Battle: Angel Summoner vs BMX Bandit

[linklord231]

Regarding the whole "fighter levels up 6 times by defeating 4 dragons at once thing:"  First, each dragon is a CR 27 encounter by itself.  Since there is more than 1 of them, that puts them in the category of "eight or more Challenge Ratings higher than the character’s level", which the DMG says requires ad hoc XP awards.  So even assuming they are supposed to grant XP (which I'm not convinced of), how much they grant is entirely within the realm of DM fiat.  Second, page 58 of the PHB says "A character can advance only one level at a time. If, for some extraordinary reason, a character’s XP reward from a single adventure would be enough to advance two or more levels at once, he or she instead advances one level and gains just enough XP to be 1 XP short of the next level. Any excess experience points are not retained."  So even if the DM decided that defeating 4 gold dragons at once was worth 200 million XP, the Fighter would only level up once.  He'd be 1 XP shy of lvl 22, but he's still only be lvl 21.  Still not all that impressive.


Regarding the whole "when does an encounter end" thing:
The DMG has this to say about encounters:

An encounter can begin in one of three situations.
• One side becomes aware of the other and thus can act first.
• Both sides become aware of each other at the same time.
• Some, but not all, creatures on one or both sides become aware of the other side.

Obviously, it's only talking about combat encounters (social encounters and traps are entirely different beasts), but that's what we're interested in here anyway.  From this, we can induce that a given combat encounter does not end until both sides are unaware of each other.  A wizard in a Time Stop can still perceive his opponents, so casting Time Stop does not end an encounter/start a new one.  Teleporting away would, because presumably he's teleporting far enough away that he can no longer sense his opponent.  Shifting to the Ethereal Plane would not, because creatures on the Ethereal Plane can still perceive the Material. 

[SorO_Lost]

Regarding the whole "fighter levels up 6 times by defeating 4 dragons at once thing:"  First, each dragon is a CR 27 encounter by itself.  Since there is more than 1 of them, that puts them in the category of "eight or more Challenge Ratings higher than the character’s level", which the DMG says requires ad hoc XP awards.

Stop there, back up, and reread it. The CR system does not change because the number of opponents did. The Encounter Level goes up for multiple opponents, as well as a -3~+3 tweak for circumstances, but not the Challenge Ratings. The CR "cap" has nothing to do with EL. And it's the same on your Encounter point, quoting starting rules has nothing to do with ending and the DMG (and I think both complete adventurer and cityscape expands on) ways to resolve combat without outright murder. Kind of crimp where ever you're going with awareness don't it?

Secondly, I cannot pull the PHB at this time but given the record of people half quoting stuff I'm going to wait to reply on the PHB part. However, two things do deserve a mention. First WotC has published Adventurers that you are expected to level up more than once so I doubt the application of this quoted rule having the pull you think it does. Secondly, Wizards & Clerics fight Gate using opponents too, lv21 means Epic Spellcasting. And I'd like to think with all that non-epic content AND epic content, even a pure Mundane can find something he'd like. You're welcome to review everything ever printed to prove me wrong through. But don't knock lv21 because it's a number to you and you have no understanding of it's value.

Edit - Trivial point since it's not about a single fight. But even a pure mundane Fighter can take the Epic Destiny Feat at the 21st level granting him an auto-cast True Resurrection every morning. It lets you continually harass the Wizard at least.

[linklord231]

I'm aware that the table on DMG pg 38 applies only to the CR of single monsters.  But I cannot for the life of me find rules for awarding XP for fighting multiple monsters at once - every group I've ever played in has simply found the EL of an encounter, then used the table on pg 38 as if the EL were the CR for a single creature.  I apologize if this is a houserule; I thought that's just how it's done.  If you could point me towards the actual rules for assigning XP for encounters with multiple creatures, I'd be much obliged. 

But as for not being able to talk about when encounters end based on the rules for when they begin, that's just nonsense.  You can't be in more than one encounter at once, so a new encounter cannot start until the last has ended.  The common thread of when to start an encounter is "when either side becomes aware of the other and can act."  So from that we know that you switch from "not in an encounter" to "in an encounter" when you go from "unaware of opponent" to "aware of opponent" (or your opponent does).  It follows that the way to switch back to "not in an encounter" is to switch back to "unaware of opponent + opponent unaware of you."

Finally, didn't mean that lvl 21 is unimpressive in general, only for a pure Fighter in immediate combat with a wizard (that is still what we're talking about, right?).  He gets one feat, which may be Epic, but which he still must meet the prereqs for.  There might be some interesting choices, but I can't think of any that would be the difference between victory and defeat against the wizard. 


Edit:  Just for funsies, I plugged in the lvl 20 fighter vs 4 ancient wyrm gold dragons into the Encounter Calculator on the srd.  For defeating all 4 of them at once, the fighter would gain 256,000 XP, enough to put him at lvl 30.  Too bad he doesn't get to keep it 

[SorO_Lost]

I'm aware that the table on DMG pg 38 applies only to the CR of single monsters.  But I cannot for the life of me find rules for awarding XP for fighting multiple monsters at once - every group I've ever played in has simply found the EL of an encounter, then used the table on pg 38 as if the EL were the CR for a single creature.  I apologize if this is a houserule; I thought that's just how it's done.  If you could point me towards the actual rules for assigning XP for encounters with multiple creatures, I'd be much obliged.

It's discussed under the multiple different CRs.

And who says you cannot be in more than one Encounter at once? IT's not in the rules and look at what your saying. Both "sides" enter a room, they are *aware* of each other but you attempt to talk them down (a skill based encounter) and after failing that they attack (a combat encounter). During the fight someone steps on a rock that moves and a dart shoots at them (a trap encounter). Since according to you none of these Encounters has ended, they must all be at the same time correct? OR, if they cannot be in multiple Encounters, when did those others end?

I'm plugged into this topics fight enough to seem on topic. But I've already mentioned the real aim here is to find a tactic to handling Gate being used against you, in this case I'm testing this theory we're arguing about. FAQ's got my back that you get XP, maybe Concerned has a point going it's half rate, but half is more than enough. But the real trick is getting it during the encounter, which currently is sort of playing into favorable rule reading as you technically earn xp as monsters are defeated, the DM him just just doesn't do the paperwork until he feels like it. To detract from the favorable reading into the more practical realm, XP is awarded at the end of an Encounter, a definition of when an Encounter is over needs to be agreed upon but the rules are pretty vague and I realize this would just be an unnecessary detraction from anything truly relevant so I haven't been to keen on pointing anything out other than it's pretty vague.

Waiting in the side lines as a follow up is breaking Gate directly. Think back to your entire argument on you leave an Encounter by not being in one. It's built on the concept if you are not one, then you can only be the other. Deities & uniques are under no Compulsion from Gate, so then by the same logical everyone else it. YEah, you should know where that can go form there. And outside of that, Protection From X is vague and intentionally designed to apply to all forms of mental control, no matter the school of the spell used. However, a freed Elder Great Wyrm may not actually be your ally, worse it could be hungry, so it's a little too unpredictable and dangerous to use as anything but a last resort. Kind of like casting True Resurrection on the Druid's Dragonhide armor

[brujon]

It might not be your ally, but it definitely won't be the ally of the Wizard who pulled it out of wherever he was to MAKE him fight for him.

I loved your example of casting True Resurrection on the Druid's Dragonhide armor... Too bad the casting time is so long, because it would be FUN to do it in combat.

[OutlawPhilosopher]

So, I've been following this discussion with some amusement. I confess that I am now utterly lost:

Think back to your entire argument on you leave an Encounter by not being in one. It's built on the concept if you are not one, then you can only be the other. Deities & uniques are under no Compulsion from Gate, so then by the same logical everyone else it. YEah, you should know where that can go form there.

What is this supposed to say? I suspect that you are trying to get at something interesting, but I can't quite figure out what it is (I suspect there's a language barrier operating here?)

[linklord231]

Again, I was talking pretty exclusively about only combat encounters - I thought I made that clear, but I guess not.  And no, you can't be in 2 combat encounters at the same time.  That doesn't even make sense.  How would you determine initiative? 

Edit:

It's discussed under the multiple different CRs.

By that I assume you mean the "Multiple Monsters and Encounter Levels" heading on pg 48.  The only thing I can find from that is "To balance an encounter with a party, determine the party’s level (the average of all the members’ character levels). You want the party’s level to match the level of the encounter, so find that number in the “Encounter Level” column. Then look across that line to find the CR of the kind of creature that you want to use in the encounter. Once you have found it, look at the top of that column to find the number of creatures that makes a balanced encounter for the party."  That seems to imply that the EL should always match the average party level, which is dumb.  Or were you referring to a different rule?

[Esgath]

To determine the XP award for an encounter, follow these steps.
1. Determine each character’s level. Don’t forget to account for ECL (see Monsters as Races, page 172) if any of the characters are of a powerful race.
2. For each monster defeated, determine that single monster’s Challenge Rating.
3. Use Table 2–6: Experience Point Awards (Single Monster) to crossreference one character’s level with the Challenge Rating for each defeated monster to find the base XP award.
4. Divide the base XP award by the number of characters in the party. This is the amount of XP that one character receives for helping defeat that monster.
5. Add up all the XP awards for all the monsters the character helped defeat.
6. Repeat the process for each character.

Step 2 is the important one.
Your rule by using the EL as CR is suggested on page 49:

In general, you can treat a group of creatures as a single creature whose CR equals the group’s EL. For example, instead of having the PCs encounter one CR 4 creature (say, a brown bear), you could substitute two CR 2 creatures (a pair of black bears), whose EL together is 4. However, creatures whose CR is far below the party’s level often provide no challenge at all, so don’t substitute hordes of low-CR creatures for a single high-CR creature.

Why it is written that way I don't know. The whole section talks about encounter levels and I always thought it meant to calculate encounter levels which are more complicated, e.g. 1 CR 3, 5 CR 1/2 equals CR 3 + CR 3(5x 1/2, CR = EL) which equals EL 5 in a whole.


Edit: too dumb to quote 

[SorO_Lost]

So, I've been following this discussion with some amusement. I confess that I am now utterly lost:

Think back to your entire argument on you leave an Encounter by not being in one. It's built on the concept if you are not one, then you can only be the other. Deities & uniques are under no Compulsion from Gate, so then by the same logical everyone else it. YEah, you should know where that can go form there.

What is this supposed to say? I suspect that you are trying to get at something interesting, but I can't quite figure out what it is (I suspect there's a language barrier operating here?)

Gate notes Deities and Unique beings are under no Compulsion to enter the Gate and cannot be controlled.

In a way, that would mean everything else is under a Compulsion and it's under that effect that you can command them as you do. Compulsion is a Mind-Affecting based effect that blocked by a couple dozen effects allowing you to free the Gated being form the Wizard's control without ending the Gate spell it's self (such as IHS would do). Now it does play into if not X, then surly Y. Which is technically an assumption that there is no W or Z. But it's one of things you have to assume such until something mentions otherwise.

@Brujon cast it on him while he sleeps? 

[Halinn]

So, I've been following this discussion with some amusement. I confess that I am now utterly lost:

Think back to your entire argument on you leave an Encounter by not being in one. It's built on the concept if you are not one, then you can only be the other. Deities & uniques are under no Compulsion from Gate, so then by the same logical everyone else it. YEah, you should know where that can go form there.

What is this supposed to say? I suspect that you are trying to get at something interesting, but I can't quite figure out what it is (I suspect there's a language barrier operating here?)

Gate notes Deities and Unique beings are under no Compulsion to enter the Gate and cannot be controlled.

In a way, that would mean everything else is under a Compulsion and it's under that effect that you can command them as you do. Compulsion is a Mind-Affecting based effect that blocked by a couple dozen effects allowing you to free the Gated being form the Wizard's control without ending the Gate spell it's self (such as IHS would do). Now it does play into if not X, then surly Y. Which is technically an assumption that there is no W or Z. But it's one of things you have to assume such until something mentions otherwise.

@Brujon cast it on him while he sleeps? 

By your argument, someone who is Lawful or Chaotic is under a Mind-Affecting effect to obey or rebel (PHB p. 104, Law vs. Chaos, the part where it discusses what neutral on that axis means).
You are confusing the Enchantment subschool of (Compulsion) with the word compulsion. The subschool is not Mind-Affecting because it's a compulsion, it's Mind-Affecting because it's Enchantment (PHB p. 173)
By omission in the DMG on p. 291, neither charms nor compulsions are automatically Mind-Affecting.

[linklord231]

To determine the XP award for an encounter, follow these steps.
1. Determine each character’s level. Don’t forget to account for ECL (see Monsters as Races, page 172) if any of the characters are of a powerful race.
2. For each monster defeated, determine that single monster’s Challenge Rating.
3. Use Table 2–6: Experience Point Awards (Single Monster) to crossreference one character’s level with the Challenge Rating for each defeated monster to find the base XP award.
4. Divide the base XP award by the number of characters in the party. This is the amount of XP that one character receives for helping defeat that monster.
5. Add up all the XP awards for all the monsters the character helped defeat.
6. Repeat the process for each character.

Step 2 is the important one.
Your rule by using the EL as CR is suggested on page 49:

In general, you can treat a group of creatures as a single creature whose CR equals the group’s EL. For example, instead of having the PCs encounter one CR 4 creature (say, a brown bear), you could substitute two CR 2 creatures (a pair of black bears), whose EL together is 4. However, creatures whose CR is far below the party’s level often provide no challenge at all, so don’t substitute hordes of low-CR creatures for a single high-CR creature.

Why it is written that way I don't know. The whole section talks about encounter levels and I always thought it meant to calculate encounter levels which are more complicated, e.g. 1 CR 3, 5 CR 1/2 equals CR 3 + CR 3(5x 1/2, CR = EL) which equals EL 5 in a whole.

Thanks    But why they put that information in the PHB and not the DMG, I have no idea... 

[SorO_Lost]

By your argument, someone who is Lawful or Chaotic is under a Mind-Affecting effect to obey or rebel (PHB p. 104, Law vs. Chaos, the part where it discusses what neutral on that axis means).
You are confusing the Enchantment subschool of (Compulsion) with the word compulsion. The subschool is not Mind-Affecting because it's a compulsion, it's Mind-Affecting because it's Enchantment (PHB p. 173)
By omission in the DMG on p. 291, neither charms nor compulsions are automatically Mind-Affecting.

I'm not sure where you are going with things, you're pretty tangled up there. It seems like you're making a "compulsion" mean "compulsion" argument.

First of all, my comment on Compulsion being a key word and not "simple" English, was already covered on page 7. In part, it is based on how well the SRD's hyperlink claiming such holds up.

Secondly, I think the SRD is spot on. If you check the official online Glossary there is separate entries for "Compulsion" and the "Compulsion Subschool". Resource into the former;  DMG's Special Abilities section doesn't discuss Spell Sub-Schools and between Breath Weapons and Cold Immunity you'll find an entry called Charms & Compulsions. It of course notes a Compulsion forces a creature to obey the caster too. Which is what Gate does. But at the end of it all, If you want it to mean plain English, then honestly a Gated creature could ignore you irregardless because Commanding someone to do something doesn't mean they will do it.

So it's actually a road only a fool would follow.

[Halinn]

I covered the DMG's Special Abilities section. The part of your argument I'm trying to refute is where you claim that it is Mind-Affecting. By omission in the DMG, it isn't. The various (compulsion) spells that exist are all Mind-Affecting, but that is because they're covered by the general rule for Enchantment spells.

[Lo77o]

I covered the DMG's Special Abilities section. The part of your argument I'm trying to refute is where you claim that it is Mind-Affecting. By omission in the DMG, it isn't. The various (compulsion) spells that exist are all Mind-Affecting, but that is because they're covered by the general rule for Enchantment spells.

If it is at all relevant you can cast both Necromancy (Compulsion) and Alteration (Compulsion) spells.

[brujon]

I covered the DMG's Special Abilities section. The part of your argument I'm trying to refute is where you claim that it is Mind-Affecting. By omission in the DMG, it isn't. The various (compulsion) spells that exist are all Mind-Affecting, but that is because they're covered by the general rule for Enchantment spells.

If it is at all relevant you can cast both Necromancy (Compulsion) and Alteration (Compulsion) spells.

Examples? For the life of me i can't recall a single Compulsion spell from those schools...

[linklord231]

But at the end of it all, If you want it to mean plain English, then honestly a Gated creature could ignore you irregardless because Commanding someone to do something doesn't mean they will do it.

I guess that means Command Undead is an entirely worthless spell then. 

[SorO_Lost]

I covered the DMG's Special Abilities section. The part of your argument I'm trying to refute is where you claim that it is Mind-Affecting. By omission in the DMG, it isn't. The various (compulsion) spells that exist are all Mind-Affecting, but that is because they're covered by the general rule for Enchantment spells.

So I don't know where you're going here. Honestly I don't.

Compulsion as a Subschool inherits its super's rules and unless it overrides said rules stand. This is how D&D works, why do you think each separate Class doesn't define Base Attack Bonus? Why Gold Dragons don't have to define their Natural Weapons, why Grease doesn't contain the rules telling you how to cast it ...Ahh to hell with it. I'm not going to waste my breath explaining things to you.

Charms and compulsions are mind-affecting effects.

Like a can of raid, it keeps pests away.

***

But at the end of it all, If you want it to mean plain English, then honestly a Gated creature could ignore you irregardless because Commanding someone to do something doesn't mean they will do it.

I guess that means Command Undead is an entirely worthless spell then.

You epically failed your Sense Motive check and Profession(sarcasm).

My smart ass comment was if you want to bitch "compulsion" is quote on quote simple English with no rule value. Then on that same road so is "command". IE you can command the Gold Dragon to eat the Fighter, it doesn't care and wanders off. You just quoted Command Undead to prove that Gate's command and compulsion words should be taken to have more value than stupid simple English.

You need a nap. Take a day off, the stress of RL must be getting to you.

[linklord231]

But at the end of it all, If you want it to mean plain English, then honestly a Gated creature could ignore you irregardless because Commanding someone to do something doesn't mean they will do it.

I guess that means Command Undead is an entirely worthless spell then.

You epically failed your Sense Motive check and Profession(sarcasm).

My smart ass comment was if you want to bitch "compulsion" is quote on quote simple English with no rule value. Then on that same road so is "command". IE you can command the Gold Dragon to eat the Fighter, it doesn't care and wanders off. You just quoted Command Undead to prove that Gate's command and compulsion words should be taken to have more value than stupid simple English.

You need a nap. Take a day off, the stress of RL must be getting to you.

No, you just need to learn what "command" means.  Here, I'll teach you.

to have or exercise authority or control over; be master of; have at one's bidding or disposal

When you command the dragon, you are exercising control over him.  This agrees with the wording in the rest of the Gate spell.  I agree that "compulsion" is using the d&d definition, but "command" is not - that only applies to undead who have half as many hit dice as the cleric who Rebuked them. 

However, just because I agree that "compulsion" is referring to [compulsion] effects doesn't mean I agree with the rest of what you're saying.  The Gate spell works like everyone thinks it does.  Deities and Uniques aren't compelled through, but neither is anyone else.  They are "pulled through", as per the spell description.  Or, failing that, you could command (there's that word again) the creature to come through.  Gate doesn't have a [Mind Effecting] or [Compulsion] tag on it, so why should we believe that it creates those effects?
The conditional statement is "If you are a Deity or Unique Being, then you are not compelled through the Gate."  You're trying to pass off the inverse of that statement as true, which does not logically follow. 

[brujon]

You're forgetting about the part where it says: "Deities and unique beings cannot be controlled in any event. An uncontrolled being acts as it pleases, making the calling of such creatures rather dangerous. An uncontrolled being may return to its home plane at any time."

And then "A controlled creature can be commanded to perform a service for you."

This is all after the part we're discussing, where it says "Deities and unique beings are under no compulsion to come through the gate, although they may choose to do so of their own accord."

Also, in www.d20srd.org, the bolded compulsion part links to http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#charmAndCompulsion

Where we can read

"A compulsion overrides the subject’s free will in some way or simply changes the way the subject’s mind works. A charm makes the subject a friend of the caster; a compulsion makes the subject obey the caster."

In other words, a creature under your compulsion is under your control. It's being commanded by you to fulfill a certain task.

To me, at least, this seals the deal: Gate has two effects.

The first effect, is to make the gate appear exactly next to the creature you're calling through it, and forcefully pull it through, this is a given by this sentence:

"By naming a particular being or kind of being as you cast the spell, you cause the gate to open in the immediate vicinity of the desired creature and pull the subject through, willing or unwilling."

The second effect, is putting the creature under a compulsion to perform "any other actions that can be accomplished within 1 round per caster level counts as an immediate task".

The caveats for this compulsion effect to work are very well defined in the spell:

- Does not work on Deities or Unique Beings
- Can't be something that will take more than 1 round per caster level.

Everything else, is fair game, and the creature has no way of saying no. This is strong evidence that there is a mind effecting component to gate, and it's what seals the deal for me.

Also of note, is this oft overlooked sentence, under calling creatures use of the spell: "This use of the spell creates a gate that remains open just long enough to transport the called creatures."

This means that the gate DOES NOT REOPEN for the creature to go BACK to where it came from. If it has a means of planar travel available to it, it can use those, and if not, it has to find one. The rest of the description just says "The creature departs at the end of the spell.", but bears no mention of the gate reopening, which is implied by the previous bolded sentence.


This leaves me with the conclusion, that there are two main possible weaknesses to the Gate spell:

1 - You can negate the compulsion, and the creature will no long be bound and, as by text of the gate spell "An uncontrolled being acts as it pleases, making the calling of such creatures rather dangerous. An uncontrolled being may return to its home plane at any time.".

2 - Gate provides for a way IN for the creatures, but not for a way OUT. Once the task is completed, the compulsion effect ends, and the creature is then uncontrolled.

In the context of this situation of Fighter vs 4 Ancient Gold Dragons, this means that with this interpretation, the fighter just needs to evade the dragons for 20 rounds (Wizard's CL), before they are no longer under the effects of the compulsion. Then, you have four VERY pissed Ancient Gold Dragons that got forcefully pulled out of wherever the hell they may have been and commanded by a Wizard who is individually weaker than even a single one of them.

Do note that Gold Dragons are good, and probably wouldn't take it kindly to be ordered to slaughter someone who, as far as they know, have done nothing wrong.

[Esgath]

To determine the XP award for an encounter, follow these steps.
1. Determine each character’s level. Don’t forget to account for ECL (see Monsters as Races, page 172) if any of the characters are of a powerful race.
2. For each monster defeated, determine that single monster’s Challenge Rating.
3. Use Table 2–6: Experience Point Awards (Single Monster) to crossreference one character’s level with the Challenge Rating for each defeated monster to find the base XP award.
4. Divide the base XP award by the number of characters in the party. This is the amount of XP that one character receives for helping defeat that monster.
5. Add up all the XP awards for all the monsters the character helped defeat.
6. Repeat the process for each character.

Step 2 is the important one.
Your rule by using the EL as CR is suggested on page 49:

In general, you can treat a group of creatures as a single creature whose CR equals the group’s EL. For example, instead of having the PCs encounter one CR 4 creature (say, a brown bear), you could substitute two CR 2 creatures (a pair of black bears), whose EL together is 4. However, creatures whose CR is far below the party’s level often provide no challenge at all, so don’t substitute hordes of low-CR creatures for a single high-CR creature.

Why it is written that way I don't know. The whole section talks about encounter levels and I always thought it meant to calculate encounter levels which are more complicated, e.g. 1 CR 3, 5 CR 1/2 equals CR 3 + CR 3(5x 1/2, CR = EL) which equals EL 5 in a whole.

Thanks    But why they put that information in the PHB and not the DMG, I have no idea...

They did, I had a brainfart and didn't quote right. It's edited now.