# Should I Ban Tanglefoot Bags?



## Menexenus (Mar 1, 2007)

Is it just me, or are tanglefoot bags really annoying?  I've had them used against me as a player and now that I'm a GM, I'm having them used against my bad guys.  If they don't have a slashing weapon, a monster strength score, or some alcohol, they are just dead in the water (or very slow - if they make their Reflex saves).  A tanglefoot bag literally killed one of my Bosses because the boss was an elderly cleric who wielded a club, had no Strength score, and a crappy Reflex save.  (The PCs just stood 10 feet away and shot him full of arrows while he was helplessly stuck to the ground.)

I'm seriously thinking about just banning them in my game.  Has anyone else done the same?  Does anyone think banning them would be a cruel injustice the likes of which the world has never seen?

Sound off!


----------



## javcs (Mar 1, 2007)

Yes, tanglefoot bags can be really annoying. But bannage worthy? Not IMO.

Where were the cleric's minions when he was getting stuck with the tanglefoot bag? Why didn't he try and make the DC15 Concentration check to cast while bound?

The stuff is only effective for 2d4 rounds.

I've never known anyone who banned them or was in a game that banned them.

It seems like you just want to get rid of tanglefoot bags because of some disappointing experiences with them, which, in effect, just winds up punishing players and their usage of available resources to reduce the threat of otherwise powerful foes to easy levels.


----------



## mvincent (Mar 1, 2007)

Menexenus said:
			
		

> A tanglefoot bag literally killed one of my Bosses because the boss was an elderly cleric who wielded a club, had no Strength score, and a crappy Reflex save.



Couldn't he cast spells (or was he designed to only attack with the club)?



> I'm seriously thinking about just banning them in my game.



I haven't had that problem (i.e. there are worse abuse than that) but it sound like they are having fun. Maybe have fun back (like sundering the things while the PC's are still holding them).


----------



## blargney the second (Mar 1, 2007)

I removed them from my game because they're as effective as a 4th level spell (_enervation_) for too low a cost.


----------



## phindar (Mar 1, 2007)

Menexenus said:
			
		

> (The PCs just stood 10 feet away and shot him full of arrows while he was helplessly stuck to the ground.)



Now that's the sort of heroic end battle I'd like to see in movie.  (Actually, RotJ ended like this, with Darth Vader throwing an old man down a well.  Good times.)  

I don't think tanglefoot bags are all that bad, they're less trouble than Web spells, Grease or half a dozen other low level spells that keep you from moving.  I wouldn't blame the bag though, sometimes the pc's just totally gank the main boss.  Its kind of bummer for the GM, but its just one of those things.  Some days its good to be a player.


----------



## frankthedm (Mar 1, 2007)

Banning the ACME glue bag can help. Anything that effects movement like that is pretty severe. The real problem is the bag gets stronger as levels increase due to how precious speed and actions become. IMHO This item along with Evards are some big reasons why classed NPCs are wimpy compared to Monsters of equivalent CR. 

I believe a 3E designer has admitted the tanglefoot bag was a mistake. Or maybe that was "_Find The Path_"

If you don't ban it be sure to use them against the party. 50 gp is pretty cheap for NPC gear and an orc leader is free to distribute the goop amoung the troops.

If it works use it.


----------



## Diirk (Mar 1, 2007)

blargney the second said:
			
		

> I removed them from my game because they're as effective as a 4th level spell (_enervation_) for too low a cost.




huh?! Tablefoot bags don't level drain...


----------



## hong (Mar 1, 2007)

I changed them so that the Reflex save negates all effects, including the slow movement.


----------



## blargney the second (Mar 1, 2007)

Diirk said:
			
		

> huh?! Tablefoot bags don't level drain...



I know.  Compare the numbers that result from the two effects.
-blarg


----------



## Ogrork the Mighty (Mar 1, 2007)

Rather than ban them, why not just make them unavailable in large quantities?


----------



## Diirk (Mar 1, 2007)

blargney the second said:
			
		

> I know.  Compare the numbers that result from the two effects.
> -blarg



While some of the side effects of enervation are comparatively minor (the loss of attack, saves etc) the things to be worried about are the loss of spells (if a caster) and the possibility of dying due to too many negative levels.


----------



## Moon-Lancer (Mar 1, 2007)

compare 2nd level spells with that effect. oops level 2 spells like Touch of Idiocy, or level 1 spells like Ray of Enfeeblement break that third level spell by comparison. 1 shot from ray of enfeeblement could have had the same effect in this situation. i dont see how you can compaire enervation with a tangle foot bag. Tangle foot bags are a bit too strong, but they are broken becuse they are like enervation? you know enervation can kill on its own right? and that it has no save? i think web or entangle could have had the same effect in the encounter, given a reflex save that might have been failed with the tangle foot bag.


----------



## bestone (Mar 1, 2007)

If the price was different, then ok, prices for things are wonkey in 3rd.

As has been pointed out before, a 10 foot ladder costs 1/4 the amount of a 10 foot pole, wow!

Edit - Then maybey! they are just to readilly available and cheap as is (and you get a lot of money later)


----------



## Dross (Mar 1, 2007)

If a tanglefoot bag is such an effective weapon, everyone able to will use it. How many more NPCs are there than PCs?

If the tanglefoot bag trick is used often enough, any enemy that has time to learn what the PCs do will know and counter or "do unto them" the tactic.


----------



## Celebrim (Mar 1, 2007)

A DC 15 'Reflex Partial' save is pretty tough, since you are still -4 Dex, -2 to attack, and move half speed for on average 5 rounds.  

The main thing that strikes is me is that without magic, this seems to imply a really big bag.  Make it semi-heavy (10 lbs or something), to deter loading up with these things.

Drop the DC of the reflex save to 10, drop the range increment to 5', lose the 1/2 speed penalty entirely and have the successful save leave you at -2 Dex, -1 to attack.


----------



## Stalker0 (Mar 1, 2007)

I love tanglefoot bags, but they are pretty strong. I'd up the cost. But frankly I wish more alchemical items did stuff like this, the way it goes by 2nd or 3rd level if it isn't magic its crap, and that's no good imo.


----------



## Twowolves (Mar 1, 2007)

I believe that as I first opened my 3rd ed PHB and perused the equipment section, this was the first thing to which I said "nuh-uh, not in my game" and have never had a problem since. Shortly thereafter, most all of the "alchemical" items followed suit.

Yeah, a 1st or 2nd level spell can do the same thing. Fighters and rogues don't typically cast a lot of 1st and 2nd level spells, however.


----------



## Drowbane (Mar 1, 2007)

Menexenus said:
			
		

> Is it just me, or are tanglefoot bags really annoying?  I've had them used against me as a player and now that I'm a GM, I'm having them used against my bad guys.  If they don't have a slashing weapon, a monster strength score, or some alcohol, they are just dead in the water (or very slow - if they make their Reflex saves).  A tanglefoot bag literally killed one of my Bosses because the boss was an elderly cleric who wielded a club, had no Strength score, and a crappy Reflex save.  (The PCs just stood 10 feet away and shot him full of arrows while he was helplessly stuck to the ground.)
> 
> I'm seriously thinking about just banning them in my game.  Has anyone else done the same?  Does anyone think banning them would be a cruel injustice the likes of which the world has never seen?
> 
> Sound off!




I've disallowed "standard alchemical items" (with the exception of tindertwigs) since 3e's release.  They just don't fit in *my* D&D campaign (hey look! weaponized glue in a bag!).

I've never seen Tanglefoot bags used where the result wasn't ridiculous and cheesy... this from a self-proclaimed powergamer.


----------



## Darklone (Mar 1, 2007)

I never had a PC without alcohol quickdrawable. Fine, it's not universal solvent, but close.


----------



## Ogrork the Mighty (Mar 1, 2007)

bestone said:
			
		

> ... they are just to readilly available and cheap as is (and you get a lot of money later)




Do you not play with a DM? That's who determines how readily available something is. If the PCs try to show up with 10 tanglefoot bags, the DM just needs to say, "Sorry, the store only had three available." Or two, or one, or none!

Problem solved.


----------



## green slime (Mar 1, 2007)

I don't think they are worth banning. They are rather heavy to carry around a large collection of them into the dungeon.


----------



## Agamemnon (Mar 1, 2007)

Celebrim said:
			
		

> The main thing that strikes is me is that without magic, this seems to imply a really big bag.  Make it semi-heavy (10 lbs or something), to deter loading up with these things.




That's actually not a bad point.


----------



## pallandrome (Mar 1, 2007)

I love when my players use tanglefoot bags on my NPCs. I usually let it work once or twice, then I have an NPC ready an action to pop the bag with an arrow as soon as the PC pulls it out of his backpack. Hilarity ensues.


----------



## el-remmen (Mar 1, 2007)

The weight of them is not a deterrent to their use when most people (and I am going by threads on this subject here) don't calculate encumbrance (something I insist on as a DM).

However, since they don't really fit my game's flavor, they are not available in Aquerra, along with similar equipment like tinder twigs and thunder stones and whatever else.


----------



## green slime (Mar 1, 2007)

el-remmen said:
			
		

> The weight of them is not a deterrent to their use when most people (and I am going by threads on this subject here) don't calculate encumbrance (something I insist on as a DM).
> 
> However, since they don't really fit my game's flavor, they are not available in Aquerra, along with similar equipment like tinder twigs and thunder stones and whatever else.




I don't slavishly follow encumbrance, but can and will do checks every now and then. Once per level, perhaps. Sort of goes along with checking the average character wealth. Helps keep the players aware of those limitations, as well.


----------



## Notmousse (Mar 1, 2007)

I'd say banning is a step too far.

I'd also say that any old cleric without a bottle of wine was a doppleganger infiltrating the church for some nefarious scheme no doubt.

I do wonder how the cleric wasn't casting any spells.  Were the players smart enough to take turns readying an arrow for him when he cast?


----------



## kigmatzomat (Mar 1, 2007)

Meh.  IMC the players are sufficiently high level that tanglefoot bags are used more on them than vice versa.  Their foes know how dangerous the PCs are and can spend some cash.  A bunch of tanglefoot bags enable 5th level mooks to have an effect on the 20th level PCs.  

It was a highly expensive option in the beginning, a good idea for a period of time, and now they are typically a suboptimal tactical maneuver.


----------



## Storyteller01 (Mar 1, 2007)

I wouldn't ban them. Gives the casters a reason to fear the non-casters. IRL, we've been
experimenting with our own variations for years.

'BOW DOWN BEFORE THE GODLY MIGHT OF BELNAR THE ALL...'

thawck; splat

'Aw crap...'


----------



## Storyteller01 (Mar 1, 2007)

http://www.fas.org/faspir/nonleth.jpg


----------



## Jubilee (Mar 2, 2007)

We have a GM who hasn't allowed us to find tangle foot bags since we bought some and started seriously impeeding his NPCs... 

/ali


----------



## bestone (Mar 2, 2007)

If a player likes to cheese out, or do something reaaaaly munchkin while playing a game i run, sometimes, just sometimes i make them taste thier own medicine. Pc's like to abuse tanglefoot bags? well 10 mad gnomes attack with tanglefoot bags...STEAM OPERATED TANGLE FOOT BAGS WITH BUILT IN FORKS!

obviously im kidding, but no, if they wanna twink or be abusive of the rules, they can try, but they cant abuse the rules as good as the dm can, and they need to remember that.


----------



## Greg K (Mar 2, 2007)

I ban it.  It does not fit the style of games that I like to run.


----------



## StreamOfTheSky (Mar 2, 2007)

Menexenus said:
			
		

> Is it just me, or are tanglefoot bags really annoying?  I've had them used against me as a player and now that I'm a GM, I'm having them used against my bad guys.  If they don't have a slashing weapon, a monster strength score, or some alcohol, they are just dead in the water (or very slow - if they make their Reflex saves).  A tanglefoot bag literally killed one of my Bosses because the boss was an elderly cleric who wielded a club, had no Strength score, and a crappy Reflex save.  (The PCs just stood 10 feet away and shot him full of arrows while he was helplessly stuck to the ground.)
> 
> I'm seriously thinking about just banning them in my game.  Has anyone else done the same?  Does anyone think banning them would be a cruel injustice the likes of which the world has never seen?
> 
> Sound off!




First off, how does your "boss" fail to have either a slashing weapon of any kind or a monster strength score?  Failing this, what about spell-casting?  He was a cleric, right?  Even clerics of Kord get spells!  Concentration 15 is fairly easy to make.  I suppose the party probably just readied attacks to shoot him, in which case, good for them!  As you yourself described him, he got exactly what he deserved for facing the entire party head-on without more numbers.  There's nothing horribly broken about Tanglefoot bags.  At low levels, they're pricy,twice as much as a first level spell scroll!  At higher levels, it's just not worth the action in combat to use one.  I suppose for a while, levels ~ 4 - 8, they may be pretty sweet.  So what?

Sorry to go on a rant here, but it's still somewhat related to your banning question.  Why are so many people accepting of magic being able to do literally anything, yet balk in disgust when more mundane things are allowed to be cool?  In this case, it's alchemy, something that never even (successfully) existed in real life!  By the flaws you described, wouldn't a casting of ray of enfeeblement (clerics have the touch AC of a barn!) bring him down even more easily, as he had "no strength score"?  How about a handy fireball for a save he'd have no hope of making?  If that insta-killed him, is it ok because it's magic?


----------



## Drowbane (Mar 2, 2007)

StreamOfTheSky said:
			
		

> ....
> 
> <snip>
> 
> ...If that insta-killed him, is it ok because it's magic?




Absolutely.


----------



## Darklone (Mar 2, 2007)

Friend of mine used tanglefoot bags and called them NETS.


----------



## Infiniti2000 (Mar 3, 2007)

Stalker0 said:
			
		

> I love tanglefoot bags, but they are pretty strong. I'd up the cost. But frankly I wish more alchemical items did stuff like this, the way it goes by 2nd or 3rd level if it isn't magic its crap, and that's no good imo.



 I actually DO think that's good.  I don't like the idea of "high-tech" tanglefoot bags and what complications it brings to the world I create.  I also ban a number of other mundane "high-tech" items like that.  That way, the world is medieval + magic.  If the item, whatever it is, doesn't fit within the tech-level of a medieval environment then it must be magical.


----------



## RigaMortus2 (Mar 3, 2007)

Menexenus said:
			
		

> A tanglefoot bag literally killed one of my Bosses because the boss was an elderly cleric who wielded a club, had no Strength score, and a crappy Reflex save.




Sounds to me like having no Str score and a crappy Reflex save are what killed your BBECleric.


----------



## RigaMortus2 (Mar 3, 2007)

I've very rarely seen Tanglefoot bags used in any campaign I have ever been involved in, going back to 3E.  Sure, it's come up once or twice in the past (how many years since 3E came out?).  And of those couple of times, it wasn't that big of a deal.  I find Tree feather tokens more troublesome (at least in 3E, not sure if they were changed in 3.5 (price maybe?), haven't used them since 3E).


----------



## Menexenus (Mar 4, 2007)

Notmousse said:
			
		

> I do wonder how the cleric wasn't casting any spells.  Were the players smart enough to take turns readying an arrow for him when he cast?




Since a couple folks have asked about this, I'll answer it.

This was the end of a bigger fight.  (The Erythnul temple underneath the Dourstone mine in the second AoW module.)  The PCs had already chopped their way through the grimlock cleric's minions, and the cleric had already cast all of his good range spells by that time.  So at the end of the fight, when it was just the PCs vs. him, he didn't have much in the way of spell power left.

Other posters have seemed incredulous that a cleric would not have a slashing weapon.  That incredulousness seems odd, since clerics aren't proficient with many of them.  But that point aside, I run the bad guys as they are statted out.  (In my view, it's no fair to the PCs to change the bad guys in the middle of the fight.)  According to the bad guy's stat block, his only weapon was a morningstar - which is non-slashing.

Anyway, I hope that satisfies your curiosity.


----------



## javcs (Mar 4, 2007)

Clerics are proficient with daggers. <soapbox> Every character should have a dagger </soapbox> Seriously though, only a commoner could be non-proficient with a dagger.

You say he was out of good range spells, that he'd cast most of his spells already, that's what killed him, not the tanglefoot bag.

Tanglefoot bags, IMO, are cool and good, but they get used far less often than not used.


----------



## Menexenus (Mar 4, 2007)

javcs said:
			
		

> Clerics are proficient with daggers. <soapbox> Every character should have a dagger </soapbox>




Dude, I hate to burst your bubble, but a dagger is a PIERCING weapon, not a slashing weapon.  (Those soapboxes sure are slippery things, aren't they?)

Besides, (like I said before) I am not going to suddenly give the bad guy a dagger if his stat block doesn't say he has one.


----------



## javcs (Mar 4, 2007)

Menexenus said:
			
		

> Dude, I hate to burst your bubble, but a dagger is a PIERCING weapon, not a slashing weapon.  (Those soapboxes sure are slippery things, aren't they?)
> 
> Besides, (like I said before) I am not going to suddenly give the bad guy a dagger if his stat block doesn't say he has one.



They're actually piercing OR slashing, the wielder picks.

I can understand where you're coming from with not giving the guy a dagger, I don't mess with stat blocks much, but if something's incredibly messed up* from WotC I might change minor aspects. 
* IMO, YMMV.


----------



## Menexenus (Mar 4, 2007)

javcs said:
			
		

> They're actually piercing OR slashing, the wielder picks.




Oops.  I didn't realize that that had changed between 3.0 and 3.5.  You are totally right.  My apologies.


----------



## Jhulae (Mar 5, 2007)

blargney the second said:
			
		

> I removed them from my game because they're as effective as a 4th level spell (_enervation_) for too low a cost.




Umm, yeah.

There's a first level spell that is *much* more effective than a tangle foot bag. Did you ban that spell too?  By your reasoning, that 1st level spell would be just as powerful as a 4th level spell.


----------



## hong (Mar 5, 2007)

I would say a dagger is simple enough that every significant person in the campaign would have one, whether it's explicitly noted on the statblock or not. It's "adventuring gear", just like food, clothes, underwear, and toilet paper.


----------



## Darklone (Mar 5, 2007)

hong said:
			
		

> I would say a dagger is simple enough that every significant person in the campaign would have one, whether it's explicitly noted on the statblock or not. It's "adventuring gear", just like food, clothes, underwear, and toilet paper.



People forgot to take a lunch knife along since they started to calculate for smackdowns.


----------



## Cyronax (Mar 6, 2007)

Simple DM policy.

I don't bring out 'annoying' aspects of 3.0/3.5 til the players do. Players start throwing around a sunder or a disarm .... enemies might or might not do the same a session or two later.

Same goes for tanglefoot bags. A player of mine started throwing them at my flying half-fiend assassin guy and so far hasn't faced a tanglefoot bag. Thanks for the reminder....


****

Anyway, its not too bad even at low levels. Diversification of a BBEG is actually a more enjoyable fight for PCs. Higher level lone NPCs go down fast against a party anyway, why not give them a bunch of mooks to match the CR of a low level adventure (since a tanglefoot bag DOES NOT scale to higher levels due to typical classed NPC saves and skill check progressions). 

To bounce off Menexenus's comment, I also think its totally appropriate to play the villain as written at the time of gaming. However, I never run an adventure on the fly. If I see an obvious stat or tactical flaw that a reasonably intelligent villain could have avoided, I take it. Planning one's adventures is a DM virtue.

Its wrong to fudge the dice rolls unless its in the players' benefits (while safely behind your big-ass DM screen of course). 

C.I.D.


----------



## Wish (Mar 6, 2007)

I don't see any reason why classed NPCs should be any stupider than your average PC.  PCs carry backups and contingency plans.  NPCs should do the same.


----------



## pallandrome (Mar 6, 2007)

Tanglefoot bag SCREAMS for a contengency Baleful Transposition.


----------



## green slime (Mar 6, 2007)

Wish said:
			
		

> I don't see any reason why classed NPCs should be any stupider than your average PC.  PCs carry backups and contingency plans.  NPCs should do the same.




That's it! I've had it. This just confirms what I have suspected for a long time:


NPC's are broken!


----------



## molonel (Mar 6, 2007)

javcs said:
			
		

> The stuff is only effective for 2d4 rounds.




With all due respect, in D&D combat, that might as well be an eternity.


----------



## green slime (Mar 6, 2007)

molonel said:
			
		

> With all due respect, in D&D combat, that might as well be an eternity.




Yep. The affected PC may as well slash his own wrists and be done with it.


----------



## Jhulae (Mar 10, 2007)

blargney the second said:
			
		

> I removed them from my game because they're as effective as a 4th level spell (_enervation_) for too low a cost.




I'm still waiting to see how you've handled Entangle, because if TFBs are the equivalent of Enervation, is Entangle the equivalent of some 8th or 9th level spell in your book?


----------



## Jhulae (Mar 10, 2007)

green slime said:
			
		

> Yep. The affected PC may as well slash his own wrists and be done with it.




Okay, so if one PC become entangled for 2d4 rounds, and he "might as well slash his own wrists", how do all of you handle Entangle, which is a 1st level spell that affects a 40' radius and has a higher avoidance and escape DC, as well as lasting 1 minute a level, meaning at the *least* 10 rounds?

If 2d4 rounds is *so awful* for a single character, what is a harder to avoid 10 round minimum for multiple characters?


----------



## Eloi (Mar 13, 2007)

Tanglefoot bags are exceedingly useful to sneaky folks who are primarily concerned about what happens should they be discovered. Getting that head start which might allow them to get back to the group.. yes, worth expending a Bag for that. (Even if they do show up with a trail of angry folks pounding along right behind them..)

The other high-value use for a Bag is to glom a Charmed friend to the ground so the hostile spellcaster can be eradicated.. and then hopefully your friend will regain his senses. In the hands of a non-caster, this is a great option - sure beats having to whack the Cleric unconscious.

Those two really good uses for a Tanglefoot Bag generally mean they get conserved for those critical uses. And they're not exactly cheap. When you're trying to save 2000 gold for a +1 sword, you wince a little about cavalierly using up a half-dozen Bags.


----------



## Sejs (Mar 13, 2007)

blargney the second said:
			
		

> I know.  Compare the numbers that result from the two effects.
> -blarg



OKay.

*Tanglefoot Bag*
-2 to hit
-4 penalty to Dex, resulting in:
... -2 to AC
... -2 to ref saves
... -2 to Dex-related skill checks
... -2 to hit with missle weapons (net penalty of -4)
Possible inability to move from their current space, pending a DC 15 ref save.
Reduced to half movemet speed if not stuck in place.
Forces a DC 15 concentration check on spellcasting if bound.
Wears off after 2d4 rounds, can be removed with a DC 17 str check or via 15 pts of slashing dmg.
Protected against by means of Freedom of Movement, a 4th level spell.

*Enervation*
Causes 1d4 negative levels, resulting in a loss of:
-1 to -4 to hit
-1 to -4 on all skill checks
-1 to -4 on all ability checks
-5 to -20 hit points
-1 to -4 to the character's effective level for level-dependent variables, such as caster level for spells or wild shape duration
Loss of 1 to 4 of the character's highest level spells that they have currently available
Slain outright if negative levels equal or exceed subject's HD
Persists for 1 hour per caster level, max of 15 hours.
No normal way to avoid or mitigate the effects, other than not being hit.  No save.
Protected against by means of Death Ward, a 4th level spell.



For point of interest, here's Entangle: 

*Entangle*
Requires sufficient plant cover.  Assuming such is available, applies the following to all targets within its 40' radius area:
-2 to hit
-4 penalty to Dex, resulting in:
... -2 to AC
... -2 to ref saves
... -2 to Dex-related skill checks
... -2 to hit with missle weapons (net penalty of -4)
Forces a DC 15 concentration check on spellcasting if bound.
Unable to move pending a ref save (DC set by caster), or a full round action making DC 20 str or escape artist check.
Reduced to half movemet speed if not stuck in place.
Effect reapplies itself every round subject is within the spell's area.  Spell lasts 1 minute/caster level.
Protected against by means of Freedom of Movement, a 4th level spell.


Tanglefoot Bags arn't Enervation In A Can.  Enervation penalizes everything you do.  Enervation steals spells.  Enervation can flat-out kill you.

Tanglefoot Bags are a watered down version of a 1st level druid spell.


----------



## hong (Mar 13, 2007)

Jhulae said:
			
		

> Okay, so if one PC become entangled for 2d4 rounds, and he "might as well slash his own wrists", how do all of you handle Entangle, which is a 1st level spell that affects a 40' radius and has a higher avoidance and escape DC, as well as lasting 1 minute a level, meaning at the *least* 10 rounds?




I consider it cheese as well.


----------



## Bad Paper (Mar 13, 2007)

frankthedm said:
			
		

> I believe a 3E designer has admitted the tanglefoot bag was a mistake. Or maybe that was "_Find The Path_"



wha?  What's wrong with _FtP_?

Also, I am thinking that maybe what tanglefoot bags need is an expiration date.  Like, if you don't use it within three days of manufacture, it becomes less effective (DC drops by 2, duration halves), and then in another three days it is just a medicine ball.


----------



## Presto2112 (Mar 13, 2007)

pallandrome said:
			
		

> I love when my players use tanglefoot bags on my NPCs. I usually let it work once or twice, then I have an NPC ready an action to pop the bag with an arrow as soon as the PC pulls it out of his backpack. Hilarity ensues.




What a nifty use for Ranged Disarm!  Or Ranged Sunder!


----------



## blargney the second (Mar 13, 2007)

Proud Nails.
-blarg


----------



## Bladesong (Mar 13, 2007)

Well, it is your game you can ban them if you wish. Any item from that list in the PHB should not be easily accessible IMO. The tanglefoot bag in my campaign was actually developed by a humanoid race (kobolds I believe). Adventurers have to either find them or buy them on the "black market" as they are not allowable in the open market.


----------



## lukelightning (Mar 13, 2007)

I have problems just picturing them. How do you carry around bags of glop that are ready to burst with a light impact?  Why a _bag_ and not a ceramic jar?

Oh, and don't forget that _enervation_ is a cheap way to make wights.


----------



## Slaved (Mar 13, 2007)

lukelightning said:
			
		

> Oh, and don't forget that _enervation_ is a cheap way to make wights.




Having a weapon with holy, unholy, anarchic, or axiomatic on it works pretty well too. High initial cost but if you can set it up right you can turn any number of 1hd creatures of the wrong alignment into wights!

Of course all you really need is one in the middle of a town which is not ready for it and......


----------



## lukelightning (Mar 13, 2007)

Slaved said:
			
		

> Having a weapon with holy, unholy, anarchic, or axiomatic on it works pretty well too. High initial cost but if you can set it up right you can turn any number of 1hd creatures of the wrong alignment into wights!




Just get one holy sling bullet.


----------



## The Levitator (Mar 13, 2007)

I have a player in my group that likes tanglefoot bags and thunderstones and such so much that he asked me to create an "alchemist" subclass for his character, which I did using a version of the one created in Feudal Lords.  One of the things he loves about playing his alchemist/herbalist/sorcerer is that he can't just whip them up whenever he feels like it.  He has to find the materials, and successfully craft them.  He likes the process, and since I make him work for every one he makes, he is constantly nagging the party to use them wisely.  It makes for great roleplaying and in our world they have pretty limited use anyway.  But they are very useful for a low level party that gets caught with their pants down.  Their 1st level party's first encounter was a chance encounter with a dire wolf out in the woods.  A couple of tanglefoot bags (these were given to the party by the character's mentor, he wasn't able to make them yet) bought them enough time to get outta Dodge.  My players aren't a "kill everything that moves" kinda bunch, so Tanglefoot Bags are great for evasive maneuvers too.  I could totally see though how they could get abused by players with more of a videogame mindset.  Of course, just about everything in D&D is abusable by a videogame mindset by either the players or the DM.

As a DM, I feel like my job is to tell a great story that allows the players to be the hero how they want to be the hero.  If I have a player who wants to play a alchemist/herbalist/sorcerer who's main job is to create the materials needed by the party for their jobs, then I find a way to make it happen.  I was worried about tanglefoot bags being a little too plentiful, so I just make the process of creating them a little bit laborious and a little bit time-consuming in game, so that he doesn't have his character just sit there mass producing them during downtime.  I treat alchemy just like magic in my world; something rare and powerful and wonderful.  If I don't treat things as mundane in my world, my hope is that my players will also perceive those things as rare and powerful and unique.  That's why I don't have Magic-Marts or Bob's House of Potions in my worlds.  Finding the crafters of such things are a mini-quest in and of themselves, which keeps availability to manageable levels and better represents the kind of world my players want to play in.

Just as an example, the party was seeking out someone that could help them discover their purpose for being somehow teleported into a glade in a forest together.  They stumbled upon a Loremaster who had envisioned meeting "4 strangers who were friends by circumstance" that he knew he was supposed to aid.  In addition to being a Loremaster, he is also an alchemist and has taken Michael's character under his wing to teach him alchemy.  Michael's first task was to learn how to make Tanglefoot Bags.  The ingredients are rare, and can only be found in the desolated part of a lush forest called "The Dead Wood".  The Dead Wood is a dangerous place, a place destroyed by negative magic gone bad and has twisted and distorted everything in this part of the forest.  So, in order to get the materials to create Tanglefoot Bags, the party is going to accompany Michael into the Dead Wood to procure the materials.  It's a mini-quest in and of itself that serves me several purposes as a DM, and also paints the picture that creating some alchemical substances are somewhat dangerous.  The party somehow found that a lot more fun and interesting than just plunking down a bag of gold at Alices' Alchemy Barn.

So I guess my long-winded opinion would be; don't ban them, just make them a bit of a pain to acquire.  This will keep quantities manageable, paint a more tangible world for your players, and give you a couple more hooks for small side adventures.  I use this approach with everything magical or holy in my worlds and the players really seem to like it.  Mechanically speaking, it's not really different.  I don't charge more for the items or nerf the items.  I just make them a little harder to obtain, and everything else seems to fall right into place.


----------

