Possible Tournament

[ErictheRed]

I think the more rules and regulations we come up with, the less fun this tournament starts to sound to me (not to mention hard to enforce). Why not just have a ten second countdown before a fight? You have 10 seconds to buff, and then you better come out swinging. Allowing some buffs, but not others, etc. just makes things too complicated. I think players should be allowed to use whatever they've got; why handicap them in any way? I agree that it wouldn't be fair to have a Cleric buff for 15 rounds before the fight starts, but if we have a set time limit (like 10 seconds), Thomas can just yell out: "10!....9!....8!....1!...Begin!" and people start fighting. Whatever buffs you got up in that time is what you start the fight with.

Less rules are better, imho.

[papaya taco]

Etherealness makes the countdown moot, especially against fighters. There's no save, and no way to hurt the person who cast it besides utilizing AoO's, which some classes (fighters, rogues) don't have. It's basically giving the middle finger to fighters looking to score lucky knockdowns, or the rogue hoping for the spell-disrupting sneak attack.

That's why I singled that particular spell out.

[ErictheRed]

Well, if it's a team battle, does it really matter? Each side will probably have magic users (or should). But maybe your right.

I still think we need to be careful we don't ruin the fun by making a bunch of rules that are hard to enforce, anyways.

[Stormknife]

Well, if it's a team battle, does it really matter?

Step 1: Etherealness. Refresh as necessary to buff to completion.
Step 2: Only come out of etherealness to alpha strike enemy team.
Step 3: Win.

[ErictheRed]

I know how it works. My point is that if both sides have the potential to have the same abilities/spells, etc., then it's fair.

[Stormknife]

I know how it works. My point is that if both sides have the potential to have the same abilities/spells, etc., then it's fair.

Fair, maybe. Fun? Not so much, considering you just guaranteed every team has to have at least one caster capable of tossing up Etherealness, and probably able to cast it multiple times.

[Shorn]

Ok, since this might get a bit of the back and forth bickering, im going to set out the grounds rules as I see them being.

Brackets:
1v1
1-4,5-9,10-13,14+
3v3
5-9 and 10-13, if interest provides
14+

Spell restrictions:
No instant kill spells.
No Etherealness

Buffing:
2 buffs allowed on each player
No scrolls, and no more than two crit heal potions.

Clerics:
Both Agra and Will are willing to help
In addition, we have DM support, and I can backup heal

Anyone find any major faults with that?

[Stormknife]

Sorry for doing nothing but poking holes. It's what I'm good at.

No instant kill spells.

You may want to clarify that. IGMS will one shot anyone with less than 120 HP (almost guaranteed for wizards and sorcerers, and very possible for rogues and bards), but not a fighter. Similarly, Bigby's anything isn't necessarily a one shot kill in and of itself, but it definitely ends the fight as soon as it hits.

2 buffs allowed on each player
No scrolls, and no more than two crit heal potions.

The wizard puts up Shadow Shield and displacement.
The warlock puts up the DR 20/adamantine buff and +4 dex.

I'd say either 2 buffs and X seconds to buff before the fight starts, or no scrolls and you have to buff while the fight is going on.

[Evelond Formos]

Sorry for doing nothing but poking holes. It's what I'm good at.

No instant kill spells.

You may want to clarify that. IGMS will one shot anyone with less than 120 HP (almost guaranteed for wizards and sorcerers, and very possible for rogues and bards), but not a fighter. Similarly, Bigby's anything isn't necessarily a one shot kill in and of itself, but it definitely ends the fight as soon as it hits.

He means Death spells, like Phantasmal Killer, or Power Word: Kill.

2 buffs allowed on each player
No scrolls, and no more than two crit heal potions.

The wizard puts up Shadow Shield and displacement.
The warlock puts up the DR 20/adamantine buff and +4 dex.

I'd say either 2 buffs and X seconds to buff before the fight starts, or no scrolls and you have to buff while the fight is going on.

I agree.

[Shorn]

Since the only remaining divided topic is the buff time, ill put up a poll on a seperate topic, to set that straight to the majorities satisfaction, and will try to incorporate some form of interest poll into it as well

And someone also suggested a backstory for the tournament, I would love to see something like that, but im terrible with things like that

[IronWaffle]

Ok, since this might get a bit of the back and forth bickering, im going to set out the grounds rules as I see them being.

Brackets:
1v1
1-4,5-9,10-13,14+
3v3
5-9 and 10-13, if interest provides
14+

Spell restrictions:
No instant kill spells.
No Etherealness

Buffing:
2 buffs allowed on each player
No scrolls, and no more than two crit heal potions.

Clerics:
Both Agra and Will are willing to help
In addition, we have DM support, and I can backup heal

Anyone find any major faults with that?

The only suggestion I can make on that is to remove potions. It's nice in theory and all for the 2 potion limit, but trust me when I say it's a headache waiting to happen, you're more better off just banning potions.

[Dm Chicken Little]

As has been done in the past with players setting these types of tournes up...having something seperate for mages is possible.

The last big tourne had three level groups...a contest for mages...and a group battle.

[Shorn]

This is the final ruleset, and I hope its as small as possible while keeping things fair, will update as needed.

Buffing: No buffing until the battle starts
Potions and scrolls: Dissallowed
Wands: allowed
Spells: No instant kill spells, No etherealness
Brackets:
1v1-
1-4,5-9,10-13,14+
3v3-14+

I like Chicken littles idea, or rather, the idea from Dasaria 1, and I also think it would be fun to include and archery contest, but that would require builder support to make AC increasing targets.

Was that just a straight up mage battle, btw?

[Elerion]

I'm completely baffled by the no etherealness rule, especially combined with no buffing time. Speaking as a class with no strong disabling spells, no invisibility (other than etherealness), and that is completely reliant on a combination of many small buffs, that is absolute rape.

[ChikenKannon]

I'm completely baffled by the no etherealness rule, especially combined with no buffing time. Speaking as a class with no strong disabling spells, no invisibility (other than etherealness), and that is completely reliant on a combination of many small buffs, that is absolute rape.

It's intended to *keep the playing field as equal as possible*

EDIT: *snipped to simplify*