Template and Mob Rules

[zook1shoe]

*nods* yeah we both get screwed by WotC 

i was looking in the Savage Species, they have some stuff that would change it, if it didn't also say that all the previous stuff applied too.

[EjoThims]

Firstly, apologies for not responding sooner. Between finals week and move out keeping work hell and the flu keeping me sick, I was distracted.

I see that part of my position's defense was already done for me, by zook's finding of a quote I could not remember where to locate.

For mobs:

Although mobs are treated as one creature, it sometimes becomes necessary to determine the fate of a specific individual caught up in the mob. If a mob is dispersed by nonlethal attacks, there are no casualties. If the mob is dispersed by lethal attacks, assume that 30% of its number are slain and 30% are reduced to 0 hit points. To determine a specific individual’s fate, simply roll d%: a result of 01–30 indicates death, 31–60 indicates the victim is reduced to 0 hit points, and a roll of 61–100 indicates the victim escapes relatively unscathed.

Emphasis mine. Between that unqualified statement that they are treated as one creature (contrary to your assertion), and the fact that Mob is a template applied to a single base creature (not a group of creatures; "“Mob” is an acquired template that can be added to any Small, Medium, or Large creature.") by the rules, you have no support for your arguments about mobs other than common sense, which, again, I completely agree with if we are to allow that. I don't know how I can be clearer about this. There is absolutely nothing in the mob rules stating that a mob is treated as multiple creatures for all other purposes. Again, there is nothing. Show me a quote.[/quote]

I think, perhaps that I understand where the disparity between our views lies.

To you, the phrasing "Although mobs are treated as one creature, it sometimes becomes necessary to determine the fate of a specific individual caught up in the mob. If a mob is dispersed..." to be necessarily linked. That "If a mob is dispersed" is the only instance it "becomes necessary to determine the fate of a specified individual." To me, they are not necessarily linked and "If a mob is dispersed" is only one of the times it "sometimes becomes necessary to determine the fate of a specified individual." Everything must be either a time it is "treated as one creature" or a time it "becomes necessary to determine the fate of a specific individual caught up in the mob." Times for each are listed in the template. One list must be an exhaustive list of all possibilities of that list, the other not, because there is no other list of times for the mob. Meaning that  for one of the lists, there are other instances, including all times not specifically called out in the template's rules. That "sometimes" is huge. Sometimes implies there is another time than the one immediately listed. Meaning it is not the only item on it's list. Meaning there are other times it "becomes necessary to determine the fate of a specified individual."

There are no other rules except for those in the mob template for when it is treated as one creature, yet those same rules implies that there are times other than the one it lists that they aren't treated as one creature. So the exhaustive list must be "treated as one creature."

[Bauglir]

That "sometimes", at least to me, clearly parses as meaning that it is not always necessary to determine the fate of an individual (sometimes, as a DM, you don't care what happens to them). I mean, for one, that implies that it is not always necessary (meaning that in cases not described, it is otherwise treated as a single creature). But really, it seems to be a "This is something you might want to do sometimes" rule. If it said, "Sometimes, when it is necessary...", then I could see your argument.

But, that said, yeah, a Tauric Mob relies both upon mobs being treated as single creatures (which I maintain they are, except for all situations explicitly called out as otherwise in the template), and upon an acquired template being nonsensically applied before an inherited one. The latter has been thoroughly disproven, so the option is out.

[zook1shoe]

What about an afflicted were-mob?

[Bauglir]

What about an afflicted were-mob?

Interesting, in that the whole mob would turn into a single animal. I don't believe (although I'm not 100% sure) that you can use a templated creature as the base animal, but I can't cite a rule for that. If true, you could still make Voltron by having a bunch of people turn into a lion, but you couldn't have a single creature turn into a mob that way.

[zook1shoe]

if they didn't update Curse of Lycanthropy from Complete Divine.... you could

[EjoThims]

That "sometimes", at least to me, clearly parses as meaning that it is not always necessary to determine the fate of an individual (sometimes, as a DM, you don't care what happens to them).

I agree 100%. I just feel that, as poorly written as it may be, that "sometimes" means that there must be other times  than the one example given. And if the "not a single creature" list is the non-exhaustive one, that must be the list that contains everything not explicitly stated in the template.

Also, you are correct that templated creatures are not able to be the base animal for a lycanthropy template. Curse of Lycanthropy, however, I will have to reexamine.

[zook1shoe]

Also, you are correct that templated creatures are not able to be the base animal for a lycanthropy template.

how so? i don't see how a templated animal (as long as the templates are inherited) is much different than an advanced animal, used as a base animal for lycanthropy.

the old Curse of Lycanthropy inflicts the creature with ANY form of afflicted lycanthropy, which is implied that it is based on the blood you use as a material component. but if use Eschew Materials, then you can make up any sort of "blood" you want

[EjoThims]

Also, you are correct that templated creatures are not able to be the base animal for a lycanthropy template.

how so? i don't see how a templated animal (as long as the templates are inherited) is much different than an advanced animal

Lycanthropy's Alternate Form is based on Alter Self, which doesn't allow you to change into templated creatures.

I can dig up a link to a more comprehensive  look at it, if you'd like, but I'm in the middle of catching up on 3 months of not updating my Rewrite Compilation, so it could be a minute. Or you could go through my post history. 

[zook1shoe]

but the Lycanthropy template only wants an omnivorous or carnivorous animal... the alternate form doesn't apply until the creature actually has the template.

[Bauglir]

So you could arguably apply it, but then you wouldn't be able to use it because of the ability's restrictions. I thought Alternate Form was errata'd to have its own, independent, rules, though?

[EjoThims]

So you could arguably apply it, but then you wouldn't be able to use it because of the ability's restrictions.

Essentially. Making it functionally useless.And I refuse to believe that anyone would willingly pay 1 HD and 2 LA for +2 Wisdom. 

I thought Alternate Form was errata'd to have its own, independent, rules, though?

It was. And that bit is included.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20060502a

Scroll down to the part where things get red.

These changes are YEARS old, yet the same old confuses still come up. 

Feral on the whole lycanthrope also no longer works, thanks to "The creature loses the natural weapons, natural armor, and movement modes of its original form, as well as any extraordinary special attacks of its original form not derived from class levels (such as the barbarian's rage class feature)."

As soon as you use Alternate Form to change to animal or hybrid, all the benefits of the Feral template are lost.

[Bauglir]

That's a shame (for this section of the boards). Thanks for the link.

[zook1shoe]

Just find an animal with a bunch of bonus feats

What if you get the template, but can't change forms... doesn't Black Blood Hunter get around that? Or does it just increase stuff while in alternate form?

[EjoThims]

Just find an animal with a bunch of bonus feats

Because animals all have such good basic bonus feats... 

What if you get the template, but can't change forms... doesn't Black Blood Hunter get around that? Or does it just increase stuff while in alternate form?

i would have to check out BBH again, but unless it has something specifically saying it ignores the normal restrictions of Alternate Form, either in regards to templates or without specification at all, then it wouldn't be able to get around the later errata.

[zook1shoe]

Me too.

I was thinking it gave you your hybrid attacks in any form. But I might be thinking of the BB Cultist rage thing.

EDIT: The animal aspect thing comes close, but neither help

[nijineko]

not to mention the updated template rules that all templates are acquired templates, including inherited templates. quoted in brief here: http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=12169.0

[Bastian]

not to mention the updated template rules that all templates are acquired templates, including inherited templates. quoted in brief here: http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=12169.0

You mean all templates can become acquired templates, they aren't automatically acquired templates. Also those aren't updated template rules, it even that specifies that "Unlike the regular template rules as given in the Monster Manual...this variant rules system allows a character to gain levels in a desired inherited template class after gaining levels in an acquired template, if desired". Your general point was still correct, your wording was just off.

Edit: The templates only become acquired templates 'in effect' as opposed to in name, how much that matters depends on your interpretation and whether there are rules dependent on them being called acquired templates.

[nijineko]

quite so, thank you for your succinct clarifications. you'd think i'd learn not to post when i'm tired, but... yeah.