Heh, Ralph, The Godfather of DnD in Miami, you took the bait hook line and sinker about the Egg, that's how I know you metagame.
Hey boy, I have always known you were against the cabal the egg statement made by you was just something you wanted to ice the cake with. When you got killed just after the encounter- you said that and it just made you look foolish- your character that is.
you have always sown party dis-trust even with other cabal members.
I made the choice with the character if I got killed I wasn't coming back to the game with that character which is why I argued the point with the Baleful Polymorph. My spell technically functioned but because of a rules SNAFU I ended up dying instead.
The truth is that unknown at the time she would have killed his opponent and this argument would be mute, but because noone caught the misteak she was dead next round and p.j. forgot his spell is higher level. This gave the opponent an extra round and she died for it.
if you aren't aware of the tactical situation and capabilities of the enemy it doesn't matter how good you are you will be killed.
noone knows the capabilities of an opponent until you fight him and if he is better then prepare to lose people no matter how good you are. well bad saves can kill you too, but thats another matter all together.
I wholeheartedly agree that if the Arcane
Warrior had absolutely NO means of reaching the wizard to effectively
thwart him as a threat to a wizard win that arcane warriors party who is
being threatened in any way then the Arcane Warrior should be allowed
a pass. However, if they had any means of getting to them and being
effective against the foe who is posing a serious threat to the wizard in
his party ( be it with a potion of fly, tossing a necklace of fire balls bead,
ect. ) and did not attempt to go after that foe in order to prevent harm
of any kind to the wizard in his / her party then that arcane warrior did
indeed fail the Cabal IMHO.
reading my previous post you will see that the opponent had range on all of us even the fastest flyer's of our party. RANGE KILLS.
But besides that, if it was a "save or die" situation can he be held accountable for PJ's death? If so, what protects anyone else in that party? or for that matter, anyone in a party that has a character death from being held responsible for a characters death in that regard.
Sometimes theres just things you can't do and even if you can, there's always a nat 1.
thats exactly what happened regardless of me even hanging around his shoulders as a cloak of resistance. I would have loved that save even though I could have rolled that 1, but what can I say - I resist well but if I'm not the target then nothing I can do rules-wise or cabal-wise.
Greg killed me based on pure logic, take out the highest threat level and you work your way down the list.
I don't blame Greg, I don't blame Ralph, The Godfather of DnD in Miami, (but I shake my head in dissapointment), I don't blame anyone at the table. I had to choose, step up and lay down the firepower I was expected to bring or play it safe and let Ed or Ramon take a hit for the team and possibly lose their life. I made myself a target and I paid a high price. But based on the situation we could have lost a lot more people. Once you've played the module I'd be happy to explain the situation and the locations of the players.
We had only three visible targets, one got targeted, and one died.
Even p.j. admits he was going to be targeted no matter who else was around as I was one of the visible targeted I was not chosen, therefore they went for p.j.- we buffed all we could even though lady sarah wanted all the buffs herself being a selfish paladin( well needless to say she became useless by round 2) and I did say give the main buffs to the spellcasters as they need it more, but no ramon tried to take the buffs for himself but we stopped that cold.