| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Saxmilian |
Posted - 19 Nov 2012 : 04:26:20
Being swarmed by spiders, player Dimension Doors, does the spider go along? Reduced damage from being away from most of the swarm? Damage to the Swarm for some of them vanishing? What about Teleport? Do the spiders go along oronly the caster? Ideas? |
| 24 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Aldrick |
Posted - 24 Nov 2012 : 14:42:17
Saxmilian -
No problem. I think the only thing you need to worry about is being consistent. That's why we play with rules in the first place. So long as you're consistent in what you're doing then everything remains fair. |
| Aldrick |
Posted - 24 Nov 2012 : 14:37:23
quote:
Originally posted by Lichprince
People should really just start reading the rules.
Unconscious people are automatically considered willing. As for the baby, sucks to be it if it doesn't want to be dimension-doored to safety. But if you're that concerned, just hit it with some nonlethal damage (I'm sure that some assinine GM will then come up with a stupid house-rule about how you accidently killed the baby - such GMs would also rule that the baby would die from being dimension-doored, or that it gets eaten by an astral juggernaught just waiting in the vicinity or anything like that to screw the player anyway), or if you're that wimpy (most likely from being a spellcaster in the first place), then just cast sleep on it. Or just give the baby to a true hero who doesn't have to rely on magic to save the day.
I just LOL'ed. I pictured how this would play out in my mind. The DM explains to the group that the baby can't escape with them through the Dimension Door spell, because it's an infant and doesn't understand what is going on. As a result it can't consent, and therefore can't be considered willing.
A brief discussion among the group breaks out on how to handle the problem, then suddenly a single player stands up and declares boldly after consulting the rules, "I PUNCH THE BABY IN THE FACE!"
The group, at first horrified, realizes the genius of the plan, and then begin to punch the baby in the face until it is rendered unconscious. They then use Dimension Door to escape to safety, vowing to find a cleric to heal the fractured face of the infant king.
Seriously, that's hilarious and makes me want to switch sides in this argument so bad just for the tiny chance that this might take place in a game somewhere. "And that's how King Azoun V got his crooked nose..." 
Sadly, though I have to stand with Arcanamach in this one. The DM should just make a ruling for what makes sense in the game being played. Then stay consistent with that ruling. Thus, if the DM feels that the swarm shouldn't travel with him - fine. But that means no babies travel with him either. IMO, it's fair so long as the DM remains consistent and has clear reasoning for his ruling. |
| Saxmilian |
Posted - 24 Nov 2012 : 14:32:35
Thanks for all the input. I posequestions like these to see what others do,so for me there is no right or wrong answer. I ended uphaving a part of swarm go with the Duskblade. The original swarm being reduced by a medium-sized amount suffered 1d6 damage and the hero suffered one final round of swarm damage as the now-seperated swarm broke off and fled into the nooks and crannies of the chambers, seperated from the "Hive" mind of the swarm.
Like many of the responses here, my players argue both sides of the coin (and not just to the beniift of themselves) but we are a small group and being inexperienced, they want other opinions.
I like the example of the grapplineg goblin. I agree that as an intelligent creature, that the goblin could decide if it wanted to go along with the wizard. It might not be a good thing for the hero, "you escape butwhen you arrive back at your safe-house the ugly little bugger is still chewing on your leg". Nor for the goblin, "As commanded by your evil master you do everything in your power to stop the heroic mage, as he opens his portal you feel the magic of the human trying to moveyou through space and you bravely squeeze his leg tighter, shut your eyes, steel yourself for the ride and wet yourself heavily down his leg....however one the stomach-lurching effect fade you have found yourself cut off from your brothers and sisters and in what appears to be a temple of some holy-do-gooder- god."
"Crap...well I bite hisleg some more screaming you'll never take me alive human!"
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 24 Nov 2012 : 14:27:43
quote:
Originally posted by Lichprince
People should really just start reading the rules.
But as I said, rules and logic don't always coincide. And when that happens, as long as it doesn't impede game play, I favor the logical approach.
The rules are to help you tell the story. They should not get in the way of that. |
| Lichprince |
Posted - 24 Nov 2012 : 13:10:15
People should really just start reading the rules.
Unconscious people are automatically considered willing. As for the baby, sucks to be it if it doesn't want to be dimension-doored to safety. But if you're that concerned, just hit it with some nonlethal damage (I'm sure that some assinine GM will then come up with a stupid house-rule about how you accidently killed the baby - such GMs would also rule that the baby would die from being dimension-doored, or that it gets eaten by an astral juggernaught just waiting in the vicinity or anything like that to screw the player anyway), or if you're that wimpy (most likely from being a spellcaster in the first place), then just cast sleep on it. Or just give the baby to a true hero who doesn't have to rely on magic to save the day. |
| Derulbaskul |
Posted - 24 Nov 2012 : 12:29:33
There is no way I would allow the caster to bring the swarm with him.
|
| The Arcanamach |
Posted - 24 Nov 2012 : 03:29:04
It's cases like this that make me prefer some of 2e flexibility over 3e having rules for everything. Sometimes a DM just has to make a judgement call. If you want to go by an exacting interpretation of the rules then I guess none of the swarm goes with you (and no babies either). But I prefer to look at rules at guidelines. So long as a DM is consistent and reasonable in his/her judgements then flexibility with the rules is, IMO, the best way to go. Thats what DMs are for after all. |
| Aldrick |
Posted - 24 Nov 2012 : 02:14:00
quote:
Originally posted by Kilvan
How I understand it is that a caster may take other creatures with him, but only if they are willing. A willing creature that the caster doesn't want to bring with him stays behind. In that case, a grappling goblin couldn't follow the escaping wizard.
So in the counter example I gave above, if you have a baby in a harness on your back, and you use Dimension Door the baby is left behind? The baby cannot consent, and thus cannot be willing.
Likewise, a situation where a player is attempting to rescue a badly injured individual who has been rendered unconscious. The individual would be left behind even if the player slung them over their shoulder and didn't exceed their maximum load.
My personal view is that a DM who would force the baby or injured individual to be left behind (to likely die) is being a jerkass. Most people would reasonably assume that the baby would travel with them because it's strapped to their back.
However, if we allow for that case, it therefore makes sense that part of the swarm would also travel with the caster through the Dimension Door for exactly the same reason... and the way that works is by treating them as objects because they're "worn" on the casters body. |
| Kilvan |
Posted - 23 Nov 2012 : 15:24:05
How I understand it is that a caster may take other creatures with him, but only if they are willing. A willing creature that the caster doesn't want to bring with him stays behind. In that case, a grappling goblin couldn't follow the escaping wizard.
As for swarms, I don't think mindless = object, but it becomes hard to define. Is an animated skeleton an object? A Golem? An ooze? I think they are not, but I'd leave the call to the DM. |
| Kentinal |
Posted - 23 Nov 2012 : 15:09:04
quote:
Originally posted by Kilvan
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Rules are rules, but there's times when rules and logic do not coincide. And in this particular case, I favor the logic. Bugs crawling on a person are still going to be crawling on that person when he is translocated, unless he arrives buck nekkid.
Why would it be different for, say a goblin grappling the caster?
A swarm is not a creature like a goblin. A swarm is a collection of mindless creatures. Thus most are treating them as objects.
As to DD It reads quote:
You and touched objects or other touched willing creatures
thus it might be the grappling goblin would be a willing character. It would be up to the goblin not the caster. |
| Kilvan |
Posted - 23 Nov 2012 : 14:51:09
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Rules are rules, but there's times when rules and logic do not coincide. And in this particular case, I favor the logic. Bugs crawling on a person are still going to be crawling on that person when he is translocated, unless he arrives buck nekkid.
Why would it be different for, say a goblin grappling the caster? |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 23 Nov 2012 : 14:47:18
Rules are rules, but there's times when rules and logic do not coincide. And in this particular case, I favor the logic. Bugs crawling on a person are still going to be crawling on that person when he is translocated, unless he arrives buck nekkid. |
| Kilvan |
Posted - 23 Nov 2012 : 14:19:17
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
Oh this can be fun "May" and "Shall" clearing having meanings in Law.
The Law is clear that "Shall" is a required duty, for game purposes an example a spell must be known before it can be cast.
As to "May" the law clearly does indicate something as an optional duty or power that might not be used.
In practice, doing a "Shall" often results in a "May" duty being required as a result of actions taken.
A Swarm is not a creature, it is much more like an ooze in that it is mindless, no Int. just operating on instinct.
A casting of a spell is not a "Shall" action, the Character chooses to cast a spell or not, however the character "May" suffer unexpected results from casting a spell in combat.
I'm sorry, I didn't get your point. Are you saying that a swarm, since it is not a creature (but I think it is, several hundred of creatures in fact), then they are teleported? Or are you saying that a caster may or may not choose to let them teleport with him, as stated in the spell description? |
| Kentinal |
Posted - 23 Nov 2012 : 05:12:21
Oh this can be fun "May" and "Shall" clearing having meanings in Law.
The Law is clear that "Shall" is a required duty, for game purposes an example a spell must be known before it can be cast.
As to "May" the law clearly does indicate something as an optional duty or power that might not be used.
In practice, doing a "Shall" often results in a "May" duty being required as a result of actions taken.
A Swarm is not a creature, it is much more like an ooze in that it is mindless, no Int. just operating on instinct.
A casting of a spell is not a "Shall" action, the Character chooses to cast a spell or not, however the character "May" suffer unexpected results from casting a spell in combat. |
| Aldrick |
Posted - 23 Nov 2012 : 04:36:42
Like some others have stated, I'd rule that part of the swarm (the part that is in direct contact with the caster) travels with him. The bulk of the swarm would remain behind, however, so in that sense it's still an effective tactic.
Similarly, there are more beneficial situations in which this works in the players favor. For example, imagine if he had a wounded comrade tossed over his shoulder, or a baby strapped to his back. I'd rule that they travel with him and don't count against his creature limit. They also wouldn't receive a choice - the reason being is that they're effectively acting like held objects. The only thing that would work against the PC is if he exceeds his maximum load.
I don't imagine this would go over very well:
"I use Dimension Door to escape to safety with the baby!"
"Sorry, the baby couldn't willfully give his consent. The harness on your back is now empty, and you assume that the baby crashed to the ground as you teleported away. You can imagine the baby screaming horrifically as the dire wolves begin to rip it apart."
Yeah, I don't see that going over well.
You might be able to rules lawyer it down like Lichprince is doing, and say that only a few spiders travel with him... but I'd dismiss that as the swarm counts as one creature. I think I could make a better argument that the entire swarm would travel with him since it's treated as a single creature that is literally "on top" of the PC.
That being said, I think it's more fair and realistic to say that only the part of the swarm in direct contact with the PC travels with him. The rest is left behind. |
| Lichprince |
Posted - 22 Nov 2012 : 08:46:07
Spiders are creatures, and not objects, unless they're dead (and not undead). They are not teleported with. In fact, were the caster actually willing to take the spider swarm with him, only a few of the spiders in contact with him (1 for every 3 caster level). |
| xaeyruudh |
Posted - 22 Nov 2012 : 02:09:29
Since the OP is asking for ideas, and we clearly don't have a concensus, I'll throw my two coppers in too.
I'm with the "the swarm is essentially worn, and some % of them are riding along" crowd. I wouldn't require that a player designate that he wants his character's clothes to come along on the teleport. Spiders in your hair, up your nose, and inside your clothing should be considered part of your person, to the same extent that the clothing is. Likewise, little things clinging to your clothing, or your earlobes, are attached, just like the fishhooks decorating your favorite hat... or your pieces of flair.
In this case, I don't see it as a matter of choosing to take, or not take, the spiders. If it was full-size spiders attacking from the next square, sure. But not a bazillion little crawlies swarming all over the character. I wouldn't make that a choice... dimension door could get the character away from the *rest* of the swarm, but not the part that's already on him.
I don't see the rules contradicting that interpretation... and if they did, then I'd "house rule" it because the rules would clearly be in error. 
Edit: There are teleport spells/effects which specifically don't allow you to bring anything with you, including clothes, held items, etc. I'm thinking of some portals in Undermountain, but there are probably others. The point is: those spells/effects would leave all the spiders behind, along with everything else that's not part of the caster's body.
tl;dr: if your clothes are still on your back, any critters in or latched onto those clothes are coming with you... plus anything that's crawled into your ears/nose/mouth, or is currently biting/burrowing into your skin. |
| Lichprince |
Posted - 21 Nov 2012 : 02:34:51
As per the 3.5-rules, the spiders are not teleported, unless the caster also chooses them to be the target of dimension door or teleport. No matter how willing an enemy would be, it must also be a target specified by the caster. |
| Kyrel |
Posted - 20 Nov 2012 : 21:31:59
Personally I'd say that if the critters are crawling all over the teleporting/dimension "dooring" wizard, part of the swarm goes along with him like his clothes etc. Question is how big a part of the swarm (probably about one square worth for landbound creatures, and less than that for flying creatures). |
| Kilvan |
Posted - 19 Nov 2012 : 14:39:13
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
"You may also bring one additional willing Medium or smaller creature (carrying gear or objects up to its maximum load) or its equivalent per three caster levels."
Doesn't that explicitely leave the choice of whom he is bringing or not to the caster? in addition, you cannot really consider a swarm as a single creature, after all it is immune to any spell with a single target creature IIRC.
I'm pretty sure you cannot teleport a swarm with you, even if the caster wants to. |
| Kentinal |
Posted - 19 Nov 2012 : 13:54:16
Well if you are going to treat as an object, for spiders 25 percent would move with character, inferring not bringing friends with him.
A 3.5 swarm has 4 spaces and a medium character one space. A flying swarm I would guess 50 percent in each square would be moved. or 12.5 percent of each square.
I would reduce hit points to percentage transported.
As to amount of damage done by a mini swarm, I would guess the same percentage would not apply for crawling like spider, however would drop by 1/2 for flying swarms. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 19 Nov 2012 : 13:06:49
Unless the swarm has animal intelligence or higher, I'd not consider it to have a will that would be a factor.
In this case, I'd agree that if it was attacking, it would be willing to ride thru the dim door. |
| The Arcanamach |
Posted - 19 Nov 2012 : 12:46:50
Honestly, I would rule that the swarm (or at least part of it) goes with you because, in this case, the swarm to me would be 'worn' by the caster. But that's just my opinion. Kentinal makes a good point about 'willing' creatures. I guess you would have to consider the fact that the swarm is attacking you would make them willing to go? I mean they are compelled to attack and thus would be 'willing' I think. |
| Kentinal |
Posted - 19 Nov 2012 : 04:37:08
Well edition might matter, however looking at 3.5 SRD it would appear that the spell would move person and willing creature intended to be transported.
"You may also bring one additional willing Medium or smaller creature (carrying gear or objects up to its maximum load) or its equivalent per three caster levels."
I do not believe spider swarm has a will in this matter, thus likely would not be transported. If treated as an object they might transport. |
|
|
