|
4 years ago ::
Apr 07, 2009 - 12:44AM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Aug 27, 2007
|
So im a dark pact warlock and after this weekend my eyes have been opened up to the possibly of using a rod of reaving/corruption combo/single rods.
However after reading numerous threads on this combo subject, many people say atm, wizards havent said no you cannot use this combo.
Many people have said they use house rules to say you cant do it. But with LFR you dont use house rules.
However while at a local rpga lfr event the local GMs said they dont allow it. But i dont think they can do stuff like that can they?
How is a issue like this handeled in a manerly way with out breakign rules and getting into yelling matches at people at the store.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Apr 07, 2009 - 1:04AM
#2
|
Date Joined:
May 11, 2005
|
DMs can make rules interpretations and make minor adaptions in adventures (aka 'DME'). They can't make houserules (at least none that go beyond the table), but when it comes on how some items or powers work, there is on occasion some flexibility in how to interpret a rule.
In the case of the rod of reaving/corruption, a DM can rule that it doesn't work, using their interpretation of the intention of the rules. Some DMs will, and some won't.
The way to handle this without shouting matches is to accept the ruling of the DM at the time.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Apr 07, 2009 - 1:07AM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Aug 11, 2006
|
Is that the combination that let's the character kill all the minions by just cursing them all at once?  I'm not sure if a DM can choose not to allow, but under "Important DM information" in every module, it states that you are entitled to make adjustments to the adventure and to be careful not to make the adventure to hard or to easy. You could easily adjust the minions hipoints from 1 to 5, could you? It would still ensure certain minion-death from a hit but would not break the whole encounter. As a DM, I'd probably talk to the player and ask him not to use the combo for the sake of everybody's fun. As a player, I'd wish for the DM not to allow it. I've seen it once (CORE1-6, final encounter), and a potentially interessting encounter turned into something that wasn't challenging at all and just boring.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Apr 07, 2009 - 2:52AM
#4
|
|
|
In case of a dark pact warlord it can have an even bigger impact on the fight since it not only kills it all the minions, it also creates an immensely powerful backlash to whatever creature first targets the warlock. Personally as a player I would avoid the combo unless I am playing with a group of players who love dominating the game through such combos and a DM who does not care about the fights either. Of course, I don't want any complaints afterward about how easy the adventure was or how boring the fights  In any event, LFR does NOT take a campaign wide stance on any core rules except that we follow the rules as written.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Apr 07, 2009 - 3:08AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Apr 21, 2006
|
An infinate hord orcs stands before you as far as the eye can see. In a deep gruff voice their leader barks a command and the hord begins to surge forward toward you.
Warlock: As a minor action I curse one and then, as a free action, I use my Rod of Reaving to deal 1 damage to it.
DM: It dies.
Warlock: Then, as a free action, I use my Rod of Corruption to transfer my curse to all enemies within 5 squares of it. Then, as a free action, I use my Rod of Reaving to deal 1 each of them.
DM: They all die.
Warlock: Then, as a free action, I use my Rod of Corruption to transfer my curse to all enemies within 5 squares of them. Then, as a free action, I use my Rod of Reaving to deal 1 each of them.
DM: You just killed an infinate amount of orc minions with a minor action. Welcome to level 30.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Apr 07, 2009 - 4:02AM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Mar 29, 2001
|
In case of a dark pact warlord it can have an even bigger impact on the fight since it not only kills it all the minions, it also creates an immensely powerful backlash to whatever creature first targets the warlock.
"Ahahaha! Hit me! Go on, I dare you! Hit me! Hey, where are you going? Wait! Wait, you can't run away! Come back!"
-karma
LFR Characters:
Lady Tiana Elinden Kobori Silverwane - Drow Control Wizard
Kro'tak Warscream - Orc Bard
Fulcrum of Gond - Warforged Laser Cleric
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Apr 07, 2009 - 4:55AM
#7
|
|
|
To answer your question, you're right: DMs cannot choose to ignore a particular rule or implement a new rule. However, DMs can choose to interpret a particular rule in a particular way to get the desired result.
I have often seen DMs "interpret" the rod of reaving/rod of corruption combo in the following way:
Rod of reaving states "when you place your curse on..."
Rod of corruption states "Your curse spreads..."
Therefore, by a particularly persnickety interpretation, a DM could rule that the warlock is not placing his curse, it is spreading, therefore, the rod of reaving does not function for that particular situation. I sprang this interpretation on a player once and he wasn't thrilled. I have decided not to do it again. I know Teos is going to have a spasm when he reads this, but I personally hate this combo.
Dave Kay
LFR Writing Director Retiree
dkay807 [at] yahoo [dot] com
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Apr 07, 2009 - 5:03AM
#8
|
- Senior Volunteer Community Lead
- Dragon Slayer
- D&DI News Guide
Date Joined:
Aug 31, 2005
|
Therefore, by a particularly persnickety interpretation, a DM could rule that the warlock is not placing his curse, it is spreading, therefore, the rod of reaving does not function for that particular situation. I sprang this interpretation on a player once and he wasn't thrilled. I have decided not to do it again. I know Teos is going to have a spasm when he reads this, but I personally hate this combo.
FWIW - my main is a warlock and I hate this combo. I love my Rod of Reaving, but I refuse to couple it with (or ever use) a rod of corruption. Even without the RoR.
It's quite enough for me to minor-death minions at will. Especially as a feylock who gets to TP each time he does it.
Wolf Star76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide  Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Apr 07, 2009 - 5:53AM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Mar 16, 2006
|
have often seen DMs "interpret" the rod of reaving/rod of corruption combo in the following way:
Rod of reaving states "when you place your curse on..."
Rod of corruption states "Your curse spreads..."
Therefore, by a particularly persnickety interpretation, a DM could rule that the warlock is not placing his curse, it is spreading, therefore, the rod of reaving does not function for that particular situation. I sprang this interpretation on a player once and he wasn't thrilled.
This is also the way I interpret it. I understand that it might irritate some players, but I have a strong "what makes the game fun" ethic in DMing, and autokilling all minions is not fun for anyone except possibly the player in question.
If you intend using this combo, I would strongly urge asking the GM for your game if he allows it. That will likely save bad feeling later. I have seen several players ask GMs this question, which is both courteous and helpful.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Apr 07, 2009 - 7:06AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
May 11, 2005
|
Or you can not allow more than one free action beyond using the rod.
DMs may decide hoe many free actions a PCs gets a round.
Gomez
|
|
|
