http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Attacks_of_Opportunity This is how I know attack of opportunities ( moving to the OOC channel for that ). I believe it works like that: When you move away from an ennemy, he has an AoO on your FACE TILL YOU DIE. Basically only way to avoid it is: - a 5' move - withdrawing ( but still only safe for the first square you were on at the beginning of the turn ) - if the ennemies are still flat footed ( they still havent acted so they actually may ). ( Also, Torma being quite a psycho at the moment ( for good reasons), he will attack this turn no matter what and not withdraw... ) edit: rules on withdrawing http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Full-Round_Actions#Withdraw
Hmm I am not familiar with such intricacies... oh well... will just have to learn and hope I don't stumble into something I didn't know was stupid (For example, if I had been there I would have runto the East, imagining me to be able to swoosh past them (the have no strong arms with which to stop me, I'd think).
Ok, you will draw Attacks of Opportunity (AoO) when you leave a threatened square, unless you do it in one of a couple ways. An AoO is one attack per creature, per square left. Also, as you will be moving first in the non-surprise round, they are indeed flatfooted, so no AoO.
ProTip: Most creatures only get one AoO per round. Let the warrior-types lure a monster into trying an attack, so that you can move past it -- or cast near it -- freely. Just watch out for enemies that have Combat Reflexes. They can make multiple AoOs, and do so while flat-footed.
True, but an AoO does not count against the attack limit in the round. So just getting it to attack on its turn wont help.
Pff this sounds a LOT more like a video game with rules then crafting a magnificent story with comrades in your friend's mother's basement. Seriously... attacks of opportunity? Flatfooted? Where's the creativity? Well this just means that this will be interesting! If there are other protips: I'd welcome them, as I have no idea what you guys are talking about (for example: combat reflexes? Also: I have no skill in spotting enemy skill so can't use that anyway). But don't worry, I'll search up the terms I heard so far, not meaning to leech from you without effort of my own EDIT: oh yeah, also: are we allowed to 'know' our enemies? I mean, you gave us a stat block for Diggles, but I'm pretty sure it's the first time my char has encountered them (but he has heard about them, at the very least in the town before going down). So I assume my char knows nothing about all the Dredmor mobs.
The creativity is in the story, the rules give it structure. Did you ever play "Make believe" with friends, and there was that one jerk that made himself invisible, invincible, and all powerful, and it just sucked all the fun out of it? The rules stop people like that from doing it. Combat reflexes is a feat, and represents your character having combat experience and being able to respond to combat situations even if you are surprised. There is no real spotting enemy skills and weakness skill. There are things you can do, like train in various knowledge skills relating to monsters, and you can use spot or search to try to determine details of your enemy. It is not the listed use of those skills, but it works. As for "knowing" your enemy, yes and no. The first few levels of Dredmor mobs are not exclusive to the dungeons, but can be found pretty much everywhere. But, your character may never have met them before. It all depends on backstory and the honor system. Just like the rules keep you from making a god at first level, I keep you from claiming intricate knowledge of everything in the universe. A good rule of thumb, if your character has fought a few of the enemy in front of you, then you can assume knowledge of the words on the statblock. The numbers are just for rules use, so your character will not say, "Diggles have an average of 16 hit points." They might say, "Diggles are hearty, but drop quickly to a few good blows." Now, this is an annoying concept, so hear me out. At certain points in some games, YOU might know something about the situation that your character does not know. That is called out of game, or meta, knowledge. Say, for instance, your character has never seen a dragon. They are gone from the world. But you have seen the book with the information about dragons. In fact, you are holding it in your hand. You know all about dragons, but you must play your character as he is, with no knowledge of what he is looking at. Playing your character as if he knows what you know, not just what he knows, is called metagaming, and is very frowned upon. For instance, in game, some one asked "Whats a Krong?" when we found the anvil. His character has never heard of Krong, even though everyone playing has most certainly heard of him. He was playing his character properly. tl;dr: It is fine to not know anything about the monsters. It is also fine to know quite a bit about the monsters. Until I start giving you hints about your available knowledge, you can know whatever you like and fits with your backstory. But at some point I will start saying things like, "You have never seen this kind of thing before." or, "This looks like a ___, but (stronger, bigger, different color)." At that point, your knowledge of the monsters should start getting less or even going away.
I understand you Godwin, I ve been playing D&D for years and never heard of AoO or anything like. Playing some RPG with no dices sometimes even, just stories. But hopefully once you get used to the rules, you forget about them and just play your character. Just do what seems logical, for example my character Torma could have run to join you guys but he doesnt want to go by the 12 diggles on the way. Wether you know of AoO or not, its just logical one would not want to run next to tons of blood thirsty monsters. Even though I, as a player, knows the diggles are flat footed and cant act, Torma doesnt take the chance. And you shouldnt have to think too much about it anyway, just let the DM deal with it If you want to see a RPG that has turned into a videogame take a look at D&D 4th edition... Its like World of warcraft the boardgame. Ruins all the creativity and liberty of actions and is generally a shame to the whole D&D world. Now let's slay some diggles.
Hehe funny, I heard some avid roleplay friends describe 3rd edition as a board game, no kidding! Anyway yeah, I know all about meta, and I refuse to use meta knowledge. Was just asking it since if it is more like a board game I can understand that that would have changed too and you should know certain things in order to apply the rules correctly. But I am glad that's still there. Also, I hope I have not offended anyone, I was just expressing my momentary feelings without passing judgment or anything. As I said: it will be interesting. Also in the meantime have googled flatfooted and Combat Reflexes.
I think D&D 2nd edition is still my favorite If you need infos the D&D wiki is great and has pretty much everything in detail: rules, equipment, feats...
Sorry for the delay. A lot of stuff got posted while I was away. Just a reminder: I'm going to be incredibly busy tomorrow, with the birth of my son. I have no idea if I'm going to get a chance to be online. Proxy for me as needed.
Congratulations! Also: LOL Also: yeah in terms of D&D I prefer Advanced Dungeons and Dragons. But there are many more systems. Played some very nice ones. Also: yeah you set that one up goooood
Oh yeah I was saying 2nd edition is my favorite, among D&D... Because of an excellent DM we had, my best campaign so far was in Legend of the 5 rings. Deadlands and Call of Cthulhu are awesome as well.
Dear God. If I listed all the RPG systems I've played with over the decades, I'd take up this entire page. And I'd probably miss half of the one-shot games I tried, long ago. One thing in the Edition Wars that I want to get out of the way. 4e is not perfect. Yes, some of it's been tailored to resemble the things you see in MMOs -- but consider that there are millions of kids out there that have been playing online games for years, and have never touched a pen-and-paper game. It's easier to get them to try it out if they can see some common elements. And we can't just say "keep them damn kids away", because most of us graybeards started when we were about ten. It was designed to play faster. Character creation, combat, DMing, etc., all of it's made to play quickly. They made a lot of sacrifices in the interests of speed, so it has parts that don't match the laws of physics. Not realistic, but it's very intuitive once you get the hang of it. For what it's made to do, 4th-edition D&D does it very well. It's very accessible, and you can easily jump into a game, or grab a scenario and DM it with a minimum of prep time. Some of these shortcuts means that it's not for everyone -- but it does NOT mean that the system is bad. Anyone who says the game prevents roleplaying has forgotten that people said the exact same thing when 3rd edition came out. I can point out several flaws in the 3.5 version of the rules. Doing so would be counter-productive, though. Just know that 3.x has just as many issues as 4.x. Neither system is perfect; I think a perfect RPG will never exist. For those of you who are inclined to give nasty names to anyone who doesn't hate 4e, remember this: they're still playing RPGs. Encourage them to try other systems like 3.5, Pathfinder, or Shadowrun, or whatever. Don't assume that they're just idiot n00bs who can't wipe their own mouths. There. I'm done. Let the edition-bashing stop here. I'm willing to discuss the differences between versions, as long as the above is kept in mind.
Oh never said 4e player were noobs or anything ! : ) I mean, I am actually currently playing a campaign in 4th ed and some of the players clearly seem to enjoy it ! Its just a very different type of gameplay. ps: sorry if you were offended !
