Community

Dec 23, 2009 -- 7:24AM, The1Darklord wrote:

Fair point that, the more I look at that Griffon the more I like it, combined with a badge of the berserker to allow charging each turn without opportunity attacks, you can get 3 attacks on an enemy each turn. 

Hmm...  

Daniel. 

Well, if you are lucky.  First turn, yep, charge, get 3 attacks. 

Now you are in melee.  If you want to get out, you'll have to move away and take the attack of opportunity.  (Unless you can charge a different enemy, in which case, get your three attacks.)  Now the Griffon's claws are +10 vs AC.  So at the tier you are going to be using the Griffon, you probably aren't going to hit a lot.  (Okay, +11 with the charge).  (Okay, +14 while flying and charging.  This is what my level 9 fighter has for Brash Strike.) (Okay, +16 while flying, charging and bloodied)

Nevermind. 

Hmm...  [get rogue to stab griffon in back just before combat...]

Dec 23, 2009 -- 8:08AM, The1Darklord wrote:

Hmm so the question is use a basic melee attack on the charge or go for Knockdown Assault, assuming you hit giving the griffon CA against the enemy for a further +2 to hit! Helps the rest of the party to. 

Daniel. 

Depends on what you see your job as.  If you are trying to be a defender/striker, then doing only [str modifier] damage is pretty mild.  If you are trying to be defender/controller, then the prone condition is more than worthwhile. 

Hmm.  Knockdown Assault - 4(str) + 2d6+7 + 2d6+7 [assuming both hit] = 4+14+14=32 damage

Horned Helm+avalanche hammer+iron armbands = 4(str) + 4(con-hewing charge)+2d12brutal2+1(hammer) + 2(dwt) + 2(iron armbands) + 1d6(helm) + 2d6+7(1 hit from griffon) = 4 + 4 + 16 + 2 + 2 + 3.5 + 14 = 45.5 damage

I think I'd like to make my full damage, and assume that at least one griffing claw will hit.  Even if it doesn't, I'm still doing more damage from my hit than the griffon's two claw attacks.

Dec 23, 2009 -- 8:53AM, The1Darklord wrote:

Dec 23, 2009 -- 8:20AM, Joe_Shill wrote:

Depends on what you see your job as.  If you are trying to be a defender/striker, then doing only [str modifier] damage is pretty mild.  If you are trying to be defender/controller, then the prone condition is more than worthwhile. 

Hmm.  Knockdown Assault - 4(str) + 2d6+7 + 2d6+7 [assuming both hit] = 4+14+14=32 damage

Horned Helm+avalanche hammer+iron armbands = 4(str) + 4(con-hewing charge)+2d12brutal2+1(hammer) + 2(dwt) + 2(iron armbands) + 1d6(helm) + 2d6+7(1 hit from griffon) = 4 + 4 + 16 + 2 + 2 + 3.5 + 14 = 45.5 damage

I think I'd like to make my full damage, and assume that at least one griffing claw will hit.  Even if it doesn't, I'm still doing more damage from my hit than the griffon's two claw attacks.

Hmm don't forget as the power has the weapon keyword you still do all the extra damage from Horned helm, avalanche hammer etc, taking that into account you're looking at,

4 + 4 + 8 + 2 + 2 + 3.5 + 14 + 14 = 51.5 damage

So on average it looks to be an extra 6 damage. Plus the controller benefit of the knockdown for your ally's + the defender aspect in that the enemy is less likely to be able to get away being prone.


Daniel.

Hmm.  I looked at that.  The Avalanche hammer only does the extra damage on a melee basic attack.    The Iron Armbands only do their extra damage on melee damage rolls (no roll, no extra damage).  Further, CB only marked the damage as 4 (without any bonuses) [understanding that CB sucks balls in terms of errors], so I was being conservative in my estimate of damage.  Hewing charge also states "on damage rolls", so you wouldn't get that 4 damage.

So, assuming that the avalanche hammer doesn't get the extra damage, nor the armbands, nor hewing charge, we're at 51.5 - 8 -2 -4 = 37.5.  (or still 7.5 less damage).

You can make a good argument that the controller benefit of the knockdown is easily worth 7.5 hp of damage, in which case the knockdown assualt becomes a good choice.  (Of course, if you are going with that, then don't take the avalanche hammer, take a less-expensive vanguard weapon and simply do +1d8 on a successful charge.  "Deal +1d8 damage on any successful charge."  (What's an unsuccessful charge?  Not making it to the target?  [should probably read "charge attack", but we'll leave my bitching about crappy editing for another thread].

In that case, you'd deal +4.5 damage, making the knockdown assault do only 2.5 less than the charge+melee.

4 + 4.5 + 2 + 4.5 + 14 + 14 = 43.

Dec 30, 2009 -- 9:42PM, old_dog wrote:

Dec 23, 2009 -- 6:26AM, Joe_Shill wrote:

When it dies, I'll switch mounts for the riding lizard that is probably still worth keeping for the fast movement, climb speed, swampwalk and high hp.

So you will have both mounts with you each adventure? The horse may die but comes back at the start of the next mod.

From CCG 1.9: Mounts are recovered at the end of the adventure if killed during play. A mount that dies during the course of an adventure is unavailable to the character for the remainder of the current adventure, but is recovered at the adventure’s conclusion.

Yes, I was planning on taking both mounts into the adventure.  I can ride the warhorse until it dies, or until the terrain makes it more useful to use the riding lizard.  Then I can switch mounts. 

If necessary for gameplay terms, I can move on horse, use standard action to pull lizard along.  Combat starts, I drop lizards reins as a free action. 

It might be just as good for the short term to simply not buy the riding lizard, and see how often the horse gets killed.  Then, if necessary, I can buy the riding lizard as the backup mount.

I got the idea from reading Bernard Cornwell's Sharpe series of books, where he describes some of the larger battles during the Penninsula Wars (Wellesley vs. Napoleon).  Wellesley and other officers would have multiple mounts to use when one had gotten too tired to be effective.

Dec 31, 2009 -- 8:11AM, Matt_James wrote:

By the rules, I can have all four of my mounts on an adventure?  Sure, it sounds silly but they are in possession by my character, so why not?

The rules do not specify a maximum amount of equipment.  You've paid for the equipment, why would you not be allowed to take it into the adventure?

Caveat - I can see a DM trying to say that you will have difficulty controlling all of your mounts.  You might make the counter-argument that outside of combat, you don't care if you have to herd them, or string them on a line or whatever.  You can be riding one mount, and simply drop the guide line as a free action once combat begins.  You could also loan them to other party members.

 At 25gp, a riding horse could make an excellent full-cover ally that lasts at least an encounter or two, and that you get back at the end of the adventure.  Think of it as an animated tower shield that costs you a move action to move.