Sweep 07/01/2015 03:24 AM CDT
I'm curious what there is about yetis that make them so hard to sweep. I have no trouble with krag dwellers. Level 71, 55 ranks of sweep via the Rogue guild. I'm not wounded, not encumbered, have no penalties, yet apparently need a 101 end roll to succeed.

HJ>
You come out of hiding.
[Roll result: 80 (open d100: 78) Penalties: 0]
You crouch, sweep a leg at a krag yeti and connect!
You whack a krag yeti's legs futilely! You stumble back on your feet.
Roundtime: 5 sec.

I demand to know the formula for the mechanics of the sweep maneuver, with modifications for every creature in the bestiary!

Oh wait; wrong topic thread. Sorry, ignore that outburst. I'll settle for knowing the general reason.

::This space for rent::
Reply
Re: Sweep 07/01/2015 07:28 AM CDT
They are probably treated as knowing it for defensive purposes. I don't recall that they ever actually use it offensively but I'd take a result like that as indicating yetis are honorary rogues.
Reply
Re: Sweep 07/01/2015 12:45 PM CDT
>>I demand to know the formula for the mechanics of the sweep maneuver, with modifications for every creature in the bestiary! --THROGG

>>Oh wait; wrong topic thread. Sorry, ignore that outburst. I'll settle for knowing the general reason. --THROGG

Wow, what a passive-aggressive cheap shot. Although, since I never demanded to know the formula I can't be sure if you're referring to me. However, I'm the only person defending the position of knowledge, so it would seem to be the case. You stay classy, Throgg.

>>They are probably treated as knowing it for defensive purposes. I don't recall that they ever actually use it offensively but I'd take a result like that as indicating yetis are honorary rogues. --RATHBONER

I agree with RATHBONER, this is the most likely answer.

It may also be that creature height plays a roll with sweep.

The krag yeti is large in size and about ten feet high in its current state.
The krag dweller is large in size and about nine feet high in its current state.
Reply
Re: Sweep 07/01/2015 09:48 PM CDT
>>Wow, what a passive-aggressive cheap shot.<<

Please read the definition of passive-aggressive behavior.


::This space for rent::
Reply
Re: Sweep 07/02/2015 12:36 AM CDT
>>Please read the definition of passive-aggressive behavior. --THROGG

k.

>>The indirect expression of hostility ...

Check.

>>... such as through procrastination, stubbornness, sullenness, or deliberate or repeated failure to accomplish requested tasks for which one is (often explicitly) responsible.

Check.

>>Showing a brooding ill humor.

Check.

.

You showed hostility by attempting to humorously mock me wherein you deliberately misrepresented my request to know ambushing particulars as a overbearing childish demand without referring to me directly.

.

Please educate me as to how I improperly characterized your quote.
Reply
Re: Sweep 07/02/2015 02:39 AM CDT
>>Please educate me as to how I improperly characterized your quote.<<

The comment was aggressive but there was nothing passive (i.e. indirect) about it.

This discussion has been going on for days, and taken up several pages, while not really coming to any conclusion. Now, I support everyone's right to express their opinions here, but when the debate dead-ends it's time to bring it to a close. Hence, I felt a bit of a mocking comment was called for. That, of course, is just my opinion.

::This space for rent::
Reply
Re: Sweep 07/02/2015 03:39 AM CDT
>>The comment was aggressive but there was nothing passive (i.e. indirect) about it.

I, literally, and I do mean literally, demonstrated how it was by definition passive-aggressive because you did not use me as the subject of the sentence but instead injected yourself as the subject. Seriously.

But if you think mocking me is totes magotes cool, then by all means.
Reply