Remove ads

A Sword Without a Hilt: A Song of Ice and Fire/D&D 3.5 Crossover

Reader mode
Goldfish said:
BTW, I think this might be the first time where Viserys' Mythic Beacon of Will feat could get a good workout.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
And Richard can totally body the plan to hit Viserys with will-save dropping arrows, since he can straight up NOPE up to six "precious, rare, limited time only" gouda arrows. Per round.
 
Paradosi said:
Are there ways to deny us that? I figure any serious surprise attack by Winter will include ways to stop us from simply escaping.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
There's a way to deny anything. D&D at this level is rocket tag. If it doesn't work, you're shut down. If it does work, you probably just bodied the other guy, or at least did something highly unpleasant to him, like denying him an escape route.
 
Crake said:
There's a way to deny anything. D&D at this level is rocket tag. If it doesn't work, you're shut down. If it does work, you probably just bodied the other guy, or at least did something highly unpleasant to him, like denying him an escape route.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I guess it's fitting that in the end, all that matters is where the dice land. Good thing we have pocket sand several deities up our sleeve.
 
Crake said:
This comes down to action economy shenanigans. It requires an AoO (for spell casters, this is practically never going to happen as there's no chance one would trigger for Viserys like it might for someone like Richard) or a readied action. It's almost never worth waiting for an enemy to cast a spell to begin with, since you're just... waiting for it to happen, doing nothing else, and you can cast tons of spells to shut down an enemy trying to do various things via Celerity, or counter spelling, or focus on taking down spell effects already running with a Chain Dispel, and so on.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Oh, yes, I know. But at some point we might want to try to go for it for the lulz (or as Buttercup). The question wasn't if we should, but how difficuly would it be to resist.
 
Tomcost said:
Oh, yes, I know. But at some point we might want to try to go for it for the lulz (or as Buttercup). The question wasn't if we should, but how difficuly would it be to resist.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
What, you mean using it against someone who isn't even remotely a threat to us?

If we use Distracting Taunt against someone who isn't a CR appropriate encounter, no amount of buffing will make a difference. Viserys' base social skill checks are ridiculous. Anyone below level 10 poses absolutely no threat to him, and I'm skeptical even a 5th circle caster could do anything if they weren't supported by anyone else.

Edit: And @Artemis1992, environmental hazard related traps don't count. As for anything else, if you have to go straight to the cheese to be a threat to something that resembles the BBEG, perhaps you have irreconcilable differences of opinion with your DM to sort out? :V
 
Last edited:
Crake said:
What, you mean using it against someone who isn't even remotely a threat to us?

If we use Distracting Taunt against someone who isn't a CR appropriate encounter, no amount of buffing will make a difference. Viserys' base social skill checks are ridiculous. Anyone below level 10 poses absolutely no threat to him, and I'm skeptical even a 5th circle caster could do anything if they weren't supported by anyone else.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Oh, I mean against a threat, but in a scenario that favours us. Imagine facing Lanna on her own, but with Richard defending us. How much mileage could we get from trolling her to not let her cast?

We might not have a problem with spell slots any more, but could we manage to block another mage in a dangerously wild magic zone without it going kaboom? Inside an antimagic field, while the other party tries to buff itself? If we really need to stop a spell but there is an army of counterspellers ready to counterspell our counterspell?
 
Tomcost said:
Oh, I mean against a threat, but in a scenario that favours us. Imagine facing Lanna on her own, but with Richard defending us. How much mileage could we get from trolling her to not let her cast?

We might not have a problem with spell slots any more, but could we manage to block another mage in a dangerously wild magic zone without it going kaboom? Inside an antimagic field, while the other party tries to buff itself? If we really need to stop a spell but there is an army of counterspellers ready to counterspell our counterspell?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Lanna (nor any other archmage) wouldn't be caught dead in a room alone with Viserys unless they were feeling particularly suicidal.

I would say 1/10 archmages would allow themselves in a room alone with Richard.

The particularly arrogant, soon to be dead ones.
 
Crake said:
Lanna (nor any other archmage) wouldn't be caught dead in a room alone with Viserys unless they were feeling particularly suicidal.

I would say 1/10 archmages would allow themselves in a room alone with Richard.

The particularly arrogant, soon to be dead ones.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

So it is too far fetched to think it might be useful at some point in the future, instead of just flexing on lesser mages.
 
Tomcost said:
So it is too far fetched to think it might be useful at some point in the future, instead of just flexing on lesser mages.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I can't think of any scenario where things haven't already gone horribly wrong for us (or the enemy) and narratively it's just not that interesting for DP to write off anyone remotely threatening, since most of them are by this point almost as paranoid as the thread is with regards to being caught with their pants down.
 
Speed53066 said:
[X] Goldfish

Well it was submit or die, so they had their choice.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
What would we have even done if they did surrender anyway? Trying to use magically enforced bindings to control people who utterly hate you is a horrible long term plan, but if they'd surrendered we couldn't kill them.

Barring the death of a companion I think they could have done more damage with that approach than they will in this fight.
Azel said:
Well, we gave them the choice between submission or death. They picked the latter.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It's funny how intuitively they grasp that being bound to someone else's narrative against your will might be objectionable now isn't it?

Apparently calling it the rule of law makes it offensive or something; maybe we should have produced a pop up book version of the imperial constitution for them.

[X] Goldfish
 
BronzeTongue said:
It's funny how intuitively they grasp that being bound to someone else's narrative against your will might be objectionable now isn't it?

Apparently calling it the rule of law makes it offensive or something; maybe we should have produced a pop up book version of the imperial constitution for them.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
See, this hypocrisy is what makes it so easy to feel and express contempt for this particularly odious character.

It is, however, refreshing to see Viserys outright dismissing their statements as fallacious.

When you're torching some devils, it's like, they're just doing their jobs. They made no bones about that, and it's easy to reserve anger for the Archdukes and leaders who led them here.

But Dusk Dancer is pissed because every time she tries to sell us a bridge, we point out all the structural weaknesses in it and then sell a better one.
 
BronzeTongue said:
It's funny how intuitively they grasp that being bound to someone else's narrative against your will might be objectionable now isn't it?

Apparently calling it the rule of law makes it offensive or something; maybe we should have produced a pop up book version of the imperial constitution for them.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Come to think of...
DragonParadox said:
"I also recall I offered the notion of treating different beings as suits their nature rather than being hammered into the form of your desire."
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
DragonParadox said:
"But you cared more for the scales of law than the balance of the world, to fit all our tales between those narrow covers or watch them burn."
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
@Goldfish. Use Scribes Binding on her.
 
Goldfish said:
If she survives the first round, bookification could be in her near future, though she might not avoid Petrification via SotD.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'm pretty sure. This is the Feywild and things operate on story-book logic. So it's likely that she gets a save bonus against an impersonal AoE effect, but a heavy malus when we literally throw her words back at her. Bookifying her after that spiel would fit perfectly into many a cautionary tale about why you don't anger the gods Imperator.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top