|
What if the second-order vampire orders the third-order vampire to obey the alpha vampire at all times, then the alpha vampire orders the third-order vampire to kill the second-order vampire? Are there some kind of base laws of And hey, looks like Belkar's got a date! I'm sure this won't go terribly.
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 20:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 20:31 |
|
|
Kajeesus posted:Or that Durkula would be lawful evil. It doesn't even matter if Durkula is lawful, Protection from X stops domination from all sources. Then again, having Protection from Evil on him shouldn't have hurt Belkar even though he's evil.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 20:37
|
|
|
Dolash posted:What if the second-order vampire orders the third-order vampire to obey the alpha vampire at all times, then the alpha vampire orders the third-order vampire to kill the second-order vampire? Are there some kind of base laws of Sub-vampires are described as "enslaved" so I don't imagine anything would stop that sort of kill-loop. The rule is the the immediate parent has total control, and that includes "kill yourself by ordering your sub-vampire to set you on fire". If a vampire's immediate parent dies, that vampire is instantly free-willed, so in the above scenario the sub-sub vampire is fully self-controlled as soon as its parent burns up (which is what happened with Durkula).
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 20:58
|
|
|
Does Durkon even need to control any vampires? If the gnome clerics follow the same pantheon, wouldn't they convert to Hel once they're free-willed?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 21:23
|
|
|
Mniot posted:Sub-vampires are described as "enslaved" so I don't imagine anything would stop that sort of kill-loop. The rule is the the immediate parent has total control, and that includes "kill yourself by ordering your sub-vampire to set you on fire". Or just use more mundane methods of control as a back-up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
Loki_XLII posted:Does Durkon even need to control any vampires? If the gnome clerics follow the same pantheon, wouldn't they convert to Hel once they're free-willed? The way I've seen vampires run in D&D is that they're the same person "but evil". But Rich has come up with his own system and I don't think he's explained much of it. Durkon's demon follows Hel. Is that because Durkon's from the northern pantheon? Or because Malak selected that? Or because Hel was there when the call for a vampire demon went out?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 21:54
|
|
|
"Free-willed" may be a bit of an overstatement. I'd assume that any thrall created and released by Durkula would just be another body run by a Hel-born spirit. Heh, I just realized we did get a jailer/captor subplot, like Tarquin wanted. E: ^"Nergal's snake may have sired you, but the dwarves fall under my purview. Your dark spirit was birthed in my hall." E2: Also two strips later, Yurkon says "Usually the process takes a few months," so I'm guessing Durkon's situation is pretty standard. Zulily Zoetrope fucked around with this message at 22:04 on Dec 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 21:55
|
|
|
Zoe posted:on topic: So if all it takes is a dispel spell than Belkar still can't match up to him in a fight. I wonder if he has the sense to keep it hidden away as an ace in the hole for the inevitable showdown...normally I say 'haha no' but he displayed all kinds of surprising brain activity in this one comic alone so who knows. I think Belkar would find it really funny to pretend to be dominated and then stab someone in the back, so I think it's plausible that he would do it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
Going by the RAW for Dominate Person, the vampire should be able to tell if the domination succeeded. And Belkar's bauble suppresses the domination but does not stop it. So Durkon could dominate, notice that he's not feeling anything, and slap away the bauble to take command of Belkar.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 22:28
|
|
|
Mniot posted:Going by the RAW for Dominate Person, the vampire should be able to tell if the domination succeeded. And Belkar's bauble suppresses the domination but does not stop it. So Durkon could dominate, notice that he's not feeling anything, and slap away the bauble to take command of Belkar. srd posted:Obviously self-destructive orders are not carried out. Uhh..
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 23:41
|
|
|
If we're being super spergy, he gets a new will save if he's told to jump off a cliff. If we're not, he's gonna do whatever because it's funny.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 23:47
|
|
|
Maybe Belkar's so stupid he doesn't understand the danger of jumping off the airship? Or maybe it's yet another falling-damage-in-D&D joke.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 23:58
|
|
|
Mniot posted:Maybe Belkar's so stupid he doesn't understand the danger of jumping off the airship? Or maybe it's yet another falling-damage-in-D&D joke. If you want to get rules lawyery then that provision wouldn't trigger because falling damage caps at 20d6 so it wouldn't be obviously self destructive to Belkar because he could survive it. If we're not going to get rules lawyery then as wiegieman said it doesn't work because Belkar jumping is funny.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 00:06
|
|
|
I'd love to hypothesize that Belkar is actually neutral now and the item really is faulty. And him trusting it to work will get him killed. Please don't correct me, I know I'm wrong.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 00:26
|
|
|
Well, Old Belkar would've simply murdered the shopkeep and taken her magic items, so maybe he really is neutral-ing out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 01:11
|
|
|
Dolash posted:And hey, looks like Belkar's got a date! I'm sure this won't go terribly.  Actually he doesn't have a date! After ripping her off for thousands of gold, in a rare bout of conscience-having he turned down the chance to exploit her further.Does this mean he's Lawful good now?! I bet it does!!
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 04:16
|
|
|
Well he was kinda doing her a favor since she would have otherwise thrown the amulet away, so at least she got half price instead of nothing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 04:56
|
|
|
Zoe posted:
Wait, is that what happened? I misread his excuse-making to the cat in the final panel being him trying to explain why he took her up on the lunch offer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 04:58
|
|
|
Dolash posted:Wait, is that what happened? I misread his excuse-making to the cat in the final panel being him trying to explain why he took her up on the lunch offer. He definitely accepted the date.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 05:02
|
|
|
Colonel Cool posted:But I guess a negative level seems like a reasonable enough houserule for an evil character having it cast on him? Zoe posted:\on topic: So if all it takes is a dispel spell than Belkar still can't match up to him in a fight.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 05:17
|
|
|
Allstone posted:A dispel effect only suppresses magic items for 1d4 rounds (Durkon probably isn't going to be pulling out Disjunction). That being said the CL is probably going to be fairly low, so at least the dispel check is likely to succeed. (This assumes that it's a continuous effect, which it looks like it is. The alternative is use-activated, in which case whenever Durkon casts a dispel Belkar can then just reactivate the item before Durkon gets a chance to use his Dominate ability.) I'm pretty sure the whole "rub the clasp" thing is the activation mechanism and it just casts the spell on the wearer. And it makes much more sense if it's a use per day activation item rather than unlimited charges. Unlimited charges would be a hell of a lot more expensive.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 05:28
|
|
|
Brannock posted:He definitely accepted the date. Hmm. What are the odds she's related to the gnome Belkar murdered?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 06:04
|
|
|
It seems more like he's trying to justify why he turned her down through justifications that AREN'T "I'm developing a conscience" leading up to the "I don't even like gnome food... that much."
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 06:14
|
|
|
Brannock posted:He definitely accepted the date. Rich confirmed that Belkar turned down the date. http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?386278-OOTS-969-The-Discussion-Thread posted:
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 06:16
|
|
|
Belkar interacted with somebody in a manner that involved neither anger nor lust! Varsuuvius would be surprised!
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 06:50
|
|
|
Damnit, that's sad. Belkar Date Night would've been hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 07:30
|
|
|
Kajeesus posted:Ahh, fair. That's only if the item itself is good. A clasp enchanted with Protection from Evil shouldn't be powerful enough to have an alignment.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 08:01
|
|
|
Colonel Cool posted:I'm pretty sure the whole "rub the clasp" thing is the activation mechanism and it just casts the spell on the wearer. And it makes much more sense if it's a use per day activation item rather than unlimited charges. Unlimited charges would be a hell of a lot more expensive. Kajeesus posted:Maybe it gives a negative level? I think that's the standard effect for evil characters trying to use good items and vice versa. is that good fucked around with this message at 14:13 on Dec 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 13:58
|
|
|
Allstone posted:Rules as written, the continuous version costs 4000 gold, and making it charges per day makes it cost 800 gold per charge. She says the items cost thousands of gold to make - items with a continuous level 1 spell effect turn out to be really cheap overall. Alright fair enough. I guess a CL 1, continual use, protection from evil item isn't unreasonable. Maybe the rubbing the clasp bit is just turning it on/off.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 17:10
|
|
|
JosephWongKS posted:Rich confirmed that Belkar turned down the date. I was confused when I read this strip at first, and then it made far more sense when somebody told me Belkar turned down the date This is one of the most poorly written punchlines in the strip to date, and that says something
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 18:49
|
|
|
New comic. I think this is the first time Use Magic Device has been alluded to.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 00:48
|
|
|
Carrasco posted:New comic. Haley uses it in the Dragon comics book, but yeah, in the main comic, it is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 00:51
|
|
|
Oh yeah Durkula isn't making it to the Dwarven lands.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 00:58
|
|
|
Rumda posted:Oh yeah Durkula isn't making it to the Dwarven lands. He's going to make it. He has prophecy on his side. Belkar on the other hand...
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 01:01
|
|
|
Rumda posted:Oh yeah Durkula isn't making it to the Dwarven lands. Of course he is. How else can he "bring death and destruction to us all" the next time he returns home? Now whether he goes home with the Order, on his own, or at the head of a new team of super-villains? That's yet to be decided, but Durkon is going home.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 01:04
|
|
|
Is that... Thog? Let it be Thog.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 01:11
|
|
|
Lurking in the shadows isn't really Thog's style.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 01:11
|
|
|
Yeah, my money's on Bozzok.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 01:23
|
|
|
Therkla lives!
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 01:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 20:31 |
|
|
Probably Bozzok and I wouldn't be surprised if whoever Haley's nemesis was is there too. Kind of hard to imagine them posing much threat to the order by themselves though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 02:32
|
|