Close Topic Options

PBP D&D 3.5 Dark Calling Rules - Page 3

This is true it is a captive npc which has claimed to be helpful.

However the goblin has shown signs of being evil. Also the party assumes the goblin can help them further at this point. There is nothing to say the goblin is not lying and has no idea where the goblin camp is, other than inside the forest.

What sort of serious information is the party to really gain from the goblin at this point? Also just because it is captive does that give it the same rights as a good aligned creature. It is an evil creature after all.

Rules Calling Dark Dragons and Dungeons PBP

A paladin no matter what their god can kill a captive as long as it is being held. In the same token they can not turn away and knowingly let any of the party harm a captive. Do do so is a evil act to kill a person who has been rendered a noncombative.

PBP D&D 3.5 Dark Calling Rules Archive Pathfinder / D&D

I echo those sentiments, also as a GM. However the rules may appear in a book - it is, like the rest of the book, to be interpreted in the spirit, and not the letter, of the directive - IMO.

Paladins will not knowingly associate with "bad people" and hang out and be party to their miscreant activities and lifestyles - that is a common sense wording of the obvious; to use modern day examples, you don't find people that claim to be upstanding citizens or pastors/priests, for examples, hanging out at druggie nightclubs, etc. (rather, if they got "spells"/laying on of hands, they probably wouldn't have those abilities if they did that). It's not an arbitrary ruling, it's a logical extension with real-world reasoning, within context.

However, and here I go a little philosophical, Jesus WOULD hang out with the lepers, the poor, the drunks, the criminals, the prostitutes, to talk to them, counsel and comfort them, etc. If anyone was a "Paladin", I'd say he'd qualify. That's really an extreme example but my point is that you can't just take a sentence from a gamebook and rule on it out of context, in my opinion - I'm extremely liberal on interpretations of rules and restrictions from RPGs in these kinds of cases, if it makes sense to me and especially if the players can present compelling reasoning for their case.

In the case in your game here, Paladins, a religious warrior caste, specifically of the God of Justice in this mythos, are using a goblin as a source of information, to help them find and help other people and stop evil being done.

The essential M.O. Of this is the same as any modern military in this type of situation: you capture an enemy combatant, get info from him (humanely one would presume) to learn about other people that need help, and how to free them and stop the enemy from doing worse things. If your prisoner provides good intel and cooperates, it is pointless and against a great many codes, ethical and legal, to abuse or punish them, and often encouragement and reward can be used, if it proves to get better, more useful info. You also brought up the point that the goblins appear to be forced to attack by having their own families being threatened - which is injustice, even if it is to a race that might have a Chaotic/Evil "alignment" (which I bluntly disregard, personally), so here is a whole race or at least tribe whose families are ALSO being threatened - even if they're evil, they're ALSO victims, even Heironeous *might* see this (hard to say, I'm not familiar with D&D gods), as a God of Justice (capital J, meaning the concept itself, just just the concept in relation to the Man races).

People interpret Paladins as religious zealots - fanatical nutballs, and while you can certainly play them like that, that is a gross oversimplification and removes the nuance and intelligence and depth from the theological aspect OF the class itself to begin with. Nothing says Paladins just generically want to just destroy all evil and chaos across the board, with no regard for any other consideration - they may be very strongly driven or obsessive, but it doesn't make them crazy or totally unreasonable or not able to take advantages of opportunities.

But I have a great many issues with a LOT of D&D's mechanics and rules.

Edited: JPatt on 27th Apr, 2010 - 4:12am

Page 3 Rules Calling Dark Dragons and Dungeons PBP

You make a lot of sense, I can see where you are coming from. I also agree that mercy and understanding is a part of being a Paladin. Weighing the goblins reactions against the situation one would think it is worthy of life up to this point. However the local law claims goblins as an enemy an worthy of death on sight.

What would Jesus do sort of thinking wich is in path with Paladins thinking. Tends to lean towards letting the goblin live and even letting him go if he follows with the PC's requests.

Rules Calling Dark Dragons and Dungeons PBP

I think that with all the information that you have gotten and the advise you can play it out as you see fit. I know that a lot of the AD&D rules can be bent.

PBP D&D 3.5 Dark Calling Rules

I don't see anywhere that it says attacking from the side doesn't provoke an attack of opportunity. If you can find such a statement in the rules I would be interested to see the quote. Further you cannot actually flank it and still attack its head with the torch. You would have to be behind it, KNtoran and JPatt are in front of it. Certainly on a creature this size it could turn its head and bite you. If you were attacking its back I would allow it.

That being said your torch will be held out in front of you. As the centipede turns to bite you it will ignite itself on the torch. Forcing it to rear back negating its attack of opportunity. No roll is needed sense the liquid will ignite on contact with the flame of the torch. Basically the flame is making an attack roll on the oil which is spread over a large area, this large area is coming right at the flame. You would actually have to try and not light its head on fire. This is like the man with a sword / spear who waits for a creature to pounce on him. Setting the weapon under it so its own direction and force impales it.

Also thank you for the damage for the torch. I just saw that tumble almost allows what you described, I get it now. The only problem I see with this is your tumbling in from 15 feet away. Not only is that to far a distance for you to travel in one round, moving at half speed. But once you move 10 feet to attack the head you are entering back into the attack of opportunity range. If you somehow could tumble on top of its back, or even run onto it from the back, then that would work. Otherwise you are attacking from is side which is not an actual flank in this case.

Edited: Oliron on 10th May, 2010 - 6:24am

PBP D&D 3.5 Dark Calling Rules - Page 3

I don't know the particular stupid rules (sorry D20 ticked me off recently) but surely with two people in front of the thing hacking at it with swords, the creature is not going to be terribly cognizant of a sneaky type behind it? But I don't know, this is just from my "sense in my head" PoV and not any sort of mechanics view.

PBP D&D 3.5 Dark Calling Rules D&D / Pathfinder Archive - Page 3

This is true, and some of the rules seem stupid. Like I have always wondered why a round represents 6 seconds and you can only swing a weapon once in that 6 seconds. Then again within that 6 seconds you're not only using your sword but everything else is going on at the same time around you.

The two attackers at its front are going to distract it. However attack of opportunity represents a specific moment within those 6 seconds were an enemy makes themselves venerable. It is a bit strange that attacking seemingly randomly in the middle of battle would not make you venerable. Dropping ones own guard to attack a possible flaw in anothers. Yet this is what the rules describe.

I think the key to this puzzle is that rounds happen over 6 seconds. There is a lot of stuff going on in those 6 seconds. Attack of opportunity, while not necessarily practical in every instance, represents a defenders ability to threaten the area around them. While Aive is the sneaky type he is tumbling in with a torch. The centipede has dark vision so maybe just the sudden bright light of the torch annoys it and it strikes lightning quick in anger and instinct.

I'm wondering what happened recently to make you like DnD even less. If you feel it in good taste and want to share I would be interested to hear about it. That actually isn't a bad idea for a new thread. "Bad calls by GM's", or something.