- here there be MSBs.
>
>
>> Also, remember the BBG is invisible. The archer will have a terribly
>> difficult time targetting him.
>
> True enough, but he'll still be buffed to the gills.

So? How do you target invisible creatures at range?

> A better plan is for the BBG to hit him with Touch of Idiocy and/or
> maybe Mind Fog (though that one will get noticed) before telling him to
> open fire on the PCs. He'll tend to stay Dominated for longer.

That would help.


Keith
--
Keith Davies "Trying to sway him from his current kook-
keith.davies@kjdavies.org rant with facts is like trying to create
keith.davies@gmail.com a vacuum in a room by pushing the air
http://www.kjdavies.org/ out with your hands." -- Matt Frisch
Anonymous
August 26, 2005 12:21:37 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Keith Davies <keith.davies@kjdavies.org> wrote:
> Also, remember the BBG is invisible. The archer will have a terribly
> difficult time targetting him.

Ha! My archer has a wand of /see invisibility/ and uses it regularly!
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd
Anonymous
August 26, 2005 12:24:19 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Quentin Stephens <stq@stq.gro.ku.invalid> wrote:
> "Bradd W. Szonye" <bradd+news@szonye.com> wrote in
> news:slrndgpt9l.3mj.bradd+news@szonye.com:
>
>> Quentin Stephens <stq@stq.gro.ku.invalid> wrote:
>>> He's pretty poor in close combat, right? So let him get swarmed
>>> by a horde of demented kobolds (or whatever). He'll kill loads
>>> but the rest will get to him - unless he runs - and he'll be in
>>> serious trouble despite the beasties being very low HD.
>>
>> Also, as the sunder/disarm thread mentions, it's pretty easy for
>> archers to get screwed in melee (i.e., losing the bow).
>
> True, but the way I suggest allows him an out with his skin intact
> and a lesson learned. Trying to explicitly screw over a player is bad
> form IMO - though a campaign enemy would certainly know the
> character's weaknesses.

But taking the bow away (or grappling the archer en masse, or both)
seems like a logical move for kobolds fighting an archer. Also, he'll
almost certainly survive with skin intact, just not the bow.
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd
Anonymous
August 26, 2005 1:45:47 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

chaoslight@gmail.com wrote:
> Hadsil wrote:
> > Your player decided he wants to play an archer specialist and has made
> > his character to be the best archer he can be. He even has the nerve
> > to want his character to be quite competent at something, taking all
> > the appropriate Feats and maximizing the ability score most apropropos
> > for archery.
> >
> > How dare he. What are players coming to these days. Really.
> >
> > :/ 
>
> Precisely.
>
> This player dfidn't do _anything wrong_. He engaged in no rules abuse.
> His character-building choices are completely logical, and obvious.
>
> This character is in no way overpowered. There could be three reasons
> he's overshadowing the other characters:
>
> 1) The player is cheating (deliberately or not) on his die rolls, or
> adding more bonuses than he's entitled to, etc. The fix is obvious, in
> this case.
>
> 2) The encounters are geared to be advantageous to an archer ranger.
> Again, the fix should be a no-brainer.
>
> 3) The other characters are underpowered. This is a lot tougher to fix,
> and shows a difference in skill or gaming attitude between your
> players. What are the other characters like, exactly?
>
> Laszlo

To be fair, I did miss the Weapon Specialization in the bow. That
cannot be for a single class ranger. That is either a cheat, an honest
mistake, or a DM house rule.

Gerald Katz
Anonymous
August 26, 2005 1:54:57 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Zeno wrote:
>
> Start a new campaign with 1st level characters. Reduce the rate
> of character level advancement by 50%. Force the players to rely
> on their wits not their brawn.

What if the players don't want to play that way? The DM doesn't rule the roost
unless he can afford to pick-and-choose his players, which few can.

--
Christopher Adams - Sydney, Australia
The geek with roots in Hell!
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mhacdebhandia/prestigec...
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mhacdebhandia/templatel...

Who do you blame when your kid is a - brat?
Pampered and spoiled like a Siamese - cat?
Blaming the kids is a lie and a - shame!
You know exactly who's - to - blame:
The mother and the father!
Anonymous
August 26, 2005 2:32:22 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Joel Fischoff (Agent) <petrukio@rcn.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 18:00:35 GMT, Keith Davies <keith.davies@kjdavies.org>
> wrote:
>>Way up in the air, where the bad guy can dispel his /fly/ spell at will?
>>"Hey, what?! No, I *won't*... free!"
>>"Free *falling*."
>>"Aaaaaaah!"
>
> Dispelling a Fly spell doesn't result in a person falling. Or, at least,
> not in a particularly dangerous way. Read the description of Fly again.
> Or, heck, let me just quote the relevant section from page 232 of the PHB.

Yes, yes, it's been pointed out. I didn't realize /fly/ had changed its
/dispel/ behavior.


Keith
--
Keith Davies "Trying to sway him from his current kook-
keith.davies@kjdavies.org rant with facts is like trying to create
keith.davies@gmail.com a vacuum in a room by pushing the air
http://www.kjdavies.org/ out with your hands." -- Matt Frisch
      • 1 / 3
      • 2
      • 3
      • Newest
!